text:
# Diagrammatic Computations for Quandles and Cocycle Knot Invariants

## 1. Introduction

Diagrammatic morphisms interconnect algebra and topology. Complicated algebraic formulas can be established via topological diagrams, and algebraic structures give topological invariants. In this paper, we present two instances of algebraic and topological interplay from quandle homology theory. First, we use the Kronecker product and computations on colored knot diagrams for evaluating the quandle knot cocycle invariants. Second, we describe extensions of quandles by cocycles, and give diagrammatics proofs. In both examples, relations between algebra and diagrams play key roles.

A quandle is a set with a self-distributive binary operation (defined below) whose definition was motivated from knot theory. A (co)homology theory was defined in  for quandles, which is a modification of rack (co)homology defined in . State-sum invariants using quandle cocycles as weights are defined  and computed for important families of classical knots and knotted surfaces . Quandle homomorphisms and virtual knots are applied to this homology theory . The invariants were applied to study knots, for example, in detecting non-invertible knotted surfaces . On the other hand, knot diagrams colored by quandles can be used to study quandle homology groups. This view point was developed in  for rack homology and homotopy and generalized to quandle homology in . It was poined out by Fenn and Rourke that the state-sum terms can be interpreted as Kronecker products. In this paper, we use such interpretations to evaluate the invariants.

The second diagrammatic method we present here is extensions of quandles. Cohomology theories of groups and other algebraic systems have interpretations in terms of group extensions or obstructions to deformations of algebraic systems (see for example  and for a diagrammatic approach ). We give analogous interpretations for quandle cohomology. The proofs are based on knot diagrams.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 1, we give a summary of preliminary material on quandle homology and cocycle knot invariants. Applications of the Kronecker product are given in Section 2, and the extensions of quandles by cocycles are investigated in Section 3.

Acknowledgement. We are grateful to Edwin Clark for his valuable comments.

## 2. Quandle homology and colored knot diagrams

In this section we review necessary material from the papers mentioned in the introduction.

A quandle, $`X`$, is a set with a binary operation $`(a,b)ab`$ such that

(I) For any $`aX`$, $`aa=a`$.

(II) For any $`a,bX`$, there is a unique $`cX`$ such that $`a=cb`$.

(III) For any $`a,b,cX`$, we have $`(ab)c=(ac)(bc).`$

A rack is a set with a binary operation that satisfies (II) and (III). Racks and quandles have been studied in, for example, . The axioms for a quandle correspond respectively to the Reidemeister moves of type I, II, and III (see , , for example).

A function $`f:XY`$ between quandles or racks is a homomorphism if $`f(ab)=f(a)f(b)`$ for any $`a,bX`$.

The following are typical examples of quandles.

* A group $`X=G`$ with $`n`$-fold conjugation as the quandle operation: $`ab=b^nab^n`$.
* Any set $`X`$ with the operation $`xy=x`$ for any $`x,yX`$ is a quandle called the trivial quandle. The trivial quandle of $`n`$ elements is denoted by $`T_n`$.
* Let $`n`$ be a positive integer. For elements $`i,j\{0,1,\mathrm{},n1\}`$, define $`ij2ji(modn)`$. Then $``$ defines a quandle structure called the dihedral quandle, $`R_n`$. This set can be identified with the set of reflections of a regular $`n`$-gon with conjugation as the quandle operation.
* Any $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(=𝐙[T,T^1])`$-module $`M`$ is a quandle with $`ab=Ta+(1T)b`$, $`a,bM`$, called an Alexander quandle. Furthermore for a positive integer $`n`$, a mod-$`n`$ Alexander quandle $`𝐙_n[T,T^1]/(h(T))`$ is a quandle for a Laurent polynomial $`h(T)`$. The mod-$`n`$ Alexander quandle is finite if the coefficients of the highest and lowest degree terms of $`h`$ are $`\pm 1`$.

See  for further examples of quandles.

Let $`C_n^\mathrm{R}(X)`$ be the free abelian group generated by $`n`$-tuples $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ of elements of a quandle $`X`$. Define a homomorphism $`_n:C_n^\mathrm{R}(X)C_{n1}^\mathrm{R}(X)`$ by

(1) $`_n(x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_n)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{i=2}{\overset{n}{}}}(1)^i[(x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_{i1},x_{i+1},\mathrm{},x_n)`$
$`(x_1x_i,x_2x_i,\mathrm{},x_{i1}x_i,x_{i+1},\mathrm{},x_n)]`$
for $`n2`$ and $`_n=0`$ for $`n1`$. Then $`C_{}^\mathrm{R}(X)=\{C_n^\mathrm{R}(X),_n\}`$ is a chain complex.

Let $`C_n^\mathrm{D}(X)`$ be the subset of $`C_n^\mathrm{R}(X)`$ generated by $`n`$-tuples $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ with $`x_i=x_{i+1}`$ for some $`i\{1,\mathrm{},n1\}`$ if $`n2`$; otherwise let $`C_n^\mathrm{D}(X)=0`$. If $`X`$ is a quandle, then $`_n(C_n^\mathrm{D}(X))C_{n1}^\mathrm{D}(X)`$ and $`C_{}^\mathrm{D}(X)=\{C_n^\mathrm{D}(X),_n\}`$ is a sub-complex of $`C_{}^\mathrm{R}(X)`$. Put $`C_n^\mathrm{Q}(X)=C_n^\mathrm{R}(X)/C_n^\mathrm{D}(X)`$ and $`C_{}^\mathrm{Q}(X)=\{C_n^\mathrm{Q}(X),_n^{}\}`$, where $`_n^{}`$ is the induced homomorphism. Henceforth, all boundary maps will be denoted by $`_n`$.

For an abelian group $`G`$, define the chain and cochain complexes

(2) $`C_{}^\mathrm{W}(X;G)=C_{}^\mathrm{W}(X)G,`$ $`=\mathrm{id};`$
(3) $`C_\mathrm{W}^{}(X;G)=\mathrm{Hom}(C_{}^\mathrm{W}(X),G),`$ $`\delta =\mathrm{Hom}(,\mathrm{id})`$
in the usual way, where $`\mathrm{W}`$ $`=\mathrm{D}`$, $`\mathrm{R}`$, $`\mathrm{Q}`$.

The $`n`$th quandle homology group and the $`n`$th quandle cohomology group   of a quandle $`X`$ with coefficient group $`G`$ are

(4) $`H_n^\mathrm{Q}(X;G)=H_n(C_{}^\mathrm{Q}(X;G)),H_\mathrm{Q}^n(X;G)=H^n(C_\mathrm{Q}^{}(X;G)).`$
The cycle and boundary groups (resp. cocycle and coboundary groups) are denoted by $`Z_n^\mathrm{Q}(X;G)`$ and $`B_n^\mathrm{Q}(X;G)`$ (resp. $`Z_\mathrm{Q}^n(X;G)`$ and $`B_\mathrm{Q}^n(X;G)`$), so that

$$H_n^\mathrm{Q}(X;G)=Z_n^\mathrm{Q}(X;G)/B_n^\mathrm{Q}(X;G),H_\mathrm{Q}^n(X;G)=Z_\mathrm{Q}^n(X;G)/B_\mathrm{Q}^n(X;G).$$

We will omit the coefficient group $`G`$ as usual if $`G=𝐙`$.

Let a classical knot diagram be given. The co-orientation is a family of normal vectors to the knot diagram such that the pair (orientation, co-orientation) matches the given (right-handed, or counterclockwise) orientation of the plane. At a crossing, if the pair of the co-orientation of the over-arc and that of the under-arc matches the (right-hand) orientation of the plane, then the crossing is called positive; otherwise it is negative. The crossings depicted in Fig. 1 are positive by convention.

A coloring of an oriented classical knot diagram is a function $`𝒞:RX`$, where $`X`$ is a fixed quandle and $`R`$ is the set of over-arcs in the diagram, satisfying the condition depicted in the top of Fig. 1. In the figure, a crossing with over-arc, $`r`$, has color $`𝒞(r)=yX`$. The under-arcs are called $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ from top to bottom; the normal (co-orientation) of the over-arc $`r`$ points from $`r_1`$ to $`r_2`$. Then it is required that $`𝒞(r_1)=x`$ and $`𝒞(r_2)=xy`$.

Note that locally the colors do not depend on the orientation of the under-arc. The quandle element $`𝒞(r)`$ assigned to an arc $`r`$ by a coloring $`𝒞`$ is called a color of the arc. This definition of colorings on knot diagrams has been known, see  for example. Henceforth, all the quandles that are used to color diagrams will be finite.

In Fig. 1 bottom, the relation between the Redemeister type III move and quandle axiom (self-distributivity) is indicated. In particular, the colors of the bottom right segments before and after the move correspond to self-distributivity.

A shadow coloring (or face coloring) of a classical knot diagram is a function $`𝒞:\stackrel{~}{R}X`$, where $`X`$ is a fixed quandle and $`\stackrel{~}{R}`$ is the set of arcs in the diagram and regions separated by the underlying immersed curve of the knot diagram, satisfying the condition depicted in the middle square of Fig. 4. In the figure, arcs are colored under the same rule as above, and the regions are also colored by the following similar rule. Let $`R_1`$ and $`R_2`$ be the regions separated by an arc $`r`$ colored by $`x`$. Suppose that the normal to $`r`$ points from $`R_1`$ to $`R_2`$. If $`R_1`$ is colored by $`w`$, then $`R_2`$ is required to be colored by $`wx`$. Note that near a crossing there are more than one way to go from one region to another, but the self-distributivity guarantees unique colors near a crossing. In the figures, colors on the the regions are depicted as letters enclosed within squares.

Colorings and shadow colorings are defined for knotted surfaces in $`4`$-space similarly using their diagrams in $`3`$-space. The coloring rule is depicted in Fig. 2.

Each positive crossing in a colored knot diagram represents a pair $`(x,y)C_2^\mathrm{R}(X;A)`$ as depicted in Fig. 1 top. The first factor $`x`$ is the color on an under-arc away from which the normal of the over-arc points. The color $`y`$ is on the over-arc. If the crossing is negative, then such colors represent $`(x,y)`$. The relation between colored crossings and boundary homomorphisms is depicted in Fig. 3. The $`1`$-chains represented by colored and oriented points on line segments are depicted as boundaries in Fig. 3. The color on the center vertex on an arc determine the $`1`$-chain that the vertex represents. These colors are the colors at the end points of the arc in the crossing. The sign of the $`1`$-chain is determined by pushing the normal to the arc into the boundary and comparing to the oriented subarc of the boundary given the counterclockwise orientation. In Fig. 3, the boundary terms of the $`2`$-chain $`(x,y)`$ are $`1`$-chains $`(xy)`$, $`(y)`$, $`(x)`$, and $`(y)`$, and thier formal sum matches the negative of $`(x,y)`$, where $``$ is the boundary homomorphism of quandle homology. In particular, any colored knot diagram represents a $`2`$-cycle, as the boundary terms cancel.

Similarly, shadow colored crossings represent triples $`(w,x,y)`$ as depicted in Fig. 4. The boundaries are also indicated in the figure. In particular, shadow colored knot diagrams represent $`3`$-cycles. The signs are determined as above and the chain (for example $`(w,x)`$ on the left) is determined as follows. The color $`w`$ is the color in the region away from which the normal to the arc colored $`x`$ points, and $`x`$ is the color on that arc.

Colored or shadow colored classical knot diagrams in orientable surfaces are defined similarly, and represent $`2`$\- or $`3`$-cycles, respectively, as boundary terms also cancel. For example, the colored knot diagram on a surface depicted in Fig. 5 represents a $`2`$-cycle $`c=(\alpha ,\beta )+(\beta ,\gamma )(\beta ,\alpha )`$ in $`Z_\mathrm{Q}^2(R_3;𝐙_3)`$, where $`\{\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \}=\{0,1,2\}=R_3`$. In fact, $`[c]=0H_\mathrm{Q}^2(R_3;𝐙_3)`$, as it is known  that $`H_\mathrm{Q}^2(R_3;𝐙_3)=0`$. The shaded regions in Fig. 5 are crossings of the diagram, and the unshaded crossing in the middle is a cross-over of the surface, and is not a crossing of the diagram. Since all boundaries of each colored crossing are attached to other colored crossings, we see that the boundary terms cancel, and the diagram represents a $`2`$-cycle.

Furthermore, for shadow colored diagrams, we allow the colored end point diagram that is depicted in Fig. 6. Since the boundary term of the end point diagram represents $`\pm (x,x)`$, which represents zero as a quandle chain, a shadow colored knot diagram represents a quandle $`3`$-cycle even with such colored end points allowed. Examples are depicted in Fig. 7 left and middle. All three diagrams in Fig. 7 represent a generator of $`H_\mathrm{Q}^3(R_3;𝐙_3)`$.

These colored knot diagrams on surfaces (possibly with end points for shadow colors) are called colored abstract knot (or arc, respectively) diagrams.

Colored and shadow colored abstract knot diagrams represent cycles, and the moves for colored diagrams are known : Colored diagrams related by a finite sequence of the moves represent the same homology class. Such moves are depicted in Figs. 8 and 9, and called the quandle homology moves.

The (fundamental) quandle of an $`n`$-knot diagram  is generated by the $`n`$-regions of the diagram; the relations in the quandle can be read from the crossings ($`n=1`$) or double point curves ($`n=2`$). See  for Wirtinger presentations of knot quandles defined from knot diagrams, which are similar to Wirtinger presentations of knot groups. In this case, arcs of knot diagrams represent generators, and crossings give relations of Wirtinger form. Let $`Q(K)`$ represent such a quandle for a knot diagram $`K.`$

Let $`K`$ be a knot diagram on a compact oriented surface $`F`$. Then the fundamental shadow quandle $`SQ(K)`$ is defined as follows . The generators correspond to over-arcs and connected components of $`F(\text{universe of}K)`$, where the universe is the underlying immersed curves of $`K`$ (without crossing information). The relations are defined for each crossing as ordinary fundamental quandles, and at each arc dividing regions. Specifically, if $`a`$ and $`b`$ are generators corresponding to adjacent regions such that the normal points from the region colored $`a`$ to that colored $`b`$, and if the arc dividing these regions is colored by $`c`$, then we have the relation $`b=ac`$. This defines a presentation of a quandle, which is called the fundamental shadow quandle of $`K`$. Two diagrams on $`F`$ that differ by Reidemeister moves on $`F`$ have isomorphic fundamental shadow quandles. The shadow colors are regarded as quandle homomorphisms from the fundamental shadow quandle to a quandle $`X`$.

## 3. Cocycle invariants as Kronecker products

In this section we give an interpretation of the state-sum invariants (called quandle cocycle invariants) defined in  in terms of pairings on quandle homology theory. Using this interpretation, a new method of computing these invariants is given. In this section all (co)chain, (co)cycle, (co)boundary, and (co)homology groups are quandle groups and we sometimes drop the letter $`\mathrm{Q}`$ from the subscript or superscript.

Let $`(𝒞,)`$ be a chain complex with the boundary homomorphism $``$. Let $`,:Z_n(𝒞)Z^n(𝒞;G)`$ be the Kronecker product, where $`G`$ is a coefficient abelian group, and it is omitted as usual if $`G=𝐙`$. Thus $`\eta ,\varphi =\varphi (\eta )`$ for any $`\eta Z_n(𝒞)`$ and $`\varphi Z^n(𝒞;G)`$. This pairing induces a well-defined bilinear pairing (Kronecker product) $`,:H_n(𝒞)H^n(𝒞;G)G`$.

Let $`(𝒞_0,)`$ be another chain complex, and denote by $`\text{Hom}(𝒞_0,𝒞)`$ be the set of chain homomorphisms. For $`\eta Z_n(𝒞_0)`$ and $`\varphi Z^n(𝒞;G)`$, define

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta ,\varphi )=\underset{\{f\text{Hom}(𝒞_0,𝒞)\}}{}f_\mathrm{\#}\eta ,\varphi ,$$

where $``$ is a fixed finite subset of $`\text{Hom}(𝒞_0,𝒞)`$. This defines a bilinear pairing $`\mathrm{\Phi }:Z_n(𝒞_0)Z^n(𝒞;G)𝐙[G]`$. Since each Kronecker product depends only on the homology and cohomology classes, we have the following.

###### Lemma 3.1.

The above defined $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ does not depend on the choice of (co)cycles and is determined only by their (co)homology classes. Thus it induces a well-defined bilinear pairing

$$\mathrm{\Phi }([\eta ],[\varphi ])=\underset{\{f\text{Hom}(𝒞_0,𝒞)\}}{}f_{}[\eta ],[\varphi ].$$

###### Definition 3.2.

Let $`K`$ be an abstract $`n`$-knot diagram, for $`n=1,2`$. In the above description, let $`𝒞`$ be the chain complex $`\{C_{}^\mathrm{Q}(X)\}`$ for a finite quandle $`X`$, and $`𝒞_0`$ be $`\{C_{}^\mathrm{Q}(\mathrm{\Pi })\}`$ where $`\mathrm{\Pi }=Q(K)`$ is the fundamental quandle of a knot $`K`$. A knot diagram $`K`$ represents a class $`[K]H_{n+1}(\mathrm{\Pi })`$. Pick and fix $`\varphi Z^{n+1}(X;G)`$. Let $`\text{Hom}(𝒞_0,𝒞)`$ be the set of all chain maps induced from all quandle homomorphisms $`\mathrm{\Pi }X`$, that is,

$$=\{f_\mathrm{\#}:𝒞_0𝒞|f:\mathrm{\Pi }X:\text{quandle homomorphism}\}.$$

Define $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\varphi (K)=\mathrm{\Phi }([K],[\varphi ])𝐙[G]`$. This is called the quandle cocycle invariant of $`K`$ with color quandle $`X`$.

A similar invariant, called shadow quandle cocycle invariant, is defined using fundamental shadow quandles $`SQ(K)`$, by $`S\mathrm{\Phi }_\theta (K)=\mathrm{\Phi }([K],[\theta ])𝐙[G]`$, where $`[K]H_{n+2}(SQ(K))`$ and $`\theta H^{n+2}(X;G)`$.

###### Remark 3.3.

The (shadow) quandle cocycle invariants coincide with the state-sum invariant defined in . The set of colorings in  corresponds to $``$, and the Boltzmann weight defined from a fixed cocycle $`\varphi `$ corresponds to $`[K],f^\mathrm{\#}\varphi `$. The definition in terms of pairing was suggested to us by Fenn and Rourke in a correspondence. The above gives a generalization using quandle homology and abstract knots. The following generalizes the invariants to abstract knots.

###### Proposition 3.4.

The quandle cocycle invariant $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\varphi (K)`$ is an invariant for abstract knots of dimensions $`3`$ and $`4`$ (i.e., it does not depend on the choice of the diagram, and is well-defined up to equivalence of abstract knot diagrams).

The shadow quandle cocycle invariant $`S\mathrm{\Phi }_\varphi (K)`$ is an invariant of knot diagrams in Euclidean spaces $`𝐑^n`$ up to Reidemeister moves (and their analogues in dimension $`4`$).

###### Proof.

The equivalence relation in question does not alter the class $`[K]H_n(Q(K))`$ or $`H_{n+1}(SQ(K))`$ in the situations stated. ∎

The above interpretation can be used for computation of the invariant as follows.

Recall that $`R_3`$ is $`𝐙_3`$ as a set with the quandle operation $`ab2ba`$ (mod 3). Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }(K)`$ denote the cocycle invariant of classical knots defined by shadow colorings by $`R_3`$ and the cocycle $`\xi Z_\mathrm{Q}^3(R_3;𝐙_3)`$ defined by

$$\xi =\chi _{012}\chi _{021}\chi _{101}\chi _{201}\chi _{202}\chi _{102}$$

where

$$\chi _{abc}(x,y,z)=\{\begin{array}{cc}t\hfill & \hfill \text{if }(x,y,z)=(a,b,c),\\ 1\hfill & \hfill \text{if }(x,y,z)(a,b,c).\end{array}$$

In this section we give examples of this invariant using the pairing interpretations given in the previous section.

###### Lemma 3.5.

For any $`\{\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \}=\{0,1,2\}`$, the shadow colored diagram on the left of Fig. 7 represents a generator of $`H_3^\mathrm{Q}(R_3;𝐙_3)𝐙_3`$.

For any $`\{\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \}=\{0,1,2\}`$, the shadow colored diagram which is the mirror image of that in the left of Fig. 7 represents the inverse of the generator of $`H_3^\mathrm{Q}(R_3;𝐙_3)𝐙_3`$ given above.

###### Proof.

The shadow colored diagram represents $`(\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )+(\alpha ,\gamma ,\alpha )`$. It is known  that the cocycle $`\xi `$ which is defined above represents a generator of $`H_\mathrm{Q}^3(R_3;𝐙_3)𝐙_3`$. All possibilities of $`\{\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \}=\{0,1,2\}`$ are evaluated by $`\xi `$ to give the generator $`1𝐙_3`$, and the result follows. The mirror image is checked similarly. ∎

Note that the other diagrams in Fig. 7 also represent the same generator, and have the same property as stated in the above lemma.

###### Proposition 3.6.

A torus knot or link $`T(2,n)`$ is $`3`$-colorable if and only if $`n`$ is a multiple of $`3`$, $`n=3k`$ for some integer $`k`$. In this case, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(T(2,3k))=9+18t^k`$. Here $`k`$ is regarded as an element of $`𝐙_3`$.

###### Proof.

We represent $`T(2,n)`$ as a closed $`2`$-braid as depicted in Fig. 10. If the top two segments receive the same color, the cocycle invariant is trivial. There are $`9`$ such shadow colors. If the two top segments receive distinct colors, then perform the quandle homology moves as indicated in the figure, and produce a copy of a generator in Fig. 7 for each set of three crossings. By Lemma 3.5, for any choice of $`\{\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \}=\{0,1,2\}`$, the figure represents the generator of $`H_3(R_3;𝐙_3)`$. Hence for any non-trivial coloring $`𝒞`$, $`[T(2,3k)],𝒞^{}\xi =t^k`$. The result follows. ∎

###### Proposition 3.7.

A torus knot or link $`T(3,n)`$ is $`3`$-colorable if and only if $`n`$ is a multiple of $`2`$, $`n=2k`$ for some integer $`k`$. If $`k`$ is not a multiple of $`3`$, then $`\mathrm{\Phi }(T(3,2k))=9+18t^k`$, where $`k`$ is regarded as an element of $`𝐙_3`$. Otherwise, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(T(3,2k))=45`$.

###### Proof.

There are three cases to color the top strings. All three colors are distinct, two colors are the same, and all colors are the same. If all colors are the same, such colorings contribute $`1`$ to the invariant, and there are $`9`$ such shadow colorings. If all colors are distinct, then such a coloring is depicted in Fig. 11 left. Such a color exists if and only if $`n`$ is even. Note that the color of the middle string, $`\beta `$, stays in the middle strings. Hence we need to consider two types of shadow colors, (1) $`\beta `$ is not a color of the unbounded region, (2) it is. The case (1), (2) are shown in Fig. 11, 12 respectively. For each case, the figure shows that such a colored diagram is homologous to a copy of a generator for each set of $`6`$ crossings. Hence this contributes $`t^k`$ to the invariant.

By symmetry of the diagram, if two colors are the same, it can be assumed that the top strings receive, say, $`(\alpha ,\beta ,\beta )`$ in this order from left to right, as depicted in the left hand side of Fig. 13. In this case $`k`$ must be a multiple of $`3`$ for such a color to exist, as can be seen from the figure. Hence the first case (when $`k`$ is not a multiple of $`3`$) follows from the above argument, and the cases for $`T(3,3\mathrm{})`$ remain. A block of one contribution of $`\mathrm{}`$ (i.e., $`T(3,3)`$) is depicted in the figure. There are $`6`$ such colorings, and there are $`18`$ such shadow colorings. There are three cases for shadow colors, as depicted in Figs. 13, 14, 15 left, respectively. For each of these cases, the figures show that they are homologous to three copies of a generator, contributing $`1`$ to the invariant (as each contribution is counted modulo $`3`$). The second case follows. ∎

Next we compute the invariant for doubled knots $`D(n)`$ depicted in Fig. 16. These knots are twisted Whitehead doubles of the unknot. The integer $`n`$ represents the number of crossings as indicated. In the figure the crossings are positive ones, and if $`n`$ is negative, we take negative crossings.

###### Proposition 3.8.

A doubled knot $`D(n)`$ is $`3`$-colorable if and only if $`n=3k+1`$. If $`k=2m`$, then $`\mathrm{\Phi }(D(3k+1))=9+18t^{m+1}`$, and if $`k=2m+1`$, then $`\mathrm{\Phi }(D(3k+1))=9+18t^m`$.

###### Proof.

Figure 16 shows the first half of the statement. Note that there are $`3`$ trivial colorings on strings and $`9`$ corresponding shadow colorings, and $`18`$ shadow colorings corresponding to non-trivial colorings on strings. In Fig. 17, it is shown that for a particular shadow coloring, a set of three crossings in the diagrams of $`D(n)`$ contributes a single copy of a generator of $`H_\mathrm{Q}^3(R_3;𝐙_3)`$, and changes the crossings from positive to negative. These three negative crossings cancel with the next set of three positives. Hence this particular shadow coloring contributes $`t^m`$ from $`6m`$ crossings. If $`n=6m+1`$, then the rest is a single crossing, and $`D(1)`$ is a right-handed trefoil knot, giving another generator. For other choices of colorings on the regions, simply change the starting point of replacement and use the same argument. Apply type II Reidemeister moves if necessary, to reduce the given colored diagram to $`n=1`$ case. This gives the case $`n=6m+1`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(D(n))=9+18t^{m+1}`$. If $`n=6m+4`$, then apply the operation in Fig. 17 $`(m+1)`$ times, to obtain $`D(2)`$, which is a left-handed trefoil, representing the negative of the generator. Hence the contribution is $`(m+1)1=m`$, giving $`\mathrm{\Phi }(D(6m+4))=9+18t^m`$. ∎

Let $`T^{}(2n)`$ denote the type $`(2,2n)`$ torus link of $`2`$-components with opposite orientations given to parallel strings. In other words, $`T^{}(2n)`$ is obtained from Fig. 17 with $`2n`$ crossings by taking the “braid closure” between left and right ends.

###### Corollary 3.9.

The link $`T^{}(2n)`$ is $`3`$-colorable if and only if $`n=3k`$. In this case, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(T^{}(6k))=9+18t^k`$.

###### Proof.

The method depicted in Fig. 17 applies in the same manner as in the proof of the above proposition. ∎

###### Remark 3.10.

The methods developed so far can be applied effectively to other examples to evaluate the invariant, directly or indirectly. As examples, we examine knots in the table. There are four knots in the table less than $`8`$ crossing that are $`3`$-colorable: $`3_1`$, $`6_1`$, $`7_4`$, and $`7_7`$.

* $`3_1`$ is a generator, so $`\mathrm{\Phi }(3_1)=9+18t`$ if it is right-handed.
* $`6_1`$ is $`D(4)`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(6_1)=9+18t^0=27`$.
* $`7_4`$ is deformed to $`T^{}(6)`$ as depicted in Fig. 18 by a smoothing at a crossing where all colors are the same. Note that the colors indicated in the figure exhaust all possibilities as $`7_4`$ has cyclic Alexander module (by the result of Inoue ). Hence we find $`\mathrm{\Phi }(7_4)=9+18t`$.
* $`7_7`$ is deformed to $`T^{}(6)`$ as depicted in Fig. 19, hence $`\mathrm{\Phi }(7_7)=9+18t`$. The first deformation is a smoothing the second is isotopy. Compare the left bottom diagram with the second left entry of Fig. 17. The left and right half of the diagram in Fig. 19 are identified with the figure in Fig. 17, and hence can be replaced by the top left entry of Fig. 17. The result is $`T^{}(6)`$ as depicted in bottom right entry in Fig. 19.

The computational technique discussed in this section can be applied to knotted surfaces. We illustrate this with the $`2`$-twist spun trefoil.

###### Example 3.11.

Shadow coloring is closely related to coloring a knotted surface diagram and its lower decker set. The correspondence was given in , but we sketch the notion briefly.

Given an embedded surface in $`4`$-space, we chose a generic projection into $`3`$-space and label the double points of the projection above and below to indicate their relative distance from the $`3`$-space into which they are projected. The pre-image of the double point set on the surface is called the double decker set. It is separated into upper and lower pieces called the upper decker set and the lower decker set.

A quandle coloring of a knotted surface diagram induces a shadow coloring of the lower decker set considered as an abstract arc diagram in the surface. The scheme for determining this coloring is as follows: Along a double point arc, an upper sheet with color $`y`$ locally separates the lower sheet into two pieces (by the broken surface convention). One component of the lower sheet is colored $`x`$ and the other sheet is colored $`xy`$ as depicted on the left of Fig. 2. The arc of lower decker points is colored $`y`$ which represents the color of the corresponding over crossing sheet. A branch point is an end-point of a lower decker arc. At such a point, the colors on the arc and surrounding $`2`$-dimensional region coincide. In the lowest of the three sheets that intersect at a triple point, two lower decker arcs intersect. The arc that corresponds to the upper most sheet is depicted as un-broken on the surface, and the middle arc is broken into arcs locally. The colors on the arcs and regions match the shadow color condition depicted in Fig. 4 (see also Fig. 2).

In Figure 20, the double decker set for the $`2`$-twist spun trefoil is depicted. We give a brief description on how to obtain this diagram from a movie of the $`2`$-twist spun trefoil. More details can be found in . The solid lines correspond to the lower decker points, and the dashed lines correspond to the upper decker points. The diagram has been colored by the $`3`$-element dihedral quandle $`R_3=\{0,1,2\}`$ where $`\{\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \}=\{0,1,2\}`$. The integer labels on double arcs are Gauss codes. Even parity labels correspond to positive classical crossings, and odd parity labels correspond to negative crossings. Negative signs indicate undercrossings; thus all solid lines have negative labels. For example, the first type II move in a movie of the knotted surface will induce the birth of a negative and a positive crossing that are labeled $`1`$ and $`2`$, repsectively. Immediately after the top saddle we have the Gauss code $`(5,3,1,2,4,6,2,4,6,5,3,1)`$ which is the standard code of the square knot. The diagram for this decker set also indicates the height with respect to the movie direction at which the critical points occur. For example the crossing in the center of the diagram that involves arcs labeled $`7`$, and $`9`$ corresponds to the crossings between arcs labels $`9`$ and $`2`$ (on the left of the figure) and between $`7`$ and $`2`$ on the right of the figure. All three of these crossings correspond to a Reidemeister type III move among crossing points labeled $`2`$, $`7`$ and $`9`$.

In Fig. 21, only the lower decker set and colors are depicted.

We now compute the state-sum invariant of this surface by the following technique. Perform surgeries along the dotted arcs to obtain four copies of the negative of the generator given in Fig. 7. Hence this color contributes $`1`$ as the Kronecker product with the pull-back of the $`3`$-cocycle $`\xi `$. Hence we obtain $`\mathrm{\Phi }(K)=3+6t^2`$, as we computed in  by a different method.

## 4. Extensions of quandles by cocycles

Let $`X`$ be a quandle and $`A`$ be an abelian group written multiplicatively. Let $`\varphi Z_\mathrm{Q}^2(X;A)`$. Consider $`A`$ as a trivial quandle ($`ab=a`$ for any $`a,bA`$). Let $`E(X,A,\varphi )`$ be the quandle defined on the set $`A\times X`$ by the operation $`(a_1,x_1)(a_2,x_2)=(a_1\varphi (x_1,x_2),x_1x_2)`$.

###### Lemma 4.1.

The above defined operation $``$ on $`A\times X`$ indeed defines a quandle $`E(X,A,\varphi )=(A\times X,)`$.

###### Proof.

The idempotency is obvious. For any $`(a_2,x_2),(a,x)A\times X`$, let $`x_1X`$ be a unique element $`x_1X`$ such that $`x_1x_2=x`$. Then let $`a_1=a\varphi (x_1,x_2)^1`$. Then it follows that $`(a_1,x_1)(a_2,x_2)=(a,x)`$, and the uniqueness of $`(a_1,x_1)`$ with this property is obvious. The self-distributivity follows from the $`2`$-cocycle condition by computation, as follows.

$`[(a_1,x_1)(a_2,x_2)](a_3,x_3)`$
$`=`$ $`(a_1\varphi (x_1,x_2),x_1x_2)(a_3,x_3)`$
$`=`$ $`(a_1\varphi (x_1,x_2)\varphi (x_1x_2,x_3),(x_1x_2)x_3),`$
and

$`[(a_1,x_1)(a_3,x_3)][(a_2,x_2)(a_3,x_3)]`$
$`=`$ $`(a_1\varphi (x_1,x_3),x_1x_3)(a_2\varphi (x_2,x_3),x_2x_3)`$
$`=`$ $`(a_1\varphi (x_1,x_3)\varphi (x_1x_3,x_2x_3),(x_1x_3)(x_2x_3)).`$
We remark here that the computation above can be seen in knot diagrams in Fig. 1. Go along the string that goes from top left to bottom right in Reidemeister type III move and read off the cocycles assigned at crossings. Then it picks up the cocycles in the above two computations, for before and after the Reidemeister move, respectively. ∎

###### Definition 4.2.

Two surjective homomorphisms of quandles $`\pi _j:E_jX`$, $`j=1,2`$, are called equivalent  if there is a quandle isomorphism $`f:E_1E_2`$ such that $`\pi _1=\pi _2f`$.

Note that there is a natural surjective homomorphism $`\pi :E(X,A,\varphi )=A\times XX`$, which is the projection to the second factor.

###### Lemma 4.3.

If $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ are cohomologous, i.e., $`[\varphi _1]=[\varphi _2]H_\mathrm{Q}^2(X;A)`$, then $`\pi _1:E(X,A,\varphi _1)X`$ and $`\pi _2:E(X,A,\varphi _2)X`$ are equivalent.

###### Proof.

There is a $`1`$-cochain $`\eta C_\mathrm{Q}^1(X;A)`$ such that $`\varphi _1=\varphi _2\delta \eta `$. We show that $`f:E(X,A,\varphi _1)=A\times XA\times X=E(X,A,\varphi _2)`$ defined by $`f(a,x)=(a\eta (x),x)`$ gives rise to an equivalence. First we compute

$`f((a_1,x_1)(a_2,x_2))`$ $`=`$ $`f((a_1\varphi _1(x_1,x_2),x_1x_2))`$
$`=`$ $`(a_1\varphi _1(x_1,x_2)\eta (x_1x_2),x_1x_2),\text{and}`$
$`f((a_1,x_1))f((a_2,x_2))`$ $`=`$ $`(a_1\eta (x_1),x_1)(a_2\eta (x_2),x_2)`$
$`=`$ $`(a_1\eta (x_1)\varphi _2(x_1,x_2),x_1x_2)`$
which are equal since $`\varphi _1=\varphi _2\delta \eta `$. Hence $`f`$ defines a quandle homomorphism. The map $`f^{}:A\times XA\times X`$ defined by $`f^{}(a,x)=(a\eta (x)^1,x)`$ defines the inverse of $`f`$, hence $`f`$ is an isomorphism. The map $`f`$ satisfies $`\pi _1=\pi _2f`$ by definition. ∎

###### Lemma 4.4.

If natural surjective homomorphisms (the projections to the second factor $`A\times XX`$) $`E(X,A,\varphi _1)X`$ and $`E(X,A,\varphi _2)X`$ are equivalent, then $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ are cohomologous: $`[\varphi _1]=[\varphi _2]H_\mathrm{Q}^2(X;A)`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`f:E(X,A,\varphi _1)=A\times XA\times X=E(X,A,\varphi _2)`$ be a quandle isomorphism with $`\pi _1=\pi _2f`$. Since $`\pi _1(a,x)=x=\pi _2(f(a,x))`$, there is an element $`\eta (x)A`$ such that $`f(a,x)=(a\eta (x),x)`$, for any $`xX`$. This defines a function $`\eta :XA`$, $`\eta C_\mathrm{Q}^1(X;A)`$. The condition that $`f`$ is a quandle homomorphism implies that $`\varphi _1=\varphi _2\delta \eta `$ by the same computation as the preceding lemma. Hence the result follows. ∎

The lemmas imply the following theorem.

###### Theorem 4.5.

There is a bijection between the equivalence classes of natural surjective homomorphisms $`E(X,A,\varphi )X`$ for a fixed $`X`$ and $`A`$, and the set $`H_\mathrm{Q}^2(X;A)`$.

###### Example 4.6.

The dihedral quandle $`R_4`$ is an abelian extension of $`T_2`$ by a non-trivial cocycle. Let

$$\varphi =\chi _{(0,1)}+\chi _{(1,0)}Z_\mathrm{Q}^2(T_2;𝐙_2)$$

where $`\chi `$ denotes the characteristic function

$$\chi _x(y)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & \text{if}x=y\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{if}xy.\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`X=X(T_2,\varphi )`$. Then an isomorphism $`f:R_4X`$ is defined by

$$f(x)=(x/2,x(mod2)),$$

where $`a`$ denotes the largest integer not exceeding $`a`$. It is checked directly that $`f`$ gives an isomorphism, but we can also see it as follows. The quandle operation $`ab`$ in $`R_4`$ is characterized by the following property: if $`a`$ and $`b`$ have the same parity, then $`ab=a`$. Otherwise, $`ab=\overline{a}`$, where $`\overline{a}`$ has the same parity as $`a`$ but is distinct from $`a`$. For an element $`(x,y)X=𝐙_2\times T_2`$, regard $`y`$ as the parity. Then by the definition of $`\varphi `$, we see that $`X`$ has the quandle operation with the same property as above.

###### Example 4.7.

The quaternion group $`Q_8=\{\pm 1,\pm i,\pm j,\pm k\}`$ under conjugation is a quandle. The set $`\{\pm 1\}`$ acts trivially on the rest as quandle operation, and the rest $`Q_6=\{\pm i,\pm j,\pm k\}`$ forms a subquandle. The obvious projection $`\pi :Q_6T_3=\{I,J,K\}`$ defined by $`\pi (\pm i)=I,\pi (\pm j)=J,\pi (\pm k)=K`$ is a surjective quandle homomorphism. One sees that $`Q_6=E(X,A,\varphi )`$ where $`X=T_3`$, $`A=𝐙_2`$, and $`\varphi Z_\mathrm{Q}^2(X;A)`$ is defined by $`\varphi =_{ab,a,bT_3}\chi _{a,b}`$.

###### Remark 4.8.

Let $`\pi :QX`$ be a surjective quandle homomorphism, such that the equalizer $`E_\pi (x)=\{zE|\pi (z)=x\}`$ has the same (finite) cardinality. Then it is an interesting problem to determine when $`Q`$ is isomorphic to $`E(X,A,\varphi )`$ for some $`A`$ and $`\varphi Z_\mathrm{Q}^2(X;A)`$.

Next we consider interpretations of $`3`$-cycles in extensions of quandles. Let $`1N\stackrel{i}{}G\stackrel{p}{}A1`$ be a short exact sequence of abelian groups. Let $`X`$ be a quandle. For $`\varphi Z^2(X;A)`$, let $`E(X,A,\varphi )`$ be as in the preceding section. Let $`s:AG`$ be a set-theoretic (not necessarily group homomorphism) section, i.e., $`ps=\text{id}_A`$ and $`s(1_A)=1_G`$.

Consider the binary operation $`(G\times X)\times (G\times X)G\times X`$ defined by

(5)
$$(g_1,x_1)(g_2,x_2)=(g_1s\varphi (x_1,x_2),x_1x_2).$$

We describe an obstruction to this being a quandle operation by $`3`$-cocycles.

Since $`\varphi `$ satisfies the $`2`$-cocycle condition,

$$p(s\varphi (x_1,x_2)s\varphi (x_1x_2,x_3))=p(s\varphi (x_1,x_3)s\varphi (x_1x_3,x_2x_3))$$

in $`A`$. Hence there is a function $`\theta :X\times X\times XN`$ such that

(6)
$$s\varphi (x_1,x_2)s\varphi (x_1x_2,x_3)=i\theta (x_1,x_2,x_3)s\varphi (x_1,x_3)s\varphi (x_1x_3,x_2x_3).$$

###### Lemma 4.9.

$`\theta Z_\mathrm{Q}^3(X;N)`$.

###### Proof.

First, if $`x_1=x_2`$, or $`x_2=x_3`$, then the above defining relation for $`\theta `$ implies that $`\theta (x_1,x_1,x_3)=1=\theta (x_1,x_2,x_2)`$. For the $`3`$-cocycle condition, one computes

$`\underset{¯}{s\varphi (x_1,x_2)s\varphi (x_1x_2,x_3)}s\varphi ((x_1x_2)x_3,x_4)`$
$`=`$ $`i\theta (x_1,x_2,x_3)[s\varphi (x_1,x_3)\underset{¯}{s\varphi (x_1x_3,x_2x_3)}]\underset{¯}{s\varphi ((x_1x_2)x_3,x_4)}`$
$`=`$ $`[i\theta (x_1,x_2,x_3)i\theta (x_1x_3,x_2x_3,x_4)]`$
$`[\underset{¯}{s\varphi (x_1x_3,x_4)}s\varphi ((x_1x_3)x_4,(x_2x_3)x_4)]\underset{¯}{s\varphi (x_1,x_3)}`$
$`=`$ $`[i\theta (x_1,x_2,x_3)i\theta (x_1x_3,x_2x_3,x_4)i\theta (x_1,x_3,x_4)]`$
$`[s\varphi (x_1,x_4)s\varphi (x_1x_4,x_3x_4)]s\varphi ((x_1x_3)x_4,(x_2x_3)x_4)`$
and on the other hand,

$`s\varphi (x_1,x_2)\underset{¯}{s\varphi (x_1x_2,x_3)s\varphi ((x_1x_2)x_3,x_4)}`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{¯}{s\varphi (x_1,x_2)}[i\theta (x_1x_2,x_3,x_4)\underset{¯}{s\varphi (x_1x_2,x_4)}s\varphi ((x_1x_2)x_4,x_3x_4)]`$
$`=`$ $`i\theta (x_1x_2,x_3,x_4)\underset{¯}{s\varphi ((x_1x_2)x_4,x_3x_4)}`$
$`[i\theta (x_1,x_2,x_4)s\varphi (x_1,x_4)\underset{¯}{s\varphi (x_1x_4,x_2x_4)}]`$
$`=`$ $`i\theta (x_1x_2,x_3,x_4)i\theta (x_1,x_2,x_4)s\varphi (x_1,x_4)[i\theta (x_1x_4,x_2x_4,x_3x_4)`$
$`s\varphi (x_1x_4,x_3x_4)s\varphi ((x_1x_4)(x_3x_4),(x_2x_4)(x_3x_4))]`$
so that we obtain the result. The underlines in the equalities indicates where the relation 6 is going to be applied in the next step of the calculation. ∎

###### Remark 4.10.

The above calculations are based on the knot diagrams as follows. In Fig. 22, two paths (denoted by dotted arcs) going from the left region to the right region are depicted in a shadow colored diagram near a crossing. Let $`\gamma _1`$ be the top path, $`\gamma _2`$ be the bottom path. Assign the cocycle $`s\varphi (x_1,x_2)`$ when a dotted arc crosses an over-arc with color $`x_2`$ from the region colored $`x_1`$ to the region colored $`x_1x_2`$ in the same direction as the normal to the over-arc. The product of these cocycles along $`\gamma _1`$ is the left-hand side of Equality (6), and the product for $`\gamma _2`$ appears in the right-hand side. The corresponding $`3`$-cocycle $`i\theta (x_1,x_2,x_3)`$ is assigned to the crossing. We see this situation as follows. As we homotop $`\gamma _1`$ to $`\gamma _2`$ through a crossing, the descrepancy of the products is the $`3`$-cocycle assigned at the crossing.

In Fig. 23, the shadow colors before/after the Reidemeister type III move is specified. The paths denoted by dotted arcs are also depicted, and named $`\gamma _i`$, $`i=1,2,3,4`$. As we homotope the paths from $`\gamma _1`$ to $`\gamma _4`$, we read off the $`3`$-cocycles assigned to the crossings. The left and right of the Reidemeister move correspond to the above two computations in the proof, respectively.

Let $`s^{}:AG`$ be another section, and $`\theta ^{}`$ be a $`3`$-cocycle defined similarly for $`s^{}`$ by

(7)
$$s^{}\varphi (x_1,x_2)s^{}\varphi (x_1x_2,x_3)=i\theta ^{}(x_1,x_2,x_3)s^{}\varphi (x_1,x_3)s^{}\varphi (x_1x_3,x_2x_3).$$

###### Lemma 4.11.

The two $`3`$-cocycles $`\theta `$ and $`\theta ^{}`$ are cohomologous, $`[\theta ]=[\theta ^{}]H_\mathrm{Q}^3(X;N)`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`s(a)^1s^{}(a)i(N)`$ for any $`aA`$, there is a function $`\sigma :AN`$ such that $`s^{}(a)=s(a)i\sigma (a)`$ for any $`aA`$. From Equality (7) we obtain

$`s\varphi (x_1,x_2)i\sigma \varphi (x_1,x_2)s\varphi (x_1x_2,x_3)i\sigma \varphi (x_1x_2,x_3)`$
$`=`$ $`i\theta ^{}(x_1,x_2,x_3)s\varphi (x_1,x_3)i\sigma \varphi (x_1,x_3)s\varphi (x_1x_3,x_2x_3)i\sigma \varphi (x_1x_3,x_2x_3).`$
Hence we have $`\theta ^{}=\theta \delta (\sigma \varphi )`$. ∎

###### Lemma 4.12.

If $`\theta `$ is a coboundary, i.e., $`[\theta ]=0H_\mathrm{Q}^3(X;N)`$, then $`G\times X`$ admits a quandle structure such that $`p\times \text{id}_X:G\times XA\times X`$ is a quandle homomorphism.

###### Proof.

By assumption there is $`\xi C_\mathrm{Q}^2(X;N)`$ such that $`\theta =\delta \xi `$. Define a binary operation on $`G\times X`$ by

$$(g_1,x_1)(g_2,x_2)=(g_1s\varphi (x_1,x_2)\xi (x_1,x_2)^1,x_1x_2).$$

Then by Equality (6), this defines a desired quandle operation. ∎

We summarize the above lemmas as

###### Theorem 4.13.

The obstruction to extending the quandle $`E(X,A,\varphi )=A\times X`$ to $`G\times X`$ lies in $`H_\mathrm{Q}^3(X;N)`$. In particular, if $`H_\mathrm{Q}^3(X;N)=0`$, then $`E(X,A,\varphi )`$ extends to $`G\times X`$ for any $`\varphi Z_\mathrm{Q}^2(X;A)`$.

###### Example 4.14.

For $`X=𝐙_2[T,T^1]/(T^2+T+1)`$, it is known  that $`H_\mathrm{Q}^2(X;𝐙_2)=𝐙_2`$, so that there is a non-trivial extension of $`X`$ to $`X(𝐙_2,\varphi )=𝐙_2\times X`$ defined by a generating $`2`$-cocycle $`\varphi `$. It is known that $`H_\mathrm{Q}^3(X;𝐙_2)=𝐙_2^3`$, but we do not know which (if any) $`3`$-cocycles obstruct extensions to $`G\times X`$ with $`1𝐙_2G𝐙_21.`$ However, we obtain the following information from Theorem 4.13: for any $`N𝐙_2`$ with $`1NG𝐙_21`$, the above non-trivial extension $`E(X,A,\varphi )`$ further extends to $`G\times X`$, as $`H_\mathrm{Q}^3(X;N)=0`$.


format: text

text:
# Multichannel pseudogap Kondo model: Large-𝑁 solution and quantum-critical dynamics

\[

## Abstract

We discuss a multichannel SU($`N`$) Kondo model which displays non-trivial zero-temperature phase transitions due to a conduction electron density of states vanishing with a power law at the Fermi level. In a particular large-$`N`$ limit, the system is described by coupled integral equations corresponding to a dynamic saddle point. We exactly determine the universal low-energy behavior of spectral densities at the scale-invariant fixed points, obtain anomalous exponents, and compute scaling functions describing the crossover near the quantum-critical points. We argue that our findings are relevant to recent experiments on impurity-doped $`d`$-wave superconductors.

\]

The Kondo effect in metals is a well studied phenomenon in many-body physics. The low-energy physics is completely determined by a single energy scale, the Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$, and the impurity spin is fully quenched in the low-temperature limit, $`TT_\mathrm{K}`$ . The standard picture of the Kondo effect has to be revised if the conduction band density of states (DOS) vanishes identically at the Fermi energy . This is the case in so-called pseudogap systems with a power-law DOS $`\rho (ϵ)|ϵ|^r`$ ($`r>0`$) which arises in one-dimensional interacting systems, in certain zero-gap semiconductors, and in systems with long-range order where the order parameter has nodes at the Fermi surface, e.g., $`p`$\- and $`d`$-wave superconductors ($`r=2`$ and 1). Of special interest are high-$`T_c`$ cuprate superconductors, where indeed non-trivial Kondo-like behavior has been observed associated with the magnetic moments induced by non-magnetic Zn impurities .

The pseudogap Kondo problem has attracted a lot of attention during the last decade. A number of studies  including the initial work by Withoff and Fradkin employed a slave-boson large-$`N`$ technique; further progress and insight came from numerical renormalization group (NRG) calculations  and the local moment approach . The general picture arising from these studies is that there exists a zero-temperature phase transition at a critical Kondo coupling, $`J_c`$, below which the impurity spin is unscreened even at lowest temperatures. Also, the behavior depends sensitively on the presence or absence of particle-hole (p-h) symmetry: in the p-h symmetric case there is no complete screening even for $`J_\mathrm{K}>J_c`$. A comprehensive discussion of possible fixed points and their thermodynamic properties has been given by Gonzalez-Buxton and Ingersent  based on the NRG approach. Spectral properties of the pseudogap Kondo model have so far been investigated for the p-h symmetric case only , and the knowledge about the quantum-critical dynamics is limited. Importantly, recent advances in scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) have made it possible to directly observe local spectral properties of impurities in superconductors .

The purpose of this paper is to provide an exact low-energy solution of the pseudogap Kondo problem in a certain large-$`N`$ limit  which is appropriate for obtaining dynamical properties. We shall determine anomalous exponents and spectral densities at the fixed points of interest, and describe the crossovers in the vicinity of quantum-critical points. The critical fixed points are found to have exponents varying continuously with the pseudogap exponent $`r`$. To our knowledge, our study represents the first critical theory of the pseudogap Kondo transition in the presence of p-h asymmetry.

We begin by describing the generalized multichannel Kondo problem, characterized by $`K`$ channels of conduction electrons and a spin symmetry group extended from SU(2) to SU($`N`$). The choice of the SU($`N`$) representation for the impurity spin $`\widehat{S}`$ qualitatively influences the phase diagram in the large-$`N`$ limit. For $`r=0`$, a symmetric (bosonic) representation leads to both underscreened and overscreened  phases with an exactly screened phase in between , whereas an antisymmetric representation only allows for an overscreened situation . A second crucial difference is that the bosonic large-$`N`$ limit contains a generic p-h asymmetry which prevents a study of a p-h symmetric model. Therefore, we choose an antisymmetric representation  for $`\widehat{S}`$, corresponding to a Young tableau with a single column of $`Q`$ boxes. The $`N^21`$ traceless components of $`\widehat{S}`$ can be written in terms of $`N`$ auxiliary fermions, $`f_\nu `$, as $`S_{\nu \mu }=f_\nu ^{}f_\mu Q\delta _{\nu \mu }/N`$, together with the constraint $`_\nu f_\nu ^{}f_\nu =Q`$. The conduction electrons transform under the fundamental representation of SU($`N`$), and carry a channel (flavor) index $`i=1,\mathrm{},K`$ and SU($`N`$) spin index $`\nu =1,\mathrm{},N`$. The Hamiltonian of the model reads:

$$H=\underset{𝐤i\nu }{}ϵ_𝐤c_{𝐤i\nu }^{}c_{𝐤i\nu }+J_\mathrm{K}\underset{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}i\nu \mu }{}S_{\nu \mu }c_{𝐤i\mu }^{}c_{𝐤^{}i\nu }$$
(1)
The fermionic bath is assumed to have a power law DOS at low energies; for simplicity we use a model DOS given by $`\rho (ϵ)=\rho _0|ϵ/D|^r`$ for $`|ϵ|<D`$.

For $`r=0`$, it is known that weak antiferromagnetic coupling $`J_\mathrm{K}`$ grows under renormalization for $`K2`$ and any $`N`$, $`Q`$, and there is a stable intermediate-coupling non-Fermi-liquid fixed point associated with overscreening of the impurity spin. For $`r>0`$, we find that the situation is different, and a number of phases appear: (i) A local moment (LM) regime is reached for weak initial coupling. Here $`J_\mathrm{K}`$ flows to zero, and the impurity is unscreened. (ii) An overscreened phase (OS) is found for $`0<r<r_{\mathrm{max}}^{}`$ and $`J_{c1}<J_\mathrm{K}<J_{c2}`$, it is a natural generalization of the $`r=0`$ overscreened fixed point. (iii) There is a new asymmetric strong-coupling (ASC) phase which exists for $`r>0`$, and is reached only for $`J_\mathrm{K}>J_{c2}`$ and a sufficient amount of p-h symmetry breaking. Qualitative phase diagrams are shown Fig. 1; the important case of $`r=1`$ corresponds to Fig. 1c.

We now proceed with the analysis of the model in the large-$`N`$ limit which has been introduced in Refs. . We set $`K=\gamma N`$, $`J_\mathrm{K}=J/N`$, and take the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$ keeping $`\gamma `$ and $`J`$ fixed. The important difference of the present large-$`N`$ limit to the usual non-crossing approximation (NCA)  is the treatment of the occupation constraint: here we set $`Q=q_0N`$ and keep $`q_0`$ fixed. The advantage is twofold: we can achieve p-h symmetry with $`Q=N/2`$, and in the large-$`N`$ limit the dynamics of the system is determined by a true (time-dependent) saddle point . (Formally, results corresponding to $`Q=1`$ as in Ref.  are obtained here in the limit $`q_00`$.) The Kondo interaction in Eq. (1) can be decoupled in each channel by auxiliary bosonic fields $`B_i(\tau )`$, conjugate to the amplitude $`_\nu c_{i\nu }^{}(\tau )f_\nu (\tau )`$. The constraint is implemented with a Lagrange multiplier field $`\lambda (\tau )`$. One finds the following integral equations for the fermionic and bosonic Green’s functions $`G_f(\tau )=\mathrm{T}_\tau f_\nu (\tau )f_\nu ^{}(0)`$, $`G_B(\tau )=\mathrm{T}_\tau B_i(\tau )B_i^{}(0)`$:

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_f(\tau )=\gamma G_0(\tau )G_B(\tau ),\mathrm{\Sigma }_B(\tau )=G_0(\tau )G_f(\tau ),$$
(2)
with the self-energies $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_f`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_B`$ defined by:

$`G_f^1(i\omega _n)`$ $`=`$ $`i\omega _n+\lambda \mathrm{\Sigma }_f(i\omega _n)`$ (3)
$`G_B^1(i\nu _n)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{J}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_B(i\nu _n).`$ (4)
In these expressions $`\omega _n=(2n+1)\pi /\beta `$ and $`\nu _n=2n\pi /\beta `$ denote fermionic and bosonic Matsubara frequencies. The third saddle point equation fixes the impurity “occupation” and thus determines $`\lambda `$:

$$G_f(\tau =0^{})=\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{n}{}G_f(i\omega _n)e^{i\omega _n0^+}=q_0.$$
(5)
Eqs. (2,3,4) are identical in structure to the usual NCA equations, but the physics is changed by the constraint eq. (5) which keeps track of the choice of the impurity spin representation. With a symmetric conduction band DOS, the model is p-h symmetric (invariant under $`f_\nu ^{}f_\nu `$ and $`c_{𝐤i\nu }^{}c_{𝐤i\nu }`$) for $`q_0=1/2`$. P-h symmetry can be broken at the impurity spin ($`q_01/2`$) as well as in the environment (potential scattering or doping), both leading to similar effects.

An important dynamic observable is the conduction electron T-matrix $`T(\omega )`$ (which corresponds to the impurity Green’s function for an impurity Anderson model), given by the convolution of $`G_f`$ and $`G_B`$, so its Fourier transform is $`T(\tau )=(1/N)G_f(\tau )G_B(\tau )`$. Local susceptibilities for the spin and channel degrees of freedom are obtained by $`\chi _{\mathrm{loc},\mathrm{sp}}=_0^\beta 𝑑\tau G_f(\tau )G_f(\tau )`$ and $`\chi _{\mathrm{loc},\mathrm{ch}}=_0^\beta 𝑑\tau G_B(\tau )G_B(\tau )`$; these have to be distinguished from the impurity contributions $`\chi _{\mathrm{imp},\mathrm{sp},\mathrm{ch}}`$ to the reponse to a global (spin or channel) field.

We now turn to a detailed analysis of the low-energy, low-temperature behavior of the above equations. In a first step, we analyze possibly existing scale-invariant fixed points where the Green’s functions follow power laws at small frequencies. It is important to note that any continuous quantum phase transition (as well as other possible intermediate coupling fixed points) must be described by such behavior. The constant terms in Eqs. (3,4) have to vanish, $`\lambda \mathrm{\Sigma }_f(i0^+)0,1/J\mathrm{\Sigma }_B(i0^+)0`$ as $`T0`$ . A power-law ansatz $`G_B(\tau )A_B/\tau ^{2\mathrm{\Delta }_B},G_f(\tau )A_f/\tau ^{2\mathrm{\Delta }_f}`$ for the Green’s functions in the regime $`1/T^{}\tau \beta \mathrm{}`$ (where $`T^{}`$ is a crossover temperature) is equivalent to low-energy spectral densities

$`\rho _{f,B}(\omega 0^\pm ){\displaystyle \frac{A_{f,B,\pm }}{(\pm \omega )^{12\mathrm{\Delta }_{f,B}}}},`$ (6)
which have the same power-law exponent, but different prefactors $`A_\pm `$, for $`\omega >0`$ and $`\omega <0`$. Inserting these Green’s functions into Eqs. (2,3,4) one finds the following equations for the exponents:

$`2\mathrm{\Delta }_f+2\mathrm{\Delta }_B`$ $`=`$ $`1r,`$ (7)
$`\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{(12\mathrm{\Delta }_B)\mathrm{sin}2\pi \mathrm{\Delta }_B}{\mathrm{sin}^2\pi \mathrm{\Delta }_B+\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha /2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(12\mathrm{\Delta }_f)\mathrm{sin}2\pi \mathrm{\Delta }_f}{\mathrm{cos}^2\pi \mathrm{\Delta }_f+\mathrm{sinh}^2\alpha /2}}.`$ (8)
Here, $`\alpha `$ is a spectral asymmetry parameter defined by $`\mathrm{exp}(\alpha )=A_{f,}/A_{f,+}=A_{B,}/A_{B,+}`$. For $`r=0`$, $`\alpha `$ drops out, and there is a single solution with non-trivial exponents, $`2\mathrm{\Delta }_f=1/(1+\gamma )`$, $`2\mathrm{\Delta }_B=\gamma /(1+\gamma )`$, which describes an infrared stable fixed point corresponding to an overscreened spin . In contrast, the behavior for $`0<r1`$ is much richer, and is illustrated in Figs. 1 and 2. For small $`r`$ and $`\alpha 0`$, one finds three solutions, one infrared stable representing the OS phase, and two unstable corresponding to the quantum phase transitions from OS to LM and ASC. With increasing $`r`$, two solutions disappear at $`r^{}(\alpha )`$, leaving a single unstable solution for the direct transition between the LM and ASC phases. In the p-h symmetric case ($`\alpha `$=0), the unstable solution for the transition to ASC is absent. Therefore, no scale-invarian solution is found for $`r>r^{}(0)`$: the p-h symmetric system here always flows to the LM weak coupling phase. The critical value $`r^{}(\alpha )`$ is bounded, $`r_{\mathrm{min}}^{}<r^{}<r_{\mathrm{max}}^{}`$.

From the presence or absence of intermediate coupling fixed points one can infer phase diagrams as in Fig. 1; these are also well borne out by our numerical studies of Eqs. (2,3,4). In the narrow range $`r_{\mathrm{min}}^{}<r<r_{\mathrm{max}}^{}`$, the existence of the OS phase depends on the amount of p-h symmetry breaking, Fig. 1b.

The $`N=K=2`$ version of the overscreened pseudogap Kondo model has been studied earlier by NRG , with results somewhat different from the large-$`N`$ limit. The $`N=K=2`$ model has a single $`r^{}`$ value, no ASC region for $`r<r^{}0.23`$, and a minimal potential scattering value to reach ASC for $`r>r^{}`$. Some of these differences arise from the fact that the $`N=K=2`$ case exhibits isolated critical fixed points, whereas the scale-invariant large-$`N`$ solutions actually correspond to continuous lines of fixed points, parametrized by the low-energy spectral asymmetry $`\alpha `$, which is determined by the symmetry-breaking parameters of the model.

The universal low-energy behavior of the T-matrix at the scale-invariant fixed points is readily obtained from the convolution of $`G_f`$ and $`G_B`$, its spectral density $`\rho _\mathrm{T}(\omega 0)`$ diverges as $`A_\mathrm{T}|\omega |^r`$. Notably, the prefactors for both signs of $`\omega `$ are equal here, i.e., the asymmetry described by $`\alpha `$ disappears in the scaling limit . Furthermore, the amplitude $`A_\mathrm{T}`$ in the OS phase is independent of $`J`$, this is the analog of Friedel’s sum rule. The scaling forms of the finite-temperature spectral densities can be determined  from the $`T=0`$ quantities (6) by applying a conformal transformation $`z=\mathrm{exp}(i2\pi \tau /\beta )`$. Low-temperature thermodynamic quantities can now be calculated, e.g., the local spin susceptibility  follows $`\chi _{\mathrm{loc},\mathrm{sp}}1/T^{14\mathrm{\Delta }_f}`$ for $`4\mathrm{\Delta }_f<1`$, $`\chi _{\mathrm{loc},\mathrm{sp}}\mathrm{ln}(1/T)`$ for $`4\mathrm{\Delta }_f=1`$, and $`\chi _{\mathrm{loc},\mathrm{sp}}\mathrm{const}`$ otherwise; similar results hold for $`\chi _{\mathrm{loc},\mathrm{ch}}`$ in terms of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_b`$.

In a second step, we discuss possible non-scale-invariant fixed points of the system (which are absent at $`r=0`$): the local moment (LM) and the asymmetric strong coupling (ASC) fixed point. These solutions of Eqs. (2,3,4) appear if the $`T=0`$ “compensation” of the constant terms in Eqs. (3,4) is not realized.

For the LM fixed point, reached for small Kondo coupling, it is important to notice that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_B(i0+)`$ is bounded from above for $`r>0`$ and cannot compensate large $`1/J`$ values (the corresponding integral is infrared divergent for $`r=0`$). Hence, there is no power-law solution for $`J`$ smaller than a critical $`J_{c1}`$. A constant term in $`G_B^1`$ implies a $`\delta `$-peak in the $`T=0`$ fermion spectral density; furthermore the spectral asymmetry flows to zero in the scaling limit, leading to $`\rho _f(\omega )\delta (\omega )`$. This is equivalent to an unscreened spin: the local spin susceptibility follows a Curie law for $`T0`$. The “local moment” $`T\chi _{\mathrm{loc},\mathrm{sp}}`$ is reduced from its free spin value, but $`T\chi _{\mathrm{imp},\mathrm{sp}}`$, measuring the total impurity-induced Curie contribution to the uniform susceptibility, is that of a free spin, i.e., part of the moment is carried by the surrounding conduction electrons due to the residual coupling mediated by $`G_B`$.

The ASC fixed point is reached at sufficient particle-hole asymmetry and Kondo coupling. Here, $`\lambda \mathrm{\Sigma }_f(i0^+)`$ does not vanish for $`T0`$. This leads to a $`\delta `$-peak in the auxiliary boson spectral density, $`\rho _B(\omega )\pm \delta (\omega 0^\pm )`$ \[the sign depending on $`\mathrm{sgn}(q_01/2)`$ \], which implies maximal spectral asymmetry in the scaling limit. The channel susceptibility diverges like $`1/T`$, and the system has a free “moment” in the channel (flavor) degrees of freedom, also leading to a residual $`T=0`$ entropy. In contrast, the spin is completely screened, $`\chi _{\mathrm{imp},\mathrm{sp}}`$, $`\chi _{\mathrm{loc},\mathrm{sp}}\mathrm{const}`$. The ASC phase can be understood as $`(NQ)`$ conduction electrons bound to the impurity; for $`N=K=2`$ this is equivalent to a spin singlet, channel doublet state .

For both the LM and ASC fixed points, the spectral density $`\rho _\mathrm{T}(\omega )`$ of the T-matrix behaves as $`|\omega |^r`$ at small frequencies, and the spectral asymmetry disappears in the scaling limit of $`\rho _\mathrm{T}`$.

At this point we briefly comment on the case $`r1`$: the OS phase disappears for all $`\gamma `$; in the presence of particle-hole asymmetry a transition between LM and ASC is still possible. For $`r=1`$ the above power law analysis remains valid, but has to be supplemented with logarithmic corrections. For $`r>1`$ the critical power law at the LM-ASC transition is replaced by $`\rho _\mathrm{T}|\omega |^{r2}`$.

After having described the fixed points we now turn to the universal behavior near the quantum phase transitions. In the vicinity of each critical point, one can define an energy scale $`T^{}`$, which vanishes at the transition, and defines the crossover energy above which quantum-critical behavior is observed . From the above low-energy analysis one can deduce the dependence of $`T^{}`$ on the reduced coupling, $`j=(JJ_c)/J_c`$, measuring the distance from the critical point at $`J_c`$. Approaching the LM-OS or LM-ASC transition from small $`J`$ we have $`T^{}(j)^{1/r}`$, from large $`J`$ we find $`T^{}j^{1/(r+2\mathrm{\Delta }_{f,\mathrm{cr}})}`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{f,\mathrm{cr}}`$ is the anomalous fermion exponent at the critical fixed point. Similarly, we have $`T^{}(j)^{1/(r+2\mathrm{\Delta }_{f,\mathrm{OS}})}`$ and $`T^{}j^{1/(r+2\mathrm{\Delta }_{f,\mathrm{cr}})}`$ if we approach the OS-ASC transition from below or above, respectively. The local susceptibilities are easily derived, e.g., in the ASC phase we have $`\chi _{\mathrm{loc},\mathrm{sp}}(T`$=0) $`T^{(4\mathrm{\Delta }_{f,\mathrm{cr}}1)}j^{\overline{\gamma }}`$ with $`\overline{\gamma }=(14\mathrm{\Delta }_{f,\mathrm{cr}})/(r+2\mathrm{\Delta }_{f,\mathrm{cr}})`$.

Near a critical point all observables show scaling behavior as function of $`T/T^{}`$ and $`\omega /T^{}`$ ($`k_B=1`$). For instance, the T-matrix obeys the scaling form

$$T(\omega )=\frac{𝒜}{T^{(1\eta _\mathrm{T})}}\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{T}(\frac{\omega }{T^{}},\frac{T}{T^{}}),$$
(9)
where $`𝒜`$ is an amplitude prefactor, $`\eta _\mathrm{T}=1r`$ is the anomalous exponent, and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{T}`$ is a universal scaling function (for the particular transition and values of $`r`$, $`\gamma `$, $`q_0`$). As an example, we focus on the transition between the LM and ASC phases, for $`J>J_c`$. A result for the $`T=0`$ scaling function $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{T}`$ is shown in Fig. 3. For $`\overline{\omega }=\omega /T^{}1`$ we have ASC behavior with $`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{T}|\overline{\omega }|^r`$, for $`\overline{\omega }1`$ the spectral density follows the quantum-critical power law $`|\overline{\omega }|^r`$ as predicted above. In both limits the spectrum is particle-hole symmetric (!), however, in the crossover region the asymmetry leads to a large peak for one sign of $`\overline{\omega }`$ \[depending again on $`\mathrm{sgn}(q_01/2)`$ \].

Finally, we mention possible applications of our results. Although we have taken a multichannel large-$`N`$ limit here, the T-matrix spectral properties of the LM, ASC, and critical fixed points turn out to apply also to the single-channel case . In most systems there is a finite particle-hole asymmetry, and if Kondo screening is present in a pseudogap system (and $`r`$ is not too small), the physics will be described by the ASC fixed point . Then, in contrast to the metallic $`r=0`$ case, the impurity spectral function does not show a peak at the Fermi level, but at an energy of order $`T_\mathrm{K}T^{}`$ (Fig. 3, see also ). Interestingly, STM studies of Zn impurities in the cuprate $`d`$-wave superconductor BSCCO  have shown a large peak in the differential conductance at a small bias of 1.5 meV, and a likely possibility is that this peak arises from the Kondo screening of the impurity-induced moment . The value of $`T^{}`$ = 15 K is consistent with NMR studies  which show a $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ of order 20–40 K around optimal doping. Last not least, genuine multichannel pseudogap physics may be found in quantum dots coupled to $`d`$-wave-superconducting leads, and possibly in heavy-fermion superconductors .

The author thanks H. Alloul, R. Bulla, A. Georges, O. Parcollet, A. Polkovnikov, T. Pruschke, and S. Sachdev for invaluable discussions. This research was supported by the DFG through SFB 484.