Skip to main content

Full text of "Random orthonormal bases of spaces of high dimension"

See other formats



Abstract. We consider a sequence T-L n of finite dimensional Hilbert spaces of dimensions 
djv — ► oo. Motivating examples are eigenspaces, or spaces of quasi- modes, for a Laplace or 
Schrodinger operator on a compact Riemannian manifold. The set of Hermitian orthonormal 
bases of "Hat may be identified with [/(d/v), and a random orthonormal basis of ® w Hn is 
a choice of a random sequence Un € U(d^) from the product of normalized Haar measures. 
We prove that if — > oo and if j-Tr A\-u N tends to a unique limit state uj(A), then almost 
surely an orthonormal basis is quantum ergodic with limit state w(A). This generalizes an 
earlier result of the author in the case where is the space of spherical harmonics on S 2 . 
In particular, it holds on the fiat torus M. d /Z d if d > 5 and shows that a highly localized 
orthonormal basis can be synthesized from quantum ergodic ones and vice- versa in relatively 
small dimensions. 

The purpose of this article is to prove a general result on the quantum ergodicity of random 
orthonormal bases {ipN,j}j=i of finite dimensional Hilbert spaces "Hat C L 2 (M) of dimensions 
d,N — > oo of a compact Riemannian manifold (M, g). The proof is based on a "moment poly- 
tope" interpretation of quantum ergodicity from |Zlj : the quantum variances of a Hermitian 
observable A e \1/°(M) are identified with moments of inertia of the convex polytopes V? 

defined as the convex hull of the vectors A = (Ai, . . . , A^) of eigenvalues (in all possible 
orders) of UnAU^ where : L 2 (M) — > %n is the orthogonal projection. Equivalently, 
is the image of the coadjoint orbit of the diagonal matrix -D(A) under the moment map 
for the Hamiltonian action of the maximal torus Tj N C U(cIn) of diagonal matrices acting 
by conjugation on In particular, the main estimates of quantum ergodicity can be for- 
mulated in terms of estimates of the first four moments of inertia of Vt. The main result, 
Theorem [TJ states that random orthonormal bases are almost surely quantum ergodic as 
long as (In — » oo and ^TrU N AU N — > oj(A) for all A e \I/°(M), where lo(A) is the Liouville 
state. More generally, if these traces have any unique limit state, then almost surely it is the 
quantum limit of a random orthonormal basis. The proof is essentially implicit in [Zlj, but 
we bring it out explicitly here and also give detailed calculations of the moments of intertia, 
which seem of independent interest. 

Quantum ergodicity of random orthonormal bases is a rigorous result on the 'random 
wave model' in quantum chaos, according to which eigenfunctions of quantum chaotic sys- 
tems should behave like random waves. It also has implications for the approximation of 
modes by quasi-modes. Since eigenfunctions of the Laplacian A of a compact Riemannian 
manifold (M , g) form an orthonormal basis, it is natural to compare the orthonormal basis of 
eigenfunctions to a 'random orthonormal basis'. In |Z1] . the result of this article was proved 
for the special case where T-Ln is the space of degree N spherical harmonics on the standard 

Research partially supported by NSF grants # DMS-0904252 and DMS-1206527. 



S 2 . In |Z2| the quantum ergodic property was generalized to any compact Riemannian mani- 
fold, with V,n the span of the eigenfunctions in a spectral interval [N, N+l] for vA- Related 
results have recently been proved in |SZ[ IBL] . The dimension of such Hn grows at the rate 
jV m_1 where m = dimM and thus a random element of Hn is a superposition of jV m-1 
states. The results of this article show that the same quantum ergodicity property holds for 
sequences of eigenspaces (or linear combinations) whose dimensions tend to infinity at 
any rate. For instance, the results show that random orthonormal bases of eigenfunctions 

on a flat torus of dimension > 5 are quantum ergodic (for the precise statement, see £4.1 

and for further discussion, see £0.1 

To explain the moment map interpretation and the variance formula, recall that quantum 
ergodicity is concerned with quantum variances, i.e. with the dispersion from the mean of 
the diagonal part of a Hermitian matrix Hn on a large dimensional vector space Hn- The 
matrix Hn is the restriction 

T$ ■= H N AU N (0.1) 

to I-Ln of a pseudo-differential operator A 6 \I/ (M); here II/v is the orthogonal projection to 
U N and *°(M) is the space of pseudo-differential operators of order zero. The same methods 
and results apply to other context such as semi-classical pseudo-differential operators or to 
Toeplitz operators on holomorphic sections of powers of a positive line bundle |SZj . Given an 
ONB {ipN,j} d jZi of "Hat we define the quantum variances of the ONB (indexed by A e \E f0 (M) 

VaMnh}) := -r yilWtfj,^) -co(A)\ 2 . (0.2) 

dN U 

Here, u>{A) = f s * M UAd^L where d\Xh is normalized Liouville measure (of mass one). 
Definition: A sequence {ipNj}N of ONB's of %n is a quantum ergodic ONB of L 2 (M) if 

(SV) lim V A ({ip Nk }) = 0, MA e *°(M). (0.3) 


By a standard diagonal argument, this implies that almost all the individual elements 
(AipNjjipNj) tend to u)(A). Since this aspect of quantum ergodicity is the same as in 

31 EZ] (e.g.) we do not discuss it here. 
To define random orthonormal bases, we introduce the probability space (OAfB, dv), where 
ONB is the infinite product of the sets OJ\fBjy of orthonormal bases of the spaces T-Ln, and 
v = rijv=i u n, where un is Haar probability measure on ONBn- A point of ONB is thus a 
sequence VP = {(ipi , . . . , V'^ v )}A r >i of orthonormal basis. Given one orthonormal basis {e^} 
of "Hat any other is related to it by a unique unitary matrix. So the probability space is 
equivalent to the product 


(ONB, dv) ~ Y[ [U{d N ), dU) (0.4) 


where dU is the unit mass Haar measure on U(cIn)- Here we are working with Hermitian 
orthonormal bases and Hermitian pseudo-differential operators. We could also work with real 
self-adjoint operators and real orthornormal bases, which are then related by the orthogonal 
group. The results in that setting are essentially the same but the proofs are somewhat more 
complicated; for expository simplicity we stick to the unitary Hermitian framework. 



Let A £ \J r ° and denote the eigenvalues of T- by Ai, . . . , X dN . The empirical measure of 
eigenvalues of T- is defined by 


><r ! £*V (0-5) 


N d N . 

Its moments are given by 


Pk(Xi, ... } X dN ) = J2 X " = Tr(T^) fc . (0.6) 

To obtain quantum ergodicity, we we put the following constraint on the sequence {Hn}'- 
Definition: We say that Hn has local Weyl asymptotics if, for all A £ \I/ (M), 

^TrT^ = u;(A)+o(l). (0.7) 

In fact, the results generalize to the case where u)(A) is replaced by any other limit state, 
i.e. f stM aAd(jL where d\i is another invariant probability measure for the geodesic flow. 
Our main result is: 

Theorem 1. Let be a sequence of subspaces of L 2 (M) of dimensions d^ = dim "Hat — > 
oo. Assume that j^TtUnAUn = oj(A) + o(1) for all A £ \I/°(M). Then with probability one 
in (ONB,dv), a random orthonormal basis of @ n 1-Ln is quantum ergodic. 

A natural question (which we do not study here) is whether a random orthonormal basis 
is QUE, i.e. whether 

max{\ (Aip NJ ,ip NJ ) - uj(A)\ 2 , j = 1, . . . , d N } {a.s.)dv ?. 

As a tail event the probability of a random orthonormal basis being QUE is either or 1. 

We now explain how to formula Theorem [T] in terms of moment maps and polytopes. 
Quantum ergodicity of a random orthonormal bases concerns the dispersion from the mean 
of the diagonal part of The diagonal part depends on the choice of an orthonormal basis 
of Hn- Once an orthonormal basis is fixed, iT$ can be identified with an element if at of 
the Lie algebra u(d N ) of \J(d]y), and a unitary change of the orthonormal basis results in the 
conjugation H N — > U n H n Un of H N . If the vector of eigenvalues of H N is denoted Ajv, then 
the conjugates sweep out the orbit 0^ N - Let t(djv) denote the Cartan subalgebra of diagonal 
elements in u(d N ), and let || ■ || 2 denote the Euclidean inner product on t(d N ). Also let 

J dN : iu(d N ) -)■ it(d N ) 

denote the orthogonal projection (extracting the diagonal). Extracting the diagonal from 
each element of the orbit is precisely the moment map 



J dN :0 XN ^V XN Cit(d N ), J dN (UD(X)U*)=\^..,J2\ j \U ij \ 2 ,... ) (0.f 

of the conjugation action of T dN . Finally, let 

J dN (H) = Q-Tr HJ ld dN , D (X N ) = D(X N ) - Q-Tr H ) Id djv , 



for Hermitian matrices H 6 iu{d x ). We also introduce notation for the diagonal of D Q (\): 

-D (A) = £>(A), with; A,- := A r -j-J] A,. (0.9) 


H = H [> + J d (H), resp. D(\ N ) = D (\ N ) + I J-Tr # ) Id ( 


with if traceless, corresponds to the decomposition u(c? A r) = su{d x ) © E. 

As this description indicates, quantum ergodicity of random orthonormal bases is mainly a 
result about the asymptotic geometry of the polytopes V x corresponding to a sequence T$ 
of Toeplitz operators. The pushforward of the [/(ciAr)-invariant normalized measure on O x 
to V x is the so-called Duistermaat-Heckman measure dC? H , a piecewise polynomial measure 
on Vy To prove almost sure quantum ergodicity, we prove that for all such sequences T$ 
and their spectra {A^}, the second and fourth moments of inertia of V x with respect to 

dCj? are bounded. We use the property in Definition 0.7 to replace oo(A) by the centers of 

mass, i.e. the scalar matrix with the same trace as T-. The Kolmogorov strong law of large 
numbers then gives the quantum ergodicity property. In [Z3J , we study higher moments and 
their implication for the limit shape of V? along a sequence {Xn} with a limit empirical 

We asymptotically evalute the moments using the Fourier transform 

fa(X) := / e^ x ^ Y »d H (Y) (0.10) 

of the 5-function on Or. Here, we assume X 6 IR djv . We may identify X with a diagonal 
matrix, and then (X, diag(F)) = TrXY, and we get the standard Fourier transform. We 
obviously have: 

Lemma 1. Let A be the Euclidean Laplacian ofR dN acting in the X variable. Then, 

m 2 (V XN ) := E|| J dN (U*D(X)U)\\ 2 = -Afa(X)\ x=0 , 

m A {V lN ) := E|| J dN (U*D(\)U)\\* = A^ X (X)\ X=0 , 

We translate A by its center of mass to make the center of mass of V x equal to 0, i.e. 
Aj = 0. Using a formula for (i\{X) in terms of Schur polynomials, we prove 

Lemma 2. Letpk be the power functions (0.6). Assume that P\(X) = 0. Then, 
A 2 /i x (0) = (3 4 (d N ) p!(A), 

uri+h R (rl \ — ( ±d N {d N -l) ±d N {d N -l) , (12^+4^(^-1)) 

WU/l P4{UN) I (d N + l)d 2 N (d N -l) (d N +2)(d N +l)d N (d N -2) 1" (d N +3)(d N +2)(d N +l)d N 



The proof of Theorem [I] follows directly from Lemma [2] and the Kolmogorov SLLN (strong 
law of large numbers). When grows fast enough it also follows directly from the Borel- 
Cantelli Lemma. We first introduce notation for the basic random variables: 


Y4:OATB N ^[0,+oo), V = (U dl ,U d2 ,...) 

Y£(Hf) := \\J dN (U* N D(\)U N ) -D(\)f = || J djV (^L> (A)^ 


Then Lemma [T]-Lemma [2] determine the asymptotics of their mean and variance 

Var (yrf) := E((Y^) 2 ) - (E((Y^)) 2 . 

Corollary 1. 

Var(Y^) = (f3 i (d N )- J ^)pl(A)^pi(A). 

The Lemma first implies that E|| J dN (U*D(X)U)\\ 2 is bounded for all A G *°(M). Hence, 
E(^-|| Jd JV (f/*-D(A)f/)|| 2 ) as long as —> oo. Thus, the mean of the quantum variances 

(0.2[) tends to zero. As in [Zl, SZJ we then apply the Kolmogorov SLLN (or the martingale 

convergence theorem). The {Y^} is a sequence of independent random variables as N varies 
and Lemma [2] shows that they have bounded variance. Hence the SLLN implies that the 
partial sums, 

J2U Y n~ EY n) (0-11) 


have the property, 

„ N dr ' 

— Sn — > 0, almost surely (0.12) 

and this is equivalent to quantum ergodicity of random orthonormal bases. As mentioned 
above, if d^ grows at a faster rate one can obtain stronger results from the Borel-Cantelli 
Lemma: E.g. if Y^=i i~ < 00 ' one obtains almost sure convergence j-Y^ — > (a.s.). 

Since the argument above only requires that j-KY^ — > and Var(y^) is bounded, it 
does not require any assumption that EY^ 4 tends to a limit. Our calculations therefore go 
beyond what is necessary for almost sure quantum ergodicity, and pertain to the asymptotic 
geometry of the polytopes V^. There is a natural condition on the this sequence of polytopes: 

Definition: We say that the sequence {Hn} has Szego asymptotics if, for all A e \E' (M), 
there exists a unique weak* limit, u% — > ua € .M(K) as iV — > oo. Here, .M(R) is the set of 
probability measures on IR. 

Under this stronger assumption, Lemma [2] gives moment asymptotics: 
Proposition 1. Let Xn £ K djv be a sequence of vectors with the property that the empirical 

measures (0.5) tend to a weak limit v. Then 

™±CPx N )->4{L(t-i) 2 dvy 



This Proposition is closely related to the "Weingarten theorem" that the matrix elements 
y/dNUij are asymptotically complex normal random variables, where C/y are the matrix 
elements of U G U{cLn) |Wj- Perhaps this explains why the fourth moment is a constant 
multiple of the square of the second moment. It would be interesting to see if the pattern 
continues; we plan to study V? further in [Z3J. 

0.1. Discussion. The motivation for proving quantum ergodicity of random orthonormal 
bases for Hn of any dimensions tending to infinity was prompted by the general question: 
how many diffuse states (modes or quasi-modes) does it take to synthesize localized modes 
or quasi-modes? Vice-versa, how many localized states does it take to synthesize diffuse 
states? We would like to synthesize entire orthonormal bases rather than individual states 
and measure the dimensions of the space of states in terms of the Planck constant h. Let us 
consider some examples. 

In the case of the standard S 2 , the eigenspaces Hn of A are the spaces of spherical harmon- 
ics of degree N. They have the well-known highly localized basis of joint eigenfunctions 
of A and of rotations around the X3-axis. By localized we mean that a sequence {Y^} with 
m/N — > a microlocally concentrates on the invariant tori in S*S 2 where pe = a. Here, 
Po(x,^) = where J| generates the x 3 -axis rotations. On the other hand, it is proved 

in |Z1] that independent "random" orthonormal bases oH-Ln are quantum ergodic, i.e. are 
highly diffuse in S*S 2 . Since dim?^ — 2iV + 1, it is perhaps not surprising that the same 
eigenspace can have both highly localized and highly diffuse orthonormal bases when its 
dimenson is so large. The question is, how large must it be for such incoherently related 
bases to exist? 

A setting where the eigenvalues have high multiplicity but of a lower order of magnitude 
than on S 2 is that of flat rational tori R n /L such as R n /Z n . Of course it has an orthonormal 
basis of localized eigenfunctions, e 1 ^'^ . The key feature of such rational tori is the high 
multiplicity of eigenvalues of the Laplacian A of the flat metric. It is well-known and easy 
to see that the multiplicity is the number of lattice points of the dual lattice L* lying 
on the surface of a Euclidean sphere. We denote the distinct multiple A-eigenvalues by 
Hn, the corresponding eigenspace hy %n and the multiplicity of n 2 N by cIn = dim "Hat. In 
dimensions n > 5, (In ~ /^aT 2 , one degree lower than the maximum possible multiplicity of a 
A-eigenvalue on any compact Riemannian manifold, achieved on the standard S n . Further, 
j^TvUnAUn —> u)(A). Hence, the results of this article show that despite the relatively 
slow growth of (In on a flat rational torus, orthonormal bases of "Ha? in dimensions > 5 are 
almost surely quantum ergodic. The statement for dimensions 2,3,4 is more complicated 

An interesting setting where the behavior of eigenfunctions is largely unknown is that of 
KAM systems. For these, one may construct a 'nearly' complete and orthonormal basis for 
L 2 (M) by highly localized quasi-modes associated to the Cantor set of invariant tori. It 
seems unlikely that the actual eigenfunctions are quantum ergodic; but the results of this 
article show that if they resemble random combinations of the quasi-mode, then it is possible 

that they are. Further discussion is in £4.2 



I. Background 

In this section, we review the definition of random orthonormal basis and relate it to 
properties of the moment map for the diagonal action of the maximal torus Td N on co- 
adjoint orbits of U(cIn). 

1.1. Random orthonormal bases of eigenspaces. Suppose that we have a sequence of 
Hilbert spaces Hs N = 1,2,... of dimensions d N = dim'Hjv — > oo. We define the large 
Hilbert space 


' I X 


and orthogonal projections 

U N :U^U N . ri.r 

We then consider the orthonormal bases (0.4 ) of H which arise from sequences of orthonormal 
bases of %n . 

1.2. The basic random variables. Let A e \1/°(M) be a zeroth order pseudo-differential 
operator. By a Toeplitz operator we mean the compression T- (0.1) of A to %n- 

P A 
■ N 

Given one ONB of Hn, TA can be identified with a Hermitian ds x ds matrix. We fix 

orthonormal bases {e^}^ of "Hat and introduce the random variables: 

' " ( 

where * = {U N }, U N G U(d N ) = OBN N . We also define 



(U N T£U N ef,ef)---TrT N 
d N 



T-itf (*) = t E ^-(*) = t- E ^(*) + °w ( L4 ) 

3=1 3=1 

(where the o(l) term is independent of ^). Thus, 

LEMMA 1.1. |Zll ISZ] The ergodic property of an ONB \I/ (SV) is equivalent to: 

1 - 1 

i im m E T Y »W = ' VA G *°( M ) • ( L5 ) 

jV->oc A/ ^— ' d n 


As mentioned in the introduction, it follows by a standard diagonal argument that almost 
all the individual elements (Aipsj^Nj) tend to oo{A) for all A. We do not discuss this step 
since it is nothing new. 



1.3. Moment map interpretation. In the case where the components of A at are distinct, 
the covex polytope V% is the permutahedron determined by A, that is, the simple convex 

polytope defined as the convex hull of the points {a(Ajv)} where a £ SV runs over the 
symmetric group on d^ letters (i.e. the Weyl group of U(cIn))- The center of mass is the 
unique point X £ V? so that 

Xa(X N ) = <=► X = — ^ V 

where XY = X — Y is the vector from X to Y. The center of mass is evidently invariant 
under Sd N , hence has the form (a, a, ... , a) for some a and clearly a = Ylj=i ^j- 

In effect, we want to asymptotically calculate the moments of inertia of the sequence of 
permutahedra associated to a Toeplitz operator. 

Per mut ahedr on 

1.4. Symmetric polynomials and Schur polynomials. The elementary symmetric poly- 
nomials of N variables are defined by 

e k (Xi, . . . ,X N ) = ^2 x h ---x iN . 


If one replaces < by < one obtains the complete symmetric polynomials h^. The Schur 
polynomials are symmetric polynomials defined by 

S x = det [hxi+j-i) = det (e^ +j -i) 

where [i is a dual partition to A. 

1.5. Fourier transform of the orbit. We can compute the moments using the Fourier 

transform (0.10) of the orbital measure on the orbit of -D(A). 

An explicit formuae for fi\(X) is given in the first line of the proof of Theorem 5.1 of [OVJ: 
Lemma 1.2. ForU(d), 

Here, £(fi) is the number of rows of the partition fi. The degree of is the number of 


Since we would like to shift the center of mass of V r to the origin, we mainly consider 
p>ji(X) the Fourier transform of the traceless orbit (see (0.9)). 

2. Proof of Proposition [TJ Moment asymptotics 
2.1. Second moment asymptotics. We now prove: 

Lemma 3. [ZH [Z2l [SZ] Let A = (Ai, . . . , X dN ) G K djv , and Zei A)(AaO denote the trace zero 
diagonal matrix with entries (0.9). Thus, Pi(A) = (0.9). Then 

= / ^(^(WfcZC/ = , (2.1) 

where as above, dll is the normalized Haar probability measure on U(aV). 

This Lemma was proved in |Z11 IZ21 ISZj using the so-called Itzykson-Zuber-Harish-Chandra 
formua for the Fourier transform of the orbit, and again using Gaussian integrals. The 
proof we give here generalizes better to higher moments. We also sketch a proof using the 
Weingarten formulae. 

Proof. We use Lemma L2 to obtain 


E\\J dN (U*D(X)U)\\ 2 = (d N - 1)! • • • 0! 

»M=2 M < dN 0* +dN ~ ^ + dN ~ 2 ) ! ' • 

We sum over the Young diagrams with exactly two boxes and < d^ rows. There are just 
two of them: one row of two boxes or two rows of one box each corresponding respectively 
to the Schur functions 5(2,0) , £(1,1) ■ Note that S X k = is the kth elementary symmetric 
function and S^) = hj. is the complete kth degree symmetric function. 

We then translate A to A so that ^ ■ Aj = ei(A) = 0, i.e. we replace D(Ajv) by D (Xn)- 
Since the degree \fj,\ = 2, then we can only use \i = (2), (11) and 

0C i 0C j . 

S(i, 1) = e 2 = ^2 XiX i> S (w) = e i ~ 62 = x ? + ' 

i<j j i<j 


Ae 2 = 0, A{el-e 2 ) = 2\\Ve 1 \\ 2 = 2d N . 

For each monomial X{Xj we have AXiXj = 25^. Thus, ASn t i\ = and AS (20) = 2dj^. 
Since the Schur polynomials are homogeneous of degree 2, we can remove the % under the 
Schur polynomials to get an overall factor of —1, which is cancelled by the — sign from A. 

E||J djv (^ (A)£/)|| 2 = (2^)(d^-l)!^§ = ^g^5 PW)) (<X) 

= ra^o)(M = ^(e?-e 2 )(A). 

Since ei(Ajv) = we find that 

E||J djv (f/*A>(A)£/)|| 2 = -^re 2 (A) = ^p 2 (A 




Here we use that 

e x = px, 2e 2 = e-iPx - p 2 . 
The formula agrees with the one stated in the Lemma |3j 


2.2. Weingarten formulae for the expectation. As a second proof, we use the Wein- 
garten formula for integrals of polynomials over U(N) [W]. We denote the eigenvalues of 
D (X) by A. Then, 

||diag(£/*A)(A)f/)|| 2 = E hj2 ^AhJ:i\Uinm h \ 2 . 

The Weingarten formulae for these special polynomials state that asymptotically \fd^\Uij\ 2 
is a complex Gaussian random variable of mean zero and variance one. Thus, to leading 

Iu(d N ) \Uhoi \ 2 Whj2 \ 2 dU ~ d N (1 + 8j x 



E^Ah^EiJuujUiuAm^dU ~ ^ 1 (2E i A? + E il ^A jl A i2 ). (2.2) 


we get 

2.3. Proof of Proposition [TJ Variance and fourth moment asymptotics. We now 

prove the 4th moment identity in Proposition [TJ which is the main new step in this article. 

To calculate the variance of Y$ we use the expression in Lemma [l] in terms of jx^ and then 
use the formula of Lemma 11.21 

A Schur polynomial S nij _ }Jld (xi, . . . ,Xd) of degree n in d variables is parameterized by a 
partition of of the degree n = n% + n 2 + • • • + rid into d parts. When n = 4 and d > 4 there 
are 5 partitions: 

^1,1,1,1 O^) ^4 ^^X<i<j<k<£ "^i^j^k^ti 

S 2 ,i,i(xi, . . . ,x N ) = eie 3 


= e\- eie 3 



= e\ — 3efe 2 + 2eie 3 + e\ 

, 53,1,0 

= e\e 2 - el - e x e z . 

We note that Ae&(X) = for all k, so Ae^e™ = 2Ve/c ■ Ve n . Also, Vei is a constant vector. 
So A 2 eie 3 = Vei • VAe 3 = and 

A 2 ele 2 = 4A( ei Vei • Ve 2 ) = 8Ve! ■ V(Vei ■ Ve 2 ) = 8TrHesse 2 = 0. 



Here, Hess denotes the Hessian. We also use that A(V/ • Vg) = 2Hess(/) • Hess(g) when 
Af = Ag = 0. Also, 

Vei • V(Vei • Ve 2 ) = (1, 1, . . . , 1) • ^ 


d 2 e 2 d 
dxjdxk dxk 

Tr Hess(e2) = 0. 


A 2 e 2 2 = 2A(Ve 2 • Ve 2 ) = 4||Hess(e 2 )| | 2 = 4d N (d N - 1). 

Further, Aef = 2Vei ■ Vei = 2d,N, so that 

A 2 e\ = A{2(Ae 2 1 )e 2 1 + 2Ve 2 ■ Ve 2 ) = A{U N e\ + 2e\d N ) = 12d%. 
We recall Newton's identities, 

' ei = 

= Pi 

2e 2 

= eiPi 


3e 3 

= e 2 pi 

- eiP2 + P3 

k 4e 4 

= em 

- e 2 p 2 + eip 3 - Pa 

We note that Ae^ = for all k, so at X = 0, 

= L 

AS 2j1j1 = 

A 2 

< A 2 S 2:2 fl = 

-- A 

AS^Qfi = 

A 2 


k A5 3 ,i, = 8V ei • V(V ei • Ve 2 ) - ||Hess(e 2 )|| 2 = -4||Hess(e 2 )|| 2 = -4d N (d N - 1). 


By routine calculations and Lemma 1.2 we have 

A 2 Aa(()) : 

A 2 5 M (0)5 M (»A) 

- (d N l)!-"0! ^1^=4 ( Atl+djv _i)!( A12+ d JV -2)!... Al£ijv ! 

= (d N -l)l(d N - 2)1^0^0^1 

I (J 1M A 2 54.o,o(0)54,o,o(^A) 

+ l d iV-lJ! ( djv+3 )! 

_i_ (A \\\( A qm A 2 53,i,o(0)53,i, (iA) 

+ [d N - i)l{d N - zy. (djv+2)!(djv _ 1)! 

A 2 52,2,0(0)S2,2,0(»A) 

(djv + l)^(<ijv-l) 

A 2 5 4 ,o,o(0)54,o,o(»A) 
(d JV +3)(d J v+2)(d J v+l)d JV ' (d N +2)(d N +l)d N (d N -2)- 




A 2 S 3 ,i,o(0)g3.i,o(iA) 



By (2.4), we then have 

A 2 Aa(0) 

4d N (d N -l)S2,2,o(iA-) 
(d N +l)d%(d N -l) 

Recalling (2.3) and that ei(A) 

(12d 2 N +2d N (d N -l))Si, , (iA) 
+ {d N +3)(d N +2)(d N +l)d N + 

= 0, we get 

-4d N (d N -l)S 3 ,i,o(iA) 
(d N +2)(d N +l)d N (d N -2)- 


A 2 Aa(0) 

(d N +l)d 2 N (d N -l) 

Further recalling that 2e2 = eipi 

Ad N (d N -l)e 2 (iA) (l2d 2 N +id N (d N -l))el{itL) 


A 2 ^(0) 

d N {d N -l)pl(i\) 

(d N +3)(d N +2){d N +l)d N 

- P2 we finally get 

(3d 2 N +d N (d N -l))p 2 (iA) 


—4d N (d N — l)e^(iK) 
(d N +2)(d N + l)d N (d N -2)- 



-d N (d N -l)p 2 (iA) 



(d N +l)d^(d N -l) 1 (d N +3)(d N +2)(d N +l)d N 1 (d JV +2)(<i J v+l) ( i i v(d J v-2) 

Since the polynomials are homogeneous of degree 4, the factor of i inside the polynomials 
may be removed, and we get 

(3d 2 N +d N (d N -l))p 2 (A) 


-d N (d N -l)p%(A) 

FN T (TJ*D CAVnil 4 = d N (d N -l)p 2 (A) 

JE 'IKdjvV L/ ^OW^II - (diV+ i )d 2 r((ijv _ 1) -r (diV+3)(djv+2)(diV+1)diV i (^+2)^+1)^(^-2) ■ 
As A" — > oo the leading asymptotics of the outer terms cancel and the middle term is 

We note that P2 f, Ajv - > is bounded. If the the empirical measure of 

asymptotic to 4rp\{k 


eigenvalues tends to a limit measure, then 

d N 

tends to its second moment. 

Together with Lemma 2.1, this completes the proof of Proposition [TJ Corollary [T] follows 
by subtracting the square of the expectation. 

3. Completion of proof of Theorem \T\ 

By the assumption of Definition (0.7) 




-Tr 7^ + 0(1) 


By Lemma TlCorollary 



the variances of the independent random variables j^Y 1 
bounded. Hence, as explained in the introduction (see also \Z1\ ISZj ). (1.5) follows from 

Lemma [T]-Corollary [T] and the Kolmogorov strong law of large numbers, which gives 

lim , 

1 N 



d n 

almost surely . 


By (1.4) 

sup \X 







Hence also 

lim , 

N^oo N 

1 N 



1 X A 

almost surely 


If the dimensions d^ grow fast enough so that ^— is summable, then we obtain a stronger 
form from the fact that X^i^^r^n 4 i s finite hence the general term must tend to zero 
almost everywhere. It follows again that E^-A"^ 1 — > almost everywhere. 



4. Applications 

4.1. Fat tori. Theorem [l] applies to eigenspaces of the Laplacian on the flat torus ]R d /Z d (or 
other rational lattices) of dimension > 5 and for many eigenspaces in dimensions d = 2,3, 4. 

Proposition 4.1. Random orthornomal bases of A- eigenspaces of the flat torus M, d /7j d are 
quantum ergodic for d > 5. Also for d = 2, 3, 4 for special eigenspaces (specified below). 

The only condition on the eigenspaces for Theorem [T] is that (0.7) holds, and we now recall 

the known results on this problem. Given A e we denote the eigenspaces on a flat torus, 
enumerated in order of the eigenvalue by Hn and by II jv the orthogonal projection to 1-Lm q 

Lemma 4.2. The condition (0.7) is valid in dimensions > 5 on M~/'L d . That is, 

1 f 

-j—Tr AUn ~ / a(x, u)dx A du. 

djy J s*T m 

It follows that j-Y£ —> almost surely. 

In dimensions 2, resp. 3, resp. 4 there are restrictions on the sequence of eigenvalues 

n/ Z n 

—TrTl N A= / aA(x,k)dx. 

given in |EH] . resp. [DSP], resp. [P]. For eigenvalues in the allowed sequences, (0.7) is 

Proof. We use the basis = e^ k,x ' with \k\ = /ijv- Then 

( Ae k> e k) = [ a A (x,k)dx. 


d*N , ,T~~ JR"/Z n 

k:\k\=n N 1 

In dimensions n > 5, djv ~ I^n~ 2 - It is proved that lattice points of fixed norm on a sphere 
of radius y/n become uniformly distributed as n — > oo [P] . It follows that 

— / o~a{x, k)dx — ¥ I a(x, u)dx A dco. 

N .iii JR"/Z n Js*T m 
k:\k\=ti N I 

As in the last step of the proof of Theorem jlj Kj^X^ is summable when n > 5. 

The Liouville limit formula is true in dimension 4 when the number of lattice points grows 
linearly in n. The condition on n is given in [Pj. In dimension 3, the equidistribution result 
is proved in |DSPj with similar conditions on the sequence of integers n. 

Dimension 2 is more complicated. In dimension 2, the eigenvalues of integers n for which 
there exist lattice points (a, b) on the circle a 2 + b 2 = n. It is necessary that all prime factors 
of n are congruent to 1 modulo 4. In [EH] it is shown that for almost all such n, the lattice 
points on the circle become uniformly distributed as n — ¥ oo. □ 

Remark: In the case of a generic lattice L C M. d , the multiplicity of eigenvalues of A on IR d / L 
is two. The analogue of the eigenspaces above are spectral subspaces for a/A of shriking width 
w. Thus, one considers the exponentials e 1 ^'^ for £ G L with \t\ e [A — Cw, X + w]. It follows 
from the lattice point results of [G] that in dimensions d > 5, the number of eigenvalues of 

thanks to Z. Rudnick for explanations and references 



an irrational flat torus in [A, A + 0(X x ] is of order X d 2 . The question whether the trace 

asymptotics (0.7) hold for the span of the corresponding eigenf unctions does not appear to 

have been studied. 

4.2. Quasi-modes. Theorem [T] is not restricted to eigenspaces of the Laplacian and is 
equally valid for spaces of quasi-modes. We refer to |CVt IPo] for background on quasi- 
modes. Following |Poj . we define a C°° quasimode of infinite order for h 2 A with index set 
A4h to be a family 

Q = {(lPm(-,fr),Vrn{fr)) ■ m G M h } 

of approximate eigenfunctions satisfying 

{i)\\{h 2 A- ^ m {n))^ m {-M\Hs = M (h M ), (vmgZ+), 


m^ m ^ n ) ~ 6 mn \ = M (h M ), (VM G Z+). 

It follows by the spectral theorem that for any M G Z + , there exists at least one eigenvalue 
of h 2 A in the interval 

i r U = W{h) - h M ^ m {h) + h M l 


\\E IhA ^ k -^ k \\ Hs =0 M (h M ). (4.2) 

Here, Ej denotes the spectral projection for h 2 A corresponding to the interval /. We denote 
the quasi-classical eigenvalue spectrum of hyAbj 

QSph = {^ m {h) : m G Mn}- 

Since quasi-eigenvalues /j, m (h) are only defined up to errors of order h°°, there is a notion 
of 'multiple quasi-eigenvalue' defined as follows: we say fi m (h) ~ Unifi) if A*m — A*n — 0(h°°) 
and define the multiplicity of ix m (h) by 

mult{ji m {h)) = #{n : fx m (h) ~ /i n (^)} = dim Span{^ n (-, ti) : (^ 2 A - fi m (h))^ n = 0(h°°)}. 
We then introduce slightly larger intervals I m ,n (if need be) so that 

QSp(h) C [J X mjfi , Z m>h nl n>h = {m^n). 


Here, .A/f consists of equivalence classes of indices (corresponding to equivalence classes of 
quasimodes). We denote by the span of the quasimodes {ip m (-,h) : fJ, m (h) G 2^}. Then 

||^-^|| = 0(0, if vent- 

Theorem [l] applies to quasi-mode spaces "H^ as long as their dimensions tend to infinity and 
as long as there exists a unique limit state for dir ^ nh TrA\ n r^. One might expect true modes 

(eigenfunctions) with eigenvalues in the intervals to be close to linear combinations of 
the quasi-modes with quasi-eigenvalues in that interval. The question raised by Theorem [T] 
is whether they behave like random linear combinations or not. If they do, Theorem [T] gives 
their quantum limits. 

In particular, this bears on the question whether A-eigenf unctions of compact Riemannian 
manifolds (M, g) with KAM geodesic flow might be quantum ergodic. It seems unlikely that 
they are, but we are not aware of a proof that they are not. For such KAM (M,g), a 



large family of quasi-modes is constructed in \CV\ IPoj which localize on the invariant tori 
of the KAM Cantor set of tori. Without reviewing the results in detail, the 'large' family 
has positive spectral density i.e. the number of quasi-eigenvalues < /i grows like a positive 
constant times /i n where n = dim M. 

To our knowledge, the multiplicities and trace asymptotics for KAM quasi-modes have 
not been studied at this time. As in the discussion of flat tori, one would need to determine 
the equidistribution law of the tori in the invariant Cantor set corresponding to eigenvalues 
(or pseudo-eigenvalues) of \J~K in very short intervals I\ = [A — w, A + wj. The orthonormal 
basis of eigenfunctions is not simple to relate to the near orthonormal basis of quasi-modes in 
this case, but we might expect that a positive density of the eigenfunctions are mainly given 
as linear combinations of KAM quasi-modes with quasi-eigenvalues very close to the true 
eigenvalues. Whether or not they are quantum ergodic would reflect the extent to which they 
are sufficiently random combinations of quasi-modes and the extent to which the collection 
of quasi-modes in 1^ is Liouville distributed. 


[BL] N. Burq and G. Lebeau, Injections de Sobolev probabilistes et applications, arXiv:1111.7310| 

[CV] Y.Colin de Verdiere, Quasi-modes sur les varietes Riemanniennes compactes, Invent. Math. 43 
(1977), 15-52. 

[DSP] W. Duke and R. Schulze-Pillot, Representation of integers by positive ternary quadratic forms and 

equidistribution of lattice points on ellipsoids. Invent. Math. 99 (1990), no. 1, 49-57. 
[EH] P. Erdos and R. R. P. Hall, On the angular distribution of Gaussian integers with fixed norm. Paul 

Erdos memorial collection. Discrete Math. 200 (1999), no. 1-3, 87-94. 
[OV] G. Olshanski and A. Vershik, Ergodic unitarily invariant measures on the space of infinite Hermitian 

matrices. Contemporary mathematical physics, 137 - 175, Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2, 175, 

Amer. Math. Soc, Providence, RI, 1996. 
[G] F. Gotze, Lattice point problems and values of quadratic forms. Invent. Math. 157 (2004), no. 1, 


[P] C. Pommerenke, Uber die Gleichverteilung von Gitterpunkten auf m-dimcnsionalen Ellipsoiden. 

Acta Arith. 5 1959 227-257. 
[Po] G. Popov, Invariant tori, effective stability and quasimodes with exponentially small errors I- 

Birkhoff normal forms, Ann. Henri Poincare 1 (2000), 223-248. 
[S] S. Samuel, U(N) integrals, 1/N, and the De Wit-'t Hooft anomalies. J. Math. Phys. 21 (1980), no. 

12, 2695- 2703. 

[SZ] B. Shiffman and S. Zelditch, Distribution of zeros of random and quantum chaotic sections of 

positive line bundles. Comm. Math. Phys. 200 (1999), no. 3, 661-683. 
[W] D. Weingarten, Asymptotic behavior of group integrals in the limit of infinite rank. J. Math. Phys. 

19(5), 999-1001 (1978). 

[Zl] S. Zelditch, Quantum ergodicity on the sphere. Comm. Math. Phys. 146 (1992), no. 1, 61-71. 
[Z2] S. Zelditch, A random matrix model for quantum mixing. Internat. Math. Res. Notices 1996, no. 
3, 115-137. 

[Z3] S. Zelditch, Large N limits of coadjoint orbits (in preparation). 

Department of Mathematics, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208-2370, USA 
E-mail address: