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 abelian sandpile model and rotor - routing model are combinatorial models of various dynamics on graphs that were rediscovered several times in several different communities , ranging from combinatorics to self - organized criticality , arithmetic geometry , and algorithms . ( for example , @xcite ; see @xcite for more details and references . ) the stable configurations in the abelian sandpile model on a graph @xmath1 form a group called the sandpile group or the critical group of @xmath1 ; it is also known as the picard group of the graph , which we will denote @xmath0 in analogy with the picard group of a riemann surface . it has long been known that the order of @xmath0 is equal to the number of spanning trees of @xmath1 ( see , e.g. , @xcite and references therein ) . indeed , this is a form of kirchoff s matrix  tree theorem . a natural first question to ask , then , is whether there is a canonical bijection between the elements of @xmath0 and the spanning trees of @xmath1 . what does `` canonical '' mean here ? at the very least , we should require that the bijection be invariant under automorphisms of @xmath1 , for certainly it should nt depend on what we name the vertices and edges . but there is clearly no such bijection : many graphs , e.g.  a complete graph or an @xmath2-cycle , do nt even have a distinguished spanning tree that could correspond to the identity element of @xmath0 .    so it is natural to ask instead for the next best thing : _ is there a canonical free , transitive action of the sandpile group on the set of spanning trees ? _ in other words , is there a canonical @xmath0-torsor structure on the set of spanning trees of @xmath1 ? by `` canonical , '' we still mean an action that is invariant under automorphisms of @xmath1 . such an action would give a bijection between the sandpile group and the set of spanning trees , once we decide on a spanning tree that corresponds to the identity element . but this is still too much to ask for . for example , consider the graph @xmath1 with two vertices and @xmath2 parallel edges between them . the sandpile group @xmath0 is cyclic of order @xmath2 , and each edge of @xmath1 is itself a spanning tree . so an automorphism - invariant action of @xmath3 amounts to an automorphism - invariant cyclic ordering of the edges , which clearly does not exist . this example , and others like it , suggest that we might hope for a free transitive action that is canonically defined on @xmath1 once we ve fixed the additional structure of a cyclic ordering of the edges incident to each vertex . a graph together with such a system of cyclic orderings is called a _ ribbon graph _ ( or sometimes `` combinatorial embedding '' ) . we therefore arrive at the following question . [ q : intro ] is there a free and transitive action of @xmath0 on the spanning trees of @xmath1 that is invariant under automorphisms preserving a ribbon graph structure on @xmath1 ? holroyd _ et al . _ @xcite gave one possible way to answer question  [ q : intro ] . given a ribbon graph _ and _ a choice of a basepoint vertex , they used rotor - routing to define a free and transitive action of @xmath0 on the spanning trees of @xmath1 . this action is explained in section  2 . therefore an affirmative answer to question  [ q : intro ] would follow if one could prove that the basepoint in the construction of holroyd _ et al _ is unnecessary . in other words , we have the following question , which to our knowledge was first asked by ellenberg @xcite : does the rotor - routing action of @xmath0 on the spanning trees of @xmath1 depend on the choice of basepoint ?    in this paper we prove that if @xmath1 is a _ planar _ ribbon graph , then miraculously , the action defined by rotor routing is independent of the basepoint and hence canonical . furthermore , we show that this characterization is tight : only planar ribbon graphs have this property . our main theorem is thus :    [ theorem : main ] let @xmath1 be a connected ribbon graph . the action of the sandpile group @xmath0 on the set @xmath4 of spanning trees is independent of the choice of basepoint vertex if and only if @xmath1 is a planar ribbon graph . the proof is based on three key ideas . first , the rotor - routing action of the sandpile group on spanning trees can be partially modeled via _ rotor - routing on unicycles _ ( @xcite ) . this is a related dynamical system with the property that rotor - routing becomes periodic , rather than terminating after finitely many steps . rotor - routing on unicycles is described in section  [ sec : reversibility ] . the second main idea is that the independence of the sandpile action on spanning trees can be described in terms of _ reversibility of cycles_. we introduce the notion of reversibility ( previously considered in @xcite only for planar graphs ) , and prove in proposition  [ prop : reversibility2 ] that reversibility is a well - defined property of cycles in a ribbon graph . we establish a relation between reversibility and basepoint - independence in section  [ sec : spanningtrees ] . third , reversibility is closely related to whether a cycle separates the surface corresponding to the ribbon graph into two components . we prove in lemma  [ lemma : almostseparating ] that these conditions are almost equivalent . moreover , although they are not equivalent for individual cycles , we prove in proposition  [ prop : planar_is_reversible ] that _ all _ cycles are reversible if and only if all cycles are separating , in which case the ribbon graph is planar . by a _ graph _ we mean a connected and undirected graph , with multiple edges allowed but no self - loops . we write @xmath5 and @xmath6 for the vertex set and edge set of @xmath1 , respectively . throughout , @xmath1 denotes a _ ribbon graph _ : a graph together with a cyclic ordering of the edges incident to each vertex . ribbon graphs are equivalent to graphs embedded into orientable surfaces ( hence their alternate name `` combinatorial embeddings '' ) : from any ribbon graph one can reconstruct a closed orientable surface in which it is naturally embedded , and conversely the local orientation of the surface at a vertex gives the cyclic ordering ( see , e.g. , ( * ? ? ? * theorem  3.7 ) ) . we denote by @xmath4 the set of spanning trees of @xmath1 . when the graph is clear from context , we sometimes write @xmath7 for @xmath4 .    * the rotor - routing model . * a _ rotor configuration _ @xmath8 on a directed graph is an assignment to each vertex @xmath9 of an outgoing edge @xmath10 $ ] based at @xmath9 . when we speak about rotor - routing or rotor configurations on a ( ribbon ) graph @xmath1 , we will always mean rotor configurations on the underlying eulerian directed graph @xmath11 obtained by replacing each undirected edge of @xmath1 with two oppositely oriented edges .    fix a ribbon graph @xmath1 . the _ rotor - routing model _ is a deterministic process on pairs @xmath12 consisting of a rotor configuration @xmath8 and a vertex @xmath13 . we think of @xmath14 as the position of a _ chip _ that will move around the graph as the process is iterated . one step of the rotor - routing process consists of replacing @xmath12 by a new pair @xmath15 defined as follows . first , the rotor configuration @xmath16 coincides with @xmath8 at every vertex except at @xmath14 , where @xmath17 $ ] is the edge leaving @xmath14 that follows @xmath18 $ ] in the cyclic order . second , the new position of the chip @xmath9 is the vertex at the other end of the edge @xmath17 $ ] from @xmath14 . in short , the rotor - routing process rotates the rotor @xmath18 $ ] at the current position of the chip to the next position , and then moves the chip along this edge in the new direction of the rotor . in this paper we will frequently iterate the rotor - routing process until a certain `` stopping condition '' is reached , and reason about the resulting configuration and the steps taken to reach it .    * the sandpile group . * the group @xmath19 of _ divisors _ on the graph @xmath1 is the free abelian group of formal @xmath20-linear combinations @xmath21 of the vertices of @xmath1 . in this paper we will be mostly interested in the subgroup @xmath22 of `` degree-0 '' divisors : @xmath23 if we fix a vertex @xmath24 ( for `` root '' ) , @xmath22 is freely generated by the basis @xmath25 as @xmath26 ranges over the other vertices of @xmath1 . the _ graph laplacian _ of a graph @xmath1 is an operator @xmath27 closely related to the adjacency matrix of @xmath1 . with respect to the basis of vertices @xmath26 , the operator @xmath28 corresponds to the symmetric matrix whose diagonal entries are @xmath29 = degree of @xmath26 and whose off - diagonal entries @xmath30 . the sum @xmath31 of each row and column is 0 , which shows both that the image of @xmath28 is contained in @xmath22 , and that @xmath32 . the image of @xmath28 is a finite - index subgroup of @xmath22 , and the _ sandpile group _ @xmath0 is the quotient : @xmath33 for any graph @xmath1 the group @xmath0 is a finite abelian group whose order is , up to sign , the determinant @xmath34 of any @xmath35 submatrix of the graph laplacian . people who study sandpile groups usually prefer to work with the distinguished representatives of each divisor class that are recurrent under a certain dynamical process . we will not describe the beautiful story of sandpile dynamics here , but that viewpoint does implicitly play a key role in the rotor - routing action that we now define . * action of @xmath0 on @xmath4 . * given a choice of root @xmath36 , holroyd _ et al . _ @xcite defined a natural action of @xmath22 on @xmath4 , which we now describe . this action is trivial on any divisor in @xmath37 and thus descends to an action of @xmath0 on @xmath4 .    . the rotor - routing process in the bottom row shows that @xmath38 and thus @xmath39 so the action of @xmath40 on @xmath41 is independent of our choice of @xmath14 or @xmath9 as basepoint . here , the white circle indicates the position of the chip , and the rotors are all oriented clockwise relative to the page.,height=192 ]    for a fixed root @xmath24 , given a spanning tree @xmath42 and a divisor @xmath43 , we will write @xmath44 for the image of @xmath41 under the rotor - routing action ( based at @xmath24 ) . we define the action of @xmath22 by describing the action @xmath45 of the generators @xmath46 for each @xmath47 , as follows . given a spanning tree @xmath41 , orient the edges of @xmath41 towards @xmath24 . the resulting collection of directed edges defines a rotor configuration on @xmath1 , except that there is no rotor at the root @xmath24 ; we think of this as a rotor configuration @xmath8 on the graph obtained from @xmath11 by removing the edges leaving @xmath24 . place a chip on the vertex @xmath14 , and iterate the rotor - routing process starting with @xmath12 . stop when the chip first reaches @xmath24 ( which it necessarily must ( * ? ? ? * lemma  3.6 ) ) , and call the resulting state @xmath48 . the rotor configuration @xmath16 is in fact another spanning tree @xmath49 oriented towards @xmath24 , and we define @xmath50 to be the spanning tree @xmath49 . see figure  [ f : planar ] . since @xmath22 is an abelian group , the action of different divisors @xmath51 will commute : @xmath52 . however , we emphasize that the actions corresponding to _ different _ root vertices @xmath24 and @xmath53 may _ not _ commute , so it is important to distinguish between @xmath54 and @xmath55 . the action of @xmath22 descends to the sandpile group @xmath0 . in fact , for any choice of root vertex @xmath24 , the resulting action of @xmath0 on @xmath4 is free and transitive ( * ? ? ? * lemmas 3.17 and 3.19 ) . ( this property has been vastly generalized to abelian networks by bond and levine in their recent preprint @xcite . ) we can now restate ellenberg s question @xcite as : if @xmath56 is the permutation defined by this action , does @xmath57 for all @xmath58 and @xmath59 ? in other words , is the rotor - routing @xmath0-torsor structure on the set of spanning trees @xmath4 independent of basepoint ? theorem  [ theorem : main ] completely answers this question . a _ path _ @xmath60 in the graph @xmath1 is an edge - injective map @xmath61 from the length-@xmath62 path @xmath63 ; it may or may not be vertex - injective . a _ cycle _ @xmath64 in @xmath1 is the image of a vertex - injective and edge - injective map @xmath65 from the length-@xmath62 cycle @xmath66 ( a circle subdivided into @xmath62 edges ) . we consider both paths @xmath60 and cycles @xmath64 to be oriented , but we identify maps @xmath67 that differ by cyclic permutation ( in other words , we do not specify a basepoint for cycles ) . we denote by @xmath68 or @xmath69 the same path or cycle with the opposite orientation . given an oriented cycle @xmath64 in a ribbon graph and a vertex @xmath70 , the edges incident to @xmath14 naturally fall into three classes : the two edges involved in @xmath64 , the edges ( if any ) on the left of @xmath64 , and the edges ( if any ) on the right of @xmath64 . the edges to the right of @xmath64 , for example , are the ones that occur after the out - edge at @xmath14 in @xmath64 and before the in - edge at @xmath14 in @xmath64 , in the cyclic order at @xmath14 . these three classes are disjoint , since our graphs have no self - loops ; however , if an edge @xmath71 has both endpoints @xmath14 and @xmath9 on @xmath64 , it is possible that @xmath71 is on the left of @xmath64 at @xmath14 but on the right of @xmath64 at @xmath9 .    a cycle @xmath64 is _ nonseparating _ if there exists a path @xmath60 in @xmath1 whose endpoints lie on @xmath64 and is disjoint from @xmath64 otherwise , with its first edge on the left of @xmath64 and its last edge on the right of @xmath64 . such a path @xmath60 is a _ witness _ that @xmath64 is nonseparating . the cycle @xmath64 is _ separating _ if no such witness exists ; this is equivalent to saying that @xmath64 is a separating curve on the surface associated to the ribbon graph @xmath1 . the ribbon graph @xmath1 is _ planar _ if every cycle is separating ( equivalently , if its associated surface is a sphere ) .    * unicycles and rotor - routing . * a _ unicycle _ @xmath72 consists of a rotor configuration @xmath8 which contains exactly one directed cycle @xmath73 , together with a vertex @xmath26 lying on the cycle @xmath73 . it is not difficult to see that applying rotor - routing to the configuration @xmath72 preserves these conditions , and thus takes unicycles to unicycles ( * ? ? ? * lemma 3.4 ) . in fact , the following is is a key observation that we will use many times :    [ lemma : periodic ] let @xmath72 be a unicycle on a graph with @xmath74 edges . iterating the rotor routing process @xmath75 times starting at @xmath72 , the chip traverses each edge of @xmath1 exactly once in each direction , each rotor makes exactly one full turn , and the stopping state is @xmath76 . we write @xmath77 if the configuration @xmath15 can be obtained from @xmath12 by iterating the rotor - routing process some positive number of times . by lemma  [ lemma : periodic ] , the relation @xmath77 is in fact an equivalence relation on unicycles . the following lemma shows that each equivalence class is naturally in bijection with the directed edges of @xmath1 . we write @xmath78 if @xmath77 and @xmath79=e$ ] . [ lemma : therotorknows ] let @xmath12 be a unicycle . for any vertex @xmath9 and any directed edge @xmath71 based at @xmath9 , there exists a unique rotor configuration @xmath16 such that @xmath80 . run the rotor - routing process starting at @xmath12 until the next occurrence of @xmath12 . according to lemma  [ lemma : periodic ] , each rotor makes precisely one full rotation in this process . since the rotor at @xmath9 only advances when the chip is at @xmath9 , this implies that at some intermediate stage @xmath15 we had @xmath79=e$ ] . the next rotor - routing step then advances the rotor at @xmath9 , so @xmath16 is unique . the _ first _ time the chip arrives at @xmath9 when rotor - routing is iterated starting with @xmath12 , the current rotor configuration @xmath16 satisfies @xmath79=\rho[y]$ ] , since @xmath9 has not previously been visited . accordingly we write @xmath81 as an abbreviation for @xmath82}(\sigma , y)$ ] . finally , when @xmath15 has already been defined , we write @xmath83 as shorthand for the rotor routing process beginning with @xmath12 and ending at the first occurrence of @xmath84 . [ def : reversible ] given a unicycle @xmath72 with directed cycle @xmath85 , let @xmath86 denote the configuration obtained from @xmath8 by reversing the edges of @xmath64 , and keeping all other rotors unchanged . we say that @xmath64 is _ reversible _ if @xmath87 .    before using this terminology , we need to verify that it is well - defined : in other words , that reversibility really is a property of the _ cycle _ @xmath64 , and does not depend on the choice of @xmath8 nor the choice of @xmath26 . note that by definition , @xmath64 is reversible if and only if @xmath69 is reversible . we will prove in proposition  [ prop : reversibility2 ] that reversibility is well - defined , but we first need the following technical result . this result will also be used , along with lemma  [ lemma : almostseparating ] , to show that reversible cycles are quite close to being separating . [ prop : lcrc ] let @xmath64 be a directed cycle . if there exists a unicycle @xmath72 with @xmath85 such that @xmath88 , then the vertices @xmath89 can be partitioned into two sets @xmath90 such that :    1 .   if @xmath89 is adjacent to @xmath91 along an edge lying on the left of @xmath64 at @xmath14 , then @xmath92 . 2 .   if @xmath89 is adjacent to @xmath91 along an edge lying on the right of @xmath64 at @xmath14 , then @xmath93 . if @xmath89 is adjacent to @xmath94 , then @xmath9 and @xmath95 are either both in @xmath96 or both in @xmath97 . any separating curve @xmath64 separates the surface into two parts @xmath96 and @xmath97 as in this proposition . the key utility of proposition  [ prop : lcrc ] is that it allows us to define the sets @xmath96 and @xmath97 knowing only that @xmath64 is _ reversible _ , without knowing whether or not @xmath64 is separating .    for any vertex @xmath9 in @xmath1 , let @xmath98 be its degree . consider the rotor - routing process that takes @xmath72 to @xmath99 . for any vertex @xmath9 _ not _ lying on @xmath64 , the rotor ends at its initial position @xmath10={\overline}{\rho}[y]$ ] , so by lemma  [ lemma : periodic ] , the vertex @xmath9 was visited either 0 or @xmath98 times . we define @xmath100 and @xmath101 . since @xmath1 has no isolated vertices ( by our convention , all graphs are connected ) , these two sets are disjoint . since no directed edge is traversed more than once , in the latter case @xmath93 the chip must arrive at @xmath9 along each of the @xmath98 adjacent edges exactly once and leave @xmath9 along each edge exactly once . now consider a vertex @xmath14 lying on @xmath64 . since the cycle @xmath64 has been reversed , the rotor at @xmath14 begins at @xmath18=c[x]$ ] and ends at @xmath102={\overline}{c}[x]$ ] . therefore the rotor rotates @xmath103 times , where @xmath104 is 1 plus the number of edges at @xmath14 on the _ right _ of @xmath64 , and so the chip visits @xmath14 precisely @xmath103 times . the first @xmath105 times the chip leaves @xmath14 , it leaves along the @xmath105 edges lying on the right of @xmath64 ; the final time it leaves @xmath14 , it leaves along the edge @xmath102={\overline}{c}[x]$ ] of the reversed cycle @xmath64 ( since this is the final state of the rotor ) . if @xmath89 is adjacent to @xmath91 along an edge lying on the right of @xmath64 at @xmath14 , the chip will leave @xmath14 along this edge at some point , so @xmath93 . similarly , if @xmath89 is adjacent to @xmath91 along an edge lying on the left of @xmath64 at @xmath14 , the chip does not leave @xmath14 along this edge ; in other words , the chip does not arrive at @xmath9 along this edge . this implies that @xmath92 , because we noted above a vertex @xmath9 lying in @xmath97 must be visited along every one of its incoming edges , and this would include the edge from @xmath14 . finally , if @xmath89 is adjacent to @xmath94 and the chip traverses this edge in either direction , then both @xmath9 and @xmath95 lie in @xmath97 ; if not , both lie in @xmath96 . the three conditions above uniquely characterize @xmath96 and @xmath97 as those vertices that can be connected by a path to the left side or right side of @xmath64 respectively ; since this description does not depend on @xmath8 or @xmath26 , the sets @xmath96 and @xmath97 depend only on the cycle @xmath64 . this seems at first to prove that @xmath64 is separating . however , it does not rule out the possibility of a witness consisting of a single edge joining the left side of @xmath91 to the right side of @xmath106 . in fact , nonseparating cycles of this form can indeed be reversible , as we will see in the proof of proposition  [ prop : planar_is_reversible ] . [ prop : reversibility2 ] let @xmath64 be a directed cycle . if @xmath107 for _ some _ unicycle @xmath108 with @xmath109 , then @xmath110 for _ any _ unicycle @xmath76 with @xmath85 . in other words , the reversibility of a cycle @xmath64 , as in definition  [ def : reversible ] , is well - defined : it only depends on @xmath64 , and not on a choice of unicycle .    given a unicycle @xmath72 with @xmath85 , define its _ maximal reversal _ @xmath111 to be the first state @xmath111 encountered in the rotor - routing process such that @xmath112 and @xmath113={\overline}{c}[u]$ ] . in other words , the chip is on the cycle @xmath64 at the vertex @xmath114 , and the rotor at @xmath114 is about to rotate _ past _ the reversed cycle @xmath69 to the edges on the left of @xmath64 for the first time . we will prove that as long as @xmath107 for _ some _ @xmath115 and some @xmath116 , the maximal reversal of @xmath72 is @xmath99 . then we will have @xmath117 as desired . ( we can not use lemma  [ lemma : therotorknows ] to deduce this from @xmath113={\overline}{c}[u]={\overline}{\rho}[u]$ ] , because we do not yet know that @xmath118 . ) assume that @xmath107 for some @xmath115 with @xmath109 , and let @xmath96 and @xmath97 be the sets defined by proposition  [ prop : lcrc ] . the set of directed edges traversed in the process @xmath119 was described in the proof of that proposition : the chip traverses ( 1 ) every directed edge leaving @xmath93 , ( 2 ) each directed edge leaving @xmath91 on the right side of @xmath64 , and ( 3 ) each edge @xmath120 $ ] leaving @xmath91 . this set of directed edges only depends on @xmath64 , not on @xmath115 or @xmath121 , so we will denote it by @xmath122 . for any vertex @xmath123 , let @xmath124 denote the number of edges in @xmath122 leaving @xmath123 . ( specifically , @xmath125 for @xmath91 , @xmath126 for @xmath93 , and @xmath127 for @xmath92 . ) since the chip ends up back at @xmath26 , it leaves each vertex @xmath123 the same number of times that it arrives there , so @xmath124 is also the number of directed edges in @xmath122 _ arriving _ at @xmath123 . now consider an arbitrary rotor configuration @xmath72 with @xmath85 and @xmath128 . the key to this lemma is the observation that if @xmath111 is the maximal reversal of @xmath72 , the process @xmath129 only traverses edges in @xmath122 . assume otherwise , and let @xmath71 be the first directed edge _ not _ in @xmath122 traversed . since the chip begins on @xmath64 , and no edges connect @xmath97 to @xmath96 , this first edge @xmath71 is based at some @xmath91 . by definition of @xmath122 , either @xmath71 lies on the left side of @xmath64 , or @xmath130 $ ] itself . in either case , the rotor at @xmath14 must rotate past @xmath120 $ ] before it can reach the edge @xmath71 . but this is a contradiction , since by definition @xmath111 is the first time the rotor at @xmath91 is @xmath131 $ ] while the chip is there .    in the process @xmath132 , the rotor at @xmath112 rotates from @xmath133=c[u]$ ] to @xmath113={\overline}{c}[u]$ ] , so the chip leaves @xmath114 precisely @xmath134 times . however , if @xmath135 , the chip must have arrived at @xmath114 precisely @xmath136 times , since it did not originate there . since the total number of edges in @xmath122 arriving at @xmath114 is only @xmath134 , this is a contradiction . this shows that @xmath137 , and moreover that the chip has arrived at @xmath26 along each of the @xmath138 edges in @xmath122 directed towards @xmath26 . one of these is the edge @xmath139 $ ] , where @xmath140 is the next vertex after @xmath26 in the cycle @xmath64 , so we must have @xmath141={\overline}{c}[w]$ ] as well . but if the rotor at @xmath123 has reversed from @xmath142=c[w]$ ] to @xmath141={\overline}{c}[w]$ ] , the chip must have left @xmath124 times . to arrive @xmath124 times at @xmath123 , the rotor at the _ next _ vertex after @xmath123 must have been reversed , and so on . by induction , we conclude that we have @xmath17={\overline}{c}[x]={\overline}{\rho}[x]$ ] for all @xmath91 . in particular , the directed cycle of @xmath16 is @xmath143 . since the process @xmath144 does not visit @xmath96 , we know that @xmath79=\rho[y]={\overline}{\rho}[y]$ ] for all @xmath92 . it remains to show that @xmath79=\rho[y]$ ] for @xmath93 . to do this , let @xmath145 be the maximal reversal of @xmath146 . since @xmath143 , the process @xmath147 does not visit @xmath148 , so @xmath149=\sigma[y]$ ] for all @xmath93 . but the previous paragraph shows that @xmath150=\overline{\sigma}[v]=\rho[v]$ ] . since @xmath151 , lemma  [ lemma : therotorknows ] implies that @xmath152 . therefore @xmath79=\rho[y]$ ] for all @xmath89 , and @xmath17={\overline}{\rho}[x]$ ] for all @xmath91 , demonstrating that @xmath153 as desired . [ lemma : almostseparating ] let @xmath64 be a directed cycle . if @xmath64 is reversible , then any path @xmath60 witnessing that @xmath64 is nonseparating must have length 1 . conversely , if @xmath64 is a separating cycle , then @xmath64 is reversible .    let @xmath60 be a path of length @xmath154 , with vertices @xmath155 , with endpoints @xmath156 and @xmath157 . if @xmath60 is a witness that @xmath64 is nonseparating , the second vertex @xmath158 lies in @xmath96 , and the second - to - last vertex @xmath159 lies in @xmath97 . but this contradicts condition ( 3 ) of proposition  [ prop : lcrc ] , which says that membership in @xmath96 is locally constant along paths in @xmath160 . therefore any witness @xmath60 must have length 1 .    to prove that any separating cycle is reversible , we will go through the proof of proposition  [ prop : lcrc ] in reverse ; the resulting argument closely parallels ( * ? ? ? * corollary 4.11 ) , where this was proved for planar ribbon graphs . ( in fact , a special case of reversibility , for cycles in an @xmath161 planar grid graph , was proved even earlier , in ( * ? ? ? * proposition i ) . ) if @xmath64 is a separating cycle , we can partition the vertices @xmath89 into @xmath162 , where @xmath163 ( resp . @xmath164 ) if there exists a path from @xmath9 to @xmath64 ending with an edge on the left side ( resp . right side ) of @xmath64 . every @xmath9 can be connected to @xmath64 by some path , since @xmath1 is connected , so @xmath165 . if @xmath166 could be connected to both sides of @xmath64 , splicing these paths together would give a witness that @xmath64 was nonseparating , so @xmath167 . let @xmath168 be the ribbon graph obtained from @xmath1 by deleting all vertices in @xmath169 , all edges adjacent to @xmath169 , and all edges lying on the right of @xmath64 . because @xmath64 is separating , no edge on the left side of @xmath64 is removed ( every such edge either joins @xmath91 to @xmath163 , or joins @xmath91 to @xmath106 , in which case it lies on the left side of @xmath64 at both endpoints ) . since no rotor in @xmath170 points along a removed edge , we can restrict the rotor configuration @xmath8 to @xmath168 as @xmath171 . it is easy to run the rotor routing process starting at @xmath172 , because at each @xmath91 the two edges of @xmath64 are now adjacent in the cyclic order . thus at each step , the rotor at one vertex on @xmath64 is reversed , and the chip moves to the previous vertex on @xmath64 . after a number of steps equal to the length of @xmath64 , each rotor on @xmath64 has moved once , the cycle @xmath64 has been reversed , and the chip is back at @xmath26 ; in other words , the process takes @xmath173 . since rotor - routing on @xmath168 is periodic , continuing gives a rotor - routing process on @xmath168 taking @xmath174 to @xmath172 . but this segment of the process does not involve any of the deleted edges . therefore if the rotor - routing process is run in parallel on @xmath1 starting with @xmath99 , the two processes will take precisely the same series of steps . when the former terminates at @xmath175 , the latter will therefore be at @xmath76 , demonstrating that @xmath176 as desired . [ prop : planar_is_reversible ] a connected ribbon graph @xmath1 without loops is planar if and only if all cycles on @xmath1 are reversible . if @xmath1 is planar , the jordan curve theorem implies that every cycle is separating , so lemma  [ lemma : almostseparating ] implies that every cycle is reversible . for the converse , suppose @xmath1 is not planar , so it has at least one nonseparating cycle , but that every cycle on @xmath1 is reversible . our first claim is that every nonseparating cycle on @xmath1 has length 2 . indeed , let @xmath60 be a path witnessing that the cycle @xmath64 is nonseparating , joining the left side of @xmath91 to the right side of @xmath106 . this path splits @xmath64 into two directed arcs from @xmath14 to @xmath177 . call them @xmath178 and @xmath179 , labeled so that @xmath180 . let @xmath181 be the cycle @xmath182 , and let @xmath183 be the cycle @xmath184 . the arc @xmath178 is now a witness that @xmath181 is nonseparating , since @xmath178 lies on the left of @xmath181 at @xmath14 but on the right of @xmath181 at @xmath177 . similarly @xmath179 witnesses that @xmath183 is nonseparating , since @xmath179 lies on the right of @xmath183 at @xmath14 but on the left of @xmath183 at @xmath177 . since all three cycles @xmath64 , @xmath181 , and @xmath183 are reversible by assumption , lemma  [ lemma : almostseparating ] implies that the paths @xmath60 , @xmath179 and @xmath178 each have length 1 . in particular , the original cycle @xmath185 has length 2 , as claimed . let us rename the edge @xmath60 to @xmath186 , and the cycle @xmath64 to @xmath187 , to expose the cyclic symmetry of our notation . then the cyclic order of these edges at @xmath14 and @xmath177 is the same , namely @xmath188 and @xmath189 respectively , and @xmath190 with indices modulo 3 . see figure  [ fig : a1a2a3 ] . let us say that an edge at @xmath14 _ lies between _ @xmath191 and @xmath192 , for @xmath193 , @xmath194 , or @xmath195 , if it comes after @xmath191 and before @xmath192 in the cyclic order of edges at @xmath14 . similarly , we will say that an edge at @xmath177 lies between @xmath196 and @xmath197 if it comes after @xmath196 and before @xmath197 in the cyclic ordering of edges at @xmath177 .     and @xmath186 in the proof of proposition  [ prop : planar_is_reversible ] . the orientation at each vertex is clockwise with respect to the page.,width=144 ]    before moving on , we observe that _ any _ path from @xmath14 to @xmath177 not passing through @xmath14 or @xmath177 except at its endpoints will witness that one of the cycles @xmath198 is nonseparating , so by lemma  [ lemma : almostseparating ] any such path has length 1 . indeed , each edge at @xmath14 other than the @xmath191 lies on the right side of exactly one cycle @xmath198 , and on the left side of the other two ; similarly , each edge at @xmath177 lies on the left of exactly one @xmath198 and on the right of the other two . thus the pigeonhole principle implies that no path from @xmath14 to @xmath177 can lie on the same side of @xmath198 for all three simultaneously . we may also assume that no edge @xmath71 connects @xmath14 to @xmath177 and lies between @xmath179 and @xmath186 at @xmath14 , after repeating the following reduction step . suppose @xmath71 is such an edge . if @xmath71 lies between @xmath199 and @xmath200 at @xmath177 , then replace @xmath179 with @xmath71 . if @xmath71 lies between @xmath199 and @xmath201 at @xmath177 , then replace @xmath186 with @xmath71 . if @xmath71 lies between @xmath200 and @xmath201 at @xmath177 , then replace either @xmath179 or @xmath186 with @xmath71 . in each case , this reduces the number of edges at @xmath14 between @xmath179 and @xmath186 while preserving the cyclic orderings of @xmath188 and @xmath202 at @xmath14 and @xmath177 , so we may repeat this step until there are no edges to @xmath177 lying between @xmath179 and @xmath186 at @xmath14 . let @xmath12 be any unicycle with @xmath203 ( e.g.  by adding @xmath178 to a spanning tree that uses @xmath179 ; see  [ sec : spanningtrees ] for details ) . we have @xmath18=a_1 $ ] and @xmath204={\overline}{a}_2 $ ] by definition . define @xmath16 by @xmath205 . we had @xmath102=a_2 $ ] and @xmath206={\overline}{a}_1 $ ] , and the latter implies @xmath207={\overline}{a}_1 $ ] . but we know moreover that @xmath17=a_3 $ ] . this is because in the rotor routing process @xmath208 , starting from the last time the chip leaves @xmath14 and ending at its arrival at @xmath177 , the chip traces out a path from @xmath14 to @xmath177 . that path has length 1 by the argument above , which means that the chip arrives for the first time at @xmath177 along some edge from @xmath14 . but we have assumed that @xmath186 is the first such edge that the rotor at @xmath14 encounters when it starts at @xmath179 . finally , define @xmath209 by @xmath210 . we had @xmath211=a_1 $ ] and @xmath212={\overline}{a_3}$ ] , and the former implies @xmath213=a_1 $ ] . we have assumed that all cycles are reversible , so @xmath214 and @xmath215 . by transitivity this implies @xmath216 ; since @xmath213=\rho[x]=a_1 $ ] , it must be that @xmath152 . however , this would mean that the rotor @xmath217 $ ] ends up at @xmath218 , which is impossible : this rotor began at @xmath212={\overline}{a}_3 $ ] , so the first edge to @xmath14 that it encounters can not be @xmath218 ( it would encounter @xmath199 first , if not some other edge ) . this contradiction completes the proof that not all cycles in @xmath1 can be reversible if @xmath1 has nonseparating cycles . * spanning trees and unicycles . * the reason that we studied unicycles so carefully in the previous section is that they are closely related to spanning trees , as we now explain . let @xmath42 be a spanning tree . any two vertices @xmath14 and @xmath9 are connected by a unique geodesic path in @xmath41 ; we write @xmath219 for that path , oriented from @xmath14 to @xmath9 . therefore if @xmath71 is an edge of @xmath1 connecting @xmath9 to @xmath14 , the undirected graph @xmath220 contains a unique cycle . now given a directed edge @xmath71 from @xmath9 to @xmath14 and a spanning tree @xmath41 , define a rotor configuration @xmath221 as follows . let @xmath222 denote the collection of directed edges obtained from @xmath41 by directing each edge towards the `` root '' @xmath9 . then the collection of directed edges @xmath223 forms a rotor configuration @xmath221 with unique directed cycle @xmath224 . we will denote this directed cycle by @xmath225 . if @xmath41 already contains @xmath71 , then @xmath225 is the length 2 cycle consisting only of @xmath226 ; note that this cycle is trivially reversible in any ribbon graph . if we took instead the edge @xmath227 from @xmath14 to @xmath9 , the rotor configuration @xmath228 comes from the directed graph @xmath229 , with directed cycle @xmath230 . the following observation will be fundamental for us .      for @xmath232 this follows because @xmath233 for vertices @xmath234 , we have @xmath235=t_y[z]$ ] , since the geodesics @xmath236 and @xmath237 share an initial segment . then @xmath238=\rho_{{\overline}e}(t)[z]$ ] , and @xmath238 = { \overline}{\rho_e(t)}[z]$ ] since @xmath95 is not on the cycle .    given a spanning tree @xmath239 and an edge @xmath71 from @xmath9 to @xmath14 , the rotor configuration @xmath240 is a unicycle since @xmath241 . conversely , given a unicycle @xmath72 , deleting the directed edge @xmath242 $ ] yields a spanning tree @xmath243 with all edges directed towards the root @xmath26 . this correspondence between spanning trees and rotor configurations lets us partially model the action of the sandpile group on spanning trees . [ prop : rotorscompute ] given a spanning tree @xmath41 in a ribbon graph @xmath1 , let @xmath71 be an edge not in @xmath41 , and @xmath53 any vertex on the @xmath41-geodesic between the endpoints @xmath244 of @xmath71 ( including @xmath14 or @xmath9 ) . let @xmath245 ( so that @xmath246 ) . then @xmath247 is a unicycle , and if @xmath16 is the rotor configuration defined by @xmath248 , then @xmath249    the rotor configuration @xmath8 is equal to @xmath223 , where @xmath222 is obtained by directing each edge of @xmath41 towards @xmath9 . the configuration @xmath8 then has a unique cycle , namely @xmath250 , and by assumption @xmath53 is on that cycle , so @xmath247 is a unicycle . next , by definition , @xmath251 is obtained by beginning with @xmath222 , placing the chip at @xmath53 , and running the rotor - routing process until the chip arrives at @xmath9 for the first time . the presence of the rotor @xmath10=e$ ] does not affect this process , since @xmath9 is not reached until the last step . therefore the rotor - routing process @xmath252 takes precisely the same steps as the process @xmath253 . we conclude that @xmath254 . since @xmath255 by definition , this proves the lemma .    * basepoint - independence and reversible cycles . * before giving our last few lemmas and proving our main theorem , let us give some intuition as to why reversibility should be at all related to basepoint - independence . consider a spanning tree @xmath256 , and let @xmath14 and @xmath9 be adjacent vertices connected by an edge @xmath71 from @xmath14 to @xmath9 . suppose that we wish to compute @xmath257 for some divisors @xmath51 . the first step is to compute @xmath258 . by proposition  [ prop : rotorscompute ] , the computation of @xmath259 can be modeled ( at least for some divisors ) by a rotor - routing process ; this process terminates with the rotor configuration @xmath260 , which is the spanning tree @xmath41 oriented towards the basepoint @xmath14 . the next step is to compute @xmath261 , and to do this we first need to re - orient the tree @xmath41 towards the basepoint @xmath9 . this does not affect any edges except those on the @xmath41-geodesic between @xmath14 and @xmath9 , which are reversed . if we add the edge @xmath71 to our rotor configuration @xmath260 to obtain @xmath262 , the reversal of the @xmath41-geodesic @xmath219 amounts to the reversal of the cycle @xmath224 in the rotor configuration @xmath221 . if this cycle is reversible , then we can compute both steps @xmath263 and @xmath264 as part of a _ single rotor - routing process _ , even though these actions involve two _ different _ basepoints . this basic observation is the heart of the relation between reversibility and basepoint - independence , upon which our main theorem rests . the next lemma capitalizes on this observation . [ lemma : ongeodesic ] given a spanning tree @xmath41 in a ribbon graph @xmath1 and an edge @xmath71 from @xmath9 to @xmath14 , let @xmath53 be any vertex on the geodesic @xmath219 ( including @xmath265 or @xmath266 ) , and set @xmath267 . let @xmath245 ; as in proposition  [ prop : rotorscompute ] , @xmath247 is a unicycle . define rotor configurations @xmath270 , @xmath16 , and @xmath209 by @xmath271 note that @xmath272={\overline}{\rho}[x]={\overline}{e}$ ] , and similarly @xmath79=\rho[y]=e$ ] implies that @xmath213={\overline}{\sigma}[x]={\overline}{e}$ ] . in fact , by lemma  [ lemma : ovrho ] and proposition  [ prop : rotorscompute ] , we have      thus we see that equality is exactly the condition @xmath276 . moreover , since @xmath272=\tau[x]={\overline}{e}$ ] , lemma  [ lemma : therotorknows ] implies that this is equivalent to @xmath277 . consider the following diagram relating these six rotor configurations : @xmath278\ar_{\txt{\large ? } } @{2{<}~2{>}}[dl]&&(\sigma , y)\ar^{\txt{\large ? } } @{2{<}~2{>}}[dr]\\    ( { \overline}{\rho},s)\ar@{2{<}~2{>}}[dr]&&&&({\overline}{\sigma},y)\ar@{2{<}~2{>}}[dl]\\    & ( \psi , x)\ar_{\txt{\large ? } } @{2{<}~2{>}}[rr]&&(\tau , x ) } \ ] ] three of these edges hold by definition , namely @xmath279 , @xmath280 , and @xmath281 . by the results of section  [ sec : reversibility ] , the upper left edge @xmath282 is equivalent to the cycle @xmath283 being reversible . similarly the upper right edge is equivalent to @xmath284 being reversible . finally , we have already shown that the bottom edge is equivalent to the assertion . therefore parts ( a ) and ( b ) of the lemma each assert that if two of the remaining three edges hold , the third does as well . but this follows immediately from the transitivity of this equivalence relation .      by lemma  [ lemma : almostseparating ] , the hypothesis of lemma  [ lemma : ongeodesic](a ) is always satisfied if @xmath1 is planar , so @xmath286 now applying @xmath287 to both sides , we conclude that @xmath288 . we emphasize that we are _ not _ yet claiming that @xmath289 , since the condition of corollary  [ corollary : first ] that @xmath53 lies on the @xmath41-geodesic from @xmath14 to @xmath9 need not hold for all trees @xmath41 . [ lemma : rununtil ] let @xmath290 be a spanning tree of an arbitrary ribbon graph @xmath1 . let @xmath14 , @xmath95 , and @xmath53 be arbitrary vertices such that @xmath53 is the first vertex on @xmath291 visited by the rotor - routing process starting with @xmath292 . then @xmath293    define @xmath294 by @xmath295 ; by definition , the underlying spanning tree @xmath49 of @xmath294 is equal to @xmath296 . similarly , define @xmath297 by @xmath298 , with underlying spanning tree @xmath299 .    as we noted in the proof of lemma  [ lemma : ovrho ] , the configurations @xmath260 and @xmath300 coincide for all vertices @xmath301 , while on this geodesic , the difference between @xmath260 and @xmath300 is that @xmath291 is reversed and thus replaced by @xmath302 . therefore if the rotor - routing processes are run in parallel starting with @xmath292 and @xmath303 , the same steps will be taken until the chip first arrives at @xmath291 . by our assumption on @xmath53 , this occurs when the chip reaches @xmath53 , i.e.  when the second process reaches @xmath304 . the first process coincides except that the geodesic between @xmath14 and @xmath53 is directed towards @xmath14 instead . but by the first sentence of this paragraph , this is the directed tree @xmath305 obtained from @xmath49 by directing its edges towards @xmath14 . to sum up , we have observed that @xmath306 .    by definition , @xmath307 can be computed by starting with @xmath308 and running the rotor - routing process until the chip reaches @xmath14 . the above shows that the first process reaches @xmath308 as an intermediate stage ; therefore continuing this process eventually yields @xmath309 , since @xmath298 by definition . this shows that @xmath310 . expanding out our notation , this says that @xmath311 applying @xmath312 to both sides yields @xmath313 , as desired . let @xmath53 be the first vertex on @xmath219 that is reached by the rotor - routing process starting with @xmath292 . note that @xmath53 is _ a fortiori _ the first vertex visited on @xmath302 or on @xmath315 as well . we use this to apply lemma  [ lemma : rununtil ] twice , giving @xmath316 write @xmath49 for the tree @xmath296 appearing in . notice that by definition of @xmath53 , in the rotor routing process that computes @xmath296 , the chip never touches any vertex on @xmath219 until it reaches @xmath53 , so @xmath317 . so @xmath53 lies on @xmath318 by corollary  [ corollary : first ] applied to @xmath49 ( with the roles of @xmath14 and @xmath9 reversed ) , we have @xmath319 the desired result follows once this equation is combined with , by applying @xmath320 to the left - hand side of and applying @xmath321 to the right - hand side of . ( @xmath322 ) first , assume that @xmath1 is a planar ribbon graph . our goal is to prove for any @xmath43 that @xmath323 as elements of @xmath324 for arbitrary vertices @xmath14 and @xmath9 . since @xmath1 is connected , it suffices to prove this when @xmath14 and @xmath9 are adjacent , with the general case following by induction . fix adjacent vertices @xmath14 and @xmath9 . the group @xmath22 is generated by divisors of the form @xmath325 as @xmath95 ranges over the vertices of @xmath1 . but we proved in corollary  [ corollary : fulladjacent ] that @xmath326 when @xmath14 and @xmath9 are adjacent . it follows that @xmath323 for any @xmath43 . this completes the proof that if @xmath1 is a planar ribbon graph , the action of @xmath0 on @xmath7 is independent of the basepoint . ( @xmath327 ) conversely , assume that the action of @xmath0 on @xmath7 is independent of the basepoint . choose any edge @xmath71 of @xmath1 with endpoints @xmath14 and @xmath9 . we claim that for any @xmath239 and any @xmath43 , the cycle @xmath225 is reversible if and only if the cycle @xmath328 is reversible . ( we have dropped the subscripted basepoints , since by assumption the action of @xmath0 does not depend on them . ) we first prove the claim in the case when @xmath329 for some @xmath95 .    as in the proof of corollary [ corollary : fulladjacent ] , let @xmath53 be the first vertex on @xmath219 reached by the rotor - routing process starting with @xmath292 . since we have assumed independence of basepoint , this process @xmath330 computes @xmath331 . since this process does not reach @xmath219 until the last step , the cycle @xmath225 remains unchanged , i.e. @xmath332 . we may now apply lemma  [ lemma : ongeodesic ] to @xmath333 , since @xmath53 lies on the cycle @xmath332 . the condition is always satisfied by our assumption that the action is independent of the basepoint , so applying lemma  [ lemma : ongeodesic](b ) implies that @xmath334 completing the proof of the claim for @xmath329 . since @xmath22 is generated by such elements , the claim follows . we now show that every cycle @xmath64 in @xmath1 is reversible . given a cycle @xmath64 , let @xmath71 be any edge of @xmath64 . extend the edge @xmath71 to a spanning tree @xmath41 , and separately extend the path @xmath335 to a spanning tree @xmath49 . since @xmath0 acts transitively on @xmath7 , there exists @xmath43 for which @xmath336 . thus the claim above shows that @xmath225 is reversible if and only if @xmath268 is reversible . but @xmath225 is the trivial cycle @xmath226 , which is always reversible in any ribbon graph , while @xmath268 is our original cycle @xmath64 . we conclude that every cycle in @xmath1 is reversible . by proposition [ prop : planar_is_reversible ] , @xmath1 is a planar ribbon graph . * acknowledgements . * we are very grateful to jordan ellenberg for calling our attention to the question considered in this paper , and we thank math overflow for providing a venue for the question . the first and third authors would also like to thank the second author for suggesting that the three of us get together to work on this problem , which was great fun ! a.  holroyd , l.  levine , k.  mszros , y.  peres , j.  propp and d.  wilson , chip - firing and rotor - routing on directed graphs , in _ in and out of equilibrium 2 _ , eds . v.  sidoravicius and m.  e.  vares , _ progress in probability _ 60 , birkhuser ( 2008 ) , 331364 . ` arxiv:0801.3306 ` .
Abstract:

Answer: the sandpile group @xmath0 of a finite graph @xmath1 is a discrete analogue of the jacobian of a riemann surface which was rediscovered several times in the contexts of arithmetic geometry , self - organized criticality , random walks , and algorithms . given a ribbon graph @xmath1 , holroyd _ et al . _ used the `` rotor - routing '' model to define a free and transitive action of @xmath0 on the set of spanning trees of @xmath1 . however , their construction depends _ a priori _ on a choice of basepoint vertex . ellenberg asked whether this action does in fact depend on the choice of basepoint . we answer this question by proving that the action of @xmath0 is independent of the basepoint if and only if @xmath1 is a planar ribbon graph .


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 the nearby universe , the population of galaxies with stellar masses greater than 10@xmath2 m@xmath5 is dominated by large early  type galaxies ( baldry et al . 2004 ) with correspondingly large sizes ( shen et al . these nearby systems contain old and metal - rich stellar populations that formed quickly in the early universe ( heavens et al . 2004 ; feulner et al . 2005 ; thomas et al . however , it has remained unknown whether the stars in these galaxies were all assembled in the same system , or formed in lower mass galaxies that later merged . two major formation models have been proposed in order to explain the properties of these galaxies : the so - called monolithic collapse model ( eggen , lynden - bell & sandage 1962 ; larson 1975 ; arimoto & yoshii 1987 ; bressan , chiosi & fagotto 1994 ) and the hierarchical merging scenario ( toomre 1977 ; white & frenk 1991 ) . these two mechanisms have both observational and theoretical successes and drawbacks . for instance , evidence in favor of a fast and dissipative monolithic collapse is the fact that the bulk of stars in massive ellipticals are old ( mannucci et al . 2001 ) and have high [ @xmath11/fe ] ratios ( i.e. short star formation time - scales ; worthey et al . 1992 ) . in addition , the structural and dynamical properties of observed spheroid galaxies are well reproduced by cold dissipationless collapse ( van albada 1982 ; may & van albada 1984 ; mcglynn 1984 ; aguilar & merritt 1990 ; londrillo et al . 1991 ; udry 1993 ; hozumi et al . 2000 ; trenti et al . 2005 ) , a process that is expected to dominate the last stages of a highly dissipative collapse . on the other hand , supporting a hierarchical merger scenario , observations find a decline in the number of massive galaxies seen at higher redshifts . this decline is moderate since z@xmath61 and much stronger at even higher redshifts ( daddi , cimatti & renzini 2000 ; pozzetti et al . 2003 ; bell et al . 2004 ; drory et al . 2004 , 2005 ; daddi et al . 2005 ; saracco et al . 2005 ; faber et al . 2005 ; pozzetti et al . 2007 ) . moreover , new renditions of semi - analytical models where merging is the cornerstone of galaxy formation ( e.g. de lucia et al . 2006 ) are much better able to match the stellar population properties of elliptical galaxies . finally , it has been found theoretically that the scaling laws followed by elliptical galaxies are robust against merging ( ciotti et al . 2007 ) .    exploring the assembly of massive galaxies with cosmic time through number density analysis or merger rate estimations are however difficult to conduct since , first , very massive galaxies are scarce and , second , their clustering properties make them strongly affected by field - to - field variance associated with limited observed volumes . these two difficulties make claims of the assembly of massive galaxies in the early universe based on number densities and merger rate estimations highly uncertain ( e.g. , cimatti , daddi & renzini 2006 ; renzini 2007 ) . a much more straightforward approach to the assembly problem of massive galaxies is to explore the size evolution of these systems at a given stellar mass . in a `` monolithic - like '' scenario where a galaxy is fully assembled after the formation of its stars , the stellar mass - size relation should remain unchanged as cosmic time evolves . in the hierarchical merging scenario , however , the stellar mass - size relation will evolve as a result of the increase in size after each galaxy merger . for instance , state - of - the - art hierarchical semi - analytical models predict a very strong ( a factor of 1.5 - 3 ) evolution in the size of very massive galaxies ( m@xmath0@xmath110@xmath2h@xmath3@xmath4m@xmath5 ) nine billion years ago ( khochfar & silk 2006b ) . this predicted evolution in size is a strong function of galaxy mass , with the more massive objects expected to have the largest increase in size . due to the lack of a large sample of very massive galaxies at high redshift , analysis of the evolution of the stellar mass - size relation of galaxies have mainly explored objects in the 10@xmath12@xmath8m@xmath13@xmath810@xmath2 m@xmath5 range . observations within this mass interval do not find a significant evolution of the stellar mass - size relation since z@xmath61 ( barden et al . 2005 ; mcintosh et al . 2005 ) . explorations of these objects at even earlier look - back times ( 1@xmath8z@xmath83 ) have been also attempted , and show a moderate decline in size for galaxies at a given stellar mass ( trujillo et al . 2004 ; 2006a ) . however , the size of very massive galaxies , m@xmath0@xmath110@xmath2m@xmath5 , is still largely unexplored , with only around a dozen objects studied in detail so far ( daddi et al . 2005 ; trujillo et al . 2006b ; longhetti et al . 2007 ; mcgrath et al . 2007 ) . definitive conclusions regarding the evolution of sizes for massive galaxies thus remain largely unknown . the goal of this paper is to shed some light on this issue by exploring the sizes of a large sample of very massive galaxies since z@xmath82 . this will help to clarify whether the evolutionary scenario for these objects is hierarchical or monolithic - like . the paper is structured as follows . in section 2 we give a brief summary of the palomar / deep2 data , and in section 3 we describe the determination of the stellar masses . size measurement technique and robustness estimations for our data are provided in section 4 . in section 5 we study the selection effects and in section 6 present the observed stellar mass  size relations . we compare our results with other samples in section 7 , and finally , we discuss our results in section 8 . in what follows , we adopt a cosmology of @xmath14=0.3 , @xmath15=0.7 and h@xmath16=70 km s@xmath17 mpc@xmath17 . we use the palomar observatory wide - field infrared ( powir)/deep2 survey ( bundy et al . 2006 ; conselice et al . 2007a , b ; davis et al . 2003 ) to define a sample of 831 galaxies with masses larger than 10@xmath2h@xmath3@xmath4m@xmath5 located over @xmath6710 arcmin@xmath18 in the extended groth strip ( egs ) . this field ( 63 hubble space telescope tiles ) was imaged with the advanced camera for surveys ( acs ) in the v(f606w , 2660s ) and i - band ( f814w , 2100s ) . each tile was observed in 4 exposures that were combined to produce a pixel scale of 0.03 arcsec , with a point spread function ( psf ) of 0.12 arcsec full width half maximum ( fwhm ) . in addition to the hst data , optical imaging from the cfht 3.6-m telescope in the b , r and i bands taken with the cfh12k camera was used . integration times for these observations were 1 hour in b and r , and 2 hours in i. limiting magnitudes reached are b=24.5 ( ab , 8@xmath19 ) , r=24.2 ( ab , 8@xmath19 ) and i=23.5 ( ab , 8@xmath19 ) . the details of the data reduction for this data is provided in coil et al . ( 2004 ) .    in the egs region , the palomar near - infrared k@xmath20-band imaging has a typical depth of greater than k@xmath21=22.5 mag ( 5 @xmath19 ) , and a j - band depth of j@xmath21=23.4 mag ( 5 @xmath19 ) . about 70% of the galaxies brighter than r@xmath21=24.1 mag in this field were targeted by the deep2 galaxy redshift survey , using the keck 10 m telescope , for a total spectroscopic redshift completeness of @xmath656% . in our case , 410 objects have a spectroscopic redshift ( @xmath650% of the full dataset ) , with a spectroscopic completeness of 61% for galaxies with z@xmath81 , and a completeness of 30% for galaxies with z@xmath91 . we supplemented our spectroscopic redshift catalogue with photometric redshifts with an accuracy for all galaxies in the total k - band survey of @xmath22z/(1+z)@xmath230.07 in the range 0.2@xmath8z@xmath81.4 and @xmath22z/(1+z)@xmath80.22 for galaxies at 1.4@xmath8z@xmath82 ( conselice et al . however , it is worth noting that , for the massive galaxies we use in this paper , the accuracy is @xmath24 at @xmath25 , and likely similarly lower for @xmath26 galaxies ( i.e. @xmath27 ) . the determination of stellar masses for each of our galaxies follows a standard multi - color ( brijk ) stellar population fitting technique , producing uncertainties of @xmath230.2 dex . the largest systematic source of error comes from the assumed initial mass function ( imf ) , in this paper we have used the chabrier imf for all stellar mass measurements . the details of these estimations are presented in bundy et al . ( 2006 ) and conselice et al . ( 2007b ) . however , because the measurement of stellar masses is an integral part of this paper , we give a brief description of how our masses are measured , and what systematics might be present . the basic mass determination method we use consists of fitting a grid of model seds constructed from bruzual & charlot ( 2003 ) ( bc03 ) stellar population synthesis models , with different star formation histories . we use an exponentially declining model to characterise the star formation , with various ages , metallicities and dust contents included . these models are parameterised by an age , and an e - folding time . these parameterisations are fairly simple , and it remains possible that stellar mass from older stars is missed under brighter younger populations . while the majority of our systems are passively evolving older stellar populations , it is possible that up to a factor of two in stellar mass is missed in any star bursting blue systems . however , stellar masses measured through our technique are roughly the expected factor of 5 - 10 smaller than dynamical masses at @xmath28 using a sample of disk galaxies ( conselice et al . 2005 ) , demonstrating their inherent reliability . we calculate the likely stellar mass , age , and absolute magnitudes for each galaxy at all star formation histories , and determine stellar masses based on this distribution . distributions with larger ranges of stellar masses have larger resulting uncertainties . it turns out that while parameters such as the age , e - folding time , metallicity , etc . are not likely accurately fit through these calculations due to various degeneracies , the stellar mass is robust . typical errors for our stellar masses are 0.2 dex from the width of the probability distributions . there are also uncertainties from the choice of the imf . our stellar masses utilise the chabrier imf , which can be converted to salpeter imf stellar masses by adding 0.25 dex . there are additional random uncertainties due to photometric errors . the resulting stellar masses thus have a total random error of 0.2 - 0.3 dex , roughly a factor of two . there is furthermore the issue of whether or not our stellar masses are overestimated based on using the bruzual & charlot ( 2003 ) models . it has recently been argued by maraston ( 2005 ) and bruzual ( 2007 ) that the exclusion of an updated treatment of thermal - pulsating agb stars in the bc03 models results in calculated stellar masses too high by a factor of a few . while we consider an uncertainty of a factor of two in our stellar masses , we must consider whether our sample is in the regime where the effects of tp - agb stars will influence our mass measurements . this has been investigated recently in maraston ( 2005 ) and bruzual ( 2007 ) who have both concluded that galaxies stellar masses computed using newer tp - agb star prescriptions are up to roughly 50 - 60% lower than without . this is particularly true for masses determined in the rest - frame infrared . this problem has also been recently investigated independently by kannappan & gawiser ( 2007 ) who come to similar conclusions , but do not advocate one model over another . furthermore , the effect of tp - agb stars is most pronounced in the rest - frame ir , and for young stellar population ages . our survey is k - selected , and the observed k - band is used as the flux in which the masses are computed . the rest - frame wavelength probed with the observed k - band ranges from 0.7@xmath29 m to 1.5@xmath29 m where the effects of tp - agb stars are minimised . the ages of our galaxies are also older than the ages where tp - agb stars have their most effect ( maraston 2005 ; bruzual 2007 ) . it is also worth noting that the effects of tp - agb stars are more important when normalising stellar masses further into the red . in this paper we find a strongest evolution at higher redshifts where we are probing the rest - frame optical at observed - k , and where the effects of tp - agb stars are minimised ( e.g. , bruzual 2007 ) . we investigate the effects of tp - agb stars in our estimations by determining how our stellar masses change between using the bc03 models and the updated charlot & bruzual ( 2007 , in prep ) models using the new tp - agb methods . we find for 1330 massive galaxies in the palomar sample a difference of @xmath60.07 in log m@xmath30 , which is neglectable . a similar conclusion has been recently achieved by mcgrath , stockton & canalizo ( 2007 ) using a sample of galaxies at z@xmath61.5 with stellar masses similar to those explored here . on comparing the new rendition of models from charlot & bruzual ( 2007 ) vs bc03 , they found that the inferred galaxy masses are slightly ( @xmath610% ) smaller using the 2007 models . although we do have spitzer data for our sources , we do not use this imaging for two reasons . the first is that by normalising the stellar masses with spitzer irac magnitudes , we are in a regime where the tp - agn stars are more pronounced , and thus would affect the stellar mass measurements to a degree even greater than using the observed k - band ( kannappan & gawiser 2007 ; bruzual 2007 ) . secondly , the large psf of the irac images makes it difficult to obtain accurate photometry for many of our sources due to contamination from other galaxies with overlapping psfs . while it is possible to correct for this , the large resulting random photometry uncertainties make the stellar masses less certain . another possible source of uncertainty is the photometric redshifts we use for our sample . while at @xmath25 about half of our sample have spectroscopic redshifts , at @xmath26 all of our systems have photometric redshifts . we can however determine the accuracy for those systems at @xmath25 . the agreement is very good for our massive systems with @xmath24 . this results in another @xmath820% uncertainty in the stellar mass measurements . for @xmath26 , if we assume @xmath31 , the uncertainty in the stellar masses would be @xmath632% . overall , however , these uncertainties can not account for the trends seen later in this paper . the structural parameters used in this paper were measured using the acs i - band filter . sizes ( as parameterised by the half - light or effective radius along the semi - major axis a@xmath32 ) were estimated using the galfit code ( peng et al . sizes were circularised , r@xmath32=a@xmath32@xmath33 , with @xmath34 being the ellipticity of the object . galfit convolves srsic ( 1968 ) r@xmath35 galaxy models with the psf of the images , and determines the best fit by comparing the convolved model with the galaxy surface brightness distribution using a levenberg - marquardt algorithm to minimise the @xmath36 of the fit . the srsic model is a flexible parametric description of the surface brightness distribution of the galaxies and contains the exponential ( n=1 ) and de vaucouleurs ( n=4 ) models as particular cases . in addition , this model is used in the structural analysis of the sdss galaxy sample ( our local comparison sample ; blanton et al . 2003 ; shen et al . 2003 ) . the srsic index n measures the shape of surface brightness profiles . in the nearby universe , galaxies with n@xmath82.5 are mostly disk - like objects , whereas galaxies with n@xmath92.5 are mainly spheroids ( ravindranath et al . we use this srsic index criterion to split our sample at higher redshifts and facilitate a comparison with the local galaxy population . during the fit , neighbouring galaxies were excluded using a mask , but in the case of closely neighbouring objects with overlapping isophotes , the objects were fitted simultaneously . the results of our fitting are shown in the appendix : table [ rawdata ] . the results presented in this paper rely on our ability to measure accurate structural parameters . to gauge the accuracy of our parameter determination realistic simulations were conducted . we have created 1000 artificial galaxies uniformly generated at random in the following ranges , matching the observed distribution of our galaxies : 18@xmath37i@xmath21@xmath3726 ( see fig . [ maghist ] ) , 0.03@xmath37r@xmath32@xmath372.55 arcsec ( which at z@xmath61 equals 0.25 - 20.5 h@xmath38 kpc ) , 0.5@xmath37n@xmath378 , and 0@xmath37@xmath34@xmath370.8 . to simulate the real conditions of our observations , we add a background sky image taken ( randomly at each time ) from a piece of the acs i - band image . finally , the galaxy models were convolved with the observed psf . the same procedure was used to retrieve the structural parameters in both the simulated and actual images . the results of these simulations are shown in figures [ simul1 ] and [ simul2 ] . fifty percent of our galaxies are brighter than i(ab)=21.9 mag , and for these galaxies we find dr@xmath32/r@xmath32@xmath85% and dn / n@xmath87% . for 95% of our galaxies which are at i(ab)@xmath824.2 mag , the uncertainties are dr@xmath32/r@xmath32@xmath830% and dn / n@xmath838% . as expected , at fainter apparent magnitudes the structural parameters are recovered with larger uncertainties . only for magnitudes fainter than i(ab)=24 mag is there a small bias ( @xmath620% ) of the index n towards smaller indices for galaxies with n@xmath39@xmath92.5 . recovery of the structural parameters with larger n are more affected than those with lower values . as shown in figure [ simul2 ] , we do not find any bias of our sizes or shape parameter as a function of the size of the objects . finally , we have also explored whether the variation of the psf along the image can affect the recovery of the size of the galaxies . using different stars in the images as a psf we find that the estimation of the sizes is robust to changes in the selected psf to analyze the data : the scatter between the sizes is @xmath4010% ( 1@xmath19 ) . the sizes of the galaxies presented in this paper were measured using the acs observed i - band , which implies that for galaxies at z@xmath91.3 sizes are retrieved in the rest - frame uv . to check whether this k - correction effect can affect our size estimates we have compared our sizes measured in the i - band with sizes obtained in the near infrared camera and multi - object spectrometer ( nicmos ) h - band ( f160w ) for a subset of 27 galaxies ( with 0.8@xmath8z@xmath81.8 and median z@xmath61.2 ) that were observed at both wavelengths . these nicmos data consist of 63 pointings of camera 3 ( 52@xmath4152 arcsec , 0.203 arcsec / pixel ) in the egs field . each pointing is the combination of four sub - pixel dithered exposures , with a total exposure time of 2600 sec . the final mosaic was assembled using a drizzle task and has a pixel scale of 0.10 arcsec . we found that sizes measured in the nicmos images , and those measured with the acs i - band data , are well correlated ( see figure [ nicmos ] ) . the scatter between both measurements is 32% ( 1@xmath19 ) . there seems to be a systematic ( although statistically non - significant ) bias of 19@xmath107% between both measurements : sizes measured in the redder band ( h - band ) are slightly smaller than those measured in the bluer band ( i - band ) . consequently , if any k - correction effect is affecting our results , the size evolution found here using the i - band filter would be an upper limit . interestingly , this trend of smaller sizes at redder bands dr@xmath42)/dlog@xmath43=-0.6(@xmath100.2 ) is in qualitative agreement to what is found in nearby galaxies -0.18@xmath9dr@xmath44(@xmath43)/dlog@xmath43@xmath9 - 0.25 ( barden et al . 2005 ; mcintosh et al . 2005 ) . however , due to the large uncertainty on the bias ( and consequently in the size corrections ) , and because we do not know how this correction could evolve with redshift we avoid making any k  correction in our results . in any case , it is important to note that the trend towards smaller sizes observed using the h - band does not strongly affect the main result of this paper . in fact , the evolution found in this paper would be even stronger using the near - infrared band sizes at high redshift . another source of concern in the size determination is the presence of an active galactic nuclei ( agn ) in the center of the galaxy which can bias our measurement towards smaller sizes ( daddi et al . deep ( 200 ks per pointing ) x - ray observations ( l@xmath45@xmath4610@xmath47 erg s@xmath17 at z@xmath61 ) from the chandra telescope in this field ( nandra et al . 2007 ; conselice et al . 2007b ) only detect emission in 35 objects ( i.e. @xmath64.2% our sample ) . we remove these potential agns from our sample in what follows , but our essential results are unchanged . in practice , any galaxy survey has a surface brightness limit beyond which the sample is incomplete . characterising this limit is particularly important for high - z samples , where the effects of the cosmological surface brightness dimming are severe . at a given total flux limit , the surface brightness limit translates into an upper limit on the size in which a galaxy can be detected . we have explored whether our k@xmath20-band selected sample could be incomplete at large sizes by examining the detectability of our galaxies as a function of their apparent magnitudes and sizes .    to determine the detection map of the palomar k@xmath20 band image , we have created two sets of 10@xmath48 mock sources each with intrinsic exponential or de vaucouleurs profiles uniformly distributed as follows : k@xmath20 band total magnitudes between 15.5 and 20.5 ( vega ) mag ( see fig . [ maghist ] ) , effective radius r@xmath32 between 0.0625 and 3.75 arcsec ( this will be equivalently to 0.5 - 30 h@xmath38 kpc at z@xmath61 ) , and ellipticities between 0 and 0.8 . the simulated sources are placed randomly on the real image and extracted as for the real source detection . we construct from these simulations detection maps giving the number of recovered sources over the number of input artificial sources per input magnitude and input log r@xmath32 bin ( see figure [ maps ] ) . at it is expected , galaxies with a de vaucouleurs profile , and consequently more centrally concentrated , are easier to detect at a given magnitude . over - plotted on the detection maps are the distribution of our sample galaxies . k@xmath20 band magnitudes are measured using the mag@xmath49 output from sextractor . the sizes are those estimated in the i - band . we are making the implicit assumption that sizes are similar in both bands ( i.e. that k - correction effects are not relevant , see previous section ) . at a given magnitude , the observed size distribution declines more rapidly to larger sizes than the detection limit . this indicates that our sample is not affected by incompleteness for the largest galaxies at a given magnitude . the accuracy of the structural parameters and the completeness of our sample has been demonstrated in the previous section . in this section we discuss the stellar mass  size relations for our massive galaxy sample . these relations are presented in figures [ disks ] ( n@xmath82.5 ; disk - like objects ) and [ spheroids ] ( n@xmath92.5 ; spheroid - like objects ) . in each of these figures , we have divided our sample ( over 0.2@xmath8z@xmath82 ) into six redshift slices with a width of dz=0.3 . over - plotted on our observed distributions are the mean and dispersion of the distribution of the srsic half - light radii from the sdss ( york et al . 2000 ) galaxies . we use the sdss sample as the local reference . as it has been done for our high - z galaxies , the sdss galaxy sizes were determined from a srsic model fit ( blanton et al . the characteristics of the sdss sample used here are detailed in shen et al . the mean of the sdss galaxies redshift distribution used for comparison is 0.1 . we use the sizes and the shapes estimated in the observed sdss r - band as this closely matches the v - band rest - frame filter at z@xmath60.1 . sdss stellar masses were derived using a kroupa ( 2001 ) imf , which gives the same masses as the chabrier imf used to measure the higher redshift sample stellar masses . figures [ disks ] and [ spheroids ] show that at a given stellar mass galaxies are progressively smaller at higher redshift . this evolution is particularly strong for more concentrated ( n@xmath92.5 ) galaxies . we find the remarkable result that there are no spheroid - like objects at z@xmath91.5 on the local relation .    to illustrate this size decrease at progressively higher z , figure [ mosaico ] shows the appearance of six of our n@xmath92.5 ( i.e. spheroid - like ) galaxies with the same stellar mass , but at different look - back times . the objects shown in figure [ mosaico ] have the mean structural properties of the galaxy population at each of the different redshift slices ( see the stellar mass - size relations in the above redshift intervals in figures [ disks ] and [ spheroids ] ) . to allow a fair comparison between the sizes of objects at very different redshifts , the limiting surface brightness in each panel is changed according to the cosmological surface bright dimming @xmath6(1+z)@xmath48 . for this reason the surface brightness of the object at z=0.35 is shown down to @xmath63.25 mag brighter than the object at z=1.85 . this figure visually illustrates that the most massive galaxies are progressively smaller at increasing redshift .    to quantify the size evolution , we measure the ratio between the observed size , and the expected size at a given stellar mass by comparing with the sdss ( shen et al . 2003 ) distribution at different redshifts . to estimate the expected size from sdss at a given stellar mass , we interpolate linearly between the sdss points when necessary . the evolution of the median and the dispersion of the above ratio are shown in figure [ evolution ] and listed in table [ data ] . the observed size evolution of m@xmath13@xmath910@xmath2 m@xmath5 galaxies is stronger than the one found in previous work using less massive galaxies ( see the detailed comparison of this issue in the next section ) . following recent claims ( i.e. maraston et al . 2006 ) that stellar masses could be systematically overstimated by a factor of few at high z , we have repeated our analysis under the assumption that our masses could be overestimated by a factor of 2 . in this case , at z@xmath61.5 , our galaxies will still be more compact than present - day galaxies of the same stellar mass by a factor of 1.6 for n@xmath82.5 and a factor of 3 for n@xmath92.5 . in other words , even a systematic effect of factor of 2 in the stellar mass determination can not avoid a significant evolution in the size of these galaxies . in fact , to prevent a significant evolution of the sizes of galaxies at a given stellar mass we found that , at z@xmath61.5 , our stellar masses would need to be overestimated by a factor of @xmath610 for galaxies with n@xmath82.5 and overestimated by a factor of @xmath650 for galaxies with n@xmath92.5 .    [ cols="^,^,^,^,^ " , ] an interesting point to explore is how the size evolution found here for the most massive galaxies compares with the size evolution observed for galaxies with lower masses . this comparison can be done in detail in the redshift range 0@xmath8z@xmath81 using the data from one of the largest sample currently available : the gems survey ( rix et al . the stellar mass - size relation of this survey has been already derived for late - type ( barden et al . 2005 ) and early - type ( mcintosh et al . 2005 ) galaxies . the gems late- and early - type separation criteria are based on the srsic index n. late - types are defined through n@xmath82.5 , and early types through n@xmath92.5 , and a colour within the `` red sequence '' ( bell et al . the comparison of the distribution of their data points with ours are shown in figure [ gemspalomar ] . it is encouraging to see that these two independent analyses and data sets match well where there is overlap in their stellar mass ( i.e. for the small subset of gems galaxies with m@xmath13@xmath910@xmath2 m@xmath5 ) . these two data sets allow us to compare the difference in size evolution in the 0@xmath8z@xmath81 redshift interval at two different mass ranges 10@xmath12@xmath8m@xmath13@xmath810@xmath2 m@xmath5 ( gems ) , and m@xmath13@xmath910@xmath2 m@xmath5 ( palomar ) . this is shown in figure [ gemspalomarevol ] . from this comparison we can see that more massive galaxies evolve in size much faster than lower mass objects ( particularly for disk - like galaxies ) . this mass dependent evolution was hinted in previous works ( trujillo et al . 2006a ) but our current large data set show this more clearly and robustly .    at higher redshift , the amount of data is more limited . at 1@xmath8z@xmath82 our results are in good agreement with recent findings ( based on a few objects ) of massive compact galaxies at high - z ( waddington et al . 2002 ; daddi et al . 2005 ; di serego alighieri et al . 2005 ; trujillo et al . 2006b ; longhetti et al . for example , using the 10 of the most massive galaxies ( 1.2@xmath8z@xmath81.7 ) in the munics survey , trujillo et al . ( 2006b ) found that these galaxies were a factor of 4@xmath50 smaller that local counterparts . at even higher z ( i.e. z@xmath62.5 ) there has been also recent claims of very compacts ( r@xmath32@xmath401 kpc ) massive galaxies ( trujillo et al . 2006a ; zirm et al . 2007 ; toft et al . as shown in section 4 the compact nature of our most massive galaxies at high - z can not be interpreted as a k - correction or agn effect . in addition , there is no observational evidence in the local universe for galaxies as massive and compact as the ones in our sample . these two observational facts raise the following two questions : first , how can these objects be so dense in the past ? second , how do these objects evolve in stellar mass and/or size in order to reach the current local relation ?    addressing the first question , recent theoretical results suggest that major galaxy mergers in the early universe had a much larger component of cold gas available than in the present ( khochfar & silk 2006a ) . these wet ( dissipative ) mergers generate very efficient and massive starbursts creating a very compact massive remnant . consequently , the very dense nature of our objects at high - z could reflect the much denser condition of the universe at the time of their formation . focusing on the second question , at lower redshifts the available amount of gas is less , and new ` dry ' ( dissipationless ) mergers ( van dokkum 2005 ; bell et al . 2006 ) would be the dominant mechanisms of size and stellar mass growing ( ciotti & van albada 2001 ; nipoti , londrillo & ciotti 2003 ; khochfar & burkert 2003 ; domnguez - tenreiro et al . 2006 ; naab , khochfar & burkert 2006 ; ciotti , lanzoni & volonteri 2007 ) . dry mergers are not efficient at forming new stars , but are efficient in increasing the size of the objects . a particular effective size evolutionary mechanism ( r@xmath32@xmath6m@xmath51 ) has been recently found ( boylan - kolchin , ma & quataert 2006 ) in mergers of galaxies with radial orbits along large - scale structure filaments . this kind of mechanism would be able to evolve our compact galaxies ( a factor of 4 smaller at z@xmath61.5 ) to the local relation with just two major ( equal - mass ) mergers . since @xmath52 very few gas rich mergers occur in massive galaxies ( e.g. , conselice et al . 2003 ; conselice 2006 ) , but a few dry mergers are possible based on pair counts ( e.g. , lin et al . in addition , dry mergers of similar mass objects ( and consequently , potentially similar ages and metallicities ) will also help to understand the age - uniformity found in the local massive ( spheroid ) galaxies . on the other hand , in agreement with our results here , new semi - analytical models ( somerville et al . 2007 ) find that disc - like galaxies ( i.e. those presumably with a relative quiet live ) evolve only mildly in size since high - z . summarising our results , we find that the size evolution of the most massive galaxies is not consistent with a scenario whereby massive galaxies were fully assembled in the early universe , and have subsequently evolved passively until today ( i.e. a pure `` monolithic '' scenario ) . in fact , our findings agree with a scenario where a fraction of the most massive galaxies possibly formed in a short `` monolithic - like '' collapse and then evolved through major gas - rich , or gas - poor merging . in this sense , the two scenarios would be just different phases of galaxy formation and evolution . our results , consequently , point to a scenario whereby the stellar populations of the most massive galaxies we observe today were located in different `` primordial '' massive galaxy pieces in the early universe . authors are grateful to m. barden and d. mcintosh for providing us with the gems data points to allow us a comparison of our results with their less massive galaxies . we acknowledge useful discussions with o. almaini and a. aragn - salamanca . we also thank the useful suggestions from an anonymous referee . the palomar and deep2 surveys would not have been completed without the active help of the staff at the palomar and keck observatories . the palomar survey was supported by nsf grant ast-0307859 and nasa stsci grant hst- ar-09920.01.a . support for the acs imaging of the egs in go program 10134 was provided by nasa through nasa grant hst - go-10134.13-a from the space telescope science institute . 99 aguilar l. a. , merritt d. , 1990 , apj , 354 , 33 arimoto n , & yoshii y. , 1987 , a&a , 173 , 23 baldry i.  k. , glazebrook k. , brinkmann j. , ivezi  , lupton r.  h , nichol r.  c. szalay a.  s. , 2004 , apj , 600 , 681 barden et al . , 2005 , apj , 635 , 959 bell e. f. et al . , 2004 , apj , 608 , 752 bell e. f. et al . , 2006 , apj , 640 , 241 blanton m. r. , et al . , 2003 , apj , 592 , 819 boylan - kolchin m. , ma c - p . , quataert e. , 2006 , mnras , 369 , 1081 bressan a. , chiosi c. , fagotto f. , 1994 , apjs , 94 , 63 bruzual g. astro - ph/0703052 bruzual g. , charlot s. , 2003 , mnras , 344 , 1000 bundy k. et al . , 2006 , apj , 651 , 120 cimatti a. , daddi e. , renzini a. , 2006 , a&a , 453 , l29 ciotti l. & van albada t. s. , 2001 , apj , 552 , l13 ciotti l. , lanzoni b. , & volonteri m. , 2007 , apj , 658 , 65 coil a. l. , newman j. a. , kaiser n. , davis m. , ma c .- p . , kocevski d.d . , koo d. c. , 2004 , apj , 617 , 765 conselice c. j. 2006 , apj , 639 , 120 conselice , c.j . , bundy , k. , ellis , r. , brichmann , j. , vogt , n. , phillips , a. 2005 , apj , 628 , 160 conselice c. j. , bershady , m.a . , dickinson , m. , papovich , c. 2003 , aj , 126 , 1183 conselice c. j. et al . , 2007a , apj , 660 , l55 conselice c. j. et al . , 2007b , mnras , submitted daddi e. , cimatti a. , renzini a , 2000 , a&a , 362 , l45 daddi e. et al . , 2005 , apj , 626 , 680 davis m. et al . , 2003 , spie , 4834 , 161 de lucia , g , springel v. , white s. d. m. , croton d. , kauffmann g. , 2006 , mnras , 366 , 499 di serego alighieri s. , et al . , 2005 , a&a , 442 , 125 domnguez  tenreiro , r. , oorbe , j. , siz , a. , artal , h. , serna , a. , 2006 , apj , 636 , l77 n. , bender r. , feulner g. , hopp u. , maraston c. , snigula j. , hill g.  j. , 2004 , apj , 608 , 742 n. , salvato m. , gabasch a. , bender r. , hopp u. , feulner g. , pannella m. , 2005 , apj , 619 , l131 eggen o. j. , lynden  bell d. , sandage a. r. , 1962 , apj , 136 , 748 faber s. m. , et al . 2005 , astro - ph/0506044 g. , gabasch a. , salvato m. , drory , n. , hopp u. , bender r. , 2005 , apj , 633 , l9 a.,panter b.,jimenez r. , dunlop j. , 2004 , nature , 428 , 625 hozumi s. , burkert a. , fujiwara t. , 2000 , mnras , 311 , 377 khochfar s. , burkert a. , 2003 , apj , 597 , l117 khochfar s. , silk j. , 2006a , mnras , 370 , 902 khochfar s. , silk j. , 2006b , apj , 648 , l21 kannappan , s.j . , & gawiser , e. 2007 , apj , 657 , l5 larson r. , 1975 , mnras , 173 , 671 lin , l. , et al . 2004 , apj , 617 , l9 londrillo p. , messina a. , stiavelli m. , 1991 , mnras , 250 , 54 longhetti m. et al . , 2007 , mnras , 374 , 614 mannucci f. , basile f. , poggianti b.m . , cimatti a. , daddi e. , pozzetti l. , vanzi l. , 2001 , mnras , 326 , 745 maraston , c. 2005 , mnras , 362 , 799 may a. , van albada t.s . , 1984 , mnras , 209 , 15 mcglynn t. a. , 1984 , apj , 281 , 13 mcgrath e. j. , stockton a. , canalizo g. , 2007a , apj , in press , astro - ph/0707.1046 mcgrath e. j. , stockton a. , canalizo g. , masanori i. , maihara t. , 2007b , apj , submitted , astro - ph/0707.1050 mcintosh d. et al . , 2005 , apj , 632 , 191 nandra k. et al . , 2007 , apjl , in press , astro - ph/0607270 nipoti c. , londrillo p. & ciotti l. , 2003 , mnras , 342 , 501 peng c.y . , ho l.c . , impey c.d . , rix h.w . , 2002 , aj , 124 , 266 pozzetti l. et al . 2003 , a&a , 402 , 387 pozzetti l. et al . 2007 , a&a , astro - ph/0704.1600 ravindranath s. et al . 2002 , apj , 604 , l9 renzini a. , 2007 , astro - ph/0702148 rix h .- w . et al . , 2004 , apj , 152 , 163 saracco p. et al . , 2005 , mnras , 357 , l40 srsic j .- l . 1968 , atlas de galaxias australes ( cordoba : observatorio astronomico ) shen s.,mo h.  j. , white s.  d.  m.,blanton m.  r. , kauffmann g.,voges w.,brinkmann j. , csabai i. , 2003 , mnras , 343 , 978 somerville r. , et al . , 2007 , apj , submitted , astro - ph/0612428 thomas d.,maraston c. , bender r. , de oliveira c.  m. , 2005 , apj , 621 , 673 toft s. , et al . , 2007 , apj , in press toomre a. , 1977 , in evolution of galaxies and stellar populations , ed . b. m. tinsley & r. b. larson ( new haven : yale univ . obs . ) , 401 trenti m. , bertin g. , van albada t.s . , 2005 , a&a , 433 , 57 trujillo i. et al . , 2004 , apj , 604 , 521 trujillo i. et al . , 2006a , apj , 650 , 18 trujillo i. et al . , 2006b , mnras , 373 , l36 udry s. , 1993 , a&a , 268 , 35 van albada t. s. , 1982 , mnras , 201 , 939 van dokkum p. g. , 2005 , aj , 130 , 2647 white s.d.m , frenk c. s. , 1991 , 379 , 52 worthey g. , faber s. m. , gonzalez j. j. , 1992 , apj , 398 , 69 york d. , et al . 2000 , aj , 120 , 1579 zirm a. w. , et al . , 2007 , apj , 656 , 66 note : full data table is available on the online version of mnras or by request to the authors . the following table contains the information about the structural parameters of the sample of galaxies analysed in this paper . column 1 indicates the galaxy identification , column 2 lists the apparent k - band magnitude in the vega system , column 3 is the efffective radius along the semimajor axis , column 4 indicates the value of the srsic index of the fit , column 5 is the ellipticity of the source , column 6 is the stellar mass of the galaxy in units of 10@xmath12h@xmath3@xmath4m@xmath5 , column 7 is the measured redshift of the object , column 8 and 9 are the r.a . and dec . of the source and , finally , column 10 specifies whether the redshift was determined spectroscopically ( 1 ) or photometrically ( 0 ) . 11051619 & 16.75 & 0.90 & 3.60 & 0.38 & 11.94 & 0.46 & 214.258865 & 52.399944 & 0 + 12004106 & 17.13 & 0.80 & 6.72 & 0.11 & 26.72 & 0.74 & 214.379730 & 52.443295 & 1 + 12004308 & 16.95 & 0.89 & 1.23 & 0.58 & 18.03 & 0.64 & 214.266815 & 52.412926 & 0 + 12004443 & 17.06 & 0.48 & 5.04 & 0.21 & 26.96 & 0.77 & 214.318298 & 52.429092 & 1 +
Abstract:

Answer: using the combined capabilities of the large near - infrared palomar / deep-2 survey , and the superb resolution of the acs hst camera , we explore the size evolution of 831 very massive galaxies ( m@xmath0@xmath110@xmath2h@xmath3@xmath4m@xmath5 ) since z@xmath62 . we split our sample according to their light concentration using the srsic index @xmath7 . at a given stellar mass , both low ( n@xmath82.5 ) and high ( n@xmath92.5 ) concentrated objects were much smaller in the past than their local massive counterparts . this evolution is particularly strong for the highly concentrated ( spheroid - like ) objects . at z@xmath61.5 , massive spheroid - like objects were a factor of 4(@xmath100.4 ) smaller ( i.e. almost two orders of magnitudes denser ) than those we see today . these small sized , high mass galaxies do not exist in the nearby universe , suggesting that this population merged with other galaxies over several billion years to form the largest galaxies we see today . [ firstpage ]    galaxies : evolution ; galaxies : elliptical and lenticular , cd ; galaxies : formation ; galaxies : fundamental parameters ; galaxies : high redshift ; galaxies : structure