text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In the Standard Model(SM) neutrinos are massless particles with zero electric charge and magnetic moments. Nonzero electromagnetic properties of neutrinos have been discussed in many extensions of the SM . In its simplest extension, neutrinos acquire magnetic moments through radiative corrections

$$\mu _{ij}=\frac{3eG_Fm_{ij}}{8\sqrt{2}\pi ^2}=3.2\times 10^{19}(m_{ij}/1eV)\mu _B,$$
(1)
where $`G_F`$ is the Fermi constant, $`\mu _{ij}(i,j=e,\mu ,\tau )`$ is the neutrino magnetic moment matrix, $`m_{ij}`$ is the Dirac neutrino mass matrix, and $`\mu _B=e/2m_e`$ is the Bohr magneton. So the magnetic moments are too small to give any observable effect. However, there are less trivial extensions of the SM  predicting magnetic moments at the level of $`(10^{10}10^{11})\mu _B`$, that are large enough to be observed in neutrino electromagnetic interactions.

If neutrinos are Majorana particles, their diagonal magnetic moments must be zero from the CPT consideration, but can have transition moments that couple one neutrino mass eigenstate to another. Dirac neutrinos can have both diagonal and transition moments.

In the case of vacuum neutrino mixing, an evolution of the effective magnetic moment of the initial flavour states depends on whether the neutrinos are Dirac or Majorana particles, and whether the transition magnetic moments are involved. Consider the following example (see also Section 2,3). In the case of two neutrino mixing:

$`\nu _\mu =cos\theta \nu _1+sin\theta \nu _2`$ (2)
$`\nu _\tau =sin\theta \nu _1+cos\theta \nu _2`$
where $`\nu _1,\nu _2`$ denote mass eigenstates and $`\theta `$ is a mixing angle. Let $`\nu _1,\nu _2`$ be the Dirac neutrinos with only diagonal magnetic moments. This is the scheme used by the Particle Data Group .

The effective magnetic moments of $`\mu _{\nu _\mu }`$ and $`\mu _{\nu _\tau }`$ neutrino are:

$`\mu _{\nu _\mu }^2=cos^2\theta \mu _{\nu _1}^2+sin^2\theta \mu _{\nu _2}^2`$ (3)
$`\mu _{\nu _\tau }^2=sin^2\theta \mu _{\nu _1}^2+cos^2\theta \mu _{\nu _2}^2`$
As can be seen here, there is no dependence of $`\mu _{\nu _\mu }`$ or $`\mu _{\nu _\tau }`$ on distance $`L`$ or neutrino energy $`E_\nu `$ , i.e. once Dirac $`\nu _\mu `$ is produced it will propagate through space with the value of the effective magnetic moment remaining constant, while the $`\nu _\tau `$ component in the beam will depend on $`L`$ and $`E_\nu `$, as described by the well-known formula for two neutrino mixing .

Taking into account recent results from the Super-Kamiokande detector on evidence for $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillations with close to maximal mixing angle $`sin^22\theta =0.81`$ , one gets

$$\mu _{\nu _\mu }\mu _{\nu _\tau }$$
(4)
Taking into account the upper limit to the magnetic moment of muon neutrinos from the $`\nu e`$ scattering experiment at LAMPF :

$$\mu _{\nu _\mu }<7.4\times 10^{10}\mu _B$$
(5)
a conservative upper bound on the diagonal magnetic moment of tau neutrino can easily be derived:

$$\mu _{\nu _\tau }<1.9\times 10^9\mu _B$$
(6)
as well as on the magnetic moments of the mass eigenstates :

$`\mu _{\nu _1}<1.9\times 10^9\mu _B`$ (7)
$`\mu _{\nu _2}<1.9\times 10^9\mu _B`$
Thus, measurements of components of the neutrino mixing matrix would allow extraction of the fundamental magnetic moments $`\mu _{ij}`$. Note that the limit of Eq.(6) is more then two orders of magnitude better then the limit extracted from the $`\nu e`$-scattering by BEBC, $`\mu _{\nu _\tau }<5.4\times 10^7\mu _B`$  or, limits extracted from the $`e^+e^{}`$ experiments, see e.g.  and its references.
In experiments the neutrino originates in weak decays and is always a flavour eigenstate. Therefore, one information on neutrino magnetic moments is obtained in flavour bases, while the fundamental magnetic moments are associated with the mass eigenstates. In this paper we consider the combined oscillation and magnetic moment effects for both Dirac and Majorana neutrino cases in both mass and flavour eigenstate bases. The basic formulae are given in Section 2. In section 3 their application to the experimental bounds on neutrino magnetic moments and to the experiments on stimulated radiative neutrino conversion is considered.

## 2 Basic formulae

The Lagrangian describing the neutrino interaction with the electromagnetic field due to non-zero anomalous transition magnetic and dipole moments in the mass eigenstates basis takes the form

$$L_\mu =\frac{1}{2}\underset{i,j=1,N}{}\overline{\nu }_j\sigma _{\mu \nu }(\mu _{ji}+d_{ji}\gamma _5)\nu _iF_{\mu \nu }+h.c.$$
(8)
Here $`\nu _i`$ and $`\nu _j`$ are neutrinos with masses $`m_i`$ and $`m_j`$ respectively. The Lagrangian (8) can be rewritten in the form

$$L_\mu =\frac{1}{2}\underset{i,j=1,N}{}\overline{\nu }_{jR}\mu _{jiRL}\sigma _{\mu \nu }\nu _{iL}F_{\mu \nu }+h.c.\frac{1}{2}\overline{\nu }_R\widehat{\mu }_{RL}\sigma _{\mu \nu }\nu _LF_{\mu \nu }+h.c.,$$
(9)
where $`\nu _{iL,R}=\frac{1}{2}(1\gamma _5)\nu _i`$ and

$$\mu _{jiRL}=(\mu d)_{ji}+(\mu +d)_{ij}^{}$$
(10)
For the Dirac neutrino (for the Majorana neutrino we have to substitute $`\mu _{ji}2Im(\mu _{ji})`$, $`d_{ji}2Im(d_{ji})`$) the decay width $`\nu _i\nu _j+\gamma `$ is determined by the formula

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu _i\nu _j+\gamma )=\frac{m_i^3(|\mu _{ji}|^2+|d_{ji}|^2)}{8\pi }(1\frac{m_j^2}{m_i^2})^3,$$
(11)
Or in terms of inverse radiative lifetime formula (11) takes the form

$$\tau _\gamma ^1=5.3s^1(\frac{\mu _{ji,eff}}{\mu _B})^2(\frac{m_i^2m_j^2}{m_i^2})^3(\frac{m_i}{eV})^3,$$
(12)
where $`\mu _{ji,eff}^2=|\mu _{ji}^2|+|d_{ji}^2|`$. In general, there are other electromagnetic form-factors besides magnetic and dipole moments but due to gauge invariance only magnetic and dipole form-factors contribute to radiative decays . Nonzero magnetic and dipole neutrino moments lead in particular to additional contributions to weak neutrino-electron scattering, namely for $`E_em_i,m_j`$

$$\frac{d\sigma }{dE_e}=\frac{d\sigma _{st}}{dE_e}+\frac{d\sigma _\mu }{dE_e},$$
(13)
where $`\frac{d\sigma _{st}}{dE_e}`$ is the standard weak scattering cross section and

$$\frac{d\sigma _\mu }{dE_e}=\frac{\pi \alpha ^2}{m_e^2}\frac{(|\mu _{\nu ,eff}|^2}{\mu _B^2}(\frac{1}{E_em_e}\frac{1}{E_\nu })$$
(14)
is the additional contribution to the weak cross section from nonzero magnetic and dipole neutrino moments. In formula (14) $`\mu _{\nu ,eff}`$ is determined by nonzero magnetic and dipole moments. These two contributions are incoherent within the limits of vanishing neutrino mass since weak scattering preserves the neutrino helicity whereas magnetic scattering changes it helicity. Eqs.(8,9) are written in the neutrino eigenstates mass basis.

Now, consider the case of Majorana neutrinos. In the Weyl basis the interaction (9) can be rewritten in the form

$$L_\mu =\frac{1}{4}\underset{i,j=1,N}{}\overline{\nu }_{L,i}^c\sigma _{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{ij}^M\nu _{L,j}F_{\mu \nu }+h.c.$$
(15)
The magnetic moment matrix $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{ij}^M`$ is antisymmetic $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{ij}^M=\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{ji}^M`$ for Majorana neutrinos  and $`\nu _L^c(\nu _L)^c=\frac{1+\gamma _5}{2}\nu ^c`$, $`\nu ^c=C\gamma ^0\nu ^{}`$, $`C=i\gamma ^2\gamma ^0`$, $`\overline{\nu }^c=\nu C`$. Here $`\nu _i`$ are the neutrinos in the eigenstates mass basis with masses $`m_i`$. The realistic case corresponds to N=3 (electron, muon and tau neutrinos). However, recent results from a solar neutrino search, Super-Kamiokande and LSND results favour the very intriguing possibilty of the existence of a 4-th light neutrino (sterile neutrino) , so maybe $`N>3`$.

For the scattering of the neutrino $`\nu _i`$ with definite mass on the target, the contribution to the total cross section from a nonzero neutrino magnetic moment matrix is

$$\sigma _\mu (\nu _ie\mathrm{})=\underset{j}{}\sigma _\mu (\nu _ie\nu _je)\underset{j}{}|\mu _{ji}^M|^2=((\widehat{\mu }^M)^+\widehat{\mu }^M),$$
(16)
where $`\widehat{\mu }_{ij}^M=\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{ij}^M`$.

Both here and elsewhere in this paper we ignore spins and phase space factors. The total cross section is the sum of different mass eigenstate transitions combined incoherently, since in principle their contributions are distinguishable in the final state.

The relation among neutrino states in flavour and mass eigenstates bases is determined by the neutrino mixing matrix, namely

$$|\nu _{iL}^F>=\underset{j=1,N}{}U_{ij}|\nu _{jL}>$$
(17)
Here $`|\nu _{iL}^F>`$ are neutrino states in flavour basis ($`|\nu _{1L}^F>=|\nu _{eL}>`$, $`|\nu _{2L}^F>=|\nu _{\mu L}>`$, $`|\nu _{3L}^F>=|\nu _{\tau L}>`$, …). Note that we have written the expression (17) at $`t=0`$, at arbitrary time $`t`$ the matrix $`U_{ij}`$ depends on time or on the distance $`l`$ between the source of neutrinos and detector (neutrino oscillations phenomenon), namely

$$U_{ij}(l)=U_{ij}\mathrm{exp}(iE_jl)\mathrm{exp}(iEl)\times U_{ij}\mathrm{exp}[i(m_j^2/2E)l]$$
(18)
Here $`U_{ij}`$ and $`U_{ij}(l)`$ are unitary matrices.

For the scattering of the neutrino $`\nu _i^F`$ with definite flavour according to the principle of superposition, the amplitude $`A(\nu _i^Fe\nu _je)`$ is proportional to

$$A(\nu _i^Fe\nu _je)\underset{k}{}\mu _{jk}^MU_{ik}$$
(19)
The total cross section is proportional to

$$\sigma _\mu (\nu _i^Fe\mathrm{})=\underset{j}{}\sigma _\mu (\nu _i^Fe\nu _je)\underset{j}{}|\underset{k}{}\mu _{jk}^MU_{ik}|^2|\mu _{eff,i}^F|^2$$
(20)
One can rewrite $`|\mu _{eff,i}^F|^2`$ in the form

$$|\mu _{eff,i}^F|^2=(\widehat{U}^{T+}\widehat{\mu }^{M+}\widehat{\mu }^M\widehat{U}^T)_{ii}=((\widehat{\mu }^F)^+\widehat{\mu }^F)_{ii},$$
(21)
where

$$\widehat{\mu }^F=(\widehat{U^T})^+\widehat{\mu }^M\widehat{U}^T,$$
(22)
$`(\widehat{U})_{ij}=U_{ij}`$, $`(\widehat{U}^T)_{ij}=(\widehat{U})_{ji}`$, $`(\widehat{U}^+)_{ij}=(\widehat{U})_{ji}^{}`$, $`(\widehat{\mu }^M)_{ij}=\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{ij}^M`$

Experimentally, neutrinos are produced in flavour states (e.g., $`\nu _{eL}`$ or $`\nu _{\mu L}`$ neutrinos). If the distance between the source and detectror is not small they will oscillate into other flavour states. In matrix notations we have the following equation relating neutrino wave function at $`l=0`$ and at $`l=ct`$

$$|\nu _{Li}^F(l)>=\underset{j}{}(\widehat{U}^{^{}}(l))_{ij}|\nu _{Lj}^F(l=0)>,$$
(23)
where

$$\widehat{U}^{^{}}(l)=\widehat{U}(l)\widehat{U}^1(l=0)$$

For the scattering of the neutrino state $`|\nu _{Li}^F(l)>`$, which is a mixture of the flavour neutrino states, the formulae (21-22) take place with the substitution of $`\widehat{U}\widehat{U}(l)`$.

For instance, formula (20) takes the form

$`\sigma _\mu (\nu _{Li}^F(l)e\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}\sigma _\mu (\nu _{Li}^F(l)e\nu _je){\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}|\mu _{ji}^F(l)|^2`$ (24)
$`=((\widehat{\mu }^F(l))^+\widehat{\mu }^F(l))_{ii}|\mu _{eff,i}^F(l)|^2,`$
where

$$\widehat{\mu }^F(l)=(\widehat{U}(l)^T)^+\widehat{\mu }^M\widehat{U}(l)^T,$$
(25)
$$\widehat{\mu }^F(l=0)=\widehat{\mu }^F$$
(26)
Thus, for example, in the Majorana case, the total cross section for the magnetic scattering can be interpreted as a sum of cross sections corresponding to the initial to final flavor transitions combined incoherently, since in principle their contributions are distinguishable in the final state. In general, there will be dependence of the effective magnetic moment on the distance l in flavour bases 333This fact is also mentioned in ref..

For the case $`N=2`$, the neutrino magnetic mass matrix has the form $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{ij}^F=ϵ_{ij}\mu `$ ($`ϵ_{12}=ϵ_{21}=1,ϵ_{11}=ϵ_{22}=0`$) and $`\mu ^F\mu ^{F+}=|\mu ^2|\times I`$, where $`I`$ is unit matrix. Therefore the magnetic transition moment $`|\mu |`$ in flavour and mass eigenstates bases coincides and does not depend on distance $`l`$. For the most realistic case $`N=3`$ neutrino magnetic matrix $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{ij}^F`$ has three nonzero matrix elements $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{12}^F\mu _{e\mu }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{13}^F\mu _{e\tau }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_{23}^F\mu _{\mu \tau }`$ and for $`\nu _e`$, $`\nu _\mu `$, $`\nu _\tau `$ electron scattering in accordance with formulae (24-26), where the corresponding effective moments are

$$\mu _{\nu _e,eff}^2=|\mu _{e\mu }|^2+|\mu _{e\tau }|^2,$$
(27)
$$\mu _{\nu _\mu ,eff}^2=|\mu _{e\mu }|^2+|\mu _{\mu \tau }|^2,$$
(28)
$$\mu _{\nu _\tau ,eff}^2=|\mu _{e\tau }|^2+|\mu _{\mu \tau }|^2$$
(29)
Trivial inequality takes place

$$\mu _{\nu _\tau ,eff}^2\mu _{\nu _e,eff}^2+\mu _{\nu _\mu ,eff}^2$$
(30)
The trace of $`\widehat{\mu }^{F+}\widehat{\mu }^F`$ is invariant under unitary transformations linking flavour and mass eigenstates bases. For the pattern involving 3 Majorana neutrinos, therefore the following combination does not depend on the distance l and coincides for eigenstates mass and flavour bases:

$$I_3\frac{1}{2}Tr(\widehat{\mu }^{F+}\widehat{\mu }^F)=|\mu _{e\mu }|^2+|\mu _{e\tau }|^2+|\mu _{\mu \tau }|^2$$
(31)
Note that the schemes with an additional light sterile neutrino  are now rather popular due to the fact that 3 neutrinos scheme cannot explain simultaneously atmospheric, solar and LSND results. In the scheme with Majorana neutrinos it corresponds to the case $`N>3`$. Consider the case $`N=4`$ (with an additional light sterile neutrino). For such a case, in addition to nonzero matrix elements for $`3\times 3`$ matrix we have nonzero matrix elements $`\mu _{es}`$, $`\mu _{\mu s}`$, $`\mu _{\tau s}`$ describing transitions of $`\nu _e`$, $`\nu _\mu `$, $`\nu _\tau `$ neutrinos to the sterile neutrino $`\nu _s`$, and in the formulae (27-29) we have to add $`|\mu _{es}^2|`$, $`|\mu _{\mu s}^2|`$ and $`|\mu _{\tau s}^2|`$ on the right-hand sides of the equations (27), (28) and (29), respectively. The corresponding invariant (analogue of (31)) is

$$I_4=I_3+|\mu _{es}|^2+|\mu _{\mu s}|^2+|\mu _{\tau s}|^2$$
(32)
Consider briefly the case of Dirac neutrinos. The derivation of the main formulae is similar to the Majorana neutrino case except for two differences. The first is that the neutrino magnetic matrix $`\widehat{\mu }_{RL}`$ in formula (9) is not asymmetric and in general is arbitrary. The second difference is that diagonalization of neutrino mass matrix is performed as an independent unitary rotation of left-handed and right-handed neutrinos by two independent unitary matrices $`\widehat{U}_L`$ and $`\widehat{U}_R`$. The relation among neutrino magnetic moments in mass eigenstates and in flavour bases has the form

$$\widehat{\mu }_{RL}^F=\widehat{U}_R^{T+}\widehat{\mu }_{RL}\widehat{U}_L^T$$
(33)
Note that in general the flavour basis for the right-handed neutrino is not well defined and can be arbitrary. So we can work in a basis where $`\widehat{U}_R=1`$, but the main formulae for effective magnetic moments in the flavour basis do not depend on $`\widehat{U}_R`$. The effective magnetic moments for flavour neutrinos are determined by formulae analogous to (20-26), namely

$$\mu _{\nu _i,eff}^2=(\widehat{\mu }_{RL}^{F+}\widehat{\mu }_{RL}^F)_{ii}=(\widehat{U}_L^{T+}\widehat{\mu }_{RL}^+\widehat{\mu }_{RL}\widehat{U}_T)_{ii}$$
(34)
For instance, if in massive eigenstates basis Dirac neutrinos are diagonal (this scenario is used by the Particle Data group ), i.e.

$$\mu _{ij,RL}=\mu _j\delta _{ij},$$
(35)
then in the flavour basis we have

$$\mu _{\nu _i,eff}^2=\underset{j}{}|U_{ij}|^2|\mu _j|^2$$
(36)
and there is no dependence on the distance l or neutrino energy for effective magnetic moments (36) . In the general case , the effective magnetic moments for $`\nu _e`$, $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ electon scattering are determined by the flavour magnetic moment matrix, namely

$$\mu _{\nu _e,eff}^2=|\mu _{ee,RL}^F|^2+|\mu _{\mu e,RL}^F|^2+|\mu _{\tau e,RL}^F|^2,$$
(37)
$$\mu _{\nu _\mu ,eff}^2=|\mu _{\mu \mu ,RL}^F|^2+|\mu _{e\mu ,RL}^F|^2+|\mu _{\tau \mu ,RL}^F|^2,$$
(38)
$$\mu _{\nu _\tau ,eff}^2=|\mu _{\tau \tau ,RL}^F|^2+|\mu _{e\tau ,RL}^F|^2+|\mu _{\mu \tau ,RL}^F|^2$$
(39)
Note that in general $`\mu _{e\mu ,RL}\mu _{\mu e,RL}`$. For the case of Dirac neutrinos the corresponding invariant (31) is

$$Tr(\widehat{\mu }^{F+}\widehat{\mu }^F)=\mu _{\nu _e,eff}^2+\mu _{\nu _\mu ,eff}^2+\mu _{\nu _\tau ,eff}^2$$
(40)
## 3 Experimental bounds on magnetic moments

In this section we consider the following bounds on neutrino magnetic moment matrix elements resulting from reactor and accelerator experiments: 444The astrophysical bounds on neutrino magnetic moments can be found in ref..

$$\mu _{\nu _e}<1.8\times 10^{10}\mu _B$$
(41)
$$\mu _{\nu _e}^2+2.1\mu _{\nu _\mu }^2<1.16\times 10^{18}\mu _B^2$$
(42)
$$\mu _{\nu _\tau }<5.4\times 10^7\mu _B$$
(43)
from the reactor , $`\nu e`$ scattering at LAMPF  and BEBC  data, respectively. The analysis of Super-Kamiokande results allows to obtain similar or more stringent bounds , , : 555It should be noted that the bound of ref. is obtained in the flavour bases.

$`\mu _{\nu _e}<(1.62)\times 10^{10}\mu _B`$ (44)
$`\mu _{\nu _\tau }<1.6\times 10^7\mu _B`$
In the derivation of the bounds (41-43) the distance between the source and the detector was small compared to possible neutrino oscillation length so the possible influence of the neutrino oscillation on the extraction of bounds on neutrino magnetic moments (the dependence of the extracted magnetic moments on the distance between neutrino source and detector) is negligible. In experiments we measure inclusive cross sections of the flavour neutrinos scattering on target, so the experimental bounds (41-43) on diagonal neutrino magnetic moments are also valid for the corresponding effective flavour magnetic moments which are generalizations of the diagonal magnetic moments for the case of nondiagonal magnetic moments.

Consider at first the case of the 3 Majorana neutrinos. Using reactor bound (41) and formulae of Eqs.(27,28) we find that

$$|\mu _{e\mu }|,|\mu _{e\tau }|<1.8\times 10^{10}\mu _B$$
(45)
LAMPF bound (42) leads to

$$|\mu _{e\mu }|<6.1\times 10^{10}\mu _B,$$
(46)
$$|\mu _{e\tau }|<1.1\times 10^9\mu _B,$$
(47)
$$|\mu _{\mu \tau }|<7.4\times 10^{10}\mu _B,$$
(48)
Bounds (45-48) have been obtained for magnetic moments in the flavour bases. Note that from the inequalities (45-48) we find that

$$I_3=|\mu _{e\mu }|^2+|\mu _{e\tau }|^2+|\mu _{\mu \tau }|^2<0.61\times 10^{18}\mu _B^2$$
(49)
As shown in section (2) this invariant is independent on distance l between the neutrino source and detector and is the same for mass eigenstates and flavour eigenstates bases. So we find that in any basis, nondiagonal neutrino transition moments in scheme with 3 Majorana neutrinos have to be less than

$$|\mu _{ij}|<7.8\times 10^{10}\mu _B$$
(50)
In particular, from the inequality (49) and formula of Eq.(29) we find that in a scheme with 3 Majorana neutrinos the effective magnetic moment of $`\tau `$neutrino has to be less than

$$\mu _{\nu _\tau ,eff}<7.6\times 10^{10}\mu _B$$
(51)
For the scheme with additional sterile Majorana neutrinos, bounds (45-48) are also valid. From the reactor bound (41) we find that $`|\mu _{es}|<1.8\times 10^{10}\mu _B`$. From the LAMPF bound Eq.(42) we find that $`|\mu _{es}|<1.1\times 10^9\mu _B`$ and $`|\mu _{\mu s}|<7.4\times 10^{10}\mu _B`$. From BEBC bound (43) we find that $`|\mu _{\tau s}|<5.4\times 10^7\mu _B`$. Using the formula (32) one can find that in any basis (mass eigenvalue basis for instance) nonzero transition magnetic moments in the scheme with additional light Majorana neutrinos have to be less than

$$|\mu _{ij}|<5.4\times 10^7\mu _B$$
(52)
For 3 Dirac neutrinos, in addition to bounds on diagonal magnetic moments similar bounds on the transition magnetic moments can be deduced. Namely, in all bases, nondiagonal neutrino magnetic moments have to be less than $`5.4\times 10^7\mu _B`$. It should be noted that bound (44) on a diagonal magnetic moment of Dirac $`\tau `$-neutrino obtained from Super-Kamiokande data in the assumption of the nearly maximal $`\nu _\tau \nu _\mu `$ mixing leads to the same bound on $`|\mu _{\tau s}|`$ in the model with 4 Majorana neutrino ($`\nu _e`$, $`\nu _\mu `$, $`\nu _\tau `$ and $`\nu _s`$). For the model with 3 Dirac neutrino the bound of (44) gives a similar bound on transition magnetic moments $`\mu _{e\tau }`$, $`\mu _{\mu \tau }`$. For the interpretation of Super-Kamiokande data as $`\nu _\mu \nu _s`$ oscillation using the results of ref. it can be found that in 4-Majorana neutrino model bound (47) also takes place. Note, that bounds on heavy sterile neutrino transition magnetic moments were obtained from the NOMAD data in ref. .

For 3 Dirac neutrinos in the assumption of the diagonal magnetic moments in the mass eigenstates basis and with maximal $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing 666The assumption of nearely maximal $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing is the simplest interpretation of Super-Kamiokande data we find that $`|U_{1j}|^2\delta _{1j}`$, $`|U_{22}|^2|U_{23}|^2|U_{32}|^2|U_{33}|^20.5`$, $`|U_{21}|^2|U_{31}|^20`$ and as a consequence

$$\mu _{\nu _\tau ,eff}^2\mu _{\nu _\mu ,eff}^2\frac{1}{2}(\mu _2^2+\mu _3^2)$$
(53)
Using the limit (42) we obtain the bounds of Eq.(6,7) discussed above.

There are interesting proposals on the search for radiative neutrino transitions through neutrino flavour conversion in a superconducting RF cavity installed in a neutrino beam -. Consider now the application of the obtained bounds on the neutrino radiative decays taking the example of the model with 3 Majorana neutrinos. It follows from Eqs.(12,50) that

$$\tau (\nu _i\nu _j+\gamma )>3\times 10^{17}s\times (\frac{m_i^2}{|m_j^2m_i^2|})^3(\frac{eV}{m_i})^3$$
(54)
If neutrino masess $`m_i`$ and $`m_j`$ are degenerate, suppression factors for the neutrino radiative lifetime arises dramatically. For example, for $`(\frac{|m_j^2m_i^2|}{m_i^2})10^3`$ and $`m_i^21eV^2`$ the radiative neutrino lifetime is $`\tau (\nu _i\nu _j+\gamma )10^{26}`$ sec. This estimate, compared with expected sensitivity of $`10^{20}`$ sec for the same mass values in the proposed experiments, makes quite difficult for them to compete with the bound of Eq.(50).

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Prof. V.A. Matveev for the interesting discussion he had with us. The work of N.V.K. has been partly supported in Russia by RFFI grants 99-02-16956 and 99-01-00091.


format: text

text:
# Color transparency in deeply inelastic diffraction

## Abstract

We suggest a simple physical picture for the diffractive parton distributions that appear in diffractive deeply inelastic scattering. In this picture, partons impinging on the proton can have any transverse separation, but only when the separation is small can they penetrate the proton without breaking it up. By comparing the predictions from this picture with the diffractive data from HERA, we determine rough values for the small separations that dominate the diffraction process.

preprint:   PSU-TH/224 August 2000

Diffractive deeply inelastic scattering (DIS) has been extensively studied at HERA . For the theoretical description of this process, one can usefully factor the perturbative short distance physics from the non-perturbative long distance physics. In such a description, the diffractive part is long distance and is described by diffractive parton distributions. The measured diffractive structure function $`F_2^{\mathrm{diff}}`$ is a convolution of these distributions with the usual hard scattering coefficients known from inclusive DIS. This is described in detail in Ref.  and the references cited there.

One of the results of Ref.  is that the diffractive gluon distribution, although it contributes to diffractive DIS only at the next-to-leading order in $`\alpha _s`$, is extremely important in diffractive DIS because it is very large. The magnitude of its ratio to the quark distribution is found to be governed by the color factor $`C_A^2(N_c^21)/(C_F^2N_c)=27/2`$. A very large gluon distribution makes diffraction an important process to probe the onset of parton saturation  and the limits of applicability of perturbative evolution . Recent experimental observations of diffractive jet production , which are especially sensitive measurements of the gluon distribution, confirm the existence of a very large diffractive gluon component. In this paper, we build on the results of Ref.  to develop a physical picture for the diffractive gluon distribution based on the analysis of absorption (color opacity) and scattering (color transparency) effects in the diffraction process.

The diffractive gluon distribution is a product of matrix elements of the gluon measurement operator

$$\stackrel{~}{G}_a(0,y^{},\mathrm{𝟎})^{+j}=\left[𝒫\mathrm{exp}\left(ig_y^{}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x^{}A_c^+(0,y^{},\mathrm{𝟎})t_c\right)\right]_{ab}G_b(0,y^{},\mathrm{𝟎})^{+j},$$
(1)
where, in standard notation, $`G`$ is the gluon field strength, $`A`$ the vector potential, $`t`$ the generators of the adjoint representation of $`SU(3)`$, and $`𝒫`$ denotes path ordering of the exponential. As explained in Ref. , when viewed in the proton rest frame  this operator creates a state consisting of partons that have large momentum in the minus direction ($`k^\pm =(k^0\pm k^3)/\sqrt{2}`$). These partons travel a long distance, then impinge on the proton and scatter. The operator in Eq. (1) contains an eikonal line operator that is capable of absorbing gluons from the color field of the proton and is equivalent to a color octet parton moving with infinite minus-momentum. Note the correspondence with the space-time description of diffractive DIS , in which a current operator $`J^\mu (0,y^{},\mathrm{𝟎})`$ creates a state of large momentum partons that impinge on the proton and scatter. In fact, in the diffractive gluon distribution, the color octet eikonal operator is a stand-in for a quark-antiquark pair that was produced by the current but is too compact to be resolved by the color field of the proton.

The partonic system created by the gluon operator can have any transverse size when it reaches the proton. We propose here that, if the partons reach the proton at a large separation, they cannot get through the proton without breaking it up. Thus diffractive deeply inelastic scattering results mainly from the incoming partons being close together and interacting with the color field of the proton only through their color dipole moment. This would seem to make diffraction quite unlikely, but the calculation shows that the partonic wave function is large at small transverse separations between the partons. Because of the short distance behavior of the perturbative wave function, diffraction turns out to be not at all unlikely.

In the following, we first restate the result  for the diffractive gluon distribution. Then we formulate the picture for the interaction of the partonic system created by the gluon operator with the proton’s color field. We use this in conjunction with the short distance factorization of the hard scattering to calculate the diffractive structure function $`F_2^{\mathrm{diff}}`$. Finally we compare the results to experiment and extract a rough value for how close together the partons have to be in order to make it through the proton without breaking it apart.

In the notation of Fig. 1, the expression for the diffractive gluon distribution is

$$\frac{df_{g/A}^{\mathrm{diff}}(\beta ,x_{IP},t,\mu )}{dx_{IP}dt}=\frac{1}{16\pi ^3}\frac{N_c^21}{\beta (1\beta )x_{IP}^2}\frac{1}{2}\underset{s_A,s_A^{},s}{}\frac{d^2𝐤}{(2\pi )^2}|𝒢|^2$$
(2)
with

$$𝒢^{js}=\frac{1}{N_c^21}\frac{dp_A^{}^+}{(2\pi )2p_A^+}𝑑y^{}e^{i\beta x_{IP}p_A^+y^{}}p_A^{},s_A^{};k,s,a|\stackrel{~}{G}_a(0,y^{},\mathrm{𝟎})^{+j}|p_A,s_A.$$
(3)
The expression in Eqs. (2) and (3) represents a perturbative approximation in which the high momentum gluon created by the operator $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ travels to the final state without splitting into any further high momentum partons, so that there is a single final state gluon with momentum $`k`$ in addition to the final state proton. If one worked to higher orders of perturbation theory, then there could be partonic splitting and joining and the final state could contain multiple high momentum partons. We integrate over the transverse momentum $`𝐤`$ of the final state gluon; its plus momentum is set to $`k^+=(1\beta )x_{IP}p_A^+`$ so that the total plus-momentum removed from the proton is $`x_{IP}p_A^+`$. Its color $`b`$ must be $`b=a`$ since the initial and diffracted proton states are color singlets.

At large $`1/x_{IP}`$ an eikonal approximation applies. There is a wave function $`\psi `$, describing the state of the fast moving gluon as it reaches the proton. This gluon passes through the proton at transverse position $`𝚫`$ while the eikonal operator in Eq. (1) is located at transverse position $`\mathrm{𝟎}`$. The result, taken after a little manipulation from Eq. (3.38) of Ref. , is

$`𝒢^{js}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_c^21}}{\displaystyle \frac{dp_A^{}^+}{(2\pi )2p_A^+}\frac{d^2𝚫}{𝚫^2}\frac{d^2\mathbf{}}{(2\pi )^2}e^{i\mathbf{}𝚫}\frac{}{\mathrm{}^i}\frac{}{\mathrm{}^i}\psi ^{js}(\beta ,𝐤,𝐤+\mathbf{})}`$ (5)
$`\times p_A^{},s_A^{}|\mathrm{Tr}\left[1F(𝚫)F^T(\mathrm{𝟎})\right]|p_A,s_A.`$
Here the operators $`F`$ are color octet eikonal line operators:

$$F(𝐳)=𝒫\mathrm{exp}\left\{ig_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑z^{}𝒜_a^+(0,z^{},𝐳)t_a\right\}.$$
(6)
The wave function for the gluon state is

$$\psi ^{js}(\beta ,𝐤,𝐩)=\frac{\beta 𝐤^2\delta ^{js}+2(1\beta )p^jp^s}{\beta 𝐤^2+(1\beta )𝐩^2}.$$
(7)
We choose here to differentiate $`\psi `$ twice with respect to $`\mathbf{}`$. This has the effect of eliminating apparent ultraviolet divergences from the integration over $`𝐤`$ in the formulas that follow. The derivatives with respect to $`\mathbf{}`$ are compensated by a factor $`(1/𝚫^2)`$ multiplying the matrix element of the eikonal operators. The factor $`1/𝚫^2`$ does not itself produce a short distance divergence because both the matrix element and its first derivative with respect to $`𝚫`$ vanish at $`𝚫=\mathrm{𝟎}`$. See Sec. 4.1 of Ref.  for a discussion of the ultraviolet behavior in the minimal case of two gluon exchange; exchanging more gluons does not make the ultraviolet behavior worse.

Consider now the matrix element of the eikonal operators between the initial and final proton states. The initial state carries zero transverse momentum. Let $`𝐪`$ be the transverse momentum carried by the final state ($`𝐪^2t`$). We may first expand this state in terms of eigenstates of transverse position with transverse position $`𝐛`$ as

$$p_A^{},s_A^{}|=p_A^{}^+,𝐪,s_A^{}|=d^2𝐛e^{i𝐛𝐪}{}_{x}{}^{}p_A^{}^+,𝐛,s_A^{}|,$$
(8)
where the subscript $`x`$ on a state vector denotes that it is a position eigenstate. We then apply a translation to put the proton at transverse position $`\mathrm{𝟎}`$ and let the eikonal operators be at transverse positions $`𝐛`$ and $`𝐛+𝚫`$. Taking into account that the eikonal operators do not transfer any plus momentum, we define a non-perturbative function $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ as

$`(2\pi )2p_A^+\delta (p_A^{}^+p_A^+)\mathrm{\Xi }(𝐛+𝚫,𝐛;s_A^{},s_A)`$ (9)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_c^21}}{}_{x}{}^{}p_A^{}^+,\mathrm{𝟎},s_A^{}|\mathrm{Tr}[1F(𝐛+𝚫)F^T(𝐛)]|p_A^+,\mathrm{𝟎},s_A.`$ (10)
We use Eqs. (8) and (9) in Eqs. (2) and (5) to give

$`{\displaystyle \frac{df_{g/A}^{\mathrm{diff}}(\beta ,x_{IP},t,\mu )}{dx_{IP}dt}}={\displaystyle \frac{d^2𝚫}{𝚫^2}\frac{d^2𝚫^{}}{𝚫_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}d^2𝐛d^2𝐛^{}e^{i(𝐛𝐛^{})𝐪}(x_{IP},\beta ,𝚫,𝚫^{})}`$ (12)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{s_A,s_A^{}}{}}\mathrm{\Xi }^{}(𝐛^{}+𝚫^{},𝐛^{};s_A^{},s_A)\mathrm{\Xi }(𝐛+𝚫,𝐛;s_A^{},s_A)`$
where

$`(x_{IP},\beta ,𝚫,𝚫^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{16\pi ^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{N_c^21}{\beta (1\beta )x_{IP}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2𝐤}{(2\pi )^2}\frac{d^2\mathbf{}}{(2\pi )^2}e^{i\mathbf{}𝚫}\frac{d^2\mathbf{}^{}}{(2\pi )^2}e^{i\mathbf{}^{}𝚫^{}}}`$ (13)
$`\times \left[{\displaystyle \frac{}{\mathrm{}_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{k}}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\mathrm{}_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{k}}}\psi ^{js}(\beta ,𝐤,𝐤+\mathbf{}^{})\right]^{}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{}{\mathrm{}^i}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\mathrm{}^i}}\psi ^{js}(\beta ,𝐤,𝐤+\mathbf{})\right].`$ (14)
Eq. (12) provides a representation for the diffractive gluon distribution in a physically appealing form. The $`\beta `$ dependence is entirely contained in the factor $``$, which is constructed from the perturbative wave functions $`\psi `$. There are integrals over the global impact parameter of the collision ($`𝐛`$ for the amplitude and $`𝐛^{}`$ for the complex conjugate). The factor $``$ does not depend on $`𝐛`$ or $`𝐛^{}`$; these parameters merely tell where the proton is relative to the incoming partons. There are also integrals over the parton transverse separation ($`𝚫`$ for the amplitude and $`𝚫^{}`$ for its complex conjugate). The perturbative function $`/(𝚫^2𝚫_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})`$ gives the amplitudes for the partons to have separations $`𝚫`$ and $`𝚫^{}`$; then the functions $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ describe the effect of the proton’s soft color field.

If we integrate the diffractive gluon distribution (12) over $`x_{IP}`$ at fixed $`x`$ (or equivalently over $`\beta `$), this integration produces a logarithmic divergence coming from the region $`\beta =x/x_{IP}1`$. In the case of the quark distribution there is no such divergence . Then by integrating over $`\beta `$ one obtains a formula with only one separation parameter $`𝚫`$. Formulas of this kind are given, e.g., in Refs. . For the discussion that follows we are interested in the full $`\beta `$ spectrum, for which formulas with two separation parameters, $`𝚫`$ and $`𝚫^{}`$, apply.

If we integrate the diffractive gluon distribution (12) over $`t=𝐪^2`$ we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{df_{g/A}^{\mathrm{diff}}(\beta ,x_{IP},\mu )}{dx_{IP}}}=4\pi {\displaystyle \frac{d^2𝚫}{𝚫^2}\frac{d^2𝚫^{}}{𝚫_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}d^2𝐛(x_{IP},\beta ,𝚫,𝚫^{})}`$ (16)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{s_A,s_A^{}}{}}\mathrm{\Xi }^{}(𝐛+𝚫^{},𝐛;s_A^{},s_A)\mathrm{\Xi }(𝐛+𝚫,𝐛;s_A^{},s_A).`$
Now there is only one impact parameter, $`𝐛`$, but there are still two parton separation variables, $`𝚫`$ and $`𝚫^{}`$.

We now turn to the hadronic matrix element $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$. If, as in Ref. , the proton were replaced by a small meson made of heavy quarks, then perturbation theory would be applicable to compute $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$. But for a large state, such as a proton, we need to rely on a combination of perturbative and nonperturbative ideas to construct an approximation for $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$.

We first recognize that $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ is an absorption amplitude. Imagine that two high momentum gluons, represented by eikonal operators, impinge upon the proton at transverse positions $`𝐛`$ and $`𝐛+𝚫`$. Suppose that the gluons completely miss the proton. Then each of the two operators $`F`$ in $`1F(𝚫)F^T(\mathrm{𝟎})`$ can be replaced by unit operators so that $`\mathrm{\Xi }=0`$. Now, suppose that one or both of $`𝐛`$ and $`𝐛+𝚫`$ is inside the proton, with no particular relation between these positions. Then we expect that the amplitude for the proton to remain a ground state proton after the passage of the gluon(s) is approximately zero, $`p|FF^T|p0`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Xi }1\times \delta _{s_As_A^{}}`$. Thus a simple model for $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ might be

$$𝒜(𝐛+𝚫,𝐛)\delta _{s_As_A^{}}$$
(17)
where $`𝒜`$ is a smooth function such that $`𝒜0`$ if $`|𝐛+𝚫|R_p^2`$ and $`|𝐛|R_p^2`$ and $`𝒜1`$ if either $`|𝐛+𝚫|R_p^2`$ or $`|𝐛|R_p^2`$, where $`R_p`$ is the radius of the proton.

An important exception arises if $`𝚫`$ is small. Then $`F(𝐛)^T`$ is nearly the inverse of $`F(𝐛+𝚫)`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Xi }0`$. To take this color transparency effect into account, we modify our model to

$$𝒜(𝐛+𝚫,𝐛)\delta _{s_As_A^{}}[1\mathrm{exp}(\kappa _g^2𝚫^2/2)].$$
(18)
Then $`\mathrm{\Xi }0`$ for small $`𝚫`$ but for large $`𝚫`$ we retain the absorption physics explained above. Here $`1/\kappa _g`$ is a parameter that measures how close together the gluons have to be before they can traverse the proton without breaking it up. That is, $`1/\kappa _g`$ is the largest size for a color octet dipole for which the proton is transparent. We hypothesize that $`1/\kappa _g`$ is small: $`1/\kappa _gR_p.`$

In Eq. (18) we have chosen a gaussian function for reasons of simplicity. Any function that vanishes for $`\kappa _g𝚫1`$ and tends to 1 for $`\kappa _g𝚫1`$ could be used in place of $`[1\mathrm{exp}(\kappa _g^2𝚫^2/2)]`$.

We now note that the function $``$ is singular when $`𝚫`$ and $`𝚫^{}`$ become small. In fact, straightforward dimensional analysis shows that for $`|𝚫||𝚫^{}|`$, $`\text{const.}/(|𝚫||𝚫^{}|)`$. For this reason, the important contributions to the integral over $`𝚫`$ comes from small $`𝚫`$, $`|𝚫|1/\kappa _gR_p`$. In this circumstance, we can set $`𝚫`$ to zero in $`𝒜(𝐛+𝚫,𝐛)`$, giving

$$\mathrm{\Xi }(𝐛+𝚫,𝐛;s_A^{},s_A)=𝒜(𝐛,𝐛)\delta _{s_As_A^{}}[1\mathrm{exp}(\kappa _g^2𝚫^2/2)].$$
(19)
This is our model. The proton can survive, $`\mathrm{\Xi }0`$, if either $`𝐛`$ is large or $`𝚫`$ is small. The model incorporates saturation : as $`|𝚫|`$ increases, the absorption amplitude increases, but it never gets to be larger than 1. Furthermore, the important transverse separations are small .

We now use Eq. (19) in Eq. (16). The integral in $`𝐛`$ over the absorption function $`𝒜`$ must give a quantity of order $`R_p^2`$:

$$d^2𝐛|𝒜(𝐛,𝐛)|^2=\lambda _𝒜R_p^2,$$
(20)
where the precise coefficient $`\lambda _𝒜`$ depends on the detailed form of the function $`𝒜`$. In the numerical evaluations that follow we take $`R_p`$ to be the charge radius of the proton, $`R_p=0.88\mathrm{fm}`$ , and we take $`\lambda _𝒜=1`$. Using Eq. (20) and Eq. (13) for $``$ in Eq. (16), we see that

$$\frac{df_{g/A}^{\mathrm{diff}}}{dx_{IP}}=\frac{(N_c^21)\lambda _𝒜R_p^2\kappa _g^2}{x_{IP}^2}g(\beta ),$$
(21)
where $`g(\beta )`$ is a function of $`\beta `$ that we determine by calculating the integrals numerically in a suitable momentum space representation. The behavior in $`\kappa _g`$ is perhaps surprising – the larger $`\kappa _g`$, the larger the cross section. But it reflects an essential feature of the diffraction process: because of the singular nature of the wave functions the amplitude is dominated by distances of order $`1/\kappa _g`$.

Notice that the result (21) has an $`x_{IP}`$ dependence $`x_{IP}^2`$. This results from our simple treatment of the soft exchanged gluons, which we treat as having rapidities near zero in the proton rest frame. In a more sophisticated treatment, one would have a BFKL ladder of exchanged gluons with rapidities becoming large and negative along the ladder. This would lead to a dependence $`x_{IP}^{22\delta }`$ with $`\delta `$ proportional to $`\alpha _s`$. We do not pursue such a treatment here. However, in order to compare with experimental data, we suppose that the simple treatment is approximately correct for $`x_{IP}`$ of order $`x_0`$, where $`x_0`$ is small but not too small, and that there are corrections for $`x_{IP}x_0`$. Thus we multiply our result by $`x_0^{2\delta }/x^{2\delta }`$. We use the experimental value $`\delta =0.15`$  and take $`x_0=0.01`$. This gives

$$\frac{df_{g/A}^{\mathrm{diff}}}{dx_{IP}}=\frac{(N_c^21)x_0^{2\delta }\lambda _𝒜R_p^2\kappa _g^2}{x_{IP}^{2+2\delta }}g(\beta ).$$
(22)
A treatment analogous to that described for the gluon may now be applied to the quark distribution, using the appropriate quark operators as described in . Similarly to Eq. (21), the answer has the form

$$\frac{df_{q/A}^{\mathrm{diff}}}{dx_{IP}}=\frac{N_cx_0^{2\delta }\lambda _𝒜R_p^2\kappa _q^2}{x_{IP}^{2+2\delta }}q(\beta ).$$
(23)
The function $`q(\beta )`$ is different than in the gluon case due to the different lightcone wave functions $`\psi `$. The color factor is different. Finally, the scale $`\kappa _q`$ is different because color triplet eikonal operators now replace color octet operators in the functions $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$. From the color structure of these operators, we expect $`\kappa _g`$ and $`\kappa _q`$ to be roughly in the relation $`\kappa _g/\kappa _qC_A/C_F`$. Note that, together with the color factors explicitly shown in Eqs. (22) and (23), this gives back the factor $`C_A^2(N_c^21)/(C_F^2N_c)=27/2`$ of Ref.  in the ratio between the gluon and the quark distributions. Note also that, since $`\kappa _q<\kappa _g`$, the typical separation $`𝚫`$ in the case of quarks will be larger than in the case of gluons, so that the perturbative evaluation that we have used may be less reliable in the quark case.

The treatment discussed so far does not contain scaling violation. Having worked in a short-distance factorization framework, we may include the graphs that give scaling violation systematically by using next-to-leading-order hard scattering coefficients and DGLAP evolution equations, as in Ref. . We then compute predictions for the diffractive structure function $`F_2^{\mathrm{diff}}`$.

What, then, should be the starting scale $`\mu _0`$ for evolution? Evidently, $`\mu _0`$ should be roughly comparable to the physical scales $`\kappa _g`$ and $`\kappa _q`$. To go further, consider the term $`P_{qg}f_g`$ in the evolution equation for the diffractive quark distribution at scale $`\mu _0`$. The quark and antiquark have a transverse separation of order $`1/\mu _0`$. The quark-antiquark system is separated from the gluon by a larger distance, which, for us, is of order $`1/\kappa _g`$. Thus $`1/\mu _0`$ should be somewhat smaller than $`1/\kappa _g`$.

Our results for $`F_2^{\mathrm{diff}}`$ depend on $`\kappa _g`$, $`\kappa _q`$, and $`\mu _0`$. Approximate values for these scales may be extracted by comparing the predictions with experiment. Note that a very precise determination is difficult because of the uncertainty in the normalization of the model, which arises from the uncertainty in the factors $`\lambda _𝒜`$ and $`x_0^{2\delta }`$ in Eqs. (22) and (23). This normalization uncertainty affects the determination of $`\kappa _q`$ directly. The parameter $`\mu _0`$ and the ratio $`\kappa _q/\kappa _g`$ influence the shape of $`F_2^{\mathrm{diff}}`$ in $`\beta `$ and $`Q^2`$, so their determination is less directly affected.

In Fig. 2 we compare the results for $`F_2^{\mathrm{diff}}`$ with the data of Ref.  by plotting data minus theory over theory, where the theory in the two plots is the one corresponding to the two displayed sets of values for $`1/\mu _0`$, $`1/\kappa _g`$, $`1/\kappa _q`$. Recall that, for the self-consistency of the physical picture that we have discussed, we expect these distance scales to be small compared to $`R_p`$. For the case of Fig. 2a, we find that the agreement between theory and data is reasonable, given the simplicity of the model. The size $`1/\mu _0`$ of the quark-antiquark pair here is smallest and the ratio $`\kappa _g/\kappa _q`$ of the sizes of the color-triplet to the color-octet systems comes out to be in rough agreement with the expectation $`C_A/C_F`$ mentioned above. In Fig. 2b we increase the value of $`1/\mu _0`$ and then adjust $`1/\kappa _g`$ and $`1/\kappa _q`$ so as to describe the data as well as possible. We observe that the data seem to disfavor these larger distance scales: the shape of the data, in particular, is not well reproduced in this case.

It is now worth looking back at Fig. 1 and the structure of Eq. (16). The function $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$, representing the lower part of Fig. 1 and including the exchange of any number of soft gluons, is nonperturbative. We have posited a description for $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ in terms of an absorption function and a color transparency factor. The upper part of Fig. 1 is also, in general, nonperturbative, because it still contains arbitrarily large parton separations $`|𝚫|`$. Indeed, in the upper part of Fig. 1 one would expect to have not just two but several fast partons impinging on the proton, each with a large transverse separation with respect to the others. But if the separations are large, then absorption dominates the hadronic matrix element, so that central collisions are unlikely to leave the proton intact. Thus, the parton transverse separations must be smaller than the color transparency scale. If this scale is small enough, a perturbation expansion for the upper part of Fig. 1 is justified. At lowest perturbative order there are only two partons (including the eikonal line) and we obtain the calculated function $``$. At higher perturbative orders there can be multiple partons, all close together; these are the configurations that we include through radiative corrections to the hard scattering and evolution.

The results of Fig. 2 provide a justification for this expansion and lend support to the physical picture of diffractive DIS as being due to color-dipole parton systems penetrating the proton at small transverse separations. In particular, a partonic system in a configuration of a color octet dipole, which corresponds to the diffractive gluon distribution, must be especially small in transverse size. This contributes to the diffractive gluon distribution being especially large, as is consistent with the data. The picture described in this paper provides a concrete model for the mechanism through which the dominance of small size states  may be realized in diffractive DIS at HERA. More and better data will be valuable to investigate this further and decide whether or not the indications of Fig. 2 are confirmed.

We gratefully acknowledge discussions with J. Collins, M. Diehl, Z. Kunszt, A. Mueller, G. Sterman and M. Strikman. Our work is supported in part by the US Department of Energy under grants DE-FG02-90ER40577 and DE-FG03-96ER40969. F.H. acknowledges the hospitality of the University of Oregon while part of this work was being done.


text:
# Local subgroupoids II: Examples and properties KEYWORDS: local equivalence relation, local subgroupoid, coherence, holonomy, monodromy: AMS2000 Classification: 18F20,18F05,22E99,22A22,58H05

## Introduction

Any foliation gives rise to a local equivalence relation, defined by the path components of local intersections of small open sets with the leaves. Local equivalence relations were generalised to local subgroupoids in a previous paper by the first two authors , referred to hereafter as paper I. In this paper we show that a basic topological groupoid notion, that of identity star path component, leads easily to a local subgroupoid of a wide class of Lie groupoids and this generalises the local equivalence relation of a foliation. We define local subgroupoids $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ for certain open covers $`𝒰`$ of the object space of a Lie groupoid $`Q`$. Further, we show that the theory of coherence, which is prominent in the papers of Rosenthal , generalises nicely to the local subgroupoid case. The application of paper I to the holonomy and monodromy Lie groupoids of local subgroupoids (to be dealt with elsewhere) requires a condition on the local subgroupoid of having a ‘globally adapted atlas’. We develop the ‘coherence’ theory for giving conditions on $`𝒰`$ for it to be globally adapted to the local subgroupoid $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ (Corollary 7.9). This is related to the construction of a locally Lie groupoid from a foliation .

We also develop similar theory for Lie groupoids with a ‘path connection’  $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ leading to a local subgroupoid $`c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)`$ for certain open covers $`𝒰`$.

This paper is strongly influenced by papers of Rosenthal  on local equivalence relations, a concept due originally to Grothendieck and Verdier  in a series of exercises presented as open problems concerning the construction of a certain kind of topos. The concept was investigated more recently by Kock and Moerdijk . The main aims of the papers  are towards the connections with sheaf theory and topos theory.

The starting point of our investigation was to notice that an equivalence relation on $`X`$ is a wide subgroupoid of the groupoid $`X\times X`$. However an equivalence relation is just one of the standard examples of a groupoid, and so it natural to consider the corresponding theory for subgroupoids of a given groupoid $`Q`$. The expectation is that this will allow applications to combinations of foliation and bundle theory, since a standard example of a Lie groupoid is the Ehresmann symmetry groupoid of a principal bundle .

In the case $`Q`$ is the indiscrete groupoid $`X\times X`$, we recover the well known concept of local equivalence relation,

The remarkable fact is that the theory goes very smoothly, and so suggests it is a natural generalisation of the foliation case, and one which illuminates some constructions in that area.

## 1 Local subgroupoids: definitions and examples

We first recall some definitions from .

Consider a groupoid $`Q`$ on a set $`X`$ of objects, and suppose also $`X`$ has a topology. For any open subset $`U`$ of $`X`$ we write $`Q|U`$ for the full subgroupoid of $`Q`$ on the object set $`U`$. Let $`L_Q(U)`$ denote the set of all subgroupoids of $`Q|U`$ with object set $`U`$ (these are called wide subgroupoids of $`Q|U`$). For $`VU`$, there is a restriction map $`L_{UV}:L_Q(U)L_Q(V)`$ sending $`H`$ in $`L_Q(U)`$ to $`H|V`$. This gives $`L_Q`$ the structure of presheaf on $`X`$.

We interpret the sheaf $`p_Q:_QX`$ constructed in the usual way from the presheaf $`L_Q`$.

For $`xX`$, the stalk $`p_{Q}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}(x)`$ of $`_Q`$ has elements the germs $`[U,H_U]_x`$ where $`U`$ is open in $`X`$, $`xU`$, $`H_U`$ is a wide subgroupoid of $`Q|U`$, and the equivalence relation $`_x`$ yielding the germs at $`x`$ is that $`H_U_xK_V`$, where $`K_V`$ is wide subgroupoid of $`Q|V`$, if and only if there is a neighbourhood $`W`$ of $`x`$ such that $`WUV`$ and $`H_U|W=K_V|W`$. The topology on $`_Q`$ is the usual sheaf topology, with a sub-base of sets $`\{[U,H]_x:xU\}`$ for all open $`U`$ of $`X`$ and wide subgroupoids $`H`$ of $`G|U`$.

###### Definition 1.1

A local subgroupoid of $`Q`$ on the topological space $`X`$ is a continuous global section of the sheaf $`p_Q:_QX`$ associated to the presheaf $`L_Q`$.

Two standard examples of $`Q`$ are $`Q=X`$, $`Q=X\times X`$, where $`X\times X`$ has the multiplication $`(x,y)(y,z)=(x,z)`$. In the first case, $`L_X`$ is already a sheaf and $`_XX`$ is a bijection. More generally, we have:

###### Proposition 1.2

If $`Q`$ is a bundle of groups, then $`L_Q`$ is a sheaf.

Proof: By our assumption, if $`U`$ is a subset of $`X`$ then a wide subgroupoid $`H|U`$ of $`Q|U`$ is uniquely defined by the values $`H(x)`$ for all $`xU`$. This easily implies the usual two compatibility conditions for a sheaf. $`\mathrm{}`$

In the case $`Q`$ is the indiscrete groupoid $`X\times X`$ the local subgroupoids of $`Q`$ are the local equivalence relations on $`X`$, as mentioned in the Introduction. It is known that $`L_{X\times X}`$ is in general not a sheaf .

###### Definition 1.3

If $`G`$ is a wide subgroupoid of the groupoid $`Q`$ on $`X`$, then $`loc(G)`$ is the local subgroupoid defined by

$$loc(G)(x)=[X,G]_x.$$

This gives a wide and important class of local subgroupoids, but we are more interested in those which derive from connectivity considerations on a topological groupoid. For this we need to discuss atlases for local subgroupoids, which is the major way of giving a local subgroupoid.

###### Definition 1.4

An atlas  $`𝒰_H=\{(U_i,H_i):iI\}`$ for a local subgroupoid consists of an open cover $`𝒰=\{U_i:iI\}`$ of $`X`$, and for each $`iI`$ a wide subgroupoid $`H_i`$ of $`Q|U_i`$ such that the following compatibility condition holds:

1. Comp$`(H)`$: for all $`i,jI,xU_iU_j`$ there is an open set $`W`$ such that $`xWU_iU_j`$ and $`H_i|W=H_j|W`$.

The local subgroupoid $`s`$ of the atlas is then well defined by $`s(x)=[U_i,H_i]_x,xX`$.

The above atlas is compatible with an atlas $`𝒰_{}^{}{}_{H^{}}{}^{}=\{(U_j^{},H_j^{}):jJ\}`$ if for all $`iI,jJ`$ and $`xU_iU_j^{}`$ there is an open set $`W`$ such that $`xWU_iU_j^{}`$ and $`H_i|W=H_j^{}|W`$. Clearly, two compatible atlases define the same local subgroupoid.

It is well known from general sheaf theory that any local subgroupoid has a compatible atlas. Note also that the atlas $`\{(X,H)\}`$ with a single element determines the local subgroupoid $`loc(H)`$. So the atlas is a crucial part of the construction of a local subgroupoid $`s`$.

## 2 The star path component of a topological groupoid

A key concept for topological groups is the path component of the identity. The analogue for topological groupoids is the star identity path component.

###### Definition 2.1

Let $`Q`$ be a topological groupoid. If $`x\mathrm{𝖮𝖻}(Q)`$ we write $`\mathrm{St}_Qx`$ for the star of $`Q`$ at $`x`$, namely the union of all the $`Q(x,y)`$ for $`y\mathrm{𝖮𝖻}(Q)`$. The star identity path component $`C_1(Q)`$ of $`Q`$ consists of all $`gQ`$ such that if $`x=\alpha (g)`$ then there is a path in $`\mathrm{St}_Qx`$ joining $`g`$ to the identity $`1_x`$. Such a path is called a star path. We say $`Q`$ is star path connected  if $`Q=C_1(Q)`$.

###### Proposition 2.2

The star identity path component of $`Q`$ is a subgroupoid of $`Q`$.

Proof: Write $`C`$ for this star identity component. Let $`gQ(x,y),hQ(y,z)`$ and suppose also $`g,hC`$. Then there are paths $`l_t`$ in $`\mathrm{St}_Qx`$, $`m_t`$ in $`\mathrm{St}_Qy`$ such that $`l_0=g,l_1=1_x,m_0=h,m_1=1_y`$. Hence $`g.m_t`$ is a path in $`\mathrm{St}_Qx`$ joining $`gh`$ to $`g`$, and this composed with $`l_t`$ joins $`gh`$ to $`1_x`$. So $`C`$ is closed under composition.

If $`gC(x,y)`$ and $`l_t`$ joins $`g`$ to $`1_x`$ then $`g^1l_{1t}`$ joins $`g^1`$ to $`1_y`$. So $`C`$ is a subgroupoid of $`Q`$.   $`\mathrm{}`$

Note that \[13, Example II.3.7, p46\] gives an example where $`C_1(Q)`$ is not normal in $`Q`$.

We will later need the following.

###### Proposition 2.3

Let $`Q`$ be star path connected and let $`𝒰`$ be an open cover of $`X`$. Then $`Q`$ is generated by the subgroupoids $`C_1(Q|U)`$ for all $`U𝒰`$.

Proof: Let $`g\mathrm{St}_Qx`$. Then there is a path $`\lambda `$ in $`\mathrm{St}_Qx`$ from $`g`$ to $`1_x`$. Let $`\mu =\beta \lambda `$. By the Lebesgue covering lemma, we can write $`\mu =\mu _1+\mathrm{}+\mu _n`$ where each $`\mu _r`$ lie in an open set $`U_r`$ of $`𝒰`$ for $`r=1,\mathrm{},n`$. Then we can write $`\lambda =\lambda _1+\mathrm{}+\lambda _n`$ where $`\beta \lambda _r=\mu _r,r=1,\mathrm{},n`$, and $`\lambda _r`$ is a path in $`\mathrm{St}_QxU_r`$ for $`r=1,\mathrm{},n`$. Let $`g_r=\lambda _r(0)+\lambda _r(1)`$. Then $`g_rC_1(Q|U_r)`$ and $`g=g_1+\mathrm{}+g_n`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Now we recall some major examples of Lie groupoids.

###### Example 2.4

Let $``$ be a principal bundle $`p:EB`$ with group $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Then $`E\times E`$ is certainly a topological groupoid, and so also is its quotient $`Q=E\times _GE`$ by the diagonal action of the topological group $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. If $`b,b^{}B`$, we can by choosing a point in $`p^1(b)`$, identify $`Q(b,b^{})`$ with the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-maps $`p^1(b)p^1(b^{})`$. For this reason, we also write $`\mathrm{𝖲𝗒𝗆}()`$ for $`Q`$. In the case $``$ is locally trivial, and assuming $`X`$ is a manifold, the topology may also be constructed from this alternative description, since the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-maps $`p^1(b)p^1(b^{})`$ may, again by choosing a point in $`p^1(b)`$, be identified with the elements of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. It is this description we now use.

Consider in particular the double cover of the circle $`p:S^1S^1`$ given by $`zz^2`$. In this case $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the cyclic group of order 2. Let $`Q=\mathrm{𝖲𝗒𝗆}(p)`$.

This groupoid $`Q`$ is star path connected. For suppose $`gQ(z,w)`$. Let $`\lambda `$ be a path of shortest length in $`S^1`$ from $`z`$ to $`w`$ (if $`z=w`$ then there are two such paths). Let $`uS^1`$ satisfy $`u^2=z`$. Since $`p`$ is a covering map, there are unique paths $`\lambda ^+,\lambda ^{}`$ starting at $`u,u`$ and covering $`\lambda `$. Let $`v=\lambda ^+(1)`$. Then $`g`$ is a bijection $`\{u,u\}\{v,v\}`$. If $`g(u)=v`$, then the pair of paths $`\lambda ^+,\lambda ^{}`$ define a star path from the identity on $`\{u,u\}`$ to $`g`$. If $`g(u)=v`$, then such a path is determined by $`\lambda ^{}`$, the shortest path joining $`z`$ to $`w`$ in the opposite direction round $`S^1`$, and its corresponding lifts.

However, if $`U=S^1`$ with a single point removed, then $`Q|U`$ is not star-connected, since if $`\lambda `$ is a path joining $`z`$ to $`w`$ in $`U`$, then $`\lambda ^{}`$ is not a path in $`U`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Example 2.5

Let $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ be a Lie group acting smoothly on the right of a $`𝒞^r`$-manifold $`X`$. Form the Lie action groupoid $`Q=X\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Even if $`Q`$ is star path connected, this is not necessarily so for $`Q|U`$ for all open subsets $`U`$ of $`X`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 3 Local subgroupoids and star path connectivity

The previous notions give us our major examples of new and interesting local subgroupoids.

###### Example 3.1

Consider an equivalence relation $`E`$ on the space $`X`$. Then for each open set $`U`$ of $`X`$ we have an equivalence relation $`E|U`$ on $`U`$ and we can consider the partition of $`U`$ given by the path components of the equivalence classes of $`E|U`$. In general, this will not give us a local equivalence relation. Instead we need to assume given an open cover $`𝒰=\{U_i:iI\}`$ of $`X`$ satisfying the compatibility condition that for all $`i,jI,xU_iU_j`$ there is an open set $`W`$ such that $`xWU_iU_j`$ and the path components of $`E|W`$ are the intersections with $`W`$ of the path components of the classes of each of $`E|U_i,E|U_j`$. The resulting local equivalence relation will be written $`c_1(E,𝒰)`$. The compatibility condition is satisfied in for example equivalence relations given by the leaves of a foliation on a manifold, and is the standard example of the local equivalence relation defined by a foliation. $`\mathrm{}`$

We now consider similar questions for topological groupoids.

Of course if $`G`$ is a wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$, then so also is $`C_1(G)`$ and then $`loc(C_1(G))`$ is a local subgroupoid of $`Q`$.

Suppose $`Q`$ is star path connected, that is $`Q=C_1(Q)`$. Let $`X=\mathrm{𝖮𝖻}(Q)`$ and let $`U`$ be a subset of $`X`$. In general $`Q|U`$ need not be star path connected, as we show below. Further, while $`C_1(Q|U)C_1(Q)|U`$, in general we do not have equality here. Such a condition is needed locally to obtain the local subgroupoid $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ defined below.

###### Definition 3.2

An open cover $`𝒰=\{U_i:iI\}`$ of $`X`$ is said to be path compatible  with a topological groupoid $`Q`$ on $`X`$ if for all $`i,jI,xU_iU_j`$ there is an open set $`W`$ such that $`xWU_iU_j`$ and

$$C_1(Q|U_i)|W=C_1(Q|U_j)|W.$$

In this case, the local subgroupoid $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ is defined to have value $`[U_i,C_1(Q|U_i)]_x`$ at $`xU_i`$.

The next proposition gives useful sufficient conditions for $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ to be defined.

###### Proposition 3.3

Let $`Q`$ be a topological groupoid on $`X`$ and suppose there is an open cover $`𝒰=\{U_i:iI\}`$ of $`X`$ such that for all $`i,jI`$ and $`xU_iU_j`$ there is an open set $`W_x`$ such that $`xW_xU_iU_j`$ and there are groupoid retractions $`r_{i,W_x}:Q|U_iQ|W_x,r_{j,W_x}:Q|U_jQ|W_x`$ over retractions $`U_iW_x,U_jW_x`$. Then a local subgroupoid $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ is well defined by for $`iI,xU_i,x[U_i,C_1(Q|U_i)]_x`$.

Proof: The retractions ensure the compatibility condition, since if $`x,yW`$ and if $`\lambda `$ is a path in $`\mathrm{St}_{Q|U_i}`$ joining $`1_x`$ to the element $`g:xy`$ of $`Q|W`$, then $`r_{i,W}\lambda `$ is a path in $`\mathrm{St}_{Q|W}`$ joining $`1_x`$ to $`g`$. So $`C_1(Q|U_i)|W=C_1(Q|W)`$, and similarly for $`j`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let $`Q`$ be a topological groupoid on $`X`$. Then $`Q`$ is called locally trivial if for all $`xX`$ there is an open set $`U`$ containing $`x`$ and a section $`s:U\mathrm{St}_Gx`$ of $`\beta `$. Thus $`\beta s=1_U`$ and for each $`yU`$, $`\alpha (s(y))=x`$, i.e. $`s(y):xy`$ in $`Q`$. We recall the following standard result (see for example ).

###### Proposition 3.4

Let $`Q`$ be a topological groupoid on $`X`$ and $`U`$ be an open subset of $`X`$. If $`s:U\mathrm{St}_Qx`$ is a continuous section of $`\beta `$ for some $`xU`$, then the topological groupoid $`Q|U`$ is topologically isomorphic to the product groupoid $`Q(x)\times (U\times U)`$, and if $`xWU`$, then any retraction $`UW`$ is covered by a retraction $`Q|UQ|W`$.

Proof: Remark that the groupoid multiplication on $`Q(x)\times (U\times U)`$ is defined by

$$(g,(y,z))(h,(z,w))=(gh,(y,w)).$$

Define

$$\varphi :Q|UG(x)\times (U\times U),g(s(y)gs(z)^1,(y,z))$$

where $`y=\alpha (g)`$ and $`z=\beta (g)`$. Since $`s`$ is continuous, $`\varphi `$ is clearly an isomorphism of topological groupoids.

The last part follows easily. $`\mathrm{}`$

We have emphasised these results, despite their simple proofs, because they have useful applications for example to manifold and bundle theory.

If $`s`$ is a local subgroupoid of $`Q`$ defined by an atlas $`𝒰=\{(U_i,H_i):iI\}`$ and $`U`$ is an open subset of $`X`$ then $`s|U`$ is the local subgroupoid of $`Q|U`$ defined by the atlas $`𝒰U=\{(U_iU,H_i|(U_iU)):iI\}`$. It is easy to verify this is an atlas, and as a section $`s|U`$ is just the restriction of $`s`$ to the open subset $`U`$.

Suppose now that we have the local subgroupoid $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ defined by the open cover $`𝒰`$, and $`U`$ is an open subset of $`X`$. We will later need a result which follows easily from compatibility :

###### Proposition and Definition 3.5

The equality

$$c_1(Q,𝒰)|U=c_1(Q|U,𝒰U)$$

holds if for any $`i,jI`$ and $`xU_iU_jU`$ there is an open set $`W`$ such that $`xWU_iU_jU`$ and $`C_1(Q|U_i)|W=C_1(Q|U_jU)|W`$. If this condition holds for all open sets $`U`$ of $`X`$, then we say that the cover $`𝒰`$ is path local for $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 3.6

There is a variation of the local subgroupoid $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ in which the paths in $`Q`$ which are used are controlled, for example to belong to a given class, or to derive from the paths in $`X`$ in a specified way. We give an example of this in the next section. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 Path connections

The purpose of this section is to give new examples of local subgroupoids with a possibility of working towards relating the concepts of holonomy in foliation theory and in bundle theory.

Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)`$ denote the path space of a topological space $`X`$. Let $`Q`$ be a topological groupoid over $`X`$. A path connection  $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in $`Q`$ is a continuous map

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }:\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)\mathrm{\Lambda }(Q),\lambda \mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )$$

satisfying the following conditions

1. $`\alpha (\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(t))=\lambda (0)`$ and $`\beta (\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(t))=\lambda (t)`$, $`t[0,1]`$
2. the transport condition: If

$$\psi :[0,1][t_0,t_1][0,1]$$

is a homeomorphism, then

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )\psi =\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(\psi (0))\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda \psi ).$$

The second condition means

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(\psi (t))=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(\psi (0))\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda \psi )(t)$$

for $`t[0,1]`$,

By taking the homeomorphism $`\psi `$ to be the identity map $`\psi :[0,1][0,1]`$ it follows from the condition (ii) that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(0)=1_{\lambda (0)}.`$ Let $`\lambda ,\mu \mathrm{\Lambda }(X)`$ and $`\lambda (1)=\mu (0)`$, that is the composition $`\lambda +\mu `$ is defined, then we have $`\lambda =(\lambda +\mu )\psi _0`$ and $`\mu =(\lambda +\mu )\psi _1`$ where $`\psi _0(t)=\frac{1}{2}t`$ and $`\psi _1(t)=\frac{1}{2}t+\frac{1}{2}`$. Moreover applying (ii) to the path $`\lambda +\mu `$ and $`\psi _0`$ and then applying to $`\lambda +\mu `$ and $`\psi _1`$ we obtain

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda +\mu )(t)`$ $`=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(2t)\hfill & 0t\frac{1}{2}\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )(2t1)\hfill & \frac{1}{2}t1.\hfill \end{array}`$
In particular
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda +\mu )(1)`$ $`=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )(1).`$
Let $`Q`$ be a topological groupoid on $`X`$ with a continuous path connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)\mathrm{\Lambda }(Q).`$ Let $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ be the set of all $`gQ`$ such that if $`\alpha (g)=x`$ then there is a path $`\lambda `$ in $`X`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )`$ joins $`g`$ to the identity $`1_x`$ at $`x`$, that is, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(0)=1_x`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(1)=g`$. Then we prove the following proposition.

###### Proposition 4.1

$`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ is a wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$.

Proof: Let $`g,hC_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ such that $`gh`$ is defined in $`Q`$. Then there are paths $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$ joining $`g`$ to $`1_{\alpha (g)}`$ and $`h`$ to $`1_{\alpha (h)}`$ respectively. Here note that $`\lambda (0)=\alpha (g)`$, $`\lambda (1)=\beta (g)`$ and $`\mu (0)=\alpha (h)`$, $`\mu (1)=\beta (h)`$. So the composition $`\lambda +\mu `$ of the paths is defined and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda +\mu )(0)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(0)=1_{\alpha (g)}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda +\mu )(1)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )(1)=gh`$. So $`ghC_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$. That means $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ is closed under the groupoid composition.

If $`gC_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ with $`\alpha (g)=x`$ then there is a path $`\lambda `$ in $`X`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(0)=1_x`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(1)=g`$. Define a path $`\overline{\lambda }`$ in $`X`$ such that $`\overline{\lambda }(t)=\lambda (1t)`$. Then $`\overline{\lambda }(t)=(\lambda \psi )(t)`$ with $`\psi (t)=1t`$. By the transport law we have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(\psi (t))=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\overline{\lambda })(t)`$ where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(1)=g`$. So we have

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\overline{\lambda })(0)=g^1\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(1)=g^1g=1_y$$

and

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\overline{\lambda })(1)=g^1(\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(0)=g^11_x=g^1$$

So $`g^1C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$. Hence $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ is a wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We also need an analogue of Proposition 2.3.

###### Proposition 4.2

If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a path connection on the topological groupoid $`Q`$ and $`𝒰`$ is an open cover of $`X`$, then $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ is generated by the family $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U)`$ for all $`U𝒰`$.

Proof: If $`gC_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ is joined to $`1_x`$ by the path $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )`$, then we can write $`\mu =\mu _1+\mathrm{}+\mu _n`$ where each $`\mu _r`$ lies in some set $`U_r`$ of $`𝒰`$. Let $`g_r=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu _r)(0)+\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu _r)(1)`$. Then $`g_rC_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_r)`$ and $`g=g_1+\mathrm{}+g_n`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

If $`Q`$ is a topological groupoid on $`X`$ with a path connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)\mathrm{\Lambda }(Q)`$ then of course $`loc(C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q))`$ is a local subgroupoid. However we would like an analogue of $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ and this needs extra conditions. In fact the existence of a smooth path connection for the groupoid $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}(p)`$ of a principal bundle $`p:EB`$ relies on the existence of an infinitesimal connection (see , ) which itself requires extra structure on the space involved.

We give some conditions which are sufficient for $`c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)`$ to be well defined.

We suppose given an open cover $`𝒰=\{U_i:iI\}`$ for $`X`$ and for each $`iI`$ a collection $`geod(U_i)`$ of paths in $`U_i`$ – an element $`\lambda geod(U_i)`$ with $`\lambda (0)=x`$, $`\lambda (1)=y`$ is called a “geodesic path” from $`x`$ to $`y`$. We suppose

1. if $`x,yU_i`$, then there is a unique geodesic path $`geod_i(x,y)`$ from $`x`$ to $`y`$.
2. if $`x,yU_iU_j`$ then $`geod_i(x,y)=geod_j(x,y)`$.

We also need the connection to be “flat” for this structure in the sense that if $`\lambda :xy`$ is any path in $`U_i`$ then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(1)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(geod_i(x,y))(1)`$.

###### Proposition 4.3

Under the above atlas assumptions, there is a local subgroupoid $`c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)`$ defined by

$$c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)(x)=[U_i,C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_i)]_x.$$

Proof: We have to prove that if $`xU_iU_j`$ then

$$[U_i,C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_i)]_x=[U_j,C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_j)]_x.$$

This means there is an open neighbourhood $`W`$ of $`x`$ in $`U_iU_j`$ such that

$$C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_i)|W=C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_j)|W.$$

Let $`W`$ be an open neighbourhood of $`x`$ in $`U_iU_j`$. Let $`gC_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_i)|W`$ with $`\alpha (g)=x`$ and $`\beta (g)=y`$. So there is a path $`\lambda :xy`$ in $`U_i`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda )(1)=g`$. Let $`\lambda _i:xy`$ be the geodesic path. So $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda _i)(1)=g`$, by the flat condition, and so $`gC_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_j)|W`$. Hence $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_i)|WC_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_j)|W`$. Since the converse proof is similar we have $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_i)|W=C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_j)|W`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Suppose now that we have the local subgroupoid $`c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)`$ defined by the open cover $`𝒰`$, and $`U`$ is an open subset of $`X`$. We will later need a result which follows easily from compatibility :

###### Proposition and Definition 4.4

The equality

$$c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)|U=c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U,𝒰U)$$

holds if for any $`i,jI`$ and $`xU_iU_jU`$ there is an open set $`W`$ such that $`xWU_iU_jU`$ and $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_i)|W=C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U_jU)|W`$. If this condition holds for all open sets $`U`$ of $`X`$, then we say that the cover $`𝒰`$ is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ path local for $`c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 5 Partial orders and induced morphisms

We first establish some elementary but essential basic theory.

The set $`L_Q(X)`$ of wide subgroupoids of $`Q`$ is a poset under inclusion. We write $``$ for this partial order. This poset has a top element namely $`Q`$ and a bottom element namely the discrete groupoid $`X`$.

Let $`\mathrm{𝐋𝐨𝐜}(Q)`$ be the set of local subgroupoids of $`Q`$. Let $`xX`$. We define a partial order on the stalks $`p_{Q}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}(x)=(_Q)_x`$ by $`[U^{},H^{}]_x[U,H]_x`$ if there is an open neighbourhood $`W`$ of $`x`$ such that $`WUU^{}`$ and $`H^{}|W`$ is a subgroupoid of $`H|W`$. Clearly this partial order is well defined. Its bottom element is of the form $`[U,H]_x`$ where $`H`$ is discrete, and its top element is of the form $`[U,Q|U]_x`$. This partial order induces a partial order on $`\mathrm{𝐋𝐨𝐜}(Q)`$ by $`st`$ if and only if $`s(x)t(x)`$ for all $`xX`$.

The major purpose of the next topic is to relate local subgroupoids of $`Q`$ and local equivalence relations on $`\mathrm{𝖮𝖻}(Q)`$. This seems an area requiring much more development, and we hope will be the start of new ways of relating bundle and foliation theory.

Suppose given two groupoids $`Q,H`$ and a groupoid morphism $`\varphi :QH`$ on $`X`$, which is the identity on objects. Then we obtain morphisms of presheaves $`\varphi ^{}:L_QL_H`$, $`\varphi _{}:L_HL_Q`$ as follows.

Let $`U`$ be open in $`X`$. Then $`\varphi _{}:L_Q(U)L_H(U)`$ is given by $`\varphi (K)`$ is the image of $`KL_Q(U)`$ by $`\varphi `$. Here $`K`$ is a wide subgroupoid of $`Q|U`$, and so its image $`\varphi (K)`$ is a subgroupoid of $`H|U`$, since $`Ob(\varphi )`$ is injective and is clearly wide.

Further $`\varphi ^{}:L_H(U)L_Q(U)`$ is given by $`\varphi ^{}(K^{})=\varphi ^1(K^{})`$, for $`K^{}L_H(U)`$.

Hence we get induced morphism of sheaves $`\varphi _{}:_Q_H,`$ $`\varphi ^{}:_H_Q`$.

In particular, we get for a groupoid $`Q`$ an ‘anchor’ morphism of groupoids $`A:QX\times X`$ and so sheaf morphisms

$$A_{}:_Q_{X\times X},A^{}:_{X\times X}_Q.$$

Hence a local subgroupoid $`s`$ of $`Q`$ yields a local equivalence relation $`A_{}(s)`$ on $`X`$, and a local equivalence relation $`r`$ on $`X`$ yields a local subgroupoid $`A^{}(r)`$ of $`Q`$. This gives further examples of local subgroupoids.

Clearly also $`\varphi _{}`$, $`\varphi ^{}`$ are order preserving on stalks for any morphism $`\varphi :QH`$ of groupoids over $`X`$. Hence they induce morphism of posets

$$\varphi _{}:\mathrm{𝐋𝐨𝐜}(Q)\mathrm{𝐋𝐨𝐜}(H),\varphi ^{}:\mathrm{𝐋𝐨𝐜}(H)\mathrm{𝐋𝐨𝐜}(Q).$$

Further, $`s\varphi ^{}r`$ if and only if $`\varphi _{}sr`$. This can be expressed by saying that $`\varphi _{}`$ is left adjoint to $`\varphi ^{}`$.

## 6 Coherence for wide subgroupoids and local subgroupoids

We now fix a groupoid $`Q`$ on $`X`$, so that $`L_Q(X)`$ is the set of wide subgroupoids of $`Q`$, with its inclusion partial order, which we shall write $``$.

Clearly $`loc_Q`$ as defined in Definition 1.3 gives a poset morphism

$$loc_Q:L_Q(X)\mathrm{𝐋𝐨𝐜}(Q).$$

###### Definition 6.1

Let $`s`$ be a local subgroupoid of $`Q`$. Then $`glob(s)`$ is the wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$ which is the intersection of all wide subgroupoids $`H`$ of $`Q`$ such that $`sloc(H)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We think of $`glob(s)`$ as an approximation to $`s`$ by a global subgroupoid.

###### Proposition 6.2

1. $`loc`$ and $`glob`$ are morphisms of posets.
2. For any wide subgroupoid $`H`$ of $`Q`$, $`glob(loc(H))H`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

The proofs are clear.

However, $`sloc(glob(s))`$ need not hold. Rosenthal in  gives the example of the local equivalence relation $`s=loc(E)`$ where $`E`$ is the equivalence relation $`aEb`$ if and only if $`a=\pm b`$. Here is a similar example.

###### Example 6.3

Let $`Q`$ be a groupoid on $``$ such that all $`x`$ with $`x0`$ there is a neighbourhood $`U`$ of $`x`$ such that $`Q|U`$ is a bundle of groups, while no such neighbourhood of $`0`$ exists. Let $`s=loc(Q)`$. Then $`H=glob(s)`$ on $`\{0\}`$ coincides with $`Q`$ on this set, and in fact $`H`$ is the bundle of groups $`Q(x)`$ for all $`x`$. It follows that $`s(0)>loc(H)(0)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We therefore adapt from  some notions of coherence.

###### Definition 6.4

Let $`s`$ be a local subgroupoid of $`Q`$ on $`X`$.

1. $`s`$ is called coherent if $`sloc(glob(s))`$.
2. $`s`$ is called globally coherent if $`s=loc(glob(s))`$.
3. $`s`$ is called totally coherent if for every open set $`U`$ of $`X`$, $`s|U`$ is coherent.

###### Definition 6.5

Let $`HL_Q(X)`$, so that $`H`$ is a wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$.

1. $`H`$ is called locally coherent if $`loc(H)`$ is coherent.
2. $`H`$ is called coherent if $`H=glob(loc(H))`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Example 6.6

Let $`Q`$ be a groupoid on the discrete space $`X`$. Then $`glob(loc(Q))=Inn(Q)`$, the groupoid of vertex groups of $`Q`$. Thus in general, $`Q`$ is not coherent. $`\mathrm{}`$

At another extreme we have:

###### Proposition 6.7

Let $`Q`$ be a bundle of groups. Then any local subgroupoid of $`Q`$ is globally coherent, and any wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$ is coherent.

Proof: Let $`s`$ be a local subgroupoid of $`Q`$ and let $`\{(U_i,H_i):iI\}`$ be an atlas for $`s`$. Then if $`xU_i`$, we have $`s(x)=[U_i,H_i]_x`$. Let $`H(x)=H_i(x)`$. If $`xU_iU_j`$, there is a neighbourhood $`W`$ of $`x`$ such that $`WU_iU_j`$ and $`H_i|W=H_j|W`$, and hence $`H_i(x)=H_j(x)`$. Thus $`H`$ is independent of the choices. Also $`H|U_i=H_i`$. Hence $`loc(H)(x)=[U_i,H_i]_x`$, and so $`loc(H)=s`$, $`H=glob(s)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Coherence of $`s`$ says that in passing between local and global information nothing is lost due to collapsing. Notice also that these definitions depend on the groupoid $`Q`$.

###### Proposition 6.8

$`loc`$ and $`glob`$ induce morphisms of posets from the locally coherent subgroupoids of $`Q`$ to the coherent local subgroupoids of $`Q`$, and on these posets $`glob`$ is left adjoint to $`loc`$. Further, $`glob`$ and $`loc`$ give inverse isomorphisms between the posets of coherent subgroupoids and of globally coherent local subgroupoids.

Proof: Let $`H`$ be a locally coherent subgroupoid of $`Q`$ and let $`s`$ be a coherent local subgroupoid of $`Q`$. By the definition of locally coherent subgroupoid $`loc(H)`$ is a coherent local subgroupoid of $`Q`$.

Conversely, let $`K=glob(s)`$. Since $`s`$ is coherent, $`sloc(K)`$. Since $`glob`$ is a poset morphism, $`glob(s)glob(loc(K))`$, i.e., $`Kglob(loc(K))`$. Since $`loc`$ is also a poset morphism,

$$loc(K)loc(glob(loc(K))).$$

So $`loc(K)`$ is a coherent local subgroupoid, and $`K`$ is locally coherent.

The adjointness relation is that $`glob(s)Hsloc(H).`$ The implication $``$ follows from the fact that for all $`H`$ we have $`glob(loc(H))H`$. The implication $``$ follows from the coherence of $`s`$.

The final statement is obvious. $`\mathrm{}`$

Note in particular that coherence of $`H`$ implies local coherence of $`H`$.

###### Proposition 6.9

Let $`Q`$ be a topological groupoid on $`X`$ and $`G`$ a star path connected wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$. Then $`G`$ is coherent and $`loc(G)`$ is globally coherent.

Proof: We prove that $`glob(loc(G))=G`$. By Proposition 6.2 $`glob(loc(G))G`$. To prove that $`Gglob(loc(G))`$ let $`H`$ be a wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$ such that $`loc(G)loc(H)`$. Then for $`xX`$,

$$[X,G]_x[X,H]_x$$

and so for some open neighbourhood $`U_x`$ of $`x`$, $`G|U_xH|U_x`$. These sets $`U_x`$ form a cover $`𝒰`$ of $`X`$. By Proposition 2.3, $`G`$ is generated by the $`G|U`$ for $`U𝒰`$. It follows that $`GH`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 6.10

If $`X`$ is a topological space then its fundamental groupoid $`\pi _1X`$ is coherent and globally coherent.

###### Corollary 6.11

Let $`Q`$ be a topological groupoid on $`X`$. Then the star identity component $`C_1(Q)`$ is coherent.

###### Corollary 6.12

Let $`Q`$ be a topological groupoid with a path connection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)\mathrm{\Lambda }(Q)`$. Then the wide subgroupoid $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ is coherent.

###### Proposition 6.13

Let $`Q`$ be a topological groupoid on $`X`$. Suppose that the local subgroupoid $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ of $`Q`$ is well defined by an open cover $`𝒰`$. Then

1. $`glob(c_1(Q,𝒰))=C_1(Q)`$.
2. $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ is coherent.
3. If $`𝒰`$ is path local for $`Q`$, then $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ is totally coherent.

Proof: (i) Certainly $`c_1(Q,𝒰)loc(C_1(Q))`$ since for all open $`U`$ in $`X`$, $`C_1(Q|U)C_1(Q)|U`$ and so $`[U_i,C_1(Q|U_i)]_x[X,C_1(Q)]_x`$ for all $`xU`$.

Now suppose $`H`$ is a wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$ and $`c_1(Q,𝒰)loc(H)`$. We have to prove $`C_1(Q)H`$.

Let $`iI`$ and $`xU_i`$. We have $`[U_i,C_1(Q|U_i)]_x[X,H]_x`$. Hence there is an open neighbourhood $`W_x`$ of $`x`$ contained in $`U_i`$ and such that

$$C_1(Q|U_i)|W_xH.$$

By Proposition 2.3, $`C_1(Q|U_i)`$ is generated by the $`C_1(Q|U_i)|W_x`$ for all $`xU_i`$ and by the same Proposition, $`C_1(Q)`$ is generated by the $`C_1(Q|U_i)`$ for all $`iI`$. Hence $`C_1(Q)H`$.

Coherence of $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ follows from (i) and $`C_1(Q|U_i)C_1(Q)|U_i`$. Total coherence in the path local case follows by applying (ii) to $`Q|U`$, using Proposition and Definition 3.5. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 6.14

Let $`Q`$ be a topological groupoid on $`X`$ such that the local subgroupoid $`c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)`$ is well defined by the open cover $`𝒰`$. Then:

1. $`glob(c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰))=C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$.
2. $`c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)`$ is coherent.
3. If $`𝒰`$ is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ path local for $`Q`$, then $`c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)`$ is totally coherent.

Proof: (i) Note that $`c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)loc(C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q))`$ since for all $`U`$ in $`X`$, $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U)C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)|U`$. So $`glob(c_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q))C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$. To prove that $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)glob(c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰))`$ suppose that $`H`$ is a wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$ such that $`c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)loc(H)`$. We have to prove that $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)H`$. If $`U𝒰`$ and $`xU`$ then

$$[U,C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U)]_x[X,H]_x.$$

Hence $`U`$ has a covering by open sets $`W_x`$ such that $`[U,C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U)|W_xH`$. By Proposition 2.3, $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U)`$ is generated by the groupoids $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U)|W_x`$ and by Proposition 4.2 $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ is generated by the $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q|U)`$ for $`U𝒰`$. Hence $`C_\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)H`$.

The proofs of (ii), (iii) are analogous to those in the previous proposition.

$`\mathrm{}`$

## 7 Coherence and atlases

We lead up to conditions for an atlas for a local subgroupoid $`s`$ to be globally adapted to $`s`$. This notion is important for considerations of holonomy (see ), and the applications will be developed elswhere.

The next proposition gives an alternative description of $`glob`$.

Let $`𝒰_s=\{(U_i,H_i):iI\}`$ be an atlas for the local subgroupoid $`s`$. Then $`glob(𝒰_s)`$ is defined to be the subgroupoid of $`Q`$ generated by all the $`H_i,iI`$.

An atlas $`𝒱_s=\{(V_j,s_j):jJ\}`$ for $`s`$ is said to refine $`𝒰_s`$ if for each index $`jJ`$ there exists an index $`i(j)I`$ such that $`V_jU_{i(j)}`$ and $`s_{i(j)}|V_j=s_j`$.

###### Proposition 7.1

Let $`s`$ be a local subgroupoid of $`Q`$ given by the atlas $`𝒰_s=\{(U_i,H_i):iI\}`$. Then $`glob(s)`$ is the intersection of the subgroupoids $`glob(𝒱_s)`$ of $`Q`$ for all refinements $`𝒱_s`$ of $`𝒰_s`$.

Proof: Let $`K`$ be the intersection given in the proposition.

Let $`Q`$ be a subgroupoid of $`Q`$ on $`X`$ such that $`sloc(Q)`$. Then for all $`xX`$ there is a neighbourhood $`V`$ of $`x`$ and $`i_xI`$ such that $`xU_{i_x}`$ and $`H_{i_x}|V_xU_{i_x}Q`$. Then $`𝒲=\{(V_xU_{i_x},H_{i_x}|V_xU_{i_x}):xX\}`$ refines $`𝒰_s`$ and $`glob(𝒲)Q`$. Hence $`KQ`$, and so $`Kglob(s)`$.

Conversely, let $`𝒱_s=\{(V_j,H_j^{}):jJ\}`$ be an atlas for $`s`$ which refines $`𝒰_s`$. Then for each $`jJ`$ there is an $`i(j)I`$ such that $`V_jU_{i(j)},H_j^{}=H_{i(j)}|V_j`$. Then $`sloc(glob(𝒱_s))`$. Hence $`glob(s)glob(𝒱_s)`$ and so $`glob(s)K`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 7.2

A wide subgroupoid $`H`$ of $`Q`$ is coherent if and only if for every open cover $`𝒱`$ of $`X`$, $`H`$ is generated by the subgroupoids $`H|V,V𝒱`$.

Proof: Note that $`\{(X,H)\}`$ is an atlas for $`loc(H)`$, which is refined by $`𝒱_H=\{(V,H|V):V𝒱\}`$ for any open cover $`𝒱`$.

Suppose the latter condition holds. Then Proposition 7.1 implies that $`H=glob(loc(H))`$, i.e. $`H`$ is coherent. The converse holds since $`glob(𝒱_H)H`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let $`U`$ be an open subset of $`X`$. Then we have notions of local subgroupoids of $`Q|U`$ and also of the restriction $`s|U`$ of a local subgroupoid $`s`$ of $`Q`$. Clearly if $`H`$ is a wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$ then $`loc(H|U)=(loc(H))|U`$.

###### Proposition 7.3

Let $`s`$ be a local subgroupoid of $`Q`$ and let $`U`$ be open in $`X`$. Then $`glob(s|U)glob(s)|U`$.

Proof: Let $`H`$ be a wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$ such that $`sloc(H)`$. Then $`s|Uloc(H|U)`$. So $`glob(s|U)H|U`$. The result follows. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 7.4

Let $`s`$ be a local subgroupoid of $`Q`$. Then

1. If $`s`$ is globally coherent, $`U`$ is open in $`X`$, and $`s|U`$ is coherent, then $`s|U`$ is globally coherent.
2. If there is an open cover $`𝒱`$ of $`X`$ such that $`s|V`$ is coherent for all $`V𝒱`$, then $`s`$ is coherent.
3. If $`s`$ is globally coherent then for any open cover $`𝒱`$ of $`X`$, $`glob(s)`$ is generated by the groupoids $`glob(s)|V`$ for all $`V𝒱`$.
4. If there is open cover $`𝒱`$ of $`X`$ such that $`s|V`$ is globally and totally coherent for $`V𝒱`$, then $`s`$ is totally coherent.

Proof: i) We are given $`s=loc(glob(s))`$. By Proposition 7.3

$$loc(glob(s|U))loc(glob(s)|U)=loc(glob(s))|U=s|U.$$

Since $`s|U`$ is coherent, we have $`s|Uloc(glob(s|U))`$. So $`s|U=loc(glob(s|U))`$, i.e. $`s|U`$ is globally coherent.

ii) We have

$$s|Vloc(glob(s|V))loc(glob(s)|V)(loc(glob(s)))|V.$$

Since this holds for all $`V`$ of an open cover, we have $`sloc(glob(s)).`$

iii) This follows from Corollary 7.2.

iv) Let $`U`$ be open in $`X`$. Let $`V𝒱`$. Since $`s|V`$ is globally and totally coherent, then $`s|VU`$ is globally coherent. Hence by (ii) $`s|U`$ is coherent, since the $`VU,V𝒱`$, cover $`U`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 7.5

Let $`𝒰_s=\{(U_i,H_i):iI\}`$ be an atlas for the local subgroupoid $`s`$. Then:

1. $`s|U_i=loc(H_i)`$ for all $`iI`$;
2. $`loc(glob(s|U_i))s|U_i`$ for all $`iI`$;
3. if $`s|U_i`$ is coherent for all $`iI`$ then $`s`$ is globally coherent;
4. if $`s|U_i`$ is coherent for all $`iI`$ then $`glob(s)=glob(𝒰_s)`$.

Proof: i) This is clear.

ii) We have by Proposition 6.2

$$loc(glob(s|U_i))=loc(glob(loc(H_i)))loc(H_i)=s|U_i.$$

iii) This is immediate from the definition of coherence and ii).

iv) Let $`H=glob(𝒰_s)`$, i.e. $`H`$ is the subgroupoid of $`Q`$ generated by the $`H_i,iI`$. Then $`glob(s)H`$. Let $`K`$ be a wide subgroupoid of $`Q`$ such that $`sloc(K)`$. Then for all $`iI`$ and $`xU_i`$ there is a neighbourhood $`V_x^i`$ of $`x`$ such that $`V_x^iU_i`$ and $`H_i|V_x^iK|V_x^i`$. By global coherence of $`s|U_i`$ and Proposition 7.4(i,ii), $`H_i`$ is generated by the $`H_i|V_x^i`$ for all $`xU_i`$. Hence $`H_iK|U_iK`$. Hence $`HK`$. Hence $`Hglob(s)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Definition 7.6

Let $`s`$ be a local subgroupoid of the groupoid $`Q`$ on $`X`$. An atlas $`𝒰_s`$ for $`s`$ is called globally adapted if $`glob(s)=glob(𝒰_s)`$.

###### Remark 7.7

This is a variation on the notion of an $`r`$-adaptable family defined by Rosenthal in \[15, Definition 4.4\] for the case of a local equivalence relation $`r`$. He also imposes a connectivity condition on the local equivalence classes.

The construction of the holonomy groupoid of a local subgroupoid requires a globally adapted atlas (see Theorems 3.7 and 3.8 ). The following proposition is very useful to this end.

###### Proposition 7.8

Let $`s`$ be a totally coherent local subgroupoid of the groupoid $`Q`$ on $`X`$. Then any atlas for $`s`$ is globally adapted.

Proof: This is immediate from the previous Proposition, since total coherence implies that each $`s|U_i`$ is coherent. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 7.9

Any path local atlas $`𝒰`$ of the local subgroupoid $`c_1(Q,𝒰)`$ is globally adapted.

###### Corollary 7.10

Any $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ path local atlas of the local subgroupoid $`c__\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q,𝒰)`$ is globally adapted.