Arxiv:1809.00534V3 [Math-Ph] 29 Oct 2020 So-Called Alternate Loewner–Kufarev Equation, Which Describes Not Necessarily Increasing Chains of Domains

Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications SIGMA 16 (2020), 108, 25 pages Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian

Takafumi AMABA † and Roland FRIEDRICH ‡

† Fukuoka University, 8-19-1 Nanakuma, Jônan-ku,Fukuoka, 814-0180, Japan E-mail: [email protected] ‡ ETH Zürich,D-GESS, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland E-mail: [email protected] Received June 30, 2020, in final form October 22, 2020; Published online October 29, 2020 https://doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2020.108

Abstract. We introduce the class of controlled Loewner–Kufarev equations and consider aspects of their algebraic nature. We lift the solution of such a controlled equation to the (Sato)–Segal–Wilson Grassmannian, and discuss its relation with the tau-function. We briefly highlight relations of the Grunsky matrix with integrable systems and conformal field theory. Our main result is the explicit formula which expresses the solution of the controlled equation in terms of the signature of the driving function through the action of words in generators of the Witt algebra. Key words: Loewner–Kufarev equation; Grassmannian; conformal field theory; Witt algebra; free probability theory; Faber polynomial; Grunsky coefficient; signature 2020 Mathematics Subject Classification: 35Q99; 30F10; 35C10; 58J65

1 Introduction

C. Loewner [21] and P.P. Kufarev [20] initiated a theory which was then further extended by C. Pommerenke [29], and which shows that given any continuously increasing family of simply connected domains containing the origin in the complex plane, the inverses of the Riemann mappings associated to the domains are described by a partial diﬀerential equation, the so- called Loewner–(Kufarev) equation

∂ f (z) = zf 0(z)p(t, z), ∂t t t

where the ft are the inverses of the Riemann map and p(z, t) is a function with positive real part (see Section 2.2 for details). More recently, I. Markina and A. Vasil’ev [25, 27] considered the arXiv:1809.00534v3 [math-ph] 29 Oct 2020 so-called alternate Loewner–Kufarev equation, which describes not necessarily increasing chains of domains. We introduce a further generalisation, namely, the class of controlled Loewner–Kufarev equations

0 dft(z) = zft(z){dx0(t) + dξ(x, z)t}, f0(z) ≡ z ∈ D,

where D is the unit disc in the complex plane centred at zero, x0, x1, x2,... are given functions P∞ n which will be called the driving functions, x = (x1, x2,...) and ξ(x, z)t := n=1 xn(t)z . The controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation can be transformed, after a calculation, into

∞ X dft(z) = − (Lnf)(z)dxn, n=0 2 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich

n+1 where the Ln := −z ∂/(∂z), n ∈ Z, are the generators of the Witt algebra, i.e., the central charge zero Virasoro algebra, satisfying the commutation relations

[Lm,Ln] = (m − n)Lm+n. (1.1)

Therefore, we are going to consider an extension of [10], where the second author established and studied the role of Lie vector fields, boundary variations and the Witt algebra in connection with the Loewner–Kufarev equation. Let us recall first some of the classical work of A.A. Kirillov and D.V. Yuriev [15] / G.B. Segal and G. Wilson [32] / N. Kawamoto, Y. Namikawa, A. Tsuchiya and Y. Yamada [14] which will be also fundamental in the present context, in particular in understanding the appearance of the Virasoro algebra with nontrivial central charge. A.A. Kirillov and D.V. Yuriev [15], constructed a highest weight representation of the Virasoro algebra, where the representation space is given by the space of all holomorphic sections of an 1 analytic line bundle over the orientation-preserving diffeomorphism group Diff+S of the unit 1 1 1 circle S (modulo rotations). They also gave an embedding of Diff+S /S into the infinite dimensional Grassmannian. In fact, this embedding is an example of a construction of solutions to the KdV hierarchy found by I. Krichever [19], which we address in Section 3.2. If we embed a univalent function on the unit disc D into the infinite dimensional Grassmannian, by the methods of Kirillov–Yuriev [15], Krichever [19], or Segal–Wilson [32], then one needs to track the Faber polynomials and Grunsky coefficients associated to the univalent function. In general, it is not easy to calculate them from the definition. One of our main results is, however, the following.

Theorem 1.1 (see Propositions 2.12 and 2.14). The Faber polynomials and Grunsky coefficients associated to solutions of the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation satisfy linear differential equations, and the Grunsky coefficients can be explicitly calculated.

In [10], the second author proposed to lift the embedded Loewner–Kufarev equation to the determinant line bundle over the Sato–Segal–Wilson Grassmannian Gr(H), as a natural extension of the “Virasoro uniformisation” approach by M. Kontsevich [16] / R. Friedrich and J. Kalkkinen [11] to construct generalised stochastic / Schramm–Loewner evolutions [31] on arbitrary Riemann surfaces, which would also yield a connection with conformal field theory in the spirit of [14, 32]. Let us also mention the work of B. Doyon [6], who uses conformal loop ensembles (CLE), and which is related to the content of the present article. In [27], I. Markina and A. Vasil’ev established basic parts of this program, by considering embedded solutions to the Loewner–Kufarev equation into the Segal–Wilson Grassmannian and related the dynamics therein with the representation of the Virasoro algebra, as discussed by Kirillov–Yuriev [15]. Further, they considered the tau-function associated to the embedded solution as a lift to the determinant line bundle. As observed and briefly discussed in [11, 16], the generator of the stochastic Loewner equation is hypo-elliptic. I. Markina, I. Prokhorov and A. Vasil’ev [24] observed and discussed the sub-Riemannian nature of the coefficients of univalent functions. As the second author pointed out [10], this connects with the general theory of hypo-elliptic flows, as explained in the book by F. Baudoin [4], and led him to propose a connection of the (stochastic) Loewner–Kufarev equation with rough paths. Now, in the theory of rough paths (see, e.g., the introduction in [22]), one of the central objects of consideration is the following controlled differential equation:

dYt = ϕ(Yt)dXt, (1.2) where Xt is a continuous path in a normed space V , called the input of (1.2). On the other hand, the path Yt is called the output of (1.2). When we deal with this equation, an important Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 3 object is the signature of the input Xt, with values in the (extended) tensor algebra associated with V and which is written in the following form:

1 2 n S(X)s,t := 1,Xs,t,Xs,t,...,Xs,t,... , s 6 t.

n If Xt has finite variation with respect to t, then each Xs,t is the nth iterated integral of Xt over the interval [s, t]. With this object, a combination of the Magnus expansion and the Chen– Strichartz expansion theorem (see, e.g., [4, Section 1.3]) tells us that the output Yt is given as the result of the action of S(X)0,t applied to Y0. Heuristically, we may say that a ‘group element’ S(X) in some big ‘group’ acts on some element in the (extended) tensor algebra T ((V )) which gives the output Yt, or it might be better to say that the vector field ϕ defines how the ‘group element’ acts on the algebra. In this spirit, we would like to describe such a picture in the context of controlled Loewner–Kufarev equations. For this, we extract the algebraic structure of the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation. If we regard the driving functions x0, x1, x2,... just as letters in an alphabet then it turns out that explicit expressions for the associated Grunsky coefficients are given by the algebra of formal power series, where the space of coefficients is given by words over this alphabet. It is worth mentioning that the action of the words over this alphabet will be actually given by the negative part of the Witt generators. Thus the action of the signature encodes many actions of such negative generators. This can be used to derive a formula for ft(z) as the signature ‘applied’ to the initial data f0(z) ≡ z (see Theorem 3.8). Now, given a diffeomorphism of the unit circle S1, the solution to the associated conformal welding problem is a solution to the dispersionless Toda lattice hierarchy [34, 36]. Also in this case, the corresponding tau-function is described by the (full) Grunsky coefficients and this generates the solution via an explicit formula. This gives us the possibility to explicitly describe the solution to the conformal welding problem associated to Malliavin’s canonic diffusion [23] by means of a controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation; a topic to which we intend to return elsewhere. Since the canonic diffusion is a natural object ‘on’ the diffeomorphism group of S1, as well as the Brownian motion on a Euclidean space, it would describe a natural universal class in the infinite-dimensional situation. However, the story so far lets us ask how the signature associated with the driving functions describes the corresponding tau-function rather than ft itself.

Theorem 1.2 (see Theorem 3.9). Along the solution of the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation, the associated tau-function can be written as the determinant of a quadratic form of the signature.

Let us now summarise the structure of the paper. In Section2, we formulate solutions ft(z) to controlled Loewner–Kufarev equations. We add also a brief review of the classical Loewner– Kufarev equation, and then explain how the classical one is recovered from the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation. We track the variation of the Taylor-coefficients of ft and also the Faber polynomials and Grunsky coefficients. In Section3, we first recall briefly basics of the Segal–Wilson Grassmannian and Krichever’s construction. After that, we describe how a univalent function on D is embedded into the Grassmannian. We extract the algebraic structure of the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation in order to obtain Theorem 3.9. In AppendixA, we give the proofs of Theorems 2.10 and 3.9, respectively, and of Proposition 2.14.

2 The controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation

General assumption: N denotes the set of all positive integers, i.e., {1, 2, 3,...}, (without zero). 4 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich

2.1 Deﬁnition of solutions to controlled Loewner–Kufarev equations

Given functions x1, x2,... : [0,T ] → C, we will write x := (x1, x2,...) and

∞ X n ξ(x, z)t := xn(t)z , for z ∈ C, n=1 if it converges. If A: [0,T ] → C is of bounded variation, we write dA or A(dt) (when emphasising the coordinate t on [0,T ]) for the associated complex-valued Lebesgue–Stieltjes measure on [0,T ], and the total variation measure will be denoted by |dA|.

Deﬁnition 2.1. Let T > 0. Suppose that x0 : [0,T ] → R, as well as x1, x2,... : [0,T ] → C, are continuous and of bounded variation, and x0(0) = 0. Let ft : D → C be conformal mappings for 0 6 t 6 T . We say {ft}06t6T is a solution to

0 dft(z) = zft(z){dx0(t) + dξ(x, z)t}, f0(z) ≡ z ∈ D (2.1) if

(1) f0(z) ≡ z for z ∈ D, P∞ R n (2) n=1 n [0,T ] |dxn|(t)r converges for all r ∈ (0, 1), 0 (3) for each compact set K ⊂ D, the mapping [0,T ] 3 t 7→ ft|K ∈ C(K) is continuous with respect to the uniform norm on K, (4) it holds that

Z t 0 ft(z) − z = zfs(z) dx0(s) + dξ(x, z)s , (t, z) ∈ [0,T ] × D. 0

In the sequel, we refer to equation (2.1) as a controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation (with driving paths x0 and x := (x1, x2,...)). In joint work with T. Murayama [3], we proved that a solution to the controlled Loewner–Ku- farev equation is unique if it exists [3, Theorem 3.1]. In the ω-controlled case, for ω(0,T ) < 1/2, a solution exists (and hence uniquely exists), cf. [3, Theorem 3.2]. More speciﬁcally, we have

Proposition 2.2 ([3, Lemma 2.1]). Under the assumptions (1)–(3) above,

(i) the series ξ(x, z)t in z has convergence radius one for each t ∈ [0,T ],

(ii) the family {ξ(x, z)}06t6T of holomorphic functions on D is continuous in the topology of locally uniform convergence,

(iii) the function t 7→ ξ(x, z)t is of bounded variation and satisﬁes

∞ X k dξ(x, z)t = z dxk(t), k=1

for each z ∈ D.

0 x0(t) Furthermore, in [3, equations (3.1) and (3.2)] we proved that ft(0) = e > 0.

Deﬁnition 2.3. We say {ft}06t6T is a univalent solution to the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation if it is a solution to (2.1) and ft is a univalent function on D for each 0 6 t 6 T . Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 5

2.2 Loewner–Kufarev equation as a controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation

Deﬁnition 2.4. Suppose that Ω(t) ⊂ C is given for each 0 6 t 6 T . {Ω(t)}06t6T is called a Loewner subordination chain if

(1)0 ∈ Ω(s) ( Ω(t) for each 0 6 s < t 6 T , (2)Ω( t) is a simply connected domain (i.e., open, connected and simply connected) for each t ∈ [0,T ], (3) (Continuity in the sense of Carathéodory, under the conditions (1) and (2)): For each ∞ t ∈ [0,T ] and any sequence 0 6 tn ↑ t, ∪n=1Ω(tn) = Ω(t). For the following Definition 2.5, cf. specifically [29, Chapter 6, Section 6.1, pp. 156–157; Chapter 2, Section 2.1, p. 35 and Lemma 2.1].

Deﬁnition 2.5 ([29]). Let ft : D → C be given for 0 6 t 6 T . Then {ft}06t6T is called a Loewner chain if

(1) ft is analytic and univalent on D, for each 0 6 t 6 T , t 2 (2) ft(z) = e z + a2(t)z + ··· , for z ∈ D, (3) fs(D) ⊂ ft(D), for each 0 6 s < t 6 T .

The above chains {Ω(t)} and {ft} are known to be in one-to-one correspondence via the 0 relation Ω(τ) = ft(D), where t = log fτ (0) is a time-reparametrisation to satisfy Deﬁnition 2.5(2) (see [29, Chapter 6, Section 6.1]).

Theorem 2.6 ([29, Theorem 6.2]). Let ft : D → C be given for 0 6 t 6 T . Then {ft}06t6T is a Loewner chain if and only if there exist constants r0,K0 > 0, and a function p(t, z), analytic in z ∈ D, and measurable in t ∈ [0,T ] such that t (i) for each 0 6 t 6 T , the function ft(z) = e z + ··· is analytic in |z| < r0, the mapping [0,T ] 3 t 7→ ft(z) is absolutely continuous for each |z| < r0, and

t |ft(z)| 6 K0e , for all |z| < r0 and t ∈ [0,T ].

(ii) Re{p(t, z)} > 0, for all (t, z) ∈ [0,T ] × D, and ∂ f (z) = zf 0(z)p(t, z), (2.2) ∂t t t

for all |z| < r0 and for almost all t ∈ [0,T ]. According to the terminology in [5] we call the equation (2.2) the Loewner–Kufarev equation (if we regard p(t, z) as given and ft(z) as unknown). ∂ 0 Because of equation (2.2), it holds that p(t, 0) = lim ft(z) /(zft(z)) = 1, and hence the z→0 ∂t ‘Herglotz representation theorem’ applies, which permits us to conclude that, for every t ∈ [0,T ], 1 there exists a probability measure νt on S = ∂D (which is naturally identiﬁed with [0, 2π] as measurable spaces, and then the induced probability measure is still denoted by νt) such that

Z 2πeiθ + z p(t, z) = iθ νt(dθ) for z ∈ D. 0 e − z Substituting this into (2.2), the Loewner–Kufarev equation becomes

∂f Z 2πeiθ + z t 0 (2.3) (z) = zft(z) iθ νt(dθ). ∂t 0 e − z 6 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich

Assuming that νt(dθ) =: νt(θ)dθ, we write the Fourier series of νt(θ) as

( ∞ ) 1 X ν (θ) = a (t) + a (t) cos(kθ) + b (t) sin(kθ) . t 2π 0 k k k=1 R t We temporarily introduce the notation x0(t) := 0 a0(s)ds and Z t Z t uk(t) := ak(s)ds, vk(t) := − bk(s)ds, 0 0 for k = 1, 2,.... Because of the relations

Z 2π iθ Z 2π iθ 1 e + z k 1 e + z k iθ cos(kθ)dθ = z , iθ sin(kθ)dθ = −iz , 2π 0 e − z 2π 0 e − z for k = 1, 2,... and |z| < 1, equation (2.3) assumes the following form:

( ∞ ) ∂ft X (z) = zf 0(z) x˙ (t) + u˙ (t) + iv˙ (t)zk . ∂t t 0 k k k=1 This can be rewritten as the following controlled diﬀerential equation

0 dft(z) = zft(z){dx0(t) + dξ(x, z)t}, P∞ k where xk(t) = uk(t) + ivk(t) for k > 1, and ξ(x, z)t = k=1 xk(t)z . If we omit the condition Re{p(t, z)} > 0, that is, we allow the real part of p(t, z) to have an arbitrary sign, then equation (2.2) is called the alternate Loewner–Kufarev equation, as considered by I. Markina and A. Vasil’ev [25]. Intuitively, this describes evolutions of conformal mappings whose images of D are not necessary increasing, i.e., not strict subordinations. It appears that the general theory with respect to the existence and uniqueness of solutions is not yet fully developed. However, our controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation (2.1) deals with this d alternate case because we have not assumed that p(t, z) := dt (x0(t) + ξ(x, z)t) has a positive real part. Remark 2.7. Readers focusing on radial Loewner equations might feel puzzled by the heuristic νt(dθ) assumption that the Radon–Nikodym density dθ = νt(θ) exists, because the radial Loewner equation describes the case νt(dθ) = δeiw(t) (dθ) where w(t) is a continuous path in R, so that there does not exist a Radon–Nikodym density. However, several explicit examples of Loewner– Kufarev equations within this setting, are presented with simulations in Sola [33].

2.3 Taylor coeﬃcients along the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation

Suppose that x0 : [0, +∞) → R, x1, x2,... : [0, +∞) → C are continuous and of bounded variation. Let {ft}06t6T be a solution to the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation (2.1). We parametrise ft as

2 3 4 ft(z) = C(t) z + c1(t)z + c2(t)z + c3(t)z + ··· , (2.4) with the additional convention that c0(t) ≡ 1. The dynamics of the coeﬃcients (c1, c2,...) has been previously studied by Vasil’ev and his co-authors [12, 24, 25, 26]. The (stochastic/Schramm)-Loewner (equation/evolution) (SLE) case is discussed by Friedrich [10]. A complementary, conformal ﬁeld theoretic perspective of the Bieberbach–de Branges theorem is given by Duplantier et al. [7]. Within our framework, we get the following similarly: Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 7

Proposition 2.8. Let {ft}06t6T be a solution to the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation (2.1) with the parametrisation (2.4). Then we have

dC(t) = C(t)dx0(t), and  dc (t) = dx (t) + c (t)dx (t),  1 1 1 0  dc2(t) = dx2(t) + 2c1(t)dx1(t) + 2c2(t)dx0(t),  . . (2.5)  n−1  X dcn(t) = dxn(t) + (k + 1)ck(t)dxn−k(t) + ncn(t)dx0(t), for n 2,  > k=1 with the initial conditions C(0) = 1 and c1(0) = c2(0) = ··· = 0. In particular, C = {C(t)}06t6T takes its values in R.

0 x0(t)−x0(0) As ft(0) = C(t) = e 6= 0, we get

Corollary 2.9. Let {ft}06t6T be a solution to the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation (2.1). Then ft is univalent in a neighbourhood of 0, for each 0 6 t 6 T .

Theorem 2.10. Let {ft}06t6T be a solution to the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation (2.1). Then for each n ∈ N, the coeﬃcient cn in (2.4) is given by n X X c (t) = w(n) enx0(t) n e i1,...,ip p=1 i1,...,ip∈N: i1+···+ip=n Z −i1x0(s1) −i2x0(s2) −ipx0(sp) × e dxi1 (s1)e dxi2 (s2) ··· e dxip (sp),

06s1

w(n) := (n − i ) + 1 (n − (i + i )) + 1 ··· (n − (i + i + ··· + i )) + 1 , e i1,...,ip 1 1 2 1 2 p−1 and n = i1 + ··· + ip. The proof can be found in Appendix A.1.

2.4 Variation of Grunsky coefficients induced by a Loewner–Kufarev equation There are several different ways to introduce the Faber polynomials. Here we give a derivation by utilising Teo [35], and, an alternative one, in Section 3.3, which serves our purpose better. 2 3 For a (formal) power series f(z) = a1z + a2z + a3z + ··· , a1 6= 0, the (generalised) Faber polynomials Qn(w), n ∈ N, associated to f, are defined as ∞ w − f(z) f(z) X Qn(w) log = log − zn. (2.6) w a z n 1 n=1 By differentiating equation (2.6), and reordering it, we obtain, via the Residue theorem, the Faber polynomials (cf. also expression (3.1)), as

" −n # wz−n f 0(z) f −1(ζ) 1 Qn(w) = Res dz = Res dζ. z=0 w − f(z) f(z) ζ=f(z) ζ=0 1 − ζw−1 ζ 8 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich

∞ The coeﬃcients (b−m,−n)m,n=1 in the series expansion

∞ ∞ f(z) − f(ζ) X X log = − b zmζn, (2.7) z − ζ −m,−n m=0 n=0 at (z, ζ) = (0, 0), are called the (generalised) Grunsky coeﬃcients of f. Equivalently, these are deﬁned via the Laurent series at z = 0,

∞ −n X m Qn(f(z)) = z + n b−n,−mz . m=1

Proposition 2.11. Let {ft}06t6T be a solution to the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation (2.1). Then there exists an open neighbourhood U of the origin, such that

(i) U ⊂ D,

(ii) ft|U is univalent for each t ∈ [0,T ], (iii) V := T f (U) is an open neighbourhood of the origin, 06t6T t −1 (iv) for each ζ ∈ V , [0,T ] 3 t 7→ ft (ζ) is continuous and of bounded variation, −1 −1 −1 −1 (v) for each ζ ∈ V , with f (t, ζ) := ft (ζ) and dft (ζ) := f (dt, ζ), we have

( ∞ ) −1 −1 X −1 k dft (ζ) = −ft (ζ) dx0(t) + ft (ζ) dxk(t) , k=1 as Lebesgue–Stieltjes measures on [0,T ].

Let {ft}06t6T be a solution to the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation (2.1). Because of Corollary 2.9, associated to each ft(z) are the corresponding Faber polynomials and Grunsky coeﬃcients, which will be denoted by Qn(t, w), and b−n,−m(t), respectively. Proposition 2.12.

(i) (Variation of Faber polynomials): We have for each n ∈ N, n X dQn(t, w) = ndxn(t) + n Qk(t, w)dxn−k(t). k=1

(ii) (Variation of Grunsky coeﬃcients): For each n, m ∈ N, X db−n,−m(t) = −dxn+m(t) + (k + 1)b−n,−(k+1)(t)dxl(t) k,l∈ ; Z>0 k+l=m−1 X + (k + 1)b−m,−(k+1)dxl(t), (2.8) k,l∈ ; Z>0 k+l=n−1

with the initial condition b−n,−m(0) = 0, for all n, m ∈ N. −1 Proof. (i) Let n ∈ N. Let U and V be as in Proposition 2.11. Then ft (ζ), ζ ∈ V , satisﬁes the equation

( ∞ ) −1 −1 X −1 k dft (ζ) = −ft (ζ) dx0(t) + ft (ζ) dxk(t) . k=1 Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 9

Let X0 ⊂ V be an open disc centred at 0. By using Cauchy’s integral formula, we have for w ∈ X0, Z −1 −n 1 dζ d ft (ζ) dQn(t, w) = −1 2πi ∂X0 ζ 1 − ζw Z −1 −n−1 ∞ 1 f (ζ) X k dζ = (−n) t −f −1(ζ) f −1(ζ) dx (t) 2πi 1 − ζw−1 t t k ζ ∂X0 k=0 n −1 −n+k ! X n Z f (ζ) dζ = t dx (t) 2πi 1 − ζw−1 ζ k k=0 ∂X0 Z n−1 ndxn(t) 1 dζ X = + n Q (t, w)dx (t). 2πi 1 − ζw−1 ζ n−k k ∂X0 k=0

By noting that the orientation of ∂X0 is anti-clockwise, we get 1 Z 1 dζ −1 = 1, 2πi ∂X0 1 − ζw ζ and hence the result. (ii) By putting p(dt, z) := dx0(t) + dξ(x, z)t, and since ft(z) satisﬁes the controlled Loewner– Kufarev equation, we have

0 dQn(t, ft(z)) = Qn(dt, ft(z)) + Qn(t, ft(z))dft(z) 0 0 = Qn(dt, ft(z)) + Qn(t, ft(z)) zft(z)p(dt, z) = Qn(dt, ft(z)) + z ∂zQn(t, ft(z)) p(dt, z), so that dQn(t, ft(z)) = Qn(dt, ft(z)) + z ∂zQn(t, ft(z)) p(dt, z). (2.9)

−n P∞ m By recalling that Qn(t, ft(z)) = z + n m=1 b−n,−m(t)z , we have, by substitution, the following sequence of identities

∞ X m (LHS of (2.9))>1 = (LHS of (2.9)) = n z db−n,−m(t). (2.10) m=1

Here, (··· )>1 is the operator which forgets those terms in (··· ), whose degree is less than one. On the other hand, by Proposition 2.12(i), we have

n X dQn(t, ft(z)) = ndxn(t) + n Qk(t, ft(z))dxn−k(t) k=1 n ∞ ! X −k X m = ndxn(t) + n z + k b−k,−m(t)z dxn−k(t) k=1 m=1 n ∞ n ! X −k X X m = ndxn(t) + n z dxn−k(t) + n kb−k,−m(t)dxn−k(t) z , k=1 m=1 k=1 so that ∞ n ! X X m dQn(t, ft(z)) = n kb−k,−mdxn−k(t) z . (2.11) >1 m=1 k=1 10 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich

We further have ∞ ! ∞ ! −n−1 X k−1 X l z ∂zQn(t, ft(z)) p(dt, z) = z −nz + n kb−n,−kz dx0(t) + dxl(t)z k=1 l=1 ∞ −n X m = n −dx0(t)z − dxm+n(t)z m=1−n ∞ ∞ ! X m X X m + mb−n,−m(t)dx0(t)z + kb−n,−k(t)dxl(t)z , m=1 m=2 k,l>1; k+l=m from which we conclude   ∞ X  X  m z ∂zQn(t, ft(z)) p(dt, z) = n −dxn+m(t) + kb−n,−k(t)dxl(t) z . (2.12) >1   m=1 k>1, l>0; k+l=m Combining (2.11) and (2.12), we obtain

∞ X X (RHS of (2.9))>1 = n −dxn+m(t) + (k + 1)b−n,−(k+1)(t)dxl(t) m=1 k,l∈ ; Z>0 k+l=m−1 ! X m + (k + 1)b−m,−(k+1)dxl(t) z , k,l∈ ; Z>0 k+l=n−1 and then by comparing with (2.10), we get the result. Furthermore, the initial condition is derived from f0(z) ≡ z.

In order to derive an explicit formula for the Grunsky coeﬃcients b−n,−m(t), cf. equation (2.7), we shall introduce some notation. In [2], we study analytic aspects of these coeﬃcients.

Deﬁnition 2.13. Let p, q ∈ N. (1) A bijection σ : {1, 2, . . . , p + q} → {1, 2, . . . , p + q} is called a (p, q)-shuﬄe if it holds that σ(1) < σ(2) < ··· < σ(p) and σ(p + 1) < σ(p + 2) < ··· < σ(p + q).

(2) Suppose that x1, x2, . . . , xp+q : [0,T ] → C are continuous and of bounded variation. Then for each 0 6 t 6 T , we set (x1 ··· xp) ¡ (xp+1 ··· xp+q) (t) Z :=: dx1(t1) ··· dxp(tp) ¡ dxp+1(s1) ··· dxp+q(sq)

06sq6···6s16tp6···6t16t X Z t Z t1 Z tp−1 := dxσ(1)(t1) dxσ(2)(t2) ··· dxσ(p)(tp) 0 0 0 σ−1:(p, q)-shuﬄe Z tp Z s1 Z sq−1 × dxσ(p+1)(s1) dxσ(p+2)(s2) ··· dxσ(p+q)(sq). 0 0 0

The general formula for the Grunsky-coeﬃcients along the controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation (2.1) is stated as next, and which is crucial for the embedding into the Grassmannian, cf. Section3. The proof is given in Appendix A.2. Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 11

Proposition 2.14. For n, m ∈ N and t > 0, Z t (n+m)x0(t) −(n+m)x0(s) b−m,−n(t) = −e e dxm+n(s) 0 n+m−2 m−i n−j X X X X X X − w(i, j)i1,...,ip;j1,...,jq k=2 16i

06uq6···6u16sq6···6s16t Z uq ¡ −j1x0(u1) −jqx0(uq) −kx0(s) e dxj1 (u1) ··· e dxjq (uq) e dxk(s) 0 n+m−1 n+m−k X X X − w(k − m)∅;j1,...,jq k=m+1 q=1 j1,...,jq∈N: j1+···+jq=n+m−k Z (m+n)x0(t) −j1x0(s1) −jqx0(sq) × e e dxj1 (s1) ··· e dxjq (sq)

06sq6···6s16t n+m−1 m+n−k Z sq −kx0(s) X X X × e dxk(s) − w(k − n)i1,...,ip;∅ 0 k=n+1 p=1 i1,...,ip∈N: i1+···+ip=m+n−k Z (m+n)x0(t) −i1x0(u1) −ipx0(up) × e e dxi1 (u1) ··· e dxip (up)

06up6···6u16t Z up −kx0(u) × e dxk(u), (2.13) 0 where, for m = i1 + ··· + ip + r, and n = j1 + ··· + jq + s, we have put

w(r)i1,...,ip;∅ = (m − i1)(m − (i1 + i2)) ··· (m − (i1 + i2 + ··· + ip)),

w(s)∅;j1,...,jq = (n − j1)(n − (j1 + j2)) ··· (n − (j1 + j2 + ··· + jq)), and w(r, s)i1,...,ip;j1,...,jq := w(r)i1,...,ip;∅w(s)∅;j1,...,jq .

3 The controlled Loewner–Kufarev equation embedded into the Segal–Wilson Grassmannian

3.1 Segal–Wilson Grassmannian

2 1 Let H := L S , C be the Hilbert space which consists of all square-integrable complex func- 1 tions on the unit circle S . It decomposes orthogonally into H = H+ ⊕ H−, where H+ and H− k k are the closure of span z : k > 0 and span z : k < 0 , respectively. Deﬁnition 3.1 (G. Segal and G. Wilson [32, Section 2]). The Segal–Wilson Grassmannian Gr := Gr(H) is the set of all closed subspaces W of H satisfying the following:

(1) The orthogonal projection pr+ : W → H+ is Fredholm,

(2) The orthogonal projection pr− : W → H− is compact. 12 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich

The Fredholm index of the orthogonal projection pr+ : W → H+ is called the virtual dimension of W . For d ∈ Z, we set ∞ Gr 2 + d, ∞ := {W ∈ Gr: the virtual dimension of W is d}, ∞ ∞ and Gr 2 , ∞ := Gr 2 + 0, ∞ .

If we take W = H+, then the corresponding projections are given by pr+ = idH+ and pr− = 0, ∞ which are Fredholm and compact operators, respectively. Therefore we have H+ ∈ Gr 2 , ∞ . 1 ∗ Deﬁnition 3.2 ([32, Section 5]). Let Γ+ denote the set of all continuous functions g : S → C , P∞ t zk 1 such that g(z) = e k=1 k , z ∈ S for some t = (t1, t2, t3,...).

The set Γ+ acts on H by pointwise multiplication. In particular, Γ+ forms a group. This action induces the action of Γ+ on Gr: Γ+ × Gr 3 (g, W ) 7→ gW ∈ Gr (see [32, Lemma 2.2 and P∞ t zk Proposition 2.3]), where gW = {gf : f ∈ W }. For any g = e k=1 k ∈ Γ+, the action of g on H is of the form a b g = along H = H ⊕ H , 0 d + − where a: H+ → H+ is invertible and b: H− → H+ is of trace class (see [32, Proposition 2.3]). ∞ Let U be the set of all W ∈ Gr 2 , ∞ such that the orthogonal projection W → H+ is an isomorphism. Then, associated to each W ∈ U is the tau-function τW (t) of W , a function of inﬁnitely many “times” t = (t1, t2,...). It is known that the following holds:

P∞ t zn Proposition 3.3 ([32, Proposition 3.3]). Let W ∈ U. For g = e n=1 n ∈ Γ+, we have −1 τW (t) = det 1 + a bA , where t = (t1, t2, t3,...), a b g−1 = along H = H ⊕ H , 0 d + − and A: H+ → H− is the linear operator such that graph(A) = W .

3.2 Krichever’s construction In connection with algebraic geometry and infinite-dimensional integrable systems, a fundamental observation / construction of Krichever [17, 18, 19] states the following. A solution of the KdV equation is associated with each non-singular algebraic curve, equipped with some additional algebro-geometric data. Segal and Wilson [32] developed and formalised, after a remark by Mumford [28], this construction further. The specific algebro-geometric datum is given by a quintuple (X, L, x∞, z, ϕ), consisting of the following parts. X is a complete, irreducible and complex algebraic curve with a rank- one, torsion-free coherent sheaf L. Additionally, a non-singular point x∞ ∈ X, and a closed neighbourhood X∞, are chosen, such that there exists a local parameter 1/z : X∞ → D ⊂ Cb, with x∞ 7→ 0, and a trivialisation ϕ: L|X∞ → D×C, of L|X∞ . Each section of L|X∞ is identified o o with a complex function on D under ϕ. For X0 := X \ X∞, with X∞ the interior of X∞, the 1 closed sets X0 and X∞ cover X, and X0 ∩ X∞ is identified with S under z. Given this algebro-geometric datum, one can associate a closed subspace W ⊂ H, consisting 1 of all analytic functions S → C which, under the above identification, extend to a holomorphic section of L on an open neighbourhood of X0. More explicitly, one can write H the second component s is a holomorphic section W = −1 : , of ϕ ◦ s ◦ (1/z) |S1 on a neighbourhood of X0 Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 13

−1 where (1/z) : D → X∞ is the inverse function of 1/z. It is known that W ∈ Gr (see [32, Proposition 6.1]), and if X is a compact Riemann surface (then L is automatically a complex line bundle, hence a maximal torsion-free sheaf), this correspondence (X, L, x∞, z, ϕ) 7→ W ∈ Gr is one-to-one (see [32, Proposition 6.2]).

3.3 The appearance of Faber polynomials and Grunsky coeﬃcients

Let f : D → C be a univalent function such that f(0) = 0, and f(D) is bounded by a Jordan −1 curve. We set β : Cb → Cb by β(w) := 1/w. For a subset A ⊂ Cb, we shall write A := β(A), and let Db∞ := Cb \ D. We obtain an algebro-geometric datum (X, L, x∞, z, ϕ) by setting X = Cb, −1 −1 −1 L = Cb × C, x∞ := ∞, X∞ := f D , z := β ◦ f ◦ β : X∞ → Db∞, and ϕ = (1/z) × idC. −1 Correspondingly, we have X0 = Cb \ f(D) . Further, by the Caratheodory extension theorem, z extends continuously to X∞, and therefore we can embed f, by assigning a Hilbert space −1 W = Wf to it, into the Grassmannian. In this case, we have Cb \ f(D) , and hence

H −1 F is a holomorphic function Wf = F ◦ (1/z) |S1 : −1 . on a neighbourhood of Cb \ f(D) In order to start this paper’s main calculation, let us specify this more explicitly. For a closed subset V in Cb, we denote by O(V ) the space of all holomorphic functions deﬁned on an open neighbourhood of V . For a univalent function g : Db∞ → Cb, with g(∞) = ∞, and for each h ∈ O D , we call

1 Z hg−1(ξ) (F[h])(z) := dξ, z ∈ \ g( ) 2πi ξ − z C D∞ ∂(C\g(D∞)) the Faber transform of h (with respect to g). If the boundary ∂(C \ g(D∞)) is analytic, it is known that h ∈ O D iﬀ Fh ∈ O(C\g(D∞)) (see [13, Theorem 1]) and F : O D → O(C\g(D∞)) is bijective. In our case, we put

−1 −1 −1 g := (1/z) = β ◦ f ◦ β : Db∞ → f(D) , and then we can describe O(X0) by O Db∞ through the transformation

−1∗ −1∗ F ◦ β = β ◦ Adβ∗ (F): O Db∞ → O(X0),

∗ −1∗ where Adβ∗ (F) := β ◦ F ◦ β : O Db∞ → O Cb \ f(D) . A direct calculation shows that for P∞ −k each h(η) = k=0 akη ∈ O Db∞ , we have

1 Z hf −1(ζ) dζ ∗ (Adβ (F)[h])(w) = −1 , w ∈ Cb \ f(D). 2πi ∂f(D) 1 − ζw ζ

As a result, (Adβ∗ (F)[h])(w) is a power series in 1/w. Actually, in view of the Cauchy integral formula

Z n ( n 1 ζ dζ η if n 6 0, −1 = η ∈ D∞, 2πi S1 1 − ζη ζ 0 if n > 1, we have

n Z −1 −k n X ak f (ζ) dζ X −1 −k (Adβ∗ (F)[h])(w) = = ak f (w) , 2πi 1 − ζw−1 ζ 60 k=0 ∂X0 k=0 14 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich where f −1(w)−k denotes the constant-part plus the principal-part of the Laurent series 60 −1 −k −1 k for f (w) = 1/f (w) ; hence every element in O Cb \ f(D) can be written as a series in 1/w. The quantity Z −1 −k 1 f (ζ) dζ −1 −k Qk(w) := = f (w) , (3.1) −1 60 2πi ∂X0 1 − ζw ζ for k ∈ N, is called the k-th Faber polynomial associated to the domain C\f(D) (or simply to f), and it is a polynomial of degree k in 1/w, cf. also Section 2.4. −1∗ −1 −1 We conclude that β ◦ Adβ∗ (h) ◦ (1/z) = [Adβ∗ (h)] ◦ f ◦ β , and hence H Wf = span {1} ∪ {Qn ◦ f ◦ (1/z)|S1 }n>1 , where z is the identity map on Db∞; note, if f(z) ≡ z then Wf = H+. Remark 3.4. (a) The Faber polynomials appeared first (with a different formalism, but equivalent to our presentation) in the context of approximations of functions in one complex variable by analytic functions (see [8] and [9]). Since then, they also play an important role in the theory of univalent functions (see [30]). We introduced the Faber polynomials in a slightly non-standard way in order to have them in a form which is suitable for embedding univalent functions into the Grassmannian by using Faber polynomials. (b) In the context of Abelian function theory, the exterior derivatives (n) ω∞ := dQn(f(1/z)), n = 1, 2,... are known as Abelian differentials of the second kind on the Riemann sphere. In general, Krichever’s embedding of the algebro-geometric datum (X, O, Q, z, ϕ), where

(X, α1, . . . , αg, β1, . . . , βg) is a homologically marked compact Riemann surface with genus g, O is the structure sheaf of X, Q ∈ X, z and ϕ are local uniformisers, and a local trivialisation of O, is described by using multivalued meromorphic functions ϕ(0)(z) ≡ 1, Z z ∞ −m (n) X z ϕ(n)(z) := ω =: zn − q , Q nm m m=1 (n) (modulo periods) where ωQ ’s are (normalised) abelian diﬀerentials of the second kind [14, Section 2.27 and p. 304]. These multivalued meromorphic functions can be regarded as a generalisation of the Faber polynomials (see [37, p. 131]). (c) Given again a homologically marked compact Riemann surface X, (α , β )g with genus g, √ i i i=1 Krichver’s embedding of yet another datum X, Ω1/2, Q, z, dz or √ 1/2 X, Ω ⊗ Lc, Q, z, dz ⊗ sc is described in [14, equation (2.34)]. Here, Ω1/2 is the so-called theta characteristic of the compact Riemann surface X, Lc is a complex line bundle of degree 0 parametrised by g g c ∈ C (modulo the lattice associated to (αi, βi)i=1), and sc is a local trivialisation of Lc. In particular, the embedding of the latter and the associated Fermionic state (the image under 1/2 the Pl¨ucker embedding) are described by means of the Szeg˝okernel of Ω ⊗Lc (see [1, 14], in which, the scattering operator in [14, Section 5.12] is a special case of a Bogoliubov transformation discussed in [1, equations (2.15)–(2.20)]), and then the corresponding tau- P∞ function τ(t) is described as a theta function multiplied by exp n,m=1 qnmtntm (see [14, Theorem 5.6]). Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 15

3.4 Action of words in Witt algebra generators

Let X = {x1, x2, x3,...} be an alphabet, consisting of a countable set of non-commuting letters. ∗ The free monoid X on X is the set of all words in the letters X, including the empty word ∅. We denote by

∞ M M ChXi := Cw = C ⊕ ChXin w∈X∗ n=1 the free associative and unital C-algebra on X. The unit of this algebra is the empty word which L we will denote by 1 := ∅. The set ChXin stands for |w|=n Cw where the summation is taken over all words w of length n.

Deﬁnition 3.5. We deﬁne

∞ X k ξ(x, z) := xkz ∈ ChXi[[z]], n=1 and a distinguished element S(ξ(x, z)) ∈ ChXi[[z]] by

∞ n X n X X S(ξ(x, z)) := 1 + z xi1 ··· xip . n=1 p=1 i1,...,ip∈N: i1+···+ip=n

Deﬁnition 3.6. Let x0 : [0, +∞) → R and x1, x2,... : [0, +∞) → C be continuous and of R bounded variation. For 0 6 s 6 t, we deﬁne [ 1]s,t := 1 and Z Z −i1x0(u1) −i2x0(u2) −ipx0(up) (xip ··· xi2 xi1 ) := e dxi1 (u1)e dxi2 (u2) ··· e dxip (up). s,t s6u1

−1 −1 We deﬁne a bilinear map T : ChXi z × ChXi → ChXi z , by extending the pairing −1 T (f, 1) := f, and T (f, xip ··· xi1 ) := (L−i1 ··· L−ip f)xip ··· xi1 , bilinearly, for f ∈ ChXi z , k+1 p > 1, and i1, . . . , ip ∈ N. Further, Lk := −z ∂/(∂z), for k 6 −1, forms the negative part of −1 the Witt algebra, cf. (1.1), and ∂/(∂z) is a formal derivation on ChXi z . −1 For f ∈ ChXi z and x ∈ ChXi, in the sequel, T (f, x), will be denoted by f.zx. The following is clear by deﬁnition:

−1 Proposition 3.7. T deﬁnes an action of the C-algebra ChXi on ChXi z from the right. The right action T can be extended to the right action

−1 −1 ChXi w × ChXi[[z]] → ChXi w [[z]], (3.2)

n n n under which the image of (f, z xip ··· xi1 ) is mapped to z (f.wxip ··· xi1 ) =: f.w(z xip ··· xi1 ). Note that now the notation f.wS(x) makes sense. 16 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich

Theorem 3.8. Let {ft}t>0 be a solution to the Loewner–Kufarev equation. Then " !# Z ex0(t)z −1 x0(t) ft(z) = Res w .wS ξ x, e . w=0 1 − zw 0,t Proof. By setting w(n) := (n − i ) + 1 (n − (i + i )) + 1 ··· n − (i + i + ··· + i ) + 1 , e i1,...,ip 1 1 2 1 2 p−1 where n = i1 + ··· + ip, we have −1 −1 w .w1 = w , w−1. x ··· x = w(n) x ··· x w−(i1+···+ip+1). w ip i1 e i1,...,ip ip i1 P∞ m m −1 Therefore Res z w w .w1 = 1 (i.e., the empty word ), and w=0 m=0 ∅ ∞ ! X m m −1 (i1+···+ip) Res z w w .wxi ··· xi = z w(n)i ,...,i xi ··· xi . w=0 p 1 e 1 p p 1 m=0 Hence we get ! ex0(t)z −1 x0(t) Res w .wS ξ x, e w=0 1 − zw ∞ n X X X = ex0(t)z + e(n+1)x0(t)zn+1 w(n) x ··· x . e i1,...,ip ip i1 n=1 p=1 i1,...,ip∈N: i1+···+ip=n

Now, in view of Theorem 2.10, we obtain the result. By tensoring the right action (3.2) this gives rise to −1 −1 −1 −1 ChXi w ⊗ ChXi u × ChXi[[z]] ⊗ ChXi[[z]] → ChXi w ⊗ ChXi u , under which the image of (f ⊗ g, x ⊗ y) will be denoted by (f.wx) ⊗ (g.uy) in the sequel. We recall (see [32, Proposition 3.3 and pp. 50–51]) that the tau-function corresponding to W ∈ Gr, is given by −1 τW (t) = det(w+) = det 1 + a bA ,

ξ(t,z) up to a multiplicative constant, where w+ : e W → H+, is the orthogonal projection, and eξ(t,z) : H → H, is the multiplication operator by eξ(t,z), with matrix representation a b e−ξ(t,z) = along H = H ⊕ H , 0 d + − and A: H+ → H− is such that graph(A) = W . Given a bounded univalent function f : D → C, with f(0) = 0, we denote by Af : H+ → H− the linear map such that graph(Af ) = Wf .

Theorem 3.9. Let {ft}06t6T be a univalent solution to the Loewner–Kufarev equation such that ft(D) is bounded for every t ∈ [0,T ]. Then for each h ∈ H+ and |z| > 1, we have " Z h0(u) ∞ X (r+s)x0(t) −r x0(t) (Af h)(z) = Res e xr+s w .wS ξ x, e t w=0, w − z u=0 r,s=1 !# −s x0(t) ¡ u .uS ξ x, e . 0,t Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 17

The proof can be found in Appendix A.3. From this, we obtain

Corollary 3.10. For each n, m ∈ N, the coeﬃcient b−n,−m(t), is equal to " ( Z zm−1un−1 ∞ X (r+s)x0(t) −r x0(t) Res Res e xr+s w .wS ξ x, e z=0, w=0 w − z u=0 r,s=1 )# −s x0(t) ¡ u .uS ξ(x, e . 0,t

A Appendix

A.1 Proof of Theorem 2.10 By applying variation of constants to (2.5), we obtain the following recurence relation

Z t n−1 Z t nx0(t) −nx0(s) X nx0(t) −nx0(s) cn(t) = e e dxn(s) + (k + 1)e e ck(s)dxn−k(s), 0 k=1 0 −nx (t) for n > 2. Multiplying by e 0 , this transforms to Z t n−1 Z t −nx0(t) −nx0(t) X −(n−k)x0(t) −kx0(s) e cn(t) = e dxn(s) + (k + 1) e dxn−k(s) e ck(s) . 0 k=1 0

By assuming that x1, x2,... are non-commutative indeterminates, and the cn’s are polynomials in the xi’s, we shall consider the following equation:

cn = xn + 2xn−1c1 + 3xn−2c2 + ··· + (n − 1)x2cn−2 + nx1cn−1, (A.1) −nx (t) for n > 1 (roughly speaking, the polynomial cn means e 0 cn(t) and ‘applying the indeter- R t −kx0(s) minate xk from the left’ means ‘applying 0 e dxk(s)× to functions of s’) and then we shall make some observations about the equation (A.1) and introduce some notations: If we apply (A.1) to cn, we get

(a) The terms (n − k + 1)xkcn−k for each k = 1, 2, . . . , n. We shall denote these situation by

wen,kxk cn → cn−k,

respectively (note that the multiplication by the x∗’s must sit just left to the next c∗’s), where wen,k := ((n − k) + 1). (b) The term x0, to which we can not apply (A.1) anymore. This means, consider the situation that we apply (A.1) iteratively to c∗’s which appeared at a previous stage. Suppose we have the term cn at some stage. Then chasing the term multiplied by x∗ which arose from the ﬁrst term on the right-hand side in (A.1), lets us to get out of the loop of iterations; we shall symbolise this situation by

xn cn ⇒ end.

Let p ∈ N be such that 1 6 p 6 n. We ﬁx i1, . . . , ip ∈ N, so that i1 + ··· + ip = n. This data permits one to get out of the loop of iterations of (A.1) as the following diagram shows:

w x w x w x wn−(i +···+i ),i xi en,i1 i1 en−i1,i2 i2 en−i1−i2,i3 i3 e 1 p−2 p−1 p−1 cn / cn−i1 / cn−i1−i2 / ··· / cn−(i1+i2+···+ip−1)

xip / = cip / end. 18 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich

Hence we have a single path from cn to the ‘end’ in the above diagram. This path produces at the ‘end’ the term

w(n) x x ··· x x , e i1,...,ip ip ip−1 i2 i1 where, by using the relation w = w , the coeﬃcient w(n) is given by en−k,l en,k+l e i1,...,ip w(n) = w w w ··· w e i1,...,ip en,i1 en−i1,i2 en−i1−i2,i3 en−(i1+i2+···+ip−2),ip−1 = w w w ··· w en,i1 en,i1+i2 en,i1+i2+i3 en,i1+i2+···+ip−2+ip−1 = (n − i1) + 1 (n − (i1 + i2)) + 1 ··· (n − (i1 + i2 + ··· + ip−1)) + 1 .

Collecting all possibilities, we have

n X X c = w(n) x x ··· x x , n e i1,...,ip ip ip−1 i2 i1 p=1 i1,...,ip∈N: i1+···+ip=n which yields the result by reinterpreting it in the language of paths xk(t)’s, as claimed.

A.2 Proof of Proposition 2.14 By applying variation of constants to (2.8), we have

Z t (n+m)x0(t) −(n+m)x0(t) b−m,−n(t) = −e e dxn+m(s) 0 Z t (n+m)x0(t) + e (n − 1)b−m,−(n−1)(s)dx1(s) + ··· + b−m,−1(s)dxn−1(s) 0 Z t (n+m)x0(t) + e (m − 1)b−(m−1),−n(s)dx1(s) + ··· + b−1,−n(s)dxm−1(s) . 0

By assuming that x1, x2,... are non-commutative indeterminates, and the b−m,−n’s polynomials in the xi’s, we shall consider the following equation: b−m,−n = −xn+m + (n − 1)b−m,−(n−1)x1 + ··· + 2b−m,−2xn−2 + b−m,−1xn−1 + (m − 1)b−(m−1),−nx1 + ··· + 2b−2,−nxm−2 + b−1,−nxm−1 , (A.2)

−(m+n)x (t) (roughly speaking, the polynomial b−m,−n means e 0 b−m,−n(t) and ‘applying the in- R t −kx0(s) determinate xk from the right’ means ‘applying 0 e dxk(s)× to functions of s’). If we apply (A.2) to b−m,−n, we get:

(a) The terms (n−k)b−m,−(n−k)xk and (m−k)b−(m−k),−nxk for each k. We shall denote these cases by

b−m,−n (n − k)xk× b−m,−n → b−m,−(n−k) and (m − k)xk× ↓ , b−(m−k),−n

respectively (Note that the multiplication by the x∗’s must sit just right to the next b∗,∗’s).

(b) The term −xn+m, to which we can not apply (A.2) anymore. This means, consider the situation that we apply (A.2) iteratively to the b∗,∗’s which appeared at a previous stage. Suppose that we have the term b−m,−n at some stage. Then chasing the term, multiplied Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 19

by −x∗, which arose from the ﬁrst term on the right-hand side in (A.2), permits us to get out of the loop of iterations. We shall denote this situation by b −xn+m× −m,−n b−m,−n ⇒ end or −xn+m× . end

Note that the multiplication by the x∗’s must be from the left. Hence in particular, to get the term of the form xk(··· ) in the polynomial expression of b−m,−n in the xi’s, we have to escape the loop by passing to the cases

b−i,−j −xk× b−i,−j ⇒ end or −xk× , end

where i, j ∈ N with i + j = k.

b−1,−1 −x2× b−1,−1 ⇒ end or −x2× . end

Again, the multiplication by x2 must be from the left. In particular, b−m,−n does not contain the term x1(··· ) and hence b−m,−n is a linear combination of xk(··· )’s for k > 2, though the factor (··· ) may involve x1.

Let k ∈ N be such that 2 6 k 6 n + m. We shall ﬁnd the term of the form xk(··· ) in the polynomial expression of b−m,−n in the xi’s. For this, we shall ﬁx i ∈ {1, . . . , m} and j ∈ {1, . . . , n} such that i + j = k. Suppose that p, q ∈ N and i1, . . . , ip, j1, . . . , jq ∈ N satisfy i1 +···+ip = m−i and j1 +···+jq = n−j. We then put ar := m−(i1 +···+ir) for r = 1, . . . , p and cs := n − (j1 + ··· + js) for s = 1, . . . , q. Note that ap = i and cq = j. According to this notation, we distinguish the following three cases: (1) If there exist such p, q,(i1, . . . , ip) and (j1, . . . , jq), then we can consider the following diagram:

c1xj1 × c2xj2 × cqxjq × b−m,−n / b−m,−c1 / ··· / b−m,−cq = b−m,−j

a1xi1 × a1xi1 × a1xi1 ×

c1xj1 × c2xj2 × cqxjq × b−a1,−n / b−a1,−c1 / ··· / b−a1,−cq = b−a1,−j

a2xi2 × a2xi2 × a2xi2 × ......

apxip × apxip × apxip ×

c1xj1 × c2xj2 × cqxjq × b−i,−n / b−i,−c1 / ··· / b−i,−cq = b−i,−j (−1)xk×

' ' end

p+q p+q During the loop of iterations of (A.2), we have p = q -paths from b−m,−n to the ‘end’ in the above diagram, each of which produces terms

−wi1,...,ip;j1,...,jq xk(··· )’s, 20 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich where

wi1,...,ip;j1,...,jq = a1a2 ··· apb1b2 ··· bq = (m − i1)(m − (i1 + i2)) ··· (m − (i1 + i2 + ··· + ip))

× (n − j1)(n − (j1 + j2)) ··· (n − (j1 + j2 + ··· + jq)),

(note that wi1,...,ip;j1,...,jq depends only on i1, . . . , ip and j1, . . . , jq but not on the choice of paths in the diagram) and (··· ) is a monomial consisting of xip , xip−1 , . . . , xi1 and xjq , xjq−1 , . . . , xj1 , which is interlacing according to a riﬄe shuﬄe permutation (note that we should distinguish, for example xi1 xj1 and xj1 xi1 even if i1 = j1). Hence, in total all paths produce

¡ −wi1,...,ip;j1,...,jq xk (xip xip−1 ··· xi1 ) (xjq xjq−1 ··· xj1 ) .

(2) If there exist such a p and (i1, . . . , ip) but not for q and (j1, . . . , jq) (then we have j = n), then the diagram which we can have is the following:

b−m,−n

a1xi1 × b−a1,−n a x × 2 i2 . .

apxip × b−i,−n = b−i,−j

(−1)xk× end

Hence we have a single path from b−m,−n to the ‘end’ in the above diagram. This path produces the term

−wi1,...,ip xk(xip ··· xi2 xi1 ),

where wi1,...,ip;j1,...,jq = a1a2 ··· ap = (m − i1)(m − (i1 + i2)) ··· (m − (i1 + i2 + ··· + ip)). (3) If there exist such a q and (j1, . . . , jq) but not for p and (i1, . . . , ip) (then we have i = m), then the diagram which we can have is the following:

c x × c x × cqxj × (−1)xk× 1 j1 2 j2 q / b−m,−n / b−m,−c1 / ··· / b−m,−cq = b−i,−j / end.

Hence we have a single path from b−m,−n to the ‘end’ in the above diagram. This path produces the term

−wj1,...,jq xk(xjq ··· xj2 xj1 ), where

wj1,...,jq = c1c2 ··· cq = (n − j1)(n − (j1 + j2)) ··· (n − (j1 + j2 + ··· + jq)).

Now by reinterpreting it in the language of paths xk(t)’s, we obtain the result. Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 21

A.3 Proof of Theorem 3.9

n Since {u }n>1 forms a basis of H+, it is enough to show that    Z un−1 ∞ X (r+s)x0(t) −r x0(t) −s x0(t) n  Res  e xr+s w .wS ξ x, e ¡ u .uS ξ x, e  w=0, w − z r,s=1 u=0 t ∞ X −m = n b−n,−m(t)z , (A.3) m=1 where b−n,−m(t) are the Grunsky coeﬃcients associated with ft. According to the decomposition

∞ m0 0 x0(t) X m x0(t) X X S(ξ(x, e )) = 1 + e xi1 xi2 ··· xip , 0 m =1 p=1 i1,...,ip∈N: 0 i1+···+ip=m we have

−r x0(t) −s x0(t) w .wS ξ x, e ¡ u .uS ξ x, e −r −s = w .w1 ¡ u .u1 + Fr,s(w, u) + Gr,s(w, u) + Hr,s(w, u), where

−r x0(t) −s x0(t) Fr,s(w, u) := w .w S ξ x, e − 1 ¡ u .u S ξ x, e − 1 ∞ ∞ m0 n0 X X X X X X 0 0 = e(m +n )x0(t) 0 0 m =1 n =1 p=1 q=1 i1,...,ip∈N: j1,...,jq∈N: 0 0 i1+···+ip=m j1+···+jq=n −r ¡ −s × w .wxi1 xi2 ··· xip u .uxj1 xj2 ··· xjq ,

−r −s x0(t) Gr,s(w, u) := w .w1 ¡ u .u S ξ x, e − 1 ∞ n0 0 X n x0(t) X X −r ¡ −s = e w .w1 u .uxj1 xj2 ··· xjq , 0 n =1 q=1 j1,...,jq∈N: 0 j1+···+jq=n

−r x0(t) −s Hr,s(w, u) := w .w S ξ x, e − 1 ¡ u .u1 ∞ m0 0 X m x0(t) X X −r ¡ −s = e w .wxi1 xi2 ··· xip u .u1 . 0 m =1 p=1 i1,...,ip∈N: 0 i1+···+ip=m

−r −r −r −s −r −s Since w .w1 = w , we get w .w1 ¡ u .u1 = w u . Then, by using

∞ 1 X = − z−mwm−1 for |z| > |w|, w − z m=1 we have   un−1 ∞ X (r+s)x0(t) −r −s Res  e xr+s w .w1 ¡ u .u1  w=0; w − z u=0 r,s=1 22 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich

 ∞ ∞  n−1 X −m m−1 X (r+s)x0(t) −r −s = −Res u z w e xr+sw u  w=0; u=0 m=1 r,s=1 ∞ X −m (m+n)x0(t) = − z e xm+n. m=1 Let

w(r)i1,...,ip;∅ := r(ip + r)(ip + ip−1 + r) ··· (ip + ip−1 + ··· + i2 + r) = m − (i1 + ··· + ip) ··· m − (i1 + i2) (m − i1), where m = i1 + ··· + ip + r,

w(s)∅;j1,...,jq := s(jq + s)(jq + jq−1 + s) ··· (jq + jq−1 + ··· + j2 + s) = n − (j1 + ··· + jq) ··· n − (j1 + j2) (n − j1), where n = j1 + ··· + jq + s, and

w(r, s)i1,...,ip;j1,...,jq := w(r)i1,...,ip;∅w(s)∅;j1,...,jq .

For Fr+s(w, u), we ﬁrst observe that

−r −r w .wxip ··· xi2 xi1 = xip ··· xi2 xi1 L−i1 L−i2 ··· L−ip w

−(i1+i2+···+ip+r) = w(r)i1,...,ip;∅xip ··· xi2 xi1 w , and similarly

−s −(j1+j2+···+jp+s) u .uxjq ··· xj2 xj1 = w(s)∅;j1,...,jq xjq ··· xj2 xj1 u . Therefore we have n−1 u −r −s Res xr+s (w .wxi xi ··· xi ) ¡ (u .uxi xi ··· xi ) w=0; w − z 1 2 p 1 2 p u=0 ∞ X = −1 z−m1 {16n−s=j1+···+jq} {16m−r=i1+···+ip} m=1 ¡ × w(r, s)i1,...,ip;j1,...,jq xr+s[(xip ··· xi2 xi1 ) (xjq ··· xj2 xj1 )], so that un−1 Res xr+sFr,s(w, u) w=0; w − z u=0 ∞ ∞ ∞ m0 n0 X X X 0 0 X X X = − z−m e(m +n )x0(t) 1 ··· {16m−r=i1+···+ip} 0 0 m=1 m =1 n =1 p=1 q=1 i1,...,ip∈N: 0 i1+···+ip=m X ··· 1 w(r, s) x [(x ··· x x ) ¡ (x ··· x x )] {16n−s=j1+···+jq} i1,...,ip;j1,...,jq r+s ip i2 i1 jq j2 j1 j1,...,jq∈N: 0 j1+···+jq=n ∞ m−r n−s X −m ((m−r)+(n−s))x0(t) X X X = −1{16n−s} z e 1{16m−r} ··· m=1 p=1 q=1 i1,...,ip∈N: i1+···+ip=m−r Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 23

X ¡ ··· w(r, s)i1,...,ip;j1,...,jq xr+s[(xip ··· xi2 xi1 ) (xjq ··· xj2 xj1 )]. j1,...,jq∈N: j1+···+jq=n−s

Hence we have reached   un−1 ∞ X (r+s)x0(t) Res  e xr+sFr,s(w, u) w=0; w − z u=0 r,s=1 ∞ m+n−2 m−r n−s X X X X X X = − z−me(m+n)x0(t) ···

m=1 k=2 16r

Similarly, we ﬁnd that   un−1 ∞ X (r+s)x0(t) Res  e xr+sGr,s(w, u) w=0; w − z u=0 r,s=1 ∞ ∞ ∞ n0 X X X 0 X = − z−m e(r+s)x0(t) en x0(t) ··· m=1 r,s=1 n0=1 q=1 X ··· 1 1 w(s) x (x ··· x ) {16n−s=j1+···+jq} {m=r} ∅;j1,...,jq r+s jq j1 j1,...,jq∈N: 0 j1+···+jq=n ∞ m+n−1 n+m−k X −m (m+n)x0(t) X X X = − z e w(k − m)∅;j1,...,jq xk(xjq ··· xj1 ), m=1 k=m+1 q=1 j1,...,jq∈N: j1+···+jq=n+m−k and   un−1 ∞ X (r+s)x0(t) Res  e xr+sHr,s(w, u) w=0; w − z u=0 r,s=1 ∞ m+n−1 n+m−k X −m (m+n)x0(t) X X X = − z e w(k − n)i1,...,ip;∅xk(xip ··· xi1 ). m=1 k=n+1 p=1 i1,...,ip∈N: i1+···+ip=m+n−k

Now, in view of Theorem 2.13, we obtain (A.3), and hence the result.

Acknowledgements T.A. was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 15K17562. R.F. was previously supported by the ERC advanced grant “Noncommutative distributions in free probability”. Both authors thank Theo Sturm for the hospitality he offered to T.A. at the University of Bonn. T.A. thanks Roland Speicher for the hospitality offered him in Saarbrücken. R.F. thanks Roland Speicher for discussions, and Fukuoka University and the MPI in Bonn for their hospitality. We both thank Takuya Murayama for the discussions, comments and collaboration. We thank the anonymous referees for their comments which helped us to improve the paper. 24 T. Amaba and R. Friedrich References

[1] Alvarez-GauméL., Gomez C., Moore G., Vafa C., Strings in the operator formalism, Nuclear Phys. B 303 (1988), 455–521. [2] Amaba T., Friedrich R., Modulus of continuity of controlled Loewner–Kufarev equations and random mat- rices, Anal. Math. Phys. 10 (2020), 23, 29 pages, arXiv:1809.00536. [3] Amaba T., Friedrich R., Murayama T., Univalence and holomorphic extension of the solution to ω-controlled Loewner–Kufarev equations, J. Differential Equations 269 (2020), 2697–2704, arXiv:1909.13666. [4] Baudoin F., An introduction to the geometry of stochastic flows, Imperial College Press, London, 2004. [5] Bracci F., Contreras M.D., D´ıaz-Madrigal S., Vasil’ev A., Classical and stochastic Löwner–Kufarevequa- tions, in Harmonic and Complex Analysis and its Applications, Trends Math., Birkhäuser/Springer, Cham, 2014, 39–134. [6] Doyon B., Conformal loop ensembles and the stress-energy tensor, Lett. Math. Phys. 103 (2013), 233–284, arXiv:1209.1560. [7] Duplantier B., Nguyen C., Nguyen N., Zinsmeister M., The coefficient problem and multifractality of whole- plane SLE & LLE, Ann. Henri Poincaré 16 (2015), 1311–1395, arXiv:1211.2451. [8] Ellacott S.W., A survey of Faber methods in numerical approximation, Comput. Math. Appl. Part B 12 (1986), 1103–1107. [9] Faber G., Uber¨ polynomische Entwickelungen, Math. Ann. 57 (1903), 389–408. [10] Friedrich R., The global geometry of stochastic Lœwner evolutions, in Probabilistic Approach to Geometry, Adv. Stud. Pure Math., Vol. 57, Math. Soc. Japan, Tokyo, 2010, 79–117, arXiv:0906.5328. [11] Friedrich R., Kalkkinen J., On conformal field theory and stochastic Loewner evolution, Nuclear Phys. B 687 (2004), 279–302, arXiv:hep-th/0308020. [12] Hidalgo R.A., Markina I., Vasil’ev A., Finite dimensional grading of the Virasoro algebra, Georgian Math. J. 14 (2007), 419–434. [13] Johnston E., The Faber transform and analytic continuation, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 103 (1988), 237–243. [14] Kawamoto N., Namikawa Y., Tsuchiya A., Yamada Y., Geometric realization of conformal field theory on Riemann surfaces, Comm. Math. Phys. 116 (1988), 247–308. [15] Kirillov A.A., Yuriev D.V., Representations of the Virasoro algebra by the orbit method, J. Geom. Phys. 5 (1988), 351–363. [16] Kontsevich M., CFT, SLE and phase boundaries, Preprint, Arbeitstagung, MPI Bonn, 2003. [17] Krichever I.M., Algebraic-geometric construction of the Zakharov–Shabat equations and their periodic solutions, Sov. Math. Dokl. 17 (1976), 394–397. [18] Krichever I.M., Integration of nonlinear equations by the methods of algebraic geometry, Funct. Anal. Appl. 11 (1977), 12–26. [19] Krichever I.M., Methods of algebraic geometry in the theory of non-linear equations, Russian Math. Surveys 32 (1977), no. 6, 185–213. [20] Kufareff P.P., On one-parameter families of analytic functions, Math. Sb. 13(55) (1943), 87–118. [21] LöwnerK., Untersuchungen über schlichte konforme Abbildungen des Einheitskreises. I, Math. Ann. 89 (1923), 103–121. [22] Lyons T.J., Caruana M., LévyT., Differential equations driven by rough paths, Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 1908, Springer, Berlin, 2007. [23] Malliavin P., The canonic diffusion above the diffeomorphism group of the circle, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér.I Math. 329 (1999), 325–329. [24] Markina I., Prokhorov D., Vasil’ev A., Sub-Riemannian geometry of the coefficients of univalent functions, J. Funct. Anal. 245 (2007), 475–492, arXiv:math.CV/0608532. [25] Markina I., Vasil’ev A., Virasoro algebra and dynamics in the space of univalent functions, in Five Lectures in Complex Analysis, Contemp. Math., Vol. 525, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2010, 85–116. [26] Markina I., Vasil’ev A., Löwner–Kufarevevolution in the Segal–Wilson Grassmannian, in Geometric Meth- ods in Physics, Trends in Mathematics, Editors P. Kielanowski, S.T. Ali, A. Odzijewicz, M. Schlichenmaier, T. Voronov, Birkhäuser/Springer, Basel, 2013, 367–376. Controlled Loewner–Kufarev Equation Embedded into the Universal Grassmannian 25

[27] Markina I., Vasil’ev A., Evolution of smooth shapes and integrable systems, Comput. Methods Funct. Theory 16 (2016), 203–229, arXiv:1108.1007. [28] Mumford D., An algebro-geometric construction of commuting operators and of solutions to the Toda lattice equation, Korteweg deVries equation and related nonlinear equation, in Proceedings of the International Symposium on Algebraic Geometry (Kyoto Univ., Kyoto, 1977), Editor M. Nagata, Kinokuniya Book Store, Tokyo, 1978, 115–153. [29] Pommerenke C., Univalent functions (with a chapter on quadratic differentials by Gerd Jensen), Studia Mathematica/Mathematische Lehrbücher, Vol. 25, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen,1975. [30] Schiffer M., Faber polynomials in the theory of univalent functions, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 54 (1948), 503–517. [31] Schramm O., Scaling limits of loop-erased random walks and uniform spanning trees, Israel J. Math. 118 (2000), 221–288, arXiv:math.PR/9904022. [32] Segal G., Wilson G., Loop groups and equations of KdV type, Inst. Hautes Etudes´ Sci. Publ. Math. 61 (1985), 5–65. [33] Sola A., Elementary examples of Loewner chains generated by densities, Ann. Univ. Mariae Curie- Sk lodowska Sect. A 67 (2013), 83–101. [34] Takasaki K., Takebe T., SDiff(2) Toda equation – hierarchy, tau function, and symmetries, Lett. Math. Phys. 23 (1991), 205–214, arXiv:hep-th/9112042. [35] Teo L.-P., Analytic functions and integrable hierarchies – characterization of tau functions, Lett. Math. Phys. 64 (2003), 75–92, arXiv:hep-th/0305005. [36] Wiegmann P.B., Zabrodin A., Conformal maps and integrable hierarchies, Comm. Math. Phys. 213 (2000), 523–538, arXiv:hep-th/9909147. [37] Yamada A., Precise variational formulas for abelian differentials, Kodai Math. J. 3 (1980), 114–143.