\section{Introduction}

Let $(X,g)$ be a complete simply connected Riemannian manifold without
conjugate points and $SX$ its unit tangent bundle. For $v \in SX$ we
denote by $c_v: \R \to X$ the corresponding geodesic with $c_v'(0) =
v$ and $b_v: X\to \mathbb{R}$, $b_v(q) = \lim_{t \to \infty}
d(c_v(t),q) - t$ be the associated Busemann function.

Let $S_{v,r}$ and $U_{v,r}$ be the orthogonal Jacobi tensors along
$c_v$, defined by $S_{v,r}(0) = U_{v,r}(0) = \id$ and $S_{v,r}(r) = 0$
and $U_{v,r}(-r) = 0$. Note that we have $U_{v,r}(t) =
S_{-v,r}(-t)$. The stable and unstable Jacobi tensors $S_v$ and $U_v$
are defined as the Jacobi tensors along $c_v$ with initial conditions
$S_v(0) = U_v(0) = \id$ and $S_v'(0) = \lim_{r \to \infty}
S_{v,r}'(0)$ and $U_v'(0) = \lim_{r \to \infty} U_{v,r}'(0)$. We
define $U(v) = U_v'(0)$ and $S(v) = S_v'(0)$. For a general introduction
into Jacobi tensors see \cite{Kn1}.

Important for this paper will be the notion of rank which in
nonpositive curvature has been defined in \cite{BBE} as the dimension
of the parallel Jacobi fields along geodesics, and is one of the
central concepts in rigidity theory.  In the case of no conjugate
points it is due to Knieper \cite{Kn2} and generalizes this concept.

\begin{dfn}
  Let $(X,g)$ be a complete simply connected Riemannian manifold
  without conjugate points. For $v \in SX$ let $D(v) = U(v)-S(v)$ and we define
  $$
  \rank(v) = \dim (\ker D(v)) +1
  $$
  and
  $$
  \rank(X) = \min  \{ \rank(v) \mid  v \in SX \}
  $$
\end{dfn}

It is easy to see that the function $v \to \rank(v)$ is invariant
under the geodesic flow.

As already observed in \cite{Kn2} the notion of $\rank$ is very
important in the study of {\em harmonic manifolds}. After Szabo's
proof \cite{Sz} of the Lichnerowicz conjecture for {\em compact} simply
connected harmonic manifolds, the classification of {\em noncompact}
harmonic manifolds is still wide open, even though there have been
interesting new developments in the last decade (see, e.g.,
\cite{RaSh,Ni,He}). In this paper we consider the more general class of
asymptotically harmonic manifolds, originally introduced by Ledrappier
\cite[Thm 1]{Le} in connection with rigidity of measures related to
the Dirichlet problem (harmonic measure) and the dynamics of the
geodesic flow (Bowen-Margulis measure).

\begin{dfn}
  An {\em asymptotically harmonic manifold} $(X,g)$ is a complete,
  simply connected Riemannian manifold without conjugate
  points such that for all $v \in SX$ we have $\tr U(v) = h$ for a
  constant $h \ge 0$.
\end{dfn}

Our first main result is the following:

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:Dconstant} Let $(X,g)$ be an asymptotically
  harmonic manifold such that $\vert R \Vert \le R_0$
  and $\vert \nabla R \Vert \le R_0'$ with suitable constants
  $R_0,R_0' > 0$. Then $v \mapsto \det D(v)$ is a constant function
  on $SX$.

  Moreover, if $X$ has rank one, there exists $\rho > 0$ such that
  $D(v) \ge \rho \cdot \id$ for all $v \in SX$.
\end{theorem}

For harmonic manifolds, this theorem is a consequence of the relation between
$\det D(v)$ and the volume density function (see
\cite[Cor. 2.5]{Kn2}). For asymptotically harmonic manifolds this theorem
was proved in \cite[Cor. 2.1]{HKS} under the additional condition of
strictly negative curvature bounded away from zero.  Zimmer
\cite[Proof of Prop. 3.3]{Zi} provides a proof under the additional
assumption of the existence of a compact quotient, using dynamical
arguments. The proof of the general case without negative curvature or
compact quotient requires new subtle estimates for second fundamental
forms of spheres and horospheres which are presented in Section 2 of
this article.

For the next result about asymptotic geometric and dynamical properties equivalent
to the rank one condition we first need to introduce the notion of volume entropy.

\begin{dfn}
  The {\em volume entropy} $h_{vol}(X)$ of a connected Riemannian
  manifold $X$ is defined as
   \begin{equation} \label{eq:hvoldef}
   h_{vol}(X) =  \limsup_{r \to \infty} \frac{\log \vol B_r(p)}{r},
   \end{equation}
   where $B_r(p) \subset X$ is the open ball of radius $r$ around $p \in X$.
 \end{dfn}

 Note that \eqref{eq:hvoldef} does not depend on the choice of reference point $p$ and
 $h_{vol}(X)$ is therefore well defined.

Theorem \ref{thm:Dconstant} is essential in the proof of our second main result.

\begin{theorem} \label{thm:equivalences} Let $(X,g)$ be an
  asymptotically harmonic manifold such that $\vert R \Vert \le R_0$
  and $\vert \nabla R \Vert \le R_0'$ with suitable constants
  $R_0,R_0' > 0$. Let $h \ge 0$ be the mean curvature of its
  horospheres, i.e. $h = \tr U(v)$. Then the following properties are
  equivalent.
  \begin{itemize}
  \item[(a)] $X$ has rank one.
  \item[(b)] $X$ has Anosov geodesic flow $\phi^t: SX \to SX$.
  \item[(c)] $X$ is Gromov hyperbolic.
  \item[(d)] $X$ has purely exponential volume growth with growth rate
    $h_{vol} = h$.
  \end{itemize}
\end{theorem}

This equivalence has been obtained in the case of {\em noncompact
  harmonic manifolds} by Knieper in \cite{Kn2}. In the case that $(X,g)$ is an asymptotically
harmonic manifold {\em with compact quotient}, this equivalence has
been derived by Zimmer \cite{Zi}. Since for harmonic manifolds the
curvature tensor and its covariant derivative are bounded (\cite[Props. 6.57 and 6.68]{Be}), the current
article generalizes these results in both papers to asymptotically harmonic manifolds (without a compact
quotient condition).

In a subsequent article \cite{KnPe} we use the main results of this article to derive results about harmonic functions
(solution of the Dirichlet problem at infinity and mean value property of harmonic functions at infinity)
on rank one asymptotically harmonic manifolds.

\section{Manifolds without conjugate points: general results}

In this section, $(X,g)$ always denotes a complete simply connected
Riemannian manifold without conjugate points. Let $\pi: SX \to X$ be
the footpoint projection and $v \in SX$. The associated curvature
tensor $R_v(t): \phi^t(v)^\bot \to \phi^t(v)^\bot$ along $c_v$ is
defined by
$$ R_v(t)w = R(w,\phi^t(v))\phi^t(v). $$
The stable and unstable manifolds through $v \in SX$ are defined as
$W^s(v) = \{ - \grad b_v(q) \mid b_v(q) = 0 \}$ and $W^u(v) = \{ \grad
b_{-v}(q) \mid b_{-v}(q) = 0 \}$. The footpoint projections $\pi
W^s(v)$ and $\pi W^u(v)$ are level sets of Busemann functions and,
therefore, horospheres. Horospheres are usually denoted by $\mathcal
H$. Observe that $S(v)$ and $U(v)$ are the associated second
fundamental forms.

\subsection{A formula for the difference of second fundamental
  forms in horospheres}

Of importance is the following result which is based on an formula of E.
Hopf \cite[(7.2)]{Ho} for surfaces.

\begin{prop} \label{prop:Sdiff-formula} Let $\gamma: [0,1] \to W^s(v)$
  be a smooth curve with $\gamma(0) = v$ and $\gamma(1) = \widetilde
  v$. Let $e_1(s),\dots,e_{n-1}(s)$ be an orthonormal frame in
  ${\mathcal H} = \pi W^s(v)$ along $\beta = \pi \gamma$ which is
  parallel in ${\mathcal H}$ with the induced connection. Let
  $e_i(s,t)$ be the parallel translation along the geodesic
  $c_{\gamma(s)}$. Then we have
  \begin{equation} \label{eq:Stvr'-Svr'}
  S_{\widetilde v,r}'(0) - S_{v,r}'(0) = \int_0^1
  \int_0^r S_{\gamma(s),r}^{\ast}(t) \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial s}
  R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right) S_{\gamma(s),r}(t)dt\; ds
  \end{equation}
  and
  \begin{equation} \label{eq:Utvr'-Uvr'}
  U_{\widetilde v,r}'(0) - U_{v,r}'(0) = - \int_0^1
  \int_{-r}^0 U_{\gamma(s),r}^{\ast}(t) \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial
      s} R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right) U_{\gamma(s),r}(t)dt\; ds,
  \end{equation}
  where all tensors are expressed with respect to the frame
  $e_1(s,t),\dots,e_{n-1}(s,t)$.
\end{prop}

\begin{proof}
  We only prove \eqref{eq:Stvr'-Svr'}, the second identity is proved
  analogously. We start with the Jacobi equation
  $$
  S_{ \gamma(s),r}''(t)+ R_{ \gamma(s)}(t) S_{ \gamma(s),r}(t) =0
  $$
  and define
  $$
  Z_{ \gamma(s),r}(t) = \frac{\partial}{\partial s}S_{\gamma(s),r}(t).
  $$
  Then we have
  \begin{eqnarray*}
    Z_{\gamma(s),r}''(t) &=&\frac{\partial}{\partial s}
    \frac{\partial^2}{\partial^2 t} S_{\gamma(s),r}(t) =
    -\frac{\partial}{\partial s} \left(R_{\gamma(s)}(t) S_{\gamma(s),r}(t)\right) \\
    &=& - \left(\frac{\partial}{\partial s} R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right)
    S_{\gamma(s),r}(t) - R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \left(\frac{\partial}{\partial s}
      S_{\gamma(s),r}(t) \right),
  \end{eqnarray*}
  and therefore,
  $$
  Z_{\gamma(s),r}''(t) = - R_{\gamma(s)}(t) Z_{\gamma(s),r}(t) -
  \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial s} R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right) S_{
    \gamma(s),r}(t).
  $$
  Differentiating the Wronskian of $Z_{\gamma(s),r}$ and
  $S_{\gamma(s),r}$, we obtain
  \begin{multline*}
  \frac{\partial}{\partial t} \left( (Z^{\ast}_{\gamma(s),r})'(t)
    S_{\gamma(s),r}(t) - Z^{\ast}_{\gamma(s),r}(t) S'_{\gamma(s),r}(t) \right) =\\
  (Z^{\ast}_{\gamma(s),r})''(t) S_{\gamma(s),r}(t) -
  Z^{\ast}_{\gamma(s),r}(t) S_{\gamma(s),r}''(t) = \\
  -Z^{\ast}_{ \gamma(s),r}(t) R_{ \gamma(s)}(t) S_{ \gamma(s),r}(t) -
  S^{\ast}_{ \gamma(s),r}(t) \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial s} R_{
      \gamma(s)}(t) \right) S_{ \gamma(s),r}(t) \\ + Z^{\ast}_{
    \gamma(s),r}(t) R_{ \gamma(s)}(t) S_{ \gamma(s),r}(t) = -
  S^{\ast}_{ \gamma(s),r}(t) \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial s} R_{
      \gamma(s)}(t) \right) S_{ \gamma(s),r}(t).
  \end{multline*}
  Integration with respect to $t$ from $0$ to $r$ yields
  $$
  \frac{\partial}{\partial s} S'_{\gamma(s),r}(0) = (Z^{\ast}_{
    \gamma(s),r})'(0) = \int_0^r S^{\ast}_{\gamma(s),r}(t) \left(
    \frac{\partial}{\partial s} R_{ \gamma(s)}(t) \right)
  S_{\gamma(s),r}(t) dt.
  $$
  Integration with respect to $s$ from $0$ to $1$ leads finally to
  $$
  S'_{\widetilde v,r}(0) - S'_{v,r}(0) = \int_0^1 \int_0^r
  S^{\ast}_{\gamma(s),r}(t) \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial s}
    R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right) S_{\gamma(s),r}(t) dt \; ds,
  $$
  proving \eqref{eq:Stvr'-Svr'} after interchanging the integrals.
\end{proof}

In order to make use of the formulas in Proposition
\ref{prop:Sdiff-formula}, we need to have estimates for $\Vert
S_{\gamma(s),r} \Vert$, $\Vert U_{\gamma(s),r} \Vert$ and $\Vert
\frac{\partial}{\partial s} R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \Vert$. These estimates are
derived in the following two subsections.

\subsection{Estimates for $\Vert S_{v,r} \Vert$ and $\Vert U_{v,r} \Vert$}
We recall the following facts from \cite[Chapter 1, Cor. 2.12 and Lemma 2.17]{Kn1}
(choosing $r = \infty$ there):

\begin{lemma} \label{lem:AAm1} Assume that there exists a constant $R_0
  > 0$ such that $-R_0 \id \le R_v(t)$ for all $v \in SX$ and $t \in
  \R$. Let $A_v$ be the orthogonal Jacobi tensor along $c_v$ with
  $A_v(0) = 0$ and $A_v'(0) = \id$. Then we have
  $$ - \sqrt{R_0} \le A_v'(t) A_v^{-1}(t) \le \sqrt{R_0} \coth (t \sqrt{R_0}) $$
  for all $t > 0$. Furthermore, we have
  $$ -\sqrt{R_0} \le S_v'(0) \le U_v'(0) \le \sqrt{R_0} $$
  for all $v \in SX$.
\end{lemma}

Note that $A_v$ and $S_{v,r}$ are related by $S_{v,r}(t) = A_v(r-t)A_v^{-1}(r)$.
Therefore, Lemma \ref{lem:AAm1} has the following consequence.

\begin{cor} \label{cor:CR0r0T} Let $r_0 > 1$ and $T \le r_0$. If
  $\Vert R_v(t) \Vert \le R_0$ for all $v \in SX$ and $t \in \R$ with
  a constant $R_0 > 0$, we have for all $r \ge r_0$
  $$ \Vert S_{v,r}(t) \Vert \le C_1(R_0,r_0,T) \qquad
  \text{for all $0 \le t \le T$}, $$
  with $C_1(R_0,r_0,T) > 0$ only depending on $r_0$, $R_0$ and $T$.
\end{cor}

\begin{proof}
  We conclude from Lemma \ref{lem:AAm1} for all $r \ge r_0$,
  $$ \Vert S_{v,r}'(0) \Vert = \Vert A_v'(r) A_v^{-1}(r) \Vert \le
  \sqrt{R_0} \coth (r_0 \sqrt{R_0}). $$

  Let $y(t) = (y_1(t),y_2(t))^\top$ with $y_1(t) = S_{v,r}(t)$ and
  $y_2(t) = S_{v,r}'(t)$. Then
  $$ y'(t) = \begin{pmatrix} y_1'(t) \\ y_2'(t) \end{pmatrix} =
  \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -R_v(t) & 0 \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix}
    y_1(t) \\ y_2(t) \end{pmatrix} = C(t) y(t), $$
  i.e.,
  $$ y(t) = \exp\left(\int_0^t C(s) ds\right) y(0). $$
  Note that $\Vert C(t) \Vert \le \sqrt{{R_0}^2 + 1}$ and $\Vert y(0)
  \Vert^2 \le 1 + R_0 \coth^2 (r_0 \sqrt{R_0})$. This yields
  $$ \Vert S_{v,r}(t) \Vert \le \Vert y(t) \Vert \le
  \exp\left(T \sqrt{{R_0}^2 + 1}\right) \sqrt{1 + R_0 \coth^2 (r_0
    \sqrt{R_0})} $$
  for all $0 \le t \le T$, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}

Next, we present some useful Jacobi tensor identities.

\begin{lemma} \label{central} For all $v \in SX$ and $ t < r$ we have
  \begin{equation}\label{c1}
    S_{\phi^t(v),r-t}'(0) =  S_{v,r}'(t) S_{v,r}^{-1}(t),
  \end{equation}
  and
  \begin{eqnarray}\label{c2}
    U_{\phi^t(v)}'(0) - S_{\phi^t(v), r-t}'(0) &=&
    (U_v^{\ast})^{-1}(t)(U_v'(0) -S_{v, r}'(0)) S_{v, r}^{-1}(t)\nonumber \\
    &=&(S_{v, r}^{\ast})^{-1}(t)(U_v'(0) -S_{v, r}'(0)) U_v^{-1}(t).
  \end{eqnarray}
  Furthermore,
  \begin{equation}\label{c3}
    U_{\phi^t(v)}'(0) - S_{\phi^t(v),r-t}'(0) =
    (S^{\ast}_{v,r})^{-1}(t) \left(\int\limits_{-\infty}^{t}
      (S_{v,r}^{\ast}S_{v,r})^{-1}(u) du \right)^{-1} S_{v,r}^{-1}(t).
  \end{equation}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  Notice first that
  \begin{equation} \label{eq:Stransform}
  S_{\phi^t v,x}(y) = S_{v,t+x}(y+t) S_{v,t+x}^{-1}(t),
  \end{equation}
  since, for fixed $x $ and $t$, both sides define Jacobi tensors in
  $y$ which agree at $y=0$ and $y=x$. Differentiating at $y= 0$ yields
  for $x = r-t$ the first identity \eqref{c1}. Using the fact that the
  Wronskian of two Jacobi tensors is constant, we have
  \begin{multline*}
  W(U_v,S_{v,r})(t) = (U_v^{\ast})'(t) S_{v,r}(t) - U_v^{\ast}(t)
  S_{v, r}'(t) = \\ W(U_v,S_{v, r})(0) =U_v'(0) -S_{v,r}'(0).
  \end{multline*}
  This yields
  $$
  (U_v'(t) U_v^{-1}(t))^{\ast}- S_{v,r}'(t) S_{v,r}^{-1}(t) =
  (U_v^{\ast})^{-1}(t) (U_v'(0) -S_{v,r}'(0)) S_{v,r}^{-1}(t).
  $$
  Since
  $$
  (U_v'(t) U_v^{-1}(t))= U_{\phi^t(v)}'(0) \; \; \text{and} \; \;
  S_{v,r}'(t) S_{v,r}^{-1}(t) = S_{\phi^t(v),r-t}'(0)
  $$
  are symmetric, we obtain the first and second identity of \eqref{c2}.

  To prove the last assertion we note that for $0 \le t \le r$ we have
  (see \cite[(7.8)]{Kn2})
  $$
  \left(\int\limits_{-\infty}^{t} (S_{v,r}^{\ast}S_{v,r})^{-1}(u) du
  \right)^{-1} S_{v,r}(t)^{-1}U_v(t)= U_v'(0) - S_{v,r}'(0).
  $$
  Inserting this into \eqref{c2} yields \eqref{c3}.
\end{proof}

Recall from the introduction that $S(v) = S_v'(0)$ and $U(v)= U_v'(0)$.
A key role plays the positive symmetric operators
$$ D(v) = U(v) - S(v), $$
since their kernels determine the rank of the manifold $X$.

\begin{prop} \label{prop:SUest} Assume there exists $R_0 > 0$ such
  that $\Vert R_v(t) \Vert \le R_0$ for all $t \in \R$. Then we have the
  following estimates for $S_{v,r}$ and $U_{v,r}$.
  \begin{itemize}
  \item[(a)] There exists $a_1 = a_1(R_0)$ such that for all $r > 1$
    and $t \ge 0$,
    $$ \Vert S_{v,r}(-t) \Vert \le a_1 e^{\sqrt{R_0} t}, \qquad
    \Vert U_{v,r}(t) \Vert \le a_1 e^{\sqrt{R_0} t}. $$
  \item[(b)] Under the additional assumption $D(\phi^t(v)) \ge \rho
    \cdot \id$ for all $t \in \R$ and some constant $\rho > 0$, there
    exists $a_2 = a_2(R_0,\rho)$ such that for all $r > 1$ and $0 \le
    t < r$,
    $$ \Vert S_{v,r}(t) \Vert \le a_2 e^{-\frac{\rho}{2} t}, \qquad
    \Vert U_{v,r}(-t) \Vert \le a_2 e^{-\frac{\rho}{2} t}. $$
  \end{itemize}
\end{prop}

\begin{proof}
  Rauch's comparison estimate (see, e.g., \cite[Chapter 1, Prop. 2.11]{Kn1})
  implies that $\Vert A(t) x \Vert / \sinh \sqrt{R_0} t$
  is monotone decreasing. Since $S_{v,r}(-t) = A_v(r+t) A_v^{-1}(r)$
  we conclude
  $$ \Vert S_{v,r}(-t) \frac{A_v(r)x}{\Vert A_v(r)x \Vert} \Vert
  = \frac{\Vert A(r+t)x \Vert}{\Vert A(r)x \Vert} \le \frac{\sinh
    \sqrt{R_0}(r+t)}{\sinh \sqrt{R_0} r} \le a_1(R_0) e^{\sqrt{R_0} t}. $$
  This together with $U_{v,r}(t) = S_{-v,r}(-t)$ proves (a).

  Using the monotonicity $S_{w,r}'(0) \nearrow S_w'(0)$, we have by
  assumption
  $$
  U_{\phi^t(v)}'(0) - S_{\phi^t(v),r-t}'(0) \ge U_{\phi^t(v)}'(0) -
  S_{\phi^t(v)}'(0) = D(\phi^t(v)) \ge \rho \id.
  $$
  Using \eqref{c3}, this yields for all $x \in (\phi^t v)^\perp$ with
  $\|x\| =1$,
  \begin{eqnarray*}
    \rho &\le& \left \langle \left( \int\limits_{-\infty}^{t}
        (S_{v,r}^{\ast}S_{v,r}^{-1}(u) du \right)^{-1}
      S_{v,r}^{-1}(t)x, S_{v,r}^{-1}(t)x \right \rangle\\
    &\le& \left\|
      \left(\int\limits_{-\infty}^{t} (S_{v,r}^{\ast}S_{v, r})^{-1}(u) du \right)^{-1}
      \right\| \cdot \left\| S_{v, r}^{-1}(t)x \right\|^2.
  \end{eqnarray*}
  Furthermore, we have
  \begin{equation*}
    \begin{split}
      &\left\| \left(\int\limits_{-\infty}^{t}
          (S_{v,r}^{\ast}S_{v,r})^{-1}(u) du \right)^{-1} \right\| =\\
      &\quad \quad \frac{1} { \min \left \{\int\limits_{-\infty}^{t}
          \langle (S_{v,r}^{\ast}S_{v,r})^{-1}(u)y_u, y_u \rangle
          du:\; y \in v^\perp, \|y\| =1 \right\} }.
    \end{split}
  \end{equation*}
  Therefore,
  \begin{equation*}
    \begin{split}
      \rho \min &\left\{\int\limits_{-\infty}^{t} \langle
        (S_{v,r}^{\ast})^{-1}(u)y_u, (S_{v,r}^{\ast})^{-1}(u)y_u \rangle du
        :\; y \in v\perp, \|y\| =1) \right\}\\
      & \quad \quad \le \|S_{v,r}^{-1}(t)x \|^2
    \end{split}
  \end{equation*}
  for all $x \in (\phi^t v)^\perp$ with $\|x\| =1$. Defining
  \begin{eqnarray*}
    \varphi(u) &:= &\min \left\{\|(S_{v,r}^{\ast})^{-1}(u)y \|^2:\;
      y \in ( \phi^u v)^\perp, \|y\| = 1 \right\}\\
    &=& \min \left\{\|S_{v,r}^{-1}(u)y \|^2:\;
      y \in (\phi^u v) ^\perp, \|y\| = 1 \right\},
  \end{eqnarray*}
  we obtain
  $$
  \rho \int\limits_{0}^{t} \varphi(u)du \le \rho
  \int\limits_{-\infty}^{t} \varphi(u)du \le \varphi(t)
  $$
  and, hence,
  $$
  \rho F(t) \le F'(t)
  $$
  for $F(t) := \int\limits_{0}^{t} \varphi(u)du$. This means that
  $\rho \le (\log F)'(t)$, which implies $F(t) \ge \frac{F(1)}{e}
  e^{\rho t}$ for all $t \ge 1$ and, therefore,
  \begin{equation} \label{eq:phit}
  \varphi(t)= F'(t) \ge \rho F(t)\ge \frac{\rho F(1)}{e} e^{\rho t}
  \end{equation}
  for all $r > t \ge 1$. Corollary \ref{cor:CR0r0T} implies for $0 \le
  t \le 1 < r$
  \begin{eqnarray*}
  \varphi(t) &=& \min \left\{\|S_{v,r}^{-1}(t)y \|^2:\;
    y \in (\phi^t v) ^\perp, \|y\| = 1 \right\}\\ &=& \frac{1}{\Vert
    S_{v,r}(t) \Vert} \ge \frac{1}{C_1(R_0,1,1)},
  \end{eqnarray*}
  i.e., $F(1) \ge \frac{1}{C_1(R_0,1,1)}$. Plugging this into \eqref{eq:phit},
  we obtain
  $$
  \varphi(t) \ge \frac{\rho}{e C_1(R_0,1,1)} e^{\rho t} $$
  for all $r > t \ge 1$. Choosing $a_2 = \left(
    \frac{C_1(R_0,1,1)}{\min\{ \rho/e,e^{-\rho} \} } \right)^{1/2}$,
  this implies that we have
  $$ \frac{\Vert S_{v,r}^{-1}(t)y \Vert^2}{\Vert y \Vert^2} \ge \varphi(t) \ge
  \frac{1}{C_1(R_0,1,1)}\min\{ \frac{\rho}{e}, e^{-\rho}
  \}e^{\rho t} = \frac{1}{{a_2}^2} e^{\rho t} $$
  for all $r > t \ge 0$ and $y \in (\phi^t v)^\bot$, $y \neq 0$.
  Since $S_{v,r}(t): (\phi^tv)^\perp \to (\phi^tv)^\perp$ is an
  isomorphism, we obtain for all $x \in (\phi^tv)^\perp$, $r > 1$ and $t \in
  [0,r)$
  $$
  \|S_{v, r}(t)x \| \le a_2 e^{-\frac{\rho}{2} t} \|x \|,
  $$
  finishing the proof of (b).
\end{proof}

\begin{rmk}
  The special case of Proposition \ref{prop:SUest}(b) for stable and
  unstable Jacobi tensors was obtained
  by Bolton (see \cite[Lemma 2]{Bo}).
\end{rmk}

The following corollary summarizes the facts which we will need further on
in this chapter.

\begin{cor} \label{cor:SUbeta} Let $\Vert R_v(t) \Vert \le R_0$ for
  all $v \in SX$ and $t \in \R$ with a constant $R_0 > 0$. Let
  $\gamma: [0,1] \to W^s(v)$ be a smooth curve and $\rho > 0$ such that
  $$ D(\phi^t(\gamma(s))) \ge \rho \cdot \id $$
  for all $s \in [0,1]$ and $t \in \R$. Then there exists a function
  $b: \R \to (0,\infty)$, only depending on $R_0$ and $\rho$, such
  that we have for all $r > 1$ and all $-\infty < t < r$,
  \begin{equation} \label{eq:SUest}
  \Vert S_{\gamma(s),r}(t) \Vert \le b(t), \qquad
  \Vert U_{\gamma(s),r}(-t) \Vert \le b(t).
  \end{equation}
  For $t \ge 0$ we have
  \begin{equation} \label{eq:b(t)}
  b(t) \le a_2 e^{-\frac{\rho}{2} t}.
  \end{equation}
  Moreover, if $\beta = \pi \gamma$ and $\beta_t = \pi (\phi^t
  \gamma)$, we have
  \begin{eqnarray}
  \Vert \beta_t'(s) \Vert &\le& b(t)\, \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert \label{eq:betatbeta} \\
  \Vert (\phi^t \gamma)'(s) \Vert &\le& b(t)\sqrt{1 + R_0}\, \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert \label{eq:phitgamest}
  \end{eqnarray}
  for all $s \in [0,1]$ and $t \in \R$.
\end{cor}

\begin{proof}
  The inequalities \eqref{eq:SUest} and \eqref{eq:b(t)} are straightforward consequences
  of Proposition \ref{prop:SUest}. The same inequalities hold also for
  the stable and unstable Jacobi tensors $S_{\gamma(s)}$ and
  $U_{\gamma(s)}$. Note that $J_s(t) = \beta_t'(s) =
  \frac{\partial}{\partial s} c_{\gamma(s)}(t)$ is the stable Jacobi
  field along $c_{\gamma(s)}$ with initial values
  $$ J_s(0) = \beta'(s) \quad \text{and} \quad
  J_s'(0) = S_{\gamma(s)}'(0) J_s(0). $$
  Then $J_s(t) = S_{\gamma(s)}(t) (J_s(0))_t$, which implies
  $$ \Vert \beta_t'(s) \Vert \le \Vert S_{\gamma(s)}(t)
  ( \beta'(s) )_t \Vert \le b(t) \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert. $$
  Furthermore we have
  $$ \Vert (\phi^t \gamma)'(s) \Vert^2 = \Vert \frac{d}{ds} \beta_t(s) \Vert^2 + \Vert  \frac{D}{ds} \phi^t \gamma(s) \Vert^2
  = \Vert \frac{d}{ds} \beta_t(s) \Vert^2 + \Vert  \nabla_{\beta_t'(s)} \phi^t\gamma(s) \Vert^2. $$
  Since $\nabla_{\beta_t'(s)} \phi^t\gamma(s)$ is the second fundamental form of the horosphere
  $\pi W^s(\phi^t(\gamma(s)))$, we have with Lemma \ref{lem:AAm1}
  $$ \Vert (\phi^t \gamma)'(s) \Vert^2 = \Vert \frac{d}{ds} \beta_t(s) \Vert^2 + \Vert  S_{\phi^t \gamma(s)}'(0) \beta_t'(s) \Vert^2
  \le b(t)^2 (1 + R_0) \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert^2. $$
  This implies \eqref{eq:phitgamest}.
\end{proof}

\subsection{Estimate for $\Vert \frac{\partial}{\partial s}
  R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \Vert$}

Our next goal is to derive an estimate for $\Vert
\frac{\partial}{\partial s} R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \Vert$ in terms of
$\beta'(s)$. Henceforth, we assume that the curvature tensor and
its covariant derivative of $X$ are bounded, i.e.,
$$
\Vert R \Vert \le R_0 \quad \text{and} \quad \Vert \nabla R \Vert \le R_0'
$$
with suitable constants $R_0, R_0' > 0$. Moreover, let $\gamma: [0,1]
\to W^s(v)$ denote a smooth curve such that
$$ D(\phi^t(\gamma(s))) \ge \rho \cdot \id $$
for all $s \in [0,1]$ and $t \in \R$ with a suitable constant $\rho > 0$.
Let $e_i(s)$ and $e_i(s,t)$ be defined as in Proposition
\ref{prop:Sdiff-formula} and $\beta = \pi \gamma$ and $\beta_t =
\pi(\phi^t \gamma)$.

\begin{lemma} \label{lem:dsei}
  Let $r > 1$. Then there exists a constant $C_2(R_0,\rho,r)$, only
  depending on $R_0, \rho$ and $r$, such that
  $$ \left\Vert \frac{D}{ds} e_i(s,t) \right\Vert \le C_2(R_0,\rho,r)
  \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert \qquad \text{for all $t \in (-r,r)$}. $$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  First of all, note that the second fundamental form of all
  horospheres is bounded by $\sqrt{R_0}$. Let $N$ be a unit normal
  vector field of ${\mathcal H} = \pi W^s(v)$. Since $e_i$ is parallel
  in ${\mathcal H}$ with respect to the induced connection, we have
  $$ \frac{D}{ds} e_i(s) = \left\langle \frac{D}{ds} e_i(s),
    (N \circ \beta)(s) \right\rangle \; (N \circ \beta)(s). $$
  Therefore,
  \begin{eqnarray}
    \left\Vert \frac{D}{ds} e_i(s) \right\Vert^2 &=& \left\langle \frac{D}{ds}
      e_i(s), (N \circ \beta)(s) \right\rangle^2 =
    \left\langle e_i(s), \frac{D}{ds} N \circ \beta(s) \right\rangle^2
    \nonumber \\
    &\le& \Vert e_i(s) \Vert^2\; \Vert \nabla N \circ \beta(s) \Vert^2\;
    \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert^2 \nonumber \\
    &\le& R_0\; \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert^2. \label{eq:Aest}
  \end{eqnarray}
  Let $P_{\gamma(s)}^t$ be the parallel transport along $c_{\gamma(s)}$. Define
  $$ f(s,t) = \left\Vert \frac{D}{ds} e_i(s,t) \right\Vert =
  \left\Vert \frac{D}{ds} P_{\gamma(s)}^t e_i(s) \right\Vert. $$
  Differentiation yields
  \begin{equation} \label{eq:df2}
    \frac{\partial}{\partial t} f^2(s,t) = 2 \left\langle \frac{D}{dt}
    \frac{D}{ds} P_{\gamma(s)}^t e_i(s), \frac{D}{ds} e_i(s,t) \right\rangle.
  \end{equation}
  Note that
  \begin{eqnarray*}
    \frac{D}{dt} \frac{D}{ds} P_{\gamma(s)}^t e_i(s) &=&
    \underbrace{\frac{D}{ds} \frac{D}{dt} P_{\gamma(s)}^t e_i(s)}_{=0}
    + R\left(c_{\gamma(s)}'(t),\frac{\partial}{\partial s}
      c_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right)e_i(s,t) \\
    &=& R\left(c_{\gamma(s)}'(t),\frac{\partial}{\partial s}
      c_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right)e_i(s,t).
  \end{eqnarray*}
  Plugging this into \eqref{eq:df2} we conclude
  $$ \left\vert \frac{\partial f}{\partial t}(s,t) \right\vert \le R_0 \;
  \Vert c_{\gamma(s)}'(t) \Vert \; \left\Vert
    \frac{\partial}{\partial s} c_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right\Vert \; \Vert
  e_i(s,t) \Vert = R_0 \; \Vert \beta_t'(s) \Vert,
  $$
  which implies
  \begin{eqnarray*}
    f(s,t) &\le& f(s,0) + \int_{\min\{0,t\}}^{\max\{0,t\}}
    \left\vert \frac{\partial f}{\partial t}(s,\tau) \right\vert d\tau \\
    &\le& \left\Vert \frac{D}{ds} e_i(s) \right\Vert + R_0 \int_{-r}^r \Vert
    \beta'(s) \Vert d\tau \\
    &\stackrel{\eqref{eq:Aest}}{\le}&
    \sqrt{R_0} \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert + R_0 \int_{-r}^r \left\Vert S_{\gamma(s)}(\tau)
      (\beta'(s))_\tau \right\Vert d\tau \\
    &\le& \sqrt{R_0} \; \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert + R_0  \int_{-r}^r b(t) dt \;
    \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert.
  \end{eqnarray*}
  This finishes the proof.
\end{proof}

The estimate for $\Vert \frac{\partial}{\partial s} R_{\gamma(s)}(t)
\Vert$ is derived from the components. The $(i,j)$-th component of
$R_{\gamma(s)}(t)$ is
$$
\langle R_{\gamma(s)}e_i(s,t), e_j(s,t) \rangle = \langle
R(e_i(s,t),\phi^t(\gamma(s))) \phi^t(\gamma(s)), e_j(s,t) \rangle.
$$
This implies that we have
\begin{multline*}
\left( \frac{\partial}{\partial s} R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right)_{i,j} =
\left\langle \frac{D}{ds} \left( R_{\gamma(s)}(t)e_i(s,t) \right),
  e_j(s,t) \right\rangle + \\ \left\langle R_{\gamma(s)}(t) e_i(s,t),
  \frac{D}{ds} e_j(s,t) \right\rangle.
\end{multline*}
Using
\begin{multline*}
  \nabla_J (R(Z,W)W) = \\
  (\nabla_JR)(Z,W)W + R(\nabla_JZ,W)W + R(Z,\nabla_JW)W + R(Z,W)\nabla_JW
\end{multline*}
and the bounds $\Vert R \Vert \le R_0$ and $\Vert \nabla R \Vert \le R_0'$,
we obtain
\begin{multline*}
  \left\Vert \frac{D}{ds} \left( R_{\gamma(s)}(t) e_i(s,t) \right) \right\Vert
  \le \\
  R_0'\; \Vert\; \beta_t'(t) \Vert +
  R_0 \left( \left\Vert \frac{D}{ds} e_i(s,t) \right\Vert +
  2 \left\Vert \frac{D}{ds} \left( \phi^t(\gamma(s) \right) \right\Vert \right)
  \le \\
  R_0'\; b(t)\; \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert +
  R_0 \left( C_2(R_0,\rho,r) \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert +
  2 \left\Vert \frac{D}{ds} \left( \phi^t(\gamma(s) \right) \right\Vert
  \right),
\end{multline*}
where we used \eqref{eq:betatbeta} and Lemma \ref{lem:dsei}. Since
$\frac{D}{ds} \phi^t(\gamma(s)) = \nabla_{\beta_t'(s)}
\phi^t(\gamma(s))$ is the second fundamental form of the horosphere
$\pi W^s(\phi^t(\gamma(s)))$
which is bounded in norm by $\sqrt{R_0} \Vert \beta_t'(s) \Vert$,
we finally obtain
$$ \left\Vert \frac{D}{ds} \left( R_{\gamma(s)}(t) e_i(s,t) \right)
  \right\Vert \le C_3(R_0,R_0',\rho,r) \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert
$$
with $C_3(R_0,R_0',\rho,r) = R_0' b(t) + R_0 C_2(R_0,\rho,r) + 2 R_0^{3/2}
b(t)$.  This implies that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:dsRijest}
\left\vert \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial s} R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right)_{i,j}
\right\vert \le \left( C_3(R_0,R_0',\rho,r) + R_0 C_2(R_0,\rho,r)
\right) \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert.
\end{equation}

\subsection{An estimate for the difference of second fundamental forms
  in horospheres}

Combining the results in the first three subsections, we are now able
to prove the following result.

\begin{theorem} \label{thm:SUdistconv} Let $(X,g)$ be a complete
  simply connected Riemannian manifold without conjugate
  points. Assume that $\Vert R_0 \Vert \le R_0$ and $\Vert \nabla R
  \Vert \le R_0'$ with suitable constants $R_0, R_0' > 0$. Let
  $\gamma: [0,1] \to W^s(v)$ be a smooth curve and $\beta = \pi
  \gamma$. Assume that $D(\phi^t(\gamma(s))) \ge \rho \cdot \id$ for
  all $s \in [0,1]$ and $t \in \R$ and some constant $\rho > 0$. Let
  $r > 1$. Then there exists a constant $C_5(R_0,R_0',\rho,r) > 0$,
  only depending on $R_0,R_0',\rho$ and $r$, such that
  $$ \Vert S_{\gamma(1),r}'(0) - S_{\gamma(0),r}'(0) \Vert \le
  C_5(R_0,R_0',\rho,r)\; \ell(\beta) $$
  and
  $$ \Vert U_{\gamma(1),r}'(0) - U_{\gamma(0),r}'(0) \Vert \le
  C_5(R_0,R_0',\rho,r)\; \ell(\beta), $$
  where $\ell(\beta)$ denotes the length of the curve $\beta$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
  We only give the proof of the second estimate, the first estimate is
  proved analogously. Let $v = \gamma(0)$ and $\widetilde v =
  \gamma(1)$. Inequality \eqref{eq:dsRijest} implies that there is
  a constant $C_4 = C_4(R_0,R_0',\rho,r) > 0$ such that
  $$ \left\Vert \frac{\partial}{\partial s} R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right\Vert
  \le C_4 \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert. $$
  We conclude from Proposition \ref{prop:Sdiff-formula} and
  Corollary \ref{cor:SUbeta} that
  \begin{eqnarray*}
    \Vert U_{\gamma(1),r}'(0) - U_{\gamma(0),r}'(0) \Vert &\le& \int_0^1 \int_{-r}^0
    \Vert U_{\gamma(s),r}(t) \Vert^2 \; \left\Vert \frac{\partial}{\partial s}
      R_{\gamma(s)}(t) \right\Vert dt \; ds \\
    &\le& \int_0^1 C_4 \int_{-r}^0 b(-t)^2 dt\; \Vert \beta'(s) \Vert ds \\
    &\le& C_5(R_0,R_0',\rho,r) \; \ell(\beta)
  \end{eqnarray*}
  with $C_5(R_0,R_0',\rho,r) = C_4 \int_{-r}^r b(t)^2 dt$.
\end{proof}

\section{The function $\det D(v)$ is constant}

From now on, we assume that $(X,g)$ is asymptotically harmonic. Recall
that we introduced the positive symmetric operator $D(v) = U(v) -
S(v)$. Our aim is to prove Theorem \ref{thm:Dconstant} in the Introduction.

Note first that in the case of asymptotically harmonic manifolds the
stable and unstable Jacobi tensors are continuous in the sense of
\cite[p. 242]{Es}. This property is also called {\em continuous
  asymptote}.

\begin{lemma} \label{lem:contasym}
  Let $(X,g)$ be an asymptotically harmonic manifold. Then $v \mapsto
  U(v)$ and $v \mapsto S(v)$ are continuous maps on $SX$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof} Since $U_{v,t}'(0) - U_v'(0)$ is positive, we have for
  $t > 0$
  $$ \Vert U_{v,t}'(0) - U_v'(0) \Vert \le \tr (U_{v,t}'(0) - U_v'(0)) =
  \tr(U_{v,t}'(0)) - h. $$
  Since $\tr(U_{v,t}'(0))$ converges pointwise monotonically to $h$
  as $t \to \infty$, we conclude from Dini that the convergence is
  uniformly on all compact subsets of $SX$. Since the maps $v \mapsto
  U_{v,t}'(0)$ is continuous for all $t > 0$ and $U_{v,t}'(0) \to
  U_v'(0) = U(v)$ uniformly on compact sets, we conclude continuity of
  $v \mapsto U(v)$. The continuity of $v \mapsto S(v)$ follows
  immediately from $S(v) = -U(-v)$.
\end{proof}

As a start, it is easy to see that $\det D(v) = \det D(-v)$:
$$ \det D(-v) = \det (U(-v) - S(-v)) = \det (-S(v) + U(v)) = \det D(v). $$
Now we work towards the result that $\det D(v)$ is constant on all of
$SX$.

\subsection{$\det D(v)$ is constant along the geodesic flow}
\label{sec:constflow}

The arguments in this section follow the arguments given in the proof
of \cite[Lemma 2.2]{HKS}.

\begin{prop} \label{prop:detconst}
  Let $(X,g)$ be asymptotically harmonic. Then for all $v \in SX$, the map
  $t \mapsto \det (D(\phi^t v))$ is constant.
\end{prop}

\begin{proof}
  For the proof we need besides $D(v)$ the symmetric tensor $H(v) = -
  \frac{1}{2} (U(v) + S(v))$.  Note that $U$ and therefore also $S$
  are solutions of the Ricatti equation
  $$ \frac{d}{dt} U(\phi^t v) + U(\phi^t v)^2 + R_{\phi^t v} = 0. $$
  Hence, a straightforward calculation yields for all $v \in SX$
  \begin{equation} \label{eq:HGGH} (HD+DH)(\phi^tv) = S(\phi^tv)^2 -
    U(\phi^tv)^2 = \frac{d}{dt} D(\phi^t v).
  \end{equation}
  In the case $\det D(\phi^t v) = 0$ for all $t \in \R$, there is
  nothing to prove. If $\det D(\phi^t v) \neq 0$ for some $t \in \R$,
  we have
  \begin{eqnarray*}
    \frac{d}{dt} \log \det D(\phi^t v) &=&
    \frac{1}{\det D(\phi^t v)} \tr\left( \left(\frac{d}{dt} D(\phi^t v)\right)
      D^{-1}(\phi^t v) \right) \\
    &=& \frac{1}{\det D(\phi^t v)} \tr \left( (HD+DH)(\phi^t v)
      D^{-1}(\phi^t v)\right) \\
    &=& \frac{2}{\det D(\phi^t v)} \tr \left( H(\phi^t v) \right) = 0,
  \end{eqnarray*}
  since $\tr H(w) = -\frac{1}{2}(\tr U(w) + \tr S(w)) = -\frac{1}{2}
  (\tr U(w) - \tr U(-w)) = 0$. This implies that $t \mapsto \det
  D(\phi^t v)$ is constant for all $t \in \R$.
\end{proof}

\subsection{$\det D(v)$ is constant along stable and unstable
  manifolds}
\label{sec:const(un)stable}

Note that the key ingredients here are Proposition \ref{prop:SUest}(b)
and Theorem \ref{thm:SUdistconv}. We first prove the following lemma.

\begin{lemma} \label{lem:DDr} Assume there is a constant $R_0 > 0$
  such that $\Vert R \Vert \le R_0$. Let $v \in SX$. Assume there is a
  constant $\rho > 0$ such that
  $$ D(\phi^t(v)) \ge \rho \id $$
  for all $t \in \R$. Then there exists a constant $a \ge 1$, depending
  only on $R_0$ such that
  $$ 0 < S_{\phi^t(v)}'(0) - S_{\phi^t(v),r}'(0) \le \frac{a}{r} \quad
  \text{and} \quad 0 < U_{\phi^t(v),r}'(0) - U_{\phi^t(v)}'(0) \le
  \frac{a}{r}
  $$
  for all $r > 0$ and all $t \in \R$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  Since we have $U_{w,r}'(0) = - S_{-w,r}(0)$ for all $w \in SX$, it
  suffices to prove the first assertion. Proposition
  \ref{prop:SUest}(b) yields for all $t \ge 0$
  $$ \Vert S_w(t) \Vert \le a_2=a_2(R_0,\rho), $$
  where $w = \phi^s(v)$ for some $s \in \R$. Recall from \cite[Lemma
  2.3]{Kn2} that
  $$
  S_w'(0) - S_{w,r}'(0) = \left( \int_0^r (S_w^* S_w)^{-1}(u)du \right)^{-1}.
  $$
  This implies for all $x \in S_{c_v(s)}X$
  \begin{eqnarray*}
  \langle (S_w'(0)-S_{w,r}'(0))x,x \rangle &\le&
  \left\Vert \left( \int_0^r (S_w^*S_w)^{-1}(u)du \right)^{-1} \right\Vert \\
  &\le& \left( \int_0^r \Vert (S_w^*S_w) \Vert^{-1}(u)du \right)^{-1} \\
  &\le& \left( \int_0^r \frac{1}{a_2^2} du \right)^{-1} = \frac{a_2^2}{r},
  \end{eqnarray*}
  which yields the required estimate.
\end{proof}

Now we assume that $(X,g)$ has rank one, i.e., we have $\det D(w) > 0$
for all $w \in SX$. It suffices to show that $w \mapsto \det D(w)$ is
locally constant on $W^s(v)$. Let $v \in SX$ and $\rho > 0$ such that
$\det D(v) = 2 \rho$. Since $w \mapsto \det D(w)$ is continuous on
$SX$ by Lemma \ref{lem:contasym}, we find an open neighbourhood $U
\subset SX$ of $v$ such that $\det D(w) \ge \rho$ for all $w \in
U$. Let $v, \widetilde v \in U \cap W^s(v)$ and $\gamma: [0,1] \to U
\cap W^s(v)$ be a smooth curve with $\gamma(0)=v$ and
$\gamma(1)=\widetilde v$. We need to show that for every $\epsilon >
0$ we have $|\det D(v) - \det D(\widetilde v)| < \epsilon$. We have
$$ |\det D(v) - \det D(\widetilde v)| = |\det D(\phi^t(v)) - \det
D(\phi^t(\widetilde v))| $$
for all $t \in \R$ and
\begin{equation} \label{eq:dtvdttiv}
\lim_{t \to \infty }d(\phi^t(v),\phi^t(\widetilde v)) = 0,
\end{equation}
and the convergence is exponentially because of \eqref{eq:b(t)} and
\eqref{eq:phitgamest}.

Since our operators $D(w) = U(w) - S(w) \ge 0$ are uniformly bounded by $2 \sqrt{R_0}$ and
the determinant is a differentiable function, there is a uniform Lipschitz
constant $A > 0$ such that
$$ \vert \det D(w_1) - \det D(w_2) \vert \le A \, \Vert D(w_1) - D(w_2) \Vert. $$
Therefore, it suffices to show that, for every $\delta > 0$, there exists
$t > 0$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Ddiff}
\Vert D(\phi^t(v)) - D(\phi^t(\widetilde v)) \Vert < \delta.
\end{equation}
Let $D_r(w) = U_{w,r}'(0) - S_{w,r}'(0)$. Lemma \ref{lem:DDr} implies
$$ \Vert D(\phi^t(w)) - D_r(\phi^t(w)) \Vert \le \frac{2a}{r} $$
for all $w \in \gamma([0,1])$ and $t \in \R$. Therefore, we can choose $r > 1$
large enough such that we have
$$ \Vert D(\phi^t(w)) - D_r(\phi^t(w)) \Vert \le \frac{\delta}{3} $$
for all $w \in \gamma([0,1])$ and $t \in \R$. This implies that
\eqref{eq:Ddiff} holds if
$$ \Vert D_r(\phi^t(v)) - D_r(\phi^t(\widetilde v)) \Vert
< \frac{\delta}{3} $$
for some $t > 0$. But this is a direct consequence of
\eqref{eq:dtvdttiv} and Theorem \ref{thm:SUdistconv}.

This shows that $w \to \det D(w)$ is locally and therefore also
globally constant on $W^s(v)$. Note that $w \to \det D(w)$ is also
constant on $W^u(v)$: Let $w \in W^u(v)$. Then $-w \in W^s(-v)$ and
$$ \det D(w) = \det D(-w) = \det D(-v) = \det D(v). $$

\subsection{$\det D(v)$ is constant on $SX$}

In the case $\det D(v) = 0$ for all $v \in SX$ there is nothing to prove.
Therefore, we assume that there exists $v \in SX$ with $\det D(v) \neq 0$.

For $v \in SX$, let
\begin{eqnarray*}
  W^{0s}(v) &=& \bigcup_{t \in \R} \phi^t(W^s(v)) = \{ -\grad b_v(q)
  \mid q \in X \}, \\
  W^{0u}(v) &=& \bigcup_{t \in \R} \phi^t(W^u(v)) = \{ \grad b_{-v}(q)
  \mid q \in X \}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Observe that $W^{0u}(v) = - W^{0s}(-v)$.

We define a vector $w \in SX$ to be {\em asymptotic to $v \in SX$} if
$w \in W^{0s}(v)$. Since $X$ has continuous asymptote, being
asymptotic is an equivalence relation (see \cite[Prop. 3]{Es}). We write
$v \sim w$ for asymtotic vectors $v,w \in SX$. Note
that a flow line $\phi^\R(v_1)$ can intersect a leaf $W^u(v_2)$ in at
most one vector, since the footpoint sets of these leafs are level
sets of Busemann functions and $b_v(\pi(\phi^t(w))) = b_v(\pi(w)) -t$
for asymptotic vectors $v,w \in SX$.

\begin{lemma} \label{lem:WuWueq}
  Let $v, v' \in SX$ with $\det D(v) \neq 0$. Assume that $W^u(v) = W^u(v')$
  and $v' \in W^{0s}(v)$. Then $v = v'$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  $v' \in W^{0s}(v)$ implies that $v$ and $v'$ are asymptotic. Since
  $W^u(v) = - W^s(-v)$, $W^u(v) = W^u(v')$ implies that $-v$ and $-v'$
  are also asymptotic. Therefore, $v$ and $v'$ are bi-asymptotic.
  We have $v' \not\in \phi^{\mathbb R}(v)$, since both $v$ and $v'$
  lie in the same unstable manifold $W^u(v)$. By \cite[Thm. 1]{Es}(iv),
  there exists a central Jacobi field along $c_v$, i.e., $\ker D(v) \neq
  0$. But this contradicts to $\det D(v) \neq 0$.
\end{proof}

The assumption $\Vert R \Vert \le R_0$ implies that the
intrinsic sectional curvatures of all horospheres are also uniformly
bounded in absolute value, by the Gauss equation. Therefore, there
exists $\delta > 0$ such that for all horospheres $\mathcal H$ and
all $p \in {\mathcal H}$, the intrinsic exponential map
$\exp_{p,{\mathcal H}}: T_p{\mathcal H} \to {\mathcal H}$ is a
diffeomorphism on the ball $B_{p,{\mathcal H}}(\delta) = \{ v \in
T_p{\mathcal H} \mid \Vert v \Vert < \delta \}$.

Assume that $n = {\rm dim}\, X$. Let $v \in SX$ be a fixed vector with
$\det D(v) \neq 0$. Now, we define the following continuous map (see
Figure \ref{fig:varphimap})
$$ \varphi_v: X \times B_\delta(0) \to SX, $$
where $B_\delta(0) = \{ y \in  \R^{n-1} \mid \Vert y \Vert < \delta \}$: Choose
a smooth global orthonormal frame $Z_1 = -\grad b_v, Z_2, \dots, Z_n$
on $X$. Define
$$ \varphi_v(q,y) =  \psi^u_{Z_1(q)} \left[ \exp_{q,\pi W^u(Z_1(q))}\left(
\sum_{i=2}^n y_i Z_i(q) \right) \right] \in W^u(Z_1(q)),$$
where $\psi^u_w: \pi W^u(w) \to W^u(w)$ is defined by $\psi^u_w(q) =
\grad b_{-w}(q)$.

  \begin{figure}[h]
  \begin{center}
    \psfrag{v}{$v$}
    \psfrag{Wu(Z1(q))}{$W^u(Z_1(q))$}
    \psfrag{pv(q,y)}{$\varphi_v(q,y)$}
    \psfrag{Z2(q)}{$Z_2(q)$}
    \psfrag{Z3(q)}{$Z_3(q)$}
    \psfrag{q}{$q$}
    \psfrag{p}{$p$}
    \psfrag{Z1(q)=-gradbv(q)}{$Z_1(q)=-\grad b_v(q)$}
    \psfrag{ym}{$y_m$}
         \includegraphics[width=10cm]{varphiv.eps}
  \end{center}
  \caption{Illustation of the map $\varphi_v: X \times B_\delta(0) \to SX$}
  \label{fig:varphimap}
  \end{figure}

We now show that $\varphi_v$ is injective: Let $\varphi_v(q,y) = \varphi_v(q',y')$.
Then $W^u(Z_1(q)) =W^u(Z_1(q'))$ and
$$ Z_1(q') = - \grad b_v(q') \sim v \sim -\grad b_v(q) = Z_1(q), $$
which implies $Z_1(q') \in W^{0s}(Z_1(q))$.
We conclude from the previous subsections that $\det D(Z_1(q)) = \det D(v) \neq 0$.
Using Lemma \ref{lem:WuWueq}, we obtain $Z_1(q) = Z_1(q')$, i.e., $q=q'$. The equality
$y=y'$ follows now from the injectivity of the exponential maps and $\psi^u_w$.

Since $\dim X \times B_\delta(0) = 2n-1 = \dim SX$, we conclude that $U = \varphi_v(X \times
B_\delta(0)) \subset SX$ is an open neighborhood of $v$, by Brouwer's domain invariance.
Moreover, $\det D(w) = \det D(v) \neq 0$ for all $w \in U$, using that $\det D$ is constant along
unstable manifolds, as well.

Now we are able to prove Theorem \ref{thm:Dconstant}.

\begin{proof}
  Without loss of generality, we assume that there exists
  a vector $v_0 \in SX$ with $\det D(v_0) = \alpha \neq 0$. Let $SX_\alpha = \{ w
  \in SX \mid \det D(w) = \alpha \}$. By continuity of $w \mapsto \det
  D_w$, the set $SX_\alpha \subset SX$ is closed. Since $v_0 \in
  SX_\alpha$, we know that $SX_\alpha$ is non-empty. The above
  arguments and Sections \ref{sec:constflow} and
  \ref{sec:const(un)stable} show for every vector $v \in SX_\alpha$
  that the open neighbourhood $\varphi_v(U)$ is contained in
  $SX_\alpha$, i.e., $SX_\alpha$ is open. Since $SX$ is connected, we
  conclude that $SX_\alpha = SX$.

  Since $\Vert R \Vert \le R_0$ implies that $X$ has
  bounded sectional curvature, the second fundamental forms of
  horospheres are bounded and therefore the eigenvalues of the positive
  endomorphism $D(v) = U_{v}'(0) - S_{v}'(0)$ are also uniformly bounded
  from above.The rank one assumption implies $\det D(v) = {\rm const} >
  0$. Both facts together imply that the smallest eigenvalue of $D(v)$
  is uniformly bounded from below by a constant $\rho > 0$.
\end{proof}

\section{Proof of the equivalences}

From now on, we assume that $(X,g)$ is asymptotically harmonic with
$\Vert R \Vert \le R_0$ and $\Vert \nabla R \Vert \le R_0'$. Our goal
is to prove Theorem \ref{thm:equivalences}. We prove each of the
implications separately.

\subsection{Rank one implies Anosov geodesic flow}

Observe first that $h = 0$ implies $\tr D(v) = \tr U(v) - \tr S(v) =
h-h = 0$.  Since $D(v)$ is positive, this implies $D(v) = 0$ and $\det
D(v) = 0$ which contradicts to $\rank(X) = 1$. Now we assume that
${\rm rank}(X) = 1$ and, therefore, $D(v) \ge \rho > 0$, by Theorem
\ref{thm:Dconstant}. By \cite[Theorem, p. 107]{Bo} this implies that
the geodesic flow is Anosov.

\subsection{Anosov geodesic flow implies Gromov hyperbolicity}

Recall that a geodesic metric space is called {\em Gromov hyperbolic}
if there exists $\delta > 0$ such that every geodesic triangle is
$\delta$-thin, i.e., every side of the triangle is contained in the
union of the $\delta$-tubular neighborhoods of the other two sides.

Assume now that the geodesic flow $\phi^t:SX \to SX$ is Anosov with
respect to the Sasaki metric. For $v \in SX$ consider the normal
Jacobi tensor along $c_v$ with $A_v(0) = 0$ and $A_v'(0) = \id$. Then
the Anosov property implies (see \cite[p. 113]{Bo})
$$
\|A_v(t)x \|\ge c e^{\alpha t} \Vert x \Vert
$$
for $t \ge 1$ with suitable constants $c, \alpha > 0$.
Consider two distinct geodesic rays $c_1:[0, \infty) \to X$ and
$c_2:[0, \infty) \to X$ with $c_1(0) =c_2(0) = p$ and define
\begin{eqnarray*}
d^q_t(c_1(t), c_2(t)) &:= &\inf \{ L(\gamma) \mid  \;
\gamma:[a,b] \to  X \setminus B(p,t) \\
&& \text{ a piecewise smooth curve
joining } \; c_1(t) \text{ and } c_2(t) \},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $B(p,t) = \{ q \in X \mid d(p,q) < t \}$. Let $t \ge 1$ and
$\gamma: [0,1] \to X \backslash B(p,t)$ be a curve connecting $c_1(t)$
and $c_2(t)$. Let $v_1 = c_1'(0) \in S_pX$ and $v_2 = c_2'(0) \in
S_pX$. Then $\gamma(s) = \exp_p(r(s)v(s))$ with $r: [0,1] \to [t,
\infty)$ and $v: [0,1] \to S_pX$ and
\begin{eqnarray*}
\gamma'(s) &=&  D\exp_p(r(s)v(s))\left(r'(s)v(s)+r(s)v'(s)\right) \\
&=& r'(s) c_{v(s)}'(r(s)) + A_v(r(s))v'(s).
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $c_{v(s)}'(r) \bot A_v(r)v'(s)$, we conclude that
$$ \Vert \gamma'(s) \Vert \ge c e^{\alpha r(s)} \Vert v'(s) \Vert. $$
This implies that
$$ L(\gamma) = \int_0^1 \Vert \gamma'(s) \Vert ds \ge c e^{\alpha t}
\angle(v_1,v_2), $$
and therefore
\begin{equation} \label{eq:expdiv}
\liminf_{t \to \infty} \frac { \log d^q_t(c_1(t), c_2(t))}{t} \ge c_0 \alpha
\end{equation}
with a suitable constant $c_0>0$. This implies, using \cite[Chapter III,
Prop. 1.26]{BH} that $X$ is Gromov hyperbolic. (Note that the condition
there is $\liminf_{t \to \infty} \frac{d^q_t(c_1(t), c_2(t))}{t} = \infty$, which
is a priori weaker than \eqref{eq:expdiv}. In fact, both conditions are
equivalent to Gromov hyperbolicity, see \cite[Chapter III, Prop. 1.25]{BH}.)

\subsection{Gromov hyperbolicity implies purely exponential
  volume growth with $h=h_{vol}$}

We like to note first that simply connected Riemannian manifolds
$X$ without conjugate points which are Gromov hyperbolic spaces
{\em admitting compact quotients} have purely exponential volume
growth (see \cite[Thm. 7.2]{Coor}). Here we consider the special case
of an asymptotic harmonic manifold without the additional assumption
that $X$ admits a compact quotient.

\begin{dfn}
  Let $X$ be a Riemannian manifold with $h_{vol} = h_{vol}(X) >
  0$. Then $X$ has {\em purely exponential volume growth with
    growth rate $h_{vol}$} if, for every $p \in X$, there exists a
  constant $C = C(p) \ge 1$ with
  $$ \frac{1}{C} e^{h_{vol} r} \le \vol B_r(p) \le C e^{h_{vol} r}
  \quad \text{for all $r \ge 1$.} $$
\end{dfn}

We first prove the following general lemma.

\begin{lemma} \label{lem:Gromovexpvol}
  Let $X$ be a $\delta$-hyperbolic space without conjugate points and
  bounded curvature. Then the volume of any geodesic sphere
  grows exponentially. In particular, we have $h_{vol}(X) > 0$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  Fix $p \in X$ and geodesic rays $c_1, c_2: [0,\infty) \to X$ with $c_1(0)=c_2(0)$.
  As remarked above, Gromov hyperbolicity implies
  $$
  \liminf_{t \to \infty} \frac { \log d^q_t(c_1(t), c_2(t))}{t} \ge c(\delta),
  $$
  where $c(\delta) > 0$ depends only on the Gromov constant $\delta$.
  In particular, there exists $t_0 > 0$ such that for all $t \ge t_0$
  $$ d_{S_p(t)}(c_1(t),c_2(t)) \ge e^{t c(\delta)/2}, $$
  where $d_{S_p(t)}$ is the intrinsic distance in the sphere $S_p(t) \subset X$.
  Let $\gamma_t : [0,l(t)] \to S_p(t)$ be a minimal geodesic in $S_p(t)$ connnecting
  $c_1(t)$ and $c_2(t)$. The $1/4$-balls in $S_p(t)$ with centers $\gamma_t(k)$
  and $k \in \Z \cap  [0,l(t)]$ are pairwise disjoint. Lemma \ref{lem:AAm1} implies that the
  second fundamental forms of $S_p(t)$ are bounded by a universal constant for
  all $t \ge t_0 > 0$. Using the Gauss equation, this implies that the curvatures of
  the spheres $S_p(t)$ are uniformly bounded for $t \ge t_0$, as well. Therefore,
  the $1/4$-balls in $S_p(t)$ have a uniform lower volume bound $A_0 > 0$. Hence,
  we have
  $$ \vol(S_t(p)) \ge A_0 (e^{t c(\delta)/2} - 1) $$
  for all $t \ge t_0$. This finishes the proof of the lemma.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma} \label{lem:lowexp} Let $(X,g)$ be an asymptotically
  harmonic manifold. Then, for all $p \in X$, there
  exists a constant $C_1(p) > 0$ such that
  $$ \frac{\vol S_r(p)}{e^{hr}} \ge C_1(p) \quad
  \text{for all $r \ge 1$.}  $$
  In particular, we have
  $$ h \le h_{vol}(X). $$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  As in the proof of \cite[Cor. 25]{Kn2}, we have for all $v \in SX$
  $$ \frac{\det A_v(t)}{\det U_v(t)} = \frac{\det A_v(t)}{e^{ht}} =
  \frac{1}{\det(U(v) - S_{v,t}'(0))}, $$
  which implies
  \begin{equation} \label{eq:vol/ehr}
  \frac{\vol S_r(p)}{e^{hr}} =
  \int_{S_pX} \frac{1}{\det(U(v) - S_{v,r}'(0))} d\theta_p(v).
  \end{equation}
  Using $U(v) - S_{v,t_1}'(0) \ge U(v) - S_{v,t_2}'(0) > 0$ for all $0
  < t_1 < t_2$, we obtain
  $$ \frac{\vol S_r(p)}{e^{hr}} \ge
  \int_{S_pX} \frac{1}{\det(U(v) - S_{v,1}'(0))} d\theta_p(v). $$
  Continuous asymptote implies the continuity of $v \mapsto U(v) -
  S_{v,1}'(0)$. This yields the existence of a constant $a > 0$ such
  that $ \det(U(v) - S_{v,1}'(0)) \ge a$ for all $v \in S_pX$ and
  implies the statement in the lemma.
\end{proof}

Recall the following result in \cite[Cor. 4.6]{Kn2}.

\begin{prop} \label{prop:coneinhoroball}
  Let $X$ be a simply connected $\delta$-hyperbolic manifold without
  conjugate points. Consider for $v \in S_pX$, $\ell = \delta +1$ and
  $r >0$ the spherical cone in $X$ given by
  $$
  A_{v, \ell}(r) := \{ c_w(t) \mid 0 \le t \le r , w \in S_pX, d(c_v(
  \pm \ell), c_w( \pm \ell)) \le 1 \}.
  $$
  Then, for $\rho= 4 \delta +2$ the set $A_{v, \ell}(r) $ is contained
  in
  \begin{equation*}
    \begin{split}
      H_{v,\rho}(r) :=\{ c_q(t) \mid & -\rho/2 \le t \le r , \; c_q \;
      \text{is an integral curve of}\\
      & \grad b_{-v}\; \text{with} \; c_q(0) = q \in b_{-v}^{-1}(0)
      \cap B(p,\rho) \}.
    \end{split}
  \end{equation*}
\end{prop}

This useful result has the following consequence.

\begin{cor} \label{cor:hvolleqh}
  Let $(X,g)$ be a Gromov hyperbolic asymptotically
  harmonic manifold and $p \in X$. Then there exists
  a constant $C_2(p) > 0$ such that
  $$ \vol B_r(p) \le C_2(p) \int_{-\rho/2}^{r} e^{hs} ds, $$
  where $\rho$ is defined as in Proposition \ref{prop:coneinhoroball}.
  In particular, we have
  $$ h_{vol}(X) \le h. $$
\end{cor}

\begin{proof}
Let $p \in X$. Choose $l = \delta + 1$. Then we have
$$ S_pX = \bigcup_{v \in S_pX} U_{v,\ell}(r), $$
with the open sets
$$ U_{v,\ell}(r) = \{ w \in S_pX \mid d(c_v( \pm \ell), c_w( \pm \ell)) < 1 \}. $$
Since $S_pX$ is compact, we find finitely many vectors
$v_1,\dots,v_k \in S_pX$ with
$$ S_pX = \bigcup_{j=1}^k U_{v_j,\ell}(r), $$
which implies for $\rho = 4 \delta + 2$
$$ B_r(p) \subset \bigcup_{j=1}^k A_{v_j,\ell}(r) \subset
\bigcup_{j=1}^k H_{v_j,\rho}(r). $$
Using
$$ \vol(H_{v,\rho}(r) ) = \int\limits_{-\rho/2}^{r} e^{hs} ds
\vol_{0}( b_v^{-1}(0) \cap B_\rho(p))
$$
where $\vol_{0}$ denotes the induced volume on the horosphere $b_v^{-1}(0)$,
we conclude
$$ \vol B_r(p) \le \left( \sum_{j=1}^k \vol_{0}( b_{v_j}^{-1}(0) \cap B_\rho(p))
\right) \int\limits_{-\rho/2}^{r} e^{hs} ds. $$
Setting $C_2(p) = \sum_{j=1}^k \vol_{0}( b_{v_j}^{-1}(0) \cap B_\rho(p))$
proves the first part of the corollary. The inequality $h_{vol}(X) \le h$ follows
then from the definition of $h_{vol}(X)$.
\end{proof}

Now we prove the implication claimed in this subsection.

\begin{prop}
  Let $(X,g)$ be a Gromov hyperbolic asymptotically harmonic space with with
  bounded curvature. Then $X$ has purely exponential volume growth with
  $h = h_{vol}$.
\end{prop}

\begin{proof}
  Gromov hyperbolicity implies $h_{vol}(X) > 0$, by Lemma \ref{lem:Gromovexpvol}.
  Lemma \ref{lem:lowexp} and Corollary \ref{cor:hvolleqh} together yield $h = h_{vol}(X)$.
  Moreover, we derive from Corollary \ref{cor:hvolleqh} that
  $$ \vol B_r(p) \le \frac{C_2(p)}{h} e^{hr}. $$
  The lower volume estimate
  follows from Lemma \ref{lem:lowexp}: For $r \ge 2$ we have
  $$ \frac{\vol B_r(p)}{e^{hr}} \ge \frac{\int_{r-1}^r \vol S_t(p) dt}{e^{hr}}
  \ge \frac{\vol S_{t_0}(p)}{e^{hr}} \ge \frac{C_1(p)}{e^h}, $$
  for some $t_0 \in [r-1,r]$. This finishes the proof of purely exponential volume growth.
\end{proof}

\subsection{Purely exponential volume growth with $h=h_{vol}$
  implies rank one} Finally, we show the remaining implication of Theorem
\ref{thm:equivalences}. This closes the chain of implications and
finishes the proof that all four properties listed in (a), (b), (c)
and (d) are equivalent.

Assume that $(X,g)$ is asymptotically harmonic with purely exponential
volume growth $h = h_{vol}$.  We have
$$ \int_{r-1}^{r} e^{ht} \int_{S_pX} \frac{1}{\det(U(v)-S_{v,t}'(0))} d\theta_p(v) dt \le \vol(B_r(p)). $$
This implies
$$ \frac{1}{e} \int_{r-1}^{r} \int_{S_pX} \frac{1}{\det(U(v)-S_{v,t}'(0))} d\theta_p(v) dt \le \frac{\vol(B_r(p))}{e^{hr}} \le C(p) $$
for some constant $C(p) > 0$. Assume that $\det(U(v)-S_{v,t}'(0)) \to 0$ for all $v \in S_pX$. Then,
because of monotonicity and Dini, we know that this convergence is
uniform. This is in contradiction to the above inequality. Therefore,
there exist $v \in S_pX$ with $\det(U(v)-S(v)) \neq 0$ and $(X,g)$ has
rank one.

\section{Asymptotically harmonic manifolds with bounded asymptote}

The notion of bounded asymptote was first introduced by Eschenburg in \cite[Section 4]{Es}. Examples
of manifolds of bounded asymptote are manifolds with nonpositive curvature or, more generally, manifolds
with no focal points.

\begin{dfn}
  Let $(X,g)$ be a complete, simply connected Riemannian manifold without conjugate points.
  $X$ is called a manifold {\em of bounded asymptote} if there exists a constant $A \ge 1$ such
  that
  \begin{equation} \label{eq:bdasym}
  \Vert S_v(t) \Vert \le A \quad \forall\, t \ge 0, \quad \forall\; v \in SX.
  \end{equation}
\end{dfn}

\begin{lemma}
  The bounded asymptote property \eqref{eq:bdasym} implies
  $$ \Vert U_v(t) \Vert \ge \frac{1}{A} \quad \forall\, t \ge 0, \quad \forall\; v \in SX. $$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  Letting $x \to \infty$, we conclude from \eqref{eq:Stransform}
  $$ S_{\phi^t v}(y)= S_v(y+t)S_v^{-1}(t). $$
  Using $S_v(t) = U_{-v}(-t)$, we obtain
  $$ S_{-\phi^t v}(s) = U_v(t-s)U_v^{-1}(t). $$
  This implies
  $$ 1 = \Vert S_{-\phi^t v}(t) U_v(t) \Vert \le A \; \Vert U_v(t) \Vert, $$
  finishing the proof.
\end{proof}

\begin{rmk}
  Rank one asymptotically harmonic manifolds with $\Vert R \Vert \le R_0$ and $\Vert \nabla R \Vert \le R_0'$
  are manifolds of bounded asymptote by Proposition \ref{prop:SUest}.
\end{rmk}

Next, we discuss relations between the geometrically defined constants $h, h_{vol}(X)$ and the {\em Cheeger constant} $h_{Cheeg}(X)$, defined as
$$ h_{Cheeg}(X) = \inf_{K \subset X} \frac{{\rm area}(\partial K)}{{\rm vol}(K)}, $$
where $K$ ranges over all connected, open submanifolds of $X$ with compact closure and smooth boundary.

\begin{prop} \label{prop:hvolhcheegh}
  Let $(X,g)$ be an asymptotically harmonic manifold. Then we have
  $$ h_{vol}(X), h_{Cheeg}(X) \ge h. $$
\end{prop}

\begin{proof}
  The inequality $h_{vol}(X) \ge h$ was already stated in Lemma \ref{lem:lowexp}. For the proof of $h_{Cheeg}(X) \ge h$
  let $K \subset X$ be a set as described above. Choosing a Busemann function $b_v$, we have $\Delta b_v = h$ and
  obtain via Gauss' divergence theorem and $\Vert \grad b_v \Vert = 1$,
  $$ h \vol(K) = \int_K \Delta b_v(x) dx = \int_{\partial K} \langle \grad b_v,\nu \rangle dx \le {\rm area}(\partial K), $$
  where $\nu$ is the outward unit normal vector of $\partial K$ in $X$.
\end{proof}

Even though we proved in the previous section that $h = h_{vol}(X)$ for Gromov
hyperbolic asymptotically harmonic spaces $X$ with bounded curvature, we do not know
whether this holds for general asymptotically harmonic manifolds. However, a sufficient condition
for $h = h_{vol}(X) = h_{Cheeg}(X)$ is that $X$ is asymptotically harmonic and has bounded
asymptote.

\begin{theorem}
  Let $(X,g)$ be asymptotically harmonic and of bounded asymptote. Then we have
  $$ h = h_{vol}(X) = h_{Cheeg}(X). $$
  In particular, this equality holds for all rank one asymptotically
  harmonic manifolds with $\Vert R \Vert \le R_0$ and $\Vert \nabla R
  \Vert \le R_0'$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
  The bounded asymptote property implies that we have
  $$
  \frac{1}{A^2 t} \le \langle (U(v) - S_{v,t}'(0))x, x \rangle,
  $$
  for all unit vectors $x \in v^\bot$ (see the proof of \cite[Prop. 5.2]{Kn2}).
  This implies
  $$ \det (U(v) - S_{v,t}'(0)) \ge \frac{1}{A^{2n-2} t^{n-1}}., $$
  and we obtain with \eqref{eq:vol/ehr}
  $$ \frac{\vol S_r(p)}{e^{hr}} \le \int_{S_pX} A^{2n-2} r^{n-1}
  d\theta_p(v) = \omega_{n-1} A^{2n-2} r^{n-1}, $$ where
  $\omega_{n-1}$ is the volume of the Euclidean unit sphere of
  dimension $n-1$.This implies $\vol S_r(p) \le C r^{n-1} e^{hr}$ and,
  therefore, $h_{vol}(X) \le h$. Together with Lemma
  \ref{lem:lowexp} we obtain $h = h_{vol}(X)$.

  Next we prove $h_{Cheeg}(X) \le h$: Let $g(r) = \frac{\vol S_r(p)}{\vol B_r(p)}$.
  We will show that $g(r) \to h$ for $r \to \infty$ which implies $h_{Cheeg}(X) \le h$.
  We have with l'Hospital
  \begin{eqnarray*}
  \lim_{r \to \infty} g(r) &=& \lim_{r \to \infty} \frac{\int_{S_pX} \det A_v(r)\; d\theta_p(v)}{\int_0^r
  \int_{S_pX} \det A_v(s)\; d\theta_p(v) \; ds} \\
  &=& \lim_{r \to \infty} \frac{\int_{S_pX} \tr (A_v'(r) A_v^{-1}(r)) \det A_v(r)\; d\theta_p(v)}
  {\int_{S_pX} \det A_v(r)\; d\theta_p(v)},
  \end{eqnarray*}
  provided the last limit exists. (We used the notion $d\theta$ for the canonical volume element
  of the unit sphere $S_pX$). Note that $A_v'(r) A_v^{-1}(r) = U_{\phi^r v,r}'(0)$. Since
  $\Vert U_{w,r}'(0) - U_w'(0) \Vert \le \frac{A^2}{r}$ (see, for instance, \cite[bottom of p. 686]{Kn2}),
  we conclude
  $$ 0 \le \tr U_{w,r}'(0) - h \le (n-1) \frac{A^2}{r} $$
  for all $w \in SX$ and $r \ge 0$. Therefore, $\tr (A_v'(r)
  A_v^{-1}(r)) \to h$ and the convergence is uniformly, which implies
  that the last limit above exists and is equal to $h$. This, together
  with Proposition \ref{prop:hvolhcheegh} above, implies that
  $h_{Cheeg}(X) = h$.
\end{proof}

\begin{remark}
  It was shown by Zimmer in the proof of \cite[Cor. 49]{Zi} that $
  h_{vol}(X) = h $ also holds in the case that $(X,g)$ is
  asymptotically harmonic {\em admitting compact quotients}. Equality
  of $h, h_{vol}(X)$ and $h_{Cheeg}(X)$ also holds for all {\em
    noncompact harmonic manifolds} $X$ without additional conditions
  (see \cite[Theorem 5.1]{PeSa}). Moreover, the agreement of these three
  geometric constants implies (see \cite[Corollary 5.2]{PeSa}) that the
  bottom of the spectrum and of the essential spectrum of the
  Laplacian $\Delta_X$ coincide and $\lambda_0(X) = \lambda_0^{\rm ess}(X) = \frac{h^2}{4}$.
\end{remark}


\section{Introduction}
Local properties of semiconductor nanostructures can be probed by the scanning gate microscopy  \cite{sgm} (SGM)
in which the charge of the atomic force microscope tip perturbs the potential landscape below the surface of the semiconductor within the space occupied
by confined charge carriers.
SGM covers both the open systems (quantum point contacts \cite{qpc}, resonant cavities  \cite{rc}, quantum rings  \cite{qr}) in which the probe is used to read out
the wave function at the Fermi level from  the conductance perturbations as well as systems that are weakly coupled to the reservoirs, i.e. closed quantum dots \cite{fallahi,zhang,gild07,blesz08,boyd11,boydnano,huefner11,mantelli,qiang}.
For the latter, the current flows through the quantum dot only outside the Coulomb blockade conditions  \cite{kow}, i.e., when the chemical potential ($\mu_N=E_N-E_{N-1}$) of $N$  confined electrons lies
within the transport window defined by the Fermi levels of source and drain. In experiments, the tip-induced variation of $E_N$ is determined from
the shift of voltages that is necessary for restoration of the current flow  \cite{fallahi,gild07,blesz08,huefner11}. Since the variation depends on the electron density beneath the tip this technique allows
for visualization of the charge density  \cite{scb}.
The details of the variation of the charge density can be detected only for large quantum dots exceeding the range
of tip potential. In large dots and at low electron densities the SGM technique  can -- at least potentially -- resolve single-electron islands within the few-electron quantum dot
which are formed as an effect of strong electron-electron correlations with the charge density nucleating to Wigner molecules  \cite{maksym,reiman}.

The effort on the extraction of the confined charge density by the scanning gate microscopy concerned mostly quasi one-dimensional (1D) quantum
dots defined within a quantum wire  \cite{zhang,blesz08,ziani,boyd11,boydnano,mantelli,qiang}.
Wigner molecules in 1D quantum dots  \cite{rev1d} are relatively stable against external perturbations due to the fact that the electrons in one dimension cannot exchange
their positions. In circular 2D quantum dots at low carrier densities the electron localization acquires a molecular form  \cite{maksym,reiman} only in the inner
coordinates of the system and not in the charge density which remains rotationally invariant.
 The Wigner form of the electron density with separate single-electron islands can observed in the laboratory frame of quantum dots of lower symmetry
only for some $N$, for which the classical  \cite{peeters} charge distribution reproduces the symmetry of the confinement potential  \cite{szafran}.

So far, the scanning gate microscopy experiments on closed two-dimensional (2D) quantum dots
defined within the two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) concerned: imaging of the single-electron quantum dot  \cite{fallahi},
mapping the position of floating double  dot defined electrostatically  \cite{gild07}, and determination of the effective tip potential as
seen by the confined electrons  \cite{huefner11}.
In the present paper we consider an extent to which
the energy variation induced by the tip can be used for visualization of few-electron charge density in 2D quantum dots.
 We investigate the relation between the Wigner molecule formation in the laboratory frame and the reaction of the
 confined density on the potential of the tip. We perform configuration interaction
 calculations taking into account both the electron-electron correlation and the reaction of the quantum dot to the tip potential.
The study covers up to four electrons and quantum dots of various symmetries and profiles.
 We discuss the adequacy of the perturbative approach for extraction of the electron density  \cite{fallahi,boyd11,boydnano} confined in quantum dots
  and the fidelity of charge images outside the perturbative regime.
We find that the images obtained with repulsive (attractive) tip potential tend to overestimate (underestimate) the electron localization.
We demonstrate that the confined charge density is best resolved when the classical electron configuration agrees with the symmetry
of the confinement potential. We also identify cases when the confined electron density evades visualization
even for weak perturbation introduced by the tip.

\begin{figure}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=75mm
           \epsfbox {schemat.ps}
          }
\caption{Schematic drawing of the considered system with the tip potential perturbing the charge density (brown contour plot)
of a two-dimensional quantum dot. The green contours correspond to equipotential lines. The crosses correspond to
centers of Gaussians defining the multicenter basis given by Eq. (\ref{gb}).
}
\label{schemat}
\end{figure}

\section{Theory}
In this work we assume a strictly two-dimensional model of confinement which is usually justified by the strong confinement of 2DEG in the growth direction ($z$).
The Hamiltonian of $N$-electron system is taken in form
\begin{equation}
H=\sum_i^N h({\bf r}_i) +\frac{e^2}{4\pi\epsilon\epsilon_0} \sum_{i=1}^N \sum_{j=i+1}^N \frac{1}{r_{ij}}, \label{nh}
\end{equation}
where ${\bf r}_i$ is the position of the $i$th electron and $h$ is the single-electron Hamiltonian,
\begin{equation}
h=-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m^*}\nabla^2+V({\bf r})+V_t({\bf r}; {\bf r}_t). \label{1h}
\end{equation}
 In Eq. (\ref{1h}), $m^*$ is the effective mass, $\epsilon$ is the dielectric constant (we use GaAs material parameters $m^*=0.067m_0$, $\epsilon=12.5$), $V$ stands
for the external potential, $V_t$ denotes the tip potential as seen by the electrons within the plane of confinement  and ${\bf r}_t$
is the position of the tip.

The single-electron eigenequation is diagonalized ($h\phi_n=\epsilon_n \phi_n$) using a basis of Gaussian functions
 \begin{equation}
\phi_n(x,y)=\sum_{k=1}^{M\times K} c^{(n)}_k \sqrt{\frac{2a}{\pi}} \exp\left(-a\left[(x-X_k)^2+(y-Y_k)^2\right]\right), \label{gb}
\end{equation}
where the centers of Gaussians $(X_k,Y_k)$  are distributed on a rectangular lattice of $M\times K$ points  (typically several
hundred centers are taken -- see for instance the crosses in Fig. \ref{schemat}) and $a$ is optimized variationally \cite{kkk}. The applied multicenter Gaussian basis allows for description
of any smooth potential with arbitrary or no symmetry \cite{kkk}.
The few-electron eigenproblem is solved with the configuration interaction approach using the
eigenstates of operator (\ref{1h})  for construction of the basis.
The single-electron eigenfunctions ($\phi_n$) are used for construction of Slater determinants that are used as the basis for the $N$-electron Schr\"odinger equation for Hamiltonian (\ref{nh}),
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\Psi(\left\{x_i,y_i,\sigma_i;i=1,\dots,N\right\})=\\&&\sum_k d_k {\cal{A}} \left[ \phi_{k1}(x_1,y_1)\chi_{k1}(\sigma_1)\dots\phi_{kN}(x_N,y_N)\chi_{kN}(\sigma_N)\right], \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\cal{A}$ is the antisymmetrization operator, and $\chi_k$ is one of the eigenstates of the spin Pauli $\sigma_z$ matrix.
For construction of the basis of determinants we use up to 38 single-electron spin-orbitals

In experiment the maps of the chemical potential $\mu_N(x_t,y_t)=E_N-E_{N-1}$ can be gathered
by re-tuning the conditions for the current flow (i.e. lifting of the Coulomb blockade) with varied backgate potential or bias.
Since $\mu_1=E_1$, the energy maps as functions of the tip position can be deduced for any $N$.
Simulation of the confined charge density mapping
by the SGM technique is performed in the following sequence.
We first calculate the energy of $N-$electron system as a function of the tip position.
The charge density extracted from the energy map $n_r$ is obtained under the assumption
that the action of the tip is perturbative  \cite{fallahi,boyd11,boydnano}
\begin{equation} E_N({\bf r}_t)=E_N(\infty)+\int_{-\infty}^\infty \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dxdy  V_t({\bf r};{\bf r}_t) n_r({\bf r}).\label{feft} \end{equation}
Equation (\ref{feft}) is a convolution of the tip potential and the confined charge density.
The charge density can be extracted from the energy dependence of the tip position using the Fourier transform technique  \cite{fallahi,boyd11}.
Alternatively Eq. (\ref{feft}) can be treated as the Fredholm-type integral equation for $n_r$. We apply the Nystr\"om approach replacing
the integral by a quadrature (rectangle rule). Upon replacement we obtain a linear system of equations for the charge density in the mesh points used for the quadrature.
In the following we compare the charge density deduced in this way  ($n_r$) with the exact one ($n$)
that is calculated from the few-electron wave function
\begin{equation}
n({\bf r})=\langle \Psi|\sum_{i=1}^N \delta({\bf r}-{\bf r_i})|\Psi \rangle.
\end{equation}
For comparison we  calculate also the charge density $n_\delta$ assuming that the tip potential
is point-like $V_p=V_T\delta(x-x_t,y-y_t)$. Then, Eq. (\ref{feft}) reduces to
\begin{equation} E_N({\bf r}_t)=E_N(\infty)+V_T n_\delta({\bf r}_t).\label{fefut} \end{equation}
Normalized charge density $n_\delta$ derived from this formula is simply proportional to the
energy variation.

The original potential of the charged tip is of the Coulomb form. As the tip approaches the 2DEG its charge density reacts
by deformation which results in the screening of the tip potential. Previous Schr\"odinger-Poisson calculations \cite{szafranr} for the reaction of the 2DEG
to the tip indicated that the effective (i.e. screened) tip potential is close to the Lorentz form
\begin{equation}
V_t({\bf r};{\bf r}_t)=\frac{V_T}{\frac{(x-x_t)^2}{d_{tip}^2}+\frac{(y-y_t)^2}{d_{tip}^2}+1},
\end{equation}
where the width of the tip $d_{tip}$ turns out to be of the order of the tip -- 2DEG distance \cite{szafranr} independent of the charge at the tip and the density of 2DEG, which only
influence the strength of the perturbation $V_T$ and not its range. The Lorentz form of the effective tip potential for SGM measurements on 2DEG was also found in experimental studies of
2D quantum dots  \cite{huefner11}.
Therefore, in the bulk of this work we use mainly the Lorentz model potential of the tip and assume $d_{tip}=20$ nm, which seems the smallest reasonable value
of the potential width. For comparison we also consider the reaction of the confined system to the long-range Coulomb potential
\begin{equation}
V^c_t({\bf r};{\bf r}_t)=\frac{Qe}{4\pi\epsilon\epsilon_0} \frac{1}{\left((x-x_t)^2+(y-y_t)^2+z_{tip}^2\right)^{1/2}},
\end{equation}
where $Q$ is the tip potential, and $z_{tip}$ -- the position of the tip above the 2DEG plane.

An ample discussion of potentials of electrostatic quantum dots defined within 2DEG was given in Ref.  \cite{lis}.
The calculations  \cite{lis} indicated that depending on the geometry of the device one can obtain both parabolic and
quantum well profiles. The latter can only be realized for large dots \cite{lis} of the linear extent of the order of a few hundred nm, i.e. the ones which are studied in the present work.
Since our purpose is to determine the relation between the $N-$dependent classical electron distribution
and the quantum dot geometry we consider a number of potentials: parabolic
\begin{equation}
V(x,y)=\frac{m}{2} \left(\omega_x^2 x^2 +\omega_y^2 y^2\right),
\end{equation}
of circular $\omega_x=\omega_y=\omega$ and elliptic $\omega_x\neq\omega_y$ symmetry,
as well as non-parabolic dots modeled by formula
\begin{equation}
V(x,y)=V_0\left(1-\frac{1}{1+(\frac{x}{X})^{10}+(\frac{y}{Y})^{10}}\right) \label{rect}
\end{equation}
which produces a well-like potential with a flat bottom of a nearly rectangular shape
of dimensions $2X\times 2Y$. For Eq. (\ref{rect}) we discuss the dots
from a nearly 1D ($X>>Y$) to square ($X=Y$) geometry.

\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=130mm
           \epsfbox {L_oscylator_0_5meV2.ps}
          }
\caption{Results for a circular harmonic oscillator potential with $\hbar \omega=0.5$ meV and the potential
of the tip of the Lorentz form [Eq.(8) with $d_{tip}=20$ nm].
The columns correspond to various electron number from $N=1$ to 4.
The first (last) row of plots shows the energies and chemical potentials for $V_T=-0.5$ meV ($V_T=2$ meV).
The rows from the second (e-h) to the fifth (q-t) show the electron densities: the unperturbed one ($n$ brown solid
lines), the one reproduced with the perturbative formula (5) ($n_r$, blue dots) and the one obtained
under assumption of a delta-like perturbation ($n_\delta$, green triangles).
Subsequent rows correspond to various values of $V_T$.
}
\label{oscylator}
\end{figure*}

\begin{figure}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=70mm
           \epsfbox {L_oscylator_0_5meV_gestosci.ps}
          }
\caption{Charge densities for $N=2$ and 3 electrons for parameters of Fig. \ref{oscylator}. The cross
marks the tip position. The solid green curves show the equipotential lines.
}
\label{oscylatorg}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=100mm
           \epsfbox {L_eliptyczna_0_8meV.ps}
          }
\caption{Results for elliptic parabolic potential with $\hbar \omega_x=0.8$ meV,  $\omega_y=1.2\omega_x $, and the potential
of the tip of the Lorentz form [Eq.(8) with $d_{tip}=20$ nm].
Columns correspond to various electron numbers. The first row of plots (a-d) shows
the charge density in the absence of the tip. Second (e-h) and third (i-l) rows show the energies
in function of the tip position for $V_t=-2$ meV and $V_t=2$ meV, respectively.
Three next rows show the charge density reproduced by the perturbative formula, and the last
one the density calculated for the assumption of the point-like tip potential.}
\label{eliptu}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=100mm
           \epsfbox {klas_eliptyczna_0_8meV.ps}
          }
\caption{Classical lowest energy configurations of point charges for the elliptic potential of Fig. \ref{eliptu}.
For $N=3$ two equivalent configurations exist which are marked by solid and empty circles, respectively.}
\label{celiptu}
\end{figure}

\section{Results and Discussion}

\subsection{Circular potential}
Let us first consider a circular parabolic quantum dot with $\hbar \omega=0.5$ meV.
The solid line in Fig. \ref{oscylator}(e,f,g,h) shows the unperturbed radial charge density for 1,2,3 and 4 electrons,
respectively. When a tip modeled by the attractive Lorentzian with $V_t=-0.5$ meV moves above the system,
the changes in the energy are of the order of 0.2 meV only [Fig. \ref{oscylator}(a-d)].
The reproduced charge density: $n_r$ (circles) very well agrees with the unperturbed density,
which is also the case for weak repulsive tip potential [Fig. \ref{oscylator}(m-p)].
A stronger amplitude of the energy variation should be useful for the signal to noise ratio
of the experimental maps. For a stronger attractive perturbation ($V_t=-2$ meV, Fig. \ref{oscylator}(i-l)) we notice that the
size of the charge droplet is overestimated with an extra oscillation of a small amplitude.
On the other hand: a stronger repulsive potential ($V_t=2$ meV, Fig. \ref{oscylator}(q-t)) gives a smaller size of the droplet.

Figure \ref{oscylatorg} shows the two- and three- electron densities: unperturbed [Fig. \ref{oscylatorg}(a-b)],
and in the presence of the tip [Fig. 3(c-f)]. The attractive tip $V_t=-2$ meV captures a part of the density underneath [Fig. \ref{oscylatorg}(c-d)],
the position of the other electron islands becomes well resolved.  The repulsive tip also pins the orientation
of the Wigner molecule in the laboratory frame [Fig. \ref{oscylatorg}(e-f)], only with a void under the tip position.
The impact of the tip on the electron density is therefore a drastic one for both negative and positive tip potentials, so a success of the perturbative
formula given by Eq. (\ref{feft}) for reproduction of the radial density as calculated in the absence
of the tip found in Fig. \ref{oscylator} is quite remarkable, even if the original density lacks finer details.
\subsection{Elliptic potential}

The finer details of the unperturbed electron density appear for dots of lowered symmetry:
see the results for an elliptic ($\hbar \omega_x=0.8$ meV, $\omega_y=1.2 \omega_x$) quantum dot in Fig. \ref{eliptu}.
For two electrons: single-electron islands are formed [Fig. \ref{eliptu}(b)] along the $x$ axis, as in the classical solution
[Fig. \ref{celiptu}(a)].  For three electrons
two equivalent classical charge distributions exists [see Fig. \ref{celiptu}(b)] each of the symmetry lower than the elliptical one, and in consequence
the single-electron islands do not appear in the laboratory frame of the quantum system [Fig. \ref{eliptu}(c)].
For each $N$, similarly as for the circular potential, for a weak perturbation both negative tip [$V_t=-0.5$ meV -- Fig. \ref{eliptu}(m-p)]
and positive tip [not shown], $n_r$  density very well reproduces the unperturbed one.

Second and third rows of Fig. \ref{eliptu} show the energy of the system in function of the tip position for stronger
attractive and repulsive tip potentials $V_T=\pm 2$ meV. For the negative tip we obtain a flat minimum, within
more or less the entire region occupied by the unperturbed charge density [Fig. \ref{eliptu}(e-h)]. The minimum appears since the tip creates its own potential
minimum and the electron system follows the minimum as the tip is translated.  The reproduced density [Fig. \ref{eliptu}(q-t)] occupies
larger space than the original one (as in the circular for $V_t=-2$ meV -- see Fig. \ref{oscylator}(i-l)), and a variation of smaller amplitude appears
within the maximal density area.

For the positive tip the energy maximum is more strongly localized [Fig. \ref{eliptu} (i-l)] around the center of the dot,
and the amplitude of $n_r$ variation [Fig. \ref{eliptu} (u-x)] is drastically increased with respect to $n$.
Also, the reproduced density occupies visibly smaller area than the original one. Nevertheless,
the configuration of the maxima of $n_r$ agrees with the ones present for $n$.

For $V_T=2$ meV, the density $n_\delta$ reproduced with the assumption that the energy map --
obtained in fact for the Lorentz function -- is due to the delta-like tip potential, gives a closer [Fig. \ref{eliptu} (y-ab)]
idea about the size of the charge droplet. Nevertheless, the details of the density maxima are not reproduced by $n_\delta$.

\subsection{Square quantum dot}

\begin{figure}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=100mm
           \epsfbox {L_kwadrat_400nm_400nm.ps}
          }
\caption{Results for a square quantum dot $X=Y=200$ nm [Eq. (11)] and the tip potential
the Lorentz form [Eq.(8) with $d_{tip}=20$ nm].
Columns correspond to various electron numbers. The first row of plots (a-d) shows
the charge density in the absence of the tip. Second (e-h) and third (i-l) rows show the energies
in function of the tip position for $V_t=-2$ meV and $V_t=2$ meV, respectively.
Three next rows show the charge density reproduced by the perturbative formula, and the last
one -- the density calculated for the assumption of the point-like tip potential.}
\label{square}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=100mm
           \epsfbox {klas_kwadrat_400nm_400nm.ps}
          }
\caption{Classical lowest energy configurations of point charges for the potential of Fig. \ref{square}.
For $N=2$ (a) two equivalent configurations exist which are marked by different symbols.
For $N=3$ four equivalent configurations appear (b,c).}
\label{csquare}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=70mm
           \epsfbox {L_kwadrat_400nm_400nm_gestosci.ps}
          }
\caption{Charge densities for $N=2$ and 3 electrons for parameters of Fig. \ref{square}. The cross
marks the tip position.}
\label{squareg}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=100mm
           \epsfbox {C_kwadrat_400nm_400nm.ps}
          }
\caption{Results for the square quantum dot $X=Y=200$ nm [Eq. (11)] and the tip potential
the Coulomb form [Eq.(9) with $z_{tip}=30$ nm, $Q=\pm 0.1e$ and $Q=\pm 1e$].
Columns correspond to various electron numbers. The first row of plots (a-d) shows
the charge density in the absence of the tip. Plots (e-t) show the energies
as functions of the tip position.
Four next rows show the charge density reproduced by the perturbative formula, and the last
one -- the density calculated for the assumption of the point-like tip potential.}
\label{squarec}
\end{figure}

Let us now consider a square quantum dot [confinement potential given by Eq. (11) for $X=Y=200$ nm].
For $N>1$ the unperturbed electron density distinctly sticks to the corners of the square dot [Fig. \ref{square}(b-d)]
as should be expected for interacting charge density within a box.
For $N=2$ and 3 an increase of the density along the dot edges is also observed.
The classical system of 4 electrons possesses a single lowest-energy configuration [Fig. \ref{csquare}(d)] which coincides
with the charge density of Fig. \ref{square}(d).  Systems of two and three electrons possess
two and four equivalent configurations, respectively [Fig. \ref{csquare}(a-c)]. The few-electron
wave function contains contributions of all these configurations. Since one or two corners
of the square are unoccupied in the classical configurations, the lower amplitude of the maxima at the corners
than in the case of $N=4$.
As the negative tip scans the dot [Fig. \ref{square}(e-h)] we observe a rather flat dependence of the energy on
the tip position with minima at the corners -- where the unperturbed electron density is the largest.
Remarkably, for the positive tip and $N=2$ and $N=3$ the energy extrema lie on the axes of the dot [Fig. \ref{square}(j-k)], and not on
the corners. The reason for this behavior is given in Fig.\ref{squareg} which displays the charge distribution
when the tip is present. When the tip is above the corner of the dot [Fig. \ref{squareg}(g-h)] we can see that
the electron density becomes nearly identical with the classical systems of electrons [cf. Fig. \ref{csquare}(a-c)].
The other equivalent lowest-energy configurations of the charge density were excluded by the presence
of the tip above one of the corners. On the other hand, for two-electrons when the tip is above the center of the side of the dot [Fig. \ref{squareg}(e)]
the electrons instead of occupying the opposite corners of the dot, go to  its other side and approach each other, hence
the corresponding maximum of the energy [Fig. \ref{square}(j)]. For three electrons, formation of four instead
of three charge maxima is found [Fig. \ref{squareg}(f)] which also increases the electrostatic energy of the system above
the minimal one.

The charge density $n_r$ as reproduced for the negative tip [Fig. \ref{square}(m-t)] exhibits maxima near the maxima of $n$.
For stronger tip potential [Fig. \ref{square}(q-t)] the charge density localization near the potential edges is overestimated.
When a weak positive tip potential ($V_T=0.5$ meV) is applied [Fig. \ref{square}(u-v)] we notice that the maxima are pushed to the interior of the dot from the edges.
We also notice for two-electrons [Fig. \ref{square}(v)] that the position of the $n_r$ maxima is shifted to the axes of the dot,
which is the result of the energy increase for the tip above the sides of the dot discussed above.  For $V_T=2$ meV
we notice a similar phenomenon also for three electrons [Fig. \ref{square}(aa)]. For one and four electrons [Fig. \ref{square}(y,ab)]
the maxima are localized in the correct positions, and they distinctly shrink in size as compared to the maxima of $n$.

We also considered the mapping of the charge density confined in the square quantum dot by the long-range Coulomb potential [Eq. (9)]
i.e. for neglected screening of tip potential -- see Fig. \ref{squarec}. We considered the tip localized $z_{tip}=30$ nm above the dot and the charge at the tip $Q=\pm 1$ and $\pm 0.1$ [e],
for which the maximal value of the perturbation below the tip equals 3.8 meV and 0.38 meV, respectively.
The weak ($Q=-0.1$) attractive perturbation [Fig. \ref{squarec}(u-x)] gives $n_r$ which well agree with $n$.
On the other hand already for the weak repulsive perturbation ($Q=0.1$) the maxima of $n_r$ for $N=2$ and 3 go to the axes of the dot --
the phenomenon observed above for the Lorentz perturbation. For $Q=\pm 1$ the calculated $n_r$
differs drastically from the unperturbed density $n$. For $Q=-1$,  $n_r$ [Fig. \ref{squarec}(y-ab)] drifts to the edges of the dot.
This density localization convolved [Eq. (5)] with the Coulomb potential gives the flat energy curve of Fig. \ref{squarec}(i-l).
On the other hand for the positive potential $Q=1$ the derived $n_r$ density [Fig.\ref{squarec}(ag-aj)] is localized in tiny islands inside the dot
and only for a single and four electrons -- for which a single classical configuration of the charge exists -- their positions are close to the original ones.
For $N=2$ and $N=3$ the switching between similar configurations of the type presented in Fig. \ref{squareg} becomes so strong, that the reproduced charge density [Fig. \ref{squarec}(ah,ai)] have little in common
with the original one.

\subsection{Rectangular quantum dot near 1D limit}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=100mm
           \epsfbox {L1d.ps}
          }
\caption{Results for the rectangular quantum dot $X=250$nm,  $Y=50$ nm [Eq. (11)] and the tip potential
the Lorentz form [Eq.(8) with $d_{tip}=20$ nm].
Columns correspond to various electron numbers. The first row of plots (a-d) shows
the charge density in the absence of the tip. Second (e-h) and third (i-l) rows of plots show the energies
as functions of the tip position.
Three next rows show the charge density reproduced by the perturbative formula, and the last
one -- the density calculated for the assumption of the point-like tip potential.}
\label{1dl}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=100mm
           \epsfbox {C1D.ps}
          }
\caption{Same as Fig. \ref{1dl} only for the tip potential of
the Coulomb form [Eq.(9)] with $z_{tip}=30$ nm, $Q=\pm 0.1$ [e] and $Q=\pm 1$ [e].}
\label{1dc}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[ht!]
\hbox{
	   \epsfxsize=100mm
           \epsfbox {cl1d.ps}
          }
\caption{Classical lowest energy configurations of point charges for the potential of Fig. \ref{1dl}.
For each $N$ considered two equivalent configurations appear.}
\label{c1d}
\end{figure}

Finally, let us consider the rectangular quantum dot near the 1D limit ($X=250$ nm, $Y=50$ nm).
The results for the Lorentz and Coulomb tip potentials are displayed in Figs.\ref{1dl} and \ref{1dc}, respectively.
For this dot the classical few-electron systems for $N=2,3,4$ possess two equivalent zig-zag
configurations [Fig.\ref{c1d}]. The electron positions in the two configurations differ only slightly
and these differences are not resolved in the quantum charge density,
which  presents well resolved single-electron islands that are clearly visible in the original electron density for all $N$ [Fig. \ref{1dl}(a-d)].
The single-electron islands are also well resolved in the maps obtained for all the Lorentz tip potentials considered in Fig. \ref{1dl}(m-x),
as well as in the crudest assumption of point-like potential [Fig. \ref{1dl}(y-ab)].
The charge density islands obtained for $V_T=-2$ meV [Fig. \ref{1dl}(q-t)] are distinctly more
extended along the axis of the dot, which results from the fact that the islands
follow the attractive tip as it moves. On the other hand for $V_T=2$ meV [Fig. \ref{1dl}(u-x)]
an extension of the $n_r$ densities in the direction perpendicular to the axis is found.
When the repulsive tip  localized near the edges of the dot its width in $y$ direction
is effectively reduced. In this way the tip increases not only
the local potential energy but also the kinetic energy due to the localization.
For that reason, the perturbative formula produces the charge density which penetrates the region
outside the dot, where the original density vanishes.

The repulsive Coulomb potential reproduces correctly the charge localization [Fig. \ref{1dc}(q-t)]
with an enhanced effect of the elongation of charge density island perpendicular to the dot.
On the other hand, the attractive Coulomb potential [Fig. \ref{1dc}(m-p)] misses the details
of the charge density which is seen as equally spread along the dot.
For $Q=\pm 0.1$  (not shown) the 1D Wigner molecule is well reproduced by $n_r$.

\section{Summary and Conclusions}

We have performed simulations of the charge density mapping for electron systems confined in two-dimensional quantum dots
using model tip potentials of the Lorentz and Coulomb form, several confinement potentials and the exact solution of the few-electron Schr\"odinger equation.
We investigated large quantum dots, where the electron-electron correlation is strong, which can give rise to formation of single-electron islands
in the laboratory frame, i.e. the Wigner molecules.

For the circular dots we found that the molecular electron distributions appear in the laboratory frame
pinned by the tip potential. The Wigner molecule follows the tip as it moves above the dot. In consequence
the energy map in function of the tip position is rotationally invariant, and the density map reproduced
by the perturbative formula is very close to the original one. We noticed that a stronger repulsive (attractive) tip
leads to underestimate (overestimate) of the charge density size.
This conclusions for the size of the droplet holds for any dot profile studied.
Moreover, for the elliptical and square quantum dots single-electron islands appear in the charge density
for some $N$, and they are resolved in the charge density that is reproduced from the integral perturbative formula.
We have found that in the 1D dots the Wigner molecule is clearly visible in the charge density mapped from the
energy dependence for all $N$ and for most of the tip potential studied, with the exception of the negative Coulomb
potential for which the single-electron islands are lost.
We demonstrated that the charge density of electron systems which possess a few
equivalent classical configurations, generally are difficult to be resolved by the scanning probe technique
for the repulsive tip potential, since the tip switches between equivalent configurations. In consequence, the mapped charge density  maxima
do not overlap with the original ones.

\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported by National Science Centre
according to decision DEC-2012/05/B/ST3/03290 and by
PL-Grid Infrastructure. Calculations were performed in ACK--
CYFRONET--AGH on the RackServer Zeus.