Research Contribution DOI:10.56994/ARMJ.012.00?.00?
Received: 2025; Accepted: 2025


On boundary points of minimal continuously Hutchinson invariant sets

Per Alexandersson Department of Mathematics, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden per.w.alexandersson@gmail.com Nils Hemmingsson Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA nils.hemmingsson@stonybrook.edu Dmitry Novikov Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, 7610001 Israel dmitry.novikov@weizmann.ac.il Boris Shapiro Department of Mathematics, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden shapiro@math.su.se  and  Guillaume Tahar Beijing Institute of Mathematical Sciences and Applications, Huairou District, Beijing, China guillaume.tahar@bimsa.cn
(Date: March 2, 2026)
Abstact.
A linear differential operator T=Q(z)ddz+P(z) with polynomial coefficients defines a continuous family of Hutchinson operators when acting on the space of positive powers of linear forms. In this context, T has a unique minimal Hutchinson-invariant set MCHT in the complex plane. Using a geometric interpretation of its boundary in terms of envelops of certain families of rays, we subdivide this boundary into local and global arcs (the former being portions of integral curves of the rational vector field Q(z)P(z)z), and singular points of different types which we classify below.

The latter decomposition of the boundary of MCHT is largely determined by its intersection with the plane algebraic curve formed by the inflection points of trajectories of the field Q(z)P(z)z. We provide an upper bound for the number of local arcs in terms of degrees of P and Q. As an application of our classification, we obtain a number of global geometric properties of minimal Hutchinson-invariant sets.

Key words and phrases:
Action of linear differential operators, TCH-invariant subsets, minimal TCH-invariant subset, rational vector fields
2020 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 37F10, 37E35; Secondary 34C05

1 Introduction

Given a linear differential operator

T=Q(z)ddz+P(z) (1.1)

where P,Q are polynomials that are not identically vanishing, we say that a closed subset S is continuously Hutchinson invariant for T (TCH-invariant set for short) if for any uS and any arbitrary non-negative number t, the image T(f) of the function f(z)=(zu)t either has all roots in S or vanishes identically. In [AHN+24], we have initiated the study of general topological properties of TCH-invariant sets.

The main motivation for the present study that it covers an interesting and manageable special case of a more general inverse Pólya-Schur problem introduced in [ABS]. For the convenience of our readers, let us briefly recall what the Pólya–Schur problem/theory and its inverse are, see [CsCr, ABS].

The main question of the classical Pólya–Schur theory can be formulated as follows.

Problem 1.1.

Given a subset S of the complex plane, describe the semigroup of all linear operators T:[z][z] sending any polynomial with roots in S to a polynomial with roots in S (or to 0).

Definition 1.2.

If an operator T has the latter property, then we say that S is a T-invariant set, or that T preserves S.

So far 1.1 has only been solved for the circular domains (i.e., images of the unit disk under Möbius transformations), their boundaries [BB], and more recently for strips [BCh]. Even a very similar case of the unit interval is still open at present. It seems that for a somewhat general class of subsets S, 1.1 is currently out of reach of all existing methods.

In [ABS], the following inverse problem in the Pólya–Schur theory which seems both natural and more accessible than Problem 1.1 has been proposed.

Problem 1.3.

Given a linear operator T:[x][x], characterize all closed T-invariant subsets of the complex plane. Alternatively, find a sufficiently large class of T-invariant sets.

Paper [ABS] concentrates on the fundamental case when T is a linear finite order differential operator with polynomial coefficients and shows that under some weak assumptions on these coefficients, there exists a unique minimal T-invariant set (and its analogs when T acts on polynomials of degree greater than or equal to a given positive integer n). Many basic properties of T-invariant sets such as their convexity, compactness etc are discussed in [ABS] as well as the delicate connection of Problem 1.3 to the classical complex dynamics.

However effective criteria characterizing T-invariant sets and explicit description of the minimal T-invariant set in somewhat interesting cases are currently missing which motivated the consideration in [AHN+24] of the action of T on integer and positive powers of linear forms. This situation is still quite interesting and appears to be more tractable.

In particular, the following results have been obtained in [AHN+24]:

  • provided that either P or Q is not a constant polynomial, there is a unique minimal continuously Hutchinson invariant set MCHT for a given operator T (in what follows we will always assume that this condition is satisfied);

  • the only TCH-invariant set is the whole unless |degQdegP|1;

  • a complete characterization of operators T for which MCHT has an empty interior has been obtained (see Section 2.1 for details).

In this paper, we will focus on operators whose minimal set MCHT has a nonempty interior.

Definition 1.4.

For an operator T given by (1.1) with P and Q not vanishing identically, at each point z such that PQ(z)0, we define the associated ray r(z) as the half-line {z+tQ(z)P(z)|t+}.

Remarkably, TCH-invariant sets (and, in particular, the minimal one) can be characterized in terms of associated rays.

Theorem 1.5 (Theorem 3.18 in [AHN+24]).

A closed subset S is TCH-invariant if and only if it satisfies the following two conditions:

  1. (1)

    S contains the roots of the polynomials P and Q;

  2. (2)

    for any point zS, the associated ray r(z) is disjoint from S.

1.1 Main results

In the present paper, using Theorem 1.5, we provide a qualitative description of the boundary of minimal continuously Hutchinson invariant sets, including an exhaustive typology of its singular points. Our classification mainly depends on the intersection of the boundary MCHT with the curve of inflections R of the field R(z)z=Q(z)P(z)z.

Definition 1.6.

The curve of inflections R of the vector field R(z)z is defined as the closure of the set of points satisfying Im(R)=0, see [AHN+24]. It is a real plane algebraic curve of degree at most d=3degP+degQ1 (in this paper, we will always have d3).

The curve of inflections splits the complex plane into inflection domains where the sign of Im(R) remains the same.

Points of MCHT outside its intersection with R are classified with the help of two correspondences Γ and Δ sending the boundary MCHT to itself and defined as follows:

For a given point z of the boundary MCHT, Γ(z) is essentially the intersection of MCHT with the integral curve of the rational field R(z)z starting at z, where R(z)=Q(z)/P(z). In contrast, Δ is the intersection of the associated ray r(z) with the closure of MCHT in the compactification 𝕊1 of the complex plane (see Section 2.2). Formal definitions of Γ and Δ are given in Definition 4.1. Qualitatively, the boundary MCHT is made of two kinds of arcs:

  • local arcs which are integral curves of the field R(z)z (i.e. Δ(z)= and Γ(z));

  • global arcs at each point z of which the associated ray r(z) is tangent to MCHT elsewhere (i.e. Γ(z)= and Δ(z)).

Local arcs are locally strictly convex real-analytic arcs (see Proposition 4.11). In contrast, global arcs (formed by points of global type) can fail to be C1.

Local arcs inherit an obvious orientation from the vector field R(z)z. Global arcs also have canonical orientation, but its definition requires some work (see Section 4.5.2).

Local and global arcs connect special singular points of MCHT which in most of the cases belong to the curve of inflections. The latter decomposes into three loci (singular, tangent and transverse), each determining its own variety of singular points.

Definition 1.7.

The curve of inflections R of the field R(z)z decomposes into:

  • the singular locus 𝔖R formed by the points where several branches of R intersect;

  • the tangency locus 𝔗R formed by the non-singular points where the field R(z)z is tangent to R;

  • transverse locus R formed by the non-singular points of R where the field R(z)z is transverse to R.

The singular and the tangency loci are given by algebraic conditions. Therefore their intersection with MCHT is controlled in terms of degP and degQ. On the contrary, many points of the boundary can belong to the transverse locus R. We refine the definition of the correspondence Δ according to the value of R(z)uz (which, by definition, is a positive number).

Definition 1.8.

We define Δ(z)=(r(z)¯{z})MCHT¯, where r(z)¯,MCHT¯ are closures of r(z),MCHT in the compactification 𝕊1 of , respectively.

For any zR𝒵(PQ), we have Δ(z)=Δ(z)Δ0(z)Δ+(z) where uΔ(z) belongs to:

  • Δ(z) if R(z)R(z)uz;

  • Δ0(z) if R(z)=R(z)uz;

  • Δ+(z) if R(z)R(z)uz,

and uΔ(z)𝕊1 belongs to

  • Δ(z) if R(z)0;

  • Δ0(z) if R(z)=0;

  • Δ+(z) if R(z)0.

In particular, if R(z)>0, then Δ(z)=.

The main result of the present paper is a classification of boundary points of minimal continuously Hutchinson sets.

Theorem 1.9.

For any linear differential operator T given by (1.1), any point z of the boundary MCHT of its minimal TCH-invariant set belongs to one of the following types:

  • roots of polynomials P and Q (at most degP+degQ of them);

  • singular points of the curve of inflections (at most 2d of them);

  • tangency points between the curve of inflections and the field R(z)z:

    • straight segments, half-lines and lines (contained in at most degP+degQ+1 lines);

    • at most 2d2 isolated points;

  • points of the transverse locus R belonging to one of the four subclasses:

    • bouncing type: Δ+(z) and ΓΔ(z);

    • switch type: Δ+(z) and Γ(z)Δ(z)=;

    • C1-inflection type: Δ+(z)=, Δ(z) and Γ(z)=;

    • C2-inflection type: Δ+(z)= and either Δ(z)= or Γ(z).

  • points not on the curve of inflections belonging to one of the three subclasses:

    • local type: Γ(z) and Δ(z)=;

    • global type: Γ(z)= and Δ(z);

    • extruding type: Γ(z) and Δ(z).

Here, d=3degP+degQ1.

There can be many singular points of bouncing, extruding, C1-inflection, C2-inflection and switch types (we do not have a polynomial bound of their number in terms of degP and degQ). An extensive description of their geometric features is given below:

  • at points of extruding type, the boundary of MCHT is not convex and it switches from a global to a local arc (see Section 4.6 and Fig. 1);

  • at points of bouncing type, MCHT hits the curve of inflections, but does not cross it. In a neighborhood of such a point, the boundary MCHT remains in the closure of the same inflection domain (see Section 5.2 and Fig. 1);

  • at points of switch type, MCHT is strictly convex, crosses the curve of inflections and the boundary switches from a local to a global arc (see Section 5.5 and Fig. 1);

  • at points of C1-inflection type, MCHT crosses the curve of inflections and it switches from a global to another global arc having the opposite orientation. At such a point the curvature of MCHT is discontinuous (see Section 5.4 and Fig. 1);

  • at points of C2-inflection type, MCHT crosses the curve of inflections and the boundary switches from a global arc to a local arc. Besides, the curvature of MCHT is continuous at such a point (see Section 5.3 and Fig. 1).

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 1. Top row from the left: Extruding type, Switch type. Bottom row from the left: C1-inflection type, C2-inflection type, Bouncing type. In the pictures, blue arcs are global arcs, red arcs are local arcs and the black arc is a germ of the curve of inflections. The pointed arrow is the associated ray indicating the support points, when applicable.

Our second main result is an upper bound on the number of points of C1-inflection, C2-inflection and switch type in terms of d=3degP+degQ1.

Theorem 1.10.

For any operator T given by (1.1), the numbers of points of switch, C1-inflection and C2-inflection type (respectively |𝒮|, |1| and |2|) in MCHT satisfy the following bounds:

|𝒮|e16dln(d)+46d3;
2|1|+|2|e16dln(d)+46d3.
Corollary 1.11.

For any operator T given by (1.1), the boundary MCHT of the minimal set contains at most d16d+d(2d+1) local arcs.

In the last section of the paper, we deduce many results about the global geometry of minimal sets from the classification of boundary points. In several cases, an exact description can be given in terms of local and global arcs. In particular, we can prove that in generic case, the minimal TCH-invariant set is connected in .

Theorem 1.12.

For any linear differential operator T given by (1.1), the minimal continuously Hutchinson invariant set MCHT is a connected subset of with the possible exception of the case when R(z) is of the form λ+μz+o(z1) with λ and μ/λ.

In this later case, (unless both P and Q are constants and then there is no reasonable notion of a minimal set), MCHT is formed by at most 12degP+12degQ connected components.

1.2 Organization of the paper

  • In Section 2, we provide the basic background information on Hutchinson invariant sets developed in [AHN+24], including the results about their asymptotic geometry.

  • In Section 3, we describe the local geometry around singular points of the vector field R(z)z in terms of their local degree and principal value. We also describe the main properties of the curve of inflections defined by the equation Im(R)=0 and we also introduce the notion of horns.

  • In Section 4, we describe boundary points in the complement to the curve of inflections, introducing Γ and Δ correspondences.

  • In Section 5, we classify boundary points in the generic locus of the curve of inflections, proving Theorems 1.9 and  1.10 (in Sections 5.6 and 5.8.3 respectively). Corollary 1.11 is also proved in Section 5.8.3.

  • In Section 6, we apply the latter results to get precise descriptions of minimal sets in several cases. Theorem 1.12 is proven in Section 6.4.

Acknowledgments. The third author is supported by the Israel Science Foundation (grants No. 1167/17 and 1347/23), by funding received from the MINERVA Stifting with the funds from the BMBF of the Federal Republic of Germany, and from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement No. 802107). The fourth author wants to acknowledge the financial support of his research provided by the Swedish Research Council grant 2021-04900 and the hospitality of the Weizmann institute of Science in April 2021 and January 2024 when substantial part of the project was carried out. He is sincerely grateful to Beijing Institute of Mathematical Sciences and Applications for the support of his sabbatical leave in the Fall of 2023. The fifth author would like to thank France Lerner for valuable remarks about the terminology related to singular points.

2 Preliminary results and basic properties of MCHT

The following notation will be important throughout this text.

Notation 2.1.

Given an operator T as in (1.1), we define p,q, and p,q so that

P(z)=pzp+o(zp);
Q(z)=qzq+o(zq).

Furthermore, we set λ=qp and ϕ=arg(λ).

Similarly, for any point α, we have R(z)=rα(zα)mα+o(|zα|mα) with rα0 and mα. We denote by ϕα the argument of rα.

Remark 2.2.

Observe that frequently used affine changes of the variable z are applied to the vector field R(z)z and not to the rational function R(z) itself.

2.1 Regularity of the minimal set

For an operator T as in (1.1), its minimal set MCHT can be of three possible types:

  • regular if MCHT coincides with the closure of its interior;

  • fully irregular if MCHT has empty interior;

  • partially irregular if MCHT has nonempty interior but is not regular.

Actually, irregularity is related to specific reality conditions. The characterization of operators for which MCHT is fully irregular is contained in Theorem 1.15 of [AHN+24].

Theorem 2.3.

For an operator T as in (1.1), the minimal set MCHT is fully irregular in the following cases:

  • R(z)=λ for some λ;

  • R(z)=λ(zα) for some λ<0, α and degQ=1;

  • R(z)=λ(zα) for some λ>0, α and degQ2;

  • operators satisfying the following conditions (up to an affine change of variable):

    • R(z) is real on ;

    • roots of P and Q are real, simple and interlacing (i.e. the roots of P and Q alternate along the real axis);

    • |degQdegP|1;

    • if degQdegP=1, then λ>0.

In any other case, MCHT has a nonempty interior.

In this paper, we will always assume that MCHT has a nonempty interior.

Remark 2.4.

If degP+degQ1, then MCHT is either totally irregular or coincides with (see Theorem 1.15 of [AHN+24]). Therefore, our operators will always satisfy degP+degQ2. This implies in particular that d=3degP+degQ1 satisfies d3.

Referring to the closure of the interior of MCHT as the regular locus and its complement in MCHT as the irregular locus, we observe that the latter is contained in very specific lines of the plane.

Definition 2.5.

For a given rational function R(z), a line Λ is called R-invariant if for any zΛ such that R(z) is defined, we have z+R(z)Λ.

In particular, up to an affine change of variable, we can assume Λ= and thus R(z) is a real rational function. Besides, a R-invariant line is automatically an irreducible component of the curve of inflections R.

Definition 2.6.

For an operator T whose minimal set MCHT is not fully irregular, a tail is a semi-open straight segment [α,β[ in MCHT satisfying the following conditions:

  • the segment ]α,β] belongs to an R-invariant line;

  • for any z]α,β], βαR(z)>0;

  • for any z]α,β], z is disjoint from the regular locus of MCHT;

  • α belongs to the regular locus of MCHT;

  • β𝒵(PQ);

  • β is a root of the same multiplicity for both P and Q.

In particular, every tail belongs to a R-invariant line.

The following fact has been proven in Corollary 7.8 of [AHN+24].

Theorem 2.7.

For an operator T whose minimal set MCHT is not fully irregular, the irregular locus of MCHT is a (possibly empty) finite union of tails.

In particular, if P and Q have no common roots, then the minimal set of the corresponding operator is either regular or fully irregular.

2.2 Extended complex plane

Following Theorem 1.5, TCH-invariant sets are characterized by the position of the associated rays starting in their complements. Let us introduce a certain compactification111Notice that the most frequently used compactification of is ¯=P1. of which comes very handy in our considerations. We baptise it the extended complex plane 𝕊1.

The extended complex plane 𝕊1 is set-theoretically the disjoint union of and 𝕊1 endowed with the topology defined by the following basis of neighborhoods:

  • for a point x, we choose the usual open neighborhoods of x in ;

  • for a direction θ𝕊1, we choose open neighborhoods of the form IC(z,I) where I is an open interval of 𝕊1 containing θ and C(z,I) is an open cone with apex z whose opening (i.e. the interval of directions) is I.

Definition 2.8.

Given R(z) as above, let p be a non-singular point of R(z). We define σ(p) as the argument of R(p). We think of σ(p) as a point of the circle at infinity.

One can easily see that 𝕊1 of the extended plane 𝕊1 can be identified with the above circle at infinity. The extended plane is compact and homeomorphic to a closed disk. In particular, usual straight lines in have compact closures in 𝕊1. (Below we will make no distinction between a real line in and its closure in 𝕊1). Open half-planes in 𝕊1 are, by definition, connected components of the complement to a line.

Given a TCH-invariant set S, we denote by S¯ its closure in the extended plane 𝕊1.

The following result, but with a slightly different formulation, has been proved in Lemma 4.4 of [AHN+24].

Lemma 2.9.

Given an TCH-invariant set S, let α:[0,1] be such that:

  • t(0,1), αtSc;

  • σ(α0)σ(α1);

  • σ(α) is homotopic to the positive arc from σ(α0) to σ(α1) in the circle at infinity via a homotopy H(t,x):[0,1]×[0,1] such that H(0,x0)=σ(α(0)), H(1,x0)=σ(α(1)) for all x0[0,1].

If X denotes the connected component of in 𝕊1 containing the interval ]σ(α0),σ(α1)[ in the complement of r(α0)αr(α1), then XSc.

2.3 Integral curves

Another result has been proved in Proposition A.2 of [AHN+24].

Proposition 2.10.

Given a TCH-invariant set S and some point z0S, if there is a positively oriented integral curve γ:[0,ϵ[ of the vector field R(z)z such that limtϵγ(t)=z0, then for any t[0,ϵ], γ(t)S.

When referring to the proposition above, we say that the bounded backward trajectories of R(z)z of points in any invariant set S belongs to S.

2.4 Root trails

For any point u, the root trail 𝔱𝔯u of u is the closure of the set of points z such that the associated ray r(z) contains u. Except for the trivial cases described in Section 3 of [AHN+24], root trails are plane real-analytic curves. By definition, the root trail of any point of MCHT is also contained in MCHT. Furthermore, for any fixed u, we defined a t-trace (corresponding to u) as any continuous function γ(t) such that

Q(γ(t))+(γ(t)u)P(γ(t))=0

for all t0. That is, any t-trace γ(t) is a concatenation of parts of 𝔱𝔯u such that the resulting curve is continuous for any t0.

Lemma 2.11.

Consider a linear differential operator T given by (1.1) and some point u. Assuming that R(z) is not of the form λ(zu), then

(i) for any point u and any point z0𝒵(PQ) such that z0𝔱𝔯u and R(z0)+(uz0)R(z0)0, the root trail 𝔱𝔯u has a unique branch passing through z0 and its tangent slope is the argument of R2(z0)R(z0)+(uz0)R(z0) (mod π).

(ii) If R(z0)+(uz0)R(z0)=0 and m2 is the smallest integer such that R(m)(z0)0, then 𝔱𝔯u has m intersecting branches at z. Their tangent slopes are:

θ0m+kπm,

where θ0 is the argument of R(z0)R(m)(z0) and k/m.

Before proving Lemma 2.11 we prove the next two Lemmas.

Lemma 2.12.

If γ(t) is smooth planar curve, γ(0)=z0, and γ˙(t)=G(γ(t)) for some function G holomorphic and non-vanishing at z0 then the sign of the curvature of γ(t) at z0 coincides with the sign of ImG(0).

Indeed, then γ¨(t)=G(γ(t))γ˙(t). By definition, the sign of the curvature of γ(t) at z0 coincides with the sign of Imγ¨(t)γ˙(t)|t=0=ImG(0).

Lemma 2.13.

Let F be a function holomorphic at z0 with F(z0) and let m=ordz0(FF(z0)). Then the germ of IF={ImF=0} at z0 consists of m smooth branches with tangent slopes θ0m+kπm, k/m, where θ0=argF(m)(z0).

If m=1 and γ(t) is a parameterization of IF such that F(γ(t))F(z0)+t then the sign of the curvature of γ(t) coincides with the sign of Im[F′′(z0)(F)2(z0)].

Proof.

Indeed, we have F(z)=a0+am(zz0)m+, a0, so the branches of IF are tangent to the m lines satisfying equation Imam(zz0)m=0, which have slopes as stated.

For the second claim, note that γ˙(t)=1F(γ(t)), so the claim follows from Lemma 2.12. ∎

Remark 2.14.

Similar results hold for F having a pole at z0 by considering 1F.

Proof of Lemma 2.11.

Note that by definition

𝔱𝔯u={z s.t. R(z)uz+}{ImR(z)uz=0},

and Lemma 2.11 follows from the Lemma 2.13 with F(z)=R(z)uz and the fact that argR(z0)=arg(uz0). ∎

Remark 2.15.

The condition R(z0)+(uz0)R(z0)=0 means that the point u=z0R(z0)R(z0) is obtained as the the first iteration of Newton’s method of approximating roots of R(z) with the starting point z0.

When u is a point at infinity in the extended plane 𝕊1, the root trail 𝔱𝔯u of u is the closure of the points z where the argument of R(z) coincides with u.

Lemma 2.16.

Consider a linear differential operator T given by (1.1) such that R(z) is not constant. For any point u at infinity and any point z0𝒵(PQ) such that z0𝔱𝔯u, provided R(z0)0, the root trail 𝔱𝔯u has a unique branch passing through z0 and its tangent slope is the argument of R(z0)R(z0) (mod π).

If R(z0)=0 and m2 is the smallest integer such that R(m)(z0)0, then 𝔱𝔯u has m intersecting branches at z. Their tangent slopes are:

θ0m+kπm,

where θ0 is the argument of R(z0)R(m)(z0) and k/m.

Proof.

In this case 𝔱𝔯u{Im(R(z)/R(z0))=0} and the claim follows again from Lemma 2.13

Remark 2.17.

From Lemmas 2.11 and 2.16 it immediately follows that if a root trail 𝔱𝔯u can have m2 branches at some point z0, then z0 belongs to the curve of inflections R (because R(z0) and uz0 are real colinear).

Besides, if m3, then R(k)(z0)=0 for 2km1 and z0 is a singular point of R.

2.4.1. Concavity of root trails

Proposition 2.18.

Let u be a point of the extended plane 𝕊1 and z0 be a point of 𝔱𝔯u such that z0𝒵(PQ)R and z0u. We denote by L the tangent line to 𝔱𝔯u at z0. We define f(z,u) to be:

  • (R′′(z0)(uz0)2+2R(z0)(uz0)+2R(z0)](uz0)(R(z0)(uz0)+R(z0))2 if u;

  • R′′(z0)R(z0)R(z0)2 if u is a point at infinity.

Then the germ of 𝔱𝔯u at z0 belongs to

(i) the same half-plane bounded by L as the associated ray r(z0) if Im(f) and Im(R(z0)) have opposite signs.

(ii) They belong to distinct half-planes bounded by L if Im(f) and Im(R(z0)) have the same sign.

Finally, 𝔱𝔯u has an inflection point at z0 if Im(f)=0.

Proof.

Let Fu(z)=R(z)uz for u𝒞 and Fu(z)=u1R(z) for u𝕊1 so that 𝔱𝔯u={ImFu(z)=0}. Let c=Fu(z0). We have

L={z0+c1}={z|Im(c(zz0))=0}.

If γ(t) is a local parameterization of (tr)u at z0 such that Fu(γ(t))=Fu(z0)+t then γ˙(0)=c1. Moreover, (tr)uL+={Imc(zz0)>0} if the curvature of γ(t) is positive and (tr)uL={Imc(zz0)<0} otherwise.

The tangent ray r(z0)={z0+R(z0)+} lies in L+ if ImR(z0)c>0 and in L otherwise.

By Lemma 2.13 the sign of curvature of γ(t) is opposite to the sign of Im[Fu′′(z0)(Fu)2(z0)].

For u we have c=Fu(z0)=R(z0)(uz0)+R(z0)(uz0)2 and

Fu′′(z0)=R′′(z0)(uz0)2+2R(z0)(uz0)+2R(z0)(uz0)3,

so we are interested in signs of

ImR(z0)c=ImR(z0)R(z0)(uz0)+R(z0)(uz0)2=ImR(z0)

(recall that R(z0)uz0>0) and

ImFu′′(z0)(Fu)2(z0)=Im(R′′(z0)(uz0)2+2R(z0)(uz0)+2R(z0)](uz0)(R(z0)(uz0)+R(z0))2. (2.1)

For u𝕊1 we have c=u1R(z0) and we are interested in the signs of ImR(z0) and ImR′′(z0)R(z0)(R)2(z0).

In the transverse locus R of the curve of inflections, the concavity of root trails with respect to the line containing the associated ray depends on the sign of some geometrically meaningful real function.

Proposition 2.19.

Consider a point z0R𝒵(PQ) and some point u𝕊1. Assume that R(z0)+R(z0)(uz0)0 (or R(z0)0 if u is a point at infinity). Let L be the line containing the associated ray r(z0).

The germ of 𝔱𝔯u at z0 and the positive germ γz0+ of the integral curve of the field R(z)z starting at z0 belong to the same open half-plane bounded by L if R(z0)+R(z0)/(uz0) is negative (R(z0)<0 if u is a point at infinity).

The germ of 𝔱𝔯u at z0 and γz0+ belong to opposite open half-planes bounded by L if R(z0)+R(z0)/(uz0) is positive (R(z0)>0 if u is a point at infinity).

Proof.

Without loss of generality, we assume that z0=0 and R(z)=1+R(0)z+(a+bi)z2+o(z2) with R(0), a and b>0 (b0 because z0=0 belongs to the transverse locus of the curve of inflections). Necessarily u>0. Since b>0, γ0+ belongs to the upper half-plane.

By Lemma 2.16, 𝔱𝔯u has a unique branch at 0 tangent to . Let Fu(z)=R(z)uz0 for ur(z0) and Fu(z)=R(z) for u𝕊1, so 𝔱𝔯u={ImFu(z)=0}. Choose a parameterization γ(t) of this branch in such a way that Fu(γ(t))=Fu(z0)+t. Then

γ˙(0)=1Fu(0)=uz0R(0)+R(0)uz0 or γ˙(0)=1R(0)

for u or u𝕊1 being a point at infinity, respectively. Therefore γ˙(0)>0 if R(0)+R(0)/(uz0)>0 (resp. R(0)>0) and γ˙(0)<0 otherwise.

By (2.1) the sign of the curvature of γ(t) at 0 is opposite to the sign of ImR′′(0)=Imb>0, i.e. is negative. Thus γ(t) lies in the lower half-plane (i.e. not in the same half-plane as γ0+) if R(0)+R(0)/(uz0)>0 is positive and in the same half-plane as γ0+ if R(0)+R(0)/(uz0)<0 (R(0)>0 and R(0)<0 resp. for u𝕊1). Since R(z0), the number R(z0)+R(z0)/(uz0) is invariant under the maps zaz+b and zz¯ used for normalization, and the claim follows. ∎

2.4.2. Root trails and connected components of the minimal set

When degQdegP=0, root trails provide a bound on the number of connected components of the minimal set (in all other cases, it is known that MCHT is connected).

Proposition 2.20.

Consider a linear differential operator T given by (1.1) and satisfying degQdegP=0. Any connected component C of MCHT satisfies the following conditions:

  • C contains at least one root of P;

  • C contains at least one root of Q;

  • the sum of orders of zeros and poles of R(z) in C vanishes.

Proof.

We assume that a connected component C of MCHT is disjoint from 𝒵(P). Note that degQdegP=0 implies that the union of the zeros of tQ(z)+P(z)(zu) for any u, T>0 and t[0,T] is bounded.

Hence, for any uMCHTC, the root trail of u is disjoint from C, as otherwise there would be points in the complement of MCHT belonging to the root trail of u. Since MCHT coincides with the TCH-extension of any point in MCHT (see Lemma 2.2 of [AHN+24]), it follows that C cannot belong to the minimal invariant set.

Suppose now that there is a component for which the sums of orders of the zeros of Q does not equal the sums of orders of the zeros of P. Then there is a component C such that the sums of the orders of the zeros of P, say d0 is strictly greater than the sums of the orders of the zeros of Q, say d1. Taking uC we have that for all t, the zeros of tQ(z)+P(z)(zu) belonging to C have total degree d0+1. However, when sending t0, d1 of these zeros tend to the zeros of Q belonging to C and at most one tend to . This implies that at least d0d1>0 of the end points of the root trail of u does not belong to C, a contradiction. ∎

We prove now that the interior (MCHT) of the minimal set satisfies (outside zeroes and poles of R(z)) a weak property of local connectedness.

Lemma 2.21.

For any linear differential operator T given by (1.1) we consider a point α of the boundary MCHT that is neither a zero nor a pole of R(z). For any sufficiently small neighborhood V of α, the connected component MV of VMCHT containing α has connected interior.

Proof.

If α does not belong to the regular locus of MCHT, then MV is a line segment and hence has empty interior.

We have R(z)=rα+o(zα) for some rα. Then, a continuity argument immediately shows that MV has connected interior, as otherwise points in the complement of MCHT would have associated rays intersecting MCHT.

In the following, we prove that the closure of a connected component of the interior of MCHT cannot be disjoint from 𝒵(P).

Lemma 2.22.

For any linear differential operator T given by (1.1), one of the following statements holds:

  1. (1)

    MCHT is fully irregular;

  2. (2)

    MCHT=;

  3. (3)

    the closure of any connected component of the interior (MCHT) of the minimal set contains a root of P(z);

  4. (4)

    the closure of any connected component of the interior (MCHT) of the minimal set contains an endpoint of a tail.

Proof.

We suppose that we are not in the case (1), (2). Besides, we assume the existence of a connected component C of the interior (MCHT) of the minimal set whose closure is disjoint from 𝒵(P), contradicting statement (3).

We first prove that C cannot be the only connected component of (MCHT). Indeed, roots of P(z) that do not belong to the regular locus of MCHT (the closure of the interior) belong to tails (see Theorem 2.7) and they are not zeros or poles of R(z). Besides, MCHT is assumed to be distinct from . Consequently, we have |degQdegP|1. The only case where the regular locus of MCHT can be disjoint from 𝒵(P) is when R(z) is of the form λ or λ(zα). In the first case, MCHT is known to be totally irregular. In the second case, either λ>0 (and MCHT is totally irregular, see Theorem 2.3) or λ>0 and MCHT has no tails (and P(z) has no root at all). We assume therefore that the interior MCHT has several connected components.

We denote by A the set of points of C that belong to the closure of another connected component of (MCHT). By assumption, these are not these points are not roots of P(z) and Lemma 2.21 shows that each of them is a zero of R(z).

Since MCHT is minimal, there is a point uMCHTC¯ and a point z0𝔱𝔯uC. As the root trail 𝔱𝔯u changes continuously in u, u may be chosen outside A. Since |degQdegP|1, the zeros of tQ(z)+P(z)(zu) as t0 tends to 𝒵(P){u}. Further, we can assume that γ(t) does not equal for some finite t, as this would imply degQdegP=1 and λ<0, in which case MCHT is equal to . Hence, the minimal set MCHT therefore contains a continuous path γ(t) from an element of 𝒵(P){u} to z0 such that γ(t) solves tQ(γ(t))+P(γ(t))(γ(t)u)=0.

The path γ has to enter the component C and can do so either through a tail or an element of A. The path γ cannot contain any element αA because the equations Q(α)=0 and tQ(α)+P(α)(αu)=0 (for some t>0) imply P(α)=0, contradicting our assumption. Our assumption that neither (1), (2) nor (3) was satisfied thus implies (4). ∎

2.5 Asymptotic geometry of Hutchinson invariant sets

Let us recall the results of [AHN+24] concerning minimal Hutchinson invariant sets (see Theorems 1.11 and 1.12 of [AHN+24]).

Theorem 2.23.

For any operator T as in (1.1) with a minimal set MCHT having a nonempty interior, MCHT is:

  • a compact contractible subset of if degQdegP=1, and Re(λ)0;

  • a noncompact non-trivial subset of if degQdegP=0 or 1;

  • trivial, i.e. equal to otherwise.

Besides, the closure MCHT¯ in the extended plane 𝕊1 is contractible, connected and compact.

Thus, the only interesting cases for the description of MCHT are those for which the values of degQdegP are 1, 0 or 1. In the latter two cases, we have more precise results given below.

2.5.1. degQdegP=1

The following statement has been proved in Corollary 6.2 of [AHN+24].

Proposition 2.24.

For an operator T as in (1.1) such that degQdegP=1. Then the complement of its minimal Hutchinson invariant set MCHT in has exactly two connected components X1,X2. Each Xi contains infinite cones whose intervals of directions are arbitrarily close to (ϕπ2,ϕ+π2) and (ϕ+π2,ϕ+3π2) respectively.

2.5.2. degQdegP=0

The following statement has been proven in Corollary 6.4 of [AHN+24].

Proposition 2.25.

Take any operator T as in (1.1) such that degQdegP=0. Then for any ϵ>0, there exists an open cone 𝒞 whose interval of directions is arbitrary close to (ϕ+π,ϕ+π) and such that MCHT is contained in 𝒞.

3 Local analysis of the boundary of MCHT

We consider an operator T as in (1.1) whose minimal set MCHT has a nonempty interior.

Notation 3.1.

For any point αMCHT, we define rα, mα so that

R(z)=Q(z)P(z)=rα(zα)mα+o(|zα|mα). (3.1)

We also define ϕα=arg(rα) and dα:𝕊1𝕊1 where dα(θ)=ϕα+mαθ.

3.1 Description of a tangent cone

Definition 3.2.

For any αMCHT, we define 𝒦α as the subset of 𝕊1 formed by directions θ such that there is a sequence (zn)n satisfying the following conditions:

  • for any n, zn(MCHT)c;

  • znα;

  • arg(znα)θ.

We also define α as the subset of 𝕊1 formed by directions θ such that the half-line α+eiθ+ does not intersect the interior of MCHT.

Lemma 3.3.

For any αMCHT, the following statements hold:

  1. (1)

    𝒦α and α are nonempty closed subsets of 𝕊1;

  2. (2)

    α𝒦α;

  3. (3)

    for any θ𝒦α, d(θ)α. In particular, Kα is invariant under dα;

  4. (4)

    for any θ𝒦α, there exists a closed interval J𝒦α of length at most π containing both θ and dα(θ);

  5. (5)

    α𝕊1.

Proof.

From Definition 3.2 it immediately follows that 𝒦α and α are closed subsets of 𝕊1.

If αMCHT, then we can find a sequence of points in the complement of MCHT approaching α. By compactness of 𝕊1, we can choose a subsequence for which the arguments converge to some limit. Thus 𝒦α is nonempty.

Then, for any θ𝒦α, we have a sequence (zn)n in the complement of MCHT accumulating to α with the limit slope θ. The associated rays r(zn) accumulate to α+eidα(θ)+. Since none of them intersects the interior of MCHT, the half-line α+eidα(θ)+ does not intersect it either and dα(θ)α.

Besides, in the case where θdα(θ), (up to taking a subsequence of (zn)n, there is a closed interval J𝕊1 such that:

  • the endpoints of J are θ and dα(θ);

  • the length of J is at most π;

  • for any η in the interior of J, there is a bound N(η) such that for any nN(η), the associated ray r(zn) intersects the half-line α+eiη+ at some point Pη,n.

Existence of sequences (Pη,n)nN(η) proves that for any ηJ, one has η𝒦α.

Finally, α𝕊1 because in this case, MCHT would have empty interior. ∎

Remark 3.4.

Note that in the case θ=dα(θ), the interval J is a singleton {θ}.

Let us deduce local description of 𝒦α and α depending on the local invariants of α.

Corollary 3.5.

For any αMCHT, the following statements hold:

  • if |mα|2, then 𝒦α=α and they are contained in the finite set of arguments satisfying θϕα1mα[2π1mα];

  • if mα=1, then ϕα=0 and 𝒦α=α;

  • if mα=0, then ϕαα;

  • if mα=1, then 𝒦α=α and these sets are formed by at most two intervals, each of length at most π and having their midpoints at ϕα2 and ϕα2+π.

Proof.

We consider maximal interval J in 𝒦α (which is non-empty by Lemma 3.3). The images of J under the iterated action of dα belong to α.

If |mα|2, then J is a singleton since otherwise the union of its iterates would coincide with 𝕊1 (contradicting Lemma 3.3). Thus J has to be a fixed point of the map dα.

If mα=1 and ϕα0, then J coincides with 𝕊1 because no other connected subset of the circle is preserved under the action of nontrivial rotation. Therefore dα is the identity map.

If mα=0, then for any θ𝒦α, dα(θ)=ϕα. Therefore ϕαα.

If mα=1, then J is invariant under the action of θϕαθ. Thus, either ϕα2 or ϕα2+π is the bisector of J. If J is of length strictly bigger than π, then Lemma 3.3 shows that its complement (of length strictly smaller than π) is also contained in α. Therefore Lα=𝕊1 which is a contradiction. ∎

We obtain a bound on the number of petals of MCHT that can be attached to a boundary point.

Corollary 3.6.

For any linear differential operator T given by (1.1) we consider a point α of the boundary MCHT. Then for any sufficiently small open subset V the interior of the connected component MV of VMCHT containing α has at most:

  • |1mα| connected components if mα1;

  • degP connected components if mα=1

where R(z)=λ(zα)mα+o((zα)mα) with λ and mα.

Proof.

If α is not a zero or a pole of R(z), then Lemma 2.21 proves the statement. Besides, if mα{0,1}, Corollary 3.5 proves that α is in the closure of at most 1mα components.

In the remaining cases, α is a simple zero of R(z). If α is also a root of degree d of P, then it is a root of degree d+1 of Q.

We can divide P and Q by (zα)d while keeping the same minimal set MCHT (because in this case 𝒵(PQ) remains unchanged). Consequently, we can assume that α is not a root of P. Lemma 2.22 proves that for any connected component C of (MCHT) such that α is in the closure of C, either some root of P(z) belongs to the closure of C or some tail is attached to C. If α is in the closure of several connected components of (MCHT), then a same root of P cannot be in the closure of two of them because MCHT¯ would fail to be contractible. Similarly a given tail is attached to only one connected component of (MCHT) (and contains at least one root of P). Therefore, α is in the closure of at most degP components. ∎

3.2 Curve of inflections

In §A.3 of [AHN+24] we introduced the curve of inflections R of an analytic vector field R(z)z. By definition, it is the closure in of the subset of 𝒵(PQ) at each point of which the integral curve of the vector field R(z)z passing through this point has zero curvature. Here and throughout, 𝒵(F) denotes the set of zeros of the function F. Below we provide some additional information about R.

For an operator T for which R(z) is not of the form λ or λ(zα) for some λ and α, the function R(z) is a non-constant rational function. Therefore the curve of inflections R of R(z)z (which is defined as the closure of the set of points for which Im(R(z))=0) is a real plane algebraic curve.

We first characterize the points at which several local branches of the curve of inflections intersect.

Lemma 3.7.

A point z0R belongs to exactly m2 local branches of R in the following cases:

  1. (1)

    z0 is a critical point of R(z) of order m1 (including zeroes of order m of R(z));

  2. (2)

    z0 is a pole of R(z) of order m1.

The 2m limit slopes of the local branches at z0 form a regular 2m-gon in 𝕊1.

Proof.

This follows immediately from Lemma 2.13. ∎

Corollary 3.8.

The curve of inflections R has at most 4degP+degQ2 singular points.

Proof.

There are at most degP poles of R(z) and the critical points of R(z) are the zeroes of R′′(z). ∎

Lemma 3.9.

Let F(z):P1 be a non-constant rational function of degree d. Then the real algebraic curve Γ={z|ImF(z)=0}¯ is non-empty, has at most d connected components and has exactly d connected components for generic F.

Proof.

Clearly, as F1(x) for any x{F()}, Γ as well.

By the open mapping theorem, the map F:Γ¯P1, where Γ¯ is the closure of Γ in P1, is onto on each connected component of Γ¯. Since F has degree d this means that Γ has at most d components.

Note that the ramification points of F:Γ¯P1 coincide with the ramification points of F:P1P1 lying on Γ¯. Thus if the ramification values of F are not in P1 then the former map is an unramified cover of degree d, so has exactly d connected components. This means that the bound is sharp. ∎

3.2.1. Inflection domains

Definition 3.10.

The curve of inflections R subdivides into two open (not necessarily connected) domains: + given by Im(R(z))>0 and given by Im(R(z))<0.

Observe that in + (resp. ), the integral curves of the vector field R(z)z are turning counterclockwise (resp. clockwise).

3.2.2. Circle at infinity

Consider the closure of the curve of inflections R in the extended complex plane 𝕊1.

Lemma 3.11.

The intersection R𝕊1 is:

  • is empty if degQdegP=1 and λ;

  • coincides with the set {ϕ2,ϕ2+π2,ϕ2+π,ϕ2+3π2} if degQdegP=1.

In the remaining two cases:

  • degQdegP=1 and λ;

  • degQdegP=0; or

  • degQdegP{1,0,1}

the set R𝕊1 consists of 2k points forming a regular 2k-gon for some k satisfying kmax{degP,degQ}+1.

Proof.

If k=degQdegP{0,1}, then R(z) has an expansion of the form kλkzk1+o(zk1) near from which the characterization of the infinite branches of the real locus of R(z) follows by Lemma 2.13 applied to either R(z) or to 1R(z) depending on whether k>0 or k<0 (clearly both have the same real locus outside their poles).

If degQdegP=0, then R(z) has an expansion λ+Azk+o(zk) for some A and k near . (The case when R(z) is constant is ruled out by the genericity assumptions). Therefore R(z) has an expansion Akzk+1+o(zk1). We conclude that R has 2k infinite branches whose limit directions form a regular 2k-gon.

If degQdegP=1, then R(z) has an expansion λz+A+Bzk+o(zk) for some A, B, and k. (The case when R(z) is a linear function is ruled out by the genericity assumptions). We obtain that R(z) is of the form λBkzk+1+o(zk1). Consequently, unless λ is real, the curve of inflections R is compact in . If λ is real, the infinite branches of R are asymptotically the same as that of the real locus of kBzk+1. Therefore R has 2k infinite branches whose limit directions form a regular 2k-gon.

In these last two cases, we have R(z)=Mzk+1+o(zk1) for some M and k1. The number k is the ramification index of either Rλz (for degQdegP=1) or R (for degQdegP=0) at infinity, thus K cannot be bigger than the degree max{degP,degQ} of R. Therefore kmax{degP,degQ}+1.

3.2.3. Singularities of the vector field

Next we deduce from Corollary 3.5 a proof of the statement that any root of P(z) or Q(s) belonging to MCHT automatically belongs to the curve of inflections.

Corollary 3.12.

Consider an operator T as in (1.1) such that MCHT does not coincide with and has a nonempty interior. Let α be a zero or a pole of R(z) such that αMCHT. Then α also belongs to the curve of inflections R. Additionally, the number of local branches of R at α equals:

  • a+1 if α is a pole of order a1;

  • a1 if α is a zero of order a2;

  • some integer b1 if α is a simple zero.

Proof.

The statement is proved by direct computation of Im(R) in case of a pole or a zero of order a2. If α is a simple zero of R(z), then we have R(α+ϵ)=R(α)ϵ+o(ϵ). If αMCHT, then ϕα=arg(R(α))=0 (see Corollary 3.5). Thus αR.

Unless R(z) is linear, R(z) is of the form R(α)(zα)+M(zα)d+o(|zα|d) for some d2 and M. Thus R(z)=R(α)+Md(zα)d1+o(|zα|d1). Consequently, the number of local branches of the equation Im(R)=0 equals d1.

If R(z)=λ(zα), then Re(λ)0 (otherwise MCHT=) and Im(λ)0 (otherwise MCHT is totally irregular). It follows that Im(R(z)) is a non-vanishing constant and the curve of inflections is empty. In this case, R does not contain any zero or pole of R(z) on the boundary of MCHT. ∎

3.2.4. Tangency locus

Definition 3.13.

For the rational vector field R(z)z, the tangency locus 𝔗R is the subset of the curve of inflections R where R(z)z is tangent to some branch of R.

Proposition 3.14.

For an operator T as in (1.1), the tangency locus 𝔗R is the union of:

  • at most max{degQ,degP}+1 lines and;

  • at most 2(3degP+degQ1)2 points.

Proof.

For any point z𝒯R, an immediate computation involving the Taylor expansion of R(z) proves that z belongs to the intersection of the curve of inflections (given by Im(R)=0) with a real plane algebraic curve given by the equation Im(R′′R)=0. Indeed, the tangent line to R at some z0R is given by the equation R′′(z0)(zz0), and the associated ray direction is R(z0). The degrees of these two curves are respectively degQ+3degP1 and 2degQ+6degP2. Therefore, Bézout’s theorem implies that 𝔗RMCHT contains at most 2(degQ+3degP1)2 such points and some irreducible components corresponding to the common factors of the two equations.

By definition of the tangency locus these irreducible components are the integral curves of R(z)z contained in the curve of inflections. Such integral curves have identically vanishing curvature and therefore they are segments of straight lines. Therefore the relevant irreducible components are straight lines. But R intersects 𝕊1 at most 2max{degQ,degP}+2 points by Lemma 3.11. Thus the number of the lines is at most max{degQ,degP}+1. ∎

We deduce an estimate on the number of connected components of the transverse locus R of the curve of inflections. Denote d=3degP+degQ1=degR.

Corollary 3.15.

For an operator T as in (1.1), the transverse locus R of the curve of inflections is formed by at most 2d2+6d+2 connected components.

Proof.

A connected component of R is either a smooth closed loop (so a connected component of R) or an arc joining points at infinity, singular points of R or isolated points of the tangency locus.

Following Proposition 3.14, the tangent locus contains at most 2d2 isolated points. Each of them is the endpoint of two arcs of the transverse locus.

Lemma 3.11 proves that at most 2max{degP,degQ}+2 arcs of the transverse locus go to infinity.

Lemma 3.7 provides the analog result for the multiple points of the curve of inflections. In the ”worst” case, poles of R(z) and critical points of R(z) are simple. At most four arcs of the transverse locus are incident to such points. There are at most 4degP+degQ22d such points (see Corollary 3.8) so they are incident to at most 4d arcs.

Adding these bounds, we obtain an upper bound 4d2+10d+4 on the number of ends of non-compact connected components of the transverse locus, i.e. there are at most 2d2+5d+2 non-compact connected components. By Lemma  3.9 the number of the compact connected components (loops) of R is at most d, which gives the required upper bound. ∎

Corollary 3.16.

On each connected component of the transverse locus R, the sign of Im(R′′R) remains constant. If Im(R′′R) is positive (resp. negative), then for any point z of the component, the associated ray r(z) points towards + (resp. ).

Proof.

Any regular point z of the curve of inflections satisfying Im(R′′(z)R(z))=0 belongs to the tangency locus (see the proof of Proposition 3.14). A direct computation proves the rest of the claim. ∎

3.3 Horns

In this section, we introduce some curvilinear triangles called horns and find conditions under which we can conclude that they do not belong to the minimal set MCHT. Our aim is to prove that some parts of the boundary of the minimal sets are portions of integral curves of the vector field R(z)z.

3.3.1. Definitions

Recall that σ(q) is the argument of R(q), i.e. σ(q)=ImlogR(q) and r(q)=q+R(q)+ is the associated ray.

Definition 3.17.

Assume that a segment γpp of the positive trajectory of R(z)z starting at p𝒵(PQ) and ending at p doesn’t intersect the curve of inflections except possibly at p. Assume that the total variation of σ along γpp is less than π/2.

We define the horn p′′pp at p as an open curvilinear triangle formed by γpp and tangents to this trajectory at p and p intersecting at a point p′′.

Definition 3.18.

A horn p′′pp is called small positive (resp. small negative) if

  1. (1)

    for any point up′′pp, the argument σ(u+tR(u)) is monotone increasing (resp. decreasing) in the variable t as long as t0 and u+tR(u)p′′pp

  2. (2)

    for any two points u,vp′′pp, the scalar product (R(u),R(v)) is positive.

A horn p′′pp is called small if it is either small positive or small negative.

Remark 3.19.

A small positive horn becomes a small negative one after conjugation, i.e. after replacing R(z) with R(z¯)¯. Indeed,

(R(u),R(v))=ReR(u)R(v)¯

remains the same after the conjugation, and

dσ(u+tR(u))dt(t)=ImR(u+tR(u))R(u+tR(u))R(u)

changes sign.

Lemma 3.20.

The curve of inflections (given by ImR=0) does not intersect small horns.

Proof.

We have that dσ(u+tR(u)dt|t=0=ImR(u)0. Assume that we have the equality at some up′′pp. Since p′′pp is open and R is an open map, this assumption will imply that dσ(u+tR(u)dt|t=0 changes sign in p′′pp, which contradicts the smallness assumptions. ∎

We define the cone complementary to p′′pp (in short, the complementary cone) to be the open cone p′′ with the apex p′′ bounded by part of the ray r(p) starting at p′′ and by the ray extending the segment pp′′.

Lemma 3.21.

Consider a point p which neither belongs to 𝒵(PQ) nor to the interior of MCHT. Assume that the integral curve γ of the vector field R(z)z containing p is not a straight line. Then there exists a horn p′′pp such that both p′′pp and its complementary cone p′′ do not intersect MCHT.

Proof.

Let D(p)={|zp|<δ𝒵(p)=12dist(p,𝒵(PQ))}.

First, assume that pMCHT. Then by definition, r(p)MCHTc.

Choose some δ>0 and define p0=p and

pi=pi1+δR(pi1)r(pi)MCHTcD(p),i=1,,N=N(δ)=O(δ𝒵(p)δ),

(we stop when pN+1D(p)).

The broken line γ^ppN=i=1N[pi1,pi]MCHTcD(p) is the Euler approximation to the positive trajectory γp+ of R(z)z starting from p and converges to it (more exact, to the connected component γppD(p) of γp+D(p) containing p) as δ0. Thus γppMCHTc¯. Repeating this argument for all p~MCHT sufficiently close to p we see that

γpp(MCHTc¯)o=MCHTc. (3.2)

If γpp is a subset of the curve of inflections then it is a part of a straight line, which is excluded by our assumption. Thus we can assume that for p sufficiently close to p the curve γpp intersects the curve of inflections only at p. Therefore γpp is convex and, choosing p closer to p if needed, we can assume that γpp is of angle smaller than π. Therefore

(sγppr(s))=p′′p′′ppMCHTc. (3.3)

Second, assume that pMCHT and let γpp be a part of the connected piece of γp+D(p) containing p such that γpp is convex and of angle smaller than π/2. Let piMCHT be a sequence of points tending to p and take piγpi+ such that γpipi converges to γpp. By analyticity this convergence is uniform in C1 sense as well. Therefore

(sγppr(s))i(sγpipir(s))MCHTc, (3.4)

which finishes the proof.

3.3.2. Small horns exist

Proposition 3.22.

For any point p𝒵(PQ) such that the trajectory γ(p) of R starting at p is not a straight line, there exists a small horn p′′pp.

Proof.

Using an affine change of variables we can assume that p=0 and R(0)=1. By assumption R(z) is not a real rational function. Let

R(u)=1+ρ(u)+ibum+O(um+1),b>0,ρ[u],m1 (3.5)

be the Taylor expansion of R(z) at 0 (the case m=1 is covered by Lemma 3.23). Here we can assume that b>0 by replacing R(z) by R(z¯)¯, if necessary.

First, we consider the case m=1, i.e. pR.

Lemma 3.23.

For every compact set K not intersecting the curve of inflections R, there is a δ=δ(K)>0 such that for every pK, there is a small horn p′′pp of diameter greater than δ.

Proof.

Indeed, for any pK the function ReR(u)R(v)¯ is positive and ImR(u)R(u)R(v) are is non-zero at (p,p)2, so this remains true for all (u,v)2 such that dist((p,p),(u,v))<δ=δ(p) by continuity. This means that any p′′ppUδ(p)(p) is a small horn. The uniform lower bound follows from the continuity of δ(p). ∎

From now on we assume that m2. Our next goal is to find the asymptotics of γ0 near 0 and the p′′p0. We abuse notation by writing the germ of γ0 as γ0={x+iγ0(x),x>0}.

Lemma 3.24.
γ0(x)=bm+1xm+1+O(xm+2) (3.6)

and

p′′p0{0<x<ϵ,0<y<γ0(x)}. (3.7)
Proof.

Note that

γ0{ImF=0}, where F=1R,F(0)=0. (3.8)

Indeed,

ddtImF(γ0(t))=ImddtF(γ0(t))=Im(Fγ0˙(t))=0.

Now,

1R=11+ρ(u)ibum(1+ρ(u))2+O(um+1), (3.9)

so

F(u)=u+ρ~(u)ibm+1um+1+O(um+2),ρ~[u].

For u=x+iy we get

ImF(u)=y(1+o(1))bm+1xm+1+O(um+2).

Recalling that γ0 is tangent to the real axis, we have y=o(x). Therefore

{ImF=0}={x+iy:y=bm+1xm+1+O(xm+2)}{y0}

near the origin, and the claim of the Lemma follows since r(0)=+. ∎

Next, we have to check the two conditions in Definition 3.18 for p′′p0 with p sufficiently close to 0. The second condition is easy: since R(0)=1 then the scalar product (R(u),R(v)) is positive for all u,vp′′p0 by continuity.

To check the first condition set u=x1+iy1,v=x2+iy2=u+tR(u)p′′p0 with t>0. By the second property of the small horns, we have x2>x1. By (3.7) we have yi=O(xim+1). Combining (3.9) and

R(v)=ρ(v)+imbvm1+O(vm), (3.10)

we get

R(v)R(v) =(ρ(x2)+imbx2m1+O(x2m))1+ρ(x2)ibx2m+O(x2m+1)(1+ρ(x1))2
=ρ(x2)(1+ρ(x2))+imbx2m1+O(x2m)(1+ρ(x2))2.

Thus, using (3.5), we get for Φ(u,v)=(1+ρ(x2))2ImR(u)R(v)R(v) the equation

Φ =Im([1+ρ(x1)+ibx1m+O(x1m+1)][ρ(x2)(1+ρ(x2))+imbx2m1+O(x2m)])
=mbx2m1+O(x2m)>0, (3.11)

where we use x1x2. This proves the first requirement of Definition 3.18. ∎

Corollary 3.25.

The germ of R at p cannot lie between γp+ and r(p).

Proof.

This would mean that this germ lies inside p′′pp which is impossible by Proposition 3.22 and Lemma 3.20. ∎

3.3.3. Removing small horns

We will use the following general Lemma

Lemma 3.26.

Assume that for some open set U𝒵(PQ) and every point uU, the associated ray r(u) lies in the union U(MCHT)c. Then MCHTU=.

Proof.

Indeed, if not then MCHTUMCHT will be again invariant, which contradicts minimality of MCHT. ∎

The crucial property of small horns is the following Lemma.

Lemma 3.27.

For any vp′′pp, one has r(v)p′′ppp′′.

Proof.

We prove the statement assuming that the small horn p′′pp is positive, the negative case will follow by conjugation.

Figure 2. Removing small horns.

Let uγpp be a point such that vr(u). By definition of small horns, we have σ(p)<σ(u)<σ(v), see Fig. 2.

The ray rv does not intersect γpp. Indeed, assume that the ray r(v) intersects γpp at a point s. Then at the intersection point the slope of γpp should be smaller than the slope of r(v), i.e. σ(s)<σ(v) which contradicts the requirement that the slope is monotone increasing along the segment joining v and s.

Also r(v) cannot intersect pp′′ since σ(v)>σ(u) and σ(u)>σ(p), where uγpp such that vr(u).

Thus r(v) leaves p′′pp and enters p′′ at some point of p′′p with the slope σ(p)<σ(v)<σ(p). Thus r(v) never leaves p′′. ∎

Proposition 3.28.

Assume that p′′pp is a small horn and p′′MCHTc. Then p is not in the interior of MCHT.

Proof.

Follows from Lemmas 3.26 and 3.27. ∎

4 Boundary arcs

Recall that we consider an operator T whose minimal set MCHT is different from and has a nonempty interior. We want to describe its boundary in combinatorial and dynamical terms. To do this, we introduce two set-valued functions.

Recall that in our terminology, MCHT¯ is the closure of MCHT in the extended plane 𝕊1.

4.1 The correspondences Γ and Δ

Definition 4.1.

For any xMCHT𝒵(PQ), we define:

  • Γ(x)={yγx+|yx}MCHT¯ where γx+ is the positive trajectory of the vector field R(z)z starting at x;

  • Δ(x)={yr(x)|yx}MCHT¯.

Note that if yΓ(x) or yΔ(x), and xMCHT, then yMCHT as well.

Using correspondences Γ and Δ, we split the set of boundary points of MCHT disjoint from the curve of inflections into the following three types.

Definition 4.2.

A point of MCHT(𝒵(PQ)R) is a point of:

  • local type if Γ(z) and Δ(z)=;

  • global type if Γ(z)= and Δ(z);

  • extruding type if Γ(z) and Δ(z).

By Proposition 4.7 these are the only possibilities for points in MCHTR.

4.2 Support lines

In this (sub)section We prove that for a given point z, the condition Δ(z) means that the associated ray r(z) is a support line of MCHT¯.

For any oriented support line of MCHT¯, we define the co-orientation of its support in the following way. The support point x is:

  • a direct support point if the standard orientation of MCHT and the orientation of the support line agree at x;

  • an indirect support point otherwise.

In particular, if the support line is the positively oriented real axis, a support point x is called direct if the intersection of MCHT with a neighborhood of x is contained in the upper half-plane (see Figure 3 for examples of indirect support points).

Definition 4.3.

Consider z such that:

  • z does not belong to the tangency locus 𝒯R of the curve of inflections R;

  • z is not a root of P or Q.

Then we say that z𝔈+ (resp. 𝔈) if the associated ray r(z) is pointing inside the inflection domain + (resp. ). This includes z+ (resp. ).

Refer to caption
Figure 3. The point where the red arrow is tangent to MCHT is an indirect support point. The circular arrow indicates that the black point belongs to 𝔈+.
Lemma 4.4.

Consider zMCHT𝒵(PQ) such that z𝔈+ (resp. 𝔈). If yΔ(z), then y is an indirect support point (resp. a direct support point).

Proof.

Without loss of generality, we can assume that z𝔈+, z=0, r(z)=>0 and y=1. This implies that γ0 lies in the upper half-plane. By Lemma 3.21 there is a neighborhood V of y such that V(MCHT¯) is contained in the lower half-plane. Therefore y is an indirect support point. ∎

Lemma 4.5.

Take x,yMCHT such that:

  • x,y𝔈𝔈+

  • the associated rays r(x) and r(y) intersect at some point m;

  • σ(y)]σ(x)π,σ(x)[.

Then the open cone Γ with apex m and the interval of directions ]σ(y),σ(x)[ is disjoint from (MCHT) and there are the following subcases:

  • either y𝔈+ or Δ(y)[y,m];

  • either x𝔈 or Δ(x)[x,m].

Proof.

The path formed by the concatenation of segments [x,m] and [m,y] can be approached by a family paths joining x and y or a family of paths joining y and x whose interior points are disjoint from MCHT. Lemma 2.9 applies to one of these families of paths so Γ is disjoint from (MCHT).

Then, we assume by contradiction that y𝔈 and some point zΔ(y) does not belong to [y,m]. Since Γ is disjoint from (MCHT), it follows that z is an indirect support point of the line containing r(y) which contradicts Lemma 4.4. Consequently either Δ(y)[y,m] or y𝔈.

An analogous argument proves that either x𝔈 or Δ(x)[x,m]. ∎

4.3 Local arcs

In this section, we prove that local points (see Proposition 4.7) form local arcs.

Definition 4.6.

A local arc of MCHT is a maximal open arc of an integral curve of vector field R(z)z that contains only local points. In particular, it is disjoint from 𝒵(PQ) and R.

Local arcs are oriented by the vector field R(z)z.

Using the geometry of horns (see Section 3.3), we can show that every local point actually belongs to a local arc of MCHT.

Proposition 4.7.

Consider a point pMCHT and such that Δ(p)= and p𝒵(PQ)R. Then, the germ of the integral curve γp of R(z)z passing through p belongs to MCHT.

Without loss of generality, we assume that p=0, r(p)=+ and p𝔈+, so γpp lies in the upper half-plane. The proof consists of two steps illustrated by Figure 4 and Figure 5 respectively.

Lemma 4.8.

MCHT lies above the integral curve γp of R(z)z passing through p.

Proof: see Fig. 4.

By Lemma 3.21 there exists pγp+ such that the union p′′ppp′′ is outside of MCHT. Let qγpp, qp,p, and let q′′+ be the intersection point of + with the line tangent to γpp at q. By Proposition 3.22 we can assume that q′′qp is a small horn at p, q′′qpp′′pp. Clearly, σ(q)<σ(p).

The condition Δ(p)= implies that q′′MCHTc. Moreover, as +Δ(0), there is an open sector S with vertex on , containing [q′′,+) and disjoint from MCHT.

For a point p~ sufficiently close to p and lying below γp consider a horn q~′′q~p~ with vertices q~ and q~′′ close to q and q′′, respectively. By continuity, the part of r(p~) starting from q~′′ lies in S. Also, q~ lies in the horn p′′pp, so r(q~)MCHT= by Lemma 3.21.

Thus the complementary cone q~′′ of p~ with vertex q~′′ lies outside of MCHT. Therefore by Proposition 3.28 p~MCHT, so p~MCHTc¯. As this remains true for any point in a sufficiently small neighborhood of p~, we conclude p~(MCHTc¯)=MCHTc. Thus near p the set MCHT lies above γp.

Figure 4. MCHT lies above the trajectory γpp.

Lemma 4.9.

The boundary MCHT coincides with the integral curve γp in a neighborhood of p.

Proof: See Figure 5.

Lemma 4.8 and its proof implies that p lies on the boundary of a sector S with a vertex s, sp, and disjoint from MCHT.

Recall that by Lemma 3.23 there is a lower bound δ on the size of small horns for all points close to p.

Assume that a point qMCHT close to p lies above γp on a distance much smaller than δ and let q′′qq be its horn (necessarily small) of size δ/2. Both q′′qq and q′′ lie outside of MCHT.

Let p~ be a point on γq close to q and in the negative direction from q, let p~′′ be the intersection of r(p~) and the line qq′′. The horn p~′′qp~ is smaller than δ, so is small.

The ray p~′′q lies outside of MCHT. Moreover, as long as the ray p′′+R(p~)+r(p~) lies outside MCHT we have p~′′MCHTc, so p~MCHT by Proposition 3.28.

These arguments work for all points p~ sufficiently close to p and with slope σ(p~) exceeding some negative number (namely the slope of the second side of S), in particular, for points slightly above γp, the negative trajectory of γp. But p lies in the horn of size δ of such a point, which means that pMCHT by Lemma 3.21, a contradiction.

Figure 5. γpp is boundary of MCHT

Local analysis of horns (see Section 3.3) leads to the following results about the correspondence Γ.

Corollary 4.10.

Consider zMCHT such that z𝒵(PQ)R. If Γ(z) then z is either the starting point or a point of a local arc.

Proof.

We just have to prove that for some yΓ(z) such that y is close enough to z, the arc α of integral curve between z and y belongs to MCHT. This follows from Lemma 3.21. ∎

Proposition 4.11.

Any local arc is a locally strictly convex real-analytic curve. Its orientation coincides with the standard topological orientation of MCHT if it is contained in + (and with the opposite orientation otherwise).

Proof.

As any integral curve of a real-analytic vector field, a local arc is a real-analytic curve in 2. The arc has to be locally convex because otherwise, the associated ray (which is contained in the tangent line) at some point would cross the interior of MCHT. Besides, direct computation shows that the curvature of an integral curve becomes zero only at points belonging to R. ∎

Let us check that a local arc of MCHT cannot end inside an inflection domain. It cannot be periodic either.

Proposition 4.12.

Every local arc has an endpoint that belongs to 𝒵(PQ)R.

Besides, if such an endpoint belongs to 𝒵(PQ), it is either a regular point or a simple pole of R(z).

Proof.

Assume that the local arc γ is periodic and doesn’t intersect 𝒵(PQ)R. Then following Proposition 4.11, γ is a strictly convex closed loop disjoint from 𝒵(PQ) and MCHT is a strictly convex compact domain bounded by γ (in particular γ encompasses every point of 𝒵(PQ)). A neighborhood of γ is foliated by periodic integral curves γt of the vector field R(z)z that are also disjoint from 𝒵(PQ) and R, so strictly convex as well. Each of them cuts out a strictly convex compact domain 𝒟t. For each point z in the complement of some 𝒟t, r(z) remains disjoint from 𝒟t, which by Lemma 3.26 contradicts the minimality of MCHT.

Now, we show that a local arc cannot go to infinity. When |degQdegP|1, integral curves going to infinity enter the cones disjoint from MCHT and never leave them (see Section 2.5) and otherwise MCHT is trivial.

In the remaining cases, Poincaré-Bendixson theorem proves that a local arc γ has an ending point yMCHT. We assume by contradiction that y𝒵(PQ)R. We consider an arc β formed by a portion of the integral curve ending at y and a portion of the associated ray r(y). Provided that β remains in the same inflection domain as y, the family of associated rays starting at the points of the arc β sweeps out a domain containing a cone (see Lemmas 2.9 and 3.21). Therefore, we have Δ(y)=. Proposition 4.7 then proves that the local arc can be continued in a neighborhood of y.

If y𝒵(PQ) and is a zero or a pole of R(z), then y contains an interval of length at least π (see Definition 3.2). Corollary 3.5 proves that y is either a simple pole or a simple zero satisfying ϕy=0. In the latter case, y is a repelling singular point of R(z)z and therefore cannot be the endpoint of a local arc. ∎

As we will see in Section 4.6, in contrast with the case of ending points, a local arc can start inside an inflection domain at a point of extruding type.

4.4 Local connectedness of MCHT

Here we show that MCHT is locally connected, away from the part of the tangency locus that is formed by straight lines.

Lemma 4.13.

MCHT is locally connected outside of R𝒵(PQ).

Proof.

If zMCHT is a point of local type, then the boundary locally coincides with the integral curve passing through z by 4.9. Next, let zMCHT(𝒵(PQ)R) with Δ(z)0. Let yΔ(z). As z𝒵(PQ)R, by or 2.11 2.16 there is a unique germ of 𝔱𝔯y passing through z, and it does so transversely to the integral curve of R(z)z passing through z. Then taking the backward trajectories of R(z)z of points in 𝔱𝔯y, all points on one side of 𝔱𝔯y near z belong to MCHT. Taking now as a neighborhood basis a family of decreasing curvilinear quadrilaterals with two of the sides being trajectories of R(z)z and two sides being smooth curves on either side of 𝔱𝔯y, it follows that all points on the other side of 𝔱𝔯y have backward trajectories of R(z)z intersecting 𝔱𝔯y inside these neighborhoods, provided they are sufficiently small. As for any xMCHT, its backward trajectory belongs to MCHT, it follows that MCHT is locally connected at z. ∎

Lemma 4.14.

MCHT is locally connected at zeros and poles of R.

Proof.

If z0 is a pole of R one can show using Proposition 3.12 in [AHN+24] and 3.5 that MCHT is locally connected at z0. Next, for z0 a zero of R it follows from the same corollary and by using the local portrait of R(z)z near z0. ∎

Lemma 4.15.

MCHT is locally connected at all z, such that γz is not a straight line.

Proof.

Since the integral curve γz of vector field R(z)z containing z is not a straight line, some germ of the negative part γz lies outside of R. Recall that if yMCHT then the negative part γy of γy necessarily lies in MCHT.

Let γz(ϵ)Rc be the part of the negative trajectory γz lying strictly between z and y=gRϵ(z) where gRt is the flow of R(z)z. By Lemma 4.13 there is a neighborhood Vy of y of size smaller than ϵ such that VyMCHT is connected. Now, let Uz=0tϵgRt(Vy). Clearly Uz is a neighborhood of z. We claim that UzMCHT is connected. Indeed, if wUzMCHT then w=gRt(w) for some wVyMCHT, 0tϵ. Since w lies in the same connected component of UzMCHT as y and w and w are jointed by γwUzMCHT this means that UzMCHT is connected. As ϵ can be chosen arbitrarily small, the statement follows. ∎

We denote by the union of all R-invariant lines.

Corollary 4.16.

MCHTR is parametrizable.

By Carathéodory’s theorem, the boundary of an open set is parametrizable if its boundary is locally connected. For each zMCHTR we have by 4.14 and Proposition 4.15 a neighborhood basis 𝒩(z) consisting of sets such that UMCHT is connected. Define U(z)𝒩(z) to be a set of the form U(z)B(z,12d(z,R)). The union

zMCHTRU(z)

is an open cover of MCHTR and being a subset of , it has a countable subcover

nU(zn).

For each zn,U(zn)MCHT¯ is locally connected and by 2.21 and the fact that all irregular points are contained in R, its boundary is a Jordan curve away from the poles and zeros of R(z). Hence U(zn)MCHT¯ is parametrizable by Carathéodery’s theorem, injectively away from the zeros and poles of R(z). We start with a z0 and use this parametrization of U(zn)MCHT¯. Then for the smallest n=n1 such that U(zn)U(z0),MCHTU(zn)MCHTU(z0), we glue together the parametrizations of (U(zn1)U(z0))MCHT¯ with that of U(z0)MCHT¯ along the end points of the parametrizations. We then have a parametrization of (U(z0)U(zn1))MCHT1. We then take the smallest n=n2 such that U(zn2)(U(z0)U(zn1)),MCHTU(zn)1 and in the same way find a parametrization of 2(U(z0)U(zn1)U(zn2))MCHT. We proceed in this way inductively to get a parametrization of MCHTR, potentially pinched at the zeros and poles of R(z) (but not anywhere else).

4.5 Global arcs

4.5.1. Additional results about correspondence Δ

Lemma 4.17.

Consider zMCHT𝒵(PQ) such that z𝔈+ (resp. 𝔈). If yMCHT and yΔ(z), then one of the following statements holds:

  • y𝒵(PQ)R;

  • y (resp. +).

Proof.

Without loss of generality, we assume that z=0, r(z)=+ and z𝔈+.

We consider yΔ(z) such that y𝒵(PQ)R. If Δ(y)=, then Proposition 4.7 shows that y belongs to a local arc. Besides, y is an indirect support point of the associated ray r(z) (see Lemma 4.4). If y+, then the associated rays starting from a germ of the local arc at y sweep out a neighborhood of z and we get a contradiction. Therefore y.

Now we consider the case where Δ(y) and assume by contradiction that y+. If Im(R(y))>0, then Lemma 4.5 provides an immediate contradiction. If Im(R(y))<0, then y (see Definition 3.2) contains an interval of length strictly larger than π such that σ(y) is one of the ends. It follows from Corollary 3.5 that y is a simple zero of R(z) (and therefore y𝒵(PQ)).

If r(y)=y+, then for some small ϵ>0, points of the interval ]ϵ,ϵ[ are disjoint from the interior of MCHT. Associated rays starting from the points of ]ϵ,ϵ[ sweep out an open cone containing a neighborhood of y. This contradicts the assumption yMCHT. Therefore, r(y)=y++ and r(y)r(z). In this case, for some small ϵ>0, points of ]yϵ,y[ are disjoint from the interior of MCHT and their associated rays will sweep out a neighborhood of y if y+. Therefore, in that case we get that y. Similar result holds for z𝔈. ∎

Definition 4.18.

For any point zMCHT such that s𝒵(PQ)R and Δ(z), we define Δmin(z) (resp. Δmax(z)) as the infimum (resp. the supremum) in Δ(z) of the order induced by the orientation of the associated ray r(z).

Besides, we define Lz=|Δmin(z)z|.

Lemma 4.19.

For any zMCHT such that z𝒵(PQ)R and Δ(z), we have Δmin(z)z and Lz0.

Proof.

Without loss of generality, we assume that z=0, z+ and z(x)=>0. For any small enough real positive ϵ, we have Re(R(ϵ)),Im(R(ϵ))>0 and ϵ+. If such an ϵ belongs to Δ(z), then it contradicts Lemma 4.17. ∎

Since MCHT¯ is compact in 𝕊1, it follows immediately that for any z, Δmin(z) is actually a point of MCHT¯.

Definition 4.20.

For any point zMCHT such that z𝒵(PQ)R and Δ(z), we define 𝒰(z) as the connected component of (MCHT)c[z,Δmin(z)] incident to:

  • the right side of [z,Δmin(z)] if z+;

  • the left side of [z,Δmin(z)] if z.

i.e. in the half-plane bounded by r(z) different to that containing the germ of the trajectory of R(z)z starting at z.

Lemma 4.21.

Consider zMCHT such that z𝒵(PQ)R, Δ(z) and z+ (resp. ). For any yMCHT𝒰(z) such that y+ (resp. ) and Δ(y), we have 𝒰(y)𝒰(z).

Besides, if yz, we have 𝒰(y)𝒰(z).

Proof.

By connectedness of MCHT in the case degQdegP=±1 and the asymptotic geometry of MCHT in the case degQdegP=0, it follows that the associated ray r(y) intersect the associated ray r(z). Applying Lemma 4.5 to r(z) and r(y), we see that Δ(y)𝒰(z). Thus 𝒰(y)𝒰(z).

By connectedness of MCHT in the case degQdegP=±1 and the asymptotic geometry of MCHT in the case degQdegP=0, it follows that the associated ray r(y) intersects the associated ray r(z). Applying Lemma 4.5 to r(z) and r(y), we see that Δ(y)𝒰(z). Thus 𝒰(y)𝒰(z).

When 𝒰(y)=𝒰(z), the associated ray r(y) has to coincide with r(z) (with the same orientation since y and z belong to the same inflection domain). It follows that y=z. ∎

4.5.2. Orientation of global arcs

By 4.16, the following notion is well-defined.

Definition 4.22.

A global arc in MCHT is a maximal open connected arc formed by points of global type.

Furthermore, for a global arc α defined on (tmin,tmax), its end point is defined as long as

ω+(α)t0(tmin,tmax){α(t):t>t0}¯

is a singleton (and equals this element). The starting point is analogously defined if

ω(α)t0(tmin,tmax){α(t):t<t0}¯

is a singleton. If ω+(α) is not a singleton, then it can only contain points contained in R-invariant lines, again by 4.16 and similarily for ω(α). Regardless if they are singletons or not, we call the sets ω±(α) end accumulation and the start accumulation. In case they are in fact singletons, we will also call them end and starting points respectively. We have a geometrically meaningful way to define orientation on global arcs.

Lemma 4.23.

Any global arc (αt)tI can be oriented in such a way that for t>t, we have:

  • αtMCHT𝒰(αt);

  • 𝒰(αt)𝒰(αt).

In particular, in +, the orientation of global arcs coincides with the standard topological orientation of MCHT (it coincides with the opposite orientation in ).

In particular, a global arc is an interval, i.e. it cannot be a closed loop.

Refer to caption
Figure 6. Two associated rays from the same global arc.
Proof.

Removal of αt from α cuts the arc into two pieces, one of which is contained in 𝒰(αt) (see Figure 6). Lemma 4.21 then proves the inclusion of the sets of the form 𝒰(αt) as t sweeps out the interval I which provides a meaningful orientation on the global arc. ∎

Lemma 4.24.

Along a global arc α, the function σ(z)=arg(R(z)) is a monotone mapping of α to an interval in 𝕊1 with length at most π.

Besides, if σ(αt)=σ(αt) for some t>t, then Δ(αt) coincides with the point at infinity σ(αt)=σ(αt) that also belongs to Δ(αt).

Proof.

Consider two points αt and αt of a global arc satisfying t>t for the canonical orientation. By Lemma 4.23, αt𝒰(αt).

Without loss of generality, we assume that α is contained in +, αt=0 and r(αt)=+. If σ(αt)[π,0[, any associated ray starting in a small enough neighborhood of αt will cross MCHT. If σ(αt)=0, then the interior of the strip bounded by r(αt),r(αt) and the portion of global arc between αt and αt is disjoint from MCHT. It follows that Δ(αt) contains only the point at infinity. In the remaining case, we have σ(αt)]0,π[. ∎

Proposition 4.25.

Consider zMCHT such that z𝒵(PQ)R and Δ(z). Then, z is either the endpoint or a point of a global arc.

Proof.

We consider an arbitrarily small open arc α of MCHT𝒰(z) ending at z. By assumptions, α is disjoint from 𝒵(PQ)R. If some point yα satisfies Γ(y), then α partially coincides with a local arc. Since the ending point of any local arc belongs to 𝒵(PQ)R (see Proposition 4.12), comparison of the orientation of local arcs and the orientation of MCHT in a given inflection domain (see Lemma 4.11) proves that z also belongs to this local arc. This is a contradiction. Therefore, any point y in the arc α satisfies Γ(y)=. Proposition 4.7 then implies that each point of the arc α satisfies Δ(y) and is thus a point of global type. Therefore, z is either the endpoint or a point of a global arc containing α. ∎

Proposition 4.26.

If a point zMCHT satisfies:

  • z𝒵(PQ)R;

  • Δ(z);

  • Γ(z)=;

then z belongs to a global arc.

Proof.

Following Proposition 4.25, z is either the ending point or a point of a global arc. We consider a connected neighborhood V of z in MCHT that is disjoint from 𝒵(PQ)R. Without loss of generality, we assume that V belongs to +.

We consider a point yV such that the oriented arc from y to z in MCHT has the same orientation as the standard topological orientation of the boundary. If Γ(y), then y is either a point or the starting point of a local arc (Corollary 4.10) that can be continued til z (see Proposition 4.12) since V is disjoint from 𝒵(PQ)R. Therefore, Γ(y)= and it follows then from Proposition 4.7 that Δ(y). Thus, any such point y is a global point belonging to global arc α.

Then, we consider points yV such that the oriented arc from y to z in MCHT has the opposite orientation as the standard topological orientation of the boundary. If such point y satisfies Γ(y), then it is a point or the starting point of a local arc. Since V is connected and disjoint from 𝒵(PQ)R, it contains at most one local arc starting at a point of extruding type. The complement of the closure of this local arc in V coincides with global arc β. By hypothesis, z is not a point of extruding type so it belongs to a global arc β. ∎

Proposition 4.27.

If z0 is the endpoint of a global arc α and is neither a zero nor a pole of R(z), then Δ(z0).

Proof.

We assume that α is parameterized by the interval ]0,1[ (with the correct orientation) and α(t)z0 as t1. For any n2, we pick a point βnΔ(α(11/n)). Since 𝕊1 is compact, the sequence (βn)n2 has an accumulation point β. Since z0 is the endpoint of α, the point β cannot coincide with z0 (see Lemma 4.23). It follows that a family of associated rays accumulates on a half-line starting at z0 and containing β. Since arg(R(z)) is continuous in a neighborhood of z0, we get that this half-line coincides with the associated ray r(z0). ∎

Definition 4.28.

A point zMCHT is a non-convexity point if there is a cone 𝒞 at z of angle strictly bigger than π and a neighborhood V of z such that 𝒞VMCHT.

For a point z0 for which Δ(z0) consists of a single point u satisfying the condition R(z0)+(uz0)R(z0)0, Lemma 2.11 proves that: (i) the root trail 𝔱𝔯u has a unique branch at z0, (ii) it is contained in MCHT, and (iii) its tangent slope is the argument of R2(z0)R(z0)+(uz0)R(z0) (mod π). These lemma yields that if at some point z0, Δ(z0) contains more than one point, then MCHT cannot be smooth at z0:

Proposition 4.29.

At a point zR𝒵(PQ) such that Δ(z) contains at least two points, the boundary MCHT has a non-convexity point.

Proof.

First assume that Δ(z) contains two points u,v both of which are not points at infinity. Lemma 2.11 proves that z belongs to two distinct root trails. Assuming that R(z)+(uz)R(z) and R(z)+(vz)R(z) are nonzero, the tangent slopes of these root trails at z are determined by the argument of R2(z)R(z)+(uz)R(z) and R2(z)R(z)+(vz)R(z). By hypothesis, we have Im(R(z))0 and these two branches intersect transversely at z and the claim follows, taking the backward trajectories of the two root-trails. If R(z)+(uz)R(z)=0, then two branches of the root trail intersect transversely.

In the remaining case, Δ(z) contains exactly one point u satisfying the condition R(z)+(uz)R(z)0 and a point σ(z) at infinity. Then the root trail of u at z has a slope given by the argument of R2(z)R(z)+(uz)R(z) (or R(z)R(z) if u is at infinity, see Lemma 2.16). Similarly, R(z) so these curves intersect transversely at z. Summarizing we see that in all possible cases, the boundary MCHT has a non-convexity point. ∎

4.6 Points of extruding type

Outside the local and the global arcs, the only singular boundary points in the complement of 𝒵(PQ)R which can occur are points of extruding type.

Proposition 4.30.

Let z be a point of extruding type in MCHT. Then z is both the endpoint of a global arc and the starting point of a local arc.

The boundary MCHT is not C1 at z and z is a non-convexity point.

Proof.

See Fig. 7 below. By definition of the correspondence Γ, and local considerations of R, z is the starting point of a local arc. Propositions 4.25 and  4.26 show that z is the ending point of a global arc.

For any point uΔ(z), the root trail 𝔱𝔯u has a unique local branch at z and its tangent direction is the argument of R2(z)R(z)+(uz)R(z) (mod π), see Lemma 2.11. Indeed, R(z)+(uz)R(z)0 because uz is real collinear to R(z) while Im(R(z))0. Since zR, this branch transversely intersects the integral curve of R(z)z containing z. Both of these branches are (semi)analytic curves contained in MCHT and the associated rays of the points lying on the negative part of γz intersect 𝔱𝔯uMCHT. Thus the negative part of γz is disjoint from MCHT. ∎

Refer to caption
Figure 7. Negative part of γz cannot be on the boundary as 𝔱𝔯uMCHT.

4.7 Boundary arcs in inflection domains

Proposition 4.31.

For any connected component 𝒟 of the complement of the curve of inflections R, MCHT𝒟 is a union of disjoint topological arcs. In each of them, local and global arcs have the same orientation. If Im(R) is positive (resp. negative) in 𝒟 then the latter orientation coincides with (is opposite to) the topological orientation of MCHT.

Proof.

The statement about orientation follows from Proposition 4.11 and Lemma 4.23. Proposition 4.30 shows that a point of extruding type is incident to a local and a global arcs. It remains to prove that any point of 𝒵(PQ)𝒟 is incident to at most two arcs.

Such a point z0 is neither a zero nor a pole of R(z), see Corollary 3.12. Therefore, 3.6 together with the fact that all irregular points are contained in R proves the statement. ∎

5 Singular boundary points on the curve of inflections

At points belonging to the curve of inflections the boundary MCHT can display more complicated behaviours. In this section, we classify boundary points that belong to the transverse locus R of the curve of inflections (see Definition 1.7). For the following definition, recall the 1.8.

Definition 5.1.

A point of MCHT𝒵(PQ) belonging to the transverse locus R is a point of:

  • bouncing type if Δ+ and ΓΔ;

  • switch type if Δ+ and ΓΔ=;

  • C1-inflection type if Δ+=, Δ and Γ=;

  • C2-inflection type if Δ+= and either Δ= or Γ.

5.1 Horns at points of the transverse locus

At a point pR, the curve of inflections is smooth and the vector field R(z)z is transversal to it. This means that by (3.5) we can assume that

R(u)=1+ρu+(a+ib)u2+ (5.1)

where we assumed that p=0. The condition ImR(0)=0 means that ρ, and the transversality condition is equivalent to b0. Without loss of generality we can assume that b>0. In other words, m=2 in (3.5) which implies that the integral curves locally look like cubic curves with inflections at these points.

We define the diameter of a horn p′′pp to be the least upper bound t0>0 of all t>0 such that there is up′′pp such that u+tR(u)p′′pp for all t(0,t).

Lemma 5.2.

For pR, there exists a neighborhood Ω of p and ϵ>0 such that for all points uΩ+¯, where Ω+=+Ω, there exists a small horn of diameter greater than ϵ.

Proof.

Without loss of generality we assume p=0. Consider the function

T(u,t)=dσ(u+tR(u))dt(t)=Im[R(u+tR(u))R(u+tR(u))R(u)]

defined in u×t. Note that by definition +={T(u,0)>0}. Since T(0,t)=2bt+O(t2), we have Tt(0,0)=2b>0. Therefore tT(u,t)>b>0 in some sufficiently small neighborhood U~×(ϵ~,ϵ~) of (0,0). Let U~+=+U~. By definition of +, we have U~+×{0}{T>0}. Taken together, this implies that U~+×[0,ϵ~]{T>0} for some ϵ~>0. This means that the argument of R(u+tR(u)) is monotone increasing for 0<t<ϵ~ and for every uU~+.

By transversality of R and R at 0 we have

tT(gRt(0)+sR(gRt(0)),0)|s=t=0=sT(gRt(0)+sR(gRt(0)),0)|s=t=0>0,

where gRt is the flow of R(z)z.

Thus there is a neighborhood ΩU~ of 0 and ϵ<ϵ~ such that T(gRt(u)+sR(gRt(u)),0)>0 as soon as uΩ+=+Ω and t,s[0,ϵ]. Decreasing Ω,ϵ if needed, we can assume that

gRt(u)+sR(gRt(u))U~+for all uΩ+ andt,s[0,ϵ].

Thus for every uΩ+, any horn of diameter at most ϵ lies in U~+ and is therefore a small horn.

If uΩ+¯ then the horn u′′uu of diameter ϵ lies in a union of small horns u~′′u~u~ of diameter ϵ, where u~u′′uu. Thus u′′uu is a small horn as well.

5.2 Points of bouncing type

Proposition 5.3.

Let z be a point of bouncing type in MCHT:

Δ+(z)andΓ(z)Δ(z).

Then z is the ending point of a global arc and also the starting point of another arc which can either be local or global.

Further, z is is a point of nonconvexity and for small enough neighborhoods V of z, one has VMCHTR={z}.

Proof.

Without loss of generality, we can assume that z=0, R(0)=1, and R(0){0}. Since z belongs to R, we get R′′(0)=a+bi with a and b. Without loss of generality, we can assume that b>0 and therefore γz lies in the upper half-plane.

Let u+Δ+(0). If u+Δ0(0) then the germ of 𝔱𝔯u+ at 0 is smooth and tangent to at 0 and contained in the lower half-plane, see Lemma 2.11 and Proposition 2.19). Otherwise it consists of two branches transversal to and orthogonal one to another. Denote by α+𝔱𝔯u+MCHT the arc starting at 0 and lying in the lower right quadrant.

Similarly, since Γ(0)Δ(0) is nonempty there exists an arc α (either portion of an integral curve γ0 or a root trail 𝔱𝔯u of a uΔ(0)) starting at 0, contained in the upper right quadrant, and belonging to MCHT.

Denote by α=αα+, and let V be a small neighborhood of 0 such that α cuts V into two parts. The part V of V to the left of α is entirely contained in MCHT (as r(u) intersects αMCHT for any uV). This domain contains the intersection of V with a cone with vertex at 0 and of angle strictly larger than π. It also contains all the intersection of V with R excepted for the point 0, see Lemmas 2.112.16 and Remark 2.17.

It remains to prove that in a neighborhood of z, MCHT is formed by exactly two arcs.

Lemma 5.4.

Assume that Γ(0)= and Δ(0). Then 0 is a starting point of a global arc.

Proof.

By Lemma 3.21 the points lying below the forward trajectory γ0+ of 0 are not in MCHT. Let q be a point lying slightly above γ0 and near 0 such that qMCHT (it exists since otherwise γ0+MCHT). Denote by p~=p~(q) the first point on the backward trajectory γq starting from q such that r(p~)MCHT, in particular p~MCHT and therefore γp~MCHT. This point exists since the point of intersection of γq with α has this property by definition of α.

Let γp~q be the closed piece of trajectory of R joining p~ and q. By definition of p~, all point of the (evidently closed) set γp~qMCHT except p~ are necessarily in MCHT and of local type. Proposition 4.7 then implies γp~qMCHT={p~}: indeed, otherwise the set γp~qMCHT cannot be closed.

The trajectory γ0+ is convex, so taking q sufficiently close to γ0+ we can assume that r(q)MCHTc intersect γ0+ and therefore all trajectories of Rz close to and above γ0+. The points p~(q), where qr(q) lies above γ0+, form a global arc of MCHT starting at 0 and lying between α and γ0 in the upper right quadrant.

If Γ(0), then a local arc whose germ is contained in the upper half-plane starts at 0.

In both cases the portion of the boundary MCHT in a neighborhood of 0 in the lower right quadrant is a global arc ending at z. Indeed, let qz′′zzMCHTc and denote again by p~=p~(q) the first point on γq such that r(p~)MCHT, in particular p~MCHT. As before, it lies on γq between q and γqα. Repeating the arguments of Lemma 5.4 we see that γp~qMCHT={p~} and the points p~ form a global arc of MCHT lying in the lower half-plane and ending at z.

Refer to caption
Figure 8. Bouncing type

5.3 Points of C2-inflection type

Recall that a point zMCHT is called a point of C2-inflection type if Δ+(z)= and either Δ(z)= or Γ(z).

Proposition 5.5.

Consider a point p of MCHT𝒵(PQ) belonging to the transverse locus R. If Δ(p)=, then Γ(p) and p is the starting point of a local arc.

Proof.

We keep the previous normalization p=0, R(0)=1, ImR′′(0)=b>0. The positive trajectory γ0+ cuts + into two parts, one containing the convex hull of γ0 (denoted by Ω++) and another one denoted by Ω+.

The arguments of Lemma 4.8 (using Lemma 5.2 instead of Lemma 3.23) can be repeated word by word as long as p~RΩ++, see Figure 4. This proves that MCHT does not intersect Ω+. Together with Δ(0)= this implies that some small sector S={ϵ<argz<0} does not intersect MCHT.

Now, assume by contradiction, that there exists qΩ++MCHT. Shrinking Ω++ if needed we can repeat the arguments of Lemma 4.9 as long as p~+, see Figure 5, to conclude that Ω++MCHT=.

Therefore there is a neighbourhood U+ of 0 in + which is disjoint from MCHT. We can assume that U+ is the intersection of + with a small disk centered at 0.

For sufficiently small ϵ>0, the set U=U+{ϵ<argz<ϵ} is disjoint from MCHT; the part lying in the lower half-plane is in U+S and the part lying in the upper half-plane is in U+p′′p0p′′.

Now, take a small neighborhood U of 0 in Ω bounded by a convex curve transversal to R. For any uU, the ray r(u), being close to R+, lies inside UU. By Lemma 3.26, this implies that UMCHTc, and therefore 0MCHT, a contradiction. Thus Ω++MCHT and γ0MCHT. ∎

Proposition 5.6.

Consider a point p of C2-inflection type. Then there is a neighborhood V of p in which MCHT is formed by:

  • a portion of a local arc γp parameterized by an interval [0,ϵ[, ϵ>0 with γp(0)=p;

  • a portion of a global arc γ~p parameterized by [0,ϵ[ and such that γ~p(0)=p and Δ(γ~p(t))={γp(t)}.

In particular, p is simultaneously the starting point of a local arc and the starting point of a global arc.

Proof.

We again assume that p=0 and R(0)=1. Following the definition of a point of C2-inflection type (see Theorem 1.9), we have that Δ+(0)= and either Δ(0)= or Γ(0). By Proposition 5.5, if Δ(0)=, then Γ(0) is also nonempty. Therefore, in both cases 0 is the starting point of a local arc γ0 and we deduce the shape of the boundary close to 0 from the assumption Δ+(0)=.

The curve γ0 divides the domain + into two parts, and as before we denote the one containing a horn of 0 by Ω+.

Lemma 5.7.

Ω+MCHT=.

Proof.

At first, consider the case R(0)<0. Set IΩ+R{0}. We claim that r(u)MCHT= for all uI sufficiently close to 0.

Set ρ(R(0))1. By assumption MCHT+=Δ(0) is a compact subset of (ρ,+], so MCHT+[ρ,+], ρ>ρ. Again, by closedness of MCHT and by Lemma 3.21 we can assume that for any ϵ>0 and all sufficiently small 0<δ<δ(ϵ)

MCHT{|Imz|<δ}{Rez>ρϵ,Imz0}{Rez<ϵ}. (5.2)

This means that MCHTc contains not only the horn p′′p0 but also the box

Π={δ<Imz0,ϵ<Rez<ρ+ϵ}

(we take ϵ<ρρ2).

For all uI, the slope σ(u) is positive:

ImR(u)=R(0)Imu+O(u2)>0, (5.3)

as Imu<0 and Reu=O(Imu) by transversality of R and r(0). Moreover, by (5.3) we have Im(u+tR(u))=0 for t=ρ+O(u), thus r(u)+=ρ+O(u). Therefore for any ϵ>0 and for any point uI sufficiently close to 0, the ray r(u) has an arbitrarily small slope and r(u)+(ρϵ,ρ+ϵ). Therefore

r(u){Imz>0}p′′p0p′′MCHTc (5.4)

for all uI sufficiently close to 0.

Let uI, |Imu|<δ, and take u′′r(u) with Reu′′=ϵ. If ϵ is sufficiently small then by Lemma 5.2 we can assume that the horn u′′uu is small.

The complementary cone u′′ lies above r(u) and to the right of {Rez>ϵ}. Thus

u′′{Imz<0}Π

and therefore u′′{Imz0}MCHTc. Choosing ϵ sufficiently small we can assume that the angle of the sector u′′ is small enough to conclude from (5.4) that u′′{Imz>0}MCHTc as well. This implies that uMCHTc and therefore Ω+MCHTc as well.

Refer to caption
Figure 9. u′′ lies in the complement to MCHT

If R(0)0 then Δ(0)Δ+(0)=, so Δ(0)=. Then the arguments of Lemma 4.8 are applicable for all p~Ω+, which proves the required claim in this case as well.

Let γ~0 be the set of points in whose associated rays are tangent to the positive trajectory γ0 of R(z)z starting at 0.

Lemma 5.8.

For R as in (5.1) the local arc γ0 is described by the relation y(x)=b3x3+o(x3), x0 and the curve γ~0 is described by y(x)=5b3x3+o(x3), x0.

Proof.

Using (3.6) for (5.1) we see that

γ0(t)=t+o(t)+i(b3t3+O(t4))

with a and therefore the slope σ(γ0(t))=bt2+O(t3).

The point uγ~0 whose associated ray r(u) is tangent to γ0 at γ0(t) has the form

u=γ0(t)sR(γ0(t))=ts+o(t)+i(sbt2+b3t3+O(t4))

with the condition σ(u)=σ(γ0(t))=bt2+O(t3). The latter condition means that s=2t+o(t) and therefore

u=t+o(t)i(53bt3+O(t4)).

Lemma 5.9.

For any uγ~0, the ray r(u) does not intersect γ~0γ0 between u and the point of tangency z=z(u) of r(u) and γ0.

Proof.

By Lemma 5.8, there is function γ(x) such that γ0γ~0={y=γ(x)}, with γ(x)=b3x3+o(x3) for x>0 and γ(x)=5b3x3+o(x3) for x<0. Both expressions, being power series, can be differentiated and produce asymptotic formulae for γ(x),γ′′(x) as well. In particular, γ′′(x) is continuous and monotone on the interval [Reα,Rez].

Assume r(u){y=kx+b}. By construction, γ^=γ(x)kxb vanishes at Reu and has a double zero at Rez. Any other point of intersection of r(u) and γ~0γ0 will imply the existence of another zero of γ^ on [Reu,Rez], thus γ^ will have four zeros on this interval counting multiplicities. By Rolle’s Theorem this will imply the existence of two zeros of γ^′′=γ′′ on [Reu,Rez], which contradicts monotonicity of γ′′. ∎

By Lemma 5.8 the curve γ~0 is tangent to , thus transversal to R and divides Ω into two parts. Denote by Ω the closed part consisting of points whose associated rays do not intersect γ0 and let Ω+ denotes the second part. Clearly Ω+MCHT.

Corollary 5.10.

Let uγ~0 and set u+r(u)R and r+(u)r(u)Ω=u++R(u)+. Then r+(u)(MCHT)=.

Proof.

Indeed, the piece of r+(u) between u+ and the point of tangency z=z(u) of r(u) and γ0 lies in Ω+ by Lemma 5.9, and the remaining piece coincides with r(z). Thus the claim follows from Lemmas 5.7 and  3.21. ∎

Lemma 5.11.

For any uΩγ~0, one has

  1. (1)

    r(u)γ~0=,

  2. (2)

    r(u)ΩMCHTc.

Proof.

Let γαβ be the piece of trajectory of R(z)z containing u and with endpoints α=α(u)γ~0 and β=β(u)R: by Lemma 5.8 γ~0 is transversal to the trajectories of R(z)z near 0 except γ0. Let D(u)=zγαβr(z) be the domain sweeped by the rays associated to the points of γαβ. Since γαβ is convex, D(u)=r(α)γαβr(β). By Lemmas 5.9,  5.8, and  5.7, D(u)γ~0={α}, so r(u)γ~0=.

The boundary of D+(u)=D(u)Ω consists of r(β), the piece of R lying between β and the point α+ and r+(α) which do not intersect MCHT by Lemma 5.7 and Corollary 5.10. This implies the second claim of the Lemma. ∎

Proof of Proposition 5.6.

Take some uΩ and let Ω(u) be the curvilinear triangle bounded by γαβ, γ~0 and . The ray r(u) does not cross γαβ by convexity and does not cross γ~0 by Lemma 5.11. Therefore it leaves the domain Ω(u) through , with r(u)Ω(u)MCHTc Lemma 5.11. Thus r(u)Ω(u)MCHTc.

As Ω(u)Ω(u) for any uΩ(u), this means that r(u)Ω(u)MCHTc for all uΩ(u), and therefore ΩMCHT= by Lemma 3.26.

As Ω+MCHT, we see that γ~0MCHT.

Refer to caption
Figure 10. A point in the transverse locus of MCHTR with empty Δ correspondence is the starting point of a global arc.

5.4 Points of C1-inflection type

Recall that a point pMCHT𝒵(PQ) belonging to the transverse locus R is called a point of C1-inflection type if Δ+(p)=Γ(p)= and Δ(p).

Proposition 5.12.

A point pMCHTR of C1inflection type is the starting point of two global arcs (one in each of the incident inflection domains).

Proof.

We assume that p=0, R(0)=1 and γ0+ lies in the upper half-plane. We use z=x+iy notations.

Exactly as in the case of bouncing type, the conditions Δ and Γ= imply that 0 is a starting point of a global arc, see Lemma 5.4. Denote this arc by η={y=ξ(x)}. The arguments of Lemma 5.4 show that η lies between 𝔱𝔯+ and 𝔱𝔯u, where u=supΔ. Thus η has second order tangency with +. Let k(x) be the point of intersection of r((x,ξ(x))) with +. One can easily see that k(x) is an increasing function, and k(x)u as x0. This means that limx0+ξ(x)/x2 exists and is positive.

We repeat the arguments of the C2-inflection case above one by one, with γ0 replaced by η. The Lemma 5.7 can be repeated verbatim (necessarily R(0)<0), and we get Ω+MCHT.

Let η~ be the curve of points bounding (the germ at 0 of) the domain Ω consisting of points of whose associated rays do not intersect η. In particular, r(u) is a supporting line to η for all uη~. If γuβ is a trajectory of R(z)z starting at uη~ and ending at βR then γuβΩ by convexity of γuβ, as in Lemma 5.11.

Lemma 5.13.

For any uη~ the ray r(u) does not intersect η~ except at u itself.

Proof.

Note first that η lies above r(u) for any αη~. Assume the opposite to the claim of the lemma, and let ur(u)η~ be such a point of intersection. If σ(u)<σ(u) then the ray r(u) lies below r(u) and therefore cannot intersect η. Similarly, if σ(u)>σ(u) then r(u) cannot intersect η. Therefore σ(u)=σ(u), so u is a point of tangency of r(u) and R(z)z just like u.

Now, recall that 0η lies above r(u). Moreover, as u, the germ of r(u) at u lies in Ω: for vr(u) close to u we have σ(v)<σ(u), so r(v) doesn’t intersect η. Thus the germ of η~ at u lies above r(u) as well. Thus both ends of the part η~u0 of η~ between u and 0 lie above r(u), so η~u0 intersects r(u) in even number of points not including u, i.e. at least at three points including u, all of them the points of tangency of r(α) and R(z)z.

As u0 the line r(u) converges to and the points of tangency necessarily converge to 0 as well. This means that Rz has point of tangency of order at least 3 with at 0. However, pR means that ImR′′(0)0, so the order of tangency of Rz with at 0 is exactly 2 (as ImR(0)=ImR(0)=0). This contradiction proves the Lemma.

The same arguments as in Lemma 5.11 and in the proof of Proposition 5.6 now show that Ω satisfies the conditions of Lemma 3.26 and is therefore disjoint from MCHT. ∎

5.5 Points of switch type

Recall that a point pMCHT𝒵(PQ) belonging to the transverse locus R is called a point of switch type if Δ+(p) and Γ(p)Δ(p)=.

Proposition 5.14.

The negative part γ0(t) of the integral curve γ0(t) is a part of the boundary MCHT.

As before, we assume that p=0, R(0)=1 and ImR′′(0)>0. The trajectory γ0(t) and the curve R divide U into four domains Ω±,±, with Ω+ intersecting the p′′p0.

Lemma 5.15.

In the above notation, Ω++MCHTc.

Proof.

Recall that by Lemma 3.21 the union H(0)=p′′p0p′′ does not intersect MCHT.

Assume first that R(0)0 and set ρ(R(0))1+{+}. The set Δ(0) is a relatively closed subset of (0,ρ] not containing ρ (as Δ(0)=). Thus there exists a ρ<ρ such that the ray [ρ,+] is disjoint from MCHT. As both [ρ,+] and MCHT¯ are closed in 𝕊1 there is some neighborhood U~ of [ρ,+] in 𝕊1 disjoint from MCHT¯. Choose an open sector SU~ with the ray (ρ,+) as bisector, necessarily disjoint from MCHT.

By shrinking Ω±± we can assume that |σ(z)|<|σ(S)| for all zΩ±±, where ±σ(S) are the slopes of the sides of S. Moreover, we restrict ourselves to a neighborhood U of 0 so small that rays r(z) do not intersect the interval [0,ρ] for zU{Rez0} and z0: this is possible since the trails of these points lie in the lower half-plane. In particular, for any zΩ++U{Rez0} the ray r(z) intersects the boundary of H(0)S only once at γ0+(t).

The same conclusion holds in the case R(0)>0. In this case σ(z)>0 for all zU, Imz>0.

Since Γ(0)= there exists a point qΩ++MCHT. We can now repeat the arguments of Lemma 4.9 for U: the crucial fact used in Lemma 4.9 was that r(p~) doesn’t intersect MCHT, and this holds for points of Ω++. Therefore Ω++MCHT=.

Proposition 5.16.

Take p=γ0(t) for some t<0 sufficiently close to 0. The open curvilinear triangle H(p)Ω+ bounded by r(p), the curve γ0(t) and the inflection curve lies outside MCHT.

Denote x=Rez, y=Imz.

Lemma 5.17.

One has xσ(x+iy)<0 as long as z=x+iy lies in a sufficiently small sector {|z|<δ,x<0,|y|<ϵx} for some ϵ,δ>0 depending on the rational function R(z) only.

Proof.

Recall that R(z)=1+az+bz2+.., with Imb>0. Then

logR=az+(ba22)z2+

and

(logR)=a+(2ba2)z+

Therefore

xσ(x+iy)=xIm(logR)=Im(logR)=Im(2ba2)z+o(z)<0

if |argzπ|<πarg(2ba2) and |z| is sufficiently small (note that 0<arg(2ba2)<π as Imb>0 and a). ∎

Lemma 5.18.

The associated ray r(z) does not intersect γ0(t) for any zH(p).

Proof.

First consider the case Imz<0. As γ0(t) is tangent to , we can assume that this part of H(p) satisfies the conditions of Lemma 5.17, so σ(z)>σ(z+)>0, where z+=z+tγ0(t). Thus the ray r(z) lies in the half-plane bounded by the line tangent to γ0(t) at z+ and containing z. Therefore r(z) does not intersect γ0(t): by convexity of γ0(t)it lies in the other half-plane bounded by the line tangent to γ0(t) at z+.

Now, assume that Imz0. Recall that we have chosen U so small that for any zU, Imz>0, the intersection r(z)(ρ,+)+. Thus r(z){Imw<0}{Rez>ρ>0} which is disjoint from γ. ∎

Lemma 5.19.

The associated ray r(z) does not intersect r(p) for any zH(p).

Proof.

Let γz be a part of the integral curve of Rz ending at z and let zγzr(p) be the first (from z) point where γz enters H(p). This point must necessarily lie on r(p) because γz does not intersect neither the curve of inflection points R nor γ by uniqueness of solutions of ODE. Thus σ(z)σ(p).

Assume now that the ray r(z) intersects r(p). Then σ(z)>σ(p)σ(z) as z lies below r(p). Therefore the slope σ(w), wγz, is not monotone, implying that γz has an inflection point. But this is impossible since γz does not intersect the curve of inflections. ∎

Proof of Proposition 5.16.

By minimality, it is enough to prove that r(z)H(p)MCHTc for any zH(p). By Lemmas 5.185.19 the ray r(z) does not intersect r(p) and γ0(t). Thus r(z) leaves H(p) through the curve of inflections R with a small slope.

If the slope is positive then r(z)H(p)U++H(0). In particular, this is the case for all zH(p), Imz<0 by Lemma 5.17.

Assume now that σ(z)<0 (and therefore Imz>0). Recall that we have chosen U so small that for any zU, Imz>0, the intersection r(z)(s,+)+. Thus r(z)H(p)Ω++H(0)S.

Taken together, r(z)H(p)MCHTc for all zH(p). Therefore H(p)MCHTc by Lemma 3.26.

Proposition 5.20.

Consider a point pMCHT of switch type. Then there is a neighborhood V of p such that MCHTV is contained in a half-disk centered at p. Besides, no neighborhood of p in MCHT can be contained in a cone centered at p with an angle strictly smaller than π. A point of switch type is the ending point of both a local and a global arcs.

Proof.

We essentially repeat the arguments of Lemma 4.8. Take uΔ(0) and let 𝔱𝔯u+ be a germ of the branch of 𝔱𝔯uMCHT lying in the lower-right quadrant. For any q𝔱𝔯u+ let z=z(q)γq+ be the last point such that r(z)MCHT. This point exists since γq+ eventually enters p′′p0MCHTc. As in Lemma 5.4, zMCHT and therefore Imz<0, as otherwise zp′′p0. The points z(q) form a global arc ending at 0. ∎

5.6 Classification of boundary points

Here, we summarize several results obtained in the previous sections to finalize our classification of boundary points on MCHT.

Proof of Theorem 1.9.

It follows from Corollary 3.8 that there are at most 4degP+degQ22d singular points in the curve of inflections (d=3degP+degQ1). Proposition 3.14 proves that the tangency locus 𝔗R is formed by at most 2d2 isolated points and d lines.

The classification of points in R is trivial. If Δ+ is nonempty, then a point is of bouncing or switch type depending on whether ΓΔ is empty or not. If Δ+ is empty, then a point is of C1-inflection or C2-inflection type depending whether the conjunction of Δ and Γ= is satisfied or not.

Finally, for points outside 𝒵(PQ)R, we just have to check that Γ and Δ cannot both be empty. This is proved in Proposition 4.7. ∎

5.7 Estimates concerning local and global arcs

We introduce the following notations:

  • || is the number of local arcs;

  • |𝒢| is the number of global arcs;

  • || is the number of points of bouncing type;

  • || is the number of points of extruding type;

  • |1| is the number of points of C1inflection type;

  • |2| is the number of points of C2inflection type;

  • |𝒮| is the number of points of switch type.

We prove that the number of points of switch type provides an estimate for the number of local arcs (up to an error term depending only on degP and degQ).

Lemma 5.21.

In the boundary MCHT, the ending point of every local arc, except at most d(2d+1) of them, is a point of switch type where d=3degP+degQ1. Conversely every point of switch type is the endpoint of some local arc.
In other words, we have |𝒮||||𝒮|+d(2d+1).

Proof.

Proposition 5.20 proves that every point of switch type is the endpoint of some local arc. It remains to list all possible endpoints for local arcs.

Following Proposition 4.12, every local arc has an endpoint that either belongs to 𝒵(PQ) or to R. For any point α which is the endpoint of a local arc, α contains an interval of length at most π. It follows from Corollary 3.5 that such a point is either a simple pole of R(z) or a point which is neither a zero or a pole of R(z). Only two local arcs can have the same simple pole as their endpoint. Any other point is the endpoint of at most one local arc (because only one integral curve passes through such a point). Consequently, at most 3degP+degQ local arcs have an endpoint in 𝒵(PQ).

It remains to count local arcs one endpoint of which belongs to R𝒵(PQ). Any such point is incident to a unique integral curve which implies that it can be the endpoint of only one local arc. If such a point belongs to the transverse locus of the curve of inflections, then it is a point of switch type (see Propositions 5.35.65.12 and 5.20). There are |𝒮| of them. Following Proposition 3.14, the tangency locus of R is formed by at most 2d2 points and d straight lines where d=3degP+degQ1. As arg(R(z)) is constant on each such line, they contain at most one endpoint of a local arc. Thus |||𝒮|+d(2d+1).

Similarly, we prove an estimate on the number of global arcs that do not start at a point of the transverse locus of the curve of inflections.

Lemma 5.22.

In the boundary MCHT, the starting point of every global arc, except at most 12d+5d2 of them, is either a point of C1-inflection, C2-inflection or of bouncing type.
Besides, we have 2|1|+|2||𝒢|||+2|1|+|2|+12d+5d2.

Proof.

Proposition 5.6 show that every point of C1-inflection is the starting point of a global arc while Proposition 5.12 show that every point of C1-inflection is the starting point of two global arcs. It follows that 2|1|+|2||𝒢|.

Then, we list every possible starting point for a global arc (Lemma 4.23 proves that global arcs cannot be closed loops).

Since points of extruding type are not starting points of global arcs (see Proposition 4.30), every global arc either starts at a point at infinity or at a point of 𝒵(PQ)R.

We first count the number of global arcs which can start at infinity. If degQdegP=1, then by Theorem 2.23 we know that MCHT is compact. If degQdegP=1, then Proposition 6.9 proves that MCHT has only one connected component while its complement has two connected components. Therefore, we have at most four infinite global arcs in this case. If degQdegP=0, the complement of MCHT is connected so each connected component has at most two infinite global arcs. Following Proposition 2.20, MCHT has at most degP+degQ connected components. Therefore the number of global arcs starting at infinity is at most 2degP+2degQ. In the only case where 4>2degP+2degQ while degQdegP=1, Q(z) is constant while degP=1. In this case, MCHT is a straight line (see Proposition 6.7).

Let us consider the points of the transverse locus of R. Each point of C1inflection type is the starting point of exactly two global arcs (see Proposition 5.12). Each point of bouncing or C2inflection type is the starting point of exactly one global arc (see Propositions 5.3 and 5.6). No global arc starts at a point of switch type (see Proposition 5.20).

Now let us consider the tangency locus of R. It is formed by at most 2d2 points and degP+degQ+1 R-invariant lines (see Definition 2.5). For each such line, at most 4 global arcs can have start accumulation ω(α) belonging to it, because each line has two sides and rays have two possible directions. Otherwise, the rays starting from these global arcs intersect the interior of MCHT near the other global arcs. Using Corollaries 3.6, we conclude that each of the 2d2 remaining points of the tangent locus is the starting point of at most two global arcs. For the same reasons, each singular point of R that does not belong to 𝒵(PQ) is the starting point of at most two global arcs. There are 4degP+degQ22d such points (see Corollary 3.8).

It remains to estimate the number of global arcs that can start at a root α of P(z) or Q(z) in terms of the local degree mα of R(z) in α. Corollary 3.6 proves that α is the starting point of at most:

  • two arcs if mα=0;

  • 2(1mα) arcs if mα1;

  • 2degP arcs if mα1.

Consequently, in the worst case scenario, the roots of P(z) and Q(z) are simple and disjoint so at most 2degP(degP+2) global arcs can start at these points.

Therefore, the number of global arcs whose starting point does not belong to R is at most (2degP+2degQ)+4(degP+degQ+1)+4d2+4d+2degP(degP+2).

If degP=0, then degQ=1 (otherwise MCHT is trivial) and MCHT is fully irregular (and has therefore no global arcs) so we can replace the obtained bound by the slightly weaker (but more practical) upper bound 12d+5d2. ∎

5.8 Long arcs

In order to prove Theorem 1.10, we introduce a new decomposition of the boundary MCHT.

Definition 5.23.

For any linear differential operator T given by (1.1), we define the long arcs as the maximal arcs formed by gluing local and global arcs along points of extruding or bouncing type (see Sections 4.6 and 5.2).

In particular, a long arc belongs to the closure of a unique inflection domain. Consequently, local and global arcs of a same long arc share the same orientation (see Section 4.5.2). This defines the orientation a long arc.

5.8.1. Estimates concerning long arcs

Drawing on the estimates of Section 5.7, we prove that the number of long arcs corresponds to the number of intersections between MCHT and the transverse locus of R that are not of bouncing type (in other words, where the boundary of the minimal set crosses the curve of inflections).

Lemma 5.24.

Every long arc except at most 28d2+52d of them goes from a point of switch type to a point of C1-inflection or C2-inflection type. The number |𝒜| of long arcs satisfies the following inequalities:

2|𝒮||𝒜|2|𝒮|+26d+14d2;
4|1|+2|2||𝒜|4|1|+2|2|+26d+14d2.
Proof.

Inequality 2|𝒮||𝒜| follows from the fact that every point of switch type is the ending point of two long arcs. Similarly, points of C1-inflection or C2-inflection type are the starting points of two long arcs so we obtain 2|1|+2|2||𝒜|.

We denote by |𝒜L| the number of long arcs containing a local arc. We already know that the endpoint of a local arc cannot be a point of extruding or bouncing type. Therefore, the endpoint of a local arc contained in a long arc is also the endpoint of the long arc. We deduce then from Lemma 5.21 that the endpoints of all but at most d(2d+1) these long arcs containing a local arc are points of switch type: |𝒜L||𝒮|+d(2d+1).

Then, denote by |𝒜G| the number of long arcs that do not contain a local arc. The start accumulations of these long arcs are in particular start accumulations of a global arc and cannot be points of bouncing type. We deduce from the proof of Lemma 5.22 that the start accumulation of these long arcs, except at most 12d+5d2 of them are in fact starting points and they are points of C1-inflection or C2-inflection type. In other words, we have |𝒜G|2|1|+|2|+12d+5d2.

Finally, we deduce that the total number of long arcs satisfies |𝒜||𝒮|+2|1|+|2|+13d+7d2. Combining this inequality with 2|𝒮||𝒜|, we obtain that |𝒮|2|1|+|2|+13d+7d2 and therefore |𝒜|4|1|+2|2|+26d+14d2. We obtain similarly that |𝒜|2|𝒮|+26d+14d2. This also provides a bound on the number of long arcs that do not go from a point of switch type to a point of C1-inflection or C2-inflection type. ∎

5.8.2. Admissible long arcs

We will refer to a long arc going from a point of switch type to a point of C1-inflection or C2-inflection type (or the opposite) as an admissible long arc.

Definition 5.25.

We associate to each admissible long arc α a combinatorial symbol sα that contains the following information:

  • the connected component of the transverse locus R containing the starting point of α;

  • the connected component of R containing the endpoint of α;

  • the sign of the inflection domain α belongs to.

Chains of consecutive long arcs define patterns formed by the concatenation of the combinatorial symbols of their long arcs.

Chains of consecutive long arcs are given the orientation induced by the topological orientation of MCHT. Therefore, the orientation of a chain coincides with the orientation of the long arc inside positively oriented domains of inflection (and does not coincide with the orientation of the long arc inside negatively oriented domains of inflections).

Remark 5.26.

In particular, at a point z of switch, C1-inflection or C2-inflection type in a chain, the associated ray r(z) and the orientation of the chain points towards the same domain of inflection.

5.8.3. Bounding the number of transverse intersection points between MCHT and the transverse locus of R

Using the fact that an associated ray cannot cross the curve of inflections more than d times (where d=3degP+degQ1), we prove a bound on the number of chains of admissible long arcs that can realize a given pattern.

Lemma 5.27.

In the boundary MCHT of the minimal set, there cannot be 2d+2 disjoint chains of 2d admissible long arcs that realize the same pattern.

Proof.

We assume by contradiction the existence of 2d+2 disjoint chains γ1,,γ2d+2 of 2d admissible long arcs realizing the same pattern. We refer to the admissible long arc of γi corresponding to the jth symbol as αi,j.

By definition of the combinatorial symbol, for a given j, the arcs αi,j for 1i2d+2 belong to the same inflection domain 𝒟j.

We denote by β1,,β2d+1 the connected components of the transverse locus R at the endpoints of long arcs ordered according to the orientation of the chains.

We are going to prove the existence of a point z of βd+1 such that its associated ray r(z) also intersects d arcs among β1,,β2d+1, defining a straight line that intersects transversely a real algebraic curve of degree at most d in at least d+1 points, obtaining the desired contradiction.

A first observation is that the chains γ1,,γ2d+2 cannot cross each other (because the interior of MCHT is connected near endpoints of admissible arcs). Since the complex plane is simply connected, this fact implies that for a given j, the intersection points of the chains γ1,,γ2d+2 with βj determine a cyclic order that does not depend on j. We assume therefore that the indices of γ1,,γ2d+2 are elements of /(2d+2) and correspond to the previously defined cyclic ordering.

In a given inflection domain 𝒟j, it may happen that the linear orders of these intersection points with βj and βj+1 respectively are different. They may differ by a rotation if βj and βj+1 do not belong to the same connected components of the boundary of 𝒟j (if 𝒟j is not simply connected).

It follows that for any 1j2d, for every k/(2d+2) except possibly one, there is a quadrilateral in bounded by αj,k, αj,k+1, one portion of βj and one portion of βj+1. The exception correspond to the case where the linear orderings do not match. Since we have 2d+2 chains, it follows that we can assemble 2d of these strips into a unique long strip 𝒮 bounded by some γk, γk+1 and portions of β0 and β2d+1.

The chains γk and γk+1 are oriented in such a way that for any point z𝒮β0, associated ray r(z) points inside 𝒮. Since the orientation of γk and γk+1 coincides with the topological orientation of MCHT, we can find a point z of 𝒮βd+1 in the complement of MCHT. Thus, for any such point z, associated ray r(z) cannot cross chains γk and γk+1 and has to leave 𝒮 through β0 or β2d+1. Therefore, r(z) has to cross either β1,,βd+1 or βd+1,,β2d+1. This ends the proof. ∎

We deduce a bound on the number of long arcs.

Corollary 5.28.

For any linear differential operator T given by (1.1), the number |𝒜| of long arcs in MCHT satisfies

|𝒜|2e16dln(d)+92d3

where d=3degP+degQ1.

Proof.

Since the number of connected components of the transverse locus R is at most 2d2+6d+2 (see Corollary 3.15), the number of possible combinatorial symbols for an admissible long arc is 2(2d2+6d+2)2 (see Definition 5.25). Therefore, the number of possible patterns for a chain of 2d admissible long arcs is at most 22d(2d2+6d+2)4d. Since d3 (see Remark 2.4), we have 2d2+6d+252d2 and we obtain the weaker (but simpler) upper bound (25/2)2dd8d.

Then, using Lemma 5.27, we deduce that the number of disjoint chains of 2d admissible long arcs is at most (25/2)2d(2d+1)d8d.

The number of non-admissible long arcs is bounded by 28d2+52d (Lemma 5.24). It follows that in the worst case, each non-admissible arc is located between two chains of (2d1)+2d admissible long arcs. Consequently, the number of long arcs is bounded by

(25/2)2d(2d)(2d+1)d8d+(28d2+52d)+(28d2+52d+1)(2d1).

Since d3, this upper bound can be weakened to 2e16dln(d)+92d3. ∎

Theorem 1.10 then follows from the fact that |𝒮| and 2|1|+|2| are bounded by the number of long arcs (see Lemma 5.24). Corollary 1.11 then follows from the combination of Theorem 1.10 with Lemma 5.21.

6 Global geometry of minimal sets

At present we do not know a general recipe how to describe non-trivial MCHT. Nevertheless we can prove some general statements about their global geometry and provide some illuminating examples.

Recall that MCHT is nontrivial if and only if degQdegP{1,0,1}.

In some cases, description of the convex hull Conv(MCHT) is easier to obtain. The following has been proved as Corollary 5.16 in [AHN+24].

Proposition 6.1.

Consider a linear differential operator T given by (1.1).Then the intersection of all convex Hutchinson invariant set coincides with the convex hull Conv(MCHT) of the minimal set MCHT.

The local analysis of boundary points carried on in the previous sections provides interesting partial results towards a characterization of points where MCHT is locally convex.

6.1 Local convexity of the boundary

Local analysis in terms of correspondences Γ and Δ shows that corner points of MCHT have to satisfy very specific conditions.

Corollary 6.2.

For a linear differential operator T given by (1.1), consider a point α which is a corner point of the boundary MCHT. In other words, there is a neighborhood V of α such that VMCHT is contained in a cone with apex α and with the opening strictly smaller than π. Then one of the following statements hold:

  • α is a simple zero of R(z) satisfying ϕα=0 (see 3.1);

  • α is a common root of P(z) and Q(z) of the same multiplicity (i.e. α is neither a zero nor a pole of R(z)).

Besides, if α is a cusp (neighborhoods of α in MCHT can be included in cones of arbitrarily small opening angle), then one of the following statements holds:

  • α is a common root of P(z) and Q(z) of the same multiplicity;

  • MCHT is totally irregular and contained in a half-line.

Proof.

Corollary 3.5 immediately implies that α cannot be a pole or a multiple zero of R(z). Besides, if α is a simple zero, it has to satisfy the condition ϕα=0. Now we assume that α is neither a zero nor a pole of R(z). It remains to prove that α𝒵(PQ).

Assume that α𝒵(PQ). In this case if some point of the forward trajectory of R(z)z starting at α belongs to MCHT, then a germ of the integral curve starting at α is contained in MCHT (see Proposition 2.10) and α cannot be a corner point. We conclude that Γ(α)=.

If Δ(α) contains some point y, then a branch of the root trail 𝔱𝔯y containing α belongs to MCHT (see Lemmas 2.11 and 2.16). Thus in this case α cannot be a corner point and we get Δ(α)=0.

Now we take a cone 𝒞 with apex at α, of angle at least π which is locally disjoint from MCHT. If r(α) is contained in 𝒞, but is not one of the two limit rays, we can freely remove a neighborhood of α from MCHT and still get an invariant set. In any other case, we can find an arc contained in a neighborhood of α and the complement of MCHT whose associated rays sweep out a domain containing α. Thus we get a contradiction in this case as well which implies that α has to be in 𝒵(PQ).

Finally if α is a simple zero of R(z) and a cusp, then we have α=𝕊1 (see Definition 3.2). It follows that MCHT has empty interior. All such cases have been completely classified in Section 7 of [AHN+24]. ∎

Further local analysis provides necessary conditions under which boundary points belong to locally convex parts of MCHT.

Proposition 6.3.

For a linear differential operator T given by (1.1), consider a point αMCHT such that there is a neighborhood V of α with the property that VMCHT is contained in a closed half-plane whose boundary contains α.

If α𝒵(PQ), then one of the following statements holds:

  • α is a simple pole of R(z);

  • α is a simple zero of R(z) satisfying ϕα=0 (see 3.1);

  • α is a common root of P(z) and Q(z) of the same multiplicity (i.e. α is neither a zero nor a pole of R(z)).

If αR𝒵(PQ), then α is a point of switch type.

If αR𝒵(PQ), then one of the following statements holds:

  • α is a point of local type;

  • α is a point of global type and for any uΔ(α), either Im(f(u,α))=0 or Im(f(u,α)) and Im(R(α)) have opposite signs (for f defined as in Proposition 2.18).

Proof.

The case α𝒵(PQ) follows from Corollary 3.5. If αR𝒵(PQ) and Δ(α), then MCHT contains both the germ of an integral curve of the field R(z)z at α and the germ of the root trail 𝔱𝔯u for some uΔ(α). Proposition 2.19 implies that MCHT cannot be convex at α. Besides, if Γ(α), then MCHT cannot be convex in α either because a germ of an integral curve having an inflection point at α is contained in MCHT In the remaining cases, we have Γ(α)Δ(α)=. If Δ+(α), this characterizes points of switch type (see Theorem 1.9). If Δ(α)=, then we obtain a point of C2-inflection type, α is the starting point of a local arc and Γ(α) is therefore nonempty (see Proposition 5.5).

Now we consider the case αR𝒵(PQ). If Γ(α), then α is a point of local type (α cannot be a point of extruding type because of Proposition 4.30). If Γ(α)=, then it follows from Proposition 4.7 that Δ(α). Proposition 2.18 then provides the necessary condition. ∎

6.2 Case degQdegP=1

We have a rational vector field R(z)z satisfying R(z)=λz+μz2+o(1/z2) with λ and μ.

6.2.1. Horizontal locus and special line

We define the following loci.

Definition 6.4.

The horizontal locus R is the closure in of the set formed by points z𝒵(PQ), for which σ(z)=arg(λ)±π2.

We also denote by R the special line formed by points z given by the equation Im(z/λ)=Im(μ/λ2).

For the sake of simplicity, the vector field R(z)z is normalized by an affine change of variable as R(z)=1z+o(z2) (λ=1 and μ=0). The line R then coincides with the real axis .

Lemma 6.5.

R is a real plane algebraic curve of degree at most degP+degQ. It has two asymptotic infinite branches. The line R is the asymptotic line for both of them.

Proof.

Curve R can be seen as the pull-back of the real axis under the mapping R(z):11. We have R()=0 and is a simple root of R(z). Therefore, R is smooth near .

It remains to show that the tangent line to R at infinity coincides with the real axis. Actually the tangent line is the line at which the linearization of R(z) at attains real zeroes. Since this linearization is exactly 1z, the result follows. ∎

Corollary 6.6.

The closure MCHT¯ of the minimal set in the extended plane contains asymptotic directions 0 and π. Besides, the curve R is contained in the minimal set MCHT.

Proof.

Looking at separatrices of the vector field R(z)z and using Proposition 2.10 we get that the closure MCHT¯ in the extended plane contains asymptotic directions 0 and π. The associated rays of points of R are thus asymptotically tangent to MCHT and R is contained in the minimal set. ∎

Proposition 6.7.

Consider a linear differential operator T given by (1.1) such that degQdegP=1. Then the minimal convex Hutchinson invariant set Conv(MCHT) is a bi-infinite strip (domain bounded by two parallel lines).

More precisely, Conv(MCHT) is the smallest strip containing R𝒵(PQ).

Proof.

The minimal convex Hutchinson invariant set Conv(MCHT) is the complement of the union of every open half-plane disjoint from MCHT. Since R is contained in MCHT (Corollary 6.6), these open half-planes have to be disjoint from R. Conversely, any open half-plane H disjoint from R is such that Im(R(z)) is either positive or negative for every zH. Therefore, provided H does not contain any zero or pole of R(z), one can conclude that it can be removed from any Hutchinson invariant set. In other words, Conv(MCHT) is the complement to the union of all half-planes disjoint from R𝒵(PQ). Since R has asymptotically horizontal infinite branches, the boundary line of every half-plane disjoint from R has to be horizontal.

It remains to prove that such half-planes exist. It follows from the asymptotic description of R in Lemma 6.5 that |Im(z)| is bounded on R. Therefore we can find two (disjoint) open half-planes that are also disjoint from R. These half-planes contain half-planes which, in addition, are disjoint from 𝒵(PQ). ∎

6.2.2. Asymptotic geometry of the minimal set

Following Proposition 6.7, Conv(MCHT) is the smallest horizontal strip containing the curve R𝒵(PQ). The closure of the projection of Conv(MCHT) on the vertical axis is an interval [y,y+] where y0y+.

Lemma 6.8.

For 0<y<y0, denote by Mt the intersection point between the associated ray r(t+iy) and the horizontal line Im(z)=y0. Then the following statements hold:

  • for t+, Re(Mt) if y<y02;

  • for t+, Re(Mt)+ if y02<y<y0.

Analogous statements hold for t or y0<y<0.

Proof.

For large values of t, we have Re(R(z))=1t+o(t1) and Im(R(z))=yt2+o(t2). Provided t is large enough, Im(R(z)) is positive and the associated ray r(z) intersects the line Im(z)=y0. Then the real part of the intersection point equals t(y0y)ty+o(t). After simplification, we obtain (2yy0)ty+o(t). The sign of the main term is then determined by the sign of 2yy0. ∎

Proposition 6.9.

If degQdegP=1, the minimal set MCHT is connected in .

Proof.

Following Proposition 2.24, the complement (MCHT)c of MCHT in has exactly two connected components and it has been proved in Proposition 6.7 that each of them contains a half-plane. We refer to the domain containing an upper half-plane as 𝒟+ and to the domain containing a lower half-plane as 𝒟. Since MCHT contains R, we deduce that Im(R(z)) is positive on 𝒟+ and negative on 𝒟.

Proving that MCHT is connected in amounts to showing that 𝒟+ and 𝒟 have only one topological end. We will prove this statement for 𝒟+ (the proof for 𝒟 is identical). We assume by contradiction that 𝒟+ has a topological end κ distinct from the end of the upper half-plane contained in 𝒟+ (we will refer to this end as the main end of 𝒟+).

For any sequence {zn} of points in (MCHT)c approaching κ, we have (up to taking a subsequence) the sequence {arg(zn)} converging either to 0 or to π (since otherwise, κ would not be distinct from the main end). Let’s assume without loss of generality that it is 0. Again, we can assume that {Im(zn)} converges to some value ye[0,y+].

If ye>0, then Lemma 6.8, shows that for any horizontal line Lf with yf]ye,2ye[, the associated rays of the points in MCHTc converging to the end κ sweep out points of Lf whose real part is arbitrarily close to +. Assuming that ye is the maximal possible limit value, we deduce that no infinite component of MCHT can separate κ from the upper main end containing asymptotic directions of ]0,π[.

Hence, for a sequence {zn} of points in (MCHT)c approaching κ, the only accumulation value of {Im(zn)} is 0. In this case, the associated rays r(zn) accumulate onto the -axis which is therefore contained in the closure of 𝒟+.

Now we prove that the open upper half-plane defined by Im(z)>0 is disjoint from MCHT. We assume by contradiction the existence of a point z0 such that y0=Im(z0) is positive and z0MCHT. We denote by Ly0 the horizontal line formed by points satisfying Im(z)=y0. Since there is a family of associated rays accumulating onto the -axis, there exists a path (t+if(t))t such that for any t, f(t)]0,y04[ and t+if(t)𝒟+. Applying Lemma 6.8 to the intersection between Ly0 and the family of associated rays starting from t+if(t), a continuity argument proves that z0 belongs to some associated ray of the family (as t moves from to +, the intersection of the associated rays with Ly0 moves from the right end to the left end of this horizontal line). Therefore, z0 cannot belong to MCHT and the open upper half-plane defined by Im(z)>0 is disjoint from MCHT.

Then, there are interior points of connected a component X of MCHT located above κ whose imaginary value is negative. It follows that the associated rays of points of 𝒟+ approaching κ intersect the interior of X (these associated rays accumulate on the -axis). Therefore, there is no such end κ and MCHT is connected. ∎

Proposition 6.10.

There is a compact set K and a positive constant B>0 such that the intersection MCHTKc is contained in the closure of the domain bounded by the hyperbolas given by

y=y+2(1+Bx),y=y2(1+Bx):x>0 (6.1)
y=y2(1Bx),y=y+2(1Bx):x<0. (6.2)
Proof.

By Lemma 6.5 for any y in J=[y,y2[]y+2,y+], there is a positive constant A>0 such that the union of the two semi-infinite horizontal strips characterized by Im(z)J and |Re(z)|>A is disjoint from R.

Consider some positive number B>A and introduce the domain DB characterized by the inequalities:

  • Im(z)>y+ if Re(z)[B,B];

  • Im(z)>g(t) where g(t)=y+2|t|+B|t| if t=Re(z)[B,B].

For any point z such that Im(z)>y+, the associated ray r(z) remains in DB. Now we assume that z=t+iy satisfies the conditions

|t|>Bandy+2|t|+B|t|<|y|y+.

Without loss of generality, we assume that t<B.

In order to prove that the associated ray r(z) remains in DB, we have to show that for any t<B and any s[t,B], we have

Im(R(z))Re(R(z))>g(s)g(t)st.

Since g(s)g(t)stBy+2sty+2t, we just have to prove that

Im(R(z))Re(R(z))>y+2t.

In our case Re(R(z))=1t+o(t2) and Im(R(z))=yt2+o(t3) imply that

Im(R(z))Re(R(z))=yt+o(t2).

Since yy+2>y+B2|t|>0, the inequality holds provided B is large enough.

By replacing y+ by y, we get an analogous result for the lower part of the complement to MCHT. ∎

6.2.3. Examples

Consider a family of operators of the form Tα=Q(z)ddz+P(z) where Q(z)=(zα)k and P(z)=z(αz)k with the common root α of degree k.

The family Tα provides a rich assortment of examples. We have R(z)=1z. The special line is the real axis which coincides with the horizontal locus R. Besides, the integral curves of R(z)z are hyperbolas (level sets of xy).

Proposition 6.11.

If α, then the minimal set MCHT of operator Tα coincides with the real axis .

Proof.

This follows immediately from Proposition 6.7 and 6.9. ∎

If α does not belong to the real axis, we get different pictures depending on whether or not α belongs to the imaginary axis. Without loss of generality, we will assume that Im(α)>0.

Proposition 6.12.

If α is of the form y0i with y0>0, then the minimal set MCHT is the union of the segment [y02i,y0i] with the horizontal strip formed by points z satisfying 0Im(z)y02.

Proof.

From Proposition 6.7 it follows immediately that the convex hull of MCHT is contained in the strip bounded by and the horizontal line Im(z)=Im(y0). For any point of segment [0,y0i], the associated ray contains α so [0,y0i]MCHT.

For any point of the horizontal strip given by the inequalities 0Im(z)y02, a simple computation proves that its associated ray intersects the segment [0,y0i].

Finally, for any point z such that Im(z)>y02 and Re(z)0, the associated ray is disjoint from the segment [0,y0i]. This completely characterizes the minimal set. ∎

The latter case provides an example of a partially irregular minimal set whose irregularity locus is contained in a R-invariant line (the imaginary axis in this case).

In the general case, the boundary of MCHT is more complicated. Up to conjugation, we can restrict us to the case when Re(α),Im(α)>0.

Proposition 6.13.

If α is of the form x0+y0i with x0,y0>0, then the minimal set MCHT of Tα is bounded by the following arcs:

  • the real -axis ;

  • global arc (t,f1(t)) where f1(t)=y0t2tx0 for t[x0,+[;

  • local arc (t,f2(t)) where f2(t)=x0y0t for t[x0,xe];

  • global arc (t,f3(t) where f3(t)=x0y0t(2x0t+x0)2 for t[0,xe];

  • global arc (t,f4(t)) where f4(t)=y0t2tx0 for t],0].

Here, (xe,ye) is a point of extruding type. Its coordinates are xe=(3+22)x0 and ye=y03+22.

Proof.

The convex hull of MCHT is contained in the strip bounded by and the horizontal line Im(z)=Im(y0), see Proposition 6.7. The arcs (t,f1(t)) and (t,f4(t)) are characterized by the fact that the associated rays starting from their points contain x0+iy0 (this can be checked by a direct computation). In particular, they belong to two distinct branches of the same hyperbola. Besides, the domain 𝒟 between and arc (t,f4(t)) is automatically contained in MCHT.

Following Proposition 2.10, the backward trajectory of the vector field R(z)z starting at x0+y0i is contained in MCHT. The domain between this portion of the integral curve and the arc (t,f1(t)) is also contained in MCHT.

We denote by 𝒟 the domain in the open right upper quadrant where the associated ray intersects the domain 𝒟. At each point (t,γ(t)) of the upper boundary of 𝒟, the associated ray is tangent to the branch of hyperbola (s,f4(s)) for some s0. Since R(z)=1z, the argument of t+iγ(t) equals the negative of the slope of (s,f4(s)) at s. Since df4ds(s)=x0y0(2sx0)2, we get

γ(t)t=x0y0(2sx0)2.

Since the tangent line has to intersect the imaginary axis at 2γ(t)i, we obtain the following equation:

f4(s)2γ(t)s=x0y0(2sx0)2.

Replacing γ(t) by x0y0t(2sz0)2, we get t=s2x0.

Since s is the negative square root of x0t, we deduce that γ(t)=x0y0t(2x0t+x0)2. In particular, for s=x0, we get t=x0 and γ(x0)=y09.

The arc γ and the backward trajectory starting at x0+iy0 (which is a branch of hyperbola) intersect each other at some point xe+iye. From a computation, we obtain xe=(3+22)x0 and therefore ye=y03+22.

It is then geometrically clear that for any point z above the curve formed by arcs defined by functions f1,f2,f3,f4, the associated ray cannot intersect any of these arcs. ∎

The latter example provides an illustration of a point of extruding type. Since the boundary arcs are explicit algebraic curves, we can obtain the exact picture shown in Figure 11.

Refer to caption
Figure 11. The case when α=1+0.8i.

6.3 Case degQdegP=0

For the sake of simplicity, we normalize the vector field R(z)z by an affine change of variable so that R(z)=1+μzκ+o(zκ1) for some μ and κ1. The case of a constant vector field is already treated in Section 2.3 of [AHN+24].

Under the assumptions Im(μ)0 and κ=1, we are going to prove that the minimal set MCHT is connected. Firstly we show that MCHT is regular and disjoint from the curve of inflections R outside a compact set.

Lemma 6.14.

Assuming that Im(μ)(1)κ>0, there is a cone 𝒞 and a compact set K such that:

  • for any z𝒞, Im(R(z))>0 and Im(R(z))>0;

  • MCHT𝒞K.

Besides, MCHT is a regular subset of .

Proof.

Computing R(t) and R(t) for a negative real number t, we obtain that R(t)=1+μtκ+o(tκ1) and thus Im(R(t))Im(μ)tκ. The sign of the former is thus the sign of Im(μ)(1)κ. Similarly we obtain that it is also the sign of Im(R(t)) for t close enough to infinity and negative.

It follows from Proposition 2.25 that MCHT is contained in an infinite cone 𝒞0 whose asymptotic directions are ]πϵ,π+ϵ[ for some ϵ]0,π2[. Besides, since the asymptotic directions of infinite branches of the algebraic curves defined by equations Im(R)=0 and Im(R)=0 are not horizontal, 𝒞0 and thus MCHT are covered by the union of a cone 𝒞 and a compact set K such that for any z𝒞, Im(R(z))>0 and Im(R(z))>0.

Any R-invariant line (see Definition 2.5) has to be horizontal and therefore it intersects the cone 𝒞. Thus some points of any R-invariant line Λ have the associated rays that are not contained in Λ. Therefore, there are no R-invariant lines for such a vector field R(z)z. The minimal set MCHT has hence no tails and Theorem 2.23 guarantees that MCHT is regular. ∎

Corollary 6.15.

Assuming that Im(μ)(1)κ>0, consider a sequence (αn)n of points of MCHT such that |αn|+ and Δ(αn) for any n. Then there exist a subsequence (αf(n))n and a line y0 given by Im(z)=y0 such that:

  • the line y0 is disjoint from the interior of MCHT;

  • the line y0 contains a point of MCHT;

  • Re(αf(n));

  • Im(αf(n))y0 for any n.

Proof.

Up to taking a subsequence, we can also assume that every an belongs to the cone 𝒞 defined in Lemma 6.14. Lemma 4.17 implies that for any n, points of Δ(αf(n)) belong to , R or 𝒵(PQ). Therefore, following Lemma 6.14, points of Δ(αn) accumulate in a compact set as n. We denote by z0 one of their accumulation points and by Ly0 the horizontal line containing z0 (here y0=Im(z0)).

Thus, up to taking a subsequence of α, we get a sequence (yn)n such that yny0 and ynΔ(αn) for any n. As αn goes to infinity while Δ(αn) remains in a compact set, the associated rays r(αn) accumulate on Ly0. Thus the line Ly0 is disjoint from the interior of MCHT. Besides, since αn𝒞 for any n, we have Im(R(αn))>0 and therefore Im(αn)y0. ∎

Lemma 6.16.

Provided that Im(μ)0 and κ=1, no integral curve has a horizontal asymptotic line at infinity.

Proof.

Since R(z)=1+μz+o(z2), the integral curve γ(t) satisfies Re(γ(t))t as t±. Then Im(γ(t))=Im(μ)t+o(t1). We obtain that Im(γ(t)) has logarithmic growth as t± and therefore the integral curve has no asymptotic lines at infinity. ∎

Corollary 6.17.

Provided that Im(μ)0 and κ=1, the minimal set MCHT is connected in . Besides, MCHT has exactly two infinite arcs: one is a local arc starting at infinity while the other is a global arc ending at infinity.

Proof.

Without loss of generality, we can assume that Im(μ)>0. Proposition 2.20 shows that there are finitely many connected components of MCHT. Moreover they are attached to the point π𝕊1 at infinity in some linear order. We refer to these components of MCHT as X1,,Xk where X1 is the lowest component while Xk is the highest component. Besides the boundary Xi of any component Xi has exactly two topological ends. We call them the lower end Xi and the upper end Xi+.

Since MCHTR is contained in a compact set (see Lemma 6.14), points of X that are close enough to infinity are either of local, global or of extruding types. Proposition 4.12 proves that every local arc has an endpoint in R𝒵(PQ). Thus the ends of X are represented either by a local arc starting at infinity or by a global arc. Since Im(μ)>0, these points belong to so the orientation constraint shows that only the upper end can be represented by a local arc. Otherwise, the local arc would have the point at infinity as its endpoint. Equivalently, any lower end Xi has to be represented by an infinite global arc ending at infinity (see Lemma 4.23).

For any component Xi, the lower end Xi of its boundary is approached by a sequence of points of global type. Applying Corollary 6.15 to such a sequence we prove the existence of a horizontal line Li lying below the component Xi and disjoint from the interior of MCHT. Thus no component of MCHT lying below the line Li can contain an infinite local arc because the latter has no asymptotic line at infinity (see Lemma 6.16). Consequently, among the ends of MCHT, only Xk+ can be represented by a local arc.

It remains to prove that MCHT has only one connected component. Assuming that k>1, we consider the upper end X1+. We already know that it can be approached by points (αn)n for which Δ(an). Applying Corollary 6.15, we prove the existence of a line L such that:

  • L is disjoint from the interior of MCHT;

  • there is some point z0LMCHT;

  • points of (αn)n lie below the line L.

We deduce from the first and the third bullet points that the interior of component X1 lies below line L.

Besides, since for each n, αn belongs to , Δ(αn) is a direct support point of MCHT for the associated ray r(αn) (see Lemma 4.4). Then, z0 is also a direct support point of MCHT for (oriented) line L. It follows that the interior of the component of MCHT containing z0 lies above line L. In other words, z0 belongs to some component Xi such that i>1.

For any point z of Xi close enough to Xi, the associated ray r(z) has to cross the portion of the line L formed by points whose real part is smaller than Re(z0) (otherwise, the associated ray would have to cross the interior of Xi). This is impossible since z lies on or above L and Im(R(z))>0. This is a contradiction. There is no such component Xi and MCHT is connected. A neighborhood of its upper end is contained in a local arc while a neighborhood of its lower end is contained in a global arc. ∎

6.4 Connected components of minimal sets

Putting together partial results for the different values of degQdegP, we are able to state a bound on the number of connected components of MCHT in . It is already known that the closure of MCHT in the extended plane 𝕊1 is always connected.

Proof of Theorem 1.12.

For any operator T satisfying |degQdegP|>1, it has been proved in Theorem 1.11 of [AHN+24] that MCHT=. Besides, when degQdegP=1, Section 6.3 and Corollary 5.20 of the same paper proves that MCHT is connected and contractible. For degQdegP=1, it follows from Proposition 6.9.

The only case where there could be several connected components is degQdegP=0. If R(z) is constant, then there are two situations. If P,Q are both constant, then there is no meaningful notion of minimal set (see Section 2.3.1 in [AHN+24]). Otherwise, MCHT is formed by parallel half-lines starting at points of 𝒵(PQ). Since every point of 𝒵(PQ) is a common root of P and Q (otherwise R(z) would not be constant) we get that there are at most 12degP+12degQ such half-lines.

If R(z) is not constant, then we have R(z)=λ+μzκ+o(zκ) for some λ,μ and κ. If κ=1 and Im(μ/λ)0, then Corollaries 6.17 proves that MCHT is connected. Otherwise, Proposition 2.20 provides an upper bound 12degP+12degQ. ∎

6.5 Case degQdegP=1

In [AHN+24] we found that, outside a rather trivial case222When degP=0 and degQ=1, MCHT coincides with the unique root of Q(z) when λ<0 and coincides with otherwise., a necessary and sufficient condition for the compactness of MCHT in case degQdegP=1 is Re(λ)0. Moreover in case Re(λ)<0, we get MCHT=.

We will describe MCHT for Re(λ)=0. Unfortunately, in the most interesting situation Re(λ)>0, we do not have a general description of MCHT, but we provide a number of partial results, observations and examples.

6.5.1. Re(λ)=0

In this case a complete characterization of MCHT can be carried out.

Theorem 6.18.

Consider a linear differential operator T given by (1.1) such that degQdegP=1 and Re(λ)=0. In this case, the neighborhood of infinity is foliated by a family 𝒞 of closed integral curves of the vector field R(z)z.

The boundary MCHT of the minimal set of T is described as the first closed leaf (according to the natural ordering starting at infinity) of the family 𝒞 containing a point of 𝒵(PQ)R.

If the latter leaf γ contains a point of the curve of inflections R, then the latter point is a tangency point between γ and R. Moreover it is the first leaf that is non-strictly convex (the curvature at the tangency point vanishes).

In particular, MCHT is formed by finitely many local arcs. It is real-analytic and convex (but can fail to be strictly convex). It contains neither zeros nor poles of R(z)z.

Proof.

It follows from λ and Re(λ)=0 that Im(λ)0. The curve of inflections R is therefore compact. The neighborhood of infinity is foliated by a family 𝒞 of integral curves of vector field R(z)z. The orientation of these integral curves depends on the sign of Im(λ). By compactness of R, another neighborhood 𝒞 of infinity is foliated by strictly convex integral curves (the curvature of integral curves vanishes precisely on R).

We first consider the case when some point α of 𝒵(PQ) belongs to 𝒞. Denoting by γ the periodic leaf α belongs to, we deduce from Proposition 2.10 that γ belongs to MCHT and bounds a strictly convex domain 𝒟. Provided the complement of 𝒟 does not contain any other point of 𝒵(PQ), we obtain that 𝒟 coincides with MCHT. Since α is disjoint from R, it follows from Corollary 3.12 that it cannot be a zero or a pole of R(z) (α is a root of both P and Q of the same multiplicity).

In the remaining cases, we can assume that 𝒵(PQ) is disjoint from 𝒞. The cylinder 𝒞 is bounded by a singular curve formed by separatrices (integral curves connecting singularities of R(z)z). We denote by Σ the union of these separatrices and by 𝒮 the smallest simply connected subset containing Σ. By Proposition 2.10, Σ and 𝒮 are contained in MCHT. For the same reason, a point z of cylinder 𝒞 is contained in MCHT if and only if the periodic integral curve containing z belongs entirely to MCHT. Therefore, the boundary of MCHT coincides with some periodic integral curve of the cylinder 𝒞.

Since the associated rays cannot cross the interior of MCHT, its boundary MCHT (which is a periodic integral curve) has to be convex. Therefore, it is contained in the domain of inflection of infinity (or in its boundary). Since the domain 𝒞 does not belong to the interior of MCHT (its complement is clearly a TCH-invariant set), these conditions characterize the boundary γ of 𝒞 as the boundary of MCHT.

The curve γ cannot cross the curve of inflections because it is convex. If it did not intersect R there would be a strictly smaller invariant set whose boundary is an integral curve between R and γ. Thus γ has a tangency point with R. At this point, the curvature of γ vanishes.

The boundary MCHT is formed by local arcs joining points of 𝒵(PQ) (with the same multiplicity of P and Q) and some points of the tangency locus. By Proposition 4.7, there arcs are strictly convex and real-analytic. ∎

6.5.2. Re(λ)>0

As we mentioned above, we do not have a general description of MCHT, but only a number of interesting examples. Observe that in this case is a sink of R(z)z).

A qualitative description of the convex hull Conv(MCHT) is the best that we can obtain with our current knowledge.

Proposition 6.19.

Consider a linear differential operator T given by (1.1) with degQdegP=1. The boundary Conv(MCHT) of the convex hull Conv(MCHT) of the minimal set is formed by:

  • finitely many straight segments;

  • finitely many portions of integral curves of vector field R(z)z.

In particular, the latter are strictly convex and belong to local arcs of MCHT. In particular, Conv(MCHT) is piecewise-analytic.

Proof.

We denote by 𝒮 the set of points where the boundary Conv(MCHT) is strictly convex. They also belong to MCHT (these points belong to the support of the hull). It follows from Theorem 1.9 that outside finitely many points, 𝒮 is formed by either local or global arcs of MCHT. If such a point z belongs to a global arc, then the line containing the associated ray r(z) is a support line of Conv(MCHT) at z and every point of Δ(z). It follows that [z,Δmax(z)] is a straight segment contained in Conv(MCHT). Consequently any arc of 𝒮 has to be a portion of local arc.

We know that Conv(MCHT) is formed by straight segments and portions of local arcs. It remains to prove that there are finitely many of them. We consider an arc α of Conv(MCHT) contained in a local arc γ of MCHT. The endpoint of α (with the orientation defined by R(z)z) has at the same time to be the endpoint of γ (since otherwise the associated rays starting at points of α would intersect MCHT). Therefore, the endpoint of every such arc α in Conv(MCHT) belongs to 𝒵(PQ)R (see Proposition 4.12). Since there are finitely many such points in 𝒮, there are finitely many such arcs in Conv(MCHT).

If the boundary of the convex hull is not formed by finitely many straight segments and portions of integral curves, then there are infinitely many corner points of angle smaller than π between the pairs of consecutive straight segments of the boundary. It follows from Corollary 6.2 that these points belong to 𝒵(PQ). Therefore, we have finitely many corner points and finitely many straight segments. ∎

In the examples below (including a very interesting family of operators in which Q(z) has simple roots and P(z)=Q(z)), Conv(MCHT) is a polygon.

Proposition 6.20.

Consider a linear differential operator T given by (1.1), such that every root α of Q(z) is simple and satisfies P(α)0 and ϕα=0.

Then, Conv(MCHT) coincides with the convex hull of 𝒵(Q).

Proof.

The argument is similar to the one used in the proof of the classical Gauss–Lucas theorem (see [Mor]). If the differential form P(z)dzQ(z) has all positive residues, then the roots of P(z) are contained in the convex hull of 𝒵(Q).

The proof is based on consideration of the electrostatic force F created by the system of point charges placed at the poles of P(z)dzQ(z) where the value of each charge equals the residue at the corresponding pole. This electrostatic force F equals the conjugate of P(z)dzQ(z) and one can show that if we take any line L not intersecting the convex hull of 𝒵(Q) then at any point pL, F points inside the half-plane of L not containing 𝒵(Q). Now recall that the associated ray has the same direction as the conjugate of P/Q. Thus, the associated ray r(p) does not intersect the convex hull of 𝒵(Q). ∎

6.5.3. The first family of examples

Consider a family of operators of the form Tλ=Q(z)ddz+P(z) where Q(z)=λ(z1)kz and P(z)=(z1)k for some principal coefficient λ and some degree k.

Integral curves of the vector field R(z)z are logarithmic spirals parametrized by γ(t)=γ(0)eλt. In particular, they are concentric circles for Re(λ)=0.

Depending on the value of λ, the shape of the minimal set MCHT can change drastically. Namely,

  • if Re(λ)<0, then MCHT= (see Theorem 1.11 of [AHN+24]);

  • if Re(λ)=0, then MCHT is the closed unit disk (see Theorem 6.18);

  • if Re(λ)>0 and Im(λ)=0, then MCHT is segment [0,1].

When Re(λ)>0 and Im(λ)0, MCHT has a more complicated shape we describe below in terms of local and global arcs. Up to conjugation, we will assume that Im(λ)>0.

Proposition 6.21.

If λ satisfies Re(λ),Im(λ)>0, then the minimal set MCHT of operator Tλ is bounded by the following arcs:

  • local arc γ where γ(t)=eλt and t]0,t0[;

  • global arc α where α(t)=11+λt and t]0,t1[.

These two arcs intersect at 1 and the point γ(t0)=α(t1) of extruding type characterized as the first intersection point between α and γ defined on >0.

Proof.

The backward trajectory of the vector field R(z)z starting at 1 is parametrized by γ(t)=eλt and t[0,). 2.10 shows that this arc is entirely contained in MCHT.

Points z for which the associated ray contains 1 are characterized by the condition 1zλz>0. They form an arc parametrized by α(t)=11+λt for t[0,+[. This arc is also contained in MCHT.

Since R(z)=λz, it is geometrically clear that these two arcs bound MCHT. The boundary MCHT is formed by a portion of each of them with two singular points at 1 (when t=0) and the first intersection point in the parametrization. There are different ways to see that such an intersection occurs. One of them is to note that limtα(t)=0 and limtarg(α(t))=limt=arg(λ(1+λt)2) exists. Since the vector field R(z) has residue with positive real and imaginary parts, it follows that α(t) and γ(t) intersect infinitely many times. The endpoint distinct from 1 common to α and γ is the first intersection point between the two parametrized arcs defined on >0. ∎

Refer to caption
Figure 12. Illustration of the boundary of the minimal set when λ=1+6i in Prop. 6.21.

6.5.4. A second family of examples

Consider the family T=z(zk1)ddz+(zk+1), where k is a positive integer. We are going to prove that for any k, the minimal set MCHT is the unit disk.

Lemma 6.22.

Set f(z)=z+tz(zk1)zk+1, with t>0. Then |f(z)|>1 whenever |z|>1.

Proof.

We substitute z=r1keiθ with r>1. After some algebraic manipulations, we find that

|f(z)|2|z|2=|f(r1keiθ)|2r2/k=1+t2r22+r2t2cos(θk)rt+tr2+2cos(θk)r+1. (6.3)

Setting ccoskθ and rewriting further, we get

|f(r1keiθ)|2r2/k=1+t2(r21)+t((rc)2+(1c2))(r+c)2+(1c2). (6.4)

Since 1c1, it follows that

|f(r1keiθ)|2r2/k>1+tr21(r+1)2>1.

Consequently, |f(z)|>|z| whenever |z|>1 and the statement follows. ∎

Lemma 6.23.

The separatrices of the vector field R(z)z=z(zk1)zk+1z are the arcs of the unit circle, connecting roots of P(z) with roots of Q(z).

Proof.

Assuming that z is not a root of Q, we have that

zk+1z(zk1)𝑑z=k1log((1zk)2zk).

Now for z=eiθ, we find that

Imlog((1zk)2/zk)=arg((1zk)2/zk)=arg(2+eikθ+eikθ)=π.

As the integral trajectories are level curves of ImdzR(z) away from zeros or poles of R(z), it follows that the unit circle consists of the integral trajectories of R(z)z. Since the roots of P lie on the unit circle and the zeros of Q on the unit circle have positive residues, it follows that these integral trajectories must be separatrices that are contained in MCHT. ∎

Corollary 6.24.

For T=z(zk1)z+(zk+1), the minimal set MCHT coincides with the unit disk.

Proof.

By Lemma 6.22, we have that all the associated rays for points lying outside the unit disk never intersect the unit disk. Therefore, MCHT is contained in the unit disk. Since the unit circle consists of separatrices of R(z)z (see Lemma 6.23), it follows that MCHT contains the unit circle. The associated ray of any point (distinct from 0) of the open unit disk intersects the unit circle so MCHT coincides with the unit disk. ∎

References

  • [ABS] P. Alexandersson, P. Bränden, B. Shapiro, An inverse problem in Pólya-Schur theory. I. Non-degenerate and degenerate operators, submitted.
  • [AHN+24] P. Alexandersson, N. Hemmingsson, D. Novikov, B. Shapiro, G. Tahar, Linear first order differential operators and complex dynamics, Journal of Differential Equations, Vol 391, pp 265-320, 2024.
  • [Bea] A. F. Beardon. Iteration of rational functions, volume 132 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1991. Complex analytic dynamical systems.
  • [BB] J. Borcea, P. Brändén, Pólya-Schur master theorems for circular domains and their boundaries. Ann. of Math. (2) 170 (2009), no. 1, 465–492.
  • [BCh] P. Bränden, M. Chasse, Classification theorems for operators preserving zeros in a strip. J. Anal. Math. 132 (2017), 177–215.
  • [CsCr] G. Csordas, T. Craven, Composition theorems, multiplier sequences and complex zero decreasing sequences. in Value distribution theory and related topics, 131–166, Adv. Complex Anal. Appl., 3, Kluwer Acad. Publ., Boston, MA, 2004.
  • [Dia] K. Dias, A. Garijo. On the separatrix graph of a rational vector field on the Riemann sphere. Journal of Differential Equations, Vol 282: 541-565, 2021.
  • [Hut] J. E. Hutchinson. Fractals and self-similarity. Indiana Univ. Math. J., 30(5):713–-747, 1981.
  • [Mor] M. Marden. Geometry of polynomials 2nd edition, Mathematical Surveys, No. 3, American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I. 1966.
  • [Will] S. Willard. General Topology, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, Massachusetts. 1970.