text:
# Separability and the Birkhoff-Gustavson Normalization of the Perturbed Harmonic Oscillators with Homogeneous Polynomial Potentials

## 1. Introduction

The Bertrand-Darboux (BD) theorem is a very well-known theorem established more than a century ago (\[B\], \[D\], \[MW\]), which characterizes separability and existence of constants of motion quadratic in momenta of simple dynamical systems on the Euclidean plane. As expected, the BD theorem has been playing a key role of various studies on integrable systems (see \[GPS\], \[H\], \[MW\], \[W\] and references therein).

On turning to non-integrable systems, the Birkhoff-Gustavson (BG) normalization is known as one of the conventional methods to them (\[M\]): For a given system feasible to be normalized, the BG normalization provides a good account for the phase portrait in the regular régime.

Although directed to different characteristics of dynamical systems, those well-known methods have encountered in the inverse problem of the BG normalization which is posed by the author as follows (\[UCRV\], \[U1\]): For a given polynomial (or power series 111In discussing the BG normalization, we usually think of power series in formal sense \[M\]. ) Hamiltonian in the BG normal form (BGNF), identify all the possible Hamiltonians in polynomial or in power series which share the given BGNF. In the inverse problem of the BG normalization of the perturbed isotropic harmonic oscillators (PHOs) with homogeneous polynomial potentials of degree-$`3`$ 222Throughout this paper, we deal with $`2`$-degrees of freedom systems only. , the condition revealed in BD theorem (BDC) has come out as follows:

###### Theorem 1.1 (\[U1\])

A PHO with homogeneous polynomial potential of degree-$`3`$ shares its BGNF up to degree-$`4`$ with a PHO of degree-$`4`$ if and only if the PHO of degree-$`3`$ satisfies the ‘generic’ BDC 333See Eqs. (54a) and (55b) in \[U1\]. . The PHO of degree-$`4`$ corresponding to that PHO of degree-$`3`$ also satisfies the generic BDC.

From now on, the perturbed $`2`$-dimensional isotropic harmonic oscillator with a homogeneous polynomial potential of degree-$`\delta `$ will be abbreviated to as a ‘$`\delta `$-PHO’. The aim of this paper is to report briefly that the following extension of Theorem 1.1 holds true 444More detailed discussion will be made in a pair of subsequent papers, \[U2\]. :

###### Theorem 1.2 (main theorem)

For any odd $`\delta `$ greater than or equal to $`3`$, a $`\delta `$-PHO shares its BGNF up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$ with a $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO if and only if the $`\delta `$-PHO is separable within a rotation of Cartesian coordinates. The $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO sharing the BGNF with that $`\delta `$-PHO is also separable within the same rotation of Cartesian coordinates.

The organization of this paper is outlined as follows. In Section 2, the separability of the $`\delta `$-PHOs is studied by applying the BD theorem to them. On associating the $`2\times (\delta 1)`$ matrix of the form

$$(K^{(\delta )})=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}v_0^{(\delta )}v_2^{(\delta )}& v_1^{(\delta )}v_3^{(\delta )}& \mathrm{}& v_{\delta 2}^{(\delta )}v_\delta ^{(\delta )}\\ 2v_1^{(\delta )}& 2v_2^{(\delta )}& \mathrm{}& 2v_{\delta 1}^{(\delta )}\end{array}\right)$$
(1.1)
with the $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian defined by

$$K^{(\delta )}(q,p)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}(p_j^2+q_j^2)+V^{(\delta )}(q)\text{and}V^{(\delta )}(q)=\underset{h=0}{\overset{\delta }{}}v_h^{(\delta )}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta }{h}\right)q_1^hq_2^{\delta h},$$
(1.2)
the separability of the $`\delta `$-PHOs within rotations of Cartesian coordinates is shown to be equivalent to

$$\text{rank}(K^{(\delta )})=1.$$
(1.3)
Since (1.3) with $`\delta =3,4`$ provides the ‘generic’ BDC for the $`3`$\- and $`4`$-PHOs , the separability is taken as the extension of the ‘generic’ BDC. In Section 3, the BG normalization of the $`\delta `$-PHOs is studied, which provides a plausible reason to extend the relation between the degrees, $`3`$ and $`4`$ of the PHOs in Theorem 1.1 to $`\delta `$ and $`2\delta 2`$ of those in Theorem 1.2. Section 4 is devoted to the proof of Theorem 1.2: The separability is shown to be sufficient for any $`\delta `$-PHO to share its BGNF up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$ with a $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO in subsection 4.1, and is shown to be necessary in subsection 4.2.

## 2. The separability of the $`\delta `$-PHOs

### 2.1. The BD theorem for the $`\delta `$-PHOs

To extend Theorem 1.1 to the PHOs of general degree, we wish to understand more the meaning of the ‘generic’ BDC for the $`3`$\- and $`4`$-PHOs3. We start with applying the BD theorem to the $`\delta `$-PHOs.

###### Theorem 2.1

A $`\delta `$-PHO admits a first integral quadratic in momenta if and only if it satisfies one of the followings:
(I) For odd $`\delta 5`$,

$$\text{rank}(K^{(\delta )})=1,$$
(2.1)
where $`(K^{(\delta )})`$ is the matrix associated with the $`\delta `$-PHO by (1.1) and (1.2).
(II) For even $`\delta 4`$, one of the following (2.2) and (2.5);

$`\text{rank}(K^{(\delta )})=1,`$ (2.2)
$`\{\begin{array}{cc}v_{2h}^{(\delta )}=\left\{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta /2}{h}\right)/\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta }{2h}\right)\right\}v_0^{(\delta )}\text{with}v_0^{(\delta )}0\hfill & (h=1,\mathrm{},\frac{\delta }{2})\hfill \\ & \\ v_{2h^{}1}^{(\delta )}=0\hfill & (h^{}=1,\mathrm{},\frac{\delta }{2}).\hfill \end{array}`$ (2.5)
(III) For $`\delta =3`$, one of (2.6) and (2.9);

$`\text{rank}(K^{(3)})=1,`$ (2.6)
$`\text{rank}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}7v_1& v_0+6v_2& 2v_1+5v_3\\ 5v_0+2v_2& 6v_1+v_3& 7v_2\end{array}\right)=1.`$ (2.9)
###### Proof.

The proof is made straightforward by writing down explicitly the BDC (\[MW\], \[U1\]) in terms of $`v_h^{(\delta )}`$s.

The BDC: There exist real-valued constants, $`(\alpha ,\beta ,\beta ^{},\gamma ,\gamma ^{})(0,0,0,0,0)`$, for which the potential function $`V(q)`$ of a given natural dynamical system satisfies

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{^2V}{q_2^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{^2V}{q_1^2}}\right)(2\alpha q_1q_2\beta ^{}q_2\beta q_1+\gamma )`$ (2.10)
$`+2{\displaystyle \frac{^2V}{q_1q_2}}(\alpha q_2^2\alpha q_1^2+\beta q_2\beta ^{}q_1+\gamma ^{})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{V}{q_1}}(6\alpha q_2+3\beta ){\displaystyle \frac{V}{q_2}}(6\alpha q_1+3\beta ^{})=0.`$
(i) $`\delta >3`$: On substituting

$$V(q)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}(p_j^2+q_j^2)+V^{(\delta )}(q)$$
(2.11)
with (1.2) into (2.10), the lhs, denoted by $`^{(\delta )}`$, of (2.10) is calculated to be

$$^{(\delta )}=_\delta ^{(\delta )}+_{\delta 1}^{(\delta )}+_{\delta 2}^{(\delta )}+_1^{(\delta )}$$
(2.12)
with the homogeneous polynomial parts,

$$_1^{(\delta )}=3\beta q_13\beta ^{}q_2,$$
(2.13)
$`_{\delta 2}^{(\delta )}=\delta (\delta 1){\displaystyle \underset{h=0}{\overset{\delta 2}{}}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{h}\right)\{(v_h^{(\delta )}v_{h+2}^{(\delta )})\gamma +2v_{h+1}^{(\delta )}\gamma ^{}\}q_1^hq_2^{\delta 2h}`$ (2.14)
$`=\delta (\delta 1)\times (\gamma ,\gamma ^{})(K^{(\delta )})(q_2^{\delta 2},\mathrm{},\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{h}\right)q_1^hq_2^{\delta 2h},\mathrm{},q_1^{\delta 2})^T,`$
$`_{\delta 1}^{(\delta )}`$ (2.15)
$`=\beta \delta [(2\delta +1)v_1^{(\delta )}q_2^{\delta 1}+\{(\delta +2)v_\delta ^{(\delta )}(\delta 1)v_{\delta 2}^{(\delta )}\}q_1^{\delta 1}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{h=1}{\overset{\delta 2}{}}}\{(3\delta \left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{h}\right)(\delta 1)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{h}\right))v_{h+1}^{(\delta )}3(\delta 1)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{h1}\right)v_{h1}^{(\delta )}\}q_1^hq_2^{\delta 1h}]`$
$`\beta ^{}\delta [\{(\delta +2)v_0^{(\delta )}(\delta 1)v_2^{(\delta )}\}q_2^{\delta 1}+(2\delta +1)v_1^{(\delta )}q_1^{\delta 1}`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{h=1}{\overset{\delta 2}{}}}\{(3\delta \left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{h}\right)(\delta 1)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{h1}\right))v_h^{(\delta )}3(\delta 1)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{h}\right)v_{h+2}^{(\delta )}\}q_1^hq_2^{\delta 1h}],`$
and

$`_\delta ^{(\delta )}=2\alpha \delta (\delta +2)`$ (2.16)
$`\times \left[v_1^{(\delta )}q_2^\delta v_{\delta 1}^{(\delta )}q_1^\delta +{\displaystyle \underset{h=1}{\overset{\delta 1}{}}}\left\{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{h}\right)v_{h+1}^{(\delta )}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{h1}\right)v_{h1}^{(\delta )}\right\}q_1^hq_2^{\delta h}\right],`$
of degree-$`1`$, -$`(\delta 2)`$, -$`(\delta 1)`$ and -$`\delta `$, respectively 555The superscript T stands for the transpose throughout this paper. .

(ii) $`\delta =3`$: Substituting (2.11) with $`\delta =3`$ into (2.10), we obtain

$$^{(3)}=_3^{(3)}+_2^{(3)}+_1^{(3)}$$
(2.17)
with

$$_1^{(3)}=3\left\{(\gamma ,\gamma ^{})(K^{(3)})+(\beta ^{},\beta )\right\}\left(\begin{array}{c}q_2\\ q_1\end{array}\right)$$
(2.18)
and

$$_2^{(3)}=3(\beta ,\beta ^{})\left(\begin{array}{ccc}7v_1& v_0+6v_2& 2v_1+5v_3\\ 5v_0+2v_2& 6v_1+v_3& 7v_2\end{array}\right)(q_2^2,2q_1q_2,q_1^2)^T,$$
(2.19)
where $`_3^{(3)}`$ is given by (2.16) with $`\delta =3`$.

From the explicit expression of $`^{(\delta )}`$ thus obtained, we have Table 1, which classifies the possible choice of $`(\alpha ,\beta ,\beta ^{},\gamma ,\gamma ^{})0`$.

The derivation of Table 1 will be given in more detail in \[U2\]. ∎

### 2.2. The separability

As expected from the BD theorem, the classification, (2.1)-(2.9), of the BDC can be characterized from the separability viewpoint.

###### Theorem 2.2

A $`\delta `$-PHO is separable 666 As known well, a Hamiltonian system is said to be separable iff the Hamilton-Jacobi equation for that system is separable.  within a rotation of Cartesian coordinates if and only if (1.3) holds true.

###### Proof.

From the Hamilton-Jacobi equation

$$\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}\left(\frac{S}{q_j}\right)^2+V^{(\delta )}(q)=E(E:\text{energy value})$$
(2.20)
for the $`\delta `$-PHOs ($`S(q)`$: the generating function), it is easy to see that the separation of (2.20) with in rotations of Cartesian coordinates amounts to that of $`V^{(\delta )}(q)`$. Accordingly, let us assume that $`V^{(\delta )}(q)`$ is separated within a rotation

$$\kappa _\psi :(q,p)(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})=(\sigma (\psi )q,\sigma (\psi )p)$$
(2.21)
with

$$\sigma (\psi )=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{cos}\psi & \hfill \mathrm{sin}\psi \\ \hfill \mathrm{sin}\psi & \hfill \mathrm{cos}\psi \end{array}\right)(0\psi <2\pi ).$$
(2.22)
Namely,

$$\stackrel{~}{V}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q})=V^{(\delta )}(\sigma (\psi )^1\stackrel{~}{q})=\stackrel{~}{v}_0^{(\delta )}\stackrel{~}{q}_2^\delta +\stackrel{~}{v}_\delta ^{(\delta )}\stackrel{~}{q}_1^\delta ,$$
(2.23)
where $`(\stackrel{~}{v}_0^{(\delta )},\stackrel{~}{v}_\delta ^{(\delta )})(0,0)`$. Equations (2.21)-(2.23) are put together to yield the relation,

$$(4\mathrm{sin}2\psi )(v_h^{(\delta )}v_{h+2}^{(\delta )})(\mathrm{cos}2\psi )(2v_{h+1}^{(\delta )})=0(h=0,\mathrm{},\delta 2)$$
(2.24)
among $`v_h^{(\delta )}`$s, which immediately implies (1.3). The converse is easily shown by tracing back the discussion above. ∎

###### Remark 2.3.

It is also possible to characterize the other classes of $`\delta `$-PHOs subject to BDC listed in Theorem 2.10 from the separation of variables viewpoint: The condition (2.5) is shown to be equivalent to the separability in the polar coordinates, and (2.9) in a off-centered parabolic coordinates (\[U2\]).

Since the ‘generic’ BDC for the $`3`$-PHOs and the $`4`$-PHOs3 are equivalent to (1.3) with $`\delta =3,4`$, we can thereby look the separability within rotations upon as the ‘generic’ BDC for $`\delta `$-PHOs owing to Theorem 2.2.

## 3. The BG normalization of the $`\delta `$-PHO

In this section, we proceed the BG normalization of the $`\delta `$-PHOs, which provides us with a key other than Theorem 2.2 to extend Theorem 1.1 to Theorem 1.2.

We start with describe the way how the $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ is brought into the BGNF. Let $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ be the BGNF of $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ and $`W^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )`$ be the generating function 777 $`W^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )`$ is said to be of the second-type since it is a function of the ‘old’ position variables $`q`$ and the ‘new’ momentum ones $`\eta `$ (\[G\]). used for the BG normalization, both of which are expressed in power-series form1

$$G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )=\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}(\eta _j^2+\xi _j^2)+\underset{k=3}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}G_k^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )$$
(3.1)
and

$$W^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )=\underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}q_j\eta _j+\underset{k=3}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}W_k^{(\delta )}(q,\eta ),$$
(3.2)
where $`G_k^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ and $`W_k^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )`$ denote the homogeneous polynomial parts of degree-$`k`$ of $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ and $`W^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )`$, respectively. We normalize $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ by applying the canonical transformation,

$$\tau :(q,p)(\xi ,\eta )\text{with}p=\frac{W^{(\delta )}}{q}\text{and}\xi =\frac{W^{(\delta )}}{\eta }$$
(3.3)
associated with $`W^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )`$. Namely, $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ is determined by

$$G^{(\delta )}(\frac{W^{(\delta )}}{\eta },\eta )=K^{(\delta )}(q,\frac{W^{(\delta )}}{q}).$$
(3.4)
###### Definition 3.1 (The BGNF).

Let $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ be the power-series1 (3.1), where each $`G_k^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ is a homogeneous polynomial of degree-$`k`$ ($`k=3,4,\mathrm{}`$) in $`(\xi ,\eta )`$ 888The homogeneous part of degree-$`2`$ in $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ is always in the isotropic harmonic oscillator form, due to (3.2). . Then $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ is said to be in the BGNF up to degree-$`\rho `$ if and only if it satisfies

$$G_k^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )\mathrm{ker}D_{\xi ,\eta }^{(k)}(k=3,\mathrm{},\rho ),$$
(3.5)
where $`D_{\xi ,\eta }^{(k)}`$ is the restrict of the linear differential operator

$$D_{\xi ,\eta }=\underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}\left(\xi _j\frac{}{\eta _j}\eta _j\frac{}{\xi _j}\right)$$
(3.6)
on the vector space of homogeneous polynomials of degree-$`k`$ in $`(\xi ,\eta )`$.

###### Remark 3.2.

The $`D_{\xi ,\eta }`$ is understood as the Poisson derivation (\[A\]), $`D_{\xi ,\eta }=\{\frac{1}{2}_{j=1}^2(\eta _j^2+\xi _j^2),\}`$, associated with the isotropic harmonic oscillator.

The ordinary problem of the BG normalization of the $`\delta `$-PHOs is posed as follows 999For the inverse problem of the BG normalization, see \[UCRV\] and \[U2\]. :

###### Definition 3.3 (The ordinary problem of degree-$`\rho `$, \[UCRV\], \[U1\]).

Bring a given $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ of the form (1.2) into the power series, $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$, in the BGNF up to degree-$`\rho `$ through (3.4), where generating function $`W^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )`$ of the second-type in the form (3.2) is chosen to satisfy (3.4) and

$$W_k^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )\text{image}D_{q,\eta }^{(\delta )}(k=3,4,\mathrm{},\rho ).$$
(3.7)
The $`D_{q,\eta }^{(k)}`$ is defined by (3.6) with $`q`$ in place of $`\xi `$.

###### Remark 3.4.

The condition (3.7) is very crucial to ensure the uniqueness of the outcome, $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$, from $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ (\[UCRV\], \[U1\]).

We are now in a position to present an explicit expression of the BGNF $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ of the $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian. A straightforward calculation of (3.4) shows the following:

###### Lemma 3.5

The BGNF, $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$, of the $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ in the form (1.2) takes the form

$$G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )=\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}(\eta _j^2+\xi _j^2)+G_\delta ^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )+G_{2\delta 2}^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )+o_{2\delta 1}(\xi ,\eta ),$$
(3.8)
where $`o_{2\delta 1}(\xi ,\eta )`$ denotes a power series in $`(\xi ,\eta )`$ starting from degree-$`(2\delta 1)`$. The homogeneous polynomial part, $`G_\delta ^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$, of degree-$`\delta `$ is given by

$`G_\delta ^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )=V^{(\delta )}{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{ker}}(\xi ,\eta )`$ (3.9)
$`=\{\begin{array}{cc}0\hfill & (\delta \text{: odd})\hfill \\ 2^\delta {\displaystyle \underset{h=0}{\overset{\delta }{}}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta }{h}\right)v_h^{(\delta )}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{m=M^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{M^{\mathrm{}}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=N^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{N^{\mathrm{}}}{}}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{h}{m}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta h}{n}\right)\zeta _1^m\zeta _2^n\overline{\zeta }_1^{hm}\overline{\zeta }_2^{\delta hn}\right]\hfill & (\delta \text{: even}),\hfill \end{array}`$
where $`\zeta _j=\xi _j+i\eta _j(j=1,2)`$, and the ranges of the summation indices, $`m`$ and $`n`$, are determined by

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}M^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{max}(0,h\frac{\delta }{2})\hfill & M^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{min}(h,\frac{\delta }{2})\hfill \\ N^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{max}(0,\frac{\delta }{2}h)\hfill & N^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{min}(\delta h,\frac{\delta }{2}).\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.12)
The superscript $`^{\mathrm{ker}}`$ stands for taking the kernel component of $`V^{(\delta )}(q)`$ according to the action of $`D_{q,\eta }^{(\delta )}`$. The homogeneous polynomial part, $`G_{2\delta 2}^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$, of degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$ is calculated to be

$$G_{2\delta 2}^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )=\underset{m=0}{\overset{2\delta 2}{}}\underset{\mathrm{}=L^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{L^{\mathrm{}}}{}}c_{m,\mathrm{}}^{(\delta )}\zeta _1^{\mathrm{}}\zeta _2^{\delta 1\mathrm{}}\overline{\zeta }_1^m\mathrm{}\overline{\zeta }_2^{\delta 1m+\mathrm{}}$$
(3.13)
with

$`c_{m,\mathrm{}}^{(\delta )}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\delta ^2}{4^\delta }}{\displaystyle \underset{j=J^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{J^{\mathrm{}}}{}}}[\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{j}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{mj}\right)(v_j^{(\delta )}v_{mj}^{(\delta )}+v_{j+1}^{(\delta )}v_{mj+1}^{(\delta )})`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{k=K^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{K^{\mathrm{}}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{h=H^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{H^{\mathrm{}}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j}{k}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1j}{h}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{mj}{\mathrm{}k}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1(mj)}{\delta 1\mathrm{}h}\right)}{\{(2(k+h+1)\delta \}\{2(k+h)\delta \}}}].`$
The ranges of the indices, $`h`$, $`j`$, $`k`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$, in (3.13) and (3.5) are determined by

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}H^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{max}(0,(mj)\mathrm{})\hfill & H^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{min}(\delta 1\mathrm{},\delta 1j)\hfill \\ J^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{max}(0,m(\delta 1))\hfill & J^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{min}(m,\delta 1)\hfill \\ K^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{max}(0,\mathrm{}(mj))\hfill & K^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{min}(j,\mathrm{})\hfill \\ L^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{max}(0,m(\delta 1)),\hfill & L^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{min}(m,\delta 1)\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.15)
respectively.

The proof is outlined in Appendix A and will be given in more detail in \[U2\]. From Lemma 3.5, we obtain the following:

###### Theorem 3.6

Let $`\delta _1`$ and $`\delta _2`$ be any integers subject to

$$3\delta _1<\delta _2.$$
(3.16)
If the BGNF, $`G^{(\delta _1)}(\xi ,\eta )`$, of a $`\delta _1`$-PHO Hamiltonian $`K^{\delta _1}(q,p)`$ coincides with the BGNF, $`G^{(\delta _2)}(\xi ,\eta )`$, of a $`\delta _2`$-PHO Hamiltonian $`K^{(\delta _2)}(q,p)`$ up to degree-$`\delta _2`$, then $`\delta _1`$ and $`\delta _2`$ have to satisfy

$$\delta _1\text{ : an odd integer}\text{and}\delta _2=2\delta _12.$$
(3.17)
###### Proof.

Since the coincidence of the BGNFs is expressed as

$$G^{(\delta _1)}(\xi ,\eta )G^{(\delta _2)}(\xi ,\eta )=o_{\delta _2+1}(\xi ,\eta ),$$
(3.18)
we obtain

$$G_{\delta _1}^{(\delta _1)}(\xi ,\eta )=G_{\delta _1}^{(\delta _2)}(\xi ,\eta )=0$$
(3.19)
from Lemma 3.5 as a necessary condition for (3.18). Equation (3.19) is put together with (3.9) to yield the first condition in (3.17). We derive the second one in turn. On recalling Lemma 3.5 again, the lowest non-vanishing homogeneous polynomial part of $`G^{(\delta _1)}(\xi ,\eta )`$ turns out to be $`G_{2\delta _12}^{(\delta _1)}(\xi ,\eta )`$ if $`\delta _1`$ is odd, while $`G_{\delta _2}^{(\delta _2)}(\xi ,\eta )`$ is the lowest one of $`G^{(\delta _2)}(\xi ,\eta )`$. This shows the second equation of (3.17). ∎

Now that we have a pair of key Theorems 2.2 and 3.6, we are led to pose Theorem 1.2 as an extension of Theorem 1.1.

## 4. Proof of the main theorem

In this section, the proof of Theorem 1.2 is outlined. Throughout this section, we assume $`\delta `$ ($`3`$) to be odd.

### 4.1. Part I: the separability as a sufficiency

This subsection is devoted to show that the separability is sufficient for a $`\delta `$-PHO to share its BGNF with a $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$.

###### Remark 4.1.

Recalling the proof of Theorem 2.2, we see that the separability of the $`\delta `$-PHOs5 within rotations of Cartesian coordinates is equivalent to the separability of their Hamiltonians. We will use those equivalent expressions properly according to circumstances henceforce.

#### 4.1.1. The BG normalization of the $`\delta `$-PHOs in separate form

Let the $`\delta `$-PHO be associated with the Hamiltonian in separate form,

$$K_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(q,p)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}(p_j^2+q_j^2)+(v_{\text{sep},0}^{(\delta )}q_2^\delta +v_{\text{sep},\delta }^{(\delta )}q_1^\delta ).$$
(4.1)
Then, applying (3.13) and (3.5) to $`K_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$, we obtain the BGNF of $`K_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$, denoted by $`G_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$, to be in the following separate form,

$`G_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}}(\eta _j^2+\xi _j^2)+\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{2\delta ^2}{4^\delta }}{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\delta 1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{n}\right)^2}{\{2(n+1)\delta \}(2n\delta )}}\right\}`$ (4.2)
$`\times \{v_{\text{sep},0}^{(\delta )}{}_{}{}^{2}(\zeta _2\overline{\zeta }_2)_{}^{\delta 1}+v_{\text{sep},\delta }^{(\delta )}{}_{}{}^{2}(\zeta _1\overline{\zeta }_1)_{}^{\delta 1}\}+o_{2\delta 1}(\xi ,\eta ),`$
where $`\zeta _j=\xi +\eta _j`$ ($`j=1,2`$). Recalling (3.8) and (3.9) with $`2\delta 2`$ in place of $`\delta `$, we can find the unique $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO Hamiltonian

$`K_{\text{sep}}^{(2\delta 2)}(q,p)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}}(p_j^2+q_j^2)+\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2}{2\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2\delta 2}{\delta 1}\right)}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\delta 1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{n}\right)^2}{\{2(n+1)\delta \}(2n\delta )}}\right\}`$ (4.3)
$`\times \{(v_{\text{sep},0}^{(\delta )})^2q_2^{2\delta 2}+(v_{\text{sep},\delta }^{(\delta )})^2q_1^{2\delta 2}\}`$
in separate form, whose BGNF coincides with $`G_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$. To summarize, we have the following.

###### Lemma 4.2

For any $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian $`K_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ in separate form (4.1), there exists the unique $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO Hamiltonian $`K_{\text{sep}}^{(2\delta 2)}(q,p)`$ in separate form (4.3) which shares the BGNF $`G_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$ with $`K_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$.

#### 4.1.2. Proof of the sufficiency

A key to prove the sufficiency is the commutativity of the BG normalization and the rotations of Cartesian coordinates:

###### Lemma 4.3

Let $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ be the BGNF of a $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$, which associates with the generating function $`W^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )`$ (see (3.4)). Let $`\stackrel{~}{G}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$, $`\stackrel{~}{K}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{W}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$ be the power series defined by

$`\stackrel{~}{K}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})=K^{(\delta )}(\sigma ^1(\psi )\stackrel{~}{q},\sigma ^1(\psi )\stackrel{~}{p})`$
$`\stackrel{~}{G}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{\eta })=G^{(\delta )}(\sigma ^1(\psi )\stackrel{~}{\xi },\sigma ^1(\psi )\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$ (4.4)
$`\stackrel{~}{W}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{\eta })=W^{(\delta )}(\sigma ^1(\psi )\stackrel{~}{q},\sigma ^1(\psi )\stackrel{~}{\eta }),`$
where $`\sigma (\psi )`$ is defined by (2.22). Then $`\stackrel{~}{G}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$ is the BGNF of the $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian $`\stackrel{~}{K}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})`$ up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$, which is brought through the canonical transformation, $`(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})(\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$, generated by $`\stackrel{~}{W}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$.

###### Proof.

Due to the orthogonality of $`\sigma (\psi )`$, it is easily confirmed from (4.4) that $`\stackrel{~}{K}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})`$, $`\stackrel{~}{G}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{W}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$ are other $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian, BGNF up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$ and generating function of the second-type (cf. (1.2), (3.1) and (3.2)), respectively. Further, the orthogonality of $`\sigma (\psi )`$ is put together with (4.4) to yield the equation,

$$\stackrel{~}{K}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\frac{\stackrel{~}{W}^{(\delta )}}{\stackrel{~}{q}})=\stackrel{~}{G}^{(\delta )}(\frac{\stackrel{~}{W}^{(\delta )}}{\stackrel{~}{\eta }},\stackrel{~}{\eta }),$$
(4.5)
from (3.4), so that $`\stackrel{~}{G}(\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$ is the BGNF of $`\stackrel{~}{K}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})`$. This completes the proof. ∎

We are at the final stage to prove the sufficiency of the separability in Theorem 1.2 now. Let us assume that $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ is separable within a rotation of Cartesian coordinates: Namely, there exists the transformation $`\kappa _\psi `$ with a suitable $`\psi [0,2\pi )`$ (see (2.21) and (2.22)) which brings $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ to $`K_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})`$ through

$$K_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})=K^{(\delta )}(\sigma (\psi )^1\stackrel{~}{q},\sigma (\psi )^1\stackrel{~}{p}),$$
(4.6)
where $`K_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})`$ takes the separate form (4.1) with $`(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})`$ in place of $`(q,p)`$. Then on applying Lemma 4.3 to the pair, $`K_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})`$ and $`G_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$, the BGNF $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ of $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$ is given by

$$G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )=G_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\sigma (\psi )\xi ,\sigma (\psi )\eta ).$$
(4.7)
Further, according to Lemma 4.2, we can find uniquely the $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO Hamiltonian in separate form, say $`K_{\text{sep}}^{(2\delta 2)}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})`$, sharing the BGNF $`G_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{\xi },\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$ up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$ with $`K_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{p})`$. On defining the $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO Hamiltonian $`K^{(2\delta 2)}(q,p)`$ and the BGNF $`G^{(2\delta 2)}(\xi ,\eta )`$ by

$$\begin{array}{c}K^{(2\delta 2)}(q,p)=K_{\text{sep}}^{(2\delta 2)}(\sigma (\psi )q,\sigma (\psi )p)\hfill \\ G^{(2\delta 2)}(\xi ,\eta )=G_{\text{sep}}^{(\delta )}(\sigma (\psi )\xi ,\sigma (\psi )\eta ),\hfill \end{array}$$
(4.8)
Lemma 4.3 shows that $`G^{(2\delta 2)}(\xi ,\eta )`$ is the BGNF of $`K^{(2\delta 2)}(q,p)`$ up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$. Equations (4.7) and (4.8) are put together to show the coincidence of $`G^{(2\delta 2)}(\xi ,\eta )`$ with $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$. To summarize, we have the following.

###### Theorem 4.4

Let $`\delta `$ be an odd integer greater than or equal to $`3`$. If a $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian is separable (see Remark 4.1) within a rotation of Cartesian coordinates, there exists the unique $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO Hamiltonian which shares the same BGNF up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$ with the $`\delta `$-PHO. The $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO is also separable within the same rotation of Cartesian coordinates.

### 4.2. Part II: the separability as a necessity

This subsection is devoted to prove that the sfeparability is a necessary condition. Let us recall Lemma 3.5 and equate $`G^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )`$ with $`G^{(2\delta 2)}(\xi ,\eta )`$ up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$. As a necessary and sufficient condition for the equation thus obtained, we have a number of equations

$$c_{m,\mathrm{}}^{(\delta )}=c_{m,\mathrm{}}^{(2\delta 2))}(0m2\delta 2,L^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}L^{\mathrm{}}).$$
(4.9)
Since the number of equations in (4.9) is so many and since we have already shown the separability as a sufficiency, it would not be so smart to study (4.9) for all the pairs of subscripts, $`(m,\mathrm{})`$s. Hence as necessary condition for (4.9), we consider

$$c_{m,1}^{(\delta )}\stackrel{~}{c}_{m,0}^{(2\delta 2)}=c_{m,0}^{(\delta )}\stackrel{~}{c}_{m,1}^{(2\delta 2)}(m=2,3,\mathrm{},\delta 1)$$
(4.10)
with

$$\stackrel{~}{c}_{m,\mathrm{}}^{(2\delta 2)}=4^{1\delta }\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2\delta 2)}{m}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m}{\mathrm{}}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2\delta 2m}{\delta 1\mathrm{}}\right)(\mathrm{}=0,1).$$
(4.11)
Note that we have $`c_{m,\mathrm{}}^{(2\delta 2)}=v_m^{(2\delta 2)}\stackrel{~}{c}_{m,\mathrm{}}^{(2\delta 2)}`$ for $`\mathrm{}=0,1`$.

We wish to draw (1.3) as a necessary condition from (4.10). To do this, it is useful to prepare the notation,

$`U_j^{(\delta ,m)}=(v_j^{(\delta )}v_{mj}^{(\delta )}+v_{j+1}^{(\delta )}v_{mj+1}^{(\delta )})`$ (4.12)
$`(v_{j+1}^{(\delta )}v_{m(j+1)}^{(\delta )}+v_{(j+1)+1}^{(\delta )}v_{m(j+1)+1}^{(\delta )})(j=0,1,\mathrm{},m1).`$
Using (3.9), (3.13) and (4.12), we can put (4.10) into the form

$`\left({\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{m}{}}}B_n^{(\delta ,m)}\right)(v_m^{(\delta )}v_0^{(\delta )}+v_{m+1}^{(\delta )}v_1^{(\delta )})`$ (4.13)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{m1}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{j}{}}}B_n^{(\delta ,m)}\right)U_j^{(\delta ,m)}=0(m=2,\mathrm{},\delta 1),`$
where $`B_n^{(\delta ,m)}`$s are defined to be

$`\left((\delta 1)^2\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{m1}\right)\right)^1B_n^{(\delta ,m)}`$ (4.14)
$`=\{\begin{array}{cc}{\displaystyle \underset{k=mn1}{\overset{\delta n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m1}{n}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m}{n+k+1m}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+1)\delta \}(2k\delta )}}\hfill & \\ & \\ +{\displaystyle \underset{k=mn1}{\overset{\delta n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m1}{n1}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m}{n+k+1m}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+2)\delta \}\{2(k+1)\delta \}}}\hfill & \\ & \\ {\displaystyle \underset{k=mn}{\overset{\delta h1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m}{n}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m1}{n+km}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+1)\delta \}(2k\delta )}}(n0,m),\hfill & \\ & \\ {\displaystyle \underset{k=m1}{\overset{\delta 2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m}{k+1m}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+1)\delta \}(2k\delta )}}\hfill & \\ & \\ {\displaystyle \underset{k=m}{\overset{\delta 1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m1}{km}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+1)\delta \}(2k\delta )}}(n=0),\hfill & \\ & \\ {\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\delta m1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m}{k+1}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+2)\delta \}\{2(k+1)\delta \}}}\hfill & \\ & \\ {\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\delta m1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m1}{k+1}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+1)\delta \}(2k\delta )}}(n=m).\hfill & \end{array}`$ (4.22)
The definition (4.14) of $`B_n^{(\delta ,m)}`$s and several well-known formula for the binomial coefficients are put together to show

$$\underset{n=0}{\overset{m}{}}B_n^{(\delta ,m)}=0(m=2,\mathrm{},\delta 1)$$
(4.23)
(see Appendix B), so that we can put (4.13) in the form

$$\underset{j=0}{\overset{m1}{}}\left(\underset{n=0}{\overset{j}{}}B_n^{(\delta ,m)}\right)U_j^{(\delta ,m)}=0(m=2,\mathrm{},\delta 1).$$
(4.24)
We verify (4.24) further by characterizing $`U_j^{(\delta ,m)}`$ as the minors of $`(K^{(\delta )})`$ as follows. Denoting by $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ab}^{(\delta )}`$ the minor of $`(K^{(\delta )})`$ consisting of its $`a`$\- and $`b`$-th columns ($`1a<b\delta 1`$), we have

$$U_j^{(\delta ,m)}=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Delta }_{j+1mj}^{(\delta )}\hfill & (j=0,\mathrm{},[m/2]1)\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{mjj+1}^{(\delta )}\hfill & (j=[m/2],\mathrm{},m1),\hfill \end{array}$$
(4.25)
where $`[m/2]`$ stands for the integer part of $`m/2`$. Putting (4.25) and the symmetry,

$$\begin{array}{c}U_j^{(\delta ,m)}=U_{mj}^{(\delta ,m)}(j=0,1,\mathrm{},m1)\hfill \\ B_n^{(\delta ,m)}=B_{mn}^{(\delta ,m)}(n=0,\mathrm{},m),\hfill \end{array}$$
(4.26)
together, we can rewrite (4.24) to as

$$\underset{j=0}{\overset{[m/2]1}{}}\left(\underset{n=j+1}{\overset{m(j+1)}{}}B_n^{(\delta ,m)}\right)\mathrm{\Delta }_{j+1mj}^{(\delta )}=0(m=2,\mathrm{},\delta 1).$$
(4.27)
From now on, we assume

$$(v_0^{(\delta )}v_2^{(\delta )})^2+(v_1^{(\delta )})^20$$
(4.28)
on $`(K^{(\delta )})`$, which will not lose the generality (see Appendix C). We show the following Lemma:

###### Lemma 4.5

Let $`_k(K^{(\delta )})`$ be the $`2\times k`$ submatrix

$$_k(K^{(\delta )})=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}v_0^{(\delta )}v_2^{(\delta )}& \mathrm{}& v_{k1}^{(\delta )}v_{k+1}^{(\delta )}& \\ v_1^{(\delta )}& \mathrm{}& v_k^{(\delta )}& \end{array}\right)(k=1,\mathrm{},\delta 1)$$
(4.29)
of $`(K^{(\delta )})`$ subject to (4.28). If (4.27) with $`m=k+1`$ hold true under $`\text{rank}_k(K^{(\delta )})=1`$, then so does $`\text{rank}_{k+1}(K^{(\delta )})=1`$.

###### Proof.

We write down one of the assumption, (4.27) with $`m=k+1`$, more explicitly as

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{[\frac{k+1}{2}]1}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{n=j+1}{\overset{(k+1)j1}{}}}B_n^{(\delta ,k+1)}\right)\mathrm{\Delta }_{j+1k+1j}^{(\delta )}`$ (4.30)
$`=\left({\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{(k+1)+1}{}}}B_n^{(\delta ,k+1)}\right)\mathrm{\Delta }_{1k+1}^{(\delta )}+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{[\frac{k+1}{2}]1}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{n=j+1}{\overset{(k+1)j1}{}}}B_n^{(\delta ,k+1)}\right)\mathrm{\Delta }_{j+1k+1j}^{(\delta )}=0.`$
Since the other assumption, $`\text{rank}_k(K^{(\delta )})=1`$, implies

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{j+1k+1j}=0(j=1,\mathrm{},[\frac{k+1}{2}]1),$$
(4.31)
we can bring (4.30) into

$$\left(\underset{n=1}{\overset{(k+1)+1}{}}B_n^{(\delta ,k+1)}\right)\mathrm{\Delta }_{1k+1}^{(\delta )}=0.$$
(4.32)
so that we have $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{1k+1}=0`$. The vanishment $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{1k+1}=0`$ is put together with $`\text{rank}_k(K^{(\delta )})=1`$ to show $`\text{rank}_{k+1}(K^{(\delta )})=1`$. This completes the proof. ∎

We are at the final stage to draw (1.3) from (4.9): Let us consider (4.27) with $`m=2`$ for $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ subject to (4.28), which is written explicitly as $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}2}}^{(\delta )}=0`$. This shows $`\text{rank}_2(K^{(\delta )})=1`$ under (4.28). We can thereby start applying Lemma 4.5 to (4.27) recursively from $`m=3`$ to $`m=\delta 1`$, and finally reach to $`\text{rank}(K^{(\delta )})=\text{rank}_{(\delta 1)+1}(K^{(\delta )})=1`$ under (4.28). As for $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ not subject to (4.28), Appendix C shows that (1.3) is a necessary condition of (4.9). Recalling Theorem 2.2, we have the following.

###### Theorem 4.6

If a $`\delta `$-PHO shares its BGNF up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$ with a $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO up to degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$, then the $`\delta `$-PHO is separable within a rotation of Cartesian coordinates.

Theorems 4.4 and 4.6 are put together to make our conclusion:

Conclusion. Our main theorem, Theorem 1.2, holds true.

## Appendix A Outline of the proof of Lemma 3.5

Since the BGNF of the $`3`$-PHO Hamiltonians has been given explicitly 101010The expression agrees with (3.8)-(3.13). in \[U1\], we focus our attention only to the case of $`\delta 4`$ henceforth.

(i) Equating the homogeneous parts of degree-$`3`$ on the both sides of (3.4), we have $`G_3^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )+(D_{q,\eta }^{(3)}W_3^{(\delta )})(q,\eta )=0(=H_3^{(\delta )}(q,\eta ))`$ . On account of $`\mathrm{ker}D_{q,\eta }^{(3)}=\{0\}`$ 111111There is no invariant homogeneous polynomials of odd-degree under the $`SO(2)`$ action generated by $`D_{q,\eta }`$. viz $`\mathrm{ker}D_{q,\eta }^{(k)}=\{0\}`$ for any odd $`k`$. , the equation above for the degree-$`3`$ part is solved as $`G_3^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )=0`$ and $`W_3^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )=0`$. Then by induction, we can show

$$G_{\mathrm{}}^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )=0W_{\mathrm{}}^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )=0(\mathrm{}=3,\mathrm{},\delta 1).$$
(A.1)
Under (A.1), the degree-$`\delta `$ part of (3.4) takes the form $`G_\delta ^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )+(D_{q,\eta }^{(\delta )}W_\delta ^{(\delta )})(q,\eta )=V^{(\delta )}(q)(=H_\delta ^{(\delta )}(q,p)),`$ so that we have

$$G_\delta ^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )=V^{(\delta )}{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{ker}}(\xi ,\eta )W_\delta ^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )=(\stackrel{~}{D}_{q,\eta }^{(\delta )}{}_{}{}^{1}V_{}^{(\delta )}{}_{}{}^{\text{image}})(q,\eta )$$
(A.2)
where $`\stackrel{~}{D}_{q,\eta }^{(\delta )}`$ denotes the restrict of $`D_{q,\eta }^{(\delta )}`$ on its image. This shows (3.9).

(ii) Under (A.1) and (A.2), we can show

$$G_{\mathrm{}}^{(\delta )}(\xi ,\eta )=0W_{\mathrm{}}^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )=0(\mathrm{}=\delta +1,\mathrm{},2\delta 3)$$
(A.3)
by induction. On substituting (A.1)-(A.3) into (3.4), the degree-$`(2\delta 2)`$ part of (3.4) is calculated to be

$$G_{2\delta 2}^{(\delta )}(q,\eta )+(D_{q,\eta }^{(\delta )}W_{2\delta 2}^{(\delta )})(q,\eta )=\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{2}{}}\left\{\left(\frac{W_\delta ^{(\delta )}}{q_j}\right)^2\left(\frac{W_\delta ^{(\delta )}}{\eta _j}\right)^2\right\}.$$
(A.4)
The final expression (3.13) with (3.5) is obtained by writing down explicitly the kernel component of the rhs of (A.4), which requires another very simple but long calculation.

## Appendix B Proof of (4.23)

From (4.14), the rhs of (4.23) is put in a form

$`\left((\delta 1)^2\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{m1}\right)\right)^1{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{m}{}}}B_n^{(\delta ,m)}`$ (B.1)
$`={\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\delta 2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+1)\delta \}(2k\delta )}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{n=N_1^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{N_1^{\mathrm{}}}{}}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m1}{n}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m}{n+k+1m}\right)\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\delta 2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+2)\delta \}\{2(k+1)\delta \}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{n=N_2^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{N_2^{\mathrm{}}}{}}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m1}{n1}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m}{n+k+1m}\right)\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\delta 1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+1)\delta \}(2k\delta )}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{n=N_3^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{N_3^{\mathrm{}}}{}}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m}{n}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m1}{n+km}\right)\right),`$
where

$$\begin{array}{cc}N_1^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{max}(0,m1k)\hfill & N_1^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{min}(m1,\delta 1k)\hfill \\ N_2^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{max}(1,m1k)\hfill & N_2^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{min}(m,\delta 1k)\hfill \\ N_3^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{max}(0,mk)\hfill & N_3^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{min}(m,\delta 1k).\hfill \end{array}$$
(B.2)
For the sums with the summation index $`n`$ on the rhs of (B.1), we have

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{n=N_1^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{N_1^{\mathrm{}}}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m1}{n}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m}{n+k+1m}\right)=\underset{n=N_3^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{N_3^{\mathrm{}}}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m}{n}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m1}{n+km}\right)=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k}\right)\hfill \\ \underset{n=N_2^{\mathrm{}}}{\overset{N_2^{\mathrm{}}}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m1}{n1}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta m}{n+k+1m}\right)=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k+1}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(B.3)
Hence, (B.1)-(B.3) are put together to show

$`{\displaystyle \frac{{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{m}{}}}B_n^{(\delta ,m)}}{(\delta 1)^2\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{m1}\right)}}=[{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\delta 2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+1)\delta \}(2k\delta )}}`$ (B.4)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\delta 2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k+1}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+2)\delta \}\{2(k+1)\delta \}}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\delta 1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k}\right)}{\{2(k+1)\delta \}(2k\delta )}}]`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\delta 2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k}\right)\{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{k}\right)+\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 2}{k1}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta 1}{k}\right)\}}{\{2(k+1)\delta \}(2k\delta )}}=0.`$
## Appendix C $`SO(2)`$ action to $`(K^{(\delta )})`$

To make the following discussion simple, we assume that $`\delta `$ is odd. Let $`K^{}{}_{}{}^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ be the $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian given by

$$K^{}{}_{}{}^{(\delta )}(q,p)=K^{(\delta )}(\sigma (\psi )^1q,\sigma (\psi )^1p),$$
(C.1)
where $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ is defined by (1.2), and $`\sigma (\psi )`$ by (2.22). It is then shown by a straightforward calculation that they are related as

$$(K^{}{}_{}{}^{(\delta )})=\sigma (2\psi )(K^{(\delta )})R^{(\delta 2)}(\psi ),$$
(C.2)
where $`R^{(\delta 2)}(\psi )`$ is the standard representation of $`SO(2)`$ on the real vector space of homogeneous polynomials of degree-$`(\delta 2)`$.

Assume that $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ is not subject to (4.28). What we have to show is the existence of $`\sigma (\psi )`$ which brings $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ to $`K^{}{}_{}{}^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ with $`(K^{}{}_{}{}^{(\delta )})`$ having non-vanishing first column. Since the non-existence of such $`\sigma (\psi )`$ is equivalent to that the vector subspace, $`𝒩=\text{span}\{q_1^hq_2^{\delta 2h}\}_{h=1,\mathrm{},\delta 2}`$, is an invariant subspace of the $`SO(2)`$ action given by $`R^{(\delta 2)}(\psi )`$. However, this is not true: It is easily seen that any invariant subspace is given by a direct sum of the $`2`$-dimentional subspaces each of which is spanned by $`\mathrm{}((q_1+iq_2)^h(q_1iq_2)^{\delta 2h})`$ and $`\mathrm{}((q_1+iq_2)^h(q_1iq_2)^{\delta 2h})`$ ($`h=0,\mathrm{},(\delta 1)/2`$). Hence $`𝒩`$ is not $`SO(2)`$-invariant.

We are now at the final stage to explain that the assumption (4.28) does not lose generality of our proof of the necessity. Let consider the $`\delta `$-PHO Hamiltonian $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ which is not subject to (4.28) and shares its BGNF with a $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO $`K^{(2\delta 2)}(q,p)`$. As shown above, we can bring $`K^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ to $`K^{}{}_{}{}^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ through (C.1) that satisfies (4.28) by adopting a suitable rotation with $`\sigma (\psi )`$. According to the commutativity of the BG normalization and the rotations shown in Section 3, $`K^{}{}_{}{}^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ shares its BGNF with a $`(2\delta 2)`$-PHO $`K^{}{}_{}{}^{(2\delta 2)}(q,p)`$ other than $`K^{(2\delta 2)}(q,p)`$. Hence, the discussion in subsection. 4.2 is applied to $`K^{}{}_{}{}^{(\delta )}(q,p)`$ to show the necessity of $`\text{rank}(K^{}{}_{}{}^{(\delta )})=1`$. Accordingly, the equation,

$$\text{rank}(K^{}{}_{}{}^{(\delta )})=\text{rank}(K^{(\delta )}),$$
(C.3)
following from (C.2) leads us to (1.3).


format: text

text:
# 𝑱/𝝍 PRODUCTION IN DIRECT AND RESOLVED PHOTON COLLISIONS

## 1 Motivation

One of the most interesting features of quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is the apparent discrepancy between the fundamental role of color as a conserved quantum number carried by quarks and gluons and the non-observation of color in physical hadronic states. As a non-perturbative phenomenon, the confinement mechanism responsible for the color-singlet nature of hadrons is still not fully understood. One can hope to gain more insight by studying the relatively simple bound states of heavy charm and bottom quarks, such as $`J/\psi `$ or $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ mesons.

Ever since QCD emerged as the fundamental theory of the strong interaction, models have been designed to explain the compensation of color in heavy quarkonia. Well-known examples are the Color Evaporation $`^{\mathrm{?},\mathrm{?},\mathrm{?}}`$ and Hard Comover Scattering Models $`^{\mathrm{?},\mathrm{?}}`$, which assume that color is restored by soft and hard gluon exchange with the underlying event, respectively, and the Color Singlet Model (CSM) $`^{\mathrm{?},\mathrm{?}}`$, which requires the heavy quark pair to be produced in a color singlet state. The CSM leads to strong selection rules and connects the production cross section with the quarkonium wave function. Today, a rigorous effective field theory exists in the form of non-relativistic QCD (NRQCD) $`^\mathrm{?}`$, which utilizes a double expansion in the strong coupling constant $`\alpha _s`$ and the relative quark-antiquark velocity $`v`$ in order to factorize the hard production from the soft binding process $`^\mathrm{?}`$. Left-over singularities in the CSM can be removed systematically into non-perturbative color-octet operator matrix elements (OMEs), and their numerical values can be fitted to describe the hadroproduction cross sections observed at the Tevatron. However, it is necessary to demonstrate the universality of these OMEs in other production processes, such as $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions. Since the theoretical uncertainties from scale variations in leading order (LO) of $`\alpha _s`$ are quite substantial, it is furthermore important to include also contributions from next-to-leading order (NLO) virtual loop and real emission processes. In this paper, we report on recent progress along these lines.

## 2 Real corrections to $`J/\psi `$ production in direct $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions

In direct $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions, $`J/\psi `$ mesons with mass $`M=2m_c`$ and finite transverse momentum $`p_T`$ are produced in association with either a photon (see Fig. 1)

or a jet, where the final state photon in Fig. 1 has to be replaced by a gluon. In the first case, the physical color-singlet state ($`{}_{}{}^{3}S_{1}^{[1]}`$ in spectroscopic notation) is produced directly, whereas in the second case the intermediate color-octet state ($`{}_{}{}^{3}S_{1}^{[8]}`$) transforms into the physical $`J/\psi `$ through soft gluon emission. Although the strong coupling of the hard gluon enhances the second process, it is strongly suppressed by the relevant color-octet OME, which is subleading in $`v`$. In NLO of $`\alpha _s`$, an unresolved dijet system with invariant mass $`s_{jj}`$, originating from two gluons or a light quark-antiquark pair, allows for the production of intermediate $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{[8]}`$, $`{}_{}{}^{3}S_{1}^{[8]}`$, and $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{J}^{[8]}`$ states. At small $`p_T`$, virtual loop corrections have to be included to cancel the unphysical dependence on the cut-off $`s_{jj}>M^2`$, but at large $`p_T`$ these contributions become unimportant. As can be observed clearly in Fig. 2, the

cut-off dependence is reduced and the corrections from real particle emission become large $`^\mathrm{?}`$. At small $`p_T`$, one does, however, not expect large radiative corrections, as has also been shown in a full NLO calculation for direct color-singlet $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction $`^\mathrm{?}`$.

## 3 Comparison of $`J/\psi `$ production in complete $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions with CERN LEP2 data

$`J/\psi `$ production in $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions proceeds not only through direct interactions of photons with charm quarks, but also through resolved processes, where one or two of the photons emit quarks and gluons which then interact with the heavy quarks. In the small-$`p_T`$ range recently studied by the DELPHI experiment at CERN LEP2 $`^\mathrm{?}`$, $`J/\psi `$ production is dominated by the single-resolved process $`\gamma gJ/\psi g`$, where one initial state photon and the final state photon in Fig. 1 have to be replaced with gluons. In addition, processes with non-abelian coupling of the gluons and processes involving light quarks have to be taken into account using the relevant color-octet OMEs. Furthermore, contributions from $`\chi _{cJ}`$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ decays have to be included, whereas those from $`B`$ meson decays are suppressed by the small branching fraction.

In our numerical analysis, we use $`m_c=(1.5\pm 0.1)`$ GeV, $`\alpha =1/137.036`$, and the LO formula for $`\alpha _s^{(n_f)}(\mu )`$ with $`n_f=3`$ active quark flavors. As for the photon PDFs, we use the LO set from Glück, Reya, and Schienbein (GRS) $`^\mathrm{?}`$, which is the only available one that is implemented in the fixed-flavor-number scheme, with $`n_f=3`$. We choose the renormalization and factorization scales to be $`\mu =\xi _\mu m_T`$ and $`\mu _f=\xi _fm_T`$, respectively, where $`m_T=\sqrt{M^2+p_T^2}`$ is the transverse mass of the $`J/\psi `$ meson, and independently vary the scale parameters $`\xi _\mu `$ and $`\xi _f`$ between 1/2 and 2 about the default value 1. As for the $`J/\psi `$, $`\chi _{cJ}`$, and $`\psi ^{}`$ OMEs, we adopt the set determined in Ref. $`^\mathrm{?}`$ by fitting the Tevatron data using the LO proton PDFs from Martin, Roberts, Stirling, and Thorne (MRST98LO) $`^\mathrm{?}`$ as our default and the one referring to the LO proton PDFs from the CTEQ Collaboration (CTEQ5L) $`^\mathrm{?}`$ for comparison (see Table I in Ref. $`^\mathrm{?}`$). In the first (second) case, we employ $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}^{(3)}=204`$ MeV (224 MeV), which corresponds to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}^{(4)}=174`$ MeV $`^\mathrm{?}`$ (192 MeV $`^\mathrm{?}`$), so as to conform with the fit $`^\mathrm{?}`$. Incidentally, the GRS photon PDFs are also implemented with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}^{(3)}=204`$ MeV $`^\mathrm{?}`$. In the cases $`\psi =J/\psi ,\psi ^{}`$, the fit results for $`𝒪^\psi [{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{[8]}]`$ and $`𝒪^\psi [{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{[8]}]`$ are strongly correlated, and one is only sensitive to the linear combination $`M_r^\psi =𝒪^\psi [{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{[8]}]+\frac{r}{m_c^2}𝒪^\psi [{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{[8]}],`$ with an appropriate value of $`r`$. Since the cross section is sensitive to a linear combination of $`𝒪^\psi [{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{[8]}]`$ and $`𝒪^\psi [{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{[8]}]`$ that differs from $`M_r^\psi `$, we write $`𝒪^\psi [{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{[8]}]=\kappa M_r^\psi `$ and $`𝒪^\psi [{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{[8]}]=(1\kappa )\left(m_c^2/r\right)M_r^\psi `$ and vary $`\kappa `$ between 0 and 1 about the default value 1/2. The $`J`$-dependent OMEs $`𝒪^\psi [{}_{}{}^{3}P_{J}^{[8]}]`$, $`𝒪^{\chi _{cJ}}[{}_{}{}^{3}P_{J}^{[1]}]`$, and $`𝒪^{\chi _{cJ}}[{}_{}{}^{3}S_{1}^{[8]}]`$ satisfy multiplicity relations, which follow to leading order in $`v`$ from heavy-quark spin symmetry. In order to estimate the theoretical uncertainties in our predictions, we vary the unphysical parameters $`\xi _\mu `$, $`\xi _f`$, and $`\kappa `$ as indicated above, take into account the experimental errors on $`m_c`$, the decay branching fractions, and the default OMEs, and switch from our default OME set to the CTEQ5L one, properly adjusting $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}^{(3)}`$. We then combine the individual shifts in quadrature, allowing for the upper and lower half-errors to be different.

In Fig. 3 we confront the $`p_T^2`$ distribution of $`e^+e^{}e^+e^{}J/\psi +X`$ measured by DELPHI $`^\mathrm{?}`$ with our NRQCD and CSM predictions. The solid lines and shaded bands represent the central results, evaluated with our default settings, and their uncertainties. The DELPHI data clearly favors the NRQCD prediction, while it significantly overshoots the CSM one $`^\mathrm{?}`$.

## 4 Conclusion

In summary, the production of $`J/\psi `$ mesons in $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions allows for a test of factorization in color-octet processes as predicted by NRQCD and observed at the Tevatron. We have calculated the contributions from direct and resolved photons to $`J/\psi `$ mesons produced directly or from $`\chi _{cJ}`$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ decays. Our NRQCD predictions are nicely confirmed by recent data from the DELPHI collaboration at CERN LEP2, whereas the CSM prediction is clearly disfavored.

## Acknowledgment

The author thanks the organizers of the QCD Moriond 2003 conference for the kind invitation and B.A. Kniehl, L. Mihaila, and M. Steinhauser for a fruitful collaboration.

## References