it has been realized since quite some time that several extensions of the standard model ( sm ) share similar signatures at the lhc , as , for example , that of jets , leptons , and missing transverse energy  @xcite .
this is because such extensions typically have partners of the sm , with gauge quantum numbers equal to those of the sm particles  @xcite .
supersymmetric models , extra - dimensional ones , and little higgs models are indeed of this type . among them
, supersymmetric models stand out because the partners have spins that differ by @xmath12 from those of the sm particles , whereas in the other extensions have the same spins .
this has prompted several proposal of methods for determining the spin of heavy unstable particles  @xcite .
thus , supersymmetric models are also the only ones , at least so far , in which there exist irreducible renormalizable interactions of four matter partners , of type @xmath13 .
such interactions may , therefore , offer a new handle to discriminate supersymmetry ( susy ) from other extensions of the sm .
the lhc being a hadronic machine , quartic couplings of sleptons , @xmath14 , contribute only to processes whose cross sections are suppressed by many powers of the electroweak couplings .
the signals of quartic couplings of squarks , @xmath15 , may not be easily disentangled from those due to a pair of squarks .
the first , simplest scrutiny of quartic couplings , therefore , may be that of couplings of two sleptons and two squarks @xmath16 . combined with the strong interaction vertices of squarks and gluons , these give rise , at the quantum level , to the effective couplings @xmath17 , and therefore to the gluon - initiated production of a pair of slepton .    since higgs bosons couple to both
, a pair of fermions and a pair of scalars , reducible couplings of four sm partners , two quark partners and two lepton partners , can be built through the exchange of higgs bosons also in models in which the partner spins do not differ from those of the sm particles .
thus , the gluon - fusion production of a pair of lepton partners is not a special feature of supersymmetric models .
the possibility of discriminating susy through this type of studies strongly relies on the impact that the irreducible quartic couplings of supersymmetric models can have .    to the best of our knowledge ,
the one - loop process @xmath17 via quartic couplings , was never studied before .
surprisingly , very little exists in the literature also about the same process induced by the exchange of a higgs boson , @xmath18 .
it was studied in ref .
@xcite for @xmath19 , the lightest higgs bosons . since this has a mass clearly below the slepton - pair threshold , the cross section was found to be very small .
the study of this process was put aside until the authors of ref .
@xcite realized that the cross section could increase if @xmath20 is one of the two heavier neutral higgs bosons @xmath21 .
neverheless , not much attention has been given to this proposal .
although suppressed by a loop factor and by the coupling @xmath22 with respect to that of the standard drell - yan production @xmath23 , the gluon - fusion cross sections may be favoured by the fact that , at the lhc , gluon - initiated processes may dominate over the quark - initiated ones .
given the importance of the quartic couplings that may be probed , it is worth studying them in detail .
the paper is organized as follows . in sec .
[ sec : qcxsec ] we study the slepton pair production processes from gluon fusion induced by quartic couplings . in sec .
[ sec : completexsec ] we give the complete one - loop level results , including also the contribution from the higgs boson - exchange .
we summarize our findings in sec .
[ sec : conclu ] .
the relevant quartic interactions in the scalar potential of the minimal supersymmetric standard model ( mssm ) consist of d - term interactions , proportional to gauge couplings squared , and f - terms interactions , proportional to yukawa couplings squared .
these are respectively collected in : @xmath24 where @xmath25 is any of the fields @xmath26 , @xmath27 , @xmath28 , @xmath29 , of any generation , and @xmath30 is either the charged component of the su(2)@xmath31 doublet @xmath32 with hypercharge @xmath33 , or the su(2)@xmath31 singlet @xmath34 with hypercharge @xmath35 , also of any generation .
the coefficients @xmath36 and @xmath37 are listed in table  [ table : dandfcoeff ] , where @xmath38 and @xmath39 are the coupling constants of u(1)@xmath40 and su(2)@xmath31 , with the normalization @xmath41 .
the yukawa coupling matrices , denoted by @xmath42 , @xmath43 , and @xmath44 , are assumed to be diagonal and real , with only the @xmath45 element large enough to be relevant for this discussion .
these quartic couplings , together with the su(3 ) interactions for squarks : @xmath46 allow a realization of the effective couplings @xmath47 at the one - loop level , different from those due to the mediation of an s - channel higgs boson . in this expression
, @xmath48 is the strong coupling and @xmath49 are the generators of su(3 ) .    .
[ cols="^,^,^,^ " , ]     we note here that also in this case sum rules analogous to those in eq .
( [ eq : chsumrule1 ] ) exist for each generation of squarks : @xmath50 as a consequence , similar sum rules hold for the d - terms contributions to the couplings @xmath51 and @xmath52 .
this mechanism of production of a pair of sleptons through gluon fusion may also be regarded as a test of susy , although triple couplings of partners of the sm particles are not unique of susy models . in particular , unlike the drell - yan production mechanism , the gluon - fusion mechanism mediated by the exchange of a higgs boson can probe the higgs sector , the @xmath6 parameter , @xmath53 , and the trilinear @xmath5 terms .
the parton - level cross section for the gluon - fusion production of a pair of sleptons , can be expressed in terms of two form factors , which parametrize the effective lagrangian induced at the one - loop level by quartic - couplings and higgs - exchange diagrams : @xmath54 here @xmath55 is a fully antisymmetric tensor , with @xmath56 , @xmath57 and @xmath58 are the momenta of the two initial gluons , and @xmath59 is generated by the diagram with exchange of the pseudoscalar higgs boson @xmath5 , whereas all the other contributions are included in @xmath60 : @xmath61 in this expression , the tilde distinguishes the contributions from scalar loops ( @xmath62 is the truncated amplitude discussed in the previous section ) , and the subscript \{@xmath63 } refers to diagrams with exchange of a scalar higgs boson , _
i.e. _ @xmath64 . notice that , because of our assumption of imaginary @xmath65 couplings and real chirality - mixing terms in the sfermion sector , there is no contribution to @xmath66 from the exchange of the pseudoscalar higgs boson .    in terms of @xmath60 and @xmath67 the parton - level cross section is @xmath68    the expression for @xmath69 and @xmath67 ( which strictly speaking should be labelled @xmath70 ) coming from fermion loops are @xmath71   a^{\,\widetilde{l}_l \widetilde{l}_r}_p            \!&= & \!\ !
\quad \ , -\quad    g_{{\cal a } \widetilde{l}_l \widetilde{l}_r }    \left(\frac{v}{m_t}\right )    \left (    \frac{1}{1-\ !   m_a^2/\hat{s } + \!i m_a\gamma_a/\hat{s } } \right )     y_{att } \,p(\hat{s};m_t^2 ) , \label{eq : apfermion}\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath72 and @xmath73 , that for @xmath74 is @xmath75 @xmath76   & & \left .
\ \left ( s_q^2\ ,    g_{{\cal h}\widetilde{q}_l\widetilde{q}_l }        + c_q^2\ ,    g_{{\cal h}\widetilde{q}_r\widetilde{q}_r }          -2 ( s_q c_q )    g_{{\cal h}\widetilde{q}_r\widetilde{q}_l } \right )       s(\hat{s};\widetilde{m}_{q_2}^2 )    \right ] ,    \label{eq : assfermion}\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath77 and @xmath78 , and @xmath79 spanning over all three generations .
we remind that in the limit of vanishing chirality - mixing terms in the squark sector , @xmath80 , @xmath81 , and @xmath82 , @xmath83 .    the function @xmath84 is given in eq .
( [ eq : functions ] ) in sec .
[ sec : qcxsecanal ] , @xmath85 and @xmath86 are @xmath87 ,    \nonumber\\   p(\hat{s};m^2 ) & = & \tau \,f(\tau ) ,      \hspace*{3.5truecm }     \tau \equiv 4 m^2/\hat{s } , \label{eq : functionf } \end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath88 already defined in eq .
( [ eq : functionf ] ) .
the imaginary and real parts of the three functions @xmath89 , @xmath90 , and @xmath91 are plotted in fig .
[ fig : sfpfuncs ] versus @xmath92 .
we have taken @xmath93 for @xmath94 and @xmath95 , and the two values @xmath96 and @xmath97gev for @xmath98 .
the two resulting functions of @xmath92 in this last case are called @xmath99 and @xmath100 in this figure .
see the two olive lines , solid for @xmath99 and short - dashed for @xmath100 . the azure long - dashed line and the red dot - dashed one represent @xmath94 and @xmath95 , respectively .
= 12.5 cm    it should be noted here that , because of the sum rules in eqs .
( [ eq : chsumrule1 ] ) and  ( [ eq : chsumrule2 ] ) , the constant term -1 in the definition of the function @xmath98 does not contribute to the evaluation of @xmath62 and @xmath101 , when the quartic and trilinear couplings considered here are determined by d - terms . in this case
, the function @xmath98 contributes to these truncated amplitudes exactly like the function @xmath95 .
the values of the relevant real part of @xmath98 is then obtained shifting upward by the constant value 1 the two olive lines in fig .
[ fig : sfpfuncs ] .    the functions @xmath94 and @xmath95 ( and @xmath98 , when the relevant couplings come from d - terms ) vanish in the limit @xmath102 , for fixed @xmath103 , and also in the limit @xmath104 , for fixed @xmath92 .
for @xmath105 , both the real and imaginary part of @xmath94 and @xmath95 are at most of @xmath106 . nevertheless , the contribution from a bottom - quark loop , with truncated amplitudes analogous to those from the top quark given in eqs .
( [ eq : asfermion ] ) and  ( [ eq : apfermion ] ) , is enhanced by the factor @xmath107 , and unsuppressed values of the couplings @xmath108 and @xmath109 in the case of large @xmath53 .
depending on the value of @xmath53 , it may end up being the dominant contribution .
the generalization of the formulae in eqs .
( [ eq : asfermion ] ) ,  ( [ eq : apfermion ] ) , and  ( [ eq : assfermion ] ) to the case with nonvanishing chirality - mixing terms in the slepton sector can be easily obtained using the algorithm of eq .
( [ eq : genqcxsecgenslep ] ) applied to @xmath110 and @xmath111 .      even before presenting numerical results , it is possible to draw some general observations on the truncated amplitudes induced by the higgs - boson exchange from an inspection of the couplings @xmath112 , @xmath113 , @xmath114 , and @xmath115 , as well as @xmath116 , and @xmath117 , for a given higgs spectrum .
we shall examine below three different higgs spectra .
spectrum  * i * has all three higgs bosons , @xmath118 , @xmath119 , and @xmath5 , light and maximally mixed , _
i.e. _ @xmath120 . all the three states have masses below the threshold @xmath121 .
thus , no resonance is encountered when integrating @xmath92 from @xmath122 to @xmath123 .
* ii * has @xmath124 $ \sim$}}~}2 \widetilde{m}_{l}$ ] , _ i.e. _ @xmath124 $ \sim$}}~}200\,$]gev in our case study ; @xmath125 and @xmath126 are calculated as explained at the beginning of this section , and depend on @xmath53 and the specific squark sector chosen . in this case
, it is in general @xmath127 , and @xmath128 is small , but nonnegligible .
the resonant contributions of @xmath119 and @xmath5 are expected to lift up the values of our cross sections .
spectrum  * iii * has @xmath5 and @xmath119 rather heavy and completely decoupled from our problem .
the mixing angle @xmath129 is such that @xmath130 and @xmath131 , to a very good accuracy .
we consider first the case of vanishing chirality - mixing terms in the squark sector , as in the squark spectrum  * a * specified in the previous section . in this context
we start concentrating on the couplings @xmath132 and @xmath133 , the only ones giving a nonvanishing contribution to @xmath74 .    because of the sum rule in eq .
( [ eq : chsumrule2 ] ) , also the contribution to @xmath74 from d - terms , as the contribution to @xmath134 , vanishes identically in the limit of a completely degenerate squark spectrum . the squark spectrum  * a * , which we shall use in the following , was however conceived precisely with the aim of evading the effectiveness of this sum rule .    unlike in the case of @xmath134 ,
f - terms give now contributions to @xmath74 , that are nonvanishing . by inspecting the couplings @xmath132 and @xmath133 in table  [ table : mehiggsscalcoupls ] , it is easy to see that f - terms assign a privileged role to the @xmath135 squarks .
all other f - term contributions to these couplings are small even for large values of @xmath53 .
this holds in particular also for the @xmath136 squarks , whose couplings receive an f - term contribution always multiplied by @xmath137 .    in addition , the f - term contributions to the couplings @xmath138 and @xmath139 are in general larger than the contributions from d - terms to any of the couplings @xmath132 and @xmath133 , for any @xmath79 . in the case of the @xmath118 exchange ,
when , however , the cross section is expected to be small , @xmath140 dominates over @xmath141 and @xmath142 by a considerable margin .
similarly , @xmath143 dominates also over @xmath144 and @xmath145 , in the case of the heavier higgs boson exchange @xmath119 , except when @xmath146 is very close to its typical decoupling - limit value , @xmath147 . in this limit , however , @xmath119 is too heavy to be of any relevance for our cross sections .
= 12.5 cm    = 12.5 cm    we notice also that , @xmath148 $ \sim$}}~}\vert y_{{\cal h } tt}\vert$ ] .
therefore a comparison of the relative size of @xmath149 and @xmath150 , amounts practically to a comparison of @xmath151 versus @xmath152 , @xmath153 .
the @xmath135 squark loop is clearly penalized by a factor @xmath154 with respect to the factor @xmath155 , constant in @xmath92 . moreover , as fig .
[ fig : sfpfuncs ] shows , when integrated in @xmath92 , the function @xmath98 gives a smaller contribution to @xmath150 than the function @xmath94 gives to @xmath156 , at least as far as the real parts of these functions are concerned .
in contrast , the imaginary part of @xmath98 can contribute more than the imaginary part of @xmath94 for very light squarks , _
i.e. _ @xmath157gev .    thus ,
if the squark sector has vanishing chirality - mixing terms , we expect the dominant contribution to @xmath158 to be induced by the @xmath159-quark loop , followed by an in - general - smaller contribution coming from the @xmath135-squark loop , with exact size depending on @xmath122 and the two @xmath135-squark masses . finally there is a much smaller contribution from the @xmath136-squark loop , at least as far as @xmath160 for @xmath161 .
since @xmath162 is also small , the production of same - chirality sleptons proceeds always through the d - term contributions to the couplings @xmath163 , for any of the values of @xmath164 considered here ( @xmath165 $ \sim$}}~}3 $ ] ) .
therefore , the size of @xmath166 from @xmath135-squark exchange is expected to be in the same ballpark of the size of @xmath167 obtained before , except in the resonant region @xmath168 , where @xmath169 has the chance to exceed @xmath170 substantially .
we have assumed here that also the slepton sector has vanishing chirality - mixing terms .
= 12.5 cm    these observations are confirmed by the results shown in figs .
[ figplot : qcvshmed ] and  [ figplot : qcvshmedleft ] , where we plot the cross sections for the production of right - handed and left - handed sleptons , respectively , versus @xmath171 , which is defined in sec .
[ sec : qcxsecnumer ] . in both cases
we give these results for the higgs spectrum  * i * and  * iii*. for spectrum  * i * , we have used the values @xmath172gev , @xmath173gev , and @xmath174 . in spectrum  * iii * , it is @xmath175gev .
the higgs - mediated cross sections , shown by the red and blue solid lines , are almost horizontal , at @xmath176fb for the higgs spectrum  * i * , and @xmath177fb for the higgs spectrum  * iii*. that is , in spite of the fact that spectrum  * iii * contributes with the exchange of @xmath118 only , whereas spectrum  * i * contributes with @xmath118 and @xmath119 , the value of the higgs - exchange cross section is very similar in the two cases , provided the two scalar higgs bosons in spectrum  * i * are practically degenerate and have mass very similar to that of the light higgs in spectrum  * iii * , _ i.e. _ @xmath178 .
this is true for both , @xmath179 and @xmath180 .
it is easy to convince oneself of this by inspecting the relevant couplings in tables  [ table : gehiggsscalcoupls ] and  [ table : mehiggsscalcoupls ] .
a splitting between @xmath181 and @xmath182 , however , is in general present in spectrum  * i * , with size depending on the value of @xmath53 and the squark spectrum .
this accounts for the roughly @xmath183 difference in the cross sections obtained for the higgs spectrum  * i * and  * iii*. being practically independent of @xmath184 , the higgs - mediated cross sections show explicitly that the contribution from @xmath180 is small compared to that from @xmath185 , as already anticipated .
the quartic - coupling cross sections are shown by the black dot - dashed lines .
they coincide with those in fig .
[ figplot : qcxsca ] .
the total gluon - initiated cross sections are given by the two red ( blue ) dashed lines , the upper one for spectrum  * i * , the lower one for spectrum  * iii*. although the interference effects can be significant , they are similar in size to the corresponding ones induced by quartic couplings only .
we remind that the squark spectrum  * a * used for these figures was chosen in such a way to maximize the size of @xmath170 , but not necessarily that of @xmath186 . indeed , the value of the lightest @xmath135-squark in the loop ranges between 200260@xmath187gev when @xmath171 spans the interval 100200@xmath187gev .
enhancements of these cross sections are possible in the region in which the higgs boson @xmath119 and/or @xmath5 are resonant .
the cross sections in this region are very sensitive to the widths @xmath188 , which we have evaluated with the program cpsuperh  @xcite .
we plot in fig .
[ figplot : qchmres ] the cross sections obtained for the production of same - chirality sleptons at the lowest point in the squark spectrum  * a * , as a function of @xmath126 .
the smallest value of @xmath126 is that of the higgs spectrum  * i * of figs .
[ figplot : qcvshmed ] and  [ figplot : qcvshmedleft ] , the largest value , is quite close to the @xmath126 of spectrum  * iii * in these same figures .
no exchange of the pseudoscalar higgs boson @xmath5 is possible in this case .
the production of right - handed sleptons is shown by red lines , that of left - handed sleptons by blue lines .
the solid lines show the cross sections induced by higgs exchange only , the dashed lines show the cross sections due to both production mechanisms .
the enhancement over the values of the cross sections shown in figs .
[ figplot : qcvshmed ] and  [ figplot : qcvshmedleft ] is considerable for a rather large range @xmath126 .
although the @xmath135-squark loop gives a subdominant contribution to the higgs - exchange cross section with respect to @xmath159-quark loop , a smeared peak is nevertheless visible at @xmath189 .
far less visible is that at @xmath190 , because of the smoother behaviour at @xmath191 of the real and imaginary part of the function @xmath94 , with respect to that in the case of the function @xmath98 .
( see fig .
[ fig : sfpfuncs ] . ) at the peak of these resonances , the production cross sections for a pair of right - handed sleptons are roughly twice as large as those for a pair of left - handed sleptons .
this is mainly due to the fact that @xmath192 , for @xmath193 .    as in the case of those shown in fig .
[ figplot : qcxsca ] , also these cross sections apply to the production of slepton of first and second generation , as well as those of third generation for low @xmath53 .
a value @xmath194 , for example , suppresses the @xmath195-lepton yukawa couplings sufficiently to reduce @xmath196  ( see discussion in sec .  [
sec : qcxsecnumer ] ) to be about few percent , as requested in the squark spectrum  * a*. a moderate cancellation between @xmath197 and @xmath198 takes place in the chirality mixing terms of the @xmath4 sector , for a value of @xmath199 gev and @xmath200gev , presumably not too large to jeopardize the metastability of the color- and charge - preserving vacuum .
the suppression of @xmath201 , however , is not sufficient to reduce the couplings @xmath202 , @xmath203 and their conjugates , in which the parameters @xmath197 and @xmath6 appear in different combinations , to be negligible with respect , for example , to the couplings @xmath204 , @xmath205 coming mainly from d - terms .    thus , the production of opposite chirality @xmath4-sleptons is possible even for chirality - mixing terms in both , the @xmath4-slepton mass matrix as well as in squark mass matrices that are nearly vanishing , and for a relatively low value of @xmath53 .
this is in contrast to the quartic - coupling case , in which the the production of opposite - chirality @xmath4 sleptons requires a large value of @xmath53 .
= 12.5 cm    indeed , not only is the production of opposite - chirality @xmath4 s possible in this case , but it has a cross section larger than that shown for the same spectrum in fig .
[ figplot : qchmres ] , at least in the resonant higgs region .
this is because both the two heavier higgs bosons , @xmath119 and @xmath5 , can mediate the @xmath159-quark contribution to the cross section .
notice that , because no chirality - mixing terms are present in the squark sector , the exchange of the pseudoscalar higgs boson is possible only with the @xmath159-quark loop . given the sharp behaviour of the function @xmath95 shown in fig .
[ fig : sfpfuncs ] , the peak at the @xmath159-quark threshold is now considerably more pronounced than in the case of the cross section of fig .
[ figplot : qchmres ] with exchange of only the higgs boson @xmath119 .
the values of the cross section that this last figure shows on top of the higgs resonance are now quite interesting .
we expect these values , as well as those for the production of same - chirality sleptons , to increase even further for nonvanishing chirality - mixing terms in the squark sector .
depending on the values of the trilinear soft parameters , @xmath6 , and @xmath53 , also the @xmath136-squark contribution may become competitive with that due to the @xmath135-squark and possibly also the @xmath159-quark .
the results shown here are rather promising .
we believe these cross sections should be studied in full generality for more realistic sfermion spectra than the one considered here , and for all values of @xmath53 , in order to ascertain the possibility of probing , through them , important elements of the supersymmetric parameter space .
we have discussed the possibility of producing slepton pairs through gluon fusion . our guiding motivation was that of assessing the impact that the quartic couplings @xmath206 can have at the loop level for slepton production .
if unmistakably detected , coupling such as these could provide an important confirmation of supersymmetric models .
we have found that the corresponding cross sections are small . that due to the only sizable quartic coupling from f - terms is small because it is proportional to the square of the product of the yukawa couplings of the @xmath207 quark and the @xmath195 lepton .
the slepton produced are in this case @xmath4 sleptons .
the values of these couplings can be increased for large @xmath7 .
nevertheless , the cross section gets in general penalized by the mixing effects in the slepton and the squark sector , in spite of the fact that this last mixing is necessary to produce the effective coupling @xmath208 .
the cross section for slepton production is small also when it is induced by quartic couplings from d - terms .
the reason is due to a peculiar cancellation mechanism . like
the glashow  iliopoulos - maiani ( gim ) mechanism cancels the contributions from degenerate fermions of up or down - type quarks with different flavour in loop - induced flavour - changing - neutral - current processes , this mechanism cancels the contributions to slepton production from squarks that are degenerate within each generation .
the two cancellation mechanisms have however quite different origins .
the gim mechanism is due to the unitarity of the cabibbo - kobayashi - maskawa mixing matrix , whereas the cancellation observed in slepton production is due to the fact that the sum of the sm charges of all quark fields in each family vanishes identically .
in contrast , what we had hoped to be only a supersymmetric background to the gluon - fusion production of slepton pairs through quartic couplings , _
i.e. _ the gluon - fusion production with the exchange of a higgs boson , turns out to give interesting results .
the cross section can reach up to @xmath3fb if the exchanged higgs boson becomes resonant .
this value is obtained at the peak of the resonance , for a slepton mass of @xmath209gev , for vanishing chirality - mixing terms in the squark sector . in this case
, the dominant contribution comes from the @xmath159-quark loop that of the @xmath135-squark is subdominant , and the @xmath136-squark contribution is practically negligible .
the same spectrum gives a cross section up to @xmath210fb for the production of a pair of opposite - chirality @xmath4 s even for @xmath211 and chirality mixing terms in the @xmath4 sector practically negligible .
notice with the same type of slepton spectrum , only same - chirality sleptons can be produced through the drell - yan production mechanism  @xcite .
we have not given explicit values of the cross sections when chirality - mixing terms in the squarks and slepton sectors are nonvanishing , and for large values of @xmath53 , but we have argued why we expect the cross section to increase in this case , at least for sleptons still relatively light . a full - fledged analysis should be performed with more realistic squark spectra than those used here , which were devised to maximize the gluon - fusion cross sections from quartic - couplings . moreover , when @xmath53 is large , the tree - level process @xmath212 mediated by higgs boson exchange , should also be added , incoherently , to the previous processes , in order to give a correct assessment of the values that the gluon - initiated cross section can reach .
this is because the @xmath207 quark is contained in the proton via a gluon and the @xmath213-initiated cross section is of the same order in @xmath22 than those studied here .
finally , where the gluon - fusion mechanism of slepton production stands with respect to the drell  yan production depends also strongly on the role played by the qcd corrections to the two types of processes .
higher - order qcd corrections should indeed be included , together with susy - qcd corrections .
the qcd corrections for the gluon - fusion mechanism are as those for the production of higgs bosons  @xcite .
they are known to be large , more than the corrections that qcd induces in the case of the drell  yan production  @xcite .
the susy - qcd corrections are also well known  @xcite . at large @xmath53 those to the higgs boson
vertex may be well approximated  @xcite by the usual yukawa coupling corrections .
it is widely believed that , if at all , sleptons will be discovered at the lhc through cascade decays .
the production of a pair of sleptons , if kinematically allowed , will provide their direct mass measurement .
not much more than this can be learned from the drell - yan production .
the gluon - fusion production mechanism , in this respect is potentially much more interesting since it can provide valuable information about @xmath5 , @xmath6 , and @xmath7 , and confirmations about the higgs spectrum .
both mechanisms contribute to the pair production of sleptons , and the total cross section may be larger than previously thought , at least for resonant higgs exchange .
more detailed studies on this subject are clearly needed .
going back to the issue of quartic couplings , an extended gauge structure , for example with an anomalous u(1)@xmath40 in which the cancellation mechanism can be avoided , may help with their detection .
it is however possible that the hadron collider environment is not the best suited for this purpose . the possibilities that a linear collider may offer in this respect should be explored .    in the case of its photon - collider option , for example , it is easy to find a situation that parallels very closely the one described here of a pair of sleptons , which , in spite of not being sensitive to strong interactions , can nevertheless couple at the one - loop level to a pair of gluons , thanks to their quartic couplings to squark pairs .
the situation that immediately comes to mind is that of a pair of neutral scalars that can be coupled at the one - loop level to two photons thanks to their quartic couplings to a pair of charged scalars .
if the two neutral particles are supersymmetric higgs bosons , the situation can actually be much better than that of slepton production discussed here .
indeed , the cancellation mechanism above described , which does work if the charged particles exchanged in the loop are squarks , is violated when these scalars are sleptons .
this is simply due to the fact that the neutral components of the su(2)@xmath31 slepton doublets can not couple to photons .
the production of a pair of supersymmetric higgs bosons in a photon collider was already considered in several papers  @xcite . the charged slepton contribution to the loop ,
is mentioned only in ref .
it is , however , difficult to understand from this analysis the relevance of this contribution .
it may remain buried under possibly larger contributions , not only those due to the exchange of higgs bosons , but also those coming from box diagrams , that have no correspondent in our case of slepton production .
a check of the relative size of all these contributions would probably be worthwhile .     + the authors thank e.  accomando , b.  allanach , k.  fujii , j.s .
lee , k.  odagiri , n.  okamura , n.  polonsky , and k.  yokoya for stimulating discussions and inputs , d.w .
jung for initial collaboration , and m.  spira for a critical reading of the manuscript .
f.  b. acknowledges the ncts - kek exchange program , which has made this collaboration possible and the hospitality extended to her by the yukawa institute in kyoto , during the ykis  2009 . the work of f.b .
was partially supported by the excellency research project of national taiwan university , taiwan : `` mass generation , heavy flavours , neutrinos at the particle physics frontier '' , grant no  97r0066 - 60 .
is supported in part by the grant - in - aid for scientific research  ( no .
20340064 ) from mext , japan .
h.  murayama , _ confusing signals of supersymmetry _ , international linear collider workshop ( lcws2000 ) , oct .
24 - 28 , 2000 , fermilab , + http:@xmath214conferences.fnal.gov/lcws2000/web/p3_murayama/index.html .
papers cited in ref  @xcite and in : + f.  boudjema and r.  k.  singh , _ a model independent spin analysis of fundamental particles using azimuthal asymmetries _
, jhep * 0907 * ( 2009 ) 028 , + s.  y.  choi , k.  hagiwara , h.  u.  martyn , k.  mawatari and p.  m.  zerwas , _ spin analysis of supersymmetric particles _
j.   c * 51 * ( 2007 ) 753        e.  eichten , i.  hinchliffe , k.  d.  lane and c.  quigg , _ super collider physics _ , rev .
* 56 * ( 1984 ) 579 [ addendum - ibid .
* 58 * ( 1986 ) 1065 ] , + s.  dawson , e.  eichten and c.  quigg , _
search for supersymmetric particles in hadron - hadron collisions _ ,
d * 31 * ( 1985 ) 1581 , + p.  chiappetta , j.  soffer and p.  taxil , _ spin asymmetries for scalar leptons from w and z decay in p anti - p collisions _ , phys .
b * 162 * ( 1985 ) 192 , + h.  baer , c.  h.  chen , f.  paige and x.  tata , _ detecting sleptons at hadron colliders and supercolliders _ , phys .
d * 49 * ( 1994 ) 3283    m.  claudson , l.  j.  hall and i.  hinchliffe , _ low - energy supergravity : false vacua and vacuous predictions _ , nucl .
b * 228 * ( 1983 ) 501 , + j.  a.  casas , a.  lleyda and c.  munoz , _ strong constraints on the parameter space of the mssm from charge and color breaking minima _
b * 471 * ( 1996 ) 3    a.  kusenko , p.  langacker and g.  segre , _ phase transitions and vacuum tunneling into charge and color breaking minima in the mssm _ , phys .
d * 54 * ( 1996 ) 5824 , + u.  sarid , _
tools for tunneling _
d * 58 * ( 1998 ) 085017 [ arxiv : hep - ph/9804308 ] , + f.  borzumati , g.  r.  farrar , n.  polonsky and s.  d.  thomas , _ soft yukawa couplings in supersymmetric theories _ ,
b * 555 * ( 1999 ) 53        s.  kawabata , _ a new monte carlo event generator for high - energy physics _ , comput .
commun .
* 41 * ( 1986 ) 127 and _ a new version of the multidimensional integration and event generation package bases / spring _ , comput .
commun .
* 88 * ( 1995 ) 309      a.  djouadi , _ the anatomy of electro - weak symmetry breaking .
ii : the higgs bosons in the minimal supersymmetric model _ , phys .  rept .
* 459 * ( 2008 ) 1 , + m.  s.  carena _ et al . _
[ higgs working group collaboration ] , _ report of the tevatron higgs working group _ ,
arxiv : hep - ph/0010338    j.  s.  lee , a.  pilaftsis , m.  s.  carena , s.  y.  choi , m.  drees , j.  r.  ellis and c.  e.  m.  wagner , _ cpsuperh : a computational tool for higgs phenomenology in the minimal supersymmetric standard model with explicit cp violation _ , comput .
commun .
* 156 * ( 2004 ) 283    d.  graudenz , m.  spira and p.  m.  zerwas , _ qcd corrections to higgs boson production at proton proton colliders _ , phys .
lett .   * 70 * ( 1993 ) 1372 , + m.  spira , a.  djouadi , d.  graudenz and p.  m.  zerwas , _ higgs boson production at the lhc _ , nucl .
b * 453 * ( 1995 ) 17 , + r.  v.  harlander and k.  j.  ozeren , _ top mass effects in higgs production at next - to - next - to - leading order qcd : virtual corrections _ , phys .
b * 679 * ( 2009 ) 467 , + a.  pak , m.  rogal and m.  steinhauser , _ virtual three - loop corrections to higgs boson production in gluon fusion for finite top quark mass _ , phys .
b * 679 * ( 2009 ) 473 , + s.  catani , d.  de florian , m.  grazzini and p.  nason , _ soft - gluon resummation for higgs boson production at hadron colliders _
, jhep * 0307 * ( 2003 ) 028    s.  dawson , a.  djouadi and m.  spira , _ qcd corrections to susy higgs production : the role of squark loops _ ,
* 77 * ( 1996 ) 16 , + m.  muhlleitner and m.  spira , _ higgs boson production via gluon fusion : squark loops at nlo qcd _ ,
b * 790 * ( 2008 ) 1 , + r.  bonciani , g.  degrassi and a.  vicini , _ scalar particle contribution to higgs production via gluon fusion at nlo _
, jhep * 0711 * ( 2007 ) 095 , + m.  muhlleitner , h.  rzehak and m.  spira , _ mssm higgs boson production via gluon fusion : the large gluino mass limit _ , jhep * 0904 * ( 2009 ) 023    w.  beenakker , m.  klasen , m.  kramer , t.  plehn , m.  spira and p.  m.  zerwas , _ the production of charginos / neutralinos and sleptons at hadron colliders _ , phys .  rev .
* 83 * ( 1999 ) 3780 [ erratum - ibid .
* 100 * ( 2008 ) 029901 ] , + m.  grazzini , _ the drell - yan process in nnlo qcd _ , arxiv:0908.1336 [ hep - ph ]    r.  v.  harlander and m.  steinhauser , _ supersymmetric higgs production in gluon fusion at next - to - leading order _ ,
jhep * 0409 * ( 2004 ) 066 , + r.  v.  harlander and f.  hofmann , _ pseudo - scalar higgs production at next - to - leading order susy - qcd _ , jhep * 0603 * ( 2006 ) 050 , + g.  degrassi and p.  slavich , _ on the radiative corrections to the neutral higgs boson masses in the nmssm _ , nucl .
b * 825 * ( 2010 ) 119 , + c.  anastasiou , s.  beerli and a.  daleo , _ the two - loop qcd amplitude gg @xmath215 h , h in the minimal supersymmetric standard model _
* 100 * ( 2008 ) 241806    m.  s.  carena , d.  garcia , u.  nierste and c.  e.  m.  wagner , _ effective lagrangian for the @xmath216 interaction in the mssm and charged higgs phenomenology _ , nucl .
b * 577 * ( 2000 ) 88 , + j.  guasch , p.  hafliger and m.  spira , _ mssm higgs decays to bottom quark pairs revisited _ , phys .
d * 68 * ( 2003 ) 115001 , + f.  borzumati , c.  greub and y.  yamada , _ beyond leading - order corrections to @xmath217 at large tan(beta ) : the charged - higgs contribution _ , phys .
d * 69 * ( 2004 ) 055005 , and _ towards an exact evaluation of the supersymmetric o(alpha(s ) tan(beta ) ) corrections to @xmath218 _ , arxiv : hep - ph/0305063 + d.  noth and m.  spira , _ higgs boson couplings to bottom quarks : two - loop supersymmetry - qcd corrections _ , phys .  rev .
* 101 * ( 2008 ) 181801    s.  h.  zhu , _ pseudoscalar higgs boson pair production in photon photon collisions _ , j.  phys .
g * 24 * ( 1998 ) 1703 , + s.  h.  zhu , c.  s.  li and c.  s.  gao , _ lightest neutral higgs pair production in photon photon collisions in the minimal supersymmetric standard model _ , phys .
d * 58 * ( 1998 ) 015006 , + g.  j.  gounaris and p.  i.  porfyriadis , _ the gamma gamma @xmath215 a0 a0 process at a gamma gamma collider _ , eur .
j.   c * 18 * ( 2000 ) 181    y.  j.  zhou , w.  g.  ma , h.  s.  hou , r.  y.  zhang , p.  j.  zhou and y.  b.  sun , _
neutral higgs boson pair production via gamma gamma collision in the minimal supersymmetric standard model at linear colliders _ , phys .
d * 68 * ( 2003 ) 093004


in this article we study the asymptotics of large directed graphs with constrained densities of edges and outward directed @xmath0-stars .
large graphs are often modeled by probabilistic ensembles with one or more adjustable parameters ; see e.g. fienberg  @xcite , lovsz  @xcite and newman  @xcite . the _ exponential random graph models _ ( ergms ) , in which parameters are used to tune the densities of edges and other subgraphs , are one such class of models ; see e.g. besag @xcite , frank and strauss  @xcite , holland and leinhardt @xcite , newman  @xcite , rinaldo et al .
@xcite , robins et al .
@xcite , snijders et al .
@xcite , strauss @xcite , and wasserman and faust  @xcite .
it has been shown that in many ergms the subgraph densities actually _ can not _ be tuned .
for example , for the class of ergms parametrized by edges and @xmath0-stars , large graphs are essentially erds - rnyi for all values of the parameters .
( see chatterjee and diaconis  @xcite for more complete and precise statements . )
an alternative to ergms was introduced by radin and sadun  @xcite , where instead of using parameters to control subgraph counts , the subgraph densities are controlled directly ; see also radin et al .
@xcite , radin and sadun  @xcite and kenyon et al .
this is the approach we take in this article , with edges and ( outward ) @xmath0-stars as the subgraphs controlled directly .
we also consider models which split the difference between the two approaches : edges ( resp .
@xmath0-stars ) are controlled directly , while @xmath0-stars ( resp .
edges ) are tuned with a parameter .
see  @xcite for the undirected graph version of the latter .
we find that , in all our models , graphs have either uniform or bipodal structure as the number of nodes becomes infinite .
our approach , following refs .
@xcite , is to study maximizers of the entropy or free energy of the model as the number of nodes becomes infinite .
when we constrain both edge and @xmath0-star densities , we find only bipodal structure ( except when the @xmath0-star density is fixed to be exactly equal to the @xmath0th power of the edge density ) . when we constrain either edge or @xmath0-star densities ( but not both ) , we find both uniform and bipodal structures , with a sharp change at the interface .
this is in contrast with the situation in the ergm version of the model , in which one finds only uniform structures , albeit with sharp changes in their densities along a certain curve in parameter space ; see aristoff and zhu  @xcite .
these sharp changes along interfaces are called _
phase transitions_. phase transitions have recently been proved rigorously for ergms ; see e.g. yin  @xcite and especially radin and yin  @xcite for a precise definition of the term . some earlier works using mean - field analysis and
other approximations include hggstrm and jonasson  @xcite and park and newman  @xcite .
the terminology is apt , in that ergms and our models are inspired by certain counterparts in statistical physics : respectively , the _ grand canonical ensemble _ , and the _ microcanonical _ and _ canonical ensembles_. see the discussion in section  [ models ] .
our directed graph models are simpler than their undirected counterparts .
in particular , we can rigorously identify the asymptotic structures at all parameters , while in analogous models for undirected graphs , only partial results are known  @xcite . our analysis , however , does not easily extend to directed random graph models where other subgraphs , like triangles , cycles , etc .
, instead of outward directed @xmath0-stars , are constrained .
this article is organized as follows . in section  [ models ] , we describe our models and compare them with their statistical physics counterparts . in section  [ results ] , we state our main results . in section  [ ldp ] , we prove a large deviations principle for edge and @xmath0-star densities .
we use the large deviations principle to give proofs , in section  [ proofs ] , of our main results .
a directed graph on @xmath1 nodes will be represented by a matrix @xmath2 , where @xmath3 if there is a directed edge from node @xmath4 to node @xmath5 , and @xmath6 otherwise . for simplicity , we allow for @xmath7 , though this will not affect our results . let @xmath8 ( resp .
@xmath9 ) be the directed edge and outward @xmath0-star homomorphism densities of @xmath10 : @xmath11 here , @xmath0 is an integer @xmath12 .
the reason for the term homomorphism density is as follows . for a given graph @xmath10 , if @xmath13 ( resp .
@xmath14 ) are the number of homomorphisms  edge - preserving maps  from a directed edge ( resp .
outward @xmath0-star ) into @xmath10 , then @xmath15 with the denominators giving the total number of maps from a directed edge ( resp .
outward @xmath0-star ) into @xmath10 .
let @xmath16 be the uniform probability measure on the set of directed graphs on @xmath1 nodes .
thus , @xmath16 is the uniform probability measure on the set of @xmath17 matrices with entries in @xmath18 . for @xmath19
$ ] and @xmath20 , define @xmath21 throughout , @xmath22 is the natural logarithm , and we use the convention @xmath23 .
we are interested in the limit @xmath24 the function in   will be called the _ limiting entropy density_. this is the directed graph version of the quantity studied in  @xcite .
see also  @xcite for related work where triangles are constrained instead of @xmath0-stars .
for @xmath25 , @xmath19 $ ] and @xmath20 , define @xmath26,\\ & \psi_n^{\delta}(\beta_1,s ) =   \frac{1}{n^2}\log { \mathbb e}_n\left[e^{n^{2}\beta_1 e(x)}\,1_{\{s(x ) \in ( s-\delta , s+\delta)\}}\right].\\\end{aligned}\ ] ] we will also be interested in the limits @xmath27 the quantities in   will be called _ limiting free energy densities_. they are the directed graph versions of the quantities studied in  @xcite .
we abuse notation by using the same symbols @xmath28 and @xmath29 to represent different functions in   and   ( and in   below ) , but the meaning will be clear from the arguments of these functions , which will be written @xmath30 , @xmath31 , @xmath32 ( or @xmath33 as below ) .
when it is clear which function we refer to , we may simply write @xmath28 without any arguments .
we show that the limits in   and   exist by appealing to the variational principles in theorem  [ varpsimicro ] and theorem  [ varpsicanon ] below .
maximizers of these variational problems are associated with the asymptotic structure of the associated constrained directed graphs . more precisely , as @xmath34 a typical sample @xmath10 from the uniform measure @xmath16 conditioned on the event @xmath35 , @xmath36 looks like the maximizer of the variational formula for   in theorem  [ varpsimicro ] .
similarly , as @xmath34 , a typical sample from the probability measure which gives weight @xmath37 $ ] ( resp .
$ ] ) to graphs @xmath10 on @xmath1 nodes with @xmath36 ( resp .
@xmath35 ) , when conditioned on the event @xmath35 ( resp .
@xmath36 ) , looks like the maximizer of the variational formula for   in theorem  [ varpsicanon ] . thus , in   we have constrained @xmath8 and @xmath9 directly , while in   we control one of @xmath8 or @xmath9 with a parameter @xmath39 or @xmath40 . see  @xcite for discussions and related work in the undirected graph setting .
closely related to   and   is the limit @xmath41,\ ] ] which was studied extensively in aristoff and zhu  @xcite . in this
_ exponential random graph model _ ( ergm )
both @xmath8 and @xmath9 are controlled by parameters @xmath39 and @xmath40 .
there it was shown that @xmath42 is analytic except along a certain phase transition curve @xmath43 , corresponding to an interface across which the edge density changes sharply .
see radin and yin  @xcite for similar results , which use a similar variational characterization , in the undirected graph setting .
the results in  @xcite and  @xcite will be useful in our analysis .
this is because the euler - lagrange equations associated with the variational formulas for  ,   are the same as the analogous variational formula for  .
the crucial difference in the optimization problems is that for the ergm , @xmath39 and @xmath40 are fixed parameters , while in our models one or both of @xmath44 is a free variable ( i.e. , a lagrange multiplier ) .
thus , some solutions to the ergm variational problem may have no relevance to our models .
however , many of the calculations can be carried over , which is why we can make extensive use of the results in  @xcite and  @xcite .
this article focuses on computing the limiting entropy density and free energy densities in   and  , along with the corresponding maximizers in the variational formulas of theorem  [ varpsimicro ] and theorem  [ varpsicanon ] . in statistical physics modeling
there is a hierarchy analogous to  -  -  , with ( for example ) particle density and energy density in place of @xmath8 and @xmath9 , and temperature and chemical potential in place of @xmath39 and @xmath40 .
the statistical physics versions of  -  -   correspond to the _ microcanonical _ , _ canonical _ and _ grand canonical ensembles _ , respectively . in that setting
, there are curves like @xmath45 along which the free energy densities are not analytic , and these correspond to physical phase transitions , for example the familiar solid / liquid and liquid gas transitions ; see gallavotti  @xcite .
( there is no proof of this statement , though it is widely believed ; see however lebowitz et al .
we find singularities in @xmath46 and @xmath47 , but not in @xmath48 .
( in  @xcite we have shown @xmath42 has singularities as well . )
see radin  @xcite and radin and sadun  @xcite for discussions of the relationship between these statistical physics models and some random graph models that closely parallel ours .
to state our results we need the following . for @xmath49 $ ] ,
define @xmath50 with the understanding that @xmath51 .
of course @xmath52 depends on @xmath39 and @xmath40 , but we omit this to simplify notation .
clearly , @xmath52 and @xmath53 are analytic in @xmath54 and continuous on @xmath55 $ ] .
the function @xmath52 is essential to understanding the ergm limiting free energy density  @xcite .
[ trans_curve ] for each @xmath33 the function @xmath52 has either one or two local maximizers .
there is a curve @xmath43 , @xmath56 , with the endpoint @xmath57 such that off the curve and at the endpoint , @xmath52 has a unique global maximizer , while on the curve away from the endpoint , @xmath52 has two global maximizers @xmath58 .
we consider @xmath59 and @xmath60 as functions of @xmath39 ( or @xmath40 ) for @xmath61 ( or @xmath62 ) ; @xmath59 ( resp .
@xmath60 ) is increasing ( resp . decreasing ) in @xmath39 , with @xmath63    [ trans_curve_2 ] the curve @xmath45 in theorem [ trans_curve ] is continuous , decreasing , convex , and analytic for @xmath61 , with @xmath64 moreover , @xmath59 and @xmath60 are analytic in @xmath39 and @xmath40 .    the curve in theorem  [ trans_curve ] will be called the _ phase transition curve _ , and its endpoint the _ critical point_. theorem  [ trans_curve ] and theorem  [ trans_curve_2 ] will be used extensively in most of our proofs ; because of this , we will often not refer to it explicitly .
( we comment that the last statement of theorem  [ trans_curve ] , not made explicit in  @xcite and  @xcite , is proved in proposition  [ prop ] in section  [ proofs ] below . )
we will sometimes write @xmath65 for the local maximizer of @xmath52 at the critical point . note that the last part of the theorem implies @xmath66    our first main result concerns the limiting free energy density @xmath48 .
[ psimicro ] the limiting entropy density @xmath67 is analytic in @xmath68 and equals @xmath69 outside @xmath70 . with @xmath71 and @xmath72
we have the semi - explicit formula @xmath73 where @xmath74 are the unique global maximizers of @xmath52 along the phase transition curve @xmath45 which satisfy @xmath75 moreover , @xmath28 is continuous on @xmath70 , and the first order partial derivatives of @xmath28 are continuous on @xmath76 but diverge on @xmath77 . when @xmath78 , we have the explicit formula @xmath79    in theorem  [ psimicro ] , the formula is only semi - explicit because @xmath59 and @xmath60 depend on @xmath80 and @xmath81 .
note that the formula depends _ only _ on @xmath80 and @xmath81 .
( to understand the dependence better , see the subsection _ uniqueness of the optimizer : geometric proof _ in the proof of theorem  [ psimicro ] . )
note that we have not found any interesting singular behavior of @xmath28 , in contrast with the recent results of kenyon et .
@xcite for the undirected version of the model .
on the other hand , we are able to prove that our graphs are bipodal , whereas in  @xcite it was proved only that the graphs are multipodal ( though simulation evidence from the paper suggests bipodal structure ) .    [ fig1 ] -165pt   for @xmath78 .
the non - shaded portion represents the complement of @xmath70 ( where by convention @xmath28 equals @xmath69 ) . here ,
@xmath82.,title="fig : " ] -175pt    our next main result concerns @xmath46 and @xmath47 .
[ psicanon ] ( i ) there is a u - shaped region @xmath83 whose closure has lowest point @xmath84 such that the limiting free energy density @xmath85 is analytic outside @xmath86 .
the limiting free energy density has the formula @xmath87 \\
\qquad\qquad -\left[\frac{x_2-e}{x_{2}-x_{1}}i(x_{1 } ) + \frac{e - x_1}{x_{2}-x_{1}}i(x_{2})\right ] , & ( e,\beta_{2})\in u_e \end{cases}\ ] ] where @xmath88 are the global maximizers of @xmath52 at the point @xmath89 on the phase transition curve .
in particular , @xmath90 has jump discontinuities across @xmath86 away from @xmath91 , and @xmath92 is discontinuous at @xmath91 .
\(ii ) there is a u - shaped region @xmath93 whose closure has rightmost point @xmath94 such that the limiting free energy density @xmath95 is analytic outside @xmath96 .
the limiting free energy density has the formula @xmath97 \\
\qquad\qquad -\left[\frac{x_{2}^{p}-s}{x_{2}^{p}-x_{1}^{p}}i(x_{1 } ) + \frac{s - x_{1}^{p}}{x_{2}^{p}-x_{1}^{p}}i(x_{2})\right ] , & ( \beta_{1},s)\in u_s \end{cases}\ ] ] where @xmath88 are the global maximizers of @xmath52 at the point @xmath98 on the phase transition curve .
in particular , @xmath99 has jump discontinuities across @xmath86 away from @xmath100 , and @xmath101 is discontinuous at @xmath100 .    the sharp change in theorem  [ psicanon ] is called a _ phase transition _ ( because of the singularity in the derivatives of @xmath28 ) . the phase transition corresponds to a sharp change from uniform to bipodal structure of the optimizers of the variational problem for  ; see the discussion below theorem  [ varpsicanon ] .
the bipodal structure in the regions @xmath102 and @xmath103 is sometimes called a _ replica symmetry breaking phase_.    in contrast with theorem  [ psimicro ] , the @xmath59 and @xmath60 in theorem  [ psicanon ] are functions of @xmath39 or @xmath40 only and do not depend on @xmath80 or @xmath81 . see figure  1 for the region @xmath104 from theorem  [ psimicro ] , and figure  2 for the u - shaped regions @xmath102 and @xmath103 in theorem  [ psicanon ] .
[ fig2 ] -160pt   ( left ) and @xmath105 ( right ) for @xmath106 .
contour lines are included to emphasize features .
the boundaries of the u - shaped regions , @xmath86 and @xmath96 , are outlined .
here , @xmath107 and @xmath108.,title="fig : " ] -165pt
we will need the following terminology before proceeding .
a sequence @xmath109 of probability measures on a topological space @xmath10 is said to satisfy a _ large deviation principle _ with speed @xmath110 and rate function @xmath111 if @xmath112 is non - negative and lower semicontinuous , and for any measurable set @xmath113 , @xmath114 here , @xmath115 is the interior of @xmath113 and @xmath116 is its closure .
see e.g. dembo and zeitouni  @xcite or varadhan  @xcite .
we will equip the set @xmath117 of measurable functions @xmath55 \to [ 0,1]$ ] with the _ cut norm _ , written @xmath118 and defined by @xmath119 where the supremum is taken over measurable subsets @xmath113 of @xmath55 $ ] .
[ ldpthm ] the sequence of probability measures @xmath120 satisfies a large deviation principle on the space @xmath55 ^ 2 $ ] with speed @xmath121 and rate function @xmath122 where @xmath123 is the set of measurable functions @xmath124 \to [ 0,1]$ ] such that @xmath125 by convention , @xmath126 if @xmath127 $ ] , and the infimum is @xmath128 if @xmath129 is empty .
theorem [ psimicro ] and theorem [ ldpthm ] together imply that for large number of nodes , a typical sample @xmath10 from @xmath16 conditioned on the event @xmath130 and @xmath131 has the following behavior .
approximately @xmath132 of the nodes of @xmath10 each have on average @xmath133 outward pointing edges , while the other approximately @xmath134 nodes each have on average @xmath135 outward pointing edges .
when @xmath136 we call this structure _ bipodal _ ; otherwise we call it _ uniform_.    the following is an immediate consequence of  theorem  [ ldpthm ] .
[ varpsimicro ] for any @xmath19 $ ] , @xmath137.\ ] ]    the next theorem is an easy consequence of theorem  [ ldpthm ] and varadhan s lemma ( see e.g.  @xcite ) .
[ varpsicanon ] for any @xmath19 $ ] and @xmath25 , @xmath138\\ & \psi(\beta_1,s ) = \sup_{{\mathcal g}_{\cdot , s } }   \left[\beta_1 \int_0 ^ 1 g(x)\,dx - \int_0 ^ 1 i(g(x))\,dx\right],\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath139 ( resp .
@xmath140 ) is the set of measurable functions @xmath124\to [ 0,1]$ ] satisfying @xmath141    from theorem  [ ldpthm ] , the proofs of theorem  [ varpsimicro ] and theorem  [ varpsicanon ] are standard , so we omit them .
chatterjee and varadhan  @xcite established large deviations for undirected random graphs on the space of graphons ( see also lovasz  @xcite ) .
szemerdi s lemma was needed in order to establish the compactness needed for large deviations . since our model
consists of directed graphs , the results in  @xcite do not apply directly .
theorem  [ ldpthm ] avoids these technical difficulties : it is large deviations principle only on the space @xmath55 ^ 2 $ ] of edge and star densities , instead of on the ( quotient ) function space of graphons .
our proof relies on the simplicity of our edge / directed @xmath0-star model ; it can not be easily extended to the case where edges and directed triangles ( or other more complicated directed subgraphs ) are constrained .
we expect that these models can be handled by adapting the results of  @xcite to the directed case .    in aristoff and zhu @xcite
, it was proved that @xmath142 = \sup_{0\leq x\leq 1}\left(\beta_{1}x+\beta_{2}x^{p}-i(x)\right).\ ] ] observe that the grtner - ellis theorem can not be used to obtain the large deviations principle in theorem [ ldpthm ] above , due to the fact , first observed in radin and yin  @xcite , that the right hand side of   is not differentiable .
instead , we used mogulskii s theorem and the contraction principle in the proof of theorem [ ldpthm ] .    on the other hand ,
once we have established the large deviations principle in theorem [ ldpthm ] , we can use varadhan s lemma to obtain an alternative expression for the limiting free energy , @xmath143 = \sup_{(e , s)\in[0,1]^{2}}\left(\beta_{1}e+\beta_{2}s+\psi(e , s)\right).\ ] ] the limiting free energy in the directed and undirected models differ by only a constant factor of @xmath144 ( see chatterjee and diaconis  @xcite and radin and yin  @xcite for the undirected model , and aristoff and zhu  @xcite for the directed model ) . on the other hand , the limiting entropy density @xmath48
we obtain here differs nontrivially from the one recently obtained in kenyon et al .
@xcite for undirected graphs .
we start with the proof of the large deviations principle of section  [ ldp ]
. then we turn to the proofs of our main results in section  [ results ] .    by definition
, @xmath145 is the uniform probability measure on the set of directed graphs on @xmath1 nodes . recall that @xmath146 under @xmath145 , @xmath147 are i.i.d .
bernoulli random variables that take the value @xmath148 with probability @xmath149 and @xmath150 with probability @xmath149 .
therefore , the logarithm of the moment generating function of @xmath151 is , for @xmath152 , @xmath153=\log\left(\frac{1}{2}e^{\theta}+\frac{1}{2}\right ) = \log(e^{\theta}+1)-\log 2.\ ] ] its legendre transform is @xmath154 ) = x\log x+(1-x)\log(1-x)+\log 2=i(x),\ ] ] where by convention @xmath126 for @xmath127 $ ] .
let @xmath155 be the @xmath4th entry of the vector @xmath156 then , @xmath155 are i.i.d .
bernoulli random variables .
mogulskii theorem ( see e.g. dembo and zeitouni  @xcite ) shows that @xmath157 satisfies a sample path large deviation principle on the space @xmath158 $ ] consisting of functions on @xmath55 $ ] equipped with the supremum norm ; the rate function is given by @xmath159 $ } \\
+ \infty & \text{otherwise } \end{cases},\ ] ] where @xmath160 $ ] is the set of absolutely continuous functions defined on @xmath55 $ ] such that @xmath161 and @xmath162 .
the restriction @xmath162 comes from the fact that @xmath163 . on the other hand , for any @xmath164 , @xmath165 since @xmath166 therefore , @xmath167 satisfies a large deviation principle with the same space and rate function as @xmath168    to complete the proof , we need to use the contraction principle , see e.g. dembo and zeitouni @xcite or varadhan @xcite . given @xmath169 $ ] , we may write @xmath170 for a measurable function @xmath124\to[0,1]$ ] .
it is easy to see that if @xmath171 $ ] and @xmath172 in the supremum norm , then @xmath173 in the cut norm .
hence , if @xmath172 in the supremum norm , then @xmath174 moreover , for any @xmath175 , @xmath176 -\left[\int_{g_{n}<g}(g(x)^{p}-g_{n}(x)^{p})dx\right],\ ] ] and since @xmath173 in the cut norm and @xmath177 , the mean value theorem shows that @xmath178 and @xmath179 therefore , the maps @xmath180 are continuous from @xmath158\cap\mathcal{ac}_{0}[0,1]$ ] to @xmath55 $ ] and thus the map @xmath181 is continuous from @xmath158\cap\mathcal{ac}_{0}[0,1]$ ] to @xmath55^{2}$ ] . by the contraction principle , we conclude that @xmath120 satisfies a large deviation principle on the space @xmath55 ^ 2 $ ] with speed @xmath121 and rate function @xmath182    the following proofs are for our main results in section  [ results ] .    by theorem  [ varpsimicro ] , @xmath183\ ] ] where we recall
@xmath123 is the set of measurable functions @xmath124\to [ 0,1]$ ] satisfying @xmath184    _ domain of @xmath48 .
_ by jensen s inequality , @xmath185 on the other hand , since @xmath186 takes values in @xmath55 $ ] and @xmath187 , @xmath188 hence by convention @xmath48 is infinite outside @xmath70
. we will show later in the proof that @xmath48 is finite in @xmath70 .
_ optimizing over a quotient space .
_ so that we can use standard variational techniques , we show that it suffices to optimize over a compact quotient space of @xmath123 .
recall that @xmath189 is the set of measurable functions @xmath55 \to [ 0,1]$ ] endowed with the cut norm  .
let @xmath190 be the quotient space obtained by the following equivalence relation : @xmath191 if and only if there is a measure - preserving bijection @xmath192 \to [ 0,1]$ ] such that @xmath193 .
note that for any such @xmath194 we have @xmath195 , and so @xmath196 defines a metric on @xmath190 . with this
metric @xmath190 is compact  @xcite .
observe that @xmath197 are all unchanged when @xmath186 is replaced by @xmath198 .
thus , @xmath199 = \sup_{{\tilde g } \in { \tilde { \mathcal g}}_{e , s } }   \left[-\int_0 ^ 1 i(g(x))\,dx\right],\ ] ] where @xmath200 is the projection of @xmath123 in the quotient space , and on the right hand side @xmath186 is any element of the equivalence class of @xmath201 .
next we check that the functionals @xmath202 defined on @xmath203 , are all continuous .
let @xmath204 be a sequence in @xmath190 converging to @xmath201 , and let @xmath205 be representatives for @xmath206 , respectively .
we will show that @xmath207 for any uniformly continuous function @xmath208 defined on @xmath55 $ ] . for each @xmath1
, choose @xmath209 such that @xmath210 for any @xmath20 , define @xmath211 as the cut norm is equivalent to the @xmath212 norm ( this is true only in one dimension ; see  @xcite ) , we have for any @xmath20 , @xmath213 where @xmath214 is the lebesgue measure of @xmath215 .
now , observe that @xmath216}|f(x)| + \left|\int_{[0,1]\setminus a_{n,\delta } } [ f(g(x ) ) -f(g_n\circ \sigma_n(x))]\,dx \right| . \end{split}\end{aligned}\ ] ] let @xmath217 .
using uniform continuity of @xmath208 , let @xmath218 be such that @xmath219 implies @xmath220 . then   shows that @xmath221}|f(x)| + \epsilon.\ ] ] now   establishes  , as desired .
these arguments show that there exist ( global ) maximizers @xmath186 of @xmath222.\ ] ]    _ bipodal structure of the optimizers . _
if @xmath223 , then for any @xmath224 , @xmath225 suppose then that @xmath226 . since @xmath227 as @xmath228 and @xmath229 as @xmath230 , it is not hard to see that , given @xmath231 , there exists @xmath217 such that any optimizers of   must be in the following set : @xmath232 \hbox { for a.e . }
x \in [ 0,1]\}.\ ] ] to see this , note that if @xmath233 , then the values of @xmath186 can be adjusted to be @xmath234 distance away from @xmath150 and @xmath148 so that still @xmath235 and @xmath186 attains a larger value for the integral in  . then , optimizing over @xmath236 , standard results in variational calculus ( see  @xcite , theorem  9.1 , pg .
178 ) show that optimizers @xmath186 satisfy , for all @xmath237 , @xmath238 where @xmath239 , @xmath25 are lagrange multipliers , and at least one of @xmath240 , @xmath39 , @xmath40 is nonzero .
the integrals in   are the frchet derivatives of @xmath241 evaluated at @xmath237 ; a simplified version of the arguments in  -   shows the frchet derivatives are continuous in @xmath242 .
( to apply the results mentioned in  @xcite , we must switch to the uniform topology induced by the sup norm @xmath243 on the banach space of bounded measurable functions @xmath55 \to { \mathbb r}$ ] .
the statement about continuity of frechet derivatives then follows from the simple fact that @xmath244 implies @xmath245 . )    when @xmath246 ( called the _ normal _
case ) , we see that for some @xmath39 , @xmath40 , @xmath247.\ ] ] when @xmath248 ( called the _ abnormal _
case ) , we find that @xmath249 for a.e .
@xmath49 $ ] , so that @xmath186 is constant a.e . from   and jensen s inequality , this occurs precisely when @xmath250 .
let @xmath251 be a maximizer of  .
we have shown that : @xmath252;\\   & ( b ) \hbox { if } ( e , s ) \in d , \hbox { then }   \ell'(g(x ) ) = 0   \hbox { for a.e .
} x \in [ 0,1 ] ; \hbox { or}\\ & ( c ) \hbox { if } s \in { \partial d}\setminus d^{up } ,   \hbox { then } g \hbox { is constant a.e.}\end{aligned}\ ] ] theorem  [ trans_curve ] shows that , for each @xmath33 , either @xmath253 at a unique @xmath254 or @xmath253 at exactly two points @xmath255 .
thus , to maximize   it suffices to maximize @xmath256 over the set of functions @xmath235 of the form @xmath257 where @xmath258 $ ] and @xmath259 .
observe that for such @xmath186 , @xmath260 it is therefore enough to maximize @xmath261 subject to the constraints @xmath262 in case _ ( a ) _ , we must have @xmath263 , @xmath264 and @xmath265 . in case _ ( c ) _ , we must take @xmath266 .
this establishes formula   for @xmath267 .
it remains to consider _
( b)_. in this case @xmath268 we have seen that @xmath269 . moreover
if @xmath270 or @xmath271 then   can not be satisfied , so @xmath272 and @xmath273 . introducing lagrange multipliers
@xmath39 , @xmath40 , we see that @xmath274 + \beta_1(y_1-y_2 ) + \beta_2(y_1^p - y_2^p ) = 0.\end{aligned}\ ] ] thus , @xmath275 this means that @xmath276 are global maximizers of @xmath52 on the phase transition curve , away from the critical point .
_ uniqueness of the optimizer ( geometric proof ) .
_ we must prove uniqueness for @xmath277 .
consider the class of lines @xmath278 where @xmath279 are global maximizers of @xmath52 on the phase transition curve , away from the critical point . since @xmath59 ( resp .
@xmath60 ) is strictly increasing ( resp . strictly decreasing ) in @xmath39 with @xmath280
, no two distinct lines of this class can intersect .
continuity of @xmath59 , @xmath60 in @xmath39 along with   show that the union of all the lines equals @xmath281 .
thus , given @xmath277 , there is a unique optimizer @xmath186 of the form  , obtained by locating the unique line from   which contains the point @xmath30 and choosing @xmath282 satisfying the constraint  . solving for @xmath282 in the first constraint ,
we get @xmath283 .
putting this into the second constraint gives @xmath284 this establishes formula   for @xmath268 .
_ uniqueness of the optimizer ( algebraic proof ) . _
fix @xmath268 . from  , @xmath285 and
so @xmath286 we must show that   has a unique solution .
define @xmath287 note that @xmath288 and @xmath289 also define @xmath290 then @xmath291 and @xmath292 .
moreover , @xmath293 is positive if @xmath294 and it is negative if @xmath295 .
finally , @xmath296 therefore , @xmath297 now by the intermediate value theorem , there exists @xmath298 such that @xmath299 .
next we prove @xmath300 is unique .
observe that @xmath301\frac{\partial x_{2}}{\partial\beta_{1 } } + q''(\beta_{1})(s - x_{2}^{p}).\ ] ] since @xmath302 , we have @xmath303 .
we also know that @xmath304 and @xmath305 .
moreover , since @xmath306 and @xmath307 , we have @xmath308 hence , we conclude that @xmath309 for @xmath310 and therefore @xmath300 is unique .
_ regularity of @xmath48 .
_ we turn now to the claimed regularity of @xmath48 , starting with analyticity .
fix @xmath311 .
then each @xmath312 satisfies , for some @xmath313 , @xmath314 we claim that   defines @xmath39 implicitly as an analytic function of @xmath81 for @xmath312 . by differentiating the left hand side of   with respect to @xmath39
, we find the expression @xmath315 by the mean value theorem , there is @xmath316 such that this expression becomes @xmath317 +   \left[\frac{e - x_2}{x_2-x_1}\frac{\partial x_1}{\partial \beta_1 } ( py^{p-1}-px_1^{p-1})\right].\ ] ] since @xmath318 and @xmath319 , each of the terms in brackets is negative , so this expression is nonzero . by the analytic implicit function theorem  @xcite , we conclude that @xmath39 is an analytic function of @xmath81 inside @xmath104 .
similar arguments show that @xmath39 is an analytic function of @xmath80 inside @xmath104 .
( by theorem  1 , this means @xmath40 must also be an analytic function of @xmath80 and @xmath81 inside @xmath104 . )
since @xmath59 and @xmath60 are analytic functions of @xmath39 , we see that @xmath59 and @xmath60 are analytic functions of @xmath80 and @xmath81 inside @xmath104 . inspecting  , we conclude that @xmath67 is analytic in @xmath281 .
next we show that @xmath28 is continuous on @xmath70 .
we have already shown that @xmath28 is analytic , hence continuous , in @xmath281 .
it is easy to check that @xmath28 is continuous along each line @xmath320 and that the restriction of @xmath28 to the lower boundary @xmath321 is continuous .
this is enough to conclude that @xmath28 is continuous on @xmath76 .
finally for @xmath322 , we have @xmath323    next we prove continuity of the first order derivatives on @xmath76 .
it suffices to show that : ( i ) the first order partial derivatives of @xmath28 are continuous in @xmath104 ; and ( ii ) the limits of the first order partial derivatives of @xmath28 at the lower boundary @xmath324 exist . with @xmath325 and using  , we see that for @xmath268 , @xmath326 using the fact that @xmath327 , @xmath328 it is straightforward to compute that @xmath329 thus , @xmath330.\end{aligned}\ ] ] differentiating @xmath331 with respect to @xmath81 and using  , we find that @xmath332 and so @xmath333 we have already seen that @xmath40 is an analytic , hence continuous , function of @xmath30 inside @xmath104 . since @xmath334 we see that for @xmath335 , @xmath336 where @xmath337 if @xmath338 and otherwise @xmath339 . also , for any @xmath340 $ ] , @xmath341 proofs of regularity for @xmath342 are similar so we omit them .
_ explicit formula when @xmath106 .
_ when @xmath78 , we can explicitly solve @xmath343 to obtain @xmath344 and @xmath345 this yields @xmath346 where the last line uses the fact that @xmath53 is symmetric around @xmath144 .
_ proof of part ( i ) .
_ by theorem  [ varpsicanon ] , @xmath347,\ ] ] where we recall @xmath139 is the set of measurable functions @xmath124\to [ 0,1]$ ] satisfying @xmath348 arguments similar to those in the proof of theorem  [ psimicro ] show that optimizers of   exist and have the form @xmath349 where @xmath258 $ ] and @xmath259 . for such functions @xmath186
, we have @xmath350- \left[\lambda i(y_1 ) + ( 1-\lambda ) i(y_2)\right],\\   \int_0 ^ 1 g(x)\,dx & = \lambda y_1 + ( 1-\lambda ) y_2.\end{aligned}\ ] ] it is therefore enough to maximize @xmath351 -\lambda i(y_1 ) - ( 1-\lambda)i(y_2)\ ] ] subject to the constraint @xmath352 if @xmath271 or @xmath353 , then   shows that @xmath354 .
so assume that @xmath355 .
it is easy to see in this case that @xmath356 .
moreover if @xmath270 then again @xmath354 , so assume @xmath272 . introducing the lagrange multiplier @xmath39
, we find that @xmath274 + \beta_1(y_1-y_2 ) + \beta_2(y_1^p - y_2^p ) = 0,\end{aligned}\ ] ] and so @xmath357 if @xmath358 , then there are no solutions to  , while if @xmath62 , solutions occur precisely when @xmath276 are the global maximizers of @xmath52 at the point @xmath359 along @xmath45 . in the latter case ,
implies @xmath360 if @xmath361 or @xmath362 , then @xmath354 . since for @xmath363
we have ( by definition ) @xmath364 , we have established that   is valid in @xmath365 .    next , for @xmath366 define @xmath325 and @xmath367 -\left[\lambda i(x_{1 } ) + ( 1-\lambda ) i(x_{2})\right]\right).\ ] ] to establish that   is valid in @xmath102 , it suffices to show that @xmath368 for all @xmath369 .
it is easy to check that @xmath370 and @xmath371 thus , @xmath372 .
finally , @xmath373 from the proof of proposition 11 in  @xcite , we know @xmath374 , @xmath375 , and moreover there exists @xmath376 such that @xmath377 for @xmath378 while @xmath379 for @xmath380 .
the result follows .
we note that the star density can be computed easily as @xmath381 it is clear that the star density @xmath382 is continuous everywhere .
_ regularity of @xmath46_. from the formula it is easy to see that @xmath46 is analytic away from @xmath86 .
write @xmath85 and fix @xmath62 . in the interior of @xmath383 , @xmath384 while the interior of @xmath102 , @xmath385 observe that @xmath386 so @xmath342 is continuous across @xmath86 when @xmath387 . note that @xmath388 proposition  11 of  @xcite gives @xmath389
thus , @xmath390 has a jump discontinuity across @xmath86 when @xmath387 .
analogous statements hold true for @xmath391 .
now consider the situation at the point @xmath392 .
proposition  11 of  @xcite gives @xmath393 from   we see that @xmath394 is discontinuous at @xmath392 .
_ proof of part ( ii ) .
_ by theorem  [ varpsicanon ] , @xmath395\ ] ] where we recall @xmath140 is the set of measurable functions @xmath124\to [ 0,1]$ ] satisfying @xmath396 arguments analogous to those in the proof of part _ (
i ) _ show that @xmath47 has the formula  .
we note that the limiting edge density has the formula @xmath397 it is easy to see that @xmath398 is continuous everywhere .
_ regularity of @xmath47_. from the formula it is easy to see that @xmath47 is analytic away from @xmath96 .
write @xmath95 and fix @xmath61 . in the interior of @xmath399 , @xmath400 and in the interior of @xmath103 ,
@xmath401 note that @xmath402 so @xmath403 is continuous across @xmath96 when @xmath404 .
note that @xmath405 in the computations below , let @xmath406 and @xmath407 .
note that @xmath408\frac{\partial t}{\partial s } = [ \ell'(t)-\beta_{2}pt^{p-1}]\frac{\partial t}{\partial s},\ ] ] and @xmath409\frac{\partial^{2}t}{\partial s^{2 } } + \left[\ell''(t)-\beta_{2}p(p-1)t^{p-2}\right ] \left(\frac{\partial t}{\partial s}\right)^{2 } \\ & = \ell'(t)\frac{\partial^{2}t}{\partial s^{2 } } + \ell''(t)\left(\frac{\partial t}{\partial s}\right)^{2}.\end{split}\end{aligned}\ ] ] using   and proposition  11 of  @xcite , we get @xmath410 comparing with  , we see that @xmath99 has a jump discontinuity across @xmath96 for @xmath404 .
analogous results hold for @xmath411 .
now consider the situation at the point @xmath412 . from  , @xmath413 and @xmath414 as @xmath415 , @xmath416 and since @xmath417 , @xmath418 , we have @xmath419 while proposition 11 of  @xcite gives @xmath420    the next result concerns the curve @xmath43 and the shapes of @xmath102 and @xmath103 .    [ prop ] ( i ) the curve @xmath43 is analytic in @xmath61 .
\(ii ) for any @xmath310 , @xmath421 and @xmath422 .
moreover , @xmath423 for any @xmath424 , @xmath425 and @xmath426 .
moreover , @xmath427    first we show that @xmath45 is analytic .
there is an open v - shaped set containing the phase transition curve @xmath43 except the critical point @xmath428 , inside which @xmath52 has exactly two local maximizers , @xmath272 .
( see  @xcite and  @xcite . )
it can be seen from the proof of proposition 11 of  @xcite that @xmath429 and @xmath430 inside the v - shaped region . the analytic implicit function theorem  @xcite then shows that @xmath431 and @xmath432 are analytic functions of @xmath39 and @xmath40 inside this region .
note that @xmath45 is defined implicitly by the equation @xmath433 differentiating the left hand side of this equation w.r.t .
@xmath40 gives @xmath434\\ & = y_1^p - y_2^p < 0.\end{aligned}\ ] ] another application of the analytic implicit function theorem implies @xmath43 is analytic for @xmath435 .
now we turn to the statements involving @xmath59 and @xmath60 . along @xmath43 , we have @xmath436 differentiating with respect to @xmath437 , we get @xmath438\frac{\partial x_{1}}{\partial\beta_{1}}=0.\ ] ] therefore , @xmath439 since @xmath440 = \lim_{\beta_{1}\rightarrow\beta_{1}^{c}}[-\ell''(x_{1})]=0 $ ] , by lhpital s rule , @xmath441 which implies that @xmath442 since @xmath443 as @xmath444 , it is easy to see that @xmath445 the results for @xmath446 can be proved using the similar methods .
finally , notice that @xmath447 therefore the results involving @xmath448 also hold .
david aristoff was supported in part by afosr award fa9550 - 12 - 1 - 0187 .
lingjiong zhu is grateful to his colleague tzu - wei yang for helpful discussions .
the authors are grateful for useful comments from the anonymous referees and associate editor .