Citation
Hausdorff dimension of some invariant sets

Material Information

Title:
Hausdorff dimension of some invariant sets
Creator:
Gu, Xiao-Ping, 1963-
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
vi, 81 leaves : ; 29 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Cubes ( jstor )
Distance functions ( jstor )
Dyadics ( jstor )
Ellipsoids ( jstor )
Entropy ( jstor )
Euclidean space ( jstor )
Hausdorff dimensions ( jstor )
Hausdorff measures ( jstor )
Mathematics ( jstor )
Topological theorems ( jstor )
Dissertations, Academic -- Mathematics -- UF
Mathematics thesis Ph.D
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1992.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 77-80).
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Xiao-Ping Gu.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
027788481 ( ALEPH )
26529165 ( OCLC )
AJG4525 ( NOTIS )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text











HAUSDORFF DIMENSION OF SOME INVARIANT SETS


BY

XIAO-PING GU






A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA




1992


I 531UVUSII VGIUO'U 10 )a'SM'Ko





















ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


It is a pleasure to thank Professor Albert Fathi for his supervision and valu-

able advice. The author would also like to thank the Mathematics Department for

its support and the National Science Foundation for its partial summer financial

support.


- ii -















TABLE OF CONTENTS


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................... .ii

ABSTRACT . v

CHAPTERS

1. INTRODUCTION ................. ..... 1

2. HAUSDORFF DIMENSION AND CAPACITY 7

2. 1. Hausdorff Measure and Dimension 7

2. 2. Frostman's Lemma ................... ...... 9

2. 3. The Capacity . .. 13

3. THE HYPERBOLIC SET AND LYAPUNOV EXPONENTS .. 16

3. 1. The Hyperbolic Set ...... ........... 16

3. 2. The Topological Entropy . 19

3. 3. The Uniform Lyapunov Exponents ... 21

3. 4. The Distortion of a Ball under a Diffeomorphism .. 23

3. 5. The Proof of Theorem I ................. 29

3. 6. The Case of a C2 Flow ................. 34

4. THE HYPERBOLIC SET AND TOPOLOGICAL PRESSURE 37

4. 1. The Hyperbolic Set Revisited .... .37

111 -










4. 2. Topological Pressure ... 40

4. 3. A Rough Estimate on Hausdorff Dimension .. 43

4. 4. Under the Pinching Condition ... 46

4. 5. The Transversals .. .. .. .. 49

5. THE SELF SIMILAR SETS ... 52

5. 1. The Self Similar Sets . .. 52

5. 2. The Upper Bound ................... 56

5. 3. The Lower Bound ............ ....... .62

5. 4. Some Continuity in the C1 Topology .. 64

6. THE HENON ATTRACTOR ................. 69

7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ... 75

REFERENCES . ... ... 77

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .................... 81


- iv -















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy


THE HAUSDORFF DIMENSION OF SOME INVARIANT SETS

By

Xiao-Ping Gu

May, 1992


Chairman: Albert Fathi
Major Department: Mathematics


We study the Hausdorff dimension for some invariant sets. For a hyperbolic

set of a diffeomorphism or a flow of diffeomorphisms, the uniform stable and

unstable Lyapunov exponents have been defined. Using the uniform Lyapunov

exponents we define a characteristic function. At some real positive number

t the characteristic function equals the value of the topological entropy of the

diffeomorphism on the hyperbolic set. We prove that t is an upper bound for

the Hausdorff dimension of this hyperbolic set. Technically, we use a pinching

condition to cope with the nonlinearity of the diffeomorphism, to prove that the

iterated image of a ball is somehow contained in the image of the ball under the

derivative of the iterated diffeomorphism. Some earlier results are thus improved.

In Chapter 4 we have also given upper bounds for the Hausdorff dimension of

the transverse of a hyperbolic set with stable and unstable manifolds, using the

topological pressure on the hyperbolic set.

v -










Chapter 5 deals with the self similar sets. The self similar sets of iterated

mapping systems have been studied thoroughly in the cases where construction

diffeomorphisms are conformal. We study the case where the construction diffeo-

morphisms are not necessarily conformal. We give a new distortion lemma for the

construction mappings. Using topological pressure on a shift space we give an up-

per estimate of the Hausdorff dimension, when the construction diffeomorphisms

are C1+" and satisfy a K pinching condition for some K < 1. Moreover, if the

construction diffeomorphisms also satisfy the disjoint open set condition we then

give a lower bound for the Hausdorff dimension. We also obtain the continuity

of the Hausdorff dimension in the C1 topology at conformal constructions.

We study the image of a disc under the iteration of a Henon map, which

enables us to find an upper bound for the Hausdorff dimension and capacity of

the Henon attractor. That improves some earlier estimates when applied to the

case of a Henon attractor.


- vi -















CHAPTER 1


INTRODUCTION


For a topological space, especially a subset of an Euclidean space, a variety

of "dimensions" have been introduced and studied. Among them it has been

widely agreed that "Hausdorff dimension" is the most important one to use. In

the case of Euclidean spaces, the Hausdorff dimension agrees with their topo-

logical dimension which are integers. Those subsets with non-integer Hausdorff

dimensions are called "fractals." The sets we study here, i.e., the hyperbolic sets,

the self similar sets, and the Henon attractors are mostly fractals. Understanding

their structures, in particular finding their dimensions, is one of the interesting

open problems.

In 1914, Carath6odory introduced the classical idea of using covers of sets to

define measures. That idea was adopted by Hausdorff in 1919 to define a special

measure which is now called a Hausdorff measure for his study of the Cantor

set. This special measure can be defined for any dimension. However, it either

vanishes or equals infinity in all but at most one dimension, which is now called

the Hausdorff dimension. In his 1919 paper Hausdorff found the dimension of

the Cantor set is log3 2, with a positive Hausdorff measure at that dimension, see

Hausdorff (1919). The properties of Hausdorff measure and Hausdorff dimension

have been thoroughly studied by Besicovitch et al.

In this paper, we study the Hausdorff dimension of the hyperbolic sets, the

self similar sets, and the H6non attractors.

-1-








-2-
Generalizing the concept of a hyperbolic fixed point for a differentiable self

map of a smooth manifold, people introduced the hyperbolic sets. For con-

venience, we call a differentiable one to one self map of a smooth manifold a

diffeomorphism. The hyperbolic sets have been studied by Smale (1967), Mather

(1968), Hirsch and Pugh (1970) among other dynamists. After the introduction

of Pesin's theory, it was realized that Hausdorff dimension of invariant measures

was related to dynamics, and the relationship was studied in its final form by

Ledrappier and Young (1985). It is still an open problem to find the Haus-

dorff dimension of an invariant set. Fathi (1989) gave an upper bound for the

Hausdorff dimension of the hyperbolic sets, using the topological entropy. His

result shows that the Hausdorff dimension can be upper bounded by a fraction of

the topological entropy over the skewness of the hyperbolic set. We use Fathi's

idea. Technically, we use a pinching condition to cope with the nonlinearity

of the diffeomorphism, to prove that the iterated image of a ball is somehow

contained in the image of the ball under the derivative of the iterated diffeomor-

phism. For a hyperbolic set of a diffeomorphism or a flow of diffeomorphisms,

the uniform stable and unstable Lyapunov exponents have been defined. Using

the uniform Lyapunov exponents we define a characteristic function. At some

real positive number t the characteristic function equals the value of the topo-

logical entropy of the diffeomorphism on the hyperbolic set. We prove that t is

an upper bound for the Hausdorff dimension of this hyperbolic set. Some earlier

results are thus improved. Moreover, under the pinching condition, we use the

topological pressure to upper bound the Hausdorff dimensions of a hyperbolic set

and the transversals of the hyperbolic set with stable and unstable manifolds.

For the two-dimensional diffeomorphism with a horeseshoe as a basic set, our

upper bounds for the transversals agree with the identities given by McCluskey








-3-
and Manning (1983). However, due to the increase of dimensions, one does not

expect as explicit an identity for the Hausdorff dimension as the one given by

McCluskey and Manning (1983).

Self similar sets of iterated mapping systems are a special kind of limit

sets. They have been studied thoroughly in the cases where construction dif-

feomorphisms are conformal. Essentially, the conformal constructions are one-

dimensional and one has a simple formula for the Hausdorff dimension. We study

the case where the construction diffeomorphisms are not necessarily conformal.

We give a new version of distortion lemma. Using topological pressure on a shift

space we give an upper estimate of the Hausdorff dimension, when the construc-

tion diffeomorphisms are C1+' and satisfy a i pinching condition for some X < 1.

Moreover, if the construction diffeomorphisms also satisfy the disjoint open set

condition we then give a lower bound for the Hausdorff dimension. We also ob-

tain the continuity of the Hausdorff dimension in the C1 topology at conformal

constructions.

We study the image of a disc under the iteration of a Henon map, which

enables us to find an upper bound for the Hausdorff dimension and capacity of

the H6non attractor. That improves some earlier estimates when applied to the

case of a Henon attractor.

Our main results are the following four theorems. For the upper bound of

Hausdorff dimension of a hyperbolic set using uniform Lyapunov exponents, we

have


THEOREM I. Let f: U -- X be a C2 diffeomorphism with a compact hyperbolic

set K C U, where U is an open subset in the n-dimensional Riemannian manifold

X. Let ps, pI,. p be the stable uniform Lyapunov exponents of f; and let







-4-
", 2 be the unstable uniform Lyapunov exponents of f. Relabel the
numbers A, P and f, pI, as pI, /n with the order


0 > #1 #2 > "' > n.


Define r : [0, n] R the characteristic function by


r(s) = #1 + + [1s] + (s [sI)8[s]+1.


Let A = ent(f IK) be the topological entropy of f on K. Let D = Tr-(-2A), or
D = n if#1 +2+ *+P.+n > -2A. IfAB2 < 1, where A = limAk, B =limBk,
and


Ak = max{max lTzfk l max IITzf -k ,
zEK zEK fk },
Bk = max{maxllTxfk IE- I1, maxlTzf-k IE- I,
zEK zEK


then the Hausdorff dimension HD(K) < D.

Theorem I is proved in Chapter 3. For the upper bound of Hausdorff di-
mension of a C2 hyperbolic set and its transverse using topological pressure we
have

THEOREM II. If f is C2, pinched, then HD(K) < t, where t is uniquely such
that

max{P(ff,,) + P(f K,A) = 01 t + t2 = t} = 0.

f f is C2, pinched, and P(f K,Af) = 0, then


HD(K W(x, f)) < t.







-5-
If f is C2, pinched, and P(flK,tA) = 0, then


HD(K n WU(x,f)) < t.


Theorem II is proved in Chapter 4. For the self similar sets, we give upper

and lower bounds for the Hausdorff dimension. We have

THEOREM III. Let {Qij} be the C1 construction diffeomorphisms for the self
similar set E, satisfying the K pinching condition for some positive number K < 1.

Suppose the derivatives of all {pOij} are Hiilder continuous of order K. If t is the

unique positive number such that the topological pressure P(a, At) = 0, then the

Hausdorff dimension HD(E) < t.

Let {('ij} be the C1 construction diffeomorphisms for the self similar set
E in an Euclidean space R1, satisfying both the K pinching condition for some

positive number K < 1, and in addition the disjoint open set condition. Suppose

the derivatives of all {y ij} are Hilder continuous of order x. If t is the unique

positive number such that the topological pressure P(a, At) = 0, then the Hausdorff

dimension

HD(E) > l.
1+K
Theorem III is proved in Chapter 5. For a Henon attractor, we have

THEOREM IV. Let 0 < b < 1/2. Suppose that A is a compact invariant attractor

under the Henon map Ha,b and an orbit {zn = (xn,yn) = Hn(zo)} is dense in

A. Let R be the bound for A such that for every (x,y) E A we have Ixl, ly < R.
2R+ 1
Denote m = and
b

n-1
A = limsup1 n log(b+ 21 + < 0.
n-oo n m m2
i= 0








-6-

Then the upper capacity


A
C(A) 2 + < 2.
log m


Theorem IV is proved in Chapter 6. Finally, we conclude this work by

discussing the difficulty of relating the Hausdorff dimension of the Henon attractor

to the topological entropy of the Henon map.















CHAPTER 2


HAUSDORFF DIMENSION AND CAPACITY




2.1. Hausdorff Measure and Dimension


Let (X, d) be a metric space and let s be any non-negative real number. Let

K C X be a subspace of X. Let a be a collection of balls, with the union of all

balls containing K. Such a collection a is called a covering of K. For any real

number e > 0, if every ball in a has radius less than or equal to e, then a is called

an e covering of K. Suppose a = {Bi : i E I} and each ball Bi has a radius ri.

We denote by 9iJ(K) the quantity



inf rf
iEI

where the infimum is taken over all e coverings of K. If another real positive

number S < e, then any b covering is also an e covering. Thus 'Hj(K) is no larger

than HK(K). One can define the quantity



WS(K) = lim -Hi(K) = sup Hn(K).
e-*0 >0


We shall call the quantity W(K) the Hausdorff s dimensional measure of K. It

can be easily verified that Hausdorff measure 8 is an outer measure with the

-7-







-8-


following properties:


=,(0) = 0,

N'(UnAn) _5 NS(An),
n
H8(A U B) = -8(A) + iS(B),


where A and B have disjoint closures. Moreover, for any real positive numbers

s, t, e, by the definition,


H,(K) = inf ri
e coverings .i

< et- inf rf
e coverings .
= E-"H^(K).


Therefore, if s < t and VI(K) < +oo, then


Ht(K) < lim et-s (K) = 0 Hs(K) = 0.


This also implies that if t < s and V-8(K) > 0, then


't(K) = +oo.


Hence we have the following identity:


inf{s : H8(K) = 0} = sup{s : "(K) = oo}.


The Hausdorff dimension of the set K is defined by the above number, denoted

by HD(K). It is worth to notice that for an Euclidean space the Hausdorff








-9-

dimension equals the topological dimension, and the Hausdorff measure is equal

to the Lebesgue measure multiplied by a constant factor. Also, it is noticed that

many subsets of Euclidean spaces have non-integer Hausdorff dimensions. Such

sets are called fractals.

The Hausdorff measure was first introduced by Hausdorff in 1919 based on

Caratheodory's idea of using covers to define measures. Since then many research

works have been done. Here we give a well-known Lemma of Frostman which will

be used later when estimating the Hausdorff dimension of the self similar sets.

See Temam (1988) or Hurewicz and Wallman (1948) for other properties of the

Hausdorff dimensions and Hausdorff measures, and examples of fractal sets.


2.2. Frostman's Lemma

The following lemma, Frostman's lemma, is widely used when estimating

Hausdorff dimensions. It gives a necessary and sufficient condition for a subset

of an Euclidean space to allow a non trivial Hausdorff measure. For convenience

we use IBI to denote the diameter of a set B. If d is the metric then


IBI = sup{d(x,y) : x,y E B}.


LEMMA 2.2.1. Let (X,d) be an I dimensional Euclidean space or an I dimen-

sional manifold, with the metric denoted by d. Suppose K C X is a compact

subset. Then K has a positive s dimensional Hausdorff measure if and only if

there can be defined a probability measure p on K, with the property that for all

balls B in (K, d) and some positive constant C, the measure satisfies


jz(B) < C. -B18.







10 -
PROOF: The "if" part is obvious. Given a probability measure 1p on K with


p(B) C IB


for all balls B, we see that probability measure is close to a Hausdorff measure.
In fact, for any given e covering {Bi : i E I} where the radius ri = IBil/2, we
have

Z rf > IBil8/28 > E p(Bi)/28C > p(K)/28C = 1/28C.
iEI iEI iEI
Thus the Hausdorff measure tS(K) > 1/2SC > 0. That proves the "if" part.
To prove the "only if" part, let s > 0 be given such that S(K) > 0, and
let {Bi : i E I} be any covering of balls. For any e > 0, one must have either

sup{IBi : i E I} < e or sup{|Bi| : i E I} > e. Thus it follows that


SIBil' > 7, where 7 = min{es,-' (K)}.
iEI

If e is small enough, then H, (K) > 0, and also 7 will be strictly positive. There-
fore we can fix some > 0 such that for all coverings of balls of K, the sum


EIBil8 > .
iEI

The same conclusion will be true if the balls are replaced by cubes.
For a positive integer m we define a dyadic interval of order m to be any
interval of the form [p2-m, (p+ 1)2-m], where p is any integer. A dyadic cube of
order m is defined as a Cartesian product of dyadic intervals of order m. Consider
now a covering of K using dyadic cubes of order m. In order to introduce a
probability measure on K, let us distribute the mass 2-ms uniformly on each








11 -

dyadic cube of order m that intersects K. We then get a measure pm. On each

dyadic cube of order m 1 we keep the measure pm if its mass does not exceed

2-s(m-1), or we multiply pim by a constant less than 1 in such a way that the

resulting measure has mass 2-s(m-1); that way we get a measure Pm-1. For

each k > 1, the measure 1L'k- is obtained from m_ in the same way, that

is

m-k-1 =- (D) m-k

on each dyadic cube D of order m k 1, with


A(D) = min{1,2-s(m-k-1)tmk(D)-1}.


Clearly p'k is independent of k when k is large enough. Then we can write

mmk

Pm-k = Pm-


Notice the measure pm is carried by the dyadic cubes of order m which intersect

K and we have

pm(D) < 2-s(m-k)

for each dyadic cube D of order m k where k = 0, 1, Each point of K is

contained in some dyadic cube D such that the following equality holds,



pm(D) = clDIS, c = 1-/2,


where I is the topological dimension of X. For each point of K let us consider

the largest such cube D: we get a covering of K by disjoint dyadic cubes, Dn.







12-
Then using the property of 7, one has the following estimate for the norm of the

measure pm:

IIpmll = pm(Dn) = c j~E Dnl > cy
n n
We normalize the measure pm through pm/1 pmll, still denoted as pm. We thus

get a probability measure am with



Pm(D) 5 7-11DI


for each dyadic cube D of order less than or equal to m, and pm is carried by

a given neighborhood of K if m is large enough. From the sequence {pm, m =

1, 2, } we can extract a subsequence ptmi which converges weakly. The limit,

denoted by p, is a probability measure carried by K and


p(D)< 7- lIDl


for each dyadic cube D.

Now, given an interval of length b, find k such that 2-k-1 < b < 2-k; then

the interval is covered by two dyadic intervals of length 2-k. Given a ball of

diameter b, it is covered by 21 dyadic cubes of order k. Therefore,



pi(B) 5 217-11B1


for each ball B. Let C = 21'-1 and then the "only if" part is complete. I








13-

2.3. The Capacity

There have been many other dimensions defined for a topological space be-

sides the Hausdorff dimension. Among them is the capacity which some people

call fractal dimension and others call entropy dimension. Let (X, d) be any met-

ric space. Let N(X, e) denote the minimal cardinality of an e covering of balls

of X. Note that N(X, e) is the minimum number of radii e balls needed to cover

X. When X is given, N(X, e) is a decreasing function of e. The capacity of X,

denoted by C(X), is given by

S log N(X, e)
C(X) = lim suplo
e-0 log e

The capacity C(X) is also called the upper capacity. In the same way we define

the lower capacity C(X) by


C(X) = lim inf log N(X,e)
e-0 log e

Mandelbrot has suggested an alternative way of defining capacity. Let


Cs(X) = limsup eN(X, e).


The upper capacity is given by


C(X) = inf{s > 0 : C(X) = 0}.


As for lower capacity, if we let


Cs(X) = lim infeN(X,e).
E--0







- 14-


Then the lower capacity is given by


C(X) = inf{s > 0: C(X) =0}.


It is easy to verify the two definitions for upper and lower capacity agree
1
with each other. A covering using diameter e balls is indeed an e covering. So


C8(X) = lim inf eN(X, e)

> lim inf r
E- 0 E coverings E
iEI
= 1"(X).


We have

HD(X) < C(X) < C(X).

It is worth mentioning that the inequality can indeed be a strict one. See Temam

(1988) for such examples. The following fact due to Fathi (1988) about capacity

is very useful. It rewrites the capacities as the limits of sequences.

LEMMA 2.3.1. If 0 < < 1 and 6 > 0, then


log N(X, e) log N(X, Onb)
C(X) = lim sup = lim sup ,
e-0 log e n--oo -n log 0


log N(X, e) log N(X, On6)
C(X) l=m inf = lim inf
e-*0 log E n-+oo -n log 0

PROOF: To simplify notations let 6 = 1 and define


n(e) = [loge/log 0].







- 15-


We have
log e
lim n(e) = oo, and lim = 1.
e-0O e-+0 log on(e)

Since N(X, e) decreasing of e,


N(X, n()) < N(X,e) e N(X, On(c)+1).


It is reasonable to assume e < 1. We have


log N(X, On(e)) log N(X, e) log N(X, On(E)+1)
-loge -loge -loge


Now let e -- 0, and we can obtain the qualities desired. I

For other properties of capacity, see Temam (1988).














CHAPTER 3

THE HYPERBOLIC SET AND LYAPUNOV EXPONENTS


3.1. The Hyperbolic Set

In this chapter we give an upper bound for the Hausdorff dimension of

a hyperbolic set using the uniform Lyapunov exponents. By diffeomorphism

we mean a differentiable one to one map. Let U be an open set in a smooth

Riemannian manifold X and f : U -+ X a C1 diffeomorphism from U onto an

open subset of X. If x is in X, we denote by TzX the tangent space of X at x,

and by Txf : TzX -+ Tf(x)X the derivative of f at x. More generally we denote

by TKX the restriction of the tangent bundle of X to a subset K of X.

DEFINITION 3.1.1. We say that a compact set K C U is hyperbolic for f if

f(K) = K and if there is a Tf invariant splitting of the tangent bundle E =
TKX = E8 Eu such that


lim log(max JTafk IE, II)< 0,
k-++oo k zEK

and

lim 1 log(max ITlf-k IEu 1) <0,
k--++oo k zEK
where the norm is obtained from a Riemannian metric on X.

In the above definition we used the subadditivity of the two sequences


log(max lTzf-k IEu II), and log(max IlTfk IEs II)
xzK zEK


- 16-







-17-
to obtain the existence of the limits. The number r given by



r = max{ lim max lTlfk IE lri, lim max JTzf-k IEU II}
k-++oo zEK k-^+oo zEK


is called the skewness of K. Note that the notion of hyperbolicity does not

depend on the choice of the Riemannian metric. We will need the notion of
topological entropy, which is defined in the following section. Refer to Walters

(1982) for different definitions and properties. The definition of the Hausdorff

dimension is in Chapter 2 and the theory of Hausdorff dimension can be found

in Hurewicz and Wallman (1948). One can also use Temam (1988) as a reference

for the definition and properties of the Hausdorff dimension of a metric space.

The following theorem gives a better upper bound for Hausdorff dimension than

the one obtained by Fathi (1989), also see Fathi (1988) for similar results in

the case of hyperbolic linear toral maps. For related results in dimension 2, see

McCluskey and Manning (1983); and see also Ledrappier and Young (1985) for

Hausdorff dimension of invariant measures. Some earlier related works can be

found in Ledrappier (1981) and Frederickson, Kaplan, York and York (1983).

For the definition of Lyapunov exponents, see Section 3.3.

THEOREM I. Let f: U -+ X be a C2 diffeomorphism with a compact hyperbolic

set K C U, where U is an open subset in the n-dimensional Riemannian manifold

X. Let p', p',-- ps be the stable uniform Lyapunov exponents of f; and let
4I,C ,-- p2 be the unstable uniform Lyapunov exponents of f. Relabel the

numbers p., ... ,p s and /, .. pu2 as p,, Pn with the order







18-

Define r : [0, n] -+ R the characteristic function by


r(s) = 1t + + [s] + (s [sI)p[s]+l.


Let A = ent(f IK) be the topological entropy of f on K. Let D = 7-1(-2A), or

D = n if #1f +2+""'+Pn > -2A. If AB2 < 1, where A = limAk, B = limBk,

and


Ak = max{max ITf Imax IITrf-k },
zEK zEK
Bk = max{max llTfk A IEI max IITzf- IEU II~},
zEK zEK

then the Hausdorff dimension HD(K) < D.

The condition AB2 < 1 is called the pinching condition.

REMARK 1: In fact, after reordering, B = exp p. So B is the largest of these

Lyapunov numbers. Neither A nor B depends on the choice of the Riemannian

metric. Some people would prefer to define A = A1, B = B1, as Hirsch and Pugh
(1970). In the case when K = X, the condition AB2 < 1 implies that the stable

and unstable foliations of f are C1, see Hirsch and Pugh (1970). Remark also

that the condition AB2 < 1 is open in the space of C1 diffeomorphisms with C1

topology.

REMARK 2: We choose sets of the form nfl"f-'B(f'(x), a) to cover K where

x is in a (2m + 1, a) spanning subset (of K) whose cardinality grows according to
2A. The lifting of n imf B-'B(f'(), a) to the tangent space TzX looks roughly

like an ellipsoid whose axes are given by the uniform Lyapunov exponents, and

now the Hausdorff measure of K can be estimated by covering these ellipsoids by

balls. The pinching condition AB2 < 1 is needed in Lemma 3.4.2 to cope with

the effects of nonlinearity on these ellipsoids.







19-

3.2. The Topological Entropy

Let X be a compact topological space and let f : X X be a continuous
self map on X. We shall use open covers of X, denoted by a, /, **, to define

the topological entropy of f which we denote by ent(f).
If a, / are open covers of X, then denote by a V / their join, which is the

open cover by all sets of the form A n B where A E a, B E /. The join of any

finite collection of open covers of X is defined similarly. For the open cover a,
let N(a) denote the number of open sets in a, and let H(a) = log N(a). Since f
is continuous f-1a is also an open cover, with N(f-la) < N(a). Thus we can
introduce the open cover V-1 f-ia and let an = H(Vlf-'Ia).

Now N(a V /) < N(a) N(/), and hence H(a V f) < H(a) + H(/). Thus

the sequence {an} has the subadditivity as follows:


ak+n = H(V n-If a) < H(V-1f-ia) + H(f-k vn-1 f-ia)

< ak + an.


The subadditivity implies that


lim lan= lim 1H(f- Vn-1 f-a)
n-oo n n-oo n i=-


exists. We call it the entropy of f relative to the cover a, denoted by h(f, a).
For the continuous self map f of X, the topological entropy is given by


ent(f) = sup h(f, a)
a


where the supremum is taken over all the open covers of X.








20 -

For (X, d) a metric space, Bowen introduced the following alternative way

of defining the topological entropy. Bowen's definition relates the topological en-

tropy to the spanning set. This is used by Fathi (1989) to relate the upper bound

of the Hausdorff dimension of a hyperbolic set to the topological entropy of the

diffeomorphism. We also use this definition when relating the Lyapunov expo-

nents and topological entropy to the Hausdorff dimension. See Walters (1982)

for a proof that in case of a metric space Bowen's definition is equivalent to the

one using covers given above.

For each positive integer define a new metric on X by



dn(x,y)= max d(fi(x),f(y)),
O

where x,y E X. Let K be a compact subset of X and let F C K. For a real

number e > 0 we say that F is an (n, e) spanning set of K if for every point x E K

there exists y E F such that dn(x,y) < e. A subset E of K is said to be (n,e)

separated if dn(x, y) > e for any distinct x, y E E. Denote the smallest cardinality

of any (n, e) spanning set by rn(e, K, f); and denote the largest cardinality of any

(n, e) separated set by Sn(e, K, f). It is easy to check that



rn(e,K,f) sn(e,K, f) < rn(e/2, K,f).


Now let

r(e, K, f) = lim sup rn(e, K, f),
n-.oo

and

s(e, K, f) = lim sup Sn(e, K, f).
n-4-oo







21 -

Notice that r(e, K, f) and s(e, K, f) have a common limit when e -+ 0. The
topological entropy of f, denoted by ent(f), is given by the common limit:

ent(f) = sup limr(e,K,f) = sup lim s(e,K,f),
KCX 6-0 KCX -+0

where the supremum is taken over the collection of all compact subsets of X.

3.3. The Uniform Lvapunov Exponents

Let L : E -- E' be a linear map between n-dimensional Euclidean spaces.
We write

ai(L)= sup inf IIL(c)IIE',
FCE,dimF=i (pF, I~llE=1
and wi(L) = a1(L) .a ai(L) for i = 1,2, ,n. One can verify that

ai(L) 2 a2(L) > ... > an(L),

and that wi(L) is the norm of the map Ai(L) : AiE -. AiE' obtained from L.
It follows that if L' : E' -- E" is another linear map between n-dimensional
Euclidean spaces, then

wi(L'L) < wi(L') wi(L) for i = 1, .. n.

Eu As in Temam (1988),
Consider Tzf : E, Ef(x) and Txf-1 : Ex --+ E-) As in Temam (1988),

we are going to define the "stable" and "unstable" uniform Lyapunov exponents

of f on K, which can be understood as the uniform Lyapunov exponents on the
stable bundle E8, and the unstable bundle E", respectively.
Let K be a compact hyperbolic set for the C1 diffeomorphism f with TKX =
ES*eE as an Tf invariant splitting. Denote that nl = dim E8, and n2 = dim E".
Thus the dimension of X is n1 +n2 = n. The uniform stable Lyapunov exponents
and Lyapunov exponents are defined as follows.







22 -
DEFINITION 3.3.1. For 1 < i < ni define of,(f) = supzeK i(Txf E(). The
definition of oi implies that


ofs (fP+q) < fJ (f P) -o (f).

That gives the subadditivity oflog f,(fk). By the subadditivity the limit


lim log Cf(
k--oo k

exists, and is denoted by vi. Let p8 = vf, and pf = vf vs_ for 1 < i < nI.
We call those pf the uniform stable Lyapunov exponents off.

A similar argument to above leads to the uniform unstable Lyapunov expo-
nents, which are defined as follows.

DEFINITION 3.3.2. For 1 < i < n2 define Cfu(f) = sup-zKwi(Tzf-1'I E). The
definition of wi implies that


ou(fp+q) < fyu(fp) (Zu((fq).

That gives the subadditivity oflog '(fk). By the subadditivity the limit


lim 1 log u(f )
k--+oo
exists, and is denoted by v.. Let y = vU, and pY = v~ vi_ for 1 < i n2.

We call those py the uniform unstable Lyapunov exponents off.

REMARK: It is worth to notice that the unstable uniform Lyapunov exponents
of f are equal to the stable uniform Lyapunov exponents of f-1.

As a matter of fact, the uniform Lyapunov exponents pf and py are negative
numbers.







23 -
3.4. The Distortion of a Ball under a Diffeomorphism


At each x E X, the tangent space TxX is a linear Euclidean space. As in
Fathi (1989), define wrs : E -+ E8, and ru : E -+ EU to be two projections.

Let I|| IE', and 1 || IIE be norms on E8 and Eu respectively derived from the
Euclidean structure of the tangent bundle E. For a vector v E = TxX, our

max norm II||v is defined by



IlvlIE = max{JIlrs(v)IIE., I17u(v)II Eu.


We adopt this max norm throughout this chapter.

Locally around x in X is a neighborhood homeomorphic to an open subset in
Rnl+n2 = Rn. Let Ox denote the origin of the linear space Ez = TxX = E&EEx.

Using the exponential map of some Riemannian metric on X, we can find a CO
map 0 : U X, where U is an open neighborhood of the zero section in TX,
such that for each x in X, the map Oz = 0yInTX is a diffeomorphism onto some
open subset in X. Also Ox(Oz) = x and the derivative of Ox at the origin Oz of

TzX is equal to the identity. Of course, the tangent space of Ez at the origin Ox
is identified to Ez itself. Since K is compact, we can fix a real number 6 > 0 for
all x in K that 0O : B(Oz, 6) X is well defined, and


1
Slvll < IITOr (v)ll < 4|11Ji


when v E B(Oz, S). Choose 6bx > 0 for each x in X, such that


f(0x(B(Ox, b))) C Of(x)(B(Of(x), )).







24 -
Since K is compact, we can fix a small 6' > 0 meeting the needs of all x E K
as 6b. If 6' < 6, write 6 for min{6',6}; noticing that 0z is still well-defined on
B(Oz, 6) for each x E K. Define for v E B(Oz, 6) the map


fz : B(OZ,6) -- Ef() by fx(v) = 0() o f o 0(v).


Since the derivative of Ox at O, is equal to the identity, the derivative of fz at
the origin Ox is equal to Txf, thus T~fx(Oz) = Tzf : Ezx Ef(x)
Now assume that f : U -+ X is a C2 diffeomorphism. Hence fx : B(Oz, 6) -b
Ef(x) is also C2. Using the compactness of K and Taylor's formula, we can write
for v near Ox in TxX,


fx(v) = fx(Oz) + Tfx(Oz)(v) + gx(v) = TZf(v) + gx(v),


where gIgz(v)|J < AIv0 2 for some positive number A not depending on x. Again,
since K is compact, by making 6 smaller if necessary, and A big enough, then
for any v E B(Oz, 6),

fx(v) = Txf(v) + gx(v),

where Ilgz(v)lI <5 Ajv 12, and A > 0 is a constant not depending on x. Repeat
the above argument for f-1 to get


fX-1(v) = Txf-l(v) + x(v),


where IIzx(v)II < AdvI2.

LEMMA 3.4.1. Let 6 be as above. For any positive number e, there exists a
positive number o10 < 6, such that at each x E K under the maps fx and f-1,







25 -
when 0 < q7 < r0, the image of a ball centered at Ox in Ez satisfies


fz(B(Oz, r)) C (1 + e)Tzf(B(Oz, i)),

fZ'(B(Ox, 9)) C (1 + e)T f-l(B(Ozx, )),


PROOF: This follows easily from the compactness of K and the fact that the
map

(T.f) fj : B(O, 6) TzX

has the derivative identity at Oz.
In order to prove Theorem I, we notice that Np1, ...,Npn are the uni-
form Lyapunov exponents of fN and the topological entropy ent(fN1K) = N
ent(f IK). So if we can show that Theorem I is true for fN, then it is also true
for f. Since AB2 < 1, we can let N be large enough that ANB2 < 1. Without
loss of generality simply assume AiB2 < 1. The next lemma tells the distortion
of balls under iterated maps. The pinching condition is used.

LEMMA 3.4.2. Define a subset in Ex by


Bm(Oz,a) = {v E Ex\\fi()(...fx(v)lI < a,

j1-i()1-f ()I < ai= 0,...,m- 1}


where a > 0 and m is a positive integer. Let f : U -+ X be a C2 diffeomorphism
with a compact hyperbolic set K, and A1B2 < 1. Then for any e > 0, there exists
q > 0, such that


Bm(Oz,a) C (1 + e)m{Tf m(z)(B(Of-m(z), a)) n Tfim()(B(Ofm(x), a))}







26 -
for all m = 1,2,..., and all x in K, when 0 < a < l.

PROOF: Make e smaller if necessary so that


A1B (1 + ) < 1, and B1(1 + e) < 1.


Let 7 be the same as in Lemma 3.4.1, making it smaller if necessary so that
7 < eAl A-1. Lemma 3.4.1 gives


Bi (O, a) C (1 + e)Tf(B(Of-(,), a)) n (1 + e)Tf- '(B(Of(), a)).


So the case m = 1 follows. Suppose that our conclusion is true for m at all x E K.
We show that it is also true for m + 1 at all x E K and complete the induction
process.
It is clear that fx(Bm+l(Ox,a)) C Bm(Of(z),a), and so


Bm+1(Ox, a) C (fx)- (Bm(Of(z),a)) = fJ((Bm(Of(),a)).


Thus for any v E Bm+1(Ox,a), we can have
~-1
ff()(u) = v, where u E Bm(Of(z),a) exists.


Applying the induction hypothesis at the point f(x) for m, we obtain that


u E (1 + e)m{Tfm(B(Of-m+(I), a)) n Tf-m(B(O f +1 (),a))},


and in particular we can pick some


W1 E B(Ofm+1(W), a)







- 27 -


with (1 + e)mTf-m(wl) = u. Moreover,


IPr(u)I I5 (1 + e)mBgma,


and


1ru(u)11 5 (1 + e)mBma


(because IITfm IE, II < Bfm and IITf-m IEu II < Blm). It follows that


lull (1 + e)mBma < a < 6,


and thus


ff)(u) = Tf(x)f-l(u) + gf(x)(u)


is well-defined, with


II1f() (u) I < Alu112 < A (1 + e)2mB2ma2 < e(1 + e)". aA-m-1.


Since maxzEK IITzf Jll A1, we have IlTxf-1(v)ll > Al1 vlj for all x E K and
v Ex. Thus


Tzf-1(B(O, a)) Al B(Of-1(xa),


and


follows. Hence


Yf(z)(u) e(1 + e)mAlm-l(B(Oz, a)) C e(1 + e)mTf-m-l(B(Ofm+1(), a)),


Tf -n(B(Ox, a)) D A nB(Of-,,(Z),a)







28 -
which allows us to pick some w2 E B(Ofm+l(,), a) satisfying


e(1 + e)mTf-(m+l)(w2) = f(z)(u).


Setting w = (1 + E)-1(wl + ew2) E B(Ofm+,l(),a), then


v = Tf-1((1 + e)mTf-m(wi)) + e(1 + e)mTf-(m+l)(w2)

= (1 + )m+Tf-m-l(w),


showing that

v E (1 +e)m+lTf-(m+l)(B(Ofm+l(z),a)).

Hence we conclude that at x E K, one has


Bm+1(Oz, a) C (1 + e)m+lTf-(m+l)(B(Ofm+1(x), a)).


Similarly, applying induction hypothesis at f-l(x) and considering the re-
lation


(fz)- (Bm+l(Ox,a)) C Bm(Of-,(x),a),


one obtains another relation


Bm+1(O, a) C (1 + e)m+lTfm+l(B(O f(m+)(), a)).


So the induction hypothesis holds for m +1, finishing the proof of Lemma 3.4.2. |
In the proof of our Theorem I, we use the following fact:







29 -
LEMMA 3.4.3. IfL : E -+ F is a linear isomorphism between two n dimensional
linear Euclidean spaces, and B = B(O, a) is a ball of radius a, centered 0 in E,
then the image L(B) of B under L is an ellipsoid of axes (a-ail(L),...,a.an(L))
in F.

PROOF: See Temam (1989).
Lemma 3.4.3 shows that rsTfmB(O,,a) and ruTf-mB(O, a) are ellip-
soids with certain axes in E8f and E-m respectively.
fm(z) f- (.), respectively.

3.5. The Proof of Theorem I

First, for any e > 0 we can find some integer N > 0, such that when
k > N, AkB2 < 1 and


Slog o(fk) < ( + e) +.. (+ + )


for i = 1, .. n as well as

log C < ( + +.. + +


for i = 1,... ,n2.
It suffices to prove the theorem for fN since the entropy and the uniform
Lyapunov exponents of fN are those of f multiplied by N. So without loss of
generality we simply assume that


log0f((f)< (A + )+...+ (s + )


for i = 1, .. n and


log 1U(f) < (P 1 + ) + + (Pt +e)







30 -
for i = 1, ,n2, and AIB2 < 1. Relabel {/p7,p} to {pi,*..-,Un} with


0 > l> > /An.


Making e smaller if necessary assume that pi + e < 0 for i = 1,-.. ,n. Let
Pi = exp(pi +e) < 1 for i = 1,2,-- ,n, and let pf = exp(p + e) < 1 for
i = 1,2, ,ni1, as well as pU = exp(py + e) < 1 for i = 1,2, ,n2. Make e
even smaller if necessary so that (1 + e)pi < 1, for i = 1, n.
Define fz and Bm(Oz, a) as in Section 3.4. By Lemma 3.4.2, there exists
r7 > 0, such that when a < q7,


Bm(Oz, a) C (1 + e)m{Tfm(B(Of-m(x), a)) n Tf-m(B(Ofm((),a))}.


Using Lemma 3.4.3, we know that rxTfm(B(Of-m(z),a)) is an ellipsoid in EJ
with axes {aPl,m(x),- ,apnl,m(x)}, where pi,m(X) = ai(Tf"fm IE) for i =
1, n; and it follows that


Pl,m(x) ... Pi,m(X) = wi(TzfmlE') < (PA ... p)m.

In the mean time one can check that ruTfm(B(Of-m(z), a)) 3 ruB(Ox, a).
Similarly, we know that ruTf-m(B(Of-m(), a)) is an ellipsoid in EU of axes

{aPnn+l,m(x), -- apn,m(x)} where Pnl+i,m = ai(Tf-m I Ex), with


Pnl+l,m(x) D *pm+i,m(x) (p P' )m

and rsTf-m(B(O fm(z), a)) D rsB(Ox, a). Notice that we require


Pl,m(x) > ... > pni,m(x) and Pmn+l,m(x) > ... > Pn,m(x).







31 -
Therefore the set Tfm(B(Of-m (), a)) nTf -m(B(Ofm(x), a)) in Ez = E ED
is a product of two ellipsoids, one in E. and the other in Eu, with axes


{apl,m(x), apni,m(x)}, and {apnl+l,m(x), -" ,apn,m(x)}


respectively. By the following fact, if we renumber those Pi,m(x), such that

Pl,m(z) > '" > pn,m(x), and note that {P,--- ,pn} is actually a reshuffle
of these pl, py so that pl >- .. > pn, we can still get pl,m(x) Pi,m(X) <
(Pl--. pi)m for i = 1,.-. ,n.

FACT. Suppose that al > > anl and anx+1 > *.. > anl+n2, and that bI >
S. >_ bnl and bnl+l > *-* > bni+n Assume that aI .. ai < b 1. bi for

i = 1, ,ni and ani+1 ani+j < bnx+1 bni+j for j = 1, --- ,n2. If we
reshuffle those ai and bj to get a' > ... > a' +n and b > .. > bn+ we still
have a't 1...* a' i b for i = 1, n + n2-

As a product of two ellipsoids, the set


Tfm(B(O f-m(), a) n Tf -m(B(Ofm(x), a))


is covered by no more than


J Pl,m(x) ... Pj-l,m()/l(Pj,m(x))j-1


balls of radius apj,m(x), where J is a constant depending on the dimension n and
the compact set K. Hence by Lemma 3.4.2, Bm(Oz, a) is covered by no more
than


J P1,m(x) ... Pj-l,m(x)l(pj,m(x)Yj-1







32 -
balls of radius (1 + e)mapj,,m(). Since K is compact, we can find a constant

C > 0 such that for any x in K, a subset of the form Ox(B(v, l)) with P < 6 in

X can be covered by a ball of radius C38 of X for the metric on X obtained from

the Riemannian metric, where v E B(Oz,6). So Oz(Bm(Ox, a)) can be covered

by no more than J pI,m(x) pj.-l,m(z)/(pj,m(x))j-1 balls of radius


C(1 + e)mapjm(x) < C(1 + e)mpra < Ca.


Denote by N(m, a) the minimum number of sets of the form Ox(Bm(Oz, a))

needed to cover K. We let M be a subset of K such that


{Oz(Bm(Or,a)): x E M}


covers K and the cardinality of M is N(m, a). Since

m
Ox(Bm(Oz,a)) D n f-i[B(fi(x)a/C)],
i=-m

by taking f-m, we know


N(m,a) < r2m+l(a/C, K),


where r2m+1(a/C, K) is the smallest cardinality of a (2m + 1, a/C) spanning set

for f IK (see Section 3.2 or Walters (1982) for the definition of a spanning set).

When m is large enough, and a is small enough, we have


r2m+l(a/C, K) < exp m(2A + e),







33 -
where A is the topological entropy of f over K. Thus

N(m, a) < exp m(2A + e).

Pick the integer j such that j 1 < D < j. Let e' = e(n + 3)/(-pj) > 0
be fixed and let s = D + e'. Here the number e is chosen small enough that
j 1 < s < j. If {Bi : i E I} is an open cover for K, where Bi is a ball of radius
ri, we define

II = max Iri.
iEl
By definition (see chapter 2), the Hausdorff pre-measure 'H7 is given by

inf rf
III
and has been proved to be a non-increasing function of e's. Therefore,

sCa(K) = inf E rf < p(C(1 + e)mapT, s)
III JPl,m(x)...P -l,m(x)
< Pm(x- (pj,m(x))" [C(1 + e)ma]s
zEM [p,m()-i

< exp[m(2A + e)] expm(p1 + ... + pj-1 + (s j + 1)pj + se)

Sexp[m log(1 + e)]. C'Ja

= exp m[2A + pl + ... + lj-1 + (s j + 1)pj + (1 + s)e + log(1 + e)] C8Ja

= exp m[(s + 1)e + 2A + r(D) + e'pj + log(1 + e)] C8Ja8

< expm[(s + 1)e + e'pj + e] C'Ja

< expm[(n + 2)e + (-n 3)e] C'Jas

= exp(-me) CJas

0,







34 -
as m -+ oo. Thus 'H (K) = 0, if a is small enough. So


7S(K) = lim bCa(K) = 0.
a--0

Therefore

HD(K) < s = D + e(n + 3)/(-~j).

Let e -- 0, we get HD(K) < D as desired. The proof of Theorem I is thus

completed. |


3.6. The Case of a C2 Flow

Let {ft : t E R} be a C2 partial flow on the Riemannian manifold X, and

let K be a compact invariant hyperbolic subset of ft. See Fathi (1989) for the

definitions. We have results similar to Theorem I about flows. Let n1 and n2

be the dimensions of the stable and unstable foliations. Let us define stable and

unstable uniform Lyapunov exponents for a C2 partial flow ft. The subadditivity

is used for the existence of limits.

DEFINITION 3.6.1. For 1 < i < nl and 1 < j < n2, define


g(ft) = sup wi(TzftlE.),O(ft) = sup wj(Tzf-tlE).
zEK zEK

It follows that for all p > 0 and q > 0,


n(fpq) d (fP) (fq)


and


Coy(fp+q) < Coy(fP) Co(f).







- 35 -


So by subadditivity both


lim log wO(ft) and lim 1 log (ft)
t-.+oo t t--+oo t

exist, and are denoted by 4i, vi. Let ps = vs (p = V'), and pi = vf vf I for
1 < i < n (respectively, p'j = vj vy1 for 1 < j < n2). We call p! and p the

uniform stable, or unstable Lyapunov exponents for ft.

THEOREM 3.6.2. Let ft be a C2 partial flow with a compact hyperbolic set K
in the n-dimensional Riemannian manifold X. Let it,, ..., be the stable
uniform Lyapunov exponents of ft; and let p,,u, ..., I2 be the unstable uni-
form Lyapunov exponents of ft. Relabel the set {iP ,-- -- i,; pn2} as

{ili,-- ,Pn} with

0 > P1 > P2 2 > ".. Pn-

Define r : [0, n] -+ R by


T(s) = p1 + ... + l[s] + (s [S])P[]+l.


Let A = ent(f1 IK) be the topological entropy of f on K. Let


D = r-1(-2A),


or D =n if P +p 2 + ... + pn > -2A.

If AB2 < 1, where A = limAt, B = limBt, and




At = max{max IITzft 1l max IITzf-t I 11,
zEK xEK
B = max{ma.lftx IT IE IImax ITf-t IEu I1t,
zEK xEK








36 -

then the Hausdorff dimension of the hyperbolic set K of the flow satisfies



HD(K) < D + 1.


The proof of the above Theorem, which is about the case of follows, is much

the same as that of our Theorem I.

REMARK: The geodesic flows of 1/4 pinched negatively curved Riemannian met-

rics on compact manifolds satisfy the hypothesis of our Theorem 3.6.2 for any

subset of the unit tangent bundle which is invariant under the geodesic flow.















CHAPTER 4


THE HYPERBOLIC SET AND TOPOLOGICAL PRESSURE




4.1. The Hyperbolic Set Revisited


Now let us use the topological pressures on a hyperbolic set to bound the

Hausdorff dimensions of the hyperbolic set and its transverse with the stable

and unstable manifolds. For convenience in this chapter, we use an alternative

definition of the hyperbolic set. Mather has pointed out that by choosing an

appropriate Riemann metric, any set that is hyperbolic according to the previous
chapter will satisfy the definition we give here. We prove Theorem II given in

the introduction here by proving Theorems 4.2 through 4.4. Our Theorem 4.1 in

this chapter gives a generally rough estimate, and we will see the introduction of

the pinching condition enables a better estimate.

Let U be an open set in a smooth Riemannian manifold X and f : U -- X

a diffeomorphism from U onto an open subset of X. If x E X, we denote by TxX

the tangent space of X at x, and by Txf : TxX -- Tf()X the derivative of f at

x. More generally we denote by TKX the restriction of the tangent bundle of X

to a subset K of X.

DEFINITION 4.1.1. Let K C U C X be a compact subset of a Riemannian

manifold X. We say that K C U is hyperbolic for a diffeomorphism f if f(K) =

K and if there is a Tf invariant splitting of the tangent bundle E = TKX =

37 -







- 38 -


Es e Eu such that


maxf{||llf IE, II, IITf-1 IE 1} < 1,
zEK

where the norm is obtained from an appropriate Riemannian metric on X.

We call r = maxxK({IITf IE II, ITaf-1 IEu II} the skewness of K. This
definition of hyperbolicity is slightly different from the ones given in the previous
chapter and Fathi (1989). However, if K is hyperbolic in the sense of Chapter
3, we can adapt a metric to K as Mather (1968) did. Then under this Mather

metric, K is hyperbolic under our definition here. Refer to Walters (1982) or
the next section of this chapter for the definition of the topological pressure for

a function A and the map f K : K -+ K, and the variational principle. In this
chapter, we let the real valued negative function A : U -- R be defined by


A(x) = log maxi{ ITf lE II, IITZf-1E II},


Clearly the function A is continuous if f is C1. For the Hausdorff dimension of a
hyperbolic set K, first we have

THEOREM 4.1. If f is a C1 diffeomorphism with a hyperbolic set K, and at
some real positive value s we have the topological pressure P(flK, s) = 0, then
HD(K) < s.

We say f satisfies a pinching condition if AB2 < 1 where


A = max{ lTf |I, IITxf-111}
zEK

and B = maxZEK{A(x)}. We also define two characteristic functions AX and A"
as follows.







39 -
For L : E -- F a linear map between n dimensional normed spaces E and
F, we write

ai(L) = sup inf ILp IIF,
SCE,dim S=i IIlsIE=l,PES
and wi(L) = al(L) .. ai(L) where i = 1, *. ,n. Here L induces A'L : A'E -
A'F; and in fact wi(L) = | A' LIIF. If t is not an integer, we write


wt(L) = al(L)... a[t](L)a[tl+(L)t-[t.


It is noticed the linear map L sends any ball of radius r in E to an ellipsoid in F

with axes given by (ral(L), ran(L)) .
Now consider the splitting of TKX = Es8 Eu. Suppose that dimE8 =

ni, Eu = n2, where n1 + n2 = n. When x E K define


A'(t,x) = logwt(TxflE ) for t E [0,ni],


and

A"(t, z) = log wt(Txf-1^E) for t E [O, n].

Write A)(x) = AU(t, ) and Af(x) = A'(t, z). Under the pinching condition and
using functions As and Au, we have

THEOREM 4.2. If f is a C2, pinched diffeomorphism with a hyperbolic set K,
then there is a unique real non-negative value t such that


max{P(f lK, A) + P(flK, A))Itl + t2 = t} =0.


Moreover the Hausdorff dimension of the hyperbolic set K satisfies HD(K) < t.

We also give the upper bounds for the Hausdorff dimension of the transver-
sals of the hyperbolic set to the stable and unstable manifolds.







40 -

THEOREM 4.3. If f is a C2, pinched diffeomorphism with a hyperbolic set K,
and at some real positive value t we have the topological pressure P(f K, A') = 0,

then the Hausdorff dimension in the direction that transverses to WU(x,f) is
given by

HD(K n (x, f)) < t.

THEOREM 4.4. If f is a C2, pinched diffeomorphism with a hyperbolic set K,
and at some real positive value t we have the topological pressure P(fIK, N) = 0,

then the Hausdorff dimension in the direction that transverses to W(x, f) is
given by

HD(K n W"(x,f)) < t.

REMARK: The inequalities in Theorems 4.3 and 4.4 are qualities when K is the
basic set of a two dimensional horseshoe. This fact can be found in McCluskey

and Manning (1983).



4.2. Topological Pressure


We first give the definition of topological pressure using the open coverings.

Then we also give the definition using either spanning sets or separated sets.

Both definitions are equivalent. See Walters (1982) for more details and the

variational principle. The concept of topological pressure in this type of setting

was introduced by Ruelle and studied in the general case by Walters.

Let f : X --+ X be a continuous transformation of a compact metric space

(X, d). Let C(X, R) denote the Banach algebra of real-valued continuous func-
tions on X equipped with the supremum norm. The topological pressure of f will

be a map P(f,.) : C(X, R) -- R U {oo} which will have good properties relative








41 -

to the structures on C(X, R). It contains topological entropy in the sense that

P(f, 0) = ent(f) where 0 denote the member of C(X, R) which is identically zero.

Let A E C(X,R). For x E X denote Sn~(x) = En-1 A(fx). Let a be an

open cover of X and denote



qn(f, A, a) = inf{ I inf exp((SnA)(x)): / is a finite subcover of VnO1 f-ia},
BE# zEB
pn(f, A, a) = inf{ sup exp((SnA)(x)): /3 is a finite subcover of Vno1 -i a}.
BE#zEB

Notice that qn(f, A, a) < Pn(f, A, a) and the subadditivity of log pn(f, A, a) is due

to the relation pn(f, A, a) Pm(f, A, a) > pn+m(f, A, a). Let


q(f, a) = lim sup log qn(f, A, a),
n--+oo n
p(f, A,a) = lim -logpn(f,A, a).
n-oo n


Recall lal denotes the largest diameter of sets in a. Write


q(f,A, e) = sup{q(f, A, a): a is an open cover of X, laI < e},

p(f, A, e) = sup{p(f, A, a) : a is an open cover of X, Ic a e}.
a

Now both sides of the following identity gives the quantity P(f, A) which is called

the topological pressure:


lim q(f, ,e) = lim p(f, e).
E-O C--0

We have defined the (n, e) spanning set and the (n, e) separated set in the

previous chapter. Now we can use them to give alternative definitions of the








- 42 -


topological pressure. Let


Qn(f, A,e) = inf{ exp((SnA)(z)) : F is (n,e) spanning for X},
zEF
Pn(f A, e) = sup{ exp((SnA)(x)) : F is a (n,e) separated subset of X}.
zEF

Then define


Q(f, A,e) = limsup -log Qn(f, A,e),
n-+oo nf
P(f, A, e) = lim sup log Pn(f, A, ),
n--oo n

Now the topological pressure is given by


P(f, A) = lim Q(f,A,e) = lim P(f,A,e).
--*0 e-0

The variational principle shows the topological pressure can be computed

using f invariant measures.

THEOREM 4.2.1. (The Variational Principle) Let f : X -- X be a continuous

self mapping of a compact metric space and A a real valued function defined on

X. Then the topological pressure can be given by


P(f, A) = sup{hp(f) + Ad : p E M(X, f)}


where hp(f) is the entropy of f as a map that preserves the measure p and

M(X, f) is the set of all measures invariant under f.

See Walters (1982) for an introduction to the properties of the topological

pressure, as well as the proof of the variational principle and equilibrium states,

and how pressure determines the invariant measures.







43 -
4.3. A Rough Estimate on Hausdorff Dimension

Lemmas 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 are obvious.

LEMMA 4.3.1. Iff : K -- K with K compact and A1 < A2 are two real functions
on K, then P(f, l) < P(f,A2).

LEMMA 4.3.2. IfA is a negative real valued function then P(fIK, sA) is a strictly
decreasing, continuous function of s.

For x E K let TzX = E, E E, be the tangent space and 7r : TzX -
E r, : TxX -+ E, be the projections. If v E TxX, and if 1I'(v)|jIE, IIru(v) IIE
are norms induced from the adapted metric, then the norm


|Ilvl = max{llJ7(v)liE,, II7r(v)lE }


is equivalent to the one induced from the adapted metric. With the new norm K
is still hyperbolic under our definition. Let Ox : B(Oz, a) X be the exponential
map. Since K compact and since TOz = I the identity, we can find 6 > 0 such
that Ox is well-defined for all x E K and a < 6, with


1
lIv wil < d(Oz(v),0x(w)) < 211v wll.


Define fz = Of1 fOx to be the lifting of f. Define the set


Bm(O,,a) = {v E EIIIffi(,)... fx(v)II < a,

1ff1-()---- (v)11 < a, i = 0,...,m- 1}


as in Chapter 3.







44 -
PROPOSITION 4.3.3. Let f, K, be as in Theorem 3.1. IfP(f K,sA) < 0, then
the Hausdorff dimension HD(K) < s.

PROOF: Write fj(v) = Tzf(v) + g(v). Let e be a small number such that


e < -P(f,sA) s.


There is 6 > 0 with fxB(Oz,a) C (1 + e)TzfB(Oz,a) when a < 6. Thus
Bm(0, a) C (1 + e)mB(Ox, rm(x)) where


rm(x) = a max{exp(SmA(x)),exp(SmA(x))},


with SmA(z) = ,1 (f-ix), and SmA(x) = E 1 A(fix). Notice that


rm(X) < a[exp mA(x) + exp SmA(x)].


Let K1 C K be a maximal (2m + 1, -a) separated subset. Then for any
x E K In K, there exists y E K1 such that


max{d(x,y),... ,d(f2m+l(x),f2m+l(y))} < a.
4

So {Ozf-mBm(Ofym(z),2a)x E K1} is an open cover for K. Since 0f = fO,
it follows that f-mOfm(z)Bm(Ofm(x), 2a)lx E K1} is an open cover for K. Let
K2 = fmK1 which is clearly (m, ,a) separated. {OzBm(Oz, 2a)|x E K2} is also
an open cover for K. Let the number M be large enough and 6 small enough
that

1 1 1
log Pm(f, sA -a) < P(f, sA -a) + se/2 < P(f, sA) + se < -2se.
m 4 4








- 45 -


Here as in section 4.2,



Pm(f, sA, a) = sup{ expSm(sA)(x)IE is an
zEE
1
(m, 4a) separated subset of K},
4


and


1 1 1
P(f,sA, A ) = limsup- logPm(f, s, -a)
4 m-oo m 4

P(f, sA)= lim P(f, sA, a).
a--+O 4


Since P(f-,sA) = P(f,sA) < 0, we can require


1 1
-log Pm(f-,sA, a) < -2se.
m 4


Thus we have


1 1
Pm(f, sA, a) < exp(-2mse) and Pm(f-l,sA, -a) < exp(-2mse).
4 4


In particular, since Pm(f, sA, a) is the supremum,



exp(SmsA(x)) < exp(-2mse), and E exp(msA(x)) < exp(-2mse).
xEK2 xEK2


Now consider the Hausdorff s measure corresponding to the open cover


{OxBm(Ox,2a)Ix E K2}.







46 -
The radius of each open set OxBm(Oz, 2a) is less than 4a. Let a < 6/2. Thus


H4ha(K) E \ OzxBm(Ox,2a) 8
ZEK2
< 4s8 Bm(OX,2a)\8
xEK2
< 48s (2a)s(1 + e)sm(exp SmA(x) + exp SmA(x))
xEK2
< (8a)8 exp(sme)2exp(-2mse)

= 2(8a)8 exp(-sme) -+ 0,


as m -+ oo. So i a(K) = 0; and HD(K) < s. I
Lemma 4.3.1 and Proposition 4.3.3 give a proof of Theorem 4.1.

PROOF OF THEOREM 4.1: Let t = inf{sj P(fIK,sA) < 0}. Then HD(K) < t.
It is clear that P(f K,tA) = 0 and t is unique in view of Lemma 4.3.1. I


4.4. Under the Pinching Condition

The following results will prove Theorem 4.2.

PROPOSITION 4.4.1. Let f be C2, pinched, and K its hyperbolic set. Ift is such
that
max {P(f K, A ) + P(flK, A)} < 0,
tl+t2=t
then the Hausdorff dimension HD(K) < t.

PROOF: By Lemma 3.4.2, for any e > 0 there is b > 0, when r < 6,

Bm(Oz, r) C (1 + e)m{Tf-.m(z)fmB(Of-m(Z), r) n Tfm(z)f-mB(Ofm(z), r)}
Thus, considering their projections we have


rsBm(Ox, r) C (1 + e)mTfm(z)fmrsB(Of-,m(),r),







- 47 -


and

ruBm(Oz, r) C (1 + e)mTf,(z)f-mruB(Ofm(z), r).


Reshuffle



a1(Tf-m()fmlE*),... ,an(Tf-m(x)fm IE' );

al(Tfm(I)f-m Eu)," *, In2(Tfm(x)f-mIE )



to get al(m,x) < ..- < an(m,x). It follows that Bm(Ox,r) is contained in an
"ellipsoid" of axes {ral(m, x), ,rann(m, x)}.

Let j = [t] + 1. Use balls of radius raj(m, x) to cover the above ellipsoid of
axes {rca(m,x ), ,ran(m, x)}. At most



Qail(m, x) ... aj(m, x)/aj(m, x)3



balls are needed where Q depends only on the dimension n, the metric we choose
and the compact hyperbolic set K. Notice that the number aj(m, x) < 1.

Let K1, K2 be two subsets of K as in the proof of Proposition 4.3.3, where
the collection {0xBm(Oz, r)jx E K2} is an open cover for K. The balls of radius
raj(m,x) needed to cover Bm(Oz, r) is at most



Qal(m, x) aj(m, x)/aj(m, x)s.


The image in K under {Oz : x E K2} is an open cover for K, with radius less







- 48


than 4r, and the corresponding Hausdorff t measure is estimated as the following:


'Ht4r(K) < (1 + e)m Z rtQ4t al(m, x) .. aj(m, x)/aj(m, )j aY(m, (x)
zEK2
= C(1 + )m E al(m,x). ..a-_l(m,x)aj(m,x)t-j+1
zEK2
= C(1 + e)m E Wt2()(Tfm(X)f-m IE )Wt (x) Tf-m() fm lE)
xEK2
m
zEK2 i=1

Here C = rtQ4t. At least one of t1, t2 is an integer. Also t1 + t2 = t. There are
at most n(n 1) pairs of such (tl(x), t2(x)) for each x. For each pair of available

(t1, t2), we have

P(f-1 IK, ) + P(f IKAu) < O.

Thus we can require


1 log[Pm(f-1IK s,tl)Pm(flK, Au,t2)] < -2e
m

for all available pairs (tl, t2) and all large m. So,

m m
r(K) 5 Cexp(mexp() exp( Au,t2(fix)). exp( As, (f-ix))}
tl+t2=t zEK2 i=1 xEK2 i=1
< Cexp(me) : Pm(f-1 K,~s,tj)Pm(fIK, u,t2)
tl+t2=t
< C exp(me) exp(-me)

= Cexp(-me) -> 0.


Therefore -t4,(K) = 0; and HD(K) < t.
The proof of Theorem 4.2 follows immediately from the above Proposition


and Lemma 4.3.2.







49 -
4.5. The Transversals

By the Stable Manifold Theorem, the stable manifold WS(z, f) is locally
embedded in X, with TzWs(x, f) = E.. Similarly TxWU(x, f) = Eu. Now let


X0 : TzW(x, f) = E W(x, f) C X


be the exponential map for W8(x, f) at x and


0 : TzW"(x,f) = EU WU(x,f) C X


be the exponential map for WU(x, f) at x. Define : TzX = Es Eu --E T X
by

(C(w ) v) = Ol-0(w) + OOleu(v)

for w E E' and v EE. Now the exponential map O can be modified to obtain
a map

z : TzX = Es D Eu -+ X

by O ,x = Cx, with the property that TCxz(Ox) = identity. By the stable
manifold theorem, TzWS(x, f) = Ex and


ox(E n B(O, r)) C W(x, f).


It is noticed that zx is defined locally and since K compact there is r > 0 such
that Ox is well defined on B(0x, r) C TxX for all x E K. Then similarly to
Chapter 3, we let f(v) = f( )fz(v) and define the set Bm(Oz,r) through f.

A distortion lemma similar to Lemma 3.4.2 can be obtained.







-50 -
PROPOSITION 4.5.1. Let f and K be as in Theorem 4.3. For any x E K, let
W8(x,f) be the stable manifold at x. If the topological pressure P(f, A) < 0,
then the Hausdorff dimension HD(K n Ws(x, f)) < t.

PROOF: Similar to Lemma 3.4.2,


Bm(Oz, r) C (1 + e)m{Tf -m(Z)fmB(0f-m(x), r) n T ( (z)f-mB(0fm(,), r)},


we have
7rsBm(Ox, r) C (1 + e)mTf_m(x)fmrsB(-m(z), r).

The right side is an ellipsoid of axes (1 + e)mr{al(m,x), an,(m, x)}. Let
j = [t] + 1. The number of balls of radius raj(m, x) needed to cover rsBm(Oz, r)
is at most
Caq(m, x) aj(m,x)/aj(m, x)j.

Let M1 C K n Ws(f-mx, f) be a maximal (2m + 1, rr) separated subset,
such that M1 U {y} is not (2m + 1, 1r) separated if y E K n WS(f-mx, f) and

y M1. Then the set M2 given by


M2 = fmMI C K n W(x, f)


is maximal (m, r) separated; and {txzrsBm(z0,r)jx E M2} is an open cover
for K n WS(x,f). Under the collection of maps {xzlx E M2}, the image of
small balls of radius rarj(m, x) used to cover Bm(0x, f) have radius less than 4r.
The corresponding Hausdorff t measure for K n W(x, f), the quantity 7H4r(K n
Ws(x, f)) is less than


E 4Cr(1 + e)maj(m, x)tal(m, x) ... aj(m, z)/aj(m, x)
xEM2








51-


Since


aj(m, z)tal(m, x) .. aj(m, z)/aj(m, x)

= ; a(m, z) ... j_ (m, x)aj(m, x)t-j+l

= W(Tf-mfmlEs)

< wt (Tf-m f IES)W(Ty-m+lJEf .E). T (Tf-f IE8)

= exp As,t(f-m.x).. .exp As,t(f-x)
m
= exp As,t(f-ix)
i=1

and r(1 + e)maj(m, x) < r, we have

m
M",r(K n Ws(x, f)) < 4Cr(1 + e)m E exp(- Asf-ix)
zEM2 i=1
< 4Cr exp(me)Pm(f, As,t, -r)

< 4Cr exp(me)exp(-2me) -+ 0,


as m -+ oo. So t4rr(K n W(x, f)) = 0. It follows that Vit(K n W8(x,f)) = 0

and the Hausdorff dimension HD(K n W8(x, f)) < t. I

The proof of of Theorem 4.3 follows immediately from the above Proposition.
The proof of Theorem 4.4 works similarly.















CHAPTER 5


THE SELF SIMILAR SETS



5.1. The Self Similar Sets

In this chapter we shall construct the self similar sets. Then we use the
topological pressure defined in Chapter 4 to bound the Hausdorff dimension of

self similar sets. Finally we discuss the continuity of Hausdorff dimension at
conformal constructions.

The construction of a self similar set starts with a k x k matrix A = (aij)
which has entries zeroes and ones, with all entries of AN positive for some N > 0,

see Bedford (1988). For each non-zero aij we give a contraction map Pyij : R -
R1 with ||lpij(x) pij(y)l| < c||x y|l, where c < 1 is a constant and we are using

the Euclidean norm on R1. Define the Hausdorff metric by


d(E, F) = inf{6d(x, F) < 6 for all x E E, and d(y, E) < 6 for all y E F}


in the space C of all nonempty compact subsets of RI. See, for example, Hutchin-

son (1981) or Falconer (1990). The map ( on the k-fold product space Ck given
by

(FI,.. ,F) = (UiP(F,),.. ,U=1Pkj(F))

is a contraction map. By the Banach Fixed Point Theorem the contraction map

- has a unique fixed point in Ck, i.e., a vector of compact non-empty subsets of
52 -







53 -
R1, denoted by (El,..., Ek) E Ck, with


Uaii=1Pij(Ej) = Ei.

The union E = U=l Ei is called a self similar set.
Let

E = = {(xO, l,..., n,...)I1 < zi < k and a.,iz+l = 1 for all i > 0}

be the shift space with the following metric: for x = (xo, xl,... ), y = (yo, l- *)
in E, d(x,y) = 2-" if and only if n = min{mlxm Z ym}. Let a be the shift map
of E and let r : E E be given by

7r(xo, X1,..., n,...) = the only point in nn> l (xozz1 X 22... zz-n+l(Exn+l).

It is clear that r is a H6lder continuous, surjective map. We will denote the
composition Voxl "- Xn-iXn by Vzo--.,. Also, we assume all pij be C1 diffeo-
morphisms and denote the derivative of Cpij at a point x by Tzxpij or Tyij(x).

DEFINITION 5.1.1. The j-th Lyapunov number of a linear map L, denoted by
aj(L), is the square root of the j-th largest eigenvalue of LL*, where L* is the
conjugate of L. Write

wt(L) = al(L)... a[t](L)a[t]+l(L)t-[t]

For a set of construction diffeomorphisms {Qpij}, the function At : E -- R for
each t E [0, 1] and x = (x0xl ...) E E is defined by

At(z) = log al(Tzozl(iroz)) + -+ log a[t](Tvczo-(7roa))

+ (t [t]) loga[t]+l(T0Zxo1(7rza))

= logWt(Tzoxz1(7ra)).








54 -
The constructions and dimensions of self similar sets have been studied by
several authors under various restrictions. In this chapter we relax the restrictions
on construction diffeomorphisms to a K pinching condition, which is defined as
follows.

DEFINITION 5.1.2. We say that a C1 smooth homeomorphism Pij satisfies the
K-pinching condition if the derivatives satisfy the following



IITz Piill+ IIT,,io(z)Pj'I < 1


for all x E E.

REMARK: If TzijTx*- has eigenvalues


al,ij(x)2 > ... > al,ij(x)2


where TZxcp denotes the conjugate of Txrij, the numbers a, ij(x),...,a ,ij(x)

are Lyapunov numbers with


1 > al,ij(x) > ... > al,ij(x) > 0.


Then the pinching condition is equivalent to al,ij(x)1+' < alij(x).

For the definition and properties of Hausdorff dimension, refer to Chapter
2 or Kahane (1985). Also, we use the definitions and notions of Walters (1982)
in the discussions concerning topological pressure, see also Chapter 4. Theorem
III given in the introduction is proved in this chapter through Theorem 5.1 and
Theorem 5.2.








55 -

THEOREM 5.1. Let {(yij} be the C1 construction diffeomorphisms for the self
similar set E, satisfying the K pinching condition for some positive number K < 1.

Suppose the derivatives of all {yij} are Holder continuous of order K. Ift is the
unique positive number such that the topological pressure P(a, At) = 0, then the
Hausdorff dimension HD(E) < t.

Let us recall the disjoint open set condition on the construction of self similar
sets, see Hutchinson (1981). It states that for each integer i from 1 to k there is
a non-empty open set Ui such that



U pij (Uj)CUi, and Pij(Uj) n ik(Uk) = if j k.
aij=1


For n > 0, denote Un(x) = WX2ozz X2 ... xn,_-z(Uz,). It follows that Ei C Ui;
and that the collection {Un(x) : x E E} is pairwisely disjoint for each fixed n.

THEOREM 5.2. Let {1oij} be the C1 construction diffeomorphisms for the self
similar set E in RI, satisfying both the K pinching condition for some positive
number K < 1, and the disjoint open set condition. Suppose the derivatives of all

{fcij} are Hilder continuous of order K. If t is the unique positive number such
that the topological pressure P(a, At) = 0, then the Hausdorff dimension


HD(E) > lK.
1+K


REMARK: We call a C1 diffeomorphism C1+4 if its derivative is H6lder continu-
ous of order K. If we fix the construction to be C1+) for some # > 0 but let -- 0
for the i pinching condition, then our upper and lower bounds will coincide with

the estimate for conformal cases as in Bedford (1988).








56 -
Theorem 5.1 is proved in Section 5.2, and Theorem 5.2 is proved in Section

5.3. As a corollary of Theorems 5.1 and 5.2, in Section 5.4 we will also discuss

some continuity in the C1 topology of the Hausdorff dimension at conformal
Cl+' constructions under the disjoint open set condition. For discussions of

the constructions of self similar sets using similitudes and their dimensions, see
Hutchinson (1981), Mauldin and Williams (1988). For the constructions using
conformall" contraction maps, see Bedford (1988). Other related works can be

found in Dekking (1982), Bedford (1986) and Falconer (1990).


5.2. The Upper Bound


LEMMA 5.2.1. If all construction diffeomorphisms Wij are C1+' and satisfy the

K-pinching condition, then for any e > 0, there exists 6 > 0 depending only on e,

such that for all x E E, all a with 0 < a < 6, and all x = (0,xI, .) in E, all
integers n > 0, we have


(5.2.1) po...-zB(x,a) C o-...zX(x) + (1 + e)nT zo...zB(O,a).


Here B(x, a) denotes a ball of radius a centered at x in RI.

PROOF: Using Taylor's formula, for any y, w E R1,


(5.2.2) 'poxl(y + w) = zxoxl(y) + Tyxzozx(w) + rzozx(w,y).


Since E is compact, we can find some constants C > 0 and c > 0, such that for

all y E E and w E R1 with I|w|| < c, we have I|rzozx(w,y)ll < CIIwl1+K. We will

set also b = minzEE,i,j{al,ij(x)}.







-57 -
Fix any small e > 0. Since E is compact and all construction diffeomor-
phisms satisfy the r. pinching condition, without loss of generality we can assume
e to be so small that for all pairs (i,j),


(5.2.3) 11(1 + e)Tzcijll < 1 for all x E E;

(5.2.4) (1 + e)cal,ij(x)l+' < aij(x) for all x E E.


Pick 6 > 0, with 6 < min{c, (be/C)1/"}. Thus b < eatij(x)/C, for all x E E
and all pairs of (i,j). Let a < 6, and pick any w E R1 with IIwll < a. For any
x in E, lIrxoz,(w,x)jl < CIIwll+I < Cal+' < aCb t < aeal,zox,(x), and thus
rzozx(w,x) E eai,xox1(z)B(O,a). Since ealj,o(a(x)B(O, a) C eTzoxl B(O, a), it
follows from (5.2.2) that


xzoz (x + w) = xox, (x) + TxxPoxl (w) + rZol (w, x)

E pzozx (x) + Tzcpzox B(0, a) + eTroxozl B(0, a)

= zozlX(X) + (1 + e)TxzPxoxB(0,a).

That gives (5.2.1) for n = 1. Now the induction hypothesis gives


PxoXZ...x B(x, a) = Pzxox s ...zx B(x, a)

C zoz~l x[-x...z(x) + (1 + )n-lTz ,...xZB(0,a)].


Using (5.2.2):


Pxoxi k~z...Xn(x) + (1 + e)n-1Tvx,...X(w)]

= pzo...n (x) + (1 + E)n-lTvzo...x,(w)
+ rxox,((1 + e)n-lTvxl...x,,n(w), IP...,,( ()).







58 -
Because of (5.2.3), 11(1 + e)n-1T l...x,(w) < |11wI < a, where w E B(O,a).
Using (5.2.4), we have


Ilrzxoz((1 + e)n-1TwzZ...Z,,(w), wx...x,(x))II
< cl|(1 + e)n-1Tlz....,,(w) 1l+'c

< C(1 + e)(n-1)(l+) [alXz12(z2...n(z,()) ... acl,znx,,(x)IIwII]1+
< C(1 + e)n-1al,,,, z))...a,2,n 1 (x)Illwll1+

< (1 + E)n-la"CCal,T(,,1( ..., (x))... al,,n-_X(X)IIwII
< e(1 + e)n-lao,xozx(I -x ... (x)) ai,zxli2(zx...x,(x))...al,zn-_X,,(x)a.


On the other hand Tz' ijB(O, a) D al,ij(x)B(O, a), and it follows that


Tzxpxo...x,,B(O, a) D aq,zoz (Czlr...z,, (X)) **' al.n-lX,, (x)B(O, a).

Hence rx0zo((1 + e)n-1lTW ... ,, (w), cp...:,,(x)) E e(1 + e)n-1Tzx zo...z,,B(O, a).
Therefore,


Vxzoz [kx...xx) + (1 + E)n-1T Z,...X(w)]
E cpx...x,(x) + (1 + e)"-1Txzo ...,B(O, a) + e(1 + e)n-1Tz~zo...,B(O, a)

C Vo...zxn (X) + (1 + E)nTz zo.... B(0,a).


Thus (5.2.1) is true for n. That completes the induction process. I
I have learned that Jiang (1991) has a distortion lemma for a regular non-
conformal semigroup, which is a semigroup of pinched contracting diffeomor-
phisms. His version is stronger than our version here. However, for our purpose
of estimating Hausdorff dimensions here, our version is strong enough.








59 -

PROPOSITION 5.2.2. If all construction diffeomorphisms pij are Cl+ and sat-

isfy the K-pinching condition where 0 < i < 1, and if the topological pressure

P(o, At) < 0 where a is the shift map in E, then the Hausdorff dimension

HD(E) < t.

PROOF: Choose small e > 0 satisfying both (5.2.3) and (5.2.4), with


P(a, At) < -2te.


By Lemma 5.2.1, there exists 6 > 0 such that (5.2.1) holds for all integers n > 0

and each x E E, when 0 < a < 6.

We fix a < 6 small enough, and a positive integer n big enough, such that
(See Walters (1982) or Section 4.2 for notations)


log Pn(a, At, a) < -2nte.


Recall that 7 is Holder continuous. Suppose that 7 is the exponent such that

there exists a constant D with


r(x) ir(y)I < D d(x,y)7


for all x, y in E. Fix a' < min{D-/lalh/7,a}. Pick m with 2-m-1 < a' < 2-m.

Let


K' = {(x, -- m+n)I there exists x E E with x = (x0,- -. Xm+n, **)}


Choose for each word (0, xm+n) in K' a point x in E with the initial of

o,..., Xm+n, to form a subset K of E. The subset K is (n, a') separated, and is







60 -
maximal in the sense that one cannot add another point to K such that it is still

(n,a') separated. Thus, the collection {a-nB(anx, a') x E K} is an open cover
for E. Notice that 7rx = Wpx0,roax. Since irB(x,a') C B(7r(x),a) and


7{7a-nB(anx, a')lx E K} C {WXozx ...B(rnx, a)lx = (xo, x1,......n...) K}


it follows that


{XzozX...XnB(ranx,a)x != (x0,xl,...,Xn... ) E K}


is an open cover for E = U=1,Ei. Also, using (5.2.1) of Lemma 5.2.1 we have


(5.2.5) po...znB(7ranx,a) C xro- r x ( ) + (1 + e)nT" "xWZo-o.n B(0, a).


The right side of (5.2.5) is an ellipsoid with axes


{a(1 + e)n Qj(TXr x o )...)I1 < j < l}.


Pick j with j 1 < t < j. Then that ellipsoid can be covered by


C "( rjTraxroXZ...x ) aj(TTr"x.Oo... )/aj(TvanxCWxo...n)

= C wj-_1 (TrnxPo...xn)aj +l(Tlun"Xo0-.-xn)


balls of radius a(1 + e)naj(T r"xO.nXoX...z), where the constant C > 0 depends
only on the dimension of Rt. Now we calculate the Hausdorff t-measure of E,
using the smaller balls of radius a(1 + e)n aj(Tiranxxo 0...X) < a to cover the








-61 -
open set po-z...,nB(7ra"x, a). If {P: i E I} is an open cover for E where Pi is a

ball of radius ri, then we define I = maxiE ri and


= inf r t
III iEI

We have


74e< :E Cwi-1(j"rX o.X )a (T xxzoxo... x,)[a(1 + )naj(Trax Pzox...z,)]t
xEK
= (1 + )ntat( : "t(T-r0onx0...,X)
xEK
< (1 + e)ntC W(TTX zozi)wt(T-ra,2xrzXz)2) wt(Tra"xVP._z-z,)
_EK
= (1 + e)ntC exp[At(x) + At(ax) + + At(an-x)]
XEK
(1 + e)ntCPn(a, At,a')

< (1 + e)ntCPn(a, At, a)

< C exp(nte) exp(-2nte)

-+ 0,


as n -+ oo. Thus 7-t = 0. Since a can be arbitrarily small, p(t) = 0. It follows

that HD(E) < t. I

PRooF OF THEOREM 5.1: P(a, At) is a decreasing function of t's since E is

compact and At is strictly decreasing with respect to t. So there is only one real
number t such that P(a, At) = 0. Also, the unique t with P(a, At) = 0 is equal to


inf{t : P(a, At) < 0}.


Consequently, we have HD(E) < t where P(a, At) = 0. I







-62 -
5.3. The Lower Bound

PROOF OF THEOREM 5.2: Notice that for each t, the map A is H6lder contin-
uous on E. So there exists an equilibrium state p for At, in the sense that


P(, At) = hp(a) + f tdu.


Fix any p > 0, let's estimate the p measure of a ball B(z, p) centered at z with
radius p. For each x E E choose the unique n = n(x) > 0 such that the diameters
satisfy
diam(Un(x)) < p < diam(U,,_n(x)).

LEMMA 5.3.1. There exists a constant c > 0 such that for all x E E, the open
set Un(x)(x) is contained in a ball of radius p and contains a ball of radius cpl+1.

PROOF: It is clear that Un(x) is contained in a ball of radius p. Since the radius
of Un(x) decreases to 0 as n grows to infinity, without loss of generality we can
assume the maximum diameter R of all Ui is less than the number 6 given in
Lemma 5.2.1. Also pick r small enough that each Ui contains a ball of radius r.
Then Un(x) contains a ball of radius


r* ai,xox,(i}) .. a/,_ (7rcT "x)> ra x *x ..o. a n.* "i "x.


But on the other hand


p 5 diam(Un-_(x)) < al,,ozx(sax_) alX,_z,_l(,ran-lx)R,


which implies that


al,zozi(7rox) al,,n-lx,,(Or n) aOlp/R







63 -
where the constant ia = minyEE,i,j{al,ij(Y)} > 0 does not depend on either n
or x. Therefore Un(x) contains a ball of radius > rpl+ac +K/Rl+K. Writing
c = cal*+r/Rl+' a constant, then Un(x) contains a ball of radius cpl+ as
desired. I
For two points x, y E E, since the construction maps satisfy the open set
condition, Un(x)(x) and Un(y)(y) are either equal or disjoint. Let F C E be
a subset such that {Un(_x)(x)lx E F} is a disjoint collection which contains all

Un(x)(x) for x E E. Notice that {Utn(x)(x)x E r} covers E.

LEMMA 5.3.2. (Similar to Hutchinson (1981) 5.3 (a)) At most 31c-lp-tK of

{Un()(Z) E F} can meet B(z,p).

PROOF: Suppose that VI, ,Vm in {Un(x)(x) x E F} meet B(z,p). Then each
of them is a subset of B(z, 3p). By the definition of F the sets in the collection
{Un(x)(x)lx E r} are disjoint. Comparing the volumes we have


mJc1pl(l1+) < J31pl


where J is the volume of a unit ball in RI. Hence m < 31c-lp-. I
Let
Cn(X) = {y = (Yo, Y1, -) E6 IY = x0, ,yn = Xn}

be an n cylinder. Recall that p is a Gibbs measure (see Bowen (1975) for a
discussion or Bedford (1988) for a summary). There exists a constant d > 0,
with
p(Cn(x)) E [d-l, d] exp(-P(a, At)n + SnAt(x)),

for each cylinder Cn(x) in E. Thus


P(Cn(x)) E [d-l,d] exp(SnAt(x)),







- 64 -


since P(7, At) = 0. So,


p(Cn(s)) < dexp SnAt(x)

< d[al,,or1 (rTx) al,z-n-lzn (roanx)]t
< d[al,zozi (7Trx) al ,z,,- ((ran)lt/(1+x)]

< d [ diam (Un(x))/r]t/(l+)

Hence if n = n(x) we obtain


p(Cn(x)(_x)) < dpt/(l+)/rt/(l+c).


Noticing IrCn(x) D Un(x) n E, by Lemma 5.3.2,


lrp( B(z, p)) 5 [31c-ldr-t/(l+)]pt/(1+K)-IK.


By the Frostman lemma (see Chapter 2 or Kahane (1985) for a proof),


HD(E) > l.


That completes the estimate for the lower bound. |


5.4. Some Continuity in the C1 Topology

The construction of the self similar set Ep depends on the contracting dif-
feomorphisms { ij }. Now let us fix 0 < / < 1, and consider a C1 perturbation to
a C1+O conformal construction with diffeomorphisms {oij}, and obtain another







65 -
matrix of contracting diffeomorphisms {f4ij}, which is not necessarily conformal.
Denote the new self similar set for 4 by E,. Define


dcl(, ') = max dc{ ((ij, ij)},

where the later dci is the C1 metric. Note that for any K < f/, when 4 is
sufficiently C1 close to p, 4 must be C1+' and also K pinched. The following
theorem is a corollary of Theorems 5.1 and 5.2. It tells that at a Cl+4f conformal
construction satisfying the open set condition for self similar sets, the Hausdorff
dimension HD(EO) depends continuously on {f4ij} in C1 topology.

THEOREM 5.4.1. Let {pyij} be a matrix of Cl+ conformal construction diffeo-
morphisms for the self similar set Ep, satisfying the open set condition. For any
e > 0, there exists 6 > 0, such that for any C1+# construction 4 satisfying the
open set condition, with dci (V, 4) < 6, we have


IHD(Ep) HD(E)I
PROOF: Let


A,s(x>) = log w,(Tvoxx(7rrxs)),

A,,s(,x) = log ws(rfxoxIoB(7rax)),

be two real functions on E as defined in Definition 5.1.1. Let t be such that
P(a, Aq,t) = 0. Because pij's are conformal, the Hausdorff dimension of E'
equals t. Also, remark that P(a, AX,t+e) < 0 for any e > 0.
Now fix any e > 0. Let K = min{fl,e/41} and let


(5.4.1) e, = min{-P(a, A,t+c), P(a, A,t-e/4)} > 0.







66 -
Since p is C1+# and conformal, there is 6 > 0 such that the C'1+ diffeomor-
phism 4 is Cl+N and K pinched with JA,,(x) A~,,(x)l < e' for all s E [0,1], if

dci (c, 0) < S. Then

P(a, Ak,t+c) < P(7, Ap,t+E + e') < P(a, Ap,t+e) + e' < 0.

So

HD(E0) < t + e= HD(Ep) + e,

by Proposition 5.2.2.
On the other hand, by (5.4.1), when dci(<, 4) < 6, we have

P(a, A _,t-i/4) > P(a, Ap,t-e/4 e') > P(a, A _,,t-/4) e' > 0.

So we have some s > t e/4 with P(o, A,s,) = 0 since P(o, Ap,s) is strictly
decreasing with respect to s. By Theorem 5.2,


HD(E,) > s/(1 + I) In > s/(1 + e/41) l(e/41)

> s(l e/41) /4 s e/2 > t -e.

It then follows that


HD(E) 2 t-e= HD(EV) e,

as desired. |
We say a construction W with diffeomorphisms {pij} satisfies the strong
open set condition if there are open sets U1, U1 in R1 with Vij(Uj) C Ui for
all i, j. If the construction p satisfies the strong open set condition, then 4 must
also satisfy the strong open set condition if it is C1 close enough to p. Thus we
have obtained an immediate corollary of the above Theorem 5.4.1:







67 -
COROLLARY 5.4.2. Let {ij} be a matrix of C1+P conformal construction dif-
feomorphisms for the self similar set Eo, satisfying the strong open set condition.
For any e > 0, there exists 6 > 0, such that for any C1+ construction 4 with

dC (p, 0) < 6, we have


IHD(E,) HD(E,)I

Finally we have a remark on the continuity of the Hausdorff dimension in
the C1 topology at non-conformal constructions.

REMARK 5.4.3: The following example shows that if the conformall" condition
for the construction diffeomorphisms {pjij} fails, then the results in Theorem
5.4.1 and Corollary 5.4.2 can be false. The example is derived from Example
9.10 of Falconer (1990), pp 127-128.
Let S, T : R2 -+ R2 be given by


S(x,y) = (x/2,y/3 + 2/3), T,(x,y) = (x/2 + A, y/3)


where A E [0, 1/2) and (x, y) E R2. Let cpll = 321 = S, P12 = VP22 = To. Take

OA = {'ij,A} where b11,, = 021,A = S, and 012,A = 022,A = TA. The strong open
set condition is met for {f ij}. In fact if we let U1 = U2 = (-1/8,9/8)2 C R2
then pij(Uj) C Ui.
Let E(, EP, be the self similar sets for p and OA. Considering the projection
of Ep, to the x-axis, one knows that HD(E, ) > 1 for A > 0. But Eo is a Cantor
set contained in the y-axis with the Hausdorff dimension


HD(E() = log 2/log 3 < 1.








-68 -
Since dci(t/4, o) = A, so letting A -+ 0 we know the Hausdorff dimension is not

continuous at p. We notice that {Pij} are not conformal although { ij} and

{tij,A,} are all 3/4 pinched.















CHAPTER 6


THE HINON ATTRACTOR

In the 1970's H6non et al. conducted numerical experiments on the following

quadratic automorphisms of the plane, H : R2 -t R2 defined by


H(X, Y) = (1 + Y aX2, bX), where a, b are parameters ,


which "show" a "strange" attractor. We now call this map a Henon map. See

Henon (1976), H6non and Pomeau (1975) for numerical results. Say A is an

attractor of H if it is invariant under H and there is a neighborhood U of A

such that every point z E U has limn~ood(Hn(z),A) = 0. A Henon map is

regarded as the simplest smooth example that computer simulations indicate the

existence of a strange attractor. Since Henon's numerical experiments a number

of authors have studied the dynamical behavior of the Henon mappings. Devaney

(1986) gives an introduction to this subject. Milnor (1988) noticed many H6non

mappings are non-expansive, and the topological entropies of the H6non mappings

fall within [0, log 2]. In this chapter, we give an upper bound for the capacity and

the Hausdorff dimension of a H6non attractor.

Under the coordinate change suggested Devaney and Nitecki (1979), X =

x/a, Y = by/a we have the following convenient form of the Henon mapping:



H(x,y) = (a + by x2, ), where a, b are parameters.
69 -








70-
Benedicks and Carleson (1991) shows the following: Let W" = WU(z, H)

be the unstable manifold of H at the fixed point z of H in the first quadrant.

Then there is a b0 > 0 such that for all b E (0, bo) there is a set Eb of positive

one dimensional Lebesgue measure such that for all a E Eb:

(1)There is an open set U = U(a, b) such that for all z E U,


d(Hn(z), W") -4 0, as n -+ oo.


(2)There is a point z0 = zo(a, b) E WU such that {H"(zo)}n=0 is dense in

W".
1
We consider the case when b0 < -. Also, it is clear that WU is C" and one

dimensional. Thus

C(A) > C(A) > HD(A) > 1.

Now let R be the bound for A such that for every (x, y) E A we have Ixl, Iyl R,

and denote
2R+ 1
Zn = (xn,Yn) = Hn(zo), m =- 2
b
and
n-1 2 xi 1
A = limsup log(b + 21i+ -l
n--oo n m m2
i=0
Since

2Ix _I 1
b+ + 1 2b< 1,
m 2 -
we have A < 0. For the capacity of an attractor, we shall prove the following:

THEOREM IV. If A is a compact invariant attractor under the Henon map H,

as proved existing by Benedicks and Carleson (1991) then the upper capacity

A
C(A) <2+ < 2.
log m








71 -

Douady and Oesterle have an upper bound for the Hausdorff dimension of

attractors. Since HD(A) < C(A), our theorem IV also gives an upper bound for

the Hausdorff dimension. In the case of a Henon attractor our estimate is better

than Douady and Oesterl6's result applied to a Henon attractor.

Let R1 be the larger root of the equation x2 (1 + Ibj)x a = 0. Let

S = [RI,R11 x [R1, R1]. Then any point outside S on the plane will flee to

infinity under either the Henon map H or H-1, see Devaney (1986). In other

words, any invariant set A is contained in S, and thus bounded.

PROOF OF THEOREM IV: First take a look at the image of a ball under the

Henon map. Let |I(x,y)ll = max{x,y} and d be the induced metric. After a

coordinate change x = x/m, 9 = y the Henon map has the following form:



H(, y) = (ma + mby -1 2-).
m m


Let us denote the new coordinate system also by (x, y) from now on.

LEMMA 6.1. Let



B= {(x,y): x- uI < r, y-v < r}


be a ball centered at (u, v) of radius r in our metric. Then H(B) is contained in

the following rectangle:


r r
[ul 1, u1 + I] x [vl -, r + -]
m m


where

(ul, v1) = H(u, v), and I = mbr + 2 lu + -
m m








72 -

PROOF OF LEMMA 6.1: Since B is bounded by x = u r, y = v r, the image

of B, H(B) will be bounded by

u r 2
y = -, and x = ma + mbv my mbr.
m m

Pick any point (x, y) from the parabola


2 u r
x = ma + mbv my -mbr with y < -.
m m

Then
r ul r2
Ix u11 < mbr + 2 + -,
m m
which completes the proof for the lemma.

Therefore, H(B) can be covered by at most


rjuj r2 r
1 + (mbr + 2u + -)/- = m2b+ 2u + r +1
m mm

balls of radius r/m. Now let {Bi : i = 1, k} be a finite cover of A where

every ball Bi has a radius less than r/2. Since {zn : n = 0,1, } is dense in

A, one can pick some ni such that zn, E Bi. Then {B(zn,, r) : i = 1, k} is a

cover of A. Let us write in order: ni < n2 < .. < nk. Using Lemma, if a ball B

centered at (u,v) has radius r and we write H'(u,v) = (ui, vi) then Hn(B) can

be covered by at most
n-1
l (m2b+ 2ui + r + 1)
i=0
r
balls of radius --. Since {B(zn,,r) : i = 1, ,k} is a cover of A, the image

under the diffeomorphism Hn,


{HnB(zn,,r) : i= 1,... ,k}








- 73 -


is also a cover of A. Suppose N = max{ni : i = 1,.-- ,k}.


Notice that


HnB(zni, r) is covered by at most


i+n-1
H (m2b +2 an, ++ 1)


r
balls of radius --. But
mn


i+n-1
II (m2b+2lni +r+ 1)<
j=i


ni+n-1
S(m2b+ 21jl + r + 1)
j=0


N+n-1
< lI (m2b+2lxjl+r+l).
j=0


Therefore the number of balls of radius needed to cover A is at most
mn
m"


N+n-1
k- I (m2b+21xjl+r+l).
j=0


By Lemma 1.3.1, we have


C(A) < lim sup
n-*oo

= lim sup
n-+oo

= lim sup
n--oo


log k in-lj (m2b+ 2xI + r + 1)
log(r/mn)
log k + ENn-1 log(m2b + 21xj + r + 1)
n log m + log r
ENn-1 2b+log(m2xl+r+1)
j=0 ( 21 + r 1)
n log m


1 1
= lim sup 1
log m n-+oo n


N+n-1
E log(m2b+2xjl +r + 1).
j=0








- 74 -


Since x1;i < R for all i, and the function log is differentiable, there is a constant

C such that for all r with 0 < r < 1 and for all j > 0,


log(m2b + 21xj + 1) < log(m2b + 21xjl + r + 1)

5 log(m2b + 2xjl + 1) + Cr.


This implies by letting r -- 0 that


1 1
C(A) < lim sup-
log m n-0oo n


N+n-1
j=
j=0


1 1
= 2 + lim sup -
log m n-+oo n


log(m2b + 21xl + 1)


N+n-1

j=0


2mljl + 1
log(b + )
m2


1 n-1 2mlxl + 1
=2+ 1 lim sup log(b + 2-- )
log m n-oo = m
j=O
A
=2+
log m


That completes the proof. I















CHAPTER 7


SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS


In this paper we are mainly concerned with the Hausdorff dimension of

hyperbolic sets, the self similar sets and the H6non attractors. These are all

invariant sets under some smooth diffeomorphisms.

For a hyperbolic set of a diffeomorphism or a flow of diffeomorphisms, the

uniform stable and unstable Lyapunov exponents have been defined. Using the

uniform Lyapunov exponents we define a characteristic function. At some real

positive number t the characteristic function equals the value of the topological

entropy of the diffeomorphism on the hyperbolic set. We prove that t is an upper

bound for the Hausdorff dimension of this hyperbolic set. Technically, we use a

pinching condition to cope with the nonlinearity of the diffeomorphism, to prove

that the iterated image of a ball is somehow contained in the image of the ball

under the derivative of the iterated diffeomorphism. Some earlier results are thus

improved.

In Chapter 4 we have also given upper bounds for the Hausdorff dimension

of the transverse of a hyperbolic set with stable and unstable manifolds, using

the topological pressure on the hyperbolic set.

Several authors have studied the self similar sets of iterated mapping sys-

tems in the cases where construction diffeomorphisms are conformal. In chapter

5 we study the case where the construction diffeomorphisms are not necessarily

conformal. We give a new distortion lemma. Using topological pressure on a

75 -








76 -

shift space we give an upper estimate of the Hausdorff dimension, when the con-

struction diffeomorphisms are C1+" and satisfy a K pinching condition for some

K < 1. Moreover, if the construction diffeomorphisms also satisfy the disjoint

open set condition we then give a lower bound for the Hausdorff dimension. We

believe that the characteristic function A can be revised to achieve an even bet-

ter estimate for the Hausdorff dimension. We also obtain the continuity of the

Hausdorff dimension in the C1 topology at conformal constructions.

In chapter 6 we study the image of a disc under the iteration of a Henon map,

which enables us to find an upper bound for the Hausdorff dimension and capacity

of the Henon attractor. That improves some earlier estimates when applied to the

case of a Henon attractor. Milnor (1988) noticed that many Henon mappings are

non-expansive, and the topological entropies of the Henon mappings fall within

[0, log 2]. Since we cannot establish a distortion lemma similar to Lemma 3.4.2

for Henon maps, it is unknown to us whether the Hausdorff dimension of a Henon

attractor can be related to its topological entropy. It is still an open problem.
















REFERENCES


Bedford, T., Dimension and dynamics for fractal recurrent sets, J. London Math.

Soc., (2) 33 (1986), 89-100.


Bedford, T., Hausdorff dimension and box dimension in self similar sets, Proc. Conf.

Topology and Measure V (1988), Greifswald, 17-26.


Benedicks, M., and Carleson, L., The dynamics of the Henon map, Ann. Math.,

133 (1991), 73-169.


Besicovitch, A., and Ursell, H., Sets of fractional dimensions, V: On dimensional

numbers of some continuous curves, J. Lond. Math. Soc., 12 (1937), 18-25.


Bowen, R., Equilibrium states and the ergodic theory of Anosov diffeomorphisms,

Lecture notes in Mathematics 470 (1975), Springer, Berlin.


Caratheodory, C., Uber das lineare Mass von Punktmengen, eine Verallgemeinerung

das Lingenbegriffs, Nach. Ges. Wiss. G6ttingen, (1914) 406-426.


Dekking, F. M., Recurrent sets, Adv. in Math. 44 (1982) 78-104.


Devaney, R. L., An Introduction to Chaotic Dynamical Systems, The Benjamin

Cummings Publishing Company Inc., Menlo Park, California, 1986.


77-








78 -

Devaney, R., and Nitecki, Z., Shift automorphisms in the Henon mapping, Com-

mun. Math. Phys. 67 (1979) 137-146.


Douady, A., and Oesterl6, J., Dimension de Hausdorff des attracteurs, C. R. Acad.

Sci. Paris S&r. I Math., 290 (1980) 1135-1138.


Falconer, K., Fractal Geometry, Mathematical Foundations and Applications, John

Wiley and Sons, Chichester, England, 1990.


Fathi, A., Some compact invariant subsets for hyperbolic linear automorphisms of

torii, Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems, 8 (1988), 191-204.


Fathi, A., Expansiveness, hyperbocility and Hausdorff dimension, Communications

in Mathematical Physics, 126 (1989), 249-262.


Frederickson, P., Kaplan, J., Yorke, E., and Yorke, J., The Lyapunov dimension of

strange attractors, Journal of Diff. Eq. 49 (1983), 185-207.


Hausdorff, F., Dimension und iusseres Mass, Math. Annalen, 79(1919), 157-179.


Henon, M., A two-dimensional mapping with a strange attractor, Commun. Math.

Phys. 50 (1976) 69-77.


Henon, M., and Pomeau, Y., Two strange attractors with a simple structure, Lec-

ture Notes in Mathematics, 565 (1975) 29-68.


Hirsch, M., and Pugh, C., Stable manifolds and hyperbolic sets, Proceedings of the

Symposium in Pure Mathematics of the American Mathematical Society, vol.

XIV, (1970) 133-164.








79 -

Hurewicz, W., and Wallman, H., Dimension Theory, Princeton University Press,

Princeton, 1948.


Hutchinson, J., Fractals and self similarity, Indiana U. Math. J. 30(1981) 713-747.


Jiang, Y., On non-conformal semigroups, Preprint Article, State University of New

York at Stony Brook (1991).


Kahane, J., Some Random Series of Functions, Second Edition, Cambridge Univer-

sity Press, Cambridge, England, 1985.


Ledrappier, F., Some relations between dimension and Lyapunov exponents, Comm.

Math. Phys. 81 (1981), pp 229-238.


Ledrappier, F., and Young, L. S., The metric entropy of diffeomorphisms part II:

Relations between entropy, exponents and dimension, Ann. Math. 122 (1985),

540-574.


Mandelbrot, B., Fractals: Form, Chance and Dimension, W. H. Freeman, San

Francisco, 1977.


Mather, J., Characterization of Anosov diffeomorphisms, Indag. Math. 30 (1968),

No. 5.


Mauldin, R., and Williams, S., Hausdorff dimension in graph directed constructions,

Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 309 (1988) 811-829.


McCluskey, H., and Manning, A., Hausdorff dimension for horseshoes, Erg. Theo.

& Dyn. Sys., 3(1983), 251-260.








80 -

Milnor, J., Non-expansive Henon maps, Adv. in Math., 69 (1988) 109-114.


Smale, S., Differentiable dynamical systems, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 73 (1967),

747-817.


Temam, R., The Infinite Dimensional Dynamical Systems in Mechanics and

Physics, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1988.


Walters, P., An Introduction to Ergodic Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York, Hei-

delberg, Berlin, 1982.















BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH


I was born October 31, 1963, in Jiangsu Province, eastern China. I attended

the University of Science and Technology of China in Hefei, Anhui Province,

China, from 1979 to 1983. I was a graduate student at the Institute of Mathe-

matics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, from 1983 to 1987, and at the University

of Florida since 1987.


-81 -









I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.



Albert Fathi, Chairman
Professor of Mathematics



I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.



Louis Block
Professor of Mathematics



I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully ad quate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Phi phy.



a s Keesligg
ssor of Mathematics



I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.



Stephen umr rs
Associate Professor of Mathematics









I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.



David Groisser
Associate Professor of Mathematics


I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.



Robert Buchler
Professor of Physics


This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department
of Mathematics in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and to the Graduate
School and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of Doctor of Philosophy.


May, 1992


Dean, Graduate School
























UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1 22III IIIIII II l5I9i 688111111111111111
3 1262 08556 9688




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EZP5SW6RA_PLUV59 INGEST_TIME 2011-09-29T18:52:08Z PACKAGE AA00004742_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES


HAUSDORFF DIMENSION OF SOME INVARIANT SETS
BY
XIAO PING GU
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1992
sardVHsn ysLíou ¿o aíishiaihíi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It is a pleasure to thank Professor Albert Fathi for his supervision and valu¬
able advice. The author would also like to thank the Mathematics Department for
its support and the National Science Foundation for its partial summer financial
support.
11 -

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
ABSTRACT v
CHAPTERS
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. HAUSDORFF DIMENSION AND CAPACITY 7
2.1. Hausdorff Measure and Dimension 7
2. 2. Frostman’s Lemma 9
2. 3. The Capacity 13
3. THE HYPERBOLIC SET AND LYAPUNOV EXPONENTS ... 16
3. 1. The Hyperbolic Set 16
3. 2. The Topological Entropy 19
3. 3. The Uniform Lyapunov Exponents 21
3. 4. The Distortion of a Ball under a Diffeomorphism 23
3. 5. The Proof of Theorem I 29
3. 6. The Case of a C^ Flow 34
4. THE HYPERBOLIC SET AND TOPOLOGICAL PRESSURE . . 37
4. 1. The Hyperbolic Set Revisited 37
- iii -

4.2. Topological Pressure 40
4. 3. A Rough Estimate on HausdorfF Dimension 43
4. 4. Under the Pinching Condition 46
4. 5. The Transversals 49
5. THE SELF SIMILAR SETS 52
5. 1. The Self Similar Sets 52
5. 2. The Upper Bound 56
5. 3. The Lower Bound 62
5. 4. Some Continuity in the C* Topology 64
6. THE HÉNON ATTRACTOR 69
7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 75
REFERENCES 77
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 81
- iv -

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
THE HAUSDORFF DIMENSION OF SOME INVARIANT SETS
By
Xiao-Ping Gu
May, 1992
Chairman: Albert Fathi
Major Department: Mathematics
We study the Hausdorff dimension for some invariant sets. For a hyperbolic
set of a diffeomorphism or a flow of diffeomorphisms, the uniform stable and
unstable Lyapunov exponents have been defined. Using the uniform Lyapunov
exponents we define a characteristic function. At some real positive number
t the characteristic function equals the value of the topological entropy of the
diffeomorphism on the hyperbolic set. We prove that t is an upper bound for
the Hausdorff dimension of this hyperbolic set. Technically, we use a pinching
condition to cope with the nonlinearity of the diffeomorphism, to prove that the
iterated image of a ball is somehow contained in the image of the ball under the
derivative of the iterated diffeomorphism. Some earlier results are thus improved.
In Chapter 4 we have also given upper bounds for the Hausdorff dimension of
the transverse of a hyperbolic set with stable and unstable manifolds, using the
topological pressure on the hyperbolic set.

Chapter 5 deals with the self similar sets. The self similar sets of iterated
mapping systems have been studied thoroughly in the cases where construction
diffeomorphisms are conformal. We study the case where the construction diffeo-
morphisms are not necessarily conformal. We give a new distortion lemma for the
construction mappings. Using topological pressure on a shift space we give an up¬
per estimate of the Hausdorff dimension, when the construction diffeomorphisms
are C^K and satisfy a « pinching condition for some k < 1. Moreover, if the
construction diffeomorphisms also satisfy the disjoint open set condition we then
give a lower bound for the Hausdorff dimension. We also obtain the continuity
of the Hausdorff dimension in the C1 topology at conformal constructions.
We study the image of a disc under the iteration of a Hénon map, which
enables us to find an upper bound for the Hausdorff dimension and capacity of
the Hénon attractor. That improves some earlier estimates when applied to the
case of a Hénon attractor.
- vi -

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
For a topological space, especially a subset of an Euclidean space, a variety
of “dimensions” have been introduced and studied. Among them it has been
widely agreed that “Hausdorff dimension” is the most important one to use. In
the case of Euclidean spaces, the Hausdorff dimension agrees with their topo¬
logical dimension which are integers. Those subsets with non-integer Hausdorff
dimensions are called “fractals.” The sets we study here, i.e., the hyperbolic sets,
the self similar sets, and the Hénon attractors are mostly fractals. Understanding
their structures, in particular finding their dimensions, is one of the interesting
open problems.
In 1914, Carathéodory introduced the classical idea of using covers of sets to
define measures. That idea was adopted by Hausdorff in 1919 to define a special
measure which is now called a Hausdorff measure for his study of the Cantor
set. This special measure can be defined for any dimension. However, it either
vanishes or equals infinity in all but at most one dimension, which is now called
the Hausdorff dimension. In his 1919 paper Hausdorff found the dimension of
the Cantor set is log3 2, with a positive Hausdorff measure at that dimension, see
Hausdorff (1919). The properties of Hausdorff measure and Hausdorff dimension
have been thoroughly studied by Besicovitch et al.
In this paper, we study the Hausdorff dimension of the hyperbolic sets, the
self similar sets, and the Hénon attractors.
- 1 -

-2-
Generalizing the concept of a hyperbolic fixed point for a differentiable self
map of a smooth manifold, people introduced the hyperbolic sets. For con¬
venience, we call a differentiable one to one self map of a smooth manifold a
diffeomorphism. The hyperbolic sets have been studied by Smale (1967), Mather
(1968), Hirsch and Pugh (1970) among other dynamists. After the introduction
of Pesin’s theory, it was realized that Hausdorff dimension of invariant measures
was related to dynamics, and the relationship was studied in its final form by
Ledrappier and Young (1985). It is still an open problem to find the Haus¬
dorff dimension of an invariant set. Fathi (1989) gave an upper bound for the
Hausdorff dimension of the hyperbolic sets, using the topological entropy. His
result shows that the Hausdorff dimension can be upper bounded by a fraction of
the topological entropy over the skewness of the hyperbolic set. We use Fathi’s
idea. Technically, we use a pinching condition to cope with the nonlinearity
of the diffeomorphism, to prove that the iterated image of a ball is somehow
contained in the image of the ball under the derivative of the iterated diffeomor¬
phism. For a hyperbolic set of a diffeomorphism or a flow of diffeomorphisms,
the uniform stable and unstable Lyapunov exponents have been defined. Using
the uniform Lyapunov exponents we define a characteristic function. At some
real positive number t the characteristic function equals the value of the topo¬
logical entropy of the diffeomorphism on the hyperbolic set. We prove that t is
an upper bound for the Hausdorff dimension of this hyperbolic set. Some earlier
results are thus improved. Moreover, under the pinching condition, we use the
topological pressure to upper bound the Hausdorff dimensions of a hyperbolic set
and the transversals of the hyperbolic set with stable and unstable manifolds.
For the two-dimensional diffeomorphism with a horeseshoe as a basic set, our
upper bounds for the transversals agree with the identities given by McCluskey

-3 -
and Manning (1983). However, due to the increase of dimensions, one does not
expect as explicit an identity for the Hausdorff dimension as the one given by
McCluskey and Manning (1983).
Self similar sets of iterated mapping systems are a special kind of limit
sets. They have been studied thoroughly in the cases where construction dif-
feomorphisms are conformal. Essentially, the conformal constructions are one¬
dimensional and one has a simple formula for the Hausdorff dimension. We study
the case where the construction diffeomorphisms are not necessarily conformal.
We give a new version of distortion lemma. Using topological pressure on a shift
space we give an upper estimate of the Hausdorff dimension, when the construc¬
tion diffeomorphisms are C^K and satisfy a k pinching condition for some k < 1.
Moreover, if the construction diffeomorphisms also satisfy the disjoint open set
condition we then give a lower bound for the Hausdorff dimension. We also ob¬
tain the continuity of the Hausdorff dimension in the C1 topology at conformal
constructions.
We study the image of a disc under the iteration of a Hénon map, which
enables us to find an upper bound for the Hausdorff dimension and capacity of
the Hénon attractor. That improves some earlier estimates when applied to the
case of a Hénon attractor.
Our main results are the following four theorems. For the upper bound of
Hausdorff dimension of a hyperbolic set using uniform Lyapunov exponents, we
have
THEOREM I. Let f: U —» X be a C^ diffeomorphism with a compact hyperbolic
set K C U, where U is an open subset in the n-dimensional Riemannian manifold
X. Let /íf, ^2’”' uniform Lyapunov exponents of f; and let

-4 -
p^,P2,--- ^e e unstdble uniform Lyapunov exponents of f. Relabel the
numbers p*, - • • , pfll and • • • , //“2 as p j, • • • , pn with the order
0 > pi > P2 > •” > Pn-
Define t : [0, n] —» R the characteristic function by
t(s) = /!! + ••• + P[8] + (s- [s])/X[s]+i-
2A), or
lim Bk,
Let A = ent(f \E) be the topological entropy of f on K. Let D = t-1(—
D = n if pi + p2 H h pn > —2A. If AB2 < 1, where A = lim/l*., B =
and
Ak = max{max ||Tx/^||*,max \\Txf *||* },
x£K x€K
Bk = max{max||Tx/* \E, ||T, max \\Txf~k \Eu ||*},
xEK xEK
then the Hausdorff dimension HD(K) < D.
Theorem I is proved in Chapter 3. For the upper bound of Hausdorff di¬
mension of a C2 hyperbolic set and its transverse using topological pressure we
have
Theorem II. If f is C2, pinched, then HD(K) < t, where t is uniquely such
that
max{P(f\K,\t1) +P(f\K,tf2) = 0| ii +<2 = 0 = 0-
Iff is C2, pinched, and P(f\Ki^t) = 0> then
HD(K n W8(x,f)) < t.

-5-
/// is C^, pinched, and P(f\Ki^t) = ^en
HD(K D Wu(x,f)) < t.
Theorem II is proved in Chapter 4. For the self similar sets, we give upper
and lower bounds for the HausdorfF dimension. We have
THEOREM III. Let { similar set E, satisfying the k pinching condition for some positive number k < 1.
Suppose the derivatives of all { unique positive number such that the topological pressure P(er, A¿) = 0, then the
Hausdorff dimension HD(E) < t.
Let { E in an Euclidean space R}, satisfying both the k pinching condition for some
positive number k < 1, and in addition the disjoint open set condition. Suppose
the derivatives of all { positive number such that the topological pressure P( dimension
HD(E) > — U.
Theorem III is proved in Chapter 5. For a Hénon attractor, we have
THEOREM IV. Let 0 < b < 1/2. Suppose that A is a compact invariant attractor
under the Hénon map Ha ¡) and an orbit {zn = (xn,yn) = Hn(zo)} is dense in
A. Let R be the bound for A such that for every (x,y) € A we have |x|, |y| < R.
Denote m = ~y~ -, and
b
l^1, „ 2\xs\ 1,
A — lim sup — V log(6 H H k) < 0.
n—mx) n é—í m m¿
i=0

Then the upper capacity
< 2 + < 2.
log m
Theorem IV is proved in Chapter 6. Finally, we conclude this work by
discussing the difficulty of relating the HausdorfF dimension of the Hénon attractor
to the topological entropy of the Hénon map.
C{ A)

CHAPTER 2
HAUSDORFF DIMENSION AND CAPACITY
§2.1. Hausdorff Measure and Dimension
Let (X, d) be a metric space and let s be any non-negative real number. Let
K C X be a subspace of X. Let a be a collection of balls, with the union of all
balls containing K. Such a collection a is called a covering of K. For any real
number e > 0, if every ball in a has radius less than or equal to e, then a is called
an e covering of K. Suppose a = {L?¿ : i € 1} and each ball Bj has a radius rt\
We denote by Hl(K) the quantity
infV r?
iei
where the infimum is taken over all £ coverings of K. If another real positive
number 6 < e, then any 6 covering is also an e covering. Thus 'Hse{K) is no larger
than One can define the quantity
HS(K) = WmHse(K) = supH¡(K).
e>0
We shall call the quantity 7is(K) the Hausdorff s dimensional measure of K. It
can be easily verified that Hausdorff measure 7is is an outer measure with the
-7-

-8 -
following properties:
fts(0) = 0,
WS(UnAn) n
ns(A U B) = ns(A) + HS(B),
where A and B have disjoint closures. Moreover, for any real positive numbers
s,t,e, by the definition,
H^K) = inf
e coverings
iei
< £
t—s
inf
t coverings
iei
= £
t—S
K
(K).
Therefore, if s < i and 7i8(K) < +oo, then
H\K) < lim = 0 • HS(K) = 0.
This also implies that if t < s and HS(K) > 0, then
Hl{K) = Too.
Hence we have the following identity:
inf{s : li8(K) = 0} = sup{s : /HS(K) = oo}.
The Hausdorff dimension of the set K is defined by the above number, denoted
by HD(K). It is worth to notice that for an Euclidean space the Hausdorff

-9-
dimension equals the topological dimension, and the Hausdorff measure is equal
to the Lebesgue measure multiplied by a constant factor. Also, it is noticed that
many subsets of Euclidean spaces have non-integer Hausdorff dimensions. Such
sets are called fractals.
The Hausdorff measure was first introduced by Hausdorff in 1919 based on
Caratheodory’s idea of using covers to define measures. Since then many research
works have been done. Here we give a well-known Lemma of Frostman which will
be used later when estimating the Hausdorff dimension of the self similar sets.
See Temam (1988) or Hurewicz and Wallman (1948) for other properties of the
Hausdorff dimensions and Hausdorff measures, and examples of fractal sets.
§2.2. Frostman’s Lemma
The following lemma, Frostman’s lemma, is widely used when estimating
Hausdorff dimensions. It gives a necessary and sufficient condition for a subset
of an Euclidean space to allow a non trivial Hausdorff measure. For convenience
we use \B\ to denote the diameter of a set B. If d is the metric then
\B\ = sup{d(x,y) : x,y G B}.
LEMMA 2.2.1. Let (X,d) be an l dimensional Euclidean space or an l dimen¬
sional manifold, with the metric denoted by d. Suppose K C X is a compact
subset. Then K has a positive s dimensional Hausdorff measure if and only if
there can be defined a probability measure p on K, with the property that for all
balls B in (K,d) and some positive constant C, the measure satisfies
p(B)
- 10 -
PROOF: The “if” part is obvious. Given a probability measure p on K with
p(B) for all balls B, we see that probability measure is close to a Hausdorff measure.
In fact, for any given e covering {B¡ : i 6 /} where the radius r,- = |B¡\/2, we
have
Er¡ > ElB¡IV2í > E^)/2*0 s Á¡Q/*c = 1/2‘C.
iei iei iei
Thus the Hausdorff measure 7is(K) > 1/2SC > 0. That proves the “if” part.
To prove the “only if” part, let s > 0 be given such that 1-LS{K) > 0, and
let {Bi : i € 1} be any covering of balls. For any e > 0, one must have either
sup{|H,| : i € 1} < £ or sup{|f?¿| : i € 1} > £■ Thus it follows that
^2 \Bi\s > 7, where 7 = min{e8,V.8e{K)}.
iei
If e is small enough, then H¿(K) > 0, and also 7 will be strictly positive. There¬
fore we can fix some 7 > 0 such that for all coverings of balls of K, the sum
E ib¡is a 7-
iei
The same conclusion will be true if the balls are replaced by cubes.
For a positive integer m we define a dyadic interval of order m to be any
interval of the form [p2-m, (p+ l)2-m], where p is any integer. A dyadic cube of
order m is defined as a Cartesian product of dyadic intervals of order m. Consider
now a covering of K using dyadic cubes of order m. In order to introduce a
probability measure on K, let us distribute the mass 2~ms uniformly on each

-11 -
dyadic cube of order m that intersects K. We then get a measure /xâ„¢. On each
dyadic cube of order m — 1 we keep the measure if its mass does not exceed
2-s(m_1), or we multiply /1^ by a constant less than 1 in such a way that the
resulting measure has mass that way we get a measure For
each k > 1, the measure is obtained from in the same way, that
is
C-k-i = m-C-k
on each dyadic cube D of order m — k — 1, with
A(D)=mm{l,2-<"’-*-1V™_t(ü)-1}.
Clearly is independent of k when k is large enough. Then we can write
_ m
»m-k ~ V •
Notice the measure is carried by the dyadic cubes of order m which intersect
K and we have
for each dyadic cube D of order m — k where k = 0,1, • • •. Each point of K is
contained in some dyadic cube D such that the following equality holds,
Hm(D) = c\D\s, c = rs/2,
where l is the topological dimension of X. For each point of K let us consider
the largest such cube D: we get a covering of K by disjoint dyadic cubes, Dn.

- 12 -
Then using the property of 7, one has the following estimate for the norm of the
measure ¡im:
n n
We normalize the measure fim through //m/||//m||, still denoted as //m. We thus
get a probability measure /im with
/*ra(n) <7-'i£>r
for each dyadic cube D of order less than or equal to m, and [im is carried by
a given neighborhood of K if m is large enough. From the sequence {/zm,m =
1,2, • • • } we can extract a subsequence /¿mJ which converges weakly. The limit,
denoted by //, is a probability measure carried by K and
AD) <
for each dyadic cube D.
Now, given an interval of length 6, find k such that 2-*-1 < b < 2-^; then
the interval is covered by two dyadic intervals of length 2~*\ Given a ball of
diameter 6, it is covered by 2l dyadic cubes of order k. Therefore,
AB) for each ball B. Let C = 2*7~ * and then the “only if” part is complete. |

- 13 -
§2.3. The Capacity
There have been many other dimensions defined for a topological space be¬
sides the Hausdorff dimension. Among them is the capacity which some people
call fractal dimension and others call entropy dimension. Let (X, d) be any met¬
ric space. Let N(X,e) denote the minimal cardinality of an e covering of balls
of X. Note that N(X,e) is the minimum number of radii e balls needed to cover
X. When X is given, N(X,e) is a decreasing function of e. The capacity of X,
denoted by C(X), is given by
C(X) = linkup
£-+0 -loge
The capacity C(X) is also called the upper capacity. In the same way we define
the lower capacity C_(X) by
^^minfMM.
—v £— 0 -loge
Mandelbrot has suggested an alternative way of defining capacity. Let
CS(X) = limsupesAr(A', e).
£—►0
The upper capacity is given by
C(X) = inf{s > 0 : CS(X) = 0}.
As for lower capacity, if we let
CS(X) = liminfesAr(A', e).
£—►O

- 14 -
Then the lower capacity is given by
£(X) = inf{s>0 :£*(*) = 0}.
It is easy to verify the two definitions for upper and lower capacity agree
with each other. A covering using diameter e balls is indeed an -s covering. So
2
CS{X) = limin{e8N(X,e)
£—►0
> lim inf
£—►() £ coverings
ri
iei
= ns{x).
We have
HD(X) < C(X) < C(X).
It is worth mentioning that the inequality can indeed be a strict one. See Temam
(1988) for such examples. The following fact due to Fathi (1988) about capacity
is very useful. It rewrites the capacities as the limits of sequences.
Lemma 2.3.1. I/O < 9 < 1 and 6 > 0, then
C(X) = lim sup
£-+0
log N{X,e)
-loge
= lim sup
n—► oo
\ogN(X,0n6)
—n log 6
C(X) = lim inf
£—►0
log N(X,e)
— log £
= lim inf
n—>oo
log N(X,0nS)
—n log 6
PROOF: To simplify notations let 6 = 1 and define
n(e) = [logs/ log 0].

-15-
We have
lim n(e) = oo, and lim ^ £. .
e^O e^0 1ogH£)
= 1.
Since N(X, e) decreasing of e,
N(X,0n^) < N{X,e) < iV(X,H£)+1).
It is reasonable to assume e < 1. We have
logiVpr,fln(£)) log N(X,e) log N(X, fln(£)+1)
— log £ ~ — log £ ~ — log £
Now let £ —> 0, and we can obtain the equalities desired. |
For other properties of capacity, see Temam (1988).

CHAPTER 3
THE HYPERBOLIC SET AND LYAPUNOV EXPONENTS
§3.1. The Hyperbolic Set
In this chapter we give an upper bound for the Hausdorff dimension of
a hyperbolic set using the uniform Lyapunov exponents. By diffeomorphism
we mean a differentiable one to one map. Let U be an open set in a smooth
Riemannian manifold X and / : U —► X a C* diffeomorphism from U onto an
open subset of X. If x is in X, we denote by TxX the tangent space of X at x,
and by Txf : TxX —> Tj^X the derivative of / at x. More generally we denote
by TEX the restriction of the tangent bundle of X to a subset K of X.
DEFINITION 3.1.1. We say that a compact set K C U is hyperbolic for f if
f(K) = K and if there is a Tf invariant splitting of the tangent bundle E =
TEX = Es ® Eu such that
lim i log (max \\Txfk \E. ||) < 0,
k—>+oo K X6l<
and
lim \ log(max \\Txf~k \Eu ||) < 0,
¿—►+00 K xeK
where the norm is obtained from a Riemannian metric on X.
In the above definition we used the subadditivity of the two sequences
l°g(max \\Txf~k \Eu ||), and log(max||Txfk \E, ||)
- 16 -

-17-
to obtain the existence of the limits. The number r given by
r = maxi lim max IITxfk Ip» II*, lim max||Tx/-^ | r« ||*},
k-++oox€K k^+oox€K "
is called the skewness of K. Note that the notion of hyperbolicity does not
depend on the choice of the Riemannian metric. We will need the notion of
topological entropy, which is defined in the following section. Refer to Walters
(1982) for different definitions and properties. The definition of the Hausdorff
dimension is in Chapter 2 and the theory of Hausdorff dimension can be found
in Hurewicz and Wallman (1948). One can also use Temam (1988) as a reference
for the definition and properties of the Hausdorff dimension of a metric space.
The following theorem gives a better upper bound for Hausdorff dimension than
the one obtained by Fathi (1989), also see Fathi (1988) for similar results in
the case of hyperbolic linear toral maps. For related results in dimension 2, see
McCluskey and Manning (1983); and see also Ledrappier and Young (1985) for
Hausdorff dimension of invariant measures. Some earlier related works can be
found in Ledrappier (1981) and Frederickson, Kaplan, York and York (1983).
For the definition of Lyapunov exponents, see Section 3.3.
THEOREM I. Let f: U —> X be a C^ diffeomorphism with a compact hyperbolic
set K C U, where U is an open subset in the n-dimensional Riemannian manifold
X. Let p,Sy,p2i'‘‘ iPn\ be the stable uniform Lyapunov exponents of f; and let
pf,P2,--- ,Pn2 be the unstable uniform Lyapunov exponents of f. Relabel the
numbers /¿|, • • • , p,^ and //“, • • • , as pi, • • • , pn with the order
0 > pi > p2 > â–  â–  â–  > Pn-

-18-
Define r : [O, n] -» i? the characteristic function by
T(s) = n + •' • + /*[,] + (s - W)M[«]+i-
Let A = ent(f \E) be the topological entropy of f on K. Let D = r-1(—2A), or
D — n if pi + P2 H b pn > —2A. If AB^ < 1, where A = \\mAk, B = limf?*.,
and
Ak = max{max ||Tx/^||í,max \\Txf~^\\^},
xEK x£K
Bk = max{max||Txfk \E. ||T, max \\Txf~k \Eu ||T},
xeK XEA
then the Hausdorff dimension HD(K) < D.
The condition AB2 < 1 is called the pinching condition.
REMARK 1: In fact, after reordering, B = expp\. So B is the largest of these
Lyapunov numbers. Neither A nor B depends on the choice of the Riemannian
metric. Some people would prefer to define A — A\, B = B\, as Hirsch and Pugh
(1970). In the case when K — X, the condition AB^ < 1 implies that the stable
and unstable foliations of / are C1, see Hirsch and Pugh (1970). Remark also
that the condition AB2 < 1 is open in the space of C1 diffeomorphisms with C*
topology.
Remark 2: We choose sets of the form r\\zâ„¢rnf~*B(f*(x), a) to cover K where
x is in a (2m + 1, a) spanning subset (of K) whose cardinality grows according to
2A. The lifting of i)j~T^rnf~*B(f*(x), a) to the tangent space TxX looks roughly
like an ellipsoid whose axes are given by the uniform Lyapunov exponents, and
now the Hausdorff measure of K can be estimated by covering these ellipsoids by
balls. The pinching condition AB2 < 1 is needed in Lemma 3.4.2 to cope with
the effects of nonlinearity on these ellipsoids.

-19-
§3.2. The Topological Entropy
Let X be a compact topological space and let / : X —> X be a continuous
self map on X. We shall use open covers of X, denoted by a, /?,*••, to define
the topological entropy of / which we denote by ent(f).
If a, /? are open covers of X, then denote by a V (3 their join, which is the
open cover by all sets of the form A fl B where A € a, B £ /?. The join of any
finite collection of open covers of X is defined similarly. For the open cover a,
let N(a) denote the number of open sets in a, and let H(a) = log N(a). Since /
is continuous /-1a is also an open cover, with 7V(/-1o) < N(a). Thus we can
introduce the open cover /“*a and let an = H(\/^~q f-'a).
Now N(a V /?) < N(at) ■ N(f3), and hence H(a V /?) < H(a) + #(/?)• Thus
the sequence {an} has the subadditivity as follows:
H+n = ^vÜr'r’a) < ffivfco'r'a) + W* V^1 f~‘o)
< ak + an.
The subadditivity implies that
lim —an
n—too n
lim -H(f
n—+oo n
—k \/fi—1
VLo r'<*)
exists. We call it the entropy of / relative to the cover a, denoted by h(f,a).
For the continuous self map / of X, the topological entropy is given by
ent(f) = sup h(f,a)
a
where the supremum is taken over all the open covers of X.

-20-
For (X, d) a metric space, Bowen introduced the following alternative way
of defining the topological entropy. Bowen’s definition relates the topological en¬
tropy to the spanning set. This is used by Fathi (1989) to relate the upper bound
of the Hausdorff dimension of a hyperbolic set to the topological entropy of the
diffeomorphism. We also use this definition when relating the Lyapunov expo¬
nents and topological entropy to the Hausdorff dimension. See Walters (1982)
for a proof that in case of a metric space Bowen’s definition is equivalent to the
one using covers given above.
For each positive integer define a new metric on X by
Mx,y) = n d(f,(x),ft(y)),
where x,y £ X. Let K be a compact subset of X and let F C K. For a real
number e > 0 we say that F is an (n, e) spanning set of K if for every point x £ K
there exists y £ F such that dn(x,y) < e. A subset E of K is said to be (n,e)
separated if dn(x, y) > e for any distinct x,y £ E. Denote the smallest cardinality
of any (n, e) spanning set by r„(e, K, /); and denote the largest cardinality of any
(n,e) separated set by sn(e, K, /). It is easy to check that
rn(e,K, f) < sn(e,K,f) < rn(e/2,K,f).
Now let
r(e, K, f) = lim sup rn(e, K, /),
71—► OO
s(e, K, f) = lim sup sn(e, K, /).
n—►oo
and

-21 -
Notice that r(e,K,f) and s(e,K,f) have a common limit when e —> 0. The
topological entropy of /, denoted by ent(f), is given by the common limit:
ent(f) = sup lim r(e, K, /) = sup lim s(e, K, /),
ATCX £->0 KCX £->0
where the supremum is taken over the collection of all compact subsets of X.
§3.3. The Uniform Lyapunov Exponents
Let L : E —* E1 be a linear map between n-dimensional Euclidean spaces.
We write
ai(L) = sup inf \\L( FcE,dimF=i v?GF,|M|e=1
and üj¡(L) = ct\(L) • • • aj(T) for i = 1,2, • • • , n. One can verify that
a\(L) > c*2(T) > • • • > otn(L),
and that ojí(L) is the norm of the map Al(L) : AlE —»• A*^ obtained from L.
It follows that if L' : E1 —> E" is another linear map between n-dimensional
Euclidean spaces, then
íoí(L'L) < u>i(L') ■ u>i(L) for i = 1, • • • , n.
Consider Txf : and T*/-1 : —> EJ_1^xy As in Temam (1988),
we are going to define the “stable” and “unstable” uniform Lyapunov exponents
of / on K, which can be understood as the uniform Lyapunov exponents on the
stable bundle Es, and the unstable bundle Eu, respectively.
Let K be a compact hyperbolic set for the C1 diffeomorphism / with Tj ES®EU as an Tf invariant splitting. Denote that n\ = dim£s, and «2 = dimEu.
Thus the dimension of X is n\ -f = n. The uniform stable Lyapunov exponents
and Lyapunov exponents are defined as follows.

- 22 -
Definition 3.3.1. For 1 < i < n\ define wf(f) — supx^j^ u{(Txf\Ex). The
definition of implies that
< ¡¡¡(ft) .«*(/«).
That gives the subadditivity of\oguf(fk). By the subadditivity the limit
lim jlogü¡(fk)
ib—► OO AC
exists, and is denoted by vf. Let p\ = v\, and pf = vf — v*_i for 1 < i < n\.
We call those p¡ the uniform stable Lyapunov exponents of f.
A similar argument to above leads to the uniform unstable Lyapunov expo¬
nents, which are defined as follows.
Definition 3.3.2. For 1 < i < define ü^{f) = supx^j( u¡(Txf~^\Ex). The
definition of u>¡ implies that
*?(/p+’) <*?(/*) •¿.W-
That gives the subadditivity of\ogu^(fk). By the subadditivity the limit
lim ¿ logoff/4)
£—►00 AC
exists, and is denoted by v™. Let p^ = v\> and P% = v* — for 1 < i < ri2-
We call those p^ the uniform unstable Lyapunov exponents of f.
REMARK: It is worth to notice that the unstable uniform Lyapunov exponents
of / are equal to the stable uniform Lyapunov exponents of /— .
As a matter of fact, the uniform Lyapunov exponents p¿ and p“ are negative
numbers.

-23-
§3.4. The Distortion of a Ball under a Diffeomorphism
At each x 6 X, the tangent space TxX is a linear Euclidean space. As in
Fathi (1989), define ns : E —* Es, and iru '• E —> Eu to be two projections.
Let || • ||£;», and || • ||£u be norms on Es and Eu respectively derived from the
Euclidean structure of the tangent bundle E. For a vector v G Ex = TxX, our
max norm ||v|| is defined by
IMli? = max{||7rs(u)||f;,, ||||}•
We adopt this max norm throughout this chapter.
Locally around x in X is a neighborhood homeomorphic to an open subset in
i?ni+n2 = ftn Let Qx denote the origin of the linear space Ex = TxX = EX®EX.
Using the exponential map of some Riemannian metric on X, we can find a C°°
map 0 : U —> X, where U is an open neighborhood of the zero section in TX,
such that for each x in X, the map 0X = 0\uc\TxX is a diffeomorphism onto some
open subset in X. Also 6x(Ox) = x and the derivative of 0X at the origin 0X of
TxX is equal to the identity. Of course, the tangent space of Ex at the origin 0X
is identified to Ex itself. Since K is compact, we can fix a real number 6 > 0 for
all x in K that 0X : B(Ox,S) —» X is well defined , and
jIMI < l|X<«(t>)|| < 4||»||
when v € B(Ox,6). Choose 6'x > 0 for each x in X, such that
m(B(Ox,6'x)))c0f{x)(B(Of{x)l6)).

-24-
Since K is compact, we can fix a small 8' > 0 meeting the needs of all x € K
as 8X. If S' < 8, write 8 for minji^i}; noticing that 0X is still well-defined on
B(0X,8) for each x € K. Define for v € B(0X,8) the map
fx : B(0X, 8) -* Ef(x) by fx(v) = ofo 9x{y).
Since the derivative of 6X at 0X is equal to the identity, the derivative of fx at
the origin Ox is equal to Tx/, thus Tfx(Ox) = Txf : Ex —> Ef(x)-
Now assume that f : U —► X is a (72 diffeomorphism. Hence fx : B(0X,8) —►
Ej(x} is also (72. Using the compactness of K and Taylor’s formula, we can write
for v near 0X in TxX,
fx(v) = fx{Ox) + Tfx(Ox)(v) + gx(v) = Txf(v) -f gx(v),
f)
where ||<7x(u)|| < Z\||u|| for some positive number A not depending on x. Again,
since K is compact, by making 8 smaller if necessary, and A big enough, then
for any v € B(0X,8),
fx(v) = Txf(v) + gx(v),
where ||<7x(u)|| < ^d||u||2, and A > 0 is a constant not depending on x. Repeat
the above argument for /-1 to get
~fxl(v) = Txf~l(v) + gx(v),
where ||^z(v)|| < /i||u||2.
Lemma 3.4.1. Let 8 be as above. For any positive number e, there exists a
positive number tjq < 8, such that at each x € K under the maps fx and fx^,

-25-
when O < r¡ < tjq, the image of a ball centered at Ox in Ex satisfies
f,(B(0„V)) C (1 + e)Txf(B(Ot,ri)),
fxl(B(Ox,y)) C (1 +£)Txf-'(B(Ox,v)),
Proof: This follows easily from the compactness of K and the fact that the
map
(Txf)~lfx : B(Ox,6) —* TxX
has the derivative identity at Ox.
In order to prove Theorem I, we notice that Np.\,..., N pn are the uni¬
form Lyapunov exponents of and the topological entropy ent(f^\j^) = N •
ent(/|/f). So if we can show that Theorem I is true for then it is also true
for /. Since AB^ < 1, we can let N be large enough that A^B^ < 1. Without
loss of generality simply assume A\Bj* < 1. The next lemma tells the distortion
of balls under iterated maps. The pinching condition is used.
LEMMA 3.4.2. Define a subset in Ex by
Bm(Ox,a) = {u 6 Ex\\\~ffi(x)-~fx(v)\\ < a,
ffJ-i(xy~~fx\v)W <<*,i = 0,..., m — 1}
where a > 0 and m is a positive integer. Let f : U —» X be a C^ diffeomorphism
with a compact hyperbolic set K, and A\B^ < 1. Then for any e > 0, there exists
y > 0, such that
Bm(Ox,a) C (l+er{TfJlm{x)(B(Of-m{xya))nTfp{x)(B(Ofm{x),a))}

-26-
for all m = 1,2,and all x in K, when 0 < a < rj.
PROOF: Make e smaller if necessary so that
+ e) < 1, and B\{ 1 + e) < 1.
Let rj be the same as in Lemma 3.4.1, making it smaller if necessary so that
Ti < eA^ Lemma 3.4.1 gives
Bl(Ox,a) C (l+e)Tf(B(Of-¡{x),a))n(l+e)Tf-\B(Ofix),a)).
So the case m = 1 follows. Suppose that our conclusion is true for m at all x € K.
We show that it is also true for m + 1 at all 16Á' and complete the induction
process.
It is clear that fx(Bm+i(Ox, a)) C #m(0/(x),«), and so
Bm+l(Ox,ot) C (fx) ^(Bm(0j^x}, a)) = ff(xj(Bm(0a)).
Thus for any v € Bm+i(Ox,a), we can have
7/(x)(U) = v’ w^ere u € Brn(Of(x},a) exists.
Applying the induction hypothesis at the point f(x) for m, we obtain that
« e (l + er{r/m(5(0/-m+iWla))nr/-m(5(0/m+iW,a))},
and in particular we can pick some
W\
-27-
with (1 + e)mT/ m(u>i) = u. Moreover,
and
HMU)II < (1 + e)mBâ„¢a
(because ||Tfm \E. || < B? and \\Tf~m \Eu || < ). It follows that
IMI < (1 + e)mBâ„¢a < a < 8,
and thus
//¿)(u) = T/(x)/_1(w) + 0/(*)(«)
is well-defined, with
Il9/(,)(«)|| < ^||«||2 < A • (1 + £)2mBfma2 < e(l + e)m • aV"_1-
Since maxxeK \\Txf\\ < A i, we have ||7i/-1(u)|| > /1^' ||u|| for all x € K and
v € Ex. Thus
T,r\B(Ox,a)) D VB(0/-.(l),a),
and
Txf-n(B(Ox,a)) D A¡nB{Of-nit),a)
follows. Hence
»/(*)(“) €£(1 +e)mA-[m-1(B(0I,a)) C e(l + e)»>r/-»-1(fl(0/m+IW,a))>

-28-
which allows us to pick some W2 € B(0 fm+\^xy a) satisfying
£(i+£)"*Tr(m+1)w=«/(,)(«)•
Setting w = (1 +e)-1(tt;i + ewz) € B(0jm+\(xy a), then
v = Tf~\{ 1 + £)mT f~m(wi)) + e(l + e)mr/-(m+1)(n;2)
= (1 +er+lTf-m-\w),
showing that
V € (1 + e)m+1T f~(m+l\B{Ofm+i(xya)).
Hence we conclude that at x E K, one has
fWl(0*,Q) C (1 +£)m+1rr(m+1)(fl(0/»+.w,a)).
Similarly, applying induction hypothesis at /_1(x) and considering the re¬
lation
Ox) °)) C Hm(Oy-i^x),«),
one obtains another relation
¿Wl(0*,a) C (1 +£)m+1T/m+1(B(0/-,„tl,w,Q)).
So the induction hypothesis holds for m-fi 1, finishing the proof of Lemma 3.4.2. |
In the proof of our Theorem I, we use the following fact:

-29-
LEMMA 3.4.3. If L : E —> F is a linear isomorphism between two n dimensional
linear Euclidean spaces, and B = B(0,a) is a ball of radius a, centered O in E,
then the image L(B) of B under L is an ellipsoid of axes (a • a\(L), ...,a • an(L))
in F.
Proof: See Temam (1989).
Lemma 3.4.3 shows that nsTfmB(Ox,a) and nuTf~rnB(Ox,oi) are ellip¬
soids with certain axes in ESjm^ and Ej-m^xy respectively.
§3.5. The Proof of Theorem I
First, for any e > 0 , we can find some integer N > 0, such that when
k > N, A¡(..Bjj; < 1 and
Ílog¿,J(/t)<(/If + £> + ••• + (/■? + «)
for i = 1, • • • , ni , as well as
¿log for i = 1, • • • , «2-
It suffices to prove the theorem for f^ since the entropy and the uniform
Lyapunov exponents of f^ are those of / multiplied by N. So without loss of
generality we simply assume that
log (/) < (p\ + e) H (pi + e)
for i = 1, • • • , n i and
log<*>“(/) < (p\ + £) H h {Pi + e)

- 30 -
for i = 1,- • • ,«2 , and A\Bj < 1. Relabel {/z|,/zJ1} to {pi, • • • , with
0 > /ii >•••> Jin-
Making e smaller if necessary assume that fa + e < 0 for i = 1 , ••• ,n. Let
Pi = exp (pi + e) < 1 for i = 1,2, ••• ,n, and let = exp(/z? + e) < 1 for
i = 1,2, • • • , n\, as well as = exp(/z“ + e) < 1 for i = 1,2, • • • ,7*2- Make e
even smaller if necessary so that (1 + e)pi < 1, for i = 1, ■ • • , n.
Define fx and Bm(Ox,a) as in Section 3.4. By Lemma 3.4.2, there exists
rj > 0, such that when a < tj,
Bm(0„c) C (\ + c)m{T,-„{tya))OTrm(B(0fm(t),a))).
Using Lemma 3.4.3, we know that nsTfm(B(0is an ellipsoid in Ex
with axes {api,m(a:), • • • ,a/>„1)m(x)}, where p,jm(x) = a,(T'/m I#*) for i =
1, • • • , nj; and it follows that
Pl,mix)--- Pi,m(x) = Ui(Txfm\E>x) < (Pl---Pi)m-
In the mean time one can check that nuTfm(B(0j
—m(x) ’ a)) D nuB(Ox,a).
Similarly, we know that 7tuTf~m(B(0f-m^,a)) is an ellipsoid in Ex of axes
j aPn,m{x)} where Pnl+itm = at(T/_m | ££), with
Pni+l,m(x) • • • Prii+itm(x) — (Pi ''' P?)*”’
and 7tsTf~m(B(0fm(x},a)) D 7rsB(Ox,a). Notice that we require
Pl,m(x) > ... > and />ni+i,m(x) > ... > p„,m(x).

-31 -
Therefore the set T fm{B(0 f-m(xya))C\T f m(B(Ofm(xya)) in Ex = Ex ® Ex
is a product of two ellipsoids, one in Ex and the other in Ex, with axes
{aPl,m(x)i''' > aPn\,m(x)}, and {apm+bmi®)?''' ,opn)m(x)}
respectively. By the following fact, if we renumber those PitTn(x), such that
> ••• > Pn,m{x), and note that {pi,--- iPn} is actually a reshuffle
of these pf, p“ so that p\ > ••• > pn, we can still get pitm{x)' ’' Pi,m{x) —
(Pl"*Pi)m for i = l,--- ,n.
FACT. Suppose that a\ > ■ • • > any and ani+l > > ani+n2> and that b\ >
••• > bnx and bny+\ > ••• > ftni+n¡2. Assume that a\---ay < b\---b¡ for
i — 1, • • • , and Gni+1 • • • any+j < ftnj-f 1 '' * i +j for j = *'' i n2- U we
reshuffle those a¡ and bj to get a'^ > • • • > a'ny+ri2 and ftj > • • • > ftj, _|_n , we still
have a'i • • • a'- < • • • ft'- /or i = 1, • • • , n\ + «2-
As a product of two ellipsoids, the set
Tfm(B(Of-m{x),a) n Tf-m(B(Ofm{x),a))
is covered by no more than
^ ‘ Pl,m(x) '' ’ Pj—l,mix)/(Pj,m{x)y
balls of radius apjm(x), where J is a constant depending on the dimension n and
the compact set K. Hence by Lemma 3.4.2, Bm(Ox,C() is covered by no more
than
J ' Pl,m{x) "' ' Pj—l,m(x)/(Pj,m{x)y

- 32 -
balls of radius (1 + e)matpj¡m(x). Since K is compact, we can find a constant
C > 0 such that for any x in K, a subset of the form Ox(B(v, /?)) with ¡3 < 6 in
X can be covered by a ball of radius Cfl of X for the metric on X obtained from
the Riemannian metric, where v € B(0X,6). So Ox(Bm(Ox,ct)) can be covered
by no more than J ■ p\)m(x) • • • Pj-\,m{x)l(pj,m(xW~^ balls of radius
C( 1 + e)mapjim(x) < <7(1 + £)"Vr« < Ca.
Denote by N(m, a) the minimum number of sets of the form Ox(Bm(Ox, a))
needed to cover K. We let M be a subset of K such that
{Ox(Bm(Ox,a)) : x 6 M}
covers K and the cardinality of M is N(m,a). Since
m
Qx{Bm{Ox,at)) D fl rW(x),alO),
i——m
by taking f~m, we know
N(m,a) < r2m+i(a/(7,Rr),
where r2m+i(a/C, K) is the smallest cardinality of a (2m + 1, a/C) spanning set
for / \x (see Section 3.2 or Walters (1982) for the definition of a spanning set).
When m is large enough, and a is small enough, we have
r2m+l(a/C,K) < exp m(2A + e),

- 33 -
where A is the topological entropy of / over K. Thus
N(m, a) < exp m(2A -f e).
Pick the integer j such that j — 1 < D < j. Let e' = e(n + 3)/(—fij) > 0
be fixed and let s = D + e'. Here the number e is chosen small enough that
j — 1 < s < j. If {fij : i £ 1} is an open cover for K, where B¡ is a ball of radius
r,-, we define
|/| = max |r,-|.
tel
By definition (see chapter 2), the Hausdorff pre-measure 7t* is given by
¡i>j X/
iei
and has been proved to be a non-increasing function of e’s. Therefore,
HcJK) = inf £r? < ,,(C(1 +£)mai,f,s)
IH i€l
- f„. \Pj,m\x)) * [(7(1+6) a\
x£M [Pj,m(x)V 1
[(7(1 + e)ma]s • J
< exp[m(2A + e)] • expm(¿q + ... + nj_i + (s - j + 1)//j + se)
• exp[m log( 1 + e)] • CsJas
= exp m[2A + m + ... + Hj-\ + (s ~ 3 + 1 )nj + (1 + s)e + log(l + e)] • CsJas
= expm[(s + l)e + 2A + t(D) + e'Hj + log(l + e)] • CsJas
< expm[(s + l)e + e'fij -(- e] • CsJas
< expm[(n + 2)e + (—n — 3)e] • CsJas
= exp(—me) • CsJas
0,

-34 -
as m —» oo. Thus H^^K) = 0, if a is small enough. So
ns(I<)= \im'H8Ca(K) = 0.
ol—►U
Therefore
HD{K) Let £ —> 0, we get HD(K) < D as desired. The proof of Theorem I is thus
completed. |
§3.6. The Case of a C2 Flow
Let {/* : t € R} be a C2 partial flow on the Riemannian manifold X, and
let K be a compact invariant hyperbolic subset of ft. See Fathi (1989) for the
definitions. We have results similar to Theorem I about flows. Let and ny
be the dimensions of the stable and unstable foliations. Let us define stable and
unstable uniform Lyapunov exponents for a C2 partial flow ft. The subadditivity
is used for the existence of limits.
DEFINITION 3.6.1. For 1 < i < n\ and 1 < j < n *Uf‘) = ui(Txf,\E,x),a](ft) = sup
X It follows that for all p > 0 and q > 0,
and

-35-
So by subadditivity both
lim ylogwf(/*) and lim jlogwj^/*)
t—►+OO l l—►-1-00 l
exist, and are denoted by vf, vf. Lei ¿/f = uf (y™ = vf), and y? = uf —1/?_1 /or
1 < i < n\ (respectively, y1- = i/“ - i/“_j /or 1 < j < n uniform stable, or unstable Lyapunov exponents for ft.
THEOREM 3.6.2. Let /* be a C^ partial flow with a compact hyperbolic set K
in the n-dimensional Riemannian manifold X. Let y^, y^,..., yf¡ be the stable
uniform Lyapunov exponents of fl; and let y™, y%,..., y„2 be the unstable uni¬
form Lyapunov exponents of /*. Relabel the set {/¿|,--- ,y^• ,y„2} as
{/^l, * * * ,Hn} with
0 > y\ > y2 > ••• > yn-
Define r : [0, n] —+ R by
t(s) = yi + ... + /zH + (a - [s])/i[s]+1.
Let A = eni(/* |^) be the topological entropy of /* on /Í. Lei
L> = t-1(—2A),
or D = n if y\+ y2 + — + yn > -2A.
If AB^ < 1, where A = lim/l¿, 5 = lim#*, and
At = max{max ||T,J;/<|| <, max ||TX/ *||í},
zGA zeA"
= max{maxHTx/ |^. ||«,mwc||r*/-i |^« ||<},
zeA zgAT

- 36 -
then the Hausdorff dimension of the hyperbolic set K of the flow satisfies
HD(K) The proof of the above Theorem, which is about the case of follows, is much
the same as that of our Theorem I.
REMARK: The geodesic flows of 1/4 pinched negatively curved Riemannian met¬
rics on compact manifolds satisfy the hypothesis of our Theorem 3.6.2 for any
subset of the unit tangent bundle which is invariant under the geodesic flow.

CHAPTER 4
THE HYPERBOLIC SET AND TOPOLOGICAL PRESSURE
§4.1. The Hyperbolic Set Revisited
Now let us use the topological pressures on a hyperbolic set to bound the
HausdorfF dimensions of the hyperbolic set and its transverse with the stable
and unstable manifolds. For convenience in this chapter, we use an alternative
definition of the hyperbolic set. Mather has pointed out that by choosing an
appropriate Riemann metric, any set that is hyperbolic according to the previous
chapter will satisfy the definition we give here. We prove Theorem II given in
the introduction here by proving Theorems 4.2 through 4.4. Our Theorem 4.1 in
this chapter gives a generally rough estimate, and we will see the introduction of
the pinching condition enables a better estimate.
Let U be an open set in a smooth Riemannian manifold X and / : U —> X
a diffeomorphism from U onto an open subset of X. If x G X, we denote by TxX
the tangent space of X at x, and by Txf : TxX —> Tj^X the derivative of / at
x. More generally we denote by T^X the restriction of the tangent bundle of X
to a subset K of X.
DEFINITION 4.1.1. Let K c U c X be a compact subset of a Riemannian
manifold X. We say that K C U is hyperbolic for a diffeomorphism f if f(K) =
K and if there is a Tf invariant splitting of the tangent bundle E = Tj^X =
- 37 -

-38-
Es © Eu such that
■■•«{Iiii/Mi.pvr1 Ieu id < i>
xG/v
where the norm is obtained from an appropriate Riemannian metric on X.
We call r = ma*xeK{\\Txf \E‘ ||,||3®/-1 |eu ||} the skewness of K. This
definition of hyperbolicity is slightly different from the ones given in the previous
chapter and Fathi (1989). However, if K is hyperbolic in the sense of Chapter
3, we can adapt a metric to K as Mather (1968) did. Then under this Mather
metric, K is hyperbolic under our definition here. Refer to Walters (1982) or
the next section of this chapter for the definition of the topological pressure for
a function A and the map f\j( : K —* K, and the variational principle. In this
chapter, we let the real valued negative function A : U —> R be defined by
A(x) = logmax{||Tx/|£i||,||ra;/_1|i;u||},
Clearly the function A is continuous if / is . For the Hausdorff dimension of a
hyperbolic set K, first we have
THEOREM 4.1. If f is a C1 diffeomorphism with a hyperbolic set K, and at
some real positive value s we have the topological pressure P(f\]{,s\) = 0, then
HD(I<) < s.
We say / satisfies a pinching condition if AB2 < 1 where
A = m^{||TI/||,||TIrI||l|}
xEK
and B = maxa.e^'{A(x)}. We also define two characteristic functions Xs and Au
as follows.

-39 -
For L : E —*■ F a linear map between n dimensional normed spaces E and
F, we write
«*(£)= sup inf |\L ScE,dimS=i IMIfi—l, and UJ{(L) = a.\(L) • • • a¡(L) where i = l,--- ,n. Here L induces A1 L : AlE —♦
Aand in fact u>i(L) = || A* L\\p. If t is not an integer, we write
ut(L) = ai(L)---
It is noticed the linear map L sends any ball of radius r in E to an ellipsoid in F
with axes given by (ra\(L), • • • , ran(L)) .
Now consider the splitting of TpX = Es ® Eu. Suppose that dim£s =
nj, Eu = n,2, where n\ + = n. When x (E K define
\s(t,x) = \ogu>t(Txf\E*) for t e [0, nj],
and
Au(t,x) = logvtlTxf-^Ex) for t € [0,n2].
Write A“(a:) = Au(t,x) and A*(x) = As(t,x). Under the pinching condition and
using functions Xs and Au, we have
THEOREM 4.2. If f is a C^, pinched, diffeomorphism with a hyperbolic set K,
then there is a unique real non-negative value t such that
m&x{P{f\K, AfJ + P(f\K,tf2)\h + t2 = t} = 0.
Moreover the Hausdorff dimension of the hyperbolic set K satisfies HD(K) < t.
We also give the upper bounds for the Hausdorff dimension of the transver¬
sals of the hyperbolic set to the stable and unstable manifolds.

- 40 -
THEOREM 4.3. If f is a C2, pinched dijfeomorphism with a hyperbolic set K,
and at some real positive value t we have the topological pressure P(f\jc, A|) = 0,
then the Hausdorff dimension in the direction that transverses to Wu(x,f) is
given by
HD{K n Ws(x,f)) < t.
Theorem 4.4. If f is a C2, pinched diffeomorphism with a hyperbolic set K,
and at some real positive value t we have the topological pressure P(f\i{, A“) = 0,
then the Hausdorff dimension in the direction that transverses to Ws(x,f) is
given by
HD(K fl Wu(x,f)) < t.
REMARK: The inequalities in Theorems 4.3 and 4.4 are equalities when K is the
basic set of a two dimensional horseshoe. This fact can be found in McCluskey
and Manning (1983).
§4.2. Topological Pressure
We first give the definition of topological pressure using the open coverings.
Then we also give the definition using either spanning sets or separated sets.
Both definitions are equivalent. See Walters (1982) for more details and the
variational principle. The concept of topological pressure in this type of setting
was introduced by Ruelle and studied in the general case by Walters.
Let / : X —► X be a continuous transformation of a compact metric space
(X,d). Let C(X,R) denote the Banach algebra of real-valued continuous func¬
tions on X equipped with the supremum norm. The topological pressure of / will
be a map P(/,.) : C(X, R) —♦ R U {oo} which will have good properties relative

-41 -
to the structures on C(X,R). It contains topological entropy in the sense that
P(f, 0) = ent(f) where 0 denote the member of C(X, R) which is identically zero.
Let A 6 C(X,R). For x 6 X denote SnA(ar) = A(/*x). Let a be an
open cover of X and denote
qn(fi A, a) = inf{ V' inf exp((S'nA)(x)) : ¡3 is a finite subcover of VJLq1 / *a},
Pn(f, A, a) = inf{ sup exp((5nA)(x)) : /? is a finite subcover of V^Tq1 /-io}.
Bepx£B
Notice that qn{f, A, a) < pn(f, A, a) and the subadditivity of logpn(/, A, a) is due
to the relation p„(/, A, a) ■ pm{f, A, a) > pn+m(/, A, a). Let
q(f, A, a) = lim sup - log ?„(/, A, a),
n—too n.
p(/, A,a)= lim -logpn(/,A,a).
n—► oo n
Recall |q| denotes the largest diameter of sets in a. Write
a
p(f, A, e) = sup{p(/, A, a) : a is an open cover of X, |a| < e}.
a
Now both sides of the following identity gives the quantity P(f, A) which is called
the topological pressure:
limo(/,A,e) = limp(/,A,e).
c—>0 e-+0
We have defined the (n,e) spanning set and the (n,e) separated set in the
previous chapter. Now we can use them to give alternative definitions of the

- 42 -
topological pressure. Let
Qn{f, A,e) = inf{^ exp((S'nA)(x)) : F is (n,e) spanning for A-},
xeF
Pn(f,\,e) = sup{£ exp((5'nA)(x)) : F is a (n,e) separated subset of X}.
xeF
Then define
Q{f, A, e) = lim sup - log Qn(f, A, e),
n—*-oo n
P{f, A,e) = lim sup — log Pn{f, A, e),
n—+oo W
Now the topological pressure is given by
P(/,A) = lim Q(f,X,e) = lirn P(/, A,e).
£—►O e-+0
The variational principle shows the topological pressure can be computed
using / invariant measures.
Theorem 4.2.1. (The Variational Principle) Let f : X —* X be a continuous
self mapping of a compact metric space and A a real valued function defined on
X. Then the topological pressure can be given by
P(/,A) = sup{/i^(/) + J A dp : p e M(X,f)}
where h^(f) is the entropy of f as a map that preserves the measure p and
M(X,f) is the set of all measures invariant under f.
See Walters (1982) for an introduction to the properties of the topological
pressure, as well as the proof of the variational principle and equilibrium states,
and how pressure determines the invariant measures.

- 43 -
§4.3. A Rough Estimate on Hausdorff Dimension
Lemmas 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 are obvious.
Lemma 4.3.1. If f : K —> K with K compact and Ai < A2 are two real functions
on K, then P(f, Ai) < P(f, A2).
LEMMA 4.3.2. If A is a negative real valued function then P(/|/^-,sA) is a strictly
decreasing, continuous function of s.
For x € K let TxX = E%. ® E% be the tangent space and x* : TxX —►
7rx : TxX —> Ex be the projections. If u € TxX, and if 11(17)11> ll7rz(u)ll£'“
are norms induced from the adapted metric, then the norm
HI = max{||7r*(v)||£., ||xj(t;)||^}
is equivalent to the one induced from the adapted metric. With the new norm K
is still hyperbolic under our definition. Let 0X : B(0X, a) —♦ X be the exponential
map. Since K compact and since T0X = I the identity, we can find 8 > 0 such
that 9X is well-defined for all x € K and a < 8, with
i||w - w\\ < d(9x(v), 0x(w)) < 2||u - «>||.
Define fx = lifting °f /• Define the set
Bm(Ox,a) = {v6 Ex\\\~fnxy.:fx{v)\\ < a,
ffj-<(xyfxl(v)\\ = 0,..., m — 1}
as in Chapter 3.

- 44 -
PROPOSITION 4.3.3. Let f, K, be as in Theorem 3.1. If P(f\j(,sX) < 0, then
the Hausdorff dimension HD(K) < s.
PROOF: Write f-r(i>) = Txf(v) -f g(v). Let e be a small number such that
e < —P(f,sX) • ia.
There is 6 > 0 with fxB(Ox,a) C (1 + e)TxfB(0x,a) when a < 8. Thus
5m(0x,a) C (1 + e)m5(0x,rm(a:)) where
rm(x) = a • max{exp(SmA(x)),exp(SmA(x))},
with SmX(x) = A(/~*x), and S'mA(x) = A(/*x). Notice that
rm(x) < a[exp5mA(x) + exp SmA(x)].
Let K\ C K be a maximal (2m + l,^a) separated subset. Then for any
xeKD Kf, there exists y G K\ such that
max{d(x,y), ■ • ■ , d(/2m+1(x), /2m+1(y))} < ia.
So {0xf~mBm(0fm(xj, 2a)\x G K\} is an open cover for K. Since Of = fO,
it follows that f~m0fm(x}Bm(0j-m(xy2a)\x G K\) is an open cover for K. Let
K2 = fmK\ which is clearly (m, |a) separated. {0xBm(0x, 2a)|x G K2] is also
an open cover for K. Let the number M be large enough and 8 small enough
that
m
log Pm(/, sX, < P(f, sX, ia) + se/2 < P(f, sX) + se < -2se.

-45-
Here as in section 4.2,
Pm(f, s\, ja) = sup{ exP x£E
1
(m,-a) separated subset of K},
and
P(/,sA ia) = limsup — logPm(/,sA,-J-a)
4 m—*oo m 4
P(f,s\)= limM/.sA ia).
a—►() 4
Since P(f ^sA) = P(f,sX) < 0, we can require
log Pm(/ ^sA, ^a) < —2se.
m
Thus we have
Pm(f,sX,-a) < exp(—2mse) and Pm{f ^sA, -a) < exp(—2ra.se).
In particular, since Pm{f,s\, \a) is the supremum,
exp(S'msA(a:)) < exp(—2mse), and exp(5'msA(x)) < exp(—2mse).
xeK2 x€K2
Now consider the HausdorfF s measure corresponding to the open cover
{^a;5m(0x,2a)\x €

-46-
The radius of each open set 0xBm(0x, 2a) is less than 4a. Let a < 8/2. Thus
H‘4a(K)< Y, |0rflm(O*,2a)|s
xeK2
<4S Y, |5m(0x,2a)|s
x€K2
< 4s ^2 C20)^1 + e)sm(exp 5'mA(x) + exp S'mA(x))
x(EK2
< (8a)s exp(smg)2exp(—2mse)
= 2(8a)s exp(—sme) —► 0,
as m —> oo. So H\a(K) = 0; and HD(K) < s. |
Lemma 4.3.1 and Proposition 4.3.3 give a proof of Theorem 4.1.
Proof of Theorem 4.1: Let t = inf{s| P(f\K,s\) < 0}. Then HD(I<) < t.
It is clear that P(/|/^,tA) = 0 and t is unique in view of Lemma 4.3.1. |
§4.4. Under the Pinching Condition
The following results will prove Theorem 4.2.
PROPOSITION 4.4.1. Let f be C2, pinched, and K its hyperbolic set. If t is such
that
, max {P(f\K, \stl) + P(f\K, AJ)} < 0,
then the Hausdorff dimension HD(K) < t.
PROOF: By Lemma 3.4.2, for any e > 0 there is 8 > 0, when r < 8,
Bm{0x,r) c (1 -f £)rn{Tf-m(xjfTnB(0f-m(xy r) fl Tjm^f mB(0fm(xy r)}
Thus, considering their projections we have
7Ts5m(0a;,r) c (1 + £)mTy_m^/m7rsi?(0y-m(a.), 7*),

- 47 -
and
ituBm(Qx,l') C (1 + e)mTfm(xjf mnuB(Ofm(xyr).
Reshuffle
al(Tf-”'(x)fm\E‘), • • • >ani(Tf-m(x)fm\E>);
a\(Tfm{x)f~in\Eu)i' • • ,an2(Tfm(x)f-m\Eu)
to get ai(m,x) < < an(m,x). It follows that Bm(Ox,r) is contained in an
“ellipsoid” of axes {raj(m, x), • • ■ ,ran(m,x)}.
Let j = [t] + 1. Use balls of radius ratj(m,x) to cover the above ellipsoid of
axes {rai(m, x), ■ • ■ ,ran(m,x)j. At most
Qai(m, x) â–  â–  â–  ctj(m, x)/aj(m, xy
balls are needed where Q depends only on the dimension n, the metric we choose
and the compact hyperbolic set K. Notice that the number aj(m,x) < 1.
Let K\, K2 be two subsets of K as in the proof of Proposition 4.3.3, where
the collection {0x-6m(Oz, r)|a: 6 K2} is an open cover for K. The balls of radius
ratj(m,x) needed to cover Bm(Ox,r) is at most
Qati(m, x) ■ • • ctj(m, x)/aj(m, x)1.
The image in K under {6X : x (E K2} is an open cover for K, with radius less

- 48
than 4r, and the corresponding Hausdorff t measure is estimated as the following:
7i\r(K) < (1 + e)m Y^, ■ ai(m,x) • • ■ aj(m,x)/aj(m^xy • aj(m,xy
x£K2
= (7(1 + e)m ai(m,x) • • • oij_i(m,x)cKj(m,xy~j+^
x£K2
= (7(1 + e)m Y U}t2(x)(Tfm(x)f-Tn\E»)ut1(x)(Tf-”'(x)fm\E>)
x£K2
m
< Cexp(me) Y exp]QAMi(x)(f~tx) + K,t2(*)^x^
x£K2 i=l
Here C = At least one of ti,t% is an integer. Also t\ + <2 = t. There are
at most n(n — 1) pairs of such (ii(x), ^(x)) for each x. For each pair of available
(¿1, ¿2)5 we have
P(r1\KMl) + P(f\K,K1)<0-
Thus we can require
~ log[Pm{f *\Ki ^s,ti)Pm(f\K 1 ^u,t2)] < —2e
for all available pairs (i 1, ¿2) and all large m. So,
m m
n\r(I<) < C exp(me) Y i exp£ Xu,t3(fx))" exp£ AMi(/_,;r))}
ti+Í2=t XEK2 i=l x£K2 i=1
< C exp(me) E Pm{f ^\Ki ^s,ti)Pm(f\Ki ^u,t2)
t\-\-t2—t
< C exp(me)exp(—me)
= C exp(—me) —► 0.
Therefore H\r(K) = 0; and HD(K) < t. |
The proof of Theorem 4.2 follows immediately from the above Proposition
and Lemma 4.3.2.

-49-
§4.5. The Transversals
By the Stable Manifold Theorem, the stable manifold Ws(x,f) is locally
embedded in X, with TxWs(x, /) = Ex. Similarly TxWu(x, f) = Ex. Now let
K : TxWs(x,f) = ESX-+ Ws(xJ) C X
be the exponential map for Ws(x,f) at x and
0UX : TxWu(x, /) = E* -» Wu(xJ) C X
be the exponential map for Wu(x,f) at x. Define £x : TxX = Ex © Ex —> TxX
by
Uw9v) = e~1«i(u,)+e-l02(v)
for w € Ex and v € Ex. Now the exponential map 0X can be modified to obtain
a map
: TxX = Es © Eu X
by = ^xi with the property that TiJ)x(Ox) = identity. By the stable
manifold theorem, TxWs(x, f) = Ex and
0,(£5nB(O«,r))CW*(*,/).
It is noticed that i¡)x is defined locally and since K compact there is r > 0 such
that x^x is well defined on B(Ox,r) C TxX for all x € K. Then similarly to
Chapter 3, we let f(v) = fpj^fipx(v) and define the set Bm(Ox,r) through f.
A distortion lemma similar to Lemma 3.4.2 can be obtained.

-50-
PROPOSITION 4.5.1. Let f and K be as in Theorem f.3. For any x € K, let
Ws(x,f) be the stable manifold at x. If the topological pressure P(f,\f) < 0,
then the Hausdorff dimension HD(K fl Ws(x,f)) < t.
PROOF: Similar to Lemma 3.4.2,
Bm{0x,r) C (1 + e)m{Tj-m^frnB(0f-m^xy r) fl Tfm^f mB(0fm(xyr)},
we have
nsBm(0*,?') C (1 + e)rnTf_m^x'jfrn'KsB{f)f-m(xy r).
The right side is an ellipsoid of axes (1 -f £)mr{oq(m, x), ■ ■ ■ ,ani(m,x)}. Let
j — [í] -f 1. The number of balls of radius ray-(m, x) needed to cover irsB m(0j;, r)
is at most
Cai(m, x) • ■ ■ otjfm, x)/aj(m, x)J.
Let M\ C K fl Ws(f~mx, f) be a maximal (2m + 1, ^r) separated subset,
such that M\ U {y} is not (2m -f 1, \r) separated if y € K fl Ws(f~mx, f) and
y M\. Then the set M2 given by
M2 = fmMi cKDWs(x,f)
is maximal (m, |r) separated; and {ipx^sBm(Ox,r)\x € M2} is an open cover
for K fl Ws(x,f). Under the collection of maps {il>x\x £ M2}, the image of
small balls of radius rctj(m,x) used to cover 5m(0x,/) have radius less than 4r.
The corresponding Hausdorff t measure for K fl Ws(x, /), the quantity TL\r{K fl
Ws(x,f)) is less than
4Cr(l + £)maj(m,a:) i£M2

Since
-51 -
aj(m,x)tai(m,x) • • • aj(m, x)/aj(m,xy
= ai(m,x) â–  â–  â–  aj_i(m,x)aj(m,x)t-j+i
= ut(Tf-mxfm\Es)
< ut(Tf-mxf\Es)ut(Tf-m+lxf\Es) • • .ut(Tf-lxf\Es)
= exp As,t(f~mx) • • • exp \Sjt(f~^x)
m
= exP^ A s,t(f~lx)
i= 1
and r(l + e)maj(m,x) < r, we have
m
H\r(K nw‘(x,f)) <40(1 + e)m Y, exP(£ Ktr‘*)
XZ.M-2 1=1
< 4CV exp(m£)Pm(/, \s¿, ~r)
< 4Crexp(me) exp(—2me) —> 0,
as m —» oo. So H\r(K D Ws(x,f)) = 0. It follows that V}{K fl Ws(x,f)) = 0
and the Hausdorif dimension HD{K fl Ws(x,f)) < t. |
The proof of of Theorem 4.3 follows immediately from the above Proposition.
The proof of Theorem 4.4 works similarly.

CHAPTER 5
THE SELF SIMILAR SETS
§5.1. The Self Similar Sets
In this chapter we shall construct the self similar sets. Then we use the
topological pressure defined in Chapter 4 to bound the Hausdorff dimension of
self similar sets. Finally we discuss the continuity of Hausdorff dimension at
conformal constructions.
The construction of a self similar set starts with a k x k matrix A — (ajj)
which has entries zeroes and ones, with all entries of AN positive for some N > 0,
see Bedford (1988). For each non-zero we give a contraction map ip¡j : R} —»
R'! with ||¥>ij(x) — (pij(y)\\ < c||x — ?/1|, where c < 1 is a constant and we are using
the Euclidean norm on R . Define the Hausdorff metric by
d(E,F) = inf{¿|d(a;, F) < 6 for all x € E, and d(y,E) < 6 for all y € F}
in the space C of all nonempty compact subsets of . See, for example, Hutchin¬
son (1981) or Falconer (1990). The map $ on the ¿-fold product space C^ given
by
'' • , F,) = (UJ=1OT;(Í»,''' . U
is a contraction map. By the Banach Fixed Point Theorem the contraction map
$ has a unique fixed point in Ci.e., a vector of compact non-empty subsets of
- 52 -

-53-
R}, denoted by (E\,..., E^) € C*, with
Udij=llPij(Ej) = Ei-
The union E = U¿Lji£¿ is called a self similar set.
Let
E = Ej[ = {(xq,xi, ... , xn,... )|1 < x,- < k and aXiXi+1 = 1 for all ¿>0}
be the shift space with the following metric: for x = (xq, x\, ...), y = (j/q, y\,...)
in E, d(x, y) = 2~n if and only if n = min{m|xm ^ ym}. Let a be the shift map
of E and let 7r : E —> E be given by
7r(xo,£i,...,x„,...) = the only point in D„>i v>Xoxl'Pxlx2 • • • It is clear that 7r is a Holder continuous, surjective map. We will denote the
composition (pXQXl ■ • -^Xn-\xn by morphisms and denote the derivative of ipij at a point x by Txy>ij or T\?¿j(x).
DEFINITION 5.1.1. The j-th Lyapunov number of a linear map L, denoted by
otj(L), is the square root of the j-th largest eigenvalue of LL*, where L* is the
conjugate of L. Write
u,(L) = ai(I)---aw(L)a[(]+1(I)|-W.
For a set of construction diffeomorphisms { R for
each t £ [0,/] and x = (xoxi...) 6 E is defined by
Xt(x) = \ogai(T + {t~ W)logaw+1(Tv?xoXi(7rcri))
= \ogujt(TipXoXl(n
-54 -
The constructions and dimensions of self similar sets have been studied by
several authors under various restrictions. In this chapter we relax the restrictions
on construction diffeomorphisms to a k pinching condition, which is defined as
follows.
DEFINITION 5.1.2. We say that a C* smooth homeomorphism <£>,j satisfies the
K-pinching condition if the derivatives satisfy the following
\\Tz¡p¡j\\HK ■ ||r„i.(„)*>r.1|| < 1
for all x € E.
REMARK: If Txy>ijTx — al,ij(x)
where Txip*j denotes the conjugate of Txy>ij, the numbers aijj(x),... ,a¡¿j(x)
are Lyapunov numbers with
1 > > • • > a¡tij(x) > 0.
Then the pinching condition is equivalent to c*i< al,ij(x)-
For the definition and properties of Hausdorff dimension, refer to Chapter
2 or Kahane (1985). Also, we use the definitions and notions of Walters (1982)
in the discussions concerning topological pressure, see also Chapter 4. Theorem
III given in the introduction is proved in this chapter through Theorem 5.1 and
Theorem 5.2.

55 -
THEOREM 5.1. Let { similar set E, satisfying the k pinching condition for some positive number k < 1.
Suppose the derivatives of all are Holder continuous of order k. If t is the
unique positive number such that the topological pressure P(cr, A*) = 0, then the
Hausdorff dimension HD(E) < t.
Let us recall the disjoint open set condition on the construction of self similar
sets, see Hutchinson (1981). It states that for each integer i from 1 to k there is
a non-empty open set £/,• such that
U VijiUj) C U¡, and if j ± k.
a,j = l
For n > 0, denote Un(x) = and that the collection {f/n(x) : x € E} is pairwisely disjoint for each fixed n.
THEOREM 5.2. Let { similar set E in fí!, satisfying both the k pinching condition for some positive
number k < 1, and the disjoint open set condition. Suppose the derivatives of all
{ that the topological pressure P(a,Xt) = 0, then the Hausdorff dimension
HD(E) > — Ik.
REMARK: We call a C1 diffeomorphism if its derivative is Holder continu¬
ous of order k. If we fix the construction to be for some > 0 but let k —> 0
for the k pinching condition, then our upper and lower bounds will coincide with
the estimate for conformal cases as in Bedford (1988).

- 56 -
Theorem 5.1 is proved in Section 5.2, and Theorem 5.2 is proved in Section
5.3. As a corollary of Theorems 5.1 and 5.2, in Section 5.4 we will also discuss
some continuity in the C1 topology of the HausdorfF dimension at conformal
C'1+K constructions under the disjoint open set condition. For discussions of
the constructions of self similar sets using similitudes and their dimensions, see
Hutchinson (1981), Mauldin and Williams (1988). For the constructions using
“conformal” contraction maps, see Bedford (1988). Other related works can be
found in Dekking (1982), Bedford (1986) and Falconer (1990).
§5.2. The Upper Bound
LEMMA 5.2.1. If all construction diffeomorphisms (p¡j are C1+K and satisfy the
K-pinching condition, then for any £ > 0, there exists 6 > 0 depending only on e,
such that for all x € E, all a with 0 < a < 6, and all x = (a:o,£l, • • •) in E, all
integers n > 0, we have
(5.2.1) g>x0 - xnB(x, a) C ^Pxo---xn(x) + (1 + e)nTx Here B(x,a) denotes a ball of radius a centered at x in R!.
PROOF: Using Taylor’s formula, for any y, w € R ,
(5.2.2) ) + rXQXl (w,y ).
Since E is compact, we can find some constants C > 0 and c > 0, such that for
all y 6 E and tu 6 R? with ||tu|| < c, we have ||rXoa;i(tu, t/)|| < C'||tu||1+/C. We will
set also b = minx
-57-
Fix any small e > 0. Since E is compact and all construction diffeomor-
phisms satisfy the k pinching condition, without loss of generality we can assume
£ to be so small that for all pairs (i,j),
(5.2.3) ||(1 + e)Txy>ij\\ < 1 for all x € E;
(5.2.4) (1 + e^ai^x)*"*"* < for all x G E.
Pick 8 > 0, with 8 < min{c, (fe/C)1/*}. Thus 8K < ea¡jj(x)/C, for all x G E
and all pairs of (i,j). Let a < 8, and pick any w G with ||u>|| < a. For any
x in E, ||ra;oXl(u;,x)|| < C||u;||1+,c < Ca^+K < aC8K < a£a¡ XoXl(x), and thus
rxoXl{w,x) G ea¡ XoXl(x)B(0,a). Since £a¡ XoXl(x)B(0, a) C eTx follows from (5.2.2) that
€ = yx oxj (®) + (1 + s)Tx(pXoXl B( 0, a).
That gives (5.2.1) for n — 1. Now the induction hypothesis gives
lpXoxi---XnB(x, a) = ipXoXl C Using (5.2.2):
VxqXi Vpx\...xn{x) + (1 + s)” ^TipXi...xn{w)\
= X0'"Xn(w)
+ rXoXl((l + e)n~1T
-58-
Because of (5.2.3), ||(1 + e)n ^T(fXl^_Xn{w)\\ < ||u;|| < a, where w 6 5(0,a).
Using (5.2.4), we have
||rton((l +£)”"1Tvi1...i„(w),i>i,..^n(a:))||
< C(1 + e)(-*Xl+«) • a1,I„_1I>)|MI]1+,‘
< C( 1 + if-1*,,*„>„...*„(*))■ •
< (1 +£)"_1o'tCo/iI1I,(Vl,...I„(i))...a,iIn_lXn(x)||u>||
< e(l + e)"~la, ,*o*i(^*i—*n(x)) ■ a/,xix2{(Px2-xn{x)).. .a¡ Xn_lXn(x)a.
On the other hand Tx Tx Hence rXo¡Cl((l + e)n~lTipXl...Xn(w), Therefore,
Wx0XiWx-í...Xn(x) + (1 + s)n 1T £ (pxo...xn(x) + (1 + s)n ^Tx(pXQ'"XnB(0, a) + e(l + e)n ^Tx(pXo^,XnB{0,a)
C <¿>x0-..xn(x) + (1 + £)nTx(pXo,"XnB(0,a).
Thus (5.2.1) is true for n. That completes the induction process. |
I have learned that Jiang (1991) has a distortion lemma for a regular non-
conformal semigroup, which is a semigroup of pinched contracting diffeomor-
phisms. His version is stronger than our version here. However, for our purpose
of estimating Hausdorff dimensions here, our version is strong enough.

-59-
PROPOSITION 5.2.2. If all construction diffeomorphisms ip¡j are C^K and sat¬
isfy the n-pinching condition where 0 < k < 1, and if the topological pressure
P( HD(E) < t.
PROOF: Choose small e > 0 satisfying both (5.2.3) and (5.2.4), with
P(cr, A<) < —2te.
By Lemma 5.2.1, there exists 8 > 0 such that (5.2.1) holds for all integers n > 0
and each x € E, when 0 < a < 8.
We fix a < 8 small enough, and a positive integer n big enough, such that
(See Walters (1982) or Section 4.2 for notations)
logPn(cr, \t,a) < -2nte.
Recall that n is Holder continuous. Suppose that 7 is the exponent such that
there exists a constant D with
k(x) ~ 7r(y)l < D-d(x,y)7
for all x, y in E. Fix a1 < min,a}. Pick m with 2~< a' < 2-m.
Let
K1 = {(xq,-• • ,Xm+n)\ there exists xGE with x = (xq, • • ■ , xm+n, • • • )}.
Choose for each word (arQ,--- ,a;m+n) in K1 a point x in E with the initial of
• • •, Xm+n, to form a subset K of E. The subset K is (n, a') separated, and is

- 60 -
maximal in the sense that one cannot add another point to K such that it is still
(n,a') separated. Thus, the collection {a~nB(anx,a')\x £ A'} is an open cover
for S. Notice that nx = 7r{<7_nB(crnx,a,)|x 6 K} C Wx0xv-xnB(Tranx,a)\x = (xq, ®i,... ,xn...) £ K}
it follows that
{Vx0xV"XnB{nonx,a)\x = (x0, *i,..., xn ... ) € A'}
is an open cover for E = U\=\E{. Also, using (5.2.1) of Lemma 5.2.1 we have
(5.2.5) The right side of (5.2.5) is an ellipsoid with axes
{a(l + £)notj(TxcrnxiPxo---xn)\1 5: j 5; l}-
Pick j with j — 1 < t < j. Then that ellipsoid can be covered by
C • Ot\(T7T(Tnx(pxo---Xn) ■ • • &j(Tir(TnXipXo---Xn)/aj{TTr(TnX(PXo--Xny
— C'l^j—\{T-xcrnx't>X0---Xn)Oij^ {Tir(TnX(pX0-"Xn)
balls of radius a(l + £)noij{T1¡(Tnx,{>x0---Xn), where the constant C > 0 depends
only on the dimension of fí!. Now we calculate the Hausdorff ¿-measure of A,
using the smaller balls of radius a(l + e)n ■ ctj(T‘K(rnxV>x0---Xn) < a to cover the

- 61 -
open set ball of radius r¿, then we define |7| = max,e/ r,- and
m
= Y
\I\ iei
We have
Cuj-l{Tn X€K
= (1 +e)”*aiC' ^(TVo-nxV’jro-'-Xn)
X€K
— (1 + e)ntC UJt(Tw(TXlPxoXi)ut(T:r(T‘2xiPxiX2) ' ' '<*H(Tn(TnXlPxn-iXn)
X€K
= (1+ e)ntC ^2 exP[A<(x) + A<( xeK
<(l+e)ntCPn(a,\t,a')
<(l+e)ntCPn(a,\t,a)
< C exp(nte) exp(—2nte)
-o,
as n —» oo. Thus 7-fg = 0. Since a can be arbitrarily small, fi(t) = 0. It follows
that HD(E) < t. |
PROOF OF Theorem 5.1: P(cr, A<) is a decreasing function of Vs since E is
compact and A< is strictly decreasing with respect to t. So there is only one real
number t such that P(<7, A*) = 0. Also, the unique t with P(cr, A<) = 0 is equal to
inf{i : P(cr, Xt) < 0}.
Consequently, we have HD(E) < t where P(cr, A<) = 0. |

-62-
§5.3. The Lower Bound
PROOF of Theorem 5.2: Notice that for each t, the map At is Holder contin¬
uous on E. So there exists an equilibrium state p for Ain the sense that
P(a, At) = hfi(a) + J \fdp.
Fix any p > 0, let’s estimate the p measure of a ball B(z, p) centered at 2 with
radius p. For each x 6 E choose the unique n = n(x) > 0 such that the diameters
satisfy
diam(Un(x)) < p < diam(t/„_i(x)).
LEMMA 5.3.1. There exists a constant c > 0 such that for all x G E, the open
set Un^(x) is contained in a ball of radius p and contains a ball of radius cp^+K.
PROOF: It is clear that Un(x) is contained in a ball of radius p. Since the radius
of U„(x) decreases to 0 as n grows to infinity, without loss of generality we can
assume the maximum diameter R of all is less than the number 6 given in
Lemma 5.2.1. Also pick r small enough that each U{ contains a ball of radius r.
Then Un(x) contains a ball of radius
r • a/
But on the other hand
p < diam(i/„_i(x)) < aijXoa;i(xcrx) • ■ • aijXfj_2a;n_1(7rcrn_1x)i?,
which implies that
«l,r02i(7ro‘x)---a1)a.n_lXn(7r(Tnx) > aip/R

- 63 -
where the constant a\ = minyg#,j{aq jj(y)} > 0 does not depend on either n
or x. Therefore Un(x) contains a ball of radius > rp^Ka^+K / R^K. Writing
c = a constant, then t/n(x) contains a ball of radius cp^K as
desired. |
For two points x, y 6 S, since the construction maps satisfy the open set
condition, f/n(x)(x) and Un(y)(y) are either equal or disjoint. Let T C S be
a subset such that {t/n^x^(x)|x € T} is a disjoint collection which contains all
f/n(x)(x) for x 6 S. Notice that {f7n^x^(x)|x € T} covers E.
Lemma 5.3.2. (Similar to Hutchinson (1981) 5.3 (a)) At most 3^c~^p~K^ of
{C/n(j)(x)|x 6 T} can meet B(z,p).
PROOF: Suppose that Vj,• • • ,Vm in {¿4i(x)(*)l* ^ r} meet B(z,p). Then each
of them is a subset of B(z,3p). By the definition of T the sets in the collection
{£/n(x)(x)|x € T} are disjoint. Comparing the volumes we have
mJc/p/(1+K) < J3lpl
where J is the volume of a unit ball in R}. Hence m < 3^c~^p~K^. |
Let
c„(x) = {y = (t/o, 2/1, • • •) € E|j/o = x0, • • • , yn = *n}
be an n cylinder. Recall that p is a Gibbs measure (see Bowen (1975) for a
discussion or Bedford (1988) for a summary). There exists a constant d > 0,
with
/4Cn(x)) € • exp( —P( for each cylinder Cn(x) in S. Thus
p(Cn(x)) € [d l,d\ • exp(SV,A*(x)),

-64-
since P(cr, A<) = 0. So,
//(C„(x)) < dexpSnM(x)
< d[ < d[al,xOX!(™*) • • • «/,ar„_1x„(^^nx)] < d ■ [ diam (f/n(x))Af/(1+k)
Hence if n = n(x) we obtain
/‘(C„(3E)(s)) < d^/f1+'‘)/r-*/(1+'c).
Noticing x(7n(x) D í/«(x) fl E, by Lemma 5.3.2,
7r*//(5(z,p)) < [3/c-/dr- By the Frostman lemma (see Chapter 2 or Kahane (1985) for a proof),
HD(E) > — Ik.
That completes the estimate for the lower bound. |
§5.4. Some Continuity in the C1 Topology
The construction of the self similar set E¡p depends on the contracting dif-
feomorphisms {y>ij}- Now let us fix 0 < ¡3 < 1, and consider a (71 perturbation to
a conformal construction with diffeomorphisms {
- 65 -
matrix of contracting diffeomorphisms {ipij}, which is not necessarily conformal.
Denote the new self similar set for ip by Elp. Define
dCÁVi'!’) = niaxdc.i{(^-,V’tj)},
where the later d(ji is the C1 metric. Note that for any k < /3, when ip is
sufficiently C1 close to theorem is a corollary of Theorems 5.1 and 5.2. It tells that at a conformal
construction satisfying the open set condition for self similar sets, the Hausdorff
dimension HD^E^) depends continuously on {ipij} in C1 topology.
THEOREM 5.4.1. Let {p>ij} be a matrix of conformal construction diffeo¬
morphisms for the self similar set Eip, satisfying the open set condition. For any
e > 0, there exists 8 > 0, such that for any construction ip satisfying the
open set condition, with d(j\ ip) < 8, we have
IHDiE^-HDiE^lKe.
Proof: Let
V,s(x) = \ogu8{TipXoXffna\)),
^,s(x) = \ogus(TipXoXl(Trax)),
be two real functions on E as defined in Definition 5.1.1. Let t be such that
P(a,\tpj) = 0. Because spiffs are conformal, the Hausdorff dimension of E¡p
equals t. Also, remark that P(a, A¡pj+e) < 0 f°r any £ > 0.
Now fix any e > 0. Let k = min{/?,e/4/} and let
s' = - min)-P(<7, V,+t), P(a, Ay i_£/4)) > 0.
(5.4.1)

-66 -
Since ip is C1+/? and conformal, there is 8 > 0 such that the diffeomor-
phism 0 is C1+K and k pinched with |A^)S(x) — A^s(x)| < e' for all s G [0,/], if
d(ji(y?, V’) < 8. Then
P(ai ^ip,t+e) < T*(cr, A^^-i-f + er) < P((t, Xp't+e) + e' <0.
So
HD(E1p) < t + £ = HD(Eip) + £,
by Proposition 5.2.2.
On the other hand, by (5.4.1), when < 8, we have
AiP't—e/á) ^ X(p f_£j^ — £ ) > P(<7) Atpj—e/4) ~ £ >0.
So we have some s > t — e/4 with P(cr, A^ s) = 0 since P(cr, A^s) is strictly
decreasing with respect to s. By Theorem 5.2,
> 5/(1 + «)-/*> 5/(1 + e/4/) - /(e/4/)
> s(l — e/4/) — e/4 > s — e/2 > t — e.
It then follows that
HD^E^) > t — e = HD(Ep) — e,
as desired. |
We say a construction with diffeomorphisms {<£>,-,•} satisfies the strong
open set condition if there are open sets C/1, • • • , f// in Rl with ipij(Üj) C //,• for
all i, j. If the construction

also satisfy the strong open set condition if it is C1 close enough to have obtained an immediate corollary of the above Theorem 5.4.1:

-67-
COROLLARY 5.4.2. Let { feomorphisms for the self similar set Ep, satisfying the strong open set condition.
For any e > 0, there exists 6 > 0, such that for any construction rf? with
dc1((Pitl’) < b, we have
\HD(E,p) — HD(Erp)\ < e.
Finally we have a remark on the continuity of the Hausdorff dimension in
the C1 topology at non-conformal constructions.
REMARK 5.4.3: The following example shows that if the “conformal” condition
for the construction diffeomorphisms {pij} fails, then the results in Theorem
5.4.1 and Corollary 5.4.2 can be false. The example is derived from Example
9.10 of Falconer (1990), pp 127-128.
Let S, T\ : i?2 —> R? be given by
S(x, y) = (x/2, y¡3 + 2/3), Tx(x, y) = (x/2 + A, j//3)
where A € [0,1/2) and (x,y) € R2. Let p\\ = = S, <¿>12 = Vp22 = Tq. Take
V>A = U’iRx) where V’ll.A = ^21,A = S, and 012,A = ^22,A = TX- The strong °Pen
set condition is met for {pij}. In fact if we let U\ = Uy = ( —1/8,9/8)2 C i?2
then ipij(Üj) C U¡.
Let Etp, Erj,x be the self similar sets for p and %¡>X- Considering the projection
of to the x-axis, one knows that HD(E7px) > 1 for A > 0. But E^> is a Cantor
set contained in the t/-axis with the Hausdorff dimension
HD(Elp) = log 2/log 3 < 1.

-68-
Since = A, so letting A —► 0 we know the Hausdorff dimension is not
continuous at tp. We notice that {pij} are not conformal although { {ipij,\} are all 3/4 pinched.

CHAPTER 6
THE HÉNON ATTRACTOR
In the 1970’s Hénon et al. conducted numerical experiments on the following
quadratic automorphisms of the plane, H : R? —» R? defined by
H(X, F) = (1 -f Y — aX2, bX), where a, b are parameters ,
which “show” a “strange” attractor. We now call this map a Hénon map. See
Hénon (1976), Hénon and Pomeau (1975) for numerical results. Say A is an
attractor of H if it is invariant under H and there is a neighborhood U of A
such that every point z 6 U has limn—Kx, d(Hn(z), A) = 0. A Hénon map is
regarded as the simplest smooth example that computer simulations indicate the
existence of a strange attractor. Since Hénon’s numerical experiments a number
of authors have studied the dynamical behavior of the Hénon mappings. Devaney
(1986) gives an introduction to this subject. Milnor (1988) noticed many Hénon
mappings are non-expansive, and the topological entropies of the Hénon mappings
fall within [0, log 2]. In this chapter, we give an upper bound for the capacity and
the Hausdorff dimension of a Hénon attractor.
Under the coordinate change suggested Devaney and Nitecki (1979), X =
x/a,Y = by/a we have the following convenient form of the Hénon mapping:
H(x, y) = (a T by — x , x), where a, b are parameters.
- 69 -

-70-
Benedicks and Carleson (1991) shows the following: Let Wu = Wu(z,H)
be the unstable manifold of H at the fixed point z of H in the first quadrant.
Then there is a bo > 0 such that for all b 6 (0, ¿o) there is a set Ef, of positive
one dimensional Lebesgue measure such that for all a £ Ey.
(l)There is an open set U — U(a, b) such that for all z 6 U,
d(Hn(z),Wu) —> 0, as n —► oo.
(2)There is a point zq = zo{a,b) G Wu such that {7/”(zo)}nLo dense in
Wu.
We consider the case when bo < -. Also, it is clear that Wu is C°° and one
dimensional. Thus
C(A) > C(A) > HD{A) > 1.
Now let R be the bound for A such that for every (x, y) € A we have |x|, |r/| < /?,
and denote
zn = {xn,yn) = Hn(zo), m =
2R+ 1
b ’
and
Since
A = limsup — log(6 + q- J-)
n—Kx> n m m¿
i—v
2\xs\ 1
—+ <26< 1,
m m¿
we have A < 0. For the capacity of an attractor, we shall prove the following:
Theorem IV. If A is a compact invariant attractor under the Hénon map H,
as proved existing by Benedicks and Carleson (1991) then the upper capacity
C(A) < 2 + : < 2.
log m

- 71 -
Douady and Oesterlé have an upper bound for the HausdorfF dimension of
attractors. Since HD(A) < C(A), our theorem IV also gives an upper bound for
the HausdorfF dimension. In the case of a Hénon attractor our estimate is better
than Douady and Oesterlé’s result applied to a Hénon attractor.
Let R\ be the larger root of the equation — (1 + |6|)x — a = 0. Let
S = x [f?i,f?i]. Then any point outside S on the plane will flee to
infinity under either the Hénon map H or f/-1, see Devaney (1986). In other
words, any invariant set A is contained in S, and thus bounded.
PROOF OF Theorem IV: First take a look at the image of a ball under the
Hénon map. Let ||(x,t/)|| = max{i,j/} and d be the induced metric. After a
coordinate change x = x/m,y = y the Hénon map has the following form:
H(x, y) = (ma + mby —
Let us denote the new coordinate system also by (x,y) from now on.
Lemma 6.1. Let
B = {(ar,y) : \x - u| < r, \y - »| < r}
be a ball centered at (u,u) of radius r in our metric. Then H(B) is contained in
the following rectangle:
V V
[til - l,Ul + /] X [vi ,1>i + —]
m m
rltil r^
(til, ui) = H(u, v), and l = mbr + 2 H .
mm
where

-72-
PROOF OF LEMMA 6.1: Since B is bounded by x — u ± r, y = v ± r, the image
of B, H(B) will be bounded by
u r 2
y = — ± —, and x = ma + mbv — my¿ ± mbr.
m m
Pick any point (x,y) from the parabola
Then
2 i • i i u . T
x = ma + mbv — my — mbr with \y < —.
m m
, r tí r
x — «i < mbr + 2 H ,
m m
which completes the proof for the lemma.
Therefore, H(B) can be covered by at most
1 + (mbr -f 2 (- —)/— = m?b + 2|ií| + r + 1
m mm
balls of radius r/m. Now let {B{ : i = 1, ■ • • , k} be a finite cover of A where
every ball B¡ has a radius less than r/2. Since {zn : n = 0,1, • • • ,} is dense in
A, one can pick some n¡ such that zUi G B¡. Then {B(zni, r) : i = 1, • • • , k} is a
cover of A. Let us write in order: n\ < ri2 < • • • < n^. Using Lemma, if a ball B
centered at (u,u) has radius r and we write Hl(u,v) = (ui,v¡) then Hn(B) can
be covered by at most
n—1
(m2fe + 2|u,-| + r + 1)
»=0
V ,
balls of radius ——. Since {B(zUi,r) : i = 1, • • • , k} is a cover of A, the image
under the diffeomorphism Hn,
{HnB(zni,r) ,k}

-73-
is also a cover of A. Suppose N = max{n¿ : i = 1 ,•••,&}. Notice that
HnB(zni,r) is covered by at most
i+n—1
JJ (m26 + 2\xnj | + r + 1)
j=i
balls of radius . But
mn
i+n—1 n,+n—1
{m2b + 2\xnj | + r + 1) < JJ (m26 + 2\xj\ + r + 1)
j=i j=0
N+n— 1
< JJ (m2b + 2\xj\ + r + 1).
j=0
Therefore the number of balls of radius needed to cover A is at most
mn
N+n-1
k â–  JJ (m26 + 2\xj\ + r + 1).
3=0
By Lemma 1.3.1, we have
l°g*nf=+0" 1(m2^+ 2|®j| + r + 1)
log (r/mn)
log k + EjS”-1 log(m26 + 2\xj\ + r + 1)
n log m + log r
EjL"o”_1 Iog(m2¿ + 2|xj| + r + 1)
n log m
1 1 JV+n-l
= b¡^‘rS<í,Pí £ log(m2i, + 2|^| + r + l).
i=o
C(A) < lim sup
n—hx>
= lim sup
n—>oo
= lim sup
71—>00

-74-
Since |x,-| < R for all i, and the function log is differentiable, there is a constant
C such that for all r with 0 < r < 1 and for all j > 0,
log(m2f> + 2\xj\ + 1) < log(m2f> + 2\xj\ + r + 1)
< log(m26 + 2|xj| + 1) + Cr.
This implies by letting r —► 0 that
N+n—l
C(A) < limsup— V log(m26 + 21x7-1 + 1)
Incr m « . n ¿ J J
"5—~)
inn sup -
log m n—+oo n
J — U
1 1 2m|xy| +1
= 2 + - limsup— ) log(6 + J
\r%cf m ^ n * j
log m „_oo n f
j=u
n—1
1 1 7-—C „ 2m|x?-| + 1 v
=2 + E los((>+—-2—)
logm n—>oo nf
j=ü
= 2 +
log m
That completes the proof. |

CHAPTER 7
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
In this paper we are mainly concerned with the HausdorfF dimension of
hyperbolic sets, the self similar sets and the Hénon attractors. These are all
invariant sets under some smooth diffeomorphisms.
For a hyperbolic set of a diffeomorphism or a flow of diffeomorphisms, the
uniform stable and unstable Lyapunov exponents have been defined. Using the
uniform Lyapunov exponents we define a characteristic function. At some real
positive number t the characteristic function equals the value of the topological
entropy of the diffeomorphism on the hyperbolic set. We prove that t is an upper
bound for the HausdorfF dimension of this hyperbolic set. Technically, we use a
pinching condition to cope with the nonlinearity of the diffeomorphism, to prove
that the iterated image of a ball is somehow contained in the image of the ball
under the derivative of the iterated diffeomorphism. Some earlier results are thus
improved.
In Chapter 4 we have also given upper bounds for the HausdorfF dimension
of the transverse of a hyperbolic set with stable and unstable manifolds, using
the topological pressure on the hyperbolic set.
Several authors have studied the self similar sets of iterated mapping sys¬
tems in the cases where construction diffeomorphisms are conformal. In chapter
5 we study the case where the construction diffeomorphisms are not necessarily
conformal. We give a new distortion lemma. Using topological pressure on a
- 75 -

-76-
shift space we give an upper estimate of the HausdorfF dimension, when the con¬
struction diffeomorphisms are C1+'c and satisfy a k pinching condition for some
k < 1. Moreover, if the construction diffeomorphisms also satisfy the disjoint
open set condition we then give a lower bound for the HausdorfF dimension. We
believe that the characteristic function A can be revised to achieve an even bet¬
ter estimate for the HausdorfF dimension. We also obtain the continuity of the
HausdorfF dimension in the C1 topology at conformal constructions.
In chapter 6 we study the image of a disc under the iteration of a Hénon map,
which enables us to find an upper bound for the HausdorfF dimension and capacity
of the Hénon attractor. That improves some earlier estimates when applied to the
case of a Hénon attractor. Milnor (1988) noticed that many Hénon mappings are
non-expansive, and the topological entropies of the Hénon mappings fall within
[0, log 2]. Since we cannot establish a distortion lemma similar to Lemma 3.4.2
for Hénon maps, it is unknown to us whether the HausdorfF dimension of a Hénon
attractor can be related to its topological entropy. It is still an open problem.

REFERENCES
Bedford, T., Dimension and dynamics for fractal recurrent sets, J. London Math.
Soc., (2) 33 (1986), 89-100.
Bedford, T., Hausdorff dimension and box dimension in self similar sets, Proc. Conf.
Topology and Measure V (1988), Greifswald, 17-26.
Benedicks, M., and Carleson, L., The dynamics of the Hénon map, Ann. Math.,
133 (1991), 73-169.
Besicovitch, A., and Ursell, H., Sets of fractional dimensions, V: On dimensional
numbers of some continuous curves, J. Lond. Math. Soc., 12 (1937), 18-25.
Bowen, R., Equilibrium states and the ergodic theory of Anosov diffeomorphisms,
Lecture notes in Mathematics 470 (1975), Springer, Berlin.
Carathéodory, C., Über das lineare Mass von Punktmengen, eine Verallgemeinerung
das Langenbegriffs, Nach. Ges. Wiss. Gottingen, (1914) 406-426.
Dekking, F. M., Recurrent sets, Adv. in Math. 44 (1982) 78-104.
Devaney, R. L., An Introduction to Chaotic Dynamical Systems, The Benjamin
Cummings Publishing Company Inc., Menlo Park, California, 1986.
-77-

- 78 -
Devaney, R., and Nitecki, Z., Shift automorphisms in the Hénon mapping, Com-
mun. Math. Phys. 67 (1979) 137-146.
Douady, A., and Oesterlé, J., Dimension de HausdorfF des attracteurs, C. R. Acad.
Sci. Paris Ser. I Math., 290 (1980) 1135-1138.
Falconer, K., Fractal Geometry, Mathematical Foundations and Applications, John
Wiley and Sons, Chichester, England, 1990.
Fathi, A., Some compact invariant subsets for hyperbolic linear automorphisms of
torii, Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems, 8 (1988), 191-204.
Fathi, A., Expansiveness, hyperbocility and HausdorfF dimension, Communications
in Mathematical Physics, 126 (1989), 249-262.
Frederickson, P., Kaplan, J., Yorke, E., and Yorke, J., The Lyapunov dimension of
strange attractors, Journal of Diff. Eq. 49 (1983), 185-207.
HausdorfF, F., Dimension und áusseres Mass, Math. Annalen, 79(1919), 157-179.
Hénon, M., A two-dimensional mapping with a strange attractor, Commun. Math.
Phys. 50 (1976) 69-77.
Hénon, M., and Pomeau, Y., Two strange attractors with a simple structure, Lec¬
ture Notes in Mathematics, 565 (1975) 29-68.
Hirsch, M., and Pugh, C., Stable manifolds and hyperbolic sets, Proceedings of the
Symposium in Pure Mathematics of the American Mathematical Society, vol.
XIV, (1970) 133-164.

- 79 -
Hurewicz, W., and Wallman, H., Dimension Theory, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, 1948.
Hutchinson, J., Fractals and self similarity, Indiana U. Math. J. 30(1981) 713-747.
Jiang, Y., On non-conformal semigroups, Preprint Article, State University of New
York at Stony Brook (1991).
Kahane, J., Some Random Series of Functions, Second Edition, Cambridge Univer¬
sity Press, Cambridge, England, 1985.
Ledrappier, F., Some relations between dimension and Lyapunov exponents, Comm.
Math. Phys. 81 (1981), pp 229-238.
Ledrappier, F., and Young, L. S., The metric entropy of diffeomorphisms part II:
Relations between entropy, exponents and dimension, Ann. Math. 122 (1985),
540-574.
Mandelbrot, B., Fractals: Form, Chance and Dimension, W. H. Freeman, San
Francisco, 1977.
Mather, J., Characterization of Anosov diffeomorphisms, Indag. Math. 30 (1968),
No. 5.
Mauldin, R., and Williams, S., Hausdorff dimension in graph directed constructions,
Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 309 (1988) 811-829.
McCluskey, H., and Manning, A., Hausdorff dimension for horseshoes, Erg. Theo.
& Dyn. Sys., 3(1983), 251-260.

- 80 -
Milnor, J., Non-expansive Hénon maps, Adv. in Math., 69 (1988) 109-114.
Smale, S., Differentiable dynamical systems, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 73 (1967),
747-817.
Temam, R., The Infinite Dimensional Dynamical Systems in Mechanics and
Physics, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1988.
Walters, P., An Introduction to Ergodic Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York, Hei¬
delberg, Berlin, 1982.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
I was born October 31, 1963, in Jiangsu Province, eastern China. I attended
the University of Science and Technology of China in Hefei, Anhui Province,
China, from 1979 to 1983. I was a graduate student at the Institute of Mathe¬
matics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, from 1983 to 1987, and at the University
of Florida since 1987.
- 81 -

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Albert Fathi, Chairman
Professor of Mathematics
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Louis Block
Professor of Mathematics
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
lames Keeslirig
assor of Mathematics
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
0 •
Stephen Summers
Associate Professor of Mathematics

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
David Groisser
Associate Professor of Mathematics
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Robert Buchler
Professor of Physics
This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department
of Mathematics in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and to the Graduate
School and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of Doctor of Philosophy.
May, 1992
Dean, Graduate School

UNIVFR.9ITV r- r-. ~
1 1 Óft o rioipSiil 1,111111,11
J 1262 08556 9688




PAGE 1

+$86'25)) ',0(16,21 2) 620( ,19$5,$17 6(76 %< ;,$2 3,1* *8 $ ',66(57$7,21 35(6(17(' 72 7+( *5$'8$7( 6&+22/ 2) 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ ,1 3$57,$/ )8/),//0(17 2) 7+( 5(48,5(0(176 )25 7+( '(*5(( 2) '2&725 2) 3+,/2623+< 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ nVVLKYPL \VLLLRLL R DLLVLEDLPD

PAGE 2

$&.12:/('*(0(176 ,W LV D SOHDVXUH WR WKDQN 3URIHVVRU $OEHUW )DWKL IRU KLV VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG YDOXn DEOH DGYLFH 7KH DXWKRU ZRXOG DOVR OLNH WR WKDQN WKH 0DWKHPDWLFV 'HSDUWPHQW IRU LWV VXSSRUW DQG WKH 1DWLRQDO 6FLHQFH )RXQGDWLRQ IRU LWV SDUWLDO VXPPHU ILQDQFLDO VXSSRUW

PAGE 3

7$%/( 2) &217(176 $&.12:/('*(0(176 LL $%675$&7 Y &+$37(56 ,1752'8&7,21 +$86'25)) ',0(16,21 $1' &$3$&,7< +DXVGRUII 0HDVXUH DQG 'LPHQVLRQ )URVWPDQfV /HPPD 7KH &DSDFLW\ 7+( +<3(5%2/,& 6(7 $1' /<$38129 (;321(176 7KH +\SHUEROLF 6HW 7KH 7RSRORJLFDO (QWURS\ 7KH 8QLIRUP /\DSXQRY ([SRQHQWV 7KH 'LVWRUWLRQ RI D %DOO XQGHU D 'LIIHRPRUSKLVP 7KH 3URRI RI 7KHRUHP 7KH &DVH RI D &A )ORZ 7+( +<3(5%2/,& 6(7 $1' 7232/2*,&$/ 35(6685( 7KH +\SHUEROLF 6HW 5HYLVLWHG LLL

PAGE 4

7RSRORJLFDO 3UHVVXUH $ 5RXJK (VWLPDWH RQ +DXVGRUI) 'LPHQVLRQ 8QGHU WKH 3LQFKLQJ &RQGLWLRQ 7KH 7UDQVYHUVDOV 7+( 6(/) 6,0,/$5 6(76 7KH 6HOI 6LPLODU 6HWV 7KH 8SSHU %RXQG 7KH /RZHU %RXQG 6RPH &RQWLQXLW\ LQ WKH &r 7RSRORJ\ 7+( +‹121 $775$&725 6800$5< $1' &21&/86,216 5()(5(1&(6 %,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ LY

PAGE 5

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

PAGE 6

&KDSWHU GHDOV ZLWK WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHWV 7KH VHOI VLPLODU VHWV RI LWHUDWHG PDSSLQJ V\VWHPV KDYH EHHQ VWXGLHG WKRURXJKO\ LQ WKH FDVHV ZKHUH FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV DUH FRQIRUPDO :H VWXG\ WKH FDVH ZKHUH WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHR PRUSKLVPV DUH QRW QHFHVVDULO\ FRQIRUPDO :H JLYH D QHZ GLVWRUWLRQ OHPPD IRU WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ PDSSLQJV 8VLQJ WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH RQ D VKLIW VSDFH ZH JLYH DQ XSn SHU HVWLPDWH RI WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ ZKHQ WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV DUH &A. DQG VDWLVI\ D m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

PAGE 7

&+$37(5 ,1752'8&7,21 )RU D WRSRORJLFDO VSDFH HVSHFLDOO\ D VXEVHW RI DQ (XFOLGHDQ VSDFH D YDULHW\ RI fGLPHQVLRQVf KDYH EHHQ LQWURGXFHG DQG VWXGLHG $PRQJ WKHP LW KDV EHHQ ZLGHO\ DJUHHG WKDW f+DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQf LV WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW RQH WR XVH ,Q WKH FDVH RI (XFOLGHDQ VSDFHV WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ DJUHHV ZLWK WKHLU WRSRn ORJLFDO GLPHQVLRQ ZKLFK DUH LQWHJHUV 7KRVH VXEVHWV ZLWK QRQLQWHJHU +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQV DUH FDOOHG fIUDFWDOVf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f 7KH SURSHUWLHV RI +DXVGRUII PHDVXUH DQG +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ KDYH EHHQ WKRURXJKO\ VWXGLHG E\ %HVLFRYLWFK HW DO ,Q WKLV SDSHU ZH VWXG\ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI WKH K\SHUEROLF VHWV WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHWV DQG WKH +QRQ DWWUDFWRUV

PAGE 8

*HQHUDOL]LQJ WKH FRQFHSW RI D K\SHUEROLF IL[HG SRLQW IRU D GLIIHUHQWLDEOH VHOI PDS RI D VPRRWK PDQLIROG SHRSOH LQWURGXFHG WKH K\SHUEROLF VHWV )RU FRQn YHQLHQFH ZH FDOO D GLIIHUHQWLDEOH RQH WR RQH VHOI PDS RI D VPRRWK PDQLIROG D GLIIHRPRUSKLVP 7KH K\SHUEROLF VHWV KDYH EHHQ VWXGLHG E\ 6PDOH f 0DWKHU f +LUVFK DQG 3XJK f DPRQJ RWKHU G\QDPLVWV $IWHU WKH LQWURGXFWLRQ RI 3HVLQfV WKHRU\ LW ZDV UHDOL]HG WKDW +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI LQYDULDQW PHDVXUHV ZDV UHODWHG WR G\QDPLFV DQG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV VWXGLHG LQ LWV ILQDO IRUP E\ /HGUDSSLHU DQG
PAGE 9

DQG 0DQQLQJ f +RZHYHU GXH WR WKH LQFUHDVH RI GLPHQVLRQV RQH GRHV QRW H[SHFW DV H[SOLFLW DQ LGHQWLW\ IRU WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ DV WKH RQH JLYHQ E\ 0F&OXVNH\ DQG 0DQQLQJ f 6HOI VLPLODU VHWV RI LWHUDWHG PDSSLQJ V\VWHPV DUH D VSHFLDO NLQG RI OLPLW VHWV 7KH\ KDYH EHHQ VWXGLHG WKRURXJKO\ LQ WKH FDVHV ZKHUH FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLI IHRPRUSKLVPV DUH FRQIRUPDO (VVHQWLDOO\ WKH FRQIRUPDO FRQVWUXFWLRQV DUH RQHn GLPHQVLRQDO DQG RQH KDV D VLPSOH IRUPXOD IRU WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ :H VWXG\ WKH FDVH ZKHUH WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV DUH QRW QHFHVVDULO\ FRQIRUPDO :H JLYH D QHZ YHUVLRQ RI GLVWRUWLRQ OHPPD 8VLQJ WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH RQ D VKLIW VSDFH ZH JLYH DQ XSSHU HVWLPDWH RI WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ ZKHQ WKH FRQVWUXFn WLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV DUH &A. DQG VDWLVI\ D N SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ IRU VRPH N 0RUHRYHU LI WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV DOVR VDWLVI\ WKH GLVMRLQW RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ ZH WKHQ JLYH D ORZHU ERXQG IRU WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ :H DOVR REn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f§ ; EH D &A GLIIHRPRUSKLVP ZLWK D FRPSDFW K\SHUEROLF VHW & 8 ZKHUH 8 LV DQ RSHQ VXEVHW LQ WKH QGLPHQVLRQDO 5LHPDQQLDQ PDQLIROG ; /HW I Affn XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RI I DQG OHW

PAGE 10

SA3 AH XQVWDEOH XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RI I 5HODEHO WKH QXPEHUV S? f f f SIOO DQG f f f ]f DV S? ‘ f SQ ZLWK WKH RUGHU 3L 3 f +Q 'HILQH W > Q@ f§rf 5 WKH FKDUDFWHULVWLF IXQFWLRQ E\ WVf SL f f f >V@ V >V@f[>V@L $f RU OLP %N /HW $ HQWI ?(f EH WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ RI I RQ /HW Uf§ Q LI SL S + K SQ f§$ ,I $%A ZKHUH $ OLPOr % DQG $N PD[^PD[ __MA__ rPD[ ??7[I r__r ` [fK [fK %N PD[^PD[__U[r ?( __7 PD[ ??7[IaN ?(X __r` [*$ [e. WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'.f 7KHRUHP LV SURYHG LQ &KDSWHU )RU WKH XSSHU ERXQG RI +DXVGRUII GLn PHQVLRQ RI D & K\SHUEROLF VHW DQG LWV WUDQVYHUVH XVLQJ WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH ZH KDYH 7KHRUHP ,, ,I I LV & SLQFKHG WKHQ +'.f W ZKHUH W LV XQLTXHO\ VXFK WKDW PD[^3I?.?Wf 3I?.WIf K W r` 8I LV & SLQFKHG DQG 3I?.LAWf WKHQ +'. Q :V[Iff W

PAGE 11

LV &A SLQFKHG DQG 3I?.LAWf AHQ +'. :X[Iff W 7KHRUHP ,, LV SURYHG LQ &KDSWHU )RU WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHWV ZH JLYH XSSHU DQG ORZHU ERXQGV IRU WKH +DXVGRUI) GLPHQVLRQ :H KDYH 7+(25(0 ,,, /HW ^ILM` EH WKH &r FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV IRU WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHW ( VDWLVI\LQJ WKH m SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ IRU VRPH SRVLWLYH QXPEHU N 6XSSRVH WKH GHULYDWLYHV RI DOO ^3LM` DUH +ROGHU FRQWLQXRXV RI RUGHU N ,I W LV WKH XQLTXH SRVLWLYH QXPEHU VXFK WKDW WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH 3HU $f WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'(f W /HW ^ILM` EH WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV IRU WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHW ( LQ DQ (XFOLGHDQ VSDFH 5` VDWLVI\LQJ ERWK WKH N SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ IRU VRPH SRVLWLYH QXPEHU N DQG LQ DGGLWLRQ WKH GLVMRLQW RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ 6XSSRVH WKH GHULYDWLYHV RI DOO ^ILM` DUH +ROGHU FRQWLQXRXV RI RUGHU N ,I W LV WKH XQLTXH SRVLWLYH QXPEHU VXFK WKDW WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH 3M $f WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'(f f§ 7KHRUHP ,,, LV SURYHG LQ &KDSWHU )RU D +QRQ DWWUDFWRU ZH KDYH 7+(25(0 ,9 /HW E 6XSSRVH WKDW $ LV D FRPSDFW LQYDULDQW DWWUDFWRU XQGHU WKH +QRQ PDS +D cf DQG DQ RUELW ^]Q [Q\Qf +Q]Rf` LV GHQVH LQ $ /HW 5 EH WKH ERXQG IRU $ VXFK WKDW IRU HYHU\ [\f ( $ ZH KDYH _[_ _\_ 5 'HQRWH P f§f§ DQG E f ?[V? $ f§ OLP VXS f§ 9 ORJ + + Nf Qf§P[f P P L

PAGE 12

7KHQ WKH XSSHU FDSDFLW\ ORJ P 7KHRUHP ,9 LV SURYHG LQ &KDSWHU )LQDOO\ ZH FRQFOXGH WKLV ZRUN E\ GLVFXVVLQJ WKH GLIILFXOW\ RI UHODWLQJ WKH +DXVGRUI) GLPHQVLRQ RI WKH +QRQ DWWUDFWRU WR WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ RI WKH +QRQ PDS & $f

PAGE 13

&+$37(5 +$86'25)) ',0(16,21 $1' &$3$&,7< i +DXVGRUII 0HDVXUH DQG 'LPHQVLRQ /HW ; Gf EH D PHWULF VSDFH DQG OHW V EH DQ\ QRQQHJDWLYH UHDO QXPEHU /HW & ; EH D VXEVSDFH RI ; /HW D EH D FROOHFWLRQ RI EDOOV ZLWK WKH XQLRQ RI DOO EDOOV FRQWDLQLQJ 6XFK D FROOHFWLRQ D LV FDOOHG D FRYHULQJ RI )RU DQ\ UHDO QXPEHU H LI HYHU\ EDOO LQ D KDV UDGLXV OHVV WKDQ RU HTXDO WR H WKHQ D LV FDOOHG DQ H FRYHULQJ RI 6XSSRVH D ^%^ L f ` DQG HDFK EDOO %M KDV D UDGLXV Uc :H GHQRWH E\ +A.f WKH TXDQWLW\ LQI9 U" LHL ZKHUH WKH LQILPXP LV WDNHQ RYHU DOO H FRYHULQJV RI ,I DQRWKHU UHDO SRVLWLYH QXPEHU H WKHQ DQ\ FRYHULQJ LV DOVR DQ H FRYHULQJ 7KXV n+VH.f LV QR ODUJHU WKDQ 2QH FDQ GHILQH WKH TXDQWLW\ +6.f :P+VH.f VXS+c.f H! :H VKDOO FDOO WKH TXDQWLW\ LV.f WKH +DXVGRUII V GLPHQVLRQDO PHDVXUH RI ,W FDQ EH HDVLO\ YHULILHG WKDW +DXVGRUII PHDVXUH LV LV DQ RXWHU PHDVXUH ZLWK WKH

PAGE 14

IROORZLQJ SURSHUWLHV "IVf :68Q$QfA:VOQf Q QV$ 8 %f +6$f +6%f ZKHUH $ DQG % KDYH GLVMRLQW FORVXUHV 0RUHRYHU IRU DQ\ UHDO SRVLWLYH QXPEHUV VWH E\ WKH GHILQLWLRQ 7LA.f LQI H FRYHULQJV LHL e Wf§V LQI 9nn L W FRYHULQJV H Wf§V .f 7KHUHIRUH LI V W DQG L.f RR WKHQ +O.f 8LQHWA+.f f +6.f 7KLV DOVR LPSOLHV WKDW LI W V DQG +6.f WKHQ +O^.f 7RR +HQFH ZH KDYH WKH IROORZLQJ LGHQWLW\ LQI^V L^.f ` VXS^V LV$Uf RR` 7KH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI WKH VHW LV GHILQHG E\ WKH DERYH QXPEHU GHQRWHG E\ +'.f ,W LV ZRUWK WR QRWLFH WKDW IRU DQ (XFOLGHDQ VSDFH WKH +DXVGRUII

PAGE 15

GLPHQVLRQ HTXDOV WKH WRSRORJLFDO GLPHQVLRQ DQG WKH +DXVGRUII PHDVXUH LV HTXDO WR WKH /HEHVJXH PHDVXUH PXOWLSOLHG E\ D FRQVWDQW IDFWRU $OVR LW LV QRWLFHG WKDW PDQ\ VXEVHWV RI (XFOLGHDQ VSDFHV KDYH QRQLQWHJHU +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQV 6XFK VHWV DUH FDOOHG IUDFWDOV 7KH +DXVGRUII PHDVXUH ZDV ILUVW LQWURGXFHG E\ +DXVGRUII LQ EDVHG RQ &DUDWKHRGRU\fV LGHD RI XVLQJ FRYHUV WR GHILQH PHDVXUHV 6LQFH WKHQ PDQ\ UHVHDUFK ZRUNV KDYH EHHQ GRQH +HUH ZH JLYH D ZHOONQRZQ /HPPD RI )URVWPDQ ZKLFK ZLOO EH XVHG ODWHU ZKHQ HVWLPDWLQJ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHWV 6HH 7HPDP f RU +XUHZLF] DQG :DOOPDQ f IRU RWKHU SURSHUWLHV RI WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQV DQG +DXVGRUII PHDVXUHV DQG H[DPSOHV RI IUDFWDO VHWV i )URVWPDQfV /HPPD 7KH IROORZLQJ OHPPD )URVWPDQfV OHPPD LV ZLGHO\ XVHG ZKHQ HVWLPDWLQJ +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQV ,W JLYHV D QHFHVVDU\ DQG VXIILFLHQW FRQGLWLRQ IRU D VXEVHW RI DQ (XFOLGHDQ VSDFH WR DOORZ D QRQ WULYLDO +DXVGRUII PHDVXUH )RU FRQYHQLHQFH ZH XVH ?%? WR GHQRWH WKH GLDPHWHU RI D VHW % ,I G LV WKH PHWULF WKHQ ?%? VXS^G[\f [\ %` /(00$ /HW ;Gf EH DQ O GLPHQVLRQDO (XFOLGHDQ VSDFH RU DQ O GLPHQn VLRQDO PDQLIROG ZLWK WKH PHWULF GHQRWHG E\ G 6XSSRVH & ; LV D FRPSDFW VXEVHW 7KHQ KDV D SRVLWLYH V GLPHQVLRQDO +DXVGRUII PHDVXUH LI DQG RQO\ LI WKHUH FDQ EH GHILQHG D SUREDELOLW\ PHDVXUH S RQ ZLWK WKH SURSHUW\ WKDW IRU DOO EDOOV % LQ .Gf DQG VRPH SRVLWLYH FRQVWDQW & WKH PHDVXUH VDWLVILHV S%f&?%?V

PAGE 16

3522) 7KH fLIf SDUW LV REYLRXV *LYHQ D SUREDELOLW\ PHDVXUH S RQ ZLWK S%f&?%? IRU DOO EDOOV % ZH VHH WKDW SUREDELOLW\ PHDVXUH LV FORVH WR D +DXVGRUII PHDVXUH ,Q IDFW IRU DQ\ JLYHQ H FRYHULQJ ^%c L f ` ZKHUH WKH UDGLXV U _%c? ZH KDYH (Uc (O%c,9 (0Afr 0.fr& f& LHL LHL LHL 7KXV WKH +DXVGRUII PHDVXUH LV.f 6& 7KDW SURYHV WKH fLIf SDUW 7R SURYH WKH fRQO\ LIf SDUW OHW V EH JLYHQ VXFK WKDW /6^.f DQG OHW >%^ L ` EH DQ\ FRYHULQJ RI EDOOV )RU DQ\ H RQH PXVW KDYH HLWKHU VXS^_+_  e ` H RU VXS^_+_ L f ` e‘ 7KXV LW IROORZV WKDW A ?%L?V ZKHUH PLQ^H+H.f` LHL ,I H LV VPDOO HQRXJK WKHQ DQG DOVR ZLOO EH VWULFWO\ SRVLWLYH 7KHUHn IRUH ZH FDQ IL[ VRPH VXFK WKDW IRU DOO FRYHULQJV RI EDOOV RI WKH VXP ( O%cOV e U LHL 7KH VDPH FRQFOXVLRQ ZLOO EH WUXH LI WKH EDOOV DUH UHSODFHG E\ FXEHV )RU D SRVLWLYH LQWHJHU P ZH GHILQH D G\DGLF LQWHUYDO RI RUGHU P WR EH DQ\ LQWHUYDO RI WKH IRUP >SP S OfP@ ZKHUH S LV DQ\ LQWHJHU $ G\DGLF FXEH RI RUGHU P LV GHILQHG DV D &DUWHVLDQ SURGXFW RI G\DGLF LQWHUYDOV RI RUGHU P &RQVLGHU QRZ D FRYHULQJ RI XVLQJ G\DGLF FXEHV RI RUGHU P ,Q RUGHU WR LQWURGXFH D SUREDELOLW\ PHDVXUH RQ OHW XV GLVWULEXWH WKH PDVV aPV XQLIRUPO\ RQ HDFK

PAGE 17

G\DGLF FXEH RI RUGHU P WKDW LQWHUVHFWV :H WKHQ JHW D PHDVXUH ILr1 2Q HDFK G\DGLF FXEH RI RUGHU P f§ ZH NHHS WKH PHDVXUH LLI LWV PDVV GRHV QRW H[FHHG VPB f RU ZH PXOWLSO\ E\ D FRQVWDQW OHVV WKDQ LQ VXFK D ZD\ WKDW WKH UHVXOWLQJ PHDVXUH KDV PDVV WKDW ZD\ ZH JHW D PHDVXUH )RU HDFK N WKH PHDVXUH LV REWDLQHG IURP LQ WKH VDPH ZD\ WKDW LV &NL P&N RQ HDFK G\DGLF FXEH RI RUGHU P f§ N f§ ZLWK &OHDUO\ LV LQGHSHQGHQW RI N ZKHQ N LV ODUJH HQRXJK 7KHQ ZH FDQ ZULWH P B P 9PN a 9 f 1RWLFH WKH PHDVXUH LV FDUULHG E\ WKH G\DGLF FXEHV RI RUGHU P ZKLFK LQWHUVHFW DQG ZH KDYH +P'f IRU HDFK G\DGLF FXEH RI RUGHU P f§ N ZKHUH N f f f (DFK SRLQW RI LV FRQWDLQHG LQ VRPH G\DGLF FXEH VXFK WKDW WKH IROORZLQJ HTXDOLW\ KROGV +P'f F?'?V F UV ZKHUH O LV WKH WRSRORJLFDO GLPHQVLRQ RI ; )RU HDFK SRLQW RI OHW XV FRQVLGHU WKH ODUJHVW VXFK FXEH ZH JHW D FRYHULQJ RI E\ GLVMRLQW G\DGLF FXEHV 'Q

PAGE 18

7KHQ XVLQJ WKH SURSHUW\ RI RQH KDV WKH IROORZLQJ HVWLPDWH IRU WKH QRUP RI WKH PHDVXUH cLP Q Q :H QRUPDOL]H WKH PHDVXUH ILP WKURXJK P__P__ VWLOO GHQRWHG DV P :H WKXV JHW D SUREDELOLW\ PHDVXUH ?LP ZLWK rUDQf 7fLe!U IRU HDFK G\DGLF FXEH RI RUGHU OHVV WKDQ RU HTXDO WR P DQG >LP LV FDUULHG E\ D JLYHQ QHLJKERUKRRG RI LI P LV ODUJH HQRXJK )URP WKH VHTXHQFH ^PP f f f ` ZH FDQ H[WUDFW D VXEVHTXHQFH PZKLFK FRQYHUJHV ZHDNO\ 7KH OLPLW GHQRWHG E\ LV D SUREDELOLW\ PHDVXUH FDUULHG E\ DQG $'f IRU HDFK G\DGLF FXEH 1RZ JLYHQ DQ LQWHUYDO RI OHQJWK ILQG N VXFK WKDW r E A WKHQ WKH LQWHUYDO LV FRYHUHG E\ WZR G\DGLF LQWHUYDOV RI OHQJWK ar? *LYHQ D EDOO RI GLDPHWHU E LW LV FRYHUHG E\ O G\DGLF FXEHV RI RUGHU N 7KHUHIRUH $%fAWaO?%?f IRU HDFK EDOO % /HW & Af r DQG WKHQ WKH fRQO\ LIf SDUW LV FRPSOHWH _

PAGE 19

i 7KH &DSDFLW\ 7KHUH KDYH EHHQ PDQ\ RWKHU GLPHQVLRQV GHILQHG IRU D WRSRORJLFDO VSDFH EHn VLGHV WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ $PRQJ WKHP LV WKH FDSDFLW\ ZKLFK VRPH SHRSOH FDOO IUDFWDO GLPHQVLRQ DQG RWKHUV FDOO HQWURS\ GLPHQVLRQ /HW ; Gf EH DQ\ PHWn ULF VSDFH /HW 1;Hf GHQRWH WKH PLQLPDO FDUGLQDOLW\ RI DQ H FRYHULQJ RI EDOOV RI ; 1RWH WKDW 1;Hf LV WKH PLQLPXP QXPEHU RI UDGLL H EDOOV QHHGHG WR FRYHU ; :KHQ ; LV JLYHQ 1;Hf LV D GHFUHDVLQJ IXQFWLRQ RI H 7KH FDSDFLW\ RI ; GHQRWHG E\ &;f LV JLYHQ E\ &;f OLQNXS H ORJH 7KH FDSDFLW\ &;f LV DOVR FDOOHG WKH XSSHU FDSDFLW\ ,Q WKH VDPH ZD\ ZH GHILQH WKH ORZHU FDSDFLW\ &B;f E\ &;f OLPLQI O4JA;fef Hf§ ORJH 0DQGHOEURW KDV VXJJHVWHG DQ DOWHUQDWLYH ZD\ RI GHILQLQJ FDSDFLW\ /HW &6;f OLPVXSHV$U$n Hf ef§! 7KH XSSHU FDSDFLW\ LV JLYHQ E\ &;f LQI^V &6;f ` $V IRU ORZHU FDSDFLW\ LI ZH OHW &6;f OLPLQIeV1;Hf ef§2

PAGE 20

7KHQ WKH ORZHU FDSDFLW\ LV JLYHQ E\ e;f LQI^V! errf ` ,W LV HDV\ WR YHULI\ WKH WZR GHILQLWLRQV ZLWK HDFK RWKHU $ FRYHULQJ XVLQJ GLDPHWHU H EDOOV LV LQGHHG DQ f§H FRYHULQJ 6R &6^;f OLPLQI HV1;Hf ef§ OLP LQI ef§f e FRYHULQJV UL LHL QV^[f :H KDYH +';f &;f &;f ,W LV ZRUWK PHQWLRQLQJ WKDW WKH LQHTXDOLW\ FDQ LQGHHG EH D VWULFW RQH 6HH 7HPDP f IRU VXFK H[DPSOHV 7KH IROORZLQJ IDFW GXH WR )DWKL f DERXW FDSDFLW\ LV YHU\ XVHIXO ,W UHZULWHV WKH FDSDFLWLHV DV WKH OLPLWV RI VHTXHQFHV /HPPD ,2 DQG WKHQ &;f OLP VXS e ORJ 1^;Hf ORJH OLP VXS Qf§ RR ?RJ1;Qf f§Q ORJ &;f OLP LQI ef§ ORJ 1;Hf ORJH OLP LQI Qf§!RR ORJ 1;Q6f f§Q ORJ 3522) 7R VLPSOLI\ QRWDWLRQV OHW DQG GHILQH QHf >ORJV ORJ @

PAGE 21

:H KDYH OLP QHf RR DQG OLP AaU HA2 HA2ORJ Qef 6LQFH 1; Hf GHFUHDVLQJ RI H 1;QAf 1^;Hf L9;!feff ,W LV UHDVRQDEOH WR DVVXPH H :H KDYH ORJL9SUIOQeff ORJ 1;Hf ORJ 1; IOQeff f§ ORJ e a f§ ORJ e a f§ ORJ e 1RZ OHW e f§! DQG ZH FDQ REWDLQ WKH HTXDOLWLHV GHVLUHG )RU RWKHU SURSHUWLHV RI FDSDFLW\ VHH 7HPDP f

PAGE 22

&+$37(5 7+( +<3(5%2/,& 6(7 $1' /<$38129 (;321(176 i 7KH +\SHUEROLF 6HW ,Q WKLV FKDSWHU ZH JLYH DQ XSSHU ERXQG IRU WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI D K\SHUEROLF VHW XVLQJ WKH XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV %\ GLIIHRPRUSKLVP ZH PHDQ D GLIIHUHQWLDEOH RQH WR RQH PDS /HW 8 EH DQ RSHQ VHW LQ D VPRRWK 5LHPDQQLDQ PDQLIROG ; DQG 8 f§ ; D &r GLIIHRPRUSKLVP IURP 8 RQWR DQ RSHQ VXEVHW RI ; ,I [ LV LQ ; ZH GHQRWH E\ 7[; WKH WDQJHQW VSDFH RI ; DW [ DQG E\ 7[I 7[; f§ 7MA; WKH GHULYDWLYH RI DW [ 0RUH JHQHUDOO\ ZH GHQRWH E\ 7(; WKH UHVWULFWLRQ RI WKH WDQJHQW EXQGOH RI ; WR D VXEVHW RI ; '(),1,7,21 :H VD\ WKDW D FRPSDFW VHW & 8 LV K\SHUEROLF IRU I LI I.f DQG LI WKHUH LV D 7I LQYDULDQW VSOLWWLQJ RI WKH WDQJHQW EXQGOH ( 7(; (V p (X VXFK WKDW OLP M ORJ PD[ ??7[IN ?( __f Nf§!RR ;O DQG OLP A ORJPD[ ??7[IaN ?(X __f f§ [H. ZKHUH WKH QRUP LV REWDLQHG IURP D 5LHPDQQLDQ PHWULF RQ ; ,Q WKH DERYH GHILQLWLRQ ZH XVHG WKH VXEDGGLWLYLW\ RI WKH WZR VHTXHQFHV OrJPD[ ??7[IaN ?(X __f DQG ORJPD[__7[IN ?( __f

PAGE 23

WR REWDLQ WKH H[LVWHQFH RI WKH OLPLWV 7KH QXPEHU U JLYHQ E\ U PD[L OLP PD[ ,,7[IN ,S} ,,r OLP PD[??7[IaN _UX __r` NARR[e. NARR[f. LV FDOOHG WKH VNHZQHVV RI 1RWH WKDW WKH QRWLRQ RI K\SHUEROLFLW\ GRHV QRW GHSHQG RQ WKH FKRLFH RI WKH 5LHPDQQLDQ PHWULF :H ZLOO QHHG WKH QRWLRQ RI WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ ZKLFK LV GHILQHG LQ WKH IROORZLQJ VHFWLRQ 5HIHU WR :DOWHUV f IRU GLIIHUHQW GHILQLWLRQV DQG SURSHUWLHV 7KH GHILQLWLRQ RI WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ LV LQ &KDSWHU DQG WKH WKHRU\ RI +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ FDQ EH IRXQG LQ +XUHZLF] DQG :DOOPDQ f 2QH FDQ DOVR XVH 7HPDP f DV D UHIHUHQFH IRU WKH GHILQLWLRQ DQG SURSHUWLHV RI WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI D PHWULF VSDFH 7KH IROORZLQJ WKHRUHP JLYHV D EHWWHU XSSHU ERXQG IRU +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ WKDQ WKH RQH REWDLQHG E\ )DWKL f DOVR VHH )DWKL f IRU VLPLODU UHVXOWV LQ WKH FDVH RI K\SHUEROLF OLQHDU WRUDO PDSV )RU UHODWHG UHVXOWV LQ GLPHQVLRQ VHH 0F&OXVNH\ DQG 0DQQLQJ f DQG VHH DOVR /HGUDSSLHU DQG
PAGE 24

'HILQH U >2 Q@ L" WKH FKDUDFWHULVWLF IXQFWLRQ E\ 7Vf Q fn f r>@ V :f0>m@L /HW $ HQWI ?(f EH WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ RI I RQ /HW Uf§$f RU f§ Q LI SL S + E SQ f§$ ,I $%A ZKHUH $ ??P$N % OLPI"r DQG $N PD[^PD[__UDIF__PD[__ULB__` [(. [(. %N PD[^PD[__7[IN ?( __7 PD[ ??7[IaN ?(X __O` [H. ;($ WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'.f 7KH FRQGLWLRQ $% LV FDOOHG WKH SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ 5(0$5. ,Q IDFW DIWHU UHRUGHULQJ % H[SS? 6R % LV WKH ODUJHVW RI WKHVH /\DSXQRY QXPEHUV 1HLWKHU $ QRU % GHSHQGV RQ WKH FKRLFH RI WKH 5LHPDQQLDQ PHWULF 6RPH SHRSOH ZRXOG SUHIHU WR GHILQH $ f§ $? % %? DV +LUVFK DQG 3XJK f ,Q WKH FDVH ZKHQ f§ ; WKH FRQGLWLRQ $%A LPSOLHV WKDW WKH VWDEOH DQG XQVWDEOH IROLDWLRQV RI DUH & VHH +LUVFK DQG 3XJK f 5HPDUN DOVR WKDW WKH FRQGLWLRQ $% LV RSHQ LQ WKH VSDFH RI & GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV ZLWK &r WRSRORJ\ 5HPDUN :H FKRRVH VHWV RI WKH IRUP U??]r1UQIar%Ir[fDf WR FRYHU ZKHUH D LV LQ D P Df VSDQQLQJ VXEVHW RI .f ZKRVH FDUGLQDOLW\ JURZV DFFRUGLQJ WR $ 7KH OLIWLQJ RI 'Aa7AUQIar%Ir[f Df WR WKH WDQJHQW VSDFH 7[; ORRNV URXJKO\ OLNH DQ HOOLSVRLG ZKRVH D[HV DUH JLYHQ E\ WKH XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV DQG QRZ WKH +DXVGRUII PHDVXUH RI FDQ EH HVWLPDWHG E\ FRYHULQJ WKHVH HOOLSVRLGV E\ EDOOV 7KH SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ $% LV QHHGHG LQ /HPPD WR FRSH ZLWK WKH HIIHFWV RI QRQOLQHDULW\ RQ WKHVH HOOLSVRLGV

PAGE 25

i 7KH 7RSRORJLFDO (QWURS\ /HW ; EH D FRPSDFW WRSRORJLFDO VSDFH DQG OHW ; f§r ; EH D FRQWLQXRXV VHOI PDS RQ ; :H VKDOO XVH RSHQ FRYHUV RI ; GHQRWHG E\ D "rff WR GHILQH WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ RI ZKLFK ZH GHQRWH E\ HQWIf ,I D DUH RSHQ FRYHUV RI ; WKHQ GHQRWH E\ D 9 WKHLU MRLQ ZKLFK LV WKH RSHQ FRYHU E\ DOO VHWV RI WKH IRUP $&? % ZKHUH $ f D % e 7KH MRLQ RI DQ\ ILQLWH FROOHFWLRQ RI RSHQ FRYHUV RI ; LV GHILQHG VLPLODUO\ )RU WKH RSHQ FRYHU D OHW 1Df GHQRWH WKH QXPEHU RI RSHQ VHWV LQ D DQG OHW +Df ORJ 1Df 6LQFH LV FRQWLQXRXV D LV DOVR DQ RSHQ FRYHU ZLWK 9Rf 1Df 7KXV ZH FDQ LQWURGXFH WKH RSHQ FRYHU Ye,T arD DQG OHW DQ +?AaT Brrf 1RZ 1D 9 "f 1Df ‘ 1f DQG KHQFH +D 9 f +Df "ff 7KXV WKH VHTXHQFH ^DQ` KDV WKH VXEDGGLWLYLW\ DV IROORZV +Q mYWRnUnDf r IafRf DN DQ 7KH VXEDGGLWLYLW\ LPSOLHV WKDW OLP f§DQ Qf§!RR Q OLP +I Qf§!RR Q f§N ?Qf§ YU R fmf H[LVWV :H FDOO LW WKH HQWURS\ RI UHODWLYH WR WKH FRYHU D GHQRWHG E\ KIDf )RU WKH FRQWLQXRXV VHOI PDS RI ; WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ LV JLYHQ E\ HQWIf VXS KIDf D ZKHUH WKH VXSUHPXP LV WDNHQ RYHU DOO WKH RSHQ FRYHUV RI ;

PAGE 26

)RU ; Gf D PHWULF VSDFH %RZHQ LQWURGXFHG WKH IROORZLQJ DOWHUQDWLYH ZD\ RI GHILQLQJ WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ %RZHQfV GHILQLWLRQ UHODWHV WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQn WURS\ WR WKH VSDQQLQJ VHW 7KLV LV XVHG E\ )DWKL f WR UHODWH WKH XSSHU ERXQG RI WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI D K\SHUEROLF VHW WR WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ RI WKH GLIIHRPRUSKLVP :H DOVR XVH WKLV GHILQLWLRQ ZKHQ UHODWLQJ WKH /\DSXQRY H[SRn QHQWV DQG WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ WR WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ 6HH :DOWHUV f IRU D SURRI WKDW LQ FDVH RI D PHWULF VSDFH %RZHQfV GHILQLWLRQ LV HTXLYDOHQW WR WKH RQH XVLQJ FRYHUV JLYHQ DERYH )RU HDFK SRVLWLYH LQWHJHU GHILQH D QHZ PHWULF RQ ; E\ 0[\f Q r1D[ rrrf}r\ff LQf§ ZKHUH [\ e ; /HW EH D FRPSDFW VXEVHW RI ; DQG OHW ) & )RU D UHDO QXPEHU H ZH VD\ WKDW ) LV DQ Q Hf VSDQQLQJ VHW RI LI IRU HYHU\ SRLQW [ e WKHUH H[LVWV \ e ) VXFK WKDW GQ[\f H $ VXEVHW ( RI LV VDLG WR EH QHf VHSDUDWHG LI GQ[ \f H IRU DQ\ GLVWLQFW [\ e ( 'HQRWH WKH VPDOOHVW FDUGLQDOLW\ RI DQ\ Q Hf VSDQQLQJ VHW E\ UfH f DQG GHQRWH WKH ODUJHVW FDUGLQDOLW\ RI DQ\ QHf VHSDUDWHG VHW E\ VQH f ,W LV HDV\ WR FKHFN WKDW UQH. If VQH.If UQH.If 1RZ OHW UH If OLP VXS UfH f f§ 22 VH If OLP VXS VQH f Qf§RR DQG

PAGE 27

1RWLFH WKDW UH.If DQG VH.If KDYH D FRPPRQ OLPLW ZKHQ H f§! 7KH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ RI GHQRWHG E\ HQWIf LV JLYHQ E\ WKH FRPPRQ OLPLW HQWIf VXS OLP UH f VXS OLP VH f $7&; e! .&; e! ZKHUH WKH VXSUHPXP LV WDNHQ RYHU WKH FROOHFWLRQ RI DOO FRPSDFW VXEVHWV RI ; i 7KH 8QLIRUP /\DSXQRY ([SRQHQWV /HW / ( f§r ( EH D OLQHDU PDS EHWZHHQ QGLPHQVLRQDO (XFOLGHDQ VSDFHV :H ZULWH DL/f VXS LQI ??/If??(L )F(GLP) L SH)??S??( O DQG 8L/f FW?/f f f f Dc/f IRU L f f f Q 2QH FDQ YHULI\ WKDW D?/f Fr7f f f f RWQ/f DQG WKDW RM/f LV WKH QRUP RI WKH PDS $O/f $O( f§}f $O(n REWDLQHG IURP / ,W IROORZV WKDW LI /n ( f§ ( LV DQRWKHU OLQHDU PDS EHWZHHQ QGLPHQVLRQDO (XFOLGHDQ VSDFHV WKHQ XM/n/f X!L/nf ‘ Xc/f IRU L f f f Q &RQVLGHU 7[I DQL 7[Ia ([ f§! (AB[A[\ $V LQ 7HPDP f ZH DUH JRLQJ WR GHILQH WKH fVWDEOHf DQG fXQVWDEOHf XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RI RQ ZKLFK FDQ EH XQGHUVWRRG DV WKH XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RQ WKH VWDEOH EXQGOH (V DQG WKH XQVWDEOH EXQGOH (X UHVSHFWLYHO\ /HW EH D FRPSDFW K\SHUEROLF VHW IRU WKH & GLIIHRPRUSKLVP ZLWK 7M; (6p(8 DV DQ 7I LQYDULDQW VSOLWWLQJ 'HQRWH WKDW Q? GLPeV DQG m GLP(X 7KXV WKH GLPHQVLRQ RI ; LV Q? IQ Q 7KH XQLIRUP VWDEOH /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV DQG /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV DUH GHILQHG DV IROORZV

PAGE 28

'HILQLWLRQ )RU L QL GHILQH ZIIf f§ VXS[AMA X^7[I?([f 7KH GHILQLWLRQ RI ORc LPSOLHV WKDW RIWrf DWILf 7KDW JLYHV WKH VXEDGGLWLYLW\ RI?RJX!IINf %\ WKH VXEDGGLWLYLW\ WKH OLPLW OLP MORJcINf Nf§!RF H[LVWV DQG LV GHQRWHG E\ XI /HW SI Y? DQG SI YI f§ YIBL IRU L Q? :H FDOO WKRVH S WKH XQLIRUP VWDEOH /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RI I $ VLPLODU DUJXPHQW WR DERYH OHDGV WR WKH XQLIRUP XQVWDEOH /\DSXQRY H[SRn QHQWV ZKLFK DUH GHILQHG DV IROORZV '(),1,7,21 )RU L GHILQH !ff VXS[AM Xc7[IaA?([f 7KH GHILQLWLRQ RI X!c LPSOLHV WKDW r`!f 7KDW JLYHV WKH VXEDGGLWLYLW\ RI?RJXAINf %\ WKH VXEDGGLWLYLW\ WKH OLPLW OLP  ORJRIIf ef§ H[LVWV DQG LV GHQRWHG E\ Lf /HW SA YDQG Sf Lf f§ IRU ? L Q :H FDOO WKRVH SA WKH XQLIRUP XQVWDEOH /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RI I 5(0$5. ,W LV ZRUWK WR QRWLFH WKDW WKH XQVWDEOH XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RI DUH HTXDO WR WKH VWDEOH XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RI f§ $V D PDWWHU RI IDFW WKH XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV S" DQG Sf DUH QHJDWLYH QXPEHUV

PAGE 29

i 7KH 'LVWRUWLRQ RI D %DOO XQGHU D 'LIIHRPRUSKLVP $W HDFK [ ; WKH WDQJHQW VSDFH 7[; LV D OLQHDU (XFOLGHDQ VSDFH $V LQ )DWKL f GHILQH QV ( f§r (V DQG UX ( f§r (X WR EH WZR SURMHFWLRQV /HW __ f __e} DQG __ f __eX EH QRUPV RQ (V DQG (X UHVSHFWLYHO\ GHULYHG IURP WKH (XFOLGHDQ VWUXFWXUH RI WKH WDQJHQW EXQGOH ( )RU D YHFWRU Y ([ 7[; RXU PD[ QRUP __Y__ LV GHILQHG E\ ,08 PD[^__UVXf__e __UmXf__AX` :H DGRSW WKLV PD[ QRUP WKURXJKRXW WKLV FKDSWHU /RFDOO\ DURXQG [ LQ ; LV D QHLJKERUKRRG KRPHRPRUSKLF WR DQ RSHQ VXEVHW LQ L"QLQ IWQ /HW 4[ GHQRWH WKH RULJLQ RI WKH OLQHDU VSDFH ([ 7[; (;p(; 8VLQJ WKH H[SRQHQWLDO PDS RI VRPH 5LHPDQQLDQ PHWULF RQ ; ZH FDQ ILQG D &rr PDS 8 f§! ; ZKHUH 8 LV DQ RSHQ QHLJKERUKRRG RI WKH ]HUR VHFWLRQ LQ 7; VXFK WKDW IRU HDFK [ LQ ; WKH PDS ; ?XF?7[; LV D GLIIHRPRUSKLVP RQWR VRPH RSHQ VXEVHW LQ ; $OVR [2[f [ DQG WKH GHULYDWLYH RI ; DW WKH RULJLQ ; RI 7[; LV HTXDO WR WKH LGHQWLW\ 2I FRXUVH WKH WDQJHQW VSDFH RI ([ DW WKH RULJLQ ; LV LGHQWLILHG WR ([ LWVHOI 6LQFH LV FRPSDFW ZH FDQ IL[ D UHDO QXPEHU IRU DOO [ LQ WKDW [ %2[6f f§! ; LV ZHOO GHILQHG DQG L_0_ __U0IfOO + ZKHQ Y %2[f &KRRVH n[ IRU HDFK [ LQ ; VXFK WKDW I2[%2[n[fffFI^[f%2I^[fOff

PAGE 30

6LQFH LV FRPSDFW ZH FDQ IL[ D VPDOO n PHHWLQJ WKH QHHGV RI DOO [ f DV ; ,I 6n ZULWH IRU PLQMLAL` QRWLFLQJ WKDW ; LV VWLOO ZHOOGHILQHG RQ %;f IRU HDFK [ f 'HILQH IRU Y f %;f WKH PDS I[ %; f r (I[M E\ I[Yf 2-A RIR [Yf 6LQFH WKH GHULYDWLYH RI ; DW ; LV HTXDO WR WKH LGHQWLW\ WKH GHULYDWLYH RI I[ DW WKH RULJLQ 2[ LV HTXDO WR 7[ WKXV 7I[2[f 7[I ([ f§A A[f 1RZ DVVXPH WKDW I 8 f§! ; LV D GLIIHRPRUSKLVP +HQFH I[ %;f f§! (M[` LV DOVR 8VLQJ WKH FRPSDFWQHVV RI DQG 7D\ORUfV IRUPXOD ZH FDQ ZULWH IRU Y QHDU ; LQ 7[; I[Yf aI[^2[f 7I[2[fYf J[Yf 7[IYf I J[Yf ZKHUH __DXf__ =?__X__ IRU VRPH SRVLWLYH QXPEHU $ QRW GHSHQGLQJ RQ [ $JDLQ VLQFH LV FRPSDFW E\ PDNLQJ VPDOOHU LI QHFHVVDU\ DQG $ ELJ HQRXJK WKHQ IRU DQ\ Y f %;f I[Yf 7[IYf J[Yf ZKHUH __[Xf__ LG__X__ DQG $ LV D FRQVWDQW QRW GHSHQGLQJ RQ [ 5HSHDW WKH DERYH DUJXPHQW IRU WR JHW aI[OYf 7[IaOYf J[Yf ZKHUH __A]Yf__ L__X__ /HPPD /HW EH DV DERYH )RU DQ\ SRVLWLYH QXPEHU H WKHUH H[LVWV D SRVLWLYH QXPEHU WMT VXFK WKDW DW HDFK [ f XQGHU WKH PDSV I[ DQG I[A

PAGE 31

ZKHQ 2 Uc WMT WKH LPDJH RI D EDOO FHQWHUHG DW 2[ LQ ([ VDWLVILHV n0%^fQff & Hf7[I%2WULff I?%2[Yff F Hf7[I,%2[Yff 3522) 7KLV IROORZV HDVLO\ IURP WKH FRPSDFWQHVV RI DQG WKH IDFW WKDW WKH PDS 7[IfaOI[ %2Wf!7[; KDV WKH GHULYDWLYH LGHQWLW\ DW 2[ ,Q RUGHU WR SURYH 7KHRUHP ZH QRWLFH WKDW 1S? 1 SQ DUH WKH XQLn IRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RI DQG WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ HQWIA?MAf 1 f HQW_If 6R LI ZH FDQ VKRZ WKDW 7KHRUHP LV WUXH IRU WKHQ LW LV DOVR WUXH IRU 6LQFH $%A ZH FDQ OHW 1 EH ODUJH HQRXJK WKDW $A%A :LWKRXW ORVV RI JHQHUDOLW\ VLPSO\ DVVXPH $?%Mr 7KH QH[W OHPPD WHOOV WKH GLVWRUWLRQ RI EDOOV XQGHU LWHUDWHG PDSV 7KH SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ LV XVHG /(00$ 'HILQH D VXEVHW LQ ([ E\ %P2[Df ^X H ([???"IL[faI[Yf?? D :I-LIU\I[+WI: rL P f§ ` ZKHUH D DQG P LV D SRVLWLYH LQWHJHU /HW I 8 f§} ; EH D &A GLIIHRPRUSKLVP ZLWK D FRPSDFW K\SHUEROLF VHW DQG $?%A 7KHQ IRU DQ\ H WKHUH H[LVWV \ VXFK WKDW %P2[Df & OHU^7I-OP^[f%2IP^[\DffQ7IS^[f%2IP^[fDff`

PAGE 32

IRU DOO P DQG DOO [ LQ ZKHQ D UM 3522) 0DNH H VPDOOHU LI QHFHVVDU\ VR WKDW Hf DQG %?O Hf /HW UM EH WKH VDPH DV LQ /HPPD PDNLQJ LW VPDOOHU LI QHFHVVDU\ VR WKDW UM H$A /HPPD JLYHV %LfDf & OHf7I%2Ic^WfDffQOHf7I?%2Q[fDff 6R WKH FDVH P IROORZV 6XSSRVH WKDW RXU FRQFOXVLRQ LV WUXH IRU P DW DOO [ f :H VKRZ WKDW LW LV DOVR WUXH IRU P DW DOO ƒn DQG FRPSOHWH WKH LQGXFWLRQ SURFHVV ,W LV FOHDU WKDW [PO2[Rcff & %P\[fRf DQG VR %PO2[RWf & I[f MA[M Dff II[M%PDff 7KXV IRU DQ\ Y f %PL2[FHf ZH FDQ KDYH [fXf Yf ZAHUH X f H[LVWV $SSO\LQJ WKH LQGXFWLRQ K\SRWKHVLV DW WKH SRLQW I[f IRU P ZH REWDLQ WKDW X e+nQVmfmff Q UUf%WZRfff DQG LQ SDUWLFXODU ZH FDQ SLFN VRPH Z? f %2IPL[fDf

PAGE 33

ZLWK HfP7 PX!Lf X 0RUHRYHU DQG +0:f,, EHFDXVH __7IP ?( __ %" DQG ??7IaP ?(} __ f ,W IROORZV WKDW __X__ HfP%nL D D DQG WKXV fXf 7[fBZf rfff LV ZHOOGHILQHG ZLWK OOVOfXf__ D__X__ D f efP%IPD HO HfP f D$A 6LQFH PD;MJA ??7[I?? $ L ZH KDYH __[Xf__ $c __Q__ IRU DOO [ f DQG Y f ([ 7KXV 7Un%nDff $cO%2I+[fDf DQG 7[UQ%2[Dff $LQ%2IQ^[fDf IROORZV +HQFH }mfff fe HfP$>P%,Dff &

PAGE 34

ZKLFK DOORZV XV WR SLFN VRPH X f % IP?A[\ Df VDWLVI\LQJ eLef-7f!1 MZmf 6HWWLQJ Z HfWWL HWQf f %MP?[\ Df WKHQ Y 7Ia?^ efP7 IaPZLff HO HfP7PfXf HUO7IP?Zf VKRZLQJ WKDW Y f efr7ff%r1O_Dff +HQFH ZH FRQFOXGH WKDW DW [ RQH KDV I:Lr4f F O efPUUPfILPZDff 6LPLODUO\ DSSO\LQJ LQGXFWLRQ K\SRWKHVLV DW B[f DQG FRQVLGHULQJ WKH UHn ODWLRQ I[f r^%PL2[ Rff & rf RQH REWDLQV DQRWKHU UHODWLRQ :2r4f F L HU!UUWO:!mZm} 6R WKH LQGXFWLRQ K\SRWKHVLV KROGV IRU P ILQLVKLQJ WKH SURRI RI /HPPD ,Q WKH SURRI RI RXU 7KHRUHP ZH XVH WKH IROORZLQJ IDFW

PAGE 35

/(00$ ,I / ( f§! ) LV D OLQHDU LVRPRUSKLVP EHWZHHQ WZR Q GLPHQVLRQDO OLQHDU (XFOLGHDQ VSDFHV DQG % %Df LV D EDOO RI UDGLXV D FHQWHUHG 2 LQ ( WKHQ WKH LPDJH /%f RI % XQGHU / LV DQ HOOLSVRLG RI D[HV D f D?/f D f DQ/ff LQ ) 3URRI 6HH 7HPDP f /HPPD VKRZV WKDW WWV7IUQ%^2[RWf DQG QX7IaP%2[F[f DUH HOOLSn VRLGV ZLWK FHUWDLQ D[HV LQ (MPA DQG (MPA[\ UHVSHFWLYHO\ i 7KH 3URRI RI 7KHRUHP )LUVW IRU DQ\ H ZH FDQ ILQG VRPH LQWHJHU 1 VXFK WKDW ZKHQ N 1 $cA%A DQG ORJ m"rf 0f ‘" rf IRU L f f f QL DV ZHOO DV ORJ6"ff0n m f IRU L f f f m ,W VXIILFHV WR SURYH WKH WKHRUHP IRU IA VLQFH WKH HQWURS\ DQG WKH XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RI IA DUH WKRVH RI PXOWLSOLHG E\ 1 6R ZLWKRXW ORVV RI JHQHUDOLW\ ZH VLPSO\ DVVXPH WKDW OrJR!I f AI Hf + SL Hf IRU L f f f Q L DQG ORJ r!ff PL ef WrL Hf

PAGE 36

IRU L f f m DQG $?%M 5HODEHO r` WR ^SL f f f ZLWK P fff 8Q 0DNLQJ H VPDOOHU LI QHFHVVDU\ DVVXPH WKDW SL H IRU L fff Q /HW 3L H[S SL Hf IRU L fff Q DQG OHW H[S]" Hf IRU L ‘ f f Q? DV ZHOO DV H[S]f Hf IRU L f f f r 0DNH H HYHQ VPDOOHU LI QHFHVVDU\ VR WKDW HfSL IRU L ‘ f f Q 'HILQH I[ DQG %P2[Df DV LQ 6HFWLRQ %\ /HPPD WKHUH H[LVWV UM VXFK WKDW ZKHQ D WM %UDmDf&O efP^UP%fZDffQUf%P:Dff` 8VLQJ /HPPD ZH NQRZ WKDW QV7IP%LV DQ HOOLSVRLG LQ ([ ZLWK D[HV ^DSLMP[f f f f 4ffP[f` ZKHUH SLWP^[f Dc7IP ,rf IRU L f f f QM DQG LW IROORZV WKDW 3OPL[f 3LP[f 8L7[IP?(f[f 3O3LfP ,Q WKH PHDQ WLPH RQH FDQ FKHFN WKDW QX7IP%I f§P[f f Dff QX%2[Df 6LPLODUO\ ZH NQRZ WKDW LUX7IaP%LV DQ HOOLSVRLG LQ ([ RI D[HV RAQP]f` ZKHUH 3QOLWP Dc7IaP ? eef ZLWK 3QLOP^[f f f f Qr}nP[f f§ 3L n fn DQG LUV7IaP%IP[`Dff WWV%2[Df 1RWLFH WKDW ZH UHTXLUH 3OP[f ! 3P0A DQG 3QLOP^[f fff 3QP[ff

PAGE 37

7KHUHIRUH WKH VHW 7 IP^% IP[\Dff&?7 I P%IP[\Dff LQ ([ ([ p ([ LV D SURGXFW RI WZR HOOLSVRLGV RQH LQ ([ DQG WKH RWKHU LQ ([ ZLWK D[HV ^D3OP[fLnnn !D3Q?P^[f`L DQG ^RAQLOPLpf" f rn LD3QP[f` UHVSHFWLYHO\ %\ WKH IROORZLQJ IDFW LI ZH UHQXPEHU WKRVH 3LW7Q[f VXFK WKDW fO`P[f fff 3QP[f DQG QRWH WKDW ^!fff SQ` LV DFWXDOO\ D UHVKXIIOH RI WKHVH SI SnI VR WKDW S? fff SQ ZH FDQ VWLOO JHW SLWP^[fn fn 3LP^[f f§ 3Of3LfP IRU r f§ }} )$&7 6XSSRVH WKDW D? ‘ f f DQ\ DQG DQL_BL fff DQLQ DQG WKDW E? fff EQ[ DQG EQ\? fff EQLQ $VVXPH WKDW E?Ec IRU L f§ r f f 7L? DQG DQLB_BL f f f DPM AQM nn r L M IRU M rnn L Q 8 ZH UHVKXIIOH WKRVH Dc DQG EM WR JHW D M f f f DnQLUL DQG f f f B_BQ ZH VWLOO KDYH DnL f f f Dn RU L ‘ f f Q? m $V D SURGXFW RI WZR HOOLSVRLGV WKH VHW 7IP%2IP^[fDf Q 7IP%2IP^[fDff LV FRYHUHG E\ QR PRUH WKDQ f 3OP^[f fn n 3Mf§OPL[f3MP[fg EDOOV RI UDGLXV DSM P[f ZKHUH LV D FRQVWDQW GHSHQGLQJ RQ WKH GLPHQVLRQ Q DQG WKH FRPSDFW VHW +HQFH E\ /HPPD %P2[&f LV FRYHUHG E\ QR PRUH WKDQ n 3OP^[f rn n 3Mf§OP[f3MP^[f\

PAGE 38

EDOOV RI UDGLXV HfPDWSMcP[f 6LQFH LV FRPSDFW ZH FDQ ILQG D FRQVWDQW & VXFK WKDW IRU DQ\ [ LQ D VXEVHW RI WKH IRUP 2[%Y ff ZLWK c LQ ; FDQ EH FRYHUHG E\ D EDOO RI UDGLXV &IO RI ; IRU WKH PHWULF RQ ; REWDLQHG IURP WKH 5LHPDQQLDQ PHWULF ZKHUH Y f %;f 6R 2[%P2[FWff FDQ EH FRYHUHG E\ QR PRUH WKDQ ‘ S?fP[f f f f 3M?P^[fOSMP[:aA EDOOV RI UDGLXV & HfPDSMP[f HASAFW &RW 'HQRWH E\ 1P Df WKH PLQLPXP QXPEHU RI VHWV RI WKH IRUP 2[%P2[Dff QHHGHG WR FRYHU :H OHW 0 EH D VXEVHW RI VXFK WKDW ^2[%P^2[RWff [ 0` FRYHUV DQG WKH FDUGLQDOLW\ RI 0 LV 1PDf 6LQFH P 4[^%P^2[DWff IO Uf>%I?[fD&f@ Lf§f§P E\ WDNLQJ P ZH NQRZ 1PRWf UPOr&.f ZKHUH UPLD& .f LV WKH VPDOOHVW FDUGLQDOLW\ RI D P D&f VSDQQLQJ VHW IRU ?[ VHH 6HFWLRQ RU :DOWHUV f IRU WKH GHILQLWLRQ RI D VSDQQLQJ VHWf :KHQ P LV ODUJH HQRXJK DQG D LV VPDOO HQRXJK ZH KDYH UPOD&,f H[S P$ Hf

PAGE 39

ZKHUH $ LV WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ RI RYHU 7KXV 1P Df H[S P$ I Hf 3LFN WKH LQWHJHU M VXFK WKDW M f§ M /HW Hn HQ ff§ILMf EH IL[HG DQG OHW V Hn +HUH WKH QXPEHU H LV FKRVHQ VPDOO HQRXJK WKDW M f§ V M ,I ^%L L e ` LV DQ RSHQ FRYHU IRU ZKHUH %c LV D EDOO RI UDGLXV U ZH GHILQH ?,? PD[_UW_ WHO %\ GHILQLWLRQ VHH FKDSWHU f WKH +DXVGRUII SUHPHDVXUH Wr LV JLYHQ E\ OnOmf LHL DQG KDV EHHQ SURYHG WR EH D QRQLQFUHDVLQJ IXQFWLRQ RI HfV 7KHUHIRUH +&D.f LQI eU" S& efPDLIVf .O FmL LHL If ?3MP?[ff >&Oef D[e0 >3MP[f9 >&O HfPD@V f H[S>P$ Hf@ f H[SPT QMBL V M OfILM VHf f H[S>P ORJ Hf@ f &V-DV H[SP>$ P +M? ^V f§ M f ORJO Hf@ f &V-DV H[SP>V OfH $ W'f HnQM ORJO Hf@ f &V-DV H[SP>V OfH HnILM H@ f &V-DV H[SP>Q fH f§Q f§ fH@ f &V-DV H[Sf§PHf f &V-DV

PAGE 40

DV P f§} RR 7KXV 7LAA.f LI D LV VPDOO HQRXJK 6R QV,f ?LP+&D.f 2If§8 7KHUHIRUH +'^.f V HQ /HW e f§r ZH JHW +'.f DV GHVLUHG 7KH SURRI RI 7KHRUHP LV WKXV FRPSOHWHG i 7KH &DVH RI D & )ORZ /HW ^r W f 5` EH D & SDUWLDO IORZ RQ WKH 5LHPDQQLDQ PDQLIROG ; DQG OHW EH D FRPSDFW LQYDULDQW K\SHUEROLF VXEVHW RI IW 6HH )DWKL f IRU WKH GHILQLWLRQV :H KDYH UHVXOWV VLPLODU WR 7KHRUHP DERXW IORZV /HW DQG Q\ EH WKH GLPHQVLRQV RI WKH VWDEOH DQG XQVWDEOH IROLDWLRQV /HW XV GHILQH VWDEOH DQG XQVWDEOH XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV IRU D & SDUWLDO IORZ IW 7KH VXEDGGLWLYLW\ LV XVHG IRU WKH H[LVWHQFH RI OLPLWV '(),1,7,21 )RU L Q? DQG M Q GHILQH VXS VXS [f. [e. ,W IROORZV WKDW IRU DOO S DQG T rISTfrISfr:f DQG

PAGE 41

6R E\ VXEDGGLWLYLW\ ERWK OLP MORJZILf DQG OLP \ ORJ e!"rf Wf§URR O Lf§WRR H[LVW DQG DUH GHQRWHG E\ YI YI /HW \? XI \r1 Ysf DQG \" XI f§"B RU L Q? UHVSHFWLYHO\ \ Lf LfBM RU M QLf :H FDOO \c DQG \r1 WKH XQLIRUP VWDEOH RU XQVWDEOH /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV IRU IW 7+(25(0 /HW r EH D &A SDUWLDO IORZ ZLWK D FRPSDFW K\SHUEROLF VHW LQ WKH QGLPHQVLRQDO 5LHPDQQLDQ PDQLIROG ; /HW \r \A \f EH WKH VWDEOH XQLIRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RI IO DQG OHW \r1 \b \f EH WKH XQVWDEOH XQLn IRUP /\DSXQRY H[SRQHQWV RI IW 5HODEHO WKH VHW ^_ \Af [f` DV ^7 ZLWK \? \ fff \Q 'HILQH U > Q@ f§} 5 E\ WVf \? 0>V@ ^V :fLZ /HW $ HQWIr _Af EH WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ RI r RQ  /HL /! Wf§$f RU Q LI \? \ f§ \Q $ ,I $%A ZKHUH $ OLPL"r DQG $W PD[^PD[ __7AA __ PD[ __7; r__` ]*$ ]*$ PD[^PD[+7[ _A __rPZF__UrL _Am __` [*$ ]*$7

PAGE 42

WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI WKH K\SHUEROLF VHW RI WKH IORZ VDWLVILHV +'.f 7KH SURRI RI WKH DERYH 7KHRUHP ZKLFK LV DERXW WKH FDVH RI IROORZV LV PXFK WKH VDPH DV WKDW RI RXU 7KHRUHP 5(0$5. 7KH JHRGHVLF IORZV RI SLQFKHG QHJDWLYHO\ FXUYHG 5LHPDQQLDQ PHWn ULFV RQ FRPSDFW PDQLIROGV VDWLVI\ WKH K\SRWKHVLV RI RXU 7KHRUHP IRU DQ\ VXEVHW RI WKH XQLW WDQJHQW EXQGOH ZKLFK LV LQYDULDQW XQGHU WKH JHRGHVLF IORZ

PAGE 43

&+$37(5 7+( +<3(5%2/,& 6(7 $1' 7232/2*,&$/ 35(6685( i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f§! ; D GLIIHRPRUSKLVP IURP 8 RQWR DQ RSHQ VXEVHW RI ; ,I [ ; ZH GHQRWH E\ 7[; WKH WDQJHQW VSDFH RI ; DW [ DQG E\ 7[I 7[; f§ 7MA; WKH GHULYDWLYH RI DW [ 0RUH JHQHUDOO\ ZH GHQRWH E\ 7A; WKH UHVWULFWLRQ RI WKH WDQJHQW EXQGOH RI ; WR D VXEVHW RI ; '(),1,7,21 /HW F 8 F ; EH D FRPSDFW VXEVHW RI D 5LHPDQQLDQ PDQLIROG ; :H VD\ WKDW & 8 LV K\SHUEROLF IRU D GLIIHRPRUSKLVP I LI I.f DQG LI WKHUH LV D 7I LQYDULDQW VSOLWWLQJ RI WKH WDQJHQW EXQGOH ( 7U;

PAGE 44

(V k (X VXFK WKDW LLLLU ,HLL`L [*Y ZKHUH WKH QRUP LV REWDLQHG IURP DQ DSSURSULDWH 5LHPDQQLDQ PHWULF RQ ; :H FDOO U PDr[H.^??7[I ?Hf __}__r ?HX ` WKH VNHZQHVV RI 7KLV GHILQLWLRQ RI K\SHUEROLFLW\ LV VOLJKWO\ GLIIHUHQW IURP WKH RQHV JLYHQ LQ WKH SUHYLRXV FKDSWHU DQG )DWKL f +RZHYHU LI LV K\SHUEROLF LQ WKH VHQVH RI &KDSWHU ZH FDQ DGDSW D PHWULF WR DV 0DWKHU f GLG 7KHQ XQGHU WKLV 0DWKHU PHWULF LV K\SHUEROLF XQGHU RXU GHILQLWLRQ KHUH 5HIHU WR :DOWHUV f RU WKH QH[W VHFWLRQ RI WKLV FKDSWHU IRU WKH GHILQLWLRQ RI WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH IRU D IXQFWLRQ $ DQG WKH PDS I?M^ f§r DQG WKH YDULDWLRQDO SULQFLSOH ,Q WKLV FKDSWHU ZH OHW WKH UHDO YDOXHG QHJDWLYH IXQFWLRQ $ 8 f§! 5 EH GHILQHG E\ $[f ORJPD[^__7[_eL____UDB_LX__` &OHDUO\ WKH IXQFWLRQ $ LV FRQWLQXRXV LI LV &A )RU WKH +DXVGRUI) GLPHQVLRQ RI D K\SHUEROLF VHW ILUVW ZH KDYH 7+(25(0 ,I I LV D & GLIIHRPRUSKLVP ZLWK D K\SHUEROLF VHW DQG DW VRPH UHDO SRVLWLYH YDOXH V ZH KDYH WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH 3I?@^V?f WKHQ +'.f V :H VD\ VDWLVILHV D SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ LI $% ZKHUH $ PA^__7,____7,U__O_` [( DQG % PD[DHAn^$[f` :H DOVR GHILQH WZR FKDUDFWHULVWLF IXQFWLRQV ;V DQG $X DV IROORZV

PAGE 45

)RU / ( f§r‘ ) D OLQHDU PDS EHWZHHQ Q GLPHQVLRQDO QRUPHG VSDFHV ( DQG ) ZH ZULWH mref VXS LQI ??/S??) 6F(GLP6 L ,0,ILf§OWSf6 DQG X!L/f D?/f f f f Dc/f ZKHUH L Q +HUH / LQGXFHV $ / $O( f§A $DQG LQ IDFW R/f __ $r =__S ,I W LV QRW DQ LQWHJHU ZH ZULWH XW/f DL/f D>r@efD>W@efL0 ,W LV QRWLFHG WKH OLQHDU PDS / VHQGV DQ\ EDOO RI UDGLXV U LQ ( WR DQ HOOLSVRLG LQ ) ZLWK D[HV JLYHQ E\ UD?/f f f f UDQ/ff 1RZ FRQVLGHU WKH VSOLWWLQJ RI 7b; (V p (X 6XSSRVH WKDW GLP(V QL (X Q ZKHUH Q? Q Q :KHQ [ ( GHILQH ?VW[f ?RJXW^7[I?(V[f IRU W ( >QL@ DQG $XW[f ORJXWO7[IAf IRU W f >Q@ :ULWH $f[f $XW[f DQG $r[f $VW[f 8QGHU WKH SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ DQG XVLQJ IXQFWLRQV ;V DQG $X ZH KDYH 7+(25(0 ,I I LV D &A SLQFKHG GLIIHRPRUSKLVP ZLWK D K\SHUEROLF VHW WKHQ WKHUH LV D XQLTXH UHDO QRQQHJDWLYH YDOXH W VXFK WKDW Pt[^3^I?. $I3-?N $-rf_ W W` 0RUHRYHU WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI WKH K\SHUEROLF VHW VDWLVILHV +'.f W :H DOVR JLYH WKH XSSHU ERXQGV IRU WKH +DXVGRULI GLPHQVLRQ RI WKH WUDQVYHUn VDOV RI WKH K\SHUEROLF VHW WR WKH VWDEOH DQG XQVWDEOH PDQLIROGV

PAGE 46

7+(25(0 ,I I LV D & SLQFKHG GLMIHRPRUSKLVP ZLWK D K\SHUEROLF VHW DQG DW VRPH UHDO SRVLWLYH YDOXH W ZH KDYH WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH 3I?[ $_f WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ LQ WKH GLUHFWLRQ WKDW WUDQVYHUVHV WR :X[If LV JLYHQ E\ +'. Q :V[Iff W 7KHRUHP ,I I LV D & SLQFKHG GLIIHRPRUSKLVP ZLWK D K\SHUEROLF VHW DQG DW VRPH UHDO SRVLWLYH YDOXH W ZH KDYH WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH 3I?M^ $ff WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ LQ WKH GLUHFWLRQ WKDW WUDQVYHUVHV WR :V[If LV JLYHQ E\ +'. IO :X[Iff W 5(0$5. 7KH LQHTXDOLWLHV LQ 7KHRUHPV DQG DUH HTXDOLWLHV ZKHQ LV WKH EDVLF VHW RI D WZR GLPHQVLRQDO KRUVHVKRH 7KLV IDFW FDQ EH IRXQG LQ 0F&OXVNH\ DQG 0DQQLQJ f i 7RSRORJLFDO 3UHVVXUH :H ILUVW JLYH WKH GHILQLWLRQ RI WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH XVLQJ WKH RSHQ FRYHULQJV 7KHQ ZH DOVR JLYH WKH GHILQLWLRQ XVLQJ HLWKHU VSDQQLQJ VHWV RU VHSDUDWHG VHWV %RWK GHILQLWLRQV DUH HTXLYDOHQW 6HH :DOWHUV f IRU PRUH GHWDLOV DQG WKH YDULDWLRQDO SULQFLSOH 7KH FRQFHSW RI WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH LQ WKLV W\SH RI VHWWLQJ ZDV LQWURGXFHG E\ 5XHOOH DQG VWXGLHG LQ WKH JHQHUDO FDVH E\ :DOWHUV /HW ; f§ ; EH D FRQWLQXRXV WUDQVIRUPDWLRQ RI D FRPSDFW PHWULF VSDFH ;Gf /HW &;5f GHQRWH WKH %DQDFK DOJHEUD RI UHDOYDOXHG FRQWLQXRXV IXQFn WLRQV RQ ; HTXLSSHG ZLWK WKH VXSUHPXP QRUP 7KH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH RI ZLOO EH D PDS 3f &; 5f f§A 5 8 ^RR` ZKLFK ZLOO KDYH JRRG SURSHUWLHV UHODWLYH

PAGE 47

WR WKH VWUXFWXUHV RQ &; 5f ,W FRQWDLQV WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ LQ WKH VHQVH WKDW 3I f HQWIf ZKHUH GHQRWH WKH PHPEHU RI &; 5f ZKLFK LV LGHQWLFDOO\ ]HUR /HW $ &;5f )RU [ ; GHQRWH 6Q$DUf $r[f /HW D EH DQ RSHQ FRYHU RI ; DQG GHQRWH TQIL $ Df LQI^ 9n LQI H[S6nQ$f[ff c LV D ILQLWH VXEFRYHU RI 9-/T rD` 3QI $ Df LQI^ VXS H[SQ$f[ff LV D ILQLWH VXEFRYHU RI 9A7T LR` %HS[e% 1RWLFH WKDW TQ^I $ Df SQI $ Df DQG WKH VXEDGGLWLYLW\ RI ORJSQ $ Df LV GXH WR WKH UHODWLRQ SQI $mf f SPI $ Df SQP $ Df /HW T^I $ Df OLP VXS ORJ TQ^I $ Df Qf§WRR Q S $Df OLP ORJSf $Df Qf§! Q 5HFDOO _T_ GHQRWHV WKH ODUJHVW GLDPHWHU RI VHWV LQ D :ULWH $ Hf VXS^ $ Df D LV DQ RSHQ FRYHU RI ; _D_ H` D SI $ Hf VXS^S $ Df D LV DQ RSHQ FRYHU RI ; _D_ H` D 1RZ ERWK VLGHV RI WKH IROORZLQJ LGHQWLW\ JLYHV WKH TXDQWLW\ 3I $f ZKLFK LV FDOOHG WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH OLP TI?Hf OLPS$Hf ff§! Hf§! :H KDYH GHILQHG WKH QHf VSDQQLQJ VHW DQG WKH QHf VHSDUDWHG VHW LQ WKH SUHYLRXV FKDSWHU 1RZ ZH FDQ XVH WKHP WR JLYH DOWHUQDWLYH GHILQLWLRQV RI WKH

PAGE 48

WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH /HW 4Q^I $Hf LQI^A H[SnQ$f[ff ) LV QHf VSDQQLQJ IRU $` [H) 3QI?Hf VXS^e H[SnQ$f[ff ) LV D QHf VHSDUDWHG VXEVHW RI $` [H) 7KHQ GHILQH 4^I $ Hf OLP VXS ORJ 4QI $ Hf Qf§LRR Z 3 $Hf OLP VXS f§ ORJ 3Q $ Hf Qf§RR : 1RZ WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH LV JLYHQ E\ 3$f OLUQ 4I $ Hf OLUQ 3 $Hf ef§rf ef§2 7KH YDULDWLRQDO SULQFLSOH VKRZV WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH FDQ EH FRPSXWHG XVLQJ LQYDULDQW PHDVXUHV 7KHRUHP 7KH 9DULDWLRQDO 3ULQFLSOHf /HW I $ f§ $ EH D FRQWLQXRXV VHOI PDSSLQJ RI D FRPSDFW PHWULF VSDFH DQG $ D UHDO YDOXHG IXQFWLRQ GHILQHG RQ $ 7KHQ WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH FDQ EH JLYHQ E\ 3$f VXS^LAf ?GS S H 0$f` ZKHUH KAIf LV WKH HQWURS\ RI I DV D PDS WKDW SUHVHUYHV WKH PHDVXUH S DQG 0;If LV WKH VHW RI DOO PHDVXUHV LQYDULDQW XQGHU I 6HH :DOWHUV f IRU DQ LQWURGXFWLRQ WR WKH SURSHUWLHV RI WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH DV ZHOO DV WKH SURRI RI WKH YDULDWLRQDO SULQFLSOH DQG HTXLOLEULXP VWDWHV DQG KRZ SUHVVXUH GHWHUPLQHV WKH LQYDULDQW PHDVXUHV

PAGE 49

i $ 5RXJK (VWLPDWH RQ +DXVGRUII 'LPHQVLRQ /HPPDV DQG DUH REYLRXV /HPPD ,I I f§! ZLWK FRPSDFW DQG $L $ DUH WZR UHDO IXQFWLRQV RQ WKHQ 3I $Lf 3I $f /(00$ ,I $ LV D QHJDWLYH UHDO YDOXHG IXQFWLRQ WKHQ 3_AV$f LV D VWULFWO\ GHFUHDVLQJ FRQWLQXRXV IXQFWLRQ RI V )RU [ f OHW 7[; (b p (b EH WKH WDQJHQW VSDFH DQG [r 7[; f§! 7[ 7[; f§! ([ EH WKH SURMHFWLRQV ,I X f 7[; DQG LI __U_Yf__en __ULXf__ef DUH QRUPV LQGXFHG IURP WKH DGDSWHG PHWULF WKHQ WKH QRUP +, PD[^__UrXf__e __[fLf__A` LV HTXLYDOHQW WR WKH RQH LQGXFHG IURP WKH DGDSWHG PHWULF :LWK WKH QHZ QRUP LV VWLOO K\SHUEROLF XQGHU RXU GHILQLWLRQ /HW ; %; Df f§r ; EH WKH H[SRQHQWLDO PDS 6LQFH FRPSDFW DQG VLQFH 7; WKH LGHQWLW\ ZH FDQ ILQG VXFK WKDW ; LV ZHOOGHILQHG IRU DOO [ f DQG D ZLWK A__Z Z?? G[Yf [Zff __X m!__ 'HILQH I[ WR EH WKH OLIWLQJ RI 'HILQH WKH VHW %P2[Df ^Y ([???aIQ[\I[^Yf?? D ??aIML[\aI[OYf?? P f§ ` DV LQ &KDSWHU

PAGE 50

352326,7,21 /HW I EH DV LQ 7KHRUHP ,I 3I?MV?f WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'.f V 3522) :ULWH I[Yf 7[IYf JYf /HW e EH D VPDOO QXPEHU VXFK WKDW H3IV $f_m 7KHUH LV ZLWK I[%[Df & Hf7[I%[Df ZKHQ D 7KXV P[Df & HfP[UPDff ZKHUH UP[f D ‘ UQD[^H[S6P$[ffH[S6P$[ff` ZLWK 6P?[f $ar[f DQG 6nP$[f $r[f 1RWLFH WKDW UP[f D>H[SP$[f H[S6P$[f@ /HW .? & EH D PD[LPDO P Df VHSDUDWHG VXEVHW 7KHQ IRU DQ\ [H.' .I WKHUH H[LVWV \ e $nL VXFK WKDW PD[^G[ \f f f GP[fP\ff` AD 6R ^[IaP%PIP[M Df?[ e .?` LV DQ RSHQ FRYHU IRU 6LQFH 2I I2 LW IROORZV WKDW IaPIP[`%PIP[\Df?[ e .?` LV DQ RSHQ FRYHU IRU /HW IP.? ZKLFK LV FOHDUO\ P _Df VHSDUDWHG ^[%P[Df_[ e .` LV DOVR DQ RSHQ FRYHU IRU /HW WKH QXPEHU 0 EH ODUJH HQRXJK DQG VPDOO HQRXJK WKDW P ORJ 3P V$ 3I V? LDf VH 3I V;f VH VH

PAGE 51

+HUH DV LQ VHFWLRQ 3PI V? MDf VXS^ H[3 6PV?f[f?( LV DQ [e( PDf VHSDUDWHG VXEVHW RI .` DQG 3V$ LDf OLPVXS f§ ORJ3PV$-Df Pf§rRR P 3IV?f Df§2 6LQFH 3I AV$f 3IV;f ZH FDQ UHTXLUH AORJ3PLI OV? ADf Ve P 7KXV ZH KDYH 3PIV;Df H[Sf§PVHf DQG 3P AV$ Df H[Sf§PVHf ,Q SDUWLFXODU VLQFH 3P^IV? ?Df LV WKH VXSUHPXP H[S6nPV$Dff H[Sf§PVHf DQG H[SnPV$[ff H[Sf§PVHf [H. [f. 1RZ FRQVLGHU WKH +DXVGRUII V PHDVXUH FRUUHVSRQGLQJ WR WKH RSHQ FRYHU ^ADP[Df?[ f .A`

PAGE 52

7KH UDGLXV RI HDFK RSHQ VHW [%P[Df LV OHVV WKDQ D /HW D 7KXV +?D.f < _UIOP2rDf3 [H. 6 < _P[Df_V [f. V A &fA HfVPH[S P$[f H[S 6nP$[ff [(. DfV H[SVPJfH[Sf§PVHf DfV H[Sf§VPHf f§ DV P f§! RR 6R +?D.f DQG +'.f V /HPPD DQG 3URSRVLWLRQ JLYH D SURRI RI 7KHRUHP 3URRI RI 7KHRUHP /HW W LQI^V_ 3I?.V?f ` 7KHQ +',f W ,W LV FOHDU WKDW 3_AW$f DQG W LV XQLTXH LQ YLHZ RI /HPPD i /LQGHU WKH 3LQFKLQJ &RQGLWLRQ 7KH IROORZLQJ UHVXOWV ZLOO SURYH 7KHRUHP 352326,7,21 /HW I EH & SLQFKHG DQG LWV K\SHUEROLF VHW ,I W LV VXFK WKDW PD[ ^3I?. ?VWOf 3I?. $ef` WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'.f W 3522) %\ /HPPD IRU DQ\ H WKHUH LV ZKHQ U %P^[Uf F efUQ^7MP[MI7Q%IP[\ Uf IO 7MPAI P%IP[\ Uf` 7KXV FRQVLGHULQJ WKHLU SURMHFWLRQV ZH KDYH 7VPDUf F efP7\BPAPUVL"\PDf rf

PAGE 53

DQG LWX%P2DUf F efPAP[f PUX%IP[\ Uf 5HVKXIIOH DOrDfP_erf! f f f !DQL![fP_e DOP[fBP_eXf f f f LDQ7IP[fIP?(Xf WR JHW DLP[f fff DQP[f ,W IROORZV WKDW %P2[Uf LV FRQWDLQHG LQ DQ fHOOLSVRLGf RI D[HV ^UDMP [f f f ‘ UDQP[f` /HW M >W@ 8VH EDOOV RI UDGLXV UDWMP[f WR FRYHU WKH DERYH HOOLSVRLG RI D[HV ^UDLP [f ‘ ‘ ‘ UDQP[fM $W PRVW 4DLP [f ‘ ‘ ‘ FWMP [fDMP [\ EDOOV DUH QHHGHG ZKHUH 4 GHSHQGV RQO\ RQ WKH GLPHQVLRQ Q WKH PHWULF ZH FKRRVH DQG WKH FRPSDFW K\SHUEROLF VHW 1RWLFH WKDW WKH QXPEHU DMP[f /HW .? . EH WZR VXEVHWV RI DV LQ WKH SURRI RI 3URSRVLWLRQ ZKHUH WKH FROOHFWLRQ ^[P2] Uf_D e .\` LV DQ RSHQ FRYHU IRU 7KH EDOOV RI UDGLXV UDWMP[f QHHGHG WR FRYHU %P2[Uf LV DW PRVW 4DWLP [f ‘ f f FWMP [fDWMP [f 7KH LPDJH LQ XQGHU ^; [ e ` LV DQ RSHQ FRYHU IRU ZLWK UDGLXV OHVV

PAGE 54

WKDQ U DQG WKH FRUUHVSRQGLQJ +DXVGRUII W PHDVXUH LV HVWLPDWHG DV WKH IROORZLQJ L?U.f HfP 4$r ‘ DLP[f f f ‘ FWMP[fDWMP[\ f DMAPL[< [H. & HfP RTP [f f f f DMBLP [fDMP [f"O [e. HfP 8`W[f7IP[fI7Q?(}fXW[f7Ifn[fIP?(!f [(. P &H[SPHf H[3-A0[fIaW[f ;XWAW[A [(. L O +HUH & A4$ $W OHDVW RQH RI WLWb LV DQ LQWHJHU $OVR W? W‘ 7KHUH DUH DW PRVW QQ f§ f SDLUV RI VXFK LL[f ff IRU HDFK [ )RU HDFK SDLU RI DYDLODEOH Aff ZH KDYH 3U?.0f 3I?..f 7KXV ZH FDQ UHTXLUH f§ ORJ>3P A?NL ;VWLf3PI?. ;XWf@ f§e IRU DOO DYDLODEOH SDLUV L f DQG DOO ODUJH P 6R P P +WU.f &H[SPHf H[S6 ;XWIn[ff f H[S-A $VrLBDff` WL W []. [(. L H[SPHf ( 3P^I A?.L ;VWLf3PI?.L ;XWf W??Wf§W & H[SPHfH[Sf§PHf & H[Sf§PHf f§ 7KHUHIRUH +?U.f DQG +'.f W 7KH SURRI RI 7KHRUHP IROORZV LPPHGLDWHO\ IURP WKH DERYH 3URSRVLWLRQ DQG /HPPD

PAGE 55

i 7KH 7UDQVYHUVDOV %\ WKH 6WDEOH 0DQLIROG 7KHRUHP WKH VWDEOH PDQLIROG :V[If LV ORFDOO\ HPEHGGHG LQ ; ZLWK 7[:V[ f ([ 6LPLODUO\ 7[:X[ If ([ 1RZ OHW 7[:V[ If (6; :V[-f & ; EH WKH H[SRQHQWLDO PDS IRU :V[If DW [ DQG 8; 7[:X[ f (r :X[-f & ; EH WKH H[SRQHQWLDO PDS IRU :X[If DW [ 'HILQH e[ 7[; ([ k ([ f§! 7[; E\ IRU WY ] ([ DQG X f L"[ 1RZ WKH H[SRQHQWLDO PDS ; FDQ EH PRGLILHG WR REWDLQ D PDS WS[ 7[; (V k (X ; E\ 2[&[ f§ [L ZLWK WKH SURSHUW\ WKDW 7L-![;f LGHQWLW\ %\ WKH VWDEOH PDQLIROG WKHRUHP 7[:V[ If ([ DQG 0(fQ%2[UffF:[If ,W LV QRWLFHG WKDW WS[ LV GHILQHG ORFDOO\ DQG VLQFH FRPSDFW WKHUH LV U VXFK WKDW WA[ LV ZHOO GHILQHG RQ %2[Uf & 7[; IRU DOO [ f 7KHQ VLPLODUO\ WR &KDSWHU ZH OHW IYf ISMAILS[Yf DQG GHILQH WKH VHW %P2[Uf WKURXJK I $ GLVWRUWLRQ OHPPD VLPLODU WR /HPPD FDQ EH REWDLQHG

PAGE 56

352326,7,21 /HW I DQG EH DV LQ 7KHRUHP I )RU DQ\ [ f OHW :V[If EH WKH VWDEOH PDQLIROG DW [ ,I WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH 3I?If WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'. IO :V[Iff W 3522) 6LPLODU WR /HPPD P[Uf & HfP^7MPAIUQ%IPA[\ Uf IO 7IPAI P%IP[\Uf` ZH KDYH .V%P2D & HfP7MBP^[MIUQf.V%4 IP[\ Uf 7KH ULJKW VLGH LV DQ HOOLSVRLG RI D[HV I HfPU^DTP [f ‘ f ‘ DQLP[f` /HW M f§ >@ I 7KH QXPEHU RI EDOOV RI UDGLXV UDMP [f QHHGHG WR FRYHU UV% P[ Uf LV DW PRVW &DLP [f f ‘ ‘ RWMIP [fDMP [f/HW 0? & IO :VIaP[ If EH D PD[LPDO P AUf VHSDUDWHG VXEVHW VXFK WKDW 0? 8 ^\` LV QRW P I ?Uf VHSDUDWHG LI \ f IO :VIaP[ If DQG \ e 0? 7KHQ WKH VHW 0 JLYHQ E\ 0 IP0L F.':V[If LV PD[LPDO P _Uf VHSDUDWHG DQG ^LS[QV%P[ Uf_[ f 0` LV DQ RSHQ FRYHU IRU IO :V[If 8QGHU WKH FROOHFWLRQ RI PDSV ^WS[?[ e 0` WKH LPDJH RI VPDOO EDOOV RI UDGLXV UDMP[f XVHG WR FRYHU %P[If KDYH UDGLXV OHVV WKDQ U 7KH FRUUHVSRQGLQJ +DXVGRUII W PHDVXUH IRU :V[ f WKH TXDQWLW\ 7/?U^. IO :V[Iff LV OHVV WKDQ &UO HfPDMPDfRLPDf f f f DMP[fFWMP[\ [e0

PAGE 57

6LQFH DMP[fWDLP[f f f f DMP [fDMP[fDLPFf f f ‘ DMALP[fDMP[fWaAL XW7IP-P?(Vf 8W^7IP[I?(fXW7IPO[I?(6f ‘ ‘‘XW7IO[I?(Vf H[S $VWIaP[f f f f H[S ?6MWIaA[f P H[SA $6MLBO[f  DQG UO HfPRWMP[f U ZH KDYH P +?U.Q:f[IffL&U^?HU < m3e!}rf ;=0 &U H[SPef3P ?V aUf &9H[SPHf H[Sf§PHf f§! DV P f§} RR 6R +?U. :V[Iff ,W IROORZV WKDW 9`^. IO :V[Iff DQG WKH +DXVGRULI GLPHQVLRQ +'^. IO :V[Iff W 7KH SURRI RI RI 7KHRUHP IROORZV LPPHGLDWHO\ IURP WKH DERYH 3URSRVLWLRQ 7KH SURRI RI 7KHRUHP ZRUNV VLPLODUO\

PAGE 58

&+$37(5 7+( 6(/) 6,0,/$5 6(76 i 7KH 6HOI 6LPLODU 6HWV ,Q WKLV FKDSWHU ZH VKDOO FRQVWUXFW WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHWV 7KHQ ZH XVH WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH GHILQHG LQ &KDSWHU WR ERXQG WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI VHOI VLPLODU VHWV )LQDOO\ ZH GLVFXVV WKH FRQWLQXLW\ RI +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ DW FRQIRUPDO FRQVWUXFWLRQV 7KH FRQVWUXFWLRQ RI D VHOI VLPLODU VHW VWDUWV ZLWK D N [ N PDWUL[ $ f§ D^Mf ZKLFK KDV HQWULHV ]HURHV DQG RQHV ZLWK DOO HQWULHV RI $1 SRVLWLYH IRU VRPH 1 VHH %HGIRUG f )RU HDFK QRQ]HUR ZH JLYH D FRQWUDFWLRQ PDS LScM 5 f§! 5n ZLWK __g!LM[f f§ 3LM\f?? F__[ f§ "_ ZKHUH F LV D FRQVWDQW DQG ZH DUH XVLQJ WKH (XFOLGHDQ QRUP RQ 5 'HILQH WKH +DXVGRUII PHWULF E\ G()f LQI^_GD )f IRU DOO [ ( DQG G\(f IRU DOO \ f )` LQ WKH VSDFH & RI DOO QRQHPSW\ FRPSDFW VXEVHWV RI 6HH IRU H[DPSOH +XWFKLQn VRQ f RU )DOFRQHU f 7KH PDS RQ WKH IROG SURGXFW VSDFH &A JLYHQ E\ rP ‘ ‘ f )f 8` OSWM)Mff LV D FRQWUDFWLRQ PDS %\ WKH %DQDFK )L[HG 3RLQW 7KHRUHP WKH FRQWUDFWLRQ PDS KDV D XQLTXH IL[HG SRLQW LQ &LH D YHFWRU RI FRPSDFW QRQHPSW\ VXEVHWV RI

PAGE 59

5` GHQRWHG E\ (? (f f ZLWK 8DO9n}MAnMf (L 7KH XQLRQ ( LV FDOOHG D VHOI VLPLODU VHW /HW ( (MM ^[T[L [Q f_ [ N DQG D;L;L IRU DOO !` EH WKH VKLIW VSDFH ZLWK WKH IROORZLQJ PHWULF IRU [ [T [? f \ MT \?f LQ ( G[ \f aQ LI DQG RQO\ LI Q PLQ^P_[P A \P` /HW D EH WKH VKLIW PDS RI ( DQG OHW U ( f§! ( EH JLYHQ E\ U[ReL[ff WKH RQO\ SRLQW LQ 'f!L A[[A![[ ‘ ‘A[Q[Q^(;Qf ,W LV FOHDU WKDW U LV D +ROGHU FRQWLQXRXV VXUMHFWLYH PDS :H ZLOO GHQRWH WKH FRPSRVLWLRQ \!;R;O f f n9[Q?[Q E\ \!;R;Q $OVR ZH DVVXPH DOO LSLM EH & GLIIHR PRUSKLVPV DQG GHQRWH WKH GHULYDWLYH RI DW D SRLQW [ E\ 7[n3LM RU ?"M[f '(),1,7,21 7KH MWK /\DSXQRY QXPEHU RI D OLQHDU PDS / GHQRWHG E\ FWM/f LV WKH VTXDUH URRW RI WKH MWK ODUJHVW HLJHQYDOXH RI //r ZKHUH /r LV WKH FRQMXJDWH RI / :ULWH fref r ,fRZ/fRZ,ff: )RU D VHW RI FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV ^3LM` WKH IXQFWLRQ ;W ( f§! 5 IRU HDFK W e >@ DQG [ [R[Lf ( LV GHILQHG E\ $[f ORJDLUADRDLU7[ff f f f ORJ DA^7A;R;O.7[ff r f 0fOrJD>_@O9rrOr1Af ?RJXW^7LS;R;OQU[ff

PAGE 60

7KH FRQVWUXFWLRQV DQG GLPHQVLRQV RI VHOI VLPLODU VHWV KDYH EHHQ VWXGLHG E\ VHYHUDO DXWKRUV XQGHU YDULRXV UHVWULFWLRQV ,Q WKLV FKDSWHU ZH UHOD[ WKH UHVWULFWLRQV RQ FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV WR D N SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ ZKLFK LV GHILQHG DV IROORZV '(),1,7,21 :H VD\ WKDW D &r VPRRWK KRPHRPRUSKLVP e!M VDWLVILHV WKH .SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ LI WKH GHULYDWLYHV VDWLVI\ WKH IROORZLQJ O_!\OOWn O_UZ:,, IRU DOO [ f ( 5(0$5. ,I 7[SLM7[LSrM KDV HLJHQYDOXHV DO}MDf A A DOLM[f ZKHUH 7[SrM GHQRWHV WKH FRQMXJDWH RI 7[SLM WKH QXPEHUV m `LM[f Dc M[f DUH /\DSXQRY QXPEHUV ZLWK DLWLM[f ‘ f DLWLM[f 7KHQ WKH SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ LV HTXLYDOHQW WR FrL DOLM[f )RU WKH GHILQLWLRQ DQG SURSHUWLHV RI +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ UHIHU WR &KDSWHU RU .DKDQH f $OVR ZH XVH WKH GHILQLWLRQV DQG QRWLRQV RI :DOWHUV f LQ WKH GLVFXVVLRQV FRQFHUQLQJ WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH VHH DOVR &KDSWHU 7KHRUHP ,,, JLYHQ LQ WKH LQWURGXFWLRQ LV SURYHG LQ WKLV FKDSWHU WKURXJK 7KHRUHP DQG 7KHRUHP

PAGE 61

7+(25(0 /HW ^3LM` EH WKH & FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV IRU WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHW ( VDWLVI\LQJ WKH N SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ IRU VRPH SRVLWLYH QXPEHU N 6XSSRVH WKH GHULYDWLYHV RI DOO DUH +ROGHU FRQWLQXRXV RI RUGHU N ,I W LV WKH XQLTXH SRVLWLYH QXPEHU VXFK WKDW WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH 3FU $rf WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'(f W /HW XV UHFDOO WKH GLVMRLQW RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ RQ WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ RI VHOI VLPLODU VHWV VHH +XWFKLQVRQ f ,W VWDWHV WKDW IRU HDFK LQWHJHU L IURP WR $ WKHUH LV D QRQHPSW\ RSHQ VHW ef VXFK WKDW 8 9LML8Mf & 8L DQG ILM8Mf & LSLN8Nf c! LI M s N DM O )RU Q GHQRWH 8Q[f S;R[L3[L[ ‘ ‘ ‘ 9![QL[Q^8;Qf ,W IROORZV WKDW (c & DQG WKDW WKH FROOHFWLRQ ^IQ[f [ f (` LV SDLUZLVHO\ GLVMRLQW IRU HDFK IL[HG Q 7+(25(0 /HW EH WKH & FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV IRU WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHW ( LQ 5 VDWLVI\LQJ ERWK WKH N SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ IRU VRPH SRVLWLYH QXPEHU N DQG WKH GLVMRLQW RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ 6XSSRVH WKH GHULYDWLYHV RI DOO DUH +ROGHU FRQWLQXRXV RI RUGHU N ,I W LV WKH XQLTXH SRVLWLYH QXPEHU VXFK WKDW WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH 3D;Wf WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'(f f§ ,N 5(0$5. :H FDOO D & GLIIHRPRUSKLVP LI LWV GHULYDWLYH LV +ROGHU FRQWLQXn RXV RI RUGHU N ,I ZH IL[ WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ WR EH IRU VRPH EXW OHW F f§! IRU WKH N SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ WKHQ RXU XSSHU DQG ORZHU ERXQGV ZLOO FRLQFLGH ZLWK WKH HVWLPDWH IRU FRQIRUPDO FDVHV DV LQ %HGIRUG f

PAGE 62

7KHRUHP LV SURYHG LQ 6HFWLRQ DQG 7KHRUHP LV SURYHG LQ 6HFWLRQ $V D FRUROODU\ RI 7KHRUHPV DQG LQ 6HFWLRQ ZH ZLOO DOVR GLVFXVV VRPH FRQWLQXLW\ LQ WKH & WRSRORJ\ RI WKH +DXVGRUI) GLPHQVLRQ DW FRQIRUPDO &F FRQVWUXFWLRQV XQGHU WKH GLVMRLQW RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ )RU GLVFXVVLRQV RI WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQV RI VHOI VLPLODU VHWV XVLQJ VLPLOLWXGHV DQG WKHLU GLPHQVLRQV VHH +XWFKLQVRQ f 0DXOGLQ DQG :LOOLDPV f )RU WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQV XVLQJ fFRQIRUPDOf FRQWUDFWLRQ PDSV VHH %HGIRUG f 2WKHU UHODWHG ZRUNV FDQ EH IRXQG LQ 'HNNLQJ f %HGIRUG f DQG )DOFRQHU f i 7KH 8SSHU %RXQG /(00$ ,I DOO FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV ScM DUH &nF DQG VDWLVI\ WKH .SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ WKHQ IRU DQ\ e WKHUH H[LVWV GHSHQGLQJ RQO\ RQ H VXFK WKDW IRU DOO [ f ( DOO D ZLWK D DQG DOO [ DReO f f ff LQ ( DOO LQWHJHUV Q ZH KDYH f S;R;Q%[ Df & R[Qpf efQ7[S;R;Q% Df +HUH %[Df GHQRWHV D EDOO RI UDGLXV D FHQWHUHG DW [ LQ I 3522) 8VLQJ 7D\ORUfV IRUPXOD IRU DQ\ \ Z f )F f )f[T[L \ Zf LS;R;O \f 7\LI[R[L Zf U;4;O Z\f 6LQFH ( LV FRPSDFW ZH FDQ ILQG VRPH FRQVWDQWV & DQG F VXFK WKDW IRU DOO \ e ( DQG Z e %ZLWK __WX__ F ZH KDYH __U;RDLLL \f__ &n__W[A__ F :H ZLOO VHW DOVR E PLQD*e!W M^DfW-[f`

PAGE 63

)L[ DQ\ VPDOO H 6LQFH ( LV FRPSDFW DQG DOO FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRU SKLVPV VDWLVI\ WKH N SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ ZLWKRXW ORVV RI JHQHUDOLW\ ZH FDQ DVVXPH e WR EH VR VPDOO WKDW IRU DOO SDLUV LMf f __ Hf7[\!LM?? IRU DOO [ f ( f Hf.RLfWM[fOr. IRU DOO [ ( 3LFN ZLWK PLQ^F IH&fr` 7KXV HDcMM[f& IRU DOO [ ( DQG DOO SDLUV RI LMf /HW D DQG SLFN DQ\ Z ZLWK __X!__ D )RU DQ\ [ LQ ( __UDR;OX[f__ &__X__F &DA. D&. DeDc;R;O[f DQG WKXV U;R[[Z[f HDc ;R;O[f%Df 6LQFH eDc ;R;O[f% Df & H7[LS;R;O%Df LW IROORZV IURP f WKDW 3[R;O[ Zf I;R;O[f 7[S;R;OZf U;R;OZ[f f 3[[L [f 7[LI[[L % Df V7[S;R;O% Df I3[R[L Af Vf7[S;R;O % Df 7KDW JLYHV f IRU Q f§ 1RZ WKH LQGXFWLRQ K\SRWKHVLV JLYHV f3[[L[f%[ Df LS;R;OS;L;Q%[Df & 3[[[93[Y[Q[f HfQ A7[S;O;Q%^Df@ 8VLQJ f 9[T[L>3[L[f^[f HfQ A7LS;Onf;QZf? I[[Q[f HfQ O7\!;n;QZf U;R;OO HfQa7S;O;QZfS;O;Q[ff

PAGE 64

%HFDXVH RI f __ HfQ A7S;Of;QZf__ __X!_O D ZKHUH WR Df 8VLQJ f ZH KDYH OOUrRrL HfQc7I[c[AZfWI![cf]ff?? &__OefUA,,fXf__f & ef}OfGmf >DOLO,A[ffD0[f__p__@,r & AfmAAm[ff Drf,0,OW HffBDr&mL[LmA[ffmrff HO HfnD AR[LL9[Lf§;QIHff f DO[ L[^3[[Q^[ff D_;QBO;Q [fR 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG 7[SLM%4 Df D  [f% Df DQG LW IROORZV WKDW 7[S;R;Q% Df DcW;R;O3[Ya[Q[ff ‘ f f Dc;QO;Q^[f%^ Df +HQFH U;R;OO HfQa7WS;O;UOZf S;O;Q[ff f HO HfB7[Y";R;Q% Df 7KHUHIRUH :[;L:[;Q[f ef 7DLQXff@ e 9[R[Q[f VfQ A7[S;4n;Q% Df HO HfQ A7[S;RA;Q%^Df & ![[f[f efQ7[S;R[Q% Df 7KXV f LV WUXH IRU Q 7KDW FRPSOHWHV WKH LQGXFWLRQ SURFHVV KDYH OHDUQHG WKDW -LDQJ f KDV D GLVWRUWLRQ OHPPD IRU D UHJXODU QRQ FRQIRUPDO VHPLJURXS ZKLFK LV D VHPLJURXS RI SLQFKHG FRQWUDFWLQJ GLIIHRPRU SKLVPV +LV YHUVLRQ LV VWURQJHU WKDQ RXU YHUVLRQ KHUH +RZHYHU IRU RXU SXUSRVH RI HVWLPDWLQJ +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQV KHUH RXU YHUVLRQ LV VWURQJ HQRXJK

PAGE 65

352326,7,21 ,I DOO FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV LScM DUH &A. DQG VDWn LVI\ WKH .SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ ZKHUH N DQG LI WKH WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH 3U?Wf ZKHUH D LV WKH VKLIW PDS LQ ( WKHQ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'(f W 3522) &KRRVH VPDOO H VDWLVI\LQJ ERWK f DQG f ZLWK 3FU $f f§WH %\ /HPPD WKHUH H[LVWV VXFK WKDW f KROGV IRU DOO LQWHJHUV Q DQG HDFK [ f ( ZKHQ D :H IL[ D VPDOO HQRXJK DQG D SRVLWLYH LQWHJHU Q ELJ HQRXJK VXFK WKDW 6HH :DOWHUV f RU 6HFWLRQ IRU QRWDWLRQVf ORJ3QFU ?WDf QWH 5HFDOO WKDW U LV +ROGHU FRQWLQXRXV 6XSSRVH WKDW LV WKH H[SRQHQW VXFK WKDW WKHUH H[LVWV D FRQVWDQW ZLWK .[f U\fO 'G[\f IRU DOO [ \ LQ ( )L[ D PLQD` 3LFN P ZLWK a Dn P /HW ^[Tf f ;PQf? WKHUH H[LVWV [*( ZLWK [ [T f f ‘ [PQ f f f f` &KRRVH IRU HDFK ZRUG [T DPQf LQ D SRLQW [ LQ ( ZLWK WKH LQLWLDO RI [T [P?Q WR IRUP D VXEVHW RI ( 7KH VXEVHW LV Q Dnf VHSDUDWHG DQG LV

PAGE 66

PD[LPDO LQ WKH VHQVH WKDW RQH FDQQRW DGG DQRWKHU SRLQW WR VXFK WKDW LW LV VWLOO QDnf VHSDUDWHG 7KXV WKH FROOHFWLRQ ^DaQ%DQ[Dnf?[ $n` LV DQ RSHQ FRYHU IRU ( 1RWLFH WKDW Q[ 9"[R]LUFUA 6LQFH U%[Dnf & %WW[fFLf DQG U^BQFUQ[Df_[ .` & ^I[[Y[Q%7U7Q[Df?[ [T[? [Qf .` LW IROORZV WKDW :[[Ya[Q%.MQ[Df?[ [ [Q f f .` LV DQ RSHQ FRYHU IRU ( 8$ $OVR XVLQJ f RI /HPPD ZH KDYH f LS;R;Q%777Q[Df & I[[QQYQ[f HfQ7Q7QA;4;Q%^4 Df 7KH ULJKW VLGH RI f LV DQ HOOLSVRLG ZLWK D[HV ^DO VfQRWM7[7QA[[Qf?A M ` 3LFN M ZLWK M f§ W M 7KHQ WKDW HOOLSVRLG FDQ EH FRYHUHG E\ & f RW?7U7Q[S[R[Qf f f f fM^7LUDQ[LS[R[QfRLM7n.7QAS;R;Q\ f§ &n8Mf§?^7LIDQ[nr!;4[QfrLMnrnA ^(n.7Q[WA;4P;Qf EDOOV RI UDGLXV DO fQRLM^7c7Q[^![[Qf ZKHUH WKH FRQVWDQW & GHSHQGV RQO\ RQ WKH GLPHQVLRQ RI I 1RZ ZH FDOFXODWH WKH +DXVGRUII PHDVXUH RI ( XVLQJ WKH VPDOOHU EDOOV RI UDGLXV DO HfQ ‘ FWM7f.UQ[9![[Qf D WR FRYHU WKH

PAGE 67

RSHQ VHW 3[[Q%QFUQ[Df ,I L f ` LV DQ RSHQ FRYHU IRU ( ZKHUH 3c LV D EDOO RI UDGLXV U WKHQ ZH GHILQH __ PD[H Uc DQG P < ?,?D LHL :H KDYH f§ A &XML^7QUQ[3[Rf§[QfDM ^n,nA7QAS;R;Qf>D^? HfQDM^7Q7QALS;R;Q\A ;f. f§ HfQWDW& YW7Y7Q[3[f§[Qf ;f. f§ HfQW& A 8-WU7Z7;OI;R;LfOAW7U7[LI[L;fn8W^U%77UQ;3[QL;Qf ;f. HfQW& A H[S>$[f $W[f f f f $LHUQ[f@ [H. OHfQW&3QD?WDnf O HfQW&3QU?WDf & H[SQWHf H[Sf§QWHf R DV Q f§! RR 7KXV f§ 6LQFH D FDQ EH DUELWUDULO\ VPDOO ILWf ,W IROORZV WKDW +'(f W 3522) 2) 7KHRUHP 3D?Wf LV D GHFUHDVLQJ IXQFWLRQ RI 9V VLQFH ( LV FRPSDFW DQG $ LV VWULFWO\ GHFUHDVLQJ ZLWK UHVSHFW WR W 6R WKHUH LV RQO\ RQH UHDO QXPEHU W VXFK WKDW 3 $rf $OVR WKH XQLTXH W ZLWK 3FU $f LV HTXDO WR LQI^L 3FU ;Wf ` &RQVHTXHQWO\ ZH KDYH +'(f W ZKHUH 3FU $f _

PAGE 68

i 7KH /RZHU %RXQG 3522) RI 7KHRUHP 1RWLFH WKDW IRU HDFK W WKH PDS $W LV +ROGHU FRQWLQn XRXV RQ ( 6R WKHUH H[LVWV DQ HTXLOLEULXP VWDWH S IRU $LQ WKH VHQVH WKDW 3D $Wf KADf ;IGS )L[ DQ\ S OHWfV HVWLPDWH WKH S PHDVXUH RI D EDOO %] Sf FHQWHUHG DW ] ZLWK UDGLXV S )RU HDFK [ ( FKRRVH WKH XQLTXH Q Q[f VXFK WKDW WKH GLDPHWHUV VDWLVI\ GLDPWQ[ff S GLDPWfBL[ff /(00$ 7KHUH H[LVWV D FRQVWDQW F VXFK WKDW IRU DOO [ ( 6 WKH RSHQ VHW 8QA[f LV FRQWDLQHG LQ D EDOO RI UDGLXV S DQG FRQWDLQV D EDOO RI UDGLXV FSA. 3522) ,W LV FOHDU WKDW 8Q[f LV FRQWDLQHG LQ D EDOO RI UDGLXV S 6LQFH WKH UDGLXV RI 8f[f GHFUHDVHV WR DV Q JURZV WR LQILQLW\ ZLWKRXW ORVV RI JHQHUDOLW\ ZH FDQ DVVXPH WKH PD[LPXP GLDPHWHU 5 RI DOO LV OHVV WKDQ WKH QXPEHU JLYHQ LQ /HPPD $OVR SLFN U VPDOO HQRXJK WKDW HDFK 8^ FRQWDLQV D EDOO RI UDGLXV U 7KHQ 8Q[f FRQWDLQV D EDOO RI UDGLXV U f D %XW RQ WKH RWKHU KDQG S GLDP8QL^[ff DLM;RDL[FU[f f ‘ f DLM;IMBDQBUFUQB[fL" ZKLFK LPSOLHV WKDW mOU[LUU[f4fDQBO;QU7Q[f DLS5

PAGE 69

ZKHUH WKH FRQVWDQW D? PLQ\JM^DT MM\f` GRHV QRW GHSHQG RQ HLWKHU Q RU [ 7KHUHIRUH WQ[f FRQWDLQV D EDOO RI UDGLXV USA.DA. I`. :ULWLQJ F D FRQVWDQW WKHQ WQ[f FRQWDLQV D EDOO RI UDGLXV FSA. DV GHVLUHG )RU WZR SRLQWV [ \ 6 VLQFH WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ PDSV VDWLVI\ WKH RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ 8QA[f DQG 8Q\f\f DUH HLWKHU HTXDO RU GLVMRLQW /HW 7 & 6 EH D VXEVHW VXFK WKDW ^WQA[A[f_[ f 7` LV D GLVMRLQW FROOHFWLRQ ZKLFK FRQWDLQV DOO IQ[f[f IRU [ ( 1RWLFH WKDW ^IQA[A[f_[ 7` FRYHUV ( /HPPD 6LPLODU WR +XWFKLQVRQ f Dff $W PRVW AFaASa.A RI ^WQMf[f_[ 7` FDQ PHHW %]Sf 3522) 6XSSRVH WKDW 9L r 9P LQ ^WQ[f[f_[ 7` PHHW %]Sf 7KHQ HDFK RI WKHP LV D VXEVHW RI %]Sf %\ WKH GHILQLWLRQ RI 7 WKH VHWV LQ WKH FROOHFWLRQ ^IQ[f[f_[ f 7` DUH GLVMRLQW &RPSDULQJ WKH YROXPHV ZH KDYH P-FOSOO.f -OSO ZKHUH LV WKH YROXPH RI D XQLW EDOO LQ I` +HQFH P FaASa. /HW &f[f ^\ \R\L f f ff f 6_\ rR f f f L \Q rQ` EH DQ Q F\OLQGHU 5HFDOO WKDW S LV D *LEEV PHDVXUH VHH %RZHQ f IRU D GLVFXVVLRQ RU %HGIRUG f IRU D VXPPDU\f 7KHUH H[LVWV D FRQVWDQW G ZLWK &Q[ff f 0a?G@ f H[S f§3U ;WfQ 6Q$A[ff IRU HDFK F\OLQGHU &Q[f LQ 6 7KXV S&Q[ff >G F_ f H[S6Q$r[ff

PAGE 70

VLQFH 3FU $f 6R &f[ff GH[S6Q;W[f G>[?[[[^r1[f f f f DL[fB[f7FU[f@ GLDO[r r1[f f f f Df,QBLDfU7Q[f@AFf G ‘ > GLDP If[ff$INf +HQFH LI Q Q[f ZH REWDLQ 0&220f AffUnnFf 1RWLFLQJ [&nQ[f Q[f IO ( E\ /HPPD Ur]!ff >F£Unef@Ffne %\ WKH )URVWPDQ OHPPD VHH &KDSWHU RU .DKDQH f IRU D SURRIf +'(f f§ ,N 7KDW FRPSOHWHV WKH HVWLPDWH IRU WKH ORZHU ERXQG i 6RPH &RQWLQXLW\ LQ WKH & 7RSRORJ\ 7KH FRQVWUXFWLRQ RI WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHW (cS GHSHQGV RQ WKH FRQWUDFWLQJ GLI IHRPRUSKLVPV ^\!LM` 1RZ OHW XV IL[ c DQG FRQVLGHU D & SHUWXUEDWLRQ WR D FRQIRUPDO FRQVWUXFWLRQ ZLWK GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV ^3LM` DQG REWDLQ DQRWKHU

PAGE 71

PDWUL[ RI FRQWUDFWLQJ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV ^LSLM` ZKLFK LV QRW QHFHVVDULO\ FRQIRUPDO 'HQRWH WKH QHZ VHOI VLPLODU VHW IRU LS E\ (A 'HILQH G& r1rGFL^WSLMLSLMf` LZKHUH WKH ODWHU GAL LV WKH & PHWULF 1RWH WKDW IRU DQ\ N ZKHQ LS LV VXIILFLHQWO\ & FORVH WR LS PXVW EH &F DQG DOVR N SLQFKHG 7KH IROORZLQJ WKHRUHP LV D FRUROODU\ RI 7KHRUHPV DQG ,W WHOOV WKDW DW D FRQIRUPDO FRQVWUXFWLRQ VDWLVI\LQJ WKH RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ IRU VHOI VLPLODU VHWV WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'A(Af GHSHQGV FRQWLQXRXVO\ RQ ^LSLM` LQ & WRSRORJ\ 7+(25(0 /HW ^\!LM` EH D PDWUL[ RI FRQIRUPDO FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRn PRUSKLVPV IRU WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHW (S VDWLVI\LQJ WKH RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ )RU DQ\ e WKHUH H[LVWV VXFK WKDW IRU DQ\ FRQVWUXFWLRQ LS VDWLVI\LQJ WKH RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ ZLWK GM? LSf ZH KDYH +'^(Af+'^(Af?H 3URRI /HW $AVW[f ORJXA7\S[R]A7UR[ff $AM6[f ORJ XV7LS;R;OQ D[ff EH WZR UHDO IXQFWLRQV RQ ( DV GHILQHG LQ 'HILQLWLRQ /HW W EH VXFK WKDW 3D?WSMf %HFDXVH WILLMnV DUH FRQIRUPDO WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI (cS HTXDOV W $OVR UHPDUN WKDW 3U $cSMHf IrU DQ\ e 1RZ IL[ DQ\ H /HW N PLQ^"H` DQG OHW Vn PLQf3U 9Wf 3U $\ Beff f

PAGE 72

6LQFH LS LV DQG FRQIRUPDO WKHUH LV VXFK WKDW WKH GLIIHRPRU SKLVP LS LV &F DQG N SLQFKHG ZLWK _$\fIL[f f§ $AV[f_ Hn IRU DOO V f >@ LI GALSLSf 6 7KHQ 3r AWHf 3^"! ;SWH e!f 3^" ?WHf en 6R +'([Sf W ? e +'(Sf 7 e E\ 3URSRVLWLRQ 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG E\ f ZKHQ GMLSLSf ZH KDYH 3IDL ALSWf§Hf n! 3^"W H f§ e f f§ ASWf§Hf A 6R ZH KDYH VRPH V W f§ H ZLWK 3FU?SVf VLQFH 3FU $AVf LV VWULFWO\ GHFUHDVLQJ ZLWK UHVSHFW WR %\ 7KHRUHP +'(Af V mfm! VO Hf Hf f§ Hf f§ H f§ H W f§ H ,W WKHQ IROORZV WKDW +'(Sf W H +'(Af H DV GHVLUHG :H VD\ D FRQVWUXFWLRQ \M ZLWK GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV VDWLVILHV WKH VWURQJ RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ LI WKHUH DUH RSHQ VHWV 8? f f 8c LQ I ZLWK 3LMMf & WM IRU DOO LM ,I WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ VDWLVILHV WKH VWURQJ RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ WKHQ LS PXVW DOVR VDWLVI\ WKH VWURQJ RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ LI LW LV & FORVH HQRXJK WR S 7KXV ZH KDYH REWDLQHG DQ LPPHGLDWH FRUROODU\ RI WKH DERYH 7KHRUHP

PAGE 73

&252//$5< /HW ^ScM` EH D PDWUL[ RI FRQIRUPDO FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLI IHRPRUSKLVPV IRU WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHW (S VDWLVI\LQJ WKH VWURQJ RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ )RU DQ\ H WKHUH H[LVWV VXFK WKDW IRU DQ\ FRQVWUXFWLRQ UI" ZLWK GALSWIf ZH KDYH c+'L(A+'L(AO.H )LQDOO\ ZH KDYH D UHPDUN RQ WKH FRQWLQXLW\ RI WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ LQ WKH & WRSRORJ\ DW QRQFRQIRUPDO FRQVWUXFWLRQV 5(0$5. 7KH IROORZLQJ H[DPSOH VKRZV WKDW LI WKH fFRQIRUPDOf FRQGLWLRQ IRU WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV ^SLM` IDLOV WKHQ WKH UHVXOWV LQ 7KHRUHP DQG &RUROODU\ FDQ EH IDOVH 7KH H[DPSOH LV GHULYHG IURP ([DPSOH RI )DOFRQHU f SS /HW 6 7? L" f§! 5" EH JLYHQ E\ 6[ \f [ \I f 7[[ \f [ $ \f ZKHUH $ f >f DQG [\f f 5 /HW S?? 6 ! 9S 7R 7DNH 9!$ ^9fLMD` ZKHUH 9fOO$ A$ 6 DQG $ A$ 7? 7KH VWURQJ r3HQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ LV PHW IRU ^SLM` ,Q IDFW LI ZH OHW 8? 8 f§f & L" WKHQ LSLMMf & 8c /HW (WS (UM[ EH WKH VHOI VLPLODU VHWV IRU S DQG &RQVLGHULQJ WKH SURMHFWLRQ RI (A[ WR WKH [D[LV RQH NQRZV WKDW +'(S[f IRU $ %XW (A! LV D &DQWRU VHW FRQWDLQHG LQ WKH WD[LV ZLWK WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ +'(OSf ORJ ORJ

PAGE 74

6LQFH GeLLSASf $ VR OHWWLQJ $ f§! ZH NQRZ WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ LV QRW FRQWLQXRXV DW WS :H QRWLFH WKDW ^SLM` DUH QRW FRQIRUPDO DOWKRXJK ^e!f` DQG ^LSLM?` DUH DOO SLQFKHG

PAGE 75

&+$37(5 7+( +‹121 $775$&725 ,Q WKH fV +QRQ HW DO FRQGXFWHG QXPHULFDO H[SHULPHQWV RQ WKH IROORZLQJ TXDGUDWLF DXWRPRUSKLVPV RI WKH SODQH + 5" f§r 5" GHILQHG E\ +; )f I < f§ D; E;f ZKHUH D E DUH SDUDPHWHUV ZKLFK fVKRZf D fVWUDQJHf DWWUDFWRU :H QRZ FDOO WKLV PDS D +QRQ PDS 6HH +QRQ f +QRQ DQG 3RPHDX f IRU QXPHULFDO UHVXOWV 6D\ $ LV DQ DWWUDFWRU RI + LI LW LV LQYDULDQW XQGHU + DQG WKHUH LV D QHLJKERUKRRG 8 RI $ VXFK WKDW HYHU\ SRLQW ] 8 KDV OLPQf§.[ G+Q]f $f $ +QRQ PDS LV UHJDUGHG DV WKH VLPSOHVW VPRRWK H[DPSOH WKDW FRPSXWHU VLPXODWLRQV LQGLFDWH WKH H[LVWHQFH RI D VWUDQJH DWWUDFWRU 6LQFH +QRQfV QXPHULFDO H[SHULPHQWV D QXPEHU RI DXWKRUV KDYH VWXGLHG WKH G\QDPLFDO EHKDYLRU RI WKH +QRQ PDSSLQJV 'HYDQH\ f JLYHV DQ LQWURGXFWLRQ WR WKLV VXEMHFW 0LOQRU f QRWLFHG PDQ\ +QRQ PDSSLQJV DUH QRQH[SDQVLYH DQG WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURSLHV RI WKH +QRQ PDSSLQJV IDOO ZLWKLQ > ORJ @ ,Q WKLV FKDSWHU ZH JLYH DQ XSSHU ERXQG IRU WKH FDSDFLW\ DQG WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI D +QRQ DWWUDFWRU 8QGHU WKH FRRUGLQDWH FKDQJH VXJJHVWHG 'HYDQH\ DQG 1LWHFNL f ; [D< E\D ZH KDYH WKH IROORZLQJ FRQYHQLHQW IRUP RI WKH +QRQ PDSSLQJ +[ \f D 7 E\ f§ [ [f ZKHUH D E DUH SDUDPHWHUV

PAGE 76

%HQHGLFNV DQG &DUOHVRQ f VKRZV WKH IROORZLQJ /HW :X :X]+f EH WKH XQVWDEOH PDQLIROG RI + DW WKH IL[HG SRLQW ] RI + LQ WKH ILUVW TXDGUDQW 7KHQ WKHUH LV D ER VXFK WKDW IRU DOO E e Rf WKHUH LV D VHW (I RI SRVLWLYH RQH GLPHQVLRQDO /HEHVJXH PHDVXUH VXFK WKDW IRU DOO D e (\ Of7KHUH LV DQ RSHQ VHW 8 f§ 8D Ef VXFK WKDW IRU DOO ] e 8 G+Q]f:Xf f§! DV Q f§ RR f7KHUH LV D SRLQW ]T ]RDEf e :X VXFK WKDW ^LIf]Rf`Q/R LV GHQVH LQ :X :H FRQVLGHU WKH FDVH ZKHQ ER $OVR LW LV FOHDU WKDW :X LV &rr DQG RQH GLPHQVLRQDO 7KXV &$f &$f +'$f 1RZ OHW 5 EH WKH ERXQG IRU $ VXFK WKDW IRU HYHU\ [ \f e $ ZH KDYH _[_ __ L DQG GHQRWH ]Q ^[Q\Qf +Q]Rf UQ 5 E f DQG 6LQFH $ OLP VXS f§ ORJE f§f§ A f Qf§.[! Q P P] Lf§Y +IL r A P P ZH KDYH $ )RU WKH FDSDFLW\ RI DQ DWWUDFWRU ZH VKDOO SURYH WKH IROORZLQJ 7KHRUHP ,9 ,I $ LV D FRPSDFW LQYDULDQW DWWUDFWRU XQGHU WKH +QRQ PDS + DV SURYHG H[LVWLQJ E\ %HQHGLFNV DQG &DUOHVRQ f WKHQ WKH XSSHU FDSDFLW\ &$f ORJ P

PAGE 77

'RXDG\ DQG 2HVWHUO KDYH DQ XSSHU ERXQG IRU WKH +DXVGRUI) GLPHQVLRQ RI DWWUDFWRUV 6LQFH +'$f &$f RXU WKHRUHP ,9 DOVR JLYHV DQ XSSHU ERXQG IRU WKH +DXVGRUI) GLPHQVLRQ ,Q WKH FDVH RI D +QRQ DWWUDFWRU RXU HVWLPDWH LV EHWWHU WKDQ 'RXDG\ DQG 2HVWHUOfV UHVXOW DSSOLHG WR D +QRQ DWWUDFWRU /HW 5? EH WKH ODUJHU URRW RI WKH HTXDWLRQ [r f§ __f[ f§ D /HW 6 [ 7KHQ DQ\ SRLQW RXWVLGH 6 RQ WKH SODQH ZLOO IOHH WR LQILQLW\ XQGHU HLWKHU WKH +QRQ PDS + RU +aA VHH 'HYDQH\ f ,Q RWKHU ZRUGV DQ\ LQYDULDQW VHW $ LV FRQWDLQHG LQ 6 DQG WKXV ERXQGHG 3522) 2) 7KHRUHP ,9 )LUVW WDNH D ORRN DW WKH LPDJH RI D EDOO XQGHU WKH +QRQ PDS /HW __DWf__ PD[^LM` DQG G EH WKH LQGXFHG PHWULF $IWHU D FRRUGLQDWH FKDQJH [ [P\ \ WKH +QRQ PDS KDV WKH IROORZLQJ IRUP +[ \f PD PE\ f§ /HW XV GHQRWH WKH QHZ FRRUGLQDWH V\VWHP DOVR E\ [\f IURP QRZ RQ /HPPD /HW % ^DU\f ?[ X_ U ?\ }_ U` EH D EDOO FHQWHUHG DW XXf RI UDGLXV U LQ RXU PHWULF 7KHQ +%f LV FRQWDLQHG LQ WKH IROORZLQJ UHFWDQJOH 9 9 >WLO O8O @ ; >YL !L f§@ P P UOWLO UA WLO L!Lf +X Qf DQG O PEU + PP ZKHUH

PAGE 78

3522) 2) /(00$ 6LQFH % LV ERXQGHG E\ [ f§ X s U \ Y s U WKH LPDJH RI % +%f ZLOO EH ERXQGHG E\ X U \ f§ s f§ DQG [ PD PEY f§ P\ s PEU P P 3LFN DQ\ SRLQW [\f IURP WKH SDUDEROD 7KHQ L f L L X U [ PD PEY f§ P\ f§ PEU ZLWK ?\ f§ P P U W U [ f§ mL PEU + P P ZKLFK FRPSOHWHV WKH SURRI IRU WKH OHPPD 7KHUHIRUH +%f FDQ EH FRYHUHG E\ DW PRVW PEU I f§ff§ PAE _X_ U P PP EDOOV RI UDGLXV UP 1RZ OHW ^ L ‘ f f N` EH D ILQLWH FRYHU RI $ ZKHUH HYHU\ EDOO %c KDV D UDGLXV OHVV WKDQ U 6LQFH ^]Q Q f f f ` LV GHQVH LQ $ RQH FDQ SLFN VRPH Qc VXFK WKDW ]8L %c 7KHQ ^%]QL Uf L f f f N` LV D FRYHU RI $ /HW XV ZULWH LQ RUGHU Q? m f f f 8VLQJ /HPPD LI D EDOO % FHQWHUHG DW XXf KDV UDGLXV U DQG ZH ZULWH +OXYf XL9Lf WKHQ +Q%f FDQ EH FRYHUHG E\ DW PRVW Qf§ P _X_ U f W U EDOOV RI UDGLXV f§f§ 6LQFH ^%]8LUf L f f f N` LV D FRYHU RI $ WKH LPDJH XQGHU WKH GLIIHRPRUSKLVP +Q ^+Q%]QLUf r fffr`

PAGE 79

LV DOVR D FRYHU RI $ 6XSSRVH 1 PD[^Q L ffft` 1RWLFH WKDW +Q%]QLUf LV FRYHUHG E\ DW PRVW LQf§ -PE ?[QM U f M L EDOOV RI UDGLXV %XW PQ LQf§ ULLQf§ ^PE ?[QM? U ?f -PE ?[M? U f M L M 1Qf§ -PE ?[M? U f M 7KHUHIRUH WKH QXPEHU RI EDOOV RI UDGLXV QHHGHG WR FRYHU $ LV DW PRVW PQ 1Q N ‘ PE I ?[M? U f %\ /HPPD ZH KDYH ORJ N QI Q ^PE ?[M? U f ORJ UPQf ORJ N (M6f ORJP ?[M? U f Q ORJ P ORJ U (eRB ,RJP _[M_ U f Q ORJ P 1Q ELAnfr13 ( Or6!L! KO U Of L R &$f OLP VXS Qf§!RR OLP VXS Qf§!RR OLP VXS f§22

PAGE 80

6LQFH _[_ 5 IRU DOO L DQG WKH IXQFWLRQ ORJ LV GLIIHUHQWLDEOH WKHUH LV D FRQVWDQW & VXFK WKDW IRU DOO U ZLWK U DQG IRU DOO M ORJP ?[M? f ORJPt ?[M? U f ORJP ?[M? f &U 7KLV LPSOLHV E\ OHWWLQJ U f§ WKDW 1Qf§O &$f OLPVXSf§ 9 ORJP ?[$ f ,Q Rn P A L f§ff LQQ VXS ORJ P Qf§RR Q -f§9 1WAn P_D_ OLPVXSf§ f ORJ ?UbFI P A 7L r M ORJ P fBRR Q I M X Qf§ Y f P?[M? Y :A+P6f3A ( OR6 A f ORJP Qf§!RR QI M ORJ P 7KDW FRPSOHWHV WKH SURRI _

PAGE 81

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n WHPV LQ WKH FDVHV ZKHUH FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV DUH FRQIRUPDO ,Q FKDSWHU ZH VWXG\ WKH FDVH ZKHUH WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV DUH QRW QHFHVVDULO\ FRQIRUPDO :H JLYH D QHZ GLVWRUWLRQ OHPPD 8VLQJ WRSRORJLFDO SUHVVXUH RQ D

PAGE 82

VKLIW VSDFH ZH JLYH DQ XSSHU HVWLPDWH RI WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ ZKHQ WKH FRQn VWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV DUH &nF DQG VDWLVI\ D N SLQFKLQJ FRQGLWLRQ IRU VRPH N 0RUHRYHU LI WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQ GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV DOVR VDWLVI\ WKH GLVMRLQW RSHQ VHW FRQGLWLRQ ZH WKHQ JLYH D ORZHU ERXQG IRU WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ :H EHOLHYH WKDW WKH FKDUDFWHULVWLF IXQFWLRQ $ FDQ EH UHYLVHG WR DFKLHYH DQ HYHQ EHWn WHU HVWLPDWH IRU WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ :H DOVR REWDLQ WKH FRQWLQXLW\ RI WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ LQ WKH & WRSRORJ\ DW FRQIRUPDO FRQVWUXFWLRQV ,Q FKDSWHU ZH VWXG\ WKH LPDJH RI D GLVF XQGHU WKH LWHUDWLRQ RI D +QRQ PDS ZKLFK HQDEOHV XV WR ILQG DQ XSSHU ERXQG IRU WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ DQG FDSDFLW\ RI WKH +QRQ DWWUDFWRU 7KDW LPSURYHV VRPH HDUOLHU HVWLPDWHV ZKHQ DSSOLHG WR WKH FDVH RI D +QRQ DWWUDFWRU 0LOQRU f QRWLFHG WKDW PDQ\ +QRQ PDSSLQJV DUH QRQH[SDQVLYH DQG WKH WRSRORJLFDO HQWURSLHV RI WKH +QRQ PDSSLQJV IDOO ZLWKLQ > ORJ @ 6LQFH ZH FDQQRW HVWDEOLVK D GLVWRUWLRQ OHPPD VLPLODU WR /HPPD IRU +QRQ PDSV LW LV XQNQRZQ WR XV ZKHWKHU WKH +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ RI D +QRQ DWWUDFWRU FDQ EH UHODWHG WR LWV WRSRORJLFDO HQWURS\ ,W LV VWLOO DQ RSHQ SUREOHP

PAGE 83

5()(5(1&(6 %HGIRUG 7 'LPHQVLRQ DQG G\QDPLFV IRU IUDFWDO UHFXUUHQW VHWV /RQGRQ 0DWK 6RF f f %HGIRUG 7 +DXVGRUII GLPHQVLRQ DQG ER[ GLPHQVLRQ LQ VHOI VLPLODU VHWV 3URF &RQI 7RSRORJ\ DQG 0HDVXUH 9 f *UHLIVZDOG %HQHGLFNV 0 DQG &DUOHVRQ / 7KH G\QDPLFV RI WKH +QRQ PDS $QQ 0DWK f %HVLFRYLWFK $ DQG 8UVHOO + 6HWV RI IUDFWLRQDO GLPHQVLRQV 9 2Q GLPHQVLRQDO QXPEHUV RI VRPH FRQWLQXRXV FXUYHV /RQG 0DWK 6RF f %RZHQ 5 (TXLOLEULXP VWDWHV DQG WKH HUJRGLF WKHRU\ RI $QRVRY GLIIHRPRUSKLVPV /HFWXUH QRWHV LQ 0DWKHPDWLFV f 6SULQJHU %HUOLQ &DUDWKRGRU\ & EHU GDV OLQHDUH 0DVV YRQ 3XQNWPHQJHQ HLQH 9HUDOOJHPHLQHUXQJ GDV /DQJHQEHJULIIV 1DFK *HV :LVV *RWWLQJHQ f 'HNNLQJ ) 0 5HFXUUHQW VHWV $GY LQ 0DWK f 'HYDQH\ 5 / $Q ,QWURGXFWLRQ WR &KDRWLF '\QDPLFDO 6\VWHPV 7KH %HQMDPLQ &XPPLQJV 3XEOLVKLQJ &RPSDQ\ ,QF 0HQOR 3DUN &DOLIRUQLD

PAGE 84

'HYDQH\ 5 DQG 1LWHFNL = 6KLIW DXWRPRUSKLVPV LQ WKH +QRQ PDSSLQJ &RP PXQ 0DWK 3K\V f 'RXDG\ $ DQG 2HVWHUO 'LPHQVLRQ GH +DXVGRUI) GHV DWWUDFWHXUV & 5 $FDG 6FL 3DULV 6HU 0DWK f )DOFRQHU )UDFWDO *HRPHWU\ 0DWKHPDWLFDO )RXQGDWLRQV DQG $SSOLFDWLRQV -RKQ :LOH\ DQG 6RQV &KLFKHVWHU (QJODQG )DWKL $ 6RPH FRPSDFW LQYDULDQW VXEVHWV IRU K\SHUEROLF OLQHDU DXWRPRUSKLVPV RI WRULL (UJRGLF 7KHRU\ DQG '\QDPLFDO 6\VWHPV f )DWKL $ ([SDQVLYHQHVV K\SHUERFLOLW\ DQG +DXVGRUI) GLPHQVLRQ &RPPXQLFDWLRQV LQ 0DWKHPDWLFDO 3K\VLFV f )UHGHULFNVRQ 3 .DSODQ
PAGE 85

+XUHZLF] : DQG :DOOPDQ + 'LPHQVLRQ 7KHRU\ 3ULQFHWRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ 3UHVV 3ULQFHWRQ +XWFKLQVRQ )UDFWDOV DQG VHOI VLPLODULW\ ,QGLDQD 8 0DWK f -LDQJ < 2Q QRQFRQIRUPDO VHPLJURXSV 3UHSULQW $UWLFOH 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 1HZ
PAGE 86

0LOQRU 1RQH[SDQVLYH +QRQ PDSV $GY LQ 0DWK f 6PDOH 6 'LIIHUHQWLDEOH G\QDPLFDO V\VWHPV %XOO $PHU 0DWK 6RF f 7HPDP 5 7KH ,QILQLWH 'LPHQVLRQDO '\QDPLFDO 6\VWHPV LQ 0HFKDQLFV DQG 3K\VLFV 6SULQJHU9HUODJ 1HZ
PAGE 87

%,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ ZDV ERUQ 2FWREHU LQ -LDQJVX 3URYLQFH HDVWHUQ &KLQD DWWHQGHG WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 6FLHQFH DQG 7HFKQRORJ\ RI &KLQD LQ +HIHL $QKXL 3URYLQFH &KLQD IURP WR ZDV D JUDGXDWH VWXGHQW DW WKH ,QVWLWXWH RI 0DWKHn PDWLFV &KLQHVH $FDGHP\ RI 6FLHQFHV IURP WR DQG DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD VLQFH

PAGE 88

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f 6WHSKHQ 6XPPHUV $VVRFLDWH 3URIHVVRU RI 0DWKHPDWLFV

PAGE 89

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

PAGE 90

81,9)5,79 U? U U a •IW R ;RLS6LLO