text:
# Untitled Document

Free Probability, Free Entropy and

Applications to von Neumann Algebras

Liming Ge* Academy of Mathematics and System Science, CAS, Beijing 100080, China. Department of Mathematics UNH, Durham, NH 03824, USA. E-mail: liming@math.unh.edu

This talk is organized as follows: First we explain some basic concepts in non-commutative probability theory in the frame of operator algebras. In Section 2, we discuss related topics in von Neumann algebras. Sections 3 and 4 contain some of the key ideas and results in free probability theory. Last section states some of the important applications of free probability theory.

1. Non-commutative probability spaces

In general, a non-commutative probability space is a pair $`(𝒜,\tau )`$, where $`𝒜`$ is a unital algebra (over the field of complex numbers $`𝐂`$) and $`\tau `$ a linear functional with $`\tau (I)=1`$, where $`I`$ is the identity of $`𝒜`$. Elements of $`𝒜`$ are called random variables. Since positivity is a key concept in (classical) probability theory, this can be captured by assuming that $`𝒜`$ is a * algebra and $`\tau `$ is positive (i.e., a state). Elements of the form $`A^{}A`$ are called positive (random variables).

A state $`\tau `$ is a trace if $`\tau (AB)=\tau (BA)`$. We often require that $`\tau `$ be a faithful trace ($`\tau `$ corresponds to the classical probability measure, or the integral given by the measure). In this talk, we always assume that $`𝒜`$ is a unital * algebra over $`𝐂`$ and $`\tau `$ a faithful state on $`𝒜`$. Subalgebras of $`𝒜`$ are always assumed unital * subalgebras.

Examples of noncommutative probability spaces often come from operator algebras on a Hilbert space and the states used here are usually vector states.

A C\*-probability space is a pair $`(𝒜,\tau )`$, where $`𝒜`$ is a unital C\*-algebra (norm closed subalgebra of $`()`$) and $`\tau `$ is a state on $`𝒜`$.

A W\*-probability space is a pair $`(,\tau )`$ consisting of a von Neumann algebra $``$ (strong-operator closed C\*-subalgebra of $`()`$) and a normal (i.e., countably additive) state $`\tau `$ on $``$.

The following are some more basic concepts:

Independence: In a noncommutative probability space $`(𝒜,\tau )`$, a family $`\{𝒜_j\}`$ of subalgebras $`𝒜_j`$ of $`𝒜`$ is independent if the subalgebras commute with each other and, for $`n𝐍`$, $`\tau (A_1\mathrm{}A_n)=\tau (A_1)\mathrm{}\tau (A_n)`$ for all $`A_k`$ in $`𝒜_{j_k}`$ and $`j_kj_l`$ whenever $`kl`$.

This independence gives a “tensor-product” relation among subalgebras $`𝒜_j`$: if $`𝒜`$ is generated by $`𝒜_j`$, then $`𝒜_j𝒜_j`$ (in the case of C\*- or W\*-probability spaces, the tensor-product shall reflect the corresponding topological structures on $`𝒜`$ and $`𝒜_j`$).

Distributions and moments: Given $`(𝒜,\tau )`$, for $`A`$ in $`𝒜`$, we define a map $`\mu _A:𝐂[x]𝐂`$ by $`\mu _A(p(x))=\tau (p(A))`$. Then $`\mu _A`$ is the distribution of $`A`$. For $`A_1,\mathrm{},A_n`$ in $`𝒜`$, the joint distribution $`\mu _{A_1,\mathrm{},A_n}:𝐂x_1,\mathrm{},x_n𝐂`$ is given by

$$\mu _{A_1,\mathrm{},A_n}(p(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n))=\tau (p(A_1,\mathrm{},A_n)).$$

If $`p`$ is a monomial, $`\tau (p(A_1,\mathrm{},A_n))`$ is called a (p-)moment. When random variables are non self-adjoint, one also considers (joint) * distributions of random variables, that can be defined in a similar way. In this case, there is a natural identification of $`𝐂x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,x_1^{},\mathrm{},x_n^{}`$ with the semigroup algebra $`𝐂S_{2n}`$, where $`S_{2n}`$ is the free semigroup on $`2n`$ generators. Monomials are given by words in $`S_{2n}`$.

Conditional Expectations: Suppose $``$ is a subalgebra of $`𝒜`$. A conditional expectation from $`𝒜`$ onto $``$ is a $``$-bimodule map (a projection of norm one in the case of C\*-algebras) of $`𝒜`$ onto $``$ so that the restriction on $``$ is the identity map.

Many other concepts in probability theory and measure theory can be generalized to operator algebras, especially von Neumann algebras which can be regarded as non-commutative measure spaces. For basic operator algebra theory, we refer to \[KR\] and \[T\].

2. GNS representation and von Neumann algebras

Given a C\*-probability space $`(𝒜,\tau )`$, one defines an inner product $`A,B=\tau (B^{}A)`$ on $`𝒜`$. Let $`L^2(𝒜,\tau )`$ be the Hilbert space obtained by the completion of $`𝒜`$ under the $`L^2`$-norm given by this inner product. Then $`𝒜`$ acts on $`L^2(𝒜,\tau )`$ by left multiplication. This representation of $`𝒜`$ on the Hilbert space $`L^2(𝒜,\tau )`$ is called the GNS representation. In a similar way, one can define $`L^p(𝒜,\tau )`$, where $`A_p=\tau (|A|^p)^{1/p}=\tau ((A^{}A)^{p/2})^{1/p}`$. The von Neumann algebra generated by $`𝒜`$ (or the strong-operator closure of $`𝒜`$) is sometimes denoted by $`L^{\mathrm{}}(𝒜,\tau )`$ ($`L^p(𝒜,\tau )`$, $`p1`$). All von Neumann algebras admit such a form. Any von Neumann algebra is a (possibly, continuous) direct sum of “simple” algebras, or factors (algebras with a trivial center). Von Neumann algebras that admit a faithful (finite) trace are said to be finite. The classification of (infinite-dimensional) finite factors has become the central problem in von Neumann algebras.

Murray and von Neumann \[MN\] also separate factors into three types:

Type I: Factors contain a minimal projection. They are isomorphic to full matrix algebras $`M_n(𝐂)`$ or $`()`$.

Type II: Factors contain a “finite” projection but without minimal projections: it is said to be of type $`\mathrm{II}_1`$ when the identity $`I`$ is a finite projection; of type $`II_{\mathrm{}}`$ when $`I`$ is infinite. Every type $`\mathrm{II}_{\mathrm{}}`$ is the tensor product of $`()`$ with a factor of type $`\mathrm{II}_1`$.

Type III: Every (non zero) projection is infinite.

Examples of von Neumann algebras: 1) Let $`𝒜=𝐂G`$ for some discrete group $`G`$, $``$ be $`l^2(G)`$ and $`\tau `$ be the vector state given by the vector that takes value 1 at $`g`$ and 0 elsewhere. Then $`\tau `$ is a trace, $`l^2(G)=L^2(𝒜,\tau )`$ and the weak (or strong) operator closure of $`𝒜`$ is called the group von Neumann algebra, denoted by $`_G`$. We have that $`_G`$ is a factor if and only if each conjugacy class of $`G`$ other than the identity is infinite (i.c.c.). For example, the free group $`F_n`$ ($`n2`$, on $`n`$ generators) is such an i.c.c. group.

2) Suppose $`(\mathrm{\Omega },\mu )`$ is a measure space with a $`\sigma `$-finite measure $`\mu `$, $`G`$ is a group and $`\alpha `$ is a measurability preserving action of $`G`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Formally, we have an algebra $`L^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mu )G`$ ($`=𝒜`$) similar to the group algebra definition: $`(\phi (x)g)(\psi (x)h)=\phi (x)\psi (g^1(x))gh`$, for $`\phi ,\psi L^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mu )`$ and $`g,hG`$. Assume that $`G`$ acts freely (i.e., for any $`g`$ in $`G`$ with $`ge`$, the set $`\{x\mathrm{\Omega }:g(x)=x\}`$ has measure zero). Define an action of $`𝒜`$ on the Hilbert space $`_{gG}L^2(\mathrm{\Omega },\mu )g`$ by left multiplication ( which is induced by the multiplication in $`𝒜`$), where $`L^2(\mathrm{\Omega },\mu )g`$ is an isomorphic copy of $`L^2(\mathrm{\Omega },\mu )`$. Then the von Neumann algebra generated by $`𝒜`$ is called the cross product von Neumann algebra, denoted by $`L^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mu )\times _\alpha G`$. This cross product is a factor if and only if $`\alpha `$ is ergodic. If $`\alpha `$ is ergodic and not a measure preserving action, then $`L^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mu )\times _\alpha G`$ is a factor of type III. Type II factors are obtained from measure preserving actions (with $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ a non atomic measure space) and the finiteness of $`\mu `$ gives rise to type $`\mathrm{II}_1`$ factors.

The above 1) and 2) are the two basic constructions of von Neumann algebras (given by Murray and von Neumann \[MN\]). A. Connes \[C\] shows that there are finite factors that cannot be constructed by 1). It was a longstanding open problem whether every (finite) von Neumann algebra can be obtained by using the construction in 2). Using free probability theory, especially the notion of free entropy, Voiculescu \[V2\] gives a negative answer to this question. We shall discuss some details later in the talk.

In recent years, the focus of studies of von Neumann algebras is centered on factors of type $`\mathrm{II}_1`$. Many of the unsolved problems in operator algebras are also reduced to this class. We end this section with two of the (still) open problems from the list of 20 questions asked by Kadison in 1967.

1. The weak-operator closure of the left regular representation of the free (non-abelian) group on two or more generators is a factor of type $`\mathrm{II}_1`$. Are these factors isomorphic for different numbers of generators?

2. Is each factor generated by two self-adjoint operators? —each von Neumann algebra? —the factor arising from the free group on three generators? —is each von Neumann algebra finitely generated?

Three of those 20 problems were answered in the last ten years by using free probability and free entropy. We explain some of the theory involved in the following two sections.

3. Free independence

Suppose $`(𝒜,\tau )`$ is a C\*-probability space. We assume that $`\tau `$ is a trace. A family $`𝒜_\iota `$, $`\iota 𝐈`$, of unital * subalgebras of $`𝒜`$ are called free with respect to $`\tau `$ if $`\tau (A_1A_2\mathrm{}A_n)=0`$ whenever $`A_j𝒜_{\iota _j}`$, $`\iota _1\mathrm{}\iota _n`$ ($`\iota _1`$ and $`\iota _3`$ may be the same) and $`\tau (A_j)=0`$ for $`1jn`$ and every $`n`$ in $`𝐍`$. A family of subsets (or elements) of $`𝒜`$ are said to be free if the unital * subalgebras they generate are free.

Note that freeness is a highly noncommutative notion, the non-commutativity (or algebraic freeness) of free random variables is encoded in the definition. Recall some basic concepts in free probability theory.

Semicircular elements: The Gaussian laws in classical theory is replaced by the semicircular laws. The semicircular law centered at $`a`$ and of radius $`r`$ is the distribution $`\mu _{a,r}:𝐂[x]𝐂`$ such that

$$\mu _{a,r}(\phi (x))=\frac{2}{\pi r^2}_{ar}^{a+r}\phi (t)\sqrt{r^2(ta)^2}𝑑t,$$

for each $`\phi (x)`$ in $`𝐂[x]`$. A self-adjoint random variable $`A`$ in $`(𝒜,\tau )`$ is said to be (standard) semicircular if its distribution is $`\mu _{0,1}`$. An element $`X=A+iB`$ is circular if $`A`$ and $`B`$ are free semicircular. The following theorem is proved by D. Voiculescu (see \[VDN\]).

Free Central Limit Theorem: Let $`\{A_j\}_{j=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ be a free family of identically distributed random variables in $`(𝒜,\tau )`$ with $`\tau (A_j)=0`$ and $`\tau (A_j^2)=\frac{r^2}{4}`$ for some positive number $`r`$. Then the distribution of $`\frac{A_1+\mathrm{}+A_n}{\sqrt{n}}`$ converges to the semicircular law $`\mu _{0,r}`$.

Classical independence corresponds to tensor products; while the above free independence introduced by Voiculescu is given by certain free products. Recall some examples of such freeness.

Free products: If $`G=G_1G_2`$, then $`_{G_1}`$ and $`_{G_2}`$ are free in $`_G`$, here the trace is the one given by the unit vector associated with any group element.

Let $`(𝒜_1,\tau _1)`$ and $`(𝒜_2,\tau _2)`$ be two W\*-probability spaces. Suppose $`𝒜_0`$ is the (amalgamated algebraic) free product of $`𝒜_1`$ and $`𝒜_2`$ (over the scalars). Then there is a unique $`\tau `$ on $`𝒜_0`$ such that $`𝒜_1`$ and $`𝒜_2`$ are free with respect to $`\tau `$ and the restrictions of $`\tau `$ on $`𝒜_1`$ and $`𝒜_2`$ equal to $`\tau _1`$ and $`\tau _2`$, respectively. Let $`𝒜`$ be the weak operator closure of $`𝒜_0`$ acting on $`L^2(𝒜_0,\tau )`$. Then $`𝒜`$ is called the (reduced von Neumann algebra) free product of $`𝒜_1`$ and $`𝒜_2`$ (with respect to $`\tau `$), denoted by $`𝒜_1𝒜_2`$ (and $`\tau =\tau _1\tau _2`$). For example, $`_{F_2}L^{\mathrm{}}[0,1]L^{\mathrm{}}[0,1]`$.

Full Fock space construction: Let $`_0`$ be a real Hilbert space and $``$ be $`_0𝐂`$. Its full Fock space is

$$𝒯()=𝐂1\underset{n1}{}^n.$$

For $`h_0`$, let the left creation operator $`l(h)(𝒯())`$ be given by $`l(h)\xi =h\xi `$. Then $`l(h)^{}1=0`$ and $`l(h)^{}\xi _1\xi _2\mathrm{}\xi _n=\xi _1,h\xi _2\mathrm{}\xi _n`$, so $`l(h_1)^{}l(h_2)=h_2,h_1I`$. Let $`C^{}(l(_0))`$ (or $`W^{}(l(_0))`$) be the C\*- (or W\*-) algebra generated by $`\{l(h)|h_0\}`$. Let $`\omega _{}`$ be the vector state given by the vector $`1𝒯()`$. Here $`1`$ is called the vacuum vector and $`\omega _{}`$ the vacuum state. If $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ are orthogonal subspaces of $`_0`$, then $`C^{}(l(_1))`$ and $`C^{}(l(_2))`$ are free (with respect to $`\omega _{}`$). If $`h`$ is a unit vector in $`_0`$, then $`(l(h)+l(h)^{})/2`$ is semicircular with distribution $`\mu _{0,1}`$.

Gaussian Random Matrices: Let $`X(s,n)=(f_{ij}(s,n))`$ in $`M_n(L^{\mathrm{}}[0,1])`$ be real random matrices, where $`n𝐍`$ and $`sS`$ for some index set $`S`$. Assume that $`f_{ij}(s,n)=f_{ji}(s,n)`$ and $`\{f_{ij}(s,n):i,j,s\}`$ (given each $`n`$) is a family of independent Gaussian $`(0,1/n)`$ random variables. Let $`D_n`$ be a constant diagonal matrix in $`M_n(𝐑)`$ having a limit distribution (as $`n\mathrm{}`$). Then $`\{X(s,n)\}\{D_n\}`$ is asymptotically free as $`n\mathrm{}`$ and $`\{X(s,n):sS\}`$ converges in distribution to a free semicircular family. As a corollary, Voiculescu shows that $`_{F_5}M_2(𝐂)_{F_2}`$. Moreover $`_{F_r}M_n(𝐂)_{F_{1+\frac{r1}{n^2}}}`$, for any real number $`r`$, and $`_{F_r}_{F_s}_{F_{r+s}}`$. Now we know that either $`_{F_r}`$, $`r>1`$, are all isomorphic to each other or they are all non isomorphic factors (see \[D\] and \[R\]).

Further studies of free probability theory have been pursued by many people in several directions, such as infinitely divisible laws, free brownian motion, etc. (we refer to \[B\], \[VDN\] and \[HP\] for details).

4. Free entropy

Free entropy is a non commutative analogue of classical Shannon entropy. First we recall the definition of entropy and its basic properties.

Classical Entropy: Let $`(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Sigma },\mu )`$ be a probability space with probability measure $`\mu `$ and $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_n:\mathrm{\Omega }𝐑`$ be random variables. Suppose $`\phi `$ is the density function on $`𝐑^n`$ corresponding to the joint distribution of $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_n`$. Then the entropy:

$$H(f_1,\mathrm{},f_n)=_{𝐑^n}\phi (t_1,\mathrm{},t_n)\mathrm{log}\phi (t_1,\mathrm{},t_n)𝑑t_1\mathrm{}𝑑t_n.$$

Here are two important properties of entropy: $`H(f_1,\mathrm{},f_n)=H(f_1)+\mathrm{}+H(f_n)`$ if and only if $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_n`$ are independent; when assuming that $`E(f_j^2)=1`$, $`H`$ is maximal if and only if $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_n`$ are Gaussian independent $`(0,1)`$ random variables.

Free entropy: Let $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$ be self-adjoint random variables in $`(𝒜,\tau )`$. For any $`\epsilon >0`$, when $`k`$ large, there may be self-adjoint matrices $`A_1,\mathrm{},A_n`$ in $`M_k(𝐂)`$ such that “the algebra generated by $`X_j`$’s looks like the algebra generated by $`A_j`$’s within $`\epsilon `$.” More precisely, for any $`\epsilon >0`$, large $`m𝐍`$ and any monomial $`p`$ in $`𝐂x_1,\mathrm{},x_n`$ with degree less than or equal to $`m`$, choose $`k`$ large enough so that

$$|\tau (p(X_1,\mathrm{},X_n))\tau _k(p(A_1,\mathrm{},A_n))|<\epsilon .$$
$`()`$
Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_R(X_1,\mathrm{},X_n;m,k,\epsilon )`$ be the set of all self-adjoint matrices $`(A_1,\mathrm{},A_n)`$ in $`M_k(𝐂)`$, with $`A_jR`$, such that $`()`$ holds. The limit of the “normalized” measurement of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_R(X_1,\mathrm{},X_n;m,k,\epsilon )`$ is called the free entropy of $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$. Voiculescu \[V1\] shows that this limit is independent of $`R`$ when it is larger than $`\mathrm{max}\{X_j:j=1,\mathrm{},n\}`$. Here we will fix such a constant $`R`$ and use $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$; $`m,k,\epsilon )`$ to denote $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_R(X_1,\mathrm{},X_n;m,k,\epsilon )`$. Let $`vol`$ be the euclidean volume in real euclidean space $`(M_k(𝐂)^{s.a.})^n`$ (here “s.a.” denote the self-adjoint part and the euclidean norm $`A_e^2=\mathrm{Tr}(A^2)`$). Now we define, successively,

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \chi (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n;m,k,\epsilon )& =\mathrm{log}vol(\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_1,\mathrm{},X_n;m,k,\epsilon )),\hfill \\ \hfill \chi (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n;m,\epsilon )& =\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}(k^2\chi (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n;m,k,\epsilon )+\frac{n}{2}\mathrm{log}k),\hfill \\ \hfill \chi (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)& =inf\{\chi (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n;m,\epsilon ):m𝐍,\epsilon >0\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

We call $`\chi (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)`$ the free entropy of $`(X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)`$.

The following are some basic properties of free entropy (proved in \[V1\]):

(i) $`\chi (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)\frac{n}{2}\mathrm{log}(2\pi eC^2n^1)`$;

(ii) $`\chi (X_1)=\mathrm{log}|st|d\mu _1(s)𝑑\mu _1(t)+\frac{3}{4}+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}2\pi `$, where $`\mu _1`$ is the (measure on the spectrum of $`X_1`$ corresponding to the) distribution of $`X_1`$;

(iii) $`\chi (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)=\chi (X_1)+\mathrm{}+\chi (X_n)`$ when $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$ are free random variables.

Voiculescu also introduces a notion of free entropy dimension $`\delta (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)`$ which is given by

$$\delta (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)=n+\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim\; sup}\frac{\chi (X_1+\epsilon S_1,\mathrm{},X_n+\epsilon S_n:S_1,\mathrm{},S_n)}{|\mathrm{log}\epsilon |}$$

where $`\{S_1,\mathrm{},S_n\}`$ is a standard semicircular family and $`\{X_1,\mathrm{},X_n\}`$ and $`\{S_1,\mathrm{}`$, $`S_n\}`$ are free.

5. Applications

In this section, we review some of the applications of free entropy in von Neumann algebras.

Theorem 1. (\[V1\]) Let $`S_1,\mathrm{},S_n`$ be a standard (0,1) free semicircular family. Then

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \chi (S_1,\mathrm{},S_n)& =n(\frac{1}{2}+\mathrm{log}\frac{\sqrt{2\pi }}{2});\hfill \\ \hfill \delta (S_1,\mathrm{},S_n)& =n.\hfill \end{array}$$

Note that $`S_1,\mathrm{},S_n`$ generate $`_{F_n}`$ as a von Neumann algebra.

Theorem 2. (\[V2\]) If a finite von Neumann algebra $``$ (with a trace) has a Cartan subalgebra, then, for any self-adjoint generators $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$ of $``$, $`\delta (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)1`$.

This implies that free group factors do not contain any Cartan subalgebras which answers a longstanding question in the subject.

The following result generalizes Voiculescu’s result and answers Problem 11 on Kadison’s 1967 problem list (unpublished).

Theorem 3. (\[G1\]) If a finite von Neumann algebra $``$ (with a trace) has a simple maximal abelian subalgebra, then, for any self-adjoint generators $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$ of $``$, $`\delta (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)2`$.

Furthermore, we prove the following result which shows the existence of a separable prime factor (the one that is not the tensor product of two factors of the same type).

Theorem 4. (\[G2\]) If $`=_1\overline{}_2`$ for some infinite dimensional finite von Neumann algebras $`_1`$ and $`_2`$, then, for any self-adjoint generators $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$ of $``$, $`\delta (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)1`$.

It is an outstanding open question whether the free entropy dimension is an invariant for von Neumann algebras. Following Voiculescu’s result in \[V3\], we prove the following:

Theorem 5. (\[GS\]) For any self-adjoint generators $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$ of $`_{SL_m(𝐙)}`$, $`m3`$, $`\delta (X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)1`$.

The above theorem is not true for $`SL_2(𝐙)`$.

References

\[B\] P. Biane, Proceedings of ICM2002.

\[C\] A. Connes, Sur la classification des facteurs de type $`\mathrm{II}_1`$, (French. English summary) C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. A-B 281 (1975), A13–A15.

\[D\] K. Dykema, Free products of hyperfinite von Neumann algebras and free dimension, Duke Math. J., 69 (1993), 97–119.

\[G1\] L. Ge, Applications of free entropy to finite von Neumann algebras, Amer. J. Math., 119 (1997), 467–485.

\[G2\] L. Ge, Applications of free entropy to finite von Neumann algebras, II, Ann. of Math., 147 (1998), 143–157.

\[GS\] L. Ge and J. Shen, Free entropy and property T factors, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. (USA), 97 (2000), 9881–9885.

\[HP\] F. Hiai and D. Petz, “The Semicircle Law, Free Random Variables and Entropy”, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 77, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2000.

\[KR\] R. Kadison and J. Ringrose, “Fundamentals of the Operator Algebras,” vols. I and II, Academic Press, Orlando, 1983 and 1986.

\[MN\] F. J. Murray and J. von Neumann, On rings of operators, Ann. of Math., 37 (1936), 116–229.

\[R\] F. Radulescu, Random matrices, amalgamated free products and subfactors of the von Neumann algebra of a free group, of noninteger index, Invent. Math., 115 (1994), 347–389.

\[T\] M. Takesaki, “Theory of Operator Algebras, vol I, Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg, 1979.

\[V1\] D. Voiculescu, The analogues of entropy and of Fisher’s information measure in free probability theory II, Invent. Math., 118 (1994), 411-440.

\[V2\] D. Voiculescu, The analogues of entropy and of Fisher’s information measure in free probability theory III: The absence of Cartan subalgebras, Geom. Funct. Anal. 6 (1996) 172–199.

\[V3\] D. Voiculescu, Free entropy dimension $`1`$ for some generators of property T factors of type II<sub>1</sub>, J. Reine Angew. Math. 514 (1999), 113–118.

\[VDN\] D. Voiculescu, K. Dykema and A. Nica, “Free Random Variables,” CRM Monograph Series, vol. 1, AMS, Providence, R.I., 1992.


format: text

text:
# Deterministic Secure Direct Communication Using Mixed State

## I References:

. C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard, 1984, in $`proceedings`$ $`of`$ $`the`$ $`IEEE`$ $`International`$ $`Conference`$ $`on`$ $`Computers`$, $`Systems`$ $`and`$ $`Signal`$ $`\mathrm{Pr}oces\mathrm{sin}g`$, Bangalor, India, (IEEE, New York), pp. 175-179.

. A. Ekert, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 661 (1991).

. D. Bruss, Phys.Rev. Lett. 81, 3018 (1998).

. A. Beige, B.-G. Englert, C. Kurtsiefer, and H. Weinfurter, Acta Phys. Pol. A 101, 357 (2002).

. Kim Bostr$`\stackrel{..}{o}`$m and Timo Felbinger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 187902 (2002).

. E. H. Lieb and M. B. Ruskai. Phys. Rev. Lett., 30, 434-436, (1973).

. E. H. Lieb and M. B. Ruskai. J. Math. Phys., 14, 1938-1941, (1973).

. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000).

. W. F. Stinespring, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 6, 211 (1955).

. A. Beveratos, R. Brouri, T. Gacoin, A. Villing, J.-P. Poizat, and P. Grangier. Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 187901, (2002).

. E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and G. J. Milburn. Nature (London) 409, 46 (2001).


text:
# On the notion of geometric realization

## 1. Simplicial sets

Put $`I:=[0,1]`$. This is an ordered set and therefore a category.

Recall that a simplicial set is a functor $`X:\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\mathrm{Sets}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the category whose objects are the ordered sets $`[n]:=\{0,\mathrm{},n\}`$, $`n_+`$, and whose morphisms are nondecreasing maps. One can extend such $`X`$ to a functor $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}^{}\mathrm{Sets}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ is the category of non-empty finite linearly ordered sets. Such an extension is unique up to unique isomorphism.

We define the geometric realization of a simplicial set $`X`$ to be the set

(1.1)
$$|X|:=\underset{F}{\underset{}{lim}}X(\pi _0(IF)),$$

where $`F`$ runs through the set of all finite subsets of $`I`$ and $`\pi _0(IF)`$ is equipped with the natural order (so $`\pi _0(IF)\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ is a quotient of $`IF`$). At this point $`|X|`$ is viewed merely as a set, the definition of the topology on $`|X|`$ will be recalled later. One can also rewrite (1.1) as

(1.2)
$$|X|:=X(\underset{}{𝐼}),$$

where $`\underset{}{𝐼}`$ is the pro-object of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ which is the projective limit of the objects $`\pi _0(IF)\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ over all finite subsets $`FI`$.

It immediately follows from the definition that geometric realization commutes with finite projective limits (e.g., the map $`|X\times Y||X|\times |Y|`$ is bijective) and that the group $`\mathrm{Aut}I`$ of orientation preserving homeomorphisms of $`I`$ acts on $`|X|`$.

Example. The geometric realization $`|[n]|`$ of $`[n]`$ (i.e., of the functor $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\mathrm{Sets}`$ represented by $`[n]`$) is the set of piecewise constant nondecreasing functions $`f:I[n]`$ modulo the following equivalence relation: $`f_1f_2`$ if $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ are equal outside a finite set. We identify $`|[n]|`$ with the standard simplex

(1.3)
$$\mathrm{𝐒𝐢𝐦}^n:=\{(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)I^n|x_1\mathrm{}x_n\}$$

(a function $`f:I[n]`$ such that $`f(x)=i`$ for $`x_i<x<x_{i+1}`$ is identified with $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)\mathrm{\Delta }^n`$; here we assume that $`x_0:=0,x_{n+1}:=n`$).

Recall that the nerve $`NC`$ of a small category $`C`$ is defined by $`NC(\delta ):=\mathrm{Funct}(\delta ,`$ $`C)`$ for $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}`$, where $`\mathrm{Funct}(\delta ,C)`$ is the set of functors $`\delta C`$. So $`|NC|`$ is the set of piecewise constant functors $`IC`$, more precisely

(1.4)
$$|NC|:=\underset{F}{\underset{}{lim}}\mathrm{Funct}(\pi _0(IF)),C).$$

To pass to the usual definition of $`|X|`$ use the canonical representation of a functor $`X:\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\mathrm{Sets}`$ as an inductive limit of representable ones, namely

(1.5)
$$X=\underset{\mathrm{\Delta }/X}{\underset{}{lim}}\mathrm{\Phi },$$

where $`\mathrm{\Delta }/X`$ is the category of pairs consisting of $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and a morphism $`\xi :\delta X`$ (i.e., an element $`\xi X(\delta )`$), and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the functor from $`\mathrm{\Delta }/X`$ to the category of simplicial sets that sends $`(\delta ,\xi )`$ to $`\delta `$. As geometric realization commutes with inductive limits and the functor $`n|[n]|`$ identifies with the usual “standard simplex” functor $`\mathrm{𝐒𝐢𝐦}:\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{Sets}`$ we get the usual formula

(1.6)
$$|X|=\underset{\mathrm{\Delta }/X}{\underset{}{lim}}|\mathrm{\Phi }|,|\mathrm{\Phi }|(\delta ,\xi ):=\text{standard simplex }|\delta |,$$

which can be rewritten as

(1.7)
$$|X|=X\times _\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{𝐒𝐢𝐦},$$

where $`X\times _\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{𝐒𝐢𝐦}`$ denotes the coend of the bifunctor $`X\times \mathrm{𝐒𝐢𝐦}:\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\times \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{Sets}`$ (which is a kind of “tensor product of the right $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-module $`X`$ and the left $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-module $`\mathrm{𝐒𝐢𝐦}`$”, see §IX.6 of  or Appendix B.7 of  for more details on the $`\times _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ bifunctor).

One uses the topology on the standard simplices and either (1.6) or (1.7) to define the standard topology on the geometric realization, then one checks that geometric realization considered as a functor from the category of simplicial sets to that of compactly generated spaces commutes with finite projective limits; see  for more details.

One can describe the topology on $`|X|`$ using the following metric. To define it first choose a measure $`\mu `$ on $`I`$ such that the measure of every point is zero and the measure of every non-empty open set is non-zero. For a finite $`FI`$ denote by $`\mu _F`$ the measure on $`\pi _0(IF)`$ induced by $`\mu `$. If $`u,vX(\pi _0(IF))`$ define the distance $`d_\mu (u,v)`$ to be the minimum of $`\mu _F(\pi _0(IF)A)`$ for all subsets $`A\pi _0(IF)`$ such that the images of $`u`$ and $`v`$ in $`X(A)`$ are equal. If $`F^{}F`$ and $`u^{},v^{}`$ are the images of $`u,v`$ in $`X(\pi _0(IF))`$ then $`d_\mu (u^{},v^{})=d_\mu (u,v)`$, so we get a well defined metric $`d_\mu `$ on $`|X|`$.

It is easy to see that $`d_\mu `$ is continuous for the standard topology of $`|X|`$. It follows that this topology is Hausdorff. It also follows that if $`X`$ is finite the standard topology coincides with the one defined by the metric $`d_\mu `$. For any $`X`$ the topological space $`|X|`$ is the direct limit of the geometric realizations of the finite subsets of $`X`$.

Remarks. (i) Already  and  suggest that in the theory of simplicial sets one should use the realization (1.3) of the standard simplex rather than the “baricentric” realization $`y_0+\mathrm{}y_n=1,y_i0`$. This is also natural in view of the theory of iterated integrals .

(ii) Here is a way to think of the pro-object $`\underset{}{𝐼}`$ from (1.2). Consider the following category $``$. The objects of $``$ are finite linearly ordered sets $`J`$ of order $`2`$ (so the minimal element $`\overline{0}=\overline{0}_JJ`$ does not equal the maximal element $`\overline{1}=\overline{1}_JJ`$). The morphisms of $``$ are nondecreasing maps $`f:JJ^{}`$, $`J,J^{}\mathrm{Ob}`$, such that $`f(\overline{0}_J)=\overline{0}_J^{}`$ and $`f(\overline{1}_J)=\overline{1}_J^{}`$. It is essentially explained in §III.1.1 of  that $``$ is antiequivalent to $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. More precisely, the functor $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}^{}`$ that sends $`I\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ to the set $`I^{}:=\mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}}(I,\{0,1\})`$ equipped with the natural (“pointwise”) order is an equivalence. To see this first notice that it has a left adjoint (namely the functor $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}^{}`$ that sends $`J`$ to the set $`J^{}:=\mathrm{Hom}_{}(J,\{0,1\})`$ equipped with the natural order) and then show that for all $`I\mathrm{Ob}\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ and $`J\mathrm{Ob}`$ the adjunction morphisms $`II^{}`$ and $`JJ^{}`$ are isomorphisms.

The functor $`II^{}`$ induces an antiequivalence between the category of pro-objects of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ and that of ind-objects of $``$. The latter category identifies with the category $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ of all linearly ordered sets $`J`$ having a minimal element $`\overline{0}=\overline{0}_JJ`$ and a maximal element $`\overline{1}=\overline{1}_JJ`$ such that $`\overline{0}\overline{1}`$ (the morphisms of this category are nondecreasing maps such that $`\overline{0}\overline{0}`$ and $`\overline{1}\overline{1}`$). So one can consider $`I=[0,1]`$ as an ind-object of $``$. It is easy to see that the pro-object $`\underset{}{𝐼}`$ from (1.2) corresponds to $`I=[0,1]`$ viewed as an ind-object of $``$. Therefore (1.2) implies Theorem III.1.3 of , which says that the group of automorphisms of the geometric realization functor from the category of simplicial sets to that of sets equals the group of automorphisms of the ordered set $`I`$ (which is the same as the group of orientation preserving homeomorphisms of $`I`$).

(iii) Formula (1.2) is natural in view of the general theory of fiber functors on a topos developed in §6.8 of  (especially cf. §6.8.6 - §6.8.7). We need only the case of a topos of the form $`\widehat{C}:=`$the category of presheaves of sets on a small category $`C`$ (i.e., $`\widehat{C}`$ is the category of functors $`C^{}\mathrm{Sets}`$). According to , a functor $`\widehat{C}\mathrm{Sets}`$ is said to be a fiber functor  if it commutes with finite projective limits and arbitrary inductive limits. Let $`\mathrm{Fib}(\widehat{C})`$ denote the full subcategory of the category of functors $`\widehat{C}\mathrm{Sets}`$ that consists of fiber functors. It is closed under inductive limits, so the functor $`F:C^{}\mathrm{Fib}(\widehat{C})`$ defined by $`(Fc)(X):=X(c)`$, $`cC`$, $`X\widehat{C}`$, canonically extends to a functor $`(\mathrm{Pro}C)^{}=\mathrm{Ind}C^{}\mathrm{Fib}(\widehat{C})`$, where $`\mathrm{Pro}C`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{Ind}C`$) denotes the category of pro-objects (resp. ind-objects). According to §6.8 of , the functor $`(\mathrm{Pro}C)^{}\mathrm{Fib}(\widehat{C})`$ is an equivalence. As explained in , the quasi-inverse functor is constructed as follows. Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }:\widehat{C}`$Sets be a fiber functor. Let $``$ be the category of pairs $`(c,\xi )`$, $`cC^{}`$, $`\xi \mathrm{\Phi }(c)`$. According to , $``$ is a filtering category, and the functor $`C^{}`$ defines the desired pro-object of $`C`$. To show that $``$ is filtering the authors of  first notice that the category $`\widehat{}`$ of pairs $`(c,\xi )`$, $`c\widehat{C}^{}`$, $`\xi \mathrm{\Phi }(c)`$, is filtering (because $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ commutes with finite projective limits) and then deduce from this that $``$ is also filtering using the fact that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ commutes with direct limits (this fact and the analog of formula (1.5) with $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ replaced by $`C`$ imply that every object of $`\widehat{}`$ can be mapped to an object of $``$).

## 2. $`_+`$-categories and the category $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$

In the theory of cyclic sets the role of $`I=[0,1]`$ and $`[n]\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is played by certain $`_+`$-categories.

We define a $`_+`$-category  to be a category $`C`$ equipped with a morphism of monoids $`_+\mathrm{End}\mathrm{id}_C`$ (the operation in $`_+`$ is addition). In other words, each object $`cC`$ should be equipped with an endomorphism $`\mathrm{𝟏}_c`$ so that $`f\mathrm{𝟏}_{c_1}=\mathrm{𝟏}_{c_2}f`$ for every morphism $`f:c_1c_2`$ in $`C`$. If $`C,C^{}`$ are $`_+`$-categories then a $`_+`$-functor  $`CC^{}`$ is a functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }:CC^{}`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{𝟏}_c)=\mathrm{𝟏}_{\mathrm{\Phi }(c)}`$ for all $`cC`$. A $`_+`$-isomorphism  is a $`_+`$-functor which is an isomorphism. A full subcategory of a $`_+`$-category is a $`_+`$-category.

Examples. In this work we will work only with the following examples of $`_+`$-categories. All of them belong to the class described in Proposition 2.1.

1. Unless stated otherwise, we will always equip $`S^1:=/`$ with the following structure of $`_+`$-category:  morphisms from $`cS^1`$ to $`c^{}S^1`$ are homotopy classes of “oriented” paths $`IS^1`$ (i.e., of those paths which can be represented as a composition $`I\stackrel{f}{}/=S^1`$ with $`f`$ nondecreasing), and the composition of morphisms is usual (so our category is a subcategory of the fundamental groupoid of $`S^1`$, and $`\mathrm{𝟏}_x`$ is the homotopy class of a degree $`1`$ path from $`xS^1`$ to $`x`$).

The category $`S^1`$ is generated by morphisms $`\stackrel{}{xy}`$, $`xy`$, where $`\stackrel{}{xy}`$ is the homotopy class of the shortest oriented path from $`xS^1`$ to $`yS^1`$. If $`xy`$ then $`\stackrel{}{yx}\stackrel{}{xy}=\mathrm{𝟏}_x`$, and if $`x,y,zS^1`$ are distinct points in the correct cyclic order then $`\stackrel{}{yz}\stackrel{}{xy}=\stackrel{}{xz}`$. This is a complete set of relations between the generators $`\stackrel{}{xy}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟏}_x`$.

2. For every $`n_+`$ embed $`[n]:=\{0,\mathrm{},n\}`$ into $`S^1`$ by $`kk/(n+1)mod`$. The set $`[n]`$ equipped with the $`_+`$-category structure induced from $`S^1`$ will be denoted by $`[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$.

3. For every non-empty finite $`FS^1`$ there is a unique $`_+`$-category $`C`$ equipped with a $`_+`$-functor $`\pi _F:S^1FC`$ whose restriction to any system of representatives $`R`$ of connected components of $`S^1F`$ is an isomorphism ($`R`$ is considered as a full subcategory of $`S^1`$). We will denote $`C`$ simply by $`\pi _0(S^1F)`$. Of course, $`\pi _0(S^1F)`$ is (non-canonically) $`_+`$-isomorphic to $`[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$, $`n=\mathrm{Card}F1`$. If $`FF^{}`$ there is a unique $`_+`$-functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }:\pi _0(S^1F^{})\pi _0(S^1F)`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }\pi _F^{}=\pi _F`$.

4. Given a small category $`𝒜`$ we will define a $`_+`$-category $`𝒜_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ with the same set of objects (in fact, we will use this construction only for categories that come from linearly ordered sets, and it is not clear if it is reasonable in general). By definition, $`𝒜_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ is generated by $`𝒜`$ and new generators $`f^{}`$ corresponding to $`f\mathrm{Mor}𝒜`$. More precisely, if $`f`$ is a morphism $`c_1c_2`$ then $`f^{}`$ is a morphism $`c_2c_1`$ (intuitively, $`f^{}=\mathrm{𝟏}f^1=f^1\mathrm{𝟏}`$). Defining relations in $`𝒜_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$: $`(gf)^{}g=f^{}`$, $`f(gf)^{}=g^{}`$. $`𝒜_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ becomes a $`_+`$-category if one defines $`\mathrm{𝟏}_c:cc`$ by $`\mathrm{𝟏}_c:=(\mathrm{id}_c)^{}`$. To see this notice that for every $`𝒜`$-morphism $`f:c_1c_2`$ one has $`f\mathrm{𝟏}_{c_1}=ff^{}f=\mathrm{𝟏}_{c_2}f`$ and $`f^{}\mathrm{𝟏}_{c_2}=f^{}ff^{}=\mathrm{𝟏}_{c_1}f^{}`$ (because $`f^{}f=(f\mathrm{id}_{c_1})^{}f=(\mathrm{id}_{c_1})^{}=\mathrm{𝟏}_{c_1}`$ and $`ff^{}=f(\mathrm{id}_{c_2}f)^{}=(\mathrm{id}_{c_2})^{}=\mathrm{𝟏}_{c_2}`$). Clearly $`𝒜𝒜_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ is a functor from the category of small categories to that of small $`_+`$-categories.

If $`𝒜`$ is the ordered set $`[n]`$, $`n_+`$, considered as a category then $`𝒜_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ identifies with the $`_+`$-category $`[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ from Example 2. If $`FI:=[0,1]`$ is a finite set containg $`\{0,1\}`$ and $`𝒜`$ is the ordered set $`\pi _0(IF)`$ considered as a category then $`𝒜_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ identifies with the $`_+`$-category $`\pi _0(S^1\overline{F})`$ from Example 3, where $`\overline{F}S^1=/`$ is the image of $`F`$. If $`𝒜`$ is the ordered set $`[0,1)`$ then $`𝒜_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ identifies with $`S^1`$.

###### Proposition 2.1.

The following properties of a small $`_+`$-category $`C`$ are equivalent:

(i) $`C`$ is $`_+`$-isomorphic to $`𝒜_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ for some linearly ordered set $`𝒜`$;

(ii) every non-empty finite full subcategory of $`C`$ is $`_+`$-isomorphic to $`[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ for some $`n_+`$.

(iii) every full subcategory of $`C`$ with $`n`$ objects, $`n\{1,2\}`$, is $`_+`$-isomorphic to $`[n1]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$.

###### Proof.

It suffices to show that (iii)$``$(i). For every $`x,yC`$ there exists $`f:xy`$ such that every $`g:xy`$ is uniquely representable as $`g=f\mathrm{𝟏}_x^n`$, $`n_+`$. This $`f`$ (which is clearly unique) will be denoted by $`f_{xy}`$. Now fix $`cC`$. For every $`x,yC`$ one has $`f_{xy}f_{cx}=f_{cy}\mathrm{𝟏}_c^m`$ for some $`m=m(x,y)_+`$. Clearly $`m(x,y)+m(y,z)=m(x,z)`$ and $`m(x,y)+m(y,x)=1`$. Let $`𝒜C`$ be the subcategory with $`\mathrm{Ob}𝒜=\mathrm{Ob}C`$ whose morphisms are the $`f_{xy}`$’s corresponding to those $`x,y`$ for which $`m(x,y)=0`$. Then $`𝒜`$ is a linearly ordered set and $`𝒜_{\mathrm{cyc}}=C`$. ∎

Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{huge}}`$ be the category whose objects are small $`_+`$-categories satisfying the conditions of Proposition 2.1 and whose morphisms are $`_+`$-functors. Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (resp.$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}}`$) be the full subcategory of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{huge}}`$ formed by the $`_+`$-categories $`[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$, $`n_+`$ (resp. by $`_+`$-categories which are $`_+`$-isomorphic to $`[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ for some $`n_+`$).

The following remarks are used only at the end of §3.

Remarks. (i) A. Connes  showed that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$ is equivalent to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (see also Proposition 6.1.11 of ). A more understandable proof of this equivalence was given by Elmendorf . Here is a modification of it based on an idea of D. Arinkin. If $`C_1,C_2`$ are $`_+`$-categories and $`C_1`$ is small then $`_+\text{-Funct}(C_1,C_2)`$ (i.e., the full subcategory of $`_+`$-functors in the category of functors $`C_1C_2`$) has an obvious structure of $`_+`$-category. So we get a functor $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{huge}})^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{huge}}`$ defined by $`CC^{}:=_+\text{-Funct}(C,[0]_{\mathrm{cyc}})`$, where $`[0]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ is the $`_+`$-category from Example 2 (it has a single object $`0`$, and $`\mathrm{End}0=_+`$). As $`([0]_{\mathrm{cyc}})^{}=[0]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ one has $`_+\text{-Funct}(C_1,C_2^{})=(_+\text{-Funct}(C_2,C_1))^{}`$, so one gets a canonical $`_+`$-functor $`F_C:CC^{}`$. Finally, if $`C=[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ then $`C^{}`$ is $`_+`$-isomorphic to $`[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ and $`F_C`$ is an isomorphism. So the functor $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{huge}})^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{huge}}`$ induces an equivalence $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}})^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}}`$.

(ii) It is easy to see that in the situation of Example 3 the $`_+`$-category $`F^{}`$ defined in Remark (i) canonically identifies with $`\pi _0(S^1F)`$. Here is an abstract way to identify them. Let $`_+\text{-tors}`$ denote the $`_+`$-category of $`_+`$-torsors, i.e., $`_+`$-sets isomorphic to $`_+`$. For $`C\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{huge}}`$ one has the $`_+`$-bifunctor $`C^{}\times C_+\text{-tors}`$ defined by $`(c,c^{})\mathrm{Mor}(c,c^{})`$. Composing it with the unique $`_+`$-functor $`_+\text{-tors}[0]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ one gets a $`_+`$-functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Phi }_C:CC^{}`$. One also has the $`_+`$-functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}=(\mathrm{\Phi }_C^{})^{}:C((C^{})^{})^{}=C^{}`$ (which is usually different from $`\mathrm{\Phi }_C`$). In the situation of Example 3 the compositions $`S^1FS^1\stackrel{\mathrm{\Phi }}{}(S^1)^{}F^{}`$ and $`S^1FS^1\stackrel{\mathrm{\Phi }^{}}{}(S^1)^{}F^{}`$ are equal. This $`_+`$-functor can be taken as $`\pi _F`$ (see Example 3).

(iii) The category of ind-objects of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ (or of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) identifies with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{huge}}`$. The category of pro-objects of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ can be identified with $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{huge}})^{}`$ using the equivalence $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}})^{}\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ from Remark (i). It gives a class of equivalences $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ each two of which are related by a unique isomorphism.

## 3. Cyclic sets

In §2 we defined the categories $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{huge}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. According to A. Connes, a cyclic set  is a functor $`X:\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}\mathrm{Sets}`$. One can extend such $`X`$ to a functor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}}^{}\mathrm{Sets}`$, and the extension is unique up to unique isomorphism. The functor $`CC_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ from Example 4 of §2 can be considered as a functor $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{big}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}}`$. Using this functor one can consider any cyclic set as a simplicial set.

The geometric realization $`|X|`$ of a cyclic set $`X`$ is defined in  to be the geometric realization of $`X`$ considered as a simplicial set. By (3.1), this means that $`|X|`$ is the direct limit of $`X((\pi _0(IF))_{\mathrm{cyc}})`$, where $`F`$ runs through the set of all finite subsets of $`I:=[0,1]`$. We will get the same answer if $`F`$ runs only through the set of finite subsets of $`I`$ containing $`0`$ and $`1`$. For such $`F`$ one has $`(\pi _0(IF))_{\mathrm{cyc}}=\pi _0(S^1\overline{F})`$, where $`\overline{F}S^1=/`$ is the image of $`F`$ (see Example 4 of §2). So

(3.1)
$$|X|:=\underset{F}{\underset{}{lim}}X(\pi _0(S^1F)),$$

where $`F`$ runs through the set of all non-empty finite subsets of $`S^1`$ and $`\pi _0(S^1F)`$ is equipped with the $`_+`$-category structure from Example 3 of §2. The reader may prefer to rewrite (3.1) as

(3.2)
$$|X|:=X(\underset{}{S^1}),$$

where $`\underset{}{S^1}`$ is the pro-object of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ which is the projective limit of the objects $`\pi _0(S^1F)\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}}`$ over all finite subsets $`FS^1`$.

Let us recall that the cyclic nerve $`N_{\mathrm{cyc}}C`$ of a small category $`C`$ is defined by $`N_{\mathrm{cyc}}C(\lambda )=\mathrm{Funct}(\lambda ,C)`$ for $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{big}}`$, where $`\mathrm{Funct}(\lambda ,C)`$ is the set of functors $`\lambda C`$. So $`|N_{\mathrm{cyc}}C|`$ is the set of piecewise constant functors $`S^1C`$, more precisely

(3.3)
$$|N_{\mathrm{cyc}}C|:=\underset{F}{\underset{}{lim}}\mathrm{Funct}(\pi _0(S^1F)),C).$$

If $`X`$ is a cyclic set then $`|X|`$ is the geometric realization of $`X`$ considered as a simplicial set, so it is equipped with a topology. On the other hand, formula (3.1) or (3.2) makes it clear that the group $`\mathrm{Aut}S^1`$ of orientation preserving homeomorphisms of $`S^1`$ acts on $`|X|`$. In particular, the group of rotations $`SO(2)`$ acts.

We claim that the action of $`\mathrm{Aut}S^1`$ on $`|X|`$ is continuous if $`\mathrm{Aut}S^1`$ is equipped with the compact-open topology. To prove this, note that similarly to (1.7) and (1.6) one has canonical homeomorphisms

(3.4)
$$|X|=X\times _\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Psi },$$

(3.5)
$$|X|=\underset{\mathrm{\Lambda }/X}{\underset{}{lim}}\mathrm{\Psi }_X,$$

where $`\mathrm{\Psi }:\mathrm{\Lambda }\text{{Spaces}}`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda ):=`$the geometric realization of the functor represented by $`\lambda `$, and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_X`$ is the restriction of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }/X`$. Using the homeomorphism (3.4) or (3.5) one reduces the question to the particular case where $`X`$ is the cyclic set $`[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$ (i.e., the functor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}\mathrm{Sets}`$ represented by $`[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$). In this case one can use the following explicit description of the geometric realization $`|[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}|`$.

The geometric realization of the cyclic set $`[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$. We claim that there are canonical bijections

(3.6)
$$|[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}|\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Funct}__+([n]_{\mathrm{cyc}},S^1)\stackrel{}{}Y/,$$

where $`\mathrm{Funct}__+([n]_{\mathrm{cyc}},S^1)`$ stands for the set of $`_+`$-functors $`[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}S^1`$ and $`Y`$ is the set of non-decreasing maps $`f:`$ such that $`f(i+n+1)=f(i)`$ for all $`i`$ (the $``$-action on $`Y`$ is induced by the action of $``$ on $``$ by translations). The second bijection in (3.6) is clear. The first one is constructed as follows. By (3.1),

$$|[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}|:=\underset{F}{\underset{}{lim}}\mathrm{Funct}__+(\pi _0(S^1F),[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}).$$

By Remark (ii) from §2, $`\pi _0(S^1F)=F^{}`$, so after fixing a $`_+`$-isomorphism $`([n]_{\mathrm{cyc}})^{}\stackrel{}{}[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}`$, the set $`\mathrm{Funct}__+(\pi _0(S^1F),[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}})`$ identifies with

$$\mathrm{Funct}__+([n]_{\mathrm{cyc}},F)$$

and the set $`|[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}|`$ identifies with

$$\underset{F}{\underset{}{lim}}\mathrm{Funct}__+([n]_{\mathrm{cyc}},F)=\mathrm{Funct}__+([n]_{\mathrm{cyc}},S^1).$$

It is easy to check that the composition of the bijections (3.6) is a homeomorphism (if $`Y`$ is equipped with the natural topology). Note that

$$\mathrm{Aut}S^1=G/,$$

where $`G`$ is the group of orientation-preserving homeomorphisms $`f:\stackrel{}{}`$ such that $`f(x+1)=f(x)+1`$. So $`\mathrm{Aut}S^1`$ acts on $`Y/`$. This action is continuous, and the homeomorphism $`|[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}|\stackrel{}{}Y/`$ is ($`\mathrm{Aut}S^1`$)-equivariant. So the action of $`\mathrm{Aut}S^1`$ on $`|[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}|`$ is continuous.

Remark. The space $`|[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}|=Y/`$ is homeomorphic to the product of $`S^1`$ and the $`n`$-dimensional simplex.

Warning. Associating to a $`_+`$-functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }:[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}S^1`$ the sequence $`\mathrm{\Phi }(0),\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Phi }(n)`$ one gets a map

$$|[n]_{\mathrm{cyc}}|=\mathrm{Funct}__+([n]_{\mathrm{cyc}},S^1)(S^1)^{n+1}.$$

Unless $`n=0`$, it is *not injective* (contrary to what I wrote in the previous versions of this article<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1The mistake was noticed by M. Kapranov., including the journal version). More precisely, the preimage of a point of the diagonally embedded $`S^1(S^1)^{n+1}`$ has cardinality $`n+1`$. (All other preimages have cardinalities $`1`$.)

Remarks. (i) By Remark (iii) at the end of §2, the pro-object $`\underset{}{S^1}`$ from (3.2) can be considered as an object of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{huge}}`$. This object canonically identifies with $`S^1`$ (e.g., one can use Remark (iii) from §2).

(ii) The group of automorphisms of the geometric realization functor from the category of cyclic sets to that of sets equals $`\mathrm{Aut}S^1`$. This follows, e.g., from the previous remark.


text:
# Groups Interpretable in Theories of Fields

## 1. Introduction

In the last ten years, the model theory of fields has seen striking new developments, with applications in particular to differential algebra and Diophantine geometry. One of the main ingredients in these applications is the analysis of the structure of groups definable in fields with added “definable structure”.

Model theory studies structures with a family of distinguished subsets of their Cartesian products, the family of definable subsets, which is requested to be closed under finite Boolean operations and projections. In the case of algebraically closed fields, the definable sets are exactly the constructible sets in the Zariski topology (finite Boolean combinations of Zariski closed sets). If one considers fields which are not algebraically closed (for example, fields of positive characteristic which are separably closed and not perfect) or algebraically closed fields with new operators (differentially closed fields, fields with a generic automorphism), then the family of definable sets is much richer than the family of Zariski constructible sets. In each of the above cases, one can generalize the classical geometric notions, by using the tools developed by model theory (abstract notion of independence, of dimensions…). For example:

1. One can define “good” topologies which strictly contain the Zariski topology.

2. Different notions of dimensions can be attached to definable sets (or infinite intersections of definable sets, which we call infinitely definable, or $`\mathrm{}`$-definable, sets). In the case of algebraically closed fields, all such possible notions of abstract dimension must coincide and be equal to the classical algebraic dimension. In the other cases, these dimensions may be different, some may take infinite ordinal values or may be defined only for some special classes of definable (or $`\mathrm{}`$-definable) sets.

3. If $`K`$ is any of the above mentioned fields, and if $`H`$ is an algebraic group defined over $`K`$, then the group $`H(K)`$ of the $`K`$-rational points of $`H`$ is a definable group. But there are “new” families of definable groups which are not of this form.

In fact, it is precisely the study of certain specific families of “new” definable groups of finite dimension which are at the center of the applications to Diophantine geometry. We will not attempt here to explain how the model theoretic analysis of the finite rank definable groups yields these applications. There have been in recent years many surveys and presentations of the subject to which we refer the reader (see for example, ,, ,  or ). We will come back to this subject, but very briefly, at the end in Section 3.5..

The first general question raised by the existence of these new definable groups is that of their relation to the classical algebraic groups. Remark that this question already makes sense in the context of “pure” algebraically closed fields, about the class of definable (= constructible) groups. In that case, it is true that any constructible group in an algebraically closed field $`K`$ is constructibly isomorphic to the $`K`$-rational points of an algebraic group defined over $`K`$ (see for example  or ).

Let us now consider briefly the case of a field $`K`$ of characteristic $`p>0`$ which is separably closed and not perfect. Then the class of constructible sets is no longer closed under projection and there are many definable groups which are not constructible, the most obvious one being $`K^p`$. There are also some groups which are proper intersections of infinite descending chains of definable groups: for example, $`K^p^{\mathrm{}}(=_nK^{p^n})`$, the field of infinitely $`p`$-divisible elements of the multiplicative group, or $`_np^nA(K)`$, for $`A`$ an Abelian variety defined over $`K`$.

It is nevertheless true, as we will see, that every definable group in $`K`$ is definably isomorphic to the $`K`$-rational points of an algebraic group defined over $`K`$. Furthermore, as in the classical case of one-dimensional algebraic groups, it is possible to give a complete description, up to definable isomorphism, of the one-dimensional infinitely definable groups.

There are results of similar type for the other classes of enriched fields mentioned above. In this short paper, we will concentrate mainly on the case of separably closed fields (in Section 3.). Before this, in Section 2., we will only very briefly present the model theoretic setting for two other examples of “enriched” fields, in characteristic zero, differentially closed fields and generic difference fields. We hope this will give the reader an idea of what the common features and the differences might be in the model theoretic analysis of these different classes of fields.

Finally, there are of course many other classes of fields whose model theory has been extensively developed in the past years with many connections to algebra, semi-algebraic or subanalytic geometry, and which we are not going to mention here: for example, valued fields, ordered fields, “o-minimal” expansions of the real field…

## 2. Two short examples

We will just very briefly describe the two characteristic zero examples mentioned above.

### 2.1. Differentially closed fields of characteristic zero

We consider a field $`K`$ of characteristic zero, with a derivation $`\delta `$, that is, an additive map from $`K`$ to $`K`$ which satisfies that for all $`x,y`$ in $`K`$, $`\delta (xy)=x\delta (y)+y\delta (y)`$. We define the ring $`K_\delta [X]`$ of differential polynomials over $`K`$ to be the ring of polynomials in infinitely many variables $`K[X,\delta (X),\delta ^2(X),\mathrm{},\delta ^n(X),\mathrm{}]`$. The order of the differential polynomial $`f(X)`$ in $`K_\delta [X]`$ is $`1`$ if $`fK`$ and otherwise the largest $`n`$ such that $`\delta ^n(X)`$ occurs in $`f(X)`$ with non zero coefficient. We say that $`K`$ is differentially closed if for any non-constant differential polynomials $`f(X)`$ and $`g(X)`$, where the order of $`g`$ is strictly less than the order of $`f`$, there is a $`z`$ such that $`f(z)=0`$ and $`g(z)0`$. In model theoretic terms, this means exactly that $`K`$ is existentially closed.

From now on we suppose that $`(K,\delta )`$ is a large differentially closed field (a universal domain).

We say that $`FK^n`$ is a $`\delta `$-closed set, if there are $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_rK_\delta [X_1,\mathrm{},X_n]`$ such that $`F=\{(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)K^n;f_1(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)=\mathrm{}=f_r(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)=0\}`$. The ring $`K_\delta [X_1,\mathrm{},X_n]`$ is of course not Noetherian but the $`\delta `$-closed sets (which correspond to radical differential ideals) form the closed sets of a Noetherian topology on $`K`$, the $`\delta `$-topology.

We now consider the $`\delta `$-constructible sets, that is, the finite Boolean combinations of $`\delta `$-closed sets. This class is closed under projection (this is quantifier elimination for the theory), hence the definable sets (we call them $`\delta `$-definable sets) are exactly the $`\delta `$-constructible sets. To every $`\delta `$-definable set one can associate a dimension (the Morley rank) which can take infinite countable ordinal values.

There are “new” definable groups, which are not of the form $`H(K)`$ for any algebraic group $`H`$. In particular, any $`H(K)`$ will have infinite dimension. In contrast, the field of constants of $`K`$, $`Cons(K)=\{aK;\delta (x)=0\}`$, is a $`\delta `$-closed set which is not constructible; it is an algebraically closed subfield of $`K`$ and has dimension one.

Nevertheless the following is true:

###### Proposition 1

() Let $`G`$ be a $`\delta `$-definable group in $`K`$. Then there is an algebraic group $`H`$, defined over $`K`$, such that $`G`$ is definably isomorphic to a ($`\delta `$-definable) subgroup of $`H(L)`$.

For the many more existing results on $`\delta `$-definable groups, we refer the reader to , or from the differential algebra point of view, to .

### 2.2. Generic difference fields

We now consider an algebraically closed field $`K`$ with an automorphism $`\sigma `$. We say that $`(K,\sigma )`$ is a generic difference field if every difference equation which has a solution in an extension of $`K`$ has a solution in $`K`$. The theory of generic difference fields has been extensively studied in  and .

Let us suppose that $`(K,\sigma )`$ is a generic difference field in characteristic zero. We consider the ring of $`\sigma `$-polynomials,

$$K_\sigma [X_1,\mathrm{},X_n]=K[X_1,\mathrm{},X_n,\sigma (X_1),:\mathrm{},\sigma (X_n),\sigma ^2(X_1),\mathrm{},\sigma ^2(X_n),\mathrm{}].$$

We say that $`FK^n`$ is a f $`\sigma `$-closed set if there are $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_rK_\sigma [X_1,\mathrm{},X_n]`$ such that $`F=\{(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)K^n:f_1(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)=\mathrm{}=f_r(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n)=0\}`$. The $`\sigma `$-closed sets form the closed sets of a Noetherian topology on $`K`$, the $`\sigma `$-topology. The class of $`\sigma `$-definable sets is the closure under finite Boolean operations and projections of the $`\sigma `$-closed sets.

Again there are “new” $`\sigma `$-definable groups. For example, the field $`Fix(K)=\{aK:\sigma (a)=a\}`$, the fixed field of $`\sigma `$ in $`K`$, is a $`\sigma `$-closed set of dimension one.

Here the best result possible for arbitrary $`\sigma `$-definable groups is the following:

###### Proposition 2

() Let $`G`$ be a group definable in $`(K,\sigma )`$. Then there are an algebraic group $`H`$ defined over $`K`$, a finite normal subgroup $`N_1`$ of $`G`$, a $`\sigma `$-definable subgroup $`H_1`$ of $`H(K)`$ and a finite normal subgroup $`N_2`$ of $`H_1`$, such that $`G/N_1`$ and $`H_1/N_2`$ are $`\sigma `$-definably isomorphic.

The analysis of groups of finite dimension is one of the main tools in Hrushovski’s proof of the Manin-Mumford conjecture in .

## 3. Separably closed fields of finite degree of imperfection

Separably closed fields are particularly interesting from the model theoretic point of view for many reasons, in addition to the fact that they form the framework for Hrushovski’s proof of the Mordell-Lang conjecture in charactersitic $`p`$. Let us just mention one reason here: they are the only fields known to be stable and non superstable, and in fact it is conjectured that they are the only existing ones.

We will just focus on the main properties of the groups that are definable in a separably closed field of finite degree of imperfection, but we need first to introduce some notation and recall some basic facts (see ).

### 3.1. Some basic facts and notation

Let $`L`$ be a separably closed field of charcteristic $`p>0`$ and of finite degree of imperfection which is not perfect, i.e., $`L`$ has no proper separable algebraic extension, and $`|L:L^p|=p^\nu `$, with $`0<\nu `$. In order to avoid confusion we denote the Cartesian product of $`k`$ copies of $`L`$ by $`L^{\times k}`$.

A subset $`B=\{b_1,\mathrm{},b_\nu \}`$ of $`L`$ is called a $`p`$-basis of $`L`$ if the set of $`p`$-monomials of $`B`$, $`\{M_j:=_{i=1}^\nu b_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{j(i)};jp^\nu \}`$ forms a linear basis of $`L`$ over $`L^p`$. Each element $`x`$ in $`L`$ can be written in a unique way as $`x=_{jp^\nu }x_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{p}M_j`$. From now on we fix a $`p`$-basis $`B`$ of $`L`$ and the $`M_j`$’s, with $`jp^\nu `$, always denote the $`p`$-monomials of $`B`$. We suppose that $`L`$ is large (a universal domain, or in model theoretic terms, saturated) and we fix some small separably closed subfield $`K`$ of $`L`$, containing $`B`$ and of same degree of imperfection $`\nu `$.

We let $`f_j`$ denote the map which to $`x`$ associates $`x_j`$. The $`x_j`$’s are called the $`p`$-components of $`x`$ of level one. More generally, one can associate to $`x`$ a tree of countable height indexed by $`(p^\nu )^{<\omega }`$, which we call the tree of $`p`$-components of $`x`$. For $`\sigma (p^\nu )^{<\omega }`$, we define $`x_\sigma `$ by induction: $`x_{\mathrm{}}=x`$ and if $`\tau (p^\nu )^n`$, and $`jp^\nu `$, we let $`x_{(\tau ,j)}`$ be equal to $`f_j(x_\tau )`$; $`x_{(\tau ,j)}`$ is called a $`p`$-component of $`x`$ of level $`n+1`$.

We will also use the notation $`a_{\mathrm{}}:=(a_\sigma )_{\sigma (p^\nu )^{<\omega }}`$, for $`aL`$.

The ring $`K\mathbf{[}X_{\mathbf{}}\mathbf{]}`$. $`K[X_{\mathrm{}}]`$ is the polynomial ring in countably many indeterminates indexed in a way which will allow the natural substitution by the $`p`$-components of elements: for $`X`$ a single variable, $`X_{\mathrm{}}:=(X_\sigma )_{\sigma (p^\nu )^{<\omega }}`$, and for $`X=(Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_k)`$ a $`k`$-tuple of variables, $`X_{\mathrm{}}:=((Y_1)_{\mathrm{}},\mathrm{},(Y_k)_{\mathrm{}})`$. The ring $`K[X_{\mathrm{}}]`$ is a countable union of Noetherian rings, hence each ideal is countably generated. We let $`I^0(X)`$ denote the ideal of $`K[X_{\mathrm{}}]`$ generated by the polynomials $`X_\sigma _{jp^\nu }X_{(\sigma ,j)}^pM_j`$, $`\sigma (p^\nu )^{<\omega }`$.

### 3.2. The $`𝝀`$-topology

Given a set of polynomials $`S`$ of $`K[X_{\mathrm{}}]`$, let $`V(S)=\{aL^{\times k}:f(a_{\mathrm{}})=0\text{ for all }fS\}`$. Such a $`V(S)`$ is called $`\lambda `$-closed (with parameters in $`K`$ or over $`K`$) in $`L`$.

Given $`AL^{\times k}`$, we define its canonical ideal  $`I(A)`$ over $`K`$, $`I(A):=\{fK[X_{\mathrm{}}]:f(a_{\mathrm{}})=0\text{ for all }aA\}`$.

The $`\lambda `$-closed subsets of $`L^{\times k}`$ form the closed sets of the $`\lambda `$-topology on $`L^{\times k}`$. This topology is not Noetherian but is the limit of countably many Noetherian topologies.

Let $`C`$ be a commutative $`K`$-algebra. An ideal $`I`$ of $`C`$ is separable if, for all $`c_jC`$, $`jp^\nu `$, $`\text{if }_{jp^\nu }c_j^pM_jI,\text{ then each }c_jI`$.

###### Fact 3 (“Nullstellensatz”)

1. The map $`AI(A)`$ induces a bijection between $`\lambda `$-closed subsets of the affine space $`L^k`$ which are defined over $`K`$ and ideals of $`K[X_{\mathrm{}}]`$ which are separable and contain $`I^0(X)`$. The inverse map is $`IV(I)`$.

Now for the basic properties of the first-order theory:

###### Fact 4

1. The theory of separably closed fields of characteristic $`p`$, of degree of imperfection $`\nu `$, and with $`p`$-basis $`\{b_1,\mathrm{},b_\nu \}`$ is complete and admits elimination of quantifiers and elimination of imaginaries in the language

$$_{p,\nu }=\{0,1,+,,.\}\{b_1,\mathrm{},b_\nu \}\{f_i;ip^\nu \}.$$

In particular, any definable set is $`\lambda `$-constructible, that is, a finite Boolean combinations of definable $`\lambda `$-closed sets. Remark that it is impossible to associate to an arbitrary definable set a well-behaved notion of dimension: indeed, such a dimension would need to be invariant under definable bijections, but for every $`n`$ the map $`\lambda _n`$, defined by $`\lambda _n(x):=(x_\sigma )_{\sigma (p^\nu )^n}`$, is a definable bijection between $`L`$ and $`L^{\times p^{\nu n}}`$. But some $`\mathrm{}`$-definable sets will have a well-defined dimension, for example the field $`L^p^{\mathrm{}}:=_nL^{p^n}`$, which is the biggest algebraically closed subfield of $`L`$, has dimension one. In fact, $`L^p^{\mathrm{}}`$ is the unique (up to definable isomorphism) infinitely definable field of dimension one (, ).

### 3.3. Definable groups

Again, amongst the definable groups, one finds the “classical” ones, that is groups of the form $`H(L)`$ for $`H`$ any algebraic group defined over $`L`$. These groups have certain specific properties which are not true of all the definable groups in $`L`$. Recall that a definable subset $`X`$ of $`G`$ is said to be generic if $`G`$ is covered by a finite number of translates of $`X`$, and an element of $`G`$ is generic for the group if every definable set which contains it is generic. In an algebraic group, generics in the topological sense coincide with generics for the algebraic group. Recall also that a definable group is said to be connected if it has no proper definable subgroup of finite index, and connected-by-finite if it has a definable connected subgroup of finite index.

###### Proposition 5

(, ) Let $`H`$ be an algebraic group defined over $`K`$. Then $`H(L)`$ is connected-by-finite. If $`H`$ is connected (hence irreducible as an algebraic group), then $`H(L)`$ is connected (and irreducible for the $`\lambda `$-topology) and if $`aH(L)`$ is a generic point, then the ideal $`I(a)=\{fK[X_{\mathrm{}}]:f(a_{\mathrm{}})=0\}`$ is minimal amongst the ideals $`I(h)`$, for $`hH(L)`$.

The above says that in the group $`H(L)`$, the generics in the topological sense coincide with generics for the group. In an arbitrary group defined in $`L`$, this need not be the case.

Consider the definable bijection $`f`$ from $`L`$ to $`L`$ defined in the following way: if $`xLL^p`$, $`f(x)=x^p`$, if $`xL^pL^{p^2}`$, $`f(x)=x^{1/p}`$, if $`xL^{p^2}`$, $`f(x)=x`$.

Transporting addition through $`f`$, one gets a group on $`L`$ again, $`G:=(L,)`$, definably isomorphic to $`(L,+)`$, hence connected. The set $`L`$ itself is of course $`\lambda `$-closed and irreducible with associated ideal $`I(L)=I^0(X)`$. The ideal associated to the (group) generic of $`(L,)`$ is generated by $`I^0(X)`$ and $`\{X_i=0:ip^\nu ,i0\}`$, and strictly contains $`I^0(X)`$.

This question of the uniqueness of the notion of generic is not the only one posing problems for arbitrary definable groups in $`L`$. For example, there is no reason, coming from general properties of stable (non superstable) theories, which a priori forces all these definable groups to be connected-by-finite.

Nevertheless, one can in fact show that the situation is as close to the classical one as it could be:

###### Proposition 6

 Every definable group $`G`$ in $`L`$ is connected-by-finite and is definably isomorphic to the group of $`L`$-rational points of an algebraic group $`H`$ defined over $`L`$.

One more remark, in the case of algebraic groups, by Prop. 5, irreducibility transfers down to the set of $`L`$-rational points. But this is not the case for an arbitrary variety: if one considers for example the irreducible variety defined by the equation $`Y^{p^m}X+Z^{p^m}=0`$, for $`m1`$, then the $`\lambda `$-closed set $`V(L)`$ is no longer irreducible in the sense of the $`\lambda `$-topology.

### 3.4. Minimal groups

The previous result enables us to give a complete description of groups of dimension one, and more generally of some classes of commutative groups.

We say that an $`\mathrm{}`$-definable set $`D`$ is minimal if any definable subset of $`G`$ is finite or co-finite. If $`D`$ is actually definable, then we say that $`D`$ is strongly minimal.

The minimal groups are exactly the connected groups of dimension (U-rank) equal to one. A minimal group must be commutative.

From the basic properties of commutative algebraic groups over an algebraically closed field of characteristic $`p`$ and Proposition 6, one can deduce:

###### Lemma 7

Let $`G`$ be a minimal group $`\mathrm{}`$-definable in $`L`$, then $`G`$ has exponent $`p`$ or $`G`$ is divisible.

We first consider the commutative groups of exponent $`p`$:

###### Proposition 8

 Let $`G`$ be a commutative $`\mathrm{}`$-definable group of exponent $`p`$ definable in $`L`$. Then $`G`$ is definably isomorphic to a $`\lambda `$-closed subgroup of the additive group $`(L,+)`$. Furthermore, if $`G`$ is definable, then it is definably isogenous to the group of $`L`$-rational points of a vector group.

Note that even when $`G`$ is connected it is not necessarily definably isomorphic to the group of rational points of a vector group.

Then we consider the commutative divisible groups, which we show to be exactly the ones that were considered by Hrushovski in :

###### Proposition 9

 1. Let $`G`$ be any $`\mathrm{}`$-definable commutative divisible group in $`L`$. Then $`G`$ is definably isomorphic to some $`p^{\mathrm{}}A(L):=_np^nA(L)`$, for $`A`$ a semi-Abelian variety defined over $`L`$.

2. If $`A`$ is a semi-Abelian variety defined over $`L`$, $`p^{\mathrm{}}A(L)`$, which is the maximal divisible subgroup of $`A(L)`$ is also the smallest $`\mathrm{}`$-definable subgroup of $`A(L)`$ which is Zariski dense in $`A`$.

Finally, this analysis, together with some results from  and , yields the full description of minimal groups.

Before stating the actual result, let us give some last definitions. The group $`G`$ is said to be of linear type if for every $`n`$, every definable subgroup of $`G^{\times n}`$ is a finite Boolean combination of translates of definable subgroups of $`G^{\times n}`$. We define the transcendence rank over $`K`$ of a group $`G`$, defined over $`K`$, to be the maximum of $`\{\text{tr.degree}(K(g_{\mathrm{}}),K):gG\}`$.

###### Proposition 10

Let $`G`$ be an $`\mathrm{}`$-definable minimal group in $`L`$.

1. Either $`G`$ is not of linear type and then,

* $`G`$ is definably isomorphic to the multiplicative group $`((L^p^{\mathrm{}})^{},)`$,
    * or $`G`$ is definably isomorphic to $`E(L^p^{\mathrm{}})`$ for $`E`$ an elliptic curve defined over $`L^p^{\mathrm{}}`$,
    * or $`G`$ is definably isogenous to $`(L^p^{\mathrm{}},+)`$. (isogenous here cannot be replaced by isomorphic).
2. Or $`G`$ is of linear type and then,

* $`G`$ is divisible and $`G`$ is definably isomorphic to $`p^{\mathrm{}}A(L)`$ for some simple Abelian variety $`A`$ defined over $`K`$ which is not isogenous to an Abelian variety defined over $`L^p^{\mathrm{}}`$,
    * or $`G`$ is of exponent $`p`$ and is definably isomorphic to a minimal $`\lambda `$-closed subgroup of $`(L,+)`$.

In the divisible case $`G`$ has finite transcendence rank; in the exponent $`p`$ case, all transcendence ranks are possible.

The induced module-type structure on the minimal groups of exponent $`p`$ and of linear type is analyzed in .

A short word about some of the tools involved in the proofs of Propositions 6 and 10: the proofs of 6, 1 and 2 all involve at some point the classical theorem of Weil’s constructing an algebraic group from a generic group law on a variety, or some generalizations of this theorem to an abstract model theoretic context. In the specific case of separably closed fields, another fundamental tool is the analysis of the properties of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$-functors, naturally associated to the maps $`\lambda _n`$: for each $`n`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ is a covariant functor from the category of varieties $`V`$ defined over $`K`$ to itself, with the property that the $`L`$-rational points of the variety $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_nV`$ are exactly the image by the map $`\lambda _n`$ of the $`L`$-rational points of $`V`$. In the case of an algebraic group defined over $`K`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1`$ is equal to the composition of the inverse of the Frobenius and of the classical Weil restriction of scalars functor from $`K^{1/p}`$ to $`K`$.

Finally, the way we have stated Proposition 10 uses the fact that if a minimal group is not of linear type, then it is non orthogonal to $`L^p^{\mathrm{}}`$ (and hence definably isogenous to the $`L^p^{\mathrm{}}`$-rational points of some definable group over $`L^p^{\mathrm{}}`$). The only known proof of this so far uses the powerful abstract machinery of Zariski structures from . This dichotomy result, for the particular case of groups of the form $`p^{\mathrm{}}A(L)`$, is essential in Hrushovski’s proof of the Mordell-Lang conjecture in characteristic $`p`$, which is still the only existing proof for the general case. In a recent paper Pillay and Ziegler (), show that, with some extra assumptions on $`A`$, one can replace in this proof the heavy Zariski structure argument by a much more elementary one. These extra assumptions are satisfied when $`A`$ is an ordinary semi-Abelian variety (i.e. $`A`$ has the maximum possible number of $`p^n`$-torsion points for every $`n`$), case which was already covered by previous non model-theoretic proofs (see ).

### 3.5. Final remarks and questions

As we have already mentioned earlier, the groups of finite dimension definable in these “enriched” theories of fields play a major role in the applications of model theory to Diophantine geometry. In the characteristic zero case, the relevant groups are the definable subgroups of the group of rational points of Abelian varieties in differentially closed fields (Mordell-Lang conjecture for function fields ), in generic difference fields (the Manin-Mumford conjecture ,  and the Tate-Voloch conjecture for semi-Abelian varieties defined over $`_p`$ , ). In the characteristic $`p`$ case, the relevant groups are: the $`\mathrm{}`$-definable divisible subgroups of the group of rational points of semi-Abelian varieties in separably closed fields (the Mordell-Lang conjecture for function fields ) and the definable subgroups of the additive groups in generic difference fields of characteristic $`p`$ (Drinfeld modules ).

One should note that, in fact, separably closed fields are just another instance of a field with extra operators (derivations or automorphisms): one can equip any separably closed field $`L`$ of finite degree of imperfection, with an infinite family of Hasse derivations in such a way that the resulting structure is bi-definably equivalent with $`L`$ considered as a structure in the language described in section 3.2.. There are many interesting other possible types of “enriched” fields in this sense where the complete analysis of the model theoretic structure remains to be done.

Finally, one crucial step towards possible further applications of the fine study of finite rank definable sets to geometry would be an understanding of the structure induced on the so-called trivial or disintegrated definable (or infinitely definable) minimal sets, that is the minimal sets such that the induced pregeometry is disintegrated. This condition immediately rules out definable groups. The absence of any well-understood algebraic structure living on these “trivial” sets makes them very difficult to analyze. The only results obtained so far are in the context of differentially closed fields of characteristic $`0`$: Hrushovski (), building on some results of Jouanolou (), showed that in any trivial strongly minimal set defined by a differential equation of order one, the induced pregeometry is locally finite. The question of whether this is true for higher order equations is still open.