Mathematics education policy as a high stakes political struggle: The case of Soviet Russia of the 1930s

Abstract: This paper is an introduction to our ongoing more comprehensive work on a critically important period in the history of Russian mathematics education; it provides a glimpse into the socio-political environment in which the famous Soviet tradition of mathematics education was born. The authors are practitioners of mathematics education in two very different countries, England and Russia. We have a chance to see that too many trends and debates in current education policy resemble battles around mathematics education in the 1920s and 1930s Soviet Russia. This is why this period should be revisited and re-analysed, despite quite a considerable amount of previous research. Our main conclusion: mathematicians, first of all, were fighting for control over selection, education, and career development, of young mathematicians. In the harshest possible political environment, they were taking potentially lethal risks.

\section{Introduction}

In the 1930s leading Russian mathematicians became deeply involved in mathematics education policy. Just a few names: Andrei Kolmogorov, Pavel Alexandrov, Boris Delaunay, Lev Schnirelmann, Alexander Gelfond, Lazar Lyusternik, Alexander Khinchin -- they are remembered, 80 years later, as internationally renowned creators of new fields of mathematical research -- and they (and many of their less famous colleagues) were all engaged in political, by their nature, fights around education. This is usually interpreted as an idealistic desire to maintain higher -- and not always realistic -- standards in mathematics education; however, we argue that much more was at stake.

	Using analysis of contemporary sources, including previously unpublished materials from archives, we show how mathematicians (``the young reformers'', as they are frequently called in Russian literature on the history of mathematics) used their deep involvement in mathematics education and education policy to insist that mathematics as an academic discipline had the right to exist. This could not be taken for granted: for example, at that very time genetics had been systematically suppressed \cite{Lyubishchev2006,Strunnikov1989}. Moreover, mathematics was the first of the sciences to be attacked as an idealistic deviation from the Marxists ``dialectical materialism'' -- it happened in 1929--1931. Mathematics survived, perhaps because it was one of the first such attacks, at the time when the machine of repression was not yet working at its full capacity.

	The starting point of mathematicians' argumentation was an ideological thesis:
\begin{itemize}
\item The new socialist society (being built in harsh socio-economic conditions) needed a step improvement in mathematics education.
\end{itemize}

We show that they used this to prove two points:
\begin{itemize}
\item academic mathematicians were indispensable as guardians of rigour and the quality of mathematics education;
\item the health of mathematics as a profession required a steady supply of bright young people with good school background in mathematics.
\end{itemize}

	We argue that there was an undisclosed aim of these mathematicians' political struggle: namely, an attempt to protect mathematics from the same ideological and political pressure which authorities applied to genetics (and, wider, biology), which eventually led to genetics being forbidden as ``bourgeois pseudo-science'', and to the imprisonment and death of leading Russian geneticists.\footnote{Lyubishchev (2006), Strunnikov (1989), Frolov (1998).}

	In our view, another aim was to prevent the dilution of the academic mathematics community by political appointees; by that time, ``Red Professors'' were already quite prominent in Russian universities and dominated the humanities.

	Finally, in the environment of the Stalinist purges, personal survival was very much at stake.

	Without analysing this page in history, it is difficult to assess important later events and trends in Russian mathematics education. For
example:
\begin{itemize}
\item The ``new math'' reform in Russian school mathematics education initiated in the 1960-70s by Kolmogorov.
\item The Russian tradition (born in the 1930s and still very valuable) of popularisation of mathematics, outreach activities, mathematical olympiads, and later specialist mathematical schools.
\end{itemize}
	In the literature, this theme is covered, in our opinion, inadequately and is occasionally dominated by ideological battles inherited from the past.\footnote{See, for example \cite{Kostenko2013}. }

	A study of this episode in history is also relevant for education policies of today. The authors of this paper are practitioners of mathematics education and education policy and will write on that matter elsewhere.

	A few disclaimers are due.

	This paper is only the start of a big research programme. We expect it to be a hard task.

 	First of all, we are trying to assess something which, for variety of political and cultural reasons, was not properly analysed before. We sit on a mass of material: about 5GB of hundreds of books, papers, archive materials. Only tiny bits of it are reflected in the paper; it simply lists a few key points of our approach. We limit ourselves to highlighting a few pivotal episodes from history, and to introducing people who are likely to play principal roles in any systematic narrative. And we try not to jump to easy conclusions.

	Perhaps the greatest omission from this paper -- again for lack of space -- is discussion of the connection between these struggles in mathematics education with the Luzin affair \cite{Demidov1999,Neretin2020}.

	We hope to publish, in a series of papers, a much more detailed account. This will inevitably involve publication, in some form, of large fragments of Russian language sources and their English translations.

\section{Professor L. L. Mishchenko: Letter to the Academy of Sciences of the USSR}
And now let us look at what may at first sight appear to be a relatively  insignificant document from 1935 -- but the one which is in fact representative of developments. It shows the dramatic human conditions at the heart of our story.

	This document was discovered by chance in archives\footnote{\foreignlanguage{russian}{Архивы Российской Академии Наук, Фонд 389, опись
1, дело 6}, \url{http://isaran.ru/?q=ru/opis&ida=1&guid=C7C839A1-D6F1-2387-A3F2-65FF39F60967},  \foreignlanguage{russian}{Протокол заседания
Комиссии по средней школе при Группы математики АН СССР, переписка с Наркоматом просвещения РСФСР и профессорами Фихтенгольцем Г.М. И
Тартаковским В.А. о преподавании математики в средней школе}.}: a letter with criticism of the standard school geometry textbook, sent in 1935 to the Academy of Sciences of the USSR from a remote settlement in Kazakhstan. The author of the letter gives his name as Professor Leonid Leonidovich Mishchenko. What follows is an English translation of the letter.

\begin{quotation}
To the Division of Physic-Mathematical Sciences of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR

The so-called stabilised\footnote{``Stabilised'' is translation of the Russian \foreignlanguage{russian}{стабильный}; this was an official
term for textbook which were supposed to be used over extended period of time and regularly reprinted.}  textbooks are generally not at the
required level, but textbooks on mathematics stand out as record-holders in exactly the negative sense. Especially illiterate are books by
author collectives 1) Brusilovsky and Gangnus, and 2) Gurwitz and Gangnus.

		I believe that the Academy of Sciences cannot ignore the glaring facts of the official distribution of mathematical ignorance in the USSR. On a practical level, the Academy of Sciences can instruct individuals and commissions to analyse the most dubious textbooks and then make their authoritative decision in a documented report.

		In this letter I offer, as a random illustration to the thought formulated above, one of the problems-theorems given by Gurwitz and Gangnus and analysed in the attached brief note.

		If the Academy of Sciences were to take the trouble to subject the textbooks on mathematics and mechanics to analysis, then, for my part, I would not refuse to take a most active part in this work.

L. Mishchenko

Address: Kazakhstan, post office Shchuch'e, Lunacharsky Str., 25. Professor Mishchenko Leonid Leonidovich.
\end{quotation}

This cover letter was followed with a text with analysis of one of exercise problems in the textbook.

\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5in]{Mishchenko_pp_4-5.jpg}
\end{center}
\caption{A fragment of a letter from L. L. Mishchenko.}
\label{fig:icing}
\end{figure}

Let us take the book: Yu.O. Gurwitz and R.V. Gangnus. A systematic course of geometry. Part 2. Stereometry. Textbook for 8th and 9th forms of secondary school. 1934, Moscow, 2nd Edition, corrected.  Approved by NarKomPros RSFSR.

	On p. 65 in paragraph ``Questions and exercises'' under No. 2 we find the following problem:
Among all rectangular parallelepipeds with the sum of three dimensions equal 24, the cube has the smallest surface area. Check this statement, taking into consideration that [lengths of edges] are integers.
I dare to think that the authors of the stabilised textbook are deeply mistaken, in other words, they show complete mathematical ignorance.

		The proposed problem is one of the most elementary and is solved without any difficulty.
We have to admit that the problem appears to be not very well posed from a pedagogical point of view (even if ``minimum'' is replaced, as it should be, by ``maximum''). Indeed, what were pupils supposed to do? Check every positive integer combination $x + y + z = 24$?

	Mishchenko then gives a standard solution based on differential calculus and the second order derivative test and concludes that at $x = y = z$ (that is, in the cube) the surface has maximum, and not minimum. He continues:
\begin{quote}
``I reiterate, the stabilized textbook of geometry by Gurwitz and Gangnus gives a diametrically opposite deviation from the truth.
	I see it as my duty to protest against these outrageous facts of official distribution of mathematical ignorance in RSFSR.
\begin{flushright}
Professor L. L. Mishchenko\\
6 January 1935\\
 Shchuch'e''
\end{flushright}

\end{quote}

\section{Mishchenko's letter: comments}

Mishchenko focuses his assessment of the textbook by Gurwitz and Gangnus on a single problem (most likely, for lack of paper). Mishchenko rightly points out that the cube has not the minimal but the maximal surface area, and, ignoring the assumption that the edges of the parallelepiped have integer lengths, uses calculus to prove that the cube has maximal surface area.

His calculation leaves an impression that it was done by an engineer, not a mathematician. Indeed, Mishchenko was a military engineer by education and a man of very wide intellectual interests. He taught mathematics and engineering in a variety of institutions of secondary and higher education, was a publisher and editor of journals popularising science and engineering, published books on an incredible range of topics -- from aviation (still fledging, in pre-World War I era) to speech therapy. He was an officer in the Russian army during World War I, was wounded and decorated.

Any normal society at the stage of development when it desperately needed  education would value a competent teacher like Mishchenko. But his letter was handwritten on sheets of paper from a school notebook. At that time (winter 1935), Mishchenko and his wife lived as political exiles in a god-forsaken small settlement on the Karaganda rail line in the brutally cold wind-swept Kazakh steppes. Two years later,  he was arrested and perished in the Gulag. It remains unknown whether his arrest was related to his letter.\footnote{Source with further bibliographic references: \rus{Электронная Библиотека «Научное Наследие России»,} http://library.ruslan.cc/authors/\rus{мищенко-леонид-леонидович/}, accessed 06 January 2020.}

This sets the socio-political background for (not only mathematical) education in the USSR at that time: namely, the acute shortage of educated people -- who, at the same time, were being systematically destroyed. This was the environment in which young reformers who fought for changes in
mathematics education lived and worked.

It is important to emphasise that in his letter, Mishchenko gives a harsh assessment of the textbook by Gurwitz and Gangnus, but makes no political denunciations; his criticism is only directed at mathematical illiteracy.

The sad irony of this story is that Gangnus himself was sent to the Gulag in 1938 (allegedly, for spying on behalf of Latvia), but was lucky -- he was released already in 1943 and exiled to Murom, a provincial town not far from Moscow. He died in 1949 in Moscow.

Meanwhile, Gurwitz continued a successful academic career and was awarded a number of honours. It perhaps helped that he was teaching (and ran a mathematical circle) in a privileged school in Moscow which taught children of the highest tier of the Communist Party elite -- including Stalin's children. He had a reputation for being an excellent teacher as evidenced, for example, by one of his former students \cite{Nikolaev2002}.

\section{Further developments}

It remains unknown whether Mishchenko got any response from the Academy of Sciences. But perhaps his letter contributed to the fate of the textbook by Gurwitz and Gangnus -- it was discovered, unnumbered and not entered in the list of contents, in the same folder in the archives of the Academy of Sciences\footnote{\rus{Архивы Российской Академии Наук, Фонд 389, опись 1, дело 6.}} which contains documents from 1935 and 1936 related to the vicious attack by the young reformers on this particular textbook. One can see how Kolmogorov, Alexandrov, Lyusternik, Delaunay, Schnirelmann, Fichtengolz were appointed to the key committees in the Academy of Sciences and People's Commissariat of Education leading eventually to the following decision of the Mathematics Committee of the People's Commissariat of Education.
\begin{quote}
``The textbook of Gurwitz and Gangnus, as a hackwork and an illiterate presentation of the foundations of geometry, has to be immediately withdrawn from schools. The Committee deems the correction of this book in subsequent editions as impossible and suggests, as a temporary measure, publication of one of the geometry textbooks existing in Russian or foreign literature or available in manuscript form. The Committee takes responsibility for recommending and subsequent editing of one of the books.''
\end{quote}
It was followed by publication of papers by Fichtenholtz \cite{Fichtenholtz1937} and  Schnirelman \cite{Schnirelman1937}, evidence of consolidation of the victory of the young reformers and their influence and sometimes control of curriculum development and publication of textbooks for schools. Fichtenholz wrote, among other things, about the need to re-hire experienced ``old'' school teachers.  This would not help Mischenko though: he was arrested on 2 November 1937, on 5 December 1937 sentenced by an infamous Trojka to 10 years in labour camps; his date of death is unknown. It is almost certain that he never learned about the academic debate around the book by Gurwitz and Gangnus.

	The limited space does not allow us to explain the historic background: World War I 1914--18; the Civil War 1918--1921; the ruined economy of Russia; famine; destruction of the old school system replaced by the experimental and vaguely defined concept of ``labour school'' and other bizarre, from the modern point of view, experiments in education in 1918--1930.

	The more pragmatic approach to education and the return to more traditional methods started in 1931\footnote{Marked by decrees of the Central Committee VKP(b) ``On primary and secondary school'' of 25 August 1931 and ``On study programmes and regime in primary and secondary school'' of 25 August 1932. Quite interesting is the directive of Narkompros RSFSR ``On the results of the 1933/34 school year in teaching of principal subjects in primary and secondary school''; it reformulates the Decrees of CC VKP(b) in clear and succinct terms.}, but the new education system (which survived until the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991) was developing in the environment of the Great Break (the words coined by Stalin in 1929), forced collectivisation and industrialisation, famine in Ukraine, start and escalation of mass repressions, deep distrust of, and systematic repressions against, ``old specialists'' -- this category included essentially all people with pre-revolutionary (that is, before 1917) university education.

	Remarkably, some very high quality popular and semi-popular books on mathematics were published in Leningrad in 1920--30s. But on the national scale, the lack of any system in the production of new school mathematics textbooks is astonishing. For anyone familiar with publication of mathematics books, it is obvious that most textbooks did not pass through a proper refereeing and copy-editing process. Busev \cite{Busev2007,Busev2009} provides a good analysis of reforms of mathematics education and production of textbooks. But the episode with Mishchenko suggests a more serious underlying reason for chaos: the destruction of the mathematics education community. The involvement of professional research mathematicians became really needed -- mathematical education in 1918--30 had lost its error-correcting capacity.

	The sad state of mathematics textbooks produced in the 1930s in the chaos of reforms (and, in particular, of the new ``stable textbooks'') made them an easy target and a welcome chance for the young reformers to prove that mathematicians were indispensable.

	Returning to Gurwitz and Gangnus, Busev \cite{Busev2008} claims with reference to a later highly critical review of the textbook, that about 300 typos and mistakes were identified in the book -- indeed, it was messy. Busev also suggests a plausible explanation for its failure: both Gurwitz and Gangnus were well-educated ``old specialists'', but were conditioned in their involvement in the 1920s in production of study guides for adult education, where mathematical rigour was replaced by explanation of practical examples. He also refers to the ``chaos'' left by the experiments of the 1920s, and to lack of proper copy editing in publishing.

\section{What was at stake?}

We should have no illusion: the very survival of mathematics was at stake. After all, the 1930s were the period of escalating prosecution and step-by-step destruction of genetics -- and geneticists. The peak of the campaign, that is, the VASKhNIL (All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences) congress of 1948 was  its most public and triumphal moment; but the systematic suppression started in the 1930s \cite{Strunnikov1989}, and observers from academic circles watched it with increasing alarm. Savina \cite{Savina1995} analyses how these developments were reflected in diaries, letters, and contemporaneous notes by Vernadsky, one of the prominent members of the Academy of Sciences; it is obvious that Lysenko, the principal leader of anti-geneticists, a ``barefoot professor'' as he was described in the official propaganda, was perceived in the academic circles as a very serious danger, the most dangerous breed of a ``Red Professor'', a political appointee to the academia.

	Mathematics was perhaps the first science to be attacked as an idealistic deviation from the Marxists ``dialectical materialism'' -- it happened in 1929--31; see Leifert \cite{Leifert1931} as an example of one of the battles (and political games the mathematicians were forced to play) and Bogolyubov  \cite{Bogolyubov1991} for analysis of the wider landscape. Mathematics survived the ideological attacks of 1929--31, perhaps because at that time the machine of terror was not yet working at its full capacity.

	However, a new large scale attack could start at any time. Freedom -- and life!  -- could not be taken for granted.

	There was also a real threat that the academic mathematical community might be diluted and dominated by ``Red Professors''. By mid-1930s, ``Red Professors'' dominated the humanities -- and were successfully destroying genetics.

 	What would you do if you were a mathematician?

	It is our conjecture (so far supported by all documentary materials that we had a chance to see), that the young reformers started to learn -- and very efficiently -- the rules of the political game.

\section{Meritocratic elitism -- but with political filters}

This subtitle is perhaps the best description of the Soviet system of education as it was shaped in 1930s and existed for several decades.

	The speech by Andrei Bubnov, People's Commissary of Education in 1929--37 at XVII Party Congress of 1934 is quite illuminating. Besides what would now be described as ``widening participation'', ensuring the steady progress of working class children through the school system, he also emphasises a different task which could be formulated as
\begin{quote}
Educating the new generation of loyal to the regime high level specialists for the military, industry, science, medicine.
\end{quote}
Some examples given by Bubnov in his speech:
\begin{quote}
``Look at Kamai -- professor at Kazan University, Tatar, former docker, now the author of a number of research works in the area of organic compounds of phosphorous and arsenic.'' \cite[p. 114]{VKP(b)1934}
\end{quote}

We should not forget that ``organic compounds of phosphorous and arsenic'' were an obvious euphemism for ``precursors of chemical weapons''. Bubnov's previous post was the Head of the Main Political Directorate of the Red Army. 	The directive of Narkompros RSFSR on the results of the 1933/34 school year contains an interesting line: criticism of teaching geography at school for insufficient attention to giving students practical skills of orientation on the map. It is hard to avoid an impression that Bubnov cared not only about chemical weapons, but also about training of sufficient number artillery officers and air pilots. This was the time of mass conscription armies, and in the hour of need the country had to be prepared to conscript, say, 50 thousand healthy young men with a good knowledge of trigonometry and train them as artillery officers. Indeed, World War II showed that a mathematics graduate could be trained as an artillery officer in a week.

	This explains Bubnov's respect for pure mathematics:
\begin{quote}
``Our universities [\dots ] already have young scientists who grew up after the October Revolution -- just look at MGU [Moscow State University] professors Schnirelman\footnote{ Lev Schnirelman: In 1933 he was elected a Corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences of the Soviet Union; committed suicide on 24 September 1938, after being forced to become an informer of NKVD (the secret police). This happened soon after Bubnov was shot as an “enemy of the people” (1 August 1938).} and Gelfond\footnote{Alexander Gelfond: In 1939 he was elected a Corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences of the Soviet Union for his works in the field of cryptography (and not number theory, as one would expect). According to Vladimir Arnold, https://docplayer.ru/40310638-Vladimir-arnold-opasatsya-kompetentnyh-sopernikov-ochen-estestvenno-dlya-nachalnikov.html, during the World War II Gelfond was the Chief Cryptographer of the Soviet Navy.}, already well known for their scientific work in mathematics -- they are young, they were born in 1905.'' \cite[p. 114]{VKP(b)1934}
\end{quote}
It was not number theory (the specialism of Schnirelman and Gelfond) that was needed -- people with mathematics education were needed as a strategic resource of the state. But these mathematicians had to be politically loyal. This opened to the young reformers a window of opportunity.

\section{Mathematical olympiads and ``mathematical outreach''}

The battle for stabilised textbooks was only one of many facets of the work of the young reformers in education. The most interesting and completely new development at that time was the creation of the mathematics olympiad system.

	The first mathematical olympiads were organised in 1934 in Leningrad by Boris Delaunay \cite{Chistyakov1935}, and in 1935 in Moscow by Pavel Alexandrov and other Moscow mathematicians \cite{Bonchkovsky1936}.

	Mathematicians invested remarkable energy and effort in this project. Why?	Because olympiads and other outreach activities were giving them some influence on who is coming into mathematics, and gave a chance to protect university mathematics from political appointees.

	In the Moscow mathematics olympiad of 1935,  Pavel Alexandrov was the chairman of the organising committee. Next year, he wrote in an introduction to a little booklet with problems and solutions of this olympiad:
\begin{quote}
``The olympiad is the first entry of future mathematicians into the
mathematical arena. It should help us to select these future
mathematicians from among our youth, it should help us to provide
opportunities for their further mathematical development and education.''\footnote{P.S. Alexandrov's \emph{Foreword} to \cite{Bonchkovsky1936}.}
\end{quote}
Here we see an unashamed elitism in a supposedly egalitarian country -- but, in view of the previous discussion, this is not so surprising. What is really astonishing is the phrase
\begin{quote}
``It should help us to select these future mathematicians from among our youth.''
\end{quote}
Selection and promotion of the ``cadre'' was the ultimate monopoly of the ruling Communist Party -- just read a random speech at its XVII Congress \cite{VKP(b)1934}. The young reformers offered, at the right moment, their services to the Party, thus ensuring some degree of their own control over the supply of fresh blood to the top tier of the mathematical profession. In mathematics, ``Red Professors'', recruited from the working class party activists (or Young Communist League activists), could not compete with people who were much more deeply educated and who started their development as mathematicians within the olympiad system.

Mathematicians dared to ask for autonomy in selection and development of their own. It could be seen in other documents of the epoch, for example, in Resolutions of the Second All-Union Congress of Mathematicians which took place in 1934 \cite{VMS1935}: a special resolution was about olympiads (p. 56), and it called for ``identification of gifted youths'', stated that
\begin{quote}
``Universities might use olympiads for recruitment of students to mathematical, mechanical and physics departments.''
\end{quote}
and requested funding from the Narkompros (the Ministry of Education) for running olympiads and related activities.

	Apparently, these requests were met by the authorities. Starting from 1935, mathematical olympiads and related activities, first of all, mathematical circles, flourished in Leningrad and Moscow, with \emph{cr\`{e}me de la cr\`{e}me} of research mathematicians actively involved; what is important, new didactical approaches to exposition of non-trivial mathematics were invented and tested. A good and detailed narrative of these remarkable developments can be found in Boltyansky and Yaglom  \cite{Boltyansky1965}.

	This was a two-pronged action of mathematicians aimed at establishing themselves as guardians of standards of mathematics education: one was criticism of school textbooks and involvement in curriculum development, and another one showing by practical work that they can identify and nurture mathematical talent. It was successful and helped mathematicians to improve their positions on the ideological front. We have no space to discuss that in any detail, but can quote a couple of contemporary documents.

	In 1941, Otto Schmidt, a mathematician, a member of the Academy of Sciences, and a high ranking governmental official, was able to formulate the role of mathematicians as specialists who maintain the strategically important mathematical culture of the country:
\begin{quote}
``Not only us, professionals of science, but the whole country was happy to learn about solution of a problem set 150 years ago. This problem was solved by academician Vinogradov who proved that every odd number could be written as a sum of three prime numbers. Is this needed at the practical level? No. Maybe it is not needed at all? On the contrary, it is much needed, because the culture, the mathematical culture depends on the level of these works in pure mathematics and theoretical physics. You all know that this is not needed for each of us, but we all are interested in the highest possible level of mathematical culture in our country, because it is important to be able to solve any mathematical problem and for that it is important to be able to solve problems such as Goldbach's problem.

The level of mathematical culture in our country is exceptionally high. One may confidently say that in that respect our countries is on the first and leading place in the world.'' \footnote{	O.Yu. Schmidt. On connection between science and practice, Archive RAS, fund 496, inventory 1, file 248. Quoted from \cite[p. 150]{Dubovitskaya2009}.}
\end{quote}
	Esakov \cite{Esakov1994} gives a tiny, but exceptionally important piece of evidence of Stalin's attitude to mathematics. The text of the speech by Lysenko at the infamous session of the All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences in 1948 \cite{VASKhNIL1948} was submitted to Stalin for approval. Stalin underlined Lysenko's statement ``Every science is rooted in class [by its nature]'' and wrote on the margin:
\begin{quote}
		``Hah-hah-hah \dots\  And mathematics? And Darwinism?''
\end{quote}
So, by 1948 Stalin (and perhaps even earlier) did not believe in the class nature of mathematics. This was a victory for mathematicians and had a profound effect on the fate of mathematics in the Soviet Union. Not every area of science was so lucky.

\section{The reformers' legacy}

Mishchenko's letter also serves as a useful indication of an important part of the reformers' legacy. The  ``olympiad'' or ``outreach'' mathematics which was created by them in Russia at that very time deeply transformed the understanding of elementary mathematics.

	For people influenced by the outreach culture of Russian mathematics, a natural way to approach an extremal geometric problem is to look first at its various degenerate cases, in particular, in the problem of Gurwitz and Gangnus, at the case where the parallelepiped is a long rod with sides $\epsilon$, $\epsilon$, and $24 - 2\epsilon$; its surface area is $2\epsilon^2 + 4\epsilon (24 - 2\epsilon)$ and tends to zero when $\epsilon$ decreases -- the entire calculation could be done in the head. This argument is more appropriate in a discussion of a school textbook. After that, it could be observed that even assuming that all three dimensions are integers, the rod $1 \times 1 \times 22$ has surface area $2 + 4 \times 22 = 90$, which is significantly smaller than the surface area of the cube $8 \times 8 \times 8$ which is $6 \times 8^2 =384$.

	We think it is important to emphasise that Kolmogorov and his comrades-in-arms did more than critique the state of mathematics education: they had created new educational structures -- such as mathematical circles and mathematics competitions, focused on the mathematics of qualitative analytic thinking. They also created a new, previously never existing, cultural system: the advanced level ``outreach mathematics'', and the community which shared its values.

	By the 1970s, a distinctive ``mathematics outreach'' community had reached a considerable degree of development: a loose informal network of academic mathematicians and school teachers of mathematics involved in organising mathematical competitions, running mathematical circles, summer schools, Sunday schools, distance learning by correspondence schools, undergraduate students who helped to run all these activities -- and, of course, schoolchildren who were enthusiastically taking part in them. The vast majority of professional mathematicians, either in academia or in industry, were to some extent nurtured by this community.

\section{Conclusion}

Borovik \cite[p. 371]{Borovik2016} characterised the current situation in mathematics education as a three-way choice:
\begin{quote}
Democratic nations, if they are sufficiently wealthy, have three options:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A)] Avoid limiting children's future choices of profession, teach rich mathematics to every child -- and invest serious money into thorough professional education and development of teachers.
\item[(B)] Teach proper mathematics, and from an early age, but only to a selected minority of children. This is a much cheaper option, and it still meets the requirements of industry, defence and security sectors, etc.
\item[(C)] Do not teach proper mathematics at all and depend on other countries for the supply of technology and military protection.
\end{itemize}
Which of these options are realistic in a particular country at a given time, and what the choice should be, is for others to decide.
\end{quote}

Russian mathematicians of the 1930s offered, fought a political battle for, and successfully implemented, a solution which appeared to be a version of (B). It is an interesting lesson.

First, their project started in the worst possible economic conditions.
\begin{itemize}
\item The old system of school mathematics education inherited from the pre-revolutionary times was in ruins.
\item The new system, with a wider social base, had just started to be built from scratch.
\item There was acute shortage of teachers.
\item There were no textbook.
\item In modern European history, only Nazi Germany was able to compete with Stalin's regime in brutality and mass crimes against humanity.
\end{itemize}

Its accomplishments became obvious only in the period from the late 1950s to the 1960s, when the Soviet mathematics flourished -- see the previous Section.

	In our next paper (to be published elsewhere) we demonstrate that many elements of this solution naturally fit in a model of mathematics education for the 21st century.

	A lot of interesting historic materials were not even mentioned here; we are preparing a much larger text, to be made public in due course.

\subsection*{Acknowledgments.} The first author thanks Tony Gardiner for helpful advice, and we all thank the reviewers for suggestions which improved the paper. The work on this paper was completed when the first author visited the Nesin Mathematics Village in Turkey\footnote{https://nesinkoyleri.org/en/nesin-villages/}, a unique institution which rightly claims its own place in the history of mathematics education.

	And we wish to express our great respect to Leonid Leonidovich Mishchenko, 1882--19??.


Self-diffusion on Si(001) mono-hydride surfaces revisited: The role of adatom clustering

Abstract: First-principles total-energy calculations of the H/Si(001)-2x1 surfaces reveals a dual diffusion process for the Si adatoms: single along the dimer row while pairing up across the row. The calculated diffusion barrier along the dimer row is 1.1 eV, which is, however, too small to account for the hydrogen-induced growth disruption seen by experiments. Instead, we find that the adatom diffusion, in the presence of H, leads to the formation of immobile fourfold-ring Si tetramers which are difficult to break. This could explain the adverse effects of H on Si homoepitaxy.

\section{Single adatom adsorption and diffusion}.
In our calculation, we mimic actual growth process by placing a Si
adatom above the H/Si(100) surface and then let it move. We find
that the adatom slowly goes to one of the two lowest energy sites
shown in \fig{si}(a) and (d). In qualitative agreement with the
previous calculations by Nara et al.\cite{Ohno}, Jeong and
Oshiyama\cite{Oshiyama}, and Lee et al.\cite{lee}, the capture of
H by the Si adatom from the hydrogenated surface is spontaneous.
However, different from their studies, we find that in both cases,
the Si adatom causes spontaneously segregation of, {\it not one},
but {\it two} hydrogen atoms from the nearby Si-Si dimers to form
highly stable Si-H$_2$ complexes with the adatom. This finding is
consistent with a recent experiment\cite{Shen}, in which it was
shown that most of the H atoms remain to be on top of the surface
during homoepitaxial growth.

While the atomic structures in \fig{si}(a) and (d) resemble that of
Si adatom on the bare\cite{brocks} and on hydrogenated
surfaces\cite{hong}, they differ considerably from
Refs.\cite{Ohno,Oshiyama,lee}, in which the Si adatom diffusion
pathways have been calculated. In the work of Jeong and
Oshiyama\cite{Oshiyama} and Lee et al.\cite{lee}, the Si adatoms
assume only high-energy configurations (as determined from the
present calculations) that involve either one or zero H atom. Not
surprisingly, the calculated diffusion barriers are low (0.7 and
1.0 eV, respectively, in Ref.\cite{Oshiyama} for diffusions
parallel and perpendicular to the surface dimer row). In contrast,
Nara et al.\cite{Ohno} considered a different diffusion pathway
involving a two-step process, intra and inter (1x1) cell hopping
where the capture and release process of the
hydrogen atoms also plays a key role. It was concluded that while
an H$_2$ capture significantly lowers the energy of the Si
adatoms, it is advantageous to move the adatom around within the
(1x1) cell with only one H atom. The calculated intra-cell barrier
is 0.5 eV. However, only one of the low-energy configurations in
\fig{si}, i.e., (d), was considered in the calculation. As a result,
diffusion out of the (1x1) cell (inter-cell hopping) is difficult.
Nara et al. suggested\cite{Ohno} that to diffuse across cells, the
Si adatom must temporarily loss both of the H atoms to become bare
silicon. This unfavorable configuration leads to, on top of the
0.5-eV intra-cell barrier, the unphysical large inter-cell barriers
of 1.0 and 1.2 eV, respectively, for diffusions parallel and
perpendicular to the dimer row.

In the present study, we consider adatom diffusion along a path
connecting the low-energy H$_2$-capture configurations shown in
\fig{si}(a) to (d). The edge-Si adatom in \fig{si}(a) is the ground
state configuration. Interestingly, because this structure has a
mirror symmetry in the ($\bar 1$10) plane, inter- and intra-cell
diffusions make no difference, in contrast to the findings of Nara
et al.\cite{Ohno}. \fig{si}(b) shows a transition state where the
displaced Si adatom gives back one of the H atoms to the surface
atom, labeled 1. The energy is 0.5-eV higher than the ground
state due to the ``quasi" twofold coordination. \fig{si}(c) shows
another transition state where the Si adatom recaptures a second H
from the surface atom, labeled 2. The diffusing adatom eventually
lands on top of the Si-Si dimer in \fig{si}(d), which is only 0.03 eV
higher in energy than the ground state. The Si adatom can diffuse
further up along the dimer row in a reversed order of (d) to (a),
and so on. The calculated upper bound for the diffusion barrier is
0.7 eV.

With the 0.7-eV barrier, a growth temperature of 400K, and with the typical vibration frequency
for the surface atoms of $10^{13}H_z$\cite{boro}, we estimate that the diffusion event happens at
a frequency of $2\times10^4H_z$.
The Si adatom is ready to diffuse  along the
dimer row. On the other hand, diffusion perpendicular to the dimer row is much more difficult.
There are two reasons for this: (i) diffusion across the dimer rows requires the adatom to give
back both H atoms, which is energetically costly,
and (ii) in the middle of the trough, the adatom
is to a large extent unbonded.

\section{Formation of the adatom clusters}.
The above discussion shows that Si adatom diffusion rate is not
the reason for the disruption of silicon homoepitaxy growth with
1ML H coverage\cite{Tromp}. Instead, Si adatoms should readily
diffuse, at least parallel to the dimer row. This leads to the
possibility of adatom clustering, which will be considered next.

\fig{si2} shows the calculated low-energy Si-adatom pairs along
with their energies. Throughout the paper, the energy of the
edge-Si adatom in \fig{si}(a) is taken as the energy zero. Given the
negative energies in \fig{si2}, it is clear that the formation of the
pairs is energetically favored. The atop-dimer in \fig{si2}(a) is
typical of the surface dimers, whereas the edge-dimer and
in-trough dimer in \fig{si2} (b) and (c) are not, although they have
lower or comparable total energy. A closer examination of the
latter reveals that in both cases the Si ad-dimer is engaged in a
planar $sp^2$ configuration with nearly 120$^\circ$ bond angles,
not seen on bare silicon\cite{lee1,boro,zhang,bedr}.

Recently, it has been suggested that adatoms may diffuse in pairs
with a rate comparable to or even faster than individual
adatoms\cite{lee1,boro}. Here, we study such a possibility.
Consider the edge-dimer configuration in \fig{si2}(b): In order to
become the in-trough dimer in \fig{si2}(c), it is required to go
through an intermediate step as shown in \fig{si2}(d). Note that the
ad-dimer diffusion parallel to the dimer row is simply a repeat of
the pattern in \fig{si2}, i.e.,
(b)$\rightarrow$(d)$\rightarrow$(c)$\rightarrow$(d)$\rightarrow$(b),
$\cdots$ etc. The corresponding energy barrier is 1.2 eV. It is
also interesting to note that while diffusion perpendicular to the
dimer row is difficult for single adatoms, it could be much easier
for ad-dimers, which could be treated separately as (i) diffusion
across the dimer row and (ii) diffusion across the trough. Process
(i) can be realized via the intermediate step in \fig{si2}(a), which
requires only the rotation of the ad-dimer with respect to the
surface atoms and a transfer of the H atoms. Process (ii) is no
different from diffusion parallel to the dimer row, with the
resulting edge-dimer, however, on the other side of the trough.
The corresponding diffusion barrier is 1.2 eV.

Speaking of clusters, it is also important to consider the
4-adatom clusters or the tetramers. \fig{si4} shows four such
configurations made of the ad-dimer pairs. These clusters can be
classified into three different categories: (i) ad-dimer pairs with
direct bonding such as those in \fig{si4}(a) and (b), (ii) ad-dimer
pairs in close association but without any direct bonding such as
the one in \fig{si4}(c), and (iii) ad-dimer pairs distant apart. All
the tetramers here have energies considerably lower than either
the adatom or ad-dimer, for example, by as much as 1.09 eV per
adatom.

In case (i), the adatoms form fourfold-ring square structures with
90$^\circ$ bond angles. With respect to the surface atoms, the
trough-tetramer in \fig{si4}(a) forms five- [along the ($\bar 1$10)
direction] and seven-fold [along (110)] rings, respectively. On
the other hand, the atop-tetramer in \fig{si4}(b) forms five- [along
($\bar 1$10)] and four-fold [along (110)] rings, respectively.
Naturally, the latter (-0.8 eV/atom) have significantly higher
energy than the former (-1.02 eV/atom). In case (ii), the two
ad-dimers form a second nearest neighbor (NN) pair as shown in
\fig{si4}(c). These are dimers similar to those on the substrate, except
being one layer higher and rotated by 90$^\circ$. The NN-tetramers
have the lowest energy because they involve only the five- [along
($\bar 1$10)] and six-fold [along (110)] rings. The energy is not
much lower than the trough-tetramers (only by 0.07 eV per Si),
however, because of the strain, which can be easily seen by the
large adatom displacements with respect to the surface atoms in
\fig{si4}(c). In case (iii), two distant ad-dimers are bound with an
energy, -0.83 eV per Si through flipping surface dimers in
between. \fig{si4}(d) shows the distant tetramers with the smallest
ad-dimer separation possible.

According to their effects on the homoepitaxial growth, we can
also classify the tetramers in terms of being a growth mode or
growth-interruption mode. By this definition, the NN- and the
distant tetramers belong to the growth mode because they are
consistent with the further growth of the adatom clusters into a
new surface layer indistinguishable from the substrate. The
trough-tetramers, on the other hand, belong to the
growth-interruption mode, as here two ad-dimers are packed into a
region with twice of the normal adatom density. To resume the
growth from the growth-interruption mode, either one has to break
up the trough-tetramers, which will cost energy, or the growth
front will become defective. Recently, it has been
shown\cite{spitz} that the smallest stable adatom islands in the
CVD growth (in which H is involved) consist of two dimers or a
tetramer. \fig{stm} compares the calculated STM image for the
trough-tetramer with experiment where adatom clusters are created
by applying electrical pulse through STM tip coated with silicon.
The relative stability of the clusters, the size and the relative
position of the images with respect to the substrate suggests that
the trough-tetramer model could explain the experiment.

Finally, although the NN-tetramer has a slightly lower energy than the trough-tetramer (by 0.07 eV/atom),
kinetically, the trough-tetramers are more readily to form because the diffusing adatoms and ad-dimers are
mostly in the forms of edge-atoms and edge-dimers, respectively.
Hence, the trough-tetramers have a much
higher probability to form than the NN-tetramers whose formation is an activated process in order to move
the adatoms/ad-dimers from the trough region to atop the dimer row.
This kinetic enhancement, together with the
difficulty to break up the fourfold rings, provides an alternative explanation
to the growth disruption by H.

Because part of the surface dimers in the growth mode, either the
NN-tetramer in \fig{si4}(c) or the distant tetramer in \fig{si4}(d), is
strained, replacing the Si adatoms by Ge adatoms, or replacing
some of the surface Si atoms by Ge as suggested by a recent
study\cite{rudk}, could lower the strain energy because Ge is
larger and prefers longer bonds. Hence, one can expect that the
NN- and distant tetramers to be stabilized with respect to the
trough-tetramers during heteroepitaxy on Si substrates. In other
words, while hydrogenation leads to the interruption of the
homoepitaxy, a similar effect could be absent in the heteroepitaxy
of germanium. Indeed, it is known\cite{kahng} that the presence of
hydrogen assists the epitaxial growth of Ge on Si, against the
formation of islands.

\section{Summary}
In summary, we have studied the Si adatom diffusion processes on
the H/Si(100)(2x1) surface by first-principles total-energy
calculations. Our results show that Si adatom diffusion along the
dimer row proceeds with an energy barrier significantly lower than
what is required for growth disruption, whereas diffusion
perpendicular to the dimer row involves the motion of adatom
pairs. Study of the adatom tetramers reveals that the formation of
the growth-interruption trough-tetramers could be the reason for
the hydrogen induced disruption of homoepitaxial growth of
silicon.

We are grateful to T. C. Shen for fruitful discussions. The work
at UIUC was supported in part by DARPA DAAD19-01-1-0324. S. F. Ren
was supported by NSF 9803005 and NSF 0001313. The work at NREL was
supported by the U.S. DOE-SC-BES under contract No.
DE-AC36-99GO10337 and by the NERSC for MPP time.


Nucleosynthesis in the Early Galaxy

Abstract: Recent observations of r-process-enriched metal-poor star abundances reveal a non-uniform abundance pattern for elements $Z\leq47$. Based on non-correlation trends between elemental abundances as a function of Eu-richness in a large sample of metal-poor stars, it is shown that the mixing of a consistent and robust light element primary process (LEPP) and the r-process pattern found in r-II metal-poor stars explains such apparent non-uniformity. Furthermore, we derive the abundance pattern of the LEPP from observation and show that it is consistent with a missing component in the solar abundances when using a recent s-process model. As the astrophysical site of the LEPP is not known, we explore the possibility of a neutron capture process within a site-independent approach. It is suggested that scenarios with neutron densities $n_{n}\leq10^{13}$ $cm^{-3}$ or in the range $n_{n}\geq10^{24}$ $cm^{-3}$ best explain the observations.

\section{Introduction}
The r-process is responsible for the origin of about half of the
heavy isotopes beyond the iron group in nature, yet its site is
still not determined with certainty \citep{CTT91,TCP02,cowan06}.
The r-process involves extremely unstable nuclei and in order for
neutron captures to overcome the correspondingly short beta decay
rates, typical conditions with neutron densities in excess of
$10^{20}$ cm$^{-3}$ and a process duration of less than $\approx$5 s
are required \citep{kratz93}. R-process models have had difficulties
in obtaining such conditions in realistic astrophysical
environments. One promising scenario and one of the most studied is
the neutrino-driven wind off a proto-neutron star in core collapse
supernovae \citep{WWH92,TWJ94,Wan01,Tho01,Far06}. Alternative
scenarios include neutron star mergers \citep{FRT99,ROS99,GDJ05},
jets in core collapse supernovae \citep{Cam01}, and gamma ray bursts
\citep{SuM05}. The s-process is responsible for creating roughly the
other half of the isotopes beyond the iron group, while the
p-process has significant contributions only on the relatively rare
isotopes on the proton-rich side of the nuclei chart. It has also
been recognized that to correctly reproduce the solar system
s-process abundances at least two different components are required
\citep{kaeppeler82}; the weak s-process component responsible for
creating s-isotopes with  $A\leq90$ \citep{raiteri92,PIG06}, and the
main s-process responsible for the heavier s-isotopes
\citep{Arlandini99,Travaglio04,CRI06}. A third s-process component,
called strong s-process, was envisaged by \citet{clayton67} at the
termination of the s-process, to account essentially for about 50\%
of solar $^{208}$Pb. This component was recently recognized as the
outcome of AGB stars of low metallicity \citep{travaglio01}.

The solar system r-process abundances are often inferred by using
the calculated s- and p- abundances and subtracting them from the
observed solar system abundances. If there is an additional
nucleosynthesis process creating only small amounts of residual
abundances, its contribution may be ``hidden" in the such defined
solar system r-process abundances.

In addition to the solar system abundance distribution, observations
of elemental abundances in unevolved metal-poor halo stars can
provide important clues about nucleosynthesis events in the early
Galaxy. These stars are old and preserve in their photospheres the
abundance composition at the location and time of their formation.
In particular a sub-class of extremely metal-poor
([Fe/H]$\approx-$3) but Eu enhanced stars ([Eu/Fe]$>$0.5) exhibit
what appears to be a pure r-process abundance pattern for the heavy
r-process elements $Z\geq56$ and $Z<83$. This pattern is remarkably
stable from star to star and in excellent agreement with the
contribution of the r-process to the solar abundances. A few of
these stars have been found to date, with CS~22892-052
\citep{sneden03} being the prime example. Since they are thought to
exhibit the abundance pattern produced by a single or at most a few
r-process events in the early Galaxy, the stability of the observed
abundance pattern and the good agreement with the solar system
r-process contribution imply that r-process events generate a
universal abundance distribution. The universality of the abundance
pattern of the heavy r-process elements seems not to extend to the
actinides Th and U, where some star to star scatter has been found
in some cases \citep{hill02,Gor02,Sch02,honda04}.

While the r-process abundance pattern for $56\leq Z<83$ is stable
from star-to-star, the overall level of enrichment with respect to
iron (for example [Eu/Fe]) shows a very large star to star scatter.
This implies that very metal-poor halo stars sample a largely
unmixed early Galaxy and that the r-process occurs in at most
2-10$\%$ of iron producing core collapse supernovae \citep{TCP02}
(assuming core collapse supernovae are the site of the r-process).

However, this simple picture breaks down for the lighter neutron
capture elements with $Z\leq47$. The abundances of these elements
measured in the strongly Eu-enhanced stars once normalized to Eu do
not agree entirely with the solar system r-process residual pattern.
In particular the abundances of Y, Mo, Rh, Pd and Ag are
consistently below the solar system values. This either indicates that the r-process in this region is not robust and depends on the astrophysical condition or metallicity, or that the r-process observed in these stars is not the only nucleosynthesis process leading to the abundance pattern obtained by subtracting the s- and p- processes from the solar abundances \citep{pfeiffer01a,pfeiffer01b}. There is
additional evidence for such a second process being present in the
early Galaxy: \citet{wasserburg96} and \citet{qian00a} first proposed
the existence of two different r-process sites or components based
on meteoritic evidence of live light r-process $^{129}$I
(T$_{1/2}$=15.7 Myr) in the early solar system compared to the heavy
r-process isotopes such as $^{182}$Hf (T$_{1/2}$=8.9 Myr,
\citet{vockenhuber04}). \citet{qian00b,qian01,qian03}
also proposed that two r-processes together with a ``prompt" nucleosynthesis
 contribution could explain the metal poor star abundance observations
 available at the time. However, it has been pointed
out that the proposal of different r-process sites for the isotopes
in the second r-process peak from I to Te
(including $^{129}$I) and for isotopes of Ba and beyond (including $^{182}$Hf) are
difficult to reconcile with r-process models and the known nuclear
physics at the $N=82$ shell gap \citep{kratz06}. \citet{mcwilliam98},
\citet{burris00}, \citet{norris01}, \citet{johnson02},
\citet{lambert02}, \citet{TCP02}, \citet{honda04} and
\citet{barklem05} reported the observation of a large scatter in
[Sr/Ba] in low-metallicity stars. This has been interpreted as further
evidence for a second, independent process
that produces Sr but little or no Ba at low metallicities.
\citet{Travaglio04} demonstrated that the same is true for Y, and
Zr, and they postulated a LEPP - Light Element Primary Process
producing Sr, Y, and Zr, but little Eu and Ba. \citet{TCP02} pointed
out that there is in fact a non-correlation of [Sr/Ba] and [Ba/Fe]
in some stars showing very large [Sr/Ba] ratios but little Ba.
Again, this can be explained by the presence of a second process
producing mainly Sr that happens to dominate the composition in such
stars. A similar non-correlation was found by \citet{kaori06} for a
few stars in the globular cluster M15. \citet{aoki05} came to a
similar conclusion based on trends in the behavior of Y and Zr as a
function of Eu.

We show here in $\S$~\ref{abundanceclues} that such an
non-correlation can be found in all metal-poor, r-process-enriched
stars, and for additional light elements beyond Sr, Y, and Zr. This
includes previously noted ``anomalies" such as the observed
abundances in HD~122563 \citep{honda06} that cannot be fit by an r-
or an s-process alone. Also included is the abundance pattern in the
moderately r-element enhanced star HD~221170 \citep{ivans06} which
does not exhibit the underabundance of light r-process elements with
respect to the solar r-process contribution. We show that these
``anomalies" are in fact part of a general trend that is consistent
with a mixture of two processes in metal-poor stars, an r-process
and a LEPP process exhibiting rather stable abundance patterns,
which are mixed in varying proportions. In $\S$~\ref{modelsection}
we then analyze the features of the newly derived LEPP abundance
pattern in terms of a neutron capture process model to determine the
astrophysical conditions required for this new process. Conclusions
are presented in $\S$~\ref{conclusions}.

\section{Abundance clues}
\label{abundanceclues}
The observed elemental abundances of metal-poor ([Fe/H]$<-$1) and
r-process enriched ([Ba/Eu]$<$0) stars are shown in
Fig.~\ref{ratios}
\citep{burris00,honda04,christlieb05,barklem05,honda06}. All
abundances are normalized to Eu, which is predominantly an r-process
element ($\approx$95$\%$ of the total solar abundance). The heavy
r-process elements with $Z\geq56$ exhibit, within the observational
errors, a constant ratio with respect to Eu, independent of the Eu
enrichment of the star. This ratio is consistent with the element
ratio of the r-process contribution to the solar system. This
indicates that the heavy elements are produced by the r-process that
produces a universal abundance pattern with fixed element ratios
consistent with the solar r-process abundance pattern. This is the
same conclusion that has been drawn from the abundance pattern of
the few very metal-poor, strongly r-process enhanced stars where a
large range of elemental abundance have been determined (see for
example the reviews by \citet{TCP02,cowan06}).

It is also obvious from Fig.~\ref{ratios} that the lighter r-process
elements behave very differently. Clearly, the [Y/Eu], [Sr/Eu] and
[Zr/Eu] ratios are not constant but show a non-correlation with the
Eu enrichment. This non-correlation indicates that a different
process (the LEPP), which does not create substantial amounts of
heavier r-process elements such as Eu, has contributed significantly
to the abundances of Sr, Y, and Zr. \citet{kaori06} studying 6 giants in the globular cluster
M15 observed a similar relation for Y and Zr with respect to Eu and
came to the same conclusion, but with very low statistics. We
confirm their result with a much larger sample and show that this is
true for all r-process enhanced, metal-poor stars. While observations require this process to be different in the sense that it operates not always simultaneously with the process that produces the r-process abundances observed in highly r-process-enhanced stars (r-II, with
[Eu/Fe]$>$1.0 and [Ba/Eu]$<$0.0 , according to \citet{beers05}), it is still possible that both processes occur in the same astrophysical object.

The [X$_i$/Eu] versus [Eu/Fe] slopes for the light r-process elements in Fig.~\ref{ratios} are at least for not too large [Eu/Fe] roughly consistent with -1. This is a consequence of the correlation of the light r-process elements with Fe instead of Eu. As \citet{Travaglio04} have shown for Sr, Y, and Zr, [X$_i$/Fe] is roughly constant and shows a rather small scatter as a function of metallicity [Fe/H]. Because of [X$_i$/Eu]$=$[X$_i$/Fe]$-$[Eu/Fe], this results in a -1 slope in [X$_i$/Eu] versus [Eu/Fe].

An interesting question is the behavior of other light r-process
elements below Ba. Ag would be a good indicator for the r-process as
$\approx$80-86$\%$
\citep{Arlandini99,burris00,Travaglio04}\footnotemark[11] of the
total solar abundance is produced in the r-process. Unfortunately,
only metal-poor stars CS~22892-052 \citep{sneden03}, HD~155444
\citep{westin00,sneden06}, BD~+17$^{o}$3248 \citep{cowan02},
CS~31082-001 \citep{hill02}, HD~221170 and HD 122563 have published
abundance yields of Nb, Mo, Ru, Rh, Pd and Ag\footnotemark[12]. Nevertheless,
although the statistics are low for Pd and Ag, the elemental
abundances shown in Fig.~\ref{ratios} are more consistent with an Eu
non-correlation as observed for Sr, Y, and Zr, than with the
constant ratio exhibited by the heavier r-process elements. We must
caution, however, that the observed Ag abundances in these
metal-poor stars may have some uncertainties. The atomic data for
this element are well established and the Solar System abundance
also appears well determined, but it is not clear whether non-LTE
effects could have affected the abundance analysis since the Ag abundances are based upon (low-lying) neutral transitions as opposed to ion transitions.

Within their
very low statistics (2-4 data points) the abundances of Nb, Mo, and
Rh  are also consistent with the trend exhibited by Sr, Y, Zr, Pd
and Ag. A possible exception  is Ru, which shows a flat trend, but
it is not possible to make definite conclusions based on just 3 data
points. Also, Ru has less established atomic data for the lines
analyzed. We therefore conclude that the LEPP not only produces Sr,
Y, and Zr, but most likely all light elements between Sr and Ag
observed in very low metallicity stars.

\footnotetext[11]{A reanalysis of the calculations in
\citet{Travaglio04} indicates some modification in the  values for
the Ag entries in their table 5. The corrected $s$ fraction is 14\%
and the $r$ residual is then 86\%.}

\footnotetext[12]{Recent high resolution spectroscopy of the extremely metal-poor star HD~88609 was recently reported in \citet{honda07} after the manuscript was completed and it is not included in the discussion. Its elemental distribution is very similar to the one observed in HD~122563.}

Fig.~\ref{ratios} also shows the underproduction of Sr, Y, Zr, Ag,
and Pd versus Eu with respect to the solar pattern for the most Eu
enriched stars. Clearly this underproduction is a function of Eu
enrichment. \citet{ivans06} recently pointed out that in HD~221170
([Eu/Fe]=0.8) not only the heavy r-process elements, but also the
light r-process elements are in reasonable agreement with the solar
r-process abundance pattern and do not show the pronounced
underproduction of some elements such as Ag and Pd as seen in other
r-process enhanced stars. Given the slopes indicated by the data
displayed in Fig.~\ref{ratios}, one does indeed expect [Sr/Eu],
[Y/Eu], [Zr/Eu], [Pd/Eu], and [Ag/Eu] ratios close to the solar
r-process value for moderately r-process enriched stars around
[Eu/Fe]=0.8.

Recently \citet{honda06} reported seven new elemental abundances in
the metal-poor star HD~122563 and observed an excess of light
neutron-capture elements. This star has ratios of [Ba/Eu]=$-$0.5,
[Fe/H]=$-$2.7 and [Eu/Fe]=$-$0.5, and the enhancement of light
neutron-capture elements makes it a candidate for a LEPP enhanced
metal-poor star.
The abundances of HD~122563 are also shown in Fig.~\ref{ratios}.
They follow nicely the abundance trends found in all the other
metal-poor stars and this consistency makes us believe that
HD~122563 has in fact a significant LEPP contribution.

There are some indications that the observed stable abundance pattern of the main r-process (except for U and Th) extends to the light r-process elements. Fig.~\ref{ratios} shows a flattening of the [X$_{i}$/Eu] vs. [Eu/Fe] slopes for light r-process elements in the most enriched stars with [Eu/Fe]$>$1.3 where the main r-process component dominates. This is most clearly seen for Sr and Y, but Zr, Pd, and Ag are not inconsistent with such a trend. In addition, within the error bars the  [X$_{i}$/Eu] scatter in the [Eu/Fe]$>$1.3 region is small and comparable to the heavier r-process elements. We therefore take the most Eu enriched stars such as CS~22892-052 and CS~31082-001 ([Eu/Fe]$>$+1.0 ) as representatives of a stable, universal r-process component (except for U and Th). The picture that then emerges is that in less Eu enriched stars an additional contribution from the LEPP to the light elements from Sr to Ag becomes visible. We will show below that one then obtains also a LEPP abundance pattern that is fairly consistent from star to star, which again is a hint that our assumptions are justified.

One might argue that there is the possibility of
 a metallicity dependence of the r-process abundance pattern for
 the light r-process elements. Fig.~\ref{metallicity} shows the
 ratio [Sr/Ba] as a function of metallicity. There is no indication
 of a metallicity dependence from these data and at least for
 [Fe/H]$<-$1 they are consistent with a large scatter resulting
 from mixing light and heavy element nucleosynthesis processes
 at low metallicities and a gradual homogenization of the composition
 of the Galaxy as a function of metallicity.

In order to find the LEPP pattern in all the metal-poor stars studied, we use CS~31082-001 as an r-process only star, and determine the LEPP abundances in other stars by subtracting its abundance pattern normalized to Eu.
This assumes that all Eu is made in the r-process. The resulting
residual abundances shown in Fig.~\ref{ratiosWeak} were scaled to Zr
so that the patterns can be compared. As  Fig.~\ref{ratiosWeak} shows, the residual
abundances are very consistent for all elements and for all stars
shown. A similar result is obtained by using CS~22892-052 as a
representative of an r-process only star. The scatter of the data in Fig.~\ref{ratiosWeak} measures variations
 within the light element pattern. Clearly the scatter is greatly reduced
 compared to [X/Fe], which has already been shown  for Y, Sr, Zr \citep{Travaglio04}.
Here we show that the few data on Pd and Ag are consistent with a similar behavior.
Even though the error bars are large for high [Eu/Fe], they become smaller for
stars with significant LEPP contribution.
The distribution of the data is consistent with no scatter indicating a consistent
pattern from star to star for the lighter elements.

We therefore conclude that the LEPP creates a $uniform$
and $unique$ pattern and that with a mixing of a robust r-process,
the abundance composition of the other metal-poor stars can be obtained.
 For elements from Sr to Ag all weakly Eu-enriched
stars show an overabundance with respect to CS~31082-001, simply
reflecting the extra LEPP component. For elements heavier than Ag,
the LEPP enrichment is less significant and for almost all of the
stars only an upper limit in the abundance can be obtained.

To obtain information on the elements that are only weakly produced
in the LEPP one therefore needs to look at the stars with the lowest
[Eu/Fe] where the LEPP most prominently dominates the composition.
We believe that HD~122563 is an example of such a star. Therefore,
having argued for the uniformity and uniqueness of the LEPP
abundance pattern based on a number of stars, we now use HD~122563
to obtain our best estimate of the LEPP abundance pattern. We take
the average of the known r-II stars, and subtract this best
estimate of the r-process from the HD~122563 abundance pattern
assuming that Eu, Gd, Dy, Er and Yb were solely produced in the
r-process (i.e. scaling the main component to those elemental
abundances). Both patterns are shown in Fig.~\ref{HD122563}. The
result is referred to as the {\it stellar LEPP} abundance
pattern in this paper, and it is shown in Fig.~\ref{weak}. It is
noteworthy that we find that some smaller amounts of Ba, Ce, Pr, Nd,
Sm and Eu are still produced by the LEPP.

It would be desirable to obtain a more complete abundance pattern of
more Eu-deficient metal-poor stars that exhibit the same
(non)correlations as HD~122563. Candidates for such stars are HD~88609 ([Fe/H]=$-$2.93, [Eu/Fe]=$-$0.3), HD~13979 ([Fe/H]=$-$2.26, [Eu/Fe]=$-$0.4) and HD~4306 ([Fe/H]=$-$2.7, [Eu/Fe]=$-$0.6).
However, the abundances of elements from Ru to Ag have not yet been
observed in these stars.

To determine the LEPP contribution to the solar system abundances,
we subtracted the average of the known highly r-process-enhanced
stars from the abundance pattern obtained by subtracting the s- and
p-processes from the solar abundance. Any determination of the solar
r-process abundances suffers from the uncertainties in predicting
the s- and p- process contributions. In particular, uncertainties in
the neutron-capture cross sections and in the solar system
abundances \citep{Arlandini99,Travaglio04} create uncertainties in
the predicted s-process abundances which were taken into account in
the calculations. The solar system abundances were taken from
\citet{anders89} and \citet{lodders03}. The weak component of the
s-process was included using the results of \citet{raiteri92}.
Different models have been used in the past for the main s-process
component, which is the most important one for our study.
\citet{Arlandini99} used the average s-process yield from two AGB
stellar models for a $1.5 M_\odot$ and a $3 M_\odot$ star, both at
metallicity 1/2 $Z_\odot$. On the other hand, \citet{Travaglio04}
followed a Galactic chemical evolution model that used a range of
masses and metallicities and also included intermediate mass star
s-process yields. For elements with $Z\geq50$ both models agree
within the error bars and no major discrepancies are found. While
for elements with $Z\leq37$, \citet{Travaglio04} produce relatively
more s- material than \citet{Arlandini99} due to the additional
contribution in this region by AGB stars of intermediate mass (4 to
8 $M_\odot$), the opposite happens for elements in the range $38\leq
Z\leq51$. The main difference in the resulting solar r-process
contributions are therefore found for Sr, Y and Zr. Using the
s-process contribution from \citet{Arlandini99}, the solar residuals
exhibit smaller amounts of Sr, Y and Zr material than when using the
s-process calculations from \citet{Travaglio04}. Because the
\citet{Travaglio04} Galactic chemical evolution model is more
complete and includes more relevant physics, it is the model that
was used in our study. The effect of the p-process to the elemental
abundance was included by assuming that it solely adds to abundances
of proton-rich isotopes. Only the abundance of Mo and Ru are
significantly modified by the p-process. The elemental LEPP
contribution to the solar system abundances, which we now call the
{\it solar LEPP} pattern, obtained by subtracting the s-, p- and the
r-process (average of r-II stars) from the solar abundances, is
shown in Table~\ref{LEPPabun}. Upper limits of the isotopic solar
LEPP abundances were also obtained. Note that for s-only isotopes
the LEPP abundances can be unambiguously calculated since they do
not have an r-process contribution.

Figure~\ref{weak} compares the solar LEPP pattern with the stellar
LEPP abundance pattern. We find rather good agreement for elements
Y, Sr, Zr, Nb, Mo, Ru and Rh. We therefore propose that the LEPP observed in the abundances of metal poor stars and the process that is responsible for filling in the residual obtained when subtracting from the solar abundances the s-process from \citet{Travaglio04}, the r-process component observed in the most Eu enriched metal poor stars, and the p-process, are the same.
The relative contributions of the LEPP to the solar system abundances
are also in agreement with \citet{ishimaru05}, who found indications
that the LEPP (or weak r-process in their notation) contribution
decreases with atomic number. The element Pd would be somewhat
intermediate between Sr, which is dominated by the LEPP, and Ba,
which is dominated by the main r-process. However, there are also
some discrepancies between the stellar and the solar LEPP patterns.
The solar LEPP abundance of Pd is about a factor of 2 smaller than
the stellar one, but still within 2 $\sigma$ of the error bars.
However, the solar LEPP abundance of Ag is 5 times less than the
stellar LEPP abundance. Since Ag is mainly an r-process element
($\approx$80-86$\%$), it is unlikely that the s-process contribution
is underestimated by more than a factor of 3 to account for the
difference. As mentioned earlier, one possible explanation is the
uncertainty of non-LTE effects in the metal-poor stars abundance
analysis.

\section{Astrophysical conditions}
\label{modelsection}

The second nucleosynthesis process producing the lighter r-process elements postulated in the pioneering work of \citet{wasserburg96} has usually been assumed to be an r-process due to its required production of $^{129}$I. Consequently \citet{qian98} did attempt to model its abundance pattern with a schematic strongly simplified r-process model based on the few observational data that were available at the time.

Traditionally, light s-process products have not been thought
to be produced at very low metallicities. In particular, the weak
s-process abundance contribution is
negligible in extremely metal-poor stars with [Fe/H]$\approx-$3 to
account for the abundance of Sr, Y and Zr since the main neutron
source in massive stars, $^{22}$Ne, is of secondary nature. Indeed,
production of $^{22}$Ne derives from the original CNO nuclei, first
converted essentially to $^{14}$N during core H-burning, then
converted to $^{18}$O by $\alpha$ capture at the beginning of core
He-burning and further processed by $\alpha$ capture to $^{22}$Ne.
Neutrons are released by the $^{22}$Ne($\alpha$,n)$^{25}$Mg channel
near core He exhaustion or during the following convective shell
$^{12}$C burning.

Furthermore, the main s-process occurs in low and intermediate mass
stars which have relatively long life spans and cannot thus explain
the observation of metal-poor stars abundances. The isotopic deficiencies of the Galactic chemical evolution s-process model of \citet{Travaglio04} in the s-only isotopes $^{86}$Sr, $^{96}$Mo, $^{100}$Ru, $^{104}$Pd, $^{110}$Cd, $^{116}$Sn, $^{122-124}$Te and $^{128,130}$Xe, which are only produced with abundances of 70-80\% of the solar value, are problematic since those isotopes should
come entirely from the main s-process. Either a third s-process
component has to be included to account for such deficiencies or
there is a problem in their model. For such reason, the possible
existence of a primary s-process contributing to abundances in this
region cannot be excluded. In addition, \citet{froehlich06} and
\citet{wanajo06} have recently suggested that the $\nu$p-process
might contribute to the Y, Sr, and Zr abundances observed in
metal-poor stars. The $\nu$p-process occurs in a proton-rich,
neutrino-driven wind off a proto-neutron star and is therefore a
primary process that could operate in the early Galaxy. While this
process produces primarily neutron-deficient isotopes, it cannot be
excluded observationally as only elemental abundance data are
available for the light r-process elements.

Since we are interested in determining where this second nucleosynthesis process, the LEPP, operates, we explore here the possibility of a neutron capture process being responsible for the LEPP. We do not make any assumptions about the neutron exposure, but
rather determine the necessary conditions to reproduce the newly
obtained LEPP abundance pattern with site-independent full network
calculations. Our goal is to constrain the neutron densities and
temperatures needed for a LEPP process in order to be consistent
with observations. In particular, we want to determine whether the
LEPP is an s- or an r-process (different from the one creating the r-II abundances).

We use a classical approach with a constant neutron exposure of
neutron density $n_{n}$ and duration $\tau$ at a temperature $T$. We
vary conditions from s-process type conditions to r-process type. We
do not use any waiting point or steady flow approximation, but
employ a full reaction network for the abundances of 3224 nuclei
from H to Ta, taking into account neutron capture rates, their
inverse ($\gamma$,n) photo-disintegration rates, and $\beta$-decay
rates with $\beta$-delayed neutron emission. The nuclear reaction
rates were taken from the recent REACLIB compilation, which includes
theoretical reaction rates based on NON-SMOKER statistical model
calculations \citep{rauscher00} with Q-values obtained with the FRDM
\citep{frdm} mass model. Experimental Maxwellian average neutron capture cross sections and their temperature trends were taken from \citet{bao00} when available. Experimental $\beta$-decay rates were used when available \citep{nndc,pfeiffer02}. Theoretical $\beta$-decay rates were taken
from \citet{moeller97} or when available, from calculations
including first forbidden transitions \citep{moeller03}.
Temperature and density dependent $\beta$-decay rates from \citet{takahashi87} were included. The temperature was kept
constant as a function of time. The initial abundance composition
consisted of neutrons and seed nuclei, either $^{56}$Fe, $^{40}$Ca
or a solar distribution seed. The $^{56}$Fe mass fraction used in
the calculation was 1\%. The neutron to seed ratio was chosen such
that $n_{n}$ did not change by more than 5\% during the calculation.
The choice of seed abundance does not affect the final
 abundance pattern, as long as it is below the mass region of interest,
 and therefore none of our conclusions depend on it. Our choice of Fe
 as seed is arbitrary and a purely technical means to create a neutron
 capture flow through the relevant mass region. In particular it does
 not imply the process to be of secondary nature. In general a
neutron capture process requires some seed. In the case of a
primary process, this seed had to be created in the same
astrophysical event. An example is
the $\alpha$-process generating the seed
 for the r-process in the neutrino-driven wind scenario in core
 collapse supernovae.

To quantify which conditions better fit the stellar LEPP abundance
pattern a $\chi^{2}$ function $f(n_{n},T,\tau)$ defined as,
\begin{equation}
f(n_{n},T,\tau)=\sum_{i~\in~LEPP}\left(\frac{Y^{CAL}_{i}-Y^{LEPP}_{i}}{\Delta
Y_{i}} \right)^{2}\textrm{,}
\end{equation}
was used, where $Y^{CAL}_{i}$ is the calculated stable abundance and
$Y^{LEPP}_{i}$ is the desired abundance of element $i$. The closer
the value of $f(n_{n},T,\tau)$ to the number of residuals is, the
better the agreement between the calculated abundance pattern and
the stellar LEPP abundance pattern. Since the size of the
uncertainty of the reference abundances for all elements is
relatively the same, the $\chi^2$ function is not dominated by one
uncertainty and its use is justified.

The duration for the neutron exposure  $\tau$ was chosen to minimize
$f(n_{n},T,\tau)$ for a given set of astrophysical conditions
$n_{n}$ and $T$. In order to do this, we started the calculation for
a given $T$ and $n_n$, and for every time step determined the
abundance pattern that would be produced if the neutrons would be
instantly exhausted at that point and all nuclei would decay back to
stability via $\beta$-decays. The use of a full decay network
including $\beta$-delayed neutron emission for this purpose at every
time step and for all conditions was computationally impracticable.
Beta delayed neutron emission was however included when calculating
the final abundance pattern for the optimum process duration.

The resulting best abundance patterns for different conditions are
shown in Fig.~\ref{abundancepatterns}. These calculations were
performed with a $^{56}$Fe seed. Using $^{40}$Ca or a solar
abundance distribution as seed did not have a major impact on the
abundance pattern, but only changed the neutron flux duration
$\tau$. We find that the abundances of elements $38\leq Z\leq47$ can
be reasonably reproduced under a variety of different astrophysical
conditions. Even though low neutron densities $n_{n}\approx10^{8}$
cm$^{-3}$ and high neutron densities $n_{n}\approx10^{28}$ cm$^{-3}$
can fit the LEPP pattern best in this region, other neutron
densities can reproduce the pattern within a factor of 3 for every
element. However, if heavier elements ($Z\geq56$), even in a
relatively low amount such as in the LEPP, also have to be created,
low neutron densities are favored to reproduce the desired
abundances. This is illustrated in Figure~\ref{proxHD122563}, which
displays $f(n_{n},T,\tau)$ for different astrophysical conditions.
Neutron-capture processes with a low neutron density,
$n_{n}\leq10^{13}$ cm$^{-3}$, reproduce the residual abundance
pattern better. Higher neutron densities fail to reproduce the
abundance pattern since it is not possible (within the model) to
create the correct abundances for $38\leq Z\leq47$ and sufficient
amounts of $Z\geq56$ material. The dependence on temperature is
small; only for low neutron densities can a high temperature be
excluded.

The average atomic number of the created nuclei increases as a
function of time as neutron captures are followed by $\beta$-decays.
As the material becomes heavier, some of it reaches the region
$38\leq Z\leq47$ and the desired abundance pattern may be
reproduced. As more and more material increases its atomic number,
the abundance in the region $38\leq Z\leq47$ decreases and the
abundance of $Z\geq56$ starts to increase.  To satisfactorily
reproduce the residual abundance pattern most of the abundance has
to go into $38\leq Z\leq47$. For $Z\geq56$, the amount of created
material has to be about one order of magnitude less than the
average abundance of the light elements. The neutron shell closure
$N=82$ is a bottleneck where abundances accumulate. In order to
produce sufficient  $38\leq Z\leq47$ abundances the neutron flux has
to be exhausted while most of the material is passing through the
$N=82$ bottleneck. For processes with a large neutron density, the
abundance peak occurs around $50\leq Z\leq56$.  In order to produce
elements $56\leq Z\leq62$, enough material has to leak out of the
bottleneck. Because of the relatively long time for that to occur,
the abundance of elements $Z=47$ and $48$ already decreases before
enough $56\leq Z\leq62$ material is created. For processes with a
relatively small neutron density, the shell closure produces
progenitor bottleneck abundances in the region $56\leq Z\leq60$ and
therefore the required amount of heavy material can still be
obtained.

Even though low neutron density scenarios produce a higher amount of
heavy material that is in agreement with the solar LEPP abundances,
the stellar LEPP abundance pattern is not completely reproduced for
$Z\geq56$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{abundancepatterns}.  While Ba seems
to be always overproduced, Pr and Sm are underproduced by the
network model using low neutron density scenarios. The neutron flux
duration necessary to obtain a reasonable fit under the lowest
neutron density ($\tau \approx 1170$ years for $n_{n}=10^{8}$
cm$^{-3}$) far exceeds what is expected by present nucleosynthesis
calculations in massive stars
\citep{woosley02,rauscher02,chieffi04}. More favorable conditions
would require higher $n_{n}$. The choice $n_{n}=10^{13}$ cm$^{-3}$
implies $\tau \approx 5$ days. A primary neutron source would also
be necessary to obtain a primary-LEPP mechanism, either by the
elusive channel $^{12}$C+$^{12}$C$\rightarrow$n+$^{23}$Mg, or by
more sophisticated situations in which convective shell C-burning
layers merge with hotter inner regions suffering Ne-shell and
O-shell burning in the most advanced phases. These developments are
outside the scope of the present analysis.

Even though in the high end of the $n_n\le 10^{13}$ cm$^{-3}$ range some amount of $^{129}$I is made (at a neutron density $n_n \approx 10^{11}$ cm$^{-3}$ the neutron capture on $^{127}$Te becomes comparable to the beta decay halflive $\approx10$ h and therefore a subsequent neutron capture on the stable $^{128}$Te and the $^{129}$Te beta decay creates it), in our calculations not enough $^{127}$I is produced to explain the meteoritic ratios. It is however interesting that for low neutron densities, $n_{n}\leq10^{11}$ cm$^{-3}$, the derived solar LEPP isotopic abundances are in agreement with the missing s-process abundances in the region Mo to Xe predicted by the Galactic chemical evolution model by \citet{Travaglio04} that includes the yields of all AGB stars according to their lifetimes and production at various metallicities. In particular, s-only isotopes in the region from Mo to Xe are within 20 to 30$\%$ of their solar abundances. For higher neutron densities, the LEPP isotopic distribution shifts progressively towards an r-process behavior.

The disadvantage of using a site-independent
model is that the reaction network calculations may be over
simplistic and some important features can be left out.
R-process scenarios such as the neutrino driven wind
in supernovae and supernova fallback
\citep{WWH92,TWJ94,Wan01,Tho01,Far06,fryer06}
have neutron densities that dramatically evolve with time.
By keeping a single constant neutron density the effect of
such change cannot be correctly reproduced. For such a reason
we also performed test calculations to explore whether separate
r-process components for the $38\leq Z\leq47$ and the
$56\leq Z\leq62$ regions could reproduce the LEPP abundance
pattern. Fig.~\ref{abundancepatterns} shows the abundance
pattern when using components $n_{n}=10^{28}$ cm$^{-3}$,
$\tau=60$ ms and $n_{n}=10^{25}$ cm$^{-3}$, $\tau=2$ s
at $T_{9}=1.5$. Although the stellar LEPP is not completely
reproduced for the heavy elements, the abundance pattern
is reproduced to better than an order of magnitude with the exception
of Ba and Pr. Even though the choice of components is not unique,
a lower neutron density limit of $n_{n}=10^{24}$ cm$^{-3}$
was found preferable to reproduce light and heavy elements
without overproducing Pd, Ag, though some overproduction of
Ba cannot be avoided. In this case, no s-process production is
possible.  Site-dependent
calculations should be performed in the future to compare
the observed LEPP abundances with predictions from various
realistic scenarios.

\section{Conclusions}
\label{conclusions}
We have shown that the elemental abundances of metal-poor halo stars
exhibit a non-correlation between [X/Eu] and [Eu/Fe] for Y, Sr, Zr,
Pd, and Ag. The same behavior had been found before for Y and Zr in
a few stars in M15 \citep{kaori06}. This provides new further
evidence for the existence of a primary LEPP process that
contributes together with the r-process, the weak s-process, the
main s-process, and the p-process to the nucleosynthesis not only of
Y, Sr, and Zr, but, as we show here, for most elements in the Sr-Ag
range. We also find that a very small contribution to still heavier
elements up to Eu is likely. Based on our results we were then able
to show that the LEPP produces a uniform and unique abundance
pattern, shown in Fig.~\ref{weak}, and that together with the pattern observed in Eu-enriched stars (r-process rich), are able to explain the abundances of all metal-poor stars considered.

Metal-poor stars with very weak Eu enhancement play an essential
role in constraining the LEPP as they have the smallest contribution
from the r-process. A prime example is HD~122563, for which a wide
range of elemental abundances are observed. We are therefore able to
explain the abundance observations in HD~122563 and HD~221170 that
previously had been identified as ``anomalies", together with the
abundances observed in other metal-poor halo stars with a consistent
picture of mixed contributions from the r-process and the LEPP.
In addition, it was found that the LEPP
contributes significantly to the solar system abundances
based on the use of the \citet{Travaglio04} s-process model.
While we consider this model to be the best available it
should be noted that the use of the simpler s-process
model by \citet{Arlandini99}, for example, would have
led to a significantly reduced solar system contribution
of the LEPP. However, only when using the \citet{Travaglio04}
s-process model do the solar and the stellar LEPP
abundance patterns agree.

Since the astrophysical conditions that would create the LEPP
abundance pattern are not known, full reaction network calculations
were performed in a heuristic way assuming different neutron capture
process conditions. A variety of different neutron densities from
s-process to r-process like were found to reproduce the abundance
pattern between Sr and Ag within the observational uncertainties.
However, intermediate neutron densities in between typical s- or
r-process conditions seem to be excluded. Using a single component
to reproduce the LEPP pattern only neutron densities $n_{n}\leq10^{13}$
cm$^{-3}$ seem to create enough Ba to Sm material (which actually consist
of quite small contributions to solar) that is consistent within
an order of magnitude with the abundances inferred for HD~122563.
These low neutron densities correspond to densities found in the
s-process, or not so far from it.
A LEPP characterized by neutron densities of $n_{n}\leq10^{13}$ cm$^{-3}$
 then not only addresses the the problem of explaining metal poor star abundance patterns,
 but also the problem of the underproduction of some s-only isotopes in the s-process
 galactic chemical evolution model of \citet{Travaglio04}.

Multiple nucleosynthesis processes are also required to explain the early solar system $^{129}$I/$^{127}$I
and $^{182}$Hf/$^{180}$Hf ratios inferred from meteorites \citep{qian03}.
As $^{129}$I and $^{182}$Hf are radioactive nuclei with different
half-lives, the detected abundance ratios imply different chemical evolution
histories for $^{129}$I and $^{182}$Hf, both thought to be produced
in the r-process. If low neutron density scenarios are responsible
for the LEPP, the A=130 abundance peak could be attributed to
the main r-process component (as observed in r-II metal-poor stars).
In this case, most of $^{129}$I and $^{182}$Hf would be produced in the same
r-process events, which could not explain the meteoritic data.
It should be noted however that \citet{meyer00} have questioned
the pure r-process origin of $^{182}$Hf. An alternative scenario that would
satisfy the meteoritic constraints would be that yet another process
is responsible for the origin of the $A=130$ abundance peak. This would
require that the $A=130$ production, or at least the production of
$^{129}$I, be largely avoided in the main r-process that
is known to produce the heavy elements from Ba and beyond. Similarly,
the hypothetical additional process that is responsible for the synthesis of $^{129}$I
would have to provide negligible contributions to Ba. It would
have to be demonstrated in realistic model calculations that
both requirements can be achieved. Recent studies based on the
classical r-process model indicate that this might be difficult
given the know nuclear physics around the $N=82$ shell closure \citep{kratz06}.

The astrophysical scenarios involving  neutron densities $n_{n}\leq10^{13}$ cm$^{-3}$ do not correspond to the traditional
weak or main s-process because the nucleosynthesis occurs in very
low metallicity stars and the required neutron flux duration is too
long compared to what is expected in those scenarios. A particular
challenge is to find a stellar scenario with low neutron densities
during a long period of time occurring in low metallicity stars
strong enough to produce elements up to Eu. Since it is hard to
envision such a scenario, possibilities other than low neutron capture processes should also be considered
to explain the observed LEPP abundances.

While it is not possible to reproduce the entire LEPP abundance pattern at high neutron densities with a single neutron exposure, we showed that in principle a multi-component exposure with neutron densities $n_{n}\geq10^{24}$ cm$^{-3}$
could reproduce the observed abundances. In such a model
the LEPP could synthesize $^{129}$I explaining the meteoritic data,
though the overproduction of Ba is difficult to avoid.
A high neutron density LEPP would however require
that the solar abundance residual (our solar LEPP abundance pattern)
cannot, or at least not entirely, be explained with LEPP anymore, as it
contains the s-only nuclei underproduced in \citet{Travaglio04}.
In this case one would have to conclude that the LEPP
contributes at most a small amount to the solar abundances, and that
an unknown additional s-process component is required to explain the solar
abundances. Moreover, the agreement between our solar LEPP
pattern and the observed LEPP component in metal poor stars
pointed out in this work would than have to be considered coincidental.

The s-process contribution to solar $^{96}$Mo is only 78\%. Since
that isotope is shielded by $^{96}$Ru against an rp-process far from
stability, one might argue that such a process is
possibly excluded as an explanation for the LEPP. Nevertheless, a
nucleosynthesis process on the proton-rich side running closer to
stability such as the recently proposed $\nu$p-process should be
considered. Besides proton captures, the $\nu$p-process includes
neutron induced reactions and therefore has a path closer to
stability producing isotopes such as $^{96}$Mo. In addition,
\citet{wanajo06} have shown that the $\nu$p-process under some
conditions can produce enough material up to Eu. Further studies
should also consider this process a candidate for the production of
LEPP abundances.

The parameter study in the present work is a first step toward
determining the astronomical site responsible for creating the
abundance of material not created in the r-process in metal-poor
stars. More observational data, particularly for r-process poor
stars and for more elements below Ba, would certainly be important
for further progress. It would also be desirable to identify actual
sites that could be responsible for the LEPP and perform site
specific calculations to reproduce our derived LEPP abundance
pattern.

After submission of this paper, \citet{qian07} presented a
refinement of their phenomenological model that is based on
similar observational constraints as presented here. Their model is
based on the observed abundances in HD~122563 (for their ``L"
component) and CS~22892-052 (for their ``H" component). Tough their
adopted patterns are slightly different, their conclusion that such
a two component model can explain currently available metal poor
star abundance patterns is in agreement with this work. Our results
concerning the implications of the production of some A$\ge$130
nuclei in the LEPP, the likely nature of the LEPP and its potential
relevance for the s-process are not affected.

\acknowledgments We thank I.I. Ivans, J. E. Lawler, C. Sneden and K.
Lodders for helpful discussions, and F.-K. Thielemann for providing
the reaction network solver. This work has been supported in part by
NSF grants PHY 02-16783 (Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics)
and PHY 01-10253. Support was also provided by NSF grants
AST03-07279 (J.J.C) and AST04-06784 (T.C.B), by the Virtuelles
Institut f{\"u}r Struktur der Kerne und Nukleare Astrophysik under
HGF grant VH-VI-061, by the Univ. Mainz-GSI F+E Vertrag under grant
MZ/KLK (K.-L.K, B.P. and K.F), and by the Italian MIUR-FIRB Project
``Astrophysical Origin of the Heavy Elements Beyond Fe'' (R.G.).

Nucleosynthesis in the Early Galaxy