an obvious E$_{F}$ crossing in the nodal direction occurs for p ∼ 0 . 075, where the system becomes superconducting. This is contrasted with spectra of LSCO with similar doping levels, where the LHB stays away ( ∼− 0 . 5 eV) from E$_{F}$ but a sharp QP peak crossing E$_{F}$ is visible already for p ≃ 0 . 03 2 due to the presence of two separate spectral features, namely, the LHB and the QP crossing E$_{F}$ . Figure 2(a)-(d) shows the ARPES spectra along the “underlying” Fermi surface $^{6}$. Here, by the “underlying” Fermi surface is meant the minimum-gap locus including the pseudogap region around k ≃ ( π, 0) as reported for underdoped Bi2212 $^{13}$. The figure again shows a single dispersive feature that moves upward with hole doping p . This is also contrasted with the case of LSCO where the LHB stays ∼ 0 . 5 eV below E$_{F}$ , where the QP crosses, leading to the “two-component” behavior, in particular around ( π, 0) $^{11}$. While a dispersive peak which crosses E$_{F}$ occurs in the (0 , 0)-( π, π ) nodal direction (for p ≥ 0.075), no E$_{F}$ crossing occurs and a finite (pseudo)gap persists around k ∼ ( π, 0). The second derivatives of the spectra shown in Fig. 2(e)-(h) indicate the dispersion along the underlying Fermi surface. In Fig. 3, we have plotted the doping dependence of the peak positions in EDCs on the (underlying) Fermi surface at ∼ ( π/ 2 , π/ 2) and those at ∼ ( π, 0) thus determined by taking the second derivatives. One can see that in Bi2212, the peak positions at ∼ ( π/ 2 , π/ 2) and ∼ ( π, 0) show nearly parallel shifts with doping in the lightly-doped region, again indicating a rigid-band-like shift of the LHB similar to the case of Na-CCOC 8 and Bi2201 $^{5}$. In the same figure, we have plotted the doping dependence of the peak position at ∼ ( π/ 2 , π/ 2) and ∼ ( π, 0) in LSCO determined in the same way $^{14}$. In LSCO a sharp QP feature appears near E$_{F}$ already at p ∼ 0 . 03 and stays there while the LHB is located at ∼− 0 . 5 eV. The amount of the shift of each feature is much smaller in LSCO than that in Bi2212 and Na-CCOC. To reveal further details of the evolution of the electronic structure near E$_{F}$ , EDCs along (0 , 0)-( π, π ) of lightly-doped Bi2212 are plotted on an expanded scale in Fig. 4(a)-(d) with the peak positions determined by the second derivatives of the EDCs. Figure 4(e) shows the dispersion of the EDC peak (representing that of the LHB) along the (0,0)-( π, π ) direction. In addition, we have plotted the dispersion of the “QP band” which has been determined by the momentum distribution curve (MDC) analysis, as performed for Bi2201 5 and Na- CCOC $^{8}$. Although there is no sharp peak crossing E$_{F}$ in the EDCs of the p =0.03 and 0.05 samples, the peak in the MDCs shows a clear dispersion crossing E$_{F}$ , as shown in Fig. 4(e). Here, the results for each composition have been shifted so that the LHB positions coincide. 4