\section{Introduction}\label{introsec}
\noindent
The study of group actions on categories is a rich topic which arises in
many areas of mathematics. Such group actions appear when topological field
theories are present. An $n$-dimensional topological field theory $\mathrm{Z}$
associates to each $(n-2)$-manifold $\Sigma$ a category $\mathrm{Z}(\Sigma)$ upon
which the mapping class group $\Gamma(\Sigma)$ of $\Sigma$ acts. In
particular, there are equivalences
$$ F_g : \mathrm{Z}(\Sigma) \to \mathrm{Z}(\Sigma) \conj{ for each } g \in \Gamma(\Sigma).$$
When $n=4$, one expects many examples of mapping class groups
$\Gamma(\Sigma)$ acting on categories $\mathrm{Z}(\Sigma)$, see \cite{KH,
  Roberts}. While there are examples of categorical braid group actions in
the literature \cite{KoSei, Rou, ThoSei, Webster}, there are very few
examples for surfaces of genus greater than zero; although, see \cite{LOT}.

In this paper we present a means by which the categories associated to the
Khovanov homology of knots and links can be used to produce categories which
are representations of the modular group $\slz$ (the mapping class group of
the torus). A hyperelliptic involution is used to reduce the mapping class
group of the torus to the mapping class group of the four punctured
sphere. This identification allows us to construct several families of
modular group representations from braid group representations.

The theory of modular functors shows that it is possible to construct
representations for surfaces of arbitrary genus when given a family of braid
group representations and a representation of the modular group satisfying
some compatibility conditions \cite{BaK, MS, Walker}.  In this sense, the
special case of $\slz$ actions is an essential component of the most general
case.

\subsection*{Organization}
In Section \ref{algsec}, definitions related to knot homology and group
actions are recalled. In Section \ref{braidsec}, we review information about
braid groups and mapping class groups. In Section \ref{gensec}, we construct
countable families of categories $\eR_{n,k}$ and $\eK_n$ which support
$\slz$ actions.

\section{Algebraic Background}\label{algsec}

\noindent In this section we collect background information that is
necessary to understand the main construction. We begin by recalling
the differential graded categories $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(n)$ and the
existence of certain chain complexes $P_{n,k}$ within
$\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(n)$. The definition of a group action on a category is
given and a construction for reducing the gradings is introduced.

\subsection{Cobordisms}\label{cobsec}
Dror Bar-Natan's graphical formulation \cite{DBN} of the Khovanov
categorification \cite{KH} consists of a series of categories:
$\Cob(n)$ and $\Kom(n)$. The construction in Section \ref{gensec} will take
place within categories related to $\Kom(n)$. Definitions are reviewed
below. They are the same as those appearing in \cite{CK, CH} with the
exception that we adopt the Kauffman bracket grading convention from
Rozansky \cite{R3}.

\subsubsection{Categories of cobordisms}
There is a pre-additive category $\PCob(n)$ whose objects are isotopy
classes of formally $\mathbb{Z}$-graded 1-manifolds with $2n$ boundary points.
There is a functor
$$q : \PCob(n) \to \PCob(n)$$
which increases the grading of all objects by one. The morphisms of the
category $\PCob(n)$ are given by linear combinations of isotopy classes of
orientable cobordisms.

The \emph{internal degree} of a cobordism $C : q^i A \to q^j B$ is the sum
of its topological degree and its $q$-degree:
$$\deg(C) = \deg_{\chi}(C) + \deg_q(C).$$
The {\em topological degree} $\deg_{\chi}(C) = \chi(C) - n$ is given by the
Euler characteristic of $C$ and the {\em $q$-degree} $\deg_q(C) = j - i$ is given
by the relative difference in $q$-gradings.

We impose the relations implied by the requirement that the circle is isomorphic to the direct sum of two empty sets,
\begin{equation}\label{circeq}
\CPic{circle}\quad\cong\quad q\emptyset \oplus q^{-1} \emptyset,
\end{equation}
using maps of internal degree zero (see \cite{DBN2}). In doing so, we obtain
a new category $\Cob(n)$ as a quotient of the additive closure
$\Mat(\PCob(n))$ of $\PCob(n)$.

There is a composition
$$\otimes : \Cob(n) \times \Cob(n) \to \Cob(n).$$
which obtained by gluing of cobordisms. The unit $1_n$ with respect to this composition is a diagram consisting of $n$ parallel lines.

\subsubsection{Categories of half-graded chain complexes}\label{chcxsec}

\begin{definition}
  If $\EuScript{A}$ is an additive category then $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)$ will denote the {\em
    differential graded category of $\frac{1}{2}$-graded chain complexes} in
  $\EuScript{A}$.
\end{definition}

In more detail, the objects of $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)$ are chain complexes $C =
(C_i,d^C_i)_{i\in\frac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z}}$ where $C_i\in \EuScript{A}$ and $d^C_i : C_i \to
C_{i+1}$. Each chain complex $C$ is bounded from below: $C_i = 0$ for $i$ sufficiently small.

Suppose that $C = (C_i,d^C_i)_{i\in\frac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z}}$ and $D =
(D_i,d^D_i)_{i\in\frac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z}}$ are chain complexes in $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)$. Then a
{\em map} $g : C \to D$ of {\em $t$-degree} $l$ is a collection $g = \{ g_i
: C_i \to D_{i+l} \}_{i\in \frac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z}}$ of maps in $\EuScript{A}$. The group of
maps of $t$-degree $l$ will be denoted by $\Hom^l(C,D)$.  There is a
composition
$$\circ : \Hom^l(C, D) \otimes \Hom^m(D, E) \to \Hom^{l+m}(C, E)$$
and there are identity maps $1_{C} = \{ 1_{C_i} : C_i \to C_i \}$ of degree
zero.

There is a differential $d : \Hom^l(C, D) \to \Hom^{l+1}(C, D)$ which is
defined on a map $g = \{g_i\}$ of $t$-degree $l$ by the formula:
\begin{equation}\label{homdiffeq}
(dg)_{i+1} = g_{i+1} \circ d^C_i + (-1)^{l+1} d^D_{i+l} \circ g_i.
\end{equation}
If $g \in \Hom^l(C,D)$ and $h \in \Hom^m(C,D)$ are maps of $t$-degree $l$ and $m$ respectively, then the differential $d$ satisfies the Leibniz rule:
$$d(h \circ g) = h \circ (dg) + (-1)^{l} (dh) \circ g.$$
If $1_C : C \to C$ is the identity map then $d(1_C) = 0$. Let $\Hom^*(C,D) =
\prod_l \Hom^l(C,D)$ denote all of the maps from $C$ to $D$. Then the
collections $(\Hom^*(C,D),d)$ are chain complexes and the category $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)$
is a differential graded category \cite{Toen}.

\begin{definition}
The {\em homotopy category} $\Ho_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)$  of $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)$ has the same objects as the category $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)$. The maps in $\Ho_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)$ are given by the zeroth homology groups of the maps in $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)$:
$$\Hom_{\Ho_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)}(C,D) = \Hm^0(\Hom^*(C,D)),$$
see \cite[Def. 1]{Toen}.
\end{definition}

Two objects $C$ and $D$ in $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)$ are {\em homotopic}, $C\simeq D$, when they are isomorphic in the homotopy category $\Ho_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)$. A chain complex $C$ is {\em contractible} when $C\simeq 0$.

\begin{definition}
The {\em category of $\frac{1}{2}$-graded chain complexes of cobordisms} $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(n)$ is the differential graded category of $\frac{1}{2}$-graded chain complexes in $\Cob(n)$.
\end{definition}

\subsubsection{Tangle invariants}\label{tangsec}

\begin{definition}\label{skeindef}
The {\em skein relation} associated to a crossing is the cone complex:
\begin{equation}\label{skeineq}
\CPic{crossing} = t^{\frac{1}{2}} \CPic{Iresolution} \to t^{-\frac{1}{2}} \CPic{Hresolution}.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}

The definition above allows one to associate a chain complex in $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(n)$ to a
diagram of a framed $(n,n)$-tangle. Any two such diagrams which differ by
Reidemeister moves 2 or 3 are assigned to homotopy equivalent chain
complexes. The first Reidemeister move results in a degree shift, see
Property \ref{abstwprop} in Section \ref{twandtangsec}.

\subsection{Projectors}\label{projectorsec}
In \cite{CK}, V. Krushkal and the author defined a special chain complex
$P_n$. This construction is summarized by the theorem below. See also \cite{FSS, R1}.

\begin{theorem}\label{uprojectorthm}
There exists a chain complex $P_n \in \Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(n)$ called the \emph{universal
  projector} which satisfies

\begin{enumerate}
\item $P_n$ is positively graded with differential having internal degree zero.
\item The complex $P_n\otimes D$ is contractible for any diagram $D$ which is not the identity $1_n$.
\item The identity object appears only in homological degree zero and only once.
\end{enumerate}
\noindent Properties (1)--(3) characterize the projector $P_n$ uniquely up to homotopy.
\end{theorem}

In \cite{CH}, M. Hogancamp and the author constructed a series of projectors
$P_{n,k}\in\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(n)$ where $k = n, n-2, n-4, \ldots, n \imod{2}$. (The bottom
projector $P_{n,n\imod{2}}$ is $P_{n,0}$ when $n$ is even and $P_{n,1}$ when
$n$ is odd.) These {\em higher order projectors} are characterized by
properties analogous to those mentioned in the theorem above.

\begin{definition}
The \emph{through-degree} $\tau(a)$ of a chain complex $a\in \Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(n)$ is the maximum
over all of the components $a_i$ of $a$ of the minimum number of vertical
strands in any cross section of $a_i$.
\end{definition}

In other words, $\tau(a)$ is the largest number of lines connecting the bottom to
the top of any diagram $a_i$ in $a$. Since vertical lines can only be added
or removed in pairs:
$$\tau(a)\in\{ n,n-2,n-4,\ldots,n \imod{2}\}.$$

\begin{theorem}\label{hothm}
  For each positive integer $n$, there is a series of {\em higher order
    projectors} $P_{n,k}\in\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(n)$ where $k = n, n-2, n-4, \ldots, n
  \imod{2}$ which satisfy the properties:

\begin{enumerate}
\item The $P_{n,k}$ have through-degree $\tau(P_{n,k}) =k$.
\item If $a$ is diagram with through-degree $\tau(a) < k$ then
$$a\otimes P_{n,k} \simeq 0\conj{ and } P_{n,k} \otimes a \simeq 0.$$
\end{enumerate}

\noindent Together with a normalization axiom, analogous to (3) in Theorem
\ref{uprojectorthm} above, these properties characterize each object
$P_{n,k}$ uniquely up to homotopy.
\end{theorem}

The higher order projectors satisfy orthogonality and idempotence relations. They also fit together to form a convolution chain complex that is homotopy equivalent to the identity object.
\begin{equation}\label{decompeq}
P_{n,l}\otimes P_{n,k}\simeq \d_{lk}P_{n,k} \conj { and } 1_n \simeq P_{n,n \imod{2}} \rightarrow \cdots \rightarrow P_{n,n-4} \rightarrow P_{n,n-2}\rightarrow P_{n,n}
\end{equation}

\vskip .1in

\begin{remark}
  The objects $P_n$ and $P_{n,k}$ were originally defined in categories
  $\Kom(n)$. By construction, every object of $\Kom(n)$ is an object of
  $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(n)$. This identification allows us to state the
  theorems as we have above.
\end{remark}

\subsubsection{Tangles and twists}\label{twandtangsec}
If the projector $P_{n,k}$ is represented by a box then it satisfies the two
properties below.

\begin{property}{(drags through tangles)}\label{dragprop}
$$\CPic{line-proj-o1} \simeq \CPic{line-proj-o2}\conj{ and } \CPic{line-proj-u1} \simeq \CPic{line-proj-u2}$$
\end{property}

\begin{property}{(absorbs twists)}\label{abstwprop}
$$\CPic{pflipper1} \simeq\quad \pSHIFT \CPic{line-proj}\hspace{-.185in}\conj{ and }\CPic{pflipper2} \simeq\quad \nSHIFT  \CPic{line-proj}$$
\end{property}

It is necessary for the skein relation to be given by Equation
\eqref{skeineq} for the degree shifts above to be accurate. When $n=1$ and
$k=1$, Property 2 determines the grading shift associated to the first
Reidemeister move.

\subsection{Group actions on categories}\label{groupactsec}
If $G$ is a group and $\eC$ is a differential graded category then an action
of $G$ on $\eC$ is a homomorphism from the group $G$ to the category
functors from $\eC$ to $\eC$:
$$F : G \to \Endo(\eC)\conj{ such that } F(gh)\simeq F(g)\circ F(h). $$
For discussion of dg functors see \cite[\S 2.3]{Toen}.

If $G = \inp{ S : R}$ is a presentation for the group $G$ then a group
action is obtained by specifying functors $F_s, F_{s^{-1}} : \eC \to \eC$
for each generator $s\in S$, and homotopy equivalences
\begin{equation}\label{eqeq}
F_{s_1} \circ F_{s_2} \circ \cdots \circ F_{s_N} \simeq F_{s'_1} \circ
F_{s'_2} \circ \cdots \circ F_{s'_M}
\end{equation}
whenever the words $s_1 s_2 \cdots s_N$ and $s'_1 s'_2 \cdots s'_M$ coincide
by virtue of the relations in $R$.

When a group $G$ acts on a dg category $\EuScript{C}$, there is an induced action of
$G$ on the homotopy category $\Ho(\EuScript{C})$ of $\EuScript{C}$. If $\Ho(\EuScript{C})$ is a
triangulated category then the action of $G$ on $\Ho(\EuScript{C})$ agrees with
definitions found in the references \cite{KoSei, Rou, ThoSei}.

The notion of group action that is given above is sometimes called
\emph{weak}. A strong action is one in which the homotopy equivalences
\eqref{eqeq} are uniquely determined. We will only prove that the actions
defined here are weak.

In Section \ref{gensec}, we will construct $\SL(2,\mathbb{Z})$ actions on
categories $\eR_{n,k}$ and $\eK_n$.

\subsection{Reducing the grading}\label{cyclicgrsec}

\newcommand{\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m}{/ t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m}
\newcommand{t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m}{t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m}

In this section we introduce cyclically graded dg categories $\EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m$. If
$\EuScript{C}$ is a $\frac{1}{2}$-graded dg category, such as
$\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(\EuScript{A})$, then there are functors
\begin{equation}\label{shifteq}
t^{\frac{1}{2}},q : \EuScript{C} \to \EuScript{C},
\end{equation}
which increase the $t$ and $q$ gradings by $\frac{1}{2}$ and
$1$ respectively. The identity:
$$t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m \cong \Id_{\EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m}$$
will hold in the functor category $\Endo(\EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m)$ of the cyclically graded
category $\EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m$. The categories $\EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m$ are obtained by collapsing the
grading. This is accomplished by extending a technique used to define
$\mathbb{Z}/2$-graded dg categories \cite[\S 5.1]{Dyckerhoff}.

\begin{defn}\label{anmalg}
  For each pair of integers $n,m\in \mathbb{Z}$, there is a $q$-graded differential
  graded algebra
$$L_{n,m} = k[t^{\frac{1}{2}}, q]/(t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m=1) \conj{ with } d = 0.$$
The grading of $L_{n,m}$ is determined by the table below.
\begin{center}\begin{tabular}{c||cc} & $\deg_q$ & $\deg_t$ \\
\hline
$q$ & $1$ & $0$\\
$t^{\frac{1}{2}}$ &$0$  & $\frac{1}{2}$\\
\end{tabular}\end{center}
\end{defn}

\begin{defn}
Let $\EuScript{C}$ be a $\frac{1}{2}$-graded dg category. A {\em $L_{n,m}$-module} in $\EuScript{C}$ is a pair $(C,f)$ consisting of an object $C \in \EuScript{C}$ and a map of $q$-graded dg algebras:
$$f : L_{n,m} \to \Endo(C).$$
The {\em category $\EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m$ of $L_{n,m}$-modules in $\EuScript{C}$} is the dg category consisting of $L_{n,m}$-modules in $\EuScript{C}$.
\end{defn}

In more detail, the objects of $\EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m$ are pairs $(C, f)$ consisting
of objects $C\in \EuScript{C}$ and maps $f : L_{n,m} \to \Endo(C)$ of
differential graded algebras which preserve the gradings. A map $h : (C,f) \to (D,g)$ of degree $l$
is a map $h : C \to D$ of degree $l$ in $\EuScript{C}$ that commutes with the
action of $L_{n,m}$ on $C$ and $D$:
\begin{equation}\label{commeq}\begin{tikzcd}
C\arrow{r}{h}\arrow{d}{f(a)}&D\arrow{d}{g(a)}\\
C\arrow{r}{h}&D
\end{tikzcd}\end{equation}
for all $a \in L_{n,m}$.

The functors $t^{\frac{1}{2}} , q : \EuScript{C} \to \EuScript{C}$ from Equation
\eqref{shifteq} induce functors $t^{\frac{1}{2}}, q : \EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m \to
\EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m$. For each pair of integers $k,l\in \mathbb{Z}$, if $(C,f)$ is an object of
$\EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m$ then $t^{\frac{k}{2}}q^l(C,f) = (t^{\frac{k}{2}} q^l C, \varphi(f))$
where $\varphi$ is the natural isomorphism $\Endo(t^{\frac{k}{2}}q^l
C)\to \Endo(C)$.

The proposition below shows that the categories introduced above satisfy the
equation $t^{\frac{n}{2}} q^m \cong \Id$ that was discussed in the introduction to this
section.

\begin{proposition}
Suppose that $t^{\frac{1}{2}} : \Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA) \to \Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)$ and $q : \Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA) \to \Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)$ denote the functors which increase the $t$-degrees and $q$-degrees of $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)$ by $\frac{1}{2}$ and $1$ respectively. Then there is an isomorphism,
$$\eta : t^{\frac{n}{2}} q^m \cong \Id$$
in the functor category $\Endo(\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
  By construction, each object $(C,f)\in \Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m$ has maps
  $f(t^{\frac{1}{2}}) : C\to C$ and $f(q) : C\to C$ which determine
  isomorphisms: $\eta_C : t^{\frac{n}{2}} q^m (C,f) \to (C,f)$.  If $h : (C,f) \to
  (D,g)$ is a map in $\Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA)\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m$ then Equation \eqref{commeq} implies that
  $h$ commutes with $\eta_C$. So the collection $\eta = \{\eta_C\}$ is a
  natural transformation $t^{\frac{n}{2}} q^m \to \Id$.
The map $\eta$ is the isomorphism in the statement above.
\end{proof}

Suppose that $\gVect_k$ is the category of graded vector spaces over
$k$. Then the example below illustrates the material introduced above.

\begin{example}
An $L_{0,m}$-module in the dg category $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(\gVect_k)$ is a chain complex $C$ on which the translation functor $q^m : C\to C$ acts by identity. Similarly, an $L_{n,0}$-module $C$ in the category $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(\gVect_k)$ is a chain complex on which the translation functor $t^{\frac{n}{2}} : C\to C$ acts by identity.

The categories $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(\gVect_k)/ t^0q^m$ and $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(\gVect_k)/ t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^0$ consist of $q^m$-cyclic and $t^{\frac{n}{2}}$-cyclic chain complexes respectively.
\end{example}

\vskip .1in

There is a {\em forgetful functor} $U : \EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m \to \EuScript{C}$ which is determined by
$(C,f) \mapsto C$.
The functor $U$ has a left adjoint $P : \EuScript{C} \to \EuScript{C}\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m$ which sends a chain complex $C$ to $P(C) = L_{n,m}\otimes_k C$. If $\pi : \frac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z} \to \frac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}/(n,m)$ is the quotient map then
$$P(C)_{i,j} = \bigoplus_{\substack{(k,l)\in\frac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}\\ \pi(k,l)=\pi(i,j)}} C_{k,l}$$
where $C_{k,l}$ denotes the value of $C$ in $t$-degree $k$ and $q$-degree $l$.
The proposition below records this information.

\newcommand{\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)\qu}{\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(\EuScript{A})\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m}
\newcommand{\Ho_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)\qu}{\Ho_{\frac{1}{2}}(\EuScript{A})\sls t^{\frac{n}{2}}q^m}

\begin{proposition}\label{adjprop}
There is an adjunction:
$$P : \Kom_{\frac{1}{2}}^*(\eA) \leftrightarrows \Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)\qu : U.$$
\end{proposition}
The proof that the functor $P = L_{n,m}\otimes_{k} -$ is left adjoint to the forgetful functor $U$ is standard \cite{MacLane}.

\begin{remark}
If $U(C)$ and $U(D)$ are cyclically graded complexes then $U(C)\otimes U(D)$ is a cyclically graded complex. If $\EuScript{A}$ is a monoidal category then $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)\qu$ is a monoidal category.
\end{remark}

\begin{proposition}
The homotopy category $\Ho_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)\qu$ of $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)\qu$ is a triangulated category.
\end{proposition}
In order to avoid more digression, the proof assumes familiarity with
the reference \cite{BK}.
\begin{proof}
  The functors $P$ and $U$ commute with totalization.

  In more detail, let $\EuScript{C} = \Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)\qu$.  Given a twisted complex $E = \{E_i,
  r_{ij}\}$ over $\EuScript{C}$ \cite[\S 1 Def. 1]{BK}. Let $\a(E) : \EuScript{C}^{\oplus} \to
  \Kom$ be the functor determined by $E$ \cite[\S 1 Def. 3]{BK}. By
  definition,
$$\a(E)(X) = \oplus_i t^i \Hom_{\EuScript{C}}(X,E_i).$$
The differential of this chain complex is the sum $d + Q$ where $d$ is the
$\Hom$-differential from Equation \eqref{homdiffeq} and $Q=(r_{ij})$.  Let
$T(E) = \oplus_i t^i E_i \in \EuScript{C}$ be the chain complex with differential
$(r_{ij})$.

Then the chain complex $T(E)$ represents the functor $\a(E)$. The functor
$h_{T(E)} : \EuScript{C}^{\oplus}\to\Kom$ associated to $T(E)$ by the Yoneda embedding
is given on objects $X$ by
$$h_{T(E)}(X) = \Hom(X,T(E)) = \Hom(X,\oplus_i t^i E_i) \cong\oplus_i t^i \Hom(X, E_i).$$
Checking that the differentials agree implies that $h_{T(E)}(X) \cong
\a(E)(X)$. This isomorphism does not depend on $X$, so $h_{T(E)} \cong
\a(E)$.

Since each twisted complex $E$ is represented by a chain complex $T(E)$ in
$\EuScript{C}$, the category $\EuScript{C}$ is pre-triangulated \cite[\S 3 Def. 1]{BK}. It
follows that the homotopy category $\Ho_{\frac{1}{2}}(\eA)\qu = \Ho(\EuScript{C})$ is triangulated
\cite[\S 3 Prop. 2]{BK}.
\end{proof}

\vskip .1in

The proof of the main theorem shows that the modular group relations hold in
a certain category $\eE_{n,k}$ up to the application of a translation
functor $\sh_k$. The construction introduced in this section will ensure
that the modular group acts on a category which is obtained by performing
the appropriate grading reduction: $\eR_{n,k} = \eE_{n,k}/\sh_k$.

\section{Braid groups and the modular group}\label{braidsec}

In this section we recall the relationship between the braid group $\mathbf{t}$ and
the modular group $\pslz$. Notation established here will be used later.

\subsection{Braid groups}\label{braidgpssec}
If $D_n$ is the closed disk with $n$ punctures then the {\em braid group} $\B_n$
on $n$ strands is given by the path components of the group of boundary and
orientation preserving diffeomorphisms of $D_n$,
$$\B_n = \pi_0(\Diff^+(D_n,\partial)).$$
Alternatively, if $\Config_n(D^2)$ is the configuration space of $n$ distinct points in the unit disk then the symmetric group $S_n$ acts on $\Config_n(D^2)$ by permuting these points. The braid group $\B_n$ is the fundamental group of the quotient,
$$\B_n = \pi_1(\Config_n(D^2)/S_n,x_0),$$
see \cite{Birman, FM}. Each loop $\gamma \in\B_n$ can be viewed as a braid
in 3-space and each such braid can be represented by a diagram consisting of
a sequence of crossings $\sigma_i$ for $1\leq i < n$.

When $n=3$, a presentation for the braid group in terms of these generators
is given by
$$\mathbf{t} = \inp{\sigma_1, \sigma_2 : \sigma_1 \sigma_2 \sigma_1 = \sigma_2\sigma_1\sigma_2 }.$$

\subsection{Modular groups}\label{pslzsec}

The {\em modular group} $\slz$ is the group of $2\times 2$ matrices
with integer coefficients and determinant $1$:
$$\slz = \left\{ \left(\begin{array}{cc} a & b \\ c & d \end{array} \right) : a,b,c,d\in\mathbb{Z}\conjj{and} ad-bc = 1\right\}.$$
It is also the mapping class group of the torus $T$, see \cite{FM}. If $I\in
\slz$ is the identity matrix then the center $\eZ(\slz) \subset \slz$ is the
subgroup $\{ I, -I \}$. The {\em projective modular group} $\pslz$ is the quotient
$$\pslz = \slz/\{I, -I\}.$$
Choosing representatives for the elements $\{I,-I\}$ yields a $\mathbb{Z}/2$-action on the torus
with the quotient, $S^2_4 = T/(\mathbb{Z}/2)$, the four punctured sphere. The group
$\pslz$ is the mapping class group of $S^2_4$. It can be shown that $\pslz$
is isomorphic to the free product $\mathbb{Z}/2 * \mathbb{Z}/3$; equivalently:
$$\pslz \cong \inp{ a, b : a^2 = 1, b^3 = 1}.$$

\subsection{Relating $\mathbf{t}$ and $\pslz$}\label{relatingsec} Denote by $q_n$ the braid:
$$q_n = \sigma_{n-1} \sigma_{n-2} \cdots \sigma_1 \in \B_n.$$
For instance:
$$q_3 = \CPic{cubebraid3}.$$
Multiplying $q_n$ by itself $n$ times produces the full twist, $T_n = q_n^n$. The equation,
\begin{equation}\label{commuteeq}
\sigma_i T_n = T_n \sigma_i \conj{for} 1\leq i < n,
\end{equation}
can be seen by dragging $\sigma_i$ through from the bottom of $T_n$ to the top of
$T_n$. It follows that $T_n$ is contained in the center $\eZ(\B_n) \subset
\B_n$ of the braid group. In fact, $\inp{T_n} = \eZ(\B_n)$, see \cite{chow}.

When $n=3$, the following proposition tells us that the quotient
$\B_n/\inp{T_n}$ is related to the modular group.

\begin{proposition}\label{btpslzthm}
The quotient of $\B_3$ by the subgroup generated by the full twist $T_3$ is isomorphic to the projective modular group $\pslz$.
$$\B_3/\inp{T_3} \cong \pslz$$

\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
If we set $a = \sigma_1 \sigma_2 \sigma_1$ and $b = \sigma_1 \sigma_2$ then
$$\B_3/\inp{T_3} = \inp{\sigma_1, \sigma_2 : \sigma_1 \sigma_2\sigma_1 = \sigma_2\sigma_1\sigma_2, T_3 = 1} \cong \inp{a,b : a^2 = 1, b^3 = 1} \cong \pslz.$$
\end{proof}

The groups $\B_n/\inp{T_n}$ are always related to mapping class groups of
punctured spheres, see \cite[\S 4.2]{Birman}.

\section{The Construction}\label{gensec}

\noindent In this section we construct sequences of categories $\eR_{n,k}$ and
prove that each category supports an action of the modular group. We begin
by defining categories $\eE_{n,k}$ as extensions of $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(3n)$ from
Section \ref{cobsec}. The categories $\eR_{n,k}$ are obtained from
$\eE_{n,k}$ using the construction in Section \ref{cyclicgrsec}. In Theorem
\ref{pslactsthm} below, it is shown that there is an action of the group
$\pslz$ on each category $\eR_{n,k}$. This induces an action of the modular
group on $\eR_{n,k}$.

The first step is to define a chain complex $E_{n,k}$ consisting of a
composition of projectors. This object is illustrated in the proof
of Theorem \ref{pslactsthm}.

\begin{definition}{($E_{n,k}$)}
  Suppose that $P_{n,k}$ is the higher order projector from Theorem \ref{hothm}.
Then set
$$E_{n,k} = (P_{n,k} \sqcup P_{n,k} \sqcup P_{n,k}) \otimes P_{3n,k}.$$
\end{definition}

\begin{definition}{($\eE_{n,k}$)}\label{apndef}
The category $\eE_{n,k} \subset \Kom^*(3n)$ is the image of the functor
$-\otimes E_{n,k}$.
\end{definition}

Alternatively, $\eE_{n,k}$ is the full dg subcategory of $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(3n)$
consisting of objects which are homotopy equivalent to those of the form $C
\otimes E_{n,k}$.

Each object in the category $\eE_{n,k}$ is bigraded. One can shift either
the $t$-degree or the $q$-degree of each object using the functors
$t^{\frac{1}{2}}$ or $q$. Property \ref{abstwprop} in Section
\ref{projectorsec} suggests the following definition.

\begin{definition}{($\sh_k$)}
  The shift functor $\sh_k : \eE_{n,k} \to \eE_{n,k}$ is given by the
  composition $\sh_k = t^{\ptwTsq} q^{\ptwQsq}$. If $C\in\eE_{n,k}$ is a
  chain complex then
$$\deg_t(\sh_k(C)) = \deg_t(C) + \ptwTsq \conj{and} \deg_q(\sh_k(C)) = \deg_q(C) + \ptwQsq.$$
\end{definition}

\begin{definition}{($\eR_{n,k}$)}\label{arndef}
The category $\eR_{n,k}$ is obtained by making the shift functor $\sh_k$ act trivially on $\eE_{n,k}$:
$$\eR_{n,k} = \eE_{n,k}/ \sh_k.$$
\end{definition}

\begin{theorem}\label{pslactsthm}
The group $\pslz$ acts on the category $\eR_{n,k}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Using the presentation  $\pslz = \inp{ a, b : a^2 = 1, b^3 = 1}$ from Section \ref{pslzsec}, we will construct a functor:
$$\pslz \to \Endo(\eR_{n,k}) \conj{where} g\mapsto F_g.$$
Associated to the generators $a$ and $b$ are chain complexes which are determined by the tangles:
$$a=\CPic{cubebraid4} \conj{and} b = \CPic{cubebraid3},$$
where each line represents an $n$-cabled strand. There are functors, $F_a,
F_b :\eR_{n,k} \to \eR_{n,k}$, given by tensoring on the left. To the
identity element $1 \in\pslz$, we associate the functor $F_1$ where $1=1_{3n}$ is
the diagram consisting of $3n$ vertical strands. For inverses, $a^{-1}$ and
$b^{-1}$, we use the functors $F_{a}$ and $F_{b^2}$. To a word
$w\cdot w' \in \inp{a,b}$, we associate the functor $F_w\circ F_w'$.  In
this manner, we obtain a functor $F_g : \eR_{n,k} \to \eR_{n,k}$ for each
word $g\in\inp{a,b}$.

We proceed by checking that the relations $a^2 = 1$ and $b^3 = 1$ hold.
Since the braids $a^2$ and $b^3$ are both full twists with some framing
dependency, it suffices to check that this full twist is homotopy equivalent
to the identity object in the category $\eR_{n,k}$.

Consider what happens when the tangles $a^2$ or $b^3$ are glued onto
$E_{n,k}$. As framed tangles, the full twist $T_3$ is isotopic to the tangle
pictured on the right below.

$$\hspace{-1.5in}\CPic{fulltwist1}\quad\quad\simeq\CPic{fulltwist3} \hspace{1.2in}\simeq \quad \left(\pSHIFT\right)^3 \CPic{fulltwist4}$$

Using the relations of Section \ref{algsec}, we can move the small projectors to the top and absorb the top twists. Using the big projector $P_{3n,k}$ at the bottom to absorb the middle twist leaves us with:
$$\left(\pSHIFT\right)^3\left(\pSHIFT\right)^{-1} \CPic{enpic}\quad =\quad \sh_k \CPic{enpic}\quad \simeq \CPic{enpic}\hspace{.1in}.$$
The last equality follows because we have reduced the grading, see Section \ref{cyclicgrsec}.
We have shown that the relations $a^2 = 1$ and $b^3 = 1$ hold up to homotopy.
\end{proof}

The corollary below notes that the above theorem defines representations of
the modular group $\slz$ via pullback.

\begin{corollary}
The group $\slz$ acts on the category $\eR_{n,k}$.
\end{corollary}

\begin{proof}
To each $x\in\slz$ associate the functor $F_{\pi(x)}$ defined in the proof
of the theorem where $\pi : \slz\to \pslz$.
\end{proof}

\subsection{Concluding remarks}

\begin{remark}\label{remark3}
  There are several variations which also yield modular group
  representations. For instance, we could have instead chosen to associate
  to $a^{-1}$ and $b^{-1}$ the functors $F_{a^{-1}}$ and $F_{b^{-1}}$.

  The argument in Theorem \ref{pslactsthm} applies to the
  subcategories $\eX_n = \Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(n,n,n,n)$ of $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(4n)$, see \cite[\S
  6]{CK}. The objects of $\eX_n$ are homotopy equivalent to convolutions of
  chain complexes of the form:
\begin{equation}\label{eqn1}
\CPic{nnnndiag}
\end{equation}
where $D$ is a disjoint union of intervals interfacing between four copies
of the projector $P_n$. Reducing the grading so that the functor $\sh_n$
acts by identity gives a new category $\eK_n = \eX_n/ \sh_n$. After
fixing one projector, act on the other three by $n$-cabled strands as in the
proof above. This is a $\PSL(2,\mathbb{Z})$ representation.

It is possible to argue that the action of $\PSL(2,\mathbb{Z})$ on the category
$\eK_n \otimes \mathbb{F}_2$ is strong by using results from previous papers. This
material has been omitted.

\end{remark}

\begin{remark}
The category $\eK_n$ is analogous to the vector space assigned to the four
punctured sphere $S^2_4$ by $\SU(2)$ Chern-Simons theory. The quotient, $T
\to S^2_4$, described in Section \ref{pslzsec}, allows one to identify the
$\SU(2)$ skein space for $S^2_4$ with the $\SO(3)$ skein space for the torus
at the level $r = 2(n+1)$.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}
Spin networks of the form (\ref{eqn1}) correspond to $\quantsl$-equivariant
maps from the $n$th irreducible representation $V_n$ to $V_n^{\otimes
  3}$. The dimension of this space is $n+1$. We may view the categories
$\eK_n$ as a sequence of representations of increasing complexity.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}
  Tensoring the decomposition of identity in Equation \eqref{decompeq} with
  a chain complex representing the full twist and applying Property
  \ref{abstwprop} shows that the projectors in Theorem \ref{hothm}
  diagonalize the action of the center $\eZ(\B_n)$ on $\Kom^*_{\frac{1}{2}}(n)$. In order
  to reduce an arbitrary $G$-action to a $G/\eZ(G)$-action in a more general
  setting, one must first find an extension of $\EuScript{C}$ in which the action of
  the center $\eZ(G)$ respects the grading.

\end{remark}


\section{Introduction}

Tellurium dioxide bolometers are excellent detectors to search
for rare processes.  Operated at a temperature of about 10\un{mK}, these
detectors feature an energy resolution of a few keV over an energy range
extending from a few keV up to several MeV.  This, together with the
low level of radioactive background achievable and the low cost, makes
them ideal detectors for CUORE, an experiment that will search
for neutrinoless double beta decay (0$\nu$DBD) of $^{130}\mathrm{Te}$~\cite{Arnaboldi:2003tu,ACryo}.

CUORE\ will consist of 988 $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\ bolometers of 750\un{g} each and is expected to
reach a background level at the $^{130}\mathrm{Te}$\ Q-value (around 2528 keV~\cite{Redshaw:2009zz,scielzo09,Rahaman:2011zz}) of
the order of 0.01\un{counts/keV/kg/y}, thus allowing a sensitivity to 0$\nu$DBD\ down
to the inverted hierarchy of neutrino masses. CUORE\
is currently being installed at the Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso
(LNGS) in Italy and is scheduled to start taking data in 2014. The
experimental design was validated by CUORICINO, an array of 62 $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\
bolometers (for total mass of 40.7\un{kg}) which took data at LNGS from 2003
to 2008 and put stringent limits on the 0$\nu$DBD\
half-life~\cite{Andreotti:2010vj,Andreotti:2011in}.  To test the new assembly line
and the materials chosen for CUORE, an array of 52 $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\ bolometers,
named CUORE-0, has been recently built. It is expected to have a smaller background than CUORICINO\ and will start taking data in Fall 2012.

Given the high mass, the good energy resolution, and the low background,
CUORE-0\ and CUORE\ experiments can search for rare processes such
as Dark Matter interactions.  While there is significant evidence
that Dark Matter exists~\cite{Bertone:2004pz}, its composition is
as of yet unknown. Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs) are
the theoretically favored candidates~\cite{Steigman:1984ac},  and
several earthbound experiments have been designed to detect their
scattering off nuclei, which should produce energy releases of a few
keV~\cite{Goodman:1984dc}. Many experiments use multiple signatures
(e.g. phonon, scintillation and ionization) to discriminate nuclear
recoils from the $\beta/\gamma$ background originating from natural
radioactivity. Other experiments search for the expected annual modulation
of the interaction rate as the Earth traverses the uniform Dark Matter
distribution in the galactic halo~\cite{Drukier:1986tm}. Some experiments
have reported compatibility with the signal expected for a galactic halo
WIMP population, but have been met with skepticism~\cite{pdg2012}. As
our knowledge of the properties of Dark Matter is limited, a variety of
different experimental approaches are required and the search for Dark
Matter with $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\ bolometers could provide important new information.

Such searches were not performed in CUORICINO\ because
the energy threshold was too high, of the order of tens of keV. A new software trigger
was developed to lower the energy threshold~\cite{DiDomizio:2010ph}.
The trigger  is based on the matched filter algorithm~\cite{Gatti:1986cw,Radeka:1966}
and also provides a pulse shape parameter to suppress false signals
generated by detector vibrations and electronics noise.

In this paper we show the energy spectrum of four $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\ bolometers originally
operated at LNGS to test the performances
 of CUORE\ crystals~\cite{Alessandria:2011vj}. In three of them we were
 able to set the energy threshold around 3\un{keV}, while the fourth was set to 10\un{keV}
 because of higher detector noise.
The energy spectrum of the three bolometers exhibits a peak at 4.7\un{keV} whose origin
is presently unknown.  The peak has a constant rate in time, and
its presence is confirmed by a reanalysis of the data from the last two
months of operation of CUORICINO.
Given the observed counting rate,
we also evaluate the sensitivity of CUORE-0\ and CUORE\ to an annual
modulation signal induced by  WIMP Dark Matter candidates, comparing it to the results of other experiments.

\section{Experimental setup}

A CUORE\ bolometer is composed of two main parts: a $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\
crystal and a neutron transmutation doped Germanium (NTD-Ge)
thermistor~\cite{wang,Itoh}. The crystal, a $750\un{g}$ cube of
side length $5\un{cm}$, is held by PTFE supports in copper frames.
The frames are connected to the mixing chamber of a dilution
refrigerator, which keeps the bolometers at a temperature of about
$10\un{mK}$.  The thermistor is glued to the crystal and acts as
thermometer.  The temperature increase due to an energy deposition
in the crystal is measured by the decrease in the resistance of the
thermistor~\cite{Mott:1969,Itoh:1996}.  The thermistor is biased
by a constant current and a change in the voltage across it constitutes
the signal~\cite{AProgFE}.  In the setup presented in this paper, called
CUORE\ Crystal Validation Run 2 (CCVR2), each crystal
was provided with two thermistors for redundancy.
Two Joule heaters  were also glued on two crystals and used to inject heat
pulses with controlled amounts of energy to monitor the detector gain
and efficiencies~\cite{stabilization,Arnaboldi:2003yp,Andreotti:2012zz}.
The bolometers were operated in the cryogenic R\&D facility of CUORE\
whose details can be found in Refs.~\cite{Pirro:2006mu,Arnaboldi:2006mx,Arnaboldi:2004jj}.

Data were collected over 23\un{days} with small interruptions for
calibrations and cryostat maintenance. The effective live time amounted
to 19.4\un{days}.  On each of the four bolometers, labeled B1, B2,
B3 and B4, we selected the thermistor in which the trigger reached the
lowest energy threshold.

The energy calibration was performed by inserting two wires of thoriated
tungsten in proximity of the detector, between the cryostat and the
lead shields placed externally. The main $\gamma$ lines of $^{232}$Th,
ranging from 511 to 2615\un{keV}, and the lines generated by metastable
Te isotopes in the crystals, ranging from 30 to 150\un{keV}, were used
for the determination of the calibration function. These isotopes are
produced by cosmogenic activation during production and
air-shipment of the crystals outside the underground laboratory.

\section{Detector performance}

The energy resolution was evaluated both at the baseline level and on
the lowest energy peak in the spectrum. Randomly triggered events,
not containing pulses, were used to evaluate the fluctuation of the
baseline after the application of the matched filter.  A Gaussian fit
was performed on the 30.5\un{keV} Sb line, which is due to EC decays
of metastable Te isotopes.  As one can
see from Tab.~\ref{tab:OTeff},  baseline and 30.5\un{keV} resolutions
are quite close, since at these energies the resolution of bolometers is
expected to be dominated by the noise. The bolometers feature excellent
energy resolution, with B2, B3, and B4 below 1\un{keV~FWHM}, and B1
at 3.3\un{keV~FWHM}.

The detection efficiencies were measured via an energy scan performed
at the end of the run by using the Joule heaters to provide
sequences of pulses from 1 to $50\un{keV}$.  However,
heater events and actual particle events have slightly different pulse
shapes which could result in slightly different energies and detection
efficiencies.
The trigger efficiency and any differences that may result from the difference between the heater pulses and particle events were investigated by Monte Carlo\ simulations.

Heater pulses between 1--50\un{keV} and particle pulses in the same energy range were simulated separately using the tools described in Ref.~\cite{Carrettoni:2011rn}.  Only B2 and B3 were simulated for heater pulses while all the four bolometers were considered for the particle pulses simulation.
Both Monte Carlo\ runs included simulated
detector noise and the background from particle pulses, randomly generated
to match the event rate and the entire measured energy spectrum  from threshold
up to 5.4\un{MeV}, i.e. the energy of $^{210}$Po decays
in the crystal.  We processed the output of the simulation in the same
way as the heater scan measurement.  The estimated efficiencies on B2
are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:MCsignal3}, where the good agreement
between Monte Carlo\ and data is evident.

The similarities in the energy dependence demonstrate that the trigger
acts in the same way on particle and heater pulses. This feature
is visible also on B3, the other bolometer with a heater.  We
estimate the detection efficiencies on the two bolometers without heater
(B1 and B4) using the Monte Carlo.  For each bolometer, we set the energy
threshold for the data analysis as the energy at which the plateau
is reached. The detection efficiency $\epsilon_D$ is computed as the
weighted average of each point in the plateau and it is considered constant
in the data analysis above threshold. The energy threshold,
the heater-measured, and particle-simulated detection efficiencies of
each bolometer are reported in Tab.~\ref{tab:OTeff}.
The heater-simulated detection efficiencies
are found consistent with the heater-measured ones within $1 \sigma$.

The residual 10-20\% inefficiency in the plateau is due to the trigger dead time, which is mainly due to $^{210}$Po decays. $^{210}$Po is introduced in the
crystal growth and has a half-life of 147 days. For sufficiently aged crystals, such as the CUORE-0\ and CUORE\ ones, the dead time is expected to be negligible because this activity has decayed away, raising the efficiencies up to 100\% (see Ref.~\cite{DiDomizio:2010ph} for further details).
\begin{table}[htb]
\begin{center}
\caption{Baseline resolution ($\Delta E_{\rm base}$), resolution at 30.5\un{keV} ($\Delta E_{30\un{keV}}$),
software energy threshold ($\theta_E$) and detection
efficiencies measured with the Joule heater ($\epsilon_D^{heater}$) and estimated from the Monte Carlo\
simulation of the four bolometers ($\epsilon_D^{MC}$).} \label{tab:OTeff}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Bolo& $\Delta E_{\rm base}$ & $\Delta E_{30\un{keV}}$ & $\theta_E$ & $\epsilon_D^{heater}$ & $\epsilon_D^{MC} $ \\
          & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{[keV FWHM]}       & [keV]  &&\\
\hline
B1 & $ 3.3 $   &  $3.3 \pm 0.7$   & 10.0 & n/a & $0.878 \pm 0.002$  \\
B2 & $ 0.66 $  &  $0.53 \pm 0.08$ & 3.0 &  $0.910 \pm 0.005$ & $0.913 \pm 0.001$   \\
B3 & $0.76 $   &  $0.83 \pm 0.09$ & 2.5 & $0.828 \pm 0.007$ & $0.825 \pm 0.001$  \\
B4 & $0.82 $   &  $0.59 \pm 0.12$ & 2.5 & n/a & $0.828 \pm 0.002$  \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig1_ccvr2eff.eps}
\caption{Detection efficiency on B2: particle Monte Carlo\ in black circles,
heater Monte Carlo\ in green circles, heater scan data in big red circles. The
shadowed band represents the region below the energy threshold chosen for
the data analysis.}
\label{fig:MCsignal3}
\end{figure}

\section{Energy calibration}

The calibration function is a third order polynomial without intercept.
The residual with respect to the nominal energy of the
peaks in the low energy spectrum is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:metares}.
\begin{figure}[b] \centering
\begin{overpic}[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig2_low_residuals.eps}
\put(26,55){\footnotesize Sb}
\put(21,52){\footnotesize (K shell)}
\put(50,37){\footnotesize $^{127m}$Te}
\put(60,60){\footnotesize $^{129m}$Te}
\put(76,30){\footnotesize $^{125m}$Te}
\end{overpic}
\caption{Residuals of the calibration function of B2 on metastable Te lines.}
\label{fig:metares}
\end{figure}

The accuracy at energies lower than $30\un{keV}$ was
verified by using events from $^{121}$Te and $^{40}$K contaminations
in the crystals.  These isotopes may decay via EC to $^{121}$Sb and
$^{40}$Ar, respectively, with the emission of a $\gamma$-ray from the
daughter nucleus de-excitation ($507.6\un{keV}$ or $573.1\un{keV}$
 from $^{121}$Te and 1461\un{keV} from $^{40}$K) and the de-excitation
 of the atomic shell L$_1$ and K ($E_{L1}=4.6983\un{keV}$
or $E_K=30.4912\un{keV}$ from $^{121}$Te and $E_K=3.2060\un{keV}$
from $ ^{40}$K). The atomic de-excitation process is fully contained
in the crystal while, in some cases, the $\gamma$ can escape and hit
another crystal, thus producing a double hit event. To select double
hit events, we set the time coincidence window to 10~\un{ms}, i.e. the
measured jitter between the response of the bolometers.  We required that in one of the two crystals there is an energy
release corresponding to the $\gamma$-rays from $^{121}$Te or $^{40}$K,
and then, after applying the SI cut, we selected energy depositions between threshold and 40\un{keV} in the other crystal (Fig.~\ref{fig:coincidences}). Two events from  $^{40}$K
were found (3.04 and 3.18\un{keV}), three from the L$_1$ (4.48, 4.67 and
4.74\un{keV}), and ten from the K de-excitation after the $^{121}$Te
decay ($30.53\pm 0.04$\un{keV}). Since all the events are compatible
with their expected energy, the accuracy of the low-energy calibration
is confirmed.  We also note that the K/L capture ratio for $^{121}$Te
is compatible within two standard deviations with the expected value
of 7~\cite{Ohya20101619}.

\begin{figure}[tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig3_coincidences.eps}
\caption{Summed energy spectrum from B2, B3 and B4 in time coincidence with
an energy deposition on another bolometer (including B1)  compatible
with the $\gamma$ lines from $^{40}$K (solid) or $^{121}$Te decays
(hashed).  The dashed lines represent the nominal values of the
de-excitation energies. No event is observed away from these lines.}
\label{fig:coincidences}
\end{figure}

\section{Event selection}

We selected signal events using the shape indicator variable (SI)
described in Ref.~\cite{DiDomizio:2010ph}. This variable is based
on the $\chi^2$ of the fit of the waveforms with the expected shape of the signal.
The distribution of SI versus energy for B2 is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:scatterSI}.
The signal region is easily identified, and a considerable part of the pulses generated
by thermal and electronic noise
can be removed with a cut on this variable.
\begin{figure}[bt]
\centering
\begin{overpic}[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig4_shapeindicator.eps}
\put(40,50){\rotatebox{13}{noise and spikes}}
\put(50,32){signal}
\end{overpic}
\caption{Pulse shape indicator (SI) distribution on B2.  The band at low
SI is populated by signal events.  At higher values there are triggered
mechanic vibrations, electronic spikes and pileups. The optimal cut for
this bolometer was found to be ${\rm SI}<2.2$.} \label{fig:scatterSI}
\end{figure}

We evaluated the optimal value of the cut on SI using the Sb K line
at $30.5\un{keV}$.  We performed a series of extended
unbinned maximum-likelihood fits, selecting the events below a fixed SI value.  For each
SI cut, the spectra of cut accepted events and cut rejected events were
simultaneously fitted with a Gaussian,  representative of the signal,
plus a first-order polynomial function, representative of the background.
Signal ($\epsilon_S$) and background ($\epsilon_B$) efficiencies after the cut
were evaluated directly in the fit. For each bolometer we selected
the cut which maximized the statistical significance, defined as
$\epsilon_S/\sqrt{\epsilon_B}$, corresponding in this case to
$\epsilon_S=1$.

No anti-coincidence cut is applied. Since over the entire energy range multiple-hit events
are mainly due to random coincidences, the application of anti-coincidence
cuts reduces the statistics without gaining in background reduction.

\section{Measured spectra}

The energy spectra of the four detectors show several $\gamma$ and $\alpha$
peaks that are clearly identified as due to U, Th and K contaminations
(of the crystals themselves and of the experimental setup) and few low
energy peaks identified as being due to Te metastable isotopes.
The region between
threshold and $40\un{keV}$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:spectra_best}.
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\begin{overpic}[width=0.23\textwidth,clip=true]{fig5a_ccvr2_ch2_spectrum.eps}
\put(79,58){B1}
\end{overpic}
\begin{overpic}[width=0.23\textwidth,clip=true]{fig5b_ccvr2_ch3_spectrum.eps}
\put(79,58){B2}
\end{overpic}
\begin{overpic}[width=0.23\textwidth,clip=true]{fig5c_ccvr2_ch6_spectrum.eps}
\put(79,58){B3}
\end{overpic}
\begin{overpic}[width=0.23\textwidth,clip=true]{fig5d_ccvr2_ch7_spectrum.eps}
\put(79,58){B4}
\end{overpic}
\caption{Low energy spectra of the four bolometers. Full statistics
(19.4 days) with pulse shape cut applied.} \label{fig:spectra_best}
\end{figure}
In the three bolometers with the lowest threshold, a peak appears at
about $4.7\un{keV}$, the energy of the L$_1$ atomic shell of Sb. This
in principle indicates that the line could be ascribed to the EC decay
of a Te isotope, however none of the known or predicted isotope decays
can explain our observation:
\begin{itemize}
\item The $^{121m}$Te and its daughter $^{121}$Te  decay via EC with
half-lives of 154 and 17 days, respectively.  However the  intensity of
the observed peak is higher than the K line of Sb at 30.5 keV. This is
in contradiction with the measured value of the K/L$_1$ capture ratio for
these isotopes which is greater than one.
\item The other EC decaying metastable Te isotopes (and their daughters) have half-lives smaller than 4.7\un{days}. As it will demonstrated later,
the observed peak rate is constant over 20\un{days}.
\item $^{123}\mathrm{Te}$\ is a naturally occurring isotope of Tellurium (abundance  $0.908\pm0.002\,\%$~\cite{ohya2004nuclear})
which may decay via EC to $^{123}$Sb with a Q-value of $52.2 \pm 1.5
\un{keV}$.  Since the transition is 2$^{\rm nd}$-forbidden unique,
it has been estimated that very little K capture actually occurs
and that the majority of EC decays take place from the L$_3$  shell.
Several searches for Sb K lines from EC of $^{123}\mathrm{Te}$\ have been performed.
Positive evidence, $T_{1/2} = (1.24 \pm 0.10) \cdot 10^{13}\un{y}$, was
claimed~\cite{watt1962search} but subsequently ruled
out~\cite{zuber:2003, PhysRevC.67.014323}.  In this paper, we show
for the first time an energy spectrum down to the L energy region. The
line we observe however cannot be attributed to $^{123}$Te, since,
as described in the next section, the
energy is compatible with the L$_1$ shell (4.6983\un{keV}) and not with
the L$_3$ one (4.1322\un{keV}).

\end{itemize}

To further investigate the peak origin, in the next future we will operate
crystals enriched in $^{128}$Te and $^{130}$Te (therefore depleted in
other Te isotopes) and see if the peak intensity changes. In the following we
report the analysis of the peak in the energy distribution of single
bolometers, to provide all the possible details and to stimulate a
discussion within the scientific community that will hopefully lead to its
identification.

To determine the intensity, the peaking background due to
the EC decay of $^{121m}$Te--$^{121}$Te was removed. The $\gamma$-rays
produced by these isotopes can escape without hitting another crystal,
such that only the K or the L de-excitations are measured. The number of
pure L events from $^{121}$Te and $^{121m}$Te ($N_{121}$) were estimated
using a Monte Carlo\ simulation based on GEANT4~\cite{allison2006geant4},
normalizing the single hit spectra to the measured rate of the most
intense $^{121m}$Te peak (294.0\un{keV}).

To estimate the intensity and the energy of the line from the
data, we performed a separate extended unbinned maximum-likelihood fit for each bolometer,
using a likelihood function constituted by a Gaussian plus two exponential
functions to reproduce the background.
We set the pulse shape cuts at the estimated optimal values.
Since the events in the 4.7\un{keV} peak are more plentiful
than in the Sb K peak at 30.5\un{keV}, the selection efficiencies
were recomputed, and confirmed to be equal to 1.
The obtained number of
events $N_{e}$ was then corrected taking into account the detection and cut efficiencies
and the expected background $N_{121}$, according to the equation
$N_{sig}=(N_{e}-N_{121})/(\epsilon_{D}\epsilon_{S})$. Best fits are
shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:bestfit4keV}. In Tab.~\ref{tab:fit4keV} we report
the summary of the peak parameters of each bolometer, also including the
estimated peaking background $N_{121}$.

\begin{figure}[tbp]
\centering
\begin{overpic}[width=0.23\textwidth,clip = true]{fig6a_fit_ch3.eps}
\put(79,58){B2}
\end{overpic}
\begin{overpic}[width=0.23\textwidth,clip = true]{fig6b_fit_ch6.eps}
\put(79,58){B3}
\end{overpic}
\begin{overpic}[width=0.23\textwidth,clip = true]{fig6c_fit_ch7.eps}
\put(79,58){B4}
\end{overpic}
\includegraphics[width=0.218\textwidth,clip=true]{fig6d_PNLL.eps}
\caption{Best fits
at the $4.7\un{keV}$ line on the three bolometers with low threshold.
On the bottom right, the combined profile negative log-likelihood
projected over the number of signal events.}
\label{fig:bestfit4keV}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[tbp]
\begin{center}
\caption{Best fit results for the $4.7\un{keV}$ line and estimated peaking background
from $^{121}$Te. The error on the energy includes the systematic due to the calibration.}
\label{tab:fit4keV}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Bolometer& Energy &  FWHM&  $N_{sig}$ & $N_{121}$\\
 & [keV] & [keV] & [counts] & [counts] \\
\hline
B2 & $4.75\pm0.28$ & $0.57\pm0.11$  & $191^{+41}_{-31}$ & $6.1 \pm 1.3$\\
B3 & $4.66\pm0.28$ & $0.87\pm0.10$  & $255^{+51}_{-35}$ & $13.5 \pm 1.6$\\
B4 & $4.76\pm0.38$ & $0.75\pm0.12$  & $205^{+45}_{-34}$ & $7.5 \pm 1.4$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}

We combined the profile negative log-likelihoods of $N_{e}$ and $N_{121}$
of the three bolometers (Fig.~\ref{fig:bestfit4keV}) to compute the average rate. The estimated
value of the number of signal events is $223\pm 22\un{counts/crystal}$,
from which we evaluated the line intensity in $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\
to be $I=15.3\pm1.5\un{counts/day/kg}$.  The energy averaged over the
three bolometers is $4.72\pm0.18\un{keV}$.

Figure~\ref{fig:LTe_rate_vs_time} shows the peak rate along the duration
of the data-taking, which is in a very good agreement with a constant distribution, indicating
that this signal is not due to a short-living radioactive contamination. It also indicates
that any variation of the detection efficiency with time is negligible compared
to the statistical error.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig7_peakrate.eps}
\caption{Rate of the $4.7\un{keV}$ peak versus time in all
three CCVR2 bolometers summed together. No variation is appreciable.} \label{fig:LTe_rate_vs_time}
\end{figure}

To check the stability of the line over a longer period of time, we checked
its presence in the CUORICINO\ data.  During the last two months of
operation of CUORICINO, the data-acquisition system being developed for CUORE\
(the same used for CCVR2), was run in parallel with the old system,
saving to disk the continuous stream of data.
The live-time of continuous data amounts to 47.5\un{days}.  We ran the
new trigger on these data but we were able to reach a threshold below
4\un{keV} only on 4 bolometers, because of the high vibrational noise
transmitted by the holder to the crystals (CCVR, CUORE-0\ and CUORE\
holders have been explicitly redesigned to lower the transmitted noise).
These 4 bolometers had smaller size
(3x3x6\un{cm^3}, 330\un{g}) than other CUORICINO\ and CUORE\ bolometers,
and featured higher signal to noise ratio.

The sum energy spectrum of the four bolometers is overlaid
to the sum energy spectrum of the CCVR2 bolometers in
Fig.~\ref{fig:CCVRvscuoricinorate}.  In CUORICINO\ the
heater energy scan was not performed, therefore the spectrum shown is
not corrected for the detection efficiencies.
 As it can be seen from the
figure, the peak is very well visible, with a fitted energy
resolution of $0.52\pm0.04\un{keV~FWHM}$. The intensity and the
average energy are found to be similar to the CCVR2 ones, being
$(10.0\pm 0.6)/{\epsilon}\un{counts/day/kg}$ and $4.73\pm0.01\un{keV}$,
respectively. We also note that the 30.5\un{keV} peak disappeared,
because the $^{121m-121}$Te isotopes decayed away during the 5 years
of underground data taking.

As the calibration was based on the $^{232}$Th source only, and given the
lack of low energy peaks, the accuracy of the calibration function at
low energies cannot be checked directly on CUORICINO\ data. To have
an estimate of the calibration accuracy, during a new CCVR run we built a new setup in
which a $^{55}$Fe source was deposited on the copper holder. The
detector was operated in the same setup used for the CCVR2 one, reaching
an energy resolution of 1.4\un{keV~FWHM} and an energy threshold of
around 3\un{keV}. To emulate the CUORICINO\ conditions, the calibration
function was estimated using the peaks from the $^{232}$Th source only.
The X-rays produced by the $^{55}$Fe, with nominal energies between 5.888
and 6.490\un{keV}, resulted in detected energies that were shifted, on
average, by only $+(48\pm16)\un{eV}$ from their nominal values. Even
if the operating conditions of this setup were not identical to the
CUORICINO\ ones, this shift can be taken as an indication of the
systematics associated to the calibration function.

\begin{figure}[t]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,clip=true]{fig8_qinovsccvr.eps}
\caption{Comparison of CCVR2 (black circles) and CUORICINO\ (red triangles) data, with a zoom on the 4.7\un{keV}. Unlike
in CCVR2, CUORICINO\ data are not corrected for the efficiencies and the calibration at low energies is not optimized.}
\label{fig:CCVRvscuoricinorate}
\end{figure}

\section{Sensitivity to WIMPs}

WIMPs can couple to nucleons via both spin-independent and spin-dependent
(axial vector) interactions. Spin-independent scattering dominates when $A\ge30$ because,
for low momentum transfer, it benefits from coherence across the nucleus~\cite{Jungman1996}.
In addition, spin-dependent scattering is significant only on nuclei with an odd number of nucleons.
Since $99.8\%$ of Oxygen is constituted by $^{16}$O and $92\%$ of Tellurium is
composed by even isotopes (mainly $^{130}$Te, $^{128}$Te and $^{126}$Te), $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\ will be most sensitive for spin-independent interacting WIMPs. It has to be remarked
that $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\ bolometers, unlike other bolometric detectors for Dark
Matter, do not discriminate the nuclear recoils induced by WIMPs from
the radioactive $\beta/\gamma$ background.  Nevertheless, the high mass
and low background achievable with these detectors make it possible to
search for an annual modulation of the counting rate.

Compared to CUORICINO, the CCVR2 rate has the same behavior at energies
greater than 10\un{keV}, but is considerably higher at lower energies
(Fig.~\ref{fig:CCVRvscuoricinorate}).
We are unable to explain this difference at present, however
we expect that the CUORE-0\ and CUORE\ low energy background will not be
higher than the CCVR2 one. All the materials used in detector construction, in fact,
will be the same as those employed for CCVR2.
Moreover, in the case of CUORE-0, the bolometers will be operated in the same
cryostat of CUORICINO, which has lower radioactive contaminations compared to the one
used to operate CCVR2.
To be conservative, we estimate the CUORE-0\ and CUORE\ sensitivity to WIMPs
assuming the background rate of these experiments to be equal to the one
measured on CCVR2. We assume that the noise will be under control and that all
bolometers will achieve a 3\un{keV} threshold. We focus on the energy
region between threshold and 25\un{keV}, featuring an observed background
counting rate ranging from about 25\un{cpd/keV/kg} to 2\un{cpd/keV/kg}.

We perform toy Monte Carlo\ simulations generating background events from
the CCVR2 fit function shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:CCVRvscuoricinorate}, and WIMP events from the
predicted distribution described in Ref.~\cite{LewinSmith1996}, using
the following WIMP parameters: density $\rho_W=0.3\un{GeV/cm^3}$, average
velocity $v_0 = 220\un{km/s}$ and escape velocity from the Galaxy $v_{esc}
= 600\un{km/s}$.  The quenching factor (QF) of the interactions in $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\
is set to 1~\cite{Alessandrello:1997ca}.  We include the dependence
of the WIMP interaction rate on the time in the year, and estimate the
background+signal asymmetry subtracting the 3-month integrated spectrum
across  December the 2nd from the 3-month integrated spectrum across
June the 2nd.  The resulting differential spectrum is fitted with the
expected shape induced by the modulation, $H_1$ (examples are given
in Fig.~\ref{fig:expmod}), and with a flat line at zero counts, $H_0$.
The cross section in the toy simulation is lowered as long as, in a set
of experiments, the fit probability of the $H_1$ hypothesis
is greater than the $H_0$ one at least 90\% of the times.

This procedure defines the cross section that could be sensed for a fixed
WIMP mass. The 90\% CL upper limit sensitivity to the cross-section as a function of the WIMP mass is reported in
Fig.~\ref{fig:exclusion} for 3-years of CUORE-0\ data-taking and 5-years
of CUORE. The comparison with other experiments shows that CUORE-0\ could
test the indication of a $\sim 10\un{GeV}$ WIMP from the DAMA (no-channeling),
CoGeNT and CRESST experiments, while CUORE\ could completely test the DAMA
results, under the hypothesis that Dark Matter is purely made of
spin-independent interacting WIMPs.
We reiterate that because the quenching factor  for nuclear recoils compared to electron recoils in $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\ bolometers is 1, the 2-6 keV energy region of DAMA corresponds to 7-20 keV
assuming scattering on Na (QF=0.3) or 22-67 keV assuming scattering on I
(QF=0.9).  Therefore, in $\mathrm{TeO}_2$\ bolometers it will be possible to look at
lower energies and to study with larger detail the shape of the modulation
spectrum, thus providing new information to this complicated search.

\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering \begin{overpic}[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig9_modulation_dRdEr_wimpMass5-100GeV_TeO2.eps}
\put(17,28){5}
\put(22,38){10}
\put(32,51){20}
\put(70,33){50}
\put(35,18){100}
\end{overpic}
\caption{WIMP simulated signal: difference between the 3-month integrated spectra across December the 2nd and
June the 2nd, for a WIMP cross section of $10^{-41}\un{cm^2}$ and masses between 5 and 100\un{GeV}.}
\label{fig:expmod}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth, clip=true]{fig10_DM_scatter.eps}
\caption{90\% sensitivity to WIMP spin-independent scattering of CUORE-0\ and CUORE\
assuming a 3\un{keV} threshold for all detectors and the same background level of the CCVR2 detectors. Evidences of DAMA-$3\sigma$~\cite{Bernabei:2008yi},  CoGeNT-90\%~\cite{Aalseth:2011wp} and CRESST-$2\sigma$~\cite{Angloher:2011uu} are reported for comparison.}
\label{fig:exclusion}
\end{figure}

\begin{acknowledgments}
The CUORE Collaboration thanks the Directors and Staff of the Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso and the technical staffs of our Laboratories.
This work was supported by the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN); the Director, Office of Science, of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract Nos. DE-AC02-05CH11231 and DE-AC52-07NA27344; the DOE Office of Nuclear Physics under Contract Nos. DE-FG02-08ER41551 and DEFG03-00ER41138; the National Science Foundation under Grant Nos. NSF-PHY-0605119, NSF-PHY-0500337, NSF-PHY-0855314, and NSF-PHY-0902171; the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation; and the University of Wisconsin Foundation.
\end{acknowledgments}

\cleardoublepage


\section{Introduction}

A fundamental task in quantum information science is to transfer an
unknown internal quantum state of a particle from one location
$\mathcal{A}$ to another location $\mathcal{B}$. A direct method is to
mechanically move the particle from $\mathcal{A}$ to $\mathcal{B}$
while keeping the internal state invariant. A more sophisticated way
is quantum state teleportation ~\cite{PhysRevLett.70.1895}, where the
unknown state is teleported with the aid of a pair of particles in a
Bell state and $2$ bits of classical communications. The third way is
to transfer the state via a two-particle quantum operation
$\mathcal{E}^{AB}$, which can be realized by linking two nodes A and B
to a quantum network, e.g., a quantum wire (a one-dimensional chain of
particles with interactions) ~\cite{PhysRevLett.78.3221,
  PhysRevLett.91.207901, PhysRevLett.92.187902}. Here the node A,
located in $\mathcal{A}$, is the particle with the unknown state to be
transferred, and the node B, located in $\mathcal{B}$, is the particle
as the state receiver.

The aim of Refs.~\cite{PhysRevLett.91.207901, PhysRevLett.92.187902,
  PhysRevA.71.032309, PhysRevLett.98.010501, PhysRevLett.101.230502,
  PhysRevLett.106.040505, PhysRevLett.109.050502} is to achieve
perfect quantum state transfer by optimizing the quantum network. In
addition, the capacity of quantum state transfer to characterize the
non-locality of a bipartite unitary transformation is studied in
Refs. ~\cite{PhysRevA.64.032302, Hammerer2002}.  Here we will solve
another related question: For a given two-particle quantum operation
$\mathcal{E}^{AB}$, what is the maximal average probability for
quantum state transfer? This maximal probability reflects the power of
quantum state transfer of the bipartite operation $\mathcal{E}^{AB}$.

The approach we will adopt is similar to that in the power of
entanglement generation for a local unitary gate
~\cite{PhysRevA.62.030301, PhysRevA.63.062309,
  PhysRevA.67.052301}. Here we want to emphasize that the bipartite
quantum operations, including non-unitary gates, are necessary
to be considered for quantum state transfer.

The article is organized as follows. In Sec. II, we introduce the
basic formula of the power of quantum state transfer, and four basic
properties for the QST power are proved. In Sec. III, we give the
analytical results of two-qubit operations. In particular, an
exact result of the QST power for any two-qubit unitary transformation
is given. Finally we present some discussions and a brief summary.

\section{General results}

\subsection{The power of QST}

In this section, we will give a proper quantity to measure the power
of QST for a bipartite quantum operation.

We consider two particles $A$ and $B$, whose Hilbert space is
$\mathcal{H}^{AB}=\mathcal{H}^{A}\otimes\mathcal{H}^{B}$ with
$\dim\mathcal{H}^{A}=\dim\mathcal{H}^{B}=d$. In other words, particles
A and B are two qudits. Initially particle $A$ is prepared in an
unknown state $\vert\psi^{A}\rangle$, and particle $B$ is in some
given state $\vert\xi^{B}\rangle$. For convenience, we take
$\vert\psi^{A}\rangle=R\vert{0^{A}}\rangle$ with $\vert{0^{A}}\rangle$
being any given state and $R\in SU(d)$. In general, there are many
choices of $R$ for given $\vert\psi^{A}\rangle$ and
$\vert{0^{A}}\rangle$, which does not affect the following
formulations. After performing a bipartite quantum operation
$\mathcal{E}^{AB}$, we need to estimate to which degree the unknown
state $\vert\psi^{A}\rangle$ being transferred to partilce $B$. This
process of QST is depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:1}.

\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (1,1) rectangle (3,2);
\path (2,1.5) node (na) {$\mathcal{E}^{AB}$};
\draw[->] (1.4,0.5)--(1.4,1.0);
\draw[->] (1.4,2.0)--(1.4,2.5);
\draw[->] (2.6,0.5)--(2.6,1.0);
\draw[->] (2.6,2.0)--(2.6,2.5);
\node at (1.4,0.2) {$\vert\psi^A\rangle$};
\node at (2.6,0.2) {$\vert\xi^B\rangle$};
\node at (2.6,2.8) {$S^B\vert\psi^B\rangle$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The process of quantum state transfer using a bipartite
  quantum operation $\mathcal{E}^{AB}$. We maximize the probability of
  QST over particle B's initial states $\vert\xi^B\rangle$ and the
  unitary transformations $S^B$.}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}

For a given bipartite quantum operations, we may improve the QST by
controlling two elements. On one hand, the QST power of
$\mathcal{E}^{AB}$ depends on the input state of particle $B$
$\vert\xi^{B}\rangle$.  We can improve the QST by preparing particle
$B$ in a suitable initial state. On the other hand, notice that if the
final state is $S^{B}\left|\psi^{B}\right\rangle$, where $S^{B}$ is a
unitary transformation on particle $B$ independent of the unknown state
$\vert\psi^{A}\rangle$, the unkown state will be regarded as being
perfectly transferred. Different choices of $S^B$ implies different
identifications of the bases between $\mathcal{H}^A$ and
$\mathcal{H}^B$. Hence we can improve the QST of $\mathcal{E}^{AB}$ by
adjusting $S^B$.

To give a measure to characterize
the power of QST for $\mathcal{E}^{AB}$, we need to optimize over
$\vert\xi^{B}\rangle$ and $S^{B}$. Therefore the QST power for a
quantum operation $\mathcal{E}^{AB}$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
  \mathcal{P}_{QST}\left(\mathcal{E}^{AB}\right)  =
  \max_{S^{B}, \left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle}
  \int d\mu\left(R\right) P(R;\mathcal{E}^{AB};S^{B},\vert\xi^B\rangle)
\label{def:qst}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
  P(R;\mathcal{E}^{AB};S^B,\vert\xi^B\rangle) = \Tr\nolimits
  \left(\mathcal{E}^{AB}
    \mathcal{R}^{A}\left(P_{0}^{A}P_{\xi}^{B}\right)
    \mathcal{S}^{B}\mathcal{R}^{B} (P_{0}^{B})\right)
\label{eq:prob}
\end{equation}
with $P_{0}^{A}=\vert0{}^{A}\rangle\langle0{}^{A}\vert$,
$P_{\xi}^{B}=\vert\xi{}^{B}\rangle\langle\xi{}^{B}\vert$,
$P_{0}^{B}=\vert0{}^{B}\rangle\langle0{}^{B}\vert$, $\mathcal{R}$ and
$\mathcal{S}$ are the local quantum operations corresponding to the
unitary transformations $R$ and $S$, and $d\mu\left(R\right)$ being
the Haar measure on $SU\left(d\right)$.  Because the Harr measure is
right-invariant, the power of QST is independent of the choice of
$\left|0\right\rangle$. Since we have no reasons to give different
probabilities to two sets of states connecting by a unitary
transformation in the average over the unknown states, the Harr
measure is a natural choice for the average.

For a given initial state $R^A\vert{0}\rangle\otimes\vert\xi^B\rangle$
and a given identification between $\mathcal{H}^A$ and $\mathcal{H}^B$
specified by $S^B$, $P(R;\mathcal{E}^{AB};S^B,\vert\xi^B\rangle$ is
the probability of QST for the state $R\vert{0}\rangle$ by
$\mathcal{E}^{AB}$. Further more, the power of QST for
$\mathcal{E}^{AB}$ is the maximal average probability for particle $B$
in the unkown state after the action of $\mathcal{E}^{AB}$.

\subsection{Properties of the QST power}

In the above subsection, we give a definition of the QST power for a
bipartite quantum operation, and give its physical
interpretation. Here we will prove that the QST power
$\mathcal{P}_{QST}\left(\mathcal{E}^{AB}\right)$ has the following
desired properties.

\textbf{Property (i).} The QST power is invariant under local unitary
transformations.

Let $X^{A}$, $Y^{B}$, $U^{A}$, $V^{B}$ be local unitary
transformations, and let $\mathcal{X}^{A}$, $\mathcal{Y}^{B}$,
$\mathcal{U}^{A}$, $\mathcal{V}^{B}$ be the corresponding local
quantum operations.  Then
\begin{eqnarray}
  &  & \mathcal{P}_{QST}\left( \mathcal{X}^{A} \mathcal{Y}^{B}
    \mathcal{E}^{AB} \mathcal{U}^{A} \mathcal{V}^{B} \right) \nonumber\\
  & = & \max_{S^{B},\left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle } \int d\mu(R)
  P(R;\mathcal{X}^{A} \mathcal{Y}^{B} \mathcal{E}^{AB} \mathcal{U}^{A}
  \mathcal{V}^{B};S^B,\vert\xi^B \rangle) \nonumber\\
  & = & \max_{S^{B}, \left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle} \int d\mu(R)
  P(UR;\mathcal{E}^{AB};Y^{B\dagger}S^BV^{B\dagger},V^B\vert\xi^B\rangle)
  \nonumber\\
  & = & \max_{S^{B},\left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle }\int d\mu(R)
  P(R;\mathcal{E}^{AB};S^B,\vert\xi^B\rangle) \nonumber\\
  & = & \mathcal{P}_{QST}\left(\mathcal{E}^{AB}\right),
\label{eq:pro1}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used Eq. (\ref{eq:inva}) in the third line of the above
equation.

Property (i) shows the power of a bipartite quantum operation
characterizes its nonlocal property ~\cite{PhysRevA.67.052301}.

\textbf{Property (ii).} The range of the QST power is in the period
$\left[\frac{1}{d},1\right]$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
  \frac {1} {d} \le \mathcal{P}_{QST} \left(\mathcal{E}^{AB}\right)
  \le 1.
\label{eq:pro2}
\end{equation}

This can be proved as follows. Because
\begin{eqnarray*}
  &  & \mathcal{P}_{QST} \left(\mathcal{E}^{AB}\right)\\
  & = & \max_{S^{B},\left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle } \int d\mu
  \left(R\right)  P(R;\mathcal{E}^{AB};S^B,\vert\xi^B\rangle)\\
  & \le & \max_{S^{B},\left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle } \int
  d\mu\left(R\right) 1 = 1.
\end{eqnarray*}
In addition, if
$\mathcal{P}_{QST}\left(\mathcal{E}^{AB}\right)<\frac{1}{d}$, then
\begin{eqnarray*}
  &  & \int d\mu\left(S\right) \int d\mu\left(R\right)
  P(R;\mathcal{E}^{AB};S^B,\vert\xi^B\rangle) \\
  & \le & \int d\mu \left(S\right) \mathcal{P}_{QST}
  \left(\mathcal{E}^{AB}\right) < \frac {1} {d}.
\end{eqnarray*}
However,
\begin{eqnarray*}
  &  & \int d\mu\left(S\right) \int d\mu\left(R\right)
  P(R;\mathcal{E}^{AB};S^B,\vert\xi^B\rangle)\\
  & = & \int d\mu\left(R\right) \Tr\nolimits \left( \mathcal{E}^{AB}
    \left(R^{A}P_{0}^{A}R^{A\dagger}P_{\xi}^{B}\right) \frac {I^{B}}
    {d}  \right)\\
  & = & \int d\mu\left(R\right) \frac {1} {d} = \frac {1} {d}.
\end{eqnarray*}
In the second line, we used the lemma (\ref{lemma}). This result
contradicts with the above inequality. Therefore
$\frac{1}{d}\le\mathcal{P}_{QST}\left(\mathcal{E}^{AB}\right)$.

Notice that the lower bound $1/d$ is the same as in the case of
transferring a classical discrete
variable with $d$ different states.

\textbf{Property (iii).} The QST power of a local operation
$\mathcal{E}^{A}\otimes\mathcal{E}^{B}$ is $\frac{1}{d}$.
\begin{eqnarray*}
  &  & \mathcal{P}_{QST} \left( \mathcal{E}^{A} \otimes
    \mathcal{E}^{B}  \right)\\
  & = & \max_{S^{B},\left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle } \int d\mu\left(R\right)
  P(R;\mathcal{E}^{A}\mathcal{E}^{B};S^B,\vert\xi^B\rangle) \\
  & = & \max_{S^{B},\left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle } \int
  d\mu\left(R\right) \Tr\nolimits \left(\mathcal{E}^{B}
    \left(P_{\xi}^{B}\right) S^{B} R^{B} P_{0}^{B} R^{B\dagger}
    S^{B\dagger} \right)\\
  & = & \max_{\left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle } \int d\mu\left(R\right)
  \Tr\nolimits \left(\mathcal{E}^{B} \left(P_{\xi}^{B}\right) R^{B}
    P_{0}^{B} R^{B\dagger} \right)\\
  & = & \max_{\left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle } \Tr\nolimits
  \left( \mathcal{E}^{B} \left(P_{\xi}^{B}\right)
    \frac {I^{B}} {d} \right)\\
  & = & \frac{1}{d}.
\end{eqnarray*}
In the fifth line of the above equation, we use the lemma
(\ref{lemma}).

As expected, a local operation has the lowest power in transferring an
unknown state.

\textbf{Property (iv).} The QST power of the swapping gate $SWAP^{AB}$
is $1$.
\begin{eqnarray*}
  &  & \mathcal{P}_{QST} \left(SWAP^{AB}\right)\\
  & = & \max_{S^{B},\left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle } \int d \mu\left(R\right)
  P(R;{SWAP}^{AB};S^B,\vert\xi^B\rangle) \\
  & = & \max_{S^{B},\left|\xi^{B}\right\rangle } \int
  d\mu\left(R\right) \Tr\nolimits \left(R^{B}P_{0}^{B}R^{B\dagger}
    P_{\xi}^{A} S^{B} R^{B} P_{0}^{B} R^{B\dagger} S^{B\dagger} \right)\\
  & = & \max_{S^{B}} \int
  d\mu\left(R\right) \Tr\nolimits \left( R^{B} P_{0}^{B} R^{B\dagger}
    S^{B} R^{B} P_{0}^{B} R^{B\dagger} S^{B\dagger} \right)\\
  & = & \int d\mu\left(R\right) \Tr\nolimits \left(
    R^{B} P_{0}^{B} R^{B\dagger} R^{B} P_{0}^{B} R^{B\dagger} \right)\\
  & = & 1.
\end{eqnarray*}
This result is reasonable because the unknown state is swapped, i.e.,
perfectly transferred.

\section{Analytical results of the qubit case}

Since the QST power is defined as an optimization problem over a state
and a unitary transformation in a $d$-dimensional Hilbert space, the
explicit calculations of the QST power of $\mathcal{E}^{AB}$ when A
and B are two qudits, in general, are complex. In this section, we
will give an analytical result on the QST power for an arbitrary
two-qubit quantum operation $\mathcal{E}^{AB}$, which makes the
numerical calculation of the QST power becomes accessible. In
particular, we further obtain the exact result of the QST power for
any two-qubit unitary transformation.

For the qubit case, let
$P_0=\frac{I+\sigma_z}{2}$. $\forall{R}\in{SU(2)}$, we can find a
coordinate frame $\{\vec{R}_x,\vec{R}_y,\vec{R}_z\}$ to characterize
it. The base vector of the coordinate frame is defined by
$R\sigma_{n}R^{\dagger}=\vec{R}_{n}\cdot\vec{\sigma}$. Then the
component of the bases vector
$R_{n}^{m}=\frac{\Tr\left(R\sigma_{n}R^{\dagger}\sigma_{m}\right)}{2}$. The
initial state of particle B
$P_{\xi}^{B}=\frac{I^{B}+\vec{T}\cdot\vec{\sigma}^{B}}{2}$, where
$\vec{T}$ is the Bloch vector for the state $\vert\xi^B\rangle$.

The QST power of $\mathcal{E}^{AB}$ is
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{P}_{QST} \left(\mathcal{E}^{AB}\right) =
 \frac {1} {2} + \frac {\max\limits_{S,T} \left( \sum \limits_{l,n}
     \mathcal{E}_{0n}^{l} S_{l}^{n} + \sum \limits_{l,m,n}
     \mathcal{E}_{mn}^{l} T^{m} S_{l}^{n} \right)} {24},
\label{eq:qstp2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
  \mathcal{E}_{0n}^{l} & = & \Tr \left( \mathcal{E}^{AB} \left(
      \sigma_{l}^{A}I^{B} \right) \sigma_{n}^{B} \right),\\
  \mathcal{E}_{mn}^{l} & = & \Tr\left( \mathcal{E}^{AB}
    \left(\sigma_{l}^{A} \sigma_{m}^{B} \right) \sigma_{n}^{B} \right),
\end{eqnarray*}
and $\{S_n\}$ is the basis vectors of the coordinate frame defined by
the unitary transformation $S$.

To derive Eq. (\ref{eq:qstp2}), we used the following Harr average
values on $SU(2)$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
  \left\langle R_{z}^{m} \right\rangle  & = & 0,\\
  \left\langle R_{z}^{m} R_{z}^{n} \right\rangle  & = & \frac {1} {3}
  \delta_{mn},
\end{eqnarray*}
 whose detailed proofs are given in the appendix B.

 Let us demonstrate the power of Eq. (\ref{eq:qstp2}) with calculating
 the QST power of the CNOT gate. A direct calculation gives
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathcal{P}_{QST} \left(CNOT^{AB}\right)
 = \frac {1} {2} + \frac {\max_{S,T} \left( T^{x} S_{z}^{x} +
     T^{y} S_{z}^{y} \right)} {6}
 =  \frac {2} {3}.
\end{eqnarray*}

It is worthy to point out that Eq. (\ref{eq:qstp2}) can be used as the
foundation for numerical calculations of the QST power for arbitrary
two-qubit quantum operation. For example, it may find applications in
the process of QST along a quantum wire ~\cite{PhysRevLett.91.207901,
  PhysRevLett.92.187902, PhysRevA.71.032309}.

\subsection{Exact result on QST power for arbitrary two-qubit unitary
  transformations}

In this subsection, we will apply Eq. (\ref{eq:qstp2}) to the case
when $\mathcal{E}^{AB}$ is a two-qubit unitary transformation. In this
case, the exact result of the QST power will be obtained.

First notice that a general unitary transformation for two qubits can
be written as
\[
U^{AB} = U^{A} U^{B} U_{d}^{AB} V^{B} V^{A},
\]
where
\[
U_{d}^{AB} = e^{-\frac {i} {2} \left(\sum_{m} d_{m} \sigma_{m}^{A}
    \sigma_{m}^{B} \right)}
\]
with $\left|d_{z}\right|\le d_{y}\le d_{x}\le\frac{\pi}{2}$
~\cite{PhysRevA.63.032308, PhysRevA.63.062309}. Because
the QST power is invariant under local unitary transformations, it is
sufficient to study the unitary transformation $U_{d}^{AB}$.

Through a complex but direct calculation, we arrives at
\begin{eqnarray*}
  \mathcal{P}_{QST} \left(U^{AB}\right)
  =  \frac {1} {2} + \frac {\max_{S,T}f} {6},
\end{eqnarray*}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
f && =  \sin d_{y} \sin d_{z} S_{x}^{x} + \sin d_{z} \sin
d_{x} S_{y}^{y} + \sin d_{x} \sin d_{y} S_{z}^{z}\\
 && +  \cos d_{y} T^{y} \sin d_{x} S_{x}^{z} + \cos d_{z} T^{z} \sin
 d_{y} S_{y}^{x} + \cos d_{x} T^{x} \sin d_{z} S_{z}^{y}\\
 && - \cos d_{z} T^{z} \sin d_{x} S_{x}^{y} - \cos d_{x} T^{x} \sin
 d_{y} S_{y}^{z} - \cos d_{y} T^{y} \sin d_{z} S_{z}^{x}.
\end{eqnarray*}

Notice that
\[
f \left( -\vec{S}_{x},-\vec{S}_{y},\vec{S}_{z},-\vec{T} \vert d_{z} \le
  0 \right) = f \left( \vec{S}_{x},\vec{S}_{y},\vec{S}_{z},\vec{T}
  \vert d_{z} \ge 0 \right).
\]
Hence
$\max{f}\left(d_{z}\right)=\max{f}\left(-d_{z}\right)$.
Therefore we only need to study the case when $d_{z}\ge{0}$.

We obtain the exact result on the maximization of $f$:
\begin{equation}
  \max_{S,T} f = \sin d_x +\sin d_y +\sin d_x \sin d_y.
\label{eq:maxf}
\end{equation}
The proof of Eq. (\ref{eq:maxf}) can be found in the appendix
$C$. Therefore the power of a two-qubit unitary transformation is
\begin{equation}
  \mathcal{P}_{QST} \left(U^{AB}\right)
  =  \frac {1} {2} + \frac {\sin d_x + \sin d_y + \sin d_x \sin d_y} {6}.
\label{eq:qstp2u}
\end{equation}

A remarkable feature in the QST power of $U^{AB}$ is that it is
independent of the parameter $d_z$. For the CNOT gate, $d_x=\pi/2$ and
$d_y=d_z=0$, so its QST power is $2/3$, which is the same as
calculated above. To make a perfect QST, we require that
$d_x=d_y=\pi/2$. To make the QST power lowest, we get $d_x=d_y=0$,
where $U^{AB}$ becomes a local unitary transformation.

\section{Discussions and summary}

In Refs. ~\cite{PhysRevA.64.032302, Hammerer2002}, the nonlocal
properties of a bipartite gate are classified according their
capacities in transmitting classical or quantum bits of
information. Here we suggest the QST power to characterize the
capacity to transmit quantum state.  In parallel, our method can be
generalized to classical state transfer or quantum state swapping.

Technically, we prove that the QST power of a local bipartite quantum
operation is $1/d$. However we don't know whether the QST power of a
bipartite quantum operation is $1/d$ implies that the bipartite
quantum operation is local. In addition, we give a lengthy proof of
the maximization, Eq. (\ref{eq:maxf}), in Appendix C. Does there
exist some simpler proof of Eq. (\ref{eq:maxf})?

In summary, we suggest the QST power of a bipartite quantum operation
as the maximal average probability of QST using the bipartite quantum
operation. Four basic properties of the QST power of a bipartite
quantum operation are proved. Then we obtain the analytical result of
the QST power for any two-qubit quantum operation, which may be used
as the foundation for numerical calculations of the QST power. The
exact result of the QST power for arbitrary two-qubit unitary
transformation is obtained. We hope that our work present an
alternative method to characterize the non-locality of a bipartite
quantum operation.

\begin{acknowledgments}
  We thank S.L. Luo, Z.W. Zhou, and C.P. Sun for helpful
  discussions.  This work is supported by NSF of China (Grant
  Nos. 10975181 and 11175247) and NKBRSF of China (Grant
  No. 2012CB922104).
\end{acknowledgments}

\begin{appendix}

\section{Harr measure}
Notice that the Harr measure satisfies two useful properties
~\cite{Rudi91}:

i) It is normalized.
\begin{equation}
  \int d\mu(R) 1 = 1.
\label{eq:norm}
\end{equation}

ii) It is left-invariant and right-invariant.
$\forall S\in SU(d)$,
\begin{equation}
  \int d\mu(R) f(R) = \int d\mu(R) f(S R) = \int d\mu(R) f(RS).
\label{eq:inva}
\end{equation}

 \begin{lemma}
$\forall\vert0\rangle\in\mathcal{H}$ and $R\in{SU(d)}$, we have
\begin{equation}
  \int d\mu(R) R P_0 R^\dagger = \frac {I} {d}.
\label{lemma}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
This can be proved as follows. Firstly we take a complete normal
orthogonal bases of $\mathcal{H}$, denoted as
$\{\vert{n}\rangle,\;n\in\{0,1,\cdots,d-1\}\}$. Because $\forall{n}$
there exists a unitary transformation $S_n$ such that
$\vert{n}\rangle=S_n\vert{0}\rangle$, Eq. (\ref{eq:inva}) gives
$\int{d}\mu(R)R{P_n}R^\dagger=\int{d}\mu(R)R{P_0}R^\dagger$.
Therefore
$\int{d}\mu(R)R{P_0}R^\dagger=\int{d}\mu(R)R\frac{\sum_n{P_n}}{d}R^\dagger=\frac{I}{d}$.

\section{Harr average on $SU(2)$}

\begin{proposition}
$\forall m,n\in\{x,y,z\}$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
  \langle R_z^m \rangle &=& 0, \nonumber\\
  \langle R_z^m R_z^n\rangle &=& \frac {1} {3} \delta_{mn}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\end{proposition}

We can prove the above result by a direct calculation. Here we present
an alternative approach as follows.

$\forall m\in\{x,y,z\}$, $\exists n\neq m$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
  \left\langle R_{z}^{m}\right\rangle  & = & \int d\mu\left(R\right)
  \frac {\Tr\left(R\sigma_{z}R^{\dagger} \sigma_{m} \right)} {2}\\
  & = & \int d\mu\left(R\right) \frac{\Tr \left( \sigma^{n} R
      \sigma_{z} R^{\dagger} \sigma_{n}^{\dagger} \sigma_{m} \right)} {2}\\
  & = & -\int d\mu\left(R\right) \frac {\Tr \left(R \sigma_{z}
      R^{\dagger} \sigma_{m} \right)} {2}\\
  & = & -\left\langle R_{z}^{m} \right\rangle .
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore $\left\langle R_{z}^{m}\right\rangle=0$.

When $m\ne{n}$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
  &&\left\langle R_{z}^{m} R_{z}^{n} \right\rangle  =  \int d\mu
   \left(R\right) \frac {\Tr\left(R^{A} \sigma_{z}^{A} R^{A\dagger}
      \sigma_{m}^{A} R^{B} \sigma_{z}^{B} R^{B\dagger} \sigma_{n}^{B}
    \right)} {4}\\
  && =  \int d\mu\left(R\right) \frac {\Tr \left(\sigma_{m}^{A} R^{A}
      \sigma_{z}^{A} R^{A\dagger} \sigma_{m}^{A\dagger} \sigma_{m}^{A}
      \sigma_{m}^{B}R^{B} \sigma_{z}^{B} R^{B\dagger}
      \sigma_{m}^{B\dagger} \sigma_{n}^{B\dagger} \right)} {4}\\
  && =  -\int d\mu\left(R\right) \frac {\Tr \left(R^{A} \sigma_{z}^{A}
      R^{A\dagger} \sigma_{m}^{A} R^{B} \sigma_{z}^{B} R^{B\dagger}
      \sigma_{n}^{B} \right)} {4}\\
  && =  -\left\langle R_{z}^{m} R_{z}^{n} \right\rangle .
\end{eqnarray*}
Hence, $\left\langle R_{z}^{m}R_{z}^{n}\right\rangle =0$ if $m\neq n$.

When $m\neq n$, $\exists$ a unitary transformation $H$, such that
$H^{\dagger}\sigma_{m}H=\sigma_{n}$. Hence
\begin{eqnarray*}
  &&\left\langle R_{z}^{m} R_{z}^{m} \right\rangle  =  \int d\mu
  \left(R\right) \frac {\Tr\left(R^{A} \sigma_{z}^{A} R^{A\dagger}
      \sigma_{m}^{A} R^{B} \sigma_{z}^{B} R^{B\dagger} \sigma_{m}^{B}
    \right)} {4}\\
  && =  \int d\mu \left(R\right) \frac {\Tr \left(H^{A} R^{A}
      \sigma_{z}^{A} R^{A\dagger} H^{A\dagger} \sigma_{m}^{A} H^{B}
      R^{B} \sigma_{z}^{B} R^{B\dagger} H^{B\dagger}
      \sigma_{m}^{B\dagger} \right)}  {4}\\
  && =  \int d\mu\left(R\right) \frac {\Tr \left(R^{A} \sigma_{z}^{A}
      R^{A\dagger} \sigma_{n}^{A} R^{B} \sigma_{z}^{B} R^{B\dagger}
      \sigma_{n}^{B} \right)} {4}\\
  && =  \left \langle R_{z}^{n} R_{z}^{n} \right\rangle .
\end{eqnarray*}
Because
$\sum_{m}\left(R_{z}^{m}\right)^{2}=1$,
we have
$\left\langle{R_{z}^{m}}R_{z}^{m}\right\rangle=\frac{1}{3}$.

\section{Maximization of the function $f$}

In this appendix, we will prove Eq. (\ref{eq:maxf}). First, we divide
$f$ into two parts:
\[
f = f_1 + f_2,
\]
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
  f_{1} & = & \sin{d_{y}} \sin{d_{z}} S_{x}^{x} + \sin{d_{z}}
  \sin{d_{x}} S_{y}^{y} + \sin{d_{x}} \sin{d_{y}} S_{z}^{z},\\
  f_{2} & = & \lambda a +\mu b + \gamma c + \eta g + \nu p + \xi q
\end{eqnarray*}
with $\lambda=T^{z}S_{x}^{y}$, $\mu=-T^{z}S_{y}^{x}$,
$\gamma=-T^{y}S_{x}^{z}$, $\eta=T^{y}S_{z}^{x}$, $\nu=T^{x}S_{y}^{z}$,
$\xi=-T^{x}S_{z}^{y}$, and $a=\cos{d_{z}}\sin{d_{x}}$,
$b=\cos{d_{z}}\sin{d_{y}}$, $c=\cos{d_y}\sin{d_{x}}$,
$g=\cos{d_y}\sin{d_{z}}$, $p=\cos{d_x}\sin{d_y}$,
$q=\cos{d_x}\sin{d_{z}}$.

Because $\vec{T}$ is a unit vector, and
$\{\vec{S}_x,\vec{S}_y,\vec{S}_z\}$ is a right-handed coordinate
frame, they are parameterized as follows.
\begin{eqnarray}
  T^{x} & = & \sin\alpha \cos\beta,\label{eq:1}\\
  T^{y} & = & \sin\alpha \sin\beta,\label{eq:2}\\
  T^{z} & = & \cos\alpha,\label{eq:3}\\
  S_{x}^{x} & = & (\sin^2\phi + \cos^{2}\theta \cos^{2}\phi) \cos\omega
  + \cos^{2}\phi \sin^{2}\theta,\label{eq:4}\\
  S_{x}^{y} & = & \cos\phi \sin\phi+\cos\theta \sin\omega - \cos\phi
  \cos^{2}\theta \sin\phi \nonumber \\
  &  & - \cos\omega \cos\phi \sin\phi + \cos\omega \cos\phi
  \cos^{2}\theta \sin\phi, \label{eq:5}\\
  S_{x}^{z} & = & \sin\theta (\cos\phi \cos\theta (1 - \cos\omega) -
  \sin\omega \sin\phi), \label{eq:6}\\
  S_{y}^{x} & = & \cos\phi \sin\phi - \cos\theta \sin\omega - \cos\phi
  \cos^{2}\theta \sin\phi \nonumber \\
  &  & - \cos\omega \cos\phi \sin\phi + \cos\omega \cos\phi
  \cos^{2}\theta \sin\phi, \label{eq:7}\\
  S_{y}^{y} & = & (\cos^{2}\phi + \cos^2\theta \sin^2\phi) \cos\omega +
  \sin^{2}\theta \sin^{2}\phi, \label{eq:8}\\
  S_{y}^{z} & = & \sin\theta (\cos\phi \sin\omega + (1 - \cos\omega)
  \cos\theta \sin\phi), \label{eq:9}\\
  S_{z}^{x} & = & \sin\theta (\sin\omega \sin\phi + (1-\cos\omega)
  \cos\phi \cos\theta), \label{eq:10}\\
  S_{z}^{y} & = & \sin\theta ((1 - \cos\omega) \cos\theta \sin\phi -
  \cos\phi \sin\omega), \label{eq:11}\\
  S_{z}^{z} & = & \cos^{2}\theta + \cos\omega \sin^{2}\theta,\label{eq:12}
\end{eqnarray}
where $0\leq\alpha,\theta,\omega\leq\pi$, $0\leq\beta,\phi\leq2\pi$.

\subsection{Analysis of $f_{1}$}

Using Eq.(\ref{eq:4}), Eq.(\ref{eq:8}), Eq.(\ref{eq:12}), we can
rewrite $f_{1}$ as
\begin{eqnarray*}
f_{1} & = & \sin{d_y} \sin{d_{z}} S_{x}^{x} + \sin{d_{z}} \sin{d_x}
S_{y}^{y} + \sin{d_x} \sin{d_y} S_{z}^{z}\\
 & = & \left(1 - \cos\omega \right) M \cos^{2}\theta + \sin{d_x}
 \sin{d_y} \cos\omega\\
 &  & + \sin{d_y} \sin{d_{z}} \left(\cos^{2}\phi + \cos\omega
   \sin^{2}\phi \right)\\
 &  & + \sin{d_x} \sin{d_{z}} \left(\sin^{2}\phi + \cos\omega
   \cos^{2}\phi \right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Because
\begin{eqnarray*}
  M & = & \sin{d_x} \sin{d_y} - \sin{d_y} \sin{d_{z}} \cos^{2}\phi -
  \sin{d_x} \sin{d_{z}} \sin^{2}\phi\\
  & \geq & \sin{d_x} \sin{d_y} - \sin{d_y} \sin{d_{z}} \cos^{2}\phi -
  \sin{d_x} \sin{d_{z}} \sin^{2}\phi\\
  & \geq & \sin{d_x} \sin{d_y} \left(1 - \cos^{2}\phi - \sin^{2}\phi
  \right)\\
  & = & 0
\end{eqnarray*}
and $1-\cos\omega\geq0$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
  f_{1} & \leq & f_{1} \left(\theta=0,\,\phi,\,\omega \right) = f_{1}
  \left( \theta = \pi,\,\phi,\,\omega\right)\\
  & = &
  \sin{d_x} \sin{d_y} + \cos\omega \left(\sin{d_x} + \sin{d_y} \right)
  \sin{d_{z}}\\
  & \equiv & f_{1max}.
\end{eqnarray*}

\subsection{Analysis of $f_2$}

From $0\leq{d_{z}}\leq{d_y}\leq{d_x}\leq\frac{\pi}{2}$, we can get
the inequality:
\[
a \geq \left\{
  \begin{array}{c}
    b\\
    c
  \end{array}
\right\} \geq \left\{
  \begin{array}{c}
    g\\
    p
  \end{array}
\right\} \geq q.
\]

We also have the relations
\begin{eqnarray}
  &  & \lambda + \mu + \gamma + \eta + \nu + \xi \nonumber \\
  & = & -2 \left(\cos\alpha \cos\theta + \cos[\beta - \phi] \sin\alpha
    \sin\theta \right) \sin\omega \nonumber \\
  & = & -2 \sqrt{\cos^{2}\theta + \cos^{2}[\beta - \phi]
    \sin^{2}\theta} \sin \left(\alpha + \varphi\right) \sin\omega
  \nonumber \\
  & \leq & 2 \left(\sqrt{1 + \left(\cos^{2}[\beta - \phi] -1 \right)
      \sin^{2}[\theta]} \right) \sin\omega \nonumber \\
  & \leq & 2\sin\omega \label{eq:full}\\
  & \leq & 2,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
$\tan\varphi=\frac{1}{\cos\left(\beta-\phi\right)\tan\left(\theta\right)}$.
The equality holds when $\beta=\phi$, $\alpha-\theta=\pm\pi$,
$\omega=\frac{\pi}{2}$ or $\beta-\phi=\pm\pi$, $\alpha+\theta=\pi$,
$\omega=\frac{\pi}{2}$.

\begin{eqnarray}
  &  & \lambda + \mu + \gamma + \eta \nonumber \\
  & = & 2 (\cos\alpha \cos\theta + \sin\alpha \sin\beta \sin\theta
  \sin\phi) \sin\omega \nonumber \\
  & \leq & 2 \sin\omega \label{eq:nonfull}\\
  & \leq & 2,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{equation}
  \lambda + \gamma = T^{z} S_{x}^{y} -T^{y} S_{x}^{z} =
  \left(\vec{S_{x}} \times \vec{T}\right)_{x} \leq 1,
\end{equation}

\begin{equation}
  \nu + \mu = T^{x} S_{y}^{z} - T^{z} S_{y}^{x} = \left(\vec{S_{y}}
    \times \vec{T}\right)_{y} \leq 1,
\end{equation}

\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:proposition} $f_2\le a+b$.
\end{proposition}

To see this, we consider
\begin{eqnarray*}
  a + b - f_2 & = & a + b- \left(\lambda a + \mu b + \gamma c + \eta g +
    \nu p + \xi q \right)
\end{eqnarray*}
1) If $-\eta{g}-\xi{q}\geq{0}$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
  &  & a + b - f_2\\
  & = & \left(1 - \lambda \right) a + \left(1 - \mu\right) b - \gamma c
  - \nu p - \eta g - \xi q\\
  & \geq & \left(1 - \lambda - \gamma \right) c + \left(1 - \mu - \nu
  \right) p - \eta g - \xi q\\
  & \geq & 0;
\end{eqnarray*}
2) if $-\eta{g}-\xi{q}\leq{0}$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
  &  & -\eta g-\xi q \leq 0\\
  & \Leftrightarrow & \left(- \eta \cos{d_y} - \xi \cos{d_x} \right)
  \sin{d_{z}} \leq 0\\
  & \Leftrightarrow & \left(- \eta \cos{d_y} - \xi \cos{d_x} \right)
  \sin{d_y} \leq \left(- \eta \cos{d_y} - \xi \cos{d_x} \right)
  \sin{d_{z}}\\
  & \Leftrightarrow & -\eta h-\xi p \le - \eta g - \xi q
\end{eqnarray*}
 where $h=\cos{d_y}\sin{d_y}$.

We also have the relation:
\begin{displaymath}
  a \geq \left\{
    \begin{array}{c}
      b\\c
    \end{array}
  \right\} \geq h \geq p \geq 0.
\end{displaymath}

So we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
  &  & a + b - f_2\\
  & = & \left(1 - \lambda\right) a + \left(1 - \mu\right) b - \gamma c
  - \nu p - \eta g - \xi q\\
  & \geq & \left(1 - \lambda - \gamma\right) c + \left(1 - \mu\right) b
  - \nu p - \eta h - \xi p\\
  & \geq & \left(2 - \lambda - \gamma - \mu - \eta\right) h - \nu p -
  \xi p\\
  & \geq & \left(2 - \lambda - \gamma - \mu - \eta - \nu
    - \xi \right) p\\
  & \geq & 0.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore we conclude from above that $a+b\geq{f_2}$, where the
equality is satisfied iff
$\theta=0,\pi$, $\alpha=\pi$, $\omega=\frac{\pi}{2}$ (that is
$T^{z}=-1$).

Let $f'=f{}_{1max}+f_{2}\geq{f}$. Because
$f{}_{1max}(\omega_{1})<f{}_{1max}\left(\omega_{2}\right)$ when
$0\leq\omega_{2}<\omega_{1}\leq\pi,$ and $f_{2}\leq
f\left(\theta=0,\pi\,\omega=\frac{\pi}{2}\right)$, we can get the
conclusion that $f$ arrives at its maximum in the domain
$0\leq\omega\leq\pi/2$.

\begin{proposition}
$f_2\leq\left(a+b\right)\sin\omega$, when
$0\leq\omega\leq\frac{\pi}{2}$.
\end{proposition}

From Eq.(\ref{eq:full}) and Eq.(\ref{eq:nonfull}), we have the
inequality:
\[
\lambda + \mu + \gamma + \eta + \nu + \xi \leq 2 \sin\omega,\text{ if } 0
\leq\omega \leq \frac {\pi} {2}
\]
 and
\[
\lambda + \mu + \gamma + \eta \leq 2 \sin\omega, \text{ if } 0 \leq
\omega \leq \frac {\pi} {2}.
\]
Also we have the relations:
\begin{eqnarray*}
  \eta + \xi & = & T^{y} S_{z}^{x} - T^{x} S_{z}^{y}\\
  & = & 2 \sin \frac {\omega} {2} \sin\alpha \sin\theta \left[\cos
    \frac {\omega} {2} \cos\left(\phi - \beta\right) - \sin \frac
    {\omega} {2} \cos\theta \sin\left(\phi - \beta\right) \right]\\
  & \le & 2 \sin \frac {\omega} {2} \sin\theta \sqrt{\cos^{2} \frac
    {\omega} {2} + \sin^{2} \frac {\omega} {2} \cos^{2} \theta}\\
  & = & 2 \sin \frac {\omega} {2} \sqrt{- \left(\sin \frac {\omega} {2}
      \sin^{2}\theta - \frac {1} {2 \sin \frac {\omega} {2}}
    \right)^{2} + \left(\frac {1} {2 \sin \frac {\omega} {2}}\right)^{2}}
\end{eqnarray*}
Then if $\sin^{2}\theta=\frac{1}{2\sin^{2}\frac{\omega}{2}}\le1$,
then $\eta+\xi\le1$. If $\sin^{2}\frac{\omega}{2}\le\frac{1}{2}$,
i.e., $\omega\le\frac{\pi}{2}$, then $\eta+\xi\le\sin\omega$.

Similarly, when $0\leq\omega\leq\frac{\pi}{2}$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
  \lambda + \gamma  & \leq & \sin\omega, \\
  \nu + \mu & \leq & \sin \omega,
\end{eqnarray*}

Therefore we can prove this proposition using the method used in the
proof of proposition (\ref{prop:proposition}) just replacing 1 and 2
with $\sin\omega$ and $2\sin\omega$ respectively.

\subsection{Conclusion}

Therefore
\begin{eqnarray*}
  f & \leq & f' \leq f{}_{1max} + \left(a + b\right) \sin\omega\\
  & = & \sin{d_x} \sin{d_y} + \left(\sin{d_x} + \sin{d_y}\right)
  \sin\left(\omega + {d_{z}}\right)\\
  & \le & \sin{d_x} \sin{d_y} + \sin{d_x} + \sin{d_y},
\end{eqnarray*}
the equality holds when $\alpha=k\pi$, $\theta=\left(k+1\right)\pi$,
and $\omega=\frac{\pi}{2}-{d_{z}}$.

\end{appendix}