\section*{\Roman{section}. Introduction}

The Lanczos Algorithm is one of the few reliable and general methods for
computing the ground state and excited state properties of strongly interacting
quantum Many-body Systems. It has been traditionally employed as a numerical
technique on small finite systems, with attendant round-off error
problems, although the main obstacle to its further development has been
the rapid growth of the number of basis states with system size.
The reader is referred to a review of the applications of this
method\cite{lanczos-D-94} in strongly correlated electron problems.
In this work we examine the Lanczos process in the context of the extensive
quantum Many-Body Systems, where it is employed entirely in an exact manner
and where the thermodynamic limit is taken.
So in complete contrast to the traditional use of the Lanczos algorithm - we
completely circumvent the issues of loss of orthogonality due to round-off
errors and the inability to approach the thermodynamic limit because of
the requirement to construct a full basis on the cluster.
The systems we have in mind are those with an infinite number of degrees
of freedom, yet are extensive, in that all total averages of any
physical quantity scale linearly with the numbers of degrees of freedom
however quantified. These would include all condensed matter systems
with sufficiently local interactions (the precise conditions need to be
clarified, but it is clear which specific systems obey extensivity) and
Quantum Field Theories, with the proviso that the spectrum is bounded
below (in some cases there is also an upper bound too).

After noting some of the advantageous features of the algorithm in general we
discuss the scaling behaviour of the Lanczos Process as it approaches
convergence and as the thermodynamic limit is taken. Central to this approach
is the manifestation of extensivity through a description based on the Cumulant
Generating Function, which we take to be given. We then derive a set of
general integral equations which define the scaled Lanczos functions in the
thermodynamic limit, which can be explicitly and exactly solved for certain
integrable models, or employed in a truncated manner for non-integrable models.
An alternative formulation is also given which expresses the equivalence of
the Lanczos Process with the continuum Toda Lattice Model treated as a
boundary value problem. Finally we state some general results concerning the
behaviour of the Lanczos functions.

\vfill\eject

\stepcounter{section}
\section*{\Roman{section}. The Lanczos Process, Orthogonal Polynomials and Moments}

The Lanczos Algorithm or Process\cite{lanczos,eigen-P,eigen-C} begins with
a trial state $ |\psi_0 \rangle $ appropriate to the model and the symmetries
of the phase being investigated. From this the Lanczos recurrence generates a
sequence of orthonormal states $ \{ | \psi_n \rangle \}^{\infty}_{n=1} $ and
Lanczos coefficients $ \{ \alpha_n(N) \}^{\infty}_{n=0} $ and
$ \{ \beta_n(N) \}^{\infty}_{n=1} $, thus
\begin{equation}
  \hat{H} |\psi_n \rangle =
  \beta_n |\psi_{n-1} \rangle + \alpha_n |\psi_n \rangle
 + \beta_{n+1} |\psi_{n+1} \rangle \ ,
\label{lanczos-recur}
\end{equation}
with the Lanczos coefficients being defined
\begin{equation}
 \begin{split}
 \alpha_{n}
  & = \langle \psi_{n}| \hat{H} |\psi_{n}\rangle \ , \\
 \beta_{n}
  & = \langle \psi_{n-1}| \hat{H} |\psi_{n}\rangle \ . \\
\end{split}
\label{lanczos-coeff}
\end{equation}
We distinguish a total or extensive operator or variable such as $ H $
from its density or intensive counterpart by $ \hat{H} $.
In this basis the transformed Hamiltonian takes the following tridiagonal form
\begin{equation}
  T_{n} =
  \left(
   \begin{array}{cccccc}
    \alpha_0 & \beta_1  &         &             &              &          \\
    \beta_1  & \alpha_1 & \beta_2 &             &              &          \\
             &          & \ddots  &             &              &          \\
             &          &         & \beta_{n-1} & \alpha_{n-1} & \beta_n  \\
             &          &         &             & \beta_n      & \alpha_n
   \end{array}
  \right) \ .
\label{tridiag}
\end{equation}
As such the Lanczos process is one of the Krylov subspace
methods\cite{eigen-S}, in that at a finite step $ n $, the eigenvectors
belong to the Krylov Subspace
$ {\rm Span}\{ |\psi_0 \rangle, \hat{H} |\psi_0 \rangle,
           \hat{H}^2 |\psi_0 \rangle, \ldots \hat{H}^n |\psi_0 \rangle \} $.

In the Many-Body context one would iterate the Lanczos Process until
termination whereupon the Hilbert space is exhausted (at this point one of the
$ \beta_{n_T} = 0 $, where $ n_T $ is the dimension of
the Hilbert space in the sector defined by the ground state), or until the
process has converged according to some arbitrary criteria $ n \to n_C $.
Then one would perform the thermodynamic limit $ N \to \infty $
where it should be understood that the above conclusion of the Lanczos
process is also dependent on the system size, that is to say $ n_T(N), n_C(N) $.
These cutoffs are monotonically increasing functions of the system size so they
will all tend to $ \infty $ in the thermodynamic limit as well.
Taking the limits in the reverse order clearly leads to nonsensical results,
as taking $ N \to \infty $ with $ n $ fixed produces $ \alpha_n \to c_1 $ and
$ \beta_n \to 0 $. The great virtue of the Lanczos process is that it can be
shown to converge essentially exponentially fast with respect to iteration
number, using the Kaniel-Paige-Saad exact bounds\cite{leb-K,leb-P,leb-S} for
the rate of convergence. This means that convergence occurs within a very small
subspace of the total Hilbert space, so that $ n_C << n_T $.

The Lanczos process is entirely equivalent to the 3-term recurrence for an
Orthogonal Polynomial System\cite{ops-S,ops-C,ops-F}, however we consider a
slight generalisation of the preceding process to one with a single parameter
evolution (a "time" $ t $). In this construction we are continuing a
development begun by Lindsay\cite{mm-L89a} and Chen and
Ismail\cite{matrix-CI-97}, which will lead to some powerful tools in treating
the Lanczos process. The measure, or that component which is absolutely
continuous, is defined by the weight function
\begin{equation}
   w(\epsilon,t) = e^{-u(\epsilon)+tN\epsilon} \ ,
\label{t-weight}
\end{equation}
on the real line $ \epsilon \in {\mathbb R} $. Our system under study is
described by the initial value of the system at $ t = 0 $ and often we will
suppress this argument for the sake of simplicity. This measure defines a
system of monic Orthogonal Polynomials $ \{P_n(\epsilon,t) \}^{\infty}_{n=0} $
with an orthogonality relation
\begin{equation}
 \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty} d\epsilon\; w(\epsilon,t)
      P_m(\epsilon,t) P_n(\epsilon,t) = h_n(t) \delta_{mn} \ ,
\label{orthog}
\end{equation}
and normalisation $ h_{n}(t) $. This is equivalent to the following three-term
recurrence relation
\begin{equation}
   P_{n+1}(\epsilon,t) = (\epsilon-\alpha_n(t)) P_{n}(\epsilon,t)
                               - \beta^2_n(t) P_{n-1}(\epsilon,t) \ ,
\label{ops-recur}
\end{equation}
with the recursion coefficients $ \alpha_{n}(t) $ real for $ n \geq 0 $ and
$ \beta^2_{n}(t) $ real and positive for $ n > 0 $. By convention we take
$ \beta^2_{0} = 1 $. It can be readily shown that the Lanczos coefficients are
given in terms of the normalisation thus
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
   \alpha_{n}(t) & = {1\over Nh_{n}(t)}{d \over dt}h_{n}(t)  \ ,
   \\
   \beta^2_{n}(t) & = {h_{n}(t) \over h_{n-1}(t)} \ .
\end{split}
\label{ops-coeff}
\end{equation}
The direct connection between the Lanczos Process and the OPS are given by the
determinant relation of the characteristic polynomial
\begin{equation}
   P_{n+1}(\epsilon) = (-)^{n+1}|T_{n}-\epsilon I_{n+1}| \ ,
\label{tridiag-eigen}
\end{equation}
so that the zeros of the Orthogonal Polynomial are eigenvalues of Hamiltonian.

Some comments are in order regarding the differences, or more accurately
the special character, of these Orthogonal Polynomials with respect to
the generic OPS or with some of the scaling versions of OPS\cite{ops-vA-90}.
These OPS have been termed Many-Body OPS, but could be equally described as
extensive OPS. They all have an additional, essential parameter to the
generic OPS, the system size $ N $, which appears in both the gross scaling
factors (the `external' scaling such as in the energy densities $ \epsilon $
defined by $ E = N\epsilon $), but also internally in the 3-term recurrence
coefficients, in the Polynomials themselves and in other derived quantities.
The internal dependence in the Lanczos coefficients on the system size is not
at all apparent and the most transparent way that extensive scaling properties
can be exhibited is through the Cumulant Generating Function, (CGF), which
hitherto has played no role in Orthogonal Polynomial Theory. In fact the CGF
is central to this class of OPS rather than the moments, and is in a practical
sense the starting point in any application of the Formalism to physical Models.
For all models it is clear that the ground state energy $ E_0 $ is proportional
to $ N $ and unbounded in the thermodynamic limit, and similarly the total
Lanczos coefficients (as opposed to the densities) are unbounded as
$ n \to \infty $ for fixed $ N $. When everything is recast in terms of
densities the spectrum is bounded below by $ \epsilon_0 $ and in many models
will also be bounded above, and similarly the density Lanczos coefficients are
bounded.  Another difference that Many-Body OPS exhibit in comparison to
general OPS is, as we have noted above, the three-term recurrence will
terminate exactly at $ n = n_{T} $, although this will never present any
problems as this is exponentially large.

The Lanczos process is intimately connected with the Hamburger moment
problem\cite{moment-ST,moment-A}, via the Resolvent operator
\begin{equation}
     R(\epsilon) = \langle {1 \over \epsilon-\hat{H}} \rangle
     \qquad \epsilon \notin {\rm Supp}[d\rho] \ .
\label{resolvent-defn}
\end{equation}
Its formal Laurent series establishes a direct link with Hamiltonian moments
\begin{equation}
     R(\epsilon) = \sum^{\infty}_{i=0} {\mu_{i} \over \epsilon^{i+1}} \ ,
\label{resolvent-moment}
\end{equation}
where these moments are defined as expectation values with respect to the trial
state referred to above
\begin{equation}
        \mu_n \equiv \langle \hat{H}^n \rangle\ , \qquad \mu_0 = 1 \ .
\label{H-moment}
\end{equation}
The resolvent has a real Jacobi-fraction continued fraction
representation\cite{cf-JT,cf-LW}
\begin{equation}
  R(\epsilon) =
  - {\Large\mathbf{K}}^{\infty}_{n=0}
              -\left({ \beta^2_n \over \epsilon-\alpha_n }\right) \ ,
 \label{resolvent-J-cf}
\end{equation}
with elements coming from the Lanczos coefficients.

An equivalent description to that of the Hamiltonian moments is to formulate
everything in terms of cumulants or connected moments\cite{moment-K,cumulant-K}
$ \{ \nu_n \}^{\infty}_{n=1} $, and to ignore all corrections which vanish in
the thermodynamic limit $ N \to \infty $. Cumulants scale directly with the
size of the system so that for the extensive Many-Body Problem we have
\begin{equation}
  \nu_n = c_n N + {\rm o}(1)
\label{cum-GS}
\end{equation}
in the ground state sector, or
\begin{equation}
  \nu_n = c_n N + m_n + {\rm o}(1)
\label{cum-ES}
\end{equation}
in any other sector\cite{pexp-tgap-HWW}. This also means that no finite-size
scaling can be performed given that only the limiting quantities are retained
here and boundary condition effects do not appear. The foundation ingredient
is the Moment Generating Function which is related to the Cumulant Generating
Function in the following way.
\begin{definition}
The Moment Generating Function (MGF) $ M(t) $ and the Cumulant Generating
Functions (CGF) $ F(t) $ are defined by,
\begin{equation}
    M(t) \equiv \langle e^{tH} \rangle
         = \sum^{\infty}_{n=0} \mu_{n} {t^n \over n!}
         = \exp\left( \sum^{\infty}_{n=1} \nu_{n} {t^n \over n!} \right)
         \equiv \exp(NF(t)) \ .
\label{gen-funs}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
Some examples of Cumulant Generating Functions include the isotropic XY
model using the z-polarised N\'eel state as the trial state\cite{texp-W-97}
\begin{equation}
  F(t) = {1 \over \pi}
           \int^{\pi/2}_{0}\, dq \log\cosh(t\cos q) \ ,
\label{xy-cgf}
\end{equation}
and the Ising model in a transverse field using the disordered state as the
trial state, and coupling constant $ x $\cite{alm-itf-W-98}
\begin{equation}
  F(t) =
    {1 \over 2\pi} \int^{\pi}_{0} dq\,
         \ln \left[ \cosh(2t\epsilon_{q})
                  - {(\cos q\!+\!x) \over \epsilon_{q}}\sinh(2t\epsilon_{q})
            \right] \ ,
\label{itf-cgf}
\end{equation}
where the quasiparticle energies $ \epsilon_{k} $ are defined by
$ \epsilon^2_{q} = 1+x^2+2x\cos q $.

\begin{definition}
The Determinants of the Moment Matrices $ \Delta_{n}(t) $ for $ n \geq 0 $
are defined by the Hankel form -
\begin{equation}
   \Delta_n(t)
   = |M^{(i+j-2)}(t)|^{n+1}_{i,j=1} \ .
\label{hankel-tD}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
The direct relationship from moments to the Lanczos coefficients which is
established in this way is via the construction of a sequence of Hankel
determinants of the Moment Matrices and their Selberg-type integral
representation\cite{ops-S}
\begin{equation}
   \Delta_n(t)
   = {1\over (n\!+\!1)!} \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}
        \prod^{n+1}_{k=1} d\epsilon_k\; w(\epsilon_k,t)
        \prod_{1\leq i<j \leq n+1} |\epsilon_i-\epsilon_j|^2
             \ .
\label{hankel-tS}
\end{equation}
These determinants are related to the normalisations via
\begin{equation}
   \Delta_n(t) = \prod_{j \leq n} h_j(t) \ .
\label{hankel-norm}
\end{equation}
\begin{definition}
Our final definition, that of the Lanczos $ L $-function, is
\begin{equation}
   N^2 L_{n}(t) =
   { \Delta_{n}(t) \Delta_{n-2}(t)
                   \over \Delta^2_{n-1}(t) } \ ,
\label{l-function}
\end{equation}
for $ n \geq 1 $ and $ L_{0}(t) = M(t) $.
\end{definition}
The converse result is then
\begin{equation}
    \Delta_{n}(t) = N^{n(n+1)} \prod^{n}_{k=0} L^{n+1-k}_{k}(t) \ ,
\label{D-function}
\end{equation}
for $ n \geq 1 $. From these the Lanczos coefficients are given simply by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
   \alpha_n(t)  & =
   {1\over N} \sum^{n}_{j=0}
           { L'_{j}(t) \over L_{j}(t) } \ ,
             \\
   \beta^2_n(t)  & = L_{n}(t)
             \ .
\end{split}
\label{coeff-l-function}
\end{equation}

\begin{theorem}
The equation of motion for the Lanczos $ L $-functions is
\begin{equation}
   L_{n}(t) = {1\over N}
   \sum^{n}_{j=1} {j \over N} D_{t}^2 \log L_{n-j}(t) \ .
\label{l-function-recur}
\end{equation}
with the initial condition on the recurrence given by $ \log L_{0}(t) = NF(t) $
for all $ t $.
\end{theorem}
The advantage of introducing evolution into the Lanczos Process is that
Sylvester's Theorem applied to the Hankel
determinants\cite{positive-K},
\begin{equation}
   \Delta_{n+1}(t) \Delta_{n-1}(t) =
   \Delta_{n}(t) \Delta''_{n}(t) - \left( \Delta'_{n}(t) \right)^2 \,
\label{sylvester}
\end{equation}
so that the theorem follows directly from this.$ \square $

The first few members of the Lanczos $ L $-sequence are
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
  L_{1}(t)
  & = {1\over N} F''(t) \ ,
  \\
  L_{2}(t)
  & = {2\over N} F''(t) +
      {1\over N^2}{ F^{(2)}F^{(4)}-(F^{(3)})^2 \over (F^{(2)})^2 }
  \ .
\end{split}
\label{l-function-first}
\end{equation}

The consequence of Sylvester's theorem for the evolution of the $ \Delta_{n} $
is the following theorem
\begin{theorem}
The $ \Delta_{n}(t) $ obey the following differential-difference equation
\begin{equation}
  \exp\left\{ \log\Delta_{n+1} + \log\Delta_{n-1} - 2 \log\Delta_{n}
      \right\}
  = D^2_{t} \log\Delta_{n} \ ,
\label{D-function-eqn}
\end{equation}
with the boundary value $ \log\Delta_{0} = NF(t) $ and conventionally
$ \Delta_{-1} = 1 $.
\end{theorem}
This follows directly from Sylvester's Identity.$ \square $

This evolution equation is just the finite Toda Lattice equation of
motion\cite{ops-T}, and this point has been previously noted in
Ref.~\cite{matrix-CI-97}.

\vfill\eject

\stepcounter{section}
\section*{\Roman{section}. Scaling in the Thermodynamic Limit}

As was discussed earlier there are two limiting processes that one must
consider when the thermodynamic limit is taken in the Lanczos Algorithm, both
$ n, N \to \infty $, and the issue then is what mutual relationship exists
between them in the limit. One can view this limiting process in the $ 1/n $
vs. $ 1/N $ plane and then consider along what types of paths must one approach
the origin. We shall find that the general relationship is $ n, N \to \infty $
with $ s \equiv n/N $ fixed, although for systems at criticality it seems
inevitable that $ s $ will become unbounded in the analysis.
A consequence of these ideas is the confluence property of the Lanczos
coefficients as $ n,N \to \infty $ at fixed $ s=n/N $
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
   \alpha_n(N)  & = \alpha(s) + {\rm O}(1/N) \ , \\
   \beta^2_n(N) & = \beta^2(s) + {\rm O}(1/N) \ . \\
\end{split}
\label{lanczos-confl}
\end{equation}
There are a number of ways to see this approach to the thermodynamic limit.

Using the explicit forms connecting cumulants and moments, and a direct
evaluation of the Hankel determinants one can prove\cite{pexp-proof-WH} for
general $ n $ and $ N $ that the Lanczos coefficients have a leading order
scaling in $ s=n/N $ for the first two orders of an expansion in large $ N $.
Actually this expansion is valid for all $ n $ not just for large values and
thus includes all the subdominant contributions. Thus
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
   \alpha_{n} =
 & c_1 N  + n \left[ {c_{3}\over c_{2}} \right]
 \\
 & \qquad + {1\over 2}n(n-1)
    \left[ {3 c_3^3\!-\!4 c_2 c_3 c_4\!+\!c_2^2 c_5 \over 2 c_2^4} \right]
               {1\over N}
 \\
 & \qquad\qquad + \dots \ ,
\end{split}
\label{alpha-exp}
\end{equation}
for $ n \ge 0 $, and
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
   \beta_{n}^{2}
 & = n c_{2} N
          + {1\over 2}n(n-1)
          \left[ {c_{2}c_{4}\!-\!c_{3}^{2}\over c_{2}^{2}} \right]
 \\
 & \quad + {1\over 6}n(n-1)(n-2)
     \left[ {-12 c_{3}^4\!+\!21 c_{2} c_{3}^2 c_{4}
              \!-\!4 c_{2}^2 c_{4}^2\!-\!6 c_{2}^2 c_{3} c_{5}
                \!+\!c_{2}^3 c_{6}
                             \over 2 c_{2}^5} \right] {1\over N}
 \\
 & \qquad  + \dots \ ,
\end{split}
\label{beta-exp}
\end{equation}
for $ n \ge 1 $.
However this approach cannot be generalised to higher orders and therefore for
the full exact Lanczos coefficients. The first two terms in the above
expansions were also proven by Lindsay using the Sylvester Identity in the
statistical context\cite{mm-L89a} but no further, while this form for the
higher terms (but finite numbers) was conjectured in Reference\cite{pexp-1st-H}.
We shall find that use of the Sylvester Identity allows one to very easily
recover this result, to in fact go to much higher orders in constructing
explicit forms and to prove this type of scaling in a completely general way.

\begin{lemma}
The Lanczos $ L $-function $ L_{n}(t,N) $ is a rational function of $ 1/N $
for fixed $ n $, and all $ t $.
\end{lemma}
The Difference-Differential Eq.~(\ref{l-function-recur}) is of finite order in
$ j/N $ and $ t $, so the result follows.$ \square $

Also for fixed $ n $ we have
\begin{equation}
  \lim_{N \to \infty} L_{n}(t,N) = 0 \ ,
\label{l-function-limit}
\end{equation}
and specifically the leading order term is $ {\rm O}(N^{-1}) $ which arises
from the $ j = n $ term in the sum. Therefore we can expand this function in a
descending series in $ N^{-1} $, thus
\begin{equation}
   L_{n}(t,N) = \sum_{p \geq 1}
     { l_{np}(t) \over N^{p} } \ ,
\label{l-function-exp}
\end{equation}
and defining the connected series related by
\begin{equation}
    \sum_{p \geq 1} { m_{np}(t) \over N^{p} }
  \equiv \log\left( 1+\sum_{p \geq 1} { l_{np+1}/l_{n1} \over N^{p} }
        \right) \ .
\label{l-function-coeff-1}
\end{equation}
This last relation can be rendered into an explicit form
\begin{equation}
  m_{np} = - \sum_{\sum_{i} q_{i}r_{i} = p} (\sum_{i} q_{i}\!-\!1)!
         \prod_{i} {1\over q_{i}!}
         \left({-l_{nr_{i}+1} \over l_{n1}} \right)^{q_{i}} \ .
\label{l-function-coeff-2}
\end{equation}
It is actually necessary to perform an expansion of this type because it
combines the iteration number ($ n $) dependence of the numerator and
denominator which are both essential in the following results.

Then one can establish a hierarchy of equations for these coefficients
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
  l_{n1}(t)
  & = n F''(t) \ ,
  \\
  l_{n2}(t)
  & = \sum^{n-1}_{j=1} j D^2_{t} \log l_{n-j1}(t) \ ,
  \\
  l_{np}(t)
  & = \sum^{n-1}_{j=1} j m''_{n-jp-2}(t)
  \qquad \text{for } p \geq 3 \ ,
\end{split}
\label{l-function-exp-recur}
\end{equation}
for $ n \geq 1 $ whilst for $ n=0 $ we have $ l_{np}(t) = 0 $ as
$ L_{0}(t,N) = \exp( NF(t) ) $. The first members of this hierarchy can be
easily solved for yielding
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
  l_{n1}(t)
  & = n F''(t) \ ,
  \\
  l_{n2}(t)
  & = \frac{1}{2} n(n-1) { F^{(2)}F^{(4)} - (F^{(3)})^2 \over (F^{(2)})^2 } \ ,
  \\
  l_{n3}(t)
  & = \frac{1}{12} n(n-1)(n-2)
      \left( { F^{(2)}F^{(4)} - (F^{(3)})^2 \over (F^{(2)})^3 }
      \right)^{(2)} \ ,
\end{split}
\label{l-function-exp-first}
\end{equation}
and from these it is easy to establish the leading order terms already found
in Eq.~(\ref{alpha-exp},\ref{beta-exp}).

\begin{lemma}
The hierarchy coefficients $ l_{np}(t), m_{np}(t) $ are polynomials in $ n $.
\end{lemma}
These coefficients are constructed from a finite difference equation in $ n $.
$ \square $

\begin{theorem}
The hierarchy coefficients $ l_{np}(t), m_{np}(t) $ are polynomials of degree
$ p $ in $ n $.
\end{theorem}
This is proved by induction on $ p $ using the hierarchy equations. If we take
$ l_{jq}(t) $ to be of degree $ q \leq p-2 $ in $ n $ then similarly for
$ m_{jq}(t) $ and $ m''_{jq}(t) $. Now for any polynomial $ P(n) $ of degree
$ p-2 $ in its argument then
\begin{equation}
   \sum^{n-1}_{j=1} j P(n\!-\!j) \ ,
\label{induction}
\end{equation}
is a $ p $th degree polynomial. Thus the recurrence,
Eq.~(\ref{l-function-exp-recur}), establishes that $ l_{n+1p} $ is also a
$ p $th degree polynomial.$ \square $

From this result it is clear that the limiting forms of the Lanczos coefficients
$ \alpha_{n}(N), \beta^2_{n}(N) $ exist when $ n, N \to \infty $ with $ n/N $
fixed. If the ratio is not kept constant in this limiting operation, say with
$ n = {\rm o}(N) $ then the Lanczos coefficients will vanish in the limit,
while if the reverse is true $ N = {\rm o}(n) $ then there will be divergent
terms in the limit.

Given that the scaling Lanczos coefficients have been established then all the
exact theorems for the ground state
properties\cite{pexp-exactgse-HW,pexp-2dhm-WHW} that were predicated on this
result now are established. The first example of these theorems was the one for
the ground state Energy Density,
\begin{equation}
  \epsilon_0 = \inf_{s \in {\mathbb R^+}}[\alpha(s)-2\beta(s)] \ ,
\label{GSE-bot}
\end{equation}
which also has an analogue for the top of the spectrum, if this exists
\begin{equation}
  \epsilon_{\infty} = \sup_{s \in {\mathbb R^+}}[\alpha(s)+2\beta(s)] \ .
\label{GSE-top}
\end{equation}
For many models these Lanczos Functions will be bounded on the positive real
axis, and have limits as $ s \to \infty $ on the real line. So there is a
superficial similarity to classes of Orthogonal Polynomials whose 3-term
recurrence coefficients have limiting values, such as the S-class, the M-class,
or the $ M(a,b) $ classes\cite{ops-vA-90}.

\vfill\eject

\stepcounter{section}
\section*{\Roman{section}. The extensive Measure}

It is necessary to determine the OPS measure, its weight function
$ w(\epsilon) $, and this is not generally known at the outset, but rather the
Cumulant Generating Function is. In fact it seems to be the case that the
measures are not exactly expressible in simple terms, but the CGF or
characteristic functions are. There is of course a direct route from a model
system and a trial state to the Lanczos coefficients, but from many points of
view including practical considerations the route beginning with a cumulant
description is more useful.

\begin{theorem}
Given that the cumulant generating function $ F(-t) $ is analytic for
$ \Re(t) > 0 $ and in the neighbourhood of the origin $ t = 0 $ the OPS weight
function $ w(\epsilon) $ has the following asymptotic development in the
thermodynamic limit $ N \to \infty $,
\begin{equation}
  w(\epsilon) =
  \sqrt{ N \over 2\pi F^{(2)}(\xi)}
   e^{N\left[ -\epsilon\xi + F(\xi) \right]}
    + {\rm O}(N^{-1/2}) \ ,
\label{weight-tl}
\end{equation}
where the function $ \xi(\epsilon) $ is defined implicitly by
\begin{equation}
   \epsilon = F'(\xi) \ .
\label{stationary}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
Starting with the definition of the cumulant generating function $ F(t) $
\begin{equation}
   \langle e^{tH} \rangle \equiv \exp\{NF(t)\}
   = \exp\left\{ N\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} {c_n \over n!} t^n \right\} \ .
\label{cgf}
\end{equation}
We assume here that this infinite series is not just formal but actually exists,
that is it has a finite radius of convergence in addition to its analytic
character for $ \Re(t) < 0 $. However the Moment Generating Function is simply
the analytic continuation of the characteristic function and this continuation
is possible given its analyticity, so that a Fourier inversion of this will
yield the weight function,
\begin{equation}
 \begin{split}
  w(\epsilon)
  & = {N \over 2\pi} \int^{i\gamma+\infty}_{i\gamma-\infty}
   dt\; e^{N[ -it\epsilon + F(it) ]} \ ,
  \\
  & = {N \over 2\pi i} \int^{\gamma+i\infty}_{\gamma-i\infty}
   dt\; e^{N[ t\epsilon + F(-t) ]} \qquad \Re(\gamma) > 0 \quad \ .
 \end{split}
\label{fi-character-fn}
\end{equation}
One does not require the exact inversion but only the leading order in $ N $
in a steepest descent approximation. In an asymptotic analysis the relevant
function is
\begin{equation}
   g(t) = t\epsilon + F(-t) \ ,
\label{exponent}
\end{equation}
which is analytic for all $ \Re(t) > 0 $. We will assume the existence of a
stationary point which occurs at $ t_0 $
\begin{equation}
  \epsilon = F'(-t_0) \ ,
\label{stationary-t}
\end{equation}
and is assumed to be unique. This point is evidently real because the energy
density is real and the CGF is a real function of a real argument (here we
define $ \xi = -t_0 $ for convenience). One requires the inversion of this
relation for $ \xi(\epsilon) $ and this is guaranteed by the Implicit Function
Theorem because $ F^{(2)}(\xi) > 0 $. This latter condition also implies that
the saddle point is of order unity. Indeed one clearly has the case of
$ F^{(2)}(t) > 0 $ for real values of $ t $ in the neighbourhood of the saddle
point and $ F^{(2)}(t) < 0 $ for imaginary values of $ t $ in the same
neighbourhood. Thus the path of steepest descent through the saddle point is
parallel to the imaginary axis.  One can then apply the standard saddle point
analysis, see Wong\cite{asymptotic-W} Section II.4, to arrive at the stated
result. $ \square $

The corresponding example of the saddle point equation for the isotropic XY
model is
\begin{equation}
  \epsilon = {1\over \pi} \int^{\pi/2}_0 dq\, \cos q \tanh(\xi\cos q) \ ,
\label{xy-saddle}
\end{equation}
and that for the Ising model in a transverse field is
\begin{equation}
   \epsilon = {1 \over \pi}
   \int^{\pi}_{0}dq\, \epsilon_{q}
   { {\displaystyle x\!+\!\cos q \over \displaystyle \epsilon_{q}}
     + \tanh(2\xi\epsilon_{q})
     \over
     1 + {\displaystyle x\!+\!\cos q \over \displaystyle \epsilon_{q}}
         \tanh(2\xi\epsilon_{q}) } \ .
\label{itf-saddle}
\end{equation}

The first of the more obvious properties concerns the convexity of the measure
arising in the thermodynamic limit,
\begin{theorem}
The leading order of the negative logarithm of the weight function
$ u(\epsilon) $ is convex for all real energies $ \epsilon $.
\end{theorem}
This follows from the relationship of $ u(\epsilon) $ to the stationary point
\begin{equation}
   {d \over d\epsilon} u(\epsilon) = N \xi(\epsilon) \ ,
\label{deriv-u}
\end{equation}
and the definition
\begin{equation}
  \epsilon = F'(\xi) \ .
\label{stationary-2}
\end{equation}
Now it can be easily seen that $ F''(t) > 0 $  for $ t $ real and the Hermitian
Hamiltonian using the definition of $ F(t) $ in terms of the expectation value
$ NF(t) = \ln \langle \exp(tH) \rangle $.$ \square $

Some detailed, yet general information, concerning the extensive measure in the
neighbourhood of the ground state is available. This arises from consideration
of the overlap of the trial state with the true ground
state\cite{cmx-overlap-C}, and its relation to the Horn-Weinstein function
$ E(t) \equiv F'(-t) $ via
\begin{equation}
  \left| \langle \Psi_{GS} | \psi_{0} \rangle \right|^{2}
  = \exp\left\{ -N \int^{\infty}_{0} dt\;
                 [ E(t)-E(\infty) ] \right\} \ .
\label{overlap}
\end{equation}
In general the limit $ E(t) $ as $ t \to \infty $ will exist, and is the ground
state energy, and so the asymptotic properties of $ E(t) $ for $ \Re(t) > 0 $
as this tends to infinity is a means of classifying systems. This equivalent to
the asymptotic properties of $ \epsilon(\xi) - \epsilon(-\infty) $ as
$ \xi \to -\infty $ (we denote the Ground State Energy by $ \epsilon_0 $,
which is also the same as $ \epsilon(-\infty) $). In general the overlap is
non-zero, so that $ E(t)-E(\infty) \in L^{1}[0,\infty) $ but it is possible at
isolated points that this is not true (critical points in the model for example)
and the overlap may vanish. For example the overlap squared in the case of the
isotropic XY model is $ 2^{-N/2} $ and that for the Ising model in a transverse
field is
\begin{equation}
 \exp\left\{ {N \over 2\pi} \int^{\pi}_{0} dq\,
     \ln \left({ \epsilon_{q}\!+\!x\!+\!\cos q \over 2\epsilon_{q} }
         \right) \right\} \ .
\label{itf-overlap}
\end{equation}
Where the overlap is non-zero then several possibilities for the asymptotic
behaviour exist, which do actually arise in the exact solutions of the example
models -
\begin{itemize}

\item\underline{gapless case}, isotropic XY and critical Ising Model in a
  transverse Field, Ref.\cite{alm-xy-W,alm-itf-W-98}:\\
  At a critical point, the first excited state gap vanishes and
  \begin{equation}
     \epsilon - \epsilon_0 \sim A |\xi|^{-\gamma} \ ,
  \label{gapless-HW}
  \end{equation}
  as $ \xi \to -\infty $ and if the overlap is finite then
  $ \Re(\gamma) > 1 $. Therefore the weight function at the
  bottom of the spectrum takes the following form
  \begin{equation}
     w(\epsilon) \sim
     (\epsilon-\epsilon_{0})^{-{1+\gamma \over 2\gamma}}
     \exp\left\{ N {b \over 1\!-\!1/\gamma}
                   (\epsilon-\epsilon_{0})^{1-1/\gamma}
         \right\} \ ,
  \label{gapless-wgt}
  \end{equation}
  This measure is integrable on $ (\epsilon_0,\epsilon_{\infty}) $
  because of the above condition $ \Re(\gamma) > 1 $ and has a branch point
  at the ground state energy $ \epsilon_{0} $.

\item\underline{gapped case 1}, Ising Model in a transverse Field, in the
  ordered phase with the disordered trial state, Ref.\cite{alm-itf-W-98}:\\
  if the gap is finite then one possibility is that
  \begin{equation}
     \epsilon - \epsilon_0 \sim A e^{-\Delta |\xi|} \ ,
  \label{gap1-HW}
  \end{equation}
  as $ \xi \to -\infty $ and where the excited state gap $ \Delta > 0 $.
  One can show that the weight function near the bottom edge of the spectrum
  is analytic having the form
  \begin{equation}
     w(\epsilon) \sim
     { 1 \over
       \Gamma(N {[\epsilon-\epsilon_{0}] \over \Delta}\!+\!1) } \ .
  \label{gap1-wgt}
  \end{equation}

\item\underline{gapped case 2}, Ising Model in a transverse Field, in the
  disordered phase with the disordered trial state, Ref.\cite{alm-itf-W-98}:\\
  and yet another type of gap behaviour exists
  \begin{equation}
     \epsilon - \epsilon_0 \sim A |\xi|^{-\gamma} e^{-\Delta |\xi|} \ ,
  \label{gap2-HW}
  \end{equation}
  The leading order behaviour of the weight function in this case is
  \begin{equation}
     w(\epsilon) \sim
     (\epsilon-\epsilon_{0})^{-1/2-N(\epsilon-\epsilon_{0})}
     \left[ -\log(\epsilon-\epsilon_{0})
     \right]^{-N\gamma(\epsilon-\epsilon_{0})} \ ,
  \label{gap2-wgt}
  \end{equation}
  which again has a branch point at the bottom edge of the spectrum.

\end{itemize}

So generally we find the support of the measure is bounded which excludes
a number of weight function types such as the Freud or Erd\"os weights, but
that the weight functions belong to the Szeg\"o class on
$ [\epsilon_0,\epsilon_{\infty}] $,
\begin{equation}
  \int^{\epsilon_{\infty}}_{\epsilon_0} d\epsilon\;
  { \log w(\epsilon) \over
    \sqrt{[\epsilon_{\infty}-\epsilon][\epsilon-\epsilon_0]} }
  > -\infty \ .
\label{szego}
\end{equation}

\vfill\eject

\stepcounter{section}
\section*{\Roman{section}. Exactly Solvable Lanczos Process}

In this section we derive how the exact Lanczos functions $ \alpha(s) $ and
$ \beta^2(s) $ can be constructed directly from the knowledge of the connected
Moments or Cumulants, or more specifically from the Cumulant Generating
Function.  This is the initial data that one uses in any analysis of quantum
Many-Body Systems with this approach, and for soluble models the full Generating
Function may be available. However if this is not the case then one would use a
set of low order Cumulants, up to a given order.

As a first step we recast the Hankel determinants into Selberg Integral form,
from the classical result\cite{ops-S}
\begin{equation}
    \Delta_n(t)
    = {1\over (n\!+\!1)!} \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}
        \prod^{n+1}_{k=1} d\rho(\epsilon_k) \;
          e^{Nt\sum^{n+1}_{k=1} \epsilon_{k}}
            \prod_{1\leq i<j \leq n+1} |\epsilon_i-\epsilon_j|^2
  \ .
\label{hankel-2}
\end{equation}

For the steps leading to the two conditions which will define the Lanczos
functions we follow Chen and Ismail\cite{matrix-CI-97}. A similar approach, but
just confined to the evaluation the Hankel determinants, was taken in References
\cite{ops-BIPZ-78,ops-BBM-92}. The Hankel determinant can be recast into
the form of a partition function, which is,
\begin{equation}
  \Delta_n(t) = {1 \over (n\!+\!1)!}
            \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty} \prod^{n+1}_{i} d\epsilon_i\;
    \exp\left\{ -\sum^{n+1}_{i} u(\epsilon_i)
                +Nt\sum^{n+1}_{i} \epsilon_i
                +2\sum^{n+1}_{i<j} \ln |\epsilon_{i}-\epsilon_{j}|
        \right\} \ .
\label{hankel-pf}
\end{equation}
One should observe that both $ \sum^{n+1}_{i} u(\epsilon_i) $ and
$ Nt\sum^{n+1}_{i} \epsilon_i $ are of order $ (n\!+\!1)N $ whilst the remaining
term in the argument $ \sum^{n+1}_{i<j} \ln |\epsilon_{i}-\epsilon_{j}| $ is
of order $ (n\!+\!1)^2 $, so that the only relative scaling that remains
nontrivial is one in which $ n/N $ is fixed. The alternatives would lead to
completely trivial consequences. The leading order term for this Hankel
determinant as $ n, N \to \infty $ is given by a steepest descent approximation
(see Ref.~\cite{asymptotic-W} section IX.5)
\begin{equation}
   \Delta_{n}(t) =
   {(2\pi)^{n+1} \over (n\!+\!1)!} \left|
   {\partial^2 f \over \partial\epsilon^{0}_{i}\partial\epsilon^{0}_{j}}
                                  \right|^{-1/2}
   e^{-f(\epsilon^{0})}\left[1 + {\rm O}(1/n,1/N)\right] \ ,
\label{hankel-steep}
\end{equation}
where the function $ f(\epsilon) $ is defined as
\begin{equation}
   f(\epsilon) = \sum^{n+1}_{i} u(\epsilon_i)
                -Nt\sum^{n+1}_{i} \epsilon_i
                -2\sum^{n+1}_{i<j} \ln |\epsilon_{i}-\epsilon_{j}| \ ,
\label{saddle-fn}
\end{equation}
and the saddle points $ \{\epsilon^{0}_{i}\}^{n+1}_{i=1} $ are given by
\begin{equation}
   u'(\epsilon^{0}_{i}) = Nt + 2 \sum^{n+1}_{i \neq j}
   {1 \over \epsilon^{0}_{i}-\epsilon^{0}_{j}} \ .
\end{equation}
\label{saddle-pt}
One can easily show that the Hessian in Eq.~(\ref{hankel-steep}) is positive
definite given that $ u(\epsilon) $ is convex. One can carry the continuum
limit further by describing the saddle points as a charged fluid whose dynamics
are governed by an Energy Functional $ F[\sigma] $
\begin{equation}
  \exp\left( -f(\epsilon^{0}) \right)
  \xrightarrow[n,N \to \infty]{} \exp\left( -F[\sigma_0] \right) \ ,
\label{hankel-fluid}
\end{equation}
with a charge density $ \sigma(\epsilon) $ defined on an interval of
integration which is to be determined, $ I = (\epsilon_{-},\epsilon_{+}) $. The
energy functional takes the following form
\begin{equation}
   F[\sigma] = \int_{I} d\epsilon \sigma(\epsilon)
           \left[ u(\epsilon) - Nt \epsilon \right]
           - \int_{I} d\epsilon \int_{I} d\epsilon'
     \sigma(\epsilon) \ln |\epsilon-\epsilon'| \sigma(\epsilon') \ ,
\label{fluid-functional}
\end{equation}
where the single particle confining potential is controlled by the OPS measure
and the two-body interaction is a logarithmic type. The result of minimising
this Functional yields the following singular integral equation for the Charge
Density
\begin{equation}
       u'(\epsilon)-Nt = 2\,{\rm PV}\int_{I} d\epsilon'
                { \sigma_{0}(\epsilon') \over \epsilon-\epsilon' } \ .
\label{fluid-singular}
\end{equation}
The solution of this integral equation for the Minimal Charge Density
$ \sigma_{0}(\epsilon) $ can be found exactly and is
\begin{equation}
       \sigma_{0}(\epsilon) =
{ \sqrt{ (\epsilon_{+}-\epsilon)(\epsilon-\epsilon_{-}) } \over
  2\pi^2 } \,{\rm PV}\int_{I} d\epsilon'
{ u'(\epsilon')-Nt \over (\epsilon'-\epsilon)
     \sqrt{ (\epsilon_{+}-\epsilon')(\epsilon'-\epsilon_{-}) } } \ .
\label{fluid-soln}
\end{equation}
There are two conditions arising from this solution -
\begin{itemize}
  \item
   the first is a Supplementary Condition which is necessary for the charge
   density solution to be well defined throughout the interval $ I $
   \begin{equation}
       0 = \int_{I} d\epsilon { u'(\epsilon)-Nt \over
     \sqrt{ (\epsilon_{+}-\epsilon)(\epsilon-\epsilon_{-}) } } \ ,
   \label{suppl-cond}
   \end{equation}
  \item
   and the Normalisation Condition which simply counts the number of Lanczos
   steps
   \begin{equation}
       n = { 1 \over 2\pi } \int_{I} d\epsilon\; \epsilon
   { u'(\epsilon)-Nt \over
     \sqrt{ (\epsilon_{+}-\epsilon)(\epsilon-\epsilon_{-}) } } \ .
   \label{norm-cond}
   \end{equation}
\end{itemize}
Using this solution for the charge density one can substitute this into the
original defining equations for the Hankel determinants (the leading order
approximations) and establish that the Lanczos functions are simply defined by
the interval $ I $ in this way, $ \epsilon_{\pm} = \alpha \pm 2\beta $.

\begin{theorem}
The Lanczos functions are given implicitly by the two integral equations
\begin{equation}
       0 = \int^{\alpha+2\beta}_{\alpha-2\beta}
     d\epsilon { \xi(\epsilon) \over
     \sqrt{ 4\beta^2 - (\epsilon-\alpha)^2 } } \ ,
\label{suppl-lanczos-eqn}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
       s = { 1 \over 2\pi } \int^{\alpha+2\beta}_{\alpha-2\beta}
     d\epsilon { \epsilon \xi(\epsilon) \over
     \sqrt{ 4\beta^2 - (\epsilon-\alpha)^2 } } \ ,
\label{norm-lanczos-eqn}
\end{equation}
where the model dependent equation for the stationary point $ \xi(\epsilon) $
is given by Eq.~(\ref{stationary-2}).
\end{theorem}
This theorem follows from the previous conditions, namely
Eqs.~(\ref{suppl-cond},\ref{norm-cond}), and the result for the logarithmic
derivative of the weight function,
\begin{equation}
  u'(\epsilon) = N \xi(\epsilon) + {\rm O}(\log N) \ .
\label{log-deriv}
\end{equation}
$ \square $

Usually this later equation for the saddle point is also an implicit equation
and invariably a nonlinear one. In our derivation the scaling $ s=n/N $ remains
finite whilst $ n,N \to \infty $ emerges naturally and in fact it is difficult
to see how one could avoid this confluence.

We now give an alternative result for the Lanczos functions which is based on
the time evolution of the Lanczos $ L $-function.
\begin{theorem}
The Lanczos $ L $-function, in the thermodynamic limit is the solution of the
following integro-differential equation
\begin{equation}
   L(s,t) =
   \int^{s}_{0} dr\; r D^2_{t} \log L(s-r,t) + sF^{(2)}(t) \ ,
\label{l-function-tl}
\end{equation}
and the two Lanczos functions are derivable from this via
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
  \alpha(s)
  & = \int^{s}_{0} dr\; D_{t}\log L(r,0) + F'(0) \ ,
  \\
  \beta^2(s)
  & = L(s,0) \ .
\end{split}
\label{coeff-l-function-tl}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
The integro-differential equation is simply derived from the discrete
recurrence, namely Eq.~(\ref{l-function-recur}), after making the observation
that the $ j=n $ term involving $ L_{0}(t) $ has to be separated from the sum
because it encompasses the initial conditions and is itself not generated by
the recurrence.$ \square $

Finally we give a result equivalent to the theorem above, but which involves
only scaled forms of the Hankel determinants $ \Delta_{n}(N,t) $ and is the
differential analogue of the above
Theorem.
\begin{definition}
We make the following definition for $ \delta(n,N,t) $ in terms of the Hankel
Determinant,
\begin{equation}
   \Delta_{n}(N,t) = N^{n(n+1)}
   \left[ \delta(n,N,t) \right]^{N^2} \ ,
\label{d-defn}
\end{equation}
for $ n \geq 1 $ and $ \Delta_{0}(t) = [ \delta(0,t) ]^N $.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}
The function $ \delta(n,N,t) $ is well defined in the scaling limit
$ n, N \to \infty $.
\end{lemma}
This follows naturally from the relation of the $ \Delta_{n}(t) $ and the
Lanczos $ L $-function as given in Eq.~(\ref{D-function}), and the well defined
scaling of this latter function as demonstrated in the Theorem 3 above.
$ \square $

Then we have the following result -
\begin{theorem}
The Lanczos $ \delta(s,t) $-function satisfies the following partial
differential equation in the thermodynamic limit
\begin{equation}
   \exp\left\{ D^2_{s} \log\delta(s,t) \right\}
  = D^2_{t} \log\delta(s,t) \ ,
\label{d-pde}
\end{equation}
with the boundary condition
\begin{equation}
   \lim_{s \to 0^+} { \log\delta(s,t) \over s }
   = F(t) \qquad \forall\; t \in {\mathbb R^+} \ ,
\label{d-bc}
\end{equation}
The Lanczos functions are given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
  \alpha(s)  & = \left. D_{t}D_{s} \log\delta(s,t) \right|_{t=0} \ ,
  \\
  \beta^2(s) & = \exp\left\{ D^2_{s} \log\delta(s,0) \right\} \ .
\end{split}
\label{d-lanczos}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
Using the scaling relation above, Eq.~(\ref{d-defn}), and the equation of motion
for $ \Delta_{n}(t) $, Eq.~(\ref{D-function-eqn}), the result follows.
$ \square $

These last two theorems relate to the dynamics of a nonlinear continuum Toda
Lattice in one space domain $ s \in {\mathbb R^+} $ and one time domain $ t $,
with boundary conditions defined at the origin $ s = 0 $ for all times $ t $
by the cumulant generating function $ F(t) $. The object is then to find the
Lanczos functions $ \alpha(s), \beta^2(s) $ from a solution of this system,
wherein these functions are directly related to the solution at a given time
$ t = 0 $ over all spatial points $ s > 0 $.

\vfill\eject

\stepcounter{section}
\section*{\Roman{section}. The Taylor Series Expansion}

The investigation of the Taylor series expansion of the Lanczos coefficients
about $ s=0 $, is an essential element in the application of this Lanczos
method, as was indicated earlier, where one has only a finite set of low order
cumulants available, say for non-integrable models. Therefore in this case one
can only construct a truncated Taylor series expansion and so issues concerning
convergence, the radius of convergence of the series, and whether one can
extrapolate immediately arise. In addition one would like a direct algorithm
relating the cumulants to the Lanczos functions from a purely practical point of
view.

We define the Taylor series expansion of the two Lanczos functions by two new
sequences of coefficients,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
  \alpha(s) & = c_1 + \sum^{\infty}_{n=0} a_{n}s^{n+1} \ ,
            \\
  \beta^2(s) & = \sum^{\infty}_{n=0} b_{n}s^{n+1} \ .
\end{split}
\label{coeff-taylor-exp}
\end{equation}
In order to find these coefficients one could use either of the two general
solutions for the Lanczos process,
Eqs.~(\ref{suppl-lanczos-eqn},\ref{norm-lanczos-eqn}) or
Eq.~(\ref{l-function-tl}), and the two methods are presented below.

The first step involves the inversion of the following Taylor series expansion
\begin{equation}
  \epsilon = c_{1} + \sum_{n=1} {c_{n+1} \over n!} \xi^{n} \ ,
\label{pe-energy}
\end{equation}
for $ \xi(\epsilon) $, namely the coefficients $ e_{k} $ appearing in
\label{pe-xi}
\begin{equation}
  \xi = \sum_{k=1} e_{k} (\epsilon-c_{1})^k \ .
\end{equation}
The coefficients $ c_{n} $ appearing in Eq.~\ref{pe-energy} are the cumulant
coefficients. The existence of this inverse function is guaranteed because the
second cumulant $ c_2 > 0 $ in all systems and we assume that the saddle point
function, Eq.~(\ref{stationary-2}), is analytic in the neighbourhood of
$ \xi = 0 $. The next step involves the solution of the two recurrences
\begin{equation}
 \begin{split}
   0 & =
       \sum_{k=1} e_{k} \sum^{\lfloor k/2\rfloor}_{m=0}
       \binom{k}{2m} {(1/2)_{m} \over m!}
       (\alpha-c_{1})^{k-2m} (4\beta^2)^{m} \ ,
     \\
  2s & =
       \sum_{k=1} e_{k} \sum^{\lfloor (k-1)/2\rfloor}_{m=0}
       \binom{k}{2m\!+\!1} {(1/2)_{m+1} \over (m\!+\!1)!}
       (\alpha-c_{1})^{k-2m-1} (4\beta^2)^{m+1} \ ,
 \end{split}
\label{pe-L}
\end{equation}
which are used to solve for the coefficients $ a_{n}, b_{n} $ appearing in
Eq.~(\ref{coeff-taylor-exp}).

In the second method we define a continuum version of the coefficients that are
defined in Eq.~(\ref{l-function-coeff-1}) in the following way
\begin{equation}
  \log {L(s,t) \over sl_{1}(t)}
  = \log\left( 1+\sum_{p \geq 1} { l_{p+1} \over l_{1}} s^{p} \right)
  \equiv \sum_{p \geq 1} { m_{p}(t) s^{p} } \ ,
\label{l-function-taylor}
\end{equation}
and the inverse of Eq.~(\ref{l-function-coeff-2}) in an explicit form
\begin{equation}
  {l_{p+1} \over l_{1}} = \sum_{\sum_{i} q_{i}r_{i} = p}
             \prod_{i} {1\over q_{i}!} m_{r_{i}}^{q_{i}} \ .
\label{l-function-coeff-inv}
\end{equation}
From these relations one can find a hierarchy of equations for these
coefficients
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
  l_{1}(t)
  & = F''(t) \ ,
  \\
  l_{2}(t)
  & = { F^{(2)}F^{(4)} - (F^{(3)})^2 \over 2(F^{(2)})^2 } \ ,
  \\
  l_{p+2}(t)
  & = {m''_{p}(t) \over (p\!+\!2)(p\!+\!1)}
    = l_{1}(t) \sum_{\sum_{i} q_{i}r_{i} = p+1}
               \prod_{i} {m_{r_{i}}^{q_{i}} \over q_{i}!}
  \qquad \text{for } p \geq 1 \ .
\end{split}
\label{l-function-taylor-recur}
\end{equation}

Thus one can verify from the solution for the initial value problem above that
the general Taylor series coefficients are given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
   [(n\!+\!1)!]^2 c^{3n\!+\!1}_{2} a_n
  &  =
   \sum_{\lambda \vdash 2n+1} A(n;\lambda)
   \prod^{2n+1}_{i=0} c^{a_i}_{2+i}
  \\
   (n\!+\!1)!n! c^{3n\!-\!1}_{2} b_n
  &  =
   \sum_{\lambda \vdash 2n} B(n;\lambda)
   \prod^{2n}_{i=0} c^{a_i}_{2+i}
  \ ,
\end{split}
\label{taylor-lanczos}
\end{equation}
where the coefficients labeled by the partition
$ \lambda = (1^{a_1}.2^{a_2} \ldots i^{a_i}) $, denoted by
$ A(n;\lambda), B(n;\lambda) $, are listed in Table(\ref{lanczos-table}) of
the Appendix. There are constraints operating in the above equations, namely
$ \sum^{2n+1}_{i=1} ia_i = \sum^{2n+1}_{i=0} a_i = 2n\!+\!1 $ for the first
relation and $ \sum^{2n}_{i=1} ia_i = \sum^{2n}_{i=0} a_i = 2n $ for the second.

Clearly the Taylor series expansion of the Lanczos functions has low order
coefficients which are constructed from the low order cumulants, and is a form
of a linked cluster expansion. However it is not just a simple linked cluster
expansion as in the Taylor series expansion of the Cumulant Generating Function,
but involves a subtle interplay and cancellation of all cumulants below a given
order.

\vfill\eject

\stepcounter{section}
\section*{\Roman{section}. General Properties}

There are some very general properties that the Lanczos process in the
thermodynamic limit and the associated Lanczos functions satisfy and we examine
these now. Some are quite obvious and not particularly surprising, however we
state these for completeness sake, while there are some other properties which
are not so immediate but very important nevertheless.

The next, and natural, property concerns the monotonicity of the two envelope
functions $ \epsilon_{\pm}(s) = \alpha(s) \pm 2\beta(s) $.
\begin{theorem}
The envelope functions $ \epsilon_{+}(s), \epsilon_{-}(s) $ are monotonically
increasing and decreasing functions of real, positive $ s $ respectively.
\end{theorem}
This follows from a recasting of the normalisation condition in the following
way
\begin{equation}
  2\pi s = \int^{\xi{+}}_{\xi_{-}} d\xi
   \sqrt{ [\epsilon(\xi_{+})-\epsilon(\xi)]
          [\epsilon(\xi)-\epsilon(\xi_{-})] } \ ,
\label{norm-lanczos-2}
\end{equation}
where the $ \xi_{\pm} $ are defined by $ \epsilon(\xi_{\pm}) = \epsilon_{\pm} $.
Now it is straight forward to write the explicit forms for the derivatives of
the envelope functions with respect to $ s $ as
\begin{equation}
 \begin{split}
   {d \epsilon_{+} \over ds} & = 4\pi \Big/
   \int^{\xi_{+}}_{\xi_{-}} d\xi
   \sqrt{ \epsilon(\xi)-\epsilon(\xi_{-}) \over
          \epsilon(\xi_{+})-\epsilon(\xi) } \ ,
   \\
   {d \epsilon_{-} \over ds} & = -4\pi \Big/
   \int^{\xi_{+}}_{\xi_{-}} d\xi
   \sqrt{ \epsilon(\xi_{+})-\epsilon(\xi) \over
          \epsilon(\xi)-\epsilon(\xi_{-}) }
   \ ,
 \end{split}
\label{lanczos-mono}
\end{equation}
so that the stated properties are evident.$ \square $

It is clear that the envelope functions $ e_{\pm}(s) $ are bounded in the
following ways, $ \epsilon_{-}(s) \geq \epsilon_{0} $ and
$ \epsilon_{+}(s) \leq \epsilon_{\infty} $.

The 3-term recurrence which serves as one of the definitions of the Orthogonal
Polynomials themselves is now going to take a definite limiting form when
$ n, N \to \infty $ such that $ s $ is finite. This is going to lead to a
scaling form for one set of the Polynomials themselves, which would be more
correctly termed orthogonal functions $ p(s,\epsilon) $. Heuristically one can
see how this arises by the following argument. If one ensures that Lanczos
densities are employed and the following scaling of the polynomials thus
$ P_n(E) = N^n p_n(\epsilon) $, then the 3-term recurrence becomes
\begin{equation}
  p_{n+1}(\epsilon)/p_n(\epsilon) +
  \beta^2_n {1 \over p_{n}(\epsilon)/p_{n-1}(\epsilon)} =
  \epsilon-\alpha_n \ .
\label{ops-3-term}
\end{equation}
Now these ratios are approximated by
\begin{equation}
  {p_{n+1}(\epsilon) \over p_n(\epsilon)} \sim
 \exp\left( {1 \over N}{\partial \over \partial s} \ln p(s,\epsilon)
     \right) \ ,
\label{ops-ratio}
\end{equation}
for arguments $ \epsilon \in {\mathbb C}\backslash{\rm Supp}[d\rho] $. So that
in the asymptotic regime the recurrence becomes
\begin{equation}
 \exp\left( {1 \over N}{\partial \over \partial s} \ln p(s,\epsilon) \right)
  + \beta^2(s)
 \exp\left(-{1 \over N}{\partial \over \partial s} \ln p(s,\epsilon) \right)
  \sim \epsilon-\alpha(s) \ ,
\label{ops-recur-tl}
\end{equation}
whose solutions are
\begin{equation}
  p^{\pm}(s,\epsilon) \sim p(0)
  \exp\left\{ N\int^s dt \ln \frac{1}{2}
      \left[ \epsilon-\alpha(t) \pm
             \sqrt{ (\epsilon-\alpha(t))^2 - 4\beta^2(t) } \right]
      \right\} \ .
\label{poly-tl}
\end{equation}
These are the corresponding results for the ratio $ P_{n}(x)/P_{n+1}(x) $ or
n-th root $ \sqrt[n]{P_{n}(x)} $ asymptotics of generic Orthogonal Polynomials
as $ n \to \infty $\cite{ops-S,ops-F,ops-N,ops-N-79,ops-vA}, or the scaled
Orthogonal Polynomials\cite{ops-vA-90}, but are rather different due to the
particular nature of Many-Body Orthogonal Polynomials.
\begin{theorem}
Given the scaling behaviour of the Lanczos coefficients, and that they are
bounded for $ n, N \to \infty $, then the n-th root of the denominator
Orthogonal Polynomials $ p_{n}(\epsilon) $ have the limiting form uniformly
for $ \epsilon $ in compact subsets of
$ {\mathbb C}\backslash{\rm Supp}[d\rho] $.
\begin{equation}
  p(s,\epsilon) \equiv
  \lim_{n, N \to \infty}|p_{n}(N,\epsilon)|^{1/N} =
  \exp\left\{ \int^{s}_{0} dt\; \ln \frac{1}{2}
      \left[ \epsilon\!-\!\alpha(t) +
             \sqrt{ (\epsilon\!-\!\alpha(t))^2\! -\! 4\beta^2(t) } \right]
      \right\}
\label{poly-limit}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
The proof of this parallels the one constructed by van Assche in
Ref.~\cite{ops-vA-90} through the use of Tur\'an Determinants,
\begin{equation}
  D_{n} \equiv p^{2}_{n} -  p_{n+1}p_{n-1}
\label{turan-D}
\end{equation}
One can show that these obey the following recurrence relation
\begin{equation}
  D_{n} = \beta^2_{n}D_{n-1}
          + (\alpha_{n}\!-\!\alpha_{n-1})p_{n}p_{n-1}
          + (\beta^2_{n}\!-\!\beta^2_{n-1})p_{n}p_{n-2}
\label{turan-recur}
\end{equation}
Using the partial fraction decomposition of the ratio of two successive
Orthogonal Polynomials one can also find a bound on this ratio
\begin{equation}
  \left|{ p_{n-1}(\epsilon) \over p_{n}(\epsilon) }\right|
  \leq {C \over d} \qquad \forall\; n
\label{ratio-bound}
\end{equation}
for all $ \epsilon \in K $ where the compact set
$ K \subset {\mathbb C}\backslash{\rm Supp}[d\rho] $ and $ d $ is the
distance between this set and the interval
$ [\epsilon_{0},\epsilon_{\infty}] $, and $ C $ is a positive constant.
Using Eq.~(\ref{turan-recur}) we have
\begin{equation}
  \left|{ D_{n} \over p^2_{n} }\right| \leq
    \sup_{n}(\beta^2_{n}){C^2 \over d^2}
    \left|{ D_{n-1} \over p^2_{n-1} }\right|
      + |\alpha_{n}-\alpha_{n-1}|{C \over d}
        + |\beta^2_{n}-\beta^2_{n-1}|{C^2 \over d^2}
\label{turan-bound}
\end{equation}
Given the scaling form of the Lanczos coefficients the ratio
$ |D_{n}/ p^2_{n}| \to 0 $ as $ n, N \to \infty $ uniformly in $ \epsilon $
whenever $ d $ is large enough. This means that $ |p_{n-1}/p_{n}| $ and
$ |p_{n}/p_{n+1}| $ tend to the same accumulation point which we denote by
$ p(s,\epsilon) $. This point is given by the solution of the quadratic
equation $ p + \beta^2(s)/p = \epsilon-\alpha(s) $, and the positive branch of
the solution must be taken as $ p \to \infty $ when $ \epsilon \to \infty $.
The functions $ p(s,\epsilon) $ are analytic functions of $ \epsilon \in K $
which are uniformly bounded, so the restriction on $ d $ can be lifted to being
only non-zero. The behaviour of the n-th ratio then gives the n-th root
behaviour directly as
\begin{equation}
  \left| p_{n} \right|^{1/N} =
  \exp\left\{ {1\over N} \sum_{k=1}^{n}
              \log \left|{ p_{k}(\epsilon) \over p_{k-1}(\epsilon) }
                   \right|
      \right\}
\label{root-ratio}
\end{equation}
The asymptotic behaviour that we have found applies to the denominator OP only
as can be seen from the observation that $ p_{1} = \epsilon-c_{1} $ and
$ p_{2} = (\epsilon-c_{1})^2 - c_{3}/c_{2}N(\epsilon-c_{1}) - c_{2}/N $, while
\begin{equation}
   \left[ \epsilon\!-\!\alpha(s) +
             \sqrt{ (\epsilon\!-\!\alpha(s))^2\! -\! 4\beta^2(s) } \right]
   \xrightarrow[s \to 0]{}
   {1\over \epsilon-c_{1}}
   \left( (\epsilon-c_{1})^2 - c_{3}/c_{2}N(\epsilon-c_{1}) - c_{2}/N
   \right) \ .
\label{initial-OP}
\end{equation}
This establishes the result.$\square$

\vfill\eject

\stepcounter{section}
\section*{\Roman{section}. Summary}

In this work we have demonstrated the general scaling behaviour of the Lanczos
Process as applied to Many-Body Systems when the process is taken to
convergence and the thermodynamic limit taken. We also find explicit
constructions of the limiting Lanczos coefficients in two equivalent
formulations, from an initial exact solution of the moment problem, that is to
say the cumulant generating function for the system. There are explicit
examples where the CGF can be found and the whole Lanczos process explicitly
realised. Furthermore we have given the corresponding results for the associated
Orthogonal Polynomial system and the measure in this regime, quite generally.
However we must emphasise that these results apply only to the bulk properties,
that is to say the ground state properties that scale extensively and the
spectral properties in the interior (the "bulk") of the spectrum. So this does
not include the delicate scaling behaviour at the edges of the spectrum, nor in
the neighbourhood of singularities - this theory would have to be extended to
treat the excited state gaps near the bottom of the spectrum. A number of
general theorems are given which constrain the behaviour of the Lanczos
functions, and the process in general. We also indicate how a number of such
constraints operating can lead to some concrete realisations or scenarios that
the Lanczos process can present, namely its behaviour at a critical point in
the model under study. This is a significant step on the way to the goal of a
rigorous classification of Many-Body Systems in terms of their character via
the Lanczos process. Other important questions that arise in the treatment of
non-integrable models, for which the general results presented here have
suggested some answers, are the questions of the choice of trial state, the
rate of convergence of the truncated Lanczos process and how one might
accelerate its convergence given some independent qualitative knowledge.

\vfill\eject

\bibliographystyle{jmp}


\section{Definition and properties of the short-circuit map.}

We define the ``short-circuit'' map $\s_n$ from the pure
braid group on $2n+1$ strands $\p{2n+1}$ to the monoid of
the isotopy classes of oriented knots $\K$ as pictured on
Figure~\ref{f:def}. The strands of the braid are joined
together in turn at the bottom and at the top.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\[\epsffile{braids1.eps}\]
\caption{A braid $b\in\p{5}$ and the knot $\s_2(b)$.}\label{f:def}
\end{figure}
We think of knots as of non-compact, or ``long'' knots
here. These maps are compatible with the inclusions
$\p{2n+1}\hra\p{2n+3}$ so they extend to a map $\s
:\p{\infty}\to \K.$ Here by $\p{\infty}$ we understand the inductive limit
of the sequence of inclusions $\p{i}\hra\p{i+1}$.

The construction and, as we will see later, some properties
of the map $\s$ resemble those of the plat closure which
sends braids with even number of strands to links. (For the
definition and properties of the plat closure see
\cite{Bi1,Bi2}.) Indeed, if $t_n$ denotes the $2n$-strand
braid pictured on Figure~\ref{f:plat}, then for any
$x\in\p{2n+1}$ the (unoriented) knot $\s(x)$ is equivalent to the knot,
obtained by taking the image of $x$ in $\p{2n+2}$ under the
standard inclusion, multiplying by $t_{n+1}$ on the left
(i.e.\ on the top) and taking the plat closure.

\begin{figure}[ht]
\[\epsffile{braids2.eps}\]
\caption{The braid $t_n$.}\label{f:plat}
\end{figure}

However, if we are interested in knots rather than links the
map $\s$ is more convenient than the plat closure.
The most obvious difference is the behaviour under
stabilization maps and tensor products. Adding two
unbraided strands to a braid changes its image under the
plat closure by adding an unknotted and unlinked component,
while the image of the short-circuit map does not change. As
for tensor (external) products, the plat closure sends a
product of braids to the distant union of their plat
closures, while under short-circuiting the tensor product of
braids is sent to the connected sum of the corresponding
knots.

To make the last statement more precise, we may define the tensor
product of two pure braids with odd numbers of strands as follows.

Let $i:\p{2n+1}\hra\p{2(n+m)+1}$ be the standard inclusion onto the first
$2n+1$ strands and $i':\p{2m+1}\hra\p{2(n+m)+1}$ be the inclusion onto
the last $2m+1$ strands.  Then we can define a product
\[ \p{2n+1}\otimes\p{2m+1}\to\p{2(n+m)+1} \]
by sending a pair $(b_1,b_2)$, where $b_1\in\p{2n+1}$ and
$b_2\in\p{2m+1}$ to
\[i(b_1)i'(b_2)\in\p{2(n+m)+1}.\]
With this definition it is clear that
\[ \s_n(b_1)\#\s_m(b_2)=\s_{n+m}(b_1\otimes b_2).\]

The restriction to an odd number of strands is
by no means crucial.  If $b\in\p{2n}$ we can define an analogue of the
short-circuit map as a suitably oriented plat closure of the braid $t_{n}b$.
This definition is equally good for the purposes of our paper and has certain
advantages.  Namely, this version of the short-circuit
closure respects the usual tensor product of braids;
also, in this set-up Theorem~\ref{thm:bridge} below becomes
tautological.

Nevertheless, we prefer to work with braids on odd number of
strands.  It follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:bridge} that any
knot which can be realized as a plat closure of a
$2n$-stranded braid can be obtained by short-circuiting some
pure braid on $2n-1$ strands.  This generalizes the
well-known fact that a 2-bridge knot can be represented by a
braid in $\p{3}$. In this sense, the short-circuit map for
$\p{\rm odd}$ is more ``economic''.  We repeat, however,
that in our context this is a matter of taste.

\subsection{Filtration by the number of strands and the bridge number.}

Any filtration on the infinite pure braid group $\p{\infty}$
is sent by $\s$ to a filtration on knots. The most obvious
filtration on $\p{\infty}$ to consider is the filtration
``by the number of strands''
\[\p{1}\subset\p{3}\subset\p{5}\subset\ldots\subset\p{\infty}.\]
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:bridge}
The filtration on knots by $\s(\p{2n+1})$ is the filtration by knots
with bridge number less than or equal to $n+1$.
\end{theorem}

To prove Theorem~\ref{thm:bridge} it is enough to show that the minimal
number of maxima of the height function in a realization of a knot in
$\R^3$ as a long knot is the bridge number minus 1; this will be done in
Section~\ref{s:bridge}.

The bridge number minus 1 is
an additive knot invariant (see \cite{Sch})
so, the filtration by
$\s(\p{2n+1})$ gives rise to an additive grading on $\K$.

\subsection{Structure of the short-circuit map.}

First we introduce some notation. By $A_{i,j}$ where $i\neq
j$ are positive integers we denote the standard generators
of $\p{\infty}$. By $\phi_i^{n}$ we mean the homomorphism
$\p{2n}\to\p{2n+1}$ which doubles the $i$th strand.
Homomorphisms $\phi_i^{n}$ respect the standard inclusions
of the pure braid groups so as $n$ tends to infinity the limit
$\phi_i:\p{\infty}\to\p{\infty}$
is well-defined.

Let $H^T\in\p{\infty}$ be the subgroup generated by
$A_{i,i+1}$ and $\phi_i(A_{i,j})$
for all even $i$ and all $j\neq i$.  Similarly we define the
subgroup $H^B$ with the only difference that $i$ is required
to be odd.
The subgroup $H^T$ acts on $\p{\infty}$ on the left and this action
preserves the fibres of $\s$, see Figure~\ref{f:act}.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\[\epsffile{braids3.eps}\]
\caption{
Examples of the action of $H^T$ on the trivial braid.}\label{f:act}
\end{figure}
Similarly, $H^B$ act on $\p{\infty}$ on the right, also
preserving the fibres.

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:structure}
The short-circuit map identifies the monoid of knots $\K$ with the
quotient set $H^T \backslash \p{\infty} /H^B$.
\end{theorem}

This theorem is a version of the main theorem of \cite{Bi2}
which describes the equivalence classes of plat
closures. The proof we sketch in Section~\ref{s:structure}
is simplified by the fact the we are only interested in
knots.  Note also that Birman's theorem as stated in \cite{Bi2} concerns
unoriented knot and link types, whereas our theorem concerns oriented
knot types.

\subsection{Lower central series and Vassiliev invariants.}

One can easily check that Vassiliev knot invariants pull
back under the short-circuit map to Vassiliev invariants of
braids. The action of $H^T$ and $H^B$ on $\p{\infty}$
induces an action on Vassiliev braid invariants which,
clearly, preserves the type. (Here we do not assume the
invariants to be normalized, i.e.\ do not require them to
take a prescribed value on the trivial braid.) Thus the
finite type knot invariants can be identified with those
finite type pure braid invariants which are fixed by the
two-sided action of $H^T$ and $H^B$.

Sometimes it is more convenient, however, to think of
Vassiliev invariants in the dual setting. Recall that a knot
(pure braid) is called $n$-trivial if it cannot be
distinguished from the the trivial knot (braid) by
invariants of order less than $n$. For pure braids
$n$-triviality is well-understood: $b\in\p{k}$ is
$n$-trivial if and only if $b\in\gamma_{n}\p{k}$ - the $n$-th
term of the lower central series of $\p{k}$.

Let $\K_n\subset\K$ be the set of $n$-trivial knots.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:lcs}
Short-circuiting sends the filtration of $\p{\infty}$ by the
lower central series to the filtration by $n$-trivial knots:
\[\s(\gamma_{n}\p{\infty})=\K_n.\]
\end{theorem}

This allows to formulate problems from the theory of
Vassiliev knot invariants in purely group-theoretic
terms. For example, finite type knot invariants separate the
unknot if and only if any orbit of the two-sided action of
$H^T$ and $H^B$, apart from the orbit of the trivial braid,
intersects only a finite number of terms of the lower
central series.  Another way to state this is to consider
the nilpotent topology on $\p{\infty}$ (with basis
the cosets of $\gamma_{n}{\p{\infty}}$ for all $n$).
Then finite type invariants separate the unknot if and
only if the set $H^T H^B = \{tb\ |\ t \in H^T, b \in H^B\}$
is closed in the nilpotent topology.

The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:lcs} follows closely
the same arguments as in \cite{St}.
It is even simplified in some ways in our setting.
For example, if $x$ and $y$ are two braids, then
$\s{(x)} \# \s{(y)} = \s{(xtyb)} = \s{(xty)} = \s ((t^{-1}xtx^{-1})xy)$,
which is equivalent to $\s (xy)$ modulo a commutator.  Inductively,
braid product and connected sum are equivalent, modulo commutators
of higher order, which is the main idea behind the results in \cite{St}.

\section{Bridge number for long knots.}\label{s:bridge}

Here we will see that  the minimal
number of maxima $b_L$
of the ``height function'' in the realization of a knot in
$\R^3$ as a long knot is less by 1 than  the minimal
number of maxima of the height function in the compact realization
$S^1\hra \R^3$ of the same knot, i.e.\ than the bridge number $b$.

For a long knot with $b_L$ maxima of the height function it is obvious
that there exist a compact embedding of the same knot with  $b_L+1$
maxima, see Figure~\ref{f:close}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\[\epsffile{braids4.eps}\]
\caption{A long knot $K$ and the corresponding compact knot.}\label{f:close}
\end{figure}

Conversely, let $k$ be a compact knot $S^1\hra \R^3$ with $b$ maxima
and $b$ minima which can be taken to be non-degenerate. We construct a long
knot $k'$ with  $b-1$ maxima which
is equivalent to $k$ as follows.

Choose a point on $k$ which is not critical for the height function to be the
origin in $\R^3$. Let $A$ be the maximum and $B$ the minimum between which the
chosen point  lies; by $AB$ we denote the closed segment of $k$
which lies between $A$ and $B$ and passes through the origin.

Let $F(t):\R\to\R^3$ be a curve which intersects each horizontal plane once
and such that its intersection with the knot $k$ is exactly the segment $AB$.
We can assume that the curve $F$ is parametrized by the $z$-coordinate in
$\R^3$, i.e. $F(t)=(F_x(t),F_y(t),t)$, and that $F$ is a smooth function of
$t$ everywhere apart from the points where $F(t)=A$ or $F(t)=B$.

Consider a map $\Phi: \R^3\to\R^3$ given by
\[\Phi(x,y,z) = (x-F_x(z),y-F_y(z),z).\]
The transformation $\Phi$ preserves the horizontal planes, so it
does not change the number of maxima and minima of the height function on the
knot $k$. It is clear that there exist such $R>0$ that
the intersection of the image of the embedding $\Phi(k)$ with
the cylinder $x^2+y^2<R^2$ is an interval, which is embedded
with exactly one minimum and one maximum of the height function. Strictly
speaking, the embedding $\Phi(k)$ is only piecewise-smooth, however, we
can smooth it out in such a way that its intersection with
the cylindrical neighbourhood of the $z$-axis of radius $R$ is an interval,
which intersects the $z$-axis in the origin only and which is embedded
with exactly one minimum and one maximum of the height function,
see Figure\ref{f:cylinder}(a).

Thus in what follows we can assume that $k$
has the above form.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\[\epsffile{braids5.eps}\]
\caption{}\label{f:cylinder}
\end{figure}
Now we compactify $\R^3$ to $S^3$ by an interval adding a point
at infinity to each horizontal plane and  two points $z=\pm\infty$.
Denote by $V\subset S^3$ a copy of $\R^3$ obtained by throwing out the closure
of the $z$-axis. The intersection of the knot $k$ with $V$
is a long knot, which is equivalent to $k$ if we choose the
orientation of $V$ to be compatible with that of $\R^3$. In the coordinates
centred at the point at infinity whose $z$-coordinate is zero, this long
knot looks as on Figure~\ref{f:cylinder}(b). Obviously, it is
equivalent to the knot $k'$ that differs from $k$ only inside the
cylindrical neighbourhood of the $z$-axis (which
is pictured as the outside part of the cylinder on Figure~\ref{f:cylinder}(b))
and has exactly $b-1$ maxima and $b-1$ minima.

\section{Short-circuit map as a two-sided quotient map.}\label{s:structure}

We say that a smooth long knot $k(t):\R\to\R^3$ is a Morse knot if the height
function on it: (a) has only a finite number of critical points, all of which
are non-degenerate; (b) tends to $\pm\infty$ as $t\to\mp\infty$; in other
words, we assume that all knots ``point downwards''. Two Morse knots are Morse
equivalent if one can be deformed into the other through Morse knots.

Let $k$ be a Morse knot and $x$ be a point on $k$ which is non-critical for
the height function. We will say that a knot $k'$ is obtained from $k$ by
insertion of a hump at $x$ if $k$ and $k'$ coincide outside some small
neighbourhood of $x$ and inside this neighbourhood they differ as on
Figure~\ref{f:insert}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\[\epsffile{braids6.eps}\]
\caption{Inserting a hump.}\label{f:insert}
\end{figure}

\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:insert}
Any two knots obtained from the same Morse knot by insertion of a hump
are Morse equivalent.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The lemma is clearly true if there are no critical points of the height
function between the points $x_1$ and $x_2$ where we insert humps.
In case there is one critical point between $x_1$ and $x_2$ the lemma follows
\begin{figure}[ht]
\[\epsffile{braids7.eps}\]
\caption{Passing a hump through a critical point.}\label{f:movehump}
\end{figure}
from the argument on Figure~\ref{f:movehump}. This also proves the lemma
in the general case.
\end{proof}

Let $b_1\in\p{2n+1}$ and $b_2\in\p{2m+1}$ and, as before, denote by $i(b_k)$
the image
of the standard inclusion of $b_k$ into $\p{2N+1}$, $N\geqslant n,m$.

\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:Me}
If $\s_{n}(b_1)$ and $\s_{m}(b_2)$ are in the same isotopy class in $\K$ there
exists $N\geqslant n,m$ such that $\s_{N}(i(b_1))$ and $\s_{N}(i(b_2))$ are
Morse equivalent.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let
\[ f^T(t)=(f_x^T(t),f_y^T(t),f_z^T(t))\]
where $T\in [0,1]$ and $t\in\R$ be a homotopy between
$\s_{n}(b_1)$ and $\s_{m}(b_2)$, that is, for each $T$ the map
$f^T(t):\R\to\R^3$
defines a long knot and $f^0(t)=\s_{n}(b_1)$ and $f^1(t)=\s_{m}(b_2)$.

In $[0,1]\times\R$ consider the subset $W$ of pairs $(T,t)$ such that
$\frac{\partial}{\partial{t}} f_z^T(t)=0.$
Without loss of generality we can assume that $W$ is a union of smooth
compact non-singular curves whose boundary is either empty or belongs to
$(\{0\}\cup\{1\})\times\R$ and that there are only a finite number of
tangencies of $W$ with horizontal lines of the form $\{T\}\times\R$. In
addition we require these tangencies to take place at different values
of the parameter $T$; see Figure~\ref{f:homotopy}.
These assumptions imply, in particular, that for
all but a finite number of values of $T$ the knot $f^T(t)$ is Morse and
that the perestroikas at the bifurcation values of $T$ are generic,
i.e.\ are insertions (or removals) of humps.

If there are no points of tangency of $W$ with  horizontal lines
the knots $\s_{n}(b_1)$ and $\s_{m}(b_2)$ are Morse equivalent and $n=m=N$.

Otherwise,
choose the point of tangency of $W$ with a horizontal line which corresponds
to the insertion of a hump with the smallest value of $T$.
It is clear that we can connect it with the lower
boundary line $\{0\}\times\R$ by a segment $s$ of a curve which is
disjoint from $W$ and whose tangent is nowhere
horizontal, see Figure~\ref{f:homotopy}(a).
\begin{figure}[ht]
\[\epsffile{braids8.eps}\]
\caption{}\label{f:homotopy}
\end{figure}

In the  neighbourhood of each point of $s$ we can modify the knots
$f^T(t)$ by inserting humps, this changes $W$ as shown on
Figure~\ref{f:homotopy}(b). Notice that the number of points where $W$ has a
horizontal tangent has decreased by one and the knot $f^0(t)=\s_{n}(b_1)$
was changed by an insertion of a hump.

Thus, proceeding inductively, we eliminate all insertions of humps.
In the same way we eliminate the removals of humps with the only
difference that we connect them to the upper boundary line and proceed
from the bifurcation with the largest value of $T$ downwards.

The result is that we construct a Morse equivalence between  $\s_{n}(b_1)$,
possibly with several humps inserted, and $\s_{m}(b_2)$, also with some
extra humps. However, from Lemma~\ref{lemma:insert} we know that $\s_{n}(b_1)$
and $\s_{m}(b_2)$ with humps inserted are  Morse equivalent to
$\s_{N}(i(b_1))$ and $\s_{N}(i(b_2))$ respectively (here $N$ is the number
of maxima of the modified knots) and this proves the lemma.

\end{proof}

Let $b_1\in\p{2N+1}$ and $b_2\in\p{2N+1}$ represent the same knot.
Lemma~\ref{lemma:Me} allows us to assume that the knots $\s_N(b_1)$ and
$\s_N(b_1)$ are Morse equivalent.

Given a deformation of $\s_N(b_1)$ to $\s_N(b_1)$ through Morse knots
we are going to construct a one-dimensional family of
braids $f^T:[0,1]\to\p{2N+1}$ such that $f^0=b_1$, $f^1=b_2$ and which is not
continuous only at a finite number of values of the parameter, where the
``jump'' can be expressed as the multiplication by some element of $H^T$ or
$H^B$.

The braid $f^0$ is obtained by ``suspending'' the knot $\s_N(b_1)$ by maxima
and minima, see Figure~\ref{f:susp}. Here we choose the points $\alpha_i$
and $\beta_i$ in such a way that the deformation of $\s_n(b_1)$ into
$\s_n(b_2)$ takes place entirely between the horizontal planes in which
$\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ are situated. Of course, $f^0$ is the same braid as
$b_1$. Think of the double lines which connect maxima and minima with the
points $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ respectively as of very narrow rubber strips.
Then, if we deform the knot keeping  the points $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$
fixed,  the suspended knot also deforms and gives the
braid $f^T$.

It may happen in the process of deformation that some rubber strips
intersect the knot or intersect each other. Without loss of generality we can
assume that these events take place near a finite number of distinct
values of $T$.

Suppose that the rubber strip which
connects a maximum with points $\alpha_i$ and $\alpha_{i+1}$ intersects the
knot between $T=T_{0}$ and $T=T_{0}+\epsilon$. Then one can find
$x,y\in\p{2N+1}$ such that: \\
(a) $f^{T_{0}}=xy$ and $f^{T_{0}+\epsilon}=
x\cdot\phi_{i}^{N}(A_{i,j}^{\pm 1})\cdot y$ for some $j$;\\
(b) $x=\phi_{i}^{N}(x')$ for some $x'\in\p{2N}$.\\ Thus
\[ f^{T_{0}+\epsilon}=x\phi_{i}^{N}(A_{i,j}^{\pm 1})x^{-1}\cdot f^{T_{0}}=
 \phi_{i}^{N}(x'A_{i,j}^{\pm 1}{x'}^{-1})\cdot f^{T_{0}}.\]
Notice that conjugation by $x'$ maps $A_{i,j}$ to a product of $A_{i,j_{m}}$
for some set of $j_{m}$,  so $\phi_{i}^{N}(x'A_{i,j}^{\pm 1}{x'}^{-1})$
lies in $H^{T}$.

Similarly, if the rubber strip is  attached to the
minimum, $f^{T_{0}}$ is multiplied on the right by some braid from $H^B$.
In case two rubber strips intersect each other
we have to multiply by a product of two braids of such form; as above,
the product will lie in $H^T$ or $H^B$. (If one rubber strip is attached
to a minimum and the other one to a maximum this product will automatically
lie in the intersection $H^T\cap H^B$.)
\begin{figure}[ht]
\[\epsffile{braids9.eps}\]
\caption{Getting a braid from a knot.}\label{f:susp}
\end{figure}
Finally, when the isotopy is finished and all minima and maxima have arrived
back to their places what may happen is that some rubber strips may be twisted.
This corresponds to multiplications by some $A_{i,i+1}$
on the left  for $i$  even  and
on the right for $i$  odd.

\bigskip

\noindent{\bf Acknowledgments.}
We would like to thank Mario Eudave for finding an important reference,
Sofia Lambropoulou and other organizers of the conference
``Knots in Hellas '98'' who gave us a chance to meet, and Natig Atakishiev
with whose pen a part of this paper was written. The second author was
partially supported by the Naval Academy Research Council.

{\small