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: in this paper , we study the behavior of different physical quantities at the resonances generated by the maximum of the potential of a semiclassical schrdinger operator . in particular , we show quantitatively to what extent the presence of these resonances drives the behavior of the scattering amplitude and of the schrdinger group . the resonances generated by the maximum point of the potential ( usually called barrier - top resonances ) have been studied by briet , combes and duclos @xcite and sjstrand @xcite . these authors have given a precise description of the resonances in any disc of size @xmath0 centered at the maximum of the potential . in particular , they have shown that the resonances lie at distance of order @xmath0 from the real axis , which is in very strong contrast to the case of shape resonances ( the well in the island case ) , with exponentially small imaginary part ( see helffer and sjstrand @xcite ) . the description of resonances in larger discs of size @xmath1 , @xmath20,1]$ ] has been obtained by kaidi and kerdelhu @xcite under a diophantine condition . for small discs of size one , this question has been treated in the one dimensional case by the third author @xcite with the complex wkb method . in the two dimensional case , the resonances in discs of size one have also been considered by hitrik , sjstrand and v ngc @xcite ( see also the references in this paper ) . here , we consider only the resonances at distance @xmath0 of the maximum of the potential and we recall their precise localization in section  [ k5 ] .    resonances can be defined as the poles of the meromorphic continuation of the cut - off resolvent ( see e.g. hunziker @xcite ) . the generalized spectral projection associated to a resonance is defined as the residue of the resolvent at this pole : @xmath3 as an operator from @xmath4 to @xmath5 . if @xmath6 were an isolated eigenvalue , this formula would give the usual spectral projection . many physical quantities can be expressed in terms of these generalized spectral projections . in the case of shape resonances , their semiclassical expansion has been computed by helffer and sjstrand in @xcite . in section [ a1 ] below , we obtain the semiclassical expansion of the generalized spectral projection for barrier - top resonances . since the resonances in the present case have a much larger imaginary part , our result is very different from that of the shape resonance case . resonances appear also in scattering theory ( they are called scattering poles in this context ) . in @xcite , lax and phillips have shown that they coincide with the poles of the meromorphic extension of the scattering amplitude . this result , proved for the wave equation in the exterior of a compact obstacle , was extended by grard and martinez @xcite to the long range case for the schrdinger equation ( see also the references in this paper for earlier works ) . for shape resonances , the residue of the scattering amplitude was calculated in the semiclassical limit by nakamura @xcite , lahmar - benbernou @xcite and lahmar - benbernou and martinez @xcite . more generally , upper bounds on the residues of the scattering amplitude have been obtained by stefanov @xcite ( in the compact support case ) and michel @xcite ( in the long range case ) for resonances very close to the real axis . in section [ k2 ] , we give the semiclassical expansion of the residues of the scattering amplitude for barrier - top resonances and we will see that these upper bounds do not hold in the present setting . it is commonly believed that resonances play also a crucial role in quantum dynamics . indeed , it is sometimes possible to describe the long time evolution of the cut - off propagator ( for example , the schrdinger or wave group ) in term of the resonances . typically , if the resonances are simple , the propagator @xmath7 truncated by @xmath8 satisfies @xmath9 here , @xmath10 is the generalized spectral projection defined previously . such a formula generalizes the poisson formula , valid for the operators with discrete spectrum . the resonance expansion of the wave group was first obtained by lax and phillips @xcite in the exterior of a star - shaped obstacle . this result has been generalized , using various techniques , to different non trapping situations ( see e.g. vanberg @xcite and the references of the second edition of the book @xcite ) . the trapping situations have been treated by tang and zworski @xcite and burq and zworski @xcite for very large times . on the other hand , the time evolution of the quasiresonant states ( sorts of quasimodes ) has been studied by grard and sigal @xcite . a specific study of the schrdinger group for the shape resonances created by a well in a island has been made by nakamura , stefanov and zworski @xcite . there are also some works concerning the situation of a hyperbolic trapped set . we refer to the work of christiansen and zworski @xcite for the wave equation on the modular surface and on the hyperbolic cylinder , and to the work of guillarmou and naud @xcite for the wave equation on convex co - compact hyperbolic manifolds . section [ k3 ] is devoted to the computation of the asymptotic behavior for large time of the schrdinger group localized in energies close to the maximum of the potential .    for the proof of the different results of this paper , we use an estimate of the distorted resolvent around the resonances , polynomial with respect to @xmath11 . indeed , such a bound allows to apply the semiclassical microlocal calculus . this estimate is established in section  [ k4 ] . to prove it , we proceed as in @xcite and use the method developed by martinez @xcite , sjstrand @xcite and tang and zworski @xcite . similar bounds around the resonances are already known in various situations ( see e.g. grard @xcite for two strictly convex obstacles , michel and the first author @xcite in the one dimensional case ) . note that , in our setting , a limiting absorption principle have been proved in @xcite . we consider the semiclassical schrdinger operator on @xmath12 , @xmath13 , @xmath14 where @xmath15 is a smooth real - valued function . we denote by @xmath16 the associated classical hamiltonian . the vector field @xmath17 is the hamiltonian vector field associated to @xmath18 . integral curves @xmath19 of @xmath20 are called classical trajectories or bicharacteristic curves , and @xmath18 is constant along such curves . the trapped set at energy @xmath21 for @xmath22 is defined as @xmath23 we shall suppose that @xmath15 satisfies the following assumptions    [ a1 ] @xmath24 extends holomorphically in the sector @xmath25 for some @xmath26 . moreover @xmath27 as @xmath28 in @xmath29 . [ a2 ] @xmath15 has a non - degenerate maximum at @xmath30 and @xmath31 with @xmath32 and @xmath33 . [ a3 ] the trapped set at energy @xmath34 is @xmath35 . notice that [ a3 ] ensures that @xmath30 is the unique global maximum for @xmath15 . moreover , there exists a pointed neighborhood of @xmath36 in which all the energy levels are non trapping . in the following , @xmath37 denote the strictly increasing sequence of linear combinations over @xmath38 of the @xmath39 s . in particular , @xmath40 and @xmath41 . the linearization @xmath42 at @xmath43 of the hamilton vector field @xmath44 is given by @xmath45 and has eigenvalues @xmath46 . thus @xmath43 is a hyperbolic fixed point for @xmath44 and the stable / unstable manifold theorem gives the existence of a stable incoming lagrangian manifold @xmath47 and a stable outgoing lagrangian manifold @xmath48 characterized by @xmath49 moreover , there exist two smooth functions @xmath50 , defined in a vicinity of @xmath51 , satisfying @xmath52 and such that @xmath53 near @xmath43 . since @xmath22 is a schrdinger operator , we have @xmath54 .    under the previous assumptions , the operator @xmath22 is self - adjoint with domain @xmath55 , and we define the set @xmath56 of resonances for @xmath22 as follows ( see @xcite ) . let @xmath57 be a large constant , and let @xmath58 be a smooth vector field , such that @xmath59 for @xmath60 and @xmath61 for @xmath62 . for @xmath63 small enough , we denote @xmath64 the unitary operator defined by @xmath65 for @xmath66 . then the operator @xmath67 is a differential operator with analytic coefficients with respect to @xmath68 , and can be analytically continued to small enough complex values of @xmath68 . for @xmath69 small enough , we denote @xmath70 the spectrum of @xmath71 is discrete in @xmath72 , and the resonances of @xmath22 are by definition the eigenvalues of @xmath71 in @xmath73 . we denote their set by @xmath56 . the multiplicity of a resonance is the rank of the spectral projection @xmath74 where @xmath75 is a small enough closed path around the resonance @xmath6 . the resonances , as well as their multiplicity , do not depend on @xmath76 and @xmath77 . as a matter of fact , the resonances are also the poles of the meromorphic extension from the upper complex half - plane of the resolvent @xmath78 ( see e.g. @xcite ) .    in the present setting , sjstrand @xcite has given a precise description of the set of resonances in any disc @xmath79 of center @xmath36 and radius @xmath80 . this result has also been proved simultaneously by briet , combes and duclos @xcite under a slightly stronger hypothesis ( a virial assumption ) . _ [ e17 ] assume [ a1][a3 ] . let @xmath81 be different from @xmath82 for all @xmath83 . then , for @xmath84 small enough , there exists a bijection @xmath85 between the sets @xmath86 and @xmath87 , where @xmath88 such that @xmath89 . _    in particular , the number of resonances in any disk @xmath90 is uniformly bounded with respect to @xmath0 . for @xmath91 , we denote @xmath92 . _ we shall say that @xmath93 is simple if @xmath94 implies @xmath95 . _    _ [ k1 ] if @xmath96 is simple , the corresponding resonance @xmath97 is simple for @xmath0 small enough and proposition  0.3 of @xcite proves that @xmath97 has a complete asymptotic expansion in powers of @xmath0 . _    _ the analyticity of @xmath15 in a full neighborhood of @xmath12 is used only for the localization of the resonances . indeed , if the conclusions of theorem [ e17 ] and remark [ k1 ] hold for @xmath15 smooth and analytic outside of a compact set , then the results of this paper still apply under this weaker assumption . _    the semiclassical pseudodifferential calculus is a tool used throughout this paper , and we fix here some notations . we refer to @xcite for more details . for @xmath98 an order function and @xmath99 , we say that a function @xmath100 is a symbol of class @xmath101 when , for all @xmath102 , @xmath103 if @xmath104 , the semiclassical pseudodifferential operator @xmath105 with symbol @xmath106 is defined by @xmath107 for all @xmath108 . we denote by @xmath109 the space of operators @xmath110 . the rest of this paper is organized as follows . in section [ k4 ] , we prove a resolvent estimate in the complex plane that we use in all the rest of the paper . then , in section [ a1 ] , we compute the spectral projection associated to a resonance . in section [ k2 ] , we give the asymptotic expansion of the residue of the scattering amplitude at a simple resonance for long range potentials . section [ k3 ] is devoted to the computation of the asymptotic behavior for large @xmath111 of the schrdinger group @xmath112 , where the spectral projection appears naturally . at last , we have placed in appendix [ k6 ] some geometrical considerations about hamiltonian curves in a neighborhood of the hyperbolic fixed point , that we need in section [ a1 ] . in this section , we prove a polynomial estimate for the resolvent of the distorted operator @xmath71 around the resonances . this estimate is used throughout the paper to control remainder terms . more precisely , we prove the following result . _ [ aaa ] assume [ a1][a3 ] . there exists @xmath113 such that , for all @xmath81 and @xmath0 small enough , _ @xmath114 the operator @xmath22 has no resonances in @xmath115 + i [ -c h , 0 ] \setminus d ( e_{0 } , 2 c h ) .\ ] ]    @xmath116 assume @xmath117 with @xmath118 . then , there exists @xmath119 such that @xmath120 for all @xmath121 + i [ -c h , c h]$ ] .    in particular , the previous theorem states that all the resonances in @xmath122 + i [ -c h , 0]$ ] are those given by theorem [ e17 ] . the rest of this section is devoted to the proof of theorem  [ aaa ] . we follow the approach of tang and zworski @xcite and we use the constructions of ( * ? ? ? * section 4 ) , where the propagation of singularities through a hyperbolic fixed point is studied , and of ( * ? ? ? * section 3 ) , where a sharp estimate for the weighted resolvent for real energies is given . @xmath124    the distorted operator @xmath71 defined in is a differential operator of order @xmath125 whose symbol @xmath126 satisfies @xmath127 with @xmath128 and @xmath129 we write the taylor expansion of @xmath130 with respect to @xmath76 as @xmath131 for some @xmath132 which vanishes in @xmath133 . notice that @xmath134 so that for @xmath135 small enough , there exists @xmath136 such that @xmath137 for all @xmath138)$ ] with @xmath139 . we want to gain as much ellipticity as we can near @xmath43 . as in ( * section 4 ) , we shall work with a weighted operator , and we start by defining the weights . let @xmath140 and @xmath141 . there exists a symplectic map @xmath142 defined near @xmath143 , with @xmath144 , such that , setting @xmath145 , @xmath146 here @xmath147 is a @xmath148 map from @xmath149 to the space @xmath150 of @xmath151 matrices with real entries such that @xmath152 let @xmath153 be a unitary fourier integral operator microlocally defined near @xmath154 and associated to the canonical transformation @xmath142 . then @xmath155 is a pseudodifferential operator in @xmath156 with a real ( modulo @xmath157 ) symbol @xmath158 , such that @xmath159    let @xmath160 . since the trapped set at energy @xmath34 for @xmath18 is @xmath161 , we recall from @xcite that , for the compact set @xmath162 ) \subset t^ { * } \r^{n}$ ] , there exist @xmath163 and a bounded function @xmath164 such that @xmath165 has compact support and @xmath166 as in @xcite , we set , for @xmath167 to be chosen later , @xmath168 where @xmath169 ) $ ] with @xmath170 on @xmath171 and @xmath172 ) $ ] with @xmath173 $ ] and @xmath174 in a neighborhood of @xmath175 $ ] . we also define functions on the @xmath176 side . we set @xmath177 here @xmath178 is a parameter that will be chosen later on . since we consider the semiclassical regime , we will assume that @xmath179 . moreover , @xmath180 , where @xmath181 is such that @xmath182 near @xmath183 and @xmath184 is such that @xmath185 near @xmath51 in @xmath186 . at last , we choose four cut - off functions @xmath187 such that , setting again @xmath188 , we have @xmath189 the notation @xmath190 means that @xmath191 near the support of @xmath192 . we define the operators @xmath193 for @xmath194 . notice that @xmath195 is acting on functions of @xmath196 , whereas the other operators are acting on functions of @xmath176 . the @xmath197 s are real constants that will be fixed below . then , @xmath198 for some @xmath199 . we define the operator @xmath200 splitting @xmath201 , we write @xmath202 and we compute the symbols of the operators @xmath203 separately . @xmath124    the goal of this part is to prove the following identity .    _ [ e41 ] let @xmath123 be the operator defined in . then , @xmath204 _    _ [ e40 ] we will show in the proof of lemma [ e41 ] ( more precisely in ) that the operators @xmath205 and @xmath206 are invertible on @xmath207 and @xmath208 for @xmath209 and @xmath0 small enough . moreover , their inverses are polynomially bounded in @xmath11 . in particular , the resonances of @xmath22 are the poles of @xmath210 and to estimate @xmath211 , it is enough to estimate @xmath210 . _    the rest of this section is devoted to the proof of lemma  [ e41 ] . in fact , is close to the equation ( 4.44 ) of @xcite and we will use some identities from @xcite when possible . @xmath212 first we consider @xmath213 . since we can assume that @xmath214 , we have @xmath215 with @xmath216 given , for any @xmath217 , by @xmath218 then again @xmath219 with @xmath220 given , for any @xmath221 , by @xmath222 the @xmath223-th term in is easily seen to be @xmath224 , so that choosing @xmath225 large enough , we conclude that @xmath226 . moreover @xmath227 modulo @xmath228 , and @xmath229 for some @xmath230 with @xmath231 modulo @xmath228 .    by egorov s theorem , @xmath232 where @xmath233 verify @xmath234 modulo @xmath228 . moreover , from , we have @xmath235 with @xmath236 and a symbol @xmath237 satisfying @xmath238 modulo @xmath228 . since @xmath239 , we have @xmath240 and we get by pseudodifferential calculus @xmath241 then , using , , and , we obtain @xmath242    the first term in the right hand side of has already been computed in the equations ( 4.15)(4.41 ) of @xcite ( the reader should notice however that the symbol @xmath18 there has to be replaced by @xmath243 here ) . we have @xmath244    on the other hand , since @xmath245 , @xmath246 near the support of @xmath247 and @xmath248 . thus , @xmath249 and then , working as in  , we obtain @xmath250    using and collecting and , the identity gives @xmath251    @xmath212 now we consider @xmath252 . as in  , we have @xmath253 for some @xmath254 . moreover @xmath255 modulo @xmath228 and @xmath256 since @xmath257 , the pseudodifferential calculus gives @xmath258 . furthermore , using egorov s theorem , we obtain @xmath259 where @xmath260 and @xmath261 modulo @xmath262 . using @xmath263 , the supports of @xmath264 and @xmath265 are disjoint and @xmath266    @xmath212 it remains to study @xmath267 . working as in  , we get @xmath268 with @xmath269 and @xmath270 modulo @xmath228 . as in , we have @xmath271 where @xmath272 . now and yield @xmath273 working as in the equation ( 4.43 ) of @xcite , we get @xmath274 combining with the last identity , we finally obtain @xmath275    @xmath212 the same way , one can prove @xmath276 and the same kind of estimate holds for the product the other way round . on the other hand , @xmath277 and @xmath278 . then the two operators @xmath205 and @xmath206 are invertible on @xmath279 for @xmath209 and @xmath0 small enough and they satisfy @xmath280 for some @xmath281 . the same thing can be done on @xmath208 since the operators we consider differ from @xmath282 by compactly supported pseudodifferential operators . this shows remark [ e40 ] . @xmath212 adding , and , we get lemma [ e41 ]      @xmath124    let @xmath283 ) $ ] be such that @xmath284 near @xmath51 . we define @xmath285 for some large constant @xmath286 fixed in the following . _ [ e39 ] assume that @xmath26 , @xmath287 and @xmath117 with @xmath118 . denote @xmath288 . choose @xmath289 and fix @xmath290 large enough in this order . then , we have , for @xmath0 small enough , _    @xmath114 for @xmath291 + i [ - 2 c_{0 } h , 2 c_{0 } h ] $ ] and @xmath292 , the operator @xmath293 is invertible and @xmath294    @xmath116 for @xmath291 + i [ - 2 c_{0 } h , 2 c_{0 } h ] $ ] , the operator @xmath295 is invertible and @xmath296    this lemma is similar to proposition  4.1 of @xcite . we will only give the proof of part @xmath116 since the first part can be proved the same way ( using instead of ) . let @xmath297 ) $ ] be such that @xmath298 as usual , we denote @xmath299 . we now recall some ellipticity estimates proved in @xcite by means of grding s inequality and caldern  vaillancourt s theorem . from the equations ( 4.50 ) , ( 4.51 ) , ( 4.54 ) , ( 4.55 ) and ( 4.64 ) of @xcite , we have @xmath300 for some @xmath301 which do not depend on @xmath0 , @xmath302 and the @xmath197 s .    from and since @xmath117 , @xmath303 let @xmath304)$ ] be such that @xmath305 ) } \prec \omega_{6 } \prec \one_{b ( 0 , 2 r_{1 } ) \cap p^{-1 } ( [ e_{0 } - 3 \varepsilon , e_{0 } + 3 \varepsilon ] ) } .\ ] ] from the definition of @xmath306 , we have @xmath307 using grding s inequality , implies @xmath308    let @xmath309 ; [ 0,1])$ ] with @xmath310 near @xmath311 $ ] . using the functional calculus for pseudodifferential operators , we can write @xmath312 note that the operator @xmath313 is uniformly bounded on @xmath207 . grding s inequality together with give @xmath314    adding , , and and using grding s inequality , we obtain @xmath315 combining the formulas and and the estimates , and , we get @xmath316 now , assume that @xmath317 $ ] and @xmath318 is small . we choose the parameters , in this order , @xmath319 , @xmath320 , @xmath321 then @xmath322 and finally @xmath289 with @xmath323 . then , for @xmath0 small enough , grding s inequality implies @xmath324    on the other hand , from , we have @xmath325 then , @xmath326 for all @xmath0 small enough . summing and @xmath327 times the square of , we obtain @xmath328 for @xmath329 fixed large enough . then , using @xmath330 with @xmath331 , we finally obtain @xmath332 since we can obtain the same way the same estimate for the adjoint @xmath333 , we get the lemma .    to prove the part @xmath114 of theorem [ aaa ] ( the resonance free zone ) , we will use in addition the following lemma .    _ [ e37 ] assume @xmath334 . under the assumptions of lemma [ e39 ] , we have @xmath335 _    since @xmath336 , gives @xmath337 since the support of @xmath247 does not intersect the support of the symbol of @xmath338 , we obtain @xmath339 moreover , working as in , @xmath340 we now rescale the variables as in @xcite and in the equation ( 4.18 ) of @xcite . we define a unitary transformation @xmath15 on @xmath279 by @xmath341 if @xmath342 is a symbol , then @xmath343 if possible , we will identify in the following an operator with its conjugation by @xmath15 . as in ( * ? ? ? * ( 4.24 ) ) , we define the class of symbols @xmath344 , for an order function @xmath345 , by @xmath346 we refer to the appendix of @xcite for the pseudodifferential calculus in @xmath347 . from ( * ( 4.23 ) ) , we have that @xmath348 . since @xmath349 , we also have @xmath350 . then , the pseudodifferential calculus in @xmath347 implies @xmath351 the same way , ( * ? ? ? * equation ( 4.38 ) ) gives @xmath352 . so , @xmath353 working in @xmath354 , we get @xmath355 since @xmath356 , ( * ? ? ? * equation ( 4.48 ) ) yields that @xmath357 . using caldern  vaillancourt s theorem for this operator , we finally obtain @xmath358 the lemma follows from , the choice of @xmath302 in lemma [ e39 ] and the estimates , , and . @xmath124    we first prove that holds for @xmath359 + i [ - c_{0 } h , c_{0 } h ] .\ ] ] here , @xmath360 is any fixed constant . we used a method due to tang and zworski @xcite . for @xmath361 + i [ - 2 c_{0 } h , 2 c_{0 } h]$ ] , the quantity @xmath302 can always be replaced by @xmath323 in lemma [ e39 ] ( see  ) . then , @xmath362 is holomorphic in this set and @xmath363 . as usual ( see section 4 of @xcite for instance ) , we can find an operator @xmath364 such that @xmath365 , @xmath366 and such that holds with @xmath367 replaced by @xmath364 . furthermore , thanks to remark  [ e40 ] , the resonances coincide with the poles of @xmath210 ( with the same multiplicity ) . mimicking the proof of proposition 4.2 of @xcite or lemma 6.5 of @xcite ( which are adaptations of lemma 1 of @xcite ) , the estimates and imply @xmath368 for some @xmath369 and any @xmath370 + i [ - c_{0 } h , c_{0 } h]$ ] . on the other hand , remark  [ e40 ] gives @xmath371 for some @xmath372 . this proves for @xmath370 + i [ - c_{0 } h , c_{0 } h]$ ] . thanks to theorem  [ e17 ] which describes all the resonances in any neighborhood of size @xmath0 of @xmath36 , it remains to prove that @xmath22 has no resonance in @xmath373 \setminus [ e_{0 } - a h , e_{0 } + a h ] \big ) + i [ - c_{0 } h , c_{0 } h ] , \ ] ] for one @xmath374 and that the resolvent satisfies in this region an upper bound polynomial with respect to @xmath11 . in particular , we can assume that @xmath334 . using lemma  [ e39 ] , lemma  [ e37 ] and @xmath375 , we get @xmath376 for some @xmath26 . then , summing the first identity with @xmath377 times the second one , we obtain @xmath378 since @xmath379 . if now we assume that @xmath380 , we get @xmath381 for @xmath382 large enough . thanks to remark  [ e40 ] , this implies that @xmath22 has no resonance in the region given in and that holds in this set . the purpose of this part is to give the asymptotic expansion of the generalized spectral projection @xmath383 associated to an isolated resonance @xmath384 in some @xmath385 . we recall that @xmath383 is the operator from @xmath386 to @xmath387 defined by @xmath388 where @xmath75 is a simple loop in the complex plane , oriented counterclockwise , such that @xmath384 is the only resonance in the bounded domain delimited by @xmath75 .    _ [ a2 ] assume [ a1][a3 ] . let @xmath83 be such that @xmath389 is simple . then , as operators from @xmath386 to @xmath387 , @xmath390 where @xmath391 and the function @xmath392 satisfies the following properties : _ @xmath114 it is locally uniformly in @xmath207 : for all @xmath393 , @xmath394    @xmath116 it satisfies the schrdinger equation : @xmath395    @xmath396 it is outgoing : there exists @xmath397 such that @xmath398    @xmath399 finally , locally near @xmath43 , we have @xmath400 where @xmath401 is a classical symbol satisfying @xmath402    we prove this result the following way . using @xcite , we compute @xmath403 for some well prepared wkb function @xmath404 and @xmath6 on a loop around the resonance @xmath384 . integrating with respect to @xmath6 , we get @xmath405 and thus the resonant state @xmath192 . to finish the proof , we obtain the constant @xmath406 computing @xmath407 by a stationary phase argument .    _ @xmath114 since @xmath192 is not necessarily in @xmath408 , saying `` @xmath409 microlocally near @xmath410 '' means that there exists @xmath411 with @xmath412 such that , for every @xmath413 , @xmath414 in @xmath415 . _    @xmath116 the properties @xmath114@xmath399 of theorem [ a2 ] characterize uniquely the resonant state @xmath392 modulo @xmath416 . in particular , the usual propagation of singularities implies that this function is a classical lagrangian distribution of order @xmath51 with lagrangian manifold @xmath417 .    for the punctual well in the island situation , the generalized spectral projection has been computed by helffer and sjstrand @xcite . in particular , they have proved that this operator is almost orthogonal . indeed , if the resonance @xmath6 is isolated and the cut - off @xmath418 is equal to @xmath419 near the well , then @xmath420 is exponentially close to the spectral projection associated to the dirichlet problem in the well and @xmath421 for some @xmath26 . the situation is very different in the present setting since , for @xmath422 , @xmath423 is of order @xmath424 .    from the previous discussion , the polynomial upper bound on the resolvent proved in theorem  [ aaa ] occurs effectively . more precisely , in every disc @xmath425 , with @xmath113 , the cut - off resolvent can not be bounded by anything smaller than @xmath426 for some @xmath427 . moreover , since @xmath428 , this constant can not be taken uniformly with respect to @xmath384 .    one may perhaps prove theorem [ a2 ] with other methods than the one we use here . in the one dimensional case , the resolvent can be written in term of a basis of solutions of @xmath429 and of their wronskian . thus , it must be possible to use the results of @xcite in which the scattering amplitude , which can be expressed through the wronskians of the jost solutions , has been computed . in any dimension , another approach is perhaps also possible . one may first try to calculate the resonant state @xmath192 with various methods ( using , for example , the works of briet , combes and duclos @xcite , sjstrand @xcite or hassell , melrose and vasy @xcite ) . it then remains to calculate the constant @xmath406 . this question is equivalent to the calculation of the scalar product @xmath430 . if we neglect the problems of integration at infinity , this calculation is reduced to a problem of stationary phase at point @xmath51 . but , since @xmath431 vanishes to order @xmath432 , the knowledge of @xmath433 is not enough and we must explicitly know the @xmath434 first terms in the expansion of @xmath192 in powers of @xmath0 . in this computation , the situation becomes , in a sense , similar to that of the eigenvectors of the harmonic oscillator for which the `` good variable '' is @xmath435 . however , this is not the case in theorem [ a2 ] since the factor @xmath436 in @xmath192 has modulus @xmath419 .    it may be possible to obtain some results when @xmath389 is not simple . in that case , various situations may occur : several resonances can be very close to each other , the resonances can have a non - trivial multiplicity and they can be multiple poles of the resolvent . we refer to ( * ? ? ? * section 4 ) where such phenomena are shown . in the remainder of this discussion , we consider the simplest case where a double resonance can appear . we assume that @xmath437 and that @xmath438 is a double resonance . then , near @xmath439 , the resolvent can be written @xmath440 where @xmath441 is holomorphic near @xmath439 . in that case , @xmath442 and @xmath443 . it seems possible to calculate @xmath444 with a proof similar to that of theorem [ a2 ] . using proposition  [ d10 ] , we can construct two initial data @xmath445 such that the microsupport of @xmath446 and @xmath447 intersect along a hamiltonian curve which goes to @xmath51 along the @xmath448-th vector basis . then , computing the residue of @xmath449 , we obtain that @xmath450 is of the form @xmath451 modulo a constant . in the following , we can neglect @xmath452 as it gives lower order terms . since @xmath453 and @xmath454 can not be collinear , @xmath455 ( resp . @xmath456 ) forms a basis of @xmath457 ( resp . @xmath458 ) . to finish the computation of @xmath444 , it is sufficient to calculate @xmath459 . the scalar products @xmath460 can be calculated as in the proof of theorem [ a2 ] . but , according to the choice of the @xmath446 s and to the form of the @xmath461 s , @xmath459 appears to be smaller when @xmath462 . eventually , in the @xmath455 and @xmath456 bases , the operator @xmath444 seems to be a @xmath463-matrix whose diagonal coefficients are given by at the first order and whose off - diagonal coefficients are of lower order . one can probably also say something about @xmath464 . but , one may need to calculate several lower order terms in the semiclassical expansions ( for the resonance for example ) . this operator seems to have a smaller norm .      @xmath124    [ a34 ]    to prove the theorem , it is enough to show that @xmath465 for @xmath418 . let @xmath466 be the spectral projection of @xmath71 at the resonance @xmath384 . it is the operator on @xmath207 defined by @xmath467 we now assume that the distortion occurs outside of the support of @xmath468 . in particular , @xmath469 . let @xmath470 be the anti - linear operator on @xmath279 defined by @xmath471 since @xmath22 is a schrdinger operator with a real potential , @xmath472 and a direct calculation gives @xmath473 . thus , @xmath466 can be written @xmath474 with @xmath475 . the same way , @xmath476 for some @xmath477 . moreover , from @xcite , we can always assume that @xmath478 . in particular , @xmath479 .    since @xmath389 is simple , for all @xmath480 ( where @xmath481 ) , @xmath482 with @xmath483 implies @xmath484 . then , from lemma [ d3 ] and proposition [ d10 ] , there exists a hamiltonian curve @xmath485 such that , for all @xmath480 , we have @xmath486 . we now construct the `` test functions '' , supported microlocally near the `` test curve '' @xmath487 , on which we will evaluate the spectral projection . let @xmath488 be a function defined in a vicinity of @xmath51 but not at @xmath51 . we assume that @xmath489 is a wkb solution of @xmath490 . more precisely , near the @xmath491-projection of @xmath492 , we have @xmath493 here @xmath494 is a @xmath148 function solving the eikonal equation @xmath495 . we assume that @xmath496 intersects transversely @xmath447 along @xmath487 . note that the construction of such a phase , whose associated lagrangian manifold projects nicely on the @xmath491-space in a vicinity of @xmath487 , can always be done thanks to ( * ? ? ? * proposition c.1 ) . the symbol @xmath497 is classical : for all @xmath498 , @xmath499 uniformly for @xmath500 . moreover , @xmath501 and the @xmath502 s are @xmath148 with respect to @xmath491 and analytic with respect to @xmath500 . finally , we assume that @xmath489 satisfies @xmath503 and @xmath504 near the @xmath491-projection of @xmath487 . for that , it is enough to solve the usual transport equations . finally , we suppose that @xmath505 outside a neighborhood of the spacial projection of @xmath487 . then , we set @xmath506 u , \ ] ] where @xmath507 with @xmath508 close to @xmath51 and @xmath509 near @xmath51 . we consider @xmath510 in all the proof of theorem [ a2 ] , we will work with @xmath6 in a ring @xmath511 such that @xmath389 is the unique element of @xmath512 in @xmath513 . note that theorem [ aaa ] implies that @xmath514 uniformly for @xmath515 , for some @xmath516 . @xmath124    we begin the proof by showing that @xmath517 is @xmath51 in the incoming region . more precisely , we have    _ [ a4 ] let @xmath518 be such that @xmath519 and @xmath520- \infty , 0 ] h_{p } ) ( \rho ) $ ] does not meet the microsupport of @xmath404 . then , @xmath521 microlocally near @xmath522 , uniformly in @xmath515 . _    this lemma can be proved as theorem 2 of @xcite . first , assume @xmath523 . using the elliptic equation @xmath524 , the norm estimates @xmath525 and the condition @xmath526 , the standard pseudodifferential calculus implies that @xmath527 . more precisely , for all @xmath528 with @xmath529 near @xmath36 , we have @xmath530 uniformly in @xmath515 . assume now that @xmath531 . from the hypotheses , the half - curve @xmath532 , @xmath533 , does not meet @xmath534 and goes to @xmath535 as @xmath536 . then , one can find a symbol @xmath537 such that @xmath538 near @xmath522 , @xmath539 , @xmath520- \infty , 0 ] h_{p } ) ( \supp \omega   ) $ ] does not meet @xmath540 and @xmath541 for some @xmath542 , @xmath543 and @xmath544 . here , @xmath545 . then , mimicking the proof of ( * ? ? ? * theorem 2 ) , we get @xmath546 , uniformly in @xmath515 . the unique difference with its proof is that the @xmath51 in the left hand side of ( * ? ? ? * ( 3.4 ) ) is replaced by @xmath416 ( here , we use that @xmath547 ) . we will now calculate @xmath517 on @xmath447 near @xmath51 . first , using @xmath548 , the previous lemma implies the following consequence .    _ [ a7 ] we have @xmath549 microlocally near each point of @xmath550 . _    on the other hand , near @xmath487 , we have the following lemma . note that the results of this lemma and of remark [ a7 ] are uniform for @xmath515 .    _ [ a6 ] let @xmath551 be a point close enough to @xmath51 . then , @xmath552 microlocally near @xmath522 . _ ( 0,0).,title="fig : " ]    # 1#2#3#4#5 @font    ( 12573,5760)(-1457,-5666 ) ( -1424,-2461)(0,0)[lb ] ( 1126,-2461)(0,0)[lb ] ( 5551,-886)(0,0)[lb ] ( 3151,-3586)(0,0)[lb ] ( 6376,-2161)(0,0)[lb ] ( 9676,-3136)(0,0)[lb ] ( 10126,-4411)(0,0)[lb ] ( 11101,-5611)(0,0)[lb ]    we define @xmath553 u \ , d t , \ ] ] where @xmath554 is chosen such that @xmath555 - \infty , 0 ] h_{p } ) ( \rho ) = \emptyset$ ] ( see figure  [ f1 ] ) . then , microlocally near each point of @xmath487 , we have @xmath556 u - e^{-i t ( p -z)/h } [ p , \tau ] u .\end{aligned}\ ] ] for the first equality , we have used that @xmath557 near the spacial projection of @xmath558 . thus , microlocally near @xmath487 , we have @xmath559 u .\ ] ] in particular , the choice of @xmath560 and the egorov theorem imply @xmath561 microlocally near @xmath520 - \infty , 0 ] h_{p } ) ( \rho ) $ ] . on the other hand , combining lemma [ a4 ] ( for @xmath517 ) and the egorov theorem ( for @xmath562 ) , we obtain @xmath563 microlocally near @xmath564 , for all @xmath565 large enough . using moreover that @xmath566 , the propagation of singularities implies that @xmath567    then , microlocally near @xmath522 , we have @xmath568 u \ , d t = \frac{i}{h } \int_{0}^{t } e^{-i t ( p - z ) /h } \big ( ( p - z ) \tau u   - \tau ( p -z ) u \big ) d t   \nonumber   \\ & = \frac{i}{h } \int_{0}^{t } e^{-i t ( p - z ) /h } ( p - z ) \tau u \ , d t = - e^{- i t ( p - z ) /h } \tau u + \tau u = u , \end{aligned}\ ] ] which proves the lemma . in fact , one can prove more directly lemma [ a4 ] and lemma [ a6 ] by applying the proof of theorem 2 of @xcite to the function @xmath569 . @xmath124    we will use the variable @xmath570 , the notation @xmath571 and the set @xmath572 . note that @xmath573 and @xmath574 does not depend on @xmath0 and @xmath575 . since @xmath509 near @xmath51 , we have @xmath576 u = 0 , \ ] ] in a neighborhood of @xmath51 . on the other hand , let @xmath577 with @xmath578 small enough . from remark [ a7 ] and lemma [ a6 ] , we have @xmath579 microlocally near @xmath522 . moreover @xmath580 . then , we are in position to apply theorem 2.1 and theorem 2.5 of @xcite which give a representation of @xmath517 microlocally near @xmath43 . more precisely , theorem 5.1 of @xcite states that , microlocally near @xmath43 , @xmath581 concerning the symbol @xmath582 , we will only use that @xmath583 is a holomorphic function of @xmath584 which decays uniformly exponentially in @xmath111 ( see ( * ? ? ? * proposition 5.11 ) ) . the constant @xmath585 is defined by @xmath586 for all @xmath587 . the symbol @xmath588 , holomorphic for @xmath589 , is constructed the following way . there exists an expandible symbol @xmath590 of the form @xmath591 where the @xmath592 s satisfy @xmath593 we refer to helffer and sjstrand @xcite for the definition of expandible functions . here , @xmath565 is defined by @xmath594 the symbols @xmath595 are holomorphic for @xmath596 . moreover , as in ( * ? ? ? * ( 6.26 ) ) , @xmath597 does not depend on @xmath111 ( and @xmath598 ) and @xmath599 with @xmath600 , @xmath601 being the spatial projection . let @xmath602 be the expandible function @xmath603 constructed in ( * ? ? ? * section 5 ) . recall that @xmath604 satisfies the eikonal equation @xmath605 we consider the expandible symbol ( see ( 5.77 ) of @xcite ) @xmath606 for some @xmath607 fixed large enough , @xmath608 then , @xmath609 is a symbol , holomorphic with respect to @xmath589 , such that @xmath610 for some @xmath611 large enough .    in the following , we will need some informations on the @xmath612 . let @xmath613 be such that @xmath614 or @xmath615 . since @xmath389 is simple , @xmath39 can not be written as a non - trivial combination of the @xmath616 s ( i.e. @xmath482 implies @xmath617 ) . therefore , calculating the term in @xmath618 of , we obtain @xmath619 working as in section 6.1 of @xcite ( see also ( 5.59 ) of @xcite for @xmath615 ) , one can prove that @xmath620 does not depend on @xmath111 ( i.e. @xmath621 ) , that @xmath622 and that @xmath623 since @xmath624 is collinear to the @xmath448-th vector of basis , we also denote this @xmath448-th component of the vector @xmath624 by @xmath624 . @xmath124    [ k9 ]    let @xmath75 be a fixed simple loop in @xmath574 around @xmath51 oriented counterclockwise and @xmath625 . we integrate @xmath517 on the loop @xmath626 . first , since @xmath384 is a simple resonance for @xmath0 small and since @xmath404 is a holomorphic function with respect to @xmath627 , the equations and give @xmath628    on the other hand , we can also calculate this quantity microlocally near @xmath43 with the help of . since @xmath629 is holomorphic in @xmath630 , the second term in the right hand side of gives no contribution to this integral . moreover , for @xmath631 , the function @xmath632 is holomorphic for @xmath633 . this implies that only the terms of with @xmath634 give a non - zero contribution to the integral over @xmath598 . we now look for the terms with @xmath634 in . among these terms , the one which gives the higher possible power of @xmath11 , is given by @xmath635 and is equal to @xmath636 here , we have used the fact that @xmath389 is simple . note that , since @xmath597 and @xmath637 , with @xmath614 , does not depend on @xmath111 ( see the discussion before ) , this term does not depend on @xmath111 . then , @xmath638 satisfies , as @xmath639 , @xmath640 where the @xmath641 s are holomorphic with respect to @xmath589 and @xmath148 with respect to @xmath491 near @xmath51 . the function @xmath642 is holomorphic in @xmath643 . moreover , @xmath644    using the previous discussion , together with and , we obtain that @xmath645 microlocally near @xmath646 . moreover , @xmath647    to be more precise , in the @xmath148 case , theorem 2.1 of @xcite gives only uniqueness for @xmath6 outside of a set @xmath648 , which is finite uniformly with respect to @xmath0 . then , to prove , we integrate first on a loop @xmath649 of length of order @xmath0 and which may depend on @xmath0 in a non trivial way . but , since the function @xmath517 is holomorphic in @xmath650 , we can deform the contour @xmath651 to @xmath626 and thus justify . @xmath124    [ a46 ]    we define the functions @xmath652 and @xmath653 by @xmath654 where , using the notation @xmath655 , @xmath656 as usual , we have @xmath657 if the distortion holds outside of the support of @xmath8 . from , @xmath652 ( resp . @xmath653 ) is in the image of @xmath383 ( resp . @xmath466 ) . moreover , using ( which gives that @xmath658 ) , , , , and , we have , microlocally near @xmath43 , @xmath659 where @xmath660 is a classical symbol satisfying @xmath661 in particular , @xmath652 is not identically zero . then , @xmath383 can be written as @xmath662 and @xmath652 satisfies @xmath399 of theorem [ a2 ] . furthermore , using lemma  [ a4 ] , integrating over @xmath6 and coming back to the definition of @xmath652 ( see ) , we immediately obtain the point @xmath396 of theorem  [ a2 ] . since @xmath652 is in the image of @xmath383 which is the spectral projection at a simple resonance , the point @xmath116 of theorem  [ a2 ] is clear . combining @xmath396 , @xmath399 , , which gives a uniform bound outside of the energy level , together with `` the transport equation '' @xmath116 , we get the point @xmath114 by a standard argument of propagation of singularities . @xmath124    [ a53 ]    here we calculate the scalar product between @xmath664 and @xmath665 . from and , the function @xmath404 is supported near @xmath666 and micro - supported near @xmath667 . then , if @xmath508 is close enough to @xmath51 , the previous section and imply that @xmath668 b e^{i \psi /h } , \overline{\widetilde{d } e^{i \varphi_{+ } /h } } \big ) + \co ( h^{\infty } ) .\ ] ] a direct calculus gives @xmath669 \big ( b e^{i \psi /h } \big ) = \widetilde{b } ( x , h ) e^{i \psi ( x ) /h},\ ] ] with @xmath670 then , using that @xmath671 , we get @xmath672    the critical points of the phase @xmath673 ( i.e. the points @xmath491 such that @xmath674 ) are the points in the spatial projection of @xmath675 . moreover , since this intersection is transversal , the phase function @xmath673 is non degenerate in the directions that are transverse to @xmath676 ( @xmath601 being the spatial projection ) . then , applying the method of the stationary phase in the orthogonal directions of @xmath676 ( written @xmath677 ) and parameterizing the curve @xmath676 by @xmath678 , gives @xmath679 with @xmath680 and @xmath681 from , we have @xmath682 for all @xmath683 . in particular , can be written @xmath684 with @xmath685    from and , we have @xmath686 using , we have the transport equation @xmath687 which gives @xmath688 on the other hand , since @xmath689 is @xmath148 and @xmath678 is expandible , the function @xmath690 is expandible . moreover , since @xmath39 can not be written as a non - trivial combination of the @xmath616 s , the taylor expansion of @xmath637 shows that the term in @xmath691 in the expansion of @xmath692 is @xmath693 . since gives another asymptotic expansion , the uniqueness of the development implies that @xmath694 then , combining with , we obtain @xmath695 note here that the curve @xmath487 has been chosen in section [ a34 ] such that @xmath696 .    from the construction of @xmath489 in and since @xmath384 is a classical symbol ( see remark [ k1 ] ) with @xmath697 , the function @xmath698 satisfies the usual transport equation @xmath699 mimicking the proof of , we get @xmath700 therefore , gives @xmath701    from proposition c.1 of @xcite and since @xmath702 , we have @xmath703 using @xmath704 , we get @xmath705 and @xmath706 for @xmath111 large enough .    finally , using the expansion of @xmath707 , we have @xmath708    combining the definitions of @xmath709 and of @xmath710 with the relations , , , and , the constant @xmath709 does not vanish if @xmath711 and the support of @xmath712 is sufficiently small near @xmath560 large enough . @xmath124    [ a57 ]    from and , we have @xmath713 in particular , using and , we get @xmath714 with @xmath715    at this point , the function @xmath652 and the constant @xmath716 may depend on @xmath404 . nevertheless , since @xmath717 and @xmath718 ( the first term in the development of @xmath652 given in ) do not depend on @xmath404 , the constant @xmath719 also does not depend on @xmath404 . we choose a sequence of functions @xmath720 ( say @xmath721 ) , with @xmath722 , such that @xmath723 converges to the dirac mass @xmath724 for some fixed @xmath725 . then , from the definition of @xmath709 and of @xmath726 , we get @xmath727 combining , , , , and , we obtain @xmath728 then , letting @xmath111 going to @xmath729 and using that @xmath719 does not depend on @xmath111 , it follows @xmath730    we now consider a fixed @xmath404 as in the beginning of this subsection . with @xmath731 as in , gives that @xmath732 where @xmath733 now , we define @xmath734 . then , gives and the properties of @xmath192 given in theorem  [ a2 ] follow from the properties of @xmath652 given in section  [ a46 ] and @xmath735 . in this section , we give the semiclassical expansion of the residue of the scattering amplitude at an isolated resonance . to define the scattering matrix , we assume that the potential is long range :    [ h7 ] for some @xmath736 , we have @xmath737 for all @xmath738 . using the constructions of isozaki and kitada ( see @xcite and @xcite ) , the assumption [ h7 ] allows to define the scattering matrix @xmath739 , @xmath740 0 , + \infty [ $ ] related to the pair @xmath741 and @xmath22 as a unitary operator @xmath742 in the short range case ( i.e. @xmath743 ) , this operator coincides with the usual scattering matrix . next , introduce the operator @xmath744 defined by @xmath745 its kernel @xmath746 is smooth away from the diagonal of @xmath747 ( see @xcite ) . here , @xmath748 ( resp . @xmath749 ) is called the outgoing ( resp . incoming ) direction . finally , the scattering amplitude is defined for @xmath750 by @xmath751 with @xmath752 in @xcite , grard and martinez have shown that for @xmath750 fixed , the scattering amplitude has a meromorphic continuation to a neighborhood of @xmath7530 , + \infty [ $ ] , whose poles are the resonances of @xmath22 . moreover , the multiplicity of each pole is less or equal to the multiplicity of the resonance . notice that , since the kernel of the residue of the scattering matrix is not singular at @xmath754 ( see theorem 1.1 ( iii ) of @xcite ) , we drop the assumption @xmath750 in the sequel . we will now make some hypotheses on the behavior of the classical curves . let @xmath755 be a hamiltonian curve in @xmath756 . under the hypotheses [ a1][h7 ] , there are only two possible behaviors for @xmath678 as @xmath757 : either it escapes to @xmath758 , or it goes to @xmath51 . from the long range assumption [ h7 ] , if @xmath678 escapes to @xmath535 , then @xmath759 has a limit in @xmath760 . moreover the set of points with asymptotic direction @xmath748 and @xmath749 , @xmath761 are lagrangian submanifolds of @xmath186 ( see @xcite ) . we suppose that    [ h8 ] @xmath762 and @xmath47 ( resp . @xmath763 and @xmath48 ) intersect in a finite number @xmath764 ( resp @xmath765 ) of bicharacteristic curves , with each intersection transverse . we denote these curves , respectively , @xmath766 and @xmath767 note that , from proposition  2.5 of @xcite , the intersections @xmath768 and @xmath769 are never empty ( i.e. @xmath770 and @xmath771 ) . from @xcite , the curve @xmath772 with @xmath773 satisfies @xmath774 from lemma  [ d3 ] , if @xmath39 satisfies @xmath775 , then @xmath776 . moreover , there always exists a @xmath777 such that @xmath778 . we define @xmath779 we know that @xmath780 is one of the @xmath39 s and that @xmath776 ( see ( * ? ? ? * ( 2.18 ) ) ) . we shall denote @xmath781 for some @xmath782 large enough which is equal to @xmath729 in the short range case @xmath783 . moreover , in the short range case @xmath783 , the bicharacteristic curves in @xmath784 , @xmath785 , are the bicharacteristic curves @xmath786 for which there exists a @xmath787 such that @xmath788 these trajectories are smooth with respect to @xmath789 . we denote by @xmath790 the impact parameter of the curve @xmath772 . let @xmath791 be the maslov determinants for @xmath772 which exist and satisfy @xmath792 ( see @xcite ) . we shall also denote by @xmath793 the maslov index of the curve @xmath772 . _ [ a47 ] assume [ a1][h8 ] . let @xmath83 be such that @xmath389 is simple . then , the residue of the scattering amplitude satisfies @xmath794 where @xmath795 moreover , @xmath796 if and only if @xmath797 . finally , in the short range case @xmath743 , we have @xmath798 _    in the last formula @xmath799 is a shorthand for @xmath800 where @xmath801 is identified with its @xmath448-th coordinate . to prove the theorem , we first obtain a representation formula for the scattering amplitude involving the resolvent . then we apply theorem [ a2 ] to express the residue of the scattering amplitude with the help of the resonant state @xmath192 . finally , the result follows from the computation of two scalar products which are done with the stationary phase method .    _ stefanov @xcite ( in the compact support case ) and michel @xcite ( in the long range case ) have given a priori estimates for the residue of the scattering amplitude . for the resonances @xmath802 very close to the real axis ( more precisely @xmath803 ) and under a separation condition , they have proved that the residue satisfies @xmath804 in the present situation , these results do not apply since the resonances are `` too far '' from the real axis . furthermore , the previous estimate does not hold . indeed , the imaginary part of @xmath384 behaves like @xmath805 but the residue is typically of order @xmath806 . _    in the one dimensional case , theorem [ a47 ] can probably be deduced from the computation of the scattering amplitude obtained by the third author in @xcite .    for a punctual well in the island case and under some geometrical assumptions , the asymptotic of the residue of the scattering amplitude has been computed by nakamura @xcite , lahmar - benbernou @xcite and lahmar - benbernou and martinez @xcite . it is possible to compare theorem [ a47 ] with the semiclassical expansion of the scattering amplitude for real energy obtained in @xcite . assume for simplicity that the @xmath39 s are non - resonant ( @xmath807-independent for example ) , @xmath808 , @xmath809 , @xmath810 and @xmath811 for all @xmath613 . in particular , we have @xmath812 . let @xmath813 be the first @xmath448 with @xmath814 ( thus , @xmath815 ) . in that case , theorem 2.6 ( a ) of @xcite gives @xmath816 for @xmath21 real with @xmath817 . here , @xmath818 and @xmath819 is an explicit function , analytic near @xmath36 . thus , the main term in , defined in @xcite for @xmath21 real , has a meromorphic extension in a fix neighborhood of @xmath36 . moreover , its poles are exactly the pseudo - resonances @xmath820 with @xmath821 and the corresponding residue coincides with that given in theorem [ a47 ] . in particular , this principal term does not contribute to the residue at the other ( pseudo)-resonances . the cases ( b ) and ( c ) in theorem 2.6 of @xcite only appear for resonant @xmath39 s and the corresponding main terms in the semiclassical expansion of the scattering amplitude have poles at some @xmath820 which are not simple . @xmath124    in this section , we recall a representation formula of the scattering amplitude for complex energies due to grard and martinez @xcite . their approach consists in extending the formula of isozaki and kitada @xcite to complex energies . for this purpose , they show that the phases and the symbols involved in that formula can be chosen to be analytic in a suitable complex neighborhood of @xmath822 . we only recall what will be useful in the following and refer to @xcite for the details .    for @xmath823 large enough , @xmath824 , @xmath113 and @xmath8250 , 1[$ ] , we denote @xmath826 let @xmath113 , @xmath827 , @xmath828 and @xmath829 be sufficiently large . for @xmath830 , we denote @xmath831 . in @xcite , grard and martinez construct some phases @xmath832 and some symbols @xmath833 satisfying the general assumptions of isozaki and kitada @xcite and the following properties . the phases @xmath834 have a holomorphic extension to @xmath835 and satisfy @xmath836 uniformly in @xmath835 . moreover , @xmath837 .    there exist two symbols @xmath838 supported inside @xmath839 , with @xmath840 such that @xmath841 moreover , for some @xmath578 with @xmath842 , we have @xmath843 for @xmath844 . finally , they extend holomorphically with respect to @xmath845 and @xmath846 for @xmath847 in @xmath848 and @xmath849 in a complex neighborhood of @xmath850 . furthermore , their extensions continue to satisfy estimates analogous to the previous ones . the symbols @xmath851 are then defined by @xmath852 and satisfy , for some @xmath853 , @xmath854 uniformly with respect to @xmath0 and @xmath855 .    under the assumption [ h7 ] , grard and martinez @xcite have proved that the scattering amplitude can be written @xmath856 where @xmath857 has a holomorphic extension in a ( fixed ) neighborhood of @xmath36 , @xmath858 and @xmath859 by assumption , the resonance @xmath384 is simple for @xmath0 small enough . moreover , theorem [ aaa ] implies that @xmath860 for @xmath117 and some @xmath861 . then lemma 5.4 of @xcite ( see also proposition 5.1 of @xcite in the case of a well in the island ) states that @xmath862 where @xmath418 satisfies @xmath863 with @xmath864 . in particular , there is no distortion ( i.e. @xmath865 ) on the support of @xmath468 and theorem [ a2 ] implies @xmath866 where @xmath867 with @xmath731 given by . @xmath124    [ a68 ]    we will calculate the scalar product @xmath868 by the stationary phase method . first , we will prove that this quantity has an asymptotic expansion in power of @xmath0 and then calculate the first term using a limit at the origin . we will use arguments close to the ones developed in section [ a53 ] or ( * ? ? ? * section 7 ) . ( 0,0 ) and @xmath869.,title="fig : " ]    # 1#2#3#4#5 @font    ( 10023,8033)(811,-7611 ) ( 9151,-286)(0,0)[lb ] ( 5851,-4636)(0,0)[lb ] ( 9376,-2011)(0,0)[lb ] ( 826,-361)(0,0)[rb ] ( 901,-1486)(0,0)[rb ] ( 901,-2761)(0,0)[rb ]    @xmath870    ( 0,0 ) and @xmath869.,title="fig : " ]    # 1#2#3#4#5 @font    ( 10023,8033)(811,-7611 ) ( 9151,-286)(0,0)[lb ] ( 5851,-4636)(0,0)[lb ] ( 826,-361)(0,0)[rb ] ( 901,-1486)(0,0)[rb ] ( 901,-2761)(0,0)[rb ] ( 9376,-2011)(0,0)[lb ]    denote @xmath871 and @xmath872 . from theorem [ a2 ] @xmath116 and , we have @xmath873 u \big ) = - \big ( f , [ p , \chi ] u \big ) .\ ] ] from and the choice of @xmath468 , @xmath874 microlocally near @xmath875 . moreover , since @xmath384 has an asymptotic expansion in power of @xmath0 , we can write , microlocally near @xmath875 , @xmath876 where @xmath877 has an asymptotic expansion in power of @xmath0 . note that @xmath878 . using maslov s theory , we can extend the function @xmath489 near @xmath879 , a small neighborhood of @xmath880 , such that @xmath489 is still a solution of @xmath881 microlocally in @xmath879 . let @xmath882 be such that @xmath883 out of @xmath879 ( see figure  [ f2 ] ) . in particular , @xmath884 microlocally near the support of @xmath885 . so , we have @xmath886 u \big ) - \big ( ( p - z_{\alpha } ) f , \op ( \chi - \widetilde{\chi } ) u \big ) + \big(f , \op ( \chi - \widetilde{\chi } ) ( p - \overline{z_{\alpha } } )   u \big )    \nonumber \\ = & - \big ( f , [ p , \op ( \widetilde{\chi } ) ] u \big ) + \co ( h^{\infty } ) . \end{aligned}\ ] ]    on the other hand , since @xmath887 , the microsupport of @xmath888 u$ ] satisfies @xmath889 u \big ) & \subset \lambda_{\varphi_{1 } ( \cdot , \sqrt{e_{0 } } \omega ) } \cap \supp \nabla \widetilde{\chi }    \\ & \subset \big ( \lambda^{-}_{\omega } \cap \gamma^{- } ( r_{1 } , d , \sigma^{-}_{1 } /2 ) \big ) \cup \big ( \lambda^{+}_{\omega } \cap \omega \big ) .\end{aligned}\ ] ] moreover , theorem  [ a2 ] gives @xmath890 . then , modulo @xmath891 , the non - zero contributions to @xmath892 u ) $ ] comes from the values of the functions @xmath192 and @xmath888 u$ ] microlocally on the set @xmath893 ( which constitute the intersection of the two microsupports ) . let @xmath894 be @xmath895 functions with support in a small enough neighborhood of @xmath896 such that @xmath897 in a similar neighborhood . then , becomes @xmath898 u \big ) + \co ( h^{\infty } ) .\ ] ]    we now compute @xmath899 u$ ] . from proposition c.1 of @xcite , the lagrangian manifold @xmath900 has a nice projection with respect to @xmath491 in a neighborhood of any point of @xmath901 close to @xmath43 . then , maslov s theory implies that @xmath489 can be written as @xmath902 microlocally in such a neighborhood . from the construction of @xcite and @xcite , we see that @xmath903 for some @xmath904 large enough ( equal to @xmath729 in the short range case ) . the symbol @xmath905 has an asymptotic expansion @xmath906 with @xmath907 . moreover , in the short range case , equation ( 7.12 ) of @xcite gives @xmath908 where @xmath909 is the maslov index of the curve @xmath901 and @xmath910 is the maslov s determinant @xmath911 moreover , from section 6 of @xcite , we know that @xmath912 exists and satisfies @xmath913 . so , @xmath914 u = \widetilde{a}_{\ell}^{+ } ( x , h ) e^{i \psi_{\ell}^{+ } ( x ) /h } , \ ] ] with @xmath915 and @xmath916    since the support of @xmath917 is close enough to @xmath43 , theorem  [ a2 ] @xmath399 and imply that @xmath918 we proceed now as in . in the support of the symbol @xmath919 , the critical points of the phase function @xmath920 ( i.e. the points @xmath491 such that @xmath921 ) are the points in the spacial projection of @xmath901 . since this intersection @xmath922 is transverse from the assumption [ h8 ] , the phase @xmath920 is non degenerate in the directions transverse to @xmath923 . therefore , performing the method of the stationary phase in the orthogonal directions of @xmath924 ( as in ) and parameterizing the curve @xmath924 by @xmath925 , gives @xmath926 with @xmath927 and @xmath928    since @xmath929 , @xmath930 and @xmath931 have the same derivative ( with respect to @xmath111 ) , and gives @xmath932 for all @xmath933 . then , combining with , we get @xmath934 with @xmath935 and @xmath936    from , @xmath937 does not depend on @xmath869 , modulo @xmath938 . in particular , changing @xmath869 in a neighborhood of a fixed curve @xmath901 , we obtain that each @xmath939 does not depend on @xmath869 . from proposition  c.1 of @xcite , we have , up to a linear change of variables in @xmath12 , @xmath940 where @xmath941 is such that @xmath942 . since @xmath943 as expandible symbol ( see ( * ? ? ? * definition 5.2 ) ) , this implies @xmath944 as @xmath536 . on the other hand , gives @xmath945    we first consider the long range case ( @xmath946 ) . if @xmath947 , then and imply that @xmath948 . we will now prove that @xmath949 if @xmath950 . let @xmath951 be sufficiently large such that the quantities in , and do not vanish and holds at @xmath952 . then , if @xmath953 satisfies @xmath954 and has its support close enough to @xmath560 , the previous discussion , @xmath955 and imply that @xmath949 . let us now consider the short range case ( @xmath783 ) . assume that the support of @xmath956 is sufficiently negative . then , the formula and the estimates , , , , and give @xmath957 where the @xmath958 does not depend on @xmath869 . now , we take a sequence of functions @xmath869 such that the support of @xmath959 goes to @xmath960 and @xmath961 ( see figure  [ f2 ] ) . since @xmath939 does not depend on @xmath869 , the previous expression gives @xmath962      @xmath124    following the approach of section [ a68 ] , one can prove that @xmath963 with @xmath964 and @xmath965 if and only if @xmath966 . moreover , in the short range case , we have @xmath967 then , combining the representation of the residue given in with the constants given in and , and the scalar products and , we obtain @xmath968 with @xmath969 and @xmath970 if and only if @xmath971 . moreover , in the short range case , and imply @xmath972 in this section , we prove a resonance expansion for the cut - off schrdinger propagator . the proof relies on the resolvent estimate in theorem [ aaa ] and on standard arguments .    _ [ c1 ] assume [ a1][a3 ] . let @xmath973 be different from @xmath82 for all @xmath83 . let @xmath418 and @xmath974 ) $ ] for some @xmath135 small enough . then , there exists @xmath975 such that @xmath976 for all @xmath933 . in particular , if all the @xmath389 in @xmath977 are simple , we have @xmath978 for all @xmath933 . here , @xmath383 is the generalized spectral projection associated to @xmath384 and described in theorem  [ a2 ] . _    _ note that the previous expansions make sense only for @xmath979 . _    one might think that the resonance expansion holds for shorter times . but , in fact , it is not possible to do much better . this follows from the paper of de bivre and robert @xcite which is stated with slightly different hypotheses . in the one dimensional case , they have proved that the coherent states propagate through a maximum of the potential for times of order @xmath980 and that they stay at @xmath43 before . on the other hand , the sum of the generalized spectral projections over the resonances appearing in theorem  [ c1 ] can not be microlocalized only at @xmath43 thanks to theorem  [ a2 ] . thus , if the resonance expansion with a small error holds at time @xmath933 , we have necessarily @xmath981 in the one dimensional case . if we only want to prove that @xmath982 as @xmath639 , we can more simply apply the standard propagation of singularities with an initial data microlocalized in @xmath983 . there is also a simplest way to justify this phenomena . let @xmath68 be such that @xmath984 . then , @xmath802 is the unique resonance in @xmath985 for @xmath0 small enough and @xmath986 is always simple . assume that , for some @xmath933 , we can write @xmath987 where @xmath988 is small . the left hand side is of order @xmath419 since the propagator is unitary . on the other hand , from theorem [ e17 ] and theorem [ a2 ] , the right hand side is of order @xmath989 . then , implies @xmath990 . remark that this critical time coincides with the one obtained by de bivre and robert in the one dimensional case . the situation is different for the well in the island case which was treated by nakamura , stefanov and zworski @xcite . in that setting , the cut - off schrdinger group is well approximated by the resonance expansion after a fix time . this is in adequacy with the geometrical interpretation since a fix time is enough to dispel the part of the initial data which is not localized in the well . nevertheless , grard and sigal @xcite have proved that the schrdinger equation with a quasiresonant state ( sorts of quasimodes ) as initial data is always well approximated by the resonance expansion for all time @xmath933 . _ when @xmath991 as @xmath639 , the sum over the resonances is negligible and theorem [ c1 ] simply yields @xmath992 . _    the remainder terms @xmath938 in theorem [ c1 ] come from the @xmath148 pseudodifferential calculus . thus , if the cut - off functions @xmath993 are in some gevrey class , it is perhaps possible to replace these remainder terms by @xmath994 for some @xmath578 . in that case , the sum over the resonances will dominate the remainders until @xmath111 is of order @xmath995 . burq and zworski @xcite ( see also tang and zworski @xcite ) have obtained a long time expansion of semiclassical propagators in terms of resonances close to the real axis . their result in the present situation gives @xmath992 for all @xmath996 for some @xmath997 . let @xmath998)$ ] be such that @xmath999 near @xmath1000 $ ] . then , from the pseudodifferential calculus , we get @xmath1001 where @xmath1002 , the spectral projection , is given by the stone formula @xmath1003 and @xmath1004 is analytic for @xmath1005 . then , @xmath1006 making a change of contour , we obtain @xmath1007 where @xmath1008 and @xmath1009 - \infty , e_{0 } - 2 \varepsilon ] $ ] , @xmath1010 $ ] , @xmath1011 - i \mu h$ ] , @xmath1012 $ ] and @xmath1013 ( see figure  [ f3 ] ) . the theorem will follow from the estimates on the @xmath1014 s given below . ( 0,0).,title="fig : " ]    # 1#2#3#4#5 @font    ( 10844,3266)(504,-6405 ) ( 2401,-5311)(0,0)[lb ] ( 2101,-3661)(0,0)[lb ] ( 9001,-3661)(0,0)[lb ] ( 5701,-6061)(0,0)[lb ] ( 4501,-3286)(0,0)[lb ] ( 3901,-5461)(0,0)[lb ] ( 8701,-5461)(0,0)[lb ] ( 5776,-4561)(0,0)[lb ]    @xmath212 estimations of @xmath1015 and @xmath1016 . using that @xmath1017 , there exists @xmath1018 such that @xmath1019 near @xmath1020 and @xmath1021 near @xmath1022 . then , by pseudodifferential calculus , @xmath1023 . therefore , yields @xmath1024 the same way , we get @xmath1025 . @xmath212 estimations of @xmath1026 . using theorem [ aaa ] for @xmath1027 , we obtain @xmath1028    @xmath212 estimations of @xmath1029 and @xmath1030 . let @xmath117 be as in theorem [ aaa ] and assume that the distortion occurs outside of the support of @xmath468 . then , @xmath1031 and @xmath1032 . in particular , we can write @xmath1033 let @xmath1034 be such that @xmath1035 near @xmath1036 and @xmath1037 near @xmath1022 ( see figure [ f4 ] ) . then , for @xmath1038 , @xmath1039 therefore becomes @xmath1040 where @xmath1041    ( 0,0 ) , @xmath223 and @xmath494.,title="fig : " ]    # 1#2#3#4#5 @font    ( 13469,3421)(-696,-4625 ) ( 376,-2461)(0,0)[lb ] ( 2926,-4561)(0,0)[lb ] ( 6526,-4561)(0,0)[lb ] ( 10576,-4561)(0,0)[lb ] ( -674,-4561)(0,0)[lb ] ( 8026,-2461)(0,0)[lb ] ( 5026,-2461)(0,0)[lb ]    since @xmath223 and @xmath494 have disjoint support , the pseudodifferential calculus gives @xmath1042 . thus , theorem [ aaa ] implies @xmath1043 since @xmath1044 for @xmath1038 .    on the other hand , @xmath1045 and @xmath1046 uniformly in @xmath1038 . moreover , @xmath1047 is a differential operator whose coefficients are supported outside of the support of @xmath468 . then , the microlocal analysis gives @xmath1048 uniformly in @xmath1038 . combining this estimate with theorem [ aaa ] , we get @xmath1049    using and to estimate , we conclude @xmath1050 . the same way , we have @xmath1051 . in this section , we construct hamiltonian curves in @xmath447 with a prescribed asymptotic expansion at infinity . they are used in section [ a1 ] , where test functions for the projection are built in a microlocal neighborhood of these curves . we will work on @xmath447 , but the same work can be done in @xmath417 . let @xmath1052 be a hamiltonian curve in @xmath447 . from ( * section 3 ) , the curve @xmath487 satisfies , in the sense of expandible functions , @xmath1053 the spectrum of @xmath42 is @xmath1054 . we denote by @xmath1055 the spectral projection on the eigenspace of @xmath42 associated to @xmath1056 . remark that @xmath1057      we have @xmath1062 . taking the taylor expansion of @xmath44 at @xmath51 , we get @xmath1063 where @xmath1064 is a polynomial of order @xmath223 and @xmath1065 . since @xmath39 can not be written as the sum of at least two terms @xmath1066 , the cross products @xmath1064 in the previous formula provide no term of the form @xmath618 . then , @xmath1067 which can be written @xmath1068 if @xmath1069 , the previous equation , together with , gives a contradiction thus , @xmath1060 and @xmath1061 from . we construct the coefficients @xmath1073 inductively . using the taylor expansion of @xmath44 at @xmath51 as in , one can see that it is enough to find @xmath1073 , @xmath1074 , such that @xmath1075 where the @xmath1076 depend only on the @xmath1077 for @xmath1078 . assume that the @xmath1077 have been chosen to satisfy for all @xmath1079 and for all @xmath1080 .    if @xmath1081 , then it is enough to take @xmath1082 , @xmath1083 and , for @xmath1084 , @xmath1085 if @xmath1086 for some @xmath448 , then we take @xmath1087 and @xmath1088 here , @xmath1089 is the inverse of the map @xmath1090 . with these choices , and are always verified .      let @xmath1093 where the @xmath1094 are given by lemma [ d6 ] and @xmath1095 will be fixed ulteriorly . since is verified for all @xmath1096 , we have @xmath1097 with @xmath1098 . we seek a solution of the form @xmath1099 . then , @xmath1100 must satisfies @xmath1101 let @xmath1102 be such that @xmath1103 and @xmath1104 for all @xmath1105 . we define inductively @xmath1106 by @xmath1107      define @xmath1111 we will prove the lemma inductively . first , @xmath710 satisfies . assume now that @xmath1112 exists on @xmath1109 and verifies . in particular , @xmath1113 for @xmath1105 . then , gives @xmath1114 for @xmath1105 . therefore , if @xmath1115 , @xmath1116 satisfies and the lemma follows .                using standard arguments , lemma [ d14 ] provides us with a function @xmath1129 satisfying @xmath116 . then , part @xmath114 follows directly from lemma [ d11 ] . on the other hand , @xmath1130 as @xmath1131 . then , taking the limit @xmath1131 in , we obtain @xmath1132 thus , @xmath1124 and @xmath1127 satisfies @xmath1128 . to finish the proof of proposition [ d10 ] , we impose in addition that @xmath1133 . then , the function @xmath487 of lemma [ d16 ] is a hamiltonian curve in @xmath447 and , since @xmath1134 , lemma  [ d6 ] assures that @xmath1135 for all @xmath1071 . p.  briet , j .- combes , and p.  duclos , _ on the location of resonances for schrdinger operators in the semiclassical limit . i. resonances free domains _ , j. math . * 126 * ( 1987 ) , no .  1 , 9099 .    p.  briet , j .- combes , and p.  duclos , _ on the location of resonances for schrdinger operators in the semiclassical limit ii : barrier top resonances _ , comm . in partial differential equations * 2 * ( 1987 ) , no .  12 , 201222 . j.  sjstrand , _ semiclassical resonances generated by nondegenerate critical points _ , pseudodifferential operators ( oberwolfach , 1986 ) , lecture notes in math . , vol . 1256 , springer , berlin , 1987 , pp . 402429 . j.  sjstrand , _ a trace formula and review of some estimates for resonances _ , microlocal analysis and spectral theory ( lucca , 1996 ) , nato adv . 490 , kluwer acad . publ . , dordrecht , 1997 , pp .
Abstract:

Answer: we study the spectral projection associated to a barrier - top resonance for the semiclassical schrdinger operator . first , we prove a resolvent estimate for complex energies close to such a resonance . using that estimate and an explicit representation of the resonant states , we show that the spectral projection has a semiclassical expansion in integer powers of @xmath0 , and compute its leading term . we use this result to compute the residue of the scattering amplitude at such a resonance . eventually , we give an expansion for large times of the schrdinger group in terms of these resonances .