text:
# Effect of different choices of the Boltzmannized flux operator on thermal exchange and recombination reactions

## I Introduction

To study a chemical reaction at the most detailed level, it is necessary to treat the action of the time evolution operator, $`\mathrm{exp}(i\widehat{H}t)`$ ($`\widehat{H}`$ is the Hamiltonian of the system), We use the natural unit, i.e., $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$. onto a (given) initial wave function or density matrix, which is a function of total energy $`E`$ and total angular momentum $`J`$. Such quantum scattering calculations have actually been studied for simple chemical reactions.Zang (1999) A time-dependent scattering formalism based on the $`S`$-matrix Kohn variational approachMielke et al. (1994) or a coupled channel method in hyperspherical coordinatesKuppermann (1996) has usually been used to evaluate the quantum reactive scattering cross sections. The number of open vibration-rotation channels, however, increases very rapidly as thermally accessible collision energy becomes high. Therefore, at high energy the exact quantum state-to-state calculations would not be feasible even for a simple reaction. Furthermore, if it is only the rate constant that is desired, such a complete calculation for all state-to-state information is not economical.

A totally different approach for treating chemical reactions is that based on a correlation between quantum flux operators in the statistical thermodynamics. In the early 60’s, YamamotoYamamoto (1960) first formulated an exact expression for the rate constant as an application of the general statistical mechanical theory of irreversible process, which was established by Kubo et al.Kubo (1957); Kubo et al. (1957) and Mori.Mori (1956) (See also Ref.Wolynes, 1981.) Independently, Miller et al.Miller (1974, 1975); Miller et al. (1983) have developed a method for the rate constant using a time integral of the flux-flux autocorrelation function, which is also exact in the limit that the dynamics is extended to $`t\mathrm{}`$. The feasibility of this approach depends on how to evaluate the time evolution operator for the system, and the correlation is usually calculated using the Feynman path integral technique.Feynman and Hibbs (1965); Schulman (1981) Although this method is powerful and convenient to obtain the rate constant, the direct application to large, complicated systems is still difficult because of the notorious sign problem.Doll et al. (1994); Mak et al. (1998) One approach to improve this situation is a filtering or smoothing techniqueFilinov (1986) such as the stationary-phase Monte Carlo.Doll and Freeman (1989) Recently, semiclassical (SC) approaches, implemented via the initial-value representation (SC-IVR), have received a rebirth of interest. (Van VleckVleck (1928) first discussed a drastic approximation based on the semiclassical picture.) A number of studiesYamamoto et al. (2002); Zhao and Miller (2002); Yamamoto and Miller (2003) have been carried out along SC-IVR and have demonstrated the capability of these approaches to describe various quantum effects in chemical reactions.

It has also been shown how a quantum mechanical version of the Lindemann mechanism for collisional recombination, where the process is affected by the bath gas $`M`$,

$`A+B`$ $``$ $`AB^{},`$ (1)
$`AB^{}+M`$ $``$ $`AB+M,`$ (2)
can be handled by the flux-flux autocorrelation function for the $`AB`$ collision.Miller (1995); Germann and Miller (1997); Miller (1998) Some applications of this theory are listed in Refs.Qi and Bowman, 1996; Mandelshtam et al., 1996. It is furthermore possible to generalize the formalism to include chemical reactions as well as recombination:

$`A+BC`$ $``$ $`ABC^{}AB+C,`$ (3)
$`ABC^{}+M`$ $``$ $`ABC+M.`$ (4)
Equations (3) and (4) simultaneously describe the recombination process ($`A+BCABC`$) and the exchange reaction ($`A+BCAB+C`$).Germann and Miller (1997) This method has been applied to the interesting (combustion) reactions ($`O+OHH+O_2`$) and the recombination reactions ($`O+OH+MHO_2+MH+O_2+M`$), which are very important in atmospheric chemistry.Miller et al. (1990); Wennberg et al. (1994)

As mentioned above, there are two different ways to calculate the rate constant for chemical reactions, i.e., the Yamamoto approach, in which the Kubo form of the flux operator is used, and the Miller approach, in which the traditional half-split form is chosen. The two approaches can provide the same result to the rate constant because it is given in terms of the integral of the flux-flux correlation function with respect to time.Miller (1974); Miller et al. (1983) However, the shapes of the correlation functions calculated by the two approaches are quite different from each other. Therefore, for the recombination and exchange reactions (like Eqs.(3) and (4)) the rate constants in the two approaches could be different, because they are given by Laplace transforms of the flux-flux correlation functions.Saito (2003) The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the effect of different choices of the Boltzmannized flux operator on the rate constants for recombination and exchange reactions.

First, we summarize the correlation function method briefly in Sec.II. The expressions of the correlation functions in the Yamamoto and Miller approaches can be unified using a general form of the Boltzmannized flux operator. The difference between the two approaches is discussed explicitly. The rate constants for recombination and exchange processes are also studied. In Sec.III, we consider an exactly solvable model, i.e., the free particle case, in terms of a new scaling function. In Sec.IV, as a non-trivial case, we study the recombination and exchange reactions at very high pressure. Finally, the summary and conclusion are given in Sec.V.

## II Flux-flux correlation approach to rate constants

The quantum mechanically exact expression for a thermal rate constant $`k(T)`$ can be written in terms of the flux correlation functionMiller (1974)For simplicity, we consider a reaction in one-dimension.

$$k(T)=Q_0(T)^1\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}C_s(r;t),$$
(5)
where $`Q_0(T)`$ is the reactant partition function per unit volume and $`C_s(r;t)`$ is the flux-side correlation function defined by

$$C_s(r;t)=\mathrm{tr}[e^{\beta \widehat{H}}\widehat{F}(r)\widehat{𝒫}].$$
(6)
Here, $`\widehat{F}(r)`$ is the bare flux operator given by

$$\widehat{F}(r)=i[\widehat{H},h(\widehat{s})]_{s=r},$$
(7)
with $`h`$ the Heaviside step function and $`s`$ the reaction coordinate – see Fig.1. $`h(s)`$ takes the value of $`0(1)`$ in the reactant (product) side of the dividing point $`r`$. In Eq.(6), $`\widehat{𝒫}`$ is the projection operator defined by

$$\widehat{𝒫}=e^{i\widehat{H}t}h(\widehat{p})e^{i\widehat{H}t},$$
(8)
with $`\widehat{p}`$ the momentum operator.

For the rate constant, two different approaches have been proposed so far: one is the Yamamoto approach,Yamamoto (1960) which is based on the linear response theory (or the so-called Kubo formula),Kubo (1957); Kubo et al. (1957) and the other is the flux-flux autocorrelation function method developed by Miller et al.Miller (1974, 1975); Miller et al. (1983) In the Miller approach, Eq.(6) are modified by following two useful facts: the first one is made by noting that $`\widehat{𝒫}`$ and $`\widehat{H}`$ commute each other (i.e., $`[\widehat{𝒫},\widehat{H}]=0`$) in the limit $`t\mathrm{}`$, and the second is to replace $`h(\widehat{p})`$ by $`h(\widehat{s})`$ in Eq.(8), which is also correct in the limit $`t\mathrm{}`$. By virtue of these modifications, the flux-side correlation function in the Miller approach can be rewritten as

$$C_s^M(r;t)=\mathrm{tr}[\widehat{F}^M(\beta ,r)e^{i\widehat{H}t}h(\widehat{r})e^{i\widehat{H}t}],$$
(9)
where the superscript $`M`$ stands for ”Miller”. Here, $`\widehat{F}^M(\beta ,r)`$ is the half-split Boltzmannized flux operator

$$\widehat{F}^M(\beta ,r)=e^{\beta \widehat{H}/2}\widehat{F}(r)e^{\beta \widehat{H}/2}.$$
(10)
Using Eq.(7), the rate constant can also be expressed in terms of the flux-flux correlation function $`C(r,r;t)`$ as

$$Q_0(T)k(T)=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑tC^M(r,r;t),$$
(11)
where

$$C^M(r,r;t)=\mathrm{tr}[\widehat{F}^M(\beta ,r)e^{i\widehat{H}t}\widehat{F}(r)e^{i\widehat{H}t}].$$
(12)
On the other hand, the linear response theory gives the rate constant

$$Q_0(T)k(T)=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑tC^Y(r,r;t),$$
(13)
where

$$C^Y(r,r;t)=\mathrm{tr}[\widehat{F}^Y(\beta ,r)e^{i\widehat{H}t}\widehat{F}(r)e^{i\widehat{H}t}],$$
(14)
with

$$\widehat{F}^Y(\beta ,r)=\frac{1}{\beta }_0^\beta 𝑑\lambda e^{(\beta \lambda )\widehat{H}}\widehat{F}(r)e^{\lambda \widehat{H}}.$$
(15)
Here, the superscript $`Y`$ stands for ”Yamamoto”.

If a general form of the Boltzmannized flux operator is introduced byYamamoto and Miller (2003)

$$\widehat{F}^\kappa (\beta ,r)=\frac{1}{\kappa \beta }_{(1\kappa )\beta /2}^{(1+\kappa )\beta /2}𝑑\lambda e^{(\beta \lambda )\widehat{H}}\widehat{F}(r)e^{\lambda \widehat{H}},$$
(16)
where $`\kappa `$ is a parameter ($`0\kappa 1`$), the correlation functions in the Miller and Yamamoto approaches can be unified as

$$C^\kappa (r,r;t)=\mathrm{tr}[\widehat{F}^\kappa (\beta ,r)e^{i\widehat{H}t}\widehat{F}(r)e^{i\widehat{H}t}].$$
(17)
It is easy to check that in the limit $`\kappa 0(1)`$ Eq.(17) reproduces the correlation function in the Miller (Yamamoto) approach.

Using Eq.(7), the integral with respect to $`\lambda `$ in the general form of the Boltzmannized flux operator can be performed:

$$\widehat{F}^\kappa (\beta ,r)=\frac{i}{\kappa \beta }\left[e^{(1\kappa )\beta \widehat{H}/2}h(\widehat{r})e^{(1+\kappa )\beta \widehat{H}/2}e^{(1+\kappa )\beta \widehat{H}/2}h(\widehat{r})e^{(1\kappa )\beta \widehat{H}/2}\right].$$
(18)
Combining the partial Boltzmann operator, $`e^{(1\pm \kappa )\beta \widehat{H}/2}`$, with the real-time evolution operator $`e^{\pm i\widehat{H}t}`$, we obtain two complex-time evolution operators: $`e^{i\widehat{H}t_+}`$ and $`e^{i\widehat{H}t_{}}`$ with $`t_\pm =ti(1\pm \kappa )\beta /2`$. Then, the correlation function is rewritten as

$$C^\kappa (r,r;t)=\frac{2}{\kappa \beta }\mathrm{}\mathrm{tr}[\widehat{F}(r)e^{i\widehat{H}t_+^{}}h(\widehat{r})e^{i\widehat{H}t_{}}],$$
(19)
where $`\mathrm{}`$ stands for taking the imaginary part. Performing the trace operation in Eq.(19), the correlation function reads

$`C^\kappa (r,r^{};t)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\kappa \beta }}\mathrm{}\mathrm{tr}[\widehat{F}(r)e^{i\widehat{H}t_+^{}}h(\widehat{r^{}})e^{i\widehat{H}t_{}}]`$ (20)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m\kappa \beta }}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle _r^{\mathrm{}}}ds[is|e^{i\widehat{H}t_+}|s^{}^{}{\displaystyle \frac{}{s^{}}}s|e^{i\widehat{H}t_{}}|s^{}`$
$``$ $`is|e^{i\widehat{H}t_{}}|s^{}{\displaystyle \frac{}{s^{}}}s|e^{i\widehat{H}t_+}|s^{}^{}]_{s^{}=r^{}},`$
where $`s|e^{i\widehat{H}t}|s^{}`$ is the propagator in the coordinate representation. The correlation function $`C^\kappa (r,r;t)`$ is given in the limit $`r^{}r`$.

It is possible to generalize the flux correlation approach to treat recombination and exchange reactions.Miller (1998, 1995); Germann and Miller (1997); Qi and Bowman (1996); Mandelshtam et al. (1996) Let us consider the reaction of $`A+BCAB+C`$ and $`ABC`$ in one-dimension (see Eqs.(3) and (4) and Fig.2). The rate constants for the exchange ($`A+BCAB+C`$) and recombination ($`A+BCABC`$) reactions are again given by the average of the flux $`\widehat{F}(r)`$ and the projection operator $`\widehat{𝒫}`$ over the Boltzmann distribution, where $`\widehat{F}(r)`$ describes the flux at the reactant dividing point $`r`$ (see Fig.2). Similarly, we can define the flux operator $`\widehat{F}(p)`$ at the product dividing point $`p`$.

Because the probability of the system experiencing a deactivating ($`ABC^{}+MABC+M`$) collision with the bath gas $`M`$ can be evaluated by $`1e^{\eta t}`$ at time $`t`$ ($`\eta `$ describes the frequency of deactivating collisions and it depends on pressure $`P`$ and $`T`$ of the bath gas), the recombination probability is proportional to $`1e^{\eta \tau }`$, where $`\tau `$ is the time the trajectory (it is on $`r`$ at $`t=0`$) is in the compound region (see Fig.2). On the other hand, for the exchange reaction, the probability is given by $`e^{\eta \tau _p}`$, where $`\tau _p`$ is the time the trajectory exists through the point $`p`$.

Using these probabilities and the correlation function, the rate constants for the recombination and exchange reactions are finally given byGermann and Miller (1997)

$`Q_0(T)k_{rec}^\kappa (T,P)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑te^{\eta t}[C^\kappa (r,r;t)C^\kappa (r,p;t)],`$ (21)
$`Q_0(T)k_{exc}^\kappa (T,P)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑te^{\eta t}C^\kappa (r,p;t),`$ (22)
where the relation

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑tC^\kappa (r,r;t)=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑tC^\kappa (r,p;t)$$
(23)
holds. This ensures that the recombination rate vanishes in the limit $`\eta 0`$.

Because the rate constants for recombination and exchange processes are calculated by the Laplace transforms of the correlation functions, it is clear that the evaluated results depend on $`\kappa `$, that is, the shape of the correlation function affects the rate constants.Saito (2003) Of course, the integral of the correlation function with respect to time itself does not depend on $`\kappa `$.

## III Solvable model – free particle case

In this section and the next section, we calculate the rate constants for recombination and exchange reactions using the Feynman path integral technique.Feynman and Hibbs (1965); Schulman (1981) A huge calculation is usually required to obtain the exact matrix elements of propagators for a realistic system. Furthermore, it is necessary to take some approximations and numerical techniques to perform it.Doll and Freeman (1989); Yamamoto et al. (2002); Zhao and Miller (2002); Yamamoto and Miller (2003); Leforestier and Miller (1994); Thompson and Miller (1997); Sun and Miller (2002) Because the aim of this paper is to show how the rate constant for recombination or exchange reaction depends on $`\kappa `$ (i.e., a choice of the Boltzmannized flux operator), it would be more intuitive and useful to first consider a simple system rather than a complicated case. We here study an analytically solvable model, i.e., the free particle case in one-dimension, and discuss a non-trivial case in the next section.

If no potential acts on the system (see Fig.3), the propagator in the coordinate representation is easily calculated by the path integral.Feynman and Hibbs (1965) The flux-flux correlation function Eq.(20) then gives

$`C_0^\kappa (r,p;t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi \kappa \beta ^2\sqrt{D_+D_{}}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{m\beta d^2(t^2+(1\kappa ^2)\beta ^2/4)}{2D_+D_{}}}\right]`$ (24)
$`\times `$ $`\left[(2tA\kappa \beta B)\mathrm{sin}X+(2tB+\kappa \beta A)\mathrm{cos}X\right],`$
where $`D_\pm =t^2+(1\pm \kappa )^2\beta ^2/4`$, $`X=\kappa mt\beta ^2d^2/2D_+D_{}`$ and

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\left(\sqrt{D_+}+t\right)\left(\sqrt{D_{}}+t\right)\right]^{1/2}+\left[\left(\sqrt{D_+}t\right)\left(\sqrt{D_{}}t\right)\right]^{1/2},`$ (25)
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\left(\sqrt{D_+}+t\right)\left(\sqrt{D_{}}t\right)\right]^{1/2}\left[\left(\sqrt{D_+}t\right)\left(\sqrt{D_{}}+t\right)\right]^{1/2},`$ (26)
with $`d`$ the distance between $`r`$ and $`p`$ and $`m`$ the reduced mass. Note that, as it should be, the correlation depends on only the distance $`d`$ and is independent of the positions $`r`$ and $`p`$.

If $`\kappa =1`$ (the Yamamoto approach), Eq.(24) gives

$`C_0^Y(r,p;t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \beta ^2\sqrt{2t(t^2+\beta ^2)}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{m\beta d^2}{2(t^2+\beta ^2)}}\right]`$ (27)
$`\times `$ $`\left[(\sqrt{t^2+\beta ^2}+t)^{3/2}\mathrm{sin}X^{}+(\sqrt{t^2+\beta ^2}t)^{3/2}\mathrm{cos}X^{}\right],`$
where $`X^{}=m\beta ^2d^2/2t(t^2+\beta ^2)`$, and

$$C_0^Y(r,r;t)=\frac{(\sqrt{t^2+\beta ^2}t)^{3/2}}{2\pi \beta ^2\sqrt{2t}(t^2+\beta ^2)^{1/2}}.$$
(28)
On the other hand, taking the limit $`\kappa 0`$ in Eq.(24), we obtain the correlation functions in the Miller approach:

$$C_0^M(r,p;t)=\frac{1}{4\pi (t^2+\beta ^2/4)^{3/2}}\left[\frac{\beta }{2}+\frac{2mt^2d^2}{t^2+\beta ^2/4}\right]\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{m\beta d^2}{2(t^2+\beta ^2/4)}\right],$$
(29)
and

$$C_0^M(r,r;t)=\frac{\beta }{8\pi (t^2+\beta ^2/4)^{3/2}}.$$
(30)
Now it is very convenient to introduce a new scaling function

$`S_{rp}^\kappa (x,c)`$ $``$ $`2\pi \beta ^2C_0^\kappa (r,p;t)`$ (31)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa \sqrt{\overline{D}_+\overline{D}_{}}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[c\left({\displaystyle \frac{x^2+(1\kappa ^2)/4)}{\overline{D}_+\overline{D}_{}}}\right)\right]`$
$`\times `$ $`\left[(2x\overline{A}\kappa \overline{B})\mathrm{sin}X+(2x\overline{B}+\kappa \overline{A})\mathrm{cos}X\right],`$
where $`x(=t/\beta )`$ and $`c(=md^2/2\beta )`$ are dimensionless variables. Since the scaling function itself is a function of $`x`$ and $`c`$, it is also dimensionless. Here, $`\overline{D}_\pm =x^2+(1\pm \kappa )^2/4`$, $`X=\kappa cx/\overline{D}_+\overline{D}_{}`$, and $`\overline{A}`$ and $`\overline{B}`$ are given by replacing $`D_\pm `$ with $`\overline{D}_\pm `$ and $`tx`$ in Eqs.(25) and (26), respectively. If we set $`r=p`$ (or $`d=0`$), we obtain

$$S_{rr}^\kappa (x)2\pi \beta ^2C_0^\kappa (r,r;t)=\frac{1}{2\kappa \sqrt{\overline{D}_+\overline{D}_{}}}(2x\overline{B}+\kappa \overline{A}),$$
(32)
which is a function of only $`x`$ because $`c=0`$.

We show these scaling functions in Figs.4 and 5. Note that the integral of the scaling function with respect to $`x`$ does not, of course, depend on $`\kappa `$. In Fig.4 the scaling function for $`\kappa =1`$ (Yamamoto approach) is divergent like $`1/\sqrt{x}`$ at $`x=0`$. Taking the limit $`x0`$ implies that $`t`$ approaches $`0`$ but $`\beta `$ is finite or $`T`$ is very low ($`\beta \mathrm{}`$) but $`t`$ is finite. In the Miller approach ($`\kappa =0`$), the scaling function is finite at $`x=0`$: $`S_{rr}^{\kappa =0}(0)=2`$. For arbitrary $`\kappa `$, we find $`S_{rr}^\kappa (0)=2/\sqrt{1\kappa ^2}`$. By contrast, in the limit $`x\mathrm{}`$ (which corresponds to the case where $`T`$ is very high ($`\beta 0`$) but $`t`$ is finite or $`t\mathrm{}`$ but $`\beta `$ is finite), the scaling function does not depend on $`\kappa `$ and behaves like $`1/4x^3`$.

In Fig.5 we take $`c=1.0`$ to illustrate the scaling function $`S_{rp}^\kappa `$ clearly. It is remarkable that the interference effect in the correlation is fully taken into account in the Yamamoto approach ($`\kappa =1`$). Hence the scaling function oscillates very rapidly near the origin. Contrastingly, in the case of $`\kappa 1`$ the interference is averaged and the shape is very smooth. The value of the scaling function at $`x=0`$ is given by $`(2/\sqrt{1\kappa ^2})\mathrm{exp}(4c/(1\kappa ^2))`$ for $`\kappa 1`$. The partial-split form of the Boltzmannized flux operator (i.e., $`0\kappa <1`$) is thus very convenient for actual computations. For large $`x`$ the scaling function is again independent of $`\kappa `$ and behaves like $`(1+8c)/4x^3`$.

Next, we study the rate constants for recombination and exchange reactions, which are given by Eqs.(21) and (22), respectively. Using the scaling functions, we first calculate the $`(rr)`$\- and $`(rp)`$-rate constants, which are, respectively, defined by

$`Q_0(T)k_{rr}^\kappa `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \beta }}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑xe^{\alpha x}S_{rr}^\kappa (x),`$ (33)
$`Q_0(T)k_{rp}^\kappa `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \beta }}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑xe^{\alpha x}S_{rp}^\kappa (x,c),`$ (34)
with $`\alpha (=\beta \eta )`$ a dimensionless variable. Then, the rate constants are given as $`k_{rec}^\kappa =k_{rr}^\kappa k_{rp}^\kappa `$ and $`k_{exc}^\kappa =k_{rp}^\kappa `$.

In order to convert the collision frequency $`\eta `$ to more familiar variables, we approximate the collisional deactivation rate constant by an expression given by the hard sphere collision theory. Furthermore, if one uses the ideal gas expansion, the frequency can be expressed byGermann and Miller (1997)

$$\eta =k_{deact}[M]=P\sqrt{\frac{2000}{T}}\times 10^{11},$$
(35)
with $`\eta `$ in fs<sup>-1</sup>, $`P`$ in Pa and $`T`$ in K. Then, we find

$$\alpha =\beta \eta 3.42\times \frac{P}{T^{3/2}}\times 10^6.$$
(36)
The factor $`c`$ is also converted as

$$c=\frac{md^2}{2\beta }=0.0103\times A_mTd^2,$$
(37)
with $`A_m`$ the reduced mass of the system in atomic mass units and $`d`$ in Å.

Now we are in a position to show our results for the free particle case. We define the ratio of the rate constant for arbitrary $`\kappa `$ to that for $`\kappa =1`$ (Yamamoto approach):

$`R_{rr}^\kappa (\alpha )=k_{rr}^\kappa /k_{rr}^{\kappa =1},`$ (38)
$`R_{rp}^\kappa (\alpha ,c)=k_{rp}^\kappa /k_{rp}^{\kappa =1}.`$ (39)
The ratio $`R_{rr}^\kappa `$ is a function of only $`\alpha `$, through which it depends on $`T`$ and $`P`$, while the ratio $`R_{rp}^\kappa `$ depends on $`\alpha `$ and $`c`$. In Figs.6 and 7, we illustrate the two ratios for the free particle case. Here, we choose $`0\alpha 1`$, which, for example, covers the region of $`P1.5`$ GPa at $`T300`$ K. In Fig.7, $`c`$ is fixed to be $`20`$ because the ratio is not sensitive to it in the region of $`0\alpha 1`$. In $`R_{rr}^\kappa `$, the ratio decreases linearly and it is about $`0.9`$ ($`10\%`$ reduction) at $`\alpha =1`$ in the case of $`\kappa =0`$. Note that a large value of $`\alpha `$ corresponds to the case of high $`P`$ and low $`T`$, and that the ratio at large $`\alpha `$ is mainly determined by the correlation function (or the scaling function) at $`x0`$ (see Fig.4). By contrast, in $`R_{rp}^\kappa `$ the deviation of the ratio from unity is not large, and the ratio for $`\kappa =0`$ is enhanced by about $`45`$% at $`\alpha =1`$.

Combining the $`(rr)`$\- and $`(rp)`$-rate constants, we can calculate the ratio of the recombination rate constants, $`R_{rec}^\kappa =k_{rec}^\kappa /k_{rec}^{\kappa =1}`$. Because the $`(rp)`$-rate constant itself is, however, much smaller than the $`(rr)`$-rate constant, the ratio $`R_{rec}^\kappa `$ is very close to $`R_{rr}^\kappa `$. We find that $`R_{rec}^{\kappa =0}`$ is again about $`0.9`$ at $`\alpha =1`$. On the other hand, the ratio for the exchange process is given by $`R_{exc}^\kappa =k_{exc}^\kappa /k_{exc}^{\kappa =1}=R_{rp}^\kappa `$.

## IV Rate constants at high pressure limit

As a non-trivial example, we consider the rate constants for recombination and exchange reactions at very high pressure. As we have seen in the previous section, it is very notable that at short time (or small $`x`$) the correlation function (or the scaling function) in the Yamamoto approach is quite different from the other case ($`\kappa 1`$). The rate constant is calculated by the Laplace transform of the correlation function (see Eqs.(21) and (22)), in which the integrand involves the factor $`\mathrm{exp}(\eta t)`$ and $`\eta `$ is proportional to pressure. Thus, at sufficiently high pressure the rate constant may be determined by the correlation function at short time ($`t\eta ^1`$).

For a short time, the paths which must be considered in evaluating a potential $`V`$ never move very far from the initial position. Thus, to a first approximation, we can expand the potential $`V`$ around the average of the initial ($`s`$) and final ($`s^{}`$) positions:

$$V(x(t))V(\overline{x})+[x(t)\overline{x}]V^{}(\overline{x})+\frac{1}{2}[x(t)\overline{x}]^2V^{\prime \prime }(\overline{x}),$$
(40)
where $`\overline{x}=(s+s^{})/2`$. Here we ignore terms of higher order than the second derivative of $`V`$. By virtue of the quadratic form of $`x(t)`$, we can easily find the propagatorFeynman and Hibbs (1965); Schulman (1981)

$$s^{}|e^{i\widehat{H}t}|s=\left[\frac{m\omega }{2\pi i\mathrm{sin}\tau }\right]^{1/2}e^{itV(\overline{x})}e^{iS},$$
(41)
where

$$S=\frac{m\omega }{4\mathrm{sin}\tau }(1+\mathrm{cos}\tau )(ss^{})^2\frac{f^2F(\tau )}{2m\omega ^3\mathrm{sin}\tau },$$
(42)
with $`\tau =\omega t`$, $`f=V^{}(\overline{x})`$, $`\omega ^2=V^{\prime \prime }(\overline{x})/m`$ and $`F(\tau )=2(1\mathrm{cos}\tau )\tau \mathrm{sin}\tau `$. Because the potential is expanded up to $`𝒪(V^{\prime \prime })`$, Eq.(41) is valid up to $`𝒪(f^2)`$ or $`𝒪(\omega ^2)`$.

To take the temperature effect into account, it is again necessary to introduce complex-times. Because the correlation function is given by (see Eqs.(16) and (17))

$`C^\kappa (r,p;t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa \beta }}{\displaystyle _{(1\kappa )\beta /2}^{(1+\kappa )\beta /2}}𝑑\lambda \mathrm{tr}[e^{(\beta \lambda )\widehat{H}}\widehat{F}(r)e^{\lambda \widehat{H}}e^{i\widehat{H}t}\widehat{F}(p)e^{i\widehat{H}t}],`$ (43)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa \beta }}{\displaystyle _{\kappa \beta /2}^{\kappa \beta /2}}𝑑\lambda \mathrm{tr}[\widehat{F}(r)e^{i\widehat{H}(t+i(\beta /2+\lambda ))}\widehat{F}(p)e^{i\widehat{H}(ti(\beta /2\lambda ))}],`$ (44)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa \beta }}{\displaystyle _{\kappa \beta /2}^{\kappa \beta /2}}𝑑\lambda C^\kappa (r,p,\lambda ;t),`$ (45)
we define new complex-times as $`t_\pm (\lambda )=t\pm i(\beta /2\pm \lambda )`$. Because of very high pressure (or short complex-time), it is clear that the $`(rp)`$-rate constant becomes very small compared with the $`(rr)`$-rate constant. Therefore, we here focus on the $`(rr)`$-rate constant and do not consider the $`(rp)`$-rate constant. Then, using the propagator Eq.(41) we obtain

$$C^\kappa (r,r,\lambda ;t)\frac{1}{4\pi [t_+(\lambda )t_{}(\lambda )]^{3/2}}\left[\frac{\beta }{2}\frac{\beta ^3}{24m}V^{\prime \prime }(r)\right]e^{\beta V(r)},$$
(46)
up to $`𝒪(V^{\prime \prime })`$. The correlation $`C^\kappa (r,r,\lambda ;t)`$ is completely determined by $`V`$ and $`V^{\prime \prime }`$, while the first derivative $`V^{}`$ gives a correction to the correlation for the $`(rp)`$-rate constant. Because the quantum correction due to the potential does not depend on $`\lambda `$ explicitly (see Eq.(46)), the correlation function $`C^\kappa (r,r;t)`$ can be described in terms of that for the free particle case. It is then written best in the form

$$C^\kappa (r,r;t)=\mathrm{exp}\left[\beta V(r)\frac{\beta ^2}{12m}V^{\prime \prime }(r)\right]\times C_0^\kappa (r,r;t).$$
(47)
In a typical chemical reaction, the interatomic distance and forces usually range over one or two angstroms, and hence one can expect that the change of the potential is small while the motion of the order of $`1`$Å has been achieved. Because, in the ideal gas model, the root-mean-square speed of a molecule is usually estimated as $`v1.6\sqrt{T/A_m}\times 10^2`$ (m/s), the particle moves by as much as $`\mathrm{\Delta }x3.5(T/P\sqrt{A_m})\times 10^4`$ (m) for the short period of $`\eta ^1`$. Thus, if $`\mathrm{\Delta }x1`$ Å, the expansion of the potential Eq.(40) is justified and we can use the correlation function Eq.(47). If we assume a typical mass of $`A_m20`$ and $`T300`$ K, we find the condition of $`P0.24`$ GPa.

Since the correction due to the potential in Eq.(47) is common to the correlation function for arbitrary $`\kappa `$, the ratio of the $`(rr)`$-rate constant for arbitrary $`\kappa `$ to that in the Yamamoto approach ($`\kappa =1`$) is again given by the ratio for the free particle case: $`R_{rr}^\kappa (\alpha )=k_{rr}^\kappa /k_{rr}^{\kappa =1}`$. (Note that $`R_{rec}^\kappa R_{rr}^\kappa `$ because at high pressure the $`(rp)`$-rate constant is negligibly small.) In Fig.8, we show the ratio $`R_{rr}^\kappa `$ in the region of $`1\alpha 10`$ (cf. Fig.6). At large $`\alpha `$ the ratio is reduced considerably, which implies that at very high pressure the $`(rr)`$-rate constant for $`\kappa 1`$ is much smaller than that in the Yamamoto approach.

At high $`P`$, the rate constant for $`\kappa 1`$ may be estimated by

$$Q_0(T)k_{rr}^{\kappa 1}\frac{Z}{\beta ^2}\times S_{rr}^{\kappa 1}(0)_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑xe^{\alpha x}=\frac{2Z}{\alpha \beta \sqrt{1\kappa ^2}},$$
(48)
where $`Z`$ is a (dimensionless) constant which involves the correction due to the potential. By contrast, in the case of $`\kappa =1`$ the rate constant may be given by

$$Q_0(T)k_{rr}^{\kappa =1}\frac{Z}{\beta ^2}\times [\sqrt{x}S_{rr}^{\kappa =1}(x)]_{x0}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x\frac{e^{\alpha x}}{\sqrt{x}}=\frac{Z}{\beta }\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{2\alpha }}.$$
(49)
The ratio at high pressure is thus given as

$$R_{rr}^\kappa =\frac{2}{\sqrt{1\kappa ^2}}\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi \alpha }},$$
(50)
which approaches zero in the limit $`P\mathrm{}`$. At $`\alpha =10`$ (which, for example, corresponds to the case of $`T300`$ K and $`P15`$ GPa), Eq.(50) gives $`R_{rr}^\kappa =0.5(0.58)[0.76]`$ for $`\kappa =0(0.5)[0.75]`$. The value for $`\kappa =0`$ very well agrees with the numerical result (see Fig.8), while the value for $`\kappa =0.75`$ is a little larger than the numerical one. The approximation Eq.(48) may not work well for large $`\kappa `$ because the peak of the scaling function at $`x=0`$ becomes sharp near $`\kappa =1`$ (see Fig.4). In the present calculation, we find that the $`(rr)`$-rate constant in the Yamamoto approach is considerably different from the result calculated by the partial-split form. At $`\alpha 10`$ the rate constant for $`\kappa =1`$ is about twice as large as that for $`\kappa =0`$.

## V Summary and Conclusion

The exact quantum mechanical expression for thermal reaction rates can be formulated by the linear response theory,Kubo (1957); Kubo et al. (1957); Mori (1956) which Yamamoto first discussed in the early 60’s.Yamamoto (1960) Later, Miller et al.Miller (1974, 1975); Miller et al. (1983) have independently proposed a more convenient way, i.e., the flux-flux autocorrelation function method, to perform numerical computations. The Miller approach can provide the exact rate constant in the limit that the dynamics of the system is extended to $`t\mathrm{}`$. Using a general form of the Boltzmannized flux operator, we have unified the two approaches and studied the rate constants for thermal exchange and recombination reactions. Because they are calculated by Laplace transforms of the flux-flux correlation functions, the result depends on how to choose the Boltzmannized flux operator.

In this paper, we have first considered a solvable model, i.e., the free particle case, to demonstrate the dependence of the rate constant on $`\kappa `$ intuitively. To study it, we have introduced a new scaling function and investigated its properties in detail. As a non-trivial case, we have discussed the $`(rr)`$-rate constant at very high pressure. Because under such conditions the reaction rate is determined by a propagator at short time, the ratio of the rate constant in the partial-split form of the Boltzmannized flux operator to that in the Yamamoto approach can be described in terms of the scaling function for the free particle case. We have found that the rate constant for recombination reaction in the Yamamoto approach is larger than that in the case of $`\kappa 1`$. In particular, the $`(rr)`$-rate constant in the Yamamoto approach is about twice as large as that in the Miller approach at $`\alpha 10`$.

In conclusion, the partial-split form of the Boltzmannized flux operator is certainly an economical and powerful tool to perform numerical calculations for thermal rate constants of realistic reactions. However, for the recombination reaction it may underestimate the rate constant compared with the result calculated by the linear response theory. The difference could be seen if the experiments for recombination reactions could be performed under the conditions of very high pressure.


format: text

text:
# Longest increasing subsequences in pattern-restricted permutations

## 1 Introduction

A great deal of spectacular work has been done on determining the distribution of the length of the longest increasing subsequence, LIS($`p`$), in a random permutation $`p`$. This work culminated in the paper of Baik, Deift and Johansson  which found the limiting distribution function.

Historically, the average length, $`\mu (n)`$, of the LIS had been found to be $`\sqrt{n}/2`$  and then $`2\sqrt{n}`$ . The correct order of magnitude was established in , where it was shown to be $`2\sqrt{n}`$. Next the standard deviation $`\sigma (n)`$ had been estimated  to be approximately $`n^{1/6}`$ but was not proved to be so. Finally, in , the complete limiting distribution function of the normalized random variable $`(\mathrm{LIS}\mu (n))/n^{1/6}`$ was determined.

We can ask the same questions in some given subset of the set of all permutations. For example, what is the distribution of the length of the longest increasing subsequence in a randomly chosen permutation from the set of those that avoid the pattern111A permutation $`p`$ avoids (132) (resp. (231), (321)) if there do not exist $`1i<j<kn`$ s.t. $`p(i)<p(k)<p(j)`$ (resp. $`p(k)<p(i)<p(j)`$, $`p(i)>p(j)>p(k)`$). $`(231)`$, or the pattern $`(321)`$? The tools are available for the study of such problems. A paper of Reifegerste  finds a simple expression for the frequencies of different LIS lengths in the $`(231)`$-avoiding case. For $`(132)`$-avoiding permutations it turns out that the distributions are identical with known distribution functions of ordered trees by height, so we can simply quote the known results. Finally, for $`(321)`$-avoiding permutations the problem is related to a celebrated theorem of Erdős-Szekeres. In this case we exhibit the relevant statistics and find explicitly the limiting distribution function.

We remark that for all six of the patterns of length 3 it is true that the number of permutations of $`n`$ letters that avoid the pattern is the Catalan number $`C_n=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{n}\right)/(n+1)`$. So for each of the six patterns that we will study here, we will be asking what fraction of the roughly $`c4^n/n^{3/2}`$ permutations that avoid that pattern have a LIS of some given length.

Our main results are the following.

###### Theorem 1.

In the class of $`(231)`$-avoiding permutations of $`n`$ letters, and in the class of $`(312)`$-avoiding permutations of $`n`$ letters, the length of the longest increasing subsequence has mean $`(n+1)/2`$, and standard deviation $`\sqrt{n}/2`$. Moreover, the random variable $`(LIS(p)(n+1)/2)/(\sqrt{n}/2)`$ has asymptotically the standard normal distribution.

###### Theorem 2.

In the class of $`(132)`$-avoiding permutations of $`n`$ letters, and in the class of $`(213)`$-avoiding permutations of $`n`$ letters, the length of the longest increasing subsequence has mean $`=\sqrt{\pi n}+O(n^{\frac{1}{4}})`$ and standard deviation

$$=c_1\sqrt{n}+O(n^{\frac{1}{4}})(c_1=\sqrt{\pi \left(\frac{\pi }{3}1\right)}=0.38506..).$$
(1.1)
Moreover, the normalized random variable

$$X_n(p)=\text{def}\frac{\mathrm{LIS}(p)\sqrt{\pi n}}{\sqrt{n}},$$

defined for $`n`$-permutations $`p`$ that avoid the pattern (132), satisfies

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\mathrm{Prob}(X_n(p)\theta )=\underset{t=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(12t^2(\theta +\sqrt{\pi })^2)e^{(\theta +\sqrt{\pi })^2t^2}(\theta >\sqrt{\pi }).$$
(1.2)
###### Theorem 3.

For permutations $`p`$ in the class of $`(321)`$-avoiding permutations of $`n`$ letters, define the random variable

$$X_n(p)=\text{def}\frac{\mathrm{LIS}(p)\frac{n}{2}}{\sqrt{n}}.$$

Then we have

$`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\mathrm{Prob}(X_n(p)\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi }}}{\displaystyle _0^{4\theta ^2}}u^{1/2}e^u𝑑u`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(3/2,4\theta ^2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(3/2)}},`$
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(z,w)`$ is the incomplete Gamma function

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(z,w)=_0^wu^{z1}e^u𝑑u.$$

## 2 Avoiding the pattern $`(231)`$

One situation where it is simple to deduce the limiting distribution is that of $`(231)`$-avoiding permutations. This is because Reifegerste  has shown that the number of $`(231)`$-avoiding permutations whose longest increasing subsequence has length exactly $`k`$ is

$$e(n,k)=\frac{1}{n}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{k}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{k1}\right).$$
(2.1)
The number of all $`(231)`$-avoiding permutations of $`n`$ letters is $`C_n`$, the Catalan number. From this it is easy to check that the mean length of the LIS in this family is $`(n+1)/2`$ and the standard deviation is $`\sqrt{n}/2+O(1)`$. Finally it is a straightforward exercise in Stirling’s formula to find that

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\sqrt{n}\frac{e(n,\frac{n+1}{2}+\theta \frac{\sqrt{n}}{2})}{C_n}=\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi }}e^{\theta ^2}.$$

This says that for $`(231)`$-avoiding permutations $`p`$, the random variable

$$X(p)=\frac{LIS(p)\frac{n+1}{2}}{\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{n}}$$

has asymptotically the standard normal distribution.

It seems noteworthy that in this case the mean is quite large, i.e., typically such a permutation contains an increasing subsequence whose length is about half that of the permutation itself.

It also is noteworthy that (2.1) shows that the number of $`(231)`$-avoiding permutations of $`n`$ letters whose longest increasing subsequence has length $`k`$ is the same as the number whose longest increasing subsequence has length $`nk+1`$. It is arresting that the number of $`(231)`$-avoiding permutations of, say, 1000 letters, whose LIS has length 980 is equal to the number whose LIS has length 21.

## 3 Avoiding the pattern $`(132)`$

The case of $`(132)`$-avoiding permutations is handled by the following sequence of observations.

* The number $`f(n,k)`$ of $`n`$-permutations that avoid $`(132)`$ and whose longest increasing subsequence has length $`<k`$ is equal to the number of ordered trees of $`n`$ edges whose height is $`<k`$. This follows from a bijection of Jani and Rieper .
* It is known from the theory of ordered trees  that this number is

$$f(n,k)=2\underset{t=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{n+t(k+1)}\right)\frac{1}{4}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n+2}{n+1+t(k+1)}\right)\right)(k=1,2,3,\mathrm{}).$$
(3.1)
* To see that the normalized random variable

$$X(p_n)=\frac{\mathrm{LIS}(p_n)\sqrt{\pi n}}{\sqrt{n}},$$

defined on $`(132)`$-avoiding permutations $`p_n`$ of $`n`$ letters, has a nontrivial limiting distribution, as $`n\mathrm{}`$, we consider

$`\mathrm{Prob}(X(p_n)<\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Prob}(\mathrm{LIS}(p_n)(\theta +\sqrt{\pi })\sqrt{n})`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f(n,\sqrt{n}(\theta +\sqrt{\pi }))}{C_n}},`$
where

$$C_n=\frac{1}{n+1}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{n}\right)$$

is the $`n`$th Catalan number. But by (3.1) we see that

$$f(n,\sqrt{n}(\theta +\sqrt{\pi }))=\frac{1}{C_n}\underset{t=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\varphi (n,t),$$

in which the general $`t`$-th term of the sum is

$$\varphi (n,t)=\frac{n+1}{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{n}\right)}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{n+tc\sqrt{n}}\right)(2\frac{(n+1)(2n+1)}{(n+1)^2t^2c^2n}).(c=\theta +\sqrt{\pi })$$

It is an easy exercise in Stirling’s formula to see that

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\varphi (n,t)=(12c^2t^2)e^{c^2t^2}$$

and the proof is complete.

The limiting cumulative distribution function $`F(\theta )`$, in (1.2), is related to the Jacobi theta function

$$\mathrm{\Theta }(x)=\underset{t=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{t^2\pi x}.$$

In fact, $`F(\theta )=\mathrm{\Theta }(u)+2u\mathrm{\Theta }^{}(u)`$, where $`u=(1+\theta /\sqrt{\pi })^2`$. It is well known  that this is indeed the limiting distribution, from the theory of ordered trees, but the derivation is simple enough that we have included it above. Indeed  shows that this same distribution function, originally considered by Rényi and Szekeres , is the limiting distribution function for many classes of trees.

We remark that although the Jani-Rieper bijection  is the most explicit mapping between $`132`$-avoiding permutations of $`n`$ letters whose LIS has length $`k`$ and ordered trees of $`n`$ edges whose height is $`k`$, there are other, somewhat less explicit, bijections in the literature. Indeed, in Krattenthaler , we find an explicit bijection between such permutations and Dyck paths. This mapping has the property that the length of the LIS corresponds to the height of the image path. In view of well known bijections between Dyck paths by height and ordered trees by height, we have, by composition, the mapping that we need here. Likewise in Chow, West  there are remarks in section 5 that suggest, less explicitly, that such bijections exist. Other, equivalent bijections with Dyck paths have been given by Fulmek , Reifegerste , and Bandlow and Killpatrick .

## 4 The $`(321)`$ case and the Erdős-Szekeres theorem

Finally we ask for the limiting distribution function for the length of the longest increasing subsequence in the class $`S_n(321)`$ of $`(321)`$-avoiding permutations of $`n`$ letters. Let $`f(n,k)`$ denote the number of such permutations whose longest increasing subsequence has length $`k`$. A famous theorem of Erdős-Szekeres states that every permutation of $`(r1)(s1)+1`$ or more letters contains either a decreasing subsequence of length $`r`$ or an increasing subsequence of length $`s`$. If we take $`r=3`$ we see that every permutation in the class $`S_{2k+1}(321)`$ has an increasing subsequence of length $`k+1`$, i.e. $`f(n,k)=0`$ for all $`n2k+1`$.

Even though, for each fixed $`k`$, $`f(n,k)`$ vanishes for all large enough $`n`$, the question of the limiting distribution function of the LIS remains.

###### Theorem 4.

The number $`a(n,k)`$ of $`(321)`$-avoiding permutations having longest increasing subsequence of length $`=k`$ is given by

$$a(n,k)=\left(\frac{2kn+1}{n+1}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+1}{k+1}\right)\right)^2$$
(4.1)
for $`(n+1)/2kn,`$ and vanishes otherwise.

These permutations correspond 1-1, under the Schensted insertion algorithm (see, e.g., ), to pairs of Young tableaux with $`n`$ cells, at most two rows, and $`k`$ columns, so the number of them is $`B^2`$, where $`B`$ is the number of such tableaux. A brief computation with the hook formula shows that

$$B=\frac{2kn+1}{n+1}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+1}{nk}\right),$$

completing the proof. $`\mathrm{}`$

It follows that the number $`f(n,k)`$ of permutations in $`S_n(321)`$ whose LIS has length $`k`$ is

$$f(n,k)=\underset{(n+1)/2jk}{}\left(\frac{2jn+1}{n+1}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+1}{j+1}\right)\right)^2.$$
(4.2)
Now fix $`t>0`$. The probability that a permutation of $`n`$ letters has LIS of length at most $`n/2+t\sqrt{n}`$ is

$$\frac{f(n,n/2+t\sqrt{n})}{\frac{1}{n+1}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{n}\right)}.$$

Hence the limiting probability distribution function that we seek is

$`F(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\frac{1}{n+1}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{n}\right)}}{\displaystyle \underset{(n+1)/2jn/2+t\sqrt{n}}{}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2jn+1}{n+1}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+1}{j+1}}\right)\right)^2`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{4}{(n+1)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{n}\right)}}{\displaystyle \underset{0kt\sqrt{n}+1/2}{}}k^2\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+1}{(n+1)/2+k}}\right)^2.`$
By an easy application of Stirling’s formula the relation

$$\frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2m}{mk}\right)}{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2m}{m}\right)}e^{k^2/m}$$

holds uniformly for all $`|k|<t\sqrt{m}`$, and we have

$$F(t)=\frac{32}{\sqrt{\pi }}\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\underset{0kt\sqrt{n}}{}\frac{k^2}{n}e^{4k^2/n}.$$

The quantity whose limit is being taken is a Riemann sum that approximates the integral

$$_0^tx^2e^{4x^2}$$

with grid size $`1/\sqrt{n}`$, and so the desired limit is

$`F(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{32}{\sqrt{\pi }}}{\displaystyle _0^t}x^2e^{4x^2}𝑑x`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi }}}{\displaystyle _0^{4t^2}}u^{1/2}e^u𝑑u`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(3/2,4t^2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(3/2)}}.`$
The limiting distribution $`F(t)`$ is well-known in statistics: Except for a linear change of variables, it is a $`\chi ^2`$ distribution with three degrees of freedom, which arises as the distribution of the length of a $`3`$-vector whose entries are independent standard normal random variables (see, for example, ). It would be interesting to find a heuristic explaining this connection.

## 5 Other patterns of three letters

We have so far dealt with the statistics of the length of the longest increasing subsequence in permutations that avoid any one of the patterns (132), (231), or (321). There remain three other patterns of three letters, viz. (123), (312), and (213).

The (123) case is trivial. If an $`n`$-permutation avoids (123) then its LIS has length exactly 2 except for the reversal of the identity permutation, whose LIS has length 1.

The (312) case is identical with the (231). Indeed, the length of the LIS of a (312)-avoiding permutation is equal to the length of the longest decreasing subsequence of its reversal, which is (213)-avoiding, and that is equal to the length of the LIS of the complement of its reversal, which is (231)-avoiding, as claimed.

Similarly, by reversal and complementation, the (213) case is identical with the (132).

We thank Christian Krattenthaler, Brendan McKay and Julian West for informative discussions related to this paper.


text:
# A Noncommutative Geometric Analysis of a Sphere/Torus Topology Change

## 1 Introduction

In noncommutative geometry we often wish to find analogues to topological properties of a manifold such as compactness, connectedness and genus, which we will consider here. For matrix geometries  the question of genus is tricky since both the sphere and torus have matrix analogues.

In deformation quantisation , one can simply take the commutative limit and ask what the genus of the underlying manifold is. In the case of the sphere and torus, we can also take the representation of the noncommutative algebra and compare its properties with the representations of the noncommutative sphere and torus.

In this article we present, in section 2, a one parameter set of deformation algebras $`𝒜(R)`$ for $`R`$. The commutative limit of these algebras are $`C_0^\omega ((R))`$ the commutative algebra of complex polynomials on the manifold (or variety) $`(R)`$. This manifold has different topologies depending on the value of $`R`$. Varying from nothing, to a point, a sphere, a variety and finally a torus. This is described in section 1.2.

In section 3 we look at the finite dimensional representations of $`𝒜(R)`$. These can be classified as either $`S^2`$-type representations or $`T^2`$-type representations by comparing them to the representations for the noncommutative torus or the noncommutative sphere. Depending on the value of $`R`$ one or other of these representations exists. What we show in this article is that there is a region of $`R`$ where both types of representation exist. This region, which we shall name the sphere-torus, is a purely noncommutative region, it disappears in the commutative limit.

We summarise the various representation in the conclusion, section 4.

### 1.1 Notation

| $`_+`$ | $`\left\{t\right|t>0\}`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $``$ | Manifold or variety. |
| $`C^\omega ()`$, $`C^\omega (^r)`$ | Commutative algebra of complex analytic functions over $``$ or $`^r`$. |
| $`C_0^\omega ()`$, $`C_0^\omega (^r)`$ | Commutative algebra of complex polynomials over $``$ or $`^r`$. |
| $`𝒜`$, $``$ | Noncommutative algebras over $``$. |
| Unbold symbols:  $`f,g,u,v,x_i,`$  $`F_s,w,x,y,z`$ | Elements of the commutative algebras. i.e. Analytic or polynomial functions over $``$ or $``$. |
| Bold symbols:  $`𝒇,𝒈,𝒖,𝒗,𝒙_i,`$  $`𝑭_s,𝒘,𝒙,𝒚,𝒛`$ | Elements of the noncommutative algebras $`𝒜`$ and $``$ |
| $`𝜺`$ | Element in the centre of the noncommutative algebras $`𝒜`$ and $``$ |
| $``$ | Finite or infinite dimensional Hilbert space. |
| $`(,)`$ | Space of linear maps over $``$. (Bounded or unbounded operators.) |
| $`M_n()`$ | Space of $`n\times n`$ complex matrices. |
| $`\mathrm{𝟏}\text{I}`$ | The identity in $`(,)`$ and the unit matrix in $`M_n()`$. |
| $`|\theta `$ | Bra-ket notation for vectors in $``$. |

### 1.2 A one parameter set of immersions with a sphere, torus and variety

Consider the immersions given by

$`(R)=\left\{(x,y,z)^3\right|z^2+(x^2+y^2R)^2=1\}`$ (1)
It is obvious that for $`R<1`$ there is no solution to (1) while for $`R=1`$, $`(R)`$ consists of the single point at the origin $`(x,y,z)=(0,0,0)`$. To picture $`(R)`$ for $`R>1`$, we note that it is axisymmetric about the $`z`$-axis. Therefore we can examine the shape of $`(R)`$ by setting $`y=0`$ and rotating the subsequent 1 dimensional variety about the $`z`$-axis. From figure 1 we can see that for $`1<R0`$, $`(R)`$ is a convex manifold topologically equivalent to the sphere. For $`0<R<1`$, $`(R)`$ is a non convex manifold topologically equivalent to the sphere. For $`R=1`$, $`(R)`$ is not a manifold but instead a 2 dimensional variety, which is smooth about all points except the origin $`(x,y,z)=(0,0,0)`$. For $`R>1`$, $`(R)`$ is a torus.

There is a Poisson structure on $``$ is given by

$`\{x,y\}=z,\{z,x\}=2(x^2+y^2R)y=2wy,\{y,z\}=2(x^2+y^2R)x=2wx`$ (2)
where $`w=x^2+y^2R`$, which is consistent with (1)

We can give a Darboux coordinate system $`(p,q)`$ such that

$`x=(R+\mathrm{cos}(2p))^{1/2}\mathrm{cos}(q),y=(R+\mathrm{cos}(2p))^{1/2}\mathrm{sin}(q),z=\mathrm{sin}(2p)`$ (3)
where $`\{p,q\}=1`$. It is easy to see that (1) and (2) are satisfied. A necessary condition for these to be valid is $`R+\mathrm{cos}(2p)>0`$. Thus for the torus $`R>1`$ this is valid for all $`p`$. More specifically we can patch coordinate systems with $`0<q<2\pi `$ and $`0<p<\pi `$. For the variety $`R=1`$ we must exclude the point $`p=\frac{1}{2}\pi `$ which correspond to the point at the origin. For $`1<R<1`$ we have $`\frac{1}{2}(\pi \mathrm{arccos}(R))<p<\frac{1}{2}(\pi \mathrm{arccos}(R))`$, and we must exclude the two points $`(x,y,z)=(0,0,\pm (1R^2)^{1/2})`$.

### 1.3 Brief introduction to deformation quantisation

We limit ourselves in this article to a the deformation quantisation of algebraic manifolds and varieties with algebraic Poisson structures. Let $``$ smooth $`m`$ dimensional Poisson manifold or variety given by

$`=\{(x_1,..,x_r)^r|F_s(x_1,..,x_r)=0,s=1,..,rm\}`$ (4)
where $`F_s(x_1,..,x_m)`$ are polynomials. Let the Poisson structure $`\{,\}`$ be given by $`\{x_i,x_j\}=C_{ij}(x_1,..,x_m)`$, where $`C_{ij}(x_1,..,x_m)`$ are also polynomials. Consistency implies $`\{x_i,F_s\}=0`$. Let $`C^\omega ()`$ be the algebra of complex analytic functions on $``$ and let $`C_0^\omega ()`$ be the subalgebra of polynomials in $`(x_1,..,x_m)`$, this is dense in $`C^\omega ()`$.

Let $``$ be the free noncommutative algebra generated by $`\{𝒙_1,..,𝒙_r,𝜺\}`$, and define the linear map $`\pi _{}:C_0^\omega (^r)`$ where $`C_0^\omega (^r)`$ is the algebra of polynomials in $`(x_1,..,x_n)`$, via

$`\pi _{}(𝒇+𝒈)=\pi _{}(𝒇)+\pi _{}(𝒈),\pi _{}(𝒇𝒈)=\pi _{}(𝒇)\pi _{}(𝒈),\pi _{}(\lambda )=\lambda ,\pi _{}(𝜺)=0,\pi _{}(𝒙_i)=x_i`$ (5)
Choose the elements $`𝑭_s`$ for $`s=1,..,rm`$ and $`𝑪_{ij}`$ for $`i,j=1,..,r`$ such that $`\pi _{}(𝑭_s)=F_s`$ and $`\pi _{}(𝑪_{ij})=C_{ij}`$. We define the algebra $`𝒜`$ to be $``$ quotiented by the noncommutative polynomial relationships

$`[𝜺,𝒙_i]=0,𝑭_s=0,[𝒙_i,𝒙_j]=𝜺𝑪_{ij}`$ (6)
for $`i,j=1,..,r`$ and $`s=1,..,rm`$. The first equation in (6) implies that $`𝜺`$ is in the centre of $`𝒜`$. We demand that $`𝒜`$ be an associative algebra. This imposes restrictions on the possible choices of $`𝑭_s`$ and $`𝑪_{ij}`$, which we will not investigate here.

We can define the map

$`\pi :𝒜C_0^\omega ();\pi (𝜺)=0`$ (7)
which is surjective. It is easy to see that this gives the Poisson structure via

$`\{\pi (𝒇),\pi (𝒈)\}=\pi \left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{i𝜺}}[𝒇,𝒈]\right)`$ (8)
Thus the following diagram commutes

$`\begin{array}{c}\text{}\end{array}`$ (10)
We also demand that there is a conjugate structure $`:𝒜𝒜`$ such that

$`(𝒇𝒈)^{}=𝒈^{}𝒇^{},\lambda ^{}=\overline{\lambda }\text{ for }\lambda ,\pi (𝒇^{})=\overline{\pi (𝒇)},𝜺^{}=𝜺`$ (11)
We are interested in representations $`\mathrm{\Psi }:𝒜(,)`$ where $`(,)`$ is the space of linear maps on the Hilbert space $``$. We demand that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is irreducible, and $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝜺)=\epsilon \mathrm{𝟏}\text{I}`$ where $`\epsilon _+`$. If $`dim=n`$ then $`(,)M_n()`$. On the other hand if $`dim=\mathrm{}`$ then $`(,)`$ may contain unbounded operators. We also demand that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ preserve the conjugate structure $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒇^{})=\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒇)^{}`$ where the dagger on the right is the Hermitian conjugate or adjoint.

We use the bra-ket notation so that if $`|\theta `$ then $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒇)|\theta `$ the action of $`𝒇𝒜`$ on $`|\theta `$ is written $`𝒇|\theta `$. Since $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ preserves the conjugate we have $`\theta ^{}\left|𝒇^{}\right|\theta =\overline{\theta \left|𝒇\right|\theta ^{}}`$.

We sometimes want to recover the commutative structure from the matrix algebras. This requires finding a sequence of representations $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n:𝒜M_n()`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n(𝜺)0`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$. However in general there is no canonical map $`M_n()M_{n+1}()`$. One exception being the noncommutative sphere .

As stated above, in this article we give a shall give a one parameter family of such algebras, whose representations can be compared to those for the sphere and torus. Here we give a brief summary of these two noncommutative geometries.

The Noncommutative Sphere is generated by $`𝒙,𝒚,𝒛,𝜺`$ with

$$[𝒙,𝒚]=i𝜺𝒛,[𝒚,𝒛]=i𝜺𝒙,[𝒛,𝒙]=i𝜺𝒚,𝒙^2+𝒚^2+𝒛^2=1,𝒙^{}=𝒙,𝒚^{}=𝒚,𝒛^{}=𝒛$$
(12)
The representations are the finite dimensional irreducible representations of $`SO(3)`$. A basis for $``$ is $`|0,..,|n1`$ so that

$`\epsilon =2(n^21)^{1/2},`$ $`𝒂_+|r=\epsilon (nr1)^{1/2}(r+1)^{1/2}|r+1,`$ (13)
$`𝒛|r=\epsilon (r\frac{1}{2}(n1))|r,`$ $`𝒂_{}|r=\epsilon (nr)^{1/2}r^{1/2}|r1`$
where $`𝒂_+=𝒙+i𝒚`$ and $`𝒂_{}=𝒙i𝒚`$ are called the ladder elements. We note that the ladder operators, which are the representations of the ladder elements, terminate $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n(𝒂_+)^n=0`$. We also note that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is unique for each $`n`$, and that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n(𝜺)0`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$.

In our language we the Noncommutative Torus is generated by $`\{𝒙_1,𝒙_2,𝒙_3,𝒙_4,𝜺\}`$ with

$$\begin{array}{cc}& 𝒙_1^2+𝒙_2^2=1,\hfill \\ & 𝒙_3^2+𝒙_4^2=1,\hfill \\ & [𝒙_1,𝒙_2]=0,\hfill \\ & [𝒙_3,𝒙_4]=0,\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{cc}& [𝒙_1,𝒙_3]=i𝜺(𝒙_2𝒙_4+𝒙_4𝒙_2),\hfill \\ & [𝒙_1,𝒙_4]=i𝜺(𝒙_2𝒙_3+𝒙_3𝒙_2),\hfill \\ & [𝒙_2,𝒙_3]=i𝜺(𝒙_1𝒙_4+𝒙_4𝒙_1),\hfill \\ & [𝒙_2,𝒙_4]=i𝜺(𝒙_1𝒙_3+𝒙_3𝒙_1),\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{cc}& 𝒙_1^{}=𝒙_1,\hfill \\ & 𝒙_2^{}=𝒙_2,\hfill \\ & 𝒙_3^{}=𝒙_3,\hfill \\ & 𝒙_4^{}=𝒙_4\hfill \end{array}$$
(14)
If we set $`𝒖=𝒙_1+i𝒙_2`$, $`𝒗=𝒙_3+i𝒙_4`$, and $`𝒒=(1+i𝜺)/(1i𝜺)`$ then we derive the usual noncommutative torus.

$`𝒖𝒖^{}=𝒖^{}𝒖=1,𝒗𝒗^{}=𝒗^{}𝒗=1,𝒖𝒗=𝒒𝒗𝒖`$ (15)
However as we have defined the algebra $`𝒜`$, the element $`𝒒`$ and $`𝒒^{}`$ are not members of $`𝒜`$. To solve this problem we say that $`𝒜`$ is generated by $`\{𝒙_1,𝒙_2,𝒙_3,𝒙_4,𝜺,(1+𝜺^2)^1\}`$.

There are both finite and infinite representations of the noncommutative torus. The finite dimensional representations $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n`$ have a basis $`|0,..,|n1`$

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_n(𝒒)=q\mathrm{𝟏}\text{I},q=e^{2\pi ik/n},𝒖|r=e^{i(\beta +2\pi rki/n)}|r,`$ (16)
$`𝒗|r=|r+1,𝒗|n1=\nu |0`$
where $`n,k`$ and where $`\nu `$, $`|\nu |=1`$ is a phase. We impose that $`n`$ and $`k`$ are relatively prime, so that there are no multiple eigenvalues of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$. There also exist other more complicated finite dimensional representations of the noncommutative torus where $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$ has multiple eigenvalues.

We note that the ladder elements of this representation are given by $`𝒗`$ and $`𝒗^{}`$ and that the ladder operators do not terminate $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n(𝒗)^m0`$ for all $`n,m`$. To specify $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n`$ completely requires giving $`(n,k,\beta ,\nu )`$. If $`k=1`$ then $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n(𝒒)1`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$.

The infinite dimensional representations have a basis $`|r`$, $`r`$, and are determined by the parameters $`\alpha ,\beta `$ where $`\alpha /2\pi `$ is irrational

$`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒒)`$ $`=q\mathrm{𝟏}\text{I},q=e^{i\alpha },𝒖|r=e^{i(r\alpha +\beta )}|r,𝒗|r=|r+1`$ (17)
The eigenvalues of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$ are dense on unit circle.

## 2 $`𝒜(R)`$: The deformation algebra of polynomials on $`(R)`$

In section 1.2, we define a one parameter set of immersions $`(R)^3`$. The commutative algebra of complex valued polynomials in $`(x,y,z)`$ on $`(R)`$ is written $`C_0^\omega ((R))`$ and of course is dense in $`C^\omega ((R))`$. Here we give a one parameter set of complex noncommutative algebras $`𝒜(R)`$ with $`R`$, which are the deformation quantisation of $`C_0^\omega ((R))`$. Each $`𝒜(R)`$ is generated by $`\{𝒙,𝒚,𝒛,𝜺,(1+𝜺^2)^1\}`$ with $`𝜺`$ in the centre of $`𝒜(R)`$. The reason for including $`(1+𝜺^2)^1`$ is similar as for the noncommutative torus. These are related via

$`[𝒙,𝒚]=i𝜺𝒛,[𝒚,𝒛]=i𝜺(𝒘𝒙+𝒙𝒘),[𝒛,𝒙]=i𝜺(𝒘𝒚+𝒚𝒘)`$ (18)
and

$`𝒛^2+𝒘^2=1`$ (19)
where we define the element $`𝒘𝒜(R)`$ via

$`𝒘=𝒙^2+𝒚^2R`$ (20)
The adjoint operation is given by

$`𝒙^{}=𝒙,𝒚^{}=𝒚,𝒛^{}=𝒛,𝒘^{}=𝒘`$ (21)
It is easy to see that, assuming (18-20) define an associative algebra, then $`\pi :𝒜(R)C_0^\omega ((R))`$, where $`\pi (𝒙)=x`$, $`\pi (𝒚)=y`$, $`\pi (𝒛)=z`$. It also gives with the correct Poisson structure. We shall show that these relationships define an associative algebra in lemma 2 below. But first we need to define some new elements of $`𝒜(R)`$ and derive some relationships which are valid if $`𝒜(R)`$ is associative.

We define the ladder elements $`𝒂_+,𝒂_{}𝒜(R)`$ via

$`𝒂_+=𝒙+i𝒚,𝒂_{}=𝒙i𝒚`$ (22)
In order to emphasise the circular nature of $`𝒘`$ and $`𝒛`$ we shall define the element $`𝒖𝒜(R)`$ via

$`𝒖=𝒘+i𝒛𝒜(R)`$ (23)
and we show below that $`𝒖`$ is unitary, i.e. $`𝒖^{}=𝒖^1`$.

We define the “pseudo element” $`𝜶`$ via

$`𝜺=\mathrm{tan}(\frac{1}{2}𝜶)`$ (24)
and observe that $`𝜶`$ is not a member of $`𝒜(R)`$. However since $`𝜺𝒜(R)`$ and $`(1+𝜺^2)^1𝒜(R)`$ then from the tan half angle formulae we have $`\mathrm{sin}(𝜶)=2𝜺(1+𝜺^2)^1𝒜(R)`$ and $`\mathrm{cos}(𝜶)=(1𝜺^2)(1+𝜺^2)^1𝒜(R)`$. Also $`e^{\pm in𝜶}=(\mathrm{cos}(𝜶)\pm i\mathrm{sin}(𝜶))^n`$ so $`e^{in𝜶}𝒜(R)`$ for all $`n`$.

Before showing that the algebra $`𝒜(R)`$ is associative we derive some direct consequences of these definitions.

###### Lemma 1.

From the above definitions, and the assumption that $`𝒜(R)`$ is associative, we have the following relationships:

$`[𝒛,𝒘]=0`$ (25)
$`𝒖𝒖^{}=𝒖^{}𝒖=1`$ (26)
$`𝒂_+𝒂_{}=𝒘+R+𝜺𝒛,𝒂_{}𝒂_+=𝒘+R𝜺𝒛`$ (27)
$`[𝒘,𝒂_+]=𝜺(𝒛𝒂_++𝒂_+𝒛),[𝒘,𝒂_{}]=+𝜺(𝒛𝒂_{}+𝒂_{}𝒛)`$ (28)
Also

$`𝒛𝒂_+=𝒂_+(\mathrm{cos}(𝜶)𝒛+\mathrm{sin}(𝜶)𝒘),𝒘𝒂_+=𝒂_+(\mathrm{sin}(𝜶)𝒛+\mathrm{cos}(𝜶)𝒘)`$ (29)
$`𝒛𝒂_{}=𝒂_{}(\mathrm{cos}(𝜶)𝒛\mathrm{sin}(𝜶)𝒘),𝒘𝒂_{}=𝒂_{}(\mathrm{sin}(𝜶)𝒛+\mathrm{cos}(𝜶)𝒘)`$
or alternatively

$`𝒖𝒂_+=𝒂_+𝒖e^{i𝜶},𝒖𝒂_{}=𝒂_{}𝒖e^{i𝜶},𝒖^{}𝒂_+=𝒂_+𝒖^{}e^{i𝜶},𝒖^{}𝒂_+=𝒂_{}𝒖^{}e^{i𝜶}`$ (30)
The general element $`𝐟𝒜(R)`$ can be written uniquely in the form

$`𝒇={\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s=N}{\overset{N}{}}}𝒂_+^r𝒖^s\xi _{r,s}(𝜺)+{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s=N}{\overset{N}{}}}𝒂_{}^r𝒖^s\xi _{r,s}(𝜺)`$ (31)
for some $`N`$ where for all $`r,s=N,..,N`$ the function $`\xi _{r,s}(t)`$ is a ration function in $`t`$ with denominator $`(1+t^2)^m`$ for some $`m`$.

###### Proof.

Equation (27) follows automatically from (22), (20) and the first equation in (18). Equation (28) follows from

$`[𝒘,𝒂_+]=[𝒂_+𝒂_{}R𝜺𝒛,𝒂_+]=𝒂_+[𝒂_{},𝒂_+]𝜺[𝒛,𝒂_+]=𝜺(2𝒂_+𝒛+[𝒛,𝒂_+])`$
and likewise for $`[𝒘,𝒂_{}]`$. For (25) we have

$`[𝒛,𝒘]`$ $`=[𝒛,𝒂_+𝒂_{}R𝜺𝒛]=[𝒛,𝒂_+]𝒂_{}+𝒂_+[𝒛,𝒂_{}]=𝜺(𝒘𝒂_+𝒂_{}+𝒂_+𝒘𝒂_{}𝒂_+𝒘𝒂_{}𝒂_+𝒂_{}𝒘)`$
$`=𝜺(𝒘𝒂_+𝒂_{}𝒂_+𝒂_{}𝒘)=𝜺[𝒂_+𝒂_{},𝒘]=𝜺[𝒘+R+𝜺𝒛,𝒘]=𝜺^2[𝒛,𝒘]`$
hence $`(1+𝜺^2)[𝒛,𝒘]=0`$, so $`[𝒛,𝒘]=(1+𝜺^2)^1(1+𝜺^2)[𝒛,𝒘]=0`$. The unitarity of $`𝒖`$ (26) follow from the definition of $`𝒖`$ and the commutativity of $`𝒛`$ and $`𝒘`$.

From (18) and (28) we can have

$`𝒛𝒂_+𝒂_+𝒛=+𝜺𝒘𝒂_++𝜺𝒂_+𝒘,𝜺𝒛𝒂_+𝜺𝒂_+𝒛=𝒘𝒂_+𝒂_+𝒘`$
solving these as simultaneous equations and using the tan half angle identity give the first of results of (29). The other identities in (29) follow similarly. The identities in (30) are then the complex version of (29).

The generators all $`𝒜(R)`$ are all of the form (31). Given $`𝒇`$ of this form, then $`𝒇𝒖`$, $`𝒇𝜺`$ and $`𝒇(1𝜺^2)^1`$ are all of the form (31). Also

$`𝒇𝒂_+={\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s=N}{\overset{N}{}}}𝒂_+^{r+1}𝒖^se^{is𝜶}\xi _{r,s}(𝜺)+{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s=N}{\overset{N}{}}}𝒂_{}^{r1}(\frac{1}{2}(1+i𝜺)𝒖+\frac{1}{2}(1i𝜺)𝒖^1+R)𝒖^se^{is𝜶}\xi _{r,s}(𝜺)`$
So $`𝒇𝒂_+`$ is of the form (31), likewise for $`𝒇𝒂_{}`$.

For uniqueness, from linearity, it is enough to show that if $`𝒇`$ is of the form (31) and $`𝒇=0`$ then $`\xi _{r,s}=0`$ for all $`r,s`$. By multiplying $`𝒇`$ with $`(1+𝜺^2)^M`$ for sufficiently high $`M`$ then we can assume $`\xi _{r,s}`$ are all polynomials. Let $`m`$ be the largest degree of these polynomials. Now

$`0=\pi (𝒇)={\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s=N}{\overset{N}{}}}\pi (𝒂_+)^r\pi (𝒖)^s\xi _{r,s}(0)+{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{s=N}{\overset{N}{}}}\pi (𝒂_{})^r\pi (𝒖)^s\xi _{r,s}(0)`$
so by looking at the coordinate system on $`(R)`$ this implies $`\xi _{r,s}(0)=0`$ for all $`r,s`$. Thus $`\xi _{r,s}(𝜺)=𝜺\widehat{\xi }_{r,s}(𝜺)`$ where $`\widehat{\xi }_{r,s}(𝜺)`$ are polynomials of degree $`m1`$. Continuing this gives $`\xi _{r,s}=0`$

###### Lemma 2.

The relationships (20) to (30) define an associative algebra.

###### Proof.

Let $`𝒮`$ be set of all expressions of the form (31). We define a product $``$ on $`𝒮`$ using the above definitions.

We wish to show that $`𝒇_1(𝒇_2𝒇_3)=(𝒇_1𝒇_2)𝒇_3`$ for $`𝒇_1,𝒇_2,𝒇_3𝒮`$. Where the inner bracket must be written in the form (31) first. It is sufficient to show that $`𝒇_1(𝒇_2𝒇_3)=(𝒇_1𝒇_2)𝒇_3`$ where $`𝒇_1,𝒇_2,𝒇_3`$ are from the set $`\{𝒖,𝒂_+,𝒂_{},𝜺,(1+𝜺^2)^1\}`$. This is because any expression can be constructed from these five elements. The element $`𝒖^{}=2𝒘𝒖`$ with $`𝒘`$ given by (20). If $`𝒇_1,𝒇_2`$ or $`𝒇_3`$ are either $`𝜺`$ or $`(1+𝜺^2)^1`$ then the association relation holds since $`𝜺`$ commutes with all the generators.

The remaining 27 relationships must be proved in turn, the interesting ones are

$`(𝒖𝒂_+)𝒂_{}`$ $`=𝒂_+𝒖e^{i𝜶}𝒂_{}=(\frac{1}{2}(1i𝜺)𝒖+\frac{1}{2}(1+i𝜺)𝒖^1+R)𝒖`$
$`=𝒖(\frac{1}{2}(1i𝜺)𝒖+\frac{1}{2}(1+i𝜺)𝒖^1+R)=𝒖(𝒂_+𝒂_{})`$
and

$`(𝒂_+𝒂_{})𝒂_+`$ $`=(\frac{1}{2}(1i𝜺)𝒖+\frac{1}{2}(1+i𝜺)𝒖^1+R)𝒂_+=𝒂_+(\frac{1}{2}(1i𝜺)𝒖e^{i𝜶}+\frac{1}{2}(1+i𝜺)𝒖^1e^{i𝜶}+R)`$
$`=𝒂_+(\frac{1}{2}(1+i𝜺)𝒖+\frac{1}{2}(1i𝜺)𝒖^1+R)=𝒂_+(𝒂_{}𝒂_+)`$
## 3 Finite dimensional representations of $`𝒜(R)`$

As mentioned in the introduction, we wish to find irreducible representations over a finite Hilbert space $``$ of $`𝒜(R)`$, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Psi }:𝒜(R)(,)M_n()`$. Such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝜺)=\epsilon \mathrm{𝟏}\text{I}`$ where $`\epsilon _+`$ and such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ preserves the adjoint operator so that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒇^{})=\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒇)^{}`$ where the dagger on the right hand side is the Hermitian conjugate. We note that since $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)^{}\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)=\mathrm{𝟏}\text{I}`$ we can diagonalise $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$ and the eigenspaces of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$ are orthogonal. We shall further assume that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$ has no multiple eigenvalues, so the eigenspaces of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$ are all one dimensional. This significantly simplifies the types of representations.

###### Theorem 3.

Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }:𝒜(R)(,)M_n()`$ be an irreducible adjoint preserving $`n`$ dimensional representation, such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝛆)=\epsilon \mathrm{𝟏}\text{I}`$, $`\epsilon _+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐮)`$ has no multiple eigenvalues. Let $`\alpha `$ be given by $`\mathrm{tan}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )=\epsilon `$, $`0<\alpha <\pi /2`$. Then there exists $`\beta `$, such that we can label the orthonormal bases for $``$ which are the eigenspaces $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐮)`$

$`|\beta ,|\beta +\alpha ,|\beta +2\alpha ,\mathrm{},|\beta +(n1)\alpha `$ (32)
where

$`𝒖|\beta +m\alpha `$ $`=e^{i(\beta +m\alpha )}|\beta +m\alpha ,m=0,..,n1`$ (33)
There also exists a set of complex constants $`C_{\beta +m\alpha }`$ for $`m=0,..,n`$ satisfying

$`|C_{\beta +m\alpha }|^2`$ $`=\mathrm{sec}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )\mathrm{cos}(\beta \frac{1}{2}\alpha +m\alpha )+R`$ (34)
and $`C_{\beta +m\alpha }0`$ for $`m=1,..,n1`$ so that

$`𝒂_{}|\beta +m\alpha `$ $`=C_{\beta +m\alpha }|\beta +(m1)\alpha ,`$ $`m=1,..,n1`$ (35)
$`𝒂_+|\beta +m\alpha `$ $`=\overline{C_{\beta +(m+1)\alpha }}|\beta +(m+1)\alpha ,`$ $`m=0,..,n2`$
The action of $`𝐚_{}`$ and $`𝐚_+`$ on the first and last vectors of (32) respectively are given by either

$`𝒂_{}|\beta =0,𝒂_+|\beta +(n1)\alpha =0`$ (36)
or

$`𝒂_{}|\beta =C_\beta |\beta +(n1)\alpha ,𝒂_+|\beta +(n1)\alpha =\overline{C_\beta }|\beta `$ (37)
In the first case $`C_\beta =C_{\beta +n\alpha }=0`$ satisfies (34). In the second case $`C_\beta =C_{\beta +n\alpha }0`$ satisfies (34) and

$`n\alpha =2\pi k`$ (38)
where $`k`$, $`1k<n/2`$ and $`n`$ and $`k`$ are relatively prime.

###### Proof.

Let $`|\theta `$ be a normalised eigenvector of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$ with eigenvalue $`\lambda `$ then $`|\lambda |^2=\theta \left|𝒖^{}𝒖\right|\theta =1`$ hence we can set $`\lambda =e^{i\theta }`$. From (23) we have $`𝒘|\theta =\mathrm{cos}(\theta )|\theta `$ and $`𝒛|\theta =\mathrm{sin}(\theta )|\theta `$. Let $`N:`$ be given by $`N(\theta )=\mathrm{sec}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )\mathrm{cos}(\theta \frac{1}{2}\alpha )+R`$. From (27) we have

$`𝒂_{}|\theta ^2`$ $`=\theta \left|𝒂_+𝒂_{}\right|\theta =\theta \left|(𝒘+\mathrm{tan}(\frac{1}{2}𝜶)𝒛+R)\right|\theta =\mathrm{cos}(\theta )+\mathrm{tan}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )\mathrm{sin}(\theta )+R=N(\theta )`$
$`𝒂_+|\theta ^2`$ $`=\theta \left|𝒂_{}𝒂_+\right|\theta =\theta \left|(𝒘\mathrm{tan}(\frac{1}{2}𝜶)𝒛+R)\right|\theta =\mathrm{cos}(\theta )\mathrm{tan}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )\mathrm{sin}(\theta )+R=N(\theta +\alpha )`$
Thus if $`|\theta `$ is a eigenvector then $`N(\theta )0`$ and $`N(\theta +\alpha )0`$. Furthermore $`N(\theta )=0𝒂_{}|\theta =0`$ and $`N(\theta +\alpha )=0𝒂_+|\theta =0`$.

From (30) we have

$`𝒖𝒂_{}|\theta =𝒂_{}𝒖e^{i𝜶}|\theta =𝒂_{}e^{i\alpha }e^{i\theta }|\theta =e^{i(\theta \alpha )}𝒂_{}|\theta `$
Hence if $`N(\theta )0`$ then there must exist another normalised eigenvector $`|\theta ^{}`$ with eigenvalue $`e^{i(\theta \alpha )}`$. If we let $`𝒂_{}|\theta =C_\theta |\theta ^{}`$ then $`|C_\theta |^2=N(\theta )`$. Thus $`C_\theta `$ is determined from $`N(\theta )`$ up to a phase.

Similarly $`𝒖𝒂_+|\theta ^{}=e^{i(\theta ^{}+\alpha )}𝒂_+|\theta ^{}=e^{i\theta }𝒂_+|\theta ^{}`$. Since the eigenspaces of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$ are all one dimensional then $`𝒂_+|\theta ^{}`$ is parallel to $`|\theta `$. Thus setting $`𝒂_+|\theta ^{}=D_\theta |\theta `$ then

$`D_\theta =\theta ^{}\left|𝒂_+\right|\theta =\overline{\theta \left|𝒂_{}\right|\theta ^{}}=\overline{C_\theta ^{}}`$
hence $`𝒂_+|\theta ^{}=\overline{C_\theta ^{}}|\theta `$.

Claim: We now make the following claim. Let $`rn`$ and there exists a set of independent normalised eigenvectors $`\left\{\right|\beta +m\alpha |m=0,..,r1\}`$ such that $`N(\beta +m\alpha )>0`$ for $`m=1,..,r1`$. If either

$`N(\beta )>0\text{ and }𝒂_{}|\beta =C_\beta |\beta +(r1)\alpha \text{ for some choice of }C_\beta `$
or

$`N(\beta )=0,\text{ and }N(\beta +r\alpha )=0`$
then $`r=n`$

Proof of claim: Let $`V_r=\text{span}\left\{\right|\beta +m\alpha |m=0,..,r1\}`$. Since $`N(\beta +m\alpha )>0`$ for $`m=1,..,n1`$ then we can define $`C_{\beta +m\alpha }0`$ for $`m=1,..,n1`$ so that $`𝒂_{}|\beta +m\alpha =C_{\beta +m\alpha }|\beta +(m1)\alpha `$ for $`m=1,..,r1`$ and $`𝒂_+|\beta +m\alpha =\overline{C_{\beta +(m+1)\alpha }}|\beta +(m+1)\alpha `$ for $`m=0,..,n2`$

For the first option $`𝒂_{}|\beta =C_\beta |\beta +(r1)\alpha `$ for so $`C_\beta 0`$, so from the argument above $`𝒂_+|\beta +(r1)\alpha =\overline{C_\beta }|\beta `$.

For the second option $`𝒂_{}|\beta =0`$ and $`𝒂_+|\beta +(r1)\alpha =0`$.

Hence, for both cases, the action of $`𝒖,𝒂_+,𝒂_{}`$ on $`V_r`$ remains in $`V_r`$. Thus if $`r<n`$ then it is obvious that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ can be reduced to $`V_r`$. This contradicts the irreducibility of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ or the dimension $``$ is $`n`$. Hence $`r=n`$.

Continuation of Proof:

Since $`N(\theta )0`$ for all eigenvectors $`|\theta `$ we have two possibilities. Either $`N(\theta )>0`$ for eigenvectors $`|\theta `$ or there exists a $`|\beta `$ such that $`N(\beta )=0`$.

Taking the first case, that $`N(\theta )|>0`$ all eigenvectors $`|\theta `$. Choose $`\beta `$ so that $`|\beta `$ is any normalised eigenvector of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$. We choose the phases of $`C_{\beta +m\alpha }`$, and define $`|\beta +m\alpha =\overline{C_{\beta +m\alpha }}^1𝒂_+|\beta +(m1)\alpha `$ for $`m=1,..,n1`$.

From the claim above the $`\left\{\right|\beta +m\alpha |m=0,..,n1\}`$ are independent. Since $`N(\beta )>0`$ then $`𝒂_{}|\beta `$ must be parallel to one of the this set. But from the claim the only possibility is $`𝒂_{}|\beta =C_\beta |\beta +(n1)\alpha `$ for some choice of phase of $`C_\beta `$. i.e. (37).

Given condition (37) then

$`e^{i\beta }\overline{C_\beta }|\beta `$ $`=𝒖\overline{C_\beta }|\beta =𝒖𝒂_+|\beta +(n1)\alpha =e^{i\alpha }𝒂_+𝒖|\beta +(n1)\alpha `$
$`=e^{i\alpha }e^{i(\beta +(n1)\alpha )}𝒂_+|\beta +(n1)\alpha =e^{i(\beta +n\alpha )}\overline{C_\beta }|\beta `$
Hence $`e^{in\alpha }=1`$ so $`n\alpha =2\pi k`$ for some integer $`k`$. Clearly $`k1`$ and $`k<n/2`$ so that $`0<\alpha <\pi `$. Also $`k`$ and $`n`$ must be relatively prime so that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$ has distinct eigenvalues i.e. (38).

Now consider the second possibility. That there exist a $`|\beta `$ such that $`N(\beta )=0`$ and hence $`𝒂_{}|\beta =0`$. Again we choose the phases of $`C_{\beta +m\alpha }`$ and define $`|\beta +m\alpha =\overline{C_{\beta +m\alpha }}^1𝒂_+|\beta +(m1)\alpha `$ for $`m=1,..,n1`$. These are all independent and none of the $`C_{\beta +m\alpha }=0`$ by the claim above.

If $`𝒂_+|\beta +(n1)\alpha 0`$ then by the claim above $`𝒂_+|\beta +(n1)\alpha =\overline{C_{\beta +n\alpha }}|\beta `$. Hence

$`|C_{\beta +n\alpha }|^2=\beta +(n1)\alpha \left|𝒂_{}𝒂_+\right|\beta +(n1)\alpha =\overline{C_{\beta +n\alpha }}\beta +(n1)\alpha \left|𝒂_{}\right|\beta =0`$
hence $`C_{\beta +n\alpha }=0`$ which contradicts $`𝒂_+|\beta +(n1)\alpha 0`$. Hence (36) ∎

By analogy with the representations of the noncommutative sphere these we shall call representations which satisfy (36) $`S^2`$-type representations and we say a $`S^2`$-type representation is minimal if

$`n\alpha <2\pi `$ (39)
By analogy to the representations of the noncommutative torus we shall call representations which satisfy (37) $`T^2`$-type representations and we say a $`T^2`$-type representation is minimal if

$`n\alpha =2\pi `$ (40)
We now wish to find what values of $`(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ give rise to finite dimensional irreducible representations of $`𝒜(R)`$, with no multiple eigenvalues of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$. A summary is given in table 1 below.

### 3.1 $`S^2`$-type representations

Before we look at the different types of $`S^2`$-type representation and when they exist we shall give some basic facts about $`S^2`$-type representation.

###### Lemma 4.

If $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is an $`S^2`$ representation with $`(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ given in theorem 3 then we can find a basis (32) such that $`C_{\beta +m\alpha }_+`$. Also there exist an equivalent representation $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ with that same values of $`(R,n,\alpha )`$ and with $`\beta `$ replaced by $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$ where $`2\pi <\stackrel{~}{\beta }\frac{1}{2}\alpha 0`$.

If $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ are $`S^2`$ representation with the same $`(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ then they are equivalent.

###### Proof.

We can see that given $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ the basis (32) is only defined up to a phase, likewise $`C_{\beta +m\alpha }`$ is also only defined up to a phase. Thus given the set $`\{\nu _m|\nu _m\overline{\nu _m}=1,m=0,..,n1\}`$, we can always make the following replacement

$`|\beta +m\alpha |\beta +m\alpha ^{}=\nu _m|\beta +m\alpha ,C_{\beta +m\alpha }C_{\beta +m\alpha }^{}=\nu _{m1}\overline{\nu _m}C_{\beta +m\alpha }`$ (41)
without changing the equations (33) and (35). Thus if we set $`\nu _m=\nu _{m1}C_{\beta +m\alpha }/|C_{\beta +m\alpha }|`$ then all the $`C_{\beta +m\alpha }^{}`$ are real and positive.

Clearly replacing $`\beta `$ with $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }\beta +2\pi k`$ for $`k`$ doesn’t change the representation. Therefore we can place $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$ in any $`2\pi `$ range. The one chosen makes the calculations below simpler.

If $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ are representation with the same $`(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ then, setting the $`C_{\beta +m\alpha }`$ to be real and positive, the bases (32) are the same (up to an overall choice phase), and the action (33), (35) on these basis elements are the same, therefore the representations are equivalent. ∎

For the rest of this subsection we assume we are given $`R`$ and $`n`$, and we wish to find $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ so that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ is $`S^2`$-type irreducible representation. Given $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ we write $`\beta ^{}=\beta \frac{1}{2}\alpha `$. For a general $`S^2`$ representation (34) and (36) imply

$`\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{})=\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{}+n\alpha )=R\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )`$ (42)
The first equality is solved by setting $`\beta ^{}+n\alpha =2\pi k\pm \beta ^{}`$ for some $`k`$. This implies either

$`\alpha =2\pi k/n`$ (43)
or

$`\beta ^{}=\pi k\frac{1}{2}n\alpha `$ (44)
We can now place some simple constraints on $`(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ is an irreducible $`S^2`$ representation. From (42) we see that for $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ to be an $`S^2`$ representation then

$`R\mathrm{sec}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )=(1+\epsilon ^2)^{1/2}`$ (45)
since $`\epsilon =\mathrm{tan}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )`$. By looking at (34) we see that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ is an irreducible $`S^2`$ representation if and only if

$`\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{}+m\alpha )+R\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )>0,m=1,..,n1`$ (46)
#### Minimal $`S^2`$ representation

The first result is on the existence and uniqueness of minimal $`S^2`$-type representations.

###### Lemma 5.

Given $`R`$ and $`n`$ there exists minimal $`S^2`$-type representation if and only if $`1<R<\mathrm{sec}(\pi /n)`$. This representation is unique and is given by

$`\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}n\alpha )+R\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )=0,0<\alpha <2\pi /n,\beta ^{}=\frac{1}{2}n\alpha `$ (47)
###### Proof.

If $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is minimal we must exclude (43). Since we choose $`\beta ^{}`$ so that $`2\pi <\beta ^{}0`$ from (44) we have $`2<kn\alpha /(2\pi )0`$. Applying $`0<n\alpha /(2\pi )<1`$ we have

$`2<n\alpha /(2\pi )<k1+n\alpha /(2\pi )<1`$
therefore $`k=0`$ or $`1`$.

We shall exclude the case $`k=1`$. If $`k=1`$ so that $`\beta ^{}=\pi \frac{1}{2}n\alpha `$, therefore $`2\pi <\beta ^{}<\pi `$. Now $`\beta ^{}+\alpha =\pi \frac{1}{2}(n2)\alpha \pi `$ since $`n2`$. Thus $`2\pi <\beta ^{}<\beta ^{}+\alpha \pi `$. Since $`\mathrm{cos}`$ is strictly decreasing in the range $`2\pi \mathrm{}\pi `$ we have $`1\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{}+\alpha )<\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{})<1`$. Thus $`\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{}+\alpha )\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{})=\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{}+\alpha )+R\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )<0`$ which contradicts (46).

Thus if $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a minimal $`S^2`$ representation we have (47).

Now consider the function $`\widehat{R}(\alpha )=\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}n\alpha )/\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )`$ for the range $`0<\alpha <2\pi /n`$. We observe that $`\widehat{R}(0)=1`$ and $`\widehat{R}(2\pi /n)=\mathrm{sec}(\pi /n)`$ and

$`\widehat{R}^{}(\alpha )`$ $`=(\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha ))^2(\frac{1}{2}n\alpha \mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )\mathrm{sin}(\frac{1}{2}n\alpha )\frac{1}{2}\alpha \mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}n\alpha )\mathrm{sin}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha ))`$
$`=(\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha ))^2\frac{1}{2}\alpha ((n1)\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )\mathrm{sin}(\frac{1}{2}n\alpha )+\mathrm{sin}(\frac{1}{2}(n1)\alpha ))>0`$
Thus $`\widehat{R}:\left\{\alpha \right|0<\alpha <2\pi /n\}\left\{R\right|1<R<\mathrm{sec}(\pi /n)\}`$ is an invertible function so we can uniquely solve (47). This also implies that $`1<R<\mathrm{sec}(\pi /n)`$.

We now wish to show that an $`\alpha ,\beta ^{}`$ satisfying (47) is a representation. This simply requires showing (46) is satisfied. Consider separately the cases $`m=1,..,\frac{1}{2}n`$ and $`m=\frac{1}{2}n+1,..,n1`$. In the first case we have $`\frac{1}{2}n<m\frac{1}{2}n0`$ this implies $`\pi \frac{1}{2}n\alpha <(m\frac{1}{2}n)\alpha 0`$. Since $`\mathrm{cos}`$ is strictly increasing in this range we have $`1\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}n\alpha )<\mathrm{cos}(m\alpha \frac{1}{2}n\alpha )1`$ and hence (46) is satisfied. Likewise if $`m=\frac{1}{2}n+1,..,n1`$ then $`0m\frac{1}{2}n<\frac{1}{2}n`$ so $`0m\alpha \frac{1}{2}n\alpha <\frac{1}{2}n\alpha \pi `$. Since $`\mathrm{cos}`$ is strictly decreasing in this range we have $`1\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}n\alpha )<\mathrm{cos}(m\alpha \frac{1}{2}n\alpha )1`$ and hence (46) is satisfied. ∎

The minimal $`S^2`$ representation may be said to be the closest to the representation of the true noncommutative sphere, since they exist for $`1<R<1`$ when the commutative limit is a topologically the sphere, they are uniquely determined for each $`R`$ by $`n`$, and $`\epsilon =\mathrm{tan}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )0`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$.

As lemma 5 shows there exists a minimal $`S^2`$ representation of dimension $`n`$ for $`1<R<\mathrm{sec}(\pi /n)`$. The relationship between $`R`$, $`n`$ and $`\alpha `$ is shown in Figure 2a, $`n=2,3,\mathrm{}`$. Given a permitted $`R`$ and $`n`$ we can draw a diagram to represent $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$. This an open polygon inside a circle. The vertices are at the points $`e^{i(\beta ^{}+m\alpha )}`$. Equations (46) implies that there is a sector (called the “forbidden sector”) and all the vertices must lie to the right of this sector. The open polygon begins and ends on the edge of this sector. Figures 2b and 2c are represent representations for different $`n`$ and $`R`$. Note for Figure 2c, $`R>1`$.

#### Non minimal $`S^2`$ representation

The situation for non minimal $`S^2`$ representation is more complicated. We have the following lemmas:

###### Lemma 6.

If $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a non minimal $`S^2`$-type representation then $`R1`$.

###### Proof.

If $`|\theta `$ is a basis vector then from (46) $`\mathrm{cos}(\theta )R\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )`$. Therefore if we set $`\theta ^{}=(\theta )mod2\pi `$ so that $`0\theta ^{}<2\pi `$, then $`\theta ^{}`$ must lie either in the range $`0\theta ^{}\pi \frac{1}{2}\delta `$ or $`\pi +\frac{1}{2}\delta \theta ^{}<2\pi `$ where $`\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\delta )=R\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )`$ and $`0<\delta `$. The range $`\left\{\theta ^{}\right|\pi \frac{1}{2}\delta <\theta ^{}<\pi +\frac{1}{2}\delta \}`$ is called the forbidden sector.

Since $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is non minimal there exists an $`m`$ such that $`0(\beta ^{}+m\alpha )mod2\pi \pi \frac{1}{2}\delta `$ and $`\pi +\frac{1}{2}\delta (\beta ^{}+(m+1)\alpha )mod2\pi <2\pi `$. Thus $`0<\delta \alpha <\pi `$. Since $`\mathrm{cos}`$ is decreasing we have $`0<\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\delta )<1`$. Hence result. ∎

###### Lemma 7.

If $`R1`$ there exist no $`S^2`$-type representations.

###### Proof.

Follows from lemmas 5 and 8. ∎

###### Lemma 8.

If $`R1`$ then there may exists many non minimal $`S^2`$-type representation. Given such a $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ then $`1R\mathrm{sec}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )`$ and $`\frac{3}{2}\pi <\beta ^{}<\frac{1}{2}\pi `$ and also $`(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ obey either

$`\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}n\alpha )=(1)^{k+1}R\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha ),2\pi /n<\alpha <\pi /2,\beta ^{}=\pi k\frac{1}{2}n\alpha ,k=[n\alpha /(2\pi )]1`$ (48)
or

$`\alpha =2k\pi /n,1k(n1)/2,\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{})=R\mathrm{cos}(\pi k/n)`$ (49)
###### Proof.

From (42) and $`|\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{})|1`$ we have $`R\mathrm{sec}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )`$. Also since $`R>0`$ and $`\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )>0`$ then $`\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{})<0`$ then $`\frac{3}{2}\pi <\beta ^{}<\frac{1}{2}\pi `$.

From (42) we have either (43) or (44) is true. If (44) is true then from (42) the first equation in (48) is true. Also $`\beta ^{}/\pi =kn\alpha /(2\pi )`$ so $`[\beta ^{}/\pi ]=1=k[n\alpha /(2\pi )]`$.

If (43) is satisfied, then from (42) equation (49) is satisfied. ∎

We note that the converse is to lemma 8 is not true. That is given $`(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ which satisfies either (48) or (49) there need not be a corresponding representation $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$. This is due to the requirement that (46) is satisfied. For example given $`(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ which is a solution to (48) such that $`n`$ is even and $`k`$ is old, then for $`m=n/2`$ we have

$`\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{}+m\alpha )+R\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )=\mathrm{cos}(\pi k\frac{1}{2}n\alpha +m\alpha )\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{})=\mathrm{cos}(\pi k)\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{})=1\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{})<0`$
hence (46) is not satisfied.

In general that exact set of $`(R,n,\alpha ,\beta )`$ which have non minimal $`S^2`$ representation is complicated. In figure 3 we see the relationship between $`R`$ and $`\alpha `$ for $`n=11`$. Figure 3b is simply a smaller region of $`R`$. Figure 4 gives four different representation with $`n=11`$, the first two are acceptable since (46) is satisfied, whereas the second two are unacceptable since (46) is not satisfied. Figures 4a and 4c correspond to (48). Figures 4b and 4d correspond to (49)

### 3.2 $`T^2`$-type representations

Again before we look at the different types of $`T^2`$-type representation and when they exist, we shall give some basic facts about $`T^2`$-type representation. Recall that for a $`T^2`$-type representation $`\alpha =2\pi k/n`$.

We note take we can still make the replacement given by (41) for $`m=0,..,n1`$ with $`\nu _1=\nu _{n1}`$. However in this case the constant $`C_{\text{prod}}=_{m=0}^{n1}C_{\beta +m\alpha }`$ is unchanged under the replacement (41). i.e. $`C_{\text{prod}}C_{\text{prod}}^{}=C_{\text{prod}}`$. Thus there is a resulting phase $`\nu =C_{\text{prod}}/|C_{\text{prod}}|`$.

###### Lemma 9.

If $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ are $`T^2`$ representation with the same $`(R,n,k,\beta ,\nu )`$ then they are equivalent.

If $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a $`T^2`$ representation we can find an equivalent representation $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ with the same $`(R,n,k,\nu )`$ and with $`\beta `$ replaced by $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$ such that $`\pi 2\pi /n<\stackrel{~}{\beta }\frac{1}{2}\alpha \pi `$.

###### Proof.

Since $`(R,n,k,\nu )`$ are the same for $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ then $`\alpha =2\pi k/n`$ is the same for $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$. By the same argument in lemma 4 we can choose basis elements (32) such that $`C_{\beta +m\alpha }_+`$ for $`m=1,..,n1`$ and thus $`C_\beta =\nu |C_\beta |`$. Doing this for both $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ then the action (33), (35) on these basis elements are the same, therefore the representations are equivalent.

In the proof of theorem 3 in the case of a $`T^2`$ representation when all $`C_\theta 0`$ we choose $`\beta `$ to be any value such that $`e^{i\beta }`$ was an eigenvalue of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$. Since the $`n`$ roots are equally spaced around the circle we can choose any arc of length $`2\pi /n`$ to place $`\beta `$ in. The one chosen makes the calculations below simpler. ∎

For this subsection we assume we are given $`(R,n,k,\nu )`$, and we wish to find $`\beta `$ so that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,k,\beta ,\nu )`$ is $`T^2`$-type irreducible representation. Again we define $`\beta ^{}=\beta \frac{1}{2}\alpha `$.

###### Lemma 10.

Given $`R`$, $`n`$ and $`k`$ such that $`R<\mathrm{cos}(\pi /n)\mathrm{sec}(\pi k/n)`$ there are no $`T^2`$ representation $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,k,\beta ,\nu )`$.

Given $`R`$, $`n`$ and $`k`$ such that $`\mathrm{cos}(\pi /n)\mathrm{sec}(\pi k/n)<R\mathrm{sec}(\pi k/n)`$ then there exist a one parameter set of $`T^2`$ representation $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,k,\beta ,\nu )`$ with $`\beta `$ in the range

$`\pi 2\pi /n+\frac{1}{2}\delta <\beta ^{}<\pi \frac{1}{2}\delta ,\text{ where }\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\delta )=R\mathrm{cos}(\pi k/n)`$ (50)
Given $`R`$, $`n`$ and $`k`$ such that $`R>\mathrm{sec}(\pi k/n)`$ there exist a parameter set of irreducible $`T^2`$ representation $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,k,\beta ,\nu )`$ with the full range of $`\beta `$, i.e. $`\pi 2\pi /n<\beta ^{}\pi `$.

###### Proof.

By looking at (34) we see that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,k,\beta ,\nu )`$ is an irreducible $`T^2`$ representation if only if

$`\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{}+2\pi mk/n)+R\mathrm{cos}(\pi k/n)>0,m=0,..,n1`$ (51)
hence if $`R>\mathrm{sec}(\pi k/n)`$, (51) is satisfied for all $`\beta ^{}`$, hence $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,k,\beta ,\nu )`$ is a representation for all $`\beta `$.

For $`R\mathrm{sec}(\pi k/n)`$ then similar to lemma 6 if we set $`\theta ^{}=(\beta ^{}+2\pi mk/n)mod2\pi `$ then $`\theta ^{}`$ must lie either in the range $`0\theta ^{}<\pi \frac{1}{2}\delta `$ or $`\pi +\frac{1}{2}\delta <\theta ^{}<2\pi `$ where $`\delta `$ is given in (50). Since the set $`\{e^{i(\beta ^{}+2\pi mk/n)}|m=0,..,n=1\}`$ are equally spaced then $`\delta <2\pi /n`$. Hence $`0<\frac{1}{2}\delta <\pi /n\frac{1}{2}\alpha <\frac{1}{2}\pi `$ and $`\mathrm{cos}`$ is strictly decreasing we have $`0<\mathrm{cos}(\pi /n)<\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\delta )<1`$. Since $`\mathrm{cos}(\frac{1}{2}\delta )=R\mathrm{cos}(\pi k/n)`$ we have $`R>\mathrm{cos}(\pi /n)\mathrm{sec}(\pi k/n)`$.

Since $`\beta ^{}\pi `$ then $`\beta ^{}\pi \frac{1}{2}\delta `$. Now there exists and $`m`$ such that $`e^{i(\beta ^{}+2\pi mk/n)}=e^{i(\beta ^{}+2\pi /n)}`$, hence $`(\beta ^{}+2\pi mk/n)mod2\pi =\beta ^{}+2\pi /n`$ hence $`\beta ^{}+2\pi /n`$ must lie either in the range $`0\beta ^{}+2\pi /n<\pi \frac{1}{2}\delta `$ or the range $`\pi +\frac{1}{2}\delta <\beta ^{}+2\pi /n<2\pi `$ but since $`\beta ^{}+2\pi /n>\pi `$ we have $`\beta ^{}>\pi +\frac{1}{2}\delta +2\pi /n`$. Thus for $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ to be $`T^2`$ representation we must have $`\beta ^{}`$ given by (50).

If $`\beta ^{}`$ is given by (50) then all the $`\theta ^{}`$ lie in the permitted regions hence (51) so it is a representation. ∎

We can see that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a minimal $`T^2`$ representation if $`k=1`$. Thus we have the following corollary

###### Corollary 11.

If $`R1`$ there are no $`T^2`$ representation.

Given $`R`$ and $`n`$ such that $`1<R\mathrm{sec}(\pi /n)`$ then there exist a one parameter set of irreducible $`T^2`$ minimal representation $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,k=1,\beta ,\nu )`$ with $`\beta `$ given in (50).

Given $`R`$ and $`n`$ such that $`R>\mathrm{sec}(\pi /n)`$ there exist a one parameter set of irreducible $`T^2`$ representation $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,n,k=1,\beta ,\nu )`$ with the full range of $`\beta `$, i.e. $`\pi 2\pi /n<\beta ^{}\pi `$.

The range of possible $`(R,\alpha )`$ for minimal $`T^2`$ representation is simply $`R>1`$ and $`\alpha =2\pi /n`$. These are pictures in figure 5a. Figure 5b gives the range of possible $`(R,\alpha )`$ for $`n=11`$. Figure 5c gives an example of a $`T^2`$ representation.

### 3.3 Infinite dimensional $`T^2`$ representations

Like the noncommutative torus $`𝒜(R)`$ also have infinite dimensional representations. We shall consider here only the infinite dimensional representations of the form (with $``$ having the basis $`\left\{|\beta +m\alpha |m\right\}`$)

$`𝒖|\beta +m\alpha =e^{i(\beta +m\alpha )}|\beta +m\alpha ,𝒂_{}|\beta +m\alpha =C_{\beta +m\alpha }|\beta +(m1)\alpha ,`$ (52)
$`𝒂_+|\beta +m\alpha =C_{\beta +(m+1)\alpha }|\beta +(m+1)\alpha `$
where

$`C_{\beta +m\alpha }`$ $`=(\mathrm{sec}(\frac{1}{2}\alpha )\mathrm{cos}(\beta ^{}+m\alpha )+R)^{1/2},\beta ^{}=\beta \frac{1}{2}\alpha `$ (53)
and where $`\alpha 2\pi n/k`$ for any $`n,k`$. The eigenvalues of $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒖)`$ are dense on the circle, so there exist an infinite dimensional representations if only if $`R\mathrm{sec}(\alpha )`$.

If $`R=\mathrm{sec}(\alpha )`$ there also exist semi-infinite dimensional $`T^2`$ representation. These are given by $`\beta ^{}=\pi `$. Thus $`𝒂_{}|\beta =0`$ and $`𝒂_+|\beta \alpha =0`$ so we can reduce the Hilbert space to the subspaces $`\text{span}\left\{|\pi +r\alpha ,r0\right\}`$ and $`\text{span}\left\{|\pi +r\alpha ,r1\right\}`$.

## 4 Conclusion and Discussion

Table 1 gives a list of all the possible representations. We can see that representations reflect the topology, but not completely.

There are loosely speaking four regions of $`R`$. If $`R1`$ then there is either no manifold $`(R)`$ or it is just a point. Consequently there are no representations either.

The next region $`1<R<1`$ the algebra $`𝒜(R)`$ is closest to the noncommutative sphere. The commutative limit is the sphere, and there exist only minimal $`S^2`$ representations which are the closest to the representations of the noncommutative sphere, in that they are parameterised by $`n`$.

In the region $`1<R<(1+\epsilon ^2)^{1/2}`$ the algebra $`𝒜(R)`$ is a new object which we may call the “sphere-torus”. This is a purely noncommutative object since setting $`\epsilon =0`$ gives $`1<R<1`$ so there is no commutative analogue. In this region $`𝒜(R)`$ has the minimal $`S^2`$ representations, the non minimal $`S^2`$ representations and the finite dimensional $`T^2`$ representations.

Only when $`R>(1+\epsilon ^2)^{1/2}`$ can we say that $`𝒜(R)`$ is a deformation of the torus. There are no $`S^2`$ representations and, as well as the finite dimensional $`T^2`$ representations, the infinite $`T^2`$ representations exist.

If any definition of genus is applied to noncommutative geometry it would be interesting to see what values it would attain for the sphere-torus.

## Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Arne Sletsjøe Math Department University of Oslo, John Madore Laboratoire de Physique Théorique Université de Paris Sud and Richard Kerner Laboratoire Physique Théorique des Liquides, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris VI for help in preparing this paper.

The author would like to thank the the math department of the University of Oslo for their facilities.