\section{Introduction}
Critical gravities have  been the subject of active interest because
they were considered as toy models for quantum
gravity~\cite{Li:2008dq,Lu:2011zk,Deser:2011xc,Porrati:2011ku}.
According to the AdS/LCFT correspondence, one finds that a rank-2
logarithmic conformal field theory (LCFT)  is dual to a critical
gravity~\cite{Grumiller:2008qz,Myung:2008dm,Maloney:2009ck}.
However, one has to deal with the non-unitarity issue of these
theories because the LCFT is in general non-unitary.

Recently, a higher-derivative critical (polycritical) gravity was
introduced to provide multiple critical points~\cite{Nutma:2012ss}
which might be described by  a higher-rank LCFT.  The rank of the
LCFT refers to the dimensionality of the Jordan cell. The LCFT dual
to critical gravity has rank-2 and thus, an operator has one
logarithmic partner. The LCFT dual to tricritical gravity has rank-3
and thus, an operator has two logarithmic partners. An odd-rank LCFT
allows for a truncation to a unitary conformal field theory
(CFT)~\cite{Bergshoeff:2012sc}. A six-derivative gravity in three
dimensions was treated as dual to a rank-3
LCFT~\cite{Bergshoeff:2012ev}, while four-derivative critical
gravity in four dimensions was considered as dual to a rank-3
LCFT~\cite{Johansson:2012fs}. Furthermore, it is shown that a
consistent unitary truncation of polycritical gravity was possible
to occur at the linearized level for odd
rank~\cite{Kleinschmidt:2012rs}.   On the other hand, a non-linear
critical gravity of rank-3 in three and four dimensions was
investigated in~\cite{Apolo:2012vv}, showing that truncation which
appears to be unitary at the linear level might be inconsistent at
the non-linear level. It worth noting that a tricritical gravity was
first mentioned in the six-derivative gravity in six
dimensions~\cite{LPP}.

It is important to note that one can construct a rank-3 parity odd
theory in the simple context of four-derivative gravity as
generalized massive gravity (GMG) in the three dimensional anti-de
Sitter (AdS$_3$) spacetimes~\cite{LS}. In fact, the GMG is a combination of
topologically massive gravity (TMG)~\cite{Deser:1981wh} and new
massive gravity (NMG)~\cite{Bergshoeff:2009hq}. There exists one
parity-odd tricritical point in the GMG parameter space where the
theory propagates one left-moving massless graviton as well as
right-moving massless graviton, and two logarithmic modes
associated with left-movers known as  log and log$^2$ boundary
behaviors on the AdS$_3$ background. Its dual theory is a rank-3
LCFT~\cite{Grumiller:2010tj}. A truncation of tricritical GMG  is
made by imposing $Q_L=0$ with $Q_L$ the Abbott-Deser-Tekin
charge~\cite{Bergshoeff:2012ev}. After truncation, one has found
the left-moving sector with a CFT which is unitary, in addition to
the right-moving massless sector which dictates the chiral
gravity.

Before we proceed, we would like to mention the following difference
in AdS/LCFT correspondence:

\indent $\bullet$ tricritical gravity on the AdS$_3 \rightarrow$
 a rank-3 zero temperature LCFT

\indent $\bullet$ tricritical gravity on the BTZ black hole $
\rightarrow$ a rank-3 finite temperature~LCFT.

In this work, to confirm the AdS/LCFT
correspondence~\cite{Birmingham:2001pj}, we obtain
log$^2$-quasinormal modes and frequencies of a graviton around the
BTZ black hole (instead of the AdS$_3$) at the tricritical GMG by
employing the operator method. In order to obtain the quasinormal
modes precisely, one needs to know a rank-3 finite temperature LCFT
while a rank-2 finite temperature LCFT was known in Ref.
\cite{Myung:1999nd}. Here, we show that the log$^2$-quasinormal
frequencies are also obtained by considering a finite temperature
CFT~\cite{Sachs}.

\section{Generalized massive gravity}

We consider the generalized massive gravity (GMG) action
 \be\label{gmg}
 S_{\rm GMG}=\frac{1}{16\pi G}\int d^3x~\sqrt{-g}\left[\sigma R-2\lambda +\frac{1}{m^2}K+\frac{1}{\mu}L_{\rm CS}\right],
 \ee
where $K$ ($L_{\rm CS}$) is the new massive gravity (NMG) term (the
Chern-Simons term) given by
 \ba
 K&=&R_{\mu\nu}R^{\mu\nu}-\frac{3}{8}R^2,\\
 L_{\rm CS}&=&\frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}\Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\beta}
  \left[\partial_\nu\Gamma^\beta_{\alpha\rho}+\frac{2}{3}\Gamma^\beta_{\nu\gamma}\Gamma^\gamma_{\rho\alpha}\right].
 \ea
Here $m$ and  $\mu$ are the two mass parameters, while $\sigma$ is a
dimensionless sign parameter which takes $+1$ for our purpose. We also use the convention of $\epsilon^{\rho uv}=1/\sqrt{-g}$~\cite{Grumiller:2009mw}.
Replacing $m^2$ by $-m^2$ leads to the action in~\cite{LS}.  Also,
$\lambda$ is the cosmological constant. Its equation of motion takes
the form \be G_{\mu\nu}+\lambda
g_{\mu\nu}+\frac{1}{2m^2}K_{\mu\nu}+\frac{1}{\mu}C_{\mu\nu}=0, \ee
where
 \ba
 G_{\mu\nu}&=&R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu\nu}R, \\
 K_{\mu\nu}&=&-\frac{1}{2} \nabla^2R g_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}
 \nabla_\mu\nabla_\nu R +2 \nabla^2 R_{\mu\nu} \nonumber  \\
 &+&4R_{\mu\alpha\nu \beta}R^{\alpha \beta} -\frac{3}{2}
 RR_{\mu\nu}-R_{\alpha \beta}R^{\alpha \beta}
 g_{\mu\nu}+\frac{3}{8}R^2 g_{\mu\nu},
 \ea
and the Cotton tensor is given by
 \be
 C_{\mu\nu}=\epsilon_{\mu}^{~\alpha\beta}\nabla_{\alpha}
 \Big(R_{\beta\nu}-\frac{1}{4} g_{\beta\nu} R\Big).
 \ee In this work,
we consider the BTZ black hole in the Schwarzschild coordinates
\be \label{sle} ds^2_{\rm BTZ}=-\Big(-{\cal
M}+\frac{r^2}{\ell^2}\Big)dt^2+\frac{dr^2}{-{\cal
M}+\frac{r^2}{\ell^2}}+r^2d\phi^2 \ee whose horizon is located at
$r_+=\ell \sqrt{{\cal M}}$.  The ${\cal M}=-1$ case corresponds to
the AdS$_3$ spacetimes, while ${\cal M}=1$ provides a unity mass
of the BTZ black hole. In these cases, one finds a relation among
$m^2$, $\lambda$, and $\Lambda$ as
 \be
 m^2=\frac{\Lambda^2}{4(\lambda-\Lambda)},~~ \Lambda=-1
 \ee with
$\ell=1$. Also, the left-temperature, and right-temperature, and
Hawking temperature are the same as \be
T_L=T_R=T_H=\frac{1}{2\pi}. \ee The line element (\ref{sle}) is
expressed in terms of global coordinates
 \ba\label{btz}
  ds^2
  &=&-\sinh^2(\rho)d\tau^2+\cosh^2(\rho)d\phi^2+d\rho^2,
 \ea
where we have introduced the radial coordinate $r=\cosh\rho$ such
that the event horizon of $r=r_+=1$ is located at $\rho=0$, while
the infinity is at $\rho=\infty$.   Introducing the light cone
coordinates $u/v=\tau\pm \phi$, the line element  becomes
 \ba\label{lc}
 ds^2&=&\bar{g}_{\mu\nu}dx^\mu dx^\nu \nonumber \\
     &=& \frac{1}{4}du^2-\frac{1}{2}\cosh(2\rho)dudv+\frac{1}{4}dv^2+d\rho^2.
 \ea
Then, the metric tensor (\ref{lc}) admits the Killing vector fields
$L_k$, $k=0,-1,1$ for local SL$(2,R)_{\rm L}\times$SL$(2,R)_{\rm R}$ algebra as
 \be
 L_0=-\partial_u,~~L_{-1/1}=e^{\mp u}
 \Big[-\frac{\cosh(2\rho)}{\sinh(2\rho)}\partial_u
 -\frac{1}{\sinh(2\rho)}\partial_v \mp \frac{1}{2} \partial_\rho\Big],
 \ee
and $\bar{L}_0,\bar{L}_{-1/1}$ are similarly obtained by
interchanging $u$ and $v~ (u \leftrightarrow v)$. Locally, they
form a basis of the Lie algebra SL$(2,R)$ as
 \be
 [L_0,L_{\pm 1}]=\mp L_{\pm 1},~~[L_1,L_{-1}]=2L_0,
 \ee
which will be used to generate the whole tower of quasinormal modes
in three dimensions.

Now, we are going to  expand
$g_{\mu\nu}=\bar{g}_{\mu\nu}+h_{\mu\nu}$ around the BTZ background
in Eq. (\ref{lc}) and choose the transverse-traceless (TT) gauge
 \be \label{TT}
 \bar{\nabla}_{\mu}h^{\mu\nu}=0,~~h^{\mu}_{~\mu}=0.
 \ee
Here we wish to mention that the TT gauge is allowed, thanks to
$\delta R(h)=0$  which is obtained by tracing both sides of the
linearized Einstein equation. Under the TT gauge, the linearized
Einstein equation becomes the fourth-order  differential equation
 \be\label{4theom}
 (\bar{\nabla}^2-2\Lambda)
 \Bigg[\bar{\nabla}^2h_{\mu\nu}+\frac{m^2}{\mu}\epsilon^{~\alpha\beta}_\mu\bar{\nabla}_\alpha h_{\beta\nu}
 +\left(m^2-\frac{5}{2}\Lambda\right)h_{\mu\nu}\Bigg]=0.
 \ee
 Introducing four  mutually commuting operators
of
 \ba \label{meq}
 (D^{L/R})^\beta_\mu &=& \delta^\beta_\mu\pm\epsilon_\mu^{~\alpha\beta}\bar{\nabla}_\alpha,\nonumber\\
 ~~(D^{m_i})^\beta_\mu &=& \delta^\beta_\mu
            +\frac{1}{m_i}\epsilon_\mu^{~\alpha\beta}\bar{\nabla}_\alpha,~~~(i=1,2),
 \ea
the linearized equation of motion (\ref{4theom}) can be written to
be compactly
 \be \label{geq}
 \Big(D^RD^LD^{m_1}D^{m_2}h\Big)_{\mu\nu}=0.
 \ee
Here, the mass parameters are given by
 \ba
 m_1&=&\frac{m^2}{2\mu}+\sqrt{\frac{m^4}{4\mu^2}-m^2+\frac{1}{2}},\nonumber\\
 m_2&=&\frac{m^2}{2\mu}-\sqrt{\frac{m^4}{4\mu^2}-m^2+\frac{1}{2}}.
 \ea
The parameter space is shown in~\cite{Bergshoeff:2012ev}. The two
critical lines appear when $m_1=m_2$. The NMG and TMG limits of
the GMG are on the $\frac{1}{m^2}(x)$-axis and
$\frac{1}{\mu}(y)$-axis, respectively. When a critical line
intersects with one of them, either critical TMG or critical NMG
is recovered. We are interested in two tricritical points \ba
{\rm point}~ &1&:m^2=2\mu=\frac{3}{2}, \\
{\rm point}~ &2&:m^2=-2\mu=\frac{3}{2}. \ea At the point 1 of
$m_1=m_2=1$, ${\cal D}^{m_1}$ and ${\cal D}^{m_2}$ degenerate with
${\cal D}^{L}$, while
 at the  point 2 of $m_1=m_2=-1$, ${\cal D}^{m_1}$ and ${\cal D}^{m_2}$
degenerate with ${\cal D}^{R}$. The presence of two tricritical
points is a main feature of the GMG,  but it is not a feature of
the TMG or NMG. This implies that there is no tricritical point in
the context of the TMG or NMG.  Hereafter, we will focus on the
tricritical point 1 because results for the point 2 could be
obtained by exchanging $L$ and $R$.

\section{Log-square quasinormal modes at the tricritical GMG}

We start with a first-order massive equation
 \ba \label{eql1}
 (D^{M}h)_{\mu\nu} = 0 \to
 \epsilon_\mu^{~\alpha\beta}\bar{\nabla}_\alpha
 h_{\beta\nu}+Mh_{\mu\nu}=0,
 \ea
 where $M=m_{i}$.
This can be solved with the TT gauge as~\cite{SS,MKMP}
 \be \label{hmassive}
 h^M_{\mu\nu}=e^{-ik(\tau+\phi)-2h_L\tau} (\sinh\rho)^{-2h_L}(\tanh\rho)^{-ik}
 \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    1 & 0 & \frac{2}{\sinh(2\rho)} \\
    0 & 0 & 0 \\
    \frac{2}{\sinh(2\rho)} & 0 & \frac{4}{\sinh^2(2\rho)}\\
  \end{array}
 \right),
 \ee
 where $h_L$ is  the conformal weight of graviton with mass $M$  given by
 \be \label{conw}
 h_L=\frac{M-1}{2},~~M \ge 1.
 \ee
As was pointed out in~\cite{SS}, the highest weight condition of
$L_1 h^M_{\mu\nu}=\bar{L}_1 h^M_{\mu\nu}=0$ which is suited to
reproduce the normalizable modes in AdS$_3$ spacetimes is too
strong in the BTZ black hole background because the descendants of
such highest weight modes have imaginary $\phi$-momentum. This
problem could be resolved when imposing a weaker condition
so-called the chiral highest weight condition of $\bar{L}_1
h^M_{\mu\nu}=0$ which is compatible with the TT gauge condition
(\ref{TT}). This allows for real $\phi$-momentum.

For $M=1(=m_1=m_2)$, the solution is reduced to
 \be \label{hmassless}
 h^{M=1}_{\mu\nu}=h^L_{\mu\nu}=e^{-ik(\tau+\phi)}(\tanh\rho)^{-ik}
 \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    1 & 0 & \frac{2}{\sinh(2\rho)} \\
    0 & 0 & 0 \\
    \frac{2}{\sinh(2\rho)} & 0 & \frac{4}{\sinh^2(2\rho)}\\
  \end{array}
 \right),
 \ee
which corresponds to the left-moving solution with $h_L=0$
propagating on the BTZ black hole
background~\cite{MKMP,Myung:2012sh,Kim:2012pt}. This left-moving
solution with the zero conformal weight is a cornerstone to
construct the log-solution at the critical point and the
log$^2$-solution at the tricritical point.

One can now construct the log-solution~\cite{Grumiller:2008qz}  as
 \be\label{logeom1}
 h^{L,{\rm log}}_{\mu\nu} = \partial_{M}h^{M}_{\mu\nu}|_{M=1}=y(\tau,\rho)h^{L}_{\mu\nu},
 \ee
which is responsible for describing the critical GMG. Here
$y(\tau,\rho)$ is defined by
 \be
 y(\tau,\rho)=-\tau-\ln[\sinh(\rho)].
 \ee
The classical stability for this log-solution in the critical NMG
has been explicitly studied in Ref.~\cite{MKMP}. On the other hand,
we need to introduce the log$^2$-solution
 \be\label{loglogeom1}
 h^{L,{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu} = \frac{1}{2} \partial^2_{M}h^{M}_{\mu\nu}|_{M=1}=\frac{1}{2}
 y^2(\tau,\rho)h^{L}_{\mu\nu}
 \ee
for describing the tricritical GMG  whose linearized equation is
given by
 \be
 \Big(D^RD^LD^{L}D^{L}h^{L,\log^2}\Big)_{\mu\nu}=0.
 \ee
One can easily check that
 \ba
 && (D^L h^{L,{\rm log^2}})_{\mu\nu} = - h^{L,{\rm log}}_{\mu\nu},\nonumber\\
 && (D^L D^L h^{L,{\rm log^2}})_{\mu\nu}  = h^{L}_{\mu\nu},\nonumber\\
 && (D^L D^L D^L h^{L,{\rm log^2}})_{\mu\nu} =  (D^L h^{L})_{\mu\nu}=0.
 \ea
One of non-trivial tasks on the BTZ black hole is to derive
quasinormal modes of graviton and their frequencies. Usually, one
needs to solve the second-order differential equation to find
quasinormal modes with the ingoing wave at horizon and Dirichlet
boundary condition at infinity. However, if one makes the
second-order equation from the first-order one, sign ambiguity may
appear in the mass term. Hence, it would be better to use the
operator method  to obtain quasinormal modes. According to the
Sachs's proposal~\cite{Sachs}, the logarithmic quasinormal modes
can be constructed by using the operator method as
 \be
 h^{L(n),{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu}(u,v,\rho)=
 \Big(\bar{L}_{-1}L_{-1}\Big)^n  h^{L,{\rm
 log^2}}_{\mu\nu}(u,v,\rho),
 \ee
 which implies that all descendants could be obtained from the
chiral highest weight $h^{L,{\rm
 log^2}}_{\mu\nu}$ satisfying  $\bar{L}_1 [h^{L,{\rm
 log^2}}_{\mu\nu}]=0$ by acting $\bar{L}_{-1}L_{-1}$ on it.
Explicitly, the first descendant of $h^{L,{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu}$
is given by
 \ba\label{leftsol1}
 h^{L(1),{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu}(u,v,\rho) &=&
 \Big(\bar{L}_{-1}L_{-1}\Big) h^{L,{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu}(u,v,\rho)\nonumber\\
 &=&\frac{e^{-2\tau}}{2\sinh^2\!\rho}e^{-ik(\tau+\phi)}(\tanh\!\rho)^{-ik}
  \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    f^{L(1)}_{uu} & f^{L(1)}_{uv} & \frac{f^{L(1)}_{u\rho}}{\sinh(2\rho)}\\
    f^{L(1)}_{uv} & 0 & \frac{f^{L(1)}_{v\rho}}{\sinh(2\rho)} \\
    \frac{f^{L(1)}_{u\rho}}{\sinh(2\rho)} & \frac{f^{L(1)}_{v\rho}}{\sinh(2\rho)} & \frac{f^{L(1)}_{\rho\rho}}{\sinh^2(2\rho)} \\
  \end{array}
  \right)_{\mu\nu}, \nonumber\\
 \ea
whose relevant components are given by
 \ba
 f^{L(1)}_{uu}&=& 1+\cosh(2\rho)+[4+2\cosh(2\rho)+ik(3+\cosh(2\rho))]y(t,\rho)\nonumber\\
              &+& (2-k^2+3ik)y^2(\tau,\rho), \nonumber \\
 f^{L(1)}_{uv} &=& 2y(\tau,\rho)\left[1+(1+\frac{ik}{2})y(t,\rho)\right], \nonumber\\
 f^{L(1)}_{u\rho}&=& 2[1+\cosh(2\rho)+4(1+\cosh(2\rho))y(t,\rho)
                       +(2+2\cosh(2\rho)-k^2)y^2(\tau,\rho) \nonumber\\
                 &+& ik(3+\cosh(2\rho))y(t,\rho)(1+y(\tau,\rho))], \nonumber \\
 f^{L(1)}_{v\rho}&=& 4y(\tau,\rho)\left[1+(1+\frac{ik}{2})y(t,\rho)\right], \nonumber\\
 f^{L(1)}_{\rho\rho}&=&  4[1+\cosh(2\rho)+2(2+3\cosh(2\rho))y(t,\rho)
                       +(2+4\cosh(2\rho)-k^2)y^2(\tau,\rho) \nonumber\\
                 &+& ik(3+\cosh(2\rho))y(t,\rho)(1+y(\tau,\rho))].
 \ea

Next, the second descendant of $h^{L,{\rm
log^2}}_{\mu\nu}(u,v,\rho)$ is derived from the operation as
 \ba\label{leftsol2}
 h^{L(2),{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu}(u,v,\rho) &=& \Big(\bar{L}_{-1}L_{-1}\Big)^2
                 h^{L,{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu}(u,v,\rho) \nonumber\\
&=&\frac{e^{-4\tau}}{2\sinh^4\!\rho}e^{-ik(\tau+\phi)}(\tanh\!\rho)^{-ik}
  \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    f^{L(2)}_{uu} & f^{L(2)}_{uv} & \frac{f^{L(2)}_{u\rho}}{\sinh(2\rho)}\\
    f^{L(2)}_{uv} & f^{L(2)}_{vv} & \frac{f^{L(2)}_{v\rho}}{\sinh(2\rho)} \\
    \frac{f^{L(2)}_{u\rho}}{\sinh(2\rho)} & \frac{f^{L(2)}_{v\rho}}{\sinh(2\rho)} & \frac{f^{L(2)}_{\rho\rho}}{\sinh^2(2\rho)} \\
  \end{array}  \right)_{\mu\nu}, \nonumber\\
 \ea
whose components are explicitly given by
 \ba
 f^{L(2)}_{uu}&=& \frac{1}{4}[145+140\cosh(2\rho)+11\cosh(4\rho)
                  -k^2(27+20\cosh(2\rho)+\cosh(4\rho))]\nonumber\\
                  &+& \frac{1}{4}[274+200\cosh(2\rho)+6\cosh(4\rho)-k^2(163+76\cosh(2\rho)+\cosh(4\rho))]y(\tau,\rho), \nonumber \\
                  &+& (24+12\cosh(2\rho)-k^2(30+7\cosh(2\rho))+k^4)y^2(\tau,\rho)\nonumber\\
                  &+&  \frac{ik}{4}(125+108\cosh(2\rho)+7\cosh(4\rho))\nonumber \\
                  &+&  \frac{ik}{4} [367+220\cosh(2\rho)+5\cosh(4\rho)-8k^2(3+\cosh(2\rho))]y(\tau,\rho) \nonumber \\
                  &+& ik(44+16\cosh(2\rho)-k^2(9+\cosh(2\rho)))y^2(\tau,\rho),
 \ea
 \ba
 f^{L(2)}_{uv}&=& 18+14\cosh(2\rho)+2[26+16\cosh(2\rho)-k^2(5+\cosh(2\rho))]y(t,\rho)\nonumber\\
              &+& 2(12+6\cosh(2\rho)-k^2(7+\cosh(2\rho)))y^2(\tau,\rho)\nonumber\\
              &+& 4ik(2+\cosh(2\rho))+2ik(23+9\cosh(2\rho))y(t,\rho) \nonumber\\
              &+& 2ik(16+5\cosh(2\rho)-k^2)y^2(\tau,\rho),
 \ea
 \ba
 f^{L(2)}_{u\rho}&=&  \frac{1}{2}[177+212\cosh(2\rho)+35\cosh(4\rho)
                  -k^2(27+20\cosh(2\rho)+\cosh(4\rho))]\nonumber\\
                  &+& \frac{1}{2}[358+408\cosh(2\rho)+50\cosh(4\rho)-k^2(167+116\cosh(2\rho)+5\cosh(4\rho))]y(\tau,\rho) \nonumber \\
                  &+& [66+72\cosh(2\rho)+6\cosh(4\rho)-k^2(63+42\cosh(2\rho)+\cosh(4\rho))+2k^4]y^2(\tau,\rho)\nonumber\\
                  &+&  \frac{ik}{2}(133+140\cosh(2\rho)+15\cosh(4\rho))\nonumber \\
                  &+&  \frac{ik}{2} [411+404\cosh(2\rho)+33\cosh(4\rho)-8k^2(3+\cosh(2\rho))]y(\tau,\rho) \nonumber \\
                  &+& ik[103+96\cosh(2\rho)+5\cosh(4\rho)-6k^2(3+\cosh(2\rho))]y^2(\tau,\rho),
 \ea
 \ba
 f^{L(2)}_{vv} &=&
 2[2+10y(\tau,\rho)+(6-k^2)y^2(\tau,\rho)+4iky(\tau,\rho)-5iky^2(\tau,\rho)],
 \ea
 \ba
 f^{L(2)}_{v\rho}&=& 4 \{ 9(1+\cosh(2\rho))+[26+26\cosh(2\rho)-k^2(5+\cosh(2\rho))]y(t,\rho)\nonumber\\
              &+& (12+12\cosh(2\rho)-k^2(7+2\cosh(2\rho)))y^2(\tau,\rho)\nonumber\\
              &+& 2ik(2+\cosh(2\rho))+ik(23+13\cosh(2\rho))y(t,\rho)\nonumber\\
              &+& ik(16+10\cosh(2\rho)-k^2)y^2(\tau,\rho) \},
              \ea
 \ba
 f^{L(2)}_{\rho\rho}&=&  217+284\cosh(2\rho)+67\cosh(4\rho)) -k^2(27+20\cosh(2\rho)+\cosh(4\rho))\nonumber\\
                  &+& [482+616\cosh(2\rho)+134\cosh(4\rho)-3k^2(57+52\cosh(2\rho)+3\cosh(4\rho))]y(\tau,\rho) \nonumber \\
                  &+& 4[48+60\cosh(2\rho)+12\cosh(4\rho)-k^2(34+35\cosh(2\rho)+2\cosh(4\rho))-k^4]y^2(\tau,\rho)\nonumber\\
                  &+&  ik(141+172\cosh(2\rho)+23\cosh(4\rho))\nonumber \\
                  &+&  ik[471+588\cosh(2\rho)+77\cosh(4\rho)-8k^2(3+\cosh(2\rho))]y(\tau,\rho) \nonumber \\
                  &+& 4ik[64+80\cosh(2\rho)+10\cosh(4\rho)-k^2(9+5\cosh(2\rho))]y^2(\tau,\rho).
 \ea
From these expressions, one can deduce the $n^{\rm th}$-order
descendant as
 \ba\label{lqnms}
  h^{L(n),{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu}(u,v,\rho)&=&  \Big(\bar{L}_{-1}L_{-1}\Big)^n
                                      h^{L,{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu}(u,v,\rho) \nonumber\\
 &=&\frac{e^{-2n\tau}}{2\sinh^{2n}\!\rho}e^{-ik(\tau+\phi)}(\tanh\!\rho)^{-ik}F^{L(n)}_{\mu\nu}(\rho),
 \ea
where $F^{L(n)}_{\mu\nu}(\rho)$ is the corresponding $n^{\rm th}$-
order matrix.  As a result, we read off the log-square quasinormal
frequencies of the graviton  at the tricritical point 1 as
 \be \label{lsqnm}
 \omega^n_L=k-i4\pi T_L n, ~~n\in Z,
 \ee
which is the same expression for the spin-2 graviton $h_{\mu\nu}$ at
the critical point~\cite{Sachs}.

At this stage, it is appropriate to comment on the right-moving
solution and log-square quasinormal modes at the tricritical point
2. The right-moving solution and its corresponding log-square
solution can be easily constructed by the substitution of $u\to v$,
$L\to R~(\phi\rightarrow -\phi,~ k\rightarrow -k$)  in Eqs.
(\ref{hmassive}) and (\ref{hmassless}). Actually, one starts with
 \be \label{imassive}
 h^M_{\mu\nu}=e^{ik(\tau+\phi)-2h_R\tau} (\sinh\rho)^{-2h_R}(\tanh\rho)^{ik}
 \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    0 & 0 & 0 \\
    0 & 1 & \frac{2}{\sinh(2\rho)} \\
    0 & \frac{2}{\sinh(2\rho)} & \frac{4}{\sinh^2(2\rho)}\\
  \end{array}
 \right),
 \ee
 where $h_R$ is  the conformal weight of graviton with mass $M$  given by
 \be \label{iconw}
 h_R=-\frac{M+1}{2},~~ M\le -1.
 \ee
For $M=-1$, $h_{\mu\nu}^M$ leads to $h^R_{\mu\nu}$ \be
\label{imassive}
 h^R_{\mu\nu}=e^{ik(\tau+\phi)} (\tanh\rho)^{ik}
 \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    0 & 0 & 0 \\
    0 & 1 & \frac{2}{\sinh(2\rho)} \\
    0 & \frac{2}{\sinh(2\rho)} & \frac{4}{\sinh^2(2\rho)}\\
  \end{array}
 \right).
 \ee
With the log and log-square solutions of
 \ba
 h^{R,{\rm Log}}_{\mu\nu}&=&-y(\tau,\rho)h^R_{\mu\nu}, \\
  h^{R,{\rm Log2}}_{\mu\nu}&=& \frac{1}{2}y^2(\tau,\rho)h^R_{\mu\nu},
 \ea
the tricritical GMG at the point 2 is described by
 \be
 \Big(D^LD^RD^{R}D^{R}h^{R,\log^2}\Big)_{\mu\nu}=0.
 \ee
One can also easily check that
 \ba
 && (D^R h^{R,{\rm log^2}})_{\mu\nu} = - h^{R,{\rm log}}_{\mu\nu},\nonumber\\
 && (D^R D^R h^{R,{\rm log^2}})_{\mu\nu}  = h^{R}_{\mu\nu},\nonumber\\
 && (D^R D^R D^R h^{R,{\rm log^2}})_{\mu\nu} =  (D^R h^{R})_{\mu\nu}=0.
 \ea
The succeeding descendants of the log-square quasinormal modes at
the tricritical point 2 is simply derived by applying the
mentioned substitution, and finally yield the quasinormal
frequencies as
 \be\label{rqnms}
 \omega^n_R=-k-i4\pi T_R n, ~~n\in Z.
 \ee

\section{Log-square boundary conditions}
First of all, we review the log$^2$-boundary condition on the
AdS$_3$ spacetimes.  On the AdS$_3$ background, the log$^2$-solution
does not obey either the Brown-Henneaux boundary or the log-boundary
conditions. Hence, Liu and Sun~\cite{LS} have introduced the
log$^2$-boundary condition, \ba \label{adslogeom12} \tilde{h}^{\rm
log^2}_{\mu\nu}=
  \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    \rho^2 & 1 & \rho^2e^{-2\rho}\\
    1 & 1 & e^{-2\rho} \\
    \rho^2e^{-2\rho} & e^{-2\rho} & e^{-2\rho} \\
  \end{array}
 \right)_{\mu\nu},
 \ea
which is a relaxed form obtained by replacing $ \tilde{h}_{uu}=1$
and $ \tilde{h}_{u\rho}=e^{-2\rho}$ in the Brown-Henneaux boundary
by $ \tilde{h}^{\rm log^2}_{uu}=\rho^2$ and $\tilde{ h}^{\rm
log^2}_{u\rho}=\rho^2 e^{-2\rho}$ on the AdS$_3$ spacetimes. It is
worth noting that the log$^2$-boundary condition is different from
the Brown-Henneaux boundary in the CFT.

Similarly, we conjecture that for log$^2$-quasinormal modes, its
asymptotic boundary condition should differ from those of ordinary
quasinormal modes.  In the case of quasinormal modes around the BTZ
black hole, one expects that all quasinormal modes fall off
exponentially in time $\tau$ and for large radial distance $\rho$,
together with ingoing modes at the horizon. The asymptotic behavior
for  the highest weight mode (\ref{hmassless}) for constructing the
ordinary quasinormal modes is given by~\cite{SS}
 \ba \label{ologeom12}
  h^{L}_{\mu\nu}
 &\sim&
  \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    1 & 0 & e^{-2\rho}\\
    0 & 0 & 0 \\
    e^{-2\rho} & 0 & e^{-4\rho} \\
  \end{array}
 \right)_{\mu\nu}.
 \ea
On the other hand, the asymptotic behavior for  the highest weight
mode (\ref{loglogeom1}) for constructing log$^2$-quasinormal modes
takes the form
 \ba \label{loglogeom12}
  h^{L,{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu}
 &\sim&  \rho^2
  \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    1 & 0 & e^{-2\rho}\\
    0 & 0 & 0 \\
    e^{-2\rho} & 0 & e^{-4\rho} \\
  \end{array}
 \right)_{\mu\nu}.
 \ea
Here we note that (\ref{loglogeom12}) involves  $h^{L,{\rm
log^2}}_{uu}$ which  is quadratically  growing for large  $\rho$.
This might be tempted to disqualify as a quasinormal mode because
all quasinormal modes  fall off  for large radial distance $\rho$.
Considering  Eq. (\ref{adslogeom12}), $h^{L,{\rm log^2}}_{uu} \sim
\rho^2$ in Eq. (\ref{loglogeom12}) shows a similar behavior as in
$\tilde{h}^{\rm log^2}_{uu} \sim \rho^2$ on the AdS$_3$
spacetimes. However, from the observation of the first descendent
(\ref{leftsol1}) of the log$^2$ solution, its asymptotic form is
given by
 \ba
  h^{L(1),{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu}
 &\sim&  \rho^2
  \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
  -\frac{1}{\rho} & e^{-2\rho} & e^{-2\rho}\\
    e^{-2\rho} & 0 & e^{-4\rho} \\
    e^{-2\rho} & e^{-4\rho} &  e^{-4\rho} \\
  \end{array}
 \right)_{\mu\nu},
 \ea
which contains still $h^{L(1),{\rm log^2}}_{uu}\sim \rho$-term
which gives rise to divergences at infinity.  In order to see how
this divergence is tamed, we obtain asymptotic form of the second
descendent (\ref{leftsol2}) of the log$^2$-solution
 \ba\label{2nddes}
   h^{L(2),{\rm log^2}}_{\mu\nu}
 &\sim&  \rho^2
  \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
   -\frac{1}{\rho} & e^{-2\rho} & e^{-2\rho}\\
   e^{-2\rho} & e^{-4\rho} & e^{-4\rho} \\
    e^{-2\rho} &  e^{-4\rho} & e^{-4\rho} \\
  \end{array}
 \right)_{\mu\nu}
 \ea
where $\rho$ still appears in the $(uu)$-element. Successively, it
is appropriate to compute the third descendants of $h^{L(3),{\rm
log^2}}_{\mu\nu}$. Its asymptotic behavior is exactly the same
with the asymptotic form (\ref{2nddes}) of the second descendent.
As a result, similar to the previous work~\cite{Kim:2012pt}, we
expect that all higher order descendants with $n>3$ behave as the
second descendent shows. This implies that one could not eliminate
the linear divergence in $h^{L(2),{\rm log^2}}_{uu}$ if one
considers the tricritical gravity, as in the log$^2$-bounary
condition on the AdS$_3$. However, this may give rise to some
difficulty in identifying the corresponding dual operator in the
CFT~\cite{Sachs}.

\section{Rank-3 LCFT}
First of all, the log gravity at the tricritical point could be
dual to a rank-3 LCFT with $c_L=0$ on the
boundary~\cite{Grumiller:2010tj,Bergshoeff:2012ev}.  The rank-3
LCFT ~\cite{Gurarie:1993xq,Flohr:2001zs} is composed of three
operators $\{ {\cal O}^{\rm L}(z),{\cal O}^{\rm log}(z),{\cal
O}^{\rm log^2}(z)\}$ which are denoted as $\{ C(z),D(z),E(z)\}$,
for simplicity. The two-point functions of these operators take
the forms
\begin{eqnarray}\label{c11}
&&<C(z) C(0)>=<C(z)D(0)>=0, \\
\label{c12} &&<C(z) E(0)>=<D(z)D(0)>=\frac{a_{\rm L}}{2z^{2h_L}},\\
\label{c13} &&<D(z) E(0)>=-\frac{a_{\rm L}\log z}{z^{2h_L}}, \\
\label{c14} &&<E(z) E(0)>=\frac{a_{\rm L} \log^2 z}{z^{2h_L}},
\end{eqnarray}
which form a rank-3 Jordan cell. Schematically, these two-point
correlation functions are represented by \be <{\cal O}^i{\cal O}^j>
\sim \left(
  \begin{array}{ccc}
    0 & 0 & {\rm CFT} \\
    0 & {\rm CFT} & {\rm L} \\
   {\rm  CFT} & {\rm L} & {\rm L}^2 \\
  \end{array}
\right),
 \ee
 where $i,j$ =$L$, log, log$^2$, CFT denotes the CFT two-point
 function (\ref{c12}), L represents (\ref{c13}), and L$^2$ denotes
 (\ref{c14}).

 At this stage, we stress that (\ref{c11})-(\ref{c14}) show a
 rank-3 zero temperature LCFT.
Even though one knows a rank-3  zero temperature LCFT, it is a
non-trivial task to construct a rank-3 finite temperature LCFT whose
zero temperature limits correspond to (\ref{c11})-(\ref{c14}). If
one knows the latter, one could read off  the log$^2$ quasinormal
frequencies from the finite temperature LCFT exactly. We note that a
rank-2 finite temperature LCFT was known in ~\cite{Myung:1999nd}.

In this section, we derive the quasinormal frequencies
$\omega^n_{L}= k- i4\pi T_L n $ (\ref{lsqnm}) of the graviton using
the finite temperature CFT. Here we wish to use the finite
temperature CFT but not the finite temperature LCFT.   In order to
derive quasinormal modes, we focus at the location of the poles in
the momentum space for the retarded two-point functions
$G^{CE}_R(\tau,\sigma)$, $G^{DD}_R(\tau,\sigma)$,
$G^{DE}_R(\tau,\sigma)$, and $G^{EE}_R(\tau,\sigma)$~\cite{Sachs}.
It is  important to recognize that as is shown in Eq. (\ref{c12}),
$G^{CE}_R(\tau,\sigma)$ and $G^{DD}_R(\tau,\sigma)$ are identical
with that of the two-point function in the finite temperature
CFT~\cite{Birmingham:2001pj}. The momentum space representation can
be read off from the commutator whose pole structure is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\cal D}^{CE}(p_+)\sim {\cal D}^{DD}(p_+) \propto
\Gamma\left(h_L+i\frac{p_+}{2\pi T_L}\right)
\Gamma\left(h_L-i\frac{p_+}{2\pi T_L}\right), \label{9}
\end{eqnarray}
where  $p_+=(\omega- k)/2$  and $T_L=1/2\pi$ for the BTZ black hole.
This function has poles in both the upper and lower half of the
$\omega$-plane. It turned out that the poles located in the lower
half-plane are the same as those  of the retarded two-point
functions $G^{CE}_R(\tau,\sigma)$ and $G^{DD}_R(\tau,\sigma)$.
Restricting the poles in Eq. (\ref{9}) to the lower half-plane, we
find one set of simple poles
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_s&=&k- i4\pi T_L (n+h_L), \label{10}
\end{eqnarray}
with $n\in N$. This  set of poles characterizes the decay of the
perturbation on the CFT side~\cite{Birmingham:2001pj}, while
(\ref{10}) was first derived from the scalar perturbation around the
BTZ black hole~\cite{Cardoso:2001hn} and scalar wave-falloff was
discussed in AdS$_3$ spacetimes~\cite{Chan:1996yk}. At this stage,
we  would like to mention that the same quasinormal frequencies
(\ref{10}) was obtained by a slightly different operator method
based on the hidden conformal symmetry appeared in the linearized
equation ~\cite{Chen:2010ik,Chen:2010sn}, which is not an underlying
symmetry of the spacetime itself as shown in the line element
(\ref{lc}).  Sach and Solodukhin~\cite{SS} have used the latter
symmetry to construct quasinormal modes and to find quasinormal
frequencies, followed by us. Even though the symmetry group is the
same as SL(2,$R$), their origin is different.

Furthermore, $G^{DE}_R(t,\sigma)$ can be inferred by
noting~\cite{Sachs} \be <D(x) E(0)>=\frac{\partial}{\partial
h_L}<C(x) E(0)>. \ee Then, this implies  that its momentum space
representation takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ddpole}
{\cal D}^{DE}(p_+) \propto  \Gamma'\left(h_L+ip_+\right)
\Gamma\left(h_L-ip_+\right) +\Gamma\left(h_L+ip_+\right)
\Gamma'\left(h_L-ip_+\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where the prime ($'$) denotes the differentiation with respect to
$h_L$. We mention that  (\ref{ddpole}) is a relevant part for
extracting  pole structure,  but its explicit form appeared
in~\cite{Myung:1999nd}.  The poles in the lower half-plane are
relevant to  deriving quasinormal modes.  We note that ${\cal
D}^{DE}(p_+)$ has double poles, while ${\cal D}^{CE}(p_+)$ has
simple poles at the same location.  These double poles  are
responsible for explaining the linear-time dependence in $y(t,\rho)$
of the corresponding quasinormal modes (\ref{logeom1}). Restricting
the double poles in Eq. (\ref{ddpole}) to the lower half-plane, we
find one set of double  poles
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_d&=&k- i4\pi T_L (n+h_L). \label{dpq}
\end{eqnarray}

Finally,  $G^{EE}_R(t,\sigma)$ can be inferred by noting  \be <E(x)
E(0)>=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial h_L^2}<C(x) E(0)>, \ee
which implies  that its momentum space representation takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{dddpole}
{\cal D}^{EE}(p_+) &\propto&  \Gamma''\left(h_L+ip_+\right)
\Gamma\left(h_L-ip_+\right) +2\Gamma'\left(h_L+ip_+\right)
\Gamma'\left(h_L-ip_+\right) \nonumber
\\
&+&\Gamma\left(h_L+ip_+\right) \Gamma''\left(h_L-ip_+\right).
\end{eqnarray}
 The poles in the lower half-plane are relevant to deriving
quasinormal modes. We mention that  ${\cal D}^{EE}(p_+)$ has triple
poles, while ${\cal D}^{CE}(p_+)$ has simple poles at the same
location.  These triple  poles  are responsible for the
quadratic-time dependence in $y^2(t,\rho)$ of the corresponding
quasinormal modes (\ref{loglogeom1}). Restricting the triple poles
in Eq. (\ref{dddpole}) to the lower half-plane, we find one set of
triple poles
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_t&=&k- i4\pi T_L (n+h_L). \label{tpq}
\end{eqnarray}
All these quasinormal frequencies ($\omega_s,\omega_d,\omega_t)$ are
for the scalar with $h_L=2$. For the tensor perturbation, its
conformal weight is given by $h_L=(M-1)/2$ as (\ref{conw}) is shown.
At the tricritical point $M=1$, one has $h_L=0$ and finally,
plugging it to (\ref{tpq}) leads to (\ref{lsqnm}).

\section{Truncation of the tricritical GMG}

On the AdS$_3$ background, in order to remove the non-unitary LCFT,
one restricts the theory to the zero of Abbott-Deser-Tekin charge
($Q_L=0$). This corresponds  to truncating tricritical GMG, which
amounts to reducing  the log$^2$-boundary conditions to log-boundary
condition. After the truncation, the two-point correlation functions
take the form \be \label{tmatrix}
 <{\cal O}^i{\cal O}^j> \sim \left(
  \begin{array}{cc}
    0& 0 \\
    0 & {\rm CFT} \\
  \end{array}
\right),
 \ee
 which implies that the left-moving sector involves a non-trivial
 two-point correlator
 \be
 <D(z)D(0)>\equiv <{\cal O}^{\rm log}(z){\cal O}^{\rm log}(0)>=\frac{a_{\rm
 L}}{2z^{2h_L}}. \ee
 This is unitary and thus, the non-unitary issue is resolved  by truncating the
 tricritical point of the GMG.

What happens for the quasinormal modes when truncating the log$^2$-
quasinormal modes on the BTZ black hole? At this stage, it is not
easy to answer to this question because we did not construct  a
rank-3 finite temperature LCFT whose zero temperature limits
correspond to (\ref{c11})-(\ref{c14}). If this finite temperature
LCFT is constructed, one may apply the above truncation process to
obtain the quasinormal modes (\ref{10}) which is obtained from
simple poles existing in the finite temperature CFT. This may
correspond to CFT in (\ref{tmatrix}).

\section{Discussions}

As was mentioned in the introduction, there is a clear difference
in the AdS/LCFT correspondence between ``tricritical gravity on
the AdS$_3 \rightarrow$
 a rank-3  LCFT"
and ``tricritical gravity on the BTZ black hole $ \rightarrow$ a
rank-3 finite temperature LCFT".  We investigated the tricritical
GMG by following the latter line because the former was almost
confirmed.

We have obtained  log-square  quasinormal modes and frequencies of a
graviton  around the BTZ black hole  at the tricritical GMG  by
employing the operator method.  The log-square quasinormal
frequencies are  also obtained  by using a finite temperature CFT.
This shows the AdS/LCFT correspondence at the tricritical point
approximately.

 Even though one
knows a rank-3 zero temperature LCFT (\ref{c11})-(\ref{c14}), it
is a non-trivial task to construct a rank-3 finite temperature
LCFT whose zero temperature limits correspond to
(\ref{c11})-(\ref{c14}). If one knows the latter, one could read
off the log$^2$-quasinormal frequencies from the finite
temperature LCFT precisely.   In this case, one could apply the
truncation process to obtain the quasinormal modes (\ref{10})
which is obtained from simple poles existing in the finite
temperature CFT, together with removing (\ref{dpq}) and
(\ref{tpq}).

\section*{Acknowledgement}
Two of us (Y. S. Myung and Y.-W. Kim) were supported by the
National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the
Korea government (MEST) (Grant No.2011-0027293). Y.-J. Park was
partially supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea
(NRF) Grant funded by the Korea government (MEST) through the
Center for Quantum Spacetime (CQUeST) of Sogang University with
Grant No. 2005-0049409, and was also supported by World Class
University program funded by the Ministry of Education, Science
and Technology through the National Research Foundation of Korea
(Grant No. R31-20002).

\vskip 1cm


\section{Introduction}

A well-known problem in quantum field theory is how to define a
quantity which decreases along any renormalization group (RG) trajectory. In two-dimensional QFT, an elegant solution to this problem was given by Zamolodchikov \cite{Zamolodchikov:1986gt}, who used the two-point functions of the stress-energy tensor to define a monotonic ``$c$-function.'' At RG fixed points the Zamolodchikov $c$-function equals the Weyl anomaly coefficient $c$.

An important additional property of the Zamolodchikov $c$-function is that it is stationary at the fixed points.
For example, if we consider
perturbing a CFT by a slightly relevant operator ${\cal O}$ of dimension $2-\delta $ then
\be \label{confpert}
c(g)= c_{\rm UV}- g^2 \delta  + O(g^3) \ ,
\ee
where $g$ is the renormalized dimensionless coupling. More generally, in a theory with more than one coupling constant,
\be \label{gradflow}
{\partial c\over \partial g^i}= G_{ij} \beta^j \ ,
\ee
where $G_{ij}$ is the Zamolodchikov metric, and $\beta^j= \mu {dg^j\over d\mu}$ is the beta-function for the coupling $g^j$.
The fact that the metric $G_{ij}$ is non-singular guarantees the stationarity of the Zamolodchikov $c$-function at any fixed point in two-dimensions.

It is of great interest to find out if these results extend to field theory in dimension $d>2$.
  In four-dimensional conformal field theory there are two Weyl anomaly coefficients, $a$ and $c$. Long ago Cardy conjectured \cite{Cardy:1988cwa}  that it should be the $a$-coefficient that decreases under RG flow.  This coefficient can be calculated from the expectation of value of the trace of the stress-energy tensor
in the Euclidean theory on $S^4$. Using conformal perturbation theory, it is possible to establish the analogue of (\ref{confpert}) in four-dimensions \cite{Cardy:1988cwa}:
\be
c(g)= a_{\rm UV}- g^2 \delta  + O(g^3) \ ,
\ee
where the perturbing operator ${\cal O}$ has dimension $4-\delta$.
Over the years
considerable evidence was accumulated in favor of Cardy's conjecture, especially in supersymmetric 4-d field theories where $a$ is determined by the $U(1)_R$ charges \cite{Anselmi:1997am}. In particular, the principle of $a$-maximization \cite{Intriligator:2003jj}, which states that at superconformal fixed points the correct R-symmetry locally maximizes $a$, has passed many consistency checks that rely both on the field theoretic methods and on the AdS/CFT correspondence \cite{Maldacena:1997re,Gubser:1998bc,Witten:1998qj}.
Last year, a general proof of the $a$-theorem was constructed in \cite{Komargodski:2011vj,Komargodski:2011xv}.

A proposal for a similar theorem, called the $F$-theorem, in 3-d Euclidean CFT was made in \cite{Jafferis:2011zi}:
\es{MtheoryExpectation}{
  F = -\log |Z_{S^3}| \,,
 }
where $Z_{S^3}$ is the Euclidean path integral of the CFT conformally mapped to $S^3$.  The 3-d analogue of $a$-maximization is that the R-symmetry of
${\cal N}=2$ superconformal theories in three-dimensions locally maximizes $F$ \cite{Jafferis:2010un,Closset:2012vg}. In \cite{Jafferis:2011zi} it was further conjectured that in unitary 3-d CFT $F$ is positive, that it decreases along any RG flow, and that it is stationary at the fixed points. The three-sphere free energy is ambiguous along RG flow but is well-defined for any conformal field theory. Thus, a precise statement of the conjecture is that, if there is smooth RG flow from a UV CFT to an IR CFT, then their three-sphere free energies satisfy $F_{\rm UV} > F_{\rm IR}$. Various ${\cal N}=2$ supersymmetric examples have been presented in support of these statements; see, for example,
\cite{Jafferis:2011zi,Amariti:2011da,Klebanov:2011td}. Perturbations of a CFT on a three-sphere by slightly relevant operators were studied in \cite{Klebanov:2011gs}, and results
analogous to (\ref{confpert}) were found. In particular, the $S^3$ free energy (\ref{MtheoryExpectation}) is stationary at the fixed points.

 Closely related ideas
 in Minkowski signature were advanced in \cite{Myers:2010tj}.  For a field theory on $\mathbb{R}^{2,1}$, it was proposed in \cite{Myers:2010tj} that one should consider the finite part of the entanglement entropy $S(R)$ across a circle of radius $R$. It was further shown in \cite{Casini:2011kv} (see also \cite{Dowker:2010yj}) that if the field theory in question is a CFT, this entanglement entropy agrees with the free energy of the Euclidean CFT on $S^3$:
 if such a field theory is conformal, then
\begin{equation}
S(R) = \alpha { 2\pi R \over \epsilon}  - F \,,
\label{genent}
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon$ is the short-distance cutoff.

The ideas related to the quantum entanglement entropy were recently made more precise, and a proposal for a monotonic $c$-function
for a general, Poincar\'e invariant $(2+1)$-dimensional QFT has emerged. It is the so-called Renormalized Entanglement Entropy (REE) \cite{Liu:2012ee,Casini:2012ei}
\begin{equation}
{\cal F}(R)=- S(R) + R S'(R)
\ .\label{Ffcn}\end{equation}
An advantage of this definition is that the UV divergence proportional to the radius cancels, so that REE is manifestly finite for
theories that are conformal in the UV\@. Studies of various explicit examples, both in free field theory and in the AdS/CFT correspondence
\cite{Liu:2012ee,Klebanov:2012yf}, yielded a monotonic $c$-function ${\cal F}$. Furthermore, ${\cal F}'(R)= R S''(R)$.
It was shown in \cite{Casini:2012ei} using Strong Subadditivity of the EE, that for any Poincar\'e invariant field theory $S''(R)\leq 0$. This demonstrates that
${\cal F}(R)$ is a non-increasing function and establishes the $F$-theorem.

In this note we address a question about the proposed $c$-function ${\cal F}(R)$ that has not yet been elucidated: namely, is it
stationary for arbitrary perturbations around a CFT? In studies of holographic entanglement entropy \cite{Ryu:2006bv,Ryu:2006ef}, ${\cal F}$ turned out to be stationary \cite{Liu:2012ee,Klebanov:2012yf}, but it is not clear that this is a general property of the REE.

In a general field theory which does not have a gravity dual, the calculation of REE is a difficult problem even if we resort to
numerical methods.
In this paper we consider a particularly simple example of RG flow provided by a free massive scalar field on $\mathbb{R}^{2,1}$ with
the action
\be
I =-\frac 1 2 \int d^3 x\left[ (\partial_\mu \phi)^2 + m^2 \phi^2 \right]\ .
\ee
In this case there
are efficient numerical algorithms for calculating ${\cal F}$ \cite{Srednicki:1993im,Huerta:2011qi}. On dimensional grounds, ${\cal F}$  must be a function of
$g=(m R)^2$, which is the dimensionless coupling associated with the
relevant perturbation  $m^2\phi^2/2$. The UV fixed point of this theory is that of a massless free scalar, for which the value of ${\cal F}$ is known analytically \cite{Dowker:2010yj,Klebanov:2011gs}; therefore,
\es{F0}{
{\cal F}(g=0)={\cal F}_{\rm UV}={\ln 2\over 8}- {3\zeta(3)\over 16 \pi^2}\approx 0.0638\ .
}
The stationarity of the $c$-function at the UV fixed point would require ${\cal F}'(0)=0$. However, our numerical calculation
instead indicates that ${\cal F}'(g)$ is negative at small $g$. In fact, it may diverge in the limit $g\rightarrow 0$, but
the limitations of our numerical work do not allow us to make a precise statement about the small $g$ behavior of
${\cal F}'(g)$.

Our numerical results suggest that REE does not in general define a $c$-function in the Zamolodchikov sense, because it is not always stationary
at conformal fixed points.\footnote{In $(1+1)$-dimensions the monotonic $c$-function derived from the entanglement entropy of a segment
\cite{Casini:2004bw} is not stationary with respect to $m^2$ either. In $(1+1)$-dimensions this is likely due to the fact that $\phi^2$ is not a conformal primary field in the CFT of a massless scalar.} It is not clear how to compare this statement with the proof \cite{Casini:2012ei} of the monotonicity of ${\cal F}$.
If $g$ can have either sign, then ${\cal F}'(0)\neq 0$ would violate monotonicity. In the example we have considered,
however, insisting on a stable UV fixed point requires that $g$ is positive. So, there is no immediate conflict with the work of
\cite{Casini:2004bw}. We note, however, that the absence of stationarity means that an equation like (\ref{gradflow}) cannot
in general apply to ${\cal F}$.
Examination of other examples where the stationarity of ${\cal F}$ can be tested is highly desirable.

\section{Strip entanglement entropy at small mass}
Although the renormalized entanglement entropy across a circle is of our main interest, as a warm-up we start with a slightly different but simpler quantity, the entanglement entropy of a strip.

The entanglement entropy between the strip of width $R$ and its complement in $(2+1)$-dimensional free field theory is simply related to the entanglement entropy between the interval of length $R$ and its complement in the $(1+1)$-dimensional theory.  More precisely, for the $(2+1)$-dimensional massive scalar field of mass $m$ we have the relation~\cite{Casini:2005zv}
\es{Sstrip}{
S^{(2+1)}_{\text{strip}}(m, R) = {L \over \pi} \int_0^\infty dp \, S^{(1+1)}_{\text{interval}}\big(\sqrt{p^2 + m^2}, R \big) \,,
}
where $\sqrt{p^2 + m^2}$ is the mass of the $(1+1)$-dimensional scalar field, and $L$ is the length of the strip.  To derive this equation one first compactifies the direction parallel to the strip to a large circle of length $L$.  Decomposing the $(2+1)$-dimensional scalar field into angular momentum modes along this circle and then taking $L \to \infty$ leads to~\eqref{Sstrip}.

 It is useful to define the entropic $c$-function for the strip through
 \be \label{stripc}
 C_{\text{strip}}  \equiv R^2 \, \partial_R \, \hat S^{(2+1)}_{\text{strip}}\ ,
  \ee
  where $\hat S^{(2+1)}_{\text{strip}} \equiv S^{(2+1)}_{\text{strip}} / L$ is the entanglement entropy per unit length. This function is manifestly finite and cut-off independent \cite{Nishioka:2006gr,Klebanov:2007ws}.   For the massive scalar field, $ C_{\text{strip}}$ is also simply related to the $(1+1)$-dimensional entropic $c$-function, defined \cite{Casini:2004bw} by $c(t=mR) \equiv R \, \partial_R \, S^{(1+1)}_{\text{interval}}$, through~\eqref{Sstrip}:
 \es{Candc}{
C_{\text{strip}}(mR) = {1 \over 2\pi} \int_{-\infty}^\infty dx\ c(\sqrt{x^2 + (mR)^2}  ) \,.
}
We should note, however, that in general $ C_{\text{strip}}$ is not expected to be a good $c$-function; for example, it is not constant
 along lines of fixed points.

The entropic $c$-function for the $(1+1)$-dimensional massive scalar field is a well studied quantity (see~\cite{Casini:2009sr} for a review).  The function interpolates between $1/3$ in the UV ($t = 0$) and $0$ in the IR ($t \to \infty$).
At small and large values of $t$ one can calculate the leading behavior of $c(t)$ analytically~\cite{Casini:2005zv},
\es{smallLarge}{
c(t) &= {1 \over 3} + {1 \over 2 \log t} + \cdots \,, \qquad t \ll 1 \,, \\
c(t) &= {t \over 4} K_1 (2 t) + \cdots \,,  \qquad t \gg 1 \,.
}
Unfortunately there is no known closed form expression for $c(t)$ along the entire RG flow.  The function may be constructed numerically by solving an infinite sequence of nonlinear differential equations~\cite{Casini:2005zv}.  Following this procedure leads to the curve in figure~\ref{S2Plot}.
  \begin{figure}[htb]
  \leavevmode
\begin{center}
\scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{S1p1Int.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{The entropic $c$-function $c \equiv R \, \partial_R \, S^{(1+1)}_{\text{interval}}$ for the $(1+1)$-dimensional massive scalar field as a function of $t \equiv m R$, where $m$ is the mass and $R$ is the length of the interval.  The black curve comes from a numerical calculation using the prescription in~\cite{Casini:2005zv}.  The blue and orange curves are the analytic approximations in~\eqref{smallLarge} at small and large values of $t$, respectively.  The dotted red line marks the conformal value $c(0) = 1/3$.     }
\label{S2Plot}
\end{figure}

The function $ C_{\text{strip}} (mR)$ is a monotonically decreasing function that approaches zero exponentially fast in the IR\@.  Using~\eqref{Candc} one may determine numerically its value at $mR = 0$~\cite{Casini:2005zv},
 \es{C0}{
 C_{\text{strip}} ( 0) = {1 \over \pi}  \int_0^\infty dt \, c( t ) \approx 3.97 \times 10^{-2} \,.
}
At large $mR$ we may use the approximation for $c(t)$ in the second line of~\eqref{smallLarge} to write
\es{IRstrip}{
C_{\text{strip}} (mR) \approx {1 \over 16} e^{-2 mR} \left( mR + {1 \over 2} \right) \,, \qquad mR \gg 1 \,.
}
In figure~\ref{Cstrip} we numerically plot $C_{\text{strip}}$ along the RG flow together with the IR analytic approximation.
  \begin{figure}[htb]
  \leavevmode
\begin{center}
\scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{S2p1Int.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{The function $ C_{\text{strip}}  \equiv R^2 \, \partial_R \, \hat S^{(2+1)}_{\text{strip}}$ for the free massive scalar field in black, where $\hat S^{(2+1)}_{\text{strip}} \equiv S^{(2+1)}_{\text{strip}} / L$ is the entanglement entropy per unit length across the strip of width $R$.  The orange curve is the IR approximation in~\eqref{IRstrip}.  The dotted red line is the initial value at $t = mR = 0$ given in~\eqref{C0}.      }
\label{Cstrip}
\end{figure}

It is interesting to ask whether $C_{\text{strip}}$ is stationary at $mR = 0$.
The first derivative of the entropic $c$-function \eqref{Candc} with respect to $t=mR$
gives
\es{Cstder}{
	C'_\text{strip}(t) &= \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{-\infty}^\infty dx \frac{t}{\sqrt{x^2 + t^2}}\, c'(\sqrt{x^2 + t^2})  \\
	&=  \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{-\infty}^\infty dx \frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2 + 1}} \left[ -\frac{1}{2\sqrt{x^2 + 1} \log^2 (t\sqrt{x^2 + 1})} + O\left(  \log^{-3} t \right) \right]  \\
	&\xrightarrow[t \to 0]{} -\frac{1}{4\log^2 t} \, ,
}
where we used the asymptotic form of the $(1+1)$-dimensional entropic $c$-function \eqref{smallLarge} and rescaled $x\to t x $ in the second line.  While this implies that  $C_{\text{strip}}'(0) = 0$, stationarity additionally requires that
$C'_\text{strip}(t) / t$ vanishes at $t = 0$.  This is clearly not the case since this quantity
diverges as $-1 / (4 t \log^2 t)$ as $t \to 0$.
As can be seen in figure~\ref{secondD}, we confirm this behavior numerically by plotting $C'_\text{strip}(t) / t$ along with the analytic prediction.

\begin{figure}[htb]
\leavevmode
\begin{center}
\scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{CppLog.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{The first derivative $ C_{\text{strip}}'(t)/t$ as $t = mR \to 0$.  The black curve comes from the numerical calculation, and the dotted orange curve comes from fitting the numerics to the function $C_{\text{strip}}'(t)/t \approx a/(t \log^2 t) $ as $t \to 0$.  We find $a \approx -0.25$, which agrees with the analytic result in~\eqref{Cstder}.  This
means that $C_{\text{strip}}$ is not stationary for the massive scalar field.  }
\label{secondD}
\end{figure}

To summarize the results of this section, we have found that the small mass expansion of the UV finite function (\ref{stripc}) for a strip of width $R$ is
\be
C_{\text{strip}}(mR) \approx 0.0397- {|mR|\over 4\log^2 (mR)} + \cdots\ .
\ee
In the next section we will present evidence that the REE across a circle of radius $R$ has a similar structure, with $d{\cal F}/dg$
looking clearly negative at small $g=(mR)^2$.

\section{Disk entanglement entropy at small mass}

The entanglement entropy for the massive scalar field across the circle of radius $R$ may be calculated numerically following the prescription in~\cite{Huerta:2011qi,Casini:2009sr,Srednicki:1993im,2003JPhA...36L.205P}.  This numerical method has passed many non-trivial checks.  For example, in~\cite{Huerta:2011qi} the terms proportional to $(mR)$ and $1 / (mR)$ in the large $(mR)$ expansion of the disk entanglement entropy were matched numerically to the analytic predictions to high accuracy.  A similar analysis in~\cite{Safdi:2012sn} matched the $1 / (mR)^3$ term in the large mass expansion of the EE to the analytic prediction, and in~\cite{Liu:2012ee} the value of the REE at $mR = 0$ was shown to agree with~\eqref{F0}.

The numerical procedure~\cite{Huerta:2011qi,Casini:2009sr,Srednicki:1993im,2003JPhA...36L.205P} expands the scalar field into modes of integer angular momentum $n$.  The radial direction is discretized into a lattice of $N$ units.  For each $n$ the discrete Hamiltonian takes the form $H_n = {1\over2} \sum_i \pi_i^2 + {1\over2} \sum_{ij} \phi_i K_n^{ij} \phi_j$, where $\pi_i$ is the conjugate momentum to $\phi_i$ and $i = 1, \dots, N$.  The nonzero entries of the  $N \times N$ matrix $K_n$ are
\es{Kmat}{
K_n^{11} = {3 \over 2} + n^2 + m^2 \,, \qquad K_n^{ii} = 2 + {n^2 \over i^2} + m^2 \,, \qquad K_n^{i,i+1} = K_n^{i+1,i} = - {i+1/2 \over \sqrt{i(i+1)} } \,.
}

To compute the entanglement entropy we need to know the two-point correlators $X \equiv \left< \phi_i \phi_j \right> ={1\over 2} (K^{-1/2})_{ij}$ and $P \equiv \left< \pi_i \pi_j \right> ={1\over 2} (K^{+1/2})_{ij}$.  If the radius of the entangling circle $R$ is a half-integer in units of the lattice spacing, then we must reduce the matrices $X_{ij}$ and $P_{ij}$ to the $r \times r$ matrices $X^r_{ij}$ and $P^r_{ij}$, which are defined by taking  $1 \leq i,j \leq r$ with $r = R - {1 \over 2}$.  The entanglement entropy is then given by
\es{NumS}{
S(R) = S_0 + 2 \sum_{n=1}^\infty S_n \,,
}
with
\es{Sn}{
S_n = \tr \left[ \left( \sqrt{X_n^r P_n^r} + \frac12 \right) \log \left( \sqrt{X_n^r P_n^r }+ \frac12 \right) - \left( \sqrt{X_n^r P_n^r} - \frac12 \right) \log \left( \sqrt{X_n^r P_n^r} - \frac12 \right) \right] \,.
}
Further details of the numerical calculation can be found in~\cite{Huerta:2011qi}.

In order to achieve the continuum limit we need to take $N \gg r \gg 1$ and $m\ll 1$ (restoring the lattice spacing, the latter condition is $m\epsilon \ll 1$). Then $mR$ can be either small or large, and we can explore the REE as a function of this parameter.

In our calculations we use a radial lattice consisting of $N = 200$ points.  We want to calculate the entanglement entropy for $.06 < mR < 2$, but to minimize lattice effects we restrict $30 < r < 50$ in lattice units.  To accomplish this we calculate the entanglement entropy for $ m = .002\cdot i$ in inverse lattice units, with $i = 1, \dots, 20$.
To take into account finite lattice effects, we follow~\cite{Liu:2012ee} and for the lowest $10$ angular momentum modes we repeat the calculation on lattices of sizes $N = 200+10\cdot j$, with $j = 0, \dots,50$, and then extrapolate to $N = \infty$.
We perform the numerical calculation for the first $3000$ angular momentum modes.  We take into account higher angular momentum modes by
using the asymptotic behavior of $S_n$ derived in Appendix~\ref{LARGEN}.

From the entanglement entropy we construct the renormalized entanglement entropy ${\cal F}$ along the RG flow.  A plot of this function versus $(mR)^2$ is given in figure~\ref{scalarPlot}.
  \begin{figure}[htb]
  \leavevmode
\begin{center}
\scalebox{1}{\includegraphics{Fscalar.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{The renormalized entanglement entropy ${\cal F}$ across the circle of radius $R$ for the massive real free scalar plotted in black as a function of $(mR)^2$.
In this plot it can clearly be seen that $\partial_{(mR)^2} {\cal F}$ is negative and nonzero at $(mR)^2 = 0$, which implies that the REE ${\cal F}$ is not stationary at the UV fixed point of a free massless scalar field.
The dotted red line is the zero mass value ${\cal F}_{\rm UV}={\ln 2\over 8}- {3\zeta(3)\over 16 \pi^2}$.}
\label{scalarPlot}
\end{figure}
From this plot we can see that $\partial_{(mR)^2} {\cal F}$ is clearly negative and nonzero at $(mR)^2 = 0$.  Moreover, it appears that this quantity might actually diverge as $(mR)^2 \to 0$, though our limited numerical precision prevents us from making any precise statements along these lines.

\section{A toy model: the massive scalar on $\mathbb{H}^2\times S^1$}

For a CFT in $(2+1)$-dimensions the calculation of the R\' enyi $q$-entropy of a disk may be mapped to a calculation on $\mathbb{H}^2\times S^1$
\cite{Casini:2010kt,Casini:2011kv},
where $q$ is the radius of the circle. For a free scalar field of mass $m$ the free energy on this space is \cite{Klebanov:2011uf}
\es{FqOneInt}{
  {\cal F}_q(m^2) = \int_0^\infty d \lambda {\cal D}(\lambda)
   \left[ \log \left(1 - e^{-2 \pi q \sqrt{\lambda + (mR)^2 } }  \right)
    + \pi q  \sqrt{\lambda + (mR)^2 }\right] \,,
 }
 where the density of states is given by
 \es{DLambda}{
  {\cal D}(\lambda) d\lambda = \frac{\Vol(\mathbb{H}^2)}{4 \pi} \tanh (\pi \sqrt{\lambda}) d\lambda \ ,
 }
 and the regularized volume of the hyperbolic space is $\Vol(\mathbb{H}^2)=-2\pi$.
 The formula for the finite part of entanglement entropy is
 \be
 S_1= {\partial {\cal F}_q\over \partial q}\bigg|_{q=1}-  {\cal F}_1
 \ .
 \ee
 Applying this relation at $m=0$, which corresponds to a massless scalar on a disk, one obtains
 $S_1= -{\ln 2\over 8}+ {3\zeta(3)\over 16 \pi^2}$, in agreement with other methods \cite{Klebanov:2011uf}.

 The status of the calculation on $\mathbb{H}^2\times S^1$ for $m^2>0$ is less clear since this does not correspond to turning on mass
 on the original disk geometry. It is still interesting to inquire whether $S_1$ defined above is stationary with respect to turning on
 $m^2$. An explicit calculation yields
\be\label{EEmass}
 {\partial S_1\over \partial m^2}\bigg|_{m^2 = 0}= {\pi^2\over 16} R^2\,.
 \ee
 Similarly, the calculation of the R\' enyi entropy can be mapped to that on the $q$-fold
covering of $S^3$ \cite{Klebanov:2011uf}. For a massive free scalar field of mass $m$ on
this space, the derivative of $S_1$ with
respect to the mass of the scalar field is
$ {\partial S_1\over \partial m^2}|_{m^2 = 0} = -{\pi^2\over 16} R^2$, which agrees in absolute value with (4.4) but has a different sign.
Either way,
$S_1$ is not stationary in these toy models.
 This lack of stationarity of $S_1$, which is easily established analytically, is reminiscent of the numerical result for the disk entanglement
 found in the previous section.

\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank H.~Casini, Z.~Komargodski, D.~Kutasov, S.~Sachdev and E.~Witten
 for helpful discussions.
 The work of IRK and TN was supported in part by the US NSF under Grant No.~PHY-0756966. IRK gratefully acknowledges support from the IBM Einstein Fellowship at the Institute for Advanced Study, and from the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Fellowship.  SSP was supported by a Pappalardo Fellowship in Physics at MIT and by the U.S. Department of Energy under cooperative research agreement Contract Number DE-FG02-05ER41360\@.  BRS was supported by the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program. IRK is grateful to the Aspen Center for Physics and the NSF Grant No. 1066293 for hospitality during the completion of this paper. BRS thanks the Institute for Advanced Study for hospitality.


\section{Introduction}

The nonlocality \cite{Aspect-Review,Mermin-RMP}, nonseparability
\cite{Horodecki-RMP,Guhne-PR}, and quantumness \cite{Celeri-Review,Modi-Review}
of correlations in composite systems are currently recognized as important
ingredients for the efficiency of protocols in quantum information
science. Substantial progress has been achieved latterly regarding
the characterization, identification, and quantification of total,
classical, and quantum correlations \cite{Groisman-PRA,Henderson-JPA,Ollivier-QD,Horodecki-Defict,Piani-NLB,Cavalcanti-SMerg,Madhok-SMerg,Ferraro,Zurek-MD,Adesso-CV,Giorda-CV,Cornelio-EIrrev,Streltsov-DEM,Maziero-Wit,Aguilar-WPRL}.
The nonclassicality originated from local indistinguishability of
quantum states is the more recent paradigm for analyzing correlations.
This kind of correlation was studied mostly in the case of bipartite
systems, with novel and interesting results already obtained. By its
turn, the investigation of (genuine) multipartite quantum and classical
correlations has been receiving its deserved attention only very recently
\cite{kaszlikowski,walczak,grudka-arxiv,Saitoh-IJQI,Rulli-Sarandy-GQD,Chakrabarty-MQD,Okrasa-EPL,Parashar-Rana,Campbell-IJQI,Giorgi-GMTC-XY,Byczuk-PRL,Ranzan-Dynamics-GQD,Comment-Paper-Giorgi,Square-D-&-Monogamy,Average-GMQD,Mahdian-MQD-Dec,Xu-GQD,GMQD-Detection,Saguia-Wit,Modi-reldis,Giorgi-genuine,Bennett-genuine}.
In this article we are interested in this last scenario. We shall
define measures for genuine $n$-partite correlations (Section \ref{sec:quantifiers})
and study how these correlations develop during decoherent system-environment
dynamics (Section \ref{sec:dynamics}).

\subsection{The decoherence process}
The thorough investigation of the decoherence process \cite{Zurek-RMP,Breuer-Petruccione,Schlosshauer}
is an important issue to be addressed towards large scale implementations
of, for instance, quantum computers, quantum simulators, and communication
protocols. The decoherence phenomenon is a result of the inevitable
interaction between a quantum system and its surroundings. Let us
consider a system $s$ and its environment $E$ in an initial product
state $\rho_{sE}=\rho_{s}\otimes|0_{E}\rangle\langle0_{E}|$, where $|0_{E}\rangle$ is the vacuum state of the environment. The dynamics of the whole closed system is unitary, i.e., $\rho_{sE}(t)=U_{sE}(t)\rho_{sE}U_{sE}^{\dagger}(t)$
with $U_{sE}(t)U_{sE}^{\dagger}(t)=\mathbb{I}$, where $\mathbb{I}$
is the identity operator. Then, by tracing out the environmental variables
we write down the system's evolved state in the Kraus or operator-sum
representation: $\mathcal{E}(\rho_{s})=\sum_{i}K_{i}\rho_{s}K_{i}^{\dagger}$,
where $K_{i}:=\langle i_{E}|U_{sE}(t)|0_{E}\rangle$ are linear operators
on the state space of the system, $\mathcal{H}_{s}$, such that $\sum_{i}K_{i}^{\dagger}K_{i}\le\mathbb{I}$ and $\{|i_{E}\rangle\}$ is a basis for the environment with $i$ specifying number of excitations that is distributed in all its modes.
We observe that the quantum operation $\mathcal{E}$ can be used to describe general
transformations between quantum states \cite{Nielsen-Chuang,Preskill}.

One can verify that the dynamical map for the evolution of the system-environment
state:
\begin{equation}
U_{sE}|\psi_{s}\rangle\otimes|0_{E}\rangle=\sum_{i}K_{i}|\psi_{s}\rangle\otimes|i_{E}\rangle,
\end{equation}
leads to the same motion equation for the system state as shown above.
Thus, we can obtain the Kraus' operators describing the noise channel
acting on the system using a phenomenological approach \cite{Almeida-POA,Diogo-Dec-Control}
or via quantum process tomography \cite{Chuang.Nielsen-PT,Vandersypen.Chuang-RMP}
and use this information to investigate, for example, the system-environment
correlations, without worry about the usually complicated structure
of the environment.

\subsection{A partial classification of quantum states}
\label{state-classification}

A possible, partial, classification of multipartite quantum states
concerning its correlations, or with regard to the operations needed
to generate such correlations, can be introduced as follows. For an
$n$-partite system prepared in a product state vector $|\psi_{\mathrm{init}}\rangle=|\psi_{01}\cdots\psi_{0n}\rangle,$
any uncorrelated $n$-partite product state of this system,
\begin{equation}
\rho_{1\cdots n}^{p}=\rho_{1}\otimes\cdots\otimes\rho_{n},
\end{equation}
can be created by means of local quantum operations (LQO). The sub-index
$is$ in $|\psi_{\mathrm{init}}\rangle$ specifies the state and subsystem,
respectively, and we use throughout this article the notation $|\psi_{01}\cdots\psi_{0n}\rangle:=|\psi_{01}\rangle\otimes\cdots\otimes|\psi_{0n}\rangle$.

Starting with the system in state $|\psi_{\mathrm{init}}\rangle$,
any $n$-partite classically-correlated state can be prepared via
local classical operations (LCO) coordinated by the exchange of classical
communication (CC) and has the form:
\begin{equation}
\rho_{1\cdots n}^{c}=\sum_{i1,\cdots,in}p_{i1,\cdots,in}|\psi_{i1}\cdots\psi_{in}\rangle\langle\psi_{i1}\cdots\psi_{in}|,
\end{equation}
where the states $\{|\psi_{is}\rangle\}\in\mathcal{H}_{s}$ form a
complete ($\sum_{is}|\psi_{is}\rangle\langle\psi_{is}|=\mathbb{I}_{s}$)
orthonormal ($\langle\psi_{is}|\psi_{js}\rangle=\delta_{ij}$), and
therefore distinguishable, basis for the subsystem $s$. Above, by
LCO we mean (complete) transformations between the pointer basis states
\cite{Zurek-RMP}. It can be seen that if the probability distribution
in the state $\rho_{1\cdots n}^{c}$ factorizes, i.e., $p_{i1,\cdots,in}=p_{i1}\cdots p_{in}$,
there is no correlation at all in the system, that is to say, it is an $n$-partite
product state.

An $n$-partite separable but quantumly correlated state
needs LQO and CC to be generated from $|\psi_{\mathrm{init}}\rangle$.
This kind of state has the general form
\begin{equation}
\rho_{1\cdots n}^{s}={\textstyle \sum_{i}}p_{i}\rho_{i1}\otimes\cdots\otimes\rho_{in},
\end{equation}
with $\{p_{i}\}$ being a joint probability distribution and $\{\rho_{is}\}$
being noncommuting density operators. We note that if the density
operators $\rho_{is}$ commute for different $i$, then the state
$\rho_{1\cdots n}^{s}$ is an $n$-partite classically-correlated state.
If in addition the probability distribution $\{p_{i}\}$ factorizes,
then $\rho_{1\cdots n}^{s}$ is an $n$-partite product state.

The $n$-partite entangled, or non-separable, states $\rho_{1\cdots n}^{e}$
cannot be prepared locally, requiring direct or mediated interaction
for its generation. One famous example of entangled state is the GHZ
state \cite{GHZ,GHZ-E}:
\begin{equation}
2^{-1/2}(|0_{1}\cdots0_{n}\rangle+|1_{1}\cdots1_{n}\rangle),
\end{equation}
where $\{|0_{s}\rangle,|1_{s}\rangle\}$ is the
one-qubit computational basis.

\subsection{Relative entropy-based measures of correlation}
\label{subsec-rebq}

Considering the operational state classification of the last subsection and with the aim of quantifying the different kinds of correlation in an unified manner, Modi \emph{et al.} \cite{Modi-reldis} introduced measures of correlation using the relative entropy \cite{Vedral-RE},
\begin{equation}
S(\rho||\sigma)=\mathrm{tr}(\rho(\log_{2}\rho-\log_{2}\sigma)),
\end{equation}
to estimate the ``distance'' between two states $\rho$ and $\sigma$.
The total correlation in an $n$-partite state $\rho_{1\cdots n}$
is quantified by how distinguishable or how distant it is from an
uncorrelated $n$-partite product state \cite{Modi-reldis}, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray}
I(\rho_{1\cdots n}) & = & \min_{\rho_{1\cdots n}^{p}}S(\rho_{1\cdots n}||\rho_{1\cdots n}^{p})\nonumber \\
 & = & S(\rho_{1\cdots n}||\rho_{1}\otimes\cdots\otimes\rho_{n}).
\end{eqnarray}
The last equality was established in Ref. \cite{Modi-reldis} and
shows that the closest $n$-partite product state of any state $\rho_{1\cdots n}$
is obtained from its marginal states in the product form. Recalling
the state classification presented in the previous paragraph, the
quantum part of the correlation in $\rho_{1\cdots n}$ can be defined
as its minimal distance from $n$-partite classically-correlated states \cite{Modi-reldis}:
\begin{eqnarray}
Q(\rho_{1\cdots n}) & = & \min_{\rho_{1\cdots n}^{c}}S(\rho_{1\cdots n}||\rho_{1\cdots n}^{c})\nonumber \\
 & = & S(\rho_{1\cdots n}||\chi_{1\cdots n}^{\rho}),
\end{eqnarray}
with $\chi_{1\cdots n}^{\rho}=\sum_{i1,\cdots,in}p_{i1,\cdots,in}|\psi_{i1}\cdots\psi_{in}\rangle\langle\psi_{i1}\cdots\psi_{in}|$
and $p_{i1,\cdots,in}=\langle\psi_{i1}\cdots\psi_{in}|\rho_{1\cdots n}|\psi_{i1}\cdots\psi_{in}\rangle$
\cite{Modi-reldis}. In the second equality for $Q$, we leave implicit
the minimization over local basis needed to find the closest classically-correlated
state $\chi_{1\cdots n}^{\rho}$. Finally, the classical part of the
correlations in $\rho_{1\cdots n}$ is given by the total correlation
of $\chi_{1\cdots n}^{\rho}$ \cite{Modi-reldis}:
\begin{eqnarray}
C(\rho_{1\cdots n}) & = & \min_{\rho_{1\cdots n}^{p}}S(\chi_{1\cdots n}^{\rho}||\rho_{1\cdots n}^{p}),
\end{eqnarray}
and quantifies how distant $\chi_{1\cdots n}^{\rho}$ is from being an uncorrelated state.

\subsection{Genuine multipartite correlations}
\label{subsec-gmc}

Though the state classification and the correlation quantifiers presented
above are very useful in several contexts, they are restricted in
a certain sense because they classify the system state without considering
the possibility of a more complex distribution for the correlations.
For instance, in studying multipartite spin systems, which may have
a far more intricate density operator with groups or cluster of spins
in different families of states, it would be desirable to generalize
the results presented in the last two paragraphs in order to include
and quantify such complexity. As we will discuss in the sequence,
the concept of genuine multipartite correlation fits well for the
study of these more general scenarios and can be utilized as the starting
point to define generalizations of the correlation quantifiers
discussed above.

Addressing this subject, Bennett \emph{et al.} (see
Ref. \cite{Bennett-genuine})\emph{ }postulated that if an $n$-partite
state has no genuine $n$-partite correlation, then we cannot create
genuine $n$-partite correlation by adding a subsystem in a product
state or by performing trace non-increasing local quantum operations.
Also, we cannot create genuine ($n+1$)-partite correlation by splitting
a subsystem in two. They proved that the following definitions satisfy
these requirements. An $n$-partite state has genuine $n$-partite
correlation only if it is non-product under any bipartite cut of the
system. For $k\le n$, an $n$-partite state has genuine $k$-partite
correlation only if there exists a subset of $k$ subsystems presenting
genuine $k$-partite correlation. Bennett and collaborators also defined
the degree of correlation of an $n$-partite state as the maximum number
$k$ of subsystems possessing genuine $k$-partite correlation.

\section{Quantifiers for Genuine Multipartite Correlations}

\label{sec:quantifiers}

The investigation of the different types of correlation presented in quantum states is one of the main problems in quantum information science. Recently the identification and quantification of genuine multipartite correlations (which are those correlations we cannot account looking only to a part of the system) has been receiving its first studies. In this section we shall introduce definitions and quantifiers for genuine multipartite correlations by using the concepts reviewed in Section \ref{subsec-gmc} to generalize the measures discussed in Section \ref{subsec-rebq}.

From the definition given in Section \ref{subsec-gmc}, it follows that an $n$-partite state
has genuine $n$-partite correlation only if it is non-product under
any bipartite cut of the system, i.e., if $\rho_{1\cdots n}\ne\rho_{c_{1}}\otimes\rho_{c_{2}},$
where $c_{1}\mbox{ }(c_{2})$ indicates a group with a number $n_{1}\mbox{ }(n_{2})$
of subsystems, and $n_{1}+n_{2}=n$. In other words, if $\rho_{1\cdots n}$
possesses genuine $n$-partite correlation then there does not exist
two completely uncorrelated clusters of particles in the system. Thus,
a measure for \textit{genuine $n$-partite total correlation} of an $n$-partite
state can be logically defined as
\begin{equation}
I_{n}(\rho_{1\cdots n}):=\min_{(c_{1},c_{2})}S(\rho_{1\cdots n}||\rho_{c_{1}}\otimes\rho_{c_{2}}),
\end{equation}
where the minimum is taken over all possible bi-partitions $(c_{1},c_{2})$
of the system. Therefore the quantity $I_{n}$ measures the minimum
distance between $\rho_{1\cdots n}$ and states that do not possess
genuine $n$-partite correlation.

Starting from a possible generalization of Shannon's mutual information for tripartite systems, the quantifier for genuine $n$-partite total correlation $I_{n}(\rho_{1\cdots n})$ was also noticed by Giorgi
and colleagues in Ref. \cite{Giorgi-genuine}. They also defined measures for genuine classical and quantum correlations using a quantum discord-like approach, i.e., assuming additivity of mutual information in classical
and quantum correlations. As shown in Ref. \cite{Comment-Paper-Giorgi}, the complicated alternative definitions presented in Ref. \cite{Giorgi-genuine} for genuine $n$-partite quantum and classical correlation of $n$-partite states do not coincide in general.
In sequence of this article, we shall start from a direct extension of the operational classification of states discussed in Section \ref{state-classification} and use relative entropy-based distinguishability measures to define simple and general correlation quantifiers for genuine multipartite correlations that are valid for any number of subsystems and for any dimension of its Hilbert spaces. It is also worthwhile to mention that, although we choose the relative entropy as a measure of distance, our quantifiers for correlation can be defined in a similar manner using other distance measures.

Regarding total correlations, we can also look to the structure of the system's correlation by defining a measure for \textit{genuine $k$-partite total correlation} of an $n$-partite state:
\begin{equation}
I_{k}(\rho_{1\cdots n}):=\max_{\rho_{k}}I_{k}(\rho_{k}).
\end{equation}
In the last equation, the maximum is taken over all states $\rho_{k}$ comprising $k$ subsystems and aims to identify the most correlated $k$-partite  group of particles in the system. For example, if $k=n-1$, $I_{n-1}(\rho_{1\cdots n})$ is the maximal genuine $(n-1)$-partite total correlation of the states obtained by tracing out one subsystem of $\rho_{1\cdots n}$.

This last quantifier, $I_{k}(\rho_{1\cdots n})$, can be applied to study the \textit{degree of correlation} (as defined in Section \ref{subsec-gmc}) of a system and can find application, for instance, in the study of quantum phase transitions in critical systems
\cite{Sachdev}.

Based on the discussion about classically-correlated states and of the quantum correlation present in non-classical states, addressed in the introductory section, we propose the following definition.

\textit{Definition 1.} An $n$-partite state
$\rho_{1\cdots n}$ has genuine $n$-partite quantum correlation only
if it is not a classical state under any bipartite cut of the system,
viz., $\rho_{1\cdots n}\ne\chi_{c_{1}c_{2}}^{\rho},$ with $\chi_{c_{1}c_{2}}^{\rho}=\sum_{ic_{1},ic_{2}}p_{ic_{1},ic_{2}}|\psi_{ic_{1}}\psi_{ic_{2}}\rangle\langle\psi_{ic_{1}}\psi_{ic_{2}}|,$
where $\{p_{ic_{1},ic_{2}}=\langle\psi_{ic_{1}}\psi_{ic_{2}}|\rho_{1\cdots n}|\psi_{ic_{1}}\psi_{ic_{2}}\rangle\}$
is a probability distribution and $\{|\psi_{ic_{s}}\rangle\}$ is
an orthonormal basis for $\mathcal{H}_{c_{s}}$.

From this definition, a quantifier of \textit{genuine $n$-partite quantum correlation} of an $n$-partite state follows as
\begin{equation}
Q_{n}(\rho_{1\cdots n}):=\min_{(c_{1},c_{2})}S(\rho_{1\cdots n}||\chi_{c_{1}c_{2}}^{\rho}).
\end{equation}
$Q_{n}(\rho_{1\cdots n})$ measures the minimum distance between $\rho_{1\cdots n}$ and the bipartite classical states $\chi_{c_{1}c_{2}}^{\rho}$. By definition, $Q_{n}(\rho_{1\cdots n})\ge0$ with equality only in cases where $\rho_{1\cdots n}=\chi_{c_{1}c_{2}}^{\rho}$.

Now a measure for \textit{genuine $k$-partite quantum correlation} of an $n$-partite system
is defined in an analogous manner to the genuine $k$-partite total correlation introduced above, namely:
\begin{equation}
Q_{k}(\rho_{1\cdots n}):=\max_{\rho_{k}}Q_{k}(\rho_{k}).
\end{equation}
Using this quantifier, we define the \textit{degree of quantumness}, or degree of quantum correlation, of an $n$-partite system as the maximum number $k$ of its subsystems that presents genuine $k$-partite quantum correlation.

One possible definition for genuine $n$-partite classical correlation
of an $n$-partite state is given as follows.

\textit{Definition 2.} An $n$-partite state
$\rho_{1\cdots n}$ possesses genuine $n$-partite classical correlation
only if its closest $n$-partite classical state $\chi_{1\cdots n}^{\rho}$
has genuine $n$-partite total correlation, namely, if the classical
probability distribution $p_{i1,\cdots,in}$ does not factorizes under
any bipartite cut of $\chi_{1\cdots n}^{\rho}$, i.e., $p_{i1,\cdots,in}\ne p_{c_{1}}p_{c_{2}}.$

Based on this definition, we propose the following quantifiers for
\textit{genuine $n$-partite classical correlation}:
\begin{equation}
C_{n}(\rho_{1\cdots n}):=I_{n}(\chi_{1\cdots n}^{\rho}),
\end{equation}
and for \textit{genuine $k$-partite classical correlation}:
\begin{equation}
C_{k}(\rho_{1\cdots n})=\max_{\chi_{k}^{\rho}}I_{k}(\chi_{k}^{\rho}),
\end{equation}
of an $n$-partite state. The states $\chi_{k}^{\rho}$ in the last
equation are obtained by tracing out all but the chosen $k$ subsystems
of $\chi_{1\cdots n}^{\rho}$ and the maximization is made over all
possibilities for $\chi_{k}^{\rho}$.

Now, using $C_{k}$, we can define the \textit{degree of classical correlation} of an $n$-partite state as the maximum number $k$ of subsystems possessing genuine $k$-partite classical correlation.

In the next section we will
apply some of the quantifiers of genuine $n$-partite correlations
introduced here to study the generation of genuine multipartite system-environment correlations
in some decoherent dynamics.

\section{System-Environment Correlations in Decoherent Dynamics}

\label{sec:dynamics}

Let us consider a two-qubit system initially prepared in a Werner's state
\begin{equation}
\rho_{ab}^{w}=(1-c)\mathbb{I}_{ab}/4+c|\psi_{ab}^{-}\rangle\langle\psi_{ab}^{-}|,
\end{equation}
where $|\psi_{ab}^{-}\rangle=(|0_{a}1_{b}\rangle-|1_{a}0_{b}\rangle)/\sqrt{2}$ and $0\le c\le1$. This state has a rich structure with respect to correlations. It violates the CHSH inequality \cite{CHSH} for $c\ge 1/2$, it violates the Peres' criterion for separability \cite{PeresC} when $c> 1/3$, and it has nonzero quantum discord \cite{Ollivier-QD} for all $c\ne 0$. So, any possible qualitative difference in the multipartite system-environment correlations due to system's initial correlations (i.e., if the system state is nonlocal, nonseparable, discordant or classical) would be observed using the Werner's state as the system's initial state.

Now these two sub-systems are let to interact locally with two independent
environments in the vacuum state $|0_{E_{s}}\rangle$, where $s=a,b$.
So, the initial state of the whole system is
\begin{equation}
\rho_{abE_{a}E_{b}}=\rho_{ab}^{w}\otimes|0_{E_{a}}\rangle\langle0_{E_{a}}|\otimes|0_{E_{b}}\rangle\langle0_{E_{b}}|.
\end{equation}
For this system, it was shown in Ref. \cite{Maziero-PRA} that, in
contrast to dissipative interactions, the decoherent dynamics of the
two qubits under phase-damping or Pauli channels does not generate
entanglement between the systems and its respective environments or
between the two environments. The bipartite quantum discord created
in such a dynamics was then indicated as the mechanism for the leakage
of quantum information out of the systems. Moreover, the initial quantum
correlation between the two qubits was shown to be not transfered
to the environments, seeming to evaporate.

Here we extend these results
by studying the generation of genuine multipartite system-environment
correlations. We show that the quantum correlations initially shared
between the qubits do not disappear, but are transformed into genuine
multipartite correlations between systems and environments. Furthermore,
these correlations present an interesting dynamics with sudden changes
in behavior. For more results related to the sudden-change phenomenon
see Refs. \cite{Maziero-SC,Auccaise-SC,Xu-SC-Nature,Mazzola-SC,Cornelio-SC}.
Further works considering the dynamics of system-environment correlations
can be found in Refs. \cite{Lopez-ESB,Zhang-SE,Pernice-SE,Luo-Dec-Cap,Man-SE,Fanchini-SE}.

\subsection{Amplitude-damping channels}

We begin by studying the situation in which the two qubits, $a$ and
$b$, evolve under the influence of local-independent amplitude-damping
channels. The Kraus' operators for a dissipative reservoir at zero
temperature are $K_{0}=|0_{s}\rangle\langle0_{s}|+\sqrt{1-p_{s}}|1_{s}\rangle\langle1_{s}|$
and $K_{1}=\sqrt{p_{s}}|0_{s}\rangle\langle1_{s}|$, where $p_{s}$
is a parametrization of time for the subsystem $s$, with $p=0$ corresponding
to $t=0$ and $p=1$ being equivalent to $t\rightarrow\infty$ \cite{Salles-PRA}.
Throughout this article we consider identical environments and consequently
$p_{a}=p_{b}:=p$. Thus, by using the Kraus operators shown above,
we obtain the dynamical map for the system-environment evolution:
\begin{eqnarray}
U_{sE_{s}}|0_{s}0_{E_{s}}\rangle & = & |0_{s}0_{E_{s}}\rangle,\\
U_{sE_{s}}|1_{s}0_{E_{s}}\rangle & = & \sqrt{1-p_{s}}|1_{s}0_{E_{s}}\rangle+\sqrt{p_{s}}|0_{s}1_{E_{s}}\rangle.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Utilizing this map, we find the evolved state for the whole system:
\begin{equation}
\rho_{abE_{a}E_{b}}^{ad}(p)=(1-c)\iota_{ad}(p)+c|\Upsilon_{ad}(p)\rangle\langle\Upsilon_{ad}(p)|,\label{eq:Global-Evol-state}
\end{equation}
with $\iota_{ad}(p)$ and $|\Upsilon_{ad}(p)\rangle$ given in Appendix
\ref{appendix-A}.

From $\rho_{abE_{a}E_{b}}^{ad}(p)$ we can access
the state of any partition of the system and calculate numerically
its entropy and correlations.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.37]{GTC43-ad}

\caption{Genuine $4$- and $3$-partite total correlation of the whole system
$aE_{a}bE_{b}$ and genuine $3$-partite correlation of $abE_{a}$
and $aE_{a}E_{b}$ for local-dissipative environments. We see that,
in general, the multiparticle correlations increase with $p$ up to
a certain instant of time from which they start to diminish going
to zero in the asymptotic limit $p=1$.}

\label{gtc-ad}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.52]{QC-ad}

\caption{Multipartite system-environment quantum correlations for local amplitude-damping
channels. For $p=1$ the systems state is $|0_{s}\rangle$ and its
initial correlations were altogether transfered to the environments.}

\label{qc-ad}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.39]{GCC43-ad}

\caption{Genuine multipartite system-environment classical correlation for
local amplitude-damping channels. The generic behavior of these correlations
is similar to that of genuine multipartite total correlation.}

\label{gcc-ad}
\end{figure}
 Here we will concentrate on multipartite correlations. A detailed
analysis of the bipartite correlations can be found in Ref. \cite{Maziero-PRA}.

We observe that, due to the assumed symmetries of the systems and
environments, the following partitions are equivalent in what refer
to correlations: $aE_{a}\equiv bE_{b}$, $aE_{b}\equiv bE_{a}$, $abE_{a}\equiv abE_{b}$,
and $aE_{a}E_{b}\equiv bE_{a}E_{b}$. Considering these symmetries we have,
from the definition of genuine $n$-partite total correlation introduced
in Section II, that
\begin{equation}
I_{4}(\rho_{aE_{a}bE_{b}})=\min_{(c_{1},c_{2})}(S(\rho_{c_{1}})+S(\rho_{c_{2}}))-S(\rho_{aE_{a}bE_{b}}^{ad}),
\end{equation}
with the following possible bi-partitions of the system: $(c_{1},c_{2})=(a,E_{a}bE_{b})$,$(E_{a},abE_{b})$,$(ab,E_{a}E_{b})$,$(aE_{a},bE_{b})$,
$(aE_{b},bE_{a})$. In the last equation $S(\rho)=-\mathrm{tr}(\rho\log_{2}\rho)$ is the von Neumann entropy.

The $3$-partite genuine total correlation of
the whole system is given by
\begin{equation}
I_{3}(\rho_{aE_{a}bE_{b}}^{ad})=\max(I_{3}(\rho_{aE_{a}b}^{ad}),I_{3}(\rho_{aE_{a}E_{b}}^{ad}))
\end{equation}
with analogous bi-partitions used to compute the genuine $3$-partite
correlation of the $3$-partite states. All genuine total correlations
discussed above are shown in Fig. \ref{gtc-ad}. We see that, in general,
multipartite correlations are generated during the dissipative interaction
between the qubits and its respective reservoirs up to a certain instant
of time from which such correlations \textit{suddenly} begin to decrease going
to zero in the asymptotic time $p=1$.

We also calculated the $3$-
and $4$-partite quantum correlations and genuine classical correlations
of the system, which are presented in Figs. \ref{qc-ad} and \ref{gcc-ad},
respectively. As expected, the asymptotic behavior of the genuine
3- and 4-partite classical correlations is similar to that of genuine
multipartite total correlation. We observe that the quantum correlation
remaining at $p=1$ is due solely to the environments, once the systems
state in this limit is $|0_{s}\rangle$.

It is worthwhile mentioning that,
although explicit parametrizations for states and unitary operators
of systems with dimension greater than two are possible in principle
\cite{Bruning-Par}, all the important aspects we want to emphasize
here can be addressed without computing the genuine multipartite quantum
correlations. We leave related issues for future investigations.

\subsection{Phase-damping channels}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.37]{GTC43-pd}

\caption{Genuine $4$- and $3$-partite total correlation of the whole system
$aE_{a}bE_{b}$ and genuine $3$-partite correlation of $abE_{a}$
and $aE_{a}E_{b}$ for local phase-damping channels. In this case,
the genuine multipartite correlations generally increase with time
and, in contrast to amplitude-damping channels, there exists a considerable
amount of genuine $n$-partite total correlation left over in the
asymptotic limit $p=1$, depending on the purity of the initial two-qubit
state.}

\label{gtc-pd}
\end{figure}

Let us consider the dynamics of two qubits under local phase-damping
channels. This kind of noise environment causes loss of phase relations
in the system without exchange of energy. The Kraus' operators for
these channels are given by: $K_{0}=|0_{s}\rangle\langle0_{s}|+\sqrt{1-p}|1_{s}\rangle\langle1_{s}|$
and $K_{1}=\sqrt{p}|1_{s}\rangle\langle1_{s}|$. Thus, the following
map for the system-environment evolution is obtained
\begin{eqnarray}
U_{sE}|0_{s}0_{E_{s}}\rangle & = & |0_{s}0_{E_{s}}\rangle,\\
U_{sE}|1_{s}0_{E_{s}}\rangle & = & |1_{s}\rangle\otimes\left(\sqrt{1-p}|0_{E_{s}}\rangle+\sqrt{p}|1_{E_{s}}\rangle\right).\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
In a correspondent manner as we did for amplitude-damping channels,
we use the map shown in the last equation to compute the global evolved
state and then calculate its correlations. In this case, $\rho_{aE_{a}bE_{b}}^{pd}(p)$
is given as in Eq. (\ref{eq:Global-Evol-state}) but with $\iota_{pd}(p)$
and $|\Upsilon_{pd}(p)\rangle$ presented in Appendix \ref{Appendix-B}.
The genuine total correlations generated in the evolution under local
phase environments are shown in Fig. \ref{gtc-pd}. These correlations also exhibit the sudden-change phenomenon.

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.52]{QC-pd}

\caption{Dynamics of $3$- and $4$-partite system-environment quantum correlations
for local phase-damping channels. Tripartite quantum correlations
are generated during the system's evolution but decay to zero at $p=1$
while there still exists multipartite quantum correlation involving
the whole system in this asymptotic limit. }

\label{qc-pd}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.39]{GCC43-pd}

\caption{Genuine $3$- and $4$-partite system-environment classical correlation
for local phase-damping channels. By comparing these results with
the genuine total correlations in Fig. \ref{gtc-pd}, we see that
the genuine $3$-partite classical and total correlations have the
same range and behavior.  Therefore there is no or feeble quantumness
in the genuine tripartite correlations of the system. However, as
can be observed in Fig. \ref{qc-pd}, there exists $4$-partite quantum
correlation that was created during the system-environment interaction.}

\label{gcc-pd}
\end{figure}
 In sharp contrast to the case of amplitude-damping channels, we see
that the dynamics induced by phase environments does generate genuine
multipartite correlations in the asymptotic limit $p=1$. In this
limit, the whole system will be correlated in a degree that is proportional
to the purity of the two-qubit initial state.

We also calculated the
multipartite quantum correlations and the genuine $3$- and $4$-partite
classical correlations, which are presented in Figs. \ref{qc-pd}
and \ref{gcc-pd}, respectively. It is interesting that the genuine
$3$-partite classical and total correlations range from zero to one
for this kind of environment. This fact indicates that the system presents
no or small genuine $3$-partite quantum correlation. As can be seen
in Figs. \ref{gtc-pd}-\ref{gcc-pd}, this situation changes in the
case of $4$-partite correlations. In fact, we observe in Fig. \ref{qc-pd}
that tripartite quantum correlations are created during the system's
evolution but disappear in the asymptotic limit while there are $4$-partite
quantum correlation remnant at $p=1$.

\section{Concluding Remarks}

Summing up, we introduced operational definitions and quantifiers for genuine $n$- and $k$-partite total, quantum, and classical correlations of an $n$-partite state. We also used our correlation quantifiers to define the degree of correlation, the degree of quantumness, and the degree of classical correlation of a physical system.
Using these correlation measures, we showed that, in contrast to amplitude-damping
channels, for which the initial correlations between the qubits are
simply transfered to the environments, phase noise channels turn such
bipartite correlations into genuine multipartite system-environment
total, quantum, and classical correlations.

Now, in order to get a better grasp of these results, let us look
at the kind of state generated during the evolution of the system
under different kinds of noise environment. It is straightforward
to verify that if the system initial state is $|\psi_{ab}^{-}\rangle$
(i.e., if $c=1$), the whole system state for amplitude-damping channels
and $p=1/2$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
|\Upsilon_{ad}(1/2)\rangle & = & (|0001\rangle+|0010\rangle-|0100\rangle-|1000\rangle)/2\nonumber \\
 & := & |\psi_{W}\rangle,
\end{eqnarray}
which is equivalent, modulo local rotations, to the well known four-qubit
$W$ state \cite{W-state}. For phase noise environments and $p=1$,
it follows that
\begin{eqnarray}
|\Upsilon_{pd}(1)\rangle & = & (|0011\rangle-|1100\rangle)/\sqrt{2}\nonumber \\
 & := & |\psi_{GHZ}\rangle,
\end{eqnarray}
which is, also modulo local unitaries, equivalent to a $GHZ$ state
(see Section I).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{fidelities}

\caption{Dependence of the fidelities (a) $F(|\psi_{W}\rangle,\rho_{aE_{a}bE_{b}}^{ad}(p))$
and (b) $F(|\psi_{GHZ}\rangle,\rho_{aE_{a}bE_{b}}^{pd}(p))$ with
$p$ and $c$. See the text for details.}

\label{fidelities}
\end{figure}

 For any $c$ and $p$, we obtain the following expressions for the fidelity,
\begin{equation}
F(|\psi\rangle,\rho):=\sqrt{\langle\psi|\rho|\psi\rangle},
\end{equation}
between these states and its corresponding evolved density operators:
\begin{equation}
F(|\psi_{W}\rangle,\rho_{aE_{a}bE_{b}}^{ad}(p))=\sqrt{\frac{(1+3c)(1+2\sqrt{p(1-p)})}{8}}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
F(|\psi_{GHZ}\rangle,\rho_{aE_{a}bE_{b}}^{pd}(p))=\sqrt{(1+3c)p}/2.
\end{equation}
These fidelities are shown in Fig. \ref{fidelities}.
We also observe that the mutual information is invariant under local unitary
transformations and, as one can easily verify, the genuine total correlations
for the $W$ and $GHZ$ states are given by: $I_{4}(|W\rangle)=I_{4}(|GHZ\rangle)=2$,
$I_{3}(|W\rangle)=0.81$, and $I_{3}(|GHZ\rangle)=1$. Moreover, if
we trace out a subsystem of a $GHZ$ state, the obtained tripartite
density operator has zero quantum correlations. The same action in
a $W$ state produces a $3$-partite system possessing quantumness
in its correlations. Thus, the values of the fidelities (shown in
Fig. \ref{fidelities}) and the structure of $W$ and $GHZ$ states
with respect to its correlations help us to partially explain the
general behavior of the correlations that we presented and discussed
in the last section. In reality, both kinds of decoherent dynamics generated
genuine multipartite correlations. The main difference is that for
the amplitude-damping channel these correlations are null for $p=1$
while for phase environments they generally reach its maximum value
in this limit.

Thorough investigations about the decoherence process are essential for us to obtain a better understanding of the phenomenon per se and also for the development of methods to circumvent it in the path for large scale implementations of protocols in quantum information science. From the fundamental point of view, before 2010 one believed that the flow of coherent information from the system to the environment was caused by the creation of entanglement between the two. Nevertheless, considering bipartite correlations, one of us and colleagues showed, in Ref. [57], that this is not the case in general. For some composite systems interacting with local-independent phase-damping channels (or Pauli channels), it was shown that the systems lose its initial coherent phase relations but only bipartite non-classical correlation of separable states are generated during such decoherent dynamics. Another interesting finding reported in this article was the fact that the initial bipartite quantum correlation between the
systems (non-local, non-separable, and discordant) evaporated, i.e., only bipartite classical correlations was present at the asymptotic time of evolution. In the present manuscript, besides proposing definitions and introducing quantifiers for genuine multipartite correlations, we studied the many-body correlations generated for some important decoherent processes. Our investigation extended the previous ones in several directions, helping us to understand the global structure of the states generated during these evolutions and also explaining why the bipartite quantum correlations disappeared in the asymptotic time, by showing that they are transformed into genuine multipartite correlations. Moreover, we showed that the genuine multipartite total correlation may also exhibits a sudden change in its evolution rate.

As continuation of the present work, besides the actual calculation of the genuine multipartite quantum correlations, other interesting topic for future research is considering the dynamics of such correlations for the composition of both phase and (generalized) amplitude channels, which is a common situation in nature \cite{Auccaise-SC,Diogo-Dec-Control}.
In this case, the global state generated during the evolution under local environments will be a mixture involving W and GHZ components. The extension of these results for global and correlated environments  \cite{Diogo-quad} and to continuous variables systems \cite{Eisert-Plenio} is also worth pursuing.

It is also important to mention that the first experiment with complete
tomography of the environment's state has been successfully performed
recently using an optical system \cite{Tom-Env}. Therefore, all the
theoretical results presented here can be verified experimentally
with current technology.

\begin{acknowledgments}
The authors acknowledge financial support from the Brazilian funding agencies Coordena\c{c}\~ao de Aperfei\c{c}oamento de Pessoal de N\'ivel Superior, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cient\'ifico e Tecnol\'ogico, and Funda\c{c}\~ao de Amparo \`a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul. J.M. thanks Marcelo S. Sarandy and Gabriel H. Aguilar for helpful discussions. We acknowledge a referee for his (her) constructive comments.
\end{acknowledgments}