Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: gravitational lensing by large - scale structure along the line - of - sight can alter the observed number density of galaxies on the sky ( gunn 1967 ) . lensing increases the area of a given patch on the sky , thus diluting the number density . on the other hand , galaxies fainter than the limiting magnitude are brightened due to lensing and may be included in the sample , thus increasing the number density . the net effect , known as magnification bias , can go either way : it can lead to an enhancement or suppression of the observed number density of galaxies , depending on the slope @xmath0 of the number counts of galaxies @xmath1 in a sample with limiting magnitude @xmath2 , @xmath3 . magnification by amount @xmath4 changes the number counts to ( e.g. broadhurst , taylor & peacock 1995 ) , @xmath5 for the critical value @xmath6 , magnification does not change the number density ; it leads to an excess for @xmath7 , and a deficit for @xmath8 . this magnification effect also leads to an excess correlation of qsos and foreground galaxies associated with the lensing mass distribution ( canizares 1981 ; schneider , ehlers & falco 1992 ; see also keel 1982 ; peacock 1982 ) . it is measured through the excess or deficit in the counts of galaxies around background qsos . it is critical to ensure that the galaxies are not physically associated with the qsos ; this can be done by choosing appropriate cuts in the redshifts of the two populations . several measurements of the qso - galaxy cross - correlation have been made : significant excesses of galaxies around qsos have been found , although the magnitude of the effect measured remains well in excess of the expectations of dark - matter theory with simple biasing , as discussed below ( bartelmann & schneider 2001 give an excellent review of the theory and observations ) . this has remained an unresolved problem , manifested in particular in measurements on angular scales of order an arcminute ( see the discussion in bentez et al 2001 ) . calculations of the expected amplitude of this effect have been done using both linear and non - linear dark - matter clustering ( bartelmann 1995 ) . several observational measurements of qso - galaxy correlations have been made , beginning with the mid-1980 s . while the results vary considerably , most studies with radio loud qsos have found correlations in excess of lensing predictions ( tyson 1986 ; fugmann 1988,1990 ; hammer & le fvre 1990 ; hintzen et al . 1991 ; drinkwater et al . 1992 ; thomas et al . 1995 ; bartelmann & schneider 1993b , 1994 ; bartsch , schneider , & bartelmann 1997 ; bentez et al . 1995 ; bentez & martinez - gonzalez 1995 , 1997 ; norman & williams 1999 ; norman & impey 1999 , 2000 ) . although these results are qualitatively in agreement with the magnification bias effect , in most cases the amplitude of the correlation is much higher than that expected from gravitational lensing models . studies that have used optically selected qsos have found both positive and null or negative correlations . webster et al ( 1988 ) , rodrigues - williams & hogan ( 1991 ) , williams & irwin ( 1998 ) and gaztanaga ( 2003 ) found positive correlations that are much stronger than the predictions from the magnification bias effect , while boyle et al . ( 1988 ) ; romani & maoz ( 1992 ) ; ferreras , bentez & martinez - gonzalez ( 1997 ) and croom & shanks ( 1999 ) found null or even negative correlations , which in some cases can not be explained by the lensing hypothesis . some of the measured cross - correlations are likely to be affected by the incompleteness of the qso samples , and most have small samples of galaxies and qsos with little information on the redshifts of the galaxy population .    even with these caveats , it is fair to say that there are severe discrepancies between measured qso - galaxy correlations and theoretical predictions . two kinds of resolutions have been discussed in the literature : observational effects , such as bias in the selection of qso samples , physical associations of qsos and galaxies , and dust obscuration ; and improved theoretical modeling of the lensing ( see the discussions in bentez , sanz & martinez - gonzalez 2001 and bartelmann & schneider 2001 ) . on the theory side , various nonlinear effects have been modeled . bartelmann & schneider ( 1993 ) and bartelmann ( 1995 ) provided the framework for theoretical modeling in terms of large - scale structure parameters . dolag & bartelmann ( 1997 ) and sanz et al ( 1997 ) made magnification predictions including nonlinear gravitational evolution , as done by jain & seljak ( 1997 ) for the shear , while williams ( 2001 ) and mnard et al ( 2002 ) studied corrections to the weak lensing approximations . however , severe discrepancies remain ; in a careful analysis , bentez , sanz & martinez - gonzalez ( 2001 ) find a signal that is a factor of a few larger than model predictions on scales of @xmath9 .    in this paper we model the galaxy distribution using the halo model of clustering ( e.g. cooray & sheth 2002 ) . we compute qso - galaxy and galaxy - galaxy cross - correlation using this model for the galaxies and compare it to the linear bias approach used so far in the literature . we seek to explain some of the discrepancies between measurements and lensing predictions with our galaxy model . under the lensing hypothesis , the qso - galaxy cross - correlation is due to the cross - correlation of galaxy number density with magnification . this in turn can be expressed as the projection of the galaxy - mass cross - correlation . we only modify the next , final step , of expressing the galaxy - mass cross - correlation as a linear bias factor times the mass - mass correlation . instead we use the halo model of clustering to populate halos of given mass with galaxies , and then compute the cross - correlation consistently . one might expect that on small enough scales , @xmath10 mpc , the results would differ significantly from a linear bias model because the occupation of halos with galaxies is complicated and depends strongly on galaxy type . our approach to galaxy - mass correlations is similar to that of seljak ( 2000 ) , but there are differences in the galaxy model used . we aim our predictions at forthcoming survey data , primarily from the sloan digital sky survey ( sdss ) , and the cfht legacy survey . we make predictions for the qso - galaxy and the galaxy - galaxy cross - correlation . section 1 contains the formalism for the cross - correlation calculation . section 2 details the halo model and the prescription for assigning galaxies to halos . the results are presented in section 4 and we conclude in section 5 . angular correlations can be expressed as projections of the 3-dimensional power spectrum using limber s equation . we follow the convention and derivations of moessner & jain ( 1998 ) . let @xmath11 be the number density of foreground galaxies with mean redshift @xmath12 , observed in the direction @xmath13 in the sky , and @xmath14 that of the sample with a higher mean redshift @xmath15 . the angular cross - correlation function is then defined as : @xmath16 where @xmath17 , with @xmath18 the average number density of the @xmath19th sample . the measured @xmath20 is the sum of fluctuations due to the true clustering of galaxies @xmath21 , and due to magnification bias @xmath22 . the fluctuations on the sky due to intrinsic clustering are a projection of the galaxy fluctuations along the line - of - sight , weighted with the radial distribution @xmath23 of the galaxies , @xmath24 where @xmath25 denotes the expansion scale factor . the comoving radial coordinate @xmath26 and the comoving angular diameter distance @xmath27 are explicitly defined in e.g. jain & seljak ( 1997 ) . @xmath28 is the distance to the horizon .    in the weak lensing limit the magnification is @xmath29 , where the convergence @xmath30 is a weighted projection of the density field along the line - of - sight ( see equation [ kappa1 ] below ; see also mnard et al 2002 for tests of the weak lensing limit ) . equation [ mag1 ] then gives the magnification induced fluctuations in number counts as @xmath31 with the convergence @xmath30 given by @xmath32 where the radial weight function @xmath33 can be expressed in terms of @xmath27 ; for a delta - function distribution of source galaxies at @xmath34 it is @xmath35 . the cross - correlation @xmath36 is then given by the sum of four terms . in the case where the background and foreground samples have no overlap , the cross - correlation is dominated by ( moessner & jain 1998 ) , @xmath37 \ ; ,   \label{omegagl}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath38 is the galaxy - mass cross - power spectrum , note that the expression for the mean tangential shear around a foreground galaxy is identical to the above equation except for the replacement of @xmath39 by @xmath40 ( this follows from the relation @xmath41 ) . the difference in bessel functions that appear for the shear and magnification can be useful in combining information from the two measurements . they weight length scales in different ways because the magnification measures probe the local projected density while the shear measures probe the integrated mass inside an aperture . thus with comparable signal to noise measurements from the two probes , one can gain not only an imrovement in overall sensitivity , but also probe a larger range of length scales . we express galaxy - mass cross - correlations by developing a halo model based description of the cross - power spectrum , @xmath38 , introduced above . @xmath42 can be modeled in at least three ways : ( i ) take it to be a bias factor times the matter - matter power spectrum ; ( ii ) assume there is a one - to - one correspondence between galaxies and halos , and that the galaxy sits at the centre of its parent halo ; ( iii ) use the halo model ( seljak 2000 ; peacock & smith 2000 ; scoccimarro et al . 2001 ; see the recent review by cooray & sheth 2002 ) , which allows for the possibility that the number of galaxies in a halo may vary from halo to halo , and allows for the possibility that the distribution of galaxies around the parent halo centre may depend on galaxy type .    in the halo model , all dark matter particles and galaxies inhabit halos . this means that @xmath43 here @xmath44 is the comoving number density of halos which have mass @xmath2 , @xmath45 is the average number of galaxies in halos of mass @xmath2 , @xmath46 is the bias parameter , and @xmath47 and @xmath48 are the fourier transforms of the density run of dark matter and galaxies around the centres of the halos they inhabit . the models assume that the density run can be well parametrized by allowing for a depedence on halo mass : @xmath49 where the factor of @xmath50 defines our fourier transform convention , and the integral in the denominator defines the mass @xmath2 of the halo . the denominator normalizes @xmath51 so that it is unity at small @xmath52 ; for all profiles of interest , it decreases to zero as @xmath52 increases , although the decrease need not be monotonic . option ( ii)one and only galaxy per halo , and the galaxy sits at the halo centre  corresponds to setting @xmath53 and @xmath54 for all @xmath2 ( we use @xmath55 to denote @xmath45 for simplicity ) . this is a reasonable model for the large red galaxy ( lrg ) sample provided by the sdss ; results for this model are shown in figure [ fig : halo ] .    option ( iii ) requires additional assumptions to fully specify the galaxy distribution . for example , one might expect the distribution of galaxies around the halo centre to depend on galaxy type . in what follows , we will assume for simplicity that the galaxies in a halo trace the dark matter : therefore , we set @xmath56 . sheth et al . ( 2001 ) show that this is a reasonable approximation . ( see scranton 2001 for more discussion of how @xmath57 might depend on galaxy type ) . it is probably accurate to assume that one of the @xmath58 galaxies in a halo sits at the halo centre  this is almost certainly a good assumption if there is only one galaxy in a halo . to account for this , one assumes that the other galaxies get the usual density profile denoted by @xmath59 , whereas the central galaxy is simply unity . to see the effect of this on the two - halo term , we must average both pieces of the two halo term over @xmath60 , the probability of having @xmath61 galaxies in a halo of mass @xmath2 , with the requirement that @xmath62 . with this averaging , we will replace @xmath63 by an effective number of galaxies , @xmath64 , which is a function of @xmath52 for given @xmath2 . it is given by ( cooray & sheth 2002 ) @xmath65 \ p(n|m ) \nonumber\\ & + & \sum_{n>0 } \ \langle n-1|m\rangle\,u(k|m ) + u(k|m)\,p(0|m ) . \end{aligned}\ ] ] the first term can be written as @xmath66 $ ] , allowing us to express the above equation as @xmath67\,[1 - u_{\rm gal}(k|m ) ]    + \langle n|m\rangle\ , u_{\rm gal}(k|m ) .\ ] ] since both factors in the first term are positive , there is an enhancement in power from always placing one galaxy at the halo centre . since @xmath47 decreases as @xmath52 increases , the enhancement in power is largest on small scales ( large @xmath52 ) . in sufficiently massive halos one might expect to have many galaxies , and so @xmath68 . in this limit , the expression above becomes @xmath69 . on the other hand , if most halos have no galaxies , then @xmath70 is probably much larger than all other @xmath60 with @xmath71 . then the leading order term in the sum above is @xmath70 . since @xmath72 , we have that @xmath73 . in this limit , only a fraction @xmath74 of the halos contain a galaxy , and the galaxy sits at the halo centre , so there is no factor of @xmath59 .    the contribution of the galaxy counts to the one halo term of the galaxy  mass correlation function is similar . using the expressions above yields @xmath75 if the run of galaxies around the halo centre is not the same as of the dark matter , then one simply uses @xmath57 instead of @xmath59 in @xmath64 . if the two - halo term usually does not dominate the power on small scales ( this is almost always a good approximation ) , it is reasonable to ignore the enhancement in power associated with the central galaxy , and to simply set @xmath76 . the one - halo term requires knowledge of @xmath77 . since @xmath77 is usually unknown , some authors ( e.g. , seljak 2000 ) interpolate between the two limits discussed earlier by setting @xmath78 if @xmath79 , and @xmath80 if @xmath81 . it is worth noting that the one halo term of the galaxy  galaxy correlation function is only slightly more complicated , as shown in cooray & sheth ( 2002 ) . the halo model is specified by the mass function @xmath44 , bias @xmath46 and the halo profile @xmath47 . for the first two functions we use ( e.g. cooray & sheth 2002 ) @xmath82 and @xmath83 , @xmath84^{-1 } \approx 0.3222 $ ] , and @xmath85 ( sheth & tormen 1999 ) . here @xmath86 is the critical density required for spherical collapse at @xmath87 , extrapolated to the present time using linear theory , and @xmath88 where @xmath89 $ ] and @xmath90 . that is to say , @xmath91 is the rms value of the initial fluctuation field when it is smoothed with a tophat filter of comoving size @xmath92 , extrapolated using linear theory to the present time . if @xmath93 and @xmath94 , then @xmath44 is the same as that first written down by press & schechter ( 1974 ) , and @xmath46 is the same as that given by cole & kaiser ( 1989 ) and mo & white ( 1996 ) . in addition , we will assume that the halo profiles have the form given by navarro , frenk & white ( 1996 ) , truncated at the virial radius @xmath95 which is defined by requiring that @xmath96 . for spatially flat universes with @xmath97 and @xmath98 , @xmath99 . the fourier transform of the density run around a halo of mass @xmath2 is    @xmath100- { \rm si}(\kappa ) \big ) \nonumber \\ & + & \cos \kappa \big ( { \rm ci}[\kappa(1+c)]- { \rm ci}(\kappa ) \big ) - \frac{\sin ( \kappa c)}{\kappa ( 1+c ) } \big ] ,   \label{unfw}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath101 $ ] , @xmath102 , @xmath103 is the sine integral and @xmath104 is the cosine integral function . the concentration parameter of the halos depends on halo mass ; we use the parametrization of this dependence given by bullock et al . ( 2001 ) :    @xmath105      our model for the galaxy distribution is taken from the gif n - body simulations of the @xmath106cdm model , coupled to a semi - analytic galaxy formation model ( kauffmann et al . catalogs of galaxy positions , apparent and absolute magnitudes , colors and star - formation rates , at a range of redshifts , are available at http://www.mpa - garching.mpg.de / gif/. from the catalogs at redshifts @xmath107 , 0.13 , 0.27 , 0.35 , 0.42 , and 0.52 we selected apparent magnitude limited samples which satisfied @xmath108 . at each redshift we then computed the first and second factorial moments of the number of galaxies as a function of halo mass . the parameters for the first moment are given in table  [ tab : ngal ] . these galaxies also form a surface defined by the first and second factorial moments as a function of halo mass and galaxy absolute magnitude which we can also integrate over given our apparent magnitude limits and a redshift ( scranton 2002 ) . in the gif models , the mean number of galaxies in a halo @xmath109 evolves little out to @xmath110 if the galaxies have the same fixed rest - frame luminosity . thus at fixed luminosity the evolution of galaxy clustering is driven by the evolution of the halo population . however , this means that at fixed apparent magnitude , the case in which we are most interested , @xmath109 evolves more strongly . this is because only the most luminous galaxies from the higher redshift samples satisfy the apparent magnitude limit , and , in halos which host only one galaxy , there is a tight correlation between halo mass and galaxy luminosity . in principle , fits to @xmath109 at fixed luminosity , along with the assumption that these relations do not evolve , allow one to estimate how @xmath109 depends on redshift for the apparent magnitude limits we apply . in practice , we chose the more tedious but accurate method of making redshift dependent fits to the apparent magnitude @xmath109 relation in the gif model . the results are shown in figure  [ fig : ngm ] . .parameters which specify the mean number of galaxies in halos as a function of halo mass : @xmath111 $ ] . this table gives the parameter values for the qso - galaxy case , with the foreground galaxies selected in the magnitude range @xmath112 . [ cols="^,^,^,^,^,^",options="header " , ]     [ tab : dndz ] figures [ fig : gg]-[fig : halo ] show the predicted cross - correlation for different foreground - background populations . we use equation [ omegagl ] , with an @xmath113 , @xmath114 cosmological model with @xmath115 and the galaxy - mass power spectrum determined using the halo model ingredients described in section 3 . while @xmath115 is close to the most recent determinations from the cmb and other datasets , there is uncertainty at about the 10% level in this parameter ( e.g. wang et al 2002 ; spergel et al 2003 ; verde et al 2003 ) . our results , especially for the higher redshift lens galaxies , are sensitive to @xmath116 : for higher @xmath116 , the lens galaxies are less biased and vice versa . note that we have left out the @xmath117 factor which depends on galaxy type . it will modulate both the amplitude and possibly the sign of our plotted cross - correlation . we consider galaxy - galaxy correlations in figure [ fig : gg ] for redshift distributions appropriate to the cfht legacy survey in the upper panels and the sdss survey in the lower panel . the right panels show the ratio of the cross - correlation to the peacock - dodds prediction . on large scales this reduces to the usual bias parameter , but on small scales it must be interpreted more carefully in terms of properties of the halo occupation distribution . the results show that the cross - correlations are strongly dependent on galaxy - type and angular scale . this arises from the modeling of the `` red '' and `` blue '' galaxy sub - samples that make up the full foreground sample . the galaxy samples are defined by the @xmath55 models given in tables 2 and 3 for the full sample and for red galaxies ( the blue galaxies are given by the difference of the two ) . similar trends are seen in figure [ fig : qg ] , which uses the galaxy distribution in table 4 and a mean redhisft @xmath118 for the quasars . it is interesting that for red galaxies , lowering the redshifts of the source and lens population does not change the signal significantly ( comparing the upper and lower panels of figure [ fig : gg ] ) . this is a consequence of how little @xmath55 evolves between @xmath119 and @xmath120 for these galaxies . the net change in lensing signal as one lowers the redshifts is a trade off between two opposing effects : a reduction due to smaller lensing path length , and an increase because a given angle corresponds to a smaller length scale at the lens redshift . with a simplified power law model for the galaxy - mass power spectrum one can see that the net signal can increase with decreasing redshift . let @xmath121 , and let the lenses and sources be at a single redshift such that the distance to sources is twice the distance to the lenses . then for an einstein - de sitter model equation [ omegagl ] gives the analytic scaling @xmath122 thus for @xmath123 ( corresponding to a two - point correlation function with logarithmic slope of @xmath124 ) , one can see that @xmath125 would lead to an increasing signal with decreasing lens redshift . the choice @xmath123 and @xmath126 is in good agreement with the behavior of the red galaxy sample , but not of the blue galaxies for which the cross - correlation is lower for lower redshifts of the lenses and sources . the differences between red and blue galaxies arise primarily from the difference in the @xmath55 relation for them ( sheth et al 2001 ; scranton 2002 ) . on larger scales , corresponding to @xmath127mpc , the difference between predictions for red and blue galaxies decreases . in the linear regime they are both expected to follow the growth rate of mass fluctuations , so the large - scale differences are primarily due to differences in @xmath128 . we estimate the contribution of poisson errors and sample variance on the measured @xmath36 . scranton ( 2002 ) discusses the relative contributions of these errors and of the gaussian and non - gaussian terms in the covariance . over the scales we have considered , the poisson contribution dominates for a large survey like the sdss . for parameters of the full sdss survey , roughly 10 million galaxies in each sample and an area of 10,000 square degrees , the statistical errors are tiny . the errors are of order 1% of the signal and have been multiplied by a factor of 10 in figure 2 to be visible at all . clearly the signal to noise is high enough for such a dataset that estimates for sub - samples of galaxies by type and varying redshift bin are possible , thus allowing for the possibility of measuring their halo occupation properties in detail . the signal to noise can be scaled to other survey parameters relatively easily on small scales , where shot noise dominates so that the scaling is @xmath129 , where @xmath130 and @xmath131 are the number densities of the two samples , and @xmath132 is the survey area . figure 3 shows that the errors expected from quasar - galaxy correlation measurements are significantly higher , due to the smaller number of quasars . thus if systematic errors can be controlled , magnification bias is more effectly measured using galaxy - galaxy correlations . the two major source of systematic errors are photometric calibration and errors in the photometric redshifts that are not well characterized or highly correlated with determination of the galaxy type . the latter leads to contamination of the samples : e.g. a foreground galaxy may be assigned to the background sample in the galaxy - galaxy case , or may in reality be physically associated with the quasar . in either case the auto - correlation signal , which is much stronger than the lensing signal , will get mixed in . moessner & jain ( 1998 ) estimate the required accuracy for photometric redshifts for a desired accuracy in the cross - correlation . given the miniscule statistical errors , characterizing the systematic errors accurately will be paramount for any interpretation of results from either the cfht or sdss surveys . for the quasar - galaxy @xmath36 shown in figure [ fig : qg ] the error bars are larger because of the smaller number of quasars compared to background galaxies . even so , they are at the 1% level and would allow for a definitive measurement from the sdss provided systematic errors are under control .    figure [ fig : halo ] shows the cross - correlation for halos of different masses . this is not an observable , but it is helpful to see the wide variation in the signal as a function of halo mass since galaxies are modelled as occupying these halos . clearly small changes in the @xmath55 relation will change the expected signal since it will populate halos of different masses with galaxies differently . the dot - dashed curve shows the prediction for halos of mass @xmath133 , which have a very large amplitude at small scales . this is relevant for the sdss since it will produce a sample of large red galaxies , which are expected to occupy the centers of massive halos . a more quantitative connection is beyond the scope of this paper . the redshift distribution of galaxies we have used has not been chosen to be consistent with the models for @xmath55 . this amounts to requiring from survey measurements that some ( typically small ) fraction of galaxies be discarded before estimating the cross - correlation to ensure consistency . we have used the halo model of clustering to estimate the cross - correlation induced by magnification bias between samples of galaxies and quasars at different redshifts . our focus has been on the effect of the model for galaxies used on the predicted signal . we used fits to the gif simulations for @xmath55 , the mean number of galaxies for halos of mass @xmath2 , to find the number of galaxies as a function of redshift , magnitude and galaxy type . we find that the predicted cross - correlation is very sensitive to these parameters . its amplitude varies on arcminute scales is a factor of 2 larger or smaller compared to an unbiased population , depending on the redshift range and galaxy type of the foreground population . the reason for this wide range is that on small scales the relation of the galaxy distribution to the mass is complex and can not be described by a constant bias factor of order unity . further , with increasing redshift a given apparent magnitude limit corresponds to brighter absolute magnitudes and therefore the selection of galaxies with higher @xmath134 , which tend to be more strongly clustered . our results on arcminute scales therefore differ from previous studies which used linear bias models . the state of measurements of qso - galaxy correlations are summarized in bentez et al ( 2001 ) and guimaraes et al ( 2001 ) . clearly some of the measurements are affected by incomplete sampling and other observational systematics . others find excess correlations on large scales , which are still difficult to reconcile with models . but most anomalous measurements are on arcminute scales where we find great sensitivity to the redshift distribution and galaxy type used for the measurement . thus variations of a factor of 2 to even 10 in extreme cases can be explained . in existing data , the galaxy samples used are difficult to characterize given the lack of redhift or color information . the data discussed in bentez & martinez - gonzalez ( 1995 ) show that the sample with red galaxies does have higher signal  this is consistent with our results , but it is difficult to be quantitative given the partial information available for the data .    in view of the massive improvement in the available sample expected from the sdss and other forthcoming surveys such as the cfht legacy survey , we have chosen to simply provide model predictions for these surveys rather than attempt a detailed analysis of past measurements . our models can be extended significantly , to include more detailed galaxy types and galaxy models that are checked for consistency with sdss measurements of the galaxy auto - correlations . the statistical errors expected from the sdss survey are very small , about 1% of the signal for the full sample from galaxy - galaxy correlations . we have focused on scales below 20 arcminutes , where the signal to noise is high . on these scales the data from the sdss can be split by galaxy type and redshift bins to make a detailed study of galaxy clustering in relation to the dark matter distribution . on large - scales the interpretation is simple , giving the bias parameter of desired galaxy sub - samples as a function of redshift . what can we learn from sub - mpc scale measurements of the galaxy - mass correlation ? in the halo model , the 1-halo term is a linear measure of ( the product of ) @xmath55 and other parameters : the halo mass function , halo mass profile and galaxy profile . scranton ( 2002 ) analyzed the accuracy with which different parameters describing the galaxy distribution can be constrained using angular correlations from the photometric sdss survey . our results show that valuable additional information can be gained using measurements of magnification bias . in particular , the lensing induced cross - correlation is a measure of projected galaxy - mass correlations : it is thus linear in the parameters of the galaxy distribution such as the mean halo occupation number of galaxies @xmath55 . galaxy clustering measurements probe the second moment of this distribution , and therefore one is required to make an assumption of how the second moment scales with the mean ( on large scales galaxy clustering measurements do constrain the first moment through the two - halo term , but only averaged over a broad mass range ) . the magnification bias measurements considered here would constrain @xmath55 directly and thus provide the basis for interpreting the higher order moments from galaxy clustering measurements . further , the lensing measurement would help break the degeneracies between the various parameters . scranton ( 2002 ) gives the accuracy with which more than 10 parameter combinations will be constrained by sdss measurements of the angular clustering of galaxies binned by photometric redshift . for the basic parameters of @xmath55 in table 1 , he typically finds accuracies of well below 1% . for the lensing induced cross - correlation , the signal is significantly smaller and for the dominant parameters in @xmath55 such as @xmath128 one can expect better than 10% level accuracy from the lensing measurements alone . the main power however will be in combining the lensing and galaxy clustering measurements . we leave this exercise for future work . our formalism is similar to that of seljak ( 2000 ) and guzik & seljak ( 2001 ) for galaxy - galaxy lensing . these authors have used measurements from the sdss to constrain the mass profiles of large galaxy halos and the contribution of group halos ( guzik & seljak 2002 ; see also mckay et al 2001 ) . while in principal magnification bias measures a closely related cross - correlation ( replacing the tangential shear with the convergence ) , in practice the measurements have been relevant on different scales . galaxy - galaxy lensing has been measured so far on relatively small scales , the best signal being on @xmath135kpc . it remains to be seen from the completed sdss survey and cfht surveys how the relevant systematics play out for magnification and shear measures . it will be of great interest to analyze the measurements jointly to constrain galaxy - mass correlations . similarly the large scale bias parameter inferred from shear surveys ( van waerbeke 1998 ; hoekstra et al 2002 ) can be directly compared with measurements of magnification bias . this will be an extremely useful cross - check since the errors in both measurements are likely to be dominated by systematic errors . we have used the weak lensing approximation in this paper , setting @xmath136 . there are corrections to this relation if @xmath30 or @xmath137 are of order unity ( e.g. mnard et al 2002 ) . correlations using the fully nonlinear magnification relation @xmath138 $ ] can be computed using the halo model approach developed in takada & jain ( 2003a , b ) . it leads to higher amplitudes for magnification bias on subarcminute scales , especially for source redshifts @xmath139 ( takada & hamana 2003 ) ; it will therefore be important to incorporate the nonlinear effects for deep surveys . further , we have treated galaxies as points within halos , rather than subclumps with mass profiles . using the formalism of sheth & jain ( 2002 ) we have estimated the effect and found it to be small for the range of scales studied in this paper . we thank n. bentez , a. connolly , r. scoccimarro , a. szalay and m. takada for helpful discussions . we thank the referee , brice mnard , whose comments helped improve and correct the paper . some of the work presented here was begun during a summer 2002 workshop at the aspen center for physics . bj is supported by nasa grants nag5 - 10923 , nag5 - 10924 and a keck foundation grant .
Abstract:

Answer: several measurements of qso - galaxy correlations have reported signals much larger than predictions of magnification by large - scale structure . we find that the expected signal depends stronly on the properties of the foreground galaxy population . on arcminute scales it can be either larger or smaller by a factor of two for different galaxy types in comparison with a linearly biased version of the mass distribution . thus the resolution of some of the excess measurements may lie in examining the halo occupation properties of the galaxy population sampled by a given survey ; this is also the primary information such measurements will provide . we use the halo model of clustering and simulations to predict the magnification induced cross - correlations and errors for forthcoming surveys . with the full sloan digital sky survey the statistical errors will be below 1 percent for the galaxy - galaxy correlations and significantly larger for qso - galaxy correlations . thus accurate constraints on parameters of the galaxy halo occupation distribution can be obtained from small scale measurements and on the bias parameter from large scales . since the lensing induced cross - correlation measures the first moment of the halo occupation number of galaxies , these measurements can provide the basis for interpreting galaxy clustering measurements which measure the second and higher order moments . cosmology : dark matter  cosmology : gravitational lensing  galaxies : clustering


Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: the fermion chern - simons field theoretical approach @xcite , motivated by the composite fermions theory @xcite in which the fractional quantum hall effect ( fqhe ) @xcite is viewed as the integer qhe of certain bound objects of electrons and vortices , i.e , the  composite fermions " , has shown to be a useful method for investigating the physical properties of the fqhe . in such a field theoretical approach , one , roughly speaking ,  attaches " even number of flux quanta to the two - dimensional ( 2d ) electrons through introducing the so called chern - simons gauge field . in the mean - field approximation where the statistical gauge fluxes are delocalized from the electrons and uniformly spread out in the 2d plane , this mean gauge field partially cancels the external magnetic field such that at certain filling fractions the mean - field state is descibed by integer number of filled effective landau level ( ll ) , which signals the occurrence of the fqhe . qualitatively correct physics of the fqhe may be recovered by incorporating the effect of fluctuations of the gauge field . this approach has been adopted for investigating the fqhe at filling fractions with odd - denominators at zero temperature in @xcite , and at finite temperature in @xcite . for the @xmath2 state , in which the mean statistical field and external magnetic field precisely cancel each other such that the mean - field theory is just a filled fermi sea , this approach @xcite has successfully explained the anomaly in the surface acoustic wave propagation @xcite . its qualitative correctness has also been verified by a series of experiments @xcite . since the fqhe is observed in the presence of high magnetic field @xmath3 , it is conceivable that the fqhe may be understood at the infinite magnetic field limit , where the hilbert space is composed solely by the states in the lowest ll ( lll ) . this limit is important conceptually , since in which the kinetic energy is frozen , showing clearly the non - perturbative effect of electron - electron interactions . because the size of the hilbert space is drastically reduced by the restriction to the lll , this limit is also of great convenience for numerical studies which have been indispensable to the development of our understanding of the fqhe . the seminal work of laughlin @xcite is formulated entirely within the lll . noticeably that jain s wavefunction , whose construction is aided with states in higher lls ( to utilize the mapping between fqh states and iqh states ) , also needs to be ultimately mapped back to the lll in order to give the correct low energy physics @xcite . the importance of the lll is not explicit in the present field theoretical approach , at least not in the first order loop expansion commonly adopted in the literature . in fact the electron - electron interaction , which is crucial for the occurrence of the fqhe , plays only a nominal role in the chern - simons field theory scheme mentioned above . formally , if one actually carried out the same calculation for non - interacting electrons at these special fillings ( become clear later ) , one would obtain qualitatively the same physics ( e.g. , incompressibility of the ground state ) as that with interactions . on the positive side , this fact may be interpreted as the  correctness " of the mean - field theory @xcite ; on the other hand , it is also quite disturbing since we know that the ground state of a system of non - interacting electrons with a partially filled ll is compressible and is highly degenerate , and the fqhe occurs only as a result of strong electron - electron correlations . because the interaction has not been treated properly , the energy scale of the problem in this approach is incorrectly given by an effective cyclotron energy which is on the same order of the bare cyclotron energy , while the physical energy scale is set by the electron - electron interaction . this serious defect of the theory not only renders any quantitative description of the low energy physics of the fqhe impossible , but has also raised a fundamental question concerning the validity of the theory itself . in @xcite , this problem was dealt phenomenologically through a fermi liquid theory . in this approach , the magnetic field is treated semi - classically , and the effective mass is introduced as a free parameter . this fermi liquid approach has been examined recently through a comparison with exact numerical results on small systems @xcite . while it provides a way of dealing the problem of mass renormalization , its phenomenological nature is unsatisfactory . furthermore , for fqh states at filling fraction such as @xmath4 , @xmath5 , @xmath6 etc . in which the number of filled effective lls are small , the semi - classical approximation is expected to break down due to the strong effective magnetic field . what we would like to have is a microscopic formalism with a mean - field theory for which minimal fluctuation corrections are needed to reveal the qualitatively ( and quantitatively ) correct physics . with this philosophy in mind , we propose here a fermion chern - simons field theory constrained to the lll , in which the essential role of the electron - electron interaction for the fqhe is explicit . our hope is that true physics may be revealed in some low order perturbation expansion .    in the lll , the kinetic energy is frozen and the effect of interaction is non - perturbative . there are several works in the literature dealing with the issue of formulating field theories constrained in the lll @xcite . however , since the states in the lll are incomplete , a field theory constructed directly from the states in the lll possesses some peculiar properties which make evaluations of physical properties extremely difficult . here we shall follow an alternative formalism . to illustrate our approach , it is instructive to have a closer look at jain s construction of the ground state wavefunction for a fqh state @xcite . while the wavefunction itself is built solely from the states in the lll , it is constructed in such a way that the role of higher lls is explicit . mathematically , it provides a compact way of expressing otherwise ( i.e. , writing directly within the hilbert space of the lll ) an extremely complicated object . physically , it helps tremendously in gaining insight ( i.e. , bridging the connection between the fqhe and the iqhe ) to the problem . our approach here is similar in spirit : instead of working directly in the subspace spanned by the states in the lll , we shall start with the whole hilbert space to utilize the notion of mapping the fqhe onto the iqhe . the restriction to the lll is enforced by a @xmath0-functional described by an auxiliary field @xmath7 ( see below ) . thus , just like that in jain s theory one employs states in the higher lls to construct the wavefunction but ultimately projects it back to the lll , here we use the higher lls in intermediate stages of calculations and integrate out the @xmath1-field at the end to realize the constraint . as we shall see later , in this theory the density and current fluctuations not only couples to themselves and to each other , but also couples to a local kinetic energy density such that the constraint to the lll is satisfied . a direct consequence of this approach is to provide a microscopic calculation of the energy gap , which is experimentally measurable @xcite and is an important quantity for estimating the effect of thermal fluctuations on the accuracy of the fqhe . one may also study the low energy collective excitation spectrum within the present theory . the properties of low energy excitations may be extrapolated from numerical results obtained through exact diagonalization on small systems @xcite and from direct construction of trial wavefunctions for low energy excited states @xcite , or be studied through the chern - simons - landau - ginzburg field theory @xcite . while these studies are very useful to our understanding of the physics of the fqhe , for quantitative comparisons with experiments we still need a _ microscopic _ calculation done directly in the _ thermodynamic limit _ , especially in view of the current discrepancies between experiments and theories on the physical quantities such as the magnitude of the energy gap . the previous works using the unconstrained fermion chern - simons field theory @xcite can not serve this purpose owing to its intrinsic difficulty with the energy scale discussed above .    in the present work , we shall consider only those systems with filling fraction @xmath8 ( @xmath9 integer ) whose ground states are known to be incompressible and for whom there are considerable amount of numerical results available which may be helpful for testing the correctness of our theory . on the other hand , computations , especially the numerical solution for the dressed stationary point equation of the @xmath1-field in such a system are unfortunately much more complicated than that for a @xmath10 system in which the mean - field ground state is just a filled fermi sea . however , since the calculation of the @xmath11 state is quite different from the present one , it shall be studied in a separate work . the rest of the paper is organized as following : in the next section we present the formalism of our approach ; in section iii , we study the electro - magnetic response ; we discuss some consequences of the theory and conclude in the section iv . the quantum many - body wave function describing a system of 2d electrons of band mass @xmath12 in a magnetic field @xmath13 occupying only the lll satisfies the condition @xmath14 where @xmath15 is the cyclotron frequency . in the second quantized language , one may express the partition function for such a system by a coherent functional integral subjected to a constraint : @xmath16 with the action ( in the unit @xmath17 ) @xmath18 -\frac{1}{2}\omega_{c}\psi^{\dagger}\psi(r ) \right \ } \;.\end{aligned}\ ] ] in the above expression , @xmath19 is the chemical potential which fixes the ll filling fraction at @xmath20 . @xmath21 is a two - body interaction potential . in this paper we shall consider the coulomb interaction explicitly in our calculation , where @xmath22 , and @xmath23 is the dielectric constant . other forms of interaction may be substituted straightforwardly into our calculations . the last term is a @xmath0-functional enforcing the constraint ( [ con1 ] ) , where the kinetic energy term is symmetrized with respect to @xmath24 and @xmath25 . notice that since the kinetic and potential energy term do not commute with each other , the constraint is intrinsically dynamical . thus @xmath26 depends explicitly on the ( imaginary ) time @xmath27 . this is different from that in the situation in , e.g. , the slave boson approach for lattice fermions with infinite on - site repulsion in which the no - double - occupancy constraint may also be enforced by a @xmath0-functional @xcite . the constraint equation there is a constant of motion hence @xmath28 is time independent . because of the local nature of the auxiliary field @xmath1 , the kinetic energy in the last term may not be rearranged into the usual form @xmath29 through partial integration . in the spirit of composite fermion approach , we rewrite the action ( [ action0 ] ) in terms of the  transformed fermion fields " , still denoted by @xmath30 and @xmath25 , such that @xmath31 with @xmath32 -\frac{1}{2}\omega_{c}\psi^{\dagger}(r)\psi(r )   \right \ } \;\;.\end{aligned}\ ] ] here @xmath33 , and @xmath34 is an integer . in the integral of @xmath35 , a gauge fixing procedure is implicitly assumed . we attached even ( @xmath36 ) flux quanta per fermion through the well - known  chern - simons term " with statistical gauge field @xmath37 : integrating out the @xmath38-component of @xmath37 , we obtain @xmath39 is a local density . while in the rest of the paper we will mainly focused on the ground state properties , we have formulated our theory within a finite temperature field theory formalism . similar actions but without the constraint have been investigated in @xcite in the context of anyon superconductivity and in @xcite in a study of the fqhe at finite temperature . since the ground state of free fermions in a partially filled ll is highly degenerate , it is clearly not suitable for perturbative expansions . the above gauge transformation is motivated by the desire of finding a suitable mean - field theory which may provide a convenient starting point for approximations . without the constraint and at zero @xmath40 , this has been investigated by lopez and fradkin @xcite : consider the homogeneous liquid saddle point solution for the chern - simons field @xmath41 , such that @xmath42 where @xmath43 is the average particle density . in this mean - field theory , the single - particle orbitals are described by the lls determined by the effective magnetic field @xmath44 for the filling fraction @xmath20 such that @xmath45 , an integer , @xmath46 , the mean - field theory possesses an incompressible ground state described by @xmath47 filled ( effective ) lls . the filling fraction @xmath20 which satisfies this condition is precisely the value where the fqhe arises . however , since this mean - field approximation for the chern - simons statistical gauge field @xmath37 does not depend on the nature of the underlying electronic state ( other than the assumption that it is a homogeneous liquid ) , in the _ unconstrained _ theory this mapping of such a fractionally filled state onto an incompressible state also works ( by which we mean that the mean - field solution exists and is stable against gaussian fluctuations ) for free electrons ! this contradicts with the well known fact that the fqhe is a result of strong electron - electron correlations hence the mapping between the fqh states and the iqh states is sensible only when interactions are present . this serious deficiency of the unconstrained theory is reflected by the fact that the energy scale describing the fqh states in this theory is given the effective cyclotron energy @xmath48 , which is proportional to the bare cyclotron energy @xmath49 @xcite . now we consider the homogeneous mean - field solution _ with _ the constraint . the mean - field theory is obtained by substitutions @xmath50 , @xmath51 , where @xmath52 is given by eqn.([mfcs ] ) and @xmath53 is a constant , independent of @xmath54 , such that @xmath55 enforces the lll constraint . in the free electron case , the ground state of the mean - field theory for the statistical field ( [ mfcs ] ) is given by the configurations of electrons occupying the effective lls subjected to the constraint @xmath56 where @xmath57 is the mean - field cyclotron frequency and @xmath58 is the occupancy of the l - th ll . consider the example of @xmath59 . in this case @xmath60 , and the mean - field eigenspectrum is given by @xmath61 . as illustrated in fig . 1 , this ground state is highly degenerate as expected . thus we see that there is indeed no resemblance of a fractionally filled state to the iqh state for free systems . notice that in this ( non - interacting ) case , the mean - field value for the @xmath1-field @xmath62 is not a stationary point since the free energy is a linear function of @xmath53 . consider now the interacting case . as shown in the ref . @xcite , the treatment of interaction is equivalent to a treatment of the fluctuations in the gauge field @xmath35 because of the condition ( [ constraint ] ) . thus one may write the interaction term in the action ( [ action1 ] ) in terms of the statistical field @xmath35 . shift @xmath63 so that @xmath37 and @xmath1 represent fluctuations with respect to the saddle point solution , we write the action @xmath64 in the form @xmath65 , with @xmath66 and @xmath67 v(\vec{r}-\vec{r } ) [ { \vec \nabla } \times \vec{a}(r^{\prime } ) ] \;\;,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath68 @xmath69 are renormalized mass and renormalized chemical potential respectively . @xmath70 is the mean - field current density and @xmath71\ ] ] is the mean - field kinetic energy density . @xmath53 is determined by the extremal condition @xmath72 without @xmath73 , the mean - field ground state is highly degenerate as discussed above . following the  composite fermion " picture @xcite , it is nature to expect that a new stationary point solution , which describes @xmath47 filled ( effective ) lls for the filling fraction @xmath74 , will emerge when the interaction is properly treated . however , it is a non - trivial task to determine which level of approximations would qualify to be the  proper treatment " of the interaction . in the present work , we will only examine the single loop quantum corrections described by a gaussian theory .    as the very first step for constructing a loop expansion , one needs to decide which mean - field state should be taken . based on the above discussion , we shall assume that fluctuations will shift the non - interacting mean - field ground state to a new one which is non - degenerate and is described by @xmath47 filled effective lls for the filling fractions @xmath8 . with this new mean - field state , we calculate the ( one ) loop corrections and obtain the physical description of the corresponding fqh state . the correctness of our assumption will be determined later by a self - consistency requirement . as will be discussed below , the self - consistency equation may be seen as the equation for the mass renormalization of composite fermions . the fact that fluctuation corrections may result in a new stationary point state is well documented . for a charged superconductor , it is known that in certain situations @xcite gauge field fluctuations may shift the order parameter and render the superconducting transition to first order , in contrast to the usual second order phase transition predicted by the ginzburg - landau theory without considering the fluctuations in the electric - magnetic field @xcite . in quantum field theory , a similar case is also found in the scalar electrodynamics in four dimension @xcite . in our case , the situation is slightly different since here we postulate the new mean - field solution first , compute the loop corrections with respect to this assumed mean - field solution , and verify the correctness ( i.e. , the existence and the stability of this new solution ) self - consistently by solving the saddle point equation , which is now dressed by loop corrections . our hope is that the one - loop theory will be sufficient to give the correct physics . an idea of similar spirit has been proposed previously by weng in his treatment of doped quantum antiferromagnet @xcite . if one ignores the fluctuations in @xmath1 , and considers only the gaussian fluctuations in the statistical field @xmath37 , one would obtain similar results as those of the unconstrained theory @xcite , but with a renormalized mass @xmath75 . however , this simple minded approach violates kohn s theorem @xcite . thus it is essential to incorporate the fluctuations in @xmath1 , treat them at the same footing as those in the statistical field @xmath37 . as noted in @xcite , in a theory without constraint , one may utilize the continuity equation to simplify the calculation of the response kernel through some special choice of gauge . for a system of electrons constrained to the lll , however , it is in general not possible to apply such a procedure since in this case the current defined in the usual manner does not satisfy the continuity equation @xcite . thus we shall use the gauge invariant formalism of @xcite . denote @xmath76 , the gaussian action may be expressed as @xmath77 with the kernel @xmath78 here @xmath79 is the tree diagram contribution @xmath80 and @xmath81 gives the one - loop contribution ( for @xmath82 ) , @xmath83 with @xmath84 and @xmath85^{2-j } \left [ ( l - m - x)l_{m}^{l - m}(x)+2x\frac{dl_{m}^{l - m}(x)}{dx } \right ] ^{j}\end{aligned}\ ] ] for j=0,1,2 @xcite ; and @xmath86 \left [ ( 2(l - m)-x)l_{m}^{l - m}(x)+2x\frac{dl_{m}^{l - m}(x)}{dx } \right ] \;\;,\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath87^{2 } \;,\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath88 \;\;,\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath89^{2 } \;.\end{aligned}\ ] ] in the above equations , @xmath90 is the matsubara frequency , @xmath91 is the laguerre polynomial , @xmath92 , and @xmath93 , @xmath94 , are the effective magnetic length and the effective cyclotron frequency respectively . @xmath95 is the ratio of @xmath96 to the effective bohr radius @xmath97 . the chemical potential @xmath19 is renormalized by @xmath53 according to ( [ renormu ] ) such that there are precisely @xmath47 ll are filled @xcite : @xmath98 where @xmath99 . for the case @xmath100 , the one - loop contribution is given by @xmath101 where @xmath102^{2-j } \left [ ( l_{m}^{0}(x)-2l_{m}^{1}(x ) \right ] ^{j}\ ] ] for j=0,1,2 ; @xmath103 @xmath104^{2 } \;\;,\ ] ] @xmath105   \;,\ ] ] @xmath106^{2 } e^{(\epsilon_{m}-\tilde\mu)}f^{2}(\epsilon_{m}-\tilde\mu ) \left [ l_{m}^{0}(x ) \right ] ^{2 } \;\;.\ ] ] the computation for @xmath107 is detailed in the appendix . notice that because there are no tree diagrams involving the auxiliary field @xmath108 , the matrix @xmath79 possesses no inverse . the free energy is obtained by completing the functional integral ( with the standard gauge fixing procedure ) of @xmath35 and @xmath1 in the partition function : @xmath109 where @xmath110 is the mean - field contribution to the free energy and the determinant of @xmath111 , @xmath112 , is given by , apart from a constant ( in @xmath113 ) factor ( see @xcite ) , @xmath114 \nonumber \\ & & -\sigma_{6}(1-\tilde{n}\sigma_{1})^{2}- \tilde{n}^{2}\sigma_{0}\sigma_{5}^{2}- 2\tilde{n}\sigma_{4}\sigma_{5}(1-\tilde{n}\sigma_{1 } ) \;\;.\end{aligned}\ ] ] the saddle point value @xmath53 is given by the extremal condition ( [ dfdlambda ] ) which , in the present case of one - loop expansion , can be written as @xmath115 if one lets @xmath116 in ( [ detd ] ) , which corresponds to that for a non - interacting system with gaussian fluctuation corrections ( in both @xmath37 and @xmath1 ) , one would easily see that @xmath117 is linear in @xmath113 and therefore there is no saddle point . because of the interaction , the free energy is no more a linear function of @xmath53 , hence one may expect a non - trivial solution . thus , after taking a mean - field state of integer - filled pseudo lls ( which is not a legitimate state for non - interacting electrons but is assumed to emerge as a valid one when the interaction is switched on ) as our starting point for the loop expansion , our assumption is checked self - consistently by finding solutions for ( [ massrn ] ) , in which the free energy is calculated with the one - loop fluctuation corrections .    from the expression of @xmath118 , eqn.([mfaction ] ) , it is tempting to interpret @xmath119 as an  effective mass " of the composite fermions . ( notice that the stability of the mean field solution requires that @xmath120 . ) thus the above equation ( [ massrn ] ) may be seen as the mass renormalization equation for composite fermions . while nominally this definition of the effective mass differs from the usual one @xcite , it too is a result of electron - electron interactions and gauge field fluctuations . and we shall see later , @xmath75 also measures the energy gap in the excitation spectrum . incorporating higher order loop expansions will in general further shift @xmath53 , giving additional corrections to the effective mass . the electro - magnetic response for a system constrained to the lll is a quite subtle problem . consider fluctuations in @xmath121 such that @xmath122 . it is tempting to write the action describing the system with this additional fluctuating electric - magnetic field as @xmath123 -\frac{1}{2}\omega_{c}\psi^{\dagger}\psi(r ) \right \ } \;.\end{aligned}\ ] ] notice that the term involving the @xmath1-field is independent of @xmath124 . one would expect that such an action describes the electro - magnetic response of the system to the perturbation @xmath124 while it is confined to the hilbert space of the lll of the unperturbed system , consistent with the  standard approach " using trial wavefunctions @xcite . however , as it stands this action is not invariant under the gauge transformation @xmath125 because one does not have the usual  minimal coupling " for the external perturbation @xmath126 , the current density can not be simply obtained from the derivative @xmath127 on the other hand , the action ( [ action0 ] ) ( or equivalently ( [ action1 ] ) ) clearly preserves the global @xmath128 symmetry of the unconstrained theory , one may thus still define a noether current density accordingly . as usual , consider a phase change in the fermion field such that @xmath129 invariance of the action with respect to an arbitrary infinitesimal change of @xmath23 lead to a conserved current density @xmath130 , which in terms of the chern - simons transformed fields is given by @xmath131 + \frac{1}{m_b } ( \frac{e}{c}{\vec a_{eff}}-{\vec a})\psi^{\dagger}\psi(r ) \right \ }   \;,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath132 is the mean - field current density defined in ( [ mfcd ] ) . @xmath130 is , of course , not the physical current density measured in experiments , which must be obtained by integrating out the auxiliary field @xmath1 @xcite .    to study the electro - magnetic response , we shall consider a simpler case where the external fluctuating field is in the time component only , i.e. , @xmath133 , so that it couples to the system according to ( [ action0 ] ) with the substitution @xmath122 . the action is then invariant under the gauge transformation @xmath134 , and the system under such a perturbation @xmath124 is still constrained to the ( original ) lll . using the standard faddeev - popov procedure ( where the gauge fixing term can be chosen as , e.g. , @xmath135 , one may integrate out the statistical field @xmath37 and arrives an effective action for such a @xmath124 . after some algebra , one obtains @xmath136 one may interpret @xmath137 as the density - density correlation function @xcite @xmath138 for @xmath139 , @xmath140 the linear response is obtained by the standard procedure @xmath141 . thus one may find the collective excitation spectrum by locating the poles in @xmath137 . notice that if one applies a similar procedure to a system without the constraint , one would obtain the same response kernel @xmath137 as that with an arbitrary @xmath126 . hence it is reasonable to expect that @xmath137 gives the correct density - density correlation , and is sufficient for the purpose of studying physics other than transport properties . the compressibility is obtained from @xmath142 where @xmath143 is obtained from ( [ detd ] ) with the substitution @xmath144 . at @xmath145 , @xmath146 , the system is incompressible . as @xmath40 is raised from zero , the compressibility acquires an exponential correction as expected . the mass renormalization equation ( [ massrn ] ) can in principle be solved numerically , which is quite complicated due to the large ( infinite ) number of singularities in the integrand . we shall not discuss it the present work . instead , we will offer a conjecture on a solution based on physical considerations . since the physical energy scale is given by the electron - electron interaction , we have @xmath147 when @xmath21 is the coulomb interaction . here @xmath148 is the bare magnetic length , @xmath149 . we may in this case write ( @xmath17 ) @xmath150 where @xmath151 is a numerical factor ( to be determined from ( [ massrn ] ) ) . a strict constraint on any theory of electrons in magnetic field is the celebrated kohn s theorem , which states that in an impurity free system the total oscillation strength @xmath137 is saturated by the cyclotron mode ( to the order @xmath152 ) , regardless the details of interactions . since in our theory the system is constrained to the lll , the cyclotron mode is pushed up to infinite . kohn s theorem then requires that all the modes in our theory must be weighted with some higher power then @xmath152 as @xmath153 . to ensure the one - loop expansion adopted here to be sensible , we must demonstrate that kohn s theorem is indeed satisfied within our gaussian theory . below we show this explicitly for the case @xmath145 .    as @xmath154 , we have @xmath155^{2-j } \left [ ( l - m - x)l_{m}^{l - m}(x)+2x\frac{dl_{m}^{l - m}(x)}{dx } \right ] ^{j}\end{aligned}\ ] ] for j=0,1,2 ; and @xmath156 \left [ ( 2(l - m)-x)l_{m}^{l - m}(x)+2x\frac{dl_{m}^{l - m}(x)}{dx } \right ] \;\;,\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath157^{2 } \;,\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath158 \;\;,\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath159^{2 } \;,\end{aligned}\ ] ] for @xmath160 , they are just the results obtained previously for the unconstrained theory at @xmath145 @xcite . as @xmath153 , @xmath161 may be expanded to the order @xmath162 : @xmath163 @xmath164 @xmath165 @xmath166 @xmath167 @xmath168 @xmath169 substitute these results to ( [ k00 ] ) , we obtain the small @xmath170 behavior of the density - density response kernel @xmath171 thus one finds that the weight of the poles in @xmath137 vanishes according to @xmath172 , satisfying kohn s theorem . this feature of our theory is non - trivial and is quite encouraging , indicates strongly that this formalism may have well captured the correct low energy physics of the fqhe . notice that the situation here is quite different from that in the unconstrained theory @xcite in which the cyclotron mode is explicitly present and sets the energy scale of all the low energy excitations . incidentally , ( [ k00q0 ] ) also shows that the energy gap at @xmath173 ( at @xmath145 ) is @xmath174 . from our knowledge about the collective energy gap obtained through numerical works @xcite , we may estimate that @xmath175 for @xmath4 . one may also calculate the dispersion of the low energy collective modes at finite @xmath170 by finding the poles of @xmath137 . it depends on the details ( such as the range and strength ) of the electron - electron interaction , as well as @xmath113 . the numerical calculation of the full dispersion of the collective modes is straightforward once the value of @xmath113 is known . however , it is not clear that the above estimate for @xmath151 is correct within the _ one - loop _ expansion . it is well possible ( especially in view of the dynamical nature of the @xmath1-field ) that one needs corrections beyond the one - loop level to give a reasonable value for @xmath151 . these issues , of course , can only be clarified by actually solving the stationary point equation ( [ massrn ] ) , which we hope to be done in the near future . in the absence of the solution for the mass renormalization equation ( [ massrn ] ) , we shall not address the quantitative questions such as the dispersion of the collective modes in the present work . to summarize , we present in this paper a fermion chern - simons field theory describing two - dimensional electrons in the lll . the constraint is realized through a @xmath0-functional represented by an auxiliary field @xmath1 which fixes the kinetic energy of electrons at @xmath176 . in a mean - field approximation , the ground state is highly degenerate for non - interacting systems when @xmath20 is not an integer . assuming a new non - degenerate mean field ground state at @xmath177 ( which is described by @xmath47 filled effective lls ) for interacting electrons , we perform the one - loop expansion around this mean - field state and subject our assumption to an self - consistency requirement . the resulting dressed stationary point equation for @xmath113 is then physically interpreted as the mass renormalization equation for the composite fermions . an important issue which needs to be investigated in the future is to numerically solve the renormalization equation to provide an answer for the the energy gap of a fqh state in the thermodynamical limit . the author thanks g.s . canright , m. ma and especially j.k . jain for many stimulating discussions , and w. chen , s.m . girvin , a.h . macdonald , j. quinn , z.b . su and y.s . wu for helpful comments . this work was supported by the national science foundation under grant no . dmr-9413057 , and by the u.s . department of energy through contract no . de - ac05 - 84or21400 administered by martin marietta energy systems inc ..    in this appendix , we give some details of calculations of the matrix elements in @xmath178 . at zero @xmath40 and without the constraint , this has been done in @xcite . calculations at finite @xmath40 is quite similar @xcite . the imaginary time free fermion propagator , written in the landau gauge , is given by @xmath179 with @xmath180 where @xmath181 is a hermit polynomial . the one - loop kernel in real space may be written as @xmath182 where @xmath183 denotes time - ordered average . to make our notation compact , we express the matrix elements of @xmath184 with index @xmath185 , such that for @xmath186 , they represent the fluctuating gauge field @xmath37 , while for @xmath187 , they represent the fluctuating @xmath1-field . now , as an example , we work out @xmath188 in detail . @xmath189d_{x_2}g(r_{2}-r_{1})+ [ d_{x_2}^{\dagger}g(r_{1}-r_{2})]d_{x_1}^{\dagger}g(r_{2}-r_{1 } )   \nonumber \\ & & -[d_{x_1}d_{x_2}^{\dagger}g(r_{1}-r_{2})]g(r_{2}-r_{1})- g(r_{1}-r_{2})d_{x_1}^{\dagger}d_{x_2}g(r_{2}-r_{1 } ) \ } \nonumber \\ & & + \delta^{3}(r_{1}-r_{2})\frac{\overline{\rho}}{m^ { * } } \;\;,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath190 is the covariant derivative . in the landau gauge it has the form @xmath191 define the fourier transform @xmath192 with the above expression of the free fermion propagator , we have @xmath193 with @xmath194 in the above expressions @xmath195 is the bosonic matsubara frequency while @xmath196 is fermionic , given by @xmath197 . the sum over @xmath196 may be done through the standard contour integral method @xcite . the result is ( for @xmath82 ) @xmath198 where @xmath199 is the fermi distribution function . now we compute the integral @xmath200 . using the relation @xcite @xmath201 we have @xmath202 \nonumber \\ & & + \left [ \frac{1}{2 } \tilde{h}_{l+1}(\frac{y}{\tilde{l}_{0}}- \tilde{l}_{0}k ) + l\tilde{h}_{l-1}(\frac{y}{\tilde{l}_{0}}- \tilde{l}_{0}k )   \right ] \tilde{h}_{l'}(\frac{y}{\tilde{l}_{0}}-\tilde{l}_{0}(k - q_{x } ) ) \ } \;\;.\end{aligned}\ ] ] shifting the variable @xmath203 , and use @xcite @xmath204 we have @xmath205 here @xmath206 . after some algebra , we obtain @xmath207 \right \ } \ ; , \;\;\ ;   ( l < l')\ ; ; \nonumber \\ -\frac{\tilde{l}_{0}(q_{x}-iq_{y})}{2}i_{1x}(\vec{q } ) & = & ( \frac{i}{\tilde{l}_{0 } } )   e^{-iq_{y}\tilde{l}_{0}^{2}(k-\frac{q_{x}}{2 } ) } e^{-\frac{\tilde{l}_{0}^{2}q^{2}}{4 } } \pi\tilde{l}_{0}2^{l}l ' ! ( -\frac{\tilde{l}_{0}(q_{x}+iq_{y})}{2})^{l - l'-1 }   \nonumber \\ & & \left \ { q_{x}(l - l')l^{l - l'}_{l'}(x)-iq_{y } \left [ 2x\frac{dl^{l - l'}_{l'}(x)}{dx } + ( l - l'-x)l^{l - l'}_{l'}(x ) \right ] \right \ } \ ; , \;\;\ ;   ( l > l')\;;\end{aligned}\ ] ] the summation over @xmath208 may be straightforwardly carried out @xmath209 where @xmath210 is the degeneracy of a ( pseudo ) landau level . these lead to @xmath211 \left [ ( 2(l - m)-x)l_{m}^{l - m}(x)+2x\frac{dl_{m}^{l - m}(x)}{dx } \right ] \tilde{\omega}_{c}^{2 } \frac{q_{y}^2}{q^2 } \right \ } \nonumber \\ & -\frac{l^{2}\beta}{2\pi\tilde{\omega}_{c}}e^{-x}\sum_{m < l } \frac{m!}{l!}x^{l - m-1}(l - m)\ { f(\epsilon_{m}-\tilde\mu)-f(\epsilon_{l}-\tilde\mu ) \ } \tilde{\omega}_{c}^{2}(l^{l - m}_{m}(x))^{2 } + \frac{\overline{\rho}}{m^ { * } }   ) \;\;.\end{aligned}\ ] ] define @xmath212 we have @xmath213 \;\;.\end{aligned}\ ] ] the last term vanishes as @xmath214 . according to @xcite , we ignore it hereafter . ( a similar treatment is also applied to @xmath215 . ) this ensures the gauge invariance of @xmath107 . the new matrix elements which appear in the present theory are those involve the ( mean - field ) kinetic energy density @xmath216 . now we evaluate one of them as an example . consider @xmath217g(r_{2}-r_{1 } ) \right \ } \;\;.\end{aligned}\ ] ] in the fourier space we have @xmath218 with @xmath219 @xmath220 may be evaluated straightforwardly using ( [ hermit2 ] ) . the final result is given in ( [ pi0 ] )    now we consider the case @xmath100 . for @xmath221 , the matsubara frequency sum in ( [ pi11 ] ) is still given by ( [ msum1 ] ) with substitution @xmath100 . however , the term with @xmath222 also contribute in the present situation : @xmath223 ^ 2 } = \beta \frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial z}|_{z=\epsilon_{l}-\tilde\mu } = -\beta^{2 } e^{(\epsilon_{l}-\tilde\mu)}f^{2}(\epsilon_{l}-\tilde\mu ) \;\;.\ ] ] to evaluate , e.g. , @xmath224 , one needs calculate the integral ( [ i1x ] ) for the case @xmath225 . using a similar procedure , one obtains @xmath226 \;\;.\ ] ] this result , together with that obtained for @xmath227 , eqn . ( [ i1x1 ] ) , gives @xmath224 expressed in ( [ pi00 ] ) . other matrix elements in ( [ pi0 ] ) and ( [ pi00 ] ) may be obtained in similar manner . lett . * 71 * , 3850 ( 1993 ) ; v.j . et al . _ , ibid , * 72 * , 2065 ( 1994 ) ; r.r . _ , ibid , * 70 * , 2944 ( 1993 ) ; ibid , * 73 * 3274 ( 1994 ) ; solid state commun . * 90 * , 71 ( 1994 ) ; d.r . et al . _ , 72 * , 1906 ( 1994 ) ; r.l . _ , ibid , * 71 * , 3846 ( 1993 ) ; h.c . et al . _ , ibid , * 73 * , 3270 ( 1994 ) . b. sakita , d.n . sheng and z.b . su , phys . b * 44 * , 11510 ( 1991 ) ; z.s . ma and z.b . su , ibid , * 48 * 2347 ( 1993 ) ; r. ray and b. sakita , ann . phys . ( n.y . ) * 230 * , 131 ( 1994 ) ; r. ray and g. gat , _ unpublished_. although @xmath228 does not appear in @xmath107 , we still show it here and in the subsequent calculations . @xmath228 emerges when one adopts the special guage choice @xmath229 , with @xmath230 and @xmath231 , as it was done in @xcite for the unconstrained case . while the two calculations coincide there in the @xmath153 limit , we find that they differ at finite @xmath170 , contrary to what was found in @xcite . the physical origin of this discrepancy is not clear , although one may argue that it is due to the  weak form " @xcite of the gauge invariance property of @xmath107 . they would give the same collective modes ( i.e. , the same poles in @xmath137 ) if one substitutes @xmath232 with @xmath233 . one may also make such a substitution in ( [ detd ] ) for the constraint theory . notice that such a problem does not occur in the @xmath234 case considered in @xcite where the mean - field ground state is a filled fermi - sea .
Abstract:

Answer: we propose a fermion chern - simons field theory describing two - dimensional electrons in the lowest landau level . this theory is constructed with a complete set of states , and the lowest landau level constraint is enforced through a @xmath0-functional described by an auxiliary field @xmath1 . unlike the field theory constructed directly with the states in the lowest landau level , this theory allows one utilizing the physical picture of  composite fermion " to study the fractional quantum hall states by mapping them onto certain integer quantum hall states ; but unlike it in the unconstrained theory , such a mapping is sensible only when interactions between electrons are present . an  effective mass " , which characterizes the scale of low energy excitations in the fractional quantum hall systems , emerges naturally from our theory . we study a gaussian effective theory and interpret physically the dressed stationary point equation for @xmath1 as an equation for the  mass renormalization " of composite fermions .