text:
# Diffractive 𝜂_𝑐 and 𝜂_𝑏 productions by neutrinos via neutral currents

## Abstract

We report a first theoretical study for neutrino-induced diffractive productions of heavy pseudoscalar mesons, $`\eta _c`$ and $`\eta _b`$, off a nucleon. Based on factorization formalism for exclusive processes, we evaluate the forward diffractive production cross section in perturbative QCD in terms of the light-cone $`Q\overline{Q}`$ wave functions (WFs) of $`\eta _{c,b}`$ mesons and the gluon distribution of the nucleon. The light-cone WFs of the $`\eta _c`$ ($`\eta _b`$) meson are constructed to satisfy the spin symmetry relations with those of the $`J/\psi `$ ($`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$) meson. The diffractive $`\eta _c`$ production is governed by the axial-vector coupling of the longitudinally polarized $`Z`$ boson to $`Q\overline{Q}`$ pair, and the resulting $`\eta _c`$ production rate is larger than the $`J/\psi `$ one by one order of magnitude. We also discuss the production of bottomonium $`\eta _b`$, which shows up for higher beam energy.

Exclusive diffractive leptoproductions of neutral vector mesons provide unique insight into an interplay between nonperturbative and perturbative effects in QCD Levin . The diffractive processes are mediated by the exchange of a Pomeron with the vacuum quantum numbers, whose QCD description is directly related to the gluon distributions inside the nucleons for small Bjorken-$`x`$ Ry ; BFGMS ; FKS ; RRML ; LMRT . The processes also allow us to probe the light-cone wave functions (WFs) of the vector mesons. Relating to the latter point, however, the applicability is apparently limited to probing the neutral vector mesons.

In this Letter, we propose the exclusive diffractive productions of mesons in terms of the neutrino beam. The weak currents allow us to observe both neutral ($`M^0`$) and charged mesons ($`M^\pm `$) as $`\nu _\mu +N\nu _\mu /\mu ^{}+N+M^0/M^\pm `$ by $`Z/W`$ boson exchange KM , and these mesons can be not only vector but also other types of mesons including pseudoscalar mesons. Thus, such processes may reveal structure of various kinds of mesons, the coupling of the QCD Pomeron to quark-antiquark pair with various spin-flavor quantum numbers, and information on the CKM matrix elements. There already exist some experimental data for $`\pi `$, $`\rho `$, $`D_s^\pm `$, $`D_s^{}`$ E632 ; E815 , $`D_s^+`$ CHORUS , and $`J/\psi `$ production E815 , but there are only a few theoretical calculations, e.g., for the $`J/\psi `$ production in a vector meson dominance model BKP  and for $`D_s^{}`$ production with the generalized parton density LS . Our work gives a first QCD calculation for diffractive meson productions via the weak neutral current. Here, our interest will be directed to productions of heavy pseudoscalar mesons, especially $`\eta _c`$ and $`\eta _b`$ as in Fig. 1. So far $`\eta _c`$ has been observed via the decays of $`J/\psi `$ or $`B`$ mesons produced by $`p\overline{p}`$ and $`e^+e^{}`$ reactions, while $`\eta _b`$ has not been observed. The diffractive productions via the weak neutral current will give a direct access to $`\eta _c`$ as well as a new experimental method to identify $`\eta _b`$ by e.g. measuring the two photon decay.

We treat the $`\eta _c`$ and $`\eta _b`$ productions by generalizing the approach in the leading logarithmic order of perturbative QCD, which has been developed successfully for the vector meson electroproductions Ry ; BFGMS ; FKS ; RRML ; LMRT . We consider the near-forward diffractive productions $`Z^{}(q)+N(P)\eta _Q(q+\mathrm{\Delta })+N^{}(P\mathrm{\Delta })`$, where $`Q=c,b`$, and $`q,q+\mathrm{\Delta },P`$ and $`P\mathrm{\Delta }`$ denote the momenta of the virtual $`Z`$ boson, $`\eta _Q`$ meson, initial and final nucleons, respectively. The total center-of-mass energy $`W=\sqrt{(P+q)^2}`$ is much larger than any other mass scales involved, i.e., $`W^2K^2`$ with $`K^2=𝒬^2,t,m_Q^2,\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}^2,\mathrm{}`$, where $`𝒬^2=q^2`$, $`t=\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$, and $`m_Q`$ is the heavy-quark mass. We also suppose $`tm_Q^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}^2m_Q^2`$. The heavy quark mass $`m_Q`$ ensures that perturbative QCD can be applied even for $`𝒬^2=0`$ to calculate the creation of the $`Q\overline{Q}`$ pair as well as its time development before the nonperturbative effects to form a quarkonium state $`\eta _Q`$ set in. The crucial point is that at high $`W`$ the scattering of the $`Q\overline{Q}`$ pair on the nucleon occurs over a much shorter timescale than the $`Z^{}Q\overline{Q}`$ fluctuation or the $`Q\overline{Q}\eta _Q`$ formation times (see Fig. 1). As a result, the production amplitudes obey factorization in terms of the $`Z`$ and $`\eta _Q`$ light-cone WFs. The $`Q\overline{Q}`$-$`N`$ elastic scattering amplitude, sandwiched between the $`Z`$ and $`\eta _Q`$ WFs, is further factorized into the $`Q\overline{Q}`$-gluon hard scattering amplitude and the nucleon matrix element corresponding to the (unintegrated) gluon density distribution. This latter step in the factorization to get the gluon distribution can be carried out in the same manner as in the previous works Ry ; BFGMS ; FKS ; RRML ; LMRT . The participation of the “new players” $`Z`$ and $`\eta _Q`$ in the former step requires an extension of the previous works by introducing the corresponding light-cone WFs.

First of all, we discuss the extension due to the participation of the $`Z`$ boson. The $`ZQ\overline{Q}`$ weak vertex of Fig. 1 is given by $`(g_W/2\mathrm{cos}\theta _W)\gamma _\mu (c_Vc_A\gamma _5)`$, where $`(g_W/2\mathrm{cos}\theta _W)^2=\sqrt{2}G_FM_Z^2`$ with $`G_F`$ the Fermi constant and $`M_Z`$ the $`Z`$ mass. $`c_V=1/2(4/3)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W,c_A=1/2`$ for the $`c`$-quark and similarly for the $`b`$-quark. As usual, we introduce the two light-like vectors $`q^{}`$ and $`p^{}`$ by the relations $`q=q^{}(𝒬^2/s)p^{}`$, $`P=p^{}+(M_N^2/s)q^{}`$, $`q^2=p^2=0`$, $`s=2q^{}p^{}`$ with $`M_N`$ the nucleon mass and $`sW^2+𝒬^2M_N^2`$, and the Sudakov decomposition of all momenta, e.g., $`k=\alpha q^{}+\beta p^{}+k_{}`$.

We also introduce the polarization vectors $`\epsilon ^{(\xi )}`$ ($`\xi =0,\pm 1`$) of the virtual $`Z`$ boson to satisfy $`_\xi (1)^{\xi +1}\epsilon _{\mu }^{(\xi )}{}_{}{}^{}\epsilon _\nu ^{(\xi )}=g_{\mu \nu }+q_\mu q_\nu /M_Z^2`$, which is the numerator of the propagator for the massive vector boson. Because the $`q_\mu q_\nu /M_Z^2`$ term vanishes when contracted with the neutral current, we conveniently choose as

$`\epsilon ^{(0)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{𝒬}}q^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{𝒬}{s}}p^{},\epsilon ^{(\pm 1)}=\epsilon _{}^{(\pm 1)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(0,1,\pm i,0),`$ (1)
for the longitudinal ($`\xi =0`$) and transverse ($`\xi =\pm 1`$) polarizations, respectively. Eq. (1) coincides with the polarization vectors for the virtual photon in Refs. Ry ; BFGMS ; FKS ; RRML . For the $`J/\psi `$ electroproductions, the wavy line of Figs. 1 and 2(a) denotes a virtual photon. The corresponding photon light-cone WFs are derived as BFGMS ; FKS ; GQ

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^{\gamma (\xi )}(\alpha ,𝒌_{})=e_Q{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\alpha (1\alpha )}\overline{u}_\lambda (k)\text{/}\epsilon ^{(\xi )}v_\lambda ^{}(qk)}{\alpha (1\alpha )𝒬^2+𝒌_{}^2+m_Q^2}},`$ (2)
with eq. (1) for $`\xi =0,\pm 1`$. Here $`e_Q`$ is the electric charge of the quark, and $`u_\lambda (k)`$ ($`v_\lambda ^{}(qk)`$) denote the on-shell spinor for the (anti)quark with helicity $`\lambda `$ ($`\lambda ^{}`$). These WFs describe the probability amplitudes to find the photon in a state with the $`Q\overline{Q}`$ pair, where the quark carries the longitudinal momentum fraction $`\alpha `$ and the transverse momentum $`𝒌_{}`$ as $`k=\alpha q^{}+\beta p^{}+k_{}`$, $`k_{}^2=𝒌_{}^2`$. Obviously, the light-cone WFs for the virtual $`Z`$ boson can be obtained from eq. (2) by the replacement $`e_Q\gamma _\mu (g_W/2\mathrm{cos}\theta _W)\gamma _\mu (c_Vc_A\gamma _5)`$ as

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^{Z(\xi )}(\alpha ,𝒌_{})={\displaystyle \frac{g_W}{2\mathrm{cos}\theta _W}}`$ (3)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\alpha (1\alpha )}\overline{u}_\lambda (k)\text{/}\epsilon ^{(\xi )}\left(c_Vc_A\gamma _5\right)v_\lambda ^{}(qk)}{\alpha (1\alpha )𝒬^2+𝒌_{}^2+m_Q^2}}.`$
Next we proceed to the light-cone WFs for the $`\eta _Q`$ meson, corresponding to Fig. 2(b). Again, it is convenient to exploit the correspondence with the $`J/\psi `$ electroproductions. The light-cone WFs for the heavy vector mesons $`V=J/\psi ,\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ have been discussed in many works, but are still controversial in the treatment of subleading effects like the Fermi motion corrections FKS ; RRML ; hood , corrections to ensure the pure $`S`$-wave $`Q\overline{Q}`$ state ivanov , corrections via the Melosh rotation HIKT , etc. Here we employ the light-cone WFs for the vector meson given by (see Fig. 2(b))

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^{V(\varpi )}{}_{}{}^{}(\alpha ,𝒌_{})={\displaystyle \frac{\overline{v}_\lambda ^{}(\stackrel{~}{q}k)}{\sqrt{1\alpha }}}\gamma ^\mu e_{\mu }^{(\varpi )}{}_{}{}^{}{\displaystyle \frac{u_\lambda (k)}{\sqrt{\alpha }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi ^{}(\alpha ,𝒌_{})}{M_V}},`$ (4)
where $`\stackrel{~}{q}=q+\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`M_V`$, and $`e_\mu ^{(\varpi )}`$ ($`\varpi =0,\pm 1`$) are momentum, mass, and the polarization vector of the vector meson with $`\stackrel{~}{q}^2=M_V^2`$, $`e^{(\varpi )}\stackrel{~}{q}=0`$, and $`e^{(\varpi )}e^{(\varpi ^{})}=\delta _{\varpi \varpi ^{}}`$. $`(1+\text{/}\stackrel{~}{q}/M_V)/2`$ denotes the projection operator, $`^2=`$, to ensure the $`S`$-wave $`Q\overline{Q}`$ state in the heavy-quark limit Ry ; hood ; BJ . (This projection operator coincides with that discussed in Ref. ivanov  up to the binding-energy effects of the quarkonia.) Note that eq. (4) reduces to the vector-meson WFs of Ref. BFGMS  by the replacement $`1`$. The physical interpretation of eq. (4) is similar to the “perturbative” WFs (2) and (3), but the scalar function $`\varphi (\alpha ,𝒌_{})`$ contains nonperturbative dynamics between $`Q`$ and $`\overline{Q}`$. Now, the light-cone WFs for the $`\eta _Q`$ meson can be derived from eq. (4) utilizing spin symmetry, which is exact in the heavy-quark limit. This symmetry relates the $`S`$-wave states, $`\eta _Q`$ and the three spin states of the vector meson Geo . Namely, $`M_{\eta _Q}=M_V`$, and the pseudoscalar state is related to the vector state with longitudinal polarization as $`|\eta _Q=2\widehat{S}_Q^3|V(\varpi =0)`$, where $`\widehat{S}_Q^3`$ is the third component of the hermitean spin operator $`\widehat{S}_Q^i`$ which acts on the spin of the heavy quark $`Q`$ but does not act on $`\overline{Q}`$. For the WFs we get (see eq. (4))

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^{\eta _Q}(\alpha ,𝒌_{})`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\overline{v}_\lambda ^{}(\stackrel{~}{q}k)}{\sqrt{1\alpha }}}\gamma ^\mu e_{\mu }^{(0)}{}_{}{}^{}\left(2S^3\right){\displaystyle \frac{u_\lambda (k)}{\sqrt{\alpha }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi ^{}(\alpha ,𝒌_{})}{M_V}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{v}_\lambda ^{}(\stackrel{~}{q}k)}{\sqrt{1\alpha }}}\gamma _5{\displaystyle \frac{u_\lambda (k)}{\sqrt{\alpha }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi ^{}(\alpha ,𝒌_{})}{M_{\eta _Q}}}.`$ (5)
Here $`S^3`$ is a matrix repesentation of $`\widehat{S}_Q^3`$ as $`S^3=\gamma _5\text{/}\stackrel{~}{q}\text{/}e^{(0)}/(2M_V)`$, which is related to a spin matrix $`\sigma ^{12}/2=\gamma _5\gamma ^0\gamma ^3/2`$ in the meson rest frame by a Lorentz boost in the third direction Geo . Thus the $`\eta _Q`$ is described by the same nonperturbative WF $`\varphi (\alpha ,𝒌_{})`$ as the vector meson. Note that, due to the presence of $``$, the “$`Q\overline{Q}\eta _Q`$ vertex” involves pseudovector as well as pseudoscalar coupling.

Combining our $`Z`$ and $`\eta _Q`$ WFs with the $`Q\overline{Q}`$-$`N`$ elastic amplitude which was obtained in Ref. BFGMS , we get the total amplitude for the polarization $`\epsilon ^{(\xi )}`$ of the $`Z`$ boson as

$`\text{Im}^{(\xi )}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}\pi s}{2\sqrt{N_c}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda ^{}\lambda }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\alpha d^2k_{}}{16\pi ^3}d^2l_{}\frac{\alpha _s(𝒍_{}^2)}{𝒍_{}^4}}`$
$`\times `$ $`f(x,𝒍_{}^2)[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\mathrm{\Psi }_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^{Z(\xi )}(\alpha ,𝒌_{})\mathrm{\Psi }_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^{Z(\xi )}(\alpha ,𝒌_{}+𝒍_{})`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^{Z(\xi )}(\alpha ,𝒌_{}𝒍_{})]\mathrm{\Psi }^{\eta _Q}_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^{}(\alpha ,𝒌_{}),`$ (6)
up to the terms suppressed for high $`W`$ and $`𝚫_{}^2t0`$. Here $`\alpha _s(𝒍_{}^2)`$ denotes the running coupling constant for $`N_c`$ colors. As usual, we have explicitly dealt with the imaginary part of the production amplitude, because the small real part can be reconstructed perturbatively (see eq. (7) below). $`f(x,𝒍_{}^2)`$ denotes the unintegrated gluon density, and $`x=(𝒬^2+M_{\eta _Q}^2)/s`$ and $`𝒍_{}`$ are the longitudinal momentum fraction and the transverse momentum, respectively, which are carried by a gluon inside the nucleon BFGMS ; RRML . We substitute eqs. (3) and (5) into eq. (6), and go over to the “$`𝒃`$-space” conjugate to the $`𝒌_{}`$-space via the Fourier transformation $`\varphi (\alpha ,𝒌_{})=4\pi d^2be^{i𝒌_{}𝒃}\varphi (\alpha ,𝒃)`$; $`𝒃`$ denotes the transverse separation between $`Q`$ and $`\overline{Q}`$. Then, it is straightforward to see $`\text{Im}^{(\pm 1)}=0`$ which reflects helicity conservation in the high energy limit. $`\text{Im}^{(0)}`$ can be calculated in parallel with previous works for the vector meson production RRML ; FKS ; SHIAH . In the integrand, there appear the terms $`e^{i𝒍_{}𝒃}`$ and $`e^{i𝒍_{}𝒃}`$. The leading $`\mathrm{ln}(𝒬^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}^2)`$ contribution comes from the region $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}^2𝒍_{}^2𝒬_{\mathrm{eff}}^2([𝒬^2+M_{\eta _Q}^2]/4)`$ of the $`𝒍_{}`$-integral BFGMS ; RRML , where $`𝒍_{}𝒃1`$ is satisfied because $`|𝒃|1/m_Q`$. We retain only the leading nonzero term in the power series in $`𝒍_{}𝒃`$, which corresponds to the “color-dipole picture” FKS ; SHIAH . Then, using $`^{𝒬_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}𝑑l_{}^2f(x,𝒍_{}^2)/𝒍_{}^2=xG(x,𝒬_{\mathrm{eff}}^2)`$ with $`G(x,𝒬_{\mathrm{eff}}^2)`$ the conventional gluon distribution, we get ($`b|𝒃|`$) SHIAH

$`i^{(0)}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}\pi ^2W^2}{\sqrt{N_c}}}{\displaystyle \frac{g_Wm_Qc_A}{M_{\eta _Q}𝒬\mathrm{cos}\theta _W}}\alpha _s(𝒬_{\mathrm{eff}}^2)\left[1+i{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\text{ln}x}}\right]`$
$`\times x`$ $`G(x,𝒬_{\mathrm{eff}}^2){\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle \frac{d\alpha 𝒬_m}{\alpha (1\alpha )}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑bb^2\varphi ^{}(\alpha ,b)K_1\left(b𝒬_m\right),`$ (7)
where $`𝒬_m=[\alpha (1\alpha )𝒬^2+m_Q^2]^{1/2}`$, $`K_1`$ is a modified Bessel function, and we have included the real part of the amplitude as a perturbation BFGMS ; FKS ; RRML . As expected, the result (7) is proportional to $`c_A`$, so that the $`\eta _Q`$ meson is generated by the axial-vector part of the weak current.

For comparison, we also calculate the diffractive vector meson production via the weak neutral current, by the replacement $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^{\eta _Q}\mathrm{\Psi }_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}^{V(\varpi )}`$ in eq. (6). Substituting eq. (4), we find that $`\xi =\varpi `$, i.e., $`^{(0)}`$ and $`^{(\pm 1)}`$ give the production of the longitudinally and transversely polarized vector mesons, respectively, and that all these amplitudes are proportional to the vector coupling $`c_V`$. (When we replace the factor $`g_Wc_V/(2\mathrm{cos}\theta _W)`$ by $`e_c=2e/3`$ in these results, we obtain the amplitudes $`^{(\xi )}`$ identical to those for the diffractive electroproduction of $`J/\psi `$ FKS ; RRML , up to the corrections due to $``$ of eq. (4).)

Combining eq. (7) with the $`Z`$ boson propagator and the weak neutral current by a neutrino, the forward differential cross section for the $`\eta _Q`$ production is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3\sigma (\nu N\nu ^{}N^{}\eta _Q)}{dsd𝒬^2dt}}|_{t=0}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4(8\pi )^3E_\nu ^2M_N^2s}}{\displaystyle \frac{g_W^2}{\mathrm{cos}\theta _W^2}}`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒬^2}{\left(𝒬^2+M_Z^2\right)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{1ϵ}}\left|^{(0)}\right|^2,`$ (8)
where $`E_\nu `$ is the neutrino beam energy in the lab system, and $`ϵ=[4(1y)Q^2/E_\nu ^2]/[2\{1+(1y)^2\}+Q^2/E_\nu ^2]`$ with $`y=s/(2M_NE_\nu )`$ is the polarization parameter of the virtual $`Z`$ boson KM ; BKP . In order to evaluate the corresponding elastic $`\eta _Q`$ production rate, we assume the $`t`$-dependence as $`d^3\sigma /dsd𝒬^2dt=d^3\sigma /dsd𝒬^2dt|_{t=0}\mathrm{exp}(B_{\eta _Q}t)`$ with a constant diffractive slope, as in the case of the vector meson production. Integrating $`d^2\sigma /dsd𝒬^2=(1/B_{\eta _Q})d^3\sigma /dsd𝒬^2dt|_{t=0}`$ over $`𝒬^2`$ and $`s`$, we get the elastic production rate $`\sigma (\nu N\nu ^{}N^{}\eta _Q)`$ as a function of $`E_\nu `$.

For numerical computation of $`\sigma (\nu N\nu ^{}N^{}\eta _Q)`$, we need explicit form of $`\varphi (\alpha ,𝒃)`$ of eq. (7). From eqs. (4) and (5), we can use the corresponding nonperturbative part of the vector-meson WF which was constructed in the previous works based on, e.g., non-relativistic potential model for heavy quarkonia FKS ; SHIAH . In this work, we adopt the WF from the Cornell potential model with the corresponding quark masses $`m_c=1.5`$ GeV, $`m_b=4.9`$ GeV EQ . A procedure to construct $`\varphi (\alpha ,𝒌_{})`$ with the light-cone variables from the usual Schrödinger WF $`\varphi _{NR}(𝒌)`$ has been given in Refs. FKS ; SHIAH . Also, we use the empirical values for the masses $`M_{\eta _c}=2.98`$ GeV, $`M_N=0.94`$ GeV and $`M_Z=91.2`$ GeV. For $`\eta _b`$, we use $`M_{\eta _b}=9.45`$ GeV estimated in Ref. HK . Because the slope $`B_{\eta _Q}`$ introduced above is unknown, we assume that $`B_{\eta _Q}`$ has the same value as that for the corresponding vector meson: $`B_{\eta _c}=4.5`$ GeV-2 from the experimental value for $`J/\psi `$ RRML  and $`B_{\eta _b}=3.9`$ GeV-2 following the value for $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ in Ref. FMS . For the gluon distribution $`G(x,𝒬_{\mathrm{eff}}^2)`$ of eq. (7), we employ GRV95 NLO parameterization GRV95 .

We show the elastic $`\eta _c`$ production rate, $`\sigma (\nu N\nu ^{}N^{}\eta _c)`$, by the solid curve in Fig. 3. The result monotonically increases as a function of the beam energy $`E_\nu `$. Such behavior is similar with that observed in the $`\pi `$-production data by the neutral KM  and charged currents E632 . For comparison, we show the elastic $`J/\psi `$ production rate $`\sigma (\nu N\nu ^{}N^{}J/\psi )`$ by the dashed curve (see the discussion below eq. (7)) foot . The rate for $`\eta _c`$ production is much larger than that for $`J/\psi `$ by a factor $`20`$. This is mainly due to the relevant weak couplings, $`c_A`$ for $`\eta _c`$ and $`c_V`$ for $`J/\psi `$, as $`(c_A/c_V)^27`$. Another important effect comes from the different behavior of the $`Z`$ light-cone WFs (3) between the axial-vector and vector channels: It is straigtforward to see that the $`\eta _c`$ diffractive amplitude (7) as well as the corresponding amplitudes for the longitudinally and transversely polarized $`J/\psi `$ decreases rather rapidly for high $`𝒬^2`$ region, $`𝒬^24m_c^2`$, so that the elastic production rates are in principle dominated by the low $`𝒬^2`$ contribution of the differential cross sections (similar behavior is observed also for $`J/\psi `$ electroproductions FKS ; RRML ). For weak neutral current proceses, however, a typical factor $`𝒬^2/(𝒬^2+M_Z^2)^2`$ appears in the diffrential cross sections as in eq. (8). The low $`𝒬^2`$ contribution of the differential cross section for $`J/\psi `$ is suppressed by this factor, while that for $`\eta _c`$ avoids the suppression due to $`1/𝒬`$ behavior of eq. (7). This particular behavior of the $`\eta _c`$ diffractive amplitude comes from the spinor matrix element of the $`Z`$ light-cone WFs (3) as $`\overline{u}_\lambda (k)\text{/}\epsilon ^{(0)}\gamma _5v_\lambda ^{}(qk)1/𝒬`$ for $`𝒬0`$. On the other hand, $`\overline{u}_\lambda (k)\text{/}\epsilon ^{(0)}v_\lambda ^{}(qk)𝒬`$ and $`\overline{u}_\lambda (k)\text{/}\epsilon ^{(\pm 1)}v_\lambda ^{}(qk)\mathrm{const}`$, for the vector channels relevant for $`J/\psi `$.

In Fig. 3, we also show the $`\eta _b`$ production rate $`\sigma (\nu N\nu ^{}N^{}\eta _b)`$ by the dotted curve. Although the rate for $`\eta _b`$ is generally much smaller than that for $`\eta _c`$, the former increases more rapidly than the latter for increasing $`E_\nu `$. Therefore, the $`\eta _b`$ production rate could become comparable with the $`\eta _c`$ production for higher beam energy, suggesting a possibility to observe $`\eta _b`$ through the diffractive productions by high-intensity neutrino beams available in ongoing or forthcoming neutrino facilities.

In conclusion, we have computed the diffractive production cross sections of $`\eta _{c,b}`$ mesons via the weak neutral current, using the new results of the light-cone WFs for $`Z`$ and $`\eta _{c,b}`$. Our results demonstrate that neutrino-induced productions will open a new window to measure $`\eta _{c,b}`$.

###### Acknowledgements.

We are pleased to acknowledge useful discussions with T. Hatsuda and H. Mineo in the early stage of this work. One of the authors (A.H.) is grateful to T. Hirano for his support in numerical calculation. A.H. is supported by JSPS Research Fellowship for Young Scientists.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In theories with extra dimensions there is an interesting alternative to the conventional seesaw mechanism of giving neutrinos a small mass . In that scheme, the left-handed neutrino ($`\nu _L`$) resides on the brane together with all other Standard Model fields, whereas the right handed neutrinos ($`\nu _R`$) live in the bulk. The neutrino mass of any flavor is then suppressed with respect to other fermion masses by a factor of the order of $`M_{}/M_P`$, $`M_P`$ being the four dimensional Planck mass and $`M_{}`$ is the string scale. Its currently favored value is somewhere between $`10`$ TeV and $`100`$ TeV. Phenomenological implications of such a scheme have been studied by a number of authors. For our purposes, the relevant papers are the ones authored by Faraggi and Pospelov , McLaughlin and Ng  and by Agashe and Wu .

We argue that if indeed $`\nu _R`$ of any flavor lives in the bulk, then magnetic Cherenkov radiation by that neutrino flavor is enhanced due to the contribution of Kaluza-Klein (KK) excitations to the transition probability. In the next Section we outline the calculation leading to such a conclusion. We find that, in fact, there is hardly anything to calculate, since one is able to use results of ref.  combined with those of Sawyer . In Sec. 3 practical aspects of the results are discussed; in particular, we estimate the yield of Cherenkov photons in water, relevant for underwater detectors.(Estimates of yields in detectors in ice are somewhat lower, but not dramatically so.) The last Section is devoted to a discussion of the results.

It is to be noted that there exists an extensive literature on magnetic Cherenkov radiation of neutrinos: several results have been repeatedly rediscovered, rederived, etc. often with results which contradict each other. To our knowledge, the papers of Sawyer  and of Ionnisian and Raffelt  are internally consistent. In addition, ref.  contains an extensive list of references. Throughout this paper natural units are used: $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$.

## 2 Cherenkov radiation in the presence of KK excitations

If a particle is neutral, but of nonzero spin, it is scattered on an electromagnetic field due to its magnetic moment. By using the optical theorem and crossing symmetry, the magnitude of the magnetic moment can be extracted from the imaginary part of the forward (magnetic) Compton amplitude in the zero frequency limit. If the particle in question has excited states, this leads to an energy dependent effective magnetic moment: the imaginary part of the Compton amplitude depends on the number of excited states available at a given energy. This is, in fact, the argument put forward in ref. .

The forward Compton amplitude depends on the expression of the transition moments between the ground state of the particle and its excited states. Obviously, this reasoning is applicable to neutrinos with $`\nu _R`$ living in the bulk, due to the existence of KK excitations. Assuming toroidal compactification of the extra dimensions of equal radii ($`R^1=M_c`$), it is obvious that the effective magnetic moment squared is proportional to the number of available KK states at a given energy, as well as to the mass squared of the neutrino:

$$\mu _{\mathrm{eff}}^2m_D^2\left(\frac{E}{M_c}\right)^n$$
(1)
McLaughlin and Ng  find for a reasonable choice of parameters, qualitatively consistent with solar and atmospheric neutrino data:

$$\mu _N1.6\times 10^{19}\mu _B\frac{m_D}{1\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}},$$
(2)
where $`\mu _N`$ is the transition moment between the zero mode of $`\nu _L`$ and the $`N^{\mathrm{th}}`$ KK level, while $`m_D`$ stands for the (Dirac) mass of the neutrino. The quantity $`\mu _B`$ is the Bohr magneton, giving a convenient comparison scale. The result quoted above is valid in the weak mixing approximation, which is well justifiable here, see . Remarkably, the transition moment is independent of the KK level: this fact plays a significant role in what follows.

The resulting effective magnetic moment is given by:

$$\mu _{\mathrm{eff}}^21.6\times 10^{15}\mu _B^2\frac{\pi ^{\left(1n\right)/2}}{2^n\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{n+1}{2}\right)}\left(\frac{E}{M_{}}\right)^n,$$
(3)
where $`n`$ stands for the number of compactified dimensions. The factor multiplying $`\left(E/M_{}\right)^n`$ is proportional to the degeneracy factor of the KK states. In the last equation, the mass of the neutrino has been eliminated in favor of its Yukawa coupling to the Higgs field, $`y`$, according to the formula:

$$m_D^2=y^2V^2\left(\frac{M_c}{2\pi M_{}}\right)^n,$$
(4)
see ref. . Here, $`V`$ stands for the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs field; its standard value is being used. Due to our ignorance, we also set $`y1`$. As far as $`n`$, the number of compactified dimensions is concerned, certain models (superstring, SUGRA) suggest $`n=6`$ or $`n=7`$, respectively. However, it should be realized that at present, it is unclear whether we have a phenomenologically viable model describing physics beyond the Standard Model. For that reason, we prefer to keep an open mind about the number of compactified dimensions.

With present techniques, Cherenkov radiation can be detected typically in the visible and in the (near) UV. Hence, one can directly use the emission rates obtained by Sawyer , replacing $`\mu ^2\mu _{\mathrm{eff}}^2`$. (This approximation is justified by the fact that the energy of the emitted Cherenkov photon is low compared to energy scales of the KK excitations.)

Using this, one obtains the formula for the number of photons emitted in a unit frequency interval and per unit length by a neutrino of $`v1`$:

$$\frac{dN}{d\omega dx}=\omega ^2\left(\mu _{\mathrm{eff}}\right)^2\left(ϵ\left(\omega \right)1\right).$$
(5)
It is amusing to observe that in the tree approximation used by Sawyer , the result of a lowest order perturbative calculation of the Cherenkov emission rate gives the same result as the old calculation of Ginzburg based on classical electrodynamics . This is a fairly general result: the tree approximation to any given Feynman diagram can be expressed in terms of an iterative solution of the classical field equations to the given order. Taking into account KK excitations requires the use of a quantum calculation of the type devised by Sawyer, l.c. However, in the effective moment approximation as used above, one can still resort to the classical calculation.

## 3 Observability

Without the enhancement provided by the presence of KK excitations, it is hopeless to observe the magnetic Cherenkov radiation. Using the upper limits on the magnetic moments of neutrinos as given by the Particle Data Group , one finds that the number of photons emitted by a neutrino of any flavor is $`10^{16}`$/km or so. Clearly, the observation of such a rare event, let alone its identification as a Cherenkov emission is out of question in any detector at present or in the foreseeable future.

Do KK excitations help?

In order to answer that question, we assume a quantum efficiency of the PMTs in a detector to be around 10% and that about 100 photoelectrons have to be detected in a detector in order to identify a Cherenkov ring. Furthermore, we assume a detector size of the order of 1km. A simple model of phototube response consists of no response below a minimal wavelength, $`\lambda _{min}`$, in the UV, a flat response between $`\lambda _{min}`$ and a fixed $`\lambda _{max}`$, taken to be $`\lambda _{max}0.55\mu `$m and no response again for $`\lambda >\lambda _{max}`$. This appears to be a reasonable zeroth approximation to phototube response  leading to the requirement that about 1,000 photons have to be emitted for $`\lambda _{min}<\lambda <\lambda _{max}`$. We integrate eq. (5) for a fixed $`\lambda _{max}=550\mu `$m and for several values of $`\lambda _{min}`$, using an empirical formula  for the frequency dependence of the index of refraction of water. This formula is a fair approximation to the frequency dependence found in ref. . The empirical formula reads:

$$ϵ=1.762530.0133998\left(\lambda \right)^2+\frac{0.00630957}{\left(\lambda \right)^20.0158806},$$
(6)
the wavelength $`\lambda `$ being measured in $`\mu `$m. Using (6) one has to calculate the integral:

$$F=_{\lambda _{min}}^{\lambda _{max}}𝑑\lambda \frac{1}{ϵ\lambda ^2}\left(ϵ1\right)\frac{d}{d\lambda }\frac{1}{\sqrt{ϵ}\lambda }$$
(7)
The integration over frequencies was replaced by an integration over wavelengths, using the relation $`\omega \lambda =2\pi ϵ^{1/2}`$. The integral $`F`$ is plotted as a function of $`\lambda _{min}`$ in Fig. 1, while keeping $`\lambda _{max}`$ fixed.

It is to be noted that in contrast to Cherenkov radiation by a charge, the emission rate grows as $`\omega ^2`$, thus magnetic Cherenkov radiation is more sensitive to detector response in the ultraviolet.

In the following table we list values of the energy, $`E_{1000}`$, necessary to generate 1,000 Cherenkov photons over a distance of 1 km, (typical of the size of future detectors) for some relevant numbers of compactified dimensions. Because of the structure of eq. (5), the energies listed are measured in units of $`M_{}`$.

It is to be noted that the table above can only serve as a benchmark. In any present and future detector, the minimal number of photons required depends on a geometrical factor: the fraction of the detector volume or surface covered by PMTs, depending on the specific detector type. Since the coverage is never 100%, the minimal number of photons is higher than exhibited above. However, based on the data presented, it is easily calculable for any specific detector.

So far, we have not taken into account an essential feature of the theory as described here. In order for the usual theory of Cherenkov radiation be valid, one has to make sure that the target medium responds collectively and not as a collection of individual atoms. One can establish a criterion for a collective response rather easily.

Assuming that the medium responds as a macroscopic body, one finds that it can take up momentum, but not energy. As a consequence, the equation of energy conservation reads:

$$p_iE_i=\sqrt{p_f^2+M_{KK}^2}+\omega .$$
(8)
In eq. (8), $`\omega `$ stands for the energy of the emitted photon, $`p_i,p_f`$ for the initial and final momenta of the neutrino, respectively and $`M_{KK}`$ for the mass of the KK excitation. On noting that $`\omega `$ is typically in the visible or in the near-UV, one finds that its contribution can be safely neglected in eq. (8). Thus, from eq. (8), one easily finds an approximate expression of the momentum transferred to the target medium, viz

$$q=p_ip_f\frac{M_{KK}^2}{2E_i}$$
(9)
The medium responds collectively if $`1/qd`$, where $`d`$ is the average intermolecular distance. In water $`d10^8`$ cm; the corresponding energy being $`1/d2`$ keV. Very little is known about water or ice under extreme conditions, such as the ones prevailing at the sites of NESTOR or AMANDA. It is expected that $`d`$ is smaller there. However, we use the above value to be on the safe side. In order to obtain an estimate of the neutrino energies needed, we take $`N=1`$, so that $`M_{KK}M_c`$. It follows that the initial energy of an incident neutrino has to satisfy the approximate inequality:

$$\frac{E_i}{M_c}\frac{M_cd}{2}$$
(10)
## 4 Discussion

It is clear from Table 1 that low numbers of extra dimensions are disfavored from the point of view of the observability of magnetic Cherenkov radiation. In view of the stringent lower limits on $`M_c`$ given by Hannestad and Raffelt  it is unreasonable to expect any effect even at $`E10^{20}`$ eV. The situation is somewhat unclear for values of $`n`$ motivated by currently existing theoretical schemes, ($`n=6,7`$), since currently there are no stringent limits comparable to the ones given by ref.  for a low number of compactified dimensions. Future limits on $`n`$ obtained from other sources will determine whether or not magnetic Cherenkov radiation is a useful tool in the search for large compactified extra dimensions.

For now, we take the limits obtained by Anchordoqui et al., ref. () as a guide, as well as our recent estimate of the value of $`M_{}`$ . Anchordoqui et al. give lower limits on $`M_{}`$ about 1 or 2 TeV, whereas, in ref.  we estimate $`M_{}80`$ TeV. The requirement of coherent response, eq. 10 depends explicitly on $`M_c`$. Given symmetric toroidal compactification, as assumed, one can calculate $`M_c`$ from $`M_{}`$ using the ADD formula, :

$$M_c=2\pi M_{}\left(\frac{M_{}}{M_P}\right)^{2/n}.$$
(11)
Using this information, we list the minimal incident neutrino energy (in the laboratory system) assuming $`n=6`$ as required by a supersting for the values of $`M_{}`$ mentioned above.

Clearly, very high neutrino energies are needed in order to make magnetic Cherenkov radiation emitted by neutrinos of any flavor observable. As a consequence, the coherence requirement is not a very serious issue. However, due to its unique features, such a radiation can serve as a very useful diagnostic tool in future detectors.

Acknowledgements. We thank Peter Nemethy for useful discussions on the criteria of observability of Cherenkov radiation and for supplying the empirical formula for the index of refraction. Shmuel Nussinov kindly drew our attention to the limitations of the collective description of a continuum. We thank Haim Goldberg for pointing out an error in the original version of this paper. A.E. thanks the Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Universitá e della Ricerca for partial support of this research under Cofinanziamento P.R.I.N. 2001. G.D. and S.K.D. thank G. Pintér for first raising the possibility of using magnetic Cherenkov radiation as a tool in the search for “new physics”.


text:
# Statistical Equivalence and StochasticProcess Limit TheoremsResearch supported in part by NSF-Division of Mathematical Sciences.

## 1. Probability setting

### 1.1. Background

Let F be the CDF for a probability on ;. F abs. cont., with

$$f(x)\stackrel{\mathrm{\Delta }}{=}\frac{F}{x}on[0,1].$$

Let X1, …, Xn iid from F. $`\widehat{F}_n`$ denotes the sample CDF,

$$\widehat{F}_n(x)\stackrel{\mathrm{\Delta }}{=}\frac{1}{n}\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}𝐈_{[0,x]}\left(X_j\right).$$

Let $`\widehat{Z}_n`$denote the corresponding sample “bridge”,

$$\widehat{Z}_n(x)\stackrel{\mathrm{\Delta }}{=}\widehat{F}_n(x)F(x)$$
(1)
Let W(t) denote the standard Wiener process on  and let $`\widehat{W}_n`$ denote the white noise process with drift f and local variance $`f(t)\mathrm{/}n`$. Thus $`\widehat{W}_n`$ solves

$$d\widehat{W}_n(t)=f(t)dt+\sqrt{\frac{f(t)}{n}}dW\left(t\right).$$

An alternate description of $`\widehat{W}_n`$ is that it is the Gaussian process with mean F(t) and independent increments having

$$var\left(\widehat{W}_n(t)\widehat{W}_n(s)\right)=\frac{1}{n}\left(F(t)F(s)\right),for\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}0}s<t1.$$

The analog of $`\widehat{Z}_n`$ is the Gaussian Bridge, defined by

$$\widehat{B}_n(t)=\frac{\widehat{W}_n(t)}{\widehat{W}_n(\text{1})}F(t).$$

There are various ways of describing the stochastic similarity between $`\widehat{Z}_n`$ and $`\widehat{B}_n`$. For example Komlos, Major, and Tusnady (1975, 1976) proved a result of the form

Theorem (KMT): Given any absolutely continuous F {X1,…,Xn} can be defined on a probability space on which $`\widehat{B}_n`$ can also be defined as a (randomized) function of {X1,…,Xn}. This can be done in such a way that $`\widehat{B}_n`$ has the Gaussian Bridge distribution, above, and

$$P_F\left(\underset{t[0,1]}{sup}\sqrt{n}\left|\widehat{Z}_n(t)\widehat{B}_n(t)\right|>a_n\right)c.$$
(2)
Here $`c>0`$ and $`a_n`$ are suitable positive constants with $`a_n(d\mathrm{log}n)/\sqrt{n}`$ for some $`d>0`$. The process $`\widehat{B}_n`$ can be constructed as a (randomized) function of $`\widehat{Z}_n`$, that is, $`\widehat{B}_n(t)=Q_n\left(\widehat{Z}_n(t)\right)`$. It should be noted that the construction depends on knowledge of F.

\[Various authors, such as Csörgö and Revesz (1981) and Bretagnolle and Massart (1989) have given increasingly detailed and precise values for $`a_n`$ and $`c=c(a_n)`$, and also uniform (in n) versions of (2). These are not our focus.\]

### 1.2. Extensions

1. Results like the above also extend to functional versions of the process $`\widehat{Z}_n`$. Various authors including Dudley (1978), Massart (1989) and Koltchinskii (1994) have established results of the following form.

Let q:$`\mathrm{}`$ be of bounded variation. One can define

$$\widehat{Z}_n(q)\stackrel{\mathrm{\Delta }}{=}qd\{\widehat{F}_nF\}=\left(F\widehat{F}_n\right)𝑑q.$$

(Thus, $`\widehat{Z}_n(x)=\widehat{Z}_n\left(𝐈_{[0,x]}\right)`$.) There is a similar definition for $`\widehat{B}_n(q)`$ as a stochastic integral. (See, for example, Steele (2000).) Then the KMT theorem extends to a fairly broad, but not universal, class of functions, $`𝒬`$. That is, for each F, $`\widehat{B}_n`$ can be defined to satisfy

$$P_F\left(\underset{q\mathrm{Q}}{sup}\sqrt{n}\left|\widehat{Z}_n(q)\stackrel{~}{B}_n(q)\right|>a_n^{}\right)c\text{ where}\{a_n^{}\}\text{depends \hspace{0.33em}on}𝒬.$$
(3)
(For most classes $`𝒬`$, $`a_n^{}\sqrt{n}\mathrm{/}\mathrm{log}n\mathrm{}`$ so that $`a_n^{}>>a_n`$.)

2. Bretagnolle and Massart (1989) proved a similar result for inhomogeneous Poisson processes. Let {T1,…,TN} be (ordered) observations from an inhomogeneous Poisson process with cumulative intensity function nF and, correpondingly, (local) intensity nf. Note that N$``$Poisson(n) and conditionally given N the values of {T1,…,TN} are the order statistics corresponding to an iid sample from the distribution F. In this context we continue to define $`\widehat{F}_n(t)=n^1\left\{\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}I_{[0,t]}(T_j)\right\}`$ where the term in braces now has a Poisson distribution with mean nF(t). Also, continue to define $`\widehat{Z}_n(t)\stackrel{\mathrm{\Delta }}{=}\widehat{F}_n(t)F(t)`$ as in (1). (But, note that it is no longer true that $`\widehat{Z}_n(\text{1})=0`$, w.p.1, as was the case in (1).)

Then versions of the conclusions (2) and (3) remain valid. We give an explicit statement since this result will provide a model for our later development.

Theorem (BM): Given any n and any absolutely continuous F the observations {T1,…,TN} of the inhomogeneous Poisson process can be defined on a probability space on which $`\widehat{B}_n`$ can also be defined as a (randomized) function of {T1,…,TN}. This can be done in such a way that $`\widehat{B}_n`$ has the Gaussian Bridge distribution, above, and

$$P_F\left(\underset{t[0,1]}{sup}\sqrt{n}\left|\widehat{Z}_n(t)\widehat{B}_n(t)\right|>a_n\right)c.$$
(4)
Here $`c>0`$ and $`a_n`$ are suitable constants with $`a_nd\mathrm{log}n/\sqrt{n}`$.

Remark: Clearly there must be extensions of (3) that are valid for the Poisson case also, although we are not aware of an explicit treatment in the literature. Such a statement would conclude in this setting that

$$P_F\left(\underset{q\mathrm{Q}}{sup}\sqrt{n}\left|\widehat{Z}_n(q)\widehat{B}_n(q)\right|>a_n^{}\right)c\text{w}here\{a_n^{}\}\text{depends \hspace{0.33em}on}𝒬.$$
(5)
## 2. Main results

The objective is a considerably modified version of (3) and (5) that is stronger in several respects and (necessarily) different in others. We will concentrate for most of the following on the statement (5) since our results are slightly stronger and more natural in this setting. The extension of (3) will be deferred to a concluding Section.

Expression (5) involves the target function $`\widehat{B}_n`$. In the modified version the role of target function is instead played by $`\stackrel{~}{W}_n`$ which is the solution to the stochastic differential equation

$$d\stackrel{~}{W}_n(t)=g(t)dt+\frac{1}{2\sqrt{n}}dW(t)$$
(6)
where $`g(t)=\sqrt{f(t)}`$. An alternate description of $`\stackrel{~}{W}_n`$ is thus

$$\stackrel{~}{W}_n=G(t)+W(t)/(2\sqrt{n})\text{w}hereG(t)=\underset{0}{\overset{t}{}}\sqrt{f(\tau )}𝑑\tau .$$
(7)
(In the special case where $`f`$ is the uniform density, $`f`$=1, then $`\stackrel{~}{W}_n=W_{4n}`$.)

The role of the constructed random process $`\widehat{Z}_n`$ is now played by a differently constructed process $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_n`$. As before $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_n`$ depends only on {T1,…TN}, and not otherwise on their CDF, F. This version also involves a large set, $``$, of absolutely continuous CDFs. Both $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_n`$ and $``$ will be described later in more detail. Here are statements of the main results.

Theorem 1: Let $``$ be a set of densities satisfying Assumption A or A’, below. Let $`𝒬`$ be the set of all functions of bounded variation. Let {T1,…,TN} be an inhomogeneous Poisson process with local intensity $`nf`$. The process $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_n`$ can be constructed as a (randomized) function of {T1,…,TN}, with the construction not depending on $`f`$. The Gaussian process $`\stackrel{~}{W}_n`$ having the distribution (7 ) can also be defined on this same space as a (randomized) function of {T1,…,TN}. \[This construction depends on $`f`$ on a set of probability at most $`c_n`$.\] This can be done in such a way that

$$\underset{fF}{sup}P_f\left(\underset{q\mathrm{Q}}{sup}\left|\stackrel{~}{Z}_n(q)\stackrel{~}{W}_n(q)\right|>0\right)c_n0.$$
(8)
To be more precise, the phrase in brackets refers to the fact that there is a basic construction, independent of $`f`$, and that this construction must then be modified on a set of measure at most $`c_n`$ with this set and the modification depending on $`f`$.

For the situation of iid variables, as in (1), a similar result holds. In this case the matching Gaussian process is again $`\stackrel{~}{W}_n`$, rather than the Brownian bridge of the KMT theorem.

Theorem 2: Let $``$ be a set of densities satisfying Assumption B, below. Let $`𝒬`$ be the set of all functions of bounded variation. Given any n and f$``$, iid variables {X1,…,Xn} with density $`f`$ can be defined on a probability space. A process $`\stackrel{~}{\stackrel{~}{Z}}_n`$ can be constructed as a (randomized) function of {X1,…,Xn}, with the construction not depending on $`f`$. The Gaussian process $`\stackrel{~}{W}_n`$ having the distribution (7) can also be defined on this same space as a (randomized) function of {X1,…,Xn}. \[This construction depends on $`f`$, but only on a set of probability at most $`c_n`$.\] This can be done in such a way that

$$\underset{f}{sup}P_f\left(\underset{q𝒬}{sup}\left|\stackrel{~}{\stackrel{~}{Z}}_n(q)\stackrel{~}{W}_n(q)\right|>0\right)c_n0.$$
(9)
## 3. Statistical background

### 3.1. Settings

The first purpose of the discussion here is to motivate the probabilistic results described above. A second purpose is to state the result on which to base the proof of Theorem 1. The setting involves two statistical formulations:

Formulation 1 (nonparametric inhomogeneous Poisson process): The observations are T = {T1,…,TN} from the Poisson process with local intensity n$`f`$, $`f`$. The problem is “nonparametric” because the “parameter space”, $``$, is a very large set – too large to be smoothly parameterized by a mapping from a (subset of) a finite dimensional Euclidean space. Some possible forms for $``$ are discussed below. The statistician desires to make some sort of inference, $`\delta `$, (possibly randomized) based on the observation of X.

Formulation 1’ (nonparametric density with random sample size): The relation between Poisson processes and density problems has been mentioned above. As a consequence, Problem 1 is equivalent to a situation where the observations are {X1,…,XN} with N$``$Poisson(n) and {X1,…,XN} the order statistics from a sample of size N from the distribution with density $`f`$. Clearly, this situation is closely related to the more familiar one in which the observations are {X1,…,Xn} with n specified in advance.

Formulation 1” (nonparametric density with fixed sample size): This formulation refers to the more conventional density setting in which the observations are {X1,…,Xn} iid with density $`f`$.

Formulation 2 (white noise with drift): The statistician observes a White noise process $`d\stackrel{~}{W}_n(t)`$, t$``$, with drift g$`𝒢`$ and local variance $`\text{1}\mathrm{/}\text{4n}`$. Thus

$$d\stackrel{~}{W}_n(t)=g(t)dt+\frac{1}{2\sqrt{n}}dW(t),$$

and $`\stackrel{~}{W}_n(t)G(t)=W(t)\mathrm{/}2\sqrt{n}`$ where $`G(t)=\underset{0}{\overset{t}{}}g(\tau )𝑑\tau `$. Again $`𝒢`$ is a very large – hence “nonparametric” – parameter space. Throughout, $`𝒢_2=\{g:g^2<\mathrm{}\}`$. As of now, there need be no relation between $`f`$ in Formulation 1 and g in Formulation 2, but such a relation will later be assumed in connection with Theorem 1, where

$$g=\sqrt{f}\text{a}nd𝒢=\{\sqrt{f}:f\}.$$
(10)
This can alternatively be considered as a statistical formulation having parameter space $``$ under the identification (10). We take this point of view in the BCLZ theorem, below.

### 3.2. Constructive asymptotic statistical equivalence

Here is one definition of the strongest form of such an equivalence.

Definition (asymptotic equivalence): Let $`𝒫_\text{j}^{\text{(n)}}\text{ = (}𝒳_\text{j}^{\text{(n)}}\text{}_\text{j}^{\text{(n)}}\text{,}_\text{j}^{\text{(n)}}\text{)}`$ j = 1,2, n = 1,2,… be two sequences of statistical problems on the same sequence of parameter spaces, $`\mathrm{\Theta }^{(n)}`$. Hence, $`_\text{j}^{\text{(n)}}=\{F_{j,\theta }^{(n)}:\theta \mathrm{\Theta }^{(n)}\}`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_2`$are asymptotically equivalent if there exist (randomized) mappings $`Q_j^{(n)}:𝒳_\text{j}^{\text{(n)}}𝒳_\text{k}^{\text{(n)}}`$, j, k = 1, 2, k$``$j, such that

$$\underset{\theta \mathrm{\Theta }^{(n)}}{sup}F_{j,\theta }^{(n)}()Q_k^{(n)}(|x_k)F\left(dx_k\right)_{TV}=c_n0,j,k=1,2,kj,$$
(11)
where $`_{TV}`$ denotes the total variation norm.

This definition involves a reformulation of the general theory originated by LeCam (1953, 1964). See also Le Cam (1986), Le Cam and Yang (2000), van der Vaart (2002) and Brown and Low (1996) for background on this theory including several alternate versions of the definition and related concepts, a number of conditions that imply asymptotic equivalence, and many applications to a variety of statistical settings. Note that both Formulations 1 and 2 involve an index, n, and can thus be considered as sequences of statistical problems in the sense of the definition.

### 3.3. Spaces of densities (or intensities)

Suitable families of densities, $``$, can be defined via Besov norms with respect to the Haar basis. The Besov norm with index $`\alpha `$ and shape parameters p = q can most conveniently be defined via the stepwise approximants to $`f`$ at resolution level k. These approximants are defined as

$$\overline{f}_k(t)=\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{2^k1}{}}I_{[\mathrm{}\mathrm{/}2^k,(\mathrm{}+1)\mathrm{/}2^k)}(t)\underset{\mathrm{}\mathrm{/}2^k}{\overset{(\mathrm{}+1)\mathrm{/}2^k}{}}2^kf,$$

and the Besov($`\alpha `$,p) norm is defined as

$$f_{\alpha ,p}=\left\{\left|\overline{f}_0\right|^p+\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}2^{pk\alpha }\overline{f}_k\overline{f}_{k+1}_p^p\right\}^{1\mathrm{/}p}.$$

The statement of Theorem 1 can now be completed by stating the assumption on $``$ needed for its validity.

Assumption A: $``$ satisfies

$$\{f:\underset{0x1}{inf}f(x)\epsilon _0\}\text{f}orsome\epsilon _0>0$$
(12)
and $``$ is compact in both Besov(1/2,2) and Besov(1/2,4).

Other function spaces are also conventional for nonparametric statistical applications of this type. The most common of these are based on either the Lipshitz norm $`f_\beta ^{(L)}`$ or the Sobolev norm $`f_\beta ^{(S)}`$. These are defined for $`\beta `$1 by

$$f_\beta ^{(L)}=\underset{0x<y1}{sup}\frac{\left|f(y)f(x)\right|}{\left|yx\right|^\beta },f_\beta ^{(S)}=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}k^{2\beta }\vartheta _k^2$$

where $`\vartheta _k=\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}f(x)e^{ik2\pi x}𝑑x`$ denote the Fourier coefficients of f. (Both spaces have natural definitions for $`\beta `$¿1 as well, but we need consider here only the case $`\beta 1`$.)

The following implies Assumption A and hence also suffices for validity of Theorem 1.

Assumption A’: $``$ satisfies (12), and is bounded in the Lipshitz norm with index $`\beta `$, and is compact in the Sobolev norm with index $`\alpha `$, where $`\alpha \beta `$ and either $`\beta >1/2`$ or $`\alpha 3/4`$ and $`\alpha +\beta 1`$.

The following assumption is noticeably stronger than either A’ or A, and is used in Theorem 2.

Assumption B: $``$ satisfies (12) and is bounded in the Lipshitz norm with index $`\beta `$, where $`\beta >1/2`$.

For more information about the relation of these spaces in this context see Brown, Cai, Low and Zhang (2002) and Brown, Carter, Low and Zhang (2002) (referred to as BCLZ below).

### 3.4. Statistical equivalence theorems

BCLZ then extended earlier results of Nussbaum (1996) and Klemela and Nussbaum (1998) to prove the following basic result:

Theorem a (BCLZ): Consider the statistical Formulations 1 and 2 with the parameter space $``$ and the relation (10). Assume $``$ satisfies Assumption A (or A’. Then the sequences of statistical problems defined in these two formulations are asymptotically statistically equivalent.

BCLZ describes in detail a construction of $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_n`$ as a (randomized) function of {T1,…,Tn}. (More precisely, BCLZ describes the construction of the Haar basis representation of $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_n`$, from which $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_n`$ can directly be recovered.) This construction is invertible, in that {T1,…,Tn} can be recovered as a function of $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_n`$. Further, BCLZ shows that both $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_n`$and $`\stackrel{~}{W}_n`$ can be represented on the same probability space so that their distributions, $`P_{\stackrel{~}{Z}_n}`$ and $`P_{\stackrel{~}{W}_n}`$, say, satisfy

$$P_{\stackrel{~}{Z}_n}P_{\stackrel{~}{W}_n}_{TV}0.$$

The mappings {$`Q_j^{(n)}`$: j=1,2, n = 1,2,…} that yield the equivalence of the above theorem can then be directly inferred from this construction. To save space here we refer the reader to that paper or Brown (2002) for details of the construction and proof. It can be remarked that these bear considerable similarity to parts of the construction and proof in Bretagnolle and Massart (1989) and other proofs of KMT type theorems. But there are also some basic differences, especially those related to the appearance of the square-root in the fundamental relation (10) and the total variation norm in the definition of equivalence. In addition, the fact that (8) is uniform in $`𝒬`$ and $``$ entails the need for various refinements in the proof.

Theorem 1 is now an immediate logical consequence of this result from BCLZ and the following lemma.

Lemma: Suppose $`𝒫_\text{j}^{\text{(n)}}\text{ = (}𝒳_\text{j}^{\text{(n)}}\text{,}_\text{j}^{\text{(n)}}\text{}_\text{j}^{\text{(n)}}\text{)}`$ j = 1,2, n = 1,2,… are asymptotically equivalent sequences of statistical problems on the same sequence of parameter spaces, $`\mathrm{\Theta }^{(n)}`$. Let {$`Q_j^{(n)}`$: j=1,2, n=1,2,…} denote a sequence of mappings that define this equivalence, as in (11). Then there are non-randomized mappings {$`\stackrel{~}{Q}_j^{(n)}`$: j=1,2, n = 1,2,…} such that

$$P_f(\stackrel{~}{Q}_j^{(n)}=Q_j^{(n)})1c_n\text{f}oreveryf_\text{j}^{\text{(n)}},j=1,2,n=1,2,\mathrm{}$$
(13)
and for every $`\theta \mathrm{\Theta }^{(n)}`$

$$P_{f_{j,\theta }}\left(\stackrel{~}{Q}_j^{(n)}\left(X_j^{(n)}\right)A\right)=P_{f_{k,\theta }}\left(X_k^{(n)}A\right),\theta \mathrm{\Theta }^{(n)}$$
(14)
for every measurable $`A𝒳_\text{k}^{\text{(n)}}`$, $`j,k=1,2`$, $`jk`$, $`n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$.

Proof of Lemma: Fix n, j, k$``$j, $`\theta \mathrm{\Theta }^{(n)}`$. Let $`F_k`$ denote the distribution under $`\theta `$ of $`X_k^{(n)}`$ and let $`F_k^{}`$ denote the distribution under $`\theta `$ of $`Q_j^{(n)}\left(X_j^{(n)}\right)`$. Let H = min($`F_k`$, $`F_k^{})`$. Let $`\mathrm{}f_k^{}=\frac{dF_k^{}}{dH}1`$. Then define $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_j^{(n)}`$ as a version of the randomized map satisfying

$$\stackrel{~}{Q}_j(B|x)=\frac{1}{f_k^{}(x)}Q_j(B|x)+\frac{f_k^{}1}{f_k^{}}\left(F_k^{}(B)H(B)\right).$$

This completes the proof of the lemma, and consequently also that of Theorem 1. $`\mathrm{}`$

Theorem 2 requires a slightly different fundamental result. The following result is the foundation for the proof of Theorem 2. It is adapted from Theorem 2 of BCLZ. This result closely resembles Theorem a, above, but as noted in BCLZ it appears to require a modified construction for its proof. The argument there is based heavily on results in Carter (2001).

Theorem b (BCLZ): Consider the statistical Formulations 1” and 2 with the parameter space $``$ and the relation (10). Assume $``$ satisfies Assumption B. Then the sequences of statistical problems defined in these two formulations are asymptotically statistically equivalent.


text:
# The depth of the associated graded ring of ideals with any reduction number

## 0. Introduction

Let $`R`$ be a Noetherian local ring with infinite residue field $`k`$, and let $`I`$ be an $`R`$-ideal. The Rees algebra $`=R[It]_{i0}I^i`$ and the associated graded ring $`𝒢=gr_I(R)=_RR/I_{i0}I^i/I^{i+1}`$ are two graded algebras that reflect various algebraic and geometric properties of the ideal $`I`$. For example, Proj$`()`$ is the blow-up of Spec$`(R)`$ along $`V(I)`$ and Proj$`(𝒢)`$ corresponds to the exceptional fiber of the blow-up. Many authors have extensively studied the Cohen-Macaulay property of $``$ and $`𝒢`$. The most general results have been obtained by Johnson and Ulrich \[6, 3.1\] and by Goto, Nakamura and Nishida \[4, 1.1\]. The goal of this paper is to estimate the depth of $`𝒢`$ and $``$ when these rings are not necessarily Cohen-Macaulay. We can focus on the study of $`0pt𝒢`$, since if $`𝒢`$ is not Cohen-Macaulay, we have that $`0pt`$ = $`0pt𝒢+1`$ \[5, 3.10\]. In order to state and motivate our results, we first need to recall some definitions and background.
A very useful tool in the study of blow-up rings is the notion of reduction of an ideal, with the reduction number measuring how closely the two ideals are related. This approach is due to Northcott and Rees . An ideal $`JI`$ is called a reduction of $`I`$ if the morphism $`R[Jt]R[It]`$ is finite, or equivalently if $`I^{r+1}=JI^r`$ for some $`r0`$. The least such $`r`$ is denoted by $`r_J(I)`$. A reduction is minimal if it is minimal with respect to inclusion, and the reduction number $`r(I)`$ is defined as $`\mathrm{min}\{r_J(I)J\mathrm{a}\mathrm{minimal}\mathrm{reduction}\mathrm{of}I\}`$. One of the big advantages of reductions is that they contain a lot of information about the ideal $`I`$, but often require fewer generators. More precisely, every minimal reduction of $`I`$ is generated by $`\mathrm{}`$ elements, where $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(I)`$ is the analytic spread of $`I`$; i.e., the Krull dimension of the ring $`_Rk𝒢_Rk`$. The analytic spread is at least the height $`g`$ of $`I`$, and at most the dimension of $`R`$. The difference $`\mathrm{}g`$ is the analytic deviation of $`I`$. Ideals for which the analytic deviation is zero are said to be equimultiple. For further details see .
Cortadellas and Zarzuela came up with formulas for $`0pt𝒢`$ in , in the special cases of ideals with analytic deviation at most one and reduction number at most two. Ghezzi in  found a general estimate of $`0pt𝒢`$ involving the depth of the powers of the ideal $`I`$ up to the reduction number (see \[2, 2.1\] for the precise statement). This theorem recovers the formulas of  and generalizes the results of  and . However, in the set-up of  (as well as in , , and ), the reduction number is at most the “expected” one. Namely, the assumptions of \[2, 2.1\] imply that $`r(I)\mathrm{}g+1`$. The main goal of this paper is to find an estimate of $`0pt𝒢`$ without any restriction on $`r(I)`$. In Section 1 we treat the cases in which the ideal is either equimultiple, or has analytic deviation one. We make an assumption on $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢`$, where $`𝒢_+`$ denotes the ideal of $`𝒢`$ generated by homogeneous elements of positive degree. We are now ready to state our main results.

Theorem 1.1. Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring with infinite residue field, and let $`I`$ be an equimultiple ideal with height $`g`$ and reduction number $`r`$. Let $`t=\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^jr+j|1jr\}`$.
(1) If $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=g`$, then $`0pt𝒢g+\mathrm{max}\{0,t\}`$.
(2) If $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=g1`$, then $`0pt𝒢g+\mathrm{max}\{1,t\}`$.

In particular, if the reduction number is small, we have a formula for $`0pt𝒢`$.

Corollary 1.3. Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring with infinite residue field, and let $`I`$ be an equimultiple ideal with height $`g`$ and reduction number two. Assume that $`0ptR/I^2<0ptR/I`$. If either $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=g`$ or $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=g1`$, then $`0pt𝒢=g+0ptR/I^2`$.

Theorem 1.5. Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring with infinite residue field, and let $`I`$ be an analytic deviation one ideal with height $`g`$ and reduction number $`r`$. Assume that $`I`$ is generically a complete intersection, and that $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=g`$. Let $`t=\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^jr+j|1jr\}`$. Then, $`0pt𝒢g+1+\mathrm{max}\{1,t\}.`$

The key fact in the proofs of Theorem 1.1 and of Theorem 1.5 is that we can reduce to the case where $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=0`$ and so the reduction of the ideal is principal. The case of a reduction generated by two elements is more complicated (see Proposition 1.7 for a special case).
In Section 2 we give a lower bound for $`0pt𝒢`$ in terms of the depth of the first $`r+\mathrm{}`$ powers of the ideal $`I`$. Here $`r`$ denotes the Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity of the associated graded ring of $`I`$. In general it is known that $`rr(I)`$, but our results of Section 2 are valid for ideals with any reduction number (not just ideals with the expected reduction number). We first recall the definition and some notation that we will use throughout Section 2.
Let $`S=_{n0}S_n`$ be a finitely generated standard graded ring over a Noetherian ring $`S_0`$. For any graded $`S`$-module $`M=_{n0}M_n`$, we define

$$a(M):=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{max}\{n|M_n0\}\hfill & \text{ if }M0,\hfill \\ \mathrm{}\hfill & \text{ if }M=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`S_+=_{n>0}S_n`$ be the ideal generated by the homogeneous elements of positive degree of $`S`$. For $`i0`$, set

$$a_i(S_+,S):=a(H_{S_+}^i(S)),$$

where $`H_{S_+}^i(.)`$ denotes the $`i`$th local cohomology functor with respect to the ideal $`S_+`$. The Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity of $`S`$ is defined as the number

$$\text{reg }S:=\mathrm{max}\{a_i(S_+,S)+i|i0\}.$$

This is an important invariant of the graded ring $`S`$ (see for instance  and the literature cited there).
The main result of Section 2 can be stated as follows.

Theorem 2.4. Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring with infinite residue field, and let $`I`$ be an $`R`$-ideal with analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$. Let $`𝒢`$ be the associated graded ring of $`I`$, and $`r=\mathrm{reg}𝒢`$. Then, $`0pt𝒢\mathrm{min}(\{0ptR/I^j|1jr+1\}\{0ptR/I^j+jr|2+rj\mathrm{}+r\}).`$

The proof of Theorem 2.4 uses the techniques of . The result is inspired by work of Trung , that shows that we can find a minimal reduction of $`I`$ with “good intersection properties” (see Lemma 2.1).

## 1. Main Results

The following theorem gives a lower bound of $`0pt𝒢`$ for equimultiple ideals with any reduction number.

###### Theorem 1.1.

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring with infinite residue field, and let $`I`$ be an equimultiple ideal with height $`g`$ and reduction number $`r`$. Let $`t=\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^jr+j|1jr\}`$.

1. If $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=g`$, then $`0pt𝒢g+\mathrm{max}\{0,t\}`$.
2. If $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=g1`$, then $`0pt𝒢g+\mathrm{max}\{1,t\}`$.

###### Proof.

We prove the results by induction on $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢`$.
(1) Suppose that $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=0`$. Then $`I^{r+1}=0`$. Hence, $`𝒢=R/II/I^2\mathrm{}I^{r1}/I^rI^r`$, and $`0pt𝒢=\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I,0ptI/I^2,\mathrm{},0ptI^{r1}/I^r,0ptI^r\}`$.
Since $`0ptI^i/I^{i+1}\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^{i+1},0ptR/I^i+1\}`$ for each $`1ir1`$, and $`0ptI^r0ptR/I^r`$, we have that $`0pt𝒢\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^j|1jr\}t`$.
Now assume that $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢>0`$. Let $`xI`$ be an element such that $`\overline{x}I/I^2`$ is regular on $`𝒢`$. By \[9, 2.7\] $`x`$ is regular on $`R`$ and $`I^j(x)=xI^{j1}`$ for every $`j1`$. Let $`\overline{R}=R/(x),\overline{I}=I/(x)`$ and $`\overline{𝒢}=𝒢/(\overline{x})=𝒢_{\overline{R}}(\overline{I})`$. By the induction hypothesis, we have that $`0pt\overline{𝒢}g1+\mathrm{min}\{0pt\overline{R}/\overline{I}^jr+j|1jr\}`$, and so $`0pt𝒢g+\mathrm{min}\{0pt\overline{R}/\overline{I}^jr+j|1jr\}.`$ For $`2jr`$, consider the exact sequence

$$0R/xI^{j1}R/I^jR/(x)\overline{R}/\overline{I}^j0.$$

It follows that $`0pt\overline{R}/\overline{I}^j\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^j,0ptR/I^{j1}1\}`$ for $`1jr`$. Hence we have that $`0pt𝒢g+t`$.

(2) Suppose that $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=0`$. Let $`J=(a)`$ be a minimal reduction of $`I`$ with $`r_J(I)=r`$. For every $`jr+1`$ we have an exact sequence

$$0R/I^{j1}R/I^jR/(a)0.$$

Using induction on $`j`$ we see that $`0ptR/I^j0ptR/I^r`$ for every $`jr`$. Hence, $`0pt𝒢inf\{0ptR/I^j|j1\}=\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^j|1jr\}t.`$ We may assume that $`t0`$. If $`t>0`$, let $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_tR`$ be a regular sequence on $`R`$ and on $`R/I^j`$ for all $`j=1,\mathrm{},r`$. Write $`\overline{R}=R/(x_1,\mathrm{},x_t)`$, $`\overline{I}=I\overline{R}`$. Since $`0pt\overline{R}/\overline{I}^j=0ptR/I^jt`$ for all $`j=1,\mathrm{},r`$, we have that $`\mathrm{min}\{0pt\overline{R}/\overline{I}^jr+j|1jr\}=0`$. Hence we can reduce the problem to the case where $`t=0`$. Now, choose $`xR`$ such that $`x`$ is regular on $`R`$ and on $`R/I^j`$ for all $`j=1,\mathrm{},r1`$. Let $`x^{}`$ and $`a^{}`$ be the initial forms of $`x`$ and $`a`$ in $`𝒢`$ ($`x^{}`$ has degree 0 and $`a^{}`$ has degree 1). We claim that $`x^{}+a^{}`$ is regular on $`𝒢`$, which proves the assertion. If not, there exists $`v^{}=v_0^{}+\mathrm{}+v_n^{}𝒢`$, with $`v_i^{}I^i/I^{i+1}`$ and at least one $`v_i^{}0`$, such that $`(x^{}+a^{})v^{}=0`$ in $`𝒢`$. Suppose that $`nr1`$. Then, $`a^{}v_n^{}=0`$ implies that $`av_nI^{n+2}=aI^{n+1}`$, and so $`v_nI^{n+1}`$ since $`a`$ is regular on $`R`$. Hence $`v_n^{}=0`$. Let $`v_k^{}0`$ be the lowest degree term of $`v^{}`$. Then $`x^{}v_k^{}=0`$ implies that $`xv_kI^{k+1}`$. Since $`k+1r1`$, $`x`$ is regular on $`R/I^{k+1}`$, and so $`v_kI^{k+1}`$, i.e., $`v_k^{}=0`$, a contradiction. This finishes the proof of the case $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=0`$.
If $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢>0`$, we can follow the same induction step as that of part (1) to prove the theorem. ∎

The following remark gives an upper bound for $`0pt𝒢`$ in a general context.

###### Remark 1.2.

\[2, 2.11\] Let $`R`$ be a Noetherian local ring, let $`I`$ be an $`R`$-ideal with analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$. Then $`0pt𝒢inf\{0ptR/I^jj1\}+\mathrm{}`$.

The next corollary is a special case of Theorem 1.1, for reduction number two. Combining Theorem 1.1 with Remark 1.2, we have a formula for $`0pt𝒢`$.

###### Corollary 1.3.

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring with infinite residue field, and let $`I`$ be an equimultiple ideal with height $`g`$ and reduction number two. Assume that $`0ptR/I^2<0ptR/I`$. If either $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=g`$ or $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=g1`$, then $`0pt𝒢=g+0ptR/I^2`$.

In the next example we compute the depth of the associated graded ring.

###### Example 1.4.

Let $`R=k[[X,Y,T_1,\mathrm{},T_n]]/(X^3Y)=k[[x,y,t_1,\mathrm{},t_n]]`$, where $`k`$ is a field and $`n2`$. $`R`$ is Cohen-Macaulay and $`dimR=n+1`$. Let $`I=(xy,t_1,\mathrm{},t_{n1})`$, and let $`J=(t_1,\mathrm{},t_{n1})`$. $`I`$ is equimultiple with $`\text{ht }I=n1`$ and reduction number 2. $`J`$ is a minimal reduction of $`I`$. We have that $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=n1`$ by \[9, 2.7\], since $`I^2J=JI`$. Furthermore, $`0ptR/I=2`$ and $`0ptR/I^2=1`$. Corollary 1.3 implies that $`0pt𝒢=n`$.

In the next theorem we treat the case of analytic deviation one ideals with any reduction number. We obtain a lower bound for $`0pt𝒢`$ similar to that of Theorem 1.1.

###### Theorem 1.5.

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring with infinite residue field, and let $`I`$ be an analytic deviation one ideal with height $`g`$ and reduction number $`r`$. Assume that $`r(I_{\mathrm{}})<r`$ for every prime $`\mathrm{}`$ containing $`I`$ with $`\text{ht }\mathrm{}=g`$, and that $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=g`$. Let $`t=\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^jr+j|1jr\}`$. Then,

$$0pt𝒢g+1+\mathrm{max}\{1,t\}.$$

###### Proof.

We prove the result by induction on $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢`$. Suppose that $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=0`$, and let $`J=(a)`$ be a minimal reduction of $`I`$ with $`r_J(I)=r`$. Since $`(0:a)I^r=0`$, by \[1, 3.4\] we have that $`0ptR/I^{r+1}=0ptR/I^r`$, if $`R/I^r`$ is not Cohen-Macaulay, and that $`0ptR/I^{r+1}=0ptR/I^r1`$, if $`R/I^r`$ is Cohen-Macaulay. In particular $`R/I^{r+1}`$ is not Cohen-Macaulay, and so \[1, 3.4\] implies that $`0ptR/I^j=0ptR/I^{r+1}`$ for every $`jr+1`$. Hence, if $`R/I^r`$ is not Cohen-Macaulay, then $`0pt𝒢\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^j|1jr\}t`$. If $`R/I^r`$ is Cohen-Macaulay, then $`0pt𝒢\mathrm{min}(\{0ptR/I^j|1jr1\}\{dimR1\})t`$, if $`r2`$. If $`r1`$, by \[11, 3.1\] we still have that $`0pt𝒢t`$. Now we proceed as in the proof of part (2) of Theorem 1.1 to obtain that $`0pt𝒢1+t`$. This finishes the proof of the case $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=0`$.
Suppose now that $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢>0`$. We follow again the same induction step of Theorem 1.1 to get the assertion. ∎

The following example is an application of Theorem 1.5.

###### Example 1.6.

Let $`R=k[[X,Y,Z,W,T_1,\mathrm{},T_n]]/(X^4Y,ZW)=k[[x,y,z,w,t_1,\mathrm{},t_n]]`$, where $`k`$ is a field and $`n2`$. $`R`$ is Cohen-Macaulay and $`dimR=n+2`$. The ideal $`I=(xy,z,t_1,\mathrm{},t_{n1})`$ has height $`n1`$, analytic deviation 1, reduction number 3, and it is generically a complete intersection. The ideal $`J=(z,t_1,\mathrm{},t_{n1})`$ is a minimal reduction of $`I`$. We have that $`0pt_{𝒢_+}𝒢=n1`$ by \[9, 2.7\], since $`I^n(t_1,\mathrm{},t_{n1})=(t_1,\mathrm{},t_{n1})I^{n1}`$ for every $`n1`$ . Since $`0ptR/I=3`$, $`0ptR/I^2=2`$, and $`0ptR/I^3=1`$, Theorem 1.5 and Remark 1.2 imply that $`0pt𝒢=n+1`$.

We remark again that the key fact in the proofs of Theorem 1.1 and of Theorem 1.5 is that we can reduce to the case where the reduction of the ideal is principal. Even when the reduction is generated by a regular sequence of two elements the situation is much more complicated. The next proposition treats a special case.

###### Proposition 1.7.

Let $`R`$ be a Noetherian local ring with infinite residue field, and let $`I`$ be an equimultiple ideal of height two and reduction number $`r`$. Let $`J=(a_1,a_2)`$ be a minimal reduction of $`I`$ such that $`I^r:a_1=I^r:a_2`$. Then, $`0ptR/I^j\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^r1,0ptR/I^{r+1}\}`$ for every $`jr+1`$, and

$$0pt𝒢\mathrm{min}(\{0ptR/I^j|1jr1\}\{0ptR/I^r1,0ptR/I^{r+1}\})$$

###### Proof.

For $`jr+1`$ we have that $`I^j=J^{jr}I^r`$, and so we have the following exact sequences

$`0{\displaystyle \frac{R}{a_1J^{jr1}I^ra_2^{jr}I^r}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{R}{a_1I^{j1}}}{\displaystyle \frac{R}{a_2^{jr}I^r}}R/I^j0.`$ (1.1)
Since $`I^r:a_1=I^r:a_2`$, we have that $`a_1J^{jr1}I^ra_2^{jr}I^r=a_1a_2^{jr}(I^r:J)`$. The sequence (1.1) for $`j=r+1`$ implies that

$$0pt\frac{R}{I^r:J}\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^r,0ptR/I^{r+1}+1\}.$$

Now we prove by induction on $`j`$ that $`0ptR/I^j\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^r1,0ptR/I^{r+1}\}`$ for all $`jr+1`$. The claim is clear for $`j=r+1`$. Suppose that $`jr+2`$. From the sequence (1.1), we have that $`0ptR/I^j\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^r1,0ptR/I^{r+1},0ptR/I^{j1}\}\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^r1,0ptR/I^{r+1}\}.`$ The first assertion is proved. The second assertion follows from the first one. ∎

###### Remark 1.8.

Let $`R`$ be a Noetherian local ring with infinite residue field, and let $`I`$ be an analytic deviation one ideal of height one and reduction number $`r`$. Let $`J=(a_1,a_2)`$ be a minimal reduction of $`I`$ such that $`(a_1:a_2^n)I^r(a_1)`$ for every $`n1`$, and $`I^r:a_1=I^r:a_2`$. Then, by the proof of Proposition 1.7, we have that $`0ptR/I^j\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^r1,0ptR/I^{r+1}\}`$ for every $`jr+1`$, and $`0pt𝒢\mathrm{min}(\{0ptR/I^j|1jr1\}\{0ptR/I^r1,0ptR/I^{r+1}\})`$.

## 2. Depth of $`𝒢`$ and its Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring, let $`I`$ be an $`R`$-ideal with analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$, let $`𝒢`$ be the associated graded ring of $`I`$, and let $`r=\text{reg }𝒢`$. The purpose of this section is to give a lower bound for $`0pt𝒢`$ involving the depth of the first $`r+\mathrm{}`$ powers of $`I`$. We first prove some technical results (Lemmas 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3), that will play a crucial role for the proof of Theorem 2.4.

###### Lemma 2.1.

Let $`R`$ be a local ring with infinite residue field, let $`I`$ be an ideal of $`R`$, $`𝒢=gr_I(R)`$ and $`r=\mathrm{reg}𝒢`$. For $`aI`$ let $`a^{}`$ denote the image of $`a`$ in $`[𝒢]_1`$. Let $`J`$ be a reduction of $`I`$. Then there exists a minimal basis $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_s`$ of $`J`$ satisfying the following conditions:

$`[(a_1,\mathrm{},a_i):a_{i+1}]I^j`$ $`=`$ $`(a_1,\mathrm{},a_i)I^{j1},0is1,jr+1.`$ (2.1)
$`[(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{}):a_{i+1}^{}]_j`$ $`=`$ $`(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})_j,0is1,jr+1.`$ (2.2)
###### Proof.

By \[8, 1.1\] there exists a minimal basis $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_s`$ of $`J`$ such that $`[(a_1,\mathrm{},a_i):a_{i+1}]I^{r+1}=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_i)I^r`$, whenever $`0is1`$. Thus, \[8, 4.7\] implies (2.1). By \[8, 4.8\], $`a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_s^{}`$ is a filter-regular sequence of $`𝒢`$. We have that $`[(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{}):a_{i+1}^{}]_j=(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})_j`$ whenever $`0is1`$ and $`ja(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_s^{})+1`$, where $`a(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_s^{})`$ is defined to be $`\mathrm{max}\{a[(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{}):a_{i+1}^{}/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})]i=0,\mathrm{},s1\}.`$ By \[8, 2.4\] we have that $`ra(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_s^{})`$. This implies (2.2). ∎

In particular, (2.1) implies that $`[0:a_1]I^j=0jr+1`$. We remark that since $`k`$ is infinite, we can choose the basis $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_s`$ such that each $`a_i`$ satisfies $`[0:a_i]I^j=0jr+1.`$

###### Lemma 2.2.

(see \[2, 2.3\]) Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring of dimension $`d`$ with infinite residue field, and let $`I`$ be an $`R`$-ideal. Let $`J`$ be a reduction of $`I`$ with basis $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_s`$ satisfying (2.1). Write $`𝔞_i=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_i)`$ for all $`i=0,\mathrm{},s`$. Then, $`0ptR/𝔞_iI^j\mathrm{min}(\{di\}\{0ptR/I^{jn}n|0ni1\})`$, for $`0is`$ and $`jr+i.`$

###### Proof.

We use induction on $`i`$. For $`i=0`$ the result is trivial. Assume that $`0is1`$. We need to show that the inequality holds for $`i+1`$. Let $`jr+i+1`$. By (2.1), $`𝔞_iI^ja_{i+1}I^j=a_{i+1}[(𝔞_iI^j:a_{i+1})I^j]a_{i+1}[(𝔞_i:a_{i+1})I^j]=a_{i+1}𝔞_iI^{j1}𝔞_iI^ja_{i+1}I^j`$. Hence we obtain an exact sequence

$`0a_{i+1}𝔞_iI^{j1}𝔞_iI^ja_{i+1}I^j𝔞_{i+1}I^j0.`$ (2.3)
On the other hand, by (2.1) for $`i=0`$, $`[0:a_{i+1}]𝔞_iI^{j1}[0:a_{i+1}]I^j=0`$, and therefore $`a_{i+1}𝔞_iI^{j1}𝔞_iI^{j1}`$, $`a_{i+1}I^jI^j`$. The conclusion follows from (2.3) and the induction hypothesis. ∎

###### Lemma 2.3.

\[2, 2.5\] Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring with infinite residue field, and let $`I`$ be an $`R`$-ideal. Let $`J`$ be a reduction of $`I`$ with basis $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_s`$ satisfying (2.2). Then, $`0pt[𝒢/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})]_j\mathrm{min}(\{0ptR/I^n+nj1|ji+1nj+1\}\{0ptR/I^{ji}i+1\})`$, whenever $`0is`$ and $`jr+i+1`$.

The goal of this section is to prove the following theorem.

###### Theorem 2.4.

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring of dimension $`d`$ with infinite residue field, let $`I`$ be an $`R`$-ideal, and let $`J`$ be a reduction of $`I`$ generated by $`s`$ elements. Let $`𝒢`$ be the associated graded ring of $`I`$, and $`r=\mathrm{reg}𝒢`$. Then,

$$0pt𝒢\mathrm{min}(\{0ptR/I^j|1jr+1\}\{0ptR/I^j+jr|2+rjs+r\}).$$

To prove Theorem 2.4, we will apply the methods of . We first need some preliminary notation and lemmas.

Let $`J`$ be a reduction of $`I`$ with basis $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_s`$ satisfying the conclusions of Lemma 2.1. If $`s>0`$, for $`0is`$ consider the graded $`𝒢`$-modules:

$$M_{(i)}=[𝒢/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})]_{r+i+1}=\frac{𝒢_+^{r+i+1}}{(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})𝒢_+^{r+i}}$$

$$N_{(i)}=\frac{𝒢_+^{r+i}}{a_i^{}𝒢_+^{r+i}+(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_{i1}^{})𝒢_+^{r+i1}}.$$

Then, $`[N_{(i)}]_{r+i+1}=M_{(i)}`$ and $`[N_{(i)}]_{r+i}=[𝒢/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_{i1}^{})]_{r+i}`$. Hence, for $`0is`$ we have the exact sequences

$`0M_{(i)}N_{(i)}[𝒢/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_{i1}^{})]_{r+i}0.`$ (2.4)
Furthermore, if $`0is1`$, then $`N_{(i+1)}=M_{(i)}/a_{i+1}^{}M_{(i)}`$ and by (2.2) we have that $`0:_{M_{(i)}}(a_{i+1}^{})=0`$. Thus, in the range $`0is1`$ we have exact sequences

$`0M_{(i)}(1)M_{(i)}N_{(i+1)}0.`$ (2.5)
Notice that $`M_{(s)}=0`$, since $`I^{r+s+1}=JI^{r+s}`$.

Let $`\lambda =\mathrm{min}(\{0ptR/I^j|1jr+1\}\{0ptR/I^j+jr|2+rjs+r\}).`$
Recall that our goal is to show that $`0pt𝒢\lambda .`$ The next lemma gives an estimate of $`0ptM_{(i)}`$. In particular we show that $`0ptM_{(i)}\lambda i1`$.

###### Lemma 2.5.

In addition to the assumptions of Theorem 2.4, assume that $`s>0`$. Let $`M_{(i)}`$ be defined as above. Then,

$$0ptM_{(i)}\mathrm{min}(\{di,0ptR/I^{r+1}i+1\}\{0ptR/I^j+jri1|2+rjs+r\}).$$

###### Proof.

We use decreasing induction on $`i`$. For $`i=s`$, the assertion is true since $`M_{(s)}=0`$. Suppose that $`0is1`$. Consider the exact sequence (2.4)

$$0M_{(i+1)}N_{(i+1)}[𝒢/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})]_{r+i+1}0.$$

It follows from Lemma 2.3 and the induction hypothesis that $`0ptN_{(i+1)}\mathrm{min}(\{di1,0ptR/I^{r+1}i\}\{0ptR/I^j+jri2|2+rjs+r\}\{0ptR/I^j+jri2|2+rjr+i+2\}).`$ If $`is2`$, then $`0ptN_{(i+1)}\mathrm{min}(\{di1,0ptR/I^{r+1}i\}\{0ptR/I^j+jri2|2+rjs+r\}).`$ If $`i=s1`$, then by Lemma 2.2 we have that $`0ptR/I^{r+s+1}=0ptR/JI^{r+s}\mathrm{min}(\{ds\}\{0ptR/I^{r+sn}n|0ns1\}).`$ It follows that $`0ptN_{(s)}\mathrm{min}(\{ds,0ptR/I^{r+1}s+1\}\{0ptR/I^j+jrs1|2+rjs+r\}).`$ In any case $`0ptN_{(i+1)}\mathrm{min}(\{di1,0ptR/I^{r+1}i\}\{0ptR/I^j+jri2|2+rjs+r\})`$, and since $`0ptM_{(i)}=0ptN_{(i+1)}+1`$, the conclusion follows. ∎

Let $`S`$ be a homogeneous Noetherian ring with $`S_0`$ local and homogeneous maximal ideal $`𝔐`$, let $`H^{}()`$ denote local cohomology with support in $`𝔐`$.
For a graded $`S`$-module $`N`$ and an integer $`j`$ we put $`a_j(N)=\mathrm{max}\{n[H^j(N)]_n0\}`$.
The following lemma is well known, but we recall it for convenience.

###### Lemma 2.6.

\[2, 2.6\] Let $`0ABC0`$ be an exact sequence of graded $`S`$-modules, let $`n`$ and $`j`$ be integers.

1. If $`a_j(A)n`$ and $`a_j(C)n`$, then $`a_j(B)n`$.
2. 1. If $`H^j(A)=0`$, then $`a_j(C)a_j(B)`$.
    2. If $`H^j(B)=0`$, then $`a_{j+1}(A)a_j(C)`$.
    3. If $`H^j(C)=0`$, then $`a_{j+1}(B)a_{j+1}(A)`$.

###### Lemma 2.7.

In addition to the assumptions of Theorem 2.4, assume that $`s>0`$. Let $`M_{(i)}`$ and $`\lambda `$ be defined as above. Then,

1. $`a_j(M_{(i)})r+i`$ for any integer $`j`$ and $`0is`$.
2. $`0ptM_{(i)}\lambda i1`$ and if $`0ptM_{(i)}=\lambda i1`$ then $`a_{\lambda i1}(M_{(i)})=r+i`$.

###### Proof.

(1) We prove the claim by decreasing induction on $`i`$. For $`i=s`$ the assertion is trivial, since $`M_{(s)}=0`$. Suppose that $`0is1`$ and that $`a_j(M_{(i+1)})r+i+1`$ for any integer $`j`$. Consider the exact sequence (2.4)

$$0M_{(i+1)}N_{(i+1)}[𝒢/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})]_{r+i+1}0.$$

By \[3, 2.2\], for any integer $`j`$, $`H^j([𝒢/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})]_{r+i+1})`$ is concentrated in degree $`r+i+1`$. Hence, Lemma 2.6 $`(`$a$`)`$ implies that $`a_j(N_{(i+1)})r+i+1`$ for any $`j`$. Applying the local cohomology functor to the sequence (2.5)

$$0M_{(i)}(1)M_{(i)}N_{(i+1)}0$$

it follows that for any $`j`$, $`[H^j(M_{(i)})]_n=0`$ whenever $`n>r+i`$. Hence $`a_j(M_{(i)})r+i`$ and the proof of (a) is completed.

(2) It follows from Lemma 2.5 that $`0ptM_{(i)}\lambda i1`$. To prove the last assertion, we again use decreasing induction on $`i`$. For $`i=s`$, the assertion is vacuous. Suppose that $`0is1`$, and that $`0ptM_{(i)}=\lambda i1`$. It follows from (2.5) that $`0ptN_{(i+1)}=\lambda i2`$, and so $`H^{\lambda i2}(N_{(i+1)})0`$. Applying the local cohomology functor to (2.4) we obtain the exact sequence

$$\mathrm{}H^{\lambda i2}(M_{(i+1)})H^{\lambda i2}(N_{(i+1)})H^{\lambda i2}\left([𝒢/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})]_{r+i+1}\right)\mathrm{}.$$

If $`0ptM_{(i+1)}>\lambda i2`$, then $`H^{\lambda i2}(N_{(i+1)})H^{\lambda i2}([𝒢/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})]_{r+i+1})`$, and so $`a_{\lambda i2}(N_{(i+1)})=r+i+1`$. If $`0ptM_{(i+1)}=\lambda i2`$, then by induction hypothesis we have that $`a_{\lambda i2}(M_{(i+1)})=r+i+1`$. Again, we consider the exact sequence (2.4)

$$0M_{(i+1)}N_{(i+1)}[𝒢/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})]_{r+i+1}0.$$

It follows from Lemma 2.3 (and Lemma 2.2 when $`i=s1`$) that $`0pt[𝒢/(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_i^{})]_{r+i+1}\lambda i2`$. Thus, applying Lemma 2.6 $`(`$b$`)`$ $`(`$iii$`)`$ with $`j=\lambda i3`$ to the exact sequence above we get that $`a_{\lambda i2}(N_{(i+1)})r+i+1`$. In any case, we have that $`a_{\lambda i2}(N_{(i+1)})r+i+1`$. Since depth $`M_{(i)}=\lambda i1`$, applying Lemma 2.6 $`(`$b$`)`$ $`(`$ii$`)`$ to the sequence (2.5) we conclude that $`a_{\lambda i1}(M_{(i)})r+i`$. ∎

We are now ready to prove Theorem 2.4.

Proof of Theorem 2.4. We need to show that $`0pt𝒢\lambda `$. Let $`J`$ be a reduction of $`I`$ with basis $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_s`$ satisfying the conclusions of Lemma 2.1. If $`s=0`$, then $`𝒢=R/II/I^2\mathrm{}I^{r1}/I^rI^r,`$ where $`r=r_J(I)`$ is the reduction number of $`I`$ with respect to $`J`$. Hence $`0pt𝒢=\mathrm{min}\{0ptR/I^j1jr\}`$. The result follows from the fact that $`rr`$.
Suppose now that $`s>0`$. From the definition of $`M_{(0)}`$, we have the exact sequence

$`0M_{(0)}𝒢_{n=0}^rI^n/I^{n+1}0.`$ (2.6)
Let $`C=_{n=0}^rI^n/I^{n+1}`$. Since $`0ptC\lambda `$, and $`0ptM_{(0)}\lambda 1`$ by Lemma 2.7, it follows that $`0pt𝒢\lambda 1`$. Applying local cohomology to (2.6) we see that $`H^{\lambda 1}(M_{(0)})H^{\lambda 1}(𝒢)`$. Furthermore, by Lemma 2.7 and by Lemma 2.6 $`(`$a$`)`$, we have that $`a_j(𝒢)r`$ for any integer $`j`$. If $`0pt𝒢=\lambda 1`$, then $`0ptM_{(0)}=\lambda 1`$, and so $`a_{\lambda 1}(M_{(0)})=r`$ by Lemma 2.7. On the other hand, since $`\lambda 1<d`$, by \[2, 2.9\] we have that $`a_{\lambda 1}(𝒢)<r`$, a contradiction. Hence, $`0pt𝒢\lambda `$. $`\mathrm{}`$