Polyharmonic surfaces in $3$-dimensional homogeneous spaces

In the first part of this paper we shall classify proper triharmonic isoparametric surfaces in 3-dimensional homogeneous spaces (Bianchi-Cartan-Vranceanu spaces, shortly BCV-spaces). We shall also prove that triharmonic Hopf cylinders are necessarily CMC. In the last section we shall determine a complete classification of CMC r-harmonic Hopf cylinders in BCV-spaces, r>=3. This result ensures the existence, for suitable values of r, of an ample family of new examples of r-harmonic surfaces in BCV-spaces.


Introduction
In order to introduce the geometrical setting of this paper we recall that harmonic maps are the critical points of the energy functional where ϕ : M → N is a smooth map between two Riemannian manifolds (M, g) and (N, h).
The left member of (1.2) is a vector field along the map ϕ or, equivalently, a section of the pull-back bundle ϕ −1 T N: it is called tension field and denoted τ (ϕ).In addition, we recall that if ϕ is an isometric immersion, then ϕ is a harmonic map if and only if the immersion ϕ defines a minimal submanifold of N (see [8,9] for background).Let us denote ∇ M , ∇ N and ∇ ϕ the induced connections on the bundles T M, T N and ϕ −1 T N respectively.The rough Laplacian on sections of ϕ −1 T N, denoted ∆, is defined by , where {e i } m i=1 is a local orthonormal frame field tangent to M. Now, in order to define the notion of an r-harmonic map, we consider the following family of functionals which represent a version of order r of the classical energy (1.1).
If r = 2s, s ≥ 1: ∇ ϕ e j ∆ s−1 τ (ϕ), ∇ ϕ e j ∆ s−1 τ (ϕ) N dV .(1.5) We say that a map ϕ is r-harmonic if, for all variations ϕ t , This condition is equivalent to the vanishing of the r-tension field τ r (ϕ).We recall that the expressions which describe the r-tension field of a general map ϕ : M → N between two Riemannian manifolds were computed by Maeta (see [10]) and are the following: where ∆ −1 = 0 and {e i } m i=1 is a local orthonormal frame field tangent to M (the sum over i is not written but understood).Similarly, If r = 1, the functional (1.5) is just the energy.In the case that r = 2, the functional (1.4) is called bienergy and its critical points are the so-called biharmonic maps.At present, a very ample literature on biharmonic maps is available and, again, we refer to [17] and references therein for an introduction to this topic.More generally, the r-energy functionals E r (ϕ) defined in (1.4), (1.5) have been intensively studied (see [2,10,11,12,13,14,15], for instance).Inspection of the Euler-Lagrange equations for E r (ϕ) shows that a harmonic map is always r-harmonic for any r ≥ 2. When the target manifold is nonflat, we use to call an r-harmonic map proper if it is not harmonic (similarly, an r-harmonic submanifold, i.e., an r-harmonic isometric immersion, is proper if it is not minimal).As a general fact, when the ambient space has nonpositive sectional curvature there are several results which assert that, under suitable conditions, an r-harmonic submanifold is minimal (see [11] and [12], for instance).Things drastically change when the ambient space is positively curved.Let us denote by S m+1 the sphere S m+1 (1) of radius 1.Moreover, let A be the shape operator of M m into S m+1 and H = f η the mean curvature vector field, where η is the unit normal vector field and f is the mean curvature function.Throughout the whole paper, when we write that M m is a CMC hypersurface we mean that f is a constant which will be denoted by α.
In [16] Ou derived the equation for biharmonic hypersurfaces in a generic Riemannian manifold.More precisely, he proved: Theorem 1.1.[16] Let ϕ : M m → N m+1 be an isometric immersion of codimension-one with mean curvature vector H = f η.Then ϕ is biharmonic if and only if: where Ric N : T q N −→ T q N denotes the Ricci operator of the ambient space defined by Ric N (Z), W = Ric N (Z, W ) and A is the shape operator of the hypersurface with respect to the unit normal vector η.
We point out that, contrary to [16], the sign convention for ∆ in this paper is such that ∆f = −f ′′ on R. If the mean curvature f is constant, say f ≡ α, then the biharmonic equation reduces to (1.9) from which we deduce that a non minimal CMC hypersurface M m is proper biharmonic if and only if In the instance that M m is a hypersurface of S m+1 the biharmonic condition (1.10) reduces to As for the r-harmonic case, condition (1.11) was generalized in [13]: Theorem 1.2.Let M m be a non-minimal CMC hypersurface in S m+1 and assume that |A| 2 is constant.Then M m is proper r-harmonic (r ≥ 3) if and only if As an application of Theorem 1.2, several new examples of isoparametric r-harmonic hypersurfaces were illustrated in [13], where it was stressed that the value of r, r ≥ 2, plays a crucial role when the ambient is positively curved.By contrast, when the target space form has nonpositive curvature, generally non-existence results are confirmed for all values of r, r ≥ 2.
As a natural further step, in this paper we shall focus on the study of r-harmonic surfaces into 3-dimensional homogeneous spaces with group of isometries of dimension 4.
It is well-known (see, e.g., [1], [3], [6]) that 3-dimensional homogeneous spaces with group of isometries of dimension 4 admit, as a canonical model, the so called Bianchi-Cartan-Vranceanu spaces (shortly, BCV-spaces) The space M 3 m,ℓ is the total space of the following Riemannian submersion over a simply connected complete surface M 2 (4m) of constant curvature 4m, see [6]: We point out that while in S n (ρ) the letter ρ indicates the radius, in M 2 (4m), H 2 (4m) the real number within the brackets represents the sectional curvature.These BCV-spaces are also a model for Thurston's eight 3-dimensional geometries with the exception of the hyperbolic space H 3 and Sol.More precisely, they include the 3-dimensional space forms 1 for a representation of the BCV-spaces with respect to the values of the parameters ℓ and m. ℓ m In his paper [18], Ou used equation (1.8) to study biharmonic surfaces in BCV-spaces.He first showed that a totally umbilical biharmonic surface in any 3-dimensional Riemannian manifold has constant mean curvature.Then he used this to show that the only totally umbilical proper biharmonic surface in 3-dimensional geometries is a part of S 2 (1/ √ 2m) in S 3 (1/ √ m).Moreover, he proved the following characterization of CMC biharmonic surfaces: Theorem 1.3.(see [18]) A CMC surface in a 3-dimensional Bianchi-Cartan-Vranceanu space is proper biharmonic if and only if it is a part of one of the following: The main aim of our paper is to investigate the existence of triharmonic and, more generally, r-harmonic surfaces in this geometric setting (r ≥ 3).Our paper is organised as follows.In Section 2 we state our main results on triharmonic surfaces in BCV-spaces.These results will be proved in Sections 4 and 5. Finally, in Section 6, we shall determine a complete classification of proper CMC r-harmonic Hopf cylinders in Bianchi-Cartan-Vranceanu spaces, r ≥ 3.As an application, we shall be able to describe, for suitable values of r, an ample family of new examples of r-harmonic surfaces in BCV-spaces.

Statement of the results on triharmonic surfaces in BCV-spaces
In order to state our results, it is convenient to recall first some basic facts and terminology.For a Bianchi-Cartan-Vranceanu 3-space given in (1.13), one can easily check that the vector fields where F = 1 + m(x 2 + y 2 ), form a global orthonormal frame field (see [3,18]).Now, let γ(s) = (x(s), y(s)), s ∈ I be a smooth curve in the base space M 2 (4m) of the Riemannian submersion (1.14).Then the Hopf cylinder Σ γ = Σ over the curve γ is defined as Then the surface Σ can be parametrized as r(s, t) = (x(s), y(s), t) since the fiber of π over a point (x 0 , y 0 ) is π −1 (x 0 , y 0 ) = {(x 0 , y 0 , t) : t ∈ R}.
It is convenient to assume that the base curve γ is parametrized by arc length, i.e., ẋ2 + ẏ2 Then the unit vector field η is normal to the Hopf cylinder Σ and {X, E 3 , η} is a global orthonormal frame field adapted to Σ.
Our first result is: The analysis in the proof of Theorem 2.1 shows that, if Σ is a Hopf cylinder, then its tension field is τ = −κ g η, where κ g denotes the geodesic curvature of its base curve.
Our second result is: 2 and the geodesic curvature κ g of its base curve verifies The analysis of the Hopf cylinders fits naturally into the context of the study of isoparametric surfaces.We recall that, in a general Riemannian manifold, a hypersurface is said to be isoparametric if itself and its locally defined nearby equidistant hypersurfaces have constant mean curvature.In the 30's, Cartan characterized isoparametric hypersurfaces in space forms as those with constant principal curvatures and achieved their classification in hyperbolic spaces H n .Segre obtained a similar result for Euclidean spaces R n .In both cases, isoparametric hypersurfaces are also open parts of extrinsically homogeneous hypersurfaces, that is, codimension one orbits of isometric actions on the ambient space.By contrast, the classification problem in spheres S n is much more complicated and rich, and there are inhomogeneous examples (see [5] and references therein, for instance).
In spaces of nonconstant curvature, very few classification results are known.In the case of interest for us we have the following important result: Remark 2.5.We point out that in references [4,6,7] the authors use parameters κ, τ instead of m, ℓ.The relationship between these parameters is κ = 4m, τ = ℓ/2.Also, in these papers our constant α is denoted by H.
The parabolic helicoids P α,m,ℓ will be described explicitly in Section 4.
Our main result in the context of isoparametric surfaces is the following: m,ℓ is a space form with nonnegative sectional curvature and in this case the only proper triharmonic isoparametric surface is [11]).

Preliminaries
In order to prepare the ground for our proofs we need to carry out some preliminary work.Generally, the use of a bar over a symbol indicates that we refer to an object of the ambient space.We adopt the following notation and sign convention for the Riemannian curvature tensor field: it is easy to compute: Similarly, a further computation gives the possible nonzero values of the sectional curvatures: (3.4) The Riemannian curvature tensor field R of M 3 m,ℓ can be described as follows (see [6], where the opposite sign convention for the curvature tensor is adopted).

R(X, Y
Another useful formula is the following (see [6]): where × here has the following meaning: We shall study oriented immersed surfaces ϕ : M 2 → M 3 m,ℓ and denote by η the unit normal vector field.
The vector field E ⊤ 3 = E 3 − ν η, where we have set (3.7) will play a basic role in our analysis.This vector field plays an important part also in the previous literature on this subject.For our purposes, it is useful to recall (see Proposition 3.3 of [6]): where J denotes the π/2 rotation on T M 2 .If p is an arbitrarily fixed point of M 2 , then, as ∇J = 0, we can consider a geodesic frame field {X 1 , X 2 } such that, in a small neighbourhood of p, J(X Moreover, taking into account the definition (3.7), we compute: 4. Proof of Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 Let {T, N} denote the canonically oriented unit tangent and normal fields to γ in the base space M 2 (4m) = ( M , h), i.e., T = ( ẋ, ẏ) , N = (− ẏ, ẋ) , so that the geodesic curvature κ g of γ is defined in the base space by means of Note that we denote ∇ = ∇ g , ∇ = ∇ Σ .A computation shows that Our first lemma is: Lemma 4.1.Let X, η be the vector fields defined in (2.2).Then Proof.We note that X = T H , i.e., X is the horizontal lift of T and, similarly, η = −N H .Because π is a Riemannian submersion, we know that By way of example, we prove (ii): It follows that Next, using (3.6), we deduce that The other computations of this lemma are similar and so we omit them.
It is easy to deduce from Lemma 4.1 that the tension field of the Hopf cylinder is In particular, the Hopf cylinder Σ is CMC (α = −κ g /2) if and only if its base curve γ has constant geodesic curvature.Next, we need: Lemma 4.2. where Proof.We compute: Since τ is orthogonal to Σ, we deduce from Lemma 4.1(i) that ∇ X X = 0. Also, ∇ E 3 E 3 = 0 and so, using again Lemma 4.1, we compute: and the conclusion follows readily.Now, we compute: Lemma 4.3.Let A, B, C be the function defined in Lemma 4.1.Then Computing as in Lemma 4.1 we find: Adding up these three terms we obtain (4.4).Now, using again Lemma 4.1 and the explicit expression (3.5) of the Riemannian curvature tensor field, we can compute the two curvature terms of the 3-tension field (1.7) and we find: Finally, adding up the terms computed in Lemmata 4.3-4.4 and simplifying using the explicit expression of the functions A, B, C defined in Lemma 4.1, we obtain the explicit expression of the 3-tension field of a Hopf cylinder.This is summarized in the following Proposition 4.5.As in (2.1), let Σ be a Hopf cylinder in a BCV-space M 3 m,ℓ .Then its 3-tension field is given by We deduce from (4.5) that a Hopf cylinder Σ is 3-harmonic if and only if the geodesic curvature κ g of its base curve γ verifies: g = 0 .Proof of Theorem 2.1.Because τ = −κ g η, the proof amounts to showing that the base curve γ of Σ has constant geodesic curvature κ g .We denote by K1, K2, K3 respectively the left-hand sides of the three equations in (4.6).Case ℓ = 0 We argue by contradiction.So, let us suppose that (4.6) admits a nonconstant solution.It follows that there exists an open interval I such that κ g (s), κg (s) are both different from zero on I.We work on I. First, from 4ℓK1 + 5κ g K2 = 0 we deduce that (4.7) κg = κ g 40 (3ℓ 2 − 5κ 2 g ) .
Next, replacing the derivative of (4.7) into K2 gives − 7 10 ℓ(ℓ 2 + 15κ 2 g ) κg = 0 , Thus, since ℓ = 0, we must have that κg = 0 obtaining a contradiction.Case ℓ = 0 In this case (4.6) is equivalent to Explicit integration of (4.8) (i) yields (4.9) 2κ g κg = κ 4 g − κ2 g + c, where c is a real constant.Taking the first and the second derivative of (4.9) we obtain the expression of κg , κ g + κ2 g ) 2 = 0 from which we obtain a contradiction.Now, let (m, c) = (0, 0).From (4.10) we obtain We can restrict our attention to an open subinterval of I where g is positive.Taking the derivative of (4.11) (we choose the solution with the sign + before the square root, the other case is similar) we obtain an expression of κg as a function of κ g and c.Substituting this expression and (4.11) into (4.9)we easily obtain that κ g is a root of the following polynomial with constant coefficients 3 .Since (m, c) = (0, 0), it follows again that κ g is constant, a contradiction.Thus the proof is ended.
Proof of Theorem 2.2.The proof follows easily from Proposition 4.5 using the assumption that κ g is a constant.

Proof of Theorem 2.6
Our first goal is to compute all the terms which occur in the expression of the 3-tension field (5.1) For this purpose, we now establish a series of useful preliminary lemmata.
Because the above expression is symmetric with respect to Y, Z the conclusion follows.
(c) Let p ∈ M 2 be an arbitrarily fixed point and consider a geodesic frame field {X i } 2 i=1 around p. At p we have: Now, first using (a) and then the explicit expression of the curvature tensor field (3.5), we continue the previous sequence of equalities as follows: and so the proof of the lemma is ended.
Next, we compute: (5.9) 3 ) from which (5.7) follows immediately (note that each line of (5.8) is equal to the corresponding line of (5.9)).Now, we can state the main result which is of independent interest and summarizes the preliminary work which we have carried in this section.Proposition 5.5.Let M 2 be an oriented surface in M 3 m,ℓ .Assume that M 2 has CMC equal to α.Then its 3-tension field is where ν is defined in (3.7).
Proof.The explicit expression of the curvature tensor field is given in (3.5) and so we have all the ingredients to compute the 3-tension field (5.1).More in detail: (I) ∆ 2 τ is given in Lemmata 5.3 and 5.4.
(II) Here we compute the first curvature term R ∆τ (ϕ), dϕ(e i ) dϕ(e i ) , which we rewrite as (5.11) where, according to (5.5), we have Now, we recall (see [4]) some basic facts about the half-space model.We have an explicit isometry Θ : where we have set Moreover, an explicit positively oriented global orthonormal frame field on the half-space model is: For future use, we observe that dΘ(E 3 ) = Ẽ3 .Next, we compute Then, using the Koszul identity (3.2), it is easy to verify that the version of (3.3) in this context is: ( The parabolic helicoids P α,m,ℓ (see [7]) are the CMC surfaces in M3 m,ℓ parametrized by X(u, v) = (u, v, a log v) , v > 0 , where a is non-vanishing real constant whose relation with the geometrical parameters α, m, ℓ will be made explicit in (5.21) below.We have to verify that a parabolic helicoid P α,m,ℓ , α = 0, cannot be triharmonic.For this purpose, we apply Proposition 5.5.In order to compute all the terms which appear in the expression of the 3-tension field τ 3 (see (5.10) it is convenient to express and compute all the relevant quantities with respect to the global orthonormal frame field { Ẽ1 , Ẽ2 , Ẽ3 }.Writing [x 1 , x2 , x3 ] for x1 Ẽ1 + x2 Ẽ2 + x3 Ẽ3 , we compute: where we have set (5.18) L = ℓ 2 + 4m(4a 2 m − 1) By way of summary, a parabolic helicoid P α,m,ℓ is proper triharmonic if and only if (5.23) Now, if ℓ = 0, the third equation of system (5.23)becomes 64 α 2 (m + α 2 ) = 0 , which has not relevant solutions since in our construction m + α 2 < 0 by hypothesis.Next, we handle the case ℓ = 0. First, we observe that the condition T 2 − T 3 = 0 implies (5.24) Now, replacing this value of ℓ 2 into T 2 simplifying we find that necessarily Because m < 0, the only possibilities are: (5.25) The first value for m is not acceptable because, if we replace it into (5.24),we find a contradiction.As for the second value of m into (5.25), it suffices to observe that it would imply m + α 2 > 0, a fact which contradicts our assumption.Therefore, there exists no proper triharmonic parabolic helicoid P α,m,ℓ and so the proof of Theorem 2.6 is completed.

Proper CMC r-harmonic Hopf cylinders
In this section we focus on the study of proper CMC r-harmonic Hopf cylinders.We shall show that the existence of such submanifolds depends not only on the curvature of the ambient space, but also on the value of r.This will be illustrated in Corollary 6.3 which is a consequence of the following theorem.
Theorem 6.1.Assume that r ≥ 2. Let Σ be a non minimal CMC Hopf cylinder in a BCVspace M 3 m,ℓ .Then Σ is proper r-harmonic if and only if the geodesic curvature κ g of its base curve γ is a non zero constant which verifies (6.1) Remark 6.2.From (4.1) (ii) and (iv), the norm |A| 2 of the shape operator of Σ is (see also [18]): Using (6.2), condition (6.1) is equivalent to Thus, setting r = 2 into (6.3), it is immediate to recover the result of Ou [18] concerning CMC biharmonic Hopf cylinders.Also, in the special case r = 3 in (6.1), it is easy to recover the statement of Theorem 2.2.
In the following corollary we shall indicate for which values of the parameters ℓ, m and r there are acceptable solutions of (6.1).We suggest that the reader keeps in mind the geometrical counterpart of the cases (i), (ii), (iii) of Corollary 6.3 referring to the diagram in Figure 1.
Corollary 6.3.Let M 3 m,ℓ be a BCV-space.Then there exists a proper CMC r-harmonic Hopf cylinder if and only if one of the following holds: (i) 4m − ℓ 2 > 0 and r ≥ 2; (ii) 4m − ℓ 2 = 0, ℓ = 0 and r ≥ 5; (iii) 4m − ℓ 2 < 0, R 1212 = 4m − 3ℓ 2 /4 > 0 and Remark 6.4.The assumptions 4m − ℓ 2 < 0 and R 1212 = 4m − 3ℓ 2 /4 > 0 in Case (iii) of Corollary 6.3 have a geometrical meaning because they state that the ambient space is SU(2) endowed with a metric with positive sectional curvature.Here we point out that from the analytical view point these hypotheses are equivalent just to the condition (3/4)ℓ 2 < 4m < ℓ 2 which corresponds to the region between the two parabolas 4m = (3/4)ℓ 2 and 4m = ℓ 2 (see Figure 2).It is convenient to describe this region as the union ∪ a γ a , 3/4 < a < 1, where γ a is the parabola 4m = aℓ 2 .Now, on γ a the lower bound for r in (6.4) becomes We observe that on (3/4, 1) r a is a strictly decreasing function of a with lim a→3/4 + r a = +∞ and lim a→1 − r a = 4. Therefore, the more we approach γ 3/4 , the larger r must be in order to have a proper CMC r-harmonic Hopf cylinder.Now, we prove the results of this section.
Proof of Theorem 6.1.We know that τ = −κ g η and κ g is constant.To simplify the notation, we set We know from Lemma 4.2 that ∆τ = −κ g cη and then we deduce that (6.5) ∆ r τ = −κ g c r η .
Proof of Corollary 6.3.We will proceed by an accurate analysis of the dependence of the roots of equation (6.1) on the values of the parameters ℓ, m and r.Putting x = k 2 g in (6.1), the existence of a proper r-harmonic CMC Hopf cylinder is equivalent to the existence of a positive solution of the equation (6.9) x 2 + −4m(r − 1) + 3ℓ 2 r 4 x − ℓ 2 2 (4m − ℓ 2 ) = 0 .
We divide the analysis in a series of cases.If m ≤ 0, then the coefficients of (6.9) are nonnegative and thus there exists no positive solution.Thus, from now on, we assume that m > 0. Then we have the following subcases: (i) If 4m − ℓ 2 > 0, then there exists a unique positive solution κ 2 g of (6.9) for all r ≥ 2. (ii) If 4m − ℓ 2 = 0, then equation (6.9) admits the positive solution κ 2 g = r − 4 4 if and only if r ≥ 5. We point out that this result is in accordance with the discussion in Remark 1.3 of [14].(iii) If 4m − ℓ 2 < 0, then replacing R 1212 = 4m − 3ℓ 2 /4 in (6.9) we obtain (6.10) x Remark 6.5.(i) We observe that, for all r ≥ 5, there always exist suitable couples m, ℓ such that (6.11), or (6.12), is verified.In the case that (6.11) holds the corresponding two solutions give rise to two non-congruent r-harmonic Hopf cylinders.
(ii) Concerning the case 4m − ℓ 2 > 0, if r = 2 we find κ 2 g = 4m − ℓ 2 .On the other hand, Ou and Wang (see Theorem 1.3 (iii)) find that γ must be a circle of radius (6.13) R = 1 √ 8m − ℓ 2 in the base space S 2 1 2 √ m = M 2 (4m).In order to check that our result is coherent with that of Ou and Wang, we observe that a curve of constant curvature κ g in S 2 (ρ) is a plane curve in R 3 with constant curvature κ and radius (6.14) .

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Distribution of BCV-spaces w.r.t. to the values of ℓ and m.
g in terms of κ g , κg and c.Substituting these expressions in (4.8) (ii) we obtain(4.10)

Lemma 5 . 1 .
Let ϕ : M 2 → M 3 m,ℓ be an oriented surface.Let A denote the shape operator, f = (1/2) trace A the mean curvature function and η the unit normal.Then