text:
# The Chen-Ruan Cohomology Ring of Mirror Quintic

## 1. Introduction

The Chen-Ruan orbifold cohomology (cf. \[CR1\]) gives mathematical meaning, à la Gromov-Witten theory, to the various invariants such as “orbifold Euler characteristic” and “orbifold cohomology” for global quotient orbifolds that have been in use, courtesy of string theorists, for quite a while. The most interesting feature of this new cohomology theory, besides the generalization to non-global quotients, is the existence of a ring structure which was previously missing. The ring structure is obtained from Chen-Ruan’s orbifold quantum cohomology construction (cf. \[CR2\]) by restricting to the class of maps called ghost maps, in the same spirit as the ordinary cup product may be recovered from quantum cup product.

One of the motivations of Chen and Ruan was to construct a mathematical theory that is rich enough to formulate mirror symmetry for Calabi-Yau orbifolds without having to resort to their smooth crepant resolutions which do not always exist in dimensions higher than three. Although the Chen-Ruan cohomology has had several successes, it is yet to make serious progress in this direction. One problem has been that the computation of the ring structure was an unsolved problem when the “obstruction bundle” is not trivial, which is indeed the case for the Batyrev mirror families of hypersurfaces in Fano toric varieties.

Here we try to rectify the situation by suggesting that the Riemann bilinear relations for periods \[Gr\] may be adequate to identify the obstruction bundle. Although we do not prove this, we show that this is true in the mirror quintic example. We then proceed to give an explicit description of the ring structure for this example. The integral of the Euler class of the obstruction bundle is computed first by an ad hoc method that is shorter but rather restrictive, and then recomputed by using localization techniques which should work for any toric Calabi-Yau hypersurface. We deliberately avoid making use of the fact that the mirror quintic is a global quotient. Rather, we focus on developing a strategy that should work in the general setting. For instance the twisted sectors of the mirror quintic can be readily determined since it is a global quotient. However we obtained them as a special case of a more general theorem. We would like to point out that the computation of the ordinary cup product of ample toric hypersurfaces is made possible by recent results of Mavlyutov \[Ma\] and Gröbner basis method (cf. \[CLO\]).

Finally, we draw the reader’s attention to a relevant conjecture of Ruan. String theory suggests that the orbifold quantum cohomology ring of a Calabi-Yau orbifold should be isomorphic to the ordinary quantum cohomology ring of its crepant resolution. This is, of course, not easy to check. It is known that the Chen-Ruan ring structure is not preserved under (partial) crepant resolutions. But the Cohomological Crepant Resolution Conjecture (cf. \[Ru\]) specifies how the ordinary cup product of the crepant resolution may be deformed by using certain quantum corrections to make it equal to the orbifold cup product of the original space. Developing the machinery to compute the Gromov-Witten invariants involved in these correction terms seems to be an interesting problem. The reader may find a parallel approach to stringy cohomolgy spaces in \[BM\] interesting as well.

### Acknowledgments

We thank Alejandro Adem, Karl Heinz Dovermann, Ronald Fintushel, John McCarthy, Yongbin Ruan and Jon Wolfson for very helpful discussions and encouragements. We especially thank Yongbin Ruan for explaining to us how localization might be used to compute integral of the Euler class of the obstruction bundle. The second author also benefitted from conversations with Yuan-Pin Lee, Ernesto Lupercio and Bernardo Uribe. Some computations were done with the aid of Mathematica<sup>®</sup> Version 4.1 (cf. \[Wo\]).

## 2. Preliminaries

### 2.1. Mirror Quintic

Let $`\zeta =\mathrm{exp}(2\pi i/5)`$. Consider the following action of $`(_5)^3`$ on $`^4`$:

$$[x_1:x_2:x_3:x_4:x_5][\zeta ^{a_1}x_1:\zeta ^{a_2}x_2:\zeta ^{a_3}x_3:\zeta ^{a_4}x_4:\zeta ^{a_5}x_5]$$

where $`a_i_5`$ and $`_{i=1}^5a_i0mod5`$. From now on, an element of $`(_5)^3`$ will be denoted by a 5-tuple $`g=(\zeta ^{a_1},\zeta ^{a_2},\zeta ^{a_3},\zeta ^{a_4},\zeta ^{a_5})`$ satisfying the above congruence.

The mirror family (cf. \[Bat\], \[GP\]) of smooth quintic hypersurfaces in $`^4`$ is given by a one-parameter family of quintic hypersurfaces $`X_\psi ^4/(_5)^3`$ satisfying the following equations:

(2.1)
$$x_1^5+x_2^5+x_3^5+x_4^5+x_5^5+\psi x_1x_2x_3x_4x_5=\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0}.$$

Every member of this mirror family is a 3-dimensional Calabi-Yau orbifold, provided that $`\psi 5\zeta ^k`$ $`(k)`$. Note that our terminology is slightly different from the existing literature, where the simultaneous desingularization of our family is called the (Batyrev) mirror family. We need to give a toric description of these hypersurfaces. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ be the polytope in the lattice $`N^4`$ with vertices, $`v_1=(4,1,1,1)`$, $`v_2=(1,4,1,1)`$, $`v_3=(1,1,4,1)`$, $`v_4=(1,1,1,4)`$, $`v_5=(1,1,1,1)`$. The fan $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ of the toric variety $`^4/(_5)^3`$ is obtained by coning over the faces of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$. Then the $`x_i`$ can be regarded as the generators of the homogeneous coordinate ring of $`^4/(_5)^3`$ corresponding to the $`v_i`$.

### 2.2. Orbifold Structure

###### Definition 2.1.

An orbifold structure on a Hausdorff, separable topological space $`X`$ is given by an open cover $`𝕌`$ of $`X`$ satisfying the following conditions:

* Each element $`U`$ in $`𝕌`$ is uniformized, say by $`(V,G,\pi )`$. Namely, $`V`$ is a smooth manifold and $`G`$ is a finite group acting smoothly on $`V`$ such that $`U=V/G`$ with $`\pi `$ as the quotient map. Let $`\mathrm{Ker}(G)`$ be the subgroup of $`G`$ acting trivially on $`V`$.
* For $`U^{}U`$, there is a collection of injections $`(V^{},G^{},\pi ^{})(V,G,\pi )`$. Namely, the inclusion $`i:U^{}U`$ can be lifted to maps $`\stackrel{~}{i}:V^{}V`$ and an injective homomorphism $`i_{}:G^{}G`$ such that $`i_{}`$ is an isomorphism from $`\mathrm{Ker}(G^{})`$ to $`\mathrm{Ker}(G)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{i}`$ is $`i_{}`$-equivariant.
* For any point $`xU_1U_2`$, $`U_1,U_2𝕌`$, there is a $`U_3𝕌`$ such that $`xU_3U_1U_2`$.

For any point $`xX`$, suppose that $`(V,G,\pi )`$ is a uniformizing neighborhood and $`\overline{x}\pi ^1(x)`$. Let $`G_x`$ be the stabilizer of $`G`$ at $`\overline{x}`$. Up to conjugation, it is independent of the choice of $`\overline{x}`$ and is called the *local group* of $`x`$. Then there exists a sufficiently small neighborhood $`V_x`$ of $`\overline{x}`$ such that $`(V_x,G_x,\pi _x)`$ uniformizes a small neighborhood of $`x`$, where $`\pi _x`$ is the restriction $`\pi |_{V_x}`$. $`(V_x,G_x,\pi _x)`$ is called a local chart at $`x`$. The orbifold structure is called reduced if the action of $`G_x`$ is effective for every $`x`$.

Let $`pr:EX`$ be a rank $`k`$ complex orbifold bundle over an orbifold $`X`$ (cf. \[CR1\]). Then a uniformizing system for $`E|_U=pr^1(E)`$ over a uniformized subset $`U`$ of $`X`$ consists of the following data:

* A uniformizing system $`(V,G,\pi )`$ of $`U`$.
* A uniformizing system $`(V\times ^k,G,\stackrel{~}{\pi })`$ for $`E|_U`$. The action of $`G`$ on $`V\times ^k`$ is an extension of the action of $`G`$ on $`V`$ given by $`g(x,v)=(gx,\rho (x,g)v)`$ where $`\rho :V\times G\mathrm{Aut}(^k)`$ is a smooth map satisfying:

$$\rho (gx,h)\rho (x,g)=\rho (x,hg),g,hG,xV.$$
* The natural projection map $`\stackrel{~}{pr}:V\times ^kV`$ satisfies $`\pi \stackrel{~}{pr}=pr\stackrel{~}{\pi }`$.

By an orbifold connection $`D`$ on $`E`$ we mean an equivariant connection that satisfies $`D=g^1Dg`$ for every uniformizing system of $`E`$. Such a connection can be always obtained by the averaging trick and an equivariant partition of unity.

### 2.3. Twisted Sectors

Let $`X`$ be an orbifold. Let $`\stackrel{~}{X}_k`$ denote the set of pairs $`(x,(𝐠)_x)`$ where $`(𝐠)_x`$ stands for the conjugacy class of $`𝐠=(g_1,\mathrm{},g_k)`$ with $`g_jG_x`$. Let $`V_x^{g_j}`$ denote the fixed point set of $`g_j`$ in $`V_x`$, and let $`C(g_j)`$ denote the centralizer of $`g_j`$ in $`G_x`$. $`\stackrel{~}{X}_k`$ has a natural, possibly nonreduced, orbifold structure (cf. \[CR1\], \[Ka\]) whose local chart at $`(x,(𝐠)_x)`$ is given by

(2.2)
$$\left(V_x^𝐠,C(𝐠),\pi :V_x^𝐠V_x^𝐠/C(𝐠)\right)$$

where $`V_x^𝐠=_{j=1}^kV_x^{g_j}`$, $`C(𝐠)=_{j=1}^kC(g_j)`$. The topology on $`\stackrel{~}{X}_k`$ is, of course, specified by declaring each $`V_x^𝐠/C(𝐠)`$ to be an open set.

We describe the connected components of $`\stackrel{~}{X}_k`$. Each point $`xX`$ has a local chart $`(V_x,G_x,\pi _x)`$ which gives a uniformized neighborhood $`U_x=V_x/G_x`$ of $`x`$. If $`yU_x`$, up to conjugation there is a unique monomorphism $`i_{}:G_yG_x`$ . For $`𝐠(G_y)^k`$, the conjugacy class $`i_{}(𝐠)_y`$ is well-defined. We define an equivalence relation $`i_{}(𝐠)_y(𝐠)_y`$. Let $`T_k`$ denote the set of equivalence classes. By slight abuse of notation, we use $`(𝐠)`$ to denote the equivalence class to which $`(𝐠)_x`$ belongs. We will usually denote an element of $`T_1`$ by $`(g)`$. $`\stackrel{~}{X}_k`$ is decomposed as a disjoint union of connected components

$$\stackrel{~}{X}_k=\underset{(𝐠)T_k}{}X_{(𝐠)},$$

where $`X_{(𝐠)}=\left\{(x,(𝐠^{})_x)\right|𝐠^{}(G_x)^k,(𝐠^{})_x(𝐠)\}`$. Note that for $`𝐠=(1,\mathrm{},1)`$ we have $`X_{(𝐠)}X`$. A component $`X_{(𝐠)}`$ is called a twisted $`k`$-sector, provided that $`𝐠`$ is not the identity. $`X_{(g)}`$ is simply called a twisted sector. An almost complex, complex or Kähler structure on $`X`$ induces an analogous structure on $`X_{(𝐠)}`$ via (2.2).

Now define

$`T_3^0`$ $`=\left\{(𝐠)=(g_1,g_2,g_3)T_3\right|g_1g_2g_3=1\},`$
$`𝒯_3^0`$ $`=\{X_{(𝐠)}|(𝐠)T_3^0\}`$
There is a one-to-one correspondence between $`T_2`$ and $`T_3^0`$ given by $`(g_1,g_2)(g_1,g_2,(g_1g_2)^1)`$. We shall call an element of $`𝒯_3^0`$ a tricyclic sector. The twisted sectors of Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces of a Fano toric variety are described in \[Po\]. Following the same line of argument, we can identify $`𝒯_3^0`$ in the present example.

## 3. Tricyclic Sectors

### 3.1. $`𝒯_3^0`$ for Simplicial Toric Varieties

Let $`Y`$ be the toric variety associated to a simplicial fan $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ in a $`d`$-dimensional lattice $`N`$. Denote the set of $`n`$-dimensional cones by $`\mathrm{\Xi }(n)`$. For a cone $`\tau \mathrm{\Xi }`$, denote the set of its primitive $`1`$-dimensional generators by $`\tau [1]`$, the corresponding affine open subset of $`Y`$ by $`U_\tau `$, and the corresponding torus orbit by $`O_\tau `$. We write $`\nu \tau `$ if the cone $`\nu `$ is a face of the cone $`\tau `$, and $`\nu <\tau `$ if it is a proper subface. $`U_\tau =_{\nu \tau }O_\nu `$. Let $`M=\mathrm{Hom}(N,)`$ be the dual lattice of $`N`$ with dual pairing $`,`$. For any cone $`\tau \mathrm{\Xi }`$, denote its dual cone in $`M`$ by $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\tau }`$. Let $`S_\tau =\stackrel{ˇ}{\tau }M`$. $`[S_\tau ]`$ is the $``$-algebra with generators $`\chi ^m`$ for each $`mS_\tau `$ and relations $`\chi ^m\chi ^m^{}=\chi ^{m+m^{}}`$. $`U_\tau =\mathrm{Spec}([S_\tau ])`$. Define $`R(\tau ):=\{a_if_i|f_i\tau [1],\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0}a_i<1\}N`$. We will describe the orbifold structure of $`Y`$.

Let $`\sigma `$ be any $`d`$-dimensional cone of $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$. The elements of $`\sigma [1]`$, $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_d`$, are linearly independent in $`N`$. Let $`N_\sigma `$ be the sublattice of $`N`$ generated by $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_d`$. Let $`G_\sigma :=N/N_\sigma `$ be the quotient group. $`G_\sigma `$ is finite and Abelian. Let $`\sigma ^{}`$ be the cone $`\sigma `$ regarded in $`N_\sigma `$. Let $`M_\sigma `$ be the dual lattice of $`N_\sigma `$ and let $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\sigma }^{}`$ be the dual cone of $`\sigma ^{}`$ in $`M_\sigma `$. $`U_\sigma ^{}=\mathrm{Spec}([\stackrel{ˇ}{\sigma }^{}M_\sigma ])`$. Note that $`\sigma ^{}`$ is a smooth cone in $`N_\sigma `$. So $`U_\sigma ^{}^d`$.

There is a canonical dual pairing $`M_\sigma /M\times N/N_\sigma /^{}`$, the first map by the pairing $`,`$ and the second by $`q\mathrm{exp}(2\pi iq)`$. Now $`G_\sigma `$ acts on $`[M_\sigma ]`$, the group ring of $`M_\sigma `$, by: $`n(\chi ^m)=\mathrm{exp}(2\pi im,n)\chi ^m`$, for $`nN`$ and $`mM_\sigma `$. Observe that $`G_\sigma `$ acts on $`U_\sigma ^{}`$ and $`([M_\sigma ])^{G_\sigma }=[M]`$. Thus $`U_\sigma =U_\sigma ^{}/G_\sigma `$. Let $`\pi _\sigma `$ be the quotient map. So $`U_\sigma `$ is uniformized by $`(U_\sigma ^{},G_\sigma ,\pi _\sigma )`$. For any $`\tau <\sigma `$, the orbifold structure on $`U_\tau `$ is same as the one induced from the uniformizing system on $`U_\sigma `$. Then $`\{(U_\sigma ^{},G_\sigma ,\pi _\sigma )|\sigma \mathrm{\Xi }(d)\}`$ defines a reduced orbifold structure on $`Y`$.

It is convenient to have the following description of the local groups. Let $`F`$ be the nonsingular matrix with generators $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_d`$ of $`\sigma `$ as rows. Then $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\sigma }^{}`$ is generated in $`M_\sigma `$ by the column vectors $`f^1,\mathrm{},f^d`$ of the matrix $`F^1`$. So $`\chi ^{f^1},\mathrm{},\chi ^{f^d}`$ are the coordinates of $`U_\sigma ^{}`$. For any $`r=(r_1,\mathrm{},r_d)N`$, the corresponding coset $`[r]G_\sigma `$ acts on $`U_\sigma ^{}`$ in these coordinates as a diagonal matrix: diag$`(e^{2\pi ic_1},\mathrm{},e^{2\pi ic_d})`$ where $`c_i=r,f^i`$. Such a matrix is uniquely represented by a $`d`$-tuple $`a=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_d)`$ where $`a_i[0,1)`$ and $`c_i=a_i+b_i`$, $`b_i`$. In matrix notation, $`rF^1=a+br=aF+bF.`$ We denote the integral vector $`aF`$ in $`N`$ by $`r_a`$ and the diagonal matrix corresponding to $`a`$ by $`g_a`$. The correspondence $`g_ar_a`$ gives a bijection between the elements of $`G_\sigma `$ and the elements of $`R(\sigma )`$.

Now we examine the orbifold chart induced by $`(U_\sigma ^{},G_\sigma ,\pi _\sigma )`$ at any point $`xU_\sigma `$. By the orbit decomposition, there is unique $`\tau \sigma `$ such that $`xO_\tau `$. Assume $`\tau `$ is generated by $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_j`$, $`jd`$. Let $`z`$ be a preimage of $`x`$ with respect to $`\pi _\sigma `$. Then $`\chi ^{f^i}(z)=0`$ iff $`ij`$. Let $`G_\tau :=\{g_aG_\sigma |a_i=0\mathrm{if}j+1id\}=\{g_aG_\sigma |r_aR(\tau )\}`$. We can find a small neighborhood $`W(^{})^{dj}`$ of $`(z_{j+1},\mathrm{},z_d)`$ such that the inclusions $`^j\times WU_\sigma ^{}`$ and $`G_\tau G_\sigma `$ induces an injection of uniformizing systems $`(^j\times W,G_\tau ,\pi )(U_\sigma ^{},G_\sigma ,\pi _\sigma )`$ on some small open neighborhood $`U_x`$ of $`x`$. So we have $`G_x=G_\tau `$ and an orbifold chart $`(^j\times W,G_\tau ,\pi )`$.

Now we determine $`𝒯_3^0`$. Take any $`xY`$ with nontrivial local group. Then $`x`$ belongs to a unique $`O_\tau `$ such that $`\tau `$ is not the trivial cone. Pick any elements $`g_a,g_b`$ from $`G_x=G_\tau `$. We shall find $`Y_{(𝐠)}`$ where $`𝐠=(g_a,g_b,(g_ag_b)^1)`$. Let $`\tau _a,\tau _b`$ be the faces of $`\tau `$, whose interiors contain $`r_a`$ and $`r_b`$ respectively. Let $`\sigma `$ be any $`d`$-dimensional cone containing $`\tau `$. Let $`z`$ be any point in $`U_\sigma ^{}`$. Suppose $`z`$ is fixed by both $`g_a`$ and $`g_b`$. Then $`\chi ^{f^i}(z)=0`$ whenever $`f_i\tau _a\tau _b`$. Hence $`\pi _\sigma (z)\overline{O}_{\tau _a}\overline{O}_{\tau _b}U_\sigma `$. A local uniformizing system for $`Y_{(𝐠)}`$ is given by $`(V_x^𝐠,G_x,\pi )`$, where

$$V_x^𝐠=(^j\times W)\{\chi ^{f^i}=0,f_i\tau _a\tau _b\}.$$

This leads us to observe that $`\{(x,𝐠)Y_{(𝐠)}|xU_\sigma \}`$ is complex analytically isomorphic to $`\overline{O}_{\tau _a}\overline{O}_{\tau _b}U_\sigma `$. Since this is true irrespective of the choice of $`\sigma `$, $`Y_𝐠\overline{O}_{\tau _a}\overline{O}_{\tau _b}`$. Note that $`\overline{O}_{\tau _1}\overline{O}_{\tau _2}`$ is empty whenever $`\tau _1[1]\tau _2[1]`$ does not generate an element of $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$.

###### Proposition 3.1.

If $`\tau _1[1]\tau _2[1]`$ generate an element of $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$, then for every pair $`r_1R(\tau _1)\mathrm{Int}(\tau _1)`$, $`r_2R(\tau _2)\mathrm{Int}(\tau _2)`$ we have a unique element of $`𝒯_3^0(Y)`$, which is analytically isomorphic to $`\overline{O}_{\tau _1}\overline{O}_{\tau _2}`$. As we vary over $`\tau _1,\tau _2`$, we obtain all elements of $`𝒯_3^0(Y)`$.

### 3.2. $`𝒯_3^0`$ for a Nondegenerate Quasi-smooth Hypersurface

A hypersurface $`X`$ of the toric variety $`Y`$ is called quasi-smooth if for any $`\sigma \mathrm{\Xi }(d)`$, $`\pi _\sigma ^1(XU_\sigma )`$ is smooth. Then $`X`$ is clearly a suborbifold of $`Y`$, the orbifold structure being induced by $`\{(\pi _\sigma ^1(XU_\sigma ),G_\sigma ,\pi _\sigma )|\sigma \mathrm{\Xi }(d)\}`$.

$`X`$ is called nondegenerate if for every $`\tau \mathrm{\Xi }`$, $`XO_\tau `$ is either empty or a smooth variety of codimension one in $`O_\tau `$. When X is nondegenerate, the above orbifold structure on $`X`$ is reduced. So any point $`xXO_\tau `$ has local group $`G_\tau `$. Then by an argument analogous to the one for $`𝒯_3^0(Y)`$, we have the following description of $`𝒯_3^0(X)`$.

###### Proposition 3.2.

Let $`X`$ be a nondegenerate quasi-smooth hypersurface of a simplicial toric variety $`Y`$ with fan $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$. If $`\tau _1[1]\tau _2[1]`$ generate an element of $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$, then for every pair $`r_1R(\tau _1)\mathrm{Int}(\tau _1)`$, $`r_2R(\tau _2)\mathrm{Int}(\tau _2)`$ the connected components of $`X\overline{O}_{\tau _1}\overline{O}_{\tau _2}`$ are elements of $`𝒯_3^0(X)`$. As we vary over $`\tau _1,\tau _2`$, we obtain all elements of $`𝒯_3^0(X)`$.

### 3.3. $`𝒯_3^0`$ for Mirror Quintic

Let $`Y=^4/(_5)^3`$ and let $`X`$ be a member of the mirror quintic family such that $`\psi 5\zeta ^k`$ (2.1). Then $`X`$ is nondegenerate and quasi-smooth. The fan $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ of $`Y`$ is described in Subsection 2.1. We shall conveniently use the action of an element of $`G_\tau `$ on the homogeneous coordinate ring of $`Y`$ to describe that element. For instance, $`(\zeta ,1,\zeta ^2,\zeta ^2,1)`$ will represent an element of $`G_\tau `$ where $`\tau [1]=\{v_1,v_3,v_4\}`$. The corresponding element of $`R_\tau `$ is $`(\frac{1}{5}v_1+\frac{2}{5}v_3+\frac{2}{5}v_4)`$.

Note that $`\overline{O}_\tau =\{x_i=0|i\mathrm{such}\mathrm{that}v_i\tau [1]\}`$. Since there is no complex reflection, if $`xO_\tau `$ has nontrivial local group then $`dim(\tau )2`$ and consequently $`\mathrm{codim}(O_\tau )2`$. By nondegeneracy, $`dim(X\overline{O}_\tau )=\mathrm{codim}(\tau )1`$. Hence a nontrivial element of $`𝒯_3^0(X)`$ (i.e. an element not corresponding to $`(𝐠)=(1,1,1)`$) has dimension less than $`2`$. We have the following classification of nontrivial elements of $`𝒯_3^0(X)`$.

###### Corollary 3.3.

$`X_{(𝐠)}`$ is $`0`$-dimensional if $`\tau _1[1]\tau _2[1]`$ generate a $`3`$-dimensional cone, i.e. if any of the following holds:

* $`\tau _1`$,$`\tau _2`$ are both $`2`$-dimensional and have a $`1`$-dimensional face in common.
* $`\tau _1`$ is a $`3`$-dimensional and $`\tau _2`$ is a $`2`$-dimensional subface of $`\tau _1`$, or vice versa.
* $`\tau _1=\tau _2`$ and $`dim(\tau _i)=3`$.

$`X_{(𝐠)}`$ is $`1`$-dimensional if $`\tau _1[1]\tau _2[1]`$ generate a $`2`$-dimensional cone, i.e. if $`\tau _1=\tau _2`$ and $`dim(\tau _i)=2`$.

From the description of $`G_\tau `$ in terms of $`R_\tau `$ in Subsection 3.1, it is not hard to see that $`G_\tau (_5)^{\mathrm{dim}(\tau )1}`$. For a point $`(x,(𝐠))X_{(𝐠)}`$ with $`xO_\tau X`$ and $`(𝐠)`$ determined by $`r_iR(\tau _i)\mathrm{Int}(\tau _i)`$, a local uniformizing system for $`X_{(𝐠)}`$ is given by $`(V_x^𝐠,G_\tau ,\pi )`$, where $`V_x^𝐠`$ is a small neighborhood of a preimage of $`x`$ in $`\widehat{X}\{x_i=0,i\mathrm{such}\mathrm{that}v_i\tau _1\tau _2\}`$. Here $`\widehat{X}^4`$ is the zero locus of the polynomial (2.1).

## 4. Chen-Ruan Orbifold Cohomology

Assume that $`X`$ is a $`d`$-dimensional compact almost complex orbifold with an almost complex structure $`J`$ (cf. \[CR1\]). Then for a point $`x`$ with nontrivial local group $`G_x`$, $`J`$ gives rise to an effective representation $`\rho _x:G_xGL(d,)`$. For any $`gG_x`$ we write $`\rho _x(g)`$, up to conjugation, as a diagonal matrix

$$\mathrm{diag}(e^{2\pi i\frac{m_{1,g}}{m_g}},\mathrm{},e^{2\pi i\frac{m_{d,g}}{m_g}}),$$

where $`m_g`$ is the order of $`g`$ in $`G_x`$, and $`0m_{i,g}<m_g.`$ Define a function $`\iota :\stackrel{~}{X}_1`$ by

$$\iota (x,(g)_x)=\{\begin{array}{cc}_{i=1}^d\frac{m_{i,g}}{m_g}\hfill & \mathrm{if}g1,\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \mathrm{if}g=1.\hfill \end{array}$$

This function $`\iota :\stackrel{~}{X}_1`$ is locally constant. Denote its value on $`X_{(g)}`$ by $`\iota _{(g)}`$. We call $`\iota _{(g)}`$ the *degree shifting number* of $`X_{(g)}`$. It has the following properties:

* $`\iota _{(g)}`$ is integral iff $`\rho _x(g)SL(d,)`$.
* $`\iota _{(g)}+\iota _{(g^1)}=\mathrm{rank}(\rho _x(g)Id)=ddim_{}X_{(g)}`$.

A $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ differential form on $`X`$ is a $`G`$-invariant $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ differential form on $`V`$ for each uniformizing system $`(V,G,\pi )`$. Then orbifold integration is defined as follows. Suppose $`U=V/G`$ is connected. For any compactly supported differential $`d`$-form $`\omega `$ on $`U`$, which is, by definition, a $`G`$-invariant $`d`$-form $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$ on $`V`$,

(4.1)
$$_U^{orb}\omega :=\frac{1}{|G|}_V\stackrel{~}{\omega },$$

where $`|G|`$ is the order of $`G`$. Then orbifold integration over $`X`$ is defined by using a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ partition of unity. The orbifold integration coincides with the usual measure theoretic integration if and only the orbifold structure on $`X`$ is reduced.

Holomorphic forms for a complex orbifold $`X`$ are again obtained by patching $`G`$-invariant holomorhic forms on the uniformizing systems $`(V,G,\pi )`$. We consider the Čech cohomology groups of X and $`X_𝐠`$ with coeffcients in the sheaves of holomorphic forms. These Čech cohomology groups can be identified with the Dolbeault cohomology groups of $`(p,q)`$-forms \[Bai\].

###### Definition 4.1.

(cf. \[CR1\]) Let $`X`$ be a closed complex orbifold. We define the *orbifold cohomology groups* of $`X`$ by

$$H_{orb}^n(X):=\underset{(g)T_1}{}H^{n2\iota _{(g)}}(X_{(g)};).$$

We define, for $`0p,qdim_{}X,`$ *orbifold Dolbeault cohomology groups*

$$H_{orb}^{p,q}(X):=\underset{(g)T_1}{}H^{p\iota _{(g)},q\iota _{(g)}}(X_{(g)};).$$

### 4.1. Obstruction Bundle

Choose $`(𝐠)=(g_1,g_2,g_3)T_3^0`$. Let $`(x,(𝐠)_x)`$ be a generic point in $`X_{(𝐠)}`$. Let $`K(𝐠)`$ be the subgroup of $`G_x`$ generated by $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$. Consider an orbifold Riemann sphere with three orbifold points, $`(𝕊^2,(x_1,x_2,x_3),`$$`(k_1,k_2,k_3))`$. When there is no confusion, we will simply denote it by $`S^2`$. The orbifold fundamental group is

$$\pi _1^{orb}(S^2)=\left\{\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\lambda _3\right|\lambda _i^{k_i}=1,\lambda _1\lambda _2\lambda _3=1\},$$

where $`\lambda _i`$ is represented by a loop around the marked $`x_i`$. There is a surjective homomorphism

(4.2)
$$\rho :\pi _1^{orb}(S^2)K(𝐠),$$

specified by mapping $`\lambda _ig_i`$. Ker($`\rho `$) is a finite-index subgroup of $`\pi _1^{orb}(S^2)`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$ be the orbifold universal cover of $`S^2`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}/\mathrm{Ker}(\rho )`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is smooth, compact and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }/K(𝐠)=S^2`$. The genus of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ can be computed using Riemann-Hurwitz formula for Euler characteristic of a branched cover, and turns out to be

(4.3)
$$g(\mathrm{\Sigma })=\frac{1}{2}\left(2+|K(𝐠)|\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\frac{|K(𝐠)|}{k_i}\right).$$

$`K(𝐠)`$ acts holomorphically on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and hence $`K(𝐠)`$ acts on $`H^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$. The “obstruction bundle” $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ over $`X_{(𝐠)}`$ is constructed as follows. On the local chart $`(V_x^𝐠,C(𝐠),\pi )`$ of $`X_{(𝐠)}`$, $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ is given by $`(TV_xH^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma }))^{K(𝐠)}\times V_x^𝐠V_x^𝐠`$, where $`(TV_xH^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma }))^{K(𝐠)}`$ is the $`K(𝐠)`$-invariant subspace. We define an action of $`C(𝐠)`$ on $`TV_xH^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$, which is the usual one on $`TV_x`$ and trivial on $`H^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$. Then the actions of $`C(𝐠)`$ and $`K(𝐠)`$ commute and $`(TV_xH^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma }))^{K(𝐠)}`$ is invariant under $`C(𝐠)`$. Thus we have obtained an action of $`C(𝐠)`$ on $`(TV_xH^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma }))^{K(𝐠)}\times V_x^𝐠V_x^𝐠`$, extending the usual one on $`V_x^𝐠`$. These trivializations fit together to define the bundle $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ over $`X_{(𝐠)}`$. If we set $`e:X_{(𝐠)}X`$ to be the map given by $`(x,(𝐠)_x)x`$, one may think of $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ as $`(e^{}TXH^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma }))^{K(𝐠)}`$. The rank of $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ is given by the formula

(4.4)
$$\mathrm{rank}_{}(E_{(𝐠)})=dim_{}(X_{(𝐠)})dim_{}(X)+\underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}\iota _{(g_j)}.$$

### 4.2. Orbifold Cup Product

There is a natural map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:X_{(g)}X_{(g^1)}`$ defined by $`(x,(g)_x)(x,(g^1)_x)`$.

###### Definition 4.2.

Let $`d=dim_{}(X)`$. For any integer $`0n2d`$, the pairing

$$,_{orb}:H_{orb}^n(X)\times H_{orb}^{2dn}(X)$$

is defined by taking the direct sum of

$$,_{orb}^{(g)}:H^{n2\iota _{(g)}}(X_{(g)};)\times H^{2dn2\iota _{(g^1)}}(X_{(g^1)};)$$

where

$$\alpha ,\beta _{orb}^{(g)}=_{X_{(g)}}^{orb}\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }^{}(\beta )$$

for $`\alpha H^{n2\iota _{(g)}}(X_{(g)};)`$, and $`\beta H^{2dn2\iota _{(g^1)}}(X_{(g^1)};)`$.

Choose an orbifold connection $`A`$ on $`E_{(𝐠)}`$. Let $`e_A(E_{(𝐠)})`$ be the Euler form computed from the connection $`A`$ by Chern-Weil theory. Let $`\eta _jH^{d_j}(X_{(g_j)};)`$, for $`j=1,2,3`$. Define maps $`e_j:X_{(𝐠)}X_{(g_j)}`$ by $`(x,(𝐠)_x)(x,(g_j)_x)`$.

###### Definition 4.3.

We define the $`3`$-point function to be

(4.5)
$$\eta _1,\eta _2,\eta _3_{orb}=_{X_{(𝐠)}}^{orb}e_1^{}\eta _1e_2^{}\eta _2e_3^{}\eta _3e_A(E_{(𝐠)}).$$

Note that the above integral does not depend on the choice of $`A`$. As in Definition 4.2, we extend the $`3`$-point function to $`H_{orb}^{}(X)`$ via linearity. We define the orbifold cup product by the relation

(4.6)
$$\eta _1_{orb}\eta _2,\eta _3_{orb}=\eta _1,\eta _2,\eta _3_{orb}.$$

Again we extend $`_{orb}`$ to $`H_{orb}^{}(X)`$ via linearity.

###### Remark 4.4.

Note that if $`(𝐠)=(1,1,1)`$, then $`\eta _1_{orb}\eta _2`$ is just the ordinary cup product $`\eta _1\eta _2`$ in $`H^{}(X)`$.

## 5. Computations for Mirror Quintic

Let $`X`$ be a generic member of the mirror quintic family. The crucial part of the cup product computation is identifying the obstruction bundles $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ and integrating their Euler class. We will content ourselves with computing the $`3`$-point functions. We showed in Subsection 3.2 that $`X_{(𝐠)}`$ is either a point or a curve, provided that $`(𝐠)`$ is not the identity. The ordinary cup product corresponding to the identity case will be covered in Section 6.

### 5.1. Point Case

If $`X_{(𝐠)}`$ is a point then $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ is a vector space and we can use rank formula (4.4). For the 3-point function to be nonzero, we need $`\mathrm{rank}_{}(E_{(𝐠)})=0`$, which forces $`_{j=1}^3\iota _{(g_j)}=3`$. In this case, we have $`\eta _1,\eta _2,\eta _3_{orb}=\frac{1}{25}\eta _1\eta _1\eta _3`$, where $`\eta _jH^{0,0}(X_{(g_j)})`$.

All in all there are 930 possible choices of point sectors (g) that give nonzero 3-point function. We can divide these into two types:

* $`\iota _{(g_j)}=1`$ for all $`j=1,2,3`$.
* $`\iota _{(g_3)}=0`$, i.e. $`g_3=\mathrm{id}`$.

Note that for type (i), $`\iota _{(g_1g_2)}=2`$ by property (ii) of degree shifting number in Section 4. There are 810 point sectors of type (i) and 120 point sectors of type (ii). For example,

$`((\zeta ^4,\zeta ,1,1,1),(1,\zeta ^3,\zeta ^2,1,1),(\zeta ,\zeta ,\zeta ^3,1,1)),`$
$`((\zeta ^3,\zeta ,\zeta ,1,1),(\zeta ,\zeta ^2,\zeta ^2,1,1),(\zeta ,\zeta ^2,\zeta ^2,1,1)),`$
$`((\zeta ^2,\zeta ^3,1,1,1),(\zeta ^2,\zeta ,\zeta ^2,1,1),(\zeta ,\zeta ,\zeta ^3,1,1))`$
are type (i) and

$$((\zeta ^3,\zeta ,\zeta ,1,1),(\zeta ^2,\zeta ^4,\zeta ^4,1,1),(1,1,1,1,1))$$

is type (ii).

### 5.2. Curve Case

Now consider the case when $`X_{(𝐠)}`$ is a curve. Then by Corollary 3.3, up to a canonical isomorphism , $`X_{(𝐠)}=\overline{O}_\tau X`$, where $`dim(\tau )=2`$. Consequently $`G_\tau _5`$. Hence $`K(𝐠)`$, the subgroup of $`G_\tau `$ generated by $`g_j`$ ($`j=1,2,3`$), is just $`G_\tau `$. Thus we may have $`g_2=(g_1)^k`$ where $`k=1,2,3,4`$. The kernel of the homomorphism $`\rho `$ (4.2), and hence the Riemann surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, depend on the value of $`k`$. We shall fully compute one representative case for each value of $`k`$. The computations for remaining cases can be completed using the same method and are left to the reader.

In the case $`k=4`$, $`g_3=1`$, and so to construct $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ we have to consider the orbifold sphere $`(𝕊^2,(x_1,x_2,x_3),(5,5,1))`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=𝕊^2`$, the smooth sphere.

For other values of $`k`$, the order of each $`g_j`$ is $`5`$. So in these cases we need to work with the orbifold sphere $`(𝕊^2,(x_1,x_2,x_3),(5,5,5))`$, which we continue to denote by $`S^2`$. Recall that

$$\pi _1^{orb}(S^2)=\left\{\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\lambda _3\right|\lambda _i^5=1,\lambda _1\lambda _2\lambda _3=1\}.$$

Its orbifold universal cover is the hyperbolic plane $`^2`$ (cf. \[Sc\]). We will use the Poincaré disk model of $`^2`$. Let $`\kappa `$ be the geodesic triangle $`\mathrm{}ovw`$ in $`^2`$ as in Figure 1 with all of its angles equal to $`\theta =\pi /5`$. The sides of $`\kappa `$ are labelled by $`L,M,N`$. Without causing too much confusion, we will denote the hyperbolic reflection about a side of $`\kappa `$ by the same letter. Let $`ϵ`$ denote the region $`\kappa M\kappa `$.

There is a properly discontinuous action of $`\pi _1^{orb}(S^2)`$ on $`^2`$ which gives a tiling of $`^2`$ with fundamental region $`ϵ`$ as follows: $`\lambda _1`$ acts as the composition $`LM`$, $`\lambda _2`$ acts as the composition $`MN`$, and $`\lambda _3`$ acts as the composition $`NL`$. The quotient of $`^2`$ by $`\pi _1^{orb}(S^2)`$ action is the fundamental region $`ϵ`$ with the edge $`\overline{ou}`$ identified with the edge $`\overline{ov}`$, and the edge $`\overline{uw}`$ identified with the edge $`\overline{vw}`$.

It is not difficult to compute that

$$v=\sqrt{\frac{2}{1+\sqrt{5}}}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.786151}.$$

The side $`N`$ of $`\kappa `$ is an arc of the circle in $``$ with center $`z_0`$ and radius $`R`$, where

$`z_0`$ $`=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{5+3\sqrt{5}}{10}}}\mathrm{exp}(\pi i/10)\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1.02909}+0.33437i,`$
$`R`$ $`=\mathrm{Im}z_0\mathrm{sec}\theta ={\displaystyle \frac{1+\sqrt{5}}{2\sqrt[4]{5}}}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.413304}.`$
Then we can write $`\lambda _1(z)=e^{i4\theta }z`$, and

$$\lambda _2(z)=e^{i4\theta }\frac{\overline{z_0}z+(R^2|z_0|^2)}{zz_0}.$$

#### 5.2.1. The Case $`g_1=g_2`$

Consider the homomorphism $`\rho :\pi _1^{orb}(S^2)K(𝐠)`$ given by $`\lambda _ig_i`$. $`\mathrm{Ker}(\rho )`$ is a normal subgroup generated by commutators of $`\lambda _i`$ and the element $`\lambda _1\lambda _2^1`$. $`\mathrm{Ker}(\rho )`$ acts freely on $`^2`$ with quotient being the decagon shown in Figure 2. The sides of the decagon are identified by the elements of $`\mathrm{Ker}(\rho )`$ given in Table 1.

We cut out four hyperbolic triangles along the geodesic curves, $`\alpha =(BE)^1,\beta =BA,\gamma =BD^1,\delta =E^1C`$. After pasting the triangles along the geodesic curves, $`A,B,C,D,E`$ or their translates by elements of $`\mathrm{Ker}(\rho )`$, we obtain the octagon in Figure 3, whose boundary curves comprise a symplectic basis $`\{a_1,b_1,a_2,b_2\}=\{\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ,\delta \}`$ for $`H_1(\mathrm{\Sigma };)`$ after appropriate identifications.

Taking the Universal Coefficients Theorem duals, we obtain a canonical symplectic basis $`\{\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha },\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta },\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma },\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }\}`$ for $`H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma };)`$. From the Riemann bilinear relations in \[Gr\] (Chapter V, §3), we know that there exists a complex basis $`\{\omega _1,\omega _2\}`$ for $`H^{1,0}(\mathrm{\Sigma })=H^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },K_\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ such that its period matrix with respect to the $`a_i`$-classes is the identity matrix, and its period matrix with respect to the $`b_i`$-classes is a symmetric complex matrix

$$P=\left(\begin{array}{cc}p& q\\ q& s\end{array}\right)$$

with the imaginary part, $`\mathrm{Im}P`$, being a positive definite matrix. Hence we can write $`\{\omega _1,\omega _2\}=\{\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }+p\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+q\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta },\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }+q\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+s\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }\}`$.

The rotation $`\lambda _1`$ induces the following map on $`\pi _1(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$:

$$\begin{array}{c}\alpha A^1C=\beta ^1\alpha ^1\delta \hfill \\ \beta C^1B^1=\delta ^1\alpha \hfill \\ \gamma C^1E=\delta ^1\hfill \\ \delta A^1D^1=\beta ^1\gamma \hfill \end{array}$$

Hence the automorphism $`(\lambda _1)_{}:H_1(\mathrm{\Sigma })H_1(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ can be expressed in the matrix

(5.1)
$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 0\end{array}\right)$$

with respect to the basis $`\{\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ,\delta \}`$. The automorphism $`\lambda _1^{}:H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ can be expressed in the matrix

(5.2)
$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 0\end{array}\right)$$

with respect to the dual basis $`\{\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha },\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta },\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma },\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }\}`$, which is the transpose of matrix (5.1). From matrix (5.2), we can easily calculate that

$$\begin{array}{c}\lambda _1^{}\omega _1=(1p+q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }+(1q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }+(p)\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta },\hfill \\ \lambda _1^{}\omega _2=(q+s)\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }+(s)\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+(s)\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }+(1q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }.\hfill \end{array}$$

Since $`\lambda _1`$ is a holomorphic map, $`\lambda _1^{}`$ preserves the subspace $`H^{1,0}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$. Hence $`\lambda _1^{}\omega _1`$ and $`\lambda _1^{}\omega _2`$ can be expressed as complex linear combinations of $`\omega _1`$ and $`\omega _2`$, so we easily obtain a system of equations satisfied by the triple $`(p,q,s)`$:

(5.3)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}1q=p(1p+q)q^2\hfill \\ p=q(1p+q)qs\hfill \\ s=p(q+s)sq\hfill \\ 1q=q(q+s)s^2\hfill \end{array}$$

One can verify that there are four solutions to system (5.3), but only one of them satisfies the condition that Im$`P`$ is positive definite, namely,

(5.4)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}p=\mathrm{exp}(3\pi i/5),\hfill \\ q=\frac{1}{2}\left(1+i\sqrt{52\sqrt{5}}\right),\hfill \\ s=\mathrm{exp}(2\pi i/5)=\zeta .\hfill \end{array}$$

We now know that $`H^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma })=\overline{H^{1,0}(\mathrm{\Sigma })}`$ is generated by

$$\{\overline{\omega }_1,\overline{\omega }_2\}=\{\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }+\overline{p}\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+\overline{q}\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta },\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }+\overline{q}\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+\overline{s}\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }\}.$$

#### Representative Case

Choose $`g_1=(\zeta ^n,\zeta ^{5n},1,1,1)`$ where $`n=1,2,3`$ or 4. First we consider $`e^{}TX`$ over the corresponding $`X_{(𝐠)}`$, which we identify with $`X\{x_1=x_2=0\}`$ as an analytic space. The orbifold structure on $`X_{(𝐠)}`$ is not reduced. At the three points $`p_j=X\{x_1=x_2=x_j=0\}`$ corresponding to $`j=3,4`$ or 5, the local groups are isomorphic to $`_5^2`$ and contain $`K(𝐠)_5`$ as a subgroup. The local group is $`K(𝐠)`$ at the remaining points. But the $`K(𝐠)`$ action in the local chart is trivial at each point. By quotienting out all the local groups by $`K(𝐠)`$, we can associate a reduced orbifold $`X_{(𝐠)}^{}:=X_{(𝐠)}^{red}`$ to $`X_{(𝐠)}`$. We again identify $`X_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ with $`X\{x_1=x_2=0\}`$, which is a genus zero curve (cf. \[Po\], Section 5.3).

Take the open charts $`V_i=\{x_i0\}`$ of $`^4`$, and $`U_i=V_i/(_5)^3`$ of $`^4/(_5)^3`$, where $`x_i`$ are the homogeneous coordinates. Let $`\pi _i:V_iU_i`$ denote the projection map. For points in $`V_5`$, we define new coordinates $`z_i=x_i/x_5`$, with $`z_5=1`$. On $`V_4`$ we define coordinates $`w_i=x_i/x_4`$, with $`w_4=1`$. Note that

$$z_i=\frac{x_i}{x_5}=\frac{x_i/x_4}{x_5/x_4}=\frac{w_i}{w_5};w_i=\frac{x_i}{x_4}=\frac{x_i/x_5}{x_4/x_5}=\frac{z_i}{z_4}.$$

Let $`\widehat{X}_i=\pi _i^1(XU_i)`$ and let $`X_{(𝐠)}^{}=X_{(𝐠)}\{p_3,p_4,p_5\}`$, $`X_{(𝐠)}^{{}_{}{}^{}}=X_{(𝐠)}^{}\{p_3,p_4,p_5\}`$.

Next we write down a local framing for $`T\widehat{X}_5|_{\pi _5^1(X_{(𝐠)}^{})}`$ in terms of the $`z_i`$ coordinates. Note that

$$\widehat{X}_5=\{z_1^5+z_2^5+z_3^5+z_4^5+1+\psi z_1z_2z_3z_4=0\}.$$

The normal direction to $`\widehat{X}_5`$ on a point is given by the vector

$$\stackrel{}{N}=(5z_1^4+\psi z_2z_3z_4,\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}5}z_2^4+\psi z_1z_3z_4,\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}5}z_3^4+\psi z_1z_2z_4,\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}5}z_4^4+\psi z_1z_2z_3)$$

For a point $`z=(0,0,z_3,z_4)\pi _5^1(X_{(𝐠)}^{})`$, we have $`\stackrel{}{N}_z=(0,0,5z_3^4,5z_4^4)`$. Hence a local framing for $`T\widehat{X}_5|_{\pi _5^1(X_{(𝐠)}^{})}`$ is given by tangent vectors

(5.5)
$$\left\{\xi _1:=\frac{}{z_1},\xi _2:=\frac{}{z_2},\xi _3:=z_4^4\frac{}{z_3}z_3^4\frac{}{z_4}\right\}.$$

$`K(𝐠)`$ action on the framing is given by $`g_1(z,\xi _1)=(z,\zeta ^n\xi _1)`$, $`g_1(z,\xi _2)=(z,\zeta ^{5n}\xi _2)`$, and $`g_1(z,\xi _3)=(z,\xi _3)`$.

Now consider the framing $`\{\xi _1\overline{\omega }_1,\xi _2\overline{\omega }_1,\xi _3\overline{\omega }_1,\xi _1\overline{\omega }_2,\xi _2\overline{\omega }_2,\xi _3\overline{\omega }_2\}`$ for the bundle $`T\widehat{X}_5H^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ over $`\pi _5^1(X_{(𝐠)}^{})`$. With respect to this framing, $`\lambda _1^{}=g_1`$ is given by the matrix

(5.6)
$$\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}\zeta ^n\left(1\overline{p}+\overline{q}\right)& 0& 0& \zeta ^n\left(\overline{q}+\overline{s}\right)& 0& 0\\ 0& \zeta ^{5n}\left(1\overline{p}+\overline{q}\right)& 0& 0& \zeta ^{5n}\left(\overline{q}+\overline{s}\right)& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\overline{p}+\overline{q}& 0& 0& \overline{q}+\overline{s}\\ \zeta ^n\left(\overline{q}\right)& 0& 0& \zeta ^n\left(\overline{s}\right)& 0& 0\\ 0& \zeta ^{5n}\left(\overline{q}\right)& 0& 0& \zeta ^{5n}\left(\overline{s}\right)& 0\\ 0& 0& \overline{q}& 0& 0& \overline{s}\end{array}\right)$$

where $`\zeta =\mathrm{exp}(2\pi i/5)`$. Matrix (5.6) can be diagonalized over $``$, and we find that $`1`$ is an eigenvalue of multiplicity one with corresponding eigenvector in Table 2.

Hence a generator $`s`$ for the restricted obstruction bundle $`(e^{}TXH^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma }))^{K(𝐠)}|_{X_{(𝐠)}^{}}X_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ is given by Table 3. Note however that $`s`$ does not define an orbifold section of the restricted obstruction bundle.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{p}_3\pi _5^1(p_3)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{p}_4\pi _5^1(p_4)`$ be any preimages. Then in a neighborhood of $`\stackrel{~}{p}_3`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{p}_4`$, $`(T\widehat{X}_5H^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma }))^{K(𝐠)}`$ is still generated by the eigenvector from Table 3. Now consider $`p_5`$ and let $`\stackrel{~}{p}_5\pi _4^1(p_5)`$. Then in a small neighborhood of $`\stackrel{~}{p}_5`$ in $`\widehat{X}_4`$, $`T\widehat{X}_4`$ is generated by tangent vectors

$$\left\{\xi _1^{}:=\frac{}{w_1},\xi _2^{}:=\frac{}{w_2},\xi _3^{}:=w_5^4\frac{}{w_3}w_3^4\frac{}{w_5}\right\}.$$

For any point $`w=(0,0,w_3,w_5)`$ in such a neighborhood, $`K(𝐠)`$ action on this basis is given by $`g_1(w,\xi _1^{})=(w,\zeta ^n\xi _1^{})`$, $`g_1(w,\xi _2^{})=(w,\zeta ^{5n}\xi _2^{})`$, and $`g_1(w,\xi _3^{})=(w,\xi _3^{})`$. Hence by an argument completely analogous to the $`\widehat{X}_5`$ case, a generator for $`(T\widehat{X}_4H^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma }))^{K(𝐠)}`$ can be obtained from Table 3 by substituting $`\xi _j^{}`$ for $`\xi _j`$.

Now we are in a position to describe the local uniformizing charts for $`E_{(𝐠)}`$. The following description holds only in the cases $`n=1`$ or $`2`$. The other two cases are completely analogous and left to the reader.

Choose a local chart $`(V_x^𝐠,C(𝐠),\pi )`$ for $`X_{(𝐠)}`$ at a point $`x`$.

* If $`xX_{(𝐠)}^{}`$, then $`C(𝐠)=G_x=K(𝐠)_5`$, and $`(V_x^𝐠\times ,K(𝐠),\stackrel{~}{\pi })`$ is a uniformizing system for $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ where $`K(𝐠)`$ acts on $`V_x^𝐠\times `$ by $`g_1(u,v)=(u,\zeta ^{5n}v)`$.
* If $`x=p_3`$, then $`C(𝐠)=G_x(_5)^2`$. An element of $`C(𝐠)`$ is of the form $`(\zeta ^a,\zeta ^b,\zeta ^c,1,1)`$, where $`a+b+c0mod5`$. Choose generators $`g_1`$ and $`h=(1,\zeta ,\zeta ^4,1,1)`$ of $`C(𝐠)`$. $`C(𝐠)`$ acts on $`V_x^𝐠\times `$ as follows: $`g_1(u,v)=(u,\zeta ^{5n}v)`$, and $`h(u,v)=(\zeta ^4u,\zeta v)`$.
* If $`x=p_4`$, then $`C(𝐠)=\{(\zeta ^a,\zeta ^b,1,\zeta ^c,1)|a+b+c0mod5\}`$. Choose $`h=(1,\zeta ,1,\zeta ^4,1)`$. Then the $`C(𝐠)`$ action on $`V_x^𝐠\times `$ is given by the same formulas as for $`p_3`$.
* If $`x=p_5`$, then $`C(𝐠)=\{(\zeta ^a,\zeta ^b,1,1,\zeta ^c)|a+b+c0mod5\}`$. Choose $`h=(1,\zeta ,1,1,\zeta ^4)`$. Then the $`C(𝐠)`$ action on $`V_x^𝐠\times `$ is given by the same formulas as for $`p_3`$.

We conclude that there is a smooth $`K(𝐠)`$ action on $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ that preserves the fiber.

$`E_{(𝐠)}`$ is a line bundle. So the $`3`$-point function (4.5) is nonzero only if $`\eta _iH^{0,0}(X_{(g_i)})`$, $`1i3`$. If this is the case then

(5.7)
$$\eta _1,\eta _2,\eta _3_{orb}=\eta _1\eta _2\eta _3c_1(E_{(𝐠)}),[X_{(𝐠)}]=\eta _1\eta _2\eta _3_{X_{(𝐠)}}^{orb}c_1(A)$$

where $`A`$ is any orbifold connection on $`E_{(𝐠)}`$.

Now consider the associated orbifold principal $`S^1`$ bundle $`P_{(𝐠)}`$ such that $`E_{(𝐠)}=P_{(𝐠)}\times _{S^1}`$. Recall that there is a global action of $`K(𝐠)_5`$ on each fiber $`F=S^1`$ of $`P_{(𝐠)}`$. The quotient $`P_{(𝐠)}/K(𝐠)`$ is again an orbifold principal bundle over the orbifold $`X_{(𝐠)}`$. Let $`\pi _{K(𝐠)}:P_{(𝐠)}P_{(𝐠)}/K(𝐠)`$ be the quotient map, which extends to an orbifold bundle map. Choose an orbifold connection $`A`$ that is the pullback $`\pi _{K(𝐠)}^{}(A^{})`$, where $`A^{}`$ is an orbifold connection on the associated bundle $`E_{(𝐠)}^{}=(P_{(𝐠)}/K(𝐠))\times _{S^1}`$ over $`X_{(𝐠)}`$. Note that $`\pi _{K(𝐠)}`$ on each fiber is given by $`zz^5`$. The Lie algebra of $`F`$ can be identified with $``$. Hence the induced map on the Lie algebra $`(\pi _{K(𝐠)})_{}:`$ is just mutiplication by 5.

Let $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}`$ be curvature 2-forms for $`A`$ and $`A^{}`$. By Proposition 6.1 of \[KN\], we must have $`\pi _{K(𝐠)}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=5\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Hence by Chern-Weil Theory, we have

(5.8)
$$_{X_{(𝐠)}}^{orb}c_1(A)=\frac{1}{5}_{X_{(𝐠)}}^{orb}c_1(A^{}).$$

Since the action of $`K(𝐠)`$ in any uniformizing system of $`E_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ is trivial, $`E_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ induces an orbifold bundle $`E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$ over the reduced orbicurve $`X_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ which has an induced connection $`A^{\prime \prime }`$. The connections $`A^{}`$ and $`A^{\prime \prime }`$ may be represented by the same $`1`$-form on $`V`$ for any pair of corresponding uniformizing systems $`(V\times ,G^{},\stackrel{~}{\pi }_1^{})`$ and $`(V\times ,G^{}/K(𝐠),\stackrel{~}{\pi }_1^{\prime \prime })`$ of $`E_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ and $`E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$ respectively. By Chern-Weil theory, $`c_1(A^{})`$ and $`c_1(A^{\prime \prime })`$ may therefore be represented by the same $`2`$-form on $`V_1`$. Hence by (4.1)

(5.9)
$$_{X_{(𝐠)}}^{orb}c_1(A^{})=\frac{1}{5}_{X_{(𝐠)}^{}}^{orb}c_1(A^{\prime \prime })=\frac{1}{5}c_1(E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }),[X_{(𝐠)}^{}].$$

Finally we know that (cf. \[CR1\], equation (4.2.5))

(5.10)
$$c_1(E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }),[X_{(𝐠)}^{}]=c_1(|E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }|),[\mathrm{\Sigma }_0]+\underset{j=3}{\overset{5}{}}\frac{\mu _j}{5},$$

where $`|E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }|`$ denotes the desingularization of $`E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$ over a smooth genus $`0`$ curve $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$, and $`0\mu _j<5`$ are the local invariants of $`E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$ at the singular points $`p_j`$ of $`X_{(𝐠)}^{}`$.

To pin down the local invariants $`\mu _j`$, we need to describe the uniformizing system for $`E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$. Choose a local chart $`(V_x^𝐠,C(𝐠)/K(𝐠),\pi ^{\prime \prime })`$ for $`X_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ at a point $`x`$. In the $`n=1`$ or $`2`$ cases,

* If $`xX_{(𝐠)}^{{}_{}{}^{}}`$, then $`C(𝐠)/K(𝐠)`$ is the trivial group.
* If $`x=p_3`$, then $`C(𝐠)/K(𝐠)_5`$ and $`_5`$ acts on $`V_x^𝐠\times `$ by $`h(u,v)=(\zeta ^4u,v)`$.

From (ii) we immediately conclude that all $`\mu _j=0`$.

To compute $`c_1(|E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }|)`$, note that $`s^5`$ is a holomorphic orbifold section of $`E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }|_{X_{(𝐠)}^{{}_{}{}^{}}}X_{(𝐠)}^{{}_{}{}^{}}`$. This section can be extended to a global holomorphic section of the desingularized bundle $`|E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }|`$ as follows.

Note that we can express our framing (5.5) in terms of $`w_i`$ coordinates. On $`V_4`$ we have

(5.11) $`\xi _1={\displaystyle \frac{}{z_1}}`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{5}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{w_j}{z_1}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{w_j}}={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{5}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{z_1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{z_j}{z_4}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{}{w_j}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{z_4}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{w_1}}={\displaystyle \frac{w_5}{w_4}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{w_1}}=w_5{\displaystyle \frac{}{w_1}}.`$
Similarly, we have

(5.12)
$$\xi _2=\frac{}{z_2}=\underset{j=1}{\overset{5}{}}\frac{w_j}{z_2}\frac{}{w_j}=\frac{1}{z_4}\frac{}{w_2}=w_5\frac{}{w_2}.$$

One can express $`\xi _3`$ similarly, but we will not need it.

Now note that $`s^5`$ defines a global holomorphic section of $`|E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }|`$, where

$$s^5|_{U_4\mathrm{\Sigma }_0}=(\zeta w_5)^5\frac{}{w_2}\overline{\omega }_1+(w_5)^5\frac{}{w_2}\overline{\omega }_2.$$

We also note that $`(w_5)^5`$ defines the local coordinate of the desingularized curve $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ centered at $`p_5`$. Hence the section $`s^5`$ has a unique zero of order one at the point $`p_5=[x_1:x_2:x_3:x_4:x_5]=[0:0:\zeta :1:0]`$ in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$.

Since a generic holomorphic section of $`|E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }|`$ will also have a single zero, we conclude that

$$c_1(|E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }|),[\mathrm{\Sigma }_0]=\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}.$$

It follows from (5.8), (5.9) and (5.10) that

$$c_1(E_{(𝐠)}),[X_{(𝐠)}]=\frac{1}{25}.$$

Finally, (5.7) becomes

(5.13)
$$\eta _1,\eta _2,\eta _3_{orb}=\frac{1}{25}\eta _1\eta _2\eta _3.$$

We remark that (5.13) holds true when $`n=3`$ or $`4`$, as well as for the other choices of $`(𝐠)`$, as long as $`g_2(g_1)^4`$.

#### 5.2.2. The Case $`g_2=(g_1)^2`$

For this choice of $`\rho `$, the quotient $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=^2/\mathrm{Ker}(\rho )`$ is the genus two surface given by the decagon in Figure 4 whose sides are identified according to Table 4.

After cutting and pasting along the geodesics as in the previous case, we can find a set of generators of $`\pi _1(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ based at the point $`v`$:

$$\alpha =AB,\beta =EDCB,\gamma =ED,\delta =CE^1$$

which descends to a canonical symplectic basis for $`H_1(\mathrm{\Sigma };)`$. The rotation $`\lambda _1`$ induces the following map on $`\pi _1(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$:

$$\begin{array}{c}\alpha D^1C^1=\gamma ^1\delta ^1\hfill \\ \beta ABEC^1=\alpha \delta ^1\hfill \\ \gamma AB=\alpha \hfill \\ \delta EA^1=\delta ^1\gamma ^1\beta \alpha ^1\hfill \end{array}$$

Hence the automorphism $`\lambda _1^{}:H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ can be expressed in the matrix

(5.14)
$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\end{array}\right)^T=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1\end{array}\right)$$

with respect to the dual basis $`\{\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha },\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta },\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma },\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }\}`$.

Let $`\{\omega _1,\omega _2\}=\{\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }+p\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+q\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta },\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }+q\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+s\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }\}`$ be a basis for $`H^{1,0}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ as before. From matrix (5.14), we calculate that

$$\begin{array}{c}\lambda _1^{}\omega _1=(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }+(1q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }+(1+pq)\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }=(q)\omega _1+\omega _2,\hfill \\ \lambda _1^{}\omega _2=(1s)\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }+(s)\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+(1+qs)\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }=(1s)\omega _1.\hfill \end{array}$$

Comparing coefficients, we obtain the system:

(5.15)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}1q=qp+q\hfill \\ 1+pq=q^2+s\hfill \\ s=p(1s)\hfill \\ 1+qs=q(1s)\hfill \end{array}$$

Just as in the previous case, there are four solutions to system (5.15), but only one of them satisfies the condition that Im$`P`$ is positive definite, namely,

(5.16)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}p=\frac{5\sqrt{5}}{4}+i\sqrt{\frac{5+\sqrt{5}}{8}}=\sqrt{\frac{5\sqrt{5}}{2}}\mathrm{exp}(3\pi i/10),\hfill \\ q=\frac{1}{2}\left(1+i\sqrt{52\sqrt{5}}\right)=\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}2}\mathrm{sin}(\pi /10)\mathrm{exp}(\pi i/5),\hfill \\ s=\frac{5+\sqrt{5}}{4}+i\sqrt{\frac{5+\sqrt{5}}{8}}=\sqrt{\frac{5\sqrt{5}}{2}}\mathrm{exp}(7\pi i/10).\hfill \end{array}$$

#### Representative Subcase

Without loss of generality, we choose $`g_1=(\zeta ^n,\zeta ^{5n},1,1,1)`$, where $`n=1,2,3,4`$. Once again, consider the framing

(5.17)
$$\{\xi _1\overline{\omega }_1,\xi _2\overline{\omega }_1,\xi _3\overline{\omega }_1,\xi _1\overline{\omega }_2,\xi _2\overline{\omega }_2,\xi _3\overline{\omega }_2\}$$

for the bundle $`T\widehat{X}_5H^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ over $`\pi _5^1(X_{(𝐠)}^{})`$. With respect to this framing, $`\lambda _1^{}=g_1`$ is given by the matrix

(5.18)
$$\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}\zeta ^n\overline{q}& 0& 0& \zeta ^n\left(1\overline{s}\right)& 0& 0\\ 0& \zeta ^{5n}\overline{q}& 0& 0& \zeta ^{5n}\left(1\overline{s}\right)& 0\\ 0& 0& \overline{q}& 0& 0& 1\overline{s}\\ \zeta ^n& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& \zeta ^{5n}& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)$$

where $`\zeta =\mathrm{exp}(2\pi i/5)`$. Matrix (5.18) is diagonalizable over $``$, and one finds that $`1`$ is an eigenvalue of multiplicity one with corresponding eigenvector in Table 5.

The rest of the computation goes exactly like in the previous case almost verbatim.

#### 5.2.3. The Case $`g_2=(g_1)^3`$

For this choice of $`\rho `$, the quotient $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=^2/\mathrm{Ker}(\rho )`$ is the genus two surface given by the decagon in Figure 5 whose sides are identified according to Table 6.

After cutting and pasting along the geodesics as in previous cases, we can find a set of generators of $`\pi _1(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ based at the point $`v`$:

$$\alpha =E^1C^1,\beta =AB,\gamma =AD,\delta =E^1A^1$$

which descends to a canonical symplectic basis for $`H_1(\mathrm{\Sigma };)`$. The rotation $`\lambda _1`$ induces the following map on $`\pi _1(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$:

$$\begin{array}{c}\alpha B^1A^1=\beta ^1\hfill \\ \beta D^1C^1=\gamma ^1\delta ^1\alpha \hfill \\ \gamma D^1E=\gamma ^1\delta ^1\hfill \\ \delta B^1D=\beta ^1\gamma \hfill \end{array}$$

Hence the automorphism $`\lambda _1^{}:H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ can be expressed in the matrix

(5.19)
$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 0\end{array}\right)^T=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 0\end{array}\right)$$

with respect to the dual basis $`\{\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha },\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta },\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma },\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }\}`$.

Let $`\{\omega _1,\omega _2\}=\{\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }+p\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+q\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta },\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }+q\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+s\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }\}`$ be a basis for $`H^{1,0}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ as before. From matrix (5.19), we calculate that

$$\begin{array}{c}\lambda _1^{}\omega _1=(p)\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }+(1q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }+(p)\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }=(p)\omega _1+(q)\omega _2,\hfill \\ \lambda _1^{}\omega _2=(q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }+(1s)\stackrel{ˇ}{\beta }+(1s)\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }+(1q)\stackrel{ˇ}{\delta }=(q)\omega _1+(1s)\omega _2.\hfill \end{array}$$

Comparing coefficients, we obtain the system:

(5.20)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}1q=p^2q^2\hfill \\ p=pqqs\hfill \\ 1s=pq+q(1s)\hfill \\ 1q=q^2+s(1s)\hfill \end{array}$$

which has a unique solution satisfying the positive definiteness condition, namely,

(5.21)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}p=\frac{1}{10}i(5+3\sqrt{5})\sqrt{52\sqrt{5}},\hfill \\ q=\frac{1}{10}\left(5i\sqrt{5(52\sqrt{5})}\right)=\sqrt{\frac{5\sqrt{5}}{10}}\mathrm{exp}(\pi i/10),\hfill \\ s=\frac{1}{10}\left(5+i\sqrt{5(5+2\sqrt{5})}\right)=\sqrt{\frac{5+\sqrt{5}}{10}}\mathrm{exp}(7\pi i/10).\hfill \end{array}$$

#### Representative Subcase

Without loss of generality, we choose $`g_1=(\zeta ^n,\zeta ^{5n},1,1,1)`$, where $`n=1,2,3,4`$. With respect to the framing (5.17) for $`T\widehat{X}_5H^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ over $`\pi _5^1(X_{(𝐠)}^{})`$, $`\lambda _1^{}=g_1`$ is given by the matrix

(5.22)
$$\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}\zeta ^n\overline{p}& 0& 0& \zeta ^n\overline{q}& 0& 0\\ 0& \zeta ^{5n}\overline{p}& 0& 0& \zeta ^{5n}\overline{q}& 0\\ 0& 0& \overline{p}& 0& 0& \overline{q}\\ \zeta ^n\overline{q}& 0& 0& \zeta ^n\left(1\overline{s}\right)& 0& 0\\ 0& \zeta ^{5n}\overline{q}& 0& 0& \zeta ^{5n}\left(1\overline{s}\right)& 0\\ 0& 0& \overline{q}& 0& 0& 1\overline{s}\end{array}\right)$$

Matrix (5.22) is diagonalizable, and we find that $`1`$ is an eigenvalue of multiplicity one with corresponding eigenvector in Table 7.

The rest of the computation goes exactly like in the previous two cases.

#### 5.2.4. The Case $`g_2=(g_1)^4`$

As we remarked earlier in this case $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=𝕊^2`$. Hence $`H^{0,1}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ is trivial and $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ is a rank zero bundle. So $`e_A(E_{(𝐠)})=1`$. Thus the $`3`$-point function (4.5)

$$\eta _1,\eta _2,\eta _3_{orb}=_{X_{(𝐠)}}^{orb}e_1^{}\eta _1e_2^{}\eta _2e_3^{}\eta _3.$$

For the integral to be nonzero exactly one of the $`\eta _j`$ must be a $`(1,1)`$-form and the other two must be $`0`$-forms.

Let $`H`$ denote the hyperplane class in $`H_6(^4/_5^3)`$. Let $`\eta H^{1,1}(X)`$ denote the generator whose Poincaré dual is $`[HX]H_4(X)`$. Then $`\eta ^{}=e_3^{}\eta `$ generates $`H^{1,1}(X_{(𝐠)})`$. Moreover, the maps $`e_1`$ and $`e_2`$ are isomorphisms in this case. Hence we only need to compute $`_{X_{(𝐠)}}^{orb}\eta ^{}.`$

First write $`e_3`$ as the composition $`X_{(𝐠)}\stackrel{q}{}X_{(𝐠)}^{}\stackrel{j}{}X`$, where $`q`$ is the reduction map. We have

$$_{X_{(𝐠)}}^{orb}e_3^{}\eta =\frac{1}{5}_{X_{(𝐠)}^{}}^{orb}j^{}\eta =\frac{1}{5}_{j(X_{(𝐠)}^{})}^{orb}\eta =\frac{1}{5}_{j(X_{(𝐠)}^{})}\eta .$$

Note that the last equality follows from the fact that $`X_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ is reduced.

Since $`X`$ is a normal complex algebraic variety, there is a well-defined notion of Poincaré duality (cf. \[GM\]). Hence the last integral is given by the intersection number of $`[j(X_{(𝐠)}^{})]`$ and $`PD(\eta )`$; it is easily checked that this is $`1`$. Hence $`_{X_{(𝐠)}}^{orb}\eta ^{}=\frac{1}{5}`$.

## 6. Ordinary Cup Product on Mirror Quintic

First we determine the Hodge numbers of $`X`$. We start with Lefschetz Hyperplane Theorem in \[BC\] (Proposition 10.8).

###### Theorem 6.1.

Let $`X`$ be a nondegenerate ample hypersurface of an $`n`$-dimensional complete simplicial toric variety $`Y`$. Then the natural map induced by inclusion $`j^{}:H^i(Y)H^i(X)`$, is an isomorphism for $`i<n1`$ and an injection for $`i=n1`$.

Applying the above theorem to our mirror quintic $`X`$ inside $`Y=^4/(_5)^3`$, we easily conclude that $`h^{1,1}(X)=1`$ and $`h^{1,0}(X)=h^{2,0}(X)=0`$. Complex conjugation gives $`h^{0,1}(X)=h^{0,2}(X)=0`$. By Kodaira-Serre duality (cf. \[CR1\], Proposition 3.3.2), it follows that $`h^{3,2}(X)=h^{3,1}(X)=0`$ and $`h^{2,2}(X)=1`$. By Theorem 4 in \[Po\], we can calculate that $`h^{2,1}(X)=1`$.

By Poincaré duality, we may compute the cup product by computing the intersection of dual cycles (cf. \[GM\]). Let $`H`$ denote the hyperplane class in $`H_6(Y)`$. Let $`\eta H^{1,1}(X)`$ denote the generator whose Poincaré dual is $`[HX]H_4(X)`$. To compute $`\eta \eta \eta `$, we look at the intersection of $`X`$ and three hyperplanes in general position. In particular, we look at hyperplanes $`x_1=0`$, $`x_2=0`$, and $`x_3=0`$. These intersect $`X`$ transversally at the unique point $`[0:0:0:\zeta :1]`$ in $`Y`$. Thus $`\eta \eta \eta =PD([X])`$.

### 6.1. Middle Cohomology

The cup product for the middle cohomology of an ample hypersurface is described for the smooth case in \[CG\] and for the quasi-smooth case in \[Ma\].

First we state some general facts. Let $`X`$ be a nondegenerate ample hypersurface in a $`d`$-dimensional projective simplicial toric variety $`Y`$. Let $`S=[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ be the homogeneous coordinate ring of $`Y`$ which is graded by the Chow group $`A_{d1}(Y)`$. Suppose $`X`$ is defined by a degree $`\beta `$ homogeneous polynomial $`fS_\beta `$. Denote by $`D_i`$ the effective divisor $`\{x_i=0\}`$ and let $`D=b_iD_i`$ be an ample divisor such that $`[D]=\beta `$. Set $`\beta _0=\mathrm{deg}(x_1\mathrm{}x_n)=[_{i=1}^nD_i]`$.

Let $`F_j=x_j\frac{f}{x_j}`$. Given $`fS_\beta `$ we get the ideal quotient (cf. \[CLO\], p. 191)

$$J_1(f)=F_1,\mathrm{},F_n:(x_1\mathrm{}x_n)$$

and the ring $`R_1(f)=S/J_1(f)`$ graded by $`A_{d1}(Y)`$.

Fix an integer basis $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_d`$ for the lattice $`M`$. Moreover suppose $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_n`$ are the primitive integral generators of the $`1`$-dimensional cones of the fan of $`Y`$. Then given a subset $`I=\{i_1,\mathrm{},i_d\}\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$, we define

$$det(e_I)=det(m_j,e_{i_k}_{1jd,i_kI}),$$

$`dx_I=dx_{i_1}\mathrm{}dx_{i_d}`$, and $`\widehat{x}_I=_{iI}x_i`$. Define the $`n`$-form $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ by the formula

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\underset{|I|=d}{}det(e_I)\widehat{x}_Idx_I.$$

For $`AS_{(a+1)\beta \beta _0}`$ consider the rational $`d`$-form $`\omega _A=A\mathrm{\Omega }/f^{a+1}`$ which gives a class in $`H^d(YX)`$ and by the residue map

$$\mathrm{Res}:H^d(YX)H^{d1}(X)$$

we get $`\mathrm{Res}(\omega _A)H^{d1}(X)`$. Denote the $`(b,a)`$ Hodge component of $`\mathrm{Res}(\omega _A)`$ by $`\mathrm{Res}(\omega _A)^{b,a}`$, where $`a+b=d1`$. Then the map

(6.1)
$$\mathrm{Res}(\omega _{})^{b,a}:R_1(f)_{(a+1)\beta \beta _0}H^{b,a}(X)$$

is injective by Theorem 4.4 of \[Ma\]. By Theorem 11.8 of \[BC\], the vector spaces $`R_1(f)_{(a+1)\beta \beta _0}`$ and $`PH^{b,a}(X):=(H^{d1}(X)/j^{}H^{d1}(Y))^{b,a}`$ have the same dimension. If $`d`$ is even then $`H^{d1}(Y)=0`$, and hence $`PH^{b,a}(X)=H^{b,a}(X)`$. Thus for even $`d`$, which is true for our mirror quintic case, the map (6.1) is an isomorphism.

Now let $`I=\{i_0,\mathrm{},i_d\}\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$. Let $`J=det(\frac{F_j}{x_i})_{i,jI}/(c_I^\beta )^2\widehat{x}_I`$, where $`(c_I^\beta )`$ is the determinant of the $`(d+1)\times (d+1)`$ matrix obtained from $`(m_j,e_{i_k}_{1jd,i_kI})`$ by adding the first row $`(b_{i_0},\mathrm{},b_{i_d})`$.

For $`AR_1(f)_{(a+1)\beta \beta _0}`$ and $`BR_1(f)_{(b+1)\beta \beta _0}`$ there is a unique constant $`c`$ such that

$$AB(x_1\mathrm{}x_n)cJx_1\frac{f}{x_1},\mathrm{},x_n\frac{f}{x_n}.$$

Then

$$_X\mathrm{Res}(\omega _A)^{b,a}\mathrm{Res}(\omega _B)^{a,b}=c(2\pi i)^dc_{ab}d!\mathrm{Vol}(\mathrm{\Delta }_D),$$

where $`c_{ab}=\frac{(1)^{a(a+1)/2+b(b+1)/2+a^2+d1}}{a!b!}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_D`$ is the polytope associated to the ample divisor $`D`$.

In the mirror quintic situation, $`n=d+1=5`$, $`e_i=v_i`$, $`\beta =\beta _0=[_{i=1}^5D_i]`$. $`\mathrm{\Delta }_D`$ is the polytope with vertices $`(1,0,0,0)`$, $`(0,1,0,0)`$, $`(0,0,1,0)`$, $`(0,0,0,1)`$ and $`(1,1,1,1)`$. Note that $`\mathrm{Vol}(\mathrm{\Delta }_D)=\frac{5}{4!}`$. We compute that $`(c_I^\beta )=625`$, and

$`J=`$ $`\psi (x_1x_2x_3x_4)^5+\psi (x_1x_2x_3x_5)^5+\psi (x_1x_2x_4x_5)^5`$
$`+\psi (x_1x_3x_4x_5)^5+\psi (x_2x_3x_4x_5)^5+25(x_1x_2x_3x_4x_5)^4.`$
Now there are two cases to consider.

* $`H^{3,0}H^{0,3}`$: Both $`H^{3,0}(X)R_1(f)_0`$ and $`H^{1,2}(X)R_1(f)_{3\beta }`$ have rank $`1`$. Choose $`A=1R_1(f)_0`$ and $`B^{}=(x_1x_2x_3x_4x_5)^3R_1(f)_{3\beta }`$. Then we use the Division Algorithm in \[CLO\], p. 61, to compute that $`c=\frac{125}{\psi ^5+5^5}`$. Here we have $`a=0`$, $`b=3`$ and thus $`c_{ab}=\frac{1}{3!}`$. Hence we have

$$\mathrm{Res}(\omega _A)^{3,0}\mathrm{Res}(\omega _B)^{0,3}=\frac{5000\pi ^4}{3(\psi ^5+5^5)}PD([X]).$$
* $`H^{2,1}H^{1,2}`$: Again both $`H^{2,1}(X)R_1(f)_\beta `$ and $`H^{1,2}(X)R_1(f)_{2\beta }`$ have rank $`1`$. Choose $`A^{}=x_1x_2x_3x_4x_5R_1(f)_\beta `$ and $`B^{}=(x_1x_2x_3x_4x_5)^2R_1(f)_{2\beta }`$. Since $`A^{}B^{}`$ is same as $`AB`$, we have the same $`c=\frac{125}{\psi ^5+5^5}`$. But now $`a=1`$ , $`b=2`$ and thus $`c_{ab}=\frac{1}{2!}`$. Hence we have

$$\mathrm{Res}(\omega _A^{})^{2,1}\mathrm{Res}(\omega _B^{})^{1,2}=\frac{5000\pi ^4}{\psi ^5+5^5}PD([X]).$$

## 7. $`3`$-Point Function via Localization

Consider the general case, i.e. $`X`$ is a nondegenerate Calabi-Yau hypersurface of a projective simplicial toric variety $`Y`$. Then a tricyclic sector $`X_{(𝐠)}`$ is a hypersurface of the corresponding tricyclic sector $`Y_{(𝐠)}`$ of $`Y`$. Denote the associated reduced varieties by $`X_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ and $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$. We showed that $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ is a toric variety. There exists a torus equivariant line bundle $`L_{(𝐠)}`$ over $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ with $`X_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ as the zero locus of a section of $`L_{(𝐠)}`$. On the other hand, the obstruction bundle $`F_{(𝐠)}`$ over $`Y_{(𝐠)}`$ restricts to the reduced obstruction bundle $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ over $`X_{(𝐠)}`$. This follows from the definition of obstruction bundle and the rank formula (4.4). We can associate reduced bundles $`E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$ over $`X_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ to $`E_{(𝐠)}`$ and $`F_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$ over $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ to $`F_{(𝐠)}`$ by using a $`K(𝐠)`$-invariant homomorphism of the structure group as in Section 5. $`F_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$ restricts to $`E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$ over $`X_{(𝐠)}^{}`$. By Poincaré duality we have

(7.1)
$$_{X_{(𝐠)}^{}}e(E_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime })=_{Y_{(𝐠)}^{}}e(F_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime })e(L_{(𝐠)})=_{Y_{(𝐠)}^{}}e(F_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }L_{(𝐠)}).$$

The torus action on $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ lifts to an action (not unique) on the bundle $`F_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }L_{(𝐠)}`$ that maps each fiber linearly. Hence we can use the localization technique of Atiyah and Bott \[AB\], adapted to reduced orbifolds, to calculate the last integral in (7.1). We carry this out below when $`XY=^4/(_5)^3`$ is a member of the mirror quintic family. Let $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ denote the fan of $`^4/(_5)^3`$ in $`N`$ as in Section 2.1 and let $`M`$ denote the dual lattice of $`N`$.

Let $`g_1=(\zeta ^2,\zeta ^3,1,1,1)`$ and $`g_2=g_1`$. Then $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ is isomorphic to the toric variety $`\{x_1=x_2=0\}Y`$. In other words, $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}=\overline{O}_\tau `$ where $`\tau [1]=\{v_1,v_2\}`$. Recall that $`N_\tau `$ is the sublattice of $`N`$ generated by $`v_1`$ and $`v_2`$. Let $`N(\tau )=N/N_\tau `$ be the quotient lattice. The fan of $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ is given by the projection of $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ to $`N(\tau )`$. The dual lattice of $`N(\tau )`$ is $`M(\tau )=\tau ^{}M`$. The $`2`$-dimensional torus associated to $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ is $`𝐓=\mathrm{Spec}([M(\tau )])=O_\tau `$. The characters $`\chi ^m`$ correspond to rational functions on $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ when $`mM(\tau )`$. Let $`\{m_1,m_2,m_3,m_4\}`$ be the standard basis of $`M`$. Then $`\{c_1=m_1+m_2+3m_4,c_2=m_3m_4\}`$ is a basis for $`M(\tau )`$. The $`𝐓`$ action on $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ has three fixed points $`q_j=\{x_i=\delta _{i,j}\},\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}3}j5`$. We study the action of $`𝐓`$ on the normal bundle of $`q_j`$, i.e., the orbifold tangent space $`(TY_{(𝐠)}^{})_{q_j}`$.

Consider $`q_5`$ first. Denote local coordinates on a uniformizing sysytem of $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ around $`q_5`$ by $`z_3=\frac{x_3}{x_5}`$ and $`z_4=\frac{x_4}{x_5}`$ as in Section 5. Let $`m^1=\frac{1}{5}c_1+\frac{2}{5}c_2`$ and $`m^2=\frac{1}{5}c_1+\frac{1}{5}c_2`$. Then observe that $`m^1,v_3=1`$, $`m^1,v_4=0`$ and $`m^1,v_5=1`$. Hence $`z_3=\chi ^{m^1}`$ (see Section 3.1). Similarly, $`z_4=\chi ^{m^2}`$. Thus with respect to the basis $`\{c_1,c_2\}`$, $`𝐓`$ action is given by $`(t_1,t_2)(z_3)=t_1^{\frac{1}{5}}t_2^{\frac{2}{5}}z_3`$ and $`(t_1,t_2)(z_4)=t_1^{\frac{1}{5}}t_2^{\frac{1}{5}}z_4`$. Let $`u_1,u_2`$ be parameters on the Lie algebra $`𝐭_{}`$ of $`𝐓`$ corresponding the above choice of basis. Then the $`𝐓`$-equivariant Euler class of the normal bundle of $`q_5`$ is given by $`e_𝐓(\nu _{q_5})=(\frac{1}{5}u_1+\frac{2}{5}u_2)(\frac{1}{5}u_1+\frac{1}{5}u_2)`$. One similarly obtains $`e_𝐓(\nu _{q_4})=(\frac{1}{5}u_2)(\frac{1}{5}u_1\frac{1}{5}u_2)`$, and $`e_𝐓(\nu _{q_3})=(\frac{1}{5}u_2)(\frac{1}{5}u_1\frac{2}{5}u_2)`$.

Now we want to lift the $`𝐓`$ action to the line bundles $`L_{(𝐠)}`$ and $`F_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$. Quite generally, suppose $`L`$ is a line bundle on a toric variety, corresponding to a Cartier divisor $`\{U_\sigma ,\chi ^{m_\sigma }\}`$. The transition functions $`h_{\tau \sigma }:U_\sigma \times U_{\sigma \tau }\times U_{\sigma \tau }\times U_\tau \times `$ for $`L`$ are given by $`h_{\tau \sigma }(x,c)=(x,\chi ^{(m_\sigma m_\tau )}(x)c)`$. Then one can define a $`𝐓`$ action on $`L`$ that makes it a $`𝐓`$-equivariant bundle (cf. \[Od\]) as follows: $`t(x,c)=(tx,\chi ^{m_\sigma }(t)c)`$ for $`t𝐓`$ and $`(x,c)U_\sigma \times `$.

Let $`D_i`$ denote the Weil divisor $`\{x_i=0\}`$ of $`Y`$. Then the hypersurface $`X`$ corresponds to a section of the anticanonical bundle $`K_Y=_{i=1}^5D_i`$. Thus $`X\{x_1=x_2=0\}`$ corresponds to a section of $`K_YD_1D_2`$ which is linearly equivalent to $`5D_1D_2D_3`$. Hence $`L_{(𝐠)}=[5D_1D_2D_3]`$. Consider the open covering of $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ by $`U_iY_{(𝐠)}^{}=\{x_1=x_2=0,x_i0\},\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}3}i5`$. $`U_iY_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ is the affine open set of $`Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ corresponding to the cone generated by the projection of $`\{v_j,v_k:\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}j,k5,j,ki\}`$. For instance $`U_5Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ is generated by projection of $`\{v_3,v_4\}`$. The equations $`m,v_3=5`$ and $`m,v_4=0`$ have solution $`m=c_1+2c_2`$ in $`M(\tau )`$. Hence the divisor $`5D_1D_2D_3`$ is given by the rational function $`\chi ^{(c_1+2c_2)}`$ on $`U_5Y_{(𝐠)}`$. Similarly, it is given by the rational functions $`\chi ^{c_2}`$ on $`U_4Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$ and $`\chi ^0`$ on $`U_3Y_{(𝐠)}^{}`$. Hence the action of $`𝐓`$ on $`L_{(𝐠)}`$ at the fixed points $`q_5,q_4\mathrm{and}q_3`$ has weights $`(u_1+2u_2),u_2\mathrm{and}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}`$ respectively.

The orbifold line bundle $`F_{(𝐠)}`$ is trivialized by the generator $`\frac{}{(x_2/x_i)}(\zeta \overline{\omega }_1+\overline{\omega }_2)`$ on $`U_iY_{(𝐠)}`$. The transition maps $`h_{ij}:(U_jY_{(𝐠)}^{})\times (U_jU_iY_{(𝐠)}^{})\times (U_jU_iY_{(𝐠)}^{})\times (U_iY_{(𝐠)}^{})\times `$ for $`F_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$ are given by $`h_{ji}(x,c)=(x,(\frac{x_j}{x_i})^5(x)c)`$. Thus we can define a $`𝐓`$ action on $`F_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$ by:

* $`t(x,c)=(tx,c)=(tx,\chi ^0(t)c)`$ for $`t𝐓`$ and $`(x,c)(U_5Y_{(𝐠)}^{})\times `$.
* $`t(x,c)=(tx,(\frac{x_5}{x_4})^5(t)c)=(tx,\chi ^{c_1c_2}(t)c)`$ for $`t𝐓`$ and $`(x,c)(U_4Y_{(𝐠)}^{})\times `$.
* $`t(x,c)=(tx,(\frac{x_5}{x_3})^5(t)c)=(tx,\chi ^{c_12c_2}(t)c)`$ for $`t𝐓`$ and $`(x,c)(U_3Y_{(𝐠)}^{})\times `$.

This action of $`𝐓`$ on $`F_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }`$ at the fixed points $`q_5,q_4\mathrm{and}q_3`$ has weights $`0,(u_1u_2)\mathrm{and}(u_12u_2)`$ respectively.

Applying corollary 9.1.4 of \[CK\], which shows that for reduced orbifolds the localization formula has to be modified by dividing the contribution of each fixed point by the order of its local group, we have

$`{\displaystyle _{Y_{(𝐠)}^{}}}e(F_{(𝐠)}^{\prime \prime }L_{(𝐠)})`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{25}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{0(u_1+2u_2)}{(\frac{1}{5}u_1+\frac{2}{5}u_2)(\frac{1}{5}u_1+\frac{1}{5}u_2)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(u_1u_2)u_2}{(\frac{1}{5}u_2)(\frac{1}{5}u_1\frac{1}{5}u_2)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(u_12u_2)0}{(\frac{1}{5}u_2)(\frac{1}{5}u_1\frac{2}{5}u_2)}}\right)`$
$`=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}.`$
Finally by (5.8) and (5.9) we must have

$$_{X_{(𝐠)}}^{orb}e(E_{(𝐠)})=\frac{1}{25}.$$


format: text

text:
# Operator-Schmidt decomposition of the quantum Fourier transform on ℂ^𝑁₁⊗ℂ^𝑁₂

## 1. Introduction

Operator-Schmidt decompositions are useful for quantifying the non-local nature of operators on finite-dimensional bipartite Hilbert spaces. The first special cases of Schmidt decompositions of the quantum Fourier transform were computed by Nielsen  to illustrate his study of coherent quantum communication complexity. He considered the following problem:

> Suppose Alice is in possession of $`m`$ qubits, Bob is in possession of $`n`$ qubits, and they wish to perform some general unitary operation $`U`$ which acts on their $`m+n`$ qubits. How many qubits must be communicated between Alice and Bob for them to achieve this goal?

Nielsen proved that the number $`Q_0\left(U\right)`$ of such qubits was bounded by

$$1/2\times K_{\text{Har}}\left(U\right)Q_0\left(U\right)2\mathrm{min}(n,m),$$
(1)
where the Hartley strength $`K_{\text{Har }}`$ satisfies

$$K_{\text{Har}}\left(U\right)\mathrm{log}_2\left(\mathrm{Sch}\left(U\right)\right)\text{,}$$

where $`\mathrm{Sch}\left(U\right),`$ defined in Definition 4 below, is the number of nonzero Schmidt coefficients of $`U`$. The upper bound of $`\left(\text{1}\right)`$ is trivial, for Alice could simply send her qubits to Bob and let him send them back after performing $`U,`$ or vice-versa. To illustrate his theorem, Nielsen considered the quantum Fourier transform $`_{2^n\times 2^n}`$ on $`n+n`$ qubits. He showed that $`K_{\text{Har}}\left(_{2^n\times 2^n}\right)=2n,`$ yielding $`nQ_0\left(_{2^n\times 2^n}\right)2n`$. Subsequent work by Nielsen  improved the general lower bound of $`\left(\text{1}\right)`$ by a factor of two,222See also footnote 7 for a brief outline of an alternative proof. We remark that Nielsen considers qubits for convenience only. In particular, let $`V`$ be a unitary on $`^{N_1}C^{N_2}`$, where $`N_1`$ and $`N_2`$ are the respective dimensions of Alice and Bob’s quantum states, with no requirement that $`N_1`$ and $`N_2`$ be a powers of two. Then any quantum computation of $`V`$ employing some combination of qudit communication and ancillae, possibly of varying dimension, satisfies the following bound: $`_{d=2}^{\mathrm{}}N_d\mathrm{log}_2\left(d\right)K_{\text{har}}\left(V\right)`$, where $`N_d`$ is the number of qudits of dimension $`d`$ communicated between Alice and Bob. It is assumed that at the end of the computation that Alice and Bob retain posession of their (now altered) data qudits, although the bound holds whether or not a given net transfer of the (restored) ancillae is allowed. in particular implying that

$$Q_0\left(_{2^n\times 2^n}\right)=2n.$$

In a later paper , Nielsen and collaborators further employ operator Schmidt decompositions in the quantitative study of strength measures of the nonlocal action of unitary operators.333They also consider more general quantum operations than unitaries. Besides revisiting the Hartley strength, among the several strength measures considered is the Schmidt strength,

$$K_{\text{Sch}}\left(U\right)=H\left(\left\{\frac{\lambda _k^2}{dim\left(𝒦\right)}\right\}\right)\text{,}$$

where $`U`$ is a unitary operator on $`𝒦`$, $`\left\{\lambda _k\right\}`$ are its Schmidt coefficients, and $`H`$ is the Shannon entropy. They give a Schmidt decomposition of $`_{2^m\times 2^n}`$ on $`m+n`$ qubits for the case $`mn`$ and conjecture that $`\mathrm{Sch}\left(_{2^m\times 2^n}\right)=2^{2n}`$ for $`m>n.`$

### 1.1. Results

Schmidt decompositions of the quantum Fourier transform $`_{N_1\times N_2}:^{N_1}^{N_2}^{N_1}^{N_2}`$ are given for all $`N_1,N_2>1`$, with no requirement that either $`N_1`$ or $`N_2`$ be a power of two. As a special case, the conjecture of Nielsen and collaborators is affirmed. In all cases, the results of Nielsen imply that the bipartite communication cost of exact computation of the quantum Fourier transform is maximal. Once stated, the decomposition is easily verified; a short derivation is given in the Appendix.

### 1.2. Definitions and Notation

###### Definition 1

Let $`N,`$ $`N_1,`$ $`N_2`$ be integers greater than one satisfying $`N=N_1N_2`$. The quantum Fourier transformation444This is unitarily equivalent to the discrete Fourier transform. $`_N:^N^N`$ is the unitary operator satisfying

$$_N|s_N=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\underset{t=0}{\overset{N1}{}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2\pi i}{N}ts\right)|t_N,s\{0,\mathrm{},N1\},$$

where each $`|s_N`$ is a standard basis element. The quantum Fourier transformation $`_{N_1\times N_2}`$ on $`^{N_1}^{N_2}`$ is obtained by identifying $`^N`$ with $`^{N_1}^{N_2}`$ under the mixed-decimal representation, which asserts the equalities

$$|s_N=|k\mathrm{}_{N_1,N_2}=|k_{N_1}|\mathrm{}_{N_2}$$

when

$$s=kN_2+\mathrm{}\text{}k\{0,\mathrm{},N_11\}\text{}\mathrm{}\{0,\mathrm{},N_21\}\text{.}$$

###### Remark 2

In the case that $`N_1N_2`$, the reader is warned that the operator $`_{N_1\times N_2}`$ is not equivalent in what follows to $`_{N_2\times N_1}`$. Specifically, $`_N`$ does not commute with the unitary operator $`R_{N_1,N_2}:^N^N`$ given by

$$R_{N_1,N_2}|kN_2+\mathrm{}=|\mathrm{}N_1+k\text{}k\{0,\mathrm{},N_11\}\text{}\mathrm{}\{0,\mathrm{},N_21\},$$

which interchanges the digits of the mixed-decimal representation.

###### Notation 3

Let $``$ be a finite-dimensional Hilbert space. Then $`B\left(\right)`$ is the Hilbert space of linear transformations on $``$ with the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product $`A,B_{B\left(\right)}=TrA^{}B`$.555If $`A`$ is a linear operator on $``$, then $`A^{}`$ is defined by $`x,Ay_{}=A^{}x,y_{}`$ for all $`x,y`$. Here $`,_{}`$ is the inner product on $``$, and we will always take inner products to be linear in the second argument.

###### Definition 4

Let $``$ and $`𝒦`$ be finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces, and let $`F`$ be a nonzero linear transformation on $`𝒦`$. An (operator) Schmidt decomposition of $`F`$ is a decomposition of the form

$$F=\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{Sch}\left(F\right)}{}}\lambda _kA_kB_k\text{}\lambda _k>0,$$
(2)
where $`\left\{A_k\right\}_{k=1\mathrm{}\mathrm{Sch}\left(F\right)}`$ and $`\left\{B_k\right\}_{k=1\mathrm{}\mathrm{Sch}\left(F\right)}`$ are orthonormal sets666but not necessarily bases of operators on $``$ and $`𝒦`$ respectively, under the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product. The quantity $`\mathrm{Sch}\left(\mathrm{F}\right)`$ is called the Schmidt number, and the $`\lambda _k`$ are called the Schmidt coefficients. Such a decomposition is said to be completely degenerate if $`\mathrm{Sch}\left(F\right)=\left(\mathrm{min}(dim,dim𝒦)\right)^2`$ and all the $`\lambda _k`$ are equal.777More generally, if $`F:𝒦^{}𝒦^{}`$, then one may consider decompositions of the form $`\left(\text{2}\right)`$, where now the $`A_k:^{}`$ and $`B_k:𝒦𝒦^{}`$ are orthornormal. A useful such decomposition exists for the communication operator $`C:\left(^{n_1}^{n_2}\right)^{n_3}^{n_1}\left(^{n_2}^{n_3}\right)`$, defined by $`C\left(ab\right)c=a\left(bc\right)`$. One may check that $`C=_{k=1}^{n_2}\sqrt{n_1n_3}A_kB_k`$, where $`A_k=n_1^{1/2}_{i=1}^{n_1}|iik|:`$ $`^{n_1}^{n_2}^{n_1}`$ and $`B_k=n_3^{1/2}_{i=1}^{n_3}|kii|:^{n_3}^{n_2}^{n_3}`$. Replacing the swap operators in section III.B.3 of  by communication operators, one obtains the aforementioned sharp quantum communication complexity bound of .

We remark that the operator-Schmidt decomposition is just a special case of the well-known Schmidt-decomposition

$$\psi =\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{Sch}\left(\psi \right)}{}}\lambda _ke_kf_k\text{}\lambda _k>0$$

of a vector $`\psi _0𝒦_0`$, where the $`\left\{e_k\right\}`$ and $`\left\{f_k\right\}`$ are orthonormal.888See  for a discussion of the Schmidt decomposition. In particular, one sets $`_0=B\left(\right),`$ $`𝒦_0=B\left(𝒦\right)`$, and $`\psi =FB\left(𝒦\right)`$. The decomposition $`\left(\text{2}\right)`$ is then obtained by identifying $`B\left(\right)B\left(𝒦\right)`$ with $`B\left(𝒦\right)`$ under the natural isomorphism.999In particular, there exists a unique unitary $`\mathrm{\Xi }:B\left(\right)B\left(𝒦\right)B\left(𝒦\right)`$ such that $`\left(\mathrm{\Xi }\left(A\stackrel{~}{}B\right)\right)\left(fg\right)=\left(Af\right)\left(Bg\right)`$ for all $`f`$ and $`g𝒦`$. Here $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ denotes the defining tensor product of $`B\left(\right)B\left(𝒦\right)`$, considering $`B\left(\right)`$ and $`B\left(𝒦\right)`$ as abstract Hilbert spaces. It follows that $`F`$ and $`G`$ in $`B\left(𝒦\right)`$ $`B\left(\right)B\left(𝒦\right)`$ have the same operator-Schmidt coefficients, counting multiplicity, iff

$$A=\left(𝕌𝕍\right)B$$

for some unitary “super-operators”$`𝕌B\left(B\left(\right)\right)`$ and $`𝕍B\left(B\left(𝒦\right)\right)`$.101010See exercise 2.80 of . One would like to know much more, i.e. invariants which specify when are there local unitaries $`U,YB\left(\right)`$ and $`V,ZB\left(𝒦\right)`$ such that $`A=\left(UV\right)B\left(YZ\right)`$. Such invariants are known only in the two-qubit case,  where one has the corresponding canonical decomposition of Khaneja, Brockett, and Glaser  (see also Kraus and Cirac  for simple “magic basis” proof.)

The well-known procedure for computing Schmidt decompositions is reviewed in Theorem 8 of the Appendix. We content ourselves here with the statement that the Schmidt coefficients of $`\psi _0𝒦_0`$ are the square roots of the nonzero eigenvalues of the reduced density matrix

$$\rho _\psi =\underset{𝒦_0}{Tr}|\psi \psi |\text{.}$$

Equivalently, the Schmidt coefficients are the nonzero singular values of the operator $`B_\psi :_0𝒦_0^{}`$ given by

$$\left(B_\psi f\right)\left(g\right)=\psi ,fg_{_0𝒦_0},$$

where $`𝒦_0^{}`$ is the dual space of continuous linear functionals on $`𝒦_0`$.111111See  for a proof that the Schmidt decomposition is a consequence of the singular value decomposition. In fact they are mathematically equivalent.

## 2. Schmidt Decomposition of $``$

###### Notation 5

Let $`_{N_1}=\{0,\mathrm{},N_11\}`$, $`_{N_2}=\{0,\mathrm{},N_21\}`$, $`_{N_2}^2=_{N_2}\times _{N_2}`$, $`N_1^2=\left\{(N_1x,N_1y)\right|x,y\}`$, $`x=\mathrm{min}\left\{n|n>x\right\}`$, and $`x=x`$. Denote the cardinality of a set $`C`$ by $`\left|C\right|`$. Its characteristic function $`\mathrm{\chi }_\mathrm{C}`$ satisfies

$$\chi _C\left(x\right)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}1& \text{if}& xC\\ 0& \text{if}& xC\end{array}\text{.}$$

Adopt the convention $`n\mathrm{mod}m_m.`$

###### Theorem 6

Define an equivalence relation $``$ on $`_{N_2}^2`$ by

$$\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{}{m}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{}{m}N_1^2\text{,}$$

where the subtraction is not modular, and define $`=_{N_2}^2/`$ to be the set of equivalence classes.121212The reader may check that for $`N_1=2`$ and $`N_2=3`$ that $``$ consists of $`\{(0,0),(0,2),(2,0),(2,2)\}`$, $`\{(1,0),(1,2)\}`$, $`\{(0,1),(2,1)\}`$, and $`\left\{(1,1)\right\}`$. Then a Schmidt decomposition of $`_{N_1\times N_2}`$ is given by

$$_{N_1\times N_2}=\underset{C}{}\sqrt{\frac{N_1}{N_2}\left|C\right|}A_CB_C,$$
(3)
where the matrices of $`A_C:^{N_1}^{N_1}`$ and $`B_C:^{N_2}^{N_2}`$ are defined by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\left(A_C\right)_{k_1k_2}=\frac{1}{N_1}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{2\pi i}{N_1}\left(N_2k_1k_2+k_1\stackrel{~}{c}_2+k_2\stackrel{~}{c}_1\right)\right]\hfill & k_1,k_2_{N_1}\hfill \\ \left(B_C\right)_{\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2}=\frac{1}{\left|C\right|^{1/2}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2\pi i}{N}\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2\right)\chi _C\left((\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2)\right)\hfill & \mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2_{N_2},\hfill \end{array}$$

with each $`(\stackrel{~}{c}_1,\stackrel{~}{c}_2)C`$ arbitrarily chosen. ($`A_C`$ doesn’t depend on this choice.)

Proof. It is trivial to check that $`\left\{A_C\right\}`$ and $`\left\{B_C\right\}`$ are orthonormal sets. Furthermore, for $`k_1,k_2_{N_1}`$ and $`\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2_{N_2}`$,

$`k_1,\mathrm{}_1|`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \underset{C}{}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{N_1}{N_2}}\left|C\right|}A_CB_C\right)|k_2,\mathrm{}_2`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{C}{}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{N_1}{N_2}}\left|C\right|}k_1\left|A_C\right|k_2\mathrm{}_1\left|B_C\right|\mathrm{}_2`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{C}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi i}{N}}\left(N_2^2k_1k_2+N_2k_1\stackrel{~}{c}_2+N_2k_2\stackrel{~}{c}_1+\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2\right)\right]\chi _C\left((\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2)\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{C}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi i}{N}}\left(N_2^2k_1k_2+N_2k_1\mathrm{}_2+N_2k_2\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2\right)\right]\chi _C\left((\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2)\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi i}{N}}\left(N_2k_1+\mathrm{}_1\right)\left(N_2k_2+\mathrm{}_2\right)\right]`$
$`=k_1\mathrm{}_1\left|_{N_1\times N_2}\right|k_2,\mathrm{}_2,`$
as desired.

The reader may find it instructive to compute the linear spans of the matrices $`B_C`$ corresponding to each of the Schmidt coefficients.

###### Corollary 7

The Schmidt decompositions of $`_{N_1\times N_2}`$ fall into three categories:

1. If $`N_1`$ is a factor of $`N_2,`$ then there is only one Schmidt coefficient,$`\sqrt{N_2/N_1}`$, with multiplicity $`N_1^2`$.
2. If $`N_1N_2,`$ there is only one Schmidt coefficient, $`\sqrt{N_1/N_2}`$, with multiplicity $`N_2^2`$.
3. Otherwise, $`_{N_1\times N_2}`$ has three distinct nonzero Schmidt coefficients:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\sqrt{\frac{N_2}{N_1}^2\frac{N_1}{N_2}}\hfill & \text{,}\hfill & \text{multiplicity }\left(N_2\mathrm{mod}N_1\right)^2\hfill \\ \sqrt{\frac{N_2}{N_1}\frac{N_2}{N_1}\frac{N_1}{N_2}}\hfill & \text{,}\hfill & \text{multiplicity }2\left(N_2\mathrm{mod}N_1\right)\left(\left(N_2\right)\mathrm{mod}N_1\right)\hfill \\ \sqrt{\frac{N_2}{N_1}^2\frac{N_1}{N_2}}\hfill & \text{,}\hfill & \text{multiplicity }\left(\left(N_2\right)\mathrm{mod}N_1\right)^2\hfill \end{array}$$

In all cases, the Schmidt number of $`_{N_1\times N_2}`$ is $`\mathrm{min}(N_1^2,N_2^2)`$. In particular, the Schmidt decomposition is completely degenerate in Cases $`1`$ and $`2`$.

We remark that the previously known cases fall under Case 1. Case 2 verifies the Schmidt numbers conjectured in . Since the Schmidt decomposition in Case 1 (or Case 2) is completely degenerate, Theorem 8 (below), may be used to find a Schmidt decomposition of the form of equation $`\left(\text{2}\right)`$ for *any* orthonormal basis $`\left\{A_k\right\}`$ (or $`\left\{B_k\right\}`$, in case 2).131313Note that cases 1 and 2 overlap for $`N_1=N_2.`$

Acknowledgments: Michael Nielsen’s correspondence was greatly appreciated. I would like to thank Mary Beth Ruskai for her comments, which were most useful in making the manuscript more readable. This research was carried out for the Clay Mathematics Institute.

## 3. Appendix: A Derivation

It will soon be apparent that the crucial fact which allows easy calculation of a Schmidt decomposition of $``$ is the following: No two of the $`B_C`$ have a nonzero matrix entry in the same place.

The well-known computational recipe needed here is summarized in

###### Theorem 8

Let $`\psi 𝒦`$ be nonzero. If

$$\rho _𝒦\underset{}{Tr}|\psi \psi |=\underset{\mathrm{}L}{}\mu _{\mathrm{}}|f_{\mathrm{}}f_{\mathrm{}}|\text{,}$$

is a spectral decomposition of the reduced density matrix, then a Schmidt decomposition of $`\psi `$ is given by

$$\psi =\underset{\left\{\mathrm{}\right|\mu _{\mathrm{}}>0\}}{}\sqrt{\mu _{\mathrm{}}}e_{\mathrm{}}f_{\mathrm{}}\text{,}$$
(4)
where each $`e_{\mathrm{}}`$ is defined by the requirement that

$$\psi ,vf_{\mathrm{}}_𝒦=\sqrt{\mu _k}e_{\mathrm{}},v_{}$$
(5)
for all $`v`$. Furthermore, all Schmidt decompositions of $`\psi `$ may be exhibited in this manner.

Derivation of Theorem 6. We follow the prescription of Theorem 8, and employ the natural isomorphism $`B\left(^{N_1}\right)B\left(^{N_2}\right)B\left(^{N_1}^{N_2}\right)`$, as explained in section 1.2. The reduced density superoperator $`\rho B\left(B\left(^{N_2}\right)\right)`$ is defined by the equation

$$A,\rho B_{B\left(^{N_2}\right)}=\underset{E}{}EA,_{B\left(^{N_1}^{N_2}\right)},EB_{B\left(^{N_1}^{N_2}\right)\text{,}}$$

for arbitrary $`A,BB\left(^{N_2}\right)`$, where $`E`$ runs over a basis of $`B\left(^{N_1}\right)`$. For $`\stackrel{}{j}_{N_1}^2`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}_{N_2}^2`$define the standard basis elements

$$E_\stackrel{}{j}=|j_1j_2|B\left(C^{N_1}\right)\text{}F_{\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}}=|\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2|B\left(^{N_2}\right).$$

We compute $`\rho `$ by studying its matrix coordinates

$$\rho _\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{}{m}=F_{\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}},\rho F_\stackrel{}{m}_{B\left(^{N_2}\right)}\text{,}$$

Similarly, let

$$_\stackrel{}{j}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}=E_\stackrel{}{j}F_{\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}},_{B\left(^N\right)}\text{.}$$

Then

$`\rho _\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{}{m}`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{\stackrel{}{j}_{N_1}^2}{}}_\stackrel{}{j}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}\overline{}_{\stackrel{}{j}\stackrel{}{m}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{j_1=0}{\overset{N_11}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j_2=0}{\overset{N_11}{}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2\pi i}{N}\left(N_2j_1+\mathrm{}_1\right)\left(N_2j_2+\mathrm{}_2\right)\right)\hfill \\ \times \mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2\pi i}{N}\left(N_2j_1+m_1\right)\left(N_2j_2+m_2\right)\right)\hfill \end{array}\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\pi i}{N}}\left(\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2m_1m_2\right)\right)`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{j_1=0}{\overset{N_11}{}}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\pi i}{N_1}}(\mathrm{}_2m_2)j_1\right)\times {\displaystyle \underset{j_2=0}{\overset{N_11}{}}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\pi i}{N_1}}(\mathrm{}_1m_1)j_2\right)`$
Evaluating the appropriate inverse-Fourier transforms,

$$\rho _\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{}{m}\frac{N_1}{N_2}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2\pi i}{N}\left(\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2m_1m_2\right)\right)\times \chi _{N_1^2}\left(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{}{m}\right)\text{.}$$
(6)
The spectral decomposition of $`\rho `$ into a linear combination of projections may be simply read off from the asymptotic $`n\mathrm{}`$ behavior of $`\left(\text{6}\right)`$ to the power of $`n^+`$.141414using matrix multiplication One need not do this, however, for using the identity

$$\chi _{N_1^2}\left(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{}{m}\right)=\underset{C}{}\chi _C\left(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}}\right)\chi _C\left(\stackrel{}{m}\right)\text{,}$$

equation $`\left(\text{6}\right)`$ may be rewritten as

$$\rho =\underset{C}{}\frac{N_1}{N_2}\left|C\right|\times |B_CB_C|\text{,}$$

where the $`B_C`$ are orthonormal, as noted before. The $`A_C`$ are easily computed using $`\left(\text{5}\right)`$.