Differential Geometry – Horizontal Lift of X_t in M=?^1

differential-geometry

I am self-studying https://sayanmuk.github.io/StochasticAnalysisManifolds.pdf and I am struggling with the following example of a horizontal lift which should be elementary.

Example 2.3.6. Let $M = \mathbb{R}^1$ equipped with a general connection given by $\nabla \mathrm{e} = \Gamma \mathrm{e}$, where $\mathrm{e}$ is the usual unit vector field on $\mathbb{R}^1$: $\mathrm{e}(f) = f'$, and $\Gamma \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^1)$. Define
$$
G(x) = \int_{0}^{x} \Gamma(y) \, dy, \quad \phi(x) = \int_{0}^{x} e^{-G(y)} \, dy.
$$

Let $X$ be a semimartingale.
With the canonical embedding $\text{GL}(\mathbb{R}^1) = \mathbb{R}^1 \times \mathbb{R}^1$, the horizontal lift of $X$ is given by
$$
U_t = \left( X_t, e^{-G(X_t)} \right).
$$

I can see this is following the resaoning of the material I covered in this question: Understanding Associated Frame bundle terminology $u e_i = e_j^i X_j$

But I am failing to see why the $GL(n,\mathbb{R})$ should be $e^{-G(X_t)}$. I am sure there is some proof underneath this. But I do not see how I should do it.

Questions:
How to prove the assertion? Why does the author define $\phi(x)=\int_0^x e^{+G(y)} dy$?

Thanks in advance.

Best Answer

Here is how the product rule (always) arises in such situations. Let $\xi = fe$. Then (differentiating in the direction of the vector $e = d/dx$ is understood) $$\nabla \xi = \nabla(fe) = f'(x)e + f\nabla e = \big(f'(x)+f(x)\Gamma(x)\big)e.$$ So $\xi$ is parallel if and only if $f'(x)+f(x)\Gamma(x)=0$, which means $f'(x)/f(x) = -\Gamma(x)$. Taking $f(0)=1$, this gives us $$f(x) = f(0)e^{-\int_0^x \Gamma(y)\,dy} = e^{-G(x)}.$$ I presume the text you are reading will discuss the relevance of $\phi$.