text:
# Incomplete electronic relaxation and population upconversion in quantum dots

## I Introduction

Relaxation of the electronic energy in individual quantum dots and the question of the phonon bottleneck still remain to be of considerable current interest Yoffe (2001); Bockelmann and Bastard (1990); Benisty et al. (1991). The Fröhlich’s mechanism of the electron-LO-phonon coupling in the polar semiconductors is regarded as very important Ledentsov et al. (1998). The electronic self-energy due to this electronic interaction was studied by Inoshita and Sakaki Inoshita and Sakaki (1997), who found that the spectral features of the electronic spectral density have very narrow width. The dependence of these very narrow spectral peaks on the energy parameter $`E`$ was shown to have the shape of the $`E^{1/2}`$, in the limit of zero temperature Král and Khás (1998a).

The relaxation of the electron energy in quantum dots was studied later Král and Khás (1997, 1998b); Tsuchiya and Miyoshi (1998); Král and Khás  in the approximation of multiple electronic scattering on optical phonons expressed in the self-consistent Born approximation. It was theoretically shown that despite the fact that the spectral peaks of the electronic spectral density have zero width in the sense of full width at half maximum, the relaxation rate of an electron from the excited state in the quantum dot remains nonzero in the limit of zero temperature of the lattice Král and Khás (1997); Tsuchiya and Miyoshi (1998). The relaxation rate obtained in this way was shown to have the order of magnitude of 1/ps Král and Khás (1998b); Tsuchiya and Miyoshi (1998), in agreement with broad experimental data.

In the same approximation to the electronic self-energy it was demonstrated that the model gives the electronic relaxation even in cases when the electronic inter-level energy separation is not equal to the optical phonon enery. The dependence of the relaxation rate on the detuning, between the electronic energy level separation and the energy of the optical phonon, has a resonance structure Král and Khás (1999). The existence of this resonance structure is in accord with the well-known experimental rule for detecting the presence of quantum dots in quantum dot samples with help of optical methods Ledentsov et al. (1998), basing on the detection of the resonance structure of the photoluminescence excitation signal with peaks separated by optical phonon energy $`E_{LO}`$.

The important role of Fröhlich’s coupling has also been supported by the recent interpretation of the optical line broadening and of the continuous background observed in photoluminescence excitation spectra measured on self-assembled quantum dot samples at high levels of the electronic excitation Král and Zdeněk .

Treating the electronic relaxation in the self-consistent Born approximation to the self-energy means that the electron makes the irreversible transition between two electronic states which are renormalized with respect to the electron-phonon coupling, with the electronic self-energy taken in the self-consistent Born approximation. This approximation takes into account multiple scattering processes of electron on the system of optical phonons and introduces in this way the multiphonon states into the relaxation rate formula and into the formula for the self-energy. The coherent multiphonon states created in this way are analogous to the classical macroscopic oscillations Terzi (1983) of the lattice and the irreversible process of the electronic relaxation in this system can be viewed as a quantum transition in a potential dependent on time Král et al. (2000). A nonconservation of energy in such a system then may be manifested as an absence of the phonon bottleneck in quantum dots. Because of the rapidity of the electronic relaxation in quantum dots, this property of the electronic relaxation between the electronic states in the dot restricts considerably the possible use of quantum dots in constructing quantum bits using the electronic orbital states in quantum dots as qubit states Tanamoto ; Wu et al. .

To our knowledge, in the theory the electronic relaxation has so far been studied with an emphasis to the relaxation rate from the excited state only, calculated at the innitial stage of the relaxation, which was understood to be such instant of time, at which the electron is created at this state Tsuchiya and Miyoshi (1998); Král and Khás (1998b). The time dependence of the electronic relaxation in quantum dots has not yet been given much attention in theory. In this paper we present the numerical evaluation of the time dependence of the relaxation. We point out several features which are seen from the numerical data, concerning the final stage of the relaxation. In particular, we demonstrate theoretically the effect of the rapid decrease of the population of the ground state energy level in the quantum dot and an appearence of electronic population in the excited state, after resonantly exciting the electron to the ground state (an upconversion). The effect of the incomplete depopulation of the electronic excited state in quantum dot, at the end of the electronic relaxation from the higher-energy state and at low temperatures, is also shown. We point out possible connection of this theoretical effect to the recent experiments Urayama et al. (2001); Quochi et al. (2002); Urayama et al. (2002).

## II The transport equation

Similarly, as it was done in the previous works, we restrict ourselves to a simple model of the electronic and phonon structure of the quantum dot. First of all, we ignore completely the presence of the holes in the valence band states of the dot. Although the holes may be simply assumed as being in thermal equilibrium with the surrounding Jiang and Singh (1997), we simplify our model assuming the holes to be heavy enough, so that they do not influence considerably the motion of the system under consideration and contribute only to the static potential of the quantum dot.

We consider the presence of a single electron only. The quantum dot electronic orbital states, and the corresponding energies, are approximated by the eigenstates of the infinitely deep cubic quantum dot, with the lateral size $`d`$ and with the material properties of GaAs crystal. We consider again the two-energy level model Král and Khás , assuming that the electronic ground state $`\psi _0(𝐫)`$, with the index $`n=0`$ and with the energy $`E_0`$, is given by the electronic ground state in the infinitly deep cubic quantum dot. The excited state, with $`\psi _1(𝐫)`$ being the wave function of the state $`n=1`$ with the energy $`E_1`$, is chosen to be one of the triple degenerate lowest energy excited states in this cubic dot. We put $`E_0=0`$ in this work.

The electron is assumed to interact with the bulk modes of the longitudinal optical phonons of lattice vibrations, neglecting in this way any influence which the interfaces in the quantum dot may have on the structure of the optical phonons. It was shown earlier that the details of the optical phonons can be neglected in heterostructures with not too small characteristic dimensions Rücker et al. (1991). We confine ourselves to this simple model, neglecting all other interaction, like the electronic coupling to the acoustic phonons, and other electronic interactions. Neglecting the electronic spin, the Hamiltonian of the electron-phonon system under consideration reads Král and Khás ; Král and Khás (2000)

$$H=H_0+H_1,$$
(1)
where $`H_0`$ is Hamiltonian of free electrons and free optical phonons,

$$H_0=\underset{n=0,1}{}E_nc_n^+c_n+\underset{𝐪}{}b_𝐪^+b_𝐪,$$
(2)
$`c_n`$ is annihilation operator of electron in state $`n`$, $`b_𝐪`$ is annihilation operator of optical phonon with wave vector $`𝐪`$. The electron-phonon interaction operator (Fröhlich’s coupling) is

$$H_1=\underset{m,n=0,1}{}\underset{𝐪}{}A_q\mathrm{\Phi }(n,m,𝐪)(b_𝐪b_𝐪^+)c_n^+c_m,$$
(3)
where the summation over $`𝐪`$ extends over the phonon wavevectors in the first Brillouine zone. In the latter operator the coupling constant is $`A_q=(ie/q)[E_{LO}(\kappa _{\mathrm{}}^1\kappa _0^1)]^{1/2}(2\epsilon _0V)^{1/2}`$, where $`\kappa _{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\kappa _0`$ are, respectively, high-frequency and static dielectric constants, $`\epsilon _0`$ is permittivity of free space, $`e`$ is the electronic charge, $`q=𝐪`$, and $`V`$ is volume of the sample. $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the form-factor,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(n,m,𝐪)=d^3𝐫\psi _n^{}(𝐫)e^{i\mathrm{𝐪𝐫}}\psi _m(𝐫),$$
(4)
which modifies the original bulk form Callaway (1974) of the electron-phonon operator to the case of quantum dot.

The relaxation rate $`dN_1/dt`$ can be obtained using the nonequilibrium Green’s functions method Lifshitz and Pitaevskii (June 1981). Assuming the self-consistent Born approximation for the electronic self-energy, the instantaneous collisions approximation, the diagonal approximation for the single-particle Green’s functions and distribution functions, and the Kadanoff-Baym ansatz Kadanoff and Baym (1962) with the use of the equilibrium spectral densities for the interacting system, we finally get:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dN_1}{dt}}={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\mathrm{}}}\alpha _{01}[N_1(1N_0)((1+\nu _{LO}){\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}dE\sigma _1(E)\sigma _0(EE_{LO})+\nu _{LO}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}dE\sigma _1(E)\sigma _0(E+E_{LO}))`$
$`N_0(1N_1)((1+\nu _{LO}){\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}dE\sigma _0(E)\sigma _1(EE_{LO})+\nu _{LO}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}dE\sigma _0(E)\sigma _1(E+E_{LO}))]`$ (5)
We do not give here the details of the derivation of the relaxation rate formula, referring the reader to referencesKrál and Khás ; Tsuchiya and Miyoshi (1998) In formula (II) $`\sigma _n(E)`$ is spectral density of the state $`n`$ calculated in the self-consistent Born approximation, $`E`$ being the energy variable. $`\nu _{LO}`$ is Bose-Einstein distribution, giving the population of the optical phonon modes at the given temperature $`T`$ of the lattice. The constant $`\alpha _{mn}`$ is given by the definition

$$\alpha _{mn}=\underset{𝐪}{}A_q^2\mathrm{\Phi }(n,m,𝐪)^2,\alpha _{mn}=\alpha _{nm}.$$
(6)
The spectral densities, obeying the condition $`_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\sigma _n(E)𝑑E=1`$, are determined from the corresponding Green’s functions. The retarded electronic self-energy $`M_n(E)`$ of the state $`n`$ is obtained, in the self-consistent Born approximation, from the self-consistent equation

$`M_n(E)={\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}\alpha _{nm}`$
$`\times ({\displaystyle \frac{1N_m+\nu _{LO}}{EE_mE_{LO}M_m(EE_{LO})+i0_+}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{N_m+\nu _{LO}}{EE_m+E_{LO}M_m(E+E_{LO})+i0_+}}.)`$ (7)
In the formula (II) for the relaxation rate the spectral densities depend on the electronic density matrix by means of the equation (7) for the self-energy. This dependence of the relaxation rate on the state of the electronic system is not easily seen in a quantitative manner from the formula (II) and will be therefore demonstrated numerically below. Let us remark, that in the case of approximating the electronic spectral densities by delta-functions, which would be a suitable approximation in the case of very weak electron-phonon interaction, the integrals on the right hand side of (II) would be performed and the dependence of the relaxation rate on the population of the unperturbed electronic states would be be simple. This approximation would give nonzero relaxation rate only when the inter-level energy separation equals the optical phonon energy. We shall therefore not pay any further attention to this simple approximation.

## III Electronic relaxation

In the present approximation, in which we confine ourselves to the diagonal terms of the electronic density matrix, given by $`N_n`$, $`n=0,1`$, the electronic density matrix is determined by one of the terms $`N_n`$, because $`N_0+N_1=1`$. This fact allows us to plot the electronic relaxation rate $`dN_1/dt`$ simply as a function of $`N_0`$. The dependence of the relaxation rate on $`N_0`$ is shown in the Fig. 1.

The plot is shown for three values of the quantum dot size, in which the corresponding inter-level separation, or the detuning, is set up to be such, that $`E_1=\xi E_{LO}`$, with $`\xi `$ being 0.7, 1 and 1.7. The value of $`\xi =1`$ corresponds to the resonance between $`E_1`$ and $`E_{LO}`$. The relaxation rate is not constant as a function of $`N_0`$. Also, the relaxation rate depends on the magnitude of the detuning $`\xi `$. The relaxation rate changes sign at some values of $`N_0`$, which are different from 0 and 1. Another numerical result says that the dependence of the rate on the population is monotoneous. We see in Fig. 1 that at all three cases of the detuning $`\xi `$ the relaxation rate becomes zero at the population, which is about between 0.1 and 0.2 at the lattice temperature of 10 K. Realizing that the optical phonon energy in GaAs is about 36.2 meV, the electronic inter-level energy separations considered in this figure are of the same order of magnitude. The value of $`N_0`$ in Fig. 1, at which the rate is zero and the relaxation stops, is therefore not expected to be simply due to the equilibrium effect of the lattice temperature electronic level population.

Fig. 1 shows that the final state of the electronic relaxation from the state with the population $`N_1=1`$, at low temperatures, cannot be the state with $`N_1=0`$, but it should be another state of the sytem, in which the population of the ground state $`n=0`$ is different from one. In other words, the electron does not relax to the ground state even in the limit of low temperatures. In Fig. 2 we plot the final population $`N_{1f}`$ of the excited state, which is defined as such a value of the population $`N_1`$, at which the relaxation rate becomes zero. The quantity $`N_{1f}`$ is plotted as a function of the detuning and lattice temperature.

We expect that due to the population dependence of the relaxation rate, shown in Fig. 1, the population of the state $`n=1`$ will be always either decreasing at $`t>0`$, if we start with $`N_1=1`$ at $`t=0`$, or increasing, if we start with the population $`N_1=0`$ at $`t=0`$. The population of the states will be developing towards the limiting population $`N_{1f}`$ plotted in Fig. 2.

The final value $`N_{1f}`$ of $`N_1`$ depends both on lattice temperature and on the detuning $`\xi `$. The quantity $`N_{1f}`$ appears to increase with increasing the lattice temperature, which is expected. The dependence of $`N_{1f}`$ on the detuning $`\xi `$ displays a certain modulation. At the integer values of $`\xi `$, which correspond to the resonance between the excitation energy $`E_1`$ and a multiple of the LO phonon energy, the value of $`N_{1f}`$ shows a minimum, which is rather pronounced especially in the limit of low temperature and near $`\xi =1`$. At higher lattice temperatures the latter resonance structure appears to weaken. The present two-level model shows that the limiting value $`N_{1f}`$ is especially large, achieving the magnitude of about 0.4 to 0.5, when the detuning is either much larger, or much lower than 1.

Studying the time dependence of the electronic distribution in the process of the electronic relaxation, let us first assume that the electron is prepared in the state $`n=1`$ at $`t=0`$. The numerical result is displayed in Fig. 3. On the time scale of picoseconds, the population of the excited state decreases with time, reaching the limiting value of the electronic population, in agreement with the data shown in Fig. 2.

It is very interesting to observe the time development of the electronic distribution in the present two-level model in the particular case when the electron is prepared in the ground state $`n=0`$, namely when the population $`N_1=0`$ is prepared at time $`t=0`$. This innitial condition may correspond to the experiments, in which time resolved depopulation of the energy levels is measured, including the time dependence of the optical properties of quantum dots after exciting the quantum dots to the lowest energy state of the electronic subsystem in a single quantum dot Quochi et al. (2002); Urayama et al. (2001). The time dependence of the population $`N_1`$ corresponding to this initial condition is displayed in Figs. 4 and 5, in which this time dependence is shown for two values of the detuning $`\xi `$. From these figures it is seen that on the time scale of picoseconds the population of the electronic excited state can increases to about 0.2 to 0.3, which means that the population of the lower energy state can decrease to 0.8 to 0.7. This happens in the limit of low temperatures, at which the thermal population of the higher-energy states would be unexpected. From the difference between Figs. 4 and 5 we see that the characteristic time of this population upconversion slightly varies with detuning and temperature. In agreement with the data shown in the Figs. 2, the results shown in Figs. 4 and 5 demonstrate that at temperatures below about 100 K the rapidity of the population changes does not depend significantly on temperature.

## IV Discussion

The present theoretical results can find a counterpart in the recent experiments in which the time resolved response of quantum dots to short laser pulse is studied Urayama et al. (2001); Quochi et al. (2002). The experimental experience shows that when a quantum dot is excited with a short laser pulse to the lowest-energy state, the subsequent relaxation process may lead to the appearence of the electronic population of electronic states with higher energy Quochi et al. (2002). Another effect found in experiment is: the system of quantum dot, when prepared in an excited state, relaxes fast from this state, but the relaxation ends without depopulating completely the excited state Urayama et al. (2001). In these experiment the depopulation effects do not show any dependence on the resonance between the electronic inter-level energy separation and optical phonon energy. These effects were recently interpreted to be a result of a non-geminate excitation of the electrons and holes in quantum dots Urayama et al. (2001, 2002) or as a manifestation of multiphonon scattering processes including acoustic phonons Quochi et al. (2002).

Besides the interpretations of the origin of these depopulation effects given in the experimental papers Urayama et al. (2001); Quochi et al. (2002); Urayama et al. (2002), we propose the mechanism studied in this paper as another possible source of these effects. This mechanism assumes the absence of the phonon bottleneck effect: The formula (II) for the relaxation rate does not contain the energy conservation delta function factor. It describes the electronic transitions between two electronic states, which are bound to a cloud of optical phonons. This coherent phonons cloud is induced thanks to the electron-phonon coupling by the virtual transitions of the electron between the two electronic states. Because these multiphonon states are not necessarily Fock states with well-defined number of LO phonons, the energy conserving delta function does not appear in the relaxation rate formula. The coherent multiphonon states can be seen as classical macroscopic oscillations of the optical phonon modes. These macroscopic oscillations can be regarded as a source of an effective electronic Hamiltonian depending explicitly on time, making the system nonconservative. In such a system we do not speak about the energy conservation. This is the way how we can understand the electronic relaxation in the case of nonresonant situation between the inter-level energy separation and the phonon energy, both in the case of the relaxation from the high energy level and in the case of the relaxation of the electron from the low-energy level to the high-energy one.

The coupling of the electron to the phonon system via multiple scattering virtual transitions may cause a strong mixing of the two electronic states causes. Because of the effective lack of the energy conservation, the final state of the relaxation of the system need not to be identical with the low energy state, in the limit of zero temperature.

Summing up, we have demonstrated the time dependence of electronic relaxation in the model quantum dot with two levels and a single electron. We demonstrate the incomplete depopulation of the excited state and we also demonstrate the appearence of the population of the excited state after the resonance excitation of the ground state. We present the characteristic times of these processes. These theoretical results are discussed in relation to the recent experiments and an additional interpretation of these experiments is proposed.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported by grants IAA1010113, RN19982003014 and by the project AVOZ1-010-914.


format: text

text:
# Pseudodifferential operators on manifolds with a Lie structure at infinity

## Introduction

Let $`(M_0,g_0)`$ be a complete, non-compact Riemannian manifold. It is a fundamental problem to study the geometric operators on $`M_0`$. As in the compact case, pseudodifferential operators provide a powerful tool for that purpose, provided that the geometry at infinity is taken into account. One needs, however, to restrict to suitable classes of non-compact manifolds.

Let $`M`$ be a compact manifold with corners such that $`M_0=MM`$, and assume that the geometry at infinity of $`M_0`$ is described by a Lie algebra of vector fields $`𝒱\mathrm{\Gamma }(M;TM)`$, that is, $`M_0`$ is a Riemannian manifold with a Lie structure at infinity, Definition 1.3. In , Melrose has formulated a far reaching program to study the analytic properties of geometric differential operators on $`M_0`$. An important ingredient in Melrose’s program is to define a suitable pseudodifferential calculus $`\mathrm{\Psi }_𝒱^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ on $`M_0`$ adapted in a certain sense to $`(M,𝒱)`$. This pseudodifferential calculus was called a “microlocalization of $`\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M_0)`$” in , where $`\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M_0)`$ is the algebra of differential operators on $`M_0`$ generated by $`𝒱`$ and $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$. (See Section 2.)

Melrose and his collaborators have constructed the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_𝒱^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ in many special cases, see for instance , and especially . One of the main reasons for considering the compactification $`M`$ is that the geometric operators on manifolds with a Lie structure at infinity identify with degenerate differential operators on $`M`$. This type of differential operators appear naturally, for example, also in the study of boundary value problems on manifolds with singularities. Numerous important results in this direction were obtained also by Schulze and his collaborators, who typically worked in the framework of the Boutet de Monvel algebras. See  and the references therein. Other important cases in which this program was completed can be found in . An earlier important motivation for the construction of these algebras was the method of layer potentials for boundary value problems and questions in analysis on locally symmetric spaces. See for example .

An outline of the construction of the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_𝒱^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ was given by Melrose in , provided certain compact manifolds with corners (blow-ups of $`M^2`$ and $`M^3`$) can be constructed. In the present paper, we modify the blow-up construction using Lie groupoids, thus completing the construction of the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_𝒱^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$. Our method relies on recent progress achieved in .

The explicit construction of the algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ microlocalizing $`\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M_0)`$ in the sense of  is, roughly, as follows. First, $`𝒱`$ defines an extension of $`TM_0`$ to a vector bundle $`AM`$ ($`M_0=MM`$). Let $`V_r:=\{d(x,y)<r\}M_0^2`$ and $`(A)_r=\{vA,v<r\}`$. Let $`r>0`$ be less than the injectivity radius of $`M_0`$ and $`V_r(x,y)(x,\tau (x,y))(A)_r`$ be a local inverse of the Riemannian exponential map $`TM_0v\mathrm{exp}_x(v)M_0\times M_0`$. Let $`\chi `$ be a smooth function on $`A`$ with support in $`(A)_r`$ and $`\chi =1`$ on $`(A)_{r/2}`$. For any $`aS_{1,0}^m(A^{})`$, we define

(1)
$$\left[a_i(D)u\right](x)=(2\pi )^n_{M_0}\left(_{T_x^{}M_0}e^{i\tau (x,y)\eta }\chi (x,\tau (x,y))a(x,\eta )u(y)𝑑\eta \right)𝑑y.$$

The algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ is then defined as the linear span of the operators $`a_\chi (D)`$ and $`b_\chi (D)\mathrm{exp}(X_1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}(X_k)`$, $`aS^{\mathrm{}}(A^{})`$, $`bS^{\mathrm{}}(A^{})`$, and $`X_j𝒱`$, and where $`\mathrm{exp}(X_j):𝒞_\text{c}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)𝒞_\text{c}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ is defined as the action on functions associated to the flow of the vector field $`X_j`$.

The operators $`b_\chi (D)\mathrm{exp}(X_1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}(X_k)`$ are needed to make our space closed under composition. The introduction of these operators is in fact a crucial ingredient in our approach to Melrose’s program. The results of  are used to show that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ is closed under composition, which is the most difficult step in the proof.

A closely related situation is encountered when one considers a product of a manifold with a Lie structure at infinity $`M_0`$ by a Lie group $`G`$ and operators $`G`$ invariant on $`M_0\times G`$. We obtain in this way an algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0;G)`$ of $`G`$–invariant pseudodifferential operators on $`M_0\times G`$ with similar properties. The algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0;G)`$ arises in the study of the analytic properties of differential geometric operators on some higher dimensional manifolds with a Lie structure at infinity. When $`G=^q`$, this algebra is slightly smaller than one of Melrose’s suspended algebras and plays the same role, namely, it appears as a quotient of an algebra of the form $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱^{}}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0^{})`$, for a suitable manifold $`M_0^{}`$. The quotient map $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱^{}}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0^{})\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0;G)`$ is a generalization of Melrose’s indicial map. A convenient approach to indicial maps is provided by groupoids .

We also introduce a semi-classical variant of the algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$, denoted $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0[[h]])`$, consisting of semi-classical families of operators in $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$. For all these algebras we establish the usual mapping properties between appropriate Sobolev spaces.

The article is organized as follows. In Section 1 we recall the definition of manifolds with a Lie structure at infinity and some of their basic properties, including a discussion of compatible Riemannian metrics. In Section 2 we define the spaces $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ and the principal symbol maps. Section 3 contains the proof of the crucial fact that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ is closed under composition, and therefore it is an algebra. We do this by showing that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ is the homomorphic image of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢)`$, where $`𝒢`$ is any $`d`$-connected Lie groupoid integrating $`A`$ ($`d`$–connected means that the fibers of the domain map $`d`$ are connected). In Section 4 we establish several other properties of the algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ that are similar and analogous to the properties of the algebra of pseudodifferential operators on a compact manifold. In Section 5 we define the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0[[h]])`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0;G)`$, which are generalizations of the algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$. The first of these two algebras consists of the semi-classical (or adiabatic) families of operators in $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$. The second algebra is a subalgebra of the algebra of $`G`$–invariant, properly supported pseudodifferential operators on $`M_0\times G`$, where $`G`$ is a Lie group.

#### Acknowledgements:

We thank Andras Vasy for several interesting discussions and for several contributions to this paper. R. L. is grateful to Richard B. Melrose for numerous stimulating conversations and explanations on pseudodifferential calculi on special examples of manifolds with a Lie structure an infinity. V. N. would like to thank the Institute Erwin Schrödinger in Vienna and University Henri Poincaré in Nancy, where parts of this work were completed.

## 1. Manifolds with a Lie structure at infinity

For the convenience of the reader, let us recall the definition of a Riemannian manifold with a Lie structure at infinity and some of its basic properties.

### 1.1. Preliminaries

In the sequel, by a manifold we shall always understand a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-manifold possibly with corners, whereas a smooth manifold is a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-manifold without corners (and without boundary). By definition, every point $`p`$ in a manifold with corners $`M`$ has a coordinate neighborhood diffeomorphic to $`[0,\mathrm{})^k\times ^{nk}`$ such that the transition functions are smooth up to the boundary. If $`p`$ is mapped by this diffeomorphism to $`(0,\mathrm{},0,x_{k+1},\mathrm{},x_n)`$, we shall say that $`p`$ is a point of boundary depth $`k`$ and write $`\mathrm{depth}(p)=k`$. The closure of a connected component of points of boundary depth $`k`$ is called a face of codimension $`k`$. Faces of codimension $`1`$ are also called hyperfaces. For simplicity, we always assume that each hyperface $`H`$ of a manifold with corners $`M`$ is an embedded submanifold and has a defining function, that is, that there exists a smooth function $`x_H0`$ on $`M`$ such that

$$H=\{x_H=0\}\text{ and }dx_H0\text{ on }H.$$

For the basic facts on the analysis on manifolds with corners we refer to the forthcoming book . We shall denote by $`M`$ the union of all non-trivial faces of $`M`$ and by $`M_0`$ the interior of $`M`$, i.e.,  $`M_0:=MM`$. Recall that a map $`f:MN`$ is a submersion of manifolds with corners if $`df`$ is surjective at any point and $`df_p(v)`$ is an inward pointing vector if, and only if, $`v`$ is an inward pointing vector. In particular, the sets $`f^1(q)`$ are smooth manifolds (no boundary or corners).

To fix notation, we shall denote the sections of a vector bundle $`VX`$ by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,V)`$, unless $`X`$ is understood, in which case we shall write simply $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(V)`$. A Lie subalgebra $`𝒱\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,TM)`$ of the Lie algebra of all smooth vector fields on $`M`$ is said to be a structural Lie algebra of vector fields provided it is a finitely generated, projective $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$-module and each $`V𝒱`$ is tangent to all hyperfaces of $`M`$.

###### Definition 1.1.

A Lie structure at infinity on a smooth manifold $`M_0`$ is a pair $`(M,𝒱)`$, where $`M`$ is a compact manifold, possibly with corners, and $`𝒱\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,TM)`$ is a structural Lie algebra of vector fields on $`M`$ with the following properties:

1. $`M_0`$ is diffeomorphic to the interior $`MM`$ of $`M,`$
2. for any vector field $`X`$ on $`M_0`$ and any $`pM_0`$, there is a neighborhood $`V`$ of $`p`$ in $`M_0`$ and a vector field $`Y𝒱`$, such that $`Y=X`$ on $`V`$.

A manifold with a Lie structure at infinity will also be called a *Lie manifold*.

Here are some examples.

###### Examples 1.2.

1. Take $`𝒱_b`$ to be the set of all vector fields tangent to all faces of a manifold with corners $`M`$. Then $`(M,𝒱_b)`$ is a manifold with a Lie structure at infinity.
2. Take $`𝒱_0`$ to be the set of all vector fields vanishing on all faces of a manifold with corners $`M`$. Then $`(M,𝒱_0)`$ is a Lie manifold. If $`M`$ is a smooth manifold (i.e., if $`M`$ is a manifold with boundary), then $`𝒱_0=r\mathrm{\Gamma }(M;TM)`$, where $`r`$ is the distance to the boundary.
3. As another example consider a manifold with smooth boundary and consider the vector fields $`𝒱_{\mathrm{sc}}=r𝒱_b`$, where $`r`$ and $`𝒱_b`$ are as in the previous examples.

These three examples are, respectively, the “$`b`$-calculus”, the “$`0`$-calculus,” and the “scattering calculus” from . These examples are typical and will be referred to again below. Some interesting and highly non-trivial examples of Lie structures at infinity on $`^n`$ are obtained from the $`N`$-body problem  and from strictly pseudoconvex domains . Further examples of Lie structures at infinity were discussed in .

If $`M_0`$ is compact without boundary, then it follows from the above definition that $`M=M_0`$ and $`𝒱=\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,TM)`$, so a Lie structure at infinity on $`M_0`$ gives no additional information on $`M_0`$. The interesting cases are thus the ones when $`M_0`$ is non-compact.

Elements in the enveloping algebra $`\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M)`$ of $`𝒱`$ are called $`𝒱`$-differential operators on $`M`$. The order of differential operators induces a filtration $`\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^m(M)`$, $`m_0`$, on the algebra $`\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M)`$. Since $`\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M)`$ is a $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$-module, we can introduce $`𝒱`$-differential operators acting between sections of smooth vector bundles $`E,FM`$, $`E,FM\times ^N`$ by

(2)
$$\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M;E,F):=e_FM_N(\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M))e_E,$$

where $`e_E,e_FM_N(𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M))`$ are the projections onto $`E`$ and, respectively, $`F`$. It follows that $`\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M;E,E)=:\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M;E)`$ is an algebra that is closed under adjoints.

Let $`AM`$ be a vector bundle and $`\varrho :ATM`$ a vector bundle map. We shall also denote by $`\varrho `$ the induced map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,A)\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,TM)`$ between the smooth section of these bundles. Suppose a Lie algebra structure on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,A)`$ is given. Then the pair $`(A,\varrho )`$ together with this Lie algebra structure on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$ is called a Lie algebroid if $`\varrho ([X,Y])=[\varrho (X),\varrho (Y)]`$ and $`[X,fY]=f[X,Y]+(\varrho (X)f)Y`$ for any smooth sections $`X`$ and $`Y`$ of $`A`$ and any smooth function $`f`$ on $`M`$. The map $`\varrho :ATM`$ is called the anchor of $`A`$. We have also denoted by $`\varrho `$ the induced map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,A)\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,TM)`$. We shall also write $`Xf:=\varrho (X)f`$.

If $`𝒱`$ is a structural Lie algebra of vector fields, then $`𝒱`$ is projective, and hence the Serre-Swan theorem  shows that there exists a smooth vector bundle $`A_𝒱M`$ together with a natural map

(3)
$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill \varrho _𝒱:A_𝒱& & & & TM\hfill \\ & & & & \\ & & M& & \end{array}$$

such that $`𝒱=\varrho (\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,A_𝒱))`$. The vector bundle $`A_𝒱`$ turns out to be a Lie algebroid over $`M`$.

We thus see that there exists an equivalence between structural Lie algebras of vector fields $`𝒱=\mathrm{\Gamma }(A_𝒱)`$ and Lie algebroids $`\varrho :ATM`$ such that the induced map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,A)\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,TM)`$ is injective and has range in the Lie algebra $`𝒱_b(M)`$ of all vector fields that are tangent to all hyperfaces of $`M`$. Because $`A`$ and $`𝒱`$ determine each other up to isomorphism, we sometimes specify a Lie structure at infinity on $`M_0`$ by the pair $`(M,A)`$. The definition of a manifold with a Lie structure at infinity allows us to identify $`M_0`$ with $`MM`$ and $`A|_{M_0}`$ with $`TM_0`$.

We now turn our attention to Riemannian structures on $`M_0`$. Any metric on $`A`$ induces a metric on $`TM_0=A|_{M_0}`$. This suggests the following definition.

###### Definition 1.3.

A manifold $`M_0`$ with a Lie structure at infinity $`(M,𝒱)`$, $`𝒱=\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,A)`$, and with metric $`g_0`$ on $`TM_0`$ obtained from the restriction of a metric $`g`$ on $`A`$ is called a Riemannian manifold with a Lie structure at infinity.

The geometry of a Riemannian manifold $`(M_0,g_0)`$ with a Lie structure $`(M,𝒱)`$ at infinity has been studied in . For instance, $`(M_0,g_0)`$ is necessarily of infinite volume and complete. Moreover, all the covariant derivatives of the Riemannian curvature tensor are bounded. Under additional mild assumptions, we also know that the injectivity radius is bounded from below by a positive constant, i.e.,  $`(M_0,g_0)`$ is of bounded geometry. (A manifold with bounded geometry is a Riemannian manifold with positive injectivity radius and with bounded covariant derivatives of the curvature tensor, see  and references therein). A useful property is that all geometric operators on $`M_0`$ that are associated to a metric on $`A`$ are $`𝒱`$-differential operator (i.e., in $`\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^m(M)`$ ).

On a Riemannian manifold $`M_0`$ with a Lie structure at infinity $`(M,𝒱)`$, $`𝒱=\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,A)`$, the exponential map $`\mathrm{exp}_p:T_pM_0M_0`$ is well-defined for all $`pM_0`$ and extends to a differentiable map $`\mathrm{exp}_p:A_pM`$ depending smoothly on $`pM`$. A convenient way to introduce the exponential map is via the geodesic spray, as done in . A related phenomenon is that any vector field $`X\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$ is integrable, which is a consequence of the compactness of $`M`$. The resulting diffeomorphism of $`M_0`$ will be denoted $`\psi _X`$.

###### Proposition 1.4.

Let $`F_0`$ be an open face of $`M`$ and $`X\mathrm{\Gamma }(M;A)`$. Then the diffeomorphism $`\psi _X`$ maps $`F_0`$ to itself.

###### Proof.

This follows right away from the assumption that all vector fields in $`𝒱`$ are tangent to all faces . ∎

## 2. Kohn-Nirenberg quantization and pseudodifferential operators

Throughout this section $`M_0`$ will be a fixed manifold with Lie structure at infinity $`(M,𝒱)`$ and $`𝒱:=\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$. We shall also fix a metric $`g`$ on $`AM`$, which induces a metric $`g_0`$ on $`M_0`$. We are going to introduce a pseudodifferential calculus on $`M_0`$ that microlocalizes the algebra of $`𝒱`$-differential operators $`\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M_0)`$ on $`M`$ given by the Lie structure at infinity.

### 2.1. Riemann-Weyl fibration

Fix a Riemannian metric $`g`$ on the bundle $`A`$, and let $`g_0=g|_{M_0}`$ be its restriction to the interior $`M_0`$ of $`M`$. We shall use this metric to trivialize all density bundles on $`M`$. Denote by $`\pi :TM_0M_0`$ the natural projection. Define

(4)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }:TM_0M_0\times M_0,\mathrm{\Phi }(v):=(x,\mathrm{exp}_x(v)),x=\pi (v).$$

Recall that for $`vT_xM`$ we have $`\mathrm{exp}_x(v)=\gamma _v(1)`$ where $`\gamma _v`$ is the unique geodesic with $`\gamma _v(0)=\pi (v)=x`$ and $`\gamma _v^{}(0)=v`$. It is known that there is an open neighborhood $`U`$ of the zero-section $`M_0`$ in $`TM_0`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }|_U`$ is a diffeomorphism onto an open neighborhood $`V`$ of the diagonal $`M_0=\mathrm{\Delta }_{M_0}M_0\times M_0`$.

To fix notation, let $`E`$ be a real vector space together with a metric or a vector bundle with a metric. We shall denote by $`(E)_r`$ the set of all vectors $`v`$ of $`E`$ with $`|v|<r`$.

We shall also assume from now on that $`r_0`$, the injectivity radius of $`(M_0,g_0)`$, is positive. We know that this is true under some additional mild assumptions and we conjectured that the injectivity radius is always positive . Thus, for each $`0<rr_0`$, the restriction $`\mathrm{\Phi }|_{(TM_0)_r}`$ is a diffeomorphism onto an open neighborhood $`V_r`$ of the diagonal $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{M_0}`$. It is for this reason that we need the positive injectivity radius assumption.

We continue, by slight abuse of notation, to write $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ for that restriction. Following Melrose, we shall call $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ the Riemann-Weyl fibration. The inverse of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is given by

$$M_0\times M_0V_r(x,y)(x,\tau (x,y))(TM_0)_r,$$

where $`\tau (x,y)T_xM_0`$ is the tangent vector at $`x`$ to the shortest geodesic $`\gamma :[0,1]M`$ such that $`\gamma (0)=x`$ and $`\gamma (1)=y`$.

### 2.2. Symbols and conormal distributions

Let $`\pi :EM`$ be a smooth vector bundle with orthogonal metric $`g`$. Let

(5)
$$\xi :=\sqrt{1+g(\xi ,\xi )}.$$

We shall denote by $`S_{1,0}^m(E)`$ the symbols of type $`(1,0)`$ in Hörmander’s sense . Recall that they are defined, in local coordinates, by the standard estimates

$$|_x^\alpha _\xi ^\beta a(\xi )|C_{K,\alpha ,\beta }\xi ^{m|\beta |},\pi (\xi )K,$$

where $`K`$ is a compact trivializing subset (i.e.,  $`\pi ^1(K)K\times ^n`$) and $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are multi-indices. If $`aS_{1,0}^m(E)`$, then its image in $`S_{1,0}^m(E)/S_{1,0}^{m1}(E)`$ is called the principal symbol of $`a`$ and denoted $`\sigma ^{(m)}(a)`$. A symbol $`a`$ will be called homogeneous of degree $`\mu `$ if $`a(x,\lambda \xi )=\lambda ^\mu a(x,\xi )`$ for $`\lambda >0`$ and $`|\xi |`$ and $`|\lambda \xi |`$ large. A symbol $`aS_{1,0}^m(E)`$ will be called classical if there exist symbols $`a_kS_{1,0}^{mk}(E)`$, homogeneous of degree $`mk`$, such that $`a_{j=0}^{N1}a_kS_{1,0}^{mN}(E)`$. Then we identify $`\sigma ^{(m)}(a)`$ with $`a_0`$. (See any book on pseudodifferential operators or the corresponding discussion in .)

We now specialize to the case $`E=A^{}`$, where $`AM`$ is the vector bundle such that $`𝒱=\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,A)`$. Recall that we have fixed a metric $`g`$ on $`A`$. Let $`\pi :AM`$ and $`\overline{\pi }:A^{}M`$ be the canonical projections. Then the inverse of the Fourier transform $`_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1`$, along the fibers of $`A^{}`$ gives a map

(6)
$$_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1:S_{1,0}^m(A^{})𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(A):=𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(A)^{},_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1a,\phi :=a,_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1\phi ,$$

where $`aS_{1,0}^m(A^{})`$, $`\phi `$ is a smooth, compactly supported function, and

(7)
$$_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(\phi )(\xi ):=(2\pi )^n_{\overline{\pi }(\zeta )=\pi (\xi )}e^{i\xi ,\zeta }\phi (\zeta )𝑑\zeta .$$

Then $`I^m(A,M)`$ is defined as the image of $`S_{1,0}^m(A^{})`$ through the above map. We shall call this space the space of distributions on $`A`$ conormal to $`M`$. The spaces $`I^m(TM_0,M_0)`$ and $`I^m(M_0^2,\mathrm{\Delta }_{M_0})=I^m(M_0^2,M_0)`$ are defined similarly. In fact, these definitions are special cases of the following more general definition. Let $`XY`$ be an embedded submanifold of a manifold with corners $`Y`$. On a small neighborhood $`V`$ of $`X`$ in $`Y`$ we define a structure of a vector bundle over $`X`$, such that $`X`$ is the zero section of $`V`$. As a bundle $`V`$ is isomorphic to the normal bundle of $`X`$ in $`Y`$. Then we define the space of distributions on $`Y`$ that are conormal of order $`m`$ to $`X`$, denoted $`I^m(Y,X)`$, to be the space of distributions on $`M`$ that are smooth on $`YX`$ and, that are, in a tubular neighborhood $`VX`$ of $`X`$ in $`Y`$, the inverse Fourier transforms of elements in $`S^m(V^{})`$ along the fibers of $`VX`$. For simplicity, we have ignored the density factor. For more details on conormal distributions we refer to  and the forthcoming book  (for manifolds with corners).

The main use of spaces of conormal distributions is in relation to pseudodifferential operators. For example, since we have

$$I^m(M_0^2,M_0)𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M_0^2):=𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0^2)^{},$$

we can associate to a distribution in $`KI^m(M_0^2,M_0)`$ a continuous linear map $`T_K:𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M_0):=𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)^{},`$ by the Schwartz kernel theorem. Then a well known result of Hörmander  states that $`T_K`$ is a pseudodifferential operator on $`M_0`$ and that all pseudodifferential operators on $`M_0`$ are obtained in this way, for various values of $`m`$. This defines a map

(8)
$$T:I^m(M_0^2,M_0)\mathrm{Hom}(𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0),𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)).$$

Recall now that $`(A)_r`$ denotes the set of vectors of norm $`<r`$ of the vector bundle $`A`$. We agree to write $`I_{(r)}^m(A,M)`$ for all $`kI^m(A,M)`$ with $`\text{supp}k(A)_r`$. The space $`I_{(r)}^m(TM_0,M_0)`$ is defined in an analogous way. Then restriction defines a map

(9)
$$:I_{(r)}^m(A,M)I_{(r)}^m(TM_0,M_0).$$

Recall that $`r_0`$ denotes the injectivity radius of $`M_0`$ and that we assume $`r_0>0`$. Similarly, the Riemann–Weyl fibration $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ of Equation (4) defines, for any $`0<rr_0`$, a map

(10)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{}:I_{(r)}^m(TM_0,M_0)I^m(M_0^2,M_0).$$

We shall also need various subspaces of conormal distributions, which we shall denote by including a subscript as follows:

* “cl” to designate the distributions that are “classical,” in the sense that they correspond to classical pseudodifferential operators.
* “c” to denote distributions that have compact support.
* “pr” to indicate operators that are properly supported or distributions that give rise to such operators.

For instance, $`I_c^m(Y,X)`$ denote the space of compactly supported conormal distributions, so that $`I_{(r)}^m(A,M)=I_c^m((A)_r,M)`$. Occasionally, we shall use the double subscripts “cl,pr” and “cl,c.” Note that “c” implies “pr”. .

### 2.3. Kohn-Nirenberg quantization

For notational simplicity, we shall use the metric $`g_0`$ on $`M_0`$ (obtained from the metric on $`A`$) to trivialize the half-density bundle $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{1/2}(M_0)`$. In particular, we identify $`𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0,\mathrm{\Omega }^{1/2})`$ with $`𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$. Let $`0<rr_0`$ be arbitrary. Each smooth function $`\chi `$, with $`\chi =1`$ close to $`MA`$ and support contained in the set $`(A)_r`$, induces a map $`q_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi }:S_{1,0}^m(A^{})I^m(M_0^2,M_0)`$,

(11)
$$q_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi }(a):=\mathrm{\Phi }_{}\left(\left(\chi _{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)\right)\right).$$

Let $`a_\chi (D)`$ be the operator on $`M_0`$ with distribution kernel $`q_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi }(a)`$, defined using the Schwartz kernel theorem, i.e., $`a_\chi (D):=Tq_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi }(a)`$ . Following Melrose, we call the map $`q_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi }`$ the Kohn-Nirenberg quantization map. It will play an important role in what follows.

For further reference, let us make the formula for the induced operator $`a_\chi (D):𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ more explicit. Neglecting the density factors in the formula, we obtain for $`u𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$

(12)
$$a_\chi (D)u(x)=_{M_0}(2\pi )^n_{T_x^{}M_0}e^{i\tau (x,y)\eta }\chi (x,\tau (x,y))a(x,\eta )u(y)𝑑\eta 𝑑y.$$

Specializing to the case of Euclidean space $`M_0=^n`$ with the standard metric we have $`\tau (x,y)=xy`$, and hence

(13)
$$a_\chi (D)u(x)=(2\pi )^n_^n_^ne^{i(xy)\eta }\chi (x,xy)a(x,\eta )u(y)𝑑\eta 𝑑y,$$

i.e.,  the well-known formula for the Kohn-Nirenberg-quantization on $`^n`$, if $`\chi =1`$. The following lemma states that, up to regularizing operators, the above quantization formulas do not depend on $`\chi `$.

###### Lemma 2.1.

Let $`0<rr_0`$. If $`\chi _1`$ and $`\chi _2`$ are smooth functions with support $`(A)_r`$ and $`\chi _j=1`$ in a neighborhood of $`MA`$, then $`(\chi _1\chi _2)_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)`$ is a smooth function, and hence $`a_{\chi _1}(D)a_{\chi _2}(D)`$ has a smooth Schwartz kernel. Moreover, the map $`S_{1,0}^m(A^{})𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(A)`$ that maps $`aS_{1,0}^m(A^{})`$ to $`(\chi _1\chi _2)_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)`$ is continuous, where the right hand side is endowed with the topology of uniform $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-convergence on compact subsets.

###### Proof.

Since the singular supports of $`\chi _1_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)`$ and $`\chi _2_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)`$ are contained in the diagonal $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{M_0}`$ and $`\chi _1\chi _2`$ vanishes there, we have that $`(\chi _1\chi _2)_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)`$ is a smooth function.

To prove the continuity of the map $`S_{1,0}^m(A^{})a(\chi _1\chi _2)_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(A)`$, it is enough, using a partition of unity, to assume that $`AM`$ is a trivial bundle. Then our result follows from the standard estimates for oscillatory integrals (i.e., by formally writing $`|v|^2e^{iv,\xi }a(\xi )𝑑\xi =(\mathrm{\Delta }_\xi e^{iv,\xi })a(\xi )𝑑\xi `$ and then integrating by parts, see  for example). ∎

We now verify that the quantization map $`q_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi }`$, Equation (11), gives rise to pseudodifferential operators.

###### Lemma 2.2.

Let $`rr_0`$ be arbitrary. For each $`aS_{1,0}^m(A^{})`$ and each $`\chi 𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}((A)_r)`$ with $`\chi =1`$ close to $`MA`$, the distribution $`q_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi }(a)`$ is the Schwartz-kernel of a pseudodifferential operator $`a_\chi (D)`$ on $`M_0`$, which is properly supported if $`r<\mathrm{}`$ and has principal symbol $`\sigma ^{(\mu )}(a)S_{1,0}^m(E)/S_{1,0}^{m1}(E)`$. If $`aS_{cl}^\mu (A^{})`$, then $`a_\chi (D)`$ is a classical pseudodifferential operator.

###### Proof.

Denote also by $`\chi :I^m(TM_0,M_0)I_{(r)}^m(TM_0,M_0)`$ the “multiplication by $`\chi `$” map. Then

(14)
$$a_\chi (D)=T\mathrm{\Phi }_{}\chi _{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a):=T_{\mathrm{\Phi }_{}((\chi _{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)))}=Tq_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi }(a)$$

where $`T`$ is defined in Equation (8). Hence $`a_\chi (D)`$ is a pseudodifferential operator by the Hörmander’s result mentioned above  (stating that the distribution conormal to the diagonal are exactly the Schwartz kernels of pseudodifferential operators. Since $`\chi (a)`$ is properly supported, so will be the operator $`a_\chi (D)`$).

For the statement about the principal symbol, we use the principal symbol map for conormal distributions , and the fact that the restriction of the anchor $`ATM`$ to the interior $`A|_{M_0}`$ is the identity. (This also follows from the Equation (13) below.) This proves our lemma. ∎

Let us denote by $`\mathrm{\Psi }^m(M_0)`$ the space of pseudodifferential operators of order $`m`$ on $`M_0`$ (no support condition). We then have the following simple corollary.

###### Corollary 2.3.

The map $`\sigma _{tot}:S_{1,0}^m(A^{})\mathrm{\Psi }^m(M_0)/\mathrm{\Psi }^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$,

$$\sigma _{tot}(a):=a_\chi (D)+\mathrm{\Psi }^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)$$

is independent of the choice of the function $`\chi 𝒞_\text{c}^{\mathrm{}}((A)_r)`$ used to define $`a_\chi (D)`$ in Lemma 2.2.

###### Proof.

This follows right away from the previous lemma, Lemma 2.2. ∎

Let us remark that our pseudodifferential calculus depends on more than just the metric.

###### Remark 2.4.

Non-isomorphic Lie structures at infinity can lead to the same metric on $`M_0`$. An example is provided by $`^n`$ with the standard metric, which can be obtained either from the radial compactification of $`^n`$ with the scattering calculus, or from $`[1,1]^n`$ with the $`b`$-calculus. See Examples 1.2 and the paragraph following it. The pseudodifferential calculi obtained from these Lie algebra structures at infinity will be, however, different.

The above remark readily shows that not all pseudodifferential operators in $`\mathrm{\Psi }^m(M_0)`$ are of the form $`a_\chi (D)`$ for some symbol $`aS_{1,0}^m(A^{})`$, not even if we assume that they are properly supported, because they do not have the correct behavior at infinity. Moreover, the space $`Tq_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi }(S_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(A^{}))`$ of all pseudodifferential operators of the form $`a_\chi (D)`$ with $`aS_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(A^{})`$ is not closed under composition. In order to obtain a suitable space of pseudodifferential operators that is closed under composition, we are going to include more (but not all) operators of order $`\mathrm{}`$ in our calculus.

Recall that we have fixed a manifold $`M_0`$, a Lie structure at infinity $`(M,A)`$ on $`M_0`$, and a metric $`g`$ on $`A`$ with injectivity radius $`r_0>0`$. Also, recall that any $`X\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)𝒱_b`$ generates a global flow $`\mathrm{\Psi }_X:\times MM`$. Evaluation at $`t=1`$ yields a diffeomorphism $`\mathrm{\Psi }_X(1,):MM`$, whose action on functions is denoted

(15)
$$\psi _X:𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M)𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M).$$

We continue to assume that the injectivity radius $`r_0`$ of our fixed manifold with a Lie structure at infinity $`(M,𝒱)`$ is strictly positive.

###### Definition 2.5.

Fix $`0<r<r_0`$ and $`\chi 𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}((A)_r)`$ such that $`\chi =1`$ in a neighborhood of $`MA`$. For $`m`$, the space $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ of pseudodifferential operators generated by the Lie structure at infinity $`(M,A)`$ is the linear space of operators $`𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ generated by $`a_\chi (D)`$, $`aS_{1,0}^m(A^{})`$, and $`b_\chi (D)\psi _{X_1}\mathrm{}\psi _{X_k}`$, $`bS^{\mathrm{}}(A^{})`$ and $`X_j\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$, $`j`$.

Similarly, the space $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ of classical pseudodifferential operators generated by the Lie structure at infinity $`(M,A)`$ is obtained by using classical symbols $`a`$ in the construction above.

It is implicit in the above definition that the spaces $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ are the same. They will typically be denoted by $`\mathrm{\Psi }_𝒱^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$. As usual, we shall denote

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0):=_m\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)\text{and}\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0):=_m\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0).$$

At first sight, the above definition depends on the choice of the metric $`g`$ on $`A`$. However, we shall soon prove that this is not the case.

As for the usual algebras of pseudodifferential operators, we have the following basic property of the principal symbol.

###### Proposition 2.6.

The principal symbol establishes isomorphisms

(16)
$$\sigma ^{(m)}:\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)/\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{m1}(M_0)S_{1,0}^m(A^{})/S_{1,0}^{m1}(A^{})$$

and

(17)
$$\sigma ^{(m)}:\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0)/\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^{m1}(M_0)S_{cl}^m(A^{})/S_{cl}^{m1}(A^{}).$$

###### Proof.

This follows from the classical case of the spaces $`\mathrm{\Psi }^m(M_0)`$ using also Lemma 2.2. ∎

## 3. The product

We continue to denote by $`(M,𝒱)`$, $`𝒱=\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$, a fixed manifold with a Lie structure at infinity and with positive injectivity radius. In this section we want to show that the space $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ is an algebra (i.e., it is closed under multiplication) by showing that it is the homomorphic image of the algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}𝒢)`$ of pseudodifferential operators on any $`d`$-connected groupoid $`𝒢`$ integrating $`A`$ (Theorem 3.2).

First we need to fix the terminology and to recall some definitions and constructions involving groupoids.

### 3.1. Groupoids

Here is first an abstract definition that will be made more clear below. Recall that a small category is a category whose morphisms form a set. A groupoid is a small category all of whose morphisms are invertible. Let $`𝒢`$ denote the set of morphisms and $`M`$ denote the set of objects of a given groupoid. Then each $`g𝒢`$ will have a domain $`d(g)M`$ and a range $`r(g)M`$ such that the product $`g_1g_2`$ is defined precisely when $`d(g_1)=r(g_2)`$. Moreover, it follows that the multiplication (or composition) is associative and every element in $`𝒢`$ has an inverse. We shall identify the set of objects $`M`$ with their identity morphisms via a map $`\iota :M𝒢`$. One can think then of a groupoid as being a group, except that the multiplication is only partially defined. By abuse of notation, we shall use the same notation for the groupoid and its set of morphisms ($`𝒢`$ in this case). An intuitive way of thinking of a groupoid with morphisms $`𝒢`$ and objects $`M`$ is to think of the elements of $`𝒢`$ as being arrows between the points of $`M`$. The points of $`M`$ will be called units, by identifying an object with its identity morphism. There will be structural maps $`d,r:𝒢M`$, domain and range, $`\mu :\{(g,h),d(g)=r(h)\}𝒢`$, multiplication, $`𝒢gg^1𝒢`$, inverse, and $`\iota :M𝒢`$ satisfying the usual identities satisfied by the composition of functions.

A Lie groupoid is a groupoid $`𝒢`$ such that the space of arrows $`𝒢`$ and the space of units $`M`$ are manifolds with corners, all its structural maps (i.e., multiplication, inverse, domain, range, $`\iota `$) are differentiable, the domain and range maps (i.e., $`d`$ and $`r`$) are submersions. By the definition of a submersion of manifolds with corners, the submanifolds $`𝒢_x:=d^1(x)`$ and $`𝒢^x:=r^1(x)`$ are smooth (so they have no corners or boundary), for any $`xM`$. Also, it follows that that $`M`$ is an embedded submanifold of $`𝒢`$.

The $`d`$–vertical tangent space to $`𝒢`$, denoted $`T_{vert}𝒢`$, is the union of the tangent spaces to the fibers of $`d:𝒢M`$, that is

(18)
$$T_{vert}𝒢:=_{xM}T𝒢_x=\mathrm{ker}d_{},$$

the union being a disjoint union, with topology induced from the inclusion $`T_{vert}𝒢T𝒢`$. The Lie algebroid of $`𝒢`$, denoted $`A(𝒢)`$ is defined to be the restriction of the $`d`$–vertical tangent space to the set of units $`M`$, that is, $`A(𝒢)=_{xM}T_x𝒢_x`$, a vector bundle over $`M`$. The space of sections of $`A(𝒢)`$ identifies canonically with the space of sections of the $`d`$-vertical tangent bundle (= $`d`$-vertical vector fields) that are right invariant with respect to the action of $`𝒢`$. It also implies a canonical isomorphism between the vertical tangent bundle and the pull-back of $`A(𝒢)`$ via the range map $`r:𝒢M`$:

(19)
$$r^{}A(𝒢)T_{vert}𝒢.$$

The structure of Lie algebroid on $`A(𝒢)`$ is induced by the Lie brackets on the spaces $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(T𝒢_x)`$, $`𝒢_x:=d^1(x)`$. This is possible since the Lie bracket of two right invariant vector fields is again right invariant. The anchor map in this case is given by the differential of $`r`$, $`r_{}:A(𝒢)TM`$.

Let $`𝒢`$ be a Lie groupoid with units $`M`$, then there is associated to it a pseudodifferential calculus (or algebra of pseudodifferential operators) $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢)`$, whose operators of order $`m`$ form a linear space denoted $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢)`$, $`m`$, such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m^{}(𝒢)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{m+m^{}}(𝒢)`$. This calculus is defined as follows: $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢)`$ consists of smooth families of pseudodifferential operators $`(P_x)`$, $`P_x\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢_x)`$, $`xM`$, that are right invariant with respect to multiplication by elements of $`𝒢`$ and are “uniformly supported.” To define what uniformly supported means, let us observe that the right invariance of the operators $`P_x`$ implies that their distribution kernels $`K_{P_x}`$ descend to a distribution $`k_PI^m(𝒢,M)`$. Then the family $`P=(P_x)`$ is called uniformly supported if, by definition, $`k_P`$ has compact support. If $`P`$ is uniformly supported, then each $`P_x`$ is properly supported. The right invariance condition means, for $`P=(P_x)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢)`$, that right multiplication $`𝒢_xg^{}g^{}g𝒢_y`$ maps $`P_y`$ to $`P_x`$, whenever $`d(g)=y`$ and $`r(g)=x`$. By definition, the evaluation map

(20)
$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢)P=(P_x)e_z(P):=P_z\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢_z)$$

is an algebra morphism for any $`zM`$. If we require that the operators $`P_x`$ be classical of order $`\mu `$, we obtain spaces $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl}^\mu (𝒢)`$ having similar properties. These spaces were considered in .

All results and constructions above remain true for classical pseudodifferential operators. This gives the algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢)`$ consisting of families $`P=(P_x)`$ of classical pseudodifferential operators satisfying all the previous conditions.

Assume that the interior $`M_0`$ of $`M`$ is an invariant subset. Recall that the so called vector representation $`\pi _M:\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢)\mathrm{End}(𝒞_\text{c}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0))`$ associates to a pseudodifferential operator $`P`$ on $`𝒢`$ a pseudodifferential operator $`\pi _M(P):𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ . This representation $`\pi _M`$ is defined as follows. If $`\phi 𝒞_\text{c}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$, $`\phi r`$ is a smooth function on $`𝒢`$, and we can let the family $`(P_x)`$ act along each $`𝒢_x`$ to obtain the function $`P(\phi r)`$ on $`𝒢`$ defined by $`P(\phi r)|_{𝒢_x}=P_x(\phi r|_{𝒢_x})`$. The fact that $`P_x`$ is a smooth family guarantees that $`P(\phi r)`$ is also smooth. Using then the fact that $`r`$ is a submersion, so locally it is a product map, we obtain that $`P(\phi r)=\phi _0r,`$ for some function $`\phi _0𝒞_\text{c}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$. We shall then let

(21)
$$\pi _M(P)\phi =\phi _0.$$

The fact that $`P`$ is uniformly supported guarantees that $`\phi _0`$ will also have compact support in $`M_0`$. A more explicit description of $`\pi _M`$ in the case of Lie manifolds will be obtained in the proof of Theorem 3.2, more precisely, Equation (27).

A Lie groupoid $`𝒢`$ with units $`M`$ is said to integrate $`A`$ if $`A(𝒢)A`$ as vector bundles over $`M`$. Recall that the groupoid $`𝒢`$ is called $`d`$–connected if $`𝒢_x:=d^1(x)`$ is a connected set, for any $`xM`$. If there exists a Lie groupoid $`𝒢`$ integrating $`A`$, then there exists also a $`d`$–connected Lie groupoid with this property. (Just take for each $`x`$ the connected component of $`x`$ in $`𝒢_x`$.)

Our plan to show that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ is an algebra, is then to prove that it is the image under $`\pi _M`$ of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢)`$, for a Lie groupoid $`𝒢`$ integrating $`A`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,A)=𝒱`$. In fact, any $`d`$-connected Lie groupoid will satisfy this, by Theorem 3.2. This requires the following deep result due to Crainic and Fernandes  stating that the Lie algebroids associated to Lie manifolds are integrable.

###### Theorem 3.1.

\[Cranic–Fernandes\] Any Lie algebroid arising from a Lie structure at infinity is actually the Lie algebroid of a Lie groupoid (i.e., it is integrable).

This Theorem should be thought of as an analog of Lie’s third theorem stating that every finite dimensional Lie algebra is the Lie algebra of a Lie group. However, the analog of Lie’s theorem for Lie algebroids does not hold: there are Lie algebroid which are not Lie algebroids to a Lie groupoid .

A somewhat weaker form of the above theorem, which is however enough for the proof of Melrose’s conjecture was obtained in .

We are now ready to state and prove the main result of this section. We refer to  or  for the concepts and results on groupoids and algebras of pseudodifferential operators on groupoids not explained below or before the statement of this theorem.

###### Theorem 3.2.

Let $`M_0`$ be a manifold with a Lie structure at infinity, $`(M,𝒱)`$, $`A=A_𝒱`$, as above. Also, let $`𝒢`$ be a $`d`$-connected groupoid with units $`M`$ and with $`A(𝒢)A`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)=\pi _M(\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢))`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0)=\pi _M(\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl}^m(𝒢))`$.

###### Proof.

We shall consider only the first equality. The case of classical operators can be treated in exactly the same way.

Here is first, briefly, the idea of the proof. Let $`P=(P_x)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢)`$. Then the Schwartz kernels of the operators $`P_x`$ form a smooth family of conormal distributions in $`I^m(𝒢_x^2,𝒢_x)`$ that descends, by right invariance, to a distribution $`k_PI_c^m(𝒢,M)`$ (i.e., to a compactly supported distribution on $`𝒢`$, conormal to $`M`$) called the convolution kernel of $`P`$. The map $`Pk_P`$ is an isomorphism  with inverse

(22)
$$T:I_c^m(𝒢,M)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢).$$

Fix a metric on $`AM`$. The resulting exponential map (reviewed below) then gives rise, for $`r>0`$ small enough, to an open embedding

(23)
$$\alpha :(A)_r𝒢,$$

which is a diffeomorphism onto its image. This diffeomorphism then gives rise to an embedding

(24)
$$\alpha _{}:I_{(r)}^m(A,M):=I_c^m((A)_r,M)I^m(𝒢,M)$$

such that for each $`\chi `$ as above

(25)
$$\pi _M\left(\alpha _{}(\chi _{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a))\right)=a_\chi (D)\mathrm{\Psi }^m(M_0).$$

This will allow us to show that $`\pi _M(\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢))`$ contains the linear span of all operators $`P`$ of the form $`P=a_\chi (D)`$, $`aS_{1,0}^m(A^{})`$, $`m`$ fixed. This reduces the problem to verifying that

(26)
$$\pi _M(\mathrm{\Psi }^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢))=\mathrm{\Psi }_𝒱^{\mathrm{}}(M_0).$$

Using a partition of unity, this in turn will be reduced to Equation (25). Now let us provide the complete details.

Let $`𝒢_x^x:=d^1(x)r^1(x)`$, which is a group for any $`xM_0`$, by the axioms of a groupoid. Then $`𝒢_x^x𝒢_y^y`$ whenever there exists $`g𝒢`$ with $`d(g)=x`$ and $`r(g)=y`$ (conjugate by $`g`$). We can assume, without loss of generality, that $`M`$ is connected. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:=𝒢_x^x`$, for some fixed $`xM_0`$. Our above informal description of the proof can be conveniently formalized and visualized using the following diagram whose morphisms are defined below:

We now define the morphisms appearing in the above diagram in such a way that it will turn out to be a commutative diagram. The bottom three rectangles will trivially turn out to be commutative. Recall that the index “pr” means “properly supported.”

First, recall that the maps $`_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1`$ (the fiberwise inverse Fourier transform), $`\chi `$ (the multiplication by the cut-off function $`\chi `$), $``$ (the restriction map), $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ (induced by the inverse of the exponential map), and $`e_x`$ (evaluation of the family $`(P_y)`$ at $`y=x`$) have already been defined.

We let $`\mu _1(g^{},g)=g^{}g^1`$ and $`\mu _1^{}`$ be the map induced at the level of kernels by $`\mu _1`$ by pull-back (which is seen to be defined in this case because $`\mu _1`$ is a submersion and its range is transverse to $`M`$).

The four isomorphisms not named are the “$`T`$ isomorphisms” and their inverses defined in various places earlier (identifying spaces of conormal distributions with spaces of pseudodifferential operators). More precisely, the top isomorphism is from  and all the other isomorphisms are the canonical identifications between pseudodifferential operators and distributions on product spaces that are conormal to the diagonal (via the Schwartz kernels). In fact, the top isomorphism $`T`$ is completely determined by the requirement that the left-most square (containing $`e_x`$) be commutative.

It is a slightly more difficult task to define $`r_{}`$. We shall have to make use of a minimum of groupoid theory. Let $`yM`$ be arbitrary for a moment. Since the Lie algebra of $`𝒢_y^y`$ is isomorphic to the kernel of the anchor map $`\varrho :A(𝒢)_yT_yM`$, we see that $`𝒢_y^y`$ is a discrete group if, and only if, $`yM_0`$. Then

$$r_{}:T_y𝒢_y=A(𝒢)_yT_yM_0$$

is an isomorphism, if and only if, $`yM_0`$.

Let $`xM_0`$ be our fixed point. Then $`r:𝒢_xM_0`$ is a surjective local diffeomorphism. Also $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:=𝒢_x^x`$ acts freely on $`𝒢_x`$ and $`𝒢_x/\mathrm{\Gamma }=M_0`$. Hence $`r:𝒢_xM_0`$ is a covering map with group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢_x)^\mathrm{\Gamma }=𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$. Let $`P=(P_y)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢)`$. Since $`P_x`$ is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant and properly supported, the map $`P_x:𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢_x)𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢_x)`$, descends to a map $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$, which is by definition $`r_{}(P)`$. More precisely, if $`\phi `$ is a smooth function on $`M_0`$, then $`\phi r`$, is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant function on $`𝒢_x`$. Hence $`P(\phi r)`$ is defined (because $`P`$ is properly supported) and is also $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant. Thus there exists a function $`\phi _0𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ such that $`P(\phi r)=\phi _0r`$. The operator $`r_{}(P)`$ is then given by $`r_{}(P)\phi :=\phi _0`$. This definition of $`r_{}`$ provides us with the following simpler definition of the vector representation $`\pi _M`$:

(27)
$$\pi _M(P)=r_{}(e_x(P)).$$

We also obtain that

(28)
$$\pi _MT=r_{}e_xT=r_{}T\mu _1^{},$$

by the commutativity of the left-most rectangle.

The commutativity of the bottom rectangle completely determines the morphism $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{}`$. However, we shall also need an explicit description of this map. This can be obtained as follows. Recall that $`𝒢_x`$ is a covering of $`M_0`$ with group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:=𝒢_x^x`$. Hence we can identify $`I_{pr}^m(𝒢_x^2,𝒢_x)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with $`I_{pr}^m((𝒢_x^2)^\mathrm{\Gamma },𝒢_x^\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. The map $`\tau :(𝒢_x^2)/\mathrm{\Gamma }M_0^2`$ is also a covering map. This allows us to identify a distribution with small support in $`(𝒢_x^2)/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with a distribution with support in a small subset of $`M_0^2`$. These identifications then extend by summation along the fibers of $`\tau :(𝒢_x^2)/\mathrm{\Gamma }M_0^2`$ to define a distribution $`\tau _{}(u)𝒟^{}(M_0^2)`$, for any distribution $`u`$ on $`(𝒢_x^2)/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ whose support intersects only finitely many components of $`\tau ^1(U)`$, for any connected locally trivializing open set $`UM_0`$. The morphism $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{}`$ identifies then with $`\tau _{}`$. Also, observe for later use that

(29)
$$\tau (g^{},g)=(r(g^{}),r(g))=(r(g^{}g^1),d(g^{}g^1))=(r(\mu _1(g^{},g)),d(\mu _1(g^{},g))).$$

Next, we must set $`l_{}:=\stackrel{~}{r}_{}\mu _1^{}`$, by the commutativity requirement. For this morphism we have a similar, but simpler, description of $`l_{}(u)`$. Namely, $`l_{}(u)`$ is obtained by first restricting a distribution $`u`$ to $`d^1(M_0)=r^1(M_0)`$ and then by applying to this restriction the push-forward map defined by $`(d,r):d^1(M_0)M_0^2`$ (that is, we sum over open sets in $`𝒢_x`$ covering sets in the base $`M_0^2`$). Equation (29) guarantees that this alternative description of $`l_{}`$ satisfies $`l_{}:=\stackrel{~}{r}_{}\mu _1^{}`$.

To define $`\alpha _{}`$, recall that we have fixed a metric on $`A`$. This metric then lifts via $`r:𝒢M`$ to $`T_{vert}𝒢r^{}A(𝒢)`$, by Equations (18) and (19). The induced metrics on the fibers of $`𝒢_y`$, $`yM`$, give rise, using the (geodesic) exponential map, to maps

$$A_yA(𝒢)_y=T_y𝒢_y𝒢_y.$$

These maps give rise to an application $`(A)_r𝒢`$, which, by the Inverse mapping theorem, is seen to be a diffeomorphism onto its image. It, moreover, sends the zero section of $`A`$ to the units of $`𝒢`$. Then $`\alpha _{}`$ is the resulting map at the level of conormal distributions. (Note that $`𝒢_y`$ is complete.)

We have now completed the definition of all morphisms in our diagram. To prove that our diagram is commutative, it remains to prove that

$$l_{}\alpha _{}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{}.$$

This however follows from the above description of the map $`l_{}`$, since $`(d,r)`$ is injective on $`\alpha ((A)_r)`$ and $`r:𝒢_xM_0`$ is an isometric covering, thus preserving the exponential maps.

The commutativity of the above diagram finally shows that

(30)
$$\begin{array}{c}a_\chi (D):=Tq_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi }(a)=T\mathrm{\Phi }_{}\chi _{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)\hfill \\ \hfill =\pi _MT\alpha _{}\chi _{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)=\pi _M(Q),\end{array}$$

where $`Q=T\alpha _{}\chi _{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)`$ and $`aS_{1,0}^m(A^{})`$. Thus every operator of the form $`a_\chi (D)`$ is in the range of $`\pi _M`$.

Let us notice for the rest of our argument that the definition of the vector representation $`\pi _M`$ can be extended by the same formula to arbitrary right invariant families of operators $`P=(P_x)`$, $`P_x:𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢_x)𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢_x)`$, such that the induced operator $`P:𝒞_\text{c}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢)𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢_x)`$ has range in $`𝒞_\text{c}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢)`$. We shall use this in the following case. Let $`X𝒱`$. Then $`X`$ defines by integration a diffeomorphism of $`M`$, see Equation (15). Let $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ be its lift to a $`d`$-vertical vector field on $`𝒢`$ (i.e., on each $`𝒢_x`$ we obtain a vector field, and this family of vector fields is right invariant). A result from \[14, Appendix\] (see also ) then shows that $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ can be integrated to a global flow. Let us denote by $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_X`$ the family of diffeomorphisms of each $`𝒢_x`$ obtained in this way, as well as their action on functions. It follows then from the definition that

(31)
$$\pi _M(\stackrel{~}{\psi }_X)=\psi _X.$$

The Equations (30) and (31) then give

(32)
$$\pi _M(Q\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{X_1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{X_n})=a_\chi (D)\psi _{X_1}\mathrm{}\psi _{X_n}\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0),$$

for any $`aS^{\mathrm{}}(A^{})`$ and $`Q=T\alpha _{}\chi _{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)`$. Also $`Q\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{X_1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{X_n}\mathrm{\Psi }^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢)`$, since the product of a regularizing operator with the operator induced by a diffeomorphism is regularizing. We have thus proved that $`\pi _M(\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢))\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$. Let us now prove the opposite inclusion, that is that $`\pi _M(\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢))\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$.

Let $`Q\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢)`$ be arbitrary and let $`b=T^1(Q)`$. Let $`\chi _0`$ be a smooth function on $`𝒢`$ that is equal to 1 in a neighborhood of $`M`$ in $`𝒢`$ and with support in $`\alpha ((A)_r)`$ and such that $`\chi =1`$ on the support of $`\chi _0\alpha `$. Then $`b_0:=\chi _0b`$ is in the range of $`\alpha _{}\chi _{\mathrm{fiber}}^1`$, because any distribution $`uI_{(r)}^m(A,M)`$ is in the range of $`_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1`$, if $`r<\mathrm{}`$. Then the difference $`bb_0`$ is smooth. Because $`𝒢`$ is $`d`$-connected, we can use a similar construction as the one used to define $`b_0`$ and a partition of unity argument to obtain that

(33)
$$T(bb_0)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{l}{}}T(b_j)\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{X_{j1}}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{X_{jn}}$$

for some distributions $`b_j\chi I_{(r)}^{\mathrm{}}(A,M)`$ and vector fields $`X_{jk}𝒱`$. Let $`a_j`$ be such that $`b_j=\alpha _{}\chi _{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a_j)`$, for $`a_0S_{1,0}^m(A^{})`$ and $`a_jS_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(A^{})`$, if $`j>0`$. Then Equations (30) and (32) show that

(34)
$$\pi _M(Q)=a_0(D)+\underset{j=1}{\overset{l}{}}a_j(D)\psi _{X_{j1}}\mathrm{}\psi _{X_{jn}}\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0).$$

We have thus proved that $`\pi _M(\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢))=\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0),`$ as desired. This completes our proof. ∎

Since the map $`\pi _M`$ respects adjoints: $`\pi _M(P^{})=\pi _M(P)^{}`$, , we obtain the following corollary.

###### Corollary 3.3.

The algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ are closed under taking adjoints.

We end this section with three remarks.

###### Remark 3.4.

Equation (33) is easily understood in the case of groups, when it amounts to the possibility of covering any given compact set by finitely many translations of a given open neighborhood of the identity. The argument in general is the same as the argument used to define the basic coordinate neighborhoods on $`𝒢`$ in . The basic coordinate neighborhoods on $`𝒢`$ were used in that paper to define the smooth structure on the groupoid $`𝒢`$.

###### Remark 3.5.

We suspect that any proof of the fact that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ is closed under multiplication is equivalent to the integrability of $`A`$. In fact, Melrose has implicitly given some evidence for this in  for particular $`(M,𝒱)`$, by showing that the kernels of the pseudodifferential operators on $`M_0`$ that he constructed naturally live on a modified product space $`M_𝒱^2`$. In his case $`M_𝒱^2`$ was a blow-up of the product $`M\times M`$, and hence was a larger compactification of the product $`M_0\times M_0`$. The kernels of his operators naturally extended to conormal distributions on this larger product $`M_𝒱^2`$. The product and adjoint were defined in terms of suitable maps between $`M_𝒱^2`$ and some fibered product spaces $`M_𝒱^3`$, which are suitable blow-ups of $`M^3`$ and hence larger compactifications of $`M_0^3`$. This in principle leads to a solution of the problem of microlocalizing $`𝒱`$ that we stated in the introduction whenever one can define the spaces $`M_𝒱^2`$ and $`M_𝒱^3`$. Let us also mention here that Melrose’s approach usually leads to algebras that are slightly larger than ours.

###### Remark 3.6.

Let $`𝒢`$ be a Lie groupoid such that the map $`\pi _M`$ is an isomorphism and let $`NM`$ be a face of $`M`$, then we obtain a generalized indicial map

$$R_N:\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢_N).$$

In applications, the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^{\mathrm{}}(𝒢_N)`$ often turn out to be isomorphic to the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱_1}^{\mathrm{}}(N_0;G)`$ studied in the last section of this paper. In fact, this is the motivation for introducing the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱_1}^{\mathrm{}}(N_0;G)`$.

## 4. Properties of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$

Theorem 3.2 has several consequences similar to the results in .

### 4.1. Basic properties

We obtain that the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ are independent of the choices made to define them and, thus, depend only on the Lie structure at infinity $`(M,𝒱)`$.

###### Corollary 4.1.

The spaces $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ are independent of the choice of the metric on $`A`$ and the function $`\chi `$ used to define it, but depend, in general, on the Lie structure at infinity $`(M,A)`$ on $`M_0`$.

###### Proof.

The space $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢)`$ does not depend on the metric on $`A`$ or on the function $`\chi `$ and neither does the vector representation $`\pi _M`$. Then use Theorem 3.2. The proof is the same for classical operators. ∎

An important consequence is that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)=_m\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ are filtered algebras, as it is the case of the usual algebra of pseudodifferential operators on a compact manifold.

###### Proposition 4.2.

Using the above notation, we have that

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m^{}(M_0)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{m+m^{}}(M_0)\text{and}\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0)\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m^{}(M_0)\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^{m+m^{}}(M_0),\end{array}$$

for all $`m,m^{}\{\mathrm{}\}.`$

###### Proof.

Use Theorem 3.2 and the fact that $`\pi _M`$ preserves the product. ∎

Part (i) of the following result is an analog of a standard result about the $`b`$-calculus , whereas the second formula is the independence of diffeomorphisms of the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$, in the framework of manifolds with a Lie structure at infinity. Recall that if $`X\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$, we have denoted by $`\psi _X:=\mathrm{\Psi }_X(1,):MM`$ the diffeomorphism defined by integrating $`X`$ (and specializing at $`t=1`$).

###### Proposition 4.3.

(i) Let $`x`$ be a defining function of some hyperface of $`M`$. Then

$$x^s\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)x^s=\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)\text{and}x^s\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0)x^s=\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0)$$

for any $`s`$.

(ii) Similarly,

$$\psi _X\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)\psi _X^1=\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)\text{and}\psi _X\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0)\psi _X^1=\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0),$$

for any $`X\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$.

###### Proof.

We have that $`x^s\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl}^m(𝒢)x^s=\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl}^m(𝒢)`$, for any $`s`$, by . A similar result for type $`(1,0)`$ operators is proved in the same way as in . This proves (a) because $`\pi _M(x^sPx^s)=x^s\pi _M(P)x^s`$.

Similarly, using the notations of Theorem 3.2, we have $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_X\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl}^m(𝒢)\stackrel{~}{\psi }_X^1=\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl}^m(𝒢)`$, for any $`X\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)=𝒱`$. By the diffeomorphism invariance of the space of pseudodifferential operators, $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_XP\stackrel{~}{\psi }_X^1`$ defines a right invariant family of pseudodifferential operators on $`𝒢`$ for any such right invariant family $`P=(P_x)`$, as in the proof of Theorem 3.2. To check that the family $`P_1:=\psi _XP\psi _X^1`$ has a compactly supported convolution kernel, denote by $`(𝒢)_a=\{g,dist(g,d(g))a\}`$. Then observe that $`\text{supp}(\stackrel{~}{\psi }_XP\stackrel{~}{\psi }_X^1)𝒢_{d+2X}`$ whenever $`\text{supp}(P)(𝒢)_d`$. Then use Equation (31) to conclude the result.

The proof for type $`(1,0)`$ operators is the same. ∎

Let us notice that the same proof gives (ii) above for any diffeomorphism of $`M_0`$ that extends to an automorphism of $`(M,A)`$. Recall that an automorphism of the Lie algebroid $`\pi :AM`$ is a morphism of vector bundles $`(\phi ,\psi )`$, $`\phi :MM`$, $`\psi :AA`$, such that $`\phi `$ and $`\psi `$ are diffeomorphisms, $`\pi \psi =\phi \pi `$, and we have the following compatibility with the anchor map $`\varrho `$:

$$\varrho \psi =\phi _{}\varrho .$$

### 4.2. Mapping properties

Let $`H^s(M_0)`$ be the domain of $`(1+\mathrm{\Delta })^{s/2}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the (positive) Laplace operator on $`M_0`$ defined by the metric, if $`s0`$. The space $`H^s(M_0)`$, $`s0`$, is defined by duality, the duality form being the pairing of distributions with test functions.

###### Corollary 4.4.

Each operator $`P\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$, $`P:𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$, extends to a continuous linear operators $`P:𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M)𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ and $`P:H^s(M_0)H^{sm}(M_0)`$. The space $`H^m(M_0)`$, $`m0`$, identifies with the domain of $`P`$ with the graph topology and $`H^m(M_0)=PL^2(M_0)+L^2(M_0)`$, for any elliptic $`P\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(M_0)`$.

###### Proof.

The first part is a direct consequence of the definitio of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ is properly supported. The last part follows from the results of  and .

We now sketch the proof for the benefit of the reader. It follows from the explicit form of the kernels of operators $`T\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{n1}(M_0)`$, $`n=dim(M_0)`$, that such a $`T`$ is bounded on $`L^2(M_0)`$. Using the symbolic properties of the algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$, namely Proposition 2.6 and Proposition 4.2, it then follows that any $`T\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^0(M_0)`$ is bounded on $`L^2(M_0)`$ (the details are the same as in  or ). Using again the symbolic properties of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$, it is proved as in  that the domain of the closure of $`P`$ and $`PL^2(M_0)+L^2(M_0)`$ are independent of $`P`$ elliptic of order $`m`$. Let us denote by $`H_m`$ the domain of the closure of $`P`$ and $`H_m=PL^2(M_0)+L^2(M_0)`$. Then it is proved in  that $`T:H_rH_{rm}`$ is bounded, for any $`T`$ of order $`m`$. In  it is proved using partitions of unity that $`T:H^r(M_0)H^{rm}(M_0)`$ is bounded for any $`T`$ of order $`m`$. This shows that $`H_r=H^r(M_0)`$ for any $`r`$. ∎

### 4.3. Quantization

We have the following quantization properties of the algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$.

For any $`X\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$, denote by $`a_X:A^{}`$ the function defined by $`a_X(\xi )=\xi (X)`$. Then there exists a unique Poisson structure on $`A^{}`$ such that $`\{a_X,a_Y\}=a_{[X,Y]}`$. It is related to the Poisson structure $`\{,\}^{T^{}M}`$ on $`T^{}M`$ via the formula

$$\{f_1\varrho ^{},f_2\varrho ^{}\}^{T^{}M}=\{f_1,f_2\}\varrho ^{},$$

where $`\varrho ^{}:T^{}MA^{}`$ denotes the dual to the anchor map $`\varrho `$. In particular, in $`\{,\}`$ and $`\{,\}^{T^{}M}`$ coincide on $`M_0`$.

###### Proposition 4.5.

We have that

$$\sigma ^{(m+m^{}1)}([P,Q])=\{\sigma ^{(m)}(P),\sigma ^{(m^{})}(Q)\}$$

for any $`P\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(M_0)`$ and any $`Q\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m^{}(M_0)`$, where $`\{,\}`$ is the usual Poisson bracket on $`A^{}`$.

###### Proof.

The Poisson structure on $`T^{}M_0`$ is induced from the Poisson structure on $`A^{}`$. In turn, the Poisson structure on $`T^{}M_0`$ determines the Poisson structure on $`A^{}`$, because $`T^{}M_0`$ is dense in $`A^{}`$. The desired result then follows from the similar result that is known for pseudodifferential operators on $`M_0`$ and the Poisson bracket on $`T^{}M_0`$. ∎

We conclude with the following result, which is independent of the previous considerations, but sheds some light on them. The invariant differential operators on $`𝒢`$ are generated by $`d`$–vertical invariant vector fields on $`𝒢`$, that is by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(A(𝒢))`$. We have by definition that $`\pi _M=\varrho :\mathrm{\Gamma }(M;A(𝒢))\mathrm{\Gamma }(M;TM)`$, and hence $`\pi _M`$ maps the algebra of invariant differential operators onto $`𝒢`$ to $`\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M_0)`$. In particular, the proof of Theorem 3.2 (more precisely Equation (30)) can be used to prove the following result, which we will however prove also without making appeal to Theorem 3.2.

###### Proposition 4.6.

Let $`X\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$ and denote by $`a_X(\xi )=\xi (X)`$ the associated linear function on $`A^{}`$. Then $`a_{X,\chi }S^1(A^{})`$ and $`a_X(D)=iX`$. Moreover,

$$\{a_\chi (D),a=\text{ }\text{polynomial in each fiber}\}=\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M_0).$$

###### Proof.

We continue to use a fixed metric on $`A`$ to trivialize any density bundle. Let $`u=_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)`$, where $`aS_{cl}^m(A^{})`$ polynomial in each fiber. By the Fourier inversion formula (and integration by parts), $`u`$ is supported on $`M`$, which is the same thing as saying that $`u`$ is a distribution the form $`u,f=_MP_0f(x)dvol(x)`$, with $`P_0`$ a differential operator acting along the fibers of $`AM`$ and $`f𝒞_\text{c}^{\mathrm{}}(A)`$. It then follows from the definition of $`a_\chi (D)`$, from the formula above for $`u=_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1(a)`$, and from the fact that $`\chi =1`$ in a neighborhood of the support of $`u`$ that

(35)
$$a_\chi (D)f(x)=[P_0f(\mathrm{exp}_x(v))]|_{v=0},vT_xM_0.$$

Let $`X_1,X_2,\mathrm{},X_m\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$ and

(36)
$$a=a_{X_1}a_{X_2}\mathrm{}a_{X_m}S^m(A^{}).$$

Then the differential operator $`P_0`$ above is given by the formula

$$P_0f(x)=_{A_x^{}}a(\xi )^1f(\xi ),$$

with the inverse Fourier transform $`^1`$ being defined along the fiber $`A_x`$. Hence

$$P_0=i^mX_1X_2\mathrm{}X_m,$$

with each $`X_j`$ being identified with the family of constant coefficients differential operators along the fibers of $`AM`$ that acts along $`A_x`$ as the derivation in the direction of $`X_j(x)`$.

For any $`XA`$, we shall denote by $`\psi _{tX}`$ the one parameter subgroup of diffeomorphisms of $`M`$ generated by $`X`$. (Note that $`\psi _{tX}`$ is defined for any $`t`$ because $`M`$ is compact and $`X`$ is tangent to all faces of $`M`$.) We thus obtain an action of $`\psi _{tX}`$ on functions by $`[\psi _{tX}(f)](x)=f(\mathrm{exp}(tX)x)`$. Then the differential operator $`P_0`$ is associated to $`a`$ as in Equation (36) is given by

(37)
$$P_0(f\mathrm{exp})|_M=i^m\left[_1_2\mathrm{}_m\psi _{t_1X_1+t_2X_2+\mathrm{}+t_mX_m}f\right]|_{t_1=\mathrm{}=t_m=0}.$$

Then Equations (35) and (37) give

(38)
$$a_\chi (D)f=i^m\left[_1\mathrm{}_m\mathrm{exp}(t_1X_1\mathrm{}t_mX_m)f\right]|_{t_1=\mathrm{}=t_m=0},$$

In particular, $`a_X(D)=iX`$, for any $`X\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$.

This proves that

(39)
$$a_\chi (D)\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M_0),$$

by the Campbell-Hausdorff formula , which states that $`a_\chi (D)`$ is generated by $`X_1,X_2,\mathrm{},X_n`$ (and their Lie brackets), and hence that it is generated by $`𝒱`$, which was assumed to be a Lie algebra.

Let us prove now that any differential operator $`P\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M_0)`$ is of the form $`a_\chi (D)`$, for some polynomial symbol $`a`$ on $`A^{}`$. This is true if $`P`$ has degree zero. Indeed, assume $`P`$ is the multiplication by $`f𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$. Lift $`f`$ to an order zero symbol on $`A^{}`$, by letting this extension to be constant in each fiber. Then $`P=f(D)`$. We shall prove our statement by induction on the degree $`m`$ of $`P`$. By linearity, we can reduce to the case $`P=i^mX_1\mathrm{}X_m`$, where $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_m\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$. Let $`a=a_{X_1}\mathrm{}a_{X_m}`$. Then

$$\sigma _m(a_\chi (D))(\xi )=a(\xi )=X_1(\xi )\mathrm{}X_m(\xi )=\sigma _m(P),$$

and hence $`Q:=a_\chi (D)i^mX_1\mathrm{}X_m\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{m1}(M_0)`$. By the induction hypothesis, $`Q=b_\chi (D)`$ for some polynomial symbol of order at most $`m1`$ on $`A^{}`$. This completes the proof. ∎

From this we obtain the following corollary.

###### Corollary 4.7.

Let $`\mathrm{Diff}(M_0)`$ be the algebra of all differential operators on $`M_0`$. Then

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)\mathrm{Diff}(M_0)=\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M_0).$$

###### Proof.

We know from the above proposition that

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)\mathrm{Diff}(M_0)\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M_0).$$

Conversely, assume $`P\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)\mathrm{Diff}(M_0)`$. We shall prove by induction on $`m`$ that $`P\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^m(M_0)`$. If $`m=0`$ then $`P`$ is the multiplication with a smooth function $`f`$ on $`M_0`$. But then $`f=\sigma ^{(0)}(P)S^0(A^{})`$ is constant along the fibers of $`A^{}M`$, and hence $`f𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M)\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{}(M_0)`$.

Assume now that the statement is proved for $`P`$ of order $`<m`$. We shall prove it then for $`P`$ of order $`m`$. Then $`a:=\sigma ^{(m)}(P)`$ is a polynomial symbol in $`S^m(A^{})`$. Thus $`a_\chi (D)\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^m(M_0)`$, by Proposition 4.6. But then $`\sigma ^{(m)}(Pa_\chi (D))=0`$, by Lemma 2.2, and hence $`Pa_\chi (D)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{m1}(M_0)\mathrm{Diff}(M_0)`$. By the induction hypothesis $`Pa_\chi (D)\mathrm{Diff}_𝒱^{m1}(M_0)`$. This completes the proof. ∎

## 5. Group actions and semi-classical limits

One of the most convenient features of manifolds with a Lie structure at infinity is that questions on the analysis on these manifolds often reduce to questions on the analysis on simpler manifolds. These simpler manifolds are manifolds of the same dimension but endowed with certain non-trivial group actions. Harmonic analysis techniques then allow us to ultimately reduce our questions to analysis on lower dimensional manifolds with a Lie structure at infinity. In this section, we discuss the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0,G)`$ that generalize the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ when group actions are considered. These algebras are necessary for the reductions mentioned above and are typically the range of (generalized) indicial maps. Then we discuss a semi-classical version of the algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$.

### 5.1. Group actions

We shall consider the following setting. Let $`M_0`$ be a manifold with a Lie structure at infinity $`(M,A)`$, and $`𝒱=\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$, as above. Also, let $`G`$ be a Lie group with Lie algebra $`𝔤:=\mathrm{Lie}(G)`$. We shall denote by $`𝔤_M`$ the bundle $`M\times 𝔤M`$. Then

(40)
$$𝒱_G:=𝒱𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M,𝔤)\mathrm{\Gamma }(A𝔤_M)$$

has the structure of a Lie algebra with respect to the bracket $`[,]`$ which is defined such that on $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M,𝔤)`$ it coincides with the pointwise bracket, on $`𝒱`$ it coincides with the original bracket, and, for any $`X𝒱`$, $`f𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$, and $`Y𝔤`$, we have

$$[X,fY]:=X(f)Y.$$

(Here $`fY`$ denotes the function $`\xi :M𝔤`$ defined by $`\xi (m)=f(m)Y𝔤`$.)

The main goal of this subsection is to indicate how the results of the Section (2) extend to $`𝒱_G`$, after we replace $`A`$ with $`A𝔤_M`$, $`M_0`$ with $`M_0\times G`$, and $`M`$ with $`M\times G`$. The resulting constructions and definitions will yield objects on $`M\times G`$ that are invariant with respect to the action of $`G`$ on itself by right translations.

We now proceed by analogy with the construction of the operators $`a_\chi (D)`$ in Subsection 2.3. First, we identify a section of $`𝒱_G:=𝒱𝒞^{\mathrm{}}(M,𝔤)\mathrm{\Gamma }(A𝔤_M)`$ with a right $`G`$-invariant vector field on $`M_0\times G`$. At the level of vector bundles, this corresponds to the map

(41)
$$p:T(M_0\times G)=TM_0\times TGTM_0\times 𝔤,$$

where the map $`TG𝔤`$ is defined using the trivialization of $`TG`$ by right invariant vector fields. Let $`p_1:M\times GM`$ be the projection onto the first component and $`p_1^{}A`$ be the lift of $`A`$ to $`M\times G`$ via $`p_1`$.

The map $`p`$ defined in the Equation (41) can then be used to define the lift

(42)
$$p^{}(u)I^m(p_1^{}ATG,M\times G),$$

for any distribution $`uI^m(A𝔤_M,M)`$. In particular, $`p^{}(u)`$ will be a right $`G`$-invariant distribution. Then we define $``$ to be the restriction of distributions from $`p_1^{}ATG`$ to distributions on $`TM_0\times TG=T(M_0\times G)`$.

We endow $`M_0\times G`$ with the metric obtained from a metric on $`A`$ and a right invariant metric on $`G`$. This allows us to define the exponential map, thus obtaining, as in Section 2, a differentiable map

(43)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }:(TM_0\times TG)_r=(T(M_0\times G))_r(M_0\times G)^2$$

that is a diffeomorphism onto an open neighborhood of the diagonal, provided that $`r<r_0`$, where $`r_0`$ is the injectivity radius of $`M_0\times G`$. We shall denote as before by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{}:I_c^m((TM_0\times TG)_r,M_0\times G)I_c^m((M_0\times G)^2,M_0\times G)$$

the induced map on conormal distributions.

The inverse Fourier transform will give a map

(44)
$$_{\mathrm{fiber}}^1:S_{1,0}^m(A^{}𝔤_M^{})I^m(A𝔤_M,M),$$

defined by the same formula as before (Equation (6)). Finally, we shall also need a smooth function $`\chi `$ on $`A𝔤_M`$ that is equal to 1 in a neighborhood of the zero section and has support inside $`(A𝔤_M)_r`$.

We can then define the quantization map in the $`G`$-equivariant case by

(45)
$$q_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi ,G}:=\mathrm{\Phi }_{}p^{}\chi _{\mathrm{fiber}}^1:S_{1,0}^m(A^{}𝔤_M^{})^m((M_0\times G)^2,M_0\times G).$$

The main difference with the definition in Equation (11) is that we included the map $`p^{}`$, which is the lift of distributions in $`I^m(A𝔤_M,M)`$ to $`G`$-invariant distributions in $`I^m(p_1^{}ATG,M_0G)`$, see Equation (42). Then

(46)
$$a_\chi (D)=Tq_{\mathrm{\Phi },\chi ,G},$$

as before.

With this definition of the quantization map, all the results of the previous sections remain valid, with the appropriate modifications. In particular, we obtain the following definition of the algebra of $`G`$-equivariant pseudodifferential operators associated to $`(A,M,G)`$.

###### Definition 5.1.

For $`m`$, the space $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0,G)`$ of $`G`$-equivariant pseudodifferential operators generated by the Lie structure at infinity $`(M,A)`$ is the linear space of operators $`𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0\times G)𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0\times G)`$ generated by $`a_\chi (D)`$, $`aS_{1,0}^m(A^{}𝔤_M^{})`$, and $`b_\chi (D)\psi _{X_1}\mathrm{}\psi _{X_k}`$, $`bS^{\mathrm{}}(A^{}𝔤_M^{})`$ and $`X_j\mathrm{\Gamma }(A𝔤_M)`$.

The space $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0,G)`$ of classical $`G`$-equivariant pseudodifferential operators generated by the Lie structure at infinity $`(M,A)`$ is defined similarly, but using classical symbols $`a`$.

With this definition, all the results on the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ extend right away to the spaces $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0,G)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0,G)`$. In particular, these spaces are algebras, are independent of the choice of the metric on $`A`$ used to define them, and have the usual symbolic properties of the algebras of pseudodifferential operators.

The only thing that maybe needs more explanations is with what we replace $`\pi _M`$ in the $`G`$-equivariant case, because in the $`G`$-equivariant case we no longer use the vector representation. Let $`𝒢`$ be a groupoid integrating $`A`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)=𝒱`$. Then $`𝒢\times G`$ integrates $`A𝔤_M`$. If $`P=(P_x)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0}^m(𝒢\times G)`$, then we consider $`\pi _0(P)`$ to be the operator induced by $`P_x`$ on $`(𝒢_x/𝒢_x^x)\times G`$, $`xM_0`$, the later space being a quotient of $`(𝒢\times G)_x`$. We shall use then $`\pi _0`$ instead of $`\pi _M`$ in the $`G`$-equivariant case. (By the proof of Theorem 3.2, $`\pi _0=\pi _M`$, if $`G`$ is reduced to a point.)

### 5.2. Indicial maps

The main reason for considering the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0,G)`$ and their classical counterparts is the following. Let $`(M,𝒱)`$, $`𝒱=\mathrm{\Gamma }(M,A)`$, be a manifold with a Lie structure at infinity. Let $`N_0M`$ be a submanifold such that $`T_xN_0=\varrho (A_x)`$ for any $`xN_0`$. Moreover, assume that $`N_0`$ is completely contained in an open face $`FM`$ such that $`N:=\overline{N_0}`$ is a submanifold with corners of $`F`$ and $`N_0=NN`$. Then the restriction $`A|_{N_0}`$ is such that the Lie bracket on $`𝒱=\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$ descends to a Lie bracket on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(A|_{N_0})`$. (This is due to the fact that the space $`I`$ of functions vanishing on $`N`$ is invariant for derivations in $`𝒱`$. Then $`I𝒱`$ is an ideal of $`𝒱`$, and hence $`𝒱/I𝒱\mathrm{\Gamma }(A|_N)`$ is naturally a Lie algebra.)

Assume now that there exists a Lie group $`G`$ and a vector bundle $`A_1N`$ such that $`A|_NA_1𝔤_N`$ and $`𝒱_1:=𝒱|_N\mathrm{\Gamma }(A_1)`$. Then $`𝒱_1`$ is a Lie algebra and $`(N_0,N,A_1)`$ is also a manifold with a Lie structure at infinity. In many cases (certainly for many of the most interesting examples) one obtains for any Lie group $`H`$ a natural morphism

(47)
$$R_N:\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0;H)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱_1}^m(N_0;G\times H).$$

For example, the generalizations of the morphisms considered in  are of the form (47). However, we do not know exactly what are the conditions under which the morphism $`R_N`$ above is defined.

Let $`𝔥=\mathrm{Lie}H`$ and $`𝔥_N=M\times \mathrm{Lie}H`$. Then, at the level of kernels the morphism defined by Equation (47) corresponds to the restriction maps

$$r_N:I^m(A^{}𝔥_N^{},M)I^{}(A^{}|_N𝔥_N^{},N)I^{}(A_1^{}𝔤_N𝔥_N^{},N)$$

in the sense that $`R_N(a_\chi (D))=(r_N(a))_\chi (D)`$.

### 5.3. Semi-classical limits

We now define the algebra $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0[[h]])`$, an element of which will be, roughly speaking, a semi-classical family of operators $`(T_t)`$, $`T_t\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ $`t(0,1]`$. See  for some applications of semi-classical analysis.

###### Definition 5.2.

For $`m`$, the space $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0[[h]])`$ of pseudodifferential operators generated by the Lie structure at infinity $`(M,A)`$ is the linear space of families of operators $`T_t:𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0\times G)𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(M_0\times G)`$, $`t(0,1]`$, generated by

$$a_\chi (t,tD),aS_{1,0}^m([0,1]\times A^{}𝔤_M^{}),$$

and

$$b_\chi (t,tD)\psi _{tX_1(t)}\mathrm{}\psi _{tX_k(t)},bS^{\mathrm{}}([0,1]\times A^{}𝔤_M^{}),X_j\mathrm{\Gamma }([0,1]\times A𝔤_M).$$

The space $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0[[h]])`$ of semi-classical families of pseudodifferential operators generated by the Lie structure at infinity $`(M,A)`$ is defined similarly, but using classical symbols $`a`$.

Thus we consider families of operators $`(T_t)`$, $`T_t\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$, defined in terms of data $`a,b,X_k`$, that extends smoothly to $`t=0`$, with the interesting additional feature that the cotangent variable is rescaled as $`t0`$.

Again, all the results on the algebras $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0)`$ extend right away to the spaces $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1,0,𝒱}^m(M_0[[h]])`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{cl,𝒱}^m(M_0[[h]])`$, except maybe Proposition 4.6 and its corollary, Corollary 4.7, that need to be properly reformulated.

Another variant of the above constructions is to consider families of manifolds with a Lie structure at infinity. The necessary changes are obvious though, and we will not discuss them here.