text:
# The six-dimensional Delaunay polytopes

## 1 Introduction

A distance vector $`(d_{ij})_{0i<jn}^N`$ with $`N=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+1}{2}\right)`$ is called an $`(n+1)`$-hypermetric if it satisfies the following hypermetric inequalities:

$$H(b)d=\underset{0i<jn}{}b_ib_jd_{ij}0\text{ for any }b=(b_i)_{0in}^{n+1}\text{ with }\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}b_i=1.$$
(1)
The set of distance vectors satisfying (1) is called the hypermetric cone and denoted by $`HYP_{n+1}`$.

In fact, $`HYP_{n+1}`$ is a polyhedral cone (see \[DGL93\] p. 199). Lovasz (see \[DeLa97\] p. 201-205) gave another proof of it and bound $`\mathrm{max}|b_i|n!2^n\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{n}\right)^1`$ for any vector $`b=(b_i)_{0in1}`$ defining a facet of $`HYP_n`$.

There is a one-to-one correspondence between non-degenerate elements of $`HYP_{n+1}`$ and semi-metrics on affine basis of $`n`$-dimensional Delaunay polytopes. So, the enumeration of combinatorial types of $`n`$-dimensional Delaunay polytopes is reduced to the enumeration of non-degenerate faces of $`HYP_{n+1}`$ under an equivalence relation called geometrical equivalence (see Remark 1 and Section 4). Moreover, the dimension of faces of $`HYP_{n+1}`$ allows to define the notion of rank of a Delaunay polytope (see \[DGL92\]).

We have the inclusion $`CUT_nHYP_n`$, where $`CUT_n`$ (see Section 3 below and Chapter $`4`$ of \[DeLa97\]) is the cone generated by all cut semi-metrics on $`n`$ points. One has $`HYP_n=CUT_n`$ for $`n6`$; so, the enumeration of combinatorial types of Delaunay polytopes of dimension less or equal to five correspond to the study of faces of $`CUT_6`$. This study was done by Fedorov (\[Fe85\]), Erdahl and Ryshkov (\[RyEr87\] and \[RyEr88\]), and Kononenko (\[Ko99\]) in dimension three, four and five, respectively.

In the case of dimensional six, the inclusion $`CUT_7HYP_7`$ is strict, but the description of facets (i.e. faces of rank $`20`$, corresponding to repartitioning polytopes) and extreme rays (i.e. faces of rank $`1`$, corresponding to extreme Delaunay polytopes) of the cone $`HYP_7`$ is still possible (see \[DD01\]). In Section 3 we present the number of combinatorial types of six-dimensional Delaunay polytope for every given rank. In Section 4 we present our method for the computation of those combinatorial types using the face lattice of $`HYP_7`$.

Voronoi \[Vo08\] defines a partition of the cone $`PSD_n`$ of positive semi-definite quadratic forms by $`L`$-type domains. Two forms of the same $`L`$-type domain have affinely equivalent Voronoi polytopes. Every vertex of a Voronoi polytope correspond to a center of a Delaunay polytope. All Delaunay polytopes form a partition of the space $`^n`$, which is dual to the partition by Voronoi polytopes. It is proved in \[DGL93\] that the hypermetric cone $`HYP_n`$ is the union of a finite number of $`L`$-type domains.

While Voronoi theory of $`L`$-type domains describes the combinatorial structure of lattices, the theory of hypermetrics (\[DGL92\] and \[DeLa97\]) describes combinatorial structure of one Delaunay polytope in a lattice. While the hypermetric cone $`HYP_n`$ has the symmetry group $`Sym(n)`$, a $`L`$-type domain, in general, has trivial group.

## 2 Delaunay polytopes and hypermetrics

Here we present the main notions for hypermetrics, which are needed to our study; the presentation is slightly simplified by the systematic use of affine bases. For the complete theory, with proofs, see \[DGL92\] and Chapters $`13`$$`16`$ of \[DeLa97\].

A family $`v_0,\mathrm{},v_n`$ of $`n+1`$ vertices of $`^n`$ is called independent if the family $`(v_iv_0)_{1in}`$ has linear rank $`n`$. Let $`L^n`$ be a $`n`$-dimensional lattice and let $`S=S(c,r)`$ be a sphere in $`^n`$ with center $`c`$ and radius $`r`$. Then $`S`$ is said to be an empty sphere in $`L`$ if the following two conditions hold:

* $`vcr`$ for all $`vL`$ and
* the set $`SL`$ contain an independent set of size $`n+1`$.

The center $`c`$ of $`S`$ is called a hole in \[CS99\]. The polytope $`D`$, which is defined as the convex hull of the set $`SL`$ is called a Delaunay polytope, or (in original terms of Voronoi, who introduced them in \[Vo08\]) L-polytope.

###### Definition 1

Let $`D`$ be a $`n`$-dimensional Delaunay polytope with vertex-set $`V`$.

(i) A family $`v_0`$, …, $`v_n`$ of vertices of $`D`$ is called an affine basis if for all $`vV`$ there exist an unique family $`(b_i)_{0in}^{n+1}`$, such that

$$\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}b_iv_i=v\text{ and }\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}b_i=1.$$

(ii) The Delaunay polytope $`D`$ is called basic if it has at least one affine basis. The vertices of an affine basis are called basic vertices.

All known Delaunay polytopes are basic. We prove in Theorem 1 that all six-dimensional Delaunay polytopes are basic too. We will always assume that Delaunay polytopes are basic.

For every family $`𝒜=\{v_0,\mathrm{},v_m\}`$ of vertices of a Delaunay polytope $`P`$ one can define a distance function $`d_𝒜`$ by $`d_𝒜(i,j)=v_iv_j^2`$. The function $`d_𝒜`$ turns out to be an hypermetric by the following formula (see \[As82\] and \[DeLa97\] p. 195) :

$$\underset{0i,jm}{}b_ib_jd_𝒜(i,j)=2(r^2\underset{i=0}{\overset{m}{}}b_iv_ic^2)0.$$

On the other hand, Assouad has shown in \[As82\] that every $`dHYP_{n+1}`$ can be expressed as $`d_𝒜`$ with $`𝒜`$ being a family of vertices of a Delaunay polytope $`D`$ of dimension less or equal to $`n`$.

A ray $`dHYP_{n+1}`$ is called non-degenerate if $`d=d_{}`$ with $``$ an affine basis of a $`n`$-dimensional Delaunay polytope $`D`$. For a given ray $`dHYP_{n+1}`$ the annulator is defined by

$$Ann(d)=\{b^{n+1}\text{ : }\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}b_i=1\text{ and }H(b)d=0\}.$$

We call basic vectors the vectors $`e_i=(0,\mathrm{},0,1,0,\mathrm{},0)^{n+1}`$ with $`0in`$. Using Proposition below, those vectors $`e_i`$ are identified with basic vertices $`v_i`$. One has $`H(b)=0`$ if and only if $`b=e_i`$ for some $`0in`$.

###### Proposition 1

Let $`D`$ be an $`n`$-dimensional Delaunay polytope with vertex-set $`V`$; let $`d=d_𝒜`$ with $`𝒜=\{v_0,\mathrm{},v_n\}`$ a family of $`V`$. Then there is equivalence between following properties:

(i) the family $`𝒜`$ is independent and

(ii) $`det[d(0,i)+d(0,j)d(i,j)]_{1i,jn}0`$.

Also one has equivalence between properties:

(iii) $`𝒜`$ is an affine basis and

(iv) the following mapping is one-to-one

$$bAnn(d)\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}b_iv_iV.$$

Proof. The family $`(v_i)_{0in}`$ is independent if and only if the matrix $`((v_iv_0).(v_jv_0))_{1i,jn}`$ is positive definite. The formula $`2(v_iv_0).(v_jv_0)=v_iv_0^2+v_jv_0^2v_iv_j^2`$, gives the first equivalence. The second equivalence is obvious.

By above Proposition, the set $`Ann(d)`$ is finite if $`d`$ is non-degenerate, since the hypermetric vectors $`bAnn(d)`$ correspond to lattice points $`v`$, which belong to a sphere. We will consider only non-degenerate hypermetrics (in the hypermetric cone $`HYP_{n+1}`$) associated with affine bases of $`n`$-dimensional Delaunay polytopes.

Using above mapping, we identify vertices $`v`$ of $`D`$ with hypermetric vectors $`b`$. For example, for the affine basis $`=\{v_0,\mathrm{},v_3\}`$ with $`v_0=(0,0,0)`$, $`v_1=(1,0,0)`$, $`v_2=(0,1,0)`$ and $`v_3=(0,0,1)`$ of the $`3`$-cube, one has $`(1,1,0)=v_1+v_2v_0`$, $`(0,1,1)=v_2+v_3v_0`$, $`(1,0,1)=v_1+v_3v_0`$ and $`(1,1,1)=v_1+v_2+v_32v_0`$. Note that, while $`(2,1,1,1)Ann(d_{})`$, the inequality $`H(2,1,1,1)d0`$ does not define a facet of the cone $`HYP_4`$, since $`H(2,1,1,1)=H(1,1,1,0)+H(1,0,1,1)+H(1,1,0,1)`$.

The face $`F(d)`$, associated to an hypermetric $`dHYP_{n+1}`$, is the minimal face, containing the vector $`d`$. It can also be defined as:

$$F(d)=\{eHYP_{n+1}\text{ : }H(b)e=0\text{ for all }bAnn(d).\}$$

The rank of a $`n`$-dimensional Delaunay polytope $`D`$ is defined as dimension of $`F(d_{})`$, where $``$ is an affine basis of $`D`$ (see \[DeLa97\] p. 217); its corank is, by definition, $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+1}{2}\right)rankD`$. The rank of a Delaunay polytope $`D`$ is equal to the topological dimension of the set of affine bijections $`T`$ of $`^n`$ (up to translations and orthogonal transformations), for which $`T(D)`$ is again a Delaunay polytope (see \[DeLa97\] p. 225).

If $`D`$ is an $`n`$-simplex, then its unique affine basis defines an hypermetric $`d`$, which has $`Ann(d)=\{e_0,\mathrm{},e_n\}`$ and $`F(d)=HYP_{n+1}`$. If $`D`$ is a $`n`$-dimensional Delaunay polytope with $`n+2`$ vertices $`v_0,\mathrm{},v_{n+1}`$ (such polytope is called repartitioning polytope) and affine basis $`=\{v_0,\mathrm{},v_n\}`$, then, by writing $`v_{n+1}=_{i=0}^nb_iv_i`$, one obtains $`F(d_{})=\{dHYP_{n+1},H(b)d=0\}`$. So, $`F(d)`$ is a facet of $`HYP_{n+1}`$. On the other hand, if $`dHYP_{n+1}`$ with $`F(d)`$ being a facet, then $`Ann(d)=\{e_0,\mathrm{},e_n,b\}`$ and $`d=d_{}`$ with $``$ being an affine basis of a repartitioning polytope.

Define two Delaunay polytopes to be affinely equivalent, if there is an affine bijective mapping transforming one into another; the equivalence classes by this relation are called combinatorial type. By Theorem 15.2.1 in \[DeLa97\] p. 222, two vectors $`d`$, $`d^{}`$ of $`HYP_{n+1}`$, such that $`F(d)=F(d^{})`$, correspond to affinely equivalent Delaunay polytopes. Moreover, if two Delaunay polytopes $`D`$, $`D^{}`$ are affinely equivalent, then an affine basis $``$ of $`D`$ induces an affine basis $`^{}`$ of $`D^{}`$, such that $`F(d_{})=F(d_{^{}})`$.

A face of $`HYP_{n+1}`$ is called non-degenerate, if one of its interior vectors $`d`$ is non-degenerate (by Theorem 15.2.1 of \[DeLa97\], this is equivalent to all interior vectors being non-degenerate). One can consider only non-degenerate faces, since we already assumed, that all Delaunay polytopes are basic. Given a face $`F`$ of $`HYP_{n+1}`$, we define

$$Ann(F)=\{b^{n+1}\text{ : }\underset{i}{}b_i=1\text{ and }H(b)d=0\text{ for all }dF\}.$$

We will call $`\{b^0,\mathrm{},b^n\}Ann(F)`$ an affine basis of the combinatorial type if $`det\{b^0,\mathrm{},b^n\}=\pm 1`$. Any affine basis of $`Ann(F)`$ corresponds to an affine basis of a Delaunay polytope $`D`$, if $`D`$ has this combinatorial type.

###### Definition 2

Two faces $`F`$, $`F^{}`$ of $`HYP_{n+1}`$ are said to be geometrically equivalent if there exist an affine basis $`=\{b^0,\mathrm{},b^n\}`$ of $`Ann(F)`$, such that the mapping

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \varphi _{F^{},F}:Ann(F^{})& & Ann(F)\hfill \\ \hfill b& & b_0b^0+\mathrm{}b_nb^n\hfill \end{array}$$

is bijective.

If $`\pi `$ is a permutation of $`\{0,\mathrm{},n\}`$ and $`F`$ a face of $`HYP_{n+1}`$, then $`\{e_{\pi (0)},\mathrm{},e_{\pi (n)}\}`$ is an affine basis of $`Ann(F)`$; so, two faces $`F`$ and $`F^{}`$, which are equivalent, by a symmetry of $`HYP_{n+1}`$, are also geometrically equivalent. The reverse is not true, in general.

###### Remark 1

Let $`D`$ be a $`n`$-dimensional repartitioning polytope with an affine basis $`=\{v_0,\mathrm{},v_n\}`$; we write $`v_{n+1}=_{i=0}^nb_iv_i`$. The family $`^{}=(v_0,\mathrm{}v_{i1},v_{n+1},v_{i+1},\mathrm{},v_n)`$ is an affine basis if and only if $`|b_i|=1`$.

If $`b_i=1`$, then $`F(d_{^{}})=F(d_{})=\{dHYP_{n+1},H(b)d=0\}`$, while if $`b_i=1`$, then $`F(d_{})F(d_{^{}})=\{dHYP_{n+1},H(b^{})d=0\}`$ with $`b^{}=(b_0,\mathrm{},b_{i1},b_i,b_{i1},\mathrm{},b_n)`$.

So, the study of combinatorial types of $`n`$-dimensional Delaunay polytopes is reduced to the study of non-degenerate faces of the hypermetric cone $`HYP_{n+1}`$ under the geometrical equivalence.

Consider, as an example, the two-dimensional case. We have $`HYP_3=CUT_3`$ and $`CUT_3`$ has three facets, which correspond to $`H(1,1,1)`$ and its permutations. One can check that a triangle $`𝒯=\{v_0,v_1,v_2\}`$ satisfies $`d_𝒯=(d_{01},d_{02},d_{12})HYP_3`$ if and only if it is an obtuse triangle. The vector $`d_𝒯`$ is non-degenerate if and only if three vertices of $`𝒯`$ are not aligned. Moreover, $`d_𝒯`$ is incident to an hypermetric facet, say, $`H(1,1,1)`$, if and only if the vertex $`v_0`$ has angle $`\frac{\pi }{2}`$, in which case the Delaunay polytope has four vertices: $`v_0`$, $`v_1`$, $`v_2`$ and $`v_1+v_2v_0`$. So, there are two combinatorial types of Delaunay polytopes in dimension two: obtuse triangles and rectangles.

Take a face $`F`$ of the hypermetric cone $`HYP_{n+1}`$. To every $`b=(b_i)_{0in}Ann(F)`$, we associate a vertex $`(b_1,\mathrm{},b_n)^n`$; let the set of such vertices being denoted by $`V`$. Every distance vector $`dF`$ correspond to a Gram matrix $`G`$. The set $`V`$ is the vertex-set of a Delaunay polytope, which is described by the scalar product defined by $`G`$. So, we can encode, in our computations, the combinatorial type of Delaunay polytope by the set $`Ann(F)`$.

###### Proposition 2

If $`D`$ is a Delaunay polytope and $``$, $`^{}`$ are two affine bases of $`D`$, then the faces $`F(d_{})`$, $`F(d_{^{}})`$ are equivalent up to a linear mapping. This linear mapping preserve the non-degeneracy.

Proof. If $`(v_0,\mathrm{},v_n)`$ and $`(v_0^{},\mathrm{},v_n^{})`$ are two affine bases of $`D`$, then one can express $`v_i^{}`$ in terms of $`(v_j)_{0in}`$ as follows

$$v_i^{}=\underset{j=0}{\overset{n}{}}\alpha _{ij}v_j\text{ with }\underset{j=0}{\overset{n}{}}\alpha _{ij}=1.$$

One can express $`v_{i_1}^{}v_{i_2}^{}^2`$ in terms of $`v_{j_1}v_{j_2}^2`$. This induces a linear mapping $`\varphi `$ from $`F(d_{})`$ to $`F(d_{^{}})`$; expressing $`v_j`$ in terms of $`(v_i^{})_{0in}`$, one get the reverse mapping $`\varphi ^1`$ and so, the linear equivalence.

If $`dF(d_{})`$, then $`d`$ is non-degenerate if and only if $`\varphi (d)`$ is non-degenerate.

###### Definition 3

Let $``$ be an affine basis of a Delaunay polytope $`D`$; then

(i) If $`rankD=1`$, then $`D`$ is called extreme.

(ii) If all sub-faces of $`F(d_{})`$ are degenerate, then $`D`$ is called maximal.

Above definition of maximality is independent of the choice of affine basis $``$, since, by above Proposition, the linear equivalence between two faces preserves the non-degeneracy. Obviously, any extreme Delaunay polytope is maximal. We present in Corollary 1 the list of all maximal six-dimensional Delaunay polytopes.

Let $`\gamma _n=\{0,1\}^n`$ be the vertex-set of the Delaunay polytope of the lattice $`^n`$ and let

$$h\gamma _n=\{x\gamma _n\text{ : }\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}x_i\text{ is even}\}$$

be the vertex-set of the Delaunay polytope with center $`c=(1/2,\mathrm{},1/2)`$ (this polytope is called half $`n`$-cube) of the root lattice

$$D_n=\{x^n\text{ : }\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}x_i\text{ is even}\}.$$

###### Proposition 3

The $`n`$-cube $`\gamma _n`$ and the half $`n`$-cube $`h\gamma _n`$ have rank $`n`$ and are maximal Delaunay polytopes.

Proof. One can define the following distance functions on $`\gamma _n`$ and $`h\gamma _n`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill d_i:\gamma _n\times \gamma _n& & \hfill \\ \hfill (x,x^{})& & (x_ix_i^{})^2.\hfill \end{array}$$

If $`d`$ is the distance function of the $`n`$-dimensional Delaunay polytope $`\gamma _n`$ or $`h\gamma _n`$, then this distance function is expressed as

$$d=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\lambda _id_i\text{ with }\lambda _i>0,$$

which proves that the rank of $`\gamma _n`$ and of $`h\gamma _n`$ is $`n`$. Now, if a face $`F`$ is included in $`F(\gamma _n)`$ or $`F(h\gamma _n)`$, then one of the coefficients $`\lambda _i`$ becomes zero and the face $`F`$ corresponds to $`\gamma _{n1}`$ or $`h\gamma _{n1}`$, which is of lower dimension $`n1`$. So, the Delaunay polytopes $`\gamma _n`$ and $`h\gamma _n`$ are maximal.

## 3 The case of dimension six

Call cut cone and denote by $`CUT_{n+1}`$ the cone generated by all cuts $`\delta _S^N`$ (where $`S`$ is a subset of $`\{0,\mathrm{},n\}`$), defined by

$$(\delta _S)_{ij}=1\text{ if }|S\{i,j\}|=1\text{ and }(\delta _S)_{ij}=0\text{, otherwise}.$$

Clearly, $`H(b)\delta _S=b(S)(1b(S))`$ with $`b(S)=_{aS}b_a`$; this proves that all hypermetric inequalities are valid on $`CUT_{n+1}`$. So, $`CUT_{n+1}HYP_{n+1}`$. Moreover, a cut $`\delta _S`$ is incident to the face, defined by $`H(b)`$, if and only if $`b(S)=0`$ or $`1`$.

The list of $`3773`$ facets of $`HYP_7`$ was found by Baranovskii \[Ba99\] using the method described in \[Ba70\], i.e. he found, by hand, that for all other hypermetric vectors $`b`$, one can express $`H(b)`$ as a sum of terms $`H(b^{})`$ with $`b^{}`$ belonging to his list of $`3773`$ elements. While this result was announced in \[Ba99\], the detailed computations were not published. In \[DD01\], another method was proposed: if the Baranovskii’s list was not complete, then, in our computation \[DD01\] of the extreme rays of $`HYP_7`$, we should find some extreme rays, which are not hypermetric. But this was not the case; so, the list is complete.

The list of representents of $`14`$ orbits of facets is given below:

| $`b^1=(1,1,1,0,0,0,0)`$ | $`b^2=(1,1,1,1,1,0,0)`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`b^3=(1,1,1,1,1,2,0)`$,  $`b^4=(2,1,1,1,1,1,0)`$ | |
| $`b^5=(1,1,1,1,1,1,1)`$ | $`b^6=(2,1,1,1,1,1,2)`$ |
| $`b^7=(2,2,1,1,1,1,1)`$,  $`b^8=(1,1,1,1,1,2,2)`$ | |
| $`b^9=(3,1,1,1,1,1,1)`$,  $`b^{10}=(1,1,1,1,1,1,3)`$ | |
| $`b^{11}=(2,2,1,1,1,1,3)`$,  $`b^{12}=(3,1,1,1,1,2,2)`$ | |
| $`b^{13}=(3,2,1,1,1,1,2)`$,  $`b^{14}=(2,1,1,1,1,2,3)`$ | |

It gives the total of $`3773`$ inequalities. The first ten orbits are the orbits of hypermetric facets of the cut cone $`CUT_7`$; first four of them come as $`0`$-extension of facets of the cone $`HYP_6=CUT_6`$ (see \[DeLa97\], Chapter $`7`$). Last four orbits consist of some $`19`$-dimensional simplex-faces of $`CUT_7`$, becoming $`20`$-dimensional, i.e. simplex-facets in $`HYP_7`$.

Using Remark 1, we obtain that the list of $`14`$ orbits of facets fall into nine equivalence classes $`b^1`$, $`b^2`$, $`\{b^3,b^4\}`$, $`b^5`$, $`b^6`$, $`\{b^7,b^8\}`$, $`\{b^9,b^{10}\}`$, $`\{b^{11},b^{12}\}`$, $`\{b^{13},b^{14}\}`$. So, there are nine combinatorial types of six-dimensional Delaunay polytopes of rank $`20`$ (i.e. repartitioning polytopes).

In \[DeLa97\] p. 229 another notion, called switching by root of $`b`$, is defined: if $`A\{0,\mathrm{},n\}`$ and $`b(A)=0`$, then define $`b^A`$ by $`b_i^A=b_i`$ if $`iA`$ and $`b_i^A=b_i`$ if $`iA`$. It is proved that the switching by root of a facet-defining vector of $`HYP_{n+1}`$ is again a facet-defining vector. Three following vectors define facets of $`HYP_7`$, which are switching by root equivalent:

$$b^1=(2,2,1,1,1,1,1),b^2=(2,2,1,1,1,1,1),b^3=(2,2,1,1,1,1,1).$$

On the other hand, $`b^1`$ and $`b^3`$ are geometrically equivalent by Remark 1, while $`b^1`$ and $`b^2`$ are not geometrically equivalent.

Remind that $`E_6`$, $`E_7`$, $`E_8`$ are root  lattices defined by

$$\begin{array}{c}E_6=\{xE_7\text{ : }x_1+x_2=0\},E_7=\{xE_8\text{ : }x_1+\mathrm{}+x_8=0\},\\ E_8=\{x^8\text{ : }x^8(\frac{1}{2}+)^8\text{ and }_ix_i2\}.\end{array}$$

Unique type of Delaunay polytope of $`E_6`$ is called Schlafli polytope (see \[Cox63\]) and denoted by $`Sch`$. Its skeleton graph is $`27`$-vertex (strongly regular) graph, called the Schlafli graph, whose symmetry group has size $`51840`$ and is isomorphic to the group of isometry, preserving the Schlafli polytope. This group is denoted by $`Aut(Sch)`$.

In \[DGL92\] were found $`26`$ orbits of non-cut extreme rays of $`HYP_7`$ by classifying the affine bases of the Schlafli polytope of the root lattice $`E_6`$. For every non-cut extreme ray $`(_+v)`$ of $`HYP_7`$, there exist a facet-inducing inequality $`f(x)0`$ of $`CUT_7`$, which is non-hypermetric, so that $`f(v)<0`$. This property establish a bijection between the $`26`$ orbits of non-hypermetric facets of the cut cone $`CUT_7`$ (see \[Gr90\]) and the $`26`$ orbits of non-cut extreme rays of $`HYP_7`$ and proves that $`HYP_7`$ has $`29`$ orbits of extreme rays: three orbits of non-zero cuts and $`26`$ orbits coming from $`Sch`$ (see \[DD01\]).

###### Proposition 4

Let $``$ be an affine basis of Schlafli polytope; then

(i) The distance vector $`d_{}`$ is incident to $`20`$ hypermetric faces of $`HYP_7`$, which are all facets of $`HYP_7`$.

(ii) If $`F`$ is a face of $`HYP_7`$, containing the vector $`d_{}`$, then it is non-degenerate and $`|Ann(F)|=7+corank(F)`$.

Proof. The Schlafli polytope is six-dimensional and has $`27`$ vertices. So, for every affine basis $``$, the vector $`d_{}`$ satisfies $`H(b)d_{}=0`$ for $`27`$ different $`bAnn(d_{})`$; we write $`Ann(d_{})\{e_0,\mathrm{},e_6\}=\{b^1,\mathrm{},b^{20}\}`$. On the other hand, it is known (\[DGL92\] and \[DeLa97\] p. 239), that the Schlafli polytope has rank $`1`$. So, the rank of the matrix $`[H(b^1),\mathrm{},H(b^{20})]`$ must be $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{6+1}{2}\right)1=20`$. So, the family $`[H(b^i)]_{1i20}`$ is linearly independent. If one of $`H(b^i)`$ is not a facet of $`HYP_7`$, then it can be expressed in terms of $`[H(b^j)]_{ji}`$; this contradicts to linear independence and so, (i) holds.

The extreme ray $`d_{}`$ is non-degenerate and is a sub-face of $`F`$; so, $`F`$ is also non-degenerate. Every hypermetric face, containing $`F`$, contains $`d_{}`$; so, one has $`Ann(F)\{e_0,\mathrm{},e_6\}=\{b_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1},\mathrm{},b_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{k}\}\{b^1,\mathrm{},b^{20}\}`$. The linear independence of the family $`[H(b^i)]_{1i20}`$ implies that $`k=corank(F)`$ and so, (ii) holds.

Above Proposition is not true for the $`56`$-vertex Gosset polytope (\[Cox63\]): the Gosset polytope has $`374`$ orbits of affine bases. Each extreme ray, corresponding to an affine basis $`\{v_0,\mathrm{},v_7\}`$ of the Gosset polytope, is incident to $`48`$ ($`=568`$) hypermetric faces of $`HYP_8`$. But amongst these $`48`$ face-defining inequalities, the number of facets varies from $`27`$ ($`=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{7+1}{2}\right)1`$) to $`41`$. See \[DeLa97\], p. 230 for general lower bounds (on the number of vertices of a Delaunay polytope) as a function of its rank.

###### Theorem 1

All six-dimensional Delaunay polytopes are basic.

Proof. The simplex is a basic polytope, since there are $`7`$ vertices and they form an affine basis.

Assume that $`D`$ is a non-simplicial Delaunay polytope of a lattice $`L`$ generated by the vectors $`w_1`$, …, $`w_6`$. Denote by $`V`$ the volume of the simplex formed by the vectors $`0`$, $`w_1`$, …, $`w_6`$. Take a family of $`7`$ independent vertices $`𝒜=\{v_0,\mathrm{},v_6\}`$ in the vertex-set of $`D`$ and denote the volume of the corresponding simplex by $`V^{}`$.

In \[RyBa98\], it was proved that the relative volume $`k=\frac{V^{}}{V}`$ is $`1`$, $`2`$ or $`3`$. If $`k=1`$, then $`𝒜`$ is an affine basis and we are done. Assume now that $`k>1`$, i.e. that $`𝒜`$ is not an affine basis. Then, there exists a vertex $`v`$ of $`D`$, which is written uniquely as $`v=_{i=0}^6b_iv_i`$ with $`b`$ being fractional and $`_{i=0}^6b_i=1`$.

The distance vector $`d_𝒜`$ satisfies $`H(b)d_𝒜=0`$ with $`b=(b_0,\mathrm{},b_6)`$ being a fractional hypermetric vector. But one can express $`H(b)`$ as $`_{l=1}^N\lambda _lH(b^l)`$ with $`\lambda _l>0`$ and $`b^l`$ being a permutation of one of the following vectors (see \[RyBa98\]):

| Case $`k=2`$ | Case $`k=3`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`\frac{1}{2}(1,1,1,1,1,1,0)`$ | $`\frac{1}{3}(1,1,1,1,1,2,2)`$ |
| $`\frac{1}{2}(1,1,1,1,1,1,2)`$ | $`\frac{1}{3}(1,1,1,1,1,1,1)`$ |
| $`\frac{1}{2}(2,1,1,1,1,1,3)`$ | $`\frac{1}{3}(2,1,1,1,1,1,2)`$ |
| $`\frac{1}{2}(2,1,1,1,1,1,1)`$ |  |
| $`\frac{1}{2}(1,1,1,1,1,2,3)`$ |  |
| $`\frac{1}{2}(3,1,1,1,1,1,2)`$ |  |
| $`(1,1,1,0,0,0,0)`$ |  |

Since $`\lambda _l>0`$, one has $`H(b^l)d=0`$, i.e. the vectors $`w_l^{}=_{i=0}^6b_i^lv_i`$ with $`1lN`$ are vertices of the Delaunay polytope $`D`$.

Since $`b`$ is fractional, at least one of $`b^l`$ is fractional, say, $`b^{l_0}`$. But all fractional hypermetric vectors of above Table have one coordinate with absolute value equal to $`\frac{1}{k}`$, say, $`|b_i^{l_0}|=\frac{1}{k}`$. So, the family $`\{v_0,\mathrm{},v_{i1},v_{l_0}^{},v_{i+1},\mathrm{},v_6\}`$ defines a simplex of relative volume $`k|b_i^{l_0}|=1`$, i.e. it is an affine basis.

###### Theorem 2

The $`6241`$ combinatorial types of Delaunay polytopes are partitioned by rank in the following way:

| rank | Nr. in $`HYP_7`$ | Nr. in $`CUT_7`$ |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 21 | 1(simplex) | 0 |
| 20 | 9(repart.) | 1 |
| 19 | 30 | 2 |
| 18 | 95 | 8 |
| 17 | 233 | 28 |
| 16 | 500 | 95 |
| 15 | 814 | 241 |
| 14 | 1092 | 434 |
| 13 | 1145 | 527 |
| 12 | 984 | 481 |
| 11 | 686 | 325 |
| 10 | 417 | 183 |
| 9 | 218 | 83 |
| 8 | 108 | 35 |
| 7 | 52 | 13 |
| 6 | 21 | 3 |
| 5 | 8 | 0 |
| 4 | 4 | 0 |
| 3 | 2 | 0 |
| 2 | 1 | 0 |
| 1 | 1(Schlafli) | 0 |

Proof. The proof is purely computational and the method is described in next Section.

###### Corollary 1

All maximal six-dimensional Delaunay polytopes are: Schlafli polytope, $`6`$-cube, half $`6`$-cube and direct product of half $`5`$-cube with $`1`$-cube.

Proof. This result follows directly from the computation of above Theorem.

## 4 Computational methods

Our computation of combinatorial types of six-dimensional Delaunay polytopes used the face-lattice of $`HYP_7`$; combinatorial types of Delaunay polytopes of corank $`i+1`$ were found from combinatorial types of Delaunay polytopes of corank $`i`$. We start from the list of combinatorial types of corank $`1`$, i.e. the nine repartitioning polytopes. The plan of our computation was as follows:

1. Take the list of combinatorial types of Delaunay polytopes of corank $`i`$.
2. For each of them, find all sub-faces, using our knowledge of facets and extreme rays of $`HYP_7`$; we obtain faces of corank $`i+1`$.
3. For every face $`F`$ of corank $`i+1`$, find extreme rays $`(_+f_i)_{1iN}`$, contained in it, and define $`d=_{i=1}^Nf_i`$. The distance vector $`d`$ is in the interior of $`F`$; so, using Proposition 1, one can test if this ray is non-degenerate or not and this tells us if the face is non-degenerate or not.
4. Find the classes of geometrical equivalence amongst the non-degenerate faces and so, the list of combinatorial types of corank $`i+1`$.

Above procedure finds all combinatorial types of Delaunay polytopes from corank $`1`$ (i.e. repartitioning polytopes) till corank $`20`$ (i.e. the Schlafli polytope). But in order to describe completely our method, we need to precise how we find the classes under geometrical equivalence.

The first algorithm for the problem of geometrical equivalence is the following: given two faces $`F`$ and $`F^{}`$, find all affine bases of $`Ann(F)`$ until one finds an equivalence $`\varphi _{F,F^{}}`$ (see Definition 2). This method works for corank $`1`$ or $`2`$ and was used by Kononenko in the five-dimensional case. But the number of affine bases becomes too important to be workable in corank $`3`$.

So, one needs another, more efficient method. The first idea is to split the set of faces of $`HYP_7`$ into two classes: faces, which contain (one or more) Schlafli extreme rays, and those, which are generated only by cuts.

###### Definition 4

Let $`F`$ be a face of $`HYP_7`$, which contains a Schlafli extreme ray $`d_{}`$ corresponding to an affine basis $`=\{v_0,\mathrm{},v_6\}`$. Then, every $`bAnn(F)`$ defines a vertex $`v=_{i=0}^6b_iv_i`$ of $`Sch`$. All such vertices are denoted by $`𝒮(F,d_{})`$.

So, every combinatorial type of faces, which contains at least one Schlafli extreme ray, can be interpreted as a set of vertices of $`Sch`$.

###### Proposition 5

Let $`F`$ and $`F^{}`$ be two faces, which contain at least one Schlafli extreme ray; then it holds:

(i) If $`F`$ and $`F^{}`$ are geometrically equivalent, then for every Schlafli extreme ray $`d_{}`$ in $`F`$, there exist an affine basis $`^{}`$ of $`Sch`$, such that $`𝒮(F,d_{})=𝒮(F^{},d_{^{}})`$.

(ii) If $`F`$ and $`F^{}`$ contain a Schlafli extreme ray $`d_{}`$ and $`d_{^{}}`$, such that $`𝒮(F,d_{})`$ is identical to $`𝒮(F^{},d_{^{}})`$ up to an element of $`Aut(Sch)`$, then $`F`$ and $`F^{}`$ are geometrically equivalent.

Proof. For every distance vector $`d_{}F`$, one gets an identification of $`Ann(F)`$ with $`𝒮(F,d_{})`$. If $`F^{}`$ is geometrically equivalent to $`F`$, then the vectors $`e_0,\mathrm{},e_6`$ in $`Ann(F^{})`$ are identified with vertices $`v_0^{},\mathrm{},v_6^{}`$ in $`𝒮(F,d_{})`$. These vertices form an affine basis $`^{}`$ and one has $`𝒮(F^{},d_{^{}})=𝒮(F,d_{})`$; so, (i) holds.

Since $`𝒮(F,d_{})`$ is isomorphic to $`𝒮(F^{},d_{^{}})`$ by an element of $`Aut(Sch)`$, one can, without loss of generality, assume that they are identical. Now, $``$ is identified with vertices $`v_0,\mathrm{},v_6`$ of $`𝒮(F,d_{})`$ and $`^{}`$ is identified with vertices $`v_0^{},\mathrm{},v_6^{}`$ of $`𝒮(F,d_{})`$. Then, the expression of $`v_j^{}`$ in terms of $`v_i`$ determine an affine basis of $`Ann(F)`$, for which the mapping $`\varphi _{F,F^{}}`$ is well-defined and bijective.

Above Proposition express the geometrical equivalence in terms of the existence of an element of $`Aut(Sch)`$ mapping a set of vertices into another set of vertices. Those sets of vertices are identified with corresponding sets of vertices of the Schlafli graph (the Schlafli graph and the Schlafli polytope have the same symmetry group $`Aut(Sch)`$). So, the problem is expressed in graph-theoretic terms and can be solved, using, for example, the nauty program (\[MK\]). Therefore, one can build the geometrical equivalence classes.

Now, we extend above method to the case of faces generated by cuts. Let $`F`$ be a face, generated by cuts $`\{\delta (S_i)\}_{1iN}`$; we first need to find $`Ann(F)`$, i.e. all vectors $`b^{n+1}`$ with $`_{i=0}^nb_i=1`$, having $`H(b)\delta (S_i)=0`$.

Those equations can be rewritten as $`_{xS_i}b_x=x_i`$ with $`x_i=0`$ or $`1`$, i.e. a linear system in $`b`$. This linear system has rank $`n+1`$, because of Proposition below; so, one can find the set $`Ann(F)`$ for every face, generated by cuts.

###### Proposition 6

Let $``$ be a face of $`HYP_{n+1}`$ generated by cuts $`(\delta (S_i))_{1iN}`$. Then the following properties are equivalent:

(i) the face $`F`$ is non-degenerate and

(ii) the linear system, formed by the equations $`_{xS_i}b_x=0`$ and $`_{i=0}^nb_i=0`$, has solution set $`\{0\}`$.

Proof. If the face $`F`$ is degenerate, then there exist a vertex $`v`$, which can be expressed in two different forms $`v=_{i=0}^nb_iv_i=_{i=0}^nb_i^{}v_i`$. So, after denoting $`\alpha _i=b_ib_i^{}`$, one gets $`v=_{i=0}^n(b_i+k\alpha _i)v_i`$ with $`k`$ and $`b+k\alpha `$ belongs to $`Ann(F)`$. Therefore, one gets $`(b+k\alpha )(S_i)=0`$ or $`1`$, and $`_{i=0}^nb_i+k\alpha _i=1`$ for all $`k`$. This is possible only if $`_{xS_i}\alpha _x=0`$ and $`_{i=0}^n\alpha _i=0`$.

Let the solution set be non-zero, i.e. suppose that one can find an integer-valued non-zero solution $`\alpha `$. This implies that the vectors $`e_0+k\alpha `$ belong to $`Ann(F)`$ for every $`k`$. So, $`Ann(F)`$ is infinite and $`F`$ is degenerate.

If we write $`Ann(F)=\{b^1,\mathrm{},b^V\}`$, then every cut $`\delta (S_i)F`$ with $`1iN`$ defines an Euclidean semi-metric on the set $`\{e_0,\mathrm{},e_n\}`$; this semi-metric can be uniquely extended to $`Ann(F)`$ by $`\delta _i(b,b^{})=|b(S_i)b^{}(S_i)|`$.

So, to every face, generated by cuts, one can associate a set of semi-metrics on $`Ann(F)`$, which are, in fact, cut semi-metrics.

A combinatorial type of Delaunay polytope encodes all possible embeddings of $`Ann(F)`$ into the vertex-set $`V`$ of a Delaunay polytope of a lattice. These embeddings are completely described by the distance vector $`d_V`$ on their vertices. This distance vector is expressed as $`_{i=1}^N\lambda _i\delta _i`$ with $`\lambda _i>0`$.

Therefore, the combinatorial type of a face, generated by cuts, corresponds to the description of all semi-metrics on this set. This information can be expressed in graph-theoretic terms; so, we can test if two faces, generated by cuts, are isomorphic, using the nauty program (\[MK\]). So, again one can build the geometrical equivalence classes and our method is completely described.


format: text

text:
# A New Kind of Deformed Hermite Polynomials and Its Applications This project supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China and LWTZ 1298.

## 1 Introduction

Parastatistics was introduced by Green as an exotic possibility extending the Bose and Fermi statistics  and for the long period of time the interest to it was rather academic. Nowadays it finds some applications in the physics of the quantum Hall effect  and (probably) it is relevant to high temperature superconductivity . The paraquantization, carried out at the level of the algebra of creation and annihilation operators, involves trilinear(or double) commutation relations in place of the bilinear relations that characterize Bose and Fermi statistics. Recently, the trilinear commutation relations of single paraparticle systems was rewritten as bilinear commutation relations by virtue of the so-called R-deformed Heisenberg algebra . For instance, the trilinear commutation relations

$$[a,\{a^{},a\}]=2a,[a,\{a^{},a^{}\}]=4a^{},[a,\{a,a\}]=0,$$
(1)
where $`a^{}`$ and $`a`$ are parabose creation and annihilation operators respectively, can be replaced by

$$[a,a^{}]=1+(p1)R,\{R,a\}=\{R,a^{}\}=0,R^2=1,$$
(2)
where $`R`$ is a reflection operator and $`p`$ is the paraquantization order $`(p=1,2,3,\mathrm{})`$. Obviously, the bilinear commutation relations (2) may be treated as some kind of deformation of the ordinary Bose commutator with deformation parameter $`p`$.

¿From the experience of studying q-deformed oscillators , we know that it will be very useful if one introduces corresponding deformed calculus to analyse the parabose systems. This was done recently and based on the new deformed calculus, the parabosonic coordinate representation was developed . Since special functions play important roles in mathematical physics, it is reasonable to imagine that some deformation of the ordinary special functions based on the new deformed calculus will also play similar roles in studying the parabose systems. In this paper, we introduce a new kind of deformation for the ordinary Hermite polynomials and demonstrate its various useful properties.

It is well-known that squeezed state is one of the most important non-classical states for the usual bose system. In fact in phase space the simultaneous measurements of canonical variables $`x`$ (position) and $`P`$ (momentum) are restricted to a limit of accuracy due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, one may attempt to measure one component in a quadrature to much greater accuracy at the cost of high uncertainty in the other component. This has been realized in the case of squeezed states for bosons. Since the squeeze operator is identical for both the ordinary and parabose systems, it is natural to investigate squeezing behaviours of a parabose system. Applying the squeeze operator to parabose number states gives the so-called parabose squeezed number states. We derive explicit forms for these states and show they can be expressed by virtue of the deformed Hermite polynomial, whose argument is the parabose creation operator multiplied by a constant, acting on the vacuum. We discuss basic squeezing properties of these states. Especially, we show the parabose squeezed vacuum is a minimum uncertainty state for normal squeezing (i.e., either in $`x`$ and $`P`$ direction squeezing), as well as for amplitude-squared squeezing (i.e., squeezing in variables that are quadratic of the creation or annihilation operators). It is also interesting to ask, besides the para-squeezed vacuum, if there exist other states for a one mode parabose system, which are not only amplitude-squared squeezing but also minimum uncertainty states? We present a particularly simple subset of such states, that is, the deformed Hermite polynomial states. These states may or may not be squeezed in the normal sense.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, for the sake of self-contained of the present paper, we briefly mention the basic idea of the new kind of deformed calculus. The deformed Hermite polynomials are introduced in section 3, their orthonormality, generating function, differential and integral representaions, and recursion relations are also discussed in this section. In section 4, we show that the deformed Hermite polynomials can be used to give the explicit forms for parabose squeezed number states, which are constructed by applying the squeeze operator to the parabose number states, and analyse the basic squeezing properties of these states. In section 5 by solving an eigenvalue equation that allows one to find the minimum uncertainty states, we present the subset of its solutions which has a particularly simple form, and discuss the properties of these states.

## 2 Deformed calculus related to parabosonic coordinate representation

It is well-known that parabose algebra is characterized by the double commutation relations (1). If one demands that the usual relations

$$a=\frac{x+iP}{\sqrt{2}},a^{}=\frac{xiP}{\sqrt{2}}$$
(3)
still work for the parabose case, where $`x`$ and $`P`$ stand for the coordinate and momentum operator respectively, it can be proved that the most genaral expression for the momentum operator $`P`$ in the coordinate $`x`$ diagonal representation is of

$$P=i\frac{d}{dx}i\frac{p1}{2x}(1R),$$
(4)
where $`p`$ is the paraquantization order and $`R`$ the reflection operator which has property $`Rf(x)=f(x)`$ in the coordinate representation for any $`x`$ dependent function $`f(x)`$. From (4) a new derivative operator $`D`$ can be defined which acts on function $`f(x)`$ as

$`Df(x)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{D}{Dx}}f(x)={\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}}f(x)+{\displaystyle \frac{p1}{2x}}(1R)f(x)`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`df(x)+{\displaystyle \frac{p1}{2x}}\left(f(x)f(x)\right),`$
where $`df=\frac{d}{dx}f`$. Definition (5) implies that $`D`$ acts on an even function $`f_e(x)=f_e(x)`$ as the ordinary derivative $`Df_e(x)=df_e(x)`$, and $`D`$ acting on an odd function $`f_o(x)=f_o(x)`$ leads to $`Df_o(x)=df_o(x)+\frac{p1}{x}f_o(x)`$. For $`p=1`$ case, $`D`$ reduces to the ordinary derivative operator $`d`$. Since $`P=iD`$, Eq.(3) means that the pair $`(x,D)`$ in realization of parabose algebra for a single degree of freedom plays the same role as $`(x,d)`$ in realization of the ordinary Bose algebra. Like q-deformed calculus in which the q-analogue of the number system was defined by $`[n]_q=\frac{q^n1}{q1}`$ , such that when $`q1`$, $`[n]_qn`$, in the present case, one can introduce a new kind of deformed number system which is defined by

$$[n]=n+\frac{p1}{2}(1()^n).$$
(6)
Obviously, $`[2k]=2k`$, $`[2k+1]=2k+p`$ for any integer $`k`$ and when $`p1`$, $`[n]n`$. So paraquantization order $`p`$ may be referred to as a deformation parameter. In terms of the number system $`[n]`$, basis vectors of Fock space for single mode of parabose oscillators take the usual form

$$|n=\frac{(a^{})^n}{\sqrt{[n]!}}|0,a^{}|n=\sqrt{[n+1]}|n+1,a|n=\sqrt{[n]}|n1,$$
(7)
where $`[n]!=[n][n1]\mathrm{}[1],[0]!1`$, and $`|0`$ is the unique vacuum vector satisfying $`a|0=0,aa^{}|0=p|0`$. Generalization of the ordinary differential relation $`dx^n=nx^{n1}`$ reads

$$Dx^n=[n]x^{n1},$$
(8)
which reveals the effect of the deformed derivative operator $`D`$ on the polynomials of $`x`$. If we introduce a notation $`E(x)`$ defined by

$$E(x)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{x^n}{[n]!},$$
(9)
we also have

$$DE(x)=E(x)$$
(10)
Therefore the $`E(x)`$ is a deformation of the ordinary exponential function $`e^x`$ in our case and it will reduce to $`e^x`$ when $`p1`$. It is worthy of metion that in some special situation the usual Leibnitz rule also works for the deformed operator $`D`$

$$D(fg)=(Df)g+f(Dg),$$
(11)
where either $`f(x)`$ or $`g(x)`$ is an even function of $`x`$.

Of course, inversion of the deformed derivative operator $`D`$ also leads to a new deformed integration which may be formally written as

$`{\displaystyle DxF(x)}={\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}()^n\left({\displaystyle 𝑑x\frac{p1}{2x}(1R)}\right)^n{\displaystyle 𝑑xF(x)}`$ (12)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑xF(x)}{\displaystyle 𝑑x\frac{p1}{2x}(1R)𝑑xF(x)}`$
$`+\left({\displaystyle 𝑑x\frac{p1}{2x}(1R)}\right)^2{\displaystyle 𝑑xF(x)}\mathrm{}.`$
¿From this expression, it is easily seen that if $`F(x)`$ is an odd function of $`x`$, its deformed integration will reduce to the ordinary integration, that is, $`DxF(x)=𝑑xF(x)`$ for $`F(x)=F(x)`$. Corresponding to Eq. (8), one has

$$Dxx^n=\frac{x^{n+1}}{[n+1]}+c,$$
(13)
where c is an integration constant. Eq.(12) gives a formal definition for the deformed integration in the sence of indefinite integral. For definite integral, we have

$`{\displaystyle _a^b}DxF(x)={\displaystyle _a^b}𝑑x{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}()^n\left({\displaystyle \frac{p1}{2x}}(1R){\displaystyle _a^x}𝑑x\right)^nF(x)`$ (14)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _a^b}𝑑xF(x){\displaystyle _a^b}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{p1}{2x}}(1R){\displaystyle _a^x}𝑑xF(x)`$
$`+{\displaystyle _a^b}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{p1}{2x}}(1R){\displaystyle _a^x}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{p1}{2x}}(1R){\displaystyle _a^x}𝑑xF(x)\mathrm{}.`$
If either $`F(x)`$ or $`G(x)`$ is an even function of $`x`$, one has a formula of integration by parts from Eq.(11)

$$_a^bDx\frac{DF}{Dx}G=FG|_a^b_a^bDxF\frac{DG}{Dx}.$$
(15)
## 3 Deformed Hermite polynomials and their properties

Let us consider solutions of a second-order differential equation based on the deformed derivative operator $`D`$ defined in the previous section

$$D^2f(x)2xDf(x)+\mu f(x)=0.$$
(16)
In terms of the ordinary derivative notation, Eq.(16) can be rewritten as

$$\frac{d^2}{dx^2}f(x)\left(2x\frac{p1}{x}\right)\frac{d}{dx}f(x)(p1)\left(1+\frac{1}{2x^2}\right)f(x)$$

$$+(p1)\left(1+\frac{1}{2x^2}\right)f(x)+\mu f(x)=0.$$
(17)
We find out that when the parameter $`\mu `$ takes eigenvalues $`\mu =2[n],n=0,1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$, for each given paraquantization order $`p`$, the deformed second-order differential equation (16) has solutions (eigenfunctions) which form a set of orthogonal functions in the whole real $`x`$ axis. In fact, it is not difficult to see that the following polynomials

$$H_n^{(p)}(x)=[n]!\underset{k=0}{\overset{[n/2]^{^{}}}{}}\frac{()^k(2x)^{n2k}}{k![n2k]!}$$
(18)
are the desired solutions of the deformed second-order differential equation (16) for $`\mu =2[n]`$ which will reduce to the usual Hermite polynomials when $`p1`$, where $`[k]^{^{}}`$ in the above of summation notation $``$ stands for the largest integer smaller than or equal to $`k`$. So the polynomials (18) may be considered as a deformation of the usual Hermite polynomials. The first few polynomials of $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$ have the following explicit forms

$`H_0^{(p)}(x)=1,H_1^{(p)}(x)=2x,H_2^{(p)}(x)=4x^2[2]!,`$
$`H_3^{(p)}(x)=8x^34[3]x,H_4^{(p)}(x)=16x^416[3]x^2+2[3]!,`$
$`H_5^{(p)}(x)=32x^532[5]x^3+8[5][3]x,`$
$`H_6^{(p)}(x)=64x^696[5]x^4+48[5][3]x^2[5]!.`$ (19)
In order to convince oneself that the polynomials (18) are indeed solutions of eq.(16), one may substitute (18) into (16) and check coefficients of all powers of $`x`$ being zero. To do this, more convenient forms for $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$ are

$$H_{2l}^{(p)}(x)=()^l[2l]!\underset{k=0}{\overset{l}{}}\frac{()^k(2x)^{2k}}{(lk)![2k]!}$$
(20)
and

$$H_{2l+1}^{(p)}(x)=()^l[2l+1]!\underset{k=0}{\overset{l}{}}\frac{()^k(2x)^{2k+1}}{(lk)![2k+1]!},$$
(21)
where $`l`$ are non-negative integers. Thus we have

$$D^2H_n^{(p)}(x)2xDH_n^{(p)}(x)+2[n]H_n^{(p)}(x)=0,$$
(22)
or, by virtue of the Leibnitz rule (11), we also have

$$D\left(e^{x^2}DH_n^{(p)}(x)\right)+2[n]e^{x^2}H_n^{(p)}(x)=0.$$
(23)
Also from Eq.(18) we know that $`H_n^{(p)}(x)=()^nH_n^{(p)}(x)`$, which means that the deformed Hermite polynomial $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$ has its parity $`()^n`$.

As in the ordinary Hermite polynomials case, the deformed ones also have their generating function. Using the deformed exponential function $`E(x)`$ defined by (9), we can write the generating function of $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$ as

$$e^{t^2}E(2tx)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{t^n}{[n]!}H_n^{(p)}(x).$$
(24)
We also would like to point out a differential representation of the deformed Hermite polynomials $`H_n^{(P)}(x)`$ being

$$H_n^{(p)}(x)=()^ne^{x^2}D^ne^{x^2}.$$
(25)
Before writing out an integral representation of $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$, let us introduce a notation $`[x+y]^n`$ which is defined as

$$[x+y]^n\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{[n]!}{[k]![nk]!}x^{nk}y^k.$$
(26)
Using this notation, the integral representation of $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$ can be written as

$$H_n^{(p)}(x)=2^nN_0^2_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dt[x+it]^ne^{t^2},$$
(27)
where $`N_0`$ is determined by

$$N_0^2=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dte^{t^2}.$$
(28)
Using the following integral formula

$$N_0^2_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dtt^{2n}e^{t^2}=\frac{[1][3]\mathrm{}[2n1]}{2^n},(n>0)$$
(29)
it is easily to show that equation (27) works. In fact,

$$2^nN_0^2_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dt[x+it]^ne^{t^2}=2^nN_0^2\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{[n]!i^kx^{nk}}{[k]![nk]!}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dtt^ke^{t^2}.$$
(30)
Noticing that for odd $`k`$, the deformed integration in the right-hand side of (30) will reduce to ordinary integration which has no any contribution to the summation, the above summation can be written as

$$2^nN_0^2\underset{k=0}{\overset{[n/2]^{^{}}}{}}\frac{()^kx^{n2k}}{[2k]![n2k]!}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dtt^{2k}e^{t^2}=H_n^{(p)}(x),$$
(31)
where (29) has been used.

Now we turn to the question of demonstrating the orthonormality of $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$

$$_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dxe^{x^2}H_n^{(p)}(x)H_m^{(p)}(x)=\frac{2^n[n]!}{N_0^2}\delta _{n,m}.$$
(32)
Firstly we show the orthogonality of $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$

$$_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dxe^{x^2}H_n^{(p)}(x)H_m^{(p)}(x)=0,(nm).$$
(33)
For $`n+m`$ odd case, Eq.(33) works obviously. In fact, from the parity of $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$ we have $`H_n^{(p)}(x)H_m^{(p)}(x)=H_n^{(p)}(x)H_m^{(p)}(x)`$, which means that the deformed integration in (33) will reduce to an ordinary integration with an odd integrand $`e^{x^2}H_n^{(p)}(x)H_m^{(p)}(x)`$ over a whole real $`x`$ axis, therefore the integration should be zero. For $`n+m`$ even case, because of (23), $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$ and $`H_m^{(p)}(x)`$ satisfy the following equations

$$D\left(e^{x^2}DH_n^{(p)}(x)\right)+2[n]e^{x^2}H_n^{(p)}(x)=0,$$
(34)
$$D\left(e^{x^2}DH_m^{(p)}(x)\right)+2[m]e^{x^2}H_m^{(p)}(x)=0$$
(35)
respectively. Multiplying Eq.(34) and Eq.(35) by $`H_m^{(p)}(x)`$ and $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$ respectively, and substracting the resulting equations, then integrating it over the whole real $`x`$ axis, we have

$$_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dx\left(H_m^{(p)}\frac{D}{Dx}\left(e^{x^2}\frac{D}{Dx}H_n^{(p)}\right)H_n^{(p)}\frac{D}{Dx}\left(e^{x^2}\frac{D}{Dx}H_m^{(p)}\right)\right)$$

$$+2([n][m])_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dxe^{x^2}H_n^{(p)}H_m^{(p)}=0.$$
(36)
Since the first integration in Eq.(36) satisfies condition of the deformed integration by parts either for $`n`$ and $`m`$ being all even or all odd, we can write it as

$`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}Dx{\displaystyle \frac{D}{Dx}}\left(e^{x^2}(H_m^{(p)}{\displaystyle \frac{D}{Dx}}H_n^{(p)}H_n^{(p)}{\displaystyle \frac{D}{Dx}}H_m^{(p)})\right)`$ (37)
$`=`$ $`e^{x^2}\left(H_m^{(p)}{\displaystyle \frac{D}{Dx}}H_n^{(p)}H_n^{(p)}{\displaystyle \frac{D}{Dx}}H_m^{(p)}\right)|_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}=0,`$
here we have used a fact that $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$, $`H_m^{(p)}(x)`$ and their deformed derivatives are all polynomials of $`x`$, so the right-hand side of (37) equals to zero. Noticing that $`nm`$, we obtain Eq.(33).

Then we calculute integration

$$I_n=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dxe^{x^2}H_n^{(p)}(x)H_n^{(p)}(x).$$
(38)
Substituting Eq.(25) into this integration, we have

$$I_n=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}DxH_n^{(p)}(x)()^n\frac{D^n}{Dx^n}e^{x^2}.$$
(39)
Noticing that the integration (38) also satisfies the condition of the deformed integration by parts no matter what non-negative integer $`n`$ is, we get

$$I_n=()^nH_n^{(p)}(x)D^{n1}e^{x^2}|_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}()^n_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dx\frac{DH_n^{(p)}(x)}{Dx}\frac{D^{n1}}{Dx^{n1}}e^{x^2}$$

$$=e^{x^2}H_n^{(p)}(x)H_{n1}^{(p)}(x)|_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}()^n_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dx\frac{DH_n^{(p)}(x)}{Dx}\frac{D^{n1}}{Dx^{n1}}e^{x^2}.$$

Continuing the procedure of integration by parts, at last we arrive at

$$I_n=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}Dx\frac{D^nH_n^{(p)}(x)}{Dx^n}e^{x^2}=\frac{2^n[n]!}{N_0^2}.$$
(40)
Thus we demonstrated the equation (32).

To conclude this section, let us mention that there are some definite relations between neighbouring deformed Hermite polynomials and their derivatives which are called recursion relations of $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$. The main recursion relations are the following two:

$$DH_n^{(p)}(x)2[n]H_{n1}^{(p)}(x)=0,$$
(41)
$$H_{n+1}^{(p)}(x)2xH_n^{(p)}(x)+2[n]H_{n1}^{(p)}(x)=0.$$
(42)
It is straightforward to prove these relations by virtue of the definition (18) and the deformed differential relation (8).

## 4 Parabose squeezed number states

As an application of the deformed Hermite polynomials $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$, let us consider the resulting states from parabose squeezed operator $`S(r)=e^{\frac{r}{2}a^2\frac{r}{2}(a^{})^2}`$ acting on the parabose number states $`|n`$

$$|r,n=S(r)|n,(n=0,1,2,3,\mathrm{})$$
(43)
here for the sake of simplicity, we take the squeezing parameter $`r`$ as a real number. We call $`|r,n`$ the parabose squeezed number states. Obviously, $`|r,n`$ form a complete and orthonormal state-vector set for the single mode of parabose system:

$$r,n|r,m=n|m=\delta _{n,m},\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|r,nr,n|=1.$$
(44)
Using the following transformations

$`S(r)aS(r)^1`$ $`=`$ $`coshra+sinhra^{},`$
$`S(r)a^{}S(r)^1`$ $`=`$ $`coshra^{}+sinhra`$ (45)
and the disentangling formula

$$S(r)=exp\left(\frac{tanhr}{2}(a^{})^2\right)exp\left(\frac{\mathrm{ln}coshr}{2}(a^{}a+aa^{})\right)exp\left(\frac{tanhr}{2}a^2\right),$$
(46)
we can write $`|r,n`$ as

$$|r,n=\frac{(sechr)^{p/2}}{\sqrt{[n]!}}\left(coshra^{}+sinhra\right)^ne^{tanhr(a^{})^2/2}|0.$$
(47)
In terms of the deformed Hermite polynomials $`H_n^{(p)}(x)`$, the explicit form of $`|r,n`$ is

$$|r,n=\frac{(sechr)^{p/2}}{\sqrt{[n]!}}\left(\frac{1}{2}tanhr\right)^{n/2}H_n^{(p)}\left(\frac{a^{}}{i\sqrt{sinh2r}}\right)e^{tanhr(a^{})^2/2}|0.$$
(48)
We prove (48) by induction. Firstly, from (47), and using

$$e^{tanhr(a^{})^2/2}a^ne^{tanhr(a^{})^2/2}=(atanhra^{})^n,$$
(49)
for $`n=1`$ case, we have

$$|r,1=\frac{(sechr)^{p/2}}{\sqrt{[1]!}coshr}a^{}e^{tanhr(a^{})^2/2}|0$$

$$=\frac{(sechr)^{p/2}}{\sqrt{[1]!}}\left(\frac{1}{2}tanhr\right)^{1/2}H_1^{(p)}(\chi )e^{tanhr(a^{})^2/2}|0,$$
(50)
where $`\chi `$ stands for $`\frac{a^{}}{i\sqrt{sinh2r}}`$. Then supposing

$$|r,n1=\frac{(sechr)^{p/2}}{\sqrt{[n1]!}}\left(\frac{1}{2}tanhr\right)^{\frac{n1}{2}}H_{n1}^{(p)}(\chi )e^{tanhr(a^{})^2/2}|0,$$
(51)
we have

$`|r,n={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{[n]}}}\left(coshra^{}+sinhra\right)|r,n1`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{(sechr)^{p/2}}{\sqrt{[n]!}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}tanhr\right)^{\frac{n1}{2}}coshra^{}H_{n1}^{(p)}(\chi )e^{tanhr(a^{})^2/2}|0`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{(sechr)^{p/2}}{\sqrt{[n]!}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}tanhr\right)^{\frac{n1}{2}}sinhre^{tanhr(a^{})^2/2}(atanhra^{})`$
$`H_{n1}^{(p)}(\chi )|0.`$ (52)
Using the following relation

$$[a,(a^{})^n]=(a^{})^{n1}\left(n+\frac{p1}{2}(1()^n)R\right)$$
(53)
it is easily to find

$$aH_{n1}^{(p)}(\chi )|0=\frac{2[n1]}{i\sqrt{sinh2r}}H_{n2}^{(p)}(\chi )|0.$$
(54)
Substituting (54) into (52), we obtain

$`|r,n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(sechr)^{p/2}}{\sqrt{[n]!}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}tanhr\right)^{n/2}\left(2\chi H_{n1}^{(p)}(\chi )2[n1]H_{n2}^{(p)}(\chi )\right)`$ (55)
$`e^{tanhr(a^{})^2/2}|0.`$
Thus (48) is proved by virtue of the recursion relation (42).

¿From (3) we have Hermitian operators $`x`$ and $`P`$ defined by

$$x=\frac{a+a^{}}{\sqrt{2}},P=\frac{aa^{}}{i\sqrt{2}},$$
(56)
which satisfy the commutator $`[x,P]=i[a,a^{}]=i(1+(p1)R)`$. The variances of the operators $`x`$ and $`P`$ in the parabose squeezed number states are of the form

$`r,n|(\mathrm{}x)^2|r,n`$ $``$ $`r,n|x^2|r,nr,n|x|r,n^2=e^{2r}(n+{\displaystyle \frac{p}{2}}),`$
$`r,n|(\mathrm{}P)^2|r,n`$ $``$ $`r,n|P^2|r,nr,n|P|r,n^2=e^{2r}(n+{\displaystyle \frac{p}{2}}),`$ (57)
which lead to

$$r,n|(\mathrm{}x)^2|r,nr,n|(\mathrm{}P)^2|r,n=\left(n+\frac{p}{2}\right)^2.$$
(58)
On the other hand, according to the uncertainty relation

$$r,n|(\mathrm{}x)^2|r,nr,n|(\mathrm{}P)^2|r,n\frac{1}{4}\left|r,n|[a,a^{}]|r,n\right|^2,$$
(59)
we also have

$$r,n|(\mathrm{}x)^2|r,nr,n|(\mathrm{}P)^2|r,n\left(\frac{1}{2}+\frac{p1}{2}()^n\right)^2,$$
(60)
which means that only for the parabose squeezed vaccum $`|r,0`$, the uncertainty relation reduces to an equality. Note that since $`[a,a^{}]`$ is in general not a c-number, the right-hand side of (59) itself depends on the given state.

In order to show the squeezing properties of the parabose squeezed number states $`|r,n`$, let us consider the variances of the operators $`x`$ and $`P`$ in the parabose number states

$$n|(\mathrm{}x)^2|n=n|(\mathrm{}P)^2|n=n+\frac{p}{2},$$
(61)
which means that for $`r0`$, the states $`|r,n`$ are squeezed in the $`x`$ direction

$`r,n|(\mathrm{}x)^2|r,n`$ $``$ $`n|(\mathrm{}x)^2|n,`$
$`r,n|(\mathrm{}P)^2|r,n`$ $``$ $`n|(\mathrm{}P)^2|n`$ (62)
and for $`r<0`$, the states $`|r,n`$ are squeezed in the $`P`$ direction

$`r,n|(\mathrm{}x)^2|r,n`$ $``$ $`n|(\mathrm{}x)^2|n,`$
$`r,n|(\mathrm{}P)^2|r,n`$ $``$ $`n|(\mathrm{}P)^2|n`$ (63)
respectively.

## 5 Parabose Hermite polynomial states

In the previous section we show that the parabose squeezed vacuum $`|r,0`$ is a minimum uncertainty state for the normal squeezing. In fact, $`|r,0`$ is also a minimum uncertainty state for parabose amplitude-squared squeezing. To see this, let us introduce two Hermitian operators

$$Y_1=\frac{1}{2}(a^2+a^2),Y_2=\frac{1}{2i}(a^2a^2),$$
(64)
which satisfy the commutator $`[Y_1,Y_2]=2iN`$ and the uncertainty relation

$$\psi |(\mathrm{}Y_1)^2|\psi \psi |(\mathrm{}Y_2)^2|\psi (\psi |N|\psi )^2,$$
(65)
where $`N=\{a^{},a\}/2`$ and $`\psi |(\mathrm{}Y)^2|\psi `$ stands for the variance of the operator $`Y`$ in the state $`|\psi `$. It is easily to calculate the variances of $`Y_1`$ and $`Y_2`$ in the parabose squeezed vacuum $`|r,0`$

$$r,0|(\mathrm{}Y_1)^2|r,0=\frac{p}{2}(cosh2r)^2,r,0|(\mathrm{}Y_2)^2|r,0=\frac{p}{2}.$$
(66)
Comparing with $`r,0|N|r,0=\frac{p}{2}cosh2r`$, one finds that

$$r,0|(\mathrm{}Y_1)^2|r,0r,0|N|r,0,r,0|(\mathrm{}Y_2)^2|r,0r,0|N|r,0,$$
(67)
which mean that the state $`|r,0`$ is squeezed in the $`Y_2`$ direction.

To search other minimum uncertainty states for parabose amplitude-squared squeezing, following , let us consider the eigenvalue eqaution

$$(Y_1+i\lambda Y_2)|\psi =\beta |\psi ,$$
(68)
where $`\lambda `$ is real and $`\beta `$ is complex. Multiplying (68) by the operator $`Y_1i\lambda Y_2`$ and then taking the inner product with $`|\psi `$, one gets

$$\psi |(\mathrm{}Y_1)^2|\psi +\lambda ^2\psi |(\mathrm{}Y_2)^2|\psi =2\lambda \psi |N|\psi .$$
(69)
Again multiplying (68) by $`Y_1+i\lambda Y_2`$ and taking the inner product with $`|\psi `$ provides further information

$$\psi |(\mathrm{}Y_1)^2|\psi =\lambda ^2\psi |(\mathrm{}Y_2)^2|\psi .$$
(70)
¿From these two equations we have

$$\psi |(\mathrm{}Y_1)^2|\psi =\lambda \psi |N|\psi ,\psi |(\mathrm{}Y_2)^2|\psi =\frac{1}{\lambda }\psi |N|\psi .$$
(71)
These equations show that a solution of (68) is a minimum uncertainty state for parabose amplitude-squared squeezing, and the real $`\lambda `$ plays the role of squeezing parameter.

Now we begin to solve (68) for $`|\psi `$. First, in terms of creation and annihilation operators, we can rewrite (68) as

$$(\frac{1\lambda }{2}a^2+\frac{1+\lambda }{2}a^2)|\psi =\beta |\psi .$$
(72)
Introducing a new state $`|\psi ^{}=S(z)|\psi `$, where $`S(z)=exp(\frac{z^{}}{2}a^2\frac{z}{2}a^2)`$ is the squeezed operator and $`z=re^{i\theta }`$, one finds that $`|\psi ^{}`$ satisfies

$`({\displaystyle \frac{1\lambda }{2}}cosh^2r+{\displaystyle \frac{1+\lambda }{2}}e^{2i\theta }sinh^2r)a^2|\psi ^{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}({\displaystyle \frac{1\lambda }{2}}e^{i\theta }+{\displaystyle \frac{1+\lambda }{2}}e^{i\theta })sinh2r\{a^{},a\}|\psi ^{}`$
$`+({\displaystyle \frac{1\lambda }{2}}e^{2i\theta }sinh^2r+{\displaystyle \frac{1+\lambda }{2}}cosh^2r)a^2|\psi ^{}=\beta |\psi ^{}.`$ (73)
Suitably choosing the parameter $`z`$, one can eliminate the coefficient of $`a^2`$ term. In doing so, for $`0<\lambda <1`$, we choose $`\theta =\pi /2`$ and $`coshr=\sqrt{\frac{1+\lambda }{2\lambda }}`$, $`sinhr=\sqrt{\frac{1\lambda }{2\lambda }}`$; for $`\lambda 1`$, we choose $`\theta =0`$, and $`coshr=\sqrt{\frac{\lambda +1}{2}}`$, $`sinhr=\sqrt{\frac{\lambda 1}{2}}`$. Substituting these expressions into the above equation, for $`0<\lambda <1`$, we have

$$(a^2+\frac{i}{2}\sqrt{1\lambda ^2}\{a^{},a\})|\psi ^{}=\beta |\psi ^{},$$
(74)
and for $`\lambda 1`$, we have

$$(a^2+\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\lambda ^21}\{a^{},a\})|\psi ^{}=\beta |\psi ^{}.$$
(75)
We now expand $`|\psi ^{}`$ in terms of the parabose number states (7), $`|\psi ^{}=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}c_n|n`$, and substitute this expression into (74) and (75). This leads to the recursion relations $`c_{n+2}=\frac{\beta i\sqrt{1\lambda ^2}(n+p/2)}{\sqrt{[n+1][n+2]}}c_n`$ for $`0<\lambda <1`$, and $`c_{n+2}=\frac{\beta \sqrt{\lambda ^21}(n+p/2)}{\lambda \sqrt{[n+1][n+2]}}c_n`$ for $`\lambda 1`$. Here we want to consider a particularly simple subset of solutions. Noting that for $`0<\lambda <1`$, if one takes $`\beta =i\sqrt{1\lambda ^2}(m+\frac{p}{2})`$, where $`m`$ is a non-negative integer, then one has a truncated series for $`|\psi ^{}`$ with $`c_m|m`$ being the last term. Similarly, for $`\lambda 1`$, and $`\beta =\sqrt{\lambda ^21}(m+\frac{p}{2})`$, one also gets a polynomial expression for $`|\psi ^{}`$ with all $`c_n=0`$ when $`n>m`$. Thus if $`0<\lambda <1`$, for even $`m`$, taking $`c_1=0`$, we have

$$|\psi ^{}(m,\lambda )=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\frac{m}{2}}{}}\frac{(i\sqrt{1\lambda ^2})^k2^k(\frac{m}{2})!}{\sqrt{[2k]!}(\frac{m}{2}k)!}c_0|2k,$$
(76)
and for odd $`m`$, taking $`c_0=0`$, we have

$$|\psi ^{}(m,\lambda )=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\frac{m1}{2}}{}}\frac{\sqrt{p}(i\sqrt{1\lambda ^2})^k2^k(\frac{m1}{2})!}{\sqrt{[2k+1]!}(\frac{m1}{2}k)!}c_1|2k+1.$$
(77)
If $`\lambda 1`$, for even $`m`$, also taking $`c_1=0`$, we have

$$|\psi ^{}(m,\lambda )=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\frac{m}{2}}{}}\frac{(\sqrt{\lambda ^21})^k2^k(\frac{m}{2})!}{\lambda ^k\sqrt{[2k]!}(\frac{m}{2}k)!}c_0|2k,$$
(78)
and for odd $`m`$, taking $`c_0=0`$, we have

$$|\psi ^{}(m,\lambda )=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\frac{m1}{2}}{}}\frac{\sqrt{p}(\sqrt{\lambda ^21})^k2^k(\frac{m1}{2})!}{\lambda ^k\sqrt{[2k+1]!}(\frac{m1}{2}k)!}c_1|2k+1.$$
(79)
Using the deformed Hermite polynomial $`H_m^{(p)}`$, we can express these states in a relatively compact form

$$|\psi ^{}(m,\lambda )=c_m(\lambda )H_m^{(p)}(i\gamma (\lambda )a^{})|0,$$
(80)
where $`c_m(\lambda )`$ is a normalization constant, and for $`0<\lambda <1`$, $`\gamma (\lambda )=e^{i\pi /4}\sqrt{\sqrt{1\lambda ^2}/2}`$; for $`\lambda 1`$, $`\gamma (\lambda )=\sqrt{\sqrt{\lambda ^21}/2\lambda }`$. Finally, combining this with the squeezing transformation we have the minimum uncertainty states

$$|\psi (m,\lambda )=S^1(z)|\psi ^{}(m,\lambda )=c_m(\lambda )S^1(z)H_m^{(p)}(i\gamma (\lambda )a^{})|0,$$
(81)
where $`z`$ is chosen as mentioned earlier.

We now want to examine some of the properties of the states $`|\psi (m,\lambda )`$. Eq.(71) shows that if we know the average value of the operator $`N`$ in the state $`|\psi (m,\lambda )`$, then we know the variances of the operators $`Y_1`$ and $`Y_2`$ in the same state. Using (54) and noticing that

$$0|H_m^{(p)}(i\gamma ^{}(\lambda )a)RH_m^{(p)}(i\gamma (\lambda )a^{})|0=()^m/|c_m(\lambda )|^2,$$

for $`0<\lambda <1`$ one can get

$`\psi (m,\lambda )|N|\psi (m,\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1\lambda ^2}{\lambda }}(m+{\displaystyle \frac{p}{2}})+{\displaystyle \frac{1+(p1)()^m}{2}}\lambda `$ (82)
$`+2[m]^2\lambda \sqrt{1\lambda ^2}{\displaystyle \frac{|c_m(\lambda )|^2}{|c_{m1}(\lambda )|^2}},`$
and for $`\lambda 1`$ one can get

$`\psi (m,\lambda )|N|\psi (m,\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^21}{\lambda }}(m+{\displaystyle \frac{p}{2}})+{\displaystyle \frac{1+(p1)()^m}{2\lambda }}`$ (83)
$`+2[m]^2{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\lambda ^21}}{\lambda ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{|c_m(\lambda )|^2}{|c_{m1}(\lambda )|^2}}.`$
A straightforward calculation gives

$$|c_0(\lambda )|^2=1,|c_1(\lambda )|^2=4[1]|\gamma |^2,$$

$$|c_2(\lambda )|^2=16[2]!|\gamma |^4+([2]!)^2.$$

Let us consider the state $`|\psi (1,\lambda )`$. We find for $`0<\lambda <1`$ that

$`\psi (1,\lambda )|N|\psi (1,\lambda )={\displaystyle \frac{2+p}{2\lambda }},`$
$`\psi (1,\lambda )|(\mathrm{}Y_1)^2|\psi (1,\lambda )=1+{\displaystyle \frac{p}{2}},`$
$`\psi (1,\lambda )|(\mathrm{}Y_2)^2|\psi (1,\lambda )={\displaystyle \frac{2+p}{2\lambda ^2}},`$ (84)
and for $`\lambda 1`$ that

$`\psi (1,\lambda )|N|\psi (1,\lambda )={\displaystyle \frac{2+p}{2}}\lambda ,`$
$`\psi (1,\lambda )|(\mathrm{}Y_1)^2|\psi (1,\lambda )={\displaystyle \frac{2+p}{2}}\lambda ^2`$
$`\psi (1,\lambda )|(\mathrm{}Y_2)^2|\psi (1,\lambda )=1+{\displaystyle \frac{p}{2}},`$ (85)
It is obviously that as $`\lambda 0`$, $`Y_1`$ becomes increasingly squeezed, and $`\psi (1,\lambda )|(\mathrm{}Y_1)^2|\psi (1,\lambda )`$ is equal to $`1+\frac{p}{2}`$. Similarly, as $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$, $`Y_2`$ becomes more and more squeezed and $`\psi (1,\lambda )|(\mathrm{}Y_2)^2|\psi (1,\lambda )`$ is equal to $`1+\frac{p}{2}`$. Then we examine the state $`|\psi (2,\lambda )`$. For $`0<\lambda <1`$, we have

$$\psi (2,\lambda )|N|\psi (2,\lambda )=\frac{(2+p)(4+p)(8+6p)\lambda ^2}{2\lambda (2+p2\lambda ^2)},$$
(86)
and for $`\lambda 1`$, we have

$$\psi (2,\lambda )|N|\psi (2,\lambda )=\frac{(2+p)(4+p)\lambda ^3(8+6p)\lambda }{2(2+p)\lambda 4}.$$
(87)
In this case, however, as $`\lambda `$ goes to zero, $`\psi (2,\lambda )|(\mathrm{}Y1)^2|\psi (2,\lambda )`$ goes to $`2+\frac{p}{2}`$, and as $`\lambda `$ goes to infinity, $`\psi (2,\lambda )|(\mathrm{}Y_2)^2|\psi (2,\lambda )`$ goes to $`2+\frac{p}{2}`$. Generally, for any fixed non-negative integer $`m`$, since when $`\lambda 0`$ or $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$, $`|c_m(\lambda )|^2`$ goes to a number which only depends on the given integer $`m`$ and the parastatistica order $`p`$, we have

$$\underset{\lambda 0}{lim}\psi (m,\lambda )|(\mathrm{}Y_1)^2|\psi (m,\lambda )=m+\frac{p}{2},$$

and

$$\underset{\lambda \mathrm{}}{lim}\psi (m,\lambda )|(\mathrm{}Y_2)^2|\psi (m,\lambda )=m+\frac{p}{2}.$$

A short calculation shows that the state $`|\psi (1,\lambda )`$ is not squeezed in the normal sense.

In summary, we have introduced a new kind of deformation of the usual Hermite polynomials and discussed their main preperties in this paper. These deformed Hermite polynomials may have some applications in studying parabose systems. For instance, they can be used to give the explicit form for the parabose squeezed number states, as well as to present a particularly simple subset of the minimum uncertainty states for parabose amplitude-squared squeezing. It is reasonable to believe that the para-deformed Hermite polynomials have other applications in parastatistics, and this is the task of oue next step.