text:
# THEORETICAL INTRODUCTION TO LINEAR COLLIDER PHYSICS Talk given at International Workshop on Linear Colliders, August 26 - 30, 2002, Jeju Island, Korea. This work was supported in part by Grand-in-Aid for Scientific Research, (C) (No. 13640309).

## 1 Introduction

There have been remarkable progresses in particle physics in the last century. New discoveries have changed our view on elementary particles and cosmology. In our current standpoint, goals of the elementary particle physics are not restricted to finding fundamental constitutes of matter and fundamental interactions. We have to address questions concerning the vacuum state of the Universe and the structure of space and time to understand the law of elementary particles. These issues are also closely related to questions like how the Universe have begun and evolved to today.

Current understanding of particle physics is based on the Standard Model (SM), which is a gauge theory of quarks and leptons. The gauge groups are SU(3) $`\times `$ SU(2) $`\times `$ U(1): The SU(3) group describes the strong interaction, and the SU(2) and U(1) groups correspond to the electromagnetic and the weak interactions. The SM has been tested experimentally for the last three decades, and especially the gauge interaction among fermions and bosons has been studied very precisely at LEP and SLC experiments in 1990’s. The gauge structure of the SM is now well established experimentally.

The next important steps of the particle physics are:

* To establish the mechanism of the electroweak symmetry breaking and the particles’ mass generation .
* To find the physics scenario beyond the electroweak scale.

I would like to discuss how $`e^+e^{}`$ linear collider (LC) experiments can play essential roles for these purposes. Studies of research potentials at an $`e^+e^{}`$ LC have been carried out in world-wide, and its outcome is found in literatures, especially in recent reports .

## 2 Higgs physics

Higgs fields are introduced to break electroweak symmetry and generate masses for elementary particles. Although only one Higgs doublet field is necessary for this purpose, little is known about the structure of the Higgs sector. We do not know how many Higgs fields exists, whether there are fields other than weak doublet fields, and what is the mass of the Higgs particle. We have little information on couplings between the Higgs field and fermions/gauge bosons. We need the LC experiment to answer these questions.

### 2.1 Higgs boson mass

The Higgs boson mass is the most important parameter in the Higgs sector. Since particle mass is generated from interaction with the Higgs field in the SM, the mass of the particle carries information on the strength of its interaction to the Higgs field. This is also true for the Higgs boson mass itself. In particular, the Higgs-boson mass in the SM is expressed as $`m_h=\sqrt{2\lambda }v`$, where $`\lambda `$ is the Higgs self-coupling constant ($`V=\mu ^2|\varphi |^2+\lambda |\varphi |^4`$). In general, a light Higgs boson corresponds to a weakly-coupled scenario for the mechanism of the electroweak symmetry breaking. Supersymmetry (SUSY), grand unified theory, and string unification are such examples. On the other hand, a heavy Higgs boson is a signal that some strong dynamics is behind the symmetry breaking.

The current experimental lower bond on the Higgs boson mass in the Standard Model is 114 GeV from LEP experiments at 95 % CL. On the other hand, from global analysis of the SM, we can derive the 95 % CL upper bound as 193 GeV . Although this bound is valid for the SM Higgs boson, a weakly-coupled scenario is favored for the dynamics of the electroweak symmetry breaking.

If we introduce some theoretical assumption, a possible mass range of the Higgs boson can be derived. For instance, if the SM is assumed to be valid without any change, except for a possible see-saw mechanism for neutrino mass generation, the upper and lower bounds of the Higgs boson mass are determined as a function of the cut-off scale $`(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ of the theory. For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=10^{19}`$ GeV of the Planck scale, the lower and upper bounds are about 130 GeV and 180 GeV, respectively. The Higgs sector of the minimal supersymmetric standard Model (MSSM) consists of two Higgs doublets. A remarkable feature of this model is that the upper bound of the lightest CP-even Higgs boson can be derived without reference to the cutoff scale. For reasonable choice of parameters in the model, especially the stop mass and mixing parameters, the bound is given by 130 GeV . For other models like general two Higgs doublets and SUSY models with extended Higgs sectors, we can derive the mass range of a Higgs boson whose properties are similar to the SM Higgs boson, if the cutoff scale is specified . The mass range is shown in Figure 1 for various models in the case of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=10^{19}`$ GeV. We can see that at least one Higgs boson must exist near or less that 200 GeV under this theoretical assumption.

The Higgs boson search is currently undertaken at Fermilab TEVATRON. With an integrated luminosity of 15 fb-1, it will become evident whether or not a Higgs boson exists for a relatively small mass range like 120 GeV. One of main goals of the LHC experiment, which is scheduled to start in 2007, is the discovery of a Higgs boson, irrespectively of its mass. The Higgs boson discovery is relatively easy if its mass exceeds 200 GeV, because the $`hZZllll`$ mode is available. For a smaller Higgs boson mass, the Higgs boson search involves other modes such as two photon and $`W^{()}W^{()}`$ decay modes, and $`t\overline{t}h`$ production. It is believed that the discovery of a SM Higgs boson is possible at LHC experiments with a low integrated luminosity of an order of 10 fb-1. In addition, recent studies of prospects of the Higgs physics at LHC show that useful information on Higgs coupling constants will be obtained in the era of a high luminosity run $`(\text{ }\stackrel{>}{}\text{ }100\mathrm{f}\mathrm{b}^1)`$, especially for a relatively light Higgs boson. Higgs boson production processes through a vector boson fusion play an essential role for this purpose .

### 2.2 Higgs physics at linear collides

Goals of Higgs physics at LCs are to establish the mass-generation mechanism for elementary particles and to clarify the dynamics of the electroweak symmetry breaking. With an integrated luminosity of 500 fb-1, over 100,000 light Higgs bosons can be produced at a LC, and precise information on various couplings related to the Higgs boson will be obtained from measurements of production cross section and decay branching ratios. The LC is a Higgs factory in this sense.

Production of Higgs bosons

For a LC with center-of-mass energy of up to 500 GeV, we can detect the SM Higgs boson up to 400 GeV. The discovery of a Higgs boson only requires an integrated luminosity of a few fb-1, if the Higgs boson mass is less than 200 GeV. If we consider models beyond the SM, the production cross section and decay modes may be different from the SM. For example, the production cross section of the lightest CP-even Higgs boson can be reduced for the MSSM and the next-to-minimal supersymmetric standard model (NMSSM), where an additional gauge-singlet Higgs field is introduced to the MSSM. However we can show quantitatively that at least one of Higgs bosons has a production cross section in the $`e^+e^{}Zh_i`$ precess which is smaller only by a factor of two or three than that of the SM Higgs boson. Therefore, discovery of a Higgs boson is guaranteed in these models .

Spin and parity of the Higgs boson

In order to confirm that the observed particle has right properties for the Higgs boson, we first have to determine its spin and parity. The LC experiment is necessary for unambiguous determination of these basic quantum numbers. We can distinguish the CP property of a spin-0 particle from the angular distribution of the production angle. Furthermore, an energy scan at the production threshold region provides enough information to discriminate the spin and parity of the observed particles . An integrated luminosity of several ten’s fb-1 are necessary for these determinations.

Mass-generation mechanism

In the SM, all quarks, leptons and gauge bosons are massless, if there is no electroweak symmetry breaking. Masses of these particles are generated through interactions with the Higgs field, which is supposed to condense in the vacuum. Since the Higgs boson is a physical fluctuation mode around the vacuum expectation value, we need to determine the Higgs-fermion, Higgs-W-W, Higgs-Z-Z coupling constants, and compare them with values predicted from the masses of elementary particles, in order to test the mass generation mechanism. From the production cross sections of $`e^+e^{}Zh`$ and $`e^+e^{}\nu \overline{\nu }h`$ processes and Higgs decay branching ratios, these coupling constants can be determined precisely. For a Higgs boson mass of less than 140 GeV, the $`hWW`$, $`hZZ`$, $`hbb`$, $`h\tau \tau `$ coupling constants can be determined at accuracy of a few % level with an integrated luminosity of 500 fb-1 at $`\sqrt{s}=300500`$ GeV . We can also derive the total width of the Higgs boson with an error of 5 - 10 %. The top Yukawa coupling constant can be determined from $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}h`$ production process, and the center-of-mass energy larger than 700 GeV is preferable for this purpose. In Figure 2, the mass and coupling constant relation is plotted for various particles. In general, the mass and coupling constant have a relation such as $`m_i=\kappa _iv`$ in the SM, where $`v`$ is the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs field, and the $`\kappa _i`$ is a dimensionless coupling constant which can be obtained from a three-point coupling measurement. In this figure, the expected statistical error of each coupling measurement at LC experiments is shown for charm, $`\tau `$, bottom, W, Z, and top quark. For the Higgs boson, the error is derived from the measurement of the triple Higgs-boson coupling constant.

Higgs self-coupling constant

The first information about the Higgs potential will be obtained from the measurement of the triple Higgs-boson coupling constant. For this purpose, we need to study double Higgs production processes, namely, $`e^+e^{}Zhh`$ and $`e^+e^{}\nu \overline{\nu }hh`$. In both of these processes, in addition to the diagram involving the triple Higgs-boson vertex, there are diagrams which only depend on vertexes with gauge bosons and Higgs boson(s). The production cross section is not simply proportional to the square of the self-coupling constant. For $`\sqrt{s}=500`$ GeV, the $`e^+e^{}Zhh`$ has much larger cross section than the $`e^+e^{}\nu \overline{\nu }hh`$ process. For a higher energy, the production cross section of the latter process increases, which is an important future of the WW fusion process, whereas that for the former process decreases as $`1/s`$. For $`\sqrt{s}\text{ }\stackrel{>}{}\text{ }`$ 1 TeV, the WW fusion process become more important for determination of the triple Higgs-boson coupling constant. It is expected that the sensitivity of the coupling measurement is about 20 (7) % for 1 (5) ab-1 at $`\sqrt{s}=`$ 500 (3000) GeV . The center-of mass energy dependence of the estimated sensitivity on the coupling constant is shown in Figure 3, assuming 100 % efficiency for 1 ab-1 . For $`\sqrt{s}\text{ }\stackrel{>}{}\text{ }`$ 1 TeV, the sensitivity is further improved by using initial electron (and positron) polarization, because the production cross section of the WW fusion process is increased by a factor of 2 (4) with the electron (electron and positron) polarization.

### 2.3 Study of the MSSM Higgs sector at LC

The study of the Higgs sector could also provide important information concerning possible new physics scenario. In particular, the MSSM has several characteristic features in the Higgs sector. First, the Higgs sector is a special type of a two Higgs doublet model. The physical Higgs modes contain two CP-even $`(h,H)`$, one CP-odd $`(A)`$, and one pair of charged Higgs bosons $`(H^\pm )`$. There is a theoretical upper bound on the lighter CP-even Higgs boson $`h`$, which is about 130 GeV. Since the form of the Higgs potential is restricted by the requirement of SUSY, the Higgs sector is parametrized by two parameters at the tree level, usually taken to be the CP-odd Higgs boson mass $`(m_A)`$ and the ratio of the two vacuum expectation values $`(\mathrm{tan}\beta )`$. Although the radiative correction to the Higgs potential introduces additional parameters like the stop mass, Higgs boson masses and couplings are very restrictive, and these features are useful in discriminating the MSSM from other models.

If only one of CP-even Higgs bosons is found at an earlier stage of the $`e^+e^{}`$ LC experiment and the LHC experiment, measurements of the coupling constants related to the Higgs boson can provide useful information on model parameters. For instance, the ratios of the branching ratios such as $`B(hWW)/B(h\tau \tau )`$, $`B(hc\overline{c})/B(h\tau \tau )`$ can is deviated from the SM prediction, if the heavy Higgs boson is not too heavy . Indirect information on the heavy Higgs boson mass may be obtained for $`m_A\text{ }\stackrel{<}{}\text{ }600`$ GeV, as shown in Figure 4. On the other hand, $`B(hb\overline{b})/B(h\tau \tau )`$ should be the same at the tree level in the MSSM as the SM prediction, but the deviation can be large due to SUSY loop corrections to the bottom Yukawa coupling constant, especially for a large $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ .

If the center-of mass energy is large enough, heavy Higgs bosons can be produced directly. Contours of constant production cross sections (0.1 fb-1) for various processes in the case of $`\sqrt{s}=`$ 500 and 1500 GeV are shown in the parameter space of $`m_A`$ and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ for the MSSM in Figure 5 . The discovery limit is essentially determined by the $`H`$-$`A`$ and $`H^+`$-$`H^{}`$ pair production threshold except for limited regions of large and small $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$. However, heavy Higgs bosons can be seen in different modes depending on parameter regions. This will be useful to test the MSSM and to determine parameters of the model, especially $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$.

The photon-photon collider option of the LC can be especially important for the heavy Higgs searches. This is because that the s-channel single Higgs production is possible through the photon-photon-Higgs boson coupling induced at one-loop level. Since the energy of the back-scattered photon can be 80 % of the original electron beam, the heavy Higgs-boson mass reach can increase up to about 400 GeV for the 500 GeV collider. The discovery potential of the heavy Higgs boson at a photon-photon collider was investigated for$`\sqrt{s_{ee}}=`$ 630 GeV, and it was shown that the photon-photon collider can cover the “wedge” of the MSSM parameter up to $`m_A=500`$ GeV, where only one light Higgs boson is found at LHC . The photon-photon collider is also useful to distinguish the CP property of the Higgs boson using transverse polarization and angular correlation of decay products $`(Ht\overline{t}`$, for instance) . The mass reach is, however, reduced, if we utilize the transverse polarization.

## 3 Direct Search for New Physics

Although the SM is very successful so far, there are strong motivations to search for physics beyond it. First, the SM only deals with three of the four fundamental interactions, and the gravity is not included. Unification of all gauge interactions as well as gauge interactions with gravity can be addressed only in the context of physics beyond the SM. Second, the discovery of the neutrino oscillation indicates existence of new particles and/or interactions. Third, some of fundamental problems in cosmology such as what is the dark matter, and how the unbalance between baryon and anti-baryon arose require understanding of the physics scenario beyond the electroweak scale.

There are many theoretical proposals for physics beyond the SM. We can expect some signals at the TeV scale, if introduction of new physics is motivated to explain the separation between the weak scale and the Planck scale. SUSY and a scenario with large extra-dimensions are typical examples. In both case, we will be led to a conceptual change on space-time, if it is true.

### 3.1 Supersymmetry

Since the three gauge coupling constants determined at LEP and SLC experiments turned out to be consistent with the prediction of supersymmetric grand unified theory, unified models based on SUSY has been a prime candidate of the physic beyond the SM. In SUSY models, a superpartner is introduced for each of an ordinary particle. New particles include scalar partners of quarks and leptons (squarks and sleptons), fermionic superpartners (gluino, charginos, and neutralinos). The mass spectrum of these particles depends on SUSY breaking scenarios. Therefore, the experimental determination of the spectrum will point to a specific scenario. For SUSY search, LHC experiments will provide a crucial test. In a typical mass spectrum such as one in the minimal supergravity model, colored SUSY particles up to 2 TeV can be discovered. In addition, a light Higgs boson should exist below about 130 GeV for the MSSM, which is an important check point for this model.

Roles of the LC experiment are not restricted to discovery of new SUSY particles. Masses, quantum numbers, and various couplings of SUSY particles will be measured in a good accuracy. Determination of these quantities without relying on some specific model of SUSY breaking is very important to test and establish a new symmetry principle of Nature. In many cases of SUSY studies, beam polarization can be a very useful tool. This is because SUSY is a symmetry between boson and fermion, so that spin information is important. Furthermore, the concept of chirality is extended to the squark and slepton sectors in SUSY, so that the initial electron polarization is very useful to distinguish left-handed or right-handed superparticles.

There are many issues to be addressed on SUSY at LCs.

* Determination of mass and spin of SUSY particles from decay energy distributions, production angle distributions, and threshold scans in pair production processes.
* Reconstruction of chargino and neutralino mass matrices from production cross sections and angular distributions with possible effects of CP violation .
* Determination of the selectron-electron-bino coupling through $`e^+e^{}\stackrel{~}{e_R}^+\stackrel{~}{e_R}^{}`$ for a test of a SUSY relation (Figure 6 (a)) .
* Search for lepton flavor violation in slepton pair production .
* Test of the gaugino mass GUT relation (Figure 6 (b)) .

These measurements play important roles in determination of SUSY Lagrangian in a model-independent way, and proving SUSY.

In order to obtain a whole picture of a SUSY model, it is most likely that information from LHC and LCs has to be combined. For instance, the neutralino mass determined at a LC will provide an important input for the LHC analysis. Combining colored SUSY particle masses from LHC and slepton/chargino/neutralino masses from a LC, we may be able to figure out the origin of SUSY breaking .

### 3.2 Large extra-dimensions

Recently, a scenario with a large extra-dimensions is proposed, motivated by string theory . If there are extra-space dimensions where only gravity can propagate, the fundamental scale of gravity where all interactions are unified can be close to the weak scale. The smallness of the gravity can be attributed to the existence of the large extra-space, and the Planck scale of $`10^{19}`$ GeV is not a real physical scale. In this case there is no fundamental problem of hierarchy between the Planck and weak scales.

An interesting aspect of this scenario is that we can test this idea from collider experiments. Fairly model-independent signals of this scenario are emissions of Kaluza-Klein graviton modes ($`e^+e^{}\gamma G_{KK}`$) and virtual graviton exchange in $`e^+e^{}f\overline{f}`$ processes. The sensitivity of LC experiments can be comparable to the LHC search for extra-dimensions. The cross section of the graviton emission process depends on the fundamental scale and the number of extra-dimensions. For a larger number of extra-dimensions, the cross section rises more quickly. Experiments with different collider energies are useful to determine the number of dimensions. Figure 7 illustrates how we can determine the number of the extra-dimensions from experiments at LCs with two different center-of-mass energies . If a signal is seen at one beam energy, the energy upgrade is useful to figure out the structure of extra-space. By determination of the fundamental scale and the number of extra-dimension, we can also derive the size of extra-space. The information of the number of the extra-dimensions can be also obtained by the analysis of the differential cross section with a fixed center-of-mass energy.

If some signals of the extra-space are available within the energy of the LC, thresholds of signals of strong gravity or string may be open at LHC. These signals include production of black holes and string resonance states. In order to establish a new picture of space-time, both LHC and LCs will be necessary.

## 4 Precision studies of top and gauge boson processes

The studies on the top quark and the W and Z bosons are guaranteed at the LC experiment. These studies provides fundamental parameters of the particle physics. In addition, we may be able to look for new physics effects from precise determination of anomalous coupling constants involving these particles.

The top quark is the heaviest particle observed so far. Its production and decay are only studies at TEVATRON. An $`e^+e^{}`$ collider can provide a unique opportunity to scan the threshold region. We can determine the top quark mass at the level of accuracy of 100 MeV and less, and the width to a few %  . The mass determinaton is improved by an order of magnitudes or more compared to LHC. The width measurement will be practically only possible at the threshold scan of an $`e^+e^{}`$ collider. An example of the studies at the top production threshold is shown in Figure 8.

The anomalous coupling measurements can be carried out at the threshold region as well as at the open-top-production region . Anomalous couplings of the top and photon/Z boson include the top electric dipole moment which is induced by CP violation outside the SM. The accuracies of electronic dipole moments determinations are $`10^{19}`$-$`10^{18}`$ e cm, for instance. At LHC, information on the gluon anomalous coupling will be available.

Triple and quadratic anomalous couplings of gauge bosons will be also measured precisely at LCs. Although constraints on these coupling constants are already obtained by LEP and TEVATRON experiments, the higher energy and beam polarization are advantages of the LC experiment for this study. These measurements are particularly important when a light Higgs boson is not found at the LHC and LC experiments, in which case something is missing in our current understanding of the electroweak symmetry breaking. Sensitivities to triple gauge boson coupling constants $`\kappa _V`$ and $`\lambda _V`$ defined in $`_{WWV}/g_{WWV}=ig_1^V(W_{\mu \nu }^{}W^\mu V^\nu W_\mu ^{}V_\nu W^{\mu \nu })+i\kappa _VW_\mu ^{}W_\nu V^{\mu \nu }+\frac{i\lambda _V}{m_W^2}W_{\lambda \mu }^{}W_\nu ^\mu V^{\nu \lambda }`$ are $`10^4`$-$`10^3`$ at LC experiments .

## 5 Summary

Current understanding of elementary particle physics is based on the SM, in which the gauge principle and the electroweak symmetry breaking are two basic ingredients. Nature of gauge interactions has been studied experimentally in full details last twenty years, but we know little about the electroweak symmetry breaking and the Higgs mechanism. The most important next step of the high energy physics is to clarify the dynamics of electroweak symmetry breaking and the mass generation mechanism of elementary particles. For this purpose, an $`e^+e^{}`$ LC is necessary. The LC with the center-of-mass energy of up to 500 GeV and an integrated luminosity of 500 fb-1 can be considered as a Higgs factory. We can determine the coupling constants related to the mass generation mechanism very precisely. In order to determine the top Yukawa coupling constant and the Higgs self-coupling constant with good precisions, a higher center-of-mass energy is required. The LC experiments will also play essential roles in finding and studying new physics signals, such as SUSY and the scenario with a large extra-dimensional space. For these analysis, the LHC and linear collider experiments can be complementary to each other. The clean experimental environment, availability of the beam polarization, capability of energy scan at the LC is very useful for these studies. In addition to direct search for new signals, precise studies on the SM processes including the top quark and the W boson provide alternative ways to look for new physics effects.

The high energy physics has been developed by concurrent running of hadron and lepton machines. Since the end of the LEP operation, there is no energy frontier $`e^+e^{}`$ machine. There are very strong physics cases to construct the $`e^+e^{}`$ LC which can operate concurrently with the LHC experiment. The physics of the TeV energy scale may or may not be what we are expecting, but whatever it may be, it will be necessary for us to have both machines to elucidate the physics at the electroweak scale and beyond.


format: text

text:
# Entropy and collapsing of compact complex surfaces

## 1. Introduction

The concept of an $``$-structure was introduced by M. Gromov in  as a natural generalization of a torus action on a manifold. Then J. Cheeger and Gromov () related the existence of $``$-structures with the possibility of collapsing a manifold with bounds on certain geometric invariants (curvature, injectivity radius, diameter, etc.). These results require the $``$-structures to be of a very restrictive type, namely, polarized $``$-structures. An $``$-structure is a sheaf of tori acting on open subsets of a manifold (with certain compatibility on the intersection of the open subsets); polarized means (broadly speaking) that the dimension of the orbits of the actions is locally constant. In  the authors proved that if a closed, smooth manifold $`M`$ admits a general $``$-structure, then one can collapse the volume of $`M`$ with curvature bounded from below and with bounded entropy. Namely, there exists a sequence $`g_i`$ of Riemannian metrics on $`M`$ such that there is a uniform upper bound on the entropy of the geodesic flow of $`g_i`$ and a uniform lower bound for the sectional curvatures of $`g_i`$, while the volume of $`(M,g_i)`$ converges to 0. This is our main motivation for looking at the problem of existence of $``$-structures on a given manifold.

On the other hand, compact complex surfaces provide the most important family of examples of smooth closed 4-manifolds and they are fundamental in the study of differential topology in dimension 4. Therefore it seems worthwhile to investigate which of them admit general $``$-structures. There is a well-known classification of compact complex surfaces (the Enriques-Kodaira classification). The classification first divides them according to the Kodaira dimension $`\kappa `$, which could be $`\mathrm{},0,1`$ or $`2`$. We briefly recall its definition. Let $`S`$ be a compact complex surface and let $`P_m(S)`$ be the dimension of the space of holomorphic sections of the $`m`$th tensor power of the canonical line bundle of $`S`$. If $`P_m(S)=0`$ for all $`m1`$, then $`\kappa =\mathrm{}`$, otherwise, $`\kappa =lim\; sup_m\mathrm{}\frac{\mathrm{log}P_m(S)}{\mathrm{log}m}`$.

Surfaces of Kodaira dimension 0 or 1 are all diffeomorphic to elliptic surfaces. Surfaces of Kodaira dimension 2 are known as surfaces of general type since these are the generic surfaces. It is for surfaces of Kodaira dimension $`\mathrm{}`$ that the classification is not complete (at least not known to be complete). Kähler surfaces of Kodaira dimension $`\mathrm{}`$ are obtained by blowing up $`P^2`$ or $`P^1`$-bundles over a Riemann surface and are perfectly understood. The gap in the classification appears in the non-Kähler case. Non-Kähler surfaces of Kodaira dimension $`\mathrm{}`$ are called surfaces of class VII. There are quite a few examples. First, we have the Hopf surfaces, characterized by the fact that their universal cover is $`^2\{0\}`$. Then we have the Inoue surfaces with vanishing second Betti number and some compact elliptic surfaces. Finally we have the surfaces with global spherical shells, which have positive second Betti number. These are all the known examples and it has been conjectured that these are actually all the minimal surfaces of class VII. See Section 2 for more details. The first aim of this article is to prove the following results:

Theorem A. Let $`M`$ be a compact Kähler surface. Then $`M`$ admits an $``$-structure if and only if the Kodaira dimension of $`M`$ is different from $`2`$. Actually, Kähler surfaces of Kodaira number $`\mathrm{},0`$ or $`1`$ admit $`𝒯`$-structures.

Theorem B. All known examples of compact complex surfaces which are not of Kähler type admit $`𝒯`$-structures.

Using the result of  mentioned above we obtain:

Corollary. Every compact complex surface which is not of general type has minimal entropy 0 and collapses with sectional curvature bounded from below, except, perhaps, some new examples of surfaces of class VII.

We will prove these results in Sections 2 and 3. Next, we turn our attention to the problem of determining for which compact complex surfaces the minimal entropy problem can be solved. Recall that the minimal entropy of a closed manifold $`M`$, $`𝐡(M)`$, is the infimum of the topological entropy of $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ Riemannian metrics on $`M`$ with volume one. We say that the minimal entropy problem for $`M`$ can be solved if there exists a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ metric $`g`$ with volume one for which $`\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)=𝐡(M)`$. The guiding principle is that manifolds for which the minimal entropy problem can be solved should be topologically simple and/or support geometric structures. See  for details and related results. In Section 5 we begin the study of the minimal entropy problem for compact complex surfaces of Kodaira dimension different from 2. From the Corollary after Theorem B it follows that $`𝐡(M)=0`$ for all such surfaces, modulo the gap in the classification of surfaces of class VII. Therefore the minimal entropy problem can be solved for these surfaces only if they admit a metric with vanishing topological entropy.

Finding topological obstructions to the existence of metrics with zero entropy is a subtle problem. Up to now, the known results were of two kinds. Either the fundamental group was big in the sense that it had exponential growth, or the manifold was simply connected and the exponential growth in the topology was located in the loop space homology. An important ingredient in the second case is a theorem of Gromov  which asserts that on a closed simply connected manifold $`M`$, homology classes of the pointed loop space $`\mathrm{\Omega }M`$ can be represented by cycles formed with paths of appropriately bounded length. In the appendix we will show that Gromov’s theorem also works in the case that $`M`$ is compact with non-empty boundary. This will help us to deal with the case of manifolds with an infinite fundamental group of subexponential growth. Essentially nothing was known in this case. Many compact complex surfaces fall into this category (as well as many other manifolds!). More precisely, we will prove the following result. (As usual, given a space $`Y`$ and points $`x,yY`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }(Y,x,y)`$ will denote the space of paths from $`x`$ to $`y`$.)

Theorem C. Let $`M`$ be a closed manifold and let $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ be its universal covering. Let $`X\stackrel{~}{M}`$ be a compact simply connected submanifold, possibly with boundary. Consider points $`x,zX`$ and $`y\stackrel{~}{M}`$ and a path $`\alpha `$ from $`z`$ to $`y`$. Define a map $`\iota :\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,z)\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y)`$ by $`\iota (\tau )=\tau \alpha `$ and suppose $`\iota `$ induces a monomorphism in homology with coefficients in the prime field $`k_p`$, $`p`$ prime or zero. Then, for any $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ Riemannian metric $`g`$ on $`M`$ there exists a positive constant $`C(g)`$ such that

$$\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)\frac{\lambda (g)}{2}+C(g)(\mathrm{log}R_{\mathrm{\Omega }X,p}),$$

where $`R_{\mathrm{\Omega }X,p}`$ is the radius of convergence of the Poincaré series

$$\underset{i0}{}b_i(\mathrm{\Omega }X,k_p)t^i.$$

The quantity $`\lambda (g)`$ is the volume entropy of the manifold and it is defined as the exponential growth rate of the volume of balls in $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$. Manning’s inequality  asserts that for any metric $`g`$, $`\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)\lambda (g)`$. It is well known that $`\lambda (g)>0`$ if and only if $`\pi _1(M)`$ has exponential growth. Theorem C does not really say much if $`\lambda (g)>0`$, but it is most interesting when $`\lambda (g)=0`$ and $`R_{\mathrm{\Omega }X,p}<1`$ for some $`p`$.

We describe a noteworthy application of Theorem C.

Theorem D. Let $`M`$ be a closed manifold of dimension $`n3`$. Suppose that $`M`$ can be decomposed as $`X_1\mathrm{\#}X_2`$, where the order of the fundamental group of $`X_1`$ is at least $`3`$. If $`M`$ admits a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ Riemannian metric with zero topological entropy, then $`X_2`$ is a homotopy sphere.

Theorems C and D will be proved in Section 4. Note that Theorem D is optimal. B. Totaro proved in  that $`P^n\mathrm{\#}P^n`$ and $`P^n\mathrm{\#}P^{2n}`$ are diffeomorphic to biquotients and hence they have real analytic metrics with zero topological entropy.

We can now state the theorems that will give complete solutions for the minimal entropy problem for compact complex surfaces of Kodaira dimension different from 2. We phrase the solution of the minimal entropy problem in terms of 4-dimensional geometric structures. We say that $`M`$ admits a geometric structure if $`M`$ admits a locally homogeneous metric. This means that if we endow $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ with the corresponding covering metric, then $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ is a complete homogeneous space and we say that $`M`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$. In dimension 4, the maximal geometric models have been classified by R.O. Filipkiewicz . C.T.C Wall  studied the relationship between geometric structures and complex structures for compact complex surfaces. Wall’s results will be quite useful for the proof of the two theorems below.

Theorem E. Let $`S`$ be a compact complex surface not of Kähler type. Modulo the gap in the classification of class VII surfaces we have: The minimal entropy of $`S`$ is zero and the following are equivalent:

1. The minimal entropy problem can be solved for $`S`$;
2. $`S`$ admits a smooth metric $`g`$ with $`\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)=0`$;
3. $`S`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`S^3\times 𝔼^1`$ or Nil$`{}_{}{}^{3}\times 𝔼^1`$;
4. $`S`$ has $`\kappa =\mathrm{},0`$ and is diffeomorphic to one of the following: a Hopf surface, a Kodaira surface, or a Kodaira surface modulo a finite group.

Recall that a Kodaira surface is a surface $`S`$ with $`K_S=𝒪_S`$ and $`b_1=3`$. Such a surface is diffeomorphic to the product $`S^1\times N`$, where $`N`$ is a 3-dimensional nilmanifold.

In the Kähler case we have:

Theorem F. Let $`S`$ be a compact complex Kähler surface with Kodaira dimension $`\kappa 1`$. We have: The minimal entropy of $`S`$ is zero and the following are equivalent:

1. The minimal entropy problem can be solved for $`S`$;
2. $`S`$ admits a smooth metric $`g`$ with $`\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)=0`$;
3. $`S`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`P^2`$, $`S^2\times S^2`$, $`S^2\times 𝔼^2`$ or $`𝔼^4`$ or $`S`$ is diffeomorphic to $`P^2\mathrm{\#}\overline{P^2}`$;
4. $`S`$ has $`\kappa =\mathrm{},0`$ and is diffeomorphic to one of the following: $`P^2`$, a ruled surface of genus $`0`$ or $`1`$, a complex torus or a hyperelliptic surface.

Note that $`P^2\mathrm{\#}\overline{P^2}`$ is the only non-minimal surface that admits a metric of zero entropy. It is also the only surface that admits a metric with zero entropy and no geometric structure.

Acknowledgements: We thank B. Totaro for useful discussions. We also thank C. LeBrun for useful comments and a very helpful hint in the construction of retractions in Section 4. The first author thanks the CIMAT, Guanajuato, México for hospitality and support while part of this work was carried out.

## 2. $`𝒯`$-structures and compact complex surfaces

We will first review the definition of a $`𝒯`$-structure and the results we will need about them, and then study the problem of existence of such structures on compact complex surfaces using the Enriques-Kodaira classification. We will prove here Theorems A and B in the introduction modulo the construction of $`𝒯`$-structures on surfaces of Kodaira dimension $`\mathrm{}`$ that we will carry out in the next section.

###### Definition 2.1.

A $`𝒯`$-structure on a smooth closed manifold $`M`$ is a finite open cover $`(U_i)_{i=1,\mathrm{},l}`$ of $`M`$ and a non-trivial torus action on each $`U_i`$ such that the intersections of the open subsets are invariant (through all the corresponding torus actions) and the actions commute.

The $`𝒯`$-structure is called polarized if the torus actions on each $`U_i`$ are locally free and in the intersections the dimension of the orbits (of the corresponding torus action) is constant. The structure is called pure if the dimension of the orbits is constant.

###### Remark 2.2.

If two manifolds of dimension greater than 2 admit $`𝒯`$-structures then their connected sum also admits one (see  for the case of polarized structures on odd dimensional manifolds and  for the general case). We will use this result mainly to reduce the problem of existence of a $`𝒯`$-structure on a compact complex surface $`M`$ to the case when $`M`$ is minimal, since non-minimal surfaces are obtained from minimal ones by taking connected sums with $`\overline{P^2}`$.

We will also use the following two results from :

###### Theorem 2.3.

If a closed smooth manifold $`M`$ admits a $`𝒯`$-structure then the minimal entropy of $`M`$ is 0 and $`M`$ collapses with curvature bounded below.

(Actually, the conclusion of the theorem still holds if one only assumes the existence of an $``$-structure.)

###### Theorem 2.4.

Every elliptic compact complex surface admits a $`𝒯`$-structure.

In the next section we will show that Hopf surfaces, Inoue surfaces with $`b_2`$=0 and ruled surfaces all admit $`𝒯`$-structures. Using this, we are in a position to prove Theorems A and B.

Minimal compact complex surfaces of Kähler type are: $`P^2`$, ruled surfaces, surfaces which are deformation equivalent to elliptic surfaces (with even first Betti number) and surfaces of general type. From Theorem 2.3 we know that if a closed manifold admits a $`𝒯`$-structure then it collapses with curvature bounded below, and therefore its Yamabe invariant is non-negative (see ). But it is known that surfaces of general type have strictly negative Yamabe invariant (see , for instance). Therefore they cannot admit $`𝒯`$-structures. All the other cases are covered by the previous comments and Theorem A is proved.

Minimal compact complex surfaces which are not of Kähler type are either elliptic or surfaces of class VII. We therefore only need to consider surfaces of class VII. These are the surfaces which have first Betti number equal to 1 and Kodaira dimension equal to $`\mathrm{}`$. They were first studied by Kodaira . All the known examples are the following:

i) Elliptic surfaces of class VII;

ii) Hopf surfaces;

iii) Inoue surfaces with $`b_2=0`$;

iv) Surfaces with a global spherical shell.

Elliptic surfaces admit $`𝒯`$-structures by Theorem 2.4. We will exhibit $`𝒯`$-structures on Hopf surfaces and Inoue surfaces with $`b_2=0`$ in the following section. Surfaces with a global spherical shell have positive second Betti number and are all diffeomorphic to a connected sum of $`S^1\times S^3`$ with $`b_2(M)`$ copies of $`\overline{P^2}`$. Therefore they also admit $`𝒯`$-structures by Remark 2.2.

Modulo the constructions in the following section, this finishes the proof of Theorem B.

###### Remark 2.5.

Kodaira proved that a surface of class VII with vanishing second Betti number which contains at least a curve is either an elliptic surface or a Hopf surface. Later on Inoue  constructed his examples of surfaces of class VII with $`b_2=0`$ which contain no curves. He also proves that if a surface of class VII with $`b_2=0`$ and no curves admits a line bundle $`F_0`$ such that $`\text{dim}H^0(\mathrm{\Omega }^1(F_0))>0`$ then the surface is one of his examples. Later F.A. Bogomolov  gave a proof that such a line bundle always exists, but apparently his proof was difficult to understand. Later, J. Li, S. T. Yau and F. Zheng  gave a much simpler proof. This result concluded the classification of surfaces of class VII with $`b_2=0`$. Surfaces with a global spherical shell have positive second Betti number and it has been conjectured \[32, page 220\] that every surface of class VII with positive second Betti number admits a global spherical shell. If this conjecture were true, the classification would be complete and Theorem B would cover all non-Kähler surfaces.

## 3. Construction of $`𝒯`$-structures

In this section we will carry out the construction of $`𝒯`$-structures on Hopf surfaces, Inoue surfaces with vanishing second Betti number and ruled surfaces.

### 3.1. Hopf surfaces

The topology of Hopf surfaces was studied by M. Kato \[23, Theorem 9\]. There he proves that every Hopf surface is diffeomorphic either to a product $`S^1\times (S^3/H)`$ or to an $`S^3/H`$-bundle over $`S^1`$ with an involution as the transition function (here $`H`$ is some subgroup of $`GL(2,)`$). In both cases the surface has an obvious locally free (or free) $`S^1`$-action.

Therefore we can write

###### Lemma 3.1.

Every Hopf surface admits a locally free $`S^1`$-action.

### 3.2. Inoue surfaces with $`b_2=0`$

There are three classes of Inoue surfaces with vanishing second Betti number; named $`S_M`$, $`S_{N,p,q,r;t}^+`$, and $`S_{N,p,q,r}^{}`$. They were discovered by Inoue in .

We first consider the surfaces $`S_M`$. Here $`M`$ denotes a $`3\times 3`$ integral matrix with determinant 1 and eigenvalues $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$ and $`\overline{\beta }`$ with $`\alpha >1`$ and $`\beta \overline{\beta }`$. $`M`$ induces a transformation $`f_M`$ of the torus $`T^3=^3/^3`$ (sending the class of $`x^3`$ to the class of $`Mx^3`$) and the surface $`S_M`$ is diffeomorphic to the $`T^3`$-bundle over $`S^1`$ with $`f_M`$ as transition function. Then $`S_M`$ admits a pure polarized $`𝒯`$-structure of rank 3, whose orbits are the fibers of the fibration.

Now consider the surfaces $`S_{N,p,q,r;t}^+`$. Here $`N=(n_{ij})SL(2,)`$ is a unimodular integral $`2\times 2`$ matrix with real eigenvalues $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^1`$, with $`\alpha >1`$. Then pick any integers $`p,q`$ and $`r`$ with $`r0`$ and a complex number $`t`$. These are the parameters for the surfaces $`S_{N,p,q,r;t}^+`$. Then one picks eigenvectors $`(a_1,a_2)`$ and $`(b_1,b_2)`$ (with eigenvalues $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^1`$, respectively) and considers the analytic automorphisms of $`\times `$ given by

$$g_0(w,z)=(\alpha w,z+t);$$

$$g_i(w,z)=(w+a_i,z+b_iw+c_i),i=1,2;$$

$$g_3(w,z)=(w,z+(b_1a_2b_2a_1)/r),$$

where $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ are constants which are obtained from $`N`$ and its eigenvectors (see  for the formulas) and $`=\{w:\text{Im}(w)>0\}`$. The surface $`S_{N,p,q,r;t}^+`$ is then the quotient of $`\times `$ by the group of analytic automorphisms generated by $`g_0,g_1,g_2`$ and $`g_3`$.

Think of $`S^1`$ as obtained from the interval $`[0,(b_1a_2b_2a_1)/r]`$ by identifying its endpoints (of course, $`(1/r)(b_1a_2b_2a_1)`$ can be assumed to be positive). Then it is easy to check that the formula

$$(\theta ,w,z)(w,\theta +z)$$

defines a locally free $`S^1`$-action on $`S_{N,p,q,r;t}^+`$.

Finally, let us consider the surfaces $`S_{N,p,q,r}^{}`$. Here $`NGL(2,)`$ is an integral $`2\times 2`$ matrix with determinant equal to $`1`$ having real eigenvalues $`\alpha >1`$ and $`\alpha ^1`$. Choose non-trivial eigenvectors $`(a_1,a_2)`$ and $`(b_1,b_2)`$ corresponding to $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^1`$ respectively. Fix integers $`p,q`$ and $`r`$, with $`r0`$, and consider the analytic automorphisms of $`\times `$ given by

$$g_0(w,z)=(\alpha w,z);$$

$$g_i(w,z)=(w+a_i,z+b_iw+c_i),i=1,2;$$

$$g_3(w,z)=(w,z+(b_1a_2b_2a_1)/r).$$

Here $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ are constants obtained from $`N,a_1,a_2,b_1,b_2,p`$ and $`q`$ (see  for the formulas). Then $`S_{N,p,q,r}^{}`$ is the quotient of $`\times `$ by the group of automorphisms generated by the $`g_i`$’s.

Consider the map $`\times _{>0}`$ given by the projection onto the second coordinate (the imaginary part of the first complex coordinate). It is easy to check that it induces a map $`S_{N,p,q,r}^{}S^1`$, where $`S^1`$ is the interval $`[1,\alpha ]`$ with its endpoints identified.

Consider the group $`G_y`$ of analytic automorphisms generated by $`g_1,g_2`$ and $`g_3`$. The projection is invariant under these automorphisms and the fibers of it are identified with the quotient of $`^3`$ by the action of this group (with $`y=\text{Im}(w)`$ fixed).

There is an $`S^1`$-action on each fiber given by $`\theta .(\text{Re}(w),z)=(\text{Re}(w),\text{Re}(z)+\theta ,\text{Im}(z))`$, where $`S^1`$ is now thought of as the interval $`[0,(b_1a_2b_2a_1)/r]`$ with its endpoints identified.

Now $`S_{N,p,q,r}^{}S^1`$ gives $`S_{N,p,q,r}^{}`$ a fiber bundle structure. On each fiber we have the $`S^1`$-action mentioned above. Call $`._1`$ this action. Under the transition map this action translate to a new action which we will call $`._2`$. If these two actions were to coincide we would have a well defined $`S^1`$-action, as for the surfaces $`S_{N,p,q,r;t}^+`$. But in order to have a $`𝒯`$-structure we only need these actions to commute. Now a direct computation shows that

$$\theta ._2(\text{Re}(w),\text{Re}(z),\text{Im}(z))=(\theta )._1(\text{Re}(w),\text{Re}(z),\text{Im}(z)).$$

Therefore $`S_{N,p,q,r}^{}`$ admits a pure polarized $`𝒯`$-structure of rank one.

Summarizing we can write:

###### Lemma 3.2.

Every Inoue surface with vanishing second Betti number admits a pure polarized $`𝒯`$-structure of positive rank.

### 3.3. Ruled surfaces

Every minimal ruled surface $`M`$ is diffeomorphic to the projectivization of a decomposable vector bundle of rank 2 over a compact Riemann surface $`S`$. Moreover we can assume that one of the line bundles in the decomposition is trivial and so there exists a complex line bundle $`L`$ over $`S`$ such that $`M`$ is diffeomorphic to $`𝐏(L)`$. The $`S^1`$-action on $``$ then induces an $`S^1`$-action on $`M`$. Therefore we have:

###### Lemma 3.3.

Every ruled surface admits a non-trivial $`S^1`$-action.

## 4. Obstructions to zero entropy

In this section we prove Theorems C and D. We will need the following version of a result due to M. Gromov  for manifolds with non-empty boundary. Gromov’s original proof in  is very short. A more detailed proof is given in \[16, p. 102\] but it seems unclear at certain points. There is a corrected proof in the revised an updated edition . Also I. Babenko sketches a proof in  using Adams’s cobar construction. Finally there is also a proof in . In all these references the manifold is assumed to have empty boundary. The proofs in the cited references work also in the case of compact manifolds with non-empty boundary with some modifications. For completeness we will sketch how to modify the proof given in  in the appendix.

###### Theorem 4.1.

Given a metric $`g`$ on a simply connected compact manifold $`X`$ (possibly with boundary), there exists a constant $`C>0`$ such that given any pair of points $`x`$ and $`y`$ in $`X`$ and any positive integer $`i`$, any element in $`H_i(\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,y))`$ can be represented by a cycle whose image lies in $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{Ci}(X,x,y)`$.

Let $`M`$ be a complete Riemannian manifold. Given $`x`$ and $`y`$ in $`M`$ and $`T>0`$ let $`n_T(x,y)`$ be the number of geodesic segments of length $`T`$ connecting $`x`$ to $`y`$. Let $`B(x,T)`$ be the closed ball with center at $`x`$ and radius $`T`$. Clearly $`n_T(x,y)1`$ if and only if $`yB(x,T)`$. Moreover it is easy to see that

$$_Mn_T(x,y)𝑑y=_{B(x,T)}n_T(x,y)𝑑y=_{B(0,T)}|detd_\theta \mathrm{exp}_x|𝑑\theta .$$

Let $`(M,g)`$ be a closed Riemannian manifold and let $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ be its universal covering endowed with the induced metric. Given $`x\stackrel{~}{M}`$, let $`V(x,r)`$ be the volume of the ball with center $`x`$ and radius $`r`$. Set

$$\lambda (g):=\underset{r+\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{r}\mathrm{log}V(x,r).$$

Manning  showed that the limit exists and it is independent of $`x`$.

It is well known  that $`\lambda (g)`$ is positive if and only if $`\pi _1(M)`$ has exponential growth. Manning’s inequality  asserts that for any metric $`g`$,

(1)
$$\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)\lambda (g).$$

In particular, it follows that if $`\pi _1(M)`$ has exponential growth then $`\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)`$ is positive for any metric $`g`$. This fact was first observed by E.I. Dinaburg in .

Given a manifold $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$, a subset $`X\stackrel{~}{M}`$, points $`x,zX`$, $`y\stackrel{~}{M}`$ and a continuous path $`\alpha `$ from $`z`$ to $`y`$, there is an inclusion $`\iota :\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,z)\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y)`$ given by $`\iota (\tau )=\tau \alpha `$. Let $`I:H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,z),k_p)H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y),k_p)`$ be the map induced in homology for some coefficient field $`k_p`$. Picking a different path from $`z`$ to $`y`$ gives a new inclusion, homotopic to the previous one. Therefore the map $`I`$ induced in homology is the same. Moreover, it is easy to see that the question of whether the map $`I`$ is injective or not is independent of the choices of $`x,z,y,\alpha `$. We now show:

Theorem C. Let $`M`$ be a closed manifold and let $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ be its universal covering. Suppose that there exists a compact simply connected submanifold $`X\stackrel{~}{M}`$, possibly with boundary, such that for some points $`x,zX`$, $`y\stackrel{~}{M}`$ and a path from $`z`$ to $`y`$ the inclusion $`\iota :\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,z)\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y)`$ induces a monomorphism $`I:H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,z),k_p)H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y),k_p)`$. Then, for any $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ Riemannian metric $`g`$ on $`M`$ there exists a positive constant $`C(g)`$ such that

$$\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)\frac{\lambda (g)}{2}+C(g)(\mathrm{log}R_{\mathrm{\Omega }X,p}),$$

where $`R_{\mathrm{\Omega }X,p}`$ is the radius of convergence of the Poincaré series

$$\underset{i0}{}b_i(\mathrm{\Omega }X,k_p)t^i.$$

###### Proof.

It is well known that for any $`xM`$ (cf. )

$$\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)\underset{T\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{1}{T}\mathrm{log}_Mn_T(x,y)𝑑y.$$

Let $`p:\stackrel{~}{M}M`$ be the covering projection. One easily checks that given any $`x\stackrel{~}{M}`$ we have

$$_Mn_T(p(x),y)𝑑y=_{\stackrel{~}{M}}n_T(x,y)𝑑y=_{B(x,T)}n_T(x,y)𝑑y.$$

Thus for any $`x\stackrel{~}{M}`$ we have

(2)
$$\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)\underset{T\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{1}{T}\mathrm{log}_{B(x,T)}n_T(x,y)𝑑y.$$

We will use the following lemma whose proof will be given after completing the proof of the theorem. The notation is the same as in the theorem and the comments before it. In what follows we take $`xX`$.

###### Lemma 4.2.

There exists a constant $`C(g)>0`$ such that for any $`TCi`$ and any $`yB(x,T/2)`$, every element in the image of the map $`I`$ constructed using $`z=x`$ and $`\alpha `$ a minimizing geodesic from $`x`$ to $`y`$ can be represented by a cycle in $`\mathrm{\Omega }^T(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y)`$.

If $`x`$ and $`y`$ are not conjugate points, then the Morse inequalities imply:

$$n_T(x,y)\underset{i0}{}b_i(\mathrm{\Omega }^T(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y),k_p).$$

Using the lemma and the hypothesis that $`I`$ is a monomorphism, we obtain for any positive integer $`k`$ and any $`yB(x,Ck/2)`$ not conjugate to $`x`$,

$$n_{Ck}(x,y)\underset{i0}{}b_i(\mathrm{\Omega }^{Ck}(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y),k_p)\underset{ik}{}b_i(\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,x),k_p).$$

Let us now integrate this inequality with respect to $`yB(x,Ck/2)`$. Since $`b_i(\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,x),k_p)`$ is independent of $`x`$ we obtain:

$$_{B(x,Ck/2)}n_{Ck}(x,y)𝑑yV(x,Ck/2)\left(\underset{ik}{}b_i(\mathrm{\Omega }X,k_p)\right)$$

and hence

$$C\underset{T\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{1}{T}\mathrm{log}_{B(x,T)}n_T(x,y)𝑑yC\frac{\lambda (g)}{2}+\underset{k+\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{1}{k}\mathrm{log}\underset{ik}{}b_i(\mathrm{\Omega }X,k_p).$$

Clearly

$$\mathrm{log}R_{\mathrm{\Omega }X,p}\underset{k+\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{1}{k}\mathrm{log}\underset{i=0}{\overset{k}{}}b_i(\mathrm{\Omega }X,k_p),$$

with equality if and only if the Poincaré series of $`\mathrm{\Omega }X`$ has infinitely many non-zero coefficientes. Thus

$$\underset{T\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{1}{T}\mathrm{log}_{B(x,T)}n_T(x,y)𝑑y\frac{\lambda (g)}{2}+\frac{1}{C}(\mathrm{log}R_{\mathrm{\Omega }X,p})$$

which together with inequality (2) completes the proof of the theorem.

Proof of Lemma 4.2. Consider $`cH_i(\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,x))`$. By Theorem 4.1 there exists a constant $`C^{}(g)>0`$ such that for any $`TC^{}i`$ there exists a cycle $`\eta `$ in $`\mathrm{\Omega }^T(X,x,x)`$ such that $`\eta `$ represents $`c`$.

Let $`\alpha `$ be a minimizing geodesic connecting $`x`$ to $`y`$. As before, let

$$\iota :\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,x)\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y)$$

be the map

$$\tau \tau \alpha .$$

Clearly the length $`\mathrm{}(\iota (\tau ))`$ of $`\iota (\tau )`$ is given by $`\mathrm{}(\tau )+d(y,x)`$. Let $`C=2C^{}`$ and $`TCi=2C^{}i`$. If $`yB(x,T/2)`$ we have that $`\iota `$ maps $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{C^{}i}(X,x,x)`$ into $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{C^{}i+T/2}(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y)`$. It follows that $`\iota \eta `$ is a cycle in $`\mathrm{\Omega }^T(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y)`$. Let $`[\xi ]`$ be the class represented by $`\iota \eta `$ in $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y)`$. Then, of course, $`[\xi ]=I(c)`$ and the lemma is proved.

We should add that I. Babenko showed in  that if the rational homology of the loop space of $`X`$ grows exponentially, then $`R=R_{\mathrm{\Omega }X,0}`$ where $`R`$ is the radius of convergence of:

$$\underset{i2}{}\text{dim}(\pi _i(X))t^i.$$

###### Corollary 4.3.

Let $`M`$ be a closed manifold and $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ be its universal covering. Suppose that there exists a simply connected submanifold with boundary $`X`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ such that the map $`I:H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,z),k_p)H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y),k_p)`$ is injective (for some $`x,zX`$, $`y\stackrel{~}{M}`$ and a path from $`z`$ to $`y`$) and the homology $`H_i(\mathrm{\Omega }X,k_p)`$ grows exponentially for some coefficient field $`k_p`$. Then $`M`$ does not admit a Riemannian metric with vanishing topological entropy.

The most natural condition under which one knows that the map $`I`$ is a monomorphism is when there exists a retraction from $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ to $`X`$. Therefore we have:

###### Corollary 4.4.

Let $`M`$ be a closed manifold and $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ be its universal covering. Suppose that there exists a submanifold with boundary $`X`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ such that $`X`$ is a retract of $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ and the homology $`H_i(\mathrm{\Omega }X,k_p)`$ grows exponentially for some coefficient field $`k_p`$. Then $`M`$ does not admit a Riemannian metric with vanishing topological entropy.

### 4.1. A consequence

We now want to apply the previous results to give explicit topological obstructions to the existence of metrics with vanishing topological entropy. The known results up to now deal with manifolds which have big fundamental groups (groups with exponential growth) or manifolds with very small (finite) fundamental group (if the loop space homology with coefficients in any field grows exponentially, they do not admit such a metric). We will give an obstruction which can be applied to a great variety of examples in the middle range (manifolds with infinite fundamental groups with subexponential growth).

Theorem D. Let $`M`$ be a closed manifold of dimension $`n3`$. Suppose that $`M`$ can be decomposed as $`X_1\mathrm{\#}X_2`$, where the order of the fundamental group of $`X_1`$ is greater than 2. If $`M`$ admits a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ Riemannian metric with zero topological entropy, then $`X_2`$ is a homotopy sphere.

###### Proof.

First note that the fundamental group of $`M`$ must have subexponential growth. It is a fact from combinatorial group theory (which follows immediately from the existence of normal forms for free products, for instance) that if $`A`$ and $`B`$ are two finitely generated groups, then the free product $`AB`$ contains a free subgroup of rank two unless $`A`$ is trivial or $`B`$ is trivial, or $`A`$ and $`B`$ are both of order two. Since the fundamental group of a connected sum is the free product of the fundamental groups of the summands, we conclude that $`X_2`$ must be simply connected, since the order of the fundamental group of $`X_1`$ is at least 3.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{X_1}`$ be the universal covering of $`X_1`$. The universal covering $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ of $`M=X_1\mathrm{\#}X_2`$ is identified with the connected sum of $`\stackrel{~}{X_1}`$ with one copy of $`X_2`$ for each element of the fundamental group of $`X_1`$. We now want to find a submanifold of $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ to play the role of $`X`$ in Corollary 4.3. If the fundamental group of $`X_1`$ is finite then we will take $`X=\stackrel{~}{M}`$. Assume now that the fundamental group of $`X_1`$ is infinite. Take any small $`n`$-dimensional disc $`D`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{X_1}`$. Then $`X=D\mathrm{\#}3X_2`$ appears as a submanifold of $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$. Moreover, we claim that in this case the map $`I`$ constructed as before is a monomorphism. To prove this assume that it is not the case. Then there exists a cycle defining a non-trivial homology class in $`H_i(\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,z))`$, which bounds an $`(i+1)`$-cycle in $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M},x,y)`$. The image of this $`(i+1)`$-cycle is contained in some compact subset of $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$. Performing connected sums at points away from this compact subset, we see that this $`(i+1)`$-cycle can also be considered as a cycle in $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M}\mathrm{\#}3\overline{X_2},x,y)`$. Then we would have that the map $`H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,z))H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M}\mathrm{\#}3\overline{X_2},x,y))`$ is not a monomorphism. But now we can construct a retraction $`r:\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M}\mathrm{\#}3\overline{X_2},x,y)\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,z)`$ as follows: let $`\widehat{D}`$ be an embedded disc in $`\stackrel{~}{X_1}`$ containing $`D`$ so that $`y\widehat{D}`$ and which is not contained in the $`(i+1)`$-cycle mentioned before. Of course, $`\widehat{D}D`$ is an annulus and there is a radial retraction $`\rho :\widehat{D}D`$ sending the boundary of $`\widehat{D}`$ to the center of $`D`$. We can also assume that $`\rho `$ sends $`y`$ to $`z`$ and the points where one performs the surgery with $`\overline{X_2}`$ to the points in $`D`$ where one performs surgery with $`X_2`$. The map $`\rho `$ then gives a retraction $`\widehat{\rho }:\widehat{D}\mathrm{\#}3\overline{X_2}\mathrm{\#}3X_2D\mathrm{\#}3X_2`$ (note that the original retraction $`\rho `$ is orientation reversing outside $`D`$). The map $`\widehat{\rho }`$ extends to a retraction from $`\stackrel{~}{M}\mathrm{\#}3\overline{X_2}`$ to $`X`$ by sending everything else to the center of $`D`$. But this implies that the map $`H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,z))H_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }(\stackrel{~}{M}\mathrm{\#}3\overline{X_2},x,y))`$ is a monomorphism.

Up to now we have constructed in both cases (when the fundamental group of $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ is finite or infinite) a submanifold $`X`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ such that the corresponding map $`I`$ in the homology of the path spaces is a monomorphism. To apply Corollary 4.3 it only remains to show that if $`X_2`$ is not a homotopy sphere, in both cases, the homology of the path spaces grow exponentially for some coefficient field. In the second case $`X`$ is the connected sum of a disc with 3 copies of $`X_2`$. Then the exponential growth follows from the following lemma. In the first case $`X`$ is the connected sum of the universal covering of $`X_1`$ with $`k3`$ copies of $`X_2`$; in this case the exponential growth follows from the work of P. Lambrechts \[26, Theorem 3\].

###### Lemma 4.5.

Let $`M^n`$ be a closed simply connected manifold which is not a homotopy sphere and let $`N^n`$ be a simply connected compact manifold with non-empty boundary. For a prime $`p`$ let $`k_p`$ be the field of integers modulo $`p`$. Let $`X`$ be the compact manifold with boundary obtained by taking the connected sum of $`N`$ with $`k3`$ copies of $`M`$. Then there exists a prime $`p`$ (or $`p=0`$) such that the Betti numbers of the free loop space $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)`$ with coefficients in $`k_p`$ grow exponentially. Therefore the Betti numbers of $`\mathrm{\Omega }(X)`$ also grow exponentially.

###### Proof.

Let us first consider the free loop space $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)`$. Our proof will be based on the work of Lambrechts in  and we will will make frequent use of this reference.

Given a differential graded algebra (DGA) $`(A,d)`$ we will consider the Hochschild homology, $`HH_{}(A,d)`$, of $`(A,d)`$. We will only be interested in the case when the DGA is positively or negatively graded and connected ($`A_0=R`$, where $`R`$ is the ground field). In this case the Hochschild homology is also positively or negatively graded. If $`K`$ is a simply connected $`CW`$-complex of finite type and $`C^{}(K,k_p)`$ denotes the singular cochain complex of $`K`$ with coefficients in $`k_p`$ then

$$H^{}(\mathrm{\Lambda }K,k_p)HH_{}(C^{}(K,k_p))$$

(see  or ). A quasi-isomorphism (or quism) between two DGAs is a DGA-morphism which induces an isomorphism in homology. Two DGAs are said to be weakly equivalent if there is a chain of quasi-isomorphisms connecting them. Since a quasi-isomorphism induces an isomorphism between the corresponding Hochschild homologies, two weakly equivalent DGAs have isomorphic Hochschild homologies. In summary, to prove our lemma it is enough to obtain a DGA $`(A,d)`$ which is weakly equivalent to $`C^{}(X,k_p)`$ and such that $`HH_{}(A,d)`$ grows exponentially (c.f. \[26, Proposition 8\]).

Since $`M^n`$ is not a homotopy sphere there exists a number $`i_0`$, $`1<i_0<n`$, such that $`\pi _{i_0}(M)`$ is the first non-trivial homotopy group of $`M`$. Then $`\pi _{i_0}(M)=H_{i_0}(M,)`$. Actually $`i_0n/2`$ and so $`i_0<n1`$. If $`Y`$ is the connected sum of $`k`$ copies of $`M`$ then $`H_{i_0}(Y,)=kH_{i_0}(M,)`$ (with $`k3`$). Therefore there exists a prime $`p`$ such that $`H_{i_0}(Y,k_p)`$ is a $`k_p`$-vector space of dimension $`k`$. From now on we fix the integer $`i_0`$ and the prime $`p`$.

Pick any non-zero element in $`H_{i_0}(M,k_p)`$. This element gives in a canonical way three linearly independent elements in $`H_{i_0}(Y,k_p)`$ for which the cup product between any pair of them is 0. Let $`(A,d)`$ be a $`(i_01)`$-connected DGA weakly equivalent to the singular cochain complex of $`Y`$. We can moreover assume that $`d`$ is decomposable and that $`A^m=0`$ for all $`m>n`$. We can also construct $`(A,d)`$ in such a way that it has three homogeneous cycles $`x,x^{},y`$ of degree $`i_0`$ (which correspond to the cohomology classes mentioned above) such that the product of any pair of them is 0. See for instance the argument in \[26, Proposition 17\]. By Poincaré duality there exists in any DGA weakly equivalent to the cochain complex of $`Y`$ with $`k_p`$ coefficients an element of degree $`n`$ which is a representative of the fundamental class of $`Y`$ which can be expressed as a product of homogeneous elements of positive degree. Let $`D`$ be a small open ball embedded in $`Y`$. It follows that one can construct as in \[26, Proposition 18\] a DGA $`(\widehat{A},\widehat{d})`$ weakly equivalent to the singular cochain complex of $`YD`$ such that :

1) $`\widehat{A}=Ak_p𝐱`$ as vector spaces, where $`deg(𝐱)=n1`$.

2) the differential and product of $`\widehat{A}`$ extend those of $`A`$.

3) $`𝐱.\widehat{A}^+=0`$.

4) $`\widehat{d}𝐱A^n`$ is decomposable and represents the fundamental class of $`Y`$.

Now we will find a suitable DGA weakly isomorphic to $`C^{}(ND,k_p)`$, where $`D`$ is some small open ball embedded in $`N`$. Pick a 1-connected DGA $`(B,d)`$ weakly isomorphic to $`C^{}(N,k_p)`$ such that $`B^m=0`$ for all $`m>n`$. Then we consider the DGA $`(\widehat{B},\widehat{d})`$ defined as follows: as graded vector spaces $`\widehat{B}=Bk_p𝐳`$ where $`𝐳`$ is a new element of degree $`n1`$. The product is defined by extending the product of $`B`$ and declaring $`𝐳.𝐳=0`$ and $`𝐳.B^+=0`$. It is easy to check that these choices give a well define graded algebra. To define the differential we set $`\widehat{d}=d`$ on $`B`$ and $`\widehat{d}(𝐳)=0`$. The whole idea is that $`𝐳`$ will represent the new $`(n1)`$-cohomology class represented by $`D`$.

Now we have to prove that $`(\widehat{B},\widehat{d})`$ is weakly isomorphic to $`C^{}(ND,k_p)`$.

Let $`\phi :(TV,d)C^{}(N,k_p)`$ be a minimal $`TV`$-model for $`C^{}(N,k_p)`$. Let $`\widehat{V}=Vk_p\omega W`$ be a graded vector space where $`\omega `$ has degree $`n1`$ and the elements of $`W`$ are combinations of homogeneous elements of degree $`n`$. On $`T\widehat{V}`$ we define a differential $`\widehat{d}`$ by $`\widehat{d}=d`$ on $`TV`$, $`\widehat{d}(\omega )=0`$ and $`W`$ and $`\widehat{d}|_W`$ are defined in a minimal way to kill all cohomology in dimensions higher than $`n`$. Then we extend the map $`\phi `$ to a map

$$\widehat{\phi }:T\widehat{V}C^{}(ND,k_p)$$

by setting $`\widehat{\phi }=i^{}\phi `$ on $`TV`$, where $`i`$ is the inclusion of $`ND`$ in $`N`$ and $`\phi (\omega )`$ is a representative of the new $`(n1)`$-cohomology class represented by $`D`$. It is easy to check that $`\widehat{\phi }`$ is uniquely determined by this data and it is a quasi-isomorphism.

Since $`(TV,d)`$ is weakly isomorphic to $`(B,d)`$ there exists a quasi-isomorphism $`\psi :(TV,d)(B,d)`$. Now define

$$\widehat{\psi }:(T\widehat{V},\widehat{d})(\widehat{B},\widehat{d})$$

by $`\widehat{\psi }=\psi `$ on $`TV`$, $`\widehat{\psi }=0`$ on $`W`$ and $`\widehat{\psi }(\omega )=𝐳`$. It is easy to check that $`\widehat{\psi }`$ is a quasi-isomorphism. Therefore $`(\widehat{B},\widehat{d})`$ is weakly-equivalent to $`C^{}(ND,k_p)`$. Moreover, $`\widehat{d}`$ is decomposable.

Summarizing, up to now we have constructed a DGA $`(\widehat{A},\widehat{d})`$ weakly equivalent to $`C^{}(YD,k_p)`$ with $`\widehat{d}`$ decomposable and a DGA $`(\widehat{B},\widehat{d})`$ weakly equivalent to $`C^{}(ND,k_p)`$ with $`\widehat{d}`$ decomposable. $`X`$ is obtained by joining $`YD`$ and $`ND`$ through $`D`$. A DGA $`(F,f)`$ weakly equivalent to $`C^{}(X,k_p)`$ can then be obtained from $`(\widehat{A},\widehat{d})`$ and $`(\widehat{B},\widehat{d})`$ as in \[26, Proposition 17\]:

$$F=k_pA^+B^+k_p𝐰$$

where $`f=\widehat{d}`$ on $`A^+`$ and on $`B^+`$ and $`f(𝐰)`$ is the decomposable element in $`A^n`$ representing the fundamental class of $`Y`$. Therefore $`f`$ is decomposable and the elements $`x,x^{},yA`$ satisfy all the hypotheses of \[26, Proposition 9\]. Therefore the Hochschild homology of $`(F,f)`$ grows exponentially and so does $`H^{}(\mathrm{\Lambda }(X),k_p)`$, from the discussion at the beginning of the proof. Finally exponential growth of the homology of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)`$ implies the exponential growth of the homology of $`\mathrm{\Omega }(X)`$ for any finite $`CW`$-complex by an easy argument with the spectral sequence of the fibration

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(X)\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)X.$$

## 5. Geometric structures and entropy

Let us begin by recalling the definition of geometric structures in general. A geometry is a complete simply connected Riemannian manifold $`X`$ such that the group of isometries acts transitively on $`X`$ and contains a discrete subgroup with compact quotient. We then say that a closed manifold $`M`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`X`$ if there is a Riemannian metric on $`M`$ such that the Riemannian universal covering of $`M`$ is $`X`$. Maximal geometric structures in dimension 4 have been classified by Filipkiewicz in . Wall studies the relationship between geometric structures and complex structures on 4-manifolds in . Given a compact complex surface we are only interested on whether the underlying smooth manifold admits a geometric structure, but not on the compatibility of the geometric structure with the complex structure.

In this section we will describe which maximal geometric structures admit models with metrics with zero entropy. We refer to  for a description and details of the 4-dimensional geometries.

###### Proposition 5.1.

If $`M`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on one of $`S^4`$, $`P^2`$, $`S^2\times S^2`$, $`S^2\times 𝔼^2`$, $`𝔼^4`$, $`S^3\times 𝔼^1`$, Nil$`{}_{}{}^{3}\times 𝔼^1`$ or $`\text{Nil}^4`$, then $`M`$ admits a smooth metric $`g`$ with $`\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)=0`$.

###### Proof.

1. $`S^4`$, $`P^2`$, $`S^2\times S^2`$, $`S^2\times 𝔼^2`$, $`𝔼^4`$ and $`S^3\times 𝔼^1`$: All the Jacobi fields in these geometries grow at most linearly (in the case of $`S^4`$ and $`P^2`$ they are actually bounded), and hence all the Liapunov exponents of every geodesic in $`M`$ are zero. It follows from Ruelle’s inequality  that all the measure entropies are zero. Hence, by the variational principle, the topological entropy of the geodesic flow of $`M`$ must be zero.
2. Nil$`{}_{}{}^{3}\times 𝔼^1`$ and $`\text{Nil}^4`$: The geometry Nil<sup>3</sup> can be described as $`^3`$ with the metric

$$ds^2=dx^2+dy^2+(dzxdy)^2.$$

Here, not all the Jacobi fields grow linearly, but they certainly grow polynomially. Again this implies that all the Liapunov exponents of every geodesic in $`M`$ are zero and hence the topological entropy of the geodesic flow of $`M`$ must be zero. For the case of $`\text{Nil}^4`$ we use a result of L. Butler \[7, Theorem 1.3\] which asserts that for any lattice $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in $`\text{Nil}^4`$ and any left invariant metric, the topological entropy of the geodesic flow of $`\text{Nil}^4/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is zero. In fact, Butler’s result applies to any nilpotent Lie group that admits a normal abelian subgroup of codimension one. For general nilpotent groups, the result is just not true; examples have been given by Butler himself in .

We now show that if $`M`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on one of the remaining geometries, namely $`S^2\times ^2`$, $`𝔼^2\times ^2`$, $`^3\times 𝔼^1`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{SL}}_2\times 𝔼^1`$, $`\mathrm{Sol}_0^4`$, $`\mathrm{Sol}_{m,n}^4`$ or $`\mathrm{Sol}_1^4`$, then $`M`$ cannot admit a metric of zero topological entropy. To do this, we use the next lemma, together with the fact described in Section 4, that if $`\pi _1(M)`$ grows exponentially, then $`\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)>0`$ for any smooth metric $`g`$ on $`M`$.

###### Lemma 5.2.

Let $`M`$ be a closed orientable 4-manifold, and suppose that $`M`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on one of $`S^2\times ^2`$, $`𝔼^2\times ^2`$, $`^3\times 𝔼^1`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{SL}}_2\times 𝔼^1`$, $`\mathrm{Sol}_0^4`$, $`\mathrm{Sol}_{m,n}^4`$ or $`\mathrm{Sol}_1^4`$. Then $`\pi _1(M)`$ grows exponentially.

Certainly the same is true for the geometries $`^2\times ^2`$, $`^4`$ and $`^2()`$, but here one has a better result: the simplicial volume of any $`M`$ modelled on one of these geometries will be non-zero .

###### Proof.

Let $`(M,g)`$ be a closed Riemannian manifold. Recall that $`\pi _1(M)`$ grows exponentially if and only if $`\lambda (g)>0`$.

If a closed manifold $`M`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`(X,G)`$, then $`M`$ is equipped with a locally homogeneous metric $`g`$. Let us consider the geometries $`S^2\times ^2`$, $`𝔼^2\times ^2`$, $`^3\times 𝔼^1`$. All of them have a hyperbolic space as a factor and using this, it is pretty straightforward to check that $`\lambda (g)>0`$ for all of them.

The geometry $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{SL}}_2`$ admits the unit sphere bundle of a closed surface of genus $`2`$ as a compact quotient. Since the fundamental group of the latter has exponential growth, it follows that $`\lambda (g)>0`$ for this geometry. Thus $`\lambda (g)>0`$ as well for the geometry $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{SL}}_2\times 𝔼^1`$.

To deal with the solvable geometries, it suffices to exhibit for each one of them a cocompact lattice $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has exponential growth.

Let $`ASL(3,)`$ and let $`A_tGL(3,)`$ be a 1-parameter subgroup with $`A_1=A`$. Let $`G`$ be the semidirect product $`^3_{A_t}`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_AG`$ be the cocompact lattice given by $`^3_A`$ (the ascending HNN extension of $`^3`$ by $`A`$).

If we choose $`A`$ such that it has characteristic polynomial $`\lambda ^3+m\lambda ^2n\lambda +1`$, then $`G`$ will be isomorphic to $`\mathrm{Sol}_{m,n}^4`$. We may choose for example:

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 1& 0\\ mn& m2& 1\\ mn& m3& 1\end{array}\right).$$

We claim that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_A`$ has exponential growth. To see this it suffices to use a result of J. Wolf , which asserts that a solvable (polycylic) group has exponential growth unless it is virtually nilpotent. Wolf also gives a criterion to check whether this holds \[41, Proposition 4.4\]. It amounts to whether $`A`$ has an eigenvalue with absolute value different from one, which is certainly the case for our choice of $`A`$.

To deal with $`\mathrm{Sol}_0^4`$ note that the lattice $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_A`$ exists inside $`\mathrm{Sol}_0^4`$ if $`A`$ has eigenvalues $`\alpha >1`$, $`\beta `$ and $`\overline{\beta }`$ with $`\beta \overline{\beta }`$. In fact with such a choice of $`A`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_A`$ is exactly the fundamental group of the Inoue surface $`S_A`$. As before $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_A`$ has exponential growth by Wolf’s criterion.

Finally, in the case of $`\mathrm{Sol}_1^4`$, it suffices to consider the cocompact lattice given by the ascending HNN extension of the Heisenberg lattice $`H_Z`$ by an automorphism given by a hyperbolic matrix in $`SL(2,)`$. Again, by Wolf’s criterion, the lattice has exponential growth.

## 6. Elliptic surfaces

Our references for the background material in this section about elliptic surfaces are  and references therein.

$`S`$ is called an elliptic surface if there is a holomorphic map $`\pi :SC`$ whose general fibre is an elliptic curve. We will (as usual) assume that $`S`$ is relatively minimal, i.e., no fibre contains an exceptional curve of the first kind. In fact, except when $`S`$ is rational this is equivalent to minimality in the usual sense.

A classification of the possible fibres of $`\pi `$ was given by Kodaira : the cases are labeled $`I_k`$ ($`k0`$), II, III, IV, I ($`k0`$), II, III, IV. Case $`I_0`$ means that the fibre is a smooth elliptic curve and all other types are called singular. Also important to us is the notion of multiplicity. Given $`pC`$, $`\pi ^1(p)`$ is a multiple fibre if there exists an integer $`m>1`$ such that as a divisor $`\pi ^{}(p)=mD`$. The largest such $`m`$ is called the multiplicity of the fibre. Multiple fibres can only be of type $`I_k`$ for some $`k`$.

We will often regard $`C`$ as an orbifold with a $`2\pi /m_i`$ cone point at each point $`x_i`$ corresponding to a multiple fibre of multiplicity $`m_i`$. Then the orbifold Euler characteristic of $`C`$ is:

$$\chi ^{\text{orb}}(C)=\chi (C)\underset{i}{}(1m_i^1).$$

The structure of $`S`$ at a smooth multiple fibre is homeomorphic to the product of a circle with a multiple fibre in a Seifert fibration of a 3-manifold.

Let $`\{t_1,\mathrm{},t_n\}`$ be the set of multiple points of $`C`$ and suppose each $`t_i`$ has multiplicity $`m_i`$. Given a base point $`tC`$, define the orbifold fundamental group $`\pi _1^{\text{orb}}(C,t)`$ as follows. Let $`C_0=C\{t_1,\mathrm{},t_n\}`$. The group $`\pi _1(C_0,t)`$ contains the image of the free group $`F`$ on letters $`\gamma _i`$, $`1in`$, corresponding to loops $`\gamma _i`$ in $`C_0`$ enclosing $`t_i`$ which are null-homotopic in $`C`$. Now set $`\pi _1^{\text{orb}}(C,t)`$ to be the quotient of $`\pi _1(C_0,t)`$ by the smallest normal subgroup which contains $`\gamma _i^{m_i}`$, $`1in`$.

We say that an orbifold is good if it has an orbifold covering whose total space is an orbifold with no multiple points. Otherwise, an orbifold is bad. The bad 2-dimensional orbifolds are the 2-sphere with either one multiple point or with two multiple points with unequal multiplicities.

Of central importance to us is the fact that $`\chi (S)`$, the Euler number of $`S`$, is always $`0`$ and it vanishes if and only if there are no singular fibres.

### 6.1. The case of positive Euler number

We will need the following result \[14, Theorem 2.3\].

###### Theorem 6.1.

Let $`\pi :SC`$ be an elliptic surface. If the Euler number of $`S`$ is positive, then $`\pi `$ induces an isomorphism $`\pi _1(S)\pi _1^{\text{orb}}(C)`$.

###### Lemma 6.2.

(a) Let $`S`$ be an elliptic surface with finite fundamental group. Then, the loop space homology of the universal covering of $`S`$ with rational coefficients grows exponentially.

(b) Let $`S`$ be a simply connected elliptic surface and let $`f_{\mathrm{}}`$ denote a regular fibre. Then, the loop space homology of $`Sf_{\mathrm{}}`$ with rational coefficients grows exponentially.

###### Proof.

We will use the following fact proved by J.B. Friedlander and S. Halperin \[13, Corollary 1.3\]. Let $`S`$ be a 1-connected finite CW-complex. If the loop space homology of $`S`$ with rational coefficients grows subexponentially, then

$$\underset{k1}{}2k\text{dim}(\pi _{2k}(S))n,$$

where $`n`$ is the largest integer for which $`H^n(S,)0`$.

To prove (a) observe that the Euler characteristic of $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ is given by $`12d`$, where $`d`$ is a positive integer \[14, Proposition 3.21\]. Hence $`b_2(\stackrel{~}{S})=12d2>2`$ and by the Hurewicz theorem $`\text{dim}(\pi _2(\stackrel{~}{S}))>2`$. Using the result mentioned above it follows that $`S`$ has the desired property.

Let us prove item (b). Observe first that $`Sf_{\mathrm{}}`$ is simply connected. Since $`H_1(S)=H_3(S)=H_1(Sf_{\mathrm{}})=0`$, the Mayer-Vietoris sequence gives:

$$0^3H_2(Sf_{\mathrm{}})H_2(S)^3^20.$$

It follows that $`H_2(Sf_{\mathrm{}})`$ is a free abelian group of rank $`b_2(S)+1`$. One can deduce as above that $`Sf_{\mathrm{}}`$ has the desired property.

We now prove:

###### Theorem 6.3.

Let $`\pi :SC`$ be an elliptic surface. If the Euler number of $`S`$ is positive, then any $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ Riemannian metric on $`S`$ has positive topological entropy.

###### Proof.

We split the proof into several cases.

1. $`\pi _1^{\text{orb}}(C)`$ is finite. By Theorem 6.1, $`\pi _1(S)`$ is finite. By Lemma 6.2 and Theorem C the topological entropy of any $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ metric on $`S`$ is positive.
2. $`\pi _1^{\text{orb}}(C)`$ is infinite, i.e., $`\chi ^{\text{orb}}(C)0`$. If $`\chi ^{\text{orb}}(C)<0`$, then $`C`$ is hyperbolic and $`\pi _1^{\text{orb}}(C)`$ contains a free subgroup of rank two. It follows from Theorem 6.1 that $`\pi _1(S)`$ grows exponentially and hence any metric on $`S`$ has positive topological entropy. If $`\chi ^{\text{orb}}(C)=0`$, then $`C`$ has a finite orbifold covering $`C_0`$ which has no multiple points and is a 2-torus. The finite cover $`C_0`$ induces a finite covering of the elliptic surface that we denote by $`S_0`$. By Theorem 2.16 in , $`S_0`$ is diffeomorphic to the fibre connected sum of $`𝕋^2\times 𝕋^2`$ with a simply connected elliptic surface $`S_1`$ with no multiple fibres.

We can picture $`\stackrel{~}{S_0}`$, the universal covering of $`S_0`$, as $`𝕋^2\times ^2`$ fibre connected sum with infinitely many copies of $`S_1`$ as follows. Consider $`𝕋^2`$ (as is customary) given by the square with vertices $`(0,0)`$, $`(1,0)`$, $`(1,1)`$ and $`(0,1)`$ with the sides identified. At each fibre $`𝕋^2\times \{(1/2+m,1/2+n)\}`$ consider the fibre connected sum with $`S_1`$ for all integers $`m`$ and $`n`$. The result is $`\stackrel{~}{S_0}`$. Let $`X`$ be $`S_1`$ minus an open neighborhood of a regular fibre. Let us see that $`X`$ lives inside $`\stackrel{~}{S_0}`$ as a retract. Consider a diffeomorphism of $`^2`$ that maps the points $`(1/2+m,1/2+n)`$ onto the points $`(0,m)`$. This induces a diffeomorphism of $`\stackrel{~}{S_0}`$. Now retract $`^2`$ over the set $`[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]\times `$ in the obvious way. This induces a retraction of $`\stackrel{~}{S_0}`$. Now we can “fold” the strip onto the square $`[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]\times [\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]`$ in such a way that the points $`(0,m)`$ all go to the origin preserving orientation. This describes a retraction of $`^2`$ over the square $`[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]\times [\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]`$ which induces a retraction of $`\stackrel{~}{S_0}`$ onto $`X`$.

By Lemma 6.2 and Corollary 4.4 the topological entropy of any $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ metric on $`S_0`$ (and thus of any metric on $`S`$) is positive.

### 6.2. The case of zero Euler number

We will need the following result \[14, Lemma 7.3, Proposition 7.4, Proposition 7.5\].

###### Proposition 6.4.

Let $`\pi :SC`$ be an elliptic fibration with Euler number zero. If the base orbifold is flat or hyperbolic (i.e. $`\pi _1^{\text{orb}}(C)`$ is infinite), then there is an exact sequence

$$0\stackrel{i_{}}{}\pi _1(S)\stackrel{\pi _{}}{}\pi _1^{\text{orb}}(C)\{1\},$$

where $`i`$ is the inclusion of a general fibre of $`\pi `$ into $`S`$. In case the base orbifold $`C`$ is spherical and good, then there is an exact sequence

$$\pi _1(S)\pi _1^{\text{orb}}(C)\{1\}.$$

In case the base orbifold $`C`$ is bad, then $`S`$ is either a ruled surface over an elliptic base ($`\pi _1(S)`$) or $`S`$ is a Hopf surface with $`\pi _1(S)/n`$ for some integer $`n1`$.

Let $`\kappa `$ be the Kodaira dimension.

###### Theorem 6.5.

Let $`\pi :SC`$ be an elliptic fibration with Euler number zero. Suppose that $`C`$ is a good orbifold. The following are equivalent:

1. $`S`$ admits a smooth Riemannian metric $`g`$ with $`\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)=0`$;
2. $`S`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`S^2\times 𝔼^2`$ ($`\kappa =\mathrm{}`$, $`b_1`$ even) , $`𝔼^4`$ ($`\kappa =0`$, $`b_1`$ even), $`S^3\times 𝔼^1`$ ($`\kappa =\mathrm{}`$, $`b_1`$ odd) or Nil$`{}_{}{}^{3}\times 𝔼^1`$ ($`\kappa =0`$, $`b_1`$ odd).

###### Proof.

The proof is based on the following result due to C.T.C Wall.

###### Theorem 6.6 (Theorem 7.4 in ).

An elliptic surface $`S`$ without singular fibres has a geometric structure compatible with the complex structure of $`S`$ if and only if its base $`C`$ is a good orbifold. The type of the structure is determined as follows:

| $`\kappa `$ | $`\mathrm{}`$ | 0 | 1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`b_1`$ even | $`S^2\times 𝔼^2`$ | $`𝔼^4`$ | $`𝔼^2\times ^2`$ |
| $`b_1`$ odd | $`S^3\times 𝔼^1`$ | $`\text{Nil}^3\times 𝔼^1`$ | $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{SL}}_2\times 𝔼^1`$ |

Since we are assuming that $`S`$ has zero Euler number and that $`C`$ is a good orbifold, Wall’s theorem says that $`S`$ admits a geometric structure as above. Lemma 5.2 ensures that if $`S`$ admits the geometries $`𝔼^2\times ^2`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{SL}_2\times 𝔼^1`$, then $`\pi _1(S)`$ has exponential growth and the theorem readily follows from Proposition 5.1.

We conclude this section by noting that elliptic surfaces with Kodaira dimension $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`0`$ can be completely classified \[14, Proposition 3.23\] and they are usually refer to as “not honestly” elliptic surfaces. Hence we can easily determine the surfaces appearing in Theorem 6.5:

1. If $`S`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`S^2\times 𝔼^2`$ ($`\kappa =\mathrm{}`$, $`b_1`$ even), then $`S`$ is a ruled surface of genus $`1`$.
2. If $`S`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`𝔼^4`$ ($`\kappa =0`$, $`b_1`$ even), then $`S`$ is torus or a hyperelliptic surface.
3. If $`S`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`S^3\times 𝔼^1`$ ($`\kappa =\mathrm{}`$, $`b_1`$ odd), then $`S`$ is a Hopf surface.
4. If $`S`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`\mathrm{Nil}^3\times 𝔼^1`$ ($`\kappa =0`$, $`b_1`$ odd), then $`S`$ is a Kodaira surface, or a Kodaira surface modulo a finite group.

## 7. Surfaces of Kodaira dimension $`\mathrm{}`$

### 7.1. Surfaces with a global spherical shell

###### Proposition 7.1.

A compact surface with a global spherical shell admits no metric with zero topological entropy.

###### Proof.

A compact surface $`S`$ with a global spherical shell is diffeomorphic to a connected sum of $`S^3\times S^1`$ with $`b_2(S)`$ copies of $`\overline{P}^2`$ ($`b_2(S)>0`$).

We can regard $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$, the universal covering of $`S`$, as $`S^3\times `$ connected sum with infinitely many copies of $`\overline{P^2}`$ as follows. Consider $`S^1`$ as $`[0,1]`$ with the endpoints identified and fix a point $`xS^3`$. At each point $`(x,1/2+n)S^3\times `$ consider the connected sum with $`\overline{P^2}`$ for all integers $`n`$. Let $`X_k`$ be the connected sum of $`k`$ copies of $`\overline{P^2}`$ with a small open ball around a point removed. For any $`k`$, $`X_k`$ lives inside $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ as a retract. If $`k3`$, the loop space homology of $`X_k`$ with rational coefficients grows exponentially and thus, by Corollary 4.4, the topological entropy of any $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ metric on $`S`$ is positive.

### 7.2. Hopf surfaces

###### Proposition 7.2.

Any compact Hopf surface admits a smooth metric with zero topological entropy.

###### Proof.

Let $`H`$ be a finite subgroup of $`U(2)`$ that acts freely on $`S^3^2`$. According to M. Kato  any compact Hopf surface $`S`$ is diffeomorphic to one of the following:

1. $`S^1\times (S^3/H)`$;
2. $`(S^3/H)`$-bundle over $`S^1`$ whose transition function $`S^3/HS^3/H`$ is an involution. In fact, the bundles are diffeomorphic to $`S^1\times (S^3/H)`$ divided by an action of $`_2`$ generated by

$$([t],[q])([t+1/2],[u(q)])$$

where $`u`$ is certain unitary matrix which normalizes $`H`$ and hence $`[u(q)]`$ is well defined.

Hence if we endow $`S^1\times S^3`$ with the canonical product metric we obtain a metric with zero entropy on $`S^1\times (S^3/H)`$ and since $`_2`$ acts by isometries we also obtain a metric with zero entropy on any Hopf surface. In fact, $`S`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`S^3\times 𝔼`$.

### 7.3. Ruled surfaces

###### Proposition 7.3.

A ruled surface $`S`$ over a Riemann surface $`C`$ of genus $`g`$ admits a smooth metric with zero topological entropy if and only if $`g=0,1`$.

###### Proof.

It follows from the homotopy exact sequence of the fibration that if the fundamental group of $`C`$ grows exponentially, then the fundamental group of $`S`$ also grows exponentially. Hence if $`S`$ admits a smooth metric with zero topological entropy, then the genus of $`C`$ must be $`1`$.

From the differentiable viewpoint, there are only two $`S^2`$-bundles over $`S^2`$: the trivial one $`S^2\times S^2`$ and the non-trivial one which is diffeomorphic to $`P^2\mathrm{\#}\overline{P^2}`$. We explained in  how to construct smooth metrics with zero entropy on these manifolds.

Similarly, from the differentiable viewpoint, there are only two $`S^2`$-bundles over $`𝕋^2`$ : a trivial bundle $`E_0=𝕋^2\times S^2`$ and a non-trivial bundle $`E_1`$. Clearly $`E_0`$ has a smooth metric with zero entropy.

The bundle $`E_1`$ can be described as follows (cf. \[38, p. 310\]). Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be the group isomorphic to $`_2_2`$ generated by the two diffeomorphisms of $`S^2\times 𝕋^2`$ given by:

$$(p,[u])(r_z(p),[u+1/2]),$$

$$(p,[u])(r_x(p),[u+i/2]),$$

where $`r_z`$ is rotation by 180 degrees around the $`z`$-axis and $`r_x`$ is rotation by 180 degrees around the $`x`$-axis. Endow $`S^2\times 𝕋^2`$ with the product metric. Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts by isometries we see that $`E_1`$ admits a smooth metric with zero topological entropy. In fact $`E_1`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`S^2\times 𝔼^2`$.

### 7.4. Inoue surfaces with $`b_2=0`$

They all have fundamental group with exponential growth and hence any metric has positive topological entropy. This can be checked directly from the explicit presentation of the fundamental groups given in . Alternatively, on account of Proposition 9.1 in  the Inoue surfaces admit geometric structures modelled on solvable groups and hence we can use Lemma 5.2.

## 8. Entropy of complex surfaces

We are now ready to complete the discussion of the minimal entropy problem for compact complex surfaces. The next proposition takes care of non-minimal surfaces.

###### Proposition 8.1.

Let $`S`$ be a compact complex surface. If $`S`$ admits a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ metric with zero topological entropy, then $`S`$ must be minimal unless $`S`$ is diffeomorphic to $`P^2\mathrm{\#}\overline{P^2}`$.

###### Proof.

If $`S`$ is not minimal, it is diffeomorphic to $`S^{}\mathrm{\#}\overline{P^2}`$. Theorem D implies that the fundamental group of $`S^{}`$ is either trivial or $`_2`$. Moreover, the universal covering of $`S^{}`$ must be homeomorphic to $`S^4`$ or $`P^2`$, otherwise the rational loop space homology of the universal covering of $`S`$ has exponential growth (cf. proof of part (a) Lemma 6.2 or ). Since $`S`$ is a complex surface, the result follows.

We can now directly combine Proposition 8.1 and Theorem B with the results of Sections 6 and 7 to obtain:

Theorem E. Let $`S`$ be a compact complex surface not of Kähler type. Modulo the gap in the classification of class VII surfaces we have: The minimal entropy of $`S`$ is zero and the following are equivalent:

1. The minimal entropy problem can be solved for $`S`$;
2. $`S`$ admits a smooth metric $`g`$ with $`\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)=0`$;
3. $`S`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`S^3\times 𝔼^1`$ or Nil$`{}_{}{}^{3}\times 𝔼^1`$;
4. $`S`$ has $`\kappa =\mathrm{},0`$ and is diffeomorphic to one of the following: a Hopf surface, a Kodaira surface, or a Kodaira surface modulo a finite group.

Similarly we can combine Proposition 8.1, Theorem A and the results of Sections 6 and 7 to obtain:

Theorem F. Let $`S`$ be a compact complex Kähler surface with Kodaira dimension $`\kappa 1`$. We have: The minimal entropy of $`S`$ is zero and the following are equivalent:

1. The minimal entropy problem can be solved for $`S`$;
2. $`S`$ admits a smooth metric $`g`$ with $`\mathrm{h}_{\mathrm{top}}(g)=0`$;
3. $`S`$ admits a geometric structure modelled on $`P^2`$, $`S^2\times S^2`$, $`S^2\times 𝔼^2`$ or $`𝔼^4`$ or $`S`$ is diffeomorphic to $`P^2\mathrm{\#}\overline{P^2}`$;
4. $`S`$ has $`\kappa =\mathrm{},0`$ and is diffeomorphic to one of the following: $`P^2`$, a ruled surface of genus $`0`$ or $`1`$, a complex torus or a hyperelliptic surface.

Note that $`P^2\mathrm{\#}\overline{P^2}`$ is the only non-minimal surface that admits a metric of zero entropy. It is also the only surface that admits a metric with zero entropy and no geometric structure.

## 9. Appendix: Proof of Theorem 4.1 when $`X`$ is non-empty

###### Proof.

: Assume that the boundary of $`X`$ is non-empty. We have a collar of the boundary diffeomorphic to $`X\times [0,2)`$. Let $`Y`$ be the manifold obtained by deleting $`X\times [0,1)`$ from $`X`$. Of course, $`Y`$ is diffeomorphic to $`X`$. Now find a finite number of convex subsets of $`X`$ which cover $`Y`$. Call them $`V_\alpha `$, $`1\alpha k_0`$. Let $`𝐓`$ be a triangulation of $`Y`$. For a point $`pY`$, let $`F(p)`$ be the closed cell of lowest dimension containing $`p`$ and let $`O(p)`$ be the union of all closed cells intersecting $`F(p)`$. Note that $`O(p)`$ is a compact subset of $`Y`$. Similarly, for any subset $`KY`$ one can define $`F(Y)`$ as the union of $`F(p)`$ for $`pK`$ and $`O(K)`$ as the union of $`O(p)`$ for $`pK`$. There is a positive number $`\delta `$ (depending on the covering $`\{V_\alpha \}`$ and $`g`$) such that, after taking some barycentric subdivisions, we can take $`𝐓`$ so that for every subset $`K`$ of diameter bounded by $`\delta `$, $`O(K)`$ is contained in one of the $`V_\alpha `$’s.

Now for $`x,yY`$ we define the open subset $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k`$ of $`\mathrm{\Omega }(V_\alpha ,x,y)`$ as the set of all paths $`\omega `$ in $`V_\alpha `$ with $`\omega (0)=x,\omega (1)=y`$ so that for all $`j`$ between 1 and $`2^k`$,

$$O(\{\omega (j1/2^k),\omega (j/2^k)\})\omega [j1/2^k,j/2^k]$$

is contained in one of the $`V_\alpha `$’s. It is easy to see that $`\mathrm{\Omega }(Y,x,y)`$ is contained in the union of the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k`$’s.

Let $`B_k`$ be the set of sequences $`p_0,\mathrm{},p_{2^k}`$ of points in $`Y`$ such that $`p_0=x`$, $`p_{2^k}=y`$ and for each $`j`$ between 1 and $`2^k`$ $`O(\{p_{j1},p_j\})`$ is contained in one of the $`V_\alpha `$’s. Let $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k^Y\mathrm{\Omega }_k`$ be the set of paths in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k`$ for which all intermediate $`2^k1`$ points are in $`Y`$. Then $`B_k`$ is naturally identified with a subset of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k^Y`$ (an element of $`B_k`$ uniquely determines a broken geodesic which sends $`j/2^k`$ to $`p_j`$) and it is actually a deformation retract of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k^Y`$.

Given a cycle representing a homology class in $`\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,y)`$ it can be represented by a cycle in $`\mathrm{\Omega }(Y,x,y)`$ which is therefore contained in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k^Y`$ for some $`k`$. Therefore we can retract it to $`B_k`$. But $`B_k`$ is easily identified with a subset of $`Y^{2^k1}`$. Moreover, under this identification if a point $`(p_1,\mathrm{},p_{2^k1})B_k`$, then the whole $`F(p_1)\times \mathrm{}\times F(p_{2^k1})`$ is contained in $`B_k`$. This implies that $`𝐓`$ induces a cell decomposition in $`B_k`$. Hence the $`i`$-homology class can be represented by a combination of cells of dimension $`i`$. A cell in $`B_k`$ is a product of cells in each coordinate. The dimension of such a cell is the sum of the dimensions of the corresponding cells, of course. If the total dimension is $`i`$ then there can be at most $`i`$ cells of positive dimension. Since $`X`$ is simply connected there exists a smooth map $`f:XX`$ which is smoothly homotopic to the identity and which sends the union of the images of all the geodesic segments joining vertices in the triangulation to a point. We can moreover assume that $`x`$ and $`y`$ are fixed by $`f`$. The norm of the differential of $`f`$ is bounded since $`X`$ is compact and $`f`$ induces a map $`\widehat{f}:\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,y)\mathrm{\Omega }(X,x,y)`$ which is homotopic to the identity. Now paths belonging to an $`i`$-cell of $`B_k`$ are formed by pieces joining vertices of the triangulation and at most $`2i`$ pieces in which one of the points is not a vertex. Under the map $`\widehat{f}`$ the former are sent to a point and the latter to a path of length bounded in terms of the norm of the differential of $`f`$ and the diameter of the $`V_\alpha `$’s. Therefore, there exists a constant $`C_g`$ such that the image of the $`i`$-skeleton of $`B_k`$ is sent by $`\widehat{f}`$ to the subset of paths with energy bounded by $`C_gi`$. The theorem follows.