Nuclear Physics B

NUCLEAR PHYSICS B
Journal devoted to the experimental and theoretical study of the fundamental

constituents of matter and their interactions
Editorial Board
Supervisory Editors: G. ALTARELLI, Geneva, Switzerland; W. BARTEL, Hamburg, Germany; C. BECCHI, Genova,
Italy; R.H. DIJKGRAAF, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; D. KUTASOV, Chicago, IL, USA; L. MAIANI, Rome, Italy;
H. MURAYAMA, Berkeley, CA, USA; T. NAKADA, Geneva, Switzerland; N. NEKRASOV, Bures-sur-Yvette, France;
H. OOGURI, CalTech, Pasadena, CA, USA; H. SALEUR, USC, Los Angeles, CA, USA; A. SCHWIMMER, Rehovot,
Israel
Associate Editors for Particle Physics: S.J. Brodsky, SLAC; M. Dine, UC, Santa Cruz; G. Dvali, New York; G.W.
Gibbons, Cambridge, UK; D. Gross, St. Barbara; S.S. Gubser, Princeton; L. Ibanez, Madrid; R.L. Jaffe, MIT; K. Kajantie,
Helsinki; M. Luescher, CERN; E. Rabinovici, Jerusalem; L. Randall, Princeton; A. Sen, Bombay; G. Steigman, Ohio
State; G. t Hooft, Utrecht; Y. Totsuka, KEK; P. van Baal, Leiden; S. Weinberg, Texas; J. Zinn-Justin, Saclay
Associate Editors for Field Theory and Statistical Systems: B. Duplantier, Saclay; A.W.W. Ludwig, Santa Barbara;
S. Lukyanov, Rutgers, Piscataway; T. Miwa, Kyoto; G. Mussardo, Trieste; M. Oshikawa, Tokyo; G. Parisi, Frascati;
A.M. Polyakov, Princeton; R. Sasaki, Kyoto; M. Zirnbauer, Cologne
Aims and Scope
Nuclear Physics B focuses on the domain of high energy physics and quantum field theory, and includes three main sections, i.e. particle physics, field theory and statistical systems and physical mathematics. The emphasis is on original
research papers. Conference Proceedings on the topics covered by Nuclear Physics B are published in the (separately
available) journal Nuclear Physics B-Proceedings Supplements.
Abstracted/Indexed in:
Chemical Abstracts/Current Contents: Physical, Chemical & Earth Sciences. Also covered in the abstract and citation
database SCOPUS . Full text available on ScienceDirect .
Subscription Information 2008
Volumes 788805 are scheduled for publication in 54 issues. Publication frequency: three times a month. Subscription
prices are available upon request from the Publisher or from the Regional Sales Office nearest you or from this journals
website (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/nuclphysb). A combined subscription to Nuclear Physics A ISSN 0375-9474
(volumes 798814), Nuclear Physics B ISSN 0550-3213 (volumes 788805) and Nuclear Physics B Proceedings Supplements ISSN 0920-5632 (volumes 174185) is available at a reduced rate. Subscriptions are accepted on a prepaid
basis only and are entered on a calendar year basis. Issues are sent by standard mail (surface within Europe, air delivery
outside Europe). Priority rates are available upon request. Claims for missing issues should be made within six months
of the date of dispatch.
Orders, claims, and journal enquiries: please contact the Customer Service Department at the Regional Sales Office
nearest you:
Orlando: Elsevier, Customer Service Department, 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL 32887-4800, USA; phone: (+1)
(877) 8397126 [toll free number for US customers], or (+1) (407) 3454020 [customers outside US]; fax: (+1) (407)
3631354; e-mail: usjcs@elsevier.com
Amsterdam: Elsevier, Customer Service Department, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands; phone:
(+31) (20) 4853757; fax: (+31) (20) 4853432; e-mail: nlinfo-f@elsevier.com
Tokyo: Elsevier, Customer Service Department, 4F Higashi-Azabu, 1-Chome Bldg, 1-9-15 Higashi-Azabu, Minato-ku,
Tokyo 106-0044, Japan; phone: (+81) (3) 5561 5037; fax: (+81) (3) 5561 5047; e-mail: jp.info@elsevier.com
Singapore: Elsevier, Customer Service Department, 3 Killiney Road, #08-01 Winsland House I, Singapore 239519;
phone: (+65) 63490222; fax: (+65) 67331510; e-mail: asiainfo@elsevier.com
Advertising information
Europe, USA, Canada and ROW: Advertising orders and enquiries can be sent to: Miss Katrina Barton, phone: (+44)
(0) 20 7611 4117; fax: (+44) (0) 20 7611 4463; e-mail: commercialsales@elsevier.com.
South America: Advertising orders and enquiries can be sent to: Mr Tino DeCarlo, The Advertising Department,
Elsevier Inc., 360 Park Avenue South, New York, NY 10010-1710, USA; phone: (+1) (212) 633 3815; fax: (+1) (212)
633 3820; e-mail: t.decarlo@elsevier.com.
US mailing notice Nuclear Physics B (ISSN 0550-3213) is published weekly by Elsevier B.V., P.O. Box 211, 1000
AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The annual institutional subscription price in the USA is US$ 13612 (valid in North,
Central and South America), including air speed delivery. Periodical postage paid at Rahway NJ and additional mailing
offices. USA Postmaster: Send change of address: Nuclear Physics B, Elsevier, 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL
32887-4800. Airfreight and mailing in the USA by Mercury International Limited, 365, Blair Road, Avenel, NJ 07001.
Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

www.elsevier.com/locate/nuclphysb
Fermion mass hierarchies and flavour mixing

from a minimal discrete symmetry
Ferruccio Feruglio, Yin Lin
Dipartimento di Fisica G. Galilei, Universit di Padova, INFN, Sezione di Padova,
Via Marzolo 8, I-35131 Padua, Italy
Received 4 January 2008; accepted 12 February 2008
Available online 16 February 2008
Abstract
We construct a simple model of fermion masses based on a spontaneously broken S3 Z3 flavour group.
At the leading order, in the neutrino sector S3 is broken down to a parity subgroup that enforces a
maximal atmospheric mixing angle and a vanishing 13 . In the charged lepton sector the parity is
maximally broken and the resulting mass matrix is nearly diagonal. The charged lepton mass hierarchy is
automatically reproduced by the S3 symmetry breaking parameter alone. A careful analysis shows that, after
the inclusion of all relevant subleading effects, the model predicts 23 = /4 + O(2c ) and 13 = O(2c ),
c denoting the Cabibbo angle. A simple extension to the quark sector is also illustrated, where the mass
spectrum and the mixing angles are naturally reproduced, with the exception of the mixing angle between
the first two generations, that requires a small accidental enhancement.
2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
On the eve of the tenth anniversary of the SuperKamiokande (SK) data on atmospheric neutrinos, that shook the whole field and gave rise to a decade of incredible excitement and activity,
neutrino oscillation parameters are known to a sufficiently high precision to make desirable a
theoretical description going beyond the mere fitting procedure. In particular the leptonic mixing
pattern, so different from the one in the quark sector, provides a non-trivial theoretical challenge.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: feruglio@pd.infn.it (F. Feruglio), lin@pd.infn.it (Y. Lin).

0550-3213/$ see front matter 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.02.008
78
F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793
The present data [1]:

12 = (34.5 1.4) ,

23 = 42.3+5.1
3.3 ,

13 = 0.0+7.9
0.0 ,
(1)
are fully compatible with the so-called tri-bimaximal (TB) mixing pattern, where

1
1
sin2 23 = ,
12 = 35.3 ,
sin2 13 = 0.
(2)
3
2
Several theoretical mechanisms leading to a nearly TB mixing have been suggested in the last
years [25]. The TB mixing has the advantage of correctly describing the solar mixing angle,
which, at present, is the most precisely known. Indeed, its 1 error, 1.4 degrees correspond to
less than 2c radians, where c 0.22 denotes the Cabibbo angle.
Reaching a similar sensitivity on 23 and 13 will require some more years of work, but it is
a remarkable feature that the central values of these angles remained surprisingly stable in the
last ten years. The value of 23 quoted above is largely dominated by the SK data. It is however
noticeable that the independent determinations of 23 by MACRO [6], K2K [7], MINOS [8]
and SK [9], analyzed in a two-flavour framework, all select sin2 223 = 1 as best fit value. By
removing the boundary sin2 223 1, K2K, MINOS and SK prefer sin2 223 slightly outside
the physical region. Notice that the value of 23 extracted from three-flavour global fits, quoted
in Eq. (1), is slightly non-maximal. Such an effect becomes manifest when we move from the
two-flavour analysis to the three-flavour one [10]. In the last case, the dependence on m212
is included in the analysis of atmospheric neutrino data and the deviation from maximality is
due to the presence of a small excess of events in the sub-GeV electron sample of SK, which
the two-flavour analysis cannot completely account for. At the moment such a deviation is not
statistically significant, but future, more precise data might confirm that the maximality of 23 is
violated at the 2c level. The upper bound on 13 is dominated by the CHOOZ data [11], though
the preference for a small 13 is also present in the solar and the atmospheric data samples.
Moreover, the recent significant error reduction on |m223 | by MINOS has also sharpened the
CHOOZ bound on 13 , which depends on |m223 |. From the theory point of view, maximal and
vanishing mixing angles are special and many theoretical efforts have been devoted to explain
how 23 = /4 and/or 13 = 0 can be generated.
As a matter of fact, in the so-called flavour basis, the most general neutrino mass matrix giving
rise to 23 = /4 and 13 = 0 displays a parity symmetry [12]. Such a parity symmetry,
when extended to the whole theory, is expected to be broken in the charged lepton sector by
the large hierarchy m /m 1. In a realistic model the breaking effects, responsible for nonvanishing 23 /4 and 13 , should have only a small impact on the neutrino sector. Assuming
diagonal charged leptons, textures supported by the symmetry, including breaking effects,
have been widely studied in the literature1 [1416]. Special attention has been paid to the effect
of small symmetry breaking terms coming from the neutrino sector on the values cos 223
and sin2 13 . Depending on the type of neutrino mass hierarchy, correlations among small quantities such as sin2 13 , cos 223 and R = m2sol /m2atm have been investigated. In particular,
in simple frameworks, it turns out that sin2 13 is strongly suppressed by R for normal hierarchy [14]. Since the Dirac phase is absent in the symmetric limit, we expect that deviations
of 23 /4 and 13 from zero are sensitive to CP phases (including Majorana phases) [14].
sin2 12 =
1 The exchange symmetry between the second and the third generations has also been adopted as a texture symmetry
not only for neutrinos but for all fermions [13]. Both lepton and quark mixing angles can be reproduced and there are
enough parameters to fit the fermion masses, without however explaining their hierarchies.
79
Moreover, the breaking of the symmetry can be driven entirely by the introduction of CP
violating phases [16]. In this case strict correlations between the CP violation and the broken
symmetry can be established.2 However, in a general framework where Ul , the contribution to lepton mixing from the charged leptons, is only approximately equal to the unit matrix,
many of these correlations are relaxed. For this reason, it is particularly instructive to explore
models of fermion masses providing a consistent and unified picture of the neutrino sector and
of the hierarchy among charged lepton masses. Only in such a context it will be possible to
keep under control all possible breaking effects of the symmetry and to achieve a realistic
next-to-leading order prediction for cos 223 and sin2 13 .
Nowadays promising candidates for a unified picture of fermion mass hierarchies and flavour
mixing are the models based on spontaneously broken flavour symmetries. The mixing angles,
in particular the leptonic ones, are best understood by a mechanism of vacuum misalignment
occurring in theories with non-Abelian flavour symmetries.3 In the various fermion sectors of the
theory (up quarks, down quarks, charged leptons and neutrinos) the symmetry is broken along
different directions in flavour space and the corresponding diagonalizations require misaligned
unitary transformations, which end up in the desired mixing pattern. Such breaking schemes are
easy to arrange in SUSY models based on small discrete symmetry groups, where the discussion
of vacuum alignment is particularly simple and transparent. Also the fermion mass hierarchies
can be achieved via spontaneous breaking of the flavour symmetry. However, in most cases,
a separate component of the flavour group is exploited to this purpose. Quite frequently the
flavour group is of the type D U (1)FN where D is a discrete component that controls the
mixing angles and U (1)FN is an Abelian continuous symmetry that describes the mass hierarchy,
along the lines of the original FroggattNielsen proposal [19]. It would be desirable to have a
more economical model where the same flavon fields producing the mixing pattern via VEV
misalignment are also responsible for the mass hierarchies. Models of this type based on the
gauged flavour groups SU(3), SO(3) [20] and the non-Abelian finite group PSL2 (7) [21] exist
in the literature. In some of these models the charged fermion mass hierarchies are obtained via
a flamboyant flavour symmetry breaking sector and a particular choice of the messenger scales.
It would be interesting to identify a kind of minimal flavour group with few flavon fields, able
to provide a decent description of the main features of the fermion mass spectrum, including the
approximate vanishing of 13 and of 23 /4.
In this paper we illustrate a model for lepton masses based on the small discrete group S3 Z3 .
The non-Abelian factor S3 is spontaneously broken by a special vacuum misalignment. This
guarantees the relations 23 = /4 and 13 = 0 at the lowest order in the expansion parameters
/ 1 describing the symmetry breaking of S3 . The same expansion also provides the required suppression factors that explain the observed hierarchies among charged lepton masses.
There is no need of additional flavons or of additional group factors to describe, at the level of
orders of magnitude, all lepton masses. The Z3 factor remains unbroken to forbid unwanted couplings between different fermion sectors. It is also of great experimental interest to establish at
which order in / 1 the leading order results for 23 and 13 are potentially violated. After
2 CP violating phases associated to breaking effects are also relevant in leptogenesis. In simple realizations

of the seesaw mechanism, an exact symmetry in the Dirac mass matrix and in the right-handed neutrino mass
matrix implies a vanishing primordial lepton asymmetry. A successful leptogenesis requires appropriate extensions of
this scheme [17].
3 Spontaneously broken discrete symmetries with preserved sub-groups can play also an important role in explaining
the Cabibbo angle, see for instance [18].
80
a detail analysis of all breaking effects, we get:

23 =

+ O 2c ,
4

13 = O 2c ,
(3)
where c is the Cabibbo angle. The structure of the model is very simple. The main feature is
the spontaneous breaking of S3 by two sets of flavon fields, e and ( , ). Thanks to a vacuum
alignment property, ( , ) breaks S3 down to a parity subgroup, while e breaks S3 completely. In particular the parity is maximally broken by e . These two breaking patterns
are selectively supplied to the Yukawa couplings of the theory. At the leading order of the expansion in VEV/, being the cutoff of the theory, e affects only the charged lepton mass
matrix, which is nearly diagonal, while ( , ) controls the neutrino mass matrix, which remains
invariant under the exchange, thus guaranteeing 23 = /4 and 13 = 0. Such a scheme
is particularly economic in terms of new fields and new symmetries. A distinguished feature of
our model is that the hierarchy of the masses in the charged lepton sector is also controlled by
the S3 breaking and m , m , me get their first non-vanishing contribution at the order e /,
(e /)2 , (e /)3 , respectively. This allows to estimate e / 2c . We also analyze all
the effects that can modify 23 = /4 and 13 = 0. We discuss the sub-leading operators and we
carefully minimize the scalar potential of the theory by including the relevant sub-leading corrections in order to estimate the deviations of the VEVs from the leading order alignment. The
leading order alignment is not spoiled provided , e 2c . In this regime the expected corrections to 23 = /4 and 13 = 0 are of order 2c . Finally, we extend our construction
to the quark sector. The down quark mass hierarchy is reproduced by the breaking of S3 , while
the more pronounced hierarchy in the up quark sector requires an additional, spontaneously broken, Z3 factor in the flavour group. The quark mixing angle are correctly reproduced, with the
exception of the Cabibbo angle, which requires an accidental enhancement by a factor 34.
2. A problem with the symmetry
The most general pattern of lepton masses that automatically leads to 13 = 23 /4 = 0
is characterized by a exchange symmetry, as we briefly recall now. After breaking of the
total lepton number (assumed hereafter) and of the electroweak symmetry, in a two-component
spinor notation the lepton mass terms of the Lagrangian read:
1
L = ec ml e m ,
2
(4)
where ml and m are the charged lepton mass matrix and the effective neutrino mass matrix. An
arbitrary change of basis in the generation space, realized by means of unitary transformations
ec and l acting on ec and l = (, e) respectively, modifies the form of ml and m , but does
not change the physics, in particular the charged lepton masses me , m , m , the neutrino masses
m1 , m2 , m3 and the mixing matrix UPMNS . We can exploit this freedom to render diagonal the
charged lepton mass matrix ml :
ml = diag(me , m , m ),
m = UPMNS
diag(m1 , m2 , m3 )UPMNS
.
(5)
In this basis, the effective neutrino mass matrix is completely determined by the measurable
quantities mi and UPMNS . Indeed, any complex symmetric 3 3 matrix has 9 real parameters as
the number of parameters in mi and UPMNS . In the limit where both 13 and 23 /4 vanish, the
81
PMNS mixing matrix becomes (apart from sign convention redefinitions and Majorana phases):

c12
s12
0
UPMNS = s12 /2 c12 /2 1/ 2 ,
(6)
s12 / 2 c12 / 2 1/ 2
where we are left with the only dependence on the angle 12 , through c12 cos 12 and s12
sin 12 .
In the preferred basis of Eq. (5), the conditions 13 = 23 /4 = 0 correspond to the requirement that the effective neutrino mass matrix m has the form:

c 2b
d
d

m =
(7)
d
b+a ba ,
d
ba b+a
where a, b, c, d are functions of m1 , m2 , m3 , 12 :
a = 1/2m3 ,

2
2
,
+ m2 c12
b = 1/2 m1 s12
c = m1 + m2 ,
d = 1/ 2(m2 m1 )c12 s12 .
(8)
All equivalent patterns of lepton mass matrices giving rise to 13 = 23 /4 = 0, are obtained
from ml diagonal and m of Eq. (7), by means of U (3)ec U (3)l transformations. However,
in the flavour basis, where Eq. (5) holds, it is easier to verify that m exhibits an exact
exchange symmetry. This symmetry cannot be naively extended to the whole lepton sector. Since and are members of the SU(2)L doublets ( , ) and ( , ), in such a naive
extension the theory would also be symmetric under the exchange of the left-handed charged
leptons , . But this property is difficult to reconcile with the large mass hierarchy m m .
In some proposals, several Higgs doublets and Abelian discrete symmetries of ZN type are
introduced to keep diagonal the charged leptons [1517,22], but the mass hierarchies are obtained
by fine-tuning the Yukawa parameters. Alternatively, we might try to exploit an Abelian U (1)F
flavour symmetry to reproduce the observed smallness of m /m . The simplest possible charge
assignment compatible with the parity is to give equal charges to the left-handed doublets
( , ) and ( , ), and different charges to c and c . However such a choice implies a large
contribution to 23 from the charged lepton sector, which would cause large deviations from
23 = /4.
A partial solution to this problem is given by Grimus et al. [23] in a model based on a flavour
symmetry S3 , where dots denote additional factors of the flavour group. We shortly review
the main features of this model, by adapting it in order to make easier the comparison with our
proposal. Left-handed lepton doublets are chosen as (1 + 2) of S3 : l1 = (e , e) is the invariant
singlet and Dl = (( , ), ( , )) is the S3 doublet.4 Right-handed charged leptons ec , c , c
are in a (1 + 2 ) representation: the singlet is ec and the conjugate doublet is Dlc = (c , c ). The
neutrino sector explicitly possesses the symmetry, subgroup of S3 . In the charged lepton
sector, three scalar field i (i = 1, 2, 3) are introduced: 1,2 are singlets of S3 and 3 belongs
to 1 . Thanks to an additional Z2 symmetry under which only 1 and ec transform non-trivially,
1 couples with ec while 2 does not. The Yukawa interactions of the charged lepton sector are
4 Basic properties of S are reviewed in the next section.
3
82
given by

hd c
f1 e l1 1 + f2 Dlc Dl 2 + f3 Dlc Dl 3 + h.c. + .
(9)
When the fields 1 , 2 and 3 acquire VEVs v1 , v2 and v3 respectively, after electroweak symmetry breaking, the charged leptons acquire a diagonal mass matrix with
Ll =
me = f1 v1 ,
m = f2 v2 + f3 v3 ,
m = f2 v2 f3 v3 .
We see that the non-trivial singlet 3 breaks the symmetry in the charged lepton sector. In
order to obtain the hierarchy between the masses of and a further symmetry, K, is needed:
c c

K:
, c , c , 2 3 .
(10)
The K-symmetry imposes f2 = f3 and v2 = v3 and, when softly broken by (v2 v3 ) (v2 +
v3 ), we get:
m v2 v3
=
1.
m
v2 + v3
(11)
The K-symmetry does not commute with S3 , this means that the full symmetry group is not
simply S3 K, but is rather generated by the elements in S3 and in K and consequently much
larger than S3 . Furthermore, the smallness of me is still not explained by this mechanism. In our
construction, the problem discussed here is completely solved and the whole hierarchy me
m m can be obtained without fine-tuning and without the need of any ad-hoc symmetry.
3. A model based on the group S3
We are thus naturally led to the possibility that the symmetry is only a feature of the
neutrino sector and it is strongly broken in the charged lepton sector. It is by now well known
how to realize such a hybrid symmetry pattern. We embed the Z2 parity arising from the
exchange in a larger group G. Then we selectively couple charged leptons and neutrinos to two
different scalar multiplets of G, e and ( , ), respectively. Crossed interaction terms of the
type e and ( , )ec e are forbidden by a Z3 subgroup of G which will remain unbroken.
The multiplets e and acquire VEVs that break G into different subgroups. The VEV of
breaks G down to Z2 , which becomes the residual symmetry in the neutrino sector, while
the VEV of e breaks G down to a different subgroup, not containing Z2 and guaranteeing a
hierarchical, quasi diagonal matrix ml . Here we will make such a construction explicit by taking
G = S3 Z3 . As we will see the powerful of such a broken flavour symmetry is that it will
also produce a hierarchical structure in the charged lepton mass matrices without the need of an
additional Abelian symmetry.
S3 is group of permutations of three distinct objects and is the smallest non-Abelian symmetry group. Geometrically, S3 consists of the rotations in three dimensions leaving invariant an
equilateral triangle. It has six elements divided into three conjugate classes: the identity, cyclic
and anti-cyclic circulations of triangle apices and three exchanges of two of three apices leaving
the third fixed. Therefore S3 contains three irreducible representations, which are all real (see
Table 1).
83
Table 1
Character table of S3 . Ci with i = 1, 2, 3, are the three conjugate classes of the group; n the order of a class, i.e., the
number of distinct elements contained in a class; h is the order of an element g in a class, i.e., the smallest integer (> 0)
for which g h = 1
Classes
1
C1
C2
C3
1
2
3
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
0
The S3 group has a presentation given by the generators S and T which satisfy the following
relations:
S 2 = T 3 = (ST )2 = 1.
(12)
The elements of S3 can be written as products of generators of the group: 1, S, T , ST , T S, T 2 .

The even permutations are generated by T : {1, T , T 2 } and form a Z3 subgroup. The onedimensional unitary representations are given by
S = 1,
1
1
S = 1,
T = 1,
T = 1.
This means that S3 should be broken down to Z3 by the VEV of a pseudo-singlet scalar field.
The two-dimensional unitary representation 2 of S3 is given by:

0 1
0
.
S=
,
T=
(13)
1 0
0 2
S corresponds to an interchange Z2 symmetry of the two components of a doublet field. For
this reason, S3 can be broken down to a Z2 subgroup by the VEV of a doublet scalar field:
= (v, v).
The tensor products involving pseudo-singlets are given by 1 1 = 1 and 1 2 = 2. While
the product of two doublets is given by 2 2 = 2 + 1 + 1 . From the complex representations
of S and T given in Eq. (13), one can explicitly calculate these basic tensor products. Given two
doublets = (1 , 2 )t and = (1 , 2 )t , it is easy to see that

1 2 + 2 1 1,
2 2
2.
(14)
1 2 2 1 1 ,
1 1
The complex conjugate belongs to the anti-doublet representation 2 for which the representation matrices become (S , T ). Defining

2

1 =
1
and using 1 S 1 = S and 1 T 1 = T one can show that transforms as a doublet of S3 .
Then from Eq. (14) we have

1 1 + 2 2 1,
1 2
(15)
2.
1 1 2 2 1 ,
2 1
The form of tensor product, and consequently the resulting fermion mass pattern, depends on the
group basis. Other bases are also adopted in the literature. The most important example is the
84
Table 2
Transformation properties of matter and flavon fields under the flavour group
Field
hu,d
1
1
S3
Z3
l1
1
Dl
ec
1
1
1
2
2
1
non-irreducible permutation basis in which the representation matrices for S3 are given by the
label-changing matrices. A study of the various basis of S3 (observe that by a change of basis, it
is possible to make both S and T real) and general forms of mass matrices in models based on
S3 can be found in [24].
Now we describe a model based on a spontaneously broken S3 flavour symmetry in which the
lepton flavour basis is approximately reproduced by a particular VEV alignment. To achieve the
desired alignment in a simple way, we work with a supersymmetric model, with N = 1 SUSY,
eventually broken by small soft breaking terms. The left-handed doublets transform as (1 + 2)
of S3 and we will call l1 = (e , e) the invariant singlet and Dl = (( , ), ( , )) the S3 doublet.
The right-handed charged leptons ec , c , c are all in the non-trivial singlet representation 1 .
The flavour symmetry is broken by two doublets e , and a singlet . We assume that the
flavon fields which break the S3 symmetry are gauge singlets. In addition, we introduce an extra
Abelian symmetry Z3 in such a way that and couple only to the neutrino sector and e to the
charged lepton sector, at the leading order. We summarize the transformation rules of the fields
in Table 2.
The Yukawa interactions for the lepton sector are controlled by the superpotential
w = w + we ,
(16)
where we have separated the contribution to neutrino masses and to charged lepton masses. For
neutrinos we have:
h2u
(17)
(y1 Dl Dl + y2 Dl Dl + 2y3 l1 Dl + y4 l1 l1 ) + ,
2
where dots stand for higher-order contributions. As we will see later, and develop VEVs of
the type
w =
= (v , v ),
= u.
(18)
After the flavour symmetry breaking and the electroweak symmetry breaking, w becomes:
h2u
h2u
v
(y
+
y
+
2y
+
2y
)
+
u(2y2 + y4 e e ) +
3
e
3
e
2
2
giving rise to the following neutrino mass matrix:

y4 x y3
y3
2h2u
u
m = 2 v y3
(19)
y1 y2 x , x .
v
y x y
y
w =
This mass matrix is of the form (7) since w respects explicitly the interchange symmetry.
It is diagonalized by sending into U , where

c12
s12
0
U = s12 /2 c12 /2 1/ 2 .
(20)
s12 / 2 c12 / 2 1/ 2
85
In the charged lepton sector, the leading terms of the superpotential are given by:

hd c
hd
+ + c (Dl e e ) 2

hd
+ ec + c + c l1 (e e e ) 3 + ,
we = c (Dl e )
(21)
where dots stand for additional operators of order 1/3 , to be specified in the next section.
The electroweak singlets ec , c and c have the same quantum numbers and above, without
loosing generality, we have defined c as the field coupled to (Dl e ) and ( c + c ) as the
combination coupled to (Dl e e ) . As we will see e acquires a VEV of the type:
e = (v, 0).
(22)
Such a VEV breaks the parity symmetry generated by S in a maximal way, since
e Se = 0.
(23)
We get:

2

c
v
v
c
w e = vd
+ + vd
3

c
v
+ e + c + c evd
.
(24)
Notice that, provided the ratio v/ is much smaller than one, we generates a hierarchical mass
pattern, as desired: me m m . We see that the ratio v/ should be approximately equal
to the ratio m /m . We also notice that (e e ) = 0 due to anti-symmetry and consequently the
electron mass is not generated at the same order as the muon mass.5 This is a very nice result
because we will end up with a nearly diagonal and hierarchical ml without a FroggattNielsen
mechanism based on a continuous U (1) flavour symmetry.
We define the expansion parameter
v/ 2 1.
(25)
The resulting charged lepton mass is of the type

4

0
0
ml = 4 2 0 vd 2 ,
4 2
(26)
with approximate eigenvalues:

m 2 vd ,
m 4 vd ,
me 6 vd .
(27)
In order to reproduce correctly the charged lepton hierarchy, c where c is the Cabibbo
angle. The adimensional constants , , , , , are numbers with absolute value of
order one and we find that the transformation needed to diagonalize ml is:
VeT ml Ue = diag(me , m , m ),
(28)
5 Observe that a term ( ec + c + c )l ( ) h / would be allowed by S and Z symmetries but

d
1
3
3
( ) = 0 due to the specific VEV alignment = v (1, 1). Similarly ( ) = 0.
86
e =
where the unitary matrix Ue , parametrized in the standard way, involves rotations of order 12
e = O(4 ), e = O(2 ). The lepton mixing matrix is then U

O(2 ), 13
PMNS = Ue U where U
23
is given by Eq. (20). We see that Ul introduces deviations of 13 and 23 from 0 and /4, both of
order 2 :

23 = + O 2c .
13 = O 2c ,
(29)
4
Additional deviations induced by sub-leading contributions will be discussed in the next section.
4. Vacuum alignment
In this section we discuss the minimization of the scalar potential leading to the results given
in Eqs. (18), (22). Notice that the superpotential w of Eqs. (16), (17), (21) is also invariant
under a continuous U (1)R symmetry under which matter fields have R = +1, while Higgses and
flavons have R = 0. Such a symmetry will be eventually broken down to R-parity by small SUSY
breaking effects that can be neglected in first approximation in our analysis. The superpotential
must have R = 2 and, to obtain non-trivial minima for the flavon fields, we introduce two driving
multiplets with R = 2: a full singlet under the flavour group and a doublet , transforming as
(2, ) under S3 Z3 . Under these assumptions, at the leading order the superpotential depending
on the driving fields is given by:
wd = ae2 + b2 + c
= 2ae 1 e 2 + b1 ( 1 )2 + b2 ( 2 )2 + c 1 2 + c 2 1 .
(30)
In the SUSY limit the condition for the minima are:

wd
= 2ae 1 e 2 = 0,
wd
= b( 1 )2 + c 2 = 0,
1
wd
= b( 2 )2 + c 1 = 0.
2
(31)
This set of equations admit the solution:

c
= (u, u),
= u,
(32)
b
with v and u arbitrary complex numbers. The flat directions along e 1 and can be removed by
the interplay of radiative corrections to the scalar potential and soft SUSY breaking terms. As
we have seen, to correctly reproduce the hierarchy of charged fermion masses we must assume
v/ = O(2c ). The alignment of e and is modified when higher-dimensional operators are
included in the analysis. At the next-to-leading order, the superpotential acquires the additional
contribution
e = (v, 0),
wd =
di
i=1
Ii ,
where Ii is a basis of independent invariants of dimension four:
(33)
87
I1 = e3 ,
I2 = 3 ,
I3 = 2 ,
I4 = 3 ,

I5 = (e ) 2 ,
I6 = ( )(e ),
I7 = e ,
I8 = e 2 .
(34)
We look for a new SUSY minimum of the scalar potential generated by wd + wd . By working
around the leading-order minimum (32), we find
e = (v, v),
c
= (u + u1 , u + u2 ),
b
= u,
(35)
with v and u still arbitrary and

d1
(2c3 d2 2bc2 d3 b3 d4 ) u 3 v
v
= +
,
v
2a
v
2ab3
2

c (2d5 + 3d6 ) 2bcd7 + b2 d8 v
u1
=
,
u
3bc2
2

c (4d5 + 3d6 ) 2bcd7 + 2b2 d8 v
u2
=
.
u
3bc2
(36)
We see that u1,2 /u are of order v/ 2c and, barring accidental relations, they are different,
thus modifying the leading order alignment (1, 1). We see that also v/v is of order v/
2c , provided u v. This last requirement is important in order to maintain the pattern of ml
discussed above.
The mass matrices m , Eq. (19), and ml , Eq. (26), are modified by subleading terms in the
expansion in 1/. The neutrino mass matrix is modified by terms of relative order 2c by two
independent effects: terms originating from higher-order operators containing an additional insertion of e / and terms originating from the modification to the leading order vacuum.
Coming to the charged lepton mass matrix, the higher-dimensional operators whose effect
cannot be absorbed in the parameters , , , , , are those contributing to the elements
12, 13 and 23, that vanish at the leading order. They are:
f c Dl 3
hd
,
3
f c Dl 2
hd
,
3
f c Dl 2
hd
3
(37)
where f c = (ec , c , c ). Their contribution is of order (u/)3 6c and they do not spoil our
conclusion about the contribution Ue of ml to the mixing matrix UPMNS . Finally we should
account for the modified vacuum, Eq. (35). We find that also this effect does not modify the
order of magnitude of the Ue mixing matrix. In conclusion, there are no further contribution to
the lepton mixing coming from ml and the modification to m are of relative order 2c . Therefore
our previous results, Eq. (29), are stable under inclusion of subleading effects.
88
Table 3
Transformation properties of quarks and the flavon field under the flavour group
Field
Dq
q3
d c , s c , bc
uc
cc
tc
S3
Z3
Z3
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
5. Quark masses and mixing angles

The flavour group S3 Z3 , with few additional ingredients, can also provide a satisfactory
description of the quark sector. We recall three special features of quarks. First, the top mass is
very close to the electroweak symmetry breaking scale, v = vu2 + vd2 174 GeV, indicating
an unsuppressed, renormalizable Yukawa coupling for the heaviest quark. Second, the hierarchy
among quark masses of the up type is much more pronounced than the hierarchy in the down
quark sector. Third, the mixing angle c between the first two generations is the dominant one.
The first feature suggests to adopt for quarks a different S3 assignment. We still put left-handed
quarks in a (1 + 2) representation of S3 , as for the left-handed leptons. We call q3 = (t, b) the
invariant singlet and Dq = ((u, d), (c, s)) the S3 doublet. At variance with the lepton sector,
we assign all right-handed quarks to the invariant singlet 1.6 As a consequence, there is one
combination of right-handed quarks of up-type, denoted by t c , directly coupled to a left-handed
quark q3 , the invariant singlet under S3 , thus providing a renormalizable Yukawa interaction for
the top quark. The second feature requires an extension of the flavour group, to differentiate
up and down quarks. A simple extension is provided by an additional Z3 factor. The flavour
symmetry becomes S3 Z3 Z3 . Leptons do not transform under the new Z3 , so that the whole
construction of the previous sections remains unchanged. In the quark sector we assume the
transformation properties:
uc uc ,
c c c c

d , s , b , c 2 d c , s c , bc , cc ,
(38)
and the remaining fields are taken invariant under Z3 . To complete the construction we introduce
a new flavon field, , transforming only under Z3 as , and developing a large VEV:
= u ,
u
2 .
(39)
These transformation properties are summarized in Table 3. With this charge assignment, the
leading operators contributing to quark masses are:
wq = wdown + wup .
(40)
In the down sector we have:

6 Observe that there is another equivalent choice of classification scheme under S for quarks: q transform as (1 + 2)
i
3
and the right-handed quarks transform as 1 . The resulting quark mass matrices remain unchanged.

e
hd + d s c + d bc Dq
hd

e e
+ d d c + d s c + d bc Dq 2
hd + ,
89
wdown = d bc q3
(41)
where we have defined bc as the field coupled to q3 and (d s c +d bc ) as the combination coupled
to (Dq e ). For up type quarks we obtain:

2 c
c
c
wup = u 2 u + u c + u t q3 hu

2

e

c
c
c
Dq
hd
+ u 2 u + u c + u t

2

e e
+ u 2 uc + u cc + u t c Dq 2 hd + .
(42)
The superpotential wq , after electroweak and flavour symmetry breaking, gives rise to the following mass terms:

wq = d bc bvd 2 + d s c + d bc svd 2 2

+ d d c + d s c + d bc dvd 4 2

+ u 4 uc + u 2 cc + u t c tvu

+ u 4 uc + u 2 cc + u t c cvu 2

+ u 4 uc + u 2 cc + u t c uvu 4 + .
(43)
Assuming that the VEV of is similar to the VEV of and e :
u
v
(44)
2 2 ,
we find that the quark mass matrices have the following pattern
4

0 0
4
2
md = 0 vd 2 ,
(45)
4 2 1
8

6 4
6
4
2
mu = vu ,
(46)
4 2 1
where we have set to one the unknown coefficients u,d , . . . . We see that the quark mass hierarchy is correctly reproduced by the interplay of the symmetry breaking parameters and , once
we take c
mt : mc : mu 1 : 4c : 8c ,
mb : ms : md 1 : 2c : 4c .
We have sufficiently many order-one free parameters u,d , . . . to provide a good fit to the quark
masses. Also the VCKM mixing matrix is well reproduced, at least at the level of the powers
of c , with the only exception of the Cabibbo angle, which in this model is a combination of two
independent contributions of order 2c . We need an accidental enhancement of this combination
in order to obtain the correct Cabibbo angle.
90
In summary, our flavour symmetry can be easily extended to the quark sector. Almost all
quark masses and quark mixing angles are satisfactorily described by the spontaneous breaking
of the symmetry S3 Z3 Z3 . All dimensionless coefficients of the Lagrangian are numbers
of order one. No ad-hoc relations are required, with the exception of a moderate tuning needed
to reproduce the Cabibbo angle. Unfortunately, the number of free parameters, the order-one
coefficients u,d , . . . , is too big to allow to formulate a quantitative, testable prediction, beyond
the order-of-magnitude estimates illustrated above. A generic prediction of our model is that
tan = vu /vd is of the order one, since the hierarchy between top and bottom quark is ascribed
to a symmetry breaking parameter, 2 , rather than to vu vd .
6. Conclusion
In the near future significant improvements on the parameters of the lepton mixing matrix are
expected. The angles 13 and 23 will be constrained with an accuracy of about 2c , and it will be
possible to establish more precisely how close are 13 and 23 to zero and to /4, respectively.
This will allow to discriminate between different models of fermion masses. Many models predict a generically large 23 and a generically small 13 , with deviations of order one from the
reference values 13 = 0 and 23 = /4. Only in a selected subset of the existing models a nearly
maximal 23 and a nearly vanishing 13 are expected. Even in these last special models 13 = 0
and 23 = /4 generally arise only as leading order results of a power series expansion. The
expansion parameter is the ratio / between the VEV of some field spontaneously breaking
the underlying flavour symmetry, and the cut-off of the theory. Therefore it is of great interest
to provide an accurate estimate of the expected deviations from the leading order predictions.
Here we have analyzed one of the simplest models that enforce 13 0 and 23 /4, thanks
to an approximate parity symmetry of the neutrino sector. This parity symmetry is part of
a larger flavour symmetry, S3 Z3 , of the whole lepton sector, spontaneously broken along two
different directions for neutrinos and charged leptons, respectively, as a consequence of a specific
vacuum alignment. In the charged lepton sector the parity symmetry is maximally broken.
A noticeable feature of the model is that the mass hierarchies between charged leptons are completely determined by the symmetry breaking of the permutation group, without the need of any
additional ad-hoc ingredient. We find 23 = /4 + O(2c ) and 13 = O(2c ), where the O(2c )
corrections come from the contribution of the charged lepton sector and are related to the mass
hierarchies. We have carefully analyzed subleading effects due to higher-dimensional operators
that modify the Yukawa couplings and the vacuum alignment and we have verified that they do
not spoil the above predictions. We have also briefly discussed how to extend the model to the
quark sector, where, with a minimal enlargement of the flavour symmetry, masses and mixing
angles are correctly reproduced, with the exception of the mixing angle between the first two
generations, that requires a small accidental enhancement.
Acknowledgements
We thank Guido Altarelli for useful discussion. We recognize that this work has been partly
supported by the European Commission under contracts MRTN-CT-2004-503369 and MRTNCT-2006-035505.
References
[1] A. Strumia, F. Vissani, Neutrino masses and mixings and. . . , hep-ph/0606054;
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
91
S. Choubey, What we can learn from atmospheric neutrinos, hep-ph/0609182;

G.L. Fogli, et al., Neutrino mass and mixing: 2006 status, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 168 (2007) 341;
M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, Phenomenology with massive neutrinos, arXiv: 0704.1800 [hep-ph];
T. Schwetz, Neutrino oscillations: Present status and outlook, arXiv: 0710.5027 [hep-ph].
P.F. Harrison, W.G. Scott, Permutation symmetry, tri-bimaximal neutrino mixing and the S3 group characters, Phys.
Lett. B 557 (2003) 76, hep-ph/0302025;
E. Ma, Aspects of the tetrahedral neutrino mass matrix, Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 037301, hep-ph/0505209;
K.S. Babu, X.G. He, Model of geometric neutrino mixing, hep-ph/0507217;
W. Grimus, L. Lavoura, A model realizing the HarrisonPerkinsScott lepton mixing matrix, JHEP 0601 (2006)
018, hep-ph/0509239;
E. Ma, Tribimaximal neutrino mixing from a supersymmetric model with A4 family symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 73
(2006) 057304, hep-ph/0511133;
I. de Medeiros Varzielas, G.G. Ross, SU(3) family symmetry and neutrino bi-tri-maximal mixing, Nucl. Phys. B 733
(2006) 31, hep-ph/0507176.
G. Altarelli, F. Feruglio, Tri-bimaximal neutrino mixing from discrete symmetry in extra dimensions, Nucl. Phys.
B 720 (2005) 64, hep-ph/0504165;
G. Altarelli, F. Feruglio, Tri-bimaximal neutrino mixing, A4 and the modular symmetry, Nucl. Phys. B 741 (2006)
215, hep-ph/0512103;
G. Altarelli, F. Feruglio, Y. Lin, Tri-bimaximal neutrino mixing from orbifolding, Nucl. Phys. B 775 (2007) 31,
hep-ph/0610165.
F. Feruglio, C. Hagedorn, Y. Lin, L. Merlo, Tri-bimaximal neutrino mixing and quark masses from a discrete flavour
symmetry, Nucl. Phys. B 775 (2007) 120, hep-ph/0702194.
For a review, see, for instance, G. Altarelli, Lectures on models of neutrino masses and mixings, arXiv: 0711.0161
[hep-ph], and references therein.
M. Ambrosio, et al., MACRO Collaboration, Measurements of atmospheric muon neutrino oscillations, global
analysis of the data collected with MACRO detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 36 (2004) 323.
M.H. Ahn, et al., K2K Collaboration, Measurement of neutrino oscillation by the K2K experiment, Phys. Rev. D 74
(2006) 072003, hep-ex/0606032.
M. Kordosky, D. Petyt, for MINOS Collaboration, A study of muon neutrino disappearance using the Fermilab
main injector neutrino beam, arXiv: 0711.0769 [hep-ex].
Y. Ashie, et al., Super-Kamiokande Collaboration, A measurement of atmospheric neutrino oscillation parameters
by super-Kamiokande I, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 112005, hep-ex/0501064.
C.W. Kim, U.W. Lee, Comment on the possible electronneutrino excess in the super-Kamiokande atmospheric
neutrino experiment, Phys. Lett. B 444 (1998) 204, hep-ph/9809491;
O.L.G. Peres, A.Y. Smirnov, Testing the solar neutrino conversion with atmospheric neutrinos, Phys. Lett. B 456
(1999) 204, hep-ph/9902312.
M. Apollonio, et al., CHOOZ Collaboration, Search for neutrino oscillations on a long base-line at the CHOOZ
nuclear power station, Eur. Phys. J. C 27 (2003) 331, hep-ex/0301017.
T. Fukuyama, H. Nishiura, Mass matrix of Majorana neutrinos, in: Y. Koide (Ed.), Proceedings of International
Workshop on Masses and Mixings of Quarks and Leptons, World Scientific, Singapore, 1997, hep-ph/9702253;
E. Ma, M. Raidal, Neutrino mass, muon anomalous magnetic moment, and lepton flavor nonconservation, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 011802;
E. Ma, M. Raidal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 159901, hep-ph/0102255, Erratum;
C.S. Lam, A 23 symmetry in neutrino oscillations, Phys. Lett. B 507 (2001) 214, hep-ph/0104116;
E. Ma, The all-purpose neutrino mass matrix, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 117301, hep-ph/0207352;
P.F. Harrison, W.G. Scott, reflection symmetry in lepton mixing and neutrino oscillations, Phys. Lett. B 547
(2002) 219, hep-ph/0210197;
R.N. Mohapatra, S. Nussinov, Bimaximal neutrino mixing and neutrino mass matrix, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999)
013002, hep-ph/9809415.
Y. Koide, Universal texture of quark and lepton mass matrices with an extended flavor 2 3 symmetry, Phys. Rev.
D 69 (2004) 093001, hep-ph/0312207;
S. Morisi, M. Picariello, The flavor physics in unified gauge theory from an S3 P discrete symmetry, Int. J. Theor.
Phys. 45 (2006) 1267, hep-ph/0505113;
A.S. Joshipura, Universal 23 symmetry, hep-ph/0512252;
K. Matsuda, H. Nishiura, Broken flavor 2 3 symmetry and phenomenological approach for universal quark and
lepton mass matrices, Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 013008, hep-ph/0511338;
92
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
R.N. Mohapatra, S. Nasri, H.B. Yu, Grand unification of symmetry, Phys. Lett. B 636 (2006) 114, hepph/0603020.
W. Grimus, A.S. Joshipura, S. Kaneko, L. Lavoura, H. Sawanaka, M. Tanimoto, Non-vanishing Ue3 and cos 223
from a broken Z2 symmetry, Nucl. Phys. B 713 (2005) 151, hep-ph/0408123.
A. de Gouvea, Deviation of atmospheric mixing from maximal and structure in the leptonic flavor sector, Phys. Rev.
D 69 (2004) 093007, hep-ph/0401220;
C.S. Lam, Neutrino 23 symmetry and inverted hierarchy, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 093001, hep-ph/0503159;
K. Fuki, M. Yasue, What does symmetry imply in neutrino mixings?, Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 055014, hepph/0601118;
K. Fuki, M. Yasue, Two categories of approximately symmetric neutrino mass textures, Nucl. Phys. B 783
(2007) 31, hep-ph/0608042;
R.N. Mohapatra, 13 as a probe of symmetry for leptons, JHEP 0410 (2004) 027, hep-ph/0408187;
N. Haba, W. Rodejohann, A supersymmetric contribution to the neutrino mass matrix and breaking of symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 017701, hep-ph/0603206.
T. Kitabayashi, M. Yasue, symmetry and maximal CP violation, Phys. Lett. B 621 (2005) 133, hep-ph/0504212;
R.N. Mohapatra, W. Rodejohann, Broken symmetry and leptonic CP violation, Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 053001,
hep-ph/0507312;
T. Baba, M. Yasue, Correlation between leptonic CP violation and symmetry breaking, Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007)
055001, hep-ph/0612034;
T. Baba, M. Yasue, Leptonic CP violation induced by approximately symmetric seesaw mechanism, arXiv:
0710.2713 [hep-ph].
W. Grimus, L. Lavoura, Softly broken lepton number Le L L with non-maximal solar neutrino mixing, J. Phys.
G 31 (2005) 683, hep-ph/0410279;
R.N. Mohapatra, S. Nasri, Leptogenesis and symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 033001, hep-ph/0410369;
R.N. Mohapatra, S. Nasri, H.B. Yu, Leptogenesis, symmetry and 13 , Phys. Lett. B 615 (2005) 231, hepph/0502026;
Y.H. Ahn, S.K. Kang, C.S. Kim, J. Lee, Phased breaking of symmetry and leptogenesis, Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006)
093005, hep-ph/0602160;
Y.H. Ahn, C.S. Kim, S.K. Kang, J. Lee, symmetry and radiatively generated leptogenesis, Phys. Rev. D 75
(2007) 013012, hep-ph/0610007.
C.S. Lam, Symmetry of lepton mixing, Phys. Lett. B 656 (2007) 193, arXiv: 0708.3665 [hep-ph];
A. Blum, C. Hagedorn, M. Lindner, Fermion masses and mixings from dihedral flavor symmetries with preserved
subgroups, arXiv: 0709.3450 [hep-ph];
A. Blum, C. Hagedorn, A. Hohenegger, C from the dihedral flavor symmetries D7 and D14 , arXiv: 0710.5061
[hep-ph].
C.D. Froggatt, H.B. Nielsen, Hierarchy of quark masses, Cabibbo angles and CP violation, Nucl. Phys. B 147 (1979)
277.
S.F. King, G.G. Ross, Fermion masses and mixing angles from SU(3) family symmetry, Phys. Lett. B 520 (2001)
243, hep-ph/0108112;
S.F. King, G.G. Ross, Fermion masses and mixing angles from SU(3) family symmetry and unification, Phys. Lett.
B 574 (2003) 239, hep-ph/0307190;
S.F. King, Predicting neutrino parameters from SO(3) family symmetry and quark-lepton unification, JHEP 0508
(2005) 105, hep-ph/0506297;
I. de Medeiros Varzielas, G.G. Ross, SU(3) family symmetry and neutrino bi-tri-maximal mixing, Nucl. Phys. B 733
(2006) 31, hep-ph/0507176.
C. Luhn, S. Nasri, P. Ramond, Tri-bimaximal neutrino mixing and the family symmetry Z7 Z3 , Phys. Lett. B 652
(2007) 27, arXiv: 0706.2341 [hep-ph];
C. Luhn, S. Nasri, P. Ramond, Simple finite non-Abelian flavor groups, J. Math. Phys. 48 (2007) 123519, arXiv:
0709.1447 [hep-th].
E. Ma, Permutation symmetry for neutrino and charged-lepton mass matrices, Phys. Rev. D 61 (2000) 033012,
hep-ph/9909249;
T. Kitabayashi, M. Yasue, Large solar neutrino mixing and radiative neutrino mechanism, Phys. Lett. B 524 (2002)
308, hep-ph/0110303;
T. Kitabayashi, M. Yasue, S(2L) permutation symmetry for left-handed and families and neutrino oscillations
in an SU(3)L U (1)N gauge model, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 015006, hep-ph/0209294;
93
I. Aizawa, M. Ishiguro, T. Kitabayashi, M. Yasue, Bilarge neutrino mixing and permutation symmetry for
two-loop radiative mechanism, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 015011, hep-ph/0405201.
[23] W. Grimus, L. Lavoura, A discrete symmetry group for maximal atmospheric neutrino mixing, Phys. Lett. B 572
(2003) 189, hep-ph/0305046;
W. Grimus, L. Lavoura, Maximal atmospheric neutrino mixing and the small ratio of muon to tau mass, J. Phys.
G 30 (2004) 73, hep-ph/0309050;
W. Grimus, L. Lavoura, S(3) Z(2) model for neutrino mass matrices, JHEP 0508 (2005) 013, hep-ph/0504153.
[24] N. Haba, K. Yoshioka, Discrete flavor symmetry, dynamical mass textures, and grand unification, Nucl. Phys. B 739
(2006) 254, hep-ph/0511108.

Twisted mass, overlap and Creutz fermions:

Cut-off effects at tree-level of perturbation theory
K. Cichy a , J. Gonzlez Lpez b,c, , K. Jansen c , A. Kujawa a , A. Shindler d
a Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan, Faculty of Physics, Umultowska 85, 61-614 Poznan, Poland
b Humboldt-Universitt zu Berlin, Institut fr Physik, Newtonstrasse 15, 12489 Berlin, Germany
c DESY, Zeuthen, Platanenallee 6, D-15738 Zeuthen, Germany
d Theoretical Physics Division, Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Liverpool,
Liverpool L69 7ZL, UK

Received 26 February 2008; accepted 5 March 2008
Available online 15 March 2008
Abstract
We study cutoff effects at tree-level of perturbation theory for maximally twisted mass Wilson, overlap
and the recently proposed Creutz fermions. We demonstrate that all three kinds of lattice fermions exhibit
the expected O(a 2 ) scaling behaviour in the lattice spacing. In addition, the sizes of these cutoff effects
are comparable for the three kinds of lattice fermions considered here. Furthermore, we analyze situations
when twisted mass fermions are not exactly at maximal twist and when overlap fermions are studied in
comparison to twisted mass fermions when the quark masses are not matched.
1. Introduction
This paper is an investigation of the scaling behaviour towards the continuum limit for different kinds of lattice fermions at tree-level of perturbation theory. In a previous conference
contribution [1] we had only discussed the case of Wilson twisted mass fermions [2,3]. See
Ref. [4] for a review on twisted mass lattice QCD. Here we add overlap fermions [5]. See Ref. [6]
for a review on chirally symmetric lattice actions and related topics. During the completion of
this paper a new kind of lattice fermion appeared in the literature, the so-called Creutz fermi* Corresponding author at: Humboldt-Universitt zu Berlin, Institut fr Physik, Newtonstrasse 15, 12489 Berlin,
Germany.
E-mail address: jenifer.gonzalez.lopez@desy.de (J. Gonzlez Lpez).
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.004
K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108
95
ons [7] and we decided to investigate also these lattice fermions, as well as the fermions defined
by a related action suggested by Borici [8]. We will in the following generically refer to Creutz
fermions having in mind both Creutz and Borici formulations.
All of these three kinds of lattice fermions are expected to show an O(a 2 ) scaling behaviour in
the lattice spacing. While for overlap fermions this is achieved by an exact lattice chiral symmetry, for twisted mass fermions this is achieved by a residual Nf = 2 flavoured continuum chiral
symmetry which needs, however, a tuning of the (untwisted) PCAC quark mass to zero. Creutz
fermions exhibit an exact Nf = 2 flavoured continuum chiral symmetry, but they break however
a number of discrete symmetries such as parity, charge conjugation and time reflection [9]. This
could lead to a plethora of terms in the Symanzik effective action, which would make approaching the continuum limit a rather difficult task.
Wilson twisted mass fermions are described by an ultra-local action with only nearest neighbour interactions. Hence, they are comparably cheap to simulate. Their major drawback is the
explicit O(a 2 ) isospin-breaking. Overlap fermions have the great advantage of an exact lattice
chiral symmetry [10]. However, while still local in the field theoretical sense [11], they couple
each lattice point with all others and are an order of magnitude more expensive to simulate than
twisted mass fermions. Finally, Creutz fermions [7] are also described by an ultra-local action,
again with only nearest neighbour interactions. As has been shown recently, they break however
a number of discrete symmetries and isospin symmetry [9].
Twisted mass and Creutz fermions are defined for Nf = 2 flavours of quarks. These two quark
flavours can either be taken as mass degenerate, or, some explicit flavour breaking term has to be
added. In contrast, overlap fermions can be used for a single quark flavour.
The focus in this paper is to study the scaling behaviour with the lattice spacing. In particular,
we are interested in the relative size of the cutoff effects comparing maximally twisted mass,
overlap and Creutz lattice fermions.
In particular, we will consider the scaling behaviour of the meson correlation function the
pseudoscalar mass and decay constant as well as the nucleon mass. It is important to remark here
that, at tree-level of perturbation theory there is, of course, nothing like a real meson or baryon.
However, since we use the same interpolating fields as in full QCD, we will take the freedom to
use the notation of mesons and baryons throughout this paper.
We will also address the question of the size of cutoff effects when twisted mass fermions are
not exactly tuned to maximal twist. In addition, we investigate ratios of mesonic quantities built
from twisted and overlap fermions when the quark masses are unmatched.
While actual practical calculations with overlap and twisted mass fermions are already rather
advanced, the formulation of chiral invariant fermions following Creutz is still very new.
In [1] we gave a first account of the size of cut-off effects at tree-level of perturbation theory
for twisted mass fermions. Here we extend the techniques described in [1], following [12], to the
case of overlap and Creutz fermions. A more detailed account of our earlier calculations and a
pedagogical introduction to the techniques we have used, can be found in [13].
2. Lattice propagators
In this section we provide the momentum space propagators for the different kinds of lattice
fermions we have considered. They are the building blocks for the computation of the meson and
nucleon correlation functions from which in turn the masses and decay constants are extracted.
To fix the notation our setup is a hypercubic lattice of size L3 T with spacing a.
96
Wilson twisted mass fermions

The expression for the Wilson twisted mass (Wtm) fermion propagator in the twisted basis,
at tree-level of perturbation theory (PT) and in momentum space can be derived from the Wtm
operator given for example in Ref. [4], and it is given by
SWtm (p) =
i p 1f + M(p)11f iq 5 3
2
,
2
2
p + M(p) + q
where
p =
1
sin(ap ),
a
p =

ap
2
sin
,
a
2
M(p) = m0 +
(1)
a 2
p ,
2
(2)
and where 1 and 1f are the identity matrices in Dirac and flavour space. The structure in colour
space has not been written since it is just an identity matrix at tree level of PT. The parameters
m0 and q represent the untwisted and twisted quark masses, respectively. Maximal twistin
the case of tree-level of perturbation theoryis achieved by setting m0 = 0. We then expect to
have only O(a 2 ) lattice spacing effects in physical correlation functions [3].
Overlap fermions
The expression for the overlap propagator in momentum space at tree-level of perturbation
theory can be derived from the expression of the overlap operator given for example in Ref. [10],
and it is
Sov (p) =
1/2
i(1 ma
2 )F (p) p + M(p)1
,
2
1
2
2
(1 ma
p + M(p)
2 ) F (p)
(3)
where:
a4 2 2
p p ,
2 <

2
ma
ma
1
a
p 2
1+
1
F (p)1/2 1
M(p) =
a
2
2
2
F (p) = 1 +
(4)
(5)
and 1 is the identity matrix in Dirac space. Note that in the case of overlap fermions we only
discuss one flavour. Due to the existence of an exact lattice chiral symmetry, we again expect an
O(a 2 ) scaling behaviour towards the continuum limit, if the correlation functions are computed
with the proper improved operators (see for example Ref. [14]).
Creutz fermions
The CreutzDirac operator can be found in different forms in Refs. [79]. We have rescaled
the CreutzDirac operator with a factor R that we leave unspecified for the moment. As will be
discussed below and in Appendix A, this normalization factor R is needed to obtain at tree-level
the correct continuum limit for the correlation functions we have studied. In Appendix A we
define all the relevant functions and we show that the Creutz operator can be brought to the form

a 2
p i
DC (p) = i
(6)
p + m0 1,
2
97
where and are linear combinations of gamma matrices defined in Appendix A. We recall
that Creutz fermions, as explicitly shown in Appendix A, depend in general on two parameters R
and C. From our final expression of the Creutz operator (6), we can obtain the quark propagator
for Creutz fermions. In the continuum limit, the quark propagator can be written as

i p + m0 1
cont
SC (p) =
(7)

a + = p p a a + m20
p p a
which is not the continuum Dirac propagator unless the values of C and R, whose dependence
is hidden in the matrices a and , are chosen properly.
From Eq. (7) it is also clear that in order to obtain the correct continuum limit of the quark
propagator, we have to impose that = a T is again a gamma matrix, which is equivalent to
say that the following relation holds true

T
T

a a { , } = 2
a a = 2 .
a , a =
(8)
,
Taking into account the form of the matrix a defined in Appendix A, is a gamma matrix if and
only if the following two conditions hold

3S
3
(9)
a a = 0 for =
= 1 C = ,
C
10
2

3S
a a = 1 for = R 2 = 3 +
.
(10)
C
Therefore, from this discussion, it can be concluded

that the right continuum limit of the quark
propagator can be obtained only when C = 3/ 10 and R = 2.

However,
motivated by the first version of [7], we have decided to study as well the case
C = 3/ 14. In this case we know that is not a gamma matrix, since
the condition given
by Eq. (9) does not hold. R can be still determined and must be R = 2 2 in order to satisfy
Eq. (10). As expected, the analytical expression obtained for the quark propagator in this case
does not correspond to the continuum one.
But, as it will be shown in the next sections where we present our results, the continuum limits
for the pseudoscalar correlation function, mass and decay constant turn out to be the correct ones
for the two values of C studied here.
There are two reasons to explain this behaviour. On one hand, in the correlation function
only the contribution from the pole survives in the sum over the momenta. This implies that
all the possible crossed terms of the momentum which appear in the quark propagator, whose
origin is the non-realization of Eq. (9), are cancelled. Moreover the properly chosen value of
R normalizes the quark propagator in order to obtain the would-be correct continuum limit in
absence of crossed terms.
Borici fermions
The action suggested by Borici [8] is a slight modification of the CreutzDirac operator and
reads

a
i p i
p 2 + m0 1,
DB (p) =
(11)
2
98
where are linear combinations of gamma matrices defined in Appendix A. The corresponding
propagator can be written as

i G (ap) + m0 1
,
SB (p) =
(12)

2
2
G (ap) + m0
where the functions G (ap), defined in the appendix, are trigonometric functions of their argument.
3. Correlation functions
In this section we give the expressions for the pseudoscalar and proton correlation functions
at tree-level of perturbation theory. While we evaluated the pseudoscalar correlation function
for all lattice fermions considered in this work, we use the proton correlation function only to
demonstrate how the O(a) improvement works when the Wilson average or equivalently the mass
average is performed in case standard Wilson fermions are considered.
The interpolating fields describing the charged pions, + and are
P (x) P 1 (x) iP 2 (x)
(13)
a
a
= (x)
where
5 2 (x), with a = 1, 2, 3, is the pseudoscalar density and are the
standard Pauli matrices. The computation for Wilson twisted mass is performed in the twisted
basis, where the form of the local operator (13) stays unchanged [2].
The quark propagator can be decomposed in terms of the gamma matrices as

S (p)
S(p)
= SU (p)1 +
(14)
P a (x)
in the case of overlap and Creutz fermions, while for twisted mass fermions an additional term
proportional to 5 is present

S (p) + S5 (p)5 .
S(p)
= SU (p)1 +
(15)
With such a decomposition, the pseudoscalar correlation function can be written as1
Nc Nd i(p4 p )t
4 S (p,
C(t) = 3 2
e
p4 )S (p,
p4 ),
L T p

p4
(16)
with = U, 1, 2, 3, 4 or = U, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 depending on the kind of fermion that is being considered. Nc is the number of colours and Nd is the number of Dirac components. T = aN4 and
N4 is the number of lattice points in the time direction. The expression in Eq. (16) can be evaluated as it stands, or, a time-momentum representation of the quark propagator can be obtained for
a lattice with infinite time extension, by performing the integration over p4 analytically, see [13]
for a discussion in case of twisted mass fermions. We have mostly used the representation of
Eq. (16), but checked for twisted mass fermions the results also in the time-momentum representation. In Appendix A we give the explicit expression for the Wilson twisted mass quark
propagator in the time-momentum representation for a lattice with infinite time extent.
1 The Wtm propagator has also a flavour structure. For the pseudoscalar correlation function only a single flavour
component is needed.
The local interpolating field describing the proton is given by2

P (x) 2abc daT (x)C 1 5 ub (x) u,c (x).
99
(17)
The expression for the time dependence of the proton correlation function for standard Wilson
fermions is then

Nc Nd
CP P (t) =
(18)
LU (p,
q , t) + L4 (p,
q , t) ,
6
L
p
with the definitions
q , t) SU (p + q ), t
LU (p,
+ (Nd + 3)
4

S (p,
t)S (
q , t) ,
=1
q , t) S (p + q ), t
L (p,
+ (Nd + 1)
(19)
4

(Nd + 1)SU (p,

t)SU (
q , t)
(Nd + 3)SU (p,

t)SU (
q , t)

S (p,
t)S (
q , t) .
(20)
=1
SU and S are the components of the quark propagator for standard Wilson fermions, which can
be obtained from the expression of the quark propagator for Wilson twisted mass fermions, given
in Appendix A in Eq. (A.1), just by setting q = 0. These results have been cross-checked with
a standard inverter on a cold gauge configuration.
4. Scaling tests on correlation functions, masses and decay constants
In this section we give some results from a scaling analysis in the lattice spacing. At tree-level
a dimensionless quantity can be only a function of mL, a/L and am, where m here indicates
generically the quark mass. To perform the continuum limit one can fix mL to a certain value
and the remaining dependence of the dimensionless quantity will be then in a/L. The continuum
limit is then obtained sending N = L/a to infinity. In the following we will set a = 1 and the
1/N and 1/N 2 dependence of the dimensionless quantities under investigation will correspond
to O(a) and O(a 2 ) scaling violations. We remind that if not infinity the time extent T will be
always set to be proportional to L.
In particular, we consider the correlation function C at a fixed physical time t/N , the
pseudoscalar decay constant fPS and the pseudoscalar and proton masses M. This leads us to
consider the dimensionless quantities N 3 C(t/N), N M and NfPS .
We will start our discussion with an explicit demonstration of O(a) improvement for standard
Wilson fermions from the Wilson and mass averaging procedures. We then turn over to the
comparison of the size of scaling violations from all three lattice fermions considered here. In
particular, we will compare the meson correlation function as well as the corresponding meson
mass and meson decay constant.
2 The Greek (Latin) letters denote Dirac (colour) components and u, d denote the flavour content. C is the charge
conjugation matrix and [ ] denotes spin trace.
100
Fig. 1. In the left graph, the cutoff effects and the continuum limit of the proton mass obtained from two standard Wilson
actions differing only in the sign of the quark mass, |N m0 | = 0.8 are shown. The lattices are 4 N 20. The lines
are fits according to Eq. (21). In the right graph, the average of the proton masses obtained from the same two standard
Wilson regularizations with quark masses N m0 = 0.8 (MA) has been calculated. The solid line represents a fit to
Eq. (21).
4.1. Wilson average and mass average for standard Wilson fermions
In Ref. [3] it has been demonstrated that when averaging physical observables computed with
standard Wilson actions, i.e., setting q = 0 in Eq. (1), having opposite signs of the quark mass
m0 (MA) or opposite signs of the Wilson parameter r (WA), these quantities are O(a) improved.3
Since WA and MA at tree-level are equivalent, we will in the following only discuss the MA.
As the physical observable we consider the proton mass as it can be obtained as the effective
mass from the correlation function in Eq. (18) using timeslices at t = 4N and t = 4N + 1. For
the computation we fix |N m0 | = 0.8. In the left graph of Fig. 1 the behaviour of the proton mass
NMP as a function of N1 is given when two standard Wilson regularizations, differing only in
the sign of the quark mass, are used.
The behaviour of the proton mass in Fig. 1 is linear in 1/N showing the expected O(a) scaling
violations of standard Wilson fermions. The proton mass reaches, in both cases, its continuum
value of N MP = 3|N m0 |, as expected in the absence of interaction. However, the slopes with
which the continuum value is reached, i.e., the coefficients of the O(a) cutoff effects differ in sign.
The right graph of Fig. 1 shows the continuum approach of the proton mass when the proton mass
is averaged over positive and negative values of the quark mass N m0 . In this case, the proton mass
is plotted against 1/N 2 and the linearity in 1/N 2 nicely shows the O(a)-improvement when the
MA is applied.
In order to be more quantitative, we have used the following fitting functions to describe the
analytically computed values of the proton mass:
y1 = a0 + a1
1
1
+ a2 2 ,
N
N
y 2 = b 0 + b1
1
1
+ b2 4 .
2
N
N
(21)
Here y1 (y2 ) is the physical observable under consideration and its value in the continuum limit
is given by the coefficient a0 (b0 ). We use two functional forms, the first formula of Eq. (21) for
3 The MA is actually done taking into account the chirality of the correlation function under investigation [3]. This is
practically irrelevant for our study.
101
Fig. 2. The cutoff effects and the continuum limit of the pseudoscalar mass is shown. We compare overlap, maximally
twisted mass and Creutz fermions at fixed quark mass, N m = 0.5, N q = 0.5 and N m0 = 0.5, respectively. The lattices
are 4 N 64.
a leading N1 behaviour (standard Wilson fermions) and the second formula for O(a)-improved
quantities.
The two lines in the left graph of Fig. 1 originate from a fit to Eq. (21) and correspond to the
proton mass obtained from the same Wilson actions differing only in the sign of the quark mass.
From the plot it is clear that in both cases the value of the proton mass in the continuum limit is
the same and the expected one at tree-level of PT.
From the fit, the corresponding coefficients a1 turn out to be the same in magnitude but have
opposite signs for positive and negative quark masses. Thus, performing the (MA), it is to be
expected that the O(a) effects cancel and the scaling behaviour changes from a N1 to a N12 behaviour. This can indeed be seen in the right graph of Fig. 1. Inspecting the fit coefficients a2 and
b1 , we find a2 b1 0.5. Therefore, the magnitude of the leading order cutoff effects does not
only change from an O(a) to an O(a 2 ) behaviour but also the O(a 2 ) effects do not increase when
performing the Wilson average with respect to the standard case.
One interesting observation is the mass dependence of the coefficients a1 and b1 of Eqs. (21)
for the pion and proton masses. We observe that in the case of standard Wilson fermions, the coefficient a1 /a0 , which determines the relative size of the O(a) cutoff effects, vanishes in the chiral
limit proportionally to N m0 . For Wtm fermions at maximal twist the coefficient b1 /b0 , which
determines the relative size of the O(a 2 ) cutoff effects, vanishes in the chiral limit, proportionally
to (N q )2 .
4.2. Comparing maximally twisted mass, overlap and Creutz fermions
One interesting question is the relative size of cutoff effects when comparing maximally
twisted mass, overlap and Creutz fermions. We have therefore performed a scaling analysis for
the correlation functions themselves at a fixed physical distance, the pseudoscalar mass and the
pseudoscalar decay constant. Since all the quantities under investigation are O(a)-improved, we
show them all as a function of 1/N 2 .
Let us start with the pseudoscalar mass in Fig. 2. As expected, we indeed find a nice linear
behaviour of the mass as a function of 1/N 2 . However, we observe that the different kind of
lattice fermions we have studied show quite distinct lattice artefacts at O(a 2 ). This can also be
seen in Fig. 3, where we exhibit the dependence of the correlation function and the pseudoscalar
decay constant as a function of 1/N 2 .
102
Fig. 3. In the left graph, the cutoff effects and the continuum limit of the pseudoscalar correlation function is shown.
We compare overlap, maximally twisted mass and Creutz fermions at fixed quark mass, N m = 0.5, N q = 0.5 and
N m0 = 0.5, respectively. The lattices are 4 N 64. In the right graph, the pseudoscalar decay constants obtained
from the same lattice fermions as in the left graph are shown.
In order to see the cutoff effects in a quantitative way, the coefficients of the fit and the corresponding fit function for the three lattice quantities here considered, obtained from the different
regularizations are presented in Tables 1, 2 and 3, respectively.
From the results obtained here, no clear picture of a particularly good or bad fermion discretization emerges. While we find that indeed all three kind of lattice fermions show the
expected O(a)-improvement, the (relative) size of the O(a 2 ) effects depends pretty much on
the observable considered. If at all, one could say that maximally twisted mass fermions show
uniformly small O(a 2 ) cutoff effects. On the other hand, it is somewhat amazing that Creutz
fermions which break a number of important discrete symmetries do not suffer from very large
O(a 2 ) cutoff effects. From our scaling analysis it is not possible to exclude a certain type of
lattice fermion. Only scaling tests for the interacting theory will reveal the size of actual scaling
violations of the observable considered.
5. Effects from non-optimal tuning
This section is devoted to the question of effects when tuning is performed non-optimally. In
particular, we study the cutoff effects when there is an O(a) error in tuning to maximal twist. As a
second example, we consider the case when the quark masses of two lattice fermion formulations
are not exactly matched. This case is relevant for so-called mixed action simulations.
5.1. Out of maximal twist
Here we want to study a situation when we allow an O(a) error in setting the untwisted quark
mass to zero. In order to realize this situation at tree-level of perturbation theory we force these
effects by simply fixing the twisted mass to be the physical quark mass and the untwisted mass
is set to be proportional to N1 , as N q = and N m0 = N O(a) where is kept fixed and is
a measure parametrizing the amount of violation of the maximal twist setup. The twist angle
and the bare polar mass M can be obtained as a function of and as

1
1
1
1 2 1
=
(22)
+O
+O
,
NM = 1 +
.
2
N
2 N2
N2
N4
103
Table 1
Table of fit coefficients for the pseudoscalar mass using N MPS = a + b 12 + c 14
N
N MPS
MTM
Overlap
Borici
Creutz-10
Creutz- 14
1
1
1
1
1
0.0104167
0.0208333
0.0494786
0.00781168
0.0488288
0.000292154
0.000783943
0.00558893
0.010171
0.00287405
Table 2
Table of fit coefficients for the pseudo scalar decay constant using NfPS = a + b 12 + c 14
N
NfPS
MTM
Overlap
Borici
Creutz-10
Creutz- 14
3.4641
3.4641
3.4641
3.4641
3.4641
0.0541266
0.108253
0.0676637
0.293217
0.00790885
0.000815548
0.00554908
0.00486739
0.0770494
0.0367598
Table 3
Table of fit coefficient for the pseudo scalar correlation function using N 3 C = a + b 12 + c 14
N
N 3 C(t/N = 4)
MTM
Overlap
Borici
Creutz-10
Creutz- 14
b
0.109894
0.109894
0.109894
0.109894
0.109894
0.00457891
0.0045789
0.00114427
0.0194625
0.00486428
c
3.33302 105
0.000181822
0.00135812
0.00286602
0.002942
Therefore, even if the condition of maximal twist can only be obtained up to O(a) cutoff effects,
which is generally the case in practical numerical simulations, the observables, which are only
functions of the polar mass, are still automatically O(a) improved.
Moreover, Eq. (22) also shows how the size of the leading discretization effects depends on
the ratio between the untwisted and twisted quark masses. This ratio in turn determines the value
of the lattice spacing at which the asymptotic N12 scaling sets in. Only when this ratio is small
enough and hence the lattice does not need to be chosen too large a reliable continuum limit
using reasonably sized lattices can be performed. The left graph of Fig. 4 demonstrates that the
asymptotic scaling sets in for lattices with 4 N 64 when 0 2.
However, for 10 the continuum limit is not reliable anymore if N is chosen to be too
small. This can be seen in the right graph of Fig. 4. Using only small values of N leads to an
inconsistent continuum limit value. Therefore, larger lattices are needed in order to obtain the
correct continuum behaviour as can be also seen in the right graph of Fig. 4. Here we have
added a fit of the data for a value of = 10.0 taking only large lattices into account, i.e., using
only values of N 40. In this case, indeed the right continuum value is obtained. Of course, for
practical simulations, using only lattices with N 40 appears to be rather unrealistic so to chose
a correct ratio becomes important.
104
Fig. 4. Left graph: Behaviour of the pion mass as a function of 12 , for lattices with size 4 N 64. The twisted
N
with
quark mass is set to N q = 1.0 and the untwisted quark mass is zero up to O(a) cutoff effects, i.e., N m0 = N
= 0.0, 1.0, 2.0, 10.0. Right graph: a zoom of the graph on the left with an additional fit for the analytical data corresponding to = 10.0 which considers only large lattices 40 N 64.
5.2. Unmatched quark masses

In this section we want to study the continuum limit and the size of the cutoff effects of lattice quantities constructed from ratios of physical observables computed on the lattice from two
different regularizations, i.e., here Wilson twisted mass fermions at maximal twist and overlap
fermions. In particular, we want to study the situation when both quark masses are not exactly
fixed to the same value but differ up to O(a 2 ) effects.
The reason for studying such setup is that in real simulations using a mixed but O(a)-improved
action both masses can be fixed to the same value only up to O(a 2 )effects. In order to realize
non-matched quark masses, we fix the twisted quark mass exactly at N q = 0.5 and allow for
an O(a 2 ) error in setting the overlap quark mass,
Nm = 0.5 v/N 2 .
(23)
We will vary the parameter v from v = 0 to v = 4.0.

Similar to the case of twisted mass at a non-optimally tuned value of the bare quark mass,
the leading O(a 2 ) cutoff effects can become very large when the quark masses are substantially
mis-matched. This might even induce the danger of not achieving the right continuum limit when
only too small lattice sizes are used.
This is exemplified in Fig. 5. In the left graph we show the scaling behaviour in 1/N 2 for
various values of the parameter v for the full range of the lattice sizes. If v is small, we observe
1/N 2 scaling violations. Only in the case v = 4, do the 1/N 4 corrections become relevant. More
quantitatively a linear fit in 1/N 2 including all the data points starting from N = 4 is reliable for
v 1. While for v 4 we can include, in a linear fit in 1/N 2 , only the data points starting from
N = 12.
Fig. 5 demonstrates that not only the slope of the ratio of pseudoscalar masses versus 1/N 2
increases as we make the value of v larger, but also that the O(a 4 ) effects become significant as
can be seen from the curvature in the plot for v = 4. Moreover, for v = 4, the continuum limit fit
is not reliable anymore if too small lattices are considered, which can be seen in the right graph
of Fig. 5. Thus, if the matching is not performed with a good enough precision, large lattices
have to be used to avoid higher order cutoff effects and perform a reliable continuum limit.
105
Fig. 5. The cutoff effects and continuum limit of the ratio of the pseudoscalar mass computed for maximally twisted mass
and overlap fermions. In both graphs N q = 0.5, N m = 0.5 0.4/N 2 and t/N = 4. The left graph shows the full range
of lattice sizes considered while the right graph represents a zoom.
6. Conclusions
In this paper we have performed a scaling test in the lattice spacing towards the continuum
limit for three kinds of lattice fermions. Our setup has been tree-level of perturbation theory. The
lattice fermions considered here were Wilson twisted mass, overlap and Creutz and Borici fermions. We looked at the pseudoscalar correlation function at a fixed time and the corresponding
pseudoscalar mass and decay constant.
As a first step, we have verified automatic O(a) improvement for Wilson twisted mass fermions and showed, with the example of the proton mass, the mechanisms of mass average.
The relative comparison of all three kinds of lattice fermions we have considered did not result
in a clear picture in the sense that one lattice fermion shows consistently smaller or bigger O(a 2 )
lattice artefacts than the other. Rather we found that the sizes of O(a 2 ) lattice artefacts depend
on the observable considered with perhaps the exception of maximally twisted mass fermions
which shows a rather uniform behaviour with small O(a 2 ) effects. Therefore, we expect that also
in practical simulations the O(a 2 ) lattice artefacts can turn out to be quite different depending on
the physical observable considered.
Finally, we studied the situation when parameters are tuned non-optimally. We considered
twisted mass fermions when an O(a) error was allowed in the tuning to maximal twist. In addition, we looked at ratios of physical quantities built from overlap and twisted mass fermions. In
this case we allowed an O(a 2 ) error in the matching of the quark masses. Our conclusion of these
studies is that when the corresponding O(a 2 ) error is too large, the continuum limit becomes not
reliable if the lattice spacing is not small enough.
Acknowledgements
We thank M. Brinet, V. Drach and C. Urbach for numerical checks of the Wilson twisted
mass results presented here. We thank Dru Renner for careful reading of this paper and useful
comments. A.S. thanks Chris Michael for discussions about Creutz fermions. A.S. acknowledges,
for providing hospitality, DESY-Zeuthen where a big part of this work has been done. J.G.L.
thanks M. Mller-Preussker for discussions. This work has been supported in part by the DFG
Sonderforschungsbereich/Transregio SFB/TR9-03.
106
Appendix A
In this appendix we summarize some of the formul and definitions which have been used in
this work.
Wilson twisted mass fermions
For Wilson twisted mass fermions we give the analytic expression for the time-momentum
representation of the quark propagator on a lattice with infinite time extent. Details of the computations can be found in Ref. [13].
The propagator reads,4

1
sgn(t) sinh E1 4 1f iaK(p)1
S(p,
t) =
f + (1 cosh E1 ) + aM(p)
11f
2E1

t
1
iaq 5 3 eE1 | a | + t ,0
(A.1)
11f
a
2(1 + aM(p))

with5
a 2
p i ,
2
3
M(p)
= m0 +
K(p)
=
i=1
3

i p i ,
(A.2)
i=1
a 2 K2 (p)
+ a 2 M 2 (p)
+ a 2 2q

,
cosh E1 = 1 +
2 1 + aM(p)

E1 1 + aM(p)
sinh E1 .
(A.3)
(A.4)
Creutz fermions
Our starting point for the analysis of the Creutz action is the operator given by

DC (p) = i
s (ap) + c (ap) + m0 1,
(A.5)
where 1 is the identity matrix in Dirac space and the momentum has already been reexpressed in
terms of the pole as
q = q + p .
(A.6)
Starting from a reciprocal lattice labelled here by q the poles of the CreutzDirac operator are
localized at (q,
q,
q,
q)
and (q,
q,
q,
q),
where q is related to the parameter C by the
equation C = cos(q).
In the following, we consider only the former pole. In addition, we also
define the parameter S = sin(q).
The relevant trigonometric functions for Creutz fermions are defined by

sk (ap) =
1
sk (ap),
R
s4 (ap) =
3S
s4 (ap),
RC
(A.7)
4 This expression is valid for all the possible values of the discrete Euclidean time t , even if it is negative or zero. This
generalization has been done by using the properties of the Fourier transform under change of sign of the argument.
5 sgn(t) is the sign of t , and we have denoted sgn(0) 0. It is just a convention in order to give one general expression
for the propagator for all possible values of t .
107
S
3
c4 (ap) = c4 (ap),
ck (ap),
RC
R
with the functions s and c given by
ck (ap) =
(A.8)
s1 (ap) = [p 1 + p 2 p 3 p 4 ],
(A.9)
s2 (ap) = [p 1 p 2 p 3 + p 4 ],
(A.10)
s3 (ap) = [p 1 p 2 + p 3 p 4 ],
(A.11)
s4 (ap) = [p 1 p 2 p 3 p 4 ],
(A.12)

a 2
2
2
2
c1 (ap) = p 1 + p 2 p 3 p 4 ,
(A.13)
2

a
c2 (ap) = p 12 p 22 p 32 + p 42 ,
(A.14)
2

a
c3 (ap) = p 12 p 22 + p 32 p 42 ,
(A.15)
2

a
c4 (ap) = p 12 + p 22 + p 32 + p 42 .
(A.16)
2
With the expression of Eq. (A.5) we obtain the corresponding propagator with standard manipulations as

i (s (ap) + c (ap)) + m0 1
SC (p) =
(A.17)
.

s (ap) + c (ap))2 + m20
(
In order to understand the continuum limit of the CreutzDirac operator and the role of the factor
R, we will use in the following the notation of Borici in [8], with a scalar product ( , x)

x .
We thus write Eq. (A.5) as

DC (p) = i , a s (ap) + b c(ap)

(A.18)
+ m0 1 = i a T , s (ap) + a 1 b c(ap)
+ m0 1,
where
1
s (ap) = (p 1 , p 2 , p 3 , p 4 )T ,
a
and the matrices a and b
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
a =
R 1
1
1
3S
C
3S
C
3S
C
c(ap)
1
1
1
a 2 2 2 2
T
p , p , p , p
2 1 2 3 4
1 S
b =
RC
3S
C
(A.19)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
.
1
3C
S
3C
S
3C
S
3C
S
As a next step, we define
a 1 b,
a T ,
= a T
from which we obtain the final form of the CreutzDirac operator

a 2
p i
DC (p) = i
p + m0 1.
2
This is the expression given in Eq. (6).
(A.20)
(A.21)
108
Borici fermions
Here we give the definitions we have used for Borici fermions. The matrices multiplying
the Wilson term are defined by

,
=
(A.22)
with the definition
1 1 1 1
1
1 1 1 1
=
.
2 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1

We incidentally note that = .
The trigonometric functions appearing in the Borici propagator are given by

a
G1 (ap) = p 1 p 12 + p 22 p 32 p 42 ,
4

a
G2 (ap) = p 2 p 12 + p 22 p 32 p 42 ,
4

a 2
G3 (ap) = p 3 p 1 p 22 + p 32 p 42 ,
4

a 2
G4 (ap) = p 4 p 1 p 22 p 32 + p 42 .
4
(A.23)
(A.24)
(A.25)
(A.26)
(A.27)
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
K. Cichy, et al., arXiv: 0710.2036 [hep-lat].

ALPHA Collaboration, R. Frezzotti, et al., JHEP 0108 (2001) 058, hep-lat/0101001.
R. Frezzotti, G.C. Rossi, JHEP 0408 (2004) 007, hep-lat/0306014.
A. Shindler, arXiv: 0707.4093 [hep-lat].
H. Neuberger, Phys. Lett. B 417 (1998) 141, hep-lat/9707022.
F. Niedermayer, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 73 (1999) 105, hep-lat/9810026.
M. Creutz, arXiv: 0712.1201 [hep-lat].
A. Borici, arXiv: 0712.4401 [hep-lat].
P.F. Bedaque, et al., arXiv: 0801.3361 [hep-lat].
M. Lscher, Phys. Lett. B 428 (1998) 342, hep-lat/9802011.
P. Hernandez, K. Jansen, M. Lscher, Nucl. Phys. B 552 (1999) 363, hep-lat/9808010.
D.B. Carpenter, C.F. Baillie, Nucl. Phys. B 260 (1985) 103.
J. Gonzlez Lpez, Cutoff effects for Wilson twisted mass fermions at tree-level of perturbation theory, 2007.
LF Collaboration, W. Bietenholz, et al., JHEP 0412 (2004) 044, hep-lat/0411001.

Phenomenology of spinless adjoints in two universal

extra dimensions
Kirtiman Ghosh , Anindya Datta
Department of Physics, University of Calcutta, 92, A.P.C. Road, Kolkata 700009, India
Received 10 January 2008; accepted 10 March 2008
Abstract
We discuss the phenomenology of (1, 1)-mode adjoint scalars in the framework of two Universal Extra
Dimensions. The KaluzaKlein (KK) towers of these adjoint scalars arise in the 4-dimensional effective
theory from the 6th component of the gauge fields after compactification. Adjoint scalars can have KKnumber conserving as well as KK-number violating interactions. We calculate the KK-number violating
operators involving these scalars and two Standard Model fields. Decay widths of these scalars into different
channels have been estimated. We have also briefly discussed pair-production and single production of such
scalars at the Large Hadron Collider.
1. Introduction
The primary aim for the next generation particle physics experiments will be to find out
whether a new dynamics beyond the Standard Model (SM) really exists around the TeV scale
of energy. A great effort have been put in also to pin down the exact nature of this new dynamics
at the TeV scale. In this endeavour, lots of attention have been paid to the theories with one or
more extra space like dimensions. These extra dimensional theories can be classified into two
main classes. In one of these, the Standard Model fields are confined to a (3 + 1)-dimensional
subspace of the full manifold. Models of ADD [1] or RS [2] fall in this category. On the other
hand, there are class of models where some or all of the SM fields can access the full space
time manifold. One such example is Universal Extra Dimension (UED), where all the fields can
E-mail addresses: kirtiman.ghosh@saha.ac.in (K. Ghosh), adphys@caluniv.ac.in (A. Datta).

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.012
110
K. Ghosh, A. Datta / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 109126
propagate in the full manifold [3]. Apart from the rich phenomenology, UED models in general
offer possible unification of the gauge couplings at a relatively low scale of energy, not far beyond the reach of the next generation colliders [4]. Moreover, particle spectra of UED models
contain a weakly interacting stable massive particle, which can be a good candidate for cold dark
matter [5,6].
Phenomenology of one UED (1UED, spacetime is (4 + 1)-dimensional), have been extensively studied in the context of low energy experiments [7] as well as high energy collider
experiments [8]. In this article, we will study some aspects of a particular variant of the UED
model where all the SM fields can access 5 space like and 1 time like dimensions. This is called
two Universal Extra Dimension (2UED) Model which has few additional attractive features.
2UED model can naturally explain the long life time for the proton decay [9] and more interestingly predicts that the number of fermion generations should be an integral multiple of three [10].
Recently, signals of 2UED model in future colliders like LHC [11,12] and ILC [13] have been
studied in some details. In this article, we will concentrate on the phenomenology of some of the
scalars in this theory and their possible production at the LHC.
In (1 + 5)-dimensional (6D) spacetime, gauge fields have 6 components. However, after
compactification, (1 + 3)-dimensional (4D) effective theory comprises of usual SM gauge fields
along with their KaluzaKlein (KK) excitations. The 6th component of the gauge fields emerge as
KK towers of scalar fields transforming as the adjoints of the respective gauge groups. Each KKmode fields in 2UED model is specified by a pair of positive integers (called the KK-numbers).
Phenomenology of the (1, 1)-mode adjoint scalars will be discussed in this article.
The plan of the article is the following. We will give a brief description of the model in the
next section. Interactions of the adjoint scalars will be discussed in Section 3. Section 4 will
be devoted to the decays of the (1, 1)-mode adjoint scalars. We will briefly discuss the possible
production mechanism of these scalars in Section 5. We summarise in the last section.
2. Two universal extra dimensions
As the name suggests, in 2UED all the SM fields can propagate universally in the sixdimensional spacetime. Four spacetime coordinates x ( = 0, 1, 2, 3) form the usual
Minkowski space. Two transverse spacial dimensions of coordinates x 4 and x 5 are flat and are
compactified with 0 x 4 , x 5 L. This implies that the extra-dimensional space (before compactification) is a square with sides L. Identifying the opposite sides of the square will make
the compactified manifold a torus. However, toroidal compactification, leads to 4D fermions that
are vector-like with respect to any gauge symmetry. The alternative is to identify two pairs of
adjacent sides of the square:
(y, 0) (0, y),
(y, L) (L, y),
y [0, L].
(1)
This is equivalent to folding the square along a diagonal and gluing the boundaries. Above compactification mechanism automatically leaves at most a single 4D fermion of definite chirality as
the zero mode of any chiral 6D fermion [14].
The field values should be equal at the identified points, modulo possible other symmetries of
the theory. The physics at identified points is identical if the Lagrangian takes the same value for
any field configuration:
L|x ,y,0 = L|x ,0,y ;
L|x ,y,L = L|x ,L,y .
111
This requirement fixes the boundary conditions for 6D scalar fields (x ) and 6D Weyl fermions
(x ). The requirement that the boundary conditions for 6D scalar or fermionic fields are
compatible with the gauge symmetry, also fixes the boundary conditions for 6D gauge fields.
The folding boundary conditions do not depend on continuous parameters, rather there are only
eight self-consistent choices out of which one particular choice leads to zero mode fermions after
compactification. Any 6D field (fermion/gauge or scalar) (x , x 4 , x 5 ) can be decomposed as:
1 (j,k) 4 5 (j,k)

x ,x
x .
fn
x, x4, x5 =
L
(2)
j,k
Where,
(j,k) 4
x , x5
fn
4

4

j x + kx 5 n
kx j x 5 n
1
+
+ cos
+
.
ein/2 cos
1 + j,0 k,0
R
2
R
2
(3)
The compactification radius R is related to the size, L, of the compactified space as: L = R.
Where 4D fields (j,k) (x ) are the (j, k)th KK modes of the 6D field (x ) and n is a integer
whose value is restricted to 0, 1, 2 or 3 by the boundary conditions. It is obvious from the form
(j,k)
of fn (x 4 , x 5 ) that only n = 0 allows zero mode (j = k = 0) fields in the 4D effective theory.
The zero mode fields and the interactions among zero modes can be identified with the SM.
The requirements of anomaly cancellation and fermion mass generation force the weakdoublet fermions to have opposite 6D chiralities with respect to the weak-singlet fermions. So
the quarks of one generation are given by Q+ (U+ , D+ ), U , D . The 6D doublet quarks
and leptons decompose into a tower of heavy vector-like 4D fermion doublets with left-handed
zero mode doublets. Similarly each 6D singlet quark and lepton decompose into the towers of
heavy 4D vector-like singlet fermions along with zero mode right-handed singlets. These zero
mode fields are identified with the SM fermions. As for example, SM doublet and singlets of 1st
(0,0)
(0,0)
(0,0)
generation quarks are given by (uL , dL ) Q+L (x ), uR UR (x ) and dR DR (x ).
In 6D, each of the gauge fields, has six components. Upon compactification, they decompose
into towers of 4D spin-1 fields, a tower of spin-0 fields which are eaten by heavy spin-1 fields.
Another tower of 4D spin-0 fields, all belonging to the adjoint representation of the corresponding
gauge group, remain in the physical spectrum. These are the physical spinless adjoints in which
we are interested.

2 + m2 , where M
The tree-level masses for (j, k)th KK-mode particles are given by Mj,k
j,k =
0
2
2
j + k /R. m0 is the mass of the corresponding zero mode particle. As a result, the tree-level
masses are approximately degenerate. This degeneracy is lifted by radiative effects. The fermions
receive mass corrections from the gauge interactions (with gauge bosons and adjoint scalars) and
Yukawa interactions. All of these give positive mass shift. The gauge fields and spinless adjoints
receive mass corrections from the self-interactions and gauge interactions. Gauge interactions
with fermions give a negative mass shift. While the self-interactions give positive mass shift
with different strength with respect to the former. However, masses of the hypercharge gauge
(j,k)
(j,k)
boson B and the corresponding scalar BH receive only negative corrections from fermionic
(1,0)
loops. Numerical computation shows that the lightest KK particle is the spinless adjoint BH ,
associated with the hypercharge gauge boson. As a result, 2UED model gives rise to a scalar dark
matter candidate. As an illustrative example, we have plotted (in Fig. 1) the variation of (1, 1)-
112
(1,1)
Fig. 1. Variation of GH
3(1,1)
(solid), WH
(1,1)
(small dash) and BH
(large dash) masses (after incorporating the one loop
radiative corrections) with R 1 . For comparison, R2 (dotted) has also been presented.
mode adjoint scalar masses

(after including the radiative corrections) with R 1 . For comparison,
we have also plotted R2 , which is the tree-level mass of the (1, 1)th KK-mode particles.
Conservation of momentum (along the extra dimensions) in the full theory, implies KK number conservation in the effective 4D theory. Beginning with the SM-like interactions in the 6D
(called the bulk interactions) one can obtain the KK-number as well as KK-parity conserving interactions, in 4D effective theory after compactification. However, one can generate KK number
violating operators at one loop level, starting from the bulk interactions. Structure of the theory demands that these operators can only be on (0, 0), (0, L) and (L, L) points of the chiral
square. Bulk interactions being symmetric under KK-parity, operators generated by loops also
conserve the KK-parity. These KK number violating operators are phenomenologically very important. A single non-zero mode KK particle can be produced only via the KK number violating
interactions. Thus the complete 4D effective Lagrangian can be written as:
L
L4D =
L
dx

dx 5 Lbulk + (x4 )(L x5 )L2 + (x4 )(x5 )

+ (L x4 )(L x5 ) L1 .
(4)
Lbulk includes 6D kinetic term for the quarks, leptons, SU(3)C SU(2)L U (1)Y gauge fields,
a Higgs doublet, 6D Yukawa interactions of the quarks and leptons to the Higgs doublet, and a
6D Higgs potential. L1 and L2 contain KK number violating interactions. As for example, the
lowest dimensional localized operator that involve ve chirality 6D quark field (F ) appear in
Lp (p = 1, 2) as

CpF
CpF
i FR D FR + 2 2 i FR Dl FL + h.c.
(5)
22 Ms2
2 Ms
where with = 0, 1, 2, 3 and l with l = 4, 5 are six anti-commuting 8 8 matrices, D , D l
are dimensionless parameters, and M is the cut-off scale.
are 6D covariant derivative, CpF , CpF
s
113
L1 and L2 also include 4D like kinetic terms for all 6D scalar and gauge fields and some part of
6D kinetic term. Contributions to those localized operators might be induced by physics above
the cut-off scale. We assume that those UV generated localized operators are also symmetric
under KK parity, so that the stability of the lightest KK particle which can be a promising dark
matter candidate, is ensured. Loop contributions by the physics below cut-off scale Ms are used
to renormalize the localized operators. These contributions are calculated in [15] at one loop
order. Assuming bare contributions at the cutoff scale Ms can be neglected, RG evolution fixes
the values of the C parameters.
3. Interactions of adjoint scalars
In this section, we will discuss the possible interaction of a (j, k)-mode adjoint scalar. The
interactions of spinless adjoints can be classified as KK number conserving and KK number
violating interactions. KK number conserving interactions arise from the compactification of
the bulk Lagrangian, where as, KK number violating interactions arise mainly due to the loops
involving KK number conserving interactions.
3.1. KK-number conserving interactions
Tree-level interactions of adjoint scalars with zero and non-zero mode fermions arise from the
6D kinetic terms for the fermions. After compactification and integrating over the compactified
co-ordinates one can obtain the 4D effective interactions:
(j ,k )(j2 ,k2 )(j3 ,k3 )
(j ,k ) (j ,k ) (j ,k )
rj2 ,k2 rj3 ,k3 +L1 1 AH2 2 +R3 3
(j1 ,k1 )(j2 ,k2 )(j3 ,k3 )
(j ,k ) (j ,k ) (j ,k )
ig0,1,3
rj2 ,k2 rj3 ,k3 R1 1 AH2 2 L3 3
1 1
L ig0,1,3
+ h.c.
(6)
g is the gauge coupling for the gauge group in consideration and rj,k = (j + ik)/ j 2 + k 2 . The
(j,k)
above form of the interactions are valid both for AH being an Abelian spinless adjoint field
(j,k)
a(j,k)
and non-Abelian spinless adjoint with the replacement of AH T a AH . T a s are the gauge
group generators corresponding to the representation of . Appearance of the -functions1 in
the above expression ensure the conservation of KK-number. We list the relevant Feynman Rules
arising from the above interactions in Fig. 7 of Appendix A.
3.2. KK-number violating interactions
Starting with the KK number conserving bulk interactions of 2UED one can generate KK
number violating operators via loop effects. As for example, a dimension 5 operator involving
two zero mode fermions and a even KK parity (with j + k even) (j, k)-mode spinless adjoint can
be constructed in such a way.
We have listed the KK-number violating 2-point and 3-point functions in Fig. 8 of
(j,k)
(0,0) (0,0)
Appendix A. The amplitude for AH R
R is also calculated in Appendix B and
is given by,

g (j,k)
(j,k)
M = i
(7)
K
u(p
1 )/
KC C
p PR u(p2 ) .
1R 2R
Mj,k C1R C2R
1 We follow the same convention as in Ref. [14].
114
f
(j,k)
(j,k)
Defining C j,k = KC1 C2 KC C
R
1R
2R
f
1
2
2
, one can parametrise C j,k = f 16
2 log(Ms /Mj,k ).
fL,R are dimensionless parameters which fix the couplings of adjoint scalars with two zero
mode fermions.
9
3
qL = 4gs2 + g 2 + g 2 Yq2L ,
4
4
3 2 2
2
qR = 4gs + g YqR ,
4
9 2 3 2 2
eL = g + g YeL ,
4
4
3 2 2
eR = g YeR ,
(8)
4
where Yf is the hypercharge of the corresponding fermion f . Spinless adjoints can also couple
with two SM gauge bosons. These couplings are generated from finite 1-loop diagrams (Appendix B). The dimension-5 operators, involving a (1, 1)-mode colour spinless adjoint and two
SM gauge boson, are given by:

(1,1)
(1,1)
G
+ CZg

Tr G Z GH .
CGg Tr G A GH
(9)
(1,1)
The dimension-5 operators, involving a (1, 1)-mode U (1) or SU(2) spinless adjoint (VH
(1,1)
3(1,1)
(BH or WH
) and two SM gauge bosons, are given by,

(1,1)
(1,1)
V
Cgg
+ CV A A VH

Tr G G VH
(1,1)
+ CVZ A Z VH
(1,1)
V
+ CZZ

Z Z VH
(1,1)
V
+
+ CW
W W
VH ,
+W
(10)
are the field strengths of gluon, photon, Z-boson and W where G , A , Z and
boson respectively. The values of the C coefficients can be found in Appendix B. We have used
= 1/128 and sin2 W = 0.23. The SM running of strong coupling constant (with s = 0.1 at
a scale of 1 TeV) has been used. Yukawa couplings for all light quarks (u, d, c, s) have been
neglected. Top and bottom quark Yukawa couplings are taken to be 1 and 0.02, respectively. For
quarks the resulting values of parameters at a scale about 0.5 TeV are qL = 6.82, uR = 6.02
and dR = 5.89.
Following the same algorithm in Appendix B, one can obtain dimension-6 operators involving
two spinless adjoints and a gauge boson of the form:

(1,1)
3(1,1)
(1,1)
(1,1)
+ Tr G BH GH
A BH WH

(1,1)
3(1,1)
(1,1)
3(1,1)
+ Tr G GH WH
(11)
+ Z BH WH
.
However, first, second and the third operator vanish identically if we use equation of motion for
3(1,1)
(1,1)
photon and gluon respectively. Moreover the decay of WH
to a BH (can take place via the
last one) and a massive SM gauge boson is kinematically forbidden for R 1 values upto 1.5 TeV.
4. Decays of (1, 1)-mode spinless adjoints
Until now the discussions about the couplings of the adjoint scalars were more or less general about any (j, k)-mode adjoint. However, from this section we will focus specifically on the
phenomenology of the (1, 1)-mode adjoints.
115
(1, 1)-mode spinless adjoint can decay into a lighter (1, 1)-mode particle (kinematically possible only for SU(3) and SU(2) spinless adjoints) and one or two SM particles via the KK-number
conserving couplings. This can also decay to a pair of SM fermions/gauge bosons via the KKnumber violating interactions. In this section we compute the all such decay branching fractions
of (1, 1)-mode spinless adjoints using the interactions derived in the previous section.
(1,1)
4.1. Decays of GH
(1,1)
As discussed, GH
can decay to the SM quarks via loop induced operators. The amplitude
(1,1)
for GH qq
is given by

qR
gs
qL
u(p
1 )/
p C j,k
PR + Cj,k
PL u(p2 ).
M = i
(12)
Mj,k
Applying Dirac equation it is easy to see that the amplitude is proportional to quark mass.
(1,1)
So GH predominantly decays into t t for MG(1,1) > 2mt . However, there are other dimensionH
(1,1)
5 operators which couple GH with a SM gluon and an electro-weak gauge bosons. Since
these couplings arise from finite 1-loop diagrams (Fig. 10), they are suppressed by a logarithm
(1,1)
(1,1)
q q couplings. GH
being heavier than the U (1) gauge boson B(1,1) , can
compared to the GH
(1,1)
decay into B and a SM gluon. This coupling is also generated by finite 1-loop diagram and
is thus suppressed.
The widths can be computed in terms of the
We first consider the decay into t t and bb.
parameters qL and qR given in Eq. (8). The decay width into q q is given by

2
1
2
4m2q

(1,1)
mq
GH 2
2
.
1 2
GH q q = 0 qL + qR
(13)
mG(1,1)
m (1,1)
H
GH
2 .
Where, q can be t or b and 0GH = 4s mG(1,1) C 1,1
H
(1,1)
The decay width to gB , gZ and g , induced
by finite 1-loop effect, are as the following:

2
Y
(1,1)
(1,1)

s2
GB g
GH B(1,1) g =
A
fG (mB (1,1) ),
2
32 2 cos2 w

2
3

(1,1)
s2
GgZ
2
I
f
(m
)
Q
sin
A
,
GH gZ =
G
z
32 2 cos2 w sin2 w

2
(1,1)

2
Gg
GH g = s 2
(14)
Q A
fG (0).
32
Where
fG (m) = [(m2 (1,1)

GH
m2 )/mG(1,1) ]3 and A s (in Eqs. (14), (16) and (18)) are defined
H
in Eq. (B.3). It important to notice that for MG(1,1) < 350 GeV the dominant decay mode is gZ
H
Although the G(1,1) bb couplings is logarithmically enhanced but it is suppressed

rather than bb.
H
by b-quark mass.
(1,1)
(1,1)
(1,1)
Beside those two body decays, GH undergoes tree-level 3-body decays to BH , B or
3(1,1)
WH
and SM fermionantifermion pairs. Branching fractions of those decays are also presented in Fig. 2
116
(1,1)
Fig. 2. Branching ratios of GH
. Ms R = 10 has been assumed in the calculation.
(1,1)
4.2. Decays of BH
(1,1)
(1,1)
BH is the lightest (1, 1)-mode KK particle. So, the decay BH via KK number conserving interactions are not kinematically allowed. It can decay to f f via dimension-5 operator in
(1,1)
Eq. (7). Since the coupling is proportional to the fermion mass, BH decay predominantly to
(1,1)
t t for mB (1,1) > 2mt . The decay modes bb and are suppressed due to fermion mass. BH
H
can also decay to two SM gauge bosons through dimension-5 operators Eq. (10), generated from
finite 1-loop contribution. However, these vertices are suppressed by a logarithm compared to
(1,1)
f f vertex.
BH
The decay width to t t, bb and are given by

2
1
2

(1,1)
4m2t
mt
BH 1 2
2
,
tL + 4tR
1 2
BH t t = 30
4
mB (1,1)
m (1,1)
BH

(1,1)
1 2
+ b2R
BH bb = 30BH
4 bL

mb
mB (1,1)
2
1
(1,1)
BH

= 0BH
9 2
+ 92R
4 L

m
mB (1,1)
H
Where, 0BH =
as follows:
2 .
m (1,1) C 1,1
18cos 2 w BH
2
4m2b
m2 (1,1)
BH
4m2
1 2
m (1,1)
(1,1)
BH
(1,1)
The decay widths of BH
,
1
2
(15)
BH
into two SM gauge bosons are

2
Y
s2
Bgg
gg =
fB (0),
A
2
8 2 cos2 w

2
(1,1)

Y 2
3
B
BH =
fB (0),
Q A
2
16 2 cos2 w
1
(1,1)
Fig. 3. Branching ratios of BH
(1,1)

BH Z =
117
to pair of SM particles. Ms R = 10 has been assumed in the calculation.
fB (mZ )
8 2 cos4 w sin2 w
2

Y 3
B Z
,
I Q sin2 w Q A

(1,1)
BH ZZ =
fB (mZ )
16 2 cos6 w sin4 w
2

2
Y 3
I Q sin2 w A ,

(1,1)
W +W =
BH
3
32 2 cos2 w sin4 w

fB (mW )
Y
A
2
2
(16)
Where, fB (m) = m3 (1,1) [1 4m2 /m2 (1,1) ]3/2 , and fB (m) = [(m2 (1,1) m2 )/mB (1,1) ]3 . For
BH
BH
BH
MB (1,1) < 2mt , BH dominantly decays to a pair of gluons. For MB (1,1) > 2mt , beside t t, the
H
next dominant decay mode is W + W . This is a consequence of large mass splitting of (1, 0)
mode quarks and leptons as discussed in Appendix B. The different branching ratios of BH are
presented in Fig. 3.
3(1,1)
4.3. Decays of WH
3(1,1)
3(1,1)
WH
is the next to the lightest (1, 1)-mode particle. WH
can decay only into a pair of
SM particles via KK number violating interactions mentioned before. The dominant decay mode
3(1,1)
can decay to other SM fermionantifermion pairs but
is again into t t for mW 3(1,1) > 2mt . WH
H
3(1,1)
such decays are suppressed by the respective fermion masses. The decay width of WH
into
118
f f is given by

3(1,1)
W3
f f = CF 0 H f2L
WH
2
1
4m2f
2
.
1 2
mW 3(1,1)
m 3(1,1)
mf
WH
W3
(17)
I 2
2 and C is the quadratic Casimir.

3
m 3(1,1) C 1,1
Where, 0 H =
F
2 sin2 w WH
Apart from this decay, electrically neutral (1, 1)-mode SU(2) spinless adjoint can decay into
two SM gauge bosons but these decays are again suppressed by a logarithm. The decay widths
are given by
3(1,1)

WH
gg =

s2
8 2 sin2 w

3(1,1)
=
WH
3(1,1)

WH
Z =
Wgg
I3 A
16 2 sin2 w
fW (0),

2
W
I3 Q2 A
2
fW (0),
fW (mZ )
8 2 cos2 w sin4 w
2

WZ
I3 I3 Q sin2 w Q A
,
3(1,1)

WH
ZZ =
fW (mZ )
6
sin
w
w
2

2
3 3
2
W ZZ
I I Q sin w A
,
16 2 cos4

3(1,1)
W +W =
WH
3
32 2 sin6 w

W
I3 AW
+W
2
fW (mW ).
(18)
The previous definition of f and f functions holds here with proper change in spinless adjoint
mass. The branching ratios are presented in Fig. 4.
3(1,1)
into left-handed SM fermion anti-fermion
There are also tree-level 3-body decay of WH
(1,1)
pairs and BH . As can be seen from Fig. 4, those decay modes are very suppressed compared
to others.
5. Production of (1, 1)-mode spinless adjoints
We will first discuss the pair production of (1, 1)-mode adjoint scalars. Production of (1, 0)(1,0)
) was discussed in Ref. [14]. We will also discuss the
mode scalars (in particular the GH
3
production of electroweak (WH and BH ) (1, 1)-mode scalars along with GH . Coupling of a
(1,1)
pair of GH with a zero mode gluon, and coupling of a (1,1)-mode quark with a zero mode
(1,1)
quark and a GH arise from bulk interaction. We have estimated the following cross-sections:
(GH GH ), (GH BH ), (GH WH3 ), (BH BH ), (WH3 WH3 ), (WH3 BH ) in protonproton col-
3(1,1)
Fig. 4. Branching ratios of WH
119
. Ms R = 10 has been assumed in the calculation.
lision at the LHC energies. CTEQ4L parton distribution functions [16] are used to numerically
evaluate the above cross-sections. We have fixed the factorisation scale (for parton distribution
functions) and scale of s (where relevant) at (1, 1)-mode mass.
(1,1)
All the above cross-sections are presented in Fig. 5. GH pair-production being a pure QCD
(1,1)
(1,1)
process has a large cross-section at the LHC. Single BH or WH
production along with a
(1,1)
GH also have large cross-sections. On the other hand, pair productions of electroweak adjoint
(1,1) (1,1)
scalars are miniscule even for lower values of R 1 . Dominance of GH GH pair production
can be primarily attributed to contributions from the gluongluon initiated contributions. Gluonic contributions are absent in all other cases we have presented in above two figures. Apart
(1,1) (1,1)
from the GH GH pair production, all other processes are only initiated by quarks and an
antiquarks. LHC, being a protonproton collider, antiquarks can only arise from sea-excitation.
Their densities also fall sharply with adjoint scalar masses.
(1,1)
GH pair production varies from a few pb to few fb, as we change R 1 over a range from 200
(1,1)
to 1200 GeV. Once produced GH
will decay dominantly to t t, thus copiously producing 4 t quarks. Distinguishing this signal from the SM background will be a challenging task. However,
(1,1)
masses below 2mt , it can decay to gZ, thus producing a spectacular 2-jet + 4 lepton
for GH
signal.
(1,1)
(1,1)
in association with GH
are also presented in
Production cross-sections of WH(1,1) and BH
(1,1)
(1,1)
Fig. 5(a). WH (BH ) cross-sections varies from 100 (10) fb to 0.01 fb as we vary R 1 from
200 to 1200 (1000) GeV.
Fig. 5(b), shows the pair production of electroweak adjoint scalars, namely (1, 1) mode of
WH and BH . These cross-sections are small and are comparable with the single productions of
these scalars (discussed in the following).
Pair production of all these adjoint scalars via KK-number conserving interactions, result in
4t signal, once the scalar masses are greater than twice the top mass.
(1,1)
(1,1)
We will now briefly discuss the single production of adjoint scalars, W3H and BH ,
the adjoints of the electro-weak gauge group. These can be produced at the LHC via gluon
(1,1)
gluon fusion as well as in association with top-quark. However, GH cannot be produced via
120
Fig. 5. Pair production cross-sections for various (1, 1) mode adjoint scalars. CTEQ4L parton distributions are used to
evaluate the cross-sections.
gluongluon fusion due to SU(3) symmetry. The only single production mode for this strongly
interacting adjoint scalar is in association with a pair of t -quarks.2 This associated production
rate is proportional to the fifth power of gauge couplings. As a result, the cross-sections, even
for relatively lower values of R 1 , are not so promising. They also fall sharply with R 1 . This is
(1,1)
primarily due to the direct R 1 dependence of GH t t couplings.
(1,1)
(1,1)
Resonance production cross-section of W3H and BH from pp collision is given by

pp VH(1,1) + X =

2
VH(1,1) gg
36smVH

2
dx
2
g x, mV g
,m
x
x V
(19)
m2V
s is the pp center-of-mass energy square, is a dimensionless parameter: s H . gs are the gluon

densities inside a proton.
In the previous section, we obtained the expressions for the various decay widths of the spinless adjoints. It is now straightforward to calculate the cross sections using the above expression.
(1,1)
(1,1)
We have presented the W3H and BH production cross sections in Fig. 6. CTEQ4L parton
distributions have been used to numerically evaluate the cross-sections. Smallness of the cross
sections can be attributed to the narrow decay widths of these scalars into a gluon pair. The narrow decay widths of these electroweak adjoint scalars are evident in view of incomplete anomaly
cancellation as explained in Appendix B.
(1,1)
2 Spin-less adjoints can be produced from production and subsequent cascade decays of V
. The cross-sections for
these production channels [12] are higher than the processes we are considering in the following. However, in Ref. [12],
spinless adjoints are produced along with several number of jets. This makes their detection at a hadronic collider difficult.
3(1,1)
Fig. 6. Resonant production cross-sections of WH
(1,1)
and BH
121
at the LHC with R 1 .
6. Conclusion
To summarise, we have investigated the phenomenology of the adjoint scalars in an effective
4D theory, resulting from the compactification of Standard Model in 6 spacetime dimensions.
These scalars arise from the 6th component of the gauge fields of the gauge groups SU(3),
SU(2) and U (1) respectively after compactification. Apart from KK-number conserving interactions which arise from the bulk, adjoint scalars have interactions with a pair of SM particles
via KK-number violating but KK-parity conserving terms in the interaction Lagrangian. The
later couplings arise via one-loop effects due to bulk interactions. Structure of the theory, in
particular the chiral nature of compactification forces these effective couplings to be on the
fixed points of the manifold. We have calculated these effective couplings involving the (j, k)
mode of the adjoint scalars (GH , WH and BH ) with a pair of SM fields. The possible decays of
(1, 1) mode scalars have been calculated. It is found that if kinematically allowed, they will
dominantly decay to a pair of the heaviest fermions, namely the top-quark. We have calculated the pair production cross-section of the adjoint scalars in the context of Large Hadron
Collider. Pair production of adjoint scalars involves only the KK-number conserving inter(1,1) (1,1)
(1,1) 3(1,1)
(1,1) (1,1)
actions. GH GH , GH WH
, GH BH
cross sections are large. On the other hand
(1,1) 3(1,1)
3(1,1) 3(1,1)
(1,1) (1,1)
BH WH
, WH
WH
, BH BH
pair productions at LHC are small. We have also
3(1,1)
(1,1)
computed the single production rates of WH
and BH via gluongluon fusion which take
(1,1)
place via KK-number violating interactions, at the LHC. GH cannot be produced singly via
gluongluon fusion. However, the single production cross sections via KK-number violating interaction are in general small.
Acknowledgements
K.G. acknowledges the support from Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, Govt. of
India. A.D. is partially supported by Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, Govt. of India,
via a research grant 03(1085)/07/EMR-II.
122
Fig. 7. Feynman rules of KK-number conserving interactions arising from Eq. (6). g is the gauge coupling constant and
T a is the generator of the relevant gauge group. For U (1), T a s should be replaced by Y2 .
Appendix A. Relevant Feynman rules

In this appendix, we list the Feynman rules those are relevant for loop calculations. KK number conserving vertices involving a gauge boson or a spinless adjoint and two fermions are listed
in Fig. 7.
Operators localized at the singular points, after compactification, give rise to the KK number
violating 2-point and 3-point functions. These are listed in Fig. 8. KK number violating 2-point
functions induce kinetic and mass mixing between different (j, k) modes. Corresponding 2-point
and 3-point functions involving electro-weak gauge bosons can be easily inferred from those
(j,k)
given in Fig. 8. KC1 C2 in Fig. 8 is defined as:
(j,k)
KC1 C2 =

2
2C1 + (1)j C2 .
2
(RMs )
(A.1)
C1 , C2 are the dimensionless parameters, already introduced in Eq. (5). In Appendix B, we

will use these KK-number violating 2-point functions to compute the coupling of an even KKparity spinless adjoint with two SM fermions.
Appendix B. KK-number violating loop induced couplings
(j,k)
(0,0)
(0,0)
In this appendix, we first compute AH R R amplitude. This kind of interactions

are generated only by loop effects. One can construct dimension-5 operators which couples two
zero mode fermions and a (j, k)-mode (with j + k even) spinless adjoint, using the Feynman
rules in Figs. 7 and 8. As for example, the amplitude for (following the diagrams in Fig. 9)
(j,k)
(0,0) (0,0)
BH R R is given by
M = ig

Y 1 (j,k)
(j,k)
p PR u(p2 ) .
KC1 C2 KC C
u(p
1 )/
R
R
1R 2R
2 Mj,k
(B.1)
Modulo the KK parity conservation, spinless adjoints can interact with two vector modes via
finite 1-loop diagram. The coupling of a (J1 , K1 )-mode spinless adjoint with a (J2 , K2 )-mode
gauge boson and a zero mode gauge boson is induced by the 1-loop diagram in Fig. 10. The
123
Fig. 8. Feynman rules of KK-number violating interactions arising from compactification of fixed point operators.
Fig. 9. Vertices involving two zero mode fermions and a even KK parity (j, k) mode spinless adjoint.
Fig. 10. Effective vertex involving one SM and an even KK parity (J2 , K2 ) mode gauge boson with an even KK parity
(J1 , K1 ) mode spinless adjoint.
(J1 ,K1 )
2 ,K2 ) (0,0)
amplitude for AH
A(J
A is given by:
1
(Gauge Couplings) A (p2 ) (p3 )p1 p2 ,
4 2
where we have defined A in the following way
j ,k ;j ,k
A1 1 2 2 ,
A =
M=
(B.2)
j1 ,k1 j2 ,k2
j ,k ;j ,k
A1 1 2 2
j ,k ;j ,k
m1 1 2 2
j ,k1 ;j2 ,k2
= m1
j ,k ;j ,k
(C12 C11 C0 ) m2 2 1 1 (C12 C11 ),

j1 ,k1 ;J1 ,K1 ;j2 ,k2 j2 ,k2 ;J2 ,K2 ;j3 ,k3

= mj1 ,k1 Re rJ1 ;K1 rj1 ,k1 013
103

j2 ,k2 ;J1 ,K1 ;j1 ,k1 j1 ,k1 ;J2 ,K2 ;j2 ,k2
,
013
000
(B.3)
124
C0 , C11 , C12 are the scalar and vector three point functions of t Hooft, Passarino and Veltman [17] and Gauge Couplings in Eq. (B.2) corresponds to the product of three gauge couplings (arising in Fig. 10) times respective group theory factors. C functions depend only on the
j ,k ;j ,k
three external masses and the three internal (fermionic) masses. The coefficient m1 1 2 2 survives for a finite set of (j1 , k1 ; j2 , k2 ). As for example, only (1, 0)-mode fermion contributes to
the loop in the coupling of a (1, 1) mode spinless adjoint with two zero-mode gauge bosons. The
possible combinations of (j1 , k1 ; j2 , k2 ) in the coupling of a (1, 1) spinless adjoint to a (1, 1) vector mode and a zero-mode gauge boson, are: (1, 0; 1, 0), (2, 0; 1, 1), (1, 1; 0, 0) and (1, 1; 2, 0).
After summing over such contributions, we find,
M=

1

(p2 ) (p3 )p1 p2
(Gauge Couplings) A .
2
4
(B.4)
The resulting dimension-5 operators, involving a (1, 1) mode spinless adjoint and two zeromode gauge bosons, are given in Eqs. (9), (10). The C coefficients arise in Eqs. (9), (10) are
given by,
1 2
G g
g e
Q A ,
4 2 s
CGg =

1 2 g 3
GZg
G
I Q sin2 w A ,
=
gs
CZg
2
cos w
4
B
Cgg
=
1 2
g g
4 2 s
CB =
CBZ =
1 2
e g
4 2
Y
Y
Bgg
A ,
B
Q2 A

g Y 3
1
B Z

eg
I Q sin2 w Q A ,
2
cos w
2
4
B
CZZ
=
g2
1
g
4 2 cos2 w
B
CW
+W =
g2
1
g
4 2 2
Y
2
Y
+
2
,
I3 Q sin2 w ABZZ
ABW
+W
W3
1 2 3
W 3 gg
=
gs g
I A ,
2
4
W3
1 2 3 2
W 3
=
e g
I Q A
,
2
4
Cgg
CWZ =

1
g2 3 3
W 3 Z
e
I I Q sin2 w Q A
,
2
4 cos w
+
W
CZZ
=
g3
1
4 2 cos2 w

+

2
W 3 ZZ
I3 I3 Q sin2 w A
,

3
W
CW
+W =
1 g3 3
3W +W
I AW
.
4 2 2
125
(B.5)
Where = 1, Q , I3 and Y are the electric charge, 3rd component of isospin and hypercharge of the corresponding fermion respectively.
(J ,K ) (J ,K ) (0,0)
It is important to notice that the effective AH 1 1 A 2 2 A vertex is proportional to the
gauge anomaly. So in the limit that all the fermions at each KK level are degenerate in mass,
A becomes independent of and all C coefficients vanish identically due to exact anomaly
cancellation. The mass splittings of KK fermions due to the radiative corrections thus play a very
B
crucial role for the non-zero values of the C coefficients. As for example, CW
+ W is stronger
B
B
than all other C s. In case of CW + W , anomaly cancellation takes place exactly between (1, 0)
mode of 6D +ve chirality quarks and lepton generations. Where as, for others cases, cancellation
take place partially between the (1, 0) mode of 6D +ve and ve chirality quarks and leptons.
The mass splitting between the (1, 0) mode +ve 6D chirality quarks and lepton generations is
higher than the mass splitting between (1, 0) mode of 6D +ve and ve chirality fermions [12].
W3
Similar kind of argument can be given in favour of the small value of CW
+ W compared to all
others.
References
[1] I. Antoniadis, Phys. Lett. B 246 (1990) 377;
N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulous, G. Dvali, Phys. Lett. B 429 (1998) 263;
I. Antoniadis, N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, G.R. Dvali, Phys. Lett. B 436 (1998) 257.
[2] L. Randall, R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 3370;
L. Randall, R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 4690.
[3] T. Appelquist, H.C. Cheng, B.A. Dobrescu, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 035002;
H.C. Cheng, K.T. Matchev, M. Schmaltz, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 056006.
[4] K. Dienes, E. Dudas, T. Gherghetta, Nucl. Phys. B 537 (1999) 47;
K. Dienes, E. Dudas, T. Gherghetta, Phys. Lett. B 436 (1998) 55;
G. Bhattacharyya, A. Datta, S.K. Majee, A. Raychaudhuri, Nucl. Phys. B 760 (2007) 117.
[5] G. Servant, T. Tait, Nucl. Phys. B 650 (2003) 391;
K. Kong, K. Matchev, JHEP 0601 (2006) 038.
[6] B. Dobrescu, D. Hooper, K. Kong, R. Mahbubani, J. Cosmol. Astron. Phys. 0710 (2007) 012.
[7] K. Agashe, N.G. Deshpande, G.H. Wu, Phys. Lett. B 514 (2001) 309;
D. Chakraverty, K. Huitu, A. Kundu, Phys. Lett. B 558 (2003) 173;
A.J. Buras, M. Spranger, A. Weiler, Nucl. Phys. B 660 (2003) 225;
A.J. Buras, A. Poschenrieder, M. Spranger, A. Weiler, Nucl. Phys. B 678 (2004) 455;
J.F. Oliver, J. Papavassiliou, A. Santamaria, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 056002;
T. Appelquist, B.A. Dobrescu, Phys. Lett. B 516 (2001) 85;
K. Agashe, N.G. Deshpande, G.H. Wu, Phys. Lett. B 511 (2001) 85.
[8] T.G. Rizzo, J.D. Wells, Phys. Rev. D 61 (2000) 016007;
A. Strumia, Phys. Lett. B 466 (1999) 107;
C.D. Carone, Phys. Rev. D 61 (2000) 015008;
C. Macesanu, C.D. McMullen, S. Nandi, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 015009;
C. Macesanu, C.D. McMullen, S. Nandi, Phys. Lett. B 546 (2002) 253;
H.C. Cheng, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 18 (2003) 2779;
A. Muck, A. Pilaftsis, R. Ruckl, Nucl. Phys. B 687 (2004) 55;
G. Bhattacharyya, P. Dey, A. Kundu, A. Raychaudhuri, Phys. Lett. B 628 (2005) 141;
M. Battaglia, A. Datta, A. De Roeck, K. Kong, K.T. Matchev, JHEP 0507 (2005) 033;
B. Bhattacherjee, A. Kundu, Phys. Lett. B 627 (2005) 137;
J.M. Smillie, B.R. Webber, JHEP 0510 (2005) 069.
[9] T. Appelquist, B. Dobrescu, E. Ponton, H. Yee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 181802.
126
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
B. Dobrescu, E. Poppitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 031801.

B. Dobrescu, K. Kong, R. Mahbubani, JHEP 0707 (2007) 006.
G. Burdman, B. Dobrescu, E. Ponton, Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 075008.
A. Freitas, K. Kong, arXiv: 0711.4124 [hep-ph].
B. Dobrescu, E. Ponton, JHEP 0403 (2004) 071.
E. Ponton, L. Wang, JHEP 0611 (2006) 018.
H. Lai, et al., Phys. Rev. D 55 (1997) 1280.
G. t Hooft, M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 153 (1979) 365;
G. Passarino, M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 160 (1979) 151.

Higgs production via gluongluon fusion with finite top

mass beyond next-to-leading order
Simone Marzani a , Richard D. Ball b,c , Vittorio Del Duca c,1 ,
Stefano Forte d, , Alessandro Vicini d
a School of Physics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3JZ, Scotland, UK
b CERN, Physics Department, Theory Division, CH-1211 Genve 23, Switzerland
c INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Via E. Fermi 40, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
d Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit di Milano and INFN, Sezione di Milano, Via Celoria 16, I-20133 Milano, Italy
Received 18 January 2008; accepted 17 March 2008

Available online 1 April 2008
Abstract
We present a computation of the cross section for inclusive Higgs production in gluongluon fusion for
finite values of the top mass in perturbative QCD to all orders in the limit of high partonic center-of-mass
energy. We show that at NLO the high energy contribution accounts for most of the difference between
the result found with finite top mass and that obtained in the limit mt . We use our result to improve
the known NNLO order result obtained at mt . We estimate the effect of the high energy NNLO mt
dependence on the K factor to be of the order of a few per cent.
1. The cross section in the soft limit and in the hard limit
The determination of higher-order corrections to collider processes [1], and specifically Higgs
production [2] in perturbative QCD is becoming increasingly important in view of forthcoming
phenomenology at the LHC. The dominant Higgs production mechanism in the standard model
is inclusive gluongluon fusion (gg H + X) through a top loop. The next-to-leading order
corrections to this process were computed several years ago [3,4] and turn out to be very large
E-mail address: forte@mi.infn.it (S. Forte).

1 On leave from INFN, Sezione di Torino, Italy.
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.016
128
S. Marzani et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 127145
(of order 100%). The bulk of this large correction comes from the radiation of soft and collinear
gluons [5], which give the leading contribution in the soft limit in which the partonic center-ofmass energy s tends to the Higgs mass m2H , and which at LHC energies turns out to dominate
the hadronic cross section after convolution with the parton distributions.
This dominant contribution does not resolve the effective gluongluonHiggs (ggH ) coupling
induced by the top loop. As a consequence, the NLO correction can be calculated [6,7] quite
accurately in the limit mt , where it simplifies considerably because the ggH coupling
becomes pointlike and the corresponding Feynman diagrams have one less loop. Recently, the
NNLO corrections to this process have been computed in the mt limit [8]. The NNLO
result appears to be perturbatively quite stable [9], and this stability is confirmed upon inclusion
[10] of terms in the next few orders which are logarithmically enhanced as s mH , which can
be determined [11] using soft resummation methods. This suggests that also at NNLO the large
mt approximation should provide a good approximation to the yet unknown exact result.
However, this is only true for the total inclusive cross section: for example, if one looks at the
production of Higgs plus jets, if the transverse momentum is large the infinite mt approximation
fails [12]. Indeed, even though the mt -independent contribution from soft and collinear radiation
turns out to dominate the cross section at the hadronic level, it does not necessarily provide a
good approximation to the partonic cross section in a fixed kinematical region. In particular, the
infinite mt approximation, which becomes exact in the soft limit, fails in the opposite (hard)
limit of large center-of-mass energy. This is due to the fact that the ggH vertex is pointlike in
the infinite mt limit, whereas for finite mt the quark loop provides a form factor (as we shall
see explicitly below). Clearly, a point-like interaction has a completely different high energy
behaviour than a resolved interaction which is softened by a form factor: in fact one can show
[13] that a point-like interaction at nth perturbative order has double energy logs while a resolved
interaction has only single logs.
This means that as s the gg H + X partonic cross section behaves as

k 2k1 s
s2
pointlike: mt ,
k=1 s ln
m2H

(1)

k k1 s
s s2
resolved: finite mt .
2
k=1 s ln
mH
Hence, as the center-of-mass energy grows, eventually mt ceases to be a good approximation to the exact result. It is clear from Eq. (1) that this high energy deviation between the exact
and approximate behaviour is stronger at higher orders, so one might expect the relative accuracy
of the infinite mt approximation to the kth order perturbative contribution to the cross section to
become worse as the perturbative order increases. Conversely, this suggests that it might be worth
determining the high energy behaviour of the exact cross section and use the result to improve
the infinite mt result, which is much less difficult to determine. Eventually, a full resummation
of these contributions might also become relevant.
The leading high energy contributions to this process in the infinite mt limit have in fact been
computed some time ago in Ref. [14]: this amounts to a determination of the coefficient of the
double logs Eq. (1), in the pointlike case. In this paper, we compute the coefficients of the single
logs Eq. (1) in the resolved (exact) case. Our result takes the form of a double integral, whose
numerical evaluation order by order in a Taylor expansion gives the coefficient of the logs Eq. (1)
(at the lowest perturbative order the integral can be computed in closed form). After checking
our result against the known full NLO result of Refs. [3,4], we will discuss the way knowledge
of the exact high energy behaviour of the cross section at a given order can be used to improve
the infinite mt result, using the NLO case, where everything is known, as a testing ground. We
129
will show that in fact, at NLO the different high energy behaviour Eq. (1) accounts for most of
the difference between the exact and infinite mt cross sections. We will then repeat this analysis
in the NNLO case, where only the infinite mt result is currently known. We will show that in fact
at this order the contribution of the logarithmically enhanced terms which dominate the partonic
cross section at high energy is substantial even for moderate values of the partonic center-of-mass
energy, such as s 2m2H .
The calculation of the leading high energy logs is presented in Section 2, while in Section 3
we discuss its use to improve the NLO and NNLO results. Appendix A collects the explicit
expressions of the form factors which parametrize the amplitude for the process gg H with
two off-shell gluons, which is required for the calculation of Section 2.
2. Determination of the leading high energy logarithms
2.1. Definitions, kinematics and computational procedure
We compute the total inclusive partonic cross section (gg H + X) in an expansion in
power of s , as a function of the partonic center-of-mass energy s :

(gg H + X) = gg s ; ; yt , m2H ,
(2)
where the dimensionless variables and yt parametrize respectively the partonic center-of-mass
energy and the dependence on the top mass:
m2H
,
s
m2
yt 2t .
mH
(3)
(4)
The corresponding contribution to the hadronic cross section can be obtained by convolution
with the gluongluon parton luminosity L:

gg h ; yt , m2H
1
=
h
dw gg s ; ; yt , m2H L(w),
w
(5)
1
L(w)
w

dx2
w 2
gh1
, mH gh2 x2 , m2H ,
x2
x2
(6)
where ghi (xi , Q2 ) is the gluon distribution in the ith incoming hadron and in Eq. (5) the dimensionless variable h parametrizes the hadronic center-of-mass energy s
h
m2H
.
s
(7)
Note that 0 h 1, and that if yt < 1/4 then the intermediate t t pair produced by the
gluongluon fusion can go on shell.
It is convenient to define a dimensionless hard coefficient function C(s (m2H ); , yt )
130

gg s ; ; yt , m2H = 0 (yt )C s m2H , , yt ,

s (m2H ) (1)
s (m2H )
C (, yt ) +
C s m2H , , yt = (1 ) +
(8)
2
C (2) (, yt ),
where 0 (1 ) is the leading order cross section, determined long ago in Ref. [15]:

2

s2 GF 2
1
2
4yt 1 (1 4yt )s0 (yt ) ,
0 (yt ) =
256
4
(9)
(10)
where

ln 114yt + i
1+ 14y
t
s0 (yt ) =
1
1
1
2i tan1
4yt 1 = 2i sin
4yt
if yt < 14 ,
if yt 14 .
(11)
We also define the Mellin transform

C s m2H , N, yt =
1

d N1 C s m2H , , yt ,
(12)
denoted with the same symbol by slight abuse of notation.

We are interested in the determination of the leading high energy contributions to the partonic
cross section (gg H + X), namely, the leading contributions to C(s (m2H ), , yt ) as 0
to all orders in s (m2H ). Order by order in s (m2H ), these correspond to the highest rightmost
pole in N in the expansion in powers of s (m2H ) of C(s (m2H ), N, yt ). The leading singular contributions to the partonic cross section (gg H + X) to all orders can be extracted [13] from
the computation of the cross section for a slightly different process, namely, the cross section
off (gg H ) computed at leading order, but with incoming off-shell gluons, a suitable choice
of kinematics and a suitable prescription for the sum over polarizations.
The procedure used for this determination is based on the so-called high energy (or kt ) factorization [13], and consists of the following steps.
One computes the matrix element Mab (k1 , k2 ) for the leading-order process gg H at
leading order with two incoming off-shell gluons with polarization indices , and color
indices a, b. The momenta k1 , k2 of the gluons in the center-of-mass frame of the hadronic
collision admit the Sudakov decomposition at high energy
ki = zi pi + ki ,
(13)
where pi are lightlike vectors such that p1 p2 = 0, and ki are transverse vectors, ki pj = 0
for all i, j . The gluons have virtualities
ki2 = k2i = |ki |2 .
(14)
The cross section off (gg H ) is computed averaging over incoming and summing over
outgoing spin and color:
off =

1 1

1 (k1 ) 1 (k1 )
2 (k2 ) 2 (k2 ) dP,
Mab M ba
J 256
1
(15)
131
where the flux factor

J = 2(k1 k2 k1 k2 )
(16)
is determined on the surface orthogonal to p1 , p2 Eq. (13), and the phase space is

1
|k1 + k2 |2
2
1
.
dP = 2
z
mH
m2H
(17)
Note that the kinematics for a 2 1 process is fixed, so Eq. (15) gives the total cross section
and no phase-space integration is needed.
The sums over gluon polarizations are given by

i (ki ) i (ki ) = 2
ki ki
|k2i |
i = 1, 2.
(18)
Here, the virtualities will be parametrized through the dimensionless variables

i
|ki |2
.
m2H
(19)
The reduced cross section , obtained extracting an overall factor m2H ,

m2H off (gg H ) (yt ; 1 , 2 , , z),
(20)
is then a dimensionless function (yt ; 1 , 2 , , z) of the parameter yt Eq. (4) and of the
kinematic variables 1 , 2 , the relative angle of the two transverse momenta

1 k1 k2
,
= cos
(21)
|k1 ||k2 |
and
z
m2H
m2H
=
.
2z1 z2 p1 p2 2(k1 k2 k1 k2 )
(22)
Note that, in the collinear limit k1 , k2 0, z Eq. (22) reduces to Eq. (3).
The reduced cross section is averaged over , and its dependence on z Eq. (22) is Mellintransformed:
1
(N, 1 , 2 ) =
2
dz z
N1
d
(yt ; 1 , 2 , , z).
2
(23)
The dependence on i is also Mellin-transformed, and the coefficient of the collinear pole in
M1 , M2 is extracted:

h(N, M1 , M2 ) = M1 M2

d1
d2 1M1 1 2M2 1 (N, 1 , 2 ).
(24)
Note that the integral in Eq. (24) has a simple pole in both M1 = 0 and M2 = 0. The residue
of this pole is the usual hard coefficient function as determined in collinear factorization,
which is thus C(N) = h(N, 0, 0).
132
The leading singularities of the hard coefficient function Eq. (12) are obtained by expanding in powers of s at fixed s /N the function obtained when M1 and M2 in Eq. (24) are
identified with the leading singularities of the largest eigenvalue of the singlet anomalous
dimension matrix, namely
m2H 0 (yt )C

2

s
s
s mH , N, yt = h N, s
, s
1 + O(s ) .
N
N
(25)
Here, s is the leading order term in the expansion of the large eigenvalue + of the singlet
anomalous dimension matrix in powers of s at fixed s /N :
+ (s , N) = s
s
N

+ ss
s
N
+ ,
(26)
with [16]

s
s
N

n=1

cn
CA s
N
n
;
cn = 1, 0, 0, 2 (3), . . . ,
(27)
where CA = 3.
So far, this procedure has been used to determine the leading nontrivial singularities to the hard
coefficients for a small number of processes: heavy quark photo- and electro-production [13],
deep-inelastic scattering [17], heavy quark hadroproduction [18,19], and Higgs production in the
infinite mt limit [14].
2.2. Cross section for Higgs production from two off-shell gluons
The leading-order amplitude for the production of a Higgs in the fusion of two off-shell gluons
with momenta k1 and k2 and color a, b is given by the single triangle diagram, and it is equal to
Mab
2 2
ab gs mt k2 k1
= 4i
A1 (1 , 2 ; yt ) g A2 (1 , 2 ; yt )
v
m2H
k1 k2 k1 k2
k1 k2
A
(
,
;
y
)
A
(
,
;
y
)
+
1
1
2
t
2
1
2
t
m2H
k12 k2 k2 k22 k1 k1
k12 k22

,
(28)
g2
where the strong coupling is s = 4s and the top Yukawa coupling is given by ht = mvt in terms
of the Higgs vacuum-expectation value v, related to the Fermi coupling by GF = 1 2 . The
2v
dimensionless form factors A1 (1 , 2 ; yt ) and A2 (1 , 2 ; yt ) have been computed in Ref. [12];
their explicit expression is given in Appendix A. They were subsequently rederived in Ref. [20],
where an expression for the Higgs production cross section from the fusion of two off-shell
gluons was also determined, but was not used to obtain the high energy corrections to perturbative
coefficient functions.
The spin- and colour-averaged reduced cross section Eq. (20) is then found using Eq. (15),
with the phase space Eq. (17). We get

2
2
3 2

2 yt 1
(yt ; 1 , 2 , , z) = 8 2 s GF mH
A1 A2

1 2 2z

1
1 1 2 1 2 cos .
z
133
(29)
Because of the momentum-conserving delta, the Mellin transform with respect to z is trivial,
and the reduced cross section Eq. (23) is given by

3 2
d
1
1
2 2
(N, 1 , 2 ) = 8 2 s GF mH yt
2 (1 + 1 + 2 )N (1 + cos )N
0

|A1 |2 cos2 + 1 2 |A3 |2

1
+
|A1 |2 (1 + 1 + 2 ) A1 A2 + A1 A2 cos ,
1 2
2
(30)
where we have defined the dimensionless variable
41 2
.
(1 + 1 + 2 )2
(31)
The three form factors Ai are independent of , so all the angular integrals can be performed
in terms of hypergeometric functions, with the result
(N, 1 , 2 )

1
|A1 |2
N N +1
F
= 8 2 3 s2 GF m2H yt2
,
,
2,
2 1
(1 + 1 + 2 )N
2
2
2
N +2 N +3
N N +1
+ N(N + 1) 2 F 1
,
, 3,
+ 1 2 |A3 |2 2 F 1
,
, 1,
4
2
2
2
2

1
N |A1 |2 (1 + 1 + 2 ) A1 A2 + A1 A2
1 + 1 + 2

N +1 N +2
2F 1
(32)
,
, 2, .
2
2
In the limit mt , using the behaviour of the form factors Eq. (A.12) the term in square
brackets in Eq. (32) as well as the term proportional to A3 are seen to vanish. The remaining
terms, proportional to A1 , give the result in the pointlike limit. The reduced cross section in this
limit was already derived in Ref. [14] (see Eq. (9) of that reference): our result differs from that
of Ref. [14], though the disagreement is by terms of relative O(N), hence it is immaterial for the
subsequent determination of the leading singularities of the hard coefficient function.
2.3. High energy behaviour
The leading singularities of the coefficient function can now be determined from the Mellin
transform h(N, M1 , M2 ) Eq. (24) of the reduced cross section Eq. (32), letting M1 = M2 =
s (s /N) according to Eq. (25), and expanding in powers of s (i.e. effectively in powers of
M1 , M2 ) and then in powers of N about N = 0. In the pointlike case (mt ) the Mellin
integral Eq. (24) diverges for all M1 , M2 when N = 0, and it only has a region of convergence
134
when N > 0. As a consequence, the function h(N, M1 , M2 ) Eq. (24) has singularities in the M
plane whose location depends on the value of N , namely, simple poles of the form NM11 M2 :
the expansion in powers of Mi has finite radius of convergence Mi < N , leading to an expansion
i
in powers of M
N and thus double poles when Mi = s .
In the resolved case (finite mt ) we expect the Mellin integral to converge when N = 0 at
least for 0 < Mi < M0 , for some real positive M0 . We can then set N = 0, and obtain the leading
singularities of the coefficient function from the expansion in powers of M of h(0, M, M), letting
M = s . This turns out to be indeed the case: when N = 0, (N, 1 , 2 ) only depends on 1 , 2
through the form factors, and the combination of form factors which appear in Eq. (32) is
regular when 1 , 2 0 (see Eq. (A.15)), while it vanishes when 1 , 2 (see Eq. (A.16)).
Hence, we can let N = 0 in , and get
h(0, M1 , M2 ) = 8 2 3 s2 GF m2H yt2

+
+
1
M1 M 2
d1 1M1 1
d2 2M2 1 |A1 |2 + 1 2 |A3 |2 .
(33)
2
0
Because the term in square brackets in Eq. (33) tends to a constant as 1 , 2 0, the integrals in Eq. (33) have an isolated simple pole in M1 and M2 , and thus the Taylor expansion
of h(N, M1 , M2 ) has a finite radius of convergence. We can then determine the Taylor coefficients by expanding the integrand of Eq. (33) and integrating term by term. It follows from
Eqs. (25)(27) that knowledge of the coefficients up to kth order in both M1 and M2 is necessary
and sufficient to determine the leading singularity of the coefficient function up to order sk .
Let us now determine the leading singularities of first three coefficients of the expansion of
the coefficient function Eq. (8). The constant term determines the leading-order result 0 Eq. (8):
m2H 0 (yt ) = h(0, 0, 0).
(34)
Using the on-shell limit of the form factors (see Eq. (A.15) of Appendix A) in Eq. (33) we
reproduce the well-known result Eq. (10).
The next-to-leading order term C (1) (N, yt ) is determined by noting that
+

2
d M1 A1 (, 0)
h(0, M, 0) = 4 2 3 s2 GF m2H yt2 M
0
+
3 2

d|A1 (, 0)|2
2 2
= h(0, 0, 0) 8 2 s GF mH yt M
d ln
+ O M 2 . (35)
d
0
Eqs. (25)(27) then immediately imply that

CA
1 + O(N) ,
N
+
2(8 2 )2
d|A1 (, 0)|2
(1)
C =
d
ln
.
d
|(1 14 (1 4yt )s0 (yt )2 )|2
C (1) (N, yt ) = C (1) (yt )
(36)
C (1) ,
The value of the coefficient

determined from a numerical evaluation of the integral in
Eq. (36), is tabulated in Table 1 as a function of the Higgs mass. Upon inverse Mellin transfor-
135
Table 1
Values of the coefficients Eqs. (36) and (38) of the O(s /N ) and O((s /N )2 ) of the leading singularities of the coefficient function C(s (m2H ); N, yt ) Eq. (12)
mH
C (1) (yt )
C (2) (yt )
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
5.0447
4.6873
4.3568
4.0490
3.7607
3.4890
3.2318
2.9872
2.7536
2.5296
2.3140
2.1057
1.9037
1.7072
1.5151
1.3267
1.1409
0.9568
0.7731
0.5884
16.2570
14.5133
13.0155
11.7196
10.5919
9.6058
8.7406
7.9794
7.3085
6.7166
6.1946
5.7346
5.3303
4.9761
4.6677
4.4013
4.1738
3.9828
3.8268
3.7049
mation, one finds that

lim C (1) (, yt ) = CA C (1) (yt ).
(37)
The values given in Table 1 are indeed found to be in perfect agreement with a numerical evaluation of the small limit of the full NLO coefficient function C (1) (, yt ) [4], for which we have
used the form given in Ref. [21].
Turning finally to the determination of the hitherto unknown NNLO leading singularity, we
evaluate the O(M 2 ) terms in the expansion Eq. (35): by using again Eqs. (25)(27) we find
C (2) (N, yt ) = C (2) (yt )
C
(2)
(yt ) =

CA2
1 + O(N) ,
2
N
(8 2 )2
|(1
1
2 2
4 (1 4yt )s0 (yt ) )|
+
d ln2
d|A1 (, 0)|2
d

+
+

2
2 |A1 (1 , 2 )|2
d1
d2 ln 1 ln 2
+ 2A3 (1 , 2 )
.
1 2
0
(38)
The value of the NNLO coefficient C (2) (yt ) obtained from numerical evaluation of the integrals in Eq. (38) is also tabulated in Table 1. This is the main result of the present paper.
136
Fig. 1. The hard coefficient C (1) (, yt ) Eq. (9) (parton-level coefficient function normalized to the Born result) plotted
as a function of . The curves from top to bottom on the left correspond to mt = (black), and to mt = 170.9 GeV
(red), with mH = 130, 180, 230, 280 GeV. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader
is referred to the web version of this article.)
3. Improvement of the NLO and NNLO cross sections

Knowledge of the leading small behaviour of the exact coefficient function C(s (m2H ); , yt )
Eq. (8) can be used to improve its determination. Indeed, as discussed in Section 1, we expect the
pointlike (mt ) approximation to be quite accurate at large , whereas we know that it must
break down as 0. Specifically, the small behaviour of the coefficient function is dominated
by the highest rightmost singularity in C(s (m2H ); N, yt ) Eq. (12), which for the exact result is a
kth order pole but becomes a 2kth order pole in the pointlike approximation. Hence the pointlike
approximation displays a spurious stronger growth Eq. (1) at small enough .
Having determined the exact small behaviour up to NNLO, we can improve the approximate
pointlike determination of the coefficient function by subtracting its spurious small growth and
replacing it with the exact behaviour. We discuss first the NLO case, where the full exact result
is known, and then turn to the NNLO where only the mt result is available.
3.1. NLO results
At NLO the small behaviour of the coefficient function in the pointlike approximation is
dominated by a double pole, whereas it is given by the simple pole Eq. (36) in the exact case.
This corresponds to an exact NLO contribution C (1) (, yt ) which tends to a constant at small ,
whereas the pointlike approximation to it grows as ln :
(1)
dpoint ( ) = c1 2 ln + c1 1 ,
(1)
(39)
(1)
(, yt ) + O( );
C (1) (, yt ) = dex
(1)
dex
(, yt ) = 3C (1) (yt ),
(40)
C (1) (, ) = dpoint ( ) + O( );
where
C (1) (y
t)
is tabulated in Table 1, while from Refs. [4,6,7] we get
c1 2 = 6;
c1 1 =
11
.
2
(41)
137
Fig. 2. The hard coefficient C (1) (, yt ) Eq. (9) with mH = 130 GeV (left) and mH = 280 GeV (right). The solid curves
correspond to mt = (black) and mt = 170.9 GeV (red), (same as Fig. 1). The three blue curves correspond to the
approximation Eqs. (42), (43), with k = 0 (dot-dashed), k = 5 (dotted), k = 20 (dashed). (For interpretation of the
references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
The NLO term C (1) (, yt ) Eq. (8) is plotted as a function of in Fig. 1, both in the pointlike
(mt ) approximation, and in its exact form computed with increasing values of the Higgs
mass, i.e. decreasing values of yt . It is apparent that the pointlike approximation is very accurate,
up to the point where the spurious logarithmic growth Eq. (39) sets in.
We can construct an approximation to C (1) (, yt ) by combining the pointlike approximation
with the exact small behaviour:
(1)

(1)
(, yt ) dpoint ( ) T ( )
C (1),app. (, yt ) C (1) (, ) + dex
(42)
(1)
(1)
where dex (, yt ) and dpoint ( ) are defined as in Eqs. (40) and (39) respectively, while T ( ) is
an interpolating function, which we may introduce in order to tune the point where the small
(1)
behaviour given by dex (, yt ) sets in. Clearly, as 0 the approximation Eq. (42) reproduces
the exact small behaviour of the exact coefficient function Eq. (40), provided only the interpolating function lim 0 T ( ) = 1. Furthermore, as discussed in Section 1, the behaviour of the
coefficient function C (1) (, yt ) as 1 is to all orders controlled by soft gluon radiation, which
leads to contributions to C (1) (, yt ) which do not depend on yt and diverge as 1. Hence,
(1)
(1)
the pointlike approximation is exact as 1. Because the functions dex (, yt ) and dpoint ( )
are regular as 1, this exact behaviour is also reproduced by the approximation Eq. (42),
provided only lim 1 T ( ) is finite. Hence, C (1),app. (, yt ) reproduces the exact C (1) (, yt ) as
0 up to terms that vanish as 0 and as 1 up to terms that are nonsingular as 1,
even when T ( ) = 1.
Nevertheless, we may also choose T ( ) in such a way that T (1) = 0 (while T (0) = 1 always),
so that C (1) (, yt ) agrees with the pointlike approximation C (1) (, ) in some neighborhood of
= 1. For instance, we can let
T ( ) = (1 )k ,
(43)
with k real and positive, so that the first k orders of the Taylor expansion about = 1 of
C (1),app. (, yt ) and the pointlike approximation coincide. By varying the value of k, we can
choose the matching point 0 , such that C (1),app. (, yt ) only differs significantly from the pointlike approximation if < 0 : a larger value of k leads to a smaller value of 0 .
138
Fig. 3. The hard coefficient C (2) (, yt ) Eq. (9) (parton-level coefficient function normalized to the Born result) plotted
as a function of . The curves from top to bottom on the left correspond to mt = (black), and to the approximation
Eq. (47) with T ( ) Eq. (43) and k = 5, and mt = 170.9 GeV (red), with mH = 130, 180, 230, 280 GeV. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
In Fig. 2 we compare the approximate NLO term Eq. (42) to the exact and pointlike results,
for two different values of yt , with T ( ) given by Eq. (43) and a choice of k which leads to
different values of the matching between approximate and pointlike curves. It appears that an
optimal matching is obtained by choosing k in such a way that the approximation Eq. (42) and
the pointlike result match at an optimal value = opt . The value of opt appears to be close to the
point where the linear ln rise of the pointlike result intersects the asymptotic small constant
of the exact result. Note that this optimal matching could be determined without knowledge of
the full exact result, because we know the asymptotic constant from Eq. (40) and Table 1.
Specifically, Fig. 2 suggests that for mH = 130 GeV, opt 0.05 and thus k 20, while for
mH = 280 GeV, opt 0.3 and thus k 5 With these choices, the approximation Eq. (42) differs
from the exact result for the NLO contribution to the partonic cross section by less than 5% for
all values of .
3.2. NNLO and beyond
At NNLO, the pointlike approximation to the coefficient function has a quadruple pole at
N = 0, corresponding to a ln3 rise, while the exact result only has a double pole, and thus it
rises linearly with ln :

(2)
(2)
dpoint ( ) = c2 4 ln3 + c2 3 ln2 + c2 2 ln ,
C (2) (, ) = dpoint ( ) + O 0 ;
(44)

(2)
(2)
dex
(, yt ) + O 0 ;
(, yt ) = 9C (2) (yt ) ln ,
C (2) (, yt ) = dex
(45)
where C (2) (yt ) is tabulated in Table 1, while from Ref. [8] we get

17
641
231
2333
2
2
2
2
c 3=
+ nf ;
c 2=
+ 3 + nf
,
c 4 = 6;
4
18
8
108
where nf the number of flavors.
(46)
139
Fig. 4. The hard coefficient C (2) (, yt ) Eq. (9) with mH = 130 GeV, plotted versus on a logarithmic (left) or linear
(right) scale. The solid black curve corresponds to mt = (black, same as Fig. 3)), and the three blue curves are the
approximation Eq. (47) with mt = 170.9 GeV and T ( ) Eq. (43) with and k = 0 (dot-dashed), k = 5 (dotted, same as
Fig. 3), k = 20 (dashed).
Fig. 5. Same as Fig. 4, but now with mH = 280 GeV.
At this order, the exact form of C (2) (, yt ) is not known. However, analogously to the NLO
case, we construct an approximation to it based on its determination [8] in the pointlike limit,
combined with the exact small behaviour Eq. (38):
(2)

(2)
(, yt ) dpoint ( ) T ( )
C (2),app. (, yt ) C (2) (, ) + dex
(2)
(2)
(47)
with dex (, yt ) and dpoint ( ) defined in Eqs. (45) and (44) respectively, and T ( ) an interpolating
function as discussed in Section 3.1. Note that as 0 the approximation Eq. (47) only reproduces the exact result up to a constant, whereas at NLO the approximation Eq. (42) reproduces
the exact result up to terms which vanish at least as O( ).
The approximation to the exact result C (2),app. (, yt ), computed using C (2) from Table 1 with
four different values of the Higgs mass, and taking T ( ) Eq. (43) with k = 5 is compared in Fig. 3
to the pointlike approximation C (2),app. (, yt ) of Ref. [8] (with nf = 5). In Figs. 45 we further
140
Table 2
The NLO and NNLO contributions to the K factor Eq. (48), computed with center-of-mass energy s = 14 TeV, and
mt , denoted with pointlike, or mt = 170.9 GeV, denoted with exact or approximate. The approximate result uses
Eqs. (42), (47), with T ( ) Eq. (43) and the value of k given in the table. The MRST2002 [22] gluon distribution has been
used
NLO
NNLO
mH = 130 GeV
pointlike
exact
appr., k = 5
appr., k = 20
36.69
36.58
37.64
36.66
658
n.a.
648
655
mH = 280 GeV
pointlike
exact
appr., k = 2
appr., k = 5
38.08
37.47
37.97
37.73
716
n.a.
670
693
compare the results obtained with different choices of the matching function T ( ) Eq. (43), and
the same two values of the Higgs mass used to produce Figs. 23 at NLO.
At this order, the contribution from the leading small logs to the pointlike C (2),app. (, )
is sizable even for large . Indeed, Figs. 45 show that the behaviour of C (2) around its local
maximum at 0.65 receives a sizable contribution from the ln rise and ln2 drop Eq. (44). If
these are removed by using Eqs. (47), (43) with k = 0, the shape of C (2) around the maximum is
affected significantly, but if the matching is moved to smaller by choosing k 5 the maximum
is reproduced. Hence, whereas we can still obtain a rather smooth matching at any desired value
of the choice of the optimal value of is not obvious. In particular, matching at a value of
where the contribution of the asymptotically spurious ln2 becomes significant leads to rather
large values of the matching point 0.6. Anyway, it is clear that the pointlike approximation
breaks down for 0.1.
Contributions beyond NNLO in the expansion of h(N, s , s ) Eq. (25) in powers of Ns can be
determined by pursuing the expansion of h(0, M, M) Eq. (33) in powers of M, and determining
numerically the ensuing integrals, which have the form of Eqs. (36), (38), but with higher order
powers of ln 1 , ln 2 . The series of contributions to the coefficient function Eq. (8) thus obtained
has a finite radius of convergence in N -Mellin space, dictated by the location of the rightmost
singularity in s , and thus in space it converges for all 0 < 1 [23]. Therefore, its resummation can be accomplished to arbitrary accuracy by computation of a finite number of terms. This
resummation, however, induces spurious singularities in the N -space coefficient function, which
can be removed by the inclusion of a suitable class of formally subleading running-coupling
corrections, as recently shown in Ref. [24].
3.3. K factors
The accuracy of the various approximations at the level of hadronic observables clearly depends on the individual process. For the total inclusive cross section Eq. (5), as is well known, the
pointlike approximation is actually very good, and thus the impact of the improvement Eq. (42)
141
is moderate. To give a quantitative assessment, we define a K factor by letting:

0
h ; yt , m2H K h ; yt , m2H ,
gg h ; yt , m2H = gg

s (m2H ) NLO
s (m2H ) 2 NNLO
K h ; yt , m2H = 1 +
h ; yt , m2H +
h ; yt , m2H
3 2
+ O s mH ,
(48)
0 is the leading-order form of the contribution Eq. (5) of the gluongluon channel to
where gg
total hadronic cross section. The value of the NLO and NNLO contributions to the K factors,
determined using the MRST2002 [22] gluon distribution in Eq. (5) are given in Table 2 at LHC
energies for two values of the Higgs mass, both in the pointlike, exact and approximate (Eqs. (42)
and (47)) cases.
At NLO with mH = 130 GeV (light), the pointlike approximation to NLO deviates by 0.3%
from the exact result, and even with mH = 280 GeV (heavy) it only deviates by 1.6%. It should
be kept in mind, however, that NLO itself is quite large: for s 0.1, it amounts to a 100%
contribution to the K factor Eq. (48). Hence, the error made using the pointlike approximation
is between the per mille and the per cent level, and thus not entirely negligible in a precision
analysis.
Using the approximation Eqs. (42)(43) with the values k = 20 for light Higgs and k = 5 for
heavy Higgs, which are seen from Fig. 2 to give good matching, the deviation can be reduced to
0.2% and 0.7% respectively, and even more accurate results could be obtained by an optimization
of the matching. However, a poor choice of the matching (such as k = 5 for light Higgs or k = 2
for heavy Higgs) can lead to a result at the hadronic level which is actually closer to the pointlike
approximation, or even worse than it. It is clear that at the partonic level the small behaviour
Eq. (39) accounts for most of the discrepancy between the exact and pointlike results, and even
the determination of a hadronic observable which depends very little on the parton-level small
behaviour can be improved very substantially for values of H relevant for LHC by using the
approximation Eq. (42).
The NNLO contribution NNLO is not known. Its values computed in the pointlike approximation, or with the approximation Eqs. (47), (43) and different choices of k are shown in Table 2.
Even at the inclusive hadronic level, now the size of the NNLO contribution can change up to
about 510% if the matching is performed at large . Furthermore, NNLO is also quite large:
with s 0.1, it amounts to a 50% correction to the leading order, and thus to a further 25%
correction to the K factor. Therefore, the impact of the pointlike approximation at NNLO is up to
several per cent of the total K factor, rather larger that the impact of the pointlike approximation
at NLO, and comparable to uncertainties which are currently discussed in precision studies at
NNLO.
4. Outlook
In this paper we have determined the leading high energy (i.e. small = m2H /s ) singularities
of the cross section for Higgs production in gluongluon fusion to all orders in the strong coupling, by providing an expression (Eq. (33)) whence the coefficients of these singularities can be
obtained by Taylor expanding and computing a double integral. We have given explicit numerical
expressions for these coefficients up to NNLO.
The high energy behaviour of this cross section is different according to whether it is determined with finite mt or with mt (pointlike approximation). It turns out that at NLO this
142
different high energy behaviour is responsible for most of the discrepancy between the pointlike
approximation and the exact result. As a consequence, an accurate approximation to the exact result can be constructed by combining the pointlike approximation at large with the exact small
behaviour. Some care must be taken in matching, but very accurate results can be obtained by
simply choosing the matching point as that where the spurious small behaviour of the pointlike
behaviour sets in.
At NNLO, where the exact result is not known, the impact of the high energy behaviour turns
out to be large even for moderate values of 0.5. Hence, an approximation constructed analogously to that which is successful at NLO, namely matching the pointlike limit to the asymptotic
exact behaviour at the point where the asymptotically spurious terms become significant, leads
to an approximate result which differs significantly from the pointlike approximation for most
values of the partonic center-of-mass energy.
The effect of these high energy terms on the total inclusive hadronic cross section remains
quite small, because the latter is dominated by the region of low partonic center-of-mass energy,
partly due to shape of the gluon parton distributions, which are peaked in the region where the
gluons carry a small fraction of the incoming nucleons energy, and partly because the partonic
cross section is peaked in the threshold 1 region. Even so, the pointlike determination of
the NNLO contribution to the total hadronic cross section can be off by almost 510% due to
this spurious high energy behaviour, especially for relatively large values of mH 200 GeV.
Because the NLO and NNLO corrections to the cross section are quite large, the overall effect of
these terms on the cross section is at the per cent level, and in particular their effect at NNLO is
rather larger than at NLO.
A study of the phenomenological implications of these results is thus relevant for a precision
determination of the Higgs production cross section.
Acknowledgements
We thank Thomas Binoth and Fabio Maltoni for discussions, and Guido Altarelli for a critical reading of the manuscript. This work was partly supported by the Marie Curie Research
and Training network HEPTOOLS under contract MRTN-CT-2006-035505 and by a PRIN2006
grant (Italy). The work of S. Marzani and R.D. Ball was done with the support of the Scottish
Universities Physics Alliance.
Appendix A. Form factors
The form factors in Eq. (28) are given by

4yt
41 2
1 2
(1 + 1 + 2 ) 1
+ 12 2 (1 + 1 + 2 )
A1 (1 , 2 , yt ) = C0 (1 , 2 , yt )
3
3
3

22
1 2
B0 (2 ) B0 (1)
+ 12 2 (1 + 1 2 )
3
3

21
1 2
B0 (1 ) B0 (1)
+ 12 2 (1 1 + 2 )
3
3
+
2
1
(1 + 1 + 2 ),
3 (4)2
(A.1)

1
21 2
A2 (1 , 2 , yt ) = C0 (1 , 2 , yt ) 2yt (1 + 1 + 2 ) +
2
3

2
+ B0 (2 ) B0 (1)
(1 1 + 2 )
3

1

1
(1 + 1 2 ) +
,
+ B0 (1 ) B0 (1)
3
(4)2
143
(A.2)
with
3 = 1 + 12 + 22 21 2 + 2(1 + 2 ) = (1 + 1 + 2 )2 41 2 .
It is also convenient to define the form factor

1 1 + 1 + 2
A1 A2 .
A3 (1 , 2 , yt )
1 2
2
The scalar integrals B0 and C0 are

4yt
1
tan1
,
B0 () = 2
4yt
8

1
+
4yt
4yt
1

ln
B0 () =
,
16 2
1
(A.3)
(A.4)
if 0 < < 4yt ;
if < 0 or > 4yt ;
(A.5)
4yt

1 y 1+
1
1
ln(1 y ) ln
C0 (1 , 2 )
16 2 3
1 y 1

1 z 3+
1 x 2+
+ ln(1 z ) ln
+ ln(1 x ) ln
1 x 2
1 z 3

+ Li2 y+ 1+ + Li2 y 1+ Li2 y+ 1 Li2 y 1

+ Li2 x+ 2+ + Li2 x 2+ Li2 x+ 2 Li2 x 2

+ Li2 z+ 3+ + Li2 z 3+ Li2 z+ 3 Li2 z 3 ,
(A.6)
where
1 + 2 1
,
3
1 i
,
i
2
1
and
2
4yt
x
1 1+
,
2yt
2

1
4yt
1 1+
,
y
2yt
1

1
z
1 i 4yt 1 .
2yt
1 2 1
,
3
1 + 2 + 1
,
3
(A.7)
(A.8)
(A.9)
144
In the infinite top mass limit the scalar integrals become

1
1
lim B0 () =
2
+
+
O
,
yt
6yt
16 2
yt2

1
1
1 1 2
lim C0 (1 , 2 ) =
1+
+O 3 ,
yt
12yt
32 2 yt
yt
so that the form factors reduce to
1
lim m2 A1 = m2H
;
mt t
48 2
These limits also imply that
lim 4m2t A2 = m2H
mt
(A.10)
(A.11)
s 1 + 1 + 2
.
2
48 2
(A.12)
lim m2t A3 = 0.
(A.13)
mt
In the on-shell limit the scalar integrals are

lim B0 (i ) =
i 0
1
,
8 2
1
1
2 z
2 x
ln
lim C0 (1 , 2 , yt ) =
ln
,
1 0
z+
x+
32 2 1 + 2

z
1
ln2
,
lim C0 (1 , 2 , yt ) =
1 ,2 0
z+
32 2
(A.14)
so that
1
1
2 z
ln
(4yt 1),
A1 (0, 0) =
+
z+
8 2 32 2

1
1
1
2 z
ln
2yt
.
+
A2 (0, 0) =
z+
2
16 2 32 2
(A.15)
The high energy limit of the form factors is trivially determined when 1 , 2 with
1 = 2 :
lim
A1 (1 , 2 , yt ) = 0;
lim
A2 (1 , 2 , yt ) =
1 ,2
1 ,2
lim
1 ,2
A3 (1 , 2 , yt ) = 0;
1
.
(4)2
(A.16)
If 1 , 2 with 1 = 2 the limit is more subtle. In this case we get

lim A1 (, , yt )

1 yt
C 0 (, , yt )
1
ln 1 + 4yt 1 tan1
= lim
2

4
16 2

1
+O ,
where we have defined
C 0 (1 , 2 , yt ) C0 (1 , 2 , yt ) 3 .
However, it turns out that

1
4yt 1
(A.17)
(A.18)

1
1
y
t
1
lim C 0 (, , yt ) =
4y
1
tan
4
+
4
2
ln
4yt 1
16 2

1
,
+O
145
(A.19)
hence we conclude that Eq. (A.16) holds also when 1 = 2 .

References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
G.P. Salam, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 21 (2006) 1778.

R. Harlander, Acta Phys. Pol. B 38 (2007) 693.
D. Graudenz, M. Spira, P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993) 1372.
M. Spira, A. Djouadi, D. Graudenz, P.M. Zerwas, Nucl. Phys. B 453 (1995) 17.
M. Kramer, E. Laenen, M. Spira, Nucl. Phys. B 511 (1998) 523.
A. Djouadi, M. Spira, P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B 264 (1991) 440.
S. Dawson, Nucl. Phys. B 359 (1991) 283.
C. Anastasiou, K. Melnikov, Nucl. Phys. B 646 (2002) 220;
R.V. Harlander, W.B. Kilgore, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 201801;
V. Ravindran, J. Smith, W.L. van Neerven, Nucl. Phys. B 665 (2003) 325.
S. Catani, D. de Florian, M. Grazzini, JHEP 0105 (2001) 025;
S. Catani, D. de Florian, M. Grazzini, JHEP 0201 (2002) 015;
R.V. Harlander, W.B. Kilgore, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 013015.
S. Moch, A. Vogt, Phys. Lett. B 631 (2005) 48.
S. Catani, D. de Florian, M. Grazzini, P. Nason, JHEP 0307 (2003) 028.
V. Del Duca, W. Kilgore, C. Oleari, C. Schmidt, D. Zeppenfeld, Nucl. Phys. B 616 (2001) 367.
S. Catani, M. Ciafaloni, F. Hautmann, Phys. Lett. B 242 (1990) 97;
S. Catani, M. Ciafaloni, F. Hautmann, Nucl. Phys. B 366 (1991) 135.
F. Hautmann, Phys. Lett. B 535 (2002) 159.
J.R. Ellis, M.K. Gaillard, D.V. Nanopoulos, Nucl. Phys. B 106 (1976) 292;
M.A. Shifman, A.I. Vainshtein, M.B. Voloshin, V.I. Zakharov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 30 (1979) 711, Yad. Fiz. 30 (1979)
1368.
T. Jaroszewicz, Phys. Lett. B 116 (1982) 291.
S. Catani, F. Hautmann, Nucl. Phys. B 427 (1994) 475.
R.D. Ball, R.K. Ellis, JHEP 0105 (2001) 053.
G. Camici, M. Ciafaloni, Nucl. Phys. B 496 (1997) 305;
G. Camici, M. Ciafaloni, Nucl. Phys. B 607 (2001) 431, Erratum.
R.S. Pasechnik, O.V. Teryaev, A. Szczurek, Eur. Phys. J. C 47 (2006) 429.
R. Bonciani, G. Degrassi, A. Vicini, JHEP 0711 (2007) 095.
A.D. Martin, R.G. Roberts, W.J. Stirling, R.S. Thorne, Eur. Phys. J. C 28 (2003) 455.
R.D. Ball, S. Forte, Phys. Lett. B 351 (1995) 313.
R.D. Ball, arXiv: 0708.1277 [hep-ph].

Polarized QED splittings of massive fermions and

dipole subtraction for non-collinear-safe observables
Stefan Dittmaier , Alois Kabelschacht, Tobias Kasprzik
Max-Planck-Institut fr Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), D-80805 Mnchen, Germany
Abstract
Building on earlier work, the dipole subtraction formalism for photonic corrections is extended to various
photonfermion splittings where the resulting collinear singularities lead to corrections that are enhanced
by logarithms of small fermion masses. The difference to the earlier treatment of photon radiation is that
now no cancellation of final-state singularities is assumed, i.e. we allow for non-collinear-safe final-state
radiation. Moreover, we consider collinear fermion production from incoming photons, forward-scattering
of incoming fermions, and collinearly produced fermionantifermion pairs. For all cases we also provide
the corresponding formulas for the phase-space slicing approach, and particle polarization is supported for
all relevant situations. A comparison of numerical results obtained with the proposed subtraction procedure
and the slicing method is explicitly performed for the sample process e e + .
1. Introduction
Present and future collider experiments require precise predictions for particle reactions, i.e.
for most of the relevant processes radiative corrections have to be calculated. This task becomes
arbitrarily complicated if either the order in perturbation theory (loop level) or the number of
external particles is increased, or both. In recent years the needed techniques and concepts have
received an enormous boost from various directions; for a brief overview we refer to some recent
review articles [1,2].
E-mail address: stefan.dittmaier@mppmu.mpg.de (S. Dittmaier).

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.010
S. Dittmaier et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 146189
147
In this paper we focus on real emission corrections involving photons at next-to-leading order
(NLO). Apart from the integration over a many-particle phase space, here the main complication
is the proper isolation of the singular parts which originate from soft or collinear regions in phase
space. To solve this problem at NLO, two different types of methods have been developed in the
past: phase-space slicing (see, e.g., Ref. [3]) and subtraction [48] techniques. In the slicing
approach the singular regions are cut off from phase space in the numerical integration and
treated separately. Employing general factorization properties of squared amplitudes in the soft
or collinear regions, the singular integrations can be carried out analytically. In the limit of small
cutoff parameters the sum of the two contributions reproduces the full phase-space integral. There
is a trade-off between residual cut dependences and numerical integration errors which increase
with decreasing slicing cuts; in practice, one is forced to search for a plateau in the integrated
result within some errors by varying the slicing cut parameters.
This cumbersome procedure is not necessary within subtraction formalisms which are based
on the idea of subtracting a simple auxiliary function from the singular integrand and adding
this contribution again. This auxiliary function has to be chosen in such a way that it cancels
all singularities of the original integrand so that the phase-space integration of the difference
can be performed numerically, even over the singular regions of the original integrand. In this
difference the original matrix element can be evaluated without regulators for soft or collinear
singularities. The auxiliary function has to be simple enough so that it can be integrated over
the singular regions analytically with the help of regulators, when the subtracted contribution
is added again. This singular analytical integration can be done once and for all in a processindependent way because of the general factorization properties of squared amplitudes in the
singular regions. At NLO several subtraction variants have been proposed in the literature [48],
some of which are quite general; at next-to-next-to-leading order subtraction formalisms are still
under construction [9].
The dipole subtraction formalism certainly represents the most frequently used subtraction
technique in NLO calculations. It was first proposed within massless QCD by Catani and Seymour [5] and subsequently generalized to photon emission off massive fermions [6]1 and to QCD
with massive quarks [7,8]. Among the numerous applications of dipole subtraction, we merely
mention the treatment of the electroweak corrections to e+ e 4 fermions [11], which was the
first complete treatment of a 2 4 particle process at NLO. The formulation [5,7,8] of dipole
subtraction for NLO QCD corrections assumes so-called infrared safety of observables, i.e. that
all soft or collinear singularities cancel against their counterparts from the virtual corrections, either after parton-density redefinitions for initial-state singularities or due to the inclusiveness of
event selection criteria in soft or collinear configurations for final-state singularities. In Ref. [6]
the collinear singularities from photon radiation are regularized by physical fermion masses, and
only for final-state radiation these were assumed to cancel due to inclusiveness of the observable.
In the following we generalize the method of Ref. [6] by dropping the latter assumption and by
considering also other collinear-singular configurations involving photons, which are regularized
by physical fermion masses:
1. In Section 2 we deal with non-collinear-safe final-state radiation off light (anti-)fermions f ,
where collinear singularities arise from the splitting f f . Here and in the following,
asterisks indicate off-shell particles. By non-collinear-safe radiation we mean that a collinear
1 The case of light fermions, where masses appear as regulators, has also been worked out in Ref. [10].
148
fermionphoton system is not necessarily treated as one quasi-particle, which by contrast

is the case in any collinear-safe observable. In collinear-safe situations, which are usually
enforced by photon recombination or a jet algorithm, singularities from final-state radiation
cancel according to the well-known KinoshitaLeeNauenberg (KLN) theorem [12]. Noncollinear-safe final-state radiation off a fermion f , in general, leads to corrections ln mf
that are enhanced by a logarithm of a small fermion mass mf .
2. Section 3 is devoted to processes with incoming photons and outgoing light fermions. Here
the collinear-singular splitting is f f , i.e. if an outgoing (anti-)fermion f is allowed
to be scattered into the direction of the incoming photon, the cross section receives an enhancement ln mf from this phase-space region.
3. In Section 4 we treat processes with light fermionantifermion pairs in the final state, i.e.
when an outgoing photon with low virtuality splits into an f f pair, f f. If the
collinearly produced f f pair can be distinguished from a plainly emitted photon (that has
not split), the considered cross section again receives an enhancement ln mf .
4. Finally, in Section 5 we concentrate on processes with forward-scattered light (anti-)fermions,
where the splitting f f leads to a collinear singularity if the emitted photon is almost
real. Again this phase-space region enhances the cross section by a factor ln mf .
While Section 2 builds on the conventions and results of Ref. [6], Sections 3, 4, and 5 are selfcontained and can be read independently.
Of course, the considered situations could all be treated by fully including a non-zero fermion
mass mf in the calculation. However, if mf is small compared to typical scales in the process,
which is the case for electrons or muons in almost all present and future high-energy collider
experiments, such a procedure is very inconvenient. The presence of very small or large scale ratios jeopardizes the numerical stability of phase-space integrations, and mass terms significantly
slow down the evaluation of matrix elements. The subtraction technique described in the following avoids these problems by completely isolating all mass singularities from squared matrix
elements, so that finally only amplitudes for a massless fermion f are needed. We support particle polarization whenever relevant, in particular for all incoming particles. In order to facilitate
cross-checks in applications, the corresponding formulas for the phase-space slicing approach
are also provided.
In our technical treatment of the various splittings involving fermions and photons we do not
distinguish between quarks and leptons, although the physical meaning of the occurring fermion
masses is rather different. While logarithms of lepton masses consistently describe physical effects, such as collinear photon radiation off initial- or final-state leptons, mass logarithms of
light quarks have no well-defined physical meaning in perturbation theory. Nevertheless light
quark masses are often convenient regulators for collinear singularities, and in this sense our
results can be used. In practice, logarithms of light-quark masses disappear from predictions for
observables. If such singularities are connected to incoming particles, they are removed by a redefinition of parton densities. If they are connected to outgoing particles they automatically cancel
for collinear-safe observables; in the non-collinear-safe case they can be absorbed by redefining
fragmentation functions for the final-state jets or hadrons.
In Section 6 we demonstrate the use and the performance of the methods presented in Sections 3, 4, and 5 in the example e e + . A summary is given in Section 7, and the
appendices provide more details on and generalizations of the formulas presented in the main
text. In particular, the derivation of the factorization formulas for processes with incoming po-
149
larized photons splitting into light fermions and for the forward scattering of incoming polarized
light fermions is described there.
2. Non-collinear-safe photon radiation off final-state fermions
2.1. Dipole subtraction and non-collinear-safe observables
For any subtraction formalism
the schematic form of the subtraction procedure to integrate

the squared matrix element |M1 |2 (summed over photon polarizations ) for real photon
radiation over the (N + 1)-particle phase space d1 reads

2
2
2
2
d1
|M1 | = d1
|M1 | |Msub | + d0
[dk]|Msub | ,
(2.1)
where d0 is a phase-space element of the corresponding non-radiative process and [dk] includes
the photonic phase space that leads to the soft and collinear singularities. The two contributions involving the subtraction function |Msub |2 have to cancel each other, however, they will
be evaluated
separately. The subtraction function is constructed in such a way that the differ
ence |M1 |2 |Msub |2 can be safely integrated over d1 numerically and that the singular
integration of |Msub |2 over [dk] can be carried out analytically, followed by a safe numerical
integration over d 0 .
In the dipole subtraction formalism for photon radiation, the subtraction function is given
by [6]

2
(sub)
Msub (1 ; f )2 =
Qf f Qf f e2 gff , (pf , pf , k)M0 ( 0,ff ; f ) , (2.2)
f =f
where the sum runs over all emitterspectator pairs ff , which are called dipoles. For a finalstate emitter (final-state radiation), the two possible dipoles are illustrated in Fig. 1. The relative
charges are denoted Qf , Qf , and the sign factors f , f = 1 correspond to the charge flow
(f = +1 for incoming fermions and outgoing antifermions, f = 1 for outgoing fermions
and incoming antifermions). The implicitly assumed summation over = accounts for a possible flip in the helicity of the emitter f , where f = is the sign of the helicity of f both
in |M1 |2 and |Msub |2 . The singular behaviour of the subtraction function is contained in the
(sub)
radiator functions gff , (pf , pf , k), which depend on the emitter, spectator, and photon momenta pf , pf , and k, respectively. The squared lowest-order matrix element |M0 |2 of the
Fig. 1. Generic diagrams for photonic final-state radiation off an emitter i with a spectator j or a in the final or initial
state, respectively.
150
corresponding non-radiative process enters the subtraction function with modified emitter and
(ff )
(ff )
and p f . For a final-state emitter f , the momenta are related by
spectator momenta p f
(ff )
(ff )
pf + k pf = p f
p f , where refers to a spectator f in the final or initial state,
and the same set {kn } of remaining particle momenta enters |M1 |2 and |M0 |2 . The modified
(ff )
pf + k in the collinear limit (pf k 0).
momenta are constructed in such a way that p f
Note that no collinear singularity exists for truly massive radiating particles f , because the
invariant pf k does not tend to zero if the photon emission angle becomes small (for fixed photon energy k 0 ). In such cases the corresponding masses are kept non-zero in all amplitudes, in
the subtraction functions, and in the kinematics, and the subtraction procedure works without
problems. Collinear (or mass) singularities result if the mass mf of a radiating particle is much
smaller than the typical scale in the process under consideration. In such cases it is desirable
a subtraction technique this means that mf = 0 can be
to set mf to zero whenever possible.
In
consistently used in the integral d1 ( |M1 |2 |Msub |2 ), but that the readded contribu
tion [dk] |Msub |2 contains mass-singular terms of the form ln mf . If such mass singularities
from collinear photon radiation do not completely cancel against their counterparts in the virtual
corrections, the corresponding observable is not collinear safe. The dipole subtraction formalism as described in Ref. [6] is formulated to cover possible mass singularities from initial-state
radiation, but assumes collinear safety w.r.t. final-state radiation.
In collinear-safe observables (w.r.t. final-state radiation), and only those are considered for
light fermions in Ref. [6], a collinear fermionphoton system is treated as one quasi-particle,
i.e., in the limit where f and become collinear only the sum pf + k enters the procedures of
implementing phase-space selection cuts or of sorting an event into a histogram bin of a differential distribution. Technically this level of inclusiveness is reached by photon recombination, a
procedure that assigns the photon to the nearest charged particle if it is close enough to it. Of
course, different variants for such an algorithm are possible, similar to jet algorithms in QCD.
The recombination guarantees that for each photon radiation cone around a charged particle f
the energy fraction
zf =
pf0
(2.3)
pf0 + k 0
is fully integrated over. According to the KLN theorem, no mass singularity connected with
final-state radiation remains. Collinear safety facilitates the actual application of the subtraction
procedure as indicated in Eq. (2.1). In this case the events resulting from the contributions of
|Msub |2 can be consistently regarded as N -particle final states of the non-radiative process with
particle momenta as going into |M0 ( 0,ff )|2 , i.e. the emitter and spectator momenta are given
(ff )
(ff )
(ff )
, p f , respectively. Owing to p f
pf + k in the collinear limits, the difference
by p
f
2
2
|M1 | |Msub | can be integrated over all collinear regions, because all events that differ
only in the value of zf enter cuts or histograms in the same way. The implicit full integration
over all zf in the collinear cones, on the other hand, implies that in the analytical integration of
|Msub |2 over [dk] the zf integrations can be carried out over the whole zf range.
In non-collinear-safe observables (w.r.t. final-state radiation), not all photons within arbitrarily
narrow collinear cones around outgoing charged particles are treated inclusively. For a fixed cone
axis the integration over the corresponding variable zf is constrained by a phase-space cut or by
the boundary of a histogram bin. Consequently, mass-singular contributions of the form ln mf
151
remain in the integral. Technically this means that the information on the variables zf has to be
exploited in the subtraction procedure of Eq. (2.1). The variables that take over the role of zf
in the individual dipole contributions in |Msub |2 are called zij and zia in Ref. [6], where f = i
is a final-state emitter and j/a a final-/initial-state
spectator.
In the collinear limit they behave

as zij zi and zia zi . Thus, the integral d1 ( |M1 |2 |Msub |2 ) can be performed
over the whole phase space if the events associated with |Msub |2 are treated as (N + 1)-particle
(ff )
(ff )
(ff )
event with momenta pf zff p f , pf p f , and k (1 zff )p f . This can be
formalized by introducing a step function cut (pf , k, pf , {kn }) on the (N + 1)-particle phase
space which is 1 if the event passes the cuts and 0 otherwise. The set {kn } simply contains the
momenta of the remaining particles in the process. Making the dependence on cut explicit, the
first term on the r.h.s. of Eq. (2.1) reads

d1
|M1 |2 cut pf , k, pf , {kn }

f =f

(ff )
(ff )
(ff )
|Msub,ff |2 cut zff p f , (1 zff )p f , p f , {kn } ,
(2.4)
where we have decomposed the subtraction function |Msub |2 into its subcontributions
|Msub,ff |2 of specific emitterspectator pairs ff . Apart from this refinement of the cut prescription in the subtraction part for non-collinear-safe observables, no modification in |Msub |2
is needed. Since its construction exactly proceeds as described in Sections 3 and 4 of Ref. [6],
we do not repeat the individual steps in this paper.
However, the modification of the cut procedure requires a generalization of the evaluation of
the second subtraction term on the r.h.s. of Eq. (2.1), because now the integral over zff implicitly
contained in [dk] depends on the cuts that define the observable. In the following two sections
we work out the form of the necessary modifications, where we set up the formalism in such a
way that it reduces to the procedure described in Ref. [6] for a collinear-safe situation, while the
non-collinear-safe case is covered upon including extra contributions.
2.2. Final-state emitter and final-state spectator
For a final-state emitter i and a final-state spectator j with masses mi and mj the integral of
(sub)
gij,
(pi , pj , k) over [dk] is proportional to

(sub)
Gij, Pij2 =
z2(yij )
y2
Pij4
(sub)

dyij (1 yij )
dzij gij, (pi , pj , k),
2 ij
y1
(2.5)
z1 (yij )
(sub)
where the definitions of Sections 3.1 and 4.1 of Ref. [6] are used. There the results for Gij, (Pij2 )
with generic or light masses are given in Eqs. (4.10) and (3.7), respectively. In order to leave the
integration over zij open, the order of the two integrations has to be interchanged, and the integral
solely taken over yij is needed. Therefore, we define

(sub)
Gij, Pij2 , zij =
y
2 (zij )
Pij4
(sub)

dyij (1 yij )gij, (pi , pj , k).
2 ij
y1 (zij )
(2.6)
152
(sub)
Note that no finite photon mass m is needed in the function Gij, (Pij2 , z) in practice, because
the soft singularity appearing at z 1 can be split off by employing a [ ]+ prescription in the
variable z,

(sub)

(sub)
(sub)
Gij, Pij2 , z = Gij, Pij2 (1 z) + Gij, Pij2 , z + .
(2.7)
(sub)
This procedure shifts the soft singularity into the quantity Gij,
(Pij2 ), which is already known
from Ref. [6]. Moreover, the generalization to non-collinear-safe integrals simply reduces to
(sub)
the extra term [Gij, (Pij2 , z)]+ , which cancels out for collinear-safe integrals where the full zintegration is carried out.
(sub)
For arbitrary values of mi and mj a compact analytical result of Gij, (Pij2 , z) cannot be
achieved because of the complicated structure of the integration boundary. Note, however, that
only the limit mi 0 of a light emitter is relevant, since for truly massive emitters no mass
singularity results. The case of a massive spectator j is presented in Appendix A; here we restrict
ourselves to the simpler but important special case mj = 0.
In the limit mi 0 and mj = m = 0 the boundary of the yij integration is asymptotically
given by
y1 (z) =
m2i (1 z)
Pij2 z
y2 (z) = 1,
(2.8)
(sub)
and the functions and quantities relevant in the integrand gij, behave as
pi k =
Pij2
2
yij ,
Rij (y) = 1 y,
rij (y) = 1.
(2.9)
The evaluation of Eq. (2.6) becomes very simple and yields

2

Pij z
(sub)
2
Gij,+
Pij , z = Pff (z) ln
1
+ (1 + z) ln(1 z),
m2i

(sub)
Gij, Pij2 , z = 1 z,
(2.10)
where Pff (z) is the splitting function,

Pff (z) =
1 + z2
.
1z
(2.11)
Eq. (2.10) is correct up to terms suppressed by factors of mi . For completeness, we repeat the
(sub)
form of the full integral Gij, (Pij2 ) in the case of light masses,

2
(sub)
Gij,+ Pij2 = L Pij2 , m2i

+ 1,
3
1
(sub)
Gij, Pij2 = ,
2
(2.12)
with the auxiliary function

2 2
2
2

m
m
2 2
m
m
1 2 m2
1
ln
+ ln
ln
+ ln
,
L P , m = ln
2
2
P2
P2
P2
P2
P2
(2.13)
153
which are taken from Eqs. (3.7) and (3.8) of Ref. [6].2
Finally, we give the explicit form of the ij contribution |Msub,ij (1 )|2 to the phase-space
integral of the subtraction function,

2

d1 Msub,ij (1 ; i )
= Qi i Qj j
2
1
d 0,ij
(sub)
(sub)

dz Gij, Pij2 (1 z) + Gij, Pij2 , z +

2

M0 (p i , p j ; i ) cut pi = zp i , k = (1 z)p i , p j , {kn } ,
(2.14)
generalizing Eq. (3.6) of Ref. [6]. While p i , p j , {kn } are the momenta corresponding to the generated phase-space point in 0,ij , the momenta pi and k result from p i via a simple rescaling
with the independently generated variable z. The invariant Pij2 is calculated via Pij2 = (p i + p j )2
independently of z. The arguments of the step function cut (pi , k, p j , {kn }) indicate on which
momenta phase-space cuts are imposed.
For unpolarized fermions the results of this section have already been described in Ref. [13],
where electroweak radiative corrections to the processes W W 4 fermions were calculated. In this calculation the results for non-collinear-safe differential cross sections were also
cross-checked against results obtained with phase-space slicing. Another comparison between
the described subtraction procedure and phase-space slicing has been performed in the calculation of electroweak corrections to the Higgs decay processes H W W/ZZ 4 fermions [14].
2.3. Final-state emitter and initial-state spectator
For the treatment of a final-state emitter i and an initial-state spectator a, we consistently
make use of the definitions of Sections 3.2 and 4.2 of Ref. [6]. In this paper we only consider
light particles in the initial state, because the masses of incoming particles are much smaller than
the scattering energies at almost all present and future colliders. Therefore, the spectator mass
ma can be set to zero from the beginning, which simplifies the formulas considerably.
Before we consider the non-collinear-safe situation, we briefly repeat the concept of the
collinear-safe case described in Ref. [6]. Following Eqs. (4.24) and (4.27) from there, the in(sub)
clusive integral of gia, (pi , pa , k) over [dk] is proportional to
(sub)
2
=
Gia, Pia
x1

(sub)
2
dx Gia, Pia
,x
(2.15)
with

P 2
(sub)
2
, xia = ia
Gia, Pia
z2(xia )
(sub)
dzia gia, (pi , pa , k),
(2.16)
z1 (xia )
2 If dimensional regularization is used to regularize the soft singularity instead of a finite photon mass, the photonmass logarithm in L has to be replaced according to ln(m2 ) (4 2 ) (1 + )/ + O(), where D = 4 2 is the
dimension and the reference mass of dimensional regularization.
154
where we could set the lower limit x0 of the xia -integration to zero because of ma = 0. Since,
(sub)
however, the squared lowest-order matrix element |M0 |2 multiplying gia, in Eq. (2.2) depends
2
on the variable xia , the integration of |Msub | over x = xia is performed employing a [ ]+
prescription,
z2(xia )
x
2 1
Pia
(sub)
dxia
dzia gia, (pi , pa , k)
2
0
1
=
z1 (xia )
(sub)
2
(sub)
2
(1 x) + Gia, Pia
dx Gia, Pia
,x + .
(2.17)
This integration, where the ellipses stand for x-dependent functions such as the squared lowestorder matrix elements and flux factors, is usually done numerically. Since the soft and collinear
singularities occur at x x1 = 1 O(m ), the singular parts are entirely contained in
2
G(sub)
ia, (Pia ) in Eq. (2.17), and the upper limit x1 could be replaced by 1 in the actual x-integration.
(sub)
(sub)
and Gia,
in the limit mi 0,
For completeness we give the explicit form of the functions Gia,
2 2 2
(sub)
2
, m
Gia,+
Pia = L Pia
+ 1,
i
2

1
2x
(sub)
2
Gia,+ Pia , x =
2 ln
1x
1x
2 1
G(sub)
ia, Pia = ,
2

3
(sub)
2
, x = 0,
, Gia, Pia
2
(2.18)
which are taken from Eqs. (3.19) and (3.20) of Ref. [6].
In a non-collinear-safe situation, the ellipses on the l.h.s. of Eq. (2.17) also involve zia dependent functions, as e.g. -functions for cuts or event selection. Thus, also the integration
over zia has to be performed numerically in this case, and we have to generalize Eq. (2.17) in an
appropriate way. To this end, we generalize the usual [ ]+ prescription in the following way.
Writing

(ri )
f (r)
dn r g(r) +,(a)
dn r g(r) f (r) f (r)r =a
(2.19)
for the [ ]+ prescription in the ri -integration in a multiple integral over n variables rk (k =

1, . . . , n), we can iterate this definition to two-dimensional integrals according to

(ri ,rj )
dn r g(r) +,(a,b)
f (r)
=
(r )

(ri ) (rj )
dn r g(r) +,(a)
+,(b) f (r)

dn r g(r) f (r) f (r)r =a f (r)r

i
j =b

+f (r) ri =a . (2.20)
rj =b
i
we omit the superscript (ri ) if g(r) depends only on the integration
In the notation [g(r)]+,(a)
variable ri , and we omit the subscripts (a) or (a, b) if a = 1 or a = b = 1. This obviously recovers
the usual notation for the one-dimensional prescription used above. Introducing a double [ ]+
prescription in x = xia and z = zia , we generalize Eq. (2.17) to
155
z2 (x)
x
2 1
Pia
(sub)
dx
dz gia, (pi , pa , k)
2
0
z1 (x)
1
=
1
dx
(sub)
2
(sub)
2
(1 x)(1 z) + Gia, Pia
dz Gia, Pia
, x + (1 z)
(sub)
(x,z)
(sub)
2
Gia, Pia
.
, z + (1 x) + g ia, (x, z) +
(2.21)
If the functions hidden in the ellipses do not depend on z, the last two terms within the curly
brackets do not contribute and the formula reduces to Eq. (2.17).
We derive Eq. (2.21) and the explicit form of the two extra terms in two steps. In the derivation
we quantify the previous ellipses by the regular test function f (x, z). The first step introduces a
[ ]+ prescription in the x-integration of the l.h.s. of Eq. (2.21) after interchanging the order of
the integrations,
z2 (x)
x
2 1
Pia
(sub)
I [f ]
dx
dz gia, f (x, z)
2
0
z1 (x)
x1 (z)
1
2
Pia
(sub)
dz
dx gia, f (x, z)
=
2
0
1
2
Pia
dz
2
0
0
x1 (z)
dx
(sub) (x)
gia, +,(x
1 (z))

(sub)
f (x, z) + gia, f x1 (z), z .
(2.22)
The upper limit x1 (z) of the x-integration follows upon solving the explicit form of the limits
z1,2 (x) (given in Eq. (4.22) of Ref. [6]) for x. The full form of x1 (z) is rather complicated for
finite m , but in the following it is only needed for m = 0, where it simplifies to

x1 (z)m
=0
2z
Pia
.
2
Pia z m2i (1 z)
(2.23)
Note that soft or collinear singularities result from the region of highest x values, x x1 =
max{x1 (z)}, so that the first term in curly brackets in Eq. (2.22) is free of such singularities owing
to the [ ]+ regularization. Thus, we can set mi 0 in this part, i.e. in particular x1 (z) 1,
yielding
1

x1 (z)
1
2
(sub) (x)

Pia
(sub)
I [f ] =
dz
dx gia, + f (x, z) + f x1 (z), z
dx gia, .
2
0
In the second step we introduce a [ ]+ prescription for the z-integration in both terms,
(2.24)
156
1
1
1
2
(sub) (x) (z)
(sub) (x)
Pia
I [f ] =
dz
dx gia, + + f (x, z) + dx gia, + f (x, 1)
2
0
+ f x1 (z), z
x1 (z)
(z)
(sub)
dx gia,
+ f x1 (1), 1
x1 (z)
(sub)
dx gia,
1
(x)
1
1
1
2
2
(sub) (x,z)
Pia
Pia
(sub)
dx dz gia, + f (x, z)
dx f (x, 1)
dz gia,
=
2
2
0
2
Pia
2
1

dz f x1 (z), z
x1 (z)
(z)
(sub)
dx gia,
0
2

Pia
f x1 (1), 1
2
1
x1 (z)
dz
0
(sub)
dx gia, .
0
(2.25)
In the second equality we just reordered some factors and integrations. Since all integrals over
the test function f are now free of singularities, i.e. the singularities are contained in the integrals
multiplying f , we can set the regulator masses m and mi to zero in the arguments of f . Thus,
we can write
1
I [f ] =
1
dx
dz
(x,z)
(sub)
g ia, (x, z) + f (x, z) +
1
+
1
(sub)
2
dx f (x, 1) Gia, Pia
,x +
(sub)
2
(sub)
2
dz f (1, z) Gia, Pia
, z + + f (1, 1) Gia, Pia
(2.26)
with the abbreviations

2
Pia
(sub)
gia, m =0 ,
2
mi =0
1

P 2
(sub)
2
(sub)
Gia, Pia
, x = ia dz gia, m =0 ,
2
mi =0
(sub)
g ia,
(x, z) =
P 2
(sub)
2
, z = ia
Gia, Pia
x1 (z)
(sub)
dx gia, m
=0
P 2
(sub)
2
Gia, Pia
= ia
1
x1 (z)
dz
(sub)
dx gia, .
(2.27)
Eq. (2.26) is equivalent to the anticipated result (2.21), which was to be shown. The explicit
(sub)
2 , x) and G(sub) (P 2 ) have already been given above in Eq. (2.18), the two
results for Gia, (Pia
ia,
ia
remaining functions are easily evaluated to

1
2
(sub)
(sub)
g ia,+ (x, z) =
1z ,
g ia, (x, z) = 0,
1x 2x z

2 z
Pia
2 ln(2 z)
(sub)
2
Gia,+
Pia , z = Pff (z) ln
+ (1 + z) ln(1 z),
1z
m2i
(sub)
2
Gia, Pia
, z = 1 z.
157
(2.28)
The collinear singularity ln mi that appears in non-collinear-safe observables is contained in

(sub)
2 , z).
the function Gia,+ (Pia
The resulting ia contribution |Msub,ia (1 )|2 to the phase-space integral of the subtraction
function reads

2
d1 Msub,ia (1 ; i )
= Qa a Qi i
2
1

dx
2
d 0,ia Pia
,x
1
dz
0

cut pi = zp i (x), k = (1 z)p i (x), kn (x)
(sub)
2
1 (sub)
2
(1 x)(1 z) + Gia, Pia
, x + (1 z)
Gia, Pia
x

(sub)
(x,z)
(sub)
2
M0 p i (x), p a (x); i 2 ,
P , z (1 x) + g
(x, z)
+ G
ia,
ia
ia,
(2.29)
which generalizes Eq. (3.18) of Ref. [6]. Again, the arguments of the step function cut (pi , k,
{kn }) indicate on which momenta phase-space cuts are imposed. We recall that 0,ia is the phase
space of momenta p i (x) and {kn (x)} (without final-state radiation) with rescaled incoming momentum p a (x) = xpa instead of the original incoming momentum pa . In the actual evaluation of
2 , x) and
0,ia (P 2 , x = 1) have to be genEq. (2.29), thus, the two phase-space points 0,ia (Pia
ia
erated for each value of x owing to the plus prescription in x. The relevant value of the invariant
2 is then calculated separately via P 2 = (p p )2 for each of the two points, so that P 2 rePia
i
a
ia
ia
sults from the momenta entering the matrix element M0 in both cases.3 The variable z, however,
is generated independently of the phase-space points and does not influence the kinematics in the
matrix element.
The combination of the subtraction procedures described in this and the previous section has
been successfully applied and compared to results obtained with phase-space slicing in the calculations of electroweak corrections to DrellYan-like W -boson production, pp W l l + X,
and to deep-inelastic neutrino scattering, N / + X, building on the calculations discussed in Refs. [15,16] and [17], respectively.
2.4. Phase-space slicing
In the phase-space slicing approach the soft and collinear phase-space regions are excluded
in the (numerical) integration of the squared amplitude of the real-emission process. In the socalled two-cutoff slicing method the soft region is cut off by demanding that the photon energy
k 0 should be larger than a lower cut E which is much smaller than any relevant energy scale
3 For a more formal explanation of this subtle but important point we refer to the discussion at the end of Section 6.3
of Ref. [8].
158
of the process. The collinear regions are excluded by demanding that each angle of the photon
with any other direction of a light charged particle should be larger than the cut value 1.
Note that this phase-space splitting is not Lorentz invariant. In the soft and collinear regions
the photon phase space can be integrated out analytically by employing the general factorization
properties of the squared amplitudes, which are, e.g., discussed in Section 2.2 of Ref. [6] (including polarization effects). General results for the integral over the soft region can, e.g., be found
in Refs. [18,19]. The integrals over the collinear regions for final-state radiation can be easily
obtained from intermediate results of the two previous sections as follows.
The cuts defining the collinear region for the photonemitter system of Section 2.2 translate
into new limits for the integration variables yij and zij ,
m2i (1 zij )
(pi0 )2 1 zij
<
y
<
2 ,
ij
zij
Pij2 zij
Pij2
0 < zij < 1
E
pi0
(2.30)
which are asymptotically valid up to the relevant order in mi 0. With these new limits on yij
we evaluate the integral defined in Eq. (2.6) and obtain
0 2 2

(pi )
(sli)
0
(sli)
G+ pi , z = Pff (z) ln
(2.31)
1 ,
G pi0 , z = 1 z.
2
mi
The integrals of these functions over z = zij are given by

0 2 2

(pi )
E 2
3
(sli)

ln
+
1
,
G+ pi0 = ln
2
m2i
(pi0 )2
(sli)
0
pi =
1
.
2
(2.32)
As it should be, in these results the dependence on the spectator particle j completely disappears,
because it was only needed in the phase-space parametrization. We also note that the same results
can be obtained from Section 2.3, where the limits on xia and zia are changed to
m2i (1 zia )
2
Pia zia + m2i (1 zia )
0 < zia < 1
E
pi0
< 1 xia <
(pi0 )2 1 zia
2 ,
2
zia
Pia
(2.33)
(sli)
(sli)
Using the functions G and G , the integral over the collinear photon emission cone
around particle i reads

2
d1 M1 (1 ; i )
coll,i
2
=
Q
2 i
d 0
1
0

pi (1 z) + G(sli) pi0 , z +
dz G(sli)

2

M0 (p i ; i ) cut pi = zp i , k = (1 z)p i , {kn } ,
(2.34)
where the momenta p i and {kn } belong to the phase-space point 0 . Of course, apart from the
polarization issue this is a well-known result which can be found in various papers [3].4
4 Descriptions of phase-space slicing for initial-state radiation off unpolarized particles can also be found in Ref. [3];
the case of polarized incoming particles is, e.g., treated in Ref. [20].
159
3. Collinear singularities from f f splittings

3.1. Asymptotics in the collinear limit
We consider a generic scattering process
(k, ) + a(pa ) f (pf ) + X,
(3.1)
where the momenta of the particles are indicated in parentheses and = is the photon helicity. Here a is any massless incoming particle and f is an outgoing light fermion or antifermion.
The remainder X may contain additional light fermions which can be treated in the same way
as f . For later use, we define the squared centre-of-mass energy s,
s = (pa + k)2 = 2pa k.
(3.2)
The collinear singularity in the squared matrix element |M af X occurs if the angle f between f and the incoming becomes small; in this limit the scalar product (kpf ) is of O(m2f ),
where mf is the small mass of f . Neglecting terms that are irrelevant in the limit mf 0 the
squared matrix element |M af X (k, pa , pf ; )|2 for a definite photon helicity = (but
summed over the polarizations of f ) asymptotically behaves like

M af X (k, pa , pf ; )2

2
2 2 f
M
,
Q
e
h
(k,
p
)
(p
=
xk,
p
;
)
(3.3)
f
a
f
f
aX
f
f

kp 0
|2
where x = 1 pf0 /k 0 and Qf e is the electric charge of f . The matrix element MfaX corresponds to the related process fa X that results from a( f f a) f X upon cutting the
f line in all diagrams involving the splitting f f (see also Fig. 2). The incoming momenta relevant in the different matrix elements are given in parentheses. Moreover, in Eq. (3.3)
we assume a summation over = , where = refers to the two cases where the sign f of
f
the f helicity is equal or opposite to the photon helicity . The functions h (k, pf ), which
rule the structure of the collinear singularity, are given by

xm2f
1
f
f
Pf (x) +
h (k, pf ),
h+ (k, pf ) =
x(kpf )
kpf

m2f
1
f
h (k, pf ) =
(3.4)
(1 x) 1 x
,
x(kpf )
2kpf
with the splitting function
Pf (x) = (1 x)2 + x 2 .
(3.5)
The derivation of this result is given in Appendix B.1.

Note that the collinear singularity for kpf 0 can be attributed to a single external leg
(namely f) of the related hard process fa X. Thus, there is no need to construct the subtraction function |Msub |2 from several dipole contributions Qf Qf . Instead we can construct
|Msub |2 as a single term Q2f . Nevertheless we select a spectator f to the emitter f for the
phase-space construction, which proceeds in complete analogy to the photon radiation case. We
have the freedom to choose any particle in the initial or final state as spectator. In the following
we describe the dipole formalism in two variants: one with a spectator from the initial state,
160
Fig. 2. Generic diagrams for the splittings f f with an initial-state spectator a or a final-state spectator j .
another with a spectator from the final state. The two situations are illustrated in Fig. 2. Our practical experience shows that none of the two possibilities is superior to the other, but comparing
results of the two variants provides valuable cross-checks.
3.2. Initial-state spectator
The function that is subtracted from the integrand |M af X (k, pa , pf ; )|2 is defined as
follows,

2
Msub ( )2 = Q2 e2 hf,a (k, pf , pa )M
,
(3.6)
f
f aX p f , pa , {kn }; f =
with the radiator functions

xf, a m2f
1
f,a
Pf (xf, a ) +
h (k, pf , pa ),
xf, a (kpf )
kpf

m2f
1
f,a
(1 xf, a ) 1 xf, a
,
h (k, pf , pa ) =
xf, a (kpf )
2kpf
f,a
h+ (k, pf , pa ) =
(3.7)
and the auxiliary quantity

xf, a =
p a k p f k p a pf
.
pa k
(3.8)
Here we kept the dependence on a finite mf , because it is needed in the analytical treatment
of the singular phase-space integration below. The modified momenta p f and {kn } entering the
squared matrix element on the r.h.s. of Eq. (3.6) will only be needed for mf = 0 in applications
with small values of mf . In this limit they can be chosen as
p f (x) = xk ,
p f = p f (xf, a ),
kn = kn
(3.9)
with the Lorentz transformation matrix given by

2P P
(P + P ) (P + P )
+
,
P2
P 2 + P P
P = pa + k p ,
P (x) = pa + p (x),
= g
(3.10)
P = pa + p f .
(3.11)
It is straightforward to check that |Msub |2 possesses the same asymptotic behaviour as

|M af X |2 in Eq. (3.3) in the collinear limit with mf 0. Thus, the difference |M af X |2
|Msub |2 can be integrated numerically for mf = 0.
161
The correct dependence of |Msub |2 (and the related kinematics) on a finite mf is, however,
needed when this function is integrated over f leading to the collinear singularity for f 0.
The actual analytical integration can be done as described in Ref. [6] (even for finite ma and mf ).
Here we only sketch the individual steps and give the final result. The (N + 1)-particle phase
space is first split into the corresponding N -particle phase space and the integral over the remaining degrees of freedom that contain the singularity,

d (pf , P ; k + pa )
x1
=

dx
d P (x); p f (x) + pa

dpf (s, x, yf, a ) ,
(3.12)
with the explicit parametrization

dpf (s, x, yf, a ) =
y2 (x)
s
4(2)3
dyf, a
df .
(3.13)
y1 (x)
The upper kinematical limit of the parameter x = xf, a is given by

2mf
x1 = 1 ,
s
(3.14)
but in the limit mf 0 we can set x1 = 1. While the integration of the azimuthal angle f of f
simply yields a factor 2 , the integration over the auxiliary parameter
yf, a =
kpf
2kpf
=
kpa
s
(3.15)
with the boundary

1
y1,2 (x) = 1 x
2

(1 x)2
4m2f
(3.16)
is less trivial. Defining

Hf,a (s, x) =
xs
2
y2 (x)
dyf, a hf,a
(k, pf , pa ),
(3.17)
y1 (x)
the result of this straightforward integration (for mf 0) is

s(1 x)2
f,a
f,a
+ 2x(1 x) H (s, x),
H+ (s, x) = Pf (x) ln
m2f

s(1 x)2
f,a
(1 x)2 .
H (s, x) = (1 x)2 ln
m2f
(3.18)
For clarity we finally give the contribution sub

af X that has to be added to the result for the cross
section obtained from the integral of the difference |M af X |2 |Msub |2 ,
162
sub
af X (k, pa ; )
= Nc,f
Q2f
dx Hf,a (s, x)faX (pf = xk, pa ; f = ).
(3.19)
Although formulated for integrated cross sections, the previous formula can be used to calculate
any differential cross section after obvious modifications.
For the case of unpolarized photons this subtraction variant has already been briefly described
in Ref. [17], where it was applied to the contributions to deep-inelastic neutrino scattering,
N / + X, that are induced by a photon distribution function of the nucleon N . Moreover, the method presented here was successfully used in the calculation of photon-induced real
corrections to DrellYan-like W production (see Section 10 of Ref. [1] and Ref. [16]) and of
photon- and gluon-induced real corrections to Higgs production via vector-boson fusion at the
LHC [21]. All these results were also cross-checked against phase-space slicing.
3.3. Final-state spectator
As an alternative to the case of an initial-state spectator described in the previous section, we
here present the treatment with a possibly massive final-state spectator j with mass mj , i.e. we
consider the process
(k) + a(pa ) f (pf ) + j (pj ) + X.
(3.20)
The initial-state particle a is assumed massless in the following, but all formulas can be generalized to ma = 0 following closely the treatment of phase space described in Section 4.2 of
Ref. [6]. The subtraction function now is constructed as follows,

2
Msub ( )2 = Q2 e2 hf (k, pf , pj )M

(3.21)
f
f aj X (p f , pa , p j ; f = ) ,
j,
with the radiator functions

xfj, m2f
1
f
Pf (xfj, ) +
hj, (k, pf , pj ),
xfj, (kpf )
kpf

m2f
1
f
hj, (k, pf , pj ) =
(1 xfj, ) 1 xfj,
xfj, (kpf )
2kpf
f
hj,+ (k, pf , pj ) =
(3.22)
and the auxiliary parameter

xfj, =
kpj + kpf pf pj
.
kpj + kpf
(3.23)
The momenta p f and p j are given by
p f (x) = xk ,
p f = p f (xfj, ),
p j = P + p f ,
P = p f + pj k ,
(3.24)
while the momenta of the other particles are unaffected. Note that this construction of momenta is
based on the restriction mf = 0, which is used in the integration of the difference |M afj X |2
|Msub |2 .
163
In the integration of |Msub |2 over the collinear-singular phase space, of course, the correct
dependence on a finite mf is required. Owing to the finite spectator mass mj , this procedure
is quite involved; we sketch it in Appendix B.2. Here we only present the results needed in
practice. The cross-section contribution sub
afj X that has to be added to the integrated difference
2
2
|M af X | |Msub | is given by
sub
afj X (k, pa ; )
= Nc,f
Q2f
2
dx Hj, P 2 , x faj X (pf = xk, pa ; f = ),
(3.25)
where the collinear singularity is again contained in the kernels

m2j x
m2f x
f
2
1+ 2
+ 2x(1 x)
Hj,+ P , x = Pf (x) ln
(m2j P 2 )(1 x)
(mj P 2 )(1 x)

f
Hj, P 2 , x ,

m2j x
m2f x

f
Hj, P 2 , x = (1 x)2 ln
1
+
(1 x)2 .
(m2j P 2 )(1 x)
(m2j P 2 )(1 x)
(3.26)
Of course, the singular contributions ln mf have the same form as in the case of an initial-state
spectator discussed in the previous section.
From the results of the two previous sections, the corresponding formulas for the phase-space
slicing approach can be easily obtained. The collinear region, which is omitted in the phase-space
integration, is defined by the restriction f < on the fermion emission angle f in some given
reference frame.
In Section 3.2 this constraint translates into new limits on the variable yf, a ,
m2f
s(1 xf, a )
< yf, a <
(k 0 )2 (1 xf, a ) 2
,
s
which modifies the result of the integral analogously defined to Eq. (3.17) to
0 2

(k ) (1 x)2 2
f
0
f
+ 2x(1 x) H k 0 , x ,
H+ k , x = Pf (x) ln
2
mf
0 2

(k ) (1 x)2 2
f
0
2
H k , x = (1 x) ln
(1 x)2 .
m2f
(3.27)
(3.28)
The cross-section contribution of the collinear region of f then reads

coll,f
af X (k, pa ; ) = Nc,f
Q2f
2

dx Hf k 0 , x faX (pf = xk, pa ; f = ).
(3.29)
164
The same result is obtained from Section 3.3 with Appendix B.2, where the new limits on
zfj, read
m2f xfj,
P 2 (1 xfj, )
< 1 zfj, <
(k 0 )2 xfj, (1 xfj, ) 2
.
P 2
(3.30)

a(pa ) + b(pb ) f (pf ) + f(pf ) + X,
(4.1)
where the momenta of the particles are indicated in parentheses. Depending on the particle content of the remainder X, there may be additional, independent collinear-singular configurations,
but we are interested in the region where the invariant mass (pf + pf )2 = 2m2f + 2pf pf of the
produced fermionantifermion pair f f becomes of the order O(m2f ), where mf is small compared to typical scales in the process. The singular behaviour of the full squared matrix element
|Mabf fX (pf , pf )|2 entirely originates from diagrams containing a f f splitting, i.e.
the singularity is related to the subprocess ab X. For the matrix element of this subprocess
, (k)
, where T
we write Mab X = Tab X (k)

ab X (k) is the amplitude without the pho
. In the collinear limit pf p 0 the light-like momentum k is
ton polarization vector , (k)
f
equal to k = pf + pf up to mass-suppressed terms. Neglecting terms that are irrelevant in the
limit mf 0 the squared matrix element |Mabf fX (pf , pf )|2 asymptotically behaves like

2
M

Tab
N Q2 e2 hf f, (pf , pf )Tab X (k)

X (k),
abf fX (pf , pf ) p
p 0 c,f f
f
(4.2)
where
hf f, (pf , pf ) =

k, k,
2
+
4z(1
z)
g
,
2 m2
(pf + pf )2
k
f
z=
pf0
k0
(4.3)
and Nc,f is the colour multiplicity of f (Nc,lepton = 1, Nc,quark = 3). The momentum k is the
component of pf that is orthogonal to the collinear axis defined by k, i.e. kk = 0, and becomes
of O(mf ) in the collinear limit. An explicit prescription for the construction of k can, e.g.,
be found in Ref. [8], where the analogous case of the gluonic splitting into massive quarks Q,
is worked out. It is important to realize that h
g QQ,
f f , in Eq. (4.2) is not proportional
, (k)
of the photon, so that the r.h.s. is not
to the polarization sum E = , (k)
proportional to the polarization-summed squared amplitude |Mab X |2 of the subprocess. This
spin correlation has to be taken care of in the construction of an appropriate subtraction function
in order to guarantee a point-wise cancellation of the singular behaviour in the collinear phasespace region. The spin correlation encoded in hf f, drops out if the average over the azimuthal
165
Fig. 3. Generic diagrams for the splittings f f with an initial-state spectator a or a final-state spectator j , where f
is a light fermion or antifermion.
angle f of the f f splitting plane around the collinear axis is taken.5 Indicating this
averaging by f df /(2), we get hf f, f = E hf f with (in four spacetime
dimensions)

2m2f
2
hf f (pf , pf ) =
(4.4)
(z)
+
P
f
(pf + pf )2
(pf + pf )2
up to terms that are further suppressed by factors of mf . The averaged squared matrix element
behaves as
2

M

2 .
(4.5)
Nc,f Q2f e2 hf f (pf , pf )Mab X (k)
abf fX (pf , pf ) f p
f pf 0
Since the collinear singularity for pf pf 0 can be attributed to a single external leg (the
photon) of the related hard process ab X, also in this case there is no need to construct
the subtraction function |Msub |2 from several dipole contributions. The function |Msub |2 can be
chosen as a single term Q2f . Nevertheless a spectator is selected for the phase-space construction, as in the previous section. In the following we describe the dipole construction in two
variants: one with a spectator from the initial state, another with a spectator from the final state.
The two situations are illustrated in Fig. 3.
We define the subtraction function as
Tab
|Msub |2 = Nc,f Q2f e2 haf f, (pf , pf , pa )Tab X (p a , k)

X (p a , k)
(4.6)
with
a,
hf f (pf , pf , pa )

2
4
=
z
z
p
p
p
g
f f,a f
f f,a f
f f,a f
(pf + pf )2
(pf + pf )2 f f ,a f
(4.7)
5 As described in Refs. [5,8], for unpolarized situations this average can be easily obtained upon contraction with the
projector 12 d (k) = 12 [g + (gauge terms involving k or k )]/(1 ), which fulfills g d (k) = 2(1 )
and k d (k) = 0 in D = 4 2 spacetime dimensions.
166
and the auxiliary parameters

xf f,a =
pa pf + pa pf pf pf m2f
pa pf + pa pf
zf f,a = 1 z f f,a =
pa pf
.
pa pf + pa pf
(4.8)
The auxiliary momenta entering the amplitude for the related process ab X are given by
p a (x) = xpa ,
p a = p a (xf f,a ),
k (x) = P + p a (x),
k = k (xf f,a ),
P = pf + pf pa ,
(4.9)
while the momenta of the other particles remain unchanged. In these equations we kept the
dependence on mf , but of course in the numerical integration of |Mabf fX |2 |Msub |2 we
can set mf to zero, because we are only interested in the limit mf 0. For the integration
of |Msub |2 over the collinear-singular region, we need the mf -dependence of the spin average
a,
of hf f ,
haf f (pf , pf , pa ) =

2m2f
2
(z
)
+
P
,
f f f,a
(pf + pf )2
(pf + pf )2
(4.10)
and an appropriate phase-space splitting,

x1

d (pf , pf ; P + pa ) =

dx
d k(x);
P + p a (x)

dpf P 2 , x, z ,
(4.11)

where we have used the shorthands x = xf f,a and z = zf f,a . The explicit form of [dpf ] reads
dpf P , x, z
P 2 1
=
4(2)3 x
z2 (x)
dz
df
(4.12)
z1 (x)
with the integration limits for the variables x and z

x1 x
P2
1
,
z1,2 (x) =
1
.
x1 =
2
x1 (1 x)
P 2 4m2f
(4.13)
Separating the singular contributions as described in Section 2.3, we rewrite the integral of haf f
for mf 0 as
P2
x1
z2 (x)
dz haf f (pf , pf , pa )
dx
0
z1 (x)
1
=
1
dx

dz Hfaf P 2 (1 x)(1 z) + Hfa f P 2 , x + (1 z)

(x,z)
+ H fa f P 2 , z + (1 x) + h af f (x, z) +
.
(4.14)
167
The new functions h af f , etc., defined here are obtained from obvious substitutions and straightforward integrations,
x
Pf (z),
1x

2x
Hfa f P 2 , x =
,
3(1 x)

2
P 2 z(1 z)
a
Hf f P , z = Pf (z) ln
1 + 2z(1 z),
m2f

2
P 2
16
.
Hfaf P 2 = ln
2
3
9
mf
h af f (x, z) =
(4.15)
Using these functions the phase-space integral of the subtraction function reads

df f |Msub (f f )|2
= Nc,f
Q2f
2
dx
d P , x
2
1

dz cut pf = zk(x),
pf = (1 z)k(x),
kn (x)

1
Hfaf P 2 (1 x)(1 z) + Hfa f P 2 , x + (1 z)
x

(x,z)
2
a
2
Mab X p a (x), k(x)
,
+ H P , z (1 x) + h a (x, z)
ff
ff
(4.16)
where we have made explicit which momenta enter the cut function cut (pf , pf , {kn }). Concerning the phase-space integration over d (P 2 , x) and its integration over the boost parameter x
the same comments as made after Eq. (2.29) apply. There are actually two phase-space points
for each x value to be generated (one for x < 1 and another for x = 1), each determining mo
menta p a (x), k(x),
{kn (x)} for the evaluation of P 2 and the matrix elements. The generation of
the parameter z proceeds independently, and the squared amplitude |Mab X |2 in Eq. (4.16)
does not depend on z. Thus, if the full range in z is integrated over, i.e. if the collinear f f pair
is treated as a single quasiparticle in the cut procedure, the last two terms in curly brackets do
not contribute. In this case the fermion-mass logarithm is entirely contained in the Hfaf contribution. According to the KLN theorem this contribution will be completely compensated by
virtual O() corrections to the process ab X if collinear f f pairs are not distinguished
from emitted photons.
Since the case with a massive final-state spectator j is quite involved, we here present the
formalism for mj = 0 and give the details for the massive case in Appendix C.
For mf = mj = 0, the subtraction function can be defined as
p j ) Tabj
|Msub |2 = Nc,f Q2f e2 hf f,j, (pf , pf , pj )Tabj X (k,

X (k, p j )
with
(4.17)
168
hf f,j (pf , pf , pj )

2
z p z f fj pf zf fj pf z f fj pf
=
g
pf pf f f j f
(pf + pf )2
(4.18)

zf fj = 1 z f fj =
pf pj
,
pf pj + pf pj
yf fj =
pf pf
pf pj + pf pj + pf pf
(4.19)
The new momenta entering the amplitude for the related process ab j X are given by
k = P p j ,
p j = pj /(1 yf fj ),
P = pf + pf + pj ,
(4.20)
whereas all remaining momenta kn of particles in X remain unchanged. Eq. (4.17) can be used to
integrate the difference |Mabf fj X |2 |Msub |2 for massless fermions f . In order to integrate
|Msub |2 over the collinear-singular region, the dependence on mf has to be taken into account.
Details of this procedure can be found in Appendix C. The result can be written in the form

2

df f Msub (f f )
= Nc,f
Q2f
2
1

p = (1 z)k,
p j , {kn }
dzcut pf = zk,
f

p j )2
Hf f,j P 2 (1 z) + H f f,j P 2 , z + Mabj X (k,
with
2

2
P z(1 z)
Hf f,j P , z = Pf (z) ln
1 + 2z(1 z),
m2f
2
2 2
P
16
.
Hf f,j P = ln
2
3
9
mf
(4.21)
(4.22)
p j , {kn } directly correspond to the generated phase-space point in , while the

The momenta k,
parameter z is generated independently. The comments on the z-integration made at the end of
the previous subsection apply also here. The squared amplitude |Mabj X |2 in Eq. (4.21) does
not depend on z, and thus, if the event selection for f and f is inclusive in the collinear region
of the f f splitting, the integral over z trivially reduces to the factor Hf f,j (P 2 ).
Here we again deduce the integral over the collinear phase-space region which is needed in
the slicing approach. This region can, e.g., be defined by restricting the angle f f between the f
and f directions to small values, f f < 1.
In Section 4.2 this restriction leads to new limits in xf f,a and zf f,a ,
m2f
P 2 zf f,a (1 zf f,a )
< 1 xf f,a <
(k 0 )2
z (1 zf f,a ) 2 ,
P 2 f f ,a
0 < zf f,a < 1,

(4.23)
169
where k 0 = pf0 + pf0 is the energy in the f f system. This modifies the integrated results to
0 2 2

0
(k ) z (1 z)2 2
+ 2z(1 z),
Hf f k , z = Pf (z) ln
m2f
0 2 2
2
(k )
23
,
Hf f k 0 = ln
2
3
9
mf
(4.24)
where H f f and Hf f are defined analogously to Eq. (4.14). The integral of the squared matrix
element over the collinear regions then reads

2

d M
( )
ff
abf f X
ff
f f <
= Nc,f
Q2f
2
1

p = (1 z)k,
{kn }
dz cut pf = zk,
f

2 .
Hf f k 0 (1 z) + H f f k 0 , z + Mab X (k)
(4.25)
The same results can be obtained from Section 4.3 with Appendix C, where the new limits on
the integration variables are given by
2
2
m2f zf fj + (1 zf fj )
(k 0 )2
z (1 zf fj ) 2 ,
< yf fj <
P 2 zf fj (1 zf fj )
P 2 f f j
0 < zf fj < 1.
(4.26)

f (pf , f ) + a(pa ) f (pf ) + X,
(5.1)
with the momenta of the particles and the (sign of the) helicity f = of the incoming fermion f
indicated in parentheses. We are interested in the region where the squared momentum transfer (pf pf )2 = 2m2f 2pf pf of the scattered fermion f becomes of the order O(m2f ),
where mf is small compared to typical scales in the process. The singular behaviour of the full
squared matrix element |Mf af X (pf , pf ; f )|2 entirely originates from diagrams containing
an f f splitting, i.e. the singularity is related to the subprocess a X. For the matrix
pa , ) = T
element of this subprocess we write M aX (k,

aX (k) , (k), where T aX (k)
In the collinear limit pf p 0
is the amplitude without the photon polarization vector , (k).
f
the momentum k is given by k = pf pf up to mass-suppressed terms. Neglecting terms that

are irrelevant in the limit mf 0 the squared matrix element |Mf af X (pf , pf ; f )|2 asymptotically behaves like

Mf af X (pf , pa , p ; f )2
f

p
f pf 0
Nc,f Q2f e2 hff

f , (pf , pf )T aX (k, pa ) T aX (k, pa ),
(5.2)
170
where

hff
f , (pf , pf ) =

1
4(1 x) k, k,
g
2 x 2 m2
(pf pf )2
x2
k
f

2
2
2x mf

+
(
k)
(
k)
(
k)
(
k)
2x +
+,
+,
,
,
x
(pf pf )2
(5.3)
with
x=
k0
pf0
(5.4)
The momentum k is the component of k that is orthogonal to the collinear axis defined by pf ,
i.e. k pf = 0, and becomes of O(mf ) in the collinear limit. A derivation of this factorization is
ff
described in Appendix D.1. Note that hf , in Eq. (5.2) is not proportional to the polarization

, (k)
of the photon, so that the r.h.s. is not proportional to the
sum E = , (k)
polarization-summed squared amplitude |M aX |2 of the subprocess. This spin correlation has
to be taken into account in the construction of an appropriate subtraction function in order to
guarantee a point-wise cancellation of the singular behaviour in the collinear phase-space region.
ff
The spin correlation encoded in hf , drops out if the average over the azimuthal angle f of
the f f splitting plane around the collinear axis is taken. Details of this averaging process,
which is indicated by f , are given in Appendix D.1. The result is

f

Nc,f Q2f e2 hff

(pf , pf ) M aX (k, pa ;
p
f pf 0
2
= f )
(5.5)
with summation over = and

hff
(pf , pf ) =

2xm2f
2x 2 m2f
1
+ 2x +
Pf (x) +
,
x(pf pf )2
(pf pf )2
(pf pf )2
(5.6)
which is valid in four spacetime dimensions up to terms that are further suppressed by factors
of mf . Here Pf (x) is the splitting function
Pf (x) =
1 + (1 x)2
.
x
(5.7)
Since the collinear singularity for pf pf 0 can be attributed to a single leg (the photon) of
the related hard process a X, also in this case there is no need to construct the subtraction
function |Msub |2 from several dipole contributions. The function |Msub |2 can be chosen as a
single term Q2f , and a spectator is only used in the phase-space construction as previously.
In the following we again describe the dipole construction in two variants: one with a spectator from the initial state, another with a spectator from the final state. The two situations are
illustrated in Fig. 4.
171
Fig. 4. Generic diagrams for the splittings f f with an initial-state spectator a or a final-state spectator j , where
f is a light fermion or antifermion.

We define the subtraction function as

Msub (f )2 = Nc,f Q2 e2 hff,a (pf , p , pa )T
f ,
f
f
aX (k, pa ) T aX (k, pa )
(5.8)
with
hff,a,
(pf , pf , pa )
f

k k
4(1 xf,f a )
1
=
g
2
2 x2
2
(pf pf )2
xf,f
k
a
f,f a mf

2x 2 m2f
+
(
k)
(
k)
(
k)
(
k)
2x +
x
(pf pf )2
(5.9)

xf,f a =
pa pf pf pf pa pf + m2f

pa pf
yf,f a =
pf pf m2f
pa pf
(5.10)
Assuming again the incoming particle a to be massless and defining

s = (pf + pa )2 = m2f + 2pa pf = s + m2f ,
P = pf + pa pf ,
(5.11)
the needed auxiliary momenta for the related process a X are given by

m2
p k
= p f pa ,
= k (xf,f a ),
k (x) = x p f pa ,
k
k
f
f
s
pa k
P = P (xf,f a ),
P (x) = k (x) + pa ,
kn = kn ,
(5.12)
where the Lorentz transformation matrix is constructed from the momenta P and P as
in Eq. (3.10). In these equations we kept the dependence on mf , but of course in the numerical
integration of |Mf af X |2 |Msub |2 we can set mf to zero if we are only interested in the
limit mf 0. For the integration of |Msub |2 over the collinear-singular region, we need the
mf -dependence of its azimuthal average,

Msub (f )2 = Nc,f Q2 e2 hff,a (pf , p , pa )M aX (k,
pa ; = f )2
(5.13)
f
f
172

hff,a
(pf , pf , pa )

2x 2 m2f
2x(1 x)m2f
1
Pf (x)
,
+
=
s xy
s y
y[s (1 x y) m2f (2x + y)]
(5.14)
where we have used the shorthands x = xf,f a and y = yf,f a . An appropriate phase-space splitting is given by
d(pf , P ; pf
+ pa ) =
with the explicit form of

dpf
x1

(s, x, y) =
dx
d P (x); k(x)
+ pa

dpf (s, x, y)
(5.15)
[dpf ]
s
4(2)3
y2 (x)
dy
df
(5.16)
y1 (x)
and the integration limits for the variables x and y
s mf
x1 =
,
s + mf

2m2f
s
1x
x
y1,2 (x) =
2s
s

(1 x)2
4m2f
s

x .
(5.17)
In the limit mf 0 the integral

Hff,a (s, x) =
x s
2
y2 (x)
dy hff,a
(pf , pf , pa )
(5.18)
y1 (x)
can be easily evaluated to

1x
s(1 x)
ff,a
Pf (x) + (2 x)
(1 x),
H (s, x) = ln
xmf
x
(5.19)
and the part to be added to the cross section reads

fsub
af X (pf , pa ; f )
=
Q2f
2
dx Hff,a (s, x) aX (k = xpf , pa ; = f ).
(5.20)

As an alternative to the case of an initial-state spectator, we now present the treatment with a
final-state spectator j , i.e. we consider the process
f (pf , f ) + a(pa ) f (pf ) + j (pj ) + X.
(5.21)
173
The particles a and j are assumed massless in the following; the case of a massive spectator j is
described in Appendix D.2. The subtraction function is constructed as follows,

Msub (f )2 = Nc,f Q2 e2 hff
f
j,f , (pf , pf , pj )T aj X (k, pa , p j ) T aj X (k, pa , p j )
(5.22)
with
ff,
hj,f (pf , pf , pj ) =
4(zfj,f pf zfj,f pj )(zfj,f pf zfj,f pj )

1
g
2
(pf pf )2
(pf pf )2 xfj,f
z fj,f

2
2
2x mf
+
(
k)
(
k)
(
k)
(
k)
2x +
x
(pf pf )2
(5.23)

xfj,f =
pf pf + pf pj pf pj
pf pf + pf pj
zfj,f = 1 z fj,f =
pf pf
pf pf + pf pj
(5.24)
The momenta k and p j are given by
k = xfj,f pf ,
p j = P + k ,
P = p f + pj pf .
(5.25)
Note that this construction of momenta is based on the restriction mf = 0, which is used in the
integration of the difference |Mf afj X |2 |Msub |2 for mf 0.
In the integration of |Msub |2 over the collinear-singular phase space the correct dependence on a finite mf is required. We sketch this procedure in Appendix D.2 for a possibly
finite spectator mass mj , but here we give only the relevant formulas needed in applications. The cross-section contribution fsub
afj X that has to be added to the integrated difference
2
2
|Mf af X | |Msub | is given by
fsub
af X (pf , pa ; f )
=
Q2f

dx Hffj, P 2 , x aj X (k = xpf , pa ; = f ),
(5.26)
where the collinear singularity is contained in the kernels

2 1
1x
P 2 (1 x)
(1 x).
Pf (x) + (2 x)
Hffj, P , x = ln
2
3
2
x
x mf
(5.27)

Finally, we derive the integral over the collinear phase-space region for the slicing approach.
This region is defined by restricting the angle f between the outgoing and incoming f to small
values, f < 1.
In Section 5.2 this restriction leads to new limits in yf,f a ,
m2f
2
xf,f
a
s 1 xf,f a
< yf,f a <
(pf0 )2
s
(1 xf,f a ) 2 ,
(5.28)
174
Fig. 5. QED diagrams contributing to e e + at tree level.
which modify the integrated result to

0

pf (1 x)

1x
(1 x),
Hff pf0 , x = ln
Pf (x) + (2 x)
xmf
x
(5.29)
where the integral is defined analogously to Eq. (5.18). The cross-section contribution for the
collinear scattering of f is given by
coll,f
f af X (pf , pa ; f ) =
Q2f
2

dx Hff pf0 , x aX (k = xpf , pa ; = f ). (5.30)
The same results can be obtained from Section 5.3 with Appendix D.2, where the new limits on
the integration variables are given by
(pf0 )2
m2f xfj,f [1 + (1 xfj,f )2 ]
<
z
<
xfj,f (1 xfj,f ) 2 .
fj,f
1 xfj,f
P 2
P 2
(5.31)
6. Application to the process e e +

In this section we illustrate the application of the methodsdescribed in Sections 3, 4, and 5
to the process e e + at a centre-of-mass energy s much larger than the involved
particle masses, s me , m . Of course, this process is not of particular importance in particle phenomenology, but it involves the three issues of (i) incoming photons splitting into light
f f pairs, (ii) the collinear production of light f f pairs, and (iii) forward-scattered fermions
and, thus, provides a good test process for these cases. As already mentioned in Section 2, our
treatment of non-collinear-safe final-state radiation has already been tested in other processes.
To illustrate the formalism, it is sufficient to consider the process e e + in QED,
where only the four diagrams shown in Fig. 5 contribute. The corresponding helicity amplitudes,
including the full dependence on the masses me and m , can be obtained from the treatment
of e e e e+ presented in Ref. [22] after some obvious substitutions. In the following
we compare the result with the full mass dependence to results obtained with the described
subtraction and slicing methods in various kinematical situations. Denoting the polar angle of an
outgoing particle i by i and the angle between the two outgoing muons by , we distinguish
the following cases:
(a) No collinear splittings
Angular cuts: cut < e < 180 cut and < 180 cut and cut < .
No collinear singularities are included, and the integrated cross section is well defined for
vanishing fermion masses, i.e. none of the subtraction methods has to be applied. The difference between massive and massless calculations indicates the size of the fermion mass
effects.
175
(b) Collinear splitting e e+

Angular cuts: cut < e and < 180 cut and cut < .
The collinear splitting e e+ of the incoming photon is integrated over, so that the
third diagram of Fig. 5 develops a collinear singularity for backward-scattered electrons.
The methods of Section 3 are applied to the calculation with massless fermions.
(c) Collinear splittings
Angular cuts: cut < e < 180 cut and cut < .
The collinear splittings of the incoming photon are integrated over, so that the
first two diagrams of Fig. 5 develop collinear singularities for backward-scattered muons.
(d) Collinear splitting +
Angular cuts: cut < e < 180 cut and < 180 cut .
The collinear splitting + of an intermediate photon is integrated over, so that the
last two diagrams of Fig. 5 develop collinear singularities for collinearly produced muons.
(e) Collinear splitting e e
Angular cuts: e < 180 cut and < 180 cut and cut < .
The collinear splitting e e of the incoming electron is integrated over, so that the
first two diagrams of Fig. 5 develop collinear singularities for forward-scattered electrons.
For the numerical evaluation we set the fermion masses to me = 0.51099907 MeV and m =
0.10565839 GeV, the fine-structure constant to = e2 /(4) = 1/137.0359895, the beam energies to E = Ee = E = 250 GeV, and the angular cut to cut = 10 . In the subtraction and
slicing methods the masses me and m are neglected everywhere except for the mass-singular
logarithms, i.e. the laboratory frame defined by the above beam energies coincides with the
centre-of-mass system. For the fully massive calculation the two frames are connected by a (numerically irrelevant) boost along the beam axis with a tiny boost velocity of O(m2e /E 2 ). Our
numerical results for the different kinematical situations and the various methods are collected in
Table 1. In addition in Table 2 we show the analogous results for the situation where the energy
of each final-state lepton l = e , is restricted by El > 10 GeV. All results are obtained with
an integration by Vegas [24], using 25 106 events. While a simple phase-space parametrization
is sufficient in the subtraction formalism, dedicated phase-space mappings are required to flatten
the corresponding collinear poles in the slicing approach and when employing the full mass dependence of the matrix elements. The fully massive results have been checked with the program
W HIZARD [25], where agreement within the integration errors has been found.
The results obtained with the different subtraction variants, where a spectator is chosen from
the initial state (IS) or from the final state (FS), are in mutual agreement within the integration
error, which is indicated in parentheses. Subtraction and slicing results are also consistent within
the statistical errors as long as the angular slicing cut is not chosen too large. For example,
some of the slicing results for = 101 still show a significant residual dependence on . In
the chosen example, the integration errors of the subtraction and slicing results are of the same
order of magnitude. However, we would like to mention that the subtraction approach is often
more efficient, as e.g. observed in the applications of Refs. [1417,21] mentioned above. This
superiority of the subtraction formalism typically deteriorates if complicated phase-space cuts
are applied, as in the chosen example, because the cuts act differently in the various auxiliary
phase spaces and thus introduce new peak structures in the integrand.
176
Table 1
QED cross sections for e e + in the various setups described in the main text, with signs and of the
helicities of the incoming e and , respectively. The results are obtained with the indicated methods, where IS and FS
stand for spectators in the initial and final states, respectively
Collinear splittings
Method
+ [pb]
++ [pb]
(a) None
full mass dependence

massless case
0.50910(9)
0.51110(9)
0.47172(6)
0.47384(7)

subtraction (IS spectator)
subtraction (FS spectator)
slicing ( = 101 )
slicing ( = 103 )
slicing ( = 105 )
0.52213(7)
0.52424(8)
0.52434(7)
0.52410(7)
0.52431(9)
0.52423(8)
0.56762(7)
0.57027(8)
0.57017(9)
0.57021(6)
0.57021(7)
0.57028(7)
(c)

slicing ( = 101 )
slicing ( = 103 )
slicing ( = 105 )
2.5890(5)
2.5872(3)
2.5873(8)
2.5883(3)
2.5859(8)
2.5876(13)
2.3615(4)
2.3586(5)
2.3585(5)
2.3609(2)
2.3578(8)
2.3572(13)
(d) +

slicing ( = 101 )
slicing ( = 103 )
slicing ( = 105 )
0.54076(8)
0.54309(8)
0.54306(8)
0.53164(19)
0.54287(17)
0.54335(18)
0.53357(8)
0.53597(7)
0.53603(7)
0.52386(16)
0.53624(15)
0.53580(18)
(e) e e

slicing ( = 101 )
slicing ( = 103 )
slicing ( = 105 )
5.5465(7)
5.5495(4)
5.5484(6)
5.5313(1)
5.5488(3)
5.5486(5)
4.7060(6)
4.7070(3)
4.7064(5)
4.6880(1)
4.7071(3)
4.7067(4)
(b) e e+
Finally, we remark that the impact of mass-suppressed terms is significantly reduced if the cut
on the lepton energies El is applied. This cut guarantees that El ml overall in phase space, so
that mass-suppressed terms are proportional to m2l /Q2 with Q ml . Without any restriction on
El , there are at least small regions of phase space where Q is not much smaller than ml , leading
to larger mass effects. This feature is clearly visible in Tables 1 and 2 when comparing results
based on the full mass dependence in the matrix elements with the subtraction and slicing results
that are based on the asymptotic limit ml 0.
7. Summary
The dipole subtraction formalism for photonic corrections is extended to various photon
fermion splittings where the resulting collinear singularities lead to corrections that are enhanced
by logarithms of small fermion masses mf . Specifically, we have considered non-collinear-safe
final-state radiation, collinear fermion production from incoming photons, forward-scattered incoming fermions, and collinearly produced fermionantifermion pairs. All formulas needed in
applications are provided, only the scattering matrix elements for the underlying process and
for relevant subprocesses have to be supplemented in the simple approximation of a massless
177
Table 2
Same as in Table 1, but with an energy cut El > 10 GeV for all final-state leptons
Collinear splittings
Method
+ [pb]
++ [pb]
(a) None

massless case
0.45780(6)
0.45779(6)
0.41699(6)
0.41704(5)
(b) e e+

slicing ( = 101 )
slicing ( = 103 )
slicing ( = 105 )
0.46995(6)
0.46999(6)
0.46995(6)
0.46990(7)
0.46992(7)
0.46992(7)
0.50351(6)
0.50345(6)
0.50348(7)
0.50349(5)
0.50352(5)
0.50355(6)
(c)

slicing ( = 101 )
slicing ( = 103 )
slicing ( = 105 )
2.4934(5)
2.4931(3)
2.4923(6)
2.4895(2)
2.4917(7)
2.4905(12)
2.2637(4)
2.2637(2)
2.2642(5)
2.2606(2)
2.2628(7)
2.2626(12)
(d) +

slicing ( = 101 )
slicing ( = 103 )
slicing ( = 105 )
0.48606(7)
0.48620(7)
0.48630(6)
0.47588(19)
0.48607(19)
0.48623(20)
0.47396(8)
0.47407(6)
0.47401(6)
0.46363(13)
0.47399(14)
0.47425(15)
(e) e e

slicing ( = 101 )
slicing ( = 103 )
slicing ( = 105 )
5.4878(6)
5.4866(3)
5.4871(5)
5.4690(1)
5.4869(3)
5.4862(5)
4.6467(5)
4.6471(3)
4.6475(5)
4.6278(1)
4.6467(3)
4.6466(4)
fermion f . Particle polarization is taken care of in all relevant cases, e.g., for incoming fermions and photons. For the purpose of cross-checking results in applications, we also provide the
formulas needed in the phase-space slicing method.
As an example illustrating the use and performance of the proposed methods we have explicitly applied the subtraction procedures to the process e e + and compared the results
to those obtained with phase-space slicing. The presented subtraction variants will certainly be
used in several precision calculations needed for present and future collider experiments such as
the LHC or ILC.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Markus Roth for collaborating on the issue of Section 2 in an early stage of
this work.
Appendix A. More details on non-collinear-safe final-state radiation
Here we generalize the results of Section 2.1, where non-collinear-safe photon radiation off
fermions is treated, to the situation where massive spectators in the final state exist. To this end,
we only have to consider the case of final-state emitter and final-state spectator.
178
For mi 0, m = 0, but mj = 0, the boundary of the yij integration [given for the massless
case in Eq. (2.8)] is given by
y1 (z) =
m2i (1 z)
,
P 2 z
ij

1
y2 (z) = (z) + 1 + (z) (z) + 2
with (z) =
m2j
2Pij2 z(1 z)
(A.1)
(sub)
and the functions relevant for the integrand gij, behave as

Pij2 yij
,
Pij2 = Pij2 m2j ,
2

4m2j y
2m2j y
Rij (y) = (1 y)2
,
r
(y)
=
1
.
ij
Pij2
Pij2 1 y
pi k =
(A.2)
The evaluation of Eq. (2.6) now becomes non-trivial and yields

2

mi
2z
(sub)
2
Gij,+
Pij , z = Pff (z) ln
1
(z)
+ (1 + z) ln(1 z)
2
1z
zPij

m2j
+ (1 + z) ln 1 + 2
Pij (z)

Pij2 (z)[1 z(z)]
2
2z(z)
2
ln
1
ln 1 +
(1 z) (z)
1 + (z)
m2j (1 z)

!
m2j

(sub)
+ (z) ln
(1 z) Gij, Pij2 , z ,
2
Pij (z)

(sub)
Gij, Pij2 , z = 1 z,
(A.3)
with the auxiliary functions

4m2j
(z) = 1 + 2 z(1 z),
P
(z) =
ij
[1 y2 (z)]z
[1 y2 (z)](1 z)
for z < 12 ,
for z > 12 .
(A.4)
(sub)
For mj 0, the results for Gij, (Pij2 , zij ) reduce to Eq. (2.10), as can be easily seen after
realizing that (z) = O(mj ) and (z) = 1 + O(m2j ) in this limit.
Appendix B. More details on the subtraction for f f splittings

B.1. Factorization in the collinear limit
In this section we derive the asymptotic behaviour (3.3) of the squared amplitude |M af X |2
for the case where the outgoing light fermion flies along the direction of the incoming photon.
We consider polarized incoming photons with momentum k and polarization vector , where
179
Fig. 6. Generic squared diagram for the splitting f f (left) and the corresponding squared diagram for the related
process with an incoming f (right).
= is the sign of its helicity. We further introduce a light-like gauge vector n (n2 = 0, nk =
0), i.e. is characterized by
k = n = 0.
= ,
(B.1)
In the following we make use of the identity6
1
i

=
= E (k)
k n ,
(B.2)

2
2kn
where
k n + n k

E (k) = +
(B.3)
+ +
= g +
kn
is the polarization sum of the photon in four spacetime dimensions and the Levi-Civita
tensor with 0123 = +1.
In a gauge for the photon where nk = O(k 0 ), it is easily shown by power counting that the
logarithmic singularity arising from the phase-space region kpf = O(m2f ) (mf k 0 ) originates
from diagrams in which the incoming photon collinearly splits into a light f f pair. The generic
form of such graphs is shown in Fig. 6. Assuming summation over the polarization of the outgoing fermion f , the squared matrix element, thus, behaves like

M af X (k, pa , pf ; )2
k
pf 0
Q2f e2 TfaX (pf , pa )
/
p f + mf
pf2
m2f
/ ( p
/ f + mf )/
/
pf + mf
pf2 m2f
TfaX (pf , pa ),
(B.4)
6 This identity is easily proven using a representation of the polarization vectors by Weyl spinors. Employing the

AB
AB
conventions of Ref. [23], we have +
= + AB = 2nA k B / kn and
= AB = 2k A nB / kn for the
polarization bispinors, so that

i
A E C G BD F H

AC E G BF DH k n

AB CD EF GH
4
i

= k A nC BD kX nX AC k B nD kX nX
AB CD
4
i
A B C D
B C D
A
= k n n k + n k k n
AB CD
4
= i(kn)
.
= kn kn +
+
+
+
2
k n =
The only non-trivial step is the third equality which follows from a twofold application of Schoutens identity.
180
where TfaX (pf , pa ) includes all information of the subamplitude indicated by the open blob
in Fig. 6 and TfaX = (TfaX ) 0 . To leading order in mf 0, the squared amplitude for the
subprocess fa X can be written as

2

M

/ f + O(mf ) TfaX (pf , pa ), (B.5)

f aX (pf , pa ; f ) = TfaX (pf , pa ) fp
with = 12 (1 5 ) and f = denoting the sign of the f helicity. In order to find the relation
between these squared matrix elements, we insert identity (B.2) into Eq. (B.4) and eliminate the
tensor via Chisholms identity,

i = g + g g 5 ,
(B.6)
i.e. we trade the contributions for a 5 insertion in the spinor chain. Next, we isolate the leading
terms in the collinear limit kpf = O(m2f ) 0. This limit can, e.g., be parametrized by the
decomposition of the momentum of f
pf = (1 x)k + pf, + pf,r
(B.7)
with x = 1 pf0 /k 0 , kpf, = 0, and pf,r = 0 (where boldface symbols refer the spatial parts
0 ) = O(p 0 ) = O(m2 ) and p2
2
of momenta). In this decomposition we have O(pf,
f
f, = O(mf ).
f,r
Thus, each component of the orthogonal 3-vector pf, is of O(mf ). After some straightforward
simplifying algebra, the result of applying the power counting to |M af X |2 is7

M af X (k, pa , pf ; )2

xm2f
Q2f e2
(p
,
p
)
1
2x(1
x)
+
T
p
/ f
a
k
pf 0 2x(kp ) f aX f
kpf
f

!
m2f
2x 1 +
/ f TfaX (pf , pa )
5p
kpf
2
2
1 2 2
f
f
Q e h+ + h MfaX (pf , pa ; +) + MfaX (pf , pa ; )
k
pf 0 2 f
2
2
f
f
+ h+ h MfaX (pf , pa ; +) MfaX (pf , pa ; ) . (B.8)
f
The last form results from the last but one by simply substituting |MfaX |2 and the h functions defined in Eq. (3.4), whose arguments are suppressed in the notation. This completes our
proof of Eq. (3.3), which is a more compact version of this result.
In this section we have explicitly treated f as fermion and f as antifermion. The opposite
case with f being an antifermion and f a fermion is obtained analogously and leads to the
identical final result (3.3), although some signs in intermediate results are different. This fact is,
of course, to be expected, because relations between squared helicity amplitudes cannot depend
on our convention which fermion we call the antiparticle of the other.
7 Actually there are also terms proportional to m /(kp )2 T
kp
/ f, 5 TfaX , which at first sight seem to
f
f
faX /
contribute in O(m2
)
in
the
limit
m
0.
Although
these
terms
obviously
disappear from the subtraction function
f
f
after setting mf to zero, they potentially contribute to the corresponding integrated subtraction terms, in which the limit
mf 0 is taken after the singular phase-space integration. However, the integration over the azimuthal angle of pf ,
which is always assumed in our analysis, leads to a further suppression by one power of mf , so that the contribution to
the phase-space integral of |M af X |2 is mass suppressed. Thus, these terms are irrelevant in the construction of a
subtraction function to separate mass-singular terms in the collinear cone.
181
B.2. Dipole subtraction for f f splittings with massive final-state spectator

Here we give some details on the derivation of the integrated subtraction part presented in
Section 3.3 for the collinear splitting f f in the process a fj X, where j is a possibly
massive spectator. We start by generalizing the form (3.24) of the new momenta upon restoring
the correct dependence on mf ,

P 2 + m2f m2j
fj,
P 2
+
P
P , p f = p f (xfj, ),
xk
p f (x) =
2P 2
2P 2
P 2
p j (x) = P + p f (x),
(B.9)
p j = p j (xfj, ),
where the following shorthands are used,
fj, = P 2 , m2f , m2j ,
P 2 = P 2 m2f m2j ,
(B.10)
with the auxiliary function

(x, y, z) = x 2 + y 2 + z2 2xy 2xz 2yz.
The new momenta satisfy the on-shell conditions
p f2
(B.11)
= m2f ,
p j = m2j
and correctly behave in the
kpf = O(m2f ) 0.
The splitting of the (N + 1)-particle phase

collinear limit, p f xk, where
space into the corresponding N -particle phase space and the integral over the remaining singular
degrees of freedom is given by

d (pf , pj , kX ; k + pa )
x1
=

dx
d p j (x), kX ; p f (x) + pa

dpf P 2 , x, zfj, ,
(B.12)

dpf P 2 , x, zfj, =
z2 (x)

2
1 P (pa p f (x))
dzfj, df ,
2(2)3
x2s
(B.13)
z1 (x)
and kX denoting the outgoing total momentum of X. The upper kinematical limit of the parameter
x = xfj, is given by
x1 =
P 2
P 2
.
+ 2mf mj
(B.14)
The integration of the azimuthal angle f of f simply yields a factor 2 , but the integration of
the auxiliary parameter
zfj, =
kpj
kpf + kpj
(B.15)
with the boundary

z1,2 (x) =
2m2j x + P 2 (x 1)
P 4 (1 x)2 4m2f m2j x 2
2(P 2 x P 2 )
(B.16)
182
is non-trivial. The integration kernels occurring in the final result (3.25) are defined as

f
Hj, P 2 , x =
z2 (x)
P 2
2
dzfj, hj, (k, pf , pj )
(B.17)
z1 (x)
and can be evaluated without problems analytically (even for finite mf ) yielding Eq. (3.26) for
mf 0.
Appendix C. More details on the subtraction for f f splittings
In this appendix we supplement Section 4.3, where the subtraction procedure for collinear
f f splittings has been described for a final-state spectator j . In the following we fully take
into account the spectator mass mj . The derivation widely follows Ref. [8], where the treatment
of the g QQ splitting with a massive quark Q has been considered. Our approach differs
from the one described in Ref. [8] in the level of inclusiveness that is assumed in the collinear
limit; in contrast to that paper we do not assume a recombination of the f f pair in the collinear
limit, but instead control the individual momentum flow of f and f.
For arbitrary mass values mf and mj the subtraction function can be constructed as in
Eq. (4.17) with the generalized radiator function
hf f,j (pf , pf , pj ) =

m2f
2
g
1 2 z1 z2
(pf + pf )2 vj
(pf + pf )2
(m)
4
(m)
(m)
(m)
.
z
z
p
p
p
p
f fj f
f fj f
f fj f
(pf + pf )2 f fj f
(C.1)
In addition to the parameters yf fj and zf fj , which are defined as in Eq. (4.19), we make use of
the following auxiliary quantities,
P 2 = P 2 2m2f m2j ,

2
P yf fj 2m2f
,
vf =
P 2 yf fj + 2m2f
1
z1,2 = (1 vj vf ),
2
vj =

[2m2j + P 2 (1 yf fj )]2 4m2j P 2
P 2 (1 yf fj )
1
(m)
zf fj = zf fj (1 vj ),
2
1
(m)
z f fj = z f fj (1 vj ).
2
(C.2)
The parameter is arbitrary, because the singular behaviour does not depend on it; in practice
the independence of the final result on can be used as check. The auxiliary momenta entering
the hard scattering matrix element for the subprocess ab j X also become more complicated,
p j =

P 2 + m2j
Ppj
P ,
pj 2 P +
P
2P 2
(P 2 , (pf + pf )2 , m2j )
P 2 m2j
k = P p j ,
P = pf + pf + pj .
(C.3)
183
In order to integrate the subtraction function we need the azimuthal-averaged version of hf f,j ,

2m2f
2
hf f,j (pf , pf , pj ) =
Pf (zf fj ) + 2(1 )z1 z2 +
, (C.4)
(pf + pf )2 vj
(pf + pf )2
and an appropriate splitting of the phase space of the momenta pf , pf , pj ,

dpf P 2 , yf fj , zf fj ,
d (pf , pf , pj ; P ) = d (k, p j ; P )

dpf P 2 , yf fj , zf fj =
y2
P 4
1
dyf fj (1 yf fj )
4(2)3 P 2 m2j
y1
z2 (yf fj )
dzf fj

df ,
z1 (yf fj )
(C.5)
where
2mj ( P 2 mj )
y2 = 1
P 2
2m2f
,
y1 =
P 2
(C.6)
and z1,2 (yf fj ) are the z1,2 of Eq. (C.2), evaluated as functions of yf fj . Up to this point, the full
dependence on mf and mj is kept.
Since we want to keep the momentum flow in the collinear limit open, i.e. the zf fj integration
should be done numerically, we have to interchange the order of yf fj and zf fj integrations in

the singular phase-space integration over [dpf ]. For arbitrary masses mf and mj , this seems
hardly possible analytically, so that we focus on the limit mf 0 in the following, because this
is the interesting case. We define
Hf f,j
y2 (z)
P 2
P ,z =
dyf fj (1 yf fj )hf f,j (pf , pf , pj ),
2
y1 (z)

Hf f,j P 2 =
1

dz Hf f,j P 2 , z ,
(C.7)
where we were allowed to use mf = 0 in the prefactors and in the integration limits of z = zf fj .
The relevant asymptotics of y1,2 (z) for mf 0 is

4P 2 z(1 z) + m2j mj
m2f z2 + (1 z)2

.
,
y2 (z) =
y1 (z) =
(C.8)
P 2 z(1 z)
4P 2 z(1 z) + m2 + m
j
The actual integration over yf fj yields

4P 2 z(1 z) + m2 mj
2
j
1 (z)
Hf f,j P , z = Pf (z) 2 ln
2mf

m2j [1 (z)]
2 ln 1 (z) + 2
m + (z)P 2
j
184

2m2j

P 2
2
2
+ 2 1 + z + (1 z) ln 1 + (z) 2 + 2z(1 z)
P
m
(C.9)
with

(z) =
[1 y2 (z)]z
for z < 12 ,
[1 y2 (z)](1 z)
for z > 12 .
(C.10)
The case mj = 0 given in Eq. (4.22) can be easily read off after realizing that (z) = O(mj ). For
the evaluation of Hf f,j (P 2 ) it is easier to integrate first over z and then over yf fj . The result is
2

2 4
4mj
P mj
16
+
Hf f,j P = ln
3
mf
9
3( P 2 + mj )

2

2mj
2 2mj
+
(C.11)
ln
,
3 P 2
P 2 + mj
which could also be derived from Eq. (5.36) of Ref. [8]. For mj = 0 this obviously leads to the
form given in Eq. (4.22).
Appendix D. More details on the subtraction for f f splittings
D.1. Factorization in the collinear limit
In this section we derive the asymptotic behaviour (5.2) of the squared amplitude |Mf af X |2
for the case where the incoming and outgoing light fermions become collinear. We consider po
larized incoming fermions f with momentum pf and helicity of sign f = . The corresponding
Dirac spinor u(pf , f ) is an eigenspinor of the helicity projector
1
f = (1 + f 5 /spf ),
2
where the polarization vector

0
|pf | pf
,
ef
spf =
mf mf
(D.1)
(D.2)
is aligned to the direction ef = pf /|pf | for helicity eigenstates. Defining the light-like vectors
k = k0 (1, ef ) and n = (1, ef ), the polarization vector spf can be decomposed into k and
n as follows,
spf =
(pf n)
mf
k
n .
2mf k0
2(pf n)
(D.3)
Note that the momentum k of the virtual photon fulfills kn = O(k 0 ) in the collinear limit,
because then k = k + O(mf ). The vector n will be used as gauge vector in the explicit
definition of photon polarization vectors for the subprocess a X below.
Power counting reveals that the logarithmic singularity arising from the phase-space region
pf pf = O(m2f ) 0 (mf pf0 ) originates from the square of diagrams in which the incoming
fermion collinearly emits a photon that triggers the production of X. The generic form of such
graphs is shown in Fig. 7. Assuming summation over the polarization of the outgoing fermion f ,
185
Fig. 7. Generic squared diagram for the splitting f f (left) and the corresponding squared diagram for the related
process with an incoming (right).
the squared matrix element behaves like

f

p
f pf 0
Nc,f Q2f e2
k4

Tr f (/
p f + mf ) (/
p f + mf )
T aX (k, pa ) TaX (k, pa ),
(D.4)
where T aX (k, pa ) includes all information of the subamplitude indicated by the open blob in
Fig. 7. To leading order in mf 0, the squared amplitude for the subprocess a X can be
written as

M aX (k,
pa ; )2 = , (k)T

(D.5)
aX (k, pa ) , (k)T aX (k, pa ),
with the helicity = of the incoming photon and the light-like vector k . In order to relate
the f a process with the a subprocess, we first evaluate the trace in Eq. (D.4) and drop all terms
that vanish owing to the Ward identity k T aX (k, pa ) = 0. Inserting the form (D.3) of spf , the
result can be written as

f
Nc,f Q2f e2

p
f pf 0
k 2

!
m2f
4pf, pf,
if
(pf n)
k
2 k
n
g
k0
(pf n)
k2
k
T aX (k, pa ) TaX (k, pa ).
(D.6)
Now we make use of the collinear limit which is characterized by pf pf = m2f pf k =
O(m2f ) 0. We decompose the photon momentum according to
k = xpf + k + kr
(D.7)
0 ) = O(k 0 ) =
with x = k 0 /pf0 , pf k = 0, and kr = 0. In this decomposition we have O(k
r
O(m2f ) and k2 = O(m2f ), i.e. the vector k can be counted as O(mf ). Moreover, we get
2 = x 2 m2 + k 2 (1 x) + O(m4 ). In the determination of the leading collinear behaviour of
k
f
f
Eq. (D.6), we can replace the momentum k by the light-like momentum k = k + O(mf ) in
the two T aX (k, pa ) terms. The expansion of the two terms with the -tensor is also straightforward. With the help of identity (B.2), the contraction k n becomes
186
k n = k n + O(mf )

, (k)
, (k)
+, (k)
+ O(mf ).
= i(kn) +, (k)
(D.8)

The second contraction k k can be expanded upon writing = g g g
with the following decomposition of the metric tensor,
g =
1

n k + k n + (k)
(k) (k)+ (k).
2k0
(D.9)
(k)n

k = 2ik0 , and the momentum k with an
The -tensor now only appears as + (k)
open index can be replaced via

2k0
k +
+ + (k)
k
+ O m2f ,
(k)
(k)
k + (k)
k =
(kn)
(D.10)
which follows from Eq. (D.9) upon contraction with k . This procedure spans the tensor
, (k)
and covariants involving k or k . The latter do not con k k in terms of , (k)
tribute because of the Ward identity k T aX (k, pa ) = 0. The expansion of the various scalar
products for mf 0 is straightforward, yielding
k k =
ik0 [k 2 (x 2) x 2 m2f ]
x(pf n)

, (k)
, (k)
+, (k)
+, (k)

+ (terms proportional to k or k ) + O m3f .
(D.11)
Inserting Eqs. (D.8) and (D.11) into Eq. (D.6) and performing the expansion in the collinear limit
leads to the form given in Eqs. (5.2) and (5.3).
The final step of performing the azimuthal average around the collinear axis, which leads to
Eqs. (5.5) and (5.6), is most easily carried out by fixing a specific coordinate frame. In a frame

where the direction of pf is given by eTf = (0, 0, 1), the vectors k and (k)
are given by
k = (k0 , 0, 0, k0 ),
1

(k)
= (0, 1, i, 0).
2
(D.12)
Recall that k and k differ only by terms of O(mf ) in the collinear limit. According to defini
tion (D.7) the leading term of k takes the form
k = 0, |k | cos f , |k | sin f , 0 + O m2f ,
(D.13)

where f is the azimuthal angle of pf = pf k. In this parametrization the average k k
f
is easily calculated to

k2
k2
+ O m3 ,
k k = diag(0, 1, 1, 0) + O m3f = E (k)
f
f
2
2
(D.14)

while it is trivially seen that the tensors (k)
(k) do not change after taking the azimuthal
average. With these considerations the transition from Eqs. (5.2) and (5.3) to the averaged form
in Eqs. (5.5) and (5.6) is straightforward.
187
D.2. Dipole subtraction for f f splittings with massive final-state spectator

In Section 5.3 we have presented all formulas needed for the case of a massless final-state
spectator in practice, but did not go into the details of their derivation. Here we close this gap by
deriving the formalism in the more general situation of a possibly massive spectator j . We keep
the general definition (5.22) of the subtraction function, but generalize the subtraction kernel as
follows,
hj,f (pf , pf , pj ) =
ff,

(p p )2 (1 x) + m2 x 2
f
1
4(1 x) k k
f
f
g
2
(pf pf )2
x2
(pf pf )2 (1 x)
k

2x 2 m2f
+
(
k)
(
k)
(
k)
(
k)
,
2x +
x
(pf pf )2
(D.15)
because we need the correct dependence on the emitter mass mf for the integration of |Msub |2
below. The auxiliary parameters still have the form (5.24), but the auxiliary momenta become
more complicated,

m2j P 2 x
m2j P 2
P 2 + 2m2f x
P
P ,
pf +
+
2xP 2
2P 2
P 2 R(x)
p j = p j (xfj,f ),
p j (x) = P + k (x),
k (x) =
k =
k = k (xfj,f ),

pj k pf k
pf
pj .
p j k
p j k
(D.16)
Here we made use of the abbreviations

P 2 = P 2 2m2f m2j ,
P = p f + pj p f ,

(P 2 + 2m2f x)2 4x 2 m2f P 2
.
R(x) =
P 2
(D.17)
The new momenta satisfy the on-shell conditions k 2 = 0, p j2 = m2j and correctly behave in the
collinear limit, k xpf , where pf p = O(m2 ) 0. Before carrying out the singular integraf
tions, we average the subtraction function over f , yielding

Msub (f )2 = Nc,f Q2 e2 hff (pf , p , pj )M aj X (k,
pa ; = f )2
f
f
j,
(D.18)

ff
hj, (pf , pf , pj ) =

2
2m2f xfj,f
1
(x
)
+
P
f
fj,f
P 2 zfj,f + 2m2f xfj,f

3
2xfj,f
m2f
+ 2 xfj,f +
.
(D.19)
188
The splitting of the (N + 1)-particle phase space into the corresponding N -particle phase
space and the integral over the remaining singular degrees of freedom is given by

d (pf , pj , kX ; pf + pa )
x1
=

dx
d p j (x), kX ; k(x)
+ pa

dpf P 2 , x, zfj,f ,
(D.20)

dpf
P , x, zfj,f
1 s P 2
=
4(2)3 s x 2 R(x)
z2 (x)
dzfj,f
df .
(D.21)
z1 (x)
The upper kinematical limit of the parameter x = xfj,f is given by

x1 =
P 2
.
P 2 + 2mf mj
(D.22)
The integration of the azimuthal angle f of f (pf ) simply yields a factor 2 . The non-trivial
integration over zfj,f has the boundary

2m2f x + P 2 (x 1) R(x) P 4 (1 x)2 4m2f m2j x 2
.
z1,2 (x) =
(D.23)
2[P 2 (x 1) + (m2f + m2j )x]
Defining the integrated subtraction kernel according to

ff
Hj, P 2 , x =
P 2
2R(x)
z2 (x)
dzfj,f hj, (pf , pf , pj ),

ff
(D.24)
z1 (x)
the cross-section contribution of the subtraction part takes the form (5.26) in the limit mf 0.
ff
For a non-zero spectator mass mj , the function Hj, (P 2 , x) reads

1

P 4 (1 x)2
ff
Hj, P 2 , x = ln
Pf (x) + (2 x)
2
2
3
2
2
x mf [P (1 x) + mj x]
1x
(D.25)
(1 x).
x
References
[1] C. Buttar, et al., SMH Working Group Collaboration, QCD, EW, and Higgs working group report of the workshop
Physics at TeV Colliders, Les Houches, May 2005, hep-ph/0604120.
[2] V. Del Duca, Pramana 67 (2006) 861, hep-ph/0607025;
G.P. Salam, hep-ph/0607153;
D. Forde, hep-ph/0608029;
C.F. Berger, Z. Bern, L.J. Dixon, D. Forde, D.A. Kosower, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 160 (2006) 261, hepph/0610089;
S. Heinemeyer, hep-ph/0611374;
U. Baur, hep-ph/0701164;
Z. Bern, L.J. Dixon, D.A. Kosower, Ann. Phys. 322 (2007) 1587, arXiv: 0704.2798 [hep-ph];
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
S. Weinzierl, arXiv: 0707.3342 [hep-ph];

L.J. Dixon, arXiv: 0712.3064 [hep-ph].
W.T. Giele, E.W.N. Glover, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 1980;
W.T. Giele, E.W.N. Glover, D.A. Kosower, Nucl. Phys. B 403 (1993) 633, hep-ph/9302225;
U. Baur, S. Keller, D. Wackeroth, Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 013002, hep-ph/9807417;
S. Keller, E. Laenen, Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 114004, hep-ph/9812415;
B.W. Harris, J.F. Owens, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 094032, hep-ph/0102128.
R.K. Ellis, D.A. Ross, A.E. Terrano, Nucl. Phys. B 178 (1981) 421;
S.D. Ellis, Z. Kunszt, D.E. Soper, Phys. Rev. D 40 (1989) 2188;
M.L. Mangano, P. Nason, G. Ridolfi, Nucl. Phys. B 373 (1992) 295;
Z. Kunszt, D.E. Soper, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 192;
S. Frixione, Z. Kunszt, A. Signer, Nucl. Phys. B 467 (1996) 399, hep-ph/9512328;
Z. Nagy, Z. Trcsnyi, Nucl. Phys. B 486 (1997) 189, hep-ph/9610498;
J.M. Campbell, M.A. Cullen, E.W.N. Glover, Eur. Phys. J. C 9 (1999) 245, hep-ph/9809429.
S. Catani, M.H. Seymour, Phys. Lett. B 378 (1996) 287, hep-ph/9602277;
S. Catani, M.H. Seymour, Nucl. Phys. B 485 (1997) 291, hep-ph/960532;
S. Catani, M.H. Seymour, Nucl. Phys. B 510 (1997) 291, Erratum.
S. Dittmaier, Nucl. Phys. B 565 (2000) 69, hep-ph/9904440.
L. Phaf, S. Weinzierl, JHEP 0104 (2001) 006, hep-ph/0102207.
S. Catani, S. Dittmaier, M.H. Seymour, Z. Trcsnyi, Nucl. Phys. B 627 (2002) 189, hep-ph/0201036.
S. Weinzierl, JHEP 0303 (2003) 062, hep-ph/0302180;
S. Weinzierl, JHEP 0307 (2003) 052, hep-ph/0306248;
A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, G. Heinrich, Nucl. Phys. B 682 (2004) 265, hep-ph/0311276;
C. Anastasiou, K. Melnikov, F. Petriello, Phys Rev. D 69 (2004) 076010, hep-ph/0311311;
C. Anastasiou, K. Melnikov, F. Petriello, Nucl. Phys. B 724 (2005) 197, hep-ph/0501130;
T. Binoth, G. Heinrich, Nucl. Phys. B 693 (2004) 134, hep-ph/0402265;
A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E.W.N. Glover, Nucl. Phys. B 691 (2004) 195, hep-ph/0403057;
A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E.W.N. Glover, Phys. Lett. B 612 (2005) 36, hep-ph/0501291;
A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E.W.N. Glover, Phys. Lett. B 612 (2005) 49, hep-ph/0502110;
A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E.W.N. Glover, JHEP 0509 (2005) 056, hep-ph/0505111;
W.B. Kilgore, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 031501, hep-ph/0403128;
S. Frixione, M. Grazzini, JHEP 0506 (2005) 010, hep-ph/0411399;
G. Somogyi, Z. Trcsnyi, V. Del Duca, JHEP 0506 (2005) 024, hep-ph/0502226;
S. Catani, M. Grazzini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 222002, hep-ph/0703012.
M. Roth, PhD thesis ETH Zrich 13363 (1999), hep-ph/0008033.
A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, M. Roth, L.H. Wieders, Phys. Lett. B 612 (2005) 223, hep-ph/0502063;
A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, M. Roth, L.H. Wieders, Nucl. Phys. B 724 (2005) 247, hep-ph/0505042.
T. Kinoshita, J. Math. Phys. 3 (1962) 650;
T.D. Lee, M. Nauenberg, Phys. Rev. 133 (1964) B1549.
A. Bredenstein, S. Dittmaier, M. Roth, Eur. Phys. J. C 44 (2005) 27, hep-ph/0506005.
A. Bredenstein, A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, M.M. Weber, Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 013004, hep-ph/0604011;
A. Bredenstein, A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, M.M. Weber, JHEP 0702 (2007) 080, hep-ph/0611234.
S. Dittmaier, M. Krmer, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 073007, hep-ph/0109062.
S. Brensing, S. Dittmaier, M. Krmer, A. Mck, arXiv: 0710.3309 [hep-ph].
K.P.O. Diener, S. Dittmaier, W. Hollik, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 073005, hep-ph/0310364;
K.P.O. Diener, S. Dittmaier, W. Hollik, Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 093002, hep-ph/0509084.
G. t Hooft, M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 153 (1979) 365.
A. Denner, Fortschr. Phys. 41 (1993) 307.
M. Bhm, S. Dittmaier, Nucl. Phys. B 409 (1993) 3;
M. Bhm, S. Dittmaier, Nucl. Phys. B 412 (1994) 39.
M. Ciccolini, A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 161803, arXiv: 0707.0381 [hep-ph];
M. Ciccolini, A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 013002, arXiv: 0710.4749 [hep-ph].
A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, Nucl. Phys. B 540 (1999) 58, hep-ph/9805443.
S. Dittmaier, Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 016007, hep-ph/9805445.
G.P. Lepage, J. Comput. Phys. 27 (1978) 192.
W. Kilian, T. Ohl, J. Reuter, arXiv: 0708.4233 [hep-ph].
189

Reheating and cosmic string production

Chao-Jun Feng a,b , Xian Gao a,b, , Miao Li a,b , Wei Song a,b , Yushu Song a,b
a Interdisciplinary Center of Theoretical Studies, USTC, Hefei, Anhui 230026, PR China
b Institute of Theoretical Physics, CAS, Beijing 100080, PR China
Received 8 January 2008; received in revised form 23 February 2008; accepted 18 March 2008
Abstract
We compute the string production rate at the end of inflation, using the string spectrum obtained in [M. Li,
W. Song, Y. Song, Quantizing strings in de Sitter space, JHEP 0704 (2007) 042, hep-th/0701258] in a nearde Sitter space. Our result shows that highly excited strings are hardly produced, thus the simple slow-roll
inflation alone does not offer a cosmic string production mechanism.
1. Introduction
String theory has been successful in resolving some longstanding problems, such as the existence of a consistent theory of quantum gravity. However, many problems remain unsolved [1].
One of the most important problems is that by far string theory has not made any concrete predictions verifiable by experiments, thus we do not know whether string theory is a realistic physical
theory or not. However, cosmology may be an important arena to test string theory. For example, any evidence of the existence of topological defects such as cosmic superstrings, can be an
important support for the string theory.
Cosmic strings can have two different origins, the field theoretic one and fundamental string
theory. The discovery of fundamental cosmic strings would be a spectacular way to verify string
theory [2]. Cosmic strings from string theory are characterized by some properties not shared by
GUT cosmic strings [3].
Cosmic strings can be formed as linear defects at symmetry breaking phase transitions in
the early universe. In 1980s, it was generally believed that the perturbative fundamental strings
* Corresponding author at: Interdisciplinary Center of Theoretical Studies, USTC, Hefei, Anhui 230026, PR China.
E-mail address: gaoxian@itp.ac.cn (X. Gao).

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.011
C.-J. Feng et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 190203
191
cannot become cosmic strings, due to the arguments of Witten [4]. The tension of a fundamental
string is close to the Planck scale, and would produce inhomogeneities in the CMB far larger
than observed, thus cosmic fundamental strings with such a tension are ruled out by experiments.
Moreover, the scale of string tension is much larger than the energy scale of the inflation process,
so these strings cannot be produced after inflation. However, recent research of compactifications
in string theory shows that the string tension measured in the four-dimensional Einstein frame
can be much smaller, as in the RandallSundrum model [6], and in models with large extra
dimensions Ms can much less than Mpl [5]. And thus in some situations the instability problem
is evaded, and cosmic strings as fundamental strings may indeed exist and can be observed in the
future experiments.
String creation on itself is not well understood, the best studied examples of string creation
by far are decaying D-brane solutions [2125]. In brane world cosmology, the current research
interest of the creation of strings at the end of inflation is focused on the investigation of the
final results of collision of branes. Cosmic strings are inevitably produced in this process as
topological defects. Research along this direction is spearheaded by Polchinski and Tye, and
their collaborators [2,79].
In this paper, we will study creation of strings in a more traditional fashion, namely, through
gravitational pair production in a time-dependent background. Related work has been done by
Gubser [1012] with an effective field theory viewpoint, and a steepest descent contour method
has been developed to estimate the production rate of the strings. The pair production of excited strings in a time-dependent and weak gravitational background has been calculated in [16].
Calculations with open strings created non-perturbatively have also been studied [1315].
As discussed in [1012], in a regime of parameter space where a spacetime description gives
a good approximation of string dynamics, the on-shell constraint for a given string state boils
down to a differential equation describing an oscillator with a time-dependent frequency. When
the quantization of strings is carried out in a particular background, the frequency (t) is
determined. The quantization of strings in a de Sitter background was recently done by Li et al.
[17], and the spectrum of such small strings is obtained. We will use the method developed
in [1012] to estimate the total rate of string creation, using the spectrum, i.e. the equation of
motion of string state obtained in [17], which is different from that of [1012]. The method
described in [1012] is quite general, but we use the fact that the Hubble parameter H is varying
slowly with time in our approximations, and thus our result the most general slow-roll inflation
scenario. The original equation of motion derived in [17] is in de Sitter space where the Hubble
parameter is a constant, but as we will show that in fact it is also valid at the end of inflation
and during reheating, where the Hubble parameter is a function of time instead of a constant (see
Appendix A). We will show this in Appendix B.
The main result of our investigation can be summarized as follows. In the most general slowroll inflation scenario, strings are generally produced gravitationally at the end of inflation and
during reheating, and the energy density of strings produced is highly suppressed by an exponential factor multiplied by an power factor. Since the Hubble parameter is much smaller than
1 in the unit of = 1, this energy density is very small. Our estimate is approximate quantitatively, due to the fact that there are some approximations used in deriving the string spectrum
derived in [17] and in our analytic method in estimating the string production rate. However, this
semi-quantitative result is quite general and strongly suggests to us the picture that highly excited
strings are hardly produced during reheating and the production rate is very small.
The organization of this paper is as follows. In Section 2 the density of string states is calculated, based on the spectrum obtained in [17]. In Section 3 the creation rate and the energy
192
density of strings are estimated. The final section is devoted to discussions. In Appendix A we
solve the Friedmann equation directly to get the Hubble parameter as a function of time at the
end of inflation and during reheating. In Appendix B we show that the spectrum and equation of
motion of strings obtained in [17] are valid in a general flat FRW background, not only in pure
de Sitter space.
2. Degeneracy of string states
The spectrum of strings in a near de Sitter background is different from the one in flat spacetime, and depends on two integers (we shall consider the bosonic sector only in this paper), as
will be shown in the next section. These integers are eigenvalues of two operators: the number
operator N and the other operator L, defined respectively as follows
N=
d

Nmi + N mi ,
i=1 m=1
L=
d

Nmi + N mi + 2Nmi N mi ,
(1)
i=1 m=1
where d = D 1 and D is the number of dimensions of spacetime, Nmi and N mi are the occupation
numbers of the left-mover and the right-mover respectively, i is the space index and m is the
oscillator index. We denote n as the eigenvalue of N and l as the eigenvalue of L. The degeneracy
of states at level n and fixed l is denoted by Dn,l , which is encoded in a generating function as
the coefficient of zn w l
Z(z, w) tr zN w L ,
(2)
or
Z(z, w) =
Dn,l zn w l .
(3)
n,l=0
Using (1) and (2), the generating function can be evaluated by an elementary method of quantum
statistical mechanics as follows
Z(z, w) =
d

zm(Nm +Nm ) w Nm +Nm +2Nm Nm .

i
(4)
i=1 m=1 N i ,N i =0
m m
Summing over1 N mi
Z(z, w) =
d

1 zm w 2Nm +1
i
i =0
i=1 m=1 Nm
zmNm w Nm
i

d

zmNm
f w, Nmi ,
m
1z
i
i=1 m=1 Nm =0
1 Of course one can sum over N i first.

m
(5)
193
where
i

(1 zm )w Nm
.
f w, Nmi =
(6)
i
1 zm w 2Nm +1
If w = 1, (5) is just the usual generating function of the degeneracy of bosonic string states [18].
The effect of w is to deform this generating function. This deformation is small when it comes to
evaluate the coefficient Dn,l by the steepest descent method. We will expand the generating function, i.e. (6) near w = 1 to the second order, with higher order terms truncated. This assumption
is reasonable as we will show in the saddle point calculation.
m

m

z
i 1+z
+
N
+ O (w 1)2 .
f w, Nmi = 1 + (w 1)
(7)
m
m
m
1z
1z
Thus the summation in (5) reads:

i

zmNm
1
2zm
i
(8)
f
w,
N
1
+
(w
1)
,
m
1 zm
(1 zm )2
(1 zm )2
i
Nm =0
then the generating function is

d

1
2zm
Z(z, w)
.
1 + (w 1)
(1 zm )2
(1 zm )2
(9)
m=1
Let z exp( T1 ) and x m

T . Thus x is continuous when T is large enough. In our following
calculation, around the saddle points, z is close to 1 thus T is indeed large. The infinite product
in (9) is approximated by an exponential of an integral. Taking logarithm of both sides of (9) we
obtain

2ex
ln Z(z, w)
x
+T
dx ln 1 e
dx ln 1 + (w 1)
2T
d
(1 ex )2
1/T
1/T
2T
+ 2(w 1)T
3

1/T
dx ex
(1 ex )2
2(w 1)z
,
3 ln z (1 z) ln z
in the second line we have truncated higher orders of w 1 in the logarithm function.
By definition, the degeneracy of string states is

dw
dz Z(z, w)
.
Dn,l =
2i
2i zn+1 w l+1
=
(10)
(11)
Here Z(z, w) vanishes rapidly as z 1 when w < 1, and zn+1 is very small for z < 1 when n is
very large. Consequently, for large n, there is a sharply defined saddle point for z near 1. Indeed,
the factor2

2 2
4(w 1)z
exp
(12)
(n + 1) ln z (l + 1) ln w
3 ln z (1 z) ln z
2 Here d = 2 is the dimension of physical states, i.e. the transverse oscillators are N i , i = 1, 2.
m
194
is stationary for

2

1
1 2 2
2
8(w 1)
ln z =
.
n+1 3
ln z
n+1 3
Therefore one finds that as n

2
6n
Dn,l n5/4 exp
6n l 2 ,
3
(13)
(14)
where the -function comes from the integration over w, and the exponential factor is the ordinary degeneracy of bosonic string states in four-dimensional spacetime.
3. Energy density of cosmic strings
In this section we will use the steepest descent contour method developed in [1012,19,20]
to estimate the energy density of strings produced during reheating. In [17], the quantization of
bosonic strings has been done in a de Sitter background. The on-shell constraint for quantum
states of a string leads to an equation of the form:

t2 + 3H t + k 2 e2H t + 4N + 2E0

H 2 1 + 2Nmi N mi + Nmi + N mi Nmi , N mi , , k i = 0,

(15)
m,i
where we take = 1. H is the Hubble parameter, Nmi , N mi are occupation number operators and

N i,m m(Nmi + N mi ), k i is the momentum vector in the four-dimensional spacetime and E0
is the center-of-mass energy. A general physical state |
corresponding to the string modes is
related to (Nmi , N mi , , k i ) as follows,

N i , N i , , k i N i , N i , , k i ,
|
=
(16)
m
m
m
m
i ,N
i
m
Nm
where the definition of |Nmi , N mi , , k i

can be found in [17]. Eq. (15) is regarded as the equation
of motion for the field of the corresponding string state. As we mentioned in the introduction,
this equation is different from that used in [1012], this difference makes our new result different
from others.
There is no string production in pure de Sitter space with a constant Hubble parameter, even
with the modified string spectrum as in (15). The only chance for string production to occur is
the short period of reheating during which H becomes time-dependent. Thus we have to make a
step forward, i.e. to generalize the equation of motion (15) to the case when H varies with time.
This is developed in Appendix B. From now on (k i )2 e2H t in (15) is replaced by (k i )2 /a(t)2 ,
where a(t) is the cosmological scale factor.
It is convenient to introduce (t) via (t) a(t), thus the equation of motion for (t) is:
+ H +

ki
a(t)
2

+ 4N + 2E0 C H = 0,
2
(17)
where
C2
3 + Nmi + N mi + 2Nmi N mi
195
(18)
m,i
and
H
(19)
H2
defined as the so-called slow-roll parameter, which is roughly equal to 1 at the end of inflation,
and the dot denotes the derivative with respect to t. The slow-roll parameter is not larger than 2
in the case under study, see Appendix A.
In conformal time defined by a d = dt, we can eliminate the first order derivative term,
and we will use prime to denote the derivative with respect to the conformal time. Thus (17)
becomes:

() + W ()2 () = 0,
(20)
where
W ()2 k 2 + (4N + 2E0 )a()2 C 2 a()2 H ()2 .
(21)
Having obtained the equation of motion (20), now we use the steepest descent method to extract
the approximate string pair production rate from (20). The steepest descent method was developed by various authors, especially, it was used to estimate the string production rate by Gubser
[1012]. The key assumption is that the occupation number ||2 for a given mode is always much
less than 1, where is the Bogolyubov coefficient. Setting
() i du W (u)
() i du W (u)
+
,
e
e
() =
2W ()
2W ()
(22)
with the requirement |()|2 |()|2 = 1, we recast Eq. (20) into

W 2i du W (u)
W 2i du W (u)
(),
() =
().
e
e
2W
2W
Using the assumption () 1 and () 1, we obtain an approximate formula for
() =

W
d
exp 2i du W (u) .
2W
(23)
(24)
The integral in the exponential of (24) can be calculated as follows

duW (u) =
+
du W (u),
(25)
where i is some initial time and is defined to make W ( ) = 0. Here the second term on the
right-hand side of (25) can be calculated as follows:

du W (u) =

du k 2 + (4N + 2E0 )a()2 C 2 a()2 H ()2
196

du [(4N + 2E0 )2aa C 2 2aa H 2 C 2 a 2 2H H ](u )

2
= 3/2 (4N + 2E0 )2aa C 2 2aa H 2 C 2 a 2 2H H ,
3
(26)
where we have expanded terms in the square root around , and defined . Thus

I0 exp 2i
(27)
du W (u) ,
i
where

I0

W
4i 3/2

d
S( )
exp
2W
3
(28)
and
S( ) = (4N + 2E0 )2aa C 2 2aa H 2 C 2 a 2 2H H .
(29)
Expanding W () around , we get

1
I0 =
4

d
4i 3/2

S( ) .
exp
(30)
From [19,20] we know that integrals such as (30) can be calculated by the contour integral
method, and the result for (30) is simply I0 = i/3.
Now (27) can be written as:

r

i
exp 2i du W (u) exp 2i du W (u) ,

3
(31)
where r is the real part of r iu, and r, u are real with u > 0. Since what we need is the
modulus of , the main contribution comes from the second exponential function in (31) whose
argument is the following integral and can be expanded as:

du W (u) = W (r)(iu) + W (r)
(iu)2
(iu)3
+ W (r)
+ .
2
6
(32)
r
As long as | WW | | u62 |, we can truncate this expansion to the first term (even terms do not
contribute to the modulus of since they are real), and indeed in the following calculation one

will see that | WW | | u62 | is satisfied in our case. Thus we get
2

||
exp 4uW (r) .
3
2
(33)
197
Here the imaginary part of can be derived by using (21) and expanding W ( ) around r as
follows3
0 W 2 ( )

= W 2 (r) + 2W (r)W (r)(iu) + W (r)W (r) + W 2 (r) (iu)2

(iu)3
+ W (r)W (r) + W (r)W (r) + 2W (r)W (r)
.
3
We solve these equations as follows

W 2 (r) W (r)W (r) + W 2 (r) u2 = 0,

6W (r)W (r) W (r)W (r) + 3W (r)W (r) u2 = 0.
Then

2
4W
(r)
||2
exp
.
3
W (r)/W (r) + (W (r)/W (r))2
In our case W () is expressed in (21), thus we get

2

2 a
a
W a
2 a
2 a
= k
+C
2
W ,
W
a
a
a
a
a
(34)
(35)
(36)
(37)
and
W
=
W
W
W

+
W
W
2
a
.
a
Thus we write approximately:

2 /a 2 + 4n a 2 H 2 l)

2
4(k
r r
k (n, l) exp
r
,
4n(Hr2 + Rr /6)
(38)
(39)
where we wrote as function of comoving momentum k and excitation modes n, l explicitly,

where n and l are eigenvalues of operators in (1), respectively. We have dropped the factor of
(/3)2 , Hr and Rr correspond to the Hubble expansion rate and Ricci scalar for the metric ds 2 =
a()2 (d2 dx i2 ), respectively. We emphasize that all time-dependent quantities in (39) are
evaluated at = r, where r is the real part of given by W ( ) = 0. From (39) we can see that
indeed the production of highly-excited strings, i.e. strings with large n and l are exponentially
suppressed. The total energy density of strings produced may be written as

2

1
2
dk
k
() =
(40)
Dn,l k (n, l) Mn,l (),
3
2
2 a()
n,l
where k is the comoving momentum, Mn,l () is the energy of a single string with excitation
modes (n, l), given by
3 We truncate the expansion up to the fourth term because one can check that the next order terms are much smaller

than these terms. And one can see that the condition | WW | | 62 | is also satisfied.
u
198
Mn,l ()2 = 4N + 2E0

H 2 1 + 2Nmi N mi + Nmi + N mi
m,i
= 4n + 2E0 H 2 (1 + l)
4n H 2 l.
(41)
Now insert (39) and (41) into (40), we obtain approximate formulas:

5
2
6n
1
2
4
dk k
n exp
6n l 2
()
3
2a 3
n,l

k 2 /a 2 + 4n ar2 Hr2 l
exp 4 r
4n H 2 l
4n(Hr2 + Rr /6)

5
1
2
2
4
3 dk k
n exp
6n
3
a
n

k 2 /ar2 + 4n ar2 Hr2 6n2
6n
4n H 2 2 .
exp 4
4n(Hr2 + Rr /6)
(42)
For highly excited string states, neglecting k is a good approximation, though not a uniform one
if a() becomes arbitrary small in the past. We get:

n

max
8 12ar2 Hr2 / 2 2 6
1
2
43
dn n exp
n ,
() 3 dk k
(43)
3
a
Hr2 + Rr /6
1
where we have dropped the constant factor. We define A =
812ar2 Hr2 / 2
2
Hr +Rr /6
above integral can be approximated as:

1
1/4
dk k 2 Erf Anmax Erf A ,
() 3
a A
where Erf(x) is the error function. For very large x, approximately we have

2
2

ex
ex
n 1 3 5 (2n 1)
Erf(x) 1 1 +
.
(1)
(2x 2 )n
x
x

2 6
3
for short, the
(44)
(45)
n=1
Thus we have

1
eA nmax
A
()
(46)
e
,
1/4
a()3 A3/2
nmax

812a 2 H 2 / 2
2 36 . Since we consider the highly excited strings,
where A is given by A = 2r r
Hr +Rr /6
i.e. strings with small momentum k, the integral in (44) with respect to the comoving momentum
k will contribute a small factor which we have dropped. This result will not affect the qualitative
behavior of the production rate of strings with respect to the string excitation modes n and l.
A
The upper limit of n is roughly nmax H 2 /4 1 (see Appendix B), thus a()e 3 A3/2 . We
emphasize that indeed Hr 1 . Thus in unit where = 1, Hr 1 and A 1, the above
approximation is qualitatively correct. Especially, since A 1, from (46) we can see that the
energy density of strings produced is very small and exponentially suppressed, i.e., highly excited
strings are hardly produced in our case.
199
4. Discussion
We have estimated the energy density of strings produced at the end of inflation and during
reheating, our main result is

2
eA nmax
A
()
e
,
1/4
a()3 A3/2
nmax
(47)

812a 2 H 2 / 2
here A is given by A = 2 r r 2 36 . We have reinstated which has been set to 1 in
Hr +Rr /6
our paper. Although it is difficult to

get the explicit form of Hr due to the complicated equations
of (35), one can make sure that Hr must be much smaller than 1, i.e. the Hubble scale in
string production process is much lower than the string scale. In other words, the curvature radius
is much larger than the string length, and a spacetime description gives a good approximation.
In the case of a small Hr , due to the large exponential factor in (47), one can see that the energy
density of strings produced is exponentially suppressed and indeed highly excited strings are
hardly produced (21). Planck scale, otherwise the effective field theory viewpoint we used will
broken down, so that the energy density is also small.
As a comparison, we note that in [24,25], total average number and the total energy of closed
string modes emitted by the decay of unstable Dp-branes are evaluated. For p > 2 the total number of particles and total energy radiated is finite and for p 2 the total energy diverges. While
in our analysis, we found a finite result for the gravitational production of fundamental strings.
Moreover, the integrands in [24,25] is some power of level number n due to the cancelation of
all exponential terms, while in our result the integrand contains a exponential of n, thus in
our situation the strings production especially the production of highly excited strings is highly
suppressed.
In conclusion, we have shown in this paper that highly excited strings are hardly produced
at the end of inflation, because ||2 is highly suppressed by a exponential factor within and the
degeneracy of highly excited strings is not sufficiently large to compensate it, thus the energy
density is also suppressed by this exponential factor. The creation of strings provide another
possibility to extract energy from the inflaton, and it also provide another mechanism of the
production of cosmic strings. However, our results show that it seems that excited string states
may not play a significant role in the process of inflation and reheating. Meanwhile, these excited
strings decay into states which are massless at tree level, and these states then can be thermalized.
Thus the experimental signatures of excited strings production at the early universe are not quite
clear.
As a first step estimation, we assume the inflationary background evolves independently, and
do not consider the back-reaction of the strings to the spacetime geometry, due to the fact that the
string production rate is very small. A more rigorous treatment may also take strings produced
in the process into account.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by a grant of CNSF. We thank Yi Wang for discussion.
200
Appendix A. Hubble parameter during reheating

In most of popular inflation scenarios, the temperature is practically zero during inflation,
relativistic matter is produced during the short reheating period when the inflaton oscillates coherently and decays to matter. Generally it is not known how the inflaton is coupled to a generic
string state, so the usual reheating mechanism is not easily applied to the production of strings.
However, the spacetime metric is also coupled to strings, the details of the coupling can be
seen from the string spectrum directly. When H remains nearly a constant, there is no string
production. During the reheating period, the Hubble parameter is no longer a constant, and can
be estimated by solving the Friedmann equation. In solving this equation, we should also take
radiation into account. A more rigorous treatment should also take strings produced in the process
into account, however, we do not know how to compute string energy density as a function of time
(to this end, it is required to compute the string production rate per unit time). The Friedmann
equation reads
3H 2 = + ,
(A.1)
where we set 8G = 1, and (t) and (t) are the energy densities of the inflaton and radiation
respectively, their equations of motion are
+ 3H + = 0,
(A.2)
+ 4H = 0,
(A.3)
and
where is the decay rate of the inflaton and dot denotes the derivative with respect to the
comoving time t.
Taking derivative of (A.1) with respect to t and using (A.2), (A.3) to eliminate and , and
then using (A.1) again, we find
=
2 3
,
4 2
(A.4)
where H /H 2 . Now the Friedmann equation is

3H 2 =
1
.
4 2
(A.5)
Combining (A.4) and (A.5), we get 1.5 < < 2. This result can be generalized when there are
more energy components in the Universe.
We solve (A.2) in the limit4 of H , which means that the inflaton decays very fast, indeed
this is the case during reheating. Thus (A.2) is simplified to
+ = 0.
(A.6)
The general solution is

= 0 exp( t),
4 Of course one can exactly solve the equation, but that is not necessary.
(A.7)
201
where 0 is an integration constant. Using solution (A.7), (A.5) can be rewritten as a differential
equation of H explicitly
6H + 12H 2 0 exp( t) = 0.
(A.8)
This equation can be cast into the standard form of Bessel equation by changing variable t into
= exp( t/2),
40 2
d 2 (a 2 ) 1 d(a 2 )
a = 0.
+
(A.9)
2
d
d
3 2
The general solution to this equation is a linear combination of the modified Bessel functions of
the first kind I0 and of the second kind K0 :

0 2
0 2
2
a = c 1 I0
(A.10)
+ c2 K0
,
3
3
where c1 and c2 are integration constants.
Appendix B. Constraint equation with arbitrary H (t)
The equation of motion of bosonic string states derived in [17] is valid in pure de Sitter space,
of which the Hubble parameter is a constant. In order to study string production, we focus on the
reheating phase, where the Hubble parameter is varying with time, the spectrum formula of [17]
cannot be used directly for our purpose. In this appendix we generalize the original result of [17]
to the case of arbitrary H (t) a(t)/a(t).

We refer the readers to the original paper [17] for more
details of deriving the equation of motion when H is a constant.
The key point of the generalization is to re-calculate cm in (3.16) of [17] in arbitrary H (t)
case. The general definition of cm is

t
t
m

cm = ei(m m ) m
m + 2 e2i dum (u) 2 e+2i dum (u)
, (B.1)
m m
2m
where the most general form of m and m are given by (3.7) and (3.8) of [17],
m = cosh(m )eim +im ,
m = sinh(m )eim ,
m = cosh(m )eim +im ,

m = sinh(m )eim .
m in (B.1) is defined as

m2
t2 1 ,
m sgn(m)
2
(B.2)
(B.3)
where eH t1 as in [17], and should be replaced by a formula in which exp(H t) is replaced

by a(t), and m and m in (B.2) can be solved directly from (3.9)(3.10) of [17].

m2
1
1
2
2
+ m + 2 + ,
m = cosh
(B.4)
4mm
2

t
2m
2 du m (u),
m = arctan
2 2
(B.5)
202
here we define /
for short. Insert (B.2) into (B.1) and use (B.3)(B.5), after a tedious
calculation we finally get
cm = e
i(m +m +m )
a
2
) ( aa ) ] i 2m
a [ a + t ( 2
( a + 2 )

.
2 a
2
a
[ aa + t ( 2
) ( aa ) ] + 4m
(
+
)
2
2 a
(B.6)
What is needed in the calculation of the main context is the modulus of cm

a
(B.7)
H (t),
a
it agrees with the original result of [17] where H is a constant. Eq. (B.7) tells us that the equation
of motion of string states in the reheating phase where Hubble parameter is varying with time
H = H (t) is simply given by the equation of motion of [17] when H is replaced by H (t) =
a(t)/a(t).
At the end of this appendix we want to recall that the real condition of each m is

2
m2
H
+
> 0,
(B.8)
t
2
2
2
|cm | =
where 2 = 4N + 2E0 + (p i /a)2 . In fact if 1 is real, so are m for m > 1. Then the condition
becomes

1
pi 2 3 pi 4
(B.9)
1+
H 2 > 0.
2 a
4 a
2
Because

p
a
2
=
(p i /a)2
1
4N + 2E0 + (p i /a)2
and (1.5, 2), the condition (B.9) is approximated by

pi 2
1
1+
H 2 > 0.
2 a
2
Thus we get the upper limit of n as

1
2
n < nmax =
H 2 1 +
k 2E0 ,
4
2
where k i = p i /a is the physical momentum.
References
[1] J.H. Schwarz, String theory: Progress and problems, hep-th/0702219.
[2] J. Polchinski, Cosmic superstrings revisited, AIP Conf. Proc. 743 (2005) 331;
J. Polchinski, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 20 (2005) 3413, hep-th/0410082.
[3] M.B. Hindmarsh, T.W.B. Kibble, Cosmic strings, Rep. Prog. Phys. 58 (1995) 477, hep-ph/9411342.
[4] E. Witten, Cosmic superstrings, Phys. Lett. B 153 (1985) 243.
[5] N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, G. Dvali, Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 086004.
[6] L. Randall, R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 3370.
[7] G.R. Dvali, S.H.H. Tye, Brane inflation, Phys. Lett. B 450 (1999) 72, hep-ph/9812483.
(B.10)
(B.11)
(B.12)
203
[8] N.T. Jones, H. Stoica, S.H.H. Tye, Brane interaction as the origin of inflation, JHEP 0207 (2002) 051, hepth/0203163.
[9] S. Sarangi, S.H.H. Tye, Cosmic string production towards the end of brane inflation, Phys. Lett. B 536 (2002) 185,
hep-th/0204074.
[10] S.S. Gubser, String production at the level of effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 123507, hep-th/0305099.
[11] S.S. Gubser, String creation and cosmology, hep-th/0312321.
[12] J.J. Friess, S.S. Gubser, I. Mitra, String creation in cosmologies with a varying dilaton, Nucl. Phys. B 689 (2004)
243, hep-th/0402156.
[13] C. Bachas, M. Porrati, Pair creation of open strings in an electric field, Phys. Lett. B 296 (1992) 77, hep-th/9209032.
[14] C.P. Burgess, Open string instability in background electric fields, Nucl. Phys. B 294 (1987) 427.
[15] J.H. Cho, P. Oh, C. Park, J. Shin, String pair creations in D-brane systems, JHEP 0505 (2005) 004, hep-th/0501190.
[16] A.J. Tolley, D.H. Wesley, String pair production in a time-dependent gravitational field, Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005)
124009, hep-th/0509151.
[17] M. Li, W. Song, Y. Song, Quantizing strings in de Sitter space, JHEP 0704 (2007) 042, hep-th/0701258.
[18] M. Green, J. Schwarz, E. Witten, Superstring Theory, vols. I and II, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1987.
[19] E. Brezin, C. Itzykson, Pair production in vacuum by an alternating field, Phys. Rev. D 2 (1970) 1191.
[20] D.J.H. Chung, Classical inflation field induced creation of superheavy dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 083514,
hep-ph/9809489.
[21] A. Sen, Rolling tachyon, JHEP 0204 (2002) 048, hep-th/0203211.
[22] A. Strominger, Open string creation by S-branes, hep-th/0209090.
[23] A. Maloney, A. Strominger, X. Yin, S-brane thermodynamics, hep-th/0302146.
[24] N.D. Lambert, H. Liu, J.M. Maldacena, Closed strings from decaying D-branes, JHEP 0703 (2007) 014, hepth/0303139.
[25] B. Chen, M. Li, F.-L. Lin, Gravitational radiation of rolling tachyon, JHEP 0211 (2002) 050, hep-th/0209222.

Minimal Dark Matter predictions for galactic positrons,

anti-protons, photons
Marco Cirelli a, , Roberto Franceschini b , Alessandro Strumia c
a Institut de Physique Thorique, CEA-Saclay & CNRS, France 1
b Scuola Normale Superiore & INFN, Pisa, Italy
c Dipartimento di Fisica dellUniversit di Pisa & INFN, Italy
Received 13 March 2008; accepted 19 March 2008

Abstract
We present the energy spectra of the fluxes of positrons, anti-protons and photons generated by Dark
Matter annihilations in our galaxy, as univocally predicted by the model of Minimal Dark Matter. Due to
multi-TeV masses and to the Sommerfeld enhancement of the annihilation cross section, distinctive signals
can be generated above the background, even with a modest astrophysical boost factor, in the range of
energies soon to be explored by cosmic ray experiments.
1. Introduction
We consider Minimal Dark Matter [1,2] (MDM), i.e., we assume that the DM is the neutral
component of one single weak multiplet, that interacts with SM particles only via (broken) gauge
SM interactions. The assignment of spin and SU(2)L U(1)Y quantum numbers fully identifies
each different MDM candidate: the full list, together with a short list of the most interesting
candidates, has been presented in [1,2].
The main virtues of such model (which is not inspired by more ambitious beyond-the-SM
constructions like super symmetry or extra dimensions) can therefore be summarized in terms of
economy and predictiveness. The model has no free parameters as all DM couplings are predicted
E-mail address: marco.cirelli@cea.fr (M. Cirelli).

1 CEA, DSM, Institut de Physique Thorique, IPhT, CNRS, MPPU, URA2306, Saclay, F-91191 Gif-sur-Yvette,
France.
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.013
M. Cirelli et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 204220
205
by gauge invariance and the DM mass is determined by matching the relic abundance, DM h2 =
0.110 0.005 [3]. A particularly interesting MDM candidate is the fermionic SU(2)L 5-plet
with hypercharge Y = 0, that is automatically stable on cosmological time-scale thanks to the
SM gauge and Lorentz symmetries, without having to impose ad-hoc parities (like R-parity or
KK-parity). We will restrict our study to three particularly interesting MDM candidates: the
fermionic quintuplet already mentioned above; the fermionic 3-plet with hypercharge Y = 0 (the
MDM candidate that has the same quantum numbers of the supersymmetric wino); the scalar
triplet with Y = 0.
We here compute the indirect DM signals, generated by DM DM annihilations into p,
e+ ,
in our galaxy [4]. Unlike DM candidates motivated by a successful natural solution to the hierarchy problem (which should therefore have mass below or around the Z mass), MDM predicts
specific multi-TeV values for the DM mass MDM , and annihilation cross sections enhanced by
electroweak Sommerfeld corrections: these two features imply a distinctive DM signal that can
be tested by running and future experiments like PAMELA [5] and AMS-02 [6], dedicated to
extending our knowledge of galactic Cosmic Ray (CR) spectra up to higher energies.
2. Energy spectra at production
MDM annihilates at tree level into W + W , and at loop level into , Z, ZZ. The relative
cross-sections are significantly affected by non-perturbative Sommerfeld corrections [7], and we
use the results of [2]. As a consequence of Sommerfeld corrections, the DM DM annihilation
cross sections exhibit a quite steep dependence on MDM and can vary by about one order of
magnitude within the range allowed at 3 by the cosmological DM abundance as computed
assuming thermal freeze-out (see, e.g., Figs. 25 in [2]). For the same reason, the cross section
v also depends on the DM velocity v, reaching a maximal value for v 0, as shown in Fig. 1.
The average DM velocity in our galaxy, v 103 , is however low enough that v is close to its
maximal value, which we assume.
Fig. 1. Velocity dependence of Sommerfeld-enhanced MDM annihilation cross sections, for the two candidates that we
mainly consider.
206
For definiteness, in the following we adopt the following best-fit values of MDM and v for
the MDM candidates that we consider:
MDM = 9.6 TeV,
vW W = 1.1 1023
cm3
,
s
v = 1.3 1025
cm3
s
(1a)
for the fermion quintuplet with Y = 0, and

MDM = 2.7 TeV,
vW W = 0.21 1023
cm3
,
s
v = 0.58 1025
cm3
s
(1b)
for the fermion triplet with Y = 0, and

MDM = 2.5 TeV,
vW W = 3.6 1023
cm3
,
s
v = 9.4 1025
cm3
s
(1c)
for the scalar triplet with Y = 0. We will not plot predictions to the scalar triplet, that can be
easily read out from the corresponding predictions for the fermion triplet, taking into account
that they have a similar mass, and multiplying all rates by a factor of about 16 [2], due to a large
Sommerfeld enhancement. The other automatically stable MDM candidate, the scalar eptaplet,
is expected to have a mass MDM 25 TeV, but we cannot reliably predict its annihilation cross
sections.
Annihilation cross sections into Z and ZZ are given by
Z = 2 / tan2 W = 6.5 ,
ZZ = / tan4 W = 10.8
(2)
for all MDM candidates with Y = 0.

We next need to compute the energy spectra of e+ , p , produced by decays of SM vectors. Instead of using the results available from the literature, we performed an independent
computation. Indeed, to our knowledge, previous decay computations do not take into account
spin correlations of SM vectors V in the intermediate state. We instead compute the full matrix element for DMDM V V 4 fermions. For example, including spin correlations the
energy spectra of primary positrons directly produced in the annihilation DMDM W + W
4 fermions, is

dNe+
1 2x + 2x 2
1
(3)
=
instead of (no spin correlations),

dx primary
6
9
where x = Ee+ /MDM and MDM MW . The same x-dependence applies to all massless
fermions and SM vectors, and it arises as follows (see, e.g., [8]). SM vectors are produced
isotropically in the DMDM rest frame, with equal transversally polarized helicities h: both +
or both . This is a characteristic of s-wave annihilations, that dominate in the non relativistic
limit. A V at rest decays into massless fermions with angular distribution
dN
(1 + cos )2 ,
(4)
d cos
where cos is the angle between the direction of the fermion and the spin of the vector.
We generated 4 fermions events with the M AD G RAPH 4.2 [9] Monte Carlo event generator,
where we extended the SM to incorporate the DM particle and its charged partner. This extension
incorporates proper tree level interactions among the W and the new particles. The interactions
207
of the new fields with the Z boson arises at one loop, and has been taken into account effectively
adding a tree level vertex between the Z and the neutral DM. Although not physical, this vertex is suitable for an easy implementation in the model and at the same time provide realistic
DMDM ZZ collisions. In fact we checked that it leads to the expected isotropical production
of Z pairs with same helicity, thus proving it to be equivalent to the real one loop vertex. Actually, in the case of DMDM W + W 4 fermions, we instead used a Monte Carlo routine
written by us.
The decay products of the W s and the Zs produce QED and QCD radiation. This emission
is simulated through the parton shower Monte Carlo P YTHIA 8.1 [10], in which we allowed
emission from all the final state particles and resonances. This does not take into account the
emission from intermediate states of the process as simulated at the matrix element level. This
emission is discussed below.
The formation of hadronic states out of the showers products has been simulated with
P YTHIA as well. Since we are interested to the observation of stable particles we explicitly re
quested the decay of , and of all unstable mesons and baryons (including n and n).
The whole showering, hadronizations and decay process results in the production of e+ , p ,
with lower energy x
1.
The final energy spectra are plotted in Fig. 2 and Table 1 provides the numerical coefficients
cn in the analytic approximation

cn n
dN
= exp
ln x .
(5)
d ln x
n!
n
These results apply in the limit MDM MW,Z and have no logarithmic dependence on MDM ,
since the virtuality of final state particles is MW,Z
MDM .
Fig. 2. Energy spectra of e+ , p,

produced by non-relativistic DMDM annihilations into SM vectors. Only e+ have a
secondary component (dashed green line shown on the W + W plot), that dominates at large x 1. (For interpretation
of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Table 1
Coefficients for the analytic approximation in Eq. (5) to the fragmentation functions
Process
c0
c1
c2
c3
c4
c5
c6
c7
c8
W W e+
W W p
WW
ZZ e+
ZZ p
ZZ
1.895
12.26
6.751
2.485
8.423
7.418
2.821
18.84
5.741
2.809
8.396
6.829
6.299
29.21
3.514
5.501
9.168
5.308
7.563
36.62
1.964
4.901
8.652
4.105
6.914
33.63
0.8783
2.953
5.549
2.601
4.812
20.98
0.2512
1.252
1.591
1.164
2.367
8.006
0.03369
0.3424
0.3074
0.3256
0.7273
1.411
0
0.04574
0.2717
0.04312
0.1050
0
0
0
0
0
208
As P YTHIA only takes into account brehmstrahlung from the final state fermions, we must
separately add the photons produced by brehmstrahlung from W and from the fermionic
charged components DM (relevant at x 1) [11]. Both particles have virtuality MDM , leading to a dependence on ln , where = MV /MDM :

dN
1 x 4(1 x)
=
ln
(6)
dx from W x
2
and [11]

dN
4(1 x + x 2 )2 2
=
ln
dx from DM
x(1 x)

8 3x 5 + 16x 4 37x 3 + 42x 2 24x
ln(1 x)
(1 x)(2 x)3 x

2x 6 10x 5 + 20x 4 22x 3 + 19x 2 12x + 4
2
,
(1 x)(2 x)2 x
+2
(7)
where x E /MDM < 1 .

We next need to consider how , e+ , p are produced and propagate in our galaxy.
3. Photons
3.1. Astrophysics
We consider three possible DM halo profiles: cored isothermal [12], the NavarroFrenk
White (NFW) [13] and Moore [14]. In all cases the DM density profile can be parameterized
as

r
1 + (r /rs ) ( )/
(r) =
(8)
,
r
1 + (r/rs )
where r = 8.5 kpc is the Earth distance from the galactic center, (r ) is the DM density
at the Earth position (we assume = 0.3 GeV/cm3 : values in the range 0.20.7 are considered
in the literature [15] and the , e+ , p fluxes scale as 2 ) and the , , , rs profile parameters
are:
Halo model
Cored isothermal [12]
Navarro, Frenk, White [13]
Moore [14]
2
1
1
2
3
3
0
1
1.16
rs in kpc
5
20
30
As well known, the NFW and Moore exhibit a cusp at the center of the galaxy.2
2 In various numerical computations, it is convenient to smooth out this behavior adopting the prescription discussed
in [16]. It simply amounts to replace the divergent profile by a well behaved one below an arbitrarily chosen critical
radius of rcrit = 0.5 kpc from the galactic center, while preserving the absolute number of annihilations in that region.
More precisely, we use

2 2
3
sin(r/rcrit ) 2 1/2
.
1
(r < rcrit ) = (rcrit ) 1 +
3
3 2
r/rcrit
209
Fig. 3. Photon flux from the galactic center for the isothermal (dashed, J = 13.5) and NFW (dotted, J = 1380) DM
density profiles.
Photons propagate freely. The differential flux of photons received from a given angular direction d is

f
2

dN
d
ds 2
1 c
J
vf
,
=
, J=
(9)
2
d dE 2 4 MDM
dE
r
f
line-of-sight
where the adimensional quantity J encodes the astrophysical uncertainty.

When observing a

region with angular size the factor J d gets replaced by J = J d. For = 103
centered around the galactic center one has J = 13.5 for the isothermal DM profile, J = 1380
for the NFW profile, J = 3830 for the Moore profile.
3.2. Results
Fig. 3 shows the predicted energy spectrum of the flux of photons produced by MDM annihilations. It somewhat differs from the analogous figure in [2] because we more precisely computed
the photon spectrum. We use the values of MDM and v listed in Eq. (1); they are around
the present experimental sensitivities [17]. We assumed realistic detector parameters: an energy
resolution of 15%, and that the region observed has angular size = 103 centered around the
galactic center. It can be rescaled to any other search strategy. For example, the H.E.S.S. [18] experiment has a much better angular resolution, that allows it to resolve the black hole at the center
of our galaxy. We do not here address which observational strategy maximizes the sensitivity to
MDM photons: focus on the black hole or subtract it; focus on regions of the galaxy far from the
center that have less astrophysical sources or on nearby galaxies. These choices only affect J
and not the energy spectrum of MDM photons. The scalar eptaplet with mass MDM 25 TeV
provides an energy spectrum that resembles the one emitted by the galactic center.
4. Positrons
4.1. Astrophysics
The positron flux per unit energy from DM annihilations in any point in space and time is
given by e+ (t, x , E) = ve+ f/4 (units 1/GeV cm2 s sr) where ve+ is the positron velocity (es-
210
sentially equal to c in the regimes of our interest) and the positron number density per unit energy,
f (t, x , E) = dNe+ /dE, obeys the diffusion-loss equation:

f
K(E) 2 f
b(E)f = Q,
(10)
t
E
with diffusion coefficient K(E) = K0 (E/GeV) and energy loss coefficient b(E) = E 2 /
(GeV E ) with E = 1016 s. They respectively describe transport through the turbulent magnetic fields and energy loss due to synchrotron radiation and inverse Compton scattering on
CMB photons and on infrared galactic starlight. Eq. (10) is solved in a diffusive region with the
shape of a solid flat cylinder that sandwiches the galactic plane, with height 2L in the z direction
and radius R = 20 kpc in the r direction [19]. The location of the solar system corresponds to
x = (r , z ) = (8.5 kpc, 0). The boundary conditions impose that the positron density f vanishes on the surface of the cylinder, outside of which positrons freely propagate and escape.
Values of the propagation parameters , K0 and L are deduced from a variety of cosmic ray data
and modelizations. We adopt the sets discussed in [20]:
Model
K0 in kpc2 /Myr
min (M2) 0.55 0.00595

med
0.70 0.0112
max (M1) 0.46 0.0765
L in kpc
1
4
15
(11)
Finally, the source term due to DM DM annihilations in each point of the halo with DM
density (
x ) is

2

dNek+
1
Q=
(12)
finj ,
finj =
vk
,
2 MDM
dE
k
where k runs over all the channels with positrons in the final state, with the respective thermal
averaged cross sections v.
One assumes steady state conditions, so that the first term of Eq. (10) vanishes, and the solution for the positron flux at Earth can be written in a useful semi-analytical form [20,21]:

M
DM

v e + 1 2
dE finj (E ) I D (E, E ) ,
(E, r ) = B
4b(E) 2 MDM
e+
(13)
where B 1 is an overall boost factor discussed below, D (E, E ) is the diffusion length from
energy E to energy E:

(E/GeV)1 (E /GeV)1
2D = 4K0 E
(14)
1
and the adimensional halo function I (D ) [20] fully encodes the galactic astrophysics and is
independent on the particle physics model. Its possible shapes are plotted in Fig. 4 for the set of
DM density profiles and positron propagation parameters that we consider.3 From the numerical
3 Formally, one finds that
I (D ) =

n,m=1

2 2

D
m 2
n
J0 (n r /R) sin(m/2) exp
+
Rn,m ,
2L
R
4
(15)
211
Fig. 4. Left: The uncertain halo function I (D ) of Eq. (13) that encodes the astrophysics of DM DM annihilations into
positrons and their propagation up to the Earth. The diffusion length is related to energy losses as in Eq. (14). Right:
The p astrophysical function R(T ) of Eq. (23), computed under different assumptions. In both cases, the dashed (solid)
[dotted] bands assumes the min (med) [max] propagation configuration of Eqs. (11) and (22), respectively. Each band
contains 3 lines, that correspond to the isothermal (red lower lines), NFW (blue middle lines) and Moore (green upper
lines) DM density profiles. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to
the web version of this article.)
computation we find that I (D ) is well reproduced with a nave fit function of the form

b1
( b2 )2
I (D ) = a0 + a1 tanh
a2 exp
+ a3 ,
c1
c2
(17)
with = log10 D /kpc and the coefficients reported in Table 2.

The main features of the halo function can be understood as follows. It is defined such that
I 1 at D
r , L: all positrons created close enough to the Earth can reach it without loosing
energy. I can exhibit a peak at D r if positrons produced by DM DM annihilations around
the galactic center are dominant and reach us after loosing some energy. If instead the diffusive
region is thin we only receive positrons produced within a region L around the Earth: e.g., the
dashed lines are for L 1 kpc.
4.2. Results
Unlike photons, where we look at the central cuspy region of the galactic DM halo (such that
the photon flux can be very large but also very uncertain), positrons do not have directionality.
where Ji is the Bessel function of the first kind (cylindrical harmonic) of order i, n is the nth zero of the i = 0 function
and Rn,m corresponds to the Bessel- and Fourier-transform of (/ )2 :
Rn,m =
2
J1 (n )2 R 2
R
dr rJ0 (n r/R)
0
1
L

+L
(r, z) 2
dz sin(m z/2L)
.

(16)
212
Table 2
Fit parameters for the expression in Eq. (17) for the halo function I (D ) that encodes the astrophysics of the production
density and the propagation of positrons in the galactic halo
Halo model
Propagation
a0
a1
a2
a3
b1
b2
c1
c2
NFW
min (M2)
med
max (M1)
0.500
0.502
0.502
0.774
0.621
0.756
0.448
0.688
1.533
0.649
0.806
0.672
0.096
0.891
1.205
192.8
0.721
0.799
0.211
0.143
0.155
33.88
0.071
0.067
Moore
min (M2)
med
max (M1)
0.500
0.503
0.503
0.791
0.826
0.889
0.448
0.938
1.778
0.636
0.610
0.571
0.096
0.912
1.230
192.8
0.762
0.811
0.211
0.162
0.135
33.86
0.055
0.061
isoT
min (M2)
med
max (M1)
0.500
0.495
0.499
0.903
0.629
0.695
0.449
0.137
0.677
0.557
0.784
0.721
0.096
0.766
1.092
192.8
0.550
0.951
0.210
0.193
0.379
33.91
0.296
0.231
Especially at energies just below the DM mass M, positrons are dominantly produced close to
the solar system, so that their flux is less affected by uncertainties in the DM profile.
However, the DM density in our galaxy might have local clumps that would enhance the
positron flux by an unknown boost factor B 1. We take it as energy independent and with
a value of B = 10. This is a simplifying (but widely used) assumption. Detailed recent studies
[2225] find that a certain energy dependence can be present, subject to the precise choices of
the astrophysical parameters. Within the uncertainty, these studies also converge towards small
values of B (except for extreme scenarios), with B = 10 still allowed.
The results are shown in term of the energy spectrum of the positron flux at Earth from
DM DM annihilations, computed for several astrophysical models and compared with the expected background. The latter, believed to be mainly due to supernova explosions, is obtained
bkg
by CR simulations [30] and can be parameterized as described in [31] by e+ = 4.5E 0.7 /(1 +
650E 2.3 + 1500E 4.2 ) for positron and
bkg
bkg,prim
e = e
bkg,sec
+ e
= 0.16E 1.1 / 1 + 11E 0.9 + 3.2E 2.15

+ 0.70E 0.7 / 1 + 110E 1.5 + 580E 4.2
for electrons, with E always in units of GeV. In Fig. 5 we actually plot the positron fraction,
e+ /(e+ + e ), as the flux e of cosmic ray electrons provides a convenient normalization,
and the ratio does not depend on solar activity (see the discussion in the case of anti-protons).
We see that in the region at E MDM /3 where the signal/background ratio is maximal, the
predicted signal is quite distinctive and does not significantly depend on unknown astrophysics,
being manly generated by prompt positrons created close to the Earth.
The overall rate is however uncertain because the DM DM annihilation cross-sections vary by
about one order of magnitude within the narrow range of MDM that reproduces the cosmological
DM density and because of the possible enhancement coming from the boost factor B. We here
assumed the sample values of Eqs. (1) and a boost factor: B = 10. With this choice, the excess
starts to appear just around the maximal energy probed by current experiments, and would give
a clear signal in the PAMELA experiment [5].
A signal is still present even for B = 1; however it appears only at higher energies, around
the peaks of the signal curves in Fig. 5 at E MDM /3 TeV. This region of energies will be
213
Fig. 5. Positron fraction, Ne+ /(Ne+ + Ne ), generated by DMDM annihilations. The red (upper) curves refer to the
5-plet MDM candidate (Eq. (1b)). The blue (lower) ones to the 3-plet (Eq. (1a)). In the left plot we fix the NFW halo
profile and vary the e+ propagation model. In the right plot we fix the med propagation model and vary the DM halo
profile. We assumed a boost factor B = 10: notice that a signal above the background is present even for B = 1, for the
5-plet case. The experimental data points are taken from [2629]. (For interpretation of the references to color in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
hopefully explored by the future AMS-02 experiment [6].4 Finally, we recall that the scalar triplet
MDM predicts a signal about 16 times higher than the fermion triplet MDM.
4.3. Synchrotron radiation
Another possible DM signal is the synchrotron radiation from e produced in DM DM annihilations. For simplicity, since astrophysics is anyhow significantly uncertain, we neglect the
time and space dependence of f in the diffusion equation (10): this amounts to assume that e
are trapped enough in the galaxy bulge that they loose there most of the energy, consequently
maximizing the synchrotron signal. Solving Eq. (10) the e energy spectrum is then given by
1
f (E) =
b(E)
dE Q(E ),
E = xMDM ,
(18)
and the energy spectrum of synchrotron radiation is then given by

3 1

dP
3e B
dx f (E = xMDM )F r/x 2 ,
dE
2 me
(19)
4 The experimental limitation on maximal energies arises because the energy is measured from deflection of charged
particles in the magnetic field of the spectrometer and above a certain threshold positrons are shadowed by the abundant
spillover protons [32]. The PAMELA experiment should soon release data about e+ and p up to about 190 GeV and 270
GeV respectively, while AMS-02 might reach the TeV region.
214

where F (x) x x K5/3 ( ) d x 1/3 ex is the synchrotron function. The adimensional factor
2
encodes the dependence on E , on the DM mass MDM and on asr = 2m3e E /3eBMDM
trophysics trough the uncertain magnetic field B. Numerically r 104 for a magnetic field
B = G, MDM = 1 TeV and E = 10 GHz. The integral in Eq. (19) is easily computed numerically; we here just notice that one roughly has f (x) 1/x 2 due to the E 2 dependence of b(E)
1/2
and consequently dP /dE E .
WMAP observed of an apparent excess of radiowaves with 20 GHz from the galactic center, that might be due to synchrotron radiation from e produced in DM DM annihilations [33].
The angular dependence of the signal is precisely measured; however it depends on astrophysical issues: the DM density profile and the e propagation model. A cusped halo model allows
to fit the anomaly. The energy dependence of the signal has not been precisely measured and the
MDM prediction is compatible with the WMAP haze. Furthermore for the MDM values of v
and of MDM , and for reasonable values of the magnetic field B, the intensity is comparable with
the WMAP haze [33].
5. Anti-protons
5.1. Astrophysics
The propagation of anti-protons through the galaxy is described by a diffusion equation
analogous to the one for positrons. Again, the number density of anti-protons per unit energy
f (t, x , T ) = dNp /dT vanishes on the surface of the cylinder at z = L and r = R. T = E mp
is the p kinetic energy, conveniently used instead of the total energy E (a distinction which will
not be particularly relevant for our purposes as we look at energies much larger than the proton
mass mp ). Since mp me we can neglect the energy loss term, and the diffusion equation for f
is

f
K(T ) 2 f +
sign(z)f Vconv = Q 2h(z)ann f,
(20)
t
z
where:
The pure diffusion term can again be written as K(T ) = K0 (p/GeV) , where p =
(T 2 + 2mp T )1/2 and = vp /c = (1 m2p /(T + mp )2 )1/2 are the anti-proton momentum
and velocity. and K0 are given in Eq. (22).
The Vconv term corresponds to a convective wind, assumed to be constant and directed outward from the galactic plane, that tends to push away p with energy T 10mp . Its value is
given in Eq. (22).
The source term Q due to DM DM annihilations has a form fully analogous to Eq. (12), with
E now formally replaced by T .
The last term in Eq. (20) describes the annihilations of p on interstellar protons in the galactic
plane (with a thickness of h = 0.1 kpc
L) with rate ann = (nH + 42/3 nHe )pann
p vp , where
nH 1/cm3 is the hydrogen density, nHe 0.07nH is the Helium density (the factor 42/3
accounting for the different geometrical cross section in an effective way) and pann
p is given
by [21,34]

+ 0.0115T 0.774 0.984T 0.0151 ) mbarn, for T < 15.5 GeV, (21)
ann
pp = 661(1
0.5
mbarn,
for T 15.5 GeV.
36T
215
We neglect the effect of tertiary anti-protons. This refers to primary p after they have
undergone non-annihilating interactions on the matter in the galactic disk, losing part of
their energy. The effect can be included in terms of an absorption term analogous to the
last term of Eq. (20) but proportional to a different non-ann , and of a re-injection term Qtert
proportional to the integrated cross section over f (T ). The full solution of the resulting
integro-differential equation can be found in [35]. The effect of tertiaries is mainly relevant
at low energies T few GeV.
The set of propagation parameters in the case for anti-protons that we adopt has been deduced
in [36] from a variety of cosmic ray data and modelization (see [37]):
K0 in kpc2 /Myr
Model
min
med
max
0.85 0.0016
0.70 0.0112
0.46 0.0765
L in kpc
Vconv in km/s
1
4
15
13.5
12
5
(22)
Assuming steady state conditions the first term in the diffusion equation vanishes, and the
equation can be solved analytically [3739]. In the no-tertiaries approximation that we adopt,
the solution for the anti-proton flux at the position of the Earth p (T , r ) = vp /(4)f acquires
a simple factorized form (see, e.g., [36])

1
dNpk
vp
2
p (T , r ) = B
(23)
R(T )
vk
,
4 MDM
2
dT
k
where B is the boost factor. The k index runs over all the annihilation channels with anti-protons
in the final state, with the respective cross sections; this part contains the particle physics input.
The function R(T ) encodes all the astrophysics and is plotted in Fig. 4 for various halo and
propagation models.5 From the numerical computation we find that R(T ) is well reproduced
with a fit function of the form

log10 R(T )/Myr = a0 + a1 + a2 2 + a3 3 + a4 4 ,
(26)
with = log10 T /GeV and the coefficients reported in Table 3.
Finally, for completeness we also take into account the average solar modulation effect, although it is relevant only for non-relativistic p:
the solar wind decreases the kinetic energy T and
momentum p of charged cosmic rays such that the energy spectrum dp
/dT of anti-protons
5 Formally, it is given by
R(T ) =

n=1

yn (L)
r
Vconv L
J0 n
exp
,
R
2K(T ) An sinh(Sn L/2)
(24)
with
yn (Z) =
4
J12 (n )R 2
R
0
Z
dz exp
dr rJ0 (n r/R)
0

(r, z) 2
Vconv (Z z)
.
sinh Sn (Z z)/2
2K(T )

(25)
2 /K(T )2 + 4 2 /R 2 )1/2 encode the

The coefficients An = 2hann + Vconv + K(T )Sn coth(Sn L/2) with Sn = (Vconv
n
effects of diffusion.
216
Table 3
Fit parameters for the expression in Eq. (26) for the propagation function R(T ) that encodes the astrophysics of the
production density and the propagation of anti-protons in the galactic halo
Halo model
Propagation
a0
a1
a2
a3
a4
NFW
min
med
max
0.913
1.860
2.740
0.601
0.517
0.127
0.309
0.293
0.113
0.036
0.0089
0.0169
0.0122
0.0070
0.0009
Moore
min
med
max
0.894
1.870
2.810
0.606
0.553
0.119
0.299
0.289
0.117
0.041
0.0149
0.0181
0.0128
0.0079
0.0010
isoT
min
med
max
0.927
1.790
2.480
0.590
0.399
0.156
0.315
0.315
0.098
0.0319
0.0162
0.0132
0.0115
0.0031
0.0005
that reach the Earth with energy T and momentum p is approximatively related to their energy
spectrum in the interstellar medium, dp /dT , as [40]
p 2 dp
dp
= 2
,
dT
p dT
T = T + |Ze|F ,
p 2 = 2mp T + T 2 .
(27)
The so-called Fisk potential F parameterizes in this effective formalism the kinetic energy loss.
A value of F = 0.5 GV is characteristic of a minimum of the solar cyclic activity, corresponding
to the period in which most of the observations have been done in the second half of the 90s and
are being done now.
5.2. Results
Fig. 6 shows the results for final p flux at earth (at the top of the atmosphere) from DM DM
annihilations, compared to the background and to the currently available experimental data. The
background is borrowed from the detailed analysis in [46], the results of which we find to be well
reproduced by a fitting function of the form
bkg
log10 p
= 1.64 + 0.07 2 0.02 3 + 0.028 4 ,
with = log10 T /GeV. We take for definiteness the flux corresponding to the med propagation
parameters; see [46] for a complete discussion on the effects of changing that. Particularly favorable is the fact that the uncertainty in the estimates of the background is quite narrow around
10100 GeV, where results are expected soon.
The shape of the spectrum appears to be relatively independent from the propagation model
(Fig. 6(a)) and the halo profile (Fig. 6(b)). Different p propagation models instead change the
overall signal rate by about one orders of magnitude, consistently with previous results in the
literature [35,36,46]. Different halo profiles with fixed make only a difference of a factor of
a few, which can be interpreted in terms of the fact that the signal is not dominated by the far
galactic center region, where profiles differ the most.
As for the case of the positrons, we have plotted the results assuming a modest and energy
independent boost factor B = 10 (in principle this boost factor and its properties are different
from those for positrons [24]). In this case the excesses appear in the range of energies soon
to be explored. Even for a boost factor B = 1 a signal is present above the background for most
217
Fig. 6. The antiproton flux generated by DM DM annihilations for the case of the fermion 3-plet (blue, higher) and 5-plet
(red, lower) MDM candidates, compared with the astrophysical p background (shaded area) and experimental data. In
the left plot we fix the NFW halo profile and vary the p propagation model. In the right plot we fix the med propagation
model and vary the DM density profile. The compilation of data point includes results from the BESS [41], MASS [42],
CAPRICE [43] and AMS-01 [44] experiments, as well as the preliminary results from the PAMELA experiment [45].
A boost factor B = 10 is assumed, but a signal is present even for B = 1. (For interpretation of the references to color in
this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
choices of parameters, although it would show at higher energies. Again the scalar triplet predicts
a signal about 16 times larger than the fermion triplet.
6. Conclusions
We computed the indirect detection signatures (fluxes of positrons, anti-protons, and synchrotron radiation) as predicted by Minimal Dark Matter. We focused on three particularly
interesting MDM candidates: the automatically stable ermion 5-plet with hypercharge Y = 0;
the wino-like fermion 3-plet with Y = 0; its scalar analogous. We fixed the MDM masses and
annihilation cross sections to the central values predicted in terms of the measured cosmological
abundance. These values are listed in Eq. (1). Since MDM predicts multi-TeV masses and the
Sommerfeld electroweak non-perturbative enhancement of the DMDM annihilation cross sections into W + W , , Z, ZZ, the signals for indirect detection turn out to be distinctive,
reaching multi-TeV energies and being above the astrophysical background. The spectral shapes
are characteristic of DM DM annihilations into SM vectors.
We recomputed independently most of the ingredients that are necessary for the analysis,
finding agreement with results in the literature when these are available. The spectra at production
were recomputed taking into account spin correlations among SM vectors, by implementing the
MDM interactions in M AD G RAPH [9] or by a custom-built MC routine and hadronizing the
resulting Monte Carlo events with P YTHIA [10]. The propagation diffusion-loss equation for
positrons and anti-protons was solved following the semi-analytic prescriptions discussed in the
literature and for a variety of propagation models and halo profiles. We offer plots (Figs. 2 and 4)
and simple fit functions for all these ingredients.
218
Fig. 3 shows the predicted photon energy spectrum.

The positron flux is shown in Fig. 5. This signal is only very mildly affected by the DM
density profile, except for multiplicative uncertainties due to the uncertain local DM density
(we assumed = 0.3 GeV/cm3 ) and due to the boost factor B 1, taken for simplicity as
energy independent. On the other hand, e+ fluxes somewhat depend on the e+ propagation model
in our galaxy; this uncertainty will be reduced by future measurements of cosmic rays and is
present only at E
MDM . Indeed we do not know if positrons produced around the galactic bulk
escape from the galaxy or reach us after loosing most of their energy (giving also an interesting
synchrotron radiation signal). On the contrary positrons produced in the region of the galaxy
close to the solar system surely reach us without loosing significant energy: such positrons with
E MDM give a detectable MDM signal even if B = 1.
The anti-proton flux is shown in Fig. 6. Different p propagation models give p fluxes that
differ by about one order of magnitude, and different DM density profiles give fluxes that differ
by about a factor 2. A detectable signal is again typical, and its energy spectrum (as predicted by
MDM) is not significantly affected by astrophysical uncertainties.
Experimental results are expected soon.
Acknowledgements
We thank Johan Alwall, Gianfranco Bertone, Torsten Bringmann, Nicolao Fornengo, Fabio
Maltoni, Michelangelo Mangano, Stephen Mrenna, Torbjrn Sjstrand, Mike Capell (AMS-02
Collaboration) and Vitaly Choutko (AMS-02 Collaboration). We also thank particularly Pierre
Brun and Julien Lavalle for many useful suggestions and discussions. We thank Alejandro Ibarra
and David Tran for spotting some typos in the first version of the manuscript. M.C. acknowledges
support from INFN under the postdoctoral grant 11067/05 at the early stages of this work.
References
[1] M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, A. Strumia, Nucl. Phys. B 753 (2006) 178, hep-ph/0512090.
[2] M. Cirelli, A. Strumia, M. Tamburini, Nucl. Phys. B 787 (2007) 152, arXiv: 0706.4071.
[3] These numbers summarize various recent global analyses of cosmological data within the CDM model that found
compatible values and uncertainties: D.N. Spergel, et al., WMAP Collaboration, astro-ph/0603449;
M. Cirelli, A. Strumia, JCAP 0612 (2006) 013, astro-ph/0607086;
M. Tegmark, et al., Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 123507, astro-ph/0608632.
[4] J. Silk, M. Srednicki, Phys. Rev. Lett. 53 (1984) 624;
J.R. Ellis, R.A. Flores, K. Freese, S. Ritz, D. Seckel, J. Silk, Phys. Lett. B 214 (1988) 403;
See also the pioneering work in J.E. Gunn, B.W. Lee, I. Lerche, D.N. Schramm, G. Steigman, Astrophys. J. 223
(1978) 10151031;
F.W. Stecker, Astrophys. J. 223 (1978) 10321036;
Ya.B. Zeldovich, A.A. Klypin, M.Yu. Khlopov, V.M. Chechetkin, Yad. Fiz. 31 (1980) 12861294, Sov. J. Nucl.
Phys. 31 (1980) 664669.
[5] P. Picozza, et al., Astropart. Phys. 27 (2007) 296, astro-ph/0608697, web page: http://pamela.roma2.infn.it/index.
php.
[6] Web page: http://ams.cern.ch.
[7] J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, M.M. Nojiri, O. Saito, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 015007, hep-ph/0407168;
J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, M.M. Nojiri, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 075014, hep-ph/0212022;
J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, M.M. Nojiri, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 031303, hep-ph/0307216;
J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, M.M. Nojiri, O. Saito, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 063528, hep-ph/0412403;
J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, O. Saito, M. Senami, Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 055004, hep-ph/0511118.
[8] D. Chang, W.-Y. Keung, Phys. Lett. B 305 (1993) 261, hep-ph/9301265;
V. Barger, W.Y. Keung, G. Shaughnessy, A. Tregre, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 095008, arXiv: 0708.1325.
219
[9] F. Maltoni, T. Stelzer, JHEP 0302 (2003) 027, hep-ph/0208156;

T. Stelzer, W.F. Long, Comput. Phys. Commun. 81 (1994) 357, hep-ph/9401258;
J. Alwall, et al., JHEP 0709 (2007) 028, arXiv: 0706.2334, web page: http://madgraph.phys.ucl.ac.be.
[10] T. Sjstrand, S. Mrenna, P. Skands, Comput. Phys. Commun., arXiv: 0710.3820, in press;
T. Sjstrand, S. Mrenna, P. Skands, JHEP 0605 (2006) 026, web page: http://www.thep.lu.se/~torbjorn/Pythia.html.
[11] L. Bergstrom, T. Bringmann, M. Eriksson, M. Gustafsson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 241301, hep-ph/0507229;
T. Bringmann, L. Bergstrom, J. Edsjo, JHEP 0801 (2008) 049, arXiv: 0710.3169.
[12] J.N. Bahcall, R.M. Soneira, Astrophys. J. Suppl. 44 (1980) 73.
[13] J. Navarro, C. Frenk, S. White, Astrophys. J. 490 (1997) 493, astro-ph/9611107.
[14] J. Diemand, B. Moore, J. Stadel, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 353 (2004) 624, astro-ph/0402267.
[15] See for instance the recent analysis in: M. Kamionkowski, S.M. Koushiappas, arXiv: 0801.3269.
[16] A. Barrau, P. Salati, G. Servant, F. Donato, J. Grain, D. Maurin, R. Taillet, Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 063507, astro-ph/
0506389.
[17] G.D. Mack, T.D. Jacques, J.F. Beacom, N.F. Bell, H. Yuksel, arXiv: 0803.0157.
[18] Web page of the H.E.S.S. project: http://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/hfm/HESS;
H.E.S.S. Collaboration, Nature 439 (2006) 695, astro-ph/0603021.
[19] The now standard two-zone diffusion model introduced in V.L. Ginzburg, Ya.M. Khazan, V.S. Ptuskin, Astrophys.
Space Sci. 68 (1980) 295314;
W.R. Webber, M.A. Lee, M. Gupta, Astrophys. J. 390 (1992) 36104.
[20] T. Delahaye, R. Lineros, F. Donato, N. Fornengo, P. Salati, arXiv: 0712.2312.
[21] J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, O. Saito, M. Senamim, Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 055004, hep-ph/0511118.
[22] V. Berezinsky, V. Dokuchaev, Y. Eroshenko, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 103003, astro-ph/0301551.
[23] J. Lavalle, J. Pochon, P. Salati, R. Taillet, astro-ph/0603796.
[24] J. Lavalle, Q. Yuan, D. Maurin, X.J. Bi, arXiv: 0709.3634.
[25] P. Brun, G. Bertone, J. Lavalle, P. Salati, R. Taillet, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 083506, arXiv: 0704.2543.
[26] HEAT Collaboration, S.W. Barwick, et al., Astrophys. J. 482 (1997) L191, astro-ph/9703192.
[27] CAPRICE Collaboration, M. Boezio, P. Carlson, T. Francke, N. Weber, et al., Astrophys. J. 532 (2000) 653669,
web page: http://www.roma2.infn.it/research/comm2/caprice.
[28] AMS-01 Collaboration, M. Aguilar, et al., Phys. Lett. B 646 (2007) 145154, astro-ph/0703154, web page: http://
ams.cern.ch/AMS/ams01_homepage.html.
[29] C. Grimani, et al., Astron. Astrophys. 392 (2002) 287294.
[30] I.V. Moskalenko, A.W. Strong, Astrophys. J. 493 (1998) 694, astro-ph/9710124.
[31] E.A. Baltz, J. Edsjo, Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 023511, astro-ph/9808243.
[32] See, e.g., [5] and P. Brun, arXiv: 0710.2458.
[33] D.P. Finkbeiner, astro-ph/0409027;
D. Hooper, D.P. Finkbeiner, G. Dobler, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 083012, arXiv: 0705.3655.
[34] L.C. Tan, L.K. Ng, J. Phys. G 9 (1983) 227.
[35] F. Donato, D. Maurin, P. Salati, A. Barrau, G. Boudoul, R. Taillet, Astrophys. J. 563 (2001) 172, astro-ph/0103150.
[36] F. Donato, N. Fornengo, D. Maurin, P. Salati, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 063501, astro-ph/0306207.
[37] D. Maurin, F. Donato, R. Taillet, P. Salati, Astrophys. J. 555 (2001) 585, astro-ph/0101231.
[38] P. Chardonnet, G. Mignola, P. Salati, R. Taillet, Phys. Lett. B 384 (1996) 161, astro-ph/9606174;
A. Bottino, F. Donato, N. Fornengo, P. Salati, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 123503, astro-ph/9804137;
See also: L. Bergstrom, J. Edsjo, P. Ullio, Astrophys. J. 526 (1999) 215, astro-ph/9902012.
[39] D. Maurin, R. Taillet, F. Donato, P. Salati, A. Barrau, G. Boudoul, astro-ph/0212111.
[40] L.J. Gleeson, W.I. Axford, Astrophys. J. 149 (1967) L115;
L.J. Gleeson, W.I. Axford, Astrophys. J. 154 (1968) 1011.
[41] BESS 95 + 97 Collaboration, S. Orito, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 10781081, astro-ph/9906426;
BESS 98 Collaboration, T. Maeno, et al., Astropart. Phys. 16 (2001) 121128, astro-ph/0010381;
BESS 2000 Collaboration, Y. Asaoka, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 051101, astro-ph/0109007.
[42] MASS 91 Collaboration, G. Basini, et al., Proceedings 26th International Cosmic Ray Conference, Salt Lake City,
USA, 1999, OG.1.1.21.
[43] CAPRICE 94 Collaboration, M. Boezio, et al., Astrophys. J. 487 (1997) 415423;
CAPRICE 98 Collaboration, M. Boezio, et al., Astrophys. J. 561 (2001) 787, astro-ph/0103513.
220
[44] AMS-01 Collaboration, M. Aguilar, et al., Phys. Rep. 366 (2002) 331405;
AMS-01 Collaboration, M. Aguilar, et al., Phys. Rep. 380 (2003) 9798, Erratum;
Data points: V. Choutko, private communication.
[45] See, e.g., P. Picozza, presentation at the Eight UCLA Symposium: Sources and Detection of Dark Matter and Dark
Energy in the Universe, 2022 February, 2008, Marina del Rey, California, USA. We make use of the measured
proton flux as well.
[46] T. Bringmann, P. Salati, Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 083006, astro-ph/0612514.

Electroweak and supersymmetric two-loop corrections

to lepton anomalous magnetic and electric
dipole moments
Tai-Fu Feng , Lin Sun, Xiu-Yi Yang
Department of Physics, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China
Received 7 January 2008; received in revised form 3 March 2008; accepted 20 March 2008
Abstract
Using the effective Lagrangian method, we analyze the electroweak corrections to the anomalous dipole
moments of lepton from some special two-loop diagrams where a closed neutralino/chargino loop is inserted
into relevant two Higgs doublet one-loop diagrams in the minimal supersymmetric extension of the standard
model with CP violation. Considering the translational invariance of loop momenta and the electromagnetic
gauge invariance, we get all dimension 6 operators and derive their coefficients. After applying equations of
motion to the external leptons, we obtain the anomalous dipole moments of lepton. The numerical results
imply that there is parameter space where the contributions to the muon anomalous dipole moments from
this sector may be significant.
PACS: 11.30.Er; 12.60.Jv; 14.80.Cp
Keywords: Magnetic and electric dipole moments; Two-loop electroweak corrections; Supersymmetry
1. Introduction
At both aspects of experiment and theory, the magnetic dipole moments (MDMs) of lepton
draw the great attention of physicists because of their obvious importance. The anomalous dipole
moments of lepton not only can be used for testing loop effect in the standard model (SM), but
also provide a potential window to detect new physics beyond the SM. The current experimental
E-mail address: fengtf@dlut.edu.cn (T.-F. Feng).

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.019
222
T.-F. Feng et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 221252
result of the muon MDM is [1,2]

a = 11 659 208 6 1010 .
exp
(1)
From the theoretical point of view, contributions to the muon MDM are generally divided into
three sectors [2,3]: QED loops, hadronic contributions and electroweak corrections. The largest
uncertainty of the SM prediction originates from the evaluation of hadronic vacuum polarization
and light-by-light corrections. Depending on which evaluation of hadronic vacuum polarization
is chosen, the differences between the SM predictions and experimental result are given as [2,3]:
a aSM = 33.2 8.8 1010 : 3.8,
exp
a aSM = 30.5 9.3 1010 : 3.3,

exp
a aSM = 28.2 8.9 1010 : 3.2,

exp
a aSM = 11.9 9.5 1010 : 1.3.

exp
(2)
For the convenience of numerical discussion, we will adopt the second value in Eq. (2). Within
three standard error deviations, this difference implies that the present experimental data can
tolerate new physics correction to the muon MDM as
2.6 1010 aNP 58.4 1010 .
(3)
In fact, the current experimental precision (6 1010 ) already puts very restrictive bounds on
new physics scenarios. In the SM, the electroweak one- and two-loop contributions amount to
19.5 1010 and 4.4 1010 , respectively. Comparing with the standard electroweak corrections, the electroweak corrections from new physics are generally suppressed by 2EW /2 , where
EW denotes the electroweak energy scale and denotes the energy scale of new physics.
Supersymmetry (SUSY) has been considered as a most prospective candidate for new physics
beyond the SM. In the minimal supersymmetric extension of the SM (MSSM) with CP conservation, the supersymmetric one-loop contribution is approximately given by
2

1L
10 100 GeV
a 13 10
(4)
tan sign(H ),
when all supersymmetric masses are assumed to equal a common mass , and tan = 21 1.
Where 1 and 2 are the absolute values of the vacuum expectation values (VEVs) of the Higgs
doublets and H denotes the -parameter in the superpotential of MSSM. It is obvious that the
supersymmetric effects can easily account for the deviation between the SM prediction and the
experimental data.
Actually, the two-loop electroweak corrections to the anomalous dipole moments of lepton
are discussed extensively in literature. Utilizing the heavy mass expansion approximation (HME)
together with the corresponding projection operator method, Ref. [4] has obtained the two-loop
standard electroweak correction to the muon MDM which eliminates some of the large logarithms that were incorrectly kept in a previous calculation [5]. Within the framework of MSSM
with CP conservation, the authors of Refs. [6,7] present the supersymmetric corrections from
some special two-loop diagrams where a close chargino (neutralino) loop or a scalar fermion
loop is inserted into those two-Higgs-doublet one-loop diagrams. Ref. [8] discusses the contributions to the muon MDM from the effective vertices H W , h0 (H0 ) which are induced
by the scalar quarks of the third generation in the CP conserving MSSM.
223
Fig. 1. Some two-loop self energy diagrams which lead to the lepton MDMs and EDMs in CP violating MSSM, the
corresponding triangle diagrams are obtained by attaching a photon in all possible ways to the internal particles. In
concrete calculation, the contributions from those mirror diagrams should be included also.
In this paper, we investigate the electroweak corrections to the anomalous dipole moments
of lepton from some special two-loop diagrams where a closed neutralino/chargino loop is inserted into relevant two Higgs doublet one-loop diagrams in the CP violating MSSM (Fig. 1).
Since the masses of those virtual fields (W , Z gauge bosons, neutral and charged Higgs, as
well as neutralinos and charginos) are much heavier than the muon mass m , we can apply the
effective Lagrangian method to get the anomalous dipole moments of lepton. After integrating
out the heavy freedoms mentioned above and then matching between the effective theory and
the full theory, we derive the relevant higher dimension operators as well as the corresponding
Wilson coefficients. The effective Lagrangian method has been adopted to calculate the two-loop
supersymmetric corrections to the branching ratio of b s [9], neutron EDM [10] and lepton
MDMs and EDMs [11]. In concrete calculation, we assume that all external leptons as well as
photon are off-shell, then expand the amplitude of corresponding triangle diagrams according
to the external momenta of leptons and photon. Using loop momentum translational invariance,
we formulate the sum of amplitude from those triangle diagrams which correspond to the corresponding self-energy in the form which explicitly satisfies the Ward identity required by the
QED gauge symmetry. Then we can get all dimension 6 operators together with their coefficients.
After the equations of motion are applied to external leptons, higher dimensional operators, such
as dimension 8 operators, also contribute to the muon MDM and the electron EDM in principle.
However, the contributions of dimension 8 operators contain an additional suppression factor
m2l /2 comparing with that of dimension 6 operators, where ml is the mass of lepton. Setting
100 GeV, one obtains easily that this suppression factor is about 106 for the muon lepton.
224
Under current experimental precision, it implies that the contributions of all higher dimension
operators (D 8) can be neglected safely.
We adopt the naive dimensional regularization with the anticommuting 5 scheme, where
there is no distinction between the first 4 dimensions and the remaining D 4 dimensions. Since
the bare effective Lagrangian contains the ultraviolet divergence which is induced by divergent
subdiagrams, we give the renormalized results in the on-mass-shell scheme [12]. Additional, we
adopt the nonlinear R gauge with = 1 for simplification [13]. This special gauge-fixing term
guarantees explicit electromagnetic gauge invariance throughout the calculation, not just at the
end because the choice of gauge-fixing term eliminates the W G vertex in the Lagrangian.
Within the framework of CP violating MSSM, the renormalization-group improved loop effects of soft CP violating Yukawa interactions related to scalar quarks of the third generation
cause the strong mixing among CP-even and CP-odd neutral Higgs. The linear expansions of the
Higgs doublet H 1 and H 2 around the ground state are generally written as

1

(1 + 0 + ia1 )
2+
1
2
i
2
,
=
e
,
H
H1 =
(5)
1 (2 + 0 + ia2 )
2
2
where is their relative phase. In the weak basis

2 may be expressed as
mass-squared matrix MH
2
MH
=
(M2S )11
(M2S )12
(M2S )12
(M2S )22
{10 , 20 , a
= sin a1 + cos a2 }, the neutral
1
2
cos (MSP )12
sin1 (M2SP )21 .
sin 1cos (M2SP )12
(6)
sin1 (M2SP )21

Here, the concrete expressions of (M2S )ij , (M2SP )ij can be found in the literature [14]. Since the
2 is symmetric, we can diagonalize it by an orthogonal rotation Z as:
Higgs mass matrix MH
H
1
2
cos (MSP )12

T
2
MH
ZH = diag m2h1 , m2h2 , m2h3 .
ZH
(7)
Because of this strong mixing among the neutral Higgs, the couplings involving neutral Higgs are
modified drastically comparing with that in CP conservating MSSM. Certainly, some diagrams
in Fig. 1 have been discussed in Ref. [7] where the authors apply the projecting operators to get
the lepton MDMs (Eqs. (8)(10) in Ref. [7]) within the framework of CP conservating MSSM.
On the other hand, the fermion electric dipole moments (EDMs) also offer a powerful probe
for new physics beyond the Standard Model (SM). In the SM, the EDMs of leptons are fully
induced by the CP phase of the CabibboKobayashiMaskawa (CKM) matrix elements and they
are predicted to be much smaller [15] than the present experimental precision [16,17] and beyond
the reach of experiments in the near future. As for the MSSM, there are many new sources of the
CP violation that can result in larger contributions to the EDMs of electron and neutron [18,19].
Taking the CP phases with a natural size of O(1), and the supersymmetry mass spectra at the
TeV range, we can find that the theoretical predictions on the electron and neutron EDMs at oneloop level already exceed the present experimental upper bound. In order to make the theoretical
prediction consistent with the experimental data, one can generally adopt three approaches. One
possibility is to make the CP phases sufficiently small, i.e. 102 [18]. One can also assume
a mass suppression by making the supersymmetry spectra heavy, i.e. in the several TeV range
[19], or invoke a cancellation among the different contributions to the fermion EDMs [20]. Since
the lepton EDM is an interesting topic in both theoretical and experimental aspects, we as well
present the lepton EDM by keeping all possible CP violating phases.
225
This paper is composed by the sections as follows. In Section 2, we introduce the effective Lagrangian method and our notations. Then we will demonstrate how to obtain the supersymmetric
two-loop corrections to the lepton MDMs and EDMs. Section 3 is devoted to the numerical analysis and discussion. In Section 4, we give our conclusion. Some tedious formulae are collected
in Appendix A.
2. Notations and two-loop supersymmetric corrections
The lepton MDMs and EDMs can actually be expressed as the operators
e
lF ,
al l
4ml
i
LEDM = dl l
5 lF .
2
LMDM =
(8)
Here, = i[ , ]/2, l denotes the lepton fermion, F is the electromagnetic field strength,
ml is the lepton mass and e represents the electric charge, respectively. Note that the lepton here
is on-shell.
In fact, it is convenient to get the corrections from loop diagrams to lepton MDMs and EDMs
in terms of the effective Lagrangian method, if the masses of internal lines are much heavier
than the external lepton mass. Assuming external leptons as well as photon are all off-shell, we
expand the amplitude of the corresponding triangle diagrams according to the external momenta
of leptons and photon. After matching between the effective theory and the full theory, we can
get all high dimension operators together with their coefficients. As discussed in Section 1, it is
enough to retain only those dimension 6 operators in later calculations:
O1 =
O2 =
O3 =
O4 =
O5 =
O6 =
1
/ )3 l,
l(iD
(4)2
eQf
(iD l) F l,
(4)2
eQf
(iD l),
lF
(4)2

eQf
l F l,
(4)2
ml
/ )2 l,
l(iD
(4)2
eQf ml
l,
lF
(4)2
(9)
with D = + ieA and = (1 5 )/2. When the equations of motion are applied to the
actually contribute to the

incoming and outgoing leptons separately, only the operators O2,3,6
MDMs and EDMs of leptons. We will only present the Wilson coefficients of the operators
O2,3,6
in the effective Lagrangian in our following narration because of the reason mentioned
above.
If the full theory is invariant under the combined transformation of charge conjugation, parity
and time reversal (CPT), the induced effective theory preserves the symmetry after the heavy
freedoms are integrated out. The fact implies the Wilson coefficients of the operators O2,3,6
226
satisfying the relations

C2 = C3 ,
C6+ = C6 ,
(10)
where Ci (i = 1, 2, . . . , 6) represent the Wilson coefficients of the corresponding operators Oi

in the effective Lagrangian. After applying the equations of motion to the external leptons, we
find that the concerned terms in the effective Lagrangian are transformed into
C2 O2 + C2 O3 + C6+ O6+ + C6+ O6

C2+ + C2 + C6+ O6+ + C2+ + C2 + C6+ O6

eQf ml
+
C2 + C2 + C6+ l
=
l + i C2+ + C2 + C6+ l
5 l F . (11)
2
(4)
Here,
( ) denotes the operation to take the real part of a complex number, and ( ) denotes
the operation to take the imaginary part of a complex number. Applying Eqs. (8) and (11), we
finally get

4Qf m2l +
C2 + C2 + C6+ ,
2
(4)

2eQf ml +
C2 + C2 + C6+ .
dl =
2
(4)
al =
(12)
In other words, the MDM of lepton is proportional to real part of the effective coupling C2+ +
C2 + C6+ , as well as the EDM of lepton is proportional to imaginary part of the effective
coupling C2+ + C2 + C6+ .
Using the effective Lagrangian method, we present the one-loop supersymmetric contribution
to muon MDM in [11] which coincides with the previous result in literature. Since the complication of analysis at two-loop order, we will adopt below a terminology where, for example,
the hk contribution means the sum of amplitude from those triangle diagrams (indeed three
triangles bound together), in which a closed fermion (chargino/neutralino) loop is attached to
the virtual Higgs and photon fields with a real photon attached in all possible ways to the internal lines. Because the sum of amplitude from those triangle diagrams corresponding to each
self-energy obviously respects the Ward identity requested by QED gauge symmetry, we can
calculate the contributions of all the self-energies separately. Taking the same steps which
we did in our earlier works [911], we obtain the effective Lagrangian that originates from the
self energy diagrams in Fig. 1. In the bare effective Lagrangian from the WW and ZZ contributions, the ultraviolet divergence caused by divergent subdiagrams can be subtracted safely
in on-mass-shell scheme [12]. Now, we present the effective Lagrangian corresponding to the
diagrams in Fig. 1 respectively.
2.1. The effective Lagrangian from hk (k = 1, 2, 3) and G0 sector
As a closed chargino loop is attached to the virtual neutral Higgs and photon fields, a real
photon can be emitted from either the virtual lepton or the virtual charginos in the self energy
diagram. When a real photon is emitted from the virtual charginos, the corresponding triangle
diagrams belong to the typical two-loop BarZee-type diagrams [21]. Within the framework of
CP violating MSSM, the contributions from two-loop BarZee-type diagrams to the EDMs of
227
those light fermions are discussed extensively in literature [22]. When a real photon is attached
to the internal standard fermion, the correction from corresponding triangle diagram to the effective Lagrangian is zero because of the Furry theorem, this point is also verified through a strict
analysis. The corresponding effective Lagrangian from this sector is written as

xi 1/2

L hk =
T1 (xhk , x , x ) O6+ + O6
2
2
2
i
i
x
2 2(4) sw cos
w
x 1/2

k i
T2 (xhk , x , x ) O6+ O6
+ i Hii
i
i
xw

k xi 1/2
e4 (ZH )3k tan

T2 (xhk , x , x ) O6+ + O6
Aii
2
2
2
i
i
xw
2 2(4) sw
x 1/2

+
k i

T1 (xhk , x , x ) O6 O6
i Aii
i
i
xw
e4 (ZH )1k
k
Hii
(13)
with

k
Hij
= UR i1 (UL )2j (ZH )1k + UR i2 (UL )1j (ZH )2k ,

Akij = UR i1 (UL )2j sin + UR i2 (UL )1j cos (ZH )3k
(i, j = 1, 2).
(14)
Where the two unitary matrices UL,R denote the left- and right-mixing matrices of charginos,
denotes the energy scale of new physics, and xi = m2i /2 respectively. We adopt the abbreviations: cw = cos w , sw = sin w , where w is the Weinberg angle. The concrete expressions of
T1,2 can be found in Appendix A.
Accordingly, the lepton MDMs and EDMs from hk sector are written as
h
al k
hk
dl

2e4 Qf m2l (ZH )1k k xi 1/2
Hii
=
T1 (xhk , x , x )
i
i
xw
(4)4 sw2 2 cos
4

2e Qf m2l (ZH )3k tan k xi 1/2
A
T2 (xhk , x , x ),
ii
i
i
xw
(4)4 sw2 2

k xi 1/2
e5 Qf ml (ZH )1k
=
T2 (xhk , x , x )
Hii
i
i
xw
2(4)4 sw2 2 cos

e5 Qf ml (ZH )3k tan k xi 1/2
Aii
T1 (xhk , x , x ),
i
i
xw
2(4)4 sw2 2
(15)
which are enhanced by large tan . Note here that the corrections from this sector to the MDM of
k and Ak , and the
lepton depend on a linear combination of real parts of the effective couplings Hii
ii
corrections from this sector to the EDM of lepton depend on a linear combination of imaginary
k and Ak . In the limit x x , the above expressions can
parts of the effective couplings Hii
hk
i
ii
be simplified as
228
h
al k

2e4 Qf m2l (ZH )1k k xi 1/2
Hii
=
lim
1 (x , x )
i
j
x x x
xw
(4)4 sw2 2 cos
j
j
i
4

2e Qf m2l (ZH )3k tan k xi 1/2
Aii
xw
(4)4 sw2 2

ln xhk
+ lim
1 (x , x ) ,
i
j
x x x
x

k xi 1/2 ln xhk
e5 Qf ml (ZH )1k
hk
dl =
Hii
xw
x
2(4)4 sw2 2 cos
i
+
lim
x x

e5 Qf ml (ZH )3k tan k xi 1/2
Aii
lim
x x
xw
2(4)4 sw2 2
j
i
1 (x , x )
i
j
x
j
1 (x , x ).
i
j
x
(16)
Similarly, we can formulate the corrections from G0 sector to the effective Lagrangian as
x 1/2

e4
i
L G =
T2 (xz , x , x ) O6+ + O6
(Bii )
i
i
xw
2 2(4)2 sw2 2

x 1/2

i
T1 (xz , x , x ) O6+ O6 ,
i(Bii )
i
i
xw
(17)
with

Bij = UR i1 (UL )2j cos + UR i2 (UL )1j sin
(i, j = 1, 2).
(18)
Correspondingly, the corrections to the lepton MDMs and EDMs from this sector are:
4
x 1/2
2e Qf m2l
i
G
(Bii )
T2 (xz , x , x ),
al =
i
i
xw
(4)4 sw2 2

x 1/2
e5 Qf ml
G
i
dl =
(Bii )
T1 (xz , x , x ).
i
i
xw
2(4)4 sw2 2
(19)
The corrections from this sector to the MDM of lepton are proportional to real parts of the
effective couplings Bii , and the corrections from this sector to the EDM of lepton are proportional
to imaginary parts of the effective couplings Bii , separately. In the limit x xz , we have
i
al
x 1/2

2e4 Qf m2l
ln xz
i
, x ) ,
(B
)
+
lim
(x
ii
1
i
j
xw
x x x x
(4)4 sw2 2
i
x 1/2
e5 Qf ml
i
G
dl =
(Bii )
lim
1 (x , x ).
i
j
x x x
xw
2(4)4 sw2 2
j
j
i
(20)
Using the concrete expression of 1 (x, y) presented in Appendix A, one can verify easily that
the corrections to the lepton MDMs and EDMs from the sectors are suppressed by the masses of
charginos as m mhk , mz (i = 1, 2).
i
229
2.2. The effective Lagrangian from Zhk (ZG0 ) sector

As a closed chargino loop is attached to the virtual Higgs and Z gauge boson fields, a real
photon can be attached to either the virtual lepton or the virtual charginos in the self energy
diagram. When a real photon is attached to the virtual lepton, the corresponding amplitude only
modifies the Wilson coefficients of the operators O5 in the effective Lagrangian after the heavy
freedoms are integrated out. In other words, this triangle diagram does not contribute to the lepton
MDMs and EDMs. A real photon can be only attached to the virtual lepton as the closed loop
is composed of neutralinos, the corresponding triangle diagram does not affect the theoretical
predictions on the lepton MDMs and EDMs for the same reason. Considering the points above,
we formulate the contributions from Zh0 sector to the effective Lagrangian as

xj 1/2
Z
e4 (ZH )1k
2
LZhk =
(4 + 2 ln x )
T 2Qf sw
2 Q 2 cos f
j
xw
16 2(4)2 sw4 cw
f

k L
ijR O6+ + O6
0,1 (xz , xhk ) + F1 (xz , xhk , x , x )
Hj i ij + Hjk,
i
i
j
x 1/2

j
+i
2(ln x ln x )0,1 (xz , xhk ) + F1 (xz , xhk , x , x )
i
j
i
j
xw

k L
+
R
+ F2 (xz , xhk , x , x ) Hj i ij Hjk,
i ij O6 O6
j
Z
e4 (ZH )3k tan
Tf
2
4
2
2
16 2(4) sw cw Qf
2Qf sw2
x
xw
1/2
2(2 + ln x )
j

+
R
0,1 (xz , xhk ) + F1 (xz , xhk , x , x ) Akj i ijL + Ak,
j i ij O6 O6
i
j
x 1/2

j
+
2(ln x ln x )0,1 (xz , xhk ) + F1 (xz , xhk , x , x )
i
j
i
j
xw

+
R
+
+ F2 (xz , xhk , x , x )
Akj i ijL Ak,
j i ij O6 + O6
j
(21)
with

ijL = 2ij cos 2w + UL i1 (UL )1j ,

ijR = 2ij cos 2w + UR i1 (UR )1j (i, j = 1, 2),
(22)
where the concrete expressions of the functions i,j (x1 , x2 ), F1,2 (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ) are listed in Appendix A. Additional, TfZ is the isospin of lepton, and Qf is the electric charge of lepton,
respectively. Using Eq. (21), we get the corrections to the lepton MDMs and EDMs from Zhk
sector as

xj 1/2
Z
e4 m2l (ZH )1k
alZhk =
2(2 + ln x )i,j (xz , xhk )
Tf 2Qf sw2
2 2 cos
j
xw
4 2(4)4 sw4 cw
k L
k, R
+ F1 (xz , xhk , x , x )
Hj i ij + Hj i ij
i
j

2
4
xj 1/2
e ml (ZH )3k tan Z
2
+
T 2Qf sw
2(ln x ln x )0,1 (xz , xhk )
2 2 f
i
j
xw
4 2(4)4 sw4 cw
230

R
+ F1 (xz , xhk , x , x ) + F2 (xz , xhk , x , x )
Akj i ijL Ak,
j i ij ,
i
Zh
dl k
e5 ml (ZH )1k
=
2 2 cos
8 2(4)4 sw4 cw
TfZ
2Qf sw2
x
1/2
2(ln x ln x )
xw

0,1 (xz , xhk ) F1 (xz , xhk , x , x ) F2 (xz , xhk , x , x )
i
j
j
i

k L
xj 1/2
e5 ml (ZH )3k tan Z
k, R
2
Hj i ij Hj i ij
T 2Qf sw
2 2 f
xw
8 2(4)4 sw4 cw

k L
R
2(2 + ln x )i,j (xz , xhk ) + F1 (xz , xhk , x , x ) Aj i ij + Ak,
j i ij . (23)
j
The above equations contain the suppression factor 1 4sw2 because Qf = 1 and TfZ = 1/2
for charged leptons. The corrections from this sector to the MDM of lepton are decided by a linear
k, R
k L
R
combination of real parts of the effective couplings Hjk i ijL + Hjk,
i ij and Aj i ij Aj i ij , and
the corrections from this sector to the EDM of lepton are decided by a linear combination of
k, R
k L
R
imaginary parts of the effective couplings Hjk i ijL Hjk,
i ij and Aj i ij + Aj i ij . In the limit
x , x xz , xhk , Eq. (23) can be approximated as
i

xj 1/2 1
Z
e4 m2l (ZH )1k
alZhk =
(x , x )
Tf 2Qf sw2
2 2 cos
xw
x i j
4 2(4)4 sw4 cw
j

2 2x 0,1 (x , x )

i
i
j
1,1 (xz , xhk )

Hjk i ijL + Hjk,
ijR
i
x x
i
j

2
4
xj 1/2
e m (ZH )3k tan Z
1
1
+ l
Tf 2Qf sw2
+
(x , x )
2 2
i
j
xw
x
x
4 2(4)4 sw4 cw
i
j

R
+ 20,1 (x , x )1,1 (xz , xhk )
Akj i ijL Ak,
j i ij ,
i

xj 1/2
1
1
+
xw
x
x
i
j

k L
R
(x , x ) + 20,1 (x , x )1,1 (xz , xhk ) Hj i ij Hjk,
i ij
Z
e5 ml (ZH )1k
Tf
dlZhk =
4
4
2
2
8 2(4) sw cw cos
i
2Qf sw2

xj 1/2 1
e5 ml (ZH )3k tan Z
2
T 2Qf sw
(x , x )

2 2 f
xw
x i j
8 2(4)4 sw4 cw
j

2 2x 0,1 (x , x )

i
i
j
R
1,1 (xz , xhk ) Akj i ijL + Ak,

j i ij .
x x
i
Similarly, the contribution from ZG0 sector to the effective Lagrangian is

x 1/2
j
e4
2
LZG0 =
(2 + ln x )
i
2
4
2
2
j
x
x
16 2(4) sw cw Qf
w
z

+ F1 (xz , xz , x , x ) Bj i ijL + Bji ijR TfZ 2Qf sw2 O6 O6+
i
(24)
x
231
1/2
2
(ln x ln x ) + F1 (xz , xz , x , x )
i
j
i
j
xz

R Z
+
L
2
+ F2 (xz , xz , x , x )
Bj i ij Bj i ij Tf 2Qf sw O6 + O6
+ ,
+
xw
(25)
and the contributions to the lepton MDMs and EDMs are:

Z
xj 1/2
e4 m2l
2
ZG
2
Tf 2Qf sw
(ln x ln x )
al =
4
4
2
2
i
j
xw
xz
4 2(4) sw cw

+ F1 (xz , xz , x , x ) + F2 (xz , xz , x , x )
Bj i ijL Bji ijR ,
i
dlZG =
Z
e5 ml
Tf
4
4
2
2
8 2(4) sw cw
2Qf sw2
x
1/2
xw

+ F1 (xz , xz , x , x ) Bj i ijL + Bji ijR .
i
2
(2 + ln x )
j
xz
(26)
Here, the corrections from this sector to the MDM of lepton are proportional to real parts of the
effective couplings Bj i ijL Bji ijR , and the corrections from this sector to the EDM of lepton are
proportional to imaginary parts of the effective couplings Bj i ijL + Bji ijR . When x , x xz ,
i
j
Eq. (26) can be approached by

Z
xj 1/2
e4 m2l
1
1
alZG =
Tf 2Qf sw2
+
(x , x )
2 2
i
j
xw
x
x
4 2(4)4 sw4 cw
i
j

+ 2(1 + ln xz )0,1 (x , x )
Bj i ijL Bji ijR ,
i
dlZG

xj 1/2 1
=
(x , x )
xw
x i j
j

2 2x 0,1 (x , x )

i
i
j
(1 + ln xz ) Bj i ijL + Bji ijR .

x x
Z
e5 ml
Tf
4
4
2
2
8 2(4) sw cw
2Qf sw2
(27)
2.3. The effective Lagrangian from Z sector

When a closed chargino loop is attached to the virtual and Z gauge bosons, the corresponding correction to the effective Lagrangian is very tedious. If we ignore the terms which are
proportional to the suppression factor 1 4sw2 , the correction from this sector to the effective
Lagrangian is drastically simplified as
L Z =
e4
2 2
8(4)2 sw2 cw

iiL iiR

2
lim
x x
i
T3 (xz , x , x )
i

2
TfZ Qf sw O2 + O3 + Qf sw O2+ + O3+
+ .
(28)
Using the definitions of the matrices ijL,R in Eq. (22), one can find that the effective couplings
iiL iiR (i = 1, 2) are real. Correspondingly, the correction to the lepton MDMs from this sector
232
is written as
Z
al
L

e4 Qf m2l
R
lim T3 (xz , x , x ),
ii
ii
2 2
i
j
x x
4(4)4 sw2 cw
j
(29)
and the correction to the lepton EDMs is zero. In the limit x xz , we can approximate the
i
correction to the lepton MDMs from this sector as

ln x 2 ln xz
L
13
e4 Qf m2l
Z
i
R
+
al =
ii
ii
2 2
18x
3x
4(4)4 sw2 cw
i
i

2 1
1
2x 2
(x , x ) .
+ lim
(30)
i x
i
j
x x
x
j
i
i
2.4. The effective Lagrangian from W H (W G ) sector

As a closed charginoneutralino loop is attached to the virtual W gauge boson and charged
Higgs H , the induced Lagrangian can be written as
x 1/2

j
e4 tan
L
LW H =
F3 (xw , xH , x 0 , x ) sin Gj1L
i ij
2
4
2
j
i
xw
16(4) sw cw Qf

1L L

R
j i cos G 1R ij R j i O6+
cos Gj1R
i ij O6 + sin G
ij
x 0 1/2

i
ijR cos Gj1R
ijL O6
+
i
i
j
i
xw

1L R
1R L +
+ sin G ij j i cos G ij j i O6
x 1/2

j
L
1R R
+
i ij + cos Gj i ij O6
j
i
xw

+ sin G 1L ij L j i + cos G 1R ij R j i O6+
x 0 1/2

i
ijR + cos Gj1R
ijL O6
+
i
i
j
i
xw

1L R
1R L +
+ sin G ij j i + cos G ij j i O6
(31)
with
1
(UL )1j Ni4

(UL )2j ,
ijL = Ni2
2

1
ijR = N2i UR j 1 + N3i UR j 2 ,
2
1
Gj1L
i = (UL )2j (N1i sw + N2i cw ) (UL )1j N3i cw ,
2

1
Gj1R
i = UR j 2 Ni1 sw + Ni2 cw UR j 1 Ni4 cw ,
2
(i = 1, . . . , 4, j = 1, 2).
(32)
233
Here, the 4 4 matrix N denotes the mixing matrix of the four neutralinos i0 (i = 1, . . . , 4).
The corresponding corrections to the lepton MDMs and EDMs are respectively expressed as
x 1/2
j
e4 m2l tan
alW H =
F3 (xw , xH , x 0 , x )
4
4
2
j
i
xw
4(4) sw cw

1L L
1R R

sin Gj i ij cos Gj i ij
x 0 1/2

i
R
1R L
+
F4 (xw , xH , x 0 , x )
sin Gj1L
i ij cos Gj i ij
j
i
xw
x 1/2

j
+
F5 (xw , xH , x 0 , x )
sin Gj1L
ijL + cos Gj1R
ijR
i
i
j
i
xw
x 0 1/2

i
1L R
1R L
+
F6 (xw , xH , x 0 , x )
sin Gj i ij + cos Gj i ij ,
j
i
xw

x 1/2
e5 ml tan
j
dlW H =
F3 (xw , xH , x 0 , x )
j
i
xw
8(4)4 sw4 cw 2

1L L
1R R
sin Gj i ij cos Gj i ij
x 0 1/2

i
R
1R L
+
i ij cos Gj i ij
j
i
xw
x 1/2

j
+
ijL + cos Gj1R
ijR
i
i
j
i
xw
x 0 1/2

i
R
1R L
+
(33)
,
+
cos
G
i ij
j i ij
j
i
xw
where the concrete expressions of F3,4,5,6 can be found in Appendix A. The corrections from this
sector to the MDM of lepton are decided by a linear combination of real parts of the effective
L
1R R
1L R
1R L
1L L
1R R
couplings sin Gj1L
i ij cos Gj i ij , sin Gj i ij cos Gj i ij , sin Gj i ij + cos Gj i ij ,
R
1R L
as well as sin Gj1L
i ij + cos Gj i ij , and the corrections from this sector to the EDM of lepton
are decided by a linear combination of imaginary parts of those effective couplings. Using the
asymptotic expansion of the two-loop vacuum integral (x, y, z) presented in Appendix A, we
can simplify the expressions of Eq. (33) in the limit x 0 , x xw .
i
As a closed charginoneutralino loop is attached to the virtual W gauge boson and charged
Goldstone G , the corresponding corrections to the lepton MDMs and EDMs are similarly formulated as
x 1/2

j
e4 m2l
L
1R R
alW G =
F3 (xw , xw , x 0 , x )
cos Gj1L
i ij + sin Gj i ij
4
4
2
j
i
xw
4(4) sw cw
x 0 1/2

i
R
1R L
+
F4 (xw , xw , x 0 , x )
cos Gj1L
i ij + sin Gj i ij
j
i
xw
x 1/2

j
+
F5 (xw , xw , x 0 , x )
cos Gj1L
ijL sin Gj1R
ijR
i
i
j
i
xw
x 0 1/2

i
R
1R L
+
,
F6 (xw , xw , x 0 , x )
cos Gj1L
sin
G
i ij
j i ij
j
i
xw
234
dlW G
x 1/2

j
e5 ml
L
1R R
=
F3 (xw , xw , x 0 , x ) cos Gj1L
i ij + sin Gj i ij
j
i
xw
8(4)4 sw4 cw 2
x 0 1/2

i
ijR + sin Gj1R
ijL
+
i
i
j
i
xw
x 1/2

j
L
1R R
+
i ij sin Gj i ij
j
i
xw

x 0 1/2

i
R
1R L
.
sin
G
+
(34)
i ij
j i ij
j
i
xw
Similarly, the corrections from this sector to the MDM of lepton depend on a linear combination
L
1R R
1L R
1R L
of real parts of the effective couplings cos Gj1L
i ij + sin Gj i ij , cos Gj i ij + sin Gj i ij ,
L
1R R
1L R
1R L
cos Gj1L
i ij sin Gj i ij , as well as cos Gj i ij sin Gj i ij , and the corrections from this
sector to the EDM of lepton depend on a linear combination of imaginary parts of those effective
couplings.
The contributions from those above sectors to effective Lagrangian do not contain ultraviolet divergence. In the pieces discussed below, the coefficients of high dimensional operators in
effective Lagrangian contain ultraviolet divergence that is caused by the divergent subdiagrams.
In order to obtain physical predictions of lepton MDMs and EDMs, it is necessary to adopt a
concrete renormalization scheme removing the ultraviolet divergence. In literature, the on-shell
renormalization scheme is adopted frequently to subtract the ultraviolet divergence which appears in the radiative electroweak corrections [12]. As an over-subtract scheme, the counter terms
include some finite terms which originate from those renormalization conditions in the on-shell
scheme beside the ultraviolet divergence to cancel the corresponding ultraviolet divergence contained by the bare Lagrangian. In the concrete calculation performed here, we apply this scheme
to subtract the ultraviolet divergence caused by the divergent subdiagrams.
2.5. The effective Lagrangian from the ZZ sector
The self energy of Z gauge boson composed of a closed chargino loop induces the ultraviolet
divergence in the Wilson coefficients of effective Lagrangian. Generally, the unrenormalized self
energy of the weak gauge boson Z can be written as

p2 z 2
p2 z
z
z
Z
2 z
(p) = A0 g + A1 + 2 A2 p g p p + B1 + 2 B2 p p .
(35)
Correspondingly, the counter terms are given as

ZC
(p) = m2z + m2z Zz g Zz p 2 g p p .
(36)
The renormalized self energy is given by

Z
Z
ZC
(p) =
(p) +
(p).

(37)
For on-shell external gauge boson Z, we have [12]

Z
(p) (p)p2 =m2 = 0,

z
1
Z
lim
(p) (p) = (p),

2
p 2 m2z p m2z
(38)
235
Fig. 2. The counter term diagram to cancel the ultraviolet caused by the self energy of Z boson.
where (p) is the polarization vector of Z gauge boson. From Eq. (38), we get the counter terms
m2z z
A = Az1 + xz Az2 ,
2 2
m2z = Az0 2 m2z Zz .
Zz = Az1 +
(39)
Accordingly, the effective Lagrangian originating from the counter term diagram (Fig. 2) can
be formulated as

2
1 xi + xj
L L
e4
C
2 (1 + )
R R
LZZ =
(4xR )
j i ij + j i ij
4 2
12(4)2 sw4 cw
(1 )2
xz2

5(x + x ) 2,1 (x , x )
x + x
5
i
j
i
j
i
j
+
+
+
+
ln xR
12xz
12xz2
xz2
xz2

1,1 (x , x )

1
1
ln xR
i
j
1/2 L R
R L
j i ij + j i ij
+
2
+ 2(x x )
i
j
xz2
xz2
12xz2
xz

Z
2
Tf Qf sw2 O2 + O3 + Q2f sw4 O2+ + O3+

2
1 xi + xj
L L
e4
2 (1 + )
R R
(4x
)
R
j i ij
j i ij
4 2
4(4)2 sw4 cw
(1 )2
xz2

2,1 (x , x ) x + x 7
x + x
1
i
j
i
j
i
j
ln
x
ln
x
+
ln
x
+
l
z
R
2
4xz
xz2
xz2
xz2

1,1 (x , x )

1
i
j
+ 2(x x )1/2 jLi ijR + jRi ijL 2 +
i
j
xz
xz2

1
ln xR
+ 2 (3 + ln xl ln xz ) + 2
Qf sw2 TfZ Ql sw2 O6 + O6+ + . (40)
xz
xz
Here, = 2 D/2 with D representing the time-space dimension, and xR = 2RE /2 (RE
denotes the renormalization scale).
As a result of the preparation mentioned above, we can add the contributions from the counter
term diagram to cancel the corresponding ultraviolet divergence contained by the bare effective
236
R
Lagrangian. Using the definitions of the matrices ijL,R in Eq. (22), we derive ijL = jL
i , ij =
R
j i . The resulted theoretical predictions on the lepton MDMs and EDMs are respectively written
as

2

L 2 R 2 Z
e4 m2l
ZZ
+
al,
Tf Qf sw2 + Q2f sw4
=
ij
ij
4
4
4
2
(4) sw cw

x + x
Qf
1
i
j
ln xR + T4 (xz , x , x )
T5 (xz , x , x ) +
i
j
i
j
3
4
xz2
2

1 2 2 Z
+ ijL ijR
Tf Qf sw2 Q2f sw4 T6 (xz , x , x )
i
j
8
L R Z

2 2
2 4
1/2

ij j i Tf Qf sw + Qf sw (x x )
i
j

4Qf
7Qf
1
xz
T7 (xz , x , x ) +
ln
i
j
4
xR
3xz2
3xz2

Qf
2 2
T9 (xz , x , x )
ijL + ijR sw2 TfZ Qf sw2
i
j
4

Q2f
Q2f
Q2f
xz
+ 2 2 ln
(x + x ) 2 (x ln x + x ln x )
i
j
i
i
j
j
4xz
xR
xz
2xz

2
Qf

+ 2 2,1 (x , x ) x x 0,1 (x , x )
i
j
i
j
i
j
2xz

L R 2 Z
2
2
1/2 2 ln xz + ln xR
4Qf
ij j i sw Tf Qf sw (x x )
,
i
j
xz2

L R
e5 ml
ZZ
1/2
(x
x
)
Qf sw2 TfZ Qf sw2
dl,
=
ij j i
i j
4
4
4
2
(4) sw cw

(xz , x , x ) 0 (x , x )
i
j
i
j
2
2
xz x
xz x
xz
j
i

2

1 Z
Tf Qf sw2 + Q2f sw4 T8 (xz , x , x ) .
(41)
i
j
16
In other words, the corrections from this sector to the MDM of lepton are decided by a linear
combination of the real effective couplings |ijL |2 |ijR |2 and real parts of the effective couplings
ijL jRi , and the corrections from this sector to the EDM of lepton are proportional to imaginary
parts of the effective couplings ijL jRi .
Because a real photon cannot be attached to the internal closed neutralino loop, the corresponding effective Lagrangian only contains the corrections to the lepton MDMs:

2

e4 Qf m2l
1 L 2 R 2 Z
ZZ
al,
Tf Qf sw2 + Q2f sw4
=
+ ij
ij
0
4
4
4
2
3
(4) sw cw

x 0 + x 0
i
j
ln xR
T5 (xz , x 0 , x 0 ) +
i
j
xz2

xz
7
1 L R Z
2 2
2 4
1/2 4
ln
+
ij j i Tf Qf sw + Qf sw (x 0 x 0 )
i
j
3
xz2 xR xz2

Z
xz
1 L 2 R 2
2
2
Q
T
+
Q
s
+ (x 0 ln x 0 + x 0 ln x 0 )
f
f
w f
w
ij
i
i
j
j
2
2xz2 ij

xz
2,1 (x 0 , x 0 ) + x 0 x 0 0,1 (x 0 , x 0 )
2(x 0 + x 0 ) 2 ln
i
j
i
j
i
j
i
j
xR

L R 2 Z
2
ln
x
+
ln
x
z
R
4Qf
ij j i sw Tf Qf sw2 (x 0 x 0 )1/2
i
j
xz2
237
(42)
with
L
ij
= Ni4
N4j ,
R
ij
= Nj3 N3i
(i, j = 1, . . . , 4).
(43)
In order to get Eq. (42), we apply unitary property of the matrices L,R . The corrections from
this sector to the MDM of lepton depend on a linear combination of the real effective couplings
L |2 |R |2 and real parts of the effective couplings L R , and the corrections from this sector
|ij
ij
ij j i
L R .
to the EDM of lepton are proportional to imaginary parts of the effective couplings ij
ji
We can also simplify Eqs. (41) and (42) in the limit x , x , x 0 , x 0 xz using the asympi
j
i
j
totic expansion of (x, y, z). The concrete expressions of T4 T9 can be found in Appendix A.
2.6. The effective Lagrangian from the W W sector
Similarly, the self energy of W gauge boson composed of a closed charginoneutralino loop
induces the ultraviolet divergence in the Wilson coefficients of effective Lagrangian. Accordingly, the unrenormalized W self energy is expressed as

p2 w 2
p2 w
W
w
w
+
B
(p) = 2 Aw
g
+
A
+
A
g
p
p
+
B
p
p p . (44)

0
1
1
2 2
2 2
The corresponding counter terms are given as

WC
(p) = m2w + m2w Zw g Zw p 2 g p p .
(45)
The renormalized self energy is given by

W
W
WC
(p) =
(p) +
(p).

(46)
For on-shell external gauge boson W , we have [12]

W
(p) (p)p2 =m2 = 0,

w
1
W
lim
(p) (p) = (p),

2
p 2 m2w p m2w
(47)
where (p) is the polarization vector of W gauge boson. Inserting Eqs. (44) and (45) into
Eq. (47), we derive the counter terms for the W self energy as
m2w w
w
A = Aw
1 + xz A2 ,
2 2
2
2
m2w = Aw
0 mw Zw .
Zw = Aw
1 +
(48)
Differing from the analysis in the ZZ sector, we should derive the counter term for the vertex
W + W here since the corresponding coupling is not zero at tree level. In the nonlinear R
238
Fig. 3. The counter term diagram to cancel the ultraviolet caused by the self energy of W boson and electroweak radiative
corrections to W + W vertex.
gauge with = 1, the counter term for the vertex W + W is

iC W + W = ie Zw g (k1 k2 ) + g (k2 k3 ) + g (k3 k1 ) ,
(49)
where ki (i = 1, 2, 3) denote the injection momenta of W and photon, and , , denote the
corresponding Lorentz indices respectively.
We present the counter term diagrams to cancel the ultraviolet divergence contained in the
bare effective Lagrangian from W W sector in Fig. 3, and we can verify that the sum of corresponding amplitude satisfies the Ward identity required by the QED gauge invariance obviously.
Accordingly, the effective Lagrangian originating from the counter term diagrams can be written
as

2

L L
e4
C
2 (1 + )
(4xR )
LW W =
ij ij + ijR ijR
(4)2 sw4 2 Qf
(1 )2

x 0 +x
x 0 + x
j
i
5
j
i
+ 2,1 (x 0 , x )
2
j
i
3
24xw

11
+ (x 0 + x ) ln xR +
O2 + O3 + ijL ijR + ijR ijL (x 0 x )1/2
j
j
i
i
36xw

5
1 5
(50)
+ 1,1 (x 0 , x ) ln xR
O2 + O3 + .
j
i
12xw2 6
239
Finally, we get the renormalized effective Lagrangian from the W W sector:

L L

e4
R R
LW W =
+ ij ij T10 (xw , x 0 , x )
j
i
48(4)2 sw4 Qf 2 ij ij

10
+ 2 (x 0 + x ) ln xR O2 + O3
j
i
xw
L L

e4
ij ij ijR ijR T11 (xw , x 0 , x ) O2 + O3
2
4
2
j
i
16(4) sw Qf
4
1/2

e (x 0 x )
L R

j
i
ij ij + ijR ijL T12 (xw , x 0 , x )

2
4
2
j
i
48(4) sw Qf

20
2 ln xR O2 + O3
xw
e4 (x 0 x )1/2
j
i
16(4)2 sw4 Qf 2

ijR ijL ijL ijR T13 (xw , x 0 , x ) O2 O3 .
i
(51)
Correspondingly, the resulted lepton MDMs and EDMs are respectively formulated as

L 2 R 2
e4 m2l
WW

T10 (xw , x 0 , x )
=
+ ij
al
j
i
12(4)4 sw4 2 ij

32
10
ln xR
+ 2 (x 0 + x ) ln xR
j
i
xw
xw
L 2 R 2
e4 m2l
T11 (xw , x 0 , x )
ij
ij
j
i
4
4
2
4(4) sw

e4 m2l (x 0 x )1/2

20
j
i
R L
ij ij T12 (xw , x 0 , x ) 2 ln xR ,
j
i
6(4)4 sw4 2
xw
dlW W =
e5 ml (x 0 x )1/2

j
i
ijR ijL T13 (xw , x 0 , x ).
4
4
2
j
i
4(4) sw
(52)
In a similar way, the corrections from this sector to the MDM of lepton depend on a linear
combination of the real effective couplings |ijL |2 |ijR |2 and real parts of the effective couplings
ijL ijR , and the corrections from this sector to the EDM of lepton are proportional to imaginary
parts of the effective couplings ijL ijR .
3. Numerical results and discussion
With the theoretical formulae derived in previous section, we numerically analyze the dependence of the muon MDM and EDM on the supersymmetric parameters in the CP-violating
scenario here. In particular, we will present the dependence of the muon MDM and EDM on the
supersymmetric CP phases in some detail. In order to make the theoretical predictions on the
electron and neutron EDMs satisfying the present experimental constraints, we adopt the cancelation mechanism among the different contributions to the fermion EDMs [20]. Within three
standard error deviations, the present experimental data can tolerate new physics correction to
the muon MDM as 2.6 1010 < a < 58.4 1010 . Since the neutralinos i0 (i = 1, 2, 3, 4)
240
and charginos i (i = 1, 2) appear as the internal intermediate particles in the two-loop diagrams which are investigated in this work, the corrections of these diagrams will be suppressed
strongly when the masses of neutralinos and charginos are much higher than the electroweak
scale [7]. To investigate if those diagrams can result in concrete corrections to the muon MDM
and EDM, we choose a suitable supersymmetric parameter region where the masses of neutralinos and charginos are lying in the range M < 600 GeV.
The MSSM Lagrangian contains several sources for CP violating phases: the phases of the
-parameter in the superpotential and the corresponding bilinear coupling of the soft breaking terms, three phases of the gaugino masses, and the phases of the scalar fermion Yukawa
couplings in the soft Lagrangian. As we do not consider the spontaneous CP violation in this
work, the CP phase of soft bilinear coupling vanishes due to the neutral Higgs tadpole conditions. Additional, the CP violation would cause changes to the neutral-Higgs-quark coupling,
the neutral Higgs-gauge-boson coupling and the self-coupling of Higgs boson. A direct result of
above facts is that no absolute limits can be set for the Higgs bosons masses from the present
combined LEP data [23]. For security, we take the lower bound on the mass of the lightest
Higgs boson as mh1 60 GeV [14] in the numerical analysis. In order to obtain the mixing
matrix of neutral Higgs in CP violating MSSM, we include the subroutine fillhiggs. f from
the Package CPsuperH [24] in our numerical code. Furthermore, we take the pole mass of top
quark mt (pole) = 175 GeV, the pole mass of charged Higgs mH (pole) = 300 GeV, the running
masses mb (mt ) = 3 GeV, m (mt ) = 1.77 GeV, the mass parameters of scalar fermions in soft
terms as mU 3 = mD 3 = mE 3 = mQ 3 = mL 3 = 500 GeV, the Yukawa couplings of scalar fermions
as |At | = |Ab | = |A | = 1 TeV and At = Ab = A = /2. Fixing above parameters and assuming tan 3, we find that the mass of the lightest neutral Higgs is well above 115 GeV
by scanning the parameter space of CP violating MSSM. In other words, one no longer worries
about the constraint from Higgs sector with the above assumptions on the parameter space of
CP violating MSSM. With no loss of generality, we also take the supersymmetric parameters
|m1 | = |m2 | = 500 GeV and mE 2 = mL 2 = A /2 = 500 GeV in this work.
Taking |H | = 200 GeV, m2 = H = 0 and tan = 10, 50, we plot the muon MDM a
and EDM d versus the CP phase m1 in Fig. 4. As tan = 10, the one-loop supersymmetric
correction to the muon MDM (solid-line in Fig. 4(a)) reaches 7 1010 and can account for
the deviation between the SM prediction and experimental data. Comparing with one-loop supersymmetric contribution, two-loop contribution depends on the supersymmetric parameters in
a different manner. Including the two-loop corrections, the supersymmetric contribution to the
muon MDM a is modified about 10%. Since the gaugino mass m1 affects the theoretical prediction only through the mixing matrix of neutralinos, the muon MDM a varies with the CP phase
m1 (solid line for one-loop result and dot line for the result including two-loop corrections in
Fig. 4(a)) very mildly. Meanwhile the supersymmetric contribution to the muon EDM including
two-loop corrections at the largest CP violation m1 = /2 is still below 1024 e cm (dot line
Fig. 4(b)), and it is very difficult to observe the muon EDM of this level in next generation experiments with precision 1024 e cm [17]. As tan = 50, one-loop supersymmetric correction
to the muon MDM a exceeds 35 1010 (dash line in Fig. 4(a)), and can ameliorate easily the
discrepancy between the SM prediction and experiment. Because the dominant two-loop supersymmetric corrections originating from the hk , W H sectors are enhanced by large tan ,
the relative modification from two-loop supersymmetric corrections to one-loop result is 15%
roughly (dash-dot line in Fig. 4(a)). As for the muon EDM d , one-loop supersymmetric result
together with two-loop supersymmetric corrections are all enhanced by large tan . The contri-
241
Fig. 4. The supersymmetric corrections to the muon MDM a and EDM d vary with the CP violating phase m1
when |H | = 200 GeV, m2 = H = 0 and tan = 10, 50, where the solid lines stand for the one-loop corrections
with tan = 10, the dot lines stand for the results including two-loop supersymmetric corrections with tan = 10; the
dash lines stand for the one-loop corrections with tan = 50, the dash-dot lines stand for the results including two-loop
supersymmetric corrections with tan = 50. The gray band in diagram (a) is the region allowed by the g 2 experimental
data within 3 standard errors.
bution including two-loop supersymmetric corrections is well above 1024 e cm at the largest CP
violation m1 = /2, and it is hopeful to detect the muon EDM d of this level in the near future.
Taking |H | = 200 GeV, m1 = H = 0 and tan = 10, 50, we plot the muon MDM a and
EDM d versus the CP phase m2 in Fig. 5. As tan = 10, the one-loop supersymmetric correction to the muon MDM (solid-line in Fig. 5(a)) always lies in the range |a | < 8 1010 varying
with the CP phase m2 . The relative modification from the two-loop supersymmetric corrections
to the one-loop prediction is below 5% when tan = 10. Since the gaugino mass m2 affects the
theoretical prediction through the mixing matrices of neutralinos and charginos simultaneously,
the muon MDM a depends on the CP phase m2 (solid line for one-loop result and dot line
for the result including two-loop corrections in Fig. 5(a)) strongly. Meanwhile the supersymmetric contribution to the muon EDM including two-loop corrections at the largest CP violation
m2 = /2 is about 1023 e cm (dot line Fig. 5(b)) which can be observed in next generation experiments with precision 1024 e cm [17]. When tan = 50, one-loop supersymmetric correction
242
Fig. 5. The supersymmetric corrections to the muon MDM a and EDM d vary with the CP violating phase m2
when |H | = 200 GeV, m1 = H = 0 and tan = 10, 50, where the solid lines stand for the one-loop corrections
to the muon MDM a is enhanced drastically. Because the dominant two-loop supersymmetric
corrections originating from the hk , W H sectors are also enhanced by large tan , the relative modification from two-loop supersymmetric corrections to one-loop result is 15% roughly
(dash-dot line in Fig. 5(a)). As for the muon EDM d , one-loop supersymmetric result together
with two-loop supersymmetric corrections are all enhanced by large tan . The contribution including two-loop supersymmetric corrections at the largest CP violation m2 = /2 is about
4 1023 e cm which can be detected easily in next generation experiments.
Taking |H | = 200 GeV, m1 = m2 = 0 and tan = 10, 50, we plot the muon MDM a
and EDM d versus the CP phase H in Fig. 6. As tan = 10, the one-loop supersymmetric
correction to the muon MDM (solid-line in Fig. 6(a)) always lies in the range |a | < 8 1010
varying with the CP phase H . The relative modification from the two-loop supersymmetric
corrections to the one-loop prediction is below 5% when tan = 10. Since the parameter H
affects the theoretical prediction through the mixing matrices of neutralinos and charginos si-
243
Fig. 6. The supersymmetric corrections to the muon MDM a and EDM d vary with the CP violating phase H
when |H | = 200 GeV, m1 = m2 = 0 and tan = 10, 50, where the solid lines stand for the one-loop corrections
multaneously, the muon MDM a varies with the CP phase H (solid line for one-loop result
and dot line for the result including two-loop corrections in Fig. 6(a)) drastically. Meanwhile the
supersymmetric contribution to the muon EDM including two-loop corrections at the largest CP
violation H = /2 is below 1023 e cm (dot line Fig. 6(b)). Because the dominant two-loop
supersymmetric corrections originating from the hk , W H sectors are enhanced by large
tan , the relative modification from two-loop supersymmetric corrections to one-loop result is
15% roughly (dash-dot line in Fig. 6(a)) at CP conservation when tan = 50. One-loop supersymmetric correction to the muon EDM d is enhanced by large tan . Comparing with one-loop
contribution, two-loop corrections are negligible. The contribution including two-loop supersymmetric corrections is about 4 1023 e cm, which can be detected in the near future [17].
Taking tan = 20, 50 and m1 = m2 = H = 0, we plot the muon MDM a versus the parameter H in Fig. 7. The gray band is the region allowed by present experimental data within
3 standard errors. Because the supersymmetric corrections to the muon MDM a are negative for
244
Fig. 7. The supersymmetric corrections to the muon MDM a vary with the -parameter H when
m1 = m2 = H = 0 and tan = 20, 50, where the solid lines stand for the one-loop corrections with tan = 20,
the dot lines stand for the results including two-loop supersymmetric corrections with tan = 20; the dash lines stand
for the one-loop corrections with tan = 50, the dash-dot lines stand for the results including two-loop supersymmetric
corrections with tan = 50. The gray band is the region allowed by the g 2 experimental data within 3 standard errors.
H 0, the corresponding parameter space is already ruled out by the present g 2 experimental
data. Comparing with the one-loop supersymmetric results (solid line for tan = 20 and dash line
for tan = 50 respectively), the contributions including two-loop supersymmetric corrections
are enhanced about 15% when H = 150 GeV. Along with the increasing of H , the two-loop
corrections become more and more trivial.
4. Conclusions
In this work, we analyzed the two-loop supersymmetric corrections to the muon MDM and
EDM by the effective Lagrangian method in the CP violating MSSM. In the concrete calculation, we keep all dimension 6 operators. The ultraviolet divergence caused by the divergent
subdiagrams is removed in the on-shell renormalization schemes. After applying the equations
of motion to the external leptons, we derive the muon MDM and EDM. Numerically, we analyze
the dependence of the muon MDM a and EDM d on supersymmetric CP violating phases.
As discussed above, a is decided by real parts of the effective couplings, and d is decided by
imaginary parts of the effective couplings after the heavy freedoms are integrated out. Adopting
our assumptions on parameter space of the MSSM and choosing tan = 50, we find that the
correction from those two-loop diagrams to a is 4 1010 roughly for the case of CP conservation, which lies in the order of present experimental precision in magnitude. In other words,
the present experimental data put a very restrictive bound on the real parts of those effective couplings. Additional, the contribution to d from this sector is sizable enough to be experimentally
detected with the experimental precision of near future.
Acknowledgements
The work has been supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NNSFC)
with Grant No. 10675027.
Appendix A. The functions

We list the tedious expressions of the functions adopted in the text
x i lnj x y i lnj y
,
x y
x n (x, u, v) y n (y, u, v)
n (x, y; u, v) =
,
x y
T1 (x1 , x2 , x3 )

1
x2 x3
=
4(2 + ln x2 )(ln x1 1)
1+2
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
x1
x3
x1

x2 x3
1+2
0 + 2(x2 x3 )1 (x2 , x3 ) ,
+
x3
x1

1
0
T2 (x1 , x2 , x3 ) =
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
(x2 , x3 ) ,
x1 x3
x3
T3 (x1 , x2 , x3 )
2
2 2
= (2 + ln x3 ) +
(x3 )(x1 , x2 , x3 )
x1
x1 x32
i,j (x, y) =
2 2
4
4 0
(x3 0 )(x2 , x3 )
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) +
(x2 , x3 )
x1 x32
x1 x3
x1 x3

x2 x3
x2 x3
2
2
1
(x1 , x2 , x3 ),
+
0 (x2 , x3 ) +
x1 x3
x1
x1 x3
x1
T4 (x1 , x2 , x3 )
2
2
ln x3 2 (x2 x2 ln x2 x3 + x3 ln x3 )
=
x1
x1

3

x2 x3 x32
(x
,
x
,
x
)
(x
,
x
)
1
2
3
0
2
3
x1
x1 x32

1 3
(x2 3x3 x1 )(x1 , x2 , x3 )
2
2 x1 x3

5
1 2
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) (x2 x3 ) (x1 , x2 , x3 ) 0 (x2 , x3 )
2 x1 x3
x1

2

x2 x3
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) 0 (x2 , x3 ) + 2(x1 , x2 , x3 ) ,

2
x1
x1
T5 (x1 , x2 , x3 )

5
5
ln x1 ln xR
=
+
+
+ 2 (x2 + x3 )
12x1
12x12
3x12
x1

2
7
+
ln x1 (x2 ln x2 + x3 ln x3 )
+
6x12 3x12

4
2
3 ln x1 (x2 x3 )2 1 + 1,1 (x2 , x3 )
+
3
3x1
3x1
245
246
+
+

52,1 (x2 , x3 )
23
(x2 + x3 ) 1 + 1,1 (x2 , x3 )
2
6x1
x12

2(x2 + x3 )
1
1
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) 0 (x2 , x3 )
2
x1
3x1

1 x2 + x3 2(x2 x3 )2
1 (x2 , x3 )
3x1
x1
x12

3(x2 + x3 ) 2(x2 x3 )2
1
1
+
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
3x1
x1
x1
x12

2(x2 + x3 ) (x2 x3 )2 2
1
1
+
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
3
x1
x12
x12
(x2 x3 )2
2 (x2 , x3 ),
3x12
T6 (x1 , x2 , x3 )

3
1
0
2
(x2 , x3 ) + 2x3
= 2 0 (x2 x3 )
+
x3
x1
x1 x32
x12
x2 x3
1
+ 2
2
2
x
x
x1 x3 x1
x1
3
1 x1
2

x2 x3
(x1 , x2 , x3 ),
+ 1+
x1
x1 x3
T7 (x1 , x2 , x3 )
3
2
2
= 2 2
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) +
2 (ln x2 ln x3 )
x1 x3 x1
x1 x3

3
3
3
3
+
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
+
+
x12 x3 x1 x32 x12 x2 x1 x2 x3

x2 x3
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) 0 (x2 , x3 ) ,
x1
T8 (x1 , x2 , x3 )

3

3
4
2
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) +
= 4
+
+ 2 (2 + ln x2 )
2
2
x1 x3 x1
x1 x3 x1 x2

3
3

x2 x3
(x
+
,
x
,
x
)
(x
,
x
)
(x
,
x
,
x
)
,
+ 2
1
2
3
0
2
3
1
2
3
x1
x1 x32 x12 x2
+ (x1 x2 + x3 )
T9 (x1 , x2 , x3 )

2
4x3
0
=
ln x3 2
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
(x2 , x3 )
x1
x3
x1 x3

(x1 , x2 , x3 ) 0 (x2 , x3 )
2
(x2 x3 )
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
+
x1 x3
x1

4
4x3 2
+
(x1 , x2 , x3 ),
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) +
x1 x3 x1
x1 x1 x3
247
T10 (x1 , x2 , x3 )
=
26 17x2 29x3 10
16(x2 x3 )2 10(x2 + x3 )
+ 2 + 2 + 2 2,1 (x2 , x3 )
ln x1
x1
x1
x1
x1
x12
x13

6 ln x3
16(x2 x3 ) x2 ln x2
16(x2 x3 ) x3 ln x3
+ 14
+ 4 +
x1
x1
x1
x12
x12
4

+ (x2 x3 )2 x12
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
x14

3(x2 x3 )2 3
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
+ 5x1 + 6x2 +
x1
x13

9(x2 x3 )2 6x2 3x3 2
+
+
+
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
x1
x1 x12
x12

12x2 6x3 18(x2 x3 )2
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
+ 2 2 +
x1
x1
x1
x13

12x2 6x3 18(x2 x3 )2
+
+ 3
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) 0 (x2 , x3 )
3
4
x1
x1
x1
3

2
2x3 (x2 x3 )
3 0
+
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
(x2 , x3 )
x12
x33
x33

9x2 2
3x x
2 0
(x
,
x
,
x
)
(x
,
x
)
+
1 2 3
2 3
x12
x12
x32
x32

18x3 (x2 x3 )
0
3x 9x
+
+
(x
,
x
,
x
)
(x
,
x
)
1
2
3
2
3
x3
x3
x12
x12
x13
6x3 (x2 x3 + x1 )
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) + 6x3 (x2 + x3 x1 )
x13 x3

4
x2 x3

2x32 1 +
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
x1
x1 x33

9x3 (x2 x3 ) 3
+ 3x1 3x2 18x3
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
x1
x12 x3

3x2 x3 9x32 3
+
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
+ 21x3
x1
x1 x1 x32

12x2 6x3 18x3 (x2 x3 ) 2
6
+
(x1 , x2 , x3 ),
x1
x1
x1 x3
x12
4
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
x12 x32
T11 (x1 , x2 , x3 )
2 ln x3 4(x2 x3 ) 4(x2 ln x2 x3 ln x3 )
=
x1
x12
x12
4(x2 x3 )
4(x2 x3 )
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) 0 (x2 , x3 ) +
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
3
x1
x12
x1
248

2(x2 x3 ) 2
2x3
0
1+
(x
,
x
,
x
)
(x
,
x
,
x
)
(x
,
x
)
1 2 3
1 2 3
2 3
x1
x3
x12
x12 x3

x3 (x2 x3 ) 2
2 0
+
(x
,
x
,
x
)
(x
,
x
)
1 2 3
2 3
x12
x32
x32

3
x2 x3

2
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) x3 1 +
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
2
x1 x3
x1
x1 x32
+ (x2 + x3 x1 )
3
(x1 , x2 , x3 ),
x12 x3
T12 (x1 , x2 , x3 )
18 ln x3
52
4
20
= 2 +
+ 2 ln x1 1,1 (x2 , x3 )
x1 x3 x1
x1
x12
12
12
3 (x1 , x2 , x3 ) 0 (x2 , x3 ) + 2
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
x1 x1
x1

6 2
4
3
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
(x
,
x
,
x
)
17
+
2x
1 2 3
1
x1 x12
x14
x13

2(x2 x3 )
0
6
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
(x2 , x3 )
+ 2 1+
x1
x3
x3
x1
2

2
3(x2 2x3 )
0
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
(x2 , x3 )
x12
x32
x32

3 0
x3 (x2 x3 ) 3
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
(x2 , x3 )
x12
x33
x33

4

x2 x3

2(x2 x3 ) 2
6
1+
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
x3 1
x1
x1
x1
x1 x3
x1 x33
3
3

x2 x3
x2 2x3
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
+6 2
3 1
x1
x1
x1 x32
x12 x3
+ 3(x2 x3 x1 )
4
x13 x3
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) 6
4
(x1 , x2 , x3 ),
x12 x32
T13 (x1 , x2 , x3 )
=

1
2
0
2 2
+ 2
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
(x2 , x3 )
(x1 , x2 , x3 )
x1 x3 x1 x3
x3
x1 x1 x3

x2 x3 2
2 0
(x
,
x
,
x
)
(x
,
x
)
1
2
3
2
3
x12
x32
x32
3

3
x2 x3
(x
,
x
,
x
)
2
(x1 , x2 , x3 ),
1
1
2
3
x1
x1 x32
x12 x3
F1 (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 )

1
1
x3 x4
(x3 x4 )0 (x3 , x4 ) +
=
1+
(x1 , x3 , x4 )
x1 x2 x4
x1 x2 x4
x1

x3 x4
1+
(x2 , x3 , x4 ) ,
x4
x2
F2 (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 )

x3 x4
1
1
1
(x1 , x3 , x4 )
(x3 x4 )0 (x3 , x4 ) +
=
x1 x2 x4
x1 x2 x4
x1

x3 x4
1
(x2 , x3 , x4 ) ,
x4
x2
F3 (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 )
6(x3 x4 ) 6(x3 ln x3 x4 ln x4 )
= 2(ln x4 1)0,1 (x1 , x2 )
x1 x2
x1 x2
x1 x2 + 2(x1 + x2 )(x3 x4 )
x3 3x4 0
+
0 (x3 , x4 )
(x3 , x4 )
x1 x2 x4
x12 x22

2
x4 (x3 x4 ) 2 0
(x3 , x4 )
+ x4 2 0 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 )
x1 x2
x4
x42
x4

2
+ 1 (x3 3x4 )
x4 (x3 x4 ) 2 1 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 )
x4
x4
2

1 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 ) + (x3 x4 )0 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 )

+
x1 x2

1
+
(x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 ) (x3 + x4 )
(x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 )
2
x1 x2
x4
x4

1 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 ),
+
2(x3 x4 )
x1 x2
F4 (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 )
6(x3 x4 ) 6(x3 ln x3 x4 ln x4 )
= 2(ln x4 1)0,1 (x1 , x2 )
x1 x2
x1 x2
x1 x2 2(x1 + x2 )(x3 x4 )
x3 + 3x4 0
0 (x3 , x4 ) +
(x3 , x4 )
x1 x2 x4
x12 x22

2
x4 (x3 x4 ) 2 0
0 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 )
(x
,
x
)
+
+
x
3 4
4
x1 x2
x4
x42
x42

2
+ 1 + (x3 + 3x4 )
x4 (x3 x4 ) 2 1 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 )
x4
x4
2

+
1 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 ) (x3 x4 )0 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 )
+
x1 x2

0
0 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 ) 2x4
+
(x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 )
2
x1 x2
x4

1 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 ),
+
2(x3 x4 )
x1 x2
F5 (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 )
1
x3 x4 0
0 (x3 , x4 )
(x3 , x4 )
= 2(2 + ln x4 )0,1 (x1 , x2 ) +
x1 x2
x1 x2 x4
249
250

0
(x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 ) + 1 (x3 x4 )
1 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 ),
x4
x4
F6 (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 )
1
x3 x4 0
0 (x3 , x4 ) +
(x3 , x4 )
= 2(2 + ln x4 )0,1 (x1 , x2 )
x1 x2
x1 x2 x4

0
(x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 ) 1 (x3 x4 )
1 (x1 , x2 ; x3 , x4 ).
x4
x4
(A.1)
The concrete expression of (x, y, z) can be found in [10,25]. In the limit z x, y, we can
expand (x, y, z) according z as
z2
z3
z4
(x, y, z) = 0 (x, y) + z1 (x, y) + 2 (x, y) + 3 (x, y) + 4 (x, y)
2!
3!
4!

+ 2z(ln z 1) 1 + 1,1 (x, y)

2xy
y
3
x +y
2 ln z
2z
+
ln
2!
4
(x y)2 (x y)3 x

2z3
6xy(x + y) y
12xy
ln z 11
+
ln
1+
36
x
(x y)2 3!
(x y)2
(x y)3
3

25
2x + 58x 2 y + 58xy 2 + 2y 3
ln z
2z4
4!
288
(x y)6

24xy(x 2 + 3xy + y 2 ) y
+
ln
+
(x y)7
x
(A.2)
with
(x + y) ln x ln y + (x y)(x, y), x > y;

0 (x, y) = 2x ln2 x,
x = y;
(x + y) ln x ln y + (y x)(y, x), x < y,
x+y
ln x ln y xy (x, y), x > y;

1 (x, y) = 4 2 ln x ln2 x,
x = y;
ln x ln y x+y (y, x), x < y,

yx
2
2 ) ln y
(2x
+6xy)
ln
x(6xy+2y
4xy
(xy)
x > y;
3 (x, y),
(xy)3
5
2
2 (x, y) = 9x + 3x ln x,
x = y;
(2x 2 +6xy) ln x(6xy+2y 2 ) ln y 4xy (y, x), x < y,

(xy)3
(yx)3
12xy(x+y)
2 +xy+y 2 )
(xy)5 (x, y) 2(x (xy)

4
3 +14x 2 y+11xy 2 ) ln x2(y 3 +14xy 2 +11x 2 y) ln y
2(x
+
, x > y;
(xy)5
53
1
x = y;
3 (x, y) = 150x 2 + 5x 2 ln x,
2 +xy+y 2 )
12xy(x+y)
2(x
(yx)5 (y, x) (xy)4
+ 2(x 3 +14x 2 y+11xy 2 ) ln x2(y 3 +14xy 2 +11x 2 y) ln y , x < y,

(xy)5
(A.3)
(A.4)
(A.5)
(A.6)
2 +3xy+y 2 )
3
2 y+61xy 2 +3y 3 )
48xy(x(xy)
(x, y) 2(3x +61x(xy)
7
6
4 +3x 3 y45x 2 y 2 25xy 3 ) ln x4(y 4 +3y 3 x45x 2 y 2 25yx 3 ) ln y
4(x
+
,
(xy)7
598
1
4 (x, y) = 2205x 3 + 210x 3 ln x,
2 +3xy+y 2 )
3
2 y+61xy 2 +3y 3 )
48xy(x(xy)
(y, x) 2(3x +61x(xy)
7
6
+ 4(x 4 +3x 3 y45x 2 y 2 25xy 3 ) ln x4(y 4 +3y 3 x45x 2 y 2 25yx 3 ) ln y ,

(xy)7
251
x > y;
x = y;
x < y.
(A.7)
Here, the function (x, y) is defined as

y
y
2
y
+
.
(x, y) = ln x ln 2 ln(x y) ln 2 Li2
x
x
x
3
(A.8)
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
Muon g 2 Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 161802.

J.P. Miller, E. de Rafael, B.L. Roberts, Muon (g 2): Experiment and theory, Rep. Prog. Phys. 70 (2007) 795.
F. Jegerlehner, Acta Phys. Pol. B 38 (2007) 3021.
S. Peris, M. Perrottet, E. de Rafael, Phys. Lett. B 355 (1995) 523;
A. Czarnecki, B. Krause, W.J. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D 52 (1995) 2619;
A. Czarnecki, B. Krause, W.J. Marciano, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76 (1996) 3267.
T. Kukhto, E. Kuraev, A. Schiller, Z. Silagadze, Nucl. Phys. B 371 (1992) 567.
S. Heinemeyer, D. Stckinger, G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 690 (2004) 62.
S. Heinemeyer, D. Stckinger, G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 699 (2004) 103.
C. Chen, C. Geng, Phys. Lett. B 511 (2001) 77;
A. Arhrib, S. Baek, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 075002.
T.-F. Feng, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 096012.
T.-F. Feng, X.-Q. Li, J. Maalampi, X.-M. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 056005.
T.-F. Feng, T. Huang, X.-Q. Li, X.-M. Zhang, S.-M. Zhao, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 016004;
T.-F. Feng, X.-Q. Li, L. Lin, J. Maalampi, H.-S. Song, Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 116001.
M. Bohm, H. Spiesberger, W. Hollik, Fortschr. Phys. 34 (1986) 687;
A. Denner, Fortschr. Phys. 41 (1993) 307.
L.F. Abbott, Nucl. Phys. B 185 (1981) 189;
M.B. Gavela, G. Girardi, C. Malleville, P. Sorba, Nucl. Phys. B 193 (1981) 257;
N.G. Deshpande, M. Nazerimonfared, Nucl. Phys. B 213 (1983) 390.
A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 096010;
A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Lett. B 435 (1998) 88;
A. Pilaftsis, C.E.M. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 533 (1999) 3;
M. Carena, J. Ellis, A. Pilaftsis, C.E.M. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 586 (2000) 92;
M. Carena, J. Ellis, A. Pilaftsis, C.E.M. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 625 (2002) 345.
E.P. Shabalin, Yad. Fiz. 28 (1978) 151, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 28 (1978) 75.
I.S. Alatrev, et al., Phys. Lett. B 276 (1992) 242;
K.F. Smith, et al., Phys. Lett. B 234 (1990) 191.
Y.K. Semertzidis, et al., Sensitive search for a permanent muon electric dipole moment, hep-ph/0012087.
J. Ellis, S. Ferrara, D.V. Nanopoulos, Phys. Lett. B 114 (1982) 231;
W. Buchmuller, D. Wyler, Phys. Lett. B 121 (1983) 321;
J. Polchinski, M.B. Wise, Phys. Lett. B 125 (1983) 393.
P. Nath, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (1991) 2565;
Y. Kizukuri, N. Oshimo, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 3025;
Y. Kizukuri, N. Oshimo, Phys. Rev. D 45 (1992) 1806.
T. Ibrahim, P. Nath, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 111301;
M. Brhlik, G.J. Good, G.L. Kane, Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 115004.
S.M. Barr, A. Zee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 21.
252
[22] D. Chang, W.-Y. Keung, A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 900;
D. Chang, W.-Y. Keung, A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 3972, Erratum;
A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Lett. B 471 (1999) 174;
D. Chang, W.-F. Chang, W.-Y. Keung, Phys. Lett. B 478 (2000) 239;
A. Pilaftsis, Nucl. Phys. B 644 (2002) 263.
[23] P. Bechtle, Search for CP-violating neutral Higgs bosons in the MSSM at LEP, talk given at Workshop on CP studies
and non-standard Higgs Physics, hep-ph/0608079.
[24] J.S. Lee, A. Pilaftsis, M.S. Carena, S.Y. Choi, M. Drees, J.R. Ellis, C.E.M. Wagner, Comput. Phys. Commun. 156
(2004) 283.
[25] A.I. Davydychev, J.B. Tausk, Nucl. Phys. B 397 (1993) 123.

PeV scale LeftRight symmetry and baryon asymmetry

of the Universe
Anjishnu Sarkar, Abhishek, Urjit A. Yajnik
Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, Mumbai 400076, India
Received 5 November 2007; received in revised form 18 March 2008; accepted 25 March 2008
Abstract
We study the cosmology of two versions of supersymmetric LeftRight symmetric model. The scale of
the BL symmetry breaking in these models is naturally low, 104 106 GeV. Spontaneous breakdown of
parity is accompanied by a first order phase transition. We simulate the domain walls of the phase transition
and show that they provide requisite conditions, specifically, CP violating phase needed for leptogenesis.
Additionally soft resonant leptogenesis is conditionally viable in the two models considered. Some of the
parameters in the soft supersymmetry breaking terms are shown to be constrained from these considerations.
It is argued that the models may be testable in upcoming collider and cosmology experiments.
PACS: 12.60.-i; 12.60.Jv; 98.80.Cq
1. Introduction
Leftright symmetric model [15] is a simple extension of the Standard Model (SM) [68].
From a theoretical point of view it provides an elegant explanation for the conservation of BL
which automatically becomes a gauge charge, and as a bonus provides a natural explanation for
the meaning of the electroweak hypercharge. The new gauge symmetries required constitute the
group SU(2)R U (1)B L . The model has long been understood as a possible intermediate state
in the SO(10) [9,10] grand unified theory (GUT). However unification in SO(10) generically also
forces the possible intermediate scale of LeftRight symmetry to be high and therefore inaccessi* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: anjishnu@phy.iitb.ac.in (A. Sarkar), abhishek.aero@iitb.ac.in (Abhishek), yajnik@phy.iitb.ac.in

(U.A. Yajnik).
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.020
254
A. Sarkar et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 253269
ble to accelerators. On the other hand, the less restrictive principle of exact LeftRight symmetry
is still appealing though it leaves the U (1)B L charge unrelated to the two identical charges of
SU(2)L and SU(2)R . As for the fermion sector the presence of right-handed neutrino states in
the theory allows the possibility of explaining the smallness of the observed neutrino masses
[1114] from the see-saw mechanism [1518]. While the scale of Majorana masses is no longer
as high as in the conventional see-saw expectations, the PeV scale still permits [19] explaining
the smallness of the light neutrino mass scale for at least certain textures of fermion mass parameters. It is therefore worth exploring the possibility that the scale of LeftRight symmetry be the
PeV scale, potentially testable in colliders.
Whether we follow the GUT proposal or the PeV scale possibility, the large hierarchy between
the mass scales MEW 250 GeV of electroweak symmetry and MGUT 1015 GeV is difficult to
understand within the Higgs paradigm. While the Higgs sector of the Standard Model is poorly
understood, it is nevertheless very successful. We therefore speculate that the breaking of both
the SU(2)L and SU(2)R being at a comparable scale will have a similar explanation, possibly
a comprehensive one including both. There remains the need to understand the hierarchy with
respect to a larger mass scale either the GUT scale or the Planck scale. In this paper we assume
supersymmetry (SUSY) to be the mechanism to stabilize the hierarchy beyond the electroweak
scale [20,21], in other words we assume TeV scale SUSY.1 We study what has been called the
minimal supersymmetric LeftRight symmetric model (MSLRM) [25] with the gauge group
SU(3)c SU(2)L SU(2)R U (1)B L augmented by parity P exchanging L and R sectors.
Lee et al. [26] have studied a similar model with the gauge group SU(4)c SU(2)L SU(2)R
and connected it to cosmological phenomena, specifically inflation. Our discussion differs in
being specifically PeV scale.
In the MSLRM class of LeftRight symmetric models, spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking required to recover SM phenomenology also leads to observed parity breaking. However,
for cosmological reasons it is not sufficient to ensure local breakdown of parity. We have earlier
proposed [27] that the occurrence of the SM like sector globally is connected to the SUSY breaking effects from the hidden sector. Another approach to implementing the global uniformity of
parity breaking is to have terms induced by gauge symmetry breaking which signal explicit parP. In earlier papers we have explored
ity breaking [28,29]. This model has been dubbed MSLR/
the overall cosmological setting for these models and traced issues such as removal of unwanted
relics and a successful completion of the first order phase transition. Here we show that sufficient conditions exist in the model to provide for the leptogenesis required to explain the baryon
asymmetry of the Universe.
A possible implementation of this idea follows the thermal leptogenesis [30] route. This however has been shown to generically require the scale of Majorana neutrino mass, equivalently,
in our model the scale of BL breaking to be 1011 1013 GeV [31,32], with a more optimistic
constraint MB L > 109 GeV [33,34]. This situation is not improved [3538] by assistance from
cosmic string induced violation [3941] of lepton number [42]. On the other hand, it has been
shown [19,43] that the only real requirement imposed by leptogenesis is that the presence of
heavy neutrinos should not erase lepton asymmetry generated by a given mechanism, possibly
non-thermal. This places the modest bound M1 > 104 GeV, on the mass of the lightest of the
heavy Majorana neutrinos. A scenario which exploits this window and relies on supersymmetry
1 See for instance [2224] and references therein.
255
is the soft leptogenesis [4447] relying on the decay of scalar superpartners of neutrino and
a high degree of degeneracy [48] in the mass eigenvalues due to soft SUSY breaking terms.
Another possibility for leptogenesis arises from the fact that generically the LeftRight breaking phase transition is intrinsically a first order phase transition. Due to the presence of lepton
number violating processes, the problem of leptogenesis then becomes analogous to that explored
for the electroweak phase transition [49], provided a source for CP asymmetry can be found. It
has been shown [50] that the domain walls arising during the phase transition generically give
spatially varying complex masses to neutrinos. Here we explore the parameter space required in
the two variants of LeftRight symmetric model to ensure the required leptogenesis.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sections 2 and 3 we review the models being considered.
In Section 4 we discuss the cosmological evolution characteristic of each of the models, along
with the constraints that can be obtained on the soft parameters of the models by the demand
that the phase transition is completed successfully. In Section 5 we identify the soft parameters
in the model that can be constrained by the demand for soft leptogenesis. In Sections 6 and 7 we
detail the mechanism of leptogenesis by the domain wall (DW) structure of the phase transition
and then obtain numerical solutions which support the possibility of this mechanism to operate
in the two models. Conclusions are summarized in Section 8.
2. MSLRM
The standard LeftRight symmetric model is based on the gauge group SU(3)c SU(2)L
SU(2)R U (1)B L . The right-handed charged leptons which were singlet in Standard Model
(SM), form doublets with respective right-handed neutrino species R under SU(2)R in this
model. In the same manner, the right handed up and down quarks of each generation which
were singlets in SM, form doublets under SU(2)R . The Higgs sector has two triplets (s),
and a bidoublet (). In minimal supersymmetric LeftRight model (MSLRM) [25], the bidoublet is doubled to have non-vanishing CabibboKobayashiMaskawa matrix and the triplets are
doubled for reasons of anomaly cancellation. The quark and leptonic sectors along with their
quantum numbers are represented below.
Qc = (3 , 1, 2, 1/3),
Q = (3, 2, 1, 1/3),
L = (1, 2, 1, 1),
Lc = (1, 1, 2, 1),
(1)
where we have suppressed the generation index. The minimal set of Higgs superfields required
is,
i = (1, 2, 2, 0),
= (1, 3, 1, 2),
i = 1, 2,
= (1, 3, 1, 2),
c = (1, 1, 3, 2),
c = (1, 1, 3, 2).
(2)
Under discrete parity symmetry the fields are prescribed to transform as,
Q Qc ,
c ,
L Lc ,
c .
i i ,
(3)
However, this minimal model is unable to break parity spontaneously [51,52]. A parity odd
singlet solves this problem [53], but this also breaks electromagnetic charge invariance [51].
256
Breaking R parity and introducing non-renormalizable terms solves this problem. A more appealing way out is to introduce a pair of scalar triplets (, c ), which are even under parity viz.,
c [27,29,54]. The quantum numbers for the two fields are,
= (1, 3, 1, 0),
c = (1, 1, 3, 0).
(4)
The superpotential for this model was given in [54]. It is almost the same as the superpotential
given later in this paper, in Section 3, Eq. (11) from which it can be obtained with c replaced
by c . Since in this class of models, we consider supersymmetry to be broken only at the
electroweak scale, we can safely employ the F -flatness and D-flatness conditions to obtain the
vacua of the theory. The F and D flat conditions for MSLRM are given in Ref. [54] and again are
similar in nature to the one we have worked out in Appendix A for the modified version of this
model discussed in Section 3. These F and D flat conditions imply the existence of the following
set of vacuum expectation values (vevs) for the Higgs fields as one of the possibilities
= 0,
= 0,

c
0
,
c =
0 c
= 0,

0
c =
dc

0
,
0
c =
0
0
dc
0

.
(5)
The stages of breaking required to implement parity breaking and avoid electromagnetic charge
breaking vacua, are as follows: first the s get a vev at a scale MR , which breaks SU(2)R to
its subgroup U (1)R , but conserving BL charge. At a lower scale MB L , the triplets get vev
to break U (1)R U (1)B L to U (1)Y . Thus, at low scale MSLRM breaks exactly to minimal
supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM).
From the F and D flatness conditions we are led to the following solution for the vevs [27,
29,54]

m
MR ,
|| =
a

2m m 1/2
MB L .
|d| = |d| =
(6)
a2
For parity breakdown we must have MR MB L , which is accomplished if we have m m .
If the mass scale m originates from the soft terms, then we can accept the approach of Ref. [55]
that m
MEW . This in turn would mean that m is of the same order as the gravitino mass
m3/2 . This leads us to the relation
MB2 L
MR MEW .
(7)
Thus, we have only one effective new mass scale, either MR or MB L . Now if we consider
6
MB L 104 GeV, then MR 106 GeV.
On the other10hand, MB L 10 GeV, if we choose MR
to have the largest possible value MPl MEW 10 GeV, beyond which non-renormalizable
terms will relevant. Thus the model is workable in a wide range of values, but the lower range
values make the model verifiable in the colliders.
The above solution for the vevs, is not unique. Due to LeftRight symmetric nature of the
original theory, an alternative set of vevs permitted by the F and D flatness conditions are,

0 d
0 0
0
,
,
=
,
=
=
0 0
d 0
0
c = 0,
(8)
c = 0,
c = 0.
257
Due to the possibility of alternative set of Higgs vacua, in the early universe, parity breakdown
does not select unique ground state and formation of domain walls (DW) is inevitable. As this
contradicts present observable cosmology the model must have an inbuilt asymmetry to remove
the domain walls. Since the superpotential does not allow such asymmetry in the present model,
we depend on the soft terms to do the job.
The mechanism which induces the soft terms can arise due to gravitational effects in the gravity mediated supersymmetry breaking. In gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking (GMSB), the
soft terms can arise due to the messenger sector, the hidden sector or both. In Section 3 however,
we look for an alternative possibility for the breaking parity, which arises naturally out of the
Higgs sector.
/
3. MSLRP
In this section we consider another possibility for parity breaking which takes place within
the Higgs sector. The idea was first considered by Chang et al. [28], for the non-SUSY model
SU(3)c SU(2)L SU(2)R U (1)B L P where P denotes parity symmetry. To break parity
an extra Higgs singlet which is odd under P parity was introduced, i.e. . As such the
potential of the model has a term of the form

V M L L R R ,
(9)
where the notation is self-evident. Thus, when at a high scale MP , the singlet gets a vev,
the effective masses of the left and right triplet Higgs masses become different, thus explicitly
breaking P parity, without affecting SU(2)R . However, in SUSY, a parity odd singlet in the
theory would generate the problems of charge breaking vacua as discussed by Kuchimanchi and
Mohapatra [51]. To avoid this, but to implement the idea of Chang et al. we propose an alternative
SUSY model based on the group SU(3)c SU(2)L SU(2)R U (1)B L P with a pair triplets
(, c ) which are odd under parity. This model was discussed in an earlier paper [29] and was
P. Under parity,
named MSLR/
Q Qc ,
c ,
L Lc ,
c ,
i i ,
c .
(10)
The superpotential for this parity symmetry becomes,

(i)
T
T
cT
WLR = hl LT 2 i 2 Lc + h(i)
q Q 2 i 2 Qc + ifL 2 L + ifL 2 c Lc
m
m
+ m Tr + m Tr c c +
Tr 2 +
Tr c2
2
2
+ ij Tr 2 iT 2 j + a Tr a Tr c c c
+ ij Tr i 2 jT 2 ij Tr c iT 2 j 2 ,
(11)
(i)
(i)
(i)
(i)
where color and flavor indices have been suppressed. Further, hq = hq , hl = hl , ij =

j i = ij , ij = j i . Finally, f, h are real symmetric matrices with respect to flavor indices.
The F and D flatness conditions derived from this superpotential are presented in Appendix A.
However, the effective potential for the scalar fields which is determined from modulus square
of the D terms remains the same as for the MSLRM at least for the form of the ansatz of the
vevs we have chosen. As such the resulting solution for the vevs remains identical to Eq. (6).
The difference in the effective potential shows up in the soft terms as will be shown later. Due to
258
Table 1
Pattern of symmetry breaking and the slightly different sequence of associated cosmological events in the two classes of
models
Cosmology
Scale
Symmetry group
MSLR/
P
(GeV)
MSLRM
(GeV)
or c get vev
Onset of wall dominated
secondary inflation
Higgs triplet (s) get
vev
MR
SU(3)c SU(2)L SU(2)R U (1)B L
106
106
MB L
SU(3)c SU(2)L U (1)R U (1)B L
104
104
End of inflation and

beginning of L-genesis
MB L
MS
104
103
SUSY breaking
MS
103
103
Wall disappearance
temperature
TD
10103
10102
Secondary reheat
temperature
TRs
103 104
103
102
102
Electroweak breaking
MEW
Standard Model
SU(3)c SU(2)L U (1)Y (SUSY)
SU(3)c SU(2)L U (1)Y (non-SUSY)
SU(3)c U (1)EW
soft terms, below the scale MR the effective mass contributions to and become larger than
those of c and c . The cosmological consequence of this is manifested after the MB L phase
transition when the s become massive. Unlike MSLRM where the DW are destabilized only
after the soft terms become significant, i.e., at the electroweak scale, the DW in this case become
unstable immediately after MB L . Leptogenesis therefore commences immediately below this
scale and the scenario becomes qualitatively different from that for the MSLRM.
In the next section we elaborate in detail the areas where the two models MSLRM and MSLR/
P
differ from the cosmological point of view.
4. Cosmology of breaking
In this section we recapitulate the cosmology of these models. In the two models MSLRM
and MSLR/
P the stages of breaking are slightly different as shown in Table 1. Domain walls form
in both the models at the scale MR , when the fields get vev. These DW come to dominate
the evolution of the Universe and is responsible for the onset of a secondary inflation. This
secondary inflation removes gravitinos and other relic abundances which were regenerated during
the reheating stage after the primordial inflation ended [27,29]. At the scale MB L , the triplet s
get vev. At this epoch the effective mass of the left-handed s is essentially different than those
of right-handed s in MSLR/
P. As such at this stage DW are destabilized and leptogenesis
begins in MSLR/
P unlike in MSLRM. SUSY breaking is mediated from the hidden sector to
the visible sector in both the models at the scale MS . The soft terms which become relevant at
this scale break the parity in MSLRM. Thus the DW become destabilized in MSLRM at MS ,
thus beginning the process of leptogenesis. The walls finally disappear in MSLR/
P at a scale
TD 10103 GeV and in MSLRM at TD 10102 GeV. Subsequently standard cosmology
takes over after this.
259
Table 2
Differences in values of soft supersymmetry breaking parameters of MSLRM, for a range of domain wall decay temperature values TD . The differences signify the extent of parity breaking
TD /GeV
101
10
102
103
(m2 m2 )/GeV2
(1 2 )/GeV2
1012
1016
108
1012
104
108
1
104
104
1
A handle on the explicit symmetry breaking parameters of the two models can be obtained by
noting that there should exist sufficient wall tension for the walls to disappear before a desirable
temperature scale TD . It has been observed in [56] that the free energy density difference
between the vacua, which determines the pressure difference across a domain wall should be of
the order
TD4
(12)
in order for the DW structure to disappear at the scale TD .

4.1. Consistent cosmology: MSLRM
The possible source for breaking the parity symmetry of the MSLRM lies in soft terms with
the assumption that the hidden sector, or in case of GMSB also perhaps the messenger sector
does not obey the parity of the visible sector model. For gravity mediated breaking this can be
achieved in a natural way since a discrete symmetry can be generically broken by gravity effects.
We present the possible soft terms for MSLRM below.

+ 3 Tr c c c + 4 Tr c c c
Lsoft = 1 Tr + 2 Tr

+ m21 Tr + m22 Tr + m23 Tr c c + m24 Tr c c

+ 1 Tr + 2 Tr c c .
(13)
We can determine the differences between the relevant soft parameters for a range of permissible values of TD .
In Table 2 we have taken d 104 GeV, 106 GeV and TD in the range 100 MeV10 GeV
[57]. The above differences between the values in the left and right sectors is a lower bound
on the soft parameters and is very small. Larger values would be acceptable to low energy phenomenology. However if we wish to retain the connection to the hidden sector, and have the
advantage of secondary inflation we would want the differences to be close to this bound. As
pointed out in [56,58] an asymmetry 1012 is sufficient to lift the degeneracy between the two
sectors.
P
4.2. Consistent cosmology: MSLR/
In this model parity breaking is achieved spontaneously within the observable sector below
the scale MR at which the fields acquire vevs. However the breaking is not manifested in
the vacuum till the scale MB L where the fields acquire vevs. For simplicity we assume
that the hidden sector responsible for SUSY breaking does not contribute parity breaking terms.
This is reasonable since even if the hidden sector breaks this parity the corresponding effects are
suppressed by the higher scale of breaking and in the visible sector the parity breaking effects are
dominated by the explicit mechanism proposed. Thus at a scale above MR but at which SUSY is
260
broken in the hidden sector we get induced soft terms respecting this parity. Accordingly, for the
Higgs sector the parameters can be chosen such that

1 Tr c c c + 2 Tr c c c
Lsoft = 1 Tr 2 Tr

+ m21 Tr + m22 Tr + m21 Tr c c + m22 Tr c c

+ Tr + Tr c c .
(14)
These terms remain unimportant at first due to the key assumption leading to MSSM as the effective low energy theory. The SUSY breaking effects become significant only at the electroweak
scale. However, below the scale MR , and c acquire vevs given by Eq. (5) or (8). Further,
below the scale MB L the fields acquire vevs and become massive. The combined contribution from the superpotential and the soft terms to the masses now explicitly encodes the parity
breaking,
2
2 = M
+ 1 ,
2
2c = M
1 ,
2
+ 2 ,
2 = M
2
2 = M
2 ,
c
(15)
2 is the common contribution from the superpotential. The difference in free energy
where M
across the domain wall is now dominated by the differential contribution to the masses
2(1 + 2 )d 2 ,
(16)
where we have considered c , d d dc dc . Now using Eq. (12) for a range of temperatures (TD 102 104 GeV), determines the corresponding range of values of coupling constants
as
(1 + 2 ) 106 102 GeV,
(17)
where we have considered ||

MR , |d|
MB L .
5. Supersymmetry and leptogenesis
The supersymmetric LeftRight symmetric models considered here do not favor generic thermal leptogenesis from decay of heavy Majorana neutrinos for an intriguing reason. BL asymmetry in the form of fermion chemical potential is guaranteed to remain zero in the model until
the gauged BL symmetry breaks spontaneously. As can be seen, a generic consequence of symmetry breaking in both the models is a relation among the various mass scales MB2 L
MEW MR .
Thermal leptogenesis requires MB L to be larger than 1011 1013 GeV, which pushes MR into
the Planck scale in light of the above formula. A more optimistic constraint MB L > 109 GeV
[33,34] requires LeftRight symmetry to be essentially Grand Unified theory.
However, supersymmetry provides new channels for thermal leptogenesis via out of equilibrium decay of scalar superpartners of leptons [4446]. Leptogenesis from scalar sector is free of
strong constraints on the Yukawa couplings as happens in thermal leptogenesis from fermion decay [32]. In the mechanism to be discussed, the sneutrino splits into two distinct mass eigenstates
due to soft supersymmetry breaking terms. The relevant terms in the superpotential are
T
T
cT
Wleptonic = h(i)
l L 2 i 2 Lc + ifL 2 L + ifL 2 c Lc .
(18)
The relevant soft terms (Vls ) in our model are given by

Vls = Ah(i) L T 2 i 2 L c + iBf L T 2 L + iB f L Tc 2 c L c + m
2 L L + m
2 L c L c .
(19)
261
Mixing between the two states of sneutrino generates the CP violation.

Consider the generic model introduced by [45], where the superpotential is given by
1
W = hLH N + MNN,
(20)
2
where, L, H and N are the left-handed lepton doublet, the Higgs and the right-handed neutrino
respectively. Here we have omitted the generation index for simplicity of notation. The SUSY
soft breaking terms are given by,

N + 1 BM N N + h.c + m
2 N N .
Vsoft = AhLH
(21)
2
The mixing between the two eigenstates in the decay of the right-handed sneutrino (N ) produces
the required
CP violation ( ). The two eigenstates N 1 and N 2 of the sneutrino, N = (N 1 +
i N2 )/ 2 are given by
MN2
1,2
= M2 + m
2 BM.
(22)
Due to the near degeneracy of these masses the CP asymmetry can be large. The mechanism has
been studied in detail in [59] where it is shown that the constraint on the soft parameter B is

M
m
.
B 0.1 eV
(23)
0.05 eV
TeV
This is the same as the B parameter in our model introduced in Eq. (19). In [59] it is shown that
this constraint can be corroborated by collider experiments involving Z decays. The Z sector
of the model we are considering is similar and similar collider constraints are applicable.
Further, we see that the B required is O(1012 ) relative to the electroweak scale. This smallness of the value is possible in certain scenarios [60] and is expected in models of hidden sector
supersymmetry breaking. Here we see a correspondence between the smallness of this parameter and the parameters in the Higgs sector as determined from the cosmological constraint of
disappearance of the DW summarized in Section 4.1. This is a strong indication that we may be
able to test the validity of MSLRM by ascertaining its hidden sector breaking scheme and correlating the two cosmological requirements determined from smallness of otherwise unrelated
parameters arising from the same mechanism.
6. Leptogenesis from first order phase transition
In addition to the resonant leptogenesis considered in previous section, the models considered
here also include natural possibility of non-thermal leptogenesis. The spontaneous breaking of
a discrete symmetry automatically makes the LeftRight symmetry breaking phase transition a
first order phase transition. The idea is similar to electroweak baryogenesis proposals [49,61]
where there are spontaneously formed bubbles which expand to complete the phase transition,
a mechanism also considered in the case of LeftRight symmetric model in [62]. The dynamics of LeftRight breaking phase transition considered here takes into account that due to parity
symmetry of the theory both Right-like (unbroken SU(2)R ), and Left-like (unbroken SU(2)L )
domains are liable to occur at the phase transition. In the models considered here parity is unbroken at the first stage of the symmetry breaking. The phase transition is accompanied by the
spontaneous formation of domain walls separating Left-like and Right-like regions. At a lower
scale when parity breaking is signalled, the walls sweep through the Universe ensuring global
262
choice of a unique phase everywhere. The domain walls move irreversibly during this epoch,
thereby eliminating the energetically unfavorable phase and providing time irreversibility.
Consider the interaction of neutrinos with the LR wall, which is encroaching on the energetically disfavored phase. The left-handed neutrinos, L , are massive in this domain, whereas
they are massless in the phase behind the wall. More precisely, as per see-saw mechanism, L
constitute the principal component of the heavy mass eigenstate in front of the wall but become
principal component of the light eigenstate behind the wall, and it is the L whose fate we keep
track of. To get leptogenesis, one needs an asymmetry in the reflection and transmission coefficients from the wall between L and its CP conjugate (Lc ). This can happen if a CP-violating
condensate exists in the wall. This comes from the Dirac mass terms as discussed in [6367].
Then there will be a preference for transmission of, say, L . The corresponding excess of antineutrinos (Lc ) reflected in front of the wall will quickly equilibrate with L due to helicity-flipping
scatterings, whose amplitude is proportional to the large Majorana mass. However the transmitted excess of L survives because it is not coupled to its CP conjugate in the region behind the
wall, where the Majorana mass contribution from and c vanishes.
A quantitative analysis of this effect can be made either in the framework of quantum mechanical reflection, valid for domain walls which are narrow compared to the particles thermal de
Broglie wavelengths, or using the classical force method [6367] which gives the dominant contribution for walls with larger widths. We adopt the latter here. The thickness of the wall depends
on the shape of the effective quartic potential and we shall here treat the case of thick walls. Further, we assume that the potential energy difference between the two kinds of vacua is small, for
example suppressed by Planck scale effects. In this case the pressure difference across the phase
boundary is expected to be small, leading to slowly moving walls. The classical CP-violating
force of the condensate on a fermion (in our case a neutrino) with momentum component px
perpendicular to the wall can be shown to be
F = sign(px )

1 2
m (x) (x) .
2
2E
(24)
The sign depends on whether the particle is L or Lc , m2 (x) is the position-dependent mass, E
the energy and is the spatially varying CP-violating phase. One can then derive a diffusion
equation for the chemical potential L of the L as seen in the wall rest frame:
D L vw L + (x)hf L = S(x).
(25)
Here D is the neutrino diffusion coefficient, vw is the velocity of the wall, taken to be moving in
the +x direction, hf is the rate of helicity flipping interactions taking place in front of the wall
(hence the step function (x)), and S is the source term, given by
S(x) =

vw D
vx F (x) ,
2

v
(26)
where v is the neutrino velocity and the angular brackets indicate thermal averages. The net
lepton number excess can then be calculated from the chemical potential resulting as the solution
of Eq. (25).
In order to use this formalism it is necessary to establish the presence of a position-dependent
phase . This is what we turn to in the following discussion of the nature of domain walls in the
LR model.
263
7. Wall profiles and CP violating condensate

In order for nontrivial effects to be mediated by the walls, the fermion species of interest
should get a space-dependent mass from the wall. Furthermore, the CP-violating phase should
also possess a non-vanishing gradient in the wall interior. We study the minimization of the total
energy functional of the scalar sector with this in mind.
The vevs introduced in Eq. (5) are in general complex. Some of them can be rendered real by
global SU(2) transformations [5,68]
i
i

e L
e R
0
0
=
,
U
UL =
(27)
R
0
eiL
0
eiR
according to
1 UL 1 UR ,
UL UL ,
c UR c UR ,
UL UL ,
2 UL 2 UR ,
,
UL U
L
c UR c UR ,
c UR c UR .
(28)
(29)
(30)
(31)
The vevs of the triplets and c being diagonal are not affected by these transformations.
Their phases if any do not enter fermion or sfermion masses. We choose their phases to be real.
This leaves us with 16 degrees of freedom in the Higgs sector. These can be parameterized by
allowing three of the vevs in the four fields and three of the vevs in the two bidoublets
to be complex. Here we present a simpler model. As shown in Eqs. (32) and (33), only two of
the vevs are chosen to be complex, viz., the and upper component of 1 . The parameters ij
reduce to a single value times the anti-symmetric matrix ij , and all the four values of ij are
chosen to be the same value . We have also studied the model with all the allowable phases
to be non-zero and find that it does not result in any substantial improvement to the required
condition for leptogenesis. The simpler model contains the minimal features to reproduce all the
essential features required for leptogenesis

0
0
0
0
d12 + d22
,
=
,
=
,
=
0
d1 + id2 0
0
0

c
0 0
0 dc
0
,
c =
,
,
c =
c =
(32)
dc 0
0 0
0 c

2

k1 + k22
0
k1 + ik2 0

,
2 =
.
1 =
(33)
0
k12 + k22
0
k12 + k22
The effective potential obtained by substituting these vevs is given in Eq. (B.1) in Appendix B. In
accordance with the discussion accompanying Eqs. (6) and (7), we choose the scale of MB L
104 GeV which relates to MR being of the order of 106 GeV.
For numerical simulation the mass parameters are scaled by the largest scale MR 106 GeV,
i.e. in our simulation MR 1, and other parameters are chosen m O(1) and m O(104 )
as per Eq. (6). Parameter entering the bidoublet mass terms should be 104 , however at the
scale in question, due to temperature corrections it is expected to be of the same order as MB L
and is chosen 0.01. Eq. (6) dictates that the parameter a be negative and order unity. It is chosen
to be 1.5 throughout. The asymptotic values of the fields are such as to minimize the potential
264
Fig. 1. Domain wall with CP violating condensate in MSLRM. The inset magnifies the behaviour of the k1 and k2 near
their maximum value.
Fig. 2. Domain wall with CP violating condensate in MSLR/

P. The inset magnifies the behaviour of the k1 and k2 near
their maximum value.
under translation invariance. The profiles are then found by relaxation methods. Two examples
of the numerically determined profiles are shown in Figs. 1 and 2.
265
Table 3
P for various values of
Peak phase values = tan1 (k2 /k1 ) in both MSLRM and MSLR/
k1
k2
/4
0.001
0.005
0.01
0.025
0.035
0.045
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.50
0.75
1.00
0.6170
0.6173
0.6173
0.6147
0.6108
0.6055
0.6023
0.5572
0.5042
0.4564
0.4178
0.3879
0.3233
0.2889
0.2661
0.6176
0.6183
0.6185
0.6160
0.6116
0.6053
0.6015
0.5467
0.4815
0.4225
0.3740
0.3354
0.2400
0.1745
0.1311
0.7859
0.7861
0.7863
0.7864
0.7860
0.7852
0.7847
0.7758
0.7624
0.7468
0.7301
0.7128
0.6386
0.5433
0.4579
0.0005
0.0007
0.0009
0.0010
0.0006
0.0001
0.0006
0.0095
0.0229
0.0385
0.0552
0.0725
0.1467
0.2420
0.3274
Electroweak symmetry is unbroken at the epoch under consideration and hence the asymptotic
values for k1 and k2 are zero. Since both k1 and k2 approach the same values asymptotically, the
effective asymptotic value of is /4. The departure from this value at the maxima of the
graphs are listed in Table 3. It was observed that the difference in k1 and k2 profiles, the source
of spatially varying CP violating phase arises from the terms

162 k1 k12 + k22 + 2adc2 k1 k12 + k22 + 4m ( c )k1 k12 + k22 .
(34)
The parameter entering the superpotential is the least controlled by the fundamental symmetries and phenomenological considerations, and plays a very significant role. Small values of
make the difference between k1 and k2 indistinguishable in the graphs. Since the final baryon
symmetry after conversion from the lepton asymmetry is a small number, such parameter ranges
are also of relevance. Mid-range values of are favorable to make the phase of = tan1 (k2 /k1 )
more pronounced as can be seen from Table 3.
We see in Table 3 that the CP phase values in both models are identical, other parameters
remaining the same. This can be seen from the effective potential for MSLR/
P worked out in
Appendix B. The corresponding expression for the effective potential for MSLRM can be obtained by simply reversing the sign of c . However, upon minimizing, the vev for c also has
opposite signs in the two models and hence the k1 , k2 see the same effective potential in the two
cases.
8. Conclusion
We have explored two possible realizations of supersymmetric LeftRight symmetric model
for their implications to cosmology. The superpotential imposes the requirements that SU(2)R
breaks first to U (1)R at a scale MR and U (1)B L breaks at a lower scale MB L with a see-saw
requirement MB2 L
MR MEW with respect to the SM scale MEW . This makes it interesting
to explore the values 104 GeV for BL breaking scale and 106 GeV for the SU(2)R breaking
scale.
266
The first stage of symmetry breaking makes only local choices of the new phase, leading to
formation of DW, which remain metastable down to MEW temperature scale in MSLRM but
only upto a higher scale mB L in MSLR/
P. After the DW are rendered metastable. They remain a
dominant source of energy down to a temperature TD which would depend on the details of DW
evolution dynamics. Only when the DW have disappeared is the phase transition completed, ensuring a unique global choice of chirality. These facts, summarized in Table 1 play a central role
in constraining the models since the DW dynamics is meant to achieve two important cosmological goals, that of removing unwanted relics by inducing secondary or weak inflation and causing
leptogenesis. Cosmologically acceptable values of TD are shown to constrain soft parameters
in the Higgs sectors of the two models in Table 2 and Eq. (17). We have presented the explicit
solutions for the DW configurations for a range of parameters and determined the possibility of
a transient CP violating phase in the core of the DW. It is interesting that due to the nature of the
effective potential, the CP violating phase is quantitatively identical in the two variants for the
same values of the parameters. This is discussed in Section 7.
The MSLRM permits a long duration of cosmological domination by DW. The disappearance
of the DW and the completion of the phase transition is signaled only after TeV scale supersymmetry breaking. This permits removal of cosmological relics, but also potentially leptogenesis
from the uni-directional motion of the DW. The phase transition is expected to end with reheating to a scale above the electroweak scale, so that thermal leptogenesis mechanism through
resonant leptogenesis, arising from soft supersymmetry breaking terms is also possible. It is interesting that the estimate B 0.1 eV in the leptonic sector required from thermal leptogenesis is
in concordance with the independent cosmological requirement on soft parameters in the Higgs
sector for the successful disappearance of the DW.
A new model MSLR/
P has been proposed for making global parity breakdown to a unique
vacuum natural. It relies on choosing a phase 1 for the SU(2) triplets and c under the
parity L R. The first order phase transition leading to unique global vacuum is signaled in
this model at the higher scale MB L compared to the case of MSLRM. Successful completion
of the phase transition in this model also relies on the supersymmetry breaking mechanism but
it is possible to impose the stricter requirement that the soft terms obey the gauge and discrete
symmetries of the superpotential. The uniqueness of the global vacuum then follows from the
spontaneous symmetry breaking within the visible sector. Again, as in the MSLRM, resonant
soft leptogenesis as well as DW mediated leptogenesis remain viable.
There are general arguments based on intrinsic reasons suggesting that TeV scale leptogenesis if true cannot be verified in colliders in the near future [32]. We have adopted the approach
of [59] wherein cosmology requirements arising from soft resonant leptogenesis are correlated
with collider observables. Furthermore, the occurrence of a phase transition accompanied by domain walls may be verifiable in upcoming and planned gravitational wave experiments [69]. An
open question for this class of models is a comprehensive analysis of the two different potential
sources of leptogenesis, from phase transition DW and from the resonant thermal mechanism.
Successful cumulative leptogenesis and subsequent dilution to required baryon asymmetry can
further constrain the parameters of the models.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by a grant from the Department of Science and Technology, India. The
work of A.S. is supported by Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, India.
267
Appendix A. F and D flatness conditions

The F -flatness conditions for MSLR/
P are

1
F = m + a Tr = 0,
2

1
F c = m c a c c Tr c c = 0,
2

1
F = m + a Tr = 0,
2

1
Fc = m c a c c Tr c c = 0,
2

1
F = m + a Tr + ij 2T j 2T iT = 0,
2

1
Fc = m c a c c Tr c c ij 2T jT 2T i = 0,
2
T T

T
Fi = ij 2 j 2 2 j 2 2 j 2 c + 2T j cT 2T

+ ij 2T j 2T + 2 j 2 = 0.
(A.1)
P are given by
The D-flatness conditions for MSLR/
DRi = 2 Tr c i c + 2 Tr c i c + 2 Tr c i c = 0,
DLi = 2 Tr i + 2 Tr i + 2 Tr i = 0,

DB L = 2 Tr 2 Tr c c c c = 0.
(A.2)
Since the leptons L and Lc are considered to have zero vev, we omit them from the F and D flat
conditions. The above conditions are same for MSLRM with only c replaced by c .
Appendix B. Simplified effective potential
Here we display the simplified effective potential involving seven degrees of freedom referred
to in Section 7
V7dof =
2

a 2 2
d1 + d22 + dc4 + 2a 2 2 d12 + d22 + c2 dc2
2

+ 162 3 k12 + k22 + k1 k12 + k22 + 16 2 ( c )2 k12 + k22

2

3/2

+ 8 2 k12 + k22 8 2 k1 k12 + k22
2ad1 d12 + d22 k12 + k22

+ 2a(d1 k1 + d2 k2 ) d12 + d22 k12 + k22 + 2adc2 k1 k12 + k22

2adc2 k12 + k22 + 4am d12 + d22 c dc2

+ 2m2 d12 + d22 + dc2 + 2am d1 d12 + d22 c dc2

4m ( c ) k12 + k22 k1 k12 + k22 + 2m2 2 + c2 .
(B.1)
268
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[40]
[41]
[42]
[43]
[44]
[45]
[46]
[47]
[48]
[49]
[50]
[51]
[52]
J.C. Pati, A. Salam, Phys. Rev. D 10 (1974) 275.

R.N. Mohapatra, J.C. Pati, Phys. Rev. D 11 (1975) 2558.
G. Senjanovic, R.N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. D 12 (1975) 1502.
R.N. Mohapatra, R.E. Marshak, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 (1980) 1316.
N.G. Deshpande, J.F. Gunion, B. Kayser, F.I. Olness, Phys. Rev. D 44 (1991) 837.
S.L. Glashow, Nucl. Phys. 22 (1961) 579.
S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (1967) 1264.
A. Salam, in: W. Svartholm (Ed.), Elementary Particle Theory, Almquist and Wiksell, Stockholm, 1968, p. 367.
H. Georgi, AIP Conf. Proc. 23 (1975) 575.
H. Fritzsch, P. Minkowski, Ann. Phys. 93 (1975) 193.
S. Fukuda, et al., Super-Kamiokande Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 5656, hep-ex/0103033.
Q.R. Ahmad, et al., SNO Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 011301, nucl-ex/0204008.
Q.R. Ahmad, et al., SNO Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 011302, nucl-ex/0204009.
J.N. Bahcall, C. Pena-Garay, New J. Phys. 6 (2004) 63, hep-ph/0404061.
P. Minkowski, Phys. Lett. B 67 (1977) 421.
M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond, R. Slansky, in: P. van Nieuwenhuizen, D.Z. Freedman (Eds.), Supergravity, NorthHolland, Amsterdam, 1979, p. 315.
T. Yanagida, in: O. Sawada, A. Sugamoto (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on the Unified Theory and the
Baryon Number in the Universe, Tsukuba, Japan, 1979, p. 95.
R.N. Mohapatra, G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 (1980) 912.
N. Sahu, U.A. Yajnik, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 023507, hep-ph/0410075.
E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 188 (1981) 513.
R.K. Kaul, P. Majumdar, Nucl. Phys. B 199 (1982) 36.
S.P. Martin, hep-ph/9709356.
I.J.R. Aitchison, hep-ph/0505105.
D.J.H. Chung, et al., Phys. Rep. 407 (2005) 1.
C.S. Aulakh, A. Melfo, G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 4174, hep-ph/9707256.
Q. Shafi, C.-A. Lee, Phys. Lett. B 661 (2008) 33, arXiv: 0709.4637 [hep-ph].
U.A. Yajnik, A. Sarkar, AIP Conf. Proc. 903 (2007) 685, hep-ph/0610161.
D. Chang, R.N. Mohapatra, M.K. Parida, Phys. Rev. D 30 (1984) 1052.
A. Sarkar, U.A. Yajnik, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 025001, hep-ph/0703142.
M. Fukugita, T. Yanagida, Phys. Lett. B 174 (1986) 45.
S. Davidson, A. Ibarra, Phys. Lett. B 535 (2002) 25, hep-ph/0202239.
T. Hambye, Nucl. Phys. B 633 (2002) 171, hep-ph/0111089.
W. Buchmuller, P. Di Bari, M. Plumacher, Nucl. Phys. B 665 (2003) 445, hep-ph/0302092.
W. Buchmuller, P. Di Bari, M. Plumacher, New J. Phys. 6 (2004) 105, hep-ph/0406014.
N. Sahu, P. Bhattacharjee, U.A. Yajnik, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 083534, hep-ph/0406054.
N. Sahu, P. Bhattacharjee, U.A. Yajnik, Nucl. Phys. B 752 (2006) 280, hep-ph/0512350.
R. Jeannerot, M. Postma, JCAP 0512 (2005) 006, hep-ph/0507162.
P. Gu, H. Mao, Phys. Lett. B 619 (2005) 226, hep-ph/0503126.
A. Stern, U.A. Yajnik, Nucl. Phys. B 267 (1986) 158.
M. Kawasaki, K. Maeda, Phys. Lett. B 208 (1988) 84.
A. Davis, M.A. Earnshaw, Nucl. Phys. B 394 (1993) 21.
R. Jeannerot, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 (1996) 3292, hep-ph/9609442.
W. Fischler, G.F. Giudice, R.G. Leigh, S. Paban, Phys. Lett. B 258 (1991) 45.
Y. Grossman, T. Kashti, Y. Nir, E. Roulet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 251801, hep-ph/0307081.
G. DAmbrosio, G.F. Giudice, M. Raidal, Phys. Lett. B 575 (2003) 75, hep-ph/0308031.
L. Boubekeur, T. Hambye, G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 111601, hep-ph/0404038.
E.J. Chun, S. Scopel, Phys. Lett. B 636 (2006) 278, hep-ph/0510170.
A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 5431, hep-ph/9707235.
A.G. Cohen, D.B. Kaplan, A.E. Nelson, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 43 (1993) 27, hep-ph/9302210.
J.M. Cline, U.A. Yajnik, S.N. Nayak, M. Rabikumar, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 065001, hep-ph/0204319.
R. Kuchimanchi, R.N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) 4352, hep-ph/9306290.
R. Kuchimanchi, R.N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 3989, hep-ph/9509256.
[53]
[54]
[55]
[56]
[57]
[58]
[59]
[60]
[61]
[62]
[63]
[64]
[65]
[66]
[67]
[68]
[69]
M. Cvetic, Phys. Lett. B 164 (1985) 55.

C.S. Aulakh, K. Benakli, G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79 (1997) 2188, hep-ph/9703434.
C.S. Aulakh, A. Melfo, A. Rasin, G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 115007, hep-ph/9712551.
J. Preskill, S.P. Trivedi, F. Wilczek, M.B. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B 363 (1991) 207.
M. Kawasaki, F. Takahashi, Phys. Lett. B 618 (2005) 1, hep-ph/0410158.
M. Dine, A.E. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) 1277, hep-ph/9303230.
E.J. Chun, Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 095010, hep-ph/0508050.
E.J. Chun, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 117303, hep-ph/0404029.
A.E. Nelson, D.B. Kaplan, A.G. Cohen, Nucl. Phys. B 373 (1992) 453.
J.M. Frere, L. Houart, J.M. Moreno, J. Orloff, M. Tytgat, Phys. Lett. B 314 (1993) 289, hep-ph/9301228.
M. Joyce, T. Prokopec, N. Turok, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 1695, hep-ph/9408339;
M. Joyce, T. Prokopec, N. Turok, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 3375, Erratum.
M. Joyce, T. Prokopec, N. Turok, Phys. Rev. D 53 (1996) 2930, hep-ph/9410281.
J.M. Cline, M. Joyce, K. Kainulainen, Phys. Lett. B 417 (1998) 79, hep-ph/9708393;
J.M. Cline, M. Joyce, K. Kainulainen, Phys. Lett. B 448 (1999) 321, Erratum.
J.M. Cline, M. Joyce, K. Kainulainen, JHEP 0007 (2000) 018, hep-ph/0006119.
J.M. Cline, K. Kainulainen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 5519, hep-ph/0002272.
M.-C. Chen, K.T. Mahanthappa, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 035001, hep-ph/0411158.
C. Grojean, G. Servant, Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 043507, hep-ph/0607107.
269

Semi-realistic F -term inflation model building

in supergravity
Ben Kain a,b,
a Berkeley Center for Theoretical Physics and Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA
b Theoretical Physics Group, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
Received 16 December 2007; accepted 25 March 2008

Abstract
We describe methods for building semi-realistic models of F -term inflation. By semi-realistic we mean
that they are built in, and obey the requirements of, semi-realistic particle physics models. The particle
physics models are taken to be effective supergravity theories derived from orbifold compactifications of
string theory, and their requirements are taken to be modular invariance, absence of mass terms and stabilization of moduli. We review the particle physics models, their requirements and tools and methods for
building inflation models.
Published by Elsevier B.V.
1. Introduction
Inflation provides answers for many questions concerning the early universe. This is remarkable given that we do not have a definite model of inflation. In fact, we do not even know what
particle physics model one should attempt inflation model building in. In some cases this has
led to ad hoc proposals for inflaton potentials or inflation model building only loosely based
on an underlying particle physics model. Realistic models of inflation must certainly agree with
observation, but they should also emerge from a realistic particle physics model.
As an attempt in this direction we describe methods for building semi-realistic models of
F -term inflation. By semi-realistic we mean that they are built in, and obey the requirements of,
* Correspondence address: Berkeley Center for Theoretical Physics and Department of Physics, University of
California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
E-mail address: bkain@berkeley.edu.
0550-3213/$ see front matter Published by Elsevier B.V.

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.014
B. Kain / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 270297
271
semi-realistic particle physics models, taken here to be effective supergravity theories derived
from orbifold compactifications of string theory. We consider such effective supergravity theories
to be semi-realistic because they have the potential to explain much of our universe in a self
consistent way.
This paper is in large part a review of those ideas relevant for inflation model building in
the class of supergravity theories we are considering. In the first part of this paper, making up
Sections 25, we review the effective supergravity theories. This includes the construction of
scalar potentialswith a comprehensive matter contentin two different formalisms, canonical
normalization of possible inflatons, string theory requirements the effective supergravity theories
should obey and methods for generating VEVs. This review is intended for the nonspecialist.
In Section 6 we consider inflation model building. This includes a method for building inflation
models, a review of previous attempts and, by combining the work of these previous attempts,
the construction of a small field inflaton potential. We conclude in Section 7.
In the remainder of this introduction we briefly review the standard methods
for analyzing
inflation models [1,2]. In this paper we set the reduced Planck mass, mP = 1/ 8G = 2.4
1018 GeV, equal to one: mP = 1. Then, given a scalar potential, V , the slow roll parameters are

V
V V
1 V 2
,
=
,
,
2 =
=
(1.1)
2 V
V
V2
where a prime denotes differentiation with respect to the inflaton. Inflation occurs while ,
|| 1 and is taken to end when one of , || is no longer less than one. The spectral index, n,
its running, = dn/d ln k, and the tensor fraction, r, are given by
n = 1 6 + 2,
= 16 24 2 2 2 ,
r = 16.
(1.2)
Assuming negligible running and tensor fraction, the spectral index has been measured to be [3]
n( ) = 0.95 0.02,
(1.3)
where is defined to be the value of the inflaton corresponding to this measurement. The number of efolds from = to the end of inflation at = e is given by
e
N( ) =
V
d,
V
(1.4)
with reasonable values being N ( ) 5060 [4]. Finally, the COBE normalization requires
V 1/4 = 1/4 6.6 1016 GeV,
(1.5)
which is to be evaluated at a very precise scale. We may take this scale to approximately correspond to .
2. Scalar potentials
The semi-realistic particle physics models, within which we will consider inflation model
building, are effective supergravity theories derived from orbifold compactifications of the
weakly coupled heterotic string [5,6]. For field content they contain the dilaton, three (diagonal)
Khler moduli, untwisted matter fields, twisted matter fields and gaugino condensates (allowing for the possibility of spontaneously breaking supersymmetry) which have been integrated
272
out, inducing a nonperturbative contribution to the superpotential. In this section we review the
construction of the scalar potentials in two different formalisms and discuss some of their differences.
A brief remark on notation: We will often use the word superfield, but in an abuse of notation
we will always write the lowest (scalar) component. For example, though we will mention the
we will always write the scalar fields s, s .
(anti)chiral superfields S, S,
Supergravity theories derived from string theory can be constructed in two dual formalisms:
the more common, chiral superfield formalism [6], wherein a chiral superfield contains the dilaton, s + s , as the real part of its lowest component, or the linear superfield formalism [7,8],
wherein a linear superfield contains the dilaton, , as its lowest component. We will present the
scalar potential in each formalism, but before doing so we consider aspects common to both.
The complete Khler potential is unknown. We assume, for both the chiral and linear superfield formalisms, that it includes the terms

K
(2.1)
ln xI +
XA ,
I
with
xI = tI + tI
|AI |2 ,
XA =

qIA
xI

|A |2 ,
(2.2)
where tI , I = 1, 2, 3, are the three (diagonal) Khler moduli fields, AI are the untwisted matter
fields with modular weights qJAI = JI and A are the twisted matter fields with modular weights
qIA 0.1 The Khler potential for twisted matter is known only to leading (quadratic) order. Consequently, twisted matter fields must be assumed small, so that higher order terms are negligible.
No such assumption is required for untwisted matter fields since its Khler potential is known to
all orders. In Section 4.1 we will explain the role of the modular weights and why the requirement
of modular invariance leads to the introduction of a GreenSchwarz counterterm [9],

V GS =
(2.3)
bI ln xI +
pA X A ,
I
where the values of pA are unknown (the values of bI are given below). For concreteness we
make the plausible assumption pA bI [10]. How the GreenSchwarz counterterm is implemented is specific to the formalism, as will be shown below.
2.1. The chiral superfield formalism
In the chiral superfield formalism, the Khler potential, for our matter content, is commonly
taken to be

K = ln Y
(2.4)
ln xI +
XA ,
I
where
Y = s + s V GS ,
1 In the literature one also finds modular weights denoted by nI , where nI = q for = AJ , A.
(2.5)
273
with V GS defined in (2.3). It is conventional in this formalism to write the GreenSchwarz coefficient, bI , as2
bI =
IGS
.
8 2
(2.6)
Standard compactifications lead to IGS 30 [9]. We will refrain from using I to keep the clutter
down in equations. The field dependence of the superpotential is
W = W (s, tI , AI , A ).
(2.7)
Its form will be given in Section 2.3.

The scalar potential is made up of the F -term and the D-term: V = VF + VD . VF is given by

VF = eK K mn (Wm + Km W )(W n + Kn W ) 3|W |2 ,
(2.8)
where a subscript m refers to a derivative with respect to a chiral superfield, such as tI , and
a subscript n refers to a derivative with respect to an antichiral superfield, such as tI . K mn is
the inverse of the Khler metric, Kmn . Both the Khler metric and its inverse are given in Appendix A.1. We will consider VD in Section 5.1. In the absence of twisted matter, A , the scalar
potential was given in [11] (see also [12]). Here, we give the scalar potential when twisted matter
is included, which is

VF = eK 3|W |2 + |W Y Ws |2
+
A1
Y
|WA + A A W + pA A A Ws |2
Y + pA
Y
A
A qI XA (Y + pA )
Y + bI +
I
2

A

qI A WA W bI Ws + xI
| AI WI + WAI |2 ,
xI WI +
A
(2.9)

q A
A
xI I .
(2.10)
2.2. The linear superfield formalism

In the linear superfield formalism, in the form of the BintruyGaillardWu (BGW)
model [13], the Khler potential is [10]

K = ln( ) + g( )
(2.11)
ln xI +
XA ,
I
where is the dilaton in the linear superfield formalism (its relation to the dilaton in the chiral
superfield formalism is given in Section 2.4) and g( ) is a nonperturbative correction that can
2 Though it is conventional in the chiral superfield formalism for the GreenSchwarz coefficient (or b ) to be written
I
I
with the subscript I , most compactifications lead to I independent I .
274
stabilize the dilaton, which will be discussed in Section 4.3. As we will see, the prescription for
computing the scalar potential in this formalism requires temporarily replacing the dilaton with
the (anti)chiral superfields s, s . Hence, the field dependence of the superpotential is
W = W (s, tI , AI , A ).
(2.12)
Its general form will be given in Section 2.3.

The scalar potential may be derived through the following prescription.3 First form

K (s) k(s, s )
ln xI +
XA ,
I
(2.13)
which is identical to (2.11) except that the dependence has been replaced with a dependence
on the (anti)chiral superfields s, s . Then define the effective Khler metric,
(s)
K mn Kmn + VmGS
n ,
(2.14)
whose inverse is K mn and where V GS was defined in (2.3). Both the effective Khler metric and
its inverse are given in Appendix A.2. It is conventional in this formalism to write the Green
Schwarz coefficient, bI , as independent of I ,4
bI = b.
(2.15)
Standard compactifications lead to b 30/8 2 [9]. Again, the scalar potential is made up of the
F -term and the D-term, but now the F -term is given by

(s)
(s)
VF = eK K mn Wm + Km
(2.16)
W W n + Kn W 3|W |2 ,
along with the replacements
Ks(s) ,
K s s

2
=
,
K/ 1 + g ( )
(2.17)
where the prime denotes differentiation with respect to . One finds

2

V = eK 3|W |2 + ( g + 1)W 1 Ws
+

A
A1
1
|WA + A A W + pA A A Ws |2
1 + pA
1
B
B (1 + pB )qI XB
1 + b +
I
2

A
2

xI WI +
qI A WA W bWs + xI
|AI WI + WAI |
,
A
where, as before, A
A
qIA
xI
3 Additional details may be found in Appendix A of [14].

4 See footnote 2.
(2.18)
275
2.3. The superpotential

The superpotential is made up of both a perturbative term and a nonperturbative term,
W = wp + wnp .
(2.19)
This terminology is meant to indicate that the perturbative term leads to (perturbative) loop corrections while the nonperturbative term is induced nonperturbatively.
The perturbative term is essentially an arbitrary polynomial in the matter fields. Its precise
form is dictated by the requirement of (spacetime) modular invariance, to be discussed in Section 4.1. If we denote both untwisted and twisted matter by , so that = AI , A, then, for either
formalism, it is given by

n
m
(tI )2
m
(tJ )2nm qJ ,
wp =
(2.20)
m
where the m are constants, the

tion,
(tI ) = etI /12
nm
are nonnegative integers and (tI ) is the Dedekind eta func-

1 e2ntI .
(2.21)
n=1
The nonperturbative term follows from gaugino condensation [15]. A strongly coupled hidden sector gauge group, Ga , is expected to condense, analogously to QCD. The corresponding
gaugino condensates, ua = a a , pick up nonzero VEVs, spontaneously breaking supersymmetry. If heavy enough they may be integrated out, inducing a nonperturbative contribution to
the superpotential. In the chiral superfield formalism this term takes the form [13,14]

2(b b )/b
1
(tI ) I a a ,
ba ua , ua = ceK/2 es/ba
wnp = eK/2
(2.22)
4
a
I
where ba is the -function coefficient of the condensing gauge group and c is a constant. By
squaring ua we may write it in terms of Y instead of s,

GS
(tI )4(bI ba )/ba .
|ua |2 = |c|2 eK eY/ba eV /ba
(2.23)
I
In the linear superfield formalism we have instead [13,14]

1
wnp = eK/2
ba ua ,
4
a

GS
(tI )4(bba )/ba ,
|ua |2 = |c|2 eK e(1+f )/ba eV /ba
(2.24)
along with the replacement

1
ua .
Ws eK/2
4
a
(2.25)
In (2.24) f = f ( ) is uniquely determined from the nonperturbative correction g( ) though the

differential equation and boundary conditions [13]
g = f f ,
g( = 0) = f ( = 0) = 0,
where a prime denotes differentiation with respect to .
(2.26)
276
2.4. The chiral or linear superfield formalism?

The dilaton in the two formalisms are related by [13]

1
1
= ,
=
1+f
s + s V GS Y
(2.27)
with f defined in (2.26). If we ignore the nonperturbative term in the superpotential, then for
identical perturbative terms the two formalisms are equivalent. There exists a duality transformation, made up of (2.17) and (2.27), linking them, known as chiral linear duality [7,8]. This is
manifest in the classical limit, i.e. for f = g = 0, but also holds true in the general case. When
the nonperturbative terms in the superpotential are included, it is unknown whether the two formalisms are equivalent [16]. Even with such an equivalence, it may be simpler to build models
in one formalism than in the other. In the following subsections many of the results will be presented in both formalisms.5 However, we will find, in many different cases, that inflation model
building is simpler in the linear superfield formalism.
3. Canonical normalization of the inflaton
Supergravity theories derived from string theory lead to noncanonically normalized kinetic
terms. To properly analyze inflation the canonical normalization of the inflaton must be determined. Since the method we will use to build inflation models, to be described in Section 6.1,
allows only Khler moduli and untwisted matter (or some mixture thereof) to be the inflaton, we
only consider the canonical normalization of these two types of fields.6
The kinetic terms will be given to lowest order in the GreenSchwarz coefficients. This is
largely unnecessary in the linear superfield formalism since it only requires dropping factors
of 1 + b , factors which have little effect on determining the canonically normalized field. In
the chiral superfield formalism, however, we must drop factors of (Y + bI )/Y . Dropping such
factors make determining the canonically normalized field much easier, but make determining
flat directions, as we will see in Section 6.1, difficult.
It is usually assumed that matter fields, both untwisted and twisted, have negligibly small
values. We cannot necessarily make this assumption for an untwisted matter field when it is
the inflaton. We will, however, always make this assumption for twisted matter. Then, with the
Khler potential (2.4) or (2.11), to lowest order in the GreenSchwarz coefficients, the kinetic
terms for the untwisted matter fields, AI , are

tI + tI
AI
AI
t
Lkin
(3.1)
AI
AI
I
AI
AI
I .
xI2
xI2
xI2
A,I
We assume the moduli fields, tI , are stabilized during inflation (in Section 4.1 we will see that
they are usually stabilized at O(1) values). This means that they are effectively constant, their
derivatives vanishing, allowing us to ignore the final two terms in (3.1). We also assume that
only the inflaton is comparable in size to the moduli fields, the rest of the untwisted matter fields
being much smaller and negligible. Without loss of generality, take the inflaton to be the 11
5 A major exception is Section 4.3 where we consider only the linear superfield formalism.
6 In particular, we consider one of these fields (and not a linear combination of them) to be the inflaton, and the other
to be stabilized. Interesting alternatives can be found in, for example, [11,17].
277
field, whose kinetic term is then

t1 + t1
11 11 .
(t1 + t1 |11 |2 )2
(3.2)
If we ignore the phase, then the canonically normalized inflaton, , is given by

|11 | = t1 + t1 tanh(/ 2),
(3.3)
where we have used the assumption that the moduli fields are constant.
In the case where instead a Khler moduli field is the inflaton we ignore both twisted and
untwisted matter by assuming that they are small, and find, to lowest order in the GreenSchwarz
coefficients, for the kinetic term
Lkin

I
1
tI tI .
(tI + tI )2
(3.4)
If we take the real part of t1 to be the inflaton then the canonically normalized inflaton, , is
given by
Re(t1 ) = e
(3.5)
4. String theory requirements

String theory places a number of requirements on its effective theory. We list four that we will
require inflation models to abide by.
4.1. Modular invariance
If we denote both untwisted and twisted matter by , so that = AI , A, then modular
transformations7 of the Khler moduli and matter fields are defined by [6]
tI
aI tI ibI
,
icI tI + dI
(icI tI + dI )qI ,
(4.1)
where
aI dI bI cI = 1,
aI , bI , cI , dI Z.
(4.2)
Recall that the qI are the modular weights and that for untwisted matter fields, qJ = qJAI =
JI , while for twisted matter fields, qI = qIA 0.8 The Khler potential and superpotential also
undergo modular transformations, which are a special case of a KhlerWeyl transformation
[23,25],

ln |icI tI + dI |2 ,
W W
(icI tI + dI )1 .
K K +
(4.3)
I
7 By modular transformations we mean specifically spacetime T-duality transformations.

8 See footnote 1.
278
Thus, the superpotential transforms with modular weight equal to 1. An important function with
modular weight equal to 1/2 is the Dedekind eta function,
(tI ) = etI /12

1 e2ntI ,
(tI ) (tI )(icI tI + dI )1/2 ,
(4.4)
n=1
which tells us that the superpotential transforms as (tI )2 and matter fields transform as
(tI )2qI .
Heterotic string theory is known to be modular invariant to all orders in perturbation theory [26]. This means that the effective theory must be as well. This is assured at tree level since
modular transformations are just special cases of KhlerWeyl transformations and KhlerWeyl
transformations are always symmetries of a tree level supergravity Lagrangian [23,25]. Field theory loop corrections in general break the modular symmetry, leading to a modular anomaly. This
anomaly is partially9 canceled by introducing the GreenSchwarz counterterm (2.3) [9].
We saw in Section 2 that the GreenSchwarz counterterm is introduced differently in the chiral
and linear superfield formalisms. In the chiral superfield formalism, the dilaton, s + s , is modular
invariant at tree level, but not so at loop level. For this reason, the GreenSchwarz counterterm
was introduced so that the combination in (2.5) is modular invariant and the Khler potential (2.4)
transforms correctly. An important advantage of the linear superfield formalism is that the dilaton, , is modular invariant to all orders in perturbation theory. This allows the GreenSchwarz
counterterm to be introduced as in (2.14). As we will see, this will lead to simplifications.
Modular invariance also dictates the form of the perturbative term in the superpotential
[10,13]. We wrote down its form in (2.20). The eta functions in front make sure the superpotential transforms with modular weight 1, while the eta functions on the end cancel the modular
transformations of the s.
4.2. Absence of mass terms
Massive states in string theory have masses on the order of the string scale (1017 GeV).
Since an effective theory is only relevant far below this scale, all massive fields must be integrated
out (leading to threshold corrections). Hence, the effective theory contains only massless fields
(at least, before any fields pick up nonzero VEVs) and cannot contain mass terms. From (2.9)
or (2.18) we see that the superpotential and its derivatives enter the scalar potential squared. For
there to be no dimension two terms in the scalar potential, i.e. no mass terms, each term in the
superpotential must be dimension three or greater. Note that this applies only to matter fields,
, with moduli not included in the counting.
4.3. Dilaton stabilization
The method we will use for building inflation models, to be described in Section 6.1, does not
allow the dilaton to be the inflaton.10 This means that the dilaton must be stabilized, otherwise it
can destroy inflation [27]. By stabilized we mean that during inflation the dilaton potential must
contain a stable minimum. The method we use to achieve this, known as Khler stabilization
[13,28,29,31], has been worked out in the linear superfield formalism in some detail [13,30],
9 Threshold corrections from integrating out heavy fields cancel the remainder of the anomaly [6,24].
10 In general, the dilaton as the inflaton is problematic [27].
279
Fig. 1. (a) The dilaton potential during inflation (4.5) with a stable minimum at inf = 0.87. (b) The dilaton potential in
the true vacuum (4.6) with a stable minimum and vanishing vacuum energy at 0 = 0.56. (c) Evaluated at 0 = 0.56,
the coupling constant at the string scale (4.7) is gs = 0.7.
where it is simpler. It has also been considered in a chiral superfield formalism without modular
invariance [31]. We consider only the linear superfield formalism.
We make two further requirements. First, in the true vacuum the dilaton potential must have
a stable minimum with vanishing vacuum energy,11 and second, the coupling constant for the
gauge fields at the string scale, gs , must take the supersymmetric GUT value, 0.7.
In the models we will consider the dilaton dependence during inflation is contained in the
overall factor
eg
(4.5)
,
1 + b
where g = g( ) is the nonperturbative correction in (2.11). In the true vacuum, using gaugino condensates to break supersymmetry and making the usual assumption that all matter fields
vanish, we find that the Khler moduli are stabilized at the fixed point tI = 1 [13]. The scalar
potential in the true vacuum is then (see, for example, [30])
( )
Vinf =
V0
1
ba2 2
(f f + 1)(1 + ba )2 3,
(4.6)
where ba is the -function coefficient for the hidden sector condensing gauge group which produces the gaugino condensates, with phenomenologically preferred values 0.03 > ba > 0.04
[33], and f = f ( ) was defined in (2.26). Finally, the coupling constant for the gauge fields
at the string scale, gs , is given by [13]
gs2 =
2
,
1+f
(4.7)
where the right-hand side is to be evaluated at the true vacuum.

A similar (and more comprehensive) analysis of these requirements for the dilaton was made
in [30], where additional phenomenological constraints were mentioned. Following [10,30] we
use only the two leading terms for the nonperturbative parameters [28],

1
e1/ b .
f ( ) = B 1 + A
(4.8)
b
In Fig. 1 we have plotted (4.5), (4.6) and (4.7) for the values
A = 0.27,
B = 26.8.
11 A related issue concerning dilaton stabilization in the BGW model was considered in [32].
(4.9)
280
Fig. 2. (a) A plot of (4.10) with arg(tI ) = /6. (b) A plot of (4.10) with |tI |=1. A stable minimum is clearly seen at
tI = exp(i/6).
Fig. 1(a) shows a stable minimum during inflation at inf = 0.87, Fig. 1(b) shows a stable
minimum with vanishing vacuum energy in the true vacuum at 0 = 0.56, and Fig. 1(c) shows,
when evaluated at 0 = 0.56, that the coupling constant at the string scale is 0.7.
4.4. Khler moduli stabilization
In addition to the dilaton, the three Khler moduli, tI , as long as they are not the inflaton,
must be stabilized. In modular invariant theories we are assured that the scalar potential will
have stationary points at tI = 1, exp(i/6). These two points correspond to fixed points of the
modular transformation (4.1). The important question is whether the stationary points are (stable)
minima.
In the models we will consider the Khler moduli dependence is often of the form
4 1

4 1

= (tI + tI )(tI )
,
xI (tI )
(4.10)
where we have made the usual assumption that theuntwisted matter fields, AI , are negligible
compared to the moduli. Setting tI = exp(i/6) + 3 one finds [11]

4 1

4

1
(tI + tI )(tI )
(4.11)
= ei/6 1 + ||2 + O 3 ,
3
showing that tI = exp(i/6) corresponds to a stable minimum (tI = 1 corresponds to a saddle point). Alternatively this can be shown by plotting (4.10). Fig. 2(a) is a plot of (4.10) with
arg(tI ) = /6 and Fig. 2(b) is a plot of (4.10) with |tI | = 1. It is clear that tI = exp(i/6) corresponds to a stable minimum.
5. Generating VEVs
In Section 4.2 we required each term of the superpotential to have three or more matter
fields. Only one of these fields will be the inflaton. The remainder will be given VEVs. We
consider two methods for generating VEVs which we present in the linear superfield formalism.
In Appendix B we reproduce them in the chiral superfield formalism.
5.1. D-term VEVs
In many orbifold compactifications there is an anomalous U (1) gauge group [34]. Canceling
the anomaly requires a GreenSchwarz counterterm which leads to a FayetIliopoulos contribu-
281
tion to the D-term [35]. A natural way for fields to obtain VEVs is by having them cancel such
a D-term. The D-term contribution to the scalar potential is

2
1
VD = g 2
(5.1)
q K + D ,
2
where q is the U (1) charge (and should not be confused with the modular weight) and, in the
linear superfield formalism, the FayetIliopoulos term is
2 Tr(Q)
,
(5.2)
192 2
where Tr(Q) = q 100 [34]. With the Khler potential (2.11), the D-term (5.1) becomes

2
1
q
VD = g 2
(5.3)
xI I q | |2 + D .
2
D =
To avoid D-term supersymmetry breaking during inflation the matter fields must pick up the
modular invariant VEVs,
q

2 = f
(5.4)
xI I ,
I
where f is a constant, to cancel (5.3).

5.2. F -term VEVs
It is also possible to induce VEVs using the F -term of the scalar potential [10]. Consider
three fields, , 2 , 3 . Assume 2 , 3 pick up nonzero VEVs: 2 , 3 = 0 (for example, by
canceling a D-term). Now form the modular invariant expression

(tI )2 qI , = , 2, 3,
= 2 3
(5.5)
I
to be used in the superpotential

2(1 qI )
W ( ) = 2 3
(tI )
cn n ,
I
= , 2, 3,
(5.6)
n=0
where the cn are constants. It can be shown that, upon plugging this superpotential into the scalar
potential, = 0, and thus

2

q

V = eK
(5.7)
xJ J 2 3
(tI )2(1 qI ) c0 +
cn n .
J
n=1
Since 2 , 3 are assumed to have nonzero VEVs, is determined by

cn n = 0.
c0 +
(5.8)
n=1
The only way that (5.8) could be satisfied is if [10]

= f 3,
(5.9)
282
where f is a constant, and thus

2

2

2 qI
= |f |6 2 3
(t
)
I

.
(5.10)
6. Inflation model building

In this section we consider possible directions for inflation model building in the supergravity
theory described above.
For convenience we will limit ourselves to untwisted matter and will suppress the A index.
For example, 1 corresponds to an untwisted matter field from the I = 1 moduli sector. We will
also make use of the shorthand I = (tI ) for the Dedekind eta function.
6.1. The -problem and a method for building inflation models
As a first step in F -term inflation model building in supergravity, one must overcome the
-problem, which may be understood as follows. With the help of a KhlerWeyl transformation
and a holomorphic field redefinition a Khler potential may be written as

|a |2 + ,
K=
(6.1)
a
where dots represent additional and, for the purpose of this subsubsection, irrelevant terms. The
F -term contribution to the scalar potential, as we have seen above, is of the form
VF = eK ( ).
(6.2)
The slow roll parameter , defined in (1.1), is then given by

= 1 + .
(6.3)
Recall that slow roll inflation requires || 1, and therefore, barring model dependent cancellations of the 1 in (6.3), slow roll inflation will not occur in a generic supergravity scalar potential.
This is the -problem.
The method we use to solve the -problem was proposed in [11,18], and is particularly suited
for orbifold compactifications of string theory. Consider three fields, , , , where is the
inflaton. Take to have a small, perhaps vanishing, VEV during inflation, designated by
0.
(6.4)
By small we mean that is completely negligible in the scalar potential so that any term containing can be ignored (i.e. set to zero). We take this also to mean that any function which
contains can also be ignored. In particular, the superpotential, W (, , ), which is assumed
to be a polynomial function of the fields in which every term contains , during inflation satisfies

W (, , ) 0.
(6.5)
and derivatives do not effect the overall dependence of W and so are small as well, W ,
W 0. However, a derivative of W removes a factor of , and is therefore not small,
W 0.
(6.6)
283
As shown by Stewart [18], for a Khler potential of the form12 (2.1), a W which leads to
inflation in global supersymmetry will also lead to inflation in supergravity where the inflaton can
be a Khler moduli or an untwisted matter field. Thus, inflation model building in supergravity
has been rendered equivalent to inflation model building in global supersymmetry, where there
is no -problem.
6.2. Preserving flat directions I
As an example of what these assumptions can do, we review the superpotential presented
in [10],
W = 1 22 32 ,
(6.7)
which is of the form (2.20) and where is a constant. This superpotential does not satisfy the
requirements of Section 4.2. It will be generalized in Section 6.3 so that it does. For now, we
consider it for illustrative purposes. Plugging the superpotential (6.7) into (2.18) we obtain the
scalar potential in the linear superfield formalism. It was not shown in [10] under what conditions
|1 | = 0 will correspond to a stable minimum so that the framework of the previous subsection
may be used. In Appendix C.1 we show explicitly the conditions required. Assuming these conditions, so that we may set |1 | = 0, the scalar potential collapses down to [10]
||2
.
|2 3 |4
For the Khler potential (2.11) this becomes [10]
V = e K x1
||2
eg
.
1 + b x2 x3 |2 3 |4
In the chiral superfield formalism we instead find
V=
(6.8)
(6.9)
||2
1
.
(6.10)
Y + b1 x2 x3 |2 3 |4
Notice that (6.9) is completely independent of moduli and untwisted matter from the first
moduli sector (t1 and 1A ). Any combination of these fields corresponds to perfect flat directions of the potential. The framework of Section 6.1 has allowed us to preserve flat directions,
canceling their generic lifting by supergravity, thus solving the -problem.
In (6.10) there is an explicit dependence on these fields through the GreenSchwarz counterterm (2.3) contained in Y , which appears to lift the flat directions and contradict our statement in
Section 2.4 that the two formalisms are equivalent. In fact the flat directions do exist in (6.10);
it is just more difficult to determine what they are. To do so requires diagonalizing the Khler
metric, equivalent to canonically normalizing the fields, just as we did in Section 3, but now
with the GreenSchwarz coefficients includednot an easy thing to do in the chiral superfield
formalism.
Finally, we note two things. First, the dilaton dependence of (6.9) is precisely what we showed
in Section 4.3 could stabilize the dilaton during inflation and in the true vacuum, and second, the
Khler moduli dependence of (6.9) is precisely what we showed in Section 4.4 would stabilize
Khler moduli.
V=
12 Stewart actually gives the general form that the Khler potential may take, which includes (2.1) [18].
284
6.3. Preserving flat directions II

The superpotential in Section 6.2 may be generalized so that it satisfies the requirements of
Section 4.2 [10]. To do so, consider the superpotential
W0 = w + w ,
(6.11)
where
w = 1 2 2 3 22 .
(6.12)
Assume 2 , 3 are charged under an anomalous U (1) gauge group and pick up VEVs to cancel
the D-term, as explained in Section 5.1. If (6.12) were the entire superpotential (so that we did not
have the contribution w in (6.11)), we would find (under certain assumptions; see Appendix C.1)
that 1 = 0, which would give

2
V = eK x1 2 2 3 |2 |4 .
(6.13)
It would appear then that 2 = 0, but we are going to use w in (6.11) to induce a (F -term)
VEV for 2 . Following (5.6) we take

n
w = 1 2 3
(6.14)
cn 2 2 3 24 32
n=0
where the primed fields in (6.14) and the unprimed fields in (6.12) are distinct, the cn are constants and 2 , 3 are assumed to pick up D-term VEVs. Plugging the complete superpotential
(6.11) (made up of (6.12) and (6.14)) into the scalar potential, we find that 1 = 1 = 0 (see
Appendix C.2 for details), which gives

2
K
2 2
4 2 n

cn 2 2 3 2 3 .
V = e x1 2 2 3 2 + 2 3 c0 +
(6.15)
n=1
Although 1 cannot be determined until the cn are specified, we might imagine that V is
minimized when the second term in (6.15) vanishes [10]. This is plausible since the term lowest
order in the fields is the c0 term and we might expect that 1 is determined by its cancellation.
This was the case considered in Section 5.2 and we assume it to be true here [10]. From (5.10)
we then have [10]

2 2 = |f |6 4 2 2 .
(6.16)
2 3 2 3
The potential is then
V = ||2 |f |6
f2 f3 eg
1
,

f2 f3 1 + b x2 x3 |2 3 |4
(6.17)
where we have plugged in the D-term VEVs of 2 , 3 , 2 , 3 using (5.4).

6.4. Loop corrections
In the next subsection we will consider a model in which the inflaton enters at loop level. In
this subsection we review the relevant one loop corrections to the scalar potential.
In the full supergravity theory there are numerous terms in the one loop correction to the scalar
potential [20,21]. Fortunately, for the models we consider, there will be only a single term that
285
contributes to the inflaton mass [19,20]. To write down this term we begin by reviewing Khler
covariant notation (see, for example, [20]). First, we define
A eK W,
(6.18)
with corresponding covariant derivatives

Am = Dm A = m A =
A,
m

Amn = Dm Dn A = m An mn
A ,
(6.19)
where the connection is defined by

= K p m Knp .
mn
(6.20)
With this notation we can now compactly write down the relevant loop correction. It is contained
in the expression [19,20]
ln
(6.21)
,
32 2
where is the momentum cutoff, V is the tree level F -term contribution to the scalar potential
and
V = 2V eK Aij A ij ,
A = eK W ,
A mn = K m K np A p .
(6.22)
Consider now a superpotential of the form

W = 1 2 3 + 1 ( ) + 1 ( ),
2 , 3 , 1 ,
(6.23)
1
where 1 is the inflaton,

are zero during inflation and the dots are any set of fields
not contained in the first term nor from the same moduli sector as the inflaton (in this case I = 1).
If (6.23) leads to the tree level scalar potential V then by including the loop correction (6.21)
it can be shown that

|1 |2
2
= V 1 4||2 sinh2 () ,
V = V 1 4||
(6.24)
2
t1 + t1 |1 |
where is the canonically normalized inflaton. Expanding this to quadratic order we have

V = V 1 4||2 2 ,
(6.25)
which is an example of a so-called small field model of inflation [2,22].
6.5. Loop potential
In the previous subsection we saw that to construct a model in which the inflaton dependence
shows up at loop level there must be a nonzero tree level vacuum energy. Obviously the inflaton
must also be missing from the tree level potential. Both of these requirements are satisfied by
the potential in Section 6.3. In this subsection we combine the works of [10,19] and consider the
loop corrections to that potential.
The superpotential we use is
W = 1 2 3 + W0 ,
(6.26)
2
3
where W0 was given in (6.11), 1 is the inflaton and both

and
have vanishing VEVs. This
is of the form (6.23) and it can be shown that with the fields at their VEVs the tree level potential
286
comes out as if the superpotential were just W0 , which was given in (6.17) (see Appendix C.3),
V = ||2 |f |6
f2 f3 g
1
e
.

f2 f3
x2 x3 |2 3 |4
(6.27)
The inflaton dependence then enters at loop level, as explained in the previous subsection, yielding

V = V 1 4| |2 sinh2 () .
(6.28)
This potential stabilizes the dilaton, t1 , t2 , but does not induce a potential for t1 . For small
during inflation,

V = V 1 4| |2 2 .
(6.29)
6.6. Phenomenology
The inflaton potential in (6.29) is of the form

2
V = V0 1
,
(6.30)
with
V0 = ||2 |f |6
f2 f3 g
1
e
,
f2 f3
x2 x3 |2 3 |4
=
1
4||2
(6.31)
For large (6.30) is an example of a small field model of inflation [2,22]. This is precisely the
situation we have since is small, it being a loop factor. During inflation / is usually small
enough that V V0 . The slow roll parameters (1.1) are then given by

2 2
2
= 2
(6.32)
,
= 2,
2 = 0.

For inflation to be possible we require
2
(6.33)
so that || 1. Slow roll inflation ends at

1
e = 2 ,
(6.34)
2
rolling from left to right. In lieu of (6.33) inflation is ending at large field values. If we wish to
restrict ourselves to small field values we must imagine that some other mechanism is acting to
end inflation earlier, such as the hybrid inflation mechanism [2,36]. We will therefore write the
remaining equations in terms of an arbitrary ending field value, e .
The number of e-folds, N , from = until the end of inflation at = e can be computed
with (1.4). Inverting this result yields
= e e2N/ .
2
With this we may write the spectral index, its running and the tensor fraction (1.2) as

12 e 2 4N/2
4
e
,
n=1 2 2
(6.35)
(6.36)

96 e 4 8N/2 64 e 2 4N/2
= 4
e
4
e
,

32 e 2 4N/2
e
.
r= 2

287
(6.37)
(6.38)
The COBE normalization (1.5) depends on the value of . For 10 we have roughly
V0 |f |6 | |2 1016 GeV.
(6.39)
7. Conclusion
We have described methods for building semi-realistic models of F -term inflation. By semirealistic we mean that they are built in, and obey the requirements of, semi-realistic particle
physics models, taken here to be effective supergravity theories derived from orbifold compactifications of the weakly coupled heterotic string. We reviewed those aspects of the supergravity
theories relevant for inflation model building in both the chiral and linear superfield formalisms.
This included scalar potentials with a comprehensive matter content, string theory requirements
that the effective supergravity theories should obey and various tools and methods for building
inflation models.
In the course of this review we found that inflation model building is much simpler in the
linear superfield formalism. In particular, canonical normalization of the fields, determination of
flat directions, moduli stabilization and generation of VEVs was found to be simpler. The reason
for this is the manner in which the linear superfield formalism includes the GreenSchwarz
counterterm.
After reviewing previous work on inflation model building in these supergravity theories we
combined them to construct a small field model of inflation in which the inflaton enters at loop
order. This model is incomplete in that it does not have a natural end to inflation, such as through
a hybrid mechanism. Regardless, it is illustrative of directions one may take in building inflation
models. Building such models is not simple and more will have to be done to build more realistic
models, but we hope that we have been able to offer methods for how inflation model building
can take into account details of a particular underlying particle physics model.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to Mary K. Gaillard for her help while preparing this paper. This work was
supported in part by the Director, Office of Science, Office of High Energy and Nuclear Physics,
Division of High Energy Physics of the US Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC0205CH11231, in part by the National Science Foundation under grant PHY-0098840.
Appendix A. Khler metrics
The Khler metric, Kmn , is defined by
Kmn =

K,
m n
where K is the Khler potential. K mn is the inverse Khler metric, defined by

mn
Kmp K pn
= m
,
K
= K mn
,
(A.1)
(A.2)
288
with the star denoting complex conjugation.

A.1. The chiral superfield formalism
The Khler potential in Section 2.1 is

ln xI +
XA .
K = ln Y
I
(A.3)
We define the following quantities,

bI 1 + Y 1 bI ,
PA 1 + Y 1 PA ,

I bI +
qIA PA XA ,
(A.4)
(A.5)
(A.6)
I bI +
qID PD XD ,
(A.7)
D
q
A I xI I .
A
(A.8)
The Khler metric is

Ks s = Y 2 ,
(A.9)
Ks J = Y 2 xJ1 J ,
(A.10)
KsBJ = Ks J BJ ,
Ks B = Y 2 PB B B ,
(A.11)
(A.12)
KI s = Y 2 xI1 I ,
KI J = I,J xI2 I + Y 2 (xI xJ )1 I J
+ (xI xJ )
(A.13)
qID qJD PD XD ,
(A.14)
KI BJ = KI J BJ ,
KI B = x 1 qIB PB B B Y 2 x 1 PB I B B ,
(A.15)
KAI s = Y 2 xI1 I AI ,
(A.17)
KAI J = KI J AI ,
KAI BJ = KI J AI BJ + I,J A,B xI1 I ,
KAI B = KI B AI ,
PA A A ,
KAJ = xJ qJA PA A A Y 2 xJ1 PA J A A ,
KAs = Y
KABJ = KAJ BJ ,
K = A,B PA A + Y 2 PA PB A B A B .
AB
The inverse Khler metric is

2
PD2 P 1 XD +
1 bK
,
K s s = Y 2 +
D
(A.16)
(A.18)
(A.19)
(A.20)
(A.21)
(A.22)
(A.23)
(A.24)
(A.25)
289
K s J = J1 xJ bJ ,
(A.26)
K sBJ = 0,

1 B
K s B = PB PB1
K
qK bK B ,
(A.27)
(A.28)
K I s = I1 xI bI ,

|DI |2 + xI2 ,
K I J = I,J I1 xI
(A.29)
(A.30)
K I BJ = I,J I1 xI BI ,
(A.31)
I B
K = I1 qIB xI B ,
AI s
(A.32)
= 0,
(A.33)
AI J
= I,J I1 xI AI ,
K
K AI BJ = I,J A,B I1 xI ,
AI B
(A.34)
(A.35)
= 0,

1
1 A
As
K = PA PA
K qK bK A ,
K
(A.36)
(A.37)
K AJ = J1 qJA xJ A ,
K
K
ABJ
AB
(A.38)
= 0,
= A,B PA1 A1
(A.39)
1 A B
K
qK qK A B .
(A.40)
A.2. The linear superfield formalism

The Khler potential in Section 2.2 is

K = ln( ) + g( )
ln xI +
XA .
I
(A.41)
We define the following quantities,

b 1 + b,
PA 1 + PA ,

I b +
qID PD XD ,
(A.42)
(A.43)
(A.44)
D
q
A I xI I .
A
(A.45)
The effective Khler metric is

K s s = 2 (1 + g )1 ,
K = 0,
(A.46)
K sBJ = 0,
(A.48)
sJ
(A.47)
290
K s B = 0,
(A.49)
K I s = 0,

K I J = I,J xI2 I + (xI xJ )1
PD qID qJD XD ,
(A.50)
(A.51)
K I BJ = KI J BJ ,
(A.52)
K I B = xI1 qIB PB B B ,
(A.53)
K AI s = 0,
K AI J = K I J AI ,
(A.54)
(A.55)
K AI BJ = K I J AI BJ + I,J A,B xI1 I ,
(A.56)
K AI B = K I B AI ,
(A.57)
K As = 0,
K = x 1 qJA PA A A ,
(A.58)
(A.59)
K ABJ = K AJ BJ ,
(A.60)
K AB = A,B PA A .
(A.61)
AJ
The inverse effective Khler metric is

K s s = 2 (1 + g ),
s J
(A.62)
= 0,
(A.63)
K sBJ = 0,
K s B = 0,
I s
(A.64)
(A.65)
= 0,
K I J = I,J I1 xI

|DI |2 + xI2 ,
(A.66)
(A.67)
K I BJ = I,J I1 xI BJ ,
(A.68)
K I B = I1 qIB xI B ,
(A.69)
K AI s = 0,
K AI J = I,J 1 xI AI ,
(A.70)
(A.71)
AI BJ
= I,J A,B I1 xI ,
K AI B = 0,
K As = 0,
AJ
(A.72)
(A.73)
(A.74)
= J1 qJA xJ A ,
(A.75)
ABJ
K
= 0,

1 A B
K AB = A,B PA1 A1 +
K
qK qK A B .
K
(A.76)
(A.77)
291
Appendix B. Generating VEVs in the chiral superfield formalism

In this appendix we reproduce Section 5 in the chiral superfield formalism. The D-term contribution to the scalar potential is

2
1 2
VD = g
(B.1)
q K + D ,
2
but now with the FayetIliopoulos term

2Y 1 Tr(Q)
.
192 2
With the Khler potential (2.4), the D-term (B.1) becomes

2
1 2 qI
2
xI
q | | + D ,
VD = g
2
D =
(B.2)
(B.3)

1
Y [Y + bI + B qIB XB (Y + pB )] for = AI,

for = A.
Y 1 (Y + pA )
Canceling (B.3) requires the matter fields to pick up the modular invariant VEVs,
q

2 = f Y 1 1
xI I .
(B.4)
(B.5)
Appendix C. Background calculations

In some of the subsections in Section 6 we assumed that certain fields obtained certain VEVs
during inflation. In this appendix we show explicitly under what circumstances this will happen.
To do so it proves helpful to write the scalar potential (2.18) as
V = eK V .
(C.1)
Then, designating derivatives with respect to the untwisted matter field, , by a subscript, so that
V =
V
,
I
we have
V =
2V
,
I I
(C.2)

2|I |
V = e V +
V ,
xI

2
K
,
V |=0 = e V + V
xI
=0

V |, =0 = eK V , =0 .
K
(C.3)
(C.4)
(C.5)
For simplicity we have suppressed the A index for the untwisted matter fields , and in (C.5)
and are assumed to be distinct. Finally, we will also need

1
VI |=0 = eK VI + V
(C.6)
.
xI
=0
292
C.1. Section 6.2

In this subsection we show under what circumstances |1 | = 0 is a stable minimum for the
scalar potential considered in Section 6.2. We will find, in fact, that for the simplest case, it is
actually a maximum. Begin by writing the superpotential (6.7) as
W = 1 ,
= 22 32 ,
(C.7)
so that from (C.1) we have

V = ( g 2)|1 |2 ||2 + (1 + b )1 |1 |2
1
+ (1 + b )
|xI I | + xI
2
| AI I |2
A=

2
x1 |1 |2 1 + .
(C.8)
We can see that 1 only enters V in the form of |1 |2 and therefore |1 | = 0 is a critical point
of V . From a look at (C.3) we can immediately see that |1 | = 0 is then a critical point of the full
potential V . This also means that (C.6) vanishes and so the determination of stable minima for 1
and the Khler moduli, tI , may be done independently. It follows then that t2 , t3 = exp(i/6)
correspond to minima, as discussed in Section 6.2.
|1 | = 0 will be a stable minimum if (C.4) is positive. We have

2
2V
=
||2 ,
(C.9)
x1 =0 1 + b
and
V |=0 = ( g 2)||2 + (1 + b )1
1
+ (1 + b )
|xI I |2 + xI
(1 + b )
2x1 Re(1 )
|| .
2
| AI I |2
A=
(C.10)
Now,
|xI I |2 = ||2 |2xI I + 1|2 ,
I =
1 I
,
I tI
(C.11)
for I = 2, 3 and |2xI I + 1| vanishes at the self dual point tI = exp(i/6). In the second term of
(C.10) then, only the I = 1 contribution survives. The second to last term vanishes since 1 = 0
and we make the usual assumption that the VEVs of the matter fields are zero (i.e. we ignore the
matter fields we are not using) so that the AI are zero.
Putting everything together by placing (C.9) and (C.10) into (C.4) we obtain

1
.
V |=0 = eK ||2 g 2 1
(C.12)
1 + b
Using the results of Section 4.3 we can determine numerically that when the dilaton is sitting at
its minimum (during inflation),
g | = 0.75,
= 0.87.
(C.13)
Thus,
V |=0 = (1.25)eK ||2 ,
(C.14)
293
which corresponds to |1 | = 0 being an unstable maximum. We have used b = 30/8 2 but note
that even for b = 0 (i.e. removing the GreenSchwarz counterterm) we have a maximum.
By turning on the AI it may be possible to turn this into a minimum. We made the usual
assumption that the AI (that were not the inflaton) were zero during inflation. If instead we turn
them on (say, by giving them D-term VEVs) then they contribute positively to V . Each AI
contributes

4
K
2
2
xI |I | |AI |2 = (0.431)|AI |2 eK ||2 .
V |=0 = e |F |
(C.15)
1 + b
Thus, we require

(0.43)|AI |2 > 1.25
|AI |2 > 2.91.
AI
(C.16)
AI
Recall from (5.4) that for D-term VEVs,

2 O(100)
0.16
xI
|I A |2
.
q
192 2 q
(C.17)
IA
For simplicity we have assumed each field has an identical charge, q, and the inequality follows
because we have evaluated the O(100) term at precisely 100. For q a little smaller than 1 and
O(100) a little greater than 100 this can presumably satisfy the bound in (C.16).
Finally, note that giving these terms D-term VEVs has no effect on the potential since once
we set |1 | = 0 their contribution vanishes.
C.2. Section 6.3
In this subsection we argue that |1 | = |1 | = 0 corresponds to a stable minimum for the
superpotential given in (6.11). We begin by writing the superpotential as
w = 1 ,
w = 1 ,
where
= 2 2 3 22 ,
= 2 3
(C.18)

= 2 2 3 24 32 .
cn n ,
(C.19)
Then
V = ( g 2)|1 + 1 |2 + (1 + b )1

1 (xI I ) + (xI )2
I
1
I
+ xI

1 ( AI I + AI ) + ( AI + )2
I
AI
1
A=,
2

+ (1 + b )1 x1 1 ( 1 I ) + 1 ( 1 I ) +

2
+ 1 ( 1 I ) + 1 ( 1 I ) + .
(C.20)
It is easy to see that |1 | and |1 | never appear alone and raised to the first power, so that
|1 | = |1 | = 0 are critical points of V and thus from (C.3) also critical points of V . This also
means that (C.6) vanishes and so the determination of stable minima for 1 and the Khler
moduli, tI , may be done independently.
294
Note that if the fields are at these points then the potential becomes

V = eK (1 + b )1 x1 ||2 + | |2 .
(C.21)
As discussed in Section 6.3 we take the cn to be such that the potential is minimized for
= 0.
(C.22)
To determine if our critical points correspond to minima we use the second derivative test. For
two fields this requires that both
2
D V V V
(C.23)
and V are positive (which itself requires V to be positive). Evaluated at the critical points,
|1 | = |1 | = 0, we have

2V
2V
K

|
=
e
+
V | = eK V +
,
V
V
,
x1
x1

V | = eK V ,
(C.24)
where the bar means that we have set the fields to zero and where

2
2 2
2V
|| + | |2 =
||2 .
=

x1
1 + b
1 + b
Of the second derivatives the simplest is

| AI I + AI |2 + ||2 ,
eK V = (1 + b )1 |xI I |2 + xI
(C.25)
(C.26)
A=,
where we have used = 0. We can clearly see that this is positive.

Now consider

eK V = ( g 2)1 ||2

+ (1 + b )1
| AI I + AI |2
|xI I |2 + xI
1
+ (1 + b )
+ || .
2x1 Re(1 )
2
A=,
(C.27)
There are a few things to note about this equation. First, we have again used = 0. Second
vanishes since is independent of t1 . This is a direct consequence of our choice
the Re(1 )
for 2 to be in the I = 2 sector and is a major reason why such a choice was made. In fact, I
vanishes except for when I = 2. This means that the second term only vanishes when I = 2 in
the sum, since t2 = exp(i/6) (see (C.11)). Putting it all together we have

3
1
xI
| AI I + AI |2 .
+
eK V = ||2 g 2
1 + b
1 + b
I
A=,
(C.28)
The first term is negative (though not as negative as in Section C.1 because we now have a 3
instead of a 2). In Appendix C.1 we had to turn on VEVs to get the analogous second derivative positive. Here we do not have a choice since we already have fields with D-term VEVs.
Specifically, we have

3

g 2
= 0.50
1 + b
295
(C.29)
and

1
xI
| AI I + AI |2
1 + b

I
A=,
2
2

= (1 + b )1 ||2 x2 2 2 2 + 21 + 2 2 2 + 21 + |22 2 |2 + x3 |3 |2
? (1 + b )1 x3 |3 |2 ||2 (0.75)(1.7)(0.1)2 ||2 100||2 .
(C.30)
Thus, (C.28) is easily positive. This follows since AI leads to a large contribution. Such a
contribution did not show up in Appendix C.1 since there the superpotential was linear in the
matter fields and so AI vanished.
The final second derivative is

eK V = 2(1 + b )1 Re ei( )
2(xI I )xI I + xI

( AI I + AI )(AI I + AI ) + I .
(C.31)
A=,
We have so far shown that V and V are positive. We now argue that V is smaller than
them, and therefore that (C.23) is positive. From (C.19) it is not hard to show that AI to leading
order is order four in the matter fields. The dominant contribution (i.e. the lowest leading order
term in the matter fields) to (C.31) is the AI AI which is order six. However, the dominant term
to (C.28) is the |AI |2 term which is order four and the dominant term to (C.26) is the ||2 term
which is order six. We therefore expect (C.23) to be positive and |1 | = |1 | = 0 to correspond
to a stable minimum.
C.3. Section 6.5
Here we are considering a potential of the form
W = 1 2 3 + W0 ,
(C.32)
where W0 is the superpotential in Section 6.3. We would like to show that the VEVs of the fields
in the first term of (C.32) and the fields in W0 vanish. First note that, under the assumption
that a critical point of the potential exists when the fields vanish, it is not hard to show that the
analysis for the minima of the fields is independent of the analysis for the fields.
If we set the fields in the potential to zero then it reduces to the same potential that is in
Section 6.3, where VEVs of the fields were argued to vanish. Now set the fields at their
(vanishing) VEVs, but retain the fields, to get

3
eK V = |1 2 3 |2 g 2 1
1 + b

1
+
(C.33)
x1 |2 3 |2 + x2 |1 3 |2 + x3 |1 2 |2 + ||2 ,
1 + b
296
where is given in (C.19). With (C.29) we know that the first term is negative. If it were positive
then the entire potential would be positive and the VEVs would be zero. However, it is the terms
in the second line that dominate, being fourth order in the matter fields while the first term is
order six. These terms tell us that for vanishing values of the fields we have a minimum.
References
[1] A.R. Liddle, D.H. Lyth, Cosmological Inflation and Large-Scale Structure, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK,
2000.
[2] D.H. Lyth, A. Riotto, Phys. Rep. 314 (1999) 1, hep-ph/9807278.
[3] D.N. Spergel, et al., astro-ph/0603449;
U. Seljak, A. Slosar, P. McDonald, astro-ph/0604335;
A.G. Sanchez, et al., Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 366 (2006) 189, astro-ph/0507583;
W.H. Kinney, E.W. Kolb, A. Melchiorri, A. Riotto, Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 023502, astro-ph/0605338.
[4] S. Dodelson, L. Hui, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 131301, astro-ph/0305113;
A.R. Liddle, S.M. Leach, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 103503, astro-ph/0305263.
[5] L.J. Dixon, J.A. Harvey, C. Vafa, E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 261 (1985) 678;
L.J. Dixon, J.A. Harvey, C. Vafa, E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 274 (1986) 285.
[6] D. Bailin, A. Love, Phys. Rep. 315 (1999) 285.
[7] W. Siegel, Phys. Lett. B 85 (1979) 333.
[8] P. Adamietz, P. Binetruy, G. Girardi, R. Grimm, Nucl. Phys. B 401 (1993) 257;
J.P. Derendinger, F. Quevedo, M. Quiros, Nucl. Phys. B 428 (1994) 282, hep-th/9402007;
P. Binetruy, G. Girardi, R. Grimm, Phys. Rep. 343 (2001) 255, hep-th/0005225 (Chapter 5).
[9] G. Lopes Cardoso, B.A. Ovrut, Nucl. Phys. B 369 (1992) 351;
J.P. Derendinger, S. Ferrara, C. Kounnas, F. Zwirner, Nucl. Phys. B 372 (1992) 145.
[10] M.K. Gaillard, D.H. Lyth, H. Murayama, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 123505, hep-th/9806157.
[11] E.J. Copeland, A.R. Liddle, D.H. Lyth, E.D. Stewart, D. Wands, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 6410, astro-ph/9401011.
[12] D. Lust, C. Munoz, Phys. Lett. B 279 (1992) 272, hep-th/9201047.
[13] P. Binetruy, M.K. Gaillard, Y.Y. Wu, Nucl. Phys. B 481 (1996) 109, hep-th/9605170;
P. Binetruy, M.K. Gaillard, Y.Y. Wu, Nucl. Phys. B 493 (1997) 27, hep-th/9611149;
M.K. Gaillard, B.D. Nelson, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 22 (2007) 1451, hep-th/0703227.
[14] P. Binetruy, M.K. Gaillard, B.D. Nelson, Nucl. Phys. B 604 (2001) 32, hep-ph/0011081.
[15] S. Ferrara, L. Girardello, H.P. Nilles, Phys. Lett. B 125 (1983) 457;
J.P. Derendinger, L.E. Ibanez, H.P. Nilles, Phys. Lett. B 155 (1985) 65;
M. Dine, R. Rohm, N. Seiberg, E. Witten, Phys. Lett. B 156 (1985) 55.
[16] C.P. Burgess, J.P. Derendinger, F. Quevedo, M. Quiros, Phys. Lett. B 348 (1995) 428, hep-th/9501065.
[17] J. Ellis, Z. Lalak, S. Pokorski, K. Turzynski, hep-th/0606133.
[18] E.D. Stewart, Phys. Rev. D 51 (1995) 6847, hep-ph/9405389.
[19] M.K. Gaillard, H. Murayama, K.A. Olive, Phys. Lett. B 355 (1995) 71, hep-ph/9504307.
[20] M.K. Gaillard, V. Jain, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 1951, hep-th/9308090.
[21] M.K. Gaillard, V. Jain, K. Saririan, Phys. Rev. D 55 (1997) 883, hep-th/9606052;
M.K. Gaillard, V. Jain, K. Saririan, Phys. Lett. B 387 (1996) 520, hep-th/9606135.
[22] J. Martin, C. Ringeval, JCAP 0608 (2006) 009, astro-ph/0605367.
[23] B. Zumino, Phys. Lett. B 87 (1979) 203.
[24] L.J. Dixon, V. Kaplunovsky, J. Louis, Nucl. Phys. B 355 (1991) 649.
[25] J. Wess, J. Bagger, Supersymmetry and Supergravity, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, USA, 1992.
[26] A. Giveon, N. Malkin, E. Rabinovici, Phys. Lett. B 220 (1989) 551;
E. Alvarez, M.A.R. Osorio, Phys. Rev. D 40 (1989) 1150.
[27] R. Brustein, P.J. Steinhardt, Phys. Lett. B 302 (1993) 196, hep-th/9212049.
[28] S.H. Shenker, in: O. Alvarez, E. Marinari, P. Windey (Eds.), Random Surfaces and Quantum Gravity. Proceedings,
NATO Advanced Research Workshop, Cargese, France, May 27June 2, 1990, in: NATO ASI series B, Physics,
vol. 262, Plenum, New York, USA, 1991.
[29] E. Silverstein, Phys. Lett. B 396 (1997) 91, hep-th/9611195.
[30] M.J. Cai, M.K. Gaillard, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 047901, hep-ph/9910478.
[31] J.A. Casas, Phys. Lett. B 384 (1996) 103, hep-th/9605180.
[32] D. Skinner, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 103506, hep-th/0302024.

[33] M.K. Gaillard, B.D. Nelson, Nucl. Phys. B 571 (2000) 3, hep-ph/9909563;
A. Birkedal-Hansen, B.D. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 015008, hep-ph/0102075;
A. Birkedal-Hansen, B.D. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 095006, hep-ph/0211071.
[34] J. Giedt, Ann. Phys. 297 (2002) 67, hep-th/0108244.
[35] M. Dine, N. Seiberg, E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 289 (1987) 589;
J.J. Atick, L.J. Dixon, A. Sen, Nucl. Phys. B 292 (1987) 109;
M. Dine, I. Ichinose, N. Seiberg, Nucl. Phys. B 293 (1987) 253.
[36] A.D. Linde, Phys. Lett. B 259 (1991) 38;
A.D. Linde, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 748, astro-ph/9307002.
297

D7-brane motion from M-theory cycles and obstructions

in the weak coupling limit
A.P. Braun a, , A. Hebecker a , H. Triendl b
a Institut fr Theoretische Physik, Universitt Heidelberg, Philosophenweg 16 und 19, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany
b II. Institut fr Theoretische Physik der Universitt Hamburg, Luruper Chaussee 149, D-22761 Hamburg, Germany

Abstract
Motivated by the desire to do proper model building with D7-branes and fluxes, we study the motion
of D7-branes on a CalabiYau orientifold from the perspective of F-theory. We consider this approach
promising since, by working effectively with an elliptically fibred M-theory compactification, the explicit
positioning of D7-branes by (M-theory) fluxes is straightforward. The locations of D7-branes are encoded
in the periods of certain M-theory cycles, which allows for a very explicit understanding of the moduli
space of D7-brane motion. The picture of moving D7-branes on a fixed underlying space relies on negligible backreaction, which can be ensured in Sens weak coupling limit. However, even in this limit we
find certain physics obstructions which reduce the freedom of the D7-brane motion as compared to the
motion of holomorphic submanifolds in the orientifold background. These obstructions originate in the intersections of D7-branes and O7-planes, where the type IIB coupling cannot remain weak. We illustrate this
effect for D7-brane models on CP1 CP1 (the BianchiSagnottiGimonPolchinski model) and on CP2 .
Furthermore, in the simple example of 16 D7-branes and 4 O7-planes on CP1 (F-theory on K3), we obtain
a completely explicit parameterization of the moduli space in terms of periods of integral M-theory cycles.
In the weak coupling limit, D7-brane motion factorizes from the geometric deformations of the base space.
E-mail addresses: a.braun@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de (A.P. Braun), a.hebecker@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de

(A. Hebecker), hagen.triendl@desy.de (H. Triendl).
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.021
A.P. Braun et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 298329
299
1. Introduction
During the last years, significant progress has been made in the understanding of stringtheoretic inflation, moduli stabilization, supersymmetry breaking and the fine tuning of the
cosmological constant using the flux discretuum. The most studied and arguably best understood
setting in this context is that of type IIB orientifolds with D3- and D7-branes [1] (which has
close cousins in M-theory [24]). Given this situation, it is clearly desirable to develop the tools
for particle-phenomenology-oriented model building in this context. One obvious path leading
in this direction is the study of the motion of D7-branes in the compact space and their stabilization by fluxes [59]. The long-term goal must be to achieve sufficient control of D7-brane
stabilization to allow for the engineering of the desired gauge groups and matter content based
on the D7-brane open string sector [10]. This is a non-trivial task since the underlying Calabi
Yau geometry has to be sufficiently complicated to allow for the necessary enormous fine tuning
of the cosmological constant mentioned above.
In the present paper we report a modest step towards this goal in the simple setting of the
8-dimensional Vafa model, where 16 D7-branes move on T 2 /Z2 [11]. This motion can be viewed
equivalently as the deformation of the complex structure of the dual F-theory compactification
on K3. The relevant moduli space of D7-brane motion has recently been studied as part of the
moduli space of K3 K3 compactifications of F-theory to 4 dimensions (see, e.g. [5,6,12]).
One of our main results is the parameterization of the D7-brane motion on the compact space
in terms of periods which are explicitly defined using the standard integral homology basis of K3.
In other words, we explicitly understand the motion of the 16 D7-branes and of the background
geometry in terms of shrinking or growing M-theory cycles stretched between the branes or
between the branes and the orientifold planes. In our opinion, this is a crucial preliminary step if
one wishes to stabilize specific D7-brane configurations using fluxes (which, in this context, are
inherited from M-theory fluxes and depend on the integral homology of K3). Further important
points which we discuss in some detail in the following include the geometric implications of
Sens weak coupling limit [13], the issue of obstructions arising when D7-brane motion is viewed
from the type IIB (rather than F-theory) perspective, and the relevance of Sens construction of
the double-cover CalabiYau [13] to type IIB models with branes at singularities [14,15].
Since the subsequent analysis is necessarily rather technical, we now give a detailed discussion of the organization of the paper, stating the main methods and results of each section.
In Section 2, we begin with a discussion of the possible backreaction of D7-branes on the embedding space. This is of immediate concern to us since, in contrast to other D-branes, D7-branes
have co-dimension 2 and can therefore potentially modify the surrounding geometry significantly, even in the large volume limit [1618]. However, following the analysis of [13], it is
possible to consider only configurations where Im 1 almost everywhere (weak coupling
limit). It is easy to show that, in such a setting, the deficit angle of each brane always remains
small ( 1/(Im )), while each O-plane has deficit angle . The solutions that contain a single
D7-brane only develop a deficit angle at large distances away from the brane [1618]. Sens
weak coupling limit assumes a compact space with proper charge cancellation between D-branes
and O-planes, which allows for the possibility that no deficit angle arises. One may say that, in
contrast to other models with branes on CalabiYau space, the D7-brane case is special in that
one has to take the weak coupling limit more seriously than the large volume limit to be able to
neglect backreaction.
In Section 3 we discuss obstructions to D7-brane motion. For this purpose, we have to go
beyond our simple model with base space CP1 . Using the Weierstrass description of an elliptic
300
fibration over CP2 or over CP1 CP1 (which corresponds to the BianchiSagnottiGimon
Polchinski model [19,20]), it is easy to count the degrees of freedom of D7-brane motion. We
find that the motion of D7-branes is strongly restricted as compared to the general motion of holomorphic submanifolds analysed in [7,2123]. One intuitive way of understanding these physics
obstructions is via the realization that D7-branes always have to intersect the O7-plane in pairs
or to be tangent to it at the intersection point. We emphasize this issue since it serves as an important extra motivation for our approach via M-theory cycles: If the moduli space is described
from the perspective of the M-theory complex structure, such obstructions are automatically included and no extra constraints on the possible motion of holomorphic submanifolds need to be
imposed.
Section 4 is devoted to a brief review of the geometry of K3. This is central to our analysis
as the moduli space of D7-branes on T 2 /Z2 (or, equivalently, the motion of 16 D7-branes and 4
O7-planes on CP1 ) is dual to the moduli space of M-theory on K3 in the limit where the K3 is
elliptically fibred and the volume of the fibre torus is sent to zero. In this language, the weak
coupling limit corresponds to sending the complex structure of the torus, which is equivalent to
the type IIB axiodilaton , to i. We recall that the relevant geometric freedom is encoded entirely in the complex structure of K3, which is characterized by the motion of the plane spanned
by Re and Im in a 20-dimensional subspace of H2 (K3, R). Alternatively, the same information can be encoded in two homogeneous polynomials defining a Weierstrass model and thus
an elliptic fibration.
In Section 5, we recall that at the positions of D7-branes the torus fibre degenerates while
the total space remains non-singular. When two or more D7-branes coincide, a singularity of the
total space develops, the analysis of which allows for a purely geometric characterization of the
resulting ADE gauge symmetry. For the simple case of two merging branes, we show explicitly
that a homologically non-trivial cycle of K3 with the topology of a 2-sphere collapses [24,25].
This collapsing cycle is the basic building block which will allow us to parameterize the full
moduli space of D7-brane motion in terms of the periods of such cycles in the remainder of the
paper.
In Section 6, we start developing the geometric picture of the D7-brane moduli space, which is
one of our main objectives in the present paper. Our basic building block is the S 2 cycle stretched
between two D7-branes introduced in the previous section. Here, we construct this cycle from a
somewhat different perspective: We draw a figure-8-shaped 1-cycle in the base encircling the two
branes and supplement it, at every point, with a 1-cycle in the torus fibre. In this picture, it is easy
to calculate the intersection numbers of such cycles connecting different D-brane pairs, taking
into account also the presence of O-planes (see the figures in this section). The Dynkin diagrams
of the gauge groups emerging when several branes coincide are directly visible in this geometric
approach. In particular, the relative motion of four branes belonging to one of the O-plane
can be fully described in terms of the above 2-brane cycles. The pattern of the corresponding
2-cycles translates directly in the Dynkin diagram of SO(8). To obtain a global picture, we will
have to supplement the cycles of these four SO(8) blocks by further cycles which are capable of
describing the relative position of these blocks.
Before doing so we recall, in Section 7, the duality of F-theory on K3 to the E8 E8 heterotic
string on T 2 . This is necessary since we want to relate the geometrically constructed 2-cycles
discussed above to the standard integral homology basis of K3, which is directly linked to the
root lattice of E8 E8 . In particular, we explicitly identify the part of the holomorphic 2-form
which corresponds to the two Wilson lines of the heterotic theory on T 2 and thus determines
the gauge symmetry at a given point in moduli space.
301
In Section 8, we start with the specific form of which realizes the breaking of E8 E8 to
SO(8)4 (corresponding to the choice of the two appropriate Wilson lines). The 2-cycles orthogonal to this particular -plane generate the root lattice of SO(8)4 and can be identified explicitly
with our previous geometrically constructed 2-cycles of the four SO(8) blocks. Thus, we are now
able to express these 2-cycles in terms of the standard integral homology basis of K3. Geometrically, this situation corresponds to a base space with the shape of a pillowcase (i.e. T 2 /Z2 ) with
one O-plane and four D-branes at each corner. The remaining four 2-cycles of K3, which are not
shrunk, can be visualized by drawing two independent 1-cycles on this pillowcase and multiplying each of them with the two independent 1-cycles of the fibre torus. Thus, we are left with the
task of identifying these geometrically defined cycles in terms of the standard homology basis
of K3. The relevant space is defined as the orthogonal complement of the space of the SO(8)4
cycles which we have already identified. We achieve our goal in two steps: First, we consider the
smaller (3-dimensional) subspace orthogonal to all SO(16)2 cycles (their shrinking corresponds
to moving all D-branes onto two O-planes and leaving the two remaining O-planes naked).
Second, we work out the intersection numbers with the S 2 -shaped 2-cycles connecting D-branes
from different SO(8) blocks. After taking these constraints into account, we are able to express
the intuitive four cycles of the pillowcase in terms of the standard K3 homology basis.
Finally, in Section 9, we harvest the results of our previous analysis by writing down a conveniently parameterized generic holomorphic 2-form and interpreting its 18 independent periods
explicitly as the 16 D-brane positions, the shape of the pillowcase, and the shape of the fibre torus.
Of course, the existence of such a parameterization of the moduli space of the type IIB superstring on T 2 /Z2 is fairly obvious and has been used, e.g., in [5] and in the more detailed analysis
of [6]. Our new point is the explicit mapping between the periods and certain geometrically intuitive 2-cycles and, furthermore, the mapping between those 2-cycles and the standard integral
homology basis of K3. We believe that this will be crucial for the future study of brane stabilization by fluxes (since those are quantized in terms of the corresponding integral cohomology) and
for the generalization to higher-dimensional situations.
We end with a brief section describing our conclusions and perspectives on future work.
2. Deficit angle of D7-branes
In this section we discuss the backreaction of D7-branes on the geometry. In general,
Dp-branes carry energy density (they correspond to black-hole solutions for the gravitational
background [26]). For p < 7, this deforms the geometry at finite distances, but the space remains asymptotically flat at infinity. Thus, backreaction can be avoided by considering D-brane
compactifications in the large volume limit.
By contrast, objects with codimension two (such as cosmic strings or D7-branes) produce
a deficit angle proportional to their energy density. Thus, a D7-brane in 10 dimensions may in
principle have a backreaction on the geometry which is felt at arbitrarily large distances. Let us
first consider the effect of the energy density of a D7-brane. From the DBI-action it is easy to
see that the gravitational energy density of a D7-brane is proportional to e = 1/ Im 1/2 .
A D7-brane is charged under the axion C0 = Re 1 , and supersymmetry constrains to be
a holomorphic function of the coordinates transversal to the D7-brane, see e.g. [18]. As will
become apparent in the following, this implies i at the position of the D7-brane. Thus
the energy density does not couple to gravity due to the vanishing of the string coupling near the
D7-brane.
302
But there is another effect, first investigated in [16,17], which is due to the coupling of D7branes to the axiodilaton . This coupling produces a non-trivial background around their
position whose energy deforms the geometry. In flat space this effect produces a deficit angle
around the position of the D7-brane at large distance. Let us have a closer look at the case of
finite distance and weak coupling, which is important for F-theory constructions in the weak
coupling limit.
The relevant part of the type IIB supergravity action is

10
g
.
d x g R+
(1)
222
The equations of motion (and supersymmetry) imply that is a holomorphic function of the
coordinate z parameterizing the plane transversal to the brane, = (z). Because of the SL(2, Z)
symmetry of IIB string theory acting on , it is helpful to use the modular function j ( ) instead
of itself for the description of the dependence of on z. The function j is a holomorphic
bijection from the fundamental domain of SL(2, Z) onto the Riemann sphere and is invariant
under SL(2, Z) transformations of (details can be found in [27]). Here we need the properties
j e2i for i,

j e2i/3 = 0,
(3)
j (i) = 1.
(4)
(2)
Since is holomorphic in z, the modular invariant function j ( ) depends holomorphically on z,

and we can use the Laurent expansion of j in z. As we encircle the D-brane at z = 0, j must
encircle the origin once in the opposite direction (cf. Eq. (2)). Thus j must be proportional to 1/z
and we can write
j ( )
(5)
z
for small z. Here is a modulus, the overall scaling of the axiodilaton.
From (1) we also deduce Einsteins equation
R =
1
( + ).
422
(6)
Note that there is no term representing the energy density of the brane, as argued above. If we
parameterize the plane orthogonal to the brane by z and write the metric as
ds 2 = dx dx + (z, z ) dz dz,
(7)
we finally arrive at the equation

ln = ln 2 ,
(8)
which is solved by = 2 f (z)f(z). For the simplest case of a single D7-brane in infinite 10dimensional space, one might expect that both 2 and will not depend on the angle in the
complex plane because of radial symmetry. However, this is not the case as we now explain.
The simplest solution is given by declaring Eq. (5) to be exact. Then (z) maps the transverse
plane precisely once to the fundamental domain of . Remember that the fundamental domain
contains three singular points which are fixed points under some SL(2, Z) transformation. These
points are
i
= e2i/3
=i
303
Invariant under
T
ST
S
where S and T are the standard generators of SL(2, Z). From (2) and (3) we see that the first two
of these points are mapped to |j | and j = 0. Thus by (5) these points are at the position
of the brane and at infinity, respectively. But from (4) we see that the S-monodromy point is
somewhere at finite distance and (5) tells us that this point sits at1 z = . Thus the phase of
singles out a special direction and the radial symmetry is broken. Nevertheless, if || is very
large compared to the region we are interested in, there is still an approximate radial symmetry,
as can be seen from (2). The monodromy point at z = does not deform the region near the
brane (which is mapped to large ) and the limit || blows up the region where the radial
symmetry is preserved. We will see later that this limit corresponds to the weak coupling limit of
Sen [13].
We now return to the generic case (where extra branes may be present and (5) is only approximate) and use the assumption that || is very large. As we approach a radially symmetric
situation in this limit, we can neglect the angular derivatives in (8) and arrive at

1
ln
1
ln 2
(9)
r
=
r
,
r r
r
r r
r
where r is the radius in the (z, z )-plane. The deficit angle is given by
ln
.
r
Inserting this into (9), we see that

ln 2
=
r
.
r
r
r
= r
(10)
(11)
As discussed before, there is no energy density at the position of the brane and therefore the
deficit angle is zero there. By integration we obtain

ln 2
ln 2
= r
(12)
.
+ r
r
r r=0
Let us estimate the behavior near the brane, where i. From (2) we see that
i
z
i
ln j
ln ,
2
2
and therefore

1 z
2
ln .
2

(13)
(14)
Thus (12) can be evaluated using

r
ln 2 ln(ln(r/||))
1
1
.

=

r
ln r
ln(r/||)
22
(15)
1 This is of course only true approximately if we consider a solution with many branes, so that (5) is the Laurent
expansion around the position of a single brane.
304
Since 2 for r 0, the second term in (12) vanishes and we find

1
.
22
(16)
We see that for r

|| this becomes small and therefore, in this limit, the deficit angle is small,
too. Thus, we have derived quantitatively at which distances backreaction is small in the weak
coupling limit.
Away from the D7-brane the analysis presented above breaks down. This is due to the monodromy point at which destroys the radial symmetry of the configuration. To determine the
deficit angle that emerges at distances that are much larger than ||, one has to solve (8). The
solution, and thus the physics, depends on the boundary conditions that are chosen. These are
encoded in the shape of the function f (z), which in turn is determined by the symmetry that is
required of the solution. The classic solution of [16,17] which argues for a deficit angle /6,
demands an SL(2, Z) invariant and non-singular metric. The analysis of [18] argues that, due to
its appearance in the definition of the Killing spinor, the function f (z) should be invariant under
the monodromy transformations of (z). This requirement introduces another z-dependent factor
which leads to an asymptotic deficit angle 2/3.
Our interpretation of this situation is as follows: In a configuration with a single D7-brane, one
has only three monodromy points, T , ST and S in the complex plane. Without loss of generality,
we can fix the T -monodromy point (i.e. the D7-brane) at zero and the ST -point at infinity. The
definition of a deficit angle, which requires radial symmetry, is possible at distances from the
brane much smaller or much larger than that of the S-monodromy point. In the first case the
deficit angle is parametrically small, in the second case it is 2/3 following [18]. Thus, there
appears to be no room for a deficit angle /6.
3. Sens weak coupling limit and its consequences for D7-brane motion
F-theory is defined by a Weierstrass model on some Khler manifold [11]. The Weierstrass
equation is
y 2 = x 3 + f x + g,
(17)
where f and g are sections of the line bundles L4 and L6 , respectively. The holomorphic line
bundle L is defined by the first Chern class of the base space:
c1 (L) = c1 (B).
(18)
F-theory,2
This equation is derived from the CalabiYau condition of

cf. [13].
The brane positions are given by the zeros of the discriminant of the Weierstrass equation (17)
= 4f 3 + 27g 2 .
(19)
Before going to the weak coupling limit, these objects are (p, q) branes which cannot be all
interpreted as D7 branes simultaneously. Their backreaction on the geometry is strong [11].
Furthermore, the brane motion is constrained because the form of the homogeneous polynomial
in (19) is non-generic, i.e., the branes do not move independently.
2 From duality to M-theory we know that the compactification manifold of F-theory must be CalabiYau in order to
preserve N = 1 supersymmetry.
305
Let us discuss the weak coupling limit for F-theory compactifications, in which one can formulate everything in terms of D7-branes and O7-planes. Following [13], we parameterize
f = C 3h2
(20)

g = h C 2h2 + C 2 ,
(21)
and
where C is a constant and , h and are homogeneous polynomials of appropriate degree (i.e.
sections of Ln ). Note that f and g are still in the most general form if we parameterize them
as above. The weak coupling limit now corresponds to C 0. To see this, consider the modular
function j that describes the field3 :
j ( ) =
4(24f )3
4(24)3 (C 3h2 )3
=
.

4f 3 + 27g 2
The discriminant is given as

= C 2 9h2 2 + 12h
(22)
(23)
in the weak coupling limit. We observe that for C 0 we have |j | everywhere away from
the zeros of h. Locally, this corresponds to the limit in (5). Furthermore, four pairs of
branes merge to form the O-planes at the positions where h = 0.
The remaining branes are the D7-branes of this orientifold model. Their position is defined by
the equation
2 + 12h = 0.
(24)
The left-hand side does not describe the most general section in the line bundle L8 . We conclude
that the D7-branes in an orientifold model do not move freely in general. These obstructions have,
to our knowledge, so far not been investigated and are not included in the common description
of orientifold models. We want to clarify this point further in the following.
As an explicit example we consider the Weierstrass model on B CP1 CP1 . The reason
why we take this example is that it has already been shown in [28] that the degrees of freedom of the Weierstrass model are in complete agreement with the CFT-description of the T-dual
orientifold model, the BianchiSagnottiGimonPolchinski model [19,20]. By counting the degrees of freedom we will show that this model has less degrees of freedom than a model of
freely moving D-branes in the corresponding orientifold model. For this, we take the F-theory
model described in [28], go to the weak coupling limit and recombine all O7-planes into a single
smooth O7-plane wrapped on the smooth base space of the Weierstrass model. The double-cover
CalabiYau space is now easily constructed. Furthermore, we recombine all D7-branes into a single smooth D7-brane eliminating all D7-brane intersections. We first assume, following [7] that
this D7-brane moves freely as a holomorphic submanifold (respecting, of course, the Z2 symmetry of the CalabiYau). This allows for a straightforward determination of the corresponding
number of degrees of freedom from its homology. We will then compare this number with the
degrees of freedom that are present in the actual F-theory model.
Let us investigate the F-theory model in greater detail. We call the homogeneous coordinates
[x1 : x2 ] for the first CP1 , and [y1 : y2 ] for the second CP1 . By x and y we denote the generators
3 We have changed the normalization of j ( ) in order to agree with the physics convention [13].
306
of the second cohomology, where x corresponds to the cycle that fills out the second CP1 and
is pointlike in the first CP1 , and vice versa for y. In a product of complex projective spaces a
section in a holomorphic line bundle corresponds to a homogeneous polynomial. We want to
determine the degree of the homogeneous polynomials that will be involved in the calculation.
For this purpose, we calculate the first Chern class of the base space:
c1 (B) = 2x + 2y.
(25)
From (18) we conclude that this is the first Chern class of the line bundle L. Thus, sections
in L correspond to homogeneous polynomials of degree (2, 2) and h, being a section in L2 ,
is a homogeneous polynomial of degree (4, 4). A generic polynomial of degree (4, 4) in two
complex coordinates is irreducible. Thus, a generic h indeed describes one single O7-plane that
wraps both CP1 s four times. Similarly, is a homogeneous polynomial of degree (8, 8), and
is of degree (12, 12). The left-hand side of Eq. (24) is then a homogeneous polynomial of
degree (16, 16). This polynomial is generically also irreducible and describes a single D7-brane
that wraps both CP1 s sixteen times. Note that both h and 2 + 12h do not have any base locus
and thus define smooth hypersurfaces in CP1 CP1 by Bertinis theorem, cf. [29].
Eq. (24) defines an analytic hypersurface S of complex dimension one, which is the position
of the D7-brane. This is just a Riemann surface, and in order to identify its topology, it suffices
to determine its Euler number. By the methods of [29,30] it is easy to calculate the Euler number
of a hypersurface defined by a homogeneous polynomial. The Euler characteristic is given as

T (S) = c1 T (S) .
(26)
S
The first Chern class of T (S) is given in terms of the Chern classes of the normal bundle of S
in B and the tangent bundle of B by the second adjunction formula:

c1 T (S) = c1 T (B) c1 N (S) .
(27)
The normal bundle of S in B is equivalent to the line bundle that defines S through one of its
sections.4 Putting everything together, we arrive at:

T (S) = c1 T (S) = c1 T (B) c1 N (S)
S

=

c1 T (B) c1 N (S) c1 N (S) .
(28)
The Chern class of a line bundle on CP1 CP1 that has sections which are homogeneous polynomials of degree (n, m) is simply nx + my. Together with c1 (T (CP1 CP1 )) = 2x + 2y we
find that

T (S) =
(29)
(2 n)x + (2 m)y (nx + my) = 2(n + m nm).
B

Here we used the relations x y = 1 and x x = y y = 0. By the simple relation
(S) = 2 2g we can now compute the genus of S, and therefore the Hodge number h(1,0) (S)
4 Note that this means that c (N (S)) defines a 2-form on B.
1
307
Fig. 1. Illustration of the (double cover of) a D7-brane intersecting an O7-plane in four points.
to be5
h(1,0) (S) = g = (n 1)(m 1).
(30)
From [7] we know that the number of holomorphic 1-cycles of a D7-brane in the CalabiYau
space that are odd under the orientifold action is equal to the number of its valid deformations.6
Above we computed the number of holomorphic 1-cycles that are even under the orientifold
action. To compute the number of holomorphic 1-cycles that are odd under the orientifold projection, we construct the double cover of the brane. The double cover of B is a hypersurface in a
CP1 -fibration over the base B, which is defined by [13]
2 = h,
(31)
where is the coordinate in one patch of CP1 . This introduces branch points at the location of
the O-planes. To get back to the orientifold, one then has to mod out the symmetry . This
again gives the orientifold with the topology ofB and with O7-planes at the zeros of h.
We thus have to branch S over the intersection points of the O7-plane with the D7-brane. The
double cover S of S is then formed by two copies of S that are joined by a number of tubes
that is half of the number of intersections. We can compute the number of intersections between
the D7-brane and the O7-plane by using the cup product between the corresponding elements in
cohomology:

I(D7,O7) = (4x + 4y) (nx + my) = 4(n + m).
(32)
we simply compute its genus (which is equal to the number of handles
To compute h(1,0) of S,
of S). Because we are considering the double cover, the genus of S is twice the genus of S,
plus a correction coming from intersections between the D7-brane and the O7-plane. As the
intersections are pairwise connected by branch cuts which connect S to its image under the
This is illustrated in Fig. 1.
orientifold action, they introduce 12 I(D7,O7) 1 extra handles of S.
Thus h(1,0) of S is given by
= g(S)
= 2g(S) + 1 I(D7,O7) 1.
h(1,0) (S)
2
(33)
5 One might be worried that setting m or n equal to zero, one can get a surface with g < 0. However, a homogeneous
polynomial of degree (n, 0) is reducible for n > 1, corresponding to a collection of disconnected surfaces.
6 Note that in [7] this was shown for the case of a CalabiYau 3-fold compactification down to four dimensions. Here
we consider compactifications on K3 down to 6 dimensions. Because the holomorphic n-form then has one leg less, the
degree of the relevant cohomology is reduced by one as well.
308
Now we can compute the number of holomorphic 1-cycles that are odd under the orientifold
projection:
= h(1,0) (S)
h(1,0) (S)
(S)
1
= g(S) + I(D7,O7) 1 = (n + 1)(m + 1) 1.
(34)
2
Thus a freely moving D7-brane in an orientifold model, defined by a homogeneous polynomial
(1,0)
of degree (n, m), has h = (n + 1)(m + 1) 1 degrees of freedom. This fits nicely with the
number of deformations of an arbitrary homogeneous polynomial of degree (n, m).
Coming back to our example, we see that a freely moving D7-brane on CP1 CP1 corresponds to a homogeneous polynomial P of degree (16, 16), giving 288 degrees of freedom.
From the F-theory perspective, this polynomial is constrained to be of the form
(1,0)
P = 2 + 12h
(35)
in the weak coupling limit. Here h is fixed by the position of the O-plane. Let us count the degrees
of freedom contained in this expression: is of degree (8, 8), and thus has 81 degrees of freedom.
is of degree (12, 12) and thus has 169 degrees of freedom. Furthermore, we can always factor
out one complex number from this equation so that we have to substract one degree of freedom.
Finally, there is some redundancy that arises through polynomials K = h2 2 that are both of
the form 2 and 12h . As is a polynomial of degree (4, 4), there are 25 redundant degrees of
freedom in the present case. Putting everything together, we find that (35) describes 224 degrees
of freedom. This differs by 64 degrees of freedom from what we have found for an unconstrained
polynomial of degree (16, 16). Note that this is just half of the number of intersections between
D7-branes and O7-planes on CP1 CP1 .
Before discussing the local nature of these physics obstructions (which are very different
from certain mathematical obstructions restricting the motion of holomorphic submanifolds
in specific geometries [7,22,31,32]), we want to briefly review a second example. We take the
base to be CP2 , so that there are 6 O7-planes and 24 D7-branes in the weak coupling limit. We
denote the only 2-cycle of CP2 , which is a CP1 , by x. After recombination we have one D7brane that wraps the cycle 24x and one O7-plane on the cycle 6x. From x x = 1 we conclude
that they intersect 144 times. Now we can repeat counting the degrees of freedom contained in
an unconstrained polynomial of degree 24, which is 324, and compare it to a polynomial of the
form (35). For CP2 , h is of degree 6, is of degree 18 and is of degree 12. By the same
arguments as above we find that 252 degrees of freedom are contained in (35) for CP2 . The two
numbers differ by 72, which is again half of the number of intersections between D7-branes and
O7-planes.
It is then natural to expect that the obstructed D7-brane deformations are related to the intersections between D7-branes and O7-planes. Indeed, the smallness of the coupling cannot be
maintained in the vicinity of O7-planes. Thus, our argument that the backreaction of D7-branes
on the geometry is weak breaks down and we have no right to expect that D7-branes move freely
as holomorphic submanifolds at the intersections with O7-planes.
At the level of F-theory, the above physical type-IIB-argument is reflected in the non-generic
form of the relevant polynomials in the weak coupling limit. To see this explicitly, let us investigate (35) in the vicinity of an intersection point. We parameterize the neighborhood of this point
by complex coordinates z and w. Without loss of generality, we take h = w (i.e. the O7-plane is
at w = 0) and assume that the intersection is at z = w = 0. This means that P = (2 + 12h)
309
vanishes at z = w = 0 and, since we already know that h vanishes at this point, we conclude that
(z = 0, w = 0) = 0. Expanding and around the intersection point,
(z, w) = m1 z + m2 w +
and
(z, w) = n0 + n1 z + n2 w + ,
we find at leading order7

P = m21 z2 + 12n0 w + = 0.
(36)
In the generic case n0 = 0, this is the complex version of a parabola touching the O-plane with
its vertex. Thus, we are dealing with a double intersection point.8 In the special case n0 = 0,
our leading-order P is reducible and we are dealing with two D7-branes intersecting each other
and the O7-plane at the same point. The former generic case hence results from the recombination of this D7D7-brane intersection. In both cases, we have a double intersection point. In
other words, the constraint corresponds to the requirement that all intersections between the D7branes and O7-planes must be double intersection points. There are two easy ways to count the
number of degrees of freedom removed by this constraint: On the one hand, demanding pairwise
coincidence of the 2n intersection points (each of which would account for one complex degree
of freedom for a freely moving holomorphic submanifold) removes n degrees of freedom. On
the other hand, at each of the n double intersection points the coefficient of the term z in (36)
must vanish, which also removes n complex degrees of freedom.
To summarize, we have again arrived at the conclusion that 2n intersections between a D7brane and an O7-plane remove n of the degrees of freedom of the D7-brane motion. In particular,
we have now shown that these physics obstructions have a local reason: In the weak coupling
limit, the O7-plane allows only for double intersection points.9 At the local level, our findings
are easily transferred to compactifications to 4 dimensions: The O7-plane D7-brane intersections
are now complex curves rather than points. At each point of such a curve, we can consider the
transverse compact space, which is again complex-2-dimensional. In this space, we can perform
the same local analysis as above and conclude that double intersection points are required.
We end this section with a comment on an interesting application of F-theory and elliptic
fibrations which may be useful for type-IIB model building on the basis of local CalabiYau
constructions [14,15]: Consider a non-compact Khler manifold with SU(3) holonomy (a local
CalabiYau). Such spaces play an important role in attempts to construct Standard-like models
from branes at singularities. We will now sketch a generic procedure allowing us to embed them
in a compact CalabiYau.
Assuming that the non-compact Khler manifold is given as a toric variety, it is clearly always
possible to make it compact by adding appropriate cones. Furthermore, this can always be done in
such a way that the resulting compact Khler manifold B has a positive first Chern class.10 With
7 Note that zw is subdominant w.r.t. to w, which is not true for z2 .
8 This is also clear from the fact that, if we were to introduce by hand a term z in (36), our intersection point would
split into two.

9 This means that some of the 1-cycles that would be present in the double cover of a generic holomorphic submanifold
are collapsed in the double cover of a D7-brane in the weak coupling limit. These are the 1-cycles that wind around two
branch points.
10 The fan of a toric CalabiYau is spanned by one-dimensional cones that are generated by vectors ending on a single
hyperplane H . If we add a one-dimensional cone in the direction opposite to the normal vector nH of H , we end up with
a (in general) non-compact Khler manifold of positive first Chern class. To make this space compact, we appropriately
enlarge the fan. As this can always be done such that all the one-dimensional cones that are added are generated by
vectors that end on H , we do not have to change the first Chern class.
310
the first Chern class we can associate a line-bundle L and a divisor. Positivity of the Chern class
implies that this divisor is effective, i.e., the line bundle L has sections without poles (the zero
locus of such a section defines the divisor). Now we can wrap an O7-plane (with four D7-branes
on top of it) twice along the above effective divisor. This corresponds to the orientifold limit of
a consistent F-theory model. Indeed, as explained at the beginning of this section, we can define
a Weierstrass model based on the bundle L on our compact Khler manifold B. Since c1 (L) =
c1 (B), we have constructed an elliptically fibred CalabiYau 4-fold and hence a consistent Ftheory model. The O7-plane, defined by the zero locus of h, is wrapped twice along the divisor
since h is a section of L2 . At this point, we have already realized our local CalabiYau as part of
a compact type IIB model. It is intuitively clear (although a better mathematical understanding
would be desirable) that the O7-plane can be chosen in such a way that it does not interfere
with the compact cycles of the original local CalabiYau. Indeed, the CalabiYau condition has
been violated by making the original model compact. This violation is measured by the effective
divisor associated with L. This divisor has therefore no need to pass through the region where
the original compact cycles (relevant for local CalabiYau model building) are localized. We
can even go one step further and separate the two O7-planes lying on top of the divisor of L.
Subsequently, we can recombine them at possible intersection points, thereby arriving at a single
smooth O-plane. Constructing the double cover of the base branched along this O-plane, we
obtain a compact CalabiYau (without O-plane) the orientifolding of which takes us back to the
above F-theory model [13]. The compact CalabiYau without O-plane constructed in this way
contains two copies of the original local CalabiYau model.
4. General remarks on K3
In two complex dimensions there is, up to diffeomorphisms, just one compact CalabiYau
manifold: K3. We will only collect the facts that we need; for a comprehensive review see e.g.
[33].
The Hodge diamond of K3 is well known:
1
0
1
0
20
1.
(37)
0
1
The complex structure is measured by the periods z which are the integrals of the holomorphic
2-form over integral 2-cycles.

z = .
(38)
K3
Here are the Poincar-dual 2-forms corresponding the 2-cycles . The real Khler form J
can be decomposed in a basis of 2-forms in a similar way. Together, and J specify a point in
the moduli space of K3. They have to fulfill the constraints
= 0,
J = 0,
> 0,
J J > 0.
(39)
Parameterizing and J by 3 real forms xi , such that = x1 + ix2 and J x3 , the constraints
translate to
xi xj = 0 for i = j
(40)
311
and
x12 = x22 = x32 > 0.
(41)
The symmetry between the three real 2-forms xi is related to the fact that K3 is a hyper-Khler
manifold: there is a whole S 2 of complex structures on K3.
The counting of oriented intersection numbers of 2-cycles gives us a symmetric bilinear form
on H2 (K3, Z). It can be shown [33] that with this natural scalar product, H2 (K3, Z) is an even
self-dual lattice of signature (3, 19). By the classification of even self-dual lattices we know that
we may choose a basis for H2 (K3, Z) such that the inner product forms the matrix
U U U E8 E8
where
U=

0 1
,
1 0
(42)
(43)
and E8 denotes the Cartan matrix of E8 . Choosing a point in the moduli space of K3 is now equivalent to choosing a space-like three-plane in R3,19 equipped with the inner product (42). This
space-like three-plane is spanned by the three vectors xi fulfilling the conditions (40) and (41).11
The Picard group, defined as
Pic(X) H 1,1 (X) H 2 (X, Z),
(44)
is given by the intersection of the lattice H 2 (X, Z) with the codimension-two surface orthogonal
to the real and imaginary parts of . The dimension of Pic(X), also called Picard number, counts
the number of algebraic curves and vanishes for a generic K3 manifold.
If we require K3 to admit an elliptic fibration, there are at least two algebraic curves embedded
in K3the T 2 fiber and a section, the latter being equivalent to the base CP1 . Thus the space
orthogonal to the plane defining the complex structure has a two-dimensional intersection with
the lattice H 2 (K3, Z), which fixes two complex structure moduli.12 One can show that the two
vectors in the lattice corresponding to the base and the fiber form one of the U factors in (42).
Thus, has to be orthogonal to the subspace corresponding to this U factor. The precise position
of J , which lies completely in this U factor, is fixed by the requirement that the fibre volume
goes to zero in the F-theory limit. The only remaining freedom is in the complex structure, which
is now defined by a space-like two-plane in R2,18 with the inner product
U U E8 E8 .
(45)
Any vector in the lattice of integral cycles of an elliptically fibred K3 can now be written as
D = p i ei + pj ej + qI EI ,
(46)
where i, j run from one to two and I, J from

as well as the p i are all integers.
1 to 16. The pi
2
The E8 lattice is spanned by qI fulfilling I =1...8 qI = 2Z, I =9...16 qI = 2Z. In each of the
two E8 blocks, the coefficients furthermore have to be all integer or all half-integer [34]. The
11 We identify H (K3, R) and H 2 (K3, R) here and below.
2
12 This behavior is a specialty of K3 and is related to the fact that, contrary to higher-dimensional CalabiYau spaces,
h1,1 = b2 .
312
only non-vanishing inner products among the vectors in this expansion are
EI EJ = I J ,
ei ej = ji .
(47)
There are 18 complex structure deformations left in the elliptically fibred case: may be
expanded in twenty two-forms, which leads to 20 complex coefficients. However, there is still
the possibility of an arbitrary rescaling of by one complex number, as well as the complex
constraint = 0, so that we find an 18-dimensional complex structure moduli space.
This number can easily be compared to the moduli of K3 considered as an elliptic fibration
over CP1 [11], defined by the Weierstrass equation
y 2 = x 3 + f8 (a, b)x + g12 (a, b)
(48)
where [a : b] are the homogeneous coordinates of CP and f8 and g12 are homogeneous polynomials of degree 8 and 12 respectively. They are determined by 9 + 13 = 22 parameters. There
is an SL(2, C) symmetry acting on the homogeneous coordinates of the base CP1 and an overall rescaling of (48). This reduces the independent number of parameters to 18 [11]. From the
perspective of F-theory compactified on K3, 17 of these 18 parameters describe the locations of
D7-branes and O-planes on the base of the fibration, CP1 . The remaining parameter describes
the complex structure of the fiber and corresponds to the axiodilaton . At the same time, these
18 parameters describe the variation of the complex structure of the K3, so that one can interpret
D-brane moduli as complex structure moduli of an elliptically fibred higher-dimensional space.
1
5. Singularities and the Weierstrass model

As D7-branes are characterized by a degeneration of the elliptic fibre one may wonder whether
the total space, in our case K3, is still smooth. Its defining equation shows that K3 is generically
smooth and only the fibration becomes singular. If the discriminant of the Weierstrass model has
multiple zeros, corresponding to placing multiple branes on top of each other, the total space
becomes singular as well. In the case of elliptic K3 manifolds, the classification of singularities
matches the classification of the appearing gauge groups.
The zeros of the discriminant
= 4f 3 + 27g 2
(49)
determine the points of the base where the roots of the Weierstrass equation degenerate. Let us
examine this further. The Weierstrass equation (48) can always be written in the form13
y 2 = (x x1 )(x x2 )(x x3 ).
(50)
It is easy to show that in this notation

= (x1 x2 )2 (x2 x3 )2 (x3 x1 )2 .
(51)
At a point where the fibre degenerates, two of the xi coincide so that, adjusting the normalization
for convenience, (48) reads locally
y 2 = (x x0 )2 .
(52)
13 Note that the term quadratic in x is absent in the canonical form (48). This corresponds to choosing the origin of our
coordinate system such that the three roots xi sum up to zero.
313
By a change of variables this is equivalent to xy = 0, representing an A1 singularity of the fibre.

To see what happens to the whole space we have to keep the dependence on the base coordinates.
Let us deform away from the degenerate point by shifting x0 x = x0 . This means that
now
y 2 = (x x+ )(x x ) = (x x0 )2 + 2 .
(53)
The quadratic difference of the now indegenerate roots is given by

(x+ x )2 = 4 2 .
(54)
Comparing this with (51) and ignoring the slowly varying factor associated with the distant third
root, we have
2 .
(55)
Since we also want to see what happens to the full space, we reintroduce the dependence on the
base coordinates, = (a, b), and write (53) as
y 2 = (x x0 )2 + (a, b).
(56)
Without loss of generality we assume a = 0 and use a as an inhomogeneous coordinate. Near

the singularity, where = (a a0 )n , the Weierstrass model then reads
y 2 = (x x0 )2 + (a a0 )n
(57)
which is clearly singular if n is greater than one. By a change of variables this is again equivalent
to
yx = (a a0 )n .
(58)
Thus, simple roots (n = 1) of do not lead to any singularity of the whole space, it is merely
the fibration structure that becomes singular.
We have seen that the K3 surface has a singularity when two or more branes are on top of each
other, whereas it is smooth when they are apart. If we move the two branes apart by perturbing the
polynomials in the Weierstrass equation, we remove the singularity and blow up an exceptional
2-cycle. We will make this explicit in the following. The emerging cycle will subsequently be
used to measure the distance between the two branes.
From (51) we see that the situation of two merging branes is described by

X x, y, a x 2 + y 2 + a 2 = .
(59)
We have shifted x and a for simplicity. Here a is an affine coordinate on the base and resolves
the singularity by moving the two branes away from each other.
As the situation is somewhat analogous to the conifold case [35], we will perform a similar analysis: We first note that can always be chosen to be real by redefining the coordinates.
Next, we collect x, y, a in a complex vector with real part and imaginary part . The hypersurface (59) may then be described by the two real equations
2 2 = ,
= 0.
(60)
We can understand the topology of X by considering its intersection with a set of 5-spheres in R6
given by 2 + 2 = t , t > :
t
t

2 = + ,
(61)
2 = ,
= 0.
2 2
2 2
314
If we assume for a moment that = 0, the equations above describe two S 2 s of equal size for
every t that are subject to an extra constraint. If we take the first S 2 to be unconstraint, the second
and third equation describe the intersection of another S 2 with a hyperplane. Thus we have an S 1
bundle over S 2 for every finite t. This bundle shrinks to zero size when t approaches zero so that
we reach the tip of the cone. Furthermore, the bundle is clearly non-trivial since the hyperplane
intersecting the second S 2 rotates as one moves along the first S 2 .
Let us now allow for a non-zero , so that X is no longer singular. The fibre S 1 still shrinks
to zero size at t = , but the base S 2 remains at a finite size. This is the 2-cycle that emerged
when resolving the singularity. We now want to show that the S 2 at the tip of the resolved cone is
indeed a non-trivial cycle. This is equivalent to showing that the bundle that is present for t >
does not have a global section, i.e., the S 2 at t = cannot be moved to larger values of t as a
whole. Consider a small deformation of this S 2 , parameterized by a real function f ( ):
2 = + f ( ).
(62)
This means that we have moved the S 2 at t = in the t -direction by 2f ( ), i.e.

t

= f ( ) + .
2
2
(63)
The equations for the S 1 fibration over this deformed S 2 read

2 = f ( ),
(64)
= 0.
(65)
Deforming the S 2 means choosing a continuous function ( ) subject to these equations. Since
the set of all planes defined by (65) can be viewed as the tangent bundle of an S 2 , we can
view ( ) as a vector field on S 2 . As we know that such vector fields have to vanish in at least
two points, we conclude that f ( ) has to vanish for two values of . We do not only learn that the
S 2 at the tip of the cone cannot be moved away, but also that the modulus of its self-intersection
number is two.14 This number is expected, as one can show that any cycle of K3 with the topology
of a sphere has self-intersection number minus two [33].
A similar analysis can be carried out for other types of singularities, which are determined by
the orders with which f , g and vanish [36]. For the whole K3, we can use the ordinary ADE
classification of the arising quotient singularities [33], which is equivalent to the classification
of simply laced Lie algebras. The intersection pattern of the cycles that emerge in resolving the
singularity is precisely the Dynkin diagram of the corresponding Lie algebra. This accidental
match is of course expected from the F-theory point of view which tells us that singularities are
associated with gauge groups. The correspondence between the singularity type of the whole
space and the singularity type of the fibre is more complicated when F-theory is compactified on
a manifold with more than two complex dimensions [3740]. This can also be anticipated from
the fact that gauge groups which are not simply laced appear only in IIB orientifolds with more
than one complex dimensions.
14 Note that this viewpoint also works for the classic conifold example [35], which is a cone whose base is an S 2 bundle
over S 3 . As the Euler characteristic of S 3 vanishes, the same arguments as before give the well-known result that the S 3
at the tip of the resolved conifold can be entirely moved into the base.
315
6. Geometric picture of the moduli space

In this section we want to gain a more intuitive understanding of the cycles that are responsible
for the brane movement. For this we picture the elliptically fibred K3 locally as the complex plane
(in which branes are sitting) to which a torus has been attached at every point. We will construct
the relevant 2-cycles geometrically. We have already seen that the cycles in question shrink to
zero size when we move the branes on top of each other, so that these cycles should be correlated
with the distance between the branes. Remember that D7-branes have a non-trivial monodromy
acting on the complex structure of the fibre as + 1, which has

1 1
T=
(66)
0 1
as its corresponding SL(2, Z) matrix. Similarly, O7-planes have a monodromy of T 4 , where
the minus sign indicates an involution of the torus, meaning that the complex coordinate z of the
torus goes to z. Thus 1-cycles in the fibre change orientation when they are moved around an
O-plane.
If we want to describe a 2-cycle between two D-branes, it is clear that it must have one leg
in the base and one in the fibre to be distinct from the 2-cycles describing the fibre and the base.
Now consider the 1-cycle being vertically stretched in the torus.15 If we transport this cycle once
around a D-brane and come back to the same point, this cycle becomes diagonally stretched
because of the T-monodromy. If we then encircle another brane in the opposite direction, the
1-cycle returns to its original form, so that it can be identified with the original 1-cycle. This way
to construct a closed 2-cycle was already mentioned in [24]. This 2-cycle cannot be contracted
to a point since it cannot cross the brane positions because of the monodromy in the fibre. The
form of the 2-cycle is illustrated in Fig. 2. We emphasize that to get a non-trivial cycle, its part
in the fibre torus has to have a vertical component.
Next we want to compute the self-intersection number. In order to do this, we consider a
homologous cycle and compute the number of intersections with the original one. By following
the way the fibre part of the cycle evolves, one finds that the resulting number is minus two (see
Fig. 2. The cycle that measures the distance between two D-branes. Starting with a cycle in the (0, 1) direction of the
fibre torus at point a, this cycle is tilted to (1, 1) at b. Because we surround the second brane in the opposite way, the
cycle in the fibre is untilted again so it can close with the one we started from.
15 Of course this notion depends on the SL(2, Z)-frame we consider, but anyway we construct the cycle in the frame
where the branes are D-branes. In the end the constructed cycle will be independent of the choice of frame.
316
Fig. 3. The self-intersection number of a cycle between two D-branes. As shown in the picture, we may choose the fibre
part of both cycles to be (0, 1) at A, so that they do not intersect at this point. At B however, one of the two is tilted to
(1, 1), whereas the other has undergone a monodromy transforming it to (1, 1). Thus the two surfaces meet twice in
point B.
Fig. 4. The loop between two D-branes can be collapsed to a line by pulling it onto the D-branes and annihilating
the vertical components in the fibre. All that remains is a cycle which goes from one brane to the other while staying
horizontal in the fibre all the time.
Fig. 3). The minus sign arises from the orientation. This is precisely what we expected from
the previous analysis. To see the topology of the cycle more clearly, it is useful to combine the
two lines in the base stretching between the branes to a single line. This is shown in Fig. 4. The
component of the cycle in the fibre is then an S 1 that wraps the fibre in the horizontal direction,
so that it shrinks to a point at the brane positions. Thus it is topologically a sphere, which fits
with the self-intersection number of 2 and the discussion of the previous section.
Now we want to determine the intersection number between different cycles and consider a
situation with three D7-branes. There is one cycle between the first two branes and one between
the second and the third, each having self-intersection number 2. From Fig. 5 it should be clear
that they intersect exactly once. If one now compares the way they intersect to the figure that
was used to determine the self-intersection number, one sees that the two surfaces meet with one
direction reversed, hence the orientation differs and we see that the mutual intersection number
is +1. Thus we have shown that the intersection matrix of the N 1 independent cycles between
N D-branes is minus the Cartan matrix of SU(N ).
We now want to analyze the cycles that arise in the presence of an O7-plane. Two D7-branes
in the vicinity of an O7-plane can be linked by the type of cycle considered above. However,
there are now two ways to connect the D-branes with each other: we can pass the O-plane on two
different sides, as shown in Fig. 6. By the same argument as before, each of these cycles has selfintersection number 2. To get their mutual intersection number, it is important to remember the
monodromy of the O-plane, which contains an involution of the torus fiber. Thus, the intersection
on the right and the intersection on the left, which differ by a loop around the O-plane, have
opposite sign. As a result, the overall intersection number vanishes.
317
Fig. 5. Mutual intersection of two cycles. Start by taking both cycles to have fibre part (0, 1) at B. The fact that we closed
a circle around the D-brane tells us that one of the two has been tilted by one unit at A. Thus they meet precisely once.
Fig. 6. Cycles that measure how D-branes can be pulled onto O-planes.
Fig. 7. Four D-branes and an O-plane. The D-branes are displayed as circles and the O-plane as a cross. To simplify the
picture we have drawn lines instead of loops.
Now we have all the building blocks needed to discuss the gauge enhancement in the orientifold limit, which is SO(8)4 . We should find an SO(8) for each O7-plane with four D7-branes on
top of it. The cycles that are blown up when the four D7-branes move away from the O7-plane
are shown in Fig. 7. It is clear from the previous discussion that all cycles have self-intersection
number 2 and cycle c intersects every other cycle precisely once. Thus, collecting the four
cycles in a vector (a, b, c, d), we find the intersection form
2
0
D4 =
1
0
0
2
1
0
1
0
1
0
,
2 1
1 2
(67)
which is minus the Cartan matrix of SO(8). It is also easy to see that collapsing only some of the
four cycles yields minus the Cartan matrices of the appropriate smaller gauge enhancements.
318
7. Duality to M-theory and heterotic E8 E8

In this section we give a brief review of the dualities between F-theory and M-theory, as well
as between F-theory and the E8 E8 heterotic string. We focus on the points relevant to the
discussion in this paper.
As M-theory compactified on S 1 is dual to type IIA in 10 dimensions, we can relate M-theory
to type IIB by compactifying on a further S 1 and applying T-duality. Thus, M-theory on T 2 corresponds to type IIB on S 1 . The complexified type-IIB coupling constant is given by the complex
structure of the torus. Furthermore, taking the torus volume to zero corresponds to sending the
S 1 radius on the type IIB side to infinity. In other words, M-theory on T 2 with vanishing volume gives type IIB in 10 dimensions. One may think of this as a T 2 compactification of a 12d
theory, which we take as our working definition of F-theory. Considering the compactification of
M-theory on an elliptically fibred manifold Y and using the above argument for every fibre, we
arrive at type IIB on the base space. This can be re-expressed as an F-theory compactification
on Y .
One can now study the stabilization of D7-branes through fluxes by investigating the stabilization of a (complex) fourfold Y on the M-theory side and mapping the geometry to the D-brane
positions [5,6]. One can also translate the 4-form fluxes of M-theory to 3- and 2-form fluxes in
the IIB picture. In particular, we can consider 4-cycles built from a 2-cycle stretched between
two D7-branes (see previous section) and a 2-cycle of the D7-brane. We then expect 2-form flux
on D7-branes to arise from M-theory 4-form flux on such cycles. This fits nicely with the fact
that 2-form flux on D7-branes T-dualizes to an angle between two intersecting D6-branes, so that
it is only defined relative to the flux on another D7-brane. Note that being in the F-theory limit
(i.e. ensuring that Y is elliptically fibred and the fiber volume vanishes) also has to be realized
by an appropriate flux choice on the M-theory side.
The foundation of the duality between F-theory and the E8 E8 heterotic string is the duality
between M-theory compactified on K3 and the heterotic string compactified on T 3 [41]. In the
limit in which the fibre of K3 shrinks (the F-theory limit), one S 1 decompactifies so that we end
up with heterotic E8 E8 on T 2 [11,25,4244].
In this duality the complex structure of the base and the fibre of K3 are mapped to the complex and Khler structure moduli of the T 2 on the heterotic side. The precise relation between
these parameters has been worked out in [43]. The volume of the base of K3 corresponds to the
coupling of the heterotic theory. The breaking of E8 E8 that is achieved by Wilson lines on
the heterotic side appears in the form of deformations of the Weierstrass equation away from the
E8 E8 singularity on the F-theory side. This is equivalent to deforming the complex structure
of K3.
Let us examine this point in more detail: we can parameterize the complex structure of K3 at
the E8 E8 point by
1 + U e2 + Se
2.
E8 E8 = e1 U Se
(68)
We have set the first coefficient to one by a global rescaling and used the fact that = 0. We
can now add a component in the direction of the E8 factors to (68) in order to break the gauge
group.
In the heterotic theory, the Wilson lines are two real vectors that are labelled by their direction
in T 2 : WI1 and WI2 . Let us normalize these Wilson lines such that the associated gauge-theoretical
twist is
P = e2iWI EI ,
1
(69)
319
with the action

E P E P 1 = e2iI WI E ,
1
(70)
and analogously for WI2 . This means that, whenever there is a root vector such that W 1 and
W 2 are integers, the corresponding root survives the Wilson line breaking.
Let us define WI EI = WI1 EI + U WI2 EI and write the complex structure at a general point in
moduli space as

2 U S + 1 (W )2 e1 + WI EI .
= e1 + U e2 + Se
(71)
2
Here we denote (WI1 EI + U WI2 EI )2 simply by (W )2 . Note that = 0 holds for all
values of the parameters. If we find a surviving root = I EI in the E8 E8 lattice, its inner product with the complex structure is = n U m. This means there exists a cycle
I EI + ne1 + me2 with the property = 0, implying that this cycle has shrunk to zero
size. Thus, extra massless states are present and a gauge enhancement arises, which is precisely
what one expects from a surviving root on the heterotic side. We can conclude that, by (71), we
have consistently identified the properly normalized Wilson lines W 1 and W 2 of the heterotic description with the appropriate degrees of freedom of the complex structure of K3 on the F-theory
side.
8. The SO(8)4 singularity of K3
If we describe the possible deformations of K3 by deformations of the defining functions of
the Weierstrass model, f and g, we see that singularities arise at specific points in moduli space.
We can also describe the deformations of K3 as deformations of the complex structure, . In this
description we can also reach points in the moduli space where the K3 is singular. By comparing
the singularities, we can map special values of the complex structure moduli to a special form of
the Weierstrass model. This enables us to describe the positions of the D-branes and O-planes,
which are explicit in the polynomial description, by the values of the complex structure moduli
of K3.
In the language of complex structure deformation, the K3 becomes singular if we can find
a root, i.e. an element of H 2 (Z) with self intersection 2 that is orthogonal to both and J .
If we now consider the inner product on the sublattice spanned by such roots, we find minus
the Cartan matrix of some ADE group. This structure tells us the kind of singularity that has
emerged [5,33].
We now want to discuss the cycles that shrink to produce an SO(8)4 singularity. For this we
have to find a change of basis such that the D44 in the inner product of the lattice H 2 (K3, Z)
becomes obvious. The well-known Wilson lines breaking E8 E8 down to SO(8)4 are

4
4

1
4 1
4 1
,
W 2 = 1, 07 , 1, 07 .
W = 0 , ,0 ,
(72)
2
2
W 2 breaks E8 E8 down to SO(16) SO(16), W 1 breaks this further down to SO(8)4 . Inserting
this in (71), we find at the SO(8)4 point:

2 U S 1 U 2 e1 + WI EI .
SO(8)4 = e1 + U e2 + Se
(73)
Note that setting S = 2i and U = i reproduces the complex structure given in [5].
320
Fig. 8. The assignment between the geometrically constructed cycles between branes and the cycles of the table in the
text. Note that the distribution of the cycles 1, 3 and 4 is ambiguous.
The lattice vectors orthogonal to SO(8)4 span the lattice D44 . Using the expansion (46), their
coefficients have to satisfy

2 + U p2 WI2 qI = 0.
U S 1 U 2 p 1 + p1 WI1 qI + Sp
(74)
As we know that these lattice vectors must be orthogonal to the complex structure for every value
we find the conditions
of U and S,
p 1 = 0,
p1 WI1 qI = 0,
p 2 = 0,
p2 WI2 qI = 0.
(75)
These equations are solved by the following four groups of lattice vectors:
1
2
3
4
A
E7 E8
E6 E7
e1 E5 E6
E5 E6
B
E15 + E16
E14 + E15
e1 + E13 + E14
E13 + E14
C
e2 E1 + E2
E2 + E3
E3 + E4
E3 E4
D
e2 + E9 E10
E10 E11
E11 E12
E11 + E12
(76)
It is not hard to see that there are no mutual intersections between the four groups, and that
the intersections within each group are given by the D4 matrix (67). This serves as an explicit
check that (73) is indeed the correct holomorphic two-form of K3 at the SO(8)4 point.
It should be clear that one can choose different linear combinations of the basis vectors in each
block that still have the same inner product. This only means we can describe the positions of
the D-branes by a different combination of cycles, which are of course linearly dependent on the
cycles we have chosen before and span the same lattice. We can make an assignments between
the cycles in the table and the cycles constructed geometrically as shown in Fig. 8.
When we are at the SO(8)4 point, where 16 of the 20 cycles of K3 have shrunk, the only
remaining degrees of freedom are the deformations of the remaining T 2 /Z2 T 2 . The four
cycles describing these deformations have to be orthogonal to all of the 16 brane cycles. There
are four cycles satisfying this requirement,
e1 + WI1 EI
e1
e2 + WI2 EI
e2 ,
(77)
and the torus cycles must be linear combinations of them. From the fibration perspective, the
torus cycles are the cycles encircling two blocks (and thus two O-planes), so that the monodromy
along the base part of those cycles is trivial. They can be either horizontal or vertical in the fibre,
giving the four possibilities displayed in Fig. 9. Note that all of them have self-intersection zero
and only those that wrap both fibre and base in different directions intersect twice.
321
Fig. 9. The torus cycles have to encircle two blocks to ensure trivial monodromy along the basis part of the cycles.
Note that the cycles which are orthogonal in the base and in the fibre intersect twice because of the orientation change
introduced in going around the O-plane.
To find out which linear combination of the forms in (77) gives which torus cycle, we will
consider a point in moduli space where the gauge symmetry is enhanced from SO(8)4 to SO(16)2 .
At this point, there are 16 integral cycles orthogonal to the intersection matrix of which is
minus the Cartan matrix of SO(16)2 . Furthermore, we know that this situation corresponds to
moving all D-branes onto two O7-planes. We will achieve this leaving two of the four blocks
untouched, while moving the D-branes from the other blocks onto them. This means that we
blow up one of the cycles in each of the blocks that are moved, while collapsing two new cycles
that sit in between the blocks. Doing this we find three independent linear combinations of the
cycles in (77) that do not intersect any of the cycles that are shrunk.
Before explicitly performing this computation, we choose a new basis that is equivalent
to (77):

2 e1 + e1 + WI1 EI
e1

2 e2 + e2 + WI2 EI
e2 .
(78)
In this basis we can write at the SO(8)4 point as

SO(8)4 =
+ U e2 + S U Se1 .
2
2
(79)
We also have switched to a new parameterization in terms of U and S. They will turn out to be
the complex structures of the base and the fibre torus.
Let us now go to the SO(16)2 point by setting WI1 = 0 in (71). After switching again from S
and U to S = U and U = S U , we find
SO(16)2 = e1 + U e2 + S
U Se1 .
2
(80)
322
Fig. 10. The Dynkin diagram of SO(16).
The 16 integral cycles that are orthogonal to are:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
E
e2 E1 + E2
E2 + E3
E3 + E4
E4 + E5
E5 + E6
E6 + E7
E7 + E8
E7 + E8
F
e2 + E9 E10
E10 E11
E11 E12
E12 E13
E13 E14
E14 E15
E15 E16
E15 + E16
(81)
They are labelled as shown in Fig. 10. Note that this means that we have moved block A onto
block C and block B onto block D.
One can check that, out of the basis displayed in (78), only has a non-vanishing intersection
with some of the 16 forms above, whereas all of them are orthogonal to e1 , e2 , . Thus, is contained in the cycle that wraps the fibre in vertical direction and passes in between A, B and C, D
(cf. Fig. 9). Furthermore, the non-zero intersection between e1 and tells us that e1 wraps the
fibre horizontally (for this argument we used e1 e2 = e1 = 0). Given these observations, it is
natural to identify the four cycles (78) with the four cycles displayed in Fig. 9. More specifically,
we now know that is vertical in the fibre and passes in between A, B and C, D, while e1 is horizontal in the fibre and passes in between A, C and B, D. The four cycles characterize the shape
of T 2 /Z2 T 2 . Other possible assignments between the cycles of (78) and those displayed in
Fig. 9 correspond to reparameterizations of the tori and are therefore equivalent to our choice.
We now have to assign the cycles e2 and to the two remaining cycles of Fig. 9. For this
purpose, we will explicitly construct the cycles ZXY between the four SO(8) blocks. Since they
can be drawn in the same way as the cycles between the D-branes, cf. Fig. 11, we see that all of
them must have self-intersection number 2. We also know that their mutual intersections should
be ZXY ZY Z = 1. From what we have learned so far, all of them should be either orthogonal
to and e1 or orthogonal to e2 and e1 . It is easy to check that the first case is realized by:

ZAC = E8 E1 e2 ,
ZAB = e2 + e2 E1 + E8 E9 + E16 + e1 ,
ZDB = E16 E9 e2 ,
ZCD = e2 e2 .
(82)
One can show that the second case is not possible. This can be seen from the following argument:
If we can find Z-cycles that are orthogonal to e1 and e2 , we can decompose them as
ZXY = qI EI .
(83)
Note that the ei are now responsible for making the Z-cycles wind around the base torus, so
that we do not
loose any generality by omitting them in the decomposition above. Because of
the constraint qI = 2Z, we can only have ZAB intersecting one of the cycles in block A by
323
Fig. 11. The cycles connecting the blocks. Note that all cycles in this picture are built in the same way and thus all lie
horizontally in the fibre.
Fig. 12. A schematic picture of the cycles between the blocks. We have drawn arrows to indicate the different orientations.
Note that the Z-cycles have intersection +1 with the cycle they come from and 1 with the cycle they go to. Note that
they sum up to a torus cycle, e1 , telling us which blocks are encircled.
putting qI = 1/2 appropriately for I = 5 . . . 8. By the structure of the lattice, (46), this forces
us to also set qI = 1/2 for I = 1 . . . 4. It is clear that this will also make this cycle intersect
with one of the cycles in block C, contradicting one of its defining properties. This means that
we simply cannot construct the Z-cycles to be all orthogonal to e1 and e2 .
We can now use the intersections of the Z-cycles with the complex structure at the SO(8)4
point, Eq. (79), to measure their length and consistently distribute the four blocks on the pillow
(see Fig. 12). We find that
ZAB SO(8)4 = U,
ZCD SO(8)4 = U,
1
ZAC SO(8)4 = ,
2
1
ZDB SO(8)4 = .
2
(84)
It is clear that we can add the two orthogonal cycles e1 and to the Z-cycles, Z Z + ne1 +
m, without destroying their mutual intersection pattern. However, this changes their length by
n + 2U m. This means that we can make the Z-cycles wind around the pillow n times in the real
and m times in the imaginary direction. Calling the real direction of the base (fibre) x (x ) and
the imaginary direction of the base (fibre) y (y ), we can now make the identifications:
324
Fig. 13. The distribution of the torus cycles.
e1 winds around x and x

e2 winds around x and y
winds around y and y
winds around y and x .
(85)
Alternatively one can find the positions of e2 and by computing their intersections with the
Z-cycles:
e2 ZCD = e2 ZAB = 1,
ZAC = ZDB = 1,
e2 ZAC = e2 ZDB = 0,
ZCD = ZAB = 0.
(86)
Note that these intersections change consistently when we let Z Z + ne1 + m. We display
the distribution of the torus cycles in Fig. 13.
At the orientifold point we can write the complex structure of T 2 /Z2 T 2 as
T 2 /Z2 T 2 = (dx + U dy) (dx + S dy )
= dx dx + S dx dy + U dy dx + SU dy dy .
(87)
In the above equation, U denotes the complex structure of the torus with unprimed coordinates,
whereas S denotes the complex structure of the torus with primed coordinates. We have so far
always switched freely between cycles and forms using the natural duality. We now make this
identification explicit at the orientifold point16 :
e1 = dy dy ,
e2 = dy dx ,
= dx dx ,

16 We have normalized the orientifold such that

T 2 /Z2 dx dy = 1 and T 2 dx dy = 1.
325
= dx dy .
Thus we have shown that the parameters U and S in
(88)
+ U e2 + S U Se1 ,
2
2
do indeed describe the complex structure of the base and the fibre torus. One can see the SL(2, Z)
invariance of the complex structure moduli explicitly through an appropriate rescaling of U .
The findings of this section represent one consistent identification of the torus cycles and the
Z-cycles that connect the four blocks. It is possible to add appropriate linear combinations of e1 ,
e2 , and without destroying the mutual intersections and the intersection pattern with the 16
cycles in the four SO(8) blocks. What singles out our choice is the form of SO(8)4 in (73) as
well as the SO(16) that was implicitly defined in (80).
SO(8)4 =
9. D-brane positions from periods and the weak coupling limit revisited
In this section, we study deformations away from the SO(8)4 point. To achieve this, we have
to rotate the complex structure such that not all of the vectors spanning the D44 lattice are
orthogonal to it. In other words, we want to add terms proportional to the forms in (76) to SO(8)4 .
To do this, we switch to an orthogonal basis defined by
E 1 = E1 + e2 ,
E 9 = E9 + e2 ,
E I = EI , I = 2 . . . 4, 10 . . . 12,
E J = EJ + e1 /2, J = 5 . . . 8, 13 . . . 16.
(89)
As we will see, each EI is responsible for moving only one of the D-branes when we rotate the
complex structure to

z2
e1 + E I zI .
= + U e2 + S U S
(90)
2
2
2
Here z2 denotes zI zI . Note that all of the E I are orthogonal to SO(8)4 , so that we only have to
change the coefficient of e1 to maintain the constraint = 0.
We can use the information about the length of the blown-up cycles to compute the new
positions of the branes. Let e.g. z1 = 0: This gives the first cycle of block C, C1 = e2 E1 +E2 ,
the length C1 = z1 , so that we move one brane away from the O-plane. As a result, the SO(8)
at block C is broken down to SO(6). At the same time, the sizes of ZAC and ZCD are changed to
1
ZCD = U z1 .
ZAC = + z1 ,
(91)
2
Thus we can move the brane from block C onto block A by choosing z1 = 12 , or onto block D
by choosing z1 = U . This can also be seen from the overall gauge group which is SO(6)
SO(10) SO(8)2 for these two values of z1 .
As we have seen in the last paragraph, z1 controls the position of one of the four D-branes
located at block C, as compared to the position of the O-plane at block C. If we let all of the zI
be non-zero, we find the following values for the lengths of the cycles in block C:
CI
C1
C2
C3
C4
CI
z1 z2
z2 z3
z3 z4
z3 + z4
(92)
326
Fig. 14. The positions of D-branes on C/Z2 are measured by complex line integrals along the cycles CI . As indicated in
the picture, C/Z2 is obtained from the complex plane by gluing the upper part of the dashed line to its lower part. Due
to the presence of the O-plane, the line integral along C4 has to be evaluated as indicated by the arrows. Using (92), one
can see that the positions of the branes are given by the zI .
To determine the D-brane positions, it is important to note that the D-branes are moving on
a pillow, T 2 /Z2 . We thus use a local coordinate system equivalent to C/Z2 . It is centered at the
position of the O-plane of block C at one of the corners of the pillow. The intersections of the
cycles with are line integrals along the base part of the cycles CI (see Fig. 14), multiplied by
the line integral of their fibre part (which can be set to unity locally). This is of importance for
the length of C4 : due to the orientation flip in the fibre when surrounding the O-plane, we have
to evaluate both parts of the line integral going from the O-plane to the D-branes to account for
the extra minus sign. This is indicated by the arrows that are attached to the cycles in Fig. 14. It
is then easy to see that associating the zI with the positions of the D-branes yields the correct
results. Note that one achieves the same gauge enhancement for z3 = z4 and z3 = z4 , because
for both values one of the CI is collapsed, cf. (92). Thus the D-branes labelled 3 and 4 have to
be at the same position in both cases, which fits with the fact that zI = zI holds due to the Z2
action.
By the same reasoning, the remaining zI give the positions of the other D-branes measured
relative to the respective O-plane. For example, the moduli z5 to z8 give the positions of the
D-branes of block A (see (76)). We have also shown that we can connect the four blocks by
following the gauge enhancement that arises when we move a brane from one block to another,
cf. (91). This means that we can also easily connect the four coordinate systems that are present
at the position of each O-plane. We have now achieved our goal of explicitly mapping the holomorphic 2-form to the positions of the D-branes. For this we have used forms dual to integral
cycles. These are the cycles that support the M-theory flux which can be used to stabilize the
D-branes. By using our results, it is possible to derive the positions of the D-branes from a given
complex structure (unless the solution is driven away from the weak coupling limit). We thus
view this work as an important step towards the explicit positioning of D-branes by M-theory
flux.
The geometric constructions of this article only make sense in the weak coupling limit, in
which the monodromies of the branes of F-theory are restricted to those of D7-branes and O7planes. It is crucial that the positions of the D-branes and the shape of the base torus factorize in
the weak coupling limit, S i. The shape of the base torus is measured by multiplying the
cycles , , e1 and e2 with . The result is independent of the positions of the branes in the weak
coupling limit, as the only potential source of interference is the z2 in = 2U S z2 , which is
327
negligible as compared to U S. Thus the branes can really be treated as moving on T2 /Z2 without
backreaction in the weak coupling limit.
Certain gauge groups, although present in F-theory, do not show up in perturbative type IIB
orientifolds and thus cannot be seen in the weak coupling limit. The lattice of forms orthogonal
to only has the structure of gauge groups known from type IIB orientifold models when we
let S i in (71). This comes about as follows: Starting from the SO(8)4 point, we can cancel
all terms proportional to WI EI in (71) when we are at finite coupling. In the limit S i, the
fact that has S as its prefactor prevents the cancellation of the term WI2 EI in . The presence
of this term ensures that only perturbatively known gauge enhancements arise.
10. Summary and outlook
Our main points in this article were the implications of the weak coupling limit (which is
necessary if one wants to talk about D7-branes moving in a background CalabiYau orientifold)
and the description of D7-brane motion on CP1 in terms of integral M-theory cycles.
Regarding the weak coupling limit, we have rederived the fact that the deficit angle of a
D7-brane is zero in a domain whose size is controlled by the coupling. Furthermore, we have
pointed out physics obstructions that arise in the weak coupling limit: The polynomial that
describes the D7-brane has to take a special form in the weak coupling limit, so that some degrees of freedom are obstructed. We have counted the relevant degrees of freedom explicitly for
F-theory on elliptically fibred spaces with base CP1 CP1 (which is dual to the Bianchi
SagnottiGimonPolchinski model) and with base CP2 . From a local perspective, the obstructions arise at intersections between D7-branes and O7-planes. They demand that D7-branes
always intersect O7-planes in double-intersection-points (in the fundamental domain of the orientifold model; not in the double-cover CalabiYau, where this would be a trivial statement). The
obstructions imply that a D7-brane intersecting an O7-plane has fewer degrees of freedom than a
corresponding holomorphic submanifold. It would be very interesting to analyse the implications
of this effect explicitly in higher-dimensional models.
The rest of this paper was devoted to an explicit discussion of the degrees of freedom of
F-theory on K3, corresponding to type IIB string theory compactified on an orientifold of T 2 .
We were able to construct and visualize the cycles that control the motion of D7-branes on the
base. Using these cycles, we have achieved a mapping between the positions of the D-branes and
the values of the complex structure moduli. This was done using the singularities that arise at
special points in the moduli space.
We consider our analysis an important preliminary step for the study of more realistic D7brane models. First, realistic models should contain fluxes to stabilize the geometry and the
D7-brane positions. Using a higher-dimensional generalization of our map between cycles and
D7-brane positions, it should be possible to determine explicitly the flux stabilizing a desired
D7-brane configuration. A first step in this direction, from which one should gain valuable intuition, might be the reconsideration of F-theory on K3 K3 with our tools. Second, we want
to consider F-theory compactifications on elliptically fibred CalabiYau manifolds of higher dimension. We expect new kinds of cycles and new configurations, for example cycles describing
the recombination of D7-branes and configurations leading to gauge groups that are not simply
laced.
When F-theory is compactified on a six-dimensional manifold, the latter can be analysed with
the methods used in this paper. The recombination of two intersecting D7-branes can be locally
described as a deformation of the conifold, so that an S 3 emerges. This S 3 can be seen as the
328
combination of a disc spanned in the tunnel connecting the two D7-branes and a horizontal cycle
in the fibre torus.
Although there exists a rich literature on elliptically fibred CalabiYau manifolds (see e.g.
[39,40,4549]), the direct visualization of the geometric objects achieved in this paper becomes
harder in higher dimensions. We hope that the use of toric geometry methods will allow for a
geometric understanding and simple combinatorial analysis in such cases.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Tae-Won Ha, Christoph Ldeling, Dieter Lst, Michele Trapletti, and
Roberto Valandro for useful comments and discussions.
References
[1] S.B. Giddings, S. Kachru, J. Polchinski, Hierarchies from fluxes in string compactifications, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002)
106006, hep-th/0105097;
S. Kachru, R. Kallosh, A. Linde, S.P. Trivedi, De Sitter vacua in string theory, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 046005,
hep-th/0301240.
[2] K. Becker, M. Becker, M-theory on eight-manifolds, Nucl. Phys. B 477 (1996) 155, hep-th/9605053.
[3] S. Gukov, C. Vafa, E. Witten, CFTs from CalabiYau four-folds, Nucl. Phys. B 584 (2000) 69, hep-th/9906070;
S. Gukov, C. Vafa, E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 608 (2001) 477, Erratum.
[4] K. Dasgupta, G. Rajesh, S. Sethi, M theory, orientifolds and G-flux, JHEP 9908 (1999) 023, hep-th/9908088.
[5] L. Gorlich, S. Kachru, P.K. Tripathy, S.P. Trivedi, Gaugino condensation and nonperturbative superpotentials in flux
compactifications, JHEP 0412 (2004) 074, hep-th/0407130.
[6] D. Lst, P. Mayr, S. Reffert, S. Stieberger, F-theory flux, destabilization of orientifolds and soft terms on D7-branes,
Nucl. Phys. B 732 (2006) 243, hep-th/0501139.
[7] H. Jockers, J. Louis, The effective action of D7-branes in N = 1 CalabiYau orientifolds, Nucl. Phys. B 705 (2005)
167, hep-th/0409098.
[8] H. Jockers, J. Louis, D-terms and F-terms from D7-brane fluxes, Nucl. Phys. B 718 (2005) 203, hep-th/0502059.
[9] J. Gomis, F. Marchesano, D. Mateos, An open string landscape, JHEP 0511 (2005) 021, hep-th/0506179.
[10] T. Watari, T. Yanagida, Product-group unification in type IIB string theory, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 036009, hepph/0402160.
[11] C. Vafa, Evidence for F-theory, Nucl. Phys. B 469 (1996) 403, hep-th/9602022.
[12] P.S. Aspinwall, R. Kallosh, Fixing all moduli for M-theory on K3 K3, JHEP 0510 (2005) 001, hep-th/0506014.
[13] A. Sen, Orientifold limit of F-theory vacua, Phys. Rev. D 55 (1997) 7345, hep-th/9702165.
[14] J.F.G. Cascales, M.P. Garcia del Moral, F. Quevedo, A.M. Uranga, Realistic D-brane models on warped throats:
Fluxes, hierarchies and moduli stabilization, JHEP 0402 (2004) 031, hep-th/0312051.
[15] H. Verlinde, M. Wijnholt, Building the standard model on a D3-brane, JHEP 0701 (2007) 106, hep-th/0508089.
[16] B.R. Greene, A.D. Shapere, C. Vafa, S.T. Yau, Stringy cosmic strings and noncompact CalabiYau manifolds, Nucl.
Phys. B 337 (1990) 1.
[17] G.W. Gibbons, M.B. Green, M.J. Perry, Instantons and seven-branes in type IIB superstring theory, Phys. Lett.
B 370 (1996) 37, hep-th/9511080.
[18] E.A. Bergshoeff, J. Hartong, T. Ortin, D. Roest, Seven-branes and supersymmetry, JHEP 0702 (2007) 003, hepth/0612072.
[19] M. Bianchi, A. Sagnotti, Open strings and the relative modular group, Phys. Lett. B 231 (1989) 389.
[20] E.G. Gimon, J. Polchinski, Consistency conditions for orientifolds and D-manifolds, Phys. Rev. D 54 (1996) 1667,
hep-th/9601038.
[21] W. Lerche, P. Mayr, N. Warner, Holomorphic N = 1 special geometry of openclosed type II strings, hep-th/
0207259.
[22] W. Lerche, P. Mayr, N. Warner, N = 1 special geometry, mixed Hodge variations and toric geometry, hep-th/
0208039.
[23] W. Lerche, Special geometry and mirror symmetry for open string backgrounds with N = 1 supersymmetry, hepth/0312326.
[24] A. Sen, F-theory and orientifolds, Nucl. Phys. B 475 (1996) 562, hep-th/9605150.
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[40]
[41]
[42]
[43]
[44]
[45]
[46]
[47]
[48]
[49]
329
W. Lerche, On the heterotic/F-theory duality in eight dimensions, hep-th/9910207.

C.V. Johnson, D-brane primer, hep-th/0007170.
K. Chandrasekharan, Elliptic Functions, Springer-Verlag, Germany, 1985, 189 p.
A. Sen, F-theory and the GimonPolchinski orientifold, Nucl. Phys. B 498 (1997) 135, hep-th/9702061.
T. Hbsch, CalabiYau Manifolds: A Bestiary for Physicists, World Scientific, Singapore, 1992, 362 p.
P. Griffiths, J. Harris, Principles of Algebraic Geometry, John Wiley & Sons, USA, 1978.
K. Kodaira, A theorem of completeness of characteristic systems for analytic families of compact submanifolds of
complex manifolds, Ann. Math. 75 (1) (1962) 146162, MR 24:A3665b.
I. Brunner, M.R. Douglas, A.E. Lawrence, C. Romelsberger, JHEP 0008 (2000) 015, hep-th/9906200.
P.S. Aspinwall, K3 surfaces and string duality, hep-th/9611137.
J. Polchinski, String Theory, Superstring Theory and Beyond, vol. 2, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1998,
531 p.
P. Candelas, P.S. Green, T. Hubsch, Rolling among CalabiYau vacua, Nucl. Phys. B 330 (1990) 49.
D.R. Morrison, C. Vafa, Compactifications of F-theory on CalabiYau threefolds. I, Nucl. Phys. B 473 (1996) 74,
hep-th/9602114;
D.R. Morrison, C. Vafa, Compactifications of F-theory on CalabiYau threefolds. II, Nucl. Phys. B 476 (1996) 437,
hep-th/9603161.
P.S. Aspinwall, Enhanced gauge symmetries and CalabiYau threefolds, Phys. Lett. B 371 (1996) 231, hep-th/
9511171.
P.S. Aspinwall, M. Gross, The SO(32) heterotic string on a K3 surface, Phys. Lett. B 387 (1996) 735, hep-th/
9605131.
P.S. Aspinwall, S.H. Katz, D.R. Morrison, Lie groups, CalabiYau threefolds, and F-theory, Adv. Theor. Math.
Phys. 4 (2000) 95, hep-th/0002012.
M. Bershadsky, K.A. Intriligator, S. Kachru, D.R. Morrison, V. Sadov, C. Vafa, Geometric singularities and enhanced gauge symmetries, Nucl. Phys. B 481 (1996) 215, hep-th/9605200.
E. Witten, String theory dynamics in various dimensions, Nucl. Phys. B 443 (1995) 85, hep-th/9503124.
C. Vafa, Lectures on strings and dualities, hep-th/9702201.
G. Lopes Cardoso, G. Curio, D. Lust, T. Mohaupt, On the duality between the heterotic string and F-theory in 8
dimensions, Phys. Lett. B 389 (1996) 479, hep-th/9609111.
W. Lerche, S. Stieberger, Prepotential, mirror map and F-theory on K3, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 1105,
hep-th/9804176;
W. Lerche, S. Stieberger, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 3 (1999) 1199, Erratum.
V.V. Batyrev, Dual polyhedra and mirror symmetry for CalabiYau hypersurfaces in toric varieties, J. Alg. Geom. 3
(1994) 493.
A. Klemm, B. Lian, S.S. Roan, S.T. Yau, CalabiYau fourfolds for M- and F-theory compactifications, Nucl. Phys.
B 518 (1998) 515, hep-th/9701023.
P. Candelas, A. Font, Duality between the webs of heterotic and type II vacua, Nucl. Phys. B 511 (1998) 295,
hep-th/9603170.
E. Perevalov, H. Skarke, Enhanced gauge symmetry in type II and F-theory compactifications: Dynkin diagrams
from polyhedra, Nucl. Phys. B 505 (1997) 679, hep-th/9704129.
P. Candelas, E. Perevalov, G. Rajesh, Toric geometry and enhanced gauge symmetry of F-theory/heterotic vacua,
Nucl. Phys. B 507 (1997) 445, hep-th/9704097.

Cancelling quadratic divergences

without supersymmetry
M.T.M. van Kessel
Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Received 2 November 2007; received in revised form 18 March 2008; accepted 31 March 2008
Abstract
We construct a theory which has the same particle content as softly broken minimal supersymmetric
QED (MSQED) and is free of quadratic divergences up to two loops. Also this theory is completely gauge
invariant. It appears that MSQED is not at all the only theory without these quadratic divergences. This
proves that there exist non-supersymmetric theories in which there are no quadratic divergences up to two
loops.
1. Introduction
In this paper we discuss an extension of QED where all quadratic divergences are absent up
to two loop order. Of course the softly broken supersymmetric extension of QED (MSQED) has
this nice property. The Lagrangian of this theory can be constructed with the help of superfields
(see e.g. Ref. [1]). In this way one can find the Feynman rules for MSQED. These Feynman rules
are given in Appendix A.
For supersymmetric theories one can prove [2,3] that all Greens functions are free of
quadratic divergences (QD). This is considered to be one of the great merits of supersymmetric theories, i.e. supersymmetric theories solve the naturalness problem. It is then natural to ask
whether the specific supersymmetric theory one has constructed is the only theory without QD.
It is this question that we address in the case of MSQED.
In [47] similar questions are addressed. Veltman [4] showed that in the Standard Model the
QD vanish at 1-loop order if one imposes one constraint on the coupling constants.
E-mail address: m.vankessel@science.ru.nl.
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.018
M.T.M. van Kessel / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 330348
331
Inami et al. [5] investigate a model with one Majorana fermion and a number of real spin-0
fields. They demand that no QD occur up to 2-loop order. They find that for a theory with 2
or less spin-0 fields this condition uniquely determines supersymmetry, i.e. the supersymmetric
theory is the only theory without QD.
Deshpande et al. [6] investigate several models and impose that all QD have to vanish at 1loop order and that the equations one gets for the coupling constants should be invariant under
the renormalization group equation. They find, in all the cases they consider, that with these
constraints one always gets the supersymmetric theory. Because they demand that their 1-loop
equations are invariant under the renormalization group their calculations are actually of higher
loop order, i.e. they demand that QD vanish at all orders in perturbation theory.
Jack et al. [7] investigate theories where, if the QD vanish at 1-loop order, the QD at 2-loop
automatically vanish. They give an example of such a theory which is not supersymmetric.
In [5] and [6] the absence of QD up to some loop order means the theory under consideration is necessarily supersymmetric. In this paper we show that this is not the case for all
theories. Of course we do not claim that there exist non-supersymmetric theories without QD at
all orders in perturbation theory, i.e. we do not claim that we can solve the naturalness problem
without introducing supersymmetry. It is just interesting by itself how many orders one needs
before one gets to a supersymmetric theory (if one gets there at all). As is shown in this article, in which we limit ourselves to 2-loop calculations, two loops is not enough to get to the
supersymmetric theory. Also for this reason we do not demand that our equations are invariant under the renormalization group (as they do in e.g. [6] and [13]). If we would do so our
calculation would effectively be of more than 2-loop order. To keep a clear sight on what happens at every order in perturbation theory we explicitly calculate amplitudes at every order. Of
course practical reasons have disabled us to carry on with our analysis at 3-loop order and further.
This paper is organized as follows. We start by postulating the particle content of our theory,
which is the same as MSQED. Then we start constructing the vertices one by one. We will only
introduce new vertices when it is absolutely necessary to keep everything free of QD. When
introducing a new vertex we will keep the form general. Then we will fix it as much as possible
by insisting that there are no QD. This process will be done up to 2-loop order.
After this construction up to 2-loop order we will see how much of the theory is actually
fixed. It will appear that, to keep all Greens functions free of QD up to 2-loop order, the
form of the vertices are fixed, however there is still a lot of freedom to choose the value of
coupling constants. At this point we will also check that the theory we have built is gauge invariant.
2. Building the theory
We wish to build a theory with the same particle content as MSQED. This means we have one
spin- 12 fermion with charge e and mass me (electron e), one spin-1 boson with mass 0 (photon ),
two scalar particles with charge e and mass mL and mR (left and right selectron eL and eR ) and
one spin- 12 Majorana fermion with charge 0 and mass m (photino ). Because the photino is
a Majorana fermion special Feynman rules have to be used. A convenient formulation of these
Feynman rules is given by Denner et al. in [8]. These rules are explained in Appendix A. Note
that we work in the Feynman/Lorentz gauge. In Section 6 we will come back to the point of
gauge invariance of our theory.
332
Now we want to build a minimal theory with these particles which is gauge invariant, unitary
and free of QD. Let us start by introducing the electron photon interaction we know from ordinary
QED:
ie .
(1)
If we only have this vertex we have QED with three extra particles which do not interact.
We know then that the theory is gauge invariant and unitary, but not free of QD. In the vacuum
polarization at 1-loop order we encounter a QD. Only one diagram, P1 , contributes to this
vacuum polarization, and its QD part is easily calculated:
P1
=
=
1
(2)4

d 4 l Tr (ie)
i(/
p /l + me )
i(/l + me )
(ie) 2
(p l)2 m2e + i
l m2e + i
ie2 2
g .
(2)
8 2
In the last step we kept only the QD part. How we compute the QD part of a diagram is explained
in Appendix B. We see that only the longitudinal part of the photon propagator contains a QD,
the transversal part is free of QD because it is protected by the gauge invariance of the theory.
Here we see the need of another vertex with a photon. The only 4 possibilities are depicted
below.
QD
Now for the moment, to keep our theory as simple as possible let us only introduce the first two.
The general form E of these vertices is:
E = Ap + Bq ,
(3)
where p is the momentum of the incoming selectron, q is the momentum of the outgoing
selectron and A and B are constants. All momenta are counted from left to right. Of course A
and B could depend on p2 and q 2 , however to keep our theory as simple as possible we will not
introduce form factors in the vertices. The exact form of the two vertices can be fixed with the
Ward Takahashi identity (see e.g. [9]) for the 3-vertex at tree level:
i
i
i
i
E (q p)
=e
e
.
p 2 m2L
q 2 m2L
p 2 m2L
q 2 m2L
(4)
Substituting the general expression (3) in (4) we find:

A = ie,
B = ie
so that both vertices become:
(5)
ie(p + q) ,
ie(p + q) .
333
(6)
Now, to see if we still have unitarity consider the process eL eL . The Ward identity
(also see e.g. [9]) states that if we take one of the photons longitudinally polarized and off shell,
but the other particles on shell, the matrix element should be zero. There are two diagrams:
M1 =
M2 =
(7)
All indicated momenta are again flowing from left to right. Taking photon 1 longitudinally polarized (1 q1 ) and off shell a simple calculation gives:
M1 + M2 = 2ie2 q1 2 .
(8)
This means we need another diagram to satisfy the Ward identity. Now, it can easily be seen that
none of the possible 3-vertices one can construct is going to help here. The simplest thing we can
do then is introduce a new 4-vertex. It is clear that the only 4-vertex that will help is:
This new vertex gives one extra diagram and it is easy to see from (8) that it has to be of the form
Ag , with A = 2ie2 . Of course the same reasoning can be given for the process eR eR
and we get two new 4-vertices:
2ie2 g ,
2ie2 g .
(9)
Now we go back to the photon propagator. Because of the new vertices we get 4 new diagrams,
of which the QD parts are readily calculated with the method outlined in Appendix B:
QD
P2 =
P3 =
P4 =
QD
QD
ie2 2
g ,
16 2
ie2 2
g ,
16 2
ie2 2
g ,
8 2
334
QD
P5 =
ie2 2
g .
8 2
(10)
Note again that only the longitudinal parts of all diagrams get QD. We see now that all QD
cancel in the sum P1 + + P5 . So with these 4 new vertices we solved the problems of the
longitudinal part of the photon propagator.
Now consider the left selectron propagator. With the vertices we have introduced up to now
we have two contributing diagrams:
QD
ie2 2
,
16 2
P1 =
P2 =
QD
ie2 2
.
4 2
(11)
The QD do not cancel, so we need a new vertex again. It is easy to see that the only 3-vertices
which will help here are vertices where a left selectron, an electron and a photino meet. There
are four of these:
Because the Lagrangian should be Hermitian there are two relations between these four vertices:

=

0,

0.
(12)
Now because of these new vertices we get one new diagram:

P3 =
(13)
Let us call the first of our new vertices BL (p, q):

BL (p, q) =
(14)
where p is the momentum in the electron line, flowing from left to right and q is the momentum
in the photino line, also flowing from left to right. Now the general expression for this vertex is
a Fierz decomposition:
BL (p, q) = SI + V + T + A 5 + P 5 ,
(15)
335
where is defined as

i
= .
(16)
2
Since we do not want any form factors in our fundamental vertices, to keep the theory as simple
as possible, S and P should be constants and for V , A and T we can write down the general
expressions
V = v1 p + v2 q ,
A = a1 p + a2 q ,
T = t1 p q + t2 p q + t3
p q ,
(17)
where also v1 , v2 , a1 , a2 , t1 , t2 and t3 are constants. Notice we have not included a term proportional to g in T since
g = 0.
Now P3 is given by
(18)

d 4 l Tr BL (p l, l)
i(/
p /l + me )
(p l)2 m2e + i

l + m )
0
0 i(/
.
(1) BL (p l, l)
l 2 m2 + i
P3 =
1
(2)4
(19)
Note that we do not have to worry about the special Feynman rules for Majorana fermions here,
since there is only one electron line the fermion flow can be fixed along the electron arrow
unambiguously. Now the general expression (15) should be substituted in (19). This involves a
lot of algebra and can best be done by computer. It appears we find even quartic divergences (i.e.
proportional to 4 ). The coefficients in front of these terms have to vanish, from which we find
two equations:
3|t1 t2 |2 12|t3 |2 = 0 t1 = t2 ,
t3 = 0,
4|v1 v2 | + 4|a1 a2 | = 0 v1 = v2 ,
2
a1 = a 2 .
(20)
When we substitute these results in the coefficients for the QD parts proportional to p 2
we find one more equation (the coefficient for
(20)):
|v1 |2 + |a1 |2 = 0
(p 2 )2 2
and (p 2 )2
is automatically zero when we substitute
(21)
which means that v1 = v2 = a1 = a2 = 0. Note that because t1 = t2 the whole third term in (15)
vanishes because of the anti-symmetry of .
So our general expression (15) is now reduced to
BL = SI + P 5 .
(22)
For S and P we get one constraint because the quadratically divergent part with no factor (p2 )n
in front should cancel the QD in P1 and P2 :

3e2 + 4 |S|2 + |P |2 = 0.
(23)
336
Of course one can also consider the right selectron propagator and impose the absence of QD.
Then a relation similar to (23) is found. So finally our 4 new vertices become:
SL I + PL 5 ,
SL I + PL 5 ,
SR I + PR 5 ,
SR I + PR 5
(24)
with the constraints

3e2 + 4 |SL |2 + |PL |2 = 0,

3e2 + 4 |SR |2 + |PR |2 = 0.
(25)
To get one more constraint from one loop processes we can consider eL eR . There is only
one diagram for this process:
P1 =
i
QD
SL SR + PL PR
2 ,
4 2
(26)
so that we also get

SL SR + PL PR = 0.
(27)
With the vertices we have up to now one can also calculate the QD in the electron and photino
propagator. It appears that these have no QD, because of their fermionic character. Also diagrams
with 3 or more external legs, which we have not considered up to now, will have no QD, which
can be verified by simple power counting.
So now we have constructed a theory free of QD up to 1-loop order. We still have freedom to
choose our coupling constants SL , PL , SR and PR (8 real parameters against 4 real equations) and
we have not even seen the need for introducing the selectron 4-vertices that occur in MSQED.
3. QD at 2-loop
Now let us consider our theory at 2-loop order and impose the absence of QD. First consider
the left selectron propagator. There are 29 1PI diagrams:
337
(28)
338
Note that for these 2-loops diagrams the fact that the photino is a Majorana fermion is important.
Otherwise diagrams 14, 15, 24 and 25 would not have been possible at all. It is also for these
diagrams that the special Feynman rules of the Majorana fermion become important because the
arrows of the electron lines clash.
Because of the large number of diagrams we have automatized the computation of the QD in
the propagators. The program LOOPS.frm, written in FORM [10] can do the calculation of the
QD for us. This code generates all diagrams at two loop order (also the 1PR ones) and keeps only
the QD parts. The QD parts are written in terms of the standard integrals A and B:

1
1
1
1
d 4 l1 d 4 l2 2
,
A=
4
2
2
(2)
l1 + i (l1 l2 ) + i l2 + i

1
1
1
d 4 l1 d 4 l2 2
B=
(29)
.
(2)4
(l1 + i)2 l22 + i
Notice that we omitted the masses, since these are unimportant for the QD part of the integral,
integrals A (or B) with different masses in the propagators can just be added as far as their QD
part is concerned. Also the external momentum p can be put to zero in the denominators, since
they are also unimportant for the QD parts.
Running the program in the case of the selectron propagator gives us the coefficients in front
of A and B. It appears that the coefficient of B already vanishes if we substitute the constraints
we found at one loop order. The A-part gives a new constraint, its coefficient is:
0 = 11ie4 2ie2 |SL |2 2ie2 |PL |2 10i|SL |4 10i|PL |4 16i|SL |2 |PL |2
2
2
+ 2i SL PL2 + 2iSL2 PL 10i|SL |2 |SR |2 10i|PL |2 |PR |2
2i|SL |2 |PR |2 2i|PL |2 |SR |2 + 2iSL PL SR PR + 2iSL PL SR PR
6iSL PL SR PR 6iSL PL SR PR .
(30)
We could now proceed with the other propagators at 2-loop order, however, first there is a
problem. Consider the three constraints we found at one loop order again:
3e2 4|SL |2 4|PL |2 = 0,
3e2 4|SR |2 4|PR |2 = 0,
SL SR + PL PR = 0.
(31)
From the second equation we see that

3
|SR |2 = e2 |PR |2 .
4
From the last one it follows that
PL =
SL SR
.
PR
(32)
(33)
Substituting both relations in the first equation in (31) gives:

|SL | = |PR |.
(34)
From (33) it then follows that

|SR | = |PL |.
(35)
339
If we use all these results in the 2-loop condition (30) this condition reduces to:
11 4
ie = 0.
(36)
4
Apparently our constraints are incompatible. This forces us to introduce new vertices. The only
possible 3-vertices we can still introduce are:
With the Ward Takahashi identities these vertices can be fixed like we fixed (6), they will have
exactly the same expression as (6). But this means we will ruin the photon propagator at one loop
order again!
So we have to introduce new 4-vertices. Since the problem occurs with the selectrons it seems
plausible to introduce selectron 4-vertices. These are also the simplest 4-vertices we can introduce because of the scalar character of the selectrons. So we will introduce:
= iVL ,
= iVR ,
= iVLR .
(37)
(38)
Because of these new vertices the left and right selectron propagator at 1-loop order also
change. It is easy to see that our new 1-loop constraints become:
3e2 4|SL |2 4|PL |2 + VL + VLR = 0,
3e2 4|SR |2 4|PR |2 + VR + VLR = 0,
SL SR + PL PR = 0.
(39)
Nothing changes in the electron, photon and photino propagator at one loop order.
The new constraint for the selectron propagator at two loop order can also calculated with
LOOPS.frm again. We get:
0 = 11ie4 2ie2 |SL |2 2ie2 |PL |2 10i|SL |4 10i|PL |4 16i|SL |2 |PL |2
2
2
+ 2i SL PL2 + 2iSL2 PL 10i|SL |2 |SR |2 10i|PL |2 |PR |2
2i|SL |2 |PR |2 2i|PL |2 |SR |2 + 2iSL PL SR PR + 2iSL PL SR PR
6iSL PL SR PR 6iSL PL SR PR 2ie2 VL 2ie2 VLR
+ 2i|SL |2 VL + 2i|PL |2 VL + 2i|SR |2 VLR + 2i|PR |2 VLR
1
2
+ iVL2 + iVLR
.
2
(40)
340
The QD part of the right selectron propagator and the process eL eR at two loop order can
also be calculated. From these we get:
0 = 11ie4 2ie2 |SR |2 2ie2 |PR |2 10i|SR |4 10i|PR |4 16i|SR |2 |PR |2
2
2
+ 2i SR PR2 + 2iSR2 PR 10i|SR |2 |SL |2 10i|PR |2 |PL |2
2i|SR |2 |PL |2 2i|PR |2 |SL |2 + 2iSR PR SL PL + 2iSR PR SL PL
6iSR PR SL PL 6iSR PR SL PL 2ie2 VR 2ie2 VLR
1
2
+ 2i|SR |2 VR + 2i|PR |2 VR + 2i|SL |2 VLR + 2i|PL |2 VLR + iVR2 + iVLR
,
2
(41)
0 = 2ie2 SL SR 2ie2 PL PR 8i|SL |2 PL PR 10i|SL |2 SL SR

2
+ 2iSL PL SR 8i|PL |2 SL SR 8i|PR |2 SL SR 10i|SR |2 SL SR
2
+ 2iSL SR PR2 + 2i SL PL PR 10i|PL |2 PL PR 8i|SR |2 PL PR
+ 2iPL SR2 PR 10i|PR |2 PL PR + 2iSL SR VLR + 2iPL PR VLR .
(42)
Of course (41) is just (40) with L and R swapped.

Also the QD parts of the electron, photon and photino propagator can be calculated with
LOOPS.frm. These appear to be zero already, independent of our choice of coupling constants.
4. 1 loop conclusions
Using our constraints from 1 loop (39) we can eliminate 4 of our 11 free (real) parameters.
Let us define:
SL |SL |eiL ,
PL |PL |eiL ,
SR |SR |eiR ,
PR |PR |eiR .
(43)
Now we use (39) to express everything in the 3 phases R , L and R , the magnitude |PR | and
the 4-vertex constants VL , VR and VLR .
L = R + L R + + 2n,
|SL |2 = |PR |2 ,

3
1
1
|PL |2 = e2 |PR |2 + VR + VLR ,
4
4
4
3
1
1
|SR |2 = e2 |PR |2 + VR + VLR .
4
4
4
Here is defined as
3 2
4e +
3 2
4e +
1
4 VL
1
4 VR
+ 14 VLR
+ 14 VLR
(44)
(45)
341
and the inequalities

VL + VLR 3e2 ,
VR + VLR 3e2
(46)
should be satisfied in order that there exists a solution at all.

We see there is still a lot of freedom left if one only wants a theory free of QD up to 1-loop
order.
5. 2 loop conclusions
Now we can use the 1 loop relations (44) in the 2 loop constraints (40), (41) and (42). The
easiest way is to use the 1-loop relations in (42) first. Then this equation simplifies to

1 2 2
(SL SR PL PR ) 1
(47)
PL SL = 0.
We can satisfy this equation in 3 ways:

1. SL SR = PL PR ;
2. = 1;
3. PL = SL .
5.1. Case 1
In this case (40) and (41) simplify to two quadratic equations in VL , VR and VLR , it appears
that |PR | drops out. We can use these two equations to express VL and VR in terms of VLR . This
gives 4 solutions. We are left with 4 real degrees of freedom:
L ,
R ,
|PR |,
VLR .
(48)
The 4 solutions are:

1
L = L + + (m + n),
2
1
R = R + (m n),
2
|SL |2 = |PR |2 ,

7
1
1
2 ,
|PL |2 = |SR |2 = e2 |PR |2 + VLR
110e4 + 44e2 VLR 2VLR
2
2
4

2
VL = VR = 11e2 + VLR 110e4 + 44e2 VLR 2VLR
and
1
L = L + + (m + n),
2
1
R = R + (m n),
2
|SL |2 = |PR |2 ,
(49)
342

7 2
2
1
2
397e4 + 226e2 VLR 11VLR
e |PR |2 + VLR
,
3
3
12

7
2
1
2 ,
397e4 + 226e2 VLR 11VLR
|SR |2 = e2 |PR |2 + VLR
3
3
12

19
5
1
2 ,
397e4 + 226e2 VLR 11VLR
VL = e2 + VLR
3
3
3

19
5
1
2 ,
397e4 + 226e2 VLR 11VLR
VR = e2 + VLR
3
3
3
|PL |2 =
with
=
28e2 + 8VLR
28e2 + 8VLR

2
397e4 + 226e2 VLR 11VLR
(50)
(51)
2
397e4 + 226e2 VLR 11VLR
5.2. Case 2
In this case (40) and (41) simplify to the same equation, where also |PR | drops out. This
equation has two solutions in terms of VLR . We are left with 5 real degrees of freedom:
R ,
L ,
R ,
|PR |,
VLR .
(52)
The two solutions are:

L = R + L R + + 2n,
|SL |2 = |PR |2 ,

7
1
1
2 ,
110e4 + 44e2 VLR 2VLR
|PL |2 = |SR |2 = e2 |PR |2 + VLR
2
2
4

2 .
(53)
We see that the two solutions in this case are like the first two solutions of case 1 (49), just slightly
more general (here R is also free).
5.3. Case 3
In this case we also get two quadratic equations in VL , VR and VLR , which also have four
solutions. We are left with 3 real degrees of freedom:
L ,
R ,
VLR
(54)
and the four solutions are:

L = L + m,
R = R + m,

7
1
1
2 ,
|SL |2 = |PL |2 = |SR |2 = |PR |2 = e2 + VLR
110e4 + 44e2 VLR 2VLR
4
4
8

2
(55)
343
Fig. 1. The solutions (55). |SL |2 /e2 = |PL |2 /e2 = |SR |2 /e2 = |PR |2 /e2 And VL /e2 = VR /e2 are plotted as functions
of VLR /e2 . Both the solution with (+) and () are shown. The MSQED solution is indicated by the crosses.
and
L = L + m,
R = R + m,

7
1
1
2 ,
|SL |2 = |PL |2 = e2 + VLR
183e4 + 132e2 VLR 6VLR
8
4
24

7
1
1
2 ,
|SR |2 = |PR |2 = e2 + VLR
183e4 + 132e2 VLR 6VLR
8
4
24

1
2 ,
VL = 4e2 + VLR
183e4 + 132e2 VLR 6VLR
3

1
2 .
VR = 4e2 + VLR
(56)
183e4 + 132e2 VLR 6VLR
3
The first two solutions are plotted in Fig. 1. In this figure the crosses indicate the values for
the MSQED coupling constants, they lie on the curves of the () solution (55).
The final conclusion is that, in the case of MSQED, MSQED is not at all the only theory free
of QD up to two loops. With the demand that up to two loops all QD vanish one can fix the form
of the vertices in a minimal extension of QED. For the values of the coupling constants there is
still a lot of freedom left.
6. Gauge invariance
While building our theory we have fixed some of our vertices by using the Ward or Ward
Takahashi identities. We chose our vertices such that the processes under consideration satisfied
these identities. This does not mean however that our complete theory is gauge invariant. To see
that our complete theory is gauge invariant for general SL , PL , SR , PR , VL , VR and VLR we will
demonstrate this at the level of the Lagrangian density. From our Feynman rules the Lagrangian
density can be read off. We find:
L = LK + LI ,
(57)
344
with

1
1

LK = F F i + m eL
2 + m2L eL eR
2 + m2R eR
4
2

e i + me e ,
LI = eA e e

eL ieA eR
eR
ieA eL
eL eL
eR eR
eL + e2 A2 eR
eR
+ e2 A2 eL

5
i eL e SL + PL i eL
SL + PL 5 e

i eR e SR + PR 5 i eR
SR + PR 5 e
1
1
VL eL
eL eL
eL VR eR
eR eR
eR VLR eL
eL eR
eR ,
4
4
where of course
(58)
F A A .
(59)
Now it is easy to check that indeed this Lagrangian density is invariant under the gauge transformation:
A (x) A (x) + (x),

e (x) exp ie(x) e (x),

eL (x) exp ie(x) eL ,

eR (x) exp ie(x) eR .
(Strictly speaking it is not this Lagrangian density that is invariant, but the action S =
the Lagrangian density itself is invariant up to terms which are total derivatives.)
d 4 x L,
Appendix A. The Feynman rules for MSQED

In Figs. 24 the Feynman rules for MSQED are given in the Feynman/Lorentz gauge. The
straight line with arrow indicates the electron, the combination of a straight line and a wiggly
line indicates the photino, the straight lines without arrow with a label L or R indicate the left or
right selectron and the wiggly line indicates the photon. Here the photino is a Majorana fermion,
which makes it impossible to fix a fermion flow in each diagram unambiguously. To be able to
work with Feynman rules we follow Denner et al. [8]. They state that for any fermion loop one
should choose an arbitrary orientation for the fermion flow. One should count the momenta along
this chosen fermion flow and the vertices change as:
C T C 1 .
(A.1)
Here T denotes transposition and C is the charge-conjugation matrix. The expression on the
right-hand side is equal to
C T C 1 =
where is given by:

1
for = I, i 5 , 5 ,
=
1 for = , .
(A.2)
(A.3)
345
/ + me )
i(p
p2 m2e + i
/ + me )
i(p
p2 m2e + i
/ + m )
i(p
p2 m2 + i
/ + m )
i(p
p2 m2 + i
i
p2 m2L + i
i
p2 m2R + i
ig
p2 + i
Fig. 2. The Feynman rules for the bare propagators in MSQED. The indicated momenta flow from left to right. The
arrows next to the fermion lines represent the chosen fermion flow.
The fermion flow in all diagrams (Figs. 24) will be indicated by an arrow next to the fermion
line.
Appendix B. Computing QD parts
To see how a loop integral diverges one has to introduce a regulator, in our case a cut-off
momentum. This cut-off can be a strict cut-off at momentum , which means that no momentum
occurring in a bare propagator may exceed . In our case it is however more convenient to work
with a smoother cut-off momentum [11,12] introduced by
1
lE2 + m2
d e(lE +m
2
2)
(B.1)
where lE is a Euclidean momentum. This means that in all our loop integrals we have to do a
Wick rotation first, to get a Euclidean form.
The loop integrals (1 and 2 loop) for propagator diagrams which we have to know will in general depend on the momentum p flowing through the propagator and several masses. However,
if one is only interested in the worst divergent part of a loop integral these can in principal all be
set to zero. We shall do this for the momentum p, but not for the masses, to avoid introducing
infrared singularities. On can however take all masses equal.
Now consider the 1-loop integral

1
.
In = d 4 l 2
(B.2)
(l m2 + i)n
346
ie
ie
ie(p + q)
ie(p + q)
e
(I + 5 )
2
e
(I 5 )
2
e
(I 5 )
2
e
(I + 5 )
2
Fig. 3. The Feynman rules for the 3-vertices in MSQED. The indicated momenta flow from left to right. The arrows next
to the fermion lines represent the chosen fermion flow. Notice that the electronselectronphotino vertices where the
fermion flow is opposite to the electron arrow are not explicitly given, these vertices have the same expression as their
counterparts where the fermion flow is along the electron arrow.
After the Wick rotation one finds:

1
.
In = i(1)n d 4 lE 2
(lE + m2 )n
(B.3)
Using the regularization scheme introduced above this becomes:

In = i 2 (1)n
2
d1 dn
1
2
e(1 ++n )m .
(1 + + n )2
(B.4)
347
2ie2 g
2ie2 g
2ie2
2ie2
ie2
Fig. 4. The Feynman rules for the 4-vertices in MSQED.
From this expression it is easy to see the worst divergent parts:

I1 = i 2 2 ,
I2 = 2i 2 ln ,
In>2 = i 2 (1)n
1
1
,
2n4
(n 2)(n 1) m
indeed verifying what one expects from simple power counting.

The only 2-loop integral which we will encounter is:

1
1
1
I = d 4 l1 d 4 l2 2
.
2
2
2
2
l1 m + i (l1 l2 ) m + i l2 m2 + i
(B.5)
(B.6)
348
After Wick rotating, using the regularization and performing the momentum integrals this becomes

1
2
4
d1 d2 d3
e(1 +2 +3 )m .
I =
(B.7)
(1 2 + 1 3 + 2 3 )2
2
The worst divergent part (in this case quadratically divergent, as we will see below) can be
obtained by putting the exponential to 1. Then our 2-loop integral becomes

64
4
2 ,
I = ln
(B.8)
27
indeed showing a QD.
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
J. Bagger, J. Wess, Supersymmetry and Supergravity, Lecture Notes in Physics, Springer-Verlag, 1982.
J. Wess, B. Zumino, Nucl. Phys. B 78 (1974) 1.
D.M. Capper, G. Leibbrandt, Nucl. Phys. B 85 (1975) 492.
M. Veltman, Acta Phys. Pol. B 12 (1981) 437.
T. Inami, H. Nishino, S. Watamura, Phys. Lett. B 117 (1982) 197.
N. Deshpande, R. Johnson, E. Ma, Phys. Rev. D 29 (1984) 2851.
I. Jack, D.R.T. Jones, Phys. Lett. B 234 (1990) 321.
A. Denner, H. Eck, O. Hahn, J. Kblbeck, Nucl. Phys. B 387 (1992) 467.
M.E. Peskin, D.V. Schroeder, An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory, Westview Press, 1995.
J. Vermaseren, math-ph/0010025.
G. Kleppe, R.P. Woodard, Ann. Phys. 221 (1993) 106.
D. Evens, J.W. Moffat, G. Kleppe, R.P. Woodard, Phys. Rev. D 43 (1991) 499.
J. Kubo, K. Sibold, W. Zimmermann, Phys. Lett. B 220 (1989) 191.

Finite-size effects for dyonic giant magnons

Yasuyuki Hatsuda , Ryo Suzuki
Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan
Received 16 January 2008; accepted 1 April 2008
Abstract
We compute finite-size corrections to dyonic giant magnons in two ways. One is by examining the asymptotic behavior of helical strings of [K. Okamura, R. Suzuki, A perspective on classical strings from complex
sine-Gordon solitons, Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 046001, hep-th/0609026] as elliptic modulus k goes to unity,
and the other is by applying the generalized Lscher formula for -term of [R.A. Janik, T. ukowski, Wrapping interactions at strong couplingthe giant magnon, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 126008, arXiv: 0708.2208
[hep-th]] to the situation in which incoming particles are boundstates. By careful choice of poles in the
su(2|2)2 -invariant S-matrix, we find agreement of the two results, which makes possible to predict the
(leading) finite-size correction for dyonic giant magnons to all orders in the t Hooft coupling.
1. Introduction
There has been great advance toward understanding the correspondence between N = 4
super-YangMills and superstring on AdS5 S 5 recently. The AdS/CFT correspondence [13]
predicts a map between individual string states and gauge invariant operators in super-Yang
Mills at least for large N , and under this map energy of a string state should be equal to conformal
dimension of the corresponding operator.
Progress on checking this correspondence has been catalyzed by the discovery of integrability. The dilatation operator of N = 4 super-YangMills theory is shown to have the same
form as Hamiltonian of an integrable spin chain, which enables us to study the problem of diagonalizing the Hamiltonian by a technique called Bethe ansatz [4]. Long-range Bethe ansatz
equations for the full psu(2, 2|4) sector are proposed to an arbitrary order of the t Hooft coupling
E-mail addresses: hatsuda@hep-th.phys.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Y. Hatsuda), ryo@hep-th.phys.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp (R. Suzuki).

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.04.007
350
Y. Hatsuda, R. Suzuki / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 349383
2 in [5], assuming all order integrability of super-YangMills theory. Their original pro NgYM
posal contained so-called dressing phase, which was first introduced in [6]. The dressing phase
reconciles mismatch between scaling limit of the Bethe ansatz equations of [7] and the integral equation derived from classical string theory [8]. An all-order expression of the dressing
phase was later proposed in [9,10] on the assumptions of transcendentality [1113] and crossing
symmetry [14,15].
However, the long-range Bethe ansatz equations equipped with the dressing phase can reproduce the correct answer of super-YangMills only when the length of spin chain L is large
enough. For spin chains with finite size, the Bethe ansatz equations do not account for wrapping
interactions [7], which possibly arise from the order of L as higher-genus diagrams [16]. In
fact, the Bethe ansatz prediction is found to disagree with the BFKL prediction [1719] in [20].
Recently, it is found that the wrapping effects for the four-loop anomalous dimensions of certain
short operators induce terms of higher degrees of transcendentality [21,22].
The wrapping problem does not occur for the system of infinite L at weak coupling, and
such situation has been studied under the name of asymptotic spin chain [23,24]. It was shown
that the S-matrix of the asymptotic spin chain can be determined only by the symmetry algebra psu(2|2)2 R3 up to the dressing phase, and that its BPS relation constrains the dispersion
relation of magnon excitations as (p) = [1 + f () sin2 ( p2 )]1/2 , where the function f () is conjectured as the one given in (1.1). On string theory side, the asymptotic spin chain corresponds
to the states with an infinite angular momentum. Classical string solutions which correspond
to elementary magnon excitations over the asymptotic spin chain are found in [25] and called
giant magnons. This correspondence is subsequently generalized to the one between magnon
boundstates [26] and dyonic giant magnons [27].
The S-matrix of classical worldsheet theory on AdS5 S 5 was examined in [28]. It was further found that the psu(2|2)2 R3 symmetry is realized in the worldsheet S-matrix when the
level matching conditions are relaxed [29,30]. Moreover in [30], they proposed string S-matrix
which satisfies the standard YangBaxter equation, while gauge S-matrix of [24] satisfies the
twisted YangBaxter equation.
With remarkable success for the case of infinite L in mind, a natural question is what will be
the dispersion relation of asymptotic spin chain when L is finite. From string theoretical point of
view, answering to this question boils down to construction of classical string solutions with finite
angular momenta which incorporate (dyonic) giant magnons.1 Such solutions have already been
constructed; see [31,32] for a general solution including giant magnons, and [33] for solutions
including dyonic giant magnons. And it has been found in [31] that the energy-spin relation of
giant magnons receives correction ofthe order ecJ1 , with J1 the angular momentum along a
great circle of S 2 S 5 and c = 2/[ sin( p2 )].
It is argued in [34] that the exponential finite-size correction at strong coupling is related
to the wrapping interaction at weak coupling, based on Thermodynamic Bethe ansatz approach
[3537] and the Lscher formula [3840]. Recently, Janik and ukowski have elaborated this
argument [41], assuming that Lschers argument can be applied to the non-relativistic dispersion
relation

2 p
.
(p) = 1 + 2 sin
(1.1)
2
1 In conformal gauge, the size can be interpreted also as the circumference of worldsheet.
351
Fig. 1. Diagrams for the leading finite-size corrections. The left is called -term, and the right F -term. a is an incoming
physical particle, and b, c are virtual (but on-shell) particles.
Their generalized Lscher formula computes finite-J1 correction to the energy-spin relation of
giant magnons from the S-matrix and the dispersion relation (1.1) of infinite-J1 system. Since
we know the conjectured S-matrix and dispersion relation of infinite-size system, the generalized Lscher formula will in principle give the finite-size correction valid at arbitrary values of .
However, just like the original Lscher formula, it is only sensitive to the leading part of corrections exponentially suppressed in L (or J1 ), that is the first term in the following expansion:

(p) = (p, , L)ec(p,)L + O ec (p,)L with c (p, ) > c(p, ),
(1.2)
where (p, , L) contains no factor exponentially dependent on L. According to the (generalized) Lscher formula, the leading finite-size correction arises from exchanging virtual particles
going around the worldsheet cylinder once, and is written as
(p) = (p) + F (p).
(1.3)
The first term is called -term and the second one is called F -term, which have different diagrammatic interpretation as shown in Fig. 1.
Janik and ukowski computed the -term of their generalized formula and found, after taking
contributions from the BHL/BES dressing phase [9,10] into account, that

4 3 p
2L
cL
sin
exp
2
(as , L ),
(p, , L)e
-term
2
sin( p2 )
(1.4)
which correctly reproduces the leading finite-J1 correction to the dispersion relation of giant
magnons in conformal gauge, with L = J1 [31,32].2
In this paper, we extend their analysis and study the leading finite-size correction to magnon
boundstates and dyonic giant magnons. Firstly, we analyze the asymptotic behavior of helical
strings of [33] in the limit when they nearly reduce to an array of dyonic giant magnons, and
determined the leading finite-J1 correction to the energy-spin relation. Secondly, we apply the
generalized Lscher formula for -term to the situation in which the incoming particle is magnon
boundstate.
2 What corresponds to the F -term in string theory, is not discussed in [41]. Indeed, the exponential part of F -term
seems to be different from that of -term, so we do not discuss F -term in the main text.
352
Since the generalized Lscher formula of Janik and ukowski is applicable only to incoming
elementary magnons, we slightly generalize their argument, assuming there exists an effective
field theory such that it reproduces the non-relativistic dispersion

p
Q (p) = Q2 + 2 sin2
(1.5)
,
2
and the S-matrix which is given by the product of the conjectured two-body S-matrices. Our
results serve as a consistency check between the generalized Lscher formula and the results
from string theory. It is desirable if one can give further justification of these formulae from
other methods of computing the finite-size corrections.
Also we would like to stress that evaluation of the formula is not straightforward. Evaluation
of the -term requires information of residue at the poles that are located at the nearest from
the real axis. Thus, to compute the -term correctly, we have to determine which poles of the
su(2|2)2 S-matrix are relevant.
Singularity structure of the su(2|2)2 S-matrix with the BHL/BES dressing phase has been
studied in [42,43]. Particularly in [43], they discussed where in the spectral parameter torus one
can find the singularity of magnon S-matrix corresponding to exchanges of physical particle.
In [43] they determined the location of simple and double poles when incoming particles are
elementary magnons. This result is extended in [44] to the case where incoming particles are
magnon boundstates.
To pick up the relevant poles for -term, we use heuristic reasoning based on the arguments
similar to [43,44]. It should be noticed that the generalized Lscher formula is sensitive to residue
at the (simple) poles, while kinematical (or diagrammatic) arguments of [43,44] probed only the
location of poles.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we discuss finite-J correction to dyonic giant
magnon from classical string solutions. In Section 3, we apply the generalized Lscher formula
for -term to the cases in which the incoming particle is a magnon boundstate. Section 4 is
devoted to the comparison of the two results, discussion and conclusion. In Appendices A, B, D,
we collect the details of calculation needed to derive the results in the main text. In Appendix C,
we briefly review derivation of the generalized Lscher formula, slightly modifying the argument
of [41] to the case of our interest. We give brief discussion on F -term in Appendix E.
2. Finite-J correction to dyonic giant magnons
Dyonic giant magnon is a classical string solution on Rt S 3 [27], which is two-spin generalization of the giant magnon solution found in [25]. It has one infinite angular momentum J1
and another finite angular momentum J2 , and obeys the square-root type energy-spin relation:

p1
E J1 = J22 + 2 sin2
(2.1)
.
2
The finite-J1 generalization of dyonic giant magnon is found in [33], and named helical string
after the helical-wave solution of complex sine-Gordon system. Thus, conserved charges and
winding numbers of the helical string provide us with sufficient information about the finite-J1
correction to the energy-spin relation (2.1),
We use the notation of [33] throughout this section.
353
2.1. Dyonic giant magnon

We begin with the review on J1 = case: the dyonic giant magnon. Dyonic giant magnon
can be obtained by taking k, the elliptic modulus of helical strings, to unity.
The profile of dyonic giant magnons can be written as
t = aT + bX,
1 =
v
T (, )
,
1 v2
sinh(X i1 ) i tan(1 )X+iu1 T

cos 1 iu2 T
,
2 =
,
e
e
cosh(X)
cosh(X)
v
X(, )
,
( , ) (, ),
1 v2
(2.2)
(2.3)
where a, b, v, u1 are parameters determined by 1 and u2 . The parameter determines periodicity as

+ 2. For dyonic giant magnons we set = , which relaxes the periodicity
condition for a closed string in spacetime.
The conserved charges for a single dyonic giant magnon, rescaled by / , are given by

tan2 1
E := E = u1 1
K(1),
u21

tan2 1
2
K(1) cos 1 ,
J1 := J1 = u1 1
u21
J2 := J2 = u2 cos2 1 ,
(2.4)
where K(k) is complete elliptic integral of the first kind, and K(1) = . Then, the relation (2.1)
follows by setting 1 = ( p1 )/2.
One can estimate exponential part of the finite-J1 corrections to the leading order, only
from
the above information. This is because the correction term is of order (k )2 , while k 1 k 2
can also be expressed by the angular momenta.
Let us first relate k with the complete elliptic integral of the first kind K(k). As shown in
Appendix B.2, K(k) has the asymptotic form

4
K(k) = ln + O k 2 ln k (as k 1).
(2.5)
k
Inverting this relation, we obtain k = 4 exp[K(1)]. We express a divergent constant K(1) by
angular momenta J1 and J2 . The expressions (2.4) tell us

J22 + cos2 1
1
J1
2
+
cos
=
.
K(1) =
(2.6)
,
where
u
1
1
2
cos2 1
1 tan 21 u1
u1
Eliminating u1 from the first equation, we get

J22 + cos2 1
J1 cos2 1
2
K(1) = 2
+ cos 1 ,
J2 + cos4 1
J22 + cos2 1

J1 sin2 p21
J22 + sin2 p21
2 p1
+ sin
,
2
2
J2 + sin4 p21
J22 + sin2 p21
(2.7)
354
where we neglected higher-order corrections to the relation 21 = p1 + O(k 2 ) in the second

line.
If we take the limit J2 0 within this expression, we get
K(1)
J1
J1
+1
+ 1,
cos 1
sin p21
(2.8)
which is the single-spin result [31,32].

2.2. Helical strings with two spins near k = 1
For general value of k, helical strings have two finite angular momenta J1 , J2 and two finite
winding numbers N1 , N2 . Correspondingly, there are four controllable parameters (k, U, 1 , 2 ).
Other parameters which appear in the profile of helical strings can be expressed as functions of
those four parameters. Below, we are going to investigate the precise form of these functions
when k is near 1, and determine finite-J1 correction to the energy-spin relation of dyonic giant
magnons.
The profile of type (i) helical string is shown in Fig. 2, and takes the following form [33]:
t = aT + bX,

0 (0) 1 (X i1 )
1 = C
exp Z0 (i1 )X + iu1 T ,
(X)
k0 (i1 )
0

0 (0) 3 (X i2 )
2 = C
exp Z2 (i2 )X + iu2 T .
0 (X)
k2 (i2 )
(2.9)
(2.10)
(2.11)
The parameters C, u1 , u2 are written as

C 2 =
dn2 (i2 )
2
k cn2 (i2 )
sn2 (i1 ),
u21 = U + dn2 (i1 ),
u22 = U
(1 k 2 ) sn2 (i2 )
,
cn2 (i2 )
(2.12)
and the parameters a and b satisfy

a 2 + b2 = k 2 2k 2 sn2 (i1 ) U + 2u22 ,

1 k 2 sn(i2 ) dn(i2 )
ab = iC 2 u1 sn(i1 ) cn(i1 ) dn(i1 ) u2
.
k2
cn3 (i2 )
(2.13)
(2.14)
The velocity v is chosen so that v b/a 1.

All quantities given above can be expanded in powers of k . Let us see the leading k corrections in turn. The normalization constant and the angular velocities become,

k 2
C = cos(1 ) +
1 2 cos2 2 cos3 1 cos 1 + 1 sin 1 + O k 4 ,
4

U cos2 1 + 1 k 2 sin 1 (1 + sin 1 cos 1 )

+ O k 4 ,
u1 =
cos 1
4 cos2 1 U cos2 1 + 1
u2 =

k 2 sin2 2
U+
+ O k 4 .
2
U
(2.15)
(2.16)
(2.17)
355
Fig. 2. Left: Type (i) helical spinning string solution with two spins, where the (x, y, z) axes show (Re 1 , Im 1 , |2 |).
Right: The same string solution with (x, y, z) = (Re 2 , Im 2 , |1 |).
The parameters a, b and v = b/a become, at the next-to-leading order,

U + cos2 1
+ k 2 a (2) ,
b tan 1 + k 2 b(2) ,
a
cos 1
sin 1
v
+ k 2 v (2) .
U + cos2 1
(2.18)
One can compute a (2) , b(2) and v (2) by using the formulae shown in Appendix B.
We can write down the conditions for the type (i) helical string (2.9)(2.11) to be closed. If
we define angular coordinates by 1,2 Im(log 1,2 ), the conditions read,
2
2K(k) 1 v 2
|one- hop
(2.19)
=
,
n

2N1
1 |one- hop
(2.20)
= 2K(k) iZ0 (i1 ) vu1 + (2n1 + 1),
n

2N2
= 2K(k) iZ2 (i2 ) vu2 + 2n2 .
2 |one- hop
(2.21)
n
As runs from 0 to 2 , the string hops n times in the target space, winding N1 and N2 times
in 1 - and 2 -direction, respectively. One can always set n1,2 = 0, because the shift i i +
2K (k) induces ni ni + 1 with keeping the profile (2.10), (2.11) unchanged.
The finite J1 effects on the periodicity conditions can be evaluated in a similar manner. Let
p1,2 1,2 , then Eqs. (2.20) and (2.21) are rewritten as, at the next-to-leading order,

k 2 (2)
p + O k 4 ,
2 1

2k sin 1 U
k 2 (2)
p2 + O k 4 ,
p2
22 +
2
2
U cos 1 + 1
p1 21 +
(2.22)
(2.23)
where k ln(4/k ). We omit the exact form of p1,2 . By inverting the relation (2.22), one can
express 1 in terms of p1 . However, since p2 is generally divergent as k 1, we cannot invert
the relation (2.23). We will return to this issue in Section 2.3.
(2)
356
The rescaled energy E and the spins Jj (j = 1, 2) were evaluated in [33]. There we can find

E = na 1 v 2 K(k),
(2.24)

2
2
nC u1
vk
J1 =
(2.25)
i sn(i1 ) cn(i1 ) dn(i1 ) K(k) ,
E(k) + dn2 (i1 ) +
u1
k2

sn2 (i2 )

v i sn(i2 ) dn(i2 )
nC 2 u2
2
J2 =
(2.26)
E(k) + 1 k
K(k) .
k2
cn2 (i2 ) u2
cn3 (i2 )
We may set n = 1, since a single dyonic giant magnon corresponds to this case. Now we expand
the conserved charges in k = ln(4/k ) and k , and then reexpress 1 in terms of p1 = 1 . We
obtain,

k (U + 1) sin( p21 ) k 2 (2)
E=
+
E + O k 4 ,
4
U sin2 ( p21 ) + 1

k (U + 1) sin( p21 )
k 2 (2)
p1
p1
U sin2
+ 1 sin
+
J1 + O k 4 ,
J1 =
2
2
4
U sin2 ( p1 ) + 1
(2.27)
(2.28)

k 2 (2)
2 p1
J2 = U sin
+
J + O k 4 .
2
4 2
It follows that
E J1

J22 + sin
p1
2
(2.29)

U sin( p21 )
k 2 (2)
(2)
(2)
J2 ,
+
E J1
4
U sin2 ( p21 ) + 1
(2.30)
where we assumed sin(p1 /2) > 0.

The precise form of the next-to-leading terms appearing in (2.30) can be computed with the
help of formulae in Appendix B. The result turns out quite simple:

U sin( p21 )
p1 (1 2 cos2 2 )
(2)
(2)
(2)
E J1
(2.31)
J2 sin3
.
2
U sin2 ( p21 ) + 1
U sin2 ( p21 ) + 1
At this order of validity, it can also be reexpressed as

J2
(1 2 cos2 2 )
(2)
(2)
(2)
4 p1
E J1
J2 sin
.
2
J22 + sin2 ( p21 )
J22 + sin2 ( p21 )
For later purpose, let us introduce a new rapidity variable by

U sin( p21 )
J2
tanh
=
+ O k 2 ,
=
2
J22 + sin2 ( p21 )
U sin2 ( p21 ) + 1
then it follows

cosh
=
2
J22 + sin2 ( p21 )

sin( p21 )

U sin2
p1
2
(2.32)
(2.33)

+ 1.
(2.34)
Using this rapidity variable, (2.32) is rewritten as

2
(2)
(2)
(2)
3 p1 (1 2 cos 2 )
,
J2 = sin
E J1 tanh
2
2
cosh( 2 )
which is the prefactor of the leading finite-J1 correction.
For the exponential part, recall that k is related to J1 as in (2.7):

sin2 ( p21 )

2 + sin2 p1
2 + sin2 p1
k 4 exp 2
J
+
J
J
1
2
2
2
2
J2 + sin4 ( p21 )

p
sin2 ( 1 ) cosh2 ( 2 )
J1
= 4 exp 2 p12
+1 .
p1
2
sin ( 2 ) + sinh ( 2 ) sin( 2 ) cosh( 2 )
Collecting the results (2.35) and (2.36), the energy-spin relation (2.30) becomes

sin3 ( p21 )
p1
E J1 J22 + sin2
4 cos(22 )
2
cosh( 2 )

2 sin2 ( p1 ) cosh2 ( 2 )
J1
+
1
.
exp 2 p1 2
sin ( 2 ) + sinh2 ( 2 ) sin( p21 ) cosh( 2 )
357
(2.35)
(2.36)
(2.37)
This is consistent with the finite-J1 correction to giant magnons in the literature [31,32] if we set
= 0 and cos(22 ) = 1. In other words, their results are equivalent to the asymptotic behavior
of single-spin type (i) helical strings near k = 1.
Single-spin type (ii) helical strings corresponds to the case cos(22 ) = 1. For two-spin case,
the finite-J1 correction is essentially same as (2.37), because type (ii) solution can be obtained
via the operation
2 2 + K (1) = 2 + .
(2.38)
2
2.3. Finite-gap interpretation
Results in the last subsection revealed that the finite-J1 correction to the energy-spin relation
of dyonic giant magnons depends on the parameter 2 that has not appeared in the J1 = case.3
Unfortunately we are unable to fix 2 from the quantization condition for winding numbers,
because the winding number N2 becomes divergent as k 1 as we saw in (2.23).4 To clarify the
situation we reconsider the rle of the parameter 2 from a finite-gap point of view, where the
mode numbers are always quantized properly by construction.
It is well known that by exploiting the integrable structure of classical string action on Rt S 3 ,
one can represent every classical string solution on Rt S 3 (in conformal gauge) by a set of
algebro-geometric data, an algebraic curve and Abelian integrals on it. These algebro-geometric
data also specify what is called a BakerAkhiezer vector. Conversely, with the help of Riemann
theta functions, one can construct the BakerAkhiezer vector such that it satisfy various constraints imposed on classical string solutions. Reconstruction of classical string solutions from
3 When a two-spin helical string reduces to an array of dyonic giant magnons in k 1 limit, the dependence of
2
naturally disappears whatever value it has.
4 Fig. 2 indicates the reason for this ill-definedness; the endpoints of one-hop reach the origin | | = 0 as k 1.
2
358
the BakerAkhiezer vector is straightforward. In this way, one can obtain a bijective map between
a classical string solution and a set of algebro-geometric data [45,46]. Algebraic curves are also
useful to compare classical string solutions with the counterparts in gauge theory [8,4749].
Finite-gap representation of giant magnon is first discussed in [50]. Further in [51], it is shown
that two-spin helical strings are equivalent to general elliptic finite-gap solutions of classical
string action on Rt S 3 , and that the limit k 1 corresponds to the situation in which the algebraic curve becomes singular. Written explicitly, the functions Z1 , Z2 of [51] correspond to 2 ,
1 given in (2.11), (2.10), and the parameters + , of [51] correspond to 2 , 1 , respectively.
The parameters are determined by the location of four branch points of the algebraic curve.
The hermiticity of flat currents requires that the branch points should be located symmetrically
with respect to the real axis. Following [51] let us write the branch points as
y 2 := (x x1 )(x x1 )(x x2 )(x x2 ).
(2.39)
We introduce the normalized holomorphic differential on this elliptic curve by

dx
, :=
,
:=
y
(2.40)
where the integral over a stands for the a-period. Then, the parameters are given by
0+

iK (k)
i1 = i = 2K(k)
,
2K(k)
0+

1
i2 = i + = 2K(k)
,
2
with K (k) K(k ). By using Riemanns bilinear identity, one can express the integral
terms of the location of the branch points. The results are
0+
iF ( , k )
=
,
2K(k)
with tan
2
(2.41)
( x2 x1 )( x1 + x2 )
=
,
|x1 x2 |
0+
in
(2.42)
where F (, k) is the normal (or incomplete) elliptic integral of the first kind given in Appendix
A. From (2.41) and (2.42), we obtain the relation between the parameters 1,2 of helical strings
and the location of the branch points:
1 = F (+ , k ) K (k),
2 = F ( , k ) + iK(k).
(2.43)
It is shown in [51] that the right-hand side of the second equation is always real. So we may
redefine 2 as

Re[F ( , k )]
(for k < 1, k 1),
2 =
(2.44)

Re[F ( , k )] 2 (for k > 1, k 1).
This expression is more useful than (2.43) for studying the behavior of 2 near k = 1.
Let us take the k 1 limit of the relation (2.43), which is equivalent to x2 x1 . From the
definition of in (2.42), one finds

ip
p
+
cot
,
tan
i, with x1 exp
.
tan
(2.45)
2
4
2
2
359
If we choose the upper sign in each equation, we find

p
+ = + n+ ,
(2.46)
= i + n ,
2
with n being integers. Applying the formula (A.3) to (2.43) and setting n+ = 1, we can reproduce the results in the previous subsection 1 = ( p)/2.
To study the case k is close but not equal to unity, one has to pull x2 off from x1 . What matters
here is that the direction in which x2 is to be pulled off. If we write
x2 = ei x1 ,
a + ib,
with || 1,
then the former expressions (2.45) are modified into

a
p
+
= cot
tan
+ O ||2 ,
2 p
2
4
4 sin ( 4 )

b
+ O ||2 .
= i+
tan
p
2
2 sin( 2 )
(2.47)
(2.48)
(2.49)
Note that the parameters a and b should be of order k , as follows from the expression of elliptic
modulus in terms of the location of branch points:

x1 x 2

.

k =
(2.50)
x1 x2 2 sin( p2 ) 2
Substituting these results into (2.43) and (2.44), one finds

n2 + 1
1
p
+ O || ,
2 =
+ O || ,
1 = n1 +
2
2
2
(2.51)
with n1 , n2 being integers. In particular, this result suggests that 2 is very close to (n2 + 1)/2
when k 1.
The last result clearly shows that we must take cos(22 ) = 1 within the expression of leading finite-size correction (2.37); namely,

2 p1
2
E J1 J2 + sin
2

sin3 ( p21 )
2 sin2 ( p21 ) cosh2 ( 2 )
J1
4
(2.52)
exp 2 p1
+1 ,
cosh( 2 )
where we take minus sign for cos(22 ) = +1, and plus sign for cos(22 ) = 1.
3. Finite-size corrections to magnon boundstates
In this section, we calculate finite-size corrections to magnon boundstates by using the
Lscher formula known in quantum field theory, relating finite-size correction to the singleparticle energy with the S-matrix of infinite-size system. In the infinite-size limit, (dyonic) giant
magnons correspond to solitons of (complex) sine-Gordon system, which are localized excitations of a two-dimensional theory. Thus we can think of a (dyonic) giant magnon as the particle
of an effective field theory, and use the Lscher formula to compute the finite-size effects of
it. More generally, such method will be applicable to string states corresponding to asymptotic
360
spin chains [23,24], but generic states which are not dual to asymptotic spin chains, may not be
described in a simple way using particle-like picture.5 Readers who are interested in derivation
of the generalized Lscher formula in our case, please see Appendix C. Here we focus ourselves
on considering the -term correction, which is given by
(p)

Q

ba
a = a,s , a,s = i
Sba
(q, p), (3.1)
ei(q +sp)L Res
1
Qb (q )
q=q
Qb >0
where p, q are the momenta of particles a, b respectively and Qb is multiplet number of b. We

,s
choose s R such that a becomes real, as explained in Appendix C.
There is possible contribution from the F -term. We expect that they do not contribute to the
leading finite-size correction because the exponential part of the F -term seems different from
that of the -term, or negligibly small if S-matrix behaves regularly over the path of integration.
We will discuss this point in Appendix E.
3.1. The su(2|2)2 S-matrix and its singularity
Before applying the generalized Lscher formula to our case, let us briefly summarize some
facts about the su(2|2)2 S-matrix. Recall that elementary magnons appearing here are in the
fundamental BPS representation of the su(2|2)2 superconformal symmetry.
There are 16 kinds of such elementary magnons, among which scalar fields can form a boundstate. The Q-magnon boundstate also belongs to a 16Q2 -dimensional BPS representation of
su(2|2)2 [52,53]. We refer to the number of magnons Q as the multiplet number.
Let us first consider the scattering of two elementary magnons. The two-body S-matrix has
the following form:

S(y, x) = S0 (y, x) Ssu(2|2) (y, x) Ssu(2|2) (y, x) ,
(3.2)
where S0 is the scalar factor expressed by using the dressing phase 2 as
S0 (y, x) =
y x+ 1
y+ x 1
1
xy+
1
x+y
2 (y, x),
(3.3)
and Ssu(2|2) is the su(2|2) invariant S-matrix and determined only by the symmetry algebra [24].
When considering one of the two magnons belongs to the su(2) subsector, we have to extract
j
matrix elements of the form E11 Ei from the S-matrix of [30]. Written explicitly, they are
given by
2

S(y, x) = S0 (y, x) a1 E11 E11 + (a1 + a2 )E11 E22 + a6 E11 E33 + a6 E11 E44 , (3.4)
where
x y + (x)(y)
,
x + y (x)
(y)
(y y + )(x x + )(x y + ) (x)(y)

,
a2 (y, x) =
(y x + )(x y x + y + ) (x)
(y)
a1 (y, x) =
5 We thank the reviewer of Nuclear Physics B for comments on this issue.
(3.5)
(3.6)
a6 (y, x) =
y + x + (y)
.
y x + (y)
361
(3.7)
The su(2|2) invariant S-matrix does depend on the choice of frame . For instance, if we take
the string frame of [30], we will obtain

(x)
x+
y
(y)
(3.8)
,
.
=
=
(x)
x
(y)
y+
As for the spin chain frame, we obtain (x)/(x)
= (y)/(y)
= 1.
If both magnons are in the same su(2) sector, the S-matrix without the dressing phase is called
BDS S-matrix. Explicitly, it is given by
y x+ 1
SBDS (y, x) = +
y x 1
1
xy+
1
x+y
a1 (y, x) =
2
(y + x )(1
(y x + )(1
1
)
y+x
,
1
)
yx+
(3.9)
where we take the spin chain frame.

It is important to notice that the S-matrix of two boundstates factorizes into the product of
the two-body S-matrix between elementary magnons, as the consequence of integrability. Qmagnon boundstate has spectral parameters xj (j = 1, . . . , Q), which satisfy the boundstate
conditions
xj = xj+1
(j = 2, . . . , Q).
(3.10)
The magnon boundstate is thus characterized by the outermost variables

X x1
and
+
X + xQ
.
(3.11)
The BDS S-matrix between boundstate {xj } and elementary magnon Y is given by
Q

SBDS (Y, xj ) =
j =1
Q (Y + xj )(1

1
)
Y + xj
(Y xj+ )(1
1
)
Y xj+
j =1
(Y + X )(1
(Y X + )(1
1
)
Y + X
1
)
Y X+
(Y X )(1
(Y + X + )(1
SBDS (Y, X),
1
)
Y X
1
)
Y + X+
(3.12)
where we used (3.10) and (3.11) [54,55].

In order to compute the -term (3.1), we have to evaluate the residue at poles of the S-matrix.
Then which poles should we pick up? If one follows derivation of the -term formula discussed
in Appendix C, one finds that the following criteria need to be satisfied for a given pole to
contribute to the -term:
1. The L-dependent exponential factor of (3.1) damps.
2. Gives the leading (or the largest) contribution.
3. Comes from the Iabc -type diagram.6
6 For classification of the Feynman diagrams, see Appendix C.
362
Fig. 3. The splitting process of box type.
The first two criteria will be used to derive the leading exponential term (3.20) or (3.24), where
we will consider splitting of an on-shell particle with charge Q into two on-shell particles with
1 and Q 1.
The third criterion is related to the fact that, in quantum field theories, poles of S-matrix
correspond to the scattering processes where intermediate particles become on-shell. For a given
pole, one can always draw at least one scattering process such that the on-shell condition for its
intermediate states is equivalent to the pole condition of the S-matrix. The relation between poles
of the su(2|2)2 S-matrix and scattering processes are investigated in detail in [43,44].
The third criterion states that we should pick up only the poles related to the scattering process
of Iabc -type. This is so severe that various complicated processes of splitting drop out from the term formula. For instance, from analysis of the S-matrix singularity alone, the splitting process
depicted in Fig. 3 seems possible. However, this process should be classified as a Kab -type
diagram, and hence does not contribute to the -term.
3.2. Locating relevant poles
In this section, we consider which poles we should take into account to evaluate the -term
formula (3.1). We assume the incoming particle a is a boundstate of Q magnons with Q
O(1/2 ) 1, and this is the situation appropriate for comparison with the results in Section 2.
As discussed in Appendix C, the -term correction arises from the Iabc -type process where
particle a splits into two particles b, c and these two recombine into the original one after going
around the worldsheet cylinder as shown in Fig. 1(left). The important point is that three particles
a, b and c are all on-shell. By on-shell we mean that the energy, the multiplet number, and
the momentum of a (boundstate) particle are given by functions of spectral parameters X
e(ip+)/2 as

g
1
1
p
E(X ) =
(3.13)
X + X + = 4g cosh
sin
,
i
X
X
2
2

g
1
1
p
Q(X ) =
(3.14)
X + + + X = 4g sinh
sin
,
i
X
X
2
2
+
X
p(X ) = log
(3.15)
,
X
363
where g = /(4). For real particles, p, are real. For virtual particles complex values of p are
allowed, while is fixed by (3.14). The R-charge of a boundstate is bounded as |r| Q(X ).7
As argued in [52], the Q-th totally symmetric representation of su(2|2)2 algebra contains boundstates of Q magnons.
Suppose the incoming particle a has the multiplet number Q = Q(X ), the R-charge ra = Q,
and the momentum p = p(X ). We denote the multiplet number, and the momentum of the
split particle b by Qb , pb , respectively; and similarly for the other split particle c. Then, the
conservation of energy and momentum imposes the relation:

p
2
2 pb
2 p pb
2
2
2
2
2
2
Q + 16g sin
= Qb + 16g sin
+ Qc + 16g sin
. (3.16)
2
2
2
We are interested in its solution that gives the smallest value of |Im pb |, with Im pb < 0. Such
situation occurs when Qb = 1 or Qc = 1, and we may choose Qb = 1 without loss of generality.
Further, we can constrain the multiplet number Qc by the following argument. In order that the
splitting process takes place invariantly under the su(2|2)2 symmetry, one should be able to contract the product of the representation of particle b and that of particle c with the representation
of particle a, leaving us the singlet. In particular, if we define Q Qc , we should have
| | 1.8
Let us now solve (3.16) in the region |pb | 1. The right-hand side of (3.16) can be evaluated
as

8g 2 pb sin( p2 ) cos( p2 ) + Q
p
2
R.H.S. 1 + 4g 2 pb + Q2 + 16g 2 sin2

(3.17)
,
2
Q2 + 16g 2 sin2 ( p2 )
where we used Q 1. Inserting Eq. (3.17) into Eq. (3.16), we obtain
i
(1 2 )Q2 + 16g 2 sin4 ( p2 ) Q2 + 16g 2 sin2 ( p2 )
2 Q cos( p2 ) sin( p2 ) 2g
pb
Q2 + 16g 2 sin4 ( p2 )
qsplit, ,
(3.18)
where we choose the branch Im pb < 0. It is easy to see that Im qsplit, reaches its minimum
when = 1,
2Q cos( p2 ) sin( p2 ) 2i sin2 ( p2 ) Q2 + 16g 2 sin2 ( p2 )

pb = qsplit, =
(3.19)
.
Q2 + 16g 2 sin4 ( p2 )
From Eq. (3.1), we obtain the exponential factor
2 sin2 ( p ) Q2 + 16g 2 sin2 ( p )

iq
2
2
e split, L = e(Im qsplit, )L exp
L .
4 p
2
2
Q + 16g sin ( 2 )
(3.20)
One can easily see that the coefficient of L is same as that of J1 given in (2.37) or (2.36).
7 Here we are using the term boundstate in a loose sense; the term boundstate refers to states such that constituent
magnons satisfy the condition (3.10).
8 This argument is essentially same as in [56].
364
Fig. 4. (i): Self-energy diagram of Iabc -type. (ii): Diagram of ab ab scattering made from the diagram (i). (iii): The
diagram (ii) can be viewed in two ways: s-type diagram as shown in the left, and t -type diagram as shown in the right.
Examples of the double-line diagrams are shown in Fig. 5.
We have seen that the momentum of b must be equal to qsplit, . Now we want to reexpress
this condition by using spectral parameters, and determine the combinations of {X , Y } that
can lead to (3.18).
Let X be the outermost variables of Q-magnon boundstate a given by
Q + Q2 + 16g 2 sin2 ( p2 )
X e(ip+)/2 = eip/2
4g sin( p2 )
Q + Q2 + sin2 ( p2 )
ip/2
=e
(3.21)
,
sin( p2 )
where Q Q/(4g), and the parameter introduced above is identical to (2.33) with J2 Q.
We denote by Y the spectral parameters of particle b in multiplet Qb = 1, which satisfy the
equation
Y+ +
1
1
i
Y = .
Y+
Y
g
(3.22)
The momentum of b is given by eipb = Y + /Y .

Now we remind ourselves of our strategy again. We are in search of poles of the su(2|2)2 Smatrix which can contribute to the -term formula (3.1). For a pole to be relevant, it must satisfy
three criteria given in Section 3.1. The third criterion, that the pole comes from the Iabc -type
diagram, requires pb = qsplit, as mentioned above. We will further investigate those criteria to
select relevant poles of the su(2|2)2 S-matrix.
We can regard self-energy diagrams of Iabc -type as the LandauCutkosky diagram of s- or t type using the following argument (see Fig. 4). If we set the particle travelling around the world,
namely b particle, on-shell, then self-energy diagrams of Iabc -type become equivalent to 2 2
scattering processes between particles a and b exchanging particle c, where the momenta of a
and b remain the same after scattering. If we further put particle c on-shell, this process can
be expressed in terms of the LandauCutkosky diagram of s-type or t -type. The corresponding
poles can possibly contribute to the -term.
For any process to be consistent (or kinematically allowed), it must satisfy the conservation
of energy, momentum, and R-charge at each vertex. Classification of the consistent Landau
Cutkosky diagrams of s- or t -type has essentially been done in [43,44]. By following similar
arguments, one can easily exhaust all consistent LandauCutkosky diagrams of s- or t -type, and
pick up combinations of {X , Y } which reproduce pb = qsplit, . Using Y + (1 + iqsplit, )Y
and (3.22), we obtain the results listed in Table 1.
365
Table 1
All possible combinations of scattering processes coming from Iabc -type diagrams which gives a damping exponential
factor, namely Im pb < 0. Note that the crossing transformation X 1/X within this table maps the momentum
with Im pb < 0 to the one with Im pb > 0. The combinations Y = 1/X + and Y = X are realized as s-type diagram,
while the ones Y + = 1/X + and Y + = X are as t -type
s-type
Pole condition
In SBDS
E(Z )
Q(Z )
pb
t-type
Y = X+
pole
E(X ) + E(Y )
Q(X ) + Q(Y )
i
2g sin( pi
2 )
Y = 1/X
zero
E(X ) + E(Y )
Q(X ) Q(Y )
Y + = X+
pole
E(X ) E(Y )
Q(X ) Q(Y )
i
2g sin( p+i
2 )
i
2g sin( pi
2 )
Y + = 1/X
zero
E(X ) E(Y )
Q(X ) + Q(Y )
i
2g sin( p+i
2 )
There are four possible diagrams of s- or t -type which give pb = qsplit, . Note that the processes corresponding to Y = 1/X are kinematically allowed if particle b carries negative
R-charge. However, they do not correspond to the pole of the su(2|2)2 S-matrix, and therefore
can be neglected.9 What are relevant to the -term formula are the s-channel process corresponding to Y = X + , and the t -channel one corresponding to Y + = X + . Moreover, we can easily find
that no other singularities of the su(2|2)2 S-matrix give the pole at pb = qsplit, . In summary, we
conclude that the relevant poles satisfying three criteria are the ones located at Y = X + .
Conversely, four poles of the BDS S-matrix give the momentum pb = q as
+
+
+
2g sin( pi ) = +qsplit,+ for Y = X or Y = X ,

2
q
(3.23)
i
+
for Y = X1+ or Y + = X1+ .
pi = qsplit,+
2g sin(
Thus, the leading exponential term is reproduced for the poles Y = X + and Y + = X +
e
(Im q )L

2 sin( p2 ) cosh( 2 )
L ,
exp 2 p
sin ( 2 ) + sinh2 ( 2 )
(3.24)
where L L/(4g). This is same as (3.20).

3.3. Evaluation of residues
Now let us evaluate prefactor of the -term, which is given by
a

= a,s ,
a,s Q =1
b

= i 1
(p)
Q
1 (q )
ei(q +sp)L Res

q=q
ba
Sba
(q , p), (3.25)
where a is a Q-magnon boundstate in the su(2) subsector and the summation of b runs over 16
elementary magnons.
To compute the -term, we need to consider the scattering of a Q-magnon boundstate a with
an elementary magnon b. As mentioned before, the S-matrix factorizes into the product of two9 The dressing phase does not have singularities which are independent of g, as discussed in [43]. As a result, the
zeroes of SBDS never turn into poles of the su(2|2)2 S-matrix.
366
body S-matrices, as
ba
Sba
Y, {x} =
Q

k=1
Q

ba
Sba
(y, xk ),

S0 (y, xk )
4

1
1
j
i
sij (y, xk ) E1 Ei E1 Ej ,
(3.26)
i,j =1
k=1
where the coefficients sij can be evaluated by (3.4). Since the flavors i or j remain unchanged
during each of the two-body scatterings, one can easily execute the product over k, to give

ba
Y, {x} = S0 (Y, x1 )S0 (Y, x2 ) S0 (Y, xQ )
Sba
4

j
sij (Y, x1 )sij (Y, x2 ) sij (Y, xQ ) E11 Eii E11 Ej .
(3.27)
i,j =1
The sum over the elementary magnons becomes

ba
Sba
= S0 (Y, x1 )S0 (Y, x2 ) S0 (Y, xQ )
b

2A1 + A2 + 2A6 +

2
aj1 (Y, x1 )aj2 (Y, x2 ) ajQ (Y, xQ )
(3.28)
jk =1,2

where Ai = ai (Y, x1 )ai (Y, x2 ) ai (Y, xQ ) (i = 1, 2, 6) and jk =1,2 means the summation over
the combinations (j1 , j2 , . . . , jQ ) which satisfy jk = 1, 2 except for the cases that all j s are 1
or 2. The important point is that at strong coupling the leading contribution comes only from A1 ,
namely the BDS S-matrix, as discussed in Appendix D. Therefore the sum (3.28) is evaluated as

ba
(3.29)
Sba
S0 (Y, x1 )S0 (Y, x2 ) S0 (Y, xQ )(2A1 )2 = 4ein SBDS (Y, X) 2 (Y, X),
b
where ein is contribution from the frame factor defined by

ein
(X)2 (Y )2Q
,
2 (Y
(X)
)2Q
(3.30)
and SBDS is given by (3.12). We also used

Q

2 (Y, xk ) = 2 (Y, X),
(3.31)
k=1
which follows from the definition of 2 shown in (3.37).

As we mentioned in Section 3.2, the BDS S-matrix has four poles, two of which give the
damping-type exponential. We, however, have to be careful when we evaluate the residue at these
poles. Recall in Eq. (3.29), the origin of the factor 4 is the scattering process of four different
j
flavors (E11 Eii ) (E11 Ej ) (i, j = 1, 2). If we take a as a boundstate of the complex scalar
field W , these four flavors correspond to b = W, Y, W , Y .10 Following [43,44,54], we interpret
10 As usual, we take the BPS vacuum as Tr(Z L ).
367
the pole Y = X + as the s-channel process in which the intermediate particle has multiplet
number Q + 1 (Fig. 5(i), (iii)).11 Similarly the pole Y + = X + corresponds to the t -channel
process where the intermediate particle has multiplet number Q 1 (Fig. 5(ii), (iv)). For b =
W , Y , the latter process (Fig. 5(iv)) is actually not allowed. This is because the intermediate
boundstate with multiplet number Q 1 would carry U(1)R charge Q + 1 when the particle b
has U(1)R charge 1, which is impossible in the theory of our concern. Thus we can pick up the
pole Y + = X + only for b = W, Y , and the pole Y = X + for b = W, Y, W , Y , which gives

ba
Sba
(q , p) = 4 Res +2 Res ein SBDS (Y, X) 2 (Y, X).
Res
(3.32)
q=q
Y =X +
Y + =X +
Let us evaluate the contribution from the pole Y = X + . The momentum q is given by the
first line in Eq. (3.23), and
1
(p)
Q
1 (q )
sin( p2 ) sin( pi
2 )
cosh( 2 )
(3.33)
To evaluate the residue as function of q, we use

pi
dY dY /dp sin2 ( 2 )
(3.34)
,
=
pi
dq
dq/dp
Y =X +
iei( 2 )
where the energy q is written as q = i1 (q ) = 2g(Y + Y ) i i(2g q Y 1). By using

Y + = (1 + i q )Y + O q2 ,
(3.35)
Res
1
1
= ,
+
Y X
Y
we obtain
Res SBDS (Y, X) =
Y =X +
1
1
+
(Y X )
Y
1
1
Y + X
1
Y X+
2iQ sin( p2 ) sinh( 2 )

sin3 ( pi
2 )
(3.36)
We proceed to compute the dressing phase contribution at Y = X + . It is known the dressing

phase takes the following form,
2 (Y, X) = e2i((Y
,X )(Y + ,X )+(Y + ,X + )(Y ,X + ))
(3.37)
where (x, y) = (x, y) (y, x), and

(x, y) =

(n) (x, y)
n=0
g n1
(n)
(x, y) =

r=2 s=r+1
(n)
cr,s
,
(r 1)(s 1)x r1 y s1
(3.38)
(n)
with the coefficients cr,s are given in [10]. Using (3.35) again, we find
(Y + , X ) (X + , X ) + i q X + 1,0 (X + , X ),
+
(Y , X ) i q X 1,0 (X , X ),
(3.39)
(3.40)
then the dressing phase becomes

2 (Y, X) e2q X
+ ( (X + ,X + ) (X + ,X ))
1,0
1,0
(3.41)
where 1,0 (x, y) x (x, y) = x (x, y) x (y, x).

11 Processes shown in Fig. 5 differ from similar diagram in [44] in that they considered processes inside the su(2) sector,
while here we consider the scattering of W Q against W, Y, W , Y .
368
Fig. 5. The scattering of boundstate a = W Q and elementary magnon b = W, Y, W , Y . The process (iv) is not allowed.
We follow the convention of the diagrams in [43].
A crucial fact is that 1,0 (X + , X + ) and 1,0 (X + , X ) are the order 1/g n1 quantities if
Q O(1/2 ) 1. The dressing phase with n 1 does not contribute at strong coupling, which
is remarkable distinction from the elementary magnon case [41]. Thus, it suffices to consider the
(0)
contribution of (0) , namely the AFS phase [6]. The series (3.38) with cr,s = r+1,s sums up to
give

1 1
1
1 (1 xy) log 1
.
(0) (x, y) = g
(3.42)
y x
xy
(n)
(n)
Using this equation (see Appendix D), the contribution of the AFS phase is
2
(Y, X) = e2q Y
AFS
( (0) (Y ,Y ) (0) (Y ,X ))
1,0
1,0
eip sin2 ( pi
2 )
sinh2 ( 2 )

2e/2 sin( p2 )
exp
.
sin( pi
2 )
(3.43)
369
From (3.33), (3.36) and (3.43), we finally get contribution from the pole Y = X + ,

a,s Y =X+

8Q sin2 ( p2 )
2e/2 sin( p2 )
2 sin( p2 ) cosh( 2 )
i(np+spL)
e
L
=
exp
2 p
sinh( 2 ) cosh( 2 )
sin ( 2 ) + sinh2 ( 2 )
sin( pi
2 )

32g sin3 ( p2 ) i
2 sin2 ( p2 ) cosh2 ( 2 )
LQ
=
(3.44)
e
+1 ,
exp 2 p
cosh( 2 )
where ei is the phase factor given by

2 sin( p2 )e/2
= n + p(1 sL) + Im
sin( pi
2 )

= n + p Q(Y ) sL + (Re q ) E(X ) Q(X ) ,

E(X )
(3.45)
Q(X )
where
and
are the energy and the multiplet number of boundstate given in (3.13)
and (3.14).
Similarly contribution from the pole Y + = X + is evaluated as

,s
16g sin3 ( p2 ) i
2 sin2 ( p2 ) cosh2 ( 2 )
LQ
+ + =
e
+1 .
exp 2 p
a
Y =X
cosh( 2 )
(3.46)
Thus we obtain the expression of the -term correction to Q-magnon boundstate a as,

2 sin2 ( p2 ) cosh2 ( 2 )
16g sin3 ( p2 ) in
LQ
e exp
+
1
.
a =
(3.47)
cosh( 2 )
sin2 ( p2 ) + sinh2 ( 2 ) sin( p2 ) cosh( 2 )
Note that for complex momenta, the choice of frame may possibly give a nontrivial factor. For
the spin chain frame this is obviously one, |ein | = 1. If we choose the string frame, the result
(3.47) becomes

2 sin2 ( p2 ) cosh2 ( 2 )
16g sin3 ( p2 )
L
exp
+
1
.
a =
(3.48)
cosh( 2 )
If we take the limit Q 0, i.e., 0, both (3.47) and (3.48) coincide with the finite-size
correction to giant magnon in [41].12
4. Discussion and conclusion
4.1. Comparison of results
Let us compare our results obtained in Sections 2 and 3. The result of the generalized Lscher
formula for -term in the spin chain frame (3.47) reads

2 sin2 ( p2 ) cosh2 ( 2 )
4 sin3 ( p2 )
LQ
1
exp
+
1
.
a =
(4.1)
4g
cosh( 2 )
12 However one should recall that our analysis, of course, is valid for Q O(g).
370
If we identify the variables as J1 L Q, J2 Q, p1 p, the expressions (4.1) and (2.52)

precisely agree.13 Thus the -term of the generalized Lscher formula can capture the leading
finite-size (or finite angular momentum) correction to dyonic giant magnons.
4.2. Summary and outlook
In this paper, we have computed finite-size corrections to giant magnons with two angular
momenta from two points of view:
(i) Studying the asymptotic behavior of helical strings as k 1.
(ii) Slightly modifying the generalized Lscher formula and applying the -term formula to the
case in which incoming particles are boundstates.
We found that two results exactly match taking into consideration the finite-gap interpretation
of [51]. This result supports the validity of generalized Lscher formula for the case of boundstates.
In contrast to the work of [41], it turned out that the leading term is only sensitive to the AFS
phase in the strong coupling limit. Nevertheless, our results coincide with those in [41] in the
limit Q 0.
We think the following issues are closely related to this paper and need to be clarified in the
future.
It is argued in [34,41] that the exponential-type correction at strong coupling can be seen
as wrapping interaction at weak coupling. We may be able to test this claim if we evaluate the
generalized Lscher formula at weak coupling and compare it with calculation on gauge theory
side, although we cannot trust the Bethe ansatz approach at wrapping order [2022]. The map
from BDS spin chain [7] to the one-dimensional Hubbard model [57] might give a clue in this
direction, because the Hubbard model having short-range interactions is capable of dealing with
the wrapping problem. In fact, an interesting observation has been made in [41] that the finite-size
dispersion of the Hubbard model

L
Lp
p
2
p
EHubbard = 1 + 16g 2 sin2
e 2g sin( 2 ) + O e g sin( 2 )
2
1 + 16g 2 sin2 ( p2 )

L
p
1
p
2g sin( 2 )
,
4g sin
(4.2)
p e
2
2g sin( 2 )
agrees with the prediction of the generalized Lscher formula applied to the BDS S-matrix.14
It is also interesting to study finite-size effects for (dyonic) giant magnons from matrix
quantum mechanical point of view [5861]. In the matrix quantum mechanics obtained by reducing the original N = 4 SYM on R S 3 , a string-bit, which connects two eigenvalues of
background matrices forming 1/2-BPS circular droplet, looks like a shadow of corresponding
13 It appears that what we call length depends on the choice of frame. In order to match the results in the string frame,
we have to identify J1 L, J2 Q, p1 p.
14 Strictly speaking, the Hubbard model does not agree with neither gauge nor string theory sides. For instance, the
prefactor of (4.2) does not match with the string theory result due to difference in the particle spectrum of the theory. We
thank R. Janik for this remark.
371
Fig. 6. The shadows of the (dyonic) giant magnons projected to 2d plane. (a) Infinite-J case, (b) finite-J case. p is the
azimuthal angle between two endpoints, and K is the distance between them (not the length of the shadow).
(dyonic) giant magnon projected to 2d (or LLM) plane. For the giant magnon with infinite-J ,
two endpoints of the string-bit localize on the edge of the circular droplet and the length of
the string-bit with appropriate (normalized) radius can be interpreted as the energy of the giant
magnon [25,58,59].
The length of segment between endpoints of the finite-J (dyonic) giant magnon projected
onto (Re 1 , Im 1 ) plane, approximately reproduces the energy-spin relation of the finite-J (dyonic) giant magnon (see Fig. 6(b)). After short computation, we find

K0 K
J22 + K 2 = J22 + K02
+ O (K)2 ,
J22 + K02

p
k 2
p
, K =
cos2 (2 ) sin3
,
with K0 = sin
(4.3)
2
2
2
where K = K0 K is the length of segment, rather than of arc. k is the same as (2.36). It will
be interesting to investigate whether similar results can be reproduced from the matrix quantum
mechanics.
The computation of one-loop quantum correction to dyonic giant magnon is also interesting.
It is known that the exponential terms like ecJ show up in the one-loop computation of string
theory, for the case of su(2) sector [62] as well as of sl(2) sector [63]. In [63], they further
discovered that quantum string Bethe ansatz cannot reproduce such terms. We expect the generalized Lscher formula will also reproduce such one-loop exponential terms, as explained in
Introduction.
Towards computation of the finite-size corrections exact in L, several approaches have
been known in the theory of integrable systems, such as thermodynamic Bethe ansatz (TBA)
[3537], nonlinear integral equations (NLIE) [6467], and functional relations among commuting transfer-matrices [68]. Recently, Arutyunov and Frolov have studied TBA formulation of
the finite-size system by double Wick rotation on the worksheet, and determined S-matrix of the
mirror model [69]. Moreover, they obtained the finite-size exponential factor which is identical
to the giant magnons, by considering (two-magnon) boundstates of the mirror model. It will be
very interesting to reanalyze our results from the TBA approach for multi-magnon boundstates.
Note added
After submission of the paper to arXiv, we are informed of the work of J. Minahan and O. Sax
[56,70] which has overlap with ours given in Section 2.
372
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to K. Okamura and R. Janik for reading the manuscript and giving us comments. We thank K. Sakai for interesting discussion.
Appendix A. Definitions of elliptic integrals
For elliptic functions and the complete elliptic integrals, we follow the definitions presented
in an appendix of [33]. Below we describe the definitions of other functions and integrals which
will be used in Appendix B.
Normal (or incomplete) elliptic integrals

F (, k) =
0
sin

d
1 k 2 sin2
=
0
dt
(A.1)
(1 t 2 )(1 k 2 t 2 )
is called the normal elliptic integral of the first kind. We also use the notation
F(z, k) = F (arcsin z, k).
(A.2)
At special values, it reduces to

, k = K(k),
F (0, k) = 0,
F
2
F (, 0) = ,
F (, 1) = arctanh .
(A.3)
The normal elliptic integral of the first kind is related to the inverse of an elliptic function. If
one regards F (, k) as a function of y = sin , then f (y, k) F (sin1 y, k) obeys the differential equation
2
1
f
.
=
(A.4)
2
y
(1 y )(1 k 2 y 2 )
By comparing it with
sn(z, k)
= cn(z, k) dn(z, k) =
z
one finds

1 sn2 (z, k) 1 k 2 sn2 (z, k) ,
F (, k) = f (y, k) = sn1 (y, k).
(A.5)
(A.6)
The inverse of F (, k) as a function of also defines Jacobi amplitude function, by

F (, k) = u
= am(u, k).
(A.7)
From (A.6) and (A.7), it follows

sn(u, k) = y = sin = sin am(u, k) .
(A.8)
As corollaries,
cn(u, k) = cos ,
dn(u, k) =
1 k 2 sin2
for = am(u, k).
(A.9)
373
The normal (or incomplete) elliptic integral of the second kind is defined by

E(, k) =
sin

1 k 2 sin =
2
dt
0
1 k2t 2
.
1 t2
(A.10)
We also use the notation

E(z, k) = E(arcsin z, k).
At special values, it reduces to

E(0, k) = 0,
E
, k = E(k),
2
(A.11)
E(, 0) = ,
E(, 1) = sin .
(A.12)
The normal elliptic integral of the second kind is related to the integral of an elliptic function,
as
u
dw dn2 (w, k) for = am(u, k),
E(, k) =
(A.13)
or equivalently,

E z = sn(u, k), k =
u
dw dn2 (w, k).
(A.14)
Using (A.7) and (A.13), one can rewrite Jacobian Zeta function as

E(k)
Z0 z = sn1 (, k), k = E(, k) F (, k)
K(k)

= am(z, k) ,
(A.15)
or equivalently,

E(k)
Z0 (z, k) = E sn(z, k), k z
.
K(k)
(A.16)
Using the addition formula for Zeta functions:

Z0 (u + v) = Z0 (u) + Z0 (v) k 2 sn(u) sn(v) sn(u + v),
(A.17)
one can express other Jacobi Zetas solely by Z0 , as

cn(z, k) dn(z, k)
,
sn(z, k)
sn(z, k) dn(z, k)
Z2 (z, k) = Z0 (z, k)
,
cn(z, k)
Z1 (z, k) = Z0 (z, k) +
Z3 (z, k) = Z0 (z, k)
k 2 sn(z, k) cn(z, k)
.
dn(z, k)
(A.18)
(A.19)
(A.20)
374
Appendix B. Expansions around k = 1

B.1. Jacobi sn, cn, and dn functions
Jacobi sn, cn, and dn functions can be expanded in power series of k 2 1 k 2 around k = 1.
We want to know the expansion up to the order of k 4 for later use. In an appendix of [71], the
discussion is given on how to compute the expansion of Jacobi elliptic functions around k 1
analytically. Here we just cite the results15 :
i(1 k 2 )
(sin cos )
4 cos2 ()

i(1 k 2 )2
+
(B.1)
9 cos + sin 42 + 9 7 sin2 2 sin4 ,
3
64 cos ()

1
(1 k 2 )2 2
1 k2
2
cn(i, k)
sin
+
+
cos
sin
2 1 + sin2
cos 4 cos2 ()
64 cos3 ()

(B.2)
sin cos 13 4 sin2 + 11 sin2 cos2 ,
sn(i, k) i tan() +
dn(i, k)

(1 k 2 )2 2
1 k2
1
2
sin
cos
sin
2 1 + sin2
2
3
cos 4 cos ()
64 cos ()

2
2
2
+ sin cos 3 4 sin 5 sin cos .
(B.3)
B.2. Elliptic integrals and Jacobi Zeta functions

The expansion of elliptic integrals and Jacobi Zeta functions around k = 1 is not polynomial
in k , because it involves ln k . Here we borrow the general results from the textbook [72],
Normal elliptic integrals. Normal elliptic integral of the first kind behaves as

1 + sin
1 + sin
k 2 sin
ln
F (, k) = ln
cos
4 cos2
cos

4
3

1 + sin
2 sin 3 sin
3k
+
3
ln
+ .
+
(B.4)
64 cos4
cos
cos2
Normal elliptic integral of the second kind behaves as

k 2
1 + sin
E(, k) = sin +
sin + ln
2
cos

4
3

1 + sin
sin
k
+ 3 sin 3 ln
+ .
16 cos2
cos
(B.5)
Complete elliptic integrals. Complete elliptic integral of the first kind behaves as

4
4
4
k 2
9k 4
7
K(k) = ln +
ln 1 +
ln
+ .
k
4
k
64
k
6
15 These results can be checked also by Mathematica 6.
(B.6)
Complete elliptic integral of the second kind behaves as

k 2
4
3k 4
4
1
13
E(k) = 1 +
ln
+
ln
+ .
2
k
2
16
k
12
375
(B.7)
Substituting the expansion of elliptic integrals (B.5), (B.6), (B.7) and Jacobi sn and cn functions (B.1), (B.2), into the expression of Jacobi Zeta (A.16), one obtains its asymptotic behavior
near k = 1:

2
i ik 2 + sin cos
1
Z0 (i, k) = i tan
k
4
k 2k
cos2

4
1
ik 4 2 cos + 2 sin (42 5 cos2 + 2 cos4 )
+
3
+
+
128
k 2k
cos3

1
+ O k 6 + O 3 ,
(B.8)
k
where k ln(4/k ).
Appendix C. Review of the generalized Lscher formula
In this appendix, we give a brief review on the generalized Lscher formula proposed by
Janik and ukowski [41]. The original Lscher formula is a method to compute finite-size mass
corrections from infinite-volume information of relativistic field theories [38,39]. In [41], this
formula was generalized to the non-relativistic theory, in which an elementary particle has the
dispersion relation

2 p
2
1 (p) = 1 + 16g sin
(C.1)
,
2
with g /(4) and they reproduced the correct finite-size corrections to giant magnons. Here
we consider a little more general situation where a particle satisfies the dispersion relation of a
magnon boundstate

p
Q (p) = Q2 + 16g 2 sin2
(C.2)
,
2
with Q an arbitrary integer. In other words, we draw a single propagator for a set of particles
among whose spectral parameters satisfy the boundstate conditions xj = xj+1 .
Before deriving the generalized Lscher formula, let us make our position clearer. We start
from a two-dimensional effective Lagrangian describing the worldsheet theory in the decompactified limit. To fix the 2-point function, we use the dispersion relations (C.1) and (C.2) that are
conjectured to all-loop orders in the t Hooft coupling. We also assume the existence of 3- and
higher point vertices, chosen so that they reproduce the conjectured two-body S-matrices. Our
treatment grounds on the following Lschers argument [39]. The non-perturbative nature of his
formula suggests that the leading finite-size correction can be captured only by kinematics rather
than dynamics, once the exact dispersion relation and S-matrix are known. Therefore, if we regard the magnon boundstates as a composite particle obeying the dispersion relation (C.2), we
376
Fig. 7. Diagrams which contribute to the finite-size self-energy L . The propagator carrying the exponential correction
is marked with L.
can expect generalization of Lscher formula to the dispersion relation (C.2) should reproduce
the correct finite-size corrections to dyonic giant magnons,
Now let us see derivation of the Lscher formula. As was discussed in [41], the finite-size
correction L is related to the self-energy L ,
L (p) =
1
L (p).
2Q (p)
(C.3)
There are three types of diagrams shown in Fig. 7 contributing to the self-energy of particle a
whose charge is Q:

1
Iabc +
Jabc +
Kab .
(L )a =
(C.4)
2
b,c
b,c
The term Iabc consists of odd-point vertices, Kab consists of even-point vertices, and Jabc consists of tadpole diagrams. They are given by
d 2q

1
Iabc =
2eiq L Gb,Qb (q sp)Gc,Qc q + (1 s)p
2
(2)
Qb =0 Qc =0

(C.5)
abc p, q + sp, (1 s)p + q acb p, (1 s)p q, q sp ,

2

d q
1
2eiq L Gb,Qb (q)bbc (q, q, 0)Gc,Qc (0)aac (p, p, 0),
Jabc =
2
(2)
Qb =0 Qc =0
(C.6)
d 2q
1
Kab =
(C.7)
2eiq L Gb,Qb (q)aabb (p, p, q, q),
(2)2
n=0
2 (q 1 )
where G is the (infinite-size) Green function, e.g., given by Gb,Qb (q) = ((qE0 )2 + Q
b
(q))1 , and the s are effective 3- and 4-point vertices. We replaced eiq L + eiq L with
1
2eiq L by an appropriate change of the loop momentum q, and assigned the multiplet number
Qb , Q
c to the particle b, c respectively, which travel around the world 2(see Fig. 1). The prime
over
in (C.6) means we sum over particles having no global psu(2|2) charges (if such particles exist).
1
377
By shifting the contour of integration over q 1 to the slightly lower imaginary-direction, we are
able to neglect the integral in the limit L . We cannot however neglect the contribution from
poles of the Green function. The momentum vector (qE0 , q 1 ) = (q, q ) at the pole of Gb,Qb (q)
satisfy the condition
2
(q ) = 0,
q 2 + Q
b
(C.8)
and using the dispersion relation Q (p) =
Q2 + q 2
b
q = 2i arcsinh
.
4g
Q2 + 16g 2 sin2 ( p2 ), we obtain

(C.9)
Note that the integral Iabc has two poles which come from Gb,Qb (q sp) and Gc,Qc (q + (1
+
and from Gc,Qc (q + (1 s)p)
s)p). We denote the contribution from Gb,Qb (q sp) by Iabc
by Iabc following [41]. If we set s = 0 and replace Gc,Qc (q + p) with Gc,Qc (q), the momentum
vector at the pole of Gc is same as Eq. (C.9) with Qb replaced by Qc .
Now using the residue of the Green function in [41], we can perform integration over q 1 and
get the expression
dq eiq L
I (p, q),
(L )a = i
2 (q ) a
2 Q
Q
b
(C.10)
where Ia is the integrand coming from the sum Iabc

+ Iabc
+ Jabc + Kab and explicitly given by

abc (p, q, p + q)Gc,Qc (p + q)acb (p, p q, q)
Ia (p, q) =
c
+ acb (p, p q, q)Gc,Qc (q p)abc (p, q, q p)

+ aabb (p, p, q, q)

aac (p, p, 0)Gc,Qc (0)bbc (q, q, 0),
+
b
(C.11)
where the momentum vectors p and q are both on-shell. Lschers remarkable observation is
that the integrand Ia is just the connected 4-point forward Green function Gabab (p, q, p, q)
between on-shell particles [3840]. Furthermore, this 4-point Green function is related to the
S-matrix element as follows:

ba

(q ) Q
(p) Sba
(q, p) 1 .
Gabab (p, q, p, q) = 4iQ (p)Qb (q ) Q
(C.12)
b
We finally obtain the finite-size energy correction called F -term
aF (p) =
(p)

dq
Q

ba
Sba
(q, p) 1 ,
1
eiq L
2
Qb (q )
Qb
(C.13)
where q is given by Eq. (C.9).

There is another type of the finite-size correction called -term. This correction comes from
. As mentioned above, we shifted the integration variable in Iabc

as q q p.
the integral in Iabc
This shift of the integration variable pushes the contour of integration over q into the complex
plane, because q is Euclidean while p is Minkowskian. When we deform the contour back again
378
onto the real axis, one may encounter new poles from the S-matrix. Let us denote the location
of pole by q = qloop and the momentum of particle b at the pole by qb1 = qloop sp.16 The
momentum of particle b is determined later by the on-shell condition as qb1 = q . Thus we obtain
the generalized -term formula
(p)

Q
ba
Sba
(q, p).
ei(q +sp)L Res
1
a,s (p) = i
(C.14)
Qb (q )
q=q
Qb
The above result shows dependence on the parameter s R, while the exact expression is, of
course, independent of s. As explained in [40], this is because the analyticity property of threepoint vertex like abc (p, q + sp, (1 s)p + q) does depend on s. Here we shall take s so that
,s
the finite-size correction a (p) becomes real-valued. In other words, we neglect s-dependent
information because we have no principle to determine its value. Consequently, we obtain the
generalized -term formula

(p)

Q

i(q +sp)L
ba

Res
Sba (q, p),
e
1
a (p) =
(C.15)
Qb (q )
q=q
Qb
in place of (C.14).
Appendix D. S-matrix contribution
Leading contribution. Let us evaluate the sum (3.28),

ba
Sba
= S0 (Y, x1 )S0 (Y, x2 ) S0 (Y, xQ )
b
2

A6
1
A2
(2A1 )2 1 +
+
+
aj1 (Y, x1 )aj2 (Y, x2 ) ajQ (Y, xQ ) .
2A1 A1 2A1
jk =1,2
(D.1)
The situation we are interested in is that elementary magnon b has the small momentum, i.e.,
Y + (1 + i q )Y . In this case, A2 /A1 is evaluated as

+
Q
+
1
A2 (Y Y )(xj xj )
Q
=
(i q ) O Q .
(D.2)
+
A1
g
xj Y xj Y
j =1
Thus A2 /A1 vanishes at strong coupling. Similarly, the last term in parentheses also vanishes
since there exists at least one of ks such that jk = 2 in the summation. The sum becomes

A6 2
ba
(D.3)
Sba
= 4ein SBDS (Y, X) 2 (Y, X) 1 +
,
A1
b
where n is the frame factor introduced in (3.30). One may wonder if one has to pick up the pole
from the term A6 /A1 . Since

A6 (Y + X + ) X
(D.4)
=
,
A1 (Y + X ) X +
16 We also use p to signify (p 0 , p 1 ) = ((p), p).
379
the additional pole from A6 /A1 is at Y + = X . For this pole, the momentum of b becomes
q = i/[2g sin( p+i
2 )], and the exponential term diverges for sin(p/2) > 0. Thus one should
not pick up this pole, located on the opposite side of the complex plane. Note also that A6 /A1
vanishes at strong coupling for the poles Y = X + or Y + = X + (see Eq. (D.4)).
AFS phase. Next let us see the evaluation of the AFS phase for the pole at Y = X + .

1 1
1
(0) (x, y) = g
(D.5)
1 (1 xy) log 1
,
y x
xy

g
1
1
(0)
(x, y) =
1+ x
y log 1
.
1,0
(D.6)
xy
x
xy
For (x, y) = (X + , X + ), (X + , X ),

(0)
1,0
(X + , X + ) = ge ip g 1 e ip log 1 eip ,

(0)
1,0 (X + , X ) = ge g 1 e ip log 1 e ,
then
(D.7)
(D.8)
(0) + +

(0)
2q X + 1,0
(X , X ) 1,0 (X + , X )
ip

e 2 sinh( 2 )
2e/2 sin( p2 )
= 2 log
.
i sin( pi
sin( pi
2 )
2 )
(D.9)
Appendix E. Discussion on F -term

We show that F -term becomes negligibly small when we can avoid singularities of the Smatrix.
Let us first rewrite the expression for F -term (C.13) by changing integration variable. We
introduce another variable by

Q2b q 1 = q i ,
q 2 = 16g 2 sinh2
(E.1)
2
where Qb is the multiplet number of particle b. The F -term can be rewritten as

(p)
d
Q
4g 2 sinh
F
eL
1
a (p) =
2 16g 2 sinh2 ( ) Q2
Qb (q )
Qb 1 C
b
2
Qb

ba
Sba (q, p) 1 ,
(E.2)
b
where the contour CQ is defined as

(Q)
CQ = R cr
,

Q
(Q)
cr
= 2 arcsinh
.
4g
(E.3)
(Qb )
Because each term within the sum at most gives the contribution ecr
the leading term Qb = 1 and rewrite it as

aF (p)|Qb =1
(1)
cr
eL
f (q, p).
(1)
sinh( 2 ) sinh( cr2
L,
we may focus on
(E.4)
380

(1)
At large L the dominant contribution comes from = cr . If one finds singularity of S-matrix
along the integration path, one can slightly deform the contour assuming the analyticity of
(1)
integrand. Thus, if S-matrix behaves regularly around = cr , we can approximate the integral (E.4) as

aF (p)|Qb =1
(1)
dk
0
e(k+cr
)L
(1)
ecr L f (icr , p)
=
,
(1)
(1)
L
cosh1/2 ( cr2 )
cosh1/2 ( cr2 )
(1)
f (icr , p)
(1)
(E.5)
which is subleading in the limit L , because of the factor L1/2 .

Singularities of the S-matrix appear at the position depending on the value of X and g.
(1)
And if there is a singularity at q = icr which is different from single poles of the BDS Smatrix, the above argument will break down. We will consider a few particular cases in which
(1)
the su(2|2)2 S-matrix may possibly have singularity at q 1 = icr in what follows.17
Looking at (3.28), one finds that there are possible poles other than the BDS part A1 . Actually,
from (D.2) the coefficient a2 (Y, xj ) contains new poles at
eipj =
xj+
xj
Y
Y+
or
pj = q 1
(j = 1, . . . , Q).
(E.6)
One can prove that there is no solution to this equation by Reductio Ad Absurdum. Spectral
parameters of a magnon boundstate are distributed symmetrically with respect to real axis, so we
must have the kth elementary magnon with pk = q 1 . Moreover, from the constraint Q(xj ) =
Q(xk ) = 1 we must obtain the identities xj = 1/Y and xk = Y . Suppose for simplicity
j > k. Then, by summing up elementary magnons between j and k, we obtain xj+ + 1/xj+
xk 1/xk = i(j k + 1)/g, which is equivalent to Y + + 1/Y + Y 1/Y = i(j k + 1)/g.
Since Q(Y ) = 1, we must have j = k, which is a contradiction.
The other coefficient A6 does not bring new poles.
As discussed in [43,44], the BHL/BES dressing phase contains an infinite number of double
poles located at
X+ +
1
1
im
Y =
+
X
Y
g
(m = 1, 2, . . .),
(E.7)
where either one of X + or Y must be inside the unit circle, while the other be outside. These
double poles are interpreted as the kinematical constraint for the LandauCutkosky diagram of
box type (Fig. 3). Below we will analytically continue Y keeping particle a real, X + = (X ) ,
(1)
can be solved at a particular value of X .
and study if both (E.7) and q = icr
(1)
First of all, with q = icr and Q(Y ) = 1, we evaluate Y as,

1

(1)
1 + 16g 2 sin2 ( q2 )
1
+
cr
iq 1
1 + 16g 2
1

2 =i
Y =e
=
ie
,
1
1
(1)
4g
q =icr
4g sin( q2 )
(E.8)
17 Note that the condition p(Y ) q 1 = i (1) implies E(Y ) = 0.
cr
381
showing |Y + | > 1 and |Y | < 1. Plugging (E.8) into (E.7), we find

X+ +
1
i
= (2m + 1),
X+
2g
which has the solutions

(2m + 1) (2m + 1)2 + 16g 2
+
X =i
.
4g
(E.9)
(E.10)
Note that we must choose the lower sign so that X + stays outside the unit circle. By using the
definition X e(ip+)/2 as in (3.21), we can identify this solution as p = and sinh(/2) =
(2m + 1)/4g, which implies

(2m + 1) (2m + 1)2 + 16g 2
X = i
(E.11)
.
4g
However, it turns out that the spectral parameters given by (E.10) and (E.11) give rise to
Q(X ) = (2m + 1) < 0, which is impossible. Therefore, we conclude that there are no real
(1)
values of p and which are consistent with the double pole condition (E.7), q = icr ,
Q(Y ) = 1, and Q(X ) > 0.
References
[1] J.M. Maldacena, The large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2
(1998) 231, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38 (1999) 1113, hep-th/9711200.
[2] S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov, A.M. Polyakov, Gauge theory correlators from non-critical string theory, Phys. Lett.
B 428 (1998) 105, hep-th/9802109.
[3] E. Witten, Anti-de Sitter space and holography, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 253, hep-th/9802150.
[4] J.A. Minahan, K. Zarembo, The Bethe ansatz for N = 4 super-YangMills, JHEP 0303 (2003) 013, hep-th/0212208.
[5] N. Beisert, M. Staudacher, Long-range PSU(2,2|4) Bethe ansaetze for gauge theory and strings, Nucl. Phys. B 727
(2005) 1, hep-th/0504190.
[6] G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, M. Staudacher, Bethe ansatz for quantum strings, JHEP 0410 (2004) 016, hep-th/0406256.
[7] N. Beisert, V. Dippel, M. Staudacher, A novel long range spin chain and planar N = 4 super-YangMills,
JHEP 0407 (2004) 075, hep-th/0405001.
[8] V.A. Kazakov, A. Marshakov, J.A. Minahan, K. Zarembo, Classical/quantum integrability in AdS/CFT, JHEP 0405
(2004) 024, hep-th/0402207.
[9] N. Beisert, R. Hernandez, E. Lopez, A crossing-symmetric phase for AdS5 S 5 strings, JHEP 0611 (2006) 070,
hep-th/0609044.
[10] N. Beisert, B. Eden, M. Staudacher, Transcendentality and crossing, J. Stat. Mech. 0701 (2007) P021, hep-th/
0610251.
[11] A.V. Kotikov, L.N. Lipatov, DGLAP and BFKL evolution equations in the N = 4 supersymmetric gauge theory,
hep-ph/0112346.
[12] A.V. Kotikov, L.N. Lipatov, DGLAP and BFKL equations in the N = 4 supersymmetric gauge theory, Nucl. Phys.
B 661 (2003) 19, hep-ph/0208220;
A.V. Kotikov, L.N. Lipatov, Nucl. Phys. B 685 (2004) 405, Erratum.
[13] A.V. Kotikov, L.N. Lipatov, A.I. Onishchenko, V.N. Velizhanin, Three-loop universal anomalous dimension of the
Wilson operators in N = 4 SUSY YangMills model, Phys. Lett. B 595 (2004) 521, hep-th/0404092;
A.V. Kotikov, L.N. Lipatov, A.I. Onishchenko, V.N. Velizhanin, Phys. Lett. B 632 (2006) 754, Erratum.
[14] R.A. Janik, The AdS5 S 5 superstring worldsheet S-matrix and crossing symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 086006,
hep-th/0603038.
[15] G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, On AdS5 S 5 string S-matrix, Phys. Lett. B 639 (2006) 378, hep-th/0604043.
[16] C. Sieg, A. Torrielli, Wrapping interactions and the genus expansion of the 2-point function of composite operators,
Nucl. Phys. B 723 (2005) 3, hep-th/0505071.
382
[17] L.N. Lipatov, Reggeization of the vector meson and the vacuum singularity in non-Abelian gauge theories, Sov. J.
Nucl. Phys. 23 (1976) 338, Yad. Fiz. 23 (1976) 642.
[18] E.A. Kuraev, L.N. Lipatov, V.S. Fadin, The Pomeranchuk singularity in non-Abelian gauge theories, Sov. Phys.
JETP 45 (1977) 199, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 72 (1977) 377.
[19] I.I. Balitsky, L.N. Lipatov, The Pomeranchuk singularity in quantum chromodynamics, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 28 (1978)
822, Yad. Fiz. 28 (1978) 1597.
[20] A.V. Kotikov, L.N. Lipatov, A. Rej, M. Staudacher, V.N. Velizhanin, Dressing and wrapping, J. Stat. Mech. 0710
(2007) P10003, arXiv: 0704.3586 [hep-th].
[21] F. Fiamberti, A. Santambrogio, C. Sieg, D. Zanon, Wrapping at four loops in N = 4 SYM, arXiv: 0712.3522
[hep-th].
[22] C.A. Keeler, N. Mann, Wrapping interactions and the Konishi operator, arXiv: 0801.1661 [hep-th].
[23] M. Staudacher, The factorized S-matrix of CFT/AdS, JHEP 0505 (2005) 054, hep-th/0412188.
[24] N. Beisert, The su(2|2) dynamic S-matrix, hep-th/0511082.
[25] D.M. Hofman, J.M. Maldacena, Giant magnons, J. Phys. A 39 (2006) 13095, hep-th/0604135.
[26] N. Dorey, Magnon bound states and the AdS/CFT correspondence, J. Phys. A 39 (2006) 13119, hep-th/0604175.
[27] H.Y. Chen, N. Dorey, K. Okamura, Dyonic giant magnons, JHEP 0609 (2006) 024, hep-th/0605155.
[28] T. Klose, T. McLoughlin, R. Roiban, K. Zarembo, Worldsheet scattering in AdS5 S 5 , JHEP 0703 (2007) 094,
hep-th/0611169.
[29] G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, J. Plefka, M. Zamaklar, The off-shell symmetry algebra of the light-cone AdS5 S 5
superstring, J. Phys. A 40 (2007) 3583, hep-th/0609157.
[30] G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, M. Zamaklar, The ZamolodchikovFaddeev algebra for AdS5 S 5 superstring, JHEP 0704
(2007) 002, hep-th/0612229.
[31] G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, M. Zamaklar, Finite-size effects from giant magnons, Nucl. Phys. B 778 (2007) 1, hepth/0606126.
[32] D. Astolfi, V. Forini, G. Grignani, G.W. Semenoff, Gauge invariant finite size spectrum of the giant magnon, Phys.
Lett. B 651 (2007) 329, hep-th/0702043.
[33] K. Okamura, R. Suzuki, A perspective on classical strings from complex sine-Gordon solitons, Phys. Rev. D 75
(2007) 046001, hep-th/0609026.
[34] J. Ambjorn, R.A. Janik, C. Kristjansen, Wrapping interactions and a new source of corrections to the spinchain/string duality, Nucl. Phys. B 736 (2006) 288, hep-th/0510171.
[35] A.B. Zamolodchikov, Thermodynamic Bethe ansatz in relativistic models. scaling three state potts and LeeYang
models, Nucl. Phys. B 342 (1990) 695.
[36] P. Dorey, R. Tateo, Excited states by analytic continuation of TBA equations, Nucl. Phys. B 482 (1996) 639, hepth/9607167.
[37] P. Dorey, R. Tateo, Excited states in some simple perturbed conformal field theories, Nucl. Phys. B 515 (1998) 575,
hep-th/9706140.
[38] M. Luscher, On a relation between finite size effects and elastic scattering processes, Lecture given at Cargese
Summer Inst., Cargese, France, 115 September 1983.
[39] M. Luscher, Volume dependence of the energy spectrum in massive quantum field theories. 1. Stable particle states,
Commun. Math. Phys. 104 (1986) 177.
[40] T.R. Klassen, E. Melzer, On the relation between scattering amplitudes and finite size mass corrections in QFT,
Nucl. Phys. B 362 (1991) 329.
[41] R.A. Janik, T. ukowski, Wrapping interactions at strong couplingthe giant magnon, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007)
126008, arXiv: 0708.2208 [hep-th].
[42] J.M. Maldacena, I. Swanson, Connecting giant magnons to the pp-wave: An interpolating limit of AdS5 S 5 , Phys.
Rev. D 76 (2007) 026002, hep-th/0612079.
[43] N. Dorey, D.M. Hofman, J.M. Maldacena, On the singularities of the magnon S-matrix, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007)
025011, hep-th/0703104.
[44] N. Dorey, K. Okamura, Singularities of the magnon boundstate S-matrix, JHEP 0803 (2008) 037, arXiv: 0712.4068
[hep-th].
[45] N. Dorey, B. Vicedo, On the dynamics of finite-gap solutions in classical string theory, JHEP 0607 (2006) 014,
hep-th/0601194.
[46] N. Dorey, B. Vicedo, A symplectic structure for string theory on integrable backgrounds, JHEP 0703 (2007) 045,
hep-th/0606287.
[47] N. Beisert, V.A. Kazakov, K. Sakai, Algebraic curve for the SO(6) sector of AdS/CFT, Commun. Math. Phys. 263
(2006) 611, hep-th/0410253.
383
[48] N. Beisert, V.A. Kazakov, K. Sakai, K. Zarembo, The algebraic curve of classical superstrings on AdS5 S 5 ,
Commun. Math. Phys. 263 (2006) 659, hep-th/0502226.
[49] N. Beisert, V.A. Kazakov, K. Sakai, K. Zarembo, Complete spectrum of long operators in N = 4 SYM at one loop,
JHEP 0507 (2005) 030, hep-th/0503200.
[50] J.A. Minahan, A. Tirziu, A.A. Tseytlin, Infinite spin limit of semiclassical string states, JHEP 0608 (2006) 049,
hep-th/0606145.
[51] B. Vicedo, Giant magnons and singular curves, JHEP 0712 (2007) 078, hep-th/0703180.
[52] H.Y. Chen, N. Dorey, K. Okamura, The asymptotic spectrum of the N = 4 super-YangMills spin chain, JHEP 0703
(2007) 005, hep-th/0610295.
[53] N. Beisert, The analytic Bethe ansatz for a chain with centrally extended su(2|2) symmetry, J. Stat. Mech. 0701
(2007) P017, nlin/0610017.
[54] H.Y. Chen, N. Dorey, K. Okamura, On the scattering of magnon boundstates, JHEP 0611 (2006) 035, hep-th/
0608047.
[55] R. Roiban, Magnon bound-state scattering in gauge and string theory, JHEP 0704 (2007) 048, hep-th/0608049.
[56] J.A. Minahan, O. Ohlsson Sax, Finite size effects for giant magnons on physical strings, arXiv: 0801.2064 [hep-th].
[57] A. Rej, D. Serban, M. Staudacher, Planar N = 4 gauge theory and the Hubbard model, JHEP 0603 (2006) 018,
hep-th/0512077.
[58] D. Berenstein, D.H. Correa, S.E. Vazquez, All loop BMN state energies from matrices, JHEP 0602 (2006) 048,
hep-th/0509015.
[59] S.E. Vazquez, BPS condensates, matrix models and emergent string theory, JHEP 0701 (2007) 101, hep-th/0607204.
[60] Y. Hatsuda, K. Okamura, Emergent classical strings from matrix model, JHEP 0703 (2007) 077, hep-th/0612269.
[61] D. Berenstein, S.E. Vazquez, Giant magnon bound states from strongly coupled N = 4 SYM, Phys. Rev. D 77
(2008) 026005, arXiv: 0707.4669 [hep-th].
[62] S. Schafer-Nameki, Exact expressions for quantum corrections to spinning strings, Phys. Lett. B 639 (2006) 571,
hep-th/0602214.
[63] S. Schafer-Nameki, M. Zamaklar, K. Zarembo, How accurate is the quantum string Bethe ansatz? JHEP 0612 (2006)
020, hep-th/0610250.
[64] C. Destri, H.J. de Vega, New approach to thermal Bethe ansatz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69 (1992) 2313, hep-th/9203064.
[65] C. Destri, H.J. De Vega, Unified approach to thermodynamic Bethe ansatz and finite size corrections for lattice
models and field theories, Nucl. Phys. B 438 (1995) 413, hep-th/9407117.
[66] C. Destri, H.J. de Vega, Non-linear integral equation and excited-states scaling functions in the sine-Gordon model,
Nucl. Phys. B 504 (1997) 621, hep-th/9701107.
[67] G. Feverati, F. Ravanini, G. Takacs, Nonlinear integral equation and finite volume spectrum of sine-Gordon theory,
Nucl. Phys. B 540 (1999) 543, hep-th/9805117.
[68] V.V. Bazhanov, S.L. Lukyanov, A.B. Zamolodchikov, Quantum field theories in finite volume: Excited state energies, Nucl. Phys. B 489 (1997) 487, hep-th/9607099.
[69] G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, On string S-matrix, bound states and TBA, JHEP 0712 (2007) 024, arXiv: 0710.1568
[hep-th].
[70] J. Minahan, Talk at Isaac Newton Institute, available from the following URL: http://www.newton.cam.ac.uk/
webseminars/pg+ws/2007/sis/sisw03/.
[71] H. Hayashi, K. Okamura, R. Suzuki, B. Vicedo, Large winding sector of AdS/CFT, JHEP 0711 (2007) 033, arXiv:
0709.4033 [hep-th].
[72] P.F. Byrd, M.D. Friedman, Handbook of Elliptic Integrals for Engineers and Scientists, Springer-Verlag, 1971.

Large volume axionic Swiss cheese inflation

Aalok Misra , Pramod Shukla
Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee 247 667, Uttaranchal, India
Received 8 March 2008; accepted 3 April 2008
Abstract
Continuing with the ideas of (Section 4 of) [A. Misra, P. Shukla, Moduli stabilization, large-volume dS
minimum without anti-D3-branes, (non-)supersymmetric black hole attractors and two-parameter Swiss
cheese CalabiYaus, arXiv: 0707.0105 [hep-th], Nucl. Phys. B, in press], after inclusion of perturbative
and non-perturbative corrections to the Khler potential and (D1- and D3-) instanton generated superpotential, we show the possibility of slow roll axionic inflation in the large volume limit of Swiss cheese
CalabiYau orientifold compactifications of type IIB string theory. We also include one- and two-loop
corrections to the Khler potential but find the same to be subdominant to the (perturbative and nonperturbative) corrections. The NSNS axions provide a flat direction for slow roll inflation to proceed
from a saddle point to the nearest dS minimum.
1. Introduction
The embedding of inflation in string theory has been a field of recent interest because of several attempts to construct inflationary models in the context of string theory to reproduce CMB
and WMAP observations [24]. These inflationary models are also supposed to be good candidates for testing string theory [2]. Initially, the idea of inflation was introduced to explain
some cosmological problems like horizon problem, homogeneity problem, monopole problem,
etc. [57]. Some slow roll conditions were defined (with and parameters) as sufficient
conditions for inflation to take place for a given potential. In string theory it was a big puzzle to
construct inflationary models due to the problem of stability of compactification of internal manifold, which is required for getting a potential which could drive the inflation and it was possible
E-mail addresses: aalokfph@iitr.ernet.in (A. Misra), pmathdph@iitr.ernet.in (P. Shukla).

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.04.001
A. Misra, P. Shukla / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 384400
385
to rethink about the same only after the volume modulus (as well as complex structure and axion
dilaton) could be stabilized by introducing non-perturbative effects (resulting in a meta-stable dS
also) [8]. Subsequently, several models have been constructed with different approaches such as
brane inflation (for example D3/D3 branes in a warped geometry, with the brane separation as
the inflaton field, D3/D7 brane inflation model [4,9,10]) and modular inflation [1113], but all
these models were having the so-called -problem which was argued to be solved by fine tuning
some parameters of these models. The models with multi-scalar fields (inflatons) have also been
proposed to solve the problem [14]. Meanwhile in the context of type IIB string compactifications, the idea of racetrack inflation was proposed by adding an extra exponential term with the
same Khler modulus but with a different weight in the expression for the superpotential [15].
This was followed by Inflating in a better racetrack proposed by Pillado et al. [16] considering two Khler moduli in superpotential; it was also suggested that inflation may be easier to
achieve if one considers more (than one) Khler moduli. The potential needs to have a flat direction which provides a direction for the inflaton to inflate. For the multi-Khler moduli, the idea
of treating the smaller Khler modulus as inflaton field was also proposed [13,17]. Recently,
axionic inflation in the context of type IIB compactifications shown by Grimm and Kallosh et
al. [18,19], seems to be of great interest for stringy inflationary scenarios [19]. In [1], the authors
had shown the possibility of getting a dS vacuum without the addition of D3-branes as in KKLT
scenarios [8], in type IIB Swiss cheese CalabiYau (see [20]) orientifold compactifications in
the large volume limit. In this note, developing further on this idea, we propose the possibility of
axionic inflation in the same model.
The plan of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we review the discussion of [1] pertaining to
obtaining a dS minimum without the addition of D3-branes. We also include a discussion on oneloop and two-loop corrections to the Khler potential. In Section 3, we discuss the possibility of
getting axionic inflation with the NSNS axions providing the flat direction for slow roll inflation
to proceed starting from a saddle point and proceeding towards the nearest dS minimum. Finally,
in Section 4, apart from a summary of results, we give a heuristic argument to show that the large
number of e-foldings can be explained in terms of eternal topological inflation.
2. Getting dS minimum without D3-branes
In this section, we summarize Section 4 of [1] pertaining to getting a de Sitter minimum
without the addition of anti-D3 branes in type IIB compactifications in the large volume limit,
of orientifolds of the following two-parameter Swiss cheese CalabiYau obtained as a resolution
of the degree-18 hypersurface in WCP4 [1, 1, 1, 6, 9]:
x118 + x218 + x318 + x43 + x52 18
5
xi 3x16 x26 x36 = 0.
(1)
i=1
We also include a discussion on the inclusion of one- and two-loop corrections to the Khler potential and show that two-loop contributions are subdominant w.r.t. one-loop corrections and the
one-loop corrections are sub-dominant w.r.t. the perturbative and non-perturbative corrections.
The type IIB CalabiYau orientifolds containing O3/O7-planes considered involve modding
out by ()FL where N = 1 supersymmetry requires to be a holomorphic and isometric involution: (J ) = J , () = . Writing the complexified Khler form B2 + iJ =
t A = ba a + iv where (a , ) form canonical bases for (H2 (CY3 , Z), H+2 (CY3 , Z)),
the subscript indicative of being even/odd under , one sees that in the large volume limit
386
of CY3 / , contributions from large t = v are exponentially suppressed, however the contributions from t a = ba , are not. Note that it is understood that a indexes the real subspace of
1,1
real dimensionality h
= 2; the complexified Khler moduli correspond to H 1,1 (CY3 ) with
complex dimensionality h1,1 = 2 or equivalently real dimensionality equal to 4. So, even though
Ga = ca ba (for real ca and ba and complex ) is complex, the number of Ga s is indexed
1,1
by a which runs over the real subspace h
(CY3 ) 1 ; the divisor-volume moduli are complexified by RR 4-form axions. As shown in [18], based on the R 4 -correction to the D = 10 type
IIB supergravity action [21] and the modular completion of N = 2 quaternionic geometry by
summation over all SL(2, Z) images of world sheet corrections as discussed in [22], the nonperturbative large-volume corrections that survive the process of orientifolding of type IIB
theories (to yield N = 1) to the Khler potential is given by (in the Einsteins frame):

3

( ) 2
K = ln i( ) 2 ln V +
3
2
3
2
m,nZ2 /(0,0) (2i) |m + n |
4
n0
( ) 2
3
(2i) 2 |m + n |3

a)
(Ga G
a
cos (n + m )ka
mka G
,

H2 (CY3 ,Z)
m,nZ2 /(0,0)
(4)
where n0 are the genus-0 GopakumarVafa invariants for the curve and ka = a , and Ga =
ca ba , the real RR two-form potential C2 = ca a and the real NSNS two-form potential
B2 = ba a . As pointed out in [18], in (4), one should probably sum over the orbits of the discrete
subgroup to which the symmetry group SL(2, Z) reduces. Its more natural to write out the Khler
potential and the superpotential in terms of the N = 1 coordinates , Ga and T where

i 0
1
1

a b
b ,
ab Ga Gb G
T = e v v ab c b
(5)
2
2
2( )
1 To make the idea more explicit, the involution under which the NSNS two-form B and the RR two-form C are
2
2
odd can be implemented as follows. Let zi , z i , i = 1, 2, 3, be the complex coordinates and the action of be defined
as: z1 z2 , z3 z3 ; in terms of the xi figuring in the defining hypersurface in Eq. (1), one could take, for example,
x9
z1,2 = x1,2 , etc., in the x5 = 0 coordinate patch. One can construct the following bases () of real two-forms of H 2
5
even/odd under the involution :

() ()
() =
dz1 d z 2 dz2 d z 1 , i dz1 d z 1 dz2 d z 2 1 , 2 ,

(+) (+)
(+) =
idz1 d z 1 1 , 2 .
i dz1 d z 2 + dz2 d z 1 ,
(2)
1,1
2
This implies that h1,1
+ (CY3 ) = h (CY3 ) = 2the two add up to give 4 which is the real dimensionality of H (CY3 )
for the given Swiss cheese CalabiYau. As an example, let us write down B2 R as
B2 = B12 dz1 d z 2 + B23 dz2 d z 3 + B31 dz3 d z 1 + B21 dz2 d z 1 + B32 dz3 d z 2 + B13 dz1 d z 3
+ B11 dz1 d z 1 + B22 dz2 d z 2 + B33 dz3 d z 3 .
(3)
Now, using (2), one sees that by assuming B12 = B23 = B31 = b1 , and B11 = B22 = ib2 , B33 = 0, one can write
1,1
()
() h =2 a ()
B2 = b1 1 + b2 2 a=1
b a .
387
being defined via C4 (the RR four-form potential) = , H+4 (CY3 , Z). The nonperturbative instanton-corrected superpotential was shown in [18] to be:

n (, G)
G3 +
ein T ,
W=
(6)
f (( ))
n
CY3
where the holomorphic Jacobi theta function is given as:

n (, G) =
i m2
2
Ga m
ein
(7)
ma
In (7), m2 = C ab ma mb , Cab = ab , = corresponding to that T = T (for simplicity).

Now, for (1), as shown in [23], there are two divisors which when uplifted to an ellipticallyt2
2)
fibered CalabiYau, have a unit arithmetic genus [24]: s t1 V = 21 , b t2 V = (t1 +6t
(the
2
subscripts b and s indicative of big and small divisor volumes). In (5), s = 1 is and
b = 2 ib .
To set the notations, the metric corresponding to the Khler potential in (4), will be given as:
s s K s b K s G 1 K s G 2 K
b s K b b K b 1 K b 2 K
G
G
GAB =
(8)
1 K 1 K 1 1 K 1 2 K ,
G
G
G G
G G
s
b
G2 s K G2 b K G2 G 2 K G2 G 2 K
2
where A 1,2 , G1,2 . From the Khler potential given in (4), one can show (see [1]) that the
corresponding Khler metric of (8) is given by:
3
3
1 1
0
0
ie 2
s s Z ( )
ie 2
s s Z ( )
(s s )(b b )
1 (s s )
1
1
GAB

4 ( 6 2 s s Y + 18 Y 2
(s s )(b b )
1
)
144 (
Y2
3
20
ik1 e
Z ( )
s
s
6 2Y 2
3
0
ik2 e 2 s s Z ( )
6 2Y 2
)
144 (
Y2
b b
b b
1
1
1
+ 18
4(6 2
Y
Y2
3
20
ik1 e
Z ( )
b
b
6 2Y 2
3
0
ik2 e 2 b b Z ( )
6 2Y 2
6 2Y 2
b b Z ( )
6 2Y 2
3
0
ie 2
6 2Y 2
b b Z ( )
6 2Y 2
3
0
ie 2
k12 X1
k1 k2 X1
k1 k2 X1
k22 X1
(9)
where
Z( )

c
Y VE +
An,m,nkc ( ) sin(nk . b + mk . c),
m,n
( ) 2
m,nZ2 /(0,0)
(2i) 2 |m + n |3
n0
( ) 2
3
(2i) 2 |m + n |3

a)
(Ga G
a
cos (n + m )ka
mka G ,

3

20
|n + m |3 |An,m,nkc ( )|2 cos(nk . b + mk . c)
c
m,nZ2 /(0,0) e
X1
Y
H2 (CY3 ,Z)
m,nZ2 /(0,0)
388

c
An,m,nkc ( )
m,nZ2 /(0,0) e
30
2
|n + m |3 An,m,nkc ( ) sin(nk . b + mk . c)|2

Y2
(n + m )nk c
.
|n + m |3
The inverse metric is given as:
(G)s s (G)s b
(G)s b (G)b b
1
G =
(G)s G 1 (G)b G 1
0
0
,
(10)
(G)s G
1
(G)b G
0
0
1
(k12 k22 )X1
k2
(k1 k22 k13 )X1
k2
(k1 k22 k13 )X1
1
(k12 k22 )X1
(11)
where

1
144Y 2 s + s 2b Z 2 b + b

2Z 2 + e3 X1 Y 2 b b + b e3 X1 Y 2 (3 2Y + b b + b ) ,

1
144Y 2 2Z 2 + e3 X1 Y 2 (s s )(b b ) ,
(G)s b =

3
1
1
s G
= 24ie 2 ZY 2 (s s )(3Y + 2b b + b 2b b + b ),
(G)

1
(G)b b = 144Y 2 2s Z 2 s + s + 2Z 2 + e3 X1 Y 2 s s + s

+ e3 X1 Y 2 (3 2Y s s + s ) b + b ,

3
1
1
24ie 2 ZY 2 (3Y 2s s + s + 2s s + s )(b b ) ,
(G)b G =

1 3 2
1 1
18e k1 X1 Y 4 6 2k22 s X 2 Y s + s
(G)G G =

3 2e3 k12 s X1 Y 3 s + s + 6 2k22 b X 2 Y b + b

+ 3 2e3 k12 b X1 Y 3 b + b 8k22 s b Z 2 s + s b + b

3 2e3 k12 X1 Y 3 + 2k22 Z 2 (3 2Y 4s s + s ) b b + b

+ s s + s 3 2e3 k12 X1 Y 3 8k22 X 2 b b + b

+ 2k22 Z 2 (3 2Y + 4b b + b ) ,
(12)
(G)s s =
with:

= 18e3 X1 Y 4 + 6 2s X 2 Y s + s

+ 3 2e3 s X1 Y 3 s + s 6 2b X 2 Y b + b

3 2e3 b X1 Y 3 b + b + 8s b X 2 s + s b + b

+ 3 2e3 X1 Y 3 + X 2 (6 2Y 8s s + s ) b b + b

s s + s 3 2e3 X1 Y 3 8X 2 b b + b

+ X 2 (6 2Y + 8b b + b ) .
389
Now, analogous to [25], we will work in the Large Volume Scenario (LVS) limit: V , s
2
ln V, b V 3 . In this limit, the inverse metric (11)(12) simplifies to (we will not be careful
about the magnitudes of the numerical factors in the following):
2
i Z ln V
0
V ln V V 3 ln V
X2
2
2
4
V 3 ln V
i ZV 3
V3
0
k1 X2
,
2
G 1
(13)
i Z ln V
k2
i ZV 3
1
2
2
3
2
X2
k1 X2
(k1 k2 )X1
(k1 k2 k1 )X1
k2
1
0
0
3
2
2
2
(k1 k2 )X1
(k1 k2 k1 )X1
where
X2
m,nZ2 /(0,0)
2

|n + m |3 An,m,nkc ( ) cos(nk . b + mk . c).
Refer to [25] for discussion on the minus sign in the (G1 )s s .

The Khler potential inclusive of the perturbative (using [26]) and non-perturbative (using
[18]) corrections and one- and two-loop corrections (using [27]) can be shown to be given by:

K = ln i( ) ln i

(CY3 )
2 ln V +
2
4
n0
CY3
( ) 2
m,nZ2 /(0,0)
(2i) 2 |m + n |3
( ) 2
3
(2i) 2 |m + n |3

a)
(Ga G
cos (n + m )ka
mka Ga

KK(1)
KK(1)
(U , U ) b
Cb
Cs
(U , U ) s
+
+
( )
( )

2i
2i
V( (m,n)Z2 /(0,0) |m+n
) V( (m,n)Z2 /(0,0) |m+n
)
|2
|2
KK(2)
KK(2)
Cb
(U , U ) b 2 Ktree
Cs
(U , U ) s
2 Ktree
+
+
.
2
2

( 2i
( 2i
)
)
s2
b2
V( (m,n)Z2 /(0,0) |m+n
)
V(
)
2
(m,n)Z /(0,0) |m+n |4
|4
H2 (CY3 ,Z)
m,nZ2 /(0,0)
(14)
In (14), the first line and 2 ln(V) are the tree-level contributions, the second (excluding the
volume factor in the argument of the logarithm) and third lines are the perturbative and nonperturbative corrections, the fourth line is the 1-loop contribution and the last line is the twoloop contribution; s is the volume of the small divisor and b is the volume of the big
divisor. The loop-contributions arise from KK modes corresponding to closed string or 1-loop
open-string exchange between D3- and D7- (or O7-planes) branes wrapped around the s and
b divisorsnote that the two divisors do not intersect (see [28]) implying that there is no
contribution from winding modes corresponding to strings winding non-contractible 1-cycles in
the intersection locus corresponding to stacks of intersecting D7-branes wrapped around the s
and b divisors.
390
Based on (14), the inverse metric (not been careful as regards numerical factors in the numerators and denominators) is given by (dropping 2-loop contributions as they are sub-dominant as
compared to the 1-loop contributions):
s s
1
G s b G s G
0
G
1
G s b G b b G b
0
G 1 =
G s G 1 G b G 1 G G1 G 1 G G1 G 2
2G
1
2G
2
GG
GG
KK(1)
Y 3 ln Y
Y 3 (ln Y )2 + Cs

T
Y (ln Y ) 2
KK(1)
C
ln Y
+ sT
( )
2i
2
2
KK(1)
Y 3 ln Y
Y 3 (ln Y )2 + Cs
)
T
( 2i
KK(1)
Cs
ln Y
=
) +
T
( 2i
KK(1)
C
ln Y

1
((
)(ln
Y
)2 + s T
)
2i
i ZY

KK(1)
1 ln Y
Cs
2i
+

4
3
KK(1)
Cs
KK(1)
C
s
ln Y
)
T
( 2i
KK(1)
C
ln Y
sT
( 2i )
ln Y
2i
KK(1)
(ln Y ( ) s
i ZY 3 ( 2i
)
2i
T
KK(1)
k1 X1
C
ln Y
sT
( )
C
2i
KK(1)
(ln Y ( ) s
i ZY 3 ( 2i
)
2i
T
KK(1)
k1 X1
C
ln Y
sT
( )
C
KK(1)
Cs
ln Y
) +
T
( 2i
KK(1)
Cs
ln Y
)
T
( 2i
1
(k12 k22 )1
2i
KK(1)

2
s
i ZY 1 (( 2i )(ln Y ) +
T

KK(1)
1 ln Y
Cs
2i
+
T
( )
2i )
1
ln Y ( 2i
) +
( 2i )

2i
k2
(k1 k22 k23 )1
k2
(k1 k22 k13 )1
1
1 (k12 k22 )
(15)
where
( )
2i
(m,n)Z2 /(0,0)
|m + n |2
(16)
It becomes evident from (14) and (15) that loop corrections are sub-dominant as compared to
the perturbative and non-perturbative corrections. One of the consequences of inclusion
of perturbative corrections is that the N = 1 potential receives a contribution of the type
(CY3 )|Wcs +Wnp |2
(cs complex structure, np non-perturbative) [26]. But, in the approximaV3

tion that Wcs 1 (see [8]) and further assuming that Wcs < Wnp , this contribution (given by
1
) is sub-dominant as compared to the contribution from the D1-brane and D3-brane inV 3+2ns
s s
V
stanton superpotential, e.g., G s Wnp s W np + c.c. V 2nlns 1
for D3-brane instanton number
s
n > 1. To be a bit more detailed conceptually, using (14) and (11) and appropriate expression
for Wnp , one can show that the N = 1 potential including tree-level (denoted by tree), 1-loop
(denoted by gs ) as well as perturbative (denoted by (CY3 )) and non-perturbative (denoted
) corrections is of the form:
by np
eK G
s s

)
(tree,gs ,(CY3 ), np

s W D1-instanton , G
a W D3-instanton , G
a , s , b 2 .
In the LVS limit for the Swiss cheese considered in our paper, for extremization calculations,
one can equivalently consider the following potential:

s s
a W D3-instanton , G
a , s , b 2 .
eK G tree s W D1-instanton , G
Having extremized the superpotential w.r.t. the complex structure moduli and the axion
dilaton modulus, the N = 1 potential will be given by:

1 AB

1 AB
K
V =e
A Wnp B Wnp + G
(A K)B Wnp + c.c.
G
A,B= ,Ga

+
G 1
AB
391

G 1 Kcs Kcs |Wnp |2 ,
A K B K 3 |W |2 +
,cs
A,B= ,Ga
(17)
where the total superpotential W is the sum of the complex structure moduli GukovVafaWitten
superpotential and the non-perturbative superpotential Wnp arising because of instantons (obtained by wrapping of D3-branes around the divisors with complexified volumes s and b ).
To summarize the result of Section 4 of [1], one gets the following potential:
a s
2
ns
ba bb

m + magbs n + 1ab
2gs
)2
Y ln V 2 s 2 ( ma e 2gs
V 2ns +2 e
n
V
|f (( ))|2

b) 1
b)
a (Gb G
Ga (Gb G
Ga G
1
s
ln V ns ( , G)
+ ns +2
ein (1 + 2 1ab ( ) ( ) 2 1ab ( ) ) + c.c.
f (( ))
V
2

2
|W | 3k2 + k12
+ 3
V
k12 k22

3
| c n,mZ2 /(0,0) e 2 An,m,nkc ( ) sin(nk . b + mk . c)|2

3
2 |n + m |3 |An ,m ,n
( )|2 cos(n k . b + m k . c)
c
m ,n Z2 /(0,0) e
c
k
|W |2
.
(18)
V3
On comparing (18) with the analysis of [25], one sees that for generic values of the moduli
, Ga , k 1,2 and O(1) Wcs , and ns (the D3-brane instanton quantum number) = 1, analogous to
[25], the second term dominates; the third term is a new term. However, as in KKLT scenarios
(see [8]), Wcs 1; we would henceforth assume that the fluxes and complex structure moduli
have been so fine tuned/fixed that W Wnp . We assume that the fundamental-domain-valued
a
ba s satisfy: |b | 1.2 This implies that for ns > 1, the first term in (18)| 1 Wnp |2 a positive
definite term and denoted henceforth by VI , is the most dominant. Hence, if a minimum exists,
it will be positive. As shown in [1], the potential can be extremized along the locus:
mk . c + nk . b = N(m,n;,k a )
(19)
ma .
As shown in Section 3, it turns

and very large values of the D1-instanton quantum numbers
out that the locus nk . b + mk . c = N for |ba | and |ca | corresponds to a flat saddle
point with the NSNS axions providing a flat direction.
Analogous to [25], for all directions in the moduli space with O(1) Wcs and away from

(G1 ) D Wcs
Di Wcs = D W = 0 = ca V = ba V = 0, the O( V12 ) contribution of ,cs
D W cs dominates over (18), ensuring that there must exist a minimum, and given the positive
definiteness of the potential VI , this will be a dS minimum. There has been no need to add any
D3-branes as in KKLT to generate a dS vacuum. Also, interestingly, as we show in Section 1, the
condition nk . b + mk . c = N guarantees that the slow roll parameters and are much
smaller than one for slow roll inflation beginning from the saddle point and proceeding along an
NSNS axionic flat direction towards the nearest dS minimum.
a
2 If one puts in appropriate powers of the Planck mass M , |b | 1 is equivalent to |ba | M , i.e., NSNS axions
p
p
are super sub-Planckian.
392
The arguments related to the lifetime of the dS minimum in the literature estimate the lifetime
2 2
V
to be e V0 where the minimum value of the potential, V0 ln
for N 3. The lifetime, hence,
VN
can be made arbitrarily large as V is increased.
3. Axionic slow roll inflation

In this section, we discuss the possibility of getting slow roll inflation along a flat direction
provided by the NSNS axions starting from a saddle point and proceeding to the nearest dS
minimum. In what follows, we will assume that the volume moduli for the small and big divisors
and the axiondilaton modulus have been stabilized. All calculations henceforth will be in the
axionic sectora will imply Ga in the following.
To evaluate the slow roll inflation parameters (in Mp = 1 units)
negative eigenvalue of the matrix N i j
G ik (k j V jlk l V )
,
V
G ij i V j V
2V 2
, the most
one needs the following results:
components of a G given by:

a Y
a Y
a Y
(1)
+O
,
(a G)
=O
+
3
Y 2 ln Y Y 2 (ln Y) 32
Y 2 (ln Y) 2

a Y
a Y ln Y
s 2
(1)
(a G)
+O
=O
,
8
8
Y3
Y 3 ln Y

ln Y
1
1
s G
+ Za YO
(a G)
= ik1 ka a ZO
,
Y2
Y 3 ln Y

ln Y
1
s 2
+
Z
(a G) G = ik2 ka a ZO
YO
,
a
Y2
Y 3 ln Y

a Y
b 2
(1) a Y
+O
,
=O
(a G)
7
Y3
Y3

1
a Y
b 1
(a G) G = ika ka a ZO
+
ik
,
k
O
1
a
5
8
Y3
Y3

a Y
1
2
b G
+O
,
(a G)
= ik1 ka a ZO
5
8
Y3
Y3

1
1 1
(Va X1 ),
(a G)G G = k12 ka O
V

1
1 2
(a G)G G = k1 k2 ka O
(Va X1 ),
V

ln Y
2
G2 G
,
= ik2 ka a ZO
(a G)
Y2
s s
(20)
a G 1 given by:
O(Y ln Y)
Y ln Y
O(
ln Y
O( Y 1 )
Y3
a G =
O( Z aYY2ln Y + ZYln Y )
1 )
Y3
1
O(Y 3 a Y)
a b
1
3
O (Y a b Y )
O (Y
a b Y )
O (Y
a b X1
O ( VYX
2
1
V a b X1
O ( YX 2
1
43
,
V a X1
O(
)
YX 21
0
O(
V a X1
)
YX 21
(21)
a b Y )
2 (V a X12)(V3b X2 ) )
Y X1
2 (V a X12)(V3b X2 ) )
Y X1
ln Y
O ( a b Z
)
Y
Y3
43
Z ln Y
Y )
Y3
V a X1
)
YX 21
V X
O( a 21 )
YX 1
O(
Y3
O ( a b Y1ln Y )
O( a b Y1ln Y )
Y3
a b G 1 =
a b Z ln Y
Y
O( a Y
4 )
is given by:
O(a b Y ))
O(
O( a Y
4 )
G 1
O( Z a Y2ln Y +
393
0
a b X1
O ( VYX
2
1
V a b X1
O ( YX 2
1
2 (V a X12)(V3b X2 ) )
Y X1
2 (V a X12)(V3b X2 ) )
Y X1
(22)
In terms of the real axions,
c1
1
1
N c1 N c c2 N c b1
2
2
N c 1 N c 2 N c2 1
c
b
N = b1 c
1
1
N c1 N b c2 N b b1
Nb
c1
Nb
In terms of the complex
c2
G1,2
Nb
Nc
b2
.
N b2
N
c2
b2
b2
b2
1
1
1
1
N G G1
N G G1 +
N G G 1
N G G1 ,

1
1
1
1
1
N c c2 =
N G G2 +
N G G 2
N G G2
N G G 2 ,

| |2 G1
2
2
| |2 G 1
1
1
1
N G1 +
N G G1
N G G 1 +
N G 1 ,
N c b1 =

| |2 G1
| |2 G 1
| |2 G 1
1
1
N G2
N G2 +
N G G 2 +
N G 2 ,
N c b2 =

The first derivative of the potential is given by:
Nc
c1
(23)
b1
b1 N
2
1,
and G
etc.
(24)
a V |Dcs W =D W =0

= (a K)V + eK a G bc (a Wnp c )W np + (a K)Wnp c W np

+ G bc (a b Wnp )c W np + (a b K)Wnp c W np

bc b Wnp (c K)W np + G bc (a b Wnp )(c K)W np + (b Wnp )Ga c Wnp
+ a G

a G bc b K c K + G bc (a b K)c K + a K |W |2 + G bc b K c Ka Wnp W . (25)
Using (13) and (21), one can show that the most dominant terms in (25) of O( V 2n1s +1 ) that potentially violate the requirement 1 are of the type:
e.g. eK (a G bc )(b Wnp )c W np , is proportional to a 2 , which at the locus (19), vanishes;
394
e.g. eK G bc a b Wnp c W np : the contribution to will be
0 2
H2 (n )
ln V .
Now, it turns out
that the genus-0 GopakumarVafa integer invariants n0 s for compact CalabiYaus of a projective variety in weighted complex projective spaces for appropriate degree of the holomorphic
curve, can be as large as 1020 and even higher [29] thereby guaranteeing that the said contribution
to respects the slow roll inflation requirement.
One can hence show from (25) that along (19), 1 is always satisfied.
To evaluate N a b and the Hessian, one needs to evaluate the second derivatives of the potential
and components of the affine connection. In this regard, one needs to evaluate, e.g.:
d a V = (d a K)V + a K d V + eK d K(a V )

+ eK d a G bc b Wnp c W np + (b K)Wnp c W np

+ a G bc b Wnp d c W np + Gbd Wnp c W np + (b K)Wnp d c W np

+ d G bc (a b Wnp )c W np + (a b K)Wnp c W np

+ G bc (a b Wnp )d c W np + a Gbd c W np + (a b K)Wnp d c W np

d a G bc b Wnp c K W np + a G bc b Wnp (c d K)W np

+ a G bc b Wnp c K d W np

+ d G bc (a b Wnp )c KWnp + Ga c (b Wnp )W np

+ G bc (a b Wnp )(c d K)W np + (a b Wnp )(c K)d W np

+ d Ga c (b Wnp )Wnp + Ga c (b Wnp )d W np

+ d a G bc b K c K + a G bc Gbd c K + (b K)d c K

+ d G bc a b K c K + G bc a Gbd c K + G bc (a b K)c d K + Ga d |Wnp |2

a G bc b K c K + G bc (a b K)c K + a K(d W np )Wnp

+ d G bc b K c Ka Wnp W np + G bc d b K c Ka Wnp Wnp

+ G bc b K d c Ka Wnp W np .
(26)
Using (9), (13), (20) and (22), one can show that at (19), the most dominant term (and hence the
most dominant contribution to ) in (26) comes from eK d a G bc b Wnp c W np , proportional to:
1
V
N a b
.

ln V ( H2 (n0 )2 )2
(27)
Now, the large values of the genus-0 GopakumarVafa invariants again nullifies this contribution
to .
Now, the affine connection components, in the LVS limit, are given by:

1
a
a d
a
c +
ba X1 O V 0 ,
bc = G b Gcd
(28)

implying that
V
d V
V. Vln3+n
s
G ca cb
d
ln V O(1).
N b
V
2+ns
a
(29)
395
This is the problem of [4]. One can solve the problem by noting that the contribution from
the affine connection vanishes at (19).
We will show that one gets a saddle point at {(ba , ca ) | nk . b + mk . c = N(m,n;k a ) } and the
NSNS axions provide a flat direction. We will work out the slow roll inflation direction along
which inflation proceeds between the saddle point and the minimum. Now, the Hessian or the
mass matrix M of fluctuations is defined as:

2 Re(a b V + a b V ) 2 Im(a b V + a b V )
.
M=
(30)
2 Im(a b V a b V ) 2 Re(a b V + a b V )
Evaluated at (19),

|2
ka kb ma mb (ns )2 eiab (n,m)Z2 /(0,0) |n+m
2
|
|
a b V
,

2
s
V 2n 1 |f (( ))|2 (n ,m )Z2 /(0,0) |n +m | 3
2
| |3 ( 2i
)

)2
ka kb ma mb (ns )2 eiab (n,m)Z2 /(0,0) (n+m
( )2
,
a b V

2
s
V 2n 1 |f (( ))|2 (n ,m )Z2 /(0,0) |n +m | 3
(31)
2
| |3 ( 2i
)
where ab ma (ca Aba )ns mb (cb Abb )ns + (m2a m2b ) A2 . Using the value of the Riemann zeta function
s = 2 and thereby making the
(s) analyticallycontinued to s = 11 and
, m m2 (2) = 0, one gets:
substitutions: m 1 (0) = 12 , m m (1) = 12
(ns )2 g
(1+A) sin ab
12gs
A cos ab
36
ka kb ma mb
s
Re(a b V a b V )
s
V 2n 1 |f (( ))|2
ka kb ma mb (ns )2 gs
Im(a b V a b V )
s
V 2n 1 |f (( ))|2
A
72
(1+A) sin ab
12gs
(1+A) cos ab A sin ab
+ 36
12
A
72

.
(32)
Substituting (32) into (30) and for simplicity assuming all ma s to be the same mD1 , one gets:
M=
gs (ns )2
s
V 2n 1 2 |f (( ))|2
m2D1 k1 k2 R+ sin 12
m2D1 k12 I+ cos 12
m2D1 k1 k2 I+ cos 12
m2D1 k1 k2 R+ sin 12
m2D1 k1 k2 I+ cos 12
m2D1 k22 I+ cos 12
m2D1 k12 I cos 12
m2D1 k1 k2 [I cos 12 I sin 12 ]
m2D1 k12 R cos 12
m2D1 k1 k2 R cos 12
m2D1 k22 I cos 12
m2D1 k1 k2 R cos 12
m2D1 k22 R cos 12
(2)
m2D1 k1 k2 [I cos 12
(1)
+ I sin 12 ]
(2)
(1)
(33)
(2)
A
where I+ = I = I = R+ = 1+A
2gs , R = 36 , limV ,(mk.c+nk.b)N(m,n;,k a ) V sin(mk . c +
nk . b) = , and 12 = AmD1 ns (b2 b1 ) + mD1 ns (c1 c2 ). The sine terms in the third and
fourth rows violate the symmetric nature of the Hessian and should therefore be negligible. As
a
was stated earlier, the fundamental-domain-valued ba : |b | 1; we have further assumed 1 <
mD1 ns . One can therefore drop the sine term and approximate the cosine term by unity. Then
the eigenvalues (of the symmetric Hessian) can be shown to be:
396

2 A
2
gs (ns )2
1
2
mD1
+
k
0, 0,
k
s
1
2
2 V 2n 1 2 |f (( ))|2
36

2
2 A

2
(1 + A)2 m4D1 3
3
2
2
k1 + 2k1 k2 + k2
.
+4
k1 + k2 mD1
36
144gs2
The corresponding eigenvectors are given by:
0
0
k2 ,
k1
1

0
0
,
0
0
1+A
1+A 2
3
3
2
2 A
2
2 2 A 2
2
12gs k1 ((k1 +k2 ) 36 ((k1 +k2 ) ( 36 ) +4( 12gs ) k2 (k1 +2k1 k2 +k2 )))
A 2
1+A 2
A
A 2
1+A 2
k2 ((k12 +k22 )(( 36
) +2( 12g
) ) 36
((k12 +k22 )2 ( 36
) +4( 12g
) k2 (k13 +2k12 k2 +k23 )))
s
s
1+A
A 2
1+A 2
A
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
12gs ( ((k1 +k2 ) ( 36 ) +4( 12gs ) k2 (k1 +2k1 k2 +k2 ))(k1 +k2 ) 36 )
2
2
A
1+A 2
A
A
1+A 2
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
,
(k1 +k2 )(( 36 ) +2( 12gs ) ) 36 ((k1 +k2 ) ( 36 ) +4( 12gs ) k2 (k1 +2k1 k2 +k2 ))
A 2
1+A 2
A
2 +k 2 )2 ( A )2 +4( 1+A )2 k (k 3 +2k 2 k +k 3 )))
) +2( 12g
)
k
(k
+k
))
((k
k1 (((k12 +k22 )( 36
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
36
36
12g
s
s
A 2
1+A 2
A
A 2
1+A 2
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
k2 ((k +k )(( ) +2(
) )
((k +k ) ( ) +4(
) k2 (k +2k k2 +k )))
1
36
12gs
36
36
12gs
1+A
1+A 2
3
3
2
2 A
2
2 2 A 2
2
12gs k1 ((k1 +k2 ) 36 + ((k1 +k2 ) ( 36 ) +4( 12gs ) k2 (k1 +2k1 k2 +k2 )))
A 2
1+A 2
A
A 2
1+A 2
((k12 +k22 )2 ( 36
) +4( 12g
) k2 (k13 +2k12 k2 +k23 )) 36
+(k12 +k22 )(( 36
) +2( 12g
) ))
s
s
k (
2
1+A
A
A 2
1+A 2
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
12gs ((k1 +k2 ) 36 + ((k1 +k2 ) ( 36 ) +4( 12gs ) k2 (k1 +2k1 k2 +k2 )))
A 2
1+A 2
3 +2k 2 k +k 3 )) A +(k 2 +k 2 )(( A )2 +2( 1+A )2 )
.
((k12 +k22 )2 ( 36
) +4( 12g
)
k
(k
2
2
1
1
2
1
2 36
36
12gs
s
2
2
A
1+A
A
A
1+A
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
k1 ( ((k1 +k2 )2 ( 36 ) +4( 12gs )2 k2 (k1 +2k1 k2 +k2 )) 36 +((k1 +k2 )( 36 ) +2( 12gs ) k2 (k1 +k2 )))
2
2
k2 ( ((k 2 +k 2 )2 ( A ) +4( 1+A )2 k2 (k 3 +2k 2 k2 +k 3 )) A +(k 2 +k 2 )(( A ) +2( 1+A )2 ))

1
36
12gs
36
36
(34)
12gs
1
An eigenvector of the Hessian is to be understood to denote the following fluctuation direction:
1
c Ab1
2
2
c Ab
(35)
g1 b1 .
s
g1s b2
The first eigenvector in (34) tells us that fluctuations along ba s are massless, implying that
ba s are flat directions. The third and fourth eigenvalues imply that there will be one negative
eigenvalue implying the existence of a saddle point and the corresponding eigenvector in (34)
gives the direction of slow roll inflation towards the nearest minimum along the flat direction
given by the NSNS axions provided:
k2 k1 ,
or
A = 1.
(36)
397
It is not guaranteed that the ten-dimensional axion A gets lifted to 1; it is easier to implement
k2 k1 .
Note however, the eigenvectors should involve elements that are small as they represent
fluctuationsthis is not so in (34) and can be rectified by dividing out by a large positive quantity,
e.g., V. Further, along slow roll away from the saddle point, ca and ba must satisfy (because
of (19)): mk . c = nk . b. Using (34) and (36), one can verify that this condition is identically
satisfied.
The kinetic energy terms for the NSNS and RR axions can be written as:
1
c
c2

(37)
c1 c2 b1 b2 K 1 ,
b
2
b
where
k1 k2
( + )k12 ( + )k1 k2
k12
k1 k2
k22
( + )k1 k2 ( + )k1 k2
.
K X1
(38)
2
( + )k
( + )k1 k2
| |2 k 2
| |2 k1 k2
1
( + )k1 k2
( + )k22
k1 k2 | |2
k22 | |2
the eigenvalues of K are given by:

(1 + (1 + A2 )gs2 + S )(k12 + k22 ) (1 + (1 + A2 )gs2 S )(k12 + k22 )
,
X1 0, 0,
2gs2
2gs2
Writing = A +
i
gs ,
(39)
where S 1 + 2(1 + A2 )gs2 + (1 + 14A2 + A4 )gs4 . The basis of axionic fields that would
diagonalize the kinetic energy terms is given by:

k1 (b2 k1 b1 k2 ) 1+
k12 +k22
k1 (c2 k1 c1 k2 ) 1+
k2
k12
k22
k12
(40)
k12 +k22
k2 1 (b1 (1+(1+A2 )gs2 + S )k1 +A2 b2 gs2 k2 +b2 (1gs2 + S )k2 4Ags2 (c1 k1 +c2 k2 ))

2
2
4 2 S (k1 +k2 )
k2 1 (b1 (1(1+A2 )gs2 + S )k1 A2 b2 gs2 k2 +b2 (1+gs2 + S )k2 +4Ags2 (c1 k1 +c2 k2 ))

4 2 S (k12 +k22 )
!
(1(1+14A2 +A4 )gs4 + S +(1+A2 )gs2 (2+ S ))(k12 +k22 )

). Given that the NSNS axwhere 1 (
A2 gs4 k22
ions provide flat directions for slow roll inflation to commence from a saddle point (as discussed
above) and proceed towards the nearest minimum and that the inflatonic axions should be lighter
than the non-inflatonic axions, in the approximation (36), using (37)(40) one could identify
b2 kk21 b1 as the inflaton.
4. Discussion
In this note, we have generalized the idea in [1] of obtaining a dS minimum (using perturbative
and non-perturbative corrections to the Khler potential and instanton corrections to the superpotential) without the addition of D3-branes by including the one- and two-loop corrections to the
398
Khler potential and showing that two-loop contributions are subdominant w.r.t. one-loop corrections and the one-loop corrections are sub-dominant w.r.t. the perturbative and non-perturbative
corrections in the LVS limits. Assuming the NSNS and RR axions ba , ca s to lie in the
a
a
fundamental-domain and to satisfy: |b | 1, |c | 1, the D3-brane instanton number ns associated with the small divisor to be much larger than the D1-instanton numbers maD1 s, one
gets a flat direction provided by the NSNS axions for slow roll inflation to occur starting from
a saddle point and proceeding to the nearest dS minimum. After a detailed calculation we find
that for 1 in the LVS limit all along the slow roll. The eta problem gets solved at and away
from the saddle point locus for some quantized values of a linear combination of the NSNS and
RR axions; the slow roll flat direction is provided by the NSNS axions. A linear combination of
the axions gets identified with the inflaton. Thus in a nutshell, we have shown the possibility of
axionic slow roll inflation in the large volume limit of type IIB compactifications on orientifolds
of Swiss cheese CalabiYaus. As a linear combination of the NSNS axions corresponds to the
inflaton in our work, this corresponds to a discretized expansion rate and analogous to [30] may
correspond to a CFT with discretized central charges.
To evaluate the number of e-foldings Ne , defining the inflaton I b2 kk21 b1 , one can show
that (in Mp = 1 units)
fin: dSminimum
Ne =
in: saddle point
V
dI
I V
ln V
0 2
0 2 V 2ns +1
1
n
n
ln V.
1
nk
2ns +1
H2
H2
Along (19), the axionic derivative of the potential will be O( V 2n1s +1 ), receiving contributions from
G bc a n Wnp c W np , which are suppressed by the reciprocal of the sum of the squares of genus-0
GopakumarVafa invariants which, as remarked earlier, are very large. Further, for eternal slow
roll inflation, V < , a condition that is satisfied all along the flat direction in the NSNS axion
space along which the slow roll inflation proceeds in our work.
Acknowledgements
The work of A.M. is partially supported by a Department of Atomic Energy (Govt. of India)
Young Scientist award and P.S. is supported by a CSIR junior research fellowship. One of us
(A.M.) would like to thank H. Tye, D. Kabat and specially S. Sarangi for very useful clarifications.
References
[1] A. Misra, P. Shukla, Moduli stabilization, large-volume dS minimum without anti-D3-branes, (non-)supersymmetric
black hole attractors and two-parameter Swiss cheese CalabiYaus, Nucl. Phys. B 799 (2008) 165198, arXiv:
0707.0105 [hep-th].
[2] R. Kallosh, A. Linde, Testing string theory with CMB, JCAP 0704 (2007) 017, arXiv: 0704.0647 [hep-th];
A. Krause, Large gravitational waves and Lyth bound in multi brane inflation, arXiv: 0708.4414 [hep-th].
[3] R. Bean, S.E. Shandera, S.H.H. Tye, J. Xu, Comparing brane inflation to WMAP, hep-th/0702107;
C. Destri, H.J. de Vega, N.G. Sanchez, MCMC analysis of WMAP3 data points to broken symmetry inflaton potentials and provides a lower bound on the tensor to scalar ratio, astro-ph/0703417.
399
[4] S. Kachru, R. Kallosh, A. Linde, J. Maldacena, L. McAllister, S.P. Trivedi, Towards inflation in string theory,
JCAP 0310 (2003) 013, hep-th/0308055.
[5] A.A. Starobinsky, Spectrum of relict gravitational radiation and the early state of the universe, JETP Lett. 30 (1979)
682;
A.A. Starobinsky, A new type of isotropic cosmological models without singularity, Phys. Lett. B 91 (1980) 99.
[6] A.H. Guth, The inflationary universe: A possible solution to the horizon and flatness problems, Phys. Rev. D 23
(1981) 347.
[7] A.D. Linde, A new inflationary universe scenario: A possible solution of the horizon, flatness, homogeneity, isotropy
and primordial monopole problems, Phys. Lett. B 108 (1982) 389.
[8] S. Kachru, R. Kallosh, A. Linde, S.P. Trivedi, De Sitter vacua in string theory, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 046005,
hep-th/0301240.
[9] K. Dasgupta, C. Herdeiro, S. Hirano, R. Kallosh, D3/D7 inflationary model and M-theory, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002)
126002, hep-th/0203019.
[10] G. Dvali, S.H. Tye, Brane inflation, Phys. Lett. B 450 (1999) 72, hep-th/9812483;
S. Alexander, Inflation from Danti-D-brane annihilation, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 023507, hep-th/0105032;
G. Dvali, Q. Shafi, S. Solganik, D-brane inflation, hep-th/0105203;
C.P. Burgess, M. Majumdar, D. Nolte, F. Quevedo, G. Rajesh, R.J. Zhang, The inflationary braneantibrane universe, JHEP 0107 (2001) 047, hep-th/0105204;
G. Shiu, S.H. Tye, Some aspects of brane inflation, Phys. Lett. B 516 (2001) 421, hep-th/0106274.
[11] K. Becker, M. Becker, J.H. Schwarz, String Theory and M-Theory: A Modern Introduction, Cambridge Univ. Press,
Cambridge, UK, 2007, 739 p.
[12] A. Westphal, Eternal inflation with alpha-prime corrections, hep-th/0507079.
[13] J.P. Conlon, F. Quevedo, Kahler moduli inflation, JHEP 0601 (2006) 146, hep-th/0509012.
[14] A.R. Liddle, A. Mazumdar, F.E. Schunck, Assisted inflation, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 061301, astro-ph/9804177;
P. Kanti, K.A. Olive, Assisted chaotic inflation in higher dimensional theories, Phys. Lett. B 464 (1999) 192, hep-ph/
9906331;
S. Dimopoulos, S. Kachru, J. McGreevy, J.G. Wacker, N-flation, hep-th/0507205;
K. Becker, M. Becker, A. Krause, M-theory inflation from multi M5-brane dynamics, Nucl. Phys. B 715 (2005)
349, hep-th/0501130.
[15] J.J. Blanco-Pillado, C.P. Burgess, J.M. Cline, C. Escoda, M. Gomez-Reino, R. Kallosh, A. Linde, F. Quevedo,
Racetrack inflation, JHEP 0411 (2004) 063, hep-th/0406230.
[16] J.J. Blanco-Pillado, C.P. Burgess, J.M. Cline, C. Escoda, M. Gomez-Reino, R. Kallosh, A. Linde, F. Quevedo,
Inflating in a better racetrack, JHEP 0609 (2006) 002, hep-th/0603129.
[17] A. Westphal, de Sitter string vacua from Kaehler uplifting, JHEP 0703 (2007) 102, hep-th/0611332.
[18] T.W. Grimm, Non-perturbative corrections and modularity in N = 1 type IIB compactifications, arXiv: 0705.3253
[hep-th].
[19] T.W. Grimm, Axion inflation in type II string theory, arXiv: 0710.3883 [hep-th];
R. Kallosh, N. Sivanandam, M. Soroush, Axion inflation and gravity waves in string theory, arXiv: 0710.3429
[hep-th].
[20] J.P. Conlon, F. Quevedo, K. Suruliz, Large-volume flux compactifications: Moduli spectrum and D3/D7 soft supersymmetry breaking, JHEP 0508 (2005) 007, hep-th/0505076;
P. Candelas, A. Font, S.H. Katz, D.R. Morrison, Mirror symmetry for two parameter models. 2, Nucl. Phys. B 429
(1994) 626, hep-th/9403187.
[21] M.B. Green, M. Gutperle, Effects of D-instantons, Nucl. Phys. B 498 (1997) 195, hep-th/9701093.
[22] D. Robles-Llana, M. Rocek, F. Saueressig, U. Theis, S. Vandoren, Nonperturbative corrections to 4D string theory
effective actions from SL(2, Z) duality and supersymmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 211602, hep-th/0612027.
[23] F. Denef, M.R. Douglas, B. Florea, Building a better racetrack, JHEP 0406 (2004) 034, hep-th/0404257.
[24] E. Witten, Non-perturbative superpotentials in string theory, Nucl. Phys. B 474 (1996) 343, hep-th/9604030.
[25] V. Balasubramanian, P. Berglund, J.P. Conlon, F. Quevedo, Systematics of moduli stabilisation in CalabiYau flux
compactifications, JHEP 0503 (2005) 007, hep-th/0502058.
[26] K. Becker, M. Becker, M. Haack, J. Louis, Supersymmetry breaking and alpha -corrections to flux induced potentials, JHEP 0206 (2002) 060, hep-th/0204254.
[27] M. Berg, M. Haack, E. Pajer, Jumping through loops: On soft terms from large volume compactifications, arXiv:
0704.0737 [hep-th];
M. Cicoli, J.P. Conlon, F. Quevedo, Systematics of string loop corrections in type IIB CalabiYau flux compactifications, arXiv: 0708.1873 [hep-th].
400
[28] G. Curio, V. Spillner, On the modified KKLT procedure: A case study for the P(11169)(18) model, Int. J. Mod.
Phys. A 22 (2007) 3463, hep-th/0606047.
[29] M.x. Huang, A. Klemm, S. Quackenbush, Topological string theory on compact CalabiYau: Modularity and boundary conditions, hep-th/0612125.
[30] I. Antoniadis, C. Bachas, J.R. Ellis, D.V. Nanopoulos, Cosmological string theories and discrete inflation, Phys.
Lett. B 211 (1988) 393.

Erratum
Erratum to: Vortex fermion on the lattice

[Nucl. Phys. B 636 (2002) 264290]
Keiichi Nagao a,b,c,
a Institute of Physics, University of Tokyo, Komaba, Tokyo 153-8902, Japan
b High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801, Japan
c Faculty of Education, Ibaraki University, Mito 310-8512, Japan
Received 21 February 2008

Abstract
In Ref. [H. Neuberger, hep-lat/03030090] Neuberger studied a vortex fermion model with two continuum
extra-dimensions, and pointed out that there are no k = 0 zero modes, which is in disagreement with our
paper. Since this discrepancy is due to an error in our paper, we give relevant corrections. The main result
of our paper that a normalizable zero mode solution appears at the core of the vortex does not change.
In Ref. [1] we constructed vortex fermion models in 4 + 2 dimensions toward obtaining

four-dimensional lattice chiral gauge theory, where in extra two dimensions we introduced the
spiders web lattice formulated by discretizing polar coordinates. We showed that a normalizable k = 0 zero mode solution independent of the angular coordinate appears at the core of the
vortex, where k is the angular momentum. This is the main result of Ref. [1]. We also discussed
k = 0 zero mode solutions dependent on the angular coordinate, and mentioned the PauliVillars
subtraction of massive modes and the k = 0 modes to obtain a four-dimensional chiral gauge
theory at the core of the vortex. In Ref. [2] Neuberger studied a vortex fermion model with two
continuum extra-dimensions, and pointed out the existence of a k = 0 zero mode and the absence
of k = 0 zero modes. The former agrees with Ref. [1], but the latter not. This discrepancy is due
to an error in Ref. [1]. In Ref. [1] the error occurred when we solved the zero mode equation (12)
DOI of original article: 10.1016/S0550-3213(02)00436-4.

* Correspondence address: Faculty of Education, Ibaraki University, Mito 310-8512, Japan.
E-mail address: nagao@mx.ibaraki.ac.jp.

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.017
402
K. Nagao / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 401404
in the continuum theory.1 When we rewrote Eq.(12) into a simple form, we missed an equation
() +
k
() = f () (),
(1)
which accompanied Eq. (16). As a result, we reached the wrong conclusion that there are k = 0
zero modes besides a k = 0 zero mode. If we take into account the missed equation, we reach the
correct conclusion that there is a zero mode solution

() = exp
(2)
f ( ) d
0
for k = 0, not for k = 0. This agrees with the result of Ref. [2].
Furthermore, from this error, other relevant errors were produced derivatively in the remaining
sections. Especially, similar errors to that mentioned above occurred also when we solved zero
mode equations on the lattice, namely, in the naive fermion model, the simple vortex model and
the hermitian vortex model. In each case we reached the wrong conclusion that there are k = 0
zero modes besides a k = 0 zero mode. If we consider the missed equation in each lattice model,
we come to the correct conclusion that there is a zero mode for k = 0, not for k = 0, as in the
continuum theory. We now solve the zero mode equation of the naive fermion model discussed in
Section 3.2. In Ref. [1] the k = 0 case is discussed in the body, and k = 0 case in the appendices.
Here we do not separate them. The zero mode equation obtained via the variation of the action
c
by 1, is written as
Snaive

1
2n+1 eiext h , =1
(iext )
2a
a
2
a
2
2, + 1
+ e
= 0,
2

1
2n+1 eiext h , =1
(iext )
2a

a
2, + 1
i (+ a )

iext ( 2 )
ext
2
e
+ e

= 0.
2
e
iext (+
iext (
Substituting the following form into the zero mode equation

ipx
e (, p, k)eik u for 2,
= ipx
e (, p)u
for = 1,
= 2n+1 ,
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
we obtain
a

i (2) i a ika
2 e
1 + ei 2 1 eika = 0,
a e
4 sin 2
a

i (2) i a ika
2 e
(2) (1)eik
1 + ei 2 1 eika = 0,
a e
4 sin 2
(2) (1)eik
1 Each
2n+1 in Eq. (11) is replaced by .
(7)
(8)
403
where Eq. (8) is missed in Ref. [1]. A necessary condition for the existence of the solution is to
ik = 1, but now the value
choose k such that eik = 1. Generally, k = n
a (n Z even ) satisfies e
of k is restricted to 0, 1, 2, . . . , N 1 in Eq. (5), where N is the number of lattice sites in the
angular direction, namely, N = 2
a . Thus the solution (2) = (1) exists for k = 0. We can
also solve the zero mode equation obtained via the variation of the action by for 2,
,
and obtain the minus chirality solution ( + 1) ( 1) = 2a f () (). Thus, the
following normalizable solution exists for k = 0

(2) = (1),
(9)
( + 1) = ( 1) 2a f () () for 2.
This corresponds to Eq. (46) in Ref. [1].
Next we solve the zero mode equation of the simple vortex model in Section 3.4.2 We see that
the following solution exists for k = 0

(2) = (1),
(10)
( + 1) = z () for 2,
where we have chosen w as w = 2aa . This corresponds to Eq. (61) in Ref. [1].
Similarly, we can obtain the zero mode solution also in the hermitian vortex model in Section 3.5. The following solution exists for k = 0
4
(2) = (1),
7
[1 a m0 (1
(3) =
( + 1) =
1
5
16a m0 ) + F ] (2) + 16 (1)
,
9
8
1
(
[1 a m0 (1 4 2 a1 m ) + F ] () + 4
0
1
1 + 4
(11)
(12)
1)
for 3,
(13)
wa
where we have chosen w , w and w such that w = w a2 = 12 and a = 12 . To obtain a

four-dimensional chiral gauge theory including the zero mode, we need to subtract unwanted
modes by using the PauliVillars Dirac operator. The PauliVillars Dirac operator mentioned in
Ref. [1] is assumed to include both massive modes and k = 0 modes to pick up the k = 0 mode.
The operator is replaced with that which is assumed to include massive modes only, since there
are no k = 0 modes. Therefore, the two sentences In our spiders web. . . has a constraint of
( = 1) = 0. in the sixth to eleventh lines in the last paragraph of Section 3.4 are replaced by
In our spiders web lattice, considering the situation that the zero mode solution is localized at
PV
the = 1 string, we assume the PauliVillars Dirac operator Dvortex
which has a constraint of
( = 1) = 0. Finally, as for other derivative and miscellaneous errors, the following 16 are
deleted, and the correction are given in 713:
1. The paragraphs including Eqs. (71)(85).
2. The paragraph following Eq. (85) The absence of. . . for the present purpose.
w a2 a
2 In the last line of Eq. (50) the factor w a is generally expressed as , where w is the Wilson parameter
m0
m0
introduced for the angular direction.
404
3. Footnote 8.
4. The phrase where we considered not only. . . vortex fermion on the lattice in the second
sentence of the first paragraph in Section 4.
5. The sentences in the first to sixth lines from the last, Furthermore we found. . . for the
present purpose, in the second paragraph in Section 4.
6. Appendix C.
7. The constraints in the ninth line of the third paragraph in Section 3.1 is replaced by constraint.
8. In the third paragraph of Section 4, this model to in the first line and S2 in the third and
ninth lines are replaced by this model and S 2 , respectively.
9. In the last line of Eq. (B.10) the factor
10. The term
w a
m0
is replaced by
w
1
2a m0 in Eq. (B.12) is replaced by 4a m0 .
w
in Eq. (B.13) is replaced by 4 2 a1 m .
2 2 a m0
0
w a2 a
m0 .
11. The term

12. The phrase following Eq. (B.13) where we have. . . and w = w is replaced by where we
wa
have chosen w , w and w such that w = w a2 = 12 and a = 12 .
13. Next to the above phrase and Eq. (B.7) the sentence This solution exists for k = 0. is
inserted.
In conclusion, the errors are originated from missing zero mode equations such as Eq. (1).
This is pointed out by Neuberger in Ref. [2]. Taking into account the missed equations correctly,
we reach the correct conclusion that there is a zero mode solution for k = 0, not for k = 0, which
agrees with the result of Ref. [2]. Therefore the main result of Ref. [1] does not change, and thus
the hermitian vortex fermion model can be used to construct a four-dimensional lattice chiral
gauge theory.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Prof. Tamiaki Yoneya for valuable discussions, and Prof.
Kazuo Fujikawa and Prof. Satoshi Iso for useful comments. He also would like to thank the author of Ref. [2], Prof. Herbert Neuberger, for giving him the valuable opportunity to notice the
errors and reconsider the work. This work is supported in part by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research No. 18740127 from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology.
References
[1] K. Nagao, Nucl. Phys. B 636 (2002) 264, hep-lat/0112030.
[2] H. Neuberger, hep-lat/0303009.

Erratum
Erratum to: Light-cone sum rules in soft-collinear

effective theory
[Nucl. Phys. B 733 (2006) 130]
Fulvia De Fazio a , Thorsten Feldmann b , Tobias Hurth c,d,,1
a Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Bari, Italy
b Fachbereich Physik, Universitt Siegen, D-57068 Siegen, Germany
c CERN, Department of Physics, Theory Division, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland
d SLAC, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94309, USA
Received 27 March 2008

There is a calculational error in formula (39) concerning one of the singly logarithmic terms.
The corrected result can be found in [1], formula (2.26).
With that, the results in Section 3.4 can be extended, leading now to a perfect cancellation of
scale dependence between hard vertex corrections, hard-collinear diagrams in SCET and the evolution of B () derived in [2] (within the WandzuraWiczek approximation), as it is explicitly
shown in Chapter 2.2.1 of [1]. An update of the numerical analysis can also be found in [1].
References
[1] F. De Fazio, T. Feldmann, T. Hurth, JHEP 0802 (2008) 031, arXiv: 0711.3999 [hep-ph].
[2] G. Bell, T. Feldmann, arXiv: 0802.2221 [hep-ph].
DOI of original article: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2005.09.047.

* Corresponding author at: CERN, Department of Physics, Theory Division, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland.
E-mail address: tobias.hurth@cern.ch (T. Hurth).

1 Heisenberg Fellow.
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.022

Erratum
Erratum to: A new chiral two-matrix theory for Dirac

spectra with imaginary chemical potential
[Nucl. Phys. B 766 (2007) 3467]
G. Akemann a , P.H. Damgaard b, , J.C. Osborn c , K. Splittorff b
a Department of Mathematical Sciences, Brunel University West London, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, United Kingdom
b The Niels Bohr Institute, Blegdamsvej 17, DK-2100 Copenhagen , Denmark
c Physics Department & Center for Computational Science, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, USA
Received 14 April 2008

Abstract
We correct an algebraic error in the partially quenched correlation functions.
2008 Published by Elsevier B.V.
A term which appears in the microscopic limit of the partially quenched correlation functions
was missed in [1]. The lower right-hand element of the 33 determinant in Eqs. (3.46), (3.48),
2
+1 (y)
should be instead
(3.49) and (3.53) which reads e /2 yJ
2 /2
G (y,
),
(0.1)
where we have introduced the notation

= yJ
)
+1 (y)
+ 2 J (y).
G (y,
The general correlation function for N1 = 2 and N2 = 0 flavors, Eq. (3.56), becomes
DOI of original article: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.12.016.

E-mail address: phdamg@nbi.dk (P.H. Damgaard).

0550-3213/$ see front matter 2008 Published by Elsevier B.V.
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.04.012
(0.2)
G. Akemann et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 406407
407
Fig. 1. The partially quenched two point function compared to the unquenched two point function. Here plotted as a
u = 3 and m
d = 5. The left-hand
function of the D1 eigenvalue keeping the D2 eigenvalue fixed at y = 4 and setting m
figure is for = 0.4 and the right-hand figure is for = 1.0. Notice the change of scale on the vertical axis.

(2)
n , {y}
(n,k) {x}
k
=
n
xi
k
yj det
J (i m
u)
d)
J (i m
im
u J+1 (i m
u)
im
d J+1 (i m
d)
i=1 j =1

I 0 (x , i m
u ) J (i m
u) im
u J+1 (i m
u )

i
0 1
d ) J (i m
d ) im
d J+1 (i m
d )
I (xi1 , i m
0
I (xi1 , xi2 ) J (xi2 )
xi2 J+1 (xi2 )
+

I (yj1 , i m
u ) J (i m
u) im
u J+1 (i m
u)
+

d ) J (i m
d ) im
d J+1 (i m
d)
I (yj1 , i m
+
I (yj1 , xi2 ) J (xi2 )
xi2 J+1 (xi2 )
nk
0

I (xi1 , i m
u)
J (i m
u)
im
u J+1 (i m
u )
0

I (xi1 , i m
)
J
(i
m
)
i
m
J
(i
m
)
d
d
d +1
d

2
2
I (x , y ) e /2 J (y ) e /2 G (y , )

i1 j2
j2
j2
.
+
I (yj1 , i m
u)
J (i m
u)
im
u J+1 (i m
u )
+
I (yj1 , i m
d)
J (i m
d)
im
d J+1 (i m
d )

I 0 (y , y ) e2 /2 J (y ) e2 /2 G (y , )
j1 j2
j2
j2
(0.3)
The new term does not alter the limits used as cross checks. The mistake was found after
comparison with the individual eigenvalue distributions derived in [2].
Since the new term is suppressed by 2 it only affects the plots presented in [1] slightly, cf.
the corrected Fig. 1.
The analytic prediction for the partially quenched two point function has been used to extract
the pion decay constant from lattice simulations in [3]. In the simulation the value of was
chosen to be 0.17 and for this value of the additional term is completely negligible in their data
analysis.
In the non-chiral Two-Matrix Problem also presented in [1] a corresponding new term must be
included. Again this only affects the partially quenched results (4.36), (4.38) and (4.39), where
2
2
should be replaced by e (sin(y)
+ 2 2 cos(y)).
e sin(y)
References
[1] G. Akemann, P.H. Damgaard, J.C. Osborn, K. Splittorff, Nucl. Phys. B 766 (2007) 34, hep-th/0609059.
[2] G. Akemann, P.H. Damgaard, JHEP 0803 (2008) 073, arXiv: 0803.1171 [hep-th].
[3] T. DeGrand, S. Schaefer, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 094509, arXiv: 0708.1731 [hep-lat].
NUCLEAR PHYSICS B
Journal devoted to the experimental and theoretical study of the fundamental
constituents of matter and their interactions
Editorial Board
Supervisory Editors: G. ALTARELLI, Geneva, Switzerland; W. BARTEL, Hamburg, Germany; C. BECCHI, Genova,
Italy; R.H. DIJKGRAAF, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; D. KUTASOV, Chicago, IL, USA; L. MAIANI, Rome, Italy;
H. MURAYAMA, Berkeley, CA, USA; T. NAKADA, Geneva, Switzerland; N. NEKRASOV, Bures-sur-Yvette, France;
H. OOGURI, CalTech, Pasadena, CA, USA; H. SALEUR, USC, Los Angeles, CA, USA; A. SCHWIMMER, Rehovot,
Israel
Associate Editors for Particle Physics: S.J. Brodsky, SLAC; M. Dine, UC, Santa Cruz; G. Dvali, New York; G.W.
Gibbons, Cambridge, UK; D. Gross, St. Barbara; S.S. Gubser, Princeton; L. Ibanez, Madrid; R.L. Jaffe, MIT; K. Kajantie,
Helsinki; M. Luescher, CERN; E. Rabinovici, Jerusalem; L. Randall, Princeton; A. Sen, Bombay; G. Steigman, Ohio
State; G. t Hooft, Utrecht; Y. Totsuka, KEK; P. van Baal, Leiden; S. Weinberg, Texas; J. Zinn-Justin, Saclay
Associate Editors for Field Theory and Statistical Systems: B. Duplantier, Saclay; A.W.W. Ludwig, Santa Barbara;
S. Lukyanov, Rutgers, Piscataway; T. Miwa, Kyoto; G. Mussardo, Trieste; M. Oshikawa, Tokyo; G. Parisi, Frascati;
A.M. Polyakov, Princeton; R. Sasaki, Kyoto; M. Zirnbauer, Cologne
Aims and Scope
Nuclear Physics B focuses on the domain of high energy physics and quantum field theory, and includes three main sections, i.e. particle physics, field theory and statistical systems and physical mathematics. The emphasis is on original
research papers. Conference Proceedings on the topics covered by Nuclear Physics B are published in the (separately
available) journal Nuclear Physics B-Proceedings Supplements.
Abstracted/Indexed in:
Chemical Abstracts/Current Contents: Physical, Chemical & Earth Sciences. Also covered in the abstract and citation
database SCOPUS . Full text available on ScienceDirect .
Subscription Information 2008
Volumes 788805 are scheduled for publication in 54 issues. Publication frequency: three times a month. Subscription
prices are available upon request from the Publisher or from the Regional Sales Office nearest you or from this journals
website (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/nuclphysb). A combined subscription to Nuclear Physics A ISSN 0375-9474
(volumes 798814), Nuclear Physics B ISSN 0550-3213 (volumes 788805) and Nuclear Physics B Proceedings Supplements ISSN 0920-5632 (volumes 174185) is available at a reduced rate. Subscriptions are accepted on a prepaid
basis only and are entered on a calendar year basis. Issues are sent by standard mail (surface within Europe, air delivery
outside Europe). Priority rates are available upon request. Claims for missing issues should be made within six months
of the date of dispatch.
Orders, claims, and journal enquiries: please contact the Customer Service Department at the Regional Sales Office
nearest you:
Orlando: Elsevier, Customer Service Department, 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL 32887-4800, USA; phone: (+1)
(877) 8397126 [toll free number for US customers], or (+1) (407) 3454020 [customers outside US]; fax: (+1) (407)
3631354; e-mail: usjcs@elsevier.com
Amsterdam: Elsevier, Customer Service Department, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands; phone:
(+31) (20) 4853757; fax: (+31) (20) 4853432; e-mail: nlinfo-f@elsevier.com
Tokyo: Elsevier, Customer Service Department, 4F Higashi-Azabu, 1-Chome Bldg, 1-9-15 Higashi-Azabu, Minato-ku,
Tokyo 106-0044, Japan; phone: (+81) (3) 5561 5037; fax: (+81) (3) 5561 5047; e-mail: jp.info@elsevier.com
Singapore: Elsevier, Customer Service Department, 3 Killiney Road, #08-01 Winsland House I, Singapore 239519;
phone: (+65) 63490222; fax: (+65) 67331510; e-mail: asiainfo@elsevier.com
Advertising information
Europe, USA, Canada and ROW: Advertising orders and enquiries can be sent to: Miss Katrina Barton, phone: (+44)
(0) 20 7611 4117; fax: (+44) (0) 20 7611 4463; e-mail: commercialsales@elsevier.com.
South America: Advertising orders and enquiries can be sent to: Mr Tino DeCarlo, The Advertising Department,
Elsevier Inc., 360 Park Avenue South, New York, NY 10010-1710, USA; phone: (+1) (212) 633 3815; fax: (+1) (212)
633 3820; e-mail: t.decarlo@elsevier.com.
US mailing notice Nuclear Physics B (ISSN 0550-3213) is published weekly by Elsevier B.V., P.O. Box 211, 1000
AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The annual institutional subscription price in the USA is US$ 13612 (valid in North,
Central and South America), including air speed delivery. Periodical postage paid at Rahway NJ and additional mailing
offices. USA Postmaster: Send change of address: Nuclear Physics B, Elsevier, 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL
32887-4800. Airfreight and mailing in the USA by Mercury International Limited, 365, Blair Road, Avenel, NJ 07001.
Nuclear Physics B 800 [PM] (2008) 409449

The BulloughDodd model coupled to matter fields

P.E.G. Assis 1 , L.A. Ferreira
Instituto de Fsica de So Carlos, IFSC/USP, Universidade de So Paulo, Caixa Postal 369, CEP 13560-970,
So Carlos-SP, Brazil
Received 13 August 2007; accepted 8 January 2008
Available online 15 January 2008
Abstract
The BulloughDodd model is an important two-dimensional integrable field theory which finds applications in physics and geometry. We consider a conformally invariant extension of it, and study its integrability
(2)
properties using a zero curvature condition based on the twisted KacMoody algebra A2 . The one- and
two-soliton solutions as well as the breathers are constructed explicitly. We also consider integrable extensions of the BulloughDodd model by the introduction of spinor (matter) fields. The resulting theories are
conformally invariant and present local internal symmetries. All the one-soliton solutions, for two examples of those models, are constructed using a hybrid of the dressing and Hirota methods. One model is of
particular interest because it presents a confinement mechanism for a given conserved charge inside the
solitons.
PACS: 02.20.Tw; 05.45.Yv; 04.20.Jb; 11.10.Kk; 11.10.Lm
Keywords: Solitons; Integrable field theories; Integrable hierarchies
1. Introduction
Solitons play a role in many non-perturbative aspects of field theories. They appear as classical
solutions of the equations of motion of some special non-linear theories. In general, their masses
and interaction strengths are inversely related to the coupling constant for the original fields of
the theory. Therefore, they are weakly interacting and easy to excite at the strong coupling limit,
and so are natural candidates to describe the normal modes of the theory in that regime. In the
E-mail address: laf@ifsc.usp.br (L.A. Ferreira).

1 Present address: Centre for Mathematical Science, City University, Northampton Square, London EC1V OHB, UK.
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.01.004
410
P.E.G. Assis, L.A. Ferreira / Nuclear Physics B 800 [PM] (2008) 409449
particular case of some supersymmetric gauge theories the solitons (dyons) play a crucial role in
electromagnetic duality conjectures involving the weak and strong coupling regimes [1].
Two-dimensional integrable field theories possessing soliton solutions constitute, besides their
intrinsic beauty, a laboratory to test ideas and develop exact methods on non-perturbative aspects
of physical theories. In addition, two-dimensional models have direct applications in many areas
of physics and non-linear sciences, like condensed matter, non-linear optics, etc. Classical soliton
theory in two dimensions is quite well developed [2]. Practically all soliton solutions appear in
models that admit a representation of their equations of motion in terms of the so-called zero
curvature condition or LaxZakharovShabat equation [3], with the flat connections living on
KacMoody algebras [4]. That equation leads to exact methods for constructing solutions and
infinite number of conserved charges. An important point to emphasize is that the symmetries
responsible for the appearance of solitons are symmetries of the zero curvature equation, and
not necessarily of the equations of motions or of the Lagrangean. For that reason the conserved
charges are not of the Noether type.
In this paper we consider special integrable extensions of the BulloughDodd model [5]. That
is a relativistic invariant theory in two dimensions involving just one scalar field, which first
appeared in the literature in the context of hyperbolic surfaces in R3 [6]. It is an integrable filed
theory with solitons and some of their properties was considered by Zhiber and Shabat [7] and
Mikhailov [8]. The integrable properties follow from the fact that the BulloughDodd equation
admits a zero curvature representation with flat connections taking values on the twisted affine
(2)
KacMoody algebra A2 , but with vanishing central term. The first extension we consider is
on the lines of [911], and which we call the conformal BulloughDodd model. It involves
the addition of two extra fields which makes the theory conformally invariant, and imposes the
zero curvature condition to live on the algebra A(2)
2 , but with non-trivial central term. That fact
plays a crucial role in the integrability properties of the model. The representation theory of
KacMoody algebras changes drastically when the central term is not zero. It admits highest
weight state representations which are an important tool in the construction of exact solutions.
We then construct the one and two soliton solutions of the BulloughDodd using a hybrid of the
dressing method [12] and the Hirota method [13] as proposed in [14]. The physically interesting
solitons exist when the BulloughDood scalar field is taken to be complex. We also discuss the
construction of complex breather solutions.
The second extension of the BulloughDood model that we consider involves the addition of
spinor (matter) fields following the ideas of [15]. That is achieved by considering the principal
(2)
(integer) gradation of the algebra A2 [4]. The flat connection corresponding to the (conformal)
BulloughDodd model has components in the eigensubspaces of grades 0 and 1. We extend
that connection by allowing it to have components with grades varying from l to l with l being a
positive integer. The equations of motion of the model are obtained by imposing the connections
to satisfy the zero curvature condition. Therefore, the models are integrable by construction.
As shown in [15], the fields appearing in the non-zero grade components of the connections
transform as two-dimensional Dirac spinors, and they couple to exponentials of the Bullough
Dodd scalar field. The components of the connection with grades l are taken to be constant,
and they play a crucial role in determining the physical properties of the resulting model. We
consider two models of that type corresponding to the choices l = 3 and l = 6. The models with
l = 2, 4, 5 do not seem to possess solitons. Again using a hybrid of the dressing and Hirota
methods we construct all the one-soliton solutions for those two models.
The model corresponding to l = 6 however is analyzed in much more detail because of its
interesting physical properties. Besides, the three scalar fields of the conformal BulloughDood
411
model, it possesses seven Dirac spinor fields. The equations of motion for them are Dirac equations with interaction terms involving the product of exponentials of the scalar fields with bilinear
terms in the spinors. For that reason the model does not possesses a Lagrangean which is local in
those fields. The theory however, is conformally invariant and possesses a local UL (1) UR (1)
chiral (gauge) symmetry group. Although we cannot use the Noether theorem, due to the lack
of Lagrangean, there exist two conserved currents corresponding to that symmetry group. In addition, the conservation of those currents is equivalent to the existence of two chiral currents,
depending on only one light cone variable each. A remarkable property of that model is that all
the one-soliton solutions belong to a submodel where those two chiral currents vanish. On that
submodel there exists a conserved current, depending only on the spinor fields, which is exactly
equal to the topological current involving the BulloughDodd scalar field. Such an equivalence
of matter and topological currents leads to a confinement of the corresponding matter charge
inside the solitons. As explained in [15] that confinement mechanism is special to some Toda
models coupled to matter fields, and have been studied in some interesting cases [14,16,17]. In
particular, in [16] it was shown that it provides a very interesting way of understanding the quantum equivalence between the sine-Gordon and Tirring models. From the algebraic construction
of [15], the model for l = 6 that we discuss in this paper stands for the BulloughDodd model in
the same way as the model considered in [16] stands for the sine-Gordon. We then hope that our
work may help understanding if there exists a theory which would be equivalent to the Bullough
Dodd model, in such way that the elementary excitations of its fields would correspond to the
BulloughDodd solitons.
Our paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we introduce the conformal BulloughDodd
model, discuss its integrability properties and construct its one and two soliton solutions as well
as the breathers. The dressing transformation method is discussed in Section 2.1. The construction of the models involving the matter (spinor) fields through the extension of the zero curvature
connections is discussed in Section 3, as well as the symmetries of the resulting theories. The
model corresponding to l = 6 is described in Section 4. The symmetries and the equivalence
of the matter and topological currents is discussed in Section 4.1. The method for constructing
the soliton solutions for such model is described in Section 4.2, and the particular one-soliton
solutions are given in Sections 4.3 and 4.4. The model corresponding to l = 3 is described in
Section 5 as well as its soliton solutions. Some basic facts about the twisted KacMoody alge(2)
bra A2 is given in Appendix A. The coefficients for the Hirotas tau functions corresponding to
the one-soliton of Section 4.3.2 is given explicitly in Appendix B, and some simplifications of it
in Appendix C.
2. The conformal BulloughDodd model
The BulloughDodd model is a (1 + 1)-dimensional relativistic field theory described by the
equation
2 = e + e2 ,
(2.1)
where 2 = c12 t2 x2 . Together with the sine-Gordon model, it is one of the few relativistic invariant integrable theories with just one scalar field. The integrability properties of such
theory were first discovered by Bullough and Dodd [5] who showed the existence of non-trivial
conservation laws. Zhiber and Shabat [7] found an infinite LieBacklund group of transformations for (2.1), and Mikhailov [8] studied it in the context of the Toda models using inverse
412
scattering method. However, the first time Eq. (2.1) appeared in the literature was on a paper by
Tzitzeica [6] in the context of hyperbolic surfaces in R3 . See also [18,19] for more details.
Here we consider an extension of the BulloughDodd model (2.1) on the lines of [911],
which we call the conformal BulloughDodd model, and which is defined by the equations of
motion2

2 = e e e2 ,
2 = 0,
1
2 = e2+
2
(2.2)
and corresponding Lagrangean

1
1 2+
+
L = + + 3 e
+ e
.
2
2
(2.3)
The introduction of the field renders the theory conformally invariant. Indeed, introducing the
light cone coordinates
x
ct x
,
2
1
= t x ,
c
+ = 2 =
1 2
x2
c2 t
(2.4)
one can check that (2.2) and (2.3) are invariant under the conformal transformations x
f (x ) if the field is a scalar under the conformal group and if e f+ f e . The conformal weights of are arbitrary [911].
The field is just an expectant in the sense that it does not really influence the dynamics of
and . However, it plays a crucial role in the integrability properties of the model. As we explain
below, the construction of exact solutions under the dressing method makes use of highest weight
representations of the KacMoody algebra, and that requires the existence of a non-trivial central
extension, and the consequent introduction the extra field .
The relevant algebra for the integrability properties of the BulloughDodd model (2.1) and its
(2)
conformal extension (2.2) is the twisted affine KacMoody algebra A2 [4]. The commutation
relations and a brief description of its properties are given in Appendix A. What makes the
theories (2.1) and (2.2) integrable is the fact that they admit a representation of their equations of
motion in terms of a zero curvature condition or the LaxZakharovShabat equation
+ A A+ + [A+ , A ] = 0,
(2.5)
where are derivatives w.r.t. the light cone coordinates defined in (2.4). For the conformal
BulloughDodd model (2.2) the potentials are given by

2 + 0
1/2
1
T3 + e2+ L2 ,
A+ = B+ B =
e
2

1
A = BB + = T30 + Q + C + ,
(2.6)
2 A coupling constant , mass parameter m, and relative coefficients for the exponential terms can be introduced
into the equations by the redefinitions ln , x mx , in such way that the equation for would read
2
3 e2 ).
2 = m
e (e
413
where
B = eT3 +Q+C
0
and
(2.7)
2 0
1/2
+ =
T + L2 ,
2 +
2 0
1/2
=
T + L2 .
2
(2.8)
1/2
The operators T30 , T0 , L2 , Q, and C are generators of the twisted affine KacMoody alge(2)
A2
(see Appendix A). Q is the grading operator defined in (A.3), defining the so-called
bra
(2)
principal gradation of A2 (see (A.2) and (A.5)). Notice that B is an element of the zero grade
subgroup, i.e., the one obtained by exponentiating the zero grade subalgebra G0 (see (A.2)
and (A.5)). The elements + and have grades +1 and 1 respectively, and satisfy
1
[+ , ] = C.
(2.9)
2
One can check that by replacing (2.6) into (2.5) all the non-zero grade components vanish automatically, and the zero grade component leads to the equation

+ BB 1 = , B+ B 1 .
(2.10)
The three components of (2.10), in the direction of T30 , Q and C, are the equations for the
fields , , and respectively, given in (2.2).
The zero curvature representation for the usual BulloughDodd model (2.1) is obtained
(2)
from (2.6) by setting = 0 and working with a representation of the algebra A2 where C = 0.
Then (2.10) will have just one component in the direction of T30 which corresponds to (2.1). The
algebra A(2)
2 with C = 0, a so-called loop algebra, admits finite matrix representations depending
upon a complex parameter (the so-called spectral parameter).
Notice that, if one allows the field to be complex, i.e., = R + iI , Eqs. (2.1) and (2.2)
are invariant under the discrete transformations
R R ,
I I + 2n
(2.11)
with n being an integer. Therefore, the theories have a degenerate vacua which allow the existence
of non-trivial topological charges defined by

Qtop =
dx j 0 =

1
I (x = ) I (x = ) ,
2
(2.12)
where
j =
1 I
2
x
(2.13)
with being antisymmetric, 01 = 1, x 0 = ct, and x 1 = x.

2.1. The dressing method and the solitons solutions
The zero curvature (2.5) is invariant under gauge transformations of the form: A
gA g 1 gg 1 . The dressing transformations [12] are special types of gauge transformations
414
that constitute maps among the solutions of (2.5) or equivalently (2.2). We shall use a vacuum
solution as the seed for the method, and construct the corresponding orbit of solutions under the
dressing transformation group. The vacuum solution of (2.2) we take is
1
vac = x+ x .
2
The zero curvature potentials evaluated on such solution can be written as
vac = 0,
vac = 0,
(2.14)
1
Avac
= vac vac
(2.15)
vac = ex+ + ex
(2.16)
with
with defined in (2.8). We now take a constant group element h such that there exists the
Gauss type decomposition
1
= G G0 G+ ,
vac hvac
(2.17)
(2)
where G , G0 and G+ are groups elements obtained by exponentiating the generators of A2

with negative, zero and positive grades respectively, of the principal gradation (A.2) defined by Q
given in (A.3). We introduce the element
1
h G1
0 G vac h = G+ vac
(2.18)
and the transformed potentials

Ah h h1 .
(2.19)
The fact that Ah is of the pure gauge form guarantees that it is a solution of the zero curvature
condition (2.5). In addition, the fact that h can be written in two different ways in terms of
vac , guarantees that Ah has the same grading structure as the potentials (2.6). Indeed, (2.18)
and (2.19) imply that
1
1
Ah = G+ Avac
G+ G+ G+

1 1 vac 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
G0 G
= G0 G A G0 G
G1
.
0 G
(2.20)
(2.21)
Eq. (2.20) implies that Ah has components of grades greater or equal than those of Avac
. On the
h
other hand, (2.21) implies that A has components of grades smaller or equal than those of Avac
.
Since (2.17) and (2.18) guarantee that both relations hold true it follows that Ah has the same
h
grade components as Avac
, and so as the potentials (2.6). By construction we have A given
explicitly in terms of the spacetime coordinates x . Therefore by equating it to (2.6) we get the
solutions for the fields of the model, associated to the choice h of the constant group element,
i.e., a point on the orbit of solutions of the vacuum (2.14). In order to get the explicit solution we
proceed as follows. From (2.15) and (2.21) we have that
1
1
1
1 1
Ah = G1
0 G0 G0 G G G0 + 2 x+ C + G0 G G G0
and so its zero grade part is
Ah

0
1 x x C 1

1
1
2 + G
= G1
G0 e 2 x+ x C .
0 G0 + 2 x+ C = e
0
(2.22)
(2.23)
415
Comparing (2.23) with the zero grade part of A in (2.6), we get that
B = e 2 x+ x C G1
0
1
(2.24)
and so using (2.7), we have

1
G0 = eT3 (+ 2 x+ x )C .
0
(2.25)
Notice that, from the commutation relations of Appendix A, the operator D, and so Q, is never
produced by the commutator of any pair of generators of the algebra. Therefore, if one starts with
a vacuum solution with = 0, the dressing method will never produce a solution with
= 0.
Therefore, does not appear in (2.25).
In order to obtain the explicit expression for the solutions for the fields we make use of highest
(2)
weight representations of A2 and introduce the Hirotas tau functions as the expectation value
of (2.17), i.e.,
1
| = |G0 |,
|vac hvac
(2.26)
where in the second equality we have used the fact that the highest weight state | satisfies (A.6),
and so G+ | = |, and |G = |. We shall use two of such representations and introduce
two tau functions. First 0 associated to the choice | |0 , and 1 associated to the choice
| |1 |1 , where |0 and |1 are defined in (A.7). Then, from (2.25), (2.26) and (A.7),
we have that
1
0 = e2(+ 2 x+ x ) ,
1 = e2(+ 2 x+ x )
(2.27)
or equivalently
= ln
0
,
1
1
1
= ln 0 x+ x .
2
2
(2.28)
Replacing into the equations of motion (2.2) (with = 0) we get the Hirotas equations
0 + 0 + 0 0 = 12 02 ,
1 + 1 + 1 1 = 0 1 12 .
(2.29)
The solutions on the orbit of the vacuum (2.14) we are interested in, are those obtained by the socalled solitonic specialization procedure [20]. We take the constant group element h to a product
of exponentials of eigenvectors of the operators defined in (2.8), i.e.,
h=
eVj ,
[ , Vj ] = j() Vj .
(2.30)
j =1
Then, using (2.16), one gets

1
= |vac hvac
| = |
ee
Vj
(2.31)
j =1
with j = j(+) x+ j() x . The integer N defines the N -soliton sector of the solution. For
N = 1 we get a solution traveling with constant velocity. If | belongs to an integrable representation [4], the operators Vj are nilpotent and the exponentials eVj truncate at some finite order.
That explains the truncation of the Hirotas tau functions in the Hirotas method [13].
416
The eigenvectors of with non-zero eigenvalues are

V () (z) =
zn Vn()
(2.32)
n=
with
1
()
V6n = T3n n,0 C,
3

2 n
n+1/2
()
1 3
T 2L2
,
V6n+1 =
3
2 +
n+1/2
()
= 2 2L1 ,
V6n+2
n+1/2
()
V6n+3 = 3 2L0
,
n+1/2
()
V6n+4 = 4 2L1
,

3
2 n+1
n+1/2
()
T 2L2
,
V6n+5 = 5
3
2
where 6 = 1. One can check that
()

, Vn() = 1 3Vn1
and so

, V () (z) = 3(z)1 V () (z).
(2.33)
(2.34)
(2.35)
Therefore the eigenvalues depend upon the product of a complex parameter z and of a sixth
root of 1. However, there is no degeneracy because of the operator equality among degenerate
eigenvectors, i.e., V () (z) = V ( ) (z 1 ), with 6 = 1.
Notice that the dependence of the eigenvalues on the free parameter z comes from a one
parameter group acting on the eigenvectors. Indeed, from (2.34) one has the eigenvalue equation

()
,
(2.36)
Vn
Vn() .
= 1 3
n=
n=
()
Vn
are eigenvectors of the grading operator, i.e., [Q, ] = , and

But since and
()
()
[Q, Vn ] = nVn , we have that

()
ln zQ
()
Vn
V (z) = e
(2.37)
eln zQ
n=
and so, conjugating (2.36) with e ln zQ , one gets (2.35).

The final evaluation of the solutions requires the calculation of the expectation values of products of the operators Vj in the highest weight states | (see (2.31)). In many cases that may
prove to be a laborious task. One can then use a hybrid method (see [14] for details) in which one
uses the algebraic dressing method to obtain the relation among the tau functions and the fields
(where the Hirotas method is helpless), and then apply the Hirotas method on the equations for
417
the tau functions, with the ansatz provided by the relation (2.31), i.e.,
= 1 +
j ej
j =1
i +j
i,j
e
+
(2.38)
j i=1
|V V |, etc. We shall use such hybrid procedure in this paper, to

with j = |Vj |, i,j
i j
, by the Hirotas method through a computer algorithm. Since
determine the coefficients j , i,j
the normalization of the eigenvectors Vj are not fixed by the above procedure, the coefficients
s will be determined up to some rescaling constants.
2.2. One-soliton solution

The solutions in the one-soliton sector is obtained by taking the constant group element, in()
troduced in (2.17), as h = eV (z ) , with V () (z ) given in (2.32). Then solving (2.29) with the
ansatz (2.38) for N = 1, one gets the solution
0 = 1 4ae + a 2 e2 ,
2

1 = 1 + ae
with
(2.39)
(z z )

3
x
v
=
cos (x vt) + i sin ct x ,
= 3 zx+
2
z
c
1 vc2
(2.40)
where we have parametrized z as z = e+i , and defined

v = c tanh .
and define + + i R + iI with
We now write a

3 cos
3 sin
v
(x vt) + ,
I =
ct x + .
R =
2
2
c
1 vc2
1 vc2
(2.41)
= e+i
Then, using (2.28) and (2.39) one gets = R + iI with

1
(1 2 cosh R cos I )
R = ln 1 + 3
,
2
(cosh R + cos I )2

3 sinh R sin I
.
I = ArcTan
(cosh R + cos I )2 3(1 + cosh R cos I )
(2.42)
(2.43)
We have the following particular types of solutions (we shall set v = 0 since it can be recovered by a Lorentz boost):
(1) There are two types of real solutions (I = 0), but both singular:
(a) Take cos = 1, = 0, = 0 and then

1
(1 2 cosh( 3x))
R = ln 1 + 3
2
(cosh( 3x) + 1)2
and so R 0 for x , and R for x = ArcCosh(2)/ 3.
(2.44)
418
Fig. 1. Plots of the real and imaginary parts of against x, for the one-soliton solution (2.46), with (, ) = (1, /10),
(on the left), and (, ) = (1, 2/5) (on the right). The real part of corresponds to the curve that goes to zero as
x .
(b) Take sin = 1, = 0, = 0 and so

1
(1 2 cos( 3ct))
R = ln 1 + 3
2
(1 + cos( 3ct))2
(2.45)
which is singular whenever t = (2n + 1)/(c 3 ).

(2) The regular static one-soliton solution is obtained when cos = = 1, = 0,
= 0, ,
and then

1
(1 2 cosh( 3x) cos )
,
R = ln 1 + 3
2
(cosh( 3x) + cos )2

3 sinh( 3x) sin
I = ArcTan
(2.46)
.
(cosh( 3x) + cos )2 3(1 + cosh( 3x) cos )

One can check that, as x varies from to , I varies continuously from to for
sin < 0, and from to for sin > 0. Therefore, the topological charge (2.12) is
given by
Qtop = sign( sin ).
(2.47)
We give in Fig. 1 the plots of the one-soliton solution (2.46) for two values of the parameters and .

(3) Denote sin , and set = = 0 to get R = 3(1 2 )x and I = 3ct . That is
a solution which oscillates among the possible
forms of the one-soliton given in (2.46), and
develops a singularity whenever t = n/( 3c). At those values of time the topological
charge (2.12) flips sign.
2.3. Two-soliton solution
( )
( )
The solutions on the two-soliton sector are obtained by taking h = eV 1 (z1 ) eV 2 (z2 ) , with
(
V i ) (zi ) given in (2.32). Then solving (2.29) with the ansatz (2.38) for N = 2, one gets the
solution (zi = i zi )
0 = 1 4a1 e1 4a2 e2 + a12 e21 + a22 e22
+ 8a1 a2
4a12 a2
2z14 z12 z22 + 2z24

(z1 + z2 )2 (z12 + z1 z2 + z22 )
(z1 z2 )2 (z12 z1 z2 + z22 )
(z1 + z2 )2 (z12 + z1 z2 + z22 )
e1 +2
e21 +2
4a1 a22
+ a12 a22
(z1 z2 )2 (z12 z1 z2 + z22 )

(z1 + z2 )2 (z12 + z1 z2 + z22 )
(z1 z2 )4 (z12 z1 z2 + z22 )2

(z1 + z2 )4 (z12 + z1 z2 + z22 )2
419
e1 +22
e21 +22 ,
1 = 1 + 2a1 e1 + 2a2 e2 + a12 e21 + a22 e22

+ 4a1 a2
+ 2a12 a2
+ 2a1 a22
+ a12 a22
z14 + 4z12 z22 + z24

(z1 + z2 )2 (z12 + z1 z2 + z22 )
(z1 z2 )2 (z12 z1 z2 + z22 )
(z1 + z2 )2 (z12 + z1 z2 + z22 )
(z1 z2 )2 (z12 z1 z2 + z22 )
(z1 + z2 )2 (z12 + z1 z2 + z22 )
(z1 z2 )4 (z12 z1 z2 + z22 )2

(z1 + z2 )4 (z12 + z1 z2 + z22 )2
e1 +2
e21 +2
e1 +22
e21 +22 ,
where, as before,

x
i = 3 zi x+
zi

3
vi
cos i (x vi t) + i sin i ct x
=
c
vi2
1 c2
(2.48)
(2.49)
and we have parametrized zi = ei +ii , and defined vi = c tanh i .

Solutions describing the scattering of two one-solitons can be obtained from (2.48) by setting
the parameters ai and zi , i = 1, 2, to values corresponding to the ones chosen for the one-soliton
solutions. For instance, to get the scattering of two regular one-solitons given in (2.46) one has
to take zi = ei +ii and ai = eii , with cos i = 1,
= 0, , and i setting their velocities by
vi = c tanh i . However, we do not explore in this paper such solutions further.
2.4. Breathers
Let us now consider the two-soliton solution (2.48) for the case where 1 = 2 = 0, 1 =
2 , and a2 = a1 a, with

(z1 + z2 )2 (z12 + z1 z2 + z22 )
2 cos 2 + 1
a=
(2.50)
= | cotan |
.
2 cos 2 1
(z1 z2 )2 (z12 z1 z2 + z22 )
Using (2.28) one then gets that
= ln
cosh 2R i8a cosh R sin I + a 2 cos 2I b

cosh 2R + i4a cosh R sin I + a 2 cos 2I c
(2.51)
with
R =
3 cos( )x,
I =
3 sin( )ct
(2.52)
420
and
b=
4 cos 4 1
c=
cos 4 + 2
(2.53)
.
sin (2 cos 2 1)
sin (2 cos 2 1)
Therefore, if a is pure imaginary we have that the argument of the logarithm in (2.51) is real,
but it is either positive or negative. Therefore, the solution for is not regular since it has an
imaginary part that jumps from 0 to .
On the other hand, if a is real we have that the solution is complex, and writing = R + iI ,
we have
,
1 [cosh 2R + a 2 cos 2I b]2 + [8a cosh R sin I ]2

,
ln
2 [cosh 2R + a 2 cos 2I c]2 + [4a cosh R sin I ]2
X
I = ArcTan
Y
R =
with

X = 4a cosh R sin I 2c + b 3 cosh 2R + a 2 cos 2I ,
Y = 32a 2 cosh2 R sin2 I

+ cosh 2R + a 2 cos 2I b cosh 2R + a 2 cos 2I c .
(2.54)
Notice that R 0 and tan I 0, as x . It is a localized solution that oscillates in

time, and so it is like a breather, however with a structure much more complex than that of the
sine-Gordon breather.
3. The coupling to matter fields
We now consider a generalization of the conformal BulloughDood model (2.2), on the lines
of [1416], by the introduction of extra fields. That is done by enlarging the zero curvature
potentials (2.6) with components having grades greater than 1 and smaller than 1. We then
introduce
A+ = B(E+l + F+ )B 1 ,
A = BB 1 + El + F ,
(3.1)
where B is the same group element as in (2.7), i.e., the subgroup obtained by exponentiating
the subalgebra of grade zero w.r.t. to the grading operator Q defined in (A.3). El are constant
(2)
elements of the algebra A2 with grades l, and F have components with grades varying from
1 to (l 1), i.e.,
F =
l1
Fm ,

Q, Fm = mFm .
(3.2)
m=1
The extra fields are contained in the Fm , and their explicit expression is given in the examples
we discuss below.
The equations of motion of the theory is obtained by imposing that the potentials A in (3.1),
satisfy the zero curvature condition (2.5). Replacing (3.1) into (2.5) and splitting it into their
grading components one gets the equations of motion
l1

n

F , BF+n B 1 ,
+ BB 1 = El , BEl B 1 +
n=1
(3.3)

lm1

F+n+m , B 1 Fn B ,
F+m = El , B 1 Flm B +
421
(3.4)
n=1

lm1

+ Fm = El , BF+lm B 1
Fn+m , BF+n B 1 .
(3.5)
n=1
Eqs. (3.3)(3.5) have a large symmetry group. Indeed, one can check they are invariant under
the conformal transformations
x+ f+ (x+ ),
x f (x )
(3.6)
with f+ and f being analytic functions, and with the fields transforming as
x+ , x ) = (x+ , x ),
(x+ , x ) (
e(x+ ,x ) e (x+ ,x ) = (f+ ) (f ) e(x+ ,x ) ,

x+ ,x )
= (f+ )1/ l (f )1/ l e(x+ ,x ) ,
e(x+ ,x ) e(
F+m (x+ , x ) F+m (x+ , x ) = (f+ )1+m/ l F+m (x+ , x ),

Fm (x+ , x ) Fm (x+ , x ) = (f )1+m/ l Fm (x+ , x ),
(3.7)
are arbitrary.
where the conformal weights of e , namely and ,
In addition we have local symmetries associated to the generators of the zero grade subalgebra G0 (see (A.2)) which commute with El . Indeed, suppose we have group elements
satisfying
hR (x+ )El h1
R (x+ ) = El ,
hL (x )El h1
L (x ) = El
(3.8)
with hR and hL being exponentiations of generators of G0 . Then the transformations

B(x+ , x ) hL (x )B(x+ , x )hR (x+ ),
m
F+m (x+ , x ) h1
R (x+ )F+ (x+ , x )hR (x+ ),
Fm (x+ , x ) hL (x )Fm (x+ , x )h1

L (x )
(3.9)
leave Eqs. (3.3)(3.5) invariant.

We are interested in models that possess soliton solutions. One of the key ingredients for the
appearance of solitons, as explained in [21], is the existence of vacuum solutions such that the
zero curvature potentials A evaluated on them, lie on an oscillator (Heisenberg) subalgebra the
KacMoody algebra. That is an Abelian subalgebra up to central terms, i.e., it has generators bn
such that their commutation relations is of the form
[bm , bn ] = mm+n,0 C.
(3.10)
Notice that the constant element El will always be present in A , when evaluated on any solution, since its coefficient is unity. In addition, the term BE+l B 1 can never vanish. Therefore,
when evaluated on the vacuum solution its commutator with El has to produce at most a central term. Since the vacuum value of B can always be absorbed in to the definition of E+l , i.e.,
422
1 E , we conclude that we need

Bvac E+l Bvac
+l
[El , El ] C.
(3.11)
If one looks at the eigensubspaces (A.5) and the commutation relations (A.1) for the A(2)
2 algebra,
one notices that the only possibilities for El are
E6n T3n ,
2 n
n+1/2
T + L2 ,
E6n+1
2 +
n+1/2
E6n+3 L0
,
E6n T3n ,
2 n
n1/2
E6n1
,
T + L2
2
n1/2
E6n3 L0
.
The gradation (A.2) has a period six, and the simplest models occur on the first period. The
elements E(6n+1) , for n = 0 correspond to , given in (2.8), leading to the usual Bullough
Dodd model. We will then consider in this paper the models corresponding to E6 , and E3 .
The first one is more interesting from the physical point of view and we discuss it in detail in
Section 4. The second model is discussed in Section 5.
4. The model for l = 6
We now take the potentials (3.1) with l = 6, and choose
E6 mT31 ,
(4.1)
where m is a parameter which will set the mass scale for the particles and solitons of the theory.
We then have

5
5
m
1
1
F+ B ,
A = BB + E6 +
Fm .
A+ = B E+6 +
(4.2)
m=1
m=1
The matter fields are contained in Fm , and are defined as

1 1 1
1/2
mR T 2m R2 L2 ,
2
1/2
F+4 = m R3 L1 ,
F+5 =
1/2
1
1/2
mL1 T+1 2mL2 L2 ,
2
1/2
F4 = mL3 L1 ,
F5 =
1/2
F+3 = R0 L0 ,
F3 = L0 L0 ,
1/2
1/2
F2 = m L3 L1 ,
F+2 = mR3 L1 ,
1
1
1/2
1/2
mR1 T+0 + 2mR2 L2 ,
F1 =
m L1 T0 2m L2 L2 .
F+1 =
2
2
Replacing into Eqs. (3.3)(3.5) we get the equations of motion of the theory
i
i
2 = m 1 W ()5 V 1 1 i2m 2 W ()5 V 2 2 m 3 W ()5 V 3 3 ,
2
2
(1 5 ) 1 1
1
V
2 = 2m2 e6 e3 L0 R0 + ime6 1
2
2
i
+ im 2 W ()V 2 2 + m 3 W ()V 3 3 ,
2
2 = 0,
(4.3)
(4.4)
(4.5)
(4.6)
423
i i = mi W ()V i i + U i ,
i i = mi W ()V i i + U i ,
(4.8)
i = U ,
(4.9)
(4.7)
where in (4.7) and (4.8) we have i = 1, 2, 3, with

m1 = m3 = m and m2 = 2m.
(4.10)
We have introduced a spinor notation for the matter fields as

i

UR
R
,
Ui
L
ULi
with similar notation for and U i . We have defined and U as
T
T
i i 0 , U i U i 0 , for i = 1, 2, 3
and
T
0 0 0 ,
T
U 0 U 0 0 .
(4.11)
(4.12)
(4.13)
Notice that in general is not the complex conjugate of . The representation for the Diracs
-matrices is

0 1
0 1
1 0
,
1 = i
,
5 0 1 =
.
0 = i
(4.14)
1 0
1 0
0 1
In addition, we have introduced the quantities
W ()
(1 5 )
(1 + 5 )
+ e6
,
2
2
(1 + 5 ) (1 5 )
W () e6
+
2
2
(4.15)
and the potentials involving the scalar fields3

V 2 = e(2)5 ,
V 1 = e(+)5 ,
V 2 = e(2)5 ,
(4.16)
V =e
V 3 = e(2)5 .
(4.17)
V 1 = e(+)5 ,
3
(2)5
We have also introduced potentials quadratic in the matter fields

3 + 3 1
0
L R + e2 L1 R3 ,
m e
UR =
2

3 2 3 1
0
m e
UL =
L R + e+ L1 R3 ,
2

2 3 2

3 2 0 3
1
4+ 3 2
R L + e
L R
R L e3 L0 R3 ,
e
UL = 2m e
2

m
UL2 =
e+ R3 L1 e4+ L3 R1 ,
2

UR3 = 2m e+ L2 R1 + e2 L1 R2 ,
3 Notice that, W (0) = W
(0) = 1, W ()0 = 0 W (), and V i 0 = 0 V i .
424

3 + 0 1
R L + e3 L0 R1 ,
e
2

3 3 0 1
3
e R L e+ L0 R1 ,
UR =
2

U L3 = 2m e2 L2 R1 + e+ L1 R2 ,

m + 1 3
2
R L e4+ L1 R3 ,
e
UR =
2

2 2 3
3 3 0 3
1
4+
2
3
R L + e
L R +
e R L + e2 L0 R3
U R = 2m e
2
UL3
(4.18)
and
UR1 = UR2 = U L1 = U L2 = 0.
4.1. Symmetries
As we have discussed in (3.7) the model (4.4)(4.9) is invariant under conformal transformations on the two-dimensional spacetime. In addition, it is invariant under local transformations of the type (3.9), since T30 G0 , commutes with E6 given in (4.1). Denoting
hR (x+ ) = exp(R (x+ )T30 ), and hL (x ) = exp(L (x )T30 ), we have that the fields transform,
under such UR (1) UL (1) group, as
R (x+ ) + L (x ),
,
0
i eqi [R 2 (1+5 )+L 2 (15 )] i ,
i eqi [R 2 (1+5 )+L 2 (15 )] i

1
(4.19)
with the charges being q1 = 1, q2 = 2 and q3 = 1. Notice that we can take two special global
subgroups of the local UR (1) UL (1) symmetry group. Taking R = L with constant,
we have
,
i e
qi
,
,
i
i,
i eq i ,
0 0.
(4.20)
Taking now R = L with constant, we have

2 ,
e
i
5
q i
,
,
i
i
q
,
e 5 i ,
i
0 0.
(4.21)
Therefore, if the theory had a Lagrangean we would expect, due to the Noether theorem, one
vector and one axial conserved currents. Those two currents do exist but not quite in the form
one would expect. The field 0 , that has charge zero, do contribute to the current as we explain
below.
Using the equations of motion (4.4)(4.9) one gets that

a a = i U a a a U a , a = 0, 1, 2, 3,

i 5 i = 2imi i W ()V i 5 i + i U i 5 i + i 5 U i , i = 1, 2, 3,

0 5 0 = i U 0 5 0 + 0 5 U 0
(4.22)
425
with mi as in (4.10). One can check that the following identities hold true without the use of the
equations of motion
1 1

U 1 U 1 2 U 2 2 2 U 2 U 3 3 3 U 3

1 0
U 5 0 + 0 5 U 0 = 0,
+
(4.23)
2m

1
U 5 1 + 1 5 U 1 2 U 2 5 2 + 2 5 U 2 U 3 5 3 + 3 5 U 3
1 0 0 0 0
U U = 0.
+
(4.24)
2m
Therefore, we have that the currents
1 0
J = 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 +
5 0
2m
(4.25)
and
J5 = 4 + 1 5 1 2 2 5 2 3 5 3 +
1 0 0

2m
(4.26)
are conserved
J = 0,
J5 = 0
(4.27)
as a consequence of the equations of motion (4.4)(4.9).

The conservation laws (4.27) imply that the currents
J = R1 R1 2 R2 R2 R3 R3 +
1 0 2
2+
2m R
(4.28)
and
1 0 2
J = L1 L1 2 L2 L2 L3 L3
+ 2
2m L
are chiral
(4.29)
+ J = 0.
J = 0,
Indeed, if one introduces the currents

nents (see (2.4)) are
(4.30)
J()
J+ = R1 R1 2 R2 R2 R3 R3 +
(+)
= (J J5 )/4
one gets that their light cone compo-
1 0 2
+ ,
2m R
(+)
J = ,
J+() = + ,
J = L1 L1 2 L2 L2 L3 L3
()
()
()
1 0 2
+ .
2m L
()
(4.31)
()
The conservation of J , namely J = + J + J+ = 0, implies (4.30).

The soliton solutions we construct in Section 4.2 belong to a submodel of the theory (4.4)
(4.9) where the chiral currents (4.28) and (4.29) vanish, i.e.,
J = 0,
J = 0.
(4.32)
426
Such conditions can be written in the form of an equivalence between currents

1 matter
top
= j
j
8
(4.33)
with
jmatter = 1 1 + 2 2 2 + 3 3 +
top
j =
1
0 0 ,
2m
1

2
(4.34)
top
with being an antisymmetric symbol such that 01 = 1. The fact that j is trivially conserved, i.e., it is a topological current, then the equivalence (4.33) implies that jmatter is also
conserved. So, we have
top
jmatter = 0,
j = 0.
(4.35)
The equivalence (4.33) between matter and topological currents has interesting physical consequence, as already pointed out in similar models in [1416]. From (4.33) it follows that the charge
density j0matter is proportional to the space derivative of the scalar field . Therefore, for those
solutions where is constant everywhere except for a small region in space, like in a kink type
solution, the charge density will also have to be localized. That means that the charge gets confined inside the soliton, and outside it we can have only zero charge states. The equivalence (4.33)
thus provides a confinement mechanism for the charge associated to the current jmatter .
4.2. Soliton solutions
We construct the solutions for the theory (4.4)(4.9) using the dressing method [12], in a
manner similar to that used in Section 2.1 for the BulloughDood model. We shall consider
two vacuum solutions as the seeds for the dressing method. The first and simplest vacuum is a
solution of (4.4)(4.9) where
vac1 = 0,
a
= 0,
vac
1
vac1 = 0,
i
vac
=0
vac1 = 2m2 x+ x ,
(4.36)
with a = 0, 1, 2, 3 and i = 1, 2, 3. The second vacuum solution we consider is

vac2 = 0,
vac2 = 0,
1
vac2 = 2m2 x+ x + (x+ ) (x ) + + (x+ ) + (x ),
2
0
0
i
i

vac
vac
=
0,
=
0,
R vac = +
(x+ ),
L vac =
(x ).
2
2
2
(4.37)
The vacuum (4.36) can be considered as a particular case of vacuum (4.37), where one takes
= = 0. The spectrum of soliton solutions obtained, through the dressing method, from
the vacuum (4.36), using the solitonic specialization [20], is however much richer than that obtained from vacuum (4.37). But the general analysis of the dressing method can be done for
vacuum (4.37), and only when the explicit evaluation of the solution is needed, one specializes
to one of the vacua.
The zero curvature potentials (4.2) evaluated on the vacuum (4.37) takes the form
Avac
+ = + ,
Avac
= vac2 C,
(4.38)
427
where we have denoted

(x+ )L0 ,
+ = E6 + +
1/2
1/2

= E6 +
(x )L0
(4.39)
The potentials (4.38) can be written in the pure gauge form as

1
Avac
= vac vac
(4.40)
with
1/2
1/2
vac = ex+ E6 ++ (x+ )L0 ex E6 (x )L0
e C .
(4.41)
The dressing method works for the vacuum solutions (4.36) and (4.37), and potentials (4.2), in
the very same way as in Section 2.1. Indeed, we consider a constant group element h such that
vac , given in (4.41), admits the Gauss type decomposition
1
= G G0 G+
vac hvac
(4.42)
(2)
such that G , G0 and G+ are group elements obtained by exponentiating the generators of A2
with negative, zero and positive grades respectively, of the principal gradation (A.2) defined by Q
given in (A.3). Then, we define the group element
1
h G1
0 G vac h = G+ vac
(4.43)
and the transformed potentials

Ah h h1 .
(4.44)
Since Ah is of the pure gauge it is a solution of the zero curvature condition (2.5) for the potentials (4.2). Replacing (4.43) into (4.44) one gets
1
1
Ah = G+ Avac
G+ G+ G+

1 vac 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
G0 G
= G1
G1
.
0 G A G0 G
0 G
(4.45)
(4.46)
Notice that (4.45) implies that Ah has components of grades greater or equal than those of Avac
.
In addition, (4.46) implies that Ah has components of grades smaller or equal than those of Avac
.
h
Since (4.42) and (4.43) guarantee that both relations hold true, it follows that A has the same
h
grade components as Avac
, and so as the potentials (4.2). By construction we have A given
explicitly in terms of the spacetime coordinates x . Therefore by equating it to (4.2) we get the
solutions for the fields of the model, associated to the choice h of the constant group element,
i.e., a point on the orbit of solutions of the vacuum (4.36) or (4.37). However, the procedure of
equating (4.2) to Ah can reveal complex and requires some care, as we now explain.
Taking the zero grade part of the x component of (4.46), and using (4.38), we have
h
A 0 = G1
(4.47)
0 G0 vac2 C.
Comparing with the zero part of A given in (4.2),
(A )0 = BB 1
(4.48)
we get
vac2 C
G1
= eT3 +(vac2 )C ,
0 = Be
0
(4.49)
428
where we used (2.7), and have set to zero. The reason is that we have started with vacua (4.36)
(4.37) where the field is zero. Since the grading operator Q, defined in (A.3), cannot be the
result of any commutator (since it contains D), it follows that the dressing transformation does
not excite .
Comparing the positive grade part of Ah+ in (4.46), with A+ in (4.2), which has only positive
parts, and using (4.38) and (4.49), we get,
G1
+ G
= E+6 +
>0
F+m .
(4.50)
m=1
Comparing the negative part of Ah in (4.45), with the negative part of A in (4.2) we get
G+ G1
+
= E6 +
<0
Fm .
(4.51)
m=1
Now, comparing the components of grades 1 and 2 of Ah+ in (4.45), with those same grade
components of A+ in (4.2) we obtain

m 1
+ G+ G1
(4.52)
+ m = BF+ B , m = 1, 2.
1/2
We do not include the grades 3 and higher, because Avac

+ (see (4.38)) contains L0 which has
1
vac
grade 3 and so the term G+ A+ G+ in (4.45) would have to be considered.
Similarly, comparing the components of grades 1 and 2 of Ah in (4.46), with those same
grade components of A in (4.2), and using (4.49), we obtain

1 m
G1
(4.53)
G m = B F B, m = 1, 2.
From (4.41) and (4.42) we have that, given the choice of h, G0 , G+ and G are given explicitly
as functions of the spacetime coordinates. Therefore, the relations (4.49)(4.53), provide ways
to get the explicit solutions for the fields contained in B, F+m and Fm . Notice that if we write

1
(n)
(n)
t
t
G+ = exp
(4.54)
,
G = exp
n=1
n=1
with t (n) being generators of grades n, we have from (4.50) and (4.51) that

F+6n = t (n) , E+6 + terms involving t (l) with l < n,

F6n = t (n) , E6 + terms involving t (l) with l < n.
Therefore starting with n = 1, we can recursively relate F+6n to t (l) , and F6n to t (l) , with
1/2
1/2
l n. However, at grades 3 we have t (3) L0
and t (3) L0 , which commute with
E6 T31 , and so the recursion relations break down. Therefore, our strategy is to use (4.50)
and (4.51) to relate F5 , F4 and F3 to the t (l) s, and them to use (4.52) and (4.53) to relate F1
and F2 to the same t (l) s, but now involving derivatives of them.
In order to extract the explicit spacetime dependence of the t (l) s we consider matrix elements of both sides of relation (4.42) in highest weight state representations of the A(2)
2 algebra.
(2)
In fact we use the two fundamental representations of A2 (see Appendix A). The relevant matrix
429
elements which we need to express the t (l) s are

1
|0 ,
0 = 0 |vac hvac
1
1 = 21 |vac hvac
|21 ,
1
R,1 = 21 |T+0 vac hvac
|21 ,
1
|0 ,
R,2 = 0 |L2 vac hvac
1/2
1/2
1
R,3(0) = 0 |L1 vac hvac
|0 ,
1/2
1
R,3(1) = 21 |L1 vac hvac |21 ,
1 0
L,1 = 21 |vac hvac
T |21 ,
1/2
1
L,2 = 0 |vac hvac
L2
|0 ,
1/2
1
L,3(0) = 0 |vac hvac
L1
|0 ,
1 1/2
L,3(1) = 21 |vac hvac
L1 |21 .
(4.55)
Then, using relations (4.49)(4.53) in the way explained above, we obtain the fields in terms of
the tau-functions (or equivalently of the t (l) s)
= log
0
,
1
1
1
= log 0 2m2 x+ x + (x+ ) (x ) + + (x+ ) + (x ),
2
2

1
L,1
R1 =
+
,
1
m 0
L,1
,
L1 = m
1

1 02
L,2
R2 =
,
+
0
2m 12
L,2
,
L2 = 2m
0

1 0 L,1
L,2
L,3(0)
3
+
R =
+
,
0
0
m 1 1

L,3(0) 4L,3(1)
,
L3 = m
0
1
R,1
,
R1 = m
1

1 1
R,1
,
L1 =
1
m 0
R,2
,
R2 = 2m
0

1 02
R,2
,
L2 =
0
2m 12

R,3(0) 4R,3(1)
3
,
R = m
0
1

1 0 R,1
R,2
R,3(0)
+
,
L3 =
0
0
m 1 1
R,1 R,3(1)

(x+ ) + 6m
,
R0 = +
12
430

L0 =
(x )
6m
L,1 L,3(1)
.
12
(4.56)
Now comes the point to make a distinction between the two vacua (4.36) and (4.37). As
explained in (2.30) we construct the soliton solutions using the so-called solitonic specialization
procedure [20]. According to that, we take h to be a product of exponentials of eigenvectors of
the operators appearing in Avac
, given in (4.38). Now, for the vacuum (4.36), reduces
to E6 . Therefore, the set of eigenvectors associated to the vacua (4.36) and (4.37) are different,
and so the spectrum of soliton solutions one obtains through the dressing is also different.
The eigenvectors of E6 , with non-vanishing eigenvalues, are given by4
(T )
V1 ( ) =
(L)
n=
(L)
n=
V1 ( ) =
V2 ( ) =
(6n1) Tn ,
(6n+31) L1
n+1/2
(6n+32) L2
n+1/2
(4.57)
n=
and satisfying

(T )
(T )
E+6 , V1 ( ) = m 6 V1 ( ),

(L)
(L)
E+6 , V1 ( ) = m 6 V1 ( ),

(L)
(L)
E+6 , V2
( ) = 2m 6 V2
( ),

(T )
(T )
E6 , V1 ( ) = m 6 V1 ( ),

(L)
(L)
E6 , V1 ( ) = m 6 V1 ( ),

(L)
(L)
E6 , V2
( ) = 2m 6 V2
( ).
Notice that the eigenvalues m 6 of E6 , are four fold degenerate, with the corresponding de(T )
(T )
(L)
(L)
generate eigenvectors being V+1 ( ), V1 ( ), V+1 ( ), and V1 ( ), with a sixth root
of 1, i.e., 6 = 1. Similarly, the eigenvalues 2m 6 of E6 , are two fold degenerate, and the
(L)
(L)
corresponding degenerate eigenvectors are V+2 ( ), and V2 ( ). Notice that the six possible
choices for do increase the degeneracy. Indeed, if and , with 6 = 1, are two sixth roots
(T )
(T )
of 1, then V1 ( ) = 1 V1 ( ), and so one gets the same eigenvector. The same holds
true for the other type of eigenvectors. Clearly, the eigenvalues m 6 and 2m 6 are also
four fold and two fold degenerate respectively, with the set of degenerate eigenvectors being
(T )
(T )
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(V+1 ( ), V1 ( ), V+1 ( ), V1 ( )), and (V+2 ( ), V2 ( )), respectively.
1/2
n+1/2
(L)
Notice that L0
commutes with L2 . Therefore, V2
( ) given in (4.57), has the same
eigenvalue of , given in (4.39), as that of E6 , i.e.,

(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
, V2 ( ) = 2m 6 V2 ( ).
+ , V2 ( ) = 2m 6 V2 ( ),
(4.58)
(T )
(L)
As for the subspace spanned by V1 ( ) and V1 ( ), we get four non-degenerate eigenvectors

of . Introducing
)
V(1 2 ) ( ) = V(T
( ) + 2 V(L)
( )
1
1
4 The free parameter has the same origin as the one explained in (2.36).
(4.59)
431
with 1 , 2 = 1, one gets

3 3
+ (x+ ) V(1 2 ) ( ),
2

3 3
(2 )
6
, V1 ( ) = 1 m 2
(x ) V(1 2 ) ( ).
2

+ , V(1 2 ) ( )
= 1 m 2
6
(4.60)
The soliton solutions are constructed taking the constant group element of the dressing
method, introduced in (4.42), as the exponential, or product of exponentials, of the eigenvectors
of E6 , in the case of vacuum (4.36), or of , in the case of vacuum (4.37). That is the same
solitonic specialization procedure [20] we used for the BulloughDodd solitons in (2.30). The
explicit soliton solutions are then obtained by evaluating the matrix elements, given in (4.55), in
(2)
the two fundamental representations of the KacMoody algebra A2 .
The evaluation of those matrix elements are in general very laborious, and we use here a
hybrid of the dressing and Hirota methods as explained in [14]. The dressing method is very powerful and reveals the mathematical structure behind soliton solutions, namely integrable highest
weight state representations of KacMoody algebras [4]. The Hirota method is a very direct
one, and the calculations in it are easy to implement in a computer algorithm using an algebraic
manipulation program like Mathematica or Maple. However, it has a serious drawback, since it
does not give a concrete way of finding the transformation among the tau functions and the fields.
The main property of the Hirotas tau functions is that they truncate at some finite order when
the Hirotas ansatz is used. The dressing method provides the algebraic explanation of why that
truncation occurs. The matrix elements (4.55) correspond to the Hirotas tau functions and their
truncation comes from the nilpotency of the operators, in the integrable representations of the
KacMoody algebra, corresponding to the eigenvectors of E6 or of . In addition, the dressing method does give the concrete relations among the tau functions and the fields. For the model
under consideration, those are the relations (4.56). Therefore our hybrid method consists of using
the dressing method up to the point of obtaining the relations (4.56), then we replace those into
the equations of motion (4.4)(4.9) to obtain the Hirotas equations for the tau functions. We then
solve those equations using Hirotas recurrence method implemented in a computer algorithm using the Mathematica program. In addition, we use the Hirotas ansatz for the tau functions, that
follows from the choice of h as exponentials of the eigenvectors of E6 or , in a way similar
to that done in (2.30), (2.31) and (2.38).
We point out however that the spectrum of soliton solutions we obtain through such hybrid
method is richer than that obtained by the solitonic specialization procedure. The Hirotas recurrence method presents some degeneracies at higher order that makes the solutions to depend
upon a number of parameters higher than that expect from the analysis of the degeneracy of
the eigenvectors of E6 and , done above. That happens for instance in the soliton solution
discussed in Section 4.3.2. The one-soliton solutions for the Abelian affine Toda models also
present an enlarged spectrum as reported in [22].
We give in the following sections the various types of soliton solutions. It is worth mentioning
that all soliton solutions have the property that the chiral currents (4.28) and (4.29) vanish when
evaluated on them. Therefore, in all those solutions it is valid the equivalence (4.33) between the
matter and topological currents. Consequently, it holds true the confinement mechanism of the
charge associated to the current jmatter given in (4.34), and discussed at the end of Section 4.1.
432
4.3. One-soliton solutions from vacuum (4.36)

(L)
4.3.1. One-soliton associated to V2

We construct here the solution associated to the choice of the constant group element in (4.43)
(L)
as h = eV with V being a linear combination of the degenerate eigenvectors V+2 ( ) and
V2 ( ), defined in (4.57), associated to the eigenvalues 2m 6 of E6 . Therefore, the solution depends upon two parameters. By replacing that h into (4.55) with vac given by (4.41)
with = = 0, we get the following ansatz for the tau functions
(L)
(l) el2
(4.61)
l=0
with

x
= 2 (x vt),
2 = 2m zx+
z
(4.62)
where we have denoted 6 z = e , with = 1, and real, and so

2 = 2m cosh ,
v = c tanh .
(4.63)
As explained at the end of Section 4.2, we solve the equations for the tau functions, using the
Hirotas method implemented in a computer algorithm, and find that the expansion truncates at
order N = 4, with the solution given by

a2 a 2 22
a2 a 2 22
0 = 1 +
e
e
1
,
4
4

a2 a 2 2 2 2
,
e
1 = 1
4

a2 a 2 22
2
L,2 = a2 e
e
1
,
4

a2 a 2 22
e
R,2 = a 2 e2 1
(4.64)
,
4
where a2 and a 2 are the two parameters of the solution mentioned above and associated to the
degeneracy of the eigenvalues 2m 6 , of E6 .
Using relations (4.56), one can write the solution in terms of the fields as

1 + a24a 2 e22
= log
,
1 a24a 2 e22

a 2 a 2
1
= log 1 2 2 e42 2m2 x+ x ,
2
16
1
z
a2 a 2 2
a2 a 2 2
2
2
1+
e
1
e
4
4
,
,
2 = 2ma2 e2
2 = 2ma 2 e2
1/z
1
1+
a2 a 2 2
2
4 e
= = = = = = 0.
1
a2 a 2 2
2
4 e
(4.65)
433
From the fact that the solutions excite only the fields , , 2 , and 2 , it is associated to
n+1/2
the sl(2) KacMoody subalgebra generated by T3n , L2
and C (see Appendix A). In fact
that solution is the same as the one constructed in Section 10.1 of Ref. [15], and also studied
in [16,17]. The solution for is the same as that for the sine-Gordon model.
The chiral currents (4.28) and (4.29) vanish when evaluated on such solution, and so one has
the equivalence (4.33) of the matter and topological currents, i.e.,
1
= 2 2 .
(4.66)
2
Therefore, we have here a confinement mechanism as discussed at the end of Section 4.1, and
proposed in [15].
(T )
(L)
and V1
4.3.2. One-soliton associated to V1
We now consider the solution obtained by taking the element h, defined in (4.43), to be an exponentiation of a linear combination of the four degenerated eigenvectors (4.57) of E6 , namely
(T )
(T )
(L)
(L)
V+1 ( ), V1 ( ), V+1 ( ), and V1 ( ), with 6 = 1. By replacing that h into (4.55) with
vac given by (4.41) with = = 0, we get the following ansatz for the tau functions
(l) el1
(4.67)
l=0
with

x
1 = m zx+
= 1 (x vt),
z
(4.68)
where we have denoted 6 z = e , with = 1, and real, and so

1 = m cosh ,
v = c tanh .
(4.69)
Since the solution is associated to four degenerated eigenvectors, it should then depend upon
four parameters. However, it depends in fact upon six parameters. The reason is that the Hirotas
(2)
recursion method works in a such way in this case that at second order not all coefficients
(1)
are determined uniquely in terms of the coefficients . There remain two of them free. Such
(l)
solution with six free parameters truncates at order N = 16, and the coefficients of the tau
functions are given explicitly in Appendix B.
Despite the complexity of such solution, the chiral currents (4.28) and (4.29) vanish when
evaluated on it. Therefore, the equivalence (4.33) between the matter and topological currents
holds true, and so does the confinement mechanism discussed at the end of Section 4.1.
Such solution takes some simpler forms for some special values of the parameters. For instance, the tau functions, with coefficients given in Appendix B, truncate at order 8 if one takes
b = 1 za,
a
b = i2
z
(4.70)
with a = 1, a = 1, 2.
However, the solution takes an even simpler form if one takes the parameter to satisfy
b = 1 za,
a
b = i2 ,
z
c = 21 a 2 z,
a 2
c = i22
z
(4.71)
434
with a = 1, a = 1, 2. In this case the tau functions truncate at order 4 and are given by
0 = 1 8a ae
21 + 8a 2 a 2 e41 ,
2

3
1 = 1 + 2 2ei1 2 4 a ae
21 ,

3
L,1 = 4ae1 1 + 2 2ei1 2 4 a ae
21 ,
a 2
L,2 = 4i2 e21 ,
z

3
a
L,3(0) = 4i2 e1 1 + 2 2ei1 2 4 a ae
21 ,
z

3
a 1
L,3(1) = 2i2 e 1 + 2 2ei1 2 4 a ae
21 ,
z

3
1 1 + 2 2ei1 2 4 a ae
21 ,
R,1 = 4ae
R,2 = 41 za 2 e21 ,

3
R,3(0) = 41 zae1 1 + 2 2ei1 2 4 a ae
21 ,

3
R,3(1) = 21 zae1 1 + 2 2ei1 2 4 a ae
21 .
(4.72)
The solution for can be obtained using the relation between

and the tau functions given
in (4.56). Writing = R + iI , and choosing a a = ei /(2 2 ), we have
1
cosh(41 ) + 4 + cos(2 ) 4 2 cos( ) cosh(21 )
R = ln
,
3
2 cosh(41 ) + 2 + cos(2( + 1 2 3
4 )) + 4 cos( + 1 2 4 ) cosh(21 )
I = ArcTan
A
B
(4.73)
with
A = 1 2 e41 + 41 2 + sin(2 ) + 1 2 cos(2 )

2 sin( ) + 31 2 cos( ) e21 + sin( ) + 1 2 cos( ) e21 ,
B = e41 + 4 + 1 2 sin(2 ) + cos(2 )

2 1 2 sin( ) + cos( ) e21 + 1 2 sin( ) + 3 cos( ) e21 .
The real part R goes to zero as x . The imaginary part I is very sensitive to variations
in . We give in Figs. 2 and 3 the plots of the real and imaginary parts for = 3
8 and = 3 ,
respectively, and in both we have = 1 2 = 1.
Some other simpler forms of the solution Appendix B are given in Appendix C.
4.4. One-soliton solutions from vacuum (4.37)
In this case we take the element h introduced in (4.43) to be an exponential of one of the four
( )
(non-degenerated) eigenvectors V1 2 ( ), given in (4.59). By replacing that h into (4.55) with
vac given by (4.41), we get the following ansatz for the tau functions
=
l=0
(l) el1 ,2
(4.74)
435
Fig. 2. Plots of the real and imaginary parts of against x, for the one-soliton solution (4.73), with = 1 2 = 1,
= 3
8 . The real part of corresponds to the curve that goes to zero as x .
Fig. 3. Plots of the real and imaginary parts of against x, for the one-soliton solution (4.73), with = 1 2 = 1, = 3 .
The real part of corresponds to the curve that goes to zero as x .
with
1 ,2

(x )
3
x
= 1 m zx+
+ 2
+ (x+ ) z
,
z
2
z
(4.75)
where we have denoted 6 z.

We solve the equations for the tau functions by the Hirotas method implement on a computer
(see end of Section 4.2), and find that the expansion truncates at order N = 2. However, the
dressing method in this case does not excite the fields , , and 0 (and also for the reasons
explained below (4.49)). Therefore, in all four solutions these fields have their vacuum values,
i.e.,
= 0,
= 0,
1
= 2m2 x+ x + (x+ ) (x ) + (x ) + + (x+ ),
2
436

0 =
(x )
+
+
(x ) .
(4.76)
The non-vanishing tau functions in the four solutions are given by

(1) For 1 = 1, 2 = 1
0 = 1,
1 = 1,
1 2 2
L,2 =
za e
,
L,3(0) = a e ,
4
1
R,1 = za e .
L,3(1) = a e ,
2
(2) For 1 = 1, 2 = 1
0 = 1,
1 = 1,
1 2 2+
L,2 =
za+ e
,
4
1
L,3(1) = a+ e+ ,
2
(3) For 1 = 1, 2 = 1
1 = 1,
2
L,1 = a+ e+ ,
z
L,3(0) = a+ e+ ,
R,1 =
za+ e+ .
0 = 1,
R,3(0) = 2a+ e+ ,
1 2 2+
R,2 = a+
e
,
z
R,3(1) = a+ e+ .
(4) For 1 = 1, 2 = 1
0 = 1,
1 = 1,
2
L,1 = a++ e++ ,
z
1 2 2++
R,2 = a++
e
,
z
R,3(0) = 2a++ e++ ,
R,3(1) = a++ e++ .
5. The model for l = 3

As discussed at the end of Section 3 we have two types of models defined by the potentials (3.1) which are of more interest. In Section 4 we have discussed the first case, and here we
present the second one. In this case we take the constant elements El in (3.1), with l = 3 and
given by
1/2
E3 mL0
(5.1)
where again m is a parameter setting the mass scale of the particles and solitons of the theory.
The potentials (3.1) are

2
2
n
1
A+ = B E+3 +
(5.2)
F+ B ,
A = BB1 + E3 +
Fn
n=1
n=1
437
with B being the same group element as in (2.7), and

1/2
1/2
F+1 = R L2 + ( 1 /2)R T+0 ,
F1 = L L2
+ ( 1 /2) L T0 ,

1/2
1/2
F+2 = 1 R L1 ,
F2 = 1 L L1 ,
where 1 is a free parameters, rescaling the spinors. By imposing the zero curvature condition (2.5) on the potentials (5.2) we get the equations of motion
i
i
()5 V = 0,
2 e2 5 + 1 W
2
2
1
i
i
(1 5 )
= 0,
2 + m2 e3 + e2 5 + 1 e2
2
4
2
2
2 = 0,
+ 6mW ()V + U = 0,
+ 6mW ()V + U = 0,
+ U = 0,
(5.3)
where
(1 + 5 )
(1 5 )
+ e3
,
2
2
V = e(+)5 ,
V = e(+)5
W ()
and

U=
0
2
e
R L

,
U =
The spinors have the form

R
R
,
=
,
=
L
L
(1 + 5 ) (1 5 )
W () e3
+
,
2
2
(5.4)
(5.5)
e2 L R
0

=
R
L

,
U=
1 e+ R L
1 e+ R L

.
(5.6)

(5.7)
and we have defined

= T 0 ,
U = U T 0 ,
= T 0 ,
U = U T 0 .
(5.8)
5.1. -functions and solutions

We construct the soliton solutions using the dressing method, as described in Sections 2.1
and 4.2, starting from the vacuum solutions
1
= m2 x+ x .
(5.9)
2
Then we select a set of -functions appropriate to express the solutions for the fields. The
-functions are chosen as
= = = = = 0,
1
|0 ,
0 = 0 |vac hvac
1
1 = 21 |vac hvac
|21 ,
1
1R = 21 |T+0 vac hvac
|21 ,
1
1
2
0R = 0 |L2
vac hvac
|0 ,
1 0
1L = 21 |vac hvac
T |21 ,
1
1
0L = 0 |vac hvac
L2 2 |0 .
438
The relations among the -functions and the fields are

1
1
= log 0 m2 x+ x ,
2
2

L
1
3 m 1L
1 1
,
L =
R =
+
,
1
2 1 1
1 0

R
3 m 1R
1 1
R =
,
L =
+ 1 ,
2 1 1
1
1 0
L
R
2
2
R = 02 + 0 ,
L = 02 0 .
0
0
1
1
= log
0
,
1
(5.10)
Replacing those relations in to the equations of motion we get the Hirotas equations for the
-functions. We then solve those using the Hirotas recurrence method to get the one-soliton
solution
1
0 = 1 abe2 ,
1 = 1,
4
1
1
0R = zb2 e2 ,
0L = a 2 e2 ,
4
4z
1R = ae ,
1L = be ,
where
=

3
m x+ z x z1 .
2
The solution in terms of the fields read

1
= log 1 abe2 ,
4

1
1
1
= log 1 abe2 m2 x+ x ,
2
4
2

1 3 2 2
ma e ,
R =
2 2

1 3 2 2
L =
mb e ,
2 2
be
m
,
R = 2 6z
1 (4 + abe2 )

3 m
L =
be ,
2 1

3 m
R =
ae ,
2 1
1 m
ae
L = 2 6
.
z 1 (4 + abe2 )
(5.11)
(5.12)
(5.13)
439
Acknowledgements
P.E.G. Assis is supported by a FAPESP scholarship, and L.A. Ferreira is partially supported
by a CNPq grant.
Appendix A. The twisted affine KacMoody algebra A(2)
2
(2)
The generators of the algebra A2 are given by T3m , Tm , and Lrj , with m, n Z, r, s Z + 12
and j, k = 0, 1, 2, and the commutation relations are
m n
m n
T3 , T3 = 2mm+n,0 C,
T+ , T = 2T3m+n + 4mm+n,0 C,
m n
T3 , T = Tm+n ,
m r
m r
T3 , Lk = kLm+r
,
T , Lk = 6 k(k 1)Lm+r
k
k1 ,

r s
k r+s
Lk , Lk = (1)k
+ rr+s,0 C ,
T
2 3
r s
r s
6 r+s
T ,
L0 , L2 = 0,
L0 , L1 =
4
r s 1 r+s
1
r
L1 , L2 = T ,
L1 , Ls2 = T+r+s ,
2
2
r s
r

L1 , L2 = 0,
(A.1)
L1 , Ls2 = 0.
Notice that those commutation relations are compatible with the hermiticity conditions T3m =
r
r
r
r
T3m , T+m = Tm , Lr0 = Lr
0 , L1 = L1 , and L2 = L2 .
(2)
In the text we have made use of the so-called principal gradation of the algebra A2 , i.e.,
G=
Gn ,
[Q, Gn ] = nGn ,
[Gm , Gn ] Gm+n
(A.2)
n=
and where the grading operator Q is

Q T30 + 6D.
The operator D measures the upper index of the generators, i.e.,

1 m+1/2
m+1/2
m
m
Lp
= m+
D, Lp
D, Tj = mTj ,
2
with m Z, j = 3, , and p = 0, 1, 2. Therefore the eigensubspaces of Q are

G0 = T30 , Q, C ,

G6n = T3n , n
= 0,

n+1/2
G6n+1 = T+n , L2
,
n+1/2
,
G6n+2 = L1
n+1/2
,
G6n+3 = L0
n+1/2
G6n+4 = L1
,
(A.3)
(A.4)
440

n+1/2
.
G6n+5 = Tn+1 , L2
(A.5)
A highest weight representation of G is one possessing a highest weight state | satisfying

Gn | = 0,
|Gn = 0,
(A.6)
for n > 0.
The highest weight states of the two fundamental representations of A(2)

2 satisfy
1
T30 |1 = |1 ,
2
C|1 = |1 .
C|0 = 2|0 ,
T30 |0 = 0,
(A.7)
Appendix B. Coefficients of -functions of soliton of Section 4.3.2

The -functions for the solution described in Section 4.3.2 truncate at order 16. We express
the -functions as
=
16
(l) el1 ,
(B.1)
l=0
where stands for any of the labels of the -functions defined in (4.55). The quantity 1 is
(l)
defined in (4.68). The following coefficients vanish
(2n+1)
(2n+1)
= 1
= L,2
(2n+1)
(2n+1)
= R,2
= 0,
n = 1, 2, . . . , 7,
(2n)
(2n)
(2n)
(2n)
(2n)
(2n)
L,1 = L,3(0) = L,3(1) = R,1 = R,3(0) = R,3(1) = 0,
n = 0, 1, 2, . . . , 8.
(l)
The remaining coefficients are given by

(0)
0 = 1,
(2)
0 = 8a a,

4
(4)
0 =
+ c)za + z b2 b 2 + 3a 2 zb 2 abc ,
7a 2 z 3b2 a 2 + b(4ab
z

8 2 2 3
(6)
a + b z a + 2bz 2zb 3 + 4a 2 b a c a 2
0 = 7az
z

a 2 3b2 b 2 za + 2bz
b 2 cz b2 c a
+ 7b2 a 3 + 2bcz

b(2a b c)
2ab
2 bcz
,
(8)
0 =

1 2 4
2 35z a 54b2 za 2 + 19b4 a 4 + 24b(4ab

+ c)z a 2 z b2 a 3
2
z

+ 4z b2 a 2 z 7b2 b 2 27a 2 zb 2 + 6abc a 2
4

4cb
+ 4bz
24a b 2 zb3 6b 2 czb2 + 4az 6a 2 zb 2 + cc b

+ cz 6a 2 zb 2 + cc a

+ z 6b 4 z 4c2 b4 + 24a b 2 czb
3 28a 2 b 4 z2 b2

2 2
2

4az 6a cz
b + c c 4b 4 z b + z 38a 4 b 4 z2 c2 c2 4b 4 z
,
0(10) =

8 2
b a 2 z a 2 + b 2 z 7az
a 2 + b 2 z a 3
2
z
(B.2)

+ 2bz 2zb 3 4a 2 b + a c a 2

a 2 + 3b2 b 2 za + 2bz
b2 c b 2 cz a
+ 7b2 a 3 2bcz

+ b(2a b c)
2ab
2 bcz
,
2
2 2

4 2
b a 2 z a 2 + b 2 z
3b 7a 2 z a 2 b(4ab
+ c)za
z3
2 2

+ z b b 3a 2 zb 2 + abc ,
8a a(a
2 z b2 )3 (a 2 + b 2 z)3
(14)
,
0 =
z3
(b2 a 2 z)4 (a 2 + b 2 z)4
(16)
0 =
,
z4
0(12) =
1(0) = 1,
1(2) = 4bb 4a a,
a + 4b2 b 2 4abc 2cc,

1(4) = 4a 2 a 2 + 4bc

4
(6)
a 2 + b 2 z a 3 + bz zb 3 3a 2 b + 2a c a 2
1 = az
z

a 2 + 3b2 b 2 + cc za 2b2 b cz
+ b2 a 3 2bcz
a

+ ccz
bb a 2 b2 + b 2 zb2 2a bcz
,

1
1(8) = 2 2 5z2 a 4 6b2 za 2 + b4 a 4
z

4b 2 z 3b4 10a 2 zb2 4aczb + z 3a 4 z c2 a 2 4b(2ab

+ c)2 cz
2 a

+ z2 10b4 b 4 2a 4 z2 b 4 + c2 c2 + 4abcc2 + 4a 2 b2 3zb 4 + c2 ,

2

4
(10)
1 = 2 b2 a 2 z a 2 + b 2 z az
a + b 2 z a 3 bz zb 3 3a 2 b + 2a c a 2
z

a 2 3b2 b 2 za + ccz
b2 a 3 2bcz
a + 2b2 b cz
a

ccz
+ bb a 2 b2 + b 2 zb2 + 2a bcz
,
2 a 2 z)2 (a
2 + b 2 z)2
2(2a 2 a 2 + 2b2 b 2 + 2abc + c(c 2a b))(b
(12)
,
1 =
z2
2 z b2 )3 (a 2 + b 2 z)3
4(a a + bb)(a
(14)
1 =
,
z3
(b2 a 2 z)4 (a 2 + b 2 z)4
1(16) =
,
z4
(1)
= 4a,
L,1
2
(3)
+ 12ab
L,1 = 20aa
2 4bc
,
z

4
(5)
+ ccz
L,1 = 3z 3a 2 + b 2 z a 3 + b(4a b 3c)za
2 9a 2 b2 + 7b 2 zb2 4a bcz
a
z

+ 4ab
3 b + b3 c 2bb 2 cz ,
441
442

1 2 4
+ 3c)z a 2 z b2 a 2
4 5z a 6b2 za 2 + b4 a 3 + 2b(4ab
2
z

+ z 5b 2 b4 + 8a cb
3 + 3cc 2a 2 b 2 z b2 + 8a b 2 cz 8a 3 cz
b

4
2cb
+ z b 2 5za 4 + 2c2 3a 2 cc a bz
8a b 2 zb3 + 2a 2 czb
2

+ 4az 2a 2 zb 2 + cc b + c2 cz
,

1
(9)
L,1 = 2 4 a 2 z b2 z 5a 4 + 6b 2 za 2 + b 4 z2 a 3 + 6bcz
a 2 + b 2 z a 2
z

a 3 + 3ccz
b 2 cz 2b2 c a
+ 5b2 a 4 4bcz
10b2 b 2 z a 2 4bz

+ z 3b 4 z 2c2 b2 + 3b 2 ccz
a

cz
b 8b2 b a 3 + 2b 2 cza 2 + 8b2 b 3 z 4bc
a + cz c2 2b 4 z
,

4
2
(11)
L,1 = 3 b2 a 2 z a 2 + b 2 z 3 b2 3a 2 z a 3 + b(8ab
c)za 2
z

2cb
+ z b2 b 2 + 9a 2 zb 2 + cc a + bz
2 + 8a b 2 zb + b 2 cz ,
4(b2 a 2 z)3 (a 2 + b 2 z)2 (5a a 2 + 4bb a bc + 3a b 2 z)
(13)
L,1 =
,
z3
4a(b
2 a 2 z)4 (a 2 + b 2 z)3
(15)
L,1 =
,
z4
(0)
= 0,
(7)
L,1 =
L,2
(2)
L,2 = 2c,
3

a
(4)
L,2 = 8 b
b 2 a + b c + a zb 3 + a 2 b a c ,
z

2
(6)
L,2
= ca 4 + 16b2 b a 3 + 2b 2 cz 6b2 c a 2 + 4b 4b2 b 2 cc za
z

a 2 + b 2 z + z czb 4 6b2 cb 2 + cc2
+ 2a 2 (8a b 3c)z

+ 4ab 3a 4 + 10b 2 za 2 4b cz
a + z 3zb 4 + c2 ,
(8)
L,2 =
(10)
L,2 =

8 2 2 3
6za 3 8b2 a bc a 2
a + b z 4b 2a 2 zb + acz a 3 + bz
2
z

+ z cza
3 + 8bb 2 za 2 + 3b2 ca
+ b 2 cza 6b3 b 2 + bcc a
3

cb
+ bz
2a b 2 zb2 + b 2 c 3a 2 c zb + az 4a 2 b 2 z cc ,

2 2 2 2
2 a 4 + 8bz a 2 b 2 z a 3
a + b z (c 16a b)z
2
z

+ 2z 3ca 2 + 16b2 b a + b2 c 3b 2 cz a 2 + 8a 2 b3 + 8b 2 zb3 + 4cczb
a

16ab
4 b 6a 2 b2 c + b4 c + 6b2 b 2 cz + c2 cz
,
3 3b2 a bc) + a(b
3 3a 2 zb acz))
8(b2 a 2 z)(a 2 + b 2 z)3 (bz(za
,
3
z
2(4ab + c)(b2 a 2 z)2 (a 2 + b 2 z)4
(14)
L,2
=
,
z3
(16)
= 0,
(12)
L,2 =
L,2
(1)
L,3(0) = 4b,

2
+ b 3a + b 2 ,
(3) = 4 a(c 4a b)
L,3(0)
z

4
(5)
L,3(0) = ca 3 15b2 b a 2 + 6b2 ca + 3b 2 cza 8ab a 2 + b 2 z a 3b2 b 3 z
z

cz
bc
+ a 2 z zb 3 + 9a 2 b 4a c ,

1
(7)
4za 3 2b2 a + bc a 3
L,3(0) = 2 4 11b3 3a 2 zb + 4acz a 4 + 4bz
z

+ z 6cza
3 + 22bb 2 za 2 + 14b 2 cza + 6b3 b 2 3bcc a 2
3

2cb
+ 4bz
2a b 2 zb2 + b 2 c 4a 2 c zb + az 4a 2 b 2 z cc a

+ z 3b 4 z 2c2 b3 + z 9a 2 zb 4 3ccb 2 + 4a 2 c2 b

,
b 2 + cc2
+ az 6czb 4 6a 2 cz

1 2 2 2
4 a + b z z 11zb 3 + 19a 2 b 4a c a 4 + 8bz a 3 + 3b 2 za b cz
a3
z2

2

+ z 6ca 3 34b2 b a 2 + 2 7cb
+ 6b 2 cz a 3b 2b2 b 2 + cc z a 2

2

cb
+ 4b 2b2 a 3 + ccz
6b2 b 2 z a + 2bz
+ b 2 cz a
+ 15a 2 b4 b 6a 3 b2 c

3b 2 b4 + 3ccb
2 + 2b 2 c2 z + a 6cb
4 12b 2 czb2 + c2 cz
,
+ bz

4
2
(11)
3za 3 b2 a + bc a
L,3(0) = 3 b2 a 2 z a 2 + b 2 z
b3 + 7a 2 zb + 4acz a 2 + 4bz
z

+ 6b 2 cza + 3b3 b 2 bcc ,
+ z cza
3 + 9bb 2 za 2 b2 ca
2 b2 b + ac)(
a 2 + b 2 z)3
4(b2 a 2 z)2 (3bza
(13)
L,3(0)
=
,
3
z
4b(b2 a 2 z)3 (a 2 + b 2 z)4
(15)
,
L,3(0) =
z4
(1)
= 2b,
(9)
L,3(0) =
L,3(1)
6ba 2
+ 10bb 2 2a c,
z
2
(5)
cz
L,3(1) = ca 3 9b2 b a 2 3b 2 cza 9b2 b 3 z + bc
z

+ a 2 z 3zb 3 + 7a 2 b 2a c + 4ab a 3 b 2 za + b cz
,

1
(7)
za 3 + b2 a + bc a 3
L,3(1) = 2 2 b3 5a 2 zb 2acz a 4 + 8bz
z

+ z 6b 2 b3 6a cb
2 3ccb
2a 2 b 2 zb + 2a b 2 cz a 2

2 2b 2 za 3 2bca
+ 4bz
2 + 2b2 b 2 a cca
+ 2bb 2 c a

,
+ z2 5b3 b 4 6ab2 cb 2 + acc2 + b 5a 2 zb 4 3ccb 2 + 2a 2 c2

1
(9)
L,3(1)
= 2 2 a 2 + b 2 z z2 zb 3 3a 2 b + 2a c a 4 4bz 2a 3 + b cz
a3
z
(3)
L,3(1)
=
443
444

+ z 6b2 zb 3 + 6acz
b 2 10a 2 b2 b 3ccz
b + 2ab
2 c a 2

a 2 + ccz
+ 4b 2b2 a 3 2bcz
a + b2 b cz
a + ac
cc 6b2 b 2 z

+ b2 b 5b2 b 2 + 3cc z + a 2 b 5b4 2c2 z ,

2 3

2 2
b2 a 2 z a
b a 2 z a 2 + b 2 z
3b + a 2 zb + 2acz a 2 + 8a bz
3
z

3
9bb 2 za 2 + b2 ca
+ 9b3 b 2 + bcc ,
+ z cza
2 + 4aba
+ 5b2 b + ac)(
a 2 + b 2 z)3
2(b2 a 2 z)2 (3bza
(13)
,
L,3(1) =
3
z
2b(b2 a 2 z)3 (a 2 + b 2 z)4
(15)
L,3(1) =
,
z4
(11)
L,3(1) =
(1)
R,1 = 4a,

(3)
R,1 = 4 5a a 2 bc + 3a b 2 z ,

4
(5)
R,1 = 3 b2 3a 2 z a 3 + b(4ab
+ 3c)za 2 z 7b2 b 2 9a 2 zb 2 + 4abc + cc a
z

2
2cb
+ bz
4a b 2 zb + b 2 cz ,

1
(7)
R,1 = 4 z 5a 4 + 6b 2 za 2 + b 4 z2 a 3 + 2b(4a b 3c)z
a 2 + b 2 z a 2
z

a 3 + 2b2 b 2 + 3cc za 2 + 8bz
b2 c b 2 cz a
5b2 a 4 8bcz

+ z 5b 4 z 2c2 b2 + 3b 2 ccz
a

cz
+ b 8b2 b a 3 + 2b 2 cza 2 + 8b2 b 3 z 4bc
a + cz c2 2b 4 z
,

1
(9)
b2 a 2 z a 2
R,1 = 2 4 a 2 + b 2 z 5z2 a 4 6b2 za 2 + b4 a 3 + 6bcz
z

z 3b 2 b4 + 4a cb
3 + 10a 2 zb 2 + 3cc b2 + 8a b 2 cz 4a 3 cz
b

+ z b 2 2c2 5a 4 z 3a 2 cc a
4

2cb
+ bz
8a b 2 zb3 + 2a 2 czb
2 + 4az 2a 2 zb 2 + cc b + c2 cz
,

2

4
(11)
R,1 = 2 a 2 z b2 a 2 + b 2 z 3z 3a 2 + b 2 z a 3 + b(8a b + c)za
2
z

+ 9a 2 b2 + b 2 zb2 + ccz
a 8ab
3 b + b3 c + 2bb 2 cz ,
2 z 3b2 ))
+ c)z + a(5a
4(b2 a 2 z)2 (a 2 + b 2 z)3 (b(4ab

(13)
R,1 =
,
z3
4a(a 2 z b2 )3 (a 2 + b 2 z)4
(15)
R,1 =
,
z3
(0)
R,2 = 0,
(2)
R,2 = 2c,
3 + b2 a + bc) a(b
3 + a 2 zb + acz))
8(bz(za
,
z

2
(6)
R,2 = (12a b + c)z
2 a 4 + 16bz b 2 z a 2 a 3
z
(4)
R,2 =
445

+ 2z 3ca 2 20b2 b a + b2 c + 3b 2 cz a 2

+ ccz
+ 4b 4a 2 b2 4b 2 zb2 4a bcz
a + 6a 2 b2 c + b4 c 6b2 b 2 cz

+ 4a b 3b4 c2 z ,
+ c2 cz
(8)

8 2
2za 3 8b2 a 3bc a 2
b a 2 z 4b3 6a 2 zb acz a 3 + bz
2
z
3

+ z cza
8bb 2 za 2 + b2 ca
3b 2 cza + 2b3 b 2 + bcc a

4b 2 z2 a 3 + bcza
2 6b2 b 2 za + ccza
+ b3 c bb 2 cz ,
+ bz
R,2 =
2
2

2 2
b a 2 z ca 4 + 8b2 b a 3 2 3cb
+ b 2 cz a 2
2
z

2
+ 4b 2b2 b 2 + cc za + 16ab a 2 + b 2 z

+ 2a 2 (4a b 3c)z
a 2 + b 2 z + z czb 4 6b2 cb 2 cc2 ,
3

1
(12)
a 2 + 3bb 2 a c za
R,2 = 3 8 b2 a 2 z a 2 + b 2 z ba 3 + 3a bz
z

a b 2 z bc ,
+ bz
2(4a b c)(b
2 a 2 z)4 (a 2 + b 2 z)2
(14)
R,2 =
,
z3
(10)
R,2 =
(16)
R,2 = 0,
(1)
R,3(0) = 4b,

(3)
2 + 4aba
b2 b + ac
R,3(0) = 4 3bza
,

4 3
(5)
a 2 z b2 a
b + 9a 2 zb + 4acz a 2 + 8a bz
R,3(0) =
z
3

+ z cza
+ 15bb 2 za 2 3b2 ca
+ 6b 2 cza 3b3 b 2 bcc ,

1
(7)
a3
R,3(0) = 4 z2 11zb 3 + 3a 2 b + 4a c a 4 + 4bz 4a 3 + 2b 2 za + b cz
z

cz
+ z 6ca 3 + 22b2 b a 2 14b2 ca 6b2 b 3 z + 3bc
a2

a 2 + 2b2 b 2 + cc za + bz
b2 c 2b 2 cz a
4b 4b2 a 3 4bcz
2

z 9b4 b
6a 3 b2 c + a c 6b4 c2 z + a 2 4bc

3b 2 b4 3ccb
2 + 2b 2 c2 z ,
+ bz

4

1 2
2
3
2
za 3 + 3b2 a + bc a 3
4
a
11b
z
b
+
19a
zb
+
4acz
a
+
8
bz
z2

+ z 6cza
3 + 34bb 2 za 2 12b2 ca
+ 14b 2 cza 6b3 b 2 3bcc a 2
3

2cb
4bz
6a b 2 zb2 2b 2 czb + az 2a 2 zb 2 + cc a

2 + 3b 2 z 5a 2 b 2 z cc b
+ z 2c2 3b 4 z b3 12a b 2 czb

,
b 2 + cc2
+ az 6czb 4 + 6a 2 cz
2

2

4
(11)
cz
= 2 b2 a 2 z a 2 + b 2 z ca 3 + 9b2 b a 2 6cb
+ b 2 cz a 3b2 b 3 z + bc
R,3(0)
z

,
+ a 2 z zb 3 7a 2 b + 4a c + 4ab 3a 3 + b 2 za + b cz
(9)
R,3(0) =
446
4(a 2 z b2 )3 (a 2 + b 2 z)2 (3ba 2 + bb 2 z + a cz)

,
z3
2 a 2 z)4 (a 2 + b 2 z)3
4b(b
(15)
,
R,3(0) =
z3
(13)
R,3(0) =
(1)
R,3(1) = 2b,

(3)
2 + 5b2 b + ac
R,3(1) = 2 3bza
,

2 3
(5)
za 3 + b2 a + bc a
3b 7a 2 zb 2acz a 2 + 4bz
R,3(1) =
z

3
3b2 ca
+ 9b3 b 2 b 9a 2 zb 2 + cc ,
+ z cza

1
(7)
a3
R,3(1) = 2 z2 zb 3 + 5a 2 b 2a c a 4 + 8bz a 3 b 2 za + b cz
z

z 6b2 zb 3 + 6acz
b 2 + 2a 2 b2 b 3ccz
b + 2ab
2 c a 2

a 2 2b2 b 2 za + ccz
4b 2b2 a 3 2bcz
a + 2b2 b cz
a

6b2 b 2 cc z + a 2 b 5b4 + 2c2 z ,
+ b2 b 5b2 b 2 3cc z + ac

1
(9)
2za 3 + bc a 3
R,3(1) = 2 2 b2 a 2 z b3 + 3a 2 zb + 2acz a 4 4bz
z

+ z 6b 2 b3 + 6a cb
2 + 3ccb
10a 2 b 2 zb 2a b 2 cz a 2

2 2b 2 za 3 + 2bca
+ 4bz
2 + cca
bb 2 c a

+ z2 5b3 b 4 + 6ab2 cb 2 acc2 + b 5a 2 zb 4 + 3ccb 2 2a 2 c2
,

2
2
(11)
R,3(1) = 2 b2 a 2 z a 2 + b 2 z ca 3 + 9b2 b a 2 b 2 cza
z

cz
+ 8ab a 2 + b 2 z a + 9b2 b 3 z + bc
+ a 2 z 3zb 3 + a 2 b 2a c ,
a + 5bb 2 z a cz)
2(a 2 z b2 )3 (a 2 + b 2 z)2 (3ba 2 + 4a bz

(13)
,
R,3(1) =
z3
2 a 2 z)4 (a 2 + b 2 z)3
2b(b
(15)
.
R,3(1) =
z3
Appendix C. Simpler forms of one-soliton of Section 4.3.2
Here we present simpler forms of the one-soliton solution discussed in Section 4.3.2, and for
which the coefficients of the tau functions are given in Appendix B.
c, and c,
The choice of the parameters a, a,
b, b,
appearing the coefficients (l) s given in Appendix B, for which the solution simplifies, and the corresponding non-vanishing tau functions,
are given by
(1) For b = b = c = c = 0, a = a1 /4 and a = a 1 /4 we get

a1 a 1 21 8
,
e
0 = 1
16

a1 a 1 21 6
a1 a 1 21 2
1 = 1
,
e
e
1+
16
16

a1 a 1 21 6
a1 a 1 21
1
1+
,
e
e
L,1 = a1 e
16
16

a1 a 1 21 6
a1 a 1 21
R,1 = a 1 e1 1
1+
.
e
e
16
16
1
(2) For a = a = c = c = 0, b = b1 /2 and b = b1 /2 we get

b1 b1 21 4
b1 b1 21 4
1+
e
e
0 = 1
,
4
4

b1 b1 21 6
b1 b1 21 2
1+
1 = 1
,
e
e
4
4

b1 b1 21 3
b1 b1 21 4
1+
L,3(0) = 2b1 e1 1
,
e
e
4
4

b1 b1 21
b1 b1 21 6
1
1
1+
L,3(1) = b1 e
,
e
e
4
4

b1 b1 21 3
b1 b1 21 4
1+
e
e
R,3(0) = 2b1 e1 1
,
4
4

b1 b1 21
b1 b1 21 6
1
1
1+
e
e
R,3(1) = b1 e
.
4
4
(3) For a = a = b = b = 0, c = c1 /2 and c = c1 /2 we get

c1 c1 41
c1 c1 41
1+
,
e
e
0 = 1
4
4

c1 c1 41 2
1 = 1
e
,
4

c1 c1 41
21
1
,
e
L,2 = c1 e
4

c1 c1 41
.
e
R,2 = c1 e21 1
4
(4) For b = b = 0, a = a1 /4, a = a 1 /4 c = c1 /2 and c = c1 /2 we get

a1 a 1 21 4 c1 c1 41
a1 a 1 21 4 c1 c1 41
1
,
e
e
e
e
+
0 = 1
16
4
16
4

a1 a 1 21
c1 c1 41 2
a1 a 1 21 3
1 = 1
1+
e
e
e
,
16
16
4

a1 a 1 21 3
a1 a 1 21 3
a1 a 1 21
c1 c1 41
1
1
1
1+
,
L,1 = a1 e
e
e
e
e
16
16
16
4

a1 a 1 21 4 c1 c1 41
L,2 = e21 c1 1
e
e
16
4

4

4
c1 a 1 41
c1 c1 41
a1 a 1 21
e
e
e
+
+
1
,
256z
16
4
447
448

a1 a 1 21 4 c1 c1 41
1 31
a1 c1 1
e
e
L,3(0) = e
2
16
4

a 3 c1
a1 a 1 21 4 c1 c1 41
+ 1 e21 1
,
+
e
e
16z
16
4

c1 a 13 21
1 31
a1 c1
e
L,3(1) = e
4
16z

a1 a 1 21 3
a1 a 1 21
c1 c1 41
1
e
e
e
1+
,
16
16
4

a1 a 1 21 3
1
1
R,1 = a 1 e
e
16

a1 a 1 21
c1 c1 41
a1 a 1 21 3
1+
,
e
e
e
1
16
16
4

a1 a 1 21 4 c1 c1 41
R,2 = e21 c1 1
e
e
16
4

4

4
c1 a1 z 41
a1 a 1 21
c1 c1 41
1
,
e
e
e
+
256
16
4

1
a1 a 1 21 4 c1 c1 41
R,3(0) = e31 a 1 c1 1
e
e
2
16
4

4

3
a1 c1 z 21
a1 a 1 21
c1 c1 41
1
,
e
e
e
+
16
16
4

a 3 c1 z 21
1
e
R,3(1) = e31 a 1 c1 + 1
4
16

a1 a 1 21 3
a1 a 1 21
c1 c1 41
1
1+
.
e
e
e
16
16
4
References
[1] C. Montonen, D.I. Olive, Phys. Lett. B 72 (1977) 117120;
C. Vafa, E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 431 (1994) 377, hep-th/9408074;
N. Seiberg, E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 431 (1994) 484550, hep-th/9408099;
N. Seiberg, E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 426 (1994) 19, hep-th/9407087.
[2] O. Babelon, D. Bernard, M. Talon, Introduction to Classical Integrable Systems, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2003;
L.D. Faddeev, Integrable models in 1+1 dimensional quantum field theory, in: Les Houches Lectures 1982, Elsevier
Science, 1984;
L.D. Faddeev, L.A. Takhtajan, Hamiltonian Methods in the Theory of Solitons, Springer, 1986.
[3] P.D. Lax, Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 21 (1968) 467;
V.E. Zakharov, A.B. Shabat, Zh. Exp. Teor. Fiz. 61 (1971) 118134, Sov. Phys. JETP 34 (1972) 6269 (English
transl.).
[4] V.G. Kac, Infinite Dimensional Lie Algebras, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 1990, 400 p;
P. Goddard, D.I. Olive, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 1 (1986) 303.
[5] R.K. Dodd, R.K. Bullough, Proc. R. Soc. London A 352 (1977) 481.
[6] G. Tzitzeica, Comptes Rendus Acad. Sci. 150 (1910) 955.
[7] A.V. Zhiber, A.B. Shabat, Sov. Phys. Dokl. 24 (1979) 607.
[8] A.V. Mikhailov, Physica D 3 (1981) 73.
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
449
O. Babelon, L. Bonora, Phys. Lett. B 244 (1990) 220.

H. Aratyn, L.A. Ferreira, J.F. Gomes, A.H. Zimerman, Phys. Lett. B 254 (1991) 372.
C.P. Constantinidis, L.A. Ferreira, J.F. Gomes, A.H. Zimerman, Phys. Lett. B 298 (1993) 88, hep-th/9207061.
V.E. Zakharov, A.B. Shabat, Funct. Anal. Appl. 13 (1979) 166;
E. Date, M. Jimbo, M. Kashiwara, T. Miwa, Proc. Japan. Acad. A 57 (1981) 3806;
E. Date, M. Jimbo, M. Kashiwara, T. Miwa, Physica D 4 (1982) 343;
E. Date, M. Jimbo, M. Kashiwara, T. Miwa, Publ. RIMS Kyoto University 18 (1982) 1077;
M. Semenov-Tian-Shansky, Funct. Anal. Appl. 17 (1983) 259;
M. Semenov-Tian-Shansky, Publ. RIMS Kyoto Univ. 21 (1985) 1237;
O. Babelon, D. Bernard, Phys. Lett. B 260 (1991) 81;
O. Babelon, D. Bernard, Commun. Math. Phys. 149 (1992) 279, hep-th/9111036;
O. Babelon, D. Bernard, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 8 (1993) 507, hep-th/9206002.
R. Hirota, Direct methods in soliton theory, in: R.K. Bullough, P.J. Caudrey (Eds.), Soliton, Springer, New York,
1980, pp. 157176.
A.G. Bueno, L.A. Ferreira, A.V. Razumov, Nucl. Phys. B 626 (2002) 463, hep-th/0105078.
L.A. Ferreira, J.L. Gervais, J. Sanchez Guillen, M.V. Savelev, Nucl. Phys. B 470 (1996) 236, hep-th/9512105.
H.S. Blas Achic, L.A. Ferreira, Nucl. Phys. B 571 (2000) 607, hep-th/9909118.
H. Blas, Nucl. Phys. B 596 (2001) 471, hep-th/0011243;
J. Acosta, H. Blas, J. Math. Phys. 43 (2002) 1916, hep-th/0107248.
A.Yu. Boldin, S.S. Safin, R.A. Sharipov, J. Math. Phys. 34 (12) (1993) 58015809;
I.Yu. Cherdantzev, R.A. Sharipov, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 5 (15) (1990) 30213027.
E. Wang, J. Math. Phys. 47 (2006) 053502.
D.I. Olive, M.V. Savelev, J.W.R. Underwood, Phys. Lett. B 311 (1993) 117, hep-th/9212123.
L.A. Ferreira, J.L. Miramontes, J. Sanchez Guillen, J. Math. Phys. 38 (1997) 882, hep-th/9606066.
H. Aratyn, C.P. Constantinidis, L.A. Ferreira, J.F. Gomes, A.H. Zimerman, Nucl. Phys. B 406 (1993) 727, hepth/9212086.

Pohlmeyer reduction of AdS5 S 5 superstring

sigma model
M. Grigoriev a,b,c , A.A. Tseytlin a,c,
a Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College, London SW7 2AZ, UK
b Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Imperial College, London SW7 2PE, UK
c Department of Theoretical Physics, Lebedev Institute, Moscow, Russia
Received 19 November 2007; accepted 8 January 2008

Available online 15 January 2008
Abstract
Motivated by a desire to find a useful 2d Lorentz-invariant reformulation of the AdS5 S 5 superstring
world-sheet theory in terms of physical degrees of freedom we construct the Pohlmeyer-reduced version
of the corresponding sigma model. The Pohlmeyer reduction procedure involves several steps. Starting with
a coset space string sigma model in the conformal gauge and writing the classical equations in terms of
currents one can fix the residual conformal diffeomorphism symmetry and kappa-symmetry and introduce
a new set of variables (related locally to currents but non-locally to the original string coordinate fields)
so that the Virasoro constraints are automatically satisfied. The resulting equations can be obtained from
a Lagrangian of a non-Abelian Toda type: a gauged WZW model with an integrable potential coupled
also to a set of 2d fermionic fields. A gauge-fixed form of the Pohlmeyer-reduced theory can be found
by integrating out the 2d gauge field of the gauged WZW model. The small-fluctuation spectrum near the
trivial vacuum contains 8 bosonic and 8 fermionic degrees of freedom with equal mass. We conjecture that
the reduced model has world-sheet supersymmetry and is ultraviolet-finite. We show that in the special case
of the AdS2 S 2 superstring model the reduced theory is indeed supersymmetric: it is equivalent to the
N = 2 supersymmetric extension of the sine-Gordon model.
PACS: 11.10.-z; 11.25.Tq
Keywords: AdS/CFT duality; GreenSchwarz action; 2d sigma models; Integrability; Sine-Gordon model
* Corresponding author at: Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
E-mail addresses: grig@lpi.ru (M. Grigoriev), tseytlin@imperial.ac.uk (A.A. Tseytlin).

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.01.006
M. Grigoriev, A.A. Tseytlin / Nuclear Physics B 800 [PM] (2008) 450501
451
1. Introduction
String theory in AdS5 S 5 is represented by a GreenSchwarz-type [1] action on a supercoset
[2]. It is classically integrable [3] and has an involved solitonic spectrum (see,
e.g., [4,5]). To quantize it one may attempt to eliminate first unphysical degrees of freedom by
choosing a kind of light-cone gauge, i.e. an analog of x + = p + , + = 0. One natural option
is to expand near the null geodesic parallel to the boundary in the Poincare patch; the resulting
gauge-fixed action is then quartic in fermions [6]. An alternative is to use the null geodesic
wrapping S 5 [7]; the resulting action [810] has a rather complicated structure with many nonlinear interaction terms.
An apparent disadvantage of the light-cone gauge choices is that the gauge-fixed action lacks
manifest 2d Lorentz invariance (beyond the quadratic level in the fields). This makes it hard to
apply familiar methods of integrable quantum field theories; in particular, the S-matrix for the
elementary excitations has apparently less restricted form [11,12] than in a Lorentz-invariant case
(cf. [13]).
An alternative approach which we shall explore here is to impose the conformal gauge condition and to perform a non-local transformation of variables (from coordinates to currents) that
solves the Virasoro constraints at the classical level while preserving the integrable structure. This
generalizes the Pohlmeyer reduction (or better reformulation) relating the classical S 2 sigma
model to the sine-Gordon model [14] (see also [1519]). A related work in this direction appeared in [20,21]. One is then left with the right number of physical (transverse) degrees of
freedom. In a certain sense, this reduction approach may be viewed as a covariant analog of a
light-cone gauge fixing.
The resulting reduced model should have closely related solitonic spectrum to the original
one, and one may then raise the question if the classical correspondence between the two models
may extend to the quantum level. This is not what happens in the case of the S 2 sigma model
and the sine-Gordon model (one reason is that in the reduction procedure one uses conformal
symmetry of the SO(3)/SO(2) model which does not survive beyond the classical level) but we
may conjecture that the relation may still hold in the very special case of the full AdS5 S 5
superstring model which should be conformal at the quantum level.
Below we shall first discuss the Pohlmeyer-type reduction for the bosonic part of the classical
AdS5 S 5 sigma model and then consider the full supercoset superstring theory. As we shall
see, the application of this procedure to the bosonic part of the AdS5 S 5 string action leads to
a 2d relativistically invariant reduced theory represented by a sigma model with a potential
term which has an equivalent integrable structure. It generalizes the sine-Gordon [14] and the
complex sine-Gordon [14,22] models to the case of the 4 + 4 dimensional target space.
We shall explain how to obtain a local Lorentz-invariant action for this reduced theory in
terms of physical (gauge-fixed) degrees of freedom.1 We shall follow the approach of [23,24]
(see also [25]), in which the reduced theory is interpreted as a gauge-fixed version of a gauged
PSU(2,2|4)
SO(1,4)SO(5)
1 This was not done explicitly in the past for the S n models with n > 3. The existence of a local Lagrangian is an
important issue. At the level of equations for the currents or the Lax pair equations there is a large freedom [15] in how
one can choose a local field representationmany classically equivalent models have same-looking Lax equations and
yet very different local field representations (and thus inequivalent quantum structure). When one addresses the issue of
existence of a local action the choice of the fundamental fields becomes relevant.
452
WZW theory with a potential representing an integrable deformation,2 i.e. as a special case of a
non-Abelian Toda theory [27].
The reduced model for the full AdS5 S 5 superstring (found after an appropriate kappasymmetry gauge fixing) turns out to be a 2d Lorentz-covariant fermionic generalisation of a nonSp(2,2)
Sp(4)
G
Abelian Toda theory for H
= SU(2)SU(2)
SU(2)SU(2)
with 4 + 4 dimensional bosonic target
space. Its simple structure (and the matching of the numbers of the bosonic and the fermionic
degrees of freedom) suggests that it may possess 2d supersymmetry. Indeed, the existence of
the supersymmetry can be seen directly in the special case of the AdS2 S 2 superstring theory
for which the reduced model happens to be the same as the N = 2 supersymmetric sine-Gordon
theory.
Though the relation of the reduced model to the original conformal superstring model involves
a non-local transformation, we may still expect that it should define a UV finite 2d theory. Its conformal invariance is then only spontaneously broken by a scale (entering the potential term
and its fermionic counterpart) that appears after fixing the residual conformal diffeomorphism
freedom in the conformal gauge (the same happens in the plane-wave light-cone gauge case [7]).
If this is indeed the case, the reduced model may serve as a starting point for understanding
the corresponding quantum AdS5 S 5 superstring theory.3 Its small-fluctuation spectrum near a
natural vacuum state contains 8 bosonic and 8 fermionic dynamical degrees of freedom of equal
mass , and the corresponding relativistic (and 2d supersymmetric) S-matrix should have the
[SU(2)]4 global symmetry.4
Let us now describe the contents of the paper. We shall start in Section 2 with a review of
the Pohlmeyer reduction in the case of the bosonic string models on Rt S 2 and Rt S 3 with
sine-Gordon and complex sine-Gordon models as the corresponding reduced theories.
To systematically construct the Lagrangians of reduced models for higher-dimensional
bosonic SO(n, m)/SO(n 1, m) examples we shall first explain the relation between the equations of motion of geometrical (right) F /G coset model written in terms of currents and the
G/H (leftright) gauged WZW model (gWZW) with an integrable potential. As a preparation,
we shall review the classical equations of the F /G symmetric-space sigma model (Section 3.1)
and the equations of the G/H gWZW model with a potential, i.e. of a special case of the
non-Abelian Toda theory (Section 3.2). The potential is determined by a choice of an element
T+ = T = T in the Abelian subspace in the complement of the algebra g of G in the algebra f
of F , and H is such that its algebra h is a centralizer of T in g.
In Section 4 we shall show how to relate the equations of motion of the F /G coset model to
those of the G/H gWZW model by (i) imposing the so-called reduction gauge in the equations
of the F /G model written in terms of the current components, and by (ii) making use of the
residual 2d conformal diffeomorphism symmetry to eliminate an additional degree of freedom
2 Viewed as a CFT deformation it is relevant in compact (e.g. S n ) case and irrelevant in non-compact (e.g. AdS ) case.
n
3 While the transformation used to arrive at the reduced model is non-local one may hope that in an integrable finite
field theory the solitonic spectrum should be determined essentially by the semiclassical approximation [28] and it may
then be the same in a pair of theories with classically equivalent integrable structures. The Poisson structures of the
original and reduced models are different [20,21], but as was shown in [21] in the light cone formalism, they are actually
compatible (the sum of the two Poisson brackets is again a Poisson bracket, i.e. it satisfies the Jacobi identity).
4 Having obtained the reduced model via the classical procedure and using it as a starting point for quantization one
would still need to understand how to compute the observables of the original theory in terms of the quantum reduced
theory (at the classical level one can do this by solving the linear Lax system). In particular, one would need to compute
the global charges of the PSU(2, 2|4) symmetry group as these are relevant for comparison with the gauge theory side.
453
(setting components of the stress tensor to be constant and thus satisfying the conformal gauge
constraints of the string theory on Rt F /G). This will allow us to solve part of the gaugefixed equations of motion explicitly in terms of a new field g taking values in G and the h-valued
gauge field A (Section 4.2). The resulting system will turn out to be invariant under the both left
and right H gauge symmetries. After imposing a special gauge condition under which the gauge
symmetry reduces to that of the G/H gWZW model these equations of motion become equivalent to the ones following from the gWZW action with a special integrable potential described
in Section 3.2. That the reduced equations of motion of the F /G coset model can be related to
those of the gWZW model with an integrable potential was first suggested (and checked on several examples) in [24,25]. Here we shall explain why this correspondence should work in general
and specify the necessary conditions on the groups and the algebras involved. We shall also note
that the potential term is equal to the original F /G coset Lagrangian in the reduction gauge.
In Section 4.3 we shall mention the equivalence of the Lax representations for the F /G coset
and the G/H gWZW models and in Section 4.4 we shall consider the reduced equations for the
S n = SO(n + 1)/SO(n) coset model in the A = 0 [24] H -gauge. These equations, are, however,
non-Lagrangian on physical subspace.5
As we shall discuss in Section 5, to get the Lagrangian equations for the independent n 1
degrees of freedom of the reduced counterpart of the S n model (that generalizes the sine-Gordon
and the complex sine-Gordon cases) one should start with the gWZW action, impose the H gauge on the group element g G and integrate out the gauge field components A . The
resulting reduced action is that of a sigma model with a curved target space metric (but no antisymmetric tensor coupling) combined with a relevant integrable potential term given universally
by a cosine of one of the n 1 angles. We describe few explicit examples of reduced models
for strings on Rt S 4 and Rt S 5 in Section 5.2. The generalisation to AdSn S n models is
then straightforward (Section 5.3). In Section 6 we shall turn to the AdS5 S 5 superstring startPSU(2,2|4)
F
ing with the equations of motion for the G
= Sp(2,2)Sp(4)
supercoset model (with the bosonic
SU(4)
F
part G
= AdS5 S 5 = SU(2,2)
Sp(2,2) Sp(4) ). We choose conformal gauge and write them in terms
of the components of the left-invariant current of PSU(2, 2|4). We use the formulation based on
Z4 grading property [3,57] of the superalgebra psu(2, 2|4). Fixing a particular kappa-symmetry
gauge we perform the analog of the Pohlmeyer reduction discussed earlier for the similar bosonic
cosets. An important ingredient is a generalization to the psu(2, 2|4) superalgebra case of the Lie
algebra decomposition originally used in [18] in the bosonic coset case.
Introducing the new set of fermionic variables directly related to the odd components of the
supercoset current we show in Section 6.4 that the reduced system of equations follows from a
Sp(2,2)
Sp(4)
G
2d Lorentz-invariant Lagrangian (6.49). Its bosonic part is that of H
= SU(2)SU(2)
SU(2)SU(2)
gWZW model with an integrable potential determined by a special diagonal matrix T = T in the
even part of the psu(2, 2|4) superalgebra. In addition, the Lagrangian contains a quadratic fermionic part with a standard first-derivative kinetic term. The fermions interact minimally with the
H gauge field A and are also coupled (by a Yukawa-type term) to the bosonic field g G.
We mention that as in the bosonic case, the sum of the -dependent potential and Yukawa interaction terms in the reduced Lagrangian is equal to the original superstring Lagrangian written
in terms of currents.
5 The original observation of [24] that the gWZW model with an integrable potential provides a Lagrangian formulation
of the reduced equations of motion of the F /G coset model applied on the extended configuration space involving the
auxiliary A fields. Similar construction was discussed in a string context in [26].
454
The vacua of the theory are described by constant g taking values in H ; in the A = 0 gauge
the small-fluctuation spectrum near the trivial vacuum consists of 8 bosonic and 8 fermionic
dynamical modes of the same mass . We comment on the interpretation of the parameter and
mention that the corresponding scattering matrix should have a global H = [SU(2)]4 symmetry.
The structure of the reduced action suggests the presence of a 2d supersymmetry. Its existence
is indeed confirmed in Section 7 on the example of a similar AdS2 S 2 superstring model based
on the psu(1, 1|2) superalgebra. The corresponding reduced Lagrangian is found to be the same
as that of the N = 2 supersymmetric extension of the sine-Gordon model.
There are also several Appendices AE containing some technical details and definitions.
2. Examples of reduced models: Strings in Rt S 2 and Rt S 3
Let us begin with a review of the prototypical example: reduction of the S 2 sigma model to
the sine-Gordon model [14]. Starting with the action of the sigma model on the sphere written in
1
d 2 L where ( = 0 1 )
terms of the embedding coordinates S = 4

L = + X m X m X m X m 1 , m = 1, 2, 3,
(2.1)
we get for the classical equations of motion
+ X m + X m = 0,
= + X m X m ,
X m X m = 1.
(2.2)
Then the stress tensor satisfies

T+ = 0,
+ T = 0,
T++ = 0,
T = X m X m ,
(2.3)
so that T++ = f (+ ), T = h( ). Since the theory is classically conformally invariant one

can apply conformal transformations to put T into the special constant form
+ X m + X m = 2 ,
X m X m = 2 ,
= const.
(2.4)
This effectively fixes one of the two fields of S 2
leaving us with a one-dimensional reduced theory. Indeed, one can introduce a new field variable via the following non-local transformation
Xm
2 cos 2 = + X m X m .
(2.5)
Xm
Then the equations for

(2.2) and the conditions (2.4) are solved provided is subject to the
2
sine-Gordon (SG) equation + + 2 sin 2 = 0. The latter follows from
2
L = + +
(2.6)
cos 2,
2
which is thus the Lagrangian of the reduced theory. The classical solutions and integrable
structure (Lax pair, etc.) of the original sigma model and its reduced counterpart are then directly
related.
This reduction from sigma model on S 2 to the SG theory has also an equivalent interpretation
as a classical equivalence between the bosonic string theory in Rt S 2 in a special gauge and
the SG theory. Indeed, starting with the Polyakov string action containing the time direction
term + t t in addition to the S 2 term (2.1) and choosing the conformal gauge combined
with t = (to fix the residual conformal reparametrisation symmetry) we end up with the
same conditions (2.4), now interpreted as the conformal gauge (Virasoro) constraints. Then the
455
classical string equations on Rt S 2 become equivalent to the SG equation for the one remaining
transverse degree of freedom parametrized by (the gauge conditions eliminate 1 + 1 out of
1 + 2 string degrees of freedom).
One interesting outcome of the above reduction is that while the conditions (2.4) obviously
violate the 2d Lorentz invariance of the original theory (t = spontaneously breaks the
2d Lorentz invariance in the string-theory version of the reduction), the resulting SG theory is
still Lorentz invariant. Note also that the SO(3) global symmetry of the original model (2.1)
becomes trivial in the reduced model: defined in (2.5) is SO(3) invariant. Given a SG solution
for and thus a specific value of the Lagrange multiplier function = 2 cos 2 = + X m X m
in (2.2) one can reconstruct the corresponding solution for Xm by solving the linear equation
+ X m + X m = 0.6 For a given solution for Xm one can then find the corresponding SO(3)
conserved charges. Thus the classical solitonic spectra of the two models should be in direct
correspondence (see [3032] for some specific examples).
This classical equivalence relation obviously breaks down in quantum theory where there
are UV divergences and mass generation in the S 2 sigma model so that the classical conformal
invariance is broken (invalidating, in particular, the argument leading to (2.4)). Still, one may
hope that an analog of this reduction may extend to the quantum level in the case of a theory like
AdS5 S 5 superstring which remains conformally invariant upon quantisation.
The above reduction has a straightforward generalisation to the case when S 2 is replaced by S 3
[14,22]. The reduced model corresponding to the string on Rt S 3 is the complex sine-Gordon
(CSG) model
2
L = + + tan2 + +
(2.7)
cos 2.
2
The variables and are expressed in terms of the SO(4) invariant combinations of derivatives
of the original variables Xm (m = 1, 2, 3, 4)
2 cos 2 = + X m X m ,
1
2 l
3 sin2 = mnkl X m + X n X k
(2.8)
X.
2
Again, the integrable structures and the soliton solutions of the two models are closely related
(see [31,32]).7 The CSG model can be interpreted as a special case of a non-Abelian Toda
theory [27]a massive integrable perturbation of a gauged (coset) WZW model (here SO(3)
SO(2)
model) [52].8
Reduced equations of motion for sigma models on higher spheres S n (n = 4, 5, . . .) involve field variables related to SO(n + 1) invariants built out of Xm and its higher derivatives
2 X , 3 X , . . . (with indices contracted using
Xm ,
m m
mk and m1 ...mn+1 ); they were found
in [17] (see also [16,19]). The resulting equations were not, however, derivable from a local
Lagrangian.
6 To find periodic solutions on R S 1 one would need to start with a periodic solution of SG model and also impose
periodicity on Xm in solving the linear system.
7 Let us mention that an alternative reduced theory for the S 3 sigma model formulated in terms of currents that also
solve the Virasoro conditions for a string on Rt S 3 was discussed by Faddeev and Reshetikhin [53,54]. However, the FR
model is not manifestly 2d Lorentz invariant and thus appears to be less useful than the corresponding Pohlmeyer-reduced
theory, i.e. the CSG. The precise relation between the two models is worth further study.
8 The corresponding quantum S-matrix was discussed in [55].
456
It was later shown in [24] that they can be obtained as a particular gauge-fixed version of the
SO(n)
classical equations of the SO(n1)
gauged WZW model with an integrable potential term. This
provided a Lagrangian formulation of these equations on the extended field space including the
2d gauge field A of the gWZW model.
This construction gives a strong indication that there should exist an alternative version of the
classical reduced equations of motion which is manifestly Lagrangian, i.e. that can be derived
from an action containing only physical reduced set of fields as was found in the previous
cases of the SG and CSG models.
The reason for this expectation is that the classical equations written in the Lax-pair form
admit different gauge-equivalent [15] versions related by (non-local) field redefinitions.9 This
was already noticed in [19] in the S 3 case where the field variables corresponding to the CSG
model were related by a non-local transformation to the variables of the reduced model of [17].
Below we shall present an explicit form of the reduced Lagrangian models for the string on
Rt S 4 and Rt S 5 ; the AdSn versions can be found by an analytic continuation. One is then able
to write down the reduced Lagrangian for the bosonic part of the AdS5 S 5 theory. The basic idea
SO(n)
is to follow [24] and start with the SO(n1)
gWZW model with a relevant integrable perturbation
term but instead of fixing the gauge field A = 0 as in [24] fix the gauge on the group element
and integrate out the gauge field A as in [3638,40] (see also [25,29]). In the case of the SO(3)
SO(2)
(or equivalently SU(2)
U (1) ) model that procedure immediately explains the appearance of the familiar
D = 2 target space metric in the CSG action (2.7) as was originally observed in [39].
The construction of the reduced models based on the conformal gauge and fixing the remaining conformal transformations by t = condition was applied above to a string on Rt S n .
The same can be done for the bosonic string model on AdSn S 1 in conformal gauge and with
fixing the residual conformal symmetry choosing the S 1 angle equal to . Denoting the em2 + Y 2 + + Y 2 = 1) the AdS
bedding coordinates of AdSn as Ys (with Y s Ys = Y02 Y1
n
n
1
Lagrangian is then the analog of (2.1)

L = + Y s Ys Y s Ys + 1 ,
(2.9)
with the equations of motion and conformal gauge constraints being
s = 0,
+ Ys + Y
+ Ys + Y = ,
s
= + Y s Ys ,
Y s Ys = 1,
(2.10)
Ys Y = .
s
(2.11)
By concentrating on the plane formed by the normalized vectors + Y s and Y s (orthogonal

to Y s ) one can see that their scalar product can be set equal to
+ Y s Ys = 2 cosh 2,
where is a new variable (cf. (2.5)). Then in the AdS2 case we get + +
which follows from the reduced Lagrangian (cf. (2.6))
2
cosh 2.
L = +
2
(2.12)
2
2
sinh 2 = 0
(2.13)
9 This is a classical gauge equivalence when gauge transformations at the level of Lax equations lead to equivalent
integrable systems. The resulting non-local relation at the level of field theory models does not, in general, extend to the
quantum level, cf. [34,35].
457
Let us now explain how the above special examples can be generalized to the case of the
bosonic string on AdSn S n . Denoting the embedding coordinates of AdSn as Ys and the coordinates of S n as Xm the conformal gauge condition means the vanishing of the total stress
tensor,
T++ (Y ) + T++ (X) = 0,
T (Y ) + T (X) = 0.
(2.14)
Since in the conformal gauge the equations of motion for Ys and Xm factorize, the corresponding stress tensors are separately traceless and conserved. Then instead of using t =
or = conditions (t is now part of AdSn and part of S n ) we can fix the residual conformal transformation freedom implicitly by following [14] and demanding as in (2.4) that
T (X) = 2 = const. Then (2.14) implies that
T (X) = 2 ,
T (Y ) = 2 .
(2.15)
We thus get two decoupled AdSn and S n sigma models with the constraints (2.15), to which we
can separately apply the Pohlmeyers reduction procedure. That eliminates 1 + 1 out of n + n
degrees of freedom, leaving us with an action for only the (n 1) + (n 1) physical degrees of
freedom.
Later in Section 6 we shall discuss a generalisation of this reduction procedure to the presence
of the superstring fermions when the AdSn and S n parts are no longer decoupled.
3. Coset sigma model and the corresponding gauged WZW model with an integrable
potential
Let us give a short review of a coset sigma model (of which S n model is a special case) and the
associated gauged WZW model. This will set up the notation for Section 4 where we are going
to construct an explicit change of variables which relates the F /G coset sigma model to certain
G/H gauged WZW model with a potential, giving an explicit realisation of the relationship
originally proposed in [24].
3.1. F /G coset sigma model
Let G be a subgroup of a Lie group F and M = F /G be a coset space. Let us assume that
the Lie algebra f of F is equipped with a positive-definite invariant bilinear form ,; explicitly,
let F be a matrix group and a, b = Tr(ab). In addition let F /G be a symmetric space which is
the case when
f = p g,
[g, g] g,
[g, p] p,
[p, p] g,
(3.1)
where p denotes the orthogonal complement of the algebra g of G in f. The action of the sigma
model on F /G is given by

1
d 2 ab Tr(Pa Pb ), Pa = f 1 a f p ,
S=
(3.2)
2
where ( )p denotes the orthogonal projection to p, i.e.
J = f 1 df = A + P ,
A = Jg g, P = Jp p.
(3.3)
The action is invariant under the G gauge transformation f f g for an arbitrary G valued
function g. Indeed, under this transformation J = f 1 df g 1 (f 1 df )g + g 1 dg so that P
458
transforms into g 1 P g ensuring the invariance of the Lagrangian. The current J and therefore
the action is also invariant under the global F symmetry f f0 f for any constant f0 F .
Furthermore, the classical coset sigma model action is invariant under the 2d conformal transformations.
The equations of motion take the form

Da P a = 0, Da = a + [Aa , ], Aa = f 1 a f g .
(3.4)
Using the light-cone coordinates + , they can also be written as
D+ P = 0,
D P+ = 0.
Indeed, the zero curvature condition for the current J projected to p implies

+ J J+ + [J+ , J ] p = + P P+ + [A+ , P ] + [P+ , A ] = 0,
(3.5)
(3.6)
i.e. D+ P D P+ = 0. This together with (3.4), i.e. D+ P + D P+ = 0, then leads to (3.5).10

The non-vanishing components of the stress-tensor are
1
1
T = Tr(P P ).
T++ = Tr(P+ P+ ),
(3.7)
2
2
Equations of motion imply the conservation law T++ = 0, + T = 0. Then making an appropriate conformal transformations one can always set as in (2.4) T = 2 .
The Lax representation for the coset sigma model is found from the zero curvature condition
d + = 0 for the Lax connection

= d + (A+ + P+ ) + d A + 1 P ,
(3.8)
i.e.

+ + A+ + P+ , + A + 1 P = 0,
(3.9)
where is a spectral parameter. The equations of motion (3.5) follow from (3.9) as the coefficients of order 1 and terms. The coefficient of the order 0 term is the g-component of the
zero curvature condition for the connection J = A + P .
Let us recall also two representations of the Lagrangian of the F /G sigma model. One is
to introduce an explicit parametrisation of the coset M = F /G as embedded into F . If x i are
coordinates on M, let dx i Ji be a pullback of J to M. Then the Lagrangian in (3.2) takes the
form

1
L = ab a x i b x j Gij (x), Gij (x) = Tr Ji (x)Jj (x) ,
(3.10)
2
where Gij is the metric on the coset space. Note that by choosing a particular parametrisation of
the coset we have fixed the G gauge symmetry. An alternative form of L is found by introducing
a gauge field Aa g which serves to implement the projection of the f-current on p

1
L = ab Tr f (a + Aa )f 1 f (b + Ab )f 1 ,
2
(3.11)
10 Note that the global right F -symmetry is not seen at the level of equations of motion written in terms of currents
because all the currents are explicitly invariant.
459
or, equivalently,

1
L = ab Tr f 1 a f Aa f 1 b f Ab .
2
Substituting the equation of motion for A

A = A = f 1 df g
(3.12)
(3.13)
into (3.11) one returns back to the original Lagrangian in (3.2).

3.2. G/H gauged WZW model with an integrable potential
As was suggested in [24] (see also [25]), a sigma model on a symmetric space F /G can be reduced to a symmetric space sine-Gordon model with a Lagrangian formulation in terms of the
G
11
H leftright symmetrically gauged WZW model with a gauge-invariant integrable potential.
The potential is determined by a choice of two elements T+ , T in the maximal Abelian
subspace a in the complement p of the Lie algebra g of G in the algebra f of F . The algebra h of
the subgroup H of G should be the centralizer of T in g: [h, T ] = 0. Then the action is
2

d
S (g, A) = SgWZW (g, A) 2
(3.14)
Tr T+ g 1 T g ,
2
where SgWZW is the action of the leftright symmetrically gauged WZW model [41] (we omit an
overall level k factor)
2
3

d 1
d 1
SgWZW =
Tr g + gg 1 g +
Tr g dg g 1 dg g 1 dg
4
12
2

d
(3.15)
Tr A+ gg 1 A g 1 + g g 1 A+ gA + A+ A .
2
Here g G and A h (all the fields are assumed to be matrices in a given representation of F
or of its Lie algebra f). Note that using PolyakovWiegmann identity the action (3.15) can be
written also in the following form

SgWZW = SWZW h1 gh SWZW h1 h ,
(3.16)
A+ = h1 + h,
A = h 1 h .
(3.17)
To define the action with T belonging to the algebra of F it is assumed that g G is trivially (diagonally) embedded into F . The action is then invariant under the vector gauge transformations
with parameters taking values in H :
g hgh1 ,
Aa h(Aa + a )h1 ,
h H,
(3.18)
where Aa h and h1 T h = T (since [a, h] = 0).

11 This is a special case of a non-Abelian Toda theory [27]. Non-Abelian Toda models are of the two basic types
homogeneous sine-Gordon and symmetric space sine-Gordon [25]. For the first type the gWZW part of the Toda
G
model corresponds to [U (1)]
r (r is a rank of G). The models of the second type are reduced theories associated to sigma
models on compact symmetric spaces. They are quantum-integrable but their S-matrix is not known, except for special
cases of SG and CSG models. A review can be found in [43].
460
The equations of motion following from (3.15) are

g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g + A

+ A , g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g + 2 g 1 T g, T+ = 0,

A = gg 1 + gA g 1 h .
A+ = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g h ,
(3.19)
(3.20)
Note that g 1 T g p so that [T+ , g 1 T g] m, where g = m h. In particular, the

h-component of the first equation implies that Aa is flat,
+ A A+ + [A+ , A ] = 0.
(3.21)
Let us comment on the classical integrability of the above model (3.14). It is well known that
the equations of motion of the standard WZW model can be written in the Lax form. The same
also applies to gauged WZW model with the above potential. More precisely, using [Aa , T ] = 0
one can show that Eq. (3.19) can be written in the Lax form, i.e. it follows from [L+ , L ] = 0
where ( is a spectral parameter)
L+ = + + g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g + T+ ,
L = + A + 1 g 1 T g,
or, equivalently, from the zero curvature equation for the f-valued Lax connection

= d + g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g + T+ + d A + 1 g 1 T g .
(3.22)
(3.23)
While the remaining equations (3.20) (constraints) do not follow from this condition, they may
be considered as consequences of (3.19) in the sense that given a solution to (3.19) one can find
a gauge transformation such that the transformed solution satisfies (3.20).
This is possible because Eq. (3.19) has a larger gauge symmetry than the original gWZW
model (3.15): it is invariant under the H H gauge symmetry
g h1 g h,
A+ h1 A+ h + h1 + h,
A h 1 A h + h 1 h,
(3.24)
where h and h are two arbitrary H -valued functions. The symmetry of (3.15) is the diagonal
of the extended on-shell gauge symmetry (3.24). It turns out that using
subgroup (with h = h)
this extended symmetry one can fulfill the constraints (3.20). Further details and the proof are
relegated to Appendix A. We shall also use this observation in Section 4.
Let us note also that given an automorphism of the algebra H preserving the trace one can
fix the H H gauge symmetry of the equations of motion in a more general way so that (3.20)
is replaced by

(A+ ) = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g h ,
(3.25)
A = gg 1 + g (A )g 1 h .
The corresponding equations (3.19), (3.25) then follow from the Lagrangian (3.14), (3.15) with
the replacement
A (A )
in the A g 1 + g and
g h1 g (h) where
(3.26)
g 1 A+ gA
the
terms. The corresponding gauge symmetry is then
is a lift of from h to H (see [25,29]). In this case the leftright symmetrically gauged WZW model is thus replaced by a more general asymmetrically gauged WZW
model [33,40].
461
It was observed in [24] that since the field strength of Aa vanishes (3.21) on the equations of
motion, one can choose a gauge where12
A+ = A = 0.
Then the classical equations (3.19), (3.20) reduce to

g 1 + g 2 T+ , g 1 T g = 0,

1
gg 1 h = 0.
g + g h = 0,
(3.27)
(3.28)
(3.29)
These equations happen to be equivalent to the equations of motion of the reduced F /G model
found in [16,18,19].
Various special cases, structure of vacua and solitonic solutions of Eqs. (3.28), (3.29) were
discussed in [29,43] and references there.
The set of Eqs. (3.28), (3.29) do not directly follow from a local Lagrangian. As was implied in [24], to get a local Lagrangian formulation of these equations one is to go back to the
action (3.15) on a bigger configuration space involving both g and Aa with the gauge invariance (3.18).
At the same time, one would like also to have a reduced action involving only the independent
degrees of freedom, i.e. generalizing the actions of the SG (2.6) and the CSG (2.7) models.
Below in Section 4 we shall explain why and under which conditions the relation between the
equations of the reduced theory corresponding to the F /G coset model and the equations of the
G/H gWZW model proposed in [24] actually works. Then in Section 5 we shall suggest how to
use this correspondence to find a local Lagrangian for the physical number of degrees of freedom
of the reduced model.
The main observation will be that there exists an equivalent representation for the classical
equations following from (3.14) (or gauge-equivalent, in the sense of [15], representation of the
Lax equations corresponding to (3.22)) in which they admit an explicit Lagrangian formulation
without any residual gauge invariance, thus generalizing the SG and CSG examples. Instead of
the on-shell gauge Aa = 0 used in [24] one can impose an of-shell H -gauge on the group
element g and then solve for the gauge field Aa . Integrating out Aa then leads to a sigma model
for the independent dim(G/H ) number of parameters in g in the same way as in the examples
of conformal sigma models associated to gWZW models [36,38,40].13
4. Reduced theory for F /G coset sigma model: Equations of motion
The strategy to relate the equations of motion of the F /G coset model to those of the G/H
gWZW model will be to impose the so-called reduction gauge in the equations of the F /G
model (3.5) written in terms of the independent current components and then to make use of
the 2d conformal symmetry to eliminate one additional degree of freedom. This will allow us
to solve all gauge-fixed equations of motion but the MaurerCartan equation explicitly in terms
of a new field g taking values in G and the h-valued gauge field A . The remaining system of
12 This gauge is thus possible only on-shell; to gauge away A at the level of the gWZW Lagrangian one would need
a
some additional local gauge invariance.
13 Integrating out the gauge field at the quantum level induces also a dilaton [36]; there are also quantum 1/k
corrections to the sigma model background fields [4547]. These will be ignored at the classical level we are restricted
to here.
462
equations (i.e. the components of the MaurerCartan equation in this parametrization) will turn
out to be invariant under both the left and the right H gauge symmetries. We will then prove
that one can impose the special gauge conditions under which the gauge symmetry reduces to
that of the H -gauge invariance of the G/H gWZW model and the equations become equivalent
to the ones (3.19), (3.20) following from the gWZW action with an integrable potential (3.14)
described in Section 3.2.
4.1. Equation of motion in terms of currents and the reduction gauge
The relation between the reduced F /G model and the G/H gWZW model will apply under
certain special conditions on the structure of the Lie algebras of the groups involved. These
conditions that we will specify below will be satisfied, in particular, in the case of the S n =
SO(n + 1)/SO(n) model (and its AdSn counterpart) which is our main interest here.
Let a be a maximal Abelian subspace of the orthogonal complement p of the algebra g of G
in the algebra f of F . Let h be its centralizer in g. Following [18] we shall assume the following
conditions on the structure of these algebras (which represent a special case of (3.1))
f = p g,
[m, m] h,
p = a n,
[m, h] m,
g = m h,
[m, a] n,
[a, a] = 0,
[h, a] = 0,
[a, n] m.
(4.1)
(4.2)
= f 1 df
Starting with a left-invariant current J

with f F we shall use the following notation
for its h, m and p components

Aa = f 1 a f h ,
(4.3)
Ba = f 1 a f m ,
Pa = f 1 a f p ,
i.e. Aa g in (3.3) is equal to Aa + Ba . The equations of motion of the F /G sigma model (3.5)
written in terms of the current components Aa , Ba , Pa viewed as independent fields then take
the form
D+ P = 0,
D P+ = 0,
+ (A + B ) (A+ + B+ ) + [A+ + B+ , A + B ] = [P , P+ ],
(4.4)
(4.5)
where D = + [A + B , ]. The choice of the reduction gauge [18] is based on the polar
decomposition theorem which states that for any k p there exists g0 G such that g01 kg0 a.
Using the G gauge freedom of the coset model equations of motion one can therefore assume
that one of the components of Pa , e.g., P+ is a-valued. Then D P+ = 0 implies
P+ = 0,
[B , P+ ] = 0.
(4.6)
Here we made use of the condition [m, a] n in (4.2). Under a certain regularity condition which
we shall assume (in the case when a is one-dimensional, e.g., for F /G = SO(n + 1)/SO(n), it is
enough to require that P+ = 0) the equation [B , P+ ] = 0 implies that
B = 0.
(4.7)
To summarise, by imposing the gauge in which P+ a and eliminating B by solving

[B , P+ ] = 0 (i.e. setting B to zero) one can bring the system of the F /G model equations
of motion (4.4), (4.5) to the following form:
P+ = 0,
+ P + [A+ , P ] + [B+ , P ] = 0,
(4.8)
463
B+ + [A , B+ ] = [P+ , P ],
(4.9)
A+ + A + [A , A+ ] = 0,
(4.10)
where (4.9) and (4.10) are m and h projections of (4.5) (we are using the conditions (4.1), (4.2)).
In this reduction gauge the original G gauge symmetry is reduced to H gauge symmetry under
which the current component A transforms as a gauge potential while B and P transform
covariantly, i.e. as ( ) h1 ( )h. In particular, P+ is invariant because it takes values in a
and [a, h] = 0.
Let us note that (4.10) implies that we can impose the on-shell H gauge where A = 0. In
this gauge the equations of motion (4.8), (4.9) take the form:
P+ = 0,
+ P = [P , B+ ],
B+ = [P+ , P ].
(4.11)
4.2. Fixing conformal symmetry, field redefinition and relation to G/H gauged WZW model
The first equation P+ = 0 in (4.8) implies that P+ = P+ ( + ). One can then fix one
component of the matrix function P+ using the residual conformal symmetry under which
P+ d + = P+ d + . Since in the reduction gauge P+ belongs to the Abelian subspace a of p,
then if dim a = 1 (which is the case, e.g., for the SO(n + 1)/SO(n) coset of our interest) one can
always assume that P+ = T+ where T+ a is a constant matrix in f which is a basic element
of a (we may also normalize it so that Tr(T+ T+ ) = 2). This is equivalent to requiring that the
corresponding component of the stress tensor in (3.7) is constant, i.e. T++ = 2 .
Furthermore, we can use the remaining conformal symmetry ( ) to fix the T
component in (3.7) also to be constant as in the original Pohlmeyers argument.14 Thus assuming
that the maximal Abelian subspace a of p = f g is 1-dimensional and using the conformal
symmetry we arrive at
P+ = T+ ,
T = 2 ,
1
Tr(P P ) = 2 ,
2
, T+ = const.
(4.12)
(4.13)
The first condition in (4.12) fixes one independent degree of freedom contained in P+ in the case
when dim a = 1 and the second condition reduces by one the number of independent degrees of
freedom in P . The normalization condition on P can be solved by
P = g 1 T g,
T = const,
(4.14)
where g G is a new field variable (thus non-locally related to original variable f F in (4.3))
and T is a constant matrix which is a fixed element of a. The existence of such g follows
again from the polar decomposition theorem, and the requirement of T = 2 implies that
Tr(T T ) = 2. In the case of dim a = 1 which we are considering here it follows that
T + = T T .
(4.15)
For generality and to indicate the Lorentz index structure, below we shall often keep the separate
notation for T+ and T .
14 The conservation equation T
+ = 0 can be seen directly from the second equation in (4.11).
464
The equation for P in (4.8) written in terms of g in (4.14) then becomes

+ g 1 T g + A+ , g 1 T g = 0, A+ = A+ + B+ .
(4.16)
Considering A+ g as an unknown, the general solution of this equation can be written as

A+ = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g,
(4.17)
A+
is an arbitrary h-valued function. Indeed, the first term in (4.17) is obviously a parwhere
ticular solution of (4.16) (since T = const) while the second term is a general solution of the
homogeneous equation [A+ , g 1 T g] = 0 (given that [A+ , T ] = 0 since [h, a] = 0). Thus

B+ = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g m .
A+ = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g h ,
(4.18)
In terms of the new variables g, A+ , A the first two equations of motion in (4.4) or (4.8) are
solved and the remaining equation (4.5) (or (4.9), (4.10) which are its m and h components) then
takes the form

g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g + A + A , g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g = 2 T+ , g 1 T g .
(4.19)
As discussed in Section 3.2, this equation is equivalent to the equations of motion of the gWZW
theory (3.19), (3.20) in the sense that by an appropriate gauge transformation one can always
make the following constraints satisfied:

A = g g 1 + gA g 1 h .
A+ = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g h ,
(4.20)
After renaming A+ as A+ these are exactly the equation of motion (3.19) and the constraints (3.20).15
We have thus shown that the original system of equations of the F /G sigma model (4.8),
(4.9), (4.10) is equivalent to the one described by Eq. (4.19) and the constraints (4.20) with
These are the same equations of motion (3.19), the
the H gauge symmetry (3.24) with h = h.
constraints (3.20) and the gauge symmetry as corresponding to the action (3.14) of the G/H
gauged WZW model (3.15) with the potential 2 Tr(T+ g 1 T g).
That the reduced equations of motion of the F /G coset model can be related to those of the
gWZW model with an integrable potential was first suggested in [24] (and checked on several
examples including SO(n + 1)/SO(n), SU(n + 1)/U (n), and SU(n)/SO(n) cosets). Here we
explained why this correspondence should work in general and specified the necessary conditions
on the groups and the algebras involved.
4.3. Gauge equivalence of Lax representations for the F /G coset and G/H gauged WZW
models
Imposing the reduction gauge in terms of the Lax connections can be achieved in a directly
analogous way. Let be an f-valued Lax connection defined in (3.8). The gauge equivalence
transformation = f 1 f + f 1 df with f F gives a new system determined by a gaugeequivalent Lax connection . Decomposing = p + g one observes that in the special case
15 More generally one, can consider asymmetrical gauge by introducing the appropriate h-automorphism . See the
respective discussion in Section 3.2.
465
of f = g G the component p transforms as p = g 1 p g. Using the same polar decomposition argument as discussed above one concludes that it is always possible to find a G-valued
function g such that (cf. (4.1)) (n )+ = (A+ + B+ + P+ )n = 0.
Decomposing according to f = p m h

= d + (A+ + B+ + P+ ) + d A + B + 1 P ,
A h,
B m,
P+ a,
P p,
(4.21)
one finds as above that the compatibility condition implies Eqs. (4.6), i.e. P+ = 0 and
[P+ , B ] = 0; the latter gives again B = 0. This allows us to relate the Lax connection to
that with B = 0, i.e.

= d + (A+ + B+ + P+ ) + d A + 1 P ,
(4.22)
whose flatness condition implies the last two equations in (4.8).16
As for the equations P+ = 0 and + P + [A+ + B+ , P ] = 0 in (4.8), assuming they are
satisfied, one can again use the conformal transformations to set P+ = T+ and Tr(P P ) =
22 . As a result, the Lax connection takes the following form:

red = d + (A+ + B+ + T+ ) + d A + 1 P .
(4.23)
Finally, using again the parametrisation P = g 1 T g and A+ + B+ = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g,
one arrives at

= d + g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g + T+ + d A + 1 g 1 T g ,
(4.24)
whose compatibility condition implies (4.19). It was shown in the previous subsection that by an
appropriate gauge transformation one can also satisfy the on-shell relations (4.20). We thus find
the relation to the Lax representation of the G/H gWZW model (cf. (3.20), (3.23)).
4.4. Reduced equations of S n = SO(n + 1)/SO(n) coset model in the A = 0 gauge
Let us now turn to the special case of our interest: sigma model with a sphere as a target space.
Using the standard (n + 1) (n + 1) matrix representation for F = SO(n + 1) and its diagonally
embedded G = SO(n) subgroup we can choose T+ = T to have only one non-zero upper 2 2
block so that H = SO(n 1) is also diagonally embedded into G = SO(n) (the conditions (4.1),
(4.2) are then satisfied). In this case we get for P in (4.12), (4.14)
0
1 ... 0
1 0 . . . 0
P+ = T+ =
,
... ... ... ...
0
0 ... 0
0
k 1 . . . kn
0 ... 0
k
P = 1
(4.25)
.
... ... ... ...
kn 0 . . . 0
16 Note that this reduction is local as B = 0 is an algebraic consequence of the compatibility condition, i.e. B is an
auxiliary field.
466
Here g in (4.14) is parametrized by kl and 12 Tr(P+ P+ ) = 2 . Also, 12 Tr(P P ) = 2 is

satisfied provided
n

ks ks = 1.
(4.26)
s=1
The subalgebras g = so(n) and h = so(n 1) are canonically (diagonally) embedded into f =
so(n + 1). In addition to B = 0 from (4.6), (4.7) we have for B+ = (A+ )m (see (4.16))
0
0
0 ... 0
0
b2 . . . bn
0
B+ = 0 b2 0 . . . 0 .
(4.27)
... ... ... ... ...

0 bn 0 . . . 0
In this case the equation + P + [A+ , P ] = [P , B+ ] in (4.8) can be solved algebraically for
B+ giving (4.27) with
+ kl + [A+ , k]l
,
bl =

1 nm=2 km km
l = 2, . . . , n.
(4.28)
Fixing the H = SO(n 1) on-shell gauge as

A+ = A = 0,
(4.29)
the third equation in (4.8) then gives the following reduced system of equations for the remaining
n 1 unknown functions k2 , . . . , kn (k1 is determined from (4.26)) [19]

+ kl
n
= 2 kl ,
l = 2, . . . , n.
(4.30)
m=2 km km
This is the same reduced system that follows both from the SO(n + 1)/SO(n) coset model [16,18]
and the SO(n)/SO(n 1) gWZW model in the A = 0 gauge [24]. The point g = 1 is an obvious
vacuum for Eq. (3.19) in the A = 0 gauge, i.e. a trivial solution of (3.28), (3.29) with T+ = T .
According to (4.14), (4.25) it corresponds to
k2 = = kn = 0.
(4.31)
The massive fluctuations near this vacuum in the gauge (4.29) are described by the H =
SO(n 1) invariant equation (4.30), i.e.

+ kl + 2 kl + O kl2 = 0.
(4.32)
It is convenient to rewrite Eq. (4.30) in terms of the new variables (, um ) defined so that
(4.26) is satisfied
k1 = cos 2,
kl = ul sin 2,
ul ul = 1,
l = 2, . . . , n,
(4.33)
getting [19]
1
2
tan 2+ ul ul +
sin 2 = 0,
2
2

2
1
+ ul + (+ um um )ul +
cos 2+ ul +
+ ul = 0.
sin 2
cos 2
(4.34)
467
Besides the obvious SO(n1) symmetry these equations are invariant under the following formal
transformation
+ ,
(4.35)
2 2 .
2
In the case of F /G = SO(4)/SO(3), i.e. CSG as a reduced model, this formal transformation
relates the two 2d dual reduced models with T-dual target space metrics in the corresponding
reduced Lagrangians [23,29,39].17
Let us briefly describe the modifications of the above construction in the case of the AdSn =
SO(2, n 1)/SO(1, n 1) coset model. The vector-space signature is diag(1, 1, 1, . . . , 1)
and the subgroup G = SO(1, n 1) is diagonaly embedded. In the standard representation of
f = so(2, n 1) the element T+ = T can
be choosen to have the same form as in (4.25) while
the condition (4.26) takes the form k1 k1 nm=2 km km = 1. Eq. (4.30) is then replaced by

1+
+ kl
n
= 2 kl ,
l = 2, . . . , n.
(4.36)
m=2 km km
Finally, introducing instead of (4.33) the parametrization

k1 = cosh 2,
kl = ul sinh 2,
ul ul = 1,
l = 2, . . . , n,
(4.37)
one arrives at the system (4.34) for , ul with the obvious replacement of cos , sin , tan
with cosh , sinh , tanh . The two systems of equations are thus related by the replacement
= i, as one would expect from the standard analytic continuation argument. Remarkably,
the variables ul satisfy the same normalization condition in the S n and the AdSn cases and both
systems are invariant under the same H = SO(n 1) symmetry. Note also that in the AdSn
case the linearized equations (4.32) have exactly the same form leading to the same massive
fluctuations near the vacuum g = 1.
Instead of using the parametrization of P in terms of kl in (4.25) we may start with a particular choice of g G which then determines P according to (4.14). Parametrising g G = SO(n)
by the generalized Euler angles and expressing P in terms of them one arrives at a certain
multi-field generalisation of the sine-Gordon equation which is just another form of (4.34) ( introduced in (4.33) corresponds then to the first Euler angle). In the SO(3)/SO(2) case this gives
the standard sine-Gordon equation

cos 2
sin 2
g=
,
k1 = cos 2,
(4.38)
k2 = sin 2,
sin 2 cos 2
2
sin 2 = 0.
2
In the SO(4)/SO(3) case we can parametrize g SO(3) as
+ +
(4.39)
g1 = exp(2R1 ),
g2 = exp(R2 ),
g = g 2 g1 g2 ,

0 1 0
0 0 0
R2 = 0 0 1 .
R1 = 1 0 0 ,
0 0 0
0 1 0
(4.40)
(4.41)
17 In this case of SO(3)/SO(2) gWZW model this duality is also related with the vector (g h1 gh) or the axial
(g hgh) gauging [44,45].
468
The corresponding components of the unit vector ks in (4.25), (4.33) are

k1 = cos 2,
k2 = sin 2 cos ,
k3 = sin 2 sin .
(4.42)
The equations of motion (4.34) take the form

1
2
tan 2+ +
sin 2 = 0,
2
2

2
1
+ +
cos 2+ +
+ = 0.
sin 2
cos 2
+
(4.43)
These equations can be brought to the standard complex sine-Gordon form by a (non-local)
change of variables (which may be interpreted as a gauge change in (3.19), (3.20)). Indeed,
replacing by via
+ =
cos2
+ ,
cos 2
= cos2 ,
(4.44)
we get [19]:
sin
2
+
sin 2 = 0,
+
2
cos3
2
+ +
(4.45)
(+ + + ) = 0,
sin 2
which follow from the local CSG Lagrangian (2.7). If we replace Eq. (4.44) by the transformation
+
sin2
(4.46)
= sin2 ,
+ ,
cos 2
we get instead of (4.45) the equations that follow from the analog of (2.7) with T-dual target space
metric: ds 2 = d 2 + cot2 d 2 . Both the corresponding dual Lagrangian and its equations of
motion are related, respectively, to (2.7) and (4.45) by the transformation (4.35). The fields
in (4.44) and in (4.46) are related of course by the 2d duality transformation.
In general, Eq. (4.30) found in the A = 0 gauge do not follow from a local Lagrangian for the
field km (apart from the n = 2, i.e. the SG case). In particular, this applies to the system (4.43):
one needs a nontrivial field redefinition (4.44) (which is consistent only on the equations of
motion for ) to get a Lagrangian system (4.45).
Such a non-local field redefinition may be interpreted as corresponding to a change of the H
gauge. A way to get a Lagrangian system of the reduced equations is to fix the H gauge not
on A (as was done in [24] and above in this section) but on g, i.e. to solve the equations for A
in terms of the gauge-fixed g. We shall discuss this procedure in the next section.
+ =
5. Lagrangian of reduced theory: S n = SO(n + 1)/SO(n) model

As we have seen in Section 4, the reduced equations of motion of the F /G coset model are in
general gauge-equivalent to the equations of motion of the G/H gWZW model with a specific
integrable potential. To get a Lagrangian formulation of the reduced theory corresponding to the
F /G model (or, equivalently, to the bosonic string on Rt F /G in the conformal gauge) we
may then start with the associated G/H gWZW model, fix an H -gauge on g G and solve for
the auxiliary gauge field A . This will produce a classically-equivalent integrable system. Here
we shall concentrate on the example of the S n sigma model.
469
5.1. General structure of the reduced Lagrangian

In the case of F /G = S n , i.e. G/H = SO(n)/SO(n 1) we will end up with an integrable
theory represented by an (n 1)-dimensional sigma model with a potential18
L = Gmk (x)+ x m x k 2 U (x).
(5.1)
The special cases are the n = 2 (2.6) and n = 3 (2.7) examples discussed above. Here
are the
n 1 (= dim G dim H ) independent components of g left over after the H gauge fixing on g.
In contrast to the metric of the usual geometric (or right) coset SO(n)/SO(n 1) = S n1
SO(n)
the metric Gmk in (5.1) found from the symmetrically gauged G/H = SO(n1)
gWZW model
19
will generically have singularities and no non-Abelian isometries. Following [42] we may call
SO(n)
these geometries resulting from conformal SO(n1)
gWZW models as conformal cosets or
n1
conformal spheres, with the notation
. Instead of Rmk = cGmk for a standard sphere their
metric Gmk satisfies Rmk + 2m k = 0 where is the corresponding dilaton resulting from
integrating out Aa . The explicit expressions for Gmk were worked out for a few low-dimensional
cases: 2 [36], 3 [37,38,40] and 4 [44]. The potential (tachyon) term in (5.1) originates
directly from the 2 term in (3.14). It is a relevant (and integrable) perturbation of the gWZW
model and thus also of the reduced geometry, so that it should satisfy (see also [48])
xm
1
Ge2
2 mk
Ge
G k U M 2 U = 0.
(5.2)
Below we shall comment on details of the derivation of the metric Gmk and write down explicitly
the reduced Lagrangian (5.1) for the new non-trivial cases of n = 4, 5, i.e. for the string on
Rt S 4 and Rt S 5 , which generalize the n = 3 CSG model (2.7).
SO(n)
gWZW Lagrangian (3.14)
The H gauge fixing on g and elimination of Aa from the SO(n1)
can be done by generalizing the discussion of the n = 4 case in [38]. The first step is the parametrisation of g in terms of the generalized Euler angles. Let us define the 1-parameter subgroups
corresponding to the SO(n + 1) generators Rm+1,m (m = 0, 1, . . . , n 1)
gm ( ) = eRm ,
(Rm )i = (Rm+1,m )i m m+1,i mi m+1 .
(5.3)
Then T = T in (3.14) is equivalent to the generator R0 corresponding to g0

T = R0
and the generators of the subgroup H = SO(n 1) which commutes with T contain Rm+1,m
with m = 2, . . . , n 1. A generic element of G = SO(n) can be parametrized as g =
gn1 (n1 ) g2 (2 )g1 (1 )h, where h belongs to H . A convenient H gauge choice is then [38]
g = gn1 (n1 ) g2 (2 )g1 (2)g2 (2 ) gn1 (n1 ),
(5.4)
so that 12 1 , and p (p = 2, . . . , n 1) are n 1 coordinates on the coset space n1 ,

with playing a distinguished role. With this choice of the parametrisation it turns out that the
18 The absence of the antisymmetric B
mn coupling has to do with the symmetric gauging of the maximal diagonal
subgroup.
19 While the gauge A = 0 preserves the explicit SO(n 1) invariance of the equations of motion, fixing the gauge
on g and integrating out Aa breaks all non-Abelian symmetries (the corresponding symmetries are then hidden).
470
potential U in (3.14), (5.1) has a universal form for any dimension n: it is simply proportional to
cos 2 as in the SG (2.6) or CSG (2.7) cases. Indeed, since [T , gk ] = 0 for k 2, one finds

Tr T+ g 1 T g = Tr T+ g11 T g1 = 2 cos 2.
(5.5)
The metric and the dilaton resulting from integrating out the H gauge field Aa satisfy20
ds 2 = Gmk dx m dx k = d 2 + gpq (, ) d p d q ,
2
Ge
= (sin 2)n2 ,
(5.6)
so that Eq. (5.2) is indeed solved by21

1
U = cos 2,
2
M 2 = 4(n 1).
(5.7)
Let us now make few remarks.

As was already mentioned, the reduced model (5.1) has no antisymmetric tensor coupling
term. The antisymmetric tensor contribution could originate either from the WZ term in the
WZW action in (3.15) or in the process of solving for the gauge field Aa . It turns out that
both contributions vanish if the gauge condition (5.4) is used. Details of the proof are given
in Appendix B.
The obvious vacuum configurations, i.e. extrema of the potential U are p = const and
= 2 n, n = 0, 1, 2, . . . . The metric gpq (, ) in (5.6) may, however, be singular near such
points, i.e. they may not be reachable in a given coordinate system and more detailed analysis
may be required.
One should keep in mind that the gWZW action (3.14) is the most general and universal
definition of the theory, while special gauges and parametrizations may have their drawbacks and
may not apply globally. For example, the elimination of the gauge fields A from (3.19) or the
gWZW action (3.15) requires solving the constraints in (3.20), i.e. A+ = (g 1 A+ g + g 1 + g)h
and A = (gA g 1 + g g 1 )h . The corresponding operator (1 Adg )h is singular near some
points g (e.g., g = 1) implying that in their vicinity one should use a different gauge or do not
directly solve for A .
For example, one may consider an asymmetrically gauged WZW model (see (3.26)) corresponding to a more general on-shell gauge (3.25); in this case one should use (5.4) with
the left-hand side factor gn1 (n1 ) g2 (2 ) replaced by (gn1 (n1 ) g2 (2 )) where is
the lift of the automorphism in (3.25). However, in the case when h is simple (e.g., for the
SO(5)/SO(4) coset) such an automorphism can always be represented as (A) = h1
Ah for
20 The dilaton field should be taken into account provided the model is defined on a curved 2d background and one
is interested in the Weyl invariance conditions (i.e. the definition of the conformal stress tensor) of the theory on the
restricted G/H part of configuration space obtained by eliminating the H gauge field [36,45,47]. In the present context
where we started with the string theory in the conformal gauge that would require a re-introduction of the 2d metric in
the reduced model; then the dilaton would couple to the metric in the standard way and would enter in the definition of
the stress tensor of the restricted sigma model (5.1). If there is indeed a path integral transformation that leads from
the original (super)coset model to the reduced model, then the latter can be considered as a usual world-sheet theory
coupled to a 2d metric (that will in general depend on moduli in the case of higher genus surfaces, etc.). The presence
of the potential term that spontaneously breaks the conformal symmetry (which was fixed by making constant) is
unrelated to the dilaton coupling issue.
21 We fix the overall normalisation constant in the WZW action so that k = 1.
471
some h H ; therefore it cannot be used to remove the degeneracy of the operator in the A+ A
part of the action.22
Finally, let us note that both the gauge fixing and the eliminating of A can be implemented
at the level of the Lax connection, leading to the Lax formulation of the reduced model in terms
of the generalized Euler angles, i.e. ensuring the integrability of the reduced model (5.1).
Let us now turn to specific examples.
5.2. Examples of reduced Lagrangians for S n models
Let us first show how to get the Lagrangian (2.7) of the CSG model directly from the SO(3)
SO(2)
gWZW model (3.14). The equation for A+ following from (3.15) reads:

A+ = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g h .
(5.8)
In the
SO(3)
SO(2)
gWZW case we have from (5.4) g = g2 ( )g1 (2)g2 ( ) so that

gg 1 = (1 cos 2)R2 ,
g 1 + g h = (1 + cos 2)R2 + ,
1 + cos 2
R2 + .
1 cos 2
One finds also

1
Tr g 1 + gg 1 g = 2(1 + cos 2)+ + 4+ ,
2

(1 + cos 2)2
Tr A+ gg 1 = 2
+ .
1 cos 2
Using (5.5) one finally obtains the Lagrangian
A+ =
(5.9)
(5.10)
2
L = + + cot2 + +
(5.11)
cos 2.
2
This Lagrangian is dual to that in (2.7), i.e. the two are related by 2d duality . As was
already mentioned above, the CSG Lagrangian (2.7) is directly obtained if we start with the
asymmetrically (axially) gauged WZW model with (A ) = A .23 Alternatively, the two
dual models are related by the formal transformation (4.35).
The explicit form of the n1 metric (5.6) with n = 2, 3, 4 as found directly from the action (3.14) with (5.4) is thus
2
= d 2 ,
dsn=2
2
dsn=3
= d 2 + cot2 d 2 ,
2

2
dsn=4
= d 2 + cot2 d2 + tan 3 cot 2 d3 + tan2
(5.12)
d32
2
sin 2
(5.13)
After a change of variables (x = cos 2 cos 3 , y = sin 3 ) we get the metric on 3 [38]
ds 2

n=4
= d 2 +
cot2 dx 2 + tan2 dy 2
.
1 x2 y2
(5.14)
22 The non-singular metrics known to arise in the SG and CSG cases are due to the fact that h = 0 in the CS case and
h = U (1) in the CSG case. As we will see below, the nonsingular metric in the CSG case is obtained by utilizing the
automorphism (A) = A. This automorphism does not, however, apply to the case of a non-Abelian h.
23 In this case the parametrization (5.4) takes the form g = (g )g g = g ()g (2)g ().
2 1 2
2
1
2
472
Thus in the case of n = 4 (i.e. for the string on Rt S 4 ) we find from (5.14), (5.7) that the
reduced theory is described by the following Lagrangian (cf. (2.7))
cot2 + x x + tan2 + y y 2
+
L = + +
cos 2.
2
1 x2 y2
(5.15)
An equivalent form of the metric of 3 (5.14) was found in [40]

ds 2

n=4
1+b
db2
dv 2
1b
du2
+
,
4(1 b2 ) 4(1 b) v(v u 2) 4(1 + b) u(v u 2)
(5.16)
as one can see by setting b = cos 2, u = 2y 2 , v = 2x 2 . The metric-dilaton background for 4

(i.e. n = 5) case was obtained in similar coordinates (b, u, v, w) in [44]. Setting b = cos 2,
w = cos , v = cos we get
ds 2
du2
(cos u)(u cos )

d 2
d 2
+ cot2 (cos cos )
+
.
4(u cos ) 4(cos u)
= d 2 + tan2
n=5
(5.17)
Together with the cos 2 potential (5.7) this metric thus defines the reduced model for the
string on Rt S 5 .
5.3. Reduced model for a bosonic string in AdSn S n
One can similarly find the reduced Lagrangians for the F /G = AdSn = SO(2, n 1)/
SO(1, n 1) coset sigma models related to the above ones by an analytic continuation. These
reduced models describe strings in AdSn S 1 spaces in the conformal gauge with the residual
conformal symmetry fixed, e.g., by choosing the S 1 angle equal to (cf. (2.15)).
As was already discussed at the end of Section 2, the reduced model for strings on AdSn S n
can then be obtained by simply combining the reduced models for strings on AdSn S 1 and on
R S n .24
For example, in the case of a string in AdS2 S 2 we then find the sum of the sine-Gordon and
sinh-Gordon Lagrangians (cf. (2.6), (2.13))
2
L = + + + +
(cos 2 cosh 2).
2
(5.18)
For a string in AdS3 S 3 we get (cf. (2.7))

L = + + tan2 + + + + tanh2 +
+
2
(cos 2 cosh 2).
2
(5.19)
24 Note that this is not the same as the reduced theory for the coset sigma model with F /G = AdS S n = [SO(2,
n
n 1)/SO(1, n 1)] [SO(n + 1)/SO(n)]: in the latter case we would set, following [14], the components of the total
stress tensor to be equal to a constant, while for a string in AdSn S n the total stress tensor should vanish. The reduced
theory for coset sigma model F /G = AdSn S n case is of course formally equivalent to the reduced theory for a string
on AdSn S n S 1 .
473
Similar bosonic actions are then found for a string in AdS4 S 4 and in AdS5 S 5 : one is to
double (5.15) and its analog corresponding to (5.17).25
Note that while the cos 2 potential is a relevant perturbation of the coset CFT in the compact S n case, the cosh 2 is an irrelevant perturbation of the corresponding coset CFT in the AdSn
case (the sign of the mass term in (5.7) is opposite). We expect that in the superstring AdS5 S 5
case the fermionic contributions will make the whole theory UV finite, i.e. the coefficient in the
potential will not run with scale and thus it can be considered like it is an exactly marginal perturbation (the value of is arbitrary). This is what happens in the AdS2 S 2 where the reduced
theory is equivalent to the (2, 2) supersymmetric sine-Gordon theory.
Expanding (5.18) near = = 0 we get two massive fluctuation modes. Doing similar expansion near the trivial vacuum in the case of (5.19) it may seem that only two modes ( and )
get masses , but, in fact, all 2 + 2 bosonic modes become massive. Indeed, as is clear from the
form of kinetic terms in (5.19), the expansion near the point where all angles are zero is singular.
This is like expanding near r = 0, = 0 on the disc ds 2 = dr 2 + r 2 d 2 ; instead, one is first to do
a transformation to Cartesian coordinates and then expand. Since and play the role of the
2
radial directions in the 2 + 2 dimensional space26 their 2 (cos 2 cosh 2) potential gives
mass to all 4 Cartesian fluctuations. In the CSG case this is the transformation that puts the
+ +
2 where = sin ei .
Lagrangian (2.7) into the familiar form L = 12 + 1
The analogous conclusion should be true also in the general AdSn S n case with n > 3 though
there a direct demonstration of this in the gauge where A are solved for is complicated by the
degeneracy of the metric gpq in (5.6). As we have already seen in (4.32), (4.30), in the S n case
all the (n 1) fluctuation modes near the trivial vacuum get mass if we start with the classical
equations of the reduced theory in the A+ = A = 0 gauge. Since the mass spectrum should be
gauge-invariant, the same should be true also in other gauges/parametrizations.
Thus in the AdS5 S 5 case we should get 4 + 4 massive bosonic modes. Similar conclusion
will be reached for the fermionic fields discussed in the next section (see (6.54)): all 8 dynamical
fermionic modes will also have mass . The free spectrum will thus be the same as in the
plane-wave limit of [7].
6. Pohlmeyer reduction of the AdS5 S 5 superstring model
S 5 superstring can be described in terms of the GreenSchwarz version of the
PSU(2,2|4)
(or, equivalently, Sp(2,2)Sp(4)
) coset sigma model [2]. In the conformal gauge its
bosonic part is the direct sum of the AdS5 and S 5 sigma models. Below we shall apply the idea of
the Pohlmeyer reduction to the whole action including the fermions. The important new element
will be the -symmetry gauge fixing, reducing the number of the fermionic degrees of freedom
to the same 8 (or 16 real Grassmann components) as of the bosonic ones after the solution of the
conformal gauge constraint.
We shall derive the corresponding reduced Lagrangian that generalizes the bosonic Lagrangian discussed in Section 5 above. We shall find that it is invariant under the 2d Lorentz
The AdS5
PSU(2,2|4)
SO(1,4)SO(5)
25 A mnemonic rule to get, e.g., the AdS counterparts of S n Lagrangians in (2.7), (5.15) is to change i and to
n
change the overall sign of the Lagrangian.
26 Recall also that they are related to the Lagrange multipliers for the embedding coordinates discussed in Section 2 so
we are then expanding near a point where the two Lagrange multipliers have constant vacuum values.
474
symmetry.27 Later in Section 7 we will also consider a simpler AdS2 S 2 model which is
PSU(1,1|2)
coset. In this case the reduced Lagrangian
described by a similar action for the SO(1,1)SO(2)
happens to be invariant under the N = 2 (i.e. (2, 2)) 2d supersymmetry, and is the same as the
N = 2 supersymmetric sine-Gordon Lagrangian.
6.1. Equations of motion in terms of currents in conformal gauge
Let us start with some relevant definitions and notation. The Lie superalgebra psl(2m|2m; C)
can be identified with the quotient of sl(2m|2m; C) by the central subalgebra of elements proportional to the unit matrix (which belongs to sl(2m|2m; C) since its supertrace vanishes). We
are interested in its real form psu(m, m|2m) which is defined by the condition M = M, where
is an appropriate antilinear anti-automorphism. This superalgebra corresponds to the Lie supergroup F = PSU(m, m|2m).
We shall consider the superalgebra f = psu(m, m|2m) with m = 2 or m = 1 which admits a Z4
grading [57]28
f = f0 f1 f2 f3 ,
[fi , fj ] fi+j mod 4 .
(6.1)
In this matrix realisation one also has i{fl , fm } fl+m+2 mod 4 , where {A, B} = AB + BA.29 For
details see Appendix C.
The left-invariant current f 1 a f , f F can then be decomposed as
Ja = f 1 a f = Aa + Q1a + Pa + Q2a ,
A f0 ,
Q1 f1 ,
P f2 ,
Q2 f3 .
(6.2)
Here A corresponds to the algebra of the subgroup G defining the F /G coset (i.e. G =
Sp(2, 2) Sp(4) isomorphic to SO(1, 4) SO(5) in the AdS5 S 5 case), P is the bosonic coset
component, and Q1 , Q2 are the fermionic (odd) currents.
Using this Z4 split the Lagrangian density of the AdS5 S 5 GS superstring [2] can be written
as follows [3,5759]30

1
(6.3)
STr ab Pa Pb + ab Q1a Q2b ,
2
where ab = gg ab . Written in terms of currents this coset action has bosonic gauge symmetry
with f0 -valued gauge parameter. In addition to the reparametrisations it is also invariant under
the local fermionic -symmetry [2,60,61]
LGS =
a

a
1
Ja = a + [Ja , ],
( )ab = STr W ik1()
, Qb1() + ik2(+)
, Qb2(+) ,
m

a
a
= 1 + 2 = P(+)a , ik1()
(6.4)
+ P()a , ik2(+)
,
27 This is similar to what happened in the expansion near the S 5 geodesic to quadratic order (i.e. plane-wave limit) in
the light-cone gauge [7], but here the action contains all interaction terms, i.e. is no longer truncated at the quadratic
level.
28 It appears that all the steps of the reduction procedure discussed below are formally valid for any value of m.
29 Note that for A, B representing elements of psu(m, m|2m) their symmetrized commutator i{A, B} belongs to
u(m, m|2m) but not necessarily to psu(m, m|2m).
30 Here the overall sign is consistent with having physical signs for the bosonic AdS and S 5 Lagrangians.
5
475
where31 k1() and k2(+) take values in the degree 1 and degree 3 subspaces of u(m, m|2m)
respectively (it is assumed that k1(+) = k2() = 0). W = diag(1, . . . , 1, 1, . . . , 1) is the parity
automorphism (see Appendix C), and the () components are defined as:

1 ab
(6.5)
ab Vb .
2
A detailed discussion of the -invariance can be found in Appendix D.
In what follows we shall assume the conformal gauge condition ab = ab . Then (using the
standard light-cone worldsheet coordinates + , ) the only non-vanishing components of the
metric are + = + = 1 while + = + = 1. For any vector Va one then has
a
V()
=
V(+)+ = V+ ,
V(+) = 0,
V()+ = 0,
V() = V .
In the conformal gauge the Lagrangian (6.3)

1
LGS = STr P+ P + (Q1+ Q2 Q1 Q2+ )
2
(6.6)
(6.7)
leads to the following equations of motion [3]

+ P + [A+ , P ] + [Q2+ , Q2 ] = 0,
P+ + [A , P+ ] + [Q1 , Q1+ ] = 0,
[P+ , Q1 ] = 0,
[P , Q2+ ] = 0.
(6.8)
Formulated in terms of the current components J = A + P + Q1 + Q2 , they should be

supplemented by the MaurerCartan equation
J+ + J + [J , J+ ] = 0.
(6.9)
In addition, one needs to take into account the conformal gauge (Virasoro) constraints
STr(P+ P+ ) = 0,
STr(P P ) = 0.
(6.10)
Our aim below is to perform the Pohlmeyer-type reduction of the above system (6.8)(6.10).
The bosonic part of the model is identical to that of the F /G sigma model where the bosonic
group F F has f0 f2 as its Lie algebra and G has Lie algebra f0 . In the psu(2, 2|4) case of
our interest f0 f2 is isomorphic to su(2, 2) su(4) or so(2, 4) so(6) while f0 is isomorphic
to sp(2, 2) sp(4) or so(1, 4) so(5) (in the psu(1, 1|2) case f0 f2 = su(1, 1) su(2) and
f0 = sp(1, 1) sp(2)). Because of the direct sum structure of the algebras one is allowed to use
the reduction gauge separately for each sector, just like in the purely bosonic case.
Performing the reduction, requires, besides partially fixing the G-gauge symmetry, to fix also
the -symmetry gauge. As we shall discuss below, this can be achieved in two steps. First, we
shall impose the partial -symmetry gauge condition32
Q1 = 0,
Q2+ = 0,
(6.11)
and then apply the same procedure as in the case of the Pohlmeyer reduction in the bosonic
AdSn S n case. The resulting reduced system will be still invariant under a residual -symmetry
31 Note that the definition of in (6.4) involves the symmetrized commutator so that the projection from u(m, m|2m)
to psu(m, m|2m) is assumed.
32 This choice was suggested by R. Roiban, see also [21].
476
which can be fixed by an additional gauge condition. That will finally make the number of the
fermionic degrees of freedom the same as the number of the physical bosonic degrees of freedom
(as in the familiar examples of the light-cone gauge-fixed superstring in the flat space or in the
pp-wave space).
It will turn out that the resulting system of reduced equations of motion (that originate in
particular from the MaurerCartan equations and thus are first order in derivatives) will follow
from a local Lagrangian containing only first derivatives of the fermionic fields. The bosonic
part of the reduced Lagrangian will coincide with the gauged WZW Lagrangian with the same
potential as in the bosonic model discussed in Section 5.
The possibility to make the gauge choice (6.11) can be readily justified as in the flat-space case
by using an explicit coordinate parametrization of the currents, i.e. by solving first the Maurer
Cartan equations (6.9). Here we would like to use a different logic treating all equations for
the currents on an equal footing. Then one way of demonstrating that the required -symmetry
gauge choices are allowed will rely on using the consequences of the reduction gauge in the
bosonic part of the model. For that technical reason below we shall discuss the reduction and the
-symmetry gauges in parallel.
6.2. Reduction gauge and -symmetry gauge
As a first step we shall define a decomposition f2 = a n where a is the subspace of elements
of the form a1 T 1 + a2 T 2 such that T 1 and T 2 are represented by matrices with non-vanishing upper left and lower right blocks only (i.e. T 1 is in su(2, 2) and T 2 is in su(4) parts of psu(2, 2|4)).
More precisely, we shall choose
T1 =
i
diag(t, 0),
2
T2 =
i
diag(0, t),
2
(6.12)
where
psu(2, 2|4) case: t = diag(1, 1, 1, 1),
psu(1, 1|2) case: t = diag(1, 1).
(6.13)
Let us also introduce the matrix

T = T 1 + T 2,
(6.14)
which will play an important role in what follows. It induces the decomposition
f = f f ,

P = ,
f ,
f ,
P = 0,

P = T , [T , ] .

(6.15)
(6.16)
This decomposition can also be written with the help of the projector to f
1 f3 given by
P = ,
P = 0,

P = T , {T , } .
(6.17)
Let us note that any f can be written as = [T , ] (and f can be written as = {T , }).
In particular, [T , {T , }] = {T , [T , ]} = 0 for any f. Moreover, STr( ) = 0 for any
f and f , i.e. this is an orthogonal decomposition.
477
The decomposition f = f f generalizes the bosonic decomposition (4.1) to the superalgebra case. In particular, in the bosonic sector one can easily make the following identifications33 :
a = f
2,

n = f2 ,
h = f
0,

m = f0 ,
(6.18)
while the commutation relations (4.2) follow from the Z4 -grading and the following properties34 :

f , f f ,
f , f f ,
f , f f .
(6.19)
The first two properties are obvious, while checking the last one requires using the following
identities

A, [B, C] = [A, B], C + A, {B, C} ,

A, {B, C} = [A, B], C + B, {A, C} .
(6.20)
Let us now turn to the gauge symmetry. Because the gauge algebra f0 is a direct sum of the
subalgebras represented by upper-left and lower-right non-vanishing block matrices the gauge
transformations are independent. It follows that by applying the polar decomposition theorem in
each sector independently one can partially fix the f0 gauge symmetry in order to put P+ into the
form
P+ = p1 T 1 + p2 T 2 ,
(6.21)
where p1 , p2 are some real functions. Indeed, the components of the gauge parameter taking
values in the upper-left and lower-right diagonal blocks are independent so that we can apply the
same logic as in the bosonic case in Section 4.1 to each block separately. The Virasoro constraint
STr(P+ P+ ) = 0 in (6.10) then implies p12 p22 = 0, so that, e.g., p1 = p2 = p+ and thus
P+ = p + T ,
T = T 1 + T 2.
(6.22)
Applying the polar decomposition theorem to P and using the second Virasoro constraint
in (6.10) one finds that P can be represented as follows
P = p g 1 T g,
(6.23)
where p is a real function and g is a G-valued function (recall that G is the Lie subgroup
corresponding to the Lie subalgebra f0 f, i.e. Sp(2, 2) Sp(4) in the PSU(2, 2|4) case). In
what follows we shall assume that the functions p+ and p do not have zeroes.
Now we are ready to argue that using the -symmetry (6.4) one can choose the gauge (6.11),
i.e. Q1 = Q2+ = 0, provided the fermionic equations of motion as well as the Virasoro constraints are satisfied. This basically follows from the fact that in the gauge where P+ = p+ T the
equation [P+ , Q1 ] = 0 implies that Q1 takes values in f
1 like the parameter 1 = i{P+ , k1 }
so that this gauge invariance can be used to put Q1 to zero; an analogous argument can then
be given for Q2+ . A complication is that the -transformation (6.4) does not in general preserve
both the conformal gauge and the reduction gauge and that makes the precise argument more
33 Let us note that one cannot define analogous decomposition in terms of T for the SO(n)/SO(n 1) coset in the
standard representation used in Section 4 as T in this representation do not induce the decomposition (cf. the explicit
form (4.25)).
34 These can be considered as defining an additional Z -grading on f with f and f being, respectively, the degree 0
2
and degree 1 subspaces.
478
involved. A detailed proof of the possibility to fix (6.11) taking all this into account is given in
Appendix D.
In the gauge Q1 = Q2+ = 0 the equations of motion (6.8) become
+ P + [A+ , P ] = 0,
P+ + [A , P+ ] = 0,
(6.24)
while the MaurerCartan equation (6.9) splits into

+ A A+ + [A+ , A ] + [P+ , P ] + [Q1+ , Q2 ] = 0,
Q1+ + [A , Q1+ ] [P+ , Q2 ] = 0,
+ Q2 + [A+ , Q2 ] [P , Q1+ ] = 0.
(6.25)
g 1 T g
In the reduction gauge where P+ = p+ T and P = p

the second equation P+ +
[A , P+ ] = 0 in (6.24) and the fact that A is block-diagonal imply that the same is true for
the upper-left block projection P+1 + [A1 , P+1 ] = 0. The latter implies Tr1 (P+ P+ ) = 0
and thus also Tr2 (P+ P+ ) = 0, where Tr1 and Tr2 are, respectively, the traces in the upperleft and the lower-right diagonal blocks (in this notation STr = Tr1 Tr2 ). Since Tr1 T 2 = 0
this leads to p+ = 0. As in the bosonic case, using an appropriate conformal transformation
+ + ( + ) one can then set p+ equal to some real constant . Following the bosonic
construction one then observes that the first equation in (6.24) leads to + Tr1 (P P ) = 0. The
conformal symmetry ( ) allows one to set p = . Thus finally we get
P+ = T ,
P = g 1 T g,
= const,
(6.26)
which is the direct counterpart of the reduction gauge in the bosonic case (cf. (4.12), (4.14)).
Note that in terms of the notation used in the bosonic case here we have
T + = T = T .
(6.27)
Let us recall that the variable g belongs to G, i.e to the subgroup whose Lie algebra is f0 . There
is a natural arbitrariness in the choice of g since P is invariant under g hg if h is taking
values in the subgroup of elements commuting with T . This description thus has an additional
gauge symmetry which we shall use later.
By analogy with the bosonic case in addition to the decomposition f2 = a n we make use of
the decomposition f0 = m h where h is the centralizer of a in f0 (recall that a is the subspace of

elements of the form a1 T 1 + a2 T 2 ).35 In the present case it is useful to identify h = f
0 and m = f0
so that the required decomposition of the entire superalgebra is induced by a single element T as
was observed in (6.18). Accordingly, we split
A+ = (A+ )h + (A+ )m ,
A = A + (A )m ,
A (A )h h.
(6.28)
The second equation in (6.24) then implies (A )m = 0 while the first one can be solved for A+
as follows
A+ = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g,
(6.29)
where A+ is a new field taking values in h.

35 In the case of our interest, i.e. f = psu(2, 2|4), the algebra h is [su(2) su(2)] [su(2) su(2)], i.e. is isomorphic to
so(4) so(4).
479
In this way we have constructed a new parametrisation of the system in the reduction gauge:
all the bosonic currents are now expressed in terms of the G-valued field g, h-valued field A ,
and in addition we have the fermionic currents Q1+ , Q2 . Eq. (6.25) then take the form:

g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g + A + A , g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g

= 2 g 1 T g, T + [Q1+ , Q2 ],
(6.30)
Q1+ + [A , Q1+ ] = [T , Q2 ],

+ Q2 + g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g, Q2 = g 1 T g, Q1+ .
(6.31)
These equations are invariant under the following H H gauge symmetry (H is the group whose
algebra is h):
g h1 g h,
A+ h1 A+ h + h1 + h,
Q2 h 1 Q2 h.
Q1+ h 1 Q1+ h,
A h 1 A h + h 1 h,
(6.32)
(6.33)
Let us note that this symmetry is large enough to choose the gauge A+ = A = 0. This can be
shown by a simplified version of the argument given in Appendix E. In particular, there is also a
choice of a partial gauge in which A+ and A are components of a flat connection, i.e. F+ = 0.
Eqs. (6.30), (6.31) admit a Lax representation. Moreover, they can be derived from a local
Lagrangian provided one uses the following parametrisation of the fermionic currents in terms of
the new fermionic variables q1 , q2 via Q1+ = g 1 (+ q1 + [A+ , q1 ])g, Q2 = q2 + [A , q2 ],
and imposes the appropriate gauge condition on A . This gauge condition is analogous to the
constraints (3.20) in the purely bosonic case. However, the resulting Lagrangian system is not
completely satisfactory, in particular, it contains second (instead of usual first) derivatives of the
fermions and thus will not be discussed below.
6.3. Gauge-fixing residual -symmetry
Besides the gauge symmetry (6.32), (6.33), Eqs. (6.30), (6.31) are also invariant under the
residual -symmetry which can be used to eliminate some parts of the fermionic currents. To
identify this symmetry let us first introduce the new fermionic variables Q1+ , Q2 1 , 2 :
1 = Q1+ ,
2 = gQ2 g 1 .
The equations of motion (6.30), (6.31) then take the form

g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g + A + A , g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g

= 2 g 1 T g, T g 1 2 g, 1 ,

D 1 = T , g 1 2 g ,
D = + [A , ].
D+ 2 = T , g1 g 1 ,
(6.34)
(6.35)
(6.36)
Projecting the fermionic equations (6.36) to f

1 f3 gives
D (1 ) = 0,
D+ (2 ) = 0.
(6.37)
Let us choose the gauge where (cf. the remark made below (6.33))
A+ = A = 0.
Then the solution of (6.37) has the form (1 ) = 1 ( + ) and (2 ) = 2 ( ).
(6.38)
480
Let us now describe the residual fermionic symmetry of Eqs. (6.35), (6.36). Under the infinitesimal transformation
1 1 + 1 ,
2 2 + 2 ,
g g + gh,
with 1 f1 , 2 f3 , and h f0 these equations are invariant provided

+ h + g 1 + g, h 2 g 1 T g, h , T

+ g 1 2 g, 1 + g 1 2 g, 1 + g 1 2 g, h , 1 = 0,

D 1 = T , g 1 2 g + g 1 2 g, h ,

D+ 2 = T , g1 g 1 + g[h, 1 ]g 1 .
(6.39)
(6.40)
(6.41)
Projecting the fermionic equations on f one finds that 1 = 0 and + 2 = 0, implying 1 =

1 ( + ) and 2 = 2 ( ). Let us consider then the projection of the fermionic equations on f1

f together with the bosonic equation (6.40) as a system of equations on , , h with ( + )
3
1 2
1
and 2 ( ) treated as given functions (note that their derivatives do not enter these equations).
This system of partial differential equations is not overdetermined and is linear in derivatives
so that it has a solution for any 1 ( + ) and 2 ( ), thus giving a symmetry transformation of
Eqs. (6.35), (6.36). The symmetry parameters 1 and 2 can, in fact, be identified as parameters
of the residual -symmetry in (6.4) as36

1 = + {T , ik1 },
2 = T , igk2+ g 1 ,
(6.42)
while the additional terms are needed to maintain the gauge conditions we have chosen. Finally,
using (6.37), i.e. 1 = 0 and + 2 = 0 one concludes that 1 , 2 can be put to zero by
the residual -transformations. In what follows we shall thus assume the gauge where
1 = 2 = 0.
(6.43)
The remaining fermionic degrees of freedom can be parametrized as follows

1
R = 1 ,
1
L = 2 ,
(6.44)
taking values in h1 and h3 respectively (see (6.16), (6.17)). As we shall see below the additional
12
factor in (6.44) will simplify the structure of the 2d Lorentz invariant Lagrangian description
of the resulting system (cf. (6.26)). The gauge transformations of the new fermionic variables
read as follows
R h 1 R h,
L h1 L h.
The equations of motion (6.35), (6.36) written in the gauge (6.43) are

g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g + A + A , g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g

= 2 g 1 T g, T g 1 L g, R ,
(6.45)
(6.46)
36 Note that in the gauge (6.11) the residual symmetry is determined by k , k satisfying k
1 = 0 and + k2+ +
1 2
[g 1 + g, k2+ ] = 0.

[T , D R ] = g 1 L g ,

[T , D+ L ] = gR g 1 .
481
(6.47)
These equations and the gauge symmetries (6.32), (6.45) define the reduced system of equations
of motion for the superstring on AdS5 S 5 (or on AdS2 S 2 ).
The new dynamical field variables g, L , R and A+ , A are components of the currents,
i.e. they are non-locally related to the original AdS5 S 5 sigma model fields (coordinates on the
supercoset). Note also that the bosonic equations are second-order while the fermionic equations
are first-order in derivatives, as it should be for a standard 2d bosonfermion system.
Finally, let us mention that one can see explicitly that the reduced system (6.46) and (6.47) is
integrable. The corresponding Lax pair encoding Eqs. (6.46) and (6.47) is
L = + A + 1 g 1 L g + 2 g 1 T g,
L+ = + + g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g + R + 2 T .
(6.48)
To show that the compatibility conditions [L , L+ ] = 0 imply the equations of motion (6.46)
and (6.47) one needs to use (6.16), (6.44), i.e. that [T , [T , L,R ]] = L,R .
6.4. Reduced Lagrangian: 2d Lorentz symmetry, massive spectrum and possible 2d
supersymmetry
Remarkably, it turns out that the equations of motion (6.47) and (6.46) follow from the following local Lagrangian:

Ltot = LgWZW + 2 STr g 1 T gT

1
+ STr L [T , D+ L ] + R [T , D R ] + STr g 1 L gR ,
(6.49)
2
where LgWZW represents the G/H gWZW model (3.15) with37
G
Sp(2, 2)
Sp(4)
=
.
H
SU(2) SU(2) SU(2) SU(2)
38 The dimension of
Note Ltot is explicitly H gauge-invariant under (6.32), (6.45) with h = h.
the bosonic target space here is the same as the dimension of the G/H coset, i.e. 4 + 4 = 8. The
fermionic fields contain 8 + 8 independent real Grassmann components (describing 8 dynamical
degrees of freedom).
The variations over g and L , R indeed lead to (6.46), (6.47). Thus in order to show that
the reduced model (6.46), (6.47) is described by (6.49) one is to demonstrate that the constraint
equations that arise from varying this action with respect to A represent an admissible gauge
condition for the equations of motion.39 These constraints read as

1
A+ = (A + )h , A + g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g [T , R ], R ,
(6.50)
2
37 Here L
gWZW is given by (3.15) with Tr replaced by the STr. The minus sign is needed to compensate for the
definition of the supertrace which includes the S m sector with a minus sign (the use of supertrace in the first two bosonic
terms means of course just the sum of the reduced models for the AdS5 and the S 5 parts). The corresponding reduced
2
action Stot = d2 Ltot is real (as can be seen by applying the conjugation defined in Appendix C to the expression
under the trace).

38 As was already mentioned above, our reduction procedure formally applies and leads to the Lagrangian (6.49) if one
starts with any psu(m, m|2m); in particular, the m = 1 case corresponds to AdS2 S 2 superstring model.
39 Note that in the AdS S 2 case the subalgebra h is empty and so this step is trivial.
2
482
A = (A )h ,

1
A g g 1 + gA g 1 [T , L ], L .
2
(6.51)
In Appendix E we show that they can be satisfied by an appropriate on-shell gauge transformation. Note that once these constraints are satisfied the original H H on-shell gauge symmetry
(6.32), (6.45) of the equations of motion having independent h and h parameters reduces to the H
gauge symmetry with h = h which is the off-shell gauge symmetry of the Lagrangian (6.49).40
Let us now discuss several properties of this reduced action.
The Lagrangian (6.49) is formulated in terms of the left-invariant F current variables (cf.
(6.26), (6.44)) that are blind to the original F = PSU(2, 2|4) symmetry. Note that since the
original coset F /G = PSU(2, 2|4)/[Sp(2, 2) Sp(4)] has the purely bosonic factor G, the reduced action (6.49) has only the bosonic global and gauge symmetries, i.e. it has no target-space
supersymmetry (but may have 2d supersymmetry, see below).
It is interesting to notice that the Lagrangian (6.49) can be rewritten as

1
Ltot = L gWZW + Ladd , Ladd = STr P+ P + (Q1+ Q2 Q1 Q2+ ) .
(6.52)
2
Here L gWZW is the G/H bosonic gWZW Lagrangian supplemented with the free fermionic
terms 12 STr(L [T , D+ L ] + R [T , D R ]) while Ladd stands for the sum of the remaining
dependent terms in (6.49). Here we restored the original notations for the current components, i.e. used that P+ = T , P = g 1 T g (see (6.26)), that Q1+ = Q2 = 0 due to the
-symmetry gauge condition (6.11), and that Q1+ = R , Q2 = g 1 L g in (6.34). Remarkably,
Ladd = 2 STr(g 1 T gT ) + STr(g 1 L gR ) is thus nothing but the original superstring Lagrangian (6.7) rewritten in terms of the new variables g, R , L . At the same time, the equations
following from L gWZW encode the MaurerCartan equations (6.25) for the F currents. It is then
clear that once the conformal gauge (Virasoro) constraints are imposed, Ltot describes, at least at
the level of the corresponding equations of motion and up to the various gauge transformations
and fixing the values of the conserved quantities in terms of , the same field configurations as
the original superstring sigma-model Lagrangian (6.3), (6.7). An interesting question is whether
one can implement a similar argument off-shell or even at the quantum level in terms of pathintegral transformations.41
Despite the fact that the 2d Lorentz invariance may appear to be broken by various gauge
choices made above and that L and R originated from the 2d vector components of the fermionic currents (cf. (6.34), (6.44)) it is remarkable that it is still possible to assign the fermions the
SO(1, 1) Lorentz transformation rules of the components of the left and right 2d MajoranaWeyl
spinors. Then the Lagrangian (6.49) becomes invariant under the standard 2d Lorentz symmetry
+ + ,
1 ,
L 1/2 L ,
R 1/2 R ,
(6.53)
40 More generally, similarly to the purely bosonic case, one can consider an asymmetric gauge determined by an
automorphism of h preserving the supertrace. In this case the residual gauge transformations are g h1 g (h),
R (h1 )R (h) with transformations of the remaining variables unchanged. The Lagrangian of the asymmetrically gauged model is given by (6.49) with A in A g 1 + g g 1 A+ gA terms in (3.15) replaced with (A ).
41 A natural idea is to start with the original superstring sigma model path integral in the conformal gauge (i.e. with
the delta-function insertions (T++ )(T )), fix the -symmetry gauge and change variables from coset coordinates to
PSU(2, 2|4) currents. The L gWZW term in the path integral action may then appear due to this change of variables. This
procedure can work only if the original path integral represents a 2d conformal theory: in the reduction procedure we
used the residual conformal symmetry.
483
with g and A having the usual scalar and vector transformation laws. Choosing a parametrisation for the matrix variables L and R which satisfy the parallel constraint in (6.44), (6.16)42
one can put the fermion kinetic terms in (6.49) into the familiar form L + L + R R + .
As in the case of the bosonic reduced theory the classical conformal invariance of the original superstring sigma model in the conformal gauge is broken by the -dependent interaction
terms in (6.49): the residual conformal diffeomorphism symmetry was used (cf. (6.26)) to perform the reduction procedure. This breaking is spontaneous being due to the presence of the
background field T = T+ = T . This is similar to what happened in the light-cone gauge in
the plane-wave model [7] where the mass terms (proportional to the light-cone momentum, i.e.
appearing from the x + terms) were spontaneously breaking the classical conformal invariance
of the original sigma model action.
Again as in the bosonic case discussed in Section 5, the form of the reduced Lagrangian
expressed in terms of only physical bosonic and fermionic fields may be found by imposing
an H gauge fixing condition on g and then integrating out the H gauge field components A .
This leads to a sigma-model with 4 + 4 dimensional bosonic part (5.1) supplemented by the
fermionic terms, with the following general structure (cf. (5.1))
L = G(x)+ x x 2 U (x) + L D+ L + R D R
+ F (x)L L R R + 2H (x)L R .
(6.54)
Here x stands for 8 real bosonic fields in (5.1) (i.e. for the independent variables in gaugefixed g which parametrize G/H ) and L , R for 8 + 8 independent real Grassmann fields
which are the components of the matrices L , R . The quartic fermionic term originates from
the D terms in (6.49) upon integrating out A (D in (6.54) are the standard x-dependent
covariant derivatives). As discussed below, the structure of (6.49) looks very similar to that of the
supersymmetric gWZW model modified by the bosonic potential and the fermionic Yukawa
terms, and so the presence of the quartic fermionic terms in (6.54) may be interpreted as reflecting
the curvature of the target space.
Let us now discuss the vacuum structure and the corresponding mass spectrum of the reduced
model (6.49). Since [T , H ] = 0 the obvious vacuum solution of the equations of motion (6.46),
(6.47) for (6.49) corresponds to g being any constant element h0 of H , i.e.
gvac = h0 = const,
(A+ )vac = (A )vac = 0,
(L )vac = (R )vac = 0,
(6.55)
i.e. the space of vacua is equivalent to H = [SU(2)]4 . By a global H transformation we can

always set h0 = 1, i.e. the mass spectrum should not depend on h0 . Expanding the equations of
motion (6.46), (6.47) near g = 1, i.e. g = 1 + v + , and projecting to the algebra of H and

its complement in g we find a massive equation for v m f0 (i.e. v = [[T , v], T ], see (6.16))
43
as well as F+ = 0. That all bosonic coset directions get mass was mentioned already in
Section 5.3 and follows also directly from the equations of motion in the A+ = A = 0 onshell gauge in the parametrization used in (4.30), (4.32). The linearized bosonic and fermionic
equations are thus
+ v + 2 v = 0,
(6.56)
42 The parallel subspace is formed by antidiagonal matrices with fermionic 2 2 blocks.

43 Equivalently, expanding the action (6.49) to quadratic order in fluctuations the A A term will cancel while the
+
term linear in A+ , A will project v to the coset part m of the algebra g.
484
[T , R ] + L = 0,
[T , + L ] + R = 0 + L,R + 2 L,R = 0, (6.57)
where we used that [T , [T , L,R ]] = L,R (see (6.16), (6.44)). The 8 + 8 independent real
Grassmann components of the fermionic matrix fields thus represent 8 massive 2d Majorana
fermions having the same mass as the bosonic modes. The corresponding fermionic Lagrangian is then
L + L + R R 2L R + ,
where the mass term originates from the last Yukawa term in (6.49), (6.54).44
The small-fluctuation spectrum we get is thus formally the same as in the plane-wave limit [7].
In contrast to the case of the original AdS5 S 5 superstring expanded near the S 5 geodesic in the
light-cone gauge where one scatters magnons which are small fluctuations of the superstring
coordinates and the remaining symmetry is [PSU(2|2)]2 [10,11], here we scatter the fluctuations
of the current components which are invariants of the original supergroup PSU(2, 2|4). The
manifest global symmetry of the S-matrix corresponding to (6.49) in the vacuum (6.55) appears
to be just the bosonic H = [SU(2)]4 one.45
Indeed, while the Lagrangian (6.54) obtained by integrating out the H gauge fields does not
have manifest non-Abelian global symmetry, it is natural to expect that the tree-level S-matrix
for scattering of the massive excitations near the vacuum (6.55) can be extracted directly from
the classical equations of motion (6.46), (6.47). The latter admit larger on-shell H H gauge
symmetry allowing us to choose the A+ = A = 0 gauge in which the global H -symmetry of the
remaining non-linear equations and thus of the resulting (gauge-independent) S-matrix becomes
manifest. The same H symmetry is expected also to be present in the full quantum S-matrix.46
Let us now comment on the meaning of the parameter which plays a crucial role in our
reduction procedure and sets the mass scale.47 entered first through the conditions P+ = T ,
P = g 1 T g (4.12), (6.26) on the components of the coset-space part of the current that
solve the conformal gauge constraints. In the vacuum (6.55) we thus have (cf. (6.12), (6.13))
i
(6.58)
diag(1, 1, 1, 1; 1, 1, 1, 1).
2
Thus determines the scale while T the structure of the background values of the coset currents. The corresponding charges (defined assuming the world sheet is a cylinder) thus have
both the AdS5 and S 5 non-zero components. Though P are invariants of PSU(2, 2|4) their nonzero vacuum values appear to translate, in particular, into the non-zero values of the quadratic
Casimirs for SO(2, 4) and SO(6) group. This suggests again a close relation to the BMN limit.48
In general, to relate the reduced or current formulation of the theory to the original AdS5
S 5 superstring model (6.3) (and thus to gauge theory within the AdS/CFT duality) one would
(P+ )vac = (P )vac = T ,
T=
44 This and other points discussed in this section can be illustrated on the AdS S 2 example discussed in the next
2
section (see, e.g., (7.16) below where one is to expand near = = 0).
45 If we start with the closed string picture with the sigma model defined on a cylinder R S 1 we need to take the
limit (which decompactifies the spatial world sheet direction) to define the scattering matrix. An interesting
question then is how to generalize the relativistic (cf. [11]) S-matrix for the CSG model [55] to the full reduced model
for AdS5 S 5 .
46 The S-matrix should also have higher hidden symmetries presumably related to those of the S-matrix in [11]; we
thank R. Roiban for a discussion of this point.
47 We thank S. Frolov for asking this question and useful discussions.
48 In a certain sense, our reduction procedure may then be interpreted as an invariant version of the expansion near
the BMN vacuum.
485
need to supplement the quantum theory based on (6.49) by a list of observables which are
intrinsic to the AdS5 S 5 string in its original coordinate-space formulation. This list should
include, in particular, the components of the PSU(2, 2|4) charges. They cannot be computed
directly without supplementing the reduced action with a linear problem for the associated Lax
pair, but according to the above remarks about the vacuum values of currents in (6.58) we are
guaranteed to have at least some components of the AdS5 and S 5 charges to be non-zero in the
vacuum (6.55) of the reduced theory.
Finally, let us discuss possible 2d supersymmetry of the action corresponding to (6.49). As
was already mentioned above, the number (8) of independent bosonic degrees of freedom in the
reduced Lagrangian (6.54) matches that of the fermionic ones (8 + 8), exactly as in a 2d supersymmetric model. Moreover, we saw that the spectrum of small fluctuations near the vacuum
state (6.56), (6.57) is also supersymmetric.
The structure of (6.49) is essentially that of a supersymmetric gWZW model [6264],
LSgWZW = LgWZW + L D+ L + R D R ,
(6.59)
modified by the -dependent interaction terms. If we first set = 0, i.e. ignore the potential and
Yukawa interaction terms in (6.49), then we should expect to find the same (1, 1) supersymmetry
as found in the component description of supersymmetric gWZW model [63,64], i.e.

R L g 1 D+ g G/H ,
g L R g + R gL ,

L R gD g 1 G/H ,
(6.60)
A = 0.
Here L and R are parameters of the (1, 0) and (0, 1) supersymmetries.
For this to work the fermions should transform under the H gauge transformation as elements

of the coset part of g, i.e. m = f0 , considered as a representation of the gauge algebra h = f
0 . It

appears, however, that for the case of psu(2, 2|4) the fermions R , L take values in f1,2 which is,

in general, a different representation of the gauge algebra h. More precisely, f1 and f0 considered
as representations of h are inequivalent representations related by an appropriate automorphism
of the gauge algebra h.49 In the absence of -dependent terms in (6.49) one can of course modify
the gauge transformation law of the fermions by replacing, e.g., A with its image under that
automorphism (A ) in the kinetic term for R . This does not, however, directly apply for
= 0; for example, the gauge invariance of the fermionic interaction term STr(g 1 L gR )
in (6.49) determines the gauge transformation law of the fermions in terms of that of the field g.
We leave the question whether the full (6.49) in the psu(2, 2|4) case does have a 2d supersymmetry, i.e. if it can be identified with a supersymmetric extension of the corresponding bosonic
non-Abelian Toda theory, for a future investigation.50 Our conjecture is that the answer is yes
and the supersymmetry should be the extended (2, 2) one.51
49 One can see that f and f are inequivalent by, e.g., observing that for a subalgebra h represented by the upper-left
1
1
0

block matrices there are no invariant vectors in f1,2 but all the elements from f0 represented by lower-right block matrices
are invariant. The automorphism simply interchanges su(2) factor in the upper left block with the su(2) factor in the
lower-right block in the matrix representation of h.
50 Supersymmetric extensions of generic non-Abelian Toda theories were not previously discussed in the literature
(apart from the complex sine-Gordon case [4951]). For some references on supersymmetric extensions of sigma models
with potentials and, in particular, of Abelian Toda models see [65,66].
51 The conditions for existence of the (2, 2) supersymmetry in the (1, 1) supersymmetric G/H gWZW model (i.e. in
our = 0 case) were discussed in [64] (see also [67,68]).
486
As we shall show in the next section in a similar but simpler case of the AdS2 S 2 superstring model where psu(2, 2|4) is replaced by the psu(1, 1|2) superalgebra (with trivial h so that
the complication of extending the supersymmetry from the free to = 0 level is absent) the
corresponding reduced Lagrangian (6.49) is indeed invariant under the (2, 2) supersymmetry.
An interesting question related to the existence of (2, 2) supersymmetry is about finiteness
property of the quantum theory defined by (6.49). A (supersymmetric) gWZW model corresponds to a (super)conformal theory, but including potential terms may in general introduce UV
divergences. These divergences should cancel out if this model has (2, 2) supersymmetry. We
conjecture that this is indeed the case; then this reduced model has a chance to be useful for a
quantum description of the AdS5 S 5 superstring.
7. Example: Reduced model for superstring in AdS2 S 2 as N = 2 super sine-Gordon
model
Let us now specialise the construction of the previous section to the simplest case of AdS2
S 2 superstring model [57,69] where f = psu(1, 1|2). As we shall see below, here the reduced
Lagrangian (6.49), (6.54) is equivalent to that of the N = 2 supersymmetric sine-Gordon theory.
This demonstrates the existence of the (2, 2) world-sheet supersymmetry in the reduced version
of this GS superstring model. Assuming one may consider the reduced theory as a legitimate
starting point for the quantisation, this also implies the UV finiteness of the AdS2 S 2 superstring
and its quantum integrability.
7.1. Explicit parametrisation of psu(1, 1|2)
The bosonic subspaces f0 and f2 in (6.1) here are represented by block-diagonal matrices of
the form

A 0
B = B,
f=
,
A = A,
(7.1)
0 B
with A, B being traceless 2 2 matrices and given by (C.16), i.e. A su(1, 1) and B su(2).
The subspace f0 is formed by matrices satisfying also
KAt0 K = A0 ,
KB0t K = B0 ,
(7.2)
with K = in (C.16). It is useful to parametrise these matrices as

0
0 i
,
B0 =
,
A0 =
0
i 0
(7.3)
where , are real. The elements of the subspace f2 are determined by the additional conditions
KB t K = B2t ,
KAt2 K = At2 ,
2

ib
ic
iq
,
B2 =
A2 =
ic ib
r
r
iq
(7.4)

,
(7.5)
where b, c, q, r are real. For the fermionic subspace f1 the reality condition together with M =
iM (see Appendix C) imply

0 X
iY = X.
M=
,
KY t K = iX,
(7.6)
Y 0
Since = K gives Y + = Y t K, f1 can be parametrized as

i i
i
,
X1 =
.
Y1 =
i
For f3 we have KY t K = iX and iY = X giving Y = Y t K and

i
Y3 =
,
X3 =
.
i i
i
The fixed element T = T 1 + T 2 in (6.14), (6.27) can be chosen in the form:
i 0 0 0
1 0 i 0 0
T=
.
2 0 0 i 0
0 0 0 i
487
(7.7)
(7.8)
(7.9)

The subspaces f1 and f3 defined in (6.16) are then represented by (7.7) and (7.8) with
= = 0,
= = 0.
(7.10)
The field g G introduced in (6.23) takes values in the direct product of two one-dimensional
subgroups of SU(1, 1) SU(2) isomorphic to SO(1, 1) and SO(2); it can be parametrized as
cosh sinh
0
0

A0 0
0
0
sinh cosh
g = exp
(7.11)
=
.
0
0
cos i sin
0 B0
0
0
i sin cos
7.2. Reduced Lagrangian
Let us write down the explicit form of the reduced Lagrangian (6.49) using the parametrisation
introduced above. Here the subgroup H is trivial so that A+ = A = 0. The kinetic WZW term
is simply

1
STr g 1 + gg 1 g = + + + .
2
The potential term in (6.49) is

2
2 STr g 1 T gT = (cosh 2 cos 2).
2
The fermionic terms in (6.49) are
(7.12)
(7.13)

1
STr R [T , R ] = Tr Y1 T 1 , X1 = Tr X1 T 2 , Y1 = + ,
2

1
STr L [T , + L ] = Tr + Y3 T 2 , X3
2

= Tr + X3 T 2 , Y3 = + + + ,
(7.14)

STr gR g 1 L = Tr g1 X1 g21 Y3 Tr g2 Y1 g11 X3

= 2 cosh cos ( + ) + sinh sin ( ) ,
(7.15)
488
where we have used the explicit form of the diagonal blocks T 1 = T 2 = 2i diag(1, 1) = 2i
in (7.9).
Thus the final expression of the corresponding reduced Lagrangian (6.49) in terms of the two
bosonic , and the four fermionic , , , field variables is given by (cf. (5.18))52
2
Ltot = + + + +
(cos 2 cosh 2) + + + + + +
2

2 cosh cos ( + ) + sinh sin ( ) .
(7.16)
7.3. Equivalence to N = 2 supersymmetric sine-Gordon model
The bosonic part of the AdS2 S 2 reduced Lagrangian in (5.18), (7.16) happens to be exactly
the same as the bosonic part of the N = 2 supersymmetric sine-Gordon Lagrangian [56]. Furthermore, the number of the fermionic fields in (7.16) is the same as in the N = 2 SG theory.
This suggests that the AdS2 S 2 reduced model (7.16) may have a hidden N = 2 world-sheet
supersymmetry.
Indeed, (7.16) is equivalent to the N = 2 SG theory. A generic N = 2 (i.e. (2, 2)) superfield
Lagrangian is

4

2
d W () + h.c. ,
L= d +
= + 1 L + 2 R + 1 2 D,
(7.17)
where is a chiral N = 2 superfield, = + i is a complex scalar and L , R are complex

fermions. In components

2
L = + W () + L + L + R R

+ W ()L R + W L R .
(7.18)
The sine-Gordon choice is
2

W ()2 = (cosh 2 cos 2).
2
Splitting L , R into the real and imaginary parts
W () = cos ,
L = + i,
R = + i ,
(7.19)
(7.20)
we indeed find the agreement between (7.18) and (7.16).

Let us note that it is possible to write down the N = 2 supersymmetry transformations of the
fields in (7.16) in terms of the original matrix parametrisation used in (6.49). Let us consider
separately the (2, 0) and (0, 2) supersymmetries. To describe the (2, 0) transformation let us
introduce a matrix fermionic parameter L taking values in f1 in (6.1) and satisfying in addition
[T , L ] = 0. This ensures that L contains two independent fermionic parameters ( and in the
parametrisation (7.7)). The (2, 0) supersymmetry transformation of the matrix fields in (6.49)
then reads as

L L = g 1 + g, L ,
L g = g T , [L , L ] ,
52 As expected, the Lagrangian is real (the fermionic fields are real).

L R = T , gL g 1 .
489
(7.21)
In checking the invariance of the action we have to use (besides the Z4 grading and definition
of L ) that [T , [T , L ]] = L , [[T , [L , L ]], L ] = 0, etc. The (0, 2) transformation with parameter R looks similarly.
The (2, 0) supersymmetry transformation law (7.21) can be formally generalized to the algebraically analogous models described by (6.49) provided f
1 contains a non-trivial element
commuting with the entire gauge algebra h. Indeed, suppose L belongs to f
1 and is satisfying
in addition [, h] = 0 for any h h = f0 (in other words, L should belong to the centraliser of h
in f
1 ). Then the supersymmetry transformation reads

L g = g T , [R , L ] ,
L L = T , gL g 1 ,
L R = g 1 D+ g , L ,

L A = g 1 L g , L ,
L A+ = 0,
(7.22)
where the superscript or denotes the projection to f or f respectively. Note that for = 0
the field A starts transforming under the supersymmetry.53 Since the action is invariant under
the exchange + , L R, and g g 1 one finds also the right counterpart of the left
supersymmetry (7.22) with L R where R is taking values in f
3 and is annihilated by h.
In the case of psu(1, 1|2) the subalgebra h is empty and L is an arbitrary element of the two
dimensional space f
1 (and similarly R f3 ) so that (7.22) defines a consistent (2, 0) (and also
(0, 2)) supersymmetry transformation. However, in the case of psu(2, 2|4), none of the elements
in f1,2 commute with the entire h so that (7.22) does not directly apply (cf. the discussion at the
end of Section 6.4). The existence of 2d supersymmetry of (6.49) in the AdS5 S 5 case thus
remains an interesting open question.54
Let us finally mention that the complex sine-Gordon model (2.7) also admits an N = 2
supersymmetric version [49,50]. The same applies to its double in (5.19) which has 2 + 2
dimensional target space which is a direct sum of the two Khler spaces. We expect that the
corresponding N = 2 model should be equivalent to the reduced model for the superstring on
AdS3 S 3 [70] with (5.19) as its bosonic part.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, A. Mikhailov and R. Roiban for many useful discussions, explanations and questions. We also thank to I. Bakas, G. Papadopoulous and K. Sfetsos
for useful remarks on related subjects.
M.G. acknowledges the support of Dynasty foundation, RFBR Grant 05-01-00996, and the
Grant LSS-4401.2006.2. He would like also to thank the organizers of the workshop Poisson
sigma models, Lie algebroids, deformations and higher analogues at the Erwin Schrdinger
International Institute for Mathematical Physics in Vienna, Austria for the hospitality while this
work was in progress.
A.A.T. acknowledges the support of the EU-RTN network grant MRTN-CT-2004-005104, the
INTAS 03-51-6346 grant and the RS Wolfson award. Part of this work was done while A.A.T.
53 In checking the invariance of the action one is to use the algebraic properties [[T , ], ] f , [[ , ], ]
R
R
L R
R
0
f , which follow upon the application of the projectors to f, and the use of the identities (6.20).
0
54 Among other interesting questions let us mention also the construction of reduced models for non-critical AdS
n
superstrings [59,71] and their possible world-sheet supersymmetry.
490
was a participant of the programme Strong Fields, Integrability and Strings at the Newtons
Institute in Cambridge, UK.
A.A.T. is most grateful to R. Roiban for an initial collaboration on part of the material
discussed in Sections 6 and 7. Some preliminary results of this paper (in particular, possible
existence of 2d supersymmetry in Pohlmeyer reduction of AdS5 S 5 string) were mentioned
in [72]. A.A.T. also thanks to A. Mikhailov for sending him a draft of an unpublished work [73]
which also attempted to uncover world-sheet supersymmetry in the formulation of AdS5 S 5
string model in terms of currents.
While this paper was in preparation we were informed by A. Mikhailov and S. SchferNameki about their closely related forthcoming paper [74] in which an equivalent reduced action
for AdS5 S 5 superstring is found.
Appendix A. Proof of gauge equivalence in Section 3.2
Here we provide some details of the argument in Section 3.2. Let us introduce the following
combinations
A + = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g,
A = g g 1 + gA g 1 .
(A.1)
Under the gauge transformations (3.24) A transform as follows:
A + h 1 A + h + h 1 + h,
A h1 A + h + h1 h.
(A.2)
It follows from the commutation relations [h, m] m and [h, h] h that their h projections also
transform in the same way. Then the constraints (3.20) take the form
A+ = (A + )h ,
A = (A )h .
(A.3)
Using (3.24) one can then

They are not invariant under the transformations (A.2) unless h = h.
set

(A + )h = A+ = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g h .
(A.4)
This condition can be satisfied by applying the transformation (3.24) with h = 1. Under this
transformation A+ is unchanged while (A + )h = (g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g)h transforms as an H
connection, so it is possible to find h so that transformed value of (A + )h is equal to A+ .
Next, once (A + )h = A+ , Eq. (3.19) implies that A+ , A are components of a flat 2d connection, i.e. satisfy (3.21).55 This, together with the equation on g contained in (3.19) and the
remaining part of gauge invariance (3.24) allows one to show that the second relation in (3.20)
can also be satisfied.
Indeed, let us show that one can find such h0 that the transformation (3.24) with h = h0 and
h = 1 preserves A+ = (A + )h and transforms A and g so that A = (A )h (note that A is
unchanged under such transformation). It is enough to find h0 in any admissible gauge that can be
reached by the gauge transformation with h = h (both conditions (A + )h = A+ and (A )h = A
are invariant under such gauge transformations). Without loss of generality we can choose this
gauge to be A+ = A = 0 (this gauge can always be reached by a gauge transformation with
In this gauge Eq. (3.19) and the constraint (A + )h = A+ take the form (3.28) and the first
h = h).
55 Note that contrary to the discussion before (3.21) now we do not assume that both constraints (3.20) are satisfied.
equation in (3.29) respectively. Eq. (3.28) can be written equivalently as

+ g g 1 = 2 T , gT+ g 1 ,
491
(A.5)
implying + (g g 1 )h = 0. This means that (g g 1 )h is a function of only and therefore
can be represented as (g g 1 )h = h0 h1
0 for some H -valued function h0 ( ). By performing the gauge transformation with h = 1 and h = h0 one then arrives at (A )h = (g g 1 )h = 0
while still satisfying A = 0 and (A + )h = 0.
Appendix B. Vanishing of the antisymmetric tensor coupling in the reduced Lagrangian
in Section 5.1
Here we provide details of the argument mentioned at the end of Section 5.1 that the reduced
Lagrangian (5.1) does not contain a WZ-type term. Indeed, all possible antisymmetric tensor
contributions that may result from integrating out the gauge field of the gWZW model vanish.
Let us consider the following automorphism of the orthogonal matrix group and its Lie algebra:
M ji = Mji (1)i+j ,
= M N .
MN
(B.1)
It is easy to check that

Tr M = Tr M,
det M = det M,

1 ,
M 1 = M

T.
M T = M
(B.2)
If g has the gauge-fixed form (5.4) then g = g 1 : this is obviously correct for any gk = ek Rk
because R k = Rk while g 1 has the same form with all gk replaced with gk1 .
The integrand of the WZ term in (3.14), (3.15) then satisfies

1 dg g 1 dg
Tr g 1 dg g 1 dg g 1 dg = Tr g 1 dg g

= Tr g dg 1 g dg 1 g dg 1

= Tr g 1 dg g 1 dg g 1 dg ,
(B.3)
and thus should vanish.
Another possible contribution may originate from the gauge field dependent term in the
gWZW Lagrangian (3.15)

LA = Tr A+ gg 1 A g 1 + g g 1 A+ gA + A+ A ,
(B.4)
where A should be replaced by the solutions of their equations of motion

A+ = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g h ,
A = g g 1 + gA g 1 h .
(B.5)
This gives

LA = Tr A+ gg 1 = Tr A g 1 + g .
(B.6)
It follows from the explicit form of Eqs. (B.5) that there exists a function A(g, g) such that

A+ (g, + g) = A(g, + g),
(B.7)
A (g, g) = A g 1 , g 1 .
Moreover, assuming the analyticity in g one finds

A(g,
g) = A g 1 , g 1 ,
(B.8)
492
provided g = g 1 . In particular, this holds in the gauge (5.4).

Since A are linear in g the vanishing of the antisymmetric part of the metric is equivalent
to LA (g, + g, g) = LA (g, g, + g). Assuming g = g 1 one gets

LA (g, g, + g) = Tr A(g, g)+ gg 1 = Tr A g,
g 1 + gg 1

= Tr A g 1 , g 1 + g 1 g

= Tr A g 1 + g = LA (g, + g, g).
(B.9)
This shows that the antisymmetric tensor contribution to the reduced Lagrangian indeed vanishes
in the gauge (5.4).
Appendix C. Matrix superalgebras: Definitions and notations
Here we summarize some basic definitions and notation used in Sections 6 and 7.
Let be a Grassmann algebra. The algebra Mat(n, l; ) is that of (n + l) (n + l) matrices
over whose diagonal block entries are even elements of while off-diagonal block entries are
odd.56 The super-transposition st is defined as follows:

st t
A Y t
A X
=
,
(MN)st = N st M st .
(C.1)
Y B
Xt B t
Note that in general (M st )st = M. More precisely, (M st )st = W MW where W is the parity
automorphism given by
W = diag(1, . . . , 1, 1, . . . , 1).
(C.2)
A real form of a complex matrix Lie (super)algebra can be described in terms of an antilinear
anti-automorphism satisfying

(MN ) = M N ,
(C.3)
M
= M,
(aM) = aM
, a C.
The real subspace of elements satisfying M = M is then a real Lie superalgebra.
We are interested in the case of n = l, i.e. Mat(n|n, ). Suppose first that the corresponding
operation is defined on so that (a ) = a and (ab) = a b = (1)|a||b| b a where |a| denotes
the Grassmann parity of a. Let us extend to arbitrary supermatrices according to

1

A X
A i 1 Y
(C.4)
=
,
Y B
iX
B
where applied to the block denotes standard hermitian conjugation, i.e. transposition combined
with the -conjugation of entries. It is useful to represent it as

0
1
,
M = M , =
0 1

A
A X
iY
=
.
(C.5)
Y B
iX
B
56 This corresponds to considering even matrices. In general one can also allow for both even and odd ones; this would
lead to additional sign factors in the equations below.
493
It is easy to see that is involutive provided 2 = 1 and = . Note that (MN ) = N M

and (M ) = M. Note also that (M )st = W (M st ) W where W is the parity automorphism
introduced above. Let us also note that the conjugation induces the real form of the respective
Lie group. Namely, the condition g = g 1 selects the real subgroup of the complex group. It is
obviously compatible with the conjugation for the Lie algebra due to the representation g = eM
and M = M.
To define Z4 anti-automorphism let us first consider the following automorphism

A X
Y B
K 1 At K
=
K 1 X t K
K 1 Y t K
K 1 B t K

(C.6)
where K is some matrix required to satisfy K 2 = 1 and K t = K 1 . It is useful to represent

as follows

K 0
,
M = K1 M st K, K =
(C.7)
0 K
so that we have the property
(MN ) = N M .
(C.8)
A Lie superalgebra fC admits a Z4 automorphism if it can be decomposed into a direct sum of

eigenspaces of -anti-automorphism
C
C
C
fC = f C
0 f1 f2 f3 ,
(C.9)
l
where fC
l denotes the eigenspace with eigenvalue i , i.e.
M = i m M,

[M, N ] = i m+n [M, N],
M fC
m,
N fC
n.
(C.10)
To see under which conditions is compatible with the reality condition we note that

st

st
K1 1 M K = K1 1 MK

= W 1 K1 M st K W = (i)m W 1 M W,
(C.11)
where we used
Kst = K1 ,
= 1 = ,
(C.12)
and also assumed that

[, K] = 0,
K = K1 ,
st = .
(C.13)
If in addition the eigenvectors with odd m belong to the off-diagonal blocks (which is the case
for psl(2m|2m) superalgebra) one finds
(i)m W 1 M W = i m 1 M ,
(C.14)
so that (M ) = i m M provided M = i m M. This proves that Z4 grading restricts to the real

form implying its decomposition (6.1).
494
The explicit form of
1 0 0
0 1 0
=
0 0 1
0 0 0
and K in the case of psu(2, 2|4) is57
0
0 1 0 0
0
1 0 0 0
K =
,
.
0
0 0 0 1
1
0 0 1 0
In the case of psu(1, 1|2) we take58

1 0
1
=
,
K=
0 1
0

0
,
1
(C.15)
(C.16)
which satisfy all the conditions above.

Appendix D. -symmetry transformations and gauge fixing in Section 6
To prove that the gauge condition Q1 = Q2+ = 0 (6.11) is reachable it is useful to introduce
the tangent frame field ea so that the 2d metric is expressed as g ab = ea eb where is the
tangent-space metric. We shall use the standard local frame where in the basis + = + = 1
and ++ = = 0. The frame components of the currents are defined in the standard way as
J = ea Ja .
In terms of this parametrization the Lagrangian density for the superstring sigma-model can
be written as (cf. (6.3))

1
LGS = STr P+ P + (Q1+ Q2 Q1 Q2+ ) e+ e .
(D.1)
2
a f .59 The WZ term
Recall that the components of the currents are defined as J = f 1 e
a
can be written also as Q1 Q2 and does not of course depend on the frame field. Using ea instead
of ab introduces a local 2d Lorentz invariance (with the corresponding the new gauge degree
of freedom entering through ea ). The analog of the Virasoro constraints in this formulation are
the equations of motion obtained by varying the action with respect to the frame field. Note the
following useful relations:
+
+
a LGS = ea STr(P+ P+ )e e ,
e
a LGS = ea STr (P P )e e ,
e
(D.2)
where e+ e = d 1 d 2 (det ea )1 .
The variation of the Lagrangian under the -transformation of the currents Ja = a +
[Ja , ] with = 1 + 2 = {P+ , ik1 } + {P , ik2+ } is given by:

J LGS = 2 STr [P+ , Q1 ]{P+ , ik1 } + [P , Q2+ ]{P , ik2+ } e+ e

= 2 STr P+ P+ [Q1 , ik1 ] + P P [Q2+ , ik2+ ] e+ e .
(D.3)
57 Here we follow the notation of [60,61].
58 This choice is different from the one used in [57].
59 Note that here we use for the light-cone frame components contrary to the genuine light-cone components in the
conformal gauge in the main text. They of course coincide if one chooses the adapted frame and coordinates.
495
The last expression can be rewritten as

J LGS =

1
STr(P+ P+ ) STr W [Q1 , ik1 ]
2m

+ STr(P P ) STr W [Q2+ , ik2+ ] e+ e ,
(D.4)
where m is the integer in the definition of psu(m, m)|2m.

To show thus (e.g. for the first term) it is convenient to use the gauge (6.21) where P+ =
p1 T 1 + p2 T 2 . The matrices T 1 , T 2 f2 are defined in (6.12), (6.13) for m = 1, 2 (and can be
obviously generalized to other m). In this gauge P+ P+ = 14 (p12 11 + p22 12 ) where 11 and 12 are
matrices with unit upper-left and lower-right blocks respectively so that one finds

1
STr P+ P+ [Q1 , ik1 ] =
STr(P+ P+ ) STr W [Q1 , ik1 ]
4m
(D.5)
where W is the parity automorphism (C.2) and we used that STr([Q1 , ik1 ]) = 0 and p12 p22 =
m2 STr(P+ P+ ).
The variation J LGS can be compensated by the following variation of the frame field
a
e
=

1 a
e+ STr W [Q1 , ik1 ] ,
2m
a
e +
=

1 a
e STr W [Q2+ , ik2+ ] .
2m
(D.6)
a eb + ea eb one finds
In particular, for the variation of the metric g ab = ea eb = e+

1 a b
a b
e STr W [ik2+ , Q2+ ] .
e+ e+ STr W [ik1 , Q1 ] + e
m
This can be rewritten in terms of the tangent components as
g ab =
(D.7)

b

1 b
, Qa2(+) ,
STr W ik1() , Qa1() + STr W ik2(+)
(D.8)
m g
a = gea V = (det e)1 ea V . Taking into account
where we have used that (cf. (6.5)) V()

the fact that g = 0 one indeed finds that this variation determines the variation of ab =
gg ab given in (6.4).
Let us now turn to the question of -symmetry gauge fixing in terms of the current components. The -variation of the frame components of the current is

J = ea Ja + ea a + [Ja , ] = ( e)a ea J + ea a + [J , ].
(D.9)
g ab =
The fermionic equations of motion written in terms of the frame components of the currents
take exactly the same form as in the usual light-cone coordinates (cf. last line in (6.8))
[P+ , Q1 ] = 0,
[P , Q2+ ] = 0.
(D.10)
As we have seen above the same applies to the Virasoro constraints expressed in terms of the
frame components:
STr(P+ P+ ) = 0,
STr(P P ) = 0.
(D.11)
Under the gauge transformation with G-valued gauge parameter the components P transform as
P g01 P g0 . Using the Virasoro constraints and applying exactly the same argument as in the
discussion of the reduction gauge in terms of the original light-cone components in Section 6.2
496
one can assume that P+ = p+ T and P = p g 1 T g where p are some real functions and g is
a G-valued function.
In this gauge the -transformation of the component Q1 becomes
a
a + [A , 1 ] + [P , 2 ] + [Q1 , h],
Q1 = ( e)a ea Q1 + e
(D.12)
where h = h(J, 1 , 2 ) is the f0 -valued parameter of the compensating gauge transformation

needed to maintain the gauge condition P+ = p+ T . In fact, in this gauge [P , 2 ] = 0 because
2 = i{P , k2+ } and [T , {T , M}] = 0 vanishes for any matrix M. The term with the -symmetry
transformation of the frame field is given explicitly by

1
f+ =
STr W [ik1 , Q1 ] .
( e)a ea Q1 = f+ Q1+ ,
(D.13)
2m
The transformation (D.12) then takes the form (cf. (6.4))
a
a 1 + [A , 1 ] + Q1+ f+ + [Q1 , h].
Q1 = e
(D.14)
Applying the decomposition f = f f to the -symmetry transformation of Q1 in the reduction gauge where P+ = p+ T one observes that 1 takes values in f
1 (cf. (6.4)) and at the
same time the equation [P+ , Q1 ] = 0 implies that Q1 is also f
-valued.
Because (D.14) is
1
the symmetry of the equation [P+ , Q1 ] = 0 preserving the structure of P+ , the variation Q1
also belongs to f
1 . One then concludes that Q1 can be put to zero by an appropriate choice of
f -valued 1 . This in turn implies that such 1 can be represented as i{P+ , k1 }.
1
Note that once Q1 is set to zero, any transformation with an arbitrary 2 = i{P , k1+ } and
+
a + [A , ] = 0 preserves Q
1 = i{P+ , k1 } satisfying e
a 1
1
1 = 0 because f in (D.13)
also vanishes when Q1 = 0. This statement is invariant under the f0 -gauge transformations and
therefore holds in any f0 -gauge. Analogous considerations for Q2+ in the gauge where P =
p T show that one can also set Q2+ = 0. Finally, using a local Lorentz transformation and
choosing the appropriate coordinates one can bring ea to the standard form where the only
+
non-vanishing components are e+

= e
= 1. We then arriving at the gauge choice (6.11) for the
two components of the fermionic currents.
Appendix E. Details of gauge fixing in Section 6.4
In order to show that the reduced model of Section 6.2 is indeed described by (6.49) one is to
demonstrate that the constraint equations that arise from varying this action with respect to A
represent an admissible gauge condition for the equations of motion (6.35), (6.36). To see this let
us introduce the following quantities (cf. (A.1))

A + = g 1 + g + g 1 A+ g
(E.1)
[T , R ], R ,
2

A = g g 1 + gA g 1
(E.2)
[T , L ], L .
2
Under the gauge transformation (6.32), (6.45) they transform as follows
A h1 A + h + h1 h.
A + h 1 A + h + h 1 + h,
(E.3)
Their h projections (A )h obviously have the same transformations properties. The variation of
the action (6.49) with respect to A gives
A+ = (A + )h ,
A = (A )h .
(E.4)
497
The first equation in (6.35) can be written (upon using the other two equations) as

T , [D R , R ] = 0,
A + + A + [A , A + ] + 2 g 1 T g, T
(E.5)
2
or, equivalently, as

T , [D L , L ] = 0.
+ A A+ + [A+ , A ] + 2 gT g 1 , T
(E.6)
2
Since ([T , u])h = 0 (note that [T , u] f while h = f
0 ) and projecting this equation on h one
finds that A and (A+ )h are the two components of a flat connection. Repeating the argument
used in the bosonic case one then concludes that one can set A+ = (A + )h by an appropriate
gauge transformation with h = 1. In this gauge A and A+ are then components of a flat con
nection and can be put to zero by a gauge transformation with h = h.
In the gauge A+ = A = 0 Eq. (E.6) implies:
+ (A )h = 0,
(E.7)
where we again made use of the fact that ([T , u])h = 0 for any u f0 f2 . Then (A )h is a
function of only and therefore can be set to zero by a gauge transformation with h = 1 and
h = h( ). As in the bosonic case such a gauge transformation does not spoil the conditions
A+ = A = (A + )h = 0.
References
[1] M.B. Green, J.H. Schwarz, Properties of the covariant formulation of superstring theories, Nucl. Phys. B 243 (1984)
285.
[2] R.R. Metsaev, A.A. Tseytlin, Type IIB superstring action in AdS5 S 5 background, Nucl. Phys. B 533 (1998) 109,
hep-th/9805028.
[3] I. Bena, J. Polchinski, R. Roiban, Hidden symmetries of the AdS5 S 5 superstring, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 046002,
hep-th/0305116.
[4] G. Mandal, N.V. Suryanarayana, S.R. Wadia, Aspects of semiclassical strings in AdS5 , Phys. Lett. B 543 (2002) 81,
hep-th/0206103.
[5] G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, J. Russo, A.A. Tseytlin, Spinning strings in AdS5 S 5 and integrable systems, Nucl.
Phys. B 671 (2003) 3, hep-th/0307191;
V.A. Kazakov, A. Marshakov, J.A. Minahan, K. Zarembo, Classical/quantum integrability in AdS/CFT, JHEP 0405
(2004) 024, hep-th/0402207;
N. Beisert, V.A. Kazakov, K. Sakai, K. Zarembo, The algebraic curve of classical superstrings on AdS5 S 5 ,
Commun. Math. Phys. 263 (2006) 659, hep-th/0502226;
N. Dorey, B. Vicedo, On the dynamics of finite-gap solutions in classical string theory, JHEP 0607 (2006) 014,
hep-th/0601194.
[6] R.R. Metsaev, A.A. Tseytlin, Superstring action in AdS5 S 5 : kappa-symmetry light cone gauge, Phys. Rev. D 63
(2001) 046002, hep-th/0007036;
R.R. Metsaev, C.B. Thorn, A.A. Tseytlin, Light-cone superstring in AdS spacetime, Nucl. Phys. B 596 (2001) 151,
hep-th/0009171.
[7] R.R. Metsaev, Type IIB GreenSchwarz superstring in plane wave RamondRamond background, Nucl. Phys. B
625 (2002) 70, hep-th/0112044;
D.E. Berenstein, J.M. Maldacena, H.S. Nastase, Strings in flat space and pp waves from N = 4 super-YangMills,
JHEP 0204 (2002) 013, hep-th/0202021;
R.R. Metsaev, A.A. Tseytlin, Exactly solvable model of superstring in plane wave RamondRamond background,
Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 126004, hep-th/0202109.
[8] C.G. Callan, H.K. Lee, T. McLoughlin, J.H. Schwarz, I. Swanson, X. Wu, Quantizing string theory in AdS5 S 5 :
Beyond the pp-wave, Nucl. Phys. B 673 (2003) 3, hep-th/0307032;
C.G. Callan, T. McLoughlin, I. Swanson, Holography beyond the Penrose limit, Nucl. Phys. B 694 (2004) 115,
hep-th/0404007.
498
[9] G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, Integrable Hamiltonian for classical strings on AdS5 S 5 , JHEP 0502 (2005) 059, hepth/0411089.
[10] S. Frolov, J. Plefka, M. Zamaklar, The AdS5 S 5 superstring in light-cone gauge and its Bethe equations, J.
Phys. A 39 (2006) 13037, hep-th/0603008;
G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, J. Plefka, M. Zamaklar, The off-shell symmetry algebra of the light-cone AdS5 S 5
superstring, J. Phys. A 40 (2007) 3583, hep-th/0609157.
[11] N. Beisert, The su(2|2) dynamic S-matrix, hep-th/0511082.
[12] T. Klose, T. McLoughlin, J.A. Minahan, K. Zarembo, World-sheet scattering in AdS5 S 5 at two loops, JHEP 0708
(2007) 051, 0704.3891 [hep-th];
T. Klose, T. McLoughlin, R. Roiban, K. Zarembo, Worldsheet scattering in AdS5 S 5 , JHEP 0703 (2007) 094,
hep-th/0611169;
G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, M. Zamaklar, The ZamolodchikovFaddeev algebra for AdS5 S 5 superstring, JHEP 0704
(2007) 002, hep-th/0612229.
[13] A.B. Zamolodchikov, A.B. Zamolodchikov, Factorized S-matrices in two dimensions as the exact solutions of
certain relativistic quantum field models, Ann. Phys. 120 (1979) 253.
[14] K. Pohlmeyer, Integrable Hamiltonian systems and interactions through quadratic constraints, Commun. Math.
Phys. 46 (1976) 207.
[15] V.E. Zakharov, A.V. Mikhailov, Relativistically invariant two-dimensional models in field theory integrable by the
inverse problem technique, Sov. Phys. JETP 47 (1978) 1017, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 74 (1978) 1953.
[16] H. Eichenherr, K. Pohlmeyer, Lax pairs for certain generalizations of the sine-Gordon equation, Phys. Lett. B 89
(1979) 76.
[17] K. Pohlmeyer, K.H. Rehren, Reduction of the two-dimensional O(N ) nonlinear sigma model, J. Math. Phys. 20
(1979) 2628.
[18] H. Eichenherr, M. Forger, On the dual symmetry of the nonlinear sigma models, Nucl. Phys. B 155 (1979) 381;
H. Eichenherr, M. Forger, More about nonlinear sigma models on symmetric spaces, Nucl. Phys. B 164 (1980) 528;
H. Eichenherr, M. Forger, Nucl. Phys. B 282 (1987) 745, Erratum;
H. Eichenherr, Geometric analysis of integrable nonlinear sigma models, Lect. Notes Phys. 151 (1982) 189.
[19] R. DAuria, T. Regge, S. Sciuto, A general scheme for bidimensional models with associate linear set, Phys. Lett. B
89 (1980) 363;
R. DAuria, T. Regge, S. Sciuto, Group theoretical construction of two-dimensional models with infinite set of
conservation laws, Nucl. Phys. B 171 (1980) 167;
R. DAuria, S. Sciuto, Group theoretical construction of two-dimensional supersymmetric models, Nucl. Phys. B
171 (1980) 189.
[20] A. Mikhailov, An action variable of the sine-Gordon model, J. Geom. Phys. 56 (2006) 2429, hep-th/0504035;
A. Mikhailov, A nonlocal Poisson bracket of the sine-Gordon model, hep-th/0511069.
[21] A. Mikhailov, Bihamiltonian structure of the classical superstring in AdS5 S 5 , hep-th/0609108.
[22] F. Lund, T. Regge, Unified approach to strings and vortices with soliton solutions, Phys. Rev. D 14 (1976) 1524;
F. Lund, Example of a relativistic, completely integrable, Hamiltonian system, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 1175;
B.S. Getmanov, Integrable two-dimensional Lorentz invariant nonlinear model of complex scalar field (complex
sine-Gordon Ii), Theor. Math. Phys. 48 (1982) 572, Teor. Mat. Fiz. 48 (1981) 13.
[23] I. Bakas, Conservation laws and geometry of perturbed coset models, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 9 (1994) 3443, hep-th/
9310122.
[24] I. Bakas, Q.H. Park, H.J. Shin, Lagrangian formulation of symmetric space sine-Gordon models, Phys. Lett. B 372
(1996) 45, hep-th/9512030.
[25] C.R. Fernandez-Pousa, M.V. Gallas, T.J. Hollowood, J.L. Miramontes, The symmetric space and homogeneous
sine-Gordon theories, Nucl. Phys. B 484 (1997) 609, hep-th/9606032.
[26] I. Bakas, K. Sfetsos, Universal aspects of string propagation on curved backgrounds, Phys. Rev. D 54 (1996) 3995,
hep-th/9604195.
[27] A.N. Leznov, M.V. Savelev, Two-dimensional exactly and completely integrable dynamical systems (Monopoles,
instantons, dual models, relativistic strings, Lund Regge model, generalized Toda lattice, etc.), Commun. Math.
Phys. 89 (1983) 59.
[28] R.F. Dashen, B. Hasslacher, A. Neveu, The particle spectrum in model field theories from semiclassical functional
integral techniques, Phys. Rev. D 11 (1975) 3424.
[29] J.L. Miramontes, T-duality in massive integrable field theories: The homogeneous and complex sine-Gordon models, Nucl. Phys. B 702 (2004) 419, hep-th/0408119.
[30] D.M. Hofman, J.M. Maldacena, Giant magnons, J. Phys. A 39 (2006) 13095, hep-th/0604135;
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[40]
[41]
[42]
[43]
[44]
[45]
[46]
[47]
[48]
[49]
[50]
499
N. Dorey, D.M. Hofman, J.M. Maldacena, On the singularities of the magnon S-matrix, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007)
025011, hep-th/0703104;
H.Y. Chen, N. Dorey, R.F. Lima Matos, Quantum scattering of giant magnons, JHEP 0709 (2007) 106, arXiv:
0707.0668 [hep-th].
H.Y. Chen, N. Dorey, K. Okamura, Dyonic giant magnons, JHEP 0609 (2006) 024, hep-th/0605155.
K. Okamura, R. Suzuki, A perspective on classical strings from complex sine-Gordon solitons, Phys. Rev. D 75
(2007) 046001, hep-th/0609026;
H. Hayashi, K. Okamura, R. Suzuki, B. Vicedo, Large winding sector of AdS/CFT, 0709.4033 [hep-th].
T. Quella, V. Schomerus, Asymmetric cosets, JHEP 0302 (2003) 030, hep-th/0212119.
C.R. Nappi, Some properties of an analog of the nonlinear sigma model, Phys. Rev. D 21 (1980) 418.
B.E. Fridling, A. Jevicki, Dual representations and ultraviolet divergences in nonlinear sigma models, Phys. Lett. B
134 (1984) 70;
E.S. Fradkin, A.A. Tseytlin, Quantum equivalence of dual field theories, Ann. Phys. 162 (1985) 31.
E. Witten, On string theory and black holes, Phys. Rev. D 44 (1991) 314;
K. Bardacki, M.J. Crescimanno, E. Rabinovici, Parafermions from coset models, Nucl. Phys. B 344 (1990) 344.
M.J. Crescimanno, Geometry and duality of a non-Abelian coset model, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 7 (1992) 489.
E.S. Fradkin, V.Y. Linetsky, On spacetime interpretation of the coset models in D < 26 critical string theory, Phys.
Lett. B 277 (1992) 73.
Q.H. Park, H.J. Shin, Duality in complex sine-Gordon theory, Phys. Lett. B 359 (1995) 125, hep-th/9506087.
I. Bars, K. Sfetsos, Generalized duality and singular strings in higher dimensions, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 7 (1992) 1091,
hep-th/9110054.
E. Witten, Non-Abelian bosonization in two dimensions, Commun. Math. Phys. 92 (1984) 455;
K. Bardakci, E. Rabinovici, B. Saering, String models with C < 1 components, Nucl. Phys. B 299 (1988) 151;
D. Karabali, Q.H. Park, H.J. Schnitzer, Z. Yang, A Gko construction based on a path integral formulation of gauged
WessZuminoWitten actions, Phys. Lett. B 216 (1989) 307.
P.M. Petropoulos, K. Sfetsos, Non-Abelian coset string backgrounds from asymptotic and initial data, JHEP 0704
(2007) 033, hep-th/0610055.
O.A. Castro-Alvaredo, Bootstrap methods in 1 + 1 dimensional quantum field theories: The homogeneous sineGordon models, hep-th/0109212.
I. Bars, K. Sfetsos, A superstring theory in four curved spacetime dimensions, Phys. Lett. B 277 (1992) 269,
hep-th/9111040;
I. Bars, K. Sfetsos, Global analysis of new gravitational singularities in string and particle theories, Phys. Rev. D 46
(1992) 4495, hep-th/9205037.
R. Dijkgraaf, H.L. Verlinde, E.P. Verlinde, String propagation in a black hole geometry, Nucl. Phys. B 371 (1992)
269;
E.B. Kiritsis, Duality in gauged WZW models, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 6 (1991) 2871.
I. Bars, K. Sfetsos, Conformally exact metric and dilaton in string theory on curved spacetime, Phys. Rev. D 46
(1992) 4510, hep-th/9206006;
I. Bars, K. Sfetsos, Exact effective action and spacetime geometry n gauged WZW models, Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993)
844, hep-th/9301047.
A.A. Tseytlin, Effective action of gauged WZW model and exact string solutions, Nucl. Phys. B 399 (1993) 601,
hep-th/9301015;
A.A. Tseytlin, Conformal sigma models corresponding to gauged WessZuminoWitten theories, Nucl. Phys. B 411
(1994) 509, hep-th/9302083;
K. Sfetsos, A.A. Tseytlin, Antisymmetric tensor coupling and conformal invariance in sigma models corresponding
to gauged WZNW theories, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 2933, hep-th/9310159.
I. Jack, D.R.T. Jones, J. Panvel, Quantum non-Abelian Toda field theories, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 9 (1994) 3631,
hep-th/9308080;
I. Jack, J. Panvel, WZW Toda reduction using the Casimir operator, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 9 (1994) 745, hep-th/
9302077.
E. Napolitano, S. Sciuto, The N = 2 supersymmetric generalization of the complex sine-Gordon model, Phys. Lett.
B 113 (1982) 43;
E. Napolitano, S. Sciuto, A two-dimensional Lagrangian model with extended supersymmetry and infinitely many
constants of motion, Commun. Math. Phys. 84 (1982) 171.
E. Napolitano, S. Sciuto, Supersymmetric sigma models and graded Lie groups, Nuovo Cimento A 64 (1981) 406;
E. Napolitano, S. Sciuto, Equivalence between a constrained supersymmetric sigma model and the supersymmetric
sine-Gordon model, Phys. Lett. B 104 (1981) 285.
500
[51] S.J. Gates, O.A. Solovev, Superspace supervortices, Phys. Lett. B 339 (1994) 232, hep-th/9405017.
[52] T.J. Hollowood, J.L. Miramontes, Q.H. Park, Massive integrable soliton theories, Nucl. Phys. B 445 (1995) 451,
hep-th/9412062.
[53] L.D. Faddeev, N.Y. Reshetikhin, Integrability of the principal chiral field model in (1 + 1)-dimension, Ann.
Phys. 167 (1986) 227.
[54] K. Zarembo, Semiclassical Bethe ansatz and AdS/CFT, C. R. Physique 5 (2004) 1081, Fortschr. Phys. 53 (2005)
647, hep-th/0411191.
[55] N. Dorey, T.J. Hollowood, Quantum scattering of charged solitons in the complex sine-Gordon model, Nucl. Phys. B
440 (1995) 215, hep-th/9410140.
[56] K.I. Kobayashi, T. Uematsu, N = 2 supersymmetric sine-Gordon theory and conservation laws, Phys. Lett. B 264
(1991) 107;
K.I. Kobayashi, T. Uematsu, Y.Z. Yu, Quantum conserved charges in N = 1 and N = 2 supersymmetric sine-Gordon
theories, Nucl. Phys. B 397 (1993) 283.
[57] N. Berkovits, M. Bershadsky, T. Hauer, S. Zhukov, B. Zwiebach, Superstring theory on AdS2 S 2 as a coset
supermanifold, Nucl. Phys. B 567 (2000) 61, hep-th/9907200.
[58] R. Roiban, W. Siegel, Superstrings on AdS5 S 5 supertwistor space, JHEP 0011 (2000) 024, hep-th/0010104;
M. Hatsuda, M. Sakaguchi, WessZumino term for AdS superstring, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 045020, hep-th/
0205092.
[59] A.M. Polyakov, Conformal fixed points of unidentified gauge theories, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 19 (2004) 1649, hep-th/
0405106;
A.M. Polyakov, Supermagnets and sigma models, hep-th/0512310.
[60] G. Arutyunov, Lecture notes on integrability and strings, 2006, unpublished.
[61] L.F. Alday, G. Arutyunov, A.A. Tseytlin, On integrability of classical superstrings in AdS5 S 5 , JHEP 0507 (2005)
002, hep-th/0502240;
L.F. Alday, G. Arutyunov, S. Frolov, New integrable system of 2dim fermions from strings on AdS5 S 5 , JHEP
0601 (2006) 078, hep-th/0508140.
[62] P. Di Vecchia, V.G. Knizhnik, J.L. Petersen, P. Rossi, A supersymmetric WessZumino Lagrangian in twodimensions, Nucl. Phys. B 253 (1985) 701.
[63] H.J. Schnitzer, A path integral construction of superconformal field theories from a gauged supersymmetric Wess
ZuminoWitten action, Nucl. Phys. B 324 (1989) 412;
T. Nakatsu, Supersymmetric gauged WessZuminoWitten models, Prog. Theor. Phys. 87 (1992) 795;
I. Bars, K. Sfetsos, A superstring theory in four curved spacetime dimensions, Phys. Lett. B 277 (1992) 269,
hep-th/9111040;
A.A. Tseytlin, Conformal sigma models corresponding to gauged WessZuminoWitten theories, Nucl. Phys. B 411
(1994) 509, hep-th/9302083.
[64] E. Witten, The N matrix model and gauged WZW models, Nucl. Phys. B 371 (1992) 191.
[65] C.M. Hull, G. Papadopoulos, P.K. Townsend, Potentials for (p, 0) and (1, 1) supersymmetric sigma models with
torsion, Phys. Lett. B 316 (1993) 291, hep-th/9307013;
G. Papadopoulos, P.K. Townsend, Massive sigma models with (p, q) supersymmetry, Class. Quantum Grav. 11
(1994) 515, hep-th/9307066;
G. Papadopoulos, P.K. Townsend, Massive (p, q) supersymmetric sigma models revisited, Class. Quantum Grav. 11
(1994) 2163, hep-th/9406015;
W. Machin, G. Papadopoulos, Supersymmetric gauge theories, vortices and equivariant cohomology, Class. Quantum Grav. 20 (2003) 1233, hep-th/0208076.
[66] G. Papadopoulos, Supersymmetric Toda field theories, Phys. Lett. B 365 (1996) 98, hep-th/9508175;
J.M. Evans, J.O. Madsen, Integrability versus supersymmetry, Phys. Lett. B 389 (1996) 665, hep-th/9608190;
A. Opfermann, Supersymmetric extensions of affine Toda theories, hep-th/9807227;
J.M. Evans, J.O. Madsen, Quantum integrability of coupled N = 1 super-sine/sinh-Gordon theories and the Lie
superalgebra D(2, 1, ), Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 14 (1999) 2551, hep-th/9712227.
[67] Y. Kazama, H. Suzuki, New N = 2 superconformal field theories and superstring compactification, Nucl. Phys. B
321 (1989) 232.
[68] J.M. Figueroa-OFarrill, S. Stanciu, Supersymmetric cosets from gauged SWZW models, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 12
(1997) 1677;
J.M. Figueroa-OFarrill, S. Stanciu, N = 1 and N = 2 cosets from gauged supersymmetric WZW models, hep-th/
9511229.
[69] J.G. Zhou, Super 0-brane and GS superstring actions on AdS2 S 2 , Nucl. Phys. B 559 (1999) 92, hep-th/9906013.
501
[70] I. Pesando, The GS type IIB superstring action on AdS3 S 3 T 4 , JHEP 9902 (1999) 007, hep-th/9809145;
J. Rahmfeld, A. Rajaraman, The GS string action on AdS3 S 3 with RamondRamond charge, Phys. Rev. D 60
(1999) 064014, hep-th/9809164;
J. Park, S.J. Rey, GreenSchwarz superstring on AdS3 S 3 , JHEP 9901 (1999) 001, hep-th/9812062;
N. Berkovits, C. Vafa, E. Witten, Conformal field theory of AdS background with RamondRamond flux,
JHEP 9903 (1999) 018, hep-th/9902098;
R.R. Metsaev, A.A. Tseytlin, Superparticle and superstring in AdS3 S 3 RamondRamond background in lightcone gauge, J. Math. Phys. 42 (2001) 2987, hep-th/0011191.
[71] I. Adam, P.A. Grassi, L. Mazzucato, Y. Oz, S. Yankielowicz, Non-critical pure spinor superstrings, JHEP 0703
(2007) 091, hep-th/0605118;
I. Adam, A. Dekel, L. Mazzucato, Y. Oz, Integrability of type II superstrings on RamondRamond backgrounds in
various dimensions, JHEP 0706 (2007) 085, hep-th/0702083.
[72] A.A. Tseytlin, Talk at the perimeter institute meeting on gauge theory and string theory, Waterloo, Canada, October
2006.
[73] A. Mikhailov, S. Schfer-Nameki, unpublished, December 2006.
[74] A. Mikhailov, S. Schfer-Nameki, Sine-Gordon like action for the superstring in AdS5 S 5 , arXiv: 0711.0195
[hep-th].

On WessZumino terms of braneantibrane systems

Mohammad R. Garousi a,b, , Ehsan Hatefi a
a Department of Physics, Ferdowsi University, PO Box 1436, Mashhad, Iran
b Institute for Studies in Theoretical Physics and Mathematics (IPM), PO Box 19395-5531, Tehran, Iran
Received 10 November 2007; accepted 22 January 2008

Abstract
We calculate the disk level S-matrix element of one closed string RR field, two open string tachyons
and one gauge field in type II superstring theory. An expansion for the S-matrix element has been found
that its four leading order terms are reproduced exactly by the symmetric trace tachyon DBI and the Wess
Zumino actions of D-braneanti-D-brane systems. Using this consistency, we have also found the first
higher derivative correction to the some of the WZ terms.
1. Introduction
Study of unstable objects in string theory might shed new light in understanding properties
of string theory in time-dependent backgrounds [16]. Generally speaking, source of instability
in these processes is appearance of some tachyonic modes in the spectrum of these objects. It
then makes sense to study them in a field theory which includes those modes. In this regard, it
has been shown by A. Sen that an effective action of BornInfeld type proposed in [710] can
capture many properties of the decay of non-BPS Dp -branes in string theory [2,3]. Recently,
unstable objects have been used to study spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking in holographic
model of QCD [1113]. In these studies, flavor branes introduced by placing a set of parallel
branes and antibranes on a background dual to a confining color theory [14]. Detailed study of
braneantibrane system reveals when brane separation is smaller than the string length scale,
spectrum of this system has two tachyonic modes [15]. The effective action should then include
these modes because they are the most important ones which rule the dynamics of the system.
* Corresponding author at: Department of Physics, Ferdowsi University, PO Box 1436, Mashhad, Iran.
E-mail address: garousi@ipm.ir (M.R. Garousi).

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.01.024
M.R. Garousi, E. Hatefi / Nuclear Physics B 800 [PM] (2008) 502516
503
The effective action of a Dp D p -brane in type IIA(B) theory should be given by some extension of the DBI action and the WZ terms which include the tachyon fields. The DBI part may be
given by the projection of the effective action of two non-BPS Dp -branes in type IIB(A) theory
with (1)FL [16]. We are interested in this paper in the appearance of tachyon, gauge field and
the RR field in these actions. These fields appear in the DBI part as the following [17]:

SDBI = d p+1 Tr V (T ) det(ab + 2 Fab + 2 Da T Db T ) .
(1)
The trace in the above action should be completely symmetric between all matrices of the form
Fab , Da T , and individual T of the tachyon potential. These matrices are
(1)

Fab
0
0
Da T
0 T
Fab =
(2)
Da T =
,
T =
(2) ,
0
T 0
(Da T )
0
Fab
(i)
(i)
(i)
(1)
(2)
where Fab = a Ab b Aa and Da T = a T i(Aa Aa )T . If one uses ordinary trace,

instead, the above action reduces to the action proposed by Sen [18] after making the kinetic term
symmetric and performing the trace. This latter action is not consistent with S-matrix calculation.
The tachyon potential which is consistent with S-matrix element calculations has the following
expansion:
V (|T |) = 1 + m2 |T |2 +
1 2 2 2
m |T | + ,
2
where Tp is the p-brane tension, m2 is the mass squared of tachyon, i.e., m2 = 1/(2 ). The
2
2
above expansion is consistent with the potential V (|T |) = e m |T | which is the tachyon potential of BSFT [19].
The terms of the above action which has contribution to the S-matrix element of one gauge
field and two tachyons in which we are interested in this paper are the following [17]:

(1) (1)

2
2
(2)
(2)
F F +F F
LDBI = Tp (2 ) m |T | + DT (DT )
2

2
+ Tp ( )3 DT (DT ) F (1) F (1) + F (1) F (2) + F (2) F (2)
3

2m2 2 (1) (1)
| | F F + F (1) F (2) + F (2) F (2)
+
3

4
(1)
(2)
(2)
D T D T + D T (D T ) F (1) F + F (1) F + F (2) F .
3
(3)
Note that if one uses the on-shell value for the tachyon mass, i.e., m2 = 1/(2 ), the above
terms would not be ordered in terms of power of .
The WZ term describing the coupling of RR field to gauge field of braneantibrane is given
by [20,21]

(1)
(2)
C ei2 F ei2 F ,
S = p
(4)
(p+1)
where (p+1) is the world volume and p is the RR charge of the branes. In above equation,

pm+1
C is a formal sum of the RR potentials C = m=p+1 (i) 2 Cm . Note that the factors of
504
i disappear in each term of (4). The inclusion of the tachyon fields into this action has been
proposed in [2224] using the superconnection of noncommutative geometry [2527]

SWZ = p
(5)
C STr ei2 F
(p+1)
where the curvature of the superconnection is defined as:

F = dA iA A,
(6)
the superconnection is
(1)

iA
T
iA =
,
T
iA(2)
where is a normalization constant with dimension 1/ which we shall find it later, and a
supertrace is defined by

A B
STr
= Tr A Tr D.
C D
Using the multiplication rule of the supermatrices [23]

A B
A B
AA + ()c BC AB + ()d BD

=
C D
C D
DC + ()a CA DD + ()b CB
(7)
where x is 0 if X is an even form or 1 if X is an odd form, one finds that the curvature is

(1)
iF 2 |T |2
(DT )
,
iF =
DT
iF (2) 2 |T |2
(i)
(1)
(2)
where F (i) = 12 Fab dx a dx b and DT = [a T i(Aa Aa )T ] dx a . The WZ action (5) has

the following terms:

C STr iF = Cp1 F (1) F (2) ,

C STr iF iF = Cp3 F (1) F (1) F (2) F (2)

+ Cp1 2 2 |T |2 F (1) F (2) + 2i 2 DT (DT ) ,
C STr iF iF iF

= Cp5 F (1) F (1) F (1) F (2) F (2) F (2)

+ Cp3 3 2 |T |2 F (1) F (1) F (2) F (2)

+ 3i 2 F (1) + F (2) DT (DT )

+ Cp1 3 4 |T |4 F (1) F (2) 6i 4 |T |2 DT (DT ) .
(8)
The appearance of Cp1 dT dT has been checked in [22] by studying the disk level Smatrix element of one RR field and two tachyons. In the present paper we will check, among
other things, the appearance of Cp1 DT (DT ) and Cp1 |T |2 (F (1) F (2) ) terms and
fix their coefficients using the S-matrix element of one RR field, two tachyons and one gauge
field. The coupling of one RR field, two tachyons and one gauge field in the above terms can be
505
combined into the following form:

C(p1) d A(1) A(2) T T A(1) A(2) d T T
p (2 )2 2
(p+1)

= p (2 )2 2

H(p) A(1) A(2) T T .
(9)
p+1
This combination actually appears naturally in the S-matrix element in the string theory side.
An outline of the rest of paper is as follows. In Section 2, we review the calculation of the
S-matrix element of one RR and two tachyons [22]. The low energy expansion of this amplitude
produces one massless pole and infinite number of contact terms. The massless pole is the one
reproduce by the above field theories, and its first contact term by Cp1 dT dT . This
fixes the normalization of tachyon in WZ action with respect to the tachyon in the DBI part. In
Section 3, we calculate the S-matrix element of one RR, two tachyons and one gauge field. We
find an expansion for the amplitude whose leading order terms are fully consistent with the above
field theories.
2. The T T C amplitude
The three-point amplitude between one RR field and two tachyons has been studied in [22]
where a non-zero coupling C dT dT has been found. To fix the coefficient of this term
we reexamine this amplitude in this section. The tachyon vertex operator corresponds to the real
components of the complex tachyon, i.e.,
1
T = (T1 + iT2 ).
(10)
2
The three point amplitude between one RR and two tachyons is given by the following correlation
functions:

(1)
(w, w)
,
AT ,T ,RR dx dy d 2 w VT(0) (x)VT(1) (y)VRR
(11)
where the vertex operators are
(0)
VT (x) = 2ik(x)e2ikX(x) ,
(1)
VT
(y) = e(y) e2ik X(y) ,
VRR (w, w)
= (PH
/ (n) Mp ) e(w)/2 S (w)eipX(w) e(w)/2
S (w)e
ipDX(w)
.
(1)
(12)
The tachyon vertex operator corresponds to either T1 or T2 . The projector in the RR vertex
operator is P = 12 (1 11 ) and
an
H 1 n ,
n! 1 n
where n = 2, 4 for type IIA and n = 1, 3, 5 for type IIB. an = i for IIA and an = 1 for IIB the/ (n) ) =
ory. The spinorial indices are raised with the charge conjugation matrix, e.g., (PH
/ (n) ) (further conventions and notations for spinors can be found in Appendix B
C (PH
of [28]). The RR bosons are massless so p 2 = 0 and for the tachyons k 2 = k 2 = 1/4. In the
string theory calculation we always set = 2. The world-sheet fields has been extended to the
H
/ (n) =
506
entire complex plane. That is, we have replaced

X (w)
D X (w),
(w)
D (w),
w)
M S (w),
(
(w),
and S (w)
where

D=
1p+1
0
0
19p

,
and Mp =
i
a0 a1
(p+1)!
1
a0 a1
(p+1)!
ap a0 ap
for p even,
ap 11 a0 ap
for p odd.
Using these replacements, one finds the standard propagators for the world-sheet fields X , ,
i.e.,

X (z)X (w) = log(z w),

(z)(w) = log(z w).
(13)
One also needs the correlation function between two spin operators and one . The correlation
function involving an arbitrary number of s and two Ss is obtained using the following Wicklike rule [29]:

1 (y1 ) n (yn )S (z)S (z)
=
(z z )n/25/4 n 1 1
C
|y1 z| |yn z|

+ 1 (y1 ) 2 (y2 ) n 3 C 1 perms

+ 1 (y1 ) 2 (y2 ) 3 (y3 ) 4 (y4 ) n 5 C 1

perms + ,
1
2n/2
(14)
n 1
is the totally
where dots means sum over all possible contractions. In above equation,
antisymmetric combination of the gamma matrices and the Wick-like contraction, for real yi , is
given by

Re[(y1 z)(y2 z )]
(y1 ) (y2 ) = 2
.
(y1 y2 )(z z )
The number of in the correlators (11) is one. Using the above formula for one and
performing the other correlators using (13), one finds that the integrand is invariant under
SL(2, R) transformation. Gauge fixing this symmetry by fixing the position of vertex operators
at (x, y, w, w)
= (x, x, i, i), one finds [22]
A
1

(1 + x 2 )2 2 +u 2
dx
Tr PH
/ (n) Mp a ka ,
2
2
16x
1+x

ip
[2u]
Tr PH
/ (n) Mp a ka ,
2 1
=
2
4
[ 2 u]
T ,T ,RR
(15)
where u = (k + k )2 and conservation of momentum along the world volume of brane, i.e.,
k a + k a + p a = 0, has been used. We have also normalized the amplitude by ip /4. The trace
(a)
507
(b)
Fig. 1. The Feynman diagrams corresponding to the amplitudes (16) and (19).
is zero for p = n, and for n = p it is

32
/ (n) Mp a = Ha0 ap1 a0 ap1 a .
Tr H
p!
We are going to compare string theory S-matrix elements with field theory S-matrix element
including their coefficients, however, we are not interested in fixing the overall sign of the amplitudes. Hence, in above and in the rest of equations in this paper, we have payed no attention to
the sign of equations. The trace in (15) containing the factor of 11 ensures the following results
also hold for p > 3 with H
/ (n) H(10n) for n 5.
If one replaces ka in (15) with ka pa and uses using the conservation of momentum, one
will find that the pa term vanishes using the totally antisymmetric property of a0 ap1 a . Hence
the amplitude (15) is antisymmetric under interchanging 1 2. This indicates that the three
point amplitude between one RR and two T1 or two T2 is zero.
The effective Lagrangian of massless and tachyonic particles, (3) and (8), produces the following massless pole:
A = Va (Cp1 , A)Gab (A)Vb (A, T1 , T2 ),
where the gauge field in the off-shell line is
iab
,

(2 )2 Tp (pa2 )

Vb A(1) , T1 , T2 = iTp (2 )(kb
A(1)
(16)
and
A(2) .
The propagator and vertexes are
Gab (A) =
kb ),
Vb A(2) , T1 , T2 = iTp (2 )(kb kb ),

1
Va Cp1 , A(1) = ip (2 ) a0 ap1 a H a0 ap1 ,
p!

1
(2)
Va Cp1 , A
= ip (2 ) a0 ap1 a H a0 ap1 .
p!
(17)
Replacing them in (16), one finds

A = 4ip
1
a a a H a0 ap1 k a .
p!u 0 p1
(18)
The field theory (8) has also the following contact term:
Ac = ip (2 )2 2
1
a a a H a0 ap1 k a .
p! 0 p1
The Feynman diagrams corresponding to the amplitudes (16) and (19) appear in Fig. 1.
(19)
508
The massless pole of field theory (18) can be obtained from the S-matrix element (15) by
expanding it at low energy (u = pa2 0). The prefactor of (15) has the expansion
2

[2u]
1
2 1
(20)
=
+ 4 ln(2) +
8 ln(2)2 u + O u2 .
2
u
6
[ 2 u]
The first term is exactly the field theory massless pole (18). The second term should be the contact
term in (19). This fixes the normalization constant to be

1 2 ln(2)
.
=
(21)

Note that in the string theory calculations we have set = 2, so to compare the string theory
amplitudes with the corresponding amplitudes in field theory one has to set = 2 in the field
theory side too.
Since the expansion (20) is in terms of the powers of pa2 , the other terms in (20) correspond
to the higher derivative corrections of the WZ action. For example, it is easy to check that the
following higher derivative term reproduces the third term in (20):
2

2
2
8 ln(2) Cp1 D a Da DT DT .
i( ) p
(22)
6
On the other hand, one may write u = pa2 = 1/2 2k k using the on-shell condition k 2 =
k 2 = 1/4. Then one may conclude that because of the 1/2 term, the last term in (20) does
not correspond to the higher derivative of the tachyons. As we mentioned, it is obvious that the
O(u) terms in the expansion (20) correspond to the higher derivative of the tachyons, however,
for other S-matrix elements, e.g., the S-matrix element of four tachyons, it is hard to prove it.
It is speculated though that the non-leading terms of the expansion of any S-matrix element of
tachyons correspond to the higher derivative of the tachyon field [30].
It is interesting to compare the above higher derivative term with the higher derivative term
of one RR and two gauge fields. The string theory S-matrix element of one RR and two gauge
fields is given by [31,32]
A2
[2u]
K,
[1 u]2
where K is the kinematic factor. Expansion of the prefactor at low energy is

2

1
[2u]
=
u + O u2 .
2
2
u
6
[1 u]
(23)
(24)
In this case actually there is no massless pole at u = 0 as the kinematic factor provides a compensating factor of u. The amplitude has the following expansion:

2

(4)2 p a0 a1 a2 a3 a4 ap
A=i
(25)
f
a0 ap 1 +
f
u2 + O u3 p,n+2 ,
4(p 3)!
6
where fab = i(ka b kb a ), f ab = i(ka b kb a ) and is the polarization of the RR potential.
The first term is reproduced by the couplings in the ZW terms (8), and the second term by the
following higher derivative term

( )2 p
(2 )2 Cp3 a b F (1) a b F (1) a b F (2) a b F (2) .
6
2!
(26)
509
While the leading higher derivative term in (22) has two extra derivatives with respect to the
corresponding coupling in the WZ terms, in above coupling there are four extra derivatives with
respect to the corresponding coupling in (8).
3. The T T AC amplitude
The S-matrix element of one RR field, two tachyons and one gauge field is given by the
following correlation function:

(1)

(0)
(0)
(1)
AAT T C dx1 dx2 dx3 dz d z VA (x1 )VT (x2 )VT (x3 )VRR (z, z ) ,
(27)
where we have chosen the vertex operators according to the rule that the total superghost number
must be 2. The tachyon and RR vertex operators are given in (12) and the gauge field vertex
operator in (1)-picture is
(1)
VA
= . (x1 )e(x1 ) e2ik1 .X(x1 ) ,
(28)
where a is the gauge field polarization. Introducing x4 z = x + iy and x5 z = x iy, the

scattering amplitude reduces to the following correlators:

/ (n) Mp ) a :e1/2(x4 ) :e1/2(x5 ) :e(x1 ) :

AAT T C dx1 dx5 (PH

:e2ik1 .X(x1 ) :e2ik2 .X(x2 ) :e2ik3 .X(x3 ) :eip.X(x4 ) :eip.D.X(x5 ) :

:S (x4 ):S (x5 ): a (x1 ):2ik2 . (x2 ):2ik3 . (x3 ): .
The correlators in the first and the second lines can be calculated using the propagators in (13),
and the correlator in the last line can be read from (14). The result is

AAT T C 2 dx1 dx5 k2b k3c a (x34 x35 )1/2+2k3 .p (x14 x15 )1+2k1 .p
4k1 .k2
(x24 x25 )1/2+2k2 .p x45 x23 2 3 x12
x13 1 3 (PH
/ (n) Mp )

Re[x14 x25 ] c 1
C
cba C 1 + 2ab
x12 x45

Re[x14 x35 ] b 1
Re[x24 x35 ] a 1
C + 2bc
C ,
2ac
x13 x45
x23 x45
p.D.p 4k .k
4k .k
where xij xi xj . One can show that the integrand is invariant under SL(2, R) transformation.
Gauge fix this symmetry by fixing
x1 = 0,
One finds
A
AT T C
x2 = 1,
x3 ,
dx1 dx2 dx3 x32 .

2(t+s+u)1
2 dx4 dx5 k2b k3c a x45
|x4 |2t+2s1 |1 x4 |2u+2t1/2

x + x4 x5 c 1
x b 1
C 2ac
C
cba C 1 2ab
x45
x45

x 1 a 1
C (PH
+ 2bc
/ (n) Mp ) ,
x45
510
where we have also introduced the Mandelstam variables

s = (k1 + k3 )2 ,
t = (k1 + k2 )2 ,
u = (k2 + k3 )2
and used the conservation of momentum along the brane, i.e., k1a + k2a + k3a + p a = 0.
Using the fact that Mp , H
/ (n) , and cba are totally antisymmetric combinations of the Gamma
matrices, one realizes that the first term is non-zero only for p = n + 2, and the last three terms
are non-zero only for p = n. The integral in the above equation can be written in terms of the
Gamma functions, using the following identity [33]:

d 2 z |1 z|a |z|b (z z )c (z + z )d
= (2i)c 2d
b+c
a+c
a+b+c
1+c
2 )(1 + 2 )(1
2 )( 2 )
( a2 )( b2 )(2 + c + d + a+b
2 )
(1 + d +
for d = 0, 1 and arbitrary a, b, c. The region of integration is the upper half complex plane, as in
our case. Using this integral, one finds

ip
Tr (PH
/ (n) Mp )(k3 . )(k2 . )( . ) I p,n+2
AAT T C =
2 2

+ Tr (PH
/ (n) Mp ) a J p,n k2a (t + 1/4)(2 . k3 ) + k3a (s + 1/4)(2 . k2 )

a (s + 1/4)(t + 1/4) ,
(29)
where we have normalized the amplitude by ip /2 2 . In above equation, I, J are:

(u)(s + 1/4)(t + 1/4)(t s u)
,
(u t + 1/4)(t s + 1/2)(s u + 1/4)
(u + 1/2)(s 1/4)(t 1/4)(t s u 1/2)
J = 21/2 (2)2(t+s+u+1)
.
(u t + 1/4)(t s + 1/2)(s u + 1/4)
The traces are:

32
Tr H
/ (n) Mp (k3 . )(k2 . )( . ) p,n+2 = a0 ap Ha0 ap3 k3ap2 k2ap1 ap p,n+2 ,
n!

32 a0 ap1 a
a
Tr H
(30)
/ (n) Mp p,n =
Ha0 ap1 p,n .
n!
Examining the poles of the Gamma functions, one realizes that for the case that p = n + 2,
the amplitude has massless pole and infinite tower of massive poles. Whereas for p = n case,
there are tachyon, massless, and infinite tower of massive poles. Now the nontrivial question is
how to expand this amplitude such that its leading terms correspond to the effective actions (3)
and (8), and its non-leading terms correspond to the higher derivative terms? Let us study each
case separately.
I = 21/2 (2)2(t+s+u)1
3.1. p = n + 2 case
For p = n + 2, the amplitude is antisymmetric under interchanging 2 3, hence the fourpoint function between one RR, one gauge field and two T1 or two T2 is zero. The electric part
of the amplitude for one RR, one gauge field, one T1 and one T2 is given by
a a

8ip
0 p Ha0 ap3 k3ap2 k2ap1 ap I.
AAT1 T2 C =
2 (p 2)!
(31)
(a)
511
(b)
Fig. 2. The Feynman diagrams corresponding to the amplitudes (32) and (35).
Note that the amplitude satisfies the Ward identity, i.e., the amplitude vanishes under replacement
a k1a .
The effective Lagrangian of the massless field and tachyon, (3) and (8), produces the following
massless pole for p = n + 2:

A = Va Cp3 , A(1) , A(1) Gab A(1) Vb A(1) , T1 , T2 ,
(32)
where

Gab A(1) =
iab
,
(2 )2 Tp (u)

Vb A(1) , T1 , T2 = Tp (2 )(k2 k3 )b ,

1
a
a a a H a0 ap3 k1 p2 ap1 .
Va Cp3 , A(1) , A(1) = p (2 )2
(p 2)! 0 p1
(33)
The amplitude (32) becomes

A = p (2 )
2i
a
a
a a a H a0 ap3 k2 p2 k3 p1 a .
(p 2)!u 0 p1
(34)
The WZ action (8) has also the following contact term:

Ac = p 2 (2 )3
i
a
a
a a a H a0 ap3 k2 p2 k3 p1 a .
2!(p 2)! 0 p1
(35)
The massless pole (34) and the contact term (35) can be exactly reproduced by the string
theory amplitude (29) if one expands it around
t 1/4,
s 1/4,
u 0.
In fact expansion of I around this point is

2

2 (s + t + 1/2)2
2
I = 2
+ 4 ln(2) +
8 ln(2) u
+ ,
u
6
6
u
(36)
(37)
replacing it in (31), one finds that the first term is reproduced by (34) and the second term by (35).
Now what about the other terms of (37)? A natural extension of the higher derivative term (22)
to Cp3 which is similar to the extension of Cp1 (DT DT ) to Cp3 in (8) is the following:
2

i

2
2
(38)
(2 )( ) p
8 ln(2) Cp3 F (1) + F (2) D a Da DT DT .
2
6
512
This higher derivative term in field theory reproduces exactly the contact term in the second line
of (37). The last term in (37), on the other hand, is given by the Feynman amplitude (32) where
the vertex Va (Cp3 , A(1) , A(1) ) should be derived from the higher derivative term (26), that is

(2)2
1
a
p (2 )2
a a a H a0 ap3 k1 p2 ap1 (k1 p)2 .
Va Cp3 , A(1) , A(1) =
6
(p 2)! 0 p1
(39)
Note that the vertex Vb (A(1) , T1 , T2 ) has no higher derivative correction as it arises from the kinetic term of the tachyon. The tachyon pole of string amplitude indicates that the kinetic term has
no higher derivative correction. Now replacing Vb (A(1) , T1 , T2 ) and the above vertex in (32) one
again finds exact agreement with the string theory amplitude. Hence the expansion of the string
amplitude (31) around (36) produces an expansion whose leading order terms are reproduced
by the Feynman amplitudes resulting from DBI and WZ actions and the next terms are related
to the higher derivative corrections to the WZ action. In particular, its massless poles gives information about the higher derivative corrections of Cp3 F F and its contact terms about
Cp3 F DT DT .
3.2. p = n case
Now we consider n = p case. The string theory amplitude in this case is symmetric under
interchanging 2 3. On the other hand, there is no Feynman amplitude in field theory corresponding to four-point function of one RR, one gauge field, one T1 and one T2 . Hence, for p = n
the string theory amplitude (29) is the S-matrix element of one RR, one gauge field and two T1
or two T2 . Its electric part is,

8ip a0 ap1 a

Ha0 ap1 J
AAT1 T1 C =
2 p!

k2a (t + 1/4)(2 . k3 ) + k3a (s + 1/4)(2 . k2 ) a (s + 1/4)(t + 1/4) .
(40)
Note that the amplitude satisfies the Ward identity, i.e., the amplitude vanishes under replacement
a k1a .
The effective field theory, (3) and (8), has the following massless pole for p = n:

A = Va (Cp1 , A)Gab (A)Vb A, T1 , T1 , A(1) ,
(41)
where A should be A(1) and A(2) . The propagator and vertexes Va (Cp1 , A) and Vb (A, T1 ,
T1 , A(1) ) are
iab
,
(2 )2 Tp (u + t + s + 1/2)

1
p!

1
p!
(1)

(1)
= 2iTp (2 )b ,
Vb A , T1 , T1 , A
(2)

Vb A , T1 , T1 , A(1) = 2iTp (2 )b .
Gab (A) =
(42)
(a)
513
(b)
Fig. 3. The Feynman diagrams corresponding to the amplitudes in (41) and (44).
The amplitude (41) then becomes

A=
4ip
a0 ap1 a Ha0 ap1 a .
p!(u + s + t + 1/2)
(43)
The couplings in (9) has also the following contact term:

Ac = ip ln(2)
16 a0 ap1 a
Ha0 ap1 a .

p!
(44)
Now in string theory side, expansion of (s + 1/4)(t + 1/4)J in (40) around (36) is
(s + 1/4)(t + 1/4)J

2

2
1
2
=
+ 4 ln(2) +
8 ln(2) (s + t + u + 1/2)
2
(t + s + u + 1/2)
6

2 (t + 1/4)(s + 1/4)
+ .
3 (t + s + u + 1/2)
(45)
Replacing it in (40), one finds that the first term above is reproduced by the field theory massless
pole (43) and the second term by (44). To find the higher derivative term corresponding to the
first term in the second line above, we note that the WZ terms in the third line of (8) indicates
that the following higher derivative term should accompany the term in (22):
2

( )2 p
(46)
8 ln(2)2 Cp1 D a Da F (1) F (2) |T |2 .
6
Combining the above with the coupling of one RR, two tachyons and one gauge field of (22),
one finds the following coupling:
2

2
2
( ) p
(47)
8 ln(2) Hp a a A(1) A(2) T T
6
which reproduce exactly the first term in the second line of (45).
The effective field theory has also the following poles for p = n:

A = Va (Cp1 , A)Gab (A)Vb (A, T1 , T2 )G(T2 )V T2 , T1 , A(1)

+ V (Cp1 , T1 , T2 )G(T2 )V T2 , T1 , A(1)
where the off-shell gauge field A should be A(1) and A(2) , and
(48)
514
(a)
(b)
Fig. 4. The Feynman diagrams corresponding to the amplitudes (48).
1
V (Cp1 , T1 , T2 ) = 2 p (2 ) a0 ap1 a Ha0 ap1 k2a ,
p!

V T2 , T1 , A(1) = Tp (2 )(k3 k) ,
Vb (A, T1 , T2 ) = Tp (2 )(k2a + ka ),
i
G(T2 ) =
,

(2 )Tp (s + 1/4)
(49)
where ka is momentum of the off-shell tachyon. Replacing them in (48), one finds

4 ln(2)
1 a0 ap1 a
1
Ha0 ap1 k2a (2k3 ). (50)
+

4ip
(s + 1/4)(t + s + u + 1/2) (s + 1/4) p!
Similar result appear for the Feynmann diagram in which k2 k3 . The Feynman diagram corresponding to the amplitude (48) appear in Fig. 4. Now in string theory side, expansion of
(t + 1/4)J around (36) is

1
1
4 ln(2)
(t + 1/4)J =
2
+
2
(s + 1/4)(t + s + u + 1/2) (s + 1/4)

2
2
(t + 1/4)
2 (s + t + u + 1/2)
8 ln(2)
+ .
+
6
(s + 1/4)
3 (t + s + u + 1/2)
(51)
Replacing it in the string theory amplitude (40), one finds exact agreement between the first two
terms and the field theory results (50). The first term in the second line should be reproduced by
the following Feynman amplitude in field theory:

A = V (Cp1 , T1 , T2 )G(T2 )V T2 , T1 , A(1) ,
(52)
where the propagator and the vertex V (T2 , T1 , A(1) ) is the same as in (49), however, the vertex
V (Cp1 , T1 , T2 ) should be derived from the higher derivative term (22), that is
2

1 a0 ap1 a
V (Cp1 , T1 , T2 ) = ( )2 p
Ha0 ap1 k2a (s + t + u + 1/2).
8 ln(2)2

6
p!
Replacing them in (52), one finds exact agreement with the string theory result. Finally, the sum
of last term in (51) and the corresponding term when k2 k3 , and the last term in (45) is

a0 ap1 a Ha0 ap1
4i
2 p
k2a (t + 1/4)(2 . k3 )
3
p!(s + t + u + 1/2)

1
a (s + 1/4)(t + 1/4) + (3 2) .
2
515
To find the corresponding term in field theory, consider the following Feynman amplitude:

A = Va (Cp1 , A)Gab (A)Vb A, A(1) , T1 , T1
(53)
where the vertex Va (Cp1 , A) is the same as the one appears in (42) and Vb (A, A(1) , T1 , T1 ) is
derived from the second line of (3), that is

4i

Vb A(1) , A(1) , T1 , T1 = Tp ( )3 kb (s + 1/4)(2k2 ) + (t + 1/4)(2k3 )
3

4i
+ Tp ( )3 k2b (t + 1/4)(2 . k3 ) + k3b (s + 1/4)(2 . k2 )
3

b (s + 1/4)(t + 1/4) ,

2i

Vb A(2) , A(1) , T1 , T1 = Tp ( )3 kb (s + 1/4)(2k2 ) + (t + 1/4)(2k3 )
3

2i
+ Tp ( )3 k2b (t + 1/4)(2 . k3 ) + k3b (s + 1/4)(2 . k2 )
3

b (s + 1/4)(t + 1/4) ,
where k a is the momentum of the off-shell gauge field. Replacing them in (53), one finds exact
agreement with the string theory result. Note that the F (1) F (2) term in the tachyon DBI action (3) is necessary for the above consistency. The above consistency indicates that the coupling
Cp1 F has no higher derivative correction.
Now let us speculate on the other terms of the string theory expansion. Since there is no higher
derivative corrections to Cp1 F and to the kinetic term, the expansion should not have the
double poles other than the one appears in the leading term. For the simple tachyonic poles, since
the kinetic term has no correction, the non-leading poles of tachyon should gives information
about the higher derivative corrections to Cp1 DT DT . For the simple massless poles, since
there is no correction to Cp1 F , the non-leading massless poles should give information about
the higher derivative corrections to the coupling of two tachyons and two gauge fields. Finally,
the contact terms of the string theory amplitude gives information about the higher derivative
correction to Cp1 DT DT and to Cp1 F T T . It would be interesting to study these
terms in details and find higher derivative corrections to tachyon DBI and to WZ actions.
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank A. Ghodsi for comments.
References
[1] M. Gutperle, A. Strominger, JHEP 0204 (2002) 018, hep-th/0202210;
A. Sen, JHEP 0204 (2002) 048, hep-th/0203211.
[2] A. Sen, JHEP 0207 (2002) 065, hep-th/0203265.
[3] A. Sen, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 17 (2002) 1797, hep-th/0204143.
[4] A. Sen, JHEP 0210 (2002) 003, hep-th/0207105;
P. Mukhopadhyay, A. Sen, JHEP 0211 (2002) 047, hep-th/0208142;
A. Strominger, hep-th/0209090;
F. Larsen, A. Naqvi, S. Terashima, JHEP 0302 (2003) 039, hep-th/0212248;
M. Gutperle, A. Strominger, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 126002, hep-th/0301038;
A. Maloney, A. Strominger, X. Yin, JHEP 0310 (2003) 048, hep-th/0302146;
T. Okuda, S. Sugimoto, Nucl. Phys. B 647 (2002) 101, hep-th/0208196;
516
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]
S.J. Rey, S. Sugimoto, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 086008, hep-th/0301049;

S.J. Rey, S. Sugimoto, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 026003, hep-th/0303133.
N.D. Lambert, H. Liu, J.M. Maldacena, JHEP 0703 (2007) 014, hep-th/0303139.
A. Sen, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 20 (2005) 5513, hep-th/0410103.
A. Sen, JHEP 9910 (1999) 008, hep-th/9909062.
M.R. Garousi, Nucl. Phys. B 584 (2000) 284, hep-th/0003122.
E.A. Bergshoeff, M. de Roo, T.C. de Wit, E. Eyras, S. Panda, JHEP 0005 (2000) 009, hep-th/0003221.
J. Kluson, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 126003, hep-th/0004106.
R. Casero, E. Kiritsis, A. Paredes, hep-th/0702155.
O. Bergman, S. Seki, J. Sonnenschein, arXiv: 0708.2839 [hep-th].
A. Dhar, P. Nag, arXiv: 0708.3233 [hep-th].
T. Sakai, S. Sugimoto, Prog. Theor. Phys. 113 (2005) 843, hep-th/0412141;
T. Sakai, S. Sugimoto, Prog. Theor. Phys. 114 (2006) 1083, hep-th/0507073.
A. Sen, JHEP 9808 (1998) 010, hep-th/9805019;
S.P. de Alwis, Phys. Lett. B 461 (1999) 329, hep-th/9905080.
M.R. Garousi, JHEP 0501 (2005) 029, hep-th/0411222.
M.R. Garousi, arXiv: 0710.5469 [hep-th].
A. Sen, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 066008, hep-th/0303057.
D. Kutasov, M. Marino, G.W. Moore, hep-th/0010108.
M.R. Douglas, hep-th/9512077.
M. Li, Nucl. Phys. B 460 (1996) 351, hep-th/9510161;
M.B. Green, J.A. Harvey, G.W. Moore, Class. Quantum Grav. 14 (1997) 47, hep-th/9605033.
C. Kennedy, A. Wilkins, Phys. Lett. B 464 (1999) 206, hep-th/9905195.
P. Kraus, F. Larsen, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 106004, hep-th/0012198.
T. Takayanagi, S. Terashima, T. Uesugi, JHEP 0103 (2001) 019, hep-th/0012210.
D. Quillen, Topology 24 (1995) 89.
N. Berline, E. Getzler, M. Vergne, Heat Kernels and Dirac Operators, Springer-Verlag, 1991.
G. Roepstorff, J. Math. Phys. 40 (1999) 2698, hep-th/9801040.
M.R. Garousi, R.C. Myers, Nucl. Phys. B 475 (1996) 193, hep-th/9603194.
H. Liu, J. Michelson, Nucl. Phys. B 614 (2001) 330, hep-th/0107172.
M.R. Garousi, Nucl. Phys. B 647 (2002) 117, hep-th/0209068;
M.R. Garousi, JHEP 0304 (2003) 027, hep-th/0303239;
M.R. Garousi, Nucl. Phys. B 705 (2005) 212, hep-th/0309028;
K. Bitaghsir-Fadafan, M.R. Garousi, Nucl. Phys. B 760 (2007) 197, hep-th/0607249.
A. Hashimoto, I.R. Klebanov, Phys. Lett. B 381 (1996) 437, hep-th/9604065.
M.R. Garousi, R.C. Myers, Nucl. Phys. B 542 (1999) 73, hep-th/9809100.
A. Fotopoulos, JHEP 0109 (2001) 005, hep-th/0104146.

Renormalization group functions for the WessZumino

model: Up to 200 loops through Hopf algebras
Marc P. Bellon a,b,1 , Fidel A. Schaposnik b,a,,2
a CEFIMAS, Av. Santa Fe 1145, 1069 Capital Federal, Argentina
b Departamento de Fsica, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, C.C. 67, 1900 La Plata, Argentina
Received 24 January 2008; accepted 7 February 2008

Abstract
We obtain the contributions to the renormalization group functions of all the diagrams containing the
unique one-loop primitive divergence of a simple supersymmetric WessZumino model, up to more than
200 loops. The asymptotic behavior of the coefficients in the expansion of the anomalous dimension is
analysed.
1. Introduction
Perturbative Quantum Field Theory is known for its tremendous successes, with its ability to
obtain highly precise values in Quantum Electrodynamics, or to test the Standard Model with
radiative corrections to weak interactions. However, actual calculations become rapidly cumbersome and display a conjunction of analytical and combinatorial difficulties. The fast growth of
the number of relevant terms gets compounded by the need to subtract a growing number of
subdivergences.
* Corresponding author at: Departamento de Fsica, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, C.C. 67, 1900 La Plata,
Argentina.
E-mail address: fidel@fisica.unlp.edu.ar (F.A. Schaposnik).
1 On leave from, Laboratoire de Physique Thorique et Hautes Energies, Boite 126, 4 Place Jussieu, 75252 Paris
Cedex 05. Unit Mixte de Recherche UMR 7589 Universit Pierre et Marie Curie-Paris6; CNRS; Universit Denis
Diderot-Paris7.
2 Associate to CICBA.
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.02.005
518
M.P. Bellon, F.A. Schaposnik / Nuclear Physics B 800 [PM] (2008) 517526
In the quest of organizing principles for taming the combinatorial problem, a major progress
has been the recognition of a Hopf algebra structure in the renormalization of Quantum Field
Theories [14]. The cohomology of the introduced Hopf algebras has been related to Schwinger
Dyson equations (see [7] and the references therein). An early application to the summation of
a category of diagrams in a simple Yukawa field theory or a 3 theory in 6 dimensions has been
obtained by Broadhurst and Kreimer in [5]. It was however later shown that in this simple case,
the SchwingerDyson equation, which is linear, could be solved exactly, without any reference
to the Hopf algebra of diagrams, since it gives rise to a non-linear differential equation for the
anomalous dimension [6].
In a preceding work [8], we adapted this work to a supersymmetric model with a simple
WessZumino type interaction. As it is well known, in view of its ability to limit renormalization
phenomena, supersymmetry has allowed to resolve a number of theoretical problems. Although
its relevance as a property of the physical world is up to now as elusive as ever, it is still a
leading candidate for physics beyond the standard model. Of course, if supersymmetry plays a
role in particle physics, it has to be broken through some (preferably spontaneous or dynamical)
mechanism. In this respect, theories with metastable supersymmetry breaking have been recently
very actively investigated, particularly some generalized WessZumino models [9,10].
The method employed in [6], if really powerful, does not generalize to more complex situations. A strategy has been proposed in [11] to deal with non-linear SchwingerDyson, in which
the formulation of the renormalization group in terms of the Hopf algebra of diagrams becomes
essential. We here apply this proposal in a supersymmetric setting. With respect to the cases
envisaged in [11], the supersymmetric case is simpler because we need only consider a unique
anomalous dimension, which is common to all the member of the supermultiplet. We further
simplify the procedure by a direct computation of the renormalized propagator, so that we can
obtain explicit results up to high orders.
We will first review the bases of this procedure, which are the following two results: (i) the
renormalization group is a one-parameter subgroup of the group of evaluation functions on the
Hopf algebra of graphs [4] and (ii) some combinations of graphs form sub-Hopf algebras. We
will show that these results allow to recover the full propagators from the renormalization group
functions.
We then apply this calculation scheme to the WessZumino supersymmetric model, building
on our preceding work [8]. As we shall see, the efficiency of the method allows to reach high
degrees of perturbation theory, being essentially limited by the size of the expression in terms of
values of the Riemann function. Switching to numerical approximations allows to go further
and reach the asymptotic behavior of the coefficients of the development of the anomalous dimension in powers of the fine coupling constant a. This behavior allows for the definition of
a convergent Borel transform of this serie. A singularity is however present on the positive axis
but we discuss the options for nevertheless obtaining a sensible resummation. This work suggests
further developments that we explore as a conclusion.
2. Exponentiation of the renormalization group
Our purpose is to reach high order of perturbation theory in the evaluation of renormalization
group function. Along the lines suggested in [11], we use SchwingerDyson equations to produce
a family of diagrams for which analytical evaluation is very simple. However, a nave approach to
this evaluation involves a triple serie in the coupling constant g, the logarithm of the momentum
L = log(q 2 /2 ) and the dimensional regularization parameter . It was shown in [6] how to
519
reduce the problem to a single non-linear differential equation for the renormalization group
-function, but the proposal relied on the linearity of the SchwingerDyson equation.
Now, if we work only with renormalized quantities, we can avoid the -parameter. The momentum dependence can then be recovered from the renormalization group. Consider the ratio
of the full propagator with the free propagator which, in a Lorentz invariant scheme and for a
massless theory, is a single number. It can be fixed to 1 at the scale 2 in a physical renormalization scheme and the value for any momentum p can be inferred from the action of the
renormalization group with parameter t = log(p 2 /2 ). Other renormalization schemes like the
minimal subtraction one or its variants would introduce finite contributions at the reference momentum. Similarly, vertex functions, which generically depend on multiple scales, would involve
finite contributions at the reference scale. However, here we are interested only in the propagator
of a massless theory where these complications are not present and the full propagator can be
recovered from the renormalization group.
In [4], it was shown that the renormalization group is a one parameter subgroup {Ft } of the
group of characters of the Hopf algebra of graphs, which means:
Ft (XY ) = Ft (X)Ft (Y ),
Fs+t (X) = (Fs Ft )(X).
(1)
Multiple derivations of this identity allows to recursively obtain the derivatives of Ft at the origin.
Indeed:

tk+1 Ft t=0 = s tk Fs+t s=0,t=0 = s Fs |s=0 tk Ft t=0 .
(2)
Applied on a group-like element of the Hopf algebra, that is, on an element X such that X =
X X, this identity shows that the successive derivatives are powers of the first one, so that
Ft (X) = et . We will deal however with more general elements of the Hopf algebra of diagrams,
so that the results will be more complicated.
Finally since Ft is a character, its evaluation on a product is the product of the evaluations,
so that = t Ft |t=0 , the generator of the renormalization group, is a derivation. This will be
important for the applications of Eq. (2).
3. Hopf algebra of Green functions
In order to make the best use of the Hopf algebra technique, it is convenient to work not at the
level of the individual diagrams, but on some sums of diagrams. If the sums of interest can be
shown to form sub-Hopf algebras, this allows to overcome in part the combinatorial complexities
of calculations.
Our starting point is that the effective coupling is a map from the Hopf algebra of the graphs to
the Hopf algebra of formal diffeomorphism tangent to the identity in 0. For couplings associated
to a three-point vertex, it will be convenient to express this fact not in terms of the coupling g,
but of a fine structure constant a = Cg 2 , in order to avoid square roots. The proportionality
constant C can be chosen as in QED to simplify further results. If the vertex couples particle
species j , k and l, the effective constant is defined as:
aeff =
C
v2
.
2,j
2,k
2,l
(3)
Here
2,j is the two-point function for the j specie while
v is the effective interaction vertex.
520
Writing
aeff =
aeff,n a n
(4)
the action of the coproduct on aeff is given by [4,12]

n
aeff
aeff,n .
aeff =
(5)
This corresponds to the fact that aeff is a map to the Hopf algebra of (coordinates for) formal
diffeomorphisms.
In fact, two refinements are easy to obtain. First, the same formula holds whenever we do not
take for the
s the full perturbative expansion, but only the terms which contain a certain set of
primitive divergences. This holds in particular if we take for the
s the approximation resulting
from a given truncation of the SchwingerDyson equations.
An examination of the proof of the previous identities in [12] shows that stronger results hold
for the two- or three-point functions which are involved,
2,m =
(6)
m,n a n ,
n
v = g
v,n a n ,
(7)
n=0

2,m =
2,m aeff

m,n ,
(8)

v =
v aeff

v,n .
(9)
In the cases in which the coupling constant is not renormalized, aeff = a, these equations indicate
that the
s are group like elements of the Hopf algebra. Now, when deriving relation (5) from
relations
(8), (9), one uses the
fact that formulas of this kind are multiplicative. Indeed, suppose
that A = An a n and B = Bn a n are two series satisfying a property like (8):

n
A =
(10)
Aaeff
An .
n
Then the product AB satisfies the same property. We can further remark that the coproducts
of the propagators satisfy similar equations. This easily follows from the fact that the identity
element of the Hopf algebra trivially satisfies (10). This allows to prove (5) from Eqs. (8), (9).
4. Practical formulas
Joining the results of the two preceding sections allows to construct the full renormalized
propagator at any order in perturbation theory from the first derivative with respect to L, that is,
the renormalization group function . In fact, we can get at will the propagator or its inverse, the
1PI two-point function.
1
, normalized
Let us consider the evaluation of the renormalization group on the propagator
2,j
by the free propagator,

1
Ft
2,j
=1+
k t k
n=1
(11)
521
where, as before, t = log(p 2 /2 ). Notice that the coefficient 1 in expansion (11) is related to
the anomalous dimension ,
1 = 2 .
(12)
The successive terms of the development of this expression in powers of t can be computed from
Eq. (2), using the coproduct in Eq. (8),

(k + 1)k+1 =
(13)
(1 + n)a n k,n = (1 + aa )k .
n
To obtain the preceding equation we made use of the simple differentiation rule given by (2).
This allowed to apply the derivation property of the generator of the group t Ft |t=0 to further
evaluate its effect on the left factor of A.
5. Application to the WessZumino model
The model we will consider is the simplest WessZumino model, with only one type of superfields (and not two as in our preceding work [8]). The general non-renormalization properties
of such a model ensures that the vertex is not renormalized and in fact, in a massless theory, it
cannot get any correction. The only contribution to the renormalization group comes from the
correction to the propagator and the supersymmetry has here the effect that all components of
the superfield get the same renormalization factor.3 We therefore have the simple relation
= 31
(14)
so that Eq. (13) becomes

(k + 1)k+1 = 1 (1 + 3aa )k .
(15)
The first step in our calculation is to compute the effect of the one-loop primitive divergence.
There are no primitive divergences at two loops and the three-loop one is non-planar and therefore
subleading in a large N study. For this we will insert the full renormalized propagator at order n
in the one loop diagram to derive 1 at the order n + 1. Since k is at least of order k, we only
have to consider a finite expansion in t of the correction factor of the propagator.
We therefore need to compute a simple one loop integral, but with propagators having logarithmic corrections. All of them can be obtained multiplying the propagators
21 (p 2 ) by a
factor (p 2 /2 )x . Indeed, differentiating with respect to x at x = 0 will give the logarithm factors
in each of the propagators. This procedure is essentially the same as the Mellin transform method
used in [11].
As in [8], we only need to compute the graph for the correction to the auxiliary field propagator. Indeed, the fact that we have corrections on the two propagators does not change the
observation already made there: the corrections to the free propagators of all the members of the
supermultiplet are equal. We are interested in the quantity
3 In a supersymmetric gauge theory, the situation would be subtler, since the gauge symmetry and the supersymmetry
are not easy to combine: in the component formalism, supersymmetry is not fully explicit and in a superfield formalism,
the unconstrained superfield describing the gauge supermultiplet is of dimension zero, so any power of this field can
appear in the renormalized Lagrangian. This can be overcome by an appropriate choice of the gauge fixing condition and
therefore it does not affect physical properties [13].
522

g2
q 2 , x, y = + 4
8
1
(p 2 )1x [(q p)2 ]1y

ux v y
g2
uv 2
du dv
=+ 2
exp
q
u+v
8
(1 x)
(1 y)
(u + v)2
g 2 x+y
(x y)
(1 + x)
(1 + y)
.
= + 2 q2
(2 + x + y)
(1 x)
(1 y)
8
d 4p
(16)
The overall plus sign comes from the product of the minus sign in every correction to the 1PI
two-point function and the free propagator which is 1. It will be convenient to introduce the
fine structure constant a = g 2 /8 2 . Now, we can get an expression similar (but simpler) to the
ones in [11] using the expansion of the logarithm of the
function

(2l + 1)
2

a(q 2 /2 )z
2l+1
2l+1
2l+1
q , x, y =
(17)
x
y
exp 2
z
z(1 + z)
2l + 1
l=1
where z = x + y and (2l + 1) is the Riemann zeta function. From (17) we can obtain the twopoint functions calculated with modified propagators by applying differential operator in x and y.
Differentiation with respect to log(q 2 ) produces a factor z which exactly compensates the term
which is singular for z = 0. Let us define
(q 2 , x, y)
.
H (x, y) =
(18)
log(q 2 ) q 2 =2
Then, one has

(2l + 1)

a
2l+1
2l+1
2l+1
x
y
exp 2
(x + y)
H (x, y) =
1+x +y
2l + 1
(19)
l=1
and

dn
dn
1 = 1 +
n n
1+
n n H (x, y)|x=y=0 .
dx
dy
(20)
The evaluation of the function does not require any further regularization. After the order a
term, which is obtained making x = y = 0, the following terms involve corrections to the propagators, which are obtained by taking derivatives with respect to x and y evaluated at the origin,
this corresponding to diagrams with the propagators multiplied by given powers of log(p 2 ).
We could suppose that all the formalism we developed is superfluous and that we could simply
derive further Eq. (17) with respect to log(q 2 ) to obtain directly the higher terms in the expansion. Although this is possible, the computation are really much more cumbersome, even for the
leading term of the derivatives of
2 . Furthermore, one would obtain the development of the
2-point function in the effective action, so that an inversion of the expansion would be needed to
obtain the propagator.
6. Calculation and results
Once the Mellin transform (19) is known, it is straightforward to obtain the first orders in the
development of the function from Eqs. (15) and (20). We give in Table 1 the 12 first terms
of the expansion of . The principal limitation for calculating this exact form for each term
stems from the rapid growth, which behaves as exp(n2/3 ), of the number of contribution one
523
Table 1
The first 12 terms of the development of 1
(a) = a 2a 2 + 14a 3 + (160 + 16 (3))a 4 + (2444 328 (3))a 5 + (45792 + 7056 (3) + 2016 (5))a 6
+ (1 005 480 169 152 (3) 70 896 (5) + 8960 2 (3))a 7 + (25 169 760 + 4 509 408 (3)
+ 2 199 840 (5) + 564 480 (7) 390 400 2 (3))a 8 (705 321 200 132 548 640 (3) 69 922 848 (5)
29 005 632 (7) + 14 193 504 2 (3) + 6 397 056 (3) (5))a 9 + (21 841 420 384 + 4 261 047 424 (3)
858 457 600
(9) 512 441 536 2 (3)
+ 2 354 993 856 (5) + 1 194 909 696 (7) +
3
49 556 480 3
383 788 416 (3) (5) +
(3))a 10 + (740 194 188 032 148 784 410 432 (3)
3
58 999 853 440
84 779 661 888 (5) 47 818 582 272 (7)
(9) + 19 225 297 088 2 (3)
3
3 432 237 056 3
+ 17 828 697 216 (3) (5) + 1 829 076 480 2 (5) + 3 838 602 240 (3) (7)
(3))a 11
3
+ (27 243 674 154 368 + 5 610 375 120 768 (3) + 3 266 192 145 024 (5) + 1 961 976 190 464 (7)
+ 1 019 076 124 160 (9) + 230 546 534 400 (11) 760 702 109 184 2 (3) 788 057 929 728 (3) (5)
141 297 435 648 2 (5) 297 887 016 960 (3) (7) + 59 550 068 736 3 (3)
+ 34 512 334 848 2 (3) (5))a 12 +
has to take into account. Already in the terms presented in Table 1, one can see the rapid growth
of their size. At order 25, there are already 122 possible products of values contributing to
the result and this number reaches 409 174 at order 100. Such a number, as well as the size
of the corresponding rational coefficients, limit to less than 30 the number of terms which can
be computed with a straightforward implementation on todays average computer, mainly due
to the memory footprint. The rapid growth of the required resources limit to a few units the
number of additional terms which can be computed using more efficient coding schemes and
bigger memories. The highest orders of the development cannot therefore be reached in this way,
all the more so that at the end we will need to convert these results to some concrete numerical
approximation.
It is therefore convenient to work from the start with numerical values. A much higher number
of terms is now easily within reach, since for a fixed precision, the computation work grows only
quartically with the desired number of terms. In Table 2, we give the development of 1 up to
16 loops and the 7 last terms we calculated. The full table, with all results up to 201 loops, is
available upon request from the authors.
In the calculation of the expansion of 1 , we first have to determine the Taylor expansion of
the function H (x, y). This is the part of the calculation which is numerically most demanding,
since these coefficients are the sum of a great number of terms which nearly cancel, so that care
must be taken that the true precision of the result is lesser than the number of digits used in the
computation. However, something rather remarkable happens: the Taylor expansion of the rather
complicated function H in (19) is, asymptotically, the same as the one of h, defined by:

1
1
xy
1
+
1 +
.
h(x, y) = (1 + xy)
1+x 1+y
21x y
(21)
524
Table 2
Approximations of the development of 1
(a) = a 2a 2 + 14a 3 140.767089549446491434a 4
+ 2049.72533576365307439a 5 35219.8401369368689507a 6
+ 741582.310142069315875a 7 1.74630317191742523615 107 a 8
+ 4.72719801334671229530 108 a 9 1.39759545666280992694 1010 a 10
+ 4.60146704077682933925 1011 a 11 1.63220296094286720854 1013 a 12
+ 6.32651854893093835423 1014 a 13 2.61715263667021333524 1016 a 14
+ 1.16791189443603376676 1018 a 15 5.52247245848724267096 1019 a 16
+
+ 8.4053176185682527526 10454 a 195 4.9339110330514367678 10457 a 196
+ 2.9112362346747106444 10460 a 197 1.7263592738217495952 10463 a 198
+ 1.0289894774008300571 10466 a 199 6.1636327768018535021 10468 a 200
+ 3.7107878544109289292 10471 a 201 +
More precisely, the terms of total degree n in the Taylor expansion of h and the original function H are the same up to a relative error which is smaller than 2n . If it is relatively easy to
understand the properties of the terms in xy n from the serie with general term (2p + 1) 1, the
interplay of different terms which yields such a simple result for the general terms appears quite
miraculous. Even more, the error term proportional to 2n , 3n and 4n can be given similar explicit forms and the determination of error terms proportional to powers of bigger integer seem
only to require more terms with higher precision. These asymptotic formulas have been used to
obtain the higher degrees of the Taylor expansion for our numerical application.
The asymptotic behavior of the coefficients gn in the expansion of 1 in powers of a can be
determined. With
1 (a) =
gn a n ,
(22)
n=1
we have that
gn (3)n
(n + 2/3).
(23)
This implies that a suitably defined Borel transform will have a single pole at 1/3 as dominant
singularity. However the asymmetry between odd and even terms of the series implies that there
is also a weaker singularity at +1/3. It is not a simple pole but the singularity of the dilogarithm
Li2 . This precludes the analytic continuation of the Borel transform on the positive real axis and
its approximation by Pad methods. A brutal answer to this problem is simply to integrate the
Borel transform only on the interval [0, 13 ]. This gives an analytic function which has the desired
asymptotic expansion at the origin. However this procedure is rather ad hoc and gives a far from
unique solution.
There is also the possibility that higher order corrections to the SchwingerDyson equation
stemming from the addition of multiloop primitive divergences would weaken the singularity
525
on the positive axis, so that the singularity on the positive axis would disappear in a complete
calculation.
Taken as an asymptotic formula, Eq. (21) could be useful for a demonstration of the asymptotic properties of the expansion of 1 . The second term in h has positive Taylor coefficients.
Combined with the alternating signs of the main term in the development of 1 , this introduces
strong compensation between the terms with even total powers of derivatives in Eq. (20) and
those with odd total powers. As a result, in the calculation of the term of degree n, the terms
with one of the propagator with the correction of degree n 1 and the other one equal to the free
propagator are dominant.
7. Discussion
High orders of the perturbative development of the renormalization group function have been
obtained, resumming all diagrams with the simplest primitive divergence. The number of terms
calculated in the corresponding expansion allows to reach a clearly asymptotic regime. The Borel
transform of the resulting series however presents singularities on the positive real axis. The question remains open whether this signals a fundamental limitation of the perturbative calculations
or it is just an artifact of the present approximation. Indeed, in a large N approximation, other
primitive divergences are possible, beginning at the fourth order.
However, one should first test if the additional contributions remain subdominant. Indeed, in
the contribution from the four loop primitive divergence, the corrections to the propagators can
be split between the eleven propagators, generating a rapidly growing number of terms and this
could more than compensate for the fact that corrections to the propagator of order n 3 are
of order 1/n3 with respect to the propagator of order n which gives the main contribution in
the term we have calculated. This would also be an important step in the way of conjecturing
-function style functional equations generalizing the one obtained in [11] for the simple case
where the function satisfies a differential equation.
One interesting feature of the approach we presented is that it provides a clear path for evaluating the correction stemming from additional terms in the SchwingerDyson equation. The
evaluation of the primitive diagrams looks formally as the analytic regularization proposed long
ago [1416] but the fact that we need such an evaluation only for primitively divergent diagrams
avoids much of the technicalities stemming from the complex multidimensional pole structures
appearing in general diagrams.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the Sociedad Cientifica Argentina for hospitality during part of this
work. This work is partially supported by CONICET (PIP6160), ANPCyT (PICT 20204), UNLP,
and CICBA grants. M.B. acknowledges CNRS support through his mise disposition.
References
[1] D. Kreimer, On the Hopf algebra structure of perturbative quantum field theories, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998)
303, q-alg/9707029.
[2] A. Connes, D. Kreimer, Hopf algebras, renormalization and noncommutative geometry, Commun. Math. Phys. 199
(1998) 203.
[3] A. Connes, D. Kreimer, Renormalization in quantum field theory and the RiemannHilbert problem. I: The Hopf
algebra structure of graphs and the main theorem, Commun. Math. Phys. 210 (2000) 249, hep-th/9808042.
526
[4] A. Connes, D. Kreimer, Renormalization in quantum field theory and the RiemannHilbert problem. II: The betafunction, diffeomorphisms and the renormalization group, Commun. Math. Phys. 216 (2001) 215, hep-th/0003188.
[5] D.J. Broadhurst, D. Kreimer, Combinatoric explosion of renormalization tamed by Hopf algebra: 30-loop Pad
Borel resummation, Phys. Lett. B 475 (2000) 63, hep-th/9912093.
[6] D.J. Broadhurst, D. Kreimer, Exact solutions of DysonSchwinger equations for iterated one-loop integrals and
propagator-coupling duality, Nucl. Phys. B 600 (2001) 403, hep-th/0012146.
[7] D. Kreimer, DysonSchwinger Equations: From Hopf algebras to Number Theory, hep-th/0609004.
[8] M.P. Bellon, G. Lozano, F.A. Schaposnik, Higher loop renormalization of a supersymmetric field theory, Phys. Lett.
B 650 (2007) 293297, hep-th/0703185.
[9] K. Intriligator, N. Seiberg, D. Shih, Dynamical SUSY breaking in meta-stable vacua, JHEP 0604 (2006) 021, hepth/0602239.
[10] K. Intriligator, N. Seiberg, D. Shih, Supersymmetry breaking, R-symmetry breaking and metastable vacua,
JHEP 0707 (2007) 017, hep-th/0703281.
[11] D. Kreimer, K. Yeats, An tude in non-linear DysonSchwinger equations, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 160 (2006)
116121, hep-th/0605096.
[12] W.D. van Suijlekom, Multiplicative renormalization and Hopf algebras, arXiv: 0707.0555.
[13] O. Piguet, K. Sibold, Renormalized Supersymmetry, The Perturbation Theory of N = 1 Supersymmetric Theories
in Flat SpaceTime, Birkuser, Boston, 1986.
[14] C.G. Bollini, J.J. Giambiagi, A. Gonzalez Dominguez, Nuovo Cimento 31 (1964) 550.
[15] E.R. Speer, Analytic renormalization, J. Math. Phys. 9 (1971) 14041410.
[16] E.R. Speer, On the structure of analytic renormalization, Commun. Math. Phys. 23 (1971) 2336.

On explicit free field realization of current algebras

Wen-Li Yang a,b, , Yao-Zhong Zhang b
a Institute of Modern Physics, Northwest University, Xian 710069, PR China
b Department of Mathematics, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia
Received 17 December 2007; received in revised form 30 January 2008; accepted 14 February 2008
Abstract
We construct the explicit free field representations of the current algebras so(2n)k , so(2n + 1)k and
sp(2n)k for a generic positive integer n and an arbitrary level k. The corresponding energymomentum
tensors and screening currents of the first kind are also given in terms of free fields.
PACS: 11.25.Hf
Keywords: Conformal field theory; Affine current algebra; Free field realization
1. Introduction
Conformal field theories (CFTs) [1,2] have played a fundamental role in the framework of
string theory and the theories of modern condensed matter physics and statistical physics at critical point. The WessZuminoNovikovWitten (WZNW) models [2], whose symmetry algebras
are current algebras [3], stand out as an important class of CFTs because these models are building blocks of all rational CFTs through the so-called GKO coset construction [4]. The Wakimoto
free field realizations of current algebras [2,5] have been proven to be powerful in the study of
the WZNW models [610] due to the fact that an explicit free field representation enables one to
construct integral representations of correlators of the CFT.
Free field realizations of current algebras have been extensively investigated by many authors [1118]. However, it is very complicated to apply the general procedure proposed in these
references to derive explicit free field expressions of the affine currents for higher-rank alge* Corresponding author at: Department of Mathematics, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia.
E-mail addresses: wenli@maths.uq.edu.au (W.-L. Yang), yzz@maths.uq.edu.au (Y.-Z. Zhang).

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.02.011
528
W.-L. Yang, Y.-Z. Zhang / Nuclear Physics B 800 [PM] (2008) 527546
bras [14,1821]. To our knowledge, explicit expressions have so far been known only for some
isolated cases: those associated with Lie algebras su(n) [11], B2 (or so(5)) [12], G2 [14], and
Lie superalgebra gl(m|n) [22]. In particular, explicit free field expressions for affine currents
associated with Lie algebras so(2n), so(2n + 1) and sp(2n) for generic n are still lacking.1
In this paper, we find a way to overcome the complication in the above-mentioned general
method. In our approach, the construction of the differential operator realization becomes much
simpler (cf. [14,18,19]). We shall work out the explicit forms of the differential realizations of
so(2n), so(2n + 1) and sp(2n), and apply them to construct explicit free field representations
of the corresponding current algebras. These representations provide the Verma modules of the
algebras.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we briefly review the definitions of finitedimensional Lie algebras and the associated current algebras, which also introduces our notation
and some basic ingredients. In Section 3, after constructing explicitly the differential operator
realization of so(2n), we construct the explicit free field representations of the so(2n) currents,
the corresponding energymomentum tensor and the associated screening currents at a generic
level k. In Sections 4 and 5, we present the corresponding results for the so(2n + 1) and sp(2n)
current algebras, respectively. Section 6 is for conclusions. In Appendices AC, we give the
matrix realizations associated with the fundamental representation for all generators of the finitedimensional Lie algebras so(2n), so(2n + 1) and sp(2n).
2. Notation and preliminaries
Let g be a simple Lie algebra with a finite dimension dim(g) = d < and {Ei | i = 1, . . . , d}
be a basis of g. The generators {Ei } satisfy commutation relations,
[Ei , Ej ] =
d
fijm Em ,
(2.1)
m=1
where fijm are the structure constants of g. Alternatively, one can use the associated root system
[24] to label the generators of g as follows. Let us assume the rank of g to be rank(g) = n
with a generic positive integer n 1, and h be a Cartan subalgebra of g. The set of (positive)
roots is denoted by (+ ) , and we write > 0 if + . Among the positive roots, the simple
roots are {i | i = 1, . . . , n}. Associated with each positive root , there are a raising operator E ,
a lowering operator F and a Cartan generator H . Then one has the CartanWeyl decomposition
of g
g = g h g+ .
(2.2)
One can introduce a nondegenerate and invariant symmetric metric or bilinear form (Ei , Ej )
for g. For so(2n), so(2n + 1) and sp(2n), which we consider in this paper, the corresponding
bilinear forms are given in (A.7), (B.10) and (C.9) respectively. Then the current algebra gk is
generated by the currents Ei (z) associated with the generators Ei of g. The current algebra at a
general level k obeys the following OPEs [2],
d
m
(Ei , Ej )
m=1 fij Em (w)
Ei (z)Ej (w) = k
(2.3)
+
, i, j = 1, . . . , d,
(z w)
(z w)2
1 The authors in [23] proposed certain explicit free field expressions for the so(2n), so(2n + 1) and sp(2n) current
algebras, but one can check that their results are incorrect, as was also pointed out in [14].
529
where fijm are the structure constants (2.1). The aim of this paper is to construct explicit free field
realizations of the current algebras associated with so(2n), so(2n + 1) and sp(2n) at a generic
level k.
3. Free field realization of the so(2n) currents
As mentioned in the introduction, practically it would be very involved (if not impossible) to
obtain explicit free field realizations of current algebras associated with higher-rank algebras by
the general method outlined in [11,12,14,16,18]. We have found a way to overcome the complication. In our approach, the construction of differential operator realizations becomes much
simpler, giving rise to explicit expressions of differential operators (see (3.11)(3.15) for so(2n),
(4.9)(4.13) for so(2n + 1) and (5.8)(5.12) for sp(2n) below). In this section, we consider the
so(2n) current algebra for generic n and arbitrary level k.
3.1. Differential operator realization of so(2n)
The root system of Dn (or so(2n)) are: i j , for i = j and i, j = 1, . . . , n. Among them,
the positive roots + can be chosen as: i j for 1 i < j n. The simple roots are
1 = 1 2 ,
2 = 2 3 ,
...,
n1 = n1 n ,
n = n1 + n .
(3.1)
Hereafter, we adopt the convention that

Ei Ei ,
Fi Fi ,
i = 1, . . . , n.
(3.2)
The matrix realization of the generators associated with all roots of so(2n) is given in
Appendix A, from which one may derive the structure constants for the particular choice of
the basis.
Let us introduce a coordinate xi,j associated with each positive root i j (i < j ) and
a coordinate xi,j associated with each positive root i + j (i < j ) respectively. These n (n 1)
coordinates satisfy the following commutation relations:
[xi,j , xm,l ] = 0,
[xi,j , xm,l ] = 0,
[xi,j , xm,l ] = im j l ,
(3.3)
[xi,j , xm,l ] = 0,
[xi,j , xm,l ] = 0,
[xi,j , xm,l ] = im j l ,
(3.4)
and the other commutation relations are vanishing. Let | be the highest weight vector of the
representation of so(2n) with highest weights {i }, satisfying the following conditions:
|Fi = 0,
1 i n,
|Hi = i |,
1 i n.
(3.5)
(3.6)
Here the generators Hi are expressed in terms of some linear combinations of H (A.5). An
arbitrary vector in the corresponding Verma module2 is parametrized by | and the coordinates
(x and x)
as
, x, x|
= |G+ (x, x),
(3.7)
2 The irreducible highest weight representation can be obtained from the Verma module through the cohomology
procedure [12] with the help of screening operators (e.g. (3.28) and (3.29)).
530
where G+ (x, x)
is given by (cf. [14,18])
n1,n Gn1,n )(G
n2,n1 G
n2,n Gn2,n Gn2,n1 )
G+ (x, x)
= (G
1,n G1,n G1,2 ).
1,2 G
(G
(3.8)
i,j are given by

Here, for i < j , Gi,j and G
Gi,j = e
xi,j Ei j
i,j = exi,j Ei +j .

G
(3.9)
One can define a differential operator realization (d) of the generators of so(2n) by
, x, x|g,
(d) (g) , x, x|
g so(2n).
(3.10)
Here (d) (g) is a differential operator of the coordinates {xi,j , xi,j } associated with the generator g, which can be obtained from the defining relation (3.10). The defining relation also assures
that the differential operator realization is actually a representation of so(2n). Therefore it is
sufficient to give the differential operators related to the simple roots, as the others can be constructed through the simple ones by the commutation relations. Using the relation (3.10) and the
BakerCampbellHausdorff formula, after some algebraic manipulations, we obtain the following differential operator representation of the simple generators:
i1
(d) (Ei ) =
(xm,i xm,i+1 xm,i+1 xm,i ) + xi,i+1 ,
1 i n 1,
(3.11)
m=1
(d)
(En ) =
n2
(xm,n1 xm,n xm,n xm,n1 ) + xn1,n ,
(3.12)
m=1
(d)
(Fi ) =
i1
(xm,i+1 xm,i xm,i xm,i+1 )
m=1
n
2
(xi,m xi+1,m xi,m xi,m xi,i+1 + xi,m xi+1,m ) xi,i+1
xi,i+1
m=i+2
xi,i+1
n

(xi,m xi,m + xi,m xi,m xi+1,m xi+1,m xi+1,m xi+1,m )
m=i+2
+ xi,i+1 (i i+1 ),
(d) (Fn ) =
n2
1 i n 1,
(3.13)
2
(xm,n xm,n1 xm,n1 xm,n ) xn1,n
xn1,n + xn1,n (n1 + n ), (3.14)
m=1
(d) (Hi ) =
i1
(xm,i xm,i xm,i xm,i )
m=1
n
(xi,m xi,m + xi,m xi,m ) + i ,
m=i+1
i = 1, . . . , n.
(3.15)
A direct computation shows that these differential operators (3.11)(3.15) satisfy the so(2n)
commutation relations corresponding to the simple roots and the associated Serre relations. This
implies that the differential representation of non-simple generators can be consistently constructed from the simple ones. Hence, we have obtained an explicit differential realization of
so(2n).
531
3.2. Free field realization of so(2n)k

With the help of the differential realization given by (3.11)(3.15) we can construct the explicit
free field representation of the so(2n) current algebra at arbitrary level k in terms of n (n 1)
bosonic pairs {(i,j , i,j ), (i,j i,j ), 1 i < j n} and n free scalar fields i , i = 1, . . . , n.
These free fields obey the following OPEs:
im j l
,
(z w)
im j l
i,j (z)m,l (w) = m,l (z)i,j (w) =
,
(z w)
i (z)j (w) = ij ln(z w), 1 i, j n,
i,j (z)m,l (w) = m,l (z)i,j (w) =
1 i < j n, 1 m < l n,
(3.16)
1 i < j n, 1 m < l n,
(3.17)
(3.18)
and the other OPEs are trivial.

The free field realization of the so(2n) current algebra is obtained by the substitution in the
differential realization (3.11)(3.15) of so(2n),
xi,j i,j (z),
xi,j i,j (z),
1 i < j n,
(3.19)
xi,j i,j (z), xi,j i,j (z), 1 i < j n,

j k + 2(n 1)j (z), 1 j n.
(3.20)
(3.21)
Moreover, in order that the resulting free field realization satisfies the desirable OPE for so(2n)
currents, one needs to add certain extra (anomalous) terms which are linear in (z) and (z) in
the expressions of the currents associated with negative roots (e.g., the last term in the expressions
of Fi (z), see (3.22)(3.23)). Here we present the results for the currents associated with the
simple roots,
i1

Ei (z) =
En (z) =
m=1
n2

m,i (z)m,i+1 (z) m,i+1 (z)m,i (z) + i,i+1 (z),
1 i n 1,

m,n1 (z)m,n (z) m,n (z)m,n1 (z) + n1,n (z),
m=1
Fi (z) =
i1

2
m,i+1 (z)m,i (z) m,i (z)m,i+1 (z) i,i+1
(z)i,i+1 (z)
m=1
n

i,m (z)i+1,m (z) i,m (z)i,m (z)i,i+1 (z) + i,m (z)i+1,m (z)
m=i+2
i,i+1 (z)

+ i,i+1 (z)

n

m=i+2
n

m=i+2

i,m (z)i,m (z) + i,m (z)i,m (z)

i+1,m (z)i+1,m (z) + i+1,m (z)i+1,m (z)

k + 2(n 1)i,i+1 (z) i (z) i+1 (z)

+ k + 2(i 1) i,i+1 (z), 1 i n 1,
(3.22)
532
Fn (z) =
n2

2
m,n (z)m,n1 (z) m,n1 (z)m,n (z) n1,n
(z)n1,n (z)
m=1
+
Hi (z) =

k + 2(n 1)n1,n (z) n1 (z) + n (z) + k + 2(n 2) n1,n (z),
i1

n

m,i (z)m,i (z) m,i (z)m,i (z)

i,m (z)i,m (z) + i,m (z)i,m (z)
m=1

+ k + 2(n 1)i (z),
m=i+1
1 i n.
(3.23)
Here and throughout normal ordering of free fields is implied whenever necessary. The free field
realization of the currents associated with the non-simple roots can be obtained from the OPEs
of the simple ones. We can straightforwardly check that the above free field realization of the
currents satisfies the OPEs of the so(2n) current algebra: Direct calculation shows that there are
1
at most second order singularities (e.g., (zw)
2 ) in the OPEs of the currents. Comparing with the
definition of the current algebra (2.3), terms with first order singularity (e.g., the coefficients of
1
(zw) ) are fulfilled due to the very substitution (3.19)(3.21) the differential operator realizations
(3.11)(3.15) are a representation of the corresponding finite-dimensional Lie algebra so(2n);
1
terms with second order singularity (zw)
2 also match those in the definition (2.3) after the
suitable choice we made for the anomalous terms in the expressions of the currents associated
with negative roots.
The free field realization of the so(2n) current algebra (3.22)(3.23) gives rise to the Fock representations of the current algebra in terms of the free fields (3.16)(3.18). These representations
are in general not irreducible for the current algebra. In order to obtain irreducible ones, one needs
certain screening charges, which are the integrals of screening currents (see (3.30)(3.31)), and
performs the cohomology procedure as in [7,1113]. We shall construct the associated screening
currents in Section 3.4.
3.3. Energymomentum tensor
In this subsection we construct the free field realization of the Sugawara energymomentum
tensor T (z) of the so(2n) current algebra. After a tedious calculation, we find

1
Ei j (z)Fi j (z) + Fi j (z)Ei j (z)
T (z) =
2(k + 2(n 1))
i<j
n

+
Ei +j (z)Fi +j (z) + Fi +j (z)Ei +j (z) +
Hi (z)Hi (z)
i<j
n

1

2
i (z)
i=1
ni
i (z)i (z)
2
k + 2(n 1)
i=1

i,j (z)i,j (z) + i,j (z) i,j (z) .
+
(3.24)
i<j
It is straightforward to check that T (z) satisfies the following OPE,

T (z)T (w) =
c/2
2T (w)
T (w)
+
+
.
(z w)4 (z w)2 (z w)
(3.25)
533
The corresponding central charge c is

c=
kn(2n 1)
k dim(so(2n))
.
k + 2(n 1)
k + 2(n 1)
(3.26)
Moreover, we find that with regard to the energymomentum tensor T (z) defined by (3.24) the
so(2n) currents associated with the simple roots (3.22)(3.23) are indeed primary fields with
conformal dimensional one, namely,
Ei (w)
Ei (w)
+
, 1 i n,
2
(z w)
(z w)
Fi (w)
Fi (w)
+
, 1 i n,
T (z)Fi (w) =
(z w)2 (z w)
Hi (w)
Hi (w)
T (z)Hi (w) =
+
, 1 i n.
(z w)2 (z w)
T (z)Ei (w) =
It is expected that the so(2n) currents associated with non-simple roots, which can be constructed
through the simple ones, are also primary fields with conformal dimensional one. Therefore, T (z)
is the very energymomentum tensor of the so(2n) current algebra.
3.4. Screening currents
Important objects in the application of free field realizations to the computation of correlation
functions of the CFTs are screening currents. A screening current is a primary field with conformal dimension one and has the property that the singular part of its OPE with the affine currents
is a total derivative. These properties ensure that the integrated screening currents (screening
charges) may be inserted into correlators while the conformal or affine Ward identities remain
intact [6,8].
Free field realization of the screening currents may be constructed from certain differential
operators [12,18] which can be defined by the relation,
(d) (s ), x, x|
|E G+ (x, x),
for + .
(3.27)
The operators (d) (s ) ( + ) give a differential operator realization of a subalgebra of so(2n),

which is spanned by {E , + }. Again it is sufficient to construct si (d) (si ) related to
the simple roots. Using (3.27) and the BakerCampbellHausdorff formula, after some algebraic
manipulations, we obtain the following explicit expressions for si :
si =
n
(xi+1,m xi,m xi+1,m xi+1,m xi,i+1 + xi+1,m xi,m ) + xi,i+1 ,
m=i+2
sn = xn1,n .
1 i n 1,
(3.28)
(3.29)
One may obtain the differential operators s associated with the non-simple generators from
the above simple ones. Following the procedure similar to [12,18], we find that the free field
realization of the screening currents Si (z) corresponding to the differential operators si is given
by
534
n

i+1,m (z)i,m (z) i+1,m (z)i+1,m (z)i,i+1 (z)
Si (z) =
m=i+2

(z)

i
+ i+1,m (z)i,m (z) + i,i+1 (z) e k+2(n1) ,
1 i n 1,
(3.30)

n (z)
Sn (z) = n1,n (z)e k+2(n1) .
(3.31)
is
Here (z)
=
(z)
n
(3.32)
i (z)i .
i=1
The OPEs of the screening currents with the energymomentum tensor and the so(2n) currents
(3.22)(3.23) are

Sj (w)
Sj (w)
Sj (w)
T (z)Sj (w) =
(3.33)
+
=
, j = 1, . . . , n,
w
(z w)
(z w)2 (z w)
Ei (z)Sj (w) = 0, i, j = 1, . . . , n,
(3.34)
Hi (z)Sj (w) = 0,
i, j = 1, . . . , n,

Fi (z)Sj (w) = ij w
(3.35)

i (z)
k+2(n1)
(k + 2(n 1)) e
(z w)

,
i, j = 1, . . . , n.
(3.36)
The screening currents obtained this way are called screening currents of the first kind [25].
4. Results for so(2n + 1)k
4.1. Differential operator realization of so(2n + 1)
The root system of Bn (or so(2n + 1)) are: {i j | i = j, i, j = 1, . . . , n} and {i | i =
1, . . . , n}. Among them, the positive roots + can be chosen as:
i j ,
for 1 i < j n,
and i ,
for i = 1, . . . , n.
The simple roots are

1 = 1 2 ,
2 = 2 3 ,
...,
n1 = n1 n ,
n = n .
(4.1)
Associated with each positive root , there are a raising operator E , a lowering operator F
and a Cartan generator H . The matrix realization of the generators associated with all roots of
so(2n + 1) is given in Appendix B, from which one may derive the structure constants for the
particular choice of the basis. Similar to the so(2n) case, we adopt the convention (3.2) for the
raising/lowering generators associated with the simple roots.
In addition to the coordinates {xi,j , xi,j | 1 i < j n}, which are associated with the positive roots {i j | i < j }, we also need to introduce extra n coordinates {xi | i = 1, . . . , n}
associated with the positive roots {i | i = 1, . . . , n}. The coordinates {xi,j , xi,j } and their differentials satisfy the same commutation relations as (3.3)(3.4). The other non-trivial commutation
relations are
[xi , xj ] = [xi , xj ] = 0,
[xi , xj ] = ij .
(4.2)
535
Let | be the highest weight vector of the highest weight representation of so(2n + 1) satisfying
the following conditions:
|Fi = 0,
1 i n,
|Hi = i |,
(4.3)
1 i n.
(4.4)
Here the generators Hi are some linear combinations of H (B.8). An arbitrary vector in the
corresponding Verma module is parametrized by | and the coordinates (x and x)
as
, x, x|
= |G+ (x, x),
(4.5)
where G+ (x, x)
n1,n Gn1 Gn1,n )(G
n2,n1 G
n2,n Gn2 Gn2,n Gn2,n1 )
G+ (x, x)
= (Gn )(G
1,n G1 G1,n G1,2 ).
1,2 G
(G
(4.6)
i,j for i < j , and Gi are given by
Here Gi,j and G
Gi,j = e
xi,j Ei j
i,j = exi,j Ei +j ,

G
Gi = exi Ei .
Then one can define a differential operator realization

(d) (g), x, x|
, x, x|g,
(d)
(4.7)
of the generators of so(2n + 1) by
g so(2n + 1).
(4.8)
After tedious calculations analogous to those in the so(2n) case, we have found the differential
realization of so(2n + 1). Here we give the results for the generators associated with the simple
roots,
i1
(d) (Ei ) =
1 i n 1,
(4.9)
m=1
(d) (En ) =
n1
(xm,n xm xm xm,n ) + xn ,
(4.10)
m=1
(d) (Fi ) =
i1
(xm,i+1 xm,i xm,i xm,i+1 ) xi xi+1 +
m=1
n
xi2
x
2 i,i+1
2
(xi,m xi+1,m xi,m xi,m xi,i+1 + xi,m xi+1,m ) xi,i+1
xi,i+1
m=i+2
xi,i+1
n

m=i+2
+ xi,i+1 (xi+1 xi+1 xi xi + i i+1 ),

(d) (Fn ) =
n1
(xm xm,n xm,n xm )
m=1
(d) (Hi ) =
i1
xn2
x + xn n ,
2 n
m=1
xi xi + i ,
1 i n 1,
n
(4.11)
(4.12)
(xi,m xi,m + xi,m xi,m )
m=i+1
i = 1, . . . , n.
(4.13)
536
4.2. Free field realization of so(2n + 1)k

With the help of the differential realization given by (4.9)(4.13) we can construct the free
field representation of the so(2n + 1) current algebra with arbitrary level k in terms of n2 bosonic
pairs {(i,j , i,j ), (i,j i,j ), 1 i < j n} and {(i , i ) | i = 1, . . . , n}, and n free scalar
fields i , i = 1, . . . , n. The free fields {(i,j , i,j ), (i,j i,j )} and {i } obey the same OPEs as
(3.16)(3.18). The other non-trivial OPEs are
i (z)j (w) = j (z)i (w) =
ij
,
(z w)
i, j = 1, . . . , n.
(4.14)
The free field realization of the so(2n + 1) current algebra is obtained by the substitution in
the differential realization (4.9)(4.13) of so(2n + 1),
xi,j i,j (z),
xi,j i,j (z),
xi,j i,j (z),

xi,j i,j (z),
1 i < j n,
1 i < j n,
xi i (z), xi i (z), i = 1, . . . , n,
i k + 2n 1i (z), i = 1, . . . , n,
followed by an addition of anomalous terms linear in (z) and (z) in the expressions of the
currents. Here we present the results for the currents associated with the simple roots,
i1

Ei (z) =
En (z) =
m=1
n1
1 i n 1,
(4.15)

m,n (z)m (z) m (z)m,n (z) + n (z),
m=1
Fi (z) =
i1
m=1

1
m,i+1 (z)m,i (z) m,i (z)m,i+1 (z) i (z)i+1 (z) + i2 (z)i,i+1 (z)
2
n

i,m (z)i+1,m (z) i,m (z)i,m (z)i,i+1 (z) + i,m (z)i+1,m (z)
m=i+2
i,i+1 (z)

+ i,i+1 (z)
n

m=i+2
n

i,m (z)i,m (z) + i,m (z)i,m (z)

i+1,m (z)i+1,m (z) + i+1,m (z)i+1,m (z)
m=i+2
2
(z)i,i+1 (z) + i,i+1 (z)i+1 (z)i+1 (z) i,i+1 (z)i (z)i (z)
i,i+1

+ k + 2n 1 i,i+1 (z) i (z) i+1 (z)

+ k + 2(i 1) i,i+1 (z), 1 i n 1,
Fn (z) =
n1

1
m (z)m,n (z) m,n (z)m (z) n2 (z)n (z)
2
m=1

+ k + 2n 1 n (z)n (z) + k + 2(n 1) n (z),
Hi (z) =
537
i1

n

i,m (z)i,m (z) + i,m (z)i,m (z)
m=1
i (z)i (z) + k + 2n 1i (z),
m=i+1
1 i n.
(4.16)

After a tedious calculation, we find that the Sugawara tensor corresponding to the quadratic
Casimir of so(2n + 1) is given by

1
T (z) =
2(k + 2n 1)
i<j

+
Ei +j (z)Fi +j (z) + Fi +j (z)Ei +j (z)
i<j
n

Ei (z)Fi (z) + Fi (z)Ei (z) +
Hi (z)Hi (z)
n

i=1
i=1

2n 2i + 1 2
i (z)
i (z)i (z)
2
2 k + 2n 1
n

1
i=1

n

i,j (z)i,j (z) + i,j (z) i,j (z) +
i (z)i (z).
i<j
(4.17)
i=1
It is straightforward to check that T (z) satisfies the following OPE,

c/2
2T (w)
T (w)
+
+
.
(z w)4 (z w)2 (z w)
T (z)T (w) =
(4.18)
kn(2n + 1) k dim(so(2n + 1))
.
(4.19)
k + 2n 1
k + 2n 1
so(2n + 1) currents associated with the simple roots (4.15)(4.16) are indeed primary fields with
c=
Ei (w)
Ei (w)
+
, 1 i n,
2
(z w)
(z w)
Fi (w)
Fi (w)
+
, 1 i n,
T (z)Fi (w) =
2
(z w)
(z w)
Hi (w)
Hi (w)
+
, 1 i n.
T (z)Hi (w) =
(z w)2 (z w)
T (z)Ei (w) =

Free field realization of the screening currents of so(2n + 1)k can be constructed from the
differential operators similar to those of the so(2n)k case, which are defined by the relation
(d) (s ), x, x|
|E G+ (x, x),
for + .
(4.20)
538
After some algebraic manipulations, we obtain the following explicit expressions of si associated
with the simple roots of so(2n + 1):
si =
n
(xi+1,m xi,m xi+1,m xi+1,m xi,i+1 + xi+1,m xi,m )
m=i+2
1 2
xi,i+1 + xi,i+1 ,
+ xi+1 xi xi+1
2
sn = xn .
1 i n 1,
(4.21)
(4.22)
The free field realization of the screening currents Si (z) of the so(2n + 1) current algebra corresponding to the above differential operators si is given by
n

i+1,m (z)i,m (z) i+1,m (z)i+1,m (z)i,i+1 (z) + i+1,m (z)i,m (z)
Si (z) =
m=i+2

(z)
1 2
i
+ i+1 (z)i (z) i+1 i,i+1 (z) + i,i+1 (z) e k+2n1 ,
2
1 i n 1,
(4.23)
Sn (z) = n (z)e

k+2n1
n (z)
(4.24)
is defined in (3.32). From direct calculation we find that the screening currents satisfy
where (z)
the required OPEs with the energymomentum tensor (4.17) and the so(2n + 1) currents (4.15)
(4.16), namely,

Sj (w)
Sj (w)
Sj (w)
T (z)Sj (w) =
(4.25)
+
=
, j = 1, . . . , n,
w
(z w)
(z w)2 (z w)
Ei (z)Sj (w) = 0, i, j = 1, . . . , n,
(4.26)
Hi (z)Sj (w) = 0,
i, j = 1, . . . , n,

Fi (z)Sj (w) = ij w
(4.27)

(z)
i
k+2n1
(k + 2n 1)e
(z w)

,
i, j = 1, . . . , n.
(4.28)
These screening currents, (4.23) and (4.24), are screening currents of the first kind [25].
5. Results for sp(2n)k
5.1. Differential operator realization of sp(2n)
The root system of Cn (or sp(2n)) are: {i j | i = j, i, j = 1, . . . , n} and {2i | i =
1, . . . , n}. Among them, the positive roots + can be chosen as:
i j ,
for 1 i < j n,
and 2i ,
for i = 1, . . . , n.
The simple roots are

1 = 1 2 ,
2 = 2 3 ,
...,
n1 = n1 n ,
n = 2n .
(5.1)
Associated with each positive root , there are a raising operator E , a lowering operator F and
a Cartan generator H . The matrix realization of the generators associated with all roots of sp(2n)
539
is given in Appendix C, from which one may derive the structure constants for the particular
choice of the basis. Like the so(2n) and so(2n + 1) cases, we adopt the convention (3.2) for the
raising/lowering generators associated with the simple roots.
Similar to the so(2n + 1) case, besides the coordinates {xi,j , xi,j | 1 i < j n}, which are
associated with the positive roots {i j | i < j }, we also need to introduce extra n coordinates {xi | i = 1, . . . , n} associated with the positive roots {2i | i = 1, . . . , n}. These coordinates
{xi,j , xi,j } and {xi } satisfy the same commutation relations as (3.3)(3.4) and (4.2).
Let | be the highest weight vector of the highest weight representation of sp(2n) satisfying
the following conditions:
|Fi = 0,
1 i n,
|Hi = i |,
(5.2)
1 i n.
(5.3)
Here the generators Hi are some linear combinations of H (C.7). An arbitrary vector in the
corresponding Verma module is parametrized by | and the coordinates (x and x)
as
, x, x|
= |G+ (x, x),
(5.4)
where G+ (x, x)
n1,n Gn1 Gn1,n )(G
n2,n1 G
n2,n Gn2 Gn2,n Gn2,n1 )
= (Gn )(G
G+ (x, x)
1,n G1 G1,n G1,2 ).
1,2 G
(G
(5.5)
i,j for i < j , and Gi are given by
Here Gi,j and G
Gi,j = e
xi,j Ei j
i,j = exi,j Ei +j ,

G
Gi = exi E2i .
(5.6)
Then one can define a differential operator realization (d) of the generators of sp(2n) by
, x, x|g,
(d) (g), x, x|
g sp(2n).
(5.7)
After tedious calculations analogous to those in the previous cases, we have found the differential
realization of sp(2n). Here we give the results for the generators associated with the simple roots,
i1
(d) (Ei ) =
1 i n 1,
(5.8)
m=1
(d) (En ) =
n1

2
xm,n xm,n + xm,n
xm + xn ,
(5.9)
m=1
(d) (Fi ) =
i1
(xm,i+1 xm,i xm,i xm,i+1 ) xi xi,i+1 2xi,i+1 xi+1
m=1
n
(xi,m xi+1,m xi,m xi,m xi,i+1 + xi,m xi+1,m + 2xi,m xi+1,m xi+1 )
m=i+2
xi,i+1
n

m=i+2
+ xi,i+1 (xi,i+1 xi,i+1 + 2xi+1 xi+1 2xi xi )

+ xi,i+1 (i i+1 ),
1 i n 1,
(5.10)
540
(d) (Fn ) =
n1

2
xm,n
xm + xm,n xm,n xn2 xn + xn n ,
(5.11)
m=1
(d) (Hi ) =
i1
n
m=1
(xi,m xi,m + xi,m xi,m )
m=i+1
2xi xi + i ,
i = 1, . . . , n.
(5.12)
5.2. Free field realization of sp(2n)k

With the help of the differential realization given by (5.8)(5.12) we can construct the free
field representation of the sp(2n) current algebra with arbitrary level k in terms of n2 bosonic
pairs {(i,j , i,j ), (i,j i,j ), 1 i < j n} and {(i , i ) | i = 1, . . . , n}, and n free scalar
fields i , i = 1, . . . , n. These free fields {(i,j , i,j ), (i,j i,j ), (i , i )} and {i } obey the same
OPEs as (3.16)(3.18) and (4.14).
The free field realization of the sp(2n) current algebra is obtained by the substitution in the
differential realization (5.8)(5.12) of sp(2n),
xi,j i,j (z),
xi,j i,j (z),

xi,j i,j (z),
xi,j i,j (z),
1 i < j n,
1 i < j n,
xi i (z), xi i (z), i = 1, . . . , n,

i k + 2(n + 1)i (z), i = 1, . . . , n,
followed by an addition of anomalous terms linear in (z) and (z) in the expressions of the
currents. Here we present the results for the currents associated with the simple roots,
i1

Ei (z) =
En (z) =
m=1
n1
1 i n 1,
(5.13)

2
m,n (z)m,n (z) + m,n
(z)m (z) + n (z),
m=1
Fi (z) =
i1

m,i+1 (z)m,i (z) m,i (z)m,i+1 (z) i (z)i,i+1 (z) 2i,i+1 (z)i+1 (z)
m=1
n

i,m (z)i+1,m (z) i,m (z)i,m (z)i,i+1 (z)
m=i+2
n

i,m (z)i+1,m (z) + 2i,m (z)i+1,m (z)i+1 (z)
m=i+2
i,i+1 (z)
+ i,i+1 (z)
n

i,m (z)i,m (z) + i,m (z)i,m (z)
m=i+2
n

i+1,m (z)i+1,m (z) + i+1,m (z)i+1,m (z)
m=i+2
2
i,i+1 (z)i,i+1 (z) + 2i,i+1 (z)i+1 (z)i+1 (z) 2i,i+1 (z)i (z)i (z)
541

k + 2(n + 1) i,i+1 (z) i (z) i+1 (z)

+ k + 2(i 1) i,i+1 (z), 1 i n 1,
+
Fn (z) =
n1

2
m,n
(z)m (z) + m,n (z)m,n (z) n2 (z)n (z)
m=1
+
Hi (z) =

k
k + 2(n + 1) n (z)n (z) +
+ (n 1) n (z),
2
i1

n

i,m (z)i,m (z) + i,m (z)i,m (z)
m=1

2i (z)i (z) + k + 2(n + 1)i (z),
m=i+1
1 i n.
(5.14)

After a tedious calculation, we find that the Sugawara tensor corresponding to the quadratic
Casimir of sp(2n) is given by

1
T (z) =
2(k + 2(n + 1))
i<j

+
Ei +j (z)Fi +j (z) + Fi +j (z)Ei +j (z)
i<j
+2
n

E2i (z)F2i (z) + F2i (z)E2i (z) +
Hi (z)Hi (z)
n

i=1
i=1

ni +1
2
i (z)i (z)
i (z)
2
k + 2(n + 1)
n

1
i=1

n

i,j (z)i,j (z) + i,j (z) i,j (z) +
i (z)i (z).
i<j
(5.15)
i=1
It is straightforward to check that T (z) satisfy the following OPE,

2T (w)
T (w)
c/2
+
+
.
4
2
(z w)
(z w)
(z w)
T (z)T (w) =
(5.16)
kn(2n + 1)
k dim(sp(2n))
(5.17)
.
k + 2(n + 1)
k + 2(n + 1)
sp(2n) currents associated with the simple roots (5.13)(5.14) are indeed primary fields with
c=
Ei (w)
Ei (w)
+
,
(z w)2 (z w)
Fi (w)
Fi (w)
+
,
T (z)Fi (w) =
2
(z w)
(z w)
T (z)Ei (w) =
1 i n,
1 i n,
542
T (z)Hi (w) =
Hi (w)
Hi (w)
+
,
2
(z w)
(z w)
1 i n.

Free field realization of the screening currents of sp(2n)k can be constructed from the differential operators similar to the so(2n)k and so(2n + 1)k cases in previous sections, which are
defined by the relation
|E G+ (x, x),
(d) (s ), x, x|
for + .
(5.18)
After some algebraic manipulations, we obtain the following explicit expressions of si associated
with the simple roots of sp(2n):
si =
n
(xi+1,m xi,m xi+1,m xi+1,m xi,i+1 + xi+1,m xi,m + 2xi+1,m xi,m xi )
m=i+2
+ xi+1 xi,i+1 + 2xi,i+1 xi + xi,i+1 ,
1 i n 1,
(5.19)
sn = xn .
(5.20)
The free field realization of the screening currents Si (z) of the sp(2n) current algebra corresponding to the above differential operators si is given by
n

Si (z) =
i+1,m (z)i,m (z) i+1,m (z)i+1,m (z)i,i+1 (z)
m=i+2
n

i+1,m (z)i,m (z) + 2i+1,m (z)i,m (z)i (z) + i+1 (z)i,i+1 (z)
m=i+2
+ 2i,i+1 i (z) + i,i+1 (z) e

Sn (z) = n (z)e

(z)
i
k+2(n+1)
1 i n 1,
(5.21)
n (z)
k+2(n+1)
(5.22)

where (z)
is defined in (3.32). From direct calculations we find that the screening currents
satisfy the required OPEs with the energymomentum tensor (5.15) and the sp(2n) currents
(5.13)(5.14), namely,

Sj (w)
Sj (w)
Sj (w)
T (z)Sj (w) =
(5.23)
+
= w
, j = 1, . . . , n,
(z w)
(z w)2 (z w)
Ei (z)Sj (w) = 0, i, j = 1, . . . , n,
(5.24)
Hi (z)Sj (w) = 0,
i, j = 1, . . . , n,
(5.25)

i (z)
k+2(n+1)

ij
(k + 2(n + 1))e
w
Fi (z)Sj (w) =
1 + in
(z w)

,
i, j = 1, . . . , n.
(5.26)
These screening currents, given in (5.21) and (5.22), are screening currents of the first kind [25].
543
6. Discussions
We have constructed the explicit expressions of the free field representations for the so(2n),
so(2n + 1) and sp(2n) current algebras at an arbitrary level k, and the corresponding energy
momentum tensors. We have also found the free field representation of n screening currents of
the first kind for each current algebra. Our results reduce to those in [12] for the so(5) case.
The free field realizations (3.22)(3.23), (4.15)(4.16) and (5.13)(5.14) of the current algebras so(2n)k , so(2n + 1)k and sp(2n)k respectively give rise to the Fock representations of the
corresponding current algebras in terms of the free fields (3.16), (3.18) and (4.14). They provide
explicit realizations of the vertex operator constructions of representations for affine Lie algebras
[26,27]. Moreover, these representations are in general not irreducible for the current algebras.
To obtain irreducible representations, one needs the associated screening charges, which are the
integrals of the corresponding screening currents (3.30)(3.31), (4.23)(4.24) and (5.21)(5.22),
and performs the cohomology procedures as in [7,1113].
Our explicit expressions of the affine currents, energymomentum tensor and screening currents in terms of free fields should allow one to construct the primary fields and correlation
functions of the associated WZNW models using the method developed in [18]. The approach
presented in this paper can be generalized to construct the explicit free field realizations of the
current superalgebra osp(m|2n)k with generic m and n. Results will be reported elsewhere [28].
Acknowledgements
The financial support from the Australian Research Council is gratefully acknowledged.
W.-L.Y. has also been partially supported by the New Staff Research Grant of the University
of Queensland.
Appendix A. Fundamental representation of so(2n)
Let eij , i, j = 1, . . . , n, be an n n matrix with entry 1 at the ith row and the j th column
and zero elsewhere. The 2n-dimensional fundamental representation of so(2n), denoted by 0 ,
is given by the following 2n 2n matrices,

e
e
0
0
0 (Ei j ) = ij
(A.1)
, 0 (Fi j ) = j i
, 1 i < j n,
0 ej i
0 eij

0 eij ej i
0 (Ei +j ) =
,
0
0

0
0
, 1 i < j n,
0 (Fi +j ) =
(A.2)
eij + ej i 0

e ejj
0
0 (Hi j ) = ii
(A.3)
, 1 i < j n,
0
eii + ejj

e + ejj
0
, 1 i < j n.
0 (Hi +j ) = ii
(A.4)
0
eii ejj
We introduce n linear-independent generators Hi (i = 1, . . . , n),
1
Hi = (Hi j + Hi +j ).
2
(A.5)
544
Actually, the above generators {Hi } span the Cartan subalgebra of so(2n). In the fundamental
representation, these generators can be realized by

0
e
, i = 1, . . . , n.
0 (Hi ) = ii
(A.6)
0 eii
The corresponding nondegenerate invariant bilinear symmetric form of so(2n) is given by
(x, y) =

1
tr 0 (x)0 (y) ,
2
x, y so(2n).
(A.7)
Appendix B. Fundamental representation of so(2n + 1)

Let ei (i = 1, . . . , n) be an n-dimensional row vector with the ith component being 1 and all
others being zero, and eiT be the transport of ei , namely,
ei = (0, . . . , 0, 1, 0, . . . , 0),
0
.
..

0

T
ei =
1.
0
.
.
.
0
(B.1)
Then, the (2n + 1)-dimensional fundamental representation of so(2n + 1), denoted by 0 , is

given by the following (2n + 1) (2n + 1) matrices,

0 0
0
0 (Ei j ) = 0 eij
,
0
0 0 ej i

0 0
0
0 (Fi j ) = 0 ej i
(B.2)
, 1 i < j n,
0
0 0 eij

0 0
0
0 (Ei +j ) = 0 0 eij ej i ,
0 0
0

0
0
0
0 (Fi +j ) = 0
(B.3)
0
0 , 1 i < j n,
0 eij + ej i 0

0
0 ei
0 ei 0
T
0 (Ei ) = ei 0 0 , 0 (Fi ) = 0
(B.4)
0
0 , i = 1, . . . , n,
0
0
0
0 0
eiT

0
0
0
0 (Hi j ) = 0 eii ejj
(B.5)
, 1 i < j n,
0
0
0
eii + ejj

0
0
0
0 (Hi +j ) = 0 eii + ejj
(B.6)
, 1 i < j n,
0
0
0
eii ejj
545

0 0
0
0 (Hi ) = 0 eii
, i = 1, . . . , n.
0
0 0 eii
(B.7)
1
Hi = (Hi j + Hi +j ) = Hi .
(B.8)
2
Actually, the above generators {Hi } span the Cartan subalgebra of so(2n + 1). Moreover, the
matrix realization of {Hi } in the fundamental representation is given by

0 0
0
0 (Hi ) = 0 eii
(B.9)
, i = 1, . . . , n.
0
0 0 eii
The corresponding nondegenerate invariant bilinear symmetric form of so(2n + 1) is given by

1
(x, y) = tr 0 (x)0 (y) , x, y so(2n + 1).
(B.10)
2
Appendix C. Fundamental representation of sp(2n)
The 2n-dimensional fundamental representation of sp(2n), denoted by 0 , is given by the
following 2n 2n matrices,

0
0
eij
ej i
, 0 (Fi j ) =
, 1 i < j n,
0 (Ei j ) =
(C.1)
0 ej i
0 eij

0 eij + ej i
0
0
, 0 (Fi +j ) =
, 1 i < j n,
0 (Ei +j ) =
0
0
eij + ej i 0
(C.2)

0 eii
0 0
0 (E2i ) =
(C.3)
, 0 (F2i ) =
, i = 1, . . . , n,
0 0
eii 0

0
e ejj
, 1 i < j n,
0 (Hi j ) = ii
(C.4)
0
eii + ejj

0
e + ejj
, 1 i < j n,
0 (Hi +j ) = ii
(C.5)
0
eii ejj

e
0
0 (H2i ) = ii
(C.6)
, i = 1, . . . , n.
0 eii
1
Hi = (Hi j + Hi +j ) = H2i .
(C.7)
2
Actually, the above generators {Hi } span the Cartan subalgebra of sp(2n). Moreover, the matrix
realization of {Hi } in the fundamental representation is given by

0
eii
, i = 1, . . . , n.
0 (Hi ) =
(C.8)
0 eii
The corresponding nondegenerate invariant bilinear symmetric form of sp(2n) is given by

1
(x, y) = tr 0 (x)0 (y) , x, y sp(2n).
(C.9)
2
546
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
A.A. Belavin, A.M. Polyakov, A.B. Zamolodchikov, Nucl. Phys. B 241 (1984) 333.
P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu, D. Senehal, Conformal Field Theory, Springer, Berlin, 1997.
V. Kac, Infinite-Dimensional Lie Algebras, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1990.
P. Goddard, A. Kent, D. Olive, Phys. Lett. B 321 (1985) 88;
P. Goddard, A. Kent, D. Olive, Commun. Math. Phys. 103 (1986) 105.
M. Wakimoto, Commun. Math. Phys. 104 (1986) 605.
Vl.S. Dotsenko, V.A. Fateev, Nucl. Phys. B 240 (1984) 312;
Vl.S. Dotsenko, V.A. Fateev, Nucl. Phys. B 251 (1985) 691.
V.A. Fateev, A.B. Zamolodchikov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 43 (1986) 657.
D. Bernard, G. Felder, Commun. Math. Phys. 127 (1990) 145.
P. Furlan, A.C. Ganchev, R. Paunov, V.B. Petkova, Nucl. Phys. B 394 (1993) 665.
O. Andreev, Phys. Lett. B 363 (1995) 166.
B. Feigin, E. Frenkel, Commun. Math. Phys. 128 (1990) 161.
P. Bouwknegt, J. McCarthy, K. Pilch, Prog. Phys. Suppl. 102 (1990) 67.
M. Bershadsky, H. Ooguri, Phys. Lett. B 229 (1989) 374.
K. Ito, S. Komata, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 6 (1991) 581.
A. Gerasimov, A. Morozov, M. Olshanetsky, A. Marshakov, S. Shatashvili, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 5 (1990) 2495.
E. Frenkel, hep-th/9408109.
J. de Boer, L. Feher, Commun. Math. Phys. 189 (1997) 759.
J.L. Peterson, J. Rasmussen, M. Yu, Nucl. Phys. B 502 (1997) 649.
X.-M. Ding, M. Gould, Y.-Z. Zhang, Phys. Lett. A 318 (2003) 354.
Y.-Z. Zhang, X. Liu, W.-L. Yang, Nucl. Phys. B 704 (2005) 510.
J. Rasmussen, Nucl. Phys. B 510 (1998) 688.
W.-L. Yang, Y.-Z. Zhang, X. Liu, Phys. Lett. B 641 (2006) 329;
W.-L. Yang, Y.-Z. Zhang, X. Liu, J. Math. Phys. 48 (2007) 053514.
M. Kuwahara, N. Ohta, H. Suzuki, Nucl. Phys. B 340 (1990) 448.
L. Frappat, P. Sorba, A. Sciarrino, Dictionary on Lie Algebras and Superalgebras, Academic Press, New York, 2000.
M. Bershadsky, H. Ooguri, Commun. Math. Phys. 126 (1986) 49.
J. Lepowsky, R.L. Wilson, Invent. Math. 77 (1984) 199;
J. Lepowsky, R.L. Wilson, Invent. Math. 79 (1985) 417;
J. Lepowsky, M. Primc, Contemp. Math. 46 (1985).
M. Primc, math.QA/0205262.
W.-L. Yang, Y.-Z. Zhang, in preparation.

On higher derivative corrections of tachyon action

Mohammad R. Garousi a,b, , Hanif Golchin a
a Department of Physics, Ferdowsi University, PO Box 1436, Mashhad, Iran
b School of Physics, IPM (Institute for Studies in Theoretical Physics and Mathematics),
PO Box 19395-5531, Tehran, Iran

Abstract
We have examined the momentum expansion of the disk level S-matrix element of two tachyons and two
gauge fields to find, up to on-shell ambiguity, the couplings of these fields in the world volume theory
of N coincident non-BPS D-branes to all order of . Using the proposal that the action of D-brane
anti-D-brane is given by the projection of the action of two non-BPS D-branes with (1)FL , we find the
corresponding couplings in the world volume theory of the braneanti-brane system. Using these infinite
tower of couplings, we then calculate the massless pole of the scattering amplitude of one RR field, two
tachyons and one gauge field in the braneanti-brane theory. We find that the massless pole of the field
theory amplitude is exactly equal to the massless pole of the disk level S-matrix element of one RR, two
tachyons and one gauge field to all order of . We have also found the couplings of four tachyons to all
order of by examining the S-matrix element of four tachyons.
1. Introduction
Braneanti-brane system has been used to model inflation in string theory [14]. When branes
are very far away from each other, the transverse scalar field which describes the motion of one
brane in the background of the other brane plays the role of inflaton. The dynamics of the moving
brane in this period is very well described at low energy by the DBI action. On the other hand,
when branes come within a critical distance from each other, the string stretching between the
two branes become tachyonic and inflation ends. The dynamics of the braneanti-brane in this
* Corresponding author at: Department of Physics, Ferdowsi University, PO Box 1436, Mashhad, Iran.
E-mail address: garousi@ipm.ir (M.R. Garousi).

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.005
548
M.R. Garousi, H. Golchin / Nuclear Physics B 800 [PM] (2008) 547564
period is very important for studying the reheating [57]. Braneanti-brane system has been also
used to study spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking in holographic model of QCD [810]. In
these studies, flavor branes introduced by placing a set of parallel branes and anti-branes on a
background dual to a confining color theory [11].
It is important then to study the world-volume theory of Dp -braneanti-Dp -brane. The worldvolume theory of this system has tachyon, massless and infinite tower of massive fields which
can be described by Berkovits superstring field theory [12,13]. The world-volume theory may
be rewritten in terms of the tachyon and massless fields and infinite number of derivative terms
reflecting the effect of massive fields. We call this field theory the higher derivative theory.
When the world volume fields vary slowly the higher derivative theory should be reduced to the
effective theory. It is known that the vortex solution of the field theory of the Dp -braneanti-Dp brane pair should describe the stable Dp2 -brane [14]. An effective action for braneanti-brane
which has this property has been proposed in [15]

S = Tp d p+1 V (T ) det A(1) + det A(2) ,
(1)
where

(n)
A(n)
= + 2 F + D T (D T ) + D T (D T )
(1)
(2)
(2)
where Tp is the Dp -brane tension and Da T = a T i(Aa Aa )T . The above action is a

generalization of the tachyon DBI action [1619]. The above action has a vortex solution whose
world-volume action is given by the DBI action of stable Dp2 -brane [15]. It is difficult to find
the higher derivative corrections to this action.
Another proposal for the effective action of the braneanti-brane pair which is based on the
S-matrix elements calculation is given by [20,21]

SDBI = Tp d p+1 STr V (T ) det(ab + 2 Fab + 2 Da T Db T ) .
(3)
The trace in the above action should be completely symmetric between all matrices of the form
Fab , Da T , and individual T of the tachyon potential. These matrices are
(1)

Fab
0
0
Da T
0 T
, T =
.
Da T =
Fab =
(4)
(2) ,
0
T 0
(Da T )
0
Fab
The tachyon potential which is consistent with S-matrix element calculations has the following
expansion:
V (T ) = 1 + m2 T 2 +
1 2 2 2
+
m T
2
where Tp is the p-brane tension, m2 is the mass squared of tachyon, i.e., m2 = 1/(2 ). To
implement the symmetric trace prescription, one must first expand the action then make each
terms symmetric and finally take the trace. This in particular gives a coupling between F (1)
and F (2) . There is no such coupling in (1). The above action has been found from the effective
field theory of N = 2 non-BPS branes by projecting it with (1)FL where FL is the spacetime
left-handed fermion number. On the other hand, the effective field theory of two non-BPS Dbranes has been assumed to be the natural non-Abelian extension of the tachyon DBI action, i.e.,
the action (3) without restricting the matrices to (4). In this paper, we would like to study the
higher derivative corrections to this action.
549
A method for finding the higher derivative theory is to study the S-matrix elements of this
theory and compare them with the S-matrix elements of string theory. If this higher derivative
theory is going to be identical with the string theory, the S-matrix elements of the higher derivative theory must be identical to the momentum expansion of the S-matrix elements of string
theory. Hence, by calculating the S-matrix elements of string theory and finding their momentum expansions, one can find the appropriate higher derivative couplings in the field theory. For
instance, the string theory S-matrix element of one RR field and two tachyons can be reproduced by the higher derivative theory of the braneanti-brane system if it includes the following
couplings [22]:
n

n

an
Cp1 D a Da DT DT
2i p
(5)
2
n=0
where an s are some known numbers. Or the S-matrix element of one RR and two gauge fields
can be reproduced by the higher derivative field theory if it includes

p
(6)
bn ( )n+1 a1 an+1 F a1 an+1 F
(2 )2 Cp3
2!
n=1
where bn s are some known numbers. In above couplings F is one of the gauge fields of the
braneanti-brane system. In the above examples, it is trivial to find the momentum expansions of
the S-matrix elements in the string theory side, however, in higher point functions, it is nontrivial
to find their momentum expansions. The momentum expansion of the S-matrix element of one
RR, two tachyons and one gauge field has been found in [22,23]. They can be reproduced by the
higher derivative theory if it includes the following couplings for Cp3 :
p
cp,n,m
( )2n+m Cp3 a1 a2n b1 bm F
2i ( )p
2
p,n,m=0
p

D a Da Db1 Dbm Da1 Dan DT Dan+1 Da2n DT
(7)
where again cp,n,m s are some known numbers. And the following couplings for Cp1 :
n

n

an
Cp1 D a Da F |T |2
2 p
2
(8)
n=0
where an s are exactly the numbers that appear in (5), and

p

p
ep,n,m ( )2m+n
Cp1 Da D a
2( )2 p
2
p,n,m=0

b c a1 an b1 b2m F Da1 Dan D b D b1 D bm T D c D bm+1 D b2m T

+ 2Da1 Dan Db D b1 D bm DT Dc D bm+1 D b2m DT a1 an b1 b2m F bc

+ b a1 an b1 b2m Fc Da1 Dan D b D b1 D bm DT D c D bm+1 D b2m T

+ b a1 an b1 b2m Fc Da1 Dan D b D b1 D bm DT D c D bm+1 D b2m T
(9)
where ep,n,m are some other known numbers. It has been argued in [22] that the tachyon couplings in (5), (7) and (8) have no on-shell ambiguity. Having different couplings in the higher
550
derivative theory without on-shell ambiguity, one can then find the effective theory by restricting
the fields to be slowly varying fields. It is shown in [22] that the above couplings reduce to the
WessZumino effective couplings of braneanti-brane system [2426] for slowly varying fields.
In this paper, we would like to extend the above discussion to find the higher derivative tachyon
couplings corresponding to the non-Abelian tachyon DBI action.
An outline of the rest of paper is as follows. In the next section, we find the momentum
expansion of the string theory S-matrix element of two-tachyons and two-gauge fields in the
world volume theory of N non-BPS D-branes. We then write a tower of infinite number of two
tachyontwo gauge field couplings which reproduce the above momentum expansion. We repeat
the same steps to find the couplings of four massless transverse scalar fields and the couplings of
four tachyons. In Section 3, using the proposal that the action of braneanti-brane can be found
from the action of N = 2 non-BPS branes by projecting it with (1)FL , we find the corresponding couplings in the braneanti-brane theory. Using the two tachyontwo gauge field couplings
of braneanti-brane, we calculate the massless pole of the scattering amplitude of one RR field,
two tachyons and one gauge field. We then compare the result with the corresponding massless
pole in the string theory S-matrix element [22]. We find exact agreement.
2. Higher derivative terms of non-BPS branes
The world volume of N coincident non-BPS D-branes has N 2 tachyons and N 2 gauge fields.
The higher derivative theory of non-BPS branes which includes the kinetic terms and the couplings of these fields may be found by studying the S-matrix elements in the field theory and in
the string theory. One expects that the string theory S-matrix elements should be reproduced by
the higher derivative theory if the two theories are going to be identical. In this section we would
like to find the two tachyontwo gauge field couplings and four tachyon couplings which produce the string theory S-matrix elements to all order of . We begin with the S-matrix element
of two tachyons and two gauge fields.
2.1. Two tachyontwo gauge field couplings
The S-matrix element of two gauge fields and two tachyons in string theory side is given by
[27,28]

(2s) (1/2 2u)
1
(2s) (1/2 2t)
A = 4i(2 )Tp 1 2
2
(1/2 2s 2t)
(1/2 2s 2u)

(1/2 2u) (1/2 2t)
+
(1 + 2s)

(2s) (1/2 2u)
(2s) (1/2 2t)
+ 2 1 k3 2 k4
(1/2 2s 2t)
(1/2 2s 2u)

(1/2 2u) (1/2 2t)
+34
+
(10)
(2t 2u)
where i is the polarization of gauge fields. The Mandelstam variables are
s = (k1 + k2 )2 /2,
t = (k2 + k3 )2 /2,
u = (k1 + k3 )2 /2.
(11)
551
The momenta of the gauge fields (tachyons) are k1 , k2 (k3 , k4 ). The on-shell condition for the
tachyons are ki2 = 1/(2 ), and the Mandelstam variables satisfy the constraint
s + t + u = 1/2.
(12)
The coefficients , , are the non-Abelian group factors

1
Tr(1 2 3 4 ) + Tr(1 4 3 2 ) ,
2

1
= Tr(1 3 4 2 ) + Tr(1 2 4 3 ) ,
2

1
= Tr(1 4 2 3 ) + Tr(1 3 2 4 ) .
(13)
2
The standard non-Abelian kinetic terms of the field theory produce Feynman amplitudes that
have massless pole in s-channel and tachyonic poles in t - and u-channels. It is shown in [29]
that the above amplitude reproduce the massless and tachyonic poles of the field theory if one
expands the string amplitude around
=
s 0,
t, u 1/4.
(14)
The other terms of the expansion are speculated in [2931] to be related to the higher derivatives
of tachyon and gauge fields. In this section we would like to find these higher derivative terms to
all order of . To this end, we write the amplitude (10) in the following form:

A = 4i(2 )Tp 1 2 (2t )(2u ) 2 1 k3 2 k4 (2t ) 2 1 k4 2 k3 (2u )

(2t + 2u ) (2u )
(2u ) (2t )
(2t + 2u ) (2t )
+
+

(15)
(1 + 2u )
(1 + 2t )
(1 2t 2u )
where t = t + 1/4 = k2 k3 and u = u + 1/4 = k1 k3 . The amplitude must be expanded
around
t , u 0
(16)
which is the momentum expansion. Using the Maple, one can expand the amplitude around the
above point, i.e.,

A = 4i(2 )Tp 1 2 (2t )(2u ) 2 1 k3 2 k4 (2t ) 2 1 k4 2 k3 (2u )

u + t + s
an,m u n t m + t n u m
+

4t u s
n,m=0

n m
n m
+ bn,m u t + t u
(17)
where bn,m is symmetric. Some of the coefficients an,m and bn,m are
2
,
6
a1,0 = 2 (3),
a0,0 =
2
,
12
a0,1 = 0,
b0,1 = b1,0 = (3),
b0,0 =
a1,1 = a0,2 = 7 4 /90,

b1,1 = 4 /180,
a2,0 = 4 4 /90,
b0,2 = b2,0 = 4 /45,
552
a1,2 = a2,1 = 8 (5) + 4 2 (3)/3,

b0,3 = 4 (5),
a0,3 = 0,
a3,0 = 8 (5),
b1,2 = 8 (5) + 2 (3)/3.

2
(18)
It has been shown in [2931] that the poles in the above expansion are reproduced by the nonAbelian kinetic terms, and the contact terms with coefficients a0,0 and b0,0 are also reproduced
by the following terms:

Tp ( )3 STr m2 T 2 F F + D T D T F F 4F F D T D T
(19)
where the covariant derivative is Da T = a T i[Aa , T ], and STr is the symmetrised trace
prescription. They are the two tachyontwo gauge field couplings of the non-Abelian tachyon
DBI action (3). Writing the symmetric trace in term of ordinary trace, one can write the above
couplings as

00
00
00
Tp ( )( )2 L00
(20)
1 + L2 + L3 + L4
where

2 2 2
m Tr 2T F F + T F T F ,
3
2

Tr 2D T D T F F + D T F D T F ,
L00
2
3
2

2
Tr 2D T D T F F + D T F D T F ,
L00
3 =
3

2 2
Tr 2D T D T F F + D T F D T F .
L00
4 =
3
The vertex of two on-shell tachyons and two on-shell gauge fields of the above couplings is in
fact the kinematic factor in Eq. (17) multiplies by 2 ( + + )/6. At this order the Chan
Paton factors appear in symmetric form, i.e., + + . This is the reason that the symmetric
trace appears in the field theory couplings (19) at this order. The ChanPaton factors however
does not appear in symmetric form in any other order. So one expects to have no symmetric trace
in the higher order terms.
Our strategy for finding the higher derivatives extension of the above couplings is as follows.
Since the vertex of the above terms appear as coefficient of all higher order terms in (17), one may
find the higher derivative couplings by applying appropriate derivatives on the above couplings.
The coefficient of each term in the above couplings is set by a0,0 and b0,0 . In the higher derivative
extensions one should replace them by an,m and bn,m . Let us focus on L00
1 terms which appear
in the above couplings as

2
2
+ 4b0,0 T F T F .
L00
(21)
1 = m Tr 4a0,0 T F F
L00
1 =
Extension of a0,0 to a1,0 is the following:

m2 ( ) Tr 2a1,0 Da T T D a F F + T Da T F D a F

= m2 ( ) Tr 2a1,0 Da T T D a F F + h.c.
(22)
where Da F = a F i[Aa , F ]. Note that the above Lagrangian is hermitian. Further extension to a1,1 is

m2 ( )2 Tr a1,1 Da Db T T D a F D b F + Da Db F F D a T D b T + h.c. .
(23)
Now, it is not difficult to extend the above couplings to an,m case, i.e.,

m2 ( )n+m an,m Tr Dnm T T F F + Dnm F F T T + h.c.
553
(24)
where the higher derivative operator Dnm is defined as

Dnm (EF GH ) Db1 Dbm Da1 Dan EF D a1 D an GD b1 D bm H.
(25)
Similarly, the extension of b0,0 to b1,0 is the following:

m2 ( ) Tr 2b1,0 Da T D a F T F + h.c. .
Further extension to b1,1 is

m2 ( )2 Tr b1,1 Da Db T D a F T D b F + Da Db F D a T F D b T + h.c.
(26)
and extension to bn,m case is

T F T F + Dnm
F T F T + h.c.
m2 ( )n+m an,m Tr Dnm
(27)
where the higher derivative operator

Dnm
is defined as

(EF GH ) Db1 Dbm Da1 Dan ED a1 D an F GD b1 D bm H.
Dnm
(28)
One can repeat similar steps for all other terms in (20). Hence, the proposal for the couplings
between two tachyons and two field strengths on the world volume of N non-BPS D-branes, to
all order of , is the following:
L = Tp ( )( )2+n+m

nm
nm
nm
Lnm
1 + L2 + L3 + L4
(29)
n,m=0
where

2

2
+ Dnm F F T 2
Lnm
1 = m Tr an,m Dnm T F F

T F T F + Dnm
F T F T + h.c. ,
+ bn,m Dnm

+ Dnm F F D T D T
Lnm
2 = Tr an,m Dnm D T D T F F

D T F D T F + Dnm
F D T F D T + h.c. ,
+ bn,m Dnm

F + Dnm F F D T D T
Lnm
3 = 2 Tr an,m Dnm D T D T F

+ bn,m Dnm
D T F D T F + Dnm
F D T F D T + h.c. ,

Lnm
+ Dnm F F D T D T
4 = 2 Tr an,m Dnm D T D T F F

D T F D T F + Dnm
F D T F D T + h.c. .
+ bn,m Dnm
If one calculates the coupling of two on-shell tachyons and two gauge fields from (29), one will
find the contact terms in the amplitude (17).
We have derived the tachyon couplings (29) from the string theory S-matrix element evaluated
around the unstable point of the tachyon potential, i.e., T = 0. Around this point the tachyon
varies very fast so the higher derivative terms are very important. However, one may use the
tachyon couplings to study the fluctuations around the stable point of the tachyon potential, i.e.,
T . Around this point the tachyon can be slowly varying field. When the covariant derivative
of the field strength and the second covariant derivative of tachyon are zero, the Lagrangian (29)
reduces to the couplings (19) which are the two tachyontwo gauge field strength couplings of the
554
non-Abelian tachyon DBI action. This may indicates that the non-Abelian tachyon DBI action
is the effective action of the non-BPS D-branes around the stable point of the tachyon potential
when fields vary slowly.
The couplings in (29) have on-shell ambiguity, i.e., T 2 a a T . This on-shell ambiguity
has no effect on the massless and the simple tachyon poles of the S-matrix elements. In the
massless pole it is obvious because the tachyons are on-shell. In the tachyon pole, T appears as
1/(k 2 1/2 ), whereas 2 a a T appears as 2 k 2 /(k 2 1/2 ), however, one can write it as
1
2 k 2
=
+ 2
k 2 1/2 k 2 1/2
(30)
hence in the tachyon pole, T and 2 a a T have identical effect. However, the deference is
an extra contact term. By studying an S-matrix element in which the couplings (29) appear in
tachyon poles as well as the contact terms, one may fix the on-shell ambiguity of (29).
2.2. Four massless scalar couplings
It has been shown in [30,31] that the S-matrix element of four massless transverse scalars and
the S-matrix element of four tachyons can be written in a universal form. So, one may expect that
the higher derivative couplings of four tachyons should be similar to the higher derivative couplings of four scalar fields. In fact the tachyon and the scalar fields appear in similar form in the
2 2
tachyon DBI action. The only difference is that there is a potential for the tachyon, e.g., e m T
where m2 is the mass of the tachyon. Therefore, to find the higher derivative couplings of four
tachyons, we first find the higher derivative couplings of four scalar fields and then inspired by
them we will find the tachyon couplings.
The S-matrix element of four massless transverse scalar vertex operators in the superstring
theory is given by A = As + At + Au where

(2s) (1 2u)
(2s) (1 2t)
+
As = 4iTp 1 2 3 4
(2s 2t)
(2s 2u)

(1 2t) (1 2u)
,
(1 2t 2u)

(2u) (1 2s)
(1 2s) (1 2t)
+
Au = 4iTp 1 3 2 4
(1 2s 2t)
(2u 2s)

(2u) (1 2t)
+
,
(2u 2t)

(1 2s) (1 2u)
(2t) (1 2s)
At = 4iTp 1 4 2 3
(2t 2s)
(1 2s 2u)

(2t) (1 2u)
+
(2t 2u)
where s are the scalars polarization. The on-shell condition for the scalars are ki2 = 0, and the
Mandelstam variables constrain to the relation
s + t + u = 0.
(31)
In this case the massless poles of the Feynman amplitude resulting from the non-Abelian kinetic term of the scalars can be produced by the above amplitude expanded at low energy, i.e.,
555
s, t, u 0. To find the four scalar couplings to all order of , we repeat the steps in the previous
section, so rewrite the amplitudes as

(2t + 2u) (2t)
(2t + 2u) (2u)
As = 16iTp 1 2 3 4 tu
+
(1 + 2u)
(1 + 2t)

(2t) (2u)
+
,
(1 2t 2u)

(2s) (2t)
(2t + 2s) (2s)
Au = 16iTp 1 3 2 4 ts
+
(1 2s 2t)
(1 + 2t)

(2t + 2s) (2t)
+
,
(1 + 2s)

(2s + 2u) (2s)
(2u) (2s)
At = 16iTp 1 4 2 3 us
+
(1 + 2u)
(1 2s 2u)

(2u + 2s) (2u)
.
+
(1 + 2s)
Using the Maple, one can expand the amplitude around s, t, u 0, i.e.,

u + t + s
As = 16iTp 1 2 3 4 tu
an,m un t m + t n um
+
4tus
n,m=0

+ bn,m un t m + t n um
,

s + t + u
an,m s n t m + t n s m
+
4tsu
n,m=0

+ bn,m s n t m + t n s m
,
Au = 16iTp 1 3 2 4 ts

u + s + t
At = 16iTp 1 4 2 3 su
an,m un s m + s n um
+
4sut
n,m=0

+ bn,m un s m + s n um
.
(32)
On can also write the lase term

in another form, e.g., the last term in the first
in each mamplitude
n
line can be written also as n,m=0 (tu) (s) . They produce different four scalar couplings. Up
to total derivative terms, the differences are in the couplings which involve a a i . They have no
effect on the simple massless poles of S-matrix elements because canceling k 2 with the massless
propagator one finds a contact term.
The massless poles in (32) are reproduced by the non-Abelian kinetic terms of the scalar field,
and the contact terms with coefficients a0,0 and b0,0 are also reproduced by the following terms:

2
1
1
i
b j a
i a
Tp STr Da Db i D D j + Da D i
(33)
.
4
8
556
Writing the symmetric trace in term of ordinary trace, one can write it as

00
00
Tp L00
5 + L6 + L7
(34)
where

1
Tr 4a0,0 D i D i D j D j + 4b0,0 D i D j D i D j ,
2
8

1
L00
Tr 4a0,0 D i D i D j D j + 4b0,0 D i D j D i D j ,
6 =
8 2

1
L00
Tr 4a0,0 D i D i D j D j + 4b0,0 D i D j D i D j .
7 =
2
8
To check the consistency of the above couplings with the (a0,0 , b0,0 ) order contact terms of the
string theory amplitude (32), one uses the relation 2k1 k2 k1 k3 = (k1 k2 )(k3 k4 ) (k1 k3 )
(k2 k4 ) + (k2 k3 )(k1 k4 ). Now one can extend it easily to the higher derivative terms as
L00
5 =

nm

1
n+m
nm
L5 + Lnm
T
(
)
p
6 + L7
2
4
(35)
m,n=0
where

i
j
Lnm
5 = Tr an,m Dnm D D i D D j

D i D j D i D j + h.c. ,
+ bn,m Dnm

i
j
Lnm

D i D j D i D j + h.c. ,
+ bn,m Dnm

i
j
Lnm

D i D j D i D j + h.c. .
+ bn,m Dnm
It is not difficult to check that the infinite tower of four scalar couplings (35) produce the string
theory S-matrix element (32). The above couplings can be extended to the couplings of four
gauge fields by using T-duality. Up to total derivative terms and the terms like F F F a a F ,
which is zero on-shell, one can show that the F F DF DF terms are those appear in the literature.
We now turn to the couplings of four tachyons.
2.3. Four tachyon couplings
The S-matrix element of four open string tachyon vertex operators in the superstring theory is
given by [27,28]

(2s) (2u)
(2t) (2u)
(2t) (2s)
+
+
A = 12iTp
(36)
(1 2t 2s)
(1 2s 2u)
(1 2t 2u)
where the Mandelstam variables are those defined in (11) and satisfy the constraint
s + t + u = 1.
(37)
The standard non-Abelian kinetic term in field theory produces massless poles in s-, t -, u-channels. However, the constraint (37) does not allow us to sent all s, t, u to zero at the same time to
produce massless poles. It is shown in [2931] that in order to produce the massless poles, one
557
should first arrange the amplitude in a specific form, i.e., one should write A = As + At + Au
where

(2s) (2u)
(2t) (2u)
(2s) (2t)
As = 4iTp
+
,
(1 2s 2t)
(1 2s 2u)
(1 2t 2u)

(2u) (2s)
(2u) (2t)
(2s) (2t)
+
+
,
Au = 4iTp
(1 2s 2t)
(1 2u 2s)
(1 2u 2t)

(2s) (2u)
(2t) (2u)
(2t) (2s)
At = 4iTp
(38)
+
.
(1 2t 2s)
(1 2s 2u)
(1 2t 2u)
Then one should send
s-channel:
t-channel:
u-channel:
lim
As ,
lim
At ,
lim
Au .
s0,t,u1/2
t0,s,u1/2
u0,s,t1/2
(39)
These limits are consistent with the constraint (37).

The leading term of this expansion produces the massless poles of the higher derivative theory,
and the other terms are speculated to be related to the higher derivatives of the tachyon [2931].
In this section we would like to find these higher derivative terms up to on-shell ambiguity. So
we write the amplitude in the following form:

(2t + 2u ) (2u )
(2t + 2u ) (2t )
+
As = 16iTp t u

(1 + 2u )
(1 + 2t )

(2t ) (2u )
+
,
(1 2t 2u )

(2t + 2s ) (2s )
(2s ) (2t )

Au = 16iTp t s
+
(1 2s 2t )
(1 + 2t )

(2t + 2s ) (2t )
+
,
(1 + 2s )

(2u ) (2s )
(2s + 2u ) (2s )
At = 16iTp u s
+
(1 + 2u )
(1 2s 2u )

(2u + 2s ) (2u )
+
(40)
(1 + 2s )
where s = s + 1/2 = k1 k2 , t = t + 1/2 = k2 k3 and u = u + 1/2 = k1 k3 . Now
the field theory corresponds to expanding the above amplitude around
s , t , u 0
(41)
which is the momentum expansion. Note that s + t + u = 0, u + s + t = 0 and t + s + u = 0.

Like the scalar case, one should expand the amplitude around the above point, i.e.,

u + t + s
As = 16iTp t u
an,m u n t m + t n u m
+

4t u s
n,m=0
558

n m
n m
,
+ bn,m u t + t u

s + t + u
an,m s n t m + t n s m
+

4t s u
n,m=0

,
+ bn,m s n t m + t n s m

Au = 16iTp t s

u + s + t
an,m u n s m + s n u m
+

4s u t
n,m=0

.
+ bn,m u n s m + s n u m

At = 16iTp s u
The poles in the above expansion are reproduced by the non-Abelian kinetic terms, and the
contact terms with coefficients a0,0 and b0,0 are reproduced by the following terms [2931]:
4

2
m 4 m2 2
1
2
a
a
T +
T D a T D T Da T D T
(2 ) Tp STr
(42)
8
4
8
which are the four tachyon couplings of the non-Abelian tachyon DBI action. To check this
explicitly, one needs the on-shell relation 2k1 k2 k1 k3 = m4 m2 (k2 k3 + k1 k4 ) (k1 k2 )
(k3 k4 ) (k1 k3 )(k2 k4 ) + (k2 k3 )(k1 k4 ). Writing the symmetric trace in terms of ordinary
trace, one can write (42) as

00
00
00
00
Tp ( )2 L00
(43)
8 + L9 + L10 + L11 + L12
where

4
4
4
L00
8 = 2m Tr a0,0 T + b0,0 T ,

2
2
L00
9 = 4m Tr a0,0 T D T D T + b0,0 T D T T D T ,

L00
10 = 2 Tr a0,0 D T D T D T D T + b0,0 D T D T D T D T ,

L00
11 = 2 Tr a0,0 D T D T D T D T + b0,0 D T D T D T D T ,

L00
12 = 2 Tr a0,0 D T D T D T D T + b0,0 D T D T D T D T .
(44)
Note that the last three lines add up to

2
Tr 2D T D T D T D T + D T D T D T D T .
6
However, we have written them in the form (44) to extend them easily to the higher derivative
terms using the fact that the higher derivative extension of (34) is (35). The higher derivative
00
extension of L00
9 is like the higher derivative extension of L2 which appears in (29). Therefore,
the higher derivative extension of (43) is the following:
Tp ( )2+n+m

nm
nm
nm
nm
Lnm
8 + L9 + L10 + L11 + L12
m,n=0
(45)
559
where

4

Lnm
8 = m Tr an,m Dnm [T T T T ] + bn,m Dnm [T T T T ] + h.c. ,

2
Lnm
9 = m Tr an,m Dnm T T D T D T + Dnm D T D T T T

+ bn,m Dnm
T D T T D T + Dnm
D T T D T T + h.c. ,

Lnm
10 = Tr an,m Dnm D T D T D T D T + bn,m Dnm D T D T D T D T + h.c. ,

Lnm
11 = Tr an,m Dnm D T D T D T D T + bn,m Dnm D T D T D T D T + h.c. ,

Lnm
12 = Tr an,m Dnm D T D T D T D T + bn,m Dnm D T D T D T D T + h.c. .
It is not difficult to check that the infinite tower of four tachyon couplings (45) produce the string
theory S-matrix element. It is interesting to note that when the second derivative of tachyon is
zero, the Lagrangian (45) reduces to DBI couplings (42) for Abelian tachyon. For non-Abelian
case, it does not reduces to the tachyon couplings of the non-Abelian DBI action. However, as
we mentioned before the couplings (45) have on-shell ambiguity, i.e., T 2 a a T . As long as
the on-shell ambiguity is not fixed, one cannot use the tachyon couplings (45) to find the effective
tachyon couplings. It has been check in [32] that the couplings (42) have no on-shell ambiguity,
i.e., these couplings appear in the tachyon pole and contact terms of the S-matrix element of
four tachyons and one gauge field at (2) order. It would be interesting to compare the infinite
tachyon poles and contact terms of the S-matrix element found in [32] with the tachyon pole
and the contact terms of the scattering amplitude of four tachyons and one gauge field using the
infinite tower of tachyon couplings in (45). This calculation may fix the on-shell ambiguity of all
couplings in (45).
3. Higher derivative terms of braneanti-brane
Having found the couplings in the world-volume theory of N non-BPS D-brane, we can now
find the corresponding couplings in the world-volume theory of braneanti-brane. It has been
proposed in [20] that the action of D-braneanti-D-brane may be given by the projection of the
action of two non-BPS D-brane with (1)FL where FL is the spacetime left hand fermion number. According to this proposal, the couplings in the braneanti-brane theory can be read from the
non-BPS branes couplings by using the matrices (4) for the field strength and for the tachyon. If
one replaces them into (29) and performing the trace, one finds the following couplings between
two tachyons and two gauge fields:
LD D = Tp ( )( )2+n+m

Lnm
+ Lnm
+ Lnm
+ Lnm
1D D
2D D
3D D
4D D
(46)
n,m=0
where

(1) (1)

(1) (1)
Lnm
= m2 an,m Dnm (T T F
F
) + Dnm F
F
T T + c.c.
1D D

(1)

(2) (1)

+ bn,m Dnm
T F
+ Dnm
F T F (2) T + c.c. ,
T F

(1) (1)

(1) (1)
Lnm
+ Dnm F
= an,m Dnm D T D T F
F
F
D T D T + c.c.
2D D

(1)

(2)

D T F
F D T F (2) D T + c.c. ,
D T F (1) + Dnm
+ bn,m Dnm

(1)
(1)
Lnm
= 2 an,m Dnm D T D T F (1) F + Dnm F (1) F D T D T + c.c.
3D D
560

(1)

(1)
(2)

D T F (2) D T F + Dnm
F
+ bn,m Dnm
D T F D T + c.c. ,

(1)

(1)
Lnm
= 2 an,m Dnm D T D T F F (1) + Dnm F F (1) D T D T + c.c.
4D D

(1)

(2)

+ bn,m Dnm
D T F D T F (1) + Dnm
F D T F (2) D T + c.c.
plus F (1) F (2) for an,m terms and F (1) F (2) for bn,m terms. In above equation, the covariant
(1)
derivative of field strength is ordinary derivative and Da1 Dan T = a1 Da2 Dan T i(Aa1
(2)
(1)
(2)
Aa1 )Da2 Dan T . Note that there are couplings between F and F . For the case T = T and
F (1) = F (2) , the Lagrangian (46) is the same as the Lagrangian (29) for one non-BPS D-brane
as expected. One can do similar steps to find the four tachyon couplings in the braneanti-brane
world-volume theory.
We have found the tachyon couplings from the contact terms of the momentum expansion
of the string theory S-matrix elements. A nontrivial consistency check of the higher derivative
theory with string theory is that the tachyon couplings reproduce also the infinite massless or
tachyonic poles of the string theory S-matrix elements. As an example we consider the momentum expansion of the S-matrix element of one RR field Cp1 , two tachyons and one gauge field
which is nonzero in the world volume theory of braneanti-brane. This expansion has infinite
contact terms and also infinite massless and tachyonic poles [22]. The contact terms and the
tachyonic poles are reproduced by appropriate couplings of one RR field, two tachyons and one
gauge field in field theory which has been found in [22], i.e., the higher derivative couplings in
the Introduction section. The massless poles are the following:

a0 ap1 a Ha0 ap1
2
ip ( )
k2a (t + 1/4)( . k3 )
p!(s + t + u + 1/2)

1
a (s + 1/4)(t + 1/4) + (3 2)
2

m
(47)
dn,m (s + t + 1/2)n (t + 1/4)(s + 1/4)
n,m=0
where some of the coefficients dn,m are

d0,0 = 2 /3,
d2,0 = 7 /45,
4
d3,0 = 32 (5),
d1,0 = 8 (3),
d0,1 = 4 /45,
d1,1 = 32 (5) + 8 (3) 2 /3.
The Mandelstam variables in (47) are

(48)
t = (k1 + k2 ),
u = (k2 + k3 )2 .
(k1 + k3 )2 ,
2
2
2
In above, k1 is momentum of the gauge field and k2 , k3 are the tachyon momenta. It has been
speculated in [22] that the above massless poles should be reproduced by the higher derivative
theory once one knows the two tachyontwo gauge field couplings.
Now using the two tachyontwo gauge field couplings (46), one can reproduce the string
theory massless poles (47). To this end, consider the amplitude for decaying one RR field to
two tachyons and one gauge field in the world-volume theory of braneanti-brane which has the
Feynman diagrams as shown in Fig. 1.
s=
(a)
561
(b)
Fig. 1. The Feynman diagrams corresponding to the amplitude in (49).
In field theory, this amplitude is given by

A = Va (Cp1 , A)Gab (A)Vb A, T1 , T1 , A(1)
(49)
(1)
(2)
where A should be
A and A . In above T1 is the real component of the complex tachyon, i.e.,
T = (T1 + iT2 )/ 2. It has been argued in [22] that the coupling between one RR and one gauge
field which is given by the WessZumino terms, and the kinetic term of the gauge field have no
higher derivative correction. Hence, they are given by [23]
iab
,
(2 )2 Tp ( k 2 /2)

1
p!

1
Va Cp1 , A(2) = ip (2 ) a0 ap1 a H a0 ap1 .
p!
Gab (A) =
(50)
The vertexes Vb (A, A(1) , T1 , T1 ) which have higher derivative corrections, can be derived
from (46). One finds that the vertex Vb (A(1) , A(1) , T1 , T1 ) is given by

iTp ( )( )2 ( )n+m an,m kb (s + 1/4)(2k2 ) + (t + 1/4)(2k3 )

+ k2b (t + 1/4)(2 . k3 ) + k3b (s + 1/4)(2 . k2 ) b (s + 1/4)(t + 1/4)

(k3 k)m (k3 k1 )n + (k3 k)n (k3 k1 )m + (k2 k)m (k2 k1 )n + (k2 k)n (k2 k1 )m

+ (k3 k)m (k2 k)n + (k3 k)n (k2 k)m + (k1 k2 )m (k1 k3 )n + (k1 k2 )n (k1 k3 )m
(51)
and the vertex Vb (A(2) , A(1) , T1 , T1 ) by

iTp ( )( )2 ( )n+m bn,m kb (s + 1/4)(2k2 ) + (t + 1/4)(2k3 )

+ k2b (t + 1/4)(2 . k3 ) + k3b (s + 1/4)(2 . k2 ) b (s + 1/4)(t + 1/4)

(k3 k)m (k3 k1 )n + (k3 k)n (k3 k1 )m + (k2 k)m (k2 k1 )n + (k2 k)n (k2 k1 )m

+ (k3 k)m (k2 k)n + (k3 k)n (k2 k)m + (k1 k2 )m (k1 k3 )n + (k1 k2 )n (k1 k3 )m
(52)
where k a is the momentum of the off-shell gauge field. Now one can write k2 k = k1 k3 k 2 and
k3 k = k1 k2 k 2 . The k 2 in the above vertex will be canceled with the k 2 in the denominator
of the gauge field propagator resulting a bunch of contact terms of one RR, two tachyons and
one gauge field, i.e., the diagram (b). They should be subtracted from the contact terms that have
been extracted from the S-matrix element of one RR, two tachyons and one gauge field, i.e., the
couplings in (9). Let us at the moment ignore the contact terms and consider only the massless
562
poles of the amplitude (49), i.e., diagram (a). Replacing (52), (51) and (50) in (49), one finds the
following massless pole:

a0 ap1 a Ha0 ap1
1
2

k2a (t )( . k3 ) a (s )(t ) + (3 2)
2ip ( )
p!(s + t + u)
2

(an,m bn,m )((t )m (s )n + (t )n (s )m )
(53)
n,m=0
where t = t + 1/4 = k1 k2 and s = s + 1/4 = k1 k3 .

The above amplitude should be compared with the massless poles in (47). Let us compare
them for some values of n, m. For n = m = 0, the amplitude (53) has the following factor:
2
3
which is equal to d0,0 . At the order of , the amplitude (53) has the following factor:
4(a0,0 b0,0 ) =
2(a1,0 + a0,1 b0,1 b0,1 )(s + t ) = 8 (3)(s + t + 1/2)

which is equal to d1,0 (s + t + 1/2) in (47). At the order of ( )2 , the amplitude (53) has the
following factor:

4(a1,1 b1,1 )(s )(t ) + 2(a0,2 + a2,0 b0,2 b2,0 ) (s )2 + (t )2
=
4
7 4
(s + t )2 +
(s )(t ) = d2,0 (s + t + 1/2)2 + d0,1 (s + 1/4)(t + 1/4).
45
45
At the order of ( )3 , the amplitude (53) has the following factor:

2(a3,0 + a0,3 b0,3 b3,0 ) (s )3 + (t )3 + 2(a1,2 + a2,1 b1,2 b2,1 )(s )(t )(s + t )

= 32 (5)(s + t )3 + 32 (5) + 8 2 (3)/3 (s )(t )(s + t )
which is again exactly equal to the corresponding terms in (47). Similar comparison can be done
for all order of . Hence, the field theory amplitude (53) reproduces exactly the infinite tower
of massless poles of string theory amplitude (47). In particular, this consistency requires to have
couplings between F (1) and F (2) which is in fact the case, as the coefficients bn,m in (46) are
non-zero.
Finally, let us now return to the contact terms that the field theory amplitude (49) produces.
Using the Binomial formula, one can write the contact terms as the following:

a0 ap1 a Ha0 ap1
1
2

k2a (t )( . k3 ) a (s )(t ) + (3 2)
ip ( )
p!
2

m

m

(an,m bn,m ) 2
t m s n + s m t n

n,m=0
=1
n

2 1
n n m
n m
k
s +s
t
t
+2

=1

n,m

2 +j 1
n
m n mj
n mj
k
+
s
+s
t
(54)
t
.

j
=1,j =1
563
Note that the above couplings have at least four momenta. They can be rewritten in the following
form:

a0 ap1 a Ha0 ap1
1
i( )2 p
k2a (t + 1/4)( . k3 ) a (s + 1/4)(t + 1/4) + (3 2)
p!
2

m

ep,n,m
(s + t + u + 1/2)p (s + t + 1/2)n (t + 1/4)(s + 1/4)
(55)
p,n,m=0

where ep,n,m
can be written in term of an,m and bn,m . The contact terms of one RR, two tachyons
and one gauge field that have been extracted from string theory S-matrix element in [22] have
the above structure. Hence, the coefficients ep,n,m in the couplings (9) should be replaced by

.
ep,n,m ep,n,m ep,n,m
(56)
This makes the higher derivative theory to produce the string theory S-matrix element. Since the
couplings (46) have on-shell ambiguity, the contact terms in (54) have also on-shell ambiguity.
The on-shell ambiguity of the couplings in (29) or in (46), however, may be fixed by studying
the S-matrix element of three tachyons and two gauge fields because the couplings (29) appear
in the tachyon poles and in the contact terms of this S-matrix element. It would be interesting to
perform this calculation.
Acknowledgement
H.G. would like to thank K. Bitaghsir Fadafan for discussion.
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
G.R. Dvali, S.H.H. Tye, Phys. Lett. B 450 (1999) 72, hep-ph/9812483.
S.H.S. Alexander, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 023507, hep-th/0105032.
G.R. Dvali, Q. Shafi, S. Solganik, hep-th/0105203.
S. Kachru, R. Kallosh, A. Linde, J.M. Maldacena, L.P. McAllister, S.P. Trivedi, JCAP 0310 (2003) 013, hep-th/
0308055.
J.H. Traschen, R.H. Brandenberger, Phys. Rev. D 42 (1990) 2491.
L. Kofman, A.D. Linde, A.A. Starobinsky, Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 3258, hep-ph/9704452.
R.H. Brandenberger, A.R. Frey, L.C. Lorenz, arXiv: 0712.2178 [hep-th].
R. Casero, E. Kiritsis, A. Paredes, hep-th/0702155.
O. Bergman, S. Seki, J. Sonnenschein, arXiv: 0708.2839 [hep-th].
A. Dhar, P. Nag, arXiv: 0708.3233 [hep-th].
T. Sakai, S. Sugimoto, Prog. Theor. Phys. 113 (2005) 843, hep-th/0412141;
T. Sakai, S. Sugimoto, Prog. Theor. Phys. 114 (2006) 1083, hep-th/0507073.
N. Berkovits, Nucl. Phys. B 450 (1995) 90, hep-th/9503099;
N. Berkovits, Nucl. Phys. B 459 (1996) 439, Erratum.
N. Berkovits, Fortschr. Phys. 48 (2000) 31, hep-th/9912121.
A. Sen, JHEP 9809 (1998) 023, hep-th/9808141.
A. Sen, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 066008, hep-th/0303057.
A. Sen, JHEP 9910 (1999) 008, hep-th/9909062.
E.A. Bergshoeff, M. de Roo, T.C. de Wit, E. Eyras, S. Panda, JHEP 0005 (2000) 009, hep-th/0003221.
J. Kluson, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 126003, hep-th/0004106.
M.R. Garousi, JHEP 0712 (2007) 089, arXiv: 0710.5469 [hep-th].
M.R. Garousi, arXiv: 0712.1954 [hep-th].
564
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
M.R. Garousi, E. Hatefi, arXiv: 0710.5875 [hep-th].

C. Kennedy, A. Wilkins, Phys. Lett. B 464 (1999) 206, hep-th/9905195.
P. Kraus, F. Larsen, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 106004, hep-th/0012198.
T. Takayanagi, S. Terashima, T. Uesugi, JHEP 0103 (2001) 019, hep-th/0012210.
M. Green, J. Schwarz, E. Witten, Superstring Theory, vol. 1, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1987.
J. Polchinski, String Theory, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1998.
K. Bitaghsir-Fadafan, M.R. Garousi, Nucl. Phys. B 760 (2007) 197, hep-th/0607249.

Modular forms and three-loop superstring amplitudes

Sergio L. Cacciatori a, , Francesco Dalla Piazza a , Bert van Geemen b
a Dipartimento di Scienze Fisiche e Matematiche, Universit dellInsubria, Via Valleggio 11, I-22100 Como, Italy
b Dipartimento di Matematica, Universit di Milano, Via Saldini 50, I-20133 Milano, Italy

Abstract
We study a proposal of DHoker and Phong for the chiral superstring measure for genus three. A minor
modification of the constraints they impose on certain Siegel modular forms leads to a unique solution. We
reduce the problem of finding these modular forms, which depend on an even spin structure, to finding a
modular form of weight 8 on a certain subgroup of the modular group. An explicit formula for this form,
as a polynomial in the even theta constants, is given. We checked that our result is consistent with the
vanishing of the cosmological constant. We also verified a conjecture of DHoker and Phong on modular
forms in genus 3 and 4 using results of Igusa.
MSC: 83E30; 46T12; 14K25; 05B25
Keywords: Superstrings; Amplitudes; Modular forms; Finite geometry; Theta constants
1. Introduction
Formally string theories in the perturbative approach can be formulated using the path integral
formalism outlined by Polyakov, and this is the starting point for the computation of the scattering amplitudes. The conformal invariance of the string theory forces the amplitude to be invariant
under the action of the modular group as was exploited by Belavin and Knizhnik [1] who conjectured: any multiloop amplitude in any conformal invariant string theory may be deduced from
purely algebraic objects on moduli spaces Mp of Riemann surfaces. Indeed, for bosonic strings
E-mail addresses: sergio.cacciatori@uninsubria.it (S.L. Cacciatori), f.dallapiazza@uninsubria.it (F. Dalla Piazza),

geemen@mat.unimi.it (B. van Geemen).
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.03.007
566
S.L. Cacciatori et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 [PM] (2008) 565590
this permitted the computation of the vacuum to vacuum amplitude up to four loops in terms
of modular forms [2,14]. For superstrings there are some difficulties: the presence of fermionic
interactions makes the splitting between chiral and antichiral modes hard, moreover one needs
a covariant way to integrate out the Grassmannian variables arising from the supersymmetry on
the worldsheet. In a series of articles, DHoker and Phong showed that the computation of g-loop
amplitudes in string perturbation theory is strictly related to the construction of a suitable measure on the super moduli space of genus g super-Riemann surfaces. They also claimed [79] that
the genus g vacuum to vacuum amplitude should take the form

A=
(1)
(det Im )5
c, d[]( ) d[ ]( ),
Mg
,
where and denote two spin structures (or theta characteristics), c, are suitable constant
phases depending on the details of the model and d[]( ) is a holomorphic form of maximal
rank (3g 3, 0) on the moduli space Mg of genus g Riemann surfaces. The Riemann surface
is represented by its period matrix , after a choice of canonical homology basis. Since the
integrand should be independent from the choice of homology basis, it follows that the measure
d[]( ) must transform covariantly under the modular group Sp(2g, Z).
In [5] and following papers, DHoker and Phong explicitly solved the problems outlined before for the two loop vacuum to vacuum amplitude, giving an explicit expression for the two
loop measure in terms of theta constants. Next, in [7,8], they tried to extend their results to three
loop amplitudes. Mimicking the structure of the two loop chiral measure, they proposed three
reasonable constraints (see below) which should characterize the modular forms composing the
measure. Then, they tried to find such modular forms, without success. This negative result, apparently, can be imputed to their requirement that the modular form, of weight eight, should be
a product of the fourth power of a theta constant and modular form of weight six. This led us to
look for a weaker form of the constraints, in particular relaxing the second one, by not requiring
such a decomposition and we do succeed in finding such a form. Our assumptions are consistent
with the expression for the amplitudes at genus one and two, and at genus three they provide a
unique solution. In this paper we will show the existence, provide an explicit expression for the
measure and show that the corresponding cosmological constant is zero. For the unicity of our
solution, and the fact that a solution to the constraints of DHoker and Phong does not exist, we
refer to a future paper [4].
The constraints, and the well known one loop chiral measure, also determine the modular
forms 6 [] of [5,6] uniquely, as we show in this paper. In particular, if one could prove a priori
that the two loop chiral measure has the form indicated in Section 2.2, formula (2) with g = 2,
then we would have an easy derivation for the explicit formula of this measure.
In this paper we will use action of the modular group on modular forms as a powerful tool to
solve the problem. We took advantage of the theory of induced representations: the representation
furnished by the space of forms is built up from the representation given by a suitable subspace
left invariant by a subgroup of the entire modular group. This approach is similar to the method
that Wigner used to classify the irreducible representations of the Poincar group induced from
the representation of the little group. A systematic account of the representation of modular group
on modular forms of genus three and level two will also be given in [4].
A delicate point is the assumption, made by DHoker and Phong and also in this paper, that 1
is true also for three loops. Moreover we will take contributions from even characteristics only.
Even if there are many arguments leading to the conclusion that these last assumptions should
567
not be valid for g > 2 (see for example the discussion in [3]), we think that existence, uniqueness
and simplicity of the solution are strong arguments for the opposite conclusion, at least for g = 3.
Also for g = 4 it seems that the modified constraints have a solution, we hope to report on this in
the near future.1
The structure of the paper is the following.
In Section 2 we recall some results on the measures for the bosonic string and the chiral
superstring. This leads us to consider the possibility that the chiral superstring measure might be
obtained from the bosonic string measure by multiplication by a modular form of weight 8.
In Section 2.3 we formulate some constraints which this modular form should satisfy. These
constraints are very similar to the ones considered by DHoker and Phong in [8], the differences
are discussed in Section 2.4. It turns out that for genus two we recover the chiral superstring measure as determined by DHoker and Phong [5,6]. In genus three our constraints have a (unique)
solution.
In Section 3 we study the Siegel modular forms on g (2) for g = 1, 2. In particular, we show
how our constraints lead to the functions 6 [] in genus two found earlier by DHoker and
Phong. Our explicit formula for these functions in Section 3.4 is different from theirs and might
be of independent interest.
In Section 4 we show that our constraints have a solution in genus three, and show that the
corresponding cosmological constant is zero.
In Section 5 we briefly discuss some results of Igusa which are related to a conjecture of
DHoker and Phong.
In Appendix A we discuss characteristics and symplectic geometry in a vector space over a
field with two elements. In Appendix B we recall some facts on the transformation theory of theta
constants. In Appendix C we determine the restriction of certain modular forms to reducible
period matrices.
2. Measures and modular forms
2.1. Basic definitions
The Siegel upper half space of complex g g symmetric matrices with positive definite imaginary part will be denoted by Hg . The action of g := Sp(2g, Z) on Hg is denoted as usual by

A B
M := (A + B)(C + D)1 ,
M :=
Sp(2g, Z), Hg .
C D
A Siegel modular form f of genus g and weight k on a subgroup Sp(2g, Z) is a holomorphic
function on Hg which satisfies
f : Hg C,
f (M ) = det(C + D)k f ( ),
M , Hg
(and in case g = 1 one should also impose a growth condition on f ). The factor det(C + D)
satisfies a cocycle condition:
(MN, ) = (M, N ) (N, ),
where (M, ) := det(C + D).
For a subgroup of Sp(2g, Z) which acts without fixed points on Hg one can then define a
linebundle, the Hodge bundle , on the quotient \Hg as the quotient of the trivial bundle CHg
on Hg by the action of given by :
1 See [17,18] and also [19] for the case g = 5.
568
:= \(C Hg ) \Hg ,

M (t, ) := (M, )t, M .
Even in case has fixed points, we can use this action to define a sheaf, still called , on
\Hg . The global sections of correspond to the Siegel modular forms of weight 1; more
generally, Siegel modular forms of weight k correspond to sections of k . For the definition of
the well-known theta constants []( ) with even characteristics , which are modular forms of
weight 1/2 on a subgroup of Sp(2g, Z), see Section 3.1. Recall that there are 2g1 (2g + 1) even
characteristics.
2.2. Measures
We recall some results on the bosonic measure for g 3, the chiral superstring measure for
g 2 and on the proposal of DHoker and Phong for the chiral superstring measure for g = 3.
In this section, cg and cg are constants.
The genus one bosonic measure is
(1)
dB =
1
d (1) .
(2)12 24 ( (1) )
The genus one chiral superstring measure is (cf. e.g. [6, Eq. (8.2)])

[(1) ]4 ( (1) )
d (1) = 5 4 12 (1) d (1) ,
2 ( )
so that

4

d (1) = c1 (1) (1) 12 (1) d(1)
B .
Note that [(1) ]4 ( (1) )12 ( (1) ) is a modular form of weight 2 + 6 = 8 on a subgroup of
SL(2, Z).
The genus two bosonic measure is [2,14]:
c2
dij ,
d(2)
B =
10 ( (2) )
ij
where 10 is a modular form of weight 10 on Sp(4, Z). The genus two chiral superstring measure
is (cf. [5,6]):
[(2) ]4 ( (2) )6 [(2) ]( (2) )

dij
d (2) =
16 6 10 ( (2) )
ij
so that

4

(2)

d (2) = c2 (2) (2) 6 (2) (2) dB .
Note that [(2) ]4 ( (2) )6 [(2) ]( (2) ) is a modular form of weight 2 + 6 = 8 on a subgroup of
Sp(4, Z).
The genus three bosonic measure is [2,14]:
c3
dij ,
d(3)
B =
(3)
9 ( )
ij
where 92 ( (3) ) is a Siegel modular form of weight 18 for Sp(6, Z) (cf. [11] for 9 ).
569
In [8, Eq. (1.1)], DHoker and Phong propose that the genus three chiral superstring measure
is of the form
[(3) ]4 ( (3) )6 [(3) ]( (3) )

dij ,
d (3) =
8 4 9 ( (3) )
ij
and they give three constraints on the functions 6 [(3) ]( (3) ). However, they do not succeed in
finding functions which satisfy all their constraints (we will prove that there are indeed no such
functions in [4]).
This leads us to weaken the proposal of [8] and to search for functions 8 [(3) ]( (3) ),
these should behave like the products [(3) ]4 ( (3) )6 [(3) ] which occur in the numerator of
d[(3) ]. So we assume that for g = 3:

(g)
d (g) = cg 8 (g) (g) dB ,
(2)
where the functions 8 [(3) ]( (3) ) satisfy three constraints which are obtained from those imposed on the functions [(3) ]4 ( (3) )6 [(3) ]( (3) ) in [8]. For example, in [8] the function
6 [(3) ]( (3) ) is required to be a Siegel modular form of weight 6 on a subgroup of Sp(6, Z),
and we require that 8 [] is a Siegel modular form of weight 2 + 6 = 8 on a subgroup of
Sp(6, Z). We give the three constraints on the 8 [(3) ] in Section 2.3. The main result of this
paper is that functions 8 [(3) ] which satisfy all three constraints actually exist, the uniqueness
of such functions will be shown in [4].
In general, one should keep in mind that since the canonical bundle on the moduli space Mg
(g)
of genus g curves is 13, where is the Hodge bundle, the bosonic measure dB transforms as
(g)
a modular form of weight 13 (so the sections of f dB of the canonical bundle correspond to
modular forms f of weight 13). The chiral superstring measure is known to transform as a section
of 5 under the action of a subgroup of Sp(2g, Z) (see [9] and [15,16] for the supersymmetric
case). Thus, taking only the transformation behaviour into account, it is not unreasonable to
expect that Eq. (2) should hold for general g, for some function 8 [] which corresponds to a
section of 8. As we just observed, this is proven to work for g = 1, 2 and for g = 3 we can at
least find unique 8 [(3) ] which satisfy reasonable constraints.
2.3. The modular forms 8 []
The discussion above thus leads us to search for functions

a1 ...ag
8 (g) : Hg C, where (g) = b1 ...bg

is an even characteristic, that is ai , bi {0, 1} and
ai bi 0 mod 2. It is convenient to define
8 [(g) ] = 0 in case is an odd characteristic.
Actually, the 8 [(g) ]s should be defined on the subvariety Jg Hg of period matrices of
Riemann surfaces of genus g (note that dim Jg = 3g 3 and dim Hg = g(g + 1)/2). As we do
not consider the cases g > 3 in this paper we will write Hg instead of Jg .
In order to formulate constraints for these functions for all g, we require that in case g = 1
one has:

8 (1) ( ) := (1) ( )4 ( )12 ,
see Section 2.2. Then, almost copying [8], we impose the constraints:
570
(i) The functions 8 [(g) ] are holomorphic on Hg .

(ii) Under the action of Sp(2g, Z) on Hg , these functions should transform as follows:

8 M (g) (M ) = det(C + D)8 8 (g) ( ),
(3)
for all M Sp(2g, Z), here the action of M on the characteristic is given by
t

t t
a c
(C D)0
A B
D C
c
a
b := d ,
mod 2,
t d = B
tb +
C D
A
(At B)0
where N0 = (N11 , . . . , Ngg ) is the diagonal of the matrix N .
(iii) The restriction of these functions to reducible period matrices is a product of the corresponding functions in lower genus. More precisely, let

k
0
k,gk := k,gk :=
Hg : k Hk , gk Hgk
= Hk Hgk .
0 gk
Then we require that for all k, 0 < k < g,
a1 ...ak ak+1 ...ag
a ...a
ak+1 ...ag
8 b1 ...bk bk+1 ...bg (k,gk ) = 8 b11...bkk (k )8 bk+1 ...bg (gk )
a1 ...ag
for all even characteristics (g) = b1 ...bg and all k,gk k,gk .
2.4. Remark: Comparison with [8]
We compare these constraints with those of DHoker and Phong in [8] for the functions 6 [] on H3 . The only essential difference is in constraint (ii). Note that the products
[]4 ( )6 []( ), with 6 [] as in their constraint (ii) and H3 , transforms in the same
way as our 8 [] but with a factor (M, )4+4 . However (M, )8 = 1, so []4 ( )6 []( )
transforms as 8 []. Conversely, if each 8 [] were a product of []4 and another function,
these other functions would satisfy constraint (ii) of [8].
2.5. Remark on condition (ii)
Let g (2) be the (normal) subgroup of Sp(2g, Z) defined by:

g (2) = ker Sp(2g, Z) Sp(2g, F2 )

= M Sp(2g, Z): A D I, B C 0 mod 2 ,
a
where we write F2 := Z/2Z for the field with two elements. For M g (2) we have M b =
a
a
(g)
b for all characteristics b , hence the 8 [ ] are modular forms of genus g and weight 8
on g (2).
2.6. Remark on condition (iii)
In [8], the third constraint is imposed for an arbitrary separating degeneration. However, any
such degeneration is obtained from the one in condition (iii) by a symplectic transformation.
Thus one has to consider the functions 8 [](N k,gk ) for all N Sp(2g, Z). Constraint (ii)
shows that this amounts to considering 8 [N 1 ](k,gk ) (up to an easy factor) and constraint
(iii) determines this function.
2.7. Reduction to the case [(g) ] =
571
0
0
The second constraint, in particular Eq. (3), can be used to restrict the search for
the
2g1 (2g + 1) functions 8 [(g) ] to that of a single one, for which we choose 8 00 with
0 0...0
= 0...0 . We work out the details of this reduction. In particular, we give the constraints
0

which the function 8 00 should satisfy and given this function we define functions 8 [(g) ],
for all even characteristics (g) , which satisfy the constraints from Section 2.3.
0...0
Let g (1, 2) be the subgroup of Sp(2g, Z) which fixes the characteristic 00 := 0...0
:

g (1, 2) := M g : M 00 00 mod 2

= M g : diag AtB diag C t D 0 mod 2 .

For M g (1, 2) we required that 8 00 (M ) = (C + D)8 8 00 ( ), that is, 8 00 is a
modular form on g (1, 2) of weight 8.

Given such a modular form 8 00 on g (1, 2) we now define, for each even characteristic
a function 8 [] in such a way that Eq. (3) holds. As the group Sp(2g, Z) acts transitively
(g)
on the
even characteristics, for any even characteristic [ ] there is an M Sp(2g, Z) with
M 00 = [(g) ] mod 2 and then we define, with as in Section 2.1,

8

8 (g) ( ) := M, M 1 8 00 M 1 .
(4)
(g) ] does not depend on the choice of M: if also

It is easy to check that the definition of

80 [
0
(g)
1
N 0 = [ ] mod 2, then N M fixes 0 so N 1 M g (1, 2). To verify that
8
?
8

M, M 1 8 00 M 1 = N, N 1 8 00 N 1
we let = M , so we must verify that

8

?
(M, )8 8 00 ( ) = N, N 1 M 8 00 N 1 M .
As N 1 M g (1, 2) and satisfies the cocycle condition, we get

8

8
8
N, N 1 M 8 00 N 1 M = N, N 1 M N 1 M, 8 00 ( )

= (M, )8 8 00 ( ),
which verifies the desired identity. Finally we show that the functions 8 [(g) ] satisfy constraint
(ii) of Section 2.3. So with M, (g) as above, we must verify that for all N Sp(2g, Z) we have
?
8 [N ](N ) = (N, )8 8 []( ).

As N = N M 00 , we have:

8

8 [N ](N ) = N M, (N M)1 N 8 00 (N M)1 N
8

= N M, M 1 8 00 M 1

8

= (N, )8 M, M 1 8 00 M 1
= (N, )8 8 []( ),
572

where we used the cocycle relation. Thus the second constraint is verified if 8 00 satisfies the
(g)
constraint (ii0 ) belowand
if the 8 [ ] are defined as in Eq. (4).
0
(ii0 ) The function 8 0 is a modular form 8 of weight 8 on g (1, 2).
Next we show that, in case g 3, constraint (iii) follows from the constraints:
(iii0 ) (1) For all k, 0 < k < g, and all k,gk k,gk we have

8 00 (k,gk ) = 8 00 (k )8 00 (gk ).
ab...
with ac = 1 then 8 [(g) ](1,g1 ) = 0.
(iii0 ) (2) If (g) = cd...
Obviously (iii) implies (iii0 ) (1), (2). We will only show how to use (iii0 ) (1). Let
a1 ...ag
a ...a
ak+1 ...ag
(k) := b11...bkk ,
(gk) := bk+1 ...bg
(g) = b1 ...bg ,
and assume that (k) is even, then also (gk) is even.
matrices M1
Thus there are symplectic

Sp(2k, Z) and M2 Sp(2(g k), Z) such that M1 00 = [(k) ] and M2 00 = [(gk) ]. Hence
the matrix M Sp(2g, Z) obtained from
M1 , M2 in the obvious way has the properties: M

(k,gk ) = k,gk and (g) = M 00 . As M, k,gk are made up of k k and (g k) (g k)
blocks one has

(g) = M 00 .
M, M 1 k,gk = M1 , M11 k M2 , M21 gk ,
Moreover, M 1 k,gk is the matrix in k,gk with blocks M11 k and M21 gk . Thus if
(iii0 ) (1) is satisfied we have:

8 00 M 1 k,gk = 8 00 M11 k 8 00 M21 gk .
Then we have:

8
8 (g) (k,gk ) = M, M 1 8 00 M 1 k,gk
8
8

= M1 , M11 k M2 , M21 gk 8 00 M11 k

8 00 M21 gk

= 8 (k) (k )8 (gk) (gk ),
so for these (g) the functions 8 [(g) ] satisfy (iii).
3. Siegel modular forms
3.1. Theta constants
Modular forms of even weight on g (2) can be obtained as products of the even theta constants

a
t
t
ei( (m+a/2) (m+a/2)+ (m+a/2)b)
b ( ) :=
mZg

with a = (a1 , . . . , ag ),b = (b1 , . . . , bg ), ai , bi {0, 1} and ai bi 0 mod 2 (note that we write
a
a, b as row vectors in b but as column vectors in m + a/2, t (m + a/2)b). These theta constants
are modular forms, of weight 1/2, for a subgroup of Sp(2g, Z).
It is convenient to define the 2g theta constants:

[ ]( ) := 0 (2 ), [ ] = [1 2
573
g ], i {0, 1}, Hg .
The [ ] have the advantage that they are algebraically independent for g 2 and there is a
unique relation of degree 16 for g = 3, whereas there are many algebraic relations between the
[]s, for example Jacobis relation in g = 1.
3.2. A classical formula
A classical formula for theta functions shows that any []2 is a linear combination of products of two [ ]s. Note that there are 2g functions [ ] and thus there are (2g + 1)2g /2 =
2g1 (2g + 1) products [ ][ ]. This is also the number of even characteristics, and the products [ ][ ] span the same space (of modular forms of weight 1) as the []2 s.
The classical formula used here is (cf. [12, IV.1, Theorem 2]):
2

=
(1) [ ][ + ],

where we sum over the 2g vectors and is an even characteristic, so 0 mod 2. These
formulae are easily inverted to give:
1
2
[ ][ + ] = g
(1) .
2

3.2.1. Example
In case g = 1 one has
2
00 = [0]2 + [1]2 ,
or, equivalently,
2
2
[0]2 = 00 + 10 /2,
2
[0][1] = 01 /2.
0 2
1
= [0]2 [1]2 ,
1 2
0
= 2[0][1],
2
2
[1]2 = 00 10 /2,
Note that upon substituting the first three relations in Jacobis relation
one obtains a trivial identity in the [ ]s.
0 4
0
0 4
1
1 4
0
3.3. The case g = 1

4 12
In the genus one case, the modular forms 8[]
are
given
1 by 8 [] = [] . A classical
0
0
3
formula for the Dedekind function is: = 0 1 0 , so
4 4 4
12 = 00 10 01

2
2
2
= [0]2 + [1]2 [0]2 [1]2 2[0][1] .
Another useful formula for 12 is closely related to Jacobis relation:

12
12
12
312 = 00 10 01 ,
574
a
it suffices to use the classical formulas, expressing the b s in the [ ]s, to verify the identity.

4
The function 8 00 = 00 12 is a modular form on 1 (1, 2) of weight eight. Another
4
modular form of the same type is 00 f21 ( ) with
f21 := 2
0 12
0
0 12
1
1 12
0
Below we write some other modular forms, which we will need later, in terms of f21 , 12 :
0
1
= f21 + 12 ,
3
12
8
8
4 8
4 4
0 4 0 8
0 0 + 10 + 01 = 00 + 00 00 2 10 01

1
1
12
12
=
f21 +
f21 +
+
212
3
3
2
= f21 ,
3
0 12
1 12
12
0 12
+ 1
+ 0
= f21 00
0
12
2
= f21 12 ,
3
12
0 4 1 8
4 8
8
8
0 4 0 8
0 1 + 0 0 = 00 00 + 10 + 01 00

2
1
= f21
f21 + 12
3
3
1
= f21 12 .
3
3.4. The case g = 2
In case g = 2, we define three holomorphic functions on H2 :

00 12
00 4
,
f2 :=
[]12 ,
f3 := 00
[]8 ,
f1 := 00
00 4
where we sum over the 10 even characteristics in genus 2. The functions 00
fi , i = 1, 2, 3,
are modular forms
of
weight
8
for
(1,
2),
see
Appendix
B.3.
2

The function []16 is a modular form on Sp(4, Z), and hence is a modular form of weight
00 4

fi and []16
8 for 2 (1, 2), but we do not need it. In [4] we will show that the three 00
are a basis of the modular forms of weight8 on
2 (1, 2).
00
The third constraint on the function 8 00
is:
8
00
00
4
4
(1,1 ) = 00 12 (1 ) 00 12 (1 ),
where 1,1 = diag(1 , 1 ) and 1 , 1 H1 . We try to determine ai C such that

factors in this way for such period matrices. Note that
a

ab
(1,1 ) = c (1 ) db (1 ),
cd
00 4
00
i ai fi
575
ab
00
4
4
(1,1 ) = 0 if ac = 1. As 00
(1,1 ) produces 00 (1 ) 00 (1 ), it remains
in particular cd
to find ai such that
12 (1 )12 (1 ) = (a1 f1 + a2 f2 + a3 f3 )(1,1 ).
Using the results from 3.3, the restrictions of the fi are:
12
12
00 12
(1,1 ) = 00 (1 ) 00 (1 )
00

1
1
12
12
f21 +
=
(1 ) f21 +
(1 ),
3
3

12
12
12
12
12
12
12
(1 ) 00 + 10 + 01
(1 )
[] (1,1 ) = 00 + 10 + 01

2
2
12
12
f21
(1 ) f21
(1 ),
=
3
3

4 8
8
8
00 4
8
(1 )
[] (1,1 ) = 00 00 + 10 + 01
00
4 8
8
8
00 00 + 10 + 01
(1 )
2
2
= f21 (1 ) f21 (1 ).
3
3

Next we require that the term f21 (1 ) disappears in the linear combination ( ai fi )(1,1 ), that
gives

2
1
2
a1 f21 + 12 + 2a2 f21 12 + 2a3 f21 (1 ) = 0
3
3
3
for all 1 H1 . This gives two linear equations for the ai which have a unique solution, up to
scalar multiple:
a1 + 4a2 + 4a3 = 0,
a1 2a2 = 0,
hence (a1 , a2 , a3 ) = (4, 2, 3).
A computation shows that (4f1 + 2f2 3f3 )(1,2 ) = 612 (1 )12 (1 ). Thus we conclude that

00
00 4
00 4
00 12
12
8
8 00 := 00
+2
[] 3 00
[] /6
4 00
satisfies the constraints. We will show in [4] that this is the unique modular form on 2 (1, 2)
satisfying the constraints.
00 4 00
00
As 00
the modular form determined
6 00 satisfies the same constraints (with 6 00
by DHoker and Phong in [5,6]) we obtain from the uniqueness (or from a direct computation
using the methods of [3]) that

00
00 12
00 4
12
8
6 00 = 4 00
+2
[] 3 00
[] /6.
Another formula for this function is:

00
00 01 10 4 00 01 11 4 00 10 11 4
= 11
00 01
01 10 00
10 00 11 ,
6 00
which is the one found
00 by DHoker and Phong in [6], to check the equality between the two
one can use the classical theta formula.
expressions for 6 00
576
4. The genus three case

4.1. Modular forms in genus three
In case g = 3, the 8 [ ]s define a holomorphic map

H3 P7 ,
[000]( ):. . .:[111]( ) .
The closure of the image of this map is a 6-dimensional projective variety which is defined by
a homogeneous polynomial F16 (in eight variables) of degree 16. In particular, the holomorphic
function F16 (. . . , [ ]( ), . . .) is identically zero on H3 .
To write down F16 we recall the following relation, which holds for all H3 :

000
( ),
0ab
r1 r2 = r3 , with r1 =
r2 =
a,bF2
000
1ab
( ),
a,bF2
r3 =
100
0ab
( ).
a,bF2
From this we deduce that 2r1 r2 = r12 + r22 r32 and thus

r14 + r24 + r34 2 r12 r22 + r12 r32 + r22 r32
is zero, as function of , on H3 . Let F16 be the homogeneous polynomial, of degree 16 in the
[ ]s, obtained (using the classical theta formula (3.2)) from this polynomial (of degree 8) in
the []2 . In [10] it is shown that F16 is not zero as a polynomial in the eight [ ]. Thus the
polynomial F16 defines the image of H3 P7 .
A computer computation, using once again the classical formula, shows that F16 coincides,
up to a scalar multiple, with the degree 16 polynomial in the [ ] obtained from

2

16
8
8
[]
[]
by the classical theta formulas.

4.2. The functions Fi
000
of weight
In analogy with the genus two case, we now want to find a modular form 8 000
8 on 3 (1, 2) which restricts to the diagonal 1,2 as
000

00
4
00 4 00
8 000
(1,2 ) = 8 00 (1 )8 00
(2 ) = 00 12 (1 ) 00
6 00 (2 ),
where 1,2 H3 is the block diagonal matrix with entries 1 H1 and 2 H2 . An obvious
generalization of the functions fi which we considered earlier in Section 3.4 are:

000 12
000 4
,
F2 :=
[]12 ,
F3 := 000
[]8 ,
F1 := 000
000 4
where the sum is over the 36 even characteristics in genus three. The functions 000
Fi are
modular forms of weight 8 on 3 (1, 2), see Appendix B.3. However, there is no linear combination of these three
which has the desired restriction. Therefore we introduce another

000 functions
of weight 8 on 3 (1, 2) in the next section.
modular form G 000
577
4.3. The modular forms G[]

For each even characteristic in g = 3 we define a modular form G[] of weight 8 on 3 (2).
For a brief introduction to characteristics, quadrics and isotropic subspaces see Appendix A.
An even characteristic corresponds to a quadratic form
q : V = F62 F2
which satisfies q (v + w) = q (v) + q (w) + E(v, w) where E(v, w) :=
abc
v3+i wi ). If = def
then:
i=1 (vi w3+i
q (v) = v1 v4 + v2 v5 + v3 v6 + av1 + bv2 + cv3 + dv4 + ev5 + f v6 ,

v v v
where v = (v1 , . . . , v6 ) V , we will also write v = v41v52v63 . Let Q = {v V : q (v) = 0} be
the corresponding quadric in V .
A Lagrangian (i.e. maximally isotropic subspace) L V is a subspace of V such that
abc
E(v, w) = 0 for all v, w L and such that dim L = 3. For example, the eight elements 000
V
with a, b, c F2 form a Lagrangian subspace L0 in V .
For such a subspace L we define a modular form on a subgroup of Sp(6, Z):
[Q ]2
PL :=
QL
here the product is over the even quadrics which contain L (there are eight such quadrics for each
L) and Q is the even characteristic corresponding to Q. In case L = L0 with

000 2
PL0 = (r1 r2 )2 =
abc
L0 := (v1 , . . . , v6 ) V : v4 = v5 = v6 = 0 ,
a,b,cF2
with r1 , r2 as in Section 4.1. The action of Sp(6, Z) on V =

permutes the Lagrangian
subspaces L, the subgroup 3 (2) acts trivially on V . Similarly, the PL are permuted by the action
of Sp(6, Z), see Appendix B.4, and as 3 (2) fixes all Ls, the PL are modular forms on 3 (2) of
weight 8.
For an even characteristic , the quadric Q contains 30 Lagrangian subspaces. The sum
of the 30 PL s, with L a Lagrangian subspace of Q , is a modular form G[] of weight 8 on
3 (2):

G[] :=
PL =
[Q ]2 .
Z6 /2Z6
LQ
LQ Q L
Note that []2 is one of the factors in each of the 30 products. As the PL are permuted by the
action of Sp(6, Z), also the G[] are permuted:
G[M ](M ) = det(C + D)8 G[]( ).
000
000
, the function G 000
is a modular form on 3 (1, 2).
As 3 (1, 2) fixes the characteristic 000
4.4. The restriction
000
000 4
Fi , i = 1, 2, 3 and G 000
Now we try to find a linear combination of the functions 000
which satisfies the third constraint:
0 4 12
00 4 00
000 4
000
0 (1 ) 00
(1,2 ).
6 00 (2 ) = 000
(b1 F1 + b2 F2 + b3 F3 ) + b4 G 000
578
It is easy to see that the theta constants satisfy:

abc
a
bc
def
(1,2 ) = d (1 ) ef
(2 ),
abc
in particular def
0 if ad = 1. Thus 6 of the 36 even theta constants map to zero, the other
30 = 3 10 are uniquely decomposed in the product of two even theta constants for g = 1 and
g = 2 respectively.
the results from (3.3), the functions Fi (1,2 ) are then easy to describe,
000Using

the function G 000
(1,2 ) is determined in Appendix C.3. The restrictions to 1,2
= H 1 H2
are:
000 12
12 00 12
000
= 00 00
|1,2

00 12
1
12
=
,
f21 +
00
3

12
12
12
[]12
= 00 + 10 + 01
[]12
|1,2

=

000 4
8
[]
000
2
f21 12
3
|1,2

[]12 ,

0 4 0 8
0 8
1 8 00 4
8
= 0 0 + 1 + 0 00
[]

00 4
2
8
= f21 00
[]
,
3
000
G 000
|
1,2

0 4 1
f21 12
0
3

00 4 1 00 12 2
1 00 4
+
[]12 00
[]8 .
00
00
3
3
2
000
000 4
to 1,2 , note that
(b1 F1 + b2 F2 + b3 F3 ) + b4 G 000
Thus we found the restriction of 000
000 4
0 4
00 4
the function 000 in front of the Fi gives the function 0 (1 ) 00 (2 ). In particular, the
4 00 4
4
restriction has a factor 00 00
. In order that this restriction is a multiple of 00 12 we
need that the term f21 disappears, which leads to the equation

00 12
00 4
b1 00
+ 2b2
[]12 + 2b3 00
[]8

+ b4

1 00 4
1 00 12 2
+
[]12 00
[]8 = 0.
00
3
3
2
There is a unique solution (up to scalar multiple):

(b1 , b2 , b3 , b4 ) = (4, 4, 3, 12) ( C).
00
from Section 3.4 one finds:
With = 1 and the formula for 6 00
579
000 4
000
000 (4F1 + 4F2 3F3 ) 12G 000
(1,2 )

00 4
00 4
4
00 12
+4
[]12 6 00
[]8 (2 )
= 00 12 (1 ) 00
8 00
4
00 4 00
= 12 00 12 (1 ) 00
6 00 (2 ).
000
Hence the modular form 8 000 , of weight 8 on 3 (1, 2) defined by
000 000 4
000
:= 000 (4F1 + 4F2 3F3 ) 12G 000
/12
8 000
000
=
satisfies all the constraints except maybe (iii0 ) (2). To check this last constraint, let M 000
000
000
000
abc
2

def with ad = 1, so a = d = 1. As G 000 ( ) = 000 ( )G 000 ( ) for a holomorphic
000 abc
abc
, G def (M ) is the product of 2 def
( ) and a holomorphic function,
function G 000
abc
abc
1
bc
2
2
hence G def (M 1,2 ) = 0 because def (1,2 ) = 1 (1 ) 2 ef
(2 ) = 0.
000
We conclude that 8 000 , defined as above, satisfies all three constraints.
In [4] we will show that it is the only modular form of weight 8 on 3 (1, 2) which satisfies
the constraints. This then implies that the desired functions 6 [] from [8] indeed do not exist
000
000 4
because G 000
is not the product of 000
with a modular form of weight 6.
4.5. The cosmological constant
In supersymmetric string theories one expects for the cosmological constant to vanish because
of perfect cancellation between the positive contribution from bosonic states and the negative
one from fermionic states. As a consistency check we will show that our solution for the chiral
measure gives a vanishing contribution to the cosmological constant. Like in [6], for type II
strings the GSO projections gives c, = 1 and we will prove that

d[] = 0, equivalently
8 [] ( ) = 0
for all H3 .
The sum of the 36 functions 8 [] is invariant under Sp(6, F2 ), hence it is a modular
form of

weight 8 on Sp(6, Z). In [4] we will show that it must then be a scalar multiple of []16 :

16
8 [] ( ) =
[] ( ).
The function
8 []
is given by:

2

[]16 + 4
[]4
, [ ]12 3
[]8 12
G[],
4
where the constants , = 1 are determined by the transformation theory of the theta constants.
We will show that = 0 by taking first = diag(1 , 2 , 3 ) and then let 1 , 2 , 3 i. On
the theta constants this gives

abc
[]16 8,
1 if a = b = c = 0,
def
hence
8
0 else,
[] 8.
580

In the summand []4 ( , [ ]12 ) we thus need only consider the terms with =

0 0
, = b . The terms with = b0 are summands of 8 b0 ( ). Let M be the symplectic
b
matrix

0
I B
, B = diag(b1 , b2 , b3 ), so M b0 = b+b
M=
.
0 I

In particular, M 00 = b0 and thus 8 b0 ( ) = 8 00 (M 1 ) (note that (M, M 1 ) = 1).
From the definition of the theta constants as series in 3.1 it is obvious that

0 4
4
( )
b0 M 1 = b+b

0 0
hence , = +1 if = b , = b . Thus we get:

4
0 12
0
4

12
[]
, [ ]
b
0 0 b

8 8 = 64.
b
b
Finally, each G[] is a sum of PL s and each PL is a product of eight distinct theta constants.
000

Thus all PL s map to zero except for PL0 := d,e,f def
which maps to 1. Note that L0 =
abc
000
and that L0 Q iff = def . Thus exactly 8 of the G[] map to one, and the others
000
map to zero. The constant can now be determined:
4 8 + 4 82 3 64 12 8 = 8 = 0,
hence the cosmological constant is zero.
5. A conjecture of DHoker and Phong
In [7, Section 4.1], DHoker and Phong conjecture that:

2g 8 ( ) 42 ( ) = 0 Jg ( Hg ) ,
where Jg is the closure in Hg of the set of all period matrices of Riemann surfaces of genus g,
in all genera g, where ([7, (3.10)])

4k ( ) :=
[]8k ( ),
the sum is over the 2g1 (2g + 1) even characteristics . They verify this conjecture for g = 1, 2.
The conjecture is actually known to be true for g 4, due to results of Igusa in [13] which we
briefly sketch now. Schottky discovered a modular form J of weight 8 on H4 , whose zero locus
is known to be J4 . According to [13, Theorem 1 and its proof], the modular form J is, up to a
scalar multiple, equal to
4

2

2 4 ( ) 24 8 ( ) = 28 24 8 ( ) 42 ( )
(use that Igusas s0,16 = 8 , cf. his definition on p. 356). This verifies the conjecture for g = 4.
For the case g = 3 we already verified the conjecture in Section 4.1. Alternatively, one can
use the Siegel operator, which is:
(f )(g1 ) := lim f (g1,1 ),
g i
581
where g1,1 is the matrix in Hg with diagonal blocks g1 Hg1 and g H1 (and the other
abcd
to zero if d = 1 and else the result
coefficients are zero). It is easy to verify that maps efgh
abc
2
4
is efg . Thus applying the Siegel operator to 2 8 4 we get:

24 8 42 (3 ) = 25 8 (24 )2 (3 ) = 4 23 8 42 (3 ).
As any element in H3 , viewed as boundary component of H4 , is in the closure of J4 , the modular
form 23 8 42 , of weight 8 on Sp(6, Z) is identically zero on H3 .
6. Conclusions
In this paper we considered the problem of finding the chiral measure for supersymmetric
strings. We have taken the stance that the vacuum to vacuum amplitude should split as in (1).
Such a point of view requires a detailed analysis of the geometry of the moduli space of superRiemann surfaces, however, we did not perform such an analysis here.
Instead, we determined the weakest possible constraints that should be obeyed by the measures d[(3) ] in order to provide a modular invariant expression for the vacuum to vacuum
amplitude. Our constraints are a slight modification of the ones of DHoker and Phong in [8].
Using the transformation properties of certain basic functions under suitable subgroups of the
modular group, we found that it suffices to consider only one fixed spin structure. This led us to
consider modular forms of weight 8 on 3 (1, 2) and we explicitly identified the constraints on
these modular forms.
The strategy for searching solutions has been to use group representation theory on the space
of modular forms. This permitted us to reproduce the genus g = 1, 2 results and to find a solution
for the g = 3 case. Indeed, it happens that our solution is also unique, but this will be proved
in [4], together with a systematic study of the modular group representation on modular forms
on 3 (2). We also checked that our result is consistent with the vanishing of the cosmological
constant, and proved a conjecture of DHoker and Phong.
Although the question of the chiral splitting for superstrings in the genus g = 3 case is open,
we think that our results provide some evidence for a positive answer.
Appendix A. Characteristics and quadrics
We recall the basics about characteristics, in particular their relation to quadratic forms on
2g
V = F2 , where F2 := Z/2Z is the field with two elements (cf. [12, 5.6], but we use the additive convention). We introduce a symplectic form on V (so E is non-degenerate, bilinear and
E(v, v) = 0 for all v V ),
E : V V F2 ,
E(v, w) := v1 wg+1 + v2 wg+2 + + vg w2g + vg+1 w1 + + v2g wg .
We consider the quadratic forms q on V whose associated bilinear form is E, that is the maps
q : V F2 ,
q(v + w) = q(v) + q(w) + E(v, w).
Note that q(ax) = a 2 q(x) = aq(x) for a F2 , i.e., a = 0, 1. If q, q are such quadratic
forms then, as 2 = 0 in F2 , q + q (defined as usual: (q + q )(v) = q(v) + q (v)) is linear
in v: (q + q )(v + w) = (q + q )(v) + (q + q )(w) and hence there is a w V such that
582
q (v) = q(v) + E(v, w) for all v V . Conversely, if E is associated to q and w V , then q ,

defined by q (v) = q(v) + E(v, w) also has E as associated bilinear form. Thus, once we fix q,
for each of the 22g elements w V we have obtained a quadratic form whose associated bilinear
form is E and all quadratic forms associated to E are obtained in this way. One verifies easily
that for all i , i F2 the function
q(v) = v1 vg+1 + v2 vg+2 + + vg v2g + 1 v1 + + g vg + 1 vg+1 + + g v2g
satisfies q(v +w) = q(v)+q(w)+E(v, w). In this way we obtain 22g quadratic forms associated
to E, and thus each of the 22g quadratic forms associated to E is defined by certain i , i , i =
1, . . . , g. The characteristic associated to q is defined as
q :=
1 2 ... g
1 2 ... g
let e(q ) := (1)

i=1 i i

{1, 1} .
We say that q (or q) is even if e(q ) = +1 and odd else. One can verify that
e(q )2g =
(1)q(v) .
vV
For example in case g = 1 and

q(v) = v1 v2 then q(v) = 0 for v = (0, 0), (0, 1), (1, 0) and
q(v) = 1 for v = (1, 1) so 2e( 00 ) = 3 1 = 2; if q(v) = v1 v2 + v1 + v2 then q(v) = 1 ex
cept if v = (0, 0) so 2e 11 = 1 3 = 2. It follows that q(v) has 2g1 (2g + 1) zeroes in V
if q is even and has 2g1 (2g 1) zeroes if q is odd. Moreover, there are 2g1 (2g + 1) even
characteristics and 2g1 (2g 1) odd characteristics.
The group Sp(2g, Z) acts on V = Z2g /(2Z)2g , the subgroup g (2) (see 2.5) acts trivially, so
we get an action of the quotient Sp(2g, Z)/g (2)
= Sp(2g, F2 ) (cf. [12, V.6, Lemma 25]) on V .
Let q : V F2 be a quadratic form associated to E, then we define a function q on V by

( q)(v) := q 1 v
v V , Sp(2g, Z) .
As E( 1 v, 1 w) = E(v, w) for Sp(2g, Z) and v, w V , one verifies that also q is a
quadratic form associated to E. Obviously q and q have the same number of zeroes, so the
parity of q and q are the same: e( q) = e(q). The group Sp(2g,
Z) acts transitively on the
even and the odd quadrics (cf. [12, V.6, Proposition 3]). If q = and we write v = (v , v )
g
as a row vector with v , v F2 , then q(v) = v t v + t v + t v . With the formula for 1
from Section B.2 one then easily verifies that
q q mod 2
with q as in Section 2.3. Thus the interpretation of characteristics as parameters for quadrics
associated to E leads to a transformation formula which is exactly the one of the characteristics
of the theta constants [] when we consider the modulo two.
A subspace W V is isotropic if E(w, w ) = 0 for all w, w W . Given a basis e1 , . . . , ek
of W it is not hard to see that one can extend it to a symplectic basis e1 , . . . , e2g of V (so
E(ei , ej ) = 0 unless |i j | = g and then E(ei , ej ) = 1). In particular, the group Sp(2g, Z) acts
transitively on the isotropic subspaces of V of a given dimension. The number of k-dimensional
2g
isotropic subspaces of V
= F2 is given by
583
(22g 1)(22g1 2)(22g4 4) . . . (22g(k1) 2k1 )

GL(k, F2 )
=
(22g 1)(22g1 2)(22g2 4) . . . (22g(k1) 2k1 )

(2k 1)(2k 2) . . . (2k 2k1 )
(22g 1)(22g2 1)(22g4 1)(22g6 1) . . . (22(gk)+2 1)

,
(2k 1)(2k1 1) . . . (2 1)
in the numerator we count the ordered k-tuples of independent elements v1 , . . . , vk V with

E(vi , vj ) = 0 for all i, j : for v1 we can take any element in V {0}, for v2 we can take any
2g1
except 0, v1 , so v2 v1 v1 , next v3 v1 , v2 v1 , v2 .
element in v1
= F2
If W1 , . . . , WN are the k-dimensional isotropic subspaces in an even quadric Q V defined
by q = 0, then (W1 ), . . . , (WN ) are the k-dimensional isotropic subspaces in the even quadric
(Q) V defined by q = 0, indeed ( q)( v) = q(v). In particular, any even quadric
in V contains the same number of isotropic subspaces of a given
An

even quadric
v1 ...vdimension.
g
:
v
is contained in
F
contains a maximal isotropic subspace L, for example L0 =
i
2
0...0 0...0
the even quadric Q corresponding to the characteristic 0...0 . An odd quadric does not contain
a maximal isotropic subspace however: if L Q were such a subspace,
then (L) = L0 for a
suitable Sp(2g, Z), if (Q) corresponds to the characteristic then L0 (Q) implies
that 1 = = g = 0, hence the characteristic must be even. On the other hand, an odd quadric

...vg1 0
: v i F2
does contain an isotropic subspace of dimension g 1, for example W0 = v01...
0
0
0...01
is contained in the odd quadric with characteristic 0...01
.
The number of even quadrics which contain a fixed k-dimensional isotropic subspace is easy
to count: we may assume that the subspace has basis e1 , . . . , ek and then the characteristic of an
even quadric containing it is

0
1
...
...
0
k
k+1

k+1
...
...
g
g

with
g

k+i k+i
= 0,
i=k+1
so one has 2k 2gk1 (2gk + 1) such even quadrics. To find the number of k-dimensional
isotropic subspaces in an even quadric one can now count the pairs (W, Q) of such a subspace
W contained in even quadric Q in two ways: first as the product of the number of W with
the number of even Q containing a fixed W and second as the product of the number of even
quadrics with the number of k-dimensional isotropic subspaces in an even quadric. For example
the number of pairs (W, Q) of a maximally isotropic subspace in an even quadric in F62 is 135 23 ,
and thus the number of such subspaces in a fixed Q is 135 23 /36 = 30.
For small g we list some of these dimensions in Table 1 on the left, in Table 1 on the right we
list the number of k-dimensional isotropic subspaces contained in an even quadric.
Table 1
g
1
2
3
4
dimension
1
2
3
15
15
63
315
255
5355
g
3
135
11475
2295
1
2
3
4
dimension
1
2
2
9
6
35
105
135
1575
30
2025
270
584
Appendix B. Transformation theory of theta constants

B.1. Transformation formula for the []
We recall the transformation formula for the functions [], for an even characteristic as
given in [12, V.1,
Corollary].
a
Let = b with row vectors a, b Zg and ai , bi {0, 1}. We consider the characteristic m =
(m , m ) (Rg )2 given by m = a/2, m = b/2. Then []( ) = m ( ) and for Sp(2g, Z)
the transformation formula is:

A B
Sp(2g, Z),
m ( ) = ( )e2im ( ) (, )1/2 m ( ), =
C D
where ( ) is an eight root of unity ([12, V.3, Theorem 3]), is as in Section 2.1 and
m ( ) =
g

1 t
DB kl ak al 2 t BC kl ak bl + t CA kl bk bl
8
k,l=1

1 t
D kl ak t C kl bk At B ll .
4
B.2. Transformation formula for the []4

We apply this formula above to m4 , so we get the factor ( )4 exp(8im ( )) (, ). As
exp(2in) = 1 for integers n, we obtain:
e8im ( ) = (1)a
t DB t a+bt CAt b
The condition that Sp(2g, Z) is that E t = E where E has blocks A = D = 0, B =

C = I :

B t A + A t B B t C + At D
0 I
=
.
E t = E iff
I 0
D t A + C t B D t C + C t D
As E 1 = E we find that
1 = E t E,
1 =
t B
tA
tD
t C

.
As Sp(2g, Z), also 1 Sp(2g, Z), thus satisfies also t BD t DB = 0 and t AC

= 0, that is, t DB and t CA are symmetric matrices. Hence the integers ak al , bk bl in
t
if k = l, and thus they do not cona DB t a + bCA t b are multiplied by an even integer

tribute to e8im ( ) . In the exponent there remains k (ak2 (t DB)kk + bk2 (t CA)kk ), but note that
ak2 ak mod 2. For a g g matrix M, let diag(M) be the column vector (M11 , M22 , . . . , Mgg )
of diagonal entries. Then we get the formula:
t CA
e8im ( ) = (1)a diag( DB)+b diag( CA) .

Next we consider the case that g (1, 2). Then also 1 g (1, 2) which implies that
the diagonals of t DB and t CA are zero mod 2, hence we conclude that e8im ( ) = 1 for all
g (1, 2).
A final remark is that m in [12] is computed in R2g whereas we normalize the characteristics modulo vectors in Z2g to have coefficients mi , mi {0, 1/2}. This is justified for the m4 by
formula (.2) in [12, I.10].
585
B.3. Applications
Let
0
0
f1 :=
0...0
0...0
0 12
0
be a genus g characteristic and let

f2 :=

12
(g) ,
f3 :=
0 4 (g) 8

,
0
(g)
(g)
4
where we sum over the even characteristics (g) in genus g. We show that the functions 00 fi ,
i = 1, 2, 3, are modular forms of weight 8 for g (1, 2).
In the cases i = 1, 3 these functions are polynomials of degree two in the [(g) ]8 . The
transformation formula for m8 (note ( )8 = 1, e16im ( ) = 1), is in our notation:
8
8

(g) ( ) = (, )4 1 (g) ( ) Sp(2g, Z) .
Hence the []8 are permuted by the action of Sp(2g, Z), up to the common cocycle
4

(, )4 . In particular, if g (1, 2) then 1 00 = 00 and it follows that the 00 fi ,
i = 1, 3, are modular forms of weight 8 for g (1, 2).
In case i = 2 we use the formula for the m4 . For g (1, 2) we have e8im ( ) = 1 so in our
notation we get:
4
4

(g) ( ) = ( )4 (, )2 1 (g) ( ) g (1, 2) .
Hence the [(g) ]4 are permuted by the action of g (1, 2) up to a common (i.e. independent
4

of (g) ) factor ( )4 (, )2 and these fix 00 . Thus 00 f2 transforms with the factor
( )16 (, )8 , but as ( )8 = 1 for any Sp(2g, Z), this implies that it is a modular form of
weight 8 on g (1, 2).
B.4. Transformation formula for the PL
In Section 4.3 we defined, for a Lagrangian subspace L of V = F62 the function PL =
2
QL [Q ] where the product is over the eight even quadrics which contain L. We will show
that these functions are permuted, up to a factor (, )8 , by the action of Sp(6, Z).
We write representatives in Z6 for the eight elements of L as

(0)
(7)
(0)
(0)
(7)
(7)
x1
x2
x3
x1
x2
x3
(7)
L = p(0) =
=
,
.
.
.
,
p
,
(0)
(0)
(0)
y1(7) y2(7) y3(7)
y1
y2
y3

(j )
(j )
xk , yl
{0, 1},
and we will assume that p (0) =

7

j =0
(j )
xk
7

j =0
(j )
0
0
. As L is a subgroup of F62 , it is not hard to see that
yk 0 mod 4,
7

j =0
(j ) (j )
xk x l
7

j =0
(j ) (j )
yk yl
7

j =0
(j ) (j )
xk yl
0 mod 2
x
for k, l = 1, 2, 3 (use for example y xk (or yk ) is a homomorphism of L
= F32 to F2 and
thus each fiber has either 4 or 8 elements; similarly, the fibers of the homomorphism L F22 ,
x
y (xk , xl ) contain an even number of elements, etc.).
586
a

(j )
Let Q be one of the quadrics containing L with = b . Then (j ) := a+y(j ) is an even
b+x
characteristic:

t

a + y (j ) b + x (j ) = a t b + x (j ) t y (j ) + a t x (j ) + b t y (j ) 0 + q p (j ) mod 2,
with q the quadratic form defining Q ; as L Q we have q (p (j ) ) = 0 for all j and thus
a+y (j )
is indeed even. Moreover, L Q(j ) because
(j )
b+x

q(j ) p (k) = x (k) t y (k) + a + y (j ) t x (k) + b + x (j ) t y (k)

q p (k) + E p (j ) , p (k) 0 mod 2.
In this way, given , we get 7 other even characteristics (j ) of quadrics which contain L.
Therefore the characteristics of the eight even Q with Q L are:
a (j )
a (j ) a + y (j ) mod 2, b(j ) b + x (j ) mod 2, a (j ) , b(j ) {0, 1}.
(j ) ,
b
It follows that we have the following congruences for the coefficients of the characteristics:
7

j =0
(j )
ak
7
(j )
bk 0 mod 4,
j =0
7
(j ) (j )
ak al
j =0
7
(j ) (j )
bk bl
j =0
7
(j ) (j )
a k bl
0 mod 2.
j =0
The transformation formula for the theta constants, given in Appendix B.1, shows that
P L ( ) = ( )16 e
4i
j =0 mj ( )
(, )8 PL ( ),
where we wrote mj := (a (j ) , b(j ) )/2. As ( ) is an eight root of unity we get ( )16 = 1.

Aswe observed in Appendix B.2, the matrices t DB and t CA are symmetric. The first term in
2 j mj ( ) is then
7

3
7
3
(j )
t
(j ) (j ) 1

1 t
DB kl ak al =
DB kk
ak
4
4
k
j =0 k,l=1
j =0
7

3

1 t
(j ) (j )
DB kl
ak al
,
2
j =0
k<l
hence this is an integer. Similarly the third term (with
(tCA))

is an integer. The second term

3
7
3
7

t
(j ) (j ) 1

1 t
(j ) (j )
BC kl ak bl =
BC kl
a k bl
2
2
j =0 k,l=1
k,l=1
(j ) (j )
is an integer because j ak bl is even for all k, l. The
(j ) (j )
linear in each ak , bl and j ak j bk 0 mod 4.
j =0
last term is also an integer because it is
Again we observe that m in [12] is computed in R2g whereas we normalize the characteristics modulo vectors in Z2g to have coefficients mi , mi {0, 1/2}. This is justified for the m2 by
formula (.2) in [12, I.10].

Thus we showed that e
(, )8 PL ( ), as desired.
4i
7
j =0 mj ( )
= 1 for all and it follows that P (L) ( ) =
587
Appendix C. The restriction of the G[] to 1,2

C.1. The restriction of the PL s to the diagonal
Now we determine, for each Lagrangian subspace L V , the functions PL (1,2 ) which are
modular forms in both 1 and 2 .
a
bc
abc
(1,2 ) = b (1 ) ef
(2 ). This decomposition of the charWe already recalled that def
abc
acteristic = def corresponds to the restriction of the quadratic form q to the two summands
in:
000 100 000 100
, 000 , 100 , 100
V = l l , l := 000
so l is a two-dimensional symplectic subspace of V (that is, the restriction of the symplectic form
E to l l is non-degenerate) and its perpendicular is the four dimensional symplectic subspace

0ab
l := v V : E(v, w) = 0 w l = 0cd
V : a, . . . , d F2 .
The restriction of q to l (respectively l ) is the quadratic form on F22 (respectively on F42 ),
bc
a
):
associated to the characteristic d (respectively ef
q a (v1 , v4 ) = v1 v4 + av1 + dv4 ,
d
q bc (v2 , v3 , v5 , v6 ) = v2 v5 + v3 v6 + bv2 + cv3 + ev5 + f v6 ,

ef
and q = q a + q bc .
d
ef
Let L be a Lagrangian subspace in V and consider the intersection L l. As E is nondegenerate on l, but is identically zero on L, we cannot have l L. Thus dim L l 1. For
dimension reasons, dim L l 1 and it is at most two since L l is an isotropic subspace
of l . We will show that
dim L l = 0 dim L l = 1,
dim L l = 1 dim L l = 2.
An example of the first case is

000 000 110
000
L = 001
, 110 , 000 ,
L l = {0},
L l = 001
,
abc
whereas L0 = 000 is an example of the second case.
To prove the assertions, consider the exact sequence
0 L V L = Hom(L, F2 ) 0,
(v)(v ) := E(v, v ),
(v V , v L), note that ker() = L because so E(v, v ) = 0 for all v L implies v L by

maximality of L, hence dim im() = 6 3 = 3 = dim L .
In case L l is one-dimensional, that is, dim(ker() l ) = 1, the subspace (l ) is threedimensional so (l ) = L . Hence for any non-zero v L there is a v l with E(v, v ) = 0,
and thus L l = {0}. In case L l is two-dimensional, (l ) is also two-dimensional and
hence there is a w L {0} such that E(v, w) = 0 for all v l . Hence w l, so in this case
L l = {0, w}. This concludes the proofs of the assertions.
In the first case we claim that there exists an even q such that L (q = 0) and such that the
restriction of q to l is the odd quadratic form (with characteristic 11 ), hence PL is identically
588
zero on the diagonal. To see this, let w0 be the unique non-zero element in l L. Any w
L can be written uniquely as w = wl + wp with wl l and wp l . As L is isotropic, we
have 0 = E(w0 , w) = E(w0 , wp ) + E(w0 , wl ), but E(w0 , wl ) = 0 as w0 l and wl l, hence
E(w0 , wp ) = 0. Let q be an odd quadratic form on l which is zero in w0 : q (w0 ) = 0. Then
q (w0 + wp ) = q (w0 ) + q (wp ) + E(w0 , wp ) = q (wp ).
In case wp = 0, w0 , we cannot have q (wp ) = 0, since then q = 0 would contain the maximal
isotropic subspace w0 , wp of l , but odd quadrics do not contain maximal isotropic subspaces.
Hence q (wp ) = q (w0 + wp ) = 1 for any w L. Now let q be the unique odd quadratic form
on l and define
q : l l = V F2 ,
q(l0 , lp ) := q (l0 ) + q (lp ).
Then q is an even quadratic form on V which restricts to the odd quadratic form q on l. Moreover, L (q = 0) because if w L then either w = 0 and so obviously q(0) = 0, or w = w0 l
and q(w0 ) = q (w0 ) = 0 or w = wl +wp with wl = 0 and wp = 0, so q (wl ) = 1 and q (wp ) = 1
000
and then q = q 1f , with
hence q(w) = 0. (In the example above one has L l = 001
10

.) Thus the summands PL of G[] such that L l = {0}
f = 0, 1 and thus q = q with = 11f
110
are identically zero on the diagonal.
It remains to consider those L such that L l = {0, w} for a unique non-zero w = wL l.
In that case L l is a maximal (2-dimensional) isotropic subspace L0 of l . If L Q, the
restriction of Q to l contains L0 . There are four even quadratic forms q on l containing a
maximal isotropic subspace, let 1 , . . . , 4 be their characteristics. There are two even quadratic
forms q on l with q (w) = 0, let 1 , 2 be their characteristics. Defining, as before, q = q + q
we get 2 4 = 8 even quadrics which contain L. As L is contained in exactly eight quadrics, this
implies that these are exactly the quadrics containing L and the product of the squares of the
corresponding theta nulls is PL . This implies that PL restricts to

PL (1,2 ) = [1 ]8 [2 ]8 (1 ) [1 ]4 [2 ]4 [3 ]4 [4 ]4 (2 ).
C.2. The restriction of the G[]s to the diagonal
Now we determine, for each even , the functions G[](1,2 ) which are modular forms, of
weight 8, in both 1 and 2 .
abc
and ad = 1, then []
Recall that G[] is a multiple of []2 . In particular, if = def
restricts to zero on the diagonal H1 H2 and thus also G[] restricts to zero.
As we saw in Appendix C.1, the restriction of PL to H1 H2 is non-zero iff L l = {0, w}
for a non-zero w l. In that case L l = {0, wp , wp , wp + wp } for some wp , wp l is a
maximal isotropic subspace of l . In particular, L = (L l) (L l ). Thus these Lagrangian
subspaces correspond to pairs of a non-zero point in Q l and a Lagrangian plane in Q l .
Let Q V be the (even) quadric corresponding to and assume that ad = 0. Then
Q l is
a
an even quadric in l and consists of three points, 0 and w1 , w2 l (for example, if d = 10 then
v
Q l is defined by v1 v4 + v4 = 0 so consists of the points v41 = 00 , 01 , 11 ). The intersection
Q l is an even quadric in l and has 10 zeroes, such a quadric contains 2 3 = 6 Lagrangian
subspaces.
589
As the Lagrangian subspaces L V such that PL has non-zero restriction to the diagonal
correspond to pairs of a non-zero point in Q l and a Lagrangian plane in Q l , there are
2 6 = 12 such subspaces in Q.
Using the formula for PL (1,2 ) from Appendix C.1, it follows that the restriction of G[] is
given by:

a 8
a 8
8
8
4

G[](1,2 ) = d [1 ] + d [2 ] (1 )
[Q ] (2 ),
L Q l Q L
a
where d , [1 ], [2 ] are the three even characteristics in g = 1, L runs over the six Lagrangian
subspaces in l which are contained in Q and Q runs over the even quadrics in l which
contain L . In particular, the restriction of a G[] is a product of a modular form of genus one
and one of genus two:
a
bc
abc
(1,2 ) = g1 d (1 )g2 ef
(2 ).
G def
C.3. The restriction of G
000
000
The modular forms of genus one g1

g1
0
0
0
0
and genus two g2
00
0 8 0 8
8 8
1 + 00 01
0

0 4 1
12
= 0
f21
,
3
00
are as follows.
where we used the formulas from Section 3.3. The genus two modular form is:
00
00 4 00 00 00 4 00 10 10 4 01 00 01 4
g 00
= 00
01 10 11
+ 01 00 01
+ 00 10 10
00 11 11 4 01 10 11 4 01 10 11 4
+ 11 00 11
+ 00 00 00
+ 10 01 11
00 4 00
=: 00 g2 00 ,
00
where g2 00
is a genus two modular form of weight 6. A computation, using the methods from
[3], that is, using the classical theta formula (3.2) to write the []2 s in terms of the [ ]s,
shows that
1 00 12 2
1 00 4
00
= 00
+
[]12 00
[]8 ,
g2 00
3
3
2
that is,
00
g2 00
= 13 f1
2
3 f2
1
2 f3
with fi as in Section 3.4.
References
[1] A.A. Belavin, V.G. Knizhnik, Algebraic geometry and the geometry of quantum strings, Phys. Lett. B 168 (1986)
201206.
[2] A. Belavin, A. Knizhnik, A. Morozov, A. Perelomov, Two and three loop amplitudes in the bosonic string theory,
Phys. Lett. B 177 (1986) 324328.
[3] S.L. Cacciatori, F. Dalla Piazza, Two loop superstring amplitudes and S6 representations, arXiv: 0707.0646, Lett.
Math. Phys. (2008), in press.
[4] F. Dalla Piazza, B. van Geemen, Siegel modular forms and finite symplectic groups, in preparation.
590
[5] E. DHoker, D.H. Phong, Two-loop superstrings I, Main formulas, Phys. Lett. B 529 (2002) 241255.
[6] E. DHoker, D.H. Phong, Two-loop superstrings IV, the cosmological constant and modular forms, Nucl. Phys.
B 639 (2002) 129181.
[7] E. DHoker, D.H. Phong, Asyzygies, modular forms, and the superstring measure I, Nucl. Phys. B 710 (2005)
5882.
[8] E. DHoker, D.H. Phong, Asyzygies, modular forms, and the superstring measure II, Nucl. Phys. B 710 (2005)
83116.
[9] E. DHoker, D.H. Phong, Superstrings, super-Riemann surfaces, and supermoduli space, Contribution to the Proceedings of the String Theory Conference, Rome, Italy, June 1988, Rome String Theory 1988, pp. 1768.
[10] B. van Geemen, G. van der Geer, Kummer varieties and moduli spaces of Abelian varieties, Am. J. Math. 108
(1986) 615642.
[11] T. Ichikawa, Theta constants and Teichmller modular forms, J. Number Theory 61 (1996) 409419.
[12] J. Igusa, Theta Functions, Springer, 1972.
[13] J. Igusa, Schottkys invariant and quadratic forms, in: P.L. Butzer, F. Fehr (Eds.), International Christoffel Symposium proceedings, Birkhuser, 1981, pp. 352362.
[14] A. Morozov, Explicit formulae for one, two, three, and four-loop string amplitudes, Phys. Lett. B 184 (1987) 171
176.
[15] A. Schwarz, Geometry of Fermionic String, in: Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians, Kyoto, Japan, 1990, pp. 13781386.
[16] A. Voronov, A formula for the Mumford measure in superstring theory, Funct. Anal. Appl. 22 (1988) 139140.
[17] S.L. Cacciatori, F. Dalla Piazza, B. van Geemen, Genus four superstring measures, arXiv: 0804.0457.
[18] S. Grushewsky, Superstring scattering amplitudes in higher genus, arXiv: 0803.3469.
[19] R. Salvati Manni, Remarks on superstring amplitudes in higher genus, arXiv: 0804.0512.

Integrable boundary conditions and modified Lax

equations
Jean Avan a , Anastasia Doikou b,
a LPTM, Universite de Cergy-Pontoise (CNRS UMR 8089), Saint-Martin 2, 2 avenue Adolphe Chauvin,
F-95302 Cergy-Pontoise cedex, France

b University of Bologna, Physics Department, INFN Section, Via Irnerio 46, Bologna 40126, Italy
Received 10 October 2007; received in revised form 25 February 2008; accepted 7 April 2008
Abstract
We consider integrable boundary conditions for both discrete and continuum classical integrable models.
Local integrals of motion generated by the corresponding transfer matrices give rise to time evolution
equations for the initial Lax operator. We systematically identify the modified Lax pairs for both discrete
and continuum boundary integrable models, depending on the classical r-matrix and the boundary matrix.
1. Introduction
Lax representation of classical dynamical evolution equations [1] is one key ingredient in the
modern theory of classical integrable systems [27] together with the associated notion of classical r-matrix [8,9]. It takes the generic form of an isospectral evolution equation: dL
dt = [L, A],
where L encapsulates the dynamical variables and A defines the time evolution. We shall generically consider the situation where L and A depend on a complex (spectral) parameter. The
spectrum of the Lax matrix or its extension (transfer matrices), or equivalently the invariant coefficients of the characteristic determinant, thus provide automatically candidates to realize the
hierarchy of Poisson-commuting Hamiltonians required by Liouvilles theorem [10,11]. Existence of the classical r-matrix then guarantees Poisson-commutativity of these natural dynamical
quantities taken as generators of the algebra of classical conserved charges.
E-mail addresses: avan@ptm.u-cergy.fr (J. Avan), doikou@bo.infn.it (A. Doikou).

doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.04.004
592
J. Avan, A. Doikou / Nuclear Physics B 800 [PM] (2008) 591612
The question of finding an appropriate time evolution matrix A for a given Lax matrix L
therefore entails the possibility of systematically constructing classically integrable models once
a Lax matrix is defined with suitable properties. Depending on which properties are emphasized,
this problem may be approached in several ways. One approach uses postulated Poisson algebra
properties of L, specifically the r-matrix structure, as a starting point, and establishes a systematic construction of the time evolution operator A associated to the Hamiltonian evolution
obtained from any function in the enveloping algebra of the Poisson-commuting traces of such
an L-matrix. Such a formulation was proposed long time ago [8,9] for the bulk case, when the
Poisson structure for L is a simple linear or quadratic r-matrix structure.
We shall consider here more general situations when the dynamical system also depends on
supplementary parameters encapsulated into a matrix K (see e.g. [12,13]). We shall restrict ourselves to the situation where these parameters are non-dynamical, i.e. the Poisson brackets with
themselves and with the initial bulk parameters is zero. For situations where the extra parameters are dynamical see [14,15]. Note that interpretation of the physical meaning of these c-number
parameters will come a posteriori when computing the associated Hamiltonians. In particular any
physical interpretation of the K-matrix as a description of the boundary properties (external
fields, . . .) may not be appropriate in all cases as shall appear in our discussion of examples. We
shall however keep this designation as a book-keeping device throughout this paper.
Our central purpose will be twofold. We shall first of all introduce generic sets of sufficient
algebraic conditions on K formulated in terms of the bulk r-matrix. A boundary-modified
generating matrix of candidate conserved quantities will be accordingly constructed as a suitable
combination of L- and K-matrices. As far as we know these results are new for the case of a
linear r-matrix Poisson structure. The consistency conditions for the K-matrices as well as the
corresponding generating functions for both discrete and continuous quadratic Poisson structures
were already derived in [13,17] and we shall briefly recall them.
We shall then define the time evolution operator A, and consequently the boundary Lax
pair associated to a given Hamiltonian constructed from the generating function from the new
basic elements, i.e. the modified monodromy matrix, the bulk r-matrix or (r, s) pair [9,16], and
the reflection matrix K. The derivation of the boundary Lax pair is novel in both linear and
quadratic cases. Such a construction was exemplified in [17]; what we propose here is however a
generic, systematic procedure to obtain modified boundary or folded classical integrable systems from initial pure bulk systems. Note also that the example worked out in [17] is precisely
a case which the K-matrix does describe boundary effects.
It must be emphasized here that an alternative, analytic approach to this question, at least in
the bulk case, was extensively described in [7, Chapter 3]. In this approach one starts from the
analytic properties (location of poles and algebraic structure of residues) of the Lax matrix L as
a meromorphic function of the spectral parameter. They provide for a unique consistent form of
an associated A-matrix. The subsequent Lax equation is then developed into separate equations
corresponding to the poles of L and A. The Poisson structure and r-matrix structure are only
then defined as providing a consistent Hamiltonian interpretation of this Lax equation. Similar
reformulation of our results must exist but we shall not consider them here.
We shall consider here three situations. We start with the simpler case where the initial bulk
structure is a linear Poisson structure for a Lax matrix parametrized by a single r-matrix. We
then develop the cases of both discrete and continuous parametrized Lax matrices relevant to
the description of systems on a lattice or on a continuous line. In these last two situations the
relevant r-matrix structure is a quadratic Sklyanin-type bracket [13,18]. We shall in all three
cases derive (or rederive, in the quadratic cases) the form of the generating functional for Poisson-
593
commuting Hamiltonians. In all cases we shall establish the explicit general formula yielding
the A-operator. Explicit examples shall be developed in all cases, albeit restricting ourselves
to the simplest situations of non-dynamical non-constant double-pole rational r-matrices. More
complicated situations (trigonometric and/or dynamical r-matrices, relevant for e.g. sine-Gordon
models or affine Toda field theories) will be left for further studies.
2. Linear Poisson structure
We consider here the original situation [1] where the full dynamical system under study is
represented by a single Lax matrix, living in a representation of a finite-dimensional Lie algebra
or a loop algebra. In this last case the Lax matrix also depends on a complex parameter known
as spectral parameter. In all cases the requirement of Poisson-commutativity for candidate
Hamiltonians Tr Ln is equivalent [19] to the existence of a classical r-matrix [8,9] realizing a
linear Poisson structure for L. Indeed, consider the Lax pair (L, A) satisfying
L
= [A, L]
t
the associated spectral problem

L() = u,
det L() u = 0
(2.1)
(2.2)
provides the integrals of motion, obtained through the expansion in powers of the spectral parameter of tr L(). Alternatively, in particular when no spectral parameter exists, one should
consider the traces of powers of the Lax matrix tr Ln () as natural Hamiltonians.
Assuming that the L-matrix satisfies the fundamental relation

La (), Lb () = rab ( ), La () + Lb ()
(2.3)
it is shown using (2.3) that for any integer n, m:
n

tr L (), tr Lm () = 0.
(2.4)
The reciprocal property was shown in [19]. Let us recall [8,9,19] how one may identify the Aoperator associated to the various charges in involution. Bearing in mind the fundamental relation
(2.3) it is shown that

tra Lna (), Lb ()

n1

= n tra Ln1
(2.5)
a ()rab ( ) Lb () nLb () tra La ()rab ( ) .
From (2.5) one extracts A:

An (, ) = n tra Ln1
a ()rab ( ) .
(2.6)
In the case of the simplest rational non-dynamical r-matrices [20]

r() =
where P =
N

Eij Ej i ,
(2.7)
i,j =1
P is the permutation operator, and (Eij )kl = ik j l , we end up with a simple form for An :
An (, ) =
n
Ln1 ()
(2.8)
594
and as usual to obtain the Lax pair associated to each local integral of motion one has to expand
(i)
An = i Ani . Note that generically, using the dual formulation of the classical r-matrix [9] one
also has:

A(, ) = Tr r(, ) dH
(2.9)
where H is the Hamiltonian expressed as any function in the enveloping algebra generated by
Tr Ln .
Ultimately we would like to consider an extended classical algebra in analogy to the quantum boundary algebras arising in integrable systems with non-trivial boundary conditions that
preserve integrability. Subsequently we shall deal with two types of algebras which may be associated with the two types of known quantum boundary conditions. These boundary conditions
are known as soliton preserving (SP), traditionally studied in the framework of integrable quantum spin chains (see e.g. [13,2124]), and soliton non-preserving (SNP) originally introduced in
the context of classical integrable field theories [17], and further investigated in [2527]. SNP
boundary conditions have been also introduced and studied in integrable quantum lattice systems
[2832]. From the algebraic perspective the two types of boundary conditions are associated with
two distinct algebras, i.e. the reflection algebra [13] and the twisted Yangian respectively [33,34]
(see also [27,31,32,35,36]). The classical versions of both algebras will be defined subsequently
in the text (see Section 3.2). It will be convenient for our purposes here to introduce some useful
notation:
rab () = rba ()
() = rab ()
rab
rab () = rba ()
ta tb
rab () = rba
()
for SP,
tb
rab
() = rba
()
ta
rab () = rab ()
for SP,
for SP,
for SNP,
for SNP,
for SNP,
(2.10)
together with:
L()
= L() for SP,
L()
= Lt () for SNP.
(2.11)
In addition the boundary conditions, to be interpreted on specific examples, are parametrized

by a single non-dynamical matrix k(). We propose here the following set of algebraic relations:

T1 (1 ), T2 (2 ) = r
12 (1 , 2 )T1 (1 ) T1 (1 )r12 (1 , 2 )
+
+ r+
12 (1 , 2 )T2 (2 ) T2 (2 )r12 (1 , 2 )
(2.12)
where we define:
r
12 (1 , 2 ) = r12 (1 2 )k2 (2 ) k2 (2 )r12 (1 + 2 ),
r
r12 (1 2 ) r12
(1 + 2 )k2 (2 ),
12 (1 , 2 ) = k2 (2 )
r+
r12
(1 + 2 ),
12 (1 , 2 ) = r12 (1 2 )k1 (1 ) + k1 (1 )
r+
r12 (1 2 ) + r12
(1 + 2 )k1 (1 ),
12 (1 , 2 ) = k1 (1 )
for a k-matrix satisfying:

k1 (), k2 () = 0,

k1 (), L2 () = 0,
(1
r12 (1 2 )k1 ()k2 (2 ) + k1 (1 )r12
(2.14)
+ 2 )k2 (2 )
(1 + 2 )k1 (1 ).
= k1 (1 )k2 (2 )r12 (1 2 ) + k2 (2 )r12
We then show:
(2.13)
(2.15)
595
Theorem 2.1. The quantity
T () = L()k() + k()L()
(2.16)
is a representation of the algebra defined by (2.12), with k obeying (2.14), (2.15).

Proof. We shall need in addition to (2.3) the following exchange relations:

L a (), Lb () = L a ()rab
( + ) + rab
( + )Lb () rab
( + )L a ()
( + ),
Lb ()rab

La (), Lb () = La ()rab ( + ) + rab

( + )L b () rab
( + )La ()
L b ()rab ( + ),

L a (), L b () = rab ( ), L a () + L b () .
(2.17)
By explicit use of the algebraic relations (2.15) and (2.17) we obtain:

La ()ka () + L a ()ka (), Lb ()kb () + kb ()L b ()
=

= r
ab (, ) La ()ka () + ka ()La () La ()ka () + ka ()La () rab (, )

+
+ r+
ab (, ) Lb ()kb () + kb ()Lb () Lb ()kb () + kb ()Lb () rab (, )

( + )kb ()
+ La () + Lb () rab ( )ka ()kb () ka ()rab
+ kb ()r12 ( + )ka () + ka ()kb ()r12 ( )

( + )kb ()
+ rab ( )ka ()kb () ka ()rab

+ kb ()r12 ( + )ka () + ka ()kb ()r12 ( ) L a () + L b () .

(2.18)
Bearing however in mind that the k-matrix obeys (2.15) we conclude that the last four lines of
the equation above disappear, which shows that (2.16) satisfies (2.12), and this concludes our
proof. 2
Define T() = k1 ()T (), we now prove:
Theorem 2.2.

M
tra TN
a (), trb Tb () = 0.
Proof.

M
tra TN
a (), trb Tb ()

m1
trab TNn
()TMm
() Ta (), Tb () Tn1
()
=
a
a ()Tb
b
(2.19)
(2.20)
n,m
employing (2.12) the preceding expression becomes

1
trab TN1
()TM1
()k1
a
a kb rab (, )Ta () Ta ()rab (, )
b

+
+ r+
ab (, )Tb () Tb ()rab (, )
= = 0.
(2.21)
596
Note that in order to show that the latter expression is zero we moved appropriately the factors
in the products within the trace and we used (2.15). 2
We finally identify the modified Lax formulation associated to the generalized algebra (2.12)
(2.15) as:
Theorem 2.3. Defining Hamiltonians as: tra Tn () =
for T:

T()
= Hn(i) , T()
Hn(i)
i i the classical equations of motion
(2.22)
take a zero curvature form

T()
= A(, ), T() ,
(2.23)
where An is identified as:

+
1
An (, ) = n tra Tn1
a ()ka ()rab (, ) .
(2.24)
Proof.

tra Tna (), Tb ()
=

1
+
1
= n tra Tn1
a ()ka ()kb () rab (, )Ta () Ta ()rab (, ) + rab (, )Tb ()

Tb ()r+
ab (, )
n1 1

= n tra Ta ka ()kb () r
ab (, )Ta () Ta ()rab (, )

+

+
1
+ n tra Tn1
(2.25)
a ka ()kb () rab (, )Tb () Tb ()rab (, ) .
Taking into account (2.15) we see that the first term of RHS of the equality above disappears and
the last term may be appropriately rewritten as:

tra Tna (), Tb ()

n1

+
+
= n tra Tn1 ()k1
()k1
a ()rab (, ) Tb () nTb () tra T
a ()rab (, ) .
(2.26)
From the latter formula (2.24) is deduced. 2
Finally, let T (), T () be two representations of (2.12), and let also

Ta (), Tb () = 0.
(2.27)
It is then straightforward to show, based solely on the fact that T , T satisfy (2.12) and (2.27),
that the sum T () + T () is also a representation of (2.12).
2.1. Examples
We shall present here a simple example, starting from the classical rational Gaudin model [37].
Details on the so-called dual description of the Toda chain [38,39] and the DST model [40,41],
597
(1)
both associated to the AN 1 r-matrix [42], will be presented in a forthcoming publication. Before we proceed with the particular example let us rewrite An . We consider a situation where the
Poisson brackets are parametrized by the simplest rational non-dynamical r-matrix [20]. After
substituting the rational r-matrix in (2.24) we get for both types of boundary conditions:
n1

T () k()Tn1 ()k1 ()
+
for SP,
An (, ) = n
n1

T () (k()Tn1 ()k1 ())t
for SNP.
An (, ) = n
(2.28)
+
The L-matrix associated to the classical glN Gaudin model, and satisfying the algebraic relation
(2.3) is
L() =
(i)
N
N

P
,=1 i=1
zi
(2.29)
where P glN . Recall that in the bulk case the integrals of motion are obtained through
tr Ln (). The first non-trivial example reads
N
N

t (2) () = tr L2 () =
(i)
(j )
P P
,=1 i,j =1
(2.30)
( zi )( zj )
and by taking the residue of the latter expression for zi we obtain the Gaudin Hamiltonians:
(2)
Hi
N

N P (i) P (j )

j =i, j =1 ,=1
zi zj
(2.31)
Let us now come to the generic algebra (2.12), (2.14), (2.15) considering both SP and SNP cases.
Based on the definitions (2.11) we have:
L()
=
(i)
N
N

Q
,=1 i=1
+ zi
where Q = P for SP, Q = P for SNP.
(2.32)
Let us take as a representation T () = L()k() + k()L()

+ K() where k is a solution of
(2.14), (2.15), and K is a c-number representation of (2.12) with zero Poisson bracket. To obtain
the relevant Hamiltonian we now formulate tra T2 () (where T = k1 T and we also define K =
k1 K), and the Hamiltonians arise as the residue of the latter expression at = zi :
(2)
Hi =
N

N P (i) P (j )

j =i, j =1 ,=1
N

zi zj
N

N

j =1 ,, ,, =1
(i)
K k1
k P .
(i)
(j )
k k P Q
zi + zj
(2.33)
,, ,, =1
A special case of the generic algebra (2.12) is discussed in [43,44]. Note also that expression
(2.33) may be also obtained as the semiclassical limit of the quantum glN inhomogeneous open
spin chain for special boundary conditions (see e.g. [45]), zj being the inhomogeneities attached
598
to each site j . However, here the Hamiltonians are obtained directly from the representations of
our new classical algebra (2.12), (2.14), (2.15). It appears in this example that the parameters
k() play the role of coupling constants consistent with the integrable folding of a 2N site
Gaudin model, and not the role of boundary parameters.
3. Quadratic Poisson structures: The discrete case
Quadratic Poisson structures first appeared as the well-known Sklyanin bracket [46]. A more
general form, characterized by a pair of respectively skew-symmetric and symmetric matrices
(r, s) appeared in [16] in the formulation of consistent Poisson structures for non-ultralocal classical integrable field theories. Finally it was shown [47] that this was the natural quadratic form
a la Sklyanin for a non-skew-symmetric r-matrix, reading:

{L1 , L2 } = r r , L1 L2 + L1 r + r L2 L2 r + r L1 .
(3.1)
A typical situation when one considers naturally a quadratic Poisson structure for the Lax matrix occurs when considering discrete (on a lattice) or continuous (on a line) integrable systems
where the Lax matrix depends on either a discrete or a continuous variable; the Lax pair is thus
associated to a point on the space-like lattice or continuous line [6,18]. Let us first examine the
discrete case where one considers a finite set of Lax matrices Ln labelled by n N.
3.1. Periodic boundary conditions
Introduce the Lax pair (L, A) for discrete integrable models [4] (see also [48] for statistical
systems), and the associated auxiliary problem (see e.g. [6])
n+1 = Ln n ,
n = An n .
(3.2)
From the latter equations one may immediately obtain the discrete zero curvature condition:
L n = An+1 Ln Ln An .
(3.3)
The monodromy matrix arises from the first equation (3.2) (see e.g. [6])
Ta () = LaN () La1 ()
(3.4)
where index a denotes the auxiliary space, and the indices 1, . . . , N denote the sites of the onedimensional classical discrete model.
Consider now a skew-symmetric classical r-matrix which is a solution of the classical Yang
Baxter equation [8,9]

r12 (1 2 ), r13 (1 ) + r23 (2 ) + r13 (1 ), r23 (2 ) = 0,
(3.5)
and let L satisfy the associated Sklyanin bracket

La (), Lb () = rab ( ), La ()Lb () .
(3.6)
It is then immediate that (3.4) also satisfies (3.6). Use of the latter equation shows that the quantities tr T ()n provide charges in involution, that is
n

tr T (), tr T m () = 0,
(3.7)
599
which again is trivial by virtue of (3.6). In the simple sl2 case the only non-trivial quantity is
tr T () = t (), that is the usual bulk transfer matrix.
Let us now briefly review how the classical A-operator and the corresponding classical equations of motion are obtained from the expansion of the monodromy matrix in the simple case of
periodic boundary conditions. Let us first introduce some useful notation
Ta (n, m; ) = Lan ()Lan1 () Lam (),
(3.8)
n > m.
To formulate {t (), L()} or even better {ln t (), L()}, given that usually ln tr T () gives rise
to local integrals of motion, we first derive the quantity {Ta (), Lbn ()}.

Ta (), Lbn () = Ta (N, n + 1; )rab ( )Ta (n, 1; )Lbn ()
Lbn ()Ta (N, n; )rab ( )Ta (n 1, 1; ).
Taking the trace over the auxiliary space a, and then the logarithm we conclude

ln t (), L() = t 1 () tra Ta (N, n + 1; )rab ( )Ta (n, 1; ) L()

L() tra Ta (N, n; )rab ( )Ta (n 1, 1; ) ,
(3.9)
(3.10)
the auxiliary index b is suppressed from the latter expression for simplicity. Then plugging the
latter forms into the classical equations of motions for all integrals of motion

L n () = t (), Ln ()
(3.11)
we conclude that the zero curvature condition (3.3) is realized by:

An (, ) = t 1 () tra Ta (N, n; )rab ( )Ta (n 1, 1; ) .
(3.12)
Let us focus on the classical rational r-matrix (2.7). In this case An takes the simple form:
An (, ) =
t 1 ()
T (n 1, 1; )T (N, n; ).
(3.13)
In the open case, as we shall see in the subsequent section, it is sufficient to consider the expansion of t () in order to obtain the local integrals of motion.
3.2. Open boundary conditions
We now generalize the procedure described in the preceding section to the case of the integrable boundary conditions described in [13,17]. We propose a generic construction of the
associated Lax-type evolution equations, of the form (3.12), albeit incorporating a supplementary
set of non-dynamical parameters encapsulated into a reflection matrix K(). In some examples they may indeed be interpreted as boundary effects consistent with integrability of an open
chain-like system. We should stress that this is the first time to our knowledge that this generic
formulation of the Lax-type equations is proposed. There are indeed related studies regarding
particular examples of open spin chains such as XXZ, XYZ and 1D Hubbard models [49,50].
However, the derivation of the corresponding Lax pair is restricted to the specific Hamiltonian
only and not to all associated integrals of motion of the open chain. In this study we present a
generic description independent of the choice of model, and we derive the Lax pair for each one
of the entailed boundary integrals of motion. Particular examples are also presented.
The two types of monodromy matrices will respectively represent the classical version of the
reflection algebra R, and the twisted Yangian T written in the compact form (see e.g. [13,16,17,
600
51]):

T1 (1 ), T2 (2 ) = r12 (1 2 )T1 (1 )T2 (2 ) T1 (1 )T2 (2 )r12 (1 2 )
(1 + 2 )T2 (2 ) T2 (2 )r12
(1 + 2 )T1 (1 )
+ T1 (1 )r12
(3.14)
where r , r , r are defined in (2.10). In most well-known physical cases, such as the AN 1
t1 t2
= r . In the case of the Yangian r-matrix
r-matrices r12
= r21 implying that in the SNP case rab
ab
r12 = r21 , hence all the expressions above may be written in a more symmetric form. These two
distinct algebras are respectively associated with the SP boundary conditions (R) and the SNP
boundary conditions (T).
In order to construct representations of (3.14) yielding the generating function of the integrals
of motion one now introduces c-number representations (K ) of the algebra R (T) satisfying
(3.14) for SP and SNP respectively, and also the non-dynamical condition:

K1 (1 ), K2 (2 ) = 0.
(3.15)
(1)
Taking now as T () any bulk monodromy matrix (3.4) built from local L-matrices obeying (3.6)
and defining in addition
T () = T 1 ()
for SP,
T () = T t ()
for SNP,
(3.16)
one gets representations of the corresponding algebras R, T given by the following expression
see e.g. [13,17]:
T () = T ()K ()T ().
(3.17)
For a detailed proof see e.g. [13,15]. Define now as generating function of the involutive quantities

t () = tr K + ()T () .
(3.18)
Due to (3.14) it is shown that [13]

t (1 ), t (2 ) = 0, 1 , 2 C.
(3.19)
The expansion of t () naturally gives rise to the integrals of motions, i.e.

t () =
H(i)
i
(3.20)
Usually one considers the quantity ln t () to get local integrals of motion, however for the examples we are going to examine here the expansion of t () is enough to provide the associated
local quantities as will be transparent in the subsequent section.
We now establish:
Theorem 3.1. Time evolution of the local Lax matrix Ln under generating Hamiltonian action
of t () is given by:
L n () = An+1 (, )Ln () An (, )Ln (),
where An is the modified (boundary) quantity,

An (, ) = tra Ka+ ()Ta (N, n; )rab ( )Ta (n 1, 1; )Ka ()Ta ()
+ Ka+ ()Ta ()Ka ()Ta (1, n 1; )rab

( + )Ta (n, N ; ) .
(3.21)
(3.22)
Proof. We need in addition to (3.6) one more fundamental relation, i.e.

()Lb () Lb ()rab
( + )L a ()
L a (), Lb () = L a ()rab
601
(3.23)
where the notation L is self-explanatory from (3.16). Taking into account the latter expressions
we derive for T ,

Ta (), Lbn () = Ta (1, n; )rab

( + )Ta (n + 1, N ; )Lbn ()
( + )Ta (n, N ; ).
Lbn ()Ta (1, n 1; )rab
(3.24)
The next step is to formulate {t (), Lbn ()}; indeed recalling (3.9), (3.24), (3.17) and (3.18) we
conclude:

t (), Lbn () = tra Ka+ ()Ta (N, n + 1; )rab ( )Ta (n, 1; )Ka ()T ()
( + )Ta (n + 1, N ; ) Lbn ()
+ Ka+ ()Ta ()Ka ()Ta (1, n; )rab

Lbn () tra Ka+ ()Ta (N, n; )rab ( )Ta (n 1, 1; )Ka ()T ()
( + )Ta (n, N ; ) .
+ Ka+ ()Ta ()Ka ()Ta (1, n 1; )rab
(3.25)
Expression (3.22) is readily extracted from (3.25).
Special care should be taken at the boundary points n = 1 and n = N + 1. Indeed going back
to formula (3.22) restricting ourselves to n = 1 and n = N + 1 and taking into account that
T (N, N + 1, ) = T (0, 1, ) = T (1, 0, ) = T (N + 1, N, ) = I we obtain the explicit form for
A1 , An+1 . We should stress that the derivation of the boundary Lax pair is universal, namely
the expressions (3.22) are generic and independent of the choice of L, r. Note that expansion of
A(i)
(i)
n
the latter expressions of An (, ) =
provides all the An associated to the correspondi
(i)
ing integrals of motion H , which follow from the expansion of t (). This will become quite
transparent in the examples presented in the subsequent section.
Remark 3.2. A different construction of (3.14) was already given in a very general setting in
[51]. It is relevant to the formulation of non-ultralocal integrable field theories on a lattice and
extends the analysis of [16]. The essential difference with the construction in [13,16,17] is that
the k-matrix (denoted ) in [51], is sandwiched between the local monodromy matrices Tn,n1
so as to obtain an overall Poisson bracket of the form (3.14) for the dressed monodromy matrix
. . . Tn+1,n Tn,n1 . . . . The matrix allows to take into account the effects of the non-ultralocal
part (x y) of the Poisson bracket structure. In this respect also corresponds to boundary
effects, although multiple and internal.
3.3. Examples
We shall now examine a simple example, i.e. the open generalized DST model, which may
be seen as a lattice version of the generalized (vector) NLS model (see also [15,41,5254] for
further details). The open Toda chain will be also discussed as a limit of the DST model. We
shall explicitly evaluate the boundary Lax pairs for the first integrals of motion. If we focus on
the special case (2.7), which will be our main interest here, the latter expression reduces to the
following expressions for SP and SNP boundary conditions. In particular, An for SP boundary
602
conditions reads:
An (, ) =
1
T (n 1, 1; )K ()T ()K + ()T (N, n; )
1
T (n, N ; )Ka+ ()T ()K ()T (1, n 1; ) for SP,
+
+
(3.26)
and for SNP boundary conditions:

An (, ) =
1
T (n 1, 1; )K ()T ()K + ()T (N, n; )
1 t
T (1, n 1; )Kat ()T t ()K +t ()T t (n, N ; ) for SNP,
(3.27)
where we recall that for the special points n = 1, N + 1 we take into account that: T (N, N +
1, ) = T (0, 1, ) = T (1, 0, ) = T (N + 1, N, ) = I.
The Lax operator of the gl(N ) DST model has the following form:

N
1
N
N
N

(j ) (j )
L() =
x X
Ejj + b
x (j 1) E1j
X (j 1) Ej 1 (3.28)
E11 + b
j =1
(j )
j =2
j =2
j =2
(j )
with xn , Xn being canonical variables

(i) (j ) (i) (j )
(i) (j )
xn , xm = Xn , Xm = 0,
xn , Xm = nm ij ,
i, j {1, . . . , N }, n, m {1, . . . , N }.
(3.29)
In [15] the first non-trivial integral of motion for the SNP case, choosing the simplest consistent
value K = I was explicitly computed:
H=
N
N N
1
N 1

1 (j ) (j )
1 2
(j ) (j )
(j )
X N X N + b 2 x1
Nn b
Xn xn+1
2
2
n=1 j =1
n=1
where Nn =
N
1

(j )
j =1
(j )
(3.30)
xn Xn .
j =1
Our aim is now to determine the modified Lax pair induced by the non-trivial integrable boundary conditions. We shall focus here on the case of SNP boundary conditions, basically because
in the particular example we consider here such boundary conditions are technically easier to
study. Moreover, the SNP boundary conditions have not been so much analyzed in the context of
lattice integrable models, which provides an extra motivation to investigate them. Taking into account (3.27) we explicitly derive the modified Lax pair for the generalized DST model with SNP
boundary conditions. Indeed, after expanding (3.27) in powers of 1 we obtain the quantity
associated to the Hamiltonian (3.30)1 :
(j 1)
(j 1)
=
E
X
E
+
b
xn
E1j , n {2, . . . , N },
A(2)
11
j
1
n
n1
j =1
j =1
1 To obtain both H(2) and A(2) we divided the original expressions by a factor two.
n

(2)
A1 = E11 b
(j 1)
x1
Ej 1 + b
j =1
(2)
AN+1
= E11
(j 1)
x1
603
E1j ,
j =1
(j 1)
XN Ej 1
j =1
(j 1)
XN
(3.31)
E1j .
j =1
Let us now consider the simplest possible case, i.e. the sl2 DST model. It is worth stressing that
in this case the SP and SNP boundary coincide given that
L1 () = V Lt ()V ,
V = antid(1, . . . , 1).
(3.32)
In this particular case the Hamiltonian (3.30) reduces into:

H(2) =

1 2 2
b2
1 2
xn X n b
xn+1 Xn x12 XN
.
2
2
2
N
N1
n=1
n=1
(3.33)
The equations of motion associated to the latter Hamiltonian may be readily extracted by virtue
of2

L = H(2) , L .
(3.35)
It is deduced from (3.31) for the sl2 case:
bxn
(2)
An () =
, n {2, . . . , N },
Xn1
0
bx1
(2)
(2)
,
AN+1 () =
A1 () =
bx1
0
XN
XN
0
(3.36)
Alternatively the equations of motion may be derived from the zero curvature condition
Ln
(i)
= An+1 Ln Ln A(i)
(3.37)
n
t
which the modified Lax pair satisfies. It is clear that to each one of the higher local charges a
(i)
different quantify An is associated. Both Eqs. (3.35), (3.37) lead naturally to the same equations
of motion, which for this particular example read as:
xn = xn2 Xn + bxn+1 ,
x1 = x12 X1 + bx2 ,
2
X N + XN ,
xN = xN
X n = xn Xn2 bXn1 ,
X 1 = x1 X12
n {2, . . . , N 1},
bx1 ,
2
X N = xN XN
bXN1 .
(3.38)
The Toda model may be seen as an appropriate limit of the DST model (see also [55]). Indeed
consider the following limiting process as b 0:

Xn eqn ,
(3.39)
xn eqn b1 + pn .
2 The associated Poisson brackets for both DST and Toda models are defined as:

A B
A B
, DST model,
xn Xn
Xn xn
n

A B
A B
, Toda chain.
{A, B} =
qn pn
pn qn
n
{A, B} =
(3.34)
604
It is clear that the harmonic oscillator algebra defined by (xn , Xn , xn Xn ) reduces to the Euclidian
Lie algebra (eqn , pn ), and consequently the Lax operator reduces to:

pn eqn
Ln () =
(3.40)
eqn
0
where qn , pn are canonical variables. In this case the corresponding Hamiltonian may be readily
extracted and takes the form
H(2) =
1 2 qn+1 qn 1 2q1 1 2qN

pn
e
e e
2
2
2
N
N1
n=1
n=1
(3.41)
(2)
and the corresponding An are expressed as
eqn
(2)
, n {2, . . . , N },
An () =
eqn1 0
eq1
(2)
(2)
A1 () =
,
AN+1 () =
eq1 0
eqN
eqN
0
(3.42)
In this case as well both formulas (3.37) and (3.35) lead to the following set of equations of
motions:
pn = qn ,
p1 = q1 ,
pN = qN ,
qn = eqn+1 qn eqn qn1 ,

q1 = e
q2 q1
qN = e
2qN
2q1
n {2, . . . , N 1},
qN qN1
(3.43)
4. The continuous case

4.1. Periodic boundary conditions
Let us now recall the basic notions regarding the Lax pair and the zero curvature condition
for a continuous integrable model following essentially [6]. Define as being a solution of the
following set of equations (see e.g. [6])
= U(x, t, ),
(4.1)
x
= V(x, t, ),
(4.2)
t
U, V being in general n n matrices with entries defined as functions of complex valued dynamical fields, their derivatives, and the spectral parameter . Compatibility conditions of the
two differential equation (4.1), (4.2) lead to the zero curvature condition [35]
V + [U, V] = 0,
U
(4.3)
giving rise to the corresponding classical equations of motion of the system under consideration.
The monodromy matrix may be written from (4.1) as:

x
U(x , t, ) dx ,
T (x, y, ) = P exp
y
(4.4)
605
where apparently T (x, x, ) = 1. The fact that the monodromy matrix satisfies Eq. (4.1) is extensively used to get the relevant integrals of motion and the associated Lax pairs.
Hamiltonian formulation of the equations of motion is available again under the r-matrix
approach. In this picture the underlying classical algebra is manifestly analogous to the quantum
case. Let us first recall this method for a general classical integrable system on the full line. The
existence of the Poisson structure for U realized by the classical r-matrix, satisfying the classical
YangBaxter equation (3.5), guarantees the integrability of the classical system. Indeed assuming
that the operator U satisfies the following ultralocal form of Poisson brackets

Ua (x, ), Ub (y, ) = rab ( ), Ua (x, ) + Ub (y, ) (x y),
(4.5)
T (x, y, ) satisfies:

Ta (x, y, t, 1 ), Tb (x, y, t, 2 ) = rab (1 2 ), Ta (x, y, t, 1 )Tb (x, y, t, 2 ) .
(4.6)
Making use of the latter equation one may readily show for a system on the full line:

ln tr T (x, y, 1 ) , ln tr T (x, y, 2 ) = 0,
(4.7)
i.e. the system is integrable, and the charges in involutionlocal integrals of motionare obtained by expansion of the generating function ln tr{T (x, y, )}, based essentially on the fact that
T satisfies (4.1).
Let us now recall how one constructs the V-operator associated to given local integrals of
motion. One easily proves the following identity using (4.5)
M(x, , )

Ta (L, L, ), Ub (x, ) =
+ M(x, L, L, , ), Ub (x, )
x
where we define
M(x, , ) = Ta (L, x, )rab ( )Ta (x, L, ).
(4.8)
(4.9)
For more details on the proof of the formula above we refer the interested reader to [6]; (4.8) may
be seen as the continuum version of relation (4.6). Recall that t () = tr T () then it naturally
follows from (4.8) and (4.3), that

V(x, , )
+ V(x, , ), U(x, )
ln t (), U(x, ) =
x
(4.10)

V(x, , ) = t 1 () tra Ta (L, x, )rab (, )Ta (x, L, )
(4.11)

with
and in the rational case (4.11) reduces to

V(x, , ) =
t 1 ()
T (x, L, )T (L, x, ).
(4.12)
4.2. General integrable boundary conditions

Our aim here is to consider integrable models on the interval with consistent boundary conditions, and derive rigorously the Lax pairs associated to the entailed boundary local integrals
of motion as a continuous extension of Theorem 3.1. For this purpose we follow the line of
action described in [6], using now Sklyanins formulation for the system on the interval or on
606
the half line [13]. We briefly describe this process below for any classical integrable system on
the interval. In this case one constructs a modified monodromy matrix T , following Sklyanins formulation [13] and satisfying again the Poisson bracket algebras R or T. To construct the
generating function of the integrals of motion one also needs c-number representations of the
algebra R or T satisfying (3.14) for SP and SNP respectively, such that:

K1 (1 ), K2 (2 ) = 0.
(4.13)
The modified monodromy matrices, realizing the corresponding algebras R, T, are given by the
following expressions [13,17] (T being defined in (3.16)):
T (x, y, t, ) = T (x, y, t, )K ()T (x, y, t, ).
(4.14)
The generating function of the involutive quantities is defined as

t (x, y, t, ) = tr K + ()T (x, y, t, ) .
(4.15)
Indeed one shows:

t (x, y, t, 1 ), t (x, y, t, 2 ) = 0,
1 , 2 C.
(4.16)
To now describe the Lax formulation in the case of open boundary conditions, as in the discrete integrable models, and taking into account (3.24) we first prove

Ta (0, L, ), Ub (x, ) = Ma (x, , ) + Ma (x, , ), Ub (x, )
(4.17)
where we define
M(x, , ) = T (0, x, )rab ( )T (x, L, )K ()T (0, L, )
( + )T (0, x, ).
+ T (0, L, )K ()T (x, L, )rab
(4.18)
Finally bearing in mind the definition of t () and (4.17) we conclude with:

Theorem 4.1.

V(x, , )

ln t (), U(x, ) =
+ V(x, , ), U(x, )
x
(4.19)
where

V(x, , ) = t 1 () tra K + ()Ma (x, , ) .
(4.20)
As in the discrete case particular attention should be paid to the boundary points x = 0, L.
Indeed, for these two points one has to simply take into account that T (x, x, ) = T (x, x, ) = I.
Moreover, the expressions derived in (4.18), (4.20) are universal, that is independent of the choice
of model. As was remarked upon when discussing the discrete case, a quadratic algebra of the
form (3.14) was initially obtained in the continuous case [16] when extending the derivation of
Section 4.1 to situations where the Poisson brackets (4.5) are non-ultralocal, exhibiting (x y)
terms. Connection to boundary effects was discussed previously (see Section 3.2).
607
4.3. Example
We shall now examine a particular example associated to the rational r-matrix (2.7), that is the
glN NLS model. Although in [15] an extensive analysis for both types of boundary conditions is
presented, here we shall focus on the simplest diagonal (K = I) boundary conditions. The Lax
pair is given by the following expressions [6,56]:
U = U0 + U1 ,
where
N 1

1
U1 =
2i
V0 = i
V = V0 + V1 + 2 V2

Eii EN N ,
U0 =
i=1
N
1

(4.21)
N
1

( i Ei N + i EN i ),
i=1

i j Eij |i |2 EN N i
i,j =1
N
1

i Ei N i EN i ,
i=1
V1 = U0 ,
V2 = U1
(4.22)
and i , j satisfy3 :

i (x), j (y) = i (x), j (y) = 0,

i (x), j (y) = ij (x y).
(4.24)
Note that we have

suppressed the constant from (4.22) compared e.g. to [15] by rescaling the
fields (i , i ) (i , i ).
From the zero curvature condition (4.3) the classical equations of motion for the generalized
NLS model with periodic boundary conditions are entailed, i.e.
i

i (x, t)
2 i (x, t)
j (x, t)2 i (x, t),
+
2
=
t
2x
i, j {1, . . . , N 1}.
(4.25)
It is clear that for N = 2 the equations of motion of the usual NLS model are recovered. The
boundary Hamiltonian for the generalized NLS model may be expressed as

0
H=
dx
N
1

N
1

j =1
i=1

1

2 N
2

j (x) + (x) (x)
i (x)

i (0) i (0) + i (0) i (0)
i=1
N
1

i (L) i (L) + i (L) i (L) .
(4.26)
i=1
3 The Poisson structure for the generalized NLS model is defined as:

{A, B} = i
i L
dx

A
B
A
B
.
i (x) i (x) i (x) i (x)
(4.23)
608
One sees here that the K-matrix indeed contributes as a genuine boundary effect. The Hamiltonian, obtained as one of the charges in involution (see e.g. [15] for further details) provides the
classical equations of motion by virtue of:

i (x, t)
= H(0, L), i (x, t) ,
t
L x 0.

i (x, t)
= H(0, L), i (x, t) ,
t
(4.27)
Indeed considering the Hamiltonian H, we end up with the following set of equations with
Dirichlet type boundary conditions
N
1

i (x, t)
2 i (x, t)
j (x, t)2 i (x, t),
i
+
2
=
t
2x
j =1
i (0) = i (L) = 0, i {1, . . . , N 1}.
(4.28)
For a detailed and quite exhaustive analysis of the various integrable boundary conditions of the
NLS model see [15]. Note also that the N = 2 case was investigated classically on the half line
in [57], whereas the NLS equation on the interval was studied in [58].
As mentioned our ultimate goal here is to derive the boundary Lax pair, in particular the Voperator. In general for any glN r-matrix we may express (4.20), taking also into account (4.19),
for the two types of boundary conditions already described in the first section, i.e.
t 1 ()
T (x, L, )K ()T (0, L, )K + ()T (0, x, )
t 1 ()
+
T (0, x, )K + ()T (0, L, )K ()T (x, L, )
+
and for the SNP boundary conditions we obtain:
V(x, , ) =
V(x, , ) =
for SP, (4.29)
t 1 ()
T (x, L, )K ()T (0, L, )K + ()T (0, x, )
t 1 () t
+
T (x, L, )K t ()T t (0, L, )K +t ()T t (0, x, )
+
for SNP.
(4.30)
Again for the boundary points x = 0, L we should bear in mind that T (x, x, )= T (x, x, )= I.
Ultimately we wish to expand T (), T () in powers of 1 in order to determine the Lax pair for
each one of the integrals of motion. For a detailed description of the derivation of the boundary
integrals of motion for the generalized NLS models see [15]. Hereafter we shall focus on the
SP case with the simplest boundary conditions, i.e. K = I. Expanding the expression (4.29) in
powers of 1 (we refer the interested reader to Appendix C for technical details) we conclude
that V(3) (x, )the bulk partcoincides with V defined in (4.21), (4.22), and for the boundary
points xb {0, L} in particular:
N 1

N
1

2
(3)
V (xb , ) =
Eii EN N + i
i (xb )j (xb )Eij
2i
i=1
N
1

i,j =1
i,j =1

i (xb )Ei N i (xb )EN i .
(4.31)
609
We may alternatively rewrite the latter formula as:

V(3) (xb , ) = V(xb , ) + i
N
1

N
1

i (xb )2 EN N +
i (xb )Ei N + i (xb )EN i .
i=1
i=1
(4.32)
The last two terms additional to V (4.21), (4.22) are due to the non-trivial boundary conditions;
of course more complicated boundary conditions would lead to more intricate modifications of
the Lax pair V, however such an exhaustive analysis is beyond the intended scope of the present
investigation. It can be shown that the modified Lax pair (U, V(3) ) gives rise to the classical
equations of motion (4.28). It is clear that the bulk quantity V in the case of SP boundary
conditions remains intact. In the SNP case on the other hand we may see that even the bulk part
of the Lax pair is drastically modified, due to the fact that the bulk part of the corresponding
integrals of motions is also dramatically altered. We shall not further comment on this point,
which will be anyway treated in full detail elsewhere.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by INFN, Bologna section, through grant TO12. J.A. wishes to thank
INFN and University of Bologna for hospitality.
Appendix A
We present here technical details on the derivation of the conserved quantities for the generalized NLS model on the full line (see also [15]). Recall that for i one may express T
as [6]

1
T (x, y, ) = I + W (x, ) exp Z(x, y, ) I + W (y, )
(A.1)

where W is an off diagonal matrix, i.e. W = i=j Wij Eij , and Z is purely diagonal Z =
N
i=1 Zii Eii . Also
Zii () =
(n)

Zii
,
n
Wij =
n=1
W (n)

ij
n=1
(A.2)
The first step is to insert the ansatz (A.1) in Eq. (4.1). Then we separate the diagonal and off
diagonal part and obtain the following expressions:
Z = U1 + (U0 W )(D) ,
W + W Z = U0 + (U0 W )(O) + U1 W
(A.3)
where the superscripts

(D), (O) denote
the diagonal and off diagonal part of the product U0 W .
Recall that W = i=j Wij Eij , Z = i Zii Eii then it is straightforward to obtain:
(D)
1

N
=
( i WN i Eii + i Wi N EN N ),
(O)
(U0 W )
(U0 W )
i=1
i=j, i=N , j =N
( i WN j Eij + i Wij EN j ).
(A.4)
610
Substituting the latter expressions (A.4) in (A.3), we obtain

N 1

Eii EN N
Z(L, L, ) = iL
i=1
N
1 L

dx ( i WN i Eii + i Wi N EN N ).
(A.5)
i=1 L
The leading contribution in the expansion of (ln tr T ) (where T is given in (A.1)) for i
comes from ZN N , with a leading term iL (all other Zii , i = N , have a iL leading term, so
when exponentiating such contributions vanish as i ), indeed
1

N
ZN N (L, L, ) = iL +
L
dx i (x)Wi N (x).
(A.6)
i=1 L
Due to (A.6) it is obvious that in this case it is sufficient to derive the coefficients Wi N . In any
case one can show that the coefficients Wij satisfy the following equations:

2
2
i WN
Wij Eij i
(WN i EN i Wi N Ei N ) +
i E N i + i W i N E i N
i=N
i=j
=
( i Ei N + i EN i ) +
i=N
i=N
( i WN j Eij + i Wij EN j )
i=j, i=N , j =N
( j WN j Wij Eij + i Wi N Wj N Ej N ).
(A.7)
i=j, i=N , j =N

(n)

Wij
(n)
Finally setting Wij =
n=1 n and using (A.7) we find expressions for Wi N , i.e.
(1)
(2)
Wi N (x) = i (x),
Wi N (x) = i i (x),

3
k (x)2 i (x), . . . .
i (x) i 2
(x)
=
i
Wi(3)
N
(A.8)
In the boundary case we shall need in addition to (A.8) the following objects:

(1)
(2)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
WN
WN
WN
i = i i ,
i = iWN i +
j Wj i , Wj i = iWj N WN i ,
i=j, i=N, j =N
(3)
WN
i
(2)
= iWN
i
(2)
Wij
(1) (1)
+ Wi(1)
N WN i WN i
(1) (2)
= iWi N WN j
iWj N
(1)
i=j, i=N , j =N
(1)
(2)
WN
j Wj i ,
(1)
(1)
WN j Wij .
(A.9)
Based on the latter formulas, the expression (A.1), and defining W (x, ) = W (x, ) we may
rewrite (4.29) as:
V(x, , ) =

1

1
1 + W (x) EN N 1 + W (x)

1

1
+
1 + W (x) EN N 1 + W (x) ,
+

1
1
X + K + () +
K + ()X + ,

1
1
1
V(0, , ) = X0
K ()X +
X K ()
1
V(0, , ) = X0+
611
(A.10)
where we define:

1

1

X = 1 + W (L) EN N 1 + W (L) ,
X + = 1 + W (0) EN N 1 + W (0) ,

1

X0+ = 1 + W (0, ) K + () 1 + W (0, ) N N ,

1

X0 = 1 + W (L, ) K () 1 + W (L, ) N N .
(A.11)
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
P.D. Lax, Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 21 (1968) 467.

C.S. Gardner, J.M. Greene, M.D. Kruskal, M.D. Miura, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (1967) 1095.
M.J. Ablowitz, D.J. Kaup, A.C. Newell, H. Segur, Stud. Appl. Math. 53 (1974) 249.
M.J. Ablowitz, J.F. Ladik, J. Math. Phys. 17 (1976) 1011.
V.E. Zakharov, A.B. Shabat, Anal. Appl. 13 (1979) 13.
L.D. Faddeev, Integrable models in 1 + 1 dimensional quantum field theory, in: J.B. Zuber, R. Stora (Eds.), Recent
Advances in Field Theory and Statistical Mechanics, North-Holland, 1984, p. 561, Les Houches Lectures, 1982;
L.D. Faddeev, L.A. Takhtakajan, Hamiltonian Methods in the Theory of Solitons, Springer-Verlag, 1987.
O. Babelon, D. Bernard, M. Talon, Introduction to Classical Integrable Systems, Cambridge Monographs in Mathematical Physics, 2003.
E.G. Sklyanin, Preprint LOMI E-3-97, Leningrad, 1979.
M.A. Semenov-Tian-Shansky, Funct. Anal. Appl. 17 (1983) 259.
J. Liouville, Journal de Mathematiques XX (1885) 137.
V.I. Arnold, Methods of Classical Mechanics, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 60, Springer, 1978.
I. Cherednik, Theor. Math. Phys. 61 (1984) 977.
E.K. Sklyanin, Funct. Anal. Appl. 21 (1987) 164;
E.K. Sklyanin, J. Phys. A 21 (1988) 2375.
P. Baseilhac, G.W. Delius, J. Phys. A 34 (2001) 8259.
A. Doikou, D. Fioravanti, F. Ravanini, Nucl. Phys. B 790 (2008) 465.
J.-M. Maillet, Phys. Lett. B 162 (1985) 137.
P. Bowcock, E. Corrigan, P.E. Dorey, R.H. Rietdijk, Nucl. Phys. B 445 (1995) 469;
P. Bowcock, E. Corrigan, R.H. Rietdijk, Nucl. Phys. B 465 (1996) 350.
E.K. Sklyanin, Zap. Nauch. Seminarov LOMI 95 (1980) 55;
P.P. Kulish, E.K. Sklyanin, in: J. Hietarinta, C. Montonen (Eds.), Tvarminne Lectures, in: Springer Lectures in
Physics, vol. 151, 1982.
O. Babelon, C.M. Viallet, Phys. Lett. B 237 (1990) 411.
C.N. Yang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (1967) 1312.
H.J. de Vega, A. Gonzalez-Ruiz, Nucl. Phys. B 417 (1994) 553;
H.J. de Vega, A. Gonzalez-Ruiz, Phys. Lett. B 332 (1994) 123.
L. Mezincescu, R.I. Nepomechie, Nucl. Phys. B 372 (1992) 597;
S. Artz, L. Mezincescu, R.I. Nepomechie, J. Phys. A 28 (1995) 5131.
A. Doikou, R.I. Nepomechie, Nucl. Phys. B 521 (1998) 547;
A. Doikou, R.I. Nepomechie, Nucl. Phys. B 530 (1998) 641.
W. Galleas, M.J. Martins, Phys. Lett. A 335 (2005) 167;
R. Malara, A. Lima-Santos, J. Stat. Mech. 0609 (2006) P013;
W.-L. Yang, Y.-Z. Zhang, JHEP 0412 (2004) 019.
G. Delius, Phys. Lett. B 444 (1998) 217.
G.M. Gandenberger, Nucl. Phys. B 542 (1999) 659;
G.M. Gandenberger, hep-th/9911178.
G.W. Delius, N. Mackay, Commun. Math. Phys. 233 (2003) 173.
612
[28] A. Doikou, J. Phys. A 33 (2000) 8797.

[29] D. Arnaudon, N. Cramp, A. Doikou, L. Frappat, E. Ragoucy, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 21 (2006) 1537.
[30] D. Arnaudon, J. Avan, N. Cramp, A. Doikou, L. Frappat, E. Ragoucy, J. Stat. Mech. 0408 (2004) P005;
D. Arnaudon, N. Cramp, A. Doikou, L. Frappat, E. Ragoucy, J. Stat. Mech. 0502 (2005) P007.
[31] A. Doikou, J. Math. Phys. 46 (2005) 053504.
[32] N. Cramp, A. Doikou, J. Math. Phys. 48 (2007) 023511.
[33] G.I. Olshanski, Twisted Yangians and infinite-dimensional classical Lie algebras, in: P.P. Kulish (Ed.), Quantum
Groups, in: Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1510, Springer-Verlag, 1992, p. 103;
A.I. Molev, M. Nazarov, G.I. Olshanski, Russ. Math. Surveys 51 (1996) 206.
[34] A.I. Molev, E. Ragoucy, P. Sorba, Rev. Math. Phys. 15 (2003) 789;
A.I. Molev, in: M. Hazewinkel (Ed.), Handbook of Algebra, vol. 3, Elsevier, 2003, p. 907.
[35] G.W. Delius, N.J. MacKay, B.J. Short, Phys. Lett. B 522 (2001) 335;
G.W. Delius, N.J. MacKay, B.J. Short, Phys. Lett. B 524 (2002) 401, Erratum.
[36] A. Doikou, Nucl. Phys. B 725 (2005) 493.
[37] M. Gaudin, La Fonction dOnde de Bethe, Masson, 1983;
M. Gaudin, J. Phys. (Paris) 37 (1976) 1078.
[38] P. van Moerbeke, Invent. Math. 37 (1976) 45.
[39] M. Toda, Theory of Non-Linear Lattices, Springer-Verlag, 1981.
[40] E.K. Sklyanin, Integrable systems: from classical to quantum, in: CRM Proceedings Lecture Notes, vol. 28, 2000,
p. 227, nlin.SI/0009009.
[41] A. Kundu, B. Basu Mallick, Mod. Phys. Lett. 7 (1992) 61.
[42] M. Jimbo, Commun. Math. Phys. 102 (1986) 53.
[43] K. Hikami, solv-int/9506001.
[44] N. Cramp, C.A.S. Young, J. Phys. A 40 (2007) 5491.
[45] K. Hikami, J. Phys. A 28 (1995) 4997;
W.-L. Yang, Y.-Z. Zhang, M.D. Gould, Nucl. Phys. B 698 (2004) 503;
W.-L. Yang, Y.-Z. Zhang, R. Sasaki, Nucl. Phys. B 729 (2005) 594.
[46] E. Sklyanin, Funct. Anal. Appl. 16 (1982) 263.
[47] L.C. Li, S. Parmentier, Commun. Math. Phys. 125 (1989) 545.
[48] B.M. McCoy, T.T. Wu, Nuovo Cimento B 56 (1966) 311.
[49] H.Q. Zhou, J. Phys. A 29 (1996) L489;
X.W. Guan, D.M. Tong, H.Q. Zhou, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 65 (1996) 2807;
X.W. Guan, M.S. Wang, S.D. Yang, Nucl. Phys. B 485 (1997) 685.
[50] A. Lima-Santos, solv-int/9912009.
[51] L. Freidel, J.M. Maillet, Phys. Lett. B 263 (1991) 403.
[52] V.S. Gerdjikov, M.I. Ivanov, Theor. Math. Phys. 52 (1982) 676.
[53] E. Date, M. Jimbo, T. Miwa, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 52 (1983) 761.
[54] I. Merola, O. Ragnisco, G.Z. Tu, Inverse Problems 10 (1994) 1315;
A. Kundu, O. Ragnisco, J. Phys. A 27 (1994) 6335.
[55] V.B. Kuznetsov, M. Salerno, E.K. Sklyanin, J. Phys. A 33 (2000) 171.
[56] A. Fordy, P.P. Kulish, Commun. Math. Phys. 89 (1983) 427.
[57] V.O. Tarasov, Inverse Problems 7 (1991) 435;
R.F. Bikbaev, V.O. Tarasov, J. Phys. A 24 (1991) 2507.
[58] A.S. Fokas, A.R. Its, nlin.SI/0412008.

Nuclear Physics B

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nuclear Physics B

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NUCLEAR PHYSICS B

Journal devoted to the experimental and theoretical study of the fundamental

Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

Fermion mass hierarchies and flavour mixing

E-mail addresses: feruglio@pd.infn.it (F. Feruglio), lin@pd.infn.it (Y. Lin).

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

The present data [1]:

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

a detail analysis of all breaking effects, we get:

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

d = 1/ 2(m2 m1 )c12 s12 .

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

The elements of S3 can be written as products of generators of the group: 1, S, T , ST , T S, T 2 .

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

The resulting charged lepton mass is of the type

with approximate eigenvalues:

5 Observe that a term (  ec +  c +  c )l ( ) h / would be allowed by S and Z symmetries but

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

e = O(4 ), e = O(2 ). The lepton mixing matrix is then U

In the SUSY limit the condition for the minima are:

This set of equations admit the solution:

where Ii is a basis of independent invariants of dimension four:

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

with v and u still arbitrary and

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

5. Quark masses and mixing angles

In the down sector we have:

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

S. Choubey, What we can learn from atmospheric neutrinos, hep-ph/0609182;

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

F. Feruglio, Y. Lin / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 7793

Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

Twisted mass, overlap and Creutz fermions:

Liverpool L69 7ZL, UK

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

Wilson twisted mass fermions

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

Therefore, from this discussion, it can be concluded

propagator can be obtained only when C = 3/ 10 and R = 2.

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

The local interpolating field describing the proton is given by2

with the definitions

(Nd + 1)SU (p,

(Nd + 3)SU (p,

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

5.2. Unmatched quark masses

We will vary the parameter v from v = 0 to v = 4.0.

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

The relevant trigonometric functions for Creutz fermions are defined by

K. Cichy et al. / Nuclear Physics B 800 (2008) 94108

DC (p) = i , a s (ap) + b c(ap)

5 Observe that a term ( ec + c + c )l ( ) h / would be allowed by S and Z symmetries but