format: text

text:
# Random Walks in Random Environments

## 1. Introduction

Let $`S`$ denote the 2d-dimensional simplex, set $`\mathrm{\Omega }=S^{Z^d}`$, and let $`\omega (z,)=\{\omega (z,z+e)\}_{eZ^d,|e|=1}`$ denote the coordinate of $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }`$ corresponding to $`zZ^d`$. $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is an “environment” for an inhomogeneous nearest neighbor random walk (RWRE) started at $`x`$ with quenched transition probabilities $`P_\omega (X_{n+1}=z+e|X_n=z)=\omega (x,x+e)`$ ($`e^d,|e|=1`$), whose law is denoted $`P_\omega ^x`$. In the RWRE model, the environment is random, of law $`P`$, which is always assumed stationary and ergodic. We also assume here that the environment is elliptic, that is there exists an $`ϵ>0`$ such that $`P`$-a.s., $`\omega (x,x+e)ϵ`$ for all $`x,e^d,|e|=1`$. Finally, we denote by $``$ the annealed law of the RWRE started at $`0`$, that is the law of $`\{X_n\}`$ under the measure $`P\times P_\omega ^0`$.

The RWRE model has a natural physical motivation and interpretation in terms of transport in random media. Mathematically, and especially for $`d>1`$, it leads to the analysis of irreverservible, inhomogeneous Markov chains, to which standard tools of homogenization theory do not apply well. Further, unusual phenomena, such as sub-diffusive behavior, polynomial decay of probabilities of large deviations, and trapping effects, arise, already in the one dimensional model.

When $`d=1`$, we write $`\omega _x=\omega (x,x+1)`$, $`\rho _x=\omega _x/(1\omega _x)`$, and $`u=E_P\mathrm{log}\rho _0`$. The following reveals some of the surprising phenomena associated with the RWRE:

###### Theorem 1.1 (Transience, recurrence, limit speed, $`d\mathbf{=}\mathrm{𝟏}`$)

(a) With $`\text{sign}(0)`$ $`=1`$, it holds that $``$-a.s.,

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\kappa X_n=\text{sign}(\kappa u)\mathrm{},\kappa =\pm 1.$$

Further, there is a $`v`$ such that

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{X_n}{n}=v,\text{a.s.},$$
(1.2)
$`v>0`$ if $`_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}E_P(_{j=0}^i\rho _j)<\mathrm{}`$, $`v<0`$ if $`_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}E_P(_{j=0}^i\rho _j^1)<\mathrm{}`$, and $`v=0`$ if both these conditions do not hold.
(b) If $`P`$ is a product measure then

$$v=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1E_P(\rho _0)}{1+E_P(\rho _0)},\hfill & E_P(\rho _0)<1,\hfill \\ \frac{1E_P(\rho _0^1)}{1+E_P(\rho _0^1)},\hfill & E_P(\rho _0^1)<1,\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & \text{else}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(1.3)
Theorem 1.1 is essentially due to , see  for a proof in the general ergodic setup. The surprising features of the RWRE model alluded to above can be appreciated if one notes, already for a product measure $`P`$, that the RWRE can be transient with zero speed $`v`$. Further, if $`P`$ is a product measure and $`v_0(\omega )`$ denotes the speed of a (biased) simple random walk with probability of jump to the right equal, at any site, to $`\omega _0`$, then Jensen’s inequality reveals that $`|v||E_P(v_0(\omega ))|`$, with examples of strict inequality readily available.

The reason for this behavior is that the RWRE spends a large time in small traps. This is very well understood in the case $`d=1`$, to which the next section is devoted. We introduce there certain hitting times, show how they yield precise information on the RWRE, and describe the analysis of these hitting times. Understanding the behavior of the RWRE when $`d>1`$ is a major challenging problem, on which much progress has been done in recent years, but for which many embarrassing open questions remain. We give a glimpse of what is involved in Section 3., where we introduce certain regeneration times, and show their usefulness in a variety of situations. Here is a particularly simple setup where law of large numbers (and CLT’s, although we do not emphasize that here) are available:

###### Theorem 1.4

Assume $`P`$ is a product measure, $`d6`$, and $`\omega (x,x+e)=\eta >0`$ for $`e=\pm e_i,i=1,\mathrm{},5`$. Then there exists a deterministic constant $`v`$ such that $`X_n/nv`$, $``$-a.s..

## 2. The one-dimensional case

Recursions

Let us begin with a sketch of the proof of Theorem 1.1. The transience and recurrence criterion is proved by noting that conditioned on the environment $`\omega `$, the Markov chain $`X_n`$ is reversible. More explicitly, fix an interval $`[m_{},m_+]`$ encircling the origin and for $`z`$ in that interval, define

$$𝒱_{m_{},m_+,\omega }(z):=P_\omega ^z(\{X_n\}\text{ hits }m_{}\text{ before hitting }m_+\text{)}.$$

Then,

$$𝒱_{m_{},m_+,\omega }(z)=\frac{{\displaystyle \underset{i=z+1}{\overset{m_+}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=z+1}{\overset{i1}{}}}\rho _j}{{\displaystyle \underset{i=z+1}{\overset{m_+}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=z+1}{\overset{i1}{}}}\rho _j+{\displaystyle \underset{i=m_{}+1}{\overset{z}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=i}{\overset{z}{}}}\rho _j^1\right)},$$
(2.1)
from which the conclusion follows. The proof of the LLN is more instructive: define the hitting times $`T_n=\mathrm{min}\{t>0:X_t=T_n\}`$, and set $`\tau _i=T_{i+1}T_i`$. Suppose that $`lim\; sup_n\mathrm{}X_n/n=\mathrm{}`$. One checks that $`\tau _i`$ is an ergodic sequence, hence $`T_n/n𝔼(\tau _0)`$ $``$-a.s., which in turns implies that $`X_n/n1/𝔼(\tau _0)`$, $``$-a.s.. But,

$$\tau _0=\mathrm{𝟏}_{\{X_1=1\}}+\mathrm{𝟏}_{\{X_1=1\}}(1+\tau _1^{}+\tau _0^{}),$$

where $`\tau _1^{}`$ $`(\tau _0^{})`$ denote the first hitting time of $`0`$ ($`1`$) for the random walk $`X_n`$ after it hits $`1`$. Hence, taking $`P_\omega ^0`$ expectations, and noting that $`\{E_{P_\omega ^i}(\tau _i)\}_i`$ are, $`P`$-a.s., either all finite or all infinite,

$$E_{P_\omega ^0}(\tau _0)=\frac{1}{\omega _0}+\rho _0E_{P_\omega ^1}(\tau _1).$$
(2.2)
When $`P`$ is a product measure, $`\rho _0`$ and $`E_{P_\omega ^1}(\tau _1)`$ are $`P`$-independent, and taking expectations results with $`𝔼(\tau _0)=(1+E_P(\rho _0))/(1E_P(\rho _0))`$ if the right hand side is positive and $`\mathrm{}`$ otherwise, from which (1.3) follows. The ergodic case is obtained by iterating the relation (2.2).

The hitting times $`T_n`$ are also the beginning of the study of limit laws for $`X_n`$. To appreciate this in the case of product measures $`P`$ with $`E_P(\mathrm{log}\rho _0)<0`$ (i.e., when the RWRE is transient to $`+\mathrm{}`$), one first observes that from the above recursions,

$$𝔼(\tau _0^r)<\mathrm{}E_P(\rho _0^r)<1.$$

Defining $`s=\mathrm{max}\{r:E_P(\rho _0^r)<1\}`$, one then expects that $`(X_nvn)`$, suitably rescaled, possesses a limit law, with $`s`$-dependent scaling. This is indeed the case: for $`s>2`$, it is not hard to check that one obtains a central limit theorem with scaling $`\sqrt{n}`$ (this holds true in fact for ergodic environments under appropriate mixing assumptions and with a suitable definition of the parameter $`s`$, see ). For $`s(0,1)(1,2)`$, one obtains in the i.i.d. environment case a Stable($`s`$) limit law with scaling $`n^{1/s}`$ (the cases $`s=1`$ or $`s=2`$ can also be handled but involve logarithmic factors in the scaling and the deterministic shift). In particular, for $`s<2`$ the walk is sub-diffusive. We omit the details, referring to  for the proof, except to say that the extension to ergodic environments of many of these results has recently been carried out, see .

Traps

The unusual behavior of one dimensional RWRE is due to the existence of traps in the environment. This is exhibited most dramatically when one tries to evaluate the probability of slowdown of the RWRE. Assume that $`P`$ is a product measure, $`X_n`$ is transient to $`+\mathrm{}`$ with positive speed $`v`$ (this means that $`s>1`$ by Theorem 1.1), and that $`s<\mathrm{}`$ (which means that $`P(\omega _0<1/2)>0`$). One then has:

###### Theorem 2.3 ()

For any $`w[0,v)`$, $`\eta >0`$, and $`\delta >0`$ small enough,

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{X_n}{n}(w\delta ,w+\delta )\right)}{\mathrm{log}n}=1s,$$
(2.4)
$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\frac{1}{n^{11/s+\eta }}\mathrm{log}P^0\left(\frac{X_n}{n}(w\delta ,w+\delta )\right)=0,Pa.s.,$$
(2.5)
and

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{1}{n^{11/s\eta }}\mathrm{log}P^0\left(\frac{X_n}{n}(w\delta ,w+\delta )\right)=\mathrm{},Pa.s..$$
(2.6)
(Extensions of Theorem 2.3 to the mixing environment setup are presented in . There are also precise asymptotics available in the case $`s=\mathrm{}`$ and $`P(\omega _0=1/2)>0`$, see ).

One immediately notes the difference in scaling between the annealed and quenched slowdown estimates in Theorem 2.3. These are due to the fact that, under the quenched measure, traps are almost surely of a maximal given size, determined by $`P`$, whereas under the annealed measure $``$ one can create, at some cost in probability, larger traps.

To demonstrate the role of traps in the RWRE model, let us exhibit, for $`w=0`$, a lower bound that captures the correct behavior in the annealed setup, and that forms the basis for the proof of the more general statement. Indeed, $`\{X_n\delta \}\{T_{n\delta }n\}`$. Fixing $`R_k=R_k(\omega ):=k^1_{i=1}^k\mathrm{log}\rho _i`$, it holds that $`R_k`$ satisfies a large deviation principle with rate function $`J(y)=sup_\lambda (\lambda y\mathrm{log}E_P(\rho _0^\lambda ))`$, and it is not hard to check that $`s=\mathrm{min}_{y0}y^1J(y)`$. Fixing a $`y`$ such that $`J(y)/ys+\eta `$, and $`k=\mathrm{log}n/y`$, one checks that the probability that there exists in $`[0,\delta n]`$ a point $`z`$ with $`R_k\theta ^z\omega y`$ is at least $`n^{1s\eta }`$. But, the probability that the RWRE does not cross such a segment by time $`n`$ is, due to (2.1), bounded away from $`0`$ uniformly in $`n`$. This yields the claimed lower bound in the annealed case. In the quenched case, one has to work with traps of size almost $`k=\mathrm{log}n/sy`$ for which $`kR_ky`$, which occur with probability 1 eventually, and use (2.1) to compute the probability of an atypical slowdown inside such a trap. The fluctuations in the length of these typical traps is the reason why the slowdown probability is believed, for $`P`$-a.e. $`\omega `$, to fluctuate with $`n`$, in the sense that

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\frac{1}{n^{11/s}}\mathrm{log}P_\omega ^0\left(\frac{X_n}{n}(\delta ,\delta )\right)=\mathrm{},Pa.s.,$$

while it is known that

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{1}{n^{11/s}}\mathrm{log}P_\omega ^0\left(\frac{X_n}{n}(\delta ,\delta )\right)=0,Pa.s..$$

This has been demonstrated rigorously in some particular cases, see .

The role of traps, and the difference they produce between the quenched and annealed regimes, is dramatic also in the scale of large deviations. Roughly, the exponential (in $`n`$) rate of decay of the probability of atypical events differ between the quenched and annealed regime:

###### Theorem 2.7

The random variables $`X_n/n`$ satisfy, for $`P`$-a.e. realization of the environment $`\omega `$, a large deviations principle (LDP) under $`P_\omega ^0`$ with a deterministic rate function $`I_P()`$. Under the annealed measure $``$, they satisfy a LDP with rate function

$$I(w)=\underset{Q_1^e}{inf}(h(Q|P)+I_Q(w)),$$
(2.8)
where $`h(Q|P)`$ is the specific entropy of $`Q`$ with respect to $`P`$ and $`_1^e`$ denotes the space of stationary ergodic measures on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

Theorem 2.7 means that to create an annealed large deviation, one may first “modify” the environment (at a certain exponential cost) and then apply the quenched LDP in the new environment. We refer to  (quenched) and  for proofs and generalizations to non i.i.d. environments. We also note that Theorem 2.7 stands in sharp contrast to what happens for random walks on Galton-Watson trees, where the growth of the tree creates enough variability in the (quenched) environment to make the annealed and quenched LDP’s identical, see .

Sinai’s recurrent walk and aging

When $`E_P(\mathrm{log}\rho _0)=0`$, traps stop being local, and the whole environment becomes a diffused trap. The walk spends most of its time “at the bottom of the trap”, and as time evolves it is harder and harder for the RWRE to move. This is the phenomenum of aging, captured in the following theorem:

###### Theorem 2.9

There exists a random variable $`B^n`$, depending on the environment only, such that

$$\left(\left|\frac{X_n}{(\mathrm{log}n)^2}B^n\right|>\eta \right)\underset{n\mathrm{}}{}0.$$

Further, for $`h>1`$,

$$\underset{\eta 0}{lim}\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\left(\frac{|X_{n^h}X_n|}{(\mathrm{log}n)^2}<\eta \right)=\frac{1}{h^2}\left[\frac{5}{3}\frac{2}{3}e^{(h1)}\right].$$
(2.10)
The first part of Theorem 2.9 is due to Sinai , with Kesten  providing the evaluation of the limiting law of $`B^n`$. The second part is implicit in , we refer to  and  for the proof and references.

## 3. Multi-dimensional RWRE

Homogenization

Two special features simplify the analysis of the RWRE in the one-dimensional case: first, for every realization of the environment, the RWRE is a reversible Markov chain. This gave transience and recurrence criteria. Then, the location of the walk at the hitting times $`T_n`$ is deterministic, leading to stationarity and mixing properties of the sequence $`\{\tau _i\}`$ and to a relatively simple analysis of their tail properties. Both these features are lost for $`d>1`$.

A (by now standard) approach to homogenization problems is to consider the environment viewed from the particle. More precisely, with $`\theta ^x`$ denoting the $`^d`$ shift by $`x`$, the process $`\omega _n=\theta ^{X_n}\omega `$ is a Markov chain with state-space $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Whenever the invariant measure of this chain is absolutely continuous with respect to $`P`$, law of large numbers and CLT’s can be deduced, see . For reversible situations, e.g. in the “random conductance model” , the invariant measure of the chain $`\{\omega _n\}`$ is known explicitly. In the non-reversible RWRE model, this approach has had limited consequences: one needs to establish absolute continuity of the invariant measure without knowing it explicitly. This was done in  for balanced environments, i.e. whenever $`\omega (x,x+e)=\omega (x,xe)`$ $`P`$-a.s. for all $`e^d,|e|=1`$, by developing a-priori estimates on the invariant measure., valid for every realization of the environment. Apart from that (and the very recent ), this approach has not been very useful in the study of RWRE’s.

Regeneration

We focus here on another approach based on analogs of hitting times. Throughout, fix a direction $`\mathrm{}^d`$, and consider the process $`Z_n=X_n\mathrm{}`$. Define the events $`A_\pm \mathrm{}=\{Z_n_n\mathrm{}\pm \mathrm{}\}`$. Then, with $`P`$ a product measure, one shows that $`(A_{\mathrm{}}A_{\mathrm{}})\{0,1\}`$, . We sketch a proof: Call a time $`t`$ fresh if $`Z_t>Z_n,n<t`$, and for any fresh time $`t`$, define the return time $`D_t=\mathrm{min}\{n>t:Z_n<Z_t\}`$, calling $`t`$ a regeneration time if $`D_t=\mathrm{}`$. Then, $`(A_{\mathrm{}})>0`$ implies by the Markov property that $`(A_{\mathrm{}}\{D_0=\mathrm{}\})>0`$. Similarly, on $`A_{\mathrm{}}`$, each fresh time has a bounded away from zero probability to be a regeneration time. One deduces that $`(\text{a regeneration time}|A_{\mathrm{}})=1`$. In particular, on $`A_\pm \mathrm{}`$, $`Z_n`$ changes signs only finitely many times. If $`(A_{\mathrm{}}A_{\mathrm{}})<1`$ then with positive probability, $`Z_n`$ visits a finite centered interval infinitely often, and hence it must change signs infinitely many times. But this implies that $`(A_{\mathrm{}}A_{\mathrm{}})=0`$.

The proof above can be extended to non-product $`P`$-s having good mixing properties using, due to the uniform ellipticity, a coupling with simple nearest neighbor random walk. This is done as follows: Set $`W=\{0\}\{\pm e_i\}_{i=1}^d`$. Define the measure

$$\overline{}=PQ_ϵ\overline{P}_{\omega ,}^0\text{on}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }\times W^{}\times (^d)^{}\right)$$

in the following way: $`Q_ϵ`$ is a product measure, such that with $`=(ϵ_1,ϵ_2,\mathrm{})`$ denoting an element of $`W^{}`$, $`Q_ϵ(ϵ_1=\pm e_i)=ϵ/2`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},d`$, $`Q_ϵ(ϵ_1=0)=1ϵd`$. For each fixed $`\omega ,`$, $`\overline{P}_{\omega ,}^0`$ is the law of the Markov chain $`\{X_n\}`$ with state space $`^d`$, such that $`X_0=0`$ and, for each $`eW`$, $`e0`$,

$$\overline{P}_{\omega ,}^0(X_{n+1}=z+e|X_n=z)=\mathrm{𝟏}_{\{ϵ_{n+1}=e\}}+\frac{\mathrm{𝟏}_{\{ϵ_{n+1}=0\}}}{1dϵ}[\omega (z,z+e)ϵ/2].$$

It is not hard to check that the law of $`\{X_n\}`$ under $`\overline{}`$ coincides with its law under $``$, while its law under $`Q_ϵ\overline{P}_{\omega ,}^0`$ coincides with its law under $`P_\omega ^0`$. Now, one introduces modified regeneration times $`D_t^{(L)}`$ by requiring that after the fresh time $`t`$, the “$``$” coin was used for $`L`$ steps in the direction $`\mathrm{}`$: more precisely, requiring that $`ϵ_{t+i}=u_i,i=1,\mathrm{},L`$ for some fixed sequence $`u_i^d,|u_i|=1,u_i\mathrm{}>0`$ such that $`_{i=1}^Lu_i\mathrm{}L/2`$. This, for large $`L`$, introduces enough decoupling to carry through the proof, see \[29, Section 3.1\]. We can now state the:
Embarrassing Problem 1 Prove that $`(A_{\mathrm{}})\{0,1\}`$.

For $`d=2`$, and $`P`$ i.i.d., this was shown in , where counter examples using non uniformly elliptic, ergodic $`P`$’s are also provided. The case $`d>2`$, even for $`P`$ i.i.d., remains open.

Embarrassing Problem 2 Find transience and recurrence criteria for the RWRE under $``$.

The most promising approach so far toward Problem 2 uses regeneration times. Write $`0d_1<d_2<\mathrm{}`$ for the ordered sequence of regeneration times, assuming that $`(A_{\mathrm{}})=1`$. The name regeneration time is justified by the following property, which for simplicity we state in the case $`\mathrm{}=e_1`$:

###### Theorem 3.1 ()

For $`P`$ a product measure, the sequence

$$\{\{\omega _z\}_{z\mathrm{}[Z_{d_i},Z_{(d_{i+1}1)})},\{X_t\}_{t[d_i,d_{i+1})}\}_{i=2,3,\mathrm{}}$$

is i.i.d..

From this statement, it is then not hard to deduce that once $`𝔼(d_2d_1)<\mathrm{}`$, a law of large numbers results, with a non-zero limiting velocity. Sufficient conditions for transience put forward in  turn out to fall in this class, see . More recently, Sznitman has introduced a condition that ensures both a LLN and a CLT:

Sznitman’s T’ condition: $`(A_{\mathrm{}})=1`$ and , for some $`c>0`$ and all $`\gamma <1`$,

$$𝔼(\mathrm{exp}(c\underset{0n<d_1}{sup}|X_n|^\gamma ))<\mathrm{}.$$

A remarkable fact about Sznitman’s T’ condition is that he was able to derive, using renormalization techniques, a (rather complicated) criterion, depending on the restriction of $`P`$ to finite boxes, to check it. Further, Sznitman’s T’ condition implies a good control on $`d_1`$, and in particular that $`d_1`$ possesses all moments, which is the key to the LLN and CLT statements:

$$𝔼\left(\mathrm{exp}\left(\mathrm{log}d_1\right)^\delta \right)<\mathrm{},\delta <2d/(d+1).$$

For these, and related, facts see . This leads one to the

Challenging Problem 3 Do there exist non-ballistic RWRE’s for $`d>1`$ satisfying that $`(A_{\mathrm{}})=1`$ for some $`\mathrm{}`$?

For $`d=1`$, the answer is affirmative, as we saw, as soon as $`E_P\mathrm{log}\rho _0<0`$ but $`s<1`$. For $`d>1`$, one suspects that the answer is negative, and in fact one may suspect that $`(A_{\mathrm{}})=1`$ implies Sznitman’s condition T’. The reason for the striking difference is that for $`d>1`$, it is much harder to force the walk to visit large traps.

It is worthwhile to note that the modified regeneration times $`\{D_t^{(L)}\}`$ can be used to deduce the LLN for a class of mixing environments. We refer to  for details. At present, the question of CLT’s in such a general set up remains open.

Cut points

Regeneration times are less useful if the walk is not ballistic. Special cases of non-ballistic models have been analyzed in the above mentioned , and using a heavy renormalization analysis, in  for the case of symmetric, low disorder, i.i.d. $`P`$. In both cases, LLN’s with zero speed and CLT’s are provided. We now introduce, for another special class of models, a different class of times that are not regeneration times but provide enough decoupling to lead to useful consequences.

The setup is similar to that in Theorem 1.4, that is we assume that $`d6`$ and that the RWRE, in its first 5 coordinate, performs a deterministic random walk:
$`\text{For }i=1,\mathrm{},5,\omega (x,x\pm e_i)=q_{\pm i},\text{for some deterministic }q_{\pm i},Pa.s..`$
Set $`S=_{i=1}^5(q_i+q_i)`$, let $`\{R_n\}_n`$ denote a (biased) simple random walk in $`^5`$ with transition probabilities $`q_{\pm i}/S`$, and fix a sequence of independent Bernoulli random variable with $`P(I_0=1)=S`$, letting $`U_n=_{i=0}^{n1}I_i`$. Denote by $`X_n^1`$ the first 5 components of $`X_n`$ and by $`X_n^2`$ the remaining components. Then, for every realization $`\omega `$, the RWRE $`X_n`$ can be constructed as the Markov chain with $`X_n^1=R_{U_n}`$ and transition probabilities

$$\overline{P}_\omega ^0(X_{n+1}^2=z|X_n)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1,\hfill & X_n^2=z,I_n=1,\hfill \\ \omega (X_n,(X_n^1,z))/(1S),\hfill & I_n=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

Introduce now, for the walk $`R_n`$, cut times $`c_i`$ as those times where the past and future of the path $`R_n`$ do not intersect. More precisely, with $`𝒫_I=\{X_n\}_{nI}`$,

$$c_1=\mathrm{min}\{t0:𝒫_{(\mathrm{},t)}𝒫_{[t,\mathrm{})}=\mathrm{}\},c_{i+1}=\mathrm{min}\{t>c_i:𝒫_{(\mathrm{},t)}𝒫_{[t,\mathrm{})}=\mathrm{}\}.$$

The cut-points sequence depends on the ordinary random walk $`R_n`$ only. In particular, because that walk evolves in $`^5`$, it follows, as in , that there are infinitely many cut points, and moreover that they have a positive density. Further, the increments $`X_{c_{i+1}}^2X_{c_i}^2`$ depend on disjoint parts of the environment. Therefore, conditioned on $`\{R_n,I_n\}`$, they are independent if $`P`$ is a product measure, and they possess good mixing properties if $`P`$ has good mixing properties. From here, the statement of Theorem 1.4 is not too far. We refer the reader to , where this and CLT statements (with 5 replaced by a larger integer) are proved. An amusing consequence of  is that for $`d>5`$, one may construct ballistic RWRE’s with, in the notations of Section 2., $`E_P(v_0(\omega ))=0`$!

Challenging Problem 4 Construct cut points for “true” non-ballistic RWRE’s.

The challenge here is to construct cut points and prove that their density is positive, without imposing a-priori that certain components of the walk evolve independently of the environment.

Large deviations

We conclude the discussion of multi-dimensional RWRE’s by mentioning large deviations for this model. Call a RWRE nestling if $`\text{co}\text{supp}Q`$, where $`Q`$ denotes the law of $`_{e^d:|e|=1}e\omega (0,e)`$. In words, an RWRE is nestling if by combining local drifts one can arrange for zero drift. One has then:

###### Theorem 3.2 ()

Assume $`P`$ is a product nestling measure. Then, for $`P`$-almost every $`\omega `$, $`X_n/n`$ satisfies a LDP under $`P_\omega ^0`$ with deterministic rate function.

The proof of Theorem 3.2 involves hitting times: let $`T_y`$ denote the first hitting time of $`y^d`$. One then checks, using the subaddititve ergodic theorem, that

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(y,\lambda ):=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}n^1\mathrm{log}E_\omega ^0(\mathrm{exp}(\lambda T_{ny})\mathrm{𝟏}_{\{T_{ny}<\mathrm{}\}})$$

exists and is deterministic, for $`\lambda 0`$. In the nestling regime, where slowdown has sub-exponential decay rate due to the existence of traps much as for $`d=1`$, this and concentration of measure estimates are enough to yield the LDP. But:

Embarrassing Problem 5 Prove the quenched LDP for non-nestling RWRE’s.

A priori, non nestling walks should have been easier to handle than nestling walks due to good control on the tail of regeneration times!

Challenging Problem 6 Derive an annealed LDP for the RWRE, and relate the rate function to the quenched one.

One does not expect a relation as simple as in Theorem 2.7, because the RWRE can avoid traps by contouring them, and to change the environment in a way that surely modifies the behavior of the walk by time $`n`$ has probability which seems to decay at an exponential rate faster than $`n`$. This puts the muti-dimensional RWRE in an intermediate position between the one-dimensional RWRE and walks on Galton-Watson trees . We also note that certain estimates on large deviations for RWRE’s, without matching constants, appear in .


text:
# Connectivity of finite subset spaces of cell complexes

## 1. Introduction

The $`k`$th finite subset space of a topological space $`X`$ is the space $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ of non-empty subsets of $`X`$ of size at most $`k`$, topologised as a quotient of $`X^k`$ via the map

$$(x_1,\mathrm{},x_k)\{x_1\}\mathrm{}\{x_k\}.$$

The construction is functorial, with $`f:XY`$ inducing $`\mathrm{exp}_kf:\mathrm{exp}_kX\mathrm{exp}_kY`$ sending $`\alpha X`$ to $`f(\alpha )Y`$, and moreover $`\mathrm{exp}_kf`$ and $`\mathrm{exp}_kg`$ are homotopic if $`f`$ and $`g`$ are, so that $`\mathrm{exp}_k`$ is in fact a homotopy functor.

Handel  has shown that for path-connected Hausdorff $`X`$ the map on $`\pi _i`$ induced by the inclusion $`\mathrm{exp}_kX\mathrm{exp}_{2k+1}X`$ is zero. Using results from our paper  on the finite subset spaces of connected graphs we complement this result, proving the following connectivity theorem for the finite subset spaces of a connected cell complex:

###### Theorem 1.

The $`k`$th finite subset space of a connected cell complex $`X`$ is $`(k2)`$–connected, in other words $`\pi _i(\mathrm{exp}_kX)`$ vanishes for $`ik2`$.

Using results from  the conclusion may be strengthened to $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ is $`(k1)`$–connected if $`X`$ is a simply connected cell complex, and we expect further that $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ should be $`(k+m2)`$–connected if $`X`$ is an $`m`$–connected cell complex. We discuss this in section 3 after proving the result in section 2.

## 2. Proof of Theorem 1

We note that Theorem 1 is immediate for $`k=2`$, since the finite subset spaces of a path-connected space are again path-connected, so in proving it we assume $`k3`$. In this case the conclusion is equivalent to the statement that $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ is simply connected with vanishing reduced homology in dimensions less than $`k1`$, by the Hurewicz theorem, and we shall freely use this formulation. We first prove the result for finite complexes and then pass to the infinite case via a compactness argument.

###### Proof of Theorem 1 for finite $`X`$.

The proof is by induction on the dimension of $`X`$, with the base case $`dimX=1`$ given by our paper , in which we studied the finite subset spaces of connected finite graphs. The keys to the inductive step are the following two observations:

1. If $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_{k+1}`$ are disjoint subsets of $`X`$ then a $`k`$ element subset of $`X`$ must lie in $`XP_{\mathrm{}}`$ for some $`\mathrm{}`$.
2. If $`X`$ is a connected finite $`(n+1)`$–complex, $`n1`$, and $`PX`$ lies in the open $`(n+1)`$–cells and intersects each in a non-empty finite set, then $`XP`$ has the homotopy type of a connected finite $`n`$–complex.

We use these in conjunction with the following lemma, itself proved inductively using the Mayer-Vietoris sequence.

###### Lemma 1.

Let $`Y`$ be a union of open sets $`U_1,\mathrm{},U_r`$ such that $`U_1\mathrm{}U_r`$ is non-empty and each $`U_{i_1}\mathrm{}U_{i_s}`$ has vanishing reduced homology in dimensions less than $`j`$. Then $`Y`$ has vanishing reduced homology in dimensions less than $`j`$ also.

Suppose the theorem holds for connected finite $`n`$–complexes, some $`n1`$, and let $`X`$ be a connected finite $`(n+1)`$–complex. Let $`v`$ be a vertex of $`X`$ and let $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_{k+1}`$ be disjoint subsets of $`X`$ each consisting of exactly one point from each open $`(n+1)`$–cell. By observation (1) the sets

$$𝒰_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{exp}_k(XP_{\mathrm{}})$$

cover $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$, and each $`𝒰_{\mathrm{}}`$ is open since $`(XP_{\mathrm{}})^k`$ is open in $`X^k`$. Moreover the intersection $`𝒰_1\mathrm{}𝒰_{k+1}`$ contains $`\{v\}`$ and is therefore non-empty.

Consider

$$𝒰_\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}𝒰_\mathrm{}_s=\mathrm{exp}_k(X(P_\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}P_\mathrm{}_s)).$$

By observation (2) the space $`X(P_\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}P_\mathrm{}_s)`$ has the homotopy type of a connected finite $`n`$–complex, so by the inductive hypothesis $`𝒰_\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}𝒰_\mathrm{}_s`$ has vanishing reduced homology in dimensions less than $`k1`$. It follows that the hypotheses of Lemma 1 are satisfied by the cover $`\{𝒰_{\mathrm{}}\}`$ with $`j=k1`$, and we conclude that $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ has vanishing reduced homology in dimensions less than $`k1`$.

To complete the inductive step it remains to show that $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ is simply connected. This follows immediately from the van Kampen theorem applied to the cover $`\{𝒰_{\mathrm{}}\}`$ with basepoint $`\{v\}`$. By the inductive hypothesis $`\pi _1(𝒰_{\mathrm{}},\{v\})\{1\}`$ for all $`\mathrm{}`$, and since each $`𝒰_j𝒰_{\mathrm{}}`$ is path-connected we have immediately that $`\pi _1(\mathrm{exp}_kX,\{v\})\{1\}`$ also. ∎

To pass to the infinite dimensional case we use the following lemma, which we prove with no assumptions on $`X`$.

###### Lemma 2.

If $`C\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ is compact in $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ then $`C=_{\alpha C}\alpha `$ is compact in $`X`$.

###### Proof.

Given an open cover $`𝒪`$ of $`C`$ the set

$$𝒪^{}=\left\{\mathrm{exp}_kO\right|O𝒪\text{ finite}\}$$

is an open cover of $`C`$. Extracting a finite subcover $`\{\mathrm{exp}_kO_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{exp}_kO_m\}`$ from $`𝒪^{}`$ we obtain a finite subcover $`O_1\mathrm{}O_m`$ of $`𝒪`$. ∎

Since compact subspaces of cell complexes lie in finite subcomplexes we have immediately:

###### Corollary 1.

If $`X`$ is a cell complex and $`C\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ is compact, then $`C\mathrm{exp}_kA`$ for some finite subcomplex $`A`$ of $`X`$.

###### Proof of Theorem 1 for $`X`$ infinite.

Let $`[\varphi ]\pi _i(\mathrm{exp}_kX,\{v\})`$ for some vertex $`v`$ of $`X`$ and $`ik2`$. By Corollary 1 $`\varphi (S^i)`$ lies in $`\mathrm{exp}_kA`$ for some finite subcomplex $`A`$ of $`X`$, and we may take $`A`$ to be connected since $`X`$ is. By the finite case of the theorem $`[\varphi ]`$ is trivial in $`\pi _i(\mathrm{exp}_kA,\{v\})`$, and so in $`\pi _i(\mathrm{exp}_kX,\{v\})`$ also. ∎

## 3. Discussion

Theorem 1 is consistent with the following conjecture on the finite subset spaces of cell complexes, as the theorem follows from the conjecture together with Handel’s inclusion result. We restrict our attention to complexes with a single vertex in each component, with no loss of generality up to homotopy.

###### Conjecture.

Let $`X`$ be a finite $`n`$–complex with $`c`$ components, each containing a single vertex. Then $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ has a cell structure obtained from $`\mathrm{exp}_{k1}X`$ by adding cells of dimensions $`kcink`$.

The conjecture is true in the connected case for $`n=1`$ by Lemma 1 of , and for $`n=2`$ by Theorem 6 of . To see that it implies Theorem 1 note that it implies that the homotopy groups of $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ stabilise as $`k`$ increases. By Handel’s result the stable groups must be zero when $`X`$ is connected, and careful attention to the point at which the stabilisation occurs gives the bound in the theorem.

Jacob Mostovoy (private communication) has indicated that finite subset spaces of cell complexes may be shown to have cell structures using the machinery of simplicial sets, which is described in May’s book  or Curtis’s article . Given a simplicial set $`K`$ we let $`\mathrm{exp}_jK`$ be the simplicial set whose $`n`$–simplices are subsets of size at most $`j`$ of the $`n`$–simplices of $`K`$, and whose face and degeneracy operators are the face and degeneracy operators of $`K`$ acting elementwise. Then if $`X`$ is the geometric realisation of $`K`$, $`\mathrm{exp}_jX`$ will be the geometric realisation of $`\mathrm{exp}_jK`$, showing that triangulated spaces have triangulated finite subset spaces. However, the triangulations obtained in this way apparently do not satisfy the lower bound $`kc`$ needed to prove Theorem 1. The bound comes from the following heuristic, which is motivated by the form of the lexicographic cell structures of . We suppose that $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ has a cell structure such that for each open cell $`e`$ of $`X`$ the set map

$$\mathrm{exp}_kX𝐍:\mathrm{\Lambda }|\mathrm{\Lambda }e|$$

is constant on each open cell $`\sigma `$ of $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$, and moreover that the dimension of $`\sigma `$ is at least the common number of points in $`X`$ less the $`0`$–skeleton for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\sigma `$. In particular we suppose that the vertices of $`\mathrm{exp}_kX`$ can be chosen to be subsets of the vertices of $`X`$, without adding more through subdivision. If $`X`$ has a single vertex in each component then an open cell of $`\mathrm{exp}_kX\mathrm{exp}_{k1}X`$ in such a cell structure would have dimension at least $`kc`$.

Theorem 1 can be strengthened for simply connected complexes, and we expect that it can be strengthened further for $`m`$–connected cell complexes. With this in mind we prove the following theorem, showing it suffices to prove any strengthened result for wedges of spheres.

###### Theorem 2.

Suppose that finite wedges of $`(m+1)`$–spheres have $`r`$–connected $`k`$th finite subset spaces. Then $`m`$–connected cell complexes have $`r`$–connected $`k`$th finite subset spaces also.

###### Proof.

We simply adapt the inductive step of the proof of Theorem 1, replacing observation (2) with the following observation (2$`{}_{}{}^{})`$:

1. If $`X`$ is an $`m`$–connected finite $`(n+1)`$–complex, $`nm+1`$, and $`PX`$ lies in the open $`(n+1)`$–cells and intersects each in a non-empty finite set, then $`XP`$ has the homotopy type of an $`m`$–connected finite $`n`$–complex.

If $`X`$ is an $`m`$–connected finite cell complex then up to homotopy we may assume that the $`(m+1)`$–skeleton of $`X`$ is a finite wedge of $`(m+1)`$–spheres. The base for the induction is then given by hypothesis and the argument goes through exactly as before. ∎

By \[7, Theorem 6\] $`\mathrm{exp}_k_nS^2`$ has a cell structure obtained from $`\mathrm{exp}_{k1}_nS^2`$ by adding cells in dimensions $`k`$ and higher, and using Handel’s inclusion result and Theorem 2 we conclude that simply connected cell complexes have $`(k1)`$–connected $`k`$th finite subset spaces. More generally, the construction outlined in \[7, section 2.4\] should yield cell structures for the finite subset spaces of wedges of spheres in which $`\mathrm{exp}_k_nS^{m+1}`$ is obtained from $`\mathrm{exp}_{k1}_nS^{m+1}`$ by adding cells in dimensions $`k+m1`$ and higher. Verifying the details of this construction would show that $`m`$–connected cell complexes have $`(k+m2)`$–connected $`k`$th finite subset spaces.

We conclude with an example showing the necessity of the connectedness hypothesis in Theorem 1. Consider the third finite subset space of a pair of circles, $`\mathrm{exp}_3(S^1S^1)`$. This has three connected components, two “pure” components consisting of subsets contained entirely in one or the other component circle, and a “mixed” component consisting of subsets meeting both. The two pure components are each homeomorphic to $`S^3`$ (Bott ; see also ), but the mixed component is formed by gluing two copies of $`\mathrm{exp}_2S^1\times \mathrm{exp}_1S^1\text{Möb}\times S^1`$ along their boundary. The gluing interchanges the roles of the boundary of the Möbius strip and the $`S^1`$ direction, and $`\pi _1`$ of the resulting three manifold has presentation $`a,b|[a,b^2]=[a^2,b]=1`$.


text:
# Untitled Document

Fusion and breakup of halo nuclei

M.S. Husseina, L.F. Cantob and R. Donangelo$`{}_{}{}^{b}\text{}`$

aInstituto de Física, Universidade de São Paulo,

C.P. 66318, 05389-970, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

bInstituto de Física, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro,

C.P. 68528, 21945-970, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

We discuss the effect of the coupling to the break-up channel on the total fusion involving a halo nucleus with a heavy target. We show that there is a competition between the hindrance arising from this coupling mostly at above barrier energies, and the enhancement which ensues at sub-barrier energies owing to the static effect of the extended matter distribution and the coupling to the soft modes.

1. INTRODUCTION

The fusion of heavy ions is of paramount importance in astrophysics and in the production of super heavy elements (SHE). With the advent of secondary beams of neutron and proton rich nuclei, it is important to assess how the complete fusion of these nuclear species behave as a function of bombarding energy especially near the Coulomb barrier . Several of the light neutron and proton rich nuclei exhibit halo structures, with a compact core plus one or two loosely bound nucleons occupying a far away orbit. Systems such is $`{}_{}{}^{11}Li`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{6}He`$ are two-neutron, borromean halo nuclei, while $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{19}C`$ are one-neutron halo nuclei. The isotope $`{}_{}{}^{8}B`$ has been confirmed to be a one-proton halo while $`{}_{}{}^{17}F`$ is a normal nucleus in its ground state but acquires a one-proton halo nature in its 1st excited state. We ask the question of how the above systems fuse. One important feature to remember about these loosely bound systems is their collective response. They exhibit the so-called soft giant resonances (pygmy resonances), the most notorious of which is the soft dipole resonance, very nicely confirmed in 6He by Nakayama et al . On the other hand the threshold for break-up is very small $`(<\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$ $`MeV)`$, making the study of the fusion of these nuclei with heavy targets an interesting endeavour, since the coupling to the soft modes tend to enhance fusion while the coupling to break-up reduces fusion. The latter is true since, if the Coulomb and nuclear coupling is of long range and strong, which is the case when fusion occurs with a heavy nucleus, then the projectile (the halo nucleus) would break before it reaches the target. This led us to propose a model for complete fusion which looks like

$$\sigma _{CF}=\frac{\pi }{k^2}\underset{i}{}\left(2\mathrm{}+1\right)T_{\mathrm{},i}\left(E\right)P_{\mathrm{},i}\left(E\right)$$
(1)
where $`T_{\mathrm{},i}\left(E\right)`$ is the fusion transmission coefficient for the $`lth`$ partial wave and $`P_{\mathrm{},i}\left(E\right)`$ is the break-up survival probability . The sum in Eq.(1) is over all bound states in the projectile and target. Simple approximations were then used for $`T_{\mathrm{},i}\left(E\right)`$ and $`P_{\mathrm{},i}\left(E\right)`$ and a few examples were considered. The overall result from this model was a reduction of $`\sigma _{CF}`$ near and above the barrier energy and an enhancement below. This trend was later confirmed by Takigawa et al  and more recently by the coupled channel calculation with continuum discretization of Hagino et al .

Though our results were based on intuitive arguments, one can derive Eq. (1) from general reaction theory. The same theory  allows the obtention of the incomplete fusion cross-section $`\sigma _{ICF}`$, which in many instances is not easy to distinguish from $`\sigma _{CF}`$. As an example we take the fusion of 6He recently measured by Trotta et al  on $`{}_{}{}^{238}U`$ and Kolata et al  on $`{}_{}{}^{209}Bi`$. Here the incomplete fusion is that where $`{}_{}{}^{6}He`$ is broken up and $`{}_{}{}^{5}He`$ or 4He is absorbed by the target. The remaining neutrons when detected are difficult to distinguish from evaporation neutrons from the compound nucleus.

In the present contributions we give a brief review of theoretical attempts to calculate the fusion of halo nuclei with heavy targets. We also present a short review of the experimental data currently available.

2. EXPERIMENTAL DATA

So far, four measurements were made on the fusion of $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{6}He`$ with heavy targets at near-barrier energies. Signorini et al  reported the measurements of the fusion systems $`{}_{}{}^{9,10,11}Be+^{209}Bi`$ at energies close to the Coulomb barrier. These authors reach the conclusion that in the weakly bound normal nucleus 9Be, the fusion with $`{}_{}{}^{209}Bi`$ is found significantly reduced at above barrier energies, owing to the coupling to the breakup channel. This supports our discussion in the introduction concerning the irreversible nature of the coupling to the break-up continuum. The cases of $`{}_{}{}^{10}Be`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be`$ are more subtle to understand. However, the more recent results of  on $`{}_{}{}^{6}He+^{238}U`$ and  on $`{}_{}{}^{6}He+^{209}Bi`$ do indicate that at below the barrier energies the fusion cross section is enhanced. Thus the halo shows itself as enhancement at sub-barrier energies and the break-up hinders the fusion; the effect becoming more important at above barrier energies. We should of course remind the readers that $`{}_{}{}^{6}He`$ is a borromean 2n-halo nucleus while $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be`$ is one-neutron halo nucleus. Signorini at al  found that the, normal, strongly bound $`{}_{}{}^{10}Be`$ isotope presents a larger fusion cross section than that of $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be`$ at sub-barrier energies. This effect does not fit into the picture we have just presented. We should mention that is the case of the comparison between $`{}_{}{}^{6}He`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{4}He`$ fusion with $`{}_{}{}^{209}Bi`$ by Kolata et al , the effects of the halo (enhancement) at sub-barrier energies, were quite evident.

The fusion of the proton rich isotope $`{}_{}{}^{17}F`$ with $`{}_{}{}^{208}Pb`$ was measured by Rehm et al . This weakly bound nucleus has a normal ground state, but its first excited state is mostly $`\mathrm{}=0`$ and seems to exhibit halo features. The results of Ref. (12) indicate a rather normal behaviour of the complete fusion cross-section, with a very small effect due to break-up, though the break-up channel coupling $`\left({}_{}{}^{17}F^{16}O+p\right)`$would seem to reduce the Coulomb barrier, contrary to the case of the fusion of neutron-rich, drip-line, nuclei.

If there is strong break-up effect on the fusion cross-section that leads to its reduction then the break-up cross-section itself should be noticeable. In the recent measurement by Hinde et al , of 9Be+208Pb at near-barrier energies the elastic break-up cross-section was measured. Here the prompt break-up channel is $`\alpha +\alpha +n`$ with a $`Q=1.57MeV`$. The authors reach the conclusion that this channel is responsible for the large suppression of the complete fusion cross-section at above-barrier energies (one-dimensional barrier calculation has to be multiplied by 0.68 to account for the observation).

This reduction in the complete fusion seems to be accompanied by a large incomplete fusion cross-section where one of the $`\alpha `$-particles fuses with 208Pb. Hinde et al  found that the incomplete fusion probability is about $`0.32\pm 0.07`$, clearly attesting for the unitarity constraint that $`P_{CF}+P_{ICF}`$ should be one. The corresponding total fusion cross-section $`\sigma _F\sigma _{CF}+\sigma _{ICF}`$ should be accountable by the simple one-dimensional barrier penetration model. These findings corroborates the earlier results of Dasgupta et al  which showed a considerable hindrance in $`\sigma _F`$ at above barrier energies. Hinde et al  also discuss the dependence of the fusion hindrance factor on the charge of the target. They found that $`P_{CF}`$depends strongly on the target charge. In the experiment of Ref.  involving $`{}_{}{}^{6,7}Li`$ fusion with $`{}_{}{}^{9}Be`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{12}C`$ targets, it was reported that suppression of up to 70% is found. This, however, was contested recently  through independent measurements of several of the systems studied in Ref. . The conclusions of  is that there is no supression of $`\sigma _{CF}`$ for these light systems.

In fact, the 70% fusion hindrance in the fusion of $`{}_{}{}^{6}Li`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{7}Li`$, was indeed found in Ref.  but on a heavy target, $`{}_{}{}^{209}Bi`$. We can use Eq. (1) as a guide and take for the break-up survival probability the simple DPP form  with the Coulomb DPP proportional to $`Z_T^2`$ . If the effect of the survival probability on the fusion of $`{}_{}{}^{7}Li+^{209}Bi`$ is 75%  at near-barrier energies, then, for the $`{}_{}{}^{7}Li+^{12}C`$ case of . the effect is tremendously reduced since the quantity $`\left(Z_C/Z_{Bi}\right)^20.005`$, implies an over all reduction in $`\sigma _{CF}`$ for $`{}_{}{}^{7}Li+^{12}C`$ of about $`\mathrm{exp}\left(0.005\mathrm{}n\left(1/0.75\right)\right)=0.99989`$, namely no reduction at all. Of course there are the nuclear break-up effects, but these are very small as well. Accordingly there is no suppression of $`\sigma _{CF}`$ for light systems, in total agreement with the conclusion of Refs. .

Of course other processes such as fast fission, also results in a considerable hindrance in the complete fusion involving heavy targets . This is similar to the effects of Deep Inelastic Collision on $`\sigma _{CF}`$ in the so-called Region II .

3. THEORETICAL MODELS

Theoretical description of tunnelling phenomena, such as sub-barrier fusion, in the case of strong channel coupling is made with recourse to coupled channels theory . This theory has been extensively and successfully used to describe the sub-barrier fusion of stable nuclei, which invariably exhibits enhancement over the simple one-dimensional barrier penetration model . The channels that are taken into account correspond to bound states of the partners. In extending this picture to the fusion of halo nuclei, one must take into account the break-up channel coupling. This has been done is the past for deuteron scattering from different targets within the so-called Continuum Discretized Coupled Channels (CDCC) Method . The effect of the deuteron break-up on the elastic scattering was found to be representable by a weaker attraction, and absorption (implying that the dynamic polarization potential, DPP, associated with the deuteron break-up has a repulsive real part and attractive imaginary part (absorption) ). It was from these findings that we were lead to use Eq. (1)  which later modified to incorporate the real part of the DPP  in the survival probability, $`P_{\mathrm{},i}\left(E\right)`$. In a later publication, Dasso and Vitturi  used an effective one bound “break-up” channel and reached the conclusion that the break-up leads to enhancement of fusion. In a later paper, these authors  modified their work by adding, many bound “break-up” channels and reached a similar conclusion as ours, namely, break-up hinders fusion at above-barrier energies and enhances it at lower energies. A more quantitative comparison shows that the shape of their cross section is somewhat different from ours at the barrier region and the transition from enhancement to hindrance occurs at a slightly higher energy.

In fact, the effect of the widths of these resonances (excited states with finite life times) was studied in Refs. . The overall effect of the width as compared to bound excited state, is a reduction in fusion. However, at very low energies, the pygmy resonances act as if they were bound excited states and thus the enhancement seen in the sub-barrier fusion calculation of Ref.  must arise from the above effects, as well as the farther extension of the matter distribution, and not to break-up.

Quite recently, A. Diaz-Torres and I.J. Thompson  performed the most complete calculation of the fusion cross-section of halo nuclei using the CDCC method. They found a large reduction in the complete fusion both above and below the barrier for the system $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be+^{208}Pb`$. They also calculated the incomplete fusion cross-section as that corresponding to flux loss from the break-up channels (the continuum is discretized into several channels). This definition of $`\sigma _{ICF}`$ which follows that of Hagino et al  is an overestimate since the incomplete fusion is the fusion of the heavy charged fragment only. See Ref. , for more details. In fact in many of the papers found in the literature on fusion of two-cluster (or three-cluster) nuclei, there is always ambiguities in actually measuring and also calculating $`\sigma _{ICF}`$. An exception to this is found in the work of Hinde et al  where $`\sigma _{ICF}`$ was correctly measured for the system $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be+^{209}Bi`$.

It is of interest to analyze the general structure of the total reaction cross section, $`\sigma _R`$, of the system studied by A. Diaz-Torres and Thompson , namely $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be+^{208}Pb`$ at low energies. From the formal analysis of Hussein , we can write the following expression for the reaction cross-sector

$$\sigma _R=\sigma _{DIR}+\sigma _F$$
(2)
where $`\sigma _{DIR}`$ is the total direct cross section which contains, in the specific case of $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be+^{208}Pb`$ at very low energies, just the inelastic, $`\sigma _{INE}`$ (mostly Coulomb) excitation of the $`1/2^{}`$ state at 0.32 MeV and the elastic break-up cross-section corresponding to $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be`$ splitting into $`{}_{}{}^{10}Be`$ plus a neutron in addition to the situation where the neutron is absorbed by the target forming $`{}_{}{}^{209}Pb`$, namely the one-neutron removal cross-section $`\sigma _n`$. The component $`\sigma _F`$ is the total fusion cross-section alluded to earlier, which contains the complete fusion $`\left({}_{}{}^{11}Be+^{208}Pb^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}219}}Rn\right)`$ plus the incomplete fusion $`\sigma _{ICF}`$ where $`{}_{}{}^{10}Be`$ is captured by the target It is more likely that $`\sigma _{ICF}`$ should be just $`{}_{}{}^{10}Be+^{208}Pb^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}218}}Rn`$since $`{}_{}{}^{10}Be`$ is long-lived in the present context. Thus $`\sigma _{ICF}=\sigma _{^{10}Be}`$.

Accordingly we can write

$$\sigma _{DIR}=\sigma _{INE}+\sigma _{bup}+\sigma _n$$
(3)
and

$$\sigma _F=\sigma _{CF}+\sigma _{{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.33em}10}}Be}$$
(4)
In the calculation of Hagino et al  and of Diaz-Torres and Thompson , the total fusion cross-section, $`\sigma _F`$ was obtained from

$$\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}\sigma _F\mathrm{"}=\sigma _{CF}+\sigma _{{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}10}}Be}+\sigma _n\text{ ,}$$
(5)
or

$$\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}\sigma _F\mathrm{"}\sigma _{CF}+\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}\sigma _{ICF}\mathrm{"}$$
(6)
Therefore $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}\sigma _{ICF}\mathrm{"}`$ is an overestimate of the incomplete fusion cross-section. Further, if $`\sigma _{DIR}`$ is ignored, as done in both references, then unitarity would require an underestimate of $`\sigma _{CF}`$. This explains the findings of  and points to ways of correcting them. One should resort to three - or four - body calculations in order to calculate $`\sigma _n`$ and $`\sigma _{{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}10}}Be}`$. Short of a full fledged Faddeev (3-bodies) or Jakubovskij (4-bodies) treatments of the reactions of one - and two - nucleon halo nuclei, respectively, one resorts to approximate treatments. In Ref. , using the Hussein-McVoy  formalism for inclusive break-up reactions and improvements on it, it was find that one may calculate the removal cross-section of the heavy fragment, $`\sigma _{{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}10}}Be}`$, according to the practical formula

$$\sigma _{ICF}=\sigma _{{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}10}}Be}=\frac{\pi }{k_{{}_{}{}^{10}Be}^2}\frac{v^{}}{v}\underset{\mathrm{}_1}{}\left(2\mathrm{}_1+1\right)T_\mathrm{}_1^{(^{10}Be)}\left(E_1\right)\left[1P_\mathrm{}_o\left(E\right)\right]\left[1T_\mathrm{}_2^{(n)}\left(E_2\right)\right]$$
(7)
where $`\left[1P_\mathrm{}_o\left(E\right)\right]`$ is the break-up probability of the projectile, $`T_\mathrm{}_1^{(^{10}Be)}\left(E_1\right)`$ is the fusion probability for $`{}_{}{}^{10}Be`$ and $`\left[1T_\mathrm{}_2^{(n)}\left(E_2\right)\right]`$ is the survival probability of the neutron in the process $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be^{10}Be+n`$. In Eq. (7) $`v`$ and $`v^{}`$ are the relative velocities in the elastic and break-up channels. The calculation of $`\sigma _{{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}}Be}`$ is presently in progress. The above considerations should be worked out within a few-body treatment of fusion . However, $`\sigma _{ICF}`$, according to Eq. (7), may be calculated within the CDCC of Ref. .

One last comment concerning the complete fusion cross section calculated within CDCC by Diaz-Torres and I.J. Thompson  for $`{}_{}{}^{11}Be+^{208}Pb`$. There is a reason to expect another mechanism that would further enhance the very low values of $`\sigma _{CF}`$. After discretizing the continuum, and thus replacing the density of states of the two-clusters continuum by a much smaller density of discrete states, one looses part of the fusion flux. This lost flux, should be accounted for within CDCC by an appropriate incoherent addition of a fluctuation fusion contribution. Ref.  discusses in fact the statistical nature of the coupling to the continuum, which would require, besides the “average” CDCC , the statistical treatment of the fluctuation, just as is done in the description of DIC . This should increase the Diaz-Torres and Thompson  complete fusion cross-section. Work along this line is in progress.

4. CONCLUSIONS

We have presented in this short review an account of the present status of the activities in the field of the fusion of halo nuclei. We have discuss the results of the available data and critically assessed some of the interpretations. We have also discuss theoretical attempts made so far to calculate the complete and incomplete fusion cross-sections. In particular we went at length in considering the effect of the coupling to the break-up channel. The overall conclusion that seems to emerge from several of these studies is that this coupling always leads to a reduction in $`\sigma _{CF}`$ above the barrier. At sub-barrier energies, other features of halo nuclei (extended mass distribution, pygmy resonances) come into play and they lead to an enhancement of $`\sigma _{CF}`$ compared to the single channel model results. We have also analysed the recent calculation of Diaz-Torres and Thompson  within the CDCC method and pointed to ways of improving the theory.

Fusion and break-up of halo nuclei continues to be a challenging field and certainly deserves further experimental and theoretical studies.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This work was supported in part by FAPESP and the CNPq.

REFERENCES

1. For a recent review see, C.A. Bertulani, M.S. Hussein and G. Münzenberg, “Physics of Radioactive Beams” (Nova Science, New York, 2001), Chapter 12.
2. S. Nakayama et al. Phys. Rev. Lett 85 (2002) 262.
3. M.S. Hussein, M.P. Pato, L.F. Canto and R. Donangelo, Phys. Rev. C46 (1992) 377; Phys. Rev. C47 (1993) 2398.
4. L.F. Canto, R. Donangelo, P. Lotti and M.S. Hussein, Phys. Rev. C52 (1995) R2848; L.F. Canto et al. J. Phys. G23 (1997) 1465; W.H.Z. Cárdenas et al., Nucl. Phys. A703 (2002) 673.
5. M.S. Hussein et al., Nucl. Phys. A588 (1995) 85C.
6. N. Takigawa, M Kuratani and H. Sagawa, Phys. Rev. C47 (1993) R2470.
7. K. Hagino, A. Vitturi, C.H. Dasso and S. Lenzi, Phys. Rev. C51 (2000) 037602.
8. L.F. Canto et al., Phys. Rev. C58 (1998) 1107.
9. M. Trotta et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 2342.
10. J.J. Kolata et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 4580.
11. C. Signorini et al., Eur. Phys. J. A5 (1999) 7; C. Signorini, Eur. Phys. J. A13 (2002) 129.
12. K.E. Rehm et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 3341.
13. D.J. Hinde et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 272701-1.
14. M. Dasgupta et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 1395.
15. J. Takahashi et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 30; A. Szanto de Toledo et al., Nucl. Phys. A679 (2000) 175.
16. A. Mukherjee et al., Nucl. Phys. A635 (1998) 205; A. Mukherjee et al., Nucl. Phys. A645 (1999) 13; A. Mukherjee et al., Phys. Ltett. B526 (2002) 295.
17. R.M. Anjos et al., Phys. Lett. B534 (2002) 45.
18. M. Dasgupta et al., Phys. Rev. C66 (2002) 041602 (R).
19. M.V. Andrés, J. Gómez-Camacho and M.A. Nagarajan, Nucl. Phys. A579 (1994) 273.
20. L.F. Canto, R. Donangelo, P. Lotti and M.S. Hussein, Nucl. Phys. A589 (1995) 117.
21. D.J. Hinde, M. Dasgupta and A. Mukherjee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 282701.
22. See, e.g. M. Dasgupta et al., Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 48 (1998) 401; G.R. Satchler et al., Ann. Phys. 178 (1987) 110; A.M.S. Breitschaft et al., Ann. Phys. 243 (1995) 420.
23. N. Anstern et al., Phys. Rep. 154 (1987) 110.
24. L.F. Canto et al., Nucl. Phys. A542 (1992) 131.
25. C.H. Dasso and A. Vitturi, Phys. Rev. C50 (1994) R12.
26. M.S. Hussein and A.F.R. de Toledo Piza, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994) 2693; M.S. Hussein et al., Phys. Rev. C51 (1995) 846.
27. K. Hagino and N. Takigawa, Phys. Rev. C58 (1998) 2872.
28. A. Diaz-Torres and I.J. Thompson, Phys. Rev. C65 (2002) 024606.
29. M.S. Hussein, Phys. Rev. C30 (1984) 962.
30. M.S. Hussein and K. W. McVoy, Nucl. Phys. A445 (1985) 124.
31. B.V. Carlson, T. Frederico and M.S. Hussein, to be published.
32. S. Drozdz, J. Okolowicz, M. Polszajazak and I. Rooter, Phys. Rev. C62 (2000) 024313.
33. See, e.g. D. Agassi, C.M. Ko and H.A. Weidenmüller, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 107 (1977) 140; H. Feshbach, A. K. Kerman and S.E. Koonin, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 125 (1980) 429.