text:
# Elimination Theory in Codimension Two

## 1 Introduction

Sparse elimination theory concerns the study of Chow forms and discriminants associated with toric varieties, that is, subvarieties of projective space which are parametrized by monomials , . This theory has its origin in the work of Gel’fand, Kapranov and Zelevinsky on multivariate hypergeometric functions . The singularities of these functions occur on the projectively dual hypersurfaces to the torus orbit closures on the given toric variety $`X`$. The singular locus of the hypergeometric system is described by the full discriminant of $`X`$, which is a natural specialization of the Chow form.

Classical hypergeometric functions in one variable arise when $`X`$ is a toric hypersurface, defined by one homogeneous binomial equation $`x_1^{b_1}\mathrm{}x_r^{b_r}=x_{r+1}^{b_{r+1}}\mathrm{}x_n^{b_n}`$. The Chow form of this hypersurface $`X`$ is just its defining polynomial. The discriminant of $`X`$ equals, up to an integer factor, \[4, §9.1\],

$$D_X=b_{r+1}^{b_{r+1}}\mathrm{}b_n^{b_n}x_1^{b_1}\mathrm{}x_r^{b_r}(1)^{deg(X)}b_1^{b_1}\mathrm{}b_r^{b_r}x_{r+1}^{b_{r+1}}\mathrm{}x_n^{b_n},$$
(1.1)
and the full discriminant equals $`D_X`$ times $`_{i=1}^nx_i^{deg(X)b_i}`$. It is the purpose of this article to generalize these formulas to toric varieties of codimension $`2`$. Our motivations for this study include hypergeometric functions , Horn systems in two variables , and their applications to theoretical physics .

We introduce our objects of study by means of an example. Let $`X`$ be the toric $`6`$-fold in projective $`8`$-space given parametrically by the cubic monomials

$$(a:b:\mathrm{}:i)=(u_1u_0^2:u_2u_0^2:u_3u_0^2:u_1x^2:u_2y^2:u_3z^2:u_4yz:u_4xz:u_4xy).$$

The prime ideal of the toric variety $`X`$ is generated by the $`2\times 2`$-minors of

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& b& c\\ dg^2& eh^2& fi^2\end{array}\right)$$
(1.2)
Thus $`X`$ is arithmetically Cohen-Macaulay and has degree $`13`$. The Chow form of $`X`$ is gotten by eliminating the variable $`t`$ from the $`2\times 2`$-minors of

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a_0+ta_1& b_0+tb_1& c_0+tc_1\\ (d_0+td_1)(g_0+tg_1)^2& (e_0+te_1)(h_0+th_1)^2& (f_0+tf_1)(i_0+ti_1)^2\end{array}\right)$$
(1.3)
The Chow form is an irreducible polynomial of degree $`26`$ in the $`18`$ variables $`a_0,a_1,b_0,b_1,\mathrm{},i_0,i_1`$ having exactly $`57,726`$ terms. It equals the determinant

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}123& 124& 125& 126\\ 134& 135+234& 136+235& 236\\ 135& 136+145+235& 146+236+245& 246\\ 136& 146+236& 156+246& 256\end{array}\right)$$
(1.4)
where $`ijk`$ is the $`3\times 3`$-minor with row indices $`i`$, $`j`$ and $`k`$ of the $`6\times 3`$-matrix

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}a_0& b_0& c_0& \\ a_1& b_1& c_1& \\ d_0g_0^2& e_0h_0^2& f_0i_0^2& \\ d_1g_0^2+2d_0g_0g_1& e_1h_0^2+2e_0h_0h_1& f_1i_0^2+2f_0i_0i_1& \\ d_0g_1^2+2d_1g_0g_1& e_0h_1^2+2e_1h_0h_1& f_0i_1^2+2f_1i_0i_1& \\ d_1g_1^2& e_1h_1^2& f_1i_1^2& \end{array}\right)$$
(1.5)
Note that the Chow form can also be written as a polynomial of degree $`13`$ in the brackets $`[ab]=a_0b_1a_1b_0,[ac]=a_0c_1a_1c_0,\mathrm{},[hi]=h_0i_1h_1i_0`$. We obtain the full discriminant of $`X`$ from the Chow form by substituting

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}a_0& a_1\\ b_0& b_1\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ i_0& i_1\end{array}\right)\mathrm{diag}(a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i)B,$$
(1.6)
where $`B`$ is the $`9\times 2`$-matrix with row vectors $`(1,0),(0,1),(1,1),(1,0)`$, $`(0,1),(1,1),(2,0),(0,2),(2,2)`$. The result of this substitution is the dual full discriminant $`\stackrel{~}{E}_X`$. It has exactly twelve terms and factors as follows:

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_X=2^{14}(aeh^2bdg^2)(afi^2cdg^2)(bfi^2ceh^2)\stackrel{~}{D}_X,$$
(1.7)
where the last factor $`\stackrel{~}{D}_X`$ is the irreducible polynomial

$`a^2e^2f^2h^4i^4+b^2d^2f^2g^4i^4+c^2d^2e^2g^4h^4`$
$`2abdef^2g^2h^2i^42acdfe^2g^2h^4i^22bcefd^2g^4h^2i^2`$
Replacing each variable in $`\stackrel{~}{D}_X`$ by its reciprocal, that is, $`a1/a,b1/b,\mathrm{}`$ and clearing denominators, we get the discriminant $`D_X`$, an irreducible polynomial of degree $`10`$ which defines the hypersurface projectively dual to $`X`$.

In this paper we establish exact formulas for the Chow form (Theorems 2.1 and 2.7), the full discriminant (Proposition 3.2), and the discriminant (Theorem 4.2) associated with an arbitrary toric variety $`X`$ of codimension $`2`$ in a projective space. A combinatorial construction is given for the secondary polygon (Theorem 3.4) and the Newton polygon of the discriminant (Theorem 4.3). This construction shows that the dual variety $`X^{}`$ is a hypersurface if and only if the secondary polygon is not centrally symmetric (Corollary 4.5). In Section 5 we study mixed resultants, that is, we apply our theory to codimension $`2`$ toric varieties which arise from the Cayley trick \[4, §3.2.D\]

The toric $`6`$-fold $`X`$ in our example does arise from the Cayley trick. This can be seen from the defining parametrization $`(u_1u_0^2:\mathrm{}:u_4xy)`$. Hence the discriminant $`D_X`$ is actually a resultant. Indeed, if we eliminate $`x,y,z`$ from

$$a+dx^2=b+ey^2=c+fz^2=gyz+hxz+ixy=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}0}$$
(1.8)
then the result is precisely the six-term discriminant $`D_X`$ described above.

## 2 The Chow form

Let $`B=(b_i\mathrm{})`$ be an $`n\times 2`$-integer matrix of rank $`2`$ with both column sums equal to zero. The lattice ideal $`I_B`$ is the ideal in $`k[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]`$, $`k`$ a field of characteristic zero, generated by the binomials $`x^{u_+}x^u_{}`$ where $`u=u_+u_{}`$ runs over the two-dimensional lattice $`L_B^n`$ spanned by the columns of $`B`$. The minimal generators and the higher syzygies of $`I_B`$ are described explicitly in . The ideal $`I_B`$ is homogeneous with respect to the usual $``$-grading and hence defines a subscheme $`X_B`$ of projective space $`𝐏^{n1}`$. The lattice ideal $`I_B`$ is prime if and only if $`^n/L_B`$ is a free abelian group, or equivalently, if and only if the rows of $`B`$ generate the two-dimensional lattice $`^2`$.

In this section we compute the Chow form and the Chow polygon of the projective scheme $`X_B`$. The degree of $`X_B`$, denoted $`d_B=degree(X_B)`$, is the number of intersection points with a generic $`2`$-plane in $`𝐏^{n1}`$. Let $`Y=(y_i\mathrm{})`$ be an $`n\times 2`$-matrix of indeterminates. It represents a generic parametric line $`(y_{11}+ty_{12},\mathrm{},y_{n1}+ty_{n2})`$ in $`𝐏^{n1}`$. Following \[4, §3.2.B\], the Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ of the homogeneous lattice ideal $`I_B`$ is the unique (up to sign) irreducible homogeneous polynomial in $`[y_i\mathrm{}]`$ which vanishes if and only if the corresponding line in $`𝐏^{n1}`$ meets $`X_B`$. The degree of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ equals $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}d_B`$.

Classical invariant theory (cf. \[4, Proposition 3.1.6\]) tells us that the Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ can be written (non-uniquely) as a polynomial of degree $`d_B`$ in the (dual) Plücker coordinates of a generic line, which we write as brackets

$$[ij]:=y_{i1}y_{j2}y_{i2}y_{j1}\text{for}1i<jn.$$

We further introduce a non-negative integer $`\nu _{ij}`$ for any $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}i<jn`$ as follows: if the $`i`$-th row vector and the $`j`$-th row vector of $`B=(b_i\mathrm{})`$ have the same sign in one of the two coordinates then set $`\nu _{ij}=0`$; otherwise we set

$$\nu _{ij}:=min\{|b_{i1}b_{j2}|,|b_{i2}b_{j1}|\}.$$
(2.1)
Thus, $`\nu _{ij}=0`$ unless $`b_i`$ and $`b_j`$ lie in the interior of opposite quadrants. Let

$$H_{\mathrm{}}(t)=\underset{i:b_i\mathrm{}>0}{}(y_{i1}+y_{i2}t)^{b_i\mathrm{}}\underset{i:b_i\mathrm{}<0}{}(y_{i1}+y_{i2}t)^{b_i\mathrm{}},\mathrm{}=1,2.$$
(2.2)
We regard $`H_1`$ and $`H_2`$ as polynomials in a single variable $`t`$ with coefficients in $`[y_i\mathrm{},i=1,\mathrm{},n,\mathrm{}=1,2]`$. Let $`\beta _{\mathrm{}}`$ denote the sum of the positive entries in the $`\mathrm{}`$-th column of $`B`$, for $`\mathrm{}=1,2`$. Clearly, $`degree(h_{\mathrm{}})=\beta _{\mathrm{}},\mathrm{}=1,2.`$

###### Theorem 2.1.

The Chow form of the codimension $`2`$ lattice ideal $`I_B`$ equals

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B=\frac{\mathrm{Res}_t(H_1,H_2)}{_{1r<sn}[rs]^{\nu _{rs}}},$$

where $`\mathrm{Res}_t`$ denotes the Sylvester resultant of two univariate polynomials.

###### Proof.

The binomials $`_{b_{ij}>0}x_i^{b_{ij}}_{b_{ij}<0}x_i^{b_{ij}},j=1,2,`$ defined by the two columns of $`B`$ determine a complete intersection $`Y_B`$ of degree $`\beta _1\beta _2`$ in $`𝐏^{n1}`$ which coincides with $`X_B`$ over $`\left(k^{}\right)^{n1}`$. The irreducible decomposition of $`Y_B`$ consists of the components of $`X_B`$ – of which there is only one if $`^n/L_B`$ is free abelian – together with subschemes supported on coordinate flats $`x_r=x_s=0,`$ whose Chow forms are the bracket monomials $`[rs].`$ The theorem will be proved if we show that the cycle $`\{x_r=x_s=0\}`$ occurs with multiplicity $`\nu _{rs}`$ in the complete intersection.

Suppose first that $`\nu _{rs}=0`$. We may assume that $`b_{r1},b_{s1}0.`$ Then, $`\{x_r=x_s=0\}`$ is not contained in $`Y_B`$, and thus occurs with multiplicity $`0`$. Suppose now that $`\nu _{rs}>0`$. We may assume that $`b_{r1},b_{r2}>0`$ and $`b_{s1},b_{s2}<0.`$ Then, $`\{x_r=x_s=0\}`$ is contained in $`Y_B`$, and after localizing and changing variable names, we are lead to the following situation: let $`a,b,c,d_{>0},ad>bc`$ and $`\alpha ,\beta 0`$ in an extension field $`K`$ of $`k`$, and consider the univariate resultant

$$r:=\mathrm{Res}_t((x_0+x_1t)^a\alpha (y_0+y_1t)^b,(x_0+x_1t)^c\beta (y_0+y_1t)^d).$$

We want to show that $`x_0y_1y_0x_1`$ appears with exponent $`bc`$ as a factor of $`r`$.

Indeed, when $`x_1,y_10,`$ the condition $`x_0y_1y_0x_1=0`$ holds if and only if there exists $`t`$ such that $`x_0+x_1t=y_0+y_1t=0,`$ and so $`x_0y_1y_0x_1`$ occurs in $`r`$ with exponent $`\mu `$ equal to the intersection multiplicity at the origin of the artinian ideal $`I=x^a\alpha y^b,x^c\beta y^d`$ in $`K[x,y]`$. We claim $`\mu =bc`$.

The given equations are a Gröbner basis with leading terms $`x^a`$ and $`\beta y^d`$, for the term order defined by $`\mathrm{weight}(x)=b+d`$ and $`\mathrm{weight}(y)=a+c`$. Hence $`\mathrm{dim}_KK[x,y]/I=ad`$, that is, there are $`ad`$ roots in the affine plane counting multiplicity. Of those, $`adbc`$ lie in the torus, i.e., have both coordinates non-zero. No root of $`I`$ has precisely one zero coordinate. Therefore the multiplicity of $`I`$ at the origin is the difference $`\mu =ad(adbc)=bc`$. ∎

###### Corollary 2.2.

The degree of a homogeneous lattice ideal $`I_B`$ of codimension two can be computed from the defining $`n\times 2`$-matrix $`B`$ by the following formula

$$\mathrm{degree}(X_B)=\beta _1\beta _2\underset{1r<sn}{}\nu _{rs}.$$

The polynomial ring $`[y_i\mathrm{}]`$ has a natural $`^n`$-grading defined by $`deg(y_i\mathrm{})=e_i`$, the $`i`$-th unit vector. The Chow polytope $`CP_B`$ is, by definition \[4, §6.3\], the convex hull in $`^n`$ of the degrees of all monomials appearing in the expansion of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$. Its faces correspond to toric deformations of the algebraic cycle $`X_B`$.

We assume that the row vectors $`b_1,b_2,\mathrm{},b_m`$ of the matrix $`B`$ are ordered counterclockwise in cyclic order, and that $`b_{m+1},\mathrm{},b_n=0`$. It may happen that $`b_{i+1}`$ is a positive multiple of $`b_i`$. Let $`P_B`$ denote the unique (up to translation) lattice polygon whose boundary consists of the directed edges $`b_1,b_2,\mathrm{},b_m`$. For each vector $`b_i=(b_{i1},b_{i2})`$, the linear functional

$$u=(u_1,u_2)det(b_i,u)=b_{i1}u_2b_{i2}u_1$$

attains its minimum value over $`P_B`$ at the edge parallel to $`b_i`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$ and is zero for $`i=m+1,\mathrm{},n.`$ Let $`\mu _i`$ denote the maximum value of the linear functional $`udet(b_i,u)`$ as $`u`$ ranges over the polygon $`P_B`$. For $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$, this maximum is attained at a unique vertex of $`P_B`$ unless $`b_j=\lambda b_i`$ for some $`j`$ and $`\lambda <0`$. For every lattice point $`v`$ in $`P_B`$, the quantity

$$v^{(i)}:=\mu _idet(b_i,v)$$
(2.3)
is a non-negative integer, invariant under translation of $`P_B`$. The vector $`(v^{(1)},v^{(2)},\mathrm{},v^{(n)})`$ expresses the point $`v`$ in $`P_B`$ in intrinsic coordinates.

###### Theorem 2.3.

The Chow polygon $`CP_B`$ of a codimension $`2`$ lattice ideal $`I_B`$ is the image of the polygon $`P_B`$ under the affine isomorphism $`v(v^{(1)},\mathrm{},v^{(n)})`$.

The proof of this theorem will be given in the next section, after Gale duality and duality of Plücker coordinates have been introduced. See Theorem 3.4 for the same theorem in dual formulation. Theorems 2.3 and 3.4 will then derived from the constructions in Sections 7.1.D and 8.3.B of .

###### Example 2.4.

For the example in the Introduction we take $`b_1=(1,0),b_2=(1,1),b_3=(2,2),b_4=(0,1),b_5=(1,0),b_6=(2,0),b_7=(1,1),b_8=(0,1),b_9=(0,2)`$ and $`P_B`$ the hexagon with vertices $`(0,0),(1,0),(4,3)`$, $`(4,4),(1,4),(0,3)`$. The edges of $`P_B`$ are labeled by the variables as follows: $`a,\{f,i\},b,\{d,g\},c,\{e,h\}`$, and we have $`\mu =(4,3,6,0,0,0,1,4,8)`$. The twelve points on the boundary of $`P_B`$ correspond to the twelve monomials in the expansion of $`\stackrel{~}{E}_X`$ . For instance, the vertex $`v=(0,0)`$ has intrinsic coordinates $`(v^{(1)},\mathrm{},v^{(9)})=(4,3,6,0,0,0,1,4,8)`$ and corresponds to $`a^4ce^4f^3h^8i^6`$.

For any $`vP_B`$, the coordinate sum $`_{i=1}^nv^{(i)}`$ coincides with $`_{i=1}^n\mu _i`$, and this equals the degree of the Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ as a polynomial in the $`y_i\mathrm{}`$. From this we get an alternative formula for the degree of our lattice ideal.

###### Corollary 2.5.

The degree of the variety $`X_B`$ equals $`d_B=\frac{1}{2}_{i=1}^n\mu _i`$

Counting lattice points in the polygon $`P_B`$ gives an upper bound for the number of monomials appearing in the full discriminant $`D_X`$ (see §3 below):

###### Remark 2.6.

The number of lattice points in the polygon $`P_B`$ equals

$$1+\frac{1}{2}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}gcd(b_{i1},b_{i2})+\underset{1i<jn}{}(b_{i2}b_{j1}b_{i1}b_{j2})\right)$$

###### Proof.

This is a reformulation of Pick’s formula which states that the area of a lattice polygon equals the number of lattice points in that polygon minus half the number of lattice points in its boundary, minus one. ∎

If the lattice ideal $`I_B`$ is a complete intersection then the denominator in Theorem 2.1 is $`1`$ and we get a determinantal formula for the Chow form, namely, $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ equals the univariate resultant in the numerator, which can be computed as the determinant of a Sylvester or Bézoutian matrix.

It would be desirable to have a division-free determinantal formulas for the Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ of any codimension $`2`$ lattice ideal. At this time we know such formulas only for special classes of matrices $`B`$. We present a formula for a class which includes the example in the Introduction. Recall from  that the lattice ideal $`I_B`$ is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if $`I_B`$ is generated by the $`2\times 2`$-minors of a $`2\times 3`$-matrix of monomials in $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_n`$:

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}m_1& m_2& m_3\\ m_4& m_5& m_6\end{array}\right).$$

Let $`d_i`$ denote the total degree of the monomial $`m_i`$. In order for the lattice ideal $`I_B`$ to be homogeneous it is necessary and sufficient that

$$d_1+d_5=d_2+d_4\text{and}d_1+d_6=d_3+d_4.$$

For the following discussion we make an even more restrictive assumption:

$$d_1=d_2=d_3d_4=d_5=d_6.$$
(2.4)
We introduce four new indeterminates $`s,t,u,v`$. Let $`m_i[t]`$ denote the image of the monomial $`m_i`$ under the substitution $`x_iy_{i1}+y_{i2}t`$ for $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. We define the Bézout polynomial to be the following expression:

$$\frac{1}{(su)(tv)}\mathrm{det}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}m_1[t]+m_4[t]s& m_1[t]+m_4[t]u& m_1[v]+m_4[v]u\\ m_2[t]+m_5[t]s& m_2[t]+m_5[t]u& m_2[v]+m_5[v]u\\ m_3[t]+m_6[t]s& m_3[t]+m_6[t]u& m_3[v]+m_6[v]u\end{array}\right)$$

Set $`\delta :=d_1+d_4`$. The Bézout polynomial can be written uniquely in the form

$$(1,v,v^2\mathrm{},v^{d_11},u,uv,uv^2,\mathrm{},uv^{d_41})𝐁\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ t\\ \mathrm{}\\ t^{\delta 1}\end{array}\right),$$

where $`𝐁=𝐁(y_{ij})`$ is a certain $`\delta \times \delta `$-matrix with entries in $`k[y_{11},y_{12},\mathrm{},y_{n2}]`$.

###### Theorem 2.7.

If $`I_B`$ is a Cohen-Macaulay lattice ideal of codimension $`2`$ satisfying (2.4) then its Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ equals the determinant of $`𝐁(y_{ij})`$.

###### Proof.

Consider the rational normal scroll of type $`(d_1,d_4)`$, a toric surface of degree $`\delta `$ in a projective space of dimension $`\delta +1`$. Its Chow form has an exact determinantal formula in terms of a Bézout matrix. A nice proof of this fact follows from recent results of Eisenbud and Schreyer , since the rational normal scroll is given by the $`2\times 2`$-minors of a matrix of variables. This Chow form is the unmixed, sparse resultant for three polynomials with support

$$\{1,t,t^2,\mathrm{},t^{d_1},s,st,st^2,\mathrm{},st^{d_4}\}.$$

The three polynomials $`m_i[t]+m_{i+3}[t]s`$ have exactly this support. Our formula is gotten by specializing the Bézout matrix for the scroll. ∎

###### Example 2.8.

The ideal in (1.2) satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem 2.7, with $`\delta =4`$. The matrix (1.4) is precisely the matrix $`𝐁(y_{ij})`$ in this case. ∎

## 3 The full discriminant

There are two different ways of presenting a toric variety of codimension two: by an $`n\times 2`$-matrix $`B`$ as in , or by an $`(n2)\times n`$-matrix $`A`$ as in \[4, §5.1\]. The two matrices are Gale dual, which means that the image of $`B`$ equals the kernel of $`A`$. Up to this point in the paper, we have only used the $`B`$-representation. We now make a switch and introduce the $`A`$-representation.

Let $`A=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)`$ be an $`(n2)\times n`$-integer matrix of rank $`n2`$, and suppose there exists a vector $`w^{n2}`$ such that $`wa_i=1`$ for $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. We can choose an integral $`n\times 2`$ matrix $`B`$ whose columns are a $``$-basis of $`\mathrm{ker}_{}(A)`$. The matrix $`B`$ has rank $`2`$ and $`AB=0`$. It is unique modulo right multiplication by $`GL(2,)`$. Let $`I_A=I_B`$ denote the corresponding toric ideal in $`k[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ and $`X=X_A=X_B`$ the corresponding toric variety in $`𝐏^{n1}`$.

Here it is important to note that not all integer matrices $`B`$ arise as the Gale dual of some matrix $`A`$ as above. For this it is necessary and sufficient that $`^n/im_{}(B)`$ is torsion-free, or equivalently, that the ideal $`I_B`$ is prime.

The $`A`$-discriminant $`D_A`$ is an irreducible polynomial in $`[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ which vanishes under a specialization if the corresponding Laurent polynomial

$$f=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}x_it_1^{a_{i1}}t_2^{a_{i2}}\mathrm{}t_{n2}^{a_{i,n2}}\text{where }x_1,\mathrm{},x_n^{}$$

has a multiple root $`(t_1,\mathrm{},t_{n2})`$ in $`(^{})^{n2}`$. Equivalently, the hypersurface $`\{D_A=0\}`$ is projectively dual to the toric variety $`X`$, when the dual variety $`X^{}`$ is a hypersurface, and $`D_A=1`$ otherwise; see \[4, §1.1 and §9.1\].

In the next section we give a formula for the $`A`$-discriminant $`D_A`$ and its degree. In this section, we study a larger polynomial $`E_A`$ which contains $`D_A`$ as a factor. It is called the principal $`A`$-determinant in  but we prefer the term full discriminant. Actually, our full discriminant agrees with expression (1.1) in \[4, 10.1.A\], but there is a slight inaccuracy in \[4, Theorem 10.1.2\] since $`E_A`$ does not generally have content $`1`$. An extra integer factor is needed. This integer factor would be $`2^{14}`$ for the example (1.7) in the Introduction.

Before stating the definition of $`E_A`$, we first review the duality between primal and dual Plücker coordinates, and see how it ties in with Gale duality. For $`1i<jn`$, let $`B(i,j)`$ the submatrix of $`B`$ consisting of the $`i`$-th and $`j`$-th rows, and let $`Ai,j`$ denote the submatrix of $`A`$ gotten by omitting the $`i`$-th and $`j`$-th columns. Here signs are adjusted so that $`detAi,j=detB(i,j)`$, up to a global constant. In Section 2 we used an $`n\times 2`$ matrix $`Y=(y_i\mathrm{})`$ of indeterminates. The dual Plücker coordinates of a line in $`𝐏^{n1}`$ are

$$[ij]:=\mathrm{det}Y(i,j)=y_{i1}y_{j2}y_{i2}y_{j1}\text{for}1i<jn.$$
(3.1)
Here we consider an $`(n2)\times n`$-matrix $`Z=(z_{ij})`$ of indeterminates. The primal Plücker coordinates of our line are the $`(n2)\times (n2)`$-subdeterminants

$$ij=detZi,j\text{(with the sign adjusted as usual).}$$

The dual Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ is a polynomial of degree $`d_B`$ in the brackets (3.1). Replacing $`[ij]ij`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ gives a homogeneous polynomial of degree $`(n2)d_B`$ in the variables $`z_{ij}`$. It is denoted $`𝒞_A`$ and called the primal Chow form. Note that $`𝒞_A`$ coincides with the $`A`$-resultant defined in \[4, §8.2.A\].

###### Definition 3.1.

The full discriminant $`E_A`$ is the image of the primal Chow form $`𝒞_A`$ under the specialization $`z_{ij}a_{ij}x_j`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n2`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},n`$.

We next show how to compute the full discriminant directly from the dual Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ and hence from the formulas in Theorems 2.1 and 2.7.

###### Proposition 3.2.

The full discriminant $`E_A`$ and the dual Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B(y_i\mathrm{})`$ are related by the following formula:

$$E_A(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=(x_1\mathrm{}x_n)^{d_B}\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B(b_i\mathrm{}/x_i,i=1,\mathrm{},n,\mathrm{}=1,2).$$
(3.2)
The exponent $`d_B`$ is the degree of the toric variety $`X`$ and hence coincides with the normalized volume of the $`(n3)`$-dimensional polytope $`\mathrm{conv}(A)`$. Gale dual formulas for this volume are given in Corollaries 2.2 and 2.5.

###### Proof.

The specialization $`z_{ij}a_{ij}x_j`$ in Definition 3.1 is equivalent to

$$rsdetAr,s\underset{kr,s}{}x_k\text{for }\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}r<sn$$
(3.3)
at the level of primal Plücker coordinates. The dual Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ is a $``$-linear combination of bracket terms $`[rs]`$ of degree $`d_B`$. If we substitute $`b_i\mathrm{}/x_i`$ for $`y_i\mathrm{}`$ in the expansion of such a bracket term $`[rs]`$ then we get

$`{\displaystyle [rs]}`$ $`{\displaystyle \left(\mathrm{det}B(r,s)/(x_rx_s)\right)}={\displaystyle \left(\mathrm{det}Ar,s/(x_rx_s)\right)}=`$
$`(x_1\mathrm{}x_n)^{d_B}{\displaystyle \left(\mathrm{det}Ar,s\underset{kr,s}{}x_k\right)}(x_1\mathrm{}x_n)^{d_B}{\displaystyle rs}`$
Hence the specialized dual Chow form on right hand side of (3.2) equals the specialization of the primal Chow form $`𝒞_A`$ under (3.3), as desired. ∎

It is known from \[4, Theorem 10.1.2\] that the full discriminant $`E_A`$ is a product of irreducible factors $`D_A^{}`$ where $`A^{}`$ ranges over facial discriminants. In particular, each monomial $`x_i`$ corresponding to a vertex $`a_i`$ of $`\mathrm{conv}(A)`$ appears to some positive power in the factorization of $`E_A`$. It is curious to note that the monomial factors disappear when we pass to dual coordinates. We define the dual full discriminant by specializing the dual Chow form:

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_B(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B(b_i\mathrm{}x_i,i=1,\mathrm{},n,\mathrm{}=1,2).$$
(3.4)
Proposition 3.2 is equivalent to the reciprocity formula:

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_B(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=(x_1\mathrm{}x_n)^{d_B}E_A(1/x_1,\mathrm{},1/x_n).$$
(3.5)
###### Lemma 3.3.

The dual full discriminant $`\stackrel{~}{E}_B`$ has no monomial factors.

###### Proof.

Suppose that the variable $`x_i`$ divides $`\stackrel{~}{E}_B`$. Then every bracket monomial appearing in the dual Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ contains the letter $`i`$. Equivalently, every bracket monomial in the primal Chow form $`𝒞_A`$ contains a bracket $`rs`$ with $`r=i`$ or $`s=i`$. In view of \[4, Theorem 8.3.3\], this means that every regular triangulation of $`A`$ contains a simplex for which $`a_i`$ is not a vertex. But this is false, since $`a_i`$ lies in every maximal simplex of the reverse lexicographic triangulation of $`A`$, for $`x_i`$ smallest; see \[10, Proposition 8.6\]. ∎

The secondary polygon $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(A)`$ of the configuration $`A`$ coincides with the Newton polygon of the full discriminant $`E_A`$, by \[4, Theorem 10.1.4\]. It is a $`2`$-dimensional convex polytope lying in $`^n`$. Let $`P_B`$ be the polygon considered in Section 2. For $`vP_B`$, let $`(v^{(1)},\mathrm{},v^{(n)})`$ be the vector defined in (2.3).

###### Theorem 3.4.

The secondary polytope $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(A)`$ is the image of the polygon $`P_B`$ under the affine isomorphism which sends $`v`$ to $`(d_Bv^{(1)},\mathrm{},d_Bv^{(n)}).`$

###### Proof.

It suffices to prove this theorem for the case when all $`b_i`$ are non-zero. Indeed, if $`b_{m+1}=\mathrm{}=b_n=0`$ then \[4, Theorem 10.1.2\] implies that

$$E_A(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=\left(x_{m+1}\mathrm{}x_n\right)^{d_B}E_A^{}(x_1,\mathrm{},x_m),$$

where $`A^{}`$ is a Gale dual of the configuration $`(b_1,\mathrm{},b_m)`$. Our assertion for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(A^{})`$ implies that for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(A)`$. We hence assume that $`b_i0`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$.

Each vertex $`w=(w_1,\mathrm{},w_n)`$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(A)`$ corresponds uniquely to the Gale dual of a regular triangulation $`\mathrm{\Delta }_w`$, and hence to a pair of adjacent linearly independent vectors $`b_k,b_{k+1}`$ (indices are understood modulo $`n`$; recall that $`_ib_i=0`$). By \[4, Definition 7.1.6\], the $`i`$-th coordinate of $`w`$ equals the sum of the normalized volumes of those simplices in $`\mathrm{\Delta }_w`$ which contain the point $`a_i`$. By Gale duality, $`w_i=_{r,s}|det(b_r,b_s)|`$ where the sum is over all indices $`ri,si`$ such that $`b_k`$ and $`b_{k+1}`$ lie in the cone spanned by $`b_r`$ and $`b_s`$. Let $`v_w`$ be the vertex of $`P_B`$ between the edges parallel to $`b_k`$ and $`b_{k+1}`$. We claim that $`v_w^2`$ is mapped to $`w^n`$ under the affine isomorphism given above.

We note that the maximum $`\mu _i`$ of the values $`det(b_i,v)`$ is attained at the vertex $`vP_B`$ between the edges parallel to two independent vectors $`b_{\mathrm{}},b_{\mathrm{}+1}`$ such that $`det(b_i,b_{\mathrm{}})0`$ and $`det(b_i,b_{\mathrm{}+1})<0`$ (indices modulo $`n`$). What we are claiming is the identity $`w_i=d_Bdet(b_i,v)+det(b_i,v_w)`$.

Let $`C_k`$ denote the set of index pairs $`(r,s)`$ such that $`b_k`$ and $`b_{k+1}`$ lie in the cone spanned by $`b_r`$ and $`b_s`$. The set $`C_k`$ is Gale dual to our regular triangulation, and, hence $`d_B=\mathrm{vol}(\mathrm{conv}(A))`$ equals $`_{(r,s)C_k}|det(b_r,b_s)|`$. If we start drawing $`P_B`$ from the origin, then, $`v=_{j=1}^{\mathrm{}}b_j`$ and $`v_w=_{j=1}^kb_j.`$ Our assertion takes the following form:

$$\underset{(r,s)C_k,ri,si}{}|det(b_r,b_s)|=\underset{(r,s)C_k}{}|det(b_r,b_s)|\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}det(b_i,b_j)+\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}det(b_i,b_j).$$

After erasing equal terms on both sides, the following remains to be proved:

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}det(b_i,b_j)\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}det(b_i,b_j)=\underset{j:(i,j)C_k}{}|det(b_i,b_j)|.$$

The proof is straightforward by a case distinction involving the relative positions of the vectors $`b_i,b_k,b_{k+1}`$ and $`b_{\mathrm{}}`$ in the plane. ∎

Proof of Theorem 2.3:  If $`b_1,\mathrm{},b_n`$ span the lattice $`^2`$ then we find a corresponding matrix $`A`$, and Theorem 2.3 follows directly from Theorem 3.4 and the reciprocity formula (3.5). Otherwise, the scheme $`X_B`$ is the equidimensional union of $`r>1`$ torus translates of a fixed toric variety $`X_B^{}`$. Following \[4, §4.1.A\], the Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B`$ factors into $`r`$ irreducible polynomials, each of which is a torus translate of the irreducible Chow form $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}_B^{}`$ Therefore the Chow polygon $`CP_B`$ equals $`rCP_B^{}`$. The configuration $`B^{}`$ is $`GL(^2)`$-equivalent to $`B`$, and it does possess a Gale dual $`A^{}`$. Our assertion holds for $`CP_B^{}`$ and it follows for $`CP_B`$ by scaling. ∎

Let us now take a look at what happens to the formula in Theorem 2.1 under the specialization $`y_i\mathrm{}b_i\mathrm{}x_i`$ in (3.4). A line through the origin in $`^2`$ is said to be relevant if it contains two vectors $`b_r,b_s`$ in opposite directions. So, if the rows of $`B`$ are in general position, then there are no relevant lines. The example in the introduction has three relevant lines.

Consider the specializations of the two polynomials $`H_{\mathrm{}}(t)`$ in (2.2):

$$h_{\mathrm{}}(t):=\underset{i:b_i\mathrm{}>0}{}(b_{i1}+b_{i2}t)^{b_i\mathrm{}}x_i^{b_i\mathrm{}}\underset{i:b_i\mathrm{}<0}{}(b_{i1}+b_{i2}t)^{b_i\mathrm{}}x_i^{b_i\mathrm{}},\mathrm{}=1,2.$$
(3.6)
###### Remark 3.5.

The polynomials $`h_1,h_2`$ have a common factor if and only if there exist a relevant line which is not a coordinate axis.

The presence of two vectors $`b_r,b_s`$ in opposite directions in the interior of two quadrants then causes the resultant $`\mathrm{Res}_t(h_1,h_2)`$ to vanish. Also, $`det(B(r,s))=0,`$ while $`\nu _{rs}0.`$ When there are two opposite vectors on a coordinate axis, both numbers are zero and $`det(B(r,s))^{\nu _{rs}}=1`$. We deduce:

###### Proposition 3.6.

Assume there are no relevant lines for the configuration $`B`$ except for the coordinate axes. Then the dual full discriminant equals

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_B=\frac{\mathrm{Res}_t(h_1,h_2)}{_{1r<sn}det(B(r,s))^{\nu _{rs}}_{1r<sn}(x_rx_s)^{\nu _{rs}}}.$$

In the next section we will show how to use Theorem 2.1 to compute discriminants even if the hypothesis of the above proposition is not satisfied.

## 4 The $`A`$-discriminant

Let $`A^{(n2)\times n}`$ and $`B^{n\times 2}`$ be Gale dual matrices as before, and let $`X`$ be the corresponding toric variety of codimension $`2`$ in $`𝐏^{n1}`$. The $`A`$-discriminant $`D_A`$ is the defining irreducible polynomial of the dual variety $`X^{}`$, unless $`codim(X^{})>1`$ in which case $`D_A=1`$. Gel’fand, Kapranov and Zelevinsky \[4, Theorem 10.1.2\] proved that $`D_A`$ appears with exponent one in the factorization of the full discriminant $`E_A`$. In this section we compute $`D_A`$ and all other factors of $`E_A`$ in terms of the row vectors $`b_i^2`$ of $`B`$.

Throughout this section we shall assume that $`b_i0`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$. This means that $`X`$ is not a cone over a coordinate point, or that $`X^{}`$ does not lie in a coordinate hyperplane. All results in Section 4 require this hypothesis.

Each relevant line in the plane is identified with one of the two primitive vectors $`v^2`$ on that line. We abbreviate $`b_i^{(v)}:=\mathrm{det}(b_i,v)`$. With each such line $`v`$, we associate a codimension one discriminant as in (1.1).

$$D_v:=\underset{j:b_j^{(v)}<0}{}(b_j^{(v)})^{b_j^{(v)}}\underset{i:b_i^{(v)}>0}{}x_i^{b_i^{(v)}}\underset{i:b_i^{(v)}>0}{}(b_i^{(v)})^{b_i^{(v)}}\underset{j:b_j^{(v)}<0}{}x_j^{b_j^{(v)}}$$
(4.1)
Let $`b_{i_1},\mathrm{},b_{i_s}`$ be all the row vectors of $`B`$ which lie on the relevant line $`v`$. There is a unique integer vector $`(\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _s)`$ such that $`b_{i_j}=\lambda _jv`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},s`$. We direct the primitive vector $`v^2`$ so that the coordinate sum $`\alpha _v:=\lambda _1+\mathrm{}+\lambda _s`$ is nonnegative, and we define $`\delta _v:=\{\lambda _i:\lambda _i<0\}`$. Using this notation, Remark 3.5 can now be refined as follows:

###### Remark 4.1.

If $`v=(v_1,v_2)`$ is a relevant line for $`B`$ then $`v_1+v_2t`$ appears with exponent $`\delta _vv_i`$ in the factorization of the polynomial $`h_i(t)`$ in (3.6).

Denote by $`p_1(t),p_2(t)`$ the respective remaining factors, that is,

$$h_{\mathrm{}}(t)=p_{\mathrm{}}(t)\underset{v\text{relevant}}{}(v_1+v_2t)^{\delta _vv_{\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{}=1,2.$$
(4.2)
Now the resultant $`r_B:=\mathrm{Res}_t(p_1,p_2)`$ is a non-zero polynomial in $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_n`$. It is customary to call $`r_B`$ the residual resultant of $`h_1`$ and $`h_2`$. We shall prove the following formulas for the full discriminant and the $`A`$-discriminant.

###### Theorem 4.2.

There exist monomials $`x^u,x^u^{}`$ and integers $`\nu ,\nu ^{}`$ such that

$`D_A(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ $`=(1/\nu )x^ur_B(1/x_1,\mathrm{},1/x_n)\text{and}`$
$`E_A(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ $`=\nu ^{}x^u^{}D_A(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n){\displaystyle \underset{v\mathrm{relevant}}{}}D_v(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)^{\delta _v}`$
###### Proof.

We shall first prove the following claim about the full discriminant:

$$r_B(1/x_1,\mathrm{},1/x_n)\underset{v\mathrm{relevant}}{}D_v(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)^{\delta _v}\text{divides}E_A(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)$$

in the Laurent polynomial ring $`k[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,x_1^1,\mathrm{},x_n^1]`$.

Fix any relevant line $`v`$. Choose an isomorphism in $`SL_2()`$ which maps $`v`$ to $`(0,1)`$, and apply this isomorphism to the rows of $`B`$. Also reorder the rows of $`B`$ so that the multiples of $`v`$ come first. After this transformation, the first column of $`B`$ has the entries $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},\mathrm{},0,b_{s+1}^{(v)},b_{s+2}^{(v)},\mathrm{},b_n^{(v)}`$.

For $`\mathrm{}=1,2`$ and $`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$ only, substitute $`y_i\mathrm{}=b_i\mathrm{}/x_i`$ into the Chow form $`𝒞_B`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{H}_{\mathrm{}}`$ be the polynomials resulting from $`H_{\mathrm{}}`$ in (2.2) under the same substitution. Then $`\stackrel{~}{H}_1=H_1`$, but $`\stackrel{~}{H}_2`$ is divisible by $`t^{\delta _v}`$, and this is the highest possible power of $`t`$ with this property (cf. Remark 4.1). Theorem 2.1 implies that the specialized Chow form factors, and one of its factors is

$$\mathrm{Res}_t(H_1,t^{\delta _v})=\left(H_1(0)\right)^{\delta _v}$$
(4.3)
For all subsequent specializations, the Chow form factors accordingly. When we substitute $`y_i\mathrm{}=b_i\mathrm{}/x_i`$ for $`i=s+1,\mathrm{},n,\mathrm{}=1,2,`$ into $`H_1(0)`$ then we get the binomial $`D_v`$ in (4.1). Clearly, the residual resultant $`r_B`$ divides the full discriminant $`\stackrel{~}{E}_B`$. The above claim follows from this. Moreover, our argument shows that $`D_v^{\delta _v}`$ is the highest power of $`D_v`$ which divides $`E_A`$.

Consider now the factorization formula given by Gel’fand, Kapranov and Zelevinsky in \[4, Theorem 10.1.2\]. Under Gale duality, the proper faces of the polytope $`\mathrm{conv}(A)`$ which are not simplices correspond to relevant lines $`v`$, and their face discriminants are precisely the binomials $`D_v`$. In other words, the full discriminant $`E_A`$ equals the $`A`$-discriminant $`D_A`$ times the product of the expressions $`D_v^{\delta _v}`$ where $`v`$ ranges over all relevant lines. We conclude from our claim that $`r_B(1/x_1,\mathrm{},1/x_n)`$ divides $`D_A(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ in the Laurent polynomial ring. Since $`D_A`$ is irreducible, both of our assertions follow. ∎

We next compute the Newton polygon of the $`A`$-discriminant. Define

$$b_v:=\alpha _vv=b_{i_1}+\mathrm{}+b_{i_s}$$

for any relevant line $`v`$. It may happen that $`b_v=0.`$ We take all-non zero vectors $`b_v`$ and all vectors $`b_i`$ which do not lie in relevant lines, and we order them counterclockwise in cyclic order. Let $`Q_B`$ denote the unique (up to translation) lattice polygon whose boundary consists of these directed edges. For any $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$ and any lattice point $`v`$ in $`Q_B`$, we define

$$\nu _i:=\mathrm{min}\{det(b_i,u),uQ_B\}\text{and}\overline{v}^{(i)}:=det(b_i,v)\nu _i.$$
(4.4)
Hence, $`\overline{v}^{(i)}_0`$ is the normalized lattice distance from $`v`$ to the boundary of $`Q_B`$, in the direction orthogonal to $`b_i.`$

###### Theorem 4.3.

The Newton polygon $`N(D_A)`$ of the $`A`$-discriminant $`D_A`$ is the image of the polygon $`Q_B`$ under the affine isomorphism $`v(\overline{v}^{(1)},\mathrm{},\overline{v}^{(n)}).`$

###### Proof.

Suppose first that there are no relevant lines. Then, $`Q_B=P_B`$, and the secondary polygon $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(A)`$ and the Newton polygon $`N(D_A)`$ are equal up to translation. More precisely, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(A)=N(D_A)+\alpha `$ where $`\alpha _i`$ is the exponent of $`x_i`$ as a factor of $`E_A`$. Using \[4, Theorem 10.1.2\] and Gale duality, we find

$$\alpha _i=d_B\underset{j:det(b_i,b_j)>0}{}det(b_i,b_j).$$

In light of Theorem 3.4, it suffices to show that

$$d_B\mu _i+det(b_i,v)=\alpha _i+det(b_i,v)\nu _i\text{for all}vQ_B,i=1,\mathrm{},n.$$

After cancelling terms common to both sides, what remains to be shown is

$$\underset{j:det(b_i,b_j)>0}{}det(b_i,b_j)=\mu _i\nu _i.$$

This identity holds because both sides are equal to the normalized lattice width of the polygon $`Q_B=P_B`$ in the direction orthogonal to $`b_i`$.

We next assume that relevant lines exist. Then $`\nu _i`$ generally differs from $`\nu _i^{}:=\mathrm{min}\{det(b_i,u),uP_B\}`$. The secondary polytope $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(A)`$ equals $`N(D_A)+\alpha `$ plus the Minkowski sum of the Newton segments of the binomials (4.1) where $`v`$ runs over all relevant lines. Hence, up to lattice translation,

$$P_B=Q_B+\underset{v\mathrm{relevant}}{}\mathrm{conv}\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},v\}.$$
(4.5)
The minimum value of the linear functional $`det(b_i,)`$ over the line segment $`\mathrm{conv}\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},v\}`$ is $`det(b_i,v),`$ when this value is negative and zero otherwise. Therefore (4.5) translates into the identity

$$\nu _i^{}=\nu _i+\underset{v\mathrm{relevant}}{}\delta _v\mathrm{min}\{0,det(b_i,v)\}\text{for}i=1,\mathrm{},n.$$

The argument for the case of no relevant lines now completes the proof. ∎

We deduce the following formula for the degree of the $`A`$-discriminant:

###### Corollary 4.4.

$$\mathrm{degree}(D_A)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\nu _i$$

We can also extract the following characterization from Theorem 4.3.

###### Corollary 4.5.

The $`A`$-discriminant $`D_A`$ is equal to $`1`$ if and only if the polygon $`P_B`$ is centrally symmetric.

###### Proof.

The condition $`D_A=1`$ is equivalent to $`Q_B`$ being a point. This happens if and only if all vectors $`b_i`$ lie in a relevant line, and $`\alpha _v=0`$ for each relevant line $`v`$. This last condition is equivalent to $`P_B`$ being centrally symmetric. ∎

The following variant to the formula of Theorem 4.2 works well in practice for computing the $`A`$-discriminant $`D_A`$. In the affine plane with coordinates $`(w_1,w_2)`$, consider the following parametrically presented rational curve:

$$w_{\mathrm{}}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}(b_{i1}+b_{i2}t)^{b_i\mathrm{}},\mathrm{}=1,2.$$
(4.6)
This is the Horn uniformization in \[4, §9.3.C\]. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,w_2)`$ be the irreducible polynomial defining this curve. This is a dehomogenization of the $`A`$-discriminant, by Theorem 4.2 or by \[4, Theorem 9.3.3. (a)\]. More precisely,

$$D_A(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=(\text{a monomial})\mathrm{\Delta }(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}x_i^{b_{i1}},\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}x_i^{b_{i2}}).$$
(4.7)
The common factors in the numerator and denominator of (4.6) are precisely the relevant lines which are not a coordinate axis. In other words, cancelling common factors in (4.6) is equivalent to replacing $`h_i(t)`$ by $`p_i(t)`$ in (4.2).

We can get a description of the Newton polygon $`N(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(w_1,w_2)`$ by “dehomogenizing” the result in Theorem 4.3 as follows. Let $`b_i^{}:=(b_{i2},b_{i1})`$ and note that $`det(b_i,v)`$ equals the inner product $`b_i^{},v`$.

###### Corollary 4.6.

Let $`B^{}=\{b_1^{},\mathrm{},b_n^{}\}`$ and consider the polygon $`Q_B^{}`$ translated so that it lies in the first quadrant and its boundary intersects both coordinate axes. Then $`N(\mathrm{\Delta })=Q_B^{}.`$

This result has been obtained independently by Sadykov , under the hypothesis that there are no relevant lines outside the coordinate axes.

###### Example 4.7.

We consider the toric $`3`$-fold of degree $`43`$ in $`𝐏^5`$ which appears as Example $`5.10`$ in . It is defined by the $`6\times 2`$ integer matrix $`B`$ with row vectors $`(2,3),(1,4),(5,1),(3,1),(2,3),(3,2)`$. The lattice ideal $`I_B`$ has seven minimal generators. There are no relevant lines. The polygon $`P_B=Q_B`$ is a hexagon. Using Remark 2.6 we find that $`Q_B`$ contains $`40`$ lattice points. They correspond to the $`40`$ terms in the $`A`$-discriminant $`D_A`$. The $`6`$ vertices of $`P_B`$ correspond to the various leading terms in $`D_A`$. Using (4.7) in any computer algebra system we easily compute:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}D_A\hfill & =& \left(7\right)^7\left(17\right)^{17}\left(19\right)^{19}x_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{16}x_{4}^{}{}_{}{}^{11}x_{5}^{}{}_{}{}^{23}x_{6}^{}{}_{}{}^{22}\hfill \\ & & \left(2\right)^{34}\left(3\right)^{15}\left(5\right)^{15}\left(13\right)^{13}x_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{20}x_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{36}x_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{11}x_{6}^{}{}_{}{}^{5}\hfill \\ & & +\left(2\right)^{10}\left(5\right)^{15}\left(11\right)^{11}\left(17\right)^{17}x_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{23}x_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{19}x_{5}^{}{}_{}{}^{13}x_{6}^{}{}_{}{}^{17}\hfill \\ & & +\left(2\right)^{64}\left(7\right)^{14}\left(13\right)^{13}x_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{19}x_{4}^{}{}_{}{}^{28}x_{5}^{}{}_{}{}^{16}x_{6}^{}{}_{}{}^{9}\hfill \\ & & +\left(3\right)^{21}\left(7\right)^7\left(11\right)^{11}\left(13\right)^{13}x_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{16}x_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{26}x_{4}^{}{}_{}{}^{25}x_{5}^{}{}_{}{}^{5}\hfill \\ & & \left(2\right)^{10}\left(5\right)^{15}\left(11\right)^{11}\left(17\right)^{17}x_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{9}x_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{29}x_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{21}x_{4}^{}{}_{}{}^{13}\hfill \\ & & +\mathrm{interior}\mathrm{terms}.\hfill \end{array}$$

We invite the reader to draw $`Q_B`$ and verify Theorem 4.3 for this example. ∎

## 5 Resultants having Newton triangles

Mixed resultants form a subclass among all discriminants, by the Cayley trick of elimination theory \[4, §9.1.A\]. This subclass is important for the theory of hypergeometric functions: conjecturally, it consists of the denominators of rational hypergeometric functions \[1, Conjecture 1.4\]. In this section we examine the Cayley construction and mixed resultants in codimension $`2`$.

The Gale dual of a Cayley configuration $`A`$ is a $`(2r+3)\times 2`$-matrix

$$B=(b_1,b_2,\mathrm{},b_r,c_1,c_2,b_1,\mathrm{},b_r,c_1c_2)^T,$$

where the rows of the submatrix $`\stackrel{~}{B}:=(b_1,b_2,\mathrm{},b_r,c_1,c_2)^T`$ span $`^2`$. We assume that all $`b_i`$ are non-zero and $`\mathrm{det}(c_1,c_2)0`$. By Corollary 4.5, $`D_A1`$.

Fix an $`r\times (r+2)`$-matrix Gale dual to $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$ whose left $`r\times r`$-minor is diagonal:

$$\stackrel{~}{A}=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}\gamma _1& & & \alpha _1& \beta _1\\ & \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ & & \gamma _r& \alpha _r& \beta _r\end{array}\right)\text{where}\gamma _i_{>0}\text{and}(\alpha _i,\beta _i)^2\backslash \{(0,0)\}.$$

This matrix lifts to a $`(2r+1)\times (2r+3)`$-matrix Gale dual to $`B`$ as follows:

$$A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{~}{A}& 0\\ I_{r+1}e_{r+1}& I_{r+1}\end{array}\right),$$
(5.1)
where $`I_{r+1}`$ is the unit matrix of size $`r+1`$ and $`e_{r+1}=(0,0,\mathrm{},0,1)^T`$. The columns of $`A`$ index the coefficients in a sparse system of $`r+1`$ equations:

$`f_0=`$ $`z_1t_1^{\alpha _1}\mathrm{}t_r^{\alpha _r}+z_2t_1^{\beta _1}\mathrm{}t_r^{\beta _r}+z_3`$
$`f_i=`$ $`x_it_i^{\gamma _i}+y_i\text{for}i=1,\mathrm{},r.`$
This system consists of $`r`$ binomials and one Laurent trinomial, as in (1.8). The sparse resultant $`\mathrm{Res}(f_0,f_1,\mathrm{},f_r)`$ is the unique (up to sign) irreducible polynomial in $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_r,y_1,\mathrm{},y_r,z_1,z_2,z_3`$ which vanishes when the system has a common root $`(t_1,\mathrm{},t_r)`$ in the $`r`$-torus. From \[4, Prop. 9.1.7\] we get:

###### Remark 5.1.

The $`A`$-discriminant $`D_A`$ equals the sparse resultant of $`f_0,\mathrm{},f_r`$.

We now apply the product formula for resultants , which amounts to evaluating $`f_0`$ at the common zeros of $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_r`$. The number of zeroes equals

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }:=\gamma _1\gamma _2\mathrm{}\gamma _r=|\mathrm{det}(c_1,c_2)|.$$

Let $`\eta _i`$ denote a primitive $`\gamma _i`$-th root of unity. The product formula implies:

###### Proposition 5.2.

Up to a Laurent monomial factor, the $`A`$-discriminant is

$$D_A=\mathrm{monomial}\underset{i_1=1}{\overset{\gamma _1}{}}\mathrm{}\underset{i_r=1}{\overset{\gamma _r}{}}f_0(\eta _1^{i_1}z_1,\eta _2^{i_2}z_2,\mathrm{},\eta _r^{i_r}z_r)$$

where $`z_i=\left(\frac{y_i}{x_i}\right)^{1/\gamma _i}`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$.

Since $`f_0`$ is a trinomial, this formula gives an upper bound of $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\mathrm{\Gamma }+2}{2}\right)`$ for the number of terms appearing in the expansion of $`D_A=\mathrm{Res}(f_0,\mathrm{},f_r)`$. This bound is quadratic in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. In truth, this number grows linearly in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Theorem 5.3.

The number of terms appearing in $`D_A`$ is at most $`\frac{5}{4}\mathrm{\Gamma }+\frac{7}{4}`$.

This bound is tight if the vectors $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ span the lattice $`^2`$. In this case, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{det}(c_1,c_2)=1`$ and the resultant $`D_A`$ has three terms. It is also tight for the example in the Introduction, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=4`$ and $`D_A`$ has six terms.

###### Proof.

According to Theorem 4.3, the Newton polygon of the discriminant $`D_A`$ is essentially the lattice triangle $`Q_B=\mathrm{conv}\{0,c_1,c_2\}`$. The number of terms in $`D_A`$ is at most the number of lattice points in $`Q_B`$. Using Pick’s formula as in Remark 2.6, we find that the number $`\mathrm{\#}(Q_B^2)`$ equals

$$1+\frac{1}{2}\left(|det(c_1,c_2)|+gcd(c_{11},c_{12})+gcd(c_{21},c_{22})+gcd(c_{11}+c_{21},c_{12}+c_{22})\right).$$

Using the inequality $`a+bab+1`$, we find that the sum of any two of the three last summands is bounded above by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }+1=|det(c_1,c_2)|+1`$. Therefore,

$$\mathrm{\#}(Q_B^2)1+\frac{1}{2}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }+\frac{3}{2}(\mathrm{\Gamma }+1)\right).$$

This is the desired inequality. ∎

Acknowledgements: We are grateful to Eduardo Cattani for helpful discussions and to Laura Matusevich and Thorsten Theobald for comments on an earlier draft. Alicia Dickenstein was supported by UBACYT TX94, ANPCyT Grant 03-6568 and CONICET, Argentina. Bernd Sturmfels was supported by NSF Grant DMS-9970254 and the Miller Institute at UC Berkeley.

Alicia Dickenstein

alidick@dm.uba.ar

Dto. de Matemática, FCEyN, Universidad de Buenos Aires

(1428) Buenos Aires, Argentina

Bernd Sturmfels

bernd@math.berkeley.edu

Dept. of Mathematics, University of California

Berkeley, CA 94720, USA


format: text

text:
# Strain driven charge-ordered state in La0.67Ca0.33MnO3

## I Introduction

The hole-doped perovskite manganites are of great current interest for the range of novel properties they display and for the possibility they offer of new devices. Thin films are important both for fundamental studies and for potential applications, but the relation between film properties and those of bulk materials is not well understood. In this paper we show that strain associated with a lattice mismatched substrate can cause new electronic behavior, not found in bulk materials of the same chemical composition. In hole-doped manganites with the chemical formula $`RE_{1x}AE_x`$MnO3 ($`RE`$ is a trivalent rare earth ion and $`AE`$ is divalent alkaline earth ion) a complex interplay of the charge, lattice, spin and orbital degrees of freedom leads to various novel properties. Of special interest are the metal-insulator (MI) transition at the ferromagnetic Curie temperature ($`T_C`$) and the phenomenon of charge ordering. These transitions occur at a wide range of temperatures depending on the compound i.e. factors like the hole doping concentration $`x`$, the average A-site cation radius $`<r_A>`$ (A-site refers to the $`A`$BO3 perovskite structure, where the A-site is occupied by the RE or AE ion and the B-site is occupied by the Mn ions), and the variance in the radii of the A-site cations $`<\sigma _A>`$ all of which effectively perturb one or more of the degrees of freedom mentioned above . Introducing such perturbations profoundly affects the stability of the ground state and gives more insight about the energy considerations for these transitions.

Beyond the pure phase behavior, the observation of electronic phase separation in these materials has generated considerable interest . It has been shown that for a wide range of temperatures there is a coexistence of ferromagnetic metallic (FMM) and charge ordered insulating (COI) phases in some of these materials. This phenomenon has been observed for different values of $`x`$, $`<r_A>`$, and $`<\sigma _A>`$. The low temperature FMM state for $`x0.3`$ and the phenomenon of charge ordering (CO) for $`x=0.5`$ is observed in a variety of manganite systems and has been studied extensively, both experimentally and theoretically. However, as $`<r_A>`$ is reduced below about 1.18 Å, the FMM state disappears and the paramagnetic insulating state goes directly to the charge ordered insulating state at low temperatures as observed in the compound Pr1-xCaxMnO3. This CO state can be made progressively unstable by replacing the Pr ion with the larger La ion. A focus of particular attention is the compound (La1-yPry)5/8Ca3/8MnO3. For y=1, the COI phase is observed and for y=0 the FMM phase is observed, at low temperatures. For intermediate values a y, multiphase behavior is observed at low temperatures characterized by the history dependence and slow time relaxation of the resistivity.

In these compounds the COI and the FMM states have very similar energies, resulting in the two-phase coexistence of FMM and COI regions . The similarity of the energies of the FMM and COI phases leads to a sensitive balance between the FMM and COI regions, which can be tilted in favor of the FMM phase by the application of a magnetic field or external hydrostatic pressure and towards the COI phase by an increase in the structural distortion away from the ideal cubic perovskite lattice. The structural distortion can be increased by applying internal pressure by the substitution of smaller ions at the A-site or by applying anisotropic stress .

These observations suggest that interesting phenomena may be observed in highly strained thin films of manganites. In a previous work we have shown the existence of a strain-induced insulating state in biaxially strained films of La0.67Ca0.33MnO3 (LCMO) and we claimed that this was caused by the non-uniform distribution of the strain which leads to a possible two-phase behavior . Here, we present, detailed studies of the magnetic structure, using low temperature magnetic force microscopy (MFM), and the magnetotransport properties of such biaxially strained films of LCMO that lend strong support to our claims. While in its bulk form, LCMO is a ferromagnetic metal at low temperature with a pseudo-cubic lattice structure, we show that the biaxial strain results in a distortion of the lattice structure of LCMO. This distortion makes the low temperature FMM state unstable and a CO state develops instead. Furthermore, we show that the strain is non-uniformly distributed, which leads to a two-phase coexistence of FMM and COI regions very similar to that exhibited by (La1-yPry)5/8Ca3/8MnO3. This is confirmed using low temperature MFM measurements. We present the various novel properties of this strain driven two-phase state and discuss the implications on the properties of hole-doped manganites.

## II Experimental Details

Thin films of La0.67Ca0.33MnO3 (LCMO), 150 Å in thickness, were grown on (001) LaAlO3 (LAO) and (110) NdGaO3 (NGO) substrates by pulsed laser deposition (PLD). There is a compressive lattice mismatch strain of $``$2% for a film of LCMO on LAO while on NGO this strain is negligible (less than 0.1 %). Details of the film growth are given in . The resistivities were measured by the conventional four-probe method and the DC magnetization was measured using a SQUID magnetometer. The lattice parameters were measured using a Siemens D5000 diffractometer equipped with a four circle goniometer. The nanostructure of the films were measured using a Nanoscope III AFM operated in the tapping mode.

The low temperature MFM has been described in detail previously . It is a frequency-modulated MFM that measures the magnetic force gradient $`F^{}`$(x,y) distribution on a sample. Briefly, a positive feedback loop forces a piezo-resistive cantilever to vibrate at its resonant frequency, $`\omega _0`$. A magnetic tip with iron coating is located at the free end of the cantilever. During an imaging process, the non-uniform magnetic stray field from the sample will cause this $`\omega _0`$ to change. A second feedback system prevents $`\omega _0`$ from shifting by adjusting the tip-sample distance. The output of this feedback system is used to construct an image of constant force gradient. This low temperature MFM has been used to study a variety of materials .

The cantilever we used is a commercial PiezoleverTM self-sensing device. It is a 2K$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ piezo-resistive cantilever which is 305$`\mu `$m long, 50 $`\mu `$m wide and 3 $`\mu `$m thick \[Thermomicroscopes technical datasheet\]. The cantilever’s force constant is k = 1 N/m and its resonant frequency is 33 KHz. The tip extends about 2 $`\mu `$m from the cantilever. The tip was coated with a 60-nm-thick iron and magnetized along the tip axis, z, using a permanent magnet. The force gradient was around 4 $`\times 10^3`$ N/m with small changes from one image to another.

## III Results and Discussion

### A DC transport and magnetization

Figure 1 shows the resistivity and magnetization of a 150 Å film of LCMO on LAO and for comparison, the resistivity of a 150 Å film of LCMO on NGO. This figure summarizes the effect of lattice mismatch strain on the transport and magnetic properties. The film of LCMO on LAO is insulating but a metallic temperature dependence appears in an applied field of 8.5 T whereas a film of the same thickness on the lattice matched substrate NGO shows a resistivity behavior very close to that of bulk LCMO . The magnetization ($`M`$) starts rising around 250 K but this rise is much slower than what is observed in thicker films of LCMO on LAO . The inset shows the $`M`$ vs. $`H`$ curve for the film on LAO at 5 K. The saturation value of $`M`$ ($`M_{sat}`$) is $``$ 1.8 $`\mu _B`$ which is about 50 % of the expected $`M_{sat}`$ = 3.67 $`\mu _B`$.

From these data we conclude that in zero field most of the volume of the film on LAO is in an insulating state, and the application of an 8.5 T field converts a sufficient volume fraction to a metallic state to allow metallic conduction. The magnetization data shows that the $`M_{sat}`$ is about half of what is expected. This could be due to: (1) Spin-canting and the out-of-plane orientation of the spins resulting from the strained growth and (2) phase \[

\] separation into FMM and COI phases. Since, from the transport data it is clear that in zero field a large volume fraction of the film is in the insulating state \[we will argue in following sections that it is a charge-ordered insulating state\] which in manganites is a non-ferromagnetic state, we claim that the reduction in the $`M_{sat}`$ is mainly due to the phase separation into ferromagnetic and non-ferromagnetic phases. In the following sections magnetotransport and MFM measurements will strengthen this claim and we will discuss the nature of these two phases.

In an earlier paper we showed using atomic force microscopy and cross sectional high resolution transmission electron microscopy results that under compressive strain the film grows in the form of islands and the strain was distributed non-uniformly through the sample . From these observations we propose the following hypothesis. The origin of the two-phase behavior is the non-uniform strain produced in the compressively strained film due to the island growth mode . The initial layers of the film grow coherently with the substrate and are therefore under uniform compressive stress. After a certain thickness the 3D-islands are nucleated. The edges of these islands are regions of high strain while the top of the islands are regions of low strain. Since, from the magnetization data, it is clear that the low temperature phase is ferromagnetic albeit with a reduced magnetic moment, it was suggested in ref.  that the top of the 3D islands are regions of low strain and are FMM at low temperatures. These FMM regions are separated by the high strain regions at the edges of the islands which are in the COI phase due to the strain induced lattice distortion. In contrast, the lattice matched film on NGO grows in the step flow mode and even 150 Å films of LCMO display the properties shown by bulk LCMO and there is no suggestion of a two-phase behavior . In the remainder of this paper we will present strong evidence in support of this hypothesis and discuss in detail the reasons and implications.

### B Low temperature MFM measurements

To confirm the hypothesis mentioned above, we first obtained images of the magnetic domain structure in the films of LCMO on LAO (which shows the island growth mode) and LCMO on NGO (which shows the step flow growth mode) using a low temperature MFM. Although a calibration of the actual local field and its gradient is difficult from an MFM measurement, we can get important information about the magnetic structure of the films at a scale of $``$ 500 Å. Figure 2 shows the MFM images of the films of LCMO on LAO. Figure 2a and 2b are \[

\] topography and magnetic images respectively, taken over the same area and figure 2d and 2e are topography and magnetic images taken over another area. First we make some qualitative comments about the images. The magnetic images clearly shows the presence of ferromagnetic (FM) regions in the film on LAO which shows that at low temperatures a significant part of the film is in the FMM state although the film is insulating down to the lowest temperatures. Also, the domain sizes are of the same order as the island sizes. To analyze the images quantitatively, in figure 2c and 2f we show the 2D cross correlation images of the topographic and magnetic images. 2D cross correlation is the usual method for 2D pattern recognition. The cross correlation images have their origin (zero displacement) at the center of the image and their areas are the same as the corresponding topographic and magnetic images. The positions of high correlation in the images (brighter regions) mark the relative displacements at which the topography and the magnetic images are highly correlated. From figure 2c and 2f we can see that there is a high correlation between the topography and magnetic images which, for one, shows that the magnetism of the film is linked to the topography. It also shows that the maximum correlation occurs at points slightly offset from the origin. Which means that the highest correlation between figures 2a and 2b and figures 2d and 2e happens when the topography and magnetic images are displaced relative to each other. This is understandable since the MFM image picks up the magnetic force gradient which is maximum at the edges of the islands \[the change in magnetization is expected to be maximum at the edges of the islands since the strain changes rapidly at these locations\]. The maxima in the cross correlation are hence shifted from the origin by a distance of the order of the average island size. The images of the film on NGO are shown for comparison in figure 3. The domain sizes are much larger ($`510\mu `$m) than the film on LAO. This is the typical domain size observed in the FMM state of manganites . There is no correlation between the topography and the magnetism of the film as seen in figure 3d.

Although these results are limited by the resolution of the MFM and the fact that we cannot get a direct measure of the actual local field, the results shown above lend strong support to our claim that the magnetic and topographic structure of the film on LAO are linked to each other. This is due to the variation of the local strain in the film growing under compressive strain in the form of islands. The non-uniform strain results in the coexistence of FM regions (in the areas of low strain) and non-FM regions (in the areas of high strain). In the next subsection we discuss the properties of the non-FM regions in detail.

### C The $`TH`$ phase diagram

Two points are confirmed by the discussion above, 1) the local magnetism of the non-uniformly strained LCMO film on LAO is linked to the microstructure and hence to the distribution of strain and 2) the film has a significant portion of FM regions at low temperature, which accounts for the magnetic moment of $`1.8\mu _B`$ observed at low temperatures. Yet the film is insulating and has a large MR at low temperatures which is due to the non-FM regions mentioned earlier. We now investigate this insulating state further.

Figure 4 shows the $`\rho `$ vs. $`H`$ behavior of the film at low temperatures. In each case the sample was zero field cooled to that particular temperature. The magnetic field was then increased and then reduced to zero. It shows that there is a sharp transition to a low resistance state above a certain magnetic field and this transition is associated with a significant hysteresis. This behavior is similar to the phenomenon of melting of a charge ordered state by a magnetic field which is a first order transition and is associated with a large temperature dependent hysteresis . A set of $`R`$ vs. $`H`$ curves taken at different temperatures has been used to construct a phase diagram in the $`TH`$ plane. Such a phase diagram for the 150 Å film on LAO is shown in figure 5. $`H_{Freezing}`$ and $`H_{Melting}`$ were determined from the $`Rvs.H`$ curves as the field values at which $`dR/dH`$ was maximum (Fig. 4). These data show that the insulating state at low temperatures displays a behavior just like bulk compounds in the charge ordered state . Note that in bulk La0.67Ca0.33MnO3 there is no charge ordered state at low temperature but a low temperature FMM state. Therefore we conclude that the regions of high strain (near the edges of the islands) have a distortion built into the lattice structure due to the substrate induced strain which leads to the destabilization of the FMM state at low temperatures and the charge ordered state takes over. Furthermore, the phase diagram shows that for $`T<50`$K the insulating state does not recover even when the field is reduced to zero. Such behavior is similar to that observed in compounds with $`<r_A>1.18`$ Å such as Pr1-xCaxMnO3. It has been shown for uniformly strained films that by tuning the $`c/a`$ ratio, the magnetic and electronic phases can be controlled . The data for thin films of La1-xSrxMnO3 grown on different substrates with different amounts of strain (and hence different $`c/a`$ ratios) were compared to the data for Nd1-xSrxMnO3 for different $`x`$ (which varies the $`c/a`$ ratio in this case). In our films we have shown that the strain is non-uniform due to the island like growth mode which suggests that the $`c/a`$ ratio varies over the film. The average $`c/a`$ ratio is $``$ 1.04 (as determined from the lattice constant measurements) but from the MFM and magnetization results it is clear that some parts of the film (the top of the islands) are relatively strain free i.e. $`c/a1`$. The LCMO film on LAO has therefore been distorted locally resulting in a variation of the $`c/a`$ ratio over the film and hence a variation of the magnetic and electronic properties.

It has been shown by Dörr et al. that in oxygen deficient films of LCMO a phase separation between FMM and an antiferromagnetic insulating phase is observed . This is due to reduced Mn4+ concentration in the sample. Even in our samples oxygen annealing of the film on LAO results in the film becoming FMM at low temperatures . However, we argue in the following that the two-phase behavior we observe is strain driven and not due to variations in stoichiometry and the oxygen annealing results mainly in a reduction of this strain. The basis for our argument is the $`TH`$ phase diagram in fig. 5. In the bulk La1-xCaxMnO3, there is no value of $`x`$ for which there is such a $`TH`$ phase diagram. The most striking evidence is the fact that at 10 K there is a drop of about 5 orders of magnitude in the resistance at a field of about 6 T and the insulating state is not recovered when the field is removed (fig. 4). Also for the CO state seen for $`x`$ 0.5 in bulk La1-xCaxMnO3, the melting fields are about 14 T and higher . Therefore, this strain driven phase of LCMO cannot be explained as being due to a variation in stoichiometry. In fact this state is similar to the charge ordered state in the Pr1-xCaxMnO3 system for $`x`$ 0.3, as can be seen from the phase diagram in figure 5 . Therefore this two-phase state comprising FMM and COI regions obtained by applying biaxial strain is a new, strain driven, state of LCMO. We are further investigating the additional role of oxygen deficiency on such a strain driven COI state by systematically reducing the oxygen content of our films on LAO.

### D Metastable states and long time scale dynamics

From figure 5 we observe that the width of the hysteresis in the $`R`$ vs. $`H`$ curves increases as the temperature is lowered. This is due to the decrease of the effect of thermal fluctuations on the first order transition . As mentioned earlier, for $`T<50`$K the metallic state obtained on melting the CO state by a magnetic field is retained even after the magnetic field is removed. This is a metastable state and the high resistance state is recovered when the temperature is raised above 50 K

as shown in figure 6. This association of the two-phase coexistence with the local structural distortions results in slow dynamics which we have measured as the slow relaxation of the resistance of a metastable state. We obtained the metastable state as follows. We first cooled down the sample in zero field and applied a magnetic field of 8.5 T at 5 K. A metallic state was thus obtained. The field was then removed but the film was still trapped in the metastable metallic state. We then measured the resistance as function of time of this metastable state. The resistance increases as a function of time. The relaxation of the resistance can be fitted with a stretched exponential form $`R(t)=R_0R_1exp[(t/\tau )^\beta ]`$. The stretched exponential form of the relaxation has been observed in numerous systems but the exact physical significance of the fit parameters $`\beta `$ and $`\tau `$ is not fully understood. In particular, such long time scale relaxation of the resistance has been observed in bulk charge-ordered systems like La0.5Ca0.5MnO3 and La5/8-yPryCa3/8MnO3 . One conclusion which can be drawn from these observations is that there are metastable states which are separated by energy barriers with a wide distribution of energies which leads to a distribution of relaxation times and the stretched exponential form of relaxation. The time constant $`\tau `$ has been observed to be thermally activated i.e. of the form $`\tau =\tau _0exp(E_\tau /k_BT)`$. $`E_\tau `$ is related to the distribution of physical activation energies . A variation of $`E_\tau `$ suggests that the activation energies in the system have been changed. For the film of LCMO on the LAO, $`E_\tau `$ 96$`\pm `$5 K (figure 7). It is interesting to compare the value of $`E_\tau `$ with the field required to melt the charge ordered state at low temperatures ($`H_{M0}`$). Ref.  gives the values of $`E_\tau `$ for the two compounds La0.5Ca0.5MnO3 and La5/8-yPryCa3/8MnO3 ($`y=0.375`$). The inset of figure 7 shows a plot of $`E_\tau `$ vs. $`H_{M0}`$ which shows that the two are linearly related. This analysis of the slow relaxation of the resistance shows that the strength of the charge ordered state depends on the distribution of activation energies between the metastable

states. This could presumably be due to the activation energy barriers being associated with motion of domain walls in the phase separated regime, which suggests that the field driven transition is perhaps not a thermodynamic transition. The physical significance of the value of $`\beta `$ is less clear. The only comment which can be made is that near the temperature where the metastable, low resistance state makes the transition to the higher resistance state, the $`\beta `$ value reaches up to $``$ 0.5. This indicates that the distribution of the energies of the barriers is the broadest near the transition . Similar values of $`\beta `$ ($`0.34<\beta <0.46`$) were also obtained from relaxation measurements in La5/8-yPryCa3/8MnO3 ($`y=0.375`$) .

## IV Summary

In this paper we have shown that: (1) Film growth under biaxial compressive strain readily leads to a 3D island growth mode which leads to a non-uniform distribution of the strain. This leads to pockets of high distortion (near the edges of the islands) and regions where the strain is very low (top of the islands). (2) For a system like La0.67Ca0.33MnO3 which is cubic at low temperatures, the non-uniform strain leads to the ratio $`c/a1`$ in the high strain regions and $`c/a1`$ in the low strain regions. (3) The low strain regions are FM at low temperatures and contribute to the saturation magnetization of 1.8 $`\mu _B`$. (4) The high strain regions are in the CO state at low temperatures and result in the insulating behavior of the film in zero field. The magnetoresistance behavior of the film shows that the strain drives the LCMO film to a state similar to the low temperature state observed in Pr1-xCaxMnO3 ($`x0.33`$). (5) The two-phase behavior of the film is coupled to the localized structural distortions and this leads to slow dynamics in the transport properties of the film. There is a distribution of the activation energies separating the metastable states and this distribution of energies determines the strength of the COI state. It has been shown in  that there is a strong coupling between the lattice , Mn $`e_g`$ orbital state, and the exchange interaction. When we perturb the lattice by the non-uniform strain it results in inhomogeneities in the exchange and hopping interactions. Near first order transitions such disorder leads to large scale two-phase coexistence . This disorder can also be introduced by chemical substitution . Disorder is therefore an essential ingredient for the occurence of large scale phase separation.

## V Conclusions

The most important claim that we make is that there is a strain driven COI state in La0.67Ca0.33MnO3 which is similar to the small $`<r_A>`$ compound Pr0.67Ca0.33MnO3. We support this claim with MFM and magnetotransport data. These are not “confirmatory tests” for detection of a charge ordered state like electron diffraction . We are still trying to devise a method to do perform such a confirmatory test on these samples. Nevertheless, in this paper we have presented compelling evidence to support our claims.

The results shown above elucidate the instability of the FMM(COI) phases towards the COI(FMM) phases on the application of perturbation like a magnetic field, external or internal stress etc. At certain values of these external parameters there are first order transitions between these two phases. Near these first order transitions, the defects in the sample stabilize the observed large scale phase separation in hole-doped manganites. Such effects are therefore intrinsic to the behavior of manganites and have to accounted for when explanations of the properties of manganites are attempted.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was partially supported by the MRSEC program of the NSF at the University of Maryland, College Park (Grant No. DMR-0080008).


text:
# Resonant electron transmission through a finite quantum spin chain

## Abstract

Electron transport in a finite one dimensional quantum spin chain (with ferromagnetic exchange) is studied within an $`sd`$ exchange Hamiltonian. Spin transfer coefficients strongly depend on the sign of the $`sd`$ exchange constant. For a ferromagnetic coupling, they exhibit a novel resonant pattern, reflecting the salient features of the combined electron-spin system. Spin-flip processes are inelastic and feasible at finite voltage or at finite temperature.

Motivation and scope: There is a growing interest in electronic devices which transport electron spin (together with its charge). Beside the Kondo physics , electron transmission through a region containing a lattice of magnetic atoms (mainly a domain wall) is a focus of experimental    and theoretical   investigations. In this context, the basic ingredient is an exchange interaction $`g𝐬𝐒_n`$ between the electron spin operator $`𝐬`$ and an atomic spin $`𝐒_n`$ localized at a point $`x_n`$, with an “s-d” coupling $`g`$. Most theoretical works treat the atomic spins either purely classically (as localized magnetic fields), or semi classically (the operator $`𝐒_n`$ is replaced by its expectation value $`<𝐒_n>`$ in the ground state of the quantum spin system). It is expected, however, that the quantum nature of the magnetic system will be crucial at low temperatures.
In the present work, transmission of electrons through a finite one dimensional quantum spin $`1/2`$ chain (with ferromagnetic exchange) is studied, starting from an $`sd`$ exchange Hamiltonian. The many body Kondo problem is avoided by an application of a magnetic field which removes the degeneracy of the ground state. It also enables cutting the spectrum of the spin system off at the one magnon level. The ensuing scattering formalism can then be handled within a transfer matrix algorithm, in terms of which the spin transfer coefficients (STC) are calculated as function of the electron Fermi energy. It is found that for ferromagnetic $`sd`$ exchange, the STC display a novel resonant structure which manifests the richness of the combined electron spin chain system.
Hamiltonian: Consider electrons (mass $`m`$ and charge $`e`$) moving in a one dimensional wire (along $`x`$) interacting with a chain of quantum spins (e.g. magnetic atoms) $`𝐒_n`$, ($`n=1,2,\mathrm{}N`$, $`𝐒_{N+1}=𝐒_1`$) localized at points $`x_n=na`$ ($`n=1,2,\mathrm{}N`$), subject to a perpendicular magnetic field $`𝐇=H_z\widehat{𝐳}`$. Henceforth $`a`$ and $`\mathrm{}^2/2ma^2`$ are exploited such that all length and energy quantities are dimensionless. The Hamiltonian of the system $`H=H_e+H_{sd}+H_S`$ contains an electronic part $`H_e`$, an electron-spin $`sd`$ exchange interaction $`H_{sd}`$ and a term $`H_S`$ controlling the isolated spin system. The latter is,

$`H_S={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}(J𝐒_n𝐒_{n+1}+E_ZS_{nz}),`$ (1)
where $`J>0`$ and $`E_Z`$ is the atomic Zeeman energy. The spin Hamiltonian $`H_S`$ is projected on the subspace spanned by its $`N+1`$ lowest energy states $`|k>`$ ($`k=0,1,\mathrm{}N`$). If the magnetic field is strong enough such that $`E_Z>JS`$ then, beside the (non degenerate) ground state $`|k=0>`$ (with all spins up along $`\widehat{𝐳}`$ and energy $`E_0=N(S^2J+E_ZS)`$ and $`_nS_{nz}=\frac{N}{2}`$), these are the one magnon spin waves (OMSW) with $`_nS_{nz}=\frac{N}{2}1`$. In terms of states $`|n>S_n^{}|0>`$, the OMSW and their corresponding energies are,

$`|k>={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e^{i\frac{2\pi }{N}kn}|n>,k=1,2,\mathrm{}N`$ (2)
$`E_k=E_0+4SJsin^2{\displaystyle \frac{\pi k}{N}}+2SE_Z.`$ (3)
Cutting the spectrum off at the OMSW states level is justified since above it there is a gap of $`2SE_Z`$ until the lowest energy of two magnon spin waves.

The electronic and $`sd`$ parts of the Hamiltonian should, in principle, manifest the many-body aspects of the problem (in the Kondo sense). In first quantization that amounts to, $`H_e=_i\frac{d^2}{dx_i^2}h_e_is_{iz}`$ and an exchange part $`H_{sd}=g_i_n\delta (x_in)𝐬_i𝐒_n`$ ($`h_e`$ is the electronic Zeeman energy). The sum over $`i`$ runs, principally, on all the electrons in the wire. However, due to the presence of an external magnetic field, the ground state of the spin system is non degenerate and the Kondo effect is absent. Hence, the dynamics of the system is adequately described by the single electron $`sd`$ exchange Hamiltonian,

$`H={\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dx^2}}h_es_z+g{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}\delta (xn)𝐬𝐒_n+H_S.`$ (4)
The Schrödinger equation is then,

$`H\mathrm{\Psi }(x;\{S_n\})=E\mathrm{\Psi }(x;\{S_n\}),`$ (5)
where $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x;\{S_n\})`$ and $`E`$ are the total wave function and total energy (electron and spin system).

The scattering problem: Between spins and outside the spin system, electrons propagate as plane waves with momenta $`p_{\sigma k}=\sqrt{(}EE_k+\sigma h_e)`$, (some of which might be purely imaginary), where $`\sigma =\pm \frac{1}{2}`$, (alternatively $`\sigma =`$) is the electron spin projection along $`\widehat{𝐳}`$. Solution of the scattering problem means the evaluation of transmission amplitudes $`t_{\sigma ^{}k^{}\sigma k}(E)`$, in which $`\sigma k`$ are initial electron and spin system quantum numbers, while $`\sigma ^{}k^{}`$ are the final ones. To extract the transmission amplitudes from the Schrödinger equation, note that the presence of spins at isolated points suggests using a transfer matrix formalism. For $`x_{n1}<x<x_n`$ the total wave function is expanded in electron spinors $`\chi _\sigma `$ and spin states $`|k>`$,

$`\mathrm{\Psi }(x;\{S_n\})={\displaystyle \underset{\sigma ^{}k^{}}{}}\psi _{n\sigma ^{}k^{}}(x)\chi _\sigma ^{}|k^{}>,`$ (6)
$`\psi _{n\sigma ^{}k^{}}(x)=a_{n\sigma ^{}k^{}}e^{ip_{\sigma ^{}k^{}}(xn)}+b_{n\sigma ^{}k^{}}e^{ip_{\sigma ^{}k^{}}(xn)}.`$ (7)
Analogous expansion holds for $`x_n<x<x_{n+1}`$. The matching conditions at $`x=n`$ read,

$`\mathrm{\Psi }(x=n^{};\{S_n\})=\mathrm{\Psi }(x=n^+;\{S_n\}),`$ (8)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(x=n^+;\{S_n\})\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(x=n^{};\{S_n\})`$ (9)
$`=g𝐬𝐒_n\mathrm{\Psi }(x=n^{};\{S_n\}).`$ (10)
Employing the expansion (6) and applying on the left the bra $`<k|\chi _\sigma ^{}`$, the relations (8,10) imply $`4(N+1)`$ equations from which the coefficients $`a_{n+1\sigma k},b_{n+1\sigma k}`$ are expressible in terms of $`a_{n\sigma k},b_{n\sigma k}`$. At the end of this procedure (which is briefly detailed here), it yields the transfer matrix $`\tau _n`$ that carries the system from $`n0`$ to $`n+0`$. To be definite, the order of coefficients (which determines the structure of transfer matrices) is $`(𝐚_n,𝐚_n,𝐛_n,𝐛_n`$). The required manipulation is to evaluate matrix elements of four $`(N+1)\times (N+1)`$ matrices $`I_{\sigma ^{}\sigma }`$ defined as operators in spin wave space,

$`<k^{}|I_{\sigma ^{}\sigma }|k><k^{}|\chi _\sigma ^{}^{}𝐬𝐒_n\chi _\sigma |k>.`$ (11)
Straightforward calculations yield, (separating $`k,k^{}=0`$ and $`k,k^{}0`$)

$`<k^{}|I_{}|k>=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{4}& 0\\ 0& \frac{\delta _{kk^{}}}{4}\frac{e^{i(kk^{})n}}{2N}\end{array}\right],`$ (14)
$`<k^{}|I_{}|k>=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ \frac{e^{ik^{}n}}{2\sqrt{N}}& 0\end{array}\right],`$ (17)
$`I_{}=I_{}^{},`$ (18)
$`I_{}=I_{}.`$ (19)
The transfer matrix across $`x=n`$ ($`\tau _n`$) can now be written down, remembering that in many channel problems, the plane waves are normalized to have unit velocity. In terms of the $`4(N+1)\times 4(N+1)`$ diagonal matrix,

$`p^{\frac{1}{2}}=diag(𝐩_{}^{\frac{1}{2}},𝐩_{}^{\frac{1}{2}},𝐩_{}^{\frac{1}{2}},𝐩_{}^{\frac{1}{2}}),`$ (20)
where $`𝐩_\sigma =(p_{\sigma 0},p_{\sigma 1},..p_{\sigma N})`$ is the vector of $`N+1`$ channel momenta, the result is,

$`\tau _n=1+`$ (21)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2i}}p^{\frac{1}{2}}\left[\begin{array}{cccc}I_{}& I_{}& I_{}& I_{}\\ I_{}& I_{}& I_{}& I_{}\\ I_{}& I_{}& I_{}& I_{}\\ I_{}& I_{}& I_{}& I_{}\end{array}\right]p^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$ (26)
Propagation between spins is controlled by the diagonal $`4(N+1)\times 4(N+1)`$ matrix of phases,

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }=diag(e^{i𝐩_{}},e^{i𝐩_{}},e^{i𝐩_{}},e^{i𝐩_{}}).`$ (27)
The transfer matrix $`T_n`$ across a unit cell (from $`n1+0`$ to $`n+0`$) and the total transfer matrix $`T`$ are then, $`T_n=\mathrm{\Lambda }\tau _n`$ and $`T=_{n=1}^NT_n`$. With some modifications required in case there are evanescent modes, it is not difficult to show that in the above $`4`$ block partition of transfer matrices into $`𝐚`$ and $`𝐛`$ sectors, the transfer matrices $`\tau _n`$, $`T_n`$ and $`T`$ satisfy the current conservation constraint, $`\tau _n\sigma _z\tau _n^{}=\sigma _z`$. Finally, the matrix of amplitudes $`t_{\sigma ^{}\sigma }`$ with elements $`t_{\sigma ^{}k^{}\sigma k}(E)`$ is simply given by $`T_{\mathrm{𝐚𝐚}}^1`$.

Conductance and spin transfer coefficients: An experimentally relevant question is the following: Applying a small voltage $`V`$ across the wire between $`0`$ and $`N+1`$ and letting a unit flux of electrons at Fermi energy $`\epsilon _F`$ and spin component $`\sigma `$ reach it from the left, what is the current $`I_{\sigma ^{}\sigma }`$ of electrons with spin $`\sigma ^{}`$ in the system? The ratio $`G_{\sigma ^{}\sigma }(\epsilon _F)I_{\sigma ^{}\sigma }/V`$ is the corresponding STC. The conductance per spin is $`G_\sigma =_\sigma ^{}G_{\sigma ^{}\sigma }`$ and the conductance is $`G=_\sigma G_\sigma `$. At zero temperature (and for infinitesimal voltage drop $`V`$) the system is in its ground state and only elastic scattering (of the electrons) is allowed. Due to spin conservation, processes involving spin flip are inelastic and hence are forbidden. Thus, the quantities to be calculated at zero temperature and infinitesimal voltage difference are,

$`G_{\sigma \sigma }(\epsilon _F)=|t_{\sigma 0\sigma 0}(\epsilon _F+E_0)|^2,`$ (28)
where $`\epsilon _F+E_0=E`$ is the total energy of the system. Evidently, $`G_{}`$ is trivial since it involves only the ground state $`|0>`$ of the spin system. Coupling terms to OMSW, $`<k0|\chi _\sigma ^{}^{}𝐬𝐒_n\chi _{}|0>=0`$ since the initial state $`\chi _{}|0>`$ is stretched with total spin $`N/2+1/2`$ while the final state is not. Therefore, the quantum spins are replaced by their averages $`<0|𝐒_n|0>=S_{nz}`$ and spin up incoming electrons are scattered by a sequence of $`N`$ identical delta function potentials of strength $`g/4`$. On the other hand, $`G_{}`$ involves virtual OMSW excitations and hence it is non trivial. For examples, it gets second order contributions $`<0|\chi _{}^{}𝐬𝐒_m\chi _{}|k><k|\chi _{}^{}𝐬𝐒_n\chi _{}|0>`$.
Of special interest are spin flip processes. If the potential drop $`eV`$ exceeds the gap between the ground state energy $`E_0`$ and the lowest OMSW energy (that is, $`eV2SE_Z`$), then the process $``$ is energetically feasible even at $`T=0`$. The electron stays at the Fermi energy and the spin system is heated from $`E_0`$ to $`E_1`$, the energy being supplied from the external voltage. Assuming that linear response is still valid, the corresponding STC is $`G_{}(\epsilon _F)=|t_{10}(\epsilon _F+E_0)|^2`$. After the system is excited from the ground state to the lowest OMSW state, the process $``$ is blocked. It can occur again only if the spin system returns to its ground state. This can happen for example by the process $``$ (which, by spin conservation, is allowed if the spin system is in a OMSW state but is otherwise forbidden on the ground state). Finally, consider the spin-flip process encoded in $`G_{}(\epsilon _F)=|t_{0k}(\epsilon _F+E_k)|^2`$. This can happen only at $`T>0`$ where the spin system contains also a OMSW component. At the end, the spin system cools down to the ground state, but regains the excited component energy from the heat bath.
Possible experimental realization: Out of the four parameters $`g`$, $`J`$, $`𝐇`$ and $`\epsilon _F`$, the last two are the ones which are easiest to handle and control. However, the strength of the magnetic field is somewhat constrained by the condition $`E_Z>JS`$ justifying projection on the OMSW subspace. The $`sd`$ coupling $`g`$ is material dependent and can have either sign but in general $`|g||J|`$. The atomic and electronic Zeeman energies are similar in magnitude, $`E_Zh_e`$. Thus, one should concieve a material consisting of itinerant electrons and localized magnetic moments in which the Fermi energy can be tuned by a sutable gate. Possible candidates are magnetic semiconductors (e.g. $`FeSi`$) or strongly correlated semimetals such as $`CeP`$ and $`CeSb`$.
Results: Calculations are performed on a chain of $`N=12`$ spins, using $`JS=0.06`$, and taking $`g=\pm 1`$ for the electron-atom $`sd`$ exchange strength. The atomic and electronic Zeeman energies are taken to be $`E_Z=h_e=0.2`$. The Fermi energy is taken with reference to the ground state of the spin system in units of $`|J|S`$. The results at $`T=0`$ are presented in figures 1, 2, and 3 below.

As asserted above, the behavior of $`G_{}`$ (figure 1) is somewhat expected since only the $`s_zS_{nz}`$ interaction is effective. For a ferromagnetic $`sd`$ coupling the electron encounters a periodic potential composed of attractive $`\delta `$ functions while for an antiferromagnetic exchange the potentials are repulsive. This leads to a band structure determined by, $`|cosk_0+\frac{g}{k_0}sink_0|1`$, where $`k_0=\sqrt{\epsilon }_F`$. It is easy to see that the above range of $`\epsilon _F`$ is inside the band.
The patterns of the STC $`G_{}`$ and $`G_{}`$ (figures 2 for $`g=1`$ and 3 for $`g=1`$) have a much richer content. In particular, for a ferromagnetic exchange coupling (figure 2) they display a series of very narrow resonances. It is quite remarkable that in a magnetic field and with ferromagnetic $`sd`$ coupling, still, $`G_{}`$ approaches unity at resonance. These resonances are novel, that is, they are not the usual ones encountered in resonance tunneling, since there is neither potential scattering here nor double barrier. As discussed above, the pertinent processes involve virtual excitations of the OMSW, and hence, it reflects the structure of the electron spin chain system. Unlike potential scattering in which the scattering is effected upon static (quenched) impurities, we encounter here scattering from a quantum system with an internal structure and many non-degenerate levels (the case of degenerate levels is exemplified by the Kondo effect). It is also noticed that these resonances appear only for a ferromagnetic $`sd`$ coupling $`g<0`$. Some light can be shed on these points by inspecting the corresponding bound state problem for a closed system. Namely, the one dimensional wire is closed into a ring of length $`N`$ and the bound state energies (pertaining to the total system, electron and spin chain) can be computed by solving the equation $`det[T(E)1]=0`$ (in order to avoid orbital effects, the magnetic field is tuned to yield an nteger number of flux quanta through the ring). While there is no simple relation between an open wire conductance rsonances and bound states on a closed wire, it is nevertheless instructive to notice that the bound state energies in the ferromagnetic case are lower than those in the antiferromagnetic case. In fact, the latters fall mostly outside the range of Fermi energies examined in these simulations.
At finite temperature, the spin system can be activated to the lowest OMSW (which, unlike higher OMSW, is not degenerate). The process $`10`$ is then feasible and the relevant STC $`G_{}`$ is depicted in figure 4.

It mainly reflects the coupling between the ground and lowest OMSW state of the spin system. Higher OMSW are virtually excited in higher orders through non-flip processes, e.g. $`(0)(k1)(1).`$ The resonant pattern prevails also in this case. Note that the actual value of the STC should be reduced by the activation factor $`e^{\beta (E_1E_0)}`$.
Conclusions: The formalism for studying electron transport in a quantum spin chain is developed. Application of an external magnetic field removes the Kondo problem as it lifts the degeneracy of spin states. (For infinite chains it also restores long range order which is otherwise absent due to the Mermin - Wagner theorem). Spin transfer coefficients $`G_{\sigma ^{}\sigma }`$ are evaluated and analyzed as a function of the Fermi energy. Non-flip processes $``$ and $``$ are elastic. The structure of $`G_{}`$ is trivial since the problem is equivalent to the scattering of polarized electrons on a sequence of delta function potentials. On the other hand, the behavior of $`G_{}`$ is much richer. For a ferromagnetic $`sd`$ exchange coupling it displays a novel resonant pattern which is distinct from the one encountered in potential or double barrier transmission. That is, it reflects the complex structure of the electron spin-chain system. Spin-flip processes are inelastic. The transition $``$ is endothermic, and is feasible at $`T=0`$ if the potential difference across the spin system overcomes the energy gap between the ground and lowest OMSW states. The transition $``$ is exothermic and feasible at $`T>0`$ if OMSW are activated. Although spin flip coefficients are small relative to non spin flip ones, they are still sizable. In passing, we note that there are interesting theoretical works discussing the pertinent many body problem  .
Acknowledgements: We thank M. Yamanaka, T. Koma, E. Kogan and K. Kikoin for helpful comments. Y. A. acknowledges supports by DIP German Israel Cooperation, Israeli SF grants Center of Excellence, Many Body Effects in Resonance Tunneling and US-Israel BSF Dynamical Instabilities in quantum dots. Y.T. acknowledges support from the NEDO joint research program (NTDP-98).