\section*{Introduction}

In their breakthrough paper \cite{ozawapopacartanI}, Ozawa and Popa brought new techniques to bear on the study of free group factors which allowed them to show that these factors possess a powerful structural property, what they called ``strong solidity''.

\begin{defn}[Ozawa--Popa \cite{ozawapopacartanI}]\label{def:strongsolidity}  A $\rm II_1$ factor $M$ is \textit{strongly solid} if for any diffuse amenable subalgebra $P \subset M$ we have that $\mathcal N_M(P)''$ is amenable.
\end{defn}

\noindent As usual, $\NN_M(P) = \{u \in \UU(M) : u P u^\ast = P\}$ denotes the \textit{normalizer} of $P$ in $M$. It can be seen that every nonamenable $\rm II_1$ subfactor of a strongly solid $\rm II_1$ factor is non-Gamma, prime and has no Cartan subalgebras. Thus, Ozawa and Popa's result broadened and offered a unified approach to the two main results on the structure of free group factors hitherto known: Voiculescu's \cite{voiculescuentropyIII} pioneering result, which showed that the free group factors $L\F_n$, $2 \leq n \leq \infty$, have no Cartan subalgebras, and Ozawa's \cite{ozawasolid} seminal work on ``solid'' von Neumann algebras, which showed that every nonamenable $\rm II_1$ subfactor of a free group factor is non-Gamma and prime. Moreover, they exhibited the first, and so far only, examples of $\rm II_1$ factors with a unique Cartan up to unitary conjugacy; namely, the group-measure space constructions of free ergodic profinite actions of groups with property $\rm (HH)^+$ \cite{ozawapopacartanII}; e.g., nonamenable free groups. This improved on the ground-breaking work of Popa \cite{popabetti}, which gave examples of $\rm II_1$ factors with a unique ``HT-Cartan'' subalgebra up to unitary equivalence; e.g., $L(\Z^2 \rtimes \SL_2(\Z))$.

By incorporating ideas and techniques of Peterson \cite{petersonl2}, Ozawa and Popa \cite{ozawapopacartanII} were later able to extend the class of strongly solid factors to, in particular, all group factors of ICC lattices in $\SL(2,\R)$ or $\SL(2,\C)$. Other examples of strongly solid factors were subsequently constructed by Houdayer \cite{houdayerstronglysolid} and by Houdayer and Shlyakhtenko \cite{houdayershlyakhtenko}.

In this paper we will demonstrate the following results:

\begin{thm}\label{thm:main1}  If $\G$ is an ICC lattice in $\mathrm{SO}(n,1)$ or $\mathrm{SU}(n,1)$, $n \geq 2$, then $L\G$ is strongly solid.
\end{thm}

\begin{thm}\label{thm:main2} Let $\G$ be a nonamenable, countable, discrete group which has the complete metric approximation property (Definition \ref{def:cmap}).  If $\G \cong \G_1 \ast \G_2$ decomposes as a non-trivial free product, then $L\G$ has no Cartan subalgebras. Moreover, if $N \subset L\G$ is a $\rm II_1$ factor which has a Cartan subalgebra, then there exists projections $p_1, p_2$ in the center of $N' \cap L\G$ such that $p_1 + p_2 = 1$ and unitaries $u_1, u_2 \in \UU(M)$ such that $u_i N p_i u_i^* \subset L\G_i \subset L\G$, $i \in \{1,2\}$.
\end{thm}

\noindent By a \textit{lattice} we mean a discrete subgroup $\G < G$ of some Lie group with finitely many connected components such that $G/\G$ admits a regular Borel probability measure invariant under left translation by $G$. These factors are already known by the work of Ozawa and Popa \cite{ozawapopacartanII} to have no Cartan subalgebras. Since $\SO(n,1)$ and $\SU(n,1)$ are semisimple Lie groups with finite center, Theorem 6.5 in \cite{cowlinghaagerup} shows that every $\g \in \G$ which is not in the center of $G$ has infinite $\G$-conjugacy class, so examples of ICC lattices abound. In the $\SO(n,1)$ case, the restriction of the lattice subgroup $\G$ to the identity component $\SO_0(n,1)$ is always ICC, $\SO_0(n,1)$ having trivial center, and all results in our paper will hold for these groups.

The proof follows the same strategy as Ozawa and Popa's in \cite{ozawapopacartanI, ozawapopacartanII}. Though, instead of working with closable derivations, we use a natural one-parameter family of deformations first constructed by Parthasarathy and Schmidt \cite{parthaschmidt}. The derivations Ozawa and Popa consider appear as the infinitesimal generators of these deformations (so, the approaches are largely equivalent), but by using the deformations we avoid some of the technical issues which arise when working with derivations.

The main difficulty in obtaining Theorem \ref{thm:main1} for lattice factors in $\SO(n,1)$ or $\SU(n,1)$ when $n \geq 3$ is that the bimodules which admit good deformations/derivations are themselves too weak to allow one to deduce the amenability of the normalizer algebra e.g., strong solidity.  However, sufficiently large tensor powers of these bimodules can be used to deduce strong solidity. Unfortunately, derivation techniques perturb the original bimodules slightly, and the behavior of tensor powers of the perturbed bimodules becomes unclear. To circumvent this problem, we first notice that Ozawa and Popa's techniques actually allow one to deduce a kind of relative amenability of the normalizer subalgebra with respect to the bimodule, given in terms of an ``invariant mean''. We then use a result of Sauvageot \cite{sauvageottensor} to obtain from the invariant mean an almost invariant sequence of vectors in the bimodule. Since the property of having an almost invariant sequence of vectors is stable under taking tensor powers, we are able to transfer relative amenability to a large tensor power of the bimodule in order to deduce amenability of the normalizer algebra.

\begin{ackns} The author is grateful to Jesse Peterson for suggesting the problem and making several helpful comments and suggestions. The author also thanks Jesse Peterson and Ionut Chifan for many stimulating discussions on the work of Ozawa and Popa. \end{ackns}

\section{Preliminaries}  We collect in this section the necessary definitions, concepts and results needed for the proofs of Theorems \ref{thm:main1} and \ref{thm:main2}.

\subsection{Representations, Correspondences and Weak Containment}
Let $\G$ be a countable discrete group and $\pi,\rho$ be unitary representations of $\G$ into separable Hilbert spaces $\HH_\pi$ and $\HH_\rho$, respectively.

\begin{defn} We say that $\rho$ is \textit{weakly contained} in $\pi$ if for any $\e >0$, $\xi \in \HH_\rho$ and any finite subset $F \subset \G$, there exist vectors $\xi_1',\dots,\xi_n' \in \HH_\pi$ such that $\abs{\ip{\rho(\g)\xi}{\xi} - \sum_{i=1}^n \ip{\pi(\g)\xi_i'}{\xi_i'}} < \e$ for all $\g \in F$.
\end{defn}

\noindent A representation $\pi$ is said to be \textit{tempered} if it is weakly contained in the left-regular representation, and \textit{strongly $\ell^p$} \cite{shalomrigidity} if for any $\e>0$, there exists a dense subspace $\HH_0 \subset \HH$ such that for all $\xi,\eta \in \HH_0$ the matrix coefficient $\ip{\pi(\g)\xi}{\eta}$ belongs to $\ell^{p+\e}(\G)$.  By a theorem of Cowling, Haagerup and Howe \cite{cowlinghaageruphowe}, a representation which is strongly $\ell^2$ is tempered. As was pointed out in \cite{shalomrigidity}, applying standard H\"older estimates to the matrix coefficients, we obtain that if $\pi$ is strongly $\ell^p$ for some $p \geq 2$, then for all $n > p/2$, $\pi^{\otimes n}$ is strongly $\ell^2$, hence tempered.

In the theory of von Neumann algebras, correspondences (also called Hilbert bimodules) play an analogous role to unitary representations in the theory of countable discrete groups. For von Neumann algebras $N$ and $M$, recall that an $N$-$M$ correspondence is a $\ast$-representation $\pi$ of the algebraic tensor $N \odot M^o$ into the bounded operators on a Hilbert space $\HH$ which is normal when restricted to both $N$ and $M^o$.  We will denote the restrictions of $\pi$ to $N$ and $M^o$ by $\pi_N$ and $\pi_{M^o}$, respectively. When the $N$-$M$ correspondence $\pi$ is implicit for the Hilbert space $\HH$, we will use the notation $x\xi y$ to denote $\pi(x \otimes y^o)\xi$, for $x \in N$, $y \in M$ and $\xi \in \HH$.

\begin{defn} Let $\pi: N \odot M^o \rightarrow \B(\HH_\pi)$, $\rho: N \odot M^o \rightarrow \B(\HH_\rho)$ be correspondences.  We say that $\rho$ is \textit{weakly contained} in $\pi$ if for any $\e > 0$, $\xi \in \HH_\rho$ and any finite subsets $F_1 \subset N, \ F_2 \subset M$, there exist vectors $\xi_1,\dotsc,\xi_n' \in \HH_\pi$ such that $\abs{\ip{x\xi y}{\xi} - \sum_{i=1}^n \ip{x\xi_i' y}{\xi_i'}} < \e$ for all $x \in F_1, \ y \in F_2$.
\end{defn}

There is a well-known functor from the category whose objects are (separable) unitary representations of $\G$ and morphisms weak containment to the one of $L\G$-$L\G$ correspondences and weak containment, cf. \cite{popavaeswstar}, which translates the representation theory of $\G$ into the theory of $L\G$-$L\G$ correspondences.  The construction is as follows.  Given $\pi: \G \rightarrow \UU(\HH_\pi)$ a unitary representation, let $\HH^\pi$ be the Hilbert space $\HH_\pi \otimes \ell^2\G$.  Then, the maps $u_\g(\xi \otimes \eta) = \pi(\g)\xi \otimes u_\g\eta$, $(\xi \otimes \eta)u_\g = \xi \otimes (\eta u_{\g})$ extend to commuting normal representations of $L\G$ and $(L\G)^o$ on $\HH^\pi$: the former by Fell's absorption principle, the latter trivially.  This functor is well-behaved with respect to tensor products; i.e., $\HH^{\pi \otimes \rho} \cong \HH^\pi \otimes_{L\G} \HH^\rho$ as $L\G$-$L\G$ correspondences for any unitary $\G$-representations $\pi$ and $\rho$. We refer the reader to \cite{adamenable, popacorrespondences} for the theory of tensor products of correspondences and the basic theory of correspondences in general.

For a $\rm II_1$ factor $M$ there are two canonical correspondences: the \textit{trivial correspondence}, $L^2(M)$ with $M$ acting by left left and right multiplication, and the \textit{coarse correspondence}, $L^2(M) \otimes L^2(\bar M)$ with $M$ acting by left multiplication of the left copy of $L^2(M)$ and right multiplication on the right copy. When $M = L\G$ for some countable discrete group, the trivial and coarse correspondences are the correspondences induced respectively by the trivial and left regular representations of $\G$.

\subsection{Cocycles and the Gaussian Construction}\label{sec:gaussian}  In this section, $\HH$ will denote a \textit{real} Hilbert space which we will fix along with a orthogonal representation $\pi: \G \rightarrow \OO(\HH)$ of some countable discrete group $\G$.

\begin{defn} A cocycle is a map $b : \G \rightarrow \HH$ satisfying the cocycle relation \[b(\g\g') = b(\g) + \pi(\g)b(\g') \textup{, for all } \g,\g' \in \G.\]
\end{defn}

Given $\pi$ and $\HH$, there is a canonical standard probabilty space $(X,\mu)$ and a canonical measure-preserving action $\G \car^\sigma (X,\mu)$ such that there is a Hilbert space embedding of $\HH$ into $L_\R^2(X,\mu)$ intertwining $\pi$ and the natural representation induced on $L_\R^2(X,\mu)$  by $\sigma$.  This is know as the \textit{Gaussian construction}, cf. \cite{petersonsinclair} or \cite{schmidtgaussian}.  It is well-known that the natural $\G$ representation $\sigma_0$ on $L_0^2(X,\mu) = L^2(X,\mu) \ominus \C \, 1_X$ inherits all ``stable'' properties from $\pi$, cf. \cite{petersonsinclair}.  In particular, $\sigma_0^{\otimes n}$ is tempered if and only if $\pi^{\otimes n}$ is tempered for any $n \geq 1$.

It was discovered by Parthasarathy and Schmidt \cite{parthaschmidt} that cocycles also fit well into the framework of the Gaussian construction, inducing one-parameter families of deformations (i.e., cocycles) of the action $\sigma$.  To be precise:

\begin{thm}[Parthasarathy--Schmidt \cite{parthaschmidt}] \label{thm:cocyclefamily}\label{thm:gaussian} Let $b: \G \rightarrow \HH$ be a cocycle, then there exists a one-parameter family $\omega_t: \G \rightarrow \UU(L^\infty(X,\mu)), \ t \in \R$ such that:
\begin{equation}
\omega_t(\g\g') = \omega_t(\g)\sigma_\g(\omega_t(\g')) \textup{, for all } \g,\g' \in \G \textup{; and}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cocyclenorm}
\int \omega_t(\g) d\mu = \exp(-(t\nor{b(\g)})^2) \textup{, for all } \g \in \G.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}

\subsection{Weak Compactness and the CMAP}

\begin{defn}[Ozawa--Popa \cite{ozawapopacartanI}]\label{def:weaklycompact} Let $(P,\tau)$ be a finite von Neumann algebra equipped with a trace $\tau$, and $G \car^\sigma P$ be an action of a group $G$ on $A$ by $\tau$-preserving $\ast$-automorphisms.  We say that the action $\sigma$ is \textit{weakly compact} if there exists a net of unit vectors $(\eta_k) \in L^2(P \bar \otimes \bar P, \tau \otimes \bar \tau)_{+}$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\nor{\eta_k - (v \otimes \bar v)\eta_k} \rightarrow 0 \text{, for all } v \in \UU(P)$;
\item $\nor{\eta_k - (\sigma_g \otimes \bar \sigma_g)\eta_k} \rightarrow 0 \text{, for all } g \in G$; and
\item $\ip{(x \otimes 1)\eta_k}{\eta_k} = \tau(x) = \ip{(1 \otimes \bar x)\eta_k}{\eta_k} \text{, for all } x \in P$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}

\begin{defn}\label{def:cmap}  A $\rm II_1$ factor $M$ is said to have the \textit{complete metric approximation property} (CMAP) if there exists a net $(\phii_i)$ of finite-rank, normal, completely bounded maps $\phii_i: M \rightarrow M$ such that $\limsup\nor{\phii_i}_{\rm cb} \leq 1$ and such that $\nor{\phii_i(x) - x}_2 \rightarrow 0 \text{, for all } x \in M.$
\end{defn}

\noindent If $\G$ is an ICC countable discrete group, then $L\G$ has the CMAP if and only if the Cowling-Haagerup constant of $\G$, $\Lambda_{\rm cb}(\G)$, equals 1, and if $\G$ is a lattice in $G$, then $\Lambda_{\rm cb}(\G) = \Lambda_{\rm cb}(G)$, cf. \S 12.3 of \cite{brownozawa} and \cite{haagerupwithoutcmap}.

\begin{thm}[Ozawa--Popa, Theorem 3.5 of \cite{ozawapopacartanI}]\label{thm:weaklycompactnormalizers} Let $M$ be a $\rm II_1$ factor which has the CMAP.  Then for any diffuse amenable $\ast$-subalgebra $A \subset M$, $\NN_M(A)$ acts weakly compactly on $A$ by conjugation.
\end{thm}

\section{Amenable Correspondences}

\begin{defn}[Anantharaman-Delaroche \cite{adamenable}] An $N$-$M$ correspondence $\HH$ is called \textit{(left) amenable} if $\HH \otimes_M \bar \HH$ weakly contains the trivial $N$-$N$ correspondence.
\end{defn}

The concept of amenability for correspondences is the von Neumann algebraic analog of the concept of amenablity of a unitary representation of a locally compact group due to Bekka \cite{bekkaamenable}. As was observed by Bekka, amenabilty of the representation $\pi$ is equivalent to the existence of a state $\Phi$ on $\B(\HH)$ satisfying $\Phi(\pi(g)T) = \Phi(T\pi(g))$ for all $g \in G,\ T \in \B(\HH)$.  One can ask if a similar criterion holds for amenable correspondences.  When $M$ is a $\rm II_1$ factor, we will show that this indeed is the case if we replace $\B(\HH)$ with the von Neumann algebra $\NN = \B(\HH) \cap \pi_{M^o}(M^o)'$.  That is, we obtain the following characterization of amenable correspondences:

\begin{thm}[Compare with Theorem 2.1 in \cite{ozawapopacartanI}.]\label{thm:hypertrace}  Let $\HH$ be an $N$-$M$ correspondence with $N$ finite with normal faithful trace $\tau$ and $M$ a $\rm II_1$ factor.  Let $P \subset N$ be a von Neumann subalgebra. Then the following are equivalent:

\begin{enumerate}

\item there exists a net $(\xi_n)$ in $\HH \otimes_M \bar\HH$ such that $\ip{x\xi_n}{\xi_n} \rightarrow \tau(x)$ for all $x \in N$ and $\nor{[u,\xi_n]} \rightarrow 0$ for all $u \in \UU(P)$;

\item there exists a $P$-central state $\Phi$ on $\NN$ such that $\Phi$ is normal when restricted to $N$ and faithful when restricted to $\ZZ(P' \cap N)$;

\item there exists a $P$-central state $\Phi$ on $\NN$ which restricts to $\tau$ on $N$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}

\noindent We do so by constructing a normal, faithful, semi-finite (tracial) weight $\bar\tau$ on $\NN$ which canonically realizes $\HH \otimes_M \bar \HH$ as $\LL^2(\NN,\bar\tau)$.  An identical construction to the one we propose has already appeared in the work of Sauvageot \cite{sauvageottensor} for an arbitrary factor $M$. However, we present an elementary approach in the $\rm II_1$ case.

Recall that a vector $\xi \in \HH$ is \textit{right bounded} if there exists $C >0$ such that for all $x \in M$, $\nor{\xi x} \leq C\nor{x}_2$.  The right-bounded vectors form a dense subspace of $\HH$ which we will denote by $\HH_b$.  Regarding $\HH$ as a right Hilbert $M$-module, we can define a natural $M$-valued inner product on $\HH_b$, which we will denote $(\xi | \eta) \in M$ for $\xi, \eta \in \HH_b$, by setting $(\xi|\eta)$ to be the Radon-Nikodym derivative of the normal functional $x \mapsto \ip{\xi x}{\eta}$.  Then it is easy to see that $(\cdot|\cdot)$ satisfies the following properties for all $\xi,\eta \in \HH_b,\ x,y \in M$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(\xi|\xi) \geq 0$,
\item $(\eta | \xi) = (\xi |\eta)^*$,
\item $(\xi x | \eta y) = y^*(\xi | \eta)x$
\end{enumerate}

\noindent (i.e., $(\HH_b, (\cdot|\cdot))$ is an \textit{$M$-rigged space} in the sense of Rieffel \cite{rieffelmorita}). Trivially, we have that $\ip{\xi}{\eta} = \tau((\xi|\eta))$.  Also, by the non-degeneracy of $\pi_{M^o}$, $(\xi|\xi) = 0$ only if $\xi = 0$. Moreover, $(\cdot|\cdot)$ satisfies a noncommutative Cauchy-Schwartz inequality:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(4)] $(\eta|\xi)(\xi|\eta) \leq \nor{(\xi|\xi)}_\infty (\eta|\eta)$
\end{enumerate}
(cf. \cite{rieffelinduced}, Proposition 2.9).

Let $\NN = \B(\HH) \cap \pi_{M^o}(M^o)'$. For $\xi,\eta \in \HH_b$, let $T_{\xi,\eta}: \HH_b \rightarrow \HH_b$ be the ``rank-one operator'' given by $T_{\xi,\eta}(\, \cdot \,) = \xi(\, \cdot \,|\eta)$.  Then $T_{\xi,\eta}$ extends to a bounded operator with $\nor{T_{\xi,\eta}}_\infty \leq \nor{(\xi|\xi)}_\infty \nor{(\eta|\eta)}_\infty$ \cite{rieffelinduced}.  Notice that $T_{\xi,\xi} \geq 0$ and that $T_{\xi,\xi}$ is a projection if $(\xi|\xi) \in \mathcal P(M)$. Since $T_{\xi,\eta} \, \pi_{M^o}(x) = \pi_{M^o}(x) \, T_{\xi,\eta}$ for all $x \in M^o$, we have that $T_{\xi,\eta} \in \NN$.  It is easy to see that the span of all such operators $T_{\xi,\eta}$ is a $\ast$-subalgebra of $\B(\HH)$ which we will denote by $\NN_f$.  Noticing that for any $S \in \NN$, $S(\HH_b) \subset \HH_b$, we have that $S \, T_{\xi,\eta} = T_{S\xi,\eta}$ and $ T_{\xi,\eta} \, S = T_{\xi, S^\ast\eta}$. It follows that $\NN_f$ is an ideal of $\NN$ which can be considered as the analog of the finite-rank operators in $\B(\HH)$. The following lemma further cements this analogy.

\begin{lem}\label{thm:density}  If $M$ is a $\rm II_1$ factor, we have that $\NN_f' \cap \B(\HH) = \pi_{M^o}(M^o)$; hence, $\NN_f + \C \, 1_{\B(\HH)}$ is weakly dense in $\NN$.
\end{lem}

\begin{proof} The inclusion $\pi_{M^o}(M^o) \subset \NN_f' \cap \B(\HH)$ is trivial.  Conversely, let $T \in \NN_f' \cap \B(\HH)$ and choose a non-zero $\zeta \in \HH_b$ such that $(\zeta|\zeta) = p \in \mathcal P(M)$. (One can always find such a $\zeta$ as $\HH$ has an orthonormal basis of right bounded vectors as a right Hilbert $M$-module.) Choose a sequence $\eta_i \in \HH_b$ such that $\nor{\eta_i - T\zeta} \rightarrow 0$ and let $y_i = (\eta_i|\zeta)$.  Then for every $\xi \in \HH_b$ we have that  $\nor{T(\xi p) - \xi y_i} \leq \nor{T_{\xi,\zeta}}_\infty \nor{\eta_i - T\zeta} \leq \nor{(\xi|\xi)}_\infty \nor{\eta_i - T\zeta}$; so, the sequence $(y_i)$ is $\nor{\cdot}_\infty$-bounded and has a strong cluster point.  Hence, there exists $y \in M$ such that $T(\xi p) = \xi y$ for all $\xi \in \HH$.  Since $M$ is a ${\rm II_1}$ factor, by repeating the argument with $\zeta' = \zeta u$ for $u \in \UU(M)$ and using standard averaging techniques, we conclude that there exists $y_T \in M$ such that $T\xi = \xi y_T$ for all $\xi \in \HH$.  Thus $T = \pi_{M^o}(y_T^o)$.
\end{proof}

Now, consider an element $\phii \in M_\ast$, and define a functional $\bar \phii \in (\NN_f)^\ast$ by $\bar\phii(T_{\xi,\eta}) = \phii((\xi|\eta))$.  It is easy to see that $\bar\phii$ is normal on $\NN_f$ and so, by the preceding lemma, may be extended to a normal semi-finite weight on $\NN$.  Hence, we may construct for each such $\phii$ a noncommutative $L^p$-space over $\NN$, $\LL^p(\NN,\bar\phii) = \{T \in \NN : \nor{T}_p = \bar\phii(\abs{T}^p)^{1/p} < \infty\}$.  If $M$ is a $\rm II_1$ factor with trace $\tau$, then $\bar\tau$ is a normal, faithful, semi-finite trace on $\NN$ and we denote $\LL^p(\NN,\bar\tau)$ simply by $\LL^p(\NN)$. In the case of $\LL^2(\NN)$, we compute that $\nor{T_{\xi,\eta}}_2 = \tau((\xi|\xi)(\eta|\eta)) = \ip{\xi(\eta|\eta)}{\xi}$.  This shows that the map which sends $T_{\xi,\eta}$ to the elementary $M$-tensor $\xi \otimes_M \bar \eta \in \HH \otimes_M \bar \HH$ extends to an $N$-$N$ bimodular Hilbert space isometry from $\LL^2(\NN)$ to $\HH \otimes_M \bar \HH$. We are now ready to prove the motivating result in this section.

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:hypertrace}]  The proof of (1) $\Leftrightarrow$ (3) follows the usual strategy.  For (1) $\Rightarrow$ (3), we have that there exists a net $(\xi_n)$ of vectors in $\HH \otimes_M \bar \HH$ such that $\ip{x\xi_n}{\xi_n} \rightarrow \tau(x)$ for all $x \in N$ and $\nor{[u,\xi_n]} \rightarrow 0$ for all $u \in \UU(P)$. Viewing $\xi_n$ as an element of $\LL^2(\NN)$, let $\Phi_n \in \NN_\ast$ be given by $\Phi_n(T) = \bar\tau(\xi_n^\ast\xi_n \, T)$ for any $T \in \NN$.  Then, by the generalized Powers-St\o rmer inequality (Theorem IX.1.2 in \cite{takesakiii}), we have that $\abs{\Phi_n(x) - \tau(x)} \rightarrow 0$ for all $x \in N$ and $\nor{\Ad(u)\Phi_n - \Phi_n}_1 \rightarrow 0$ for all $u \in \UU(P)$.  Taking a weak cluster point of $(\Phi_n)$ in $\NN^\ast$ gives the required $N$-tracial $P$-central state on $\NN$.  Conversely, given such a state $\Phi$, we can find a net $(\eta_n)$ in $\LL^1(\NN)_+$ such that $\Phi_n(T) = \bar\tau(\eta_n T)$ weakly converges to $\Phi$. In fact, by passing to convex combinations we may assume $\nor{[u,\eta_n]}_1 \rightarrow 0$ for all $u \in \UU(P)$. By another application of the generalized Powers-St\o rmer inequality, it is easy to check that $\xi_n = \eta_n^{1/2} \in \LL^2(\NN) \cong \HH \otimes_M \bar \HH$ satisfies the requirements of (1).

We now need only show (2) $\Rightarrow$ (3) as (3) $\Rightarrow$ (2) is trivial.  But this is exactly the averaging trick found in the proof of (2) $\Rightarrow$ (1) in Theorem 2.1 of \cite{ozawapopacartanI}. We repeat the argument here for the sake of completeness.  Since $\Phi$ is normal on $N$, we have that for some $\eta \in \LL^1(N)_+$, $\Phi(x) = \tau(\eta x)$ for all $x \in N$.  In fact, $\eta \in \LL^1(P' \cap N)_+$ since $\Phi$ is $P$-central.  Denoting by $\FF$ the net of finite subsets of $\UU(P' \cap N)$ under inclusion, for any $\e > 0$, we set $\eta_F = \frac{1}{\abs{F}} \sum_{u \in F} u \eta u^\ast$ and $\xi_{F,\e} = (\chi_{[\e,\infty)}(\eta_F))^{1/2}$.  We now let $\Psi_{F,\e}(T) = \frac{1}{\abs{F}}\sum_{u \in F} \Phi(u \xi_{F,\e} T \xi_{F,\e} u^\ast)$.  Note that $\Psi_{F,\e}$ is still $P$-central.  Now it is easy to see that $\lim_{\FF, \e}\chi_{[\e,\infty)}(\eta_F) = z$, where $z$ is the central support of $\eta$.  But by the faithfulness of $\Phi$ on $\ZZ(P' \cap N)$, we see that $z = 1$.  Hence, any weak cluster point of $(\Psi_{F,\e})_{\FF,\e}$ in $\NN^\ast$ is a $P$-central state which when restricted to $N$ is $\tau$.
\end{proof}

\begin{cor}[generalized Haagerup's criterion for amenability]\label{cor:haagerup} Let $N$, $M$ be $\rm II_1$ factors and $\HH$ an $N$-$M$ correspondence.  If $P \subset N$ is a von Neumann subalgebra, then $\HH$ is left amenable over $P$ (in the sense of Theorem \ref{thm:hypertrace}) if and only if for every non-zero projection $p \in \ZZ(P' \cap N)$ and finite subset $F \subset \UU(P)$, we have \[\nor{\sum_{u \in F} up \otimes \overline{up}}_{\HH \otimes_M \bar \HH,\infty} = \abs{F},\] where $\nor{\,\cdot\,}_{\HH \otimes_M \bar \HH, \infty}$ denotes the operator norm on $\B(\HH\otimes_M\bar\HH)$.
\end{cor}

\begin{proof} Since we have obtained a ``hypertrace'' characterization of amenability for correspondences in Theorem \ref{thm:hypertrace}, the result follows by the same arguments as in Lemma 2.2 in \cite{haagerupinjectivity}.
\end{proof}

\begin{defn}[cf. Definition 1.3 in \cite{petersonsinclair}] Let $M$ be a $\rm II_1$ factor, $\HH$ an $M$-$M$ correspondence and $P^c$ the orthogonal projection onto the subspace $\HH^c = \{\xi \in \HH : x\xi = \xi x,\ \forall x \in M\}$. The correspondence $\HH$ has \textit{spectral gap} if for every $\e > 0$ there exist $\delta > 0$ and $x_1,\dotsc,x_n \in M$ such that if $\nor{x_i \xi - \xi x_i} < \delta$, $i = 1,\dotsc,n$, then $\nor{\xi - P^c\xi} < \e$.  The correspondence $\HH$ has \textit{stable spectral gap} if $\HH \otimes_M \bar\HH$ has spectral gap.
\end{defn}

Note that if $\HH$ has stable spectral gap, then $\HH$ is amenable if and only if $(\HH\otimes_M \bar\HH)^c \neq \{0\}$.  Hence, we say an $M$-$M$ correspondence $\HH$ is \textit{nonamenable} if it has stable spectral gap and $(\HH \otimes_M \bar\HH)^c = \{0\}$. The following theorem is the analog of Lemma 3.2 in \cite{popaspectralgap} for the category of correspondences. N.B. Stable spectral gap as defined in \cite{popaspectralgap} corresponds to our definition of nonamenability.

\begin{thm}\label{thm:nonamenable} Let $M$ be a $\rm II_1$ factor and $\HH$ an $M$-$M$ correspondence.  Then $\HH$ is nonamenable if and only if $\HH \otimes_M \bar\KK$ has spectral gap and for any $M$-$M$ correspondence $\KK$.
\end{thm}

\begin{proof} Let $\HH_b$, $\KK_b$ denote subspaces of right-bounded vectors in $\HH$ and $\KK$, respectively.  Given $\xi \in \HH_b$ and $\eta \in \KK_b$, by the same arguments as above we can define a bounded operator $T_{\xi,\eta} : \KK \rightarrow \HH$ by $T_{\xi,\eta}(\, \cdot \,) = \xi(\, \cdot \,|\eta)$.  As above, one may check that $\nor{(T^*T)^{1/2}}_2 = \nor{\xi \otimes_M \bar\eta} = \nor{(TT^*)^{1/2}}_2$ so that $\HH \otimes_M \KK$ is isometric to a Hilbert-normed subspace of the bounded right M-linear operators from $\HH$ to $\KK$, which we denote $\LL^2(\HH,\KK)$.  Moreover, this identification is natural with respect to the $M$-$M$ bimodular structure on $\LL^2(\HH,\KK)$ given by $x \, T_{\xi,\eta} \, y = T_{x\xi,y^*\eta}$.

We need now only prove the forward implication, as the converse is trivial. Let us fix some arbitrary $M$-$M$ correspondence $\KK$. From Proposition 1.4 in \cite{petersonsinclair}, we have that $(\HH \otimes_M \bar\HH)^c = \{0\}$ if and only if $(\HH \otimes_M \bar\KK)^c = \{0\}$. So, by way of contradiction, we may assume that for every $\e > 0$ and $x_1,\dots,x_n \in M$, there exists a unit vector $\xi \in \HH \otimes_M \bar\KK$ such that $\nor{x_i \xi - \xi x_i}_2 \leq \e$, $i = 1,\dotsc,n$. Without loss of generality, we may assume $x_1,\dots,x_n$ are unitaries. Viewing $\xi$ as an element of $\LL^2(\HH,\KK)$, let $\eta = (\xi^*\xi)^{1/2} \in \LL^2(\HH)$. By the generalized Powers-St\o rmer inequality, we have $\nor{x_i \eta x_i^* - \eta}_2^2 \leq 2 \nor{x_i \xi x_i^* - \xi}_2 \leq 2\e$, $i = 1,\dotsc,n$. Hence, $\eta \in \LL^2(\HH) \cong \HH \otimes_M \bar\HH$ is a unit vector such that $\nor{x_i \eta - \eta x_i}_2 \leq \sqrt{2\e}$, $i = 1,\dotsc,n$. Thus, $\HH \otimes_M \bar\HH$ does not have spectral gap, a contradiction.
\end{proof}

\section{Proofs of Main Theorems}
In this section we prove our main result, from which will follow Theorems \ref{thm:main1} and \ref{thm:main2}. To begin, let $\G$ be an ICC countable discrete group which admits an unbounded cocycle $b : \G \rightarrow \KK$ for some orthogonal representation $\pi : \G \rightarrow \OO(\KK)$.  Let $\G \car^\sigma (X,\mu)$ be the Gaussian construction associated to $\pi$ as described in section \ref{sec:gaussian} and $\{\omega_t : t \in \R\}$ be the one-parameter family of cocycles associated to $b$ as given by Theorem \ref{thm:cocyclefamily}. Let $\alpha_t$ be the $\ast$-automorphism of $\tilde M = L^\infty(X,\mu) \rtimes \G$ defined by $\alpha_t(a u_\g) = a \omega_t(\g) u_\g$ for all $a \in L^\infty(X,\mu), \ \g \in \G$. Finally, we set $M = L\G$, and we denote by $\HH$ the $M$-$M$ bimodule $L_0^2(X,\mu) \otimes \ell^2\G$ with the usual bimodule structure; i.e., the one defined by $u_\g(\xi \otimes \eta) = \sigma(\g)\xi \otimes u_\g\eta$, $(\xi \otimes \eta)u_\g = \xi \otimes (\eta u_\g)$ for all $\xi \in L_0^2(X,\mu), \ \eta \in \ell^2\G$ and $\g \in \G$.

\begin{thm}\label{thm:amenablenormalizer}  With the assumptions and notations as above, suppose $P \subset M$ is a diffuse von Neumann subalgebra such that $\NN_M(P)$ acts weakly compactly on $P$ via conjugation. Let $Q = \NN_M(P)''$. If either: (1) $b$ is a proper cocycle; or (2) $\pi$ is a mixing representation and $\alpha_t$ does not converge $\nor{\cdot}_2$-uniformly to the identity on $(Qp)_1$ for any projection $p \in \ZZ(Q' \cap M)$ as $t \rightarrow 0$, then the $M$-$M$ correspondence $\HH$ is left amenable over $Q$ in the sense of satisfying Theorem \ref{thm:hypertrace} for $Q \subset M$.
\end{thm}

\begin{proof} In the case of (1), since $b$ is proper, it is easy to see by formula \ref{eq:cocyclenorm} that $E_{L\G} \circ \alpha_t$ restricted to $L\G$ is compact for all $t > 0$. Hence, by the proof of Theorem 4.9 in \cite{ozawapopacartanI}, for any non-zero projection $p \in \ZZ(Q' \cap M)$ and any finite subset $F \subset \NN_M(P)$, we can find a vector $\xi_{p,F} \in \HH \otimes L^2(\bar M)$ such that $\nor{x \xi_{p,F}} \leq \nor{x}_2$ for all $x \in M$, $\nor{p \xi_{p,F}} \geq \nor{p}_2/8$ and $\nor{[u \otimes \bar u, \xi_{p,F}]} < 1/\abs{F}$ for all $u \in F$.

In the case of (2), we need only demonstrate that our assumptions imply the existence of such a net $(\xi_{p,F})$ as in case (1) then argue commonly for both sets of assumptions. In this direction, it is suffient to show that under the assumptions of (2), $\alpha_t$ does not converge uniformly on $(Pp)_1$ for any projection $p \in \ZZ(Q' \cap M)$. Then, by contradiction if such a net $(\xi_{p,F})$ did not exist, the proof of Theorem 4.9 in \cite{ozawapopacartanI} shows that for some $t >0$ sufficiently small we have $\nor{E_M \circ \alpha_t(up)}_2 \geq \nor{p}_2/4$ for all $u \in \UU(P)$.  But since $\alpha_t$ is a one-parameter strongly-continuous group of automorphisms, we would have uniform convergence of $\alpha_t$ on $\UU(P)p$, and by Kaplansky's density theorem on $(Pp)_1$, as $t \rightarrow 0$.

To conclude the discussion of case (2), we suppose $\pi$ is mixing and $\alpha_t$ converges $\nor{\cdot}_2$-uniformly on $(P)_1$ and show $\alpha_t$ converges uniformly on $(Q)_1$. Since there is a natural trace-preserving automorphism $\beta \in \Aut(\tilde M)$ which pointwise fixes $M$ and such that $\beta \circ \alpha_t = \alpha_{-t} \circ \beta$ for all $t \in \R$ (cf. \cite{petersonsinclair}), by Popa's transversality lemma \cite{popaspectralgap}, it is enough to show that $\nor{\alpha_t(x) - E_M \circ \alpha_t(x)}_2 \rightarrow 0$ uniformly on $(Q)_1$.  Notice that $\delta_t(x) = \alpha_t(x) - E_M \circ \alpha_t(x) = (1 - E_M)(\alpha_t(x) - x)$ is a (bounded) derivation $\delta_t : M \rightarrow \HH$.  Since $\pi$ is mixing, by \cite{petersonw*e} we have that $\HH$ is a compact correspondence; hence, by Theorem 4.5 in \cite{petersonl2} $\delta_t \rightarrow 0$ uniformly in $\nor{\cdot}_2$-norm on $(Q)_1$ as $t \rightarrow 0$.

Now, proceeding commonly for both cases, let $\FF$ be the net of finite subsets of $\NN_M(P)$ under inclusion. We define the state $\Phi_p$ on $\NN = \B(\HH) \cap \pi_{M^o}(M^o)'$ by \[\Phi_p(T) = \Lim_\FF \frac{1}{\nor{p \xi_{p,F}}_2}\ip{(T \otimes 1)p\xi_{p,F}}{p\xi_{p,F}},\] where $\Lim_\FF$ is an arbitrary Banach limit. It is easy to see by the properties of $\xi_{p,F}$ that $\Phi_p$ is normal on $M$. Proceeding as in Lemma 5.3 in \cite{ozawapopacartanII}, we then have that for all $u \in \NN_M(P)$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}\Phi_p(u^\ast T u) &= \Lim_\FF \frac{1}{\nor{p \xi_{p,F}}_2}\ip{(T \otimes 1)up\xi_{p,F}}{up\xi_{p,F}} \\
&= \Lim_\FF \frac{1}{\nor{p \xi_{p,F}}_2}\ip{(T \otimes 1)p(u \otimes \bar u)\xi_{p,F}}{p(u \otimes \bar u)\xi_{p,F}} \\
&= \Lim_\FF \frac{1}{\nor{p \xi_{p,F}}_2}\ip{(T \otimes 1)p(u \otimes \bar u)\xi_{p,F}(u \otimes \bar u)^\ast}{p(u \otimes \bar u)\xi_{p,F}(u \otimes \bar u)^\ast} \\
&= \Phi_p(T).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}

\noindent Hence, we have that $\Phi_p([x,T]) = 0$ for all $x$ in the span of $\NN_M(P)$ and $T \in \NN$.  But we have that $\abs{\Phi_p(T x)} \leq \nor{T}_\infty \abs{\Lim_\FF \frac{1}{\nor{p \xi_{p,F}}_2}\ip{x p\xi_{p,F}}{p\xi_{p,F}}} \leq 8 \nor{T}_\infty \nor{x}_2$ and similarly for $\abs{\Phi_p(xT)}$.  Thus, by Kaplansky's density theorem we have that $\Phi_p$ is a $Q$-central state.

To summarize, for every non-zero projection $p \in \ZZ(Q' \cap M)$, we have obtained a state $\Phi_p$ on $\NN$ such that $\Phi_p(p) = 1$, $\Phi_p$ is normal on $M$ and $\Phi_p$ is $Q$-central.  A simple maximality argument then shows that there exists a state $\Phi$ on $\NN$ which is normal on $M$, $Q$-central, and faithful on $\ZZ(Q' \cap M)$.  Thus, $\Phi$ satisfies condition (2) of Theorem \ref{thm:hypertrace}, and we are done.
\end{proof}

Keeping with the same notations, assume now that the orthogonal representation $b : \G \rightarrow \OO(\KK)$ is such that there exists an $K > 0$ such that $\pi^{\otimes K}$ is weakly contained in the left regular representation.  As was pointed out in section \ref{sec:gaussian}, the representation induced on $L_0^2(X,\mu)$ by $\G \car^\sigma (X,\mu)$ also has this property. Let $\HH_\sigma = L_0^2(X,\mu)$ so that $\HH = \HH_\sigma \otimes \ell^2\G$ is the $M$-$M$ correspondence induced by the representation $\sigma$. Denote by $\tilde\HH^n$ the $M$-$M$ correspondence $((\HH_\sigma \otimes \bar\HH_\sigma)^{\otimes n}) \otimes \ell^2\G$ with the natural bimodule structure. It is straightforward to check that $\HH \otimes_M \bar\HH \cong \HH_\sigma \otimes \ell^2\G \otimes \bar{\HH_\sigma}$ and that $(\HH \otimes_M \bar\HH) \otimes_M \cdots \otimes_M (\HH \otimes_M \bar\HH)$ for $n+1$ copies is isomorphic to $\HH \otimes_M (\tilde\HH^n) \otimes_M \bar\HH$ as $M$-$M$ bimodules. Hence, the $M$-tensor product of $K$ copies of $\HH \otimes_M \bar\HH$ is weakly contained in the coarse $M$-$M$ correspondence.

\begin{thm}\label{thm:generalizedmain} With the assumptions and notations as above, suppose $P \subset M$ is a diffuse von Neumann subalgebra such that $\NN_M(P)$ acts weakly compactly on $P$ via conjugation. Then $Q = \NN_M(P)''$ is amenable.
\end{thm}

\begin{proof} Let $p$ be a non-zero projection in $\ZZ(Q' \cap M)$.  By the proofs of Theorems \ref{thm:amenablenormalizer} and \ref{thm:hypertrace}, it follows that we can find a net $(\xi_n)$ in $\HH \otimes_M \bar\HH$ such that $\ip{x \xi_n}{\xi_n} \rightarrow \tau(pxp)/\tau(p)$ for all $x \in M$ and $\nor{[u,\xi_n]} \rightarrow 0$ for all $u \in \UU(Q)$.  In fact, without loss of generality we may assume that $\ip{x \xi_n}{\xi_n} = \tau(pxp)/\tau(p) = \ip{\xi_n x}{\xi_n}$ for all $x \in M$ (see the proof of Proposition 3.2 in \cite{ozawapopacartanI}). In particular, $(\xi_n)$ is uniformly left and right bounded. Let $\tilde\xi_n$ be the $M$-tensor product of $K$ copies of $\xi_n$. Then then net $(\tilde\xi_n)$ may be seen to satisfy the same properties. Since $(\tilde\xi_n)$ are vectors in a correspondence weakly contained in the coarse $M$-$M$ correspondence, we have that for any finite subset $F \subset \UU(Q)$ that \[\nor{\sum_{u \in F} up \otimes \overline{up}}_{M \bar\otimes \bar M} \geq \lim_n\nor{\sum_{u \in F}u \tilde\xi_n u^\ast} = \abs{F}.\]  Hence, by Haagerup's criterion \cite{haagerupinjectivity}, $Q$ is amenable.
\end{proof}

\begin{rem} Let $M$ be a $\rm II_1$ factor and $\delta$ a closable real derivation from $M$ into an $M$-$M$ correspondence $\HH$ (cf. \cite{petersonl2}). Suppose $P \subset M$ is a von Neumann subalgebra and $\NN_M(P)$ acts weakly compactly on $P$ by conjugation.  Let $Q = \NN_M(P)''$.  One can show that if $\delta^*\bar\delta$ has compact resolvents, then $\HH$ is left amenable over $Q$. The proof is identical to the proof of Theorem B in \cite{ozawapopacartanII}, using the generalized Haagerup's criterion (Corollary \ref{cor:haagerup}). In particular, this sharpens Theorem A in \cite{ozawapopacartanII}: any $\rm II_1$ factor $M$ with the CMAP admitting such a derivation into a nonamenable correspondence has no Cartan subalgebras.
\end{rem}

We are now ready to prove Theorems \ref{thm:main1} and \ref{thm:main2}.

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main1}]
If $\G$ is an ICC lattice in $\SO(n,1)$ for $n \geq 3$ or $\SU(n,1)$ for $n \geq 2$, then Theorems 1.9 in \cite{shalomrigidity} shows that $\G$ possesses an unbounded cocycle into some strongly $\ell^p$ representation for $p \geq 2$. By Theorem 3.4 in the same, any unbounded cocycle for such a lattice is proper.  Since $L\G$ has the CMAP by \cite{decannierehaagerup} and \cite{haagerupwithoutcmap}, by Theorems \ref{thm:weaklycompactnormalizers} and \ref{thm:generalizedmain} the result obtains.
\end{proof}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main2}]
For the first assertion, since $\G \cong \G_1 \ast \G_2$, $\G$ admits a canonical unbounded cocycle $b : \G \rightarrow \bigoplus^\infty\ell^2\G$ into a direct sum of left regular representations. The left regular representation is mixing and $L\G$-$L\G$ correspondence associated to the left regular representation (the coarse correspondence) is amenable if and only if $\G$ is amenable. So, if $L\G$ did admit a Cartan subalgebra, then by Theorems \ref{thm:weaklycompactnormalizers} and \ref{thm:amenablenormalizer} the deformation $\alpha_t$ of $L\G$ obtained from the cocycle $b$ would have to converge uniformly on $(L\G)_1$ as $t \rightarrow 0$. But this contradicts that $b$ is unbounded.

For the second assertion, if a $\rm II_1$ subfactor $N \subset L\G$ admits a Cartan subalgebra, then we have that $\alpha_t$ converges $\nor{\,\cdot\,}_2$-uniformly on the unit ball of $N$, since $N$ has the CMAP and the coarse $L\G$-$L\G$ correspondence viewed an $N$-$N$ correspondence embeds into a direct sum of coarse $N$-$N$ correspondences. Let $\tilde\G = \G \ast \F_2$, where $\F_2$ is the free group on two generators.  Let $u_1,u_2 \in L\F_2$ be the canonical generating unitaries and $h_1,h_2 \in L\F_2$ self-adjoint elements such that $u_j = \exp(\pi i h_j)$, $j = 1,2$.  Define $u_j^t = \exp(\pi i t h_j)$, $j = 1,2$, and let $\theta_t$ be the $\ast$-automorphism of $L\tilde\G$ given by $\theta_t = \Ad(u_1^t) \ast \Ad(u_2^t)$. It follows from Lemma 5.1 in \cite{petersonl2} and Corollary 4.2 in \cite{petersonsinclair} that $\theta_t$ converges uniformly in $\nor{\,\cdot\,}_2$-norm on the unit ball of $N \subset L\G \subset L\tilde\Gamma$ as $t \rightarrow 0$. An examination of the proof of Theorem 4.3 in \cite{ioanapetersonpopa} shows that this is the only condition necessary for the theorem to obtain.  Our result then follows directly from Theorem 5.1 in \cite{ioanapetersonpopa}.
\end{proof}

\bibliographystyle{amsplain}


\section{}
Quarkonium production in relativistic heavy ion collisions is widely
accepted as a probe of deconfinement phase transition at finite
temperature and density. The $J/\psi$ suppression\cite{Matsui} has
been observed at SPS\cite{Topilskaya,Alessandro} and
RHIC\cite{Adare} energies and considered as a signature of the
created new state of matter, the so-called quark-gluon plasma (QGP).
At RHIC energy, however, the $J/\psi$ production and suppression
mechanisms are complicated, there are primordial production and
nuclear absorption in the initial state and
regeneration\cite{BraunMunzinger,Thews,Yan,Zhao} and anomalous
suppression during the evolution of the hot medium.

$\Upsilon$ mesons, the bound states of bottom quarks, may offer a
relatively cleaner probe into the hot and dense
medium\cite{Digal,Noronha,Vogt}. At RHIC energy, there are three
important advantages in studying $\Upsilon$ production compared with
$J/\psi$: (i) $\Upsilon$ regeneration in the hot medium can be
safely neglected\cite{Grandchamp} due to the small production cross
section of bottom quarks in nucleon+nucleon collisions. The initial
creation becomes the only production mechanism and the perturbative
QCD calculations are more reliable for estimating the production.
(ii) $\Upsilon$s are so heavy, there is almost no feed-down for
them. (iii) From the $\Upsilon$ measurement in d+Au collisions where
there is no hot nuclear matter effect, the nuclear modification
factor is about unity, implying that the cold nuclear absorption is
negligible\cite{Liu}. Therefore, the heavy and tightly bound
$\Upsilon$s can only be dissociated in the QGP phase. It is
interesting to note that the recent experimental result in Au+Au
collisions at RHIC\cite{Atomssa} has already indicated a strong
medium effect on $\Upsilon$ production.

The quarkonium dissociation temperature in the hot medium can be
determined by solving the Schr\"odinger equation for $c\bar c$ or
$b\bar b$ system with potential $V$ between the two heavy
quarks\cite{Satz}. The potential depends on the dissociation process
in the medium. For a rapid dissociation where there is no heat
exchange between the heavy quarks and the medium, the potential is
just the internal energy $U$, while for a slow dissociation, there
is enough time for the heavy quarks to exchange heat with the
medium, and the free energy $F$ which can be extracted from the
lattice calculations is taken as the potential\cite{Karsch,Shuryak}.
From the thermodynamic relation $F=U-TS<U$ where $S$ is the entropy
density, the surviving probability of quarkonium states with
potential $V=U$ is larger than that with $V=F$. In the literatures,
a number of effective potentials in between $F$ and $U$ have been
used to evaluate the charmonium evolution in QCD
medium\cite{Satz,Shuryak,Wong}.

In this Letter we investigate $\Upsilon$\ mid-rapidity production at
RHIC energy ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200$\ GeV), by solving a classical
Boltzmann equation for the phase space distribution of $\Upsilon$
states moving in a hydrodynamic background medium. Since the
$\Upsilon$ transverse momentum distribution should be more sensitive
to the dynamic evolution of the system, compared with the global
$\Upsilon$ yield, we will calculate not only the centrality
dependence of the nuclear modification factor, but also its
transverse momentum dependence and the averaged transverse momentum
for the ground and excited $\Upsilon$ states. We will also discuss
the dependence of these observables on the heavy quark potential and
the similarity between $\Upsilon$ production at RHIC and $J/\psi$
production at SPS.

From the experimental data in p+p collisions, $51\%$ of the observed
ground state $\Upsilon(1s)$ is from the direct production, and the
decay contributions from the excited $b\bar b$ states
$\Upsilon(1p)$, $\Upsilon(2s)$, $\Upsilon(2p)$ and $\Upsilon(3s)$
are respectively $27\%, 11\%, 10\%$ and $1\%$\cite{Affolder}. The
other two states $\eta_b(1s)$ and $\eta_b(2s)$ are scaler mesons
with typical width of strong interaction and therefore not
considered here. To simplify the numerical calculation, we will not
distinguish $\Upsilon(2p)$ from $\Upsilon(1p)$ and $\Upsilon(3s)$
from $\Upsilon(2s)$ and take the contribution fractions from the
directly produced $\Upsilon(1s), \Upsilon(1p)$ and $\Upsilon(2s)$ to
the observed $\Upsilon(1s)$ in the final state to be
$a_\Upsilon=51\%,\ 37\%$ and $12\%$.

Like the description for $J/\psi$\cite{Liuy}, the $\Upsilon$ motion
in a hot medium is characterized by the classical transport equation
\begin{equation}
\label{transport}
p^\mu\partial_\mu f_\Upsilon=-C f_\Upsilon,
\end{equation}
where $f_\Upsilon (\vec p, \vec x,t)$ is the $\Upsilon$ distribution
function in the phase space with $\Upsilon = 1s, 1p, 2s$, and the
loss term $C$ is responsible to $\Upsilon$ suppression in the hot
medium. We have neglected here the $\Upsilon$ regeneration at RHIC
energy, as discussed above. Taking into account the gluon
dissociation process $\Upsilon+g\rightarrow b+\bar b$ as the
suppression source, the loss term can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{loss} C=\int \frac{d^3\vec k}{(2\pi)^3 E_g}F(k,p)f_g(k,T,u)\
\sigma(k,p,T),
\end{equation}
where $\vec k$ is the gluon momentum, $E_g=|\vec k|$ the gluon
energy, $F(k,p)=k_\mu p^\mu$ the flux factor, $f_g(k,T,u_\mu)$ the
gluon thermal distribution as a function of the local temperature
$T$ and velocity $u_\mu$ of the medium, and $\sigma(k,p,T)$ the
dissociation cross section at finite temperature. The cross section
in vacuum can be calculated with the Operator Production Expansion
method\cite{Peskin,Bhanot,Arleo,Oh} and is often used for $J/\psi$
suppression and should be better for $\Upsilon$ suppression. The
medium effect on the cross section is reflected in the temperature
dependence of the $\Upsilon$ binding energy $\epsilon_\Upsilon$. By
solving the Schr\"odinger equation for the $b\bar b$ system with the
heavy quark potential $V$ at finite temperature, one obtains
$\epsilon_\Upsilon(T)$ and the wave function $\psi(\vec x,T)$ and in
turn the average size of the system $\langle r\rangle(T)$. With
increasing $T$, $\epsilon_\Upsilon$ decreases and vanishes at the
dissociation temperature $T_\Upsilon$ and $\langle r\rangle$
increases and goes to infinity at $T_\Upsilon$. From the lattice
simulation\cite{Asakawa} on the $J/\psi$ spectral function at finite
temperature, the shape of the spectral function changes only a
little for $T<T_{J/\psi}$ but suddenly collapses around the
dissociation temperature $T_{J/\psi}$. To simplify our numerical
calculation, we replace the temperature dependence of the binding
energy in the cross section by a step function,
$\sigma(k,p,T)=\sigma(k,p)/\Theta(T_\Upsilon-T)$. Under this
approximation, while the cross section becomes temperature
independent at $T<T_\Upsilon$, the dissociation rate
$\alpha=C/E_\Upsilon$ depends still on the hot medium, since the
gluon density is sensitive to the temperature.

For $V=U$, H.Satz and his collaborators\cite{Satz,Digal2} solved the
Schr\"odinger equation and found the dissociation temperatures
$T_\Upsilon/T_c=4,\ 1.8,\ 1.6$ for $\Upsilon=1s,\ 1p,\ 2s$,
respectively, where $T_c=165$ MeV\cite{Kolb} is the critical
temperature for the deconfinement. Since the lattice calculated
potential is mainly in the temperature region $T/T_c<4$,
$T_\Upsilon/T_c=4$ is considered as a low limit of the dissociation
temperature for the ground state. In the same way, we numerically
solved the Schr\"odinger equation for $V=F$ and the dissociation
temperatures $T_\Upsilon/T_c=3,\ 1.1,\ 1$ for $\Upsilon=1s,\ 1p,\
2s$, respectively. For all $\Upsilon$ states, the dissociation
temperatures are about $30\%$ lower in case of $V=F$ compared to
that of $V=U$. In Fig.\ref{fig1}, we show the $\Upsilon$
dissociation rate $\alpha$ as a function of transverse momentum at
fixed temperature $T_c<T<T_\Upsilon$ in the case of $V=U$. In the
calculation here we have chosen a typical medium velocity
$v_{QGP}=0.5$ and assumed that $\vec v_{QGP}$ and $\Upsilon$
momentum $\vec p$ have the same direction. All the rates are large
at low momentum and drop off at high momentum. When the temperature
increases from $200$ MeV (left panel) to $250$ MeV (right panel),
the rates for all $\Upsilon$ states increase by a factor of about
$2$. This can be understood qualitatively by the temperature
dependence of the gluon density, $n_g(T=250$ MeV$)/n_g(T=200$
MeV$)=(250/200)^3=1.95$.
\begin{figure}[!hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{alpha.eps}
\caption{The $\Upsilon$ dissociation rate $\alpha$ as a function of
transverse momentum at temperature $T=200$ MeV(left panel) and $250$
MeV(right panel) for the potential $V=U$. The medium velocity is
fixed as $v_{QGP}=0.5$ and its direction is chosen as the same as
the $\Upsilon$ momentum. $\Upsilon(1s), \Upsilon(1p)$ and
$\Upsilon(2s)$ are respectively shown by dashed, dot-dashed and
dotted lines. The rates for $\Upsilon(1p)$ and $\Upsilon(2s)$ are
multiplied by a factor $0.1$.}\label{fig1}
\end{figure}

In our following numerical calculations, the local temperature
$T(\vec x,t)$ and medium velocity $u_\mu(\vec x,t)$ which appear in
the gluon distribution function $f_g(k,T,u)$ and step function
$\Theta(T_\Upsilon-T)$ are controlled by the ideal hydrodynamic
equations
\begin{equation}
\label{hydro}
\partial_\mu T^{\mu\nu} = 0,\ \ \ \ \partial_\mu \left(n_B u^\mu\right) = 0,
\end{equation}
where $T^{\mu\nu}$ is the energy-momentum tensor, and $n_B$ the
baryon density. Taking into account the Hubble-like expansion
assumption for the longitudinal motion\cite{Bjorken}, the above
hydrodynamics describes the transverse evolution of the medium in
the central rapidity region. To close the hydrodynamic equations, we
take the equation of state\cite{Kolb,Sollfrank} for ideal parton gas
with parton masses $m_u=m_d=m_g=0$ and $m_s=150$ MeV and hadron gas
with hadron masses up to $2$ GeV. Here we did not consider the
back-coupling of the $\Upsilon$ states to the medium evolution. The
initial condition for the hydrodynamic equations is determined by
the corresponding nucleon+nucleon collisions and colliding nuclear
geometry\cite{Zhu}, leading to an initial temperature $T_i=340$ MeV.

The transport equation (\ref{transport}) can be solved
analytically\cite{Zhu}. The initial transverse momentum distribution
$f_\Upsilon$ can be described by the Monte Carlo event generator
PYTHIA with MSEL=62\cite{pythia} for the nucleon+nucleon collisions
and the Glauber model for the nuclear geometry. Since the collision
time for the two nuclei to pass through each other at RHIC energy is
less than the starting time of the hot medium, all the cold nuclear
matter effects can be included in the initial distribution.
Considering the fact that there is almost no $\Upsilon$ suppression
in d+Au collisions\cite{Liu}, we neglect the nuclear absorption and
take into account only the Cronin effect\cite{Gavin,Hufner}, namely
the gluon multi-scattering with nucleons before the two gluons fuse
into an $\Upsilon$. The Cronin effect leads to a transverse momentum
broadening, the averaged transverse momentum square $\langle
p_t^2\rangle_{NN}$ in nucleon+nucleon collisions is extended to
$\langle p_t^2 \rangle_{NN} + a_{gN} l$, where $l$ is the path
length that the two gluons travel in the cold nuclear medium and
$a_{gN}$ is a constant determined by the p+A data.

With the known distribution function $f_\Upsilon(\vec p, \vec x,
t)$, we can calculate the yield $N^\Upsilon_{AA}$ in the final state
by integrating $f_\Upsilon$ over the hypersurface in the phase space
determined by the critical temperature $T_c$. The nuclear
modification factors defined by
$R_{AA}=N^\Upsilon_{AA}/\left(N_{coll} N_{NN}^\Upsilon\right)$ are
shown in Fig.\ref{fig2} as functions of the number of participant
nucleons $N_{part}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt s=200$ A GeV,
where $N_{coll}$ is the number of binary collisions and
$N_{NN}^\Upsilon$ is the $\Upsilon$ yield in the corresponding
nucleon+nucleon collisions. Since the heavy quark potential at
finite temperature is not yet clear, we take the two limits of $V=U$
and $V=F$ to determine the $\Upsilon$ dissociation temperature
$T_\Upsilon$. For the ground state $\Upsilon(1s)$, the binding
energy is about 1.1 GeV which is much larger than the typical
temperature of the fireball $T\sim 300$ MeV at RHIC energy.
Therefore, $\Upsilon(1s)$ is unlikely to be destroyed in heavy ion
collision at RHIC. Considering the fact that the dissociation
temperatures $T_\Upsilon=4T_c$ for $V=U$ and $3T_c$ for $V=F$ are
both far above the temperature of the fireball, the suppression due
to the gluon dissociation is very small and independent of the heavy
quark potential. As to the excited states, the situation is
different as their binding energies are much smaller and thus their
yields are strongly suppressed. Especially, at $V=F$ which leads to
the lowest dissociation temperatures around the phase transition for
$\Upsilon(1p)$ and $\Upsilon(2s)$, almost all of them are eaten up
by the fireball in semi-central and central collisions. Including
the decay contribution from the excited states to the ground state,
the finally observed nuclear modification factor for $\Upsilon(1s)$,
$R_{AA} = \sum_{\Upsilon=1s,1p,2s}a_\Upsilon
N^\Upsilon_{AA}/\left(N_{coll} N_{NN}^\Upsilon\right)$ is controlled
by both the ground and excited states. In central Au+Au collisions,
as one can see in the figure, $R_{AA}\sim a_{1s}$=0.51. Integrating
over the number of participant nucleons, the $R_{AA}$ in minimum
bias events is 0.53 for $V=F$ and 0.63 for $V=U$. Both values are in
reasonable agreement with the preliminary PHENIX data
$R_{AA}<0.64$\cite{Atomssa}. As one can see in the figure, while the
overall $R_{AA}$ shows limited sensitivity to the heavy quark
potential, the excited states display different dependence on the
potential used in the calculation.
\begin{figure}[!hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{raanp.eps}
\caption{Centrality dependence of the nuclear modification factors
$R_{AA}$ in Au+Au collisions at top RHIC energy $\sqrt {s_{NN}}=200$
GeV. Upper and lower panels are for the heavy quark potential $V=U$
and $V=F$, respectively. The directly produced $\Upsilon(1s),
\Upsilon(1p), \Upsilon(2s)$ and the total $\Upsilon(1s)$ are
respectively shown by dashed, dot-dashed, dotted and solid lines. }
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}

In our numerical calculations, the momentum parameters $\langle
p_t^2\rangle_{NN}$ and $a_{gN}$ are respectively taken to be 7.1
(GeV/c)$^2$ from the PYTHIA simulation\cite{pythia} and 0.2
(GeV/c)$^2$/fm to best describe the available data for p+A
collisions\cite{Wang}. In order to further address the $\Upsilon$
production dynamics, we calculated the nuclear modification factor
$R_{AA}$ as a function of transverse momentum $p_t$ in central Au+Au
collisions at RHIC energy, see Fig.\ref{fig3}. There are three
nuclear matter effects that may affect the $\Upsilon$ $p_t$
dependence: the Cronin effect in the initial state, the leakage
effect\cite{Matsui,Zhu} for higher $p_t$ particles, and the
suppression mechanism in the hot medium. While both the Cronin
effect and leakage effect lead to a $p_t$ broadening, i.e. reduction
of low $p_t$ particles and enhancement of high $p_t$ particles, a
strong enough suppression may weaken the broadening. The reason is
the following: When the gluon traveling length $l$ which
characterizes the Cronin effect is long, the temperature which
controls the suppression becomes high, the competition between the
Cronin effect and the suppression may reduce the $p_t$ broadening.
For the ground state, there is only a weak suppression, a very
strong $p_t$ broadening due to the Cronin effect and leakage effect
is expected. Since most of the excited states are dissociated in
central collisions at both $V=U$ and $V=F$, their $p_t$ broadening
is strongly suppressed and not sensitive to the heavy quark
potential. The shape of the finally observed total $R_{AA}$ is
determined by the directly produced $\Upsilon(1s)$, as shown in
Fig.\ref{fig3}.
\begin{figure}[!hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{raapt.eps} %
\caption{Transverse momentum dependence of the nuclear modification
factors $R_{AA}$ in central Au+Au collisions at top RHIC energy
$\sqrt {s_{NN}}=200$ GeV. The peak caused by the Cronin effect is
clear at $p_t\sim$ 4.5 GeV/c for both potentials.} \label{fig3}
\end{figure}

To obtain more dynamic information on the nuclear medium through
survived excited states, we calculated the averaged transverse
momentum square $\langle p_t^2\rangle_{AA}$ as a function of
centrality for Au+Au collisions, the results are shown in
Fig.\ref{fig4}. To reduce the theoretical uncertainty in $\langle
p_t^2\rangle_{NN}$ and focus on the nuclear matter effect, we
considered the difference between nucleus+nucleus and
nucleon+nucleon collisions, $\Delta\langle p_t^2\rangle\equiv\langle
p_t^2\rangle_{AA}-\langle p_t^2\rangle_{NN}$. For the directly
produced ground state $\Upsilon(1s)$, the suppression is weak and
the Cronin effect plays the dominant role. As a result,
$\Delta\langle p_t^2\rangle$ increases monotonously with collision
centrality. For the excited states, however, the effect of initial
Cronin effect is overwhelmed by the disassociation especially in
central collisions. In other words, in the most central collisions,
the high temperature region is larger than that in peripheral
collisions, most of the excited $\Upsilon$s are destroyed.
Therefore, as one can see, the value of $\Delta\langle p_t^2\rangle$
goes up in peripheral collisions due to the Cronin effect, then
becomes saturated in semi-central collisions from the competition
between the Cronin effect and the increased suppression, and finally
starts to decrease when the suppression becomes strong. In addition,
as one can see in the figure, in case of $V=F$, the decrease is
remarkable due to the stronger suppression effect. Different from
the total $R_{AA}(N_{part})$ and $R_{AA}(p_t)$ which are
approximately one half of the corresponding values for the directly
produced $\Upsilon(1s)$, see Figs.\ref{fig2} and \ref{fig3}, the
total $\Delta\langle p_t^2\rangle$ is very close to the one for the
ground state, as shown in Fig.\ref{fig4}.
\begin{figure}[!hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{pt2np.eps}%
\caption{Centrality dependence of the difference $\Delta\langle
p_t^2\rangle\equiv\langle p_t^2\rangle_{AA}-\langle
p_t^2\rangle_{NN}$ between the averaged transverse momentum square
from Au+Au and p+p collisions at top RHIC energy $\sqrt
{s_{NN}}=200$ GeV. For comparison, we showed in the upper panel also
the $J/\psi$ data at SPS energy\cite{Topilskaya} multiplied by a
factor $2.4$.} \label{fig4}
\end{figure}

It is interesting to compare the $\Upsilon$ production at RHIC
energy and the $J/\psi$ production at SPS energy. Assuming there is
no $\Upsilon$ regeneration at RHIC and no $J/\psi$ regeneration at
SPS, the production mechanism in the two cases is then characterized
by the initial creation. In addition, from the relationship between
the fireball temperature and the dissociation temperature for the
ground state at $V=U$, $T_\Upsilon=4T_c\gg T_\text{RHIC}$ and
$T_{J/\psi}=2T_c \gg T_\text{SPS}$, the suppression of
$\Upsilon(1s)$ at RHIC and $J/\psi$ at SPS is negligible. Therefore,
the averaged transverse momentum squares for $\Upsilon$ in Au+Au
collisions at RHIC and $J/\psi$ in Pb+Pb collisions at SPS are
related to each other through the Cronin effect,
\begin{equation}
\label{dpt2} \Delta\langle p_t^2\rangle|_\Upsilon^\text{RHIC} =
\frac{a_{gN}^\text{RHIC} R_\text{Au}}{a_{gN}^\text{SPS}R_\text{Pb}}\Delta\langle
p_t^2\rangle|_{J/\psi}^\text{SPS}=2.4\Delta\langle
p_t^2\rangle|_{J/\psi}^\text{SPS},
\end{equation}
where we have taken $a_{gN}^\text{SPS}=0.08$
GeV$^2$/fm\cite{Gavin,Hufner}, and $R_\text{Au}$ and $R_\text{Pb}$
are the nuclear radii. This relation in fact predicts that the
centrality dependence of $\Delta \langle p_t^2\rangle$ for
$\Upsilon$ at RHIC is proportional to that for $J/\psi$ at SPS. In
the upper panel of Fig.\ref{fig4} we showed the $J/\psi$ data at
SPS\cite{Topilskaya} multiplied by the factor $2.4$. It is clear
that the relation (\ref{dpt2}) works well. For $R_{AA}(N_{part})$
and $R_{AA}(p_t)$, their behavior depends on the details of the hot
medium, it becomes difficult to obtain similar relations between
$\Upsilon$ at RHIC and $J/\psi$ at SPS.
\begin{figure}[!hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{raati.eps}%
\caption{Initial temperature dependence of the nuclear modification
factor $R_{AA}$ in central Au+Au collisions at top RHIC energy
$\sqrt {s_{NN}}=200$ GeV. } \label{fig5}
\end{figure}

How hot is the fireball formed in relativistic heavy ion collisions?
This is a crucial question that will have an influence on all
signatures for QGP formation. In all above calculations, the initial
temperature $T_i=340$ MeV is determined by the initial energy
density and baryon density which are controlled by the
nucleon+nucleon collisions and the nuclear geometry. To extract the
initial temperature of the system from $\Upsilon$ production, we now
take $T_i$ as a free parameter and calculate the momentum integrated
$R_{AA}$ as a function of $T_i$ in central Au+Au collisions at RHIC
energy, the result is shown in Fig.\ref{fig5}. While in case of
$V=F$, see bottom plot of Fig.\ref{fig5}, the values of $R_{AA}$ are
almost constants in the temperature region $1.5<T_i/T_c<2$ which is
the expected initial temperature region for collisions at RHIC, for
$V=U$, see top plot of Fig.\ref{fig5}, the excited states and the
finally observed ground state are sensitive to the temperature.
Therefore, the experimental results of $R_{AA}$ for any state will
allow us to extract the information on the initial temperature of
the system.

In summary, we studied $\Upsilon$ production in high energy nuclear
collisions at RHIC in a transport model. The observed $\Upsilon(1s)$
is mainly from the direct production, and the contribution from the
feed down of the excited states is small. The transverse momentum
distribution of $\Upsilon(1s)$ is not sensitive to the hot medium,
but characterized by the Cronin effect in the initial stage. The
above conclusion is almost independent of the heavy quark potential.
However, the behavior of the excited $\Upsilon$ states is controlled
by the competition between the cold and hot nuclear matter effects
and sensitive to the heavy quark potential. Therefore, the yield and
transverse momentum distribution for the excited states should be
measured in the future experiments, in order to probe the dynamic
properties of the formed fireball. The initial state Cronin effect
can be studied via the centrality dependence of $\langle
p_t^2\rangle$ in A+A collisions. We did not address the influence of
the parton distribution in A+A collisions\cite{Kharzeev,Ferreiro}.
Although it will affect the details of the predictions made in this
letter, the qualitative trends, especially the nature of the high
sensitivity of the excited $\Upsilon$ states to the potential and
initial temperature, will remain to be true. The consideration on
the velocity dependence of the dissociation temperature and the
influence of reduced binding energy in low temperature region will
be discussed in the future.


\section{Introduction}

 In this note we present convincing evidence for a new, surprising duality between two apparently different approaches to MHV scattering amplitudes in $\cN=4$ super-Yang-Mills theory. One of them, recently proposed in \cite{us}, consists in treating the {\it integrand} of the amplitude as a four-dimensional conformal object, the  {\it Born-level} correlation function of protected gauge-invariant composite operators with Lagrangian insertions. The other very recent approach \cite{them,Boels:2010nw} also focuses on the {\it integrand} of the amplitude,\footnote{The approach of \cite{them} covers not only MHV, but also all other kinds of amplitudes. Our approach is for the time being restricted to MHV amplitudes only.} regarding it as a four-dimensional conformal object formulated in terms of momentum twistors, and obtained from recursion relations of the BCFW type. Here we demonstrate the exact matching of the two objects for any number of particles at one loop and for 4, 5 and 6 particles at two loops.

{Our approach to constructing
scattering amplitude integrands
relies on the recent study \cite{Alday:2010zy} of correlation functions of $n$ gauge-invariant composite operators $\cO$,}
\begin{equation}\label{nO}
   G_n= \vev{\cO(x_1)\cO(x_2)\dots \cO(x_n)}
\end{equation}
in $\cN=4$ super-Yang-Mills theory, in the limit where the positions of the adjacent operators become light-like separated. In \cite{Alday:2010zy} we argued that in this singular limit the correlator, divided by its Born-level expression, becomes a Wilson loop on a light-like $n-$point polygonal contour. Such Wilson loops have been shown in the past to be dual to MHV gluon scattering amplitudes, divided by their tree-level expressions \cite{am07}--\cite{Bern4}. An essential step in establishing this relation is the so-called T-duality transformation from  momenta to dual coordinates:
\begin{equation}\label{moco}
    p_i = x_i - x_{i+1} \equiv x_{i,i+1}\,, \qquad x^2_{i,i+1}=0\,, \qquad x_{i+n} \equiv x_i
\end{equation}
(with $i=1,\ldots,n$).

In the paper \cite{us} we developed further
the approach of [3] in the following way. We restricted our discussion to bilinear scalar half-BPS operators  $\cO(x)=\Tr(\phi^2(x))$. Such operators are not renormalized and thus have fixed conformal dimension equal to their canonical dimension. We  proposed to compute the $l-$loop corrections to their correlators $G_n$ by making $l$ Lagrangian insertions,
\begin{align}\label{coloop}
G^{(l)}_n(x_1, \ldots, x_n) \propto \int \prod_{i=1}^l d^D y_i\ {\cal G}^{(0)}_{n+l}(y_1,\ldots,y_l; x_1,\ldots,x_n)\,,
\end{align}
where the integrand
\begin{equation}\label{inte}
{\cal G}^{(0)}_{n+l} = \vev{L(y_1) \ldots L(y_l)\cO(x_1)\cO(x_2)\dots \cO(x_n)}^{\rm (0)}
\end{equation}
is  the $(n+l)-$point {\it Born-level} correlator of the $n$ operators  $\cO(x_i)$ and the $l$ Lagrangian insertions.\footnote{We recall that the $\cN=4$ SYM Lagrangian, being a member of the half-BPS stress-tensor multiplet, is itself a protected operator.}

Such a procedure is well known in quantum filed theory. It has been adapted to the case of $\cN=4$ and $\cN=2$ superconformal correlators in \cite{Intriligator:1998ig,EHSSW,ESS}. A key point is that the integrand \p{inte} is a manifestly conformal rational function of the $(n+l)$ points, defined in $D=4$ dimensions. After dividing it by the Born-level expression of the $n-$point correlator $G^{(0)}_n$, we can safely go to the light-cone limit $x^2_{i,i+1} \to 0$ {and introduce the following ratio function}  (the integration points $y_i$ are kept in arbitrary positions)
\begin{align}\label{I}
 \mathcal{I}_{n+l} = \lim_{x^2_{i,i+1} \to 0}({\cal G}^{(0)}_{n+l}/G_n^{(0)})\,.
\end{align}
 Logarithmic divergences occur when we integrate  $\mathcal{I}_{n+l}$ over the insertion points. In \cite{us} we proposed to regularize  the integrals by a {\it dual infrared} dimensional regulator, i.e., to integrate with a $(D=4-2\ep)-$dimensional measure (with $\ep<0$). We compared the resulting expressions to the MHV $n-$gluon scattering amplitudes $A_n$,  computed in \cite{Anastasiou:2003kj}--\cite{Bern3} and {rewritten in the dual space \p{moco}, for arbitrary $n$ at one loop and for $n=4,5$ at two loops.} We found the following remarkable duality relation:
\begin{equation}\label{dua}
\lim_{x^2_{i,i+1} \to 0}\ln(G_n/G_n^{(0)} )= 2 \ln\left(A_n/A^{(0)}_n\right) + O(1/N_c) +O(\ep)\,.
\end{equation}
While the relation between the correlation functions and  Wilson loops established in \cite{Alday:2010zy} has a natural physical explanation, the duality \p{dua} has no obvious origin in field theory. In this aspect it resembles (and is closely related to) the duality MHV amplitudes/Wilson loops , which has so far not found its field theory explanation.\footnote{At strong coupling, a string theory mechanism for this duality was proposed in the pioneering paper \cite{am07}.}

 The reason why the duality  \p{dua} is formulated in terms of logarithms rather than simply $\lim(G_n/G_n^{(0)}) = (A_n/A^{(0)}_n)^2$, has to do with the parity-odd sector in the amplitude. Starting with $n=5$, the standard unitarity method \cite{Bern2}--\cite{Kosower:2010yk} produces a non-vanishing parity-odd contribution which however becomes $O(\ep)$ in the logarithm of the amplitude. This is crucial for matching the amplitude to the correlator $G_n$ which, as we argued in \cite{us}, is a true scalar and hence can have no pseudo-scalar sector. A related issue is the  appearance of the so-called $\mu-$terms, which are not
detected by the four-dimensional cuts \cite{Bern4, Kosower:2010yk}. Once again, these $\mu-$terms drop out from the logarithm of the amplitude. The precise reason for this property of amplitudes calculated by standard unitarity methods is not known, but it is clear that when considering dualities of the type Wilson loop/amplitude, or the newly proposed correlator/amplitude duality, we need to compare the logarithms of both objects.

It should be pointed out, however, that the $(n+l)-$point correlator ${\cal G}^{(0)}_{n+l}$ from \p{inte}, i.e. the {\it integrand} in the left-hand side of the duality relation \p{dua}, naturally contains a parity-odd sector. We consider the correlators \p{nO} in $\cN=2$ harmonic superspace \cite{hh}, where the protected operators $\cO$ are described by Grassmann-analytic (or half-BPS) superfields (hypermultiplet bilinears), depending on half of the chiral and on half of the antichiral odd superspace variables. In contrast, the $\cN=2$ SYM Lagrangian that we insert is a {\it chiral} superfield $\mathcal{L}(x,\theta)$. In terms of component fields, this means that the inserted Lagrangian is self-dual (or chiral),
\begin{align}
L(x) =\int d^4 \theta \, \mathcal{L}(x,\theta) =F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu} + i F_{\mu\nu}\tilde F^{\mu\nu}+\ldots = F_{\alpha\beta} F^{\alpha\beta} +\ldots\,.
\end{align}
The topological term  $i F\tilde F$ at the insertion points is responsible for the parity-odd contribution to the integrand  ${\cal G}^{(0)}_{n+l}$. At the same time, this term is a total derivative, so we know that it drops out from the {\it integral} in \p{coloop}.   Therefore, in \cite{us} we adopted the point of view that the parity-odd sector in ${\cal G}^{(0)}_{n+l}$  was a side effect of our calculation scheme, without any relevance to  the duality \p{dua}.

Soon afterwards, a new recursive procedure for generating scattering amplitudes in $\cN=4$ SYM was proposed in \cite{them}. It treats the {\it integrand} of the amplitude as a four-dimensional conformal object in momentum twistor space. Interestingly, this procedure also produces a parity-odd contribution to the integrand.\footnote{It should be mentioned that an alternative calculation of amplitudes \cite{Cachazo:2008hp} using the generalized unitarity method has already indicated that the integrand of the amplitude may have a parity-odd sector, which integrates to zero.} Most importantly, it is only by keeping the parity-even and odd sectors together that one achieves the manifest dual conformal symmetry \cite{Drummond:2006rz} of the integrand.

These two features of the new proposal in \cite{them} -- regarding the integrand of the amplitude as a conformal object in four dimensions and the presence of a parity-odd sector integrating to zero -- are common with our construction based on correlators with Lagrangian insertions. This stimulated us to revisit our correlator calculations, this time directly comparing integrands, not integrals. {The result is reported in this note. We found strong evidence, at one and two loops, for the following remarkably simple relation:}
\begin{equation}\label{new du}
1+\sum_{l\ge 1} g^{2l} \mathcal{I}_{n+l}  = (1+g^{2l}\sum_{l\ge 1} {I}_{n+l})^2\,.
\end{equation}
{Here $\mathcal{I}_{n+l}$ is the light-cone limit of the Born-level $n-$point correlator \re{inte} with $l$ insertions defined in \re{I}}; ${I}_{n+l}$ is the twistor integrand of the $n-$particle $l-$loop MHV amplitude from \cite{them}, depending on $n$ momentum twistors for the external particles and on $l$ pairs
of auxiliary momentum twistors for the loop integrations. Up to two loops,  the duality relation \re{new du} takes the form
\begin{align}\label{explicit}
\mathcal{I}_{n+1} = 2\, {I}_{n+1}\,,\qquad
\mathcal{I}_{n+2} =  2\, {I}_{n+2}
+ ({I}_{n+1})^2\,.
\end{align}
{Note that unlike in the duality relation \p{dua}, now  there is no need to take logarithms or to neglect $O(\ep)$ terms, the relations \p{new du} and \p{explicit} are exact. Indeed, (infrared) regularization is not an issue here, it only becomes relevant if we would substitute these integrands into the (divergent) integrals defining the amplitude. We recall that when we compare $(4-2\ep)-$dimensional {\it integrals} instead of four-dimensional {\it integrands}, we have to take into account the important observation made in Refs.~\cite{Bern4,Kosower:2010yk} that parity-odd and $\mu-$terms drop out from the logarithm of the amplitude.}

We believe that the duality between correlators with insertions and integrands of amplitudes is even more fundamental than the already known duality Wilson loops/amplitudes. {In particular, this new duality correctly captures the parity-odd terms in the integrand,  while the Wilson loop does not
produce them at all.} In some sense the former duality should lead to the latter. But we still have to discover the underlying reason for the relation \p{new du}.

In Section 2 of this note we show in detail how the new duality works in the simplest case of $n-$point one-loop correlators and MHV amplitudes. In Section 3 we briefly describe the two-loop tests for $n=4,5,6$ which we have successfully performed.

\section{One-loop MHV amplitudes}

In this section we compare the expressions for the one-loop integrand of the $n-$particle MHV amplitude in our approach \cite{us} with the one recently proposed in Ref.~\cite{them}.

\subsection{Correlation function approach}

As explained in the Introduction, in our approach the integrand of the one-loop $n-$particle MHV amplitude is obtained
from the {\it Born-level}  correlation functions involving $n$ composite conformal primary operators $\cO(x_i)$
and one supersymmetric chiral Lagrangian $\mathcal{L}(x_0, \q_0)$ \footnote{To simplify the notation, here we denote the single insertion point  by $x_0$, while in \p{inte} they were denoted by $y_i$.}
\begin{align}\label{g41}
  &  {\cal G}^{(0)}_{n+1}(x_0; x_1, \ldots, x_n)  = \int d^4\q_0\, \vev{ \mathcal{L}(x_0, \q_0) \cO(x_1)\ldots {\cal O}(x_n)}^{\rm (0)}  + O(g^4)\,,
 \\   \notag
 &  {G}^{(0)}_{n}(x_1, \ldots, x_n)  =   \vev{ \cO(x_1)\ldots {\cal O}(x_n)}^{\rm (0)} + O(g^2)
\end{align}
{Notice that the correlator with insertion in \p{g41} is of order $g^2$ in the coupling, because the fields at the insertion point (essentially the gauge kinetic term $FF+iF\tilde F$ at this perturbative level) interact with the matter fields at the outer points.} Further, in  Eq.~\p{g41} the Lagrangian is integrated over the Grassmann variables $\q_0$ at the insertion point, but {not} over the space-time point $x_0$.  The integrand we are discussing here  is defined as the ratio
of the correlation functions $ {\cal G}^{(0)}_{n+1}/G_n^{(0)}$ in the limit where the adjacent external points $x_i$ (with $i=1,\ldots,n$) are  light-like separated, $x^2_{i,i+1} =0$ (cf. the general definition \p{I}),
\begin{equation}\label{onlco}
\mathcal{I}_{n+1}(x_0;x_1,\ldots,x_n)=    \lim_{x^2_{i,i+1}\to 0} {{\cal G}^{(0)}_{n+1}}/{G^{(0)}_n}  \sim
 \lim_{x^2_{i,i+1}\to 0}\int   d^4\theta_0\  \Bigl(\sum_{k=1}^n i_{k,k+1}\Bigl)^2+ O(g^2) \,.
\end{equation}
Here the building blocks $i_{k,k+1}$ correspond to the three-point functions of two fundamental scalar
fields from the Wilson operators $\cO(x_k)$ and $\cO(x_{k+1})$
and the chiral field strength at point $(x_0,\theta_0)$ from the Lagrangian density.
The explicit expression for  $i_{k,k+1}$ can be found in Ref.~\cite{us}.
Integration over the Grassman coordinate of the Lagrangian insertion $\theta_0$ yields
\begin{align} \label{ii}
\lim_{x^2_{i,i+1}\to 0}& \int d^4\theta_0 \,  \lr{\sum_{k} i_{k,k+1}}^2 = -\frac14 \sum_{k,l=1}^n \frac{[x_{0k},x_{0,k+1} ]_\alpha{}^\beta   [x_{0l},x_{0,l+1} ] _\beta{}^ \alpha}{x_{0k}^2x_{0,k+1}^2x_{0l}^2x_{0,l+1}^2} \,,
\end{align}
where
$[x,y ]_\a{}^\b \equiv x_{\a\da} \tilde y^{\da\b} - y_{\a\da} \tilde x^{\da\b} = x^\mu y^\nu [\sigma_\mu,\tilde\sigma_\nu]_\a{}^\b\,$ (see the Appendix for our spinor conventions).
Making use of the identities \re{tra} and \re{tre}, we can easily compute the trace in \re{ii}. In doing this, we encounter the pseudo-scalar
\begin{align}
  \ep_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho} x_{0k}^\mu x_{0,k+1}^\nu x_{0l}^\lambda x_{0,l+1}^\rho
\equiv \epsilon(x_{0k},x_{0,k+1},x_{0l},x_{0l+1})\,.  \label{pssc}
\end{align}
Our final result is
\begin{align}\label{I-fin}
 \mathcal{I}_{n+1}(x_0;x_1,\ldots,x_n)= \frac12\sum_{k,l=1}^n \frac{  x_{kl}^2 x_{k+1,l+1}^2  -x_{k,l+1}^2 x_{k+1,l}^2-4i \epsilon(x_{0k},x_{0,k+1},x_{0l},x_{0,l+1})}{x_{0k}^2x_{0,k+1}^2x_{0l}^2x_{0,l+1}^2}\,.
\end{align}

By construction, $ \mathcal{I}_{n+1}$ is given
by the ratio of two correlation functions of conformal operators. So, it should
transform covariantly under conformal transformations in $x-$space with zero weight at the external points and with the canonical weight 4 of the Lagrangian at the insertion point
$x_0$. {This property is manifest for the parity-even terms  in the right-hand side of \re{I-fin}, but it does not hold for the individual parity-odd terms. However, conformal invariance in the parity-odd sector gets restored in the cyclic sum of all terms (see Eqs.~\p{long} and \re{f}  below)}. Indeed, Eq.~\re{ii} represents a sum of Feynman diagrams, which are neither gauge nor conformally invariant separately, but their sum is.

The expression for $\mathcal{I}_{n+1}$ does not have definite parity. The parity-even
part is given by a sum of terms each of which can be mapped, upon the change of variables
$p_i=x_i-x_{i+1}$, into one-loop Feynman integrands of one-mass and two-mass-easy topologies. This agrees with the well-known result for the one-loop $n-$particle MHV
amplitude \cite{Bern2}. In Ref.~\cite{us} we argued that the parity-odd part of $\mathcal{I}_{n+1}$ originates from the parity-odd part of the Lagrangian insertion $\int d^4\q_0\,  L(x_0, \q_0)$. The latter is given by a total derivative, $\epsilon_{\mu\nu\rho\lambda} F^{\mu\nu}F^{\rho\lambda} = \partial_\mu K^\mu$ and, therefore, it vanishes upon integration over the four-dimensional insertion point $x_0$.

\subsection{Momentum twistor approach}

In the approach of Ref.~\cite{them}, the integrand of the $n-$particle amplitude is formulated in terms of $n+2$ momentum twistors defined as the following $SL(4)$ spinors
\ba
Z_i = \left(
\begin{array}{r}
  \l_{i \a}  \\
 (\tilde x_i)^{\da\a}\l_{i \a}
\end{array}
\right)\,,\qquad Z_A = \left(
\begin{array}{r}
  \l_{A \a}  \\
 (\tilde x_0)^{\da\a}\l_{A \a}
\end{array}
\right)\,,\qquad Z_B = \left(
\begin{array}{r}
  \l_{B\a}  \\
 (\tilde x_0)^{\da\a}\l_{B \a}
\end{array}
\right)\,,
\end{align}
where $\a,\da=1,2$ and $i=1,\ldots,n$. Here the momentum twistors $Z_i$
correspond to the external particles carrying the light-like momenta
\ba\label{7}
(p_i)_{\a\da} =  (x_i - x_{i+1})_{\a\da} = \l_{i\a} \dl_{i\da}\,,
\end{align}
with $\l_{i\a}$, $\dl_{i\da}$ being (anti)chiral commuting spinors and  $x_i$ being the dual coordinates subject to the periodicity condition $x_{n+1}=x_1$. The two momentum twistors $Z_A$ and $Z_B$ are associated with the loop momentum. They depend on the same dual coordinate $x_0$ and two auxiliary spinors $\l_A$ and $\l_B$.

The integrand is expressed in terms of (dual conformal)  $SL(4)-$invariant contractions of four momentum twistors  $\vev{ABij}$ and $\vev{ijkl}$ given by
\ba
\vev{ijkl} &= \frac{1}{4!}\ep_{abcd} Z^a_i Z^b_j Z^c_k Z^d_l   = \vev{kl} \vev{i|x_{il} \tilde x_{jl}|j} + \vev{il} \vev{j|x_{jl} \tilde x_{kl}|k} + \vev{jl} \vev{k|x_{kl} \tilde x_{il}|i} \,,\label{10}
\end{align}
where $x_{ij}=x_i-x_j$, and the standard notation was used for the $SL(2)-$invariant contractions
of spinors,
\begin{align}
\vev{ij} = \l^\a_i \l_{j\a} = \ep^{\a\b}\l_{i\b} \l_{j\a}\,,\qquad
\vev{i|x\,\tilde y|j} = \l^\a_i x_{\a\da} \tilde y^{\da\b} \l_{j\b}\,.
\end{align}
The expression for  $\vev{ABij}$ is similar with $x_A=x_B=x_0$.

According to Ref.~\cite{them}, the one-loop integrand of the $n-$particle MHV amplitude
has the following form
\begin{align}\label{I-tw}
I_{n+1} = \frac1{n} \lr{\sum_{2 < i < n} I_{n+1}^{\rm (box)}(i) + \sum_{3<i <j \le n}  I_{n+1}^{\rm (pentagon)}(i,j)} + \text{cyclic}\,,
\end{align}
where $I_{n+1}^{\rm (box)}(i)$ and $I_{n+1}^{\rm (pentagon)}(i,j)$ correspond to box and pentagon diagrams, respectively. Their explicit expressions are
\footnote{Compared to Ref.~\cite{them}, we have inserted an additional factor $\vev{AB}^4$. This factor accounts for the different definitions of the integration measure over the loop momentum in the two approaches. In the correlation function approach this
measure takes the standard form (in four dimensions) $d^4 x_0$, while in the momentum twistor approach it is given by $d^3 Z_A d^3 Z_B = \vev{AB}^2
\vev{A dA}\vev{B dB} d^4 x_0$.
}
\begin{align}\notag
I_{n+1}^{\rm (box)}(i) &= \frac{\vev{n123}\vev{12\,i \,i+1}\vev{AB}^4}{\vev{ABn1}\vev{AB12}\vev{AB23}\vev{AB \,i\, i+1}}\,,
\\
 I_{n+1}^{\rm (pentagon)}(i,j)&=\frac{\vev{2\,j\,i-1\,i}\vev{AB\,\overline{2\,j}}\vev{AB}^4}{\vev{AB12}\vev{AB23}\vev{AB\,i-1\,i}\vev{AB\,j-1\,j}\vev{AB\,j\,j+1}}\,,
\end{align}
with $\vev{AB\,\overline{2\,j}} \equiv
\vev{A123}\vev{B\,j-1\,j\,j+1}-\vev{A\,j-1\,j\,j+1}\vev{B123}$ and $\vev{AB} = \lambda_A^\a \lambda_{B\a}$.

Making use of the definition \re{10} and of the identity $\vev{AB\,i\,i+1} = \vev{AB} \vev{i\,i+1} x_{0,i+1}^2$, we can express both $I_{n+1}^{\rm (box)}$ and $I_{n+1}^{\rm (pentagon)}$ as rational functions of the dual $x-$variables:\begin{align}\notag
I_{n+1}^{\rm (box)}(i) &=  \frac{x_{13}^2 x_{2,i+1}^2}{x_{01}^2 x_{02}^2 x_{03}^2 x_{0,i+1}^2}\,,
\\ \label{II}
 I_{n+1}^{\rm (pentagon)}(i,j)&= \frac{f(x_0)}{x_{02}^2x_{03}^2x_{0i}^2 x_{0j}^2x_{0\, j+1}^2}\,,
\end{align}
where in the second relation the notation was introduced for the scalar function
\begin{align}\label{long}
f(x_0) \equiv  [2|\tilde x_{20}x_{0j}|j]\vev{j|x_{ji}\tilde x_{i2}|2} = \tr [x_{23}\tilde x_{30}x_{0j}\tilde x_{j,j+1} x_{j+1,i}\tilde x_{i2}] \,.
\end{align}
This function depends on five points in the dual space,
$x_2,x_3,x_j,x_{j+1},x_i$, and it has a number of interesting properties. Firstly, it is manifestly conformally covariant.
Secondly, in virtue of the relation $x_{i,i+1}^2=0$, it vanishes when $x_0$ belongs
to the lines passing through the two pairs of points $(x_2,x_3)$ and $(x_j,x_{j+1})$,
\begin{align}
f(s x_2 + \bar s x_3) = f(s  x_j +  \bar s x_{j+1}) = 0\,,
\end{align}
with $ \bar s=1-s$ and $s$ arbitrary. Finally, for $x_0\to \infty$
is scales as $f(x_0)\sim -x_0^2 \tr [x_{23} \tilde x_{j,j+1} x_{j+1,i}\tilde x_{i2}]$.
Working out the trace in \p{long}, we arrive at the following relation
\begin{align}  \notag
f(x_0) &= \ft12 x_{02}^2 \left[ x_{3j}^2 x_{j+1,i}^2-x_{3,j+1}^2 x_{ji}^2
-4i\epsilon(x_{03},x_{0j},x_{0,j+1},x_{0i})\right]
\\ \notag
&+ \ft12x_{03}^2 \left[x_{2,j+1}^2 x_{ji}^2- x_{2j}^2 x_{j+1,i}^2
-4i\epsilon(x_{0j},x_{0,j+1},x_{0i},x_{02})\right]
\\ \notag
&+ \ft12x_{0j}^2 \left[ x_{2,j+1}^2 x_{3i}^2-x_{2i}^2 x_{3,j+1}^2
-4i\epsilon(x_{0,j+1},x_{0i},x_{02},x_{03})\right]
\\ \notag
&+\ft12 x_{0,j+1}^2 \left[ x_{3j}^2 x_{2i}^2-x_{3i}^2 x_{2j}^2
-4i\epsilon(x_{0i},x_{02},x_{03},x_{0j})\right]
\\ \label{f}
&+\ft12 x_{0i}^2 \left[ x_{2j}^2 x_{3,j+1}^2-x_{2,j+1}^2 x_{3j}^2
-4i\epsilon(x_{02},x_{03},x_{0j},x_{0,j+1})\right]\,.
\end{align}
We point out that each parity-even term in \p{f} transforms covariantly under
conformal transformations, while for the parity-odd terms this property holds only for the sum of the five terms involving cyclic shifts of indices.

Notice that unlike $I_{n+1}^{\rm (box)}(i)$, the pentagon
contribution $ I_{n+1}^{\rm (pentagon)}(i,j)$ does not have definite parity.
Substituting \re{II} and \re{f} into \re{I-tw}, we find that the parity-even part of the complete integrand $I_{n+1}$ is given by a sum of one-loop scalar integrands of various topologies (one-mass, two-mass easy, two-mass hard and three-mass). However, the two-mass-hard and three-mass integrands cancel out leading to the following result
\begin{align}\label{I2}
I_{n+1} = \frac14  \sum_{i,j=1}^n \frac{  x_{ij}^2 x_{i+1,j+1}^2  -x_{i,j+1}^2 x_{i+1,j}^2-4i \epsilon(x_{0i},x_{0,i+1},x_{0j},x_{0,j+1})}{x_{0i}^2x_{0,i+1}^2x_{0j}^2x_{0,j+1}^2}\,.
\end{align}

Finally, we compare the two expressions for the integrands, Eqs.~\re{I-fin} and \re{I2},  and observe that they coincide up to an overall {factor of two, }
\begin{align}\label{1}
\mathcal{I}_{n+1} =  2 \,I_{n+1} \,.
\end{align}
This result is in perfect agreement with the conjectured duality relation \re{explicit} at one loop.

\section{Two-loop tests}

In this section we give a brief description of the two-loop tests of the duality relation \p{explicit} that we have performed.

\subsection{$n=4$}

Let us first consider the case $n=4$. Here both the correlator and the twistor
expressions are very simple and easy to compare explicitly. The integrand of
the one- and two-loop four-point correlators were obtained by the insertion
method in \cite{ESS}. In the light-cone limit we define according to Eq.~\p{I}
\begin{eqnarray}
 {\cal I}_{4+1}(0;1,2,3,4) & = & 2 \, x^2_{13} x^2_{24} \, I_g(0;1,2,3,4) \, , \\
 {\cal I}_{4+2}(0,0';1,2,3,4) & = & x^2_{13} \, x^2_{24}
\Bigl( x_{13}^2 \, I_h(0,0';1,2,3;1,3,4) + x_{24}^2 \,
I_h(0,0';1,2,4;2,3,4)\Bigr) \nonumber \\
&+& \frac{1}{2} \Bigl(x^2_{13} \, x^2_{24} \, I_g(0;1,2,3,4)\Bigr)
\Bigl(x^2_{13} \, x^2_{24} \, I_g(0';1,2,3,4)\Bigr) \, + \,
(0 \leftrightarrow 0') \, .
\end{eqnarray}
Here we have used the notation
\begin{align}  \label{h1}
I_g(0;1,2,3,4) &= \frac{1}{x_{10}^2x_{20}^2x_{30}^2x_{40}^2}
\\  \label{h12}
I_h(0,0';1,2,3;4,5,6) &= \frac{1}{(x_{10}^2x_{20}^2x_{30}^2 )x_{0{0'}}^2( x_{4{0'}}^2
x_{5{0'}}^2x_{6{0'}}^2)}
\end{align}
for the integrands of the one- and two-loop scalar box integrals. On the other
hand, the integrand of the two-loop four-gluon amplitude expressed in terms of
dual $x$ coordinates is \cite{Anastasiou:2003kj}
\begin{equation}
I_{4+2} \, = \, \frac{1}{2} \, x_{13}^2 \, x_{24}^2 \Bigl( x_{13}^2
I_h(0,0';1,2,3;1,3,4) + x_{24}^2 h(0,0';1,2,4;2,3,4)\Bigr) \, + \,
(0 \leftrightarrow 0')\,, \label{a42}
\end{equation}
so that very clearly (see Eq.~\re{1})
\begin{equation}
{\cal I}_{4+2} \, = \, 2 \, I_{4+2} \, + \, \bigl( I_{4+1} \bigr)^2
\end{equation}
consistent with our duality proposal \p{explicit}. The momentum twistor
construction of \cite{them} yields
\begin{eqnarray}
I_{4+2} & = & \frac{1}{2} \,
\frac{\la 1234\ra\la 2341\ra\la 3412\ra \la AB\ra^4 \la CD\ra^4}{\la AB12\ra\la
 AB23\ra\la AB34\ra\la ABCD\ra\la CD12\ra\la CD34\ra\la CD41\ra} + \\
&& \frac{1}{2} \, \frac{\la 1234\ra\la 2341\ra\la 4123\ra \la AB\ra^4
\la CD\ra^4}{\la AB12\ra \la AB23\ra\la AB41\ra \la ABCD\ra\la CD23\ra\la
CD34\ra\la CD41\ra} \, + \, (AB \leftrightarrow CD)
\nonumber \, .
\end{eqnarray}
The equivalence of the last formula to \re{a42} follows
simply by substituting $\la i,i+1,j,j+1 \ra = \la i,i+1 \ra \la j,j+1
\ra x_{i,j}^2$ (here we have to define $x_i$ by $Z_i,Z_{i+1}$) and similar for
$\la A,B,i,i+1 \ra$. By definition, $\la 1234 \ra = - \la 2341 \ra$, so that
there is seemingly some ambiguity in reconstructing the numerator. However,
there is a unique choice for which the $\la i,i+1\ra$ terms cancel and the
$x$ space expression is reproduced.

\subsection{$n=5$}

Next, we move on to the considerably more complicated five-point two-loop
correlator. In \cite{us} we have described in detail how to construct its
integrand by the insertion method. Even in the
light-cone limit one finds a large sum over traces like
$\mathrm{tr}(\tilde x_{10}^{-1} x_{10'}^{-1} \tilde x_{20'}^{-1} x_{20}^{-1} \ldots)$
and thus of conformally covariant objects. The parity-even part is simple to
extract by putting $x_{i0} = x_{i0'} - x_{00'}$ and ordering the entries in each
trace. The trace of six sigma matrices drops from the sum, so that a single
application of \re{tre} is sufficient. The result for the parity-even
terms is concise, but like in the one-loop five-point integrand
${\cal I}_{5+1}$, we find a parity-odd part as well. The current procedure
yields a very large expression in this sector because
$\epsilon(x_{i0}, x_{j0},x_{k0},x_{l0})$ does not have definite conformal
properties.

To check the \emph{integrand} identity
\begin{equation}
{\cal I}_{5+2} \, = \, 2 \, I_{5+2} \, + \, \bigl( I_{5+1} \bigr)^2
\label{truelyMagic}
\end{equation}
in the parity-even sector amounts to verifying that
\begin{align}\notag
0& = \, x^2_{13} \, x^2_{24} \, \left[
 x^2_{13} \, I_h(0,0';1,2,3;1,3,4) + x^2_{24} \, I_h(0,0';1,2,4;2,3,4) - x^2_{14}
\, I_h(0,0';1,2,4;1,3,4) \right]
\\[2mm]  \notag&
+ \, x^2_{13} \, x^2_{14} \, x^2_{25} \bigl[ 2 \, I_h(0,0';1,2,5;1,3,4) \, - \,
I_h(0,0';1,2,3;1,4,5) \, - \, I_h(0,0';1,2,4;1,3,5) \bigr]
\\[2mm] & \notag
+ \, x^2_{24} \, x^2_{35} \left[  x^2_{25} \, I_p(0,0';1;2,5;3,4) \, - \,
x^2_{24} \, I_p(0,0';1;2,4;3,5) \, - \, x^2_{35} \, I_p(0,0';1;3,5;2,4) \right]
\\[2mm] \notag
& -  \ft1{4} \, x_{13}^2 \, x_{24}^2 \, I_g(0;1,2,3,4) \, x_{13}^2 \, x_{24}^2 \,
I_g(0';1,2,3,4) + \ft1{2} \,
x_{13}^2 \, x_{24}^2 \, I_g(0,1,2,3,4) \, x_{24}^2 \, x_{35}^2 \, I_g(0';2,3,4,5)
\\[2mm] \notag
& - \ft1{2} \, x_{13}^2 \, x_{24}^2 \, I_g(0;1,2,3,4) \, x_{35}^2 \, x_{14}^2 \,
I_g(0';1,3,4,5) + 2 \, I_\epsilon(0;1,2,3,4) \, I_\epsilon(0';1,2,3,4)
\\[2mm] \notag
&  + 4 \, I_\epsilon(0;1,2,3,4) \, I_\epsilon(0';2,3,4,5) + 4 \,
I_\epsilon(0;1,2,3,4) \, I_\epsilon(0';3,4,5,1)
\\[2mm] & + \text{(cyclic)} + (0 \leftrightarrow 0') \, . \label{magic}
\end{align}
In addition to the definitions above we need here the integrands
\begin{align}\notag
I_\epsilon(0;1,2,3,4) &= \frac{\epsilon(x_{10},x_{20},x_{30},x_{40})}
{x_{10}^2 \, x_{20}^2 \, x_{30}^2 \, x_{40}^2} \, ,
\\[2mm]
\label{penta}
I_p(0,0';1;2,3;4,5) &= \frac{x_{10'}^2}{(x_{10}^2 \,
x_{20}^2 \, x_{30}^2) \, x^2_{0{0'}} \, (x_{2{0'}}^2 \, x_{3{0'}}^2 \, x_{4{0'}}^2 \,
x_{5{0'}}^2)}
\end{align}
relating to the parity-odd one-loop terms and the integrand of the pentabox,
respectively. The product of two $I_\epsilon$ can be rewritten in terms
of $x^2_{ij}$ by the Fierz identity. The result is a very complicated
rational function, whose vanishing is not at all obvious. We have verified
\re{magic} by substituting rational values for the $x$, see below\footnote
{$I_\epsilon$ is best obtained as the trace over the four $x_{i0}$ minus
the scalar part of this.}. In \cite{us} the identity was formulated without
the $I_\epsilon$ terms, which are total derivatives. In this case it holds
only at the level of the integrals, not the integrands.

More is true, though: The principal result of this article is a numerical
check of \re{truelyMagic} and its six-point equivalent for the \emph{entire}
integrands, including both the parity-even and -odd parts.
In the notation of \cite{them}
\begin{equation}
I_{5+1} \, = \, \frac{2}{5} \frac{\la 1234\ra\la 2345\ra\la AB\ra^4}
{\la AB12\ra\la AB23\ra\la AB34\ra\la AB45 \ra} +
\frac{\la AB\overline{25}\ra\la 2534\ra\la AB\ra^4}
{\la AB12\ra\la AB23\ra\la AB34\ra\la AB45 \ra\la AB51\ra} + (\text{cyclic})
\end{equation}
which we have demonstrated to be equal to ${\cal I}_{5+1}/2$ in Section 2,
and
\begin{eqnarray}
I_{5+2} & = & \frac{1}{2} \, \frac{\la 1234\ra \la 2345\ra\la 5123\ra\la
AB\ra^4\la CD\ra^4}
{\la AB12\ra\la AB23\ra\la AB51\ra\la ABCD\ra\la CD23\ra\la CD34\ra
   \la CD45\ra} \\
& + & \frac{1}{2} \, \frac{\la 1345\ra\la 3451\ra\la AB\overline{13}\ra\la
AB\ra^4\la CD\ra^4}
{\la AB12\ra\la AB23\ra\la AB34\ra\la AB51\ra\la ABCD\ra\la CD34\ra\la CD45\ra
   \la CD51\ra} \nonumber \\
& + & (AB \leftrightarrow CD) + (\text{cyclic}) \, . \phantom{\Bigr(} \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}

To test \re{truelyMagic} by substituting numbers\footnote{We are grateful to
Nima Arkani-Hamed for suggesting this procedure to us.} is simple: We have
chosen $Z_1,\ldots,Z_5;Z_A,Z_B;Z_C,Z_D$ as vectors with four
components of the form $n_1 + i n_2$,  with $n_1$ and $n_2$  being randomly generated
integers. Since
\begin{equation}
\la AB\overline{ij}\ra \, = \, \la A,i-1,i,i+1\ra \la B,j-1,j,j+1\ra
\, - \, \la A,j-1,j,j+1\ra \la B,i-1,i,i+1\ra
\end{equation}
all momentum twistor structures can simply be evaluated by putting the four
twistors in $\la ijkl\ra$ into a matrix and taking its determinant.
In order to evaluate our expressions we treat $Z \, = \, (\lambda_\alpha,\mu_\da)$
as a row vector. Let
\begin{equation}
M^{\dot\alpha\alpha}(\lambda,\mu) \, = \,
\left(
\begin{array}{r}
  \mu_2  \\
  - \mu_1
\end{array}
\right)
\times
\left(
\begin{array}{rr}
  \lambda_2 & - \lambda_1
\end{array}
\right) \, , \qquad
\la \lambda \rho\ra = \lambda_2\rho_1- \lambda_1\rho_2 \, .
\end{equation}
With these definitions we have
\begin{equation}
\tilde x_i^{\dot\alpha \alpha} \, = \,
\frac{M^{\dot\alpha \alpha}(\lambda_i,\mu_{i+1}) -
M^{\dot\alpha \alpha}(\lambda_{i+1},\mu_i)}{\la\lambda_i \lambda_{i+1}\ra}
\end{equation}
and the same with lower indices. The square of a vector can
be obtained as $x_i^2=\frac12 \tilde x_i^{\dot\alpha \alpha}  {x_i}_{\alpha\dot\alpha }$. The evaluation of the aforementioned trace covariants
is thus reduced to matrix multiplication.

The on-shell conditions $x_{i,i+1}^2 = 0$ are solved by construction, so that
all components of the twistors are unconstrained. We have successfully run
the check for hundreds of points composed of complex integers with
real and imaginary parts in the range $\{-100,\ldots,100\}$.
{\sl Mathematica} can then do exact computations so that any disagreement would
immediately be noticed.

\subsection{$n=6$}

The insertion method with ${\cal N} = 2$ superfields can easily be applied to
the six-point correlator, too. In the following paragraph we briefly
mention a few technical points that change with respect to the discussion of the five-point case presented in Appendix A.4 of \cite{us}. We refer the interested
reader to the explanations given there.

The correlator carries charge 2 at all six outer points and its Grassmann
expansion starts at $\theta^8$ as before. This allows for the structures
\begin{eqnarray}
A & : & (\q_1)^2 (\q_2)^2 (\q_3)^2 (\q_4)^2 (56)^2 \, f_A(x) \, \nonumber \\
B & : & (\q_1)^2 (\q_2)^2 (\q_3)^2 \q_4^\alpha \q_5^\beta (46)(56) \, f_{B \,
\alpha \beta}(x) \\
C & : & (\q_1)^2 (\q_2)^2 \q_1^\alpha \q_2^\beta \q_3^\gamma \q_4^\delta
\bigl( (34)(56) \, f_{C \,\alpha \beta \gamma \delta}(x) \, + \, (35)(46) \,
g_{C \,\alpha \beta \gamma \delta}(x) \bigr) \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and their point permutations.  In the third case we need not write a
coefficient for the harmonic structure $(36)(45)\equiv(u_3 u_6)(u_4 u_5)$ because it is related
to the other two by the cyclic identity.   Here $f$ and $g$ are coefficient functions
which we can once again determine  by identifications of the harmonic variables $u$.  In case A we may identify all harmonics with $u_5$ barring for $u_6$. Note that
these terms do not automatically drop as they did for the five-point correlator.
In case B we can essentially do the same; we can read off the coefficient
$f_B$ upon identifying all harmonics with, say, $u_4$ barring for $u_6$. In
case C we must consider two different projections in order to identify the two
distinct coefficient functions. First, we identify $u_1 = u_2 = u_3 = u_5$ and
$u_4 = u_6$ which sends the $g_C$ term to zero, so that $f_C$ can be read off.
Next we identify $u_1 = u_2 = u_3 = u_4$ and $u_5 = u_6$ which projects out
$f_C$ and allows to read off $g_C$. As before this allows to sidestep the use
of the cyclic identity, which would be very heavy given the number of points.
Second, and most importantly, in all sets of identifications that we have
chosen, the ``TT-block'' (two insertions connected to one matter line)
is suppressed. The rest of the calculation is strictly analoguous to the
five-point case, notably the light-cone limit selects the graphs inscribed
into the planar hexagon $123456$. The relevant set of graphs is listed in
Figure 1.

Although the reconstructed integrand is still larger than in the five-point
case, it contains the same trace structures as before whereby the
numerical evaluation could be done by the same set of routines.
The integrand satisfies the six-point version of Eq.~\re{truelyMagic}.

\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 0.75 \textwidth]{graphs6.eps}
\vskip 0.2 cm
\caption{Graphs contributing to the six-point correlator
on the light cone}
\end{center}
\vskip 0.5 cm
\end{figure}

\section{Conclusions}

In summary, we have presented convincing evidence  that two different approaches, one
based on the analysis of the correlation functions with Lagrangian
insertions \cite{Alday:2010zy,us}
and the other on the recursive BCFW construction in momentum twistor space \cite{them,Boels:2010nw},
lead to identical expressions for the four-dimensional integrands
of MHV amplitudes. The next obvious step would be to
extend this correspondence to non-MHV amplitudes and, eventually,
identify a dual object analogous to the light-like Wilson loop which could describe
generic superamplitudes in planar $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM
theory~\cite{Coming papers1,Coming papers,Belitsky:2011zm}. Another, major challenge is to understand {\it why} this duality works. What makes the two integrands identical? Are there some hidden symmetries or some recursive structure of the correlator, which fix it to a unique form? We hope to find the answers to these questions soon.

\section*{Acknowledgments}

During this work we have profited a lot from discussions with Nima Arkani-Hamed, Simon Caron-Huot and Jake Bourjaily who shared with us their insight in the twistor formulation of scattering amplitudes.  Special thanks are due to Jake Bourjaily who provided us with a {\it Mathematica} code for generating twistor integrands. {ES is grateful to Juan Maldacena  and the Institute for Advanced Study, and to George Zoupanos and the Corfu Summer Institute  for warm hospitality at various stages of this work.} We would like to thank Johannes Henn and David Kosower for useful
discussions. This work was supported in part by the French Agence Nationale de la Recherche under grant
ANR-06-BLAN-0142. BE acknowledges support by STFC under the rolling grant ST/G000433/1.


\section*{Introduction}