text:
# 1 Kalb-Ramond case

## 1 Kalb-Ramond case

The Ansatz for the metric is taken to be

$$ds^2=N^2(\sigma )d\sigma ^2\eta ^2(\sigma )\overline{g}_{ij}dx^idx^jR^2(\sigma )h_{mn}dy^mdy^n,$$
(4)
where $`\overline{g}_{ij}`$ is a metric of constant curvature, i.e. $`R(\overline{g})_{ij}\lambda \overline{g}_{ij}`$, and $`h_{mn}`$ is a Ricci flat metric111Most of the equations in what follows can easily be generalized to include a curvature for $`h_{mn}`$. on the Kähler manifold. Furthermore, the dimension of the Kähler manifold is $`d_k`$ and the dimension of the constant curvature part is $`Dd1d_k`$, where $`d`$ is the dimension of spacetime, which will be left arbitrary. Note that it is natural to take the internal space to be compact, which means that it actually is a Calabi-Yau space. For the sake of argument though, we will always refer to the internal space as a Kähler space, since this is the only property that is really needed.

Our Ansatz for the Kalb-Ramond field, in form notation, reads

$$B=f(\sigma )𝒥=\frac{1}{2}f(\sigma )𝒥_{mn}dy^mdy^n,$$
(5)
where $`𝒥`$ is the integrable almost complex structure, the Kähler form, on the Kähler manifold and as such satisfies

$$𝒥_{}^{m}{}_{p}{}^{}𝒥_{}^{p}{}_{n}{}^{}=\delta _{}^{m}{}_{n}{}^{},\overline{}_m𝒥_{np}=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0},$$
(6)
where $`\overline{}`$ is the connection on the Kähler manifold. Finally, the dilaton is taken to depend on time, $`\sigma `$, only.

Calculating the equation of motion for the Kalb-Ramond field, one finds that

$$\dot{f}=\mathrm{}Ne^{2\varphi }\eta ^DR^{4d_k},$$
(7)
where $`\mathrm{}`$ is an arbitrary constant. Defining the field

$$\psi =\varphi +\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\left(N\right)\frac{D}{2}\mathrm{log}\left(\eta \right)\frac{d_k}{2}\mathrm{log}\left(R\right),$$
(8)
introducing $`M=e^{2\psi }N`$ and changing variables by $`e^{2\psi }d\sigma =dt`$, one can write the equations of motion as

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{log}R\right)^{\prime \prime }+\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2}R^4,`$ (9)
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{log}\eta \right)^{\prime \prime }\lambda \eta ^2M^2,`$ (10)
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{log}M\right)^{\prime \prime }D\lambda \eta ^2M^2,`$ (11)
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\left(\mathrm{log}M\right)^{}\right]^2D\left[\left(\mathrm{log}\eta \right)^{}\right]^2d_k\left[\left(\mathrm{log}R\right)^{}\right]^2\frac{d_k\mathrm{}^2}{4}R^4,`$ (12)
where the prime indicates derivation with respect to $`t`$.

The above equations can easily be solved to give $`\lambda =0`$, $`M=e^{\alpha t}`$, $`\eta =e^{\beta t}`$ and

$$R(t)=R_0\mathrm{cosh}^{1/2}\left(\mathrm{}R_0^2t\right),$$
(13)
which after substitution in Eq. (12) leads to

$$\alpha ^2D\beta ^2=\frac{d_k\mathrm{}^2R_0^4}{4}.$$
(14)
In these coordinates the dilaton, or equivalently the string coupling squared, is $`g_s^2=e^{2\varphi }=M^1\eta ^DR^{d_k}`$ and the Kalb-Ramond field strength is $`H=\mathrm{}R^4dt𝒥`$.

Although there is a world of possibilities in the above class of solutions, perhaps the most interesting case is the one where $`\beta =0`$, since then the uncompactified part of spacetime is just Minkowski space: Taking $`\alpha =1`$ for convenience, one finds that the solution in, string, cosmological time, $`\tau `$, reads

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`d\tau ^2d\stackrel{}{x}_{(D)}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}R_0^2B(\tau )^1h_{mn}dy^mdy^n,`$
$`e^{2\varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\sqrt{2}R_0\right)^{d_k}\tau ^1B(\tau )^{d_k/2},`$
$`H`$ $`=`$ $`8R_0^2d_k^{1/2}\tau ^1B(\tau )^2d\tau 𝒥,`$ (15)
$`B(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`\tau ^{2/\sqrt{d_k}}+\tau ^{2/\sqrt{d_k}}.`$ (16)
As one can see, this is a completely regular solution, modulo the usual gravitational singularities, which smoothly interpolates between two Kasner-like regions . From the lower dimensional point of view, the Ansatz considered above corresponds to a solution of dilaton-gravity coupled to moduli , where the breathing mode, $`R`$, and $`f`$ are the scalar fields parameterizing an $`SL(2,)/U(1)`$ coset model. When $`d_k=6`$, the above solutions can be obtained from the solutions given in  by applying an $`SL(2,)`$ transformation on the moduli.

## 2 RR case

In much the same way as in the foregoing subsection, we can use the RR two form in type IIA, to trigger compactification. In this case the equations of motion and the Bianchi identity imply that

$$F_{(2)}=\mathrm{}𝒥=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{}𝒥_{mn}dy^mdy^n.$$
(17)
Applying the same steps as in the foregoing paragraph, one finds

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{log}R\right)^{\prime \prime }+\frac{(d_k4)\mathrm{}^2}{8}M\eta ^DR^{d_k4},`$ (18)
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{log}\eta \right)^{\prime \prime }+\frac{d_k\mathrm{}^2}{8}M\eta ^DR^{d_k4}\lambda \eta ^2M^2,`$ (19)
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{log}M\right)^{\prime \prime }\frac{d_k\mathrm{}^2}{8}M\eta ^DR^{d_k4}D\lambda \eta ^2M^2,`$ (20)
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\left(\mathrm{log}M\right)^{}\right]^2D\left[\left(\mathrm{log}\eta \right)^{}\right]^2d_k\left[\left(\mathrm{log}R\right)^{}\right]^2\frac{d_k\mathrm{}^2}{4}M\eta ^DR^{d_k4}D\lambda M^2\eta ^2,`$ (21)
Looking at the above expressions, one sees that they simplify enormously when one considers the case $`d_k=4`$: In that case the Kähler breathing mode decouples completely and one has $`R=R_0e^{\alpha t}`$. Equating also the powers of $`M`$ and $`\eta `$ in the equations, i.e. putting $`M=\eta ^{D+2}`$, one necessarily has to impose

$$\lambda =\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{4}\left(D+3\right).$$
(22)
The two remaining equations are implied by

$$\left(\mathrm{log}\eta \right)^{}=\pm \left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{4}\eta ^{2(D+1)}+\frac{4\alpha ^2}{D(D+3)+4}\right]^{1/2}.$$
(23)
Now, when $`\alpha 0`$ the solution to the above equation is complex, but when $`\alpha =0`$ one finds that

$$\eta =\left(A\frac{(D+1)\mathrm{}^2}{2}t\right)^{\frac{1}{D+1}},$$
(24)
where the range of $`t`$ has to be chosen such that the function is well defined.

For a stringy cosmological observer, i.e. introducing a time coordinate $`Mdt=d\tau `$, the above solution is

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`d\tau ^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2}}\tau \right)^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ^2R_0^2h_{mn}dy^mdy^n,`$ (25)
$`e^\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`4R_0^2\mathrm{}^2\tau ^1.`$ (26)
So, we see that the solution describes a 6-dimensional open FRW with a dilaton such that the string coupling strength goes to zero when $`\tau \mathrm{}`$.

In order to find a solution for general $`d_k`$, we shall follow the same stratagem as above, i.e. we put $`R=\eta ^\alpha `$, $`M=\eta ^\beta `$ and will equate the powers on the righthand sides of Eqs. (21). It then follows that $`\beta =D+2+\alpha (d_k4)`$, using which one can calculate

$`\lambda `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{16}}\left(d_k(D+3)+(d_k4)^2\right),`$ (27)
$`\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{d_k4}{d_k(D+1)+(d_k4)^2}},`$ (28)
$`\beta `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d_k(D+1)(D+2)+D(d_k4)^2}{d_k(D+1)+(d_k4)^2}},`$ (29)
The dilaton is then fixed to $`e^\varphi =\eta ^{2\alpha 1}`$.

As before, the two remaining equations are implied by

$$\left(\mathrm{log}\eta \right)^{}=\pm B\eta ^{\beta 1},$$
(30)
where

$$B^2=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{16}\frac{\left[d_k(D+1)+(d_k4)^2\right]^2}{d_k(D+1)+(D1)(d_k4)^2}.$$
(31)
This then means that

$$\eta =\left[A(\beta 1)Bt\right]^{\frac{1}{\beta 1}},$$
(32)
where $`A`$ is some integration constant and the range of $`t`$ has to be chosen such that the above function is well-defined.

Choosing the minus-sign in the last equation in order to switch to the cosmological time, $`\tau `$, one finds that $`\eta =B\tau `$ and the solution reads

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`d\tau ^2B^2\tau ^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ^2\left(B\tau \right)^{2\alpha }h_{mn}dy^mdy^n,`$ (33)
$`e^\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\left(B\tau \right)^{2\alpha 1}.`$ (34)
Seeing Eq. (28), one may wonder whether the breathing mode for the Kähler mode could grow faster than $`\tau `$, and thus spoil cosmological compactification. This can however happen for $`d_k=2`$ only, in which case $`\alpha =2d^1`$ which, seeing that we at least must have $`d=3`$ in order to apply the Ansatz, is always smaller than 1. A similar analysis for the dilaton shows that it can blow up at large times only when $`d_k=2`$, $`d=3`$ and is regular in the rest of the cases.

## 3 Conclusions

Although more general solutions are bound to exist, the simple examples discussed in this work show that using a Kähler form instead of a volume form is a viable option when looking for stringy cosmological solutions.

It would be interesting to see whether this kind of compactifications survive when coupling to matter is enabled and whether the dimension of the Kähler manifold will be of any importance. It would also be interesting to generalize the above work to Heterotic strings/M-theory (See e.g. ) and to investigate cosmological solutions when other type II fields are present. Work in these directions is in progress.

## Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank E. Álvarez, T. Ortín and M.A. Vázquez-Mozo for useful discussions and the referee for very useful remarks. PM would like to thank Iberdrola and the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid for their support.


format: text

text:
# Formation of ultrashort pulses with sub-Poissonian photon statistics

\[

## Abstract

A simple method for the production of ultrashort light pulses (USPs) with suppressed photon fluctuations is considered. The method is based on self-phase modulation (SPM) of an USP in a nonlinear medium (optical fibre) and subsequent transmission of pulse through a dispersive optical element.
Enlarged version of the article published in *Quantum Electronics*, 29 No. 7, 61-63 (1999)

\] Ultrashort light pulses (USPs) continue to draw the attention of investigators today. The state of the art in this area of laser physics in the late 1980s was set forth by S. A. Akhmanov *et al*. in Refs.,. In the past decade, considerable progress has been made in quantum optics in the generation of nonclassical (the so called squeezed) light fields. The formation and application of USPs in a nonclassical state makes possible to combine in experiments a high time resolution with a low level of fluctuations.

In principle, one can obtain pulsed light fields in a nonclassical state by using the same nonlinear optical interaction as those used in the case of continuous fields ,. Parametric amplification is a technique that is most extensively used for this purpose nowadays. In the case of degenerate three-frequency parametric amplification, quadrature-squeezed light is produced. However, this light is found to have super-Poissonian statistics directly at the output of the amplifier, and one needs interferometers to transform it to get sub-Poissonian statistics. One can obtain light with sub-Poissonian photon statistics with the aid of nonlinear interferometric devices in the presence of self-phase modulation (see, e.g., Ref.). Note that the self-phase modulation itself is not accompanied by a change in photon statistics.

In a recent paper, we studied SPM of a light pulse and its subsequent propagation in a dispersive linear medium (or the passage through optical compressors). In this case, pulses with sub-Poissonian photon statistics can be formed. We managed to make an accurate calculation of the process under consideration owing to the consistent quantum theory developed by us for the self-action of light pulses in a medium with inertial nonlinearity ,. The method of formation of pulses with sub-Poissonian statistics proposed here is simple for experimental realization and stable against external random effects (technical fluctuations). Note that the theory developed in Refs., for the self-effect of USPs takes into account a relaxation time of a nonlinearity that determines the region of the spectrum of quantum fluctuations which are of substantial importance in the formation of squeezed light and does not limit the amplitude of quantum fluctuation.

When analysed from the quantum point of view, SPM of USPs is described by the expression ,.

$$\widehat{A}(t,l)=e^{\widehat{O}(t)}\widehat{A}_0(t),$$
(1)
and the Hermite conjugate operator $`\widehat{A}^+(t,l)`$. Here $`\widehat{A}^+(t,l)`$ ($`\widehat{A}(t,l)`$) is the photon creation (annihilation) operator for the given section $`x`$ at a given moment of time $`t`$ (the output of a nonlinear medium is specified by the section $`x=l`$, and the input is specified by the section $`x=0`$, $`\widehat{A}(t,x=0)=\widehat{A}_0(t)`$), $`\widehat{O}(t)=i\gamma q[\widehat{n}_0(t)]`$, and $`\gamma `$ is the coefficient related to nonlinear properties of a medium and proportional to the length $`l`$ in it. The expression $`\gamma q[\widehat{n}_0(t)]`$ characterizes the nonlinear phase incursion,

$$q[\widehat{n}_0(t)]=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}H(|t_1|)\widehat{n}_0(tt_1)𝑑t_1,$$
(2)
and $`\widehat{n}_0(t)=\widehat{A}_0^+(t)\widehat{A}_0(t)`$ is the operator of the ”density” of the number of photons at the input of a nonlinear medium. The function $`H(t)`$ takes into account a finite response time of the nonlinearity of a medium. In view of the causality principle, $`H(t)0`$ for $`t0`$ and $`H(t)=0`$ for $`t<0`$. In expression (1) and (2), $`t=t^{^{}}x/u`$ is the time in the moving coordinate system, $`t^{^{}}`$ is the current time, and $`u`$ is the pulse velocity in a medium.

In the case of SPM (see (1)) discussed here, the quadrature-squeezed light , is formed, and the photon statistics in a medium is not changed because the operator of the number of photons $`\widehat{n}(t,l)=\widehat{n}_0(t)`$ remains unchanged. In what follows, we show that the propagation of a pulse (see (1)) through a dispersive optical device is able to transform its initial Poissonian statistics into sub- or super-Poissonian statistics.

For example, let us consider the propagation of a pulse in a dispersive linear medium. At the output of the medium, we have the following expression for the photon annihilation operator :

$$\widehat{B}(t,z)=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}G(tt_1,z)\widehat{A}(t_1,l)𝑑t_1.$$
(3)
It is known that the operators $`\widehat{A}(t,l)`$ and $`\widehat{B}(t,z)`$ are bound to satisfy commutation relation of the $`[\widehat{C}(t_1),\widehat{C}^+(t_2)]=\delta (t_1t_2)`$ type. In view of relation (3) between the operators under consideration, we find the condition imposed on the Green function $`G(t)`$ of the dispersive element:

$$\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}G(t_1t,z)G^{}(t_2t,z)𝑑t=\delta (t_2t_1).$$
(4)
Let us introduce the operator of the number of photons over the measurement time $`𝒯`$,

$$\widehat{N}_𝒯(t,z)=\underset{t𝒯/2}{\overset{t+𝒯/2}{}}\widehat{N}(t_1,z)𝑑t_1,$$
(5)
and define the Mandel parameter

$$Q(t,z)=\frac{\epsilon (t,z)}{\widehat{N}_𝒯(t,z)},$$
(6)
where

$`\widehat{N}(t,z)`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{B}^+(t,z)\widehat{B}(t,z);`$ (7)
$`\epsilon (t,z)`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{N}_𝒯^2(t,z)\widehat{N}_𝒯(t,z)^2\widehat{N}_𝒯(t,z).`$ (8)
The parameter $`Q(t,z)`$ characterizes the difference between photon statistics and Poissonian statistics (for the latter $`Q(t,z)=0`$). The angle brackets in (8) denote averaging over the initial quantum state of the pulse.

One can calculate expression (8) by using the algebra of time dependent Bose operators ,. In this case we have the following relations:

$$\widehat{A}_0(t_1)e^{\widehat{O}(t_2)}=e^{\widehat{O}(t_2)+(t_2t_1)}\widehat{A}_0(t_1),$$
(9)
$$e^{\widehat{O}(t)}=\widehat{𝐍}\mathrm{exp}\{\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}[e^{(t_1)}1]\widehat{n}_0(tt_1)dt_1\},$$
(10)
where $`(t)=i\gamma h(t)`$, $`h(t)=H(|t|)`$ and $`\widehat{𝐍}`$ is the operator of normal ordering.

In the case of a coherent initial pulse, a small nonlinear phase incursion per photon, and the pulse duration $`\tau _p`$ is considerably grater than the times $`𝒯`$ and $`\tau _r`$ ($`\tau _r`$ is the nonlinearity relaxation time). After some cumbersome calculations, taking into account expression (9) and (10) one gets

$$\epsilon (t,z)=2\gamma 𝒯^2Im[I_1^2(t,z)I_2^{}(t,z)],$$
(11)
where

$`I_1(t,z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}G(tt_1,z)\alpha (t_1)e^{i\psi (t_1)}𝑑t_1;`$ (12)
$`I_2(t,z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}G(tt_1,z)G(tt_2,z)\alpha (t_1)\alpha (t_2)`$ (13)
$`\times `$ $`h(t_1t_2)e^{i[\psi (t_1)+\psi (t_2)]}dt_1dt_2;`$ (14)
Here $`\alpha (t)`$ is the eigenvalue of the operator $`\widehat{A}_0(t)`$; $`\psi (t)=2\gamma \overline{n}_0(t)`$ is the nonlinear phase incursion, $`\overline{n}_0(t)=|\alpha (t)|^2`$ is the average density of the initial number of photons, and $`\widehat{N}_𝒯(t,z)=𝒯|I_1(t,z)|^2`$.

Let us assume that the Green function G(t) has the form

$$G(t,z)=(i2\pi k_2z)^{1/2}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{it^2}{2k_2z}\right),$$
(15)
where $`z`$ is the distance traveled in the dispersive linear medium. We have the coefficients $`k_2>0`$ for normal dispersion of the group velocity, and $`k_2<0`$ for anomalous dispersion. Expression (15) corresponds to the case when dispersive properties of a medium are taken into account in the second approximation of the dispersion theory .

The dispersion effect is known  to have a spatial analogue in the form of diffraction spreading of a wave beam. The quantum description of diffraction in nonlinear optical processes was considered first by S. A. Akhmanov *et al*. in Ref. (see also Ref.), where it was shown that the mixing of different angular components of a parametrical amplified beam is able to cause additional nonclassical effects. One can expect similar effects in the case under consideration. The self-interaction effect of a pulse given by expression (1) is accompanied by changes in its phase (and therefore frequency) over time. In the course of its passage through dispersive linear elements, a frequency-modulated pulse of this type is compressed or stretched . It is precisely this effect that is able to change its photon statistics.

Let us determine the parameter $`Q(t,z)`$. To simplify calculations, we take the nonlinearity response function in the form $`h(t)=(1/\tau _r)\mathrm{exp}(t^2/\tau _r^2)`$. Let a pulse be initially of the Gaussian form $`\overline{n}_0(t)=\overline{n}_0\mathrm{exp}\left(t^2/\tau _p^2\right)`$. In the paraxial approximation, i.e., in the case where the phase $`\psi (t)`$ is replaced with $`\psi _0(1t^2/\tau _p^2)`$, ($`\psi _0=2\gamma \overline{n}_0`$), we obtain for $`\tau _p>\tau _r`$:

$$\widehat{N}_𝒯(t,z)=\overline{n}_0𝒯V^1(z)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{t^2}{V^2(z)\tau _p^2}\right),$$
(16)
$`Q(0,z)=`$ $`\psi _0`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{𝒯}{\tau _p}}\right]\mathrm{sin}\{\mathrm{arctan}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\phi (z)}{\varpi (z)}}\right)`$ (17)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{arctan}({\displaystyle \frac{2\phi _d(z)\varpi (z)}{2\phi (z)\phi _d(z)\varpi ^2(z)}}\left)\right\}`$ (18)
$`/`$ $`\left[\varpi ^4(z)2\phi ^2(z)\varpi ^2(z)+4\phi ^4(z)\right]^{1/4},`$ (19)
where

$`V^2(z)=\varpi ^2(z)+\phi ^2(z);`$ $`\varpi (z)=1s\psi _0\phi (z);`$ (20)
$`\phi (z)={\displaystyle \frac{z}{D}};\phi _d(z)={\displaystyle \frac{z}{d}};`$ $`D={\displaystyle \frac{\tau _p^2}{|k_2|}};d={\displaystyle \frac{\tau _r^2}{|k_2|}};`$ (21)
$`D`$ and $`d`$ are the characteristic dispersion lengths, $`s=1`$ for $`k_2<0`$, and $`s=1`$ for $`k_2>0`$. Let us restrict our consideration to the analysis of the parameter $`Q(t,z)`$ for $`t=0`$, because expression (19) for an arbitrary moment of time $`t`$ is rather cumbersome.

From (16) and (19) it follows that one can have $`Q(t,z)<0`$, i.e., obtain a pulse with sub-Poissonian photon statistics through both compression ($`s=1`$) and spreading ($`s=1`$) of a pulse. Of particular interest from the practical point of view is the case of anomalous group velocity dispersion ($`s=1`$) in which the compression of a phase-modulated pulse (see (16)) takes place. The dependence of the Mandel parameter and the average number of photons in this case are presented in Fig.1-Fig.2 and Fig.3.

One can see that the suppression of fluctuation of the number of photons becomes noticeable for the nonlinear phase $`\psi _0>1`$. For a given nonlinear phase $`\psi _0`$, there is a certain dispersive phase incursion for which the suppression of the number of photons is the greatest. According to (16), this is obtained for $`\phi _{opt}(z)=1/\psi _0`$. In this case, the Mandel parameter has the minimum value $`Q_{min}=\left[𝒯/\tau _p\right]\psi _0^2`$. Note that a pulse has the minimal duration for $`\phi (z)=\psi _0/(1+\psi _0^2)`$. For $`\psi _01`$ both extremities are almost coincident.

As follows from calculations, the photon statistics for the measurement time $`𝒯\tau _p`$ is of the Poissonian type. A situation identical in many aspects to the one considered here was observed in spectral measurements of fluctuations of femtosecond pulses transmitted through an optical fibre in the region of normal group-velocity dispersion. An increase in the spectral bandwidth of a filter caused an increase of the level of fluctuations .

Let us present a numerical example. Consider the interaction of a pulse at a wavelength of $`1`$ $`\mu m`$ in an optical fibre, and let its initial duration and maximum intensity be $`2\tau _p=10ps`$ and $`10^7Wcm^2`$. In this case, the nonlinear phase in a quartz fibre for the path length $`l=100m`$ is $`\psi _0=3`$. If the resulting USP travels through an optical compressor with anomalous dispersion $`|k_2|=10^{26}s^2cm^1`$, the dispersion phase $`\phi _{opt}(z)=1/\psi _0`$ is obtained at a distance of about $`8m`$. This example illustrates the feasibility of formation of USPs with sub-Poissonian photon statistics by the method proposed above.

The obtained result shows that it is possible in principle to form a pulse with sub-Poissonian photon statistics in the case where a high-intensity pulse undergoes SPM during its travel through a nonlinear medium and subsequently passes a dispersive optical device (an optical compressor or an optical fibre). In view of the fact that these processes occur in succession, one can choose an optimum scheme or optimum conditions at each transformation stage. In the specific case of formation of low-intensity USPs in a nonclassical state, one can attenuate high-intensity pulses at the output of a nonlinear medium. It is natural that this is accompanied by a partial loss of nonclassical properties. It should be noted that in the case of formation of optical solitons, SPM and the dispersion effect take place simultaneously .

Authors are grateful to V. A. Vysloukh for fruitful discussions. This work was supported in part by the Fundamental Metrology Program of the State Committee on Science and Technology.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

For compact Lie groups, conjugacy classes are essentially eigenvalues up to the Weyl group \[Ad\]. Thus the enormous physics and mathematical literature on eigenvalues of random matrices (see \[M\] for a survey) is often a study of conjugacy classes. Although the field is rapidly evolving, perhaps the closest thing to a true probabilistic understanding of eigenvalues of such matrices are the papers of Dyson \[Dy1, Dy2\]. An equally rich theory exists for the symmetric groups. The cycles of random permutations have a probabilistic description using Poisson processes \[LShe\]. The small cycles of a randomly chosen permutation are asymptotically Poisson, the medium length cycles relate to Brownian motion \[DeP\], and the long cycles relate to stick breaking \[ScV\]. The cycle structure of random permutations has numerous applications to real world problems such as population genetics (for this and more see the reference list in \[F1\]).

Some years back Persi Diaconis observed to the author that a probabilistic understanding of conjugacy classes of finite groups of Lie type was missing and urged him to find one. The paper \[F2\] provided a useful and beautiful picture for the finite general linear and unitary groups, with connections to symmetric function theory, but gave only partial results for the symplectic and orthogonal groups. The purpose of this article is to complete the program for the finite classical groups. To this two caveats should be added. First, only odd characteristic symplectic and orthogonal groups are considered. As is clear from \[W\], the even characteristic conjugacy classes have a very complicated description; a different view is given in \[FNP\]. Second, the current paper lumps together unipotent conjugacy classes with the same underlying Jordan form. As indicated at the end of the paper, this can be remedied, but the resulting formulas seem too complicated to be useful.

Before describing the contents of this paper, it is worth remarking that the probabilistic study of Jordan forms of unipotent upper triangular matrices over a finite field has a fascinating theory behind it. From the theory of wild quivers there is a provable sense in which conjugacy classes of upper triangular matrices over a finite field have no simple description; hence the reduction to Jordan form is necessary. A lovely probabilistic description of Jordan form is given in \[K\] and is exploited in \[B\]. The survey \[F3\] links their work with symmetric function theory and potential theory.

The main motivation for the current paper is \[F4\], which gave a Markov chain description of the conjugacy classes of the finite general linear and unitary groups. It is worth recalling the general nature of that description, as a variation of it occurs here. The conjugacy classes of $`GL(n,q)`$ are parameterized by rational canonical form; for each irreducible polynomial $`\varphi z`$ over $`F_q`$, one chooses a partition $`\lambda _\varphi `$ of an integer $`|\lambda _\varphi |`$, subject to the constraint that $`_\varphi deg(\varphi )|\lambda _\varphi |=n`$. One can then define a probability measure $`M`$ on the set of all partitions of all natural numbers by taking the limit as $`n\mathrm{}`$ of $`\lambda _{z1}`$ for a uniformly chosen element of $`GL(n,q)`$. (The polynomial $`z1`$ is taken without loss of generality. For other polynomials one simply replaces $`q`$ by $`q`$ raised to the degree of the polynomial in all formulas. Furthermore, asymptotically the distributions on partitions for different polynomials are independent). Recall that partitions can be viewed geometrically. For example the diagram of the partition $`(5441)`$ is:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}.& .& .& .& .\\ .& .& .& .& \\ .& .& .& .& \\ .& & & & \end{array}$$

The Markov chain method of sampling from $`M`$ operates by choosing the size of the first column according to a certain probability distribution; then given that column $`i`$ has size $`a`$, column $`i+1`$ will have size $`b`$ with probability $`K(a,b)`$. The remarkable fact is that the probabilities $`K(a,b)`$ are independent of $`i`$, yielding a Markov chain. An immediate consequence of this viewpoint was an elementary probabilistic proof of the Rogers-Ramanujan identities, which suggested generalizations to quivers.

The main result of this note is that a similar description occurs for the symplectic and orthogonal cases, except that now the description will require two Markov chains $`K_1`$ and $`K_2`$ defined on the natural numbers. These Markov chains have the property that they can never move up, and $`K_1`$ has the additional property that it can only move down by an even amount. For the symplectic case, steps with column number $`i`$ odd use $`K_1`$ and steps with column number $`i`$ even use $`K_2`$. For the orthogonal case, steps with column number $`i`$ odd use $`K_2`$ and steps with column number $`i`$ even use $`K_1`$. The Markov chains $`K_1,K_2`$ are the same for both cases. The only disappointing aspect of our result is that the product matrices $`K_1K_2`$ and $`K_2K_1`$ do not seem to have a simple diagonalization; this blocked us from proving Rogers-Ramanujan type identities for the symplectic and orthogonal groups.

The structure of this paper is as follows. Section 2 recalls the conjugacy classes of the symplectic and orthogonal groups and defines measures on partitions from them, giving combinatorially useful rewritings. Section 3 begins with generalizations of formulas of Rudavlis and Shinoda \[RShi\], \[Shi\] and proves the aforementioned description in terms of Markov chains. In fact it is shown that the set-up extends to a more general family of measures on partitions with a parameter $`u`$.

## 2 Conjugacy Classes and Measures on Partitions

Let $`\lambda `$ be a partition of some non-negative integer $`|\lambda |`$ into parts $`\lambda _1\lambda _2\mathrm{}`$. Let $`m_i(\lambda )`$ be the number of parts of $`\lambda `$ of size $`i`$, and let $`\lambda ^{}`$ be the partition dual to $`\lambda `$ in the sense that $`\lambda _i^{}=m_i(\lambda )+m_{i+1}(\lambda )+\mathrm{}`$. Let $`n(\lambda )`$ be the quantity $`_{i1}(i1)\lambda _i`$. It is also useful to define the diagram associated to $`\lambda `$ as the set of points $`(i,j)Z^2`$ such that $`1j\lambda _i`$. We use the convention that the row index $`i`$ increases as one goes downward and the column index $`j`$ increases as one goes to the right. So the diagram of the partition $`(5441)`$ is as in the introduction.

The following combinatorial lemma about parititions will be helpful in what follows. For a proof, one simply uses the fact that $`\lambda _i^{}=m_i(\lambda )+m_{i+1}(\lambda )+\mathrm{}`$.

###### Lemma 1

$$\underset{h<i}{}2hm_h(\lambda )m_i(\lambda )+\underset{i}{}(i1)m_i(\lambda )^2=\underset{i}{}(\lambda _i^{})^2\underset{i}{}m_i(\lambda )^2$$

We also recall the following formulas for the sizes of finite symplectic and orthogonal groups in odd characteristic.

$`|Sp(2n,q)|`$ $`=`$ $`q^{n^2}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(q^{2i}1)`$
$`|O^\pm (2n+1,q)|`$ $`=`$ $`2q^{n^2}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(q^{2i}1)`$
$`|O^\pm (2n,q)|`$ $`=`$ $`2q^{n^2n}(q^n1){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}(q^{2i}1)`$
### 2.1 Symplectic groups

Wall \[W\] parametrized the conjugacy classes of the finite symplectic groups and found formulas for their sizes. Let us recall his parametrization for the case of odd characteristic. Given a a polynomial $`\varphi (z)`$ with coefficients in $`F_q`$ and non vanishing constant term, define a polynomial $`\overline{\varphi }`$ by

$$\overline{\varphi }=\frac{z^{deg(\varphi )}\varphi (\frac{1}{z})}{\varphi (0)}.$$

Wall showed that a conjugacy class of $`Sp(2n,q)`$ corresponds to the following data. To each monic, non-constant, irreducible polynomial $`\varphi z\pm 1`$ associate a partition $`\lambda _\varphi `$ of some non-negative integer $`|\lambda _\varphi |`$. To $`\varphi `$ equal to $`z1`$ or $`z+1`$ associate a symplectic signed partition $`\lambda (\pm )_\varphi `$, by which is meant a partition of some natural number $`|\lambda (\pm )_\varphi |`$ such that the odd parts have even multiplicity, together with a choice of sign for the set of parts of size $`i`$ for each even $`i>0`$.

Example of a Symplectic Signed Partition

$$\begin{array}{cccccccc}& .& .& .& .& .& & \\ & .& .& .& .& .& & \\ +& .& .& .& .& & & \\ & .& .& .& & & & \\ & .& .& .& & & & \\ & .& .& & & & & \\ & .& .& & & & & \end{array}$$

Here the $`+`$ corresponds to the parts of size 4 and the $``$ corresponds to the parts of size 2. This data represents a conjugacy class of $`Sp(2n,q)`$ if and only if:

1. $`|\lambda _z|=0`$
2. $`\lambda _\varphi =\lambda _{\overline{\varphi }}`$
3. $`_{\varphi =z\pm 1}|\lambda (\pm )_\varphi |+_{\varphi z\pm 1}|\lambda _\varphi |deg(\varphi )=2n`$

Let

$$A_{Sp}(\varphi ^i)=\{\begin{array}{cc}|Sp(m_i(\lambda (\pm )_\varphi ),q)|\hfill & \text{if i odd,}\varphi =z\pm 1\hfill \\ q^{\frac{m_i(\lambda (\pm )_\varphi )}{2}}|O(m_i(\lambda (\pm )_\varphi ),q)|\hfill & \text{if i even,}\varphi =z\pm 1\hfill \\ |U(m_i(\lambda _\varphi ),q^{\frac{deg(\varphi )}{2}})|\hfill & \text{if}\varphi =\overline{\varphi }z\pm 1\hfill \\ |GL(m_i(\lambda _\varphi ),q^{deg(\varphi )})|^{\frac{1}{2}}\hfill & \text{if}\varphi \overline{\varphi }.\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`O(m_i(\lambda _\varphi ),q)`$ is the orthogonal group with the same sign as the sign associated to the parts of size $`i`$.

Theorem 1 is implicit in the discussion in \[F1\]. The three ingredients in its proof are Wall’s formulas for conjugacy class sizes \[W\], the deduction that the cycle index of the symplectic groups factors, and the fact that the formulas in the statement of Theorem 1 define probability measures (i.e. the asserted probabilities sum to one). This third fact will be deduced in the proof of Theorem 4, using only an identity of Cauchy. It is worth emphasizing that neither Steinberg’s count of unipotent elements nor the formulas of Rudvalis and Shinoda in Section 3 are needed to prove the third fact.

###### Theorem 1

Fix some value of $`u`$ with $`0<u<1`$. Then pick a non-negative even integer with the probability of getting $`2n`$ equal to $`(1u^2)u^{2n}`$ and pick uniformly in $`Sp(2n,q)`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\pm )_{z1},\mathrm{\Lambda }(\pm )_{z+1},\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi `$ be the random variables corresponding to the conjugacy class data of the chosen element of $`Sp(2n,q)`$. Then, aside from the fact that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi =\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{\varphi }}`$, any finite number of these random variables are independent, with probability laws

$`Prob(\mathrm{\Lambda }(\pm )_{z1}=\lambda (\pm )_{z1})`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{|\lambda (\pm )_{z1}|}}{q^{[_{h<i}hm_h(\lambda (\pm )_{z1})m_i(\lambda (\pm )_{z1})+\frac{1}{2}_i(i1)m_i(\lambda (\pm )_{z1})^2]}_iA_{Sp}((z1)^i)}}`$
$`Prob(\mathrm{\Lambda }(\pm )_{z+1}=\lambda (\pm )_{z+1})`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{|\lambda (\pm )_{z+1}|}}{q^{[_{h<i}hm_h(\lambda (\pm )_{z+1})m_i(\lambda (\pm )_{z+1})+\frac{1}{2}_i(i1)m_i(\lambda (\pm )_{z+1})^2]}_iA_{Sp}((z+1)^i)}}`$
$`Prob(\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi =\lambda _\varphi )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+(1)^r\frac{u^{deg(\varphi )}}{q^{deg(\varphi )r/2}})u^{deg(\varphi )|\lambda _\varphi |}}{q^{deg(\varphi )[_{h<i}hm_h(\lambda _\varphi )m_i(\lambda _\varphi )+\frac{1}{2}_i(i1)m_i(\lambda _\varphi )^2]}_iA_{Sp}(\varphi ^i)}}if\varphi =\overline{\varphi }z\pm 1`$
$`Prob(\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi =\lambda _\varphi )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1\frac{u^{2deg(\varphi )}}{q^{deg(\varphi )r}})u^{2deg(\varphi )|\lambda _\varphi |}}{q^{2deg(\varphi )[_{h<i}hm_h(\lambda _\varphi )m_i(\lambda _\varphi )+\frac{1}{2}_i(i1)m_i(\lambda _\varphi )^2]}_iA_{Sp}(\varphi ^i)}}if\varphi \overline{\varphi }.`$
Furthermore, setting $`u=1`$ in these formulas yields the laws arising from the $`n\mathrm{}`$ limit of conjugacy classes of a uniformly chosen element of $`Sp(2n,q)`$, and the random variables corresponding to different polynomials are independent, up to the fact that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi =\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{\varphi }}`$.

From Theorem 1, one sees that if $`\varphi =\overline{\varphi }`$, then the corresponding measures on partitions are specializations of those for the unitary groups treated in \[F2\]. Similarly, if $`\varphi \overline{\varphi }`$, then the corresponding measures on partitions are specializations of those for the general linear groups treated in \[F2\]. As the formulas for $`z\pm 1`$ are the same, for the rest of this paper only the partition corresponding to $`z1`$ will be studied.

Combining Theorem 1 with Lemma 1 leads one to the following measure on symplectic signed partitions:

$$M_{Sp,u}^\pm (\lambda (\pm ))=\underset{r=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})\frac{u^{|\lambda (\pm )|}}{q^{1/2[_i(\lambda (\pm )_i^{})^2_im_i(\lambda (\pm ))^2]}_iA_{Sp}((z1)^i)}.$$

Forgetting about signs (i.e. lumping together some conjugacy classes) yields a measure on underlying shapes which will be denoted by $`M_{Sp.u}`$. Using the formulas for the sizes of the finite symplectic and orthogonal groups given at the beginning of this section, one arrives at the expression:

$`M_{Sp,u}(\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{|\lambda |}}{q^{1/2[_i(\lambda _i^{})^2_im_i^2]}_{i=1mod2}(q^{\frac{m_i^2}{4}}_{l=1}^{m_i/2}(q^{2l}1))}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i=0mod2}{m_i=0mod2}}(q^{\frac{m_i^2}{4}\frac{m_i}{2}}_{l=1}^{m_i/2}(q^{2l}1))_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i=0mod2}{m_i=1mod2}}(q^{\frac{m_i^2+1}{4}}_{l=1}^{(m_i1)/2}(q^{2l}1))}}`$
### 2.2 Orthogonal groups

Wall \[W\] parametrized the conjugacy classes of the finite orthogonal groups and found formulas for their sizes. Let us recall his parametrization for the case of odd characteristic. To each monic, non-constant, irreducible polynomial $`\varphi z\pm 1`$ associate a partition $`\lambda _\varphi `$ of some non-negative integer $`|\lambda _\varphi |`$. To $`\varphi `$ equal to $`z1`$ or $`z+1`$ associate an orthogonal signed partition $`\lambda (\pm )_\varphi `$, by which is meant a partition of some natural number $`|\lambda (\pm )_\varphi |`$ such that all even parts have even multiplicity, and all odd $`i>0`$ have a choice of sign. For $`\varphi =z1`$ or $`\varphi =z+1`$ and odd $`i>0`$, we denote by $`\mathrm{\Theta }_i(\lambda (\pm )_\varphi )`$ the Witt type of the orthogonal group on a vector space of dimension $`m_i(\lambda (\pm )_\varphi )`$ and sign the choice of sign for $`i`$.

Example of an Orthogonal Signed Partition

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}& .& .& .& .\\ & .& .& .& .\\ & .& .& .& \\ & .& .& & \\ & .& .& & \\ +& .& & & \\ & .& & & \end{array}$$

Here the $``$ corresponds to the part of size 3 and the $`+`$ corresponds to the parts of size 1. The data $`\lambda (\pm )_{z1},\lambda (\pm )_{z+1},\lambda _\varphi `$ represents a conjugacy class of some orthogonal group if:

1. $`|\lambda _z|=0`$
2. $`\lambda _\varphi =\lambda _{\overline{\varphi }}`$
3. $`_{\varphi =z\pm 1}|\lambda (\pm )_\varphi |+_{\varphi z\pm 1}|\lambda _\varphi |deg(\varphi )=n`$.

In this case, the data represents the conjugacy class of exactly 1 orthogonal group $`O(n,q)`$, with sign determined by the condition that the group arises as the stabilizer of a form of Witt type:

$$\underset{\varphi =z\pm 1}{}\underset{iodd}{}\mathrm{\Theta }_i(\lambda (\pm )_\varphi )+\underset{\varphi z\pm 1}{}\underset{i1}{}im_i(\lambda _\varphi )\omega ,$$

where $`\omega `$ is the Witt type of the quadratic form $`x^2\delta y^2`$ with $`\delta `$ a fixed non-square in $`F_q`$.

Let

$$A_O(\varphi ^i)=\{\begin{array}{cc}q^{m_i(\lambda (\pm )_\varphi )/2}|Sp(m_i(\lambda (\pm )_\varphi ),q)|\hfill & \text{if i even,}\varphi =z\pm 1\hfill \\ |O(m_i(\lambda (\pm )_\varphi ),q)|\hfill & \text{if i odd,}\varphi =z\pm 1\hfill \\ |U(m_i(\lambda _\varphi ),q^{\frac{deg(\varphi )}{2}})|\hfill & \text{if}\varphi =\overline{\varphi }z\pm 1\hfill \\ |GL(m_i(\lambda _\varphi ),q^{deg(\varphi )})|^{\frac{1}{2}}\hfill & \text{if}\varphi \overline{\varphi }.\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`O(m_i(\lambda _\varphi ),q)`$ is the orthogonal group with the same sign as the sign associated to the parts of size $`i`$.

Theorem 2 is implicit in \[F1\]. The three ingredients in its proof are Wall’s formulas for conjugacy class sizes \[W\], the deduction that the cycle index for the sum of $`+`$ and $``$ types of the orthogonal groups factors, and the fact that the formulas in the statement of Theorem 2 define probability measures. As in the symplectic case, this third fact will be deduced in the proof of Theorem 5, using only an identity of Cauchy.

###### Theorem 2

Fix some value of $`u`$ with $`0<u<1`$. Then pick a non-negative integer with the probability of getting $`0`$ equal to $`\frac{(1u)}{(1+u)}`$ and probability of getting $`n>0`$ equal to $`\frac{2u^n(1u)}{1+u}`$. Choose either $`O^+(n,q)`$ or $`O^{}(n,q)`$ with probability $`\frac{1}{2}`$. Finally select an element uniformly within the chosen orthogonal group and let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\pm )_{z1},\mathrm{\Lambda }(\pm )_{z+1},\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi `$ be the random variables corresponding to its conjugacy class data. Then aside from the fact that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi =\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{\varphi }}`$, any finite number of these random variables are independent, with probability laws

$`Prob(\mathrm{\Lambda }(\pm )_{z1}=\lambda (\pm )_{z1})`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{|\lambda (\pm )_{z1}|}}{(1+u)q^{[_{h<i}hm_h(\lambda (\pm )_{z1})m_i(\lambda (\pm )_{z1})+\frac{1}{2}_i(i1)m_i(\lambda (\pm )_{z1})^2]}_iA_O((z1)^i)}}`$
$`Prob(\mathrm{\Lambda }(\pm )_{z+1}=\lambda (\pm )_{z+1})`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{|\lambda (\pm )_{z+1}|}}{(1+u)q^{[_{h<i}hm_h(\lambda (\pm )_{z+1})m_i(\lambda (\pm )_{z+1})+\frac{1}{2}_i(i1)m_i(\lambda (\pm )_{z+1})^2]}_iA_O((z+1)^i)}}`$
$`Prob(\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi =\lambda _\varphi )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1+(1)^r\frac{u^{deg(\varphi )}}{q^{deg(\varphi )r/2}})u^{deg(\varphi )|\lambda _\varphi |}}{q^{deg(\varphi )[_{h<i}hm_h(\lambda _\varphi )m_i(\lambda _\varphi )+\frac{1}{2}_i(i1)m_i(\lambda _\varphi )^2]}_iA_O(\varphi ^i)}}if\varphi =\overline{\varphi }z\pm 1`$
$`Prob(\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi =\lambda _\varphi )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1\frac{u^{2deg(\varphi )}}{q^{deg(\varphi )r}})u^{2deg(\varphi )|\lambda _\varphi |}}{q^{2deg(\varphi )[_{h<i}hm_h(\lambda _\varphi )m_i(\lambda _\varphi )+\frac{1}{2}_i(i1)m_i(\lambda _\varphi )^2]}_iA_O(\varphi ^i)}}if\varphi \overline{\varphi }.`$
Furthermore, setting $`u=1`$ in these formulas yields the laws arising from the $`n\mathrm{}`$ limit of conjugacy classes of a uniformly chosen element of $`O(n,q)`$, where the $`+,`$ sign is chosen with probability $`1/2`$. The random variables corresponding to different polynomials are independent, up to the fact that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi =\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{\varphi }}`$.

For the same reasons as with the symplectic groups, the only case remaining to be understood is the measure of the partition corresponding to the polynomial $`z1`$. Combining Theorem 1 with Lemma 1 leads one to the following measure on orthogonal signed partitions:

$$M_{O,u}^\pm (\lambda (\pm ))=\frac{1}{1+u}\underset{r=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})\frac{u^{|\lambda (\pm )|}}{q^{1/2[_i(\lambda (\pm )_i^{})^2_im_i(\lambda (\pm ))^2]}_iA_O((z1)^i)}.$$

Forgetting about signs (i.e. lumping together some conjugacy classes) yields a measure on underlying shapes which will be denoted by $`M_{O,u}`$. Using the formulas for the sizes of the finite symplectic and orthogonal groups given at the beginning of this section, one arrives at the expression:

$`M_{O,u}(\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+u}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(1u^2/q^{2r1}){\displaystyle \frac{u^{|\lambda |}}{q^{1/2[_i(\lambda _i^{})^2_im_i^2]}_{i=0mod2}(q^{\frac{m_i^2}{4}\frac{m_i}{2}}_{l=1}^{m_i/2}(q^{2l}1))}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i=1mod2}{m_i=0mod2}}(q^{\frac{m_i^2}{4}m_i}_{l=1}^{m_i/2}(q^{2l}1))_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i=0mod2}{m_i=1mod2}}(q^{\frac{m_i^21}{4}}_{l=1}^{(m_i1)/2}(q^{2l}1))}}`$
## 3 Markov Chain Description

This section proves the Markov chain descriptions of conjugacy classes as advertised in the introduction. The first goal is Theorem 3, which generalizes work of Rudvalis and Shinoda \[RShi\] (proved by different methods and not in the language of partitions). First, a lemma of Cauchy is needed.

###### Lemma 2

(\[An\], p.20) If $`|q|>1`$,

$$\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1z/q^m)^1=1+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{z^n}{q^{n^2n}(11/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(11/q^n)(1z)(1z/q)\mathrm{}(1z/q^{n1})}$$

Let $`G`$ denote either $`Sp`$ or $`O`$, and let $`P_{G,u}(i)`$ be the probability that a partition chosen from the measure $`M_{G,u}`$ has $`i`$ parts. Let

$`P_{Sp,u}^{}(i)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{P_{Sp,u}(i)}{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2i1})}}`$
$`P_{O,u}^{}(i)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(1+u)P_{O,u}(i)}{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2i1})}}.`$
###### Theorem 3

$`P_{Sp,u}(2k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(1u^2/q^{2i1}){\displaystyle \frac{u^{2k}}{q^{2k^2+k}(1u^2/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1u^2/q^{2k1})(11/q^{2k})}}`$
$`P_{Sp,u}(2k+1)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(1u^2/q^{2i1}){\displaystyle \frac{u^{2k+2}}{q^{2k^2+3k+1}(1u^2/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(11/q^{2k})(1u^2/q^{2k+1})}}`$
$`P_{O,u}(2k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2i1})}{1+u}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^{2k}}{q^{2k^2k}(1u^2/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1u^2/q^{2k1})(11/q^{2k})}}`$
$`P_{O,u}(2k+1)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2i1})}{1+u}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^{2k+1}}{q^{2k^2+k}(1u^2/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(11/q^{2k})(1u^2/q^{2k+1})}}.`$
Proof: Using only the facts that $`M_{Sp,u}`$ and $`M_{O,u}`$ define a measure (i.e. not necessarily a probability measure), the proofs of Theorems 4 and 5 will establish the equations:

$`P_{Sp,u}^{}(a)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{ba}{abeven}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^aP_{O,u}^{}(b)}{q^{(a^2b^2+2(a+1)b)/4}(q^{ab}1)\mathrm{}(q^41)(q^21)}}`$
$`P_{O,u}^{}(a)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{ba}{abeven}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^aP_{Sp,u}^{}(b)q^{(ab)^2/4}}{q^{(a^2+b2a)/2}(q^{ab}1)\mathrm{}(q^41)(q^21)}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{ba}{abodd}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^aP_{Sp,u}^{}(b)q^{((ab)^21)/4}}{q^{(a^2a)/2}(q^{ab1}1)\mathrm{}(q^41)(q^21)}}.`$
To get a recurrence relation for the $`P_{Sp,u}^{}(a)`$’s, one simply plugs the second equation into the first. Similarly one obtains a recurrence relation for the $`P_{O,u}^{}(a)`$’s. These recurrences allow one to solve for $`P_{G,u}^{}(a)`$ in terms of $`P_{G,u}^{}(0)`$, implying that the formulas for $`P_{G,u}(a)`$ are proportional to the asserted values. Thus it is enough to prove that the asserted formulas for $`P_{G,u}(a)`$ satisfy the equation $`_{a0}P_{G,u}(a)=1`$. This follows readily from Lemma 2. $`\mathrm{}`$

Before continuing, we pause to indicate how the formulas of Theorem 3 can be used to deduce group theoretic results which are normally proved by techniques such as character theory and Moebius inversion. The first set of results, Corollary 1, considers only the symplectic groups. The same technique would give results for the sum of $`+,`$ type orthogonal groups. Since the cycle index for the difference of orthogonal groups also factors, one could rework all of the paper until now to give measures corresponding to the difference of $`+,`$ type orthogonal groups, apply the same technique, and then average the results to get theorems about groups over a given $`+`$ or $``$ type. This does not deserve to be done publicly.

###### Corollary 1

1. (Steinberg, pg. 156 of \[H\]) The number of unipotent elements in $`Sp(2n,q)`$ is $`q^{2n^2}`$.
2. (\[RShi\]) The probability that an randomly chosen element of $`Sp(2n,q)`$ has a $`2k`$ dimensional fixed space is

$$\frac{1}{|Sp(2k,q)|}\underset{i=0}{\overset{nk}{}}\frac{(1)^i(q^2)^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i}{2}\right)}}{|Sp(2i,q)|q^{2ik}}.$$

The probability that an randomly chosen element of $`Sp(2n,q)`$ has a $`2k+1`$ dimensional fixed space is

$$\frac{1}{|Sp(2k,q)|q^{2k+1}}\underset{i=0}{\overset{nk1}{}}\frac{(1)^i(q^2)^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i}{2}\right)}}{|Sp(2i,q)|q^{2i(k+1)}}.$$

Proof: The arguments are completely analogous to those for $`GL(n,q)`$ in \[F2\] (Corollary 1 and Theorem 6), using the cycle index of the finite symplectic groups \[F1\]. $`\mathrm{}`$

Rudvalis and Shinoda (loc. cit.) also considered the probability that the fixed space of a random element of a finite classical group has a given isometry type. For the finite unitary groups, the isometry classes are parameterized by pairs $`(s,t)`$ of natural numbers such that $`s+2tn`$. Here a subspace $`W`$ of $`V`$ has type $`(s,t)`$ if $`dim(W/rad(W))=s`$ and $`dim(rad(W))=t`$. Theorem 2 uses cycle index techniques to give new proofs of their results for the finite unitary groups. Exactly the same methods work for the finite symplectic and orthogonal groups, but we spare the reader the details.

###### Corollary 2

The probability that an element of $`U(n,q)`$ has isometry type corresponding to the pair $`(s,t)`$ is

$$\frac{_{i=0}^{n2st}\frac{(1/q)^{(t+1)i}(1/q)^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i}{2}\right)}}{(1+1/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1(1)^i/q^i)}}{q^{s^2+2st}(1+1/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1(1)^s/q^s)(1+1/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1(1)^t/q^t)}.$$

In the $`n\mathrm{}`$ limit, this converges to

$$\frac{_{r=0}^{\mathrm{}}(\frac{1}{1+1/q^{2r+1}})}{q^{s^2+2st}(1+1/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1(1)^s/q^s)(11/q^2)(11/q^4)\mathrm{}(11/q^{2t})}.$$

Proof: The most important observation (see \[FNP\] for a readable proof) is that the fixed space of an element $`\alpha `$ of $`U(n,q)`$ has isometry type $`(s,t)`$ precisely when the partition corresponding to the polynomial $`z1`$ in the rational canonical form of $`\alpha `$ satisfies $`\lambda _1^{}=s+t`$ and $`\lambda _2^{}=t`$. In other words, the partition has $`s+t`$ parts and $`s`$ $`1`$’s. Let $`[u^n]f(u)`$ denote the coefficient of $`u^n`$ in some polynomial $`f(u)`$. Then one uses the cycle index for the unitary groups as in \[F2\] to see that the sought probability for $`U(n,q)`$ is

$$[u^n]\frac{1}{1u}\underset{\lambda :\lambda _1^{}=s+t,\lambda _2^{}=t}{}M_{U,u}(\lambda ).$$

Using the fact that

$$M_{U,u}(\lambda )=\underset{r=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1+u/(q)^r)\frac{u^{|\lambda |}}{q^{_i(\lambda _i^{})^2}_i(1+1/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1+(1)^{m_i+1}/q^{m_i})},$$

this becomes

$`[u^n]{\displaystyle \frac{u^{s+t}}{(1u)q^{(s+t)^2}(1+1/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1(1)^s/q^s)}}{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda :\lambda _1^{}=t}{}}M_{U,u}(\lambda )`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{q^{(s+t)^2}(1+1/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1(1)^s/q^s)}}[u^{nst}]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1u}}{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda :\lambda _1^{}=t}{}}M_{U,u}(\lambda )`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{i=0}^{n2st}\frac{(1/q)^{(t+1)i}(1/q)^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i}{2}\right)}}{(1+1/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1(1)^i/q^i)}}{q^{s^2+2st}(1+1/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1(1)^s/q^s)(1+1/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1(1)^t/q^t)}},`$
where the last equality is in the proof of Theorem 6 in \[F2\].

The formula for the $`n\mathrm{}`$ limit follows from the well-known identity

$$\underset{r=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1v/w^r)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(v)^n}{(w^n1)\mathrm{}(w1)}.$$

Alternatively, it follows from the principle that the limit as $`n\mathrm{}`$ of $`f(u)/(1u)`$ is $`f(1)`$ if $`f`$ has a Taylor expansion around $`0`$ converging in a circle of radius $`1`$, together with the formula for

$$\underset{\lambda :\lambda _1^{}=t}{}M_{U,1}(\lambda )$$

given in Theorem 5 of \[F2\]. $`\mathrm{}`$

Lemma 3 is crucial and motivated the combinatorial moves made in rewriting the formulas for $`M_{Sp,u}`$ and $`M_{O,u}`$ in Section 2. In all that follows $`M_{G,x}`$ will denote the probability of an event $`X`$ under the measure $`M_{G,u}`$ with $`G`$ equal to $`Sp`$ or $`O`$.

###### Lemma 3

1. If $`i`$ is odd then

$$M_{Sp,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1,\mathrm{},\lambda _{i1}^{}=s_{i1},\lambda _i^{}=k)=\frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{s_1+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}}P_{Sp,u}^{}(k)}{q^{(s_1^2+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}^2m_1^2\mathrm{}m_{i1}^2)/2}_{j=1}^{i1}A_{Sp}((z1)^{m_j})}.$$
2. If $`i`$ is even then

$`M_{Sp,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1,\mathrm{},\lambda _{i1}^{}=s_{i1},\lambda _i^{}=k)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{s_1+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}}P_{O,u}^{}(k)}{q^{(k+s_1^2+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}^2m_1^2\mathrm{}m_{i1}^2)/2}_{j=1}^{i1}A_{Sp}((z1)^{m_j})}}.`$
3. If $`i`$ is odd then

$`M_{O,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1,\mathrm{},\lambda _{i1}^{}=s_{i1},\lambda _i^{}=k)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{s_1+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}}P_{O,u}^{}(k)}{(1+u)q^{(s_1^2+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}^2m_1^2\mathrm{}m_{i1}^2)/2}_{j=1}^{i1}A_O((z1)^{m_j})}}.`$
4. If $`i`$ is even then

$`M_{O,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1,\mathrm{},\lambda _{i1}^{}=s_{i1},\lambda _i^{}=k)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{s_1+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}}q^{k/2}P_{Sp,u}^{}(k)}{(1+u)q^{(s_1^2+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}^2m_1^2\mathrm{}m_{i1}^2)/2}_{j=1}^{i1}A_O((z1)^{m_j})}}.`$

Proof: The idea for all of the proofs is the same; hence we prove part two as follows:

$`M_{Sp,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1,\mathrm{},\lambda _{i1}^{}=s_{i1},\lambda _i^{}=k)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{s_1+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}}}{q^{(s_1^2+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}^2m_1^2\mathrm{}m_{i1}^2)/2}_{j=1}^{i1}A_{Sp}((z1)^{m_j})}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda _i^{}=k\lambda _{i+1}^{}\mathrm{}0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^{_{ji}\lambda _j^{}}}{q^{_{ji}(\lambda _j^2m_j^2)/2}_{ji}A_{Sp}((z1)^{m_j})}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{s_1+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}}}{q^{(k+s_1^2+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}^2m_1^2\mathrm{}m_{i1}^2)/2}_{j=1}^{i1}A_{Sp}((z1)^{m_j})}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda _i^{}=k\lambda _{i+1}^{}\mathrm{}0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^{_{ji}\lambda _j^{}}}{q^{_{ji}(\lambda _j^2m_j^2)/2}_{ji}A_O((z1)^{m_j})}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{s_1+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}}}{q^{(k+s_1^2+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}^2m_1^2\mathrm{}m_{i1}^2)/2}_{j=1}^{i1}A_{Sp}((z1)^{m_j})}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda _1^{}=k\lambda _2^{}\mathrm{}0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^{_{j1}\lambda _j^{}}}{q^{_{j1}(\lambda _j^2m_j^2)/2}_{j1}A_O((z1)^{m_j})}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{r=1}^{\mathrm{}}(1u^2/q^{2r1})u^{s_1+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}}}{q^{(k+s_1^2+\mathrm{}+s_{i1}^2m_1^2\mathrm{}m_{i1}^2)/2}_{j=1}^{i1}A_{Sp}((z1)^{m_j})}}P_{O,u}^{}(k),`$
as desired. Note that the meat of the lemma is the second equality, which follows from the formulas for $`A_{Sp}`$ and $`A_O`$. The third equality is simply a relabelling of subscripts. $`\mathrm{}`$

For the statements of Theorems 4 and 5, we define two Markov chains on the integers. Recall that

$`P_{Sp,u}^{}(2k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{u^{2k}}{q^{2k^2+k}(1u^2/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1u^2/q^{2k1})(11/q^{2k})}}`$
$`P_{Sp,u}^{}(2k+1)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{u^{2k+2}}{q^{2k^2+3k+1}(1u^2/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(11/q^{2k})(1u^2/q^{2k+1})}}`$
$`P_{O,u}^{}(2k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{u^{2k}}{q^{2k^2k}(1u^2/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(1u^2/q^{2k1})(11/q^{2k})}}`$
$`P_{O,u}^{}(2k+1)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{u^{2k+1}}{q^{2k^2+k}(1u^2/q)(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(11/q^{2k})(1u^2/q^{2k+1})}}.`$
The chains $`K_1,K_2`$ are defined on the natural numbers with transition probabilities

$$K_1(a,b)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{u^aP_{O,u}^{}(b)}{P_{Sp,u}^{}(a)q^{\frac{a^2b^2+2(a+1)b}{4}}(q^{ab}1)\mathrm{}(q^41)(q^21)}\hfill & \text{if }ab\text{ even}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{if }ab\text{ odd}\hfill \end{array}$$

$$K_2(a,b)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{u^aP_{Sp,u}^{}(b)q^{(ab)^2/4}}{P_{O,u}^{}(a)q^{\frac{a^2+b}{2}a}(q^{ab}1)\mathrm{}(q^41)(q^21)}\hfill & \text{if }ab\text{ even}\hfill \\ \frac{u^aP_{Sp,u}^{}(b)q^{((ab)^21)/4}}{P_{O,u}^{}(a)q^{\frac{a^2a}{2}}(q^{ab1}1)\mathrm{}(q^41)(q^21)}\hfill & \text{if }ab\text{ odd}\hfill \end{array}$$

The fact that these transition probabilities add up to one will follow from the proof of Theorem 4.

###### Theorem 4

Starting with $`\lambda _1^{}`$ distributed as $`P_{Sp,u}`$, define in succession $`\lambda _2^{},\lambda _3^{},\mathrm{}`$ according to the rules that if $`\lambda _i^{}=a`$, then $`\lambda _{i+1}^{}=b`$ with probability $`K_1(a,b)`$ if $`i`$ is odd and probability $`K_2(a,b)`$ if $`i`$ is even. The resulting partition is distributed according to $`M_{Sp,u}`$.

Proof: The $`M_{Sp,u}`$ probability of choosing a partition with $`\lambda _i^{}=s_i`$ for all $`i`$ is

$$M_{Sp,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1)\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{M_{Sp,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1,\mathrm{},\lambda _{i+1}^{}=s_{i+1})}{M_{Sp,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1,\mathrm{},\lambda _i^{}=s_i)}.$$

Since $`M_{Sp,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1)`$ is equal to $`P_{Sp,u}(s_1)`$ by definition, it it is enough to prove two claims: first that for every choice of $`i,a,b,s_1,\mathrm{},s_{i1}`$,

$$\frac{M_{Sp,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1,\mathrm{},\lambda _{i1}^{}=s_{i1},\lambda _i^{}=a,\lambda _{i+1}^{}=b)}{M_{Sp,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1,\mathrm{},\lambda _{i1}^{}=s_{i1},\lambda _i^{}=a)}$$

is equal to the asserted transition rule probability for moving from $`\lambda _i^{}=a`$ to $`\lambda _{i+1}^{}=b`$, and second that the transition rule probabilities sum to one.

The first claim follows from Lemma 3. For the second claim, observe that

$$\underset{ba}{}\frac{M_{Sp,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1,\mathrm{},\lambda _{i1}^{}=s_{i1},\lambda _i^{}=a,\lambda _{i+1}^{}=b)}{M_{Sp,u}(\lambda _1^{}=s_1,\mathrm{},\lambda _{i1}^{}=s_{i1},\lambda _i^{}=a)}=1,$$

because $`M_{Sp,u}`$ is a measure and the columns of a partition are non-increasing in size as one moves to the right. Since $`_{i0}P_{Sp,u}(i)=1`$, it follows that $`M_{Sp,u}`$ is a probability measure, as promised earlier. $`\mathrm{}`$

Theorem 5 gives the analogous result for the orthogonal groups. As the proof method is the same as for the symplectic groups, we merely record the result.

###### Theorem 5

Starting with $`\lambda _1^{}`$ distributed as $`P_{O,u}`$, define in succession $`\lambda _2^{},\lambda _3^{},\mathrm{}`$ according to the rules that if $`\lambda _i^{}=a`$, then $`\lambda _{i+1}^{}=b`$ with probability $`K_2(a,b)`$ if $`i`$ is odd and $`K_1(a,b)`$ if $`i`$ is even. The resulting partition is distributed according to $`M_{O,u}`$.

We close the paper with the following remarks.

Remarks:

1. Theorem 4 and Theorem 5 allow one to draw exact samples from the measures $`M_{Sp,u}`$ or $`M_{O,u}`$. First recall that sampling from discrete distributions $`P`$ with known formulas is straightforward; simply pick $`U`$ uniformly in $`[0,1]`$ and find the value of $`j`$ such that $`_{i=0}^jP(i)<U<_{i=0}^{j+1}P(i)`$. This allows one to sample from $`P_{Sp,u}`$ or $`P_{O,u}`$. Then move according to the appropriate Markov chains.
2. For the case of $`M_{Sp,u}`$, one can view the algorithm of Theorem 4 slightly differently. One starts with an imaginary $`0`$th column of size approaching infinity, and then gets $`\lambda _1^{}`$ by transitioning according to the chain $`K_2`$. It is straightforward to verify that the resulting distribution of the first column size agrees with $`P_{Sp,u}`$. This viewpoint was useful in the general linear and unitary cases \[F4\].
3. As noted in the introduction, it is possible that the measures $`M_{Sp,u}`$ and $`M_{O,u}`$ are related to generalizations of the Rogers-Ramanujan identities, in analogy with the corresponding measures for $`GL(n,q)`$. In this regard observe that

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda :\lambda _2^{}=0}{}}M_{Sp,u}(\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(1u^2/q^{2r1}){\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^{2n}}{q^{n^2}(q^{2n}1)\mathrm{}(q^21)}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(1u^2/q^{2r1}){\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^{2n}}{q^{2n^2+n}(11/q^2)\mathrm{}(11/q^{2n})}}.`$
For the value $`u=q^{1/2}`$, the sum has a product expansion by a Rogers Ramanujan identity.
4. Although a probabilistic understanding of $`M_{Sp,u}`$ and $`M_{O,u}`$ has been given, a viewpoint explaining the products in Theorem 3 in terms of certain random variables being independent would be desirable. This was possible for the finite general linear and unitary groups \[F2\].
5. As mentioned in the introduction, the clumping of conjugacy classes given by looking at the underlying shape was not necessary. To modify things to take signs into account, $`K_1`$ starts at a number $`a`$ but outputs an ordered pair $`(b,\pm )`$, that is a choice of sign associated with $`b`$. In the $`+`$ (resp. $``$) case, the expression $`P_{O,u}^{}(b)`$ in the numerator of the definition of $`K_1`$ is replaced by the probability that the partition under the measure $`M_{O,u}`$ has $`b`$ parts and a $`+`$ (resp. $``$) choice for the parts of size 1. Unfortunately we do not know of simple formulas for these probabilities analogous to Theorem 3. Formulas can be inferred from the paper \[RShi\], but the result involves unpleasant sums and does not seem useful. The transition probabilities for $`K_2`$ are also affected: the $`P_{O,u}^{}(a)`$ are replaced the same way as for $`K_1`$, and letting $`ϵ`$ be the sign associated to $`a`$, the transition probabilities are multiplied by an additional factor of

$$\frac{1}{|O^ϵ(ab,q)|}\frac{1}{\frac{1}{|O^+(ab,q)|}+\frac{1}{O^{}(ab,q)|}}.$$

It is not necessarily surprising that the theory is nicer when conjugacy classes are lumped; the cycle index only factors for sums or differences of orthogonal groups.

## Acknowledgements

This work is a natural follow-up to the author’s Ph.D. thesis; the author expresses deep gratitude to Persi Diaconis for having introduced him to this lovely part of mathematics. A summer of conversations with Peter M. Neumann and Cheryl E. Praeger broadened the author’s understanding of conjugacy classes. This work received the financial support of an NSF Postdoctoral Fellowship.