Analogue of the universal law for general elliptic KdV potentials

Ascertain whether the differential relation dτ ∧ dB ≡ 8π dr ∧ ds holds for the monodromy map (τ, B) → (r, s) associated with second-order equations y''(z) = [∑_{j=1}^n m_j(m_j + 1)℘(z − p_j(τ); τ) + B] y(z), where q(z; τ) = ∑_{j=1}^n m_j(m_j + 1)℘(z − p_j(τ); τ) is an elliptic KdV potential satisfying the constraints (1.16) and Q_p(B; τ) denotes the corresponding spectral polynomial, thereby extending the universal law proved for Darboux–Treibich–Verdier potentials.

Background

The paper proves a universal law for Darboux–Treibich–Verdier (DTV) potentials: the map from (τ, B) to monodromy data (r, s) is holomorphic, locally one-to-one, and satisfies dτ ∧ dB ≡ 8π dr ∧ ds. The authors then consider more general elliptic KdV potentials, characterized by Gesztesy–Unterkofler–Weikard, of the form q(z; τ) = ∑ m_j(m_j + 1)℘(z − p_j(τ); τ) up to a constant, with positions p_j(τ) subject to the constraints in (1.16).

For these general potentials, the associated second-order equation y''(z) = q(z; τ) + B has a spectral polynomial Q_p(B; τ), and a monodromy map (τ, B) ↦ (r, s) analogous to the DTV case is well-defined on {(τ, B) | Q_p(B; τ) = 0}. The authors ask whether the same universal law relating parameter differentials and monodromy coordinates extends to this broader class.

References

Is there any analogue of the universal law (1.14) holding for this map? One can see that our approach does not work for the general elliptic KdV potentials, and this question remains open.

Monodromy of generalized Lame equations with Darboux-Treibich-Verdier potentials: A universal law (2404.01879 - Chen et al., 2 Apr 2024) in Section 1 (Introduction), after equation (1.17)