in this paper we study an application of left - invariant total ordering of braid group @xmath1 to knot theory .
an left - invariant total ordering , called dehornoy ordering is an interesting structure of braid groups found in 1990 s by dehornoy ( @xcite ) .
today the ordering is interpreted in both algebraic and geometric way and these interpretation shows the dehornoy ordering is a quite natural structure of braid groups .
braid groups are very important tool for studying links .
many link invariants such as jones polynomial are first constructed via closed braid representative of links , so it is natural to study an application of this interesting structure of braid groups to knot theory . in @xcite,@xcite
it is found that braid ordering can be seen as some kinds of restriction for admissibility of braid moves .
braid moves are moves of closed braids which do not change their representing link types .
most typical ( and important ) example of braid moves are _ exchange move _ or _ destabilization , stabilization _ , which is shown in figure [ braidmove ] .
these works suggest that there would be some relationships between birman - menasco s braid foliation theory and ordering of braid groups because braid moves appears naturally in braid foliation theory ( @xcite ) .
for example , exchange move is used to make braid foliation simple and it is one of the most fundamental operation in birman - menasco s braid foliation theory .
indeed , we investigate relationship between braid foliation and left invariant total ordering of braid groups , and obtain following result :        [ thm : main1 ] let @xmath2 be a braid and @xmath0 be an essential , genus @xmath3 closed surface in the complement of closed braid @xmath4 .    1 .
if @xmath0 is tiled , then @xmath5_{d } < g+2 $ ] .
2 .   if @xmath0 is mixed - foliated , @xmath5_{d } < 2g+1 $ ] .
3 .   if @xmath5_{d } \geq 2g+1 $ ] , then @xmath0 is circular foliated
.    in above statements , @xmath6_{d}$ ] represents _ dehornoy floor _ of @xmath7 , which is a non - negative integer defined in section 2 .
this integer is determined by the dehornoy ordering of braid groups , and efficiently computable .
the notion of tiled , mixed foliated or circular foliated are derived from birman - menasco s braid foliation theory , which will be explained in section 3 .
proof of theorem [ thm : main1 ] will be given in section 4 .
theorem [ thm : main1 ] means braid ordering gives some information about the geometry of closed braid complements , and especially if dehornoy floor is relatively large with respect to its genus , then the surface can be positioned to special position , which is simple .
we remark that dehornoy floor might vary under even conjugation , stabilization or destabilization , so it is far from knot invariant . indeed
, dehornoy floor of braids obtained by performing stabilization always vanish .
nevertheless theorem [ thm : main1 ] seems to suggests that braid ordering provide some important information about its closure which can not be obtained from known invariants of links .    as an application of theorem [ thm : main1 ] we obtain a sufficient condition for nielsen - thurston classification determines the geometry of its closure s complement .
nielsen - thurston theorem states braids are classified into three types by their dynamics ; _ periodic , reducible _ and _ pseudo - anosov_. on the other hand , a famous thurston s hyperbolization theorem shows knots are classified into following three types by the geometry of their complements ; _ torus knots , satellite knots , _ and _ hyperbolic knots_. although there are many similarities between these two classifications , in general there are no one - to - one correspondence of them . in figure
[ fig : example ] , we give an example of periodic , reducible and pseudo - anosov braids whose closure represents @xmath8-torus knot . therefore the following question naturally arises :    _ when the nielsen - thurston classification of braids completely determine the geometrical types of its closure ? _    theorem [ thm : main2 ] partially answers the question .
-torus knots , width=226 ]    [ thm : main2 ] let @xmath2 be a braid whose closure is a knot . if @xmath5_{d } \geq 3 $ ] , following holds :    1 .
@xmath7 is periodic if and only if @xmath4 is a torus knot .
2 .   @xmath7 is reducible if and only if @xmath4 is a satellite knot .
3 .   @xmath7 is pseudo - anosov if and only if @xmath4 is a hyperbolic knot .
especially , under this assumption , satellite knots are all braided - satellite .
we recall that satellite knot @xmath9 is called braided satellite if @xmath9 admit closed braid representatives whose axis does not intersect some essential tori in the complement of @xmath9 .
this theorem implies , under the condition @xmath5_{d } \geq 3 $ ] , the nielsen - thurston classification of braid groups and the geometric classification of their closures are in one - to - one correspondence . in @xcite
, los studied the relationship between these two classifications in the case knots are represented by closed braid with minimum braid index .
main result of @xcite shows under the condition of braid index , two classifications are related each other by performing exchange move . however , in general to determine braid index of given knots or links are very difficult question and to see whether or not given braids admit exchange move is also difficult , so the relationships between two classifications can not be seen directly . in this
regard , theorem [ thm : main2 ] gives more general and direct condition for the question .
we will give a proof of theorem [ thm : main2 ] in section 5 , and in this section we also give concrete method to create hyperbolic knots via nielsen - thurston theory .
the author would like to thank his adviser toshitake kohno for many helpful suggestions and advices for preparing this manuscript .
he also would like to thank eiko kin for useful conversations .
in this section we review some of fundamental facts of dehornoy ordering and dehornoy floor .
braid group @xmath1 is , by definition , a group which is presented by @xmath10 geometrically , elements of braid group @xmath2 are represented by braided @xmath11-strands which move from above to below , oriented downward . by connecting their endpoints of strands canonically , we obtain an oriented link . we denote this link by @xmath4 and call _ closed braid _ or _ closure _ of @xmath7 .
we call the braid @xmath12 _ garside s fundamental braid _ and denote it by @xmath13 .
the garside fundamental braid@xmath13 plays an important role in braid groups .
it is known that @xmath14 generates the center of @xmath1 , which is an infinite cyclic group . for these basic facts about braid group ,
see @xcite .      in this section
we give a brief exposition of left - invariant total ordering of braid groups called dehornoy ordering , and define dehornoy floor .
dehornoy floor is first introduced in @xcite , though they do not use term dehornoy floor .
this is a measure of how far braid is from the identity elements with respect to dehornoy ordering and can be seen as some kinds of complexity of braids .
we describe fundamental results about dehornoy floor , proved in @xcite,@xcite .
a braid @xmath2 is called @xmath15-@xmath16 if @xmath7 can be represented by a word which contains at least one @xmath17 , and contains no @xmath18 for some @xmath19 .
we say @xmath20 is true if and only if the braid @xmath21 is @xmath15-positive .
it is known that the relation @xmath22 defines left - invariant total ordering of @xmath1 ; that is , @xmath22 is total ordering and if braids @xmath23 satisfy @xmath24 , then for all braid @xmath25 , @xmath26 holds .
we call this ordering _ dehornoy ordering_. dehornoy ordering has following nice property , called
_ property @xmath27 _ or _
subword property_.    [ prop : property - s ] for any braids @xmath28 and @xmath19 , @xmath29 holds .    as we mentioned at introduction , there are many other interpretation and definition of dehornoy ordering .
see @xcite for those other definitions and meanings .
we will describe one of the geometrical definition later .
using dehornoy ordering , we define dehornoy floor of braids @xmath5_{d}$ ] as follows .
dehornoy floor @xmath5_{d}$ ] of braid @xmath2 is a minimal non - negative integer @xmath30 which satisfies @xmath31 , where @xmath32 .
now we remark one important facts
. we must be careful that when we think about dehornoy floor , which @xmath1 a braid @xmath7 belongs to is very important .
for example , for a braid @xmath33 , @xmath5_{d}=1 $ ] if we consider @xmath34 , and @xmath5_{d}=0 $ ] if we consider @xmath35 . fortunately ,
if we use braid groups to describe links , the number of strands are always implicit , so there might be no confusion about the number of braid strands .
so in most cases , we omit to write which @xmath1 a braid @xmath7 belongs to
. we also remark that dehornoy floor is not a conjugacy invariant of braids .
for example , 3-braid @xmath36 has dehornoy floor @xmath37 but its conjugation @xmath38 has zero dehornoy floor .
this is mainly because dehornoy ordering is not right - invariant ; that is , it does not hold that for every @xmath25 , @xmath39 whenever @xmath20 . thus , dehornoy floor is far from knot invariant .
the most important property of dehornor floor is that it can be seen as some kinds of restriction for admissibility of braid moves .
we summarize the basic properties of dehornoy floor , all of which are proved in @xcite , or @xcite .
[ prop : dehornoyfloor ] let @xmath23 .
then following holds .    1 .
if braid @xmath2 is represented by braid word which contains @xmath40 occurrence of @xmath41 and @xmath42 occurrence of @xmath43 , then @xmath5_{d } < max\{s , k\}$ ] .
@xmath44_{d}-[\beta']_{d}|\leq 1 $ ] if @xmath7 and @xmath45 are conjugate .
3 .   @xmath46_{d } \leq 1+[\alpha]_{d}+[\beta]_{d}$ ] .
4 .   if closure of braid @xmath2 admit destabilization or exchange move , @xmath5_{d } \leq 1 $ ] .
5 .   for every @xmath11 ,
there exist positive integer @xmath47 such that for every @xmath2 , if @xmath5_{d}>r(n)$ ] then @xmath4 is the unique closed @xmath11-braid representative of link types represented by its closure .
that is , if @xmath48 holds for some @xmath49 , @xmath7 and @xmath45 are conjugate .
we remark that dehornoy floor is not a conjugacy invariant but proposition [ prop : dehornoyfloor ] ( 2 ) shows taking conjugate changes dehornoy floor at most by one .
our definition of dehornoy floor is slightly different from one in @xcite .
our definition is rather after @xcite .
we adopt this definition because for application of knot theory , this formulation seems to be more natural and makes statement of results simple .
there exist an infinite family of left - invariant total ordering of braid groups , containing dehornoy ordering , called _ thurston - type ordering _ ( see @xcite or @xcite ) .
most of results in this paper can be stated by using thurston - type ordering instead of using dehornoy ordering , especially using `` thurston floor '' defined by the similar way .
now we give a geometric description of dehornor ordering given in @xcite .
let @xmath50 be a graph in @xmath51 consisting of horizontal line which connects puncture points .
see figure [ fig : braidorder_meaning ] .
we identify braid groups as a relative mapping class group @xmath52 , which is a group of isotopy classes of homeomorphisms of @xmath51 whose restriction to boundary @xmath53 is an identity . for braid
@xmath54 , consider the image of graph @xmath50 . by performing isotopy , we can assume @xmath55 and @xmath56 have minimal intersections .
if @xmath57 , these graphs must be different , so at some puncture point two graphs will diverge .
we say @xmath58 if at divergence point , @xmath56 moves left side of @xmath55 .
see figure [ fig : braidorder_meaning ] .
in @xcite it is proved that this relation @xmath59 coincide with dehornoy ordering @xmath60 .    since @xmath14 corresponds to rotation of the disc @xmath51 ,
dehornoy floor of @xmath7 is the number of how many times the initial segment of graph @xmath56 winding around @xmath53 under neglecting orientation .     and examples , width=377 ]      for later use , we prove slightly more precious estimation of dehornoy floor than proposition [ prop : dehornoyfloor ] ( 1 ) .
[ prop : newestimation ] if a braid @xmath7 is conjugate to a braid @xmath61 which is represented by braid word which contains @xmath40 occurrence of @xmath41 and @xmath42 occurrence of @xmath43 , then @xmath5_{d } < max\{s , k\}$ ] .
we show @xmath62 .
the proof of @xmath63 is identical . by assumption , we can write @xmath64 where @xmath65 is a braid word which contains no @xmath41 and @xmath25 . we remark that we can assume @xmath66 is empty because we can amalgamate @xmath66 into conjugating element @xmath67 .
let @xmath68 . from property
s , we can find a braid @xmath69 by inserting @xmath70 to braid @xmath7 , for sufficiently large @xmath71 . we show @xmath72 , that is equivalent to an inequality @xmath73 .
first we consider the case @xmath74 .
we use the geometric interpretation of dehornoy ordering .
let @xmath75 be a sub - disc of @xmath51 which contains @xmath76-th puncture of @xmath51 .
since @xmath77 is p - times twists around @xmath78 and @xmath14 is a rotation along @xmath53 , we conclude that the image of @xmath79 moves more left than @xmath80 for all @xmath81 , thus @xmath82 .
induction about @xmath42 gives desired result .
this proposition gives more accurate estimation of dehornoy floor than using lemma [ prop : dehornoyfloor ] ( 1 ) .
proposition [ prop : newestimation ] makes results in @xcite a bit stronger form because in @xcite they use estimation via lemma [ prop : dehornoyfloor ] ( 1 ) .
especially , we conclude that if @xmath4 admit destabilization or exchange move , then @xmath83=0 $ ] .
in this section , we summarize basic machinery of birman - menasco s braid foliation theory in case of an embedded essential surface . for details of these techniques , see @xcite or @xcite .
fix an unknot @xmath84 , called _ axis _ and choose a meridian fibration @xmath85\}$ ] of the solid torus @xmath86 .
a link @xmath87 in @xmath86 is called _ closed braid _ with axis @xmath88 if @xmath87 intersects every fiber @xmath89 transversely and each fiber is oriented so that all intersections of @xmath87 are positive .
it is easy to see closed braid @xmath87 intersects every fiber @xmath89 in the same number of points , and we call this number _ braid index _ of @xmath87 . note that closed braids @xmath4 obtained by a braid @xmath90 as described in section 2 is indeed closed braid with @xmath91axis and braid index is @xmath11 .
conversely , if we cut solid torus @xmath92 along the fiber @xmath93 , we obtain a braid @xmath7 .
it is known that isotopy in @xmath92 does not change conjugacy class of @xmath7 and if the isotopy fixes @xmath94 , obtained braid @xmath7 does not change as a element of braid group though geometrical configuration of strands are varied .
a closed embedded surface @xmath0 in @xmath86 is called _ essential _ if @xmath0 is incompressible and non - boundary parallel .
let @xmath0 be a essential closed surface in @xmath95 .
then the intersections of fiber @xmath96 with @xmath0 induce a singular foliation of @xmath0 .
leaves of this foliation are connected components of intersection with fiber .
braid foliation techniques are , in short , changing this foliation simpler as possible and obtain standard and simple position of the surface and braids . by the argument in @xcite , @xmath0 can be isotoped to `` general '' position with respect to the fibration satisfying :    ( 1 ) : :    axis @xmath88 pierces @xmath0 transversely in finitely    many points .
( 2 ) : :    for each point @xmath97 , there exists neighborhood    @xmath98 of @xmath99 such that    @xmath100 is radially foliated disc . ( 3 ) : :    all but finitely many fibers @xmath89 intersect    @xmath0 transversely , and each of the exceptional fiber is    tangent to @xmath0 exactly one point .
moreover , each point of    tangency is saddle tangency and lies in the interior of    @xmath101 .
notice that the condition above is a bit stronger than usual general position arguments , since usual general position arguments only tell us that each tangency is local minimum , maximum , or saddle .
in fact , this strong sense of general position is achieved from usual general position by deleting local minimum or maximum tangency .
we say fiber @xmath89 _ regular _ if @xmath89 transverse @xmath0 and _ singular _ if @xmath89 tangent to @xmath0 . in the foliation of @xmath0 , every non - singular leaf of induced foliation
is either simple closed curve or arc which has both endpoints on axis @xmath88 .
we call former _ c - circle _ and the latter _ b - arc_. each b - arc in a fiber @xmath89 separates @xmath89 to two components , and we say b - arc is _ essential _ if both of these components are pierced at least once by @xmath87 . for c - circle in a fiber @xmath89 , c - circle bound a disc @xmath102 in @xmath89 and we say c - circle is _ essential _ if @xmath102 is pierced at least once by @xmath87 .
as shown in @xcite , we can assume further more condition about foliation of @xmath0 .
( 4 ) : :    every fiber is essential . ( 5 ) : :    every c - circle is homotopically non - trivial .
this condition is achieved by deleting all inessential leaves or homotopically trivial c - circle . from now on
, we always assume that @xmath0 satisfies condition ( 1)@xmath103(5 ) .
we call an intersection point of @xmath88 with @xmath0 _ vertex_. for each vertex @xmath81 , the valance of vertex @xmath81 is , by definition , the number of singular leaves which pass @xmath81 .
we say singular point is @xmath104 if the singular point derived from two b - arcs . @xmath105 and
@xmath106 are defined by the same way .
each type of singularity has a neighborhood in @xmath0 as shown in figure [ fig : regions ] , and we say such a neighborhood _
regions_.    a foliation of @xmath0 is classified into following three types according to its containing leaves ; we say @xmath0 is _ tiled _ if @xmath0 is foliated entirely b - arc and _ circular _ if @xmath0 is foliated entirely c - circle . the remaining case , if @xmath0 is foliated by both b - arcs and c - circles , we say @xmath0 is _ mixed_. in tiled surface , there are only bb - singularity and circular surface has only cc - singularity
. mixed foliation might have all types of singularity and always contains bc - singularity .
now we are ready to prove theorem [ thm : main1 ] . from now on
, we always assume @xmath0 satisfies all conditions ( 1)-(5 ) described in section 3 .
first we consider the case @xmath107 . in this case
, @xmath0 is never circular foliated .
the main result of @xcite shows in this case @xmath4 admit exchange move if @xmath0 is tiled and @xmath7 has word representatives which contains no @xmath108 for some @xmath42 , so @xmath5_{d}=0 $ ] .
thus , in this case theorem holds .
thus , we always assume @xmath109
.      first we prove statement ( 1 ) , tiled case .
assume @xmath0 is tiled .
since @xmath0 is tiled , every singular point is bb - singularity , and @xmath0 can be decomposed into bb - tiles .
a decomposition into bb - tiles determines cellular - decomposition of @xmath0 , and we call this _ tiling_. the notion of vertex and valance we defined in section 3 coincides to usual definition of vertex and valance in this cellular decomposition
.    first we estimate a valance of each vertex , using euler characteristic argument which is standard in braid foliation theory .
[ lem : eulerform - tiled ] let @xmath7 be a braid and @xmath0 be a tiled essential genus @xmath3 closed surface in the complement of closed braid @xmath4 , and @xmath110 be a number of vertex whose valance is @xmath111 .
then , @xmath112 holds .
let @xmath113 be a number of 1-cell and 2-cell of tiling .
since @xmath0 has an euler characteristic @xmath114 , @xmath115 . on the other hand , each 1-cell is the boundary of exactly two 2-cells and each 1-cell has two vertices as their boundary , so @xmath116 and @xmath117 . by combining these equation , we establish the claim .    since each term of equation in lemma [ lem : eulerform - tiled ] is positive , lemma [ lem : eulerform - tiled ] implies @xmath110
are bounded except @xmath118 .
next we see that dehornor floor can be estimated from above by a valance of vertex .
[ lem : estimate - tiled ] let @xmath0 be a tiled essential genus @xmath3 closed surface in the complement of closed braid @xmath119 . if @xmath0 contains a valance @xmath99 vertex , then @xmath5_{d } < \frac{v}{2}+1 $ ] .
let @xmath81 be a valance @xmath99 vertex and @xmath120 be a sequence of singular fibers such that each @xmath121 contains singular leaves which pass the vertex @xmath81 .
let @xmath122 be a b - arc in the fiber @xmath89 which passes @xmath99 . by taking isotopy near each singular fiber @xmath121
, we can always assume that for sufficiently small @xmath123 , braiding of strands does not occur in the interval @xmath124 $ ] and each fiber @xmath125 is pierced by @xmath87 exactly the same points @xmath126 .
notice that this modification can be done without changing @xmath94 so this modification does not change braid @xmath7 as a element of braid groups .
after this modification , we can always consider sub - braiding in each interval @xmath127 $ ] , @xmath128 $ ] .
since @xmath129 is chosen to sufficiently small , we can assume there exist no other singular points in each interval @xmath124 $ ] .
now we see a sequence of @xmath122 as a move of b - arc in @xmath130
. then we can also assume by taking isotopy of surface and braids , in the interval @xmath128 $ ] , @xmath122 do not move when we see @xmath122 as a move of the arcs .
first we investigate a sub - braiding @xmath131 in @xmath132 $ ] . by taking appropriate conjugacy of @xmath131
, we can assume @xmath133 consists of several number of vertical arcs as depicted in left of figure [ fig : model ] and bb - singularity in @xmath134 is modeled as shown in the right of figure [ fig : model ] .
we denote this braid by @xmath135    then , by seeing braids as a move of puncture point of disc , we can write this modified braiding @xmath136 in @xmath132 $ ] as shown in figure [ fig : braiding ] , which contains only one @xmath137 .
the original braiding @xmath131 in @xmath132 $ ] is conjugate to the braid @xmath136 so proposition [ prop : newestimation ] shows @xmath138_{d } = 0 $ ] .
$ ] : bb - singularity case , width=302 ]    iterating this argument , we conclude that sub - braid @xmath139 in the interval @xmath140 $ ] for @xmath141 has zero dehornoy floor .
since original braid @xmath7 is conjugate to the braid @xmath142 , by proposition [ prop : dehornoyfloor ] , @xmath143_{d } < \frac{v}{2 } $ ] .
combining above two lemmas , now it is easy to estimate dehornor floor via information of tiling .
assume @xmath0 is tiled .
let @xmath110 be the number of valance @xmath111 vertices .
if some of @xmath110 is non - zero for @xmath144 , then lemma [ lem : estimate - tiled ] means @xmath5_{d } < 2 < g+1 $ ] , so conclusion holds .
therefore we can assume @xmath145 for @xmath144 , and euler characteristic formula in lemma [ lem : eulerform - tiled ] become @xmath146    since @xmath3 is not zero , there exist at least two b - arcs in each regular fiber , so at least four vertices in the tiling of @xmath0 .
therefore the minimal valance of vertices is smaller than @xmath147 , that is , @xmath148 .
then lemma [ lem : estimate - tiled ] establishes @xmath5_{d } < g+2 $ ] .
next we proceed to @xmath0 is mixed foliated case .
the strategy is almost the same as tiled case , but we need to do some additional arguments to evaluate valance of vertices because the decomposition by regions do not determine cellular decomposition .
first we see the same conclusion of lemma [ lem : estimate - tiled ] holds .
[ lem : estimate - mixed ] let @xmath0 be a mixed foliated essential genus @xmath149 closed surface in the complement of closed braid @xmath4 .
if @xmath7 contains a valance @xmath99 vertex , then @xmath5_{d } < \frac{v}{2}+1 $ ] .
let @xmath81 be a valance @xmath99 vertex .
we can use the same arguments appeared in proof of lemma [ lem : estimate - tiled ] .
the main difference is a presence of c - circles and bc - singularity around @xmath81 .
first we modify closed braid as in the proof of lemma [ lem : estimate - tiled ] so that we can consider sub - braiding in each interval @xmath124 $ ] , @xmath128 $ ] .
assume that singular point in the fiber @xmath150 is bc - singularity . then by taking appropriate conjugation of sub - braiding @xmath132
$ ] , bc - singularity is now modeled as in the figure [ fig : model2 ] .
then braiding in the interval @xmath132 $ ] can be written as shown in figure [ fig : braiding2 ] , which contains only one @xmath151 .
thus , the same argument of the proof of lemma [ lem : estimate - tiled ] gives desired estimation .
$ ] : bc - singularity case , width=302 ]    then , we want to estimate the minimal valance of vertices .
since there might be all types of singularity in the foliation of @xmath0 , in general decomposition into regions dose not define usual sense of cellular decomposition : bc - region is annulus , and cc - region is pair of pants .
however , in special case of normal mixed foliation , defined below , one can constructs canonical cellular decomposition via decomposition into regions as shown in @xcite .
first we describe this .
we say mixed foliation is _ normal _ if there exists no cc - singularity . in normal mixed foliation case
, we can construct canonical cellular decomposition as follows .
first we see that in normal mixed foliation , bc - annuli always occur in pairs .
this is because the c - circle boundary of bc - annuli must be attached to c - circle boundary of another bc - annuli , since there is no cc - regions and boundary of bb - tile are all b - arcs .
now , take annulus @xmath152 obtained by attaching two bc - annuli along their c - circle boundaries .
each component of @xmath153 has two vertices . by cutting @xmath152 along the arc which connects two vertices which lies different components of @xmath154 , as shown in figure [ fig : be - tile ] , we obtain two 2-cells , called _ be - tile_. these cutting arcs are called _ e - edge_. now decomposition into be - tile and bb - tile determines cellular decomposition of @xmath0 .        note
that there might exist be - tile which has no singular point or two singular points , but from construction of be - tile , be - tile with zero singularity and be - tile with two singularity must occur in pairs in each neighbor of vertex , so the notion of vertex and valance defined in section 3 coincide with the usual meaning of vertex and valance in this cellular decomposition .
then we see the same euler characteristic formula holds :    [ lem : eulerform - nmixed ] let @xmath0 be a normal mixed foliated surface with genus @xmath155 and @xmath156 be a number of vertex whose valance is @xmath99 in cellular decomposition described above .
then ,    @xmath157 holds .
a be - tile has exactly four 1-cells in its boundary and each 1-cell is boundary of two 2-cells , so the same argument in proof of lemma [ lem : eulerform - tiled ] gives desired result .
so we can estimate minimal valance of vertices in case of normal mixed foliation by using lemma [ lem : eulerform - nmixed ] as in the tiled case . to estimate general mixed foliated case , we perform `` preimage surgery '' to delete cc - singularities .
let @xmath0 be a mixed foliated surface and we denote @xmath158 by the preimage of @xmath0 ; that is , @xmath159 is a foliated surface forgetting information of embedding .
let @xmath160 be an one of the c - circle boundary of cc - pants @xmath161 .
@xmath160 is also a boundary of some other cc - pants or bc - annulus @xmath162 .
we modify foliations of @xmath161 and @xmath162 as shown in figure [ fig : preimagesurgery ] by filling @xmath160 by discs and changes foliation in @xmath161 and @xmath162 , according to type of regions .
since modified regions are trivially foliated , these regions are amalgamated to some other regions and they disappears .
moreover , this operation can be done so that obtained surface is connected by choosing c - circle boundary @xmath160 appropriately and reduces genus of @xmath159 because all c - circle in the foliation is non - null homotopic in @xmath159 .
thus , this modification deletes two regions @xmath161 and @xmath162 , hence two singular points .
we call this operation _ preimage surgery _ because we can regard this modification as surgery of @xmath159 along c - circle @xmath160 .
we remark that preimage surgery is not realizable as a surgery of embedded surface @xmath0 , because we can not choose take a disc bounded by @xmath160 without intersecting original surface @xmath0 in @xmath163 .
since each preimage surgery reduces a genus of @xmath159 , after @xmath164 preimage surgery we obtain normal mixed foliated surface @xmath165 .
as we remarked before , @xmath165 can not be realized as an embedded surface , but we can use the arguments of proof of lemma [ lem : eulerform - nmixed ] , because the proof uses only information from cellular decomposition of @xmath165 .
therefore we can use lemma [ lem : eulerform - nmixed ] for @xmath165 to estimate valance of vertices of preimage - surgered surface @xmath165 .
assume @xmath0 is mixed foliated and after performing preimage surgery @xmath42-times described above , we create abstract foliated surface @xmath165 with no cc - singularity , that is , normal mixed foliated .
let @xmath30 be a minimal valance of vertices of @xmath165 .
then , we trace preimage surgery procedure backwards .
each surgery deletes at most one bc - singularity , so original surface @xmath0 has at most more than @xmath42 bc - singular points than that of @xmath165 . since singular leaf containing bc - singularity has two vertices as its endpoints and there exist at least two vertices in @xmath0 , we conclude minimal valance of vertices in @xmath0 is smaller than @xmath166 .
thus , we only need to estimate @xmath30 to estimate minimal valance of vertices in original surface @xmath0 .
let @xmath156 be the number of valance @xmath99 vertices of @xmath165 .
if @xmath110 is non - zero for some @xmath167 , then form the argument above , we conclude the minimal valance of vertices of @xmath0 is smaller than @xmath168 , so @xmath5_{d } < \frac{3+g}{2 } \leq 2g+1 $ ] , so we can assume @xmath110 is zero for all @xmath167 . in this case , the euler characteristic formula for @xmath165 become @xmath169 mixed foliated means there exist at least one b - arc in the foliation , so there exist at least two vertices in @xmath165 .
therefore the minimal value of valance of vertices in @xmath165 is less than @xmath170 .
therefore , from our earlier argument , minimal valance of vertices in @xmath0 is smaller than @xmath171 .
now , lemma [ lem : estimate - mixed ] establishes an inequality @xmath5_{d } <
2g-\frac{3k}{2 } < 2g+1 $ ] .    from statement
( 1 ) and ( 2 ) , we conclude if @xmath5_{d } \geq 2g+1 $ ] , then @xmath0 is neither tiled nor mixed - foliated , hence circular - foliated .
this completes proof of theorem [ thm : main1 ]
in this section , we describe an application of theorem [ thm : main1 ] for genus one closed surface , namely , essential torus .
a description of essential torus in closed braid complements is studied in @xcite,@xcite by using braid foliation machinery .
since an essential torus deeply involves the geometry of link complements , we can extract some of geometrical information of closed braids from theorem [ thm : main1 ] .
first of all , we recall the nielsen - thurston classification of braids .
nielsen - thurston theorem states that an isotopy class of orientation preserving homeomorphism @xmath172 $ ] of compact oriented surface @xmath0 , that is , an element of mapping class group @xmath173 of @xmath0 , is classified into following three types :    1 .
_ periodic _ : there exists a positive integer @xmath30 such that @xmath174 is isotopic to the identity .
_ reducible _ : there exist an essential 1-submanifold @xmath175 of @xmath0 , which is invariant under @xmath176 .
pseudo - anosov _ : @xmath176 is isotopic to a pseudo - anosov homeomorphism .
we do not describe precise definition of pseudo - anosov homeomorphism , because we do not use it.(see @xcite for more details about nielsen - thurston theory . )
let @xmath51 be a @xmath11-punctured disc .
since braid group @xmath1 is identified with the group of boundary - fixing isotopy class of homeomorphisms of @xmath51 which is identity on @xmath53 , there exist natural projection @xmath177 regarding an element of @xmath1 as an isotopy class of homeomorphism of @xmath51 whose restriction on @xmath53 are not necessarily identity
. therefore we can define the nielsen - thurston classification of braids by taking pull - back of the nielsen - thurston classification of @xmath178 .
concretely , the nielsen - thurston classification of @xmath1 can be described as following way :    1 .
_ periodic _ : some powers of @xmath7 is equal to some powers of garside fundamental braid @xmath13 .
pseudo - anosov _ : its representing homeomorphism is pseudo - anosov .
reducible _ : its representing homeomorphism is reducible .
we remark that the nielsen - thurston classification of mapping class groups has very beautiful connection to the geometry of its mapping torus .
let @xmath0 be a closed surface , @xmath181 be a homeomorphism of @xmath0 and @xmath182 be the mapping torus of @xmath181 .
the topology of mapping torus @xmath182 only depends on the isotopy class of @xmath181 .
it is known that @xmath0 admit a complete hyperbolic structure if and only if @xmath181 is pseudo - anosov and @xmath182 is seifert - fibered if and only if @xmath181 is periodic .
moreover , @xmath182 contains an essential torus ( hence decomposable with respect to geometric decomposition ) if and only if @xmath181 is reducible .
thus , there exist one - to - one correspondence between the nielsen - thurston classification of mapping class group and the geometry of its mapping torus .
hence , in this regard , theorem [ thm : main2 ] can be seen as some generalization of this well - known fact in the knot theory settings .
first we investigate non - braided satellite knots .
recall that a satellite knot @xmath9 is called braided - satellite if its complements has essential tori @xmath183 which is circular foliated under appropriate choice of closed braid representatives of @xmath9 .
in general it is difficult to handle non - braided satellite knot in braid theory , but fortunately they do not appear under assumption of theorem [ thm : main2 ] .        in @xcite , it is proved that if a closure of @xmath7 is a composite knot , then @xmath5_{d}<2 $ ] .
proposition [ prop : nbdsatellite ] can be seen some kind of generalization of this result because composite knots are special types of non - braided satellite knots .
torus knots are exchange - reducible .
that is , for every closed braid representative @xmath4 of @xmath186-torus knot , there exists a sequence of closed braids @xmath187 such that @xmath188 is obtained by performing exchange move or destabilization or isotopy of @xmath189 , and @xmath190 .
first assume @xmath2 and @xmath191 is a torus knot .
if @xmath11 is not the braid index of knot @xmath9 , that is , if @xmath9 can be represented as a closure of other braids which have strictly smaller number of strands , then menasco s theorem says @xmath9 admit exchange move or destabilization , hence by the proposition [ prop : dehornoyfloor ] ( 5 ) , we conclude @xmath5_{d}\leq 1 $ ] , which contradicts our assumption @xmath5_{d } \geq 3 $ ] .
therefore we can assume that @xmath11 is braid index of @xmath9 .
in this case , also menasco s theorem says @xmath7 is conjugate to braid @xmath192 for some @xmath81 , hence @xmath7 is periodic .    on the other hand
, it is known that periodic braids are conjugate to braids @xmath193 or @xmath194 for some @xmath40 , both of which represent rotation of disc . since closure of @xmath194
never become a knot , it is obvious that closure of periodic braids represent torus knots .
next assume @xmath184 is a satellite knot .
let @xmath183 be a essential torus in the complement of @xmath9 .
of course there might be some of choice for such torus , we can take arbitrary one .
our assumption @xmath5_{d } \geq 3 $ ] and theorem [ thm : main1 ] shows @xmath183 is circular - foliated , so intersection of @xmath183 with some fiber @xmath89 gives reducing 1-submanifolds of @xmath7 as a homeomorphism of @xmath51 , hence @xmath7 is reducible .
the converse is trivial .      as a corollary
, we get an infinite , almost disjoint family of hyperbolic knots for each pseudo - anosov element of mapping class group of punctured disc .
although it is known that `` almost all '' prime knots are hyperbolic knot , in general it is not so easy to determine given not is hyperbolic or not .
especially , most of known family of knots known to be hyperbolic are defined through knot diagrams such as alternativeness .
we now construct many families of hyperbolic knot through braid - theoretical approach .
[ cor : c1 ] suppose @xmath172 \in mcg(d_{n})$ ] be a pseudo - anosov element of mapping class group of @xmath11-punctured disc and @xmath195 be the natural projection .
let @xmath196)=\ { \widehat{\beta } \;| \;\beta \in \pi^{-1 } ( [ f]),[\beta]_{d } \geq 3 \ } $ ] .
then @xmath197)$ ] consists of infinite number of distinct hyperbolic knots .
moreover , let @xmath198 \in mcg(d_{n})$ ] be another pseudo - anosov element which is not conjugate to @xmath172 $ ] in @xmath178 .
then , the intersection of @xmath197)$ ] and @xmath199)$ ] are finite .    since @xmath197)$ ]
consists of pseudo - anosov braids with dehornoy floor larger than three , theorem [ thm : main2 ] shows their closures are all hyperbolic knots .
proposition [ prop : dehornoyfloor ] @xmath200 says braids having sufficiently large dehornoy floor is a unique closed representative of its closure in braid index @xmath11 , therefore @xmath197)$ ] consists of infinite number of distinct hyperbolic knots and @xmath197)$ ] and @xmath199)$ ] have finite intersection unless @xmath198 $ ] is conjugate to @xmath172 $ ] .    since every hyperbolic knots are represented as a closure of pseudo - anosov braids , one might expects our construction of hyperbolic knots produces _ all _ hyperbolic knots ; that is , for every hyperbolic knots , there exists pseudo - anosov mapping class @xmath172 $ ] such that @xmath201)$ ] .
unfortunately , this too optimistic conjecture is not true .
for example , we can prove figure - eight knot , the most simple hyperbolic knots , do not appear as an element of @xmath197)$ ] . more generally , we can show genus one hyperbolic knots can not be constructed from our method .
this is a corollary of results of our subsequent paper @xcite .
since @xmath81 is prime and @xmath4 is a knot , @xmath7 is never reducible braid .
assume @xmath4 is satellite .
then proposition [ prop : nbdsatellite ] , @xmath4 is braided - satellite , so theorem [ thm : main2 ] means @xmath7 is reducible , which contradicts above . thus , under the assumption of corollary , @xmath4 is either hyperbolic or torus knot and @xmath7 is either periodic or pseudo - anosov , so theorem [ thm : main2 ] establishes the result .
although there is an algorithm to determine nielsen - thurston classification , it requires exponential times with respect to word length of braid . on the other hand , since to determine given braids are periodic or not is easy and it requires only quadratic times , corollary [ cor : c2 ] produces very many hyperbolic knots explicitly and rapidly . in particular , we conclude that for prime @xmath81 , closure of braids @xmath202 satisfying @xmath5_{d } \geq 2 $ ] are almost all hyperbolic knots .
[ b ] j.birman , _ braids , links , and mapping class groups , _ annals of math .
studies * 82 * , princeton univ .
press ( 1975 ) .
j.birman , e.finkelstein , _ studying surfaces via closed braids , _ journal of knot theory and its ramifications , * 7 * , no.3 ( 1998 ) , 267 - 334 .
j.birman , w.menasco , _ studying links via closed braid iv : split links and composite links , _ invent .
math . * 102*,(1990 ) , 115 - 139 .
j.birman , w.menasco , _ special positions for essential tori in link complements , _ topology , * 33 * , no.3 ( 1994 ) , 525 - 556 .
p.dehornoy , _ braid groups and left distributive operations , _ transactions american mathematical society , * 345 * ( 1994 ) , 115 - 150 .
p.dehornoy , i.dynnkov , d.rolfsen and b.wiest , _ why are the braids orderable ? , _ panoramas et synthses * 14 * , soc .
r.fenn , m.greene , d. rolfsen , c.rourke and b.wiest , _ ordering the braid groups , _ pacific journal of mathematics , * 191 * , no.1 ( 1999 ) , 49 - 73 .
a. fathi , f. laudenbach , v. poenaru , _ travaux de thurston sur les surfaces , _ asterique , * 66 - 67 * , 1979 .
t.ito , _ braid ordering and genus of knots , _ e - print , arxiv .
math/0805.2042v1 j.los , _ knots , braid index and dynamical type , _ topology , * 33 * , no.2 ( 1994 ) , 257 - 270 .
a.malyutin , n.netsvetaev , _
dehornoy s ordering on the braid group and braid moves , _
st.peterburg math .
j. * 15 * , no.3 ( 2004 ) , 437 - 448 .
a.malyutin , _ twist number of ( closed ) braids , _
st.peterburg math .
j. * 16 * , no.5 ( 2005 ) , 791 - 813 .
w.menasco , _ on iterated torus knots and transversal knots , _ geometry & topology , * 5 * , ( 2001 ) , 651 - 682 .
w.menasco , _ an addendum to iterated torus knots , _ e - print , arxiv .
math.gt/0610566 k.ng , _ essential tori in link complements , _ journal of knot theory and its ramifications , * 7 * , no.2 ( 1998 ) , 205 - 216 .
h.short , b.wiest , _ ordering of mapping class groups after thurston , _
lenseignement mathmatique , * 46*,(2000 ) , 279 - 312 .


carrier dynamics in metals and semiconductors in the presence of external electromagnetic fields , the potentials of which usually vary on scales considerably large than the interatomic spacing , have been conveniently described by semiclassical transport theories .
the semiclassical dynamics together with the boltzmann equation produce accurate descriptions of electrical and thermal conduction@xcite . in the larger picture ,
semiclassical approaches are indispensable in problems involving both position and momentum , since in quantum mechanics position and momentum can not be determined simultaneously . in recent years
efforts have been made to extend the semiclassical theory to spin transport and generation@xcite .
the attempts to resolve the challenges inherent in treating the transport of non - conserved quantities constitute a vibrant ongoing effort@xcite .
a fundamental feature of semiclassical transport is its accounting for the finite extent of particles in real and reciprocal space .
this feature is most naturally incorporated into the dynamics of wave packets@xcite where the notion of a wave - packet center in real space and @xmath0-space is retained .
the carrier dynamics are described in terms of the displacement of these points under the action of external fields .
the finite extent of the wave packet has important consequences for transport theory .
for example , our recent research on spin transport has shown that , due to the fact that the spin and charge centers of a wave packet do not coincide , the expressions for the spin density , torque and current distributions are , in the language of wave packets , expressed as series of multipole terms@xcite .
it has been demonstrated , in addition , that the wave packet formalism captures the physics connected with adiabatic motion and the berry phase , in particular the berry - curvature correction to the semiclassical equations of motion@xcite .
the berry phase , which until berry s seminal article@xcite was not taken into account , appears naturally as part of the wave packet distribution function .
the berry - curvature correction to the wave packet equations of motion is believed to play an important role in the anomalous hall effect@xcite and in spin transport@xcite , among other phenomena .
semiclassical transport theory is not restricted to wave packet dynamics .
wave packets , which may be constructed out of one band eigenstate@xcite or out of a superposition of eigenstates of several degenerate bands@xcite , represent pure states . in order to treat mixed states ( incoherent superpositions of eigenstates )
one must resort to a more general formalism .
this is the principal motivation behind the current article .
the most general description of a quantum mechanical system is based on the density operator . in this article
we start from the density operator and formulate a theory of carrier dynamics in metals and semiconductors .
we focus on non - interacting systems in which disorder is weak , strong spin - orbit interactions are present and a weak slowly - varying electric field is acting .
these systems have come under intense scrutiny in recent years along with the take - off of spintronics@xcite . in such non - interacting systems
the formalism may be simplified by defining a reduced one - particle density operator@xcite .
since the bloch bands are clearly resolved the reduced density operator for this system may be expanded in a basis of bloch wave functions . the density matrix which emerges from this expansion
may be defined as a wigner function .
this function is used to study single particle dynamics and formulate definitions of macroscopic quantities .
we focus on a number of fundamental aspects of adiabatic particle dynamics and demonstrate their relevance to transport phenomena .
we pay particular attention to the band mixing induced by the electric field , which gives rise to a non - adiabatic correction to the wave functions .
we also address several important questions concerning the relationship between the wigner function formalism and the wave - packet formalism@xcite .
we discuss the way the carrier position is to be found and , where possible , compare the result with the expression for the real - space center of a wave packet .
the requirement that the particle position be gauge invariant results in a gauge - dependent shift in the position at which the wigner function is evaluated .
this shift was also found by littlejohn and flynn@xcite in the study of coupled - wave equations .
this gauge - dependent shift is a consequence of the freedom of choosing the real - space center of a wave packet by changing the phase of the wave function@xcite .
the gauge - dependent shift in the position of the wigner function must be taken into account when many - particle distributions , such as the particle number density , are expressed in the crystal - momentum representation . the carrier velocity may be derived directly from the particle position , recovering the berry - phase physics known from previous work@xcite .
we also show that a spin velocity may be defined in such a way that spin transport may be described in an analogous fashion to charge transport .
we discuss , in addition , important consequences of finite particle size .
the wigner distribution is a quantum entity which takes into account the finite extent of the particles in real and reciprocal space .
the distribution of , for example , spin for a single carrier , may not coincide with that of charge and the macroscopic spin distribution will be composed of a series of multipoles .
the spin current and spin torque distributions are in turn composed of series of multipoles which we discuss and compare with those found in our previous work on spin transport@xcite .
the outline of this article is as follows .
we present the fundamentals of the single particle density matrix formalism in section ii .
we determine the carrier position and velocity , emphasizing the gauge - dependent shift in the former and the berry - phase correction in the latter .
we calculate the particle spin , torque and spin velocity and define a modified spin velocity which satisfies an equation analogous to the charge velocity . in section iii
we demonstrate the modifications which must be made to extend the theory to many non - interacting particles .
we define the charge and current densities and show the equation of continuity they satisfy . in the case of spin
we define the spin , spin current and spin torque distributions and show the equation of continuity satisfied by them in the clean limit . in section iv we demonstrate the effect of local gauge transformations and the modifications which must be made to the dipoles in the charge- and spin - related distributions in order to make them gauge covariant .
we conclude with a brief summary of our findings .
we consider systems described by a hamiltonian having the following general form : @xmath1 the term @xmath2 is composed of the usual kinetic - energy contribution and the contribution due to the lattice - periodic potential .
the term @xmath3 represents the spin - orbit interaction term involving the carrier spins and the lattice - periodic potential .
we restrict our attention to the limit in which this spin - orbit interaction is sizably stronger than the disorder broadening and the thermal broadening . in this
limit the system may also be described in terms of well - defined bands .
the eigenstates of @xmath4 , which have the periodicity of the crystal , are given by : @xmath5 these wave functions are of the bloch form , that is @xmath6 , where the functions @xmath7 represent the lattice - periodic parts of the @xmath8 .
the @xmath7 are spinors with the full periodicity of the lattice .
since the hamiltonian contains strong spin - orbit interaction terms , which may depend on wave vector and position , it is not illuminating to decompose the eigenfunctions into an orbital and a spin part .
we take the system under study to be described by a density operator @xmath9 .
it is not our concern in this article to determine an expression for the density operator for a given system , since methods of finding the density operator have been studied extensively in the past@xcite , much work being done in the context of spin orientation of carriers in the non - degenerate limit .
we assume the form of @xmath10 to be known and study the role it plays in the dynamics of charge and spin
. the density operator may be expanded in the hilbert space spanned by a complete orthonormal set of bloch wave functions @xmath11 as @xmath12 in the approach we follow , all the time dependence of the density operator is contained in the wave functions , so that @xmath13 does not have time dependence . in thermal equilibrium
it is diagonal and its elements , @xmath14 , are equal to the fermi - dirac function @xmath15 , where @xmath16 is the band energy .
the expectation value of any operator @xmath17 is found from the formula @xmath18 = & \displaystyle { \rm tr } \ , \sum_{{\bf k } , { \bf k } ' } \rho({\bf k } , { \bf k } ' ) a({\bf k } ' , { \bf k } ) .
\end{array}\ ] ] the notation @xmath19 stands for the matrix elements of the operator @xmath17 , namely @xmath20 . the operation denoted by tr is simply the matrix trace , which does not include the wave - vector summation .
if the operator @xmath17 is replaced by the identity matrix we obtain @xmath21 . for a single particle ,
the normalization condition on the density operator is @xmath22 .    in order to make transparent the analogy with the language of wave packets , center of mass and relative coordinates
may be defined in @xmath0-space such that * q * = @xmath23 and @xmath24 . the density operator as a function of these coordinates can be re - expressed as @xmath25 where @xmath26 and @xmath27 is the periodic part of the bloch wave at @xmath28 .
the wigner function corresponding to the one particle density matrix is found through the transformation @xmath29 for the sake of concreteness the integrals are represented as three dimensional .
nevertheless , the theory applies to systems of any dimensionality .
the wigner function plays the role of a distribution function in the variables * q * and * r*. technically , however , it is not a distribution since it may take negative values@xcite .
the inverse transformation is @xmath30 finally , replacing the vector summations by integrations we are able to represent the density operator in the following form    @xmath31    where @xmath32 . for the remainder of this section
, the wigner function @xmath33 will frequently be abbreviated to @xmath34 .
the variables * q * and * r * are simply labels for the carriers , not physical observables . in particular , the dummy variable * r * in the fourier expansion of the density matrix is simply the fourier dual of * q * and must not be confused with the position operator @xmath35 appearing in the density operator .
it does not correspond to an actual position .
if we consider a particle in one band , labelled @xmath36 , @xmath34 reduces to a scalar , which will be denoted by @xmath37 .
the position of the particle can be found as the expectation value of the position operator , which yields @xmath38 here @xmath39 .
the integrand is not gauge invariant but the integral can be shown to be by changing the variable of integration * r * to @xmath40 .
the connection @xmath41 has no position dependence , therefore the jacobian of the transformation is unity .
the expectation value of the position operator is @xmath42 where @xmath43 is defined in the same way as @xmath44 but with * r * replaced by @xmath45 .
the gauge invariance of ( [ rnew ] ) will emerge below .
we conclude that @xmath46 is to be interpreted as a label for the charge carrier , while the effective particle position is @xmath40 .
neither the label @xmath46 nor the gauge field @xmath47 are by themselves gauge invariant , but together they form a gauge - invariant quantity which represents the true position of the carrier .
this result was also found earlier , in somewhat different circumstances , in the work of littlejohn and flynn@xcite . in the one - band limit
, a clear connection can also be made with the dynamics of wave packets .
the gauge - dependent shift in * r * reflects the freedom of changing the phase of the wave functions @xmath11 , @xmath48 in ( [ rhodef ] ) .
it is the same freedom one has in defining the center of mass of a wave packet , demonstrated by sundaram and niu@xcite , by changing the overall phase of the wave function@xcite .    for multiple bands ,
the expression for the particle position is ( the einstein summation convention will be used henceforth ) @xmath49 one can rewrite this expression as @xmath50 and make the substitution @xmath51 as in the single band case .
although @xmath47 is a matrix the jacobian of this transformation is unity .
finally , the expectation value of the position operator can be expressed formally as @xmath52 unlike the single band case , the expression @xmath53 is a formal abbreviation for the taylor expansion about @xmath45 , that is @xmath54 @xmath55 higher order .    expression ( [ rnew ] ) identifies the position of a particle . to determine
if a particle is localized at its position one must calculate the variance of the position operator , the expectation value @xmath56 , and ensure that is does not diverge .
it is shown in the appendix that the variance does not diverge and that this result applies to any number of bands .
we consider a system acted on by a weak external electric field .
the effect of this electric field is incorporated fully into the gauge invariant crystal momentum through the addition of the electromagnetic vector potential @xmath57 .
because the bloch functions retain translational symmetry the electromagnetic vector potential does not enter the travelling - wave part of the wave functions , which have the form @xmath58 .
the lattice - periodic functions @xmath59 depend implicitly on time only through the crystal wave vector @xmath60 .
however , the presence of the external electric field results in a non - adiabatic mixing of the bands with the result that the perturbed lattice - periodic functions , @xmath61 , have the following form to first order in the electric field@xcite @xmath62 the phase @xmath63 includes the dynamical phase and the berry phase .
the differential @xmath64 is equivalent to @xmath65 since @xmath66 .
the result expressed by ( [ nonadb ] ) is general .
moreover , although its derivation relies on the assumption that the bands are non - degenerate it can be shown that , when calculating _ intrinsic _ contributions to transport ( for the definition of intrinsic please see the appendix and our recent work@xcite ) , the result also holds for degenerate bands with the difference that the sum must exclude _ all _ bands which are degenerate in energy with band @xmath67 .
the proof of this statement is given in the appendix .
henceforth , @xmath68 and @xmath69 will be abbreviated to @xmath70 and @xmath71 respectively . as stated above ,
given that the @xmath72 are functions of @xmath73 only , one may replace @xmath64 in ( [ nonadb ] ) by @xmath65 , where @xmath74@xmath75 .
equation ( [ nonadb ] ) can then be written as @xmath76 where the connection @xmath77 .
the @xmath78 form a complete set .
they are , however , _ not _ eigenstates of the _ time - dependent _ hamiltonian @xmath79 .    in the evaluations of matrix elements in this paper
the only property of the basis functions that is used is their bloch periodicity .
therefore the results which are expressed in terms of the lattice periodic bloch functions hold as well for the @xmath80 as for the @xmath81 .    in the absence of disorder , since all
the time dependence is contained in the wave functions , the density matrix @xmath13 in ( [ rhodef ] ) can only depend on the wave vector * k * , not on the crystal wave vector @xmath82 . as a result
the wigner function @xmath83 only depends on the wave vector * q * , not on @xmath73 .
it is customary to consider only a subset of the hilbert space which contains the bands that are relevant to transport , which in semiconductors usually refers to the topmost filled valence bands and/or the lowest filled conduction bands . since
the gauge of the @xmath78 is not fixed we impose the following gauge - fixing condition _ in the subspace _ under consideration @xmath84   & \displaystyle 0 , \,\,\ , { \rm for } \,\,\ , n \,\,\ , { \rm out \,\,\ , of \,\,\ , subspace } , \end{array}\ ] ] where @xmath85 .
this condition fixes the phase(s ) @xmath86 in ( [ nonadb ] ) .
we shall henceforth work only with the basis set @xmath87 .
the particle velocity can be derived directly from ( [ rmb ] ) by evaluating the time derivative @xmath88 using equation ( [ gf ] ) , the differential @xmath89 becomes , after a little straightforward algebra , @xmath90 the abbreviation @xmath91 stands for the matrix elements of the time - dependent hamiltonian @xmath92 in the presence of an electric field , @xmath93 . in one band
it is easily shown that ( [ drdt ] ) becomes @xmath94 the berry curvature for band @xmath36 , @xmath95 , is given by @xmath96 and @xmath97 represents the curl operator in reciprocal space .
the quantity @xmath98 is defined as @xmath99 . equation ( [ vel ] ) is the analog of the semiclassical equation of motion found by sundaram and niu@xcite .
writing @xmath100@xmath101 we obtain for electrons in a single band : @xmath102 for multiple bands , an elegant result is obtained by introducing the covariant derivatives@xcite @xmath103 and @xmath104 , where @xmath105 .
making use of these derivatives , equation ( [ drdt ] ) can be written in the manifestly gauge covariant form @xmath106_{n'n } - i[\frac{d}{d\tilde{q}_\alpha } , \frac{d}{dt}]_{n'n}. \end{split}\ ] ] it is important to point out that , from the gauge - fixing condition ( [ gf ] ) which defines @xmath107 , it is evident that @xmath107 is gauge covariant , implying that the time derivative @xmath64 is itself gauge - covariant .
this is a peculiarity of the gauge - fixing condition we have chosen .
the fact that carriers have a finite extent in real and wave - vector space has profound implications for particle dynamics and transport .
these implications were pointed out in a previous publication @xcite using the semiclassical language of wave - packets and will be elaborated in this section from the density matrix point of view . for the sake of clarity
we will specialize in spin , although the discussion in this section applies to any quantity .
when considering the transport of spin in a system composed of many carriers , one must associate a spin distribution with each individual carrier .
a center of spin may be defined for each particle by @xmath108
. this definition may be troublesome if the expectation value of the spin operator were zero , but its only purpose is to illustrate a physical principle .
evidently , if one replaced the spin operator with the charge or mass one would obtain the particle position as given by ( [ r ] ) , which we will refer to as @xmath109 .
it is obvious from the definition of @xmath110 that in the general case there is no reason for the center of the spin distribution of an individual particle to be the same as the actual particle position .
this center will be different for each component of the spin operator .
furthermore , since spin is not conserved in the presence of e.g. spin - orbit interactions , @xmath110 may also be a function of time .
this suggests that the spin distribution of one carrier will in general have a different shape than its charge distribution , and that the time development of the two distributions may be quite different .
these facts are illustrated in figs .  1 and 2 .    to evaluate the average carrier spin consider the expectation value of the operator @xmath111 , which stands for any one component of the spin operator .
the result is @xmath112 where @xmath113 are the matrix elements of the spin operator . in the presence of spin - orbit interactions a spin torque
is associated with the spin of every carrier , which accounts for the non - conservation of spin , as shown in fig .  2 .
the average carrier torque is found by evaluating the expectation value of @xmath114 $ ] .
the result is @xmath115 where @xmath116 .    as a result of the distinction between @xmath110 and @xmath117 , in calculations of spin - related quantities which use the center of charge as the reference
, multipole terms must be taken into account in addition to the average quantities calculated above .
for example , in the distribution of spin a spin dipole will be present , as well as higher order multipole terms , which are assumed small .
the spin dipole is found as the expectation value @xmath118 , evaluated in the appendix , and yields the gauge field @xmath119 in contrast to @xmath110 , @xmath120 is well defined .
similarly , in the distribution of torque of an individual particle a torque dipole will be present .
the torque gauge field @xmath121 is given , as shown in the appendix , by @xmath122 @xmath120 and @xmath123 are gauge dependent .
it will prove useful to define gauge - covariant dipoles as @xmath124 and @xmath125 respectively .
the remainder of the discussion of these gauge - covariant spin and torque dipoles is deferred to section iv .
we define the spin velocity as the expectation value @xmath126 , where products of non - commuting operators are assumed to be symmetrized .
the result is @xmath127 the spin velocity @xmath128 is given by @xmath129 = & \displaystyle { \frac{d \bar{\bf m}^s}{d t } } - \bar{\bf m}^\tau . \end{array}\ ] ] in order to write the velocity in a gauge covariant form , we replace in the above @xmath130 and @xmath131 .
this yields immediately @xmath132 equation ( [ vsps ] ) is the gauge - covariant form of equation ( 10 ) in ref . [ 2 ] , the integrand of which represents the spin velocity .
the first term in ( [ vsps])is a convective contribution and represents a moving electron transporting its average spin along with it .
the second term is the time derivative of the spin dipole while the last term is the torque dipole which takes into account the non - conservation of spin .
we may incorporate @xmath133 into a modified spin velocity@xcite , which we shall call @xmath134 , by @xmath135 .
the modified spin velocity is given simply by : @xmath136 the importance of this definition of the velocity will be seen in the following section , when the macroscopic spin current is introduced .
we will consider the macroscopic distributions of charge and spin starting from the formalism we have developed . in particular , our discussion of the corrections to the spin density , current and torque distributions is motivated by the observation that the existing literature has omitted various contributions to spin transport .
several works have used semiclassical concepts but did not arrive at answers containing all the terms we have derived .
the particle number density is defined by the formula : @xmath137.\ ] ] the trace operation tr involves integration over * r*. the procedure we follow has affinities with the coarse graining of electrodynamics in material media @xcite .
the size of the carriers is taken to be smaller than the length scale of the wigner function .
we regard the @xmath138-function as a sampling function@xcite with a width somewhere between the microscopic scale of the carriers and the macroscopic scale of the wigner function .
the rationale for regarding the @xmath138-function as a sampling function comes from the realization that often the physics of the problem does not require absolute resolution of position , provided that the resolution is finer than the length scale of the external field .
since the variance of @xmath35 is finite , the @xmath138-function may be expanded in a taylor series about the dummy variable * r * in the form @xmath139 $ ] .
the expansion is truncated at the first order for simplicity but we will show in the next section that all the terms may be recovered in a concise and elegant fashion . the number density can be expressed as : @xmath140 in the above @xmath34 stands for @xmath141 , an abbreviation which will be frequently used in the remainder of the article .
note that the gauge field @xmath142 in ( [ ndip ] ) plays the role of a dipole .
the charge density is defined by the formula @xmath143.\ ] ] the charge @xmath144 is not to be confused with the wave vector * q*. the charge current density @xmath145 is defined by the equation @xmath146.\ ] ] the charge equation of continuity in the absence of external sources and disorder , @xmath147 is readily verified from the first - principles definitions of the charge and current densities .    when the @xmath138-function is expanded
the current density takes the form @xmath148 the velocity matrix elements @xmath149 as shown in the appendix , where @xmath150 . since in the equation of continuity
it is the gradient of the current that appears , we have not included in ( [ jq ] ) corrections to the current which arise from the fact that the velocity distribution of a single carrier is different from its charge distribution .
these corrections are in principle present but have been omitted for simplicity .
in homogeneous systems the gradient term in ( [ jq ] ) drops out of the equation of continuity and , based on equations ( [ drdt ] ) and ( [ jq ] ) , the charge current can be expressed as the time rate of change of the gauge field @xmath142 @xmath151      the spin density is defined as @xmath152,\ ] ] while the torque density takes the form @xmath153\ ] ] and the spin current density is defined as @xmath154.\ ] ] in the absence of disorder the spin equation of continuity is @xmath155 which is verified from the first - principles definitions introduced above .
the @xmath156-functions are expanded in the same way as for the particle number density , whereupon the spin density can be expressed as @xmath157 and the torque density is @xmath158 ignoring the gradient term , the spin current is @xmath159 in analogy with the modified spin velocity of the previous section , a modified spin current @xmath160 may be defined by : @xmath161 = & \displaystyle { \rm tr } \int \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi)^3 } \,\rho\,\left(\frac{1}{2}\{{\frac{d \bar{\cal r}}{d t } } , \bar s\ } + { \frac{d \bar{\bf p}^s}{d t}}\right ) .
\end{array}\ ] ] the equation of continuity satisfied by this current in the clean limit is : @xmath162 in many models , such as the spherical four - band luttinger model@xcite , the rhs vanishes when all bands in the subspace are taken into account . in that case
the spin current @xmath160 is conserved .
much effort has been devoted to finding a conserved spin current . in our previous work
@xcite we have argued , based on semiclassical ideas , that the closest one can come to a conserved spin current is by including the torque dipole in the definition of the current . in this article
we have derived this current from a density matrix point of view and show that it supports our earlier conclusions . to date , the definition @xmath160 is the closest one has come to a conserved spin current . moreover , as shown also by zarea and ulloa @xcite , the behavior of the modified spin current may be rather different from that of @xmath163 .
we have argued in section ii that in discussing transport of an observable one must take into account the fact that the distribution of that observable for each individual carrier in general involves a dipole correction , and in principle also higher - order corrections .
if the quantity being transported is not conserved then the determination of its rate of change also involves a dipole correction .
the existence of what appears to be a sound physical argument for the inclusion of these corrections suggests that objects such as the spin dipole and the torque dipole are not simply mathematical artifacts meant to facilitate calculations .
it is appropriate to investigate whether they are in fact fundamental quantities with a true physical meaning .
if that were the case , they ought to be expressible in a gauge - covariant way and to give rise to observable effects .
in addition to these considerations , our aim of providing a physically transparent formalism requires a test of the gauge covariance of the macroscopic quantities and equations of motion we have derived in this article .
the physics contained in them must be independent of the choice of basis functions . furthermore , the physical discussion can become cluttered with futile and meaningless objects if it is formulated in terms of gauge - dependent objects .
in contrast , the gauge - covariant expressions we derive below are simple , elegant and transparent .
a general local gauge transformation is represented by @xmath164 , with @xmath165 and @xmath67 and @xmath36 are indices of bands in the subspace under consideration . under this operation @xmath166 in which @xmath167 stands for @xmath168 .
the berry curvature for one band @xmath95 is discussed extensively in the paper of sundaram and niu@xcite .
one important additional detail which emerges from the transformation given by ( [ rtrans ] ) and the definition @xmath169 is the fact that , if the curvature is non - zero , one can not make a gauge transformation to eliminate @xmath170 .
it can be easily shown that , whereas @xmath170 is gauge dependent , the berry curvature is gauge covariant .
therefore if @xmath95 is non - zero in one gauge it is non - zero in all gauges and there is no gauge in which @xmath170 can be zero . as a result , in systems in which the curvature is non - zero the gauge - dependent position shift is necessarily present in the wigner function .
it can be regarded as a ` penalty ' for working with the position operator in a basis of definite wave vector .
the wigner function itself changes under the gauge transformation defined above . using ( [ wigout ] )
, we find that , to first order in @xmath171 , the wigner function changes as @xmath172 where @xmath173 ( the opposite of the gauge connection @xmath142 ) .
all the macroscopic densities defined in the previous sections are covariant under a local gauge transformation .
this will be demonstrated for the spin density . under the above gauge transformation ,
the gauge field @xmath120 transforms as @xmath174 the matrix elements of the transformed gauge field @xmath175 are given by @xmath176 and the transformed spin operator @xmath177 . to first order
the extra terms acquired by the spin density under a gauge transformation are @xmath178 so that the spin density remains gauge covariant .
the cancellation remains true for all orders in the expansion .
similarly , the charge and current densities do not acquire additional terms under the local gauge transformation introduced above .
the extra terms appearing as a result of the transformation cancel when the trace is taken . when the change in the wigner function under a gauge transformation is taken into account
the overall expressions are gauge covariant .
equation ( [ ndip ] ) for the particle number density can be formally written the following way @xmath179 re - expressing the integrand in this manner is tantamount to making , in the density matrix , the replacement @xmath180 . to ensure the gauge covariance of the number density the fourier dual * r *
is replaced by the true position @xmath181 , as illustrated in fig .
this is the same position as found in section ii .
if the subspace contains one band expression ( [ nmod ] ) is an exact result , not simply a formal way of writing the number density .
examining more closely the spin density as given in ( [ s ] ) it is evident that , whereas the spin density itself is gauge covariant , its individual constituents are not .
if one were to consider the integrand of the dipole term in ( [ s ] ) without the wigner function , this quantity would not by itself be gauge covariant .
we have already constructed a gauge - covariant spin dipole @xmath182 . in terms of the gauge - covariant spin dipole ,
the spin density can be re - expressed as @xmath183 it can be formally written the following way @xmath184.\ ] ] the gauge - covariant spin dipole @xmath185 , as pointed out above , is the result of a carrier s center of spin being different from its center of charge .    in the same way the gauge - covariant torque dipole has been defined by @xmath186 .
carrying out an identical manipulation to that for the spin density , use of the gauge - covariant torque dipole allows us to rewrite the torque density formally as @xmath187.\ ] ] a similar formal expression exists for the spin current .
evidently , since these expressions are simply a rewriting of the spin , torque and current densities , the equation of continuity satisfied by them is unaltered .
we remark that the gauge - covariant quantities introduced throughout this paper are well defined .
in fact , even though the density matrix was expressed in a basis of extended bloch states , by means of various manipulations we have been able to obtain well - defined formulas for all the objects relevant in transport .
finally , as described by dudarev _ et al . _
@xcite in the context of atomic physics , optical lattices can be constructed which mimic the spin - orbit interaction .
in such a lattice , a wave packet can be constructed using cold atoms and the evolution of its centers of mass and spin can be followed . in the same spirit ,
kato _ et al .
_ @xcite have shown that it is possible to follow the motion of a spin packet in solid state systems , which demonstrates the feasibility of an analogous experiment in ingaas .
this would provide a way to measure a spin dipole directly .
we have formulated a theory suitable for describing the dynamics of particles in both single and multiple bands .
the one - band results known from the wave - packet formalism , including the terms connected to the berry phase , emerge from our theory . the formalism can be applied to any clean system regardless of the dimensionality of the hilbert space under consideration . as a result of the gauge degree of freedom of the basis functions , the position vector which is used as a label of the carrier
must be modified by a gauge - dependent shift in order to obtain the true particle position .
we have shown the way to define macroscopic density distributions for conserved and non - conserved operators . in the case of spin
we have highlighted the correspondence between the multipole terms which appear in the density - matrix formalism and those found earlier in the wave - packet formalism and we have shown that experiments can be performed to identify the effect of a spin dipole .
dc was supported by the nsf under grant number dmr-0404252 .
qn was supported by the doe under grant number de - fg03 - 02er45958 .
we will present in this appendix some of the proofs and evaluations which require lengthier calculations and would interrupt the flow if incorporated into the main text . for all derivations except the first , the @xmath78 and @xmath72 are interchangeable .
the perturbed eigenfunctions are given by eq.([nonadb ] ) : @xmath188 for a set of degenerate bands the equilibrium part of the density matrix is proportional to the identity matrix @xmath189 and will have the form @xmath190 , where @xmath191 is usually the fermi - dirac distribution .
transport theory often distinguishes between intrinsic effects , which are due to the equilibrium part of the density matrix , and extrinsic effects , which are due to the non - equilibrium correction to it .
if we wish to evaluate the expectation value of an operator @xmath17 using the equilibrium part of the density matrix for a set of degenerate bands , which for simplicity here we will take as being two dimensional , the following quantity must be evaluated : @xmath192 the perturbed wave functions are given by : @xmath193 & \displaystyle   { | \bar u_{2 } \rangle } = { | u_{2 } \rangle } - \frac{{\langle u_{1 } | i\hbar{\frac{d } { d t } } | u_{2 } \rangle}}{\varepsilon_2 - \varepsilon_1}{| u_{1 } \rangle } - \sum_{n\ne 1,2}\frac{{\langle u_{n } | i\hbar{\frac{d } { d t } } | u_{m } \rangle}}{\varepsilon_m - \varepsilon_n}{| u_{n } \rangle}. \end{array}\ ] ] the expectation values are : @xmath194 & \displaystyle { \langle \bar u_2 | \hat a | \bar u_2 \rangle } = a_{22 } - \frac{{\langle u_{1 } | i\hbar{\frac{d u_{2}}{d t } } \rangle}}{\varepsilon_2 - \varepsilon_1}a_{21 } - \frac{{\langle u_{2 } | i\hbar{\frac{d u_{1}}{d t } } \rangle}}{\varepsilon_2 - \varepsilon_1}a_{12 } + \sum_2^{out}. \end{array}\ ] ] in the above @xmath195 and @xmath196 stand for the sums involving the bands outside the degenerate manifold and @xmath197 .
the denominators of the terms involving @xmath198 and @xmath199 have opposite signs .
therefore , adding up the expectation values we obtain : @xmath200 therefore the terms with diverging denominators cancel out .      in the general case ,
the expectation value of the position operator is given by @xmath201 we can expand the integrand in the above equation and obtain @xmath202 & \displaystyle + { \langle i{\frac{\partial \bar u_{n'-}}{\partial { \bf q } } } | e^{i{\bf q}\cdot\hat{\bf r } }   | \bar u_{n+ } \rangle }   \\ [ 2.2ex ] & \displaystyle + { \langle \bar u_{n'- } | e^{i{\bf q}\cdot\hat{\bf r } }   | i{\frac{\partial \bar u_{n+}}{\partial { \bf q } } } \rangle }   \\ [ 2.2ex ] & \displaystyle + { \bf r}{\langle \bar u_{n'- } | e^{i{\bf q}\cdot\hat{\bf r } }   | \bar u_{n+ } \rangle}. \end{array}\ ] ] all four brackets represent integrals of products of lattice periodic functions and exponentials .
they will all eventually be proportional to @xmath203 . because of this fact the first term above integrates to zero .
the partial derivatives in the second and third terms are evaluated by expanding the lattice periodic bloch wave functions about * q * , treating * q * as a small parameter @xmath204 in the limit in which @xmath205 @xmath206 consequently @xmath207 and the expectation value of the position vector yields , finally @xmath208      the spin gauge field is found in an analogous fashion to the expectation value of the position operator @xmath209 expanding the above , @xmath210 & \displaystyle + { \langle i{\frac{\partial \bar u_{n'-}}{\partial { \bf q } } } | \hat s e^{i{\bf q}\cdot\hat{\bf r } }   | \bar u_{n+ } \rangle }   \\ [ 2.2ex ] & \displaystyle + { \langle \bar u_{n'- } | \hat s e^{i{\bf
q}\cdot\hat{\bf r } }   | i{\frac{\partial \bar u_{n+}}{\partial { \bf q } } } \rangle } .
\end{array}\ ] ] using the same arguments as in the previous section , the first term integrates to zero , and after evaluating the brackets involving the exponential and the lattice - periodic functions , we obtain in the limit @xmath211 @xmath212    an almost identical derivation applies for the expectation value @xmath213 .
the only difference is that , since @xmath214 may be a function of wave vector , an additional term involving @xmath215 is generated .
however , that term drops out when the anti - commutator is taken , leaving us with the result @xmath122      since the expectation value of the carrier position has been shown above to contain no divergences , if the expectation value @xmath216 is not divergent then the variance @xmath217 is also finite . to see that the variance of the particle position does not contain any divergences , we need to evaluate the expectation value @xmath216
this requires us to evaluate the matrix element @xmath218 first note that an expression of the form @xmath219 can be written as @xmath220 & \displaystyle + 2{\frac{\partial } { \partial { \bf q}}}\cdot[{\frac{\partial a}{\partial { \bf q } } } bcd +   ab { \frac{\partial } { \partial { \bf q}}}(cd ) ] \\ [ 2.2ex ]   & \displaystyle - \frac{\partial^2 a}{\partial q^2}bcd - 2{\frac{\partial a}{\partial { \bf q } } } \cdot b{\frac{\partial } { \partial { \bf q}}}(cd ) \\ [ 2.2ex ] & \displaystyle - ab \frac{\partial^2
b}{\partial q^2 } ( cd ) .
\end{array}\ ] ] in the case we are considering , all the products involve brackets which are proportional to @xmath203 . as a result ,
all the terms on the first line vanish under integration with respect to * q * and only the terms on the second line need to be evaluated . writing them out explicitly , @xmath221 & \displaystyle - { \langle \frac{\partial^2 \bar u_{n'-}}{\partial q^2 } | e^{i{\bf q}\cdot\hat{\bf r } } | \bar u_{n+ } \rangle } - { \langle \bar u_{n'- } | e^{i{\bf q}\cdot\hat{\bf r } } | \frac{\partial^2 \bar u_{n+}}{\partial q^2 }
\rangle } \\[2.2ex ] & \displaystyle + 2i{\bf r}\cdot({\langle { \frac{\partial \bar u_{n'-}}{\partial { \bf q } } } | e^{i{\bf q}\cdot\hat{\bf r } } | \bar u_{n+ } \rangle } + { \langle \bar u_{n'- } | e^{i{\bf q}\cdot\hat{\bf r } } | { \frac{\partial \bar u_{n+}}{\partial { \bf q } } } \rangle})\\[2.2ex ] & \displaystyle - 2{\langle { \frac{\partial
\bar u_{n'-}}{\partial { \bf q } } } | e^{i{\bf q}\cdot\hat{\bf r } } | { \frac{\partial \bar u_{n+}}{\partial { \bf q } } } \rangle}. \end{array}\ ] ]    in order to evaluate the differentials , the wave functions are expanded as in ( [ uexpand ] ) except that now the expansion must be made to second order in * q*. the final result is @xmath222 & \displaystyle + \frac{1}{2}{\langle { \frac{\partial \bar u_{n'}}{\partial \tilde{\bf q } } } |}\cdot{| { \frac{\partial \bar u_{n}}{\partial \tilde{\bf q } } } \rangle } -
\frac{1}{4}({\langle \frac{\partial^2\bar u_{n'}}{\partial \tilde q^2 } | \bar u_n \rangle } \\ [ 2.2ex ] & \displaystyle + { \langle \bar u_{n ' } | \frac{\partial^2 \bar u_{n}}{\partial \tilde q^2 } \rangle } ) ] .
\end{array}\ ] ] this is clearly finite so the variance of the position operator is finite .
the velocity matrix element @xmath223 is easily evaluated as @xmath224 & \displaystyle = \int d^3r ' \ , \bar u_{n'- } ( { \bf r } ' ) e^{-i{\bf q}_-\cdot{\bf r } ' } \hat { \bf v } e^{i{\bf q}_+\cdot { \bf r } ' } \bar u_{n+}({\bf r } ' )   \\ [ 2.2 ex ] & \displaystyle = \int d^3r ' \ , e^{i{\bf q}\cdot { \bf r } ' } \bar u_{n'- } ( { \bf r } ' ) ( e^{-i{\bf q}_+\cdot\hat{\bf r } ' } \hat { \bf v } e^{i{\bf q}_+\cdot\hat{\bf r } ' } ) \bar u_{n+}({\bf r } ' )   \\[2.2 ex ] & \displaystyle   = \delta({\bf q})\int d^3r ' \ , \bar u_{n ' } ( { \bf r } ' ) \tilde { \bf v } \bar u_{n}({\bf r } ' ) = \delta({\bf q}){\langle \bar u_{n ' } | \tilde { \bf v } |
\bar u_{n } \rangle}. \end{array}\ ] ] in the above we have abbreviated @xmath225 .
we also need to evaluate the commutator @xmath226 .
one half of the commutator is evaluated as @xmath227   & \displaystyle = { \langle \bar u_{n'- } |   e^{-i{\bf q}_-\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) } \hat { \bf v}[-i{\frac{\partial } { \partial { \bf q}_+ } } e^{i{\bf q}_+\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) } ] | \bar u_{n+ } \rangle } \\[2.2 ex ] & \displaystyle = -i{\frac{\partial } { \partial { \bf q}_+ } } { \langle \bar u_{n'- } |   e^{-i{\bf q}_-\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) } \hat { \bf v } e^{i{\bf q}_+\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) }   | \bar u_{n+ } \rangle } \\[2.2 ex ] & \displaystyle + { \langle \bar u_{n'- } |   e^{-i{\bf q}_-\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) } { \frac{\partial \hat { \bf v}}{\partial { \bf q}_+ } } e^{i{\bf q}_+\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) }   | \bar u_{n+ } \rangle } \\ [ 2.2 ex ] & \displaystyle + { \langle \bar u_{n'- } |   e^{-i{\bf q}_-\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) } \hat { \bf v } e^{i{\bf q}_+\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) }   | i{\frac{\partial \bar u_{n+}}{\partial { \bf q}_+ } } \rangle } , \end{array}\ ] ] while the other is @xmath228 & \displaystyle   = { \langle \bar u_{n'- } |   [ i{\frac{\partial } { \partial { \bf q}_- } } e^{-i{\bf q}_-\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) } ] \hat { \bf v } e^{i{\bf q}_+\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) }   | \bar u_{n+ } \rangle } \\[2.2 ex ] & \displaystyle = i{\frac{\partial } { \partial { \bf q}_- } } { \langle \bar u_{n'- } |   e^{-i{\bf q}_-\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) } \hat { \bf v } e^{i{\bf q}_+\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) }   | \bar u_{n+ } \rangle } \\[2.2 ex ] & \displaystyle   - { \langle i{\frac{\partial \bar u_{n-}}{\partial { \bf q}_- } } |   e^{-i{\bf q}_-\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) } \hat { \bf v } e^{i{\bf q}_+\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) }   | \bar u_{n'+ } \rangle } \\[2.2 ex ] & \displaystyle   - { \langle \bar u_{n'- } |   e^{-i{\bf q}_-\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) } { \frac{\partial \hat { \bf v}}{\partial { \bf q}_- } } e^{i{\bf q}_+\cdot ( \hat{\bf r } - { \bf r } ) }   | \bar u_{n+ } \rangle}. \end{array}\ ] ] all the brackets in the above two equations are proportional to @xmath229 , causing most of the terms to cancel . we are left with : @xmath230      the operator @xmath232 must be invariant under gauge transformations . from the expansion of the density operator in bloch eigenstates ,
@xmath233 it is evident that , if the wave functions change according to @xmath234 , then @xmath235 must transform to @xmath236 . using the definition of @xmath13 in terms of the wigner function , @xmath237 and remembering that @xmath238 and @xmath239 , we obtain @xmath240 the matrices @xmath241 and @xmath242 may be expanded about their arguments as : @xmath243&\displaystyle o(\tilde{\bf q}_- ) = o(\tilde{\bf q } ) - \frac{{\bf q}}{2 } \cdot
{ \frac{\partial o ( \tilde{\bf q})}{\partial \tilde{\bf q } } } + o(q^2 ) . \end{array}\ ] ] then , to first order in @xmath244 , abbreviating @xmath245 to @xmath171 and @xmath246 to @xmath247 , @xmath248&\displaystyle = o^{-1 } \rho_q o   + \frac{{\bf q}}{2 } \cdot ( { \frac{\partial o^{-1}}{\partial \tilde{\bf q}}}\rho_q o - o^{-1 } \rho_q { \frac{\partial o}{\partial \tilde{\bf q } } } ) \\[2.2ex]&\displaystyle = \tilde\rho_q + \frac{{\bf q}}{2 } \cdot ( { \frac{\partial o^{-1}}{\partial \tilde{\bf q}}}o \tilde\rho_q - \tilde \rho_q o^{-1}{\frac{\partial o}{\partial \tilde{\bf q } } } ) , \end{array}\ ] ] where @xmath249 . the last line is obtained by inserting @xmath250 or @xmath251 as appropriate . since @xmath252 , we have @xmath253 and @xmath254 finally , writing @xmath255 , we recover formula ( [ rhogt ] ) for the transformation of @xmath231 .    n. w. ashcroft and n. d. mermin ,
_ solid state physics _ , 2@xmath256 edition ( saunders college publishing , new york , 1976 ) .
d. culcer , j. sinova , n. a. sinitsyn , t. jungwirth , a. h. macdonald , and q. niu , phys .
* 93 * , 046602 ( 2004 ) .
d. culcer , y. g. yao , a. h. macdonald , and q. niu , phys .
b ( 2005 ) .
j. sinova , d. culcer , q. niu , n. a. sinitsyn , t. jungwirth , and a. h. macdonald , phys .
lett . * 92 * , 126603 ( 2004 ) .
s. murakami , n. nagaosa , and s .- c .
zhang , science * 301 * , 1348 ( 2003 ) .
s. murakami , n. nagaosa , and s .- c .
zhang , phys .
b * 69 * , 235206 ( 2004 ) . s. zhang , phys
lett * 85 * , 393 ( 2000 ) .
s. zhang and z. yang , phys .
lett . * 94 * , 066602 ( 2005 ) .
l. hu , j. gao , and s. q. shen , phys .
b * 70 * , 235323 ( 2004 ) .
j. inoue , g.w.bauer , l. w. molenkamp , phys .
b * 67 * , 033104 ( 2003 )
. e. g. mishchenko , a. v. shytov , and b. i. halperin , phys .
lett . * 93 * , 226602 ( 2004 ) .
o. v. dimitrova , phys .
b * 71 * , 245327 ( 2005 )
. g. y. guo , y. yao , and q. niu , phys .
lett . * 94 * , 226601 ( 2005 ) .
y. yao and z. fang , cond - mat/0502351 .
j. callaway , _ quantum theory of the solid state _
( academic press , new york , 1976 ) . g. sundaram and q. niu , phys .
b * 59 * , 14915 ( 1999 ) . m. v. berry , proc .
london ser .
a , * 392 * , 45 ( 1984 ) .
d. culcer , a. h. macdonald , and q. niu , phys .
b * 68 * , 045327 ( 2003 ) .
t. jungwirth , q. niu , and a. h. macdonald , phys .
lett . * 88 * , 207208 ( 2002 ) .
yugui yao , leonard kleinman , a. h. macdonald , jairo sinova , t. jungwirth , ding - sheng wang , enge wang , and qian niu , phys .
lett . * 92 * , 037204 ( 2004 ) .
d. culcer , y. g. yao , and q. niu , phys .
b ( 2005 ) .
r. shindou and k. imura , nucl .
b * 720 * [ fs ] , 399 ( 2005 ) . s. a. wolf , d. d. awschalom , r. a. buhrman , j. m. daughton , s. von molnar , m. l. roukes , a. y. chtchelkanova , and d. m. treger , science * 294 * , 1488 ( 2001 ) .
hammar and m. johnson , phys .
lett . * 88 * , 066806 ( 2002 ) .
y. k. kato , r. c. myers , a. c. gossard , and d. d. awschalom , science * 306 * , 1910 ( 2004 ) .
j. wunderlich , b. kaestner , j. sinova , and t. jungwirth , phys .
lett . * 94 * , 047204 ( 2005 ) .
y. kato , r. c. myers , a. c. gossard , and d. d. awschalom , phys .
* 93 * , 176601 ( 2004 ) .
l. e. reichl , _ a modern course in statistical physics _
( university of texas press , austin , 1980 ) . an interesting recent article , g. a. fiete and e. g. heller , phys .
a * 68 * , 022112 ( 2003 ) , discusses this topic from a somewhat different point of view .
r. g. littlejohn and w. g. flynn , phys .
a * 44 * , 5239 ( 1991 ) .
m. marder , _ condensed matter physics _ ( john wiley , new york , 2000 ) .
dyakonov and v. i. perel , jetp lett . * 35*a , 459 ( 1971 ) .
dyakonov and v. i. perel , sov .
jetp * 33 * , 1053 ( 1971 ) .
dyakonov and v. i. perel , sov .
solid state * 13 * , 3023 ( 1972 ) .
dyakonov and v. y. kachorovskii , sov .
. semicond . * 20 * , 110 ( 1986 ) .
e. l. ivchenko , y. b. lyanda - geller , and g. e. pikus , sov .
jetp * 71 * , 550 ( 1990 ) .
g. e. pikus and a. n. titkov in _ optical orientation _
( elsevier science publications , amsterdam , 1984 ) .
a. g. aronov , yu . b. lyanda - geller , and g. e. pikus , sov .
jetp * 73 * , 537 ( 1991 ) .
y. qi and s. zhang , phys .
b * 65 * , 214407 ( 2002 ) , ibid . * 67 * , 052407 ( 2003 ) .
u. fano , rev .
* 29 * , 74 ( 1957 ) .
a. messiah , _ quantum mechanics _ ( dover publications , new york , 2000 ) . ping zhang , junren shi , di xiao , and qian niu , phys .
lett * 96 * , 076604 ( 2006 ) .
jackson , _ classical electrodynamics _ , 3@xmath257 edition ( john wiley @xmath258 sons , 1999 ) , section 6.6 ( pp . 248 - 258 ) .
j. m. luttinger , phys . rev . * 102 * , 1030 ( 1956 ) . m. zarea and s. e. ulloa , phys .
b * 73 * , 165306 ( 2006 ) .
a. m. dudarev , r. b. diener , i. carusotto , and q. niu phys . rev . lett .
* 92 * , 153005 ( 2004 ) y. kato _ et al .
_ , nature * 427 * , 50 ( 2004 ) .