WKB asymptotics of meromorphic solutions of difference equations
Alexander Fedotov (Department of Mathematical Physics), Fr\'ed\'eric, Klopp (IMJ-PRG, SU)

TL;DR
This paper investigates the asymptotic behavior of meromorphic solutions to a difference Schrödinger equation with a pole in the potential, extending WKB methods to complex difference equations with singularities.
Contribution
It develops a WKB asymptotic analysis for meromorphic solutions of difference equations with poles, generalizing classical semi-classical methods to complex difference operators.
Findings
Derived asymptotic formulas for solutions near poles
Extended WKB techniques to meromorphic potentials
Analyzed the behavior of solutions in complex domains
Abstract
We consider the difference Schr{\''o}dinger equation where is a complex variable and is a small positive parameter. If is an analytic function, then, for sufficiently small, the analytic solutions to this equation have standard semi-classical behavior that can be described by means of an analog of the complex WKB method for differential equations. In the present paper, we assume that has a simple pole and, in its neighborhood, we study the asymptotics of meromorphic solutions to the difference Schr{\''o}dinger equation.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsQuantum chaos and dynamical systems · Quantum Mechanics and Non-Hermitian Physics · Mathematical functions and polynomials
Semiclassical asymptotics of meromorphic solutions
of difference equations
Alexander Fedotov and Frédéric Klopp
St. Petersburg State University, 7/9 Universitetskaya nab., St.Petersburg, 199034, Russia
Sorbonne Université, Université Paris Diderot, CNRS, Institut de Mathématiques de Jussieu - Paris Rive Gauche , F-75005, Paris, France
Abstract.
We consider the difference Schrödinger equation where is a complex variable, is a spectral parameter, and is a small positive parameter. If the potential is an analytic function, then, for sufficiently small, the analytic solutions to this equation have standard semi-classical behavior that can be described by means of an analog of the complex WKB method for differential equations. In the present paper, we assume that has a simple pole and, in its neighborhood, we study the asymptotics of meromorphic solutions to the difference Schrödinger equation.
Key words and phrases:
Difference equations, meromorphic coefficients, semiclassical asymptotics, complex WKB method
The work was supported by PRC Russie CNRS, France, and the Russian Foundation for Basic Research under the grant No 17-51-150008.
1. Introduction
We study the difference Schrödinger equation
[TABLE]
where is a complex variable, is a given meromorphic function called potential, is a spectral parameter, and is a small positive shift parameter 111The results were announced in the conference proceedings [10].
Instead of (1.1), one often considers equations of the form
[TABLE]
where is an integer variable, and is a parameter. There is a simple relation between (1.1) and (1.2): if is a solution to (1.1), then the formula yields a solution to (1.2). We note that, when is small, the coefficient in front of in (1.2) varies slowly in .
Formally, ; thus, in (1.1) is a small parameter in front of the derivative. So, is a standard semiclassical parameter.
The semi-classical asymptotics of solutions to ordinary differential equations, e.g., the Schrödinger equation
[TABLE]
are described by means of the well-known WKB method (called so after G. Wentzel, H. Kramers and L. Brillouin). There is a huge literature devoted to this method and its applications. If in (1.3) is analytic, one uses the variant often called the complex WKB method (see, e.g., [20, 6]). This powerful and classical asymptotic method is used to study solutions to (1.3) on the complex plane. Even when studying this equation on the real line, the complex WKB method is used to compute exponentially small quantities (such as the overbarier tunneling coefficient or the exponentially small lengths of spectral gaps in the case of a periodic ) or to simplify the asymptotic analysis (e.g. by going to the complex plane to avoid turning points), see, e.g., [6]. The case of meromorphic coefficients is a classical topic in the complex WKB theory. The analog of the complex WKB method for difference equations is being developed in [3, 14, 11] and in the present paper, where we turn to meromorphic solutions to equation 1.1.
Difference equations (1.1) on or on and (1.2) on with a small arise in many fields of mathematics and physics. In quantum physics, for example, one encounters such equations when studying in various asymptotic situations an electron in a two-dimensional crystal submitted to a constant magnetic field (see, e.g. [21] and references therein). The electron is described by a magnetic Schrödinger operator with a periodic electric potential. And, for example, in the semi-classical limit, in certain cases its analysis asymptotically reduces to analyzing an -pseudo-differential operator with the symbol (see [18]). Its eigenfunctions satisfy equation 1.1 with . The parameter is proportional to the magnetic flux through the periodicity cell, and the case when is small is a natural one. The reader can find more references and examples in [17]. We add only that equation 1.2 for , being a coupling constant, is the famous almost Mathieu equation (see, e.g., [1]), and, for , it is the well known Maryland equation (Maryland model) introduced by specialists in solid state physics in [15].
Difference equations in the complex plane (with analytic or meromorphic coefficients) arise in many other fields of mathematics and physics, in particular, in the study of the diffraction of acoustic waves by wedges (see, e.g., [2]) or in the theory of differential quasi-periodic equations (see, e.g., [8]). Small shift parameters arise in the problem of diffraction by thin wedges (the shift parameter is proportional to the angle of the wedge (see [2])) and for quasi-periodic equations with two periods of small ratio (the shift parameter is proportional to this ratio (see, e.g., [8])). The semi-classical analysis of difference equations is also used to study the asymptotics of orthogonal polynomials (see, e.g., [16, 4, 22]).
Even when studying (1.2) on , it is quite natural to pass to the analysis of (1.1) on or on as for this equation one can fruitfully use numerous analytic ideas developed in the theory of differential equations, e.g., tools of the theory of pseudo-differential operators and of the complex WKB method. If the coefficient is periodic, for equation (1.1) one can use ideas of the Floquet theory for differential equations with periodic coefficients, which leads to a natural renormalization method (see [7]).
B. Helffer and J. Sjöstrand (e.g., in [18]) and V. Buslaev and A. Fedotov (see, e.g. [7]) studied the cantorian geometrical structure of the spectrum of the Harper operator in the semiclassical approximation. Therefore, V. Buslaev and A. Fedotov began to develop the complex WKB method for difference equations in [3]. We are going to use the results of the present paper to study in the semiclassical approximation the multiscale structure of the (generalized) eigenfunctions of the Maryland operator (by means of the renormalization method described in [12]). In the “anti-semiclassical” case, for the almost Mathieu operator such a problem was solved in [19].
In this paper, for small , we describe uniform asymptotics of meromorphic solutions to equation 1.1 near a simple pole of . In the case of a differential equation, say, equation 1.3 with a meromorphic , the solutions may have singularities (branch points or isolated singular points) only at poles of . In the case of equation 1.1, the behavior of its solutions is completely different.
Let , , and . We assume that is analytic in and has a simple pole at zero. Let be a solution to equation 1.1 that is analytic in . Equation 1.1 implies that . Therefore, for sufficiently small , can be meromorphically continued into . It may have poles at the points of . When becomes small, these points become close one to another. We describe the semi-classical asymptotics of such meromorphic solutions in .
Below, unless stated otherwise, the estimates of the error terms in the asymptotic formulas are locally uniform for in the domain that we consider (i.e., uniform on any given compact subset of such a domain).
Instead of saying that an asymptotic representation is valid for sufficiently small , we write that it is valid as .
In the sequel, we shall not distinguish between a meromorphic function and its meromorphic continuation to a larger domain.
We also use the notations , and .
2. Main results
2.1. The complex WKB method in a nutshell
Formally equation 1.1 can be written in the form
[TABLE]
One of the main objects of the complex WKB method is the complex momentum defined by the formula
[TABLE]
It is an analytic multivalued function. Its branch points are solutions to . The points where are called turning points. A subset of the domain of analyticity of is regular if it contains no turning points.
Let be a regular simply connected domain, and be a branch of the complex momentum analytic in . Any other branch of the complex momentum that is analytic in is of the form for some and .
In terms of the complex momentum, one defines canonical domains. The precise definition of a canonical domain can be found in section 3.2. Here, we note only that the canonical domains are regular and simply connected and that any regular point is contained in a canonical domain (independent of ).
One of the basic results of the complex WKB method is
Theorem 2.1** ([13]).**
Let be a bounded canonical domain; let be a branch of the complex momentum analytic in and pick . For sufficiently small , there exists , a solution to equation 1.1 analytic in and such that, in , one has
[TABLE]
where is analytic in .
Remark 2.1**.**
The function does not vanish in regular domains; indeed, only vanishes at the points where , i.e., at the turning points.
In the case of the Harper equation (for unbounded canonical domains), the analog of Theorem 2.1 was proved in [3].
Let us underline that the branch of the complex momentum in Theorem 2.1 need not be the one with respect to which is canonical.
2.2. Asymptotics of a meromorphic solution
Let us turn to the problem discussed in the present paper. Recall that 0 is a simple pole of . Since as , reducing somewhat and if necessary, we can and do assume that the set is regular and that the imaginary part of the complex momentum does not vanish there.
2.2.1. The solution we study
Let . In , fix an analytic branch of the complex momentum satisfying .
Pick a point in . As this point is regular, there exists a solution to equation 1.1 that is analytic in a neighborhood of independent of and that admits the asymptotic representation (2.3) in this neighborhood.
Adjusting and if necessary, we can and do assume that there exists such that is analytic and admits the asymptotic representation (2.3) in the domain .
As in , the expression (compare with the leading term in (2.3)) increases as in moves to the right parallel to .
If is sufficiently small, the solution is meromorphic in ; its poles belong to and they are simple.
2.2.2. The uniform asymptotics of in
To describe the asymptotics of , we define an auxiliary function. Clearly, the complex momentum has a logarithmic branch point at zero. In , we fix the analytic branch of such that . In section 4.2.2 we check
Lemma 2.1**.**
The function is analytic in . The function is analytic and does not vanish in .
For , we set
[TABLE]
Here and below, and are positive; ; the branch of coincides with the one from (2.3).
In view of Lemma 2.1, is analytic in .
Our main result is
Theorem 2.2**.**
In , the solution admits the asymptotic representation
[TABLE]
where is the Euler -function and the integration path stays in .
So, the special function describing the asymptotic behavior of near the poles generated by a simple pole of is the -function.
2.2.3. The asymptotics of outside a neighborhood of
For large values of , the -function in (2.5) can be replaced with its asymptotics. Let us give more details.
Fix . We recall that, uniformly in the sector , one has
[TABLE]
where the functions and are analytic in this sector and satisfy the conditions and .
Fix positive sufficiently small. Using (2.6), one checks that, in outside the -neighborhood of , the representation (2.5) turns into (2.3).
By construction, admits the asymptotic representation (2.3) in . Theorem 2.2 implies that the representation remains valid in . This reflects the standard semi-classical heuristics saying that an asymptotic representation of a solution remains valid as long as the leading term is increasing; in the present case, the modulus of the exponential in the leading term in (2.3) increases in as long as moves to the right parallel to .
2.2.4. The asymptotics of near away from [math]
Assume that is inside the -neighborhood of but outside the -neighborhood of 0. In this case, to simplify (2.5), we first use the relation
[TABLE]
and, next, the asymptotic representation (2.6). This yields the asymptotic representation
[TABLE]
where , and are obtained by analytic continuation from into the domain under consideration.
2.3. A basis of solutions
The set of solutions to (1.1) is a two-dimensional module over the ring of -periodic functions (see section 3.1). We now explain how to construct a basis of this module.
2.3.1.
As the first solution, we take . In , it admits the asymptotic representation
[TABLE]
and has simple poles at the points of .
We note that increases when moves to the right parallel to .
2.3.2.
Fix . Possibly reducing somewhat, similarly to , one constructs a solution that, in , admits the asymptotic representation
[TABLE]
and has simple poles at the points of . The branches of the complex momenta appearing in (2.9) and (2.10) coincide in .
Note that increases when moves to the left parallel to .
The function being -periodic, we define another solution to equation 1.1 by the formula . The function is analytic in ; its zeroes are simple and located at the points of . As we prove in section 6.2, in , the solution has the asymptotics
[TABLE]
2.3.3.
In section 6.2, we shall see that, for sufficiently small , and form a basis of the space of solutions to equation 1.1 meromorphic in (possibly reduced somewhat).
2.4. The idea of the proof of Theorem 2.2 and the plan of
the paper
To prove Theorem 2.2, we consider the function . It is analytic in . Using tools of the complex WKB method for difference equations, outside a disk centered at 0 (and independent of ), we compute the asymptotics of and obtain . The factor is analytic and does not vanish in . Therefore, the function is analytic in , and, as it is small outside , the maximum principle implies that it is small also inside .
The plan of the paper is the following. In section 3 we describe basic facts on equation 1.1 and the main tools of the complex WKB method for difference equations. In section 4, we derive the asymptotics of the solution in outside a neighborhood of 0. In section 5, we finally prove the asymptotic representation (2.5). In section 6, we briefly discuss the solution mentioned in section 2.3.
2.5. Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the CNRS and the Russian foundation of basic research under the French-Russian grant 17-51-150008.
3. Preliminaries
We first recall basic facts on the space of solutions to equation 1.1; next, we recall basic constructions of the complex WKB method for difference equations and prepare an important tool, Theorem 3.1. We will use it various times to obtain the asymptotics of solutions to (1.1).
3.1. The space of solutions to equation 1.1
The observations that we now discuss are well-known in the theory of difference equations and are easily proved. We follow [11].
Fix so that . We discuss the set of solutions to equation 1.1 on .
Let . The expression
[TABLE]
is called the Wronskian of and . It is -periodic in .
If the Wronskian of and does not vanish, they form a basis in , i.e, if and only if
[TABLE]
where and are -periodic complex valued functions. One has
[TABLE]
The set is a two-dimensional module over the ring of -periodic functions.
3.2. Basic constructions of the complex WKB method
We begin by defining canonical curves and canonical domains, the main geometric objects of the method.
3.2.1. Canonical curves
For , we put , . A connected curve is called vertical if it is the graph of a piecewise continuously differentiable function of .
Define the complex momentum, turning points and regular domains as in section 2.1.
Let be a regular vertical curve parameterized by , and be a branch of the complex momentum that is analytic near . We pick . The curve is called canonical with respect to if, at the points where exists, one has
[TABLE]
and at the points of jumps of , these inequalities are satisfied for both the left and right derivatives.
3.2.2. Canonical domains
In this paper we discuss only bounded canonical domains.
Let be a bounded simply connected regular domain and let be a branch of the complex momentum analytic in it. The domain is said to be canonical with respect to if, on the boundary of , there are two regular points, say, and such that, for any , there exists a curve passing through and connecting to that is canonical with respect to . In this paper, we use the local canonical domains described by
Lemma 3.1**.**
For any regular point, there exists a canonical domain that contains this point.
This lemma is an analog of Lemma 5.3 in [9]; mutatis mutandis, their proofs are identical.
3.2.3. Standard asymptotic behavior
Let be a regular simply connected domain; pick and assume and are analytic in .
We say that a solution to equation 1.1 has the standard (asymptotic) behavior
[TABLE]
in if, for sufficiently small, is analytic and admits the asymptotic representation (2.3) in .
Theorem 2.1 says that, for any given bounded canonical domain , for any branch of analytic in , there exists a solution with the standard asymptotic behavior (3.5) in . To study its asymptotic behavior outside , we use the construction described in the next subsection.
3.3. A continuation principle
Assume the potential in equation 1.1 is analytic in a domain in . Let be a regular point, be a regular simply connected domain containing and be a branch of the complex momentum analytic in .
Finally, let be a solution to (1.1) having the standard asymptotic behavior (3.5) in . One has
Theorem 3.1**.**
*Let . Consider the straight line . Pick such that . Assume the segment is regular.
If along , then there exists such that the -neighborhood of is regular and has the standard behavior (3.5) in this neighborhood.*
Theorem 3.1 roughly says that the asymptotic formula (2.3) stays valid along a horizontal line as long as the leading term grows exponentially. It is akin to Lemma 5.1 in [9] that deals with differential equations. The proof of Theorem 3.1 given below follows the plan of the proof of Lemma 5.1 in [9].
Let be a solution to equation 1.1 with the standard behavior in . If in , then the analogue, mutatis mutandis, of Theorem 3.1 on the behavior of to the left of holds.
Proof of Theorem 3.1.
Clearly, for , there exists an open disk centered at such that is regular and in . In view of Lemma 3.1, if is sufficiently small, then there exists two solutions having the standard behavior in (here, we first integrate from to in , next from to along and finally from to inside ).
The segment being compact, we construct finitely many open disks , each centered in a point of , covering and such that
- (1)
for , the disk is regular and one has in ; 2. (2)
, , and has the standard behavior (3.5) in ; 3. (3)
for , there exists two solutions having the standard behavior in the domain .
Denote the rightmost point of the boundary of by . Possibly, excluding some of the disks from the collection and reordering them, we can and do assume that, for , and . Indeed, to choose , consider the point . If is to the right of , we can keep only in the collection. Otherwise, in our collection, there is a disk that contains . Denote it by . We then obtain the set of disks by induction.
For we define
[TABLE]
For , let . Pick sufficiently small so that , the -neighborhood of , be a subset of .
Let us prove that has the standard behavior (3.5) in .
First we note that, for sufficiently small, by means of the formula (i.e., by means of equation 1.1), can be analytically continued in . It clearly satisfies equation (1.1) in .
Let us justify the asymptotic representation (2.3) in . For , we define . For , we consecutively prove that has the standard behavior in to the right of . Therefore, we let , , , and then proceed in the following way.
Using the standard asymptotic behavior of and , one proves the asymptotic formula
[TABLE]
As the Wronskians are -periodic, for sufficiently small , formula (3.6) is valid uniformly in . This implies in particular that, for sufficiently small , in , the solution is a linear combination of the solutions with -periodic coefficients, and one has (3.2) and (3.3).
The leading terms of the asymptotics of and coincide in . Thus, one has
[TABLE]
Due to the -periodicity of , for sufficiently small , formula (3.7) stays valid in the whole .
One also has for . For sufficiently small , the -periodicity of yields
[TABLE]
where and mod .
Estimates (3.7) and (3.8) imply that, in , one has
[TABLE]
Assume that is located to the right of . As in , one has . This implies that has the standard behavior (3.5) in to the right of and completes the proof of Theorem 3.1. ∎
4. The asymptotics outside a neighborhood of 0
We consider the solution described in section 2.2.1 and derive its asymptotics outside a neighborhood of [math], the pole of .
4.1. The asymptotics outside a neighborhood of
Recall that
- •
in the rectangle , the solution has the standard behavior (3.5);
- •
is regular;
- •
in , the branch appearing in (3.5) satisfies the inequality .
Theorem 3.1 yields the asymptotics of in to the right of , namely
Lemma 4.1**.**
The solution admits the standard asymptotic behavior (3.5) in the domain .
Let us underline that the obstacle to justify the standard behavior of in the whole domain is the pole of at 0.
4.2. Asymptotics in a neighborhood of outside a
neighborhood of 0
We note that the function is -periodic. As satisfies equation 1.1, so does . Moreover, as has poles only at the points of and as these poles are simple, the solution is analytic in .
For , let . In this subsection, we prove
Proposition 4.1**.**
Let be sufficiently small. In , the solution has the standard behavior
[TABLE]
here, and are respectively obtained from and by analytic continuation from to .
To prove Proposition 4.1, it suffices to check that, for any point , there exists a neighborhood, say, of this point (independent of ) where the solution has the standard behavior.
As their study is simpler, we begin with the points .
4.2.1. Points in
Let . Let be an open disk (independent of ) centered at . In one has as . Furthermore, by Lemma 4.1, has the standard behavior (3.5) in . Therefore, in , one computes
[TABLE]
This implies the standard behavior (4.1) in .
4.2.2. Points in
Pick now and let be an open disk (independent of ) centered at .
We use
Lemma 4.2**.**
For , one has
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.2 yields
[TABLE]
By Lemma 4.1, has the standard behavior (3.5) in . Therefore, (4.4) implies that, in , one has
[TABLE]
and has the standard behavior (4.1) in .
To prove Lemma 4.2, we shall use
Lemma 4.3**.**
In , one has
[TABLE]
where is a branch of the logarithm analytic in , is a constant, and is a function analytic in vanishing at [math].
Proof of Lemma 4.3.
By definition (see (2.2)), satisfies . Therefore,
[TABLE]
where the branch of the square root is to be determined. Since as , we rewrite this formula in the form
[TABLE]
As in and as when , equation 2.2 implies that when . Therefore, in (4.6), the determination of the square root is to be chosen so that as . Then, (4.6) yields the representation
[TABLE]
where is analytic in a neighborhood of 0 vanishing at [math]. By assumption, has the Laurent expansion , , in a neighborhood of 0. Thus, (4.7) implies representation (4.5) in a neighborhood of 0.
The function is analytic in in a neighborhood of . To check that it is analytic in the whole domain , we consider two analytic continuations of into a neighborhood of in , one from and another from . As they coincide near 0, they coincide in the whole connected component of [math] in their domain of analyticity. So, is analytic in . This completes the proof of Lemma 4.3. ∎
It now remains to prove Lemma 4.2. Therefore, we first prove Lemma 2.1.
The proof of Lemma 2.1.
The statements of Lemma 2.1 on the analyticity of the functions and follow directly from Lemma 4.3. This lemma also implies that the second function does not vanish at 0. Finally, this function does not vanish in in view of Remark 2.1. The proof of Lemma 2.1 is complete. ∎
Proof of Lemma 4.2.
Let . The first formula in (4.3) follows directly from the representation (4.5). By Lemma 2.1, the function is analytic and does not vanish in . So, for , and either coincide or are of opposite signs. In view of (4.5), we obtain the second relation in (4.3). ∎
Having proved Lemma 4.2, the analysis for is complete.
4.2.3. Real points : construction of two linearly
independent solutions
To treat the case of real points, we define two linearly independent solutions to equation 1.1 that have standard asymptotic behavior to the right of 0 and express in terms of these solutions.
Below, in the proof of Proposition 4.1, we always assume that is a point in . Let be two points such that .
We recall that the set is regular (see the beginning of section 2.2). For , the point is regular. By Lemma 3.1 and Theorem 2.1, there exists a regular -neighborhood of in such that there exists a solution to (1.1) with the standard asymptotic behavior in the domain .
Let and be the -neighborhood of the interval .
As the imaginary part of the complex momentum can not vanish in , is negative in . Therefore, by Theorem 3.1, the solution has the standard asymptotic behavior
[TABLE]
in to the right of .
Similarly, one shows that has the standard asymptotic behavior
[TABLE]
in to the left of .
Then, (4.8) and (4.9) yield that, as , one has
[TABLE]
At cost of reducing , this asymptotic is uniform in . We note that the error term is analytic in together with .
In view of (4.10), for sufficiently small , the solutions form a basis of the space of solutions to equation 1.1 defined in ; for , we have (3.2) and (3.3). Our next step is to compute the asymptotics of and in (3.2).
4.2.4. The coefficient
We prove
Lemma 4.4**.**
As ,
[TABLE]
where the error term is analytic in .
Proof.
For , we shall compute the asymptotics of the Wronskian appearing in the formula for in (3.3).
As those of , the poles of in are contained in and they are simple. We first compute the asymptotics of in outside the real line. Then, the information on the poles yields a global asymptotic representation for in and, thus, (4.11).
First, we assume that . Then, and coincide respectively with and ; using the asymptotics of and yields
[TABLE]
Now, we assume that . Then, (4.3) implies that
[TABLE]
This representation and (4.9) yield
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
Representations (4.12) and (4.14) imply that
[TABLE]
We recall that is an -periodic function (as is ). Therefore, at the cost of reducing somewhat, we get the uniform estimate for and sufficiently small. Moreover, the description of the poles of implies that is analytic in the strip .
Now, let us consider as a function of . It is analytic in the annulus and, on the boundary of this annulus, it admits the uniform estimate . By the maximum principle, the estimate holds uniformly in the annulus.
Thus, as a function of , the function satisfies the uniform estimate for and, therefore, in the whole domain .
This estimate, the representation (4.10) and the definition of (see (3.3)) imply (4.11). ∎
4.2.5. The coefficient
We estimate in for sufficiently small. To state our result, let be the connected component of in the set of satisfying
[TABLE]
As
[TABLE]
the Implicit Function Theorem guarantees that is a smooth vertical curve in a neighborhood of . Reducing if necessary, we can and do assume that intersects both the lines . We prove
Lemma 4.5**.**
In (with reduced somewhat if necessary), on and to the right of , one has
[TABLE]
where is analytic in .
Proof.
Let us estimate the Wronskian , the numerator in (3.3).
First, we assume that . Then, and coincide respectively with and . Thus, the leading terms of the asymptotics of and coincide up to a constant factor; this yields
[TABLE]
We recall that the Wronskians are -periodic (see section 3.1). Let us assume additionally that is either between and or on one of these curves. Pick such that . In view of the definition of , as is analytic in , one has
[TABLE]
here, is a positive constant independent of . This estimate and (4.17) imply that, for either between the curves and or on one of them, one has
[TABLE]
Reducing somewhat if necessary, we can and do assume that (4.18) holds on the line between and or on one of these curves. Then, thanks to the -periodicity of , it holds for all on the line .
Now, we assume that . Using the asymptotics (4.13) and (4.8), we compute
[TABLE]
Arguing as when proving (4.18), we finally obtain
[TABLE]
Let . Estimates (4.18) and (4.19) imply that, for ,
[TABLE]
As those of the solution do, the poles of in belong to the set and are simple. So, the function is analytic in the strip . Moreover, it is -periodic as is. Thus, the maximum principle implies that (4.20) holds in the whole strip . Estimate (4.20), representation (4.10) and the definition of (see (3.3)) yield (4.16). This completes the proof of Lemma 4.5. ∎
4.2.6. Completing the proof of Proposition 4.1
Let be a disk independent of , centered at and located to the right of (i.e., such that, for any , there exists such that and ).
Below we assume that .
Using (4.9) and (4.8), the asymptotic representations for , and (4.11) and (4.16), the representations for and , we compute
[TABLE]
As before, let be such that . Then, we have
[TABLE]
Here, we used the definition of and the fact that in . As a result, we have . Formula (3.2) then yields
[TABLE]
where is analytic in . This and the asymptotic representations for and yields (4.1) in . This completes the proof of Proposition 4.1.
5. Global asymptotics
5.1. The proof of Theorem 2.2
We follow the plan outlined in section 2.4. Recall that is defined in (2.4). We prove
Proposition 5.1**.**
Let be sufficiently small. In , outside the -neighborhood of 0, one has
[TABLE]
Let us check that Theorem 2.2 follows from Proposition 5.1.
We recall that the poles of belong to and are simple. Furthermore, in view of Lemma 2.1, is analytic in . Clearly, has no zeros in . These observations imply that the function
[TABLE]
is analytic in . By Proposition 5.1, it satisfies the estimate in outside the -neighborhood of 0. Therefore, by the maximum principle, it satisfies this estimate in the whole of . This implies the statement of Theorem 2.2. To complete the proof of this theorem, it now suffices to check Proposition 5.1.
5.2. The proof of Proposition 5.1
Fix sufficiently small positive. The proof of Proposition 5.1 consists of two parts: first, we prove (5.1) in the sector , and, then, in the sector .
5.2.1. The asymptotic in the sector
If and , we can use formula (2.6) for and the standard asymptotic representation (2.3) for , see Lemma 4.1. This immediately yields (5.1) in .
5.2.2. The asymptotic in the sector
Let be so small that be a subset of (defined just above Proposition 4.1). For and small, we express in terms of by formula (2.7), then, we use formula (2.6) for and the standard asymptotic representation for (see Proposition 4.1). This yields
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and the functions and are analytic in and positive respectively if and . We note that by Lemma 2.1, is analytic in .
Define the functions and as in (2.4), i.e. so that they be analytic in and positive if and respectively. Then, these functions are related to the functions and from (5.3) by the formulas
[TABLE]
Furthermore, in the functions and coincide. These two observations imply that one has in .
As both and are analytic in , they coincide in the whole of . This and (5.2) imply the representation (5.1) for . This completes the analysis in the sector and the proof of Proposition 5.1.
6. A basis for the space of solutions
We finally discuss a basis of the space of solutions to equation 1.1 that are meromorphic in . First, we describe the two solutions forming the basis and, second, we compute their Wronskian.
6.1. First solution
As the first solution, we take . It has the standard behavior (2.9) in and simple poles at the points of . We recall that the modulus of the exponential factor in (2.9) increases when moves to the right parallel to .
6.2. Second solution
Let be a point in . Mutatis mutandis, in the way we constructed , in (possibly reduced somewhat), we construct a solution in that has the standard asymptotic behavior (2.10) and such that the quasi-momenta (and the functions ) in (2.9) and (2.10) coincide in .
The modulus of the exponential from (2.10) increases when moves to the left parallel to .
The solution has simple poles at the points of and, in , it admits the asymptotic representation
[TABLE]
Here, the functions and are analytic in and positive, respectively, if and . The factor is analytic in .
We define the second solution to be . The solution is analytic in . It has simple zeros at the points and at 0. By means of (6.1), one can easily check that, in , it has the standard behavior (2.11).
6.3. The Wronskian of the basis solutions
Using the asymptotic representations for in , one easily computes
[TABLE]
As the Wronskian is -periodic, this representation is valid in the whole domain . We see that, for sufficiently small , the leading term of the Wronskian does not vanish, and, thus, form a basis in the space of solutions to equation 1.1 in (possibly reduced somewhat for (6.3) to be uniform).
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] A. Avila and S. Jitomirskaya. The Ten Martini Problem. Annals Math., 170:303-342, 2009.
- 2[2] V. Babich, M. Lyalinov and V. Grikurov. Diffraction theory: the Sommerfeld-Malyuzhinets technique. Oxford, Alpha Science, 2008.
- 3[3] V. Buslaev and A. Fedotov. Complex WKB method for Harper equation. St. Petersburg Math. J. , 6(3):495-517, 1995.
- 4[4] S. Yu. Dobrokhotov and A. V. Tsvetkova. On Lagrangian manifolds related to asymptotics of Hermite polynomials. Math. notes , 104(6):810-822, 2018.
- 5[5] A. Eckstein. Unitary reduction for the two-dimensional Schrödinger operator with strong magnetic field. Math. Nachr. , 282(4):504-525, 2009.
- 6[6] A. Fedoryuk. Asymptotic analysis. Linear ordinary differential equations. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009.
- 7[7] A. Fedotov. Monodromization method in the theory of almost-periodic equations. St. Petersburg Math. J., 25:303-325, 2014.
- 8[8] A. Fedotov and F. Klopp. Anderson transitions for a family of almost periodic Schrödinger equations in the adiabatic case. Commun. in math. phys. , 227:1-92, 2002.
