a _ classical network _ is a capaciated directed acyclic graph @xmath0 , where @xmath1 and @xmath2 are the node and the arc sets of the graph respectively , and @xmath3 is the link capacity for arc @xmath4 .
broadcast network _ is a classical work for which all source messages are _ collocated _ at a single source node .
consider a general broadcast network with one source node @xmath5 and @xmath6 sink nodes @xmath7 , @xmath8 ( see figure  [ fig : broadnet ] ) .
the source node @xmath5 has access to a collection of _ independent _ messages @xmath9 , where @xmath10 is a finite index set .
the messages intended for the sink node @xmath7 are given by @xmath11 , where @xmath12 is a nonempty subset of @xmath10 .
when all messages from @xmath13 are _ unicast _ messages , i.e. , each of them is intended for _ only _ one of the sink nodes , it follows from the celebrated max - flow min - cut theorem @xcite that routing can achieve the entire capacity region of the network . on the other hand , when some of the messages from @xmath13 are _ multicast _ messages , i.e. , they are intended for _ multiple _ sink nodes , the capacity region of the network is generally _ unknown _ except when there is only one multicast message at the source node @xcite or there are only two sink nodes ( @xmath14 ) in the network @xcite .    in this paper
, we are interested in establishing strong network coding bounds for _ general _ broadcast networks with multiple ( multicast ) messages and more than two sink nodes ( @xmath15 ) .
in particular , we are interested in network coding bounds that rely only on the _ cut _ structure of the network .
the rational behind this particular interest is two - folded .
first , cut is a well - understood combinatorial structure for networks .
second , the fact that standard cut - set bounds ( * ? ? ?
* ch .  15.10 )
are _ tight _ for the aforementioned special cases @xcite suggests that cut as a combinatorial structure can be useful for more general broadcast - network coding problems as well .
the starting point of this work is the following simple observation . for each @xmath16 ,
let @xmath17 be a
basic " cut that separates the source node @xmath5 from the ( single ) sink node @xmath7 .
then , for any nonempty subset @xmath18:=\{1,\ldots , k\}$ ] the union @xmath19 is also a cut that separates the source node @xmath5 from the  super " sink node @xmath20 , whose intended messages are given by @xmath21 . by the standard cut - set bound ( * ? ? ?
* ch .  15.10 )
, we have @xmath22 for any achievable rate tuple @xmath23 .
here , @xmath24 is the _ rate _ function that corresponds to the rate tuple @xmath25 and is given by @xmath26 and @xmath27 is the _ capacity _ function of the network where @xmath28    note that the above observation depends critically on the fact that all messages @xmath13 are _ collocated _ at the source node @xmath5 .
when the messages are _ distributed _ among several source nodes , it is well known that the union of several basic cuts may _ no longer _ be a cut that separates the super source node from the super sink node and hence may not lead to any network coding bounds @xcite .
based on the above discussion , it is clear that for broadcast networks the _ standard _ cut - set bounds ( * ? ? ?
* ch .  15.10 )
are closely related to _
union _ as a specific set operation to combine different basic cuts of the network .
therefore , a natural question that one may ask is whether there are any other set operations ( besides the union ) that will also lead to nontrivial network coding bounds .    in this paper , we provide a positive answer to the above question by establishing a new set of network coding bounds for general broadcast networks .
we term these bounds _ generalized _ cut - set bounds based on the facts that : 1 ) they rely only on the cut structure of the network ; and 2 ) the set operations within the rate and the capacity functions are _ identical _ ( but not just the union any more ) , both similar to the case of standard cut - set bounds as in . from the proof viewpoint , as we shall see , these bounds are established via only the _ shannon - type _ inequalities .
it is well known that all shannon - type inequalities can be derived from the simple fact that shannon entropy as a set function is _ submodular _ ( * ? ? ?
so , at heart , the generalized cut - set bounds are reflections of several new results that we establish on submodular function optimization .
the rest of the paper is organized as follows . in section  [ sec : mod ] we establish several new results on submodular function optimization , which we shall use to prove the generalized cut - set bounds .
a new set of network coding bounds that relate _ three _ basic cuts of the network is provided in section  [ sec : gcsb3 ] .
the proof of these bounds is rather  hands - on " and hence provides a good illustration on the essential idea on how to establish the generalized cut - set bounds . in section  [ sec : gcsbk ] , a new set of network coding bounds that relate arbitrary @xmath6 basic cuts of the network is provided , generalizing the bounds provided in section  [ sec : gcsb3 ] . in section  [ sec : cn ] , the tightness of the generalized cut - set bounds is demonstrated via applications to _ combination _ networks @xcite .
finally , in section  [ sec : con ] we conclude the paper with some remarks .
let @xmath29 be a finite ground set .
a function @xmath30 is said to be _ submodular _ if @xmath31 and is said to be _ modular _ if @xmath32    more generally , let @xmath33 , @xmath8 , be a subset of @xmath29 . for any nonempty subset @xmath34 of @xmath35 $ ] and any @xmath36 $ ] , let @xmath37 clearly , we have @xmath38 for any nonempty @xmath18 $ ] and @xmath39 for any @xmath40 $ ] and any @xmath41 $ ] .
furthermore , it is known that ( * ? ? ?
2 ) @xmath42 if @xmath43 is a submodular function , and @xmath44 if @xmath43 is a modular function .
note that the standard submodularity relates @xmath45 for different @xmath46 but a _ fixed _
@xmath34 . to establish the generalized cut - set bounds , however
, we shall need the following technical results on modular and submodular functions that relate @xmath45 for not only different @xmath46 but also _ different _ @xmath34 .
[ lemma:1 ] let @xmath47 and @xmath48 be two integers such that @xmath49 .
we have @xmath50 ) ) & \ge \sum_{r=1}^{r'}f(s^{(r)}([j]))+\sum_{r = r'+1}^{j}f(s^{(r'+1)}([r ] ) ) \label{eq:1a}\end{aligned}\ ] ] if @xmath43 is a submodular function , and @xmath50 ) ) & = \sum_{r=1}^{r'}f(s^{(r)}([j]))+\sum_{r = r'+1}^{j}f(s^{(r'+1)}([r]))\end{aligned}\ ] ] if @xmath43 is a modular function .
note that when @xmath51 , we have @xmath52 ) = s^{(1)}([r ] ) = \cup_{k=1}^{r}s_k \supseteq s_r$ ] for any @xmath53 . in this case
, the inequality reduces to the trivial equality @xmath54 ) ) & = \sum_{r=1}^{j}f(s^{(1)}([r])).\end{aligned}\ ] ] on the other hand , when @xmath55 , the inequality reduces to the standard submodularity @xmath56)).\end{aligned}\ ] ] for the general case where @xmath57 , a proof of the lemma is provided in appendix  [ app : pf - lemma1 ] .
let @xmath58 for @xmath8 .
for any nonempty @xmath18 $ ] and any @xmath59 we have @xmath60 applying lemma  [ lemma:1 ] for @xmath61 , @xmath8 , and , we have the following corollary .    [ cor:1 ]
let @xmath47 and @xmath48 be two integers such that @xmath49 , and let @xmath62 be a subset of @xmath29 .
we have @xmath63)\cup s_0 ) \notag\\ & \ge \sum_{r=1}^{r'}f(s^{(r)}([j])\cup s_0)+\sum_{r = r'+1}^{j}f(s^{(r'+1)}([r])\cup s_0 ) \label{eq:2a}\end{aligned}\ ] ] if @xmath43 is a submodular function , and @xmath63)\cup s_0)\notag\\ & = \sum_{r=1}^{r'}f(s^{(r)}([j])\cup s_0)+\sum_{r = r'+1}^{j}f(s^{(r'+1)}([r])\cup s_0)\end{aligned}\ ] ] if @xmath43 is a modular function .
we shall also need the following lemma , for which a proof is provided in appendix  [ app : pf - lemma2 ] .
[ lemma:2 ] let @xmath34 and @xmath64 be two nonempty subsets of @xmath35 $ ] .
write , without loss of generality , that @xmath65 where @xmath66 .
let @xmath67 and @xmath68 be two integers such that @xmath69 , @xmath70 , and @xmath71 .
we have @xmath72 if @xmath43 is a submodular function , and @xmath73 if @xmath43 is a modular function .    for specific functions ,
let @xmath74 be a collection of jointly distributed random variables , and let @xmath75 be the joint ( shannon ) entropy of @xmath76 .
then , it is well known ( * ? ? ?
14.a ) that @xmath77 where @xmath78 is a _ submodular _ function .
furthermore , it is straightforward to verify that the rate function @xmath79 ( for a given rate tuple @xmath25 ) and the capacity function @xmath80 , defined in and respectively , are _ modular _ functions .
[ thm : gcsb3 ] consider a broadcast network with a collection of independent messages @xmath13 collocated at the source node @xmath5 and @xmath15 sink nodes @xmath7 , @xmath8 . for any @xmath8 ,
let @xmath11 be the intended messages for the sink node @xmath7 , and let @xmath17 be a basic cut that separates the source node @xmath5 from the sink node @xmath7 .
we have @xmath81 for any achievable rate tuple @xmath25 and any three distinct integers @xmath82 , @xmath83 , and @xmath84 from @xmath35 $ ] .
note that the left - hand sides of the generalized cut - set bounds  are _ weighted _ sum rates with integer weights on the rates of the messages from @xmath85 .
figure  [ fig : wd ] illustrates the weight distributions for the generalized cut - set bounds .
let @xmath86 be an _
admissible _ code with block length @xmath87 , where @xmath88 is the message transmitted over the arc @xmath89 . by the independence bound ( * ? ? ?
* th  2.6.6 ) and the link - capacity constraints , we have @xmath90 for notational simplicity , in this proof we shall assume _ perfect _ recovery of the messages at each of the sink nodes .
it should be clear from the proof that by applying the well - known fano s inequality ( * ? ? ?
* th  2.10.1 ) , the results also hold for _ asymptotically perfect _ recovery . by the perfect recovery requirement , for any nonempty subset @xmath18 $ ] the collection of the messages @xmath21 must be a _ function _ of the messages @xmath91 transmitted over the @xmath5-@xmath20 cut @xmath19 .
we thus have @xmath92 .
\label{eq : perfectdec}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    _ proof of .
_ let @xmath93 in .
denote by @xmath94 the mutual information between @xmath95 and @xmath96 .
we have @xmath97 where follows from the fact that : 1 ) @xmath98 and @xmath99 are functions of @xmath95 and @xmath96 respectively so we have @xmath100 ; and 2 ) @xmath11 and @xmath101 are functions of @xmath102 and @xmath103 respectively so we have @xmath104 , and follows from the fact that @xmath105 and @xmath106 note that we trivially have @xmath107 substituting and into gives @xmath108 where follows from the independence bound @xmath109 follows from for @xmath110 , @xmath111 , and @xmath112 ; and follows from the fact that the capacity function @xmath80 is a modular function . substituting @xmath113 into and dividing both sides of the inequality by @xmath87 complete the proof of .
we note here that if we had directly bounded from above the right - hand side of by @xmath115 using the independence bound , it would have led to the standard cut - set bound @xmath116 but the use of the independence bound would have implied that all messages transmitted over @xmath117 are _ independent _ , which may not be the case in the presence of multicast messages .    _
_ applying the two - way submodularity of the shannon entropy with @xmath118 , @xmath119 , and @xmath120 , we have @xmath121 substituting into gives @xmath122 where follows from the independence bound @xmath123 follows from for @xmath110 , @xmath111 , and @xmath124 ; and follows from the fact that the capacity function @xmath80 is a modular function . substituting and @xmath125 into and dividing both sides of the inequality by @xmath87 complete the proof of .
@xmath114    _ proof of .
_ by the _ symmetry _ among @xmath82 , @xmath83 , and @xmath84 in , we have @xmath126 also note that @xmath127 adding and gives @xmath128 applying the two - way submodularity of the shannon entropy with @xmath118 , @xmath119 , and @xmath129 , we have @xmath130 note that we trivially have @xmath131 substituting and into , we have @xmath132 where follows from the independence bounds @xmath133 follows from for @xmath110 , @xmath111 , @xmath17 , @xmath134 , and @xmath135 ; and follows from the fact that the capacity function @xmath80 is a modular function .
substituting , @xmath136 into and dividing both sides of the inequality by @xmath87 complete the proof of .
@xmath114    _ proof of .
_ adding and , we have @xmath137 note that we trivially have @xmath138 substituting , , and into , we have @xmath139 where follows from the independence bounds , , and ; follows from for @xmath110 , @xmath111 , @xmath17 , @xmath134 , @xmath135 and @xmath112 ; and follows from the fact that the capacity function @xmath80 is a modular function . substituting and into and dividing both sides of the inequality by @xmath87 complete the proof of .
we have thus completed the proof of theorem  [ thm : gcsb3 ] .
[ thm : gcsbk ] consider a broadcast network with a collection of independent messages @xmath13 collocated at the source node @xmath5 and @xmath15 sink nodes @xmath7 , @xmath8 . for any @xmath8 ,
let @xmath11 be the intended messages for the sink node @xmath7 , and let @xmath17 be a basic cut that separates the source node @xmath5 from the sink node @xmath7 .
let @xmath140 , @xmath34 and @xmath64 be nonempty subsets of @xmath35 $ ] such that @xmath141 let @xmath142 be a subset of @xmath143 , and let @xmath144 be a sequence of integers from @xmath145 $ ] and such that @xmath146 we have @xmath147 for any achievable rate tuple @xmath25 , where @xmath148 for any @xmath149 and @xmath150 $ ] .
note that the generalized cut - set bound involves a number of parameters : @xmath140 , @xmath34 , @xmath64 , @xmath142 , and @xmath144 .
specifying these parameters to certain choices will lead to potentially weaker but more applicable generalized cut - set bounds . more specifically ,
let @xmath151 and @xmath152 for any @xmath149 . by the ordering in , the condition in is satisfied ( the condition in holds trivially with an equality )
. thus , by theorem  [ thm : gcsbk ] we have @xmath153\setminus q}r(i^{(r)}(u))+&\sum_{q \in q}\sum_{r=1}^{q-1}\alpha_q(q , r)r(i^{(r)}(u))\notag\\ & \leq \sum_{r \in [ |u|]\setminus q}c(a^{(r)}(u))+\sum_{q \in q}\sum_{r=1}^{q-1}\alpha_q(q , r)c(a^{(r)}(u ) ) \label{eq : gcsbk2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] for any achievable rate tuple @xmath25 , where @xmath154 for any @xmath149 and @xmath155 $ ] . a proper simplification of leads to the following corollary .
see appendix  [ app : pf - cor4 ] for the details of the simplification procedure .
[ cor : gcsbk2 ] consider a broadcast network with a collection of independent messages @xmath13 collocated at the source node @xmath5 and @xmath15 sink nodes @xmath7 , @xmath8 . for any @xmath8 ,
let @xmath11 be the intended messages for the sink node @xmath7 , and let @xmath17 be a basic cut that separates the source node @xmath5 from the sink node @xmath7 .
let @xmath34 be a nonempty subset of @xmath35 $ ] , and let @xmath142 be a subset of @xmath143 .
we have @xmath156 for any achievable rate tuple @xmath25 , where @xmath157 for any @xmath36 $ ] if @xmath158 , and @xmath159 for any @xmath36 $ ] if @xmath160 .
the generalized cut - set bound can be further specified by letting @xmath161 for @xmath162 ( note that @xmath158 when @xmath163 ) . for this particular choice of @xmath142
, we have @xmath164 substituting into immediately leads to the following corollary .
[ cor : gcsbk3 ] consider a broadcast network with a collection of independent messages @xmath13 collocated at the source node @xmath5 and @xmath15 sink nodes @xmath7 ,
@xmath8 . for any @xmath8 ,
let @xmath11 be the intended messages for the sink node @xmath7 , and let @xmath17 be a basic cut that separates the source node @xmath5 from the sink node @xmath7 .
let @xmath34 be a nonempty subset of @xmath35 $ ] .
we have @xmath165 for any achievable rate tuple @xmath25 and any @xmath162 .
now , the generalized cut - set bound can be recovered from corollary  [ cor : gcsbk3 ] by setting @xmath166 and @xmath167 in ; the generalized cut - set bound can be recovered from corollary  [ cor : gcsbk2 ] by setting @xmath166 and @xmath168 such that @xmath169 the generalized cut - set bound can be recovered from theorem  [ thm : gcsbk ] by setting @xmath170 , @xmath171 ( so @xmath172 ) and @xmath158 ; and finally , the generalized cut - set bound can be recovered from theorem  [ thm : gcsbk ] by setting @xmath173 ( so @xmath174 ) , @xmath175 , @xmath176 , and @xmath177 such that @xmath178 and @xmath179 .
let @xmath86 be an _
admissible _ code with block length @xmath87 , where @xmath88 is the message transmitted over the arc @xmath89 .
similar to the proof of theorem  [ thm : gcsb3 ] , we shall assume perfect recovery of the messages at each of the sink nodes .
as such , for any nonempty subset @xmath18 $ ] the messages @xmath21 must be _ functions _ of the messages @xmath91 transmitted over the @xmath5-@xmath20 cut @xmath19 .    let us first consider the case where @xmath158 .
note that @xmath180 where and follow from the fact that the messages @xmath181 are functions of @xmath182 ; follows from the independence bound on entropy ; follows from the standard multiway submodularity ; follows from the fact that the messages @xmath11 are functions of @xmath102 so we have @xmath183 for any @xmath184 ; follows from the link capacity constraints ; follows from the fact that the capacity function @xmath80 is a modular function so we have @xmath185 ; and follows from the fact that the capacity function @xmath80 is a modular function and the assumption so we have @xmath186 . rearranging the terms in gives @xmath187 further note that @xmath188 substituting and into and dividing both sides of the inequality by @xmath87 , we have @xmath189 for any achievable rate tuple @xmath25 .
this completes the proof of for @xmath158 .
next , assume that @xmath160 .
write , without loss of generality , that @xmath190 where @xmath191 by lemma  [ lemma:2 ] , for any two integers @xmath192 and @xmath193 such that @xmath194 , @xmath195 , @xmath196 , and @xmath197 we have @xmath198 where follows from the fact that the messages @xmath199 are functions of @xmath200 so we have @xmath201 for any @xmath202 $ ] and the trivial inequalities @xmath203\\ \mbox{and } \quad h_{\mathsf{x},\mathsf{w}}&(a_{t_r}\cap(a^{(q')}(u)\cup a^{(r_{q'}+1)}(\{t_1,\ldots , t_r\})),i_{t_r}\cap(i^{(q')}(u)\cup i^{(r_{q'}+1)}(\{t_1,\ldots , t_r\})))\notag\\ & \geq h_{\mathsf{x}}(a_{t_r}\cap(a^{(q')}(u)\cup a^{(r_{q'}+1)}(\{t_1,\ldots , t_r\})));\end{aligned}\ ] ] follows from the independence bound on entropy ; follows from the link - capacity constraints ; and and follow from the fact that the capacity function @xmath80 is a modular function . letting @xmath204 and @xmath205 in ,
we have @xmath206 let @xmath207 for any @xmath149 and @xmath150 $ ] , and let @xmath208 .
note that @xmath209 and @xmath210 are always positive . multiplying both sides of by @xmath211 and then summing over all @xmath212 , we have @xmath213 note that @xmath214 where @xmath215 we can thus rewrite as @xmath216 furthermore , letting @xmath217 and @xmath218 in and multiplying both sides of the inequality by @xmath219 , we have @xmath220 adding and gives @xmath221 where @xmath222 by , when @xmath223 for some @xmath224 ( @xmath225 for convenience ) , we have @xmath226 and hence @xmath227 therefore , when @xmath228 for some @xmath229 $ ] we have @xmath230 when @xmath231 for some @xmath229 $ ] we have @xmath232 and when @xmath233 we have @xmath234 and hence @xmath235 combining , , and , we conclude that @xmath236.\end{aligned}\ ] ] dividing both sides of by @xmath237 and then summing over all @xmath238 , we have @xmath239 adding and , we have @xmath240 note that we trivially have @xmath241 .
\label{eq : pf - gcsbk2070}\end{aligned}\ ] ] substituting , , and into and dividing both sides of the inequality by @xmath87 complete the proof of for @xmath160 .
we have thus completed the proof of theorem  [ thm : gcsbk ] .
sink nodes and a complete message set . ]    to demonstrate the tightness of the generalized cut - set bounds , let us consider a special class of broadcast networks known as _ combination _ networks @xcite .
a combination network is a broadcast network that consists of three layers of nodes ( see figure  [ fig : cn3 ] for an illustration ) .
the top layer consists of a single source node @xmath5 , and the bottom layer consists of @xmath6 sink nodes @xmath7 , @xmath8 .
the middle layer consists of @xmath242 intermediate nodes , each connecting to the source node @xmath5 and a nonempty subset of sink nodes .
while the links from the source node @xmath5 to the intermediate nodes may have finite capacity , the links from the intermediate nodes to the sink nodes are all assumed to have _ infinite _ capacity .
more specifically , denote by @xmath243 the intermediate node that connects to the nonempty subset @xmath34 of sink nodes and @xmath244 the link that connects the source node @xmath5 to the intermediate node @xmath243 . the link capacity for @xmath244 is denoted by @xmath245 .
note that when @xmath246 , the intermediate node @xmath243 can be effectively removed from the network . by construction ,
the only interesting combinatorial structure for combination networks is cut .
therefore , combination networks provide an ideal set of problems to understand the strength and the limitations of the generalized cut - set bounds .    in figure
[ fig : cn3 ] we illustrate a general combination network with @xmath247 sink nodes and a general message set that consists of a total of seven independent messages @xmath248 where the message @xmath249 , @xmath250 , is intended for all sink nodes @xmath7 , @xmath184 .
this network coding problem was first introduced and solved by grokop and tse @xcite in the context of characterizing the _ latency _ capacity region @xcite of the general broadcast channel with three receivers .
more specifically , it was shown in @xcite that the capacity region of the network is given by the set of nonnegative rate tuples @xmath251 satisfying @xmath252 from the converse viewpoint , the inequalities  follow directly from the standard cut - set bounds by considering the following three basic cuts : @xmath253 , @xmath254 , and @xmath255 . for the inequalities  , the proof provided in @xcite was problem - specific and appears to be rather hand - crafted . with the generalized cut - set bounds now in place ,
however , it is clear that the inequalities  follow directly from ; the inequality follows directly from ; the inequalities  follow directly from ; and the inequality follows directly from .
thus , the standard and the generalized cut - set bounds together provide an _ exact _ characterization of the capacity region of the general combination network with three sink nodes and a complete message set .
next , let us consider the general combination network with @xmath6 sink nodes and _ symmetrical _ link capacity constraints @xcite : @xmath256\end{aligned}\ ] ] i.e. , the link - capacity constraint for arc @xmath244 depends on the subset @xmath34 only via its cardinality .
assume that the source @xmath5 has access to a set of @xmath257 independent messages @xmath258 , where @xmath259 , @xmath8 , is a private message intended only for the sink node @xmath7 , and @xmath260 is a common message intended for all @xmath6 sink nodes in the network .
for this communication scenario , note that @xmath261 is a basic cut that separates the source node @xmath5 from the sink node @xmath7 for each @xmath8 . applying corollary  [ cor : gcsbk3 ] with
@xmath262 $ ] , we have @xmath263 for any achievable rate tuple @xmath264 and any @xmath265 , where @xmath266 is the sum of the private rates .
it is clear that the outer bound given by the inequality for @xmath265 has exactly @xmath257 corner points : @xmath267 the achievability of these corner points was proved in @xcite .
therefore , the generalized cut - set bounds also provide a _ tight _ characterization of the common - v.s .- sum - private capacity region of the general symmetrical combination network
.     sinks .
the boundary of the capacity region is illustrated by solid lines , while the boundary of the cut - set outer region is illustrated by dashed lines . ]    finally , let us make an explicit comparison between the common - v.s .- sum - private capacity region of the general symmetrical combination network and the outer region given by _
just _ the standard cut - set bounds for the case of @xmath247 sink nodes . for @xmath247 , the common - v.s .- sum - private capacity region of the network
is given by all nonnegative @xmath268 pairs satisfying @xmath269 the standard cut - set bounds , in this case , are given by @xmath270 substituting @xmath271 into and using fourier - motzkin elimination to eliminate @xmath272 and @xmath273 from the inequalities in ,
we may explicitly write the outer region given by just the standard cut - set bounds as the nonnegative @xmath268 pairs satisfying @xmath274 in figure  [ fig : cnk ] we illustrate the rate regions constrained by and , respectively . clearly , even for the case with only @xmath247 sink nodes , the standard cut - set bounds alone are _ not _ tight , while the generalized cut - set bounds provide a precise characterization of the common - v.s .- sum - private capacity region .
the paper considered the problem of coding over broadcast networks with multiple ( multicast ) messages and more than two sink nodes .
the standard cut - set bounds , which are known to be loose in general , are closely related to union as a specific set operation to combine different basic cuts of the network .
a new set of network coding bounds ( termed as _ generalized _ cut - set bounds ) , which relate the basic cuts of the network via a variety of set operations ( not just the union ) , were established via the submodularity of the shannon entropy .
it was shown that the generalized cut - set bounds ( together with the standard cut - set bounds ) provide a precise characterization of the capacity region of the general combination network with three sink nodes and the common - v.s .- sum - private capacity region of the general symmetrical combination network ( with arbitrary number of sink nodes ) .
our ongoing work focuses primarily on further understanding the strength and the limitations of the generalized cut - set bounds established in this paper .
in particular , it would be interesting to see whether the generalized cut - set bounds are tight for the _ symmetrical _ capacity region of the general symmetrical combination network , which was recently characterized by tian @xcite .
fix two integers @xmath47 and @xmath48 such that @xmath275 .
let @xmath276 ) , & \mbox{for } \ ; r = r'+1,\ldots , j , \end{array } \right.\end{aligned}\ ] ] and let @xmath277 for @xmath53 . by the standard multiway submodularity and modularity we have @xmath50 ) ) & = \sum_{r=1}^{j}f(g_r ) \geq \sum_{r=1}^{j}f(g^{(r)}([j]))\label{eq : assubmod}\end{aligned}\ ] ] if @xmath43 is a submodular function , and @xmath50 ) ) & = \sum_{r=1}^{j}f(g_r ) = \sum_{r=1}^{j}f(g^{(r)}([j ] ) ) \label{eq : asmod}\end{aligned}\ ] ] if @xmath43 is a modular function .
next , we shall show that @xmath278 ) = \left\ { \begin{array}{rl } s^{(r)}([j ] ) , & \mbox{for } \ ; r=1,\ldots , r'\\ s^{(r'+1)}([j - r+r'+1 ] ) , & \mbox{for } \ ; r = r'+1,\ldots , j .
\end{array } \right .
\label{eq : as}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    we shall consider the following two cases separately
.    case 1 : @xmath279 $ ] .
note that @xmath280 for any @xmath281 $ ] , so we have @xmath282 ) \subseteq g^{(r)}([j])$ ] for any @xmath281 $ ] .
on the other hand , since @xmath283)$ ] for all @xmath281 $ ] , we have @xmath284)$ ] and hence @xmath285 ) \subseteq s^{(r)}([j ] ) \cup s^{(r'+1)}([j])$ ] for all @xmath281 $ ] .
since @xmath282 ) \supseteq s^{(r'+1)}([j])$ ] for all @xmath279 $ ] , we have @xmath285 ) \subseteq s^{(r)}([j])$ ] for all @xmath279 $ ] .
we thus conclude that @xmath285 ) = s^{(r)}([j])$ ] for all @xmath279 $ ] .
case 2 : @xmath286 . for this case
, we have the following fact .
[ fact ] for any @xmath286 , we have @xmath278 ) & = \cup_{m=1}^{\min\{r , r'+2\}}\left(s^{(m-1)}([j - r+m-1])\cap t_{j - r+m}\right).\end{aligned}\ ] ]    fix @xmath286 . by definition , @xmath278 )
= \cup_{\{u \subseteq [ j]:|u|=r\}}\cap_{k \in u}g_k .
\label{eq : as0}\end{aligned}\ ] ] fix @xmath287 $ ] such that @xmath288 .
we have @xmath289 where @xmath290 is the _
smallest _ integer in @xmath291 , and follows from the fact that @xmath292 write , without loss of generality , that @xmath293 where @xmath294 .
fix @xmath295 for some @xmath296 $ ] .
then we must have @xmath297 for any such @xmath298 .
we thus have from that @xmath299    the right - hand side of can be further simplified based on the following two observations .
first , for any @xmath286 we have @xmath300 and hence @xmath301 ) \supseteq \cap_{l=1}^{r'+1}s_{u_l } \supseteq \cap_{l=1}^{r}s_{u_l}.\end{aligned}\ ] ] we thus have @xmath302 and hence @xmath303 second , since @xmath304 , we have @xmath305)=t_{u_{r'+2}}\end{aligned}\ ] ] and hence @xmath306 it follows that for any @xmath307 , we have @xmath308 substituting into , we have @xmath309    finally , substituting into , we have @xmath278 ) & = \cup_{\{u \subseteq [ j]:|u|=r\}}\left(\cup_{m=1}^{\min\{r , r'+2\}}\left((\cap_{l=1}^{m-1}s_{u_l})\cap t_{u_m}\right)\right)\\ & = \cup_{m=1}^{\min\{r , r'+2\}}\left(\cup_{\{u \subseteq [ j]:|u|=r\}}\left((\cap_{l=1}^{m-1}s_{u_l})\cap t_{u_m}\right)\right ) \label{eq : as4}\end{aligned}\ ] ] for any @xmath286 . note that for any @xmath287 $ ] such that @xmath288 , the largest numerical value that @xmath310 can assume is @xmath311 for any @xmath312 $ ] . by the ordering in , for any @xmath313 we have @xmath314:|u|=r\}}\left((\cap_{l=1}^{m-1}s_{u_l})\cap t_{j - r+m}\right )   & = \left(\cup_{\{1 \leq u_1 < u_2 < \cdots < u_{m-1 } \leq j - r+m-1\}}\cap_{l=1}^{m-1}s_{u_l}\right)\cap t_{j - r+m}\\ & = s^{(m-1)}([j - r+m-1])\cap t_{j - r+m}. \label{eq : as5}\end{aligned}\ ] ] substituting into completes the proof of the fact .    further note that for any @xmath286 we have @xmath315 ) \subseteq s^{(r')}([j - r+m-1 ] ) \subseteq s^{(m-1)}([j - r+m-1 ] ) \label{eq : as6}\end{aligned}\ ] ] for any @xmath316 .
when @xmath317 , substituting and into fact  [ fact ] we have @xmath278 ) & = \cup_{m=1}^{r}t_{j - r+m}=t_j = s^{(r'+1)}([j ] ) .
\label{eq : as7}\end{aligned}\ ] ] when @xmath318 , by fact  [ fact ] we have @xmath278 ) & = \cup_{m=1}^{r'+2}\left(s^{(m-1)}([j - r+m-1])\cap t_{j - r+m}\right)\\ & = \left(\cup_{m=1}^{r'+1}\left(s^{(m-1)}([j - r+m-1])\cap t_{j - r+m}\right)\right)\cup\notag\\ & \hspace{13pt } \left(s^{(r'+1)}([j - r+r'+1])\cap t_{j - r+r'+2}\right)\\ & = \left(\cup_{m=1}^{r'+1}t_{j - r+m}\right)\cup\left(s^{(r'+1)}([j - r+r'+1])\cap t_{j - r+r'+2}\right)\label{eq : as7.1}\\ & = t_{j - r+r'+1}\cup\left(s^{(r'+1)}([j - r+r'+1])\cap t_{j - r+r'+2}\right)\label{eq : as7.2}\\ & = s^{(r'+1)}([j - r+r'+1])\cup\left(s^{(r'+1)}([j - r+r'+1])\cap s^{(r'+1)}([j - r+r'+2])\right)\label{eq : as7.3}\\ & = s^{(r'+1)}([j - r+r'+1])\label{eq : as8}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where follows from , and follows from the ordering in . combining and completes the proof of for @xmath286 .
finally , substituting into and we have @xmath50 ) ) & \geq \sum_{r=1}^{r'}f(s^{(r)}([j]))+\sum_{r = r'+1}^{j}f(s^{(r'+1)}([j - r+r'+1]))\\ & = \sum_{r=1}^{r'}f(s^{(r)}([j]))+\sum_{r = r'+1}^{j}f(s^{(r'+1)}([r]))\end{aligned}\ ] ] if @xmath43 is a submodular function , and @xmath50 ) ) & = \sum_{r=1}^{r'}f(s^{(r)}([j]))+\sum_{r = r'+1}^{j}f(s^{(r'+1)}([r]))\end{aligned}\ ] ] if @xmath43 is a modular function .
this completes the proof of lemma  [ lemma:1 ] .
without loss of generality , we may assume that @xmath319 $ ] such that @xmath320 for all @xmath321 . under this assumption
, the inequality can be written as @xmath322 ) ) ) .
\label{eq:3a'}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    assume that @xmath43 is a modular function .
by the two - way submodularity we have @xmath323))\right)-\notag\\ & \hspace{12pt } \sum_{r = r_q+1}^{|t|}f(s^{(q)}(u)\cup s^{(r_q+1)}([r]))\label{eq:3c}\\   & \geq\sum_{r=1}^{r_q}\left(f(s_r\cap s^{(q)}(u))+f(s_r\cup s^{(q)}(u))\right)+\notag\\ & \hspace{12pt } \sum_{r = r_q+1}^{|t|}\left(f(s_r\cap(s^{(q)}(u)\cup s^{(r_q+1)}([r])))+f(s_r\cup(s^{(q)}(u)\cup s^{(r_q+1)}([r])))\right)-\notag\\ & \hspace{12pt } \sum_{r = r_q+1}^{|t|}f(s^{(q)}(u)\cup s^{(r_q+1)}([r])).\label{eq:3d}\end{aligned}\ ] ] applying corollary  [ cor:1 ] with @xmath324 , @xmath325 , and @xmath326 , we have @xmath327)\cup s^{(q)}(u))\notag\\ & \ge \sum_{r=1}^{r_q}f(s^{(r)}(t)\cup s^{(q)}(u))+\sum_{r = r_q+1}^{|t|}f(s^{(r_q+1)}([r])\cup s^{(q)}(u))\label{eq:3e}\\ & = \sum_{r=1}^{r_q}f(s^{(r)}(t))+\sum_{r = r_q+1}^{|t|}f(s^{(r_q+1)}([r])\cup s^{(q)}(u))\label{eq:3f}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where follows from the assumption @xmath328 such that @xmath329 for any @xmath330 .
substituting into completes the proof of and hence that of .    when @xmath43 is a modular function , both inequalities and hold with an equality .
this completes the proof of and hence that of the entire corollary .
note that when @xmath158 , @xmath157 for all @xmath202 $ ] . in this case
, the corollary follows directly from . now , assume that @xmath142 is nonempty .
write , without loss of generality , that @xmath190 where @xmath331 note that @xmath332 where @xmath333 for any @xmath334 for some @xmath335 $ ] . when @xmath336 for some @xmath337 $ ] , by and we have @xmath338 for any @xmath339 and hence @xmath340 when @xmath341 for some @xmath335 $ ] , by and we have @xmath342 for any @xmath339 and hence @xmath343 where follows from the fact that @xmath344 by the definition of @xmath345 .    by , , and , the left - hand side of can be simplified as @xmath153\setminus q}&r(i^{(r)}(u))+\sum_{q \in q}\sum_{r=1}^{q-1}\alpha_q(q , r)r(i^{(r)}(u))\notag\\ & = \sum_{r \in [ |u|]\setminus q}r(i^{(r)}(u))+\sum_{r=1}^{q_{|q|}-1}\beta'_q(r)r(i^{(r)}(u))\\ & = \sum_{r \in [ |u|]\setminus q}r(i^{(r)}(u))+\sum_{r \in [ q_{|q|}]\setminus q}\left(\frac{\beta_q(r)}{\prod_{t=1}^{|q|}(q_t-1)}-1\right)r(i^{(r)}(u))\label{eq : t100}\\ & = \frac{1}{\prod_{t=1}^{|q|}(q_t-1)}\left(\sum_{r \in [ q_{|q|}]\setminus q}\beta_q(r)r(i^{(r)}(u))+\left(\prod_{t=1}^{|q|}(q_t-1)\right)\sum_{r = q_{|q|}+1}^{|u|}r(i^{(r)}(u))\right)\label{eq : t200}\\ & = \frac{1}{\prod_{t=1}^{|q|}(q_t-1)}\left(\sum_{r=1}^{q_{|q|}}\beta_q(r)r(i^{(r)}(u))+\sum_{r = q_{|q|}+1}^{|u|}\beta_q(r)r(i^{(r)}(u))\right)\label{eq : t300}\\ & = \frac{1}{\prod_{t=1}^{|q|}(q_t-1)}\sum_{r=1}^{|u|}\beta_q(r)r(i^{(r)}(u)),\label{eq : t400}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where follows from the facts that @xmath346 for all @xmath347 and that @xmath348 by the definition of @xmath345 .
similarly , the right - hand side of can be simplified as @xmath153\setminus q}c(a^{(r)}(u))+\sum_{q \in q}\sum_{r=1}^{q-1}\alpha_q(q , r)c(a^{(r)}(u ) ) = \frac{1}{\prod_{t=1}^{|q|}(q_t-1)}\sum_{r=1}^{|u|}\beta_q(r)c(a^{(r)}(u)).\label{eq : t500}\end{aligned}\ ] ] substituting and into and multiplying both sides of the inequality by @xmath349 complete the proof of corollary  [ cor : gcsbk2 ] .


the properties of quantum antiferromagnets in low dimensions have been intensely studied over the past decade and a half .
much insight has been gained by large @xmath0 treatments based on generalizing the symmetry group from su(2 ) to either su(@xmath0 ) or sp(@xmath0 ) , especially in two dimensions where exact solutions are not available .
these reformulations involve the representation of the spins by bilinears in fermionic or bosonic `` spinon '' operators at the cost of introducing local constraints on their number and an associated gauge invariance @xcite . at @xmath9
the constraints are trivially solved and a purely quadratic problem results .
most of this effort has gone into elucidating the zero temperature phase diagram and has also involved going beyond the @xmath9 limit by thinking about the structure of the gauge theory that results if the spinons are integrated out .
an oddity from the early work using bosons is the report @xcite , on a square lattice , of a finite - temperature _ phase _ at @xmath9 with no intersite correlations  a perfect paramagnet . at low temperatures the energy cost compels spins to align ( in ferromagnets ) or antialign ( in antiferromagnets ) . in the language of schwinger bosons ,
this is seen as a correlation or anticorrelation of boson flavors on adjacent sites . at higher temperatures ,
free energy @xmath10 is dominated by entropy . when the number of boson flavors @xmath11 ( with the coupling constant appropriately rescaled @xmath12 ) , the entropy of the disordered state completely overpowers the energy cost , so that neighboring sites become _ perfectly _ uncorrelated above a certain temperature .
( at large but finite @xmath0 the high - temperature phase has nonvanishing correlations . )
such a phase must then be separated from the lower temperature paramagnetic state with finite intersite correlations by a phase transition .
this phase transition clearly has no analog in the physical su@xmath4 problem and is therefore an embarrassment for the large-@xmath0 approach .
solution of the kondo problem which exhibits truly non - analytic behavior at a finite temperature .
there the exact bethe ansatz solutions were used to show that this happens only at infinite @xmath0 ; otherwise it is a crossover that sharpens continuously as @xmath0 is increased @xcite .
] we have found that an essentially identical transition occurs in the su@xmath2 generalization of the heisenberg ferromagnet at @xmath9 .
understanding its fate at finite @xmath0 is equally a matter of interest .    in this paper
we investigate this transition in some detail . to make life simpler
we have restricted ourselves to the su@xmath2 ferromagnet , although much of what we say should apply _ mutatis mutandis _ to the sp@xmath2 antiferromagnet .
we make one further simplification , that of taking the large `` spin '' or boson density limit at any fixed @xmath0 , which renders the problem classical without destroying the transition of interest . for the classical su@xmath2 ferromagnet
, we first examine the @xmath9 solution carefully and show that the transition is first order on the square lattice , a fact which will be crucial in the following .
we analyze a number of other lattices and find that this is the outcome on all lattices that have a shortest closed loop of length three or four . on other lattices , such as the honeycomb or the linear chain , which lack such loops ,
the transition is continuous .
the order of the transition at @xmath9 is thus influenced by lattice connectivity and not dimensionality .
however , life does become more interesting in @xmath13 where ferromagnetic states that break the su@xmath2 symmetry become stable to the mermin - wagner fluctuations contained in the @xmath9 theory .
now it is possible for such states to `` piggy - back '' on the finitely correlated paramagnets and first order transitions between the perfect paramagnet and ferromagnetic states result in cases where the `` underlying transition '' is predicted to be first order `` enough '' . the corresponding transition in the sp@xmath2 antiferromagnet has been found recently by desilva and co - workers @xcite .
we turn next to the survival of this transition at finite values of @xmath0 .
we offer strong evidence for the following conclusions .
+ ( a ) in @xmath14 it goes away , as it must on general grounds .
+ ( b ) in @xmath15 the first order transitions survive for sufficiently large values of @xmath0 but terminate at an ising critical endpoint ; the critical value @xmath16 is likely too large to be seen in feasible simulations .
+ ( c ) in @xmath17 and above the first order transitions again survive . in cases where they are preempted by first order transitions to the ferromagnetic state at @xmath9 the latter transition again survives at large @xmath0 and presumably turns continuous before the su@xmath4 limit is reached .
+ ( d ) in cases where the transition is continuous _ at _ @xmath9 , we conclude that the transition goes away at finite @xmath0 .
the classical su@xmath2 model we study has a pre - history for it is a lattice version of the cp@xmath3 model .
previous workers , most notably sokal and starinets @xcite , have concluded that the transition in the lattice model is an artefact of @xmath9 in _ all _ dimensions .
their arguments are based on an exact solution of the @xmath14 problem , a violation of gauge invariance at @xmath9 and the apparent lack of such a transition at small @xmath0 in simulations . in a companion paper to ours , fendley and one of us ( ot ) have independently solved the @xmath14 case and so we are in agreement with sokal and starinets on that .
we will argue below that the breakdown of gauge invariance is misleading and in the course of this argument we will appeal to a similar breakdown in an ising gauge reformulation of the @xmath5 state potts model that exhibits a phase transition with a family resemblance to the ones at issue and where one can appeal to well - established results .
we will argue that the transition at issue has the character of a liquid - gas transition in that the two phases can be smoothly continued into one another .
the two paramagnetic phases have different energy densities ; the difference varies with @xmath0 and vanishes at some critical value @xmath16 .
finally , we will compute the dimensionless surface tension at coexistence for the infinite-@xmath0 problem and show that it is small and thereby conclude that the transition terminates at rather large values of @xmath0 , consistent with the failure to observe it in simulations .    in the balance of this section
we introduce the quantum and classical hamiltonians of interest . in section [ section - infiniten ] we carry out a saddle point analysis at @xmath9 . in section [ section - finiten ]
we consider the finite ( but large ) @xmath0 problem .
we summarize our conclusions in section [ section - conclusion ] .
the quantum problems we have in mind are the bosonic su@xmath2 generalization of the heisenberg antiferromagnet : @xmath18 and the bosonic sp@xmath2 generalization of the heisenberg antiferromagnet : @xmath19 here @xmath20 is an antisymmetric block - diagonal matrix @xmath21 : @xmath22 the greek indices run from @xmath23 to @xmath0 ( @xmath24 for the antiferromagnet ) and @xmath25 fixes the `` spin '' . for su(2 ) @xmath26 sp(1 ) , @xmath27 does fix the spin . note that these generalizations , obtained by replacing the spin operators by their bosonic `` square roots '' come with local constraints and hence a local gauge invariance which we make more explicit below .    considerable insight
has been gained from considering the mean field theory that results in the @xmath28 limit taken while keeping @xmath29 fixed .
however this limit also exhibits a finite temperature phase transition between two paramagnetic phases , first discussed for the su@xmath2 case by arovas and auerbach @xcite .    to study this transition in more detail , we will study an easier limit , that of @xmath30 at finite temperatures . with appropriately rescaled variables and units such that @xmath31 this yields a classical partition function governed , in the su@xmath2 case , by the classical energy @xmath32 defined in terms of a complex @xmath0-vector @xmath33 obeying @xmath34 .
this hamiltonian is invariant under global @xmath35 rotations , and also under the aforementioned local gauge transformations @xmath36 at any site @xmath37 .
the vector @xmath38 takes values on a complex sphere @xmath39 , which as a manifold is identical to the real @xmath40-sphere @xmath41 .
however , the @xmath42 gauge symmetry can be used to effectively reduce the number of degrees of freedom in the problem by 1 by an appropriate choice of gauge .
thus @xmath33 takes values on the manifold @xmath43 which is better known as the complex projective space @xmath44 .
alternatively we can carry the gauge invariance along since it involves a compact gauge field and hence only contributes a finite multiplicative factor in finite volumes .    a similar limit yields the classical sp@xmath2 problem with energy @xmath45
as advertised , in the following we will confine ourselves to the su@xmath2 problem .
if we now take the limit @xmath11 , the partition function can be evaluated using the standard saddle - point approximation .
first , the constraint @xmath46 is enforced with the aid of a lagrange multiplier @xmath47 on every site ; the quartic interaction is made quadratic at the expense of introducing an auxiliary complex variable @xmath48 on every link : @xmath49},\ ] ] where the effective energy is @xmath50 & = &   -\sum_{\langle ij \rangle }   ( q_{ij}z^*_{i\alpha } z_{j\alpha } + \mbox{c.c . } - n|q_{ij}|^2 ) + i\sum_{i } \lambda_i ( z^*_{i\alpha}z_{i\alpha}-n ) \nonumber \\ & = &   e[q,\lambda,0 ] + \sum_{i , j}z^*_{i\alpha } { \mathcal h}_{ij } z_{j\alpha}.   \label{eq - action - full}\end{aligned}\ ] ] integration over the original variables @xmath51 yields a new effective energy @xmath52 = n\left (   \sum_{\langle ij \rangle } |q_{ij}|^2 -i\sum_{i } \lambda_i + \beta^{-1 } \ln{(\det { { \mathcal h}[q,\lambda ] } ) } \right ) .
\label{eq - action - qlambda}\ ] ]    in the limit @xmath11 the dominant contribution to the integral of @xmath53}$ ] comes from the vicinity of a saddle point , @xmath54}{\partial q_{ij } } = 0 , \hskip 5 mm \frac{\partial e[q,\lambda]}{\partial \lambda_i } = 0.\ ] ] these conditions yield a set of self - consistent ( mean - field ) equations @xmath55 where @xmath56 denotes averaging over a thermal ensemble with energy @xmath57 thus @xmath58 can be thought of as a hopping amplitude and @xmath59 as a chemical potential .
solving these equations requires either an explicit choice of gauge or a recognition that any non - trivial solution will really be a set of gauge equivalent solutions . adding in all gauge equivalent saddle points would appear to restore manifest gauge invariance but an important subtlety in this procedure is the subject of section [ subsection - gauge ] .
fluctuations of @xmath60 and @xmath61 contribute an amount of order @xmath6 and can be neglected in the limit @xmath11 . in this approximation , free energy per boson flavor is @xmath62}{n } = \sum_{\langle ij \rangle } |q_{ij}|^2 -\sum_{i } \mu_i + t\
\mbox{tr } { \ln { { \mathcal h}[q,\mu]}}. \label{eq - mf - free - energy}\ ] ] the last term  free energy of coupled harmonic oscillators @xmath63  involves the matrix @xmath64 with the following elements : @xmath65 the saddle - point conditions ( [ eq - mf - eqs ] ) become @xmath66 ( we have used the equipartition theorem for coupled harmonic oscillators @xmath63 . )    in what follows we will explore states preserving time reversal symmetry ; in such cases , one can choose a gauge where saddle - point values @xmath48 are real .
the set of equations ( [ eq - mf - h ] ) and ( [ eq - mf - equip ] ) defines mean - field solutions of the large-@xmath0 model .
this is a difficult nonlinear problem and an analytical solution is not always possible .
however , there are a few helpful general results that we spell out below .
any mean - field solution satisfies the equations @xmath67 where the sum is taken over nearest neighbors of site @xmath37 .
this result follows from the identity @xmath68 for @xmath69
.      mean - field equations ( [ eq - mf - h ] ) and ( [ eq - mf - equip ] ) always have a trivial solution with @xmath71 on all links and @xmath72 .
( @xmath73 is proportional to the unit matrix : @xmath74 . ) as we will see , this solution becomes a local minimum of free energy above the temperature @xmath75 . at high enough ( but finite ) temperatures ,
this is the _ global _ minimum .      at a high enough temperature ,
the system is in the random phase with @xmath71 everywhere .
as temperature is lowered , we expect a transition into a phase where @xmath77 on some links .
a continuous transition occurs when small fluctuations of @xmath48 have a vanishing cost in terms of free energy .
it therefore makes sense to expand free energy in powers of @xmath48 : @xmath78-f[0,t]}{n } & = & \sum_{\langle ij \rangle } |q_{ij}|^2 -\sum_{i } ( \mu_i - t ) + t\ \mbox{tr } { \ln { \frac{{\mathcal h}[q,\mu]}{t } } } \label{eq - mf - free - energy - diff } \\   & = & \mbox{tr } \left[\frac{{\mathcal q}^2}{2 } - { \mathcal m}+t + t \ln{\left(\frac{\mathcal m - q}{t}\right)}\right ] \nonumber \\ & = & \mbox{tr } \left [ \frac{\mathcal q^2}{2 }   - t \sum_{n=2}^\infty \frac{1}{n }   \left(\frac{\mathcal q - \mathcal m + t}{t}\right)^n \right ] , \label{eq - f - expansion}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath79 and @xmath80 are the diagonal and off - diagonal parts of matrix @xmath81 ( [ eq - mf - h ] ) . to eliminate the chemical potential @xmath82
, we use the constraint @xmath83 , or @xmath84 . by varying free energy ( [ eq - f - expansion ] ) with respect to @xmath82 ,
we find that @xmath85
. then , to order @xmath86 , @xmath62-f[0,t]}{n }   = \sum_{\langle ij \rangle } \frac{t-1}{t}|q_{ij}|^2 + \ldots \label{eq - f - expansion - q2}\ ] ]    eq .
( [ eq - f - expansion - q2 ] ) shows that the random phase ( @xmath71 ) becomes _ locally _ unstable for @xmath87 .
therefore , _ if _ the transition to a phase with @xmath77 is continuous , it must occur at the critical temperature @xmath88 .
it turns out , however , that in many cases the transition is _ discontinuous _ ( see table [ table - order ] in section [ section - infiniten - landau ] ) .
therefore , we should not truncate the expansion at order @xmath89 : a cubic term or an expressely negative quartic one generally result in a first - order transition with @xmath90 . at intermediate temperatures @xmath91
the random phase @xmath70 is locally stable but is not a global minimum .    what determines the order of the transition ?
sokal and starinets @xcite suggest that it is the number of dimensions .
they have shown that cubic lattices with @xmath92 exhibit a continuous transition , while those with @xmath93 have a discontinuous one . in the next few pages
we will survey a few regular lattices with @xmath94 and @xmath95 .
( the results are summarized at the beginning of section [ section - infiniten - landau ] in table [ table - order ] . )
it will be seen that the order of the transition , in fact , has nothing to do with the number of dimensions !
the relevant concept is , instead , the _ local connectivity _ of the lattice .
typically , the existence of short loops ( of length 3 or 4 ) will make the transition discontinuous .      to make further progress , consider lattices composed of equivalent sites ( fig .
[ fig - lattices ] )
. we will investigate solutions in which both the chemical potential and link variables are uniform , so that @xmath96 , where @xmath97 is the adjacency matrix ( @xmath98 for nearest neighbors and 0 otherwise ) .
note that the link strength @xmath60 must be real in order for the matrix @xmath73 to be hermitian .
the free energy now becomes a function of only two parameters @xmath60 and @xmath99 : @xmath100 where @xmath101 are eigenvalues of the adjacency matrix @xmath97 and @xmath38 is the coordination number of the lattice .
variations with respect to @xmath99 and @xmath60 yield the mean - field equations @xmath102 one can easily derive from these an analogue of eq .
( [ eq - mf - mu - via - q ] ) , @xmath103 which can be used instead of eq .
( [ eq - mf - uniform - zq ] ) .
the adjacency matrix has two eigenvalues , @xmath105 , so that eqs .
( [ eq - mf - uniform-1]-[eq - mf - uniform - zq ] ) are easily solved to obtain an equation of state : @xmath106 at high temperatures , @xmath107 , there is only a trivial solution @xmath108 .
below @xmath76 , the global minimum of the free energy moves to @xmath109 producing a continuous phase transition .
for a chain of length @xmath111 with periodic boundary conditions , the equation of state is obtained by solving eqs .
( [ eq - mf - uniform-1 ] ) and ( [ eq - mf - mu - via - q - uniform ] ) : @xmath112 in several cases this can be done analytically : @xmath113 = 0 , \label{eq - of - state - chain-4 } \\
l = \infty : \hskip 5 mm & & q^2 ( t-1+q^2 ) = 0 .
\label{eq - of - state - chain - inf}\end{aligned}\ ] ] these are shown in fig .
[ fig - chain ] .
the equation for a 3-site chain acquires nontrivial solutions when @xmath114 : @xmath115 there is a first - order transition at @xmath116 at that temperature , the absolute minimum of the free energy @xmath117 jumps from @xmath118 to @xmath119 , see fig .
[ fig - f3 ] .    at @xmath120 ,
the transition is continuous , although @xmath60 rises unusually steeply for a mean - field theory : @xmath121 .
for all @xmath122 , including the infinite chain , the transition is continuous with the usual exponent @xmath123 .
the equation of state on the infinite square lattice is again obtained by using the eqs .
( [ eq - mf - uniform-1 ] ) and ( [ eq - mf - mu - via - q - uniform ] ) : @xmath124 there is only a trivial solution @xmath70 at high temperatures , @xmath125 ; in the opposite limit , @xmath126 , there are two solutions , @xmath118 and @xmath127 , the latter being the global minimum of the free energy .
the transition between the phases with @xmath70 and @xmath128 is discontinuous and takes place at @xmath90 . for
if the phase transition were continuous , it would occur at @xmath76 , as we have argued previously ; @xmath70 would still be the global minimum of the free energy at the critical temperature .
instead , we will see that at @xmath76 the system is already in the phase with @xmath128 , so that @xmath90 .    to see that eq .
( [ eq - of - state - square ] ) has more than one solution at @xmath76 , look at the behavior of its right - hand side .
it diverges logarithmically at @xmath129 and tends to 0 as @xmath130 . by continuity
, there must be a solution for @xmath131  in addition to the trivial one , @xmath70 .
because at @xmath76 the system is already in the phase with @xmath132 , the phase transition takes place at a higher temperature and is discontinuous .
the equation of state ( [ eq - of - state - square ] ) can be integrated to obtain a closed form , @xmath133 where @xmath134 is the complete elliptic integral of the first kind .
the dependence @xmath135 is shown in fig . [ fig - square - honey ] .
one might think that the order of the transition is determined by the dimensionality of the lattice .
this is not the case .
while the transition on the two - dimensional square lattice is first - order , its counterpart on the honeycomb lattice is continuous ( fig .
[ fig - square - honey ] ) .
this case has been discussed previously by sokal and starinets @xcite for the su@xmath2 case and by desilva _
@xcite for sp@xmath2 .
there is a first - order transition at @xmath90 . unlike in lower dimensions , below @xmath136
the system is in a ferromagnetic state that breaks the su(@xmath0 ) symmetry . in an appropriate basis , @xmath137    it is interesting to note that the ferromagnetic transition in the @xmath17 heisenberg model  the su(2 ) case  is continuous .
the change to a first - order transition at large @xmath0 has a well - documented analogue in the two - dimensional potts model @xcite .
there , the ferromagnetic transition is continuous for @xmath138 states and discontinuous for @xmath139 .
we will see below why the potts model is a simpler analog of our problem .
the bethe lattice is another regular structure with equivalent sites ( fig .
[ fig - lattices ] ) . when the number of nearest neighbors @xmath141 , the number of @xmath142-th neighbors grows faster than any power of @xmath142 . in this sense
, the bethe lattice has an infinite number of dimensions .
the spectrum of the adjacency matrix for the bethe lattice is well known @xcite .
its eigenvalues fill the interval @xmath143 with density @xmath144 eq .
( [ eq - mf - uniform-1 ] ) can now be integrated .
the equation of state is @xmath145 note that it is independent of the coordination number @xmath38 and is therefore the same as that of an infinite chain ( the bethe lattice with @xmath146 ) .
the phase transition is continuous .
.order of the @xmath11 phase transition and the exponent @xmath147 for regular lattices .
[ cols="<,^,^,^,^",options="header " , ]     our survey of regular lattices is summarized in table [ table - order ] .
it demonstrates that the order of the phase transition has nothing to do with the dimensionality of the system .
this is not surprising : in the continuous version of the transition , the correlation length vanishes , instead of becoming infinite .
therefore , long - distance properties , such as dimensionality , are not important ( in the limit @xmath11 ) .
rather , details of the transition are determined by the local structure of the lattice .
this connection is evident in table [ table - order ] : the transition is discontinuous when the lattice has closed loops of length 3 or 4 .
( the 4-site chain is a border case : although the transition is continuous , the exponent @xmath148 is unusually small . )    to substantiate this claim , we expand the free energy ( [ eq - f - uniform ] ) in powers of @xmath60 : @xmath149 the term @xmath150 was written out in eq .
( [ eq - f - expansion - q2 ] ) . to obtain an expansion to order @xmath151 ,
@xmath99 should be evaluated  to order @xmath89  using the constraint @xmath152 , eq .
( [ eq - mf - uniform-1 ] ) .
we then obtain @xmath153 the integers @xmath154 give the number of distinct loops of length @xmath142 starting from some lattice node .
in particular , @xmath155 is simply the number of nearest neighbors @xmath38 .    at high temperatures ,
the minimum of free energy ( [ eq - f - order-4 ] ) is at @xmath70 . for @xmath107 ,
this point is a local minimum of @xmath156 , at @xmath87 it becomes a local maximum .
a necessary condition for a continuous phase transition at @xmath88 is the absence of a cubic term in this expansion @xcite .
a negative quartic term will also make the transition discontinuous .
a cubic term is only possible on lattices containing loops of length 3 , in which case @xmath157 .
therefore the transition is discontinuous in a closed chain of length 3 and on the triangular lattice .
the sign of the quartic term is determined by the presence of cycles of length 4 .
generally , if there are no such loops , the quartic term is positive and the transition is likely continuous ( barring a cubic term or some pathological behavior in higher orders ) .
all lattices listed in the lower part of table [ table - order ] look like trees if explored at depths up to 4 .
continuous phase transitions are then possible .
the presence of loops of perimeter 4 makes the quartic term negative or  in special cases  zero .
this alters the character of the transition and makes it first order .
the remaining lattices in table [ table - order ] ( 4-site chain , ladder , square , cubic ) all have loops of length 4 .
to prove these conjectures , let us evaluate the prefactor of the quartic term , @xmath158 , that is responsible for its sign . on a tree without loops , the number of round - trip paths of length 4 is @xmath159 , see fig .
[ fig - paths ] ( a , b ) . in this case ,
@xmath160 and the quartic term is positive .    if , in addition , @xmath161 contains @xmath162 loops [ fig .
[ fig - paths ] ( c ) ] , the quartic term is proportional to @xmath163 .
it is easy to see that the number of the loops @xmath162 can not be smaller than @xmath38 ( if they are present at all ) , hence the quartic term can not be positive when such loops are present .
the quartic term is expressely negative for a ladder ( @xmath164 , @xmath165 ) , a square lattice ( @xmath166 , @xmath167 ) , and a cubic lattice ( @xmath168 , @xmath169 ) , hence first - order transitions .
a chain of length 4 ( @xmath146 , @xmath170 ) is a special case : the quartic term just vanishes .
the transition is still continuous  thanks to a positive term @xmath171 ?  but @xmath60 rises more steeply than @xmath172 , fig .
[ fig - chain ] .      in this section , we have investigated a phase transition that occurs in an su(@xmath0 ) ferromagnet at infinite @xmath0 .
it is a transition between a seriously disordered high-@xmath173 phase with no correlations between spins whatsoever and a low-@xmath173 phase that is either a paramagnet with short - range correlations ( in low dimensions @xmath174 ) , or possibly a ferromagnet .
the transition can be first or second - order , as noted by several authors previously @xcite .
here we have uncovered what determines the order of the transition : it is the local connectivity of the lattice , rather than its dimensionality . in hindsight , this is not surprising because  in its continuous version  this is a transition between phases with finite and _ zero _ correlation lengths , so it should be more sensitive to local features ( presence of loops ) than to long - distance ones ( number of dimensions ) .
we have substantiated our claim by expanding the free energy in powers of an order parameter @xmath175 living on links .
the presence of loops of length 3 leads to the existence of a cubic term in this expansion ; loops of length 4 tend to make a quartic term negative . in either case , by the standard landau argument , the transition becomes discontinuous .
finally a caveat on connectivity : our statements are for the purely nearest neighbor model .
interactions of further range will effectively change the connectivity .
so far we have discussed the limit of infinite @xmath0 , when the saddle - point approximation is exact .
we turn next to what happens when @xmath0 is finite .
one aspect is clear : the high - temperature phase is no longer perfectly disordered .
nevertheless , for sufficiently large @xmath0 , the mean - field theory should be a good starting point for the analysis . to proceed further we will ask three questions . first , whether the @xmath9 transition is characterized by an ordering that can also characterize a phase transition at finite @xmath0 .
second , whether the finite @xmath0 phase transition can be characterized by a different ordering that still continuously connects to the @xmath9 transition .
third , we will examine the nature of the finite @xmath0 corrections to see what they suggest about the fate of the transition .
we will consider these questions in turn , starting with the first question which has been discussed previously under the rubric of elitzur s theorem for gauge theories .
as noted at the outset , our class of problems exhibit a local gauge invariance . in our @xmath9 analysis we picked a gauge to identify a saddle point and left open the option of not picking a gauge and simply adding in all the gauge equivalent saddle points .
while this would appear to be a manifestly gauge invariant way of proceeding , it hides an interesting anomaly noted most recently by sokal and starinets @xcite : the local u(1 ) gauge symmetry appears to be spontaneously broken in the low - temperature phase if one invokes the usual criterion of a response to an infinitesimal field taken to zero post - thermodynamic limit
. has been investigated by several authors @xcite ] .
so this answers our first question : there _ is _ a broken symmetry at @xmath9 but it can not be broken at any finite @xmath0 by virtue of elitzur s theorem @xcite .
sokal and starinets go further and use this observation to conclude that `` it seems unlikely that such a transition can survive to finite @xmath0 . ''
we show in the following , by a simpler example , that this is a red herring and that at least in the case of a first order transition there is no contradiction between the restoration of elitzur s theorem and the survival of the transition .
the example involves the potts model , which we will rewrite as an ising gauge theory .
this will enable us to appeal to well known results on the potts model to establish the phase diagram of the theory .
altogether we will see the breakdown of gauge invariance is a consequence of something special
the divergence between the exchange constant and the transition temperature in the infinite @xmath0 limit .
first let us note the violation of elitzur s theorem explicitly .
the gauge symmetry in question is evident from the form of energy ( [ eq - e - classical ] ) . changing the phase of the oscillator variable @xmath176 leaves the energy invariant .
however , the link variable @xmath177 is certainly not invariant : @xmath178 .
thus the absolute phases of @xmath48 are immaterial . in particular , changing the sign of all link variables ( on a bipartite lattice ! ) gives a physically equivalent configuration .
nevertheless , it can be shown that adding an infinitesimal gauge - fixing term to the energy , @xmath179 , \label{eq - e - eta}\ ] ] leads to a non - analytic behavior of the free energy near @xmath180 : @xmath181}{n } = \frac{f[q,\mu,0]}{n }   - 2|\eta| \sum_{\langle ij \rangle }   |q_{ij}| + \mathcal o(\eta^2 ) .
\label{eq - f - eta}\ ] ] ( the limit @xmath11 should be taken first to ensure validity of the mean - field treatment . )
the nonalyticity of the free energy ( [ eq - f - eta ] ) means that the values of @xmath48 are frozen either near @xmath182 or @xmath183 , depending on the sign of @xmath184 .
thus the local u(1 ) gauge symmetry is spontaneously broken in a phase with @xmath185 .
why is a gauge symmetry spontaneously broken at large @xmath0 ?
what happens when the number of flavors is large but finite ? to answer these questions , one could study thermodynamics of an su(@xmath0 ) ferromagnet in the presence of a small symmetry - breaking term ( [ eq - e - eta ] ) .
the partition function of an infinite chain ( or just of a single link ) can be evaluated for any finite @xmath0 using the transfer matrix : @xmath186^{1/l } = 2(n-1 ) \int_0^{\pi/2 } \sin^{2n-3}{\theta}\ , \cos{\theta}\ , d\theta \ { \rm e}^{n\beta(\cos^2{\theta}-\eta\cos{\theta } ) } \label{eq - z - eta}\ ] ] ( see the companion paper @xcite for details on the integration measure ) .
evaluation of the partition function ( [ eq - z - eta ] ) is a feasible , though not particularly straightforward task . to keep technical details to a minimum
, we have chosen to study a similar phenomenon in the potts model . because it involves discrete degrees of freedom , the broken gauge symmetry is also discrete ( @xmath187 ) .
we define the potts model @xcite in terms of unit vectors @xmath188 that can point along orthogonal axes in a @xmath5-dimensional internal space : the energy is @xmath189 we have doubled the number of states per site compared to the usual amount . as a result , the energy is invariant under a local @xmath187 symmetry @xmath190 .
apart from a multiplicative factor , the partition function is identical to that of the potts model .
parametrization ( [ eq - potts - z2 ] ) is a discrete analogue of representing su(@xmath0 ) spins in terms of schwinger bosons ( [ eq - e - classical ] ) .
we can construct an infinite @xmath5 treatment along the same lines as the large @xmath0 treatment discussed previously : we decouple the quartic interaction in favour of a gauge field : @xmath191 and then integrate the spins out .
the result of this analysis is the prediction of a finite temperature first order phase transition from a phase with zero correlation length as the temperature is lowered . again
the infinite @xmath5 system breaks the ising gauge invariance .
now we know that for any finite @xmath5 , the potts model has a phase transition in @xmath15 or more but not in @xmath14 and that the transition is indeed first order at large @xmath5 in @xmath192 dimensions .
dimensions , the discrete global symmetry of the potts model can be spontaneously broken . in order to characterize a ferromagnetic phase
, one must introduce an appropriate order parameter .
this complication is absent in the su@xmath2 model in @xmath15 in view of the mermin - wagner theorem .
] we also know that the finite @xmath5 problem can not break gauge invariance
. evidently the prediction of a first order transition in a dimension where it has every reason to be robust , is _ not _ vitiated by the breaking of local gauge invariance .
indeed one can use this example to see where the breaking comes from .
consider for simplicity the one dimensional chain .
the free energy density of an infinite chain can be evaluated with the aid of the transfer matrix yielding @xmath193 this is an analytic function of @xmath147 for any finite @xmath5 . at large @xmath5 ,
@xmath194 in the limit @xmath195 , the free energy develops a kink at @xmath196 , so that there is a first - order phase transition .
the @xmath187 gauge symmetry is broken in the low - temperature phase ( @xmath197 ) . to see this , add a symmetry - breaking term @xmath198 to the energy of every bond and evaluate the free energy in its presence : @xmath199 the expectation value of the gauge - dependent quantity @xmath200 ( the analogue of @xmath201 ) depends on the order of limits @xmath202 and @xmath195 : @xmath203 if the limit @xmath202 is taken first ( at finite @xmath5 ) , the gauge symmetry remains intact . reversing the order of limits ( @xmath195 first ) leads to spontaneous breaking of the gauge symmetry .
what have we learned from the potts model ?
gauge symmetry can be spoiled by adding a term that prefers one gauge configuration over all others .
the symmetry is spontaneously broken if gauge selection reliably occurs even when the gauge - fixing term is small .
the example we have just worked out shows that the there may be different degrees of smallness : the symmetry - breaking perturbation can be compared to the interaction strength , as well as to temperature .
the presence of a large number of flavors in the model pushes the temperature scale down ( as @xmath6 in the schwinger - boson case or as @xmath204 in the potts model ) .
thus a nominally small gauge - fixing term ( @xmath205 ) can still be large enough ( @xmath206 ) to pick out a gauge .
most importantly , this does not rule out a persistence of the transition when @xmath5 is finite , contradicting the belief of sokal and starinets .
the next order of business is to ask whether a gauge - invariant order parameter can discriminate between the putative finite @xmath0 versions of the two phases .
note that both are @xmath35 invariant . in our discussion of @xmath207
later we will briefly consider the new features that arise when that can be broken as well .
away from infinite @xmath0 , @xmath208 by gauge invariance while the amplitude @xmath209 will be non - zero in both phases although it could jump across the transition . at any rate it can not serve as an order parameter .
this leaves the gauge invariant fluxes that remain when the fluctuations of the amplitude are integrated out . in @xmath14
this sector is empty . in higher dimensions
these would be described , at large @xmath0 , by a weakly coupled @xmath42 gauge theory .
while the coupling may jump across the phase boundary , at sufficiently large @xmath0 is will be small on either side and we expect that the gauge fluctuations will be in the same phase on either side , i.e. barely confining in @xmath210 while deconfining in @xmath211 . in any event
we do not expect a qualitative distinction to develop between the two phases and hence the transition between them will have the character of a liquid - gas transition , and not an order - disorder transition . for this reason , we expect the transition to be generically first order if it exists . a qualitative distinction
_ could _ develop at smaller @xmath0 in @xmath207 with a change in the character of the transition .
we will briefly return to this later in our comments on @xmath207 .
an important comment is in order . from the perspective of the original quantum magnetic problem ,
we are operating at high temperatures and large `` spins '' . in this limit
the temporal dimension has shrunk to zero and so we are computing wilson loops which are not really diagnostic of the free energy cost of separating two spinons .
the latter requires a computation of the temporal polyakov loops and shows deconfinement consistent with the notion that the paramagnet is insensitive to the insertion or removal of a local fixed spin .
finite lattices and lattices in @xmath14 dimensions simply can not have a phase transition when interactions are short ranged and @xmath0 is finite .
an infinite @xmath0 , in essence , provides an extra dimension with a long - range interaction [ every flavor interacts with every other one , see eq .
( [ eq - h - quantum1 ] ) ] which allows this conclusion to be evaded .
thus in @xmath212 the transition will smooth into a crossover near @xmath76 .
an explicit solution of the one - dimensional su@xmath2 and sp@xmath2 chains in the companion paper by fendley and tchernyshyov @xcite confirms this ; we direct the reader there for details of their method .    here
we content ourselves with following the smearing of the infinite-@xmath0 transition into a crossover in the case of a single link .
the effective free energy in this case is @xmath213\ ] ] as a function of @xmath214 and @xmath215 , it has a saddle point for real and positive @xmath216 integrating out gaussian fluctuations of @xmath61 gives a nonsingular contribution of order 1 to the free energy of the link : @xmath217 this free energy has a minimum at @xmath70 if @xmath107 ; otherwise , the minimum is at @xmath218 . for large @xmath0 and @xmath173 near 1
, the partition function evaluates to @xmath219 as temperature crosses 1 , energy of the link smoothly changes from being @xmath220 to being @xmath221 : @xmath222 the width of the crossover is @xmath223 . as @xmath11 , the crossover turns into a phase transition .
this is the most interesting case for our purposes .
for one thing , the application of large @xmath0 methods has been most influential with respect to ground state properties in @xmath15 . for another
, the finite temperature problem can not break the su@xmath2 symmetry in @xmath15 by mermin - wagner and so the intra - paramagnetic liquid - gas transition we have been considering is the only possibility for a thermal transition .      in these cases ,
e.g. the square and triangular lattices , the transition should survive at sufficiently large @xmath0 .
briefly , the infinite @xmath0 transition involves the crossing of two separated saddle points . at large @xmath0
we expect corrections to the contributions from the saddle points which are subdominant in @xmath0 but these should not affect the existence of a crossing .
the only way this can go wrong is if a whole host of other saddle points enter the finite @xmath0 computation and their entropy overcomes the energy cost .
this is what happens in @xmath14 where the other saddle points are domains walls ( instantons ) that turn the first order transition into a cross - over .
( one can produce a first order transition in the infinte-@xmath0 problem in @xmath14 by adding a second neighbor coupling . )    in @xmath15 , as long as there is a finite surface tension per flavor between the two phases at @xmath9 , any domain walls of order the system size should be exponentially suppressed and hence the phase transition should survive at sufficiently large @xmath0 . as one of the two phases has zero correlation length ,
we have carried out this computation to see if the magnitude of the surface tension is anomalously small .
the computation is carried out by solving numerically the set of mean - field equations ( [ eq - mf - h ] ) and ( [ eq - mf - equip ] ) on an @xmath224 square or triangular lattice at the coexistence temperature of an infinite system .
we have used periodic boundary conditions .
a starting configuration includes two domains ( liquid and gas ) separated by two domain walls of total length @xmath225 .
the free energy per unit length of the domain wall is fit to a simple form @xmath226 the second term , a finite - size effect , contains the spinon correlation length @xmath227 determined in the uniform liquid state leaving only two fitting parameters , interface tension @xmath7 and @xmath228 ( fig .
[ fig - tension ] ) .
for the square lattice this procedure yields a surface tension @xmath229 per flavor per lattice constant and an interface of width @xmath230 lattice constants . for the triangular lattice
this yields a surface tension @xmath231 per flavor per lattice constant and an interface of width @xmath232 lattice constants .
the surface tension is higher on a triangular lattice as expected since the first order transition is stronger in this case at @xmath9 .    as the surface tension is finite ,
we conclude that immediately away from @xmath9 both phases will get dressed by local fluctuations , whose detailed theory at large @xmath0 is beyond our means at this point , but the transition will survive . we expect that the resulting line of first order transitions in the @xmath233 plane will terminate , as in the liquid - gas problem , in a critical end point governed by the @xmath15 ising critical theory .
are discontinuous across the transition and thus play the role of an `` order parameter '' .
] of course , the location of this critical end point will be non - universal and is unlikely to lie at an integer value of @xmath0 .
in all of this , in a rough sense , valid near @xmath9 , the temperature ( or , rather , @xmath234 ) plays the role of the field that discriminates between the two phases , by favoring the gas or liquid saddle point ; while @xmath0 itself is an overall multiplicative factor in the free energy ( [ eq - mf - free - energy - diff ] ) , and therefore it acts as the inverse temperature .
indeed , infinite @xmath0 corresponds to zero temperature in suppressing all fluctuations and making phase transitions possible even for finite lattices .
as the computed dimensionless surface tension for the square lattice comes out substantially smaller than 1 , we suspect that the critical end point is not too far off and that one would need to go to very large @xmath0 to see the first order transition .
a precise estimate would require a theory of the fluctuations , which we do not have in hand at this point .
our computation on the triangular lattice suggests that one may be better off trying there .
of course in neither case does the phase transition survive to @xmath235 where one knows from studies of the heisenberg model that it is nt there .
( we believe that a similar estimate for the related rp@xmath3 problem will explain the failure of sokal and collaborators to observe a first order transition in simulations for @xmath0 as large as 8 . )      in these cases we conclude that the transition exists _ only _ at @xmath9 . essentially , this situation is the limiting case of the one in the previous section where the magnitude of the first order jump at @xmath9 has gone to zero and
hence the critical end point has been displaced all the way to @xmath9 .
the important caveat is that this limit is singular as far as the properties of the critical point are concerned .
the `` critical point '' _ at _ @xmath9 has no fluctuations and has zero correlation length . at large @xmath0
there is a `` boundary layer '' where the correlation length interpolates between a small microscopic value and infinity .
starting with @xmath17 it becomes possible to break the @xmath35 symmetry .
a cursory examination of the @xmath9 theory shows that cases in which the comparison of the paramagnetic solutions suggests a large jump in @xmath236 end up going directly between the seriously disordered paramagnet and the `` ferromagnet '' in which su@xmath2 is broken . consequently the transition survives when @xmath0 is reduced and one expects that this line of first order transitions turns into a line of continuous transitions by the time the known su(2 ) cases are reached .
the other new possibility , in @xmath237 is that the inter - paramagnetic transition survives for a range of @xmath0 and then terminates in a line of confinement / deconfinement transitions .
deciding whether this is likely is beyond the methods used in this paper and of academic interest in the study of quantum magnets .
in the foregoing analysis we have established that the infinite @xmath0 transition between two paramagnetic phases is _ not _ generically , an artefact of that limit . it _ is _ however a delicate transition , since it relies on a large entropy from the number of flavors overpowering the energetics .
consequently , as illustrated by our surface tension computation , we do not expect it to survive to small values of @xmath0 .
as such , while there is no contradiction between its existence at large @xmath0 and the failure to observe it at values of @xmath0 accesible by other methods , it does mean that the large @xmath0 finite temperature phase diagram is not a reliable guide to the su@xmath4 case  which assumption is the basis of large-@xmath0 treatments .
the same is true in higher dimensional cases where the infinite @xmath0 transition is to the ferromagnetic phase .
we have also shown that the violation of elitzur s theorem at infinite @xmath0 is a consequence of a divergence between the exchange constant and the transition temperature and does not , in itself , invalidate the infinite @xmath0 analysis .
* acknowledgements : * we are extremely grateful to roderich moessner for early discussions on this problem and for collaboration on related work .
it is a pleasure to thank paul fendley for collaboration on a companion paper .
we are also very grateful to david huse for his customary enlightening comments on various statistical mechanical issues discussed in this paper and to subir sachdev and nicholas read for sharing their wisdom on large @xmath0 methods .    99 p. fendley and o. tchernyshyov , cond - mat/0202129 .
j. b. marston and i. affleck , phys .
b * 39 * ( 1989 ) 11538 .
d. p. arovas and a. auerbach , phys .
b * 38 * ( 1988 ) 316 .
s. sachdev , in _ low dimensional quantum field theories for condensed matter physicists , _ yu lu , s. lundqvist , and g. morandi eds .
( world scientific , singapore , 1995 ) ; cond - mat/9303014 .
a. d. sokal and a. o. starinets , nucl .
b * 601 * ( 2001 ) 425 .
p. coleman , phys .
b * 28 * , 5255 ( 1983 ) ; * 29 * ( 1983 ) 3035 .
p. coleman and n. andrei , j. phys .
c * 19 * ( 1986 ) 3211 .
t. desilva , m. ma and f. c. zhang ( unpublished ) . f. y wu , rev .
* 54 * ( 1982 ) 235 .
l. d. landau and e. m. lifshitz , _ statistical mechanics _
( pergamon press , 1980 ) .
h. kesten , trans .
ams * 92 * ( 1959 ) 336 .
s. elitzur , phys .
d * 12 * ( 1975 ) 3978 .
s. samuel , phys .
112b * ( 1982 ) 237 .
w. celmaster and f. freen , phys .
* 50 * ( 1983 ) 1556 .