\section{Introduction}
Historically, molecules were among the first physical systems to be associated with the concept of
geometric phase \cite{Mead1992,Resta2000}. In present-day molecular physics research, the phenomenon of
geometric phase plays a role of practical importance, and needs to be studied quantitatively. For example,
geometric phases need to be accurately accounted for in EDM (electron dipole moment) searches
\cite{Pendlebury2004,Lamoreaux2005,ShaferRay2008,Meyer2009,DeMille2009} and have been used to extract magnetic $g$
factors from experimental data \cite{Loh2013}. The specific effect of geometric phase we
wish to study in this article relates to precision spectroscopy of molecules.
A molecule occupying a specific internal state accumulates a dynamical phase over time. However, if the molecule
couples to a time-varying field, or has non-negligible center-of-mass motion, an additional, geometric, phase also
appears in its wavefunction. Such additional phases present themselves as energetic shifts when the molecule level
structure is probed by spectroscopic techniques such as the Ramsey method of separate oscillatory fields
\cite{Ramsey1949,Meyer2009}.

In this article we consider the $X^{2}\mathrm{\Pi}_{3/2}$ ground state manifold of the OH molecule, which contains
eight energy levels \cite{Ticknor2005,Avdeenkov2003,Sawyer2008,Tscherbul2010}. This ground manifold is presently employed in
precision measurements \cite{Hudson2006,Kozlov2009} and quantum computation \cite{Lev2006}. These experiments require
a quantitative characterization of the geometric phases \cite{Bochinski2004,Meerakker2005,Sawyer2007,Stuhl2012}.
In the presence of external electromagnetic fields, the OH ground manifold can be accurately described by an effective
eight-dimensional Hamiltonian that includes Stark and Zeeman effects \cite{Lara2008,Stuhl2012,Bohn2013}. The predictions of
this Hamiltonian have earlier been shown to agree well with experimental data \cite{Sawyer2007,Stuhl2012,Quemener2012}.
Recently, our group has presented an analytic solution to this Hamiltonian \cite{Bhattacharya2013}.

In this paper we
combine our analytic solutions with the dressed-molecule \cite{Meyer2009} as well as perturbation
\cite{DeMille2009} approaches to analyzing geometric phases. Within the
description provided by the effective Hamiltonian our results are exact, and could serve as a basis for the perturbative
inclusion of effects neglected in the model, such as hyperfine structure. It may be emphasized that our exact calculations
are valid for all rates of rotation including the case where the quanta of the rotating field are
resonant with the OH energy transitions. We use our results to discuss the lowest order, or adiabatic ``Berry" contribution
to the geometric phase, as well as higher order non-adiabatic corrections. Interestingly, we find that the geometric phase,
either belonging to a single OH state or measured relatively between two states, can often be made to vanish by choosing
the rate of field rotation appropriately. We expect this effect to be useful to the practical spectroscopy and quantum
information applications of OH.

The remainder of this paper is arranged as follows. Section ~\ref{sec:DressedApproach} summarizes the approach of Meyer \textit{et. al}
used to calculate the geometric phases in this article. Section ~\ref{sec:OHinEAndBFields} describes the Hamiltonian of the
ground state OH molecule in the presence of magnetic and electric fields. Section ~\ref{sec:OHGeometricPhaseInBField}
discusses the geometric phase for OH in a magnetic field, Section ~\ref{sec:OHGeometricPhaseInEField} in an electric field,
and Section ~\ref{sec:OHGeometricPhaseInBAndEFields} in combined magnetic and electric fields. A conclusion is supplied
at the end.

\section{Dressed molecule approach to the geometric phase}
\label{sec:DressedApproach}
We begin by summarizing the approach of Meyer \textit{et. al} to the problem of determination of geometric phases in
structured atoms and molecules \cite{Meyer2009}. In the present paper, this is the main method used for calculating
the geometric phases. The basic idea is to consider a finite-dimensional matrix Hamiltonian $H(t)$ that describes a
molecule in the presence of time-varying fields
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:TDH}
H(t)=\left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    h_{11}(t) & h_{12}(t) & \ldots \\
    h_{21}(t) & h_{22}(t) & \ldots \\
    \ldots & \ldots & \ldots \\
  \end{array}
\right),
\end{equation}
where $h_{ij}(t)$ where $i,j=1,2,3, \ldots$ are the generally time-dependent matrix elements. The Hamiltonian $H(t)$ satisfies the
time-dependent Schrodinger equation
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:TDSE}
i\hbar \frac{\partial \psi(t)}{\partial t}=H(t)\psi(t).
\end{equation}
In the dressed molecule approach, the wave function $\psi(t)$ is assumed to be of the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:WF}
\psi(t)=\left(
          \begin{array}{c}
            \alpha_{1}(t)e^{-i\omega_{1}t} \\
            \alpha_{2}(t)e^{-i\omega_{2}t} \\
            \ldots \\
          \end{array}
        \right),
\end{equation}
with $\omega_{i}, i=1,2,3,\ldots$ being parameters to be specified below. Using
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:TDH}) and ~(\ref{eq:WF}) in Eq.~(\ref{eq:TDSE}), the time-dependent Schrodinger
equation can be written as
\begin{equation}
i\hbar \frac{\partial \psi'(t)}{\partial t}=H'(t)\psi'(t),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\psi'(t)=\left(
          \begin{array}{c}
            \alpha_{1}(t) \\
            \alpha_{2}(t) \\
            \ldots \\
          \end{array}
        \right),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:HamDressed}
H'(t)=W^{-1}(t)H(t)W(t)-D.
\end{equation}
The new matrices are
\begin{equation}
W(t)= \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    e^{-i\omega_{1}t} & 0 & \ldots \\
    0 & e^{-i\omega_{2}t} & \ldots \\
    \ldots & \ldots & \ldots \\
  \end{array}
\right),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
D = \hbar\left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    \omega_{1} & 0 & \ldots \\
    0 & \omega_{2} & \ldots \\
    \ldots & \ldots & \ldots \\
  \end{array}
\right).
\end{equation}
With an appropriate selection of the parameters $\omega_{i}$, the matrix $H'(t)$ can be made independent of time.
The resulting matrix will be called $H_{d}$, the dressed matrix. The ``dressed" eigenvalues of $H_{d}$ include
the ``bare" molecular energies as well as the energy contributions due to the time-varying fields. In this article,
we will only consider fields varying harmonically with time at a rotation frequency $\omega_{r}$
\cite{Ramsey1949,Meyer2009,DeMille2009,Loh2013},
implying therefore that the corresponding quanta carry an energy $\hbar\omega_{r}$. The difference between the
dressed and bare energies will be used to find the geometric phase, as specified below.

\section{Ground state OH Stark-Zeeman Hamiltonian}
\label{sec:OHinEAndBFields}
In this section we present the matrix Stark-Zeeman Hamiltonian that describes OH in the $X^{2}\mathrm{\Pi}_{3/2}$ state
\cite{Stuhl2012,Lara2008}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:H1}
H_{m}=H_{0}-\vec{\mu}_{e}\cdot \vec{E}-\vec{\mu}_{b}\cdot \vec{B},
\end{equation}
where $H_{0}$ describes the internal structure of the molecule.  The second and third terms correspond to the
interaction of the OH electric ($\vec{\mu}_{e}$) and magnetic ($\vec{\mu}_{b}$) dipole moments with externally
applied electric ($\vec{E})$ and magnetic $(\vec{B}$) fields, respectively. This model is accurate for electric
fields stronger than 1 kV/cm and magnetic fields above 100 G \cite{Ticknor2005}, or for OH vapor temperatures higher
than 5 mK. In all these cases, hyperfine structure can be neglected. This model Hamiltonian has shown very good
agreement with data from OH experiments on nonadiabatic transitions \cite{Stuhl2012} and evaporative
cooling \cite{Quemener2012}. Thus, our use of the Hamiltonian of Eq.~(\ref{eq:H1}) for calculating geometric phases
in OH is justified theoretically as well as experimentally.

In the OH ground state manifold, Eq.~(\ref{eq:H1}) can be represented as an eight dimensional matrix using the Hund's
case (a) parity basis $|J,M,\bar{\Omega},\epsilon \rangle$ \cite{Lara2008}. Here
$J=3/2$ is the total molecular angular momentum, $M$ its laboratory frame projection, $\bar{\Omega}$ its component
along the internuclear axis, and $\epsilon=\{e,f\}$ is the $e-f$ symmetry. Using the matrix elements provided in
the appendix of Ref.~\cite{Lara2008} we can write the eight-dimensional matrix representation as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:HamUndressed}
H_{M}=\left(
        \begin{array}{cc}
          P & Q \\
          Q^{\dagger} & R \\
        \end{array}
      \right).
\end{equation}
The $4\times4$ matrices $P,Q$ and $R$ are
\begin{widetext}

\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\label{eq:PQR}
P=&\left(
  \begin{array}{cccc}
     -\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta -\frac{6}{5} \mu _{B} B_{z}  & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}  \mu _{B} \left(B_{x}+i B_{y}\right)  & 0 & 0 \\
     \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5} \mu _{B} \left(B_{x}-i B_{y}\right)  & -\frac{1}{2}\hbar \Delta-\frac{2}{5}\mu _{B} B_{z}  &
     \frac{4}{5}\mu _{B} \left(B_{x}+i B_{y}\right)  & 0 \\
    0 & \frac{4}{5}  \mu _{B} \left(B_{x}-i B_{y}\right) & -\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta+ \frac{2}{5}\mu _{B}B_{z} & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5} \mu _{B}\left(B_{x}+i B_{y}\right)\\
    0 & 0 & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{B}\left(B_{x}-i B_{y}\right) & -\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta+\frac{6}{5}\mu _{B}B_{z} \\
  \end{array}
\right),\\
Q=&\left(
    \begin{array}{cccc}
      \frac{3}{5}\mu _{e}E_{z} &
   -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{e}\left(E_{x}+iE_{y}\right) & 0 & 0 \\
      -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{e}\left(E_{x}-iE_{y}\right) & \frac{1}{5}\mu _{e}E_{z} & -\frac{2}{5}\mu _{e}\left(E_{x}+i
       E_{y}\right)  & 0  \\
      0 & -\frac{2}{5}\mu _{e}\left(E_{x}-iE_{y}\right)& -\frac{1}{5}\mu _{e}E_{z} & -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}
    \mu _{e}\left(E_{x}+i E_{y}\right) \\
      0 & 0 & -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{e}\left(E_{x}-i E_{y}\right) & -\frac{3}{5}\mu _{e}E_{z}  \\
    \end{array}
  \right),\\
R =& P + \hbar \Delta I_4.
\end{split}
\end{align}

\end{widetext}
\iffalse
R=\left(
  \begin{array}{cccc}
     \frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta -\frac{6}{5} \mu _{B} B_{z}  & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}  \mu _{B} \left(B_{x}+i B_{y}\right)  & 0 & 0 \\
     \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5} \mu _{B} \left(B_{x}-i B_{y}\right)  & \frac{1}{2}\hbar \Delta-\frac{2}{5}\mu _{B} B_{z}  &
     \frac{4}{5}\mu_{B} \left(B_{x}+i B_{y}\right)  & 0 \\
    0 & \frac{4}{5} \mu _{B} \left(B_{x}-i B_{y}\right) & \frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta+ \frac{2}{5}\mu _{B}B_{z}
    & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{B}\left(B_{x}+i B_{y}\right)\\
    0 & 0 & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{B}\left(B_{x}-i B_{y}\right) & \frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta+\frac{6}{5}\mu _{B}B_{z} \\
  \end{array}
\right).
\fi
where $\Delta$ is the lambda-doubling constant, $\mu_{B}$ is the Bohr magneton, $\mu_{e}$ the molecular electric
dipole moment, $I_4$ is the four-dimensional identity matrix, and $E_{x},E_{y}$ and $E_{z}(B_{x},B_{y}$ and $B_{z})$ are the Cartesian components of the electric
(magnetic) fields, respectively.

\section{Geometric phase of OH in a magnetic field}
\label{sec:OHGeometricPhaseInBField}
First we consider the ground state OH molecule in a magnetic field rotating at a frequency $\omega_{r}$ at an angle
$\theta_{m}$ with respect to the laboratory $z$ axis, see Fig.~\ref{fig:P1}(a). This situation is
relevant to pure magnetic trapping of OH \cite{Sawyer2008}. We use
\begin{eqnarray}
B_{x}=B\sin\theta_{m}\cos\omega_{r}t,& B_{y}=B\sin\theta_{m}\sin\omega_{r}t,\nonumber\\
B_{z}=B\cos\theta_{m},& E_{x}=E_{y}=E_{z}=0,\\
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
in Eq.~(\ref{eq:PQR}) and plug in the resulting Hamiltonian of Eq.~(\ref{eq:HamUndressed}) into
Eq.~(\ref{eq:HamDressed}). Subsequently, we find, that with the choice of parameters
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:FreqParam}
\omega_{1}=\omega_{5}=-\omega_{4}=-\omega_{8}=-3\omega_{r}/2,&\nonumber\\
\omega_{2}=\omega_{6}=-\omega_{3}=-\omega_{7}=-\omega_{r}/2,&\\
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
the Hamiltonian $H'$ can be made time-independent, yielding the dressed matrix
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:HamOHBPrime}
H_{d}=\left(
        \begin{array}{cc}
          P' & 0 \\
          0 & R' \\
        \end{array}
      \right),
\end{equation}
where
\small
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\label{eq:PQRPrimeOHB}
P'=&\left(
  \begin{array}{cccc}
     \frac{3}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}-\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta -\frac{6}{5} \mu _{B}B \cos\theta_{m}  & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}  \mu _{B} B\sin\theta_{m} & 0 & 0 \\
     \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5} \mu _{B} B \sin\theta_{m}  & \frac{1}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}-\frac{1}{2}\hbar \Delta-\frac{2}{5}\mu _{B} B \cos\theta_{m}  &
     \frac{4}{5}\mu _{B} B\sin\theta_{m}  & 0 \\
    0 & \frac{4}{5}  \mu _{B} B\sin\theta_{m} & -\frac{1}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}-\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta+ \frac{2}{5}\mu _{B}B\cos\theta_{m} & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5} \mu _{B}B\sin\theta_{m}\\
    0 & 0 & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{B}B\sin\theta_{m} & -\frac{3}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}-\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta+\frac{6}{5}\mu _{B}B \cos\theta_{m} \\
  \end{array}
\right),\\
R'=& P' + \hbar \Delta I_4.
\end{split}
\end{align}

\iffalse
R'=\left(
  \begin{array}{cccc}
     \frac{3}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}+\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta -\frac{6}{5} \mu _{B} B \cos\theta_{m}  & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}  \mu _{B} B\sin\theta_{m}  & 0 & 0 \\
     \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5} \mu _{B} B\sin\theta_{m}  & \frac{1}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}+\frac{1}{2}\hbar \Delta-\frac{2}{5}\mu _{B} B\cos\theta_{m}&
     \frac{4}{5}\mu_{B} B\sin\theta_{m}  & 0 \\
    0 & \frac{4}{5} \mu _{B} B\sin\theta_{m} & -\frac{1}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}+\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta+ \frac{2}{5}\mu _{B}B\cos\theta_{m}
    & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{B}B\sin\theta_{m}\\
    0 & 0 & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{B}B\sin\theta_{m} & -\frac{3}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}+\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta+\frac{6}{5}\mu _{B}B\cos\theta_{m} \\
  \end{array}
\right).\\
\fi

\normalsize
The eight eigenvalues of the dressed matrix are
\begin{equation}
\tilde{E}_{M,\epsilon}(\omega_{r})=\frac{\epsilon}{2}\hbar\Delta
+M \hbar \sqrt{\omega_L^{2}+ \omega_{r}^{2}-2\omega_L\omega_{r}\cos\theta_{m}},
\end{equation}
\end{widetext}
where $M=-3/2,-1/2,1/2,3/2$, $\epsilon=(-1,1)$ marks the $e-f$ parity, and \begin{equation}
\label{eq:LarmorMagnetic}
\omega_{L} = \frac{4}{5} \frac{\mu_{B}B}{ \hbar},
\end{equation}
is the Larmor frequency. The total phase picked up by an OH state in
a time $2\pi/\omega_{r}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\gamma_{M,\epsilon}(\omega_{r})=\frac{\tilde{E}_{M,\epsilon}(\omega_{r})}{\hbar}\frac{2\pi}{\omega_{r}},
\end{equation}
and the total geometric phase is found by subtracting the dynamical phase from the total phase,
\begin{equation}
\Delta\gamma_{M,\epsilon}(\omega_{r})=\gamma_{M,\epsilon}(\omega_{r})-\gamma_{M,\epsilon}(0).
\end{equation}
The geometric phase scaled by the laboratory projection of the angular momentum $M$ for each state is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:LabProjBerry}
\frac{\Delta\gamma_{M,\epsilon}(\omega_{r})}{M}=
\frac{2\pi}{\omega_{r}}\left(\sqrt{\omega_{L}^{2}+\omega_{r}^{2}-2\omega_{L}\omega_{r}\cos\theta_{m}}-\omega_{L}\right).
\end{equation}
 Note that the geometric phase is independent of $\Delta$ and also of the parity $\epsilon$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:P1}(b)
\begin{figure}[h!]
\label{fig:F1}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{P1.eps}
\caption{(a) The magnetic field rotating about the laboratory $z$ axis while making an angle $\theta_{m}$. (b) The
geometric phase for the OH state $\gamma_{M,\epsilon}$ [Eq.~(\ref{eq:LabProjBerry})] as a function of the magnetic
field rotation frequency $\omega_{r}$. The parameters are $\theta_{m}=\pi/8$ and $B=0.1$ T. The
critical rotation frequency $\omega_{r,c} \simeq$ \mbox{13.8 GHz} [Eq.~(\ref{eq:CritRot})], where all the geometric phases
are equal (to zero), is indicated with an arrow.}
\label{fig:P1}
\end{figure}
curves for various $\theta_{m}$ are shown as a function of the field rotation rate $\omega_{r}$. The critical value of
rotation at which all the states have vanishing geometric phase can be found readily from Eq.~(\ref{eq:LabProjBerry}),
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:CritRot}
\omega_{r,c}=2\omega_{L}\cos \theta_{m}.
\end{equation}
At this value of rotation, the adiabatic contribution to the geometric phase is canceled exactly by the non-adiabatic
phase. Presumably this is a convenient rate for performing spectroscopy, as well as useful for quantum information
processing \cite{Leek2007}. In the adiabatic case, $\omega_{r}/\omega_{L} \ll 1$ and the lowest order or Berry phase is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:BerryResultMagnetic}
\frac{\Delta\gamma_{M,\epsilon}^{(0)}(\omega_{r})}{M} \simeq -2\pi \cos \theta_{m},
\end{equation}
which can be related to the standard result (see Ref.~\cite{BohmBook} and references therein)
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:BerryStandard}
\frac{\Delta\gamma_{M,\epsilon}^{(0)}(\omega_{r})}{M} = 2\pi (1-\cos \theta_{m}),
\end{equation}
by adding our result of Eq.~(\ref{eq:BerryResultMagnetic}) to $2\pi.$ This manipulation does not change
the relative phases between the states, to which  Ramsey-type experiments are sensitive \cite{Meyer2009}. Higher
order non-adiabatic corrections can readily be obtained from Eq.~(\ref{eq:LabProjBerry}). For example, the next
order term in $\omega_{r}/\omega_{L}$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:FirstNonAdia}
\frac{\Delta\gamma_{M,\epsilon}^{(1)}(\omega_{r})}{M} = 2\pi \sin^{2} \theta_{m}\left(\frac{\omega_{r}}{2\omega_{L}}\right).
\end{equation}
Also, the limit of high rotation can be considered, where $\omega_{m} \gg \omega_{L}.$ In this case,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\Delta\gamma_{M,\epsilon}(\omega_{r})}{M} \simeq 2\pi-2\pi (1+\cos \theta_{m})\left(\frac{\omega_{L}}{\omega_{r}}\right).
\end{equation}
In the limit of very fast rotation, the states accumulate a phase of $2\pi M$ [see Fig.~\ref{fig:P1}(b)].

\section{Geometric phase of OH in an electric field}
\label{sec:OHGeometricPhaseInEField}
In this section we consider the ground state OH molecule in an electric field rotating at a frequency $\omega_{r}$ at an
angle $\theta_{e}$ with respect to the laboratory $z$ axis. This situation may be relevant to electrostatic
slowing and trapping of OH \cite{Meerakker2005}. For simplicity and in preparation for section \ref{sec:OHGeometricPhaseInBAndEFields},
we have chosen the same rotation frequency $\omega_{r}$
for the electric field as for the magnetic field above, but a different angle of inclination to the $z$ axis. We use
\begin{eqnarray}
B_{x}=B_{y}=B_{z}=0,&&\\
E_{x}=E\sin\theta_{e}\cos\omega_{r}t,& E_{y}=E\sin\theta_{e}\sin\omega_{r}t,& E_{z}=E\cos\theta_{e},\nonumber\\
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
in Eq.~(\ref{eq:PQR}) and plug in the resulting Hamiltonian of Eq.~(\ref{eq:HamUndressed}) into
Eq.~(\ref{eq:HamDressed}). Subsequently, we find, that with the choice of parameters of Eq.~(\ref{eq:FreqParam})
the Hamiltonian $H'$ can be made time-independent, yielding the dressed matrix
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:HamOHEPrime}
H_{d}=\left(
        \begin{array}{cc}
          P' & Q' \\
          Q' & R' \\
        \end{array}
      \right),
\end{equation}
where
\small
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:PQRPrimeOHB}
\begin{split}
P'=&\left(
  \begin{array}{cccc}
     \frac{3}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}-\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta  & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
     0  & \frac{1}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}-\frac{1}{2}\hbar \Delta  &
     0  & 0 \\
    0 & 0 &- \frac{1}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}-\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta & 0\\
    0 & 0 & 0 & -\frac{3}{2}\hbar\omega_{r}-\frac{1}{2}\hbar\Delta\\
  \end{array}
\right),\\
Q'=&\left(
    \begin{array}{cccc}
      \frac{3}{5}\mu _{e}E\cos\theta_{e} &
   -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{e}E\sin\theta_{e} & 0 & 0 \\
      -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{e}E\sin\theta_{e} & \frac{1}{5}\mu _{e}E\cos\theta_{e} & -\frac{2}{5}\mu _{e}E\sin\theta_{e}  & 0  \\
      0 & -\frac{2}{5}\mu _{e}E\sin\theta_{e}& -\frac{1}{5}\mu _{e}E\cos\theta_{e} & -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}
    \mu _{e}E\sin\theta_{e} \\
      0 & 0 & -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu _{e}E\sin\theta_{e} & -\frac{3}{5}\mu _{e}E\cos\theta_{e}  \\
    \end{array}
  \right),\\
R'=& P' + \hbar \Delta I_4.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
\normalsize
The eigenvalues of the corresponding dressed matrix $H_{d}$ were found analytically using the techniques of
Ref.~\cite{Bhattacharya2013}. They are provided in the Supplementary Material \cite{Supp}. The corresponding geometric
phases are plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:P2}. It can be seen that unlike Fig.~\ref{fig:P1}(b), the variation of
geometric phase with electric field rotation rate exhibits a rich structure, including crossings and avoided
crossings, and offering possibilities for coherent control of the OH geometric phase \cite{Leek2007}. We will now
make several comments about these geometric phase plots.

The (avoided) crossings in Fig.~\ref{fig:P2} may be traced back to similar structures in
the dressed eigenvalue spectrum. We note that while the geometric phases in Fig.~\ref{fig:P2} exhibit rather strong
kinks and turns, the dressed energies behave much more regularly and display (avoided) crossings when two states
approach one another. The presence of the (avoided) crossings may be explained by standard Floquet theory \cite{Grifoni1998}.
Specifically, since the Hamiltonian $H_{M}$ is periodic in time,
\begin{equation}
H_{M}\left(t+\frac{2\pi}{\omega_{r}}\right)=H_{M}(t),
\end{equation}
the dressed states are either odd or even under the same symmetry. We emphasize that in the presence of all three
components of the electric field neither parity nor any component of the angular momentum are conserved. As
the parameter $\omega_{r}$ is varied, states with the same symmetry avoid each other in the spectrum, while
those with unlike symmetry are allowed to cross, according to the Wigner von-Neumann theorem \cite{Neumann1929}.
The structure of the eigenvalues is so complicated that simple analytical expressions for the rotation rates at
which the (avoided) crossings occur are not easy to derive.

The crossings in Fig.~\ref{fig:P2}, unlike those in Fig.~\ref{fig:P1}, do not all occur at the same rotation rate.
Nonetheless, they offer similar possibilities for implementing geometric-phase-free spectroscopy and quantum
information storage \cite{Leek2007}.  As there are no incoherent
mechanisms present in the OH model, it may be said that the (non-zero) zero-phase crossings in Fig.~\ref{fig:P2}
as well as Fig.~\ref{fig:P1} correspond to the \textit{coherent} cancellation of (relative) geometric phase. The
cancellation occurs due to interferometric destruction of multiple pathways for accumulating geometric phase.
This phenomenon seems analogous to the coherent suppression of tunneling described earlier for driven quantum
systems \cite{Grifoni1998}.

It should be noticed that the geometric phase plots possess a reflection symmetry about the horizontal,
zero-phase, axis. It is this chiral symmetry which allows for the analytic determination of the phases, in a
manner similar to that shown originally for the eigenvalues of the time-independent OH spectrum \cite{Bhattacharya2013}.

Lastly, we note that for very fast rotation the OH states accumulate phases $2\pi M$, as expected.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{P2.eps}
\caption{The geometric phase for the OH state with angular momentum projection $M$ [Eq.~(\ref{eq:LabProjBerry})] as a
function of the electric field rotation frequency $\omega_{r}$. The parameters are
$\Delta=1.66$GHz, $\mu_{e}=1.667$ D, $E=2$ kV/cm, and (a) $\theta_{e}=0,$ (b) $\theta_{e}=\pi/8$, (c) $\theta_{e}=\pi/4$
and (d) $\theta_{e}=3\pi/8$.}
\label{fig:P2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{P3.eps}
\caption{The geometric phase for the OH state with angular momentum projection $M$ [Eq.~(\ref{eq:LabProjBerry})] as
a function of the electric and magnetic field rotation frequency $\omega_{r}$. The
parameters used are $\Delta=1.66$ GHz, $\mu_{e}=1.667$ D, $E=2$ kV/cm, $\theta_{e}=\pi/8,$ $\theta_{m}=\pi/3$ and
(a) $B=0.001$ T (b) $B=0.01$ T, (c) $B=0.1$ T and (d) $B=1.0$ T.}
\label{fig:P3}
\end{figure}

From the exact solutions, the expressions for the low order phases can easily be obtained. For convenience we divide
our discussion of the approximate results into two parts below, which refer to weak and strong electric fields, respectively.

\subsection{Weak electric fields: $\mu_{e}E \ll \hbar\Delta$}
Here we consider the situation where the Stark shifts are smaller than the lambda-doublet splitting. Without loss of
generality, we present the example of the most energetic state in the manifold $(M=3/2,\epsilon=f)$. For low rotation rate
$\omega_{r}$, the Berry phase is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:BerryResultElectric}
\Delta\gamma_{3/2,f}^{(0)}(\omega_{r}) \simeq 2\pi \left(\frac{3}{2}\right)\cos \theta_{e}.
\end{equation}
The first non-adiabatic correction is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:NonAdiaWeakElectric}
\Delta\gamma_{3/2,f}^{(1)}(\omega_{r})
\simeq 2\pi \left(\frac{75\Delta}{32\omega_{e}^{2}}
+\frac{9}{16\Delta}+\frac{81 \omega_{e}^{2}}{400\Delta^{3}}\right)\sin^{2}\theta_{e}\omega_{r},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\omega_{e}=\frac{\mu_{e}E}{\hbar},
\end{equation}
is the electric counterpart of the magnetic Larmor frequency of Eq.~(\ref{eq:LarmorMagnetic}).
In order for the first term in the parentheses of Eq.~(\ref{eq:NonAdiaWeakElectric}) to yield a
small correction for weak fields (i.e. small $\omega_{e}$), the rotation rate should obey the condition
\begin{equation}
\omega_{r} \ll \frac{\omega_{e}^{2}}{\Delta},
\end{equation}
which corresponds to the rotation rate being smaller than the quadratic Stark shift. It should be noted that
the presence of the $\omega_{e}$ in the denominator of the first term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:NonAdiaWeakElectric})
indicates that perturbative expansion breaks down in the limit of vanishing electric field \cite{Stuhl2012},
also see Section \ref{sec:OHGeometricPhaseInBAndEFields} below. Likewise, in order for the second term in the
parentheses to yield a small correction,
\begin{equation}
\omega_{r} \ll \Delta,
\end{equation}
and for the third term
\begin{equation}
\omega_{r} \ll \frac{\Delta^{3}}{\omega_{e}^{2}}.
\end{equation}

\subsection{Strong electric fields: $\mu_{e}E \gg \hbar\Delta$}
Now we consider the case where the electric field is large enough that the Stark shift is greater than the
lambda-doublet splitting. The Berry phase $\Delta\gamma_{3/2,f}^{(0)}(\omega_{r})$ is identical to
Eq.~(\ref{eq:BerryResultElectric}). The first nonadiabatic correction is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:NonAdiaStrongElectric}
\Delta\gamma_{3/2,f}^{(1)}(\omega_{r})
\simeq 2\pi \left(\frac{15}{8\omega_{e}}
+\frac{125 \Delta^{2}}{96\omega_{e}^{3}}\right)\sin^{2}\theta_{e}\omega_{r},
\end{equation}
where we have retained only the lowest order term in $\Delta/\omega_{e}$. For the correction of
Eq.~(\ref{eq:NonAdiaStrongElectric}) to be small, the rotation rate requires
\begin{equation}
\omega_{r} \ll \left(\omega_{e}, \frac{\omega_{e}^{3}}{\Delta^{2}}\right).
\end{equation}
We note that for strong electric fields, the regime of linear Stark effect is reached and the nonadiabatic
corrections now depend on odd powers of the electric field. Higher order terms in the geometric phase can
be extracted from our exact solutions in a similar manner. Likewise, a more detailed examination of the
physical mechanism behind the accumulation of geometric phase by other states in the ground state OH
manifold can be carried out readily \cite{Meyer2009}.

\section{Geometric phase of OH in combined $B$ and $E$ fields}
\label{sec:OHGeometricPhaseInBAndEFields}
We now consider the geometric phases accumulated by the ground state OH molecule in the combined presence
of both magnetic and electric fields. This situation corresponds to the magnetoelectrostatic manipulation of OH
\cite{Sawyer2007,Stuhl2012,Quemener2012}. We will first present an exact solution to the problem, and then a
perturbation theory approach.

\subsection{Exact results}
For the time-varying magnetic and electric fields we assume
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:SimulBAndEComponents}
B_{x}=B\sin\theta_{m}\cos\omega_{r}t,& B_{y}=B\sin\theta_{m}\sin\omega_{r}t,\nonumber\\
B_{z}=B\cos\theta_{m},&\\
E_{x}=E\sin\theta_{e}\cos\omega_{r}t,& E_{y}=E\sin\theta_{e}\sin\omega_{r}t,\nonumber\\
E_{z}=E\cos\theta_{e}.&\nonumber\\
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Following the procedure described in the previous sections, a time-independent dressed matrix $H_{d}$ was found.
Using the eigenvalues of the dressed matrix supplied in the Supplementary Material \cite{Supp}, the total
geometric phase for each state has been plotted as a
function of the rotation rate $\omega_{r}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:P3}. Although the specific structure in this case is
different from that of Fig.~\ref{fig:P2}, (avoided) crossings are still present. It can be seen that as the magnitude
of the magnetic field is increased from (a)-(d), Fig.~\ref{fig:P3} begins to resemble Fig.~\ref{fig:P1}. Thus, for
very strong magnetic fields, the electric field contribution becomes less significant, and the geometric phases can
be made almost all equal (to zero) near the critical rotation frequency.
\subsection{Time-dependent perturbation theory}
In the limit of small geometric phases, a quicker route to finding low order terms is provided by time-dependent
perturbation theory \cite{DeMille2009}. The limit of small phases corresponds in our case to assuming small $\theta_{m}$ and
$\theta_{e}$, as these determine the solid angle traversed geometrically during rotation. To implement this approach,
we use the fields of Eq.~(\ref{eq:SimulBAndEComponents}) in Eq.~(\ref{eq:PQR}) and write the resulting Hamiltonian
of Eq.~(\ref{eq:HamUndressed}) in a form suitable for Floquet perturbation theory \cite{Sambe1973},
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:HamFloquet}
H_{M}=H_{u}+V_{s}+V_{-}e^{-i\omega_{r}t}+V_{+}e^{+i\omega_{r}t},
\end{equation}
where $H_{u}$ is diagonal and describes the lambda doublet states in the presence of a time-independent magnetic
field $B_{z},$ $V_{s}$ is the nondiagonal static part of the perturbation due to the constant
electric field $E_{z}$ and $V_{-}=V_{+}^{\dagger}$ are the coefficient matrices of the time
dependent functions $e^{\mp i\omega_{r}t},$ respectively. These matrices are
\begin{widetext}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:TDmatrices}
H_{u} =
\small
\begin{pmatrix}
  -\frac{\hbar\Delta}{2}-\frac{6}{5}\mu_{B}B_{z} & 0 &  0  & 0 & 0   & 0            &    0         & 0  \\
           0     & -\frac{\hbar\Delta}{2}-\frac{2}{5}\mu_{B}B_{z}   & 0    &      0 & 0 &0           &  0           &  0 \\
           0     & 0       &  -\frac{\hbar\Delta}{2}+\frac{2}{5}\mu_{B}B_{z}   &   0  &  0      &   0            &             0     & 0 \\
           0&0&0&-\frac{\hbar\Delta}{2}+\frac{6}{5}\mu_{B}B_{z} &0 &0 &0 &0 \\
0  & 0 &       0        & 0  & \frac{\hbar\Delta}{2}-\frac{6}{5}\mu_{B}B_{z}  &             0&     0        &  0 \\
0   & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0  & \frac{\hbar\Delta}{2}-\frac{2}{5}\mu_{B}B_{z}             &   0          &  0 \\
       0    &  0 & 0& 0 & 0 & 0   &\frac{\hbar\Delta}{2}+\frac{2}{5}\mu_{B}B_{z}   & 0 \\
       0    &  0     & 0 & 0 &   0  & 0 &0 &\frac{\hbar\Delta}{2}+\frac{6}{5}\mu_{B}B_{z}   \\
\end{pmatrix},\\
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
V_{s} =
\small
\begin{pmatrix}
  0      &     0         &    0        &       0 & \frac{3}{5}\mu_{e}E_{z}   & 0            &    0         & 0  \\
           0     & 0    & 0    &      0 & 0  & \frac{1}{5}\mu_{e}E_{z}            &  0           &  0 \\
           0     & 0       &  0  &   0  &  0      &   0 & -\frac{1}{5}\mu_{e}E_{z}       & 0  \\
           0&0&0&0 &0 &0 &0&-\frac{3}{5}\mu_{e}E_{z} \\
\frac{3}{5}\mu_{e}E_{z}  & 0  &       0        & 0  & 0  &             0&     0        &  0 \\
0   & \frac{1}{5}\mu_{e}E_{z} & 0 & 0 & 0  & 0            &   0          &  0 \\
       0    &  0 & -\frac{1}{5}\mu_{e}E_{z}  & 0 & 0 & 0   &0  & 0 \\
       0    &  0     & 0  & -\frac{3}{5}\mu_{e}E_{z} &   0  & 0 &0 &0   \\
\end{pmatrix},\\
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
V_{-} =i
\small
\begin{pmatrix}
 0 & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu_{B}B_{l}  & 0 & 0 & 0 & -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu_{e} E_{l}  & 0 & 0 \\
 0 & 0 & \frac{4}{5}\mu_{B}B_{l} & 0 & 0 & 0 & -\frac{2}{5}\mu_{e} E_{l} & 0 \\
 0 & 0 & 0 & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu_{B}B_{l}  & 0 & 0 & 0 & -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu_{e} E_{l} \\
 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
 0 & -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu_{e} E_{l} & 0 & 0 & 0 & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu_{B}B_{l}  & 0 & 0 \\
 0 & 0 & -\frac{2}{5}\mu_{e} E_{l} & 0 & 0 & 0 & \frac{4}{5}\mu_{B}B_{l} & 0 \\
 0 & 0 & 0 & -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{5}\mu_{e}E_{l} & 0 & 0 & 0 & \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{5} \mu_{B}B_{l} \\
 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\end{pmatrix},\\
\end{equation}
\end{widetext}
where
\begin{equation}
B_{l}=B\sin\theta_{m}, E_{l}=E\sin\theta_{e}.
\end{equation}
Assuming that the parameters are arranged to operate away from the crossings in the spectrum of the unperturbed Hamiltonian
$H_{u}$ \cite{Cawley2013}, we use non-degenerate time-dependent perturbation theory. Our assumption of small angles
$\theta_{e}$ and $\theta_{m}$ implies that the quantities $V_s$, $V_-$, and $V_+$ (from here on collectively referred to as ``$V$") are small in Eq.~(\ref{eq:HamFloquet}), and may be used as
perturbation parameters.

\subsubsection{Second order}
From the shifts to the bare eigenvalues, the geometric phases can then be found. As in the earlier sections, without loss of
generality, we demonstrate our results on the most energetic state in the ground state manifold $(J=3/2,\epsilon=f)$. From
perturbation theory, we find there are no corrections to first order in the $V$ operators of Eq.~(\ref{eq:HamFloquet}).
The lowest correction is second order in $V$, and yields for the geometric phase,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:BerryFloquet}
\Delta\gamma_{M,\epsilon}^{0}\simeq 2\pi\left[\frac{3}{4}\tan^{2}\theta_{m}
+\frac{3\left(\omega_{e}\sin\theta_{e}\right)^{2}}{\left(5\Delta+\omega_{L}\cos\theta_{m}\right)^{2}}\right].
\end{equation}
We may compare this equation to our previous results. It can be readily seen that in the case of a zero electric field
$(\omega_{e}=0)$, and small $\theta_{m}$ both Eq.~(\ref{eq:BerryFloquet}) and Eq.~(\ref{eq:BerryStandard}) reduce to
\begin{equation}
\Delta\gamma_{M,\epsilon}^{0}\simeq 2\pi\left(\frac{3}{2}\right)\frac{\theta_{m}^{2}}{2}.
\end{equation}
Thus the results agree well in the case of a pure magnetic field.

However, in the case of a pure electric field, the result of Eq.~(\ref{eq:BerryFloquet}) does not connect smoothly with
that of Eq.~(\ref{eq:BerryResultElectric}). In fact it can be shown that the result of the perturbative approach diverges
at zero magnetic field. This is not surprising, since we assumed a lack of degeneracy in the bare spectrum so that we could
use non-degenerate perturbation theory to derive Eq.~(\ref{eq:BerryFloquet}). However, in the absence of a magnetic field,
each lambda-doublet state of the bare spectrum is in fact four-fold degenerate [as can be seen readily from
Eq.~(\ref{eq:TDmatrices})], contradicting our assumption. A correct
approach in this case would be to use time-dependent degenerate perturbation theory; we do not follow this route further.
However, we do note that this discussion underscores the importance of our exact results in the case of the OH molecule in a pure
electric field. Nonadiabatic corrections can also be found at this level of perturbation theory, but we do not discuss them here.
\subsubsection{Third order}
The next order of perturbation theory in the $V$ operators of Eq.~(\ref{eq:HamFloquet}) yields a correction to the Berry
phase
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta\gamma_{M,\epsilon}^{0,1}&=&2\pi\sin\theta_{m}\sin 2\theta_{e}\left(\frac{2\omega_{e}^{2}}{5\Delta\omega_{L}}\right)\\
&\times &\frac{\left[\left(5\Delta\right)^{2}+2\left(5\Delta\right)\omega_{L}\cos\theta_{m}
+\frac{3}{2}\omega_{L}\cos^{2}\theta_{m}\right]}{\left(5\Delta+\omega_{L}\cos\theta_{m}\right)^{3}},\nonumber\\
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
which vanishes, for example, in zero electric field. Generally, since the problem is nonlinear, the geometric phases
contain cross-coupling terms which depend on both the magnetic and electric parameters. This demonstrates that the total
geometric phase is not simply the additive result of the magnetic and electric contributions.

Before concluding this section, we make a comment about the situation where the magnetic and electric fields rotate at different
frequencies. In that case the usual Floquet theorem does not hold, and bichromatic Floquet theory needs to be used \cite{Chua2004}.
In that theory, the finite dimensional time-dependent matrix $H_{M}(t)$ is transformed into an \textit{infinite}-dimensional
time-independent dressed matrix. An analysis of the problem is being planned for the future.

\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:Conc}
We have presented the geometric phase experienced by states in the ground state manifold of the OH molecule in the presence
of magnetic and electric fields varying harmonically in time. It is important to account for these phases systematically in
precision spectroscopy techniques such as the Ramsey method. Our calculations are exact within the description provided by
an effective Hamiltonian that neglects hyperfine structure, but has been shown to agree well with experimental data. We have
also supplied approximate expressions for the lowest order Berry phase as well as higher non-adiabatic corrections, where
appropriate. Our work shows specifically that the experimental parameters may be chosen to cancel the geometric phase acquired
by a single level or the relative geometric phase between two energy levels. These configurations should be useful to ongoing
work on precision spectroscopy and quantum computation with OH. Generally, we have found that the presence of an electric field
results in rich behavior of the geometric phase, offering possibilities for its coherent control. Our results may form the basis
for a future perturbation theoretic treatment that includes hyperfine structure, or investigations in a more general setting
where the fields may have multiple Fourier components in their time variation. To conclude, our work makes an advance towards
the accurate characterization of systematic shifts in the spectroscopy of ground state OH.

We would like to thank the JILA groups for earlier discussions about their experimental and theoretical work on OH. We also thank
S. Agarwal for useful discussions, and M.B. and S. M. are particularly grateful to Prof. V. Lindberg for making their collaboration
possible.


\section{Introduction}

  Functorial semi-norms are semi-normed refinements of functors to the
  category of Abelian groups (Definition~\ref{defffsn}). Gromov
  introduced the notion of functorial semi-norms on singular
  (co)homology~\cite{gromov, vbc} in the context of simplicial volume
  and its relation with geometry and rigidity. For example, the
  $\ell^1$-semi-norm on singular homology is a finite functorial
  semi-norm on singular homology (Example~\ref{exal1top}).  Dually,
  the $\ell^\infty$-semi-norm on singular cohomology
  (Example~\ref{exalinftytop}) is a functorial semi-norm on singular
  cohomology, which is not finite; in contrast, by construction, the
  $\ell^\infty$-semi-norm on bounded cohomology (Example~\ref{exabc})
  is a finite functorial semi-norm on bounded cohomology.
  Applications of functorial semi-norms in manifold topology include
  degree theorems \cite{vbc,lafontschmidt,loehsauer}. Conversely,
  knowledge about mapping degrees allows to construct functorial
  semi-norms with interesting properties~\cite{crowleyloeh,
    kotschickloeh}.

  We investigate the relation between (non-)triviality of finite
  functorial semi-norms and so-called weak flexibility:

  \begin{defi}[weakly flexible]
    Let $C$ be a category, let $F \colon C \longrightarrow \Ab$ be a
    functor, and let $X \in \Ob(C)$. An element~$\alpha \in F(X)$ is \emph{weakly
      flexible (with respect to~$F$)} if there exist~$Y \in
    \Ob(C)$ and~$\beta \in F(Y)$ such that the set
    \[ D(\beta,\alpha)
       := \bigl\{ d \in \mathbb{Z}
       \bigm| \exi{f \in \Mor_C(Y,X)}
       F(f)(\beta) = d \cdot \alpha
       \bigr\}
    \]
    is infinite.
  \end{defi}

  It is a simple, yet fundamental, observation that any finite
  homogeneous  functorial semi-norm is trivial on weakly flexible classes
  (Proposition~\ref{propfund}).

  In this article, we give equivalent descriptions of weak flexibility
  in singular homology (Section~\ref{subsecwfsing}) and
  $\ell^1$-homology (Section~\ref{subsecwfl1}). Moreover, we apply the
  above observation to representable functors
  (Section~\ref{subsecwfrep}) and countably additive functors
  (Section~\ref{subsecwfgc}).  This shows that many classical functors
  from algebraic topology do \emph{not} admit any non-trivial finite
  homogeneous functorial semi-norms. For instance, this might be interesting for the study of
  comparison maps in bounded cohomology.

\section{Functorial semi-norms}\label{secbasics}

In this section, we introduce some basic notation and give a
definition of functorial semi-norms, generalising Gromov's concept of
functorial semi-norms on singular (co)homology:

\begin{defi}[semi-norms on Abelian groups]
  \hfil
  \begin{itemize}
    \item A \emph{semi-norm} on an Abelian group~$A$
      is a map~$|\cdot| \colon A \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} \cup \{\infty\}$
        with the following properties:
        \begin{itemize}
          \item  We have~$|0| = 0$.
          \item For all~$x \in A$ we have~$|-x| = |x|$.
          \item For all~$x , y \in A$ we have~$|x + y| \leq |x| + |y|$. Here,
            $x + \infty := \infty$ for all~$x \in \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} \cup \{\infty\}$.
        \end{itemize}
        Such a semi-norm is \emph{finite} if the value~$\infty$ is not
        in the image. The semi-norm is \emph{homogeneous} if for
        all~$n \in \mathbb{Z} \setminus \{0\}$ and all~$x \in A$ we have~$|n
        \cdot x| = |n| \cdot |x|$, where~$|n|$ denotes the ordinary
        absolute value on~$\mathbb{Z}$.  Here, $n \cdot \infty := \infty$ for
        all~$n \in \mathbb{N} \setminus \{0\}$.
    \item A \emph{(finitely) semi-normed Abelian group} is an Abelian group
      together with a (finite) semi-norm.
    \item We write $\snAb$ for the category of semi-normed Abelian
      groups, where the morphisms are group homomorphisms that are
      norm-non-increasing.
    \item We write $\snAbfin$ for the category of finitely semi-normed
      Abelian groups, where the morphisms are group homomorphisms that
      are norm-non-increasing.
  \end{itemize}
\end{defi}

\begin{defi}[functorial semi-norm]\label{defffsn}
  Let $C$ be a category, let $F \colon C \longrightarrow \Ab$
  be a functor (possibly contravariant).
  \begin{itemize}
    \item A \emph{functorial semi-norm on~$F$} is a factorisation
      functor~$\widehat F \colon C \longrightarrow \snAb$ of~$F$
      through the forgetful functor~$\snAb \longrightarrow \Ab$:
      \begin{align*}
        \xymatrix{%
          &
          \snAb \ar[d]^{\txt{forget}}
          \\
          C \ar[r]_{F} \ar@{-->}[ur]^{\widehat F}
          & \Ab
        }
      \end{align*}
    \item A \emph{finite functorial semi-norm on~$F$} is a factorisation
      $\widehat F \colon C \longrightarrow \snAbfin$ of~$F$
      through the forgetful functor~$\snAbfin \longrightarrow \Ab$:
      \begin{align*}
        \xymatrix{%
          &
          \snAbfin \ar[d]^{\txt{forget}}
          \\
          C \ar[r]_{F} \ar@{-->}[ur]^{\widehat F}
          & \Ab
        }
      \end{align*}
  \end{itemize}
\end{defi}

More explicitly, a [finite] functorial semi-norm on a functor~$F
\colon C \longrightarrow \Ab$ consists of a choice of a [finite]
semi-norm~$|\cdot|$ on~$F(X)$ for every~$X \in \Ob(C)$ such that for
all morphisms~$f \colon X \longrightarrow Y$ in~$C$ and all~$\alpha
\in F(X)$ we have
\[ \bigl|F(f)(\alpha)\bigr| \leq |\alpha|.
\]
A functorial semi-norm on~$F$ is \emph{homogeneous} if for all~$X \in
\Ob(C)$ the corresponding semi-norm on~$F(X)$ is homogeneous.
Notice that all homogeneous (functorial) semi-norms are trivial on torsion
elements.

\begin{exa}[trivial functorial semi-norm]
  If $C$ is a category and $F \colon C \longrightarrow \Ab$ is a
  functor, then equipping for every~$X \in \Ob(C)$ the group~$F(X)$
  with the zero semi-norm gives a functorial semi-norm on~$F$, the
  \emph{trivial functorial semi-norm on~$F$}.
\end{exa}

\subsection{$\ell^1$-Homology}

A key example is given by the $\ell^1$-semi-norm on homology of
simplicial sets; the $\ell^1$-semi-norm on singular homology and the
$\ell^1$-semi-norm on group homology are instances of this
construction:

\begin{exa}[$\ell^1$-semi-norm on ($\ell^1$)-homology of simplicial sets]
  \label{exal1simpset}
  Let $\Delta$ be the \emph{simplex category}: The objects of~$\Delta$
  are natural numbers; for~$n, m \in \mathbb{N}$ the set of morphisms~$n
  \longrightarrow m$ in~$\Delta$ is the set of monotone (increasing)
  functions of type~$\{0,\dots,n\} \longrightarrow \{0,\dots,m\}$, and
  composition of morphisms in~$\Delta$ is given by the set-theoretic
  composition of the underlying functions. The category of
  \emph{simplicial sets} is denoted by~$\Delta(\Set)$; objects are
  contravariant functors~$\Delta \longrightarrow \Set$ and morphisms
  are natural transformations of such functors.
  If $R$ is a ring (with unit), then there is the corresponding chain
  complex functor
  \[ \Chf_R \colon \Delta(\Set) \longrightarrow \RCh R
                              \longrightarrow \RCh \mathbb{Z}
  \]
  into the category of $R$-chain complexes~\cite{goerssjardine} followed by
  the forgetful functor into $\mathbb{Z}$-chain comlexes. By construction, for
  a simplicial set~$S$ and~$n\in \mathbb{N}$, the chain module~$\Chf_R(S)_n$
  is the free $R$-module with basis~$S(n)$.  If $R$ (as Abelian group)
  is equipped with a norm, then $\Chf_R(S)_n$ inherits a finite
  norm~$|\cdot|_{1,R}$: the $\ell^1$-norm with respect to the
  basis~$S(n)$. This norm in turn leads to the
  \emph{$\ell^1$-semi-norm on homology} in degree~$n$:
  \begin{align*}
    \|\cdot\|_{1,R} \colon H_n\bigl(\Chf_R(S)\bigr) & \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}\\
    \alpha & \longmapsto \inf \bigl\{ |c|_{1,R}
             \bigm| c \in \Chf_R(S)_n,\ \partial c= 0,\
             [c] = \alpha \bigr\}
  \end{align*}

  By definition of~$|\cdot|_{1,R}$, the functor~$\Chf_R$ turns natural
  transformations into norm-non-increasing chain maps. Applying
  homology in degree~$n$ hence yields a finite functorial semi-norm on the
  composition
  \[ H_n \circ \Chf_R \colon \Delta(\Set) \longrightarrow \Ab.
  \]

  By construction of the chain complex functor~$\Chf_R$, the boundary
  operators in the chain complex~$\Chf_R(S)$ are bounded with respect to
  the $\ell^1$-norm. Hence, completing with respect to~$|\cdot|_{1,R}$
  (and extending the boundary operators continuously) leads to a
  functor
  \[ \Chf_R^{\ell^1} \colon \Delta(\Set) \longrightarrow \RCh \mathbb{Z}.
  \]
  Clearly, the $\ell^1$-norm on the chain modules of~$\Chf_R(S)$ extends
  to an~$\ell^1$-norm on the chain modules of~$\Chf_R^{\ell^1}(S)$,
  which we will also denote by~$|\cdot|_{1,R}$. Similarly to the
  uncompleted case, we then obtain a finite functorial $\ell^1$-semi-norm on
  the \emph{$\ell^1$-homology} functor
  \[ H_n^{\ell^1} \circ \Chf_R
     = H_n \circ \Chf_R^{\ell^1} \colon \Delta(\Set)  \longrightarrow
     \Ab
  \]
  in degree~$n$.

  In all these cases, we abbreviate~$\|\cdot\|_1 := \|\cdot\|_{1,\mathbb{R}}$.
  Notice that if $\mathbb{Q}$ is a subring of~$R$, then these functorial semi-norms
  on ($\ell^1$-)homology are homogeneous. In general, $\|\cdot\|_{1.\mathbb{Z}}$
  is \emph{not} homogeneous.
\end{exa}

\begin{exa}[$\ell^1$-semi-norm on singular homology]\label{exal1top}
  Let $R$ be a normed ring, and let $n \in \mathbb{N}$. Then singular
  homology~$H_n(\;\cdot\;;R)$ in degree~$n$ of topological spaces with
  coefficients in~$R$ can be described as the composition
  \[ H_n \circ \Chf_R \circ S \colon
    \Top \longrightarrow \Delta(\Set) \longrightarrow \RCh \mathbb{Z} \longrightarrow \Ab,
  \]
  where $S \colon \Top \longrightarrow \Delta(\Set)$ denotes the total
  singular complex functor~\cite{goerssjardine}. So, $H_n(\;\cdot\;;R)$ inherits a finite
  functorial semi-norm, the $\ell^1$-semi-norm~\mbox{$\|\cdot\|_{1,R}$}.  More explicitly, $\|\cdot\|_{1,R}$
  is given as follows: If $X$ is a topological space and~$\alpha \in H_n(X;R)$,
  then
  \[ \|\alpha\|_{1,R} = \inf \biggl\{ \sum_{j=0}^k |a_j|
     \biggm| \text{$\sum_{j = 0}^k a_j \cdot \sigma_j \in C_n(X;R)$ is a cycle representing~$\alpha$}
     \biggr\},
  \]
  where $|\cdot|$ denotes the norm on~$R$.

  An example of a topological invariant defined in terms of the
  $\ell^1$-semi-norm on singular homology with $\mathbb{R}$-coefficients is
  the simplicial volume~\cite{vbc, mapsimvol}: The \emph{simplicial
    volume} of an oriented closed connected $n$-manifold~$M$ is
  \[ \|M\| := \bigl\| [M]_\mathbb{R} \bigr\|_1 \in \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0},
  \]
  where $[M]_\mathbb{R} \in H_n(M;\mathbb{R})$ is the $\mathbb{R}$-fundamental class of~$M$.
  For example, the simplicial volume of hyperbolic manifolds is
  non-zero~\cite{vbc,thurston,benedettipetronio}.  Classical applications of simplicial volume
  include Gromov's proof of Mostow rigidity~\cite{munkholm} and degree
  theorems in the presence of sufficiently negative
  curvature~\cite{vbc,lafontschmidt,loehsauer}.

\end{exa}

Functorial semi-norms on singular homology that differ essentially
from the $\ell^1$-semi-norm can be constructed via manifold
topology~\cite{crowleyloeh, kotschickloeh}. However, it remains an
open problem to determine whether there are also \emph{finite}
functorial semi-norms on singular homology that are not dominated in
some weak sense (e.g., through a monotonic function) by the
$\ell^1$-semi-norm.

\begin{exa}[$\ell^1$-semi-norm on group homology]\label{exal1groups}
  Let $R$ be a normed ring, and let $n \in \mathbb{N}$.  Similarly to the
  previous example, homology of groups in degree~$n$ with coefficients
  in~$R$ can be described as the composition
  \[ H_n \circ \Chf_R \circ B \colon
     \Group \longrightarrow \Delta(\Set) \longrightarrow \RCh \mathbb{Z} \longrightarrow \Ab,
  \]
  where $B \colon \Group \longrightarrow \Delta(\Set)$ denotes the
  simplicial classifying space functor~\cite{goerssjardine}. Hence, also
  group homology in degree~$n$ with coefficients in~$R$ inherits a
  functorial $\ell^1$-semi-norm~$\|\cdot\|_{1,R}$.

  The canonical isomorphism between group homology via
  the simplicial classifying space functor and singular homology of
  Eilenberg-MacLane spaces of type~$K(\;\cdot\;,1)$ is isometric with
  respect to~$\|\cdot\|_{1,R}$, as can be seen by constructing explicit
  mutually inverse chain homotopy equivalences.
\end{exa}

\begin{exa}[$\ell^1$-semi-norm on $\ell^1$-homology]\label{exal1l1}
  Let $R$ be a normed ring, and let $n \in \mathbb{N}$. Then
  \emph{$\ell^1$-homology of spaces or groups} respectively in
  degree~$n$ with coefficients in~$R$ are defined by
  \begin{align*}
    H^{\ell^1}_n(\;\cdot\;;R) & := H^{\ell^1}_n \circ \Chf_R \circ S
      \colon \Top \longrightarrow \Delta(\Set) \longrightarrow \Ab,\\
    H^{\ell^1}_n(\;\cdot\;;R) & := H^{\ell^1}_n \circ \Chf_R \circ B
      \colon \Group \longrightarrow \Delta(\Set) \longrightarrow \Ab.
  \end{align*}
  As in Example~\ref{exal1simpset}, these functors admit functorial
  $\ell^1$-semi-norms~$\|\cdot\|_{1,R}$. For more information about
  $\ell^1$-homology and its applications we refer to the
  literature~\cite{loehl1,buehler,bfs,loehpagliantini}.
\end{exa}

\subsection{Bounded cohomology}

Dually, we can also equip cohomology of simplicial sets with a
functorial semi-norm -- the $\ell^\infty$-semi-norm, which in turn
leads to bounded cohomology:

\begin{exa}[$\ell^\infty$-semi-norm on (bounded) cohomology of simplicial sets]
  \label{exalinftysimpset}
  Let $R$ be a normed ring. Then there is the dual cochain
  complex functor
  \[ \Chf_R^* := \Hom_\mathbb{Z}(\;\cdot\;,R) \circ \Chf_\mathbb{Z}
     \colon \Delta(\Set) \longrightarrow \CoCh_R \longrightarrow \CoCh_\mathbb{Z}
  \]
  as well as the topological dual cochain complex functor
  \[ \Chf_R^\# := B(\;\cdot\;,R) \circ \Chf_\mathbb{Z}
     \colon \Delta(\Set) \longrightarrow \CoCh_R \longrightarrow \CoCh_\mathbb{Z}
  \]
  of bounded $\mathbb{Z}$-linear functionals; both these functors are
  contravariant.  If $S$ is a simplicial set and $n \in \mathbb{N}$, then
  the modules~$\Chf_R^*(S)^n$ and $\Chf_R^\#(S)^n$ inherit a
  norm~$|\cdot|_{\infty,R}$: the $\ell^\infty$-norm on linear
  functionals with respect to the $\ell^1$-norm on~$\Chf_\mathbb{Z}(S)_n$;
  this norm on~$\Chf_R^*(S)^n$, in general, is not finite, but -- by
  construction -- this norm on~$\Chf_R^\#(S)^n$ is finite. These norms
  in turn lead to the \emph{$\ell^\infty$-semi-norm on
    cohomology} in degree~$n$
  \begin{align*}
    \|\cdot\|_{\infty,R}
    \colon H^n\bigl(\Chf_R^*(S)\bigr)
    & \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} \cup \{\infty\}
    \\
    \varphi &\longmapsto
    \inf \bigl\{ |f|_{\infty,R} \bigm| f \in \Chf_R^*(S)^n,
                                     \delta f =0, [f] =\varphi\bigr\},
  \end{align*}
  and the \emph{$\ell^\infty$-semi-norm on bounded cohomology} in degree~$n$:
  \begin{align*}
    \|\cdot\|_{\infty,R}
    \colon H^n\bigl(\Chf_R^\#(S)\bigr)
    & \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}
    \\
    \varphi &\longmapsto
    \inf \bigl\{ |f|_{\infty,R} \bigm| f \in \Chf_R^\#(S)^n,
                                     \delta f =0, [f] =\varphi\bigr\}.
  \end{align*}
  By definition of~$|\cdot|_{\infty,R}$, the functors~$\Chf_R^*$ and $\Chf_R^\#$
  turn natural transformations into norm-non-increasing chain maps. Applying
  (co)homology in degree~$n$ hence yields a finite functorial semi-norm
  on the contravariant compositions
  \begin{align*}
    H^n \circ \Chf_R^* \colon \Delta(\Set) & \longrightarrow \Ab, \\
    H^n \circ \Chf_R^\# \colon \Delta(\Set) & \longrightarrow \Ab.
  \end{align*}
  In all theses cases, we abbreviate~$\|\cdot\|_\infty :=
  \|\cdot\|_{\infty,\mathbb{R}}$.  If $\mathbb{Q}$ is a subring of~$R$, then these
  functorial semi-norms on (bounded) cohomology are homogeneous. In
  general, $\|\cdot\|_{\infty,\mathbb{Z}}$ is \emph{not} homogeneous.
\end{exa}

\begin{exa}[$\ell^\infty$-semi-norm on singular cohomology]\label{exalinftytop}
  Let $R$ be a normed ring, and let $n \in \mathbb{N}$. Then singular
  cohomology $H^n(\;\cdot\;;R)$ in degree~$n$ of topological spaces with
  coefficients in~$R$ can be described as the composition
  \[ H^n \circ \Chf_R^* \circ S \colon \Top \longrightarrow
                               \Delta(\Set) \longrightarrow \CoCh_\mathbb{Z}
                               \longrightarrow \Ab,
  \]
  where $S \colon \Top \longrightarrow \Delta(\Set)$ denotes the total
  singular complex functor. So, $H^n(\;\cdot\;;R)$ inherits a functorial
  semi-norm, the $\ell^\infty$-semi-norm~$\|\cdot\|_{\infty,R}$. More
  explicitly, $\|\cdot\|_{\infty,R}$ is given as follows: If $X$ is a
  topological space and $\varphi \in H^n(X;R)$, then
  \[ \|\varphi\|_{\infty,R}
     = \inf \Bigl\{ \sup_{\sigma \in \map(\Delta^n,X)} |f(\sigma)|
            \Bigm|
                    \text{$f\in C^n(X;R)$ is a cocycle representing~$\varphi$}
            \Bigr\},
  \]
  where $|\cdot|$ denotes the norm on~$R$.
\end{exa}

\begin{exa}[$\ell^\infty$-semi-norm on group cohomology]\label{exlinftygroup}
  Let $R$ be a normed ring, and let $n \in \mathbb{N}$. As in
  the previous examples, cohomology of groups in degree~$n$ with
  coefficients in~$R$ inherits a functorial
  $\ell^\infty$-semi-norm~$\|\cdot\|_{\infty,R}$, based on the
  simplicial classifying space functor~$B \colon \Group
  \longrightarrow \Delta(\Set)$.
\end{exa}

\begin{exa}[$\ell^\infty$-semi-norm on bounded cohomology]\label{exabc}
  Let $R$ be a normed ring, and let $n \in \mathbb{N}$. Then \emph{bounded cohomology
    of spaces or groups} respectively in degree~$n$ with coefficients in~$R$
  are defined by
  \begin{align*}
    H^n_b(\;\cdot\;;R) & :=
    H^n \circ \Chf_R^\# \circ S \colon \Top \longrightarrow \Delta(\Set)
    \longrightarrow \Ab
    \\
    H^n_b(\;\cdot\;;R) & :=
    H^n \circ \Chf_R^\# \circ B \colon \Group \longrightarrow \Delta(\Set)
    \longrightarrow \Ab.
  \end{align*}
  As described in Example~\ref{exalinftysimpset}, these functors
  admit \emph{finite} functorial $\ell^\infty$-semi-norms~$\|\cdot\|_{\infty,R}.$

  The inclusion of bounded linear functionals into all linear
  functionals induces natural transformations~$H^n_b(\;\cdot\;;R)
  \Longrightarrow H^n(\;\cdot\;;R)$ between bounded cohomology of
  spaces/groups and ordinary cohomology of spaces/groups, the
  so-called \emph{comparison maps}. In general, these comparison
  maps are neither injective nor surjective (Example~\ref{exa:compmaps}).
\end{exa}

There is a duality principle that allows to express the
$\ell^1$-semi-norm on homology in terms of the $\ell^\infty$-semi-norm
of the corresponding bounded cohomology~\cite{vbc}. Therefore, bounded
cohomology is an important algebraic tool in the study of simplicial
volume. For more information about bounded
cohomology and its applications we refer to the
literature~\cite{vbc,ivanov,monod,buehler}.

\section{Weak flexibility}\label{secweakflex}

We introduce the following notions of representability of classes,
generalising (strong) inflexibility of
manifolds~\cite{crowleyloeh}:

\begin{defi}[(weakly) flexible]
  Let $C$ be a category, let $F \colon C \longrightarrow \Ab$ be a
  functor, let $X \in \Ob(C)$, and let $\alpha \in F(X)$.
  \begin{itemize}
    \item The element~$\alpha$ is \emph{flexible (with respect to~$F$)}
      if the set
      \[ D(\alpha) := \bigl\{ d \in \mathbb{Z}
                        \bigm| \exists_{f \in \Mor_C(X,X)}\;\;\;
                               F(f)(\alpha) = d \cdot \alpha
                        \bigr\}
      \]
      is infinite. Otherwise $\alpha$ is called \emph{inflexible}.
    \item The element~$\alpha$ is \emph{weakly flexible (with respect
      to~$F$)} if there exists an object~$Y \in \Ob(C)$ and~$\beta \in
      F(Y)$ such that the set
      \[ D(\beta,\alpha)
         := \bigl\{ d \in \mathbb{Z}
                        \bigm| \exists_{f \in \Mor_C(Y,X)}\;\;\;
                               F(f)(\beta) = d \cdot \alpha
                        \bigr\}
      \]
      is infinite. Otherwise $\alpha$ is called \emph{strongly
        inflexible}.
  \end{itemize}
\end{defi}

\begin{exa}
For example, fundamental classes of spheres, tori, and (oriented)
projective spaces are flexible with respect to singular homology
with $\mathbb{Z}$- or $\mathbb{R}$-coefficients.
Not all (fundamental classes of) oriented closed simply connected manifolds are
flexible~\cite{arkowitzlupton,crowleyloeh,amann,costoyaviruel};
however, it remains an open problem whether there exist oriented
closed simply connected manifolds that are strongly inflexible.
\end{exa}

\begin{exa}[torsion classes]
  Let $C$ be a category and let $F \colon C \longrightarrow \Ab$ be a
  functor. If $X \in \Ob(C)$ and $\alpha \in F(X)$ is a torsion
  element of order~$m$, then $m \cdot \mathbb{Z} + 1\subset D(\alpha)$ and so
  $\alpha$ is flexible.
\end{exa}

In the following, we will make use of the following simple, yet
fundamental, observation:

\begin{prop}[weak flexibility and finite functorial semi-norms]
  \label{propfund}
  Let $C$ be a category, let $F \colon C \longrightarrow \Ab$
  be a functor, let $X \in \Ob(C)$ and let $\alpha \in F(X)$ be
  weakly flexible.
  If $\widehat F \colon C \longrightarrow \snAbfin$
  is a finite homogeneous functorial semi-norm on~$F$, then $|\alpha|_{\widehat F} = 0$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
  Because $\alpha$ is weakly flexible, there is an object~$Y \in
  \Ob(C)$ and $\beta \in F(Y)$ such that $D(\beta,\alpha)$ is
  infinite. If $\widehat F \colon C \longrightarrow \snAbfin$ is a
  finite homogeneous functorial semi-norm on~$F$, we obtain
  \[ |\alpha|_{\widehat F}
     \leq \inf \Bigl\{ \frac 1d \cdot |\beta|_{\widehat F}
               \Bigm| d \in D(\beta, \alpha) \setminus \{0\}\Bigr\} = 0.
     \qedhere
  \]
\end{proof}

\begin{exa}
  In particular, the fundamental class of an oriented closed connected
  manifold with non-zero simplicial volume ist \emph{not} weakly
  flexible with respect to real singular homology.  Prominent examples
  of this type are hyperbolic
  manifolds~\cite{vbc,thurston,benedettipetronio}.
\end{exa}

\section{Representable functors and cohomology theories}

We will now apply the observation Proposition~\ref{propfund} to
representable functors (Section~\ref{subsecwfrep}) as well as
countably additive functors (Section~\ref{subsecwfgc}).

\subsection{Weak flexibility and representable functors}\label{subsecwfrep}

Representable functors do not admit non-trivial finite functorial semi-norms:

\begin{cor}[finite functorial semi-norms on representable functors]
  \label{corffsnrep}
  Let $C$ be a category and let $F \colon C \longrightarrow \Ab$ be a
  (co- or contravariant) representable functor. If $\widehat F \colon
  C \longrightarrow \snAbfin$ is a finite homogeneous functorial semi-norm on~$C$,
  then $\widehat F$ is trivial.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
  We give the proof in the covariant case (the contravariant case
  being dual). By Proposition~\ref{propfund}, it suffices to establish
  that all classes are weakly flexible with respect to~$F$.
  Let $Y \in \Ob(C)$ be a representing object of~$F$,
  i.e., $V \circ F \cong \Mor_C(Y,\;\cdot\;)$, where $V \colon \Ab \longrightarrow \Set$ is the
  forgetful functor; let $\beta \in F(Y)$ be the
  element corresponding to~$\id_Y \in \Mor_C(Y,Y)$.

  Let $X \in \Ob(C)$, let $\alpha \in F(X)$, and let $d \in \mathbb{Z}$. Then
  $d \cdot \alpha$ corresponds to a morphism~$f \in \Mor_C(Y,X)$, and so
  $ d \cdot \alpha = F(f) (\beta)$. Thus, $D(\beta,\alpha) = \mathbb{Z}$, which
  shows that $\alpha$ is weakly flexible with respect to~$F$.
\end{proof}

\begin{exa}[homotopy groups]
  Let $n \in \mathbb{N}_{>1}$. Then the $n$-th homotopy group functor
  \[ \pi_n \colon \Toppth \longrightarrow \Ab
  \]
  on the homotopy category~$\Toppth$ of pointed topological spaces is
  represented by the marked $n$-sphere. Hence, by
  Corollary~\ref{corffsnrep}, the functor~$\pi_n$ does \emph{not} admit a
  non-trivial finite homogeneous functorial semi-norm.
\end{exa}

\begin{exa}[cohomology theories on CW-complexes]
  Cellular cohomology with coefficients in an Abelian group~$A$ does
  \emph{not} admit a non-trivial finite homogeneous functorial semi-norm in
  degree~$n \in \mathbb{N}$: The functor~$H^n(\;\cdot\;;A)$ on the homotopy
  category~$\CWh$ of CW-complexes is representable by CW-complexes of
  type~$K(A,n)$.

  In view of the Brown representability theorem, the same holds for
  finitely additive generalised cohomology theories on the homotopy
  category of (pointed) finite CW-complexes that yield finitely
  generated Abelian groups on
  spheres~\cite[Chapter~21.8]{strom}\cite{adams}: In general, the
  representing object will not necessarily have the homotopy type of a
  finite CW-complex, but only of a CW-complex~$Y$ of finite type. If
  $X$ is a finite CW-complex of dimension~$n$, then the
  inclusion~$Y_{n+1} \hookrightarrow Y$ of the $(n+1)$-skeleton
  induces a natural bijection~$[X,Y_{n+1}] \longrightarrow [X,Y]$ and
  we can apply Corollary~\ref{corffsnrep} to the restriction of our
  given cohomology functor~$F$ to the full subcategory of~$\CWh$
  generated by $X$ and~$Y_{n+1}$; on this subcategory, $F$ is
  naturally isomorphic to~$[\;\cdot\;, Y_{n+1}]$ This shows that all
  classes in~$F(X)$ are weakly flexible. Hence, any finite homogeneous
  functorial semi-norm on~$F$ is trivial on~$F(X)$.

  For example, this applies to complex/real topological $K$-theory or
  oriented cobordism.

  The case of countably additive cohomology theories
  can be handled as in Section~\ref{subsecwfgc}.
\end{exa}

\begin{exa}[bounded cohomology of spaces and groups]
  Let $n \in \mathbb{N}_{>1}$. Then there exist finite CW-complexes~$X$ and
  (finitely presented) groups~$G$ respectively such that
  $\|\cdot\|_\infty$ is non-trivial on~$H^n_b(X;\mathbb{R})$ and
  $H^n_b(G;\mathbb{R})$, respectively; for example, one could take the
  cohomological fundamental class of oriented closed connected
  hyperbolic $n$-manifolds and their fundamental groups,
  respectively~\cite{vbc}. Hence, the bounded cohomology
  functors~$H^n_b(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{R})$ are \emph{not} representable on the
  \begin{itemize}
    \item (homotopy) category of topological spaces
    \item (homotopy) category of finite CW-complexes
    \item category of groups
    \item category of finitely generated groups
    \item category of finitely presented groups
    \item \dots
  \end{itemize}
  Notice that in view of the mapping theorem for bounded
  cohomology~\cite{vbc,ivanov}, the pictures for the case of
  path-connected spaces and groups are equivalent.
\end{exa}

\subsection{Weak flexibility and countable additivity}\label{subsecwfgc}

\begin{cor}[finite functorial semi-norms and countable additivity]
  \label{corffsnlim}
  Let $C$ be a category such that for every object~$X \in \Ob(C)$ the
  countably infinite coproduct~$\coprod_{\mathbb{N}} X$ exists in~$C$. Let $F
  \colon C \longrightarrow \Ab$ be a contravariant functor such that
  for all $X \in \Ob(C)$ the structure maps~$X \longrightarrow
  \coprod_\mathbb{N} X$ of the summands induce an isomorphism
  \[ \varphi_X \colon F\Bigl(\coprod_\mathbb{N} X\Bigr) \longrightarrow \prod_\mathbb{N} F(X).
  \]
  If $\widehat F \colon C \longrightarrow \snAbfin$ is
  a finite homogeneous functorial semi-norm on~$C$, then $\widehat F$ is trivial.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
  Let $\alpha \in F(X)$. It suffices to show that $\alpha$ is weakly flexible
  with respect to~$F$ (Proposition~\ref{propfund}). Let $Y := \coprod_\mathbb{N} X$,
  and let
  \[ \beta := \varphi_X^{-1} \bigl( (d \cdot \alpha)_{d\in \mathbb{N}} \bigr) \in F(Y).
  \]
  For $d \in \mathbb{N}$ the structure map~$f_d \in \Mor_C(X, \coprod_\mathbb{N} X)$ of the
  $d$-th summand satisfies
  \begin{align*}
    F(f_d)(\beta)  = F(f_d) \bigl( \varphi_X^{-1}  \bigl( (d \cdot \alpha)_{d\in \mathbb{N}} \bigr)\bigr)
                   = F(\id_X) (d \cdot \alpha)
                   = d \cdot \alpha.
  \end{align*}
  Hence, $\alpha$ is weakly flexible with respect to~$F$.
\end{proof}

\begin{exa}[additive cohomology theories]
  Corollary~\ref{corffsnlim} applies to all generalised cohomology
  theory functors~$\Top \longrightarrow \Ab$ that
  satisfy the countable additivity axiom; this includes, in particular,
  for all~$n \in \mathbb{N}$ and all Abelian groups~$A$ singular cohomology
  $H^n(\;\cdot\;;A) \colon \Top \longrightarrow \Ab$ in degree~$n$.
\end{exa}

\begin{exa}[group cohomology]
  Group cohomology does \emph{not} admit a non-trivial finite homogeneous
  functorial semi-norm in non-zero degree: In the category of groups,
  all coproducts exist (given by free products of groups), and for~$n \in \mathbb{N}_{>0}$
  and all Abelian groups~$A$ the group cohomology functor~$H^n(\;\cdot\;;A)
  \colon \Group \longrightarrow \Ab$ satisfies the corresponding
  compatibility condition of Corollary~\ref{corffsnlim}. Notice that
  $H^n(\;\cdot\;;A) \colon \Group \longrightarrow \Ab$ in general is \emph{not}
  representable if~$n > 1$.
\end{exa}

\begin{exa}[comparison maps]\label{exa:compmaps}
  Let $n \in \mathbb{N}_{>1}$.  Because Abelian groups are amenable, we have
  that $H^n_b(K(\mathbb{Z}^n,1);\mathbb{R}) \cong 0$ (which follows by averaging
  over invariant means~\cite{vbc,ivanov}), but $H^n(K(\mathbb{Z}^n,1);\mathbb{R})
  \cong \mathbb{R}$. This simple example shows that the comparison
  map~$H^n_b(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{R}) \Longrightarrow H^n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{R})$ in general is
  not surjective on the category of topological spaces or groups,
  respectively.

  In contrast, we will now provide an argument that relies on the
  \emph{non-triviality} of the $\ell^\infty$-semi-norm: Let $C$ be a
  category of spaces or groups having the following properties:
  \begin{enumerate}
    \item\label{propy1}
      The functor~$H^n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{R}) \colon C \longrightarrow \Ab$ does
      not admit a non-trivial finite homogeneous functorial semi-norm,
      and
    \item\label{propy2} there exist $X \in \Ob(C)$ and~$\varphi \in
      H^n(X;\mathbb{R})$ with~$0 < \|\varphi\|_\infty < \infty$.
  \end{enumerate}
  E.g., we could take the category of topological spaces or the
  category of groups. Moreover, let $c \colon H^n_b(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{R})
  \Longrightarrow H^n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{R})$ be the comparison map on~$C$
  (Example~\ref{exabc}). Then, for all~$X \in \Ob(C)$ we obtain a
  homogeneous semi-norm
  \begin{align*}
    H^n(X;\mathbb{R}) & \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}\cup\{\infty\} \\
    \varphi & \longmapsto
    \inf \bigl\{ \|\psi\|_\infty
         \bigm| \psi \in H^n_b(X;\mathbb{R}), c_X(\psi) = \varphi
         \bigr\}
  \end{align*}
  on~$H^n(X;\mathbb{R})$, which is finite if and only if $c_X \colon
  H^n_b(X;\mathbb{R}) \longrightarrow H^n(X;\mathbb{R})$ is surjective (recall that
  $\inf \emptyset = \infty$). By construction of bounded cohomology,
  this semi-norm coincides with~$\|\cdot\|_\infty$
  on~$H^n(X;\mathbb{R})$. Hence, property~(2) implies that this functorial
  semi-norm on~$H^n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{R}) \colon C \longrightarrow \Ab$ is
  non-trivial.  Therefore, property~(1) implies that there is an~$X
  \in \Ob(C)$, for which the comparison map~$c_X \colon
  H^n_b(X;\mathbb{R}) \longrightarrow H^n(X;\mathbb{R})$ is \emph{not}
  surjective.

  It would be interesting to know whether such arguments could also be
  successfully applied to continuous bounded cohomology of restrictive
  classes of topological groups.
\end{exa}

\begin{exa}[$KK$-theory of separable $C^*$-algebras]
  Let $B$ be a separable $C^*$-algebra. Then $KK(\;\cdot\;,B) \colon \Cst
  \longrightarrow \Ab$ satisfies the countable additivity condition of
  Corollary~\ref{corffsnlim}~\cite[Theorem~19.7.1]{blackadar}, where
  $\Cst$ denotes the category of separable $C^*$-algebras. Hence,
  $KK(\;\cdot\;,B) \colon \Cst \longrightarrow \Ab$ does \emph{not} admit
  a non-trivial finite homogeneous functorial semi-norm.

\end{exa}

\section{Weak flexibility in singular homology and $\ell^1$-homology}\label{secsingl1}

We will give characterisations of weak flexibility in singular
homology (Section~\ref{subsecwfsing}) and $\ell^1$-homology
(Section~\ref{subsecwfl1}) in terms of $\ell^1$-semi-norms. Moreover,
we will show that flexibility in $\ell^1$-homology is equivalent to
vanishing of classes (Section~\ref{subsecflexl1}).

\subsection{Weak flexibility in singular homology}\label{subsecwfsing}

Weak flexibility in singular homology can be characterised as follows:

\begin{thm}[weak flexibility in singular homology]\label{thmwfsing}
  Let $X$ be a topological space, let $n \in \mathbb{N}$, and let $\alpha \in
  H_n(X;\mathbb{Z})$. Then the following are equivalent:
  \begin{enumerate}
    \item The class~$\alpha$ is weakly flexible with respect
      to~$H_n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{Z})$.
    \item The sequence
      $\bigl(\| d \cdot \alpha \|_{1,\mathbb{Z}} \bigr)_{d\in\mathbb{N}}
      $
      contains a bounded subsequence.
  \end{enumerate}
\end{thm}

For the proof of the theorem we will use that singular homology
classes can be represented essentially in terms of combinatorial types
that describe how faces of singular simplices in a singular chain can
cancel in the singular chain complex:

\begin{defi}[combinatorial types and associated chains]
  \hfil
  \begin{itemize}
  \item
    Let $k, n \in \mathbb{N}$. We then write
    \[ T(k,n) := P\bigl( (\{1,\dots,k\} \times \{0,\dots,n\})^{\times 2}
                  \bigr)
    \]
    for the set of all relations on~$\{1,\dots,k\} \times \{0,\dots,n\}$.
  \item
    For~$t \in T(k,n)$, we define the topological space
    \[ Y_t := \{1,\dots,k\} \times \Delta^n \bigm/ \sim_t,
    \]
    where ``$\sim_t$'' is the equivalence relation generated by
    \begin{align*} (j,x) \sim_t (j',x')
       \Longleftrightarrow
       \exi{y \in \Delta^{n-1}} \exi{\ell,\ell' \in \{0,\dots,n\}}
       & i_\ell(y) = x \\
       \land\; & i_{\ell'}(y) = x'\\
       \land\; & \bigl((j,\ell), (j',\ell')\bigr) \in t.
    \end{align*}
    Here, $i_\ell \colon \Delta^{n-1} \longrightarrow \Delta^n$ denotes
    the inclusion of the $\ell$-th face.
  \item For $t \in T(k,n)$ and $\varepsilon \in \{-1,0,1\}^k$ we consider
    the singular chain
    \[ z_{t,\varepsilon} := \sum_{j=1}^k \varepsilon_j \cdot \tau_j
       \in C_n(Y_t;\mathbb{Z}),
    \]
    where $\tau_j \colon \Delta^n \longrightarrow Y_t$ is the singular
    simplex induced from the inclusion~$\Delta^n \hookrightarrow
    \{1,\dots,k\} \times \Delta^n$ as $j$-th component.
  \end{itemize}
\end{defi}

\begin{lem}[representing singular classes through combinatorial types]\label{lemcombtypes}
  Let $X$ be a topological space, and let $c = \sum_{j=1}^k
  \varepsilon_j \cdot \sigma_j \in C_n(X;\mathbb{Z})$ be a cycle with
  $\varepsilon_1, \dots, \varepsilon_k \in \{-1,0,1\}$. Let
  \begin{align*}
    t:= \bigl\{ ((j,\ell), (j',\ell'))
         \bigm| \;& j, j' \in \{1,\dots,k\},\
                  \ell,\ell'\in \{0,\dots, n\},\\
                & \sigma_j \circ i_\ell = \sigma_{j'} \circ i_{\ell'}
         \bigr\} \in T(k,n),
  \end{align*}
  and let $f_c \colon Y_t \longrightarrow X$ be the continuous map
  induced from the singular simplices~$\sigma_1, \dots, \sigma_k \colon \Delta^n \longrightarrow X$.
  Then $f_c$ is well-defined, $z_{t,\varepsilon} \in C_n(Y_t;\mathbb{Z})$ is a cycle,
  and
  \[ H_n(f_c;\mathbb{Z})[z_{t,\varepsilon}] = [c]
  \]
  holds in~$H_n(X;\mathbb{Z})$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
  All these properties directly follow from the construction.
\end{proof}

The proof of Theorem~\ref{thmwfsing} now is only a matter of counting:

\begin{proof}[Proof (of Theorem~\ref{thmwfsing})]
  Suppose that the class~$\alpha$ is weakly flexible with respect
  to~$H_n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{Z})$, i.e., there is a space~$Y$ and a class~$\beta
  \in H_n(Y;\mathbb{Z})$ such that $D(\beta,\alpha)$ is infinite. Let $d \in
  D(\beta,\alpha)$; then there is a map~$f \colon Y \longrightarrow X$
  with~$H_n(f;\mathbb{Z})(\beta) = d \cdot \alpha$; in particular,
  \[ \bigl\| |d| \cdot \alpha \bigr\|_{1,\mathbb{Z}}
     = \bigl\| H_n(f;\mathbb{Z})(\beta) \bigr\|_{1,\mathbb{Z}}
     \leq \|\beta\|_{1,\mathbb{Z}}.
  \]
  Because $D(\beta,\alpha)$ is infinite, $(\|d \cdot \alpha
  \|_{1,\mathbb{Z}})_{d \in \mathbb{N}}$ thus contains a subsequence that is bounded
  by~$\|\beta\|_{1,\mathbb{Z}}$.

  Conversely, suppose that the sequence $\bigl(\| d \cdot \alpha
  \|_{1,\mathbb{Z}} \bigr)_{d\in\mathbb{N}} $ contains a subsequence,
  say~$\bigl(\| d_m \cdot \alpha \|_{1,\mathbb{Z}} \bigr)_{m\in\mathbb{N}}$, bounded
  by~$k \in \mathbb{N}$. For $m \in \mathbb{N}$ let $c_m \in C_n(X;\mathbb{Z})$ be a cycle
  representing~$d_m \cdot \alpha$ with $\|c_m\|_{1,\mathbb{Z}} \leq k$;
  we may assume that $c_m$ is of the form
  \[ c_m = \sum_{j=1}^k \varepsilon_{m,j} \cdot \sigma_{m,j}
  \]
  with~$\varepsilon_{m,1}, \dots, \varepsilon_{m,k} \in \{-1,0,1\}$.
  Moreover, let $t_m \in T(k,n)$ be the corresponding combinatorial
  type of~$c_m$ as in Lemma~\ref{lemcombtypes}. Because the set
  \[ T(k,n) \times \{-1,0,1\}^k
  \]
  is finite, there is a subsequence of~$(c_m)_{m \in \mathbb{N}}$ of chains that have
  the same combinatorial type~$t \in T(k,n)$ and the same
  coefficients~$\varepsilon \in \{-1,0,1\}^k$. For any index~$m \in \mathbb{N}$
  of this subsequence, we have
  \[ H_n(f_{c_m};\mathbb{Z})[z_{t,\varepsilon}] = H_n(f_{c_m};\mathbb{Z})[z_{t_m,\varepsilon_{m}}]
     = [c_m] = d_m \cdot \alpha,
  \]
  where $f_{c_m} \colon Y_{t_m} = Y_t \longrightarrow X$ is the map
  from Lemma~\ref{lemcombtypes}. Thus,~$D([z_{t,\varepsilon}],\alpha)$
  is infinite, i.e., $\alpha$ is weakly flexible with respect
  to~$H_n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{Z})$.
\end{proof}

\begin{rem}
  The second condition of Theorem~\ref{thmwfsing} is related to the vanishing of
  the $\ell^1$-semi-norm on singular homology with $\mathbb{R}$-coefficients
  as follows: If $X$ is a topological space, then for all~$n\in \mathbb{N}$
  the change of coefficients map~$H_n(X;\mathbb{Q}) \longrightarrow H_n(X;\mathbb{R})$
  is isometric with respect to corresponding
  $\ell^1$-semi-norms~\cite[Lemma~2.9]{mschmidt}. Rearranging denominators hence
  shows that
  \[ \| \alpha_\mathbb{R} \|_1 = \inf_{d \in \mathbb{N}_{>0}} \frac1d \cdot \| d \cdot \alpha\|_{1,\mathbb{Z}}\]
  for all~$\alpha \in H_n(X;\mathbb{Z})$, where $\alpha_\mathbb{R} \in H_n(X;\mathbb{R})$ denotes
  the image of~$\alpha$ under the change of coefficients map.

  This is the first step in a programme that defines and studies
  secondary invariants associated with the $\ell^1$-semi-norm and
  simplicial volume.
\end{rem}

\begin{cor}[weak flexibility in singular homology, manifold case]\label{cor:wfmfd}
  Let $M$ be an oriented closed connected $n$-manifold. Then the
  following are equivalent:
  \begin{enumerate}
    \item There exists an oriented closed connected $n$-manifold~$N$
      such that the set $\bigl\{ \deg f \bigm| f \in \map(N,M)\bigr\}$ of
      mapping degrees is infinite.
    \item The fundamental class~$[M]$ is weakly flexible with respect
      to~$H_n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{Z})$.
    \item The $\mathbb{R}$-fundamental class~$[M]_\mathbb{R}$ is
      weakly flexible with respect to~$H_n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{R})$.
    \item The sequence $\bigl( \| d \cdot [M] \|_{1,\mathbb{Z}}\bigr)_{d \in \mathbb{N}}$ contains
      a bounded subsequence.
    \item All finite homogeneous functorial semi-norms
      on~$H_n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{R})$ are zero on
      $[M]_\mathbb{R}$
  \end{enumerate}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
  By definition of the mapping degree and the universal coefficient
  theorem, the first three conditions are equivalent. In view of
  Theorem~\ref{thmwfsing}, condition~(2) and condition~(4) are
  equivalent. Proposition~\ref{propfund} and explicit
  constructions~\cite[Section~7.1]{crowleyloeh} of functorial
  semi-norms on~$H_n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{R})$ show that condition~(1) and condition~(5) are
  equivalent.

\end{proof}

More specifically, the case of bound~$1$ in
Corollary~\ref{cor:wfmfd}(4) is equivalent to domination by an
odd-dimensional sphere~\cite[Theorem~3.2]{smallisv}.

\begin{rem}[weak flexibility in group homology]
  Gaifullin's construction of aspherical URC
  manifolds~\cite{gaifullinurc} and the fact that $\|\cdot\|_{1,\mathbb{Z}}$
  on integral singular homology of classifying/aspherical spaces
  coincides with~$\|\cdot\|_{1,\mathbb{Z}}$ on integral group homology
  of the corresponding fundamental group (Example~\ref{exal1groups})
  allow to translate Theorem~\ref{thmwfsing} also into the
  corresponding characterisation for weak flexbility with respect
  to~$H_n(\;\cdot\;;\mathbb{Z}) \colon \Group \longrightarrow \Ab$.
\end{rem}

\subsection{Weak flexibility in $\ell^1$-homology}\label{subsecwfl1}

We will now discuss weak flexibility in $\ell^1$-homology of
simplicial sets.  In particular, the following discussions will apply
to $\ell^1$-homology of spaces and groups.

\begin{setup}\label{setupl1}
  Let $C$ be a category, let $S \colon C \longrightarrow \Delta(\Set)$
  be a functor, and $n\in \mathbb{N}_{>0}$. We abbreviate
  \[ H_n^{\ell^1,S} := H_n \circ \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1} \circ S \colon C \longrightarrow \Ab.
  \]
  This functor is equipped with the finite functorial
  $\ell^1$-semi-norm (Example~\ref{exal1simpset}). For simplicity, we
  assume that $C$ contains an object~$\bullet$ and that the
  simplicial set~$S(\bullet)$ corresponds to the simplicial set~$P$
  satisfying~$P(n) = \{\emptyset\}$ for all~$n \in \mathbb{N}$ (i.e., the
  simplicial set corresponding to a one-point space).
\end{setup}

\begin{defi}[replicable, pointable]
  In the situation of Setup~\ref{setupl1}, an object~$X \in \Ob(C)$
  is called
  \begin{itemize}
    \item \emph{replicable} if the coproduct~$\coprod_\mathbb{N} X$ exists in~$C$,
    \item \emph{pointable (with respect to~$S$)} if $\Mor_C(\bullet,X)$
      and $\Mor_C(X,\bullet)$ are non-empty.
  \end{itemize}
\end{defi}

All (non-empty) topological spaces are replicable and pointable (with
respect to the total singular complex functor) in the category of
topological spaces. All groups are replicable and pointable (with
respect to the simplicial classifying space functor) in the category
of groups.

In $\ell^1$-homology, weak flexibility is the universal reason for
vanishing of the $\ell^1$-semi-norm:

\begin{thm}[weak flexibility in $\ell^1$-homology]\label{thmweakflexl1}
  In the situation of Setup~\ref{setupl1}, let $X \in \Ob(C)$ be an
  object that is replicable and pointable, and let $\alpha \in
  H_n^{\ell^1,S}(X)$.  Then the following are equivalent:
  \begin{enumerate}
    \item The class $\alpha$ is weakly flexible with respect
      to~$H_n^{\ell^1,S}$.
    \item All finite homogeneous functorial semi-norms on~$H_n^{\ell^1,S}$ are
      zero on~$\alpha$.
    \item We have~$\|\alpha\|_1 = 0$.
  \end{enumerate}
\end{thm}

\begin{proof
  The first condition implies the second one by Proposition~\ref{propfund}.
  Clearly, the second condition implies the third.

  For the remaining implication, suppose that $\|\alpha\|_1 = 0$. We show that
  $\alpha$ is weakly flexible with respect to~$H_n^{\ell^1,S}$:
  Because $X$ is pointable there exist morphisms~$i \in \Mor_C(\bullet,X)$
  and $q \in \Mor_C(X,\bullet)$. Let
  \[ p := i \circ q \in \Mor_C(X,X).
  \]
  This morphism allows us to neglect certain $\ell^1$-chains:
  Using that $n \in \mathbb{N}_{>0}$, that $p$ factors over~$\bullet$ and
  spelling out~$\Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(S(\bullet)) = \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(P)$ explicitly
  yields:
  \begin{itemize}
    \item[($*$)]
    For any cycle~$c \in \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(S(X))$
    there is a chain~$b \in \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(S(X))$ satisfying
    \[ \partial_{n+1} b = \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(S(p))(c)
    \quad\text{and}\quad
    \| b \|_1 \leq \|c\|_1.
    \]
  \end{itemize}

  We now construct a suitable $\ell^1$-homology class on~$Y :=
  \coprod_\mathbb{N} X$: For~$k \in \mathbb{N}$ let $i_k \in \Mor_C\bigl(X,
  \coprod_\mathbb{N} X\bigr)$ be the structure map of the $k$-th summand. Using the
  universal property of the coproduct, for every~$m\in \mathbb{N}$ we obtain a
  morphism~$p_m \in \Mor_C(Y,X)$ satisfying for all~$k \in \mathbb{N}$:
  \[
     p_m \circ i_k =
     \begin{cases}
       \id_X & \text{if $k = m$}\\
       p     & \text{if $k \neq m$}.
     \end{cases}
  \]
  Because of $\|\alpha\|_1 = 0$, for every~$k \in \mathbb{N}$
  there is a cycle~$c_k \in \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1} \circ S(X)$ representing~$\alpha$
  with
  \[ \|c_k\|_1 \leq \frac 1{2^k}.
  \]
  Hence,
  \[ c := \sum_{k \in \mathbb{N}} k \cdot \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}\bigl(S (i_k)\bigr) (c_k)
  \]
  is a well-defined $\ell^1$-chain in~$\Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(S(Y))$, which is a cycle.
  We consider the corresponding class~$\beta := [c] \in H_n^{\ell^1,S}$.

  The morphisms~$(p_k)_{k \in \mathbb{N}}$ witness that~$D(\beta, \alpha)$ is infinite:
  Because of property~($*$), for every~$k \in \mathbb{N}$ there is a chain~$b_k \in \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(S(X))$ with
  \[ \partial_{n+1} b_k = \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(S(p))(c_k)
    \quad\text{and}\quad
    \| b_k \|_1 \leq \|c_k\|_1 \leq \frac 1{2^k}.
  \]
  Therefore, for all~$m \in \mathbb{N}$ we have in~$H_n^{\ell^1,S}(X)$:
  \begin{align*}
    H_n^{\ell^1,S}(p_m) (\beta)
    & = \biggl[ \sum_{k \in \mathbb{N}} k \cdot \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}\bigl(S(p_m \circ i_k)\bigr)(c_k)
        \biggr]
    \\
    & = [ m \cdot c_m]
      + \biggl[\sum_{k \in \mathbb{N} \setminus \{m\}} k \cdot \partial_{n+1} b_k
        \biggr]
    \\
    & = m \cdot [c_m] + 0
    \\
    & = m \cdot \alpha.
  \end{align*}
  In the third step, we used that $\sum_{k \in \mathbb{N} \setminus \{m\}} k
  \cdot \partial_{n+1} b_k$ is indeed an $\ell^1$-chain and that
  $\sum_{k \in \mathbb{N} \setminus \{m\}} k
  \cdot \partial_{n+1} b_k = \partial_{n+1}\bigl(\sum_{k \in \mathbb{N} \setminus\{m\}} k \cdot b_k \bigr)$.

  Hence, $\alpha$ is weakly flexible with respect to~$H_n^{\ell^1,S}$.
\end{proof}

Moreover, using the same type of arguments, we also obtain that the $\ell^1$-semi-norm
is the ``maximal'' functorial semi-norm on $\ell^1$-homology:

\begin{prop}[finite functorial semi-norms on $\ell^1$-homology]
  In the situation of Setup~\ref{setupl1}, suppose that all countable
  coproducts exist in~$C$ and that all objects in~$C$ are pointable.
  Then any finite homogeneous functorial semi-norm on~$H_n^{\ell^1,S}$
  is dominated by a multiple of the $\ell^1$-semi-norm.
\end{prop}

\begin{proof}
  Let $|\cdot|$ be a finite homogeneous functorial semi-norm on~$H_n^{\ell^1,S}$.
  \emph{Assume} for a contradiction that $|\cdot|$ is \emph{not}
  dominated by a multiple of the $\ell^1$-semi-norm. That is, for every~$k \in \mathbb{N}$
  there exists an object~$X_k \in \Ob(C)$ and a class~$\alpha_k \in H_n^{\ell^1,S}(X_k)$ satisfying
  \[ |\alpha_k| > k \cdot 2^k \cdot \|\alpha_k\|_1.
  \]
  By Theorem~\ref{thmweakflexl1}, $\|\alpha_k\|_1 \neq 0$; moreover,
  because $|\cdot|$ and $\|\cdot\|_1$ are homogeneous, we can renormalise
  these classes in such a way that we may assume in addition that
  \[ \frac 12 \leq \|\alpha_k\|_1 \leq 1
  \]
  for all~$k \in \mathbb{N}$. In particular, for every~$k \in \mathbb{N}$ there is
  a cycle~$c_k \in \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(S(X_k))$ representing~$\alpha_k$
  with~$\|c_k\|_1 \leq 2$.

  Let $X := \coprod_{k \in \mathbb{N}} X_k$ and let $i_k \in \Mor_C(X_k,X)$ be the
  structure map of the $k$-th summand. Furthermore, let $q_k \in \Mor_C(X_k,\bullet)$
  and $j_k \in \Mor_C(\bullet,X_k)$. Using the universal property of the coproduct,
  for every~$m\in \mathbb{N}$ we obtain a morphism~$p_m \in \Mor_C(X,X_m)$ satisfying for
  all~$k \in \mathbb{N}$:
  \[ p_m \circ i_k =
    \begin{cases}
      \id_{X_m} & \text{if $k = m$}\\
      j_m \circ q_k & \text{if $k \neq m$}.
    \end{cases}
  \]
  Then
  \[ \beta := \biggl[ \sum_{k \in \mathbb{N}} \frac 1{2^k} \cdot \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}\bigl(S(i_k)\bigr)(c_k)
              \biggr]
     \in H_n^{\ell^1,S}(X)
  \]
  is a well-defined $\ell^1$-homology class and the same argument as in the proof
  of Theorem~\ref{thmweakflexl1} shows that
  \[ H_n^{\ell^1,S}(p_m)(\beta) = \frac 1{2^m} \cdot \alpha_m
  \]
  for all~$m \in \mathbb{N}$. Therefore, for all~$m\in \mathbb{N}$ we obtain
  \begin{align*}
    |\beta| & \geq \bigl| H_n^{\ell^1,S}(p_m)(\beta) \bigr|
              = \frac1{2^m} \cdot |\alpha_m|
              > m \cdot \|\alpha_m\|_1
              \geq \frac 12 \cdot m
  \end{align*}
  which contradicts~$|\cdot|$ being finite.
\end{proof}

The corresponding statement for singular homology is \emph{not} true:
it is possible to ``distort'' the $\ell^1$-semi-norm in such a way
that the resulting functorial semi-norm is finite, but \emph{not}
dominated by a multiple of the $\ell^1$-semi-norm~\cite[proof of
  Theorem~5.7]{crowleyloeh}.

Moreover, for the sake of completeness, we also mention the following,
qualitative, version of Lemma~\ref{lemcombtypes} for $\ell^1$-homology
of spaces:

\begin{lem}[countable geometric support of $\ell^1$-homology classes]
  Let $X$ be a topological space, let $n \in \mathbb{N}$, and let $\alpha \in
  H^{\ell^1}_n(X;\mathbb{R})$. Then there exists a countable simplicial
  complex~$K$, a class~$\beta \in H^{\ell^1}_n(|K|;\mathbb{R})$ and a continuous
  map~$f \colon |K| \longrightarrow X$ with
  \[ H^{\ell^1}_n (f;\mathbb{R})(\beta) = \alpha
     \quad\text{and}
     \quad
     \|\beta\|_1 = \|\alpha\|_1.
  \]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
  We give a direct, geometric proof: Let $(c_k)_{k \in \mathbb{N}} \in C^{\ell^1}_n(X;\mathbb{R})$
  be a sequence of cycles representing~$\alpha$ in~$H^{\ell^1}_n(X;\mathbb{R})$ with
  \[ \|\alpha\|_1 = \inf_{k \in \mathbb{N}} \|c_k\|_1,
  \]
  and let $(b_k)_{k \in \mathbb{N}} \in C_{n+1}^{\ell^1}(X;\mathbb{R})$ satisfying
  \begin{align}\label{bdyeq}
    \partial_{n+1} b_k = c_0 - c_k;
  \end{align}
  for these chains~$(c_k)_{k \in \mathbb{N}}$ and $(b_k)_{k \in \mathbb{N}}$, in total
  only a countable set of singular simplices of dimension~$k$ or~$k+1$
  is needed.  Similarly to Lemma~\ref{lemcombtypes} and the discussion
  preceding that lemma, we can construct a topological space~$Y$ by
  gluing a countable set of copies of~$\Delta^n$ and~$\Delta^{n+1}$
  according to the combinatorics of the relations between the
  respective faces given by the fact that the~$(c_k)_{k \in \mathbb{N}}$ are
  cycles and by Equation~\eqref{bdyeq}; moreover, using the simplices
  in~$Y$ and the same coefficients as in the original chains on~$X$,
  we obtain corresponding chains~$(\overline c_k)_{k \in \mathbb{N}} \subset
  C_k^{\ell^1}(Y;\mathbb{R})$, and $(\overline b_k)_{k \in \mathbb{N}} \subset
  C_{k+1}^{\ell^1}(Y;\mathbb{R})$, as well as a continuous map~$f \colon Y
  \longrightarrow X$ (constructed out of the singular simplices of the
  original chains) satisfying
  \begin{align*}
    \|\overline c_k\|_1 & = \|c_k\|_1, \\
    \partial_{n} \overline c_k & = 0,\\
    \partial_{n+1} \overline b_k & = \overline c_0 - \overline c_k,\\
    C^{\ell^1}_n(f) (\overline c_0) &= c_0.
  \end{align*}
  Hence, $\beta \in H_n(Y;\mathbb{R})$ satisfies~$H^{\ell^1}_n(f;\mathbb{R})(\beta) = \alpha$.
  Functoriality of the $\ell^1$-se\-mi-norm and the above relations between
  the constructed cycles on~$Y$ show that $\|\beta\|_1 = \|\alpha\|_1$.

  The double barycentric subdivision of the simplices
  involved in the construction of~$Y$ yields a countable
  simplicial complex~$K$ with~$|K| \cong Y$.
\end{proof}

Already in degree~$0$ one can see that not every $\ell^1$-homology
class of any topological space can be isometrically represented by
an $\ell^1$-homology class of a finite simplicial complex.

\subsection{Flexibility in $\ell^1$-homology}\label{subsecflexl1}

On the other hand, in $\ell^1$-homology, flexibility of a class is the
same as being trivial; clearly, this behaviour is very
different from ordinary homology.

\begin{thm}[flexibility in $\ell^1$-homology]
  In the situation of Setup~\ref{setupl1}, let $X \in \Ob(C)$, and let
  $\alpha \in H_n^{\ell^1,S}(X)$.  Then the following are equivalent:
  \begin{enumerate}
    \item The class~$\alpha$ is flexible with respect to~$H_n^{\ell^1,S}$.
    \item The class~$\alpha$ is dominated by a class that is flexible
      with respect to~$H_n^{\ell^1,S}$, i.e., there is
      an object~$Y \in \Ob(C)$, a flexible class~$\beta \in H_n^{\ell^1,S}(Y)$,
      and a morphism~$f \in \Mor_C(Y,X)$ with $H_n^{\ell^1,S}(f) (\beta) = \alpha$.
    \item We have $\alpha = 0 \in H_n^{\ell^1,S}(X)$.
  \end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
  Clearly, the third condition implies the first, and the first
  condition implies the second.

  Suppose that the second condition holds, i.e., there is $Y
  \in \Ob(C)$, a flexible class~$\beta \in H_n^{\ell^1,S}(Y)$, and
  $f \in \Mor_C(Y,X)$ with $H_n^{\ell^1,S}(f) (\beta) =
  \alpha$. By functoriality, it suffices to show that $\beta = 0 \in
  H_n^{\ell^1, S}(Y)$.

  Because $\beta$ is flexible with respect to~$H_n^{\ell^1,S}$ there is
  a $d\in \mathbb{Z}$ with $|d| \geq 2$ and an endomorphism~$g \in \Mor_C(Y,Y)$ satisfying
  \[ H_n^{\ell^1,S}(g)(\beta) = d \cdot \beta.
  \]
  Let $c \in \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(S(Y))$ be a cycle
  representing the class~$\beta$. Hence, there is a chain~$b \in
  \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(S(Y))$ with
  \[ \partial_{n+1} (b) = c - \frac1d \cdot \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}\bigl(S(g)\bigr)(c).
  \]
  Then the ``geometric series''
  \[ b' := \sum_{k \in \mathbb{N}} \frac1{d^k} \cdot \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}\bigl(S(g^{\circ k})\bigr)(b)
  \]
  is an $\ell^1$-chain. Rearranging absolutely convergent series together with
  functoriality of~$\Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1} \circ S$ shows that
  \begin{align*}
    \partial_{n+1} b' & = \sum_{k \in \mathbb{N}} \frac 1{d^k} \cdot \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}\bigl(S(g^{\circ k})\bigr)(c)
                  - \sum_{k \in \mathbb{N}} \frac 1{d^{k+1}} \cdot \Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}\bigl(S(g^{\circ {k+1}})\bigr)(c)

                 = c
  \end{align*}
  holds in~$\Ch_\mathbb{R}^{\ell^1}(S(Y))$.
  Therefore,~$\beta = [c] = [\partial_{n+1} b'] = 0$ in~$H^{\ell^1,S}_n(Y)$.
\end{proof}

So, in $\ell^1$-homology, the difference between trivial
$\ell^1$-semi-norm and vanishing of the class corresponds to the
difference between weak flexibility and flexibility. It is an open
problem to determine whether for any topological space~$X$, any~$n \in
\mathbb{N}$ and any~$\alpha \in H_n(X;\mathbb{R})$ with~$\|\alpha\|_1 = 0$ the image
of~$\alpha$ in~$H_n^{\ell^1}(X;\mathbb{R})$ under the comparison map between
singular and $\ell^1$-homology can be non-trivial. This problem plays a
role in the context of simplicial volume of non-compact
manifolds~\cite[Theorem~6.4]{loehl1}.