Suppose that \left( M, g \right) is an n-dimensional
Riemannian or
pseudo-Riemannian manifold, equipped with its
Levi-Civita connection . The
Riemann curvature of M is a map that takes smooth vector fields , , and , and returns the vector field R(X,Y)Z := \nabla_X\nabla_Y Z - \nabla_Y\nabla_XZ - \nabla_{[X,Y]}Zon
vector fields , , . Since R is a tensor field, for each point , it gives rise to a (multilinear) map: \operatorname{R}_p:T_pM\times T_pM\times T_pM\to T_pM. Define for each point p \in M the map \operatorname{Ric}_p:T_pM\times T_pM\to\mathbb{R} by \operatorname{Ric}_p(Y,Z) := \operatorname{tr}\big(X\mapsto \operatorname{R}_p(X,Y)Z\big). That is, having fixed Y and , then for any orthonormal basis v_1, \ldots, v_n of the vector space , one has \operatorname{Ric}_p(Y,Z) = \sum_{i=1} \langle\operatorname{R}_p(v_i, Y) Z, v_i \rangle. It is a standard exercise of (multi)linear algebra to verify that this definition does not depend on the choice of the basis . In
abstract index notation, \mathrm{Ric}_{ab} = \mathrm{R}^{c}{}_{bca} = \mathrm{R}^{c}{}_{acb}.
Sign conventions. Note that some sources define R(X,Y)Z to be what would here be called ; they would then define \operatorname{Ric}_p as {{tmath| -\operatorname{tr}(X\mapsto \operatorname{R}_p(X,Y)Z) }}. Although sign conventions differ about the Riemann tensor, they do not differ about the Ricci tensor.
Definition via local coordinates on a smooth manifold Let \left( M, g \right) be a smooth
Riemannian or
pseudo-Riemannian n-manifold. Given a smooth chart \left( U, \varphi \right) one then has functions g_{ij}: \varphi(U) \rightarrow \mathbb{R} and g^{ij}: \varphi(U) \rightarrow \mathbb{R} for each , which satisfy \sum_{k=1}^n g^{ik}(x)g_{kj}(x) = \delta^{i}_j = \begin{cases} 1 & i=j \\ 0 & i \neq j \end{cases} for all . The latter shows that, expressed as matrices, {{tmath|1= g^{ij}(x) = (g^{-1})_{ij}(x) }}. The functions g_{ij} are defined by evaluating g on coordinate vector fields, while the functions g^{ij} are defined so that, as a matrix-valued function, they provide an inverse to the matrix-valued function {{tmath| x \mapsto g_{ij}(x) }}. Now define, for each , , , , and j between 1 and , the functions \begin{align} \Gamma_{ab}^c &:= \frac{1}{2} \sum_{d=1}^n \left(\frac{\partial g_{bd}}{\partial x^a} + \frac{\partial g_{ad}}{\partial x^b} - \frac{\partial g_{ab}}{\partial x^d}\right)g^{cd}\\ R_{ij} &:= \sum_{a=1}^n\frac{\partial\Gamma_{ij}^a}{\partial x^a} - \sum_{a=1}^n\frac{\partial\Gamma_{ai}^a}{\partial x^j} + \sum_{a=1}^n\sum_{b=1}^n\left(\Gamma_{ab}^a\Gamma_{ij}^b - \Gamma_{ib}^a\Gamma_{aj}^b\right) \end{align} as maps {{tmath| \varphi: U \rightarrow \mathbb{R} }}. Now let \left( U, \varphi \right) and \left( V, \psi \right) be two smooth charts with . Let R_{ij}: \varphi(U) \rightarrow \mathbb{R} be the functions computed as above via the chart \left( U, \varphi \right) and let r_{ij}: \psi(V) \rightarrow \mathbb{R} be the functions computed as above via the chart . Then one can check by a calculation with the chain rule and the product rule that R_{ij}(x) = \sum_{k,l=1}^n r_{kl}\left(\psi\circ\varphi^{-1}(x)\right)D_i\Big|_x \left(\psi\circ\varphi^{-1}\right)^kD_j\Big|_x \left(\psi\circ\varphi^{-1}\right)^l , where D_{i} is the first derivative along th direction of {{tmath| \mathbb{R}^n }}. This shows that the following definition does not depend on the choice of . For any , define a bilinear map \operatorname{Ric}_p : T_p M \times T_p M \rightarrow \mathbb{R} by (X, Y) \in T_p M \times T_p M \mapsto \operatorname{Ric}_p(X,Y) = \sum_{i,j=1}^n R_{ij}(\varphi(x))X^i(p)Y^j(p), where X^1, \ldots, X^n and Y^1, \ldots, Y^n are the components of the tangent vectors at p in X and Y relative to the coordinate vector fields of . It is common to abbreviate the above formal presentation in the following style: {{block indent| em = 2 | text = Let M be a smooth manifold, and let be a Riemannian or pseudo-Riemannian metric. In local smooth coordinates, define the Christoffel symbols \begin{align} \Gamma_{ij}^k &:= \frac{1}{2}g^{kl}\left(\partial_ig_{jl} + \partial_jg_{il} - \partial_lg_{ij}\right)\\ R_{jk} &:= \partial_i\Gamma_{jk}^i - \partial_k\Gamma_{ji}^i + \Gamma_{ip}^i\Gamma_{jk}^p - \Gamma_{jp}^i\Gamma_{ik}^p. \end{align} It can be directly checked that R_{jk} = \widetilde{R}_{ab}\frac{\partial\widetilde{x}^a}{\partial x^j}\frac{\partial\widetilde{x}^b}{\partial x^k}, so that R_{ij} define a (0,2)-tensor field on . In particular, if X and Y are vector fields on , then relative to any smooth coordinates one has \begin{align} R_{jk}X^jY^k &= \left(\widetilde{R}_{ab}\frac{\partial\widetilde{x}^a}{\partial x^j}\frac{\partial\widetilde{x}^b}{\partial x^k}\right)\left(\widetilde{X}^c\frac{\partial x^j}{\partial\widetilde{x}^c}\right)\left(\widetilde{Y}^d\frac{\partial x^k}{\partial\widetilde{x}^d}\right) \\ &= \widetilde{R}_{ab}\widetilde{X}^c\widetilde{Y}^d\left(\frac{\partial\widetilde{x}^a}{\partial x^j}\frac{\partial x^j}{\partial\widetilde{x}^c}\right)\left(\frac{\partial\widetilde{x}^b}{\partial x^k}\frac{\partial x^k}{\partial\widetilde{x}^d}\right) \\ &= \widetilde{R}_{ab}\widetilde{X}^c\widetilde{Y}^d\delta_c^a\delta_d^b \\ &= \widetilde{R}_{ab}\widetilde{X}^a\widetilde{Y}^b. \end{align} }} The final line includes the demonstration that the bilinear map Ric is well-defined, which is much easier to write out with the informal notation.
Comparison of the definitions The two above definitions are identical. The formulas defining \Gamma_{ij}^k and R_{ij} in the coordinate approach have an exact parallel in the formulas defining the Levi-Civita connection, and the Riemann curvature via the Levi-Civita connection. Arguably, the definitions directly using local coordinates are preferable, since the "crucial property" of the Riemann tensor mentioned above requires M to be Hausdorff in order to hold. By contrast, the local coordinate approach only requires a smooth atlas. It is also somewhat easier to connect the "invariance" philosophy underlying the local approach with the methods of constructing more exotic geometric objects, such as
spinor fields. The complicated formula defining R_{ij} in the introductory section is the same as that in the following section. The only difference is that terms have been grouped so that it is easy to see that {{tmath|1= R_{ij}=R_{ji} }}. == Properties ==