text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The initial value problem for the Korteweg – de Vries equation

$$u_t6uu_x+ϵ^2u_{xxx}=0,u(x,0)=u_0(x)$$
(1)
in the zero dispersion limit $`ϵ0`$ has been the subject of intense studies during more than 25 years. The physical interest of this limit is that it allows to model the phenomenon of dispersive shocking in dissipationless dispersive media. In contrast to the usual dissipative hydrodynamics, the regularization of a shock occurs here through the generation of small-scale nonlinear oscillations. Gurevich and Pitaevskii in  proposed to describe these oscillations with the aid of the one-phase Whitham modulation equations . Multiphase analog of the Whitham equations was derived by Flaschka, Forest and McLaughlin . Later, Lax and Levermore  rigorously showed that the multiphased averaged equations appear in the zero dispersion limit of the initial value problem for the KdV equation with asymptotically reflectionless initial data. For the reflecting potentials the zero dispersion theory was constructed by Venakides  who also identified the parameters describing the weak limit of the solution in the Lax-Levermore approach with the Riemann invariants of the modulation equations in  (see , ).

The modulation system itself, however, has to be integrated to reveal dependence of the Riemann invariants (modulation parameters) on $`x`$ and $`t`$. For this, the observation of Tsarev  (see also ) who generalized the classical hodograph method to a multidimensional (in the space of dependent variables) case was crucial. The result of applying this generalized hodograph transform to the averaged KdV is the overdetermined consistent system of linear PDE’s. Tsarev’s results were put into the algebro-geometrical setting by Krichever , .

Each solution to the Tsarev system gives rise to some local solution of the nonlinear modulation system. These solutions generically exist only within definite regions of the $`x,t`$ \- plane. To obtain the global solution one should supplement the constructed local solutions with the information about the number $`N`$ of nonlinear phases in each region and provide the smooth matching of solutions with different $`N`$ on the phase transition boundaries. The simplest, yet very important, class of problems with $`N1`$ has been investigated in works of Tian , , Gurevich, Krylov, El and their collaborators ,  who obtained a number of exact solutions for the initial value problems with monotone and hump-like data having the only break point. Tian  was also able to prove that the solutions to the Whitham system in this case do globally belong to $`N=1`$.

More general local solutions to the modulation system in the case of arbitrary $`N`$ were constructed in a symmetric form by El  with the aid of fundamental solution (an analog of the Green function) to the Tsarev equations.

Some global solutions involving the case $`N=2`$ were constructed recently by Grava  on the basis of Dubrovin’s variational approach to the Whitham equations .

The common feature of all pointed methods for constructing the global solutions to the Whitham equations is the necessity to follow all earlier times $`t<t_0`$ to obtain the solution at $`t_0`$. This difficulty has been bypassed resently by Deift, Venakides and Zhou  who obtained the algebraic equations for the KdV modulations avoiding the integration of the modulation equations themselves. The method of DVZ is based on reformulation of the initial value problem for the zero dispersion KdV with decaying solitonless analytic initial data as the steepest descent for the scalar Riemann-Hilbert problem for the complex phase function. As a result, they obtain not only the local solutions to the modulation equations, but also the system of inequalities enabling to determine the number of phases locally at each point of the $`x,t`$-plane.

It is clear, however, that the requirements of decaying and pure reflection for the initial potential are not essential in the zero dispersion limit. Really, assuming the finite speed of propagation (i.e. validity of the Whitham equations) for the zero-dispersion KdV with an arbitrary initial data one can see that only the finite part of the initial data contributes to the solution at any finite $`t`$. In this case, considering the evolution of ’multihump’ potential and and then tending number of ’humps’ to infinity one arrives at the solution for nondecaying initial data. Certainly, for the finite $`ϵ`$ the results obtained in this way are valid within finite time interval until the semiclassical (Whitham) spectrum begins to compete with the fine spectrum of the potential. The assumption of hyperbolicity in the limit studied allows also to omit the requirement of analyticity for the initial data.

In this work, we combine methods of Deift, Venakides, and Zhou  and El  to produce the global solution to the KdV modulation equations with an arbitrary initial data. Namely, by assuming validity of the modulation equations in the case of the zero dispersion KdV with an arbitrary initial data we reformulate the initial value problem for the Whitham system as the Riemann-Hilbert problem and produce the symmetric system of algebraic equations supplemented by the system of inequalities determining both the motion of the Riemann invariants and the change of the genus of the Riemann surface (number of oscillating phases). We represent the local part of the obtained general solution in a potential form with the generalized functional of the Peierls-Fröhlich type , ,  as a potential. Recently the functionals of this type in more particular form were shown to give rise by minimization to the global solutions for the Whitham equations with monotone initial data .

We also make identification of the part of the results obtained in  with the results obtained earlier in  ,  and  which unifies different approaches developed independently in this area.

## 2 Summary of the Riemann-Hilbert Steepest Descent Method for the Zero Dispersion KdV with Decaying Solitonless Initial Data

It is well known that the inverse scattering transform can be reformulated as a matrix Riemann-Hilbert (RH) problem (see , ). Deift, Venakides, and Zhou  showed by considering the quasiclassical asymptotics for the initial value problem (1) in the case of one-hump solitonless initial data $`0u_0(x)1`$ that this problem can be asymptotically (as $`ϵ0`$) reduced to the scalar RH problem for the complex phase function $`g(\lambda )`$. We present here the resulting formulas (for details see , ).

Let the interval $`(0,1)`$ of the real axis on the $`\lambda `$ \- plane is partitioned into a finite set of intervals $`\{G_k(k=0,1,\mathrm{},N):(0,r_1),(r_2,r_3),\mathrm{},(r_{2N},r_{2N+1})\}`$, $`\{B_n(n=1,\mathrm{},N+1):(r_1,r_2),(r_3,r_4),\mathrm{},(r_{2N+1},1)\}`$.

We introduce the combination

$$\alpha (\lambda )=4t\lambda ^{3/2}+x\lambda ^{1/2},$$
(2)
which will be important hereafter, and the phases of the reflection (from the right) and the transmission coefficients for the scattering on the potential $`u_0(x)`$.

$$\rho _+(\lambda )=x^+\lambda ^{1/2}+\underset{x^+}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}[\lambda ^{1/2}(\lambda u_0(x^{}))^{1/2}]𝑑x^{},$$
(3)
$$\tau (\lambda )=\underset{x^{}}{\overset{x^+}{}}(u_0(x^{})\lambda )^{1/2}𝑑x^{}.$$
(4)
where $`x^\pm =x^\pm (\lambda )`$ are the roots of the equation $`u_0(x)=\lambda `$.

Then the RH problem defining the complex phase function $`g(\lambda )`$, which plays the central role in the future, takes the form

On the intervals $`\{G_k,(k=0,\mathrm{},N):(0,r_1),(r_2,r_3),\mathrm{},(r_{2N},r_{2N+1})\}`$ the following relations hold:

$$\frac{g_+^{}+g_{}^{}}{2}=\rho _+^{}\alpha ^{}$$
(5)
$$\tau <\frac{g_+g_{}}{2i}<0,$$
(6)
It follows from the equality (5) that on each interval $`G_k`$: $`g_++g_{}2\rho _++2\alpha =\mathrm{\Omega }_k`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k`$ is some constant of integration; without loss of generality one can put $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0`$.

On the intervals $`\{B_k,(k=1,\mathrm{},N):(r_1,r_2),(r_3,r_4),\mathrm{},(r_{2N1},r_{2N})\}`$ we have

$$\frac{g_+g_{}}{2i}=\tau ,$$
(7)
$$\frac{g_+^{}+g_{}^{}}{2}<\rho _+^{}\alpha ^{}.$$
(8)
The latter ineguality is due to the further reduction of the RH problem with the aid of the steepest descent method .

On the remaining interval $`\{B_{N+1}:(r_{2N+1},1)\}`$ there exist two possibilities:

$$\text{case A:}\frac{g_+g_{}}{2i}=\tau ,\frac{g_+^{}+g_{}^{}}{2}<\rho _+^{}(\lambda )\alpha ^{}.$$
(9)
which coincides with the conditions (7), (8)

or

$$\text{case B:}g_+g_{}=0,\frac{g_+^{}+g_{}^{}}{2}>\rho _+^{}(\lambda )\alpha ^{}.$$
(10)
Also we have outside the interval $`(0,1)`$

$$g_++g_{}=0\text{if}\lambda <0,$$
(11)
$$g_+g_{}=0\text{if}\lambda >1.$$
(12)
In all above formulas we denoted

$$g_\pm (\lambda )\underset{\delta 0}{lim}g(\lambda \pm i\delta )$$

The additional requirement imposed on the function $`g(\lambda )`$ is

$$\text{The functions}(\sqrt{\lambda }g^{}(\lambda ))_\pm \text{are continuous for real }\lambda ,$$
(13)
Also it follows from  that the following asymptotic holds

$$g(\lambda )=g_1/\lambda ^{1/2}+O(1/\lambda )\text{as}\lambda \mathrm{}.$$
(14)
One can see that just formulated RH problem contains not only equations defining the function $`g(\lambda )`$ on the intervals $`B_k`$ and $`G_k`$ but also the inequalities which define the overall number $`2N`$ of the intervals (if $`N`$ has been chosen wrongly then at least one of the inequalities will be violated).

We observe that for each fixed $`x`$ and $`t`$, $`g^{}`$ also satisfies a scalar RH problem on the real axis. Indeed, $`g_+^{}+g_{}^{}=0`$ when $`\lambda <0`$, and $`g_+^{}g_{}^{}=0`$ when $`\lambda >1`$. When $`0<\lambda <1`$, the equalities (5), (7), (9) and (10) specify $`g_+^{}+g_{}^{}2\rho ^{}+2\alpha ^{}=0`$ on each interval $`G_k`$, while $`g_+^{}g_{}^{}`$ either equals 0 or equals $`2i\tau ^{}`$ outside these intervals. We only consider $`g_+^{}g_{}^{}=2i\tau ^{}`$ when $`\lambda `$ lies between any two of the $`G_k`$’s while on the remaining interval $`(r_{2N+1},1)`$, we examine both possibilities i.e. $`g_+^{}g_{}^{}=2i\tau ^{}`$ (case A) or $`g_+^{}g_{}^{}=0`$ (case B).

Necessarily $`g^{}(\lambda )`$ has the following form,

$$g^{}(\lambda )=\sqrt{R_{2N+1}(\lambda )}(_{G_k}\frac{2\rho ^{}(\mu )2\alpha ^{}(\mu )}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}^+(\mu )}(\mu \lambda )}\frac{d\mu }{2\pi i}+_{(0,E)G_k}\frac{2i\tau ^{}(\mu )}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}^+(\mu )}(\mu \lambda )}\frac{d\mu }{2\pi i},),$$
(15)
where

$$R_{2N+1}(\lambda )=\underset{j=1}{\overset{2N+1}{}}(\lambda r_j),$$
(16)
and $`E=1`$ in the case A and $`E=r_{2N+1}`$ in the case B. Here, $`\sqrt{R_{2N+1}(\lambda )}`$ is positive for $`\lambda >r_{2N+1}`$. Also, $`\sqrt{R_{2N+1}^+(\lambda )}`$ denotes the boundary value from above.

A sufficient number of conditions to determine the endpoints of the intervals $`G_j`$ can now be written down. Indeed, the condition $`g(\lambda )=O(\lambda ^{1/2})`$ for large $`\lambda `$ implies $`g^{}(\lambda )=O(\lambda ^{3/2})`$, which leads to the following moment conditions,

$$_{G_j}\frac{\rho ^{}(\lambda )\alpha ^{}(\lambda )}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}^+(\lambda )}}\lambda ^k𝑑\lambda +_{(0,E)G_j}\frac{i\tau ^{}(\lambda )}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}^+(\lambda )}}\lambda ^k𝑑\lambda =0,$$
(17)
$$k=0,\mathrm{},N.$$

A second set of conditions is obtained by integrating $`g^{}`$ around each $`G_j`$ and using (7): In case A we obtain

$$_{G_j}(g_+^{}(\lambda )g_{}^{}(\lambda ))𝑑\lambda =2i(\tau (r_{2j+1})\tau (r_{2j})),j=1,\mathrm{}N.$$
(18)
In case B, $`\tau (r_{2N})`$ and $`\tau (r_{2N+1})`$ must be replaced by zero.

Conditions (17) and (18) represent a system of $`(N+1)+N=2N+1`$ independent equations for the $`2N+1`$ unknowns (the branch points $`r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1}`$ of the Riemann surface (16)). Conversely suppose that for given $`x`$, $`t`$ and some $`N`$, the quantities $`r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1}`$ satisfy conditions (17) and (18), giving rise to an explicit expression (15) for $`g^{}`$, and hence for $`g`$ by integration. Suppose further that the function $`g`$ so constructed, also satisfies the inequalities (6) – (10). Then $`g`$ is the desired solution of the scalar RH problem.

Deift, Venakides and Zhou show that the parameters $`r_j`$ represent the “semiclassical spectrum” of the problem, i.e. they are the branch points of the spectral Riemann surface defining the local finite-gap solution of the KdV. In Sec.4 we shall directly identify the moment conditions (17), (18) with the local solution of the KdV-Whitham system.

Now we present a number of important relations which will be very useful for the identification.

We observe from the relations (5) – (12), that $`g(\lambda )`$ also satisfies a RH problem. Solving this RH problem in exactly the same way as the problem for $`g^{}`$ we obtain similarly to (15)

$$g(\lambda )=\sqrt{R_{2N+1}(\lambda )}\underset{j=0,\mathrm{},N}{}\left(_{G_j}\frac{2\rho _+(\mu )2\alpha (\mu )\mathrm{\Omega }_j}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}^+(\mu )}(\mu \lambda )}\frac{d\mu }{2\pi i}+_{(0,E)G_j}\frac{2i\tau (\mu )}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}^+(\mu )}(\mu \lambda )}\frac{d\mu }{2\pi i}\right).$$
(19)
The expression for the constant of integration $`\mathrm{\Omega }_j`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_j=2x_a_{\mathrm{}}\lambda ^{1/2}\psi _j8t_a_{\mathrm{}}\lambda ^{3/2}\psi _j+4_{G_k}\rho _+\psi _j4_{(0,E)G_k}i\tau \psi _j.$$
(20)
$$x\mathrm{\Omega }_{k1}+t\mathrm{\Omega }_{k2}+\mathrm{\Omega }_{k3}j=1,\mathrm{},N,\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.$$

We recall that

$$E=1\text{ (case A)}orE=r_{2N+1}\text{(case B)}$$
(21)
The basis of holomorphic differentials $`\psi _j`$ is given by

$$\psi _j=\underset{k=0}{\overset{N1}{}}c_{k,j}\frac{\lambda ^k}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}(𝐫,\lambda )}}d\lambda ,$$
(22)
$$\underset{\alpha _k}{}\psi _j=\delta _{jk},k,j=1,\mathrm{},N.$$
(23)
The contours $`\alpha _k(k=0,1,\mathrm{},N)`$ surround the intervals $`(r_2,r_3),\mathrm{},(r_{2j},r_{2j+1}),\mathrm{},(r_{2N},r_{2N+1})`$ clockwise;

The identities hold for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{j1}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{j2}`$:

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{j1}=Res_{\mathrm{}}\lambda ^{1/2}\psi _j,\mathrm{\Omega }_{j2}=4Res_{\mathrm{}}\lambda ^{3/2}\psi _j,$$
(24)
$$_x\mathrm{\Omega }_j=\mathrm{\Omega }_{j1},_t\mathrm{\Omega }_j=\mathrm{\Omega }_{j2}.$$
(25)
One can observe from (24) that in normalization (23) accepted, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{j1}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{j2}`$ can be identified with the wave number $`k_j`$ and the frequency $`\omega _j`$ correspondingly , where $`j`$ is the number of the phase , $`j=1,\mathrm{},N`$ Really (taking into account the change of the normalization in comparison with ), we have the expansion as $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$

$$\psi _j=\frac{1}{\lambda ^{3/2}}(k_j+\frac{1}{4\lambda }\omega _j+\mathrm{});$$
(26)
where

$$k_j=c_{N1,j},\omega _j=2c_{N1,j}\underset{m=1}{\overset{2N+1}{}}r_m+4c_{N2,j}.$$
(27)
Taking the mixed derivatives of (25) we arrive at $`N`$ equations expressing the wave number conservation laws, for each of $`N`$ phases.

$$_tk_j=_x\omega _j,j=1,\mathrm{},N.$$
(28)
## 3 Equations for the Branch Points in a Symmetric Form. Identification with Local Solutions to the Whitham Equations

Now we obtain equations for the branch points $`r_j`$ of the Riemann surface, equivalent to the moment conditions (17),(18), in a symmetric form.

Calculating $`_x\mathrm{\Omega }_j`$ directly from (20) we obtain

$$_x\mathrm{\Omega }_j=\mathrm{\Omega }_{j1}+\underset{k=1}{\overset{2N+1}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_j}{r_k}_xr_k,j=1,\mathrm{},N,$$
(29)
which, together with (25), implies

$$\underset{k=1}{\overset{2N+1}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_i}{r_k}_xr_k=0$$

for any solution $`r_k(x,t)`$.

Thus,

$$_j\mathrm{\Omega }_i=0,$$
(30)
$$_j\frac{}{r_j},j=1,\mathrm{},2N+1,i=1,\mathrm{},N,$$

provided $`_xr_j0,j=1,\mathrm{},2N+1`$.

The system (30) is the system of $`N(N+1)`$ algebraic equations for $`2N+1`$ variables $`r_j(x,t)`$. Due to the uniqueness of the solution for the Riemann-Hilbert problem (5) – (12) it has to be equivalent to the moment conditions (17),(18). To show that it is enough to prove the consistency of the system (30). In other words one has to show that all $`N`$ closed systems for $`r_j(j=1,\mathrm{},2N+1)`$ forming the overdetermined system (30) are equivalent which is to say that (30), in fact, does not depend on the index $`i`$.

With this aim in view we present the following lemma.

Lemma (Consistency)

The overdetermined system $`_j\mathrm{\Omega }_i=0,j=1,\mathrm{},2N+1,i=1,\mathrm{},N`$ , where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_i`$ is defined by (20) is consistent and equivalent to the symmetric system of $`2N+1`$ algebraic equations with respect to $`2N+1`$ variables $`r_j`$:

$$\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\{x\lambda ^{1/2}+4t\lambda ^{3/2}\}\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=\underset{\alpha _k}{}\rho _+(\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_ji\underset{\beta _n\beta _E}{}\tau (\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_j.$$
(31)
The contours $`\alpha _k,(k=0,\mathrm{},N)`$ as it was mentioned above surround the intervals $`G_k`$ clockwise. The contours $`\beta _n,(n=1,\mathrm{},N+1)`$ surround the intervals $`B_n`$ clockwise, and the contour $`\beta _E`$ surrounds the interval $`(E,1)`$, where $`E=1`$ (case A) or $`E=r_{2N+1}`$ (case B).

The differential $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j,j=1,\mathrm{},2N+1`$ is defined by

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=\frac{_j\psi _i}{_jk_i}=\frac{\lambda ^N+\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}\lambda ^{Nk}p_{k,j}}{(\lambda r_j)\sqrt{R_{2N+1}}}d\lambda ,$$
(32)
and the coefficients $`p_{k,j}`$ can be found unambigously from the normalization conditions

$$\underset{\alpha _m}{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=0,m=1,\mathrm{},N,$$
(33)
The proof of the lemma can be found in Appendix 1.

Theorem (Identification) The system of algebraic equations (31) implicitely defining positions of the branch points $`r_j(x,t)`$ of the hyperelliptic Riemann surface in the zero dispersion limit of the RH problem for the KdV equation satisfies the $`N`$-phase averaged Whitham-KdV system , .

$$_tr_j=V_j(𝐫)_xr_j,j=1,\mathrm{},2N+1,$$
(34)
where $`V_j(𝐫)`$ are computed as certain combinations of complete hyperelliptic integrals .

Proof

To identify algebraic system (31) with the solution of the Whitham equations (34) we make use of the Tsarev result , :

If $`W_j(r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1})`$ is a solution of the linear overdetermined consistent system

$$\frac{_iW_j}{W_iW_j}=\frac{_iV_j}{V_iV_j};$$
(35)
$$ij;i,j=1,\mathrm{},2N+1,$$

then the system of algebraic equations (generalized hodograph transform)

$$x+V_jt=W_j$$
(36)
gives implicitely the smooth solution $`r_j(x,t)`$ to the Whitham system (34) provided $`_xr_j0`$.

First, we observe that the following identities hold

$$\frac{1}{2\pi i}\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\lambda ^{1/2}\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=1\text{for all }j,$$
(37)
$$\frac{2}{\pi i}\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\lambda ^{3/2}\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=V_j.$$
(38)
The first equality immediately follows from the definition (32). The second one requires a bit more detailed consideration. We make use of the fact that the system (34) implies existence of the wave number conservation law (28). Then, introducing the Riemann invariants $`r_j`$ into the equation (28) explicitely one easily gets the representation for the characteristic speeds of the Whitham system (34) (see ,  for the case $`N=1`$ and  for arbitrary $`N`$).

$$V_i=\frac{_i\omega _j}{_ik_j}\text{for any }j.$$
(39)
The expression (39) can be interpreted as a generalization of the group velocity notion to the case of nonlinear waves . It should be noted that the relationships analogous to (39) arise in the classical theory of hyperbolic systems as the compatibility condition providing the existence of an additional conservation law . Using (24), (26), (32) we arrive at

$$V_i=\frac{2}{\pi i}\frac{_i}{_ik_j}\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\psi _j\lambda ^{3/2}𝑑\lambda =\frac{2}{\pi i}\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\lambda ^{3/2}\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=4p_{1,i}.$$
(40)
The solution (31) then takes the form (36) provided

$$W_i=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\{\underset{\alpha _k}{}\rho _+(\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_ii\underset{\beta _n\beta _E}{}\tau (\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_i\},$$
(41)
where the functions $`\rho _+(\lambda ),\tau (\lambda )`$ are supposed to be analytic.

We have to prove, therefore, that (41) does solve the linear system (35) which implies proving that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j`$ does solve this system at any $`\lambda `$. With this aim in view we consider the following combinations occuring in the left-hand part of (35)

$$_i\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=_ip_{1,j}\frac{\lambda ^N+\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}\lambda ^{Nk}a_{k,i}}{(\lambda r_i)(\lambda r_j)\sqrt{R_{2N+1}}}d\lambda ,$$
(42)
where all $`a_{k,i}`$ are uniquiely defined by the conditions following from the normalization (33)

$$\underset{\alpha _m}{}_i\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=0,m=1,\mathrm{},N.$$
(43)
Another relevant combination is

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_i\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=(p_{1,i}p_{1,j})\frac{\lambda ^N+\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}\lambda ^{Nk}b_{k,i}}{(\lambda r_i)(\lambda r_j)\sqrt{R_{2N+1}}}d\lambda ,$$
(44)
where, again, the coefficients $`b_{k,j}`$ are given by the normalization

$$\underset{\alpha _m}{}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_i\mathrm{\Lambda }_j)=0,ij,$$
(45)
that implies $`b_{k,i}=a_{k,i}`$. Then

$$\frac{_i\mathrm{\Lambda }_j}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_i\mathrm{\Lambda }_j}=\frac{_ip_{1,j}}{p_{1,i}p_{1,j}},$$
(46)
Recalling that $`p_{1,j}=1/4V_j`$ (see (40)) we prove the identification theorem.

Q.E.D.

We also present the equivalent form of the solution (31) parametrized by the phase of the reflection coefficient from the left $`\rho _{}`$ (cf. (3)),

$$\rho _{}(\lambda )=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{x^{}}{}}[\lambda ^{1/2}(\lambda u_0(x))^{1/2}]𝑑x\lambda ^{1/2}x^{}$$
(47)
It can be shown that the following identity holds (for details see Appendix 2)

$$\underset{\alpha _k}{}\{\rho _{}(\lambda )+\rho _+(\lambda )\}\mathrm{\Lambda }_ji\underset{\beta _n}{}\tau (\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=0.$$
(48)
Then the solution (31) takes the form

$$\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\{x\lambda ^{1/2}+4t\lambda ^{3/2}\}\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=\underset{\alpha _k}{}\rho _{}(\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_j+i\underset{\beta _E}{}\tau (\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_j,$$
(49)
In particular, in the case A we have especially simple representation (we note that $`\alpha _k=a_{\mathrm{}}`$)

$$\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\{x\lambda ^{1/2}+4t\lambda ^{3/2}+\rho _{}(\lambda )\}\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=0,j=1,\mathrm{},2N+1.$$
(50)
This form of the solution coincides with the one obtained in .

The differential $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j`$ for the first time was introduced by El  as a generating differential of the Whitham hierarchy and can be regarded as a nonlinear analog of the Green function for the modulation equations. Really, as $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j`$ depends on a free parameter $`\lambda `$ and satisfies identically the Tsarev equations (35), we have proved automatically that it is a fundamental solution to the Tsarev system . Expanding (32) in powers of $`1/\lambda `$ as $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$ we obtain the homogeneous solutions to Tsarev’s equations. Those of them with the odd indices of homegeneity $`n=3,5,7\mathrm{}`$ are the characteristic speeds of the $`N`$-gap averaged $`n`$-th KdV in the hierarchy . Therefore, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j`$ is the generating differential for the averaged KdV hierarchy. The effective formulae for the characteristic speeds of the hierarchy in terms of the generating differential are (up to a norming constant):

$$W_j^{(n)}(𝐫)d\lambda =Res_{\mathrm{}}\lambda ^{n3/2}\mathrm{\Lambda }_j,$$
(51)
Corresponding solutions $`r_j(x,t)`$ given by the system

$$\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\{x\lambda ^{1/2}+4t\lambda ^{3/2}+c\lambda ^{n3/2}\}\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=0,j=1,\mathrm{},2N+1.$$
(52)
are self-similar

$$r_j(x,t)=t^\gamma l_j(\frac{x}{t^{\gamma +1}}),\gamma =\frac{1}{n1},n=3,5,\mathrm{},$$
(53)
and solve the initial value problem

$$x=[2^n\frac{(2n1)!!}{n!}cu^n]_{t=0}.$$
(54)
Taking $`n=3`$ we arrive at the Potemin solution  (see also ) describing the universal regime of the formation of collisionless shock in the vicinity of the break point , , . This solution was also obtained by Wright  applying the Lax-Levermore methods . We also note that if

$$\rho _{}(\lambda )=\underset{k=2}{\overset{2N+1}{}}c_k\lambda ^{k+1/2},$$
(55)
then the formula (50) gives the realization of the general Krichever prescription for constructing the algebraic-geometrical solutions to the Whitham equations .

## 4 Functionals of the Peierls-Fröhlich type as the Potentials for the Local Solutions to the Whitham Equations

We point out the important relationship between the differential $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j`$ and the standard meromorphic differential (quasimomentum)

$$dp=\frac{\lambda ^N+\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}\lambda ^{Nk}q_k}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}}}d\lambda $$
(56)
normalized by

$$\underset{\alpha _m}{}𝑑p=0,m=1,\mathrm{},N.$$
(57)
As can be easily seen,

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=\frac{_jdp}{_jq_1+\frac{1}{2}}$$
(58)
In particular, for $`N=0`$:

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=2_rdp=\frac{d\lambda }{(\lambda r)^{3/2}}$$
(59)
It is well known (see, for instance, ) that $`𝑑p`$ is the generating function for the averaged Kruskal integrals $`Q_k`$:

$$P=𝑑p=2\sqrt{\lambda }+\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{2Q_k}{(2\sqrt{\lambda })^{2k+1}}.$$
(60)
Expanding (56) near infinity and comparing with (60) we find that

$$q_1=Q_0\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{2N+1}{}}r_j,$$
(61)
where

$$Q_0=\overline{u}=\underset{L\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{2L}\underset{L}{\overset{L}{}}u(x,𝐫)𝑑x$$
(62)
Then it follows from (58) that

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=\frac{_jdp}{_j\overline{u}}$$
(63)
provided $`_j\overline{u}0`$. Substituting the representation (63) into the solution (31) one arrives at the potential form of the local solution to the Whitham equations

$$_jF_N(𝐫;x,t)=0,j=1,\mathrm{},2N+1,$$
(64)
where the potential

$$F_N(𝐫;x,t)=\mathrm{\Phi }[u_0(x);x,t,N]=\frac{1}{2\pi i}[\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\{x\lambda ^{1/2}+4t\lambda ^{3/2}\}𝑑p+2\underset{G_k}{}\rho _{}(\lambda )𝑑p2i\underset{E}{\overset{1}{}}\tau (\lambda )𝑑p],$$
(65)
In the case A (E=1) we observe that $`F_N`$ represents the functional of the Peierls–Fröhlich type , , :

$$F_N(𝐫;x,t)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}[\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\{x\lambda ^{1/2}+4t\lambda ^{3/2}\}dp+2\underset{G_k}{}\rho _{}(\lambda )dp)].$$
(66)
The case of the Peierls–Fröhlich type functional with (cf.(55))

$$\rho _{}(\lambda )=\underset{k=2}{\overset{2N+1}{}}c_k\lambda ^{k+1/2}+2\underset{\lambda }{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{g(u)}{\sqrt{u\lambda }}𝑑u,$$
(67)
where $`g(u)`$ is a sufficiently small smooth function, has been studied recently by Dubrovin  who found that the minimizer to (66), (67) gives the solution to the Cauchy problem for the KdV-Whitham system with the monotone initial data

$$x=[\underset{k=2}{\overset{2N+1}{}}\frac{(2k+1)!!}{2^{k1}k!}c_ku^k+g(u)]_{t=0}.$$
(68)
One can suppose that the minimizer to the functional (65) gives rise to the solution to the Cauchy problem with hump-like initial data. We emphasize also that the solution in the form (64), (65) does not require analyticity from the initial data.

## 5 Global Solutions to the Whitham System

### 5.1 General Formulation

As it was shown in Sec.2 which gives an account of the results of , the steepest descent for the RH problem yeilds the global solution to the Whitham equations bypassing the procedure of integration of the modulational system itself. The obtained solution, however, is restricted by the requirements of decaying at infinity and of analyticity imposing upon the initial data. In addition, the consideration in  concerns only with solitonless (pure reflective) initial data. On the other hand, the Whitham equations themselves admit more general formulation of the problem cancelling these restrictions.

Our idea is to construct the global solutions to the general Cauchy problem for the Whitham equations by applying the results of the RH problem approach described above to a more general class of functions $`\rho (\lambda )`$, $`\tau (\lambda )`$ (and therefore to a more general class of initial data) appearing in the solution (31). More in detail, the functions $`\rho (\lambda )`$, $`\tau (\lambda )`$ can be multivalued (even infinite-valued) with different number of branches for different $`\lambda `$. Actually, as we will show, such type of behavior for $`\rho `$ and $`\tau `$ corresponds to a multihump (or infinite-hump nondecaying) initial data. Also, the resulting formulation of the RH problem does not require any analyticity from the functions $`\rho (\lambda )`$ and $`\tau (\lambda )`$ which cancels requirement of analyticity for the initial data and is consistent with the hyperbolic nature of the zero-dispersion KdV limit .

First, we define following Dubrovin  the Whitham system as a sequence of the modulation systems (34) defined for $`N=1,2,\mathrm{}`$ For $`N=0`$ this coincides with the Riemann wave equation

$$_tr6r_xr=0,$$
(69)
with the initial data $`r(x,0)=u_0(x)`$ are given. Solutions of the Whitham equations (34) for a given $`N`$ typically exist only within certain domains of the $`(x,t)`$ plane. The main problem of the theory of the Whitham equations is to glue together these solutions in order to produce a $`C^1`$-smooth multivalued function of $`x`$ that also depends $`C^1`$-smoothly on the parameters $`r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1}`$.

Thus, to produce the global solution to the Whitham system with the aid of the obtained local solutions (31) one should:

i) determine the right genus at every point $`x_0,t_0`$.

ii) provide $`C^1`$-smooth matching of the solutions (31) for different genera on the phase transition boundaries , .

The properties of the phase transitions can be investigated inside the local Whitham theory.

### 5.2 Phase Transitions

We study what happens to the solution (31) when one of the Riemann invariants $`r_{2j}`$ coalesces either with $`r_{2j1}`$ or with $`r_{2j+1}`$. It follows from the solution (31) that its phase transition properties are completely determined by the properties of the differential $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j`$ near the double points $`r_k=r_{k+1}`$ and can be investigated directly using the representation (32) for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j`$. It is more convenient, however, to use the relationship (63) between $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j`$ and the meromorphic differential $`dp`$ properties of which are known well.

Near the double points, the differential $`dp`$ as well as the coefficients $`Q_k`$ in the decomposition (60) have the following asymptotics :

$`1)r_{2j+1}r_{2j}0`$ (small gap)

$$f_N(r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1})=f_{N1}(r_1,\mathrm{},\widehat{r}_{2j},\widehat{r}_{2j+1},\mathrm{},r_{2N+1})+\nu ^2f_{N,j}^1(r_1,\mathrm{},\widehat{r}_{2j},\widehat{r}_{2j+1},\mathrm{};\beta ,\nu )+o(\nu ^2).$$
(70)
Here

$$\beta =\frac{r_{2j}+r_{2j+1}}{2},\nu =\frac{r_{2j+1}r_{2j}}{2}.$$
(71)
Here and below the hat means that the correspondent coordinate is omitted.

$`2)r_{2j}r_{2j1}0`$ (small band)

$$f_N(r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1})=f_{N1}(r_1,\mathrm{},\widehat{r}_{2j1},\widehat{r}_{2j},\mathrm{},r_{2N+1})+\delta f_{N,j}^2(r_1,\mathrm{},\widehat{r}_{2j1},\widehat{r}_{2j},\mathrm{};\eta ,\delta )+o(\delta ).$$
(72)
Here

$$\eta =\frac{r_{2j1}+r_{2j}}{2},\delta =[\mathrm{log}\frac{4}{(r_{2j}r_{2j1})^2}]^1.$$
(73)
One can see that in both cases, in the limit, the double points drop out of the function $`f_N`$ and it turns into its analog for the $`N1`$ genus. This fact follows from the normalization for the meromorphic differential

$$\underset{r_{2j}}{\overset{r_{2j+1}}{}}𝑑p=0,j=1,\mathrm{},N,$$
(74)
which implies that the polynomial $`\lambda ^N+\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}q_k\lambda ^{Nk}`$ in the numerator of $`dp`$ has exactly one zero in each gap. Then, if one shrinks either gap or band, this zero inevitably coincides with the double point in the denominator.

Certainly, all the averaged Kruskal integrals $`Q_k(r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1})`$ (see (60)) have the same properties near the double points. Then using the representation (63) for the generating differential we arrive at the following asymptotics by differentiating (70) and (72).

$`1)r_{2j+1}r_{2j}0`$

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^{[N]}(r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1};\lambda )=\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^{[N1]}(r_1,\mathrm{},\widehat{r}_{2j},\widehat{r}_{2j+1},\mathrm{},r_{2N+1};\lambda )+O(\nu ^2),$$
(75)
$$\text{if}k2j,2j+1,$$

and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^{[N]}(r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1};\lambda )=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{2j+}^{[N]}+O(\nu ),$$
(76)
$$\text{if}k=2j\text{or}k=2j+1,$$

where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{2j+}^{[N]}`$ is the limiting value of the differential $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^{[N]}`$ which follows from (32), (33) when one pinches the $`j`$-th gap :

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{2j+}^{[N]}\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^{[N]}(r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2j1},r_{2j},r_{2j},r_{2j+2},\mathrm{},r_{2N+1};\lambda )=\frac{\lambda ^N+\mathrm{}}{(\lambda r_{2j})^2\sqrt{R_{2N1}^{}}}d\lambda ,$$
(77)
$$R_{2N1}^{}=(\lambda r_1)(\lambda r_2)\mathrm{}(\lambda r_{2j1})(\lambda r_{2j+2})\mathrm{}(\lambda r_{2N+1}),$$

and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{2j+}^{[N]}`$ has a double pole at $`\lambda =r_{2j}`$.

$`2)r_{2j}r_{2j1}0`$

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^{[N]}(r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1};\lambda )=\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^{[N1]}(r_1,\mathrm{},\widehat{r}_{2j1},\widehat{r}_{2j},\mathrm{},r_{2N+1};\lambda )+O(\delta ),$$
(78)
$$\text{if}k2j1,2j,$$

and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^{[N]}(r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1};\lambda )=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{2j}^{[N]}+O(\nu /\delta ),$$
(79)
$$\text{if}k=2j1\text{or}k=2j,$$

where the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{2j}^{[N]}`$ is the limiting value of the differential $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^{[N]}`$ when one pinches the $`j`$-th band :

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{2j}^{[N]}\mathrm{\Lambda }_k^{[N]}(r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2j2},r_{2j},r_{2j},r_{2j+1},\mathrm{},r_{2N+1};\lambda )=\frac{\lambda ^{N1}+\mathrm{}}{(\lambda r_{2j})\sqrt{R_{2N1}^{}}}d\lambda ,$$
(80)
$$R_{2N1}^{}=(\lambda r_1)(\lambda r_2)\mathrm{}(\lambda r_{2j2})(\lambda r_{2j+1})\mathrm{}(\lambda r_{2N+1}),$$

and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{2j}^{[N]}`$ has a single pole at $`\lambda =r_{2j}`$ (cancellation of one pole occurs due to the zero in the vanishing $`j`$-th band ).

One can see the substantial difference in the limiting behavior of the differential $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{2j}^{[N]}`$ depending whether one shrinks the $`j`$-th gap (77) or the $`j`$-th band (80).

The asymptotics (75) and (78) provide natural $`C^1`$ \- smooth matching of the solution (31) for different genera on the phase transition boundaries. The limiting values in (76) and (79) determine the motion of those boundaries. Namely, the boundaries $`x_{j\pm }`$ separating $`N`$-phase and $`N1`$-phase regions correspond to closing either the $`j`$-th gap $`(+)`$ (linear wave degeneration) or the $`j`$-th band $`()`$ (soliton degeneration) and obey the ODE’s :

$$\frac{dx_{j\pm }}{dt}=4Res_{\mathrm{}}\lambda ^{3/2}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{2j\pm }^{[N]}$$
(81)
One should also check what happens to the solutions (31) under the phase transition $`(N=1)(N=0)`$. As $`N=0`$ we have $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j^{[0]}=(\lambda r)^{3/2}d\lambda `$ (see (59)) and, as a result, we arrive at two different equations corresponding to the cases A and B respectively. In the case A we have

$$\text{A:}x\frac{2t}{\pi i}\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\frac{\lambda ^{3/2}}{(\lambda r)^{3/2}}𝑑\lambda =\frac{2}{\pi }\frac{d}{dr}\underset{0}{\overset{r}{}}\frac{\rho _{}(\lambda )}{\sqrt{r\lambda }}𝑑\lambda ,$$
(82)
which is the solution of the Riemann wave equation (69) with the initial data in the form of the increasing part of the hump $`u_0(x)`$:

$$x+6rt=x^{}(r).$$
(83)
For the case $`B`$ we have an analogous result for the decreasing part of the initial hump $`u_0`$ :

$$\text{B:}x+6rt=x^{}(r)\frac{2}{\pi }\frac{d}{dr}\underset{r}{\overset{1}{}}\frac{\tau (\lambda )}{\sqrt{\lambda r}}𝑑\lambda =x^+(r).$$
(84)
It can be easily seen also that the decompositions of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j^{[1]}`$ near $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j^{[0]}`$ have the form (75), (78) that provides $`C^1`$ \- smoothness of the transition $`N=1N=0`$. This transition was investigated in detail by Avilov, Krichever and Novikov  (see also , ).

It is clear now that the cases A and B in the solution (31) describe different parts of the global solution of the Whitham equations corresponding to the monotonic branches of the initial profile $`u_0(x)`$. We also note that formulas (82), (84) give the solution to the Riemann equation in terms of the KdV scattering data and were obtained in this form by Geogjaev in .

### 5.3 Inequalities: Determination of Genus

As it has been said before, the necessary part of constructing the solution to the Cauchy problem is determination of the genus of the Riemann surface at every point $`x,t`$. In fact, this problem cannot be resolved locally in the frame of the obtained solution (31) for the Whitham system. This point of view has not been established clearly in the literature so we will describe it more in detail.

The genus (the number of oscillating phases) $`N`$ is the ”external” characteristics with respect to the local solutions to the Whitham system. To illustrate that more clearly, we present a simple example of ambiguity in the local determination of genus.

In the Figure 1, there is a typical solution of one-phase averaged Whitham equations for the initial data with the only break point (for example, the cubic breaking in the Gurevich – Pitaevskii problem ) depicted by a solid line in the region $`(x_{},x_+)`$ while the three-valued solution to the Riemann wave equation (69) is depicted by a broken line in the region $`(x_1,x_2)`$, $`x_1<x_{}<x_2<x_+`$. Outside of those intervals both solutions coincide.

One can see that in the vicinity of any point of an open interval $`(x_2,x_+)`$ both cases $`g=0`$ and $`g=1`$ can be applied without any violations of the existence for the local solution. The missing part of the information which enables to distinguish the unique solution in this interval is the break time $`t_{crit}`$ (if $`t>t_{crit}`$ then $`N=1`$ otherwise $`N=0`$) but this information is relevant to the global properties of the solution for case $`N=1`$. In other words, generically to make the right decision about the genus at $`t=t_0`$ one should follow the solution all time until $`t_0`$ and change genus after passing the critical points . The rigorous global predictions of the genus have been made so far only in a few simple cases.

In the case of analytic initial data with the only break point there are results by Tian ,  that the solution beyond the break time globally belongs to $`N=1`$.

Another result in this area is due to Grava  and it reads that the maximal genus in the Cauchy problem with polynomial initial data does not exeed the degree of the polynomial and $`N1`$ asymptotically as $`t\mathrm{}`$ (the latter result also can be found in ).

But even in the simplest case of the polynomial data the determination of genus at a fixed point $`x_0,t_0`$ requires knowledge of the behaviour of the solution in all earlier times.

The RH problem approach makes it possible to determine the right genus of the problem locally with the aid of the inequalities (8) – (12) for the complex phase function $`g(\lambda )`$. These original inequalities were derived for the decaying solitonless initial data in , . It is clear, however, that if one assumes the finite speed of propagation (hyperbolicity) in the zero dispersion limit (which has been rigorously proved for the case of decaying initial potential , , ) then one can consider an arbitrary initial profile and regard these inequalities as a complementary part to the general local solution (31) for finite $`t`$. Really, given the functions $`\rho _\pm (\lambda )`$ and $`\tau (\lambda )`$ as the simple integral (Abel) transforms (3),(47), (4) of arbitrary initial data one can construct the function $`g(\lambda )`$ and its derivative $`g^{}(\lambda )`$ and then, by trial and error, to determine the genus with the aid of inequalities. Also, one should add the relations (9) and (10) distinguishing the cases A and B for the problem with nonmonotone initial data. Certainly, for the monotonically increasing data we always are in the case A.

Example: One-Hump Problem

Following  we present now an example of a systematic procedure for obtaining $`N=N(x,t)`$ for all $`x`$ at any given $`t`$. The result of this procedure is to construct for each $`t`$ the $`separatrix`$ $`F(t)=\{(x,r):r=r(x,t),\mathrm{}<x<\mathrm{},r=r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1}\}`$ for the case of one-hump initial data with finite number of break points (see Figures 2a and 2b).

For times $`t`$ less than some critical value $`t_{crit}`$ one takes $`N=N(x,t)=0`$ and solves (69) for $`r`$; the time $`t_{crit}`$ corresponds precisely to the time at which (1) with $`ϵ=0`$ breaks down. It turns out that the associated function $`g`$ constructed as above indeed satisfies the auxilliary inequalities (6), (8), (9), (10) and hence $`g`$ is the desired solution. Thus, for $`t<t_{crit}`$, we obtain a separatrix of the shape of Figure 2a; moreover, we find that $`F(t)=(x,r):r=u(x,t)`$, where $`u(x,t)`$ is the solution of (1) with $`ϵ=0`$. For $`x>x_0(t)`$, we are in case B and for $`x<x_0(t)`$, we are in case A. When $`t>t_{crit}`$, one again sets $`N=N(x,t)=0`$ for $`x>>1`$, computes $`r`$ from (69) and verifies once again that the side conditions are satisfied in case B. However, as we move $`x`$ to the left, we find that at least one of the inequalities (6), (8), (9), (10) breaks down. In Figure 2b below the first inequality in (6), $`\tau <(g_+g_{})/2i`$, breaks down at $`x=x_1`$ and for $`x<x_1`$ the interval $`G_0`$ breaks up into two intervals $`G_0`$ and $`G_1`$. For such $`x`$ one solves the system (31) for one of the cases A or B to get $`r_1,r_2`$, and $`r_3`$ and verifies that indeed the associated $`N`$ satisfies the above inequalities. In the scenario of Figure 2b, as we move $`x`$ further to the left, the same inequality for $`\tau `$ again breaks down at some $`x=x_2(t)`$, for some $`rG_0(x_2(t),t)`$. Again $`G_0`$ splits up into two intervals yielding a total of three intervals $`G_0`$, $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$, etc. As we continue to move towards $`x_3`$, the interval $`G_1`$ shrinks to a point and eventually disappears. For $`x`$ between $`x_4`$ and $`x_3`$ we are again in the two interval case and for $`x<x_4`$ we return to the one interval case $`N=0`$. For $`x>x_0`$, we are always in case B and for $`x<x_0`$ we are always in case A. The scenario of figure 2b is representative of the generic case in which any finite number of intervals may be open at some $`x`$. For more complicated, indeed pathological initial data infinitely many folds may appear.

## 6 Zero-Dispersion KdV with General Initial Data

The basic assumption which is made in the following consideration is the hyperbolicity of the zero dispersion limit for the KdV with an arbitrary initial potential. By applying this assumption one can extend the formulation of the RH problem made in Sec.2 for the case of the solitonless alanytic initial perturbation to the case of an arbitrary initial data and to construct the solution to the corresponding Cauchy problem for the KdV-Whitham system.

It is clear that due to the (assumed) hyperbolicity of the problem only a finite number of ‘humps’ in the initial perturbation will be involved into nonlinear interaction at any finite time at any particular point. Therefore, the solution to the problem for the Whitham equations with an arbitrary (nondecaying) initial data can be obtained by solving the ”multi-hump” (decaying) problem in the zero dispersion limit and then by tending the number of humps to infinity. Certainly, the solution obtained in this way will be valid during limited time interval (presumably for $`t1/ϵ`$) until the semiclassical spectrum (Riemann invariants of the Whitham equations) begins to compete with the fine spectrum of the initial potential and the problem loses its hyperbolic character.

The main technical obstacle to the direct extension of the formulation (5) – (12) to the case of a multi-hump initial data is the multivaluedness of the functions $`\rho _+(\lambda )`$ and $`\tau (\lambda )`$ (3), (4) appearing in the RH problem. To manage this difficulty it is convenient to first reformulate the RH problem for one-hump initial data introducing the finite reference point instead of the reference point at infinity (scattering from the right).

### 6.1 Reformulation of the One-Hump Problem for the Finite Reference Point

We start with the function

$$g(\lambda ,x,0)=\underset{x}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(\lambda ^{1/2}(\lambda u_0(x^{}))^{1/2})𝑑x^{},$$
(85)
which, as can be checked directly, solves the RH problem (5) – (12) for $`t=0,N=0`$.

We introduce a new function

$$H(\lambda ,x,x_0)=\underset{x}{\overset{x_0}{}}(\lambda ^{1/2}(\lambda u_0(x^{}))^{1/2})𝑑x^{},$$
(86)
where $`x_0`$ is an arbitrary fixed reference point. Without loss of generality we put $`x_0`$ at the maximum of $`u_0(x)`$ (see Fig.2a).

One can see that

$$g_\pm (\lambda ,x,0)=H_\pm \lambda ^{1/2}x_0+\rho _+i\tau _+,$$
(87)
where

$$\tau _+(\lambda )=\underset{x_0}{\overset{x^+}{}}(u_0(x)\lambda )^{1/2}𝑑x.$$
(88)
Then we have the relationships (at $`t=0`$)

$$\frac{g_++g_{}}{2}=\frac{H_++H_{}}{2}\lambda ^{1/2}x_0+\rho _+,$$
(89)
$$\frac{g_+g_{}}{2i}=\frac{H_+H_{}}{2i}\tau _+.$$
(90)
We also introduce

$$\tau _{}(\lambda )=\tau _+(\lambda )\tau (\lambda )=\underset{x_0}{\overset{x^{}}{}}(u_0(x)\lambda )^{1/2}𝑑x.$$
(91)
Then the function $`H(\lambda ,x,x_0)`$ is the solution of the RH problem which follows directly from (5) – (12) :

In the region $`x<x^{}`$ (see Fig.2a) which lies on the left from the hump and contributes to the spectral band $`B_1`$ the correspondent relations follow from (9) (case A) taking into account (89), (90):

$$\frac{H_+H_{}}{2i}=\tau _{},\frac{H_+^{}+H_{}^{}}{2}<\alpha _0^{},$$
(92)
where

$$\alpha _0(\lambda ,x)=\lambda ^{1/2}(xx_0).$$
(93)
Analogously, for the region $`x^{}<x<x^+`$ lying under the hump and contributing to the gap $`G_0`$ we have from (5), (6):

$$\frac{H_+^{}+H_{}^{}}{2}=\alpha _0^{},\tau _{}<\frac{H_+H_{}}{2i}<\tau _+.$$
(94)
And finally, in the region $`x>x^+`$ which lies on the right from the hump and again contributes to the band $`B_1`$ (but it is the case B now) in the original RH problem (see (10)) we have

$$\frac{H_+H_{}}{2i}=\tau _+,\frac{H_+^{}+H_{}^{}}{2}>\alpha _0^{}.$$
(95)
Also we have outside the interval $`(0,1)`$ from (11), (12)

$$H_++H_{}=0\text{if}\lambda <0,$$
(96)
$$H_+H_{}=0\text{if}\lambda >1.$$
(97)
Due to the finite speed of propagation in the zero dispersion KdV with decaying initial data the topology of the picture (Fig.2a) does not change under the $`t`$-evolution (see Fig 2b). Finitely many folds which appear at some finite $`t`$ determine the band-gap structure at any point $`x`$ so that the region $`x<x^{}`$ on the $`(u,x)`$ \- plane of the initial data will provide the bands $`B_n,(n=1,\mathrm{},N+1)`$ ($`B_{N+1}`$ corresponds here to the case A), the region $`x^{}<x<x^+`$ will provide the gaps $`G_k,(k=0,\mathrm{},N)`$, and the region $`x>x^+`$ always will correspond to the band $`B_{N+1}`$ in the case B. Then one can formulate the time-dependent RH problem for the finite $`t`$ by the substitution reflecting the linear temporal evolution of the phase $`\alpha (\lambda )`$ (2):

$$\alpha _0(\lambda ,x)\alpha _0(\lambda ,x,t)=\lambda ^{1/2}(xx_0)+4\lambda ^{3/2}t$$
(98)
in the formulas (92) – (97).

Thus, we have effectively removed the infinite reference point from the formulation of the RH problem corresponding to the evolution of the one-hump perturbation.

### 6.2 Evolution of an Arbitrary Profile

The strategy of investigation of the evolution for an arbitrary initial perturbation $`u_0(x)`$ is essentially the same as in the previous subsection: we formulate the RH problem for the function $`H(\lambda ,x,x_0)`$ (86) at $`t=0`$ starting with the fixed reference point $`x_0`$ and then by assuming the finite speed of propagation (hyperbolicity of the zero-dispersion KdV) arrive at the time-dependent $`H`$-function by the substitution (98) for the phase $`\alpha _0`$ . As was mentioned, the situation, however, is complicated by the multivaluedness of the functions $`\rho (\lambda )`$ and $`\tau (\lambda )`$ appearing in such a problem.

We begin with the multihump initial potential and split up the strip $`0<u<1`$ in the $`u,x`$ \- plane of the initial data into two type of domains (see Fig.3a):

$`\tau `$ \- domains correspond to humps in the intitial perturbation and contribute to the gaps in the semiclassical spectrum.

$`\rho `$ \- domains correspond to wells in the initial perturbation and contribute to the bands in the semiclassical spetrum.

We fix the reference point $`x_0`$ at some maximum of the function $`u_0(x)`$ and enumerate the monotonic parts of $`u_0(x)`$ for $`x>x_0`$ labelling them by the roots of the equation $`\lambda =u_0(x)`$ (to avoid unnecessary notation complexities we put the number of humps on the right from the point $`x_0`$ equal to the number of humps on the left):

$$x_M^{}<x_{M+1}^+<\mathrm{}<x_1^+<x_1^{}x_0x_1^+<x_1^{}<\mathrm{}<x_{M1}^{}<x_M^+,$$
(99)
$$M𝐍,\frac{dx_m^{}}{d\lambda }>0,\frac{dx_m^+}{d\lambda }<0.$$

We denote the domains of definition for each $`x_m^\pm (\lambda )`$ as $`D_m^\pm `$. Then for each $`\lambda =\lambda ^{}`$ one can define two subsequences: $`\{x_{m_j}^{}(\lambda ^{})\}`$ and $`\{x_{m_j}^+(\lambda ^{})\}`$, ($`m_j=\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{},\pm M_j,j=j(\lambda )=1,\mathrm{},2M1,x_{k_j}^+>x_{k_j1}^{})`$ such that only those $`x_k^\pm `$ participate in $`\{x_{m_j}^\pm \}`$ for which $`\lambda ^{}D_k^\pm `$ (Fig3.b).

For each $`j=j(\lambda )`$ one can then define the sequences $`\{\rho _{m_j}\}`$, $`\{\tau _{m_j}\}`$:

$$\rho _{m_j}(\lambda )=Re\underset{x_0}{\overset{x_{m_j}^{}}{}}(\lambda u_0(x^{}))^{1/2}𝑑x^{},\tau _{n_j}(\lambda )=Im\underset{x_0}{\overset{x_{n_j}^+}{}}(\lambda u_0(x^{}))^{1/2}𝑑x^{}$$
(100)
Then the function $`H(\lambda ,x,x_0,0)`$ defined by (86) and corresponding now to a multi-hump analytic initial data $`u_0(x)`$ is related to the original function $`g(\lambda ,x,0)`$ by (cf. (87))

$$\text{if}x_{m_j1}^{}<x<x_{m_j}^{},m_j>0:g_\pm =H_\pm \lambda ^{1/2}x_0+\rho _+\rho _{m_j1}i\tau _{m_j},$$
(101)
where $`\rho _+(\lambda )`$ is redefined for the multi-hump perturbation in the following way:

$$\rho _+(\lambda )=x_{m_j}^+\lambda ^{1/2}+\underset{x_{m_j}^+}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}[\lambda ^{1/2}(\lambda u_0(x^{}))^{1/2}]𝑑x^{},$$
(102)
Here one should put $`\rho _00`$ and $`x_0^\pm x_0`$. If $`m_j<0`$ then the relationship (101) is valid within the interval $`x_{m_j}^+<x<x_{m_j+1}^+`$.

Then, at $`t=0`$ we have instead of (89), (90) within the mentioned intervals covering the entire axis:

$$\frac{g_++g_{}}{2}=\frac{H_++H_{}}{2}\lambda ^{1/2}x_0+\rho _+\rho _{m_j1},$$
(103)
$$\frac{g_+g_{}}{2i}=\frac{H_+H_{}}{2i}\tau _{m_j}.$$
(104)
Now we can formulate the RH problem which is satisfied by the function $`H`$. We substitute (103), (104) into the original RH problem (5) – (12) taking into account new definition of $`\rho _+(\lambda )`$ (102):

In each $`\tau `$ \- domain ($`x_{m_j1}^{}<x<x_{m_j}^+`$ for $`m_j>0`$ and $`x_{m_j}^{}<x<x_{m_j+1}^+`$ for $`m_j<0`$ ) one has from (5), (6)

$$\frac{H_+^{}+H_{}^{}}{2}=\alpha _0^{}+\rho _{m_j1}^{},\tau _{m_j1}<\frac{H_+H_{}}{2i}<\tau _{m_j}.$$
(105)
In each $`\rho `$ \- domain $`x_{m_j}^+<x<x_{m_j}^{}`$ we have from (7), (8), (10)

$$\frac{H_+H_{}}{2i}=\tau _{m_j},\alpha _0^{}+\rho _{m_j1}^{}<\frac{H_+^{}+H_{}^{}}{2}<\alpha _0^{}+\rho _{m_j}^{}.$$
(106)
We note that inequalities (8), (9), (10) have converted into one double inequality. One should also put $`\tau _00`$.

Outside the interval $`(0,1)`$ one has analogously to (96), (97):

$$H_++H_{}=0\text{if}\lambda <0,$$
(107)
$$H_+H_{}=0\text{if}\lambda >1.$$
(108)
As well as in the previous subsection, the time-dependent RH problem is obtained from (105) – (108) by adding the term $`4\lambda ^{3/2}t`$ to $`\alpha _0(\lambda ,x)`$ (see (98)). However, to retain validity of the formulated RH problem after this substitution one should assume hyperbolicity of the zero-dispersion limit for the KdV with general initial data. In this case the toplogy of the separatrix would not change under the evolution.

Recalling that $`\tau `$ \- regions contribute to the gaps $`G_k,(k=0,\mathrm{},N)`$ and $`\rho `$ \- regions contribute to the bands $`B_n,n=1,\mathrm{},N+1`$, one immediately obtains the function $`H(\lambda ,x,x_0,t)`$ and its derivative (cf. (19), (15)). For the sake of simplicity we write down the result assuming that the initial data are such that each $`\rho `$ \- domain contributes to only one band (analogously, each $`\tau `$ – domain contributes to only one gap). Consideration of more general data would only complicate notations adding nothing to substance.

$$H^{}(\lambda ,x,x_0,t)=\sqrt{R_{2N+1}(\lambda )}\underset{m=0}{\overset{N}{}}\left(\underset{G_m}{}\frac{2\rho _{m}^{}{}_{}{}^{}(\mu )2\alpha _0^{}(\mu ,x,t)}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}^+}(\mu \lambda )}\frac{d\mu }{2\pi i}+\underset{B_{m+1}}{}\frac{2i\tau _{m}^{}{}_{}{}^{}(\mu )}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}^+}(\mu \lambda )}\frac{d\mu }{2\pi i}\right),$$
(109)
$$H(\lambda ,x,x_0,t)=\sqrt{R_{2N+1}(\lambda )}\underset{m=0}{\overset{N}{}}\left(\underset{G_m}{}\frac{2\rho _m^{}(\mu )2\alpha _0(\mu ,x,t)\mathrm{\Omega }_m}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}^+}(\mu \lambda )}\frac{d\mu }{2\pi i}+\underset{B_{m+1}}{}\frac{2i\tau _m^{}(\mu )}{\sqrt{R_{2N+1}^+}(\mu \lambda )}\frac{d\mu }{2\pi i}\right),$$
(110)
where

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_m=2(xx_0)\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\lambda ^{1/2}\psi _j8t\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\lambda ^{3/2}\psi _j+4\underset{m=0}{\overset{N}{}}(\underset{G_m}{}\rho _m^{}\psi _ji\underset{B_{m+1}}{}\tau _m^{}\psi _j),$$
(111)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0,\rho _0^{}=0$$

. Here

$$\{\rho _m^{}(\lambda )\}\{\rho _{k_j}(\lambda )\},\{\tau _m^{}(\lambda )\}\{\tau _{k_j}(\lambda )\},m=0,\mathrm{},N.$$
(112)
The algebraic equations determining dependence of the band-gap structure on $`x`$ and $`t`$ are obtained from the condition (30) $`_j\mathrm{\Omega }_i=0`$ and can be eventually represented in a potential form (64) with the generalized Peierls - Fröhlich type functional as a potential (see Sec.3, 4)

$$_jF_N(𝐫;x,t)=0,j=1,\mathrm{},2N+1,$$
(113)
$$F_N(𝐫;x,t)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}[\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\{(xx_0)\lambda ^{1/2}+4t\lambda ^{3/2}\}𝑑p2\underset{m=0}{\overset{N}{}}(\underset{G_m}{}\rho _m^{}𝑑pi\underset{B_{m+1}}{}\tau _m^{}𝑑p)].$$
(114)
The system (113), (114) represents the general local solution to the Whitham equations. Due to the properties of the meromorphic differential $`dp`$ discussed in Sec.5.2 this solution provides $`C^1`$ \- smooth matching on the phase transition boundaries where genus $`N`$ of the hyperelliptic surface changes. The right choice of the local genus $`N`$ and the subsets $`\{\tau _m^{}\},\{\rho _m^{}\}`$ (112) is verifed by check of the fulfilment of the inequalities (105) and (106) for the function $`H(\lambda ,x_0,x,t)`$.

As an example of an effective choice of the subsets $`\{\tau _m^{}\},\{\rho _m^{}\}`$ one can indicate the case of periodic initial data $`u_0(x)`$ where $`\tau _m^{}=(m+1/2)Im_{x_0}^{x_0+T}(\lambda u_0(x^{}))^{1/2}𝑑x^{}`$, $`\rho _m^{}=mRe_{x_0}^{x_0+T}(\lambda u_0(x^{}))^{1/2}𝑑x^{}`$, $`T`$ is the period, $`m𝐍`$

Thus, we have bypassed the inverse scattering transform for the zero - dispersion KdV with general initial data by assuming hyperbolicity of the zero dispersion limit. One can see that the resulting construction requires neither decaying nor analyticity for the initial data.

Aknowledgements

The research described in this paper was made possible by the financial support of the Civilian Research and Development Foundation for the Former Soviet Union and USA (CRDF) under the grant $`\mathrm{\#}`$ RM1 - 145.

G.A.E and A.L.K thank also the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR) for the partial financial support under the grant $`\mathrm{\#}`$ 00 - 01 - 00210.

Appendix 1: Proof of the Consistency Lemma

Consider the function

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_i^{(j)}=\frac{_i\mathrm{\Omega }_j}{_ik_j}.$$
(A1.1)
We rewrite the expression (20) in the form containing contour integrals. For analytic functions $`\rho _+(\lambda )`$ and $`\tau (\lambda )`$ we have

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_j=\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\{2x\lambda ^{1/2}8t\lambda ^{3/2}\}\psi _j+\underset{\alpha _k}{}2\rho _+(\lambda )\psi _j2i\underset{\beta _n\beta _E}{}\tau (\lambda )\psi _j.$$
(A1.2)
Here we have used the fact that the functions $`\rho _+(\lambda )`$ (3) and $`\tau (\lambda )`$ (4) have their own different Riemann surfaces with the branch points:

$$0,\mathrm{}\text{for}\rho _+(\lambda )$$

$$1,\mathrm{}\text{for}\tau (\lambda )$$

Then we obtain from (A1.1)

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_i^{(j)}=2\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\{x\lambda ^{1/2}+4t\lambda ^{3/2}\}\frac{_i\psi _j}{_ik_j}+2\underset{\alpha _k}{}\rho _+(\lambda )\frac{_i\psi _j}{_ik_j}2i\underset{\beta _n\beta _E}{}\tau (\lambda )\frac{_i\psi _j}{_ik_j}.$$
(A1.3)
We consider the differential

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_i^{(j)}=\frac{_i\psi _j}{_ik_j}.$$
(A1.4)
Substituting (22) into (A1.4) we immediately obtain

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_i^{(j)}=\frac{\lambda ^N+\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}\lambda ^{Nk}p_{k,i}^{(j)}}{(\lambda r_i)\sqrt{R_{2N+1}}}d\lambda $$
(A1.5)
We integrate $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i^{(j)}`$ over the $`\alpha `$-cycles. Then, taking into account (23), (A1.4) we get

$$\underset{\alpha _m}{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_i^{(j)}=0,$$
(A1.6)
$$m,j=1,\mathrm{},N,i=1,\mathrm{},2N+1$$

The normalization (A1.6) uniquely defines the coefficients $`p_{k,i}`$ independently on $`j`$, i.e.

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_i^{(1)}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_i^{(2)}=\mathrm{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_i^{(N)}\mathrm{\Lambda }_i.$$
(A1.7)
Therefore, the differential (A1.4) does not depend on the index $`j`$, and, according to (A1.3), the function $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i^{(j)}`$ does not depend on $`j`$ as well. That means that the system (30) is cosistent and takes the form

$$\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}\{x\lambda ^{1/2}+4t\lambda ^{3/2}\}\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=\underset{\alpha _k}{}\rho _+(\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_ji\underset{\beta _n\beta _E}{}\tau (\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_j,$$
(A1.8)
provided $`_ik_j0`$.

Q.E.D.

Appendix 2: Derivation of the Identity (48)

We introduce the analytic function

$$f(\lambda )=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}[\lambda ^{1/2}(\lambda u_0(x^{}))^{1/2}]𝑑x^{}=\rho _{}(\lambda )+\rho _+(\lambda )i\tau (\lambda ).$$
(A2.1)
Then one can observe that the following identity holds

$$\underset{a_{\mathrm{}}}{}f(\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=0.$$
(A2.2)
Really, $`f(\lambda )\lambda ^{1/2}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_j\lambda ^{3/2}d\lambda `$ as $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$. Considering (A2.2) as the integral over the contour surrounding the interval $`(0,1)`$ we arrive at the identity for analytic $`\rho _{}(\lambda )`$, $`\rho _+(\lambda )`$ and $`\tau (\lambda )`$.

$$\underset{\alpha _k}{}\{\rho _{}(\lambda )+\rho _+(\lambda )\}\mathrm{\Lambda }_ji\underset{\beta _n}{}\tau (\lambda )\mathrm{\Lambda }_j=0.$$
(A2.3)
## Figure Captions

* 1. Ambiguity in local determination of genus. Solid line: solution of the Whitham equations $`(N=1)`$, broken line: solution of the Hopf equation $`(N=0)`$.
* 2. Separatrix $`\{F(t)=\{(x,r):r(x,t)=r_1,\mathrm{},r_{2N+1}\}\}`$ , one-hump case.
a) $`F(0)=\{(x,r):r=u_0(x)\}`$ b) $`F(t),t>t_{crit}`$
* 3. Multi-hump initial data. a) $`\rho `$\- and $`\tau `$\- domains. b) Sequence $`\{x_{k_j}^\pm `$}.


format: text

text:
# Nonlinear coherent wavetrains and bifurcations in a class of deformable models for one-dimensional nonlinear discrete Klein-Gordon systems

## I Introduction

The soliton concept  is now well understood. However, in the past the subject casted great controversal, but also rich debates around two main themes: the soliton proper existence as real physical object and later, its stability namely against collisions with other objects of the same kinds(solitons, phonons) and with hosts(isotopic impurities, etc.). The concensus which emerges from these past activities involves the recognition of the universal role that soliton and in general, nonlinear waves play in various applications. In condensed matter, the soliton concept attracted attention for its intrinsic interest in the fundamental problem of phase transitions . In short, the main feature here is that two or more phases of materials may coexist separated by well-defined phase boundaries. As phase transition processes are dynamical by nature, the great theoretical challenge has been to find appropriate scenarios. The most popular one consists to manage at least one of the possible phases and next to follow its evolution among different other phases. This scheme takes into account the nucleation, propagation and anihilation of phase boundaries. During nucleation, the transition involves by turns an homogeneous, single-phase configuration and an inhomogeneous, multiphase configuration. The anihilation takes place in the opposite direction. Propagation involves motion of an already existing phase interface, which moves through the system increasing or decreasing volume of one phase at the expense of the other.
While this scenario applies in various theoretical contexts, the physical systems called in question are not always the same. For this reason, several one-dimensional(1D)models are used provided acceptable basic structural considerations. In the theory, each model bears on a specific one-site potential expected to provide the appropriate features for a given physical system. The one-site potentials which have been widely studied are the $`\varphi ^4`$ , and sine-Gordon(sG) . Both admit nonlinear solutions which are solitons. By its shape profile, the kink soliton has quite often been associated with phase boundary phenomena .
In practices, phase transitions are actually more complex and phase boundaries can largely depart from the simplest ”single-kink” view-point . To this subject, relevant insights have been gained in some interesting results namely of Aubry, Bak et al.  and Pokrovsky , from which we learn that discreteness of the propagation medium is an intrinsic deal of the problem. Thus, lattice discreteness can by themselves determine the becomings of phase boundaries. This leads to relevant phenomena as ”pinned interfaces” and ”domain” configurations, revealed by experiments. In addition, the transient phases can display unexpected behaviours then indicating (phase and/or shape)memory-loss processes. These unpredictible behaviours are referred to as chaotic regimes, also pointed out and discussed at length .
The recent advance on the soliton theory was directed toward new models with parametrized one-site potentials . Their advantageous features can be summarized in the fact that they reproduce the $`\varphi ^4`$ and sG while avoiding must of their shortcomings. This paper deals with a class of deformable double-well potentials(DDWP) introduced very recently . None of the versions of this class is equivalent to the familiar sinh-Gordon(shG) potential , instead they must be regarded as distinct generalized versions of the shG model. These DDWP have several virtues including analytical tractability, in contrast with many others for which it is not always easy to get deeper in their explicit treatments. Moreover, their ”double-well” shapes can be manipulated at one wish and hence allow fitting results to a desired context. To set these interesting features in a larger perspective, in the present work we will address to some questions related to lattice discreteness.
The outlines of the work are the followings: In section II, we review their continuum dynamics and derive explicitely the Peierls stress potential (so-called Peierls-Nabarro, PN potential) by the Fourier-transform method . In section III We examine some configurations of the nonlinear solutions given by the numerical analyzis. An approximate analytical solution is looked for in terms of periodons, i.e. periodic soliton wavetrains. The periodon stability in an intrinsic phonon bath is discussed. In section IV the return map of one representative model is derived in terms of a two-dimensional, two-parameter(2D2P) map evolving in the phase space through distinct bifurcation scenarios in which alternate periodic and chaotic phases. Section V present concluding remarks.

## II The models, kinks and Peierls-stress potential

Consider a one-dimensional($`1D`$) Klein-Gordon(KG) system, that consists of a chain of harmonically coupled particles with uniform mass M, each in the well bottom of a doubly-degenerate minimum potential. The dynamics of the model is described by an Hamiltonian:

$$H=\underset{n=1}{}\left[\frac{1}{2}\varphi _{n,t}^2+\frac{C_o^2}{2ł^2}\left(\varphi _{n+1}\varphi _n\right)^2+\omega _o^2V(\varphi _n,\mu )\right]$$
(1)
Where $`\varphi _n`$ is the particle local displacement field, $`C_o`$ and $`\omega _o`$ the bare velocity and frequency respectively, and $`V(\varphi ,\mu )`$ the DDWP that we assume of general form :

$$V(\varphi ,\mu )=\frac{a}{8}\left[\frac{1}{\mu ^2}Sinh^2(\alpha \varphi )1\right]^2,\mu 0,a=\frac{a_oq^2}{[Sinh^1(\mu )]^2}$$
(2)
The quantity $`a_o`$ will be constant while $`\mu `$ can vary. q and $`\alpha `$ are depending on the main deformability parameter $`\mu `$ and can take three distinct values i.e.:

1. )

$$\alpha =\mu ,q=Sinh^1(\mu )$$
(3)
For these values, $`V(\varphi ,\mu )`$ is a DDWP whose degenerate minima are continuously shifted but leaving unaffected the barrier height .
2. )

$$\alpha =Sinh^1(\mu ),q=\frac{\mu }{\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}$$
(4)
For these second values, only the potential barrier will be affected while positions of the degenarate minima remain bounded at $`\varphi _{1,2}^o=\pm 1`$ .
3. )

$$\alpha =\frac{Sinh^1(\mu )}{\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}},q=1$$
(5)

For these last values, the whole ”double-well” shape of the potential changes by varying $`\mu `$ .
In the continuum limit, the generalized DDWP (2) can be treated analytically and yields the following single-kink solution:

$$\varphi (s=xvt,\mu )=\pm \frac{1}{\mu }\mathrm{tanh}^1\left[\frac{\mu }{\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}tanh\left(\frac{\gamma s}{\sqrt{2}d(\mu )}\right)\right]$$
(6)
$$d^2(\mu )=\frac{(1+\mu ^2)d_o^2}{a\alpha ^2\mu ^2},d_o^2=\frac{C_o^2}{\omega _o^2},\gamma ^2=1\frac{v^2}{C_o^2}$$
(7)
The associate mass as well, in virtue of its particle-like properties, is analytically obtainable and reads:

$$M_k(\mu )=\frac{\sqrt{a}}{2\mu ^2\alpha d_o}\left[Sinh(2\alpha )(1+2\mu ^2)\alpha \right]$$
(8)
This analytical expression of the generalized kink topological mass deserves instructive remarks concerning its defferent behaviours with repect to $`\mu `$, for the three cases listed in $`i)\mathrm{𝑖𝑖𝑖})`$: in the first, the kink mass displays a drastic decrease when increasing $`\mu `$, but remains always positive and non-zero. Similar behaviour prevails in the second case. In the third, by contrary, the kink mass behaves oppositely, increasing from negative to positive values through massless-kink shape for $`\mu `$ at about 0.76 .
We now turn our attention to the response of the single kink obtained above to lattice discreteness effetcs. We can restrict ourselves to the static-kink regime, which is suitable for a ”pinned-kink” configuration where kink pinnings are tough to result from forces provided by the discreteness of the propagation medium. These forces are often identified with the Peierls stresses governing structural changes in solid-state systems . The generating potential is so-called Peierls-stress potential and has been the subject of a great recent interest , most often referred to as ”Peierls-Nabarro”(PN) pinning potential.
In the static regime, the total discrete system energy reduces to:

$$U=\underset{n=1}{}G(n),G(n)=\frac{MC_o^2}{ł^2}\left(\frac{d\varphi _n}{dn}\right)^2$$
(9)
and the PN potential then follows by Fourier transforming G(n), i.e. calculating:

$$U_{PN}=MC_o^2\underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑n\left(\frac{d\varphi _n}{dn}\right)^2\mathrm{exp}(2\pi imn)$$
(10)
with:

$$\left(\frac{d\varphi _n}{dn}\right)^2=\left(\frac{B_o^2}{cosh^2(\frac{nł}{\sqrt{2}d(\mu )})+\mu ^2}\right)^2,B_o^2=\frac{\mu ^2(1+\mu ^2)}{2d^2(\mu )}$$
(11)
It is easy to check that $`G(n)`$ is an even function of the variable n. Therefore the Fourier harmonics follow from the class of integrals:

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑X\frac{cos(XY)}{\left[cosh(X)+cosh(X_o)\right]^2}=\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{2}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2+iY)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2iY)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2)sinh^{3/2}(X_o)}\mathrm{}_{1/2+iY}^{3/2}[cosh(X_o)]$$
(12)
$$X=\frac{2nł}{\sqrt{2}d(\mu )},cosh(X_o)=1+2\mu ^2,Y=\pi \sqrt{2}md(\mu )$$
(13)
$`\mathrm{}`$ in this relation is the Associate Legendre function here appropriately defined as:

$`\mathrm{}_{1/2+iY}^{3/2}[cosh(X_o)]=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{sinh^{3/2}(X_o)}}{\displaystyle _{X_o}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑u[cosh(u)cosh(X_o)]cosh(\pi Y)cos(Yu)+`$
$$_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑u[cosh(u)+cosh(X_o)]cosh(\pi Y)cos(Yu)$$
(14)
While the complex-argument Gamma function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is such that:

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(2+iY)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2iY)=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2)^2}{_{k=0}^{\mathrm{}}\left[1+\frac{Y^2}{(2+k)^2}\right]}$$
(15)
with the product function evaluated by standard formula to give:

$$\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left[1+\frac{4Y^2}{(2k+1)^2\pi ^2}\right]=cosh(Y)$$
(16)
From now on, combining (9)- (16), we find:

$$U_{PN}(n)=U_o+\underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}U_mcos(2\pi mn)$$
(17)
$$U_o=\frac{\mu ^2(1+\mu ^2)C_o^2ł}{2\sqrt{2}d(\mu )}\left[X_ocotanh(X_o)2\right],U_m=\frac{8B_o^2C_o^2ł}{sinh^{3/2}(X_o)cosh(\frac{m\pi ^2d(\mu )}{2\sqrt{2}ł})}\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{2}}\mathrm{}_{1/2+iY}^{3/2}[cosh(X_o)]$$
(18)
Comparing the zero-harmonic $`U_o`$ and the kink rest mass obtained previously in (8), it appears that this term reproduces the kink proper energy. The next harmonics will then account for the lattice discreteness effects. The leading term $`U_1`$ is dominant since the cosh argument is already almost insensitive to the second order in m.

## III Soliton wavetrains and periodons

When investigating the PN potential in section II, we assumed a continuum kink wave solution owing to the difficulty of proceeding with analytical treatment of the discrete motion equation. The best way of accessing discrete solutions is by numerical analysis. For this purpose, we will use the following nonlinear difference equation:

$$\varphi _{n+1}+\varphi _{n1}2\varphi _n=\frac{1}{d_o^2}\frac{V(u_n,\mu )}{u_n}$$
(19)
where $`d_o`$ now sets the kink(or in general, soliton)length scale. We will only show the results for one representative among the DDWP above, that is (3). On figures 1 and figures 2 we displays some characteristic features emerging from the iterates in the phase space and of the wave shapes, respectively. It is manifest that the ”wavetrain” feature prevails in the almost whole discrete regime. In particular, the discrete nonlinear regimes(Figs.2a, 2b) appear to be essentially dominated by ”soliton-lattice” structures. These soliton-lattices solutions describe multi-kink states spreading along the chain axis with well defined periodicities. By varying the deformability parameter $`\mu `$, the ”kink-lattice” structure collapses gradually and turns into almost harmonic periodic wavetrains via periodic structures that we can identify as weakly nonlinear, discrete modulational wavetrains(Fig.2c).
Tough characteristic of the discrete nonlinear equation, the kink-lattice structure is not specific to the discrete phase. Indeed, solving the continuum limit of the nonlinear difference equation provided appropriate boundary conditions such as periodic boundary conditions, we may arrive at a continuum soliton wavetrain solution then called periodon. In principle, there are two different ways to check that the periodon describes lattice of kinks with well defined periodicity. The first is by direct integration of the motion equation , leading to Elliptic functions which are indeed periodic. The second is by a naive and artificial method that consists in an algebraic sum of several(infinite) one-single kink wavefunctions. Both ways generate the same wavetrain profile and hence are equally valid. However, we choose to proceed via the first and find for the generalized version (5):

$$\varphi (s=xvt,\mu )=\pm \frac{1}{\alpha }\mathrm{tanh}^1\left[\beta _2Sn\left(\frac{\gamma s}{\sqrt{2}d_L(\mu ,\lambda )}\right)\right],0\lambda 1$$
(20)
$`d(\mu ,\lambda )={\displaystyle \frac{d_o}{\beta _1\alpha \sqrt{C}}},{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1^2}{\beta _2^2}}=\lambda ,\beta _1^2\beta _2^2={\displaystyle \frac{A}{C}},\beta _1^2+\beta _2^2={\displaystyle \frac{2B}{C}}`$
$$A=\frac{a}{8}+K_o,B=\frac{a(1+\mu ^2)}{8\mu ^2}+K_o,C=\frac{a(1+\mu ^2)^2}{8\mu ^4}+K_o$$
(21)
Sn is the Jacobi Elliptic function of modulus $`\lambda `$, $`K(\lambda )`$ the Jacobi Elliptic Integral of the first kind and $`K_o`$ is self-consistently given by the second-order polynomial:

$$\frac{a^2(1+\mu ^2)^2(1\lambda )^2}{64\mu ^4}+\frac{a}{8}\left[\frac{8(1+\mu ^2)\lambda }{\mu ^2}\left(1+\frac{(1+\mu ^2)^2}{\mu ^4}\right)(1+\lambda )^2\right]K_o+(1\lambda )^2K_o^2=0$$
(22)
The period of the nonlinear solution (20) is:

$$L=d_L(\mu ,\lambda )K(\lambda )$$
(23)
To clearly see some interesting asymptotic behaviours of (20), we consider the two limits $`\lambda 0`$ and $`\lambda 1`$. The first leads to:

$$\varphi (s=xvt,\mu )=\pm \frac{1}{\alpha }\mathrm{tanh}^1\left[\beta _2\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\gamma s}{\sqrt{2}d_L(\mu ,0)}\right)\right]$$
(24)
This solution describes a breathing-like excitations, i.e. a kink with internal periodic quasi-linear oscillations. The effect of $`\mu `$ on the shape of this excitation mode is explicit from an expansion of (24) about small values of this paramter. The leading term yields:

$$\varphi (s=xvt,\mu )=\pm \frac{\beta _2}{\alpha }\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\gamma s}{\sqrt{2}d_L(\mu ,0)}\right)$$
(25)
For the second limit, expansions of the periodon wavefunction for small values of $`\mu `$ give back the single-kink solution (6).
We would like to end this section with a short discussion on the stability of the periodon kink above against collisions in a phonon bath. Let us recast the periodon in the form:

$$\varphi (s=xvt,\mu )=\pm \frac{1}{\alpha }\mathrm{tanh}^1[u(s)],u(s)=\beta _2Sn\left(\frac{\gamma s}{\sqrt{2}d_L(\mu ,\lambda )}\right),0\lambda 1$$
(26)
where the function $`u(s)`$ is the part of the periodon wavefunction undergoing ”shape dressing” upon collisions in the phonon bath. Thus we have to introduce the periodon-phonon ansatz as follows:

$$u(s)=u(x)+\psi (x)exp(i\omega t)$$
(27)
The resulting eigenvalue problem is then:

$$\psi _{zz}+\left[P(\mathrm{\Omega },\lambda )6\lambda Sn^2(z)\right]\psi =0,z=\frac{x}{\sqrt{2}d_L(\mu )},\mathrm{\Omega }^2=\left(\frac{\omega }{\omega _o}\right)^2\frac{1}{4B\alpha ^2},P(\mathrm{\Omega },\lambda )=(1+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)(1+\lambda )$$
(28)
This is just the Jacobian form of the (second-order) Lamé equation. The same equation is found for the $`\varphi ^4`$ in the finite-support(or finit period) limit. Its bound state spectrum possesses four non-zero frequency modes in addition to the translational mode.

## IV Bifurcations and routes to chaos

Modulated systems appear as the most frequent candidates when evoking systems that can be modelled within the present theory. These systems have long served as prototypes of materials with complex behaviours. The modulation periods are either commensurate or incommensurate with the basic lattice then providing them with their unique and rich physical properties. The transition between the two phases involve domain walls which are pinned soliton lattices. Properties of these soliton lattices are fundamental in determining the nature of the prevailing phase. It has been shown  that the appearance of the soliton lattice can occur simultaneously with new phases which are essentially metastable or strongly unstable. Among them, lock-in and chaotic regimes correspond respectively to periodic domain-wall lattice and randomly pinned domain-wall lattice configurations. Theoretical attempts to understand these chaotic regimes have been carried for both $`\varphi ^4`$ and sG, in connection with physical phenonema as Peierls instabilities.
To a general viewpoint, the possibility of describing classical mechanical systems by discrete difference equations provides an excellent framework where to connect the well-understood periodic and chaotic behaviours of deterministic models with the equivalent behaviours in discrete nonlinear KG systems. The discrete logistic map is a sound ground for this purpose. According to existing approaches, the system will be said to exhibit chaos when its phase space trajectories show initially exponential sensitivity to small differences in initial conditions. This feature can be made quantitative by showing that the largest Lyapunov exponent is positive. We already know that for classical Hamiltonian dynamics with sympletic structures, the sum of all of the Lyapunov exponents is zero such that at least one is positive, unless all vanish as they due for integrable systems. By these means, chaotic instabilities are virtually generic for non integrable conservative Hamiltonian systems. In a past work , Bak and Jensen have considered the problem for the $`\varphi ^4`$, showing that the theory could be formulated as an area-preserving $`2D`$ mapping. Their approaches cover a wide range of models involving those dealth with in the present context. Still, the competitions between the two main parameters(a and $`\mu `$) in the DDWP are likely to generate new singularities in both bifurcation diagrams and chaotic windows and it is the aim of this section to point out some of the revelant ones.
Starting, consider the $`2D2P`$ map:

$$M_{(a,\mu )}:\{\begin{array}{cc}u_{n+1}=v_n+2u_n+\frac{V(u_n,\mu )}{u_n},\hfill & \\ v_{n+1}=u_n\hfill & \end{array}$$
(29)
$`M_{(a,\mu )}`$ can evolve among stable and unstable equilibra which are the fixed points of the map, and any set of points to form a trajectory on the map area will result in a periodic or chaotic orbit of one of these fixed points. As it sounds, whether the fixed points are stable or not is relevant in determining the local behabiours of the map area. Thus, a stable fixed point will be such that the orbits near it are moved even closer under the map, whereas nearby orbit points of the unstable fixed point will move aways by iteration. We can understand these equilibrium behaviours in the simple viewpoint of linear stability analysis, which consists to look at the transformation under $`M_{(a,\mu )}`$ as ”gradient crossings” of neighbouring orbit points on the surface area consisting of the whole trajectory set of the map. Mathematically, we end with the matrix equation:

$$M_{(a,\mu )}:M_nW_n=W_{n+1}$$
(30)
Where $`M_n`$, then called Jordan matrix of the map, is the square Jacobian matrix of the gradients components at points $`W_n=[u_n,v_n]`$ on the map area. From now on, further iteration will result in conjugating the matrix $`M_n`$ such that for a given period-$`ł`$ orbit of some fixed point $`W_o`$, the generator of the period-$`ł`$ orbit points is $`M_o^ł`$. It turns out that properties of the transformation matrix will have direct incidence on the geometry of the map area. Indeed, since a matrix with determinant of absolute value different from one traduces change of norm, for the map this will correspond either to the contraction or to the expansion of the map area about the fixed point. Else, the map will be invariant under transformation and hence is area preserving. On the other hand, if all the eigenvalues of the matrix have magnitudes less(greater) than one, the associate fixed point will always attract(repel) the orbit points and therefore is and attractor(repeller). If one eigenvalue is less than one and the other is greater, the fixed point is a saddle: any perturbation of the orbit away from it may be magnified by further iteration leading to an unstable fixed point. The fixed point will be hyperbolic if none of the eigenvalues has magnitude one, and elliptic if the two eigenvalues lie on a unit circle one the map area. In theory, bifurcations of any of these fixed(or of any other periodic)points on the map can occur only for the parameter values for which an eigenvalue of the corresponding orbit set has absolute value one. Basing on this preliminary, we start by looking for the fixed points of the map $`M_{(a,\mu )}`$. They are three:

$$W^{(o)}=(0,0),W^i=(1)^i[\frac{Sinh^1}{\mu },\frac{Sinh^1}{\mu }]_{i=\mathit{1},\mathit{2}}$$
(31)
It is noted that they coincide exactly with the fixed points of the 1D invariant subspace of the map. The Jordan matrix for the period-one orbit set is the $`2D`$ matrix:

$$M_n=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2+\frac{aSinh(2\mu )Sinh(2\mu x)}{\mu ^2}& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(32)
The norm of its determinant is one whatever the values of a and $`\mu `$: therefore the map is always area preserving. Its eigenvalues at the fixed points $`W^o,W^i`$ are respecively:

$$W^o:(e_1^o,e_2^0)=(1,1)$$
(33)
$$W^+:\{\begin{array}{cc}e_1^+=1+\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )+\sqrt{\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }\left[\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )2\right]Sinh(2\mu )}\hfill & \\ e_2^+=1+\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )\sqrt{\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }\left[\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )2\right]Sinh(2\mu )}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(34)
$$W^{}:\{\begin{array}{cc}e_1^{}=1\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )\sqrt{\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }\left[\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )2\right]Sinh(2\mu )}\hfill & \\ e_2^{}=1\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )+\sqrt{\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }\left[\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )2\right]Sinh(2\mu )}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(35)
Where the signs $``$ stand for $`i`$=1, 2. While the fixed point $`(0,0)`$ is elliptic, for the two others the asymptotic behaviours are not so clear. We can circumvent this uncertainty by considering instead the traces of the matrix at those points. We obtain:

$$T_{1(a,\mu )}^+=2\left[1+\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )\right],T_{1(a,\mu )}^{}=2\left[1\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )\right]$$
(36)
In terms of these traces and according to our preliminary statments, the stability condition can now turn into the inequality: $`T_{1(a,\mu )}^\pm <2`$. Since $`\mu `$ and a are all positive definite, it results that this condition on the trace will never hold for $`T_{1(a,\mu )}^+`$ and therefore $`W^+`$ is an always unstable fixed point. By contrary, $`T_{1(a,\mu )}^{}`$ can be less than 2 provided we select the following parameter values:

$$a>\frac{\mu }{\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}Sinh(2\mu )}$$
(37)
In which case $`W^{}`$ is a stable fixed point. Otherwise, it is unstable. The marginal stability at

$$a=\frac{\mu }{\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}Sinh(2\mu )},$$
(38)
marks a critical state at which the fixed point can bifurcates carrying the orbit either aways from it or closer by changing period. Since similar features hold for the fixed point $`(0,0)`$, everywhere below we will deal with trace.
The stability of the next orbits, i.e. the period-two orbit and higher can from now be easily analyzed. Besides we are able to construct the recusion laws governing successive orbits around each fixed point. Indeed, writing the matrix equation for the transformation to a given ł-cycle orbit as $`W=M^łW`$, we find by turns:

$$T_{ł(a,\mu )}^o=2^ł,T_{ł(a,\mu )}^+=\left[2\left(1+\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )\right)\right]^ł,T_{ł(a,\mu )}^{}=\left[2\left(1\frac{a\sqrt{1+\mu ^2}}{\mu }Sinh(2\mu )\right)\right]^ł$$
(39)
We learn from these recursion relations that the sequences of orbit cycles are indeed all periodic and therefore result in the map dynamics characterized by changes in the geometry of the KAM surfaces. As the phase-space trajectories in figures 1 illustrate, these per-iterate changes involve stretchings of the two axes as the separations between nearby points increase or decrease. The stretching factors in each of these two directions can be identified as the largest Lyapounov exponents of the orbit. For the fixed point $`(0,0)`$, the recursion suggests that the norms of the largest Lyapunov exponents of successive orbits all converge to the same limit $`L=\mathrm{ln}(2)`$. Positive Lyapunov exponent traduces the fact that bifurcations of the fixed points will consist of period doublings(or halvings) as long as orbits remain asymptotically periodic, and can involve openings of chaotic windows along the bifurcation loop. By the same means we can estimate the convergence limits of the largest Lyapunov exponents of the fixed points $`W^\pm `$. we find one single expression for the two non-zero fixed points (34)- (35) i.e:

$$L^{(i)}=\mathrm{ln}(2)+\mathrm{ln}\left[1\frac{a^2(1+\mu ^2)}{\mu ^2}Sinh^2(2\mu )\right]$$
(40)
According to figure 3a and 3b , depending on the values of a and $`\mu `$ the parameter $`L^{(i)}`$ can change from positive to negative values and crosses a zero value without discontinuity. This behaviour reminds Hopf singularities.
To fix our minds as concerns the map sensitivity to the two parameters a($`aM_\mu `$ map) and $`\mu `$($`\mu M_a`$ map) taken separately, we follow an arbitrary trajectory set from an input position for some range of values of each of these parameters. This leads to the bifurcation diagrams displayed on figure 4 and figures 5a-5c. Figures 4 corresponds to the $`aM_\mu `$ map, with input $`u_o=10^7`$ and for $`\mu =0.5`$. Periods of the orbits seem to get halved converging to the critical value $`a=1.685`$. Next, the first period doubling points out at $`a=1.963`$, followed by a cascade of further period-doubling bifurcations with alternating chaotic and periodic attractor windows. Namely, the period-six attractor window is observed at about $`a=2.165`$. Similar features also emerge for the $`\mu M_a`$ map. However, here emerges two main bifurcation scenarios shown on figures 5a and 5b, respectively. Figure 5a corresponds to values of a in the range $`a<1`$(in this particular case $`a=0.99`$). The first crisis consists of period doubling at $`\mu =0.76`$ with the period-six chaotic attractor windows settling at $`\mu =0.937`$. For $`a>1`$, the prevailing bifurcation scenario is that shown on figure 5b($`a=1.99`$). On figure 5c we magnify the region of figure 5b that shows apparent crisis. Here also we note ”period-doubling” cascades as well as chaotic phases marked by the random points. These complex behaviours suggest that the $`\mu M_a`$ map may show deeper sentitivity to parameter changes than the $`aM_\mu `$.

## V Conclusion

In summary, we have explored the essential discrete properties of a class of DDWP models. We have been able to derive analytical expressions of some important physical quantities as the PN potential, which makes the DDWP analytically tractable an therefore applicable to a large variety of discrete nonlinear systems. The multiplicity and richness of the distinct discrete wave amplitude solutions resulting from the numerical simulations, as well as the bifurcation diagrams showing the coexistence of period-doubling and period-halving cascades as well as chaotic phases, are of great importance for the possible large variety of domain-wall and phase regimes that they allow to explore within one single model.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Work jointly supported by FCAR-CANADA and ICTP-IAEA-UNESCO, Trieste-Italy.

## VI Figure Captions:

Figure 1a: Phase-space trajectories for $`\mu 1.5`$, $`a0.8`$.
Figure 1b: Phase-space trajectories for $`\mu 0.1`$, $`a0.8`$.
Figure 2a: $`\mu 2`$ . Well-shaped discrete periodic soliton wavetrains given by numerical simulations.
Figure 2b: $`\mu 0.5`$ . Discrete periodic wavetrain of narrow solitons.
Figure 2c: $`\mu 0.01`$. Weakly nonlinear, discrete periodic envelope modes.
Figure 3a: Largest Lyapunov exponent of the $`W^\pm `$ fixed points as function of $`\mu `$.
Figure 3b: Largest Lyapunov exponent of the $`W^\pm `$ fixed points as function of a.
Figure 4: Bifurcation diagram of the $`aM_{(a,\mu )}`$ map.
Figure 5a: Bifurcation diagram of the $`\mu M_{(a,\mu )}`$ map for $`a<1`$.
Figure 5b: Bifurcation diagram of the $`\mu M_{(a,\mu )}`$ map for $`a>1`$.
Figure 5c: First critical region of the Bifurcation diagram of $`\mu M_{(a,\mu )}`$.