1. Introduction

Transseries are a generalisation of formal power series that provide a framework for asymptotic analysis of certain classes of non-oscillating germs, one notable example being first return maps in Hilbert’s sixteenth problem. There are a few different flavours in the literature, such as LE-series and grid-based series (an incomplete list is [9, 12, 14, 15]), but for the most generality we will work with omega-series from [8], which are a little easier to define, and contain isomorphic copies of most other flavours.

Call field of transseries 𝕋\mathbb{T} a subfield of some (restricted) Hahn field

𝕋=((𝔐))𝐎𝐧={i<αri𝔪i:α ordinal,ri0,𝔪i𝔐withi<j𝔪i>𝔪j},\mathbb{T}=\mathbb{R}(\!(\mathfrak{M})\!)_{\mathbf{On}}=\left\{\sum_{i<\alpha}% r_{i}\mathfrak{m}_{i}:\alpha\text{ ordinal},r_{i}\in\mathbb{R}^{\neq 0},% \mathfrak{m}_{i}\in\mathfrak{M}\ \text{with}\ i<j\to\mathfrak{m}_{i}>\mathfrak% {m}_{j}\right\},

where the monomials 𝔐\mathfrak{M} form an ordered abelian group equipped with an isomorphism log:(𝔐,)𝕁𝔐(((𝔐>1))𝐎𝐧,+)\log:(\mathfrak{M},\cdot)\simeq\mathbb{J}_{\mathfrak{M}}\coloneqq(\mathbb{R}(% \!(\mathfrak{M}^{>1})\!)_{\mathbf{On}},+) satisfying log(𝔪)n<𝔪{\log(\mathfrak{m})}^{n}<\mathfrak{m} for every nn\in\mathbb{N} (we call its inverse exp\exp and abbreviate eγ=exp(γ)e^{\gamma}=\exp(\gamma)). We warn the reader that such 𝔐\mathfrak{M} must be a proper class; to avoid this issue, one can require, for instance, that the above ordinals α\alpha are countable. Plenty such fields exist, one notable example being Conway’s field of surreal numbers 𝐍𝐨\mathbf{No}.

Now suppose that 𝔐\mathfrak{M} contains a log-atomic element T𝔐>1T\in\mathfrak{M}^{>1}, namely such that logn(T)𝔐\log^{\circ n}(T)\in\mathfrak{M} for all nn\in\mathbb{N}, where logn\log^{\circ n} is the nn-fold composition of log\log. Then the field T\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle of omega-series in TT is the smallest subclass of 𝕋\mathbb{T} that contains \mathbb{R}, TT and is closed under taking exp\exp, log\log, and sums like i<αri𝔪i\sum_{i<\alpha}r_{i}\mathfrak{m}_{i}. T\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle is automatically of the form ((𝔒))𝐎𝐧\mathbb{R}(\!(\mathfrak{O})\!)_{\mathbf{On}} for some subgroup 𝔒𝔐\mathfrak{O}\leq\mathfrak{M}. The choice of TT and of ambient 𝕋\mathbb{T} is irrelevant: all fields of omega-series are isomorphic to each other as fields of transseries.

By construction, T\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle contains, for instance, any formal Laurent series in T1T^{-1}, such as T+1+T1+T2+T+1+T^{-1}+T^{-2}+\ldots, but also series containing exponential terms, such as the asymptotic expansion of the Γ\Gamma function at ++\infty:

2πeTlog(T)T12log(T)(1+112T+1288T2+).\sqrt{2\pi}e^{T\log(T)-T-\frac{1}{2}\log(T)}\left(1+\frac{1}{12T}+\frac{1}{288% T^{2}}+\cdots\right).

By inspecting the constructions in the literature, one can easily verify that T\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle also contains (unique) copies of grid-based transseries ([12, 13]), of LE\mathrm{LE}-series ([9, 10]), and even EL\mathrm{EL}-series ([14]). One cannot forget mentioning that LE\mathrm{LE}-series and grid-based transseries have been subject of intense model theory investigations and, as differential ordered valued fields, they are model complete and have the same theory as any maximal Hardy field [1, 2].

Note that log\log can be extended naturally to a global function on the positive transseries: given f𝕋>0f\in\mathbb{T}^{>0}, it can we written uniquely as f=r𝔪(1+ε)f=r\mathfrak{m}(1+\varepsilon), where r𝔪r\mathfrak{m} is the leading term of ff, with r>0r\in\mathbb{R}^{>0} and 𝔪𝔐\mathfrak{m}\in\mathfrak{M}, and |ε|<>0|\varepsilon|<\mathbb{R}^{>0}, and we can define

log(f)=log(r𝔪(1+ε))=log(𝔪)+log(r)+n=1(1)n+1εnn\log(f)=\log(r\mathfrak{m}(1+\varepsilon))=\log(\mathfrak{m})+\log(r)+\sum_{n=% 1}^{\infty}{(-1)}^{n+1}\frac{\varepsilon^{n}}{n}

where log(r)\log(r) is standard real logarithm, and the infinite sum is always well defined, although we gloss over the details of what that means. Its inverse exp\exp has a similar global extension given by a Taylor series. Since T\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle is closed under infinite sums, it is also closed under global exp\exp and log\log.

Just like traditional power series can be differentiated and composed, the same is true for omega-series. There is a unique derivation fff\mapsto f^{\prime} on T\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle ([15, 7]) satisfying T=1T^{\prime}=1, (eγ)=eγγ(e^{\gamma})^{\prime}=e^{\gamma}\gamma^{\prime} for any γ𝕁\gamma\in\mathbb{J}, and which is strongly \mathbb{R}-linear, namely

(i<αri𝔪i)=i<αri𝔪i.{\left(\sum_{i<\alpha}r_{i}\mathfrak{m}_{i}\right)}^{\prime}=\sum_{i<\alpha}r_% {i}\mathfrak{m}_{i}^{\prime}.

Likewise, given gTg\in\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle with g>g>\mathbb{R}, there is a unique right composition map ffgf\mapsto f\circ g satisfying Tg=gT\circ g=g, eγg=eγge^{\gamma}\circ g=e^{\gamma\circ g} for γ𝕁\gamma\in\mathbb{J}, and which is strongly \mathbb{R}-linear

(i<αri𝔪i)g=i<αri(𝔪ig).{\left(\sum_{i<\alpha}r_{i}\mathfrak{m}_{i}\right)}\circ g=\sum_{i<\alpha}r_{i% }(\mathfrak{m}_{i}\circ g).

More generally, let 𝕌=((𝔑))𝐎𝐧\mathbb{U}=\mathbb{R}(\!(\mathfrak{N})\!)_{\mathbf{On}} be a confluent field of transseries, namely such that for every x𝕌>x\in\mathbb{U}^{>\mathbb{R}} there is nn\in\mathbb{N} such that the leading term of logn(x)\log^{\circ n}(x) is log-atomic (this holds in T\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle, as by construction, logn(x)\log^{\circ n}(x) has leading monomial of the form logk(T)\log^{\circ k}(T) for nn sufficiently large). Note that 𝕌\mathbb{U} may be a new field, different from 𝕋\mathbb{T}, although it will also contain copies of T\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle obtained by replacing TT with log-atomic monomials of 𝕌\mathbb{U}. Then for every x𝕌>x\in\mathbb{U}^{>\mathbb{R}} there is a unique map ffxf\mapsto f\circ x satisfying the above properties with xx in place of gg (while the uniqueness is obvious, the existence is technically challenging, see [15, 8]; while [8] is stated for 𝐍𝐨\mathbf{No}, and seemingly using the assumption ‘T4’, the proof therein only uses confluence). Surreal numbers are an example of confluent field ([7]).

Finally, we remark that composition and derivation are compatible with global exp\exp, namely exp(f)=exp(f)f\exp(f)^{\prime}=\exp(f)f^{\prime} and exp(f)g=exp(fg)\exp(f)\circ g=\exp(f\circ g) for any fTf\in\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle, and also with each other, in the sense of the chain rule: for any f,gTf,g\in\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle with g>g>\mathbb{R} we have (fg)=(fg)g(f\circ g)^{\prime}=(f^{\prime}\circ g)g^{\prime}. Moreover, composition is compatible ‘with itself’ in the sense that it is associative: (fg)x=f(gx)(f\circ g)\circ x=f\circ(g\circ x) for any fTf\in\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle, gT>g\in\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle^{>\mathbb{R}}, x𝕌>x\in\mathbb{U}^{>\mathbb{R}}.

It is immediate from the definition that right composition by some x𝕌>x\in\mathbb{U}^{>\mathbb{R}} must be an ordered field embedding: by construction, the map ffxf\mapsto f\circ x preserves (infinite) sums, scalar multiplication by \mathbb{R}, exp\exp, log\log, and it quickly follows that it preserves multiplication and ordering.

However, the properties of left composition by some fTf\in\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle, namely of the map xfxx\mapsto f\circ x, have not been explored as much. Since transseries have been introduced to provide asymptotic expansions of real functions, we expect these maps to share at least the most basic properties. For instance, we expect the map to be strictly increasing exactly when f>0f^{\prime}>0. To the best of my knowledge, this only appears in a rarely cited preprint of Edgar [11, Prop. 4.9], for LE\mathrm{LE}-series only, under the heading ‘Simpler proof needed’, and with an ‘overly-involved proof’.

Addressing Edgar’s need, this note gives a short, self-contained proof of monotonicity for general omega-series. We also spell out a small set of inductive assumptions, so that the method can be reapplied more easily to fields larger than T\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle, in particular with an eye to the hyperseries of [3], which generalise transseries by adding transexponential functions. From now on, let 𝕌\mathbb{U} be a fixed confluent field of transseries, for instance 𝕌=𝐍𝐨\mathbb{U}=\mathbf{No}, or more generally a field of transseries equipped with a left composition by omega-series that preserves infinite sums, scalar multiplication by \mathbb{R}, exp\exp, and log\log.

Theorem A (Monotonicity).

For all fTf\in\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle, the function xfxx\mapsto f\circ x for x𝕌>x\in\mathbb{U}^{>\mathbb{R}} is strictly increasing if f>0f^{\prime}>0, strictly decreasing if f<0f^{\prime}<0, and constant if f=0f^{\prime}=0.

Since T\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle is generated from TT, a naive proof by induction would be as follows: the conclusion is true for the base case f=Tf=T, f=log(T)f=\log(T), …; if f=i<αrieγif=\sum_{i<\alpha}r_{i}e^{\gamma_{i}}, we are free to assume the conclusion for each map xγixx\mapsto\gamma_{i}\circ x, and we would like to deduce that xfxx\mapsto f\circ x is also monotonic. This works very well for f𝕁𝔒>0f\in\mathbb{J}_{\mathfrak{O}}^{>0}, and we do so in Proposition 3.1, but the inductive assumption falls short for the general case. We also need the following very weak form of mean value property: given γ𝕁𝔒>0\gamma\in\mathbb{J}_{\mathfrak{O}}^{>0} and x,y𝕌x,y\in\mathbb{U} with x>y>x>y>\mathbb{R}, we have

γxγyxyγyat least whenγxγy1 or (γy)(xy)1,\frac{\gamma\circ x-\gamma\circ y}{x-y}\preceq\gamma^{\prime}\circ y\quad\text% {at least when}\quad\gamma\circ x-\gamma\circ y\preceq 1\text{ or }(\gamma^{% \prime}\circ y)(x-y)\prec 1,

where aba\preceq b means |a|n|b||a|\leq n|b| for some nn\in\mathbb{N} and aba\prec b means n|a|<|b|n|a|<|b| for all nn\in\mathbb{N}. The condition is almost trivial to verify in the base case of TT, log(T)\log(T), \ldots, as the associated functions xlogn(x)x\mapsto\log^{\circ n}(x) are all strictly increasing and concave. The rest of the induction is then relatively straightforward (see Lemma 4.1), and it leads to a fairly short proof of Theorem A.

Since omega-series admit compositional inverses by [6], namely for every fT>f\in\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle^{>\mathbb{R}} there is a (unique) finvT>f^{\operatorname{inv}}\in\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle^{>% \mathbb{R}} such that ffinv=finvf=Tf\circ f^{\operatorname{inv}}=f^{\operatorname{inv}}\circ f=T, we can immediately deduce the following.

Corollary B.

For all fTf\in\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle, the function xfxx\mapsto f\circ x for x𝕌>x\in\mathbb{U}^{>\mathbb{R}} has the intermediate value property: if fxwfyf\circ x\leq w\leq f\circ y, there is z𝕌z\in\mathbb{U} between xx and yy such that fz=wf\circ z=w.

LE\mathrm{LE}-series are closed under composition and admit compositional inverses within LE\mathrm{LE} ([10]), thus the intermediate value property applies even for xfxx\mapsto f\circ x seen as a function from LE>\mathrm{LE}^{>\mathbb{R}} to LE\mathrm{LE}.

Given Theorem A, it also becomes relatively easy to prove the following form of Taylor’s theorem. We write aba\asymp b to mean aba\preceq b and bab\preceq a, and O(b)O(b) to represent an unspecified element of the set {a:ab}\{a:a\preceq b\}.

Theorem C (Taylor approximation for T\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle).

Let fTf\in\mathbb{R}\langle\!\langle T\rangle\!\rangle be non-zero with fTkf\not\asymp T^{k} for all kk\in\mathbb{N}, and let x,δ𝕌x,\delta\in\mathbb{U} with x>x>\mathbb{R}, x+δ>x+\delta>\mathbb{R}, x+δxx+\delta\asymp x, and fxfxδ1\frac{f^{\prime}\circ x}{f\circ x}\delta\preceq 1. Then for all n0n\geq 0,

f(x+δ)=i=0n1f(i)xi!δi+O((f(n)x)δn).f\circ(x+\delta)=\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}\frac{f^{(i)}\circ x}{i!}\delta^{i}+O\left((f% ^{(n)}\circ x)\delta^{n}\right).

The restriction fTkf\not\asymp T^{k} is a mere technicality: since the derivatives of TkT^{k} vanish after k+1k+1 steps, one must look at f(k+1)f^{(k+1)} to determine the radius of validity of the approximation, which results in a slightly more complicated but functionally equivalent statement (see Corollary 5.6).

Other versions of the Taylor theorem exist in the literature, but they focus on the equality f(x+δ)=i=0f(i)xi!δif\circ(x+\delta)=\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\frac{f^{(i)}\circ x}{i!}\delta^{i}, which in general holds for a much smaller class of δ\delta’s (see for example [10, §6][8, Prop. 7.13]). What is notable here is that the Taylor approximation is valid for the essentially largest possible meaningful class of δ\delta’s. Indeed, when δ\delta is small as required by Theorem C, the sequence (f(n)x)δn(f^{(n)}\circ x)\delta^{n} is weakly decreasing for \prec, and even strictly decreasing if we require δx\delta\prec x and (fx)δ1(f^{\dagger}\circ x)\delta\prec 1, whereas it is strictly increasing if δx\delta\succ x or (fx)δx(f^{\dagger}\circ x)\delta\succ x, making the error terms larger rather than smaller (see Corollary 5.3). The conclusion may hold or fail in the remaining case x+δxx+\delta\prec x depending on ff (Remark 5.5). In separate work with Bagayoko [5], we tackle the equality f(x+δ)=i=0f(i)xi!δif\circ(x+\delta)=\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\frac{f^{(i)}\circ x}{i!}\delta^{i} for omega-series, and show it holds under δx\delta\prec x and the strict inequality (𝔪x)δ1(\mathfrak{m}^{\dagger}\circ x)\delta\prec 1 with respect to every monomial 𝔪\mathfrak{m} appearing in ff, rather than just ff, expanding and generalising the numerous existing variants of the same result.

Several questions remain open. Notably, while we have seen that omega-series and LE\mathrm{LE}-series, when interpreted as functions, have the intermediate value property, we are not claiming that they have the mean value property: given zz such that fz=fxfyxyf^{\prime}\circ z=\frac{f\circ x-f\circ y}{x-y}, Theorem A does not seem to imply directly that zz is between xx and yy. This is related to whether f′′0f^{\prime\prime}\geq 0 implies that the function xfxx\mapsto f\circ x is convex, namely that fyfxfyxyf^{\prime}\circ y\leq\frac{f\circ x-f\circ y}{x-y} for x>yx>y, and it may require a new argument.

Going beyond omega-series, it would be interesting to know if composition of elements in hyperserial fields by hyperseries ([3]) is also monotonic as in Theorem A, and deduce the corresponding generalisation of Theorem C.

In this context, the first question is whether the weak mean value property used in the proof holds for the basic hyperlogarithmic monomials ‘α\ell_{\alpha}’, which represent, in a suitable sense, the ‘α\alpha-th iterates of log\log’. While the condition is satisfied locally, by the local Taylor expansion of the transfinite iterates of log\log, it does not seem obvious at a first glance that it has to hold globally. For the usual log\log, there is no issue because of the functional equation log(xy)=log(x)+log(y)\log(xy)=\log(x)+\log(y), but from ω\ell_{\omega} onwards functions are less well behaved. In principle, this may require additional restrictions on the growth properties in the definition of hyperserial fields, and one should check if they are already satisfied in the surreal model of [4].

A similar, and potentially equivalent consideration emerges from Proposition 3.1 (monotonicity for γ𝕁>0\gamma\in\mathbb{J}^{>0}): its proof relies on the fact that for x>y>x>y>\mathbb{R} and z>w>z>w>\mathbb{R}, if y>wy>w and xy>zwx-y>z-w, then exp(x)exp(y)>exp(z)exp(w)>1\frac{\exp(x)}{\exp(y)}>\frac{\exp(z)}{\exp(w)}>1. Once again, this property seems easy to verify locally for transfinite iterations of exp\exp, but it is less clear whether it can be extended globally, due to the lack of a functional equation like exp(x+y)=exp(x)exp(y)\exp(x+y)=\exp(x)\exp(y).

Acknowledgements

I thank Dino Peran, Jean-Philippe Rolin, and Tamara Servi for inviting me to work on normal forms. Theorem C was formulated only after it became clear it was the right statement to handle normal forms of omega-series. I also thank Vincent Bagayoko for the numerous helpful discussions on transseries and hyperseries, and for this note in particular, for helping me clarify that the bounds in Theorem C are sharp (see Lemma 5.2). I also thank an anonymous referee for the careful reading, which led to the removal of redundant assumptions in Theorem A and Corollary B. Part of this research was carried out while the author was at the IHP trimester ‘Model theory, combinatorics and valued fields’ in 2018 with support from the Fondation Sciences Mathématiques de Paris-FSMP. The author was also supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council grant EP/T018461/1.