ested ai,2 u hmn,721Prs France. Paris, 75231 Lhomond, rue 24 Paris, versit´e de 1 taysaeo h P qaino nitra n Liouville and interval Barraquand an Guillaume on equation KPZ mechanics the quantum of state Steady hl h lblhih rw ieryi iewt non with time in linearly grows height trivial global the While conditions). boundary with uni- (full-line, segment still considered is space circle, but the point half-line, dynamics of fixed geometry microscopic the KPZ the on the depends to that respect Note with versal KPZ 6]. [5, the called point the process fixed universal in are a equation) models to KPZ converge all the to and expected limit, ASEP scale particular asymmetry, (in large the class weak the to KPZ of time In the and limit to equation. space rescaling the KPZ analog upon discrete In [4], a converges ASEP is 3]. [2, density gradient local (ASEP) height the process lattice, models exclusion a transport simple on particle asymmetric in the example, as define For such can one field. models these height all a For universal scale. same large a the at contains behavior sharing which class models it KPZ well-studied dimension so-called of one the number of In contin- center the a noise. at white of is by growth driven stochastic interface the uum describes [1] equation tde n[41] h rcse bandteea limit a was as interval there obtained an processes on The ASEP [14,15]. for in limit measures studied scale interval large stationary an The the on [13]. of ansatz obtained product were matrix the formulas half-line using and exact ASEP, full and For the 12] 9], on [11, [4, conditions. studied boundary in were measures rigorously periodic stationary proved for as was [10] motion in It Brownian and the measure. admits KPZ stationary line the a full that the [1,7,8] on ago long equation noticed stationary was a It reach will distribution. points, two any between differences arXiv:2105.15178v4 [math-ph] 9 Sep 2021 aoaor ePyiu el’ de Physique de Laboratoire nipratqeto stentr ftesed state. steady the of nature the is question important An nrdcin – Introduction. t 1 / P qain P xdpito afln,a ela h Edw the as well as half-line, a on point interval. fixed KPZ limits: various equation, in KPZ measure achieved stationary is the qua determine This Liouville easily with together size. (arXiv:2103.12253) interval Knizel any and and conditions boundary codn oteKra-aiiZageuto nteinter the on equation Kardar-Parisi-Zhang the to according Abstract 3 utain,tehih rdet rteheight the or gradient, height the fluctuations, W banasml oml o h ttoaymaueo the of measure stationary the for formula simple a obtain –We h adrPrs-hn (KPZ) Kardar-Parisi-Zhang The 1 and cl oml u´rer,ES NS nvri´ S,Sor Universit´e PSL, CNRS, Sup´erieure, ENS, Normale Ecole ´ ireL Doussal Le Pierre 1 p-1 qaino h nevl[0 interval the on equation exist. for also measures was equation it stationary KPZ [11], complicated the half-line more a that on ASEP analysis expected of the measures on based stationary polymer However, the of measures wall. directed the parameter equivalent of boundary attractiveness the the which for measure for [17] problem the stationary in to specific studied proportional This was be must appropriate parameter). drift an be boundary (the with can stationary motion it is Brownian drift condition, a that half- boundary the [16] type on shown Neumann equation KPZ with the the stochastic line For at complicated below). field more (see involve processes height bound- and the on parameters depend of measures ary derivative stationary that the so fix boundary) we is, conditions interval. (that boundary the type and Neumann half-line imposes the typically the of invariant,One cases case, translation the circle in (not Gaussian) and complicated not full-line more the is in situation Brownian simply are interval. an KPZ on the of point measures fixed stationary and to meanders, correspond and should excursions they processes motions, stochastic Brownian textbook as of such terms in described be can nepii oml o h alc rnfr ftesta- the of transform (for Laplace distribution [18] the height obtained tionary for Knizel formula and explicit Corwin an breakthrough, recent a aldcniuu ulHh rcs.Ti construction This process. process Hahn stochastic dual relates auxiliary continuous an formula called to transform measure Laplace stationary This the parameters). of h usino h ttoaymauefrteKPZ the for measure stationary the of question The measures stationary the while equation, KPZ the For P xdpito nitra,half-line interval, an on point fixed KPZ tmmcais u oml losto allows formula Our mechanics. ntum a [0 val sn h eetrslso Corwin of results recent the using L , rsWlisneuto nan on equation ards-Wilkinson ihgnrlNuantype Neumann general with ] egtfil evolving field height L , a lormie pn In open. remained also has ] L ,adfrsm range some for and 1, = on Universit´e, Uni- bonne G. Barraquand and P. Le Doussal corresponds to the KPZ equation limit1 of formulas with is not differentiable, the standard way to understand (3) a similar structure obtained in [20] of formulas with a simi- is to impose these conditions on the heat kernel [19], or lar structure obtained in [20] for the stationary measure of through a path integral as in [37, 38]. For the DP, A> 0 ASEP. However, obtaining a characterization of the pro- corresponds to a repulsive wall and A < 0 an attractive cess allowing to study properties of the stationary measure one, and similarly for B at x = L. remains a challenge. This amounts to invert the compli- Main result. – Our main result is the prediction that cated Laplace transforms in [18]. the KPZ random height profile in the stationary state, In this Letter we obtain a simple formula for the station- denoted H(x) , can be written as the sum of two ary measure of the KPZ equation on an interval of any size x [0,L] independent{ random} ∈ fields L, with general Neumann type boundary conditions. Our result is particularly convenient to study various limits as 1 H(x) H(0) = W (x)+ X(x) (4) L + . In particular we recover the phase diagram for − √2 stationary→ ∞ measures of the KPZ fixed point on an interval, we obtain new crossover regimes near the critical point, where W (x) is a one sided Brownian motion (i.e. with and we study the stationary measures of the KPZ equa- W (0) = 0 and W (L) free) and the distribution tion on a half-line and their large scale limits. We unveil of the process X(x) is given by the path integral measure and exploit a surprising connection to Liouville quantum (u+v) L X L dX(x) 2 − mechanics (LQM), i.e. the Schrodinger equation in an dx( dx ) 2vX(L) 2X(x) D e− 0 e− dxe− exponential potential. The LQM, which is the 1D limit u,v 0 Z R Z ! of the 2D Liouville field theory, notably allows to study (5) the of exponential functionals of the Brownian with X(0) = 0 and X(L) free, and a normalization Zu,v motion, see [21] for a short review. As such, it appears such that 0,0 = 1. For the choice v = u, H(x)+ vx is in several areas of physics such as diffusion in 1D ran- thus simplyZ a standard Brownian motion.− The Brownian dom media [21–27], multifractal eigenfunctions of random motion with drift u is also stationary for the half-space Schrodinger and Dirac operators [21, 28–31], diffusion in KPZ equation [16], and on the segment it arises only when the hyperbolic plane [32–34], and more recently, and strik- the two boundary conditions are compatible. ingly, in quantum chaos and its relation to gravity [35,36]. In mathematical terms, X is a continuous stochastic LQM was recently used to obtain multipoint observables process on [0,L] whose measure PX is absolutely contin- for the stationary KPZ equation in a half-space (see Supp. uous with respect to that of a Brownian motion with dif- Mat. in [17]). fusion coefficient 1/2, denoted PB, with Radon-Nikodym P derivative d X = 1 e u,v(X) where dPB u,v −E Z Model. – The KPZ equation for the height field h(x, t) reads u,v(X)= E L L λ 2X(x) 2X(L) 2X(x) 2 2 u log dxe− + v log dxe − . ∂th(x, t)= ν∂xh + (∂xh) + √Dξ(x, t) (1) 2 Z0 ! Z0 ! where ξ(x, t) is a standard space-time . We use (6) 2 space-time units so that ν = 1 and λ = D = 2 . Here This is a mere reformulation of (5) in a more symmetric we study the problem on the interval so that (1) holds form so that it becomes apparent that the process is left for 0 0, will use some of their results below.

1The limit from ASEP to KPZ was previously investigated in Liouville quantum mechanics. – The Liouville [19]. Remark 2.11 therein explains how to rescale ASEP boundary Hamiltonian Hˆ on the real axis U R is defined as parameters to obtain the boundary conditions for the KPZ equation. ∈ 2 t t 2 The units chosen in [18] amount to rescaling our time as 2 , 1 d 2U → Hˆ = + e− (8) immaterial in the steady state. −4 dU 2

p-2 Steady state of the KPZ equation on an interval and Liouville quantum mechanics

Its eigenfunctions k , in coordinate basis ψ (U)= U k , Performing the change of variable U = X + U , and | i k h | i j j 0 can be chosen real and indexed by k > 0 with defining the process U(x)= X(x)+ U0, the RHS of (14), i.e. J(~s), takes the form 2 k U Hψˆ (U)= ψ (U), ψ (U)= N K (2e− ). (9) k 4 k k k ik m+1 m 2 sj (Uj Uj−1) 2vUm+1 2uU0 2 dUj e− j=1 − − − 2 i where Nk = πΓ(ik)Γ( ik) and K k is a modified Bessel Γ(u + v) R − j=0 Z function.. They form a continuum orthonormal basis with Y P m+1 x − + U(xj )=Uj j dx[( dU(x) )2+e 2U(x)] k k′ = δ(k k′) with ∞ dk k k = I. We will need x dx h | i − 0 | ih | Ue− j−1 the matrix elements of the operator × D j=1 U(xj−1)=Uj−1 R R Y Z 2αUˆ 2αU e− = dUe− U U (10) In the last line we recognize the path integral representa- R | ih | Z tion of the imaginary time Green’s function of the Liouville which read Hamiltonian Hˆ in (8). From the Feynman-Kac formula

+ 2α ˆ ∞ r dr ′ 2αU ′ ′ U(b)=U b − k e− k′ = NkNk Kik(2r)Kik (2r) dx ( dU(x) )2+e 2U(x) h | | i 0 r Ue− a dx Z U(a)=U D NkNk′ ik ik′ Z R   = Γ4 α (11) (b a)Hˆ 8Γ(2α) ± 2 ± 2 = U ′ e− − U   h | | i for any α > 0, where Γ (α x y) := Γ(a + 4 σ,τ= 1 Hence we can rewrite J(~s)= 2 J˜(~s) with σx + τy) is a product of four± Gamma± functions. ± Γ(u+v) Q

m+1 Multipoint Laplace transform. – We now com- 2vUm (2u s )U J˜(~s)= dU e− +1− − 1 0 pute, using the LQM, the multi-point Laplace transform  j  j=0 Z (LT) of the distribution of H(x), as defined in (4), (5). For Y m  m+1 the moment, we restrict ourselves to u,v > 0, and we will (sj sj+1 )Uj (xj xj−1)Hˆ e− − Uj e− − Uj 1 . (16) discuss the general case later. We consider the increasing h | | − i j=1 j=1 sequence of points Y Y

x =0 < x < < x < x = L (12) Inserting the spectral decomposition 0 1 · · · m m+1 + 1 2 Since W (x) is simply a Brownian independent of X the fol- (xj xj− )Hˆ ∞ (xj xj− )k e− − 1 = dk e− 4 − 1 j k k (17) lowing multipoint expectation, with parameters ~s = 2u> j | j ih j | Z0 s > >s >s =0 , takes the form { 1 · · · m m+1 } and using the definition (10), the RHS of (16) becomes m 1 m+1 2 sj (H(xj ) H(xj−1 )) s (xj xj−1) J(~s) E[e− j=1 − ]= e 4 j=1 j − J(0) m+1 + P P ∞ (13) 2vUm+1 (2u s1)U0 dU0dUm+1 dkj e− − − Um+1 km+1 where J(~s) is the following expectation over the process R2 h | i Z j=1 Z0 X(x), from (5), with X0 =0 Y m k2 m+1 j − (sj sj )Uˆ (xj xj 1) 4 k U k e− − +1 k e− j=1 − × h 1| 0i h j+1| | j i m+1 m j=1 sj (Xj Xj−1) 2vXm+1 Y P J(~s)= dXj e− j=1 − − (18)  R  j=1 Y Z P m+1   xj dX(x) X(xj )=Xj dx( )2 Now we use that for w> 0 − x − dx (u+v) Xe j 1 Z [X]− × D L j=1 X(xj−1)=Xj−1 Z R 2wU 2wU U Y dUe− U k = Nk dUe− Kik(2e− ) (14) R h | i R Z Z N ik 2 where Z [X] := L e 2X(x). Now we insert in the inte- = k Γ w + , (19) L 0 − 4 2 grand the following representation   R

− 2U0 and U k = k U to integrate (18) w.r.t. U0 and (u+v) 2 2U0(u+v) e ZL[X] ZL[X]− = dU0 e− − h | i h | i Γ(u + v) R Um+1. We can then substitute the matrix elements Z (sj sj )Uˆ (15) k e− − +1 k by their explicit expressions from h j+1| | j i

p-3 G. Barraquand and P. Le Doussal

(11). This leads to more explicitly in (20), coincides with the result of [18] in the domain u,v > 0 and for L = 1. ˜ J(~s)= We may now extend the result of Corwin-Knizel in two sj sj+1 ikj ikj+1 m+1 + m Γ4 − directions. First, we may assume that L is arbitrary, and 1 ∞ dkj 2 2 2 ± ± reproduce the analysis of [18] with points xi as in (12) 2 4π Γ(ik ) 2  Γ(s s )  j=1 0 j j=1 j j+1 using the same scalings as in [18] starting from the ASEP Y Z | | Y − −k2 2 m+1 j model on NL sites and arriving at the same formula (22). s ik ikm+1 (xj xj−1) Γ u 1 + 1 Γ v + e j=1 4 − . This shows why (4),(5) are correct for any L> 0 and not × − 2 2 2   P (20) only L = 1 as considered in [18]. Then, we may extend  the range of parameters u, v. We expect that the distribu- Comparison with the result of Corwin-Knizel. – tion of stationary measures depend analytically on u, v for Now, we explain why our formula for the stationary finite L. However, performing a direct analytic continua- measure in (4) and (5) is equivalent to the Laplace trans- tion on (22) is intricate and would involve many residues. form formula of Corwin-Knizel [18] for L = 1. Again, we This is why it is useful to rewrite, through LQM, the re- assume that u,v > 0 with u < 1 (though [18] provides sults of Corwin-Knizel as in (4), (5) which depends on the formulas for the whole range u + v > 0). The Laplace parameters in an analytic way for all u, v. transform of the stationary height H(x) is expressed in Thus, from now on we will assume that our result for T [18] in terms of a Markov process s s [0,2u) with values the stationary probability (5), (4) holds for any u, v, and R { } ∈ on +, called the continuous dual Hahn process (CDHP) explore the consequences. T T The transition probability for sj = tj given sj+1 = tj+1, with sj >sj+1, is given by Remark: Eq. (22) relates the Laplace transform of the KPZ height field under the stationary measure to the 1 Laplace transform of another Markov process, the CDHP, p (t ,t )= sj+1,sj j+1 j 8π where the role of time/space parameters and Laplace sj i 2 sj sj+1 i i transform parameters are exchanged. The CDHP can be Γ(u + √tj ) Γ4( − √tj+1 √tj ) | − 2 2 | 2 ± 2 ± 2 interpreted as living in the Fourier space dual to the real × Γ(u sj+1 + i √t ) 2Γ(s s )√t Γ(i√t ) 2 | − 2 2 j+1 | j − j+1 j | j | U space of LQM. A similar duality holds for Brownian and the marginal PDF of T = t at time s is given by excursions [40] and can be obtained as a limit of (22) as s L + , as we shall see in the sequel. Note also that an analog→ ∞ of (22) has been established for ASEP [20], and it p (t)= s would be interesting to study the connection to discrete (v + u)(v + u + 1) Γ(v + s + i√t )Γ(u s + i√t ) 2 variants of LQM [41]. It would be also very interesting to | 2 2 − 2 2 | 8π √t Γ(i√t) 2 know if such dualities extend to other solvable models in | | (21) the KPZ class.

Then the Laplace transform is obtained, for 2u>s1 > s2 > >sm+1 = 0, as Limits and consequences. – To study the various · · · limits, we define the scaled processes H(˜x), W (˜x) and m 1 m+1 2 sj (H(xj ) H(xj−1) s (xj xj−1) I(~s) E j=1 4 j=1 j X(˜x), withx ˜ = x/L [0, 1] as e− − = e − ∈ I0 e f  P  P (22) e with (upon some rewriting of formula (1.12) in [18]) H(x)= √LH(˜x), W (x)= √LW (˜x), X(x)= √LX(˜x) (25) m+1 + m so that one hase f e ∞ I(~s)= dt p (t ) p (t ,t )  j  0 m+1 sj+1,sj j+1 j j=1 0 j=1 Y Z Y 1 1 m+1   tj (xj xj−1) H(˜x)= W (˜x)+ X(˜x) (26) e− 4 j=1 − (23) √2 × P e f e 1 t and I0 = I(0) = dte− 4 p0(t). It is now a simple exercise 2 Clearly W (˜x) is also a standard one-sided Brownian mo- to check, using the change of variables tj = kj , that the above formula impliesR that tion. In order to impose Neumann type boundary con- ditions onf H(˜x) (with slopesu ˜, v˜ respectively at each − I(~s)=2(u + v)(u + v + 1)J˜(~s)=Γ(u + v + 2)J(~s) (24) boundary) we scale boundary parameters as e Since the prefactor cancels in the ratio, the multipoint Laplace transform (13) of our formula (4), (5) written u =u/ ˜ √L, v =v/ ˜ √L. (27)

p-4 Steady state of the KPZ equation on an interval and Liouville quantum mechanics

The measure for X(˜x) can then be written, up to a nor- Brownian + S[X] Brownian meander malization, as Xe− with the action v D e 2 1 e e 1 H(˜x) dX(˜x) u˜ 2√LX(˜x) S[X]= dx˜ + log d˜xe− dx˜ √ 0 ! L  0  H(˜x) u√Lx˜ ⇓ Z e Z − Browniane + 1 e e v˜ 2√L(X(1) X(˜x)) + log d˜xe − (28) ⇓ √L standarde Brownian motion Z0  0 e e u with X(0) = 0 and X(1) free. Limit L 0. In this limit one recovers the Edwards- H(˜x)+ v√Lx˜ e → e Wilkinson model. One sees that in (28) we can expand ⇓ up to linear order in X in the logarithmic terms, and one standarde Brownian motion finds that to leading order in L, i.e. to L0, it becomes a Gaussian action withe a parabolic mean profile. One finds (see details in [42]) 0 1 H(˜x) H(0) = u˜x˜ (˜u +˜v)˜x2 + B(˜x) (29) Fig. 1: Phase diagram of the large-scale limit of stationary − ⇒ − 2 measures for the KPZ equation on the segment. On the three regions u,v > 0 (maximal current phase), v>u< 0 (low B where e (˜x) ise a standard Brownian motion. density phase) and u>v< 0 (high density phase), we have Limit L + (KPZ fixed point). Under the scalings indicated the nature of the stationary measure in the large scale → ∞ considered above, X converges to a probability measure limit. For the directed polymer the phases are as follows: For proportional to u,v > 0 the polymer is delocalized in the bulk, for v < 0,u>v it is bound to x = L, and for u < 0,u < v it is bound to e 1 dX˜ (˜x) 2 x = 0. Exactly at the phase boundary u = v the polymer has dx˜( +˜v) 2(˜u+˜v) min X(˜x) Xe− 0 dx˜ e x˜ (30) probability 1/2 to be bound to either side. D R with X(0) =e 0. Hence it is a Brownian one [0, 1] with a non trivial Radon Nikodym derivative depending onu, ˜ v˜ implies that X(1) = 0. Thus, in the limitu, ˜ v˜ + , → ∞ (equivalentlye a Brownian with drift v˜ with derivative de- X(˜x) 1 E(˜x), where E is a standard Brownian excur- − ⇒ √2 pending only onu ˜+˜v). The measure can also be rewritten sion (i.e. a Browniane bridge conditioned to stay positive), in a more symmetric form as soe that 1 1 1 dX˜ (˜x) 2 H(˜x)= W (˜x)+ E(˜x). (32) dx˜( dx ) 2˜u minx X(˜x) +2˜v minx X(˜x) X(1) Xe− 0 ˜ e ˜{ } ˜{ − }. ⇒ √2 √2 D R (31) We recover thee same processf as in the large scale limit of As detailede in [42] the measuree (30) can bee studiede using TASEP [14] or ASEP [15] invariant measures. This shall a limit of LQM, where the exponential potential is re- not be a surprise: TASEP, ASEP and the KPZ equation placed by a hard wall. Accordingly all the above Laplace all converge at large time to the KPZ fixed point [43], so transform formula (13)-(20), are obtained for the rescaled that the process (32) describes the stationary measure of process and parameters by simply replacing Γ(z) 1/z. → the KPZ fixed point in the so called maximal current phase The field H(˜x) should correspond to stationary measures for ASEP, that is with repulsive boundary conditions in of the KPZ fixed point on the interval [0, 1] with boundary terms of the directed polymer model. parameterseu, ˜ v˜, and it is natural to predict that they arise When u˜ + , v˜ =0 or u˜ =0, v˜ + (u> 0, v =0 as scaling limit of stationary measures of all models in the or u = 0,v→ >∞0). Whenu ˜ →+ ,∞v˜ = 0 (equiv- KPZ class on an interval. This is partially confirmed in alently u > 0, v = 0) the weight→ in∞ (31) vanishes un- some special cases that we study next, where we recover less min X(˜x) = 0, hence X is now a Brownian mean- results obtained in [14,15] for the large scale limit of ASEP x˜ stationary measures. der (Brownian motion conditioned to stay positive up to time 1). Wee recover the samee as in the Phase diagram. – Now we study the phase diagram large scale limit of ASEP stationary measures [15]. Sim- in Fig. 1, obtained in the L limit when u, v are fixed ilarly, whenu ˜ = 0, v˜ + (equivalently u = 0,v > 0), → ∞ → ∞ (equivalently whenu, ˜ v˜ go to ). X(1) X(1 x) tends to a Brownian meander, and again, ±∞ − − When u,˜ v˜ + (u,v > 0). In that case the weight this matches with [15]. → ∞ in (31) vanishes unless minx˜ X(˜x) = 0 and minx˜(X(˜x) e Wheneu or v may be negative. By symmetry, we only − X(1)) = 0, in which case the weight is 1. The second iden- need to consider the case where v is negative. The mea- tity taken atx ˜ = 0, together withe the first taken atex ˜ =1 sure for X(x) in (5) is a Brownian measure with drift v − e p-5 G. Barraquand and P. Le Doussal

(u+v) L 2X(x) v weighted by ZL[X]− , where ZL[X] = 0 dxe− . We may rewrite (7), up to a renormalisation, as drift R parameter (0) E (u+v) γu B−v F (B v)ZL[B v]− , (33) HY − − defined in (34) h i Standard Brownian where B v denotes a Brownian with drift v and diffusion motion with drift u − − coefficient 1/2. It is well-known that ZL[B v] converges as 0 − u L to a finite random variable Z [B v] distributed as→ an ∞ inverse Gamma law with shape parameter∞ − 2v [22, boundary parameter 44], which becomes asymptotically independent from− the ( v) (u+v) − rescaled process X. In order for Z [B v]− to have a HY γu−v finite expectation, we need to assume∞ that− (u+v) < 2v, defined in (35) − − that is u > v. Thus,e we are considering the whole high density phase in Fig. 1. At this point, we find that the 0 resulting measure for H(˜x)+v√Lx˜ is simply the standard Brownian motion. In the low density phase where u < 0 Fig. 2: Phase diagram of stationary measures for the KPZ and v>u (see Figure 1),e we deduce by symmetry that the equation in the half-space R+ with boundary parameter u. The limiting stationary process is a standard Brownian motion diagram means that if the initial condition has drift −v at with drift u√L. infinity, the height field should converge at large time under mild assumptions to the stationary measure indicated in one Half-line KPZ equation. – Consider the KPZ equa- of the three regions of the (u, v) plane. In particular, if u 6 0 R tion (1) in +, with boundary parameter u at x = 0. The and the drift at infinity is 0, which includes the flat initial data, stationary measures of the height field can be computed the height field will converge to a Brownian motion with drift as the L limit of the stationary measures defined in u, as predicted in [17]. Along the antidiagonal line u = −v, (4) and (5)→ ∞ and depending on parameters u, v. It turns the stationary measure is always a Brownian motion with drift out that this limit was studied in [39] (see also the review u, see [42]. [45]). We will make considerable use of these results here. The set of stationary measures obtained in the L limit always depend on the boundary parameter u→, and ∞ In this phase, the limit depends on v, and we remark that sometimes depend on the parameter v. When this is the the drift at infinity of the process (35) is v (in the sense that H(x) H(0) vx when x + ).− case v can be interpreted as minus the average drift of the − ≃− → ∞ process at infinity (see below). We expect that for a large class of initial conditions with In the low density phase (u 6 0, v > u), the station- drift at infinity equal to v, the height field will converge − ary measure (4) simply converge as L to a stan- at large time (modulo a global shift) to one of the station- dard Brownian motion with drift u [39] (so→ that∞ the limit ary measures that we have just described, according to the does not depend on v). In the maximal current phase phase diagram in Figure 2. This prediction is based on an (u > 0, v > 0), the stationary measures converge [39] to a analogous convergence result at large time for ASEP on (0) a half-line proved in [11], though the stationary measures distribution that we denote γu – the letters stand for Hariya-Yor. This is the distributionHY of the processHY were explicitly described much later [13, 46]. x Large-scale limit. Now that we have described the (1) (2) 2B(2)(z) H(x)= B (x)+B (x)+log 1+ γu e− dz , stationary measures of the KPZ equation on a half-line,  0  Z (34) it would be interesting to consider their large scale limit where B(1)(x),B(2)(x) are two independent Brownian mo- as x goes to infinity. The processes obtained in this limit should be understood as stationary measures of the half- tions with diffusion coefficient 1/2 and γu is an indepen- dent Gamma random variable with shape parameter u. space KPZ fixed point, that is the universal process arising Again, the limit does not depend on v. In the high-density as scaling limit of all half-space models in the KPZ class. phase (v 6 0,u > v), the stationary measures converge In particular, we conjecture that the large scale limit of ( v) half-line ASEP stationary measures [46] do converge to the [39] to a distribution that we denote − . This is the γu−v same limit at large scale. Note that this half-space KPZ distribution of the process HY fixed point has not been defined rigorously (unlike the H(x)= B(1)(x)+ B(2)(x)+ vx full-space situation), but its multipoint distributions for x some initial conditions are known [47,48]. The large scale 2B(2)(z) 2vz + log 1+ γu v e− − dz , (35) limit of half-line KPZ equation stationary measures are −  Z0  described in the phase diagram of Fig. 3. We will let x 1 → (1) (2) + and define H(y)= H(xy) and scale the boundary where B (x),B (x) are two independent Brownian mo- √x ∞ u˜ tions with diffusion coefficient 1/2 and γu v is an indepen- parameter as u = √x . In the low-density phase, clearly, dent Gamma random variable with shape− parameter u v. the Brownian motione with drift u becomes a Brownian −

p-6 Steady state of the KPZ equation on an interval and Liouville quantum mechanics

v˜ Directed polymer endpoint. – We obtain the end- drift point probability for a very long polymer as (x) = L Q parameter (1) (2) H(x) H(x) B (y)+ B (y)+ e / 0 dxe , where H(x) is given in (4). The statis- (2) L max 0, Eu˜ 2min06z6y B (z) √ 2 G+Y Standard Brownian − − { } tics of theR ratio (L)/ (0) = e , where G is a stan- e e dard GaussianQ randomQ variable, requires only the PDF motion with driftu ˜  e P (Y ) of Y = X(L) X(0), which in some special cases 0 − u˜ takes a simple form [42]. For u + v = 1 one obtains − boundary parameter (1+2v)Y + L e− 4 L 2Y L +2Y B(1)(y)+ B(2)(y) +vy ˜ + P (Y )= erf − + erf 2 u,v 2√L 2√L (2) max 0, Eu˜−v˜ 2min 6z6y B (z) +vz ˜ Z      − − 0 { } (38) 2 e e ev L (1+2v)L  with u,v = (e 1). At the transition point, e Z 1+2v − 0 u = v = 1/2, P (Y ) becomes uniform in [ L/2,L/2] consistent− with the polymer being localized near− either Fig. 3: Large scale limits of stationary measures of the half- boundary with probability 1/2 (see [42] for details, and space KPZ equation described in Fig. 2. B(1)(y) and B(2)(y) [50] for an earlier work based on ASEP). denote independent Brownian motions with diffusion coeffi- Note. While this work was near completion, the cient 1/2. Eu˜ and Eu˜−v˜ denote independente exponentiale ran- preprint [51] appeared. This paper also performs a Laplace dom variables with parametersu ˜ andu ˜ − v˜. The parameters transform inversion of the result of [18], although [51] de- u,˜ v˜ are rescalings of the parameters u, v in Fig. 2 as explained in the Letter. scribes the process X differently, as a Markov process with explicit transition . Both descriptions are equivalent: indeed, their formula [51, (1.7)] can also motion in the variable y with driftu ˜ in the scaling limit. be read from (16) above. In the maximal current phase (˜u, v˜ > 0), the large scale limit of (34) yields ∗∗∗ (1) (2) H(y)= B (y)+ B (y) PLD acknowledges support from ANR grant ANR-17- (2) CE30-0027-01 RaMaTraF. e e + max e0, Eu˜ 2 min B (z) , (36) − − 06z6y{ }   e REFERENCES where B(1)(y), B(2)(y) are two independent Brownian mo- tions with diffusion coefficient 1/2 and E is an indepen- u˜ [1] Kardar M., Parisi G. and Zhang Y., Dynamic scaling dent exponentiale e random variable with rate parameteru ˜. 56 1 of growing interfaces, Phys. Rev. Lett., (1986) 889. Here we have used that √−x log γu/˜ √x converges to an ex- [2] Derrida B., An exactly soluble non-equilibrium system: ponential distribution with parameteru ˜. In particular, the asymmetric simple exclusion process, Phys. Reports, whenu ˜ + , we obtain the sum of a Brownian motion 301 (1998) 65. → ∞ and a Bessel 3 process [49] 3, that is a Brownian motion [3] Spohn H., Large scale dynamics of interacting particles conditioned to remain positive on [0, + ). In the high (Springer Science & Business Media) 2012. density phase (˜v < 0, u˜ > v˜), we scale ∞v = v˜ and the [4] Bertini L. and Giacomin G., Stochastic burgers and √x KPZ equations from particle systems, Comm. Math. large scale limit of (35) yields Phys., 183 (1997) 571. [5] Matetski K., Quastel J. and Remenik D., The KPZ (1) (2) H(y)= B (y)+ B (y)+˜vy fixed point, preprint arXiv:1701.00018, (2016) . [6] Corwin I., Quastel J. and Remenik D., Renormaliza- (2) e + maxe 0, Eu˜e v˜ 2 min B (z)+˜vz , (37) tion fixed point of the kpz universality class, J. Stat. Phys., − − − 06z6y{ }   160 (2015) 815. Forster D., Nelson D. R. Stephen M. J. (1) (2) e [7] and , Large- where B (y), B (y) are two independent Brownian mo- distance and long-time properties of a randomly stirred tions with diffusion coefficient 1/2 and Eu˜ v˜ is an indepen- 16 − fluid, Phys. Rev. A, (1977) 732. dent exponentiale e random variable with parameteru ˜ v˜. [8] Parisi G., On the replica approach to random directed − Again, v˜ represents the drift at infinity of the process polymers in two dimensions, Journal de Physique, 51 − H(y). Whenu ˜ = v˜, the process (37) becomes a stan- (1990) 1595. dard Brownian motion− with driftu ˜ as this was already the [9] Funaki T. and Quastel J., KPZ equation, its renormal- casee before taking any limit, although this is not immedi- ization and invariant measures, Stoch. Partial Diff. Eq.: 3 ately obvious from (37). Anal. Computat., (2015) 159. [10] Hairer M. and Mattingly J., The strong Feller prop- 3We thank A. Comtet for an exchange on this point. erty for singular stochastic PDEs, , 54 (2018) 1314.

p-7 G. Barraquand and P. Le Doussal

[11] Liggett T. M., Ergodic theorems for the asymmetric (1998) 14242. simple exclusion process, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 213 [31] Quinn E., Cope T., Bardarson J. H. and Ossipov A., (1975) 237. Scaling of critical wave functions at topological anderson [12] Andjel E. D., Invariant measures for the zero range pro- transitions in one dimension, Phys. Rev. B, 92 (2015) cess, Ann. Probab., 10 (1982) 525. 104204. [13] Derrida B., Evans M. R., Hakim V. and Pasquier V., [32] Comtet A., On the landau levels on the hyperbolic plane, Exact solution of a 1D asymmetric exclusion model using Ann. Phys., 173 (1987) 185. a matrix formulation, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen., 26 (1993) [33] Comtet A. and Monthus C., Diffusion in a one- 1493. dimensional random medium and hyperbolic brownian mo- [14] Derrida B., Enaud C. and Lebowitz J. L., The asym- tion, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen., 29 (1996) 1331. metric exclusion process and brownian excursions, J. Stat. [34] Ikeda N. and Matsumoto H., Brownian motion on Phys., 115 (2004) 365. the hyperbolic plane and selberg trace formula, J. Funct. [15] Bryc W. and Wang Y., Limit fluctuations for den- Anal., 163 (1999) 63. sity of asymmetric simple exclusion processes with open [35] Bagrets D., Altland A. and Kamenev A., Sachdev– boundaries, Ann. Instit. Henri Poincar´e, Probab. Stat., ye–kitaev model as liouville quantum mechanics, Nucl. 55 (2019) 2169. Phys. B, 911 (2016) 191. [16] Barraquand G., Krajenbrink A. and Le Doussal P., [36] Mertens T. G., Turiaci G. J. and Verlinde H. L., Half-space stationary Kardar–Parisi–Zhang equation, J. Solving the schwarzian via the conformal bootstrap, J. Stat. Phys., 181 (2020) 1149. High Energy Phys., 2017 (2017) 1. [17] Barraquand G. and Le Doussal P., The KPZ equation [37] Borodin A., Bufetov A. and Corwin I., Directed ran- in a half space with flat initial condition and the unbind- dom polymers via nested contour integrals, Ann. Phys., ing of a directed polymer from an attractive wall, preprint 368 (2016) 191. arXiv:2104.08234, (2021) . [38] De Nardis J., Krajenbrink A., Le Doussal P. and [18] Corwin I. and Knizel A., Stationary measure for the Thiery T., Delta-bose gas on a half-line and the kpz equa- open KPZ equation, preprint arXiv:2103.12253, (2021) . tion: boundary bound states and unbinding transitions [19] Corwin I. and Shen H., Open ASEP in the weakly asym- (2019), J. Stat. Mech.: Theor. Exp., 2020 (2020) 043207. metric regime, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 71 (2018) 2065. [39] Hariya Y. and Yor M., Limiting distributions associated [20] Bryc W. and Wesolowski J., Asymmetric simple ex- with moments of exponential Brownian functionals, Stud. clusion process with open boundaries and quadratic har- Sci. Math. Hung., 41 (2004) 193. nesses, J. Stat. Phys., 167 (2017) 383. [40] Bryc W. and Wang Y., Dual representations of laplace [21] Comtet A. and Texier C., One-dimensional disordered transforms of brownian excursion and generalized mean- supersymmetric quantum mechanics: a brief survey, Su- ders, Stat. Probab. Lett., 140 (2018) 77. persymmetry and Integrable Models, (1998) 313. [41] Olshanetsky M. A. and Rogov V. B. K., Liouville [22] Bouchaud J. P., Comtet A., Georges A. and Dous- quantum mechanics on a lattice from geometry of quantum sal P. L., Classical diffusion of a particle in a one- lorentz group, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen., 27 (1994) 4669. dimensional random force field, Ann. Phys., 201 (1990) [42] See supplementary material. 285. [43] Quastel J. and Sarkar S., Convergence of exclusion [23] Monthus C. and Comtet A., On the flux distribution in processes and KPZ equation to the KPZ fixed point, a one dimensional disordered system, Journal de Physique preprint arXiv:2008.06584, (2020) . I, 4 (1994) 635. [44] Dufresne D., The distribution of a perpetuity, with appli- [24] Broderix K. and Kree R., Thermal equilibrium with the cations to risk theory and pension funding, Scand. Actuar. Wiener potential: testing the replica variational approxi- J., 1990 (1990) 39. mation, EuroPhys. Lett., 32 (1995) 343. [45] Matsumoto H. and Yor M., Exponential functionals of [25] Comtet A., Monthus C. and Yor M., Exponential brownian motion, i: Probability laws at fixed time, Probab. functionals of Brownian motion and disordered systems, surveys, 2 (2005) 312. J. Appl. Probab., 35 (1998) 255. [46] Grosskinsky S., Phase transitions in nonequilibrium [26] Monthus C. and Le Doussal P., Localization of thermal stochastic particle systems with local conservation laws, packets and metastable states in the sinai model, Phys. Ph.D. thesis T.U. M¨unchen (2004). Rev. E, 65 (2002) 066129. [47] Baik J., Barraquand G., Corwin I. and Suidan T., [27] Nagar A., Majumdar S. N. and Barma M., Strong Pfaffian Schur processes and last passage percolation in a clustering of noninteracting, sliding passive scalars driven half-quadrant, Ann. Probab., 46 (2018) 3015. by fluctuating surfaces, Phys. Rev. E, 74 (2006) 021124. [48] Betea D., Ferrari P. and Occelli A., The half-space [28] Kolokolov I. V., The spatial statistical properties of airy stat process, preprint arXiv:2012.10337, (2020) . wave functions in a disordered finite one-dimensional [49] Pitman J. W., One-dimensional Brownian motion and sample, EuroPhys. Lett., 28 (1994) 193. the three-dimensional , Adv. Appl. Probab., [29] Kolokolov I., The method of functional integration for (1975) 511. one-dimensional localization, higher correlators, and the [50] Krug J. and Tang L., Disorder-induced unbinding in average current flowing in a mesoscopic ring in an arbi- confined geometries, Phys. Rev. E, 50 (1994) 104. trary magnetic field, Sov. Phys. JETP, 76 (1993) 1099. [51] Bryc W., Kuznetsov A., Wang Y. and Wesolowski [30] Shelton D. G. and Tsvelik A. M., Effective theory for J., Markov processes related to the stationary measure midgap states in doped spin-ladder and spin-peierls sys- for the open KPZ equation, preprint arXiv:2105.03946, tems: Liouville quantum mechanics, Phys. Rev. B, 57 (2021) .

p-8 arXiv:2105.15178v4 [math-ph] 9 Sep 2021 etr n e srwiei nteeuvln form equivalent the in it rewrite us let and Letter, h oko aiaadYr[1]. Yor and Hariya of work the Abstract Paris 75231 Lhomond, rue 24 Paris, versit´e, Universit´e de 1 osdrtemeasure the Consider limit Edwards-Wilkinson 1. References in 7. arguments main the of Review on Hariya-Yor6. point of fixed results KPZ the the of Translation of state 5. steady the of properties Some 4. formulas explicit Some 3. process the of Observables 2. limit Edwards-Wilkinson 1. and interval an Barraquand Guillaume in equation KPZ mechanics” the quantum Liouville of state “Steady to MATERIAL SUPPLEMENTARY with S aoaor ePyiu el’ de Physique de Laboratoire [ X e X = ] e 0 and 0 = (0) Z W rvd oefrhrdtisaotteagmnsadres and arguments the about details further some provide –We 0 1 d x S ˜ [

X e d = ] X e X d e x ˜ (˜ 1 re For free. (1) x Z D ) 0 Xe 1 ! e d 2 x ˜ − 1 +

S and (˜ [ X u d e cl oml u´rer,ES NS nvri´ S,Sor Universit´e PSL, CNRS, Sup´erieure, ENS, Normale Ecole ´ √ X ] ˜ + e d o h ecldpoes pt omlzto,gvni Eq. in given normalization, a to up process, rescaled the for L ireL Doussal Le Pierre x (˜ ˜ v L x X ) ) → ! log 2 0, +  S 1 [1] (˜ [ u − X √ e ˜ + 2 a eepne as expanded be can ] L √ v ) L p-1 log Z 0 1  d˜ 1 √ x L X France. , e Z (˜ 0 x 1 2 + ) d˜ e x L lspeetdi h etradreview and Letter the in presented ults − 2 Z √ 0 1 L X d˜ e x (˜ x X h nevlp-7 interval the e )  (˜ x 2˜ + ) 2 + v X e . . . (1)  , +2˜ on Uni- bonne v 2)i the in (28) X e (1) p-11 p-14 p-10 , p-4 p-2 p-1 (2) (1) X(˜x)

e

x˜ 1

Fig. 1: Steady-state of the Edwards-Wilkinson equation on the interval [0, 1], depicted here foru ˜ =v ˜ > 0. It is given by a parabola plus a standard Brownian motion – see (6). where we do not keep track of constant terms which are absorbed in the normalization. To the leading order as L 0, we obtain → 2 1 dX(˜x) 1 S[X] dx˜ 2(˜u +˜v) d˜x X(˜x)+2˜vX(1) (3) ≃ 0 dx˜ ! − 0 Z e Z e e e which we can rewrite, using integration by parts (and up to an irrelevant constant)

2 1 dX(˜x) S[X] dx˜ u˜ +(˜u +˜v)˜x (4) ≃ 0 dx˜ − ! Z e e This is a Gaussian measure and one can write the convergence in distribution 1 1 X(x)= u˜x˜ (˜u +˜v)˜x2 + B˜(˜x) (5) ⇒ − 2 √2 e where B˜(˜x) is a standard one sided Brownian motion with B˜(0) = 0. The mean profile of X(˜x) is thus quadratic with a curvature proportional to (˜u +v ˜). Thus the (rescaled) stationary height field H converges to a parabola plus a Brownian motion,− e e 1 H(˜x)= u˜x˜ (˜u +˜v)˜x2 + B(˜x) (6) ⇒ − 2 where B(˜x) is another standard Browniane motion, as stated in the Letter. Remark: The fact that the RHS of (6) is stationary for the EW equation can be shown by a direct calculation [2] : First, by substracting a parabola, one may reduce to the case u = v = 0. Then, we observe that starting from Brownian initial data, the height is a . Finally, using the explicit form of the Green’s function of the heat equation with Neumann boundary conditions, the spatial covariance can be computed explicitly and shown to be that of a Brownian motion.

2. Observables of the process X

Let us define, for any process X(x) with 0 6 x 6 L,

L 2X(x) ZL[X]= dxe− . (7) Z0 By definition, the average of any observable O[X] over the process X(x), defined in Eq. (5) of the Letter, can be written in the following path integral forms

L dX(x) 2 1 dx( ) 2vX(L) (u+v) E [O[X]] = XO[X]e− 0 dx e− Z [X]− , (8) D L Zu,v,L ZX(0)=0 2 R v L L dX(x) 2 e dx( dx +v) (u+v) = XO[X]e− 0 ZL[X]− . (9) u,v,L D Z ZX(0)=0 R

p-2 where u,v,L is the normalisation. Equivalently, as in Eq. (7) of the Letter, it can be written as averages over theZ Brownian motion in two equivalent forms

v2L E 1 E 2vB(L) (u+v) e E (u+v) [O[X]] = B O[B]e− ZL[B]− = B−v O[B v ]ZL[B v]− , (10) u,v,L u,v,L − − Z h i Z h i where EB denotes the average over the one-sided Brownian motion of diffusion constant 1/2 (with B(0) = 1 0), i.e. B(x) = B(x) where B(x) is the standard one-sided Brownian motion, and E − the average √2 B v 1 over the one-sided Brownian motion of diffusion constant 1/2 with a drift v, i.e. B v(x)= B(x) vx. − − √2 − The normalization is thus equal to the following expectations. E 2vB(L) (u+v) v2LE (u+v) u,v,L = B e− ZL[B]− = e B− ZL[B v]− (11) Z v − It admits a simple expression inh some cases, we will givei examples below.h i

It is interesting to note that the moments of ZL[X] for the process X can be expressed from the normalization as (here k can be any real number)

k u k,v E ZL[X] = Z − . (12) Zu,v B  A related property is that if we denote QL (Z) the PDF of the variable Z = ZL[B v] for the Brownian − B v with diffusion coefficient 1/2 and drift v, then the PDF QL(Z) of Z = ZL[X] for the process X(x) is− simply − B (u+v) QL(Z)= Cu,v,LQL (Z)Z− , (13) where Cu,v,L is a normalization. One simple application, discussed in the Letter, is for the case v < 0. Then we know that Z = ZL[B v] has a limit distribution as L + given by an inverse Gamma law 1/Γ( 2v, 1) − → ∞ − B 1 1 1/Z Q+ (Z)= e− . (14) ∞ Γ( 2v) Z1 2v − − If u > v, we see that Z = ZL[X] will also have a limit distribution for L + given by another inverse Gamma law 1/Γ(u v, 1) → ∞ − 1 1 1/Z Q+ (Z)= e− . (15) ∞ Γ(u v) Z1+u v − −

One-point distribution of total height difference. Consider here the height difference between the two boundaries of the interval. From Eq. (4) in the Letter we have √L H(L) H(0) = G + X(L) (16) − √2 where G is an independent unit Gaussian random variable. From (10) choosing O[X] = δ(X(L) Y ), − the PDF PL(Y ) of the random variable Y = X(L) is given by

1 2vB(L) (u+v) P (Y ) = E [δ(X(L) Y )] = E δ(B(L) Y )e− Z [B]− (17) L − B − L Zu,v,L Y 2 h i 1 2vY e− L (u+v) = e− EB ZL[B]− B(L)= Y (18) u,v,L √πL Z h i where the expectation value is over a Brownian motion B(x) with diffusion coefficient 1/2 and B(0) = 0, conditioned to B(L)= Y . We give some simple explicit examples below. An interesting property, which is a consequence of the form of the measure (10), is that the cumulants (respectively the moments) of the random variable X(L) (i.e. the cumulants/moments of PL(Y ) denoted n c n Y L and Y L respectively) can be obtained from the normalisation. Indeed setting u + v = w fixed andh i takingh successivei derivatives w.r.t. v one obtains n c 1 n Y L = ∂v log w v,v,L , (19) h i − 2 Z − w=u+v n  1  1 n  Y L = 2 ∂v w v,v,L . (20) h i w v,v,L − Z − Z −  w=u+v 

p-3 3. Some explicit formulas

In this section we use our main result, i.e. Eqs. (4) and (5) in the Letter, to obtain some simple explicit formulas in special cases.

3.1 The Brownian case 2 The simplest case is u + v = 0, in which case one finds = ev L and Zu,v 1 (Y +vL)2 PL(Y )= e− L (21) √πL

√L √L which leads to H(L) H(0) = G + G′ + uL = √LG′′ + uL, as expected (here G and G′ are − √2 √2 independent unit Gaussian variables, and G′′ another unit Gaussian variable). More generally the process X(x) has the same law as B v(x)= Bu(x). −

3.2 Normalisation There is one case where is trivial. For u =1/2 and v = 0 one has from [3, Prop. 5.7] Zu,v,L

1/2 1/2 = E Z [B]− = L− . (22) Zu,v,L B L h i For u + v = n, where n is a positive integer, it is possible to obtain explicit expressions. One has from [4] (with µ =− 2v, β = 2, σ =1/2, βF =2v ) or from [3, Thm 5.2] (with µ =2v), − − 0 n v2L Lk(k+2v) n k n Γ(k +2v) = e e ( 1) − (2k +2v) . (23) Zu,v,L − k Γ(n +1+ k +2v) Xk=0   For instance, for n = 1, we have by (11)

L L v2L 2vB(L) 2B(x) (1+2v)x+v2L e (1+2v)L = E dxe− − = dxe = (e 1) (24) Zu,v,L B 1+2v − "Z0 # Z0 where the average is over a Brownian motion B(x) with B(0) = 0 and diffusion coefficient 1/2. It is consistent with (23) for n = 1.

3.3 PDF of the total height difference Similarly a direct calculation of PL(Y ) is possible for u + v = n, using (18). To this aim let us define a B(x) such that B(L)= Y , in terms of the standard− Brownian bridge B˜(x), as

Y 1 x x1x2 B(x)= x + B˜(x), B˜(x)= W (x) W (L), E[B˜(x1)B˜(x2)] = min(x1, x2) , (25) L √2 − L − L where W (x) is a standard Brownian with W (0) = 0.

Case u + v = 1. One has −

L L − 2 2B(x) 2 Y x+x(1 x ) 1 (L 2Y ) L 2Y L +2Y EB dxe− = dxe− L − L = √πLe 4L erf − + erf (26) 2 2√L 2√L "Z0 # Z0      Inserting in (18) and using (24) we obtain

1 (1+2v)Y + L L 2Y L +2Y PL(Y )= e− 4 erf − + erf . (27) 2 u,v 2√L 2√L Z     

One can check that (27) with (24) is normalized to unity R dY PL(Y )=1. R p-4 On the transition line at the point u = v = 1/2, we obtain a symmetric distribution for Y = X(L) −

L 2Y L+2Y erf −√ + erf √ P (Y )= 2 L 2 L . (28) L  2L  

It is easy to see that in the large L limit, PL(Y ) converges to the uniform distribution on the interval [ L/2,L/2] with a boundary layer of size √L near the edges. As mentioned in the Letter, in the context of− the directed polymer, this is consistent with the prediction that the polymer is localized at either boundary with probability 1/2. A possible scenario which would explain this limit distribution, is that the process X(x) attains its minimum at a random location x∗ uniformly distributed between x = 0 and x = L, and the process is approximately (as L goes to infinity) a straight line with slope u on [0, x∗] and a straight line with slope v on [x∗, 1]. It would be interesting to confirm this scenario by computing multipoint distributions (see− below). Remark: For TASEP, described as a zero temperature polymer model, a similar scenario was dis- covered in [5], thus confirming the universality of stationary measures at large scale.

To obtain more detailed information, let us compute the cumulants of X(L) for any v, on the line u + v = 1. Using the general formula (19) for w = u + v = 1, we obtain − − n Y n c = 1 ∂ v2L + log(e(1+2v)L 1) log(1 + 2v) (29) h iL − 2 v − −    where in the last equation we used (24). One finds for the mean

1 1 Y = L v 1 + (30) h iL 1 e(2v+1)L − − 2v +1  −  1 2 The small L behavior is Y = (v + 2 )L + O(L ). At large L there are two cases (i) v > 1/2 and Y uL (using u +hv i= 1)− and (ii) v < 1/2 and Y vL. Around the symmetric− point v = uh =i ≃1/2 the mean vanishes− as Y = 1 L(6− + L)(v + 1h)+i≃−O((v + 1 )2). − h i − 6 2 2 The variance is

L2 L 1 Y 2 c = + + (31) h iL 2 2 cosh((2v + 1)L) 2 (2v + 1)2 − 2 L 2 2 The small L behavior is Y = 2 + O(L ). For v = 1/2 the large L behavior is simply Y L/2. Exactly at v = 1/2, theh variancei goes to a constant6 − of order L2, more precisely for any Lh aroundi ≃ the − 2 1 1 4 1 2 1 3 symmetric point one has Y = 12 L(L + 6) 60 L (v + 2 ) + O (v + 2 ) . One sees from these results that at large L and nearh thei symmetric point,− there is a diverging length scale L = 1/(v + 1 ), and a  v 2 scaling behavior with L/Lv (it will be studied in more details below). These results are consistent with (1+2v)Y the observation that from (27), PL(Y ) at large L is approximately e− times a uniform distribution on the interval [ L/2,L/2]. −

For u + v = 1 one can also easily obtain the one point PDF of X(x), denoted Px,L(Y ) for any 0

(Y +vx)2 u,v,x v2(L x) 2Y e− x u,v,L x v2x P (Y )= P (Y ) Z e − + e− Z − e , (32) x,L x √πx Zu,v,L Zu,v,L

where Px(Y ) is obtained from PL(Y ) in (27) by substituting L x, and u,v,L is given in (24). It is then easy to compute its mean using the result (30) and one thu→s finds theZ mean profile as

u,v,x v2(L x) 2vx+x u,v,L x v2x E[X(x)] = Y = Y Z e − (v + 1)xe Z − e , (33) h ix,L h ix − Zu,v,L Zu,v,L v(2v + 1)x + e(2v+1)x 1 (v + 1)(2v + 1)xe(2v+1)L = − − . (34) (2v + 1) e(2v+1)L 1 −  p-5 x(L x) At the symmetric point v = u = 1/2 the mean profile is parabolic, i.e. Y x,L = 2L− . This is consistent with the scenario discussed− above. Near the symmetric point, andh i for large− L, there is a 1 critical regime with a diverging length scale Lv =1/(v + 2 ) and the mean profile takes the scaling form

L e2˜vx˜ 1 (coth(˜v) 1) x L 1 Y x,L − − 2˜x coth(˜v) , x˜ = , v˜ = = L(v + ). (35) h i ≃ 4  v˜ − ! L Lv 2 Remark: A similar diverging length scale near u = v < 0 was obtained in previous works on TASEP [5, 6], with the same power law dependence with respect to u v. − Case u + v = n. This calculation can be extended to the case u + v = n for any positive integer n, using that − −

n L L L Y xixj 2B(x) 2 L xi+ min(xi,xj ) L E dxe− = dx dx e− i i,j − (36) B(L)=Y · · · 1 · · · n " Z0 ! # Z0 Z0 P P although the algebra becomes rapidly tedious. Instead, one can use in [3, Prop. 5.3] and obtain and obtain n+1 nY 2vY + 1 2 e− − ∞ r2/L n PL(Y )= 3 1/2 dr re− (cosh(r) cosh(Y )) (37) u,v,L n!(πL ) Y − Z Z| | where is given in (23). We can give a more explicit form for u + v = 2 Zu,v,L −

L 2(v+1)Y e 4 − 3L L Y L + Y PL(Y )= e 4 erf − + erf 2 u,v √L √L Z       L 2Y L +2Y 2 cosh Y erf − + erf , (38) − √ √   2 L   2 L   where the normalization is

2Lv+L 4L(v+1) 2 2v +3 4(v + 1)e + (2v + 1)e = ev L − . (39) Zu,v,L 2(v + 1)(2v + 1)(2v + 3)

Returning to arbitrary integer n, we see that at large L the integrand in (37) is dominated by large r2/L+nr r, where it behaves as e− . Hence if Y < Ln/2 the saddle point at r = Ln/2 dominates and the 2 | | integral is of order eL/4n , i.e approximately independent of Y . Hence for u = v = n/2 the result is nY 2vY (−u v)Y similar to the one obtained above for n = 1. The exponential factor e− − = e − will deform the distribution of Y for u v = 0 which becomes peaked near Y = sgn(u v)nL/2. − 6 − Case u + v = 1. Another case where simplifications occur is u + v = 1 where using [3, Prop. 5.9] and (18) one finds 2 Y 2vY Y 1 e− L − Ye PL(Y )= (40) u,v,L √πL L sinh Y Z and can be simply obtained from the normalization condition dY P (Y )=1. Zu,v,L R L R Case u,v > 0. In that case, we use the Laplace transform, obtained for L = 1 in [7], and which reads for general L and for 2v

+ 2 c ik 2 c ik 2 cX(L) I(c) ∞ k L Γ( 2 + v + 2 ) Γ( 2 + u + 2 ) E[e− ]= , I(c)= dke− 4 | | | − | . (41) I(0) Γ(2ik) 2 Z0 | |

For L + without rescaling u,v > 0 one finds, by rescaling k k/√L → ∞ → c 2 c 2 cX(L) Γ( 2 + v) Γ( 2 + u) E[e− ] − (42) −−−−−→L + Γ(v)2Γ(u)2 → ∞

p-6 E a Γ(u+a) Since a Gamma random variable γu of parameter u has moments [γu] = Γ(u) , we obtain the weak convergence (1) (2) 1 γv γv X(L)= log (1) (2) , (43) ⇒−2 γu γu ! where the four Gamma random variables are independent. Let us recall that the total height difference is H(L) H(0) = L G + X(L). Since X(L) is O(1) at large L it is subdominant in the variance of − 2 H(L), but it controlsq the higher cumulants of the height difference. Note that X(L)= O(1) is consistent with the rescaled process X(˜x)= 1 X(Lx˜) being a Brownian excursion in the large L limit, as shown √L in the Letter. e 4. Some properties of the steady state of the KPZ fixed point on the interval

4.1 Multipoint probability for the rescaled process, Brownian motion with an absorbing boundary, and quantum mechanics in presence of a hard wall We have shown in the Letter that, in the limit L + , upon rescaling the boundary parameters as u =u/ ˜ √L, v =v/ ˜ √L, and rescaling space asx ˜ = x/L→ ,∞ the rescaled process X(˜x)= 1 X(˜x),x ˜ [0, 1] √L ∈ has the following probability measure, which can be written in the two equivalent forms e 2 2 v˜ 1 dX˜ (˜x) 1 dX˜ (˜x) 2 e− dx˜ +˜v 2(˜u+˜v) min X(˜x) 1 dx˜( ) 2(˜u+˜v) min X(˜x) 2vX(1) Xe− 0 dx˜ e x˜ = Xe− 0 dx˜ e x˜ − (44) Z D Z D u,˜ v˜ R  u,˜ v˜ R e e e e e witheX(0) = 0 and where Zu,˜ v˜ is a normalisation.e Consider an observable O X . Its expectation is given by h i e e e v˜2 0 E e− 2(˜u+˜v)bE O[X] = dbe B− [O[B v˜]δ(min B v˜ b)] , (45) X v˜ − − Zu,˜ v˜ − Z−∞ h i 0 e 1 2(˜u+˜v)bE 2˜vB(1) e = e dbe B O[B]e− δ(min B b) , (46) Zu,˜ v˜ − Z−∞ h i where the averages are over a Browniane motion of diffusion coefficient 1/2, respectively with drift v˜ and with zero drift, on the interval [0, 1]. We denote the minimum of the process B over [0, 1] by min−B. Let us consideru ˜ +˜v > 0 and perform an integration by part

v˜2 0 E e− 2(˜u+˜v)bE O[X] = 2(˜u +˜v) dbe B− [O[B v˜]θ(min B v˜ b)] (47) X v˜ − − Zu,˜ v˜ − Z−∞ h i 0 e 1 2(˜u+˜v)bE 2˜vB(1) e = e 2(˜u +˜v) dbe B O[B]e− θ(min B b) (48) Zu,˜ v˜ − Z−∞ h i For a Brownian motion it ise easy to evaluate the multi-point probability joint with the probability that the minimum is larger than b. Let us introduce the propagator of the Brownian motion in presence of an absorbing wall at position U = b, which can be obtained from the image method

′ ′ (U−U )2 (U+U )2 ′ ′ e− x−x e− x−x Gb(U,U ′, x x′)= G(U b,U ′ b, x x′), G(U,U ′, x x′)= − θ(U)θ(U ′) (49) − − − − −  π(x x )  − ′  p  One has

Gb(U,U ′, x x′)= EB δ(B(x) U)θ min B(z) b B(x′)= U ′ θ(U ′ b). (50) − − x′

For the propagator with drift, it is similar.

p-7 The evaluation of the multi-point probabilities can be performed equivalently using the quantum mechanics of a particle in presence of a hard wall. Indeed one can also write

+ ′ 2 ∞ (x x ) k 2 G(U,U ′, x x′)= dkφ (U)φ (U ′)e− − 4 , φ (U)= sin(kU) θ(U) (51) − k k k π Z0 r This is the Green’s function for the Hamiltonian given by Eq. (8) in the Letter, where the Liouville potential V (U) = e2U is replaced by a hard wall potential, i.e. V (U)=+ for U < 0 and V (U)=0 ∞ for U > 0, which has eigenfunctions φk. It is natural that the hard wall potential arises in the large L limit, since the rescaling of the process X leads to U √LU. The formula for this quantum mechanics can be obtained by considering all LQM formula in the→ Letter in the regime of small k. One can check that in this limit the LQM eigenfunctions ψk(U) given in Eq. (9) in the Letter become equal to the eigenfunction φ (U) in (51) restricted to U > 0, upon rescaling k k/√L and U √LU. k → →

Let us return to the computation of the multipoint distribution of the process X. Forx ˜0 =0 < x˜1 < < x˜ < x˜ = 1, b ,...,b R, b 6 0 and b = 0, we may write · · · m m+1 1 m+1 ∈ 0 e v˜2 E e− B− [δ(B v˜(˜x1) b1) ...δ(B v˜(˜xm) bm)δ(B v˜(1) bm+1)θ(min B v˜ b)] v˜ − − − − − − − − 2˜vB(1) = E δ(B(˜x ) b ) ...δ(B(˜x ) b )δ(B(1) b )e− θ(B b) B 1 − 1 m − m − m+1 − h m i 2˜vb = e− m+1 G (b ,b , x˜ x˜ ). (52) b j+1 j j+1 − j j=0 Y From this result, one obtains using (48) the multipoint PDF of the rescaled process X (foru ˜ +˜v> 0)

E δ(X(˜x ) X ) ...δ(X(˜x ) X )δ(X(1) X ) e X 1 − 1 m − m − m+1 h 0 i m 1 2(˜u+˜v)b 2˜vX e e e= 2(˜eu +˜v)e dbee e− m+1 G (X , X , x x ) (53) e b j+1 j j+1 − j Zu,˜ v˜ j=0 Z−∞ Y e e e This formula is suitable to calculatee the Laplace transform in the form

m ˆ ~ s˜j (X(˜xj ) X(˜xj+1)) J s˜ E e− j=1 − = (54) X Jˆ(0)  P   e e From similar manipulations as in thee Letter (from (16) to (20)) but using the eigenfunctions for the hard wall quantum mechanics (51), it is possible to express it as

m+1 + 2 m ∞ dkj k (˜s s˜ ) Jˆ ~s˜ = j j − j+1 4π ((˜s s˜ )2 + (k + k )2)((˜s s˜ )2 + (k k )2) j=1 Z0 j=1 j − j+1 j j+1 j − j+1 j − j+1  Y Y k2 m+1 j 1 1 (xj xj−1) − j=1 4 − 2 2 2 2 e , (55) × (2˜u s1) + k 4˜v + k − 1 m+1 P where 2˜u > s˜1 > > s˜m+1. This formula coincides, up to an irrelevant global multiplicative con- stant, with the formula· · · (20) in the Letter, where one performs the rescaling s s˜ /√L, k k˜ /√L, j → j j → j x Lx˜ , u u/˜ √L, v v/˜ √L. j → j → → Finally, note that for arbitraryu ˜ +˜v we can obtain the multipoint joint PDF of the rescaled process X in the form

e E δ(X(˜x ) X ) ...δ(X(˜x ) X )δ(X(1) X ) X 1 − 1 m − m − m+1 h 0 i m e e e 1 e e2(˜u+˜v)b e 2˜vX e = dbe e− m+1 ( ∂ ) G (X , X , x˜ x˜ ) (56) − b  b j+1 j j+1 − j  Zu,˜ v˜ j=0 Z−∞ Y e  e e  e p-8 4.2 Normalisation It is easy to calculate the normalisation of the measure of the rescaled process (44) using known results about the maximum of the Brownian motion. One finds

0 + u˜2 v˜2 ∞ 4(Y 2y) (2y Y )2 2(˜u+˜v)y 2˜vY ue˜ erfc(˜u) ve˜ erfc(˜v) Zu,˜ v˜ = dy dY − e− − e − = − (57) y √π u˜ v˜ Z−∞ Z − where wee have used that the joint PDF of min B = y and B(1) = Y is 2p( √2y, √2Y ) where p is given in (1.9) in [8]. It can also be obtained by Laplace inversion from [9, Chap.− IV,− item 32].

4.3 One point distribution of X(1) The formula (53) with m = 0 gives foru ˜ +˜v> 0 the PDF of the random variable X(1) as e 0 1 2˜vY 2(˜u+˜v)b 1 Y 2 (Y 2b)2 P (Y )= E δ(X(1) Y ) = 2(˜u +˜v)e− dbe e− e− e− θ(Y b) (58) X − Zu,˜ v˜ √π − − h i Z−∞   which leads to e e e Y 2 2(˜u +˜v) 2˜vY e− 2Y (˜u+˜v) 1 1 (˜u+˜v)(˜u+˜v+4Y ) u˜ +˜v P (Y )= e− (θ(Y )+ θ( Y )e ) e 4 erfc + Y 2√π(˜u +˜v) − − 4 2 | | Zu,˜ v˜  ! (59) Using the normalisatione in (57), one checks that it is correctly normalized to unity R dY P (Y )=1.

Laplace transform. Alternatively, foru ˜ +˜v > 0 we can use the Laplace transform,R obtained for L = 1 in [7], extended here to general L, and which leads, for the rescaled process in the limit L + (as discussed in the previous section one needs to rescale k k/√L) to the formula → ∞ → + 2 2 c˜X(1) I(˜c) ∞ k k E[e− ]= , I(˜c)= F (2˜v +˜c, 2˜u c˜), F (a,b)= dke− 4 (60) I(0) − (k2 + a2)(k2 + b2) Z0 One has e a2 2 2 + 2 4 a a g(a) b g(b) ∞ k 1 πe erfc 2 F (a,b)= − , g(a)= dke− 4 = (61) a2 b2 k2 + a2 2a − Z0  This leads to the formula, for c ( 2˜v, 2˜u), ∈ − 1 c(c 4˜u) u˜2 c c c(˜u+˜v)+˜v2 e 4 − (˜v u˜) e (c 2˜u)erfc u˜ + (c +2˜v)erfc +˜v e E cX(1) − − − 2 2 e− = 2 2 (62) (c u˜ +˜v) (2ev˜ v˜ erfc(˜v) 2eu˜ u˜ erfc(˜u))   h i − − e Expanding in c, this formula leads to expressions for the mean and variance of X(1). The Laplace inversion of that formula is not a priori obvious. One can check however (through a tedious calculation) that it is indeed the Laplace transform of P (Y ) in (59). This shows the consistencye with the claims of the previous section, and that the method using the Brownian representation of the measure is quite efficient to obtain the PDF’s of the process.

4.4 Properties of the minimum of the rescaled process X Let X be the minimum of X(˜x) on the intervalx ˜ [0, 1] and let 0 6 x˜ 6 1 be the first point where m ∈ m it is reached. Then the joint PDF of Xm,x ˜m and of the value Y =e X(1) of the process at the boundary is givene by e

B 2(˜u+˜v)Xm 2˜vY P (Xm, x˜m, Ye)= Cu,vP (Xm, x˜m, Y )e e − , (63) where C is a normalization, and P B(X , x , Y ) is the corresponding joint PDF for the Brownian B u,v e m m e e with diffusion coefficient 1/2 and zero drift. Using the main result of [8] we obtain e 2 − 2 1 4 y (Y y) y (y Y ) +2(˜u+˜v)y 2˜vY − x − 1−x − P (y, x, Y )= 3|/2| − 3/2 e θ( y)θ(Y y)θ(0

p-9 Integration over x, the position of the minimum, using the identity below (1.9) in [8] leads to the joint PDF of the minimum and the value at the boundary as

1 4(Y 2y) (Y 2y)2+2(˜u+˜v)y 2˜vY P (y, Y )= − e− − − θ( y)θ(Y y) (65) √π − − Zu,v This PDF is correctly normalized to unity, from (57). Integrating over y we obtain once again (by a different method) the result (59). However, with this method it appears to be valid for anyu ˜,v ˜.

5. Translation of the results of Hariya-Yor

Let us state the results of [1, 3] and translate them into our notations. In the Letter, we consider the measure on continuous real-valued processes X(x) = Xˆ(x) vx, defined on on [0,L], such that the density of Xˆ is − (u+v) L ˆ 2 L − dx( dX ) 2Xˆ (x)+2vx Xeˆ − 0 dx dxe− . (66) D R Z0 ! Hariya and Yor [1] studied several probability measures on Brownian paths weighted by exponential functionals of the Brownian motion. In particular, they study the measure on processes X(s)= B(s)+µs defined on [0,t], denoted (µ,m) in [1], defined by Pt t m 1 t dB 2 − ds( ) 2B(s)+2µs Be− 2 0 ds dse . (67) D R Z0  where B denotes the standard Brownian motion, to distinguish it from B which we reserve for the Brownian with diffusion coefficient 1/2, i.e. B = 1 B. In order to match the measures, we let x = 2s, √2 that is Xˆ(x)= B(s = x/2). (68) − Then our measure becomes

(u+v) L/2 B 2 L/2 − 1 ds( d ) 2B(s)+4vs Be− 2 0 ds dse . (69) D R Z0 ! Hence we must identify m = u + v, µ =2v, t = L/2. (70) Haryia-Yor [1] define three regions (see Fig. 2), which exactly match the three regions of our phase diagram:

R = 2m>µ,µ> 0 = u> 0,v> 0 (71) 1 { } { } R = m < µ, 2m < µ = uµ,µ< 0 = u>v,v< 0 (73) 3 { } { } They also defined the borders between these regions

L = 2m = µ,µ > 0 = u =0,v> 0 , (74) 1 { } { } L = m = µ,µ < 0 = u = v,v < 0 , (75) 2 { } { } L = m> 0, µ =0 = u> 0, v =0 , (76) 3 { } { }

so that L1 is between R1 and R2, L2 is between R2 and R3, L3 is between R1 and R3. Hariya and Yor proved [1, Theorem 1.3] (the statement can also be found in the review [3, Theorem 7.4]) that we have the following weak convergence of probability measures on continuous functions:

(0) (0) = if (u, v) L1 R1 L3, W2γν=m−µ/2 W2γν=u ∈ ∪ ∪ (µ,m) (µ 2m) ( 2u) ===== − = − if (u, v) L1 R2 L2, (77) Pt t + ⇒  W W ∈ ∪ ∪ → ∞  ( µ) ( 2v)  − = − if (u, v) L2 R3 L3. W2γν=m−µ W2γu−v ∈ ∪ ∪  p-10 v

L1 R1

R2 L 0 3 u

L2 R3

0

Fig. 2: The regions R1, R2, R3 and their borders L1, L2, L3 defined in [1].

In (77), γ is a Gamma random variable with parameter ν (and by convention, γ = 0), (µ) denotes ν 0 W the law of a Brownian motion with drift µ , and (µ) denotes the law of the process W2γν t B t B + µt log 1+2γ e2 s+2µsds . (78) 7→ t − ν  Z0  Using (68) this implies that the process X(x) converges as L goes to infinity to the following, consistent with Equations (34) and (35) in the Letter.

• When u, v > 0, X(x) weakly converges to

x 2B(z) B(x)+log 1+ γu e− dz . (79)  Z0 

• When u 6 0 and u 6 v, X(x) weakly converges to

B(x)+ ux. (80)

• And, when v 6 0, u > v, X(x) weakly converges to

x 2B(z) 2vz B(x)+ vx + log 1+ γu v e− − dz . (81) −  Z0 

In (79), (80) and (81), B(x) denotes a Brownian motion with diffusion coefficient 1/2, and γu and γu v denote independent Gamma distributed random variables with respective shape parameters u and u −v, and scale parameter 1. − When u = v > 0, the process in (81) becomes simply a Brownian motion with drift u = v and diffusion coefficient− 1/2. This non-trivial identity can be found in [1, Eq. (1.8)], see also (97) below.−

6. Review of the main arguments in [1]

Here we describe the derivation of the convergence result (77), that is [1, Theorem 1.3], using the notation of the present paper.

6.1 Overall argument Consider the process X(x) with 0 6 x 6 L. We are interested in taking L + and describing the process X(z) for all z 6 x, where x is fixed as L + . For this we can split→ the∞ process in two parts: X(z) for 0 6 z 6 x and X(z) for x

p-11 a general bounded functional Fx[X]= F [ X(z) 06z6x] which depends only on the first part. One has, from Equation (7) in the Letter { }

u+v E 1 E 1 X [Fx[X]] = B−v Fx[B v] x L (82) u,v,L  − dze 2B−v(z) + dze 2B−v(z)  Z 0 − x − !  R R  where in the LHS the average is over the full process X(z) 6 6 and in the RHS it is over a Brownian { }0 z L motion with diffusion coefficient 1/2 and drift v, denoted B v(z) 06z6L. In the denominator we have splitted the integral into two pieces. Since the− increments{ of− the Brownian} motion after time x are independent of the value B v(x), we have the equality in law (for a fixed x) − L L L x 2B− (z) 2B− (x) 2(B− (z) B− (x)) (d) 2B− (x) − 2B˜− (z) dze− v = e− v dze− v − v = e− v dze− v (83) Zx Zx Z0

where B˜ v(z) is an independent Brownian motion with diffusion coefficient 1/2 and drift v. Hence we can rewrite− − E E X [Fx[X]] = B− (z) [Fx[B v]Qx[B v]] (84) { v }06z6x − − in terms of the weight

x ∆(a,ξ,L x) 2B−v(z) 2B−v (x) Qx[B v]= − , a = dze− , ξ = e− (85) − ∆(0, 1,L) Z0 where we have defined

L L (u+v) 2B˜− (z) 2B˜(z)+2vz ∆(a,ξ,L)= E (a + ξZ )− , Z = dze− v = dze− , (86) B˜−v L L 0 0 h i Z Z which depends only on the random variable ZL. The variable ∆(a,ξ,L) has been much studied and by [1, Theorem 2.2], translated in our variables using (68),(70), we have

− − v2x v 1 + ru 1e r e ξ− ∞ u , u> 0, v > 0 × Γ(u) 0 (ar+ξ) ∆(a,ξ,L x) (v2 u2)x (u+v) lim − =  e − ξ− R , u 6 0,u 6 v (87) L + ∆(0, 1,L) + u−v−1 −r → ∞  1 ∞ r e 6  Γ(u v) 0 (ar+ξ)u+v , v 0,v

+ b 1 r 1 1 ∞ r e E = dr − − (88) γb (γ a + ξ)c Γ(b) (ar + ξ)c  b  Z0

where γb denotes the Gamma variable Γ(b, 1). For instance, for u > v, the limit in the third line is easily understood since for v< 0 one knows that limL + ZL = Z , where 1/Z is a Gamma variable Γ( 2v, 1). For the other cases, see [1, Theorem 2.2]. → ∞ ∞ ∞ −

6.2 Large L limits Now we are able to take the large L limits of (84). The simplest case to analyze is u 6 0,u 6 v. Inserting 2B− (x) the limit in the second line of (87), with ξ = e− v , into (84) one sees that the measure for X(z), 0 6 z 6 x is x dX(z) 2 x dX(z) 2 (v2 u2)x dz +v +2(u+v)X(x) dz u Xe − e− 0 dz = Xe− 0 dz − (89) D D R  R  with X(0) = 0, so X(z) is a Brownian with diffusion coefficient 1/2 and drift u, as stated in the Letter. Note that the multiplication by the weight e2(u+v)X(x) has changed the drift from v to u. This is a general fact, which is a special case of the Cameron-Martin (CM) theorem. −

p-12 Consider now the limit in the first line in (87), that is when u> 0, v > 0. Inserting it into (84) and using the CM theorem (from the first line to the second) yields

2 1 E E v x+2vB−v(x)E X [Fx[X]] = B−v (z) 06z6x Fx[B v]e γu x (90) { } − 2B−v(z) 2B−v(x) u " " (γu 0 dze− + e− ) ##

E E 1 R = B(z) Fx[B] γu x (91) { }06z6x 2B(z) 2B(x) u " "(γu 0 dze− + e− ) ## E = Y (z) 6 6 [Fx[Y ]] R (92) { }0 z x where in the second line B has no drift. The non-trivial part is the third line, i.e. after expectation over γu the average is the same that over the path transformed process,

z ′ 2B(z ) Y (z)= B(z)+log 1+ γu dz′e− (93)  Z0  which gives the result stated in the Letter (and above in (77)). A similar identity allows to obtain the result stated above in the third line in (77), using (87), when v

6.3 The T -transformation on paths For completeness, we briefly recall here how the identity (92) is derived in [1]. For simplicity we will return to Bµ, the standard Brownian motion with drift µ used there, and use the correspondence (68),(70) at the end. The argument is based on:

(i) The definition of the path transformation Tz (also used in [10]) defined for any process X as

t T (X)(t)= X log 1+ z dse2X(s) (94) z t −  Z0  which has the following interesting properties

1 1 eTz(X)(t) ′ ′ X(t) t = t + z, TzTz = Tz+z , e = t (95) dse2Tz(X)(s) dse2X(s) 1 z dse2Tz(X)(s) 0 0 − 0 The firstR follows from theR total derivative property R

e2X(t) 1 d 1 e2Tz(X)(t) = = . (96) t 2X(s) 2 −z dt t 2X(s) (1 + z 0 dse ) 1+ z 0 dse

The second is a consequence of the first.R The third is obtained fromR the first, also consistent with the fact that the inverse path transform of Tz is T z. − (ii) The non-trivial identity in law, from [11, 12], valid for µ< 0,

B 1 B µ t>0 , + B = T2γ−µ ( µ) t>0 , 2γ µ (97) { } ∞ 2 µ(s) { − } − 0 dse !  R Using these two inputs, the derivation of (92) goes as follows. The simple change of drift

t dX(s) 2 t dX(s) 2 1 ν 1 (ν2 b2)t 1 b +(ν b)X(t) e− 2 0 ds − = e− 2 − e− 2 0 ds − − (98) R  R  gives for any observable 1 2 2 (ν b )t (ν b)Bb(t) E [O(Bν )] = e− 2 − E e − O(Bb) . (99) h i p-13 Let us apply it with the choice O(X) := F [T2γb (X)]. One obtains

1 2 2 B E B 2 (ν b )tE (ν b) b(t) B [F [T2γb ( ν )]] = e− − e − F [T2γb ( b)] (100)

h (ν b)T2γ (Bb)(ti) 1 2 2 e − b 2 (ν b )tE B = e− − B F [T2γb ( b)] (101) t 2T2γ ( b)(s) ν b " (1 2γb dse b ) # − 0 − t B b ν 2 −b(s) − 2 2 R 1 B− dse 2 (ν b )tE (ν b) b(t) 0 B = e− − e − 1 + B F [ b)] (102)  − ∞ 2 −b(s) −  0R dse !  R  In the second line we have used the last identity in (95). In the third line the identity in law (97) has B B been used to replace the joint average over T2γb ( b) and γb with the same joint average over b and + B − ∞ 2 −b 1/ 0 dse (s). Now since we are interested only in the first part of the process (up to time t) we + B (d) B ∞ 2 −b(s) 2 −b(t) canR replace t dse = e /(2γb) thus

R t B + B B 2 −b(s) ∞ 2 −b(s) 2 −b(t) 0 dse t dse (d) e 1 + B = t B + B = t B B (103) − ∞ 2 −b(s) 2 −b(s) ∞ 2 −b(s) 2 −b(s) 2 −b(t) 0R dse 0 dse R + t dse 2γb 0 dse + e R R R R Inserting into (102) and using again the CM theorem to relate expectations over B b to B ν one finally obtains the identity − −

b ν 1 − E B 6 E B 6 [F [T2γb ( ν ),s t]] = t B B F [ ν ,s t] (104)  2 −ν (s) 2 −ν (t) −  2γb 0 dse + e !  R  which for ν = 0 and b = u and upon the correspondence (68),(70) leads to (92).

7. References

[1] Hariya Y. and Yor M., Limiting distributions associated with moments of exponential Brownian function- als, Stud. Sci. Math. Hung., 41 (2004) 193. [2] Barraquand G. and Le Doussal P., unpublished., . [3] Matsumoto H. and Yor M., Exponential functionals of brownian motion, i: Probability laws at fixed time, Probab. surveys, 2 (2005) 312. [4] Monthus C. and Comtet A., On the flux distribution in a one dimensional disordered system, Journal de Physique I, 4 (1994) 635. [5] Krug J. and Tang L., Disorder-induced unbinding in confined geometries, Phys. Rev. E, 50 (1994) 104. [6] Schutz¨ G., Time-dependent correlation functions in a one-dimensional asymmetric exclusion process, Phys. Rev. E, 47 (1993) 4265. [7] Corwin I. and Knizel A., Stationary measure for the open KPZ equation, preprint arXiv:2103.12253, (2021) . [8] Shepp L. A., The joint density of the maximum and its location for a with drift, Journal of Applied probability, (1979) 423. [9] Borodin A. N. and Salminen P., Handbook of Brownian motion-facts and formulae (Springer Science & Business Media) 2015. [10] Donati-Martin C., Yor M. and Matsumoto H., Some absolute continuity relationships for certain anticipative transformations of geometric brownian motions, Publ. R. I. M. S., 37 (2001) 295. [11] Dufresne D., An affine property of the reciprocal asian option process, Osaka J. Math., 38 (2001) 379. [12] Matsumoto H. and Yor M., A relationship between Brownian motions with opposite drifts via certain enlargements of the Brownian filtration, Osaka J. Math., 38 (2001) 383.

p-14