text:
# Universal Formula for the Expectation Value of the Radial Operator under the Aharonov-Bohm Flux and the Coulomb Field

## I Introduction

The calculation of the expectation values $`r^\lambda `$ with different power $`\lambda `$ of the radial operator $`\widehat{r}`$ is important in the Hellmann-Feynman theory , the interactions of the molecular theory , and the quantum chemistry . On the other hand, the Aharonov-Bohm (AB) effect, a topological non-local physical significance at the quantum level, has shed light on the understanding of the phenomenon of the fractional quantum Hall effect , the superconductivity , and the repulsive Bose gases  in the last 20 years. It is known that the global influence of the AB effect affects all charged particle’s systems . In this paper, we will derive a recurrence formula for the expectation value $`r^\lambda `$ ($`\mathrm{}\lambda \mathrm{}`$) of the radial operator $`\widehat{r}`$ in the presence of the Coulomb field under the Aharonov-Bohm effect (ABC). Moreover, the Virial theory in quantum mechanics will also be generalized to the system with spherical symmetry under the AB flux. The general effect of the AB flux to the expectation value will also be discussed in this paper.

The fixed-energy bare Green’s function $`G^0(𝐫,𝐫^{};E)`$ for a charged particle with mass $`m`$ propagating from $`𝐫^{}`$ to $`𝐫`$ satisfies the Schrödinger equation

$$\left[E\widehat{H}_0(𝐫,\frac{\mathrm{}}{i})\right]G^0(𝐫,𝐫^{};E)=\delta ^3(𝐫𝐫^{}).$$
(1)
Here the Hamiltonian of the system is given by $`\widehat{H}_0=`$ $`\mathrm{}^2^2/2m+V(𝐫)`$. The angular decomposition of the Green’s function can be written as

$$G^0(𝐫,𝐫^{};E)=\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{k=l}{\overset{l}{}}G_l^0(r,r^{};E)Y_{lk}(\theta ,\phi )Y_{lk}^{}(\theta ^{},\phi ^{}),$$
(2)
in the spherically symmetric system with $`Y_{lk}`$ the well-known spherical harmonics. Hence the left hand side of the Eq. (1) can be reduced to the following form:

$`\left\{E{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=l}{\overset{l}{}}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dr^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{l(l+1)\mathrm{}^2}{2mr^2}}\right]V(r)\right\}`$

$$\times G_l^0(r,r^{};E)Y_{lk}(\theta ,\phi )Y_{lk}^{}(\theta ^{},\phi ^{}).$$
(3)
## II Radial wave equation for a charged particle in a magnetic field

For a charged particle in a magnetic field, the charged Green’s function $`G`$ is related to the bare Green’s function $`G^0`$ by the following equation:

$$G(𝐫,𝐫^{};E)=G^0(𝐫,𝐫^{};E)e^{\frac{ie}{\mathrm{}c}_𝐫^{}^𝐫𝐀(\stackrel{~}{𝐫})𝑑\stackrel{~}{𝐫}},$$
(4)
with a globally path-dependent nonintegrable phase factor  given above. Here the vector potential $`𝐀(\stackrel{~}{𝐫})`$ is used to represent the contribution from the magnetic field. For the Aharonov-Bohm magnetic flux under consideration, the vector potential can be written as

$$𝐀(𝐱)=\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}B\rho \widehat{e}_\phi (\rho <ϵ)\hfill \\ \frac{1}{2}B\frac{ϵ^2}{\rho }\widehat{e}_\phi =\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{2\pi \rho }\widehat{e}_\phi (\rho >ϵ)\hfill \end{array}.$$
(5)
Here the two-dimensional radial length square is defined as $`\rho ^2=x^2+y^2`$. Moreover, $`\widehat{e}_\phi `$ is the unit vector of the coordinate $`\phi `$ and $`ϵ`$ is the radius of region where the magnetic field exists. Hence the total magnetic flux is given by $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\pi ϵ^2B`$. Note that the associated magnetic field lines are confined inside a tube, with radius $`ϵ`$, along the $`z`$-axis. Along the region free of the magnetic field, the path-dependent nonintegrable phase factor is given by exp{$`i\mu _0_P^\tau d\tau ^{}\dot{\phi }(\tau ^{})\}`$. Here we have used the subscript $`P`$ to represent the path-dependent nature of the phase factor. In addition, we have denoted $`\dot{\phi }(\tau ^{})=d\phi /d\tau ^{}`$. Moreover, $`\mu _0=2eg/\mathrm{}c`$ is a dimensionless numerical factor defined by $`\mathrm{\Phi }=4\pi g`$. The minus sign we adopted is a matter of convention. According to the discussion in Ref. , only phase factors with closed-loop contour are considered where the description of electromagnetic phenomenon are complete. Hence, we have

$$n=\frac{1}{2\pi }_P^\tau 𝑑\tau ^{}\dot{\phi }(\tau ^{}),$$
(6)
with integer values $`n`$ corresponding to the winding number. The magnetic interaction is therefore a purely topological phenomenon. Therefore the nonintegrable phase factor becomes $`\mathrm{exp}\{i\mu _0\left(2n\pi \right)\}`$. With the help of equality between the associated Legendre polynomial $`P_\nu ^\mu (z)`$ and the Jacobi function $`P_n^{(\alpha ,\beta )}(z)`$ , we find that

$$P_l^k(\mathrm{cos}\theta )=(1)^k\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+k+1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(l+1)}\left(\mathrm{cos}\frac{\theta }{2}\mathrm{sin}\frac{\theta }{2}\right)^kP_{lk}^{(k,k)}(\mathrm{cos}\theta ).$$
(7)
Therefore the angular part of the Green’s function in the expression (3) can be shown to be

$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=l}{\overset{l}{}}}Y_{lk}(\theta ,\phi )Y_{lk}^{}(\theta ^{},\phi ^{})={\displaystyle \underset{k=l}{\overset{l}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{2l+1}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(lk+1\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(l+k+1\right)}}P_l^k(\mathrm{cos}\theta )P_l^k(\mathrm{cos}\theta ^{})e^{ik(\phi \phi ^{})}`$

$`={\displaystyle \underset{k=l}{\overset{l}{}}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2l+1}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(lk+1\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(l+k+1\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2\left(l+1\right)}}\right]\left(\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta ^{}}{2}}\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta ^{}}{2}}\right)^k`$

$$\times P_{lk}^{(k,k)}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )P_{lk}^{(k,k)}(\mathrm{cos}\theta ^{})e^{ik\left(\phi \phi ^{}\right)}.$$
(8)
To include the nonintegrable phase factor due to the AB effect, we can rename the index $`l`$ into $`q`$ related by the relation $`lk=q`$. As a result, Eq. (3) can be written as

$`\left\{E{\displaystyle \underset{q=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dr^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{(q+k)(q+k+1)\mathrm{}^2}{2mr^2}}\right]V(r)\right\}`$

$`\times G_{q+k}^0(r,r^{};E)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2(q+k)+1}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(q+1\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(q+2k+1\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2\left(q+k+1\right)}}\right]\left(\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta ^{}}{2}}\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta ^{}}{2}}\right)^k`$

$$\times P_q^{(k,k)}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )P_q^{(k,k)}(\mathrm{cos}\theta ^{})e^{ik\left(\phi \phi ^{}\right)}.$$
(9)
In addition, the nonintegrable phase factor $`\mathrm{exp}\{i\mu _0\left(2n\pi \right)\}`$ can thus be included with the help of the Poisson’s summation formula (p.124, )

$$\underset{k=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}f(k)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑y\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{2\pi nyi}f(y).$$
(10)
Hence, the expression (9) can be written as

$`\left\{E{\displaystyle \underset{q=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑z\underset{k=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left(\frac{d^2}{dr^2}+\frac{2}{r}\frac{d}{dr}\right)+\frac{(q+z)(q+z+1)\mathrm{}^2}{2mr^2}\right]}V(r)\right\}`$

$`\times G_{q+z}(r,r^{};E)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2(q+z)+1}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(q+1\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(q+2z+1\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2\left(q+z+1\right)}}\right]\left(\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta ^{}}{2}}\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta ^{}}{2}}\right)^z`$

$$\times P_q^{(z,z)}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )P_q^{(z,z)}(\mathrm{cos}\theta ^{})e^{i(z\mu _0)\left(\phi +2k\pi \phi ^{}\right)}.$$
(11)
Here the superscript $`0`$ in $`G_{q+k}^0`$ has been suppressed to reflect the inclusion of the AB effect. The summation over all indices $`k`$ forces $`z=\mu _0`$ modulo an arbitrary integral number. Therefore, one has

$`\left\{E{\displaystyle \underset{q=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dr^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{(q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|)(q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|+1)\mathrm{}^2}{2mr^2}}\right]V(r)\right\}`$

$`\times G_{q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|}(r,r^{};E)\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\left[2\left(q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|\right)+1\right]}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(q+1\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(2\left|k+\mu _0\right|+q+1\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2\left(\left|k+\mu _0\right|+q+1\right)}}\right\}e^{ik\left(\phi \phi ^{}\right)}`$

$$\times \left(\mathrm{cos}\theta /2\mathrm{cos}\theta ^{}/2\mathrm{sin}\theta /2\mathrm{sin}\theta ^{}/2\right)^{\left|k+\mu _0\right|}P_q^{(\left|k+\mu _0\right|,\left|k+\mu _0\right|)}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )P_q^{(\left|k+\mu _0\right|,\left|k+\mu _0\right|)}(\mathrm{cos}\theta ^{}).$$
(12)
Note that the effect of the AB flux to the radial Green’s function is to replace the integer quantum number $`l`$ with the fractional quantum number $`q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|`$. Analogously the same procedure can be applied to the delta function $`\delta ^3(𝐫𝐫^{})`$ in the rhs of the Eq. (1) with the help of the following solid angle representation of the $`\delta `$ function:

$$\delta \left(\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }^{}\right)=\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{k=l}{\overset{l}{}}Y_{lk}(\theta ,\phi )Y_{lk}^{}(\theta ^{},\phi ^{}).$$
(13)
Therefore, for the set of the fixed quantum numbers $`(q,k)`$ one can show that the radial Green’s function satisfies

$`\left\{E\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dr^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{(q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|)(q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|+1)\mathrm{}^2}{2mr^2}}\right]V(r)\right\}`$

$$\times G_{q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|}(r,r^{};E)=\delta (rr^{}).$$
(14)
Hence, the corresponding radial wave equation reads

$$\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\frac{d^2}{dr^2}u_\alpha (r)+\left[E\left(V(r)+\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)}{r^2}\right)\right]u_\alpha (r)=0,$$
(15)
where we have set $`\alpha =q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|`$, and $`u_\alpha (r)=rR_{n\alpha }(r)`$. It is clear that $`R_{n\alpha }`$ satisfies the spherical Bessel equation

$$\left[\frac{d^2}{dr^2}+\frac{2}{r}\frac{d}{dr}+\left(\kappa ^2U(r)\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)}{r^2}\right)\right]R_{n\alpha }(r)=0$$
(16)
with the definition $`\kappa =\sqrt{2mE/\mathrm{}^2}`$ and the reduced potential $`U(r)=2mV(r)/\mathrm{}^2`$. For simplicity, we have written $`R_{n\alpha }(r)`$ instead of $`R_{n,q,k}(r)`$ in which each set $`(n,q,k)`$ denote a quantum state. Hence the AB effect reflects itself by the coupling to the angular momentum in the radial Green’s function, which turns the integer quantum number to a fractional one.

In order to derive the expectation value $`r^\lambda `$ in an arbitrary quantum state $`(n,q,k)`$ of the ABC system, one notes that the attractive potential of the Coulomb field is given by $`V(r)=Ze^2/r`$ in which $`Ze`$ is the total charge at the center of source and $`e`$ representing the charge of the electron. One can show that the exact solution of the energy spectra in this case is given by

$$E_{n,q,k}=\frac{Z^2e^2}{2a_0\left[n+q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|+1\right]^2},$$
(17)
where $`a_0=\mathrm{}^2/me^2`$ is the Bohr radius, and the ranges of the quantum number are $`n,q=0,1,2,\mathrm{},`$ and $`\mathrm{}<k<\mathrm{}`$. With the help of the result, Eq. (15) can be brought to the following form:

$$\frac{d^2}{dr^2}u(r)+\left[\frac{2Z}{a_0r}\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)}{r^2}\left(\frac{Z}{\stackrel{~}{n}a_0}\right)^2\right]u(r)=0.$$
(18)
## III Recurrence Formula for the Expectation Value of the Radial operator of the Aharonov-Bohm-Coulomb System

For simplicity, we have written $`u(r)`$ instead of $`u_\alpha (r)`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{n}=\left[n+q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|+1\right]`$. For our purpose of calculating the diagonal matrix element, we will multiply $`r^\lambda u`$ to both sides of the above equation. Integrating this equation with respect to $`r`$, $`_0^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}𝑑r`$, one derives

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}r^\lambda u\left(\frac{d^2}{dr^2}u\right)𝑑r\alpha (\alpha +1)r^{\lambda 2}+\frac{2Z}{a_0}r^{\lambda 1}\left(\frac{Z}{\stackrel{~}{n}a_0}\right)^2r^\lambda =0.$$
(19)
With the help of integration by part, the first term yields

$`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}r^\lambda u\left({\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dr^2}}u\right)𝑑r=r^\lambda u\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}u\right)|_0^{\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\left(r^\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}u+\lambda r^{\lambda 1}u\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}u\right)𝑑r`$

$$=\left[r^\lambda u\left(\frac{d}{dr}u\right)\frac{\lambda }{2}r^{\lambda 1}u^2\right]|_0^{\mathrm{}}+\frac{\lambda (\lambda 1)}{2}r^{\lambda 2}_0^{\mathrm{}}r^\lambda \left(\frac{d}{dr}u\right)^2𝑑r.$$
(20)
One can show that the asymptotic behavior of the wave function is given by

$$\begin{array}{c}r0,ur^{\alpha +1}\hfill \\ r\mathrm{},ur^{\stackrel{~}{n}}e^{Zr/\stackrel{~}{n}a_0}\hfill \end{array}$$
(21)
directly from the asymptotic wave equation. Therefore, one has the necessary and sufficient condition to guarantee the vanishing of the first part of the Eq. (20)

$$r^\lambda u\left(\frac{d}{dr}u\right)|_0^{\mathrm{}}=0,r^{\lambda 1}u^2|_0^{\mathrm{}}=0,$$
(22)
as long as $`\lambda >\left(2\alpha +1\right)`$. Therefore

$$\left[\frac{\lambda (\lambda 1)}{2}\alpha (\alpha +1)\right]r^{\lambda 2}+\frac{2Z}{a_0}r^{\lambda 1}\left(\frac{Z}{\stackrel{~}{n}a_0}\right)^2r^\lambda =_0^{\mathrm{}}r^\lambda \left(\frac{d}{dr}u\right)^2𝑑r.$$
(23)
Similarly, let’s multiply $`2r^{\lambda +1}du/dr`$ to the both sides of the Eq. (18) and then integrate over $`_0^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}𝑑r`$. One can thus derive the following equations:

$`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}2r^{\lambda +1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}u\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dr^2}}u\right)𝑑r`$ $`=`$ $`r^{\lambda +1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}u\right)^2|_0^{\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}(\lambda +1)r^\lambda \left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}u\right)^2𝑑r,`$ (24)
$`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}2r^{\lambda +1}u\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}u\right)𝑑r`$ $`=`$ $`r^{\lambda +1}u^2|_0^{\mathrm{}}(\lambda +1)r^\lambda .`$ (25)
One can also derive similar equations with the power factor $`\lambda +1`$ replaced by $`\lambda `$ or $`\lambda 1`$ in above equation. According to the equation (22), the first terms in the rhs of the Eq.s (24)-(25) all vanishes. Hence, we obtain

$`(\lambda 1)\alpha (\alpha +1)r^{\lambda 2}2\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{Z}{a_0}}r^{\lambda 1}+(\lambda +1)\left({\displaystyle \frac{Z}{\stackrel{~}{n}a_0}}\right)^2r^\lambda `$

$$=(\lambda +1)_0^{\mathrm{}}r^\lambda \left(\frac{d}{dr}u\right)^2𝑑r.$$
(26)
Eliminating the term on the rhs of the above equation with the help of the equation (23), we finally obtain the general recurrence formula for the ABC system

$$\frac{\lambda +1}{\stackrel{~}{n}^2}r^\lambda (2\lambda +1)\frac{a_0}{Z}r^{\lambda 1}+\frac{\lambda }{4}\left[\left(2\alpha +1\right)^2\lambda ^2\right]\left(\frac{a_0}{Z}\right)^2r^{\lambda 2}=0.$$
(27)
This formula provides a very convenient tool to calculate the expectation value of the radial operator $`\widehat{r}^\lambda `$ for arbitrary power $`\lambda `$ in any arbitrary quantum state $`(n,q,k)`$ for the ABC system without facing the complication computing the wave functions directly. For example, let’s calculate a few leading terms of the expectation value of the radial operator. First of all, one can set $`\lambda =0`$ where the recurrence formula (27) gives

$$\frac{1}{r}_{n,q,k}=\frac{Z}{\stackrel{~}{n}^2a_0}=\frac{Z}{\left(n+q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|+1\right)^2a_0}.$$
(28)
Note that the effect of the magnetic flux leads to the decrease of the expectation value of the potential. Note that this effect has no correspondence in classical system. Moreover, if we choose $`\lambda =1,2`$, one will instead derive

$$\begin{array}{c}r_{n,q,k}=\frac{1}{2}\left[3\stackrel{~}{n}^2\alpha (\alpha +1)\right]\frac{a_0}{Z},\hfill \\ r^2_{n,q,k}=\frac{\stackrel{~}{n}^2}{2}\left[1+5\stackrel{~}{n}^23\alpha (\alpha +1)\right]\left(\frac{a_0}{Z}\right)^2.\hfill \end{array}$$
(29)
These results show that the magnetic flux effect will increase the expectation of the radial operator such as the case where the quantum states given by $`(n,q,k)=(0,0,0)`$. Indeed, one can show that

$$\begin{array}{c}r_{0,0,0}=\frac{1}{2}\left[2\left|\mu _0\right|^2+5\left|\mu _0\right|+3\right]\frac{a_0}{Z},\hfill \\ r^2_{0,0,0}=\frac{(\left|\mu _0\right|+1)^2}{2}\left[2\left|\mu _0\right|^2+7\left|\mu _0\right|+6\right]\left(\frac{a_0}{Z}\right)^2.\hfill \end{array}$$
(30)
Note that these results reduce to the well-known pure Coulomb system, where $`\mu _0=0`$, $`r_{0,0,0}=3a_0/2Z`$, and $`r^2_{0,0,0}=3(a_0/Z)^2`$ where the nonlocal effect of the magnetic flux in the physical average becomes manifest in these formulae.

According to the definition leading to the Eq. (18), we have $`\alpha _{\mathrm{max}}=\left(q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|\right)_{\mathrm{max}}=\stackrel{~}{n}1`$ corresponding to the nodes of the wave function at $`n=0`$ for the modified circular Bohr orbit. In this case, the radial wave function reduces to

$$u_{0,q,k}(r)=rR_{0,q,k}(r)=r^{\stackrel{~}{n}}e^{Zr/\stackrel{~}{n}a_0}.$$
(31)
Hence we can calculate the most possible position of the radius $`r_{\mathrm{most}}`$, defined as the position where the probability function $`|u|^2`$ attains its maximal, given by $`du_{0,q,k}(r=r_{\mathrm{most}})/dr=0`$. The result indicates that

$$r_{\mathrm{most}}=\frac{\stackrel{~}{n}^2a_0}{Z}$$
(32)
for the most possible position of the radius. It is clear that the presence of the magnetic flux increases the value of the most possible position. On the other hand, Eq. (29) gives the following radial expectation value, when $`\alpha `$ is equal to $`\alpha _{\mathrm{max}}`$,

$$r_{0,\stackrel{~}{n}1}=\left[\stackrel{~}{n}^2+\frac{\stackrel{~}{n}}{2}\right]\frac{a_0}{Z}.$$
(33)
Therefore quantum mechanical average (the expectation value) for the radius of the modified Bohr orbit is bigger then the most possible position of the radius. In addition, the position fluctuation is given by

$$\left(\mathrm{}r\right)_{0,\stackrel{~}{n}1}=\sqrt{r^2_{0,\stackrel{~}{n}1}r_{0,\stackrel{~}{n}1}^2}=\sqrt{\left[\frac{\stackrel{~}{n}^3}{2}+\frac{\stackrel{~}{n}}{4}^2\right]}\frac{a_0}{Z}$$
(34)
which implies the increase of the quantum fluctuation due to the increase of the magnetic flux. Consequently, one can derive the ratio between the fluctuation and the corresponding average

$$\frac{\left(\mathrm{}r\right)_{0,\stackrel{~}{n}1}}{r_{0,\stackrel{~}{n}1}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\stackrel{~}{n}+1}}$$
(35)
which indicates that the quantum mechanical result tends to approach the Bohr picture of orbit quantization as $`\stackrel{~}{n}`$ increases or equivalently the magnetic flux increases.

If we choose $`\lambda =1,2`$, the recurrence relation indicates that

$$r^3_{n,q,k}=\frac{a_0/Z}{\alpha (\alpha +1)(a_0/Z)^2}r^2_{n,q,k}=\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{n}^3\alpha (\alpha +1/2)(\alpha +1)}\left(\frac{Z}{a_0}\right)^3,$$
(36)
$$r^4_{n,q,k}=\frac{3\stackrel{~}{n}^2\alpha (\alpha +1)}{2\stackrel{~}{n}^5(\alpha 1/2)(\alpha +1/2)(\alpha +1)(\alpha +3/2)}\left(\frac{Z}{a_0}\right)^3.$$
(37)
Here we have used the result

$$r^2_{n,q,k}=\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{n}^3(\alpha +1/2)}\left(\frac{Z}{a_0}\right)^2,$$
(38)
which is the only moment can not be derived from the recurrence Eq. (27). It can, however, be derived from the well-known Hellmann-Feynman formula

$$\frac{E_{n,q,k}}{\alpha }=\mathrm{\Psi }_{n,q,k}\left|\frac{\widehat{H}}{\alpha }\right|\mathrm{\Psi }_{n,q,k},$$
(39)
where the Hamiltonian operator is given by

$$\widehat{H}=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\frac{d^2}{dr^2}+\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)}{r^2}\frac{Ze^2}{r}.$$
(40)
It hence follows that

$$\frac{E_{n,q,k}}{\alpha }=(\alpha +\frac{1}{2})\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{m}r^2_{n,q,k}.$$
(41)
With the help of the Eq. (17), one derives the result shown in Eq. (38). This result gives us the ratio information of the modified centrifugal potential in quantum mechanics, namely,

$$\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)\mathrm{}^2}{2mr^2}_{n,q,k}=\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)}{(\alpha +1/2)\stackrel{~}{n}}E_{\stackrel{~}{n}}.$$
(42)
Since the total kinetic energy of the system equals $`<\stackrel{~}{T}>_{n,q,k}=E_{\stackrel{~}{n}}`$ (see appendix for details), the ratio of the centrifugal potential to the total kinetic energy, $`r_c=<V_c>/<\stackrel{~}{T}>`$, is

$$r_c=\alpha (\alpha +1)/\left[(\alpha +1/2)\stackrel{~}{n}\right].$$

This result indicates that, for fixed $`\stackrel{~}{n}`$, the increase of the intensity of the magnetic flux induces the increase of the ratio $`r_c`$ and thus the weight of the centrifugal potential. When $`\alpha `$ is equal to $`\alpha _{\mathrm{max}}=\stackrel{~}{n}1`$ corresponding to the modified Bohr orbit case, the ratio $`r_c`$ become

$$r_c\frac{\stackrel{~}{n}1}{\stackrel{~}{n}1/2}.$$
(43)
On the other hand, the ratio of the average of the radial kinetic energy to the total kinetic energy, $`r_r=<p_r^2/2m>/<\stackrel{~}{T}>`$, is given by

$$r_r=\frac{p_r^2}{2m}_{0,q,k}=\frac{1}{2\stackrel{~}{n}1}$$
(44)
at the limit $`\alpha =\alpha _{max}`$. Therefore when $`\stackrel{~}{n}1`$, the radial kinetic energy will become very small reproducing the classical result.

In addition, one can also discuss the effect of the magnetic flux in the well-known formulae introduced by J. Schwinger . It was shown that

$$\begin{array}{c}\frac{dV}{dr}=\frac{2\pi \mathrm{}^2}{m}\left|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)\right|^2,l=0\hfill \\ \frac{dV}{dr}=\frac{𝐥^2}{mr^3}=l(l+1)\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{m}\frac{1}{r^3},l0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(45)
These results are very useful and of considerably general interest for the study of the bound states in a system with a central potential. The first identity relates the $`s`$-wave wave function at the origin to the gradient of the potential. This identity comes explicitly with the Planck constant $`\mathrm{}`$ indicating the significance of the quantum effect. Therefore there is no classical correspondence. The second identity is, however, a generalization of the quantum effect of an important classical theory

$$\left(\frac{dV}{dr}\right)_{\mathrm{av}}=\frac{𝐥^2}{m}\left(\frac{1}{r^3}\right)_{\mathrm{av}},$$
(46)
where $`\left(f\right)_{\mathrm{av}}`$ represents the average of the periodic function $`f(t)`$ over a classical period. Eq. (46) states that the average of a external force equals to the average of the centripetal force over the classical period.

In the presence of the magnetic flux, the Hamilton operator is given by (16)

$$\widehat{H}=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left(\frac{^2}{r^2}+\frac{2}{r}\frac{}{r}\right)+\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)\mathrm{}^2}{2mr^2}+V(r).$$
(47)
Computing the commutator of the operators $`/r`$ and $`\widehat{H}`$, one has

$$[\frac{}{r},\widehat{H}]=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{mr^2}\frac{}{r}\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)\mathrm{}^2}{mr^3}+\frac{dV}{dr}.$$
(48)
Evaluating the expectation value with respect to an arbitrary bound state which makes the contribution from the lhs vanished, we would have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dV}{dr}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)\mathrm{}^2}{m}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^3}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{m}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}`$

$$=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{m}r^2𝑑r𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{}{r}\mathrm{\Psi },$$
(49)
with $`d\mathrm{\Omega }`$ the solid angle. Since the mean value in the lhs of the above equation is a real number, so does the rhs of the above equation. Hence one has

$$𝑑r\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\frac{}{r}\mathrm{\Psi }=𝑑r\mathrm{\Psi }\frac{}{r}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=\frac{1}{2}𝑑r\frac{}{r}\left(\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\right)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{}|_0^{\mathrm{}}=0.$$
(50)
In deriving the above equations, we have used the following facts: (1) the wave function of the bound state vanishes at the region $`r\mathrm{}`$; (2) in the presence of the magnetic flux, the vanishing of the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=0`$ holds at the origin . To prove the second proposition, one notes that the asymptotic form of the wave function can be shown to be

$$u_\alpha (r)r^{\alpha +1},\alpha =q+\left|k+\mu _0\right|>0,$$
(51)
near the origin in the presence of the magnetic flux. Because that $`u_\alpha (r)=rR_\alpha (r)`$, one has immediately that $`u_\alpha ^{}(r)=R_\alpha (r)+rR_\alpha ^{}(r)`$. Therefore we obtain $`u_\alpha ^{}(0)=R_\alpha (0)`$. In addition, Eq. (51) says that $`u_\alpha ^{}(r)=(\alpha +1)r^\alpha `$ implying that $`u_\alpha ^{}(0)=0`$. This proves the second proposition that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=0`$.

Accordingly, in a central force system with a magnetic flux, one can generalize the Schwinger theorem (45) to the following form:

$$\frac{dV}{dr}_{n,q,k}=\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)\mathrm{}^2}{m}\frac{1}{r^3}_{n,q,k}.$$
(52)
In addition, the $`s`$-wave no longer exists in the presence of the magnetic flux, there is no corresponding generalization of the first identity in the Eq. (45). On the other hand, we find that the topological effect of the magnetic flux has a generalized quantum mechanical shown in Eq. (45) although such effect does not have any dynamical significance in classical mechanics.

## IV Conclusion

We have derived a general recurrence formula of the expectation value of the radial operator with different power for an Aharonov-Bohm-Coulomb system providing us a convenient method to compute the average of the radial operator in any power. With this useful recurrence formula, one can avoid tedious and complicate integration with the wave functions. The useful formulae and techniques shown in this paper have many interesting applications in the study of many physical systems in the presence of a magnetic field. For example, we have shown the generalized theorem of Schwinger for bound state system under the influence of a magnetic field.

In addition, the two dimensional (2D) system is important in the fractional quantum Hall effect and the high-$`T_c`$ superconductivity, we will also generalize our result to the 2D system at the end of this paper. Two dimensional central force quantum system is governed by the radial Schrödinger equation

$$\left\{\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left[\left(\frac{d^2}{d\rho ^2}+\frac{1}{\rho }\frac{d}{d\rho }\right)\frac{k^2}{\rho ^2}\right]+V(\rho )\right\}R_{nk}=ER_{nk},$$
(53)
where $`\rho `$ is the corresponding radial length in 2D, i.e. $`\rho =\sqrt{x^2+y^2}`$. The corresponding total wave functions is given by $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\rho ,\phi )=R_{nk}(\rho )e^{ik\phi }`$ with the range of the quantum number specified by $`k=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$. In addition, the energy spectra $`E`$ depends on $`\left|k\right|`$ and the wave function $`R_{n\left|k\right|}`$ corresponding to the energy level $`E_{n\left|k\right|}`$ satisfies the orthonormal condition

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\rho \rho R_{n\left|k\right|}^{}(\rho )R_{n^{}\left|k\right|}(\rho )=\delta _{nn^{}}.$$
(54)
If we perform a transformation $`R_{n\left|k\right|}(\rho )=\chi _{n\left|k\right|}(\rho )/\sqrt{\rho }`$, Eq. (53) will reduce to

$$\left\{\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left[\frac{d^2}{d\rho ^2}+\frac{(k1/2)(k+1/2)}{\rho ^2}\right]+V(\rho )\right\}\chi _{n\left|k\right|}(\rho )=E\chi _{n\left|k\right|}(\rho ).$$
(55)
The AB effect can be introduced by the similar procedure leading to the Eqs. (10)$``$(16). The result is

$$\left\{\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left[\frac{d^2}{d\rho ^2}+\frac{(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }1/2)(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+1/2)}{\rho ^2}\right]+V(\rho )\right\}\chi _{n\left|k\right|}(\rho )=E\chi _{n\left|k\right|}(\rho ),$$
(56)
where we have defined $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=\left|k+\mu _0\right|`$. Comparing this equation with Eq. (15), one finds that results derived for the 3D system can be generalized to the 2D system with the parameters $`\alpha `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ related by the following relation

$$\alpha (\alpha +1)(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }1/2)(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+1/2),$$
(57)
or simply

$$\alpha (\stackrel{~}{\alpha }1/2).$$

For example, we find that the energy spectra of the 2D ABC system is given by

$$E_{n,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}=\frac{Z^2e^2}{2a_0\left[n+\left|k+\mu _0\right|+1/2\right]^2}\frac{Z^2e^2}{2a_0\stackrel{~}{n}_2^2}.$$
(58)
This exact formula agrees with the previous result obtained in Ref. . In addition, one can also derive some useful and important expectation values for the 2D ABC system:

$$\frac{1}{\rho }_{n,k}=\frac{Z}{\stackrel{~}{n}_2^2}a_0,$$
(59)
$$\frac{1}{\rho ^2}_{n,k}=\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{n}_2^3\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}\left(\frac{Z}{a_0}\right)^2,$$
(60)
$$\frac{1}{\rho ^3}_{n,k}=\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{n}_2^3\stackrel{~}{\alpha }(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }1/2)(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+1/2)}\left(\frac{Z}{a_0}\right)^3.$$
(61)
Generalization to many other cases are straightforward following similar procedures.

## Acknowledgments

This work is supported in part by the National Science Council under the grant number NSC90-2112-M009-021.

## V Appendix

In the appendix, we shall prove the Virial theorem for the spherically symmetric system under an AB magnetic flux. The Hamiltonian for the spherically symmetric system under an AB magnetic flux is given by the Eq. (16)

$$\widehat{H}=\frac{\widehat{p}_r^2}{2m}+\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)\mathrm{}^2}{2mr^2}+V(r),$$
(62)
where the Hermite operator is defined as

$$\widehat{p}_r=\frac{\mathrm{}}{i}\left(\frac{}{r}+\frac{1}{r}\right)=\widehat{p}_r^{}.$$
(63)
To obtain the Virial theorem, one notes that the Heisenberg equations of motion for the position and the momentum operators are

$$\frac{d𝐫}{dt}=\frac{1}{i\mathrm{}}[𝐫,\widehat{H}]=_𝐩\widehat{H}=\widehat{e}_{p_r}\frac{\widehat{p}_r}{m},$$
(64)
$$\frac{d𝐩}{dt}=\frac{1}{i\mathrm{}}[𝐩,\widehat{H}]=_𝐫\widehat{H}=\left[\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)\mathrm{}^2}{mr^3}\frac{dV(r)}{dr}\right]\widehat{e}_r,$$
(65)
where $`\widehat{e}_{p_r}`$ is the unit vector of $`p_r`$ in the momentum space. Therefore, we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(𝐫𝐩\right)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{i\mathrm{}}}[𝐫𝐩,\widehat{H}]`$

$$=\frac{d𝐫}{dt}𝐩+𝐫\frac{d𝐩}{dt}=\frac{\widehat{p}_r^2}{m}+\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)\mathrm{}^2}{mr^2}r\frac{dV(r)}{dr}.$$
(66)
Average with respect to the wave functions, we obtain

$$\frac{\widehat{p}_r^2}{2m}+\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)\mathrm{}^2}{2mr^2}=\frac{1}{2}r\frac{dV(r)}{dr},$$
(67)
where we have used the identity $`[𝐫𝐩,\widehat{H}]=0`$. Let us define the total kinetic energy operator as

$$\stackrel{~}{T}=\frac{\widehat{p}_r^2}{2m}+\frac{\alpha (\alpha +1)\mathrm{}^2}{2mr^2}.$$
(68)
Hence one can derive the following Virial theorem for the spherically symmetric system under an AB magnetic flux

$$2\stackrel{~}{T}=r\frac{dV(r)}{dr}.$$
(69)
In particular, if the potential $`V(r)`$ is a homogeneous function of degree $`\nu `$, namely $`V(br)=b^\nu V(r)`$, the Eq. (69) can be shown to be

$$2\stackrel{~}{T}=\nu V(r).$$
(70)
Together with the total energy relation,

$$\stackrel{~}{T}+V=E_{n,q,k},$$
(71)
it is easily to show that the relations between the averages of the kinetic and the potential energy, and hence the total energy

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{T}_{n,q,k}=\frac{\nu }{\nu +2}E_{n,q,k},\hfill \\ V_{n,q,k}=\frac{2}{\nu +2}E_{n,q,k}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(72)
For an ABC system ($`\nu =1`$), one has $`<\stackrel{~}{T}>_{n,q,k}=E_{n,q,k}`$, and $`<V>_{n,q,k}=2E_{n,q,k}`$.


format: text

text:
# Force-induced unzipping of DNA with long-range correlated sequence

## Abstract

We consider force-induced unzipping transition for a heterogeneous DNA model with a long-range correlated base-sequence. It is shown that as compared to the uncorrelated situation, long-range correlations smear the unzipping phase-transition, change its universality class and lead to non-self-averaging: the averaged behavior strongly differs from the typical ones. Several basic scenarios for this typical behavior are revealed and explained. The results can be relevant for explaining the biological purpose of long-range correlations in DNA.

Introduction. Structural transformations of DNA under changing of external conditions are of primary importance for molecular biology and biophysics bio . They take place in transcription of genetic information from DNA and in duplication of DNA during cell division bio . The common physical scenario of both these processes is unwinding of the double-stranded structure of DNA under influence of external forces. Whereas theoretical and experimental studies of thermal denaturation (melting) of DNA have a long history, force-induced unzipping has been actively investigated only relatively recently hindu ; nelson ; cocco ; exp ; for a concise review and more references see cocco . The research in this field is motivated by the new generation of micromanipulation experiments exp . For the theoretical understanding of the subject both homo and heteropolymer models of DNA were studied hindu ; nelson ; cocco .

The main purpose of the present letter is to make the next step towards real DNAs and to analyze force-induced unzipping for a DNA-model, where the correlation structure of the base-sequece is taken into account. Indeed, one of the main differences between DNA and other biopolymers jenya  is that the base-sequence of the former displays long-range correlations (1/f-noise spectrum) longrange ; voss ; chin ; for a review see review . Recall that the base-sequence of a DNA molecule consists of purines (A and G) and pyrimidines (C and T). They constitute the genetic code carried by DNA. Initial studies reported long-range correlations for non-coding regions of DNA, while more recent results show that certain types of them can also exist in coding regions coding . Moreover, systematic changes were found in the structure of correlations depending on the evolutionary category of the DNA carrier voss ; chin . In spite of ubiquity of long-range correlations in DNA-structures, their biological reason remains basically unexplored.

We will show below that long-range correlations present in the base-sequence of DNA make its behavior under the unzipping external force essentially non-self-averaging: there are several widely different scenarios of behavior which specifically depend on the concrete structure of the base-sequence and are not reproduced by the averaged behavior. This is in contrast to DNAs with short-range correlated base-sequence whose behavior in the vicinity of the unzipping transition is perfectly self-averaging: almost every molecule behaves (in the thermodynamic limit) similar to the average.

The model we will work with takes into account the most minimal amount of physical ingredients needed to describe force-induced unzipping. i) a DNA molecule is lying along the $`x`$-axis between the points $`x=a`$ and $`x=L`$. ii) only inter-strand (hydrogen) bonds of the molecule are considered; they are located at points $`x_i`$, $`a<x_i<L`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},M`$. Any bond can be in one of two states: bound or broken. We choose the overall energy scale in such a way that the latter case contributes to the Hamiltonian a binding energy $`\varphi (x_i)`$, whereas the former case brings nothing. Different types of bonds do have different binding energies, so $`\varphi (x_i)`$ is a random quantity with an average $`\varphi `$: $`\varphi (x_i)=\varphi +\eta (x_i)`$. iii) a force is acting on the left end $`x=a`$ of the molecule pulling apart the two strands. Thus, if a bond $`x_i`$ is broken, all the bonds $`x_j`$ with $`j<i`$ are broken as well. Each broken bond brings additionally to the Hamiltonian a term $``$, where $``$ is proportional to the acting force. iv) summarizing all of these, one comes to the Hamiltonian $`H(x)=x+_{i=1}^x\varphi (x_i)=(\varphi )x+_{i=1}^x\eta (x_i)`$, where $`x`$ is the number of broken bonds. In the thermodynamical limit, where $`L`$ and $`M`$ are large, one applies the continiuum description with $`x`$ being a real number, $`a<x<L`$, and ends up with the following Hamiltonian and partition function:

$`H(x)=f(xa)+{\displaystyle _a^x}ds\eta (s),Z={\displaystyle _a^L}dxe^{\beta H(x)},`$ (1)
where $`f=\overline{\varphi }`$ and $`\beta =1/T`$ is the inverse temperature ($`k_\mathrm{B}=1`$). It remains to specify the properties of the noise $`\eta `$. Strictly speaking, it can take values corresponding to inter-strand bonds AT and GC. However, within the adopted description we assume it is a gaussian stationary process with an autocorelation function $`K(tt^{})=\eta (t)\eta (t^{})`$ to be specified later on. The model given by (1) and by $`K(t)\delta (t)`$ (white noise) is well-known, and was used to describe interfaces, random walks in a disordered media, and aspects of population dynamics manfred . It was recently applied for the unzipping transition in DNA nelson .

Reduction to a stochastic differential equation. In Eq. (1) one fixes $`L`$, and views $`a`$ as a parameter varying from the highest possible value $`L`$, where $`Z=0`$, to the lowest possible value which we define to be $`a=0`$. The quantity $`t=a`$ will thus monotonicaly increase and can be interpreted as a time-variable. Differentiating $`Z`$ in (1) over $`a`$ and changing the variable as $`t=a`$, one gets:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}Z}{\mathrm{d}t}}=1\beta fZ\beta \eta (t)Z,L<t<0`$ (2)
where we used $`\eta (t)=\eta (t)`$, as follows from the gaussian stationary property of the noise. This is a Langevin equation with a multiplicative noise. From (2) one can obtain a stochastic equation for $`F=T\mathrm{ln}Z`$:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}F}{\mathrm{d}t}}+V^{}(F)=\eta (t),V(F)=T^2e^{\beta F}fF.`$ (3)
The order parameter of the problem is the number of broken bonds. Along with its average and variance it is defined for $`t=0`$ as

$`x=_fF,\overline{x}=_fF,\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }x^2}\overline{x^2}\overline{x}^2=T_f\overline{x}.`$ (4)
Exponentially correlated noise. As the first example we shall consider Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (OU) noise $`K(t)=(D/\tau )e^{|t|/\tau }`$, where $`D`$ is the intensivity, and $`\tau `$ is the correlation time. Although for a finite $`\tau `$ this noise is short-range correlated, we believe that it correctly catches the basic trends of the more general situation when changing $`\tau `$ from $`0`$ to some large value. Note that the white-noise situation is recovered for $`\tau 0`$.

To handle (3) one differentiates it over $`t`$ and uses the generating equation for OU process $`\tau \dot{\eta }=\eta +\sqrt{D}\xi (t)`$, where $`\xi (t)`$ is a white gaussian noise: $`\xi (t)\xi (t^{})=2\delta (tt^{})`$. Introducing $`s=t/\sqrt{\tau }`$ one gets hanggi :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}^2F}{\mathrm{d}s^2}}+\gamma (F){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}F}{\mathrm{d}s}}=V^{}(F)+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{D}}{\tau ^{1/4}}}\xi (s),`$ (5)
where $`\gamma (F)=1/\sqrt{\tau }+\sqrt{\tau }V^{\prime \prime }(F)`$. Recall that Eq. (5) has the same form as a Langevin equation for a particle with unit mass in the potential $`V(F)`$ and subjected to a white noise and a $`F`$-dependent friction with a coeffcient $`\gamma (F)`$. $`V(F)`$ is confining only for $`f>0`$: $`V(F)\mathrm{}`$ for $`F\pm \mathrm{}`$. As well-known risken , for sufficiently long times one can neglect the inertial term $`\mathrm{d}^2F/\mathrm{d}s^2`$, provided that at least one of the following conditions are satisfied: (i) the dependence on $`F`$ in $`\gamma (F)`$ is weak; (ii) $`\gamma (F)`$ is sufficiently large. If $`V^{\prime \prime }(F)`$ is of order one, then the second condition is satisfied both for large and small $`\tau `$ hanggi . If $`V^{\prime \prime }(F)`$ is small then the first condition is satisfied. After neglection of the inertial term in (5), the remainder is an ordinary white-noise Langevin equation, and, by means of standard methods risken , can be transferred to a Fokker-Planck equation for the distribution function $`P(F,s)=\delta (FF[s])`$, where $`F[s]`$ is a particular, noise-dependent solution of (5).

$`{\displaystyle \frac{P}{s}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{F}}{\displaystyle \frac{V^{}(F)}{\gamma (F)}}P(F)={\displaystyle \frac{D}{\sqrt{\tau }}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{F}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\gamma (F)}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{F}}{\displaystyle \frac{P(F)}{\gamma (F)}}.`$ (6)
For large times (lengths), i.e. for $`L1`$ and $`ts0`$, any solution of (6) tends to the stationary distribution (see e.g. risken  for a general proof) obtained from (6) by putting $`_sP=0`$:

$`P_{\mathrm{st}}(F)=𝒩\gamma (F)\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{2D}}[V^{}(F)]^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{D}}V(F)\right],`$ (7)
where $`𝒩`$ is the normalization factor. The white-noise, $`\tau 0`$, limit of $`P_{\mathrm{st}}(F)`$ was obtained in manfred ; nelson .

The critical domain of the model coresponds to $`f+0`$, where the average energy cost for breaking a hydrogen bond tends to zero. Our aim is to compare in this domain the behavior of $`\overline{x}`$ for a finite $`\tau `$ with that of $`\tau =0`$ (white-noise) as to determine the effect of the noise-correlation. Recall from manfred  that for $`\tau =0`$ a simple formula exists: $`\overline{x}=T^2\psi ^{}(\mu )`$, where $`\mu =Tf/D`$ and $`\psi ^{}(\mu )=\mathrm{d}^2[\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mu )]/\mathrm{d}\mu ^2`$. Thus for $`f\mu 0`$, $`\overline{x}`$ becomes large nelson : $`\overline{x}=D/f^2`$. One can explain this by noting that for $`f0`$ the potential $`V(F)`$ in (3) ceases to be confining, and the particle escapes to infinity. Note that here the random quantity $`x`$ is concentrated around its average: $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }x^2}/\overline{x}^2f0`$. Thus, in the present context a given DNA molecule with a typical base-sequence does not have individuality: its behavior coincides with the averaged one.

$`P_{\mathrm{st}}(F)`$ and $`\overline{x}`$ can be expressed via Kummer functions and then easily studied numerically. Fig. (1) shows that although the behavior of $`\overline{x}`$ for very small $`f`$ does not depend much on $`\tau `$, such a dependence does exist for moderately small values of $`f`$: finite $`\tau `$’s smear the small-$`f`$ singularity and thus increase the stability of the DNA molecule, since larger external forces $``$ are demanded to achieve the same amount of broken bonds.

Long-range correlations will be modelled via a stationary gaussian noise with an autocorrelation function chin :

$`K(t)\eta (t)\eta (0)=\sigma |t|^\alpha ,`$ (8)
where $`0<\alpha <1`$ is the exponent characterizing the long-range correlation, and where $`\sigma `$ is the intensivity. Although the real noise distributions in DNA can be much more complicated review ; coding , (8) is certainly the minimal model of noise which allows to study long-range correlations.

To start with, lest us consider a case with $`\alpha =0`$, which does not have a direct physical interest and does not allow the strict thermodynamical limit, but, as seen later, it is still able to provide a relevant insight. The noise is now completely frozen: $`\eta (s)`$ in (1) does not depend on $`s`$, and due to this the problem is easily solved from (1):

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{x}}{L}}=g(\eta ),g(\eta ){\displaystyle \frac{T}{L(f+\eta )}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^{\beta L(f+\eta )}1}},`$ (9)
where $`\mathrm{}`$ is taken over the zero-average gaussian random quantity $`\eta `$ whose dispersion is $`\sigma `$. If $`\beta L`$ is large, $`g(\eta )`$ behaves as the step-function, $`g(\eta )\theta (\eta f)`$: for any single realization of the noise there is a sharp phase transition with a jump at the realization-dependent point $`f=\eta `$ (non-self-averaging). In contrast, due to the integration over $`\eta `$ in (9), the behavior of $`\overline{x}`$ is smooth, and there remains only a crossover between small $`\overline{x}/L`$ for a large $`f`$ and $`\overline{x}=L/2`$ for $`f=0`$: the sharp transition disappears.

We return to Eq. (2) with the noise $`\eta (t)`$ characterized by (8). Our aim is to obtain a Fokker-Planck equation for the probability density $`P(Z,t)=\delta (ZZ[t])`$, where $`Z[t]`$ is a noise-dependent solution of (2). Differentiating $`P(Z,t)`$ over $`t`$ and using (2), one gets:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{P}{t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{}{Z}}[(1\beta fZ)P]=\beta {\displaystyle \frac{}{Z}}Z\eta (t)\delta (ZZ[t]).`$
(10)
To handle the last term, one uses the fact that the noise is gaussian and applies Novikov’s theorem fox , to obtain

$`\eta (t)\delta (ZZ[t])={\displaystyle _L^t}dsK(ts){\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \eta (s)}}\delta (ZZ[t])`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{}{Z}}{\displaystyle _L^t}dsK(ts)\delta (ZZ[t]){\displaystyle \frac{\delta Z[t]}{\delta \eta (s)}},`$ (11)
where $`\delta /\delta \eta (s)`$ is the variational derivative, the equation for which is obtained from (2). Solving this equation and using

$`Z[s]=\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle _t^s}du\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z[u]}}\beta f\beta \eta (u)\right)\right]Z[t],`$ (12)
also obtained from (2), one finally gets

$`\eta (t)\delta (ZZ[t])={\displaystyle \frac{}{Z}}Z{\displaystyle _L^t}\mathrm{d}sK(ts)\times `$
$`\delta (ZZ[t])\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle _s^t}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}u}{Z[u]}}\right].`$ (13)
Eqs. (10, 13) are exact, but since now approximations have to be applied to get a closed equation for $`P(Z,t)`$. Note from (2, 3) the following relation valid in the stationary state: $`1/Z=\beta f`$. For $`f+0`$ this relation can be satisfied only if the corresponding stationary distribution tends to become non-normalizable due to its large-$`Z`$ behavior. Thus, we can search for this distribution assuming that the characteristic values of $`Z`$ are large. For this one takes the thermodynamical limit $`L1`$, $`t0`$, makes partial integration in the RHS of (13), uses (2), and gets for $`\varphi (Z,s)_0^sdu/Z[\eta ,u]`$ ($`\beta f1`$):

$`\varphi (Z,s)={\displaystyle \frac{s}{Z[\eta ,s]}}\beta {\displaystyle _0^s}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}uu\eta (u)}{Z[\eta ,u]}}+{\displaystyle _0^s}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}uu}{Z^2[\eta ,u]}}.`$ (14)
Now the last term can be neglected due to the above large-$`Z`$ property. Assuming additionally that the magnitude of the noise $`\eta (t)`$ is small, one can estimate the second term in the RHS as being at least of order $`𝒪(1/Z^2)`$ and neglect it as well. For the first term in the RHS of (14) one uses (12) to express $`Z(s)`$ by $`Z(0)`$ which due to the delta-function in (13) can be substituted by $`Z`$. The noise in the resulting equation for $`\varphi `$ is again neglected, and then $`\varphi `$ is determined from:

$`Z\varphi (Z,s)=se^{\varphi (Z,s)+\beta fs}.`$ (15)
Thus the stationary distribution reads

$`P_{\mathrm{st}}(Z)={\displaystyle \frac{𝒩}{Z𝒟(Z)}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle ^Z}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}u}{u𝒟(u)}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{T}{u}}f\right)\right],`$ (16)
where $`𝒩`$ is the normalization (the lower limit of integration is not specified, since it can be absorbed to $`𝒩`$), and where

$`𝒟(Z)={\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}dsK(s)e^{\varphi (Z,s)}.`$ (17)
To study the critical behavior of $`\overline{x}`$, one needs two asymptotic regimes found from (15, 17): $`𝒟(Z)Z^{1\alpha }e^{\beta f(1\alpha )Z}`$ for $`\beta fZ1`$, while $`𝒟(Z)`$ is constant for $`\beta fZ1`$. Substituting these into (16) and selecting the most divergent terms, one gets:

$`\overline{x}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )}{\stackrel{~}{\sigma }(\beta f)^\alpha }}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta f}},\kappa {\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }x^2}}{\overline{x}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\sigma }(\beta f)^{\alpha 1}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )\mathrm{ln}\frac{1}{\beta f}}},`$ (18)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }=\sigma ^{(1\alpha )/(2\alpha )}`$. Due to the above weak-noise assumption, (18) represents the leading term of the small-$`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }`$ expansion. It is seen that in contrast to the white-noise situation the behavior of $`\overline{x}`$ is smeared, and that $`x`$ is strongly non-self-averaging quantity: $`\kappa 1`$ for $`\beta f1`$ (recall nelson ; manfred  that in the white-noise case: $`\overline{x}f^2`$ and thus $`\kappa f^10`$ for $`f0`$). Both these results are contrasting to qualitative predictions made in nelson : $`\overline{x}f^{2/\alpha }`$, $`\kappa f^{1+2/\alpha }0`$, which means that the small-$`f`$ singularity is stronger and $`x`$ is even more self-averaging than in the white-noise case. We think that this discrepancy is due to inapplicability of the reasonings made in nelson  for finite temperatures.

Typical scenarios of unzipping. The above results on non-self-averaging indicate that $`\overline{x}(f)`$ is not directly relevant for experiments which are carried out on single DNA molecules: one should study different realizations of the noise and identify typical, i.e. frequently met, scenarios of behavior. Results of extensive numerical investigation of this problem will be reported elsewhere a . Here we discuss some representative examples.

By means of direct numerical enumeration of $`L=10^4`$ discrete base-pairs we studied the behavior of the (unaveraged) order parameter $`x`$ as a function of $`f`$. The long-range correlated gaussian discrete-time stochastic process was generated following to optimized recipes proposed in sancho . As compared to (8), the noise was regularized at short distances due to obvious numerical reasons. We focus on the thermodynamical domain where $`f`$ is not very small, and thus comparison with the theory is possible. In the (regularized) white noise case the simulations are in perfect agreement with the theory: $`x`$ is self-averaged and $`\overline{x}f^2`$ is reproduced. In contrast to that a strong non-self-averaging is present for the long-range correlated noise. Moreover, we found several radically different scenarios of the typical behavior. Two extremal ones among them are presented in Figs. 2, 3. The first one is present in nearly 12% of all realizations and is demonstrated by Fig. 2. It is characterized by very smooth, non-critical behavior of $`x(f)`$ for $`f0`$. Fig. 3 presents a strictly different situation: $`x(f)`$ increase by several jumps followed by very flat regions. $`x(0)`$ is either equal to its maximal possible value $`L`$ or close to it. This phase-transition scenario is met in nearly 45% of all realizations. Other typical realizations are intermediate between these two extremes.

Our discussion of the frozen noise made after (9) allows to explain this jump-plateau structure. A sizeable portion of long-range correlated noise realizations can be qualitatively visualized as several pieces of the frozen noise with different $`\eta `$ put next to each other. Now recall from (9) that every sufficiently long piece of that type has a single first order phase transition with a jump proportional to its length.

In conclusion, we have shown that long-range correlations in the base-sequence of a model DNA drastically influence its unzipping under external force: i) the behavior of the average order parameter in the critical regime is smeared; ii) the situation is essentially non-self-averaging: there are several scenarios of typical unzipping which do not coincide with the averaged behavior; iii) long-range correlations increase the adaptability of the molecule, since in some typical scenarios it becomes more stable with respect to the force, while in others the unzipping phase transition is amplified. What scenario will be selected depends on the detailed structure of the base-sequence. Some of the above tendencies, e.g. the smearing, are seen already for a short-range correlated base-sequence. We hope that these results will contribute into understanding of the role and the purpose of long-range correlations in DNA.


text:
# Core of projective dimension one modulesThe first author was partially supported by a Faculty Research Fellowship from the University of Kentucky. The second and third authors gratefully acknowledge partial support from the NSF.

## 1 Introduction

There is an extensive literature on the Rees algebra $`(I)`$ of an $`R`$-ideal $`I`$ in a Noetherian ring $`R`$. One reason for that is the major role that $`(I)`$ plays in Commutative Algebra and Algebraic Geometry, since $`\mathrm{Proj}((I))`$ is the blowup of $`\mathrm{Spec}(R)`$ along the subscheme defined by $`I`$.

There are several reasons for studying Rees algebras of finitely generated $`R`$-modules $`E`$ as well. For instance, Rees algebras of modules include the so called multi-Rees algebras, which correspond to the case of direct sums of ideals. Furthermore, symmetric algebras of modules arise naturally as coordinate rings of certain correspondences in Algebraic Geometry, and the projection of these varieties often requires the killing of torsion. This takes us back to the study of Rees algebras of modules: We refer to the articles by D. Eisenbud, C. Huneke and B. Ulrich EHU  and by A. Simis, B. Ulrich and W.V. Vasconcelos RAM  for additional motivation as well as a rich list of references. We stress, though, that this is not a routine generalization of what happens for ideals. This is essentially due to the fact that the remarkable interaction that exists between the Rees algebra and the associated graded ring of an ideal is missing in the module case.

The importance of reductions in the study of Rees algebras of ideals has long been noticed by commutative algebraists. Roughly, a reduction is a simplification of the given ideal which carries the most relevant information about the original ideal itself. In this sense, the study of the core of an ideal – by which we mean the intersection of all the reductions of the ideal – helps finding uniform properties shared by all reductions. We refer to RS ; HS ; CPU ; CPU2  for more details as well as the few known explicit formulas on the core of ideals. Another motivation for studying the core of an ideal is given by the celebrated Briançon-Skoda theorem.

Similarly to what happens for ideals, it is useful to study Rees algebras of modules via the ones of reduction modules. Like in the ideal case, one then defines $`\mathrm{core}(E)`$ to be the intersection of all reductions of $`E`$. In the setting of a local Gorenstein ring $`R`$, our goal is to give an explicit formula for the core in terms of a Fitting ideal of $`E`$, when $`E`$ is a finitely generated $`R`$-module with rank $`e`$, projective dimension one, analytic spread $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(E)e+1`$, and property $`G_{\mathrm{}e+1}`$. Interestingly enough, this is the same class of $`R`$-modules that has been studied in CP3  in the context of cancellation theorems. One of the equivalences of Theorem 2.1 below says that

$$\mathrm{core}(E)=\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(E)E$$

if and only if the reduction number of $`E`$ is at most $`\mathrm{}e`$. This result in particular covers earlier work by Mohan M .

To prove Theorem 2.1 we reduce the rank of $`E`$ by factoring out general elements. The task then becomes to assure that this inductive procedure preserves our assumptions and conclusions. This requires a sequence of technical lemmas. The corresponding results for ‘generic’ instead of ‘general’ elements have been shown in RAM  – they are useless however in our context since they require purely transcendental residue extensions which a priori may change the core.

## 2 The main result

We begin by reviewing some definitions and basic facts about Rees algebras of modules. Let $`R`$ be a Noetherian ring and let $`E`$ be a finitely generated $`R`$-module with rank $`e>0`$. The Rees algebra $`(E)`$ of $`E`$ is the symmetric algebra of $`E`$ modulo its $`R`$-torsion. If this torsion vanishes $`E`$ is said to be of linear type. Let $`UE`$ be a submodule. One says that $`U`$ is a reduction of $`E`$ or, equivalently, $`E`$ is integral over $`U`$ if $`(E)`$ is integral over the $`R`$-subalgebra generated by $`U`$. Alternatively, the integrality condition is expressed by the equations $`(E)_{r+1}=U(E)_r`$ with $`r0`$. The least integer $`r0`$ for which this equality holds is called the reduction number of $`E`$ with respect to $`U`$ and denoted by $`r_U(E)`$. Observe that if $`E`$ is of linear type then $`E`$ has no proper reductions. For any reduction $`U`$ of $`E`$ the module $`E/U`$ is torsion, hence $`U`$ has a rank and $`\mathrm{rank}U=\mathrm{rank}E`$. If $`R`$ is moreover local with residue field $`k`$ then the Krull dimension of $`(E)_Rk`$ is called the analytic spread of $`E`$ and is denoted by $`\mathrm{}(E)`$. A reduction of $`E`$ is said to be minimal in case it is minimal with respect to inclusion. If $`k`$ is infinite then minimal reductions of $`E`$ always exist and their minimal number of generators equals $`\mathrm{}(E)`$. The reduction number $`r(E)`$ of $`E`$ is defined to be the minimum of $`r_U(E)`$, where $`U`$ ranges over all minimal reductions of $`E`$. The core of $`E`$, denoted $`\mathrm{core}(E)`$, is the intersection of all reductions $`(`$minimal reductions if $`R`$ is local and $`k`$ is infinite$`)`$ of $`E`$. We write $`\mathrm{Fitt}_i(E)`$ for the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ Fitting ideal of $`E`$. Finally, we recall that $`E`$ is said to satisfy condition $`G_s`$, for an integer $`s1`$, if $`\mu (E_𝔭)dimR_𝔭+e1`$ whenever $`1dimR_𝔭s1`$.

Our first lemma establishes the existence of ‘superficial’ elements for modules:

###### Lemma 1

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring with infinite residue field, let $`E`$ be a finitely generated $`R`$-module having rank $`2`$, and let $`U`$ be a reduction of $`E`$. If $`x`$ is a general element of $`U`$ then $`RxR`$ and $`x`$ is regular on $`(E)`$. Writing $`\overline{E}=E/Rx`$ and $`K`$ for the kernel of the natural epimorphism from $`\overline{}=(E)/(x)`$ onto $`(\overline{E})`$, we have that $`K=H_{\overline{}_+}^0(\overline{})`$, in particular $`K_n=0`$ for $`n0`$.

###### Proof

Since $`\mathrm{rank}U=\mathrm{rank}E2`$ and $`xU`$ is general, we have that $`x`$ is basic for $`U`$ locally in codimension one (EE, , A). Hence $`RxR`$ and $`x`$ generates a free summand of $`E`$ locally at every minimal prime of $`R`$. It follows that $`x`$ is regular on $`(E)`$, $`K`$ is the $`R`$-torsion of $`\overline{}`$, and $`H_{\overline{}_+}^0(\overline{})K`$.

To prove the inclusion $`KH_{\overline{}_+}^0(\overline{})`$, write $`=(E)`$, $`A=\overline{}`$, $`B=A/H_{A_+}^0(A)`$. We need to show that $`B`$ is $`R`$-torsionfree. We first prove that the ring $`B`$ satisfies $`S_1`$, or equivalently that every associated prime of the ring $`A`$ not containing $`A_+`$ is minimal. To this end we consider the following subsets of $`\mathrm{Spec}()`$, $`𝒫=\{P|\mathrm{dim}_P2>\mathrm{depth}_P\}V(_+)`$ and $`V(L)=\{P|_P\mathrm{is}\mathrm{not}S_2\}`$ for $`L`$ some $``$-ideal, which exists by (EGA, , 6.11.8 and 6.11.9$`(i)`$). As $``$ satisfies $`S_1`$, $`L`$ contains an $``$-regular element $`y`$. Now $`𝒫\mathrm{Ass}_{}(/(y))`$, showing that $`𝒫`$ is a finite set $`(`$see also (F, , 3.2)$`)`$. As $`V(_+)=V(U)`$, a general element $`xU`$ is not contained in any prime of $`𝒫`$. Therefore every associated prime of $`A`$ not containing $`A_+`$ is indeed minimal.

It remains to show that every minimal prime $`P`$ of $`A`$ contracts to a minimal prime of $`R`$. To this end let $`Q`$ be the preimage of $`P`$ in $``$ and write $`𝔭=QR=PR`$. Set $`e=\mathrm{rank}E`$ and consider the subset $`=\mathrm{Min}(\mathrm{Fitt}_e(E))V(_+)`$ of $`\mathrm{Spec}()`$. Again since $`V(_+)=V(U)`$, a general element $`xU`$ is not contained in any prime of $``$. Thus since $`\mathrm{ht}_+=e2>1=\mathrm{ht}Q`$ and $`\mathrm{ht}\mathrm{Fitt}_e(E)1`$, $`Q`$ cannot contain $`\mathrm{Fitt}_e(E)`$. Therefore $`E_𝔭`$ is free, hence $`E_𝔭=U_𝔭`$ and $`\mathrm{dim}R_𝔭\mathrm{dim}_Q=1`$. Thus $`x`$ generates a free summand of $`E_𝔭=U_𝔭`$ , and so $`A_𝔭=_𝔭/(x)`$ is a polynomial ring over $`R_𝔭`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{dim}R_𝔭\mathrm{dim}A_P=0`$.

The next lemma is the main ingredient to set up the inductive procedure in the proof of Theorem 2.1. We show how the properties of a module $`E`$ change after factoring out a general element.

###### Lemma 2

In addition to the assumptions and notation of Lemma 1 write $`e=\mathrm{rank}E`$ and let $`^{\text{ }\text{ }}`$ denote images in $`\overline{E}`$.

$`\overline{E}`$ has rank $`e1`$;

if $`E`$ is torsionfree and satisfies $`G_s`$ and if $`\mathrm{ht}U:_REs`$ for some $`s2`$, then $`\overline{E}`$ is torsionfree and satisfies $`G_s`$;

if $`VE`$ is a submodule containing $`x`$ and $`\overline{V}`$ is a reduction of $`\overline{E}`$, then $`V`$ is a reduction of $`E`$;

$`\mathrm{}(\overline{E})=\mathrm{}(E)1`$;

if $`U`$ is a minimal reduction of $`E`$ then $`\overline{U}`$ is a minimal reduction of $`\overline{E}`$ and $`r(\overline{E})r_U(E)`$;

if $`(E)`$ or $`(\overline{E})`$ satisfies $`S_2`$ then $`K=0`$.

###### Proof

Let $`k`$ denote the residue field of $`R`$. Part $`(`$a$`)`$ follows since $`RxR`$ by Lemma 1. As for $`(`$b$`)`$, notice that $`U`$ satisfies $`G_s`$ and then $`\overline{U}`$ has the same property by (MY, , 3.5 and its proof). Thus $`\overline{E}`$ is $`G_s`$ since $`\mathrm{ht}\overline{U}:\overline{E}s`$. It now follows that $`\overline{E}`$ is torsionfree, because $`E`$ is torsionfree and $`\overline{E}`$ is free in codimension $`1`$. We now prove $`(`$c$`)`$. By Lemma 1, the kernel of the natural map from $`A=((E)/V(E))_Rk`$ to $`B=((\overline{E})/\overline{V}(\overline{E}))_Rk`$ is contained in $`H_{A_+}^0(A)`$. As $`\mathrm{dim}B=0`$ it follows that $`\mathrm{dim}A=0`$, hence $`V`$ is a reduction of $`E`$. To prove $`(`$d$`)`$, we may assume that the image of $`x`$ is part of a system of parameters of $`(E)_Rk`$. Thus $`\mathrm{}(\overline{E})\mathrm{}(E)1`$. Now part $`(`$c$`)`$ gives the asserted equality. As for $`(`$e$`)`$, we may choose $`x`$ to be part of a minimal generating set of $`U`$. Thus $`(`$d$`)`$ implies that $`\overline{U}`$ is a minimal reduction of $`\overline{E}`$, and hence $`r(\overline{E})r_{\overline{U}}(\overline{E})r_U(E)`$. Finally $`(`$f$`)`$ follows from Lemma 1. This is obvious in case $`(E)`$ is $`S_2`$. If on the other hand $`(\overline{E})`$ satisfies $`S_2`$, one argues as in (RAM, , the proof of 3.7).

###### Lemma 3

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen-Macaulay ring with infinite residue field, and let $`E`$ be a finitely generated $`R`$-module with $`\mathrm{proj}\mathrm{dim}E=1`$. Write $`e=\mathrm{rank}E`$, $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(E)`$, and assume that $`E`$ satisfies $`G_{\mathrm{}e+1}`$ and is torsionfree locally in codimension $`1`$. If $`U`$ is any minimal reduction of $`E`$ then $`U/(U:_RE)U(R/U:_RE)^{\mathrm{}}`$.

###### Proof

We use induction on $`e1`$. Notice that $`E`$ is torsionfree. If $`e=1`$ then $`E`$ is isomorphic to a perfect ideal of grade $`2`$. Now the assertion follows from (CPU2, , 2.5). Thus we may assume $`e2`$. Let $`x`$ be a general element of $`U`$ and let ‘$`^{\text{ }\text{ }}`$’ denote images in $`\overline{E}=E/Rx`$. By Lemma 1, $`RxR`$. Notice that $`E`$ is free locally in codimension $`1`$, thus $`\mathrm{ht}U:E2`$. Furthermore according to (Avr, , Proposition 4), $`E`$ is of linear type locally in codimension $`\mathrm{}e`$, hence $`\mathrm{ht}U:E\mathrm{}e+1`$. Therefore by Lemma 2$`(`$a$`)`$,$`(`$b$`)`$,$`(`$d$`)`$,$`(`$e$`)`$, $`\overline{E}`$ satisfies the same assumptions as $`E`$ with $`\mathrm{rank}\overline{E}=e1`$ and $`\mathrm{}(\overline{E})=\mathrm{}1`$, and $`\overline{U}`$ is a minimal reduction of $`\overline{E}`$. These facts remain true if we replace $`x`$ by $`x_i`$, for a suitable generating set $`\{x_1,\mathrm{},x_{\mathrm{}}\}`$ of $`U`$. Now the asserted isomorphism holds if and only if $`\mathrm{Fitt}_\mathrm{}1(U)U:E`$, or equivalently $`(Rx_1+\mathrm{}+\widehat{Rx_i}+\mathrm{}+Rx_{\mathrm{}}):x_iU:E`$ for every $`1i\mathrm{}`$. Taking $`x\{x_1,\mathrm{},\widehat{x}_i,\mathrm{},x_{\mathrm{}}\}`$, we have $`(Rx_1+\mathrm{}+\widehat{Rx_i}+\mathrm{}+Rx_{\mathrm{}}):x_i=\overline{(Rx_1+\mathrm{}+\widehat{Rx_i}+\mathrm{}+Rx_{\mathrm{}})}:\overline{x}_i\overline{U}:\overline{E}=U:E`$, where the middle inclusion holds by induction hypothesis.

We are now ready to prove our main result, which characterizes the shape of the core of a module with projective dimension one in terms of conditions either on the reduction number or on a Fitting ideal of the module. The corresponding result for ideals has been shown in (CPU2, , 2.6 and 3.4).

###### Theorem 2.1

Let $`R`$ be a local Gorenstein ring with infinite residue field and let $`E`$ be a finitely generated $`R`$-module with $`\mathrm{proj}\mathrm{dim}E=1`$. Write $`e=\mathrm{rank}E`$, $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(E)`$, and assume that $`E`$ satisfies $`G_{\mathrm{}e+1}`$ and is torsionfree locally in codimension $`1`$. The following conditions are equivalent:

$`(U:_RE)E\mathrm{core}(E)`$ for some minimal reduction $`U`$ of $`E`$;

$`(U:_RE)U=(U:_RE)E=\mathrm{core}(E)`$ for every minimal reduction $`U`$ of $`E`$;

$`\mathrm{core}(E)=\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(E)E`$;

$`U:_RE`$ does not depend on the minimal reduction $`U`$ of $`E`$;

$`U:_RE=\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(E)`$ for every minimal reduction $`U`$ of $`E`$;

the reduction number of $`E`$ is at most $`\mathrm{}e`$.

###### Proof

Notice that $`E`$ is free locally in codimension $`1`$ and torsionfree. Furthermore $`\mathrm{}e+1`$ by (RAM, , 4.1$`(`$a$`)`$). Let $`U`$ be any minimal reduction of $`E`$. By (Avr, , Proposition 4), $`E`$ is of linear type locally in codimension $`\mathrm{}e`$, hence $`\mathrm{ht}U:E\mathrm{}e+1`$. Thus $`U:E=\mathrm{Fitt}_0(E/U)`$ according to (BE, , 3.1$`(`$2$`)`$). In particular $`\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(E)=(U:E)`$ with $`U`$ ranging over all minimal reductions of $`E`$. This establishes the equivalence $`(`$d$`)`$ $``$ $`(`$e$`)`$ and the implications $`(`$b$`)`$ $``$ $`(`$c$`)`$ $``$ $`(`$a$`)`$. The implication $`(`$d$`)`$ $``$ $`(`$a$`)`$ on the other hand is obvious.

Now we are going to prove the remaining equivalences by induction on $`e1`$. If $`e=1`$ then $`E`$ is isomorphic to a perfect ideal of grade $`2`$, and the theorem follows from (CPU2, , 2.6$`(`$3$`)`$) and (CPU2, , 3.4). Thus we may assume that $`e2`$. Let $`x`$ be a general element of $`U`$ and let ‘$`^{\text{ }\text{ }}`$’ denote images in $`\overline{E}=E/Rx`$. By Lemma 1, $`RxR`$ and $`x`$ is regular on $`(E)`$. Furthermore Lemma 2$`(`$a$`)`$,$`(`$b$`)`$,$`(`$d$`)`$,$`(`$e$`)`$ shows that $`\overline{E}`$ satisfies the same assumptions as $`E`$ with $`\mathrm{rank}\overline{E}=e1`$, $`\mathrm{}(\overline{E})=\mathrm{}1`$ and $`\overline{U}`$ a minimal reduction of $`\overline{E}`$. Finally $`\overline{\mathrm{core}(E)}\mathrm{core}(\overline{E})`$ by Lemma 2$`(c)`$. These facts remain true if we replace $`x`$ by $`x_i`$, for a suitable generating set $`\{x_1,\mathrm{},x_{\mathrm{}}\}`$ of $`U`$.

$`(`$a$`)`$ $``$ $`(`$f$`)`$: Take $`U`$ as in $`(`$a$`)`$. Since $`\overline{\mathrm{core}(E)}\mathrm{core}(\overline{E})`$, part $`(`$a$`)`$ gives $`(\overline{U}:\overline{E})\overline{E}\mathrm{core}(\overline{E})`$. Now the induction hypothesis implies that $`r(\overline{E})\mathrm{}(\overline{E})(e1)`$. Hence $`(\overline{E})`$ is Cohen-Macaulay by (RAM, , 4.7$`(`$a$`)`$). Thus Lemma 2$`(`$f$`)`$ shows that $`(E)`$ is Cohen-Macaulay, and then $`r(E)\mathrm{}e`$ again by (RAM, , 4.7$`(`$a$`)`$).

$`(`$f$`)`$ $``$ $`(`$e$`)`$ and $`(`$b$`)`$: If $`(`$f$`)`$ holds then $`(E)`$ is Cohen-Macaulay by (RAM, , 4.7$`(`$a$`)`$). Lemma 2$`(`$f$`)`$ then shows that $`(\overline{E})(E)/(x)`$ is Cohen-Macaulay as well. Now again according to (RAM, , 4.7$`(`$a$`)`$), $`r(\overline{E})\mathrm{}(\overline{E})(e1)`$. To establish $`(`$e$`)`$ we use the isomorphism $`\omega _{(E)}\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(E)(E)[e]`$ proved in (RAM, , 4.10). From the corresponding formula for $`\omega _{(\overline{E})}`$ and the isomorphism $`\omega _{(E)}_{(E)}(E)/(x)\omega _{(\overline{E})}[1]`$, we deduce that $`\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(E)=\mathrm{Fitt}_\mathrm{}1(\overline{E})`$. On the other hand by induction hypothesis, $`\mathrm{Fitt}_\mathrm{}1(\overline{E})=\overline{U}:\overline{E}`$. Since $`\overline{U}:\overline{E}=U:E`$ we obtain the equality $`\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(E)=U:E`$ asserted in $`(`$e$`)`$. Now $`(`$e$`)`$ being established, part $`(`$d$`)`$ holds as well and hence $`(U:E)E\mathrm{core}(E)`$ for every minimal reduction $`U`$ of $`E`$. Thus to prove $`(`$b$`)`$ it suffices to show that $`\mathrm{core}(E)(U:E)U`$. By the induction hypothesis, $`\mathrm{core}(\overline{E})=(\overline{U}:\overline{E})\overline{U}`$. Since $`\overline{\mathrm{core}(E)}\mathrm{core}(\overline{E})`$ we deduce that $`\mathrm{core}(E)Rx+(U:E)U`$. Replacing $`x`$ by $`x_i`$ we obtain

$$\mathrm{core}(E)\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(Rx_i+(U:E)U).$$

However the latter module is $`(U:E)U`$. This is obvious if $`U:E=R`$ and follows from Lemma 3 if $`U:ER`$ since then the images of $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_{\mathrm{}}`$ form a basis of the free module $`U/(U:E)U`$ over the ring $`R/U:E`$.

Our first corollary says that in the setting of Theorem 2.1, formation of the core is indeed compatible with flat local base change.

###### Corollary 1

Let $`R`$ be a Noetherian local ring with infinite residue field and let $`E`$ be a finitely generated $`R`$-module with $`\mathrm{proj}\mathrm{dim}E=1`$. Write $`e=\mathrm{rank}E`$, $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(E)`$, and assume that $`E`$ satisfies $`G_{\mathrm{}e+1}`$ and is torsionfree locally in codimension $`1`$ and that $`r(E)\mathrm{}e`$. For any flat local homomorphism $`RS`$ with $`S`$ a local Gorenstein ring, one has $`\mathrm{core}(E_RS)=(\mathrm{core}(E))S`$.

Our next corollary deals with a formula for the core of modules with projective dimension one that are presented by a matrix with linear entries.

###### Corollary 2

Let $`R=k[x_1,\mathrm{},x_d]_{(x_1,\mathrm{},x_d)}`$ be the localization of a polynomial ring in $`d2`$ variables over an infinite field, let $`𝔪`$ be the maximal ideal of $`R`$, and let $`E`$ be a finitely generated $`R`$-module with $`\mathrm{proj}\mathrm{dim}E=1`$, presented by a matrix whose entries are linear forms. Write $`e=\mathrm{rank}E`$, $`n=\mu (E)`$, and assume that $`E`$ satisfies $`G_d`$. One has

$$\mathrm{core}(E)=𝔪^{ned+1}E.$$

###### Proof

We may assume that $`n>d+e1`$, since otherwise $`E`$ is of linear type according to (RAM, , 4.11). But then by the same result, $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(E)=d+e1`$. Furthermore $`(E)`$ is Cohen-Macaulay. Thus (RAM, , 4.7$`(`$a$`)`$) shows that $`r(E)\mathrm{}e`$ and $`\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(E)=\mathrm{Fitt}_0(E/U)`$ for some minimal reduction $`U`$ of $`E`$. Now according to Theorem 2.1, $`\mathrm{core}(E)=\mathrm{Fitt}_0(E/U)E`$. On the other hand, $`\mathrm{Fitt}_0(E/U)`$ has height $`d`$ and is the ideal of maximal minors of an $`ned+1`$ by $`ne`$ matrix with linear entries. Thus $`\mathrm{Fitt}_0(E/U)=𝔪^{ned+1}`$.

Theorem 2.1 also recovers the next result of Mohan about the core of integrally closed modules over a two-dimensional regular local ring (M, , 2.10).

###### Corollary 3

Let $`R`$ be a two-dimensional regular local ring with infinite residue field and let $`E`$ be a finitely generated torsionfree $`R`$-module of rank $`e`$. If $`E`$ is integrally closed then

$$\mathrm{core}(E)=\mathrm{Fitt}_{e+1}(E)E.$$

###### Proof

We may assume that $`E`$ is not free, in which case $`\mathrm{}(E)=e+1`$ by (RAM, , 4.1$`(`$a$`)`$). Since $`r(E)1`$ according to (KK, , 4.1$`(`$i$`)`$), the assertion now follows from Theorem 2.1.