On the logarithm component in trace defect formulas

In asymptotic expansions of resolvent traces \Tr(A(P-\lambda)^{-1}) for classical pseudodifferential operators on closed manifolds, the coefficient $C_0(A,P)$ of $(-\lambda)^{-1}$ is of special interest, since it is the first coefficient containing nonlocal elements from $A$; on the other hand if $A=I$ and $P=D^*D$ it gives part of the index of $D$. $C_0(A,P)$ also equals the zeta function value at 0 when $P$ is invertible. $C_0(A,P)$ is a trace modulo local terms, since $C_0(A,P)-C_0(A,P')$ and $C_0([A,A'],P)$ are local. By use of complex powers $P^s$ (or similar holomorphic families of order $s$), Okikiolu, Kontsevich and Vishik, Melrose and Nistor showed formulas for these trace defects in terms of residues of operators defined from $A$, $A'$, $\log P$ and $\log P'$. The present paper has two purposes: One is to show how the trace defect formulas can be obtained from the resolvents in a simple way without use of the complex powers of $P$ as in the original proofs. We here also give a simple direct proof of a recent residue formula of Scott for $C_0(I,P)$. The other purpose is to establish trace defect residue formulas for operators on manifolds with boundary, where complex powers are not easily accessible; we do this using only resolvents. We also generalize Scott's formula to boundary problems.Comment: 41 page

Copyright

The purpose of copyright laws is discussed. Copyright is essentially about protecting the autonomy of authors

Copyright

Copyright is the branch of Intellectual Property Law that governs works of expression such as books, paintings and songs, and the expressive aspects of computer programs. Intellectual products such as these have a partially public goods character: they are largely inexhaustible and nonexcludable. Intellectual Property Law responds to inexcludability by giving producers legal rights to exclude nonpayers from certain usages of their intellectual products. The goal is to provide incentives for new production at fairly low transaction costs. However, the copyright owner will charge a price above marginal cost and this, coupled with the inexhaustibility of most copyrighted products, creates deadweight loss. Various copyright doctrines (such as the idea/expression dichotomy, the limited duration of the copyright ownership term and the doctrine of ‘fair use’) work to reduce deadweight loss and other costs within a larger structure that creates incentives. Copyright Law, unlike Patent Law, gives owners rights only against those who actually copy the work. This limitation, too, may serve to reduce both transaction costs and deadweight loss. Empirically it is unclear how successful copyright has been in creating incentives for production, reducing transaction costs and keeping deadweight costs low