Algebraic method of group classification
for semi-normalized classes of differential equations

Célestin Kurujyibwami^†, Dmytro R. Popovych^‡§ and Roman O. Popovych^‡◇

^† College of Science and Technology, University of Rwanda, P.O. Box: 3900, Kigali, Rwanda

^‡ Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Memorial University of Newfoundland,
  St. John’s (NL) A1C 5S7, Canada

^§ Institute of Mathematics of NAS of Ukraine, 3 Tereshchenkivska Str., 01004 Kyiv, Ukraine

^◇ Mathematical Institute, Silesian University in Opava, Na Rybníčku 1, 746 01 Opava, Czechia

E-mails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

We generalize the notion of semi-normalized classes of systems of differential equations, study properties of such classes and extend the algebraic method of group classification to them. In particular, we prove the important theorems on factoring out symmetry groups and invariance algebras of systems from semi-normalized classes and on splitting such groups and algebras within disjointedly semi-normalized classes. Nontrivial particular examples of classes that arise in real-world applications and showcase the relevance of the developed theory are provided. To convincingly illustrate the efficiency of the proposed method, we apply it to the group classification problem for the class of linear Schrödinger equations with complex-valued potentials and the general value of the space dimension. We compute the equivalence groupoid of the class by the direct method and thus show that this class is uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions. This is why the group classification problem reduces to the classification of specific low-dimensional subalgebras of the associated equivalence algebra, which is completely realized for the case of space dimension two. Splitting into different classification cases is based on three integer parameters that are invariant with respect to equivalence transformations. We also single out those of the obtained results that are relevant to linear Schrödinger equations with real-valued potentials.

1 Introduction

Systems of differential equations that appear in real-world applications generally contain constant or functional parameters that are not fixed and should be found using experimental data or additional arguments. An example of such parameters called arbitrary elements is given by potentials in Shrödinger equations. The scope of relevant models is often restricted by certain requirements to their symmetry properties following from the corresponding theory, like certain scale invariance or the Galilean or special relativity principles in physics. In mathematical terminology, this means that modeling differential equations have to possess a certain symmetry group or symmetry groups with certain properties or the widest symmetry group among the possible ones [61]. Thus, to single out such models from a parameterized class of systems of differential equations, one should solve the group classification problem for this class. This is why the theory of group classification plays nowadays a central role in symmetry analysis of differential equations and its application to various sciences.

This theory has its origins in the work of Sophus Lie. His greatest achievement here was solving the group classification problems for three classes differential equations, second-order ordinary differential equations [41], second-order linear partial differential equations in two independent variables [40] and nonlinear Klein–Gordon equations of the form $d^{2}z/dx\,dy=F(z)$ [39]. Both the main approaches to solving group classification problems, which are the direct and the algebraic methods, also originated from these Lie’s studies. The modern development of the theory of group classification was started by Ovsyannikov [60, 61], and this has been the field of intensive research ever since, see [2, 27, 38, 68] and references therein.

The group classification problem for a class of differential equations is complex beyond constructing the Lie symmetry group of a single system of differential equations. It involves classifying solutions of a cumbersome overdetermined system of partial differential equations, where the unknown functions are not only the coefficients of Lie-symmetry vector fields but also the arbitrary elements of the class. This is why the progress in implementing the group classification framework in software is not significant despite there existing many specialized packages for finding Lie symmetries in various symbolic computation systems [3, 14, 15, 16, 43, 72]. Moreover, a considerable fraction of group classification problems presented in the literature is tackled using a brute-force version of the direct method, which is advisable only for some simple classes of differential equations, see a discussion in [58, Section 4]. This definitely inefficient approach requires a rigorous effort to keep track of various cases of integrating the corresponding determining equations for Lie symmetries and furthermore to check inequivalence of these cases. Any lapse in attention leads to missed, overlapping, repeated and/or incorrect classification cases afflicting most papers following this approach. Due to their unhandiness, the corresponding computations are not properly presented if presented at all, which makes the obtained classification results unverifiable and thus not trustworthy.

In the meanwhile, a number of novel techniques for group classification have been developed recently, which include variations to the advanced modification of the direct method called the method of furcate splitting [29, 58, 55] and various flavors of the algebraic method [7, 17, 35, 57, 67, 68]. The former method was suggested and applied for the first time in [55] but was given its name only in [29] and formalized to its full extend in [58]. See also [8, 65, 69, 70] and references therein for examples of its efficient application. It is advisable only for classes of simple structure, which is, at the same time, not appropriate to apply the more powerful algebraic method. In particular, arbitrary elements in such classes should be constants or depend on few arguments, and the reasonable upper bound for the number of arbitrary-element arguments, which was handled in the literature [55], is two. At the same time, the latter method is not so sensitive to the number of arguments of arbitrary elements.

Despite its invention by Lie, the algebraic method of group classification became a common tool of group analysis of differential equations considerably later, only since the 1990s [4, 24, 25, 26, 37, 38, 42, 62, 71, 73]. Moreover, the fact that the class of differential equations under consideration should admit special (normalization) properties for the proper applicability of this method was understood even later [63, 64, 67]. The straightforward application of the algebraic method to non-normalized classes of differential equations results in the so-called preliminary group classification of such classes [1, 17, 28], see the discussion in [7, Section XI]. To extend the scope of applicability of the algebraic method, a number of various techniques and approaches were invented, including splitting the class under consideration into normalized subclasses [36, 67], constructing its normalized superclass or even a hierarchy normalized classes related to it [9, 36, 57, 67], singling out its singular subclasses [7], gauging its arbitrary elements using a wide subgroupoid of its equivalence groupoid [9, 36, 57, 58, 67], mappings between classes that are generated by point transformations [58] and partitioning classification cases into regular and singular ones [68]. One of such approaches is to extend the algebraic method to classes with weaker normalization properties, e.g., to classes that are semi-normalized or normalized in the generalized or the extended sense. The first version of the algebraic method for group classification of semi-normalized classes was suggested in [35] and applied therein for solving the group classification problem for the class of (1+1)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equations with complex-valued potentials. Then this version was used to classify Lie symmetries of (1+1)-dimensional linear evolution equations of arbitrary order greater than two [9]. It was shown in [58] that further development of the algebraic method of group classification requires a deep revision of foundations of the theory of group classification, including the statement of group classification problems.

In the present paper, we enhance and further generalize the above version of this method and apply it to the class $\mathcal{F}$ of (1+$n$)-dimensional ($n\geqslant 1$) linear Schrödinger equations with complex-valued potentials

$$i\psi_{t}+\psi_{aa}+V(t,x)\psi=0,$$ (1)

where $t$ and $x=(x_{1},\dots,x_{n})$ are the real independent variables, $\psi$ is the complex dependent variable and $V$ is an arbitrary smooth complex-valued potential depending on $t$ and $x$. Here and in what follows, the subscripts $t$ and $a$ denote differentiation with respect to $t$ and $x_{a}$, respectively, the indices $a$, $b$, $c$, and $d$ run from $1$ to $n$, and we use summation convention over repeated indices. By $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ we denote the subclass of the class $\mathcal{F}$ that consists of the equations of the form (1) with real-valued potentials $V$.

More specifically, we generalize the notion of semi-normalized classes of differential equations, study properties of such classes and extend the algebraic method of group classification to them. Basic for this extension are the new theorems on factoring out symmetry groups and invariance algebras of systems from semi-normalized classes and on splitting such groups and algebras within disjointedly semi-normalized classes. For the class $\mathcal{F}$ with the general value of $n$, we compute its equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ by the direct method and thus prove its uniform semi-normalization with respect to the linear superposition of solutions. In this way, we reduce the group classification problem for the class $\mathcal{F}$ to the classification of appropriate low-dimensional subalgebras of its equivalence algebra. This problem is completely solved in the case of $n=2$. Splitting into different classification cases is based on three integer parameters. These parameters are invariant with respect to equivalence transformations and characterize the dimensions of parts of the corresponding Lie symmetry algebras, which are related to transformation of time, rotations and generalized time-dependent shifts with respect to space variables, respectively. The analogous results for the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ are singled out from those above. In the study of the class $\mathcal{F}$, the present paper succeeds [35], where the case $n=1$ was comprehensively studied, and [34], where the groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ was computed for the case $n=2$.

The study of symmetries of Schrödinger equations began in the 1970s with Lie symmetries of linear Schrödinger equations with real-valued time-independent potentials [11, 44, 47, 48, 49, 50], but later the focus shifted to nonlinear Schrödinger equations [5, 12, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 36, 62, 66, 67, 74], see also detailed reviews in [67, Section 4] and [35, Section 1]. At the same time, Lie symmetries of linear Schrödinger equations and their generalizations were not properly classified. In particular, this is the case for linear Schrödinger equations with complex-valued potentials although they also arise as models in quantum mechanics, scattering theory, condensed matter physics, quantum field theory and so forth [6, 18, 46]. Moreover, the existing results for the standard case of real-valued time-independent potentials are neither exhaustive nor completely correct, which has been found out in the course of the consideration of more general Schrödinger equations. Thus, in [54], Schrödinger equations with position-dependent mass and stationary real-valued potentials were considered from the Lie-symmetry point of view for arbitrary space dimension, and their Lie symmetries were completely classified for space dimension two. The obtained classification list contains three case families formally intersecting the case of constant mass. As a result, a Lie-symmetry classification case for Schrödinger equations with constant mass and real-valued time-independent potentials that had been missed in [11] was identified; see the conclusion of the present paper for more details. Hence there are a number of open problems even on Lie symmetries of various Schrödinger equations, including linear ones. One can consider wider or new classes of Schrödinger equations [51, 54] or carry out complete, partial or inverse group classification of models with additional properties such as superintegrability [52, 53].

The structure of this paper is as follows. Basic notions related to classes of differential equations are reviewed in Section 2. In Section 3, we extend the notion of a semi-normalized class of differential equations to the semi-normalization with respect to a uniform family of point-symmetry groups of systems from the class under consideration and a subgroup of the corresponding equivalence group, study properties of newly defined semi-normalized classes and prove the theorems on factoring out point-symmetry groups and maximal Lie invariance algebras for systems from such classes. In Section 4, we distinguish between the disjoint and the non-disjoint semi-normalizations, study specific properties of disjointedly semi-normalized classes of differential equations and prove the stronger theorems on splitting point-symmetry groups and maximal Lie invariance algebras within such classes. We also present two important examples, the class that is disjointedly semi-normalized only with respect to a proper subgroup of its equivalence group and a semi-normalized class that is not disjointedly semi-normalized. The additional attribute “uniform” for semi-normalization is introduced in Section 5. Therein we discuss an example of a class that is semi-normalized but not uniformly semi-normalized. More attention is paid to the particularly important case of uniform semi-normalization given by the classes of homogeneous linear systems of differential equations that are uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions. This specific semi-normalization is especially relevant to the symmetry analysis of the linear Schrödinger equations in the second part of the present paper. The algebraic method of group classification is extended to semi-normalized classes in Section 6.

Section 7 is devoted to the preliminary symmetry analysis of the class $\mathcal{F}$ of (1+$n$)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equations of the form (1) with complex-valued potentials and with an arbitrary value $n\geqslant 1$. We compute the equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$, the equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ and the equivalence algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ of this class. It is proved that the class $\mathcal{F}$ is uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions. We derive and preliminarily integrate the determining equations for Lie symmetries of equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$, which allows us to obtain the general form of Lie-symmetry vector fields, the kernel Lie invariance algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}$ as well as the classifying condition for such Lie symmetries. Then we analyze properties of subalgebras of $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ (more precisely, of the projection $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ of $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ to the space of independent and dependent variables) that are appropriate as maximal Lie invariance algebras of equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$. In particular, we obtain that the least upper bound for the dimensions of these subalgebras equals $n(n+3)/2+5$. As a result, we show that the group classification problem for the class $\mathcal{F}$ reduces to the classification of appropriate subalgebras of the algebra $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{g}$ with respect to the equivalence relation generated by the action of the projected group $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$. The group classification problem for the class $\mathcal{F}$ in the case $n=2$ is completely solved in Section 8. We use the above results on the class $\mathcal{F}$ in Section 9 to derive their counterparts for the class $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$.

Lastly, we conclude with a summary of results, their discussion and suggestions for future considerations in Section 10.

Conventions.

Throughout the paper, we assume summation over repeated indices. Subscripts of functions denote differentiation with respect to the corresponding variables. Given a class of differential equations, $\pi$ denotes the natural projection of the space run by the tuple of the independent and dependent variables, relevant jet variables and the arbitrary elements of the class onto the space run by the tuple of the independent and dependent variables only. When talking about pseudogroups, we omit the prefix “pseudo”. The notation $\rm id$ is used for the identity transformation in the relevant space. In Sections 2–6 with theoretical results on general systems of differential equations and in Sections 7 and 8 with specific results on Schrödinger equations, we use different locally specified notations.

2 Basics notions on classes of differential equations

In order to make the presentation self-contained, we briefly define the notion of a class (of systems) of differential equations and various objects related to point transformations in such classes, mainly following [68, Section 2]. More details can be found in [7, 59, 63, 67, 68] and references therein.

Notation.

Up to Section 6, we use a notation for independent and dependent variables that differs from that of the other sections: $x=(x_{1},\dots,x_{n})$ denotes the complete $n$-tuple of independent variables and $u=(u^{1},\dots,u^{m})$ is the $m$-tuple of dependent variables (that is, unknown functions of the independent variables), except particular examples, where natural specific notations of variables are used. The indices $i$ and $j$ run from $1$ to $n$ and the indices $a$ and $b$ run from $1$ to $m$.

Consider a system of differential equations $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$: $L(x,u_{(p)},\theta_{(q)}(x,u_{(p)}))=0$ parameterized by a tuple of arbitrary elements $\theta(x,u_{(p)})=(\theta^{1}(x,u_{(p)}),\dots,\theta^{k}(x,u_{(p)})),$ where $u_{(p)}$ stands for the tuple of derivatives of $u$ with respect to $x$ up to order $p$, including $u$ as the zeroth order derivatives, and $\theta_{(q)}$ denotes the tuple of derivatives of the tuple $\theta$ with respect to its arguments $(x,u_{(p)})$ up to order $q$. The arbitrary-element tuple $\theta$ runs through the set $\mathcal{S}$ of solutions of an auxiliary system of differential equations $S(x,u_{(p)},\theta_{(q^{\prime})}(x,u_{(p)}))=0$ and differential inequalities of the form $\Sigma(x,u_{(p)},\theta_{(q^{\prime})}(x,u_{(p)}))\neq 0$, where both $x$ and $u_{(p)}$ play the role of independent variables, and $S$ and $\Sigma$ are tuples of smooth functions depending on $x,u_{(p)}$ and $\theta_{(q^{\prime})}$. Other kinds of inequalities are also possible. By $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ we denote the class of systems $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$ with arbitrary elements $\theta$ running through $\mathcal{S}$, $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}:=\{\mathcal{L}_{\theta}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\}$.

The (point) equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is the small category with $\mathcal{S}$ as the set of objects and with the set of point transformations of $(x,u)$, i.e., of local diffeomorphisms in the space with the coordinates $(x,u)$, between pairs of systems from $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ as the set of arrows,

$$\mathcal{G}^{\sim}=\big{\{}\mathcal{T}=(\theta,\Phi,\tilde{\theta})\mid\theta,\tilde{\theta}\in\mathcal{S},\,\Phi\in{\rm Diff}^{\rm loc}_{(x,u)}\colon\Phi_{*}\mathcal{L}_{\theta}=\mathcal{L}_{\tilde{\theta}}\big{\}}.$$

More specifically, elements $\mathcal{T}$ of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ are called admissible (point) transformations within the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$. The source and target maps ${\rm s},{\rm t}\colon\mathcal{G}^{\sim}\to\mathcal{S}$ are defined by ${\rm s},{\rm t}\colon\mathcal{G}^{\sim}\ni\mathcal{T}=(\theta,\Phi,\tilde{\theta})\mapsto\theta,\tilde{\theta}$. This map pair inspires the groupoid notation $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}\rightrightarrows\mathcal{S}$. Admissible transformations $\mathcal{T}=(\theta,\Phi,\tilde{\theta})$ and $\mathcal{T}^{\prime}=(\theta^{\prime},\Phi^{\prime},\tilde{\theta}^{\prime})$ are composable if $\tilde{\theta}=\theta^{\prime}$, and then their composition is $\mathcal{T}\star\mathcal{T}^{\prime}=(\theta,\Phi^{\prime}\circ\Phi,\tilde{\theta}^{\prime})$, which defines a natural partial multiplication on $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$. For any $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$, the unit at $\theta$ is given by ${\rm id}_{\theta}:=(\theta,{\rm id},\theta)$, where ${\rm id}$ is the identity transformation of $(x,u)$. This defines the object inclusion map $\mathcal{S}\ni\theta\mapsto{\rm id}_{\theta}\in\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$, i.e., the object set $\mathcal{S}$ can be regarded to coincide with the base groupoid $\mathcal{S}\rightrightarrows\mathcal{S}:=\{{\rm id}_{\theta}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\}$. The inverse of $\mathcal{T}$ is $\mathcal{T}^{-1}:=(\tilde{\theta},\Phi^{-1},\theta)$, where $\Phi^{-1}$ is the inverse of $\Phi$. All required groupoid properties like associativity of the partial multiplication, its consistency with the source and target maps, natural properties of units and inverses are obviously satisfied. The subset $\mathcal{G}(\theta,\tilde{\theta}):={\rm s}^{-1}(\theta)\cap{\rm t}^{-1}(\tilde{\theta})$ of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ with $\theta,\tilde{\theta}\in\mathcal{S}$ corresponds to the set of point transformations mapping the system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$ to the system $\mathcal{L}_{\tilde{\theta}}$. The vertex group $\mathcal{G}_{\theta}:=\mathcal{G}(\theta,\theta)={\rm s}^{-1}(\theta)\cap{\rm t}^{-1}(\theta)$ is associated with the point symmetry (pseudo)group $G_{\theta}$ of the system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$, $G_{\theta}=\big{\{}\Phi\in{\rm Diff}^{\rm loc}_{(x,u)}\mid(\theta,\Phi,\theta)\in\mathcal{G}_{\theta}\big{\}}$. The fundamental groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\rm f}$ of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is the disjoint union of the vertex groups $\mathcal{G}_{\theta}$, $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$,

$$\mathcal{G}^{\rm f}:=\sqcup_{\theta\in\mathcal{S}}\mathcal{G}_{\theta}=\big{\{}(\theta,\Phi,\theta)\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S},\,\Phi\in G_{\theta}\big{\}}.$$

Since it has the same object set $\mathcal{S}$ and the same vertex groups as $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ and $\mathcal{T}^{-1}\mathcal{G}_{\tilde{\theta}}\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{G}_{\theta}$ for any $\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}(\theta,\tilde{\theta})$, it is a normal subgroupoid of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$, which is also called the fundamental subgroupoid of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$.

Denote by $\pi^{k}$, $k\in\{0,\dots,p\}$, the natural projection from the space with the coordinates $(x,u_{(p)},\theta)$ to the spaces with the coordinates $(x,u_{(k)})$. In this notation, $\pi^{0}=\pi$.

The (usual) equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is the (pseudo)group of point transformations $\mathscr{T}$ in the space with the coordinates $(x,u_{(p)},\theta)$ that

• are projectable to the spaces with the coordinates $(x,u_{(k)})$ for any $k\in\{0,\dots,p\}$,

• are consistent with the contact structure on the space with the coordinates $(x,u_{(p)})$, i.e., $\pi^{p}_{*}\mathscr{T}$ is the standard prolongation of $\pi^{k}_{*}\mathscr{T}$ to $p$th order jets $(x,u_{(p)})$, and

• map the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ onto itself, $\mathscr{T}_{*}\mathcal{L}_{\theta}\in\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ for any $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$.

If the arbitrary-element tuple $\theta$ depends at most on $(x,u_{(p^{\prime})})$ with $p^{\prime}<p$, then the group $G^{\sim}$ can be considered to act in the space with the coordinates $(x,u_{(p^{\prime})},\theta)$. We call the group $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$ the shadow of $G^{\sim}$. Two specific restrictions on equivalence transformations, their projectability and their locality with respect to arbitrary elements, can be weakened to generalize the notion of usual equivalence group in several ways. This results in the notions of generalized equivalence group and extended equivalence group, respectively, or the notions of extended generalized equivalence group if both restrictions are weakened simultaneously [29, 45, 57, 58, 63, 67].

The action groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{H}$a subgroup $H$ of the usual equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$,

$$\mathcal{G}^{H}:=\big{\{}(\theta,\pi_{*}\mathscr{T},\mathscr{T}_{*}\theta)\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S},\,\mathscr{T}\in H\big{\}},$$

is a wide subgroupoid of the equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ of this class, $\mathcal{G}^{H}\subseteq\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ and ${\rm s}(\mathcal{G}^{H})=\mathcal{S}$. We say that an admissible transformation $\mathcal{T}$ in the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is generated by an equivalence transformation from $H$ if $\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}^{H}$.

The kernel point symmetry group $G^{\cap}:=\cap_{\theta\in\mathcal{S}}G_{\theta}$ of systems from the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is related to the unfaithful subgroup $\tilde{G}^{\cap}$ of $G^{\sim}$ under the action on $\mathcal{S}$, $G^{\cap}=\pi_{*}\tilde{G}^{\cap}$. Thus, $\tilde{G}^{\cap}$ is a normal subgroup of $G^{\sim}$ that is isomorphic to $G^{\cap}$, and the isomorphism is established by $\pi_{*}$.

Given a transformation group, it is often required to consider the associated Lie algebra of vector fields, which consists of the generators of one-parameter subgroups of this group. The infinitesimal counterparts of the equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ and the kernel point symmetry group $G^{\cap}$ of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ and the point symmetry group $G_{\theta}$ of a system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$ are called the equivalence algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ and the kernel invariance algebra of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ and the maximal Lie invariance algebra of the system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$, respectively.

If the equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ has specific properties, then the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is more convenient for studying within the framework of symmetry analysis of differential equations [7, 35, 63, 67, 68].

Definition 1.

The class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is called normalized if $\mathcal{G}^{G^{\sim}}\!\!=\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$. It is called semi-normalized if $\mathcal{G}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{G^{\sim}}\!\!=\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$.

The Frobenius product $\mathcal{G}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{G^{\sim}}\!\!=\big{\{}\mathcal{T}\star\mathcal{T}^{\prime}\mid\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}^{\rm f},\,\mathcal{T}^{\prime}\in\mathcal{G}^{G^{\sim}}\!\!,\,{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})={\rm s}(\mathcal{T}^{\prime})\big{\}}$ is a well-defined subgroupoid of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ since the fundamental groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\rm f}$ is a normal subgroupoid of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$. It is obvious that any normalized class of differential equations is semi-normalized.

When considering different kinds of equivalence groups for the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$, the usual, the generalized, the extended or the extended generalized equivalence groups of $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$, we should specify the corresponding kinds of (semi-)normalization, (semi-)normalization in the usual, the generalized, the extended or the extended generalized sense. By default, (semi-)normalization means (semi-)normalization in the usual sense.

More general notion of semi-normalization is presented in the next section.

3 Semi-normalized classes of differential equations

By the definition introduced in [35, Section 3], a class of differential equations $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is uniformly semi-normalized if there exists a family of point-symmetry groups of systems from this class with certain properties with respect to its equivalence groupoid and its equivalence group, and these point-symmetry groups can be proper subgroups of the corresponding complete point-symmetry groups. At the same time, it was noted therein that a proper subgroup of the equivalence group can be used instead of the entire equivalence group as well. The note was important since already in [35, Section 7] we needed to classify Lie symmetries of a class that can be assumed as uniformly semi-normalized only with respect to a proper subgroup of its equivalence group. Carefully analyzing the above results, we also see that the group classification problem can be solved by the algebraic method for classes that possess at least a part of properties required for uniformly semi-normalized classes in [35]. This is why, following terminology and notation of [59, 68], in the present paper we change the terminology and extend the algebraic method of group classification to more general classes of differential equations with weaker normalization properties.

Definition 2.

Let $\mathcal{G}^{H}$ be the action groupoid of a subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$. Suppose that a family $N_{\mathcal{S}}:=\{N_{\theta}<G_{\theta}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\}$ of subgroups of the point symmetry groups $G_{\theta}$ with the associated subgroups $\mathcal{N}_{\theta}:=\{(\theta,\Phi,\theta)\mid\Phi\in N_{\theta}\}$ of the vertex groups $\mathcal{G}_{\theta}$ for each $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$ satisfies the property $\mathcal{N}_{{\rm s}(\mathcal{T})}\star\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{T}\star\mathcal{N}_{{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})}$ for any $\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}^{H}$. In other words, the family $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ is uniform with respect to the action of $H$ on $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$, or $H$-uniform for short. Then the Frobenius product

$$\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{H}=\big{\{}\mathcal{T}\star\mathcal{T}^{\prime}\mid\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{N}^{\rm f},\,\mathcal{T}^{\prime}\in\mathcal{G}^{H},\,{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})={\rm s}(\mathcal{T}^{\prime})\big{\}}$$

with $\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}:=\sqcup_{\theta\in\mathcal{S}}\mathcal{N}_{\theta}$ is a subgroupoid of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$, which coincides with the image of $\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}$ under the ${\rm s}$-action (resp. the ${\rm t}$-action) of $H$ on $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$. If $\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{H}=\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$, we call the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ semi-normalized with respect to the subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$ and the family $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ of subgroups of the point symmetry groups, or $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized for brevity.

Remark 3.

Since $G^{\sim}$ is the usual equivalence group of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$, we can say more precisely that this class is $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized in the usual sense. The other kinds of semi-normalization, in the generalized sense, in the extended sense or in the generalized extended sense, which are associated with equivalence groups of the respective kinds, will be introduced elsewhere.

The case $\mathcal{G}^{H}=\mathcal{S}\rightrightarrows\mathcal{S}$ is degenerate; then necessarily $N_{\theta}=G_{\theta}$ for any $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$, and thus $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}=\mathcal{G}^{\rm f}$ and $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}=G^{\cap}$, which is not of interest in the sense of group classification. At the same time, the other improper case, where the corresponding subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$ coincides with the entire equivalence group $G^{\sim}$, is important. The class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ that is semi-normalized with respect to the group $H=G^{\sim}$ and the family $N_{\mathcal{S}}=\big{\{}N_{\theta}=\{{\rm id}\}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\big{\}}$ is genuinely normalized since then $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}=\mathcal{G}^{G^{\sim}}$. Here and in what follows ${\rm id}$ denotes the identity transformation in the space with the coordinates $(x,u)$. If the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is semi-normalized with respect to the group $H=G^{\sim}$ and the family $N_{\mathcal{S}}=\{N_{\theta}=G_{\theta}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\}$, then it is literally semi-normalized. It is obvious that a normalized class or a class that is semi-normalized with respect to a subgroup of its equivalence group and a family of subgroups of the point symmetry groups of systems from this class is semi-normalized in the above specific sense. More generally, if $H=G^{\sim}$, then the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is called semi-normalized with respect to the family $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ of subgroups of the point symmetry groups, i.e., we avoid denominating $H$ in this specific situation. Moreover, we contract the term “a class that is semi-normalized with respect to a subgroup of its equivalence group and a family of subgroups of the point symmetry groups of systems from this class”, when talking about such classes in general, and just call them semi-normalized.

Theorem 4.

Suppose that the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is semi-normalized with respect to the subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$ and the symmetry-group family $N_{\mathcal{S}}=\{N_{\theta}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\}$.

(i) Then $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}=\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{H}=\mathcal{G}^{H}\star\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}$, $\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}$ is a normal subgroupoid of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ and $\mathcal{N}_{{\rm s}(\mathcal{T})}\star\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{T}\star\mathcal{N}_{{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})}$ for any $\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$.

(ii) Furthermore, for each $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$, $N_{\theta}$ is a normal subgroup of $G_{\theta}$, $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}:=G_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}H$ is a subgroup of $G_{\theta}$, and the group $G_{\theta}$ is the Frobenius product of $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ and $N_{\theta}$, $G_{\theta}=G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}N_{\theta}$.

(iii) Systems from the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ are similar (i.e., they are related by point transformations) if and only if they are $H$-equivalent.

Proof.

(i) The $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalization of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ means that any element $\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ can be represented in the form $\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{T}_{1}\star\mathcal{T}_{2}$ for some $\mathcal{T}_{1}\in\mathcal{N}_{{\rm s}(\mathcal{T})}$ and some $\mathcal{T}_{2}\in\mathcal{G}^{H}\cap\mathcal{G}\big{(}{\rm s}(\mathcal{T}),{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})\big{)}$. Due to the uniformity of $N_{\mathcal{S}}$, there exists $\tilde{\mathcal{T}}_{1}\in\mathcal{N}_{{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})}$ such that $\mathcal{T}_{1}\star\mathcal{T}_{2}=\mathcal{T}_{2}\star\tilde{\mathcal{T}}_{1}$. In other words, any admissible transformation $\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ can also be represented in the form $\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{T}_{2}\star\tilde{\mathcal{T}}_{1}$ for some $\mathcal{T}_{2}\in\mathcal{G}^{H}\cap\mathcal{G}\big{(}{\rm s}(\mathcal{T}),{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})\big{)}$ and some $\tilde{\mathcal{T}}_{1}\in\mathcal{N}_{{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})}$.

It is obvious that $\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}$ is a wide subgroupoid of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ (as well as $\mathcal{G}^{\rm f}$), and it coincides with its fundamental subgroupoid. In the notation of the previous paragraph, for any $\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ we have

$$\mathcal{N}_{{\rm s}(\mathcal{T})}\star\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{N}_{{\rm s}(\mathcal{T})}\star\mathcal{T}_{2}\star\tilde{\mathcal{T}}_{1}=\mathcal{T}_{2}\star\mathcal{N}_{{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})}\star\tilde{\mathcal{T}}_{1}=\mathcal{T}_{2}\star\tilde{\mathcal{T}}_{1}\star\mathcal{N}_{{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})}=\mathcal{T}\star\mathcal{N}_{{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})},$$

which directly implies that $\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}$ is a normal subgroupoid of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$. In other words, under the condition $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}=\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{H}$, the uniformity of $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ with respect to the actions of $H$ on $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ implies the uniformity of $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ with respect to the similar actions of the entire group $G^{\sim}$ or even of the entire groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$.

(ii) We fix an arbitrary $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$ and take an arbitrary $\Phi\in G_{\theta}$. Then $(\theta,\Phi,\theta)\in\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ and, since $\mathcal{G}^{H}\star\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}=\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$, the point transformation $\Phi$ admits the factorization $\Phi=(\pi_{*}\mathscr{T})\circ\Phi_{1}$ for some $\mathscr{T}\in H$ and some $\Phi_{1}\in N_{\theta}$. The element $N_{\theta}$ of the family $\mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{S}}$ is a subgroup of $G_{\theta}$, $N_{\theta}<G_{\theta}$, and hence the point transformation $\Phi_{0}:=\pi_{*}\mathscr{T}=\Phi\circ\Phi_{1}^{-1}$ also belongs to $G_{\theta}$, and consequently to $G_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}H=:G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$, which is a group as intersection of two groups and is thus a subgroup of $G_{\theta}$. This implies that for any $\Phi\in G_{\theta}$ we have the representation $\Phi=\Phi_{0}\circ\Phi_{1}$, where $\Phi_{0}\in G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ and $\Phi_{1}\in N_{\theta}$, i.e., $G_{\theta}\subseteq G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}N_{\theta}$. It is obvious that $G_{\theta}\supseteq G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}N_{\theta}$ as well, which implies $G_{\theta}=G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}N_{\theta}$.

The fact that $\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}$ is a normal subgroupoid of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ directly implies that $\mathcal{N}_{\theta}$ is a normal subgroup of $\mathcal{G}_{\theta}$, i.e., $N_{\theta}$ is a normal subgroup of $G_{\theta}$. We can also immediately prove the last claim in terms of groups. For an arbitrary $\Phi\in G_{\theta}$ and an arbitrary $\tilde{\Phi}\in N_{\theta}$, we consider the composition $\Phi\circ\tilde{\Phi}\circ\Phi^{-1}$. As an element of $G_{\theta}$, the transformation $\Phi$ admits the factorization $\Phi=\Phi_{0}\circ\Phi_{1}$ with some $\Phi_{0}\in G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ and some $\Phi_{1}\in N_{\theta}$. Since $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}<\pi_{*}H$, we have $(\theta,\Phi_{0},\theta)\in\mathcal{G}^{H}$. Due to the uniformity of the family $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ with respect to the action of $H$ on $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$, we obtain $N_{\theta}=\Phi_{0}\circ N_{\theta}\circ\Phi_{0}^{-1}$. Hence the composition $\Phi\circ\tilde{\Phi}\circ\Phi^{-1}=\Phi_{0}\circ\Phi_{1}\circ\tilde{\Phi}\circ\Phi_{1}^{-1}\circ\Phi_{0}^{-1}$ belongs to $N_{\theta}$. Thus we have that $N_{\theta}$ is a normal subgroup of $G_{\theta}$, $N_{\theta}\unlhd G_{\theta}$.

(iii) If the systems $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$ and $\mathcal{L}_{\theta^{\prime}}$ from the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ are related by a point transformation $\Phi$ in the space with coordinates $(x,u)$, $\mathcal{L}_{\theta^{\prime}}=\Phi_{*}\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$, then $\mathcal{T}=(\theta,\Phi,\theta^{\prime})$ is an admissible transformation of this class, $\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$. Hence there exist $\mathcal{T}_{1}\in\mathcal{N}_{\theta}$ and $\mathcal{T}_{2}\in\mathcal{G}^{H}\cap\mathcal{G}(\theta,\theta^{\prime})$ such that $\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{T}_{1}\star\mathcal{T}_{2}$. The existence of $\mathcal{T}_{2}\in\mathcal{G}^{H}\cap\mathcal{G}(\theta,\theta^{\prime})$ means that the systems $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$ and $\mathcal{L}_{\theta^{\prime}}$ are $H$-equivalent. ∎

The member $N_{\theta}$ of the family $\mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{S}}$ and the subgroup $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}:=G_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}H$ of $G_{\theta}$ are called the uniform point-symmetry group and the essential point-symmetry group of the system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$ that are associated with the $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalization of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$, respectively. The knowledge of a family of uniform point-symmetry groups trivializes them in the following sense: since in view of Theorem 4(ii) the group $G_{\theta}$ is factorized over $N_{\theta}$ for each $\theta$, then we only need to find the subgroup $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ in order to construct $G_{\theta}$. If either $N_{\theta}=G_{\theta}$ for any $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$ or $N_{\theta}=\{{\rm id}\}$ for any $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$, then the factorization is trivial. Theorem 4(i) implies that the family $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ is not only $H$-uniform but also $G^{\sim}$-uniform and even $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$-uniform. We can interpret each of these uniformities as the equivariance of the map $\mathcal{S}\ni\theta\mapsto(\theta,N_{\theta})$ under the analogous action on $\mathcal{S}$ and on $\{(\theta,K_{\theta})\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S},\,K_{\theta}\leq G_{\theta}\}$.

It also follows from Theorem 4(i) that the condition $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}=\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{H}$ in Definition 2 can be replaced by the condition $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}=\mathcal{G}^{H}\star\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}$ or even by the weaker condition $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}=\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{H}\star\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}$ since these conditions are equivalent if the family $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ is uniform with respect to the action of $H$ on $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$. Roughly speaking, each of these conditions means that the entire equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ is generated by distinguished equivalence transformations and transformations from uniform point symmetry groups.

Given a $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$, one can extend the subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$ and elements of $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ in such a way that this class will be semi-normalized with respect to the extended objects.

Theorem 5.

Let the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ be semi-normalized with respect to the subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$ and the symmetry-group family $N_{\mathcal{S}}=\{N_{\theta}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\}$, and let $G^{\cap}$ denote the kernel group of $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$. Then the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is $(\bar{H},N_{\mathcal{S}})$- and $(\bar{H},\bar{N}_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized, in particular $(G^{\sim},N_{\mathcal{S}})$- and $(G^{\sim},\bar{N}_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized, where $\bar{N}_{\mathcal{S}}:=\{N_{\theta}G^{\cap}\mid N_{\theta}\in N_{\mathcal{S}}\}$ with $N_{\theta}G^{\cap}$ denoting the Frobenius product of $N_{\theta}\unlhd G\theta$ and $G^{\cap}\leq G\theta$ and $\bar{H}$ is any subgroup of $G^{\sim}$ that contains $H$, $H\leq\bar{H}\leq G^{\sim}$.

Proof.

For each $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$, the uniform symmetry group $N_{\theta}$ and the kernel symmetry group $G^{\cap}$ are a normal subgroup and a subgroup of $G_{\theta}$ in view of Theorem 4 and by the definition of $G^{\cap}$, respectively. Hence the Frobenius product $\bar{N}_{\theta}:=G^{\cap}N_{\theta}$ is a subgroup $G_{\theta}$ for any $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$.

In view of Theorem 4(i), the symmetry-subgroup family $\mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{S}}$ is uniform with respect to any subgroup $\bar{H}$ of $G^{\sim}$. We show that this is also the case for the symmetry-subgroup family $\bar{N}_{\mathcal{S}}$.

We take arbitrary $\mathcal{T}=(\theta,\bar{\Psi},\theta^{\prime})\in\mathcal{G}^{\bar{H}}$ and $\bar{\Phi}\in\bar{N}_{\theta}$. By the definition of $\bar{N}_{\theta}$, there exists $\Xi\in G^{\cap}$ and $\Phi\in N_{\theta}$ such that $\bar{\Phi}=\Phi\circ\Xi$. The uniformity of $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ with respect to the action of $\bar{H}$ on $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ implies that there exists $\Phi^{\prime}\in N_{\theta^{\prime}}$ such that $\bar{\Psi}\circ\Phi=\Phi^{\prime}\circ\bar{\Psi}$. Since $G^{\cap}\unlhd\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$ and $\bar{H}\leq G^{\sim}$, we have $\bar{\Psi}\circ\Xi=\Xi^{\prime}\circ\bar{\Psi}$ for some $\Xi^{\prime}\in G^{\cap}$. As a result,

$$\bar{\Psi}\circ\bar{\Phi}=\bar{\Psi}\circ\Phi\circ\Xi=\Phi^{\prime}\circ\bar{\Psi}\circ\Xi=\Phi^{\prime}\circ\Xi^{\prime}\circ\bar{\Psi}=\bar{\Phi}^{\prime}\circ\bar{\Psi},$$

where $\bar{\Phi}^{\prime}:=\Phi^{\prime}\circ\Xi^{\prime}\in\bar{N}_{\theta^{\prime}}$.

It is obvious that $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}=\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{H}\subseteq\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{\bar{H}}\subseteq\bar{\mathcal{N}}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{\bar{H}}\subseteq\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ if $H\leq\bar{H}$. As a result, $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}=\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{\bar{H}}=\bar{\mathcal{N}}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{\bar{H}}$. The two limit cases are $\bar{H}=H$ and $\bar{H}=G^{\sim}$. ∎

We call the claim from Theorem 4(ii) on the factorization $G_{\theta}=G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}N_{\theta}$ the theorem on factoring out point-symmetry groups within semi-normalized classes. The infinitesimal version of this claim can be called the theorem on factoring out maximal Lie invariance algebras within semi-normalized classes. This version follows immediately from Theorem 4 if we replace the groups by the corresponding algebras of generators of the one-parameter subgroups of these groups.

Theorem 6.

Suppose that a class of differential equations $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is semi-normalized with respect to a subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$ and a family of symmetry subgroups $\mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{S}}=\{N_{\theta}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\}$, and $\mathfrak{h}$ is a subalgebra of $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ that corresponds to the subgroup $H$. Then, for each $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$, the Lie algebras $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ and $\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$ that are associated with the groups $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ and $N_{\theta}$ are a subalgebra and an ideal of the maximal Lie invariance algebra $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}$ of the system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}\in\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$, respectively. Moreover, the algebra $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}$ is the sum of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ and $\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$, $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}=\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}+\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$, and $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}=\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$.

4 Disjoint and non-disjoint semi-normalization

Definition 7.

Under the conditions of Definition 2, we call the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ disjointedly semi-normalized with respect to the subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$ and the family $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ of subgroups of the point symmetry groups, or disjointedly $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized for short, if in addition ${N_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}H=\{{\rm id}\}}$ for any $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$.

If the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is disjointedly $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized, then $\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\cap\mathcal{G}^{H}=\mathcal{S}\rightrightarrows\mathcal{S}$. The inverse implication does not hold in general but is obvious if the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ does not admit gauge admissible transformations.

In particular, the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ that is literally normalized is in fact disjointedly semi-normalized with respect to the group $H=G^{\sim}$ and the family $N_{\mathcal{S}}=\big{\{}N_{\theta}=\{{\rm id}\}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\big{\}}$. It is also clear that each disjointedly semi-normalized class is literally semi-normalized.

Disjointedly semi-normalized classes have nicer properties than those presented in Theorem 4 for general semi-normalized classes.

Theorem 8.

If the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is disjointedly semi-normalized with respect to a subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$ and a symmetry-subgroup family $\mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{S}}=\{N_{\theta}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\}$, then

(i) any admissible transformation $\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ possesses a unique decomposition of the form $\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{T}_{1}\star\mathcal{T}_{2}$ with $\mathcal{T}_{1}\in\mathcal{N}_{{\rm s}(\mathcal{T})}$ and $\mathcal{T}_{2}\in\mathcal{G}^{H}\cap\mathcal{G}\big{(}{\rm s}(\mathcal{T}),{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})\big{)}$ as well as one of the form $\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{T}_{2}\star\tilde{\mathcal{T}}_{1}$ with the same $\mathcal{T}_{2}$ and with $\tilde{\mathcal{T}}_{1}\in\mathcal{N}_{{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})}$;

(ii) for each $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$, the point symmetry group $G_{\theta}$ of the system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}\in\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ splits over $N_{\theta}$; more specifically, $N_{\theta}$ is a normal subgroup of $G_{\theta}$, $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}:=G_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}H$ is a subgroup of $G_{\theta}$, and the group $G_{\theta}$ is the semidirect product of $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ acting on $N_{\theta}$, $G_{\theta}=G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}\ltimes N_{\theta}$;

(iii) for each $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$, the Lie algebras $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ and $\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$ that are associated with the groups $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ and $N_{\theta}$ are a subalgebra and an ideal of the maximal Lie invariance algebra $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}$ of the system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}\in\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$, respectively; moreover, the algebra $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}$ is the semidirect sum $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}=\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}\mathbin{\mbox{$\hbox to0.0pt{$\displaystyle\hskip 3.31528pt\rule{0.4pt}{5.16663pt}$\hss}{\in}$}}\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$, and $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}=\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$, where $\mathfrak{h}$ is a subalgebra of the equivalence algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ of $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ that corresponds to the subgroup $H$.

Proof.

(i) Taking into account the proof of Theorem 4, it is only required to show the uniqueness of the first decomposition. The uniqueness of the second decomposition is proved in the same way. We fix an arbitrary admissible transformation $\mathcal{T}$ of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ and consider two decompositions of the first kind for $\mathcal{T}$, $\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{T}_{1}\star\mathcal{T}_{2}=\mathcal{T}_{3}\star\mathcal{T}_{4}$, where $\mathcal{T}_{1},\mathcal{T}_{3}\in\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}$ and $\mathcal{T}_{2},\mathcal{T}_{4}\in\mathcal{G}^{H}$. Then $\mathcal{T}_{3}^{-1}\star\mathcal{T}_{1}=\mathcal{T}_{4}\star\mathcal{T}_{2}^{-1}$. Since $\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}$ and $\mathcal{G}^{H}$ are subgroupoids of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$, the left- and right-hand sides of the last equality belong to $\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}$ and $\mathcal{G}^{H}$, respectively. This means that they both belong to $\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\cap\mathcal{G}^{H}=\mathcal{S}\rightrightarrows\mathcal{S}$. Hence $\mathcal{T}_{1}=\mathcal{T}_{3}$ and $\mathcal{T}_{2}=\mathcal{T}_{4}$.

(ii) In view of the claim on factoring out the groups $G_{\theta}$ from Theorem 4, it suffices to show that $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}\cap N_{\theta}=\{{\rm id}\}$, but this is a direct consequence of the disjointness property ${N_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}H=\{{\rm id}\}}$ since

$$G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}\cap N_{\theta}=(G_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}H)\cap N_{\theta}=G_{\theta}\cap(\pi_{*}H\cap N_{\theta})=G_{\theta}\cap\{{\rm id}\}=\{{\rm id}\}.$$

Thus, $G_{\theta}$ splits over $N_{\theta}$ for each $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$.

(iii) This item is the infinitesimal version of item (ii) and follows immediately from (ii) via replacing the groups with the corresponding algebras of generators of the one-parameter subgroups of these groups. It can also be considered as a consequence of Theorem 6. ∎

We would like to emphasize that augmenting the semi-normalization with the disjointedness in Theorem 8 additionally gives the uniqueness of the decompositions in item (i), replacing the Frobenius product by the semidirect product in item (ii) and replacing the sum of vector spaces by the semidirect sum of algebras in item (iii). We call item (ii) the theorem on splitting point-symmetry groups in disjointedly semi-normalized classes and item (iii) the theorem on splitting of maximal Lie invariance algebras in disjointedly semi-normalized classes. In contrast to Theorem 8(ii), the product of $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ and $N_{\theta}$ in Theorem 4(ii) is in general a product of subgroups with nontrivial intersection as a product of group subsets but not a semidirect product of subgroups since the condition $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}\cap N_{\theta}=\{{\rm id}\}$ necessarily holds for any $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$ only in disjointedly semi-normalized classes.

Remark 9.

There are classes of differential equations that are disjointedly semi-normalized only with respect to proper subgroups of the corresponding equivalence groups. The first example of such a class was constructed in [35, Section 7] in the course of group classification of (1+1)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equations with complex-valued potentials depending on $(t,x)$. Here we reinterpret it in the context of the above claim. More specifically, let $n=1$ in (1). Consider the subclass of the class $\mathcal{F}$ that consists of the equations of the form (1), where the potential $V$ is purely imaginary and (homogeneously) linear with respect to $x$. This subclass can be reparameterized to the class $\mathcal{E}$ of equations of the form

$$\mathcal{E}_{\gamma}\colon\quad i\psi_{t}+\psi_{xx}+i\gamma(t)x\psi=0,$$

where $\gamma$ is an arbitrary smooth real-valued function of $t$, which is the only arbitrary element.

The equivalence groupoid $$\mathcal{G}^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}} \mathcal{E} (\gamma,\Phi,\tilde{\gamma}) \Phi$$ of the class  consists of triples of the form , where is a point transformation in the space of variables with components

$$\tilde{t}=T:=\frac{a_{1}t+a_{0}}{a_{3}t+a_{2}},\quad\tilde{x}=\varepsilon|T_{t}|^{1/2}x+b_{1}T+b_{0},$$ (2a)

$$\tilde{\psi}=\frac{c}{|T_{t}|^{1/4}}\exp\left(\frac{i}{8}\frac{T_{tt}}{|T_{t}|}x^{2}+\frac{i}{2}\varepsilon b_{1}|T_{t}|^{1/2}x-\varepsilon\int\gamma\frac{b_{1}T+b_{0}}{|T_{t}|^{1/2}}\,{\rm d}t+i\frac{b_{1}^{2}}{4}T\right)(\hat{\psi}+\hat{\Theta}),$$ (2b)

the relation between $$\gamma \tilde{\gamma}$$ and  is given by

$$\tilde{\gamma}=\frac{\varepsilon\varepsilon^{\prime}}{|T_{t}|^{3/2}}\gamma,$$ (2c)

$a_{0}$, $a_{1}$, $a_{2}$, $a_{3}$, $b_{0}$ and $b_{1}$ are arbitrary real constants with $a_{1}a_{2}-a_{0}a_{3}=:\varepsilon^{\prime}=\pm 1$, $c$ is a nonzero complex constant, $\Theta=\Theta(t,x)$ is an arbitrary solution of the initial equation $\mathcal{E}_{\gamma}$, and $\varepsilon=\pm 1$. The (usual) equivalence group $G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}}$ of the class $\mathcal{E}$ is constituted by point transformations in the extended space of $(t,x,\psi,\psi^{*},\gamma)$ with components of the form (2), where $b_{0}=b_{1}=0$ and $\Theta=0$. For each $\gamma$, the equation $\mathcal{E}_{\gamma}$ admits the group $G^{\rm unf}_{\gamma}$ of point symmetry transformations of the form (2a)–(2b) with $T=t$ and $\varepsilon=1$. Elements of the kernel symmetry group $G^{\cap}_{\mathcal{E}}$ of the class $\mathcal{E}$ additionally satisfy the constrains $b_{0}=b_{1}=0$ and $\Theta=0$, i.e., it consists of the ‘scalings’ of $\psi$ with nonzero complex numbers, $\mathrm{S}_{c}$: $\tilde{t}=t$, $\tilde{x}=x$, $\tilde{\psi}=c\psi$. The class $\mathcal{E}$ is disjointedly semi-normalized with respect to the family $\mathcal{N}=\{G^{\rm unf}_{\gamma}\}$ and the subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}}$ singled out from $G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}}$ by the constraint $c=1$. Admissible transformations with $T(t)=t$, $c=1$ and $\varepsilon=1$ have no counterparts among equivalence transformations and thus, for a proper interpretation within the framework of uniform semi-normalization, their transformational parts must and can be included in uniform symmetry groups for the corresponding values of $\gamma$. Each transformation $\mathrm{S}_{c}$ with $|c|=1$ is the commutator of such transformational parts with zero $\Theta$ for any value of $\gamma$ and thus necessarily belong to any possible uniform symmetry groups of the class $\mathcal{E}$. Moreover, the above transformational parts involve antiderivatives of $\gamma$ and of $t\gamma$, which are defined up to constant summands, and thus it is also natural to include the transformations $\mathrm{S}_{c}$ with positive real $c$ into possible uniform symmetry groups of the class $\mathcal{E}$. Therefore, the family $\mathcal{N}=\{G^{\rm unf}_{\gamma}\}$ is the only natural choice for a family of uniform symmetry groups of the class $\mathcal{E}$. Since each of the transformations $\mathrm{S}_{c}$ belongs to the kernel symmetry group of the class $\mathcal{E}$, which can be embedded in the equivalence group $G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}}$ via trivial prolongation of its transformations to the arbitrary element $\gamma$ [17, Proposition 3], the intersection of $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}}$ with uniform symmetry groups cannot coincide with $\{\rm id\}$. This means that the class $\mathcal{E}$ is not disjointedly semi-normalized with respect to the entire equivalence group $G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}}$ although it is semi-normalized with respect to $G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}}$ and the family $\mathcal{N}=\{G^{\rm unf}_{\gamma}\}$. For any $\gamma$ we have $G^{\rm unf}_{\gamma}\cap\pi_{*}G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}}=G^{\cap}_{\mathcal{E}}\neq\{{\rm id}\}$.

Remark 10.

It is also clear that each disjointedly semi-normalized class is semi-normalized. At the same time, there are semi-normalized classes that are not disjointedly semi-normalized, as can be seen from the example of the class $\mathcal{H}$ of nonlinear diffusion equations $\mathcal{H}_{f}$ of the form $u_{t}=(f(u)u_{x})_{x}$ with $f_{u}\neq 0$ briefly discussed in a different terminology in [35, Section 3]. Let us properly present this example with extended arguments. The equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{H}$ consists of the transformations

$$\tilde{t}=\alpha_{1}t+\alpha_{0},\quad\tilde{x}=\beta_{1}x+\beta_{0},\quad\tilde{u}=\gamma_{1}u+\gamma_{0},\quad\tilde{f}=\alpha_{1}^{-1}\beta_{1}^{\,2}f,$$

where $\alpha_{0}$, $\alpha_{1}$, $\beta_{0}$, $\beta_{1}$, $\gamma_{0}$ and $\gamma_{1}$ are arbitrary real constants with $\alpha_{1}\beta_{1}\gamma_{1}\neq 0$, see, e.g., [1, Eq. (3.15)]. For our purpose, it is more convenient to introduce $\delta_{1}:=\alpha_{1}^{-1}\beta_{1}^{\,2}$ and reparameterize the group $G^{\sim}$ as

$$\tilde{t}=\delta_{1}^{-1}\beta_{1}^{\,2}t+\alpha_{0},\quad\tilde{x}=\beta_{1}x+\beta_{0},\quad\tilde{u}=\gamma_{1}u+\gamma_{0},\quad\tilde{f}=\delta_{1}f,$$ (3)

where $\alpha_{0}$, $\beta_{0}$, $\beta_{1}$, $\gamma_{0}$, $\gamma_{1}$ and $\alpha_{1}$ are arbitrary real constants with $\beta_{1}\gamma_{1}\delta_{1}\neq 0$. The kernel point symmetry group $G^{\cap}:=\cap_{f_{u}\neq 0}G_{f}$ of the class $\mathcal{H}$, where $G_{f}$ denotes the point symmetry group of the equation $\mathcal{H}_{f}$, is constituted by the point transformations

$$\tilde{t}=\beta_{1}^{2}t+\alpha_{0},\quad\tilde{x}=\beta_{1}x+\beta_{0},\quad\tilde{u}=u,$$

where $\alpha_{0}$, $\beta_{0}$ and $\beta_{1}$ are arbitrary constants with $\beta_{1}\neq 0$. The point symmetry group $G_{f^{0}}$ of the nonlinear diffusion equation $\mathcal{H}_{f^{0}}$ with $f^{0}(u)=u^{-4/3}$ consists of by the point transformations

$$\tilde{t}=\lambda_{1}t+\lambda_{0},\quad\tilde{x}=\frac{\alpha x+\beta}{\gamma x+\delta},\quad\tilde{u}=\lambda_{1}^{3/4}(\gamma x+\delta)^{3}u,$$ (4)

where $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, $\delta$, $\lambda_{1}$ and $\lambda_{0}$ are arbitrary constants with $\alpha\delta-\beta\gamma=\pm 1$ and $\lambda_{1}>0$, and, according to [32, 33], we take the natural domain for each transformation of the form (4) and use the modified composition of such transformations that is based on completing by continuity. The group $G_{f^{0}}$ is isomorphic to ${\rm Aff}^{+}(\mathbb{R})\times{\rm SL}^{\pm}(2,\mathbb{R})$, where ${\rm Aff}^{+}(\mathbb{R})$ is the subgroup of ${\rm Aff}(\mathbb{R})$ constituted by all invertible orientation-preserving affine transformations of the affine space $\mathbb{R}$, ${\rm Aff}^{+}(\mathbb{R})\simeq\mathbb{R}\rtimes{\rm GL}^{+}(\mathbb{R})=\mathbb{R}\rtimes\mathbb{R}_{>0}$.

Suppose that the class $\mathcal{H}$ is disjointedly semi-normalized with respect to a subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$ and a symmetry-subgroup family $\mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{S}}=\{N_{f}\lhd G_{f}\mid f\in\mathcal{S}\}$. The subgroup $N_{f^{0}}$ of $G_{f^{0}}$ should contain a transformation with a nonzero value of the parameter $\gamma$. Since in addition $N_{f^{0}}$ is a normal subgroup of $G_{f^{0}}$, it then contains the subgroup of elements of $G_{f^{0}}$ with $\lambda_{0}=0$, $\lambda_{1}=1$ and $\alpha\delta-\beta\gamma=1$. If $N_{f^{0}}$ contains an element of $G_{f^{0}}$ with $\lambda_{0}\neq 0$, then it contains the subgroup of shifts with respect to $t$, $(\tilde{t},\tilde{x},\tilde{u})=(t+\lambda_{0},x,u)$ with $\lambda_{0}$ running through $\mathbb{R}$. Then the subgroup $K_{f^{0}}$ of $N_{f^{0}}$ singled out be the constraint $\gamma=0$ consists of the transformations $\tilde{t}=\lambda_{1}t+\lambda_{0}$, $\tilde{x}=\alpha^{2}x+\beta$, $\tilde{u}=\lambda_{1}^{3/4}\alpha^{-3}u$, where the parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$ freely run through $\mathbb{R}$, the parameter $\lambda_{0}$ either freely runs through $\mathbb{R}$ or is equal to zero and the parameter $\lambda_{1}$ runs through a subgroup of the multiplicative group $\mathbb{R}^{+}$ of positive real numbers. Denoting $\hat{\lambda}_{1}=\lambda_{1}^{1/2}$ and $\hat{\alpha}=\lambda_{1}^{3/4}\alpha^{-3}$, we reparameterize elements of the subgroup $K_{f^{0}}$ as $\tilde{t}=\hat{\lambda}_{1}^{2}t+\lambda_{0}$, $\tilde{x}=\hat{\lambda}_{1}\hat{\alpha}^{-2/3}x+\beta$, $\tilde{u}=\hat{\alpha}u$, where the parameter tuple $(\hat{\alpha},\beta,\lambda_{0},\hat{\lambda}_{1})$ satisfies the same conditions as the parameter tuple $(\alpha,\beta,\lambda_{0},\lambda_{1})$ does. In particular, the parameter $\hat{\lambda}_{1}$ runs through a subgroup $\hat{P}$ of $\mathbb{R}^{+}$.

In the parameterization (3) of $G^{\sim}$, it is clear that varying the parameters $\gamma_{0}$, $\gamma_{1}$ and $\delta_{1}$ definitely leads to changing general values of the arbitrary element $f$, and varying the other parameters does not affect $f$. This is why the subgroup $H$ necessarily contain a subgroup of $G^{\sim}$ parameterized by $(\gamma_{0},\gamma_{1},\delta_{1})\in\mathbb{R}^{3}$, where the other parameters $\alpha_{0}$, $\beta_{0}$ and $\beta_{1}$ are assumed to be functions of $(\gamma_{0},\gamma_{1},\delta_{1})$, which are respectively equal to 0, 0, 1 at $(0,1,1)$. Since $(f^{0},\Phi^{\nu},f^{0})\in\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ for any $\nu\in\mathbb{R}$, where $\Phi^{\nu}$ denotes the scaling transformation $(\tilde{t},\tilde{x},\tilde{u})=(\nu^{2}t,\nu x,u)$, the elements of $H$ can be represented as

$$\tilde{t}=\delta_{1}^{-1}\check{\lambda}_{1}^{\,2}\check{\beta}_{1}^{\,2}t+\alpha_{0},\quad\tilde{x}=\check{\lambda}_{1}\check{\beta}_{1}x+\beta_{0},\quad\tilde{u}=\gamma_{1}u+\gamma_{0},\quad\tilde{f}=\delta_{1}f,$$

the parameter tuple $(\gamma_{0},\gamma_{1},\delta_{1})$ freely runs through $\mathbb{R}^{3}$, the parameter $\check{\lambda}_{1}$ runs through a subgroup $\check{P}$ of the multiplicative group $\mathbb{R}_{*}$ of real numbers that is a complement to $\hat{P}$, $\mathbb{R}_{*}=\hat{P}\times\check{P}$, $\beta_{0}$, $\check{\beta}_{1}$ and, if $\lambda_{0}$ is free in $K_{f^{0}}$, $\alpha_{0}$ are functions of $(\gamma_{0},\gamma_{1},\delta_{1},\check{\lambda}_{1})$, which are respectively equal to 0, 0, 1 at $(0,1,1,1)$, and $\alpha_{0}$ is a free real parameter if $\lambda_{0}$ takes only the zero values for elements of $K_{f^{0}}$.

Thus, the ratio $\hat{\lambda}_{1}/\check{\lambda}_{1}$ runs through the entire set $\mathbb{R}$ of real numbers if $\hat{\lambda}_{1}$ and $\check{\lambda}_{1}$ run through $\hat{P}$ and $\check{P}$, respectively. Setting $\gamma_{0}=0$, $\gamma_{1}=\hat{\alpha}$, $\delta_{1}>0$, $\hat{\lambda}_{1}=\check{\lambda}_{1}\delta^{-1/2}\check{\beta}_{1}$, $\beta=\beta_{0}(0,\hat{\alpha},\delta_{1},\check{\lambda}_{1})$, $\lambda_{0}=\alpha_{0}(0,\hat{\alpha},\delta_{1},\check{\lambda}_{1})$ if $\lambda_{0}$ is a free real parameter and $\alpha_{0}=\lambda_{0}=0$ otherwise, we obtain nonidentity transformations that are common for $K_{f^{0}}$ and $\pi_{*}H$, i.e., $N_{f^{0}}\cap\pi_{*}H\neq\{{\rm id}\}$.

Theorem 5 implies the following assertions.

Corollary 11.

If the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized and does not possess inessential equivalence transformations [13, Appendix A] and $\bar{H}$ is a subgroup of $G^{\sim}$ that properly contains $H$, then this class is non-disjointedly $(\bar{H},N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized.

Proof.

If the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is non-disjointedly $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized, then the corollary statement is trivial.

Suppose that the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is disjointedly $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$- and $(\bar{H},N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized. Let $\bar{\mathscr{T}}$ be an element of $\bar{H}\setminus H$. For any $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$, consider admissible transformation $\bar{\mathcal{T}}:=(\theta,\pi_{*}\bar{\mathscr{T}},\bar{\mathscr{T}}\theta)$. Since $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}=\mathcal{N}^{\rm f}\star\mathcal{G}^{H}$, we have $\bar{\mathcal{T}}=\mathcal{T}_{0}\star\mathcal{T}$ for some $\mathcal{T}_{0}\in\mathcal{N}_{\theta}$ and some $\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}^{H}$. Thus, $\mathcal{T}_{0}=(\theta,\Phi,\theta)$ for some $\Phi\in N_{\theta}$, $\mathcal{T}=(\theta,\pi_{*}\mathscr{T},\mathscr{T}\theta)$ for some $\mathscr{T}\in H$, $\mathscr{T}\theta=\bar{\mathscr{T}}\theta$ and $\pi_{*}\bar{\mathscr{T}}=\pi_{*}\mathscr{T}\circ\Phi$. Then $\Phi=\pi_{*}(\mathscr{T}^{-1}\circ\bar{\mathscr{T}})\in{N_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}\bar{H}=\{{\rm id}\}}$, i.e., $\Phi={\rm id}$ and $\pi_{*}\bar{\mathscr{T}}=\pi_{*}\mathscr{T}$. In other words, the equivalence transformations $\mathscr{T}$ and $\bar{\mathscr{T}}$ generate the same subset of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ and, therefore, should coincide in view of the absence of inessential equivalence transformation for the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$, which contradicts the fact that $\mathscr{T}\in H$ and $\bar{\mathscr{T}}\in\bar{H}\setminus H$. ∎

A typical property for the intersections of $\pi_{*}H$ with elements $N_{\theta}$ of the symmetry-subgroup family $\mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{S}}$ is given by $N_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}H\supseteq G^{\cap}$. Moreover, any semi-normalized class, even a disjointedly semi-normalized one, can be considered as semi-normalized with respect to a wider subgroup of the corresponding equivalence group and a family of wider uniform point symmetry subgroups that satisfy the above property.

Corollary 12.

If a class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is semi-normalized with respect to a subgroup $H$ of its equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ and a symmetry-subgroup family $N_{\mathcal{S}}=\{N_{\theta}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\}$, then it is also semi-normalized with respect to the subgroup $\bar{H}:=\hat{G}^{\cap}H$ of $G^{\sim}$ and the symmetry-subgroup family $\bar{N}_{\mathcal{S}}:=\{\bar{N}_{\theta}:=G^{\cap}N_{\theta}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\}$, where $\bar{N}_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}\bar{H}\supseteq G^{\cap}$ for any $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$.

Proof.

Denote by $\hat{G}^{\cap}$ the subgroup of $G^{\sim}$ associated with $G^{\cap}$, which is obtained from the group $G^{\cap}$ by the trivial (identity) extension of its elements to the arbitrary elements of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$. Since $\hat{G}^{\cap}$ is the normal subgroup of $G^{\sim}$ [17, Proposition 3], the Frobenius product $\bar{H}:=\hat{G}^{\cap}H$ is a subgroup of $G^{\sim}$, and then Theorem 5 directly implies the required claim. ∎

In the notation of Corollary 12, If $G^{\cap}\neq\{{\rm id}\}$, then the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is non-disjointedly $(\bar{H},\bar{N}_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized.

Recall that a normalized class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is semi-normalized with respect to its entire equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ and the trivial symmetry-subgroup family $\mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{S}}=\big{\{}N_{\theta}=\{{\rm id}\}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\big{\}}$. Hence Corollary 12 implies, in view of Theorem 4(ii), the following assertion, whose infinitesimal counterpart is Corollary 2 in [17].

Corollary 13.

For any system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$ from a normalized class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$, the kernel symmetry group $G^{\cap}$ of the systems in $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is a normal subgroup of the point symmetry group $G_{\theta}$ of $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$.

5 Uniform semi-normalization and
semi-normalization with respect to linear superposition

In addition to the basic property $\mathcal{N}_{{\rm s}(\mathcal{T})}\star\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{T}\star\mathcal{N}_{{\rm t}(\mathcal{T})}$ for any $\mathcal{T}\in\mathcal{G}^{H}$ of Definition 2, the attribute “uniform” for the subgroups $N_{\theta}$ is also justified by the fact that in most of practically relevant examples of semi-normalized classes, all the subgroups $N_{\theta}$ are isomorphic or are at least of similar structure (in particular, of the same dimension). To distinguish such examples, where in addition the subgroups $N_{\theta}$ are known a priori, we call the corresponding class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ uniformly $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized. If in addition the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is disjointedly $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized, then we can call it uniformly disjointedly $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized.

Example 14.

The class $\mathcal{H}$ defined in Remark 10 is semi-normalized but not uniformly semi-normalized. Indeed, the point symmetry group $G_{f^{0}}$ of the nonlinear diffusion equation with $f^{0}(u)=u^{-4/3}$ in particular contains the transformations of form (4), which do not belong to $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{H}}$, and hence for any choice of a family $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ of uniform symmetry subgroups, such a transformation belongs to $N_{f^{0}}$. At the same time, the point symmetry group of any equation from the complement of the $G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{H}}$-orbit of $\mathcal{H}_{f^{0}}$ in $\mathcal{H}$ is contained in $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{H}}$. Therefore, the structure of the corresponding element of $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ definitely differs from that of $N_{f^{0}}$.

A particular but important case of uniform semi-normalized classes, which is also relevant to the linear Schrödinger equations studied in this paper, is given by classes of homogeneous linear systems of differential equations. Below, we follow the presentation in the second part of Section 3 in [35] and modify it according to the framework developed in Sections 3 and 4.

We start with a normalized superclass $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ of (in general) inhomogeneous linear systems of differential equations of the form $\mathcal{L}_{\theta\zeta}$: $L(x,u_{(p)},\theta(x))=\zeta(x)$ with $(\theta,\zeta)\in\mathcal{S}$. Here we consider the arbitrary-element tuple as consisting of two parts and change its notation from $\theta$ to $(\theta,\zeta)$. The subtuple $\theta$ parameterizes coefficients of the homogeneous linear left-hand side $L$ and depends at most on $x$. Each component of the right-hand side $\zeta$ runs through the set of sufficiently smooth functions of $x$. Suppose that the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ also satisfies the following conditions:

1. Each system from this class is locally solvable.

2. Elements of the pushforward $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$ of the equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ by $\pi$ are fibre-preserving point transformations of $(x,u)$ whose components for $u$ are affine in $u$.

The second condition means that elements of $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$ are of the form

$$\tilde{x}_{j}=X^{j}(x),\quad\tilde{u}^{a}=M^{ab}(x)(u^{b}+h^{b}(x))\quad\mbox{with}\quad\det(X^{j}_{x_{j^{\prime}}})\neq 0,\quad\det(M^{ab})\neq 0.$$ (5)

The functions $X^{j}$ and $M^{ab}$ may satisfy additional constraints or even be quite specific but the components of the tuple $h=(h^{1},\dots,h^{m})$ are arbitrary smooth functions of $x$. The transformations

$$\mathscr{T}_{h}\colon\quad\tilde{x}_{j}=x_{j},\quad\tilde{u}^{a}=u^{a}+h^{a}(x),\quad\tilde{\theta}=\theta,\quad\tilde{\zeta}=\zeta-L(x,h_{(p)}(x),\theta(x)),$$

constitute a normal subgroup $N^{\sim}$ of $G^{\sim}$. Furthermore, $G^{\sim}$ splits over $N^{\sim}$ since $G^{\sim}=H\ltimes N^{\sim}$, where $H$ is the subgroup of the group $G^{\sim}$ defined by the constraint $h=0$. The normalization of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ means that its equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ coincides with the action groupoid of $G^{\sim}$.

On the infinitesimal level, the counterpart of the second condition is that the pushforward $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ of the equivalence algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ by $\pi$ consists of the vector fields of the form

$$Q=\xi^{j}(x)\partial_{x_{j}}+\big{(}\eta^{ab}(x)u^{b}+\eta^{a0}(x)\big{)}\partial_{u^{a}},$$

where coefficients $\xi^{j}$ and $\eta^{ab}$ may satisfy additional constraints but the $\eta^{a0}$ are arbitrary smooth functions of $x$. The equivalence algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ is the semidirect sum of the subalgebra $\mathfrak{h}$ and the ideal $\mathfrak{n}$, which are singled out from $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ by the constraints $\eta^{a0}=0$ and $\xi^{j}=\eta^{ab}=0$, respectively.

Any system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta\zeta}$ from the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is mapped to the associated homogeneous system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta 0}$ by the transformation $\mathscr{T}_{h}$ from $N^{\sim}$, where $h$ is a solution of $\mathcal{L}_{\theta\zeta}$. In other words, the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is mapped onto the corresponding class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ of homogeneous systems by a wide family of admissible transformations from the action groupoid of $N^{\sim}$.

We will use a double interpretation of the class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$. On the one hand, it can be embedded in the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ as the subclass singled out by the constraint $\zeta=0$, and then all the transformational structures related to $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ are substructures of their counterparts for $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$. In particular, under this interpretation, the equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}_{0}$ of $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ is the subgroupoid of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ that is singled out by the constraints $\zeta=0$, $\tilde{\zeta}=0$ and $L(x,h_{(p)}(x),\theta(x))=0$ for the source and target arbitrary elements and the parameter function tuple $h$. Up to factoring out the insignificant equivalence transformations related to the constraint $\zeta=0$ [13, Appendix A], we identify the equivalence group $G^{\sim}_{0}$ of the class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ with its subgroup consisting of the elements of $G^{\sim}$ for which the corresponding values of the parameter function tuple $h$ belong to the set $\mathcal{M}^{0}$ of common solutions of the systems from $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$. In other words, $G^{\sim}_{0}=H_{0}\ltimes N^{\sim}_{0}$, where $H_{0}=H$ and the normal subgroup $N^{\sim}_{0}$ of $G^{\sim}_{0}$ is constituted by the transformations $\mathscr{T}_{h}$ with $h\in\mathcal{M}^{0}$. Analogously, $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}_{0}=\mathfrak{h}_{0}\mathbin{\mbox{$\hbox to0.0pt{$\displaystyle\hskip 3.31528pt\rule{0.4pt}{5.16663pt}$\hss}{\in}$}}\mathfrak{n}_{0}$, where $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}_{0}$ is the equivalence algebra of $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$, $\mathfrak{h}_{0}=\mathfrak{h}$ is a subalgebra of $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}_{0}$ and $\mathfrak{n}_{0}$ is the ideal of $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}_{0}$ consisting of the vector fields $\eta^{a0}(x)\partial_{u^{a}}$ with $(\eta^{10},\dots,\eta^{m0})\in\mathcal{M}^{0}$. On the other hand, we can consider $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ as the class of systems of the form $L(x,u_{(p)},\theta(x))=0$, where $\theta$ is the complete tuple of its arbitrary elements that runs through the set $\mathcal{S}^{0}=\varpi_{*}\mathcal{S}$. By $\varpi$ we denote the natural projection from the space with the coordinates $(x,u,\theta,\zeta)$ onto the space with the coordinates $(x,u,\theta)$. Then the corresponding transformational structures are the pushforwards, by $\varpi$, of their counterparts under the former interpretation. An advantage of the latter interpretation is that it avoids the insignificant equivalence transformations in $G^{\sim}_{0}$ related to the constraint $\zeta=0$.

The systems $\mathcal{L}_{\theta\zeta}$ and $\mathcal{L}_{\tilde{\theta}\tilde{\zeta}}$ are $G^{\sim}$-equivalent if and only if their homogeneous counterparts $\mathcal{L}_{\theta 0}$ and $\mathcal{L}_{\tilde{\theta}0}$ are $G^{\sim}_{0}$-equivalent. Here the $G^{\sim}$- and $G^{\sim}_{0}$-equivalences can be replaced by the $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$- and $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}_{0}$-equivalences, respectively. Thus, the group classification of systems from the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ reduces to the group classification of systems from the class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$.

For each $\theta\in\mathcal{S}^{0}$ we denote by $G^{\rm lin}_{\theta 0}$ the subgroup of the point symmetry group $G_{\theta 0}$ of $\mathcal{L}_{\theta 0}$ that consists of the linear superposition transformations $\pi_{*}\mathscr{T}_{h}$: $\tilde{x}_{j}=x_{j}$, $\tilde{u}^{a}=u^{a}+h^{a}(x)$, where the tuple $h$ runs through the solution set of $\mathcal{L}_{\theta 0}$. The subgroup $H_{0}$ of $G^{\sim}_{0}$ and the family $N^{\rm lin}=\{G^{\rm lin}_{\theta 0}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}^{0}\}$ satisfy the conditions in Definition 7. Therefore, the class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ is disjointedly uniformly $(H_{0},N^{\rm lin})$-semi-normalized. We call this kind of semi-normalization, which is characteristic for classes of homogeneous linear systems of differential equations, uniform semi-normalization with respect to the linear superposition of solutions. If the systems from the class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ have no common solutions, which is a regular situation, then $H_{0}=G^{\sim}_{0}$, and we will not indicate $H_{0}$ in this case. By Theorem 8(ii), for each $\theta\in\mathcal{S}^{0}$ the group $G_{\theta 0}$ splits over $G^{\rm lin}_{\theta 0}$, and $G_{\theta 0}=G^{\rm ess}_{\theta 0}\ltimes G^{\rm lin}_{\theta 0}$, where $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta 0}=G_{\theta 0}\cap\pi_{*}H_{0}$. By Theorem 8(iii), the splitting of the point symmetry group induces a splitting of the corresponding maximal Lie invariance algebra, $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta 0}=\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta 0}\mathbin{\mbox{$\hbox to0.0pt{$\displaystyle\hskip 3.31528pt\rule{0.4pt}{5.16663pt}$\hss}{\in}$}}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{\theta 0}$. Here $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta 0}$ is the essential Lie invariance algebra of $\mathcal{L}_{\theta 0}$, $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta 0}=\mathfrak{g}_{\theta 0}\cap\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}_{0}$, and the ideal $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{\theta 0}$, being the trivial part of $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta 0}$, consists of vector fields generating one-parameter symmetry groups of linear superposition of solutions. Thus, the group classification problem for the class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ reduces to the classification of appropriate subalgebras of the equivalence algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}_{0}$ of this class. The qualification “appropriate” means that the pushforward of such a subalgebra by $\pi$ is the essential Lie invariance algebra of a system from $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$. We can classify appropriate subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}_{0}$ instead of $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}_{0}$, see Definition 16 below.

Given a class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ of linear homogeneous systems of differential equations that is uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions, it is not necessary to start by considering the associated normalized superclass $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ of generally inhomogeneous linear systems. The class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ itself can be the starting point of the analysis. In order to get directly its specific semi-normalization, we need to suppose the following properties of $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$:

1. The transformational part of any admissible transformation in the class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ is of the form (5). (Then the parameter function tuple $h$ necessarily runs through the solution set of the source system.)

2. Any admissible transformation in the class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ with zero value of $h$ belongs to the action groupoid of the equivalence group $G^{\sim}_{0}$ of this class.

The normal subgroup $N^{\sim}_{0}$ and the subgroup $H_{0}$ of $G^{\sim}_{0}$ and the family $N^{\rm lin}$ are defined as above, $G^{\sim}_{0}=H_{0}\ltimes N^{\sim}_{0}$ and the class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ is disjointedly uniformly $(H_{0},N^{\rm lin})$-semi-normalized, i.e., it is uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions. The action groupoid of $H_{0}$ can be called the essential equivalence groupoid of the class $\mathcal{L}^{0}|_{\mathcal{S}^{0}}$ [68, Remark 16].

The class $\mathcal{F}$ of linear Schrödinger equations fits well into the developed framework, which we use in the present paper to study the group classification problem for this class in general and completely solve it in dimension 1+2 in Sections 7 and 8, respectively.

Remark 15.

There exist classes of homogeneous linear systems of differential equations that are not uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions but disjointedly uniformly semi-normalized with respect to families of point-symmetry subgroups that are wider than the corresponding point-symmetry subgroups associated with the linear superposition of solutions, see Remark 9.

6 Algebraic method of group classification
for semi-normalized classes

The property of $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalization of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ with known $H_{0}$ and $N_{\mathcal{S}}$ allows one to solve the group classification problem for this class using an algebraic approach.

The subgroups $G^{\rm ess}_{\theta}=G_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}H$ of the groups $G_{\theta}$ and the subalgebras $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}=\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}\cap\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$ of the algebras $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}$, where $\theta$ runs through $\mathcal{S}$, are in general not known after describing the ingredients of the semi-normalization structure of $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$. According to Theorem 6, we have that for each $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$, the maximal Lie invariance algebra $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}$ of the system $\mathcal{L}_{\theta}$ is the sum of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ and $\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$, $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}=\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}+\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$. Note that in general, the essential Lie invariance algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ nontrivially intersects the uniform Lie invariance algebra $\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$, and hence a natural basis of the maximal Lie invariance algebra $\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}$ is constituted by a basis of the intersection $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}\cap\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$ and its complements to bases of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ and of $\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$. (In the infinite-dimensional case, bases are replaced by spanning sets of vector fields.) The essential Lie invariance algebras are subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$ but usually, only some of the subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$ can serve as such algebras.

Definition 16.

We call a subalgebra of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$ (resp. of $\mathfrak{h}$) appropriate if it (resp. its pushforward by $\pi_{*}$) coincides with the essential Lie invariance algebra of a system from the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$.

The pushforwards by transformations from $\pi_{*}H$ (resp. from $H$) preserve the set of appropriate subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$ (resp. of $\mathfrak{h}$) since $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mathscr{T}_{*}\theta}=(\pi_{*}\mathscr{T})_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}$ for any $\mathscr{T}\in H$ and any $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$, which generates an equivalence relation within this set. It is natural to call it the $H$-equivalence of appropriate subalgebras. In view of Theorem 4(iii), the $H$-equivalence can be replaced by the $G^{\sim}$- and even the $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$-equivalence.

Making a preliminary analysis of the determining equations for Lie-symmetry vector fields of systems from $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$, one can find constraints that are satisfied by appropriate subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$ but not by general ones. These constraints often include upper bounds for the dimensions of the appropriate subalgebras or of their specific parts. This crucially reduces the amount of subalgebras to be classified and makes the classification problem tractable even in the case of infinite-dimensional $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$. Instead of classifying the appropriate subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$, one can classify the appropriate subalgebras of $\mathfrak{h}$ and then push them forward by $\pi$.

Consequently, we derive the following assertion.

Proposition 17.

Let the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ be semi-normalized with respect to a subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$ and a symmetry-subgroup family that are known, and let $\mathfrak{h}$ be a subalgebra of $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ that corresponds to $H$. Then the solution of the group classification problem for the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ reduces to the classification, up to the $H$-equivalence, of appropriate subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$ or, equivalently, of the algebra $\mathfrak{h}$ itself.

In view of Theorem 4(iii), Theorem 6 and the above discussion, we suggest the following procedure of solving the group classification problem for a semi-normalized class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ of systems of differential equations. We formulate this procedure in terms of the algebra $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$.

• When computing the equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ and analyzing its structure, construct a subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}$ and a family of uniform point symmetry groups $N_{\mathcal{S}}=\{N_{\theta}\mid\theta\in\mathcal{S}\}$ such that the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ is $(H,N_{\mathcal{S}})$-semi-normalized.

• Find the subalgebra $\mathfrak{h}$ of $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ associated with $H$ and the uniform Lie invariance algebras $\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$ associated with $N_{\theta}$.

• Make a preliminary analysis of the system ${\rm DE}$ of determining equations for Lie-symmetry vector fields of systems from the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$. The system ${\rm DE}$ usually splits into two subsystems, the “essential” and the “uniform” ones, which are satisfied by the components of vector fields from the respective parts of the maximal Lie invariance algebras of systems from the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$.

• Derive constraints satisfied by the appropriate subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$.

• Classify, modulo the $H$-equivalence, the subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$ that satisfy the derived constraints.

• For each subalgebra $\mathfrak{s}$ in the constructed set $\mathcal{A}$ of $H$-inequivalent families of subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$,

  • successively substitute the components of its basis/spanning elements into ${\rm DE}$,

  • merge all the obtained systems into a single system ${\rm DE}_{\mathfrak{s}}$,

  • solve the system ${\rm DE}_{\mathfrak{s}}$ with respect to the arbitrary elements of the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$,

  • for each solution $\theta$ of ${\rm DE}_{\mathfrak{s}}$, check whether $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}=\mathfrak{s}$ (it may happen that $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}\varsupsetneq\mathfrak{s}$).

• The subalgebra $\mathfrak{s}$ is appropriate if and only if the system ${\rm DE}_{\mathfrak{s}}$ is compatible and $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}=\mathfrak{s}$ for a solution $\theta$ of ${\rm DE}_{\mathfrak{s}}$. This allows one to finally select those subalgebras in $\mathcal{A}$ that are indeed appropriate subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$.

• For each subalgebra $\mathfrak{s}$ in the constructed set $\mathcal{B}$ of $H$-inequivalent families of appropriate subalgebras of $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$, analyze the equivalence within the set $\mathcal{S}_{\mathfrak{s}}:=\{\theta\in\mathcal{S}\mid\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}=\mathfrak{s}\}$ that is induced by the stabilizer of $\mathfrak{s}$ in $\pi_{*}H$. If there are $\pi_{*}H$-equivalent subalgebras $\mathfrak{s}$ in $\mathcal{B}$, one can also consider the equivalence between the corresponding sets $\mathcal{S}_{\mathfrak{s}}$. When possible, use these equivalences to reduce the sets $\mathcal{B}$ and $\mathcal{S}_{\mathfrak{s}}$.

• Assemble the set $\{(\theta,\mathfrak{s})\mid\mathfrak{s}\in\mathcal{B},\,\theta\in\mathcal{S}_{\mathfrak{s}}\}$.

The last set constitutes the solution of the group classification problem for the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ in terms of essential Lie invariance algebras modulo both the $G^{\sim}$- and the $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$-equivalences [59, Section 2.2]. We call the above procedure the algebraic method of group classification for semi-normalized classes of differential equations. To present the solution of the group classification problem for the class $\mathcal{L}|_{\mathcal{S}}$ in terms of maximal Lie invariance algebras, one needs to indicate the algebra $\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}$ for each $\theta\in\mathcal{S}$ and modify the set of classification cases to $\{(\theta,\mathfrak{g}_{\theta})\mid\mathfrak{s}\in\mathcal{A},\,\theta\in\mathcal{S},\,\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\theta}=\mathfrak{s},\,\mathfrak{g}_{\theta}=\mathfrak{s}+\mathfrak{n}_{\theta}\}$.

In fact, the above method is effective for the case of uniform semi-normalization, especially disjointed uniform semi-normalization, including uniform semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions. Then all the listed steps of the classification procedure can be properly implemented, and the mere presentation of inequivalent essential Lie-symmetry extensions is definitely sufficient.

It may happen that the same class of systems of differential equations is semi-normalized under different choices of subgroups of its equivalence group and of families of uniform symmetry-subgroups of its systems. The proper selection of these objects helps to solve the group classification problem for such a class in a more efficient way.

Remark 18.

The class $\mathcal{E}$ from Remark 9 is non-disjointedly semi-normalized with respect to the entire group $G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}}$ and the family $\mathcal{N}=\{G^{\rm unf}_{\gamma}\}$. At the same time, the interpretation of the class $\mathcal{E}$ as disjointedly semi-normalized with respect to the family $\mathcal{N}=\{G^{\rm unf}_{\gamma}\}$ and the proper subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}}$ singled out from $G^{\sim}_{\mathcal{E}}$ by the constraint $c=1$, see Remark 9, is more convenient and effective for group classification of this class. Indeed, then one can apply Theorem 8, which is slightly stronger than Theorems 4 and 6, and, following Proposition 17, handle the smaller group $H$. One can also construct the generalized extended equivalence group of the class $\mathcal{E}$ or its efficient part [57, 58], considering the reparameterized class $\bar{\mathcal{E}}$ for $\mathcal{E}$, where additional arbitrary elements $\hat{\gamma}$ and $\check{\gamma}$ defined by the constraints $\hat{\gamma}_{t}=\gamma$ and $\check{\gamma}_{t}=t\gamma$, and prove that the reparameterized class $\bar{\mathcal{E}}$ is uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions in the generalized sense, i.e., the original class $\mathcal{E}$ is uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions in the generalized extended sense. Nevertheless, the group classification of $\mathcal{E}$ based on the last interpretation is essentially less efficient computationally than those based on the above semi-normalizations of $\mathcal{E}$ in the usual sense, not to mention the absence of the corresponding theoretical background and related techniques for the case of semi-normalization in the generalized extended sense.

Remark 19.

There are examples of the opposite pattern. Given a class of systems of differential equations that is disjointedly uniformly semi-normalized with respect to a subgroup of its equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ and a family of uniform symmetry-subgroups of its systems, nevertheless, the group classification problem for this class can be more efficiently solved using its non-disjointed semi-normalization with respect to a narrower subgroup of $G^{\sim}$ and a family of wider uniform symmetry-subgroups rather than involving the former (disjointed) semi-normalization. In particular, this is the case for the class $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ of (1+2)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equations of the form (1) with potentials $V=U(t,x_{2})+i\gamma(t)x_{1}$, where $U$ is a complex-valued smooth function of $(t,x_{2})$ and $\gamma$ is a real-valued smooth function of $t$, see the consideration related to the equation (20) below. The class $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ is (disjointedly) uniformly semi-normalized with respect to its entire equivalence group $G^{\sim}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ and linear superposition of solutions. At the same time, it is more convenient to solve the group classification problem for this class using its non-disjointed semi-normalization with respect to a proper subgroup of $G^{\sim}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ and a family of wider uniform symmetry groups than the symmetry groups of linear superposition of solutions. This is the way of treating the case $(k_{2},r_{0})=(0,1)$ in the proof of Theorem 38 below.

7 Preliminary symmetry analysis of multidimensional
linear Schrödinger equations with complex-valued potentials

To demonstrate the efficiency of the developed theory and the proposed algebraic method of group classification for semi-normalized classes, we study the class $\mathcal{F}$ of (1+$n$)-dimensional ($n\geqslant 1$) linear Schrödinger equations with complex-valued potentials, which are of the form (1). First, in this section we carry out a preliminary analysis of transformational properties and Lie symmetries of equations from this class for an arbitrary number $n$ of space variables $x$. It turns out that it is possible, without fixing a value of $n$, to find the equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$, the equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ and the equivalence algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}$ as well as to preliminarily analyze the determining equations for Lie symmetries of equations from this class and to derive basic properties of such symmetries. In Section 8, we specify these results to the case $n=2$ and use them to carry out the complete group classification of the class $\mathcal{F}$ with $n=2$. Recall that the case $n=1$ was exhaustively studied in [35].

Similarly to other Schrödinger equations but in contrast to most systems of differential equations arising in applications, for equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$, the independent variables $t$, $x_{1}$, …, $x_{n}$ take values in the set of real numbers, whereas values of the dependent variable $\psi$ and of the arbitrary element $V$ are in general complex. To avoid considering complex values, one may replace Schrödinger equations by equivalent systems for two real-valued unknown functions, e.g., the real and the imaginary parts of $\psi$ or the absolute value and the argument of $\psi$. Nevertheless, such a replacement complicates the study more essentially than the involvement of complex numbers does, especially when using the absolute value and the argument of $\psi$, which results in nonlinear systems instead of linear ones. This is why we work with the form (1) of equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$. In view of the complex nature of $\psi$ and $V$, it is necessary to formally extend the space of variables $(t,x,\psi)$ with $\psi^{*}$ and the tuple of the single arbitrary element $V$ with $V^{*}$. Here and in what follows star denotes the complex conjugation. In particular, we introduce $\psi^{*}$ (resp. $V^{*}$) as an additional argument for all functions depending on $\psi$ (resp. $V$), which includes, e.g., the components of point transformations and of vector fields in the spaces with coordinates $(t,x,\psi)$ or $(t,x,\psi,V)$. We thus follow Wirtinger’s approach. Confining a differential function of $\psi$, i.e., of $(\psi,\psi^{*})$ in the above interpretation, to the solution set of an equation from the class $\mathcal{F}$, we should also take into account its complex conjugate $-i\psi^{*}_{t}+\psi^{*}_{aa}+V^{*}(t,x)\psi^{*}=0$, thus considering the system of two equations instead of the single one, cf. [35, Section 1]. At the same time, there two essential simplifications due to using Wirtinger’s approach. In view of the fact that the invariance (resp. equivalence) conditions hold or do not hold simultaneously for equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$ and their complex conjugate counterparts, it suffices to check such conditions only for the former equations. Moreover, presenting point transformations in the spaces with coordinates $(t,x,\psi)$ or $(t,x,\psi,V)$, we can omit the transformation components for $\psi^{*}$ and $V^{*}$ since they are just the complex conjugates of those for $\psi$ and $V$, respectively.

Notation.

In this and the next sections, $t$ and $x=(x_{1},\dots,x_{n})$ are the real independent variables, $\psi$ is the unknown complex-valued function of $t$ and $x$. For a complex value $\beta$, its conjugate is denoted by $\beta^{*}$ , and we define

$$\hat{\beta}=\beta\quad\mbox{if}\quad T_{t}>0\quad\mbox{and}\quad\hat{\beta}=\beta^{*}\quad\mbox{if}\quad T_{t}<0,$$

where $T$ is the $t$-component of point transformations in the space with $t$ as a coordinate. The indices $a$ and $b$ run from $1$ to $n$, $\nabla\psi=(\psi_{1},\dots,\psi_{n})$, $\nabla\psi^{*}=(\psi^{*}_{1},\dots,\psi^{*}_{n})$, $\partial_{a}:=\partial/\partial x_{a}$ and $|x|^{2}:=x_{a}x_{a}$. $E$ is the $n\times n$ identity matrix. The total derivative operators $\mathrm{D}_{t}$ and $\mathrm{D}_{a}$ are defined as

$$\mathrm{D}_{t}=\partial_{t}+\psi_{t}\partial_{\psi}+\psi^{*}_{t}\partial_{\psi^{*}}+\psi_{tt}\partial_{\psi_{t}}+\psi_{tb}\partial_{\psi_{b}}+\psi^{*}_{tt}\partial_{\psi^{*}_{t}}+\psi^{*}_{tb}\partial_{\psi^{*}_{b}}+\cdots,$$

$$\mathrm{D}_{a}=\partial_{a}+\psi_{a}\partial_{\psi}+\psi^{*}_{a}\partial_{\psi^{*}}+\psi_{ta}\partial_{\psi_{t}}+\psi_{ab}\partial_{\psi_{b}}+\psi^{*}_{ta}\partial_{\psi^{*}_{t}}+\psi^{*}_{ab}\partial_{\psi^{*}_{b}}+\cdots.$$

7.1 Equivalence groupoid

We find the equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}$ using the direct method, see, e.g., [57, Section 2] and [68, Section 2] for a general description of this method and [7, 30, 31] for computational techniques involved. Let $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ denote the equation from $\mathcal{F}$ with potential $V$. We seek for all point transformations of the form

$$\Phi\colon\ \tilde{t}=T(t,x,\psi,\psi^{*}),\ \tilde{x}_{a}=X^{a}(t,x,\psi,\psi^{*}),\ \tilde{\psi}=\Psi(t,x,\psi,\psi^{*}),\ \tilde{\psi}^{*}=\Psi^{*}(t,x,\psi,\psi^{*}),$$ (6)

where $\det\partial(T,X,\Psi,\Psi^{*})/\partial(t,x,\psi,\psi^{*})\neq 0$ with $X=(X^{1},\dots,X^{n})$, that map a fixed equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ from the class $\mathcal{F}$ to an equation $\mathcal{L}_{\tilde{V}}$: $i\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{t}}+\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{x}_{a}\tilde{x}_{a}}+\tilde{V}(\tilde{t},\tilde{x})\tilde{\psi}=0$ from the same class.

The following assertion is proved similarly to [67, Lemma 1].

Lemma 20.

Any point transformation $\Phi$ connecting two equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$ satisfies the conditions

$$\begin{split}&T_{a}=T_{\psi}=T_{\psi^{*}}=0,\quad X^{a}_{\psi}=X^{a}_{\psi^{*}}=0,\\ &\Psi_{\psi}=0\quad\text{if}\quad T_{t}<0\quad\text{and}\quad\Psi_{\psi^{*}}=0\quad\text{if}\quad T_{t}>0.\end{split}$$

Theorem 21.

The equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}$ consists of the triples of the form $(V,\Phi,\tilde{V})$, where $\Phi$ is a point transformation in the space of variables, whose components are

$$\tilde{t}=T,\quad\tilde{x}_{a}=|T_{t}|^{1/2}O^{ab}x_{b}+\mathcal{X}^{a},$$ (7a)

$$\tilde{\psi}=\exp\left(\frac{i}{8}\frac{T_{tt}}{|T_{t}|}\,|x|^{2}+\frac{i}{2}\frac{\varepsilon^{\prime}\mathcal{X}^{b}_{t}}{|T_{t}|^{1/2}}\,O^{ba}x_{a}+i\Sigma+\Upsilon\right)(\hat{\psi}+\hat{\Lambda}),$$ (7b)

and the target potential $$\tilde{V}=\tilde{V}(\tilde{t},\tilde{x}) V=V(t,x)$$ is expressed via the source potential  as

$$\tilde{V}=\frac{\hat{V}}{|T_{t}|}+\frac{2T_{ttt}T_{t}-3T_{tt}{}^{2}}{16\varepsilon^{\prime}T_{t}{}^{3}}|x|^{2}+\frac{\varepsilon^{\prime}}{2|T_{t}|^{1/2}}\left(\frac{\mathcal{X}^{b}_{t}}{T_{t}}\right)_{\!t}O^{ba}x_{a}+\frac{\Sigma_{t}-i\Upsilon_{t}}{T_{t}}-\frac{\mathcal{X}^{a}_{t}\mathcal{X}^{a}_{t}+inT_{tt}}{4T_{t}{}^{2}}.$$ (7c)

Here $T$, $\mathcal{X}^{a}$, $\Sigma$ and $\Upsilon$ are arbitrary smooth real-valued functions of $t$ with $T_{t}\neq 0$, $\varepsilon^{\prime}=\mathop{\rm sgn}\nolimits T_{t}$, $O=(O^{ab})$ is an arbitrary constant $n\times n$ orthogonal matrix, and $\Lambda=\Lambda(t,x)$ is an arbitrary solution of the initial equation.

Proof.

Let a point transformation $\Phi$ connect equations $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ and $\mathcal{L}_{\tilde{V}}$ from the class $\mathcal{F}$. Lemma 20 implies that $T=T(t)$, $X^{a}=X^{a}(t,x)$ and $\Psi=\Psi(t,x,\hat{\psi})$ with $T_{t}\det(\partial X/\partial x)\Psi_{\hat{\psi}}\neq 0$. Acting the total derivative operators $\mathrm{D}_{t}$ and $\mathrm{D}_{a}$ on the equality $\tilde{\psi}(\tilde{t},\tilde{x})=\Psi(t,x,\hat{\psi})$, we derive

$$\mathrm{D}_{t}\tilde{\psi}(\tilde{t},\tilde{x})=\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{t}}T_{t}+\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{x}_{b}}X^{b}_{t}=\mathrm{D}_{t}\Psi,\quad\mathrm{D}_{a}\tilde{\psi}(\tilde{t},\tilde{x})=\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{x}_{c}}X^{c}_{a}=\mathrm{D}_{a}\Psi,$$

$$\mathrm{D}_{b}\mathrm{D}_{a}\tilde{\psi}(\tilde{t},\tilde{x})=\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{x}_{c}\tilde{x}_{d}}X^{c}_{b}X^{d}_{a}+\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{x}_{d}}X^{d}_{ab}=\mathrm{D}_{b}\mathrm{D}_{a}\Psi.$$

The above equations are equivalent to

$$\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{t}}=\frac{\mathrm{D}_{t}\Psi-Y^{a}_{b}X^{b}_{t}\mathrm{D}_{a}\Psi}{T_{t}},\quad\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{x}_{c}}=Y^{a}_{c}\mathrm{D}_{a}\Psi,\quad\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{x}_{c}\tilde{x}_{d}}=Y^{a}_{c}Y^{b}_{d}(\mathrm{D}_{b}\mathrm{D}_{a}\Psi-Y^{d}_{c}X^{c}_{ab}\mathrm{D}_{d}\Psi),$$ (8)

where $X^{a}_{c}Y^{c}_{b}=Y^{a}_{c}X^{c}_{b}=\delta_{ab}$, and $\delta_{ab}$ is the Kronecker delta. In fact, the vector-function $Y=(Y^{1},\dots,Y^{n})$ is the inverse of the vector-function $X=(X^{1},\dots,X^{n})$ with respect to $x$, and $Y^{a}_{c}=\partial Y^{a}/\partial\tilde{x}_{c}$. We substitute the expressions (6) and (8) for $\tilde{\psi}$, $\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{t}}$ and $\tilde{\psi}_{\tilde{x}_{c}\tilde{x}_{d}}$ and then the expression for $\hat{\psi}_{t}$, $\hat{\psi}_{t}=i\varepsilon^{\prime}(\hat{\psi}_{aa}+\hat{V}\hat{\psi})$, into the equation $\mathcal{L}_{\tilde{V}}$. As a result, we derive the equation

$$\frac{i}{T_{t}}\left(\Psi_{t}+\Psi_{\hat{\psi}}(i\varepsilon^{\prime}\hat{\psi}_{aa}+i\varepsilon^{\prime}\hat{V}\hat{\psi})-Y^{a}_{b}(\Psi_{a}+\Psi_{\hat{\psi}}\hat{\psi}_{a})X^{b}_{t}\right)+Y^{a}_{c}Y^{b}_{c}\left(\Psi_{ab}+2\Psi_{a\hat{\psi}}\hat{\psi}_{b}\right)$$

$$\qquad{}+Y^{a}_{c}Y^{b}_{c}\left(\Psi_{\hat{\psi}\hat{\psi}}\hat{\psi}_{b}\hat{\psi}_{a}+\Psi_{\hat{\psi}}\hat{\psi}_{ab}-Y^{d}_{c}(\Psi_{d}+\Psi_{\hat{\psi}}\hat{\psi}_{d})X^{c}_{ab}\right)+\tilde{V}\Psi=0.$$

Then splitting this equation with respect to various derivatives of $\hat{\psi}$ and additionally arranging lead to the system

$$Y^{a}_{c}Y^{b}_{c}=\frac{\delta_{ab}}{|T_{t}|},\quad\Psi_{\hat{\psi}\hat{\psi}}=0,$$ (9)

$$\frac{2}{|T_{t}|}\Psi_{a\hat{\psi}}-\frac{i}{T_{t}}Y^{a}_{b}\Psi_{\hat{\psi}}X^{b}_{t}-\frac{1}{|T_{t}|}Y^{a}_{c}\Psi_{\hat{\psi}}X^{c}_{aa}=0,$$ (10)

$$\frac{i}{T_{t}}\Psi_{t}-\frac{1}{|T_{t}|}\hat{V}\Psi_{\hat{\psi}}\hat{\psi}-\frac{i}{T_{t}}Y^{a}_{b}\Psi_{a}X^{b}_{t}+\frac{1}{|T_{t}|}\Psi_{aa}-\frac{1}{|T_{t}|}Y^{d}_{c}\Psi_{d}X^{c}_{aa}+\tilde{V}\Psi=0.$$ (11)

The first equation in (9) together with the condition $Y^{a}_{c}X^{c}_{b}=\delta_{ab}$ imply that $X^{b}_{a}=|T_{t}|Y^{a}_{b}$. Therefore, $X^{c}_{a}X^{c}_{b}=|T_{t}|\delta_{ab}$, i.e., $X_{a}\cdot X_{b}=|T_{t}|\delta_{ab}$ in terms of the tuple $X$. We differentiate this equation for each $(a,b)$ with respect to $x_{c}$ and permute the indices $a$, $b$ and $c$, which gives the equations

$$X_{ac}\cdot X_{b}+X_{a}\cdot X_{bc}=0,\quad X_{ab}\cdot X_{c}+X_{b}\cdot X_{ac}=0,\quad X_{bc}\cdot X_{a}+X_{c}\cdot X_{ab}=0$$

implying $X_{a}\cdot X_{bc}=0$ for all values of $(a,b,c)$. Since for each $(t,x)$ the tuples $X_{1}$, …, $X_{n}$ constitute an (orthogonal) basis of $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, this means that $X_{bc}=0$, i.e., the vector-function $X$ is affine in $x$ with coefficients depending on $t$. The equations $X_{a}\cdot X_{b}=|T_{t}|\delta_{ab}$ constrain the matrix $(X^{a}_{b})$, and thus we have $X^{a}=|T_{t}|^{1/2}O^{ab}(t)x_{b}+\mathcal{X}^{a}(t),$ where $O=(O^{ab})$ is a time-dependent orthogonal matrix and $\mathcal{X}^{a}$ is a time-dependent vector.

The general solution of the second equation in (9) is $\Psi=\Psi^{1}(t,x)\hat{\psi}+\Psi^{0}(t,x)$, where $\Psi^{0}$ and $\Psi^{1}$ are smooth complex-valued functions of $t$ and $x$ with $\Psi^{1}\neq 0$.

We substitute the above expression of $X^{a}$ and $\Psi$ into (10) to get

$$\frac{\Psi^{1}_{a}}{\Psi^{1}}=\frac{i}{2T_{t}}X^{b}_{a}X^{b}_{t}.$$ (12)

Cross-differentiating copies of the equation (12) with different values of $a$ and subtracting the results of differentiation from each other give $\partial_{c}(X^{b}_{a}X^{b}_{t})=\partial_{a}(X^{b}_{c}X^{b}_{t})$. Hence $O^{ba}O^{bc}_{t}=O^{bc}O^{ba}_{t}$, or $O^{\mathsf{T}}O_{t}-O^{\mathsf{T}}_{t}O=0$ in the matrix terms, where $O^{\mathsf{T}}$ is the transpose of $O$. At the same time, differentiating the orthogonality condition $O^{\mathsf{T}}O=E$, where $E$ is the $n\times n$ identity matrix, with respect to $t$ results in $O^{\mathsf{T}}O_{t}+O^{\mathsf{T}}_{t}O=0$. Therefore, $O^{\mathsf{T}}O_{t}=0$, from which we have $O_{t}=0$, and thus $O$ is a constant orthogonal matrix.

The system consisting of the equations (12) when $a$ varying integrates to the following expression for $\Psi^{1}$:

$$\Psi^{1}=\exp\left(\frac{i}{8}\frac{T_{tt}}{|T_{t}|}\,|x|^{2}+\frac{i}{2}\frac{\varepsilon^{\prime}\mathcal{X}^{b}_{t}}{|T_{t}|^{1/2}}\,O^{ba}x_{a}+i\Sigma+\Upsilon\right),$$ (13)

where $\Sigma$ and $\Upsilon$ are arbitrary smooth real-valued functions of $t$. Finally, we consider the equation (11), which reduces, under the derived conditions, to the equation

$$\frac{i}{T_{t}}\Psi_{t}-\frac{1}{|T_{t}|}\hat{V}\Psi_{\hat{\psi}}\hat{\psi}-\frac{i}{T_{t}}Y^{a}_{b}X^{b}_{t}\Psi_{a}+\frac{1}{|T_{t}|}\Psi_{aa}+\tilde{V}\Psi=0.$$

Splitting this equation with respect to $\hat{\psi}$ in view of the representation for $\Psi$ and rearranging, we obtain

$$\tilde{V}=\frac{\hat{V}}{|T_{t}|}-\frac{i}{T_{t}\Psi^{1}}\left(\Psi^{1}_{t}-\frac{X^{b}_{a}X^{b}_{t}}{|T_{t}|}\Psi^{1}_{a}\right)-\frac{1}{|T_{t}|}\frac{\Psi_{aa}^{1}}{\Psi^{1}},$$ (14)

$$i\varepsilon^{\prime}\Psi^{0}_{t}-\frac{i}{T_{t}}X^{b}_{a}X^{b}_{t}\Psi^{0}_{a}+\Psi^{0}_{aa}+|T_{t}|\tilde{V}\Psi^{0}=0.$$ (15)

We introduce the function $\Lambda=\hat{\Psi}^{0}/\hat{\Psi}^{1}$, i.e., $\Psi^{0}=\Psi^{1}\hat{\Lambda}$. The equation (15) is equivalent to the initial linear Schrödinger equation in terms of $\Lambda$. After substituting the expression (13) for $\Psi^{1}$ into (14) then additionally collecting coefficients of $x$, we derive the final expression for $\tilde{V}$. ∎

Corollary 22.

A (1+n)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equation of the form (1) is reduced to the free linear Schrödinger equation by a point transformation if and only if

$$V=\varrho(t)|x|^{2}+\varrho^{a}(t)x_{a}+\varrho^{0}(t)+i\tilde{\varrho}^{0}(t)$$

for some real-valued smooth functions $\varrho$, $\varrho^{a}$, $\varrho^{0}$ and $\tilde{\varrho}^{0}$ of $t$.

7.2 Equivalence group and equivalence algebra

The concept of equivalence group, which was suggested in [61] and properly formalized in [67, Section 2.3], see also [68] and references therein, plays a central role in the theory of group classification of differential equations. The equivalence algebra and the equivalence group of a class of differential equations can be independently computed using the infinitesimal method and the direct or the algebraic method, respectively. Nevertheless, it is much easier to find them from the equivalence groupoid of the class once this groupoid is known. The following assertions follow from Theorem 21 in a similar way as that we used in [35] to obtain consequences of [35, Theorem 6].

Corollary 23.

The (usual) equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}$ consists of the point transformations in the space with the coordinates $(t,x,\psi,\psi^{*},V,V^{*})$ whose components are of the form (7) with $\Lambda=0$.

Remark 24.

The identity component of $G^{\sim}$ consists of the transformations of the form (7), where $\Lambda=0$, $\det O=1$ and $T_{t}>0$, i.e., $\varepsilon^{\prime}=1$. The whole equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ is generated by the transformations from its identity component and two discrete transformations, the space reflection $\tilde{t}=t,$ $\tilde{x}_{a}=-x_{a},$ $\tilde{x}_{b}=x_{b},$ $b\neq a$, $\tilde{\psi}=\psi,$ $\tilde{V}=V$ for a fixed $a$ and the Wigner time reflection $\tilde{t}=-t,$ $\tilde{x}=x,$ $\tilde{\psi}=\psi^{*}$, $\tilde{V}=V^{*}$.

Theorem 25.

The equivalence algebra of the class $\mathcal{F}$ is the algebra

$$\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}=\big{\langle}\hat{D}(\tau),\,\hat{J}_{ab},\,a<b,\,\hat{P}(\chi),\,\hat{M}(\sigma),\,\hat{I}(\rho)\big{\rangle},$$

where $\tau$, $\chi=(\chi^{1},\dots,\chi^{n})$, $\sigma$ and $\rho$ run through the set of smooth real-valued functions of $t$. The vector fields spanning $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ are defined by

$$\hat{D}(\tau)=\tau\partial_{t}+\frac{1}{2}\tau_{t}x_{a}\partial_{a}+\frac{1}{8}\tau_{tt}|x|^{2}\left(i\psi\partial_{\psi}-i\psi^{*}\partial_{\psi^{*}}\right)$$

$$\phantom{\hat{D}(\tau)=}{}-\left(\tau_{t}V-\frac{1}{8}\tau_{ttt}|x|^{2}+i\frac{\tau_{tt}}{4}\right)\partial_{V}-\left(\tau_{t}V^{*}-\frac{1}{8}\tau_{ttt}|x|^{2}-i\frac{\tau_{tt}}{4}\right)\partial_{V^{*}},$$

$$\hat{J}_{ab}=x_{a}\partial_{b}-x_{b}\partial_{a},\quad a\neq b,$$

$$\hat{P}(\chi)=\chi^{a}\partial_{a}+\frac{i}{2}\chi^{a}_{t}x_{a}\left(\psi\partial_{\psi}-\psi^{*}\partial_{\psi^{*}}\right)+\frac{1}{2}\chi^{a}_{tt}x_{a}\left(\partial_{V}+\partial_{V^{*}}\right),$$

$$\hat{M}(\sigma)=i\sigma(\psi\partial_{\psi}-\psi^{*}\partial_{\psi^{*}})+\sigma_{t}(\partial_{V}+\partial_{V}^{*}),$$

$$\hat{I}(\rho)=\rho(\psi\partial_{\psi}+\psi^{*}\partial_{\psi^{*}})-i\rho_{t}(\partial_{V}+\partial_{V}^{*}).$$

Proof.

The equivalence algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}$ is obtained using the knowledge of the identity component of the equivalence group $G^{\sim}$. Searching for infinitesimal generators of one-parameter subgroups of $G^{\sim}$, we represent the parameter function $\Sigma$ in the form $\Sigma=\frac{1}{4}\mathcal{X}^{a}\mathcal{X}^{a}_{t}+\bar{\Sigma}$, where $\bar{\Sigma}$ is a function of $t$, for better consistency of the group parameterization with the one-parameter subgroup structure of $G^{\sim}$. Then we successively assume one of the transformation parameters $T$, $O$, $\mathcal{X}^{a}$, $\bar{\Sigma}$ and $\Upsilon$ to depend on a continuous parameter $\delta$ and set the other transformation parameters to the trivial values corresponding to the identity transformation, which are $t$ for $T$, $E$ for $O$ and zeroes for $\mathcal{X}^{a}$, $\bar{\Sigma}$ and $\Upsilon$, where $E$ is the $n\times n$ identity matrix. The components of the associated infinitesimal generator $Q=\tau\partial_{t}+\xi^{a}\partial_{a}+\eta\partial_{\psi}+\eta^{*}\partial_{\psi^{*}}+\theta\partial_{V}+\theta^{*}\partial_{V^{*}}$ are given by

$$\tau=\frac{\mathrm{d}\tilde{t}}{\mathrm{d}\delta}\Big{|}_{\delta=0},\quad\xi^{a}=\frac{\mathrm{d}\tilde{x}}{\mathrm{d}\delta}\Big{|}_{\delta=0},\quad\eta=\frac{\mathrm{d}\tilde{\psi}}{\mathrm{d}\delta}\Big{|}_{\delta=0},\quad\theta=\frac{\mathrm{d}\tilde{V}}{\mathrm{d}\delta}\Big{|}_{\delta=0}.$$

The above procedure results in the set of vector fields spanning the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$. ∎

Corollary 26.

The class $\mathcal{F}$ is uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions.

The uniform semi-normalization of the class $\mathcal{F}$ guarantees a specific factorization of point symmetry groups of all equations from this class. For any potential $V$, each element $\Phi$ of the point symmetry group $G_{V}$ of an equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ generates an admissible point transformation $(V,\Phi,V)$ of $\mathcal{F}$. Therefore, the transformation $\Phi$ necessarily has the form (7a)–(7b), where the transformation parameters additionally satisfy the equation (7c) with $\tilde{V}(\tilde{t},\tilde{x})=V(\tilde{t},\tilde{x})$. The symmetry transformations associated with the linear superposition of solutions to the equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ which are of the above form with $T=t$, $O=E$ and $\mathcal{X}^{a}=\Sigma=\Upsilon=0$, constitute a normal subgroup of the group $G_{V}$, which is denoted by $G^{\rm lin}_{V}$ and is the trivial part of $G_{V}$. In view of the discussion on the uniform semi-normalization with respect to the linear superposition of solutions in [35, Section 3], Corollary 26 implies that the group $G_{V}$ splits over $G^{\rm lin}_{V}$, $G_{V}=G^{\rm ess}_{V}\ltimes G^{\rm lin}_{V}$, the subgroup $G^{\rm ess}_{V}$ of $G_{V}$ is singled out from $G_{V}$ by the constraint $\Lambda=0$ and will be considered as the only essential part of $G_{V}$.

7.3 Analysis of determining equations for Lie symmetries

Using the infinitesimal criterion for Lie symmetries [10, 56, 61], for each potential $V$ we can derive the determining equations which are satisfied by the components of vector fields from the maximal Lie invariance algebra $\mathfrak{g}_{V}$ of the equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ from the class $\mathcal{F}$. In this section, we partially integrate the determining equations and preliminary analyze properties of the collection of $\mathfrak{g}_{V}$ when $V$ varies for $\mathcal{L}_{V}\in\mathcal{F}$.

The infinitesimal criterion states that a vector field $Q=\tau\partial_{t}+\xi^{a}\partial_{a}+\eta\partial_{\psi}+\eta^{*}\partial_{\psi^{*}}$, where the components $\tau$, $\xi^{a}$ and $\eta$ are smooth functions of $(t,x,\psi,\psi^{*})$, and $\eta^{*}$ is the complex conjugate of $\eta$, belongs to the algebra $\mathfrak{g}_{V}$ if an only if

$$Q_{(2)}\big{(}i\psi_{t}+\psi_{aa}+V(t,x)\psi\big{)}\big{|}_{\mathcal{L}_{V}}=0$$

with $Q_{(2)}$ being the second prolongation of the vector field $Q$, see Section 2. Expanding this expression, we obtain

$$i\eta^{t}+\eta^{aa}+(\tau V_{t}+\xi^{a}V_{a})\psi+V\eta=0,$$ (16)

where $\eta^{t}=\mathrm{D}_{t}\left(\eta-\tau\psi_{t}-\xi^{a}\psi_{a}\right)+\tau\psi_{tt}+\xi^{a}\psi_{ta}$ and $\eta^{ab}=\mathrm{D}_{a}\mathrm{D}_{b}\left(\eta-\tau\psi_{t}-\xi^{c}\psi_{c}\right)+\tau\psi_{tab}+\xi^{c}\psi_{abc}$. We recall that $\mathrm{D}_{t}$ and $\mathrm{D}_{a}$ are the operators of total derivatives with respect to $t$ and $x_{a}$, respectively. The substitution of $\psi_{t}=i\psi_{aa}+iV\psi$ and $\psi_{t}^{*}=-i\psi_{aa}^{*}-iV^{*}\psi^{*}$ into (16) and splitting with respect to the various derivatives of $\psi$ and $\psi^{*}$ lead to a linear overdetermined system of determining equations for the coefficients of $Q$,

$$\tau_{\psi}=\tau_{\psi^{*}}=\tau_{a}=0,\quad\xi^{a}_{\psi}=\xi^{a}_{\psi^{*}}=0,\quad\tau_{t}=2\xi^{1}_{1}=\dots=2\xi^{n}_{n},\quad\xi^{a}_{b}+\xi^{b}_{a}=0,\ a\neq b,$$ (17a)

$$\eta_{\psi^{*}}=\eta_{\psi\psi}=0,\quad 2\eta_{\psi a}=i\xi^{a}_{t},$$ (17b)

$$i\eta_{t}+\eta_{aa}+\tau V_{t}\psi+\xi^{a}V_{a}\psi+V\eta-(\eta_{\psi}-\tau_{t})V\psi=0.$$ (17c)

The subsystem consisting of the equations (17a) and (17b), which do not contain the potential $V$, is integrated immediately. Its general solution is

$$\tau=\tau(t),\quad\xi^{a}=\frac{1}{2}\tau_{t}x_{a}+\kappa_{ab}x_{b}+\chi^{a},\quad\eta=\left(\frac{i}{8}\tau_{tt}|x|^{2}+\frac{i}{2}\chi^{a}_{t}x_{a}+\rho+i\sigma\right)\psi+\eta^{0}(t,x),$$

where $\tau$, $\chi^{a}$, $\rho$ and $\sigma$ are smooth real-valued functions of $t$, $\eta^{0}$ is a complex-valued function of $t$ and $x$, and $(\kappa_{ab})$ is a constant skew-symmetric matrix. Then additionally splitting the last determining equation with respect to $\psi$, we derive two equations,

$$i\eta^{0}_{t}+\eta^{0}_{aa}+V\eta^{0}=0,$$ (18)

$$\tau V_{t}+\left(\frac{1}{2}\tau_{t}x_{a}+\kappa_{ab}x_{b}+\chi^{a}\right)V_{a}+\tau_{t}V=\frac{1}{8}\tau_{ttt}|x|^{2}+\frac{1}{2}\chi^{a}_{tt}x_{a}+\sigma_{t}-i\rho_{t}-i\frac{n}{4}\tau_{tt}.$$ (19)

Both the equations involve the potential $V$. At the same time, the first equation means that the parameter function $\eta^{0}$ is an arbitrary solution of the equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$. This is why the second equation is only the truly classifying condition for Lie symmetry generators of equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$ depending on the potential $V$.

Theorem 27.

The maximal Lie invariance algebra $\mathfrak{g}_{V}$ of an equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ from $\mathcal{F}$ is constituted by the vector fields of the form $D(\tau)+\sum_{a<b}\kappa_{ab}J_{ab}+P(\chi)+\sigma M+\rho I+Z(\eta^{0})$, where

$$D(\tau)=\tau\partial_{t}+\frac{1}{2}\tau_{t}x_{a}\partial_{a}+\frac{1}{8}\tau_{tt}|x|^{2}M,\quad J_{ab}=x_{a}\partial_{b}-x_{b}\partial_{a},\quad a\neq b,$$

$$P(\chi)=\chi^{a}\partial_{a}+\frac{1}{2}\chi^{a}_{t}x_{a}M,\quad M=i\psi\partial_{\psi}-i\psi^{*}\partial_{\psi^{*}},\quad I=\psi\partial_{\psi}+\psi^{*}\partial_{\psi^{*}},$$

$$Z(\eta^{0})=\eta^{0}\partial_{\psi}+\eta^{0}{{}^{*}}\partial_{\psi^{*}},$$

the parameters $\tau$, $\chi=(\chi^{1},\dots,\chi^{n})$, $\rho$ and $\sigma$ are arbitrary real-valued smooth functions of $t$ and the matrix $(\kappa_{ab})$ is an arbitrary constant skew-symmetric matrix that jointly satisfy the classifying condition (19), and the parameter $\eta^{0}=\eta^{0}(t,x)$ runs through the solution set of the equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$.

The kernel invariance algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}$, $\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}:=\bigcap_{V}\mathfrak{g}_{V}$, is obtained by splitting the conditions (18) and (19) with respect to the potential $V$ and its derivatives. This results in $\tau=\chi^{a}=0$, $\kappa_{ab}=0$, $\eta^{0}=0$ and $\sigma_{t}=\rho_{t}=0$.

Proposition 28.

The kernel Lie invariance algebra of the class $\mathcal{F}$ is $\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}=\langle M,I\rangle$.

Following [35], denote by $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ the linear span of all vector fields given in Theorem 27 when the potential $V$ varies, i.e.,

$$\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}:=\left\{D(\tau)+\sum_{a<b}\kappa_{ab}J_{ab}+P(\chi)+\sigma M+\rho I+Z(\zeta)\right\}=\sum_{V}\mathfrak{g}_{V}.$$

Here and in what follows the parameters $\tau$, $\chi^{a}$, $\sigma$ and $\rho$ run through the set of real-valued smooth functions of $t$, $\zeta$ runs through the set of complex-valued smooth functions of $(t,x)$ and $\eta^{0}$ runs through the solution set of the equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ when the potential $V$ is fixed. We have $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}=\textstyle\sum_{V}\mathfrak{g}_{V}$ since each vector field $Q$ from $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ either with nonvanishing $\tau$ or $(\kappa_{ab})$ or $\chi$ or with jointly vanishing $\tau$, $\kappa_{ab}$, $\chi$, $\sigma$ and $\rho$ necessarily belongs to $\mathfrak{g}_{V}$ for some $V$. Up to the antisymmetry of the Lie bracket of vector fields, the nonzero commutation relations between vector fields spanning $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ are

$$[D(\tau^{1}),D(\tau^{2})]=D(\tau^{1}\tau^{2}_{t}-\tau^{2}\tau^{1}_{t}),\quad[D(\tau),P(\chi)]=P\left(\tau\chi_{t}-\frac{1}{2}\tau_{t}\chi\right),$$

$$[D(\tau),\sigma M]=\tau\sigma_{t}M,\quad[D(\tau),\rho I]=\tau\rho_{t}I,$$

$$[D(\tau),Z(\zeta)]=Z\left(\tau\zeta_{t}+\frac{1}{2}\tau_{t}x_{a}\zeta_{a}-\frac{i}{8}\tau_{tt}|x|^{2}\zeta\right),$$

$$[J_{ab},J_{bc}]=J_{ac},\quad a\neq b\neq c\neq a,$$

$$[J_{ab},P(\chi)]=P(\hat{\chi})\quad\mbox{with}\quad\hat{\chi}^{a}=\chi^{b},\quad\hat{\chi}^{b}=-\chi^{a},\quad\chi^{c}=0,\quad a\neq b\neq c\neq a,$$

$$[J_{ab},Z(\zeta)]=Z(x_{a}\zeta_{b}-x_{b}\zeta_{a}),\quad a\neq b,$$

$$[P(\chi),P(\tilde{\chi})]=\frac{1}{2}\left(\chi^{a}\tilde{\chi}^{a}_{t}-\tilde{\chi}^{a}\chi^{a}_{t}\right)M,\quad[P(\chi),Z(\zeta)]=Z\left(\chi^{a}\zeta_{a}-\frac{i}{2}\chi^{a}_{t}x_{a}\zeta\right),$$

$$[\sigma M,Z(\zeta)]=-Z(i\sigma\zeta),\quad[\rho I,Z(\zeta)]=-Z(\rho\zeta).$$

The commutation relations between elements of $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ imply that the span $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ is closed with respect to the Lie bracket of vector fields and hence it is a Lie algebra. The algebra $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ can be represented as a semidirect sum of the subalgebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}:=\langle D(\tau),J_{ab},P(\chi),\sigma M,\rho I\rangle$ and the ideal $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}:=\langle Z(\zeta)\rangle$, $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}=\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}\mathbin{\mbox{$\hbox to0.0pt{$\displaystyle\hskip 3.31528pt\rule{0.4pt}{5.16663pt}$\hss}{\in}$}}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$. The kernel invariance algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}$ is an ideal in $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ and in the entire $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$. The above representation for $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ induces the similar representation for each $\mathfrak{g}_{V}$,

$$\mathfrak{g}_{V}=\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\mathbin{\mbox{$\hbox to0.0pt{$\displaystyle\hskip 3.31528pt\rule{0.4pt}{5.16663pt}$\hss}{\in}$}}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{V},\quad\mbox{where}\quad\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}:=\mathfrak{g}_{V}\cap\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}\quad\mbox{and}\quad\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{V}:=\mathfrak{g}_{V}\cap\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}=\langle Z(\eta^{0}),\,\eta^{0}\in\mathcal{L}_{V}\rangle$$

are a finite-dimensional subalgebra (see Lemma 31 below) and an infinite-dimensional abelian ideal of $\mathfrak{g}_{V}$, respectively. We call $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ the essential Lie invariance algebra of the corresponding equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$. The ideal $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{V}$ consists of vector fields associated with transformations of linear superposition on the solution set of the equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ and therefore it is a trivial part of $\mathfrak{g}_{V}$.

Definition 29.

A subalgebra $\mathfrak{s}$ of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ is called appropriate if there exists a potential $V$ such that $\mathfrak{s}=\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$.

The relation of the equivalence algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ and $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ is given by $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}=\pi_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$, where $\pi_{*}$ is the mapping from $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ onto $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ that is induced by the projection $\pi$ of the joint space of the variables and the arbitrary element onto the space of the variables only. Although the projection $\pi$ is not a (local) diffeomorphism, it properly pushes forward vector fields from $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ due to their structure and hence the mapping $\pi_{*}$ is well defined. It maps the vector fields $\hat{D}(\tau)$, $\hat{J}_{ab}$, $\hat{P}(\chi)$, $\hat{M}(\sigma)$, $\hat{I}(\rho)$ spanning $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ to the vector fields $D(\tau)$, $J_{ab}$, $P(\chi)$, $\sigma M$, $\rho I$ spanning $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$, respectively. The above relation is stronger than the inclusion $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}\subseteq\pi_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ implied by the specific uniform semi-normalization of the class $\mathcal{F}$.

As the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ coincides with the set $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ of infinitesimal generators of one-parameter subgroups of the group $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$ which is the projection of $G^{\sim}$ by $\pi$, the structure of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ is agreed with the action of $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$ on this algebra. Moreover, both $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ and $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ are invariant with respect to the action of the group $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$. This is why the action of $G^{\sim}$ on equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$ induces the well-defined action of $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$ on the essential Lie invariance algebras of these equations, which are subalgebras of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$. The kernel $\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}$ is obviously an ideal in $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ for any $V$.

Summarizing altogether we have the following proposition:

Proposition 30.

The problem of group classification of (1+n)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equations with complex-valued potentials of the form (1) reduces to the classification of appropriate subalgebras of the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ with respect to the equivalence relation generated by the action of $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$.

7.4 Further properties of Lie invariance algebras

In order to classify all appropriate subalgebras of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$, we start with describing the action of the transformations from $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$ on the vector fields from $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$. For this purpose, we compute the pushforwards of spanning vector fields of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ by elementary transformations from $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$.

Given $\Phi\in\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$ and $Q\in\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$, the pushforward $Q$ by $\Phi$ is computed as

$$\tilde{Q}:=\Phi_{*}Q=Q(T)\partial_{\tilde{t}}+Q(X^{a})\partial_{\tilde{a}}+Q(\Psi)\partial_{\tilde{\psi}}+Q(\Psi^{*})\partial_{\tilde{\psi}^{*}},$$

where into each coefficient of $\tilde{Q}$ we substitute the expressions of the variables without tildes in terms of the variables with tildes, $(t,x_{a},\psi,\psi^{*})=\Phi^{-1}(\tilde{t},\tilde{x}_{a},\tilde{\psi},\tilde{\psi}^{*})$, and $\Phi^{-1}$ denotes the inverse of $\Phi$.

By $\mathcal{D}(T)$, $\mathcal{J}(O)$, $\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{X})$, $\mathcal{M}(\Sigma)$ and $\mathcal{I}(\Upsilon)$ we denote the transformations of the form (7a)–(7b) with $\Lambda=0$ and $\varepsilon=1$, where the parameters $T$, $O$, $\mathcal{X}$, $\Sigma$ and $\Upsilon$, successively excluding one of them, are set to the trivial values, which are $t$ for $T$, $E$ for $O$ and zeroes for $\mathcal{X}$, $\Sigma$ and $\Upsilon$. These transformations, referred to as elementary transformations, generate the entire group $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$. The nonidentity pushforward actions of elementary transformations to the vector fields spanning $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ are exhausted by

$$\mathcal{D}_{*}(T)D(\tau)=D(\tilde{\tau}),\quad\mathcal{D}_{*}(T)P(\chi)=P(\tilde{\chi}),\quad\mathcal{D}_{*}(T)(\sigma M)=\tilde{\sigma}\tilde{M},\quad\mathcal{D}_{*}(T)(\rho I)=\tilde{\rho}\tilde{I},$$

$$\mathcal{J}_{*}(O)P(\chi)=\tilde{P}(O\chi),\quad\mathcal{J}_{*}(O)J_{ab}=\sum_{c<d}(O^{db}O^{ca}-O^{da}O^{cb})\tilde{J}_{cd},$$

$$\mathcal{P}_{*}(\mathcal{X})D(\tau)=\tilde{D}(\tau)+\tilde{P}\left(\tau\mathcal{X}_{t}-\frac{\tau_{t}}{2}\mathcal{X}\right)+\left(\frac{\tau_{tt}}{8}\mathcal{X}^{a}\mathcal{X}^{a}-\frac{\tau_{t}}{4}\mathcal{X}^{a}\mathcal{X}^{a}_{t}-\frac{\tau}{4}(\mathcal{X}^{a}\mathcal{X}^{a}_{tt}-\mathcal{X}^{a}_{t}\mathcal{X}^{a}_{t})\right)\tilde{M},$$

$$\mathcal{P}_{*}(\mathcal{X})J_{ab}=\tilde{J}_{ab}+P(\hat{\mathcal{X}})-\frac{1}{2}(\mathcal{X}^{a}\mathcal{X}^{b}_{t}-\mathcal{X}^{b}\mathcal{X}^{a}_{t})\tilde{M},$$

$$\mathcal{P}_{*}(\mathcal{X})P(\chi)=\tilde{P}(\chi)+\frac{1}{2}(\chi^{a}\mathcal{X}^{a}_{t}-\chi^{a}_{t}\mathcal{X}^{a})\tilde{M},$$

$$\mathcal{M}_{*}(\Sigma)D(\tau)=\tilde{D}(\tau)+\tau\Sigma_{t}\tilde{M},\quad\mathcal{I}_{*}(\Upsilon)D(\tau)=\tilde{D}(\tau)+\tau\Upsilon_{t}\tilde{I},\quad$$

where $\tilde{\tau}(\tilde{t})=(T_{t}\tau)(T^{-1}(\tilde{t}))$, $\tilde{\chi}(\tilde{t})=(|T_{t}|^{1/2}\chi)(T^{-1}(\tilde{t}))$, $\hat{\mathcal{X}}^{a}=\mathcal{X}^{b}$, $\hat{\mathcal{X}}^{b}=-\mathcal{X}^{a}$, $\hat{\mathcal{X}}^{c}=0,\,c\neq a,b$, $\tilde{\sigma}=\sigma(T^{-1}(\tilde{t}))$, $\tilde{\rho}=\rho(T^{-1}(\tilde{t}))$ and into each pushforward by $\mathcal{D}_{*}(T)$ we should substitute the expression for $t$ given by inverting the relation $\tilde{t}=T(t)$; $t=\tilde{t}$ for the other pushforwards. Tildes over vector fields mean that these vector fields are represented in the new variables.

Lemma 31.

$\dim\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\leqslant\dfrac{n(n+3)}{2}+5$ for any potential $V$, and this upper bound is least.

Proof.

Fix a potential $V$. Then similarly to the proof of Lemma 1 in [35], the classifying condition (19) implies a system of linear ordinary differential equations of the normal form

$$\tau_{ttt}=\gamma^{00}\tau_{t}+\gamma^{01}\tau+\gamma^{0,a+1}\chi^{a}+\theta^{0ab}\kappa_{ab},$$

$$\chi^{c}_{tt}=\gamma^{c0}\tau_{t}+\gamma^{c1}\tau+\gamma^{c,a+1}\chi^{a}+\theta^{cab}\kappa_{ab},$$

$$\sigma_{t}=\gamma^{n+1,0}\tau_{t}+\gamma^{n+1,1}\tau+\gamma^{n+1,a+1}\chi^{a}+\theta^{n+1,ab}\kappa_{ab},$$

$$\rho_{t}=-\frac{n}{4}\tau_{tt}+\gamma^{n+2,0}\tau_{t}+\gamma^{n+2,1}\tau+\gamma^{n+2,a+1}\chi^{a}+\theta^{n+2,ab}\kappa_{ab},$$

where the coefficients $\gamma^{pq}$ and $\theta^{pab}$, $p=0,\dots,n+2$, $q=0,\dots,n+1$, $a<b$, are functions of $t$. Therefore, the dimension of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ is bounded by the sum of the number of pairs $(a,b)$ with $a<b$ (which is associated with rotations and equals $n(n-1)/2$) and the number of arbitrary constants in the general solution of the above system (which equals $2n+5$). The derived upper bound is least since it coincides with $\dim\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ for the zero $V$ corresponding to the free Schrödinger equation. ∎

Corollary 32.

$\dim\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\cap\langle P(\chi),\sigma M,\rho I\rangle\leqslant 2n+2$.

Proof.

We follow the proof of Lemma 31 by omitting the first equation of the system from this proof and setting $\tau=0$ and $\kappa_{ab}=0$. ∎

Corollary 33.

$\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\cap\langle\sigma M,\rho I\rangle=\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}$ for any potential $V$.

Proof.

Analogously, we preserve only the last two equations of the system from the proof of Lemma 31 and set $\tau=\chi^{a}=0$ and $\kappa_{ab}=0$. ∎

Lemma 34.

For all $V$, $\pi^{0}_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ is a Lie algebra and $\dim\pi^{0}_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\leqslant 3$. Moreover,

$$\pi^{0}_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\in\{0,\langle\partial_{t}\rangle,\langle\partial_{t},t\partial_{t}\rangle,\langle\partial_{t},t\partial_{t},t^{2}\partial_{t}\rangle\}\bmod\pi^{0}_{*}G^{\sim},$$

where $\pi^{0}$ denotes the projection on the space of the variable $t$ and $\pi^{0}_{*}\mathfrak{s}\subset\pi^{0}_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}=\langle\tau\partial_{t}\rangle$.

Proof.

The proof is similar to the one given in [35]. It is based on the famous Lie classification of finite dimensional algebras of vector fields on the real line. ∎

8 Complete group classification of (1+2)-dimensional
linear Schrödinger equations with complex-valued potentials

We complete the group classification of linear Schrödinger equations of the general form (1) only in the case $n=2$. Even the case $n=3$ is much more cumbersome and requires more study, not to mention the case of general $n$. Specifying results of Section 7.3 to the case $n=2$, we obtain that for any $V$

$$\dim\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\leqslant 10,\quad\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\cap\langle\sigma M,\rho I\rangle=\langle M,I\rangle=\mathfrak{g}^{\cap},$$

$$2\leqslant\dim\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\cap\langle P(\chi),\sigma M,\rho I\rangle\leqslant 6,\quad\dim\pi^{0}_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\leqslant 3.$$

For each appropriate subalgebra $\mathfrak{s}$ of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\langle\,\rangle}$, similarly to [35] we introduce five $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$-invariant integers in order to arrange the process of the group classification:

$$k_{0}:=\dim\mathfrak{s}\cap\langle\sigma M,\rho I\rangle=\dim\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}=2,$$

$$k_{1}:=\dim\mathfrak{s}\cap\langle P(\chi),\sigma M,\rho I\rangle-k_{0}\in\{0,1,2,3,4\},$$

$$k_{2}:=\dim\mathfrak{s}\cap\langle J,\,P(\chi),\,\sigma M,\,\rho I\rangle-k_{1}-k_{0}\in\{0,1\},$$

$$k_{3}:=\dim\mathfrak{s}-k_{2}-k_{1}-k_{0}=\dim\pi^{0}_{*}\mathfrak{s}\in\{0,1,2,3\},$$

$$r_{0}:=\mathop{\rm rank}\nolimits\{\chi\mid\exists\,\sigma,\rho\colon P(\chi)+\sigma M+\rho I\in\mathfrak{s}\}\in\{0,1,2\},$$

where $\pi^{0}$ denotes the projection on the space of the variable $t$. Note that

$$\dim\mathfrak{s}=k_{0}+k_{1}+k_{2}+k_{3}\leqslant 10.$$

The parameter tuple $(k_{2},r_{0},k_{3})$ is used for the labeling of possible classification cases. In fact, not all values of $(k_{2},r_{0},k_{3})$ in $\{0,1\}\times\{0,1,2\}\times\{0,1,2,3\}$ are appropriate.

Lemma 35.

$(k_{2},r_{0})\neq(1,1)$.

Proof.

Suppose that $k_{2}=1$ and $r_{0}\geqslant 1$. Then the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ necessarily contains vector fields of the form $Q^{0}=J+P(\chi^{01},\chi^{02})+\sigma^{0}M+\rho^{0}I$ and $Q^{1}=P(\chi^{11},\chi^{12})+\sigma^{1}M+\rho^{1}I$, where $(\chi^{11},\chi^{12})\neq(0,0)$. The commutator of these vector fields

$$[Q^{0},Q^{1}]=P(\chi^{12},-\chi^{11})+\frac{1}{2}(\chi^{01}\chi^{11}_{t}+\chi^{02}\chi^{12}_{t}-\chi^{01}_{t}\chi^{11}-\chi^{02}_{t}\chi^{12})M$$

should belong to $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$, and hence $r_{0}=2$. Therefore, the case $k_{2}=r_{0}=1$ is impossible. ∎

The other constraint for appropriate values of $(k_{2},r_{0},k_{3})$, $k_{3}\neq 2$ if $(k_{2},r_{0})\neq(0,0)$, is not obvious at all and can be derived only by analyzing the complete proof of group classification for the class $\mathcal{F}$ with $n=2$.

Lemma 36.

Up to the $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$-equivalence, a vector field $P(\chi)+\sigma M+\rho I$, where the components of the tuple $\chi$ are linearly independent, reduces to $P(h\cos t,h\sin t)+\tilde{\rho}I$ with nonzero $h=h(t)$.

Proof.

We can represent the tuple $\chi$ as $\chi=(h\cos T,h\sin T)$, where $h$ and $T$ are smooth functions of $t$ with $T_{t}\neq 0$. Then we successively apply the transformations $\mathcal{D}_{*}(T)$ and $\mathcal{P}_{*}(\mathcal{X})$ with an appropriate tuple $\mathcal{X}$ of smooth functions of $t$ to the vector field and thus set $T=t$ and $\sigma=0$, which gives the required form. ∎

Lemma 37.

If $P(1,0)+\rho^{1}I\in\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$, then the vector field $P(t,0)+\rho^{2}I$ with $\rho^{2}=\int t\rho^{1}_{t}\,{\rm d}t$ also belongs to $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$.

Proof.

Suppose that $P(1,0)+\rho^{1}I\in\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$. We substitute the components of this vector field into the classifying condition (19), which gives $V_{1}=-i\rho^{1}_{t}$. This equation coincides with the one obtained by evaluating the classifying condition (19) at $\tau=\sigma=0$, $\chi=t$ and $\rho^{2}=\int t\rho^{1}_{t}\,{\rm d}t$. ∎

Putting all the above ingredients together, we have the following: any appropriate subalgebra of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ is spanned by

• the basis vector fields $M$ and $I$ of the kernel $\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}$,

• $k_{1}$ vector fields $P(\chi^{p1},\chi^{p2})+\sigma^{p}M+\rho^{p}I$, $p=1,\dots,k_{1}$, with linearly independent tuples $\chi^{1}$, …, $\chi^{k_{1}}$,

• $k_{2}$ vector fields $J+P(\chi^{01},\chi^{02})+\sigma^{0}M+\rho^{0}I$,

• $k_{3}$ vector fields $D(\tau^{q})+\kappa_{q}J+P(\chi^{q1},\chi^{q2})+\sigma^{q}M+\rho^{q}I$, $q=k_{1}+1,\dots,k_{1}+k_{3}$, with linearly independent $\tau^{k_{1}+1}$, …, $\tau^{k_{1}+k_{3}}$.

In what follows we use the notation

$$|x|=\sqrt{x_{1}^{2}+x_{2}^{2}},\quad\phi=\arctan x_{2}/x_{1},\quad\omega_{1}=x_{1}\cos t+x_{2}\sin t,\quad\omega_{2}=-x_{1}\sin t+x_{2}\cos t.$$

Theorem 38.

A complete list of inequivalent essential Lie-symmetry extensions in the class $\mathcal{F}$ of (1+2)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equations with complex-valued potentials is exhausted by the cases presented below. Here $U$ is an arbitrary complex-valued smooth function of its arguments or an arbitrary complex constant that satisfies constraints indicated in the corresponding cases, and the other functions and constants take real values.

1. $V=V(t,x)$: $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}=\big{\langle}M,\,I\big{\rangle}$.

2. $V=U(x_{1},x_{2})$: $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,D(1)\big{\rangle}$.

3. $V=U(\omega_{1},\omega_{2})$: $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,D(1)+J\big{\rangle}$.

4. $V=|x|^{-2}U(\zeta)$, $\zeta=\phi-2\beta\ln|x|$, $\beta>0$, $U_{\zeta}\neq 0$: $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,D(1),\,D(t)+\beta J\big{\rangle}.$

5. $V=|x|^{-2}U(\phi)$, $U_{\phi}\neq 0$: $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,D(1),\,D(t),\,D(t^{2})-tI\big{\rangle}$.

6. $V=U(t,|x|)+(\sigma_{t}-i\rho_{t})\phi$, $\sigma\in\{0,t\}\bmod G^{\sim}$ and, if $\sigma=0$, $\rho\in\{0,t\}\bmod G^{\sim}$:
   $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,J+\sigma M+\rho I\big{\rangle}$.

7. $V=U(|x|)+(\alpha_{1}-i\beta_{1})\phi$: $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,J+\alpha_{1}tM+\beta_{1}tI,\,D(1)\big{\rangle}$.

8. $V=|x|^{-2}U,\ U\neq 0$: $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,J,\,D(1),\,D(t),\,D(t^{2})-tI\big{\rangle}$.

9. $V=U(t,x_{2})+i\gamma(t)x_{1}$:
   $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(1,0)-\left(\int\gamma(t)\,{\rm d}t\right)I,\,P(t,0)-\left(\int t\gamma(t)\,{\rm d}t\right)I\big{\rangle}$.

10. $V=U(\zeta)+i\beta x_{1}$, $\zeta=x_{2}$:
    $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(1,0)-\beta tI,\,P(t,0)-\frac{\beta}{2}t^{2}I,\,D(1)\big{\rangle}$.

11. $V=t^{-1}U(\zeta)+i\beta|t|^{-3/2}x_{1}$, $\zeta=|t|^{-1/2}x_{2}$:
    $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(1,0)-2\beta t|t|^{-3/2}I,\,P(t,0)-2\beta t|t|^{-1/2}I,\,D(t)\big{\rangle}$.

12. $V=(t^{2}+1)^{-1}U(\zeta)+i\beta(t^{2}+1)^{-3/2}x_{1}$, $\zeta=(t^{2}+1)^{-1/2}x_{2}$:
    $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(1,0)-\beta t(t^{2}+1)^{-1/2}I,\,P(t,0)+\beta(t^{2}+1)^{-1/2}I,\,D(t^{2}+1)-tI\big{\rangle}$.

13. $V=Ux_{2}^{-2}$, $U\neq 0$: $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(1,0),\,P(t,0),\,D(1),\,D(t),\,D(t^{2})-tI\big{\rangle}$.

14. $V=U(t,\omega_{2})+\frac{1}{4}(h^{-1}h_{tt}-1)\omega^{2}_{1}+h_{t}h^{-1}\omega_{1}\omega_{2}-i\rho_{t}h^{-1}\omega_{1}$, $h=h(t)\neq 0$:
    $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(h\cos t,h\sin t)+\rho I\big{\rangle}$.

15. $V=U(\omega_{2})+\frac{1}{4}(\beta-1)\omega_{1}^{2}-\beta\omega_{1}\omega_{2}-i\alpha\beta\omega_{1}$, $\beta\neq 0$:
    $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(e^{\beta t}\cos t,e^{\beta t}\sin t)+\alpha e^{\beta t}I,\,D(1)+J\big{\rangle}$.

16. $V=U(\omega_{2})-\frac{1}{4}\omega_{1}^{2}+(\tilde{\alpha}-i\alpha)\omega_{1}$: $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(\cos t,\sin t)+\tilde{\alpha}tM+\alpha tI,\,D(1)+J\big{\rangle}$.

17. $V=\frac{1}{4}h^{ab}(t)x_{a}x_{b}+ih^{0a}(t)x_{a}$, $h^{12}=h^{21}$:
    $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(\chi^{p1},\chi^{p2})+\rho^{p}I,\,p=1,\dots,4\big{\rangle},$ where $\{(\chi^{p1}(t),\chi^{p2}(t))\}$ is a fundamental set of solutions of the system $\chi^{a}_{tt}=h^{ab}\chi^{b}$, and $\rho^{p}=-\int h^{0a}\chi^{pa}{\rm d}t$.

18. $V=\frac{1}{4}\alpha x_{1}^{2}+\frac{1}{4}\beta x_{2}^{2}+i\nu_{a}x_{a}$, $\alpha\neq\beta$ or $(\nu_{1},\nu_{2})\neq(0,0)$:
    $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(\chi^{11},0)+\rho^{1}I,\,P(\chi^{21},0)+\rho^{2}I,\,P(0,\chi^{32})+\rho^{3}I,\,P(0,\chi^{42})+\rho^{4}I,\,D(1)\big{\rangle}$, where $\{\chi^{11}(t),\chi^{21}(t)\}$ is a fundamental set of solutions of the equation $\chi^{1}_{tt}=\alpha\chi^{1}$, $\rho^{p}=-\nu_{1}\int\chi^{p1}{\rm d}t$, $p=1,2$, and $\{\chi^{32}(t),\chi^{42}(t)\}$ is a fundamental set of solutions of the equation $\chi^{2}_{tt}=\beta\chi^{2}$, $\rho^{p}=-\nu_{2}\int\chi^{p2}{\rm d}t$, $p=3,4$.

19. $V=\frac{1}{4}\alpha\omega_{1}^{2}+\frac{1}{4}\beta\omega_{2}^{2}+i\nu_{a}\omega_{a}$, $\alpha\neq\beta$ or $(\nu_{1},\nu_{2})\neq(0,0)$:
    $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(\theta^{p1}\cos t-\theta^{p2}\sin t,\theta^{p1}\sin t+\theta^{p2}\cos t)+\rho^{p}I,\,D(1)+J,\,p=1,\dots,4\big{\rangle}$, where $(\theta^{p1}(t),\theta^{p2}(t))$ are linearly independent solutions of the system $\theta^{1}_{tt}-2\theta^{2}_{t}=(1+\alpha)\theta^{1}$, $\theta^{2}_{tt}+2\theta^{2}_{t}=(1+\beta)\theta^{2}$, and $\rho^{p}=-\int\chi^{pa}h^{0a}{\rm d}t$, $p=1,\dots,4$.

20. $V=0$: $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\big{\langle}M,\,I,\,P(1,0),\,P(t,0),\,P(0,1),\,P(0,t),\,J,\,D(1),\,D(t),\,D(t^{2})-tI\big{\rangle}$.

Remark 39.

The essential Lie invariance algebras listed in Theorem 38 are really maximal for the corresponding potentials if these potentials are $G^{\sim}$-inequivalent to listed potentials with larger essential Lie invariance algebras. In some cases, we have presented simple necessary and sufficient conditions that provide such inequivalence. In other cases, these conditions are not so obvious. For example, in Cases 9–11 the condition of maximal Lie symmetry extension is ($\beta\neq 0$ or $(\zeta^{2}U)_{\zeta}\neq 0$) and ($U_{\zeta\zeta\zeta}\neq 0$ or $\mathop{\rm Im}U_{\zeta\zeta}\neq 0$), which excludes the values of $V$ that are $G^{\sim}$-equivalent to those in Cases 12 and 16–19. Case 8 is already more complicated since for it the similar condition ($\gamma\neq 0$ or $(x_{2}^{2}U)_{2}\neq 0$) and ($U_{222}\neq 0$ or $\mathop{\rm Im}U_{22}\neq 0$) should be extended with the condition excluding potentials $G^{\sim}$-equivalent to those in Cases 9–11. Analogously, potentials in Cases 13–15 are $G^{\sim}$-inequivalent to those in Cases 16–19 if and only if $U_{\omega_{2}\omega_{2}\omega_{2}}\neq 0$ or $\mathop{\rm Im}U_{\omega_{2}\omega_{2}}\neq 0$. This condition is necessary and sufficient for the maximality of Lie symmetry extensions given in Cases 14 and 15, and for Case 13 it should be extended to guarantee the exclusion of potentials related to Cases 14 and 15. Schrödinger equations related to Case 16 are not similar to the free Schrödinger equation presented in Case 19 if and only if the parameter functions $h$ satisfy at least one of the conditions $h^{12}\neq h^{21}$, $h^{12}=h^{21}\neq 0$, $h^{11}\neq h^{22}$, $h^{01}\neq 0$ and $h^{02}\neq 0$. We need additional constraints on these functions to exclude, up to the $G^{\sim}$-equivalence, potentials of Cases 17 and 18.

Remark 40.

In Theorem 38, we in general neglect possible gauges of constant parameters in $V$ by discrete and scaling equivalence transformations. For example, a nonzero parameter among $\alpha_{1}$ and $\beta_{1}$ in Case 6, the parameter $\beta$ in Case 9 and the parameter $\nu_{1}$ in Case 17 can be set to one. The parameter $\beta$ in Cases 10 and 11 and the imaginary part of $U$ in Cases 7 and 12 can be made nonnegative. In Case 18 and, if $\nu_{1}=\nu_{2}$, in Case 17, we can also assume $\alpha<\beta$.

Remark 41.

More generally, the cases that are listed in Theorem 38 are not equivalent to each other. At the same time, each of Cases 0–18 is a family of cases of essential Lie symmetry extensions within the class $\mathcal{F}$ rather than a single case, and there is an equivalence within each of these case families that is induced by the action of a subgroup of $G^{\sim}$. For example, see below the consideration of the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ of (1+2)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equations with potentials of the form (20), in particular the formula (21), for the equivalence of potentials in Case 8. Nevertheless, it is usually not convenient or even not feasible to take such an equivalence into account.

Proof.

We single out different cases depending on values of the integers $k_{3}$, $k_{2}$ and $r_{0}$. Basis vector fields of a Lie symmetry extension is denoted by

$$Q^{s}=D(\tau^{s})+\kappa_{s}J+P(\chi^{s1},\chi^{s2})+\sigma^{s}M+\rho^{s}I,$$

where the range of $s$ is equal to $\dim\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}-2$, $\kappa_{s}$ are real constants, and all the other parameters are real-valued functions of $t$.

$\boldsymbol{k_{2}=r_{0}=0}$. The corresponding Lie symmetry extensions are spanned by $\{Q^{s}\}$ with linearly independent $\tau^{s}$. By Lemma 34, $\langle\pi^{0}_{*}Q^{s}\rangle$ is an algebra isomorphic to a subalgebra of the algebra ${\rm sl}(2,\mathbb{R})$. Hence the group classification in this case reduces to the classification of subalgebras of the algebra ${\rm sl}(2,\mathbb{R})$. Varying $k_{3}$ we single out the following four subcases.

$k_{3}=0.$ This is the general case with no extension, i.e., $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}$ (Case 0).

$k_{3}=1$. The algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ contains a single linearly independent vector field $Q^{1}$ with $\tau^{1}\neq 0$. Pushing $Q^{1}$ forward by a transformation from $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$, we can set $\tau^{1}=1$, $\kappa_{1}\in\{0,1\}$ and $\chi^{1a}=\sigma^{1}=\rho^{1}=0$, i.e., the vector field $Q^{1}$ reduces to the form $Q^{1}=D(1)+\kappa_{1}J$. Evaluating the classifying condition (19) at $Q^{1}$ with $\kappa_{1}=0$ and $\kappa_{1}=1$ gives differential equations in $V$ whose general solutions are presented in Cases 1 and 2, respectively.

$k_{3}=2.$ The Lie symmetry extension is given by vector fields $Q^{1}$ and $Q^{2}$ with linearly independent $\tau^{1}$ and $\tau^{2}$. Modulo the $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$-equivalence, we can set $\tau^{1}=1$ and $\tau^{2}=t$ (cf. Lemma 34) and, as in the previous case, $\chi^{1a}=\sigma^{1}=\rho^{1}=0$. Then, the condition $[Q^{1},Q^{2}]\in\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ implies that

$$D(1)+P(\chi^{21}_{t},\chi^{22}_{t})+\sigma^{2}_{t}M+\rho^{2}_{t}I=Q^{1}+\alpha_{1}M+\beta_{1}I,$$

where $\alpha_{1}$ and $\beta_{1}$ are real constants. This equality splits into the constraints $\kappa_{1}=0$, $\chi^{2a}_{t}=0$, $\sigma^{2}_{t}=\alpha_{1}$, $\rho^{2}_{t}=\beta_{1}$. Taking these constraints into account, we push $Q^{1}$ and $Q^{2}$ forward by transformations from $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$ and linearly combine them with $M$ and $I$. This allows us to set $\chi^{2a}=\sigma^{2}=\rho^{2}=0$ and $\beta:=\kappa_{2}\geqslant 0$ when preserving $Q^{1}$. The integration of the system in $V$ obtained by evaluating the classifying condition (19) at $Q^{1}$ and at $Q^{2}$ leads to Case 3. For the extension to be maximal, we need $\beta\neq 0$ (otherwise we get Case 4 with $k_{3}=3$) and $U_{\zeta}\neq 0$ (otherwise we get Case 7).

$k_{3}=3.$ The algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ is spanned by the basis elements of the kernel algebra and vector fields $Q^{q}$ with linearly independent coefficients $\tau^{q}$, $q=1,2,3$. In view of Lemma 34, we can assume that $\tau^{1}=1$, $\tau^{2}=t$ and $\tau^{3}=t^{2}$. The commutation relations of $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ imply $\kappa_{q}=0$. Similarly to the previous case, we can also set $\chi^{qa}=\sigma^{q}=\rho^{q}=0$, $q=1,2$. The commutation relations of $Q^{3}$ with $Q^{1}$ and $Q^{2}$ implies $\chi^{3a}=0$, $\sigma^{3}_{t}=\alpha_{1}$ and $\rho^{3}_{t}=\alpha_{2}$, where $\alpha_{1}$ and $\alpha_{2}$ are real constants. Up to linearly combining with $M$ and $I$, the vector field $Q^{3}$ reduces to $Q^{3}=D(t^{2})+\alpha_{1}tM+\alpha_{2}tI$. The classifying condition (19) evaluated successively at $Q^{1}$, $Q^{2}$ and $Q^{3}$ gives the system

$$V_{t}=0,\quad tV_{t}+\frac{1}{2}x_{a}V_{a}+V=0,\quad t^{2}V_{t}+tx_{a}V_{a}+2tV=\alpha_{1}-i\alpha_{2}-i,$$

whose compatibility with respect to $V$ implies $\alpha_{1}=0$ and $\alpha_{2}=-1$. Thus, we have Case 4, where the extension is maximal if and only if $U_{\phi}\neq 0$ since otherwise it becomes Case 7.

$\boldsymbol{k_{2}=1,r_{0}=0}.$ The algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ contains a vector field $Q^{0}$ with $\tau^{0}=0$ and $\kappa_{0}=1$, and additional extensions are realized by vector fields $Q^{q}$ with linearly independent coefficients $\tau^{q}$. The commutation relation for $Q^{0}$ and $Q^{q}$ implies that $\chi^{qa}=0$. Acting by $\mathcal{P}_{*}(\mathcal{X})$ with $\mathcal{X}^{1}=\chi^{02}$ and $\mathcal{X}^{2}=-\chi^{01}$ on $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$, we set $\chi^{0a}=0$, and thus $Q^{0}=J+\sigma^{0}M+\rho^{0}I$. Similarly to the case $k_{2}=r_{0}=0$, we partition Lie symmetry extensions into three subcases depending on values of $k_{3}$. Moreover, the simplification of the parameter functions $\tau^{q}$, $\sigma^{q}$ and $\rho^{q}$ up to the $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$-equivalence jointly with linearly combining completely coincides with that in the case $k_{2}=r_{0}=0$.

$k_{3}=0$. If the function $\sigma^{0}$ (resp. $\rho^{0}$) is constant, then it can be made zero by linearly combining $Q^{0}$ with $M$ (resp. $I$). If one of these functions is not constant, up to the $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$-equivalence it can be set to be equal to $t$. Then the classifying condition (19) implies an equation in $V$ whose general solution is presented in Case 5.

$k_{3}=1.$ The vector field $Q^{1}$ is reduced to $Q^{1}=D(1)$ up to the $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$-equivalence. As the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ is closed with respect to Lie bracket of vector fields, we obtain

$$[Q^{1},Q^{0}]=\sigma^{0}_{t}M+\rho^{0}_{t}I=\alpha_{1}M+\beta_{1}I,$$

where $\alpha_{1}$ and $\beta_{1}$ are real constants. Equating the components of the vector fields on both the sides of the last equality and then solving the obtained equations, we derive $\sigma^{0}=\alpha_{1}t+\alpha_{0}$ and $\rho^{0}=\beta_{1}t+\beta_{0}$, where $\alpha_{0}$ and $\beta_{0}$ are real constants, which can be set to zero due to linearly combining with $M$ and $I$. The vector field $Q^{0}$ is reduced to $Q^{0}=J+\alpha_{1}tM+\beta_{1}t$. Successively substituting the components of $Q^{0}$ and $Q^{1}$ into the classifying condition (19) yields two independent equations in $V$: $V_{t}=0$, $x_{1}V_{2}-x_{2}V_{1}=\alpha_{1}-i\beta_{1}$, whose general solution is presented in Case 6.

$k_{3}\geqslant 2.$ The algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ necessarily contains the vector fields $M$ and $I$ from $\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}$ and vector fields $Q^{0}$ and $Q^{q}$, $q=1,2$, with linearly independent $\tau^{1}$ and $\tau^{2}$. Up to the $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$-equivalence the vector fields $Q^{1}$ and $Q^{2}$ are reduced to the form $Q^{1}=D(1)$ and $Q^{2}=D(t)$. As the commutators $[Q^{q},Q^{0}]$ belong to $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$, we have

$$[Q^{1},Q^{0}]=\sigma^{0}_{t}M+\rho^{0}_{t}I=\alpha_{1}M+\beta_{1}I,$$

$$[Q^{2},Q^{0}]=t\sigma^{0}_{t}M+t\rho^{0}_{t}I=\alpha_{2}M+\beta_{2}I,$$

where $\alpha_{j}$ and $\beta_{j}$, $j=1,2$, are real constants. The above commutation relations give the system $\sigma^{0}_{t}=\alpha_{1}$, $t\sigma^{0}_{t}=\alpha_{2}$, $\rho^{0}_{t}=\beta_{1}$, $t\rho^{0}_{t}=\beta_{2}$, which implies that $\sigma^{0}$ and $\rho^{0}$ are constants. Therefore, by linearly combining with $M$ and $I$, they can be set to be equal to zero. We successively evaluate the classifying condition (19) at $Q^{0}$, $Q^{1}$ and $Q^{2}$ and obtain the system $V_{t}=0$, $x_{1}V_{2}-x_{2}V_{1}=0$, $x_{a}V_{a}+2V=0$, whose general solution is $V=|x|^{-2}U$. At the same time, any such potential admits the Lie symmetry vector field $Q^{3}=D(t^{2})-tI$. This means that in fact $k_{3}=3$. For the Lie symmetry extension to be maximal, we require $U\neq 0$. Therefore, we obtain Case 7.

$\boldsymbol{k_{2}=0,\,r_{0}=1}$. We definitely have a vector field $Q^{1}=P(\chi^{11},\chi^{12})+\sigma^{1}M+\rho^{1}I$ with a nonzero tuple $(\chi^{11},\chi^{12})$ in $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$. An additional Lie symmetry extension may be provided by one more vector field of the same form or vector fields $Q^{q}$, $q=k_{1}+1,\dots,k_{1}+k_{3}$, with linearly independent coefficients $\tau^{q}$. We should suppose separately whether the tuple $(\chi^{11},\chi^{12})$ is either proportional or not proportional to a constant tuple.

1. Let the parameter functions $\chi^{11}$ and $\chi^{12}$ be linearly dependent. Up to the $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$-equivalence, we can set $(\chi^{11},\chi^{12})=(1,0)$, $\sigma^{1}=0$, and thus the vector field $Q^{1}$ reduces to $P(1,0)+\rho^{1}I$. Lemma 37 implies that then the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ also contains the vector field $P(t,0)+\rho^{2}I$ with $\rho^{2}=\int t\rho^{1}_{t}\,{\rm d}t$. Then substituting the components of the vector fields into the classifying condition (19) yields two dependent equations for $V$, $V_{1}=-i\rho^{1}_{t}$ and $tV_{1}=-it\rho^{1}_{t}$, whose general solution is

$$V=U(t,x_{2})+i\gamma(t)x_{1},$$ (20)

where $U$ is a complex-valued smooth function of $(t,x_{2})$ and $\gamma=-\rho^{1}_{t}$ is a real-valued smooth function of $t$. Thus, any equation from the class $\mathcal{F}$ with potential of the form (20) is invariant with respect to the vector fields $Q^{1}_{\gamma}=P(1,0)-\left(\int\gamma(t)\,{\rm d}t\right)I$ and $Q^{2}_{\gamma}=P(t,0)-\left(\int t\gamma(t)\,{\rm d}t\right)I$. The function $U$ satisfies the conditions $U_{222}\neq 0$ or $\mathop{\rm Im}U_{22}\neq 0$ since otherwise $r_{0}=2$ (see the case $r_{0}=2$ below).

Consider the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ of (1+2)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equations with potentials of the form (20) constrained by the above condition for $U$. We can reparameterize the class $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$, assuming the parameter functions $U$ and $\gamma$ as arbitrary elements instead of $V$. The equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ of $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ can be singled out from the equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ of the entire class $\mathcal{F}$, which is described in Theorem 21. A point transformation connects two equations $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ and $\mathcal{L}_{\tilde{V}}$ from the class $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ if and only if it is of the form (7a)–(7b), where the function $T$ is linear fractional in $t$, the matrix $O$ is diagonal with $O^{11},O^{22}=\pm 1$, and $\mathcal{X}^{1}=\nu_{1}T+\nu_{0}$ with arbitrary real constants $\nu_{1}$ and $\nu_{0}$. The corresponding arbitrary-element tuples are related in the following way:

$$\begin{split}&\tilde{U}=\frac{\hat{U}}{|T_{t}|}+\frac{\varepsilon^{\prime}O^{22}}{2|T_{t}|^{1/2}}\left(\frac{\mathcal{X}^{2}_{t}}{T_{t}}\right)_{\!t}x_{2}+\frac{\Sigma_{t}-i\Upsilon_{t}}{T_{t}}-\frac{(\mathcal{X}^{2}_{t})^{2}+2iT_{tt}}{4T_{t}{}^{2}}-\frac{\nu_{1}{}^{\!2}}{4}-i\tilde{\gamma}\mathcal{X}^{1},\\ &\tilde{\gamma}=\frac{\varepsilon^{\prime}O^{11}}{|T_{t}|^{3/2}}\gamma.\end{split}$$ (21)

The equivalence group $G^{\sim}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ consists of the point transformations of the form (7a)–(7b) prolonged to the arbitrary elements according to (21), where the parameters satisfy, in addition to all the above conditions for elements of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$, the constraint $\Lambda=0$. The class $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ is (disjointedly) uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the entire equivalence group $G^{\sim}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ and linear superposition of solutions. At the same time, it is already known that each equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$, where the potential $V$ is of the form (20), admits the one-parameter groups of point symmetry transformations

$$\mathcal{Q}^{1}_{\gamma}(\nu_{0})\colon\ \ \tilde{t}=t,\ \ \tilde{x}_{1}=x_{1}+\nu_{0},\ \ \tilde{x}_{2}=x_{2},\ \ \tilde{\psi}=\exp\left(-\nu_{0}\int\gamma(t)\,{\rm d}t\right)\psi,$$

$$\mathcal{Q}^{2}_{\gamma}(\nu_{1})\colon\ \ \tilde{t}=t,\ \ \tilde{x}_{1}=x_{1}+\nu_{0}t,\ \ \tilde{x}_{2}=x_{2},\ \ \tilde{\psi}=\exp\left(\frac{i}{2}\nu_{1}x_{1}+\frac{i}{4}\nu_{1}^{2}t-\nu_{1}\int t\gamma(t)\,{\rm d}t\right)\psi$$

generated by the vector fields $Q^{1}_{\gamma}$ and $Q^{2}_{\gamma}$. This is why it is convenient to include these symmetry transformations in the corresponding uniform symmetry group $G^{\rm unf}_{V}$ and to consider the class $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ as (non-disjointedly and uniformly) semi-normalized with respect to a proper subgroup $H$ of $G^{\sim}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ and a family of wider uniform symmetry groups than the symmetry groups of linear superposition of solutions.

For the group $G^{\rm unf}_{V}$ to be closed with respect to the transformation composition, we also need to include the elementary transformations $\mathcal{M}(\Sigma)$ (cf. Section 7.4) with constant values of $\Sigma$ in $G^{\rm unf}_{V}$ since they are the commutators of transformations $\mathcal{Q}^{1}_{\gamma}(\nu_{0})$ and $\mathcal{Q}^{2}_{\gamma}(\nu_{1})$. The elementary transformations $\mathcal{I}(\Upsilon)$ with constant values of $\Upsilon$ should be in $G^{\rm unf}_{V}$ since the expressions for the $\psi$-components of the transformations $\mathcal{Q}^{1}_{\gamma}(\nu_{0})$ and $\mathcal{Q}^{2}_{\gamma}(\nu_{1})$ contain antiderivatives of $\gamma$ and $t\gamma$, which are defined up to constant summands, and there is no canonical choice of these antiderivatives for general values of $\gamma$. Thus, for each equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ from the class $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$, we consider the group $G^{\rm unf}_{V}$ of its point symmetry transformations of the form (7a)–(7b), where $T=t$, $O$ coincides with the identity matrix, $\mathcal{X}^{1}=\nu_{1}t+\nu_{0}$, $\mathcal{X}^{2}=0$, $\Sigma=\frac{1}{4}\nu_{1}{}^{\!2}t+\mu_{0}$, $\Upsilon_{t}=\gamma\mathcal{X}^{1}$, $\mu_{0}$, $\nu_{1}$ and $\nu_{0}$ are arbitrary constants, and $\Lambda=\Lambda(t,x)$ is an arbitrary solution of $\mathcal{L}_{V}$. The corresponding Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm unf}_{V}$ is spanned by the vector fields $M$, $I$, $Q^{1}_{\gamma}$, $Q^{2}_{\gamma}$ and $Z(\eta^{0})$ with $\eta^{0}$ running through the solution set of $\mathcal{L}_{V}$. The suitable subgroup $H$ of the group $G^{\sim}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ is singled out from this group by the constraint $\mathcal{X}^{1}=0$, and the Lie algebra associated with $H$ is $\mathfrak{h}=\langle\hat{D}(1),\hat{D}(t),\hat{D}(t^{2}),\hat{P}(0,\chi^{2}),\hat{M}(\sigma),\hat{I}(\rho)\rangle$.

Since all the conditions of Definition 2 are satisfied and the subgroups $G^{\rm unf}_{V}$ with $V$ running through the set of potentials of the form (20) are known and of the same structure, the class $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ is (uniformly but not disjointedly) semi-normalized with respect to the subgroup $H$ of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ and the family $\mathcal{N}=\{G^{\rm unf}_{V}\}$, where $\pi_{*}H\cap G^{\rm unf}_{V}=G^{\cap}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}=G^{\cap}\neq\{{\rm id}\}$. In view of Proposition 17, the group classification of the class $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ reduces to the classification of $\pi_{*}H$-inequivalent appropriate subalgebras of the algebra

$$\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}=\langle D(1),D(t),D(t^{2}),P(0,\chi^{2}),\sigma M,\rho I\rangle.$$

Denote $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ext}_{V}:=\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\cap\pi_{*}\mathfrak{h}$. The condition $r_{0}=1$ and Corollary 33 imply that any Lie symmetry extension in the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{{\rm l}x_{1}}$ is spanned by vector fields of the form $D(\tau)+P(0,\chi^{2})+\sigma M+\rho I$, where $\tau$ runs through a set of linearly independent quadratic polynomial in $t$. This shows that the computation of inequivalent Lie symmetry extensions reduces to the classification of subalgebras of the algebra ${\rm sl}(2,\mathbb{R})$. Depending on the values of $k_{3}$ we obtain the following subcases.

$k_{3}=0$. There is no additional extension, i.e., we have Case 8.

$k_{3}=1.$ The algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ext}_{V}$ necessarily contains a vector field $Q^{3}$ with nonzero $\tau^{3}$. Up to the $\pi_{*}H$-equivalence, the vector field $Q^{3}$ takes one of the following values: $D(1)$, $D(t)$ and $D(t^{2}+1)-tI$. Taking into account the form (20) of $V$, we successively evaluate the classifying condition (19) at each value of $Q^{3}$ and obtain equations for $U$ and $\gamma$. The solution of these equations results in Cases 9, 10 and 11, respectively, where we change the notation of $U$. Note that we choose the special form of the last value of $Q^{3}$ for simplifying the representation of the corresponding potentials.

$k_{3}\geqslant 2.$ Apart from the vector fields $M$ and $I$, the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ext}_{V}$ additionally contains at least vector fields $Q^{q}$, $q=3,4$, with linearly independent $\tau^{3}$ and $\tau^{4}$. Up to the $\pi_{*}H$-equivalence and linearly combining with $M$ and $I$, the vector fields $Q^{q}$ reduce to $Q^{3}=D(1)$ and $Q^{4}=D(t)$. Evaluating the classifying condition (19) simultaneously at these values of $Q^{3}$ and $Q^{4}$ for the expression (20) of $V$, we obtain $U_{t}=0$, $x_{2}U_{2}+2U=0$ and $\gamma=0$, and thus $V=\tilde{U}x_{2}^{-2}$ with a nonzero complex constant $\tilde{U}$. At the same time, the equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ with this $V$ possesses one more Lie symmetry vector field $Q^{5}=D(t^{2})-tI$. This shows that the Lie symmetry extension with $k_{3}=2$ is not maximal. Therefore, we obtain Case 12.

2. Suppose now that the parameter functions $\chi^{11}$ and $\chi^{12}$ are linearly independent.

If we have no additional extension, then the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ is spanned by the vector fields $M$, $I$ and $Q^{1}=P(\chi^{11},\chi^{12})+\sigma^{1}M+\rho^{1}I$. Lemma 36 implies that the vector field $Q^{1}$ reduces to the form $Q^{1}=P(h\cos t,h\sin t)+\rho I$, where $h$ and $\rho$ are smooth functions of $t$ with $h\neq 0$. The substitution of the components of $Q^{1}$ into the classifying condition (19) yields the equation

$$V_{1}\cos t+V_{2}\sin t=\frac{1}{2}(h^{-1}h_{tt}-1)\omega_{1}+h^{-1}h_{t}\omega_{2}-ih^{-1}\rho_{t},$$

whose general solution is presented in Case 13.

Otherwise, the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ also contains a vector field $Q^{2}$ with nonzero $\tau^{2}$, which takes, up to the $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$-equivalence, the form $Q^{2}=D(1)+\kappa_{2}J$, $\kappa_{2}\in\{0,1\}$. The condition $[Q^{2},Q^{1}]\in\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ means that

$$P(\chi^{11}_{t},\chi^{12}_{t})+\kappa_{2}P(\chi^{12},-\chi^{11})+\sigma^{1}_{t}M+\rho^{1}_{t}=\beta_{1}Q^{1}+\beta_{2}M+\beta_{3}I,$$

where $\beta_{j},\ j=1,2,3$ are real constants. Equating the corresponding components of the vector fields on both the sides, we derive the system

$$\chi^{11}_{t}+\kappa_{2}\chi^{12}=\beta_{1}\chi^{11},\quad\chi^{12}_{t}-\kappa_{2}\chi^{11}=\beta_{1}\chi^{12},\quad\sigma^{1}_{t}=\beta_{1}\sigma^{1}+\beta_{2},\quad\rho^{1}_{t}=\beta_{1}\rho^{1}+\beta_{3}.$$ (22)

If $\kappa_{2}=0$, then the parameter functions $\chi^{11}$ and $\chi^{12}$ are linearly dependent. Hence $\kappa_{2}=1$, i.e., $Q^{2}=D(1)+J$. Integrating the systems (22) and linearly combining $Q^{1}$ with elements from the kernel, we obtain a reduced form of $Q^{1}$ depending on the value of $\beta_{1}$.

If $\beta:=\beta_{1}\neq 0$, then $Q^{1}=P(e^{\beta t}\cos t,e^{\beta t}\sin t)+\tilde{\alpha}e^{\beta t}M+\alpha e^{\beta t}I$ with real constants $\tilde{\alpha}$ and $\alpha$. Pushing vector fields from $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ forward by $\mathcal{P}_{*}(-\tilde{\alpha}\sin t,\tilde{\alpha}\cos t)$, we set $\tilde{\alpha}=0$. The successive substitution of the components of the vector fields $Q^{1}$ and $Q^{2}$ into the classifying condition (19) gives the system

$$V_{1}\cos t+V_{2}\sin t=\frac{1}{2}(\beta^{2}-1)\omega_{1}+\beta\omega_{2}-i\beta\alpha,\quad V_{t}+x_{1}V_{2}-x_{2}V_{1}=0$$

whose general solution is presented in Case 14.

If $\beta_{1}=0$, then the solution of the system (22) provides, after linearly combining with $M$ and $I$, $Q^{1}=P(\cos t,\sin t)+\beta_{2}tM+\beta_{3}tI$. In this case no further simplifications are possible. For convenience, we re-denote $\beta_{2}:=\tilde{\alpha}$ and $\beta_{3}:=\alpha$. Evaluating the classifying condition (19) at $Q^{1}$ and at $Q^{2}$ yields two equations for $V$,

$$V_{t}+x_{2}V_{1}-x_{1}V_{2}=0,\quad V_{1}\cos t+V_{2}\sin t=-\frac{1}{2}\omega_{1}+\tilde{\alpha}-i\alpha.$$

Therefore, we obtain Case 15.

Further classification. In view of Lemma 35, the values of $(k_{2},r_{0})$ not considered so far are $(0,2)$ and $(1,2)$.

Since $r_{0}=2$, the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ contains at least two vector fields of the form $Q^{a}=P(\chi^{a1},\chi^{a2})+\sigma^{a}M+\rho^{a}I$, $a=1,2$, where $\chi^{11}\chi^{22}-\chi^{12}\chi^{21}\neq 0$. The substitution of the components of the vector fields $Q^{a}$ into the classifying condition (19) leads to the following system in $V$:

$$\chi^{ab}V_{b}=\frac{1}{2}\chi^{ab}_{tt}x_{b}+\sigma^{a}_{t}-i\rho^{a}_{t}.$$

This system can be written as $V_{a}=\frac{1}{2}h^{ab}(t)x_{b}+\tilde{h}^{0a}(t)+ih^{0a}(t)$, where the coefficients $h^{ab}$, $\tilde{h}^{0a}$ and $h^{0a}$ are real-valued functions of $t$ that satisfy the conditions

$$\chi^{ab}_{tt}=\chi^{ac}h^{cb},\quad\sigma^{a}_{t}=\chi^{ac}\tilde{h}^{0c},\quad\rho^{a}_{t}=-\chi^{ac}h^{0c}.$$

The condition $V_{12}=V_{21}$ implies that the matrix $(h^{ab})$ is symmetric. Thus, the potential $V$ is a quadratic polynomial in $x_{1}$ and $x_{2}$ with coefficients depending on $t$,

$$V=\frac{1}{4}h^{ab}(t)x_{a}x_{b}+\tilde{h}^{0b}(t)x_{b}+ih^{0b}(t)x_{b}+\tilde{h}^{00}(t)+ih^{00}(t),$$ (23)

where the functions $\tilde{h}^{0b}$, $\tilde{h}^{00}$ and $h^{00}$ can be set equal to zero up to the $G^{\sim}$-equivalence but we will use this possibility later.

Next consider the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{\rm q}$ of equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$ with potentials of the form (23). Theorem 21 implies that, similarly to the entire class $\mathcal{F}$, the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{\rm q}$ is uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions, and its equivalence group coincides with the equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ of $\mathcal{F}$. The further group classification of the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{\rm q}$ splits into cases depending on the value of $k_{2}$. The conditions $k_{2}=0$ and $k_{2}=1$ partition the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{\rm q}$ into the subclasses $\mathcal{F}^{0}_{\rm q}$ and $\mathcal{F}^{1}_{\rm q}$, respectively. These subclasses are uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions as well, and their equivalence groups also coincide with the equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ of the entire class $\mathcal{F}$. The classifying condition (19) implies that the subclass $\mathcal{F}^{1}_{\rm q}$ is singled out from the class $\mathcal{F}_{\rm q}$ by the conditions $h^{12}=h^{21}=0$, $h^{11}=h^{22}$, $h^{01}=0$ and $h^{02}=0$, and the subclass $\mathcal{F}^{0}_{\rm q}$ is then singled out by requiring that one of these conditions fails to hold. In view of Corollary 22 the above condition means that each equation in the subclass $\mathcal{F}^{1}_{\rm q}$ is $G^{\sim}$-equivalent to the (1+2)-dimensional free Schrödinger equation (with $V=0$). In other words, the subclass $\mathcal{F}^{1}_{\rm q}$ is the $G^{\sim}$-orbit of the free Schrödinger equation, which gives Case 19.

Therefore, the last consideration concerns the subclass $\mathcal{F}^{0}_{\rm q}$, for which $k_{2}=0$ and $r_{0}=2$. Up to the $G^{\sim}$-equivalence, the simplified form of potentials for equations from the subclass $\mathcal{F}^{0}_{\rm q}$ is

$$V=\frac{1}{4}h^{ab}(t)x_{a}x_{b}+ih^{0b}(t)x_{b}.$$ (24)

Substituting $V$ of this form into the classifying condition (19) with $\tau=0$ and $\kappa=0$, splitting with respect to $x_{a}$ and separating real and imaginary parts, we derive the following system for $(\chi^{1},\chi^{2},\sigma,\rho)$:

$$\chi^{a}_{tt}=h^{ab}\chi^{b},\quad\sigma_{t}=0,\quad\rho_{t}=-h^{0b}\chi^{b}.$$ (25)

This system admits a fundamental set of solutions $(\chi^{p1},\chi^{p2},0,\rho^{p})$, $p=1,\dots,4$, $(0,0,1,0)$ and $(0,0,0,1)$, where the tuples $(\chi^{p1},\chi^{p2})$ are linearly independent, and $\rho^{p}=-\int h^{0b}\chi^{pb}{\rm d}t$. Thus, the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ contains the four vector fields $Q^{p}=P(\chi^{p1},\chi^{p2})+\rho^{p}I$. The last two solutions correspond to the vector fields $M$ and $I$ from the kernel algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}$. Case 16 presents general equations from the subclass $\mathcal{F}^{0}_{\rm q}$ with no additional Lie symmetry extension.

Otherwise, the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ contains a vector field $Q^{5}$ with nonzero $\tau^{5}$. Up to the $G^{\sim}$-equivalence, the parameter function $\tau^{5}$ is reduced to 1, $\kappa_{5}\in\{0,1\}$, and the simplified form (24) of $V$ is preserved. We substitute the components of $Q^{5}$ jointly with the form (24) of $V$ into the classifying condition (19) and split with respect to different powers of $x_{a}$. As a result, we obtain that the tuple $(\chi^{51},\chi^{52},\sigma^{5},\rho^{5})$ satisfies the system (25), and the parameter functions $h^{ab}$ and $h^{0b}$ are constrained by the equations

$$\begin{split}&h^{11}_{t}+2\kappa_{5}h^{12}=0,\quad h^{12}_{t}+\kappa_{5}(h^{22}-h^{11})=0,\quad h^{22}_{t}-2\kappa_{5}h^{12}=0,\\ &h^{01}_{t}+\kappa_{5}h^{02}=0,\quad h^{02}_{t}-\kappa_{5}h^{01}=0.\end{split}$$ (26)

Therefore, up to linearly combining $Q^{5}$ with $Q^{p}$, $M$ and $I$, we can set $\chi^{5a}=\sigma^{5}=\rho^{5}=0$. This reduces $Q^{5}$ to $D(1)+\kappa_{5}J$. Consider the cases $\kappa_{5}=0$ and $\kappa_{5}=1$ separately.

For $\kappa_{5}=0$, the system (26) implies that all $h^{ab}$ and $h^{0a}$ are constants. Up to rotations, we can reduce the matrix $(h^{ab})$ to a diagonal matrix ${\rm diag}(\alpha,\beta)$. The maximality of the Lie symmetry extension requires $\alpha\neq\beta$ or $(\nu_{1},\nu_{2})\neq(0,0)$ with $\nu_{a}:=h^{0a}$, which gives Case 17.

If $\kappa_{5}=1$, then, up to translations of time, the general solution of the system (26) is $h^{11}=\alpha\cos^{2}t+\beta\sin^{2}t$, $h^{12}=h^{21}=(\alpha-\beta)\cos t\sin t$, $h^{22}=\alpha\sin^{2}t+\beta\cos^{2}t$, $h^{01}=\nu_{1}\cos t-\nu_{2}\sin t$ and $h^{02}=\nu_{1}\sin t+\nu_{2}\cos t$, where $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\nu_{1}$ and $\nu_{2}$ are arbitrary real constants. The Lie symmetry extension is maximal if these constants satisfy the inequalities $\alpha\neq\beta$ or $(\nu_{1},\nu_{2})\neq(0,0)$. Rearranging the potential $V$ in terms of $\omega_{a}$ leads to Case 18.

Let us show that the dimension of additional Lie symmetry extension cannot exceed one. Suppose that this is not the case. Then the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}$ contains a two-dimensional subalgebra spanned by vector fields $Q^{5}$ and $Q^{6}$ with linearly independent $\tau^{5}$ and $\tau^{6}$. Up to the $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}$-equivalence, we can assume that $\tau^{5}=1$ and $\tau^{6}=t$. In a similar way as above, the vector field $Q^{5}$ takes the form $Q^{5}=D(1)+\kappa_{5}J$. The commutation relation for $Q^{5}$ and $Q^{6}$ implies that $\kappa_{5}=0$. Successively evaluating the classifying condition (19) at $Q^{5}$ and at $Q^{6}$ for the form (24) of $V$ and splitting with respect to different powers of $x_{a}$ provides the equations $h^{ab}=h^{0b}=0$, which contradicts the condition singling out the subclass $\mathcal{F}^{0}_{\rm q}$ from the class $\mathcal{F}_{\rm q}$. ∎

9 Subclass with real-valued potentials

Consider the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}$, which consists of the equations of the form (1) with real-valued potentials $V$, i.e., it is singled out from the class $\mathcal{F}$ by the constraint $\mathop{\rm Im}V:=-\frac{1}{2}i(V-V^{*})=0$. Since the class $\mathcal{F}$ is uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions, all results on symmetry analysis of its subclass $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ can be easily derived from the corresponding results for this entire class via singling out objects that are consistent with the constraint $\mathop{\rm Im}V=0$. In particular, using Theorem 21, we construct the equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}_{\mathbb{R}}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ as the maximal subgroupoid of $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ with the set of objects $\mathcal{S}_{\mathbb{R}}\subset\mathcal{S}$ consisting of the real-valued potentials $V$.

Corollary 42.

The equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}_{\mathbb{R}}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ consists of the triples of the form $(V,\Phi,\tilde{V})$, where $\Phi$ is a point transformation in the space of variables, whose components are of the form (7a)–(7b) and the target potential $\tilde{V}$ is expressed via the source potential $V$ as in (7c), where in addition we omit the hat accent $\hat{\ }$ over $V$ and

$$\Upsilon_{t}=-\frac{nT_{tt}}{4T_{t}}.$$

Corollary 43.

A (1+n)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equation of the form (1) with a real-valued potential $V$ is reduced to the free linear Schrödinger equation by a point transformation if and only if

$$V=\varrho(t)|x|^{2}+\varrho^{a}(t)x_{a}+\varrho^{0}(t)$$

for some real-valued smooth functions $\varrho$, $\varrho^{a}$ and $\varrho^{0}$ of $t$.

Corollary 44.

The (usual) equivalence group $G^{\sim}_{\mathbb{R}}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ consists of point transformations in the space with the coordinates $(t,x,\psi,\psi^{*},V)$ whose components are of the form (7), where in addition we omit the hat accent $\hat{\ }$ over $V$ and

$$\Upsilon_{t}=-\frac{nT_{tt}}{4T_{t}},\quad\Lambda=0.$$

Corollary 45.

The class $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ is uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions.

Remark 46.

The identity component of $G^{\sim}_{\mathbb{R}}$ is constituted by the transformations from this group, where in addition $\det O=1$ and $T_{t}>0$, i.e., $\varepsilon^{\prime}=1$. Similarly to $G^{\sim}$, the entire equivalence group $G^{\sim}_{\mathbb{R}}$ is generated by the transformations from its identity component and two discrete transformations, the space reflection $\tilde{t}=t,$ $\tilde{x}_{a}=-x_{a},$ $\tilde{x}_{b}=x_{b},$ $b\neq a$, $\tilde{\psi}=\psi,$ $\tilde{V}=V$ for a fixed $a$ and the Wigner time reflection $\tilde{t}=-t,$ $\tilde{x}=x,$ $\tilde{\psi}=\psi^{*}$, $\tilde{V}=V$.

Corollary 47.

In the notation of Theorem 25, where we omit the $V^{*}$-components in all vector fields, the equivalence algebra of the class $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ is the algebra

$$\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}_{\mathbb{R}}=\left\langle\hat{D}(\tau)-\frac{n}{4}\hat{I}(\tau_{t}),\,\hat{J}_{ab},\,a<b,\,\hat{P}(\chi),\,\hat{M}(\sigma),\,\hat{I}(1)\right\rangle.$$

Lie-symmetry vector fields of equations from the class $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ have the same properties as those within the class $\mathcal{F}$ that are presented in Sections 7.3 and 7.4 and additionally satisfy the constraint $\rho_{t}+\frac{1}{4}n\tau_{tt}=0$. In particular, the kernel invariance algebra of the class $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ is $\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}_{\mathbb{R}}=\mathfrak{g}^{\cap}=\langle M,I\rangle$, and the linear span of essential Lie-symmetry vector of equations from the class $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ is

$$\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}\mathbb{R}}:=\sum_{V\in\mathcal{S}_{\mathbb{R}}}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}=\left\{D(\tau)-\frac{n}{4}\tau_{t}I+\sum_{a<b}\kappa_{ab}J_{ab}+P(\chi)+\sigma M+cI\right\}.$$

The problem of group classification of (1+n)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equations with real-valued potentials reduces to the classification of appropriate subalgebras of the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}\mathbb{R}}$ with respect to the equivalence relation generated by the action of $\pi_{*}G^{\sim}_{\mathbb{R}}$.

In view of the relation (7c) between source and target potentials for admissible transformations within the class $\mathcal{F}$, an equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ from this class can be mapped by a point transformation to an equation from the class $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ if and only if the imaginary part of $V$ depends at most on $t$. This is why we do not need to solve the group classification problem for the class $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ with $n=2$ from the very beginning, but its solution can be easily derived from that for the class $\mathcal{F}$ presented in Theorem 38. It suffices to single out, among the cases listed in Theorem 38, those where the imaginary parts of the corresponding potentials are zero. More specifically, we should set $\mathop{\rm Im}V=0$ in Case 0, $\mathop{\rm Im}U=0$ in Cases 1–15, $\rho=0$ in Cases 5 and 13, $\beta_{1}=0$ in Case 6, $\gamma=0$ in Case 8, $\beta=0$ in Cases 9–11, $\alpha=0$ in Cases 14 and 15, $h^{01}=h^{02}=0$ in Case 16 and $\nu_{1}=\nu_{2}=0$ in Cases 17 and 18.

10 Conclusion

The initial aim of the paper was to study transformational properties of (1+$n$)-dimensional linear Schrödinger equations with complex-valued potentials, which are of the form (1) and constitute the class denoted by $\mathcal{F}$, for arbitrary values of $n\in\mathbb{N}$ and to carry out the complete group of such equations with $n=2$. It turned out that this effort requires advancing the theoretical background of symmetry analysis in classes of differential equations, which became the main subject of the paper. We have revisited and extended the entire framework of normalized classes of differential equations, including its basic notions and terminology, and proved the theorems on factoring out point-symmetry groups and maximal Lie invariance algebras within semi-normalized classes and the stronger theorems on splitting such groups and algebras within disjointedly semi-normalized classes. We have also constructed several proof-of-concept examples. This has allowed us to extend the algebraic method of group classification to classes that are semi-normalized in a more general sense, whereas previously only the disjointed semi-normalization with respect to the entire corresponding equivalence groups (in the present terminology) was considered.

For the class $\mathcal{F}$ with an arbitrary $n$, we first computed its equivalence groupoid $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ by the direct method and thus proved that this class is uniformly semi-normalized with respect to the linear superposition of solutions, which motivates the use of the developed version of the algebraic method of group classification. Knowing $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$, we have easily found the equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}$ and constructed the associated equivalence algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ as the set of infinitesimal generators of one-parameter subgroups of the group $G^{\sim}$.

Working within the framework of the algebraic method, we have reduced the group classification of equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$ to the classification of specific low-dimensional subalgebras of the algebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$ or, equivalently, $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$. After analyzing the determining equations for Lie symmetries of equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$, we have constructed the linear span $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ of the vector fields from the maximal Lie invariance algebras of these equations. This linear span can be represented as the semidirect sum of the so-called essential subalgebra $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ and an ideal $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ related to the linear superposition of solutions, $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}=\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}\mathbin{\mbox{$\hbox to0.0pt{$\displaystyle\hskip 3.31528pt\rule{0.4pt}{5.16663pt}$\hss}{\in}$}}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$. We have shown that $\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}=\pi_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$. For each equation $\mathcal{L}_{V}$ from the class $\mathcal{F}$, the representation for $\mathfrak{g}_{\mbox{\tiny$\langle\,\rangle$}}$ induces the similar representation for the maximal Lie invariance algebra $\mathfrak{g}_{V}$ of $\mathcal{L}_{V}$, $\mathfrak{g}_{V}=\mathfrak{g}^{\rm ess}_{V}\mathbin{\mbox{$\hbox to0.0pt{$\displaystyle\hskip 3.31528pt\rule{0.4pt}{5.16663pt}$\hss}{\in}$}}\mathfrak{g}^{\rm lin}_{V}$. The analysis of the determining equations has also resulted in the principal constraints for the appropriate subalgebras of the algebra $\pi_{*}\mathfrak{g}^{\sim}$.

The group classification problem of the class $\mathcal{F}$ with $n=2$ has been completely solved using the results obtained for the general value of $n$. All possible inequivalent families of potentials possessing essential Lie symmetry extensions have been listed in Theorem 38.

In contrast to the case of single space variable $(n=1)$ studied in [35], the maximal Lie invariance algebras of equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$ with $n=2$ can be of essentially greater dimensions, and some of these algebras involve the rotation vector field, which cannot appear for $n=1$. These two facts make the group classification more complex. To come up with this challenge and make the classification rigorous and efficient, we have split the group classification of the class $\mathcal{F}$ into different cases depending on three integers, $k_{2}\in\{0,1\}$, $r_{0}\in\{0,1,2\}$ and $k_{3}\in\{0,1,2,3\}$. These integers characterize the dimensions of parts of the corresponding essential Lie invariance subalgebra that are related to transformations of time, rotations and generalized time-dependent shifts with respect to space variables, respectively, and are invariant under acting by the equivalence group $G^{\sim}$ of the class $\mathcal{F}$. Not all values of the tuple $(k_{2},r_{0},k_{3})$ are appropriate. The constraint $(k_{2},r_{0})\neq(1,1)$ for the appropriate values of $(k_{2},r_{0},k_{3})$ is quite obvious and is presented in Lemma 35 in the course of the preliminary analysis of Lie symmetries of equations from the class $\mathcal{F}$. This is not the case for the other constraint $k_{3}\neq 2$ if $(k_{2},r_{0})\neq(0,0)$, which can be derived only from the entire proof of Theorem 38.

We have also comprehensively studied the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$ of $\mathcal{F}$, which is constituted by equations of the form (1) with real-valued potentials. One can easily convert the above results for the class $\mathcal{F}$ into those for the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$, merely selecting all the transformational objects related to the class $\mathcal{F}$ that are relevant for real-valued potentials. In this way, we have straightforwardly constructed the equivalence groupoid and the equivalence group of the subclass $\mathcal{F}_{\mathbb{R}}$, proved its uniform semi-normalization with respect to the linear superposition of solutions, described properties of Lie symmetries of its elements and obtained its complete group classification in the case of two space variables.

The similar study for the subclasses $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}$ and $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}_{\mathbb{R}}$ consisting of equations of the form (1) with time-independent complex- and real-valued potentials, respectively, is not straightforward at all. Even singling out the equivalence groupoids of these subclasses as subgroupoids of the groupoids $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}$ and $\mathcal{G}^{\sim}_{\mathbb{R}}$ given in Theorem 21 and Corollary 42 requires significant efforts. The entire group analysis of the subclasses $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}$ and $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}_{\mathbb{R}}$ is complicated due to the fact that these subclasses are not semi-normalized. A particular consequence of this fact is that one should consider two different group classification problems for each of the subclasses $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}$ and $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}_{\mathbb{R}}$, up to the equivalence generated by the corresponding equivalence groupoid and up to the equivalence generated by the corresponding equivalence group. The group classification lists for $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}$ and $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}_{\mathbb{R}}$ up to the former equivalence can be formally derived from Theorem 38, but they are not too useful if the equivalence groupoids of $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}$ and $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}_{\mathbb{R}}$ are not known. The study of Lie symmetries of Schrödinger equations from the class $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}_{\mathbb{R}}$ was initiated by Boyer in [11]. The classification list of potentials was presented for $n=3$, including the unfounded claim that it can be converted to the lists for $n=1$ and $n=2$ by “straightforward restriction”. It is of common knowledge that Boyer’s classification list has a number of weaknesses, see, e.g., [54]. There are missed and equivalent cases in this list and essential gaps in its derivation. In particular, it is not clear which kind of equivalence had been used. The above weaknesses have not been comprehensively corrected in the literature. Hence the rigorous group analysis of the subclasses $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}$ and $\mathcal{F}^{\prime}_{\mathbb{R}}$ with explicit indication of the used equivalence is still an open problem.

The results on group classification of the class $\mathcal{F}$ and its subclasses can be used, in particular, to classify Lie reductions of equations from this class and construct their invariant solutions.