The celebrated works of several mathematicians (including Poincaré, Denjoy, …, Arnold, Herman, Yoccoz, …) provide a very satisfactory picture of the dynamics of smooth circle diffeomorphisms:
- each
-diffeomorphism
of the circle
has a well-defined rotation number
(which can be defined using the cyclic order of its orbits, for instance);
is topologically semi-conjugated to the rigid rotation
(i.e.,
for a surjective continuous map
) whenever its rotation number
is irrational;
- if
has irrational rotation number
, then
is topologically conjugated to
(i.e., there is an homeomorphism
such that
);
- if
,
, has an irrational rotation number
satisfying a Diophantine condition of the form
for some
,
, and all
, then there exists
conjugating
and
(i.e.,
);
- etc.
In particular, if has Roth type (i.e., for all
, there exists
such that
for all
), then any
with rotation number
is
conjugated to
whenever
. (The nomenclature is motivated by Roth’s theorem saying that any irrational algebraic number has Roth type, and it is well-known that the set of Roth type numbers has full Lebesgue measure in
.)
In the last twenty years, many authors gave important contributions towards the extension of this beautiful theory.
In this direction, a particularly successful line of research consists into thinking of circle rotations as standard interval exchange transformations on 2 intervals and trying to build smooth conjugations between generalized interval exchange transformations (g.i.e.t.) and standard interval exchange transformations. In fact, Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz studied the notion of standard i.e.t. of restricted Roth type (a concept designed so that the circle rotation
has restricted Roth type [when viewed as an i.e.t. on 2 intervals] if and only if
has Roth type) and proved that, for any
, the
g.i.e.t.s
close to a standard i.e.t.
of restricted Roth type such that
is
-conjugated to
form a
-submanifold of codimension
where
is the first return map to an interval transverse to a translation flow on a translation surface of genus
and
is an i.e.t. on
intervals.
An interesting consequence of this result of Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz is the fact that local conjugacy classes behave differently for circle rotations and arbitrary i.e.t.s. Indeed, a circle rotation is an i.e.t. on 2 intervals associated to the first return map of a translation flow on the torus , so that
has genus
and also
. Hence, Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz theorem says that its local conjugacy class of
with
of Roth type has codimension
regardless of the differentiability scale
. Of course, this fact was previously known from the theory of circle diffeomorphisms: by the results of Herman and Yoccoz, the sole obstruction to obtain a smooth conjugation between
and
(with
of Roth type) is described by a single parameter, namely, the rotation number of
. On the other hand, Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz theorem says that the codimension
of the local conjugacy class of an i.e.t. of restricted Roth type with genus grows linearly with the differentiability scale
.
Remark 1 This indicates that KAM theoretical approaches to the study of the dynamics of g.i.e.t.s might be delicate because the “loss of regularity” in the usual KAM schemes forces the analysis of cohomological equations (linearized versions of the conjugacy problem) in several differentiability scales and Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz theorem says that these changes of differentiabilty scale produce non-trivial effects on the numbers of obstructions (“codimensions”) to solve cohomological equations.
In any case, this interesting phenomenon concerning the codimension of local conjugacy classes of i.e.t.s of genus led Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz to make a series of conjectures (cf. Section 1.2 of their paper) in order to further compare the local conjugacy classes of circle rotations and i.e.t.s of genus
.
Among these fascinating conjectures, the second open problem in Section 1.2 of Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz paper asks whether, for almost all i.e.t.s , any
g.i.e.t.
with trivial conjugacy invariants (e.g., “simple deformations”) and
conjugated to
is also
conjugated to
. In other words, the
and
conjugacy classes of a typical i.e.t.
coincide.
In this short post, I would like to transcript below some remarks made during recent conversations with Pascal Hubert showing that the hypothesis “for almost all i.e.t.s ” can not be removed from the conjecture above. In a nutshell, we will see in the sequel that the self-similar standard interval exchange transformations associated to two special translation surfaces (called Eierlegende Wollmilchsau and Ornithorynque) of genera
and
are
but not
conjugated to a rich family of piecewise affine interval exchange transformations. Of course, I think that these examples are probably well-known to experts (and Jean-Christophe Yoccoz was probably aware of them by the time Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz wrote down their conjectures), but I’m including some details of the construction of these examples here mostly for my own benefit.
Disclaimer: As usual, even though the content of this post arose from conversations with Pascal, all mistakes/errors in the sequel are my sole responsibility.
1. Preliminaries
1.1. Rauzy–Veech algorithm
The notion of “irrational rotation number” for generalized interval exchange transformations relies on the so-called Rauzy–Veech algorithm.
More concretely, given a -g.i.e.t.
sending a finite partition (modulo zero)
of
into closed subintervals
disposed accordingly to a bijection
to a finite partition (modulo zero)
of
into closed subintervals
disposed accordingly to a bijection
(via
-diffeomorphisms
), an elementary step of the Rauzy–Veech algorithm produces a new
-g.i.e.t.
by taking the first return map of
to the interval
where
, resp.
whenever
, resp.
(and
is not defined when
).
We say that a -g.i.e.t.
has irrational rotation number whenever the Rauzy–Veech algorithm
can be iterated indefinitely. This nomenclature is partly justified by the fact that Yoccoz generalized the proof of Poincaré’s theorem in order to establish that a
-g.i.e.t.
with irrational rotation number is topologically semi-conjugated to a standard, minimal i.e.t.
.
1.2. Denjoy counterexamples
Similarly to Denjoy’s theorem in the case of circle diffeomorphisms, the obstruction to promote topological semi-conjugations between and
as above into
-conjugations is the presence of wandering intervals for
, i.e., non-trivial intervals
whose iterates under
are pairwise disjoint (i.e.,
for all
,
).
Moreover, as it was also famously established by Denjoy, a little bit of smoothness (e.g., with derivative of bounded variation) suffices to preclude the existence of wandering intervals for circle diffeomorphisms, and, actually, some smoothness is needed because there are several examples of
-diffeomorphisms with any prescribed irrational rotation number and possessing wandering intervals. Nevertheless, it was pointed out by several authors (including Camelier–Gutierrez, Bressaud–Hubert–Maas, Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz, …), a high amount of smoothness is not enough to avoid wandering intervals for arbitrary
-g.i.e.t.: indeed, there are many examples of piecewise affine interval exchange transformations possessing wandering intervals.
Remark 2 The facts mentioned in the previous two paragraphs partly justifies the nomenclature Denjoy counterexample for a
-g.i.e.t. with irrational rotation number possessing wandering intervals.
In the context of piecewise affine i.e.t.s, the Denjoy counterexamples are also characterized by the behavior of certain Birkhoff sums. More concretely, let be a piecewise affine i.e.t. with irrational rotation number, say
is semi-conjugated to a standard i.e.t.
. By definition, the logarithm
of the slope of
is constant on the continuity intervals of
and, hence, it allows to naturally define a function
taking a constant value
on each continuity interval
of
. In this setting, it is possible to prove (see, e.g., the subsection 3.3.2 of Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz paper) that
has wandering intervals if and only if there exists a point
with bi-infinite
-orbit such that
where the Birkhoff sum at a point
with orbit
for all
is defined as
, resp.
for
, resp.
.
For our subsequent purposes, it is worth to record the following interesting (direct) consequence of this “Birkhoff sums” characterization of piecewise affine Denjoy counterexamples:
Proposition 1 Let
be a piecewise affine i.e.t. topologically semi-conjugated to a standard, minimal i.e.t.
. Denote by
the piecewise constant function associated to the logarithms of the slopes of
.If
for all
with bi-infinite
-orbit, then
is topologically conjugated to
(i.e.,
is not a Denjoy counterexample).
1.3. Special Birkhoff sums and the Kontsevich–Zorich cocycle
An elementary step of the Rauzy–Veech algorithm replaces a standard, minimal i.e.t.
on an interval
by a standard, minimal i.e.t.
given by the first return map of
on an appropriate subinterval
.
The special Birkhoff sum associated to an elementary step
is the operator mapping a function
to a function
,
, where
stands for the first return time to
.
The special Birkhoff sum operator preserves the space of piecewise constant functions in the sense that
is constant on each
whenever
is constant on each
. In particular, the restriction of
to the space of such piecewise constant functions gives rise to a matrix
. The family of matrices obtained from the successive iterates of the Rauzy–Veech algorithm provides a concrete description of the so-called Kontsevich–Zorich cocycle.
In summary, the behaviour of special Birkhoff sums (i.e., Birkhoff sums at certain “return” times) of piecewise constant functions is described by the Kontsevich–Zorich cocycle. Therefore, in view of Proposition 1, it is probably not surprising to the reader at this point that the Lyapunov exponents of the Kontsevich–Zorich cocycle will have something to do with the presence or absence of piecewise affine Denjoy counterexamples.
1.4. Eierlegende Wollmilchsau and Ornithorynque
The Eierlegende Wollmilchsau and Ornithorynque are two remarkable translation surfaces and
of genera
and
obtained from finite branched covers of the torus
. Among their several curious features, we would like to point out that the following fact proved by Jean-Christophe Yoccoz and myself: if
is a standard i.e.t. on
or
intervals (resp.) associated to the first return map of the translation flow
in a typical direction on
or
(resp.), then there are vectors
,
and a
-dimensional vector subspace
such that
is an equivariant decomposition with respect to the matrices of the Kontsevich–Zorich cocycle with the following properties:
- (a)
generates the Oseledets direction of the top Lyapunov exponent
;
- (b)
generates the Oseledets direction of the smallest Lyapunov exponent
;
- (c) the matrices of the Kontsevich–Zorich cocycle act on
through a finite group.
In the literature, the Lyapunov exponents are usually called the tautological exponents of the Kontsevich–Zorich cocycle. In this terminology, the third item above is saying that all non-tautological Lyapunov exponents of the Kontsevich–Zorich associated to
and
vanish.
In the next two sections, we will see that this curious behaviour of the Kontsevich–Zorich cocycle of or
along
allows to construct plenty of piecewise affine i.e.t.s which are
but not
conjugated to standard (and uniquely ergodic) i.e.t.s.
2. “Il n’y a pas de contre-exemple de Denjoy affine par morceaux issu de et
”
In this section (whose title is an obvious reference to a famous article by Jean-Christophe Yoccoz), we will see that the Eierlegende Wollmilchsau and Ornithorynque never produce piecewise affine Denjoy counterexamples with irrational rotation number of “bounded type”.
More precisely, let us consider is a piecewise affine i.e.t. topologically semi-conjugated to
coming from (the first return map of the translation flow in the direction of a pseudo-Anosov homeomorphism of)
or
. It is well-known that the piecewise constant function
associated to the logarithms of the slopes
of
belongs to
(see, e.g., Section 3.4 of Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz paper). In order to simplify the exposition, we assume that the “irrational rotation number”
has “bounded type”, that is,
is self-similar in the sense that some of its iterates
under the Rauzy–Veech algorithm actually coincides with
up to scaling.
If , then the item (c) from Subsection 1 above implies that all special Birkhoff sums of
(in the future and in the past) are bounded. From this fact, we conclude that
for all
with bi-infinite
-orbit: indeed, as it is explained in details in Bressaud–Bufetov–Hubert article, if
is self-similar, then the orbits of
can be described by a substitution on a finite alphabet
and this allows to select a bounded subsequence of
thanks to the repetition of certain words in the prefix-suffix decomposition.
In particular, it follows from Proposition 1 above that there is no Denjoy counterexample among the piecewise affine i.e.t.s topologically semi-conjugated to a self-similar standard i.e.t.
coming from
or
such that
.
Remark 3 Actually, it is possible to explore the fact that
is a stable vector (i.e., it generates the Oseledets space of a negative Lyapunov exponent) to remove the constraint “
” from the statement of the previous paragraph.
In other words, we showed that any always provides a piecewise affine i.e.t.
-conjugated to
. Note that this is a relatively rich family of piecewise affine i.e.t.s because
is a vector space of dimension
, resp.
, when
is a self-similar standard i.e.t. coming from
, resp.
.
3. Cohomological obstructions to conjugations
Closing this post, we will show that the elements always lead to piecewise affine i.e.t.s which are not
conjugated to self-similar standard i.e.t.s of
or
. Of course, this shows that the
and
conjugacy classes of a self-similar standard i.e.t. of
or
are distinct and, a fortiori, the Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz conjecture about the coincidence of
and
conjugacy classes of standard i.e.t.s becomes false if we remove “for almost all standard i.e.t.s” from its statement.
Suppose that is a piecewise affine i.e.t.
-conjugated to a self-similar standard i.e.t.
of
or
, say
for some
-diffeomorphism
. By taking derivatives, we get
since is an isometry. Of course, we recognize the slope of
on the left-hand side of the previous equation. So, by taking logarithms, we obtain
where is a
function. In other terms,
is a solution of the cohomological equation and
is a
-coboundary. Hence, the Birkhoff sums
are bounded and, by continuity of
, the special Birkhoff sums
of
converge to zero. Equivalently,
belongs to the weak stable space of the Kontsevich–Zorich cocycle (compare with Remark 3.9 of Marmi–Moussa–Yoccoz paper).
However, the item (c) from Subsection 1.4 above tells that the Kontsevich–Zorich cocycle acts on through a finite group of matrices and, thus,
can not converge to zero under the Kontsevich–Zorich cocycle.
This contradiction proves that is not
-conjugated to
, as desired.
Leave a Reply