_ globally coupled maps _ are collections of individual discrete - time dynamical systems ( their _ units _ ) which act independently on their respective phase spaces , except for the influence ( the _ coupling _ ) of a common parameter that is updated , at each time step , as a function of the _ mean field _ of the whole system . systems of this type have received some attention through the work of kaneko @xcite in the early 1990s , who studied systems of @xmath0 quadratic maps acting on coordinates @xmath1 $ ] , and coupled by a parameter depending in a simple way on @xmath2 . his key observation , for huge _ system size _
@xmath0 , was the following : if @xmath3 denotes the time series of mean field values of the system started in a random configuration @xmath4 , then , for many parameters of the quadratic map , and even for very small coupling strength , pairs @xmath5 of consecutive values of the field showed complicated functional dependencies plus some noise of order @xmath6 , whereas for uncoupled systems of the same size the @xmath7 , after a while , are constant up to some noise of order @xmath6 . while the latter observation is not surprising for independent units , the complicated dependencies for weakly coupled systems
, a phenomenon kaneko termed _ violation of the law of large numbers _
, called for closer investigation .
the rich bifurcation structure of the family of individual quadratic maps may offer some explanations , but since a mathematically rigorous investigation of even a small number of coupled quadratic maps in the chaotic regime still is a formidable task , there seem to be no serious attempts to tackle this problem .    a model which is mathematically much easier to treat is given by coupled tent maps .
indeed , for tent maps with slope larger than @xmath8 and moderate coupling strength , a system of @xmath0 mean field coupled units has an ergodic invariant probability density with exponentially decreasing correlations @xcite .
this is true for all @xmath0 and for coupling strengths that can be chosen to be the same for all @xmath0 .
nevertheless , ershov and potapov @xcite showed numerically that ( albeit on a much smaller length scale than in the case of coupled quadratic maps ) also mean field coupled tent maps exhibit a violation of the law of large numbers in the aforementioned sense .
they also provided a mathematical analysis which demonstrated that the discontinuities of the invariant density of a tent map are at the heart of the problem .
their analysis was not completely rigorous , however , as chawanya and morita @xcite could show that there are indeed ( exceptional ) parameters of the system for which there is no violation of the law of large numbers - contrary to the predictions in @xcite .
on the other hand , references @xcite contain further simulation results on systems violating the law of large numbers .
( but at present , a mathematically rigorous treatment of globally coupled tent maps that is capable of classifying and explaining the diverse dynamical effects that have been observed does not seem to be in sight either . )
these studies were complemented by papers by jrvenp @xcite and keller @xcite , showing ( among other things ) that globally coupled systems of smooth expanding circle maps do not display violation of the law of large numbers at small coupling strength , because their invariant densities are smooth .    given this state of knowledge ,
the present paper investigates specific systems of globally coupled piecewise fractional linear maps on the interval @xmath9 $ ] , where each individual map has a smooth invariant density . for small coupling strength ,
theorem 4 in @xcite extends easily to this setup and proves the absence of a violation of the law of large numbers . for larger coupling strength
, however , we are going to show that this phenomenon does occur in the following sense :    bifurcation : :    the nonlinear _ self - consistent perron - frobenius operator ( pfo ) _
@xmath10 on @xmath11 , which    describes the dynamics of the system in its thermodynamic limit ,    undergoes a supercritical pitchfork bifurcation as the coupling    strength increases .
( here and in the sequel @xmath12    denotes lebesgue measure . ) mixing : :    at the same time , all corresponding finite - size systems have unique    absolutely continuous invariant probability measures    @xmath13@xmath14 on their @xmath0-dimensional    state space , and exhibit exponential decay of correlations under this    measure .
stable behaviour : :    in the _ stable regime _ , i.e. for fixed small coupling strength below    the bifurcation point of the infinite - size system , the measures    @xmath13@xmath14 converge weakly , as the system size    @xmath15 , to an infinite product measure    @xmath16 , where @xmath17    is the unique fixed point of @xmath10 .
bistable behaviour : :    in the _ bistable regime _ , i.e. for fixed coupling strength above the    bifurcation point of the infinite - size system , all possible weak    limits of the measures @xmath13@xmath14 are convex    combinations of the three infinite product measures    @xmath18 ,    @xmath19 , where now @xmath17 is the    unique unstable fixed point of @xmath10 and    @xmath20 are its two stable fixed points .
( we    conjecture that the measure    @xmath16 is not charged in the    limit . )
this scenario clearly bears some resemblance to the curie - weiss model from statistical mechanics and its dynamical variants .
we also stress that a simple modification of our system leads to a variant where , instead of two stable fixed points , one stable two - cycle for @xmath10 is created at the bifurcation point .
this may be viewed as the simplest possible scenario for a violation of the law of large numbers in kaneko s original sense .
+ in the next section we describe our model in detail , and formulate the main results .
section  [ sec : finite - sys - proofs ] contains the proofs for finite - size systems . in section  [ sec : ifs ]
we start the investigation of the infinite - size system via the self - consistent pfo @xmath10 .
we observe that this operator preserves a class of probability densities which can be characterised as derivatives of herglotz - pick - nevanlinna functions .
integral representations of these functions reveal a hidden order structure , which is respected by the operator @xmath10 , and allows us to describe the pitchfork bifurcation . in section  [ sec : infinite - sys - proofs ] this dynamical picture for @xmath21 is extended to arbitrary densities .
finally , in section [ sec : noisy ] , we discuss the situation when some noise is added to the dynamics .
throughout , all measures are understood to be borel , and we let @xmath22probability measures on @xmath23 . lebesgue measure will be denoted by @xmath12 .
we introduce a @xmath24-parameter family of piecewise fractional - linear transformations @xmath25 on @xmath26 $ ] , which will play the role of the local maps . to facilitate manipulation of such maps , we use their standard matrix representation , letting @xmath27{cc}a & b\\ c & d \end{array }
\right )   \text{,}\ ] ] so that @xmath28 and @xmath29 .
specifically , we consider the function @xmath30 , depending on a parameter @xmath31 , given by the coefficient matrix @xmath32{cc}r+4 & r+1\\ 2r & 2 \end{array } \right )   \text{.}\ ] ] one readily checks that @xmath33 , @xmath34 , @xmath35 for @xmath36 , and that ( the infimum being attained on @xmath37 ) @xmath38 the latter shows that @xmath30 is uniformly expanding if and only if @xmath39 , and we define our _ single - site maps _ @xmath40 with parameter @xmath41 by letting @xmath42{ll}f_{m_{r}}(x ) & \text{on } [ -\frac{1}{2},\alpha_{r})\text{,}\\ f_{m_{r}}(x)-1=f_{n_{r}}(x ) & \text{on } ( \alpha_{r},\frac{1}{2}]\text{,}\end{array } \right.\ ] ] where @xmath43 we thus obtain a family @xmath44 of uniformly expanding , piecewise invertible maps @xmath40 , each having two increasing covering branches .
note also that this family is symmetric in that @xmath45 according to well - known folklore results , each map @xmath25 , @xmath41 , has a unique invariant probability density @xmath46 , and @xmath25 is exact ( hence ergodic ) w.r.t .
the corresponding invariant measure . due to ( [ eq_symmetry ] ) , we have @xmath47 mod @xmath12 .
we denote the _ perron - frobenius operator _ ( _ pfo_),w.r.t .
lebesgue measure @xmath12 , of a map @xmath48 by @xmath49 , abbreviating @xmath50 . in our construction
below we will exploit the fact that 2-to-1 fractional linear maps like @xmath25 in fact enable a fairly explicit analysis of their pfos on a suitable class of densities .
in particular , the @xmath51 are known explicitly :    let @xmath52 , @xmath53 .
then @xmath54 is an integrable invariant density for @xmath55 , see @xcite .
its normalised version @xmath56 is the unique @xmath55-invariant probability density .
the key point in the choice of this family of maps is that for @xmath57 , @xmath55 is steeper in the positive part of @xmath58 than in its negative part , hence typical orbits spend more time on the negative part , which is confirmed by the invariant density ( see figure [ fig : trandhr ] ) . if @xmath59 , then @xmath55 favours the positive part .
( left ) , and @xmath51 ( right ) , for @xmath60 . ]     ( left ) , and @xmath51 ( right ) , for @xmath60 . ]
the heuristics of our construction is that for sufficiently strong coupling this effect of `` polarisation '' is reinforced and gives rise to bistable behaviour .      for any probability measure
@xmath61 , we denote its mean by @xmath62 and call this the _ field _ of @xmath63 . with a slight abuse of notation we also write , for @xmath64 , @xmath65 and , for @xmath66 @xmath67    to define the system of globally coupled maps ( both in the finite- and the infinite - size case ) we will , at each step of the iteration , determine the actual parameter as a function of the present field .
this is done by means of a _
feedback function _
@xmath68 $ ] which we always assume to be real - analytic .
everything else remains true if @xmath69 is merely of class @xmath70 .
] and _ s - shaped _ in that it satisfies @xmath71 and @xmath72 for all @xmath73 , while @xmath74 if @xmath75 .
the most important single parameter in our model is going to be @xmath76 which quantifies the _ coupling strength_.    [ remark : tanh ] the following will be our standard example of a suitable feedback function @xmath69 : @xmath77 where @xmath78 and @xmath79 .
( this requires some numerical effort . for @xmath80 and @xmath81 ,
elementary estimates suffice . )    for the results to follow we shall impose a few additional constraints on the feedback function @xmath69 , made precise in assumptions i and ii below .
we consider a system @xmath82 of @xmath0 coupled copies of the parametrised map , defined by @xmath83 with @xmath84 . for the following theorem , which we prove in section  [ sec : finite - sys - proofs ] , we need the following assumption ( satisfied by the example above ) : @xmath85{0.88\linewidth}\text{\textbf{assumption i:}}\quad\text { $ g'(x){\leqslant}25 - 50|g(x)|$ for all $ x\in x$. } \end{minipage}}}\ ] ]    [ theo : finite - systems ] suppose the s - shaped function @xmath69 satisfies .
then , for any @xmath86 , the map @xmath82 has a unique absolutely continuous invariant probability measure @xmath13@xmath14 .
its density is strictly positive and real analytic .
the systems @xmath87 @xmath13@xmath88 are exponentially mixing in various strong senses , in particular do hlder observables have exponentially decreasing correlations .
the key to the proof is an estimate ensuring uniform expansion .
after establishing the latter in section  [ sec : finite - sys - proofs ] , the theorem follows from `` folklore '' results whose origins are not so easy to locate in the literature . in a @xmath89-setting ,
existence , uniqueness and exactness of an invariant density were proved essentially by krzyzewski and szlenk @xcite .
exponential mixing follows from the compactness of the transfer operator first observed by ruelle @xcite . for a result which applies in our situation and entails theorem 1
, we refer to the main theorem of @xcite .
since the coupling we defined is of mean - field type , we can adapt from the probabilistic literature ( see for example @xcite ) the classical method of taking the _ thermodynamic limit _ of our family of finite - size systems @xmath90 , as @xmath15 . to do so , consider the set @xmath91 of borel probability measures on @xmath58 , equipped with the topology of weak convergence and the resulting borel @xmath92-algebra on @xmath91 .
define @xmath93 by @xmath94    we can then represent the evolution of any finite - size system using @xmath95
. indeed , if @xmath96 is the empirical measure of @xmath97 , then @xmath98 satisfies @xmath99 .
furthermore , when restricted to the set of probability measures absolutely continuous with respect to @xmath12 , @xmath100 is represented by the _ self - consistent perron frobenius operator _ , which is the nonlinear positive operator @xmath101 defined as @xmath102 clearly , this map satisfies @xmath103 and preserves the set @xmath104 of probability densities .
note , however , that it does not contract , i.e. there are @xmath105 such that @xmath106 .
one may finally join these two aspects , the action of @xmath95 on means of dirac masses , or on absolutely continuous measures , via the following observation :    [ pr : propchaos ] let @xmath107 , with @xmath108 .
if @xmath109 is chosen according to @xmath110 , then , for any @xmath111 , the empirical measures @xmath112 converge weakly to @xmath113 as @xmath15 .
this result confirms the point of view that the self - consistent pfo @xmath114 represents the infinite - size thermodynamic limit @xmath15 of the finite - size systems @xmath90 .
its proof is reasonably simple ( easier than for stochastic evolutions ) .
the only difficulty is that @xmath100 is not a continuous map on the whole of @xmath91 .
this can be overcome with the following lemma , which proposition [ pr : propchaos ] is a direct consequence of , and whose proof is given in section [ se : conttil ] .
[ le : contttil ] assume that a sequence @xmath115 in @xmath91 converges weakly to some non - atomic @xmath63 .
then @xmath116 converges weakly to @xmath117 .
here is an immediate consequence of this lemma that will be used below .
[ coro : contttil ] assume that a sequence @xmath118 of @xmath95-invariant borel probability measures _ on _ @xmath91 converges weakly to some probability @xmath119 _ on _ @xmath91 . if there is a borel set @xmath120 with @xmath121 which only contains non - atomic measures , then @xmath119 is also @xmath95-invariant .
our goal is to analyse the asymptotics of @xmath101 on @xmath104 .
some basic features of @xmath101 can be understood considering the dynamics of @xmath122,}\ \quad { h}(r):=g(\phi(u_{r})),\ ] ] which governs the action of @xmath101 on the densities @xmath123 introduced in
[ subsec : family - def ] , as @xmath124 in studying @xmath101 , we will always presuppose the following : @xmath125 this assumption can be checked numerically for specific feedback functions @xmath69 , like that of remark [ remark : tanh ] , cf .
 [ ssec : infinite - sys - proofs-1 ] below . by ( [ eq_symmetry ] ) , @xmath126 .
note , however , that @xmath127 itself is not s - shaped ( see figure  [ fig : plots-1 ] ) so that the s - shapedness of @xmath69 alone is not sufficient for that of @xmath128 .
+ assumption ii will enter our arguments only via the following dichotomy which it entails : either    @xmath129 has a unique fixed point at @xmath130 + ( the * stable regime * with @xmath131 and @xmath130 stable ) , + or + @xmath129 has exactly three fixed points @xmath132 + ( the * bistable regime * with @xmath133 and @xmath134 stable ) .
we will see that @xmath135 and @xmath136 , so that the stable regime corresponds to the condition @xmath137 .
observe now that @xmath138 ( since @xmath139 for @xmath140 , and each @xmath25 is ergodic ) .
we are going to show that the fixed points @xmath141 , and @xmath142 dominate the long - term behaviour of @xmath143 on @xmath104 completely , and that they inherit the stability properties of the corresponding parameters @xmath132 .
therefore , the stable / bistable terminology for @xmath144 introduced above also provides an appropriate description of the asymptotic behaviour of @xmath101 .
[ * long - term behaviour of * @xmath101 * *  on * * @xmath104 ] [ theo : infinite - system ] consider @xmath145 , @xmath146 equipped with the metric inherited from @xmath11 . assuming ( i ) and ( ii )
, we have the following :    1 .   [ theo2:item1 ] in the stable regime , @xmath17 is the unique fixed point of @xmath101 , and attracts all densities , that is , @xmath147 2 .   in the bistable regime ,
@xmath148 are the only fixed points of @xmath101 .
now @xmath17 is unstable , while @xmath149 and @xmath150 are stable .
more precisely : a.   @xmath142 are stable fixed points for @xmath101 in the sense that their respective basins of attraction are @xmath151-open .
b.   if @xmath152 is not attracted by @xmath149 or @xmath150 , then it is attracted by @xmath153 . c.
@xmath153 is not stable .
indeed , @xmath17 can be @xmath151-approximated by convex analytic densities from either basin .
it is a hyperbolic fixed point of @xmath10 in the sense made precise in proposition  [ prop : hyperbolic - fixed ] of section  [ sec : infinite - sys - proofs ] .    in case
@xmath154 with @xmath78 and @xmath79 , both theorems apply .
the infinite - size system is stable iff @xmath155 , and bistable otherwise , while all finite - size systems have a unique a.c.i.m . in this parameter region .
the theorem summarises the contents of propositions [ prop : summary2 ] , [ prop : basin - boundary ] and  [ prop : hyperbolic - fixed ] of section  [ sec : infinite - sys - proofs ] ( which , in fact , provide more detailed information ) .
the proofs rest on the fact that pfos of maps with full fractional - linear branches leave the class of herglotz - pick - nevanlinna functions invariant .
this observation can be used to study the action of @xmath101 in terms of an iterated function system on the interval @xmath156 $ ] with two fractional - linear branches and place dependent probabilities . in the bistable regime
the system is of course not contractive , but it has strong monotonicity properties and special geometric features which allow to prove the theorem . + our third theorem , which is essentially a corollary to the previous ones , describes the passage from finite - size systems to the infinite - size system .
below , weak convergence of the @xmath13@xmath157 to some @xmath158@xmath159 means that @xmath160@xmath13@xmath161@xmath13 for all continuous @xmath162 which only depend on finitely many coordinates .
( so that @xmath163@xmath13@xmath14 is defined , in the obvious fashion , for @xmath0 large enough . )
[ theo : passage - to - infinity ] the @xmath90-invariant probability measures @xmath13@xmath14 of theorem  [ theo : finite - systems ] correspond to the @xmath95-invariant probability measures @xmath13@xmath164 on @xmath91 .
all weak accumulation points @xmath119 of the latter sequence are @xmath165-invariant probability measures concentrated on the set of measures absolutely continuous w.r.t .
@xmath12 . furthermore :    1 .   in the stable regime ,
the sequence @xmath166@xmath13@xmath167 converges weakly to the point mass @xmath168 . in other words ,
the sequence @xmath166@xmath13@xmath169 converges weakly to the pure product measure @xmath170 on @xmath171 .
2 .   in the bistable regime ,
each weak accumulation point @xmath119 of the sequence @xmath166@xmath13@xmath167 is of the form @xmath172 for some @xmath173 $ ] . in other words ,
each weak accumulation point of the sequence @xmath166@xmath13@xmath169 is of the form @xmath174 .
we can not prove , so far , that @xmath175 , which is to be expected because @xmath17 is an unstable fixed point of @xmath10 . in section  [ sec : noisy ]
we show that @xmath175 indeed , if some small noise is added to the system .    as @xmath99
, the @xmath90-invariant probability measures @xmath13@xmath14 of theorem  [ theo : finite - systems ] correspond to @xmath95-invariant probability measures @xmath13@xmath164 on @xmath176 .
their possible weak accumulation points are all concentrated on sets of measures from @xmath176 with density w.r.t .
@xmath12 , see theorem  3 in @xcite .
( the proof of that part of the theorem we refer to does not rely on the continuity of the local maps that is assumed in that paper . )
therefore corollary  [ coro : contttil ] shows that all these accumulation points are @xmath165-invariant probability measures concentrated on measures with density w.r.t .
@xmath12 . in other words
, they can be interpreted as @xmath177-invariant probability measures on @xmath146 .
now theorem  [ theo : infinite - system ] implies that the sequence @xmath166@xmath13@xmath167 converges weakly to the point mass @xmath178 in the stable regime , whereas , in the bistable regime , each such limit measure is of the form @xmath172 for some @xmath173 $ ] ( observe the symmetry of the system ) .
now the corresponding assertions on the measures @xmath13@xmath14 follow along known lines , for a reference see e.g. ( * ? ? ?
* proposition  1 ) .
we assume throughout this section that @xmath179 in order to apply the main theorem of mayer @xcite we must check his assumptions ( a1 )  ( a4 ) for the map @xmath180 . to that end
define @xmath181^n$ ] by @xmath182 .
obviously @xmath183 , and ( a1 )  ( a4 ) follow readily from the following facts that we are going to prove :    [ lemma : homeo ] @xmath181^n$ ] is a homeomorphism which extends to a diffeomorphism between open neighbourhoods of @xmath184 and @xmath185^n$ ] .
[ lemma : analytic - diffeo ] the inverse @xmath186 of @xmath187 is real analytic and can be continued to a holomorphic mapping on a complex @xmath188-neighbourhood @xmath189 of @xmath185^n$ ] such that @xmath190 is contained in a @xmath191-neighbourhood of @xmath184 for some @xmath192 .    to verify these two lemmas
we need the following uniform expansion estimate which we will prove at the end of this section .
( here @xmath193 denotes the euclidean norm . )
[ lemma : inv - contraction ] there is a constant @xmath194 such that @xmath195 for all @xmath196 and @xmath197 .
obviously @xmath198^n$ ] .
hence it is sufficient to prove the assertions of the lemma for the map @xmath199 .
as each @xmath200 is differentiable on @xmath201 ( recall that @xmath202 ) , @xmath203 extends to an analytic mapping from @xmath204 . by lemma
[ lemma : inv - contraction ] , it is locally invertible on @xmath205 for each sufficiently small @xmath206 .
( note that @xmath207 . )
all we need to show is that this implies global invertibility of @xmath208 , because then the possibility to extend @xmath203 diffeomorphically to a small open neighbourhood of @xmath184 in @xmath209 follows again from the local invertibility on @xmath210 for some @xmath211 .
so we prove the global invertibility of @xmath208 . as
each @xmath212 is a homeomorphism that leaves fixed the endpoints of the interval @xmath58 , we have @xmath213 and @xmath214 . observing the simple fact that @xmath215 is a paracompact connected smooth manifold without boundary and with trivial fundamental group , we only need to show that @xmath208 is proper in order to deduce from ( * ? ? ?
* corollary 1 ) that @xmath216 is a diffeomorphism of @xmath215 .
so let @xmath217 be a compact subset of @xmath215 .
as @xmath216 extends to the continuous map @xmath218 and as @xmath213 , the set @xmath219 is closed and hence compact .
therefore @xmath208 is indeed proper .    as @xmath187 is real analytic on a real neighbourhood of @xmath184 , the real analyticity of @xmath186 on a real neighbourhood of @xmath185^n$ ] follows from the real analytic inverse function theorem ( * ? ? ?
* theorem 18.1 ) .
it extends to a holomorphic function on a complex @xmath188-neighbourhood @xmath189 of @xmath185^n$ ]
see e.g. the discussion of complexifications of real analytic maps in@xcite .
if @xmath220 is sufficiently small , lemma  [ lemma : inv - contraction ] implies that @xmath186 is a uniform contraction on @xmath189 .
hence the @xmath191 in the statement of the lemma can be chosen strictly smaller than @xmath188 .
recall that @xmath221 where @xmath222 , @xmath223 and we write @xmath224 instead of @xmath200 .
denote @xmath225 , @xmath226 and observe that @xmath227 simplifies to @xmath228 so that @xmath229 then the derivative of the coupled map @xmath230 is @xmath231 with @xmath232 denoting the identity matrix .
letting @xmath233 and observing that @xmath234 so that @xmath235 , the inverse of @xmath236 is @xmath237 in order to check conditions under which @xmath187 is uniformly expanding in all directions , it is sufficient to find conditions under which @xmath238 _ uniformly _ in @xmath239 .
observe first that @xmath240 for @xmath241 . from now on we fix a point @xmath239 and suppress it as an argument to all functions . then
, if @xmath242 is any vector in @xmath243 , some scalar multiple of it can be decomposed in a unique way as @xmath244 where @xmath245 is perpendicular to @xmath246 .
denote @xmath247 , @xmath248 , and observe that @xmath249 as @xmath246 has only nonnegative entries .
we estimate the euclidian norm of @xmath250 : @xmath251 where @xmath252 . as @xmath253 and @xmath254
( observe that all entries of @xmath246 are bounded by @xmath24 ) , we can continue the above estimate with @xmath255 to estimate this expression we abbreviate temporarily @xmath256 .
then @xmath257 , and straightforward maximisation yields : @xmath258
so we can continue the above estimate by @xmath259 where @xmath260 hence @xmath261 and therefore @xmath262 observing @xmath263 one finds numerically that the norm is bounded by @xmath264 uniformly for all @xmath265 , if @xmath266 and @xmath267 .
hence the map @xmath187 is uniformly expanding in all directions provided ( [ eq : finite - ass ] ) holds .
the pfos @xmath268 allow a detailed analysis since their action on certain densities has a convenient explicit description : consider the family @xmath269 of probability densities on @xmath58 given by @xmath270 as pointed out in @xcite ( using different parametrisations ) , perron - frobenius operators @xmath271 of fractional - linear maps
@xmath272 act on these densities via their _ duals _ @xmath273 , where @xmath274{cc}0 & 1\\ 1 & 0 \end{array } \right )   \cdot m\cdot\left ( \begin{array } [ c]{cc}0 & 1\\ 1 & 0 \end{array } \right )   = \left ( \begin{array } [ c]{cc}d & c\\ b & a \end{array } \right )   \text { \quad for } m=\left ( \begin{array } [ c]{cc}a & b\\ c & d \end{array } \right )   \text{,}\ ] ] in that @xmath275 for matrices @xmath276 and intervals @xmath277 for which @xmath278 .
( this can also be verified by direct calculation ) .
since @xmath279 , one can compute the duals @xmath280 of the individual branches of @xmath25 , then express @xmath281 as the convex combination @xmath282}\cdot w_{y})\nonumber\\ & = p_{r}(y)\cdot w_{\sigma_{r}(y)}+(1-p_{r}(y))\cdot w_{\tau_{r}(y)}\text{,}\label{eq_pr_gy_in_terms_of_sigma_tau}\ ] ] with weights @xmath283    it is straightforward to check that for every @xmath31 the functions @xmath284 , @xmath285 are continuous and strictly increasing on @xmath156 $ ] with images @xmath286)=[-2,2/3]$ ] and @xmath287)=[-2/3,2]$ ] .    from this remark and ( [ eq_pr_gy_in_terms_of_sigma_tau ] )
it is clear that the @xmath268 preserve the class of those @xmath288 which are convex combinations @xmath289 of the special densities @xmath290 for some _ representing measure _
@xmath13 from @xmath291 .
we find that @xmath268 acts on representing measures according to @xmath292 where @xmath293 denotes the measure with density @xmath294 w.r.t . @xmath13 .
to continue , we need to collect several facts about the dual maps @xmath284 and @xmath285 .
we have @xmath295 showing that @xmath284 and @xmath285 are strictly concave , respectively convex , on @xmath156 $ ] .
one next gets readily from that @xmath296 wherever defined , and @xmath297\diagdown\{-r\}\ ] ] while ( and this observation will be crucial later on ) @xmath298 and @xmath299 have a common zero @xmath300 and @xmath301    in the following , we restrict our parameter @xmath302 to the set @xmath303   $ ] .
direct calculation proves that , letting @xmath304   $ ] , we have @xmath305 so that @xmath306 is an invariant set for all such @xmath284 and @xmath285 , and that @xmath307 which provides us with a common contraction rate on @xmath306 for the @xmath284 and @xmath285 from this parameter region .
all these features of @xmath298 and @xmath299 are illustrated by figure  [ fig : sigma - tau ] .     and
@xmath299 for @xmath308 .
the small invariant box has endpoints @xmath309 and @xmath299 . ]
we denote by @xmath310 the field of the density @xmath311 , and find by explicit integration that @xmath312 for @xmath313 .
in particular , @xmath314 and @xmath315 , so the field depends monotonically on @xmath316 .
note also that we have , for all @xmath317 , @xmath318    we focus on densities @xmath319 with representing measure @xmath13 supported on @xmath306 , i.e. on the class @xmath320 : @xmath321 .
writing @xmath322 and recalling ( [ eq_pr_acting_on_representing_measures ] ) , we find that our nonlinear operator @xmath101 acts on the representing measures from @xmath323 via @xmath324 as @xmath325 , the support of @xmath326 , is contained in @xmath327 , it is immediate from ( [ eq_invariance_of_y ] ) that @xmath328    for @xmath329 $ ] we find that @xmath284 and @xmath285 each have a unique stable fixed point in @xmath306 , given by @xmath330 respectively .
note that the interval @xmath331 $ ] of width @xmath332 between these stable fixed points is invariant under both @xmath284 and @xmath285 , see the small boxed region in figure  [ fig : sigma - tau ] .
furthermore , each of @xmath333 and @xmath334 is mapped to @xmath302 under the branch not fixing it , i.e. @xmath335 meaning that , restricted to @xmath336 , @xmath284 and @xmath285 are the inverse branches of some 2-to-1 piecewise fractional linear map @xmath337 .    the explicit @xmath25-invariant densities @xmath51 from ( [ eq : inv - dens-2 ] ) can be represented as @xmath338 with @xmath339 given by @xmath340    our goal in this section is to study the asymptotic behaviour of @xmath101 on @xmath341 , using its representation by means of the ifs @xmath342 .
we will prove    [ * long - term behaviour of * @xmath101 * *  on * * @xmath341 ] [ prop : summary ] take any @xmath343 , @xmath344 for some @xmath317 .
the following is an exhaustive list of possibilities for the asymptotic behaviour of the sequence @xmath345 :    1 .
@xmath346 for some @xmath111 .
then @xmath345 converges to @xmath347 and hence @xmath348 converges to @xmath349 in @xmath350 .
[ item : summary-2 ] the interval @xmath351 contains @xmath352 for all @xmath111 . then @xmath345 converges to @xmath353 and hence @xmath354 converges to @xmath17 in @xmath350 .
in this case also the length of @xmath351 tends to @xmath352 3 .
@xmath355 for some @xmath111 .
then @xmath356 converges to @xmath357 and hence @xmath348 converges to @xmath358 in @xmath350 .    in the stable regime , only scenario ( 2 ) is possible , so that we always have convergence of @xmath345 to @xmath353 .    our arguments will rely on continuity and monotonicity properties of the ifs , that we detail below , before proving proposition [ prop : summary ] in section [ se : propro ] .      _
convergence in _
@xmath323 , @xmath359 , will always mean weak convergence of measures , @xmath360 for bounded continuous @xmath361 . since @xmath306 is a bounded interval , this is equivalent to convergence in the _ wasserstein - metric _
@xmath362 on @xmath323 .
if @xmath363 and @xmath364 are the distribution functions of @xmath13 and @xmath365 , then @xmath366 the kantorovich - rubinstein theorem ( e.g. ( * ? ?
* ch.11 ) ) provides an additional characterisation : @xmath367{\leqslant}1}\int_{y}\psi\,d(\mu-\nu)\ ] ] for any @xmath368 . here , @xmath369   : = \sup_{y , y^{\prime}\in y;y\neq y^{\prime}}\left\vert \psi(y)-\psi(y^{\prime})\right\vert /\left\vert y - y^{\prime}\right\vert $ ] for any @xmath370 ( and analogously for functions on other domains ) .
we now see that there is a constant @xmath371 ( the common lipschitz bound for the functions @xmath372 on @xmath306 , where @xmath73 ) such that @xmath373 this means that , for densities from @xmath341 , convergence of the representing measures implies @xmath151-convergence of the densities .
we will also use the following estimate .
[ lemma : stability ] there are constants @xmath374 such that @xmath375 for all @xmath368 and all @xmath376 .    for lipschitz functions
@xmath377 on @xmath306 we have @xmath378   \cdot{\mathsf{d}_w}(\mu,\nu)\nonumber\\      + \sup_{y\in y}\,\mathrm{lip}_{r}\left [   \psi(\sigma_{.}(y))\,p_{. }       ( y)+\psi(\tau_{.}(y))(1-p_{.}(y))\right ]   \cdot|r - s|    \end{gathered}\ ] ] suppose that @xmath377 is @xmath379 , with @xmath380 .
then the first lipschitz constant is bounded by @xmath381 } < \infty,\ ] ] and the second one by @xmath382 } < \infty,\ ] ] and the lemma follows from the kantorovich - rubinstein theorem , since these @xmath383 functions @xmath377 uniformly approximate the lipschitz functions appearing there .
[ co : contifs ] the operators @xmath384 , @xmath385 , and @xmath342 are uniformly lipschitz - continuous on @xmath323 for the wasserstein metric .
the lipschitz - continuity of @xmath384 is immediate from lemma  [ lemma : stability ] . for @xmath342
, we recall from and that @xmath386 with @xmath387 so that @xmath388 which allows to conclude with lemma  [ lemma : stability ] .
rigorous numerical bounds give @xmath389 and @xmath390 .
these estimates can be used to show that not only the individual @xmath384 are uniformly contracting on @xmath323 , but also ( under suitable restrictions on the function @xmath69 ) @xmath342 is a uniform contraction on @xmath391 where @xmath392 is a suitable neighbourhood of the support of @xmath347 , and @xmath347 is the representing measure of @xmath349 with @xmath393 the unique positive fixed point of the equation @xmath394 .
our treatment of @xmath342 , however , does not rely on these estimates , because it is based on monotonicity properties explained below .      on the space @xmath323 of probability measures @xmath395 representing densities from @xmath396
we introduce an order relation by defining @xmath397 the symbols @xmath398 , @xmath399 and @xmath400 designate the usual variants of @xmath401 .
we collect a few elementary facts on this order relation : @xmath402{0.88\linewidth}$\mu\preceq\nu$ if and only if      $ \textstyle{\int_y } u\,d\mu{\leqslant}\int_y u\,d\nu$ for      each bounded and non - decreasing $ u : y\to{{\mathbb r}}$.\end{minipage}}}\ ] ] in particular , if @xmath403 , then @xmath404 , and hence @xmath405 as well .
@xmath406{0.88\linewidth}if $ \mu\preceq\nu$ and if $ \rho_1,\rho_2:y\to y$ are non - decreasing      and such that      $ \rho_1(y){\leqslant}\rho_2(y)$ for all $ y$ ,      then $ \mu\circ\rho_1^{-1}\preceq\nu\circ\rho_2^{-1}$.\end{minipage}}}\ ] ] @xmath407{0.88\linewidth}if $ \mu\preceq\nu$ and if    $ { \textstyle{\int_y } } u\,d\mu      = { \textstyle{\int_y } } u\,d\nu$ for some      strictly increasing\\ $ u : y\to{{\mathbb r}}$ , then $ \mu=\nu$.\end{minipage}}}\ ] ] @xmath408{0.88\linewidth}let $ z\in y$. then $ \delta_z\preceq\mu$ if and only if      $ { \operatorname{supp}}(\mu)\subseteq[z,\infty)$.\end{minipage}}}\ ] ] we also observe that the representing measures @xmath409 of the @xmath55-invariant densities @xmath51 form a linearly ordered subset of @xmath323 .
routine calculations based on ( [ eq : mu - r - density ] ) show that @xmath410    our analysis of the asymptotic behaviour of the ifs will crucially depend on the fact that the operators @xmath411 and @xmath412 respect this order relation on @xmath323 , as made precise in the next lemma :    [ lemma : pre - monotonicity ] let @xmath368 and @xmath413 .
a.   [ item : pre - monotonicity - a ] if @xmath414 , then @xmath415 . b.   [ item : pre - monotonicity - b ] if @xmath416 , then @xmath417 . c.   [ item
: pre - monotonicity - c ] if @xmath414 , then @xmath418 .
let @xmath419 be bounded and non - decreasing and recall that @xmath420}\,d\mu.\end{gathered}\ ] ]    [ item : pre - monotonicity - a ] ) let @xmath403 .
in view of ( [ eq : mono - fact-1 ] ) we can prove @xmath421 by showing that the integrand on the right - hand side of is non - decreasing .
for this we use the facts that @xmath298 and @xmath299 are strictly increasing with @xmath422 , and that @xmath423 is non - increasing , since @xmath424 .
one gets then , for @xmath425 , @xmath426.}_{{\geqslant}0 }      \end{split}\ ] ] hence @xmath403 implies @xmath427 .
now , if @xmath319 is strictly increasing , then ( [ eq : monotonicity - estimate ] ) always is a strict inequality , i.e. the integrand on the right - hand side of is strictly increasing .
therefore , @xmath414 implies @xmath428 by ( [ eq : mono - fact-2a ] ) .
+ [ item : pre - monotonicity - b ] ) we must show that is non - decreasing as a function of @xmath302 . to this end note first that @xmath429 hence , if @xmath430 , then @xmath431 and for strictly increasing @xmath319 we have indeed a strict inequality . + [ item : pre - monotonicity - c ] ) this follows from [ item : pre - monotonicity - a ] ) and [ item : pre - monotonicity - b ] ) : @xmath432 as @xmath433 by .    in  [
subsec : stablemfd ] below , we will also make use of a more precise quantitative version of statement a ) .
it is natural to state and prove it at this point .
[ lemma : gap - estimate ] suppose that @xmath434 are such that @xmath435 and @xmath436 .
then , for @xmath403 , @xmath437    observing that @xmath438 and @xmath439 are @xmath440 , we find for the last expression in that @xmath441 { \geqslant}\alpha    \beta y - \alpha \beta x.\ ] ] this turns into a chain of inequalities which shows that the function given by @xmath442 is non - decreasing .
hence , by , @xmath403 entails @xmath443 , which is .
we are now going to clarify the asymptotic behaviour of @xmath342 on @xmath323 . in view of ( [ eq : norm_w_estimate ] ) , this also determines the asymptotics of @xmath101 on @xmath341 , and hence proves proposition [ prop : summary ] .
our argument depends on monotonicity properties which we can exploit since the topology of weak convergence on @xmath323 , conveniently given by the wasserstein metric , is consistent with the order relation introduced above .
indeed , one easily checks : @xmath444{0.88\linewidth}if $ ( \nu_n)$ and $ ( \bar{\nu}_n)$ are weakly convergent sequences in    $ \mathsf{p}(y)$ with $ \nu_n \preceq \bar{\nu}_n$ for all $ n$ , then    $ \lim \nu_n \preceq \lim \bar{\nu}_n$.\end{minipage } } }    } \ ] ]    recall from   [ subsec : infinite - sys ] that , in the bistable regime , @xmath393 is the unique positive fixed point of the equation @xmath394 . for convenience ,
we now let @xmath445 then , in either case , @xmath51 with representing measure @xmath409 is fixed by @xmath101 iff @xmath446 . by ( [ eq : mono - mu - r - family ] )
we have @xmath447 with strict inequalities in the bistable regime .    [ lemma : monotonicity ] if @xmath448 , then @xmath449 , and the sequence @xmath345 converges weakly to a measure @xmath450 with @xmath446 .
the same holds for @xmath399 instead of @xmath401 .
the monotonicity of the sequence @xmath345 follows immediately from lemma  [ lemma : pre - monotonicity][item : pre - monotonicity - c ] ) .
because of ( [ eq : mono - cty - fact-1 ] ) , it implies that the sequence can have at most one weak accumulation point . compactness of @xmath323 and continuity of @xmath342
therefore ensure that @xmath345 converges to a fixed point of @xmath342 , i.e. to one of the measures @xmath409 with @xmath451 , and ( [ eq : mono - cty - fact-1 ] ) entails @xmath452 .
the proof for decreasing sequences is the same .
the following lemma strengthens the previous one considerably .
it provides uniform control , in terms of the wasserstein distance , on the asymptotics of large families of representing measures .
[ lemma : controlled - convergence ] we have the following :    a.   [ item : controlled - convergence - a ] in the stable regime , there exists a sequence @xmath453 of positive real numbers converging to zero such that @xmath454 b.   [ item : controlled - convergence - b ] in the bistable regime , for every @xmath455 there exists a sequence @xmath453 of positive real numbers converging to zero such that @xmath456 an analogous assertion holds for measures @xmath457 .     as @xmath458 $ ]
, we trivially have @xmath459 for all @xmath460 . in particular , @xmath461 , and lemma  [ lemma : monotonicity ] ensures that @xmath462 converges . due to lemma  [ lemma : pre - monotonicity][item : pre - monotonicity - c ] )
, we have @xmath463 for all @xmath111 , showing , via ( [ eq : mono - cty - fact-1 ] ) , that @xmath464 . in the same way
one proves that @xmath465 converges to @xmath357 . for the stable regime
this means that both sequences converge to @xmath466 .
+ [ item : controlled - convergence - a ] ) assume we are in the stable regime . by the above discussion
, @xmath467 tends to zero . for
any @xmath13 , ( [ eq : mono - cty - fact-1 ] ) guarantees @xmath468 for all @xmath111 .
hence @xmath469 for all @xmath316 , proving @xmath470 .
+ [ item : controlled - convergence - b ] ) now consider the bistable regime .
note first that if there is a suitable sequence @xmath453 for some @xmath455 , then it also works for all @xmath471 .
therefore , there is no loss of generality if we assume that @xmath455 is so small that @xmath472 ( use , and to see that this can be achieved . ) since @xmath473 and @xmath474 , we then have @xmath475 , recall lemma [ lemma : pre - monotonicity ] .
lemma  [ lemma : monotonicity ] then implies that @xmath476 converges to @xmath347 . in view of the initial discussion
, @xmath462 converges to @xmath347 as well , so that @xmath477 defines a sequence of reals converging to zero .
now take any @xmath317 with @xmath478 , then @xmath479 for all @xmath111 , and @xmath480 follows as in the proof of [ item : controlled - convergence - a ] ) above .
this observation enables us to determine the asymptotics of @xmath481 for any @xmath460 which is completely supported on the positive half @xmath482 $ ] of @xmath306 ( meaning that @xmath483 , cf .
( [ eq : mono - fact-3 ] ) ) , or on its negative half @xmath484 .
[ coro : monotone - convergence ] let @xmath317 .
a.   [ item : monotone - convergence - a ] in the stable regime , the sequence @xmath345 converges to @xmath353 .
b.   [ item : monotone - convergence - b ] in the bistable regime , if @xmath483 , then the sequence @xmath345 converges to @xmath347 .
if @xmath485 , it converges to @xmath357 .
[ item : monotone - convergence - a ] ) follows immediately from lemma  [ lemma : controlled - convergence][item : controlled - convergence - a ] ) .
we turn to [ item : monotone - convergence - b ] ) : let @xmath486 .
then @xmath59 because @xmath487 on @xmath482 $ ] and @xmath483 .
therefore @xmath488 .
fix some @xmath489 as in lemma  [ lemma : controlled - convergence][item : controlled - convergence - b ] ) , w.l.o.g . @xmath490 .
then @xmath491 since @xmath284 and @xmath285 map @xmath492 into @xmath493 $ ] , so that indeed @xmath494 as @xmath495 by the lemma .
it remains to investigate the convergence of sequences @xmath345 when none of these measures can be compared ( in the sense of @xmath398 ) to @xmath353 . to this end
let @xmath496:=y$ ] . given a sequence of parameters @xmath497
define @xmath498 for @xmath499 , and , for any @xmath500 $ ] , consider the measures @xmath501 then @xmath502 @xmath503 ) \cup \tau_{r_{n } } ( [ a_{n-1},b_{n-1 } ] ) \subseteq$ ] @xmath504 $ ] by induction .
write @xmath505_{\varepsilon}:=[a-\varepsilon , b+\varepsilon]$ ] , where @xmath506 .
the next lemma exploits the crucial observation that the two branches @xmath298 and @xmath299 have tangential contact at their common zero @xmath507 , see figure  [ fig : sigma - tau ] .
[ lemma : crucial ] there exists some @xmath508 such that the following holds : suppose that @xmath509 is any given sequence in @xmath510 .
if for some @xmath206 and @xmath511 we have @xmath512_{\varepsilon}\quad \text{for}\ n{\geqslant}\bar{n}(\varepsilon)\text{,}\tag{${\clubsuit}_\varepsilon$}\ ] ] then @xmath513 @xmath514 and , in case @xmath515 , @xmath516\quad \text{for}\ n{\geqslant}\bar{n}(0)+1 \text{.}\ ] ]    let @xmath206 and assume ( @xmath517 ) .
note that , for @xmath518 , @xmath519 the first implication holds because @xmath520 as @xmath521 increases strictly , and since by ( @xmath517 ) we have @xmath522 $ ] , whence @xmath523 due to ( [ eq : less3/4 ] ) .
analogously for the second implication .
the third is immediate from monotonicity .
now , as @xmath284 and @xmath285 share a common zero @xmath507 , ( [ eq : less3/4 ] ) ensures @xmath524 in case @xmath525 $ ] .
otherwise , note that @xmath507 is @xmath526-close to one of the endpoints , w.l.o.g . to @xmath527 .
since @xmath284 and @xmath285 are tangent at @xmath528 , there is some @xmath529 s.t .
@xmath530 in this case , while ( [ eq : less3/4 ] ) controls the rest of @xmath531 . in view of @xmath532
, we thus obtain , for @xmath533 , @xmath534 statement ( [ eq : club-1 ] ) follows immediately . for the asymptotic estimate ( [ eq : club-2 ] ) on @xmath535 , use the above inequality plus the observation that , by the first two implications stated in this proof , @xmath536 and @xmath537 never exceed @xmath538 . finally , if @xmath515 , ( [ eq : club-3 ] ) is straightforward from ( @xmath517 ) and the third implication above .
while the full strength of this lemma will only be required in the next subsection , the @xmath515 case enables us to now conclude the    the conclusions of ( 1 ) and ( 3 ) follow from corollary  [ coro : monotone - convergence ] .
if neither of these two cases applies , then the assumption of ( 2 ) must be satisfied , and so condition ( @xmath539 ) of lemma  [ lemma : crucial ] is satisfied with @xmath540 .
hence @xmath541 by ( [ eq : club-2 ] ) .
as the @xmath481 are supported in @xmath542 $ ] , these measures must converge to @xmath353 .
we are now going to clarify the asymptotics of the self - consistent pfo on the set @xmath104 of all densities , proving    [ * long - term behaviour of * @xmath101 * *  on * * @xmath104 ] [ prop : summary2 ] for every @xmath64 , the sequence @xmath543 converges in @xmath11 , and @xmath544 the basins @xmath545 of the stable fixed points @xmath20 are @xmath151-open .
( the set of densities attracted to @xmath17 in the bistable regime will be discussed in  [ subsec : stablemfd ] below . ) + we begin with some notational preparations . throughout , we fix some @xmath288 .
the iterates @xmath354 define parameters @xmath546 ( @xmath499 ) . with this notation , @xmath547 .
we let @xmath548 , @xmath549 , denote the partition of @xmath58 into monotonicity intervals of @xmath550 .
note that each branch of this map is a fractional linear bijection from a member of @xmath548 onto @xmath58 .
since the @xmath55 , @xmath385 , have a common uniform expansion rate , we see that @xmath551 , and hence , by the standard martingale convergence theorem , @xmath552\rightarrow u$ ] in @xmath350 , that is , @xmath553-u\right\|    _ { l_{1}({x},\lambda)}\longrightarrow0\quad \text { as } n\rightarrow\infty\text{.}\ ] ] write @xmath554\right)\quad   \text{for}\ { k}{\geqslant}0\ \text{and}\ n{\geqslant}1 , \ ] ] and observe that @xmath555 because it is a weighted sum of images of the constant function @xmath24 under various fractional linear branches ( recall ( [ eq : transfer - by - fract - lin ] ) and ( [ eq_invariance_of_y ] ) ) .    for @xmath556
we let @xmath557 and write , in analogy to the notation introduced for @xmath549 , @xmath558 and @xmath559 . obviously , @xmath560 for all @xmath561 .
hence there are measures @xmath562 such that @xmath563 .
observe also that @xmath564 as @xmath565 for all @xmath302 , so that in particular @xmath566 in addition , we need to understand the distances @xmath567 which , in fact , admit some control which is uniform in @xmath568 :    [ lemma : shadow - estimate ] there is a non - decreasing sequence @xmath569 in @xmath570 , not depending on @xmath571 , such that @xmath572    let @xmath573 , and observe that entails @xmath574 applying lemma  [ lemma : stability ] repeatedly , we therefore see that @xmath575 where the last inequality uses .
( recall that @xmath101 does not contract on @xmath576 , whence the need for the @xmath577-term . ) letting @xmath578 and @xmath579 , we thus obtain @xmath580 which proves our assertion .
we can now complete the    we begin with the easiest situation : +    [ [ the - stable - regime ] ] * the stable regime * + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +    we have to show that @xmath581 .
take any @xmath582 .
let @xmath453 be the sequence provided by lemma  [ lemma : controlled - convergence][item : controlled - convergence - a ] ) , and @xmath217 the constant from ( [ eq : norm_w_estimate ] ) .
there is some @xmath583 ( henceforth fixed ) for which @xmath584 . in view of ( [ eq : eta - n - cge-0 ] )
, there is some @xmath585 such that @xmath586 whenever @xmath587 .
we then find , using ( [ eq : shadow - estimate ] ) , lemma [ lemma : shadow - estimate ] , and ( [ eq : norm_w_estimate ] ) together with lemma  [ lemma : controlled - convergence][item : controlled - convergence - a ] ) that @xmath588 which completes the proof in this case .
+    [ [ the - bistable - regime ] ] * the bistable regime * + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +    given the sequence @xmath589 as before , we let @xmath542\subseteq y$ ] be the sequence of parameter intervals from lemma  [ lemma : crucial ] .
observe that the measures representing the @xmath590 satisfy @xmath591 $ ] for all @xmath583 and @xmath0 .
we now distinguish two cases : + _ first case : _ for all @xmath211 we have ( @xmath592 ) from lemma  [ lemma : crucial ] .
then , for any @xmath211 , the lemma ensures that there is some @xmath583 ( henceforth fixed ) with @xmath593 , so that also @xmath594 , whatever @xmath0 .
due to ( [ eq : eta - n - cge-0 ] ) , @xmath595 for @xmath587 , and we find , using ( [ eq : shadow - estimate ] ) and ( [ eq : norm_w_estimate ] ) , @xmath596 showing that indeed @xmath597 . + _ second case : _ there is some @xmath598 s.t .
( @xmath599 ) is violated in that , say , @xmath600 for infinitely many @xmath583 .
we show that this implies @xmath601 .
( if ( @xmath599 ) is violated in the other direction , @xmath602 then follows by symmetry . )
+ in view of ( [ eq : no - good - name ] ) , and since ( due to @xmath603 , ( [ eq : mono - fact-1 ] ) , and ( [ eq_mean_for_convex_combi ] ) ) @xmath604 , we have @xmath605 and hence , observing that @xmath606 and writing @xmath607 for @xmath313 , @xmath608 for all @xmath0 and @xmath568 .
note that @xmath609 , see and
. therefore , if we fix some @xmath610 , there exists some @xmath611 such that @xmath612 for all @xmath613}$ ] . without loss of generality , @xmath614 . +
now fix @xmath0 such that @xmath615 , and let @xmath616 satisfy ( [ eq : exceptional : n ] ) . due to , we have @xmath617 now , if @xmath618 , then , by ( [ eq : sigma - tilde ] ) , @xmath619 otherwise , @xmath620 , and again @xmath621 it follows inductively that @xmath622 . more precisely : if @xmath623 and @xmath624 are integers such that @xmath625 and @xmath626 , then @xmath627 in particular , if the initial density @xmath319 is such that @xmath628 , then we can take @xmath629 . + next , fix @xmath630 , and choose a sequence @xmath453 according to lemma  [ lemma : controlled - convergence][item : controlled - convergence - b ] ) . then @xmath631 and hence @xmath632 for @xmath633 so that the lemma implies @xmath634 . hence , by ( [ eq : norm_w_estimate ] ) , @xmath635 we then find , using ( [ eq : shadow - estimate ] ) and lemma  [ lemma : shadow - estimate ] , @xmath636 for @xmath633 and all @xmath637 .
now @xmath638 follows as in the stable case .
+ it remains to prove that the basin of attraction of @xmath349 is @xmath151-open .
( then , by symmetry , the same is true for @xmath358 . )
as @xmath10 is @xmath151-continuous , it suffices to show that this basin contains an open @xmath151-ball centered at @xmath349 . to check the latter condition , first notice that @xmath639 so that there is some @xmath640 such that @xmath641 . as we can assume w.l.o.g . that @xmath642 , we have @xmath643 , and as @xmath10 is @xmath151-continuous , there is some @xmath644 such that @xmath645 whenever @xmath646 .
therefore we can continue to argue as in the previous paragraph ( using the present @xmath624 and @xmath629 ) to conclude that @xmath647 .
we just proved a bit more than what is claimed in proposition  [ prop : summary2 ] : another look at equation reveals that , in the bistable regime , the stable fixed point @xmath349 of @xmath10 is even lyapunov - stable ( and the same is true for @xmath358 ) . indeed , fix @xmath648 , @xmath649 and @xmath650 as in the preceding paragraph .
that choice was completely independent of the particular initial densities investigated there , and the same is true of the choice of the constants @xmath217 , @xmath651 and @xmath652 occuring in estimate .
now let @xmath220 .
choose @xmath653 such that @xmath654 and then @xmath655 .
then equation , applied with @xmath556 , shows that for each @xmath656 with @xmath657 and for each @xmath111 holds @xmath658      let @xmath659 denote the _ stable manifold _ of @xmath17 in the space of _ all _ probability densities on @xmath58 . clearly
, all symmetric densities @xmath319 ( i.e. those satisfying @xmath660 ) belong to @xmath661 , because symmetric densities have field @xmath662 so that also the parameter @xmath663 , and symmetry is preserved under the operator @xmath664 .
+ however , @xmath661 is not a big set . in the present section
we prove    [ prop : basin - boundary ] each density in @xmath665 belongs to the boundaries of the basins of @xmath349 and of @xmath358 .
we start by providing more information on the fields @xmath666 of orbits in @xmath665 .
recall that for @xmath667 we have @xmath668 @xmath669 .
given such a density , we denote by @xmath670 the `` radius '' of the support of @xmath481 , i.e. @xmath671\}$ ] , and let @xmath672 .    [ lemma : roland ] in the bistable regime , for each @xmath673 there exists a constant @xmath674 such that @xmath675    in view of the explicit formula , we have @xmath676 and @xmath677 , and therefore see that there is some @xmath678 such that for every @xmath679 and all @xmath680 $ ] , @xmath681 where @xmath682 and @xmath683 , too , is a positive constant which only depends on the function @xmath69 .
in addition , elementary calculations based on and show that letting @xmath684 , @xmath685 can be chosen such that , for every @xmath679 and @xmath686 , also @xmath687\text { , and}\\        0>\tau_{r}(y )   & { \geqslant}\sigma_{r}(y){\geqslant}\left (   \frac{1}{2}+\varepsilon\right )        ( y+r)>-        b        \varepsilon\text { \quad for } y\in[-\varepsilon ,- r)\text{. }     \end{split }      \label{eq_estimate_tau_sigma_near_zero}\ ] ] ( recall that @xmath284 and @xmath285 share a zero at @xmath688 . ) finally , note that we can w.l.o.g .
take @xmath685 so small that @xmath689 $ ] .
( due to assumption i we have @xmath690 . )
+ consider some @xmath691 with @xmath692 .
we claim that for @xmath693 @xmath694.\ ] ] denote @xmath695 which by s - shapedness of @xmath69 satisfies @xmath696 . in view of our system s symmetry
, we may assume w.l.o.g .
that @xmath697 .
according to ( [ eq_mean_for_convex_combi ] ) and ( [ eq_p_tilda_acting_on_representing_measures ] ) we have @xmath698 so that , due to ( [ eq_estimate_f_near_zero ] ) and ( [ eq_estimate_tau_sigma_near_zero ] ) , @xmath699}\circ\sigma_{r}(y)}{6}\right )      \cdot \sigma_r(y)\,p_{r}(y)\,d\nu(y)\\      & { \geqslant}\int_{{y}}\left ( \frac{1_{[-\frac23,-r)}(y)}{6 - 6\varepsilon^2}\left ( \frac{1}{2 }          + \varepsilon\right)+\frac{1_{[-r,\frac23]}(y)}{6}\left ( \frac{1}{2 }         -\kappa\varepsilon\right)\right)\cdot ( y+r ) \,p_{r}(y)\,d\nu(y)\text{. }   \end{aligned}\ ] ] combining this with the parallel estimate for @xmath700 , we get @xmath701}\frac{\left (          \frac{1}{2}-\kappa\varepsilon\right )   ( y+r)}{6}\,d\nu(y).\ ] ] continuing , we find that @xmath702}\frac{\frac{1}{2}-\kappa\varepsilon}{6}\cdot      y\,d\nu(y)+\frac{\frac{1}{2}-\kappa\varepsilon}{6}\,\cdot r\\      & { \geqslant}\int_{[-\frac{2}{3},0)}\frac{\frac{1}{2}+\varepsilon}{6 - 6\varepsilon^2}\cdot      y\,d\nu(y)+\int_{[0,\frac{2}{3}]}\frac{\frac{1}{2}-\kappa\varepsilon}{6}\cdot      y\,d\nu(y)+\frac{\frac{1}{2}-\kappa\varepsilon}{6}\,\cdot r\\      & { \geqslant}\int_{[-\frac{2}{3},0)}k\cdot\overline{w}(y)\,d\nu(y )      + \int_{[0,\frac{2}{3}]}k^*\cdot\overline{w}(y)\,d\nu(y )      + \frac{\frac{1}{2 } -\kappa\varepsilon}{6}\,\cdot r\ ,    \end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath703 . as , because of ( [ eq_estimate_f_near_zero ] ) , @xmath704 , so that @xmath705 , we conclude @xmath706 since @xmath707 and @xmath708 whenever @xmath709 . this proves .
+ now take any @xmath673 .
then @xmath710 , and the second alternative of proposition  [ prop : summary ] applies , so that @xmath711 and @xmath712 for all @xmath583 larger than some @xmath713 . in particular , @xmath714 for these @xmath583 in view of .
applying , for @xmath715 , the estimate to @xmath716 and @xmath717 , we obtain @xmath718 suppose for a contradiction that @xmath719 for some @xmath720 .
then @xmath721 , and therefore @xmath722
. we can thus continue inductively to see that @xmath723 which contradicts @xmath710 .
therefore @xmath724 for all @xmath720 , and the assertion of our lemma follows .
[ lemma : stable - alternative ] in the bistable regime , if @xmath725 and @xmath691 are densities in @xmath726 with @xmath414 , then at most one of @xmath319 and @xmath727 can belong to @xmath661 .
suppose that @xmath728 .
we are going to show that @xmath729 , i.e. @xmath730 as @xmath495 .
assume for a contradiction that also @xmath731 .
we denote the parameters obtained from @xmath319 by @xmath732 , and define @xmath733 analogously .
then our assumption implies that @xmath734 .    in view of , @xmath735 , and one
checks immediately that @xmath736 so that there is @xmath737 such that @xmath738 for all @xmath739 . because of the strict monotonicity of @xmath342 ( lemma [ lemma : pre - monotonicity ] ) we have @xmath740 , so that ( replacing @xmath13 and @xmath365 by these iterates ) we can assume w.l.o.g .
that @xmath741 .
denote @xmath742 so that @xmath743 and ( @xmath744 being non - decreasing ) @xmath745 for @xmath746
. therefore    @xmath747    in view of the lower bounds for @xmath748 and @xmath749 , repeated application of the estimate from lemma [ lemma : gap - estimate ] yields @xmath750 observe that the last integral is strictly positive because @xmath414 , cf . .
on the other hand , due to proposition  [ prop : summary ] there are @xmath751 such that @xmath752 , \ ] ] and as @xmath753 and @xmath754 ( whence also @xmath755 ) , there exists a constant @xmath529 such that @xmath756 for @xmath757 .
hence @xmath758 for @xmath757 by lemma  [ lemma : roland ] , and as @xmath759 , this contradicts the previous estimate .
we can now conclude this section with the    suppose that @xmath760 .
for @xmath761 let @xmath762 .
then @xmath763 , hence @xmath764 by the previous proposition . therefore , due to proposition  [ prop : summary ] and monotonicity of @xmath765 , for any @xmath766
, @xmath767 converges to @xmath768 as @xmath495 .    on the other hand , @xmath769 , so @xmath319 is in the boundary of the basin of @xmath349 .
replacing @xmath770 by @xmath771 yields the corresponding result for the basin of @xmath358 .
as @xmath10 is based on a parametrised family of pfos where the _ branches _ of the underlying map ( and not only their weights ) depend on the parameter , it is nowhere differentiable , neither as an operator on @xmath11 nor as an operator on the space @xmath772 of ( much more regular ) functions of bounded variation on @xmath58 . on the other hand , as the branches of the map and their parametric dependence are analytic , one can show that @xmath10 is differentiable as an operator on the space of functions that can be extended holomorphically to some complex neighbourhood of @xmath773 .    here
we will focus on a more general but slightly weaker differentiability statement .
[ lemma : differentiability ] let @xmath774 be a probability density w.r.t . @xmath12 and let @xmath775 have @xmath776 .
then @xmath777 where @xmath778 , @xmath779 , and @xmath780 .
if we consider @xmath10 as an operator from @xmath772 to @xmath11 , then @xmath10 is even differentiable at each probability density @xmath781 and @xmath782    in order to simplify the notation define a kind of transfer operator @xmath783 by @xmath784 and note that @xmath785 .
observing that @xmath786 , we have @xmath787 .
define @xmath788 for a function @xmath774 denote by @xmath789 the antiderivative of @xmath319 .
then @xmath790 where @xmath791 as @xmath792 , we have @xmath793 together with this yields @xmath794 and @xmath795 with a constant that involves only the first two derivatives of @xmath319
.    now let @xmath774 be a probability density , and let @xmath775 be such that @xmath796 .
let @xmath797 and @xmath798 .
then @xmath799 this implies at once formula for the directional derivative , and as @xmath800 ( @xmath801 ) uniformly for @xmath802 in the unit ball of @xmath772 , also follows at once .
[ prop : hyperbolic - fixed ] in the bistable regime , @xmath803 is a hyperbolic fixed point of @xmath804 in the following sense : the derivative of @xmath805 at @xmath803 has a one - dimensional unstable subspace and a codimension @xmath24 stable subspace .
let @xmath806 .
as @xmath807 and @xmath808=[x]$ ] , it follows from that @xmath809\otimes\phi$ ] .
( here @xmath810 $ ] denotes the function @xmath811 , etc . )
observe now that @xmath812)=\frac1{12}$ ] .
then @xmath813=p_0[x]+\frac b{12}\,[x]=(\frac12+\frac b{12})[x]$ ] so that , for @xmath814 , @xmath63 has the unstable eigendirection @xmath815 $ ] with eigenvalue @xmath816 . on the other hand , as @xmath817 , we have @xmath818 , so the constant density @xmath24 is a neutral eigendirection , and finally , for @xmath819 , we have @xmath820 , so @xmath821 .
in theorem  [ theo : passage - to - infinity ] we proved that , in the bistable regime , each weak accumulation point of the sequence @xmath166@xmath13@xmath167 is of the form @xmath172 for some @xmath173 $ ] , i.e. that the stationary states of the finite - size systems approach a mixture of the stationary states of the infinite - size system .
it is natural to expect that actually @xmath175 , meaning that any limit state thus obtained is a mixture of _ stable _ stationary states of @xmath10 .
while we could not prove this for the model discussed so far , we now argue that this conjecture can be verified if we add some noise to the systems .    at each step of the dynamics
we perturb the parameter of the single - site maps by a small amount .
to make this idea more precise , let @xmath822 let @xmath823 be i.i.d .
symmetric real valued random variables with common distribution @xmath824 and @xmath825 . for @xmath826 and @xmath197 let us define the @xmath184-valued markov process @xmath827 by @xmath828 and @xmath829 assume now that the distribution of @xmath830 has density @xmath831 w.r.t .
lebesgue measure on @xmath184 .
then routine calculations show that the distribution of @xmath832 has density @xmath833 where @xmath834 is the pfo of the map @xmath835 , @xmath836 .
it is straightforward to check that , for sufficiently small @xmath526 , lemmas  [ lemma : homeo ]  [ lemma : inv - contraction ] from section  [ sec : finite - sys - proofs ] carry over to all @xmath837 ( @xmath838 ) with uniform bounds , and that @xmath839 so that the perturbation theorem of @xcite guarantees that the process @xmath827 has a unique stationary probability @xmath13@xmath840 whose density w.r.t .
@xmath841 tends , in @xmath842 , to the unique invariant density of @xmath90 as @xmath843 .
this convergence is not uniform in @xmath0 , however .
nevertheless , folklore arguments show that there is some @xmath844 such that , for all @xmath845 and all @xmath196 the absolutely continuous stationary measure @xmath13@xmath840 is unique so that the symmetry properties of the maps @xmath55 and the random variables @xmath846 guarantee that @xmath13@xmath840 is symmetric in the sense that its density @xmath847 satisfies @xmath848 .    on the other hand , for each fixed @xmath211 , all weak limit points of the measures @xmath13@xmath849 as @xmath15 are stationary probabilities for the @xmath850-valued markov process @xmath851 defined by @xmath852 compare the definition of @xmath93 in .
the proof is completely analogous to the corresponding one for the unperturbed case ( see lemma  [ le : contttil ] and corollary  [ coro : contttil ] ) .
for @xmath845 the symmetry of the @xmath13@xmath840 carries over to these limit measures @xmath63 in the sense that @xmath853 for each borel measurable set @xmath854 where @xmath855 for all borel subsets @xmath856 .
the following proposition then shows that , in the bistable regime and for small @xmath211 and large @xmath0 , the measures @xmath13@xmath840 are weakly close to the mixture @xmath857 of the stable states for @xmath10 ; compare also theorem  [ theo : passage - to - infinity ] .
suppose @xmath858 so that we are in the bistable regime and recall that the @xmath846 are symmetric random variables .
then , for every @xmath220 there is @xmath859 such that for each @xmath860 the stationary distribution @xmath861 of @xmath862 on @xmath863 is supported on the set of measures @xmath864 which have density @xmath865 with representing measures @xmath866 satisfying @xmath867 .
let @xmath63 be a stationary distribution of @xmath868 that occurs as a weak limit of the measures @xmath13@xmath840 .
so @xmath63 is symmetric .
just as in the proof of theorem  [ theo : passage - to - infinity ] , where the `` zero noise limit '' , namely the transformation @xmath95 is treated , one argues that @xmath63 is supported by the set of measures @xmath869 , @xmath870 .
arguing as in the derivation of one shows that densities in the support of @xmath63 can be approximated in @xmath11 by densities from @xmath726 , and the stationarity of @xmath63 implies that @xmath63 is indeed supported by measures with densities from @xmath726 .
therefore the process @xmath871 can be described by the transfer operator @xmath872 of an iterated function system on @xmath306 just as the self - consistent pfo @xmath177 is described by the operator @xmath873 in equation .
the only difference is that in this case one first chooses the parameter @xmath302 randomly , @xmath874 and then the branch @xmath298 or @xmath299 with respective probabilities @xmath875 and @xmath876 .
let @xmath877 be such that @xmath878 .
suppose now that for some realisation of the process @xmath871 the numbers @xmath879 satisfy condition ( @xmath880 ) of lemma  [ lemma : crucial ] for all @xmath211 .
then it follows , as in the proof of proposition  [ prop : summary ] , that @xmath881 and the measures @xmath868 converge weakly to @xmath12 so that also @xmath882 . as @xmath883 for infinitely many @xmath583
almost surely , both limit can not be zero at the same time , and we conclude that almost surely there is some @xmath211 such that ( @xmath884 ) is not satisfied . in particular , there are @xmath885 and @xmath886 such that ( @xmath887 ) is violated for @xmath888 with some positive probability @xmath889 .
let @xmath890 with @xmath891 .
( so @xmath831 and @xmath892 are random objects . ) as in we conclude that @xmath893 or @xmath894 in this case . without loss of generality
we assume that the latter happens with probability at least @xmath895 .
next , as in we may choose @xmath896 so small that @xmath897 .
hence , for reasons of continuity , there is @xmath898 such that also @xmath899 if @xmath900 .
therefore , in view of the monotonicity of the operator @xmath901 , we can conclude that @xmath902 for all @xmath903 with probability at least @xmath895 .
now fix @xmath220 . by lemma  [ lemma : controlled - convergence][item : controlled - convergence - b ] there is some ( non - random ) @xmath649 such that @xmath904 for all @xmath905 with probability at least @xmath895 .
but then , by continuity reasons again , there is @xmath906 such that @xmath907 for all @xmath903 with probability at least @xmath895 .
the claim of the proposition follows now , because @xmath908 is a markov process and because the stationary distribution @xmath63 is symmetric .
it suffices to prove the convergence for evaluations of any lipschitz continuous function @xmath909 defined on @xmath58 .
let us denote @xmath910 ( resp .
@xmath911 ) , and @xmath912 ( resp .
@xmath913 ) the discontinuity point of @xmath914 ( resp .
@xmath55 ) . recall that @xmath915 ( resp .
@xmath916 ) .    let us fix @xmath211 .
@xmath63 being non - atomic , there exists @xmath220 such that the interval @xmath917 $ ] is of @xmath63-measure smaller that @xmath526 .
the weak convergence of @xmath918 to @xmath63 implies that @xmath919 tends to @xmath683 , and that @xmath920 .
let us choose @xmath921 such that for all @xmath739 , @xmath922 and @xmath923 .
one then has @xmath924
since the application @xmath925 as a single discontinuity point , which is of zero @xmath63-measure , the first term converges to zero .
the second one also goes to zero since it measures the dependence of @xmath55 on its parameter away from the discontinuity point ( one can make an explicit computation ) .
we start with some observations on the function @xmath926 that are based on symbolic computations and on numerical evaluations .
one finds @xmath927 from this numerical evidence ( see figure  [ fig : plots-1 ] for a plot ) it is clear that , for @xmath928 $ ] , @xmath929 hence @xmath930 . as @xmath931 @xmath932 follows
provided @xmath933 .
therefore , assumption is fulfilled , if @xmath934    for @xmath935 , in which case @xmath936 and @xmath937 this can be checked numerically .
( observe that @xmath938 and distinguish the cases @xmath939 and @xmath814 . ) for an illustration see the rightmost plot of @xmath940 in figure  [ fig : plots-1 ] .
o.  bandtlow , o.  jenkinson , _ invariant measures for real analytic expanding maps _ , j. london math .
* 75 * ( 2007 ) , 343 - 368 .
t.  chawanya , s.  morita , _ on the bifurcation structure of the mean - field fluctuation in the globally coupled tent map systems _ , physica d * 116 * ( 1998 ) , 44 - 70 .
g.  chichilnisky , _ topology and invertible maps _ , adv .
mathematics * 21 * ( 1998 ) , 113 - 123 . d.a .
dawson , j.  grtner , _ large deviations from the mckean - vlasov limit for weakly interacting diffusions _ , stochastics , * 20 * ( 1987 ) , 247 - 308 .
r.  de la llave , _ invariant manifolds associaed to invariant subspaces without invariant complements : a graph transform approach , _ mathematical physics electronic journal * 9 * ( 2003 ) , paper 3 .
( http://www.ma.utexas.edu/mpej/vol/9/3.ps )
r.  dudley , real analysis and probability , cambridge univ . press ( 2002 ) .
ershov , a.b .
potapov , _ on mean field fluctuations in globally coupled maps _
, physica d * 86 * ( 1995 ) , 523 - 558 .
e.  jrvenp , _ an srb - measure for globally coupled analytic expanding circle maps , _ nonlinearity * 10 * ( 1997 ) , 1435 - 1469
. k.  kaneko , _ globally coupled chaos violates the law of large numbers but not the central limit theorem _ , phys .
letters * 65 * ( 1990 ) , 1391 - 1394 . k.  kaneko , _
remarks on the mean field dynamics of networks of chaotic elements _ , physica d * 86 * ( 1995 ) , 158 - 170 .
g.  keller , _ stochastic stability in some chaotic dynamical systems _ , monatshefte math .
* 94 * ( 1982 ) , 313 - 333 .
g.  keller , _ an ergodic theoretic approach to mean field coupled maps _ ,
progress in probability , vol .
* 46 * ( 2000 ) , 183 - 208 .
g.  keller , _ mixing for finite systems of coupled tent maps _
. math . * 216 * ( 1997 ) , 315 - 321 .
krantz , h.r .
parks , a primer of real analytic functions , sec . ed .
, birkhuser ( 1992 ) .
k.  krzyzewski , w.  szlenk , _ on invariant measures for expanding differentiable mappings _ , stud . math . * 33 * ( 1969 ) , 83 - 92 . d.h .
mayer , _ approach to equilibrium for locally expanding maps in @xmath945 _ , commun .
* 95 * ( 1984 ) , 1 - 15 .
n.  nakagawa , t.s .
komatsu , _ dominant collective motion in globally coupled tent maps _ , phys .
e * 57 * ( 1998 ) 1570 .
n.  nakagawa , t.s .
komatsu , _ confined chaotic behavior in collective motion for populations of globally coupled chaotic elements _ , phys .
rev e * 59 * ( 1999 ) , 1675 - 1682 . c.  ptzsche , s.  siegmund , _ @xmath946-smoothness of invariant fiber bundles , _ topol .
methods nonlinear anal .
* 24 * ( 2004 ) , 107 - 145 .
( http://www.math.uni-frankfurt.de/
siegmund / preprints/03hpoesie.ps ) d.  ruelle , _ zeta - functions for expanding maps and anosov flows _
, inventiones math . *
34 * ( 1976 ) , 231 - 242 .
f. schweiger , _ invariant measures for piecewise fractional linear maps_. j. austral .
a * 34 * ( 1983 ) , 55 - 59 .
sznitman , alain - sol , _ topics in propagation of chaos .
ecole dete de probabilites de saint - flour xix1989 _ , lecture notes in math . , * 1464
* , 165251,springer , berlin , 1991 .