This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
]) , J V 4 J 2 V[<(>* ,4>) = \ {a4>* * ^ * <£* * <j> + bcf>* * 4>* * ? 0. The action (6.22) suffers from the contact term divergencies 211 ' 212 ' 213,214 which arise when a pair of X-s collides in a point. This sort of singularities appears already at the tree level. Really, the tree level graphs are generated by solving the classical equation of motion by perturbation theory. For Witten's action (6.22) the equation reads QBA )}
(312)
where the covariant derivative is defined by V^ = 9M> — ig[A,t, (/>]*. g and A are coupling constants and a and b are fixed real numbers. It has been shown in 32 , that the pure complex scalar field theory is one-loop renormalizable only if a = b or b = 0. The purpose of the present analysis is to find the analogous restrictions on a and b in the case of scalar electrodynamics. The action (3.12) is invariant under the following gauge transformations <£i->- 17 * 0 * t/t ,
<£*(->•[/*>**[/*,
A„ H+ U-kA^ * [ / * + -
Ud^z,
where U is an element of the noncommutative 17(1) group 34 . Note that since our fields are in adjoint representation we could consider the theory with two real scalar fields instead of one complex. The Feynman rules for the theory (3.12) are presented in Table 1. Solid lines denote the scalar fields, "in" arrows stand for the field <j> and "out" arrows stand for the field >*.
27
k
Dfivyk) — p-
P kj, u
J
liV
(1-a)^]
Dip) = £ k2, v 4g25'"'[cos(A;i Api + fc2 Ap 2 ) - cos(pi Ap 2 ) cos(fei A fc2)]
k, n P
l
^
^
p
4
2ig(pi - p 2 ) M sin(pi A p 2 )
- 4A2[ocos(pi Ap 2 +P3 Ap 4 ) + 6cos(pi Ap 3 ) cos(p2 AP4)]
k2,v
ki.H
kyP
k
k
2> v
-2igsm(klAk2)[(kl-k2)pS^
+ (k2-k3)li6vp
+
(k3~k1)vSlMPJ
3» P
4# [((^(W - d^dyp) sin(fci Afc2)sin(k3 A A;4) +(<W
k,, a
+ (<W<SP
We do not specify the Feynman rules for ghosts, since they do not contribute to one-loop graphs with the external matter lines. All calculations are performed in Landau gauge a = 0. This is a convenient choice, since in this gauge a great number of graphs do not have divergent parts. One can prove that the theory is gauge invariant on quantum level (cf. 24,25,26,33^ s o o u r r g g ^ g a n c j conclusions are valid for an arbitrary value of a. The above mentioned restriction on a and b can come from one-loop corrections to the 4-scalar and 2-scalar-2-gluon vertices. First we consider one-loop corrections to the 4-point scalar vertex. The graphs that have non zero divergent parts in Landau gauge are presented in Figure 6. Using the dimensional regularization (d = 4 - 2e) we find that the sum of divergent parts of these
28 b.
r
4
e. *>
h Figure 6.
One-loop corrections to the 4-point scalar vertex.
graphs is equal to 4 (47r) 2 e
[(3g4 + 4 A V + A4&2) cos(pi A p2 + p3 A p 4 )
+ (3g4 + 4A4a& + A462) cosfai A p3) cos(p2 A p 4 )] •
(3.13)
The condition of one-loop renormalizability yields a system of two algebraic equations on a and b 3g4 + 4A4a2 + A462 = ca , 3g4 + 4A4a6 + A4&2 = cb , where c is a constant. These equations are self-consistent only in the case a = b. Therefore the renormalizable potential for scalar electrodynamics has the form
vw,*] = « | ({**- *K)2
(3.14)
where {/, g}* = f*g+g*fNote that in contrast to the pure noncommutative complex scalar field theory 32 we do not have the solution 6 = 0. Let us turn to an analysis of one-loop corrections to the 2-scalar-2-gluon vertex. The graphs that have non zero divergent parts in the a = 0 gauge are presented in Figure 7.
ki.H
e. ki.H k 2 ,v
k,,v Figure 7.
One-loop corrections to the 2-scalar-2-gluon vertex.
29
The sum of the divergent parts of these graphs is 12 (47r) 2 e
g 8^ [cos(pi A fci + p 2 A k2) - cos(pi A p 2 ) cos(&i A fc2)] •
(3.15)
Note that the graphs 7c and 7e do contain 4-point scalar vertex and there are terms depending on a and b. However the contributions of these graphs mutually cancel and the sum does not depend on a and b. Therefore, there are no new restrictions on these constants. We see that a counterterm requiring for a cancellation of (3.15) has just the same trigonometric structure as the initial 2-scalar-2-gluon vertex in the action, i.e. this vertex is one-loop renormalizable. Thus the above analysis leads to the conclusion that noncommutative scalar electrodynamics (3.12) is one-loop renormalizable only if the scalar potential has the anticommutator form (3.14).
3.5. Noncommutative
Jsf = 2 Super
Yang-Mills
Theory
The action for the Euclidean noncommutative Af = 2 SUSY Yang-Mills theory reads 74 - 75
S = Jd4x (-IFIIV*F»1'
+ (Z>M0_) * (V„4>+) -iX**VX
• f f V2x^(i?[x^ + L + i [ x ^ - U - y ( [ ^ - , 0 + U 2 ) ,
(3- 16)
where £>M = d^ — iglA^, •]*, L,R = | ( 1 ± T 5 ), cj>± are real scalar fields, \ is a complex four-component spinor a . The action (3.16) is a noncommutative generalization of Euclidean N = 2 SYM theory. A formulation of noncommutative M = 2 supersymmetric theories in terms of superfields was given in 34
Note that the scalar electrodynamics examined in the previous section can be considered as a bosonic part of AT = 2 NCSYM. The identification is evident: <j> and cf>* corresponds to >+ and >_, respectively. Also we should replace A by g and take a — — b = — 1. The fact that fields (j>± are not complex conjugate does not affect the performed calculations. The Feynman rules for the bosonic part of the action (3.16) can be easily obtained from the Feynman rules for scalar electrodynamics (see Table 1) using the above mentioned identification. The Feynman rules for fermion fields are presented in Table 2. a
Note that Af = 2 SYM in Minkowski space contains a complex scalar field.
30
£... >k, H R
i
^
S(v)
= T"» P
-•*-
2
P
-22gr^sin(piAp2)
i
R>
2i9v / 2sin(pi Ap 2 )-R
^
P>
2i 5 v / 2sin(pi Ap 2 )£
Table 2. Feynman rules for fermion fields.
As in the case of scalar electrodynamics we start with the examination of the one-loop corrections to the 4-point scalar vertex. The graphs with fermion loops are presented in Figure 8. The divergencies coming from these graphs b.
£\Z-A
K.l-A « - - •
+
*
Figure 8. One-loop fermion corrections to the 4-point scalar vertex.
are 32
(4TT)2C
9
cos pi
(
A
P2 + P3 A pi) .
(3.17)
Thus, taking into account the contribution (3.13) of the boson graphs we find that the boson and fermion divergencies mutually cancel. The similar result is valid for ordinary N — 2 SUSY Yang-Mills theory where the 4-point scalar vertex is finite at one-loop 134 . Next we calculate one-loop corrections to the 2-scalar-2-gluon vertex. The graphs with fermion loops are presented in Figure 9. The sum of divergent
* t
it
Figure 9. One-loop fermion corrections to the 2-scalar-2-gluon vertex.
31
parts of these graphs is 1 f\
~ TT^T 9 4 <Wcos(pi A
(3.18)
Summing the contributions of the boson (3.15) and fermion (3.18) graphs we get 4 4 (47r)2e• g * ^ [cos(pi Afci+ p2 A k2) - cos(pi A p 2 ) cos(fci A fc2)] . Note that one-loop fermion corrections as well as boson ones restore the trigonometric structure of the initial vertex. So, we conclude that the noncommutative M = 2 D = 4 SYM with the action (3.16) is one loop renormalizable. 3.6. UV/IR
Problem
It is evident that our renormalized 1PI functions do not have the limit £ —> 0. Due to this there is a nontrivial mixing of UV and IR divergencies (see 29 ' 27 for details). It turns out that a type of the UV divergency of the integral corresponding to the Feynman graph in a local model
J mi f(k,p)dk
Juvip) = /
is the same as a type of the IR behavior of the integral corresponding to the Feynman graph in a noncommutative model
JiRfo) = Je^kePf(k,p)dk. For example, the logarithmically divergent integral Juv ~ log A corresponds to a logarithmic singularity log(£|0p|) in Jm, the quadratically divergent integral Juv corresponds to a quadratic singularity (£|#p|) - 2 in Jm, and so on. Indeed, the UV behavior of the Feynman graph is defined by its index of divergence u. For u > 0 one has the asymptotic UV behaviour as A -> oo J ° s v = [ ku-xdk Jo The IR behavior is described by integral
= -A" . w
(3.19)
rOO
J™R = / k^e^dk (3.20) Jo as £ —> 0. This integral is the Fourier transform of the distribution fc"-1
Jfh=ieWu-1) J^l, , IR (£ + i0) w
(3.21) '
v
32
i.e. for w > 0 one has the correspondence with UV behaviour (3.19). To see logarithmic singularities on £ let us note that rA
M
k dk c
L -' ~ Lk^~loiA
(3 22)
-
and the corresponding non local integral is
J
^^ = JWT^dk-
(3 23)
-
The latter integral can be calculated explicitly and the result is J ^ ° = 2irK0(mt\p\)
.
(3.24)
The modified Bessel function K0(z) has an expansion + ln(2) -C + 0(z2)
Ko(z){&) = -ln(z)
where C is Euler constant, i.e. Jj^ (£p) has the logarithmic dependence on £. IR poles appear in the corrections to propagators and can produce IR divergencies in multi-loop graphs even in the massive theories. One has not to worry about logarithms, since in the origin the logarithm is an integrable function. Let us consider several examples. Example 1. One can calculate explicitly the finite part of the tadpole graph in the noncommutative y 4 theory. The answer is given by the sum of (3.7) and (3.6). The behavior of (3.7) in the limit p2 -»• 0 (the same as the limit £ —>• 0) is the following r(2)
..
1Jp
-
^ _
P^O (Cb|) 2 •
This result can be easily obtained from the series expansion of the modified Bessel function K\ (z)
Kl{z) =
~z + \ZHZ) + {\C ~ \ ~ \ b(2) ) Z + °{z3)
where C is Euler constant. Caused by this asymptotic there are problems with an IR behavior of graphs with tadpoles. They produce divergence in the IR region if the number of insertions is three or more (compare with an example of ref. [21] in 2 8 ) . Thus, theories with a real scalar field have problems with infrared behavior 29 ' 27 originated in multi one-loop insertions.
33
Example 2. Another example is a tadpole Fig. 5:e in the case of complex scalar field. The analytic expression for this graph is the following T(P)
( M 2 ) £ f ,d, A +
BcoS2(kAp)
k2+;
(2'
(^+f)(M2r /
ddk
2
2
k +m
+
pi2k/\p
B{H2) 2(2
2
k + m2
(3.25)
Integrating this expression over momentum k we obtain
r(p) =
,d-2(,,2\e2 (M )' (47r)d/2
(-D
r(i-d/2) + (
d/2-l
B
m
47r)d/2
U\0p\\
Kd/2^(2m^\6p\).
For d = 4 the second term is singular when p —> 0. But in the case B = 0 (one of the possible solution of the UV renormalizability) this term disappears and hence there is no IR problem at least at one-loop level. Example 3. In the case of scalar electrodynamics all corrections to the scalar field propagator are presented in Figure 10a,b,c. For a = b (see notations
d.
." / f r .'" T~L/ -p Figure 10.
One-loop corrections to the scalar field propagator.
in the subsection about scalar electrodynamics) the sum of the divergent parts is: 6<72(^2)2£ fd4k
r
a\2
a\2\
/
,„,
.1
(27
1 — cos(2fc Ap) 8g 2 (^ 22\2e ) d4* p k2{p + k)2 (2*)' /
fc2
where p is an external momentum. A quadratic UV divergence here is removed by a mass renormalization. To remove IR poles one has to impose the condition A2 a =
-3g2.
Computing a one-loop correction to the scalar field propagator in the N = 2 d = 4 NC SYM (3.16) we have one more graph presented in Figure lOd. Summing all contributions we have 49
2/ 2\2e f
~ ^>
^k
J (2^)4
l-cos(2A;Ap) 2
k {p+k)
2
p2+2
(ph) 2 1 k2
34
Since all UV divergencies are logarithmic there is no IR poles in the case of X = 2 D = 4 NC SYM theory. All calculations of the one-loop corrections was performed using a dimensional regularization. Now we would like to show that appearance of the IR singularities does not depend on a regularization. Namely, we compute an answer for the tadpole graph in the noncommutative complex scalar field theory using another methods. The expression for this graph is given by (3.25). First, we perform calculations using Pauli-Villars regularization. To do this we rewrite (3.25) in the following form
(p) =
reg,PV
fd4k[A
T ^
+ B cos2 (k A p)]
k2 + m2
d k2 + M2
k2 + M2
with C\ + C 2 = 1 and C\M\ + C2M\ = m 2 . All integrals are finite and we get the following answer
(A+ I ) [MlMl-m2
rre9,Pv(p) = ±
M2+M2-m2
' 2
M\
M lit
+
M2 - m2
(M2+M2-m2)) M2 M\ - m
M2 +
, 2
6
M2-m2 2
M
lit
S
- d-^K^M^epl)
Mf - C2^K1(2M2^\9p\)Sj
.
(3.26)
Note, that for fixed values of M; there is a cancellation of an IR pole l/\p6\2, i.e. the sum of the last three terms has the following asymptotic behavior for small \p6\2 up to a numeric factor m 2 log(2m£|0p|) - d M 2 log(2Mi£|0p|) - C2MJ \og{2M2t,\6p\) . It is easy to see, that one cannot do this calculation for large Mi. To remove a regularization (to take limits Mi -» oo and M2 -> oo) one has to do the standard UV renormalization which corresponds to the UV renormalization of the planar part of this graph. The first two lines in the (3.26) contain these UV divergencies of the tadpole. The non-planar part, i.e. the third line of (3.26), does not require a renormalization. If one takes limit Mi —>• oo and M 2 —> oo than two last terms in
35
the third line of (3.26) go to zero since Kx{z)
~
for
Z —¥ OO .
Therefore, after removing a regularization we are left with the following term
that contains IR pole. The same result is true for the "cut-off" regularization. We have (up to numeric factors) •
reg,A
4 (P) = [°°da /"d * \U+j)
e ^ *
2
2
2
^ + Be{ kAp-a(k +m )
-f
+ Be~
2_«lJ9plf
where A plays the role of a cut-off. For non-planar part we have B
r °° do da r°°
-«™2
(2'
^77
where A
A eff We see that in the limit A —> oo the integral remains finite and it has infrared pole. This is in an agreement with an absence of the pole in (3.26) for fixed regularization and a presence of the pole after the regularization is removed. The mixing of UV and IR divergencies was noted in 29 ' 27 and as well as consistency of noncommutative quantum field theories were discussed in many papers 2 7 - 7 8 in last two years. As it is seen from examples, theories without fermions have IR singularities (usually poles) at one loop level. There is a possibility to avoid appearance of IR singularities for complex scalar field in one special case: B = 0 in our notations. However, it should be checked that this one loop condition is not violated at higher loop levels. In the case of scalar electrodynamics it is possible to avoid an appearance of IR poles imposing additional condition on coupling constant: A2a = —3g2. In 33 the U(l) theory with additional fermion degrees of freedom was analyzed. It was shown that the IR pole modifies the dispersion relation of the photon in the following way
„2
E1 = pz - (NB -
NF)
2
j
7T {ePy
36
where NB and Np are numbers of bosons and fermions in the adjoint representation. In particular, the energy becomes imaginary for NB > Np, indicating that such a theory may suffer from instability. It is surprising that for the pure gauge theory without fermions we have IR poles which are not expected from the UV/IR correspondence found for the scalar models (See 30 for detailed calculations). The most intriguing point is that gauge invariance does not protect from appearence of the IR singularities. However, such singularities have pure noncommutative nature becuase of trigonometric factors in the vertices. This phenomenon is clear technically but not physically. On the other hand supersymmetric theories do not have pole singularities in the IR region and this was shown explicitly in the third example. This became possible thanks to presence of supersymmetry because there is only one coupling constant which can be tuned and one is unable to remove singularities using this constant. Although logarithms are still present in the Af — 2 NC SYM theory, we emphasize that the logarithm function is integrable in the origin and cannot produce non-integrable singularities in multi-loop graphs. Moreover, it seems likely that the theories with vanishing /?-function on the ordinary commutative space are to be free of nonanalytic dependence on 0 in noncommutative case. In particular, one could expect that Af = 4 NC SYM theory should be finite in both UV and IR regions 33 . Therefore, we see that all theories except M = 4 NC SYM theory have no a smooth limit 6 —> 0 in one-loop approximation and some of them have IR poles. This makes the issue of self-consistency of such theories rather questionable. 4. Cubic String Field Theory and Matrix Models 4.1. String Fields as
Functionals
4.1.1. Witten's Realization of Axioms on Space of String Functionals Witten 1 presented realization of the set (2.2c)-(2.2g') in the case when A is taken to be the space of string fields F={*[X(v);c(o-)M
(4-1)
which can be described as functionals of the matter X{a), ghost c(cr) and antighost fields b(a) corresponding to an open string in 26 dimensions with 0 ^ a ^ 7r. For this string field theory QB is the usual open string BRST charge of the form QB = J
dac(a) (TB{O)
+
X
-Tbc(a)\ .
(4.2)
37
TB and Ttc are stress tensors for the matter field and ghosts (see (5.12) and below (5.14)). The star product * is defined by gluing the right half of one string to the left half of the other using a delta function interaction. The star product factorizes into separate matter and ghost parts. For the matter fields the star product is given by
(**$)[X(ff)] = f
J ] dX'(<j)dX"(ir-o)
Y[
S[X\a)
-X"(n-a)}*[X'(a)]$[X"(o)}, X{a) = X'(p)
for
0
X(a) = X"[a)
(4.3) for
^ a ^ n
.
The integral over a string field factorizes into matter and ghost parts, and in the matter sector is given by [*=[
J]
dX
'(°)
II
8[X'{
(4.4)
Performing a Fourier mode expansion of the 26 matter fields X^ through oo
X»{p) = i g + V2rt ^2 < cos(n<7)
(4.5)
n=l
one can consider string field $[X(CT)] b (we consider there only the X-part of string field for simplicity) as depending on the set {xn}, $ = $[{x„}]. Then one can regard $[{£„}] a wave function in the coordinate representation of a system with an infinite number of degrees of freedom.
4.1.2. String Functionals as Matrices or Symbols for Operators One can consider string functionals as vector states in the coordinate representation 9[X{a)] = (X(a)|*) .
(4.6)
Our goal is to obtain the mapping from string fields |\P) to matrices |*> <=^ * n , m b
Often we shall omit the space-time index \i.
(4-7)
38
so that | ¥ ) * | * > <=» £ * n , k * k , m ,
(4-8)
k
[m*=*Tr9 = Y,iB*M-
( 4Q )
k
"'
Also we want to find a map from string fields to operators |*) <^=» #
(4.10)
| t f ) * | $ ) <^=> * $ .
(4.11)
with
In other words we look for a map between string functionals and operators 9[X(a)] <=> * ,
(4.12)
such that V[X(a)]*$[X((r)]
<=^> $ $ .
(4.13)
There is an analogy between this map and the relation between operators and their symbols 97 . Using this analogy one can interpret the Witten multiplication as a Moyal product of two functionals. Let us make a discretization of the parameter a, i.e. Oi = | ^ , i = 0 , 1 , . . . ,2n and denote Xi = X(ai). The string field $[X(
= y$(Xo,...,x„_ 1 ,x n ,y n _ 1 ,...r 0 ) x * (Yo, . . . ,Yn-i,X„,X„+i,...
Xz„) dDY0...dDYn-1.
(4.14)
The rule (4.14) looks like the matrix multiplication, only the midpoint Xn plays a particular role. To obtain a matrix let us introduce a lattice ZD in MP . Then our variables Xi will belong to this lattice. If one restricts himself to a finite sublattice then one gets a field $({XLti} , x , {XRti}), where {XLJ} = (Xo,-.. ,Xn-i) corresponds to XL(a), {XRti} = (Xn+1,... ,X2n) corresponds to XR{O) and x = Xn. Denoting multi-indexes a = {XL^} and b = {XR^} one has a matrix field $ab(x). a,b can be enumerated as a, b = 1,... ,N. Therefore, we get a matrix realization 190 of the Witten algebra where the fields are matrices $ab(%) depending on parameter x, the product * is the matrix product ($ * *) o 6 (s) = $ac(x) $cb(x)
(4.15)
39 and the integral is
(4-16)
j $ = Y; Tr ^W •
To find a map (4.7) directly in the continuous case it is useful to consider the half string formalism. 4.1.3. Half-String Functionals In (4.3) and (4.4) * and J are defined in terms of string overlaps. Each string has a preferred point, the "midpoint" a = TT/2. The midpoint divides a string X into left and right halves (XL , XR). The product of two string functionals ^[X1] and *[X"] is zero unless X'R coincides with X'[ in the space-time. So the string field $[X] is considered as a functional $[(XL,XR)] and one has
(*y)(XL,XR) = j
J J dYR(a)$[(XL,YR)}
where
r(YR(a))=YR(n-a). It is useful to perform a separate mode expansion of the left and right pieces of the string. There are different possibilities to do this 1 6 1 ' 1 6 2 ' 1 6 3 ' 1 6 7 (see also 191 192 ' ). One can define the left and right pieces of the string with or without a shift on the midpoint. In the first case one has c oo
XL(a)
= X(a) - X ( f ) = V / 2a 7 ^
x% cos(2n - 1)
(4.18a)
x% cos(2n - l)a ,
(4.18b)
n=l oo R
X (a)
= X{TT -a)-
X ( f ) = Vw
^ n=l
for 0 ^ a ^ §. Note that Xi(a) and XR(cr) obey Neumann boundary conditions at a = 0 and zero Dirichlet boundary conditions at a = | . These coordinates are called 192 "comma" coordinates. An expression for the full open string modes in terms of the modes of the left-half and modes of the right-half is:
X2n-1 = ^ {Xn - Xn) > XZn = - Yl
B
m=l c
Often we shall fix a', here a' = 1.
O
1,
2n,2m-1 (*£ + « £ ) ,
(4-19a) f» £ 1 .
(4.19b)
40
Matrices B2n,2m-i are written explicitly in Appendix 4.1. For the midpoint coordinate one has
Conversely, the center of mass in the "comma" representation is:
Without shift on the midpoint one deals with the following half string coordinates'1: 1(a) = X(a) ,
(4.22a)
r(a) = X(TT - a) ,
(4.22b)
for 0 ^ a ^ | . Note that 1(a) and r(cr) obey Neumann boundary conditions at a = 0 and Dirichlet boundary conditions at a = ^ . One can perform a separated mode expansion of the left and right half-strings choosing an odd/even extension to the interval (f ,7r]. In the first case one left only with odd modes in the Fourier expansions oo
1(a) = A / 2 0
7
Y
W I cos(2n + l)a ,
(4.23a)
r(a) = \f2a' ^ r 2 n + i cos(2n + 1)<J .
(4.23b)
n=0 oo n=l
Relations between the full-string modes and the half-string modes r2„+i and hn+i are X2n+i - j f W i -r-in+i) , x
2n
= r
/ J ^ 2 n , 2 m + l ( W l + r2m+l) m=0
(4.24a) ,
(4.24b)
where matrices X2n,2m+i are written explicitly in Appendix 4.1. Choosing an even extension to the interval (f ,7r] one left himself only with even modes in To avoid misunderstanding we use new letters I, r and xL>Xfl f° r these half-strings coordinates.
41
the Fourier expansions of the left and right half-strings oo
L
7
X ip) = Xo + ^ / 2 ^ Y, *2n cos(2na) ,
(4.25a)
n=l oo
XR{o) =Xo+
^/2o7 £ x t cos(2na) .
(4.25b)
n=l
Relations between the full-string modes and the half-string modes x\n are *2n
= 2 ( X 2 n + X?n) >
*2„-i = -
v
^ |
» ^ 0 ,
an
d X§n
(4.26a)
^ (*£ - X?) + E
B2m 2
- «+! ( ^ m - XL) •
(4.26b)
m=l
4.1.4. Half-String Functionate and Projectors Using for example (4.23a), (4.23b), one can rewrite a string field $[X(CT)] as a functional of the right and left half-string degrees of freedom *[{*2fc+i};{r2fc+i}]. The star product \P * $ in the split string language is given by oo
Y[dS2k+iy[{l2k+l};{s2k+l}}
/
fc=0
x$[{S2fe+1};{r2fc+1}].
(4.27)
Since | d e t X | = 1 (4.242), one can write the string field integral (4.4) as
/ * = / n
J
^
d/2fc x
+ * K*2*+I} ; {'2*+i>i •
^4-28)
fc=0
One can think that {r2k+i} specifies a point K in the discrete set K G K and consider \f[{72fc+i} ; {?"2A+i}] as an infinite dimensional matrix $R,L so that * =• Tr * ,
(4.29)
/ •
(* * *) [{hk+i} ; {r2k+i}} => *LK$KR
•
(4.30)
Since we have divided string into left and right half-strings it is useful following 161>162 to introduce string fields of the form n(°)A°)]=Ml(v)}Mr(
(4-31)
42
For Vz, = V'fl these string fields are rank one projectors. One simple class of them is described by Gaussian functionals il>[l(ff)] ~ exp (~hk+i
Mkj hj+i J .
(4.32)
String field (4.31) in the full string modes basis is rewritten as *[{zn}] = exp {--xnLnmxm\
,
(4.33)
— 2X2ri,2A:+l Mkj -X"2j+l,2m ,
(4.34)
where •^2*+l,2j+l = %Mf.j , L2n,2m
Li2k+l,2m
— L2n,2j+1
=0.
This means that string field of the form (4.33) is factorized when the following conditions on the matrix Lnm are imposed (a) The components Lnm must vanish when n + m is odd. (b) The nonzero components must satisfy L2n,2m
= ^2n,2ft+li2fc+l,2j+1^2j+l,2m
•
(4.35)
Examples of functionals satisfying conditions (a) and (b) are J-'nm
=
onm
and
Lnm = onmn
,
(4.36)
where identity (4.241) is used. 4.2. * in Fock Space 4.2.1. String Fields as Vectors in Fock Space One can regard ${a;„} from the previous subsection as a wave function in the coordinate representation of a system with an infinite number of degrees of freedom. From the coordinate space one can make transition to the Fock space. In our case this is the Hilbert space % of the first-quantized string theory. To describe V. let us write the canonical conjugated momentum Pv{(r)
pv
(°) = Mpr+^EKcos n A •
( 4 - 37 )
The canonical commutation relation is [X"(a) ,/*>')] = iS^Si^a') ,
(4.38)
43
where 5(a, a1) is the (5-function satisfying the Neumann boundary conditions on [0,7r]: 8(a,a') = -
^
cosnacosna'
= S(a - a') + 6(a + a') .
(4.39)
77 n = — oo
From (4.38) the commutation relations for modes are found to be
[a^p*] = « T ,
K ,p»m} = i^6n,m .
(4.40)
Now we can introduce the creation and annihilation operators for nonzero modes via M —_*
x„
< - <#
_ < + <*
'p£ » =^ V V2^
•
(4-41)
' n V2 From (4.40) and (4.41) we get the following commutation relations ( a _ m = K , a a = n r W , o .
(4-42)
The state |0,p) is defined as P"|0,p> = PM|0,P> ,
a{J|0,p> = 0 ,
n ^ 1.
(4.43)
A basis for % is given by the set of states of the form a^ni...cCjO,p),
(4.44)
where n > 0, and i is an arbitrary positive integer. Then any state |$) € H can be expanded as |$) = y*dp()(p) + ^ ( p ) a ^ 1 + J 3 ^ ( p ) a 1 1 Q l 1 + •••)|0,p) ,
(4.45)
where the coefficients in front of the basis states have the dependence on the center-of-mass momentum of the string. These coefficient functions are spacetime particle fields. The eigenstates of the position operators Xn\xn) =Xn\xn)
(4.46)
(here and in eq. (4.43) we put hats on x and p despite the fact that we have not put hats in the relations (4.40) and (4.41)) are given by / 1
\xn) =[-)
\ 1/4 e-5"
a:
"-iV5"a:"a"+^a"o"|0)n ,
(4.47)
44
where a n | 0 ) n = 0. Using the completeness of these states oo
/
Y[ \xn)(xn\ dxn = 1
(4.48)
n=l
one gets string functional corresponding to a given vector $ in the space Ti
9[X(a)] = * [{*„}] = IJ<*n|*>
(4-49)
and vice versa
\9) = J9[{xn}]Y[dxn\xn).
(4.50)
4.2.2. Vertices Using (4.50) one can express 204 (see also (4.4) as an operation
* :n®n
205 207
-
) the * operation defined by
-> n.
(4.51)
It is convenient to write the * product of |\£) and |$) using the reflection operator (R\ and 3-string vertex (V3I 123
(4-52)
| * > * | * > 3 = ia3'
(4-53)
in the form
where the subscript 1,2,3 label three interacting strings. One can rewrite (4.53) as |*>*|*>3 = i < ¥ | 2 W 3 > i 2 3 ,
(4-54)
i(*| = i2(R\9h •
(4-55)
where
1. Overlaps |Vjy)e solves the overlap conditions XT{(T) e
- Xr-i(ir
- a) = 0 ,
Pr(
We usually use / and R notations for Vi and V2 respectively.
- a) = 0
(4.56)
45 for a € L, where L denotes the interval [0, f ] and R denotes [ | , ir]. For the zero mode sector of the Fock space T-i we shall use both oscillator and momentum representations. We start with the oscillator representation. 2. Vertex in the zero mode oscillator representation 3-vertex with the zero mode in the oscillator representation can be written in the form 26
(27T)-
\V3) = V3(^
+
ex
p - , E E ^ c < * io)i
VQo)a'i
r,s
23
•
m,n^0
(4.57) Here the strange at the first sight normalization factor has been chosen to cancel unwanted factors in the proceeding expressions. Note that in (4.57) the vacuum |0) is |0) = |0)„£ 0 =
0
|0>„ = |0) 0 ® | 0 ) n > 0
(4.58)
at = a_
(4.59)
n=0,l,-
and an is related with an as On
=
an
sjn
y/n
The vertex functions Vm™ have the following properties: •*• /
v
mn
v
nm
'
2°) cyclic property Vrs where summation is assumed
= y'r+1's+1
(4.60)
mod 3;
and can be expressed as 204 V'" = \ (C + a$-rU' + ar~sU')
,
(4.61)
where a = exp( 2 ^ 1 ), Cmn = (—l)nSmn is the twist operator and the matrices U' and U' = CU' C satisfy the following relations {U'f = {U'f = 1 ,
(£/')* - U' .
(4.62)
Equations (4.61) are equivalent to the fact that the matrix V'TS can be blockdiagonalized in r, s indices by the matrix O satisfying 0~x = O^ :
v = o-1vj}o,
(4.63)
46
with ' C O O V'n = 0 U' 0 . 0 0 U'
o
1 1 1' a* a 1 a a* 1
1
7s
(4.64)
3. Vertex with zero mode in the momentum representation Relation between the zero mode vacuum in the momentum and oscillator representation is |0,p) = |p)o®|0) n > 0 =
h ' exp ( ~ T p 2 + v ^ ° » p - \ (ao)2)|0>o ®|0)n>o •
(465)
One can rewrite (4.57) in the momentum representation for the zero modes
J dp1 dp'dp" 6™ (p1 + p2 + p3) exp
\V3) = j~5
^EE^^-yE^
00 P
o / „ / , am V mn r,s m . n ^ l
|0,p>i
a
n
(4.66)
r,s n > l
The element VQQ is independent of r and we denote it as Voo = —2 log 7, where 7 = -4= . Relations between vertices V and V are v
v
mn
run
2
yrt v m0
Si
vyts
0n
+ 2V0<
•trirs ^raO
-rrlsr v 0m
i/frs
2Vn00 1 1 + <5r 3 1 + 2VOO 2y00+ 1
. y
1 . o ri'00 / vm0 > 1 + I VQC
for
n,m ^ 1 ;
(4.67a)
for
m ^ 1;
(4.67b) (4.67c)
The vertex in the zero momentum space is \V3) = exp f - ± £
£
< t y « n a -t j |o, 0) 123 ,
(4.68)
where V™n can be expressed in the same form as (4.61) 156>204. Vrs = \(C + as-rU + ar-sU) ,
(4.69)
47
where matrices U and U = CU C satisfy the relations analogous to (4.62) (tf) f = U .
{Uf = (Uf = 1 ,
(4.70)
and can be expressed in terms of the entries of U' as 1 Umn = U'mn + \V00 + | J U'm0U'0n ,
m, n > 1 .
(4.71)
Matrix Vs can be block-diagonalized by the matrix O (4.64). | V3) can be explicitly written in terms of the Neumann coefficients as 1 {V } =
*
r
3
(\
( 2 ^ 3 / ^^P^P3
S
(P1 +P2+
P3) ^
2 E
3
3
+ V^7 £
r , s = l mjjl
r=l
E
«-n^m«'-m
\
P r ^ m " ' - ™ + YNo°T,P2
E
°°
|0.P>i23 •
(4-72)
/
The Neumann coefficients AT" represent the effect of conformal transformations fr of the upper half-disks of three open strings (see Sect. 5.2) to the unit disc nm J 2m
(/i } (z) - / i > H ) 2 (4.73)
J 2m
4.3. • in Left-Right
Fock Space
4.3.1. Vertices Overlaps for iV-vertex in terms of half-string coordinates and momentum have the following forms [xH°) - X?-iW] IViv) = 0 ,
a G [O.TT/2) , (4.74)
[ p f {<*) + p f - i W ] IViv) = 0 ,
a e [O.Tr/2) ,
where i = 1,2,... , iV. Using the method developed by Gross and Jevicki 204 one can solve overlaps explicitly 193 and get the following answers for / , V2 and V3: \I) = e-b^b?»\0)L\Q)R
,
|y 2 )
= e-EL16fl6fJ1„n2=i|0)f|0)f
|y 3 )
= e
(4.75) ;
(476)
-EU^Ct1„nL1|0)f|0)f .
(4.77)
48
Here we use "comma" creation and annihilation operators introduced in Appendix 4.2. In 193 the proof of the equivalence of operator formulation of the Witten vertex and comma theory in the case of I and V2 is given. This proof is generalized for 3-vertex in 194 . It is shown that V3 is a solution of comma overlap equations. A more direct proof of the equivalence of the two forms of vertices would be direct calculation of the string vertex operator in corresponding full string modes and half-string modes starting from the functional form (4.17). 4.3.2. * in Half-String Local Basis From (4.75)-(4.77) one sees that "comma" vertices can be written in terms of local variables, for example \V3) = e - n = 1 / ^ f t ( - ) C 1 W n 3 = 1 | 0 ) f |0)f .
(4.78)
This can be seen in a more direct way. To this purpose one can following 165 rewrite conditions (4.56) as single condition using annihilation operator b(a) f b(a) = v W r P ( a )
—
X{a) .
(4.79)
2V7TQ'
The commutator of b(a) and its hermitian conjugate tf (a) is found to be [b(a),bHa')]=S(a,a').
(4.80)
The overlap conditions (4.56) are br(a) = -6 r _i f (7r - a) ,
for
a G L .
(4.81)
In terms of b(a) |V3) has a simple form |V3) = exp\J2J2
=
6XP
U £
dabK^bU^
£dada'bi(cr)Nrs(<j,o-')bl(a')\
The function NTS(a,a') Nrs(a,a')
- a)\ \0)x ® \0)2 (8 \0)3
(4.82)
|0>i ® \0)2 ® \0)3 .
is defined as
= [6r-i,.0L(tT) +8r+1,.eR(ir)]S(n-tT,a')
,
We hope that the use of tf ,b for creation and annihilation operators does not make a confusion with ghost operators.
49 where #L(
for
[TT/2,TV],
(4.83)
The reflector i 2 (i?| and the identity (I\ are the subject for the following relations 165 12(R\br(
{I\tf{a)
= - MRlbU^ir
- a) ,
= -(I\b(n-a)
.
a € L ,
r = 1,2 ,
(4.84) (4.85)
In terms of b(a) one has simple expressions for the reflector and the identity 2
i2(R\ = i(0\
®2<0|exp
r
^L
d/ da b (a)b -i 2
r
r
(TT — a)
Jo
r=l
r = l,2, (4.86)
(I\ = < 0 | e x p [ - ^ j f d a b ( a ) b ( n - a )
(4.87)
.
b(a) and tf (a) can be expanded as
b{a) = b0J-
+ J-
Ylbncos(no")
.
(4.88)
bt cos(ncr) .
(4.89)
n=l
&V) = &o y \ + \lI
£ n=l
The pairs bn , 6+ and an , an are related by the Bogoliubov transformation bn = UaJJ-1
,
6+ = UalU"1 ,
(4.90)
(an ~ ^n)
(4.91)
where U is an operator U
= eXP ( lY,10^ n=l
or bn =
n+1 n-1 a + 2Vn n 2y/H
(4.92)
Note that (4.90) is not a proper Bogoliubov transformation from creation an and annihilation a„ operators to creation bn and annihilation bn operators since the set { ( n - l ) / ( n + l)} is not quadratically summable. See m , Theorem 1 in Section 2. The operator U define a map from the Fock space of initial creation and annihilation operators a\, an to a new space built on the cyclic vector \0) that is the vacuum for the new annihilation operators. To give an operator meaning to (4.91) one can use a dressing procedure (see for example 1 8 2 ) .
50
The zero mode transforms as b0 = \[a'-p
%
-;= x . (4.93) 2v«' The formal relation between \0) and the zero momentum vacuum |0,0) is |C) = e i b ° 2 [ / | 0 , 0 ) .
(4.94)
4.3.3. * in b-Holomorphic Basis A coherent state with respect to b(a) (4.95)
Ko)\f) = f(a)\f) is given by the following formula | / ) = exp
\0).
.Jo The hermitian conjugate ( / | satisfies
(4.96)
(4.97)
(f\bH
J[dfdf] |/>e-/o-*'l/<-)la| = i ,
(4.98)
where the measure is given by ,1 _ TT dfn dfn
[dfd,J
~ 11 2m
J
n=0
where / „ are coefficients in the Fourier expansion and as usual dfn dfn = 2 i dxn dyn . Extremely simple form takes a product of two coherent states if the notation is used for | / L , / A ) denotes |/) with the functions /i,fl(cr) = 0itR(a)f(a), \h , fR) * \9L , 9R) = e~ ' * n*-°M°)
\fL , gR) .
(4.99)
Let us check that \0) satisfies left-right factorization identities (4.34). The Bogoliubov transformations (4.93), (4.92) can be rewritten in the form bo = cosh #o «o + sinh 00 a0 , bn = cosh9 n an + sinh6 n a'n and P) = exp (-^atSijafj
|0,0> ,
(4.100)
51
where the matrix S^ - tanh0j<$y- (i, j = 0 , 1 , . . . ) can be written explicitly Soo = 3 ,
(4.101)
n-1 onm — ——rdnm , n,m>0. n +1 In the coordinate representation (4.100) corresponds to
(4.102) '
exp (y-\xE-1
I^IE"1*)
,
(4.103)
where Erf = S^ Vi + 6i0 Sj0 V2 .
(4.104)
Here we have used that
\x)=exp(--xE~2x-ia^V2E-1x+-ai2j
.
(4.105)
One gets Lij matrix (4.33) of the form
(^ITI^1)
nm=
(E-1—-—E-1\
L
Loo=
=1
(4106)
=SniVnSikjSkmy/m
= Snm .
(4.107)
This concludes the proof of the factorization. 4.3.4. Summary Let us summarize what we presented in this subsection. We have found a realization of * in the string Fock space over vacuum O. This realization has the following nice properties: • O is a projector with respect to the ^-multiplication \0)*\0)
= \0);
(4.108a)
• O does not belong the Fock space; • O satisfies to left-right factorization identities; • There is also the identity operator \I): |I>*|/> = | / > ,
(4.108b)
|I)*|0> = | 0 ) ;
(4.108c)
52
• Vertex has a simple "comma" form (4.82); • The coherent states over this vacuum are multiplied according to a simple formula (4.99). 4.4. General Properties
of Cyclic
Vertices in Sliver
Basis
4.4.1. Properties of Vertex on Sliver In this section we will mostly follow the analysis of Kostelecky and Potting 156 (see also 1 7 0 ) . Let us suppose that 3-vertex operator (4.68) written in terms of the creation and annihilation operators s^ and s can be presented in the form
|Vs> = exp [ -\ £
Y, *& 1 4
s
) |H)123 ,
(4.109)
where |H) is the s-vacuum *|S) = 0 , Vrs obeys the cyclic symmetry (4.60) and (VrsY — Vsr. The cyclic symmetry means that the matrix V has the following form /yll
V21 12
yV
y-12 y21\
V11
V12
21
11
V
(4.110)
V )
Let us assume that reflector (R\ has the form (R\ = i<2| ® 2 (5|exp ( - Ts1nCnms2m
1.
(4.111)
\ m,n
Let us also suppose that the following identities (these identities are the same as identities (4.108a)-(4.108c) from the previous section) take place |S)*|S) = | S ) ,
(4.112a)
|/)*|/)=|J>,
(4.112b)
|S>*|/>=|/>*|2> = |2),
(4.112c)
|/)=ex P |-^4c nm 4J|H) .
(4.112d)
where
53 Using the cyclic symmetry one can prove that (4.112a) leads to VTr = 0 .
(4.113)
Indeed,
i<2| ® 2
|H) 123
= exp(-l4v 1 1 4)|H>3. We will widely use this property in the following calculations. Prom (4.112c) it follows that V12CV21 = 0 ,
V21CV12 = 0 .
(4.114)
Indeed,
2(I\
® i(E\V)u3
= i2<S|exp (
--s2Cs2
x e x p ( - 4 y 1 2 4 - 4 V 2 1 4 - *\V12s£) = 2 (=|exp I --s2Cs2
|3> 123
j exp ( ~ 4 ^ 1 2 4 ) Is)23
= ex P (-i4y 1 2 cy 2 1 4)|H)3, that leads us to the identity V12CV21 = 0. Identity V21CV12 = 0 can be achieved analogously. From (4.112b) it follows that V21CV21CV21 Indeed,
+ V12CV12CV12
= C .
(4.115)
54
2{I\
<E> i(i\V)123
= i 2 (H|exp i--s2Cs2
j exp (--siCsi
j
x exp (-4t> 12 4 - 4v214 - s\v124) |s>123 oc 2 (E|exp ( x exp -\(4V12 a
2 (S|exp
~-s2Cs2 + 4V21)C(V"4
(-\s2Cs2\
oc 2 (H|exp (-\s2Cs2)
+ t> 2 1 4)J exp ( - 4 ^ 4 ) |S>23
exp ( - s ^ C V 2 1 * * - 4 ^ 1 2 4 ) |S>23 exp [ ~ 4 (v21CV21
+ V12) 4 ] |S>23
oc exp
~4 (v21 + vucv12) c (v21cv21 + v12)
oc exp
~ 4 (y21cv 21cv21 + v12cv12cv12) 4
|3>3
|S>3-
Introducing notations L = V12C,
R = V21C
(4.116)
one can rewrite (4.114), (4.115) in the form LR = 0 ,
RL = 0 ,
i 3 + i? 3 = 1 .
(4.117)
This means that we get the projections operators R2 = R and L2 = L. Using the notations (4.116) and taking into account (4.113) one can rewrite CV as
CV3=
0 | R L
L 0 R
R L 0
(4.118)
Let us now suppose that creation and annihilation operators s and sf are related to a and a | v * a the Bogoliubov transformation s = w (a + Sa*) ,
s* = (cr + Sa) w
(4.119)
where w = (1 - S 2 ) - 1 / 2 .
(4.120)
55
Vacua are related via |S) = Det(u>) - 1 / 2 exp (-^SaA
|0) , (4.121)
|0) = D e t ^ J - ^ e x p ( 5 * ^ ) |S) . Let us prove that the vertex given in the a and af basis by (4.57), (4.68) satisfies the cyclic property in the s and st basis. We must note here that the analysis is the same for the case of the zero momentum in momentum representation for the zero mode (4.68) and for the case of oscillator representation for the zero mode (4.57). Reversing the Bogoliubov transformation a = w [s — Ss')
,
a' = (s
sS) w
one can rewrite the 3-vertex in terms of s \V3)=exP(-^VrsaA\0)123 oc exp {-\ar^ oc exp ~
(Vrs - S6rs) asA |S)i 23
(s+ + sS)T {w(V - S)w}TS (a* + Ss)1 |2> 123
(4.122)
where the symbol 5 is understood as SmnSrs. Using (4.270) one can rewrite equation (4.122) as \V3) oc exp (-l8^V"s'^
|S)m ,
(4.123)
where
v = {i-vsy1{v-s).
(4.124)
Since S is diagonal, matrix V given by (4.124) can be diagonalized by the same matrix O that diagonalizes V
V = 0-\\ where (1 - VDS) V£ r . Therefore,
- S)0 ,
(4.125)
1
(VD — S) is the diagonal matrix with the diagonal elements
/ l a
V
- VoSy^Vo
a*\
1 a* a \1 1 1 J
(Vg
0
0
Vg
\ 0
0
0 \ / l 0
vgj
1 1\ a* a 1 \a a* l)
(4.126)
56
where Vg r are given by Vg ={\-CS)-l{C-S)
=C ,
Vj? = (1-US)-1(U-S)
= A,
V%3 = (1-US)-1(U-S)
(4.127)
=A. 2
Note that if [V, S] = 0 then V = V, since C = 1, U2 = 1 and U2 = 1 (4.70), (4.62). Matrices A and A satisfy relations A2 = 1 and A2 = 1. Indeed,
A2 = (i - usyl{u - s){\ - usyl(u - s) = (U- S^U-^U
- S){U - S^U-^U
- 5) = 1 .
Let us prove that if S is twist symmetric [C,S] = 0 then the identity \I) which can be achieved by the Bogoliubov transformation is equal to the state introduced by (4.112d). Indeed, using eq. (4.270) |J) = exp (-^CaA = exp (-\(s*
|0) = exp (-^CaA - sS)w(C - S)w(-Ss
exp (^SaA
|S>
+ « t )'j |2)
oc exp ( - ; U + ( 1 - w(C - S)wS)-1w(C
- S)wsA
|S)
= ex P (^-i S t Cs tj| S) = |/ ) . In the same way it can be shown that (.R| achieved by the Bogoliubov transformation is equal to the one introduced by (4.111). Indeed, 12(-R| = 12 (0| exp
(-a1Ca2)
= i2(=| exp f -aiSai
J exp ( -a2Sa2 J exp ( - o i C a 2 )
=
1 2 (S|
exp i (s - s^S)8 (wTw)rs ( - 5 s f + s)s
=
12(E\
exp (-SlCs2)
,
(4.128)
57 where we have used the notation
Note that twist symmetry lead us to the relations A = CAC and L = CRC. 4.4.2. Equation for Bogoliubov Transformation for Sliver Basis As one can see from (4.113) the matrix 5 should satisfy the following requirement to create the sliver vacuum S C +A+A= 0. Following
156
(4.130)
we impose the constraints [V,SC} = 0.
(4.131)
Commutation relations (4.131) can be rewritten in the form CS = SC
US = SU ,
US = SU .
(4.132)
Let us now solve eq. (4.130): C + (1 - US)-l(U
- S) + (1 - US)-1^
-S)
= 0.
(4.133)
Multiplying (4.133) from both sides with (1 — US) and using the identity (U - S)(l - US) = (1 - US)(U - S)
(4.134)
(C + U + U)(1 + S2-CS)-3S
(4.135)
one gets = 0.
This equation was proposed and solved by Kostelecky and Potting in
156
.
4.4.3. Algebra of Coherent States on Sliver Using the projections L and R, following s = sL + sR ,
sL = ^
sLnen
170
we can split s into L and R parts
,
sR = ^2 sRnfn ,
n
(4.136)
n
where e„ and / „ are the orthonormal basises of the eigenspaces of L and R: e
n ' em
=
Jn ' Jm
Len = e„ ,
L = ^ene^, n
=
"nm >
&n ' Jm — " j
Ren = 0 ,
Lfn=0,
R = Y,f*fi n
•
Jn
=
t> en ,
Rfn = / „ ,
(4.1o7j
(4.138)
( 4 - 139 )
58
Since SL and SR commute, [sin , 4 m ]
= Isfin , 4 m
= 5nm ,
SLn , SRmj
= 0 ,
(4.140)
the Hilbert space is factorized into the Fock spaces of sx, and SR 'Ustr = 'HL®'HR.
(4.141)
In terms of SL,R, the 3-string vertex takes a "comma" form \V3) = exp (sR1s{2 + sR2s[3 + s ^ s ^ ) |S)i2 3 ,
(4.142)
44 = E s L4„-
(4-143)
where
The identity string field and the reflector become \I) = es*si |~) ,
= 12(S|es«lS"+SR2S" .
12(R\
(4.144)
It is convenient to introduce the coherent states ( / L 4 , JRWL are defined as in (4.143)) | / L , SR) = exp ( / L 4 + fRsR) Hh,
|S> ,
(4.145)
h) = exp ( / L 4 + / f i 4 ) |J> .
(4.146)
The multiplication rules for these coherent states are =efRWL\fL,wR)
\h,fR)*\v)L,wR)
,
(4.147a)
Hh , SR) * \wL , WR) = efRWL \fL + WL , wR) ,
(4.147b)
\h , SR) * I{WL , V>R) = eSnWL \h , fR + wR) ,
(4.147c)
Hh , IR) * I{WL , wR) = ef"WLI{fL +WL,fR+ 4.5. Algebra of String
WR)
.
(4.147d)
Operators
4.5.1. Operator Realization of String Functionals There is a general GSM construction operator algebra. Here we show that write an explicit form of a map of the that has the property (4.10), (4.11). fields \An) = sRn\I)
,
which maps an algebra of states to an the comma form of 3-vertex permits to algebra of states to an operator algebra Following 1T0 we introduce the string |4) =4JJ) .
(4.148)
59 They satisfy the canonical commutation relations: (4.149) where [ , ]* denotes the commutator with the star string product [A, £ ] * = A * B - B * A . We also have (4.150)
|A„>*|S> = | S > * | 4 > = 0 . On a linear span of states
|E),
K>*|S>,
K>*lO*|3>,
•••
(4.151)
one can introduce an action of operator A], = |i4j,)*
Aj,|S> = |4>*|S>,
Al\Atl2)*\Z) = AU42>
\Al)*\Al)*\E),
* K> * |H> = i43> * I42) * K> * 1=),
and the operator A n = |A n )* A„|E) = K ) * | E ) = 0 , A n i | A n 2 ) * | S ) = \Ani)*\Atl2)*\=)
,
A „ 3 | A n 2 ) * | ^ n i ) * | E ) = \An3)*\An2)*\Ani)*\E)
,
We see that due to (4.149) and the fact that |I)* acts on the states (4.151) as the identity, A* and A n satisfy the commutation relation for creation and annihilation operators [A n ,Aj„] = S n m .
(4.154)
|S) is a vacuum with respect to A ra , i.e. An|S)=0. Therefore, the linear span (4.151) is naturally embedded in the Fock space 7i representation of (4.154). Next, one can perform a map of a linear span |S),
\E)*\An),
|S)*|Ani)*K2>,
•••
(4-155)
60 to the following conjugated states in the space H
|2> * \An) = » (S|A n , ^ \=|AniAn2 ,
I—/ * \-™-n\ ) * \An2) For a general state of the form \Nk,Mt)
= \Ai1)*---\Atlh)*\S)*\Ami)*---\Ami)
(4.157)
we can consider a map \Nk,M,)=>\Nk)(M,\,
(4.158) i
*•
\Nk)(Mi\ = JJ A^|S)<S| JJ A m . .
(4.159)
This map is consistent with * multiplication of two states in the form (4.157), i.e it defines a morphism. One can check this using (4.147a)-(4.147d). It is convenient to introduce A-coherent states | / ) , and it's conjugate (g\ = <2|e£5-A. ,
|/) = e£/».AL|H) .
(4.I6O)
Using the morphism (4.158) one can write \h JR) = e ' ^ | / ) * | ~ ) * e ' « s « | J ) = e ' ^ l - X - l e ^ = \fL){fR\ . (4.161) Note that this relation is consistent with the trace Tr
(|/L,/*>)
=
|/L,/«>
= e^« .
(4.162)
One can write
i* *> - n ^
IE) * n j ^ iHXHi n -^==mm.
^w
The above construction works for half-string representation as well 165 . In this case using notations of (4.3.2) we introduce the following string fields \A(a)) = 0R(a)bHa) \I) ,
|A+(*r)> - -6R(tr)bH* - a) \I) .
(4.164)
One can check that [\A(a)),\AHa'))]^S(a,a')\I),
(4.165)
We also have \A(a))*\O)
= 0,
\O)*\A*{
= 0.
(4.166)
61
On a linear span of states \0),
\AHa))*\0),
^ V I ) ) * ! ^ ) } * ^ ) ,
...
(4.167)
one can introduce an action of operator A^(cr) = \A^(a))* AHa)\0)
=
\AH
A t ( a i ) | ^ ( a 2 ) > * \0) = \A\a,)) At(a 3 )|At(a 2 )) * \A\a{))
and the operator A(cr) =
* |^(cr 2 )) * |0> ,
* |0> = l ^ f o ) ) * | ^ ( a 2 ) ) * |^t( f f l )) * \Q) ,
|^4(CT))*
A(a)|O) = |^((7)>*|O> = 0 , A(ffl)|A(cr2)> * \0) = |^( f f l )) * |A(a2)> * \0) , A(
We see that due to (4.165) and the fact that \I)* acts on the states (4.167) as the identity, operators A^(a) and A(a) satisfy the commutation relation for creation and annihilation operators [A(a),AV)]=<W)-
(4-170)
\0) is a vacuum with respect to A{a), i.e. A{a)\0)
=0.
Therefore, the linear span (4.167) is naturally embedded in the Fock space % representation of (4.170). Next, one can perform a map of a linear span \0) ,
\
lO)*!^)}*!^)),
...
(4.171)
to the following conjugated states in the space % \0) => (0\ , \0)*\A(a))
=*(0\A(v),
|0>*|^(a!)>*|>l(a 2 )> = • <0|A(ai)A(a 2 ) ,
For a general state of the form \Nn,m({°h
W)))
= 1^Vi)> * • • • \^{on))
* \0) * \A(a[)) * • • •
\A(a'J) (4.173)
62
we can consider a map \Nn,m({a},{a'}))
=> \Nn({a})(Nm{a'})\
,
(4.174)
\Nn{{a})(Nm{a'})\ = f[Ai{ai)\0)(0\f[AW) i
.
(4.175)
i
This map is consistent with * multiplication of two states in the form (4.173). Indeed, \Nn,n'({
= ^, m ^II ( 5 ^- r ^)l A r «.«'(M,{T'})) , P
(4.176)
i
that corresponds to the product \Nn(W}) (Nn,{*'})\
• \Nm({r})
(Nm,{r'})\
.
(4.177)
It is convenient to introduce A-coherent states |/)) A(
,
{(g\A\a) = ((g\0R(a)g(a) .
Explicit form of A-coherent state and it's conjugate is ((g\ = (0\e**SA
,
|/)) = e**^\0)
.
(4.178)
The main observation at 165 is the formula
\h , fR) = e ; IR
^ - ^
A {
° »
* |0> * 4* /(ff)iA(
(4.179)
Using the map (4.174) one can write
(4.180) Using the notations (4.178) one can rewrite (4.180) as \SLJR)
= • I - r ( / L ) » «/fl| .
(4.181)
One can check directly that if
\fL,fR) => \-r(fL)))((fR\, (4.182a) \9L,9R)
=»
\-r{gL))){{g~R\
,
then the product of operators in the r.h.s. of eq. (4.182a) is I - r ( / L ) » {{fR\ • | - r{gL))) ((gR\ = e - / « / « - • ( « ) | - r ( / L ) » ((gR\ ,
(4.183)
that in accordance with (4.99) and (4.181) corresponds to the product of states |/L ; /fi) * \9L ,9R), that proves the correspondence (4.181).
63
The integration of the open string field theory
J\fL,fR) = {I\fL,fR) corresponds to Tr (| - r ( / L ) » ((fR\) = « / R | - r ( / L ) » = eS*f*-W 4.6.
Matrix
.
(4.184)
Realization
String fields A(
A <J
n—l
2
/
2
(4.185)
°°
^ A o + -/^X>« c o s ( 2 m T )>
in terms of {cos(2ncr)}„=o,i,... instead of n—l {cos(n
. . . \0) ,
where the infinitely dimensional vector n denotes (no,ni,...). such states |n)), we have |-r(/)»=
£
(-l)g^^ n
no,ni,... = 0
( /
^,
( / L
;
l ) W l
-"|n)), V n 0 ! n i ! •••
(4.186) In terms of
(4.187)
V
and we get a map \h , / « > < = • I - r(h))) ((/ill ^ = * / » , m ,
(4.188)
/ „ , m = «n| - r ( / i ) » ((/fl|m)) .
(4.189)
where
64
4.7. Ghost
Sector
The ghost sector of the open bosonic string can be described in terms of fermionic ghost fields c(a), b(a) (about bosonization in terms of a single bosonic scalar field 4>(a) see 6.2). To write down the Faddeev-Popov determinant corresponding to the conformal gauge one has to introduce two sets of ghosts (see eq. 3.1.35 in 197 ) c + , b++ and c~, b They satisfy the first order equations, d- c+
= 0,
d+c~
«9_ b++ = 0 , +
= 0,
(4.190)
d+ fo__ = 0 ,
(4.191)
+
i.e. c — C (T + a) and c~ = C~(T - a) and the same for b. The Neumann boundary conditions c + = c~\v=otn ,
b++ = b—1^=0,*-
+
left us with two functions only c — c~ = c, b++ = b
(4.192)
= b, one for the ghost
and one for the antighost field, that satisfy 27r-periodic boundary conditions (^(a + 2TT) = (*{&) ,
b±±(a + 2?r) = b±±(a) .
(4.193)
These Grassmann fields have mode decompositions t^{a,T)
=J2cnein{T±,T)
(4.194)
n
b±±{o,T) = Y,Kein^T±a)
.
(4.195)
n
The ghost creation and annihilation operators satisfy {cn,bm}
= 6n+mi0 ,
{c„ , c m } = {bn,bm}
=0.
(4.196)
The ghost Fock space has a pair of vacua |±) annihilated by cn,bn n > 0. These two vacua satisfy co|-) = l+>
c0|+)=0
&o|+> = |->
6o|-> = 0 .
for
We define the Fock space so that bo,co are hermitian and c£ = c_ n , tfn = 6_„. It follows that (+|+) = (+|co|-) = 0, and similarly ( - | - ) = 0. We normalize the vacua so that (+N+) = <-M-> = 1 •
(4-197)
We will use the ghost vacuum |+) = |0). The ghost number operator is G = J2 [c-nbn - b-ncn] + - [cob0 - b0c0] + -
(4.198)
65
so that the c„ and b„ have ghost number 1 and —1 respectively. The vacua |+) and |—) have ghost numbers 1 and 0 respectively. It is easy to describe the ghost sector in the bosonized language (see Sect. 6.2) using the functional point of view. In this language the star product in the ghost sector is given by (4.3) with an extra insertion of exp(3i>(§)/2) inside the integral and the integration is given by (4.4) with an insertion of exp(—3i
C±{(T)
= ^
C e±n
^ "
b±{a) = ^2 bne±na
= C(<J) ±™b{°) .
(4-199)
= nc{a) ±ib(a)
(4.200)
.
n=—oo
The overlap equations for N-strings are c s (a) + c s - 1 ( c r ) = 0 ,
(4.201)
*'e{
(4-202)
where s = 1,2,... ,N and one has similar equations for b{a) and iri,(a), with the role of coordinates and momenta exchanged. These overlaps can be explicitly solved to give the following formula for the identity \I9*°°t) lI9host)
= M
| )
M
D exp (f>l)"c_„6_nJ
|0> ,
(4.203)
where the midpoint insertions correspond to the bosonized insertions mentioned in the previous subsection. The 3-string vertex \V°hosi) takes the form |y/ f t o s t ) = e x p ^
£
\r, s = l n = l , m=0
CLnV^bs_m\\0), /
(4.204)
66 where the matrices V™n have cyclic symmetry as usually. One can introduce the comma ghost coordinates cr±{cr) — cr(a)±iTrl,
cL(o) = c{a) ,
where
(4.205)
R
c {a) = C(TT - a) ,
(4.206)
for 0 ^ a ^ | . Likewise defined 7rJ(or), &r(cr) and vrj(a-), where r — 1,2; L, R. We choose even extension to the interval [0, |-) for the ghost coordinate cr(a) and conjugate momentum 7r£(cr) and odd extension for the antighost coordinate br(a) and conjugate momentum 7r£(cr):
c r (
(4.207a)
n=l oo
< (a) = br0 + V2 Y, vL cos 2na ,
(4.207b)
n=l OO
r
6 (a) = v ^ Y, J>2„-i s i n ( 2 n - !) f f >
(4.207c)
n=l oo
< ( a ) = V2 J2 4 „ _ ! sin(2n - \)a .
(4.207d)
n=l
Relations between full-string modes and half-string modes for c(a) and cL'R(a) are
co = g (co + c o) . - / | (C2n + C_2„) = 2 {gin + 02n) .
" ^ 1, (4.208)
r=l 2
+ £(-l) r=l
oo P
E m=l
B
'm,2n-i
£2™ ,
n > 1
67 Relations between momentum 7TC(CT) and 717' (c) are
bo = \ K + b20) , -j= {b2n + b-2n) = - (y\n + y22n) ,
n ^ 1, (4.209)
V2
r=l
Relations between 6(a) and bL'R{a) are 2
1
-y= (&2n - b-2n) "
CO
= 2_J2-J r=l
„
(
_1
)
r 2 m
_ 1 - B 2".2m-1 hr2m-\ (4.210)
771=1
- / = (&2n-l ~ &-2n+l) = 2 {h2n-l
+ h\n-l)
•
Relations between momentum 7Tb (a) and -Kb' (cr) are 1 -j= *
2
(c2„ -
C_2n) = X ] r=l
°° z J ( m=l
_ 1
)
r
2 2 m -
l"82"'2™-1
2
2ra-l >
(4.211) 1
- ^ (C2„-1 - C _ 2 n + l ) = - (z2 „_1 + Z | n _ 1 ) .
The inverse relations introduced in Appendix 4.4. Let us introduce the comma ghost modes (see Appendix 4.4) Yn = \ (Vrn + i<) , K = ±(grn+ihrn),
n>l, n>l,
(4.212) (4.213)
with 7L n = 7 ^ and fir_n = fi$ . The zero modes are defined by 75 = 4jc£ and PQ = -75^0. These coordinates satisfy anticommutation relations (see Appendix 4.4) {lrn,Psm}
= 5rs6n+mfi.
(4.214)
Let us now present solutions of overlap equations in the comma coordinates. The comma overlaps for vertices |V$ o s t ) are cf(
(4.215)
^i(")=*CH(")1
(4-216)
68
where j = 1,2,... ,JV. For br(a) and 7r£(cr) one gets similar equations with the relative sign exchanged. These overlaps can be explicitly solved in terms of 7 r and /? r using the procedure of 204 and give the following answer for the identity |/9 ftos «) : \Phost)
= exp ( / ? ^ 7 - n + P-nl-n)
lO)^!^)^ ,
where
%W
= 0• (4.217)
For \V3ghost) one gets
\Vf°st) = exp (plW* + fP_W_* + P>W>« + Pb«l^+IS2*>yZ-n+P-nll-n)
^U\^\ty?
•
(4-218)
In 196 it is shown that the Witten cubic ghost vertices solve the comma overlaps. This shows the equivalence of two theories at the level of vertices. 4.8. Appendix
4-1-
Transition
Functions
between Two
Basis
There are two complete sets of orthogonal functions on [0, f ] cos(2m-l)<x,
m = l,2,...
(4.219a)
n = l,2,...
(4.219b)
or 1,
cos2n<x ,
Using explicit formulae for integrals r/2 / dacos2nacos(2m Jo where l ^
M
7T
- l)a =-—B2n,2m-i 2
= i ( - l ) ~ (
i
r
^ -
5
,
- l
(for n ^ 0)
r
T
T
)
(4.220)
(4.221)
and r'2 / Joo
I
TT/2
7T dcrcos(2n - l)crcos(2m - l)
(4.222)
TV
da cos 2na cos 2ma = -r<S„,m
(4.223)
one can rewrite functions of one set in terms of functions of the other set. This gives explicit relations between full open string modes and the left-half and right-half modes.
69 4.8.1. xn and x^R We can compare (4.18a), (4.18b) and (4.5) to get an expression for the full open string modes in terms of the left-half and right-half modes: m=l
m=l
±
where the matrices A are ^2n-l,m Mn,
=
~~ ^2n-l,m
=
l^n,m
m = ^2n, m = ~ #2n, Jm-1
,
(4.225)
•
(4-226)
One can rewrite (4.224) more explicitly X 2 „-l = \ (a£ - Xn)
n
>
— Y^ ic-i , >' l+m - 1 1 n
K
~
'
^TT
1
\2m + 2 n - l v
771=1
+
(4-227)
>1 >
2 m - 2 n - l ) ( ^
+
^ '
"
^
(4.228)
One can invert (4.224) and write the left-half modes and right-half modes in terms of the full string modes X* = J 2 A m n X n ,
*m=£4L*». 771=1
U>1,
(4.229)
771=1
where ^m,2n-l
=
2^2n-l,m
= t(-1\n+m-l TTK '
=
°n,m ,
^ ((2m - l ) 2 - An2) (2m - 1) '
One can rewrite (4.229) as xhm = x2m-i
+ Y, A1n, 21 x-a ,
(4-231)
(=i
xl = -ar 2 m-i + £ i + , 2/ *2i ,
m >1 .
(4.232)
z=i
Note that A+ = C7A" ,
A+ = ArC .
(4.233)
70
Matrices A* and A± also satisfy the relations A+A+ + A-A'
= 1,
A*A*
A±A±
=0,
= 1.
(4.234)
To check these properties the following identities are useful OO
j
/ _B2n,2k-l
B2m,2k-1
= J^nm
,
(4.235)
fc=l oo
2fc
1
/ „ o—3T-^2n-l,2*-B2fc,2m-l = " T ^ m
(x^,
•
(4.236)
From (4.18a) and (4.18b) one sees that the relationship between x£ and x^) does not involve the zero mode XQ of X.
4.8.2. xn and l2m+i,
r2m+i
Relations between the full-string modes and the half-string modes r2n+i and hn+i are X2n+\ - - (hn+i - r 2 n + i ) , x
2n — - 2_^ X2n, m=0
2m+l (hm+1
(4.237) + ^2m+l) ,
(4.238)
where n
-^2n,2m+l = ^ 2 m + l , 2 n = ~ 2 - B 2 n , 2 m + l ,
¥" 0 i
(4.239)
and Xo,2m+l
= ^2m+l,0 = - v 2 5 o , 2 r a + l •
(4.240)
The useful identity for this matrix is oo
£ x 2 „ + 1 ) 2 J t ( 2 f c ) 2 X 2 f c , 2 m + 1 = (2n + l)2(5„m .
(4.241)
k=0
The matrix
X = (
°
\-^2n, 2A+1
X
^>*A 0
(4.242)
J
is symmetric and orthogonal: X = XT = X~l. One can invert (4.24b) and write the left-half modes and right half modes in
71
terms of the full string modes hk+l = X2k+1 + ^ ^ 2 f c + l , 2 « Z 2 n , n=0
(4.243)
r2k+i = -X2k+i + ^2 ^ 2fc +L 2 " xin •
(4.244)
n=0
4.8.3. xn and x-im One can invert (4.26b) and write the left-half modes and right-half modes in terms of the full string modes 2v / 2o 7 v-^ (-l) f c
L
,inl„
Xo = *o + —^— J2 2 ^ 3 1 X 2 k - 1 '
(4 245)
'
k=l
X«=x0-
*^*L
^
^
-2k-,
,
(4.246)
*=i
xL = x2n + 2J2 B2n,2k-i
,
(4-247)
xfn = x2n - 2 Yl B2n, 2fc-i z 2 *-i •
(4.248)
4.9. Appendix J^.2. Operators
"Comma"
x2k-i
Creation
and
Annihilation
4.9.1. "Comma" Operators (with singled out midpoint) The quantized momentum conjugate to x% , £„ and X(n/2) usual r =
" ~idxl'
v
* = ~ldx~K'
v
=
~idX{*/2)
are defined as
•
Relation with the conventional string momentum pm are given by: _!_1 V^ , + V2 Vn - - p a n - ! + ^ ^ 2 m , n P 2 m - ^ T.R
1
^n - ~ 2 J , 2 n - 1 V
=po •
ST +
2^
AA
^
(-l)n ^ ^ (-1)"
2m,nP2m ~ ^ / ^ y 9 „ _ 1
(4 249)
"
72
The inverse relations read: P2n-1
=Vk-T>%
The creation and annihilation operators for the "comma" modes are denned in the following way g ' h : 1/2
n
~ V2 { 2 J \ I n + * 2 n - r "/ '
(4.251)
K ,^(^)-{ < _,_L_ P: }, where n ^ 1. The vacuum satisfies the relations #|0>L = 0 ,
b%\0)R=0,
n = l,...,oo.
Space of states is U = Uh®HR®UM , where % M is for the midpoint motion. Relations between &^#, 6 ^ # and a* are b
"
=
V (2n - l) 3 /2
Po +
7/f °'2n~1 + T/f ^
Mlm n
'
a2m
~
M2m n a
-
2m ' (4.252)
1
uR
V2 (-I)*"" )
0„ = — ,
_ 1 . 3 / 2 Po--J=
1
1
^
a 2 „ - l + ~T= 2 ^ ™lm, n a2m ~ M 2 m, n a 2 m ' (4.253)
and the corresponding relation for b]£ ,bffl can be achieved by changing an and a}n. These formulae define the Bogoliubov transformation with transformation matrices
g
Ml
""" = iV2? i - 2 » + V / S?i /l!± -""
(4254)
^--5l/^r*~-l/&*-.--
(4255)
Here we use notations of 1 9 2 , where relations between creation and annihilation operators for R/L n-modes and corresponding canonical operators are taken to be an = ~ ' ' ^ n (qn+i-Pn)h For half-strings we use different notations r = 1,2; L,R.
73
The inverse relations are given by: G2n-1 — 0n
,
(-D"
a2n
V^
= -1=-? + Y, Mm,
^2n
£gi
M {
m
(4"256)
M-H
]
)f
b + + M 2 n , m &£ ,
where one defines the combinations b(±)
= -L(bL ±bR)
Let us write the relation between usual vacuum an\0) = 0 for n ^ 0 and vacuum |0)L|0).R. Since a2 n -i|0) = bn~l'|0) = 0, only the combinations bn+' act on |0)x|0)fl to get the a-vacuum |0), namely: |0) = exp (-\b£»
4>n,m b%A |0) L |0) f l
(4.257)
and the matrix
One finds ^
m
=
M^M2 to be
(2n-l)1/2(2m-l)1/2——* f~ 1 / 2 V ~1/2 V 2(n + m - l ) \n-lj \m-lj
(4.258)
4.9.2. "Comma" Operators (without singled out midpoint) The quantized momenta conjugated to Xn > Xn a r e defined in the usual way
'
'
d
Pn=-iJL-
(4-259)
Relation with the conventional string momentum pm are given by 193 :
oon=1
x
P2n = ^ Pin + ( - l ) f ^ 2
(4.260)
#2n2m-l P2m-1
,
n ^ 1.
' m=l
The inverse relations are P2n
= p2n + P2n ,
n ^ 0,
2^/2 f_l)« P2n-1 = —
-Tj—y (p2n + P2n) +
°° 2
^
B
2 m 2 n - 1 ( p 2 m ~ P2m) >
« ^ 1 •
(4.261)
74
Creation and annihilation operators satisfying the commutation relation (4.262)
n >1 can be written in the form
(4.263)
Comma vacuum are introduced as brn\0)r = 0 ,
n £ 1,
(4.264)
where we have the following expressions for br
(4.265)
x {[4 + (2n - l)]a 2 n _i - [4 - (2n - l ) ] 4 „ _ i } , (-1) r+i .21 V- / 2 m - ^ 2n V3
1
^
1 / 2
m=l
2n a 2 m - l
^ 2 m - l 2n Q-1m-\ ~ Slm-\
(4.266)
'
where ^2m-12n
— #2771-1 2n
—
^2n2nx-\
j
S ^ m - l 2n — # 2 m - l In + # 2 n 2 m - l •
(4.267) 4.10. Appendix 4-5. States
Identities
for Coherent
and
Squeezed
In 156 the useful identities are introduced. Det(l - 5 • F ) 1 / 2 ( 0 | exp (x • a + ^a • S • a\ exp (fi-a^ + ^ 1 = exp A • (1 - V • S)-
• n + - A • (1 - V • S)-1
-V- aA |0)
-V-X
Li
+ i/i • (1 - 5 • V)-1 • S -fi
(4.268)
where the dot indicates contraction of indices. If the matrices A, B, and C satisfy A ,
BT = B ,
ACT = CA,
BC = CTB ,
C2 = 4,45
(4.269)
75
then the following identity takes place exp (a^Aa? + a*Ca + aBa) = Det [(1 - C ) e c ] " 1 / 2 exp [a f (l xexp[-a+ln(l-C)a]exp[aB(l-C)-1a] 4.11.
Appendix
4-4-
Ghost Half-String
C)-lAa<]
.
(4.270)
Coordinates
Here we collect some relations for the half-string and full-string ghost modes following 195>196. The inverse relations to (4.208) are 2
(—l)n
°°
cr0 = c 0 + ( - l ) r - V ; l - A r ( c 2 „ - i + c _ 2 n + 1 ) > •K
*—• In n=l
(4.271)
— 1
1
°°
9T2n = ^ | ( C 2 » + C "2«) + ^ ( - l ) 7 " J ) B 2 n,2m-l(C2m-l + C-2m+l) "
• (4.272)
m=l
The inverse relations to (4.209) are
hi = 6 0 + ( - i ) ' - _ 5 3 ^ L ( 6 2 B _ 1 + f c _ 2 n + 1 ) )
(4.273)
71=1 oo
1
y£n = -j=(b2n +fc-2n)+ >/2 ( - l ) p 5 3 S 2 n , 2 m _ 1 (6 2 m _ 1 + 6 _ 2 m + i ) . (4.274) *
m=l
The inverse relations to (4.210) are ^2n-l
=
1 ~/^(&2n-l ~ &-2n+l) ~ v 2 ( - l )
°° r
^
"
#271-1,2m(&2m ~ &-2m) •
m=l
(4.275) The inverse relations to (4.211) are oo
1
22n-l — -/s(c *
2 n
-l
-
C_2n+l) -
V2 (-l)1" 5 ^ 52n-l,2m(C2m m=l
_
C_2m)
.
(4.276) We demand the comma modes to satisfy the anticommutation relations
{°">d!k}=sraSnm-
(4 277)
-
One can check that ^= eg , 4= #£ are conjugate to 4= &g, 4 j 2/£ and likewise 75 ^2n-i a r e conjugate to ^ z ^ .
76
We now introduce equations relating the full-string ghost modes (cn,bn) and the comma ghost modes (7£,/?£). For the full-string modes one gets Co
= -/= (7o + 7o) ,
r=l
*
r=l
v
m=l 2
_ 2
*--T5^TB-»'I«-55:^K-T-.) 2m r=l
m=l
"-,B-1"!mv^ v
and c_„ = c)j, n ^ 1. Equations for bn are the same with transposition 7 ^ /?. The inverse relations are
76
n
= Co + - ( - l )
=
r
Y] r
r ( c 2 n _ l + C_2rJ+l) ,
1 1 °° r~/^(^2ra + 6-2n) + " T ^ - - * - ^ £ ^2n,2m-l(&2n-l + * * m=l
&-2n+l)
1 1 °° ~ — - / ? ( C 2 n - l - C _ 2 n + l ) + ~ 7 = ( — l ) r / J # 2 n - l , 2m{C2n ~ C-2n)
,
Tl ^ 1 ,
m=l
and 7_„ = 7+ , n ^ 1. Equations for /?£ are the same with transposition c ;=± 6.
5. Cubic String Field Theory o n Conformal Language 5.1. Vertex
Operators
By using the language of the conformal field theory (CFT) it is possible to represent each term in the String Field Theory action as some correlation function in CFT on a special two dimensional surface. To specify our notations, let us remind some basic facts concerning two dimensional CFT. A general solution of the equation (<92 - d 2 ) ^ = 0 with
77 Neumann boundary conditions is -
1 V2
^
I>,r)=/+2ayT +i ^
Z
where
— oo < r < oo
V
™
j
'
(5.1)
0 sj a < -IT .
After Wick rotation we can introduce new complex variables z = eTE+t", z = eTE~w'. Note that this variables are coordinates on the upper-half complex plane. The solution (5.1) in this coordinates gets the following form X"(z,z)
= X£{z)+X&z),
(5.2)
where X£(z) = ±x»-l-aY
logz2+i
^ £;Smz1'
and
Xn(z) = XL(z). (5.3)
The similar expansion reads for the ghost-antighost pair c(z), b(z) as
n
n
The Neumann correlation function for X's on the upper half-complex plane is of the from (X"{z,z)X''(w,v)))
= - y i ? " " {log\z-w\2+\og\z-w\2)
.
(5.5)
But for computations it is fruitful to use the traditional shorthand {X»L{z) Xl{w))
= - ^ V
log(z - w) .
(5.6)
Note that this expression is really very formal. For example, when one wants to compute a correlation function involving : e'k-x(z>z) : he encouraged to use the expression (5.5). But if the point (z,z) is on the real axis (i.e. on the boundary of the UHP), then one can write the equality . eik-X(z,z)
.
_ .
e2ik-XL(z)
and use the expression (5.6) to compute correlation functions. Indeed, one can check that these two differently computed correlators are the same while one assumes z = z. In our calculations we will use this trick. The ground state (4.43) is given in terms of conformal fields as the normal ordered exponent: |0,ifc) = : e ifeX (°'°) : |0) = : e2ikXL^
: |0> ,
(5.7)
78
and any term in the string field expansion (4.45) corresponds to the conformal field via
n<
-Qd^x^o)
|0,fc)
e2ik-XL(0)
. |Q)
( 5 g )
If it does not lead to misunderstanding we also drop out subscript "L" and use a traditional shorthand X(z) {X»{z)X»{w)) =
(5.9)
-—rTlo^z-w)
Another useful form of relation (5.6) is X»(z)Xv(w)
-rfv log(^ - w) .
(5.10)
The symbol "~" means that l.h.s and r.h.s are equal up to regular in z — w terms. For ghosts we have the following OPE c(z) b(w) ~ -
1
(5.11)
The stress tensor for the matter fields 1 Tx = - —dX • dX a' has the following OPE Tx{z)Tx{w)
(5.12)
26 2 , + , 2 T2 x(w) + -±-dTx(w) 2(2 — u/)44 f (z — w) z—w 0,
.
(5.13)
The stress tensor for the ghost fields and the reparametrization algebra are T(z) = - 2bdc(z) - ldbc(z) , T(z)b{w)
2
1 ^-*>(w>) H
(z — wy T(z)c(w)
-13 (z-w)i
db(w) ,
(5.15)
z—w
^c(w) +
(z — wy T(z)T(w)
(5.14)
dc(w) ,
(5.16)
z—w
+
(5.17)
'" '
The system has a {/(l) number current j(z) = -bc(z) = J2 J^T ' j(z)b(w)
-b(w) ,
J(z)JM j{z)c{w)
1 (z — w)2 1
c(w) , z—w
(5.18)
(5.19)
79 which charge operator jo counts c = + 1 , b = — 1 charge. The conformal properties of the current depend on the vacuum being chosen. In the SZ/2 invariant vacuum sector (c(z)b(w)) = l/{z — w), then the proper relation is
T (
^)~(^
[Lm,jn]
= - njm+n
+
(7^^ ) '
_3 + — m(m + l)Sm+nfi
(5 20)
'
,
(5.21)
so that j(z) is scale and translation covariant (m = 0 , - 1 ) but not conformal covariant (m = 1). Next commutation relations [Li,j-i]
= jo - 3 ,
[Luj-i}\=
[L-i,h]
= -jo
(5.22)
show the charge asymmetry of the system: JQ = —jo + 3. Consequently, operator expectation values of charge neutral operators will vanish since [j0,O] = qO,
j 0 |0) = 0 ,
(OljJ = - Q < 0 | ,
(5.23)
(0|joC?|0) = -Q<0|O|0) = <0|O|0) .
(5.24)
Only operators which cancel the background charge —3 survive. For example, (c(-zi)c(z2)cCz3)) = ~(zi ~ Z2){z2 - z3)(z3 - zi) . 5.2. Gluing and Conformal
(5.25)
Maps
There is a method that allows one to represent n-string interactions via correlation functions on special Riemann surfaces Rn (the so-called string configuration) /" * 1 * • • • * $ „ = ( K | $ l ) i ® ' • • ® | * n > „ = < * 1 , • • • ,
$n)Rn
Efficiency of this method is a possibility to reduce calculations of correlation functions on n-string configuration to calculations of correlation functions on the upper half-disk, or the upper half-plane using the equality < * ! , . . . , *„> fin = (Fin) o $ ! . . . f W o $ n ) .
(5.26)
The maps Fjf1' (k = 1 . . . n) are defined as follows:
ff>(«/)=(p n o fin))(w),
(5.27a)
-™Mn)-k\(l fln)(w) = e
+ iw\ \ 1 — iwj
2/n
.1-z Pa(z) = i l + zf
W
t
1—z
(5.27b) (71+ 1 where
fi(n) = <
2
n = odd (5.27c)
n+2 n = even
Further we consider only the eases n = 2 and n = 3. The maps ft' can be rewritten in the form fjt' = Tk * o f \(3)\ where T is the operator of rotation over --%-. This property of the maps as it was shown in 208 is very important to have threefold cyclically symmetric vertex. One can be puzzled why we choose different maps P2 and P3 and may think that it gives extra relative factor between the brackets with n = 2 and n = 3. But fortunately this never happens, because Witten's vertex is invariant under the conformal group 209 , so one can choose arbitrary functions P 2 and F 3 .
Figure 11. The maps for Witten's vertex, R3.
We illustrate the maps (5.27) on the Figure 11. Here we have three half discs with two marked points. Into the black point we usually insert the vertex operators corresponding to the states of the string. The grey point is the center of the string (we insert picture changing operators into this point in the cubic superstring field theory). Also on the Figure 11 we illustrate where half discs and marked points maps under the transformations (5.27). Note that the choice (5.27b) of the map nn' from the upper half disc to
81
a sector of disc differs from usual one. But this choice is very convenient for computer calculations, since it should not evaluate powers of negative numbers. The maps for n = 2 have very simple form:
i2\w) = w.
/<*>(«,) = - ^ >
(5.28)
(/ o $) in (5.26) means the conformal transform of $ by / . Let us explain this in more details. If $ is a primary field of conformal weight h, then fo$(z) is given by ( / o *)(«;) = (/'(«;))* $ ( / ( « ; ) ) .
(5.29)
For a derivative of a primary field of conformal weight h one has (/ o d*)(w) = (f'(w))h+1d*(f(w))
+ hf"(w)(f'(w))h-l$(f(w))
.
(5.30)
Since we work with free conformal fields, all the operators in the theory can be constructed as normal product of these free fields. Therefore, we have to know how to find the conformal transformations of the composite operators. Let us illustrate this technique on the example of fee-current. The operators b and c are primary ones with weights 2 and —1 respectively, so (5.29) yields (/ o b)(w) = [ / » ] 2 b(f(w))
and
( / o c)(w) = [ / ' M ] " 1 c(f(w)) . (5.31)
The 6c-current j \ , c is defined by the following expressions jbciw) = - :b(w)c(w): = - lim :b(z)c(w): = — lim I b(z)c(w) z^rw
I , Z —WJ
z-+w y
(5.32) where in the latter equality we have used the OPE of b with c. Now we apply a conformal map / to both sides of the equality (5.32): (f°jbc)(w)
-
- lim z^rw
/ o b{z)f o c{w) -
1 Z— W
y
{5 ]
= - lim {[JTTT «/<*) W(»» - T\) z-*w \ J'(W)
Z — WJ
opj^_ U m (Lg£)l! : 6 ( / ( z ) ) c ( / W ) : z-m; y J (w)
+
[/'(aWM]-1 f(z)-f{w)
1 \ z-w)
= /'M^(/H) + | ^ .
(5-33)
82
So we get the conformal transformation of the composite operator jf,c using only OPE and conformal transforms of the operators from which it is built. This scheme can be applied to find a conformal transform of any composite operator. Show that the stress energy tensor of the bosonic string Tx = — •^jdX- dX changes under conformal transformations as
EXERCISE:
/2\
(/oTx)H = /'2Tx(/) +
g(^-^
(5.34)
Check that
EXERCISE:
o
(/ o d(bc))(w) = f'2d(bc)(f)
/ tin
r
(/ o dbc)(w)
= f2db(f)c(f)
+ 2f"b(f)c(f)
= f'2b(f)dc(f)
\
fill
- f"b(f)c(f)
1 r»2
+ - J— + - i-z , n fill
(f o bdc)(w)
inl
+ - f J— - Lp J ,
+ f"b(f)c(f)
+
n
fl/2
-J—-LJ
For future use we list Taylor's series of maps (5.27) in the origin: f[z\w)
= 1 + 21W + 3
f^(W)
= \1W
tf\w)
= - 1 + 21W - 3
7
V + ^ 7 3 ^ 3 + ? 7 4 ^ 4 + ?^75™5 + 8 8 128
- A73w3
7
+
^
W
S
V + ^3w3 8
+
0(w6), (5.35a) (5.35b)
0{w7)
- ? 7 4 ^ 4 + T^75^5 + 8 128
0(w6).
(5.35c) Here
= I7z ' 5.3. TCalculations
of the Action for Tachyon and Vector
Fields
We want to compute Witten's action
^ - g
^«*,QB*»+
(5.36)
!«#,*,*»
for tachyon and vector string fields $ <-) =
/
d?6k (2») 26
[t(k)Vt(k,w)
+ All(k)V'£(k,w)
+ B(k)VB(k,w)}
,
(5.37)
83
where vertex operators V are of the form Vt(w,k)
:c(z)e2ik-x^:
=
1/2
:c(w)dXt'(w)e2ikx^:
V{f(t«,fc) = i
VB(to,Jfc) = :dc(w)e2ikx^:
(5.38)
.
All the coefficients in (5.37) are chosen in such a way that the reality condition 3>t = 3> for string field produces reality conditions for component fields. 5.3.1. Action of the BRST Charge First of all we need to calculate the action of the BRST charge (4.2) on the vertex operators. The action of the BRST charge on the tachyon vertex is the following: QBVt(w, k) = Res [c(C)T B (0 + bcdc{Q] c(w) = Res c(Q c(w) +
1
a'k2
KC-^)
'^
1 2 +
C-
2ikX(w)
d„
~^—cdc(Oe2ikX{w)
= a'k2dcce2ikX^ = [-a'k2
2ik x e
+
+ 1] cdce2ikX^
cdce2ikX^ .
(5.39)
The action of the BRST charge on the massless vector vertex is the following: QBVJJ(«;,*) = Res [c(()TB(0 Res c(()c(w) i^—w
+
a'k2 + l + (C-z)2
T
-ia'k»
ia'k»
+ bcdc(0] i
-ia'k" (C-w)3
1 QX11 C-z ou
c{w)dX»
02ik-X(w)
2ik x w e
' ( ) + — — cdc(QdX" (, - w
d2cc + dec (a'k2 + l) dX" + cdcdX" cd2ce2ikX^
e «*-*(«0
+ (-a'k2)
cdcdX*
2ik xiw) e
-
a2ik-X(w)
e2ikX^
(5.40)
84
And the action of the BRST charge on the vertex of the auxiliary field is the following: QBVB{w,k)
bcdc{Q]dce2ikx^
= Res [c(QTB(Q +
a'k2 1 (C — w)2 + ( — wo„
= Res c(Qdc(w)
+ (C -
Tcdc(Q
™)2
= cdcde2ikx^
a2ik-X(w)
e2ik-x^ cd2ce2ikx^
+
= dw [cdce 2 i **W] (w) .
(5.41)
It is convenient to rewrite QB$ in the following way d2%k r •j—^
/ +
[t(k)(QBVt)(0,k)+iA^k)(QBVi)(0,k)
B(k)(QBVB)(0,k)]
= f~^[t(k){-a'k2 + VWA^k)
+ l) (n^k2
cdce2ikXM+B'd(cdce2ikXW)
- k»k") cdcdX"e2ifc*(°)l
,
(5.42)
where
B'(k)=B(k)-
5.3.2. Conformal
ik^A^k)
(5.43)
Transformations
The operator for the tachyon field is primary, therefore, its conformal transformation is the following a'^-l
/ovt(w,A;) = [/'H] aK - 1 v t (/H,fc).
(5.44)
85
The operator for the auxiliary field is transformed as follows
= [f'(w)]ak
foVB(w,k)
YB(f(w),k)
'/...MQ
1,1 k
f" J
(5.45)
„t*t...\\„2ik-X(f(w))
The operator for the vector field is transformed in the following way
/»v;(«,i) = [ / W
VJK/M,*)
Fi/ (w)r ! c(/w)e2i xtfW)
'
+
'
• (5-46)
k»VB(w,k)
(5.47)
'' S
FVom (5.46) and (5.45) follows that the operator
V£ ( « , , * ) = V£(u;, A)+
is the primary operator of weight a'k2. It is also convenient to rewrite / o $ in the following form
+ B(p)(foVB)(w,p)] 5.47 f
^ a'
r,lf
.,„'
A
»W
+B' [ dc(f(w)) -
t(p)V»rc(f(w)) a V j^c(f(w))
(/H) 2iP-x(f(w)) _
(5.48)
86 5.3.3. Calculations of Kinetic Terms Substituting (5.48) and (5.42) in the quadratic part of the action (5.36) and expanding the obtained expression we get \J
WB \ » t(p)-pt(k)
+
j ^
(-a'k2
^TB'^l
M (27r)
26/
+ 1) (c(f)cdc{0)) (e2ipX^
t
(c(f)cdc(w)) (e 2ipX(f)
2ikX
^)
e
2ik-X(w)
w—0
\^vk2
+ t(p)— VWA^k)
Ap{p)t(k) (-a'k2
(e2ipX^dXv(0)e2ikX^)
- Jfe"*"] (c(f)cdc(O)) + 1) j(c(/)cdc(0)) (dX^(f)e2ipX^
e2ik-x(o)^
i ^ ( a c ( / ) c a c ( 0 ) ) (e2ip •*<» ew*-*<°>>}
A0(p)B'(k) A i ^£. (dc(f)cdc(w))
(c(f)cdc(w)) (dX0(f) v=0 I
(e2ipX^
J2a>Ap{p)Ap(k)
+ B'(p)
+
<9„ y
f" f
^
2ikX
^)\
e
dXv(0)
(e2ipX^dX„(0) t(k) [-a'k2
2ifcX e
(°')
2ikX e
^)
+ 1] (c(y)cdc(O)) (e2ip-x^
f
x (c{y)cdc{0))
2ik x
- ^)
e
y=f
d_ f" (c{y)cdc(w)) (e2ip-x^ B'{p)B'(k) 8 - — dw y=f, w=o dy
+ yfla~'B'{p)All{k)
e™-xM)
[rj^k2 - k"kv]
x j(c(/)c0c(O)) (dXP(f) e2ip-x^ - i ^-(dc(f)cdc(O))
2ipX e
[rj^k2 - Wkv]
d„V
{e2ipX^dXv{G)e2ikX^)
f"
/'J
y=f
2ik x e
' ^)
87
Using the expressions for OPE (5.10) and (5.11) we obtain the following result f fJ26nH26k
fia'p2
8{p + k)
-J^^ + t(p)B'(k)^
r
7^
(a'k2-l)
f2
[*(P)*(*)f (-«'* +1)
+V2^Jt(p)Afl(k)^
Ap(p)t [k(-a'k2 + 1)) if a' [-k0
-p0]
A0(p)B'(k) (2a'k2 - 1)»Q' [-k0
-p0]
- 2Af,(p)Ap(k) [f"k2 - k»k"} l ~
B'(p)B\k)
{rfv + 2a'k0kv) + a'pPa'pA
in
+ B'(p)t(k)[-a'k2 +
[V'ifc2 - A"*"] ia'p„
+ l] 2/ - jrf2
d„
v
f"
f ' l
2y + 2a'k2Vy=f
^
+ V2a~'B'(p)Ali(k) [rt^k2 - Wkv]
*
v-fy
f"
Using the conservation of momenta and the fact that jfvk2~k^kv tofcMwe obtain
/ T^TIs J ^
[t(-k)t(k)fp-a'k2
x ( 7 7 - 2 / + f2fi)
(5.49)
ia i„pvf * - i
is orthogonal
+ 1] + t(-k)B'(k) (a'k2 - l)
+ 2B'(-fc)B'(fc) [l + (2 - til}
(a'k2 - l)
+ a' (rfvk2 - k»kv) A^(-Jfe)AM(fc)
(5.50)
Recall, that the map f(w) (see also (5.28)) is defined as follows
/(«>) = - - ,
/'H =A,
/ » = "^-
(5-51)
88 Substituting this map in (5.50) and putting ro=Owe get the following expression for the quadratic action
b[t,A^B\-
f d?6k
1 ^aiUJ
U{-k)t{k) [-a'k2 + 1] +B'(-k)B'(k)
(27r)26
(r,^k2 - k»ku)
(5.52)
Av{-k)A„{k)
5.3.4. Calculation of Interaction Here we compute the cubic term of the action (5.36). First, we compute the interaction term for three tachyons. To this end we substitute only the part of the string field $ which is proportional to t(k):
- ( ( $ , $, $)) = - ( / j o $ / 2 o $ / 3 o $) /• d26^
1 3 7
(2TT)
d26k2 26
(2TT)
d26k3 26
wa'fcj-i
(2TT)
26 h
,„'**_! ,,a'*g-l h
h
x t(*i)t(*a)i(* 3 )
= 4/00CF i ( f c l ^ 2 ) ^ ) ( 2 7 r ) 2 6 a '" 3 ^ + f c +9) x
.la'lpl./d'ij-lva'^-l,, , \2a'fcifc 2 +l /l h h U l ~~ /2^
x (/i - f3)2a'kl-k3+1(f2
- h)2a'k*k*+l
.
(5.53)
Substituting the maps (5.35) into this expression and performing simplification one gets
Sint [t] =
1
~tic7^ x
( « i f V ^ 3
J
(2»)» (2*)» '<*> +k2
+ k
\t{kl)t{k2)t{h)1a'k*+a'k*+a'ks-3.
^ (5.54)
Next we compute the term which consists of two vector fields and one tachyon.
89 So, we compute the following odd bracket
«Vt(fci), v£(fc2), v£(* 3 )» = (/i ° Vt(h) h ° W 2 ) /3 ° K(fc3)>
A/-'^-vr'^/r'^(C(/i) cdX«(f3)-l-^dc(h) 2_ ,ia'k\-l
e2ik!-X(fi)
t
- ~ —jh
f'a'kl
h
2iki x e
e2ik2-X(f2)
e2ik3X(h)
(c(/i)c(/ 2 )c(/ 3 ))
h
x {dX»{f2)dXv{h)
cdX^M-^dcih)
-^
e™*-Mh)
e2ik3x(h))
(c(fi)c(f2)dc(f3))
(dX^fi)
KkvMh)dc{h)dc(h))
- V
e2ik^x^
e2ik*x^
e2i'»'x(«)
( e «*i•*(/!) e**2-*(A) e 2*s-x(/s)) (5.55)
Calculation of the correlation functions leads to the following expression
x(f2-h)2a'k2k36(k1+k2
+ k3)
rf" ( / l { 2)( { 3
/l}
- 2a'k$kl(h-h)
+ 2a'kZk2'(f3 - h) + 2 a ' * J * r ( / i - / 2 ) - 2 a ' f c ^ (A_ + a'k'k^h
+f3-
/a) to /1)
h-h
2/2) + a'A^AJ /s - A + ( / 3 - / 1 X / 1 - / 2 )
/3-/2
-o'^*j'(/1+/2-2/3) (/1-/2X/1-/3)
+ a'k^3(f3-f2) (5.56) /2-/3 Performing a simplification of this expression we get the following formula ~r tfc «Co /Co
/ l - /2 +
TOfcO.vw.v^*,,))) =
(2TT)26
a'"
1 3
^ + fc2 + is) fa"" + a'kffi
X / 2 " * ' * V 3 ' a ' % " f2)2a'klk2+1(fl
+ a'k^]
- fs)2a'klk3+1(f2
f^'^
1
~ /3)2«'*^3-l . (5.57)
90 To compute the whole interaction term for the tachyon and two vector fields we need to subtract from (5.57) the same terms with permutation (/i <-> / 2 ) and (/1 «-» / 3 ) . After substitution of the maps (5.35) we get the following action u A^ _ J _ [ d ^ k ^ k ^ k ^ Sint[t, A] = --^-TTZ J ( 27r )26 ( 27r )26 6 ^ + fc2 + *s) x t{k1)All{k2)Av{kz)
W
+a'ktku2
+a'k%k\)1a'k*+a'k*+a'k*
.
(5.58)
The cubic term of the action (5.36) for whole string field $ (5.48) is more complicate. It was computed using the program on Maple, and the answer is the following bmt[
' "'
]
"
9 2 Q /13
J
(2^)26 (2^)26
T
7~ 3 *(fci)t(fc2)i(fc3) - 7 - 1 Apik^A^Xk^fre 1
+
1-
B'(k1)B'(k2)t(k3)+21-1
+a'klk%
+ a'fc{**|)
(5.59)
B'ik^ikfA^tih)
This expression can also be rewritten in ^-representation: Sint{t,Ali,B'}
=
- ^ j d ™ .
+ 2 7 - 1 a ' &1 id^A^Ap
-r7"3ttt-7"1iV"
+ 7 - 1 tB'B'
+ 2^~x
iB'd»A„
(5.59')
At all levels the particle fields <j> in the interaction action are smeared over the distance v/a 7 : <j>{x) = exp[—a'log 7 ^ 9 " ] 4>{x) 5.4. Koba-Nielson
Amplitudes
from
(5.60)
SFT
Let us briefly describe how one can obtain Koba-Nielson tree amplitudes in the Witten string field theory. One starts with the N-point diagram:
\V2) • • • A ^ - 3 ' ) \V2) \AX) • • • | ^ ) .
A**' stands for the propagator of the free string of the number k. the propagators are obtained as a product of zero-mode polynomials inverse of L, which can be represented as the proper time integral /0°° The vertices IV3) are three-string Witten vertices and the vertices specified by the scalar product (see Sect. 4).
(5.61) Usually and the e~TLdT. IV2) are
91
It was proved that the amplitude (5.61) can be presented in CFT language as
J ] (Jdr^
lo{z1)0{z2)j>b{z[)dz[0{z^jb{z^)dz'2
...0{zN) (5.62)
where the correlation functions must be calculated on a surface R (the so-called string scattering configuration). For Witten's vertex the surface R looks like it is sketched in Figure 12.
Figure 12.
The five-point amplitude in the Witten theory.
External strings are semi-infinite rectangular strips of width -K. The internal propagator is a strip of length T, and width 7r. Witten's three-point interaction identifies the first half of one string with the second half of the next string, for all three strings. Although the world sheet action for X^, c and b is quadratic, the complicated geometry of the string configuration makes the calculations non-trivial. The key idea of the conformal technique is to map conformally from the string configuration to the upper half plane, where the propagators are known. The conformal map p{z) which takes the upper-half plane onto the string configuration for a general N-point tree amplitude was given by Giddings and
92 Martinec 36 . The function p(z) satisfies the equation IN-2
f
z
=
\ EI (z ~ zoi) (z ~ zm) N l ^ — — - , z
il ( -
(5-63,
z
r)
T=l
where z$i are complex parameters representing the locations of the singular intersection points, and zr are the asymptotic positions on the real axis of the N external states. The M is a real normalization constant. If one integrates this equation one obtains a map with the following properties: i) logarithmic singularities at the points zT ; ii) ~ (z — zoi) 5 behaviour at the interaction points. The expression (5.62) looks rather similar to the result known from the covariant version of the first quantized approach 200 l | (Jdzi)
{01{z1)02(z2)V\z3)
...Vn-1(zN^1)0N(zN))
,
(5.64)
where the Koba-Nielsen variables Zi for i = 3, • • • , N — 1 are modular parameters and 0(Zi) = c(zi)V(zi) ,
(5.65)
with V(z) a conformal field of dimension one, defined solely in terms of the matter field xM. The amplitude (5.64) can be equivalently rewritten as follows I ] (fa
fdz^(01(z1)02(z2)b(z'3)03(z3)
... 6(^_ 1 )(!? i V - 1 (z n _ 1 )0 J V (z J v)) , (5.66)
where the correlation functions must be calculated on the entire z-plane. To prove the on-shell agreement of the equations (5.62) and (5.66) one has to show that the entire integration region is covered once and the ghost contribution compensates the Jacobian, which occurs in going from proper space time variables {Tj} to the Koba-Nielsen variables z,. The proof of this has been established by Giddings for N = 4 202 and by Samuel and Bluhm for N > 4 203 . 5.5.
Sliver
Rastelli and Zwiebach150 have found a family of string fields generating a commutative subalgebra of the open string star algebra: \n) * \m) = \n + m - 1) .
(5.67)
93 The state \n) is defined by the following requirement for any state \<j>) (n\cj>) = (/„ o 0(0)) , where
(5.68)
158
fn(z) = ^t<m(-tan-1
{z)].
(5.69)
This family of states is called wedge states, because the half-disks representing their local coordinates could be considered as wedges of the full unit disks. For n = 1 the wedge corresponds to the identity state \I) and for n = 2 the wedge corresponds to the vacuum |0). In the n ->• oo limit the map (5.69) is f(z) = foo(z)= t a n " 1 (z)
(5.70)
and this wedge state has the property |S)*|S) = | S ) .
(5.71)
This wedge state is called sliver. It was found158 that the sliver |H) can be written in the factorized form |S) = |S„,) ® \Eg) .
(5.72)
The matter part of (5.72) can be defined using the CFT technique 208 |S m ) ex exp (- i r,^ o"t . 5 • aA |0) ,
(5.73)
where 1
/ dw f dz
y/^Ef
1
2m J 2-Kl Z n u ; m ( 1
+ z 2 ) ( 1 + u;2)(taI1-l(z)_tan-l^)
2
'
(5.74) First Rastelli, Sen and Zwiebach158 have compared numerically the sliver (5.73) with the matter part of the solution found by Kostelecky and Potting 156 (see Sect. 4) and have got an evidence that these two solutions are the same. Later on these two states have been identified by direct calculations 170 . 6. Cubic Super String Field Theory 6.1.
Fermions
The action for the open superstring in the conformal gauge has the form 1
/>oo
rn
r-I
(6.1)
94
Here * is a Majorana spinor and * = * T 7 ° . We introduce the explicit representation of Euclidean Dirac 7-matrices:
^=(?;)• '-CDThe spinor \&M(<7, r) has two components
Performing matrix multiplications in (6.1) and changing the variables we get the following action for fermions
S
= -^~jjd2z \f^ + <WJ •
(6-3)
Since \PM(er, r) is spinor, we can impose the following boundary conditions (the first one can always be reached by redefinition of the fields) ^"(TT.T) = V(TT,T)
^ " ( 0 , T ) = ±^M(0,r) .
,
For "+" the sector is called Ramond (R), and for "—" the sector is called NeveuSchwartz (NS). Therefore, the solution of the equations of motion (merging %p and ip) is of the form
ngZ+r
where r = 1/2 for R-sector, and r = 0 for NS-sector (z is the same as in Sect. (5.1)). Following the ordinary quantization procedure we get the following commutation relations {WM=rr6m+nfi.
(6.5)
The correlation function is (r(zW(w)) = ~rr—. / z—w 6.2. Superghosts,
(6.6)
Bosonization
Consider a general first order action 201 2TT
J
(fzbdc,
(6.7)
95
where b and c denote general conjugate fields of dimension A and 1 — A respectively; they can be either Bose or Fermi fields1. The b , c operator product expansion is 1
c(z)h(w)
e
h(z)c(w)
(6.8)
z—w z—w Here and in the sequel, e = + 1 for Fermi statistics and e = — 1 for Bose statistics. The fields have the following mode expansions and hermitian properties l Z
r ( ) - Z^ z 7n+l-X
'
b z
( ) =E^TX'
C
n ~
C
-»
bj, = eb_„.
n
The OPE (6.8) determines the (anti)commutation relations CmD n + £ OnCm = Om+n,0 •
(6.9)
There are NS and R sectors of the theory, specified by NS
R
bn , n £ Z — A
bre,
c„ , nel
cn , n e | + Z + A
+X
ne|+Z-A
T h e stress tensor and reparametrization algebra are
T(z) = -\bdc{z) T(z)b(w) T(z)c(w)
T(z)T(w)
+ (1 - X)dbc(z) , x
2 {* — w)
b(w) + —i— db(w)
1-A {z - w)
~ - ^ — ^ C2( I B ) +
c/2 ~ , ' „ + - 7lA4 (z — w
(6.10) (6.11)
z—w dc(w) ,
(6.12)
z —w c = e (1 - 3Q 2 ) ,
Q = e(l - 2A) . (6.13)
Special cases are the reparametrization ghost algebra with e = 1, A = 2, Q = — 3 and c = —26; and the local superconformal ghost algebra with e = — 1, A = 3/2, Q = 2 and c = 11. 'The formulae in the end of Sec. 5.1 are a special case of the general formulae presented in this section.
96 The system has a global C/(l) current j(z) = -bc(z) j(z)b(w)
= £
^
,
^ ) j »
~ T ^ p
,
(6-14)
~
b(w) , j(z)c(w) c(w) , (6.15) z—w z—w which charge operator jo counts c = + l , b = —1 charge. The conformal properties of the current depend on the vacuum being chosen. In the SL2 invariant vacuum (c(z)b(w)) = l/(z — w), the proper relation is
T(z)
^)~(^+(J^)fJ'(z)'
[Lm,j„] = -njm+n
+ — m(m + l)<5m+„,o •
^^ (6.16b)
So j(z) is scale and translation covariant (m = 0 , - 1 ) , but not conformal covariant (m = 1). Next commutation relations [£1, j - i ] f = [L-1J1] = -jo ,
[L1J-1] = jo + Q ,
(6.17)
show the charge asymmetry of the system: JQ = —j0 — Q. Consequently, operator expectation values of charge neutral operators will vanish since [jo, 0]=qO,
(0|jof = -Q(Q\ ,
jo|0) = 0 ,
(0\j0O\0) = -Q(O|0|O) = q(0\O\0) . Only operators which cancel the background charge Q survive. The U(l) number current may be used to build a stress energy tensor that reproduces the relation (6.16a)
Tj(z) = - \ H 2 ( * ) + Qdj(z)) ,
(6.18a)
^
(6.18b)
r
H ^
r
~ ^ ~
^
+ ^
,
( 6 - 18c )
2(7^54 + -
Thus the new stress tensor has Cj — 1 - 2 e Q 2 ; the original b , c stress tensor has c = Cj ,
e= 1 ,
(Fermi)
c = cj — 2 ,
£ = —1 ,
(Bose)
97 To reproduce correct central charge in the Bose case one has to add to (6.18a) a proper Fermi system with central charge —2 such that T = Tj+T-2-
(6.19)
More precisely, this has to be Fermi system with A_2 = 1 and Q-2 = - 1 composed of a dimension 1 field T)(z) and dimension 0 field £(z). Now let us discuss bosonization of b , c-system. To this end, we introduce bosonic field (/> such that j(z) = ed<j>{z) ,
(6.20)
This means that the stress energy tensor of the field <j> is of the form T
-£-d
=
The main object in bosonization construction is a normal ordered exponent e9<Mz). it has the following OPEs with stress-energy tensor T^ and [/(l)-current 3 T0(z)e«^) =
+
(z — w)2
j(z)eq^w)
~—i-e«*W z—w
e , 0 ( z ) eq'4>(W)
_ (z _
wyqq'
=>
tf+W+rf
0q
(6.21a)
w \jo,e9+lw)]=qe9+W L J 4tw)
_
,
(6.21b) (6.21c)
So eq^w^ has jo-charge equal to q and conformal weight ^q(q + Q). From (6.21c) it follows that e'*(z) for odd q behaves like anticommuting operator. So the main bosonization formula are Fermi
Bose
c(z) = e^ 2 ) = b(z) = e~*^
e"^ =
c(z) = 7 = 77(z)e*W a
e~ ^
b(z) = 0 = e"*( z )^(z)
The (?j, £)-system has its own conserved current £r). Using this current we can construct a new one, which is called the picture current and is of the form j P { z ) = - d
In Table 3 we collect the assignments of the ghost number n 9 and the picture number np for the conformal operators described above. Let us note that SL(2,R) invariant vacuum has zero ghost and picture numbers.
98 Table 3. Ghost number ng, picture number np and conformal weight h assignments. field
ng
b c
-1 1
0 0
0
9
-1 1 1 -1
1 -1 0 0
eq
f V 7
0
np
h 2 -1 - ^ 9 ( 9 + 2) 0 1 -1/2 3/2
Correlation functions are to be computed in the following normalization *(£(z)cdcd2c(w)e-2*M)
= -2.
It is a good point to note here, that the above expression is written in the so-called large Hilbert space. The problem is that in the bosonization formula we have used only d£ rather then £, therefore, the zero mode £o is not important for bosonization. Moreover the Hilbert space, which can be associated in a standard way with the bosonized superghosts, does not form an irreducible representation of the superghost algebra. One can make it irreducible by excluding the mode £o • In the succeeding sections we will assume this restriction and correlation functions will be normalized as follows (cdcd2c(w) e-2^) 6.3. Problems
with Action
= -2 , in — 1
where
(0| = *(0|£0 •
Picture
The original Witten's proposal 135 for NSR superstring field theory action reads:
Sw =
JA*QNSA
+-
JXA*A*A+
/V(t)¥*Q«* + 2 fv*A*V
.
(6.22) Here QNS and Qn are the BRST charges in NS and R sectors, J and * are Witten's string integral and star product to be specified below. States in the extended Fock space H are created by the modes of the matter fields X^ and i/j'1, conformal ghosts b, c and superghosts ft, 7 :
A= Y, m,j,i
9=
4.Wft...7r-^-c I ...<...C|0)-i,
(6.23)
6 Z+5
£ m, j , i € Z
9AUx)/3i
...lj...bk...cl...a»...rjA)_h.
(6.24)
99 The characteristic feature of the action (6.22) is the choice of the —1 picture for the string field A. The vacuum |0)_i in the NS sector is defined as |0)_i=c(0)e-*< 0 >|0),
(6.25)
where |0) stands for SL(2,R)-invariant vacuum. In the description of the open NSR superstring the string field A is subjected to be GSO+ . The vacuum |i4)_i in the R sector is denned as |A)_i = c ( 0 ) e - ^ ( ° > S A ( 0 ) | 0 > ,
(6.26)
where SA{Z) is a spin operator of weight 5The insertion of the picture-changing operator1200 & •
X = - ^ e-V • dX + cdt, + i 66V 2 * + \ d (^e 2 *)
(6.27)
in the cubic term is aimed to absorb the unwanted unit of the
+ XA*A
= 0 .
Here QB = QNS- The first nontrivial iteration (4-point function) involving the pair of XA * A vertices produces the contact term singularity when two of X-s collide in a point.
6.4. Action in 0 Picture and Double Step Inverse Changing Operator
Picture
To overcome the troubles that we have discussed in the previous subsection it was proposed to change the picture of NS string fields from - 1 to 0, i.e. to replace |0)_i in (6.23) by |0) 140>141. States in the —1 picture can be obtained from the states in the 0 picture by the action of the inverse picture-changing operator Y 200
Y = Acd^e-^iw)
100
with X y = YX = 1. This identity holds outside the ranges kerX(w) and kery(«;) 2 1 9 . These kernels are: kerXiw)
= [o{w) | lira X{w)0{z)
= o)
kerYtw)
= \o(w)
= o) .
I lim Y(w)0(z)
and
This means that kerX(w) and ker Y(w) depend on a point w. In particular, the following statement is true: for all operators O(z), z ^ w the product X(w)0(z) ^ 0. The existence of these local kernels leads to the fact that at the 0 picture there are states that can not be obtained by applying the picture changing operators X and Y to the states at the —1 picture. The action for the NS string field in the 0 picture has the cubic form with the insertion of a double-step inverse picture-changing operator y_ 2 140>141 J; Ss
[Y-2A*QBA+?-
[Y-2A*A*A.
(6.28)
We discuss Y-2 in the next subsection. In the 0 picture there is a variety of auxiliary fields as compared with the —1 picture. These fields become zero due to the free equation of motion: QBA = 0, but they play a significant role in the off-shell calculations. For instance, a low level off-shell NS string field expands as A £* [dk{u{k)cl-\All{k)icla,i_l-\Bll(k)lh J
\
l
>% + ^ ( t j d ^ ! ^ i 4
2
2
j
+ B(k)co + r(Jb)ci 7 i P-1 + • • • [ eifc'x(°'°) |0) .
2
2
(6.29)
Here u and r are just the auxiliary fields mentioned above. The SSFT based on the action (6.28) is free from the drawbacks of the Witten's action (6.22). The absence of contact singularities can be explained shortly. The action (6.28) yields the following equation Y_2(QBA
+ A*A)
=0.
(6.30)
Since operator YL2 is inserted in the mid point in the bulk and A is an operator in a point on the boundary we can drop out Y-2 and write the following equation QBA J
+ A*A = 0.
(6.31)
One can cast the action into the same form as the action (2.7) for the bosonic string if one modifies the NS string integral accounting the "measure" Y-2 : f = JY-2-
101
So the interaction vertex does not contain any insertion leading to singularity. The complete proofs of this fact can be found in 140 > 141 . 142 . To have well defined SSFT (6.28) the double step inverse picture changing operator must be restricted to be a) in accord with the identity k : F_ 2 X = X7_ 2 = Y ,
(6.32)
b) BRST invariant: [QB , F_ 2 ] = 0 , c) scale invariant conformal field, i.e. conformal weight of Y_2 is 0, d) Lorentz invariant conformal field, i.e. Y"_2 does not depend on momentum. The point a) provides the formal equivalence between the improved (6.28) and the original Witten (6.22) actions. The point b) allows us "to move" BRST charge from one string field to another. The point c) is necessary to make the insertion of Y_2 compatible with the ^-product. And the point d) is necessary to preserve unbroken Lorentz symmetry. As it was shown in paper 141 , there are two (up to BRST equivalence) possible choices for the operator Y_2 • The first operator, the chiral one 140 , is built from holomorphic fields in the upper half plane and is given by y_ 2 (z) = - 4 e - 2 * W - i l e-3*cd&
• dX(z) .
(6.33)
The identity (6.32) for this operator reads Y-2(z)X(z)
= X(z)Y.2(z)
= Y(z) .
This F_ 2 is uniquely defined by the constraints a) - d). The second operator, the nonchiral one 141 , is built from both holomorphic and antiholomorphic fields in the upper half plane and is of the form: Y-2(z,z)
= Y(z)Y(z).
(6.34)
Here by Y(~z) we denote the antiholomorphic field 4c(z)d^(z)e~ 2 < t > ^ z \ this choice of Y_2 the identity (6.32) takes the form: Y„2(z,z)X(z)
= X(z)Y_2(z,z)
= Y(z)
For
.
One can find the inverse operators W to YL 2 (z,z) and Y-2{z) W(z,z)Y„2{z,z) W(z)Y_2(z)
k
= 1,
= l,
W{z,z)=X{z)X{z) 2
;
W(z) = X (z) + c^Wiiz)
(6.35a) + a2W2(z)
We assume that this equation is true up to BRST exact operators.
+ a3W3(z) , (6.35b)
102
where Wi(z) = {Q,fi;(z)}, fij is given by fii = (db)d e2
= (02b) e24> ,
ft2
n3 = bd2e2*
(6.36)
and a, are the following numbers ai = _
a2 Q3 = _ (6 3?) 192' = ~48' 96The issue of equivalence between the theories based on chiral or nonchiral insertions still remains open. The first touch to the problem was performed in 210 . It was shown that the actions for low-level space-time fields are different depending on insertion being chosen.
6.5. SSFT in Conformal
Language
As for the bosonic string (see Sec. 5.2) for SSFT calculations it is convenient to employ the tools of CFT 2 0 8 . In the conformal language f and ^-product mentioned above are replaced by the odd bracket ((• • • | • • •)), defined as follows «K_ 2 |Ai,... ,An)) = (Pn o F_ 2 (0,0) A (n) o ^ ( 0 ) . . . / M o = (fjn)oY-2(i,i)fin)oA1(0)...fWoAn{0)) »
, '
An(0)\ n = 2,3.
(6.38)
Rn
Here r.h.s. contains SL(2, E) -invariant correlation function in CFT on string configuration surface Rn described in Section 5.2. Aj (j = 1 , . . . ,n) are vertex operators and {/• '} are given by eq. (5.27b). Y-2 is the double-step inverse picture changing operator (6.34) inserted in the center of the unit disc. This choice of the insertion point is very important, since all the functions fj maps the points i (the middle points of the individual strings) to the same point that is the origin. In other words, the origin is a unique common point for all strings (see Figure 11). The next important fact is the zero weight of the operator Y-2, so its conformal transformation is very simple foY-2(z,~z) = Y-2(f(z),f(~z)). Due to this property it can be inserted in any string. This note shows that the definition (6.38) is self-consistent and does not depend on a choice of a string on which we insert Y-2Due to the Neumann boundary conditions, there is a relation between holomorphic and antiholomorphic fields. So it is convenient to employ a doubling trick (see details in 1 9 8 ) . Therefore, Y-2(z,~z) can be rewritten in the following form1
Y-2{z,z) = Y(z)Y(z*). Because of this formula, the operator Y-2{ z,z) is sometimes called bilocal.
103
Here Y(z) is the holomorphicfieldand z* denotes the conjugated point of z with respect to a boundary, i.e. for the unit disc z* = 1/z and z* = ~z for the upper half plane. From now on we work only on the whole complex plane. Hence the odd bracket takes the form /1(n)oA1(0).../Wo4(0)) .
{{Y^2\AU . . . ,An)) = (Y(Pn(0))Y(Pn(oo))
(6.39) To summarize, the action we start with reads
S[A]
UY-2\A,QBA)) 9l L2
+
\({Y-2\A,A,A))
(6.40)
where g0 is a dimensionless coupling constant 6.6. Free Equation
of
Motion
The aim of this section is to illustrate that the free equation of motion (6.30) obtained from the action (6.40) and the free equation of motion (6.31) are the same1". To this purpose we consider the following GSO+ string field (in picture zero and ghost number one) A = J - ^ ^ L(k)ce2ikX^ - ^B^k^^e™-*^ + r-x(k)dce 2 i k X L ^
+
^A^cdX*e2ikX- (w)
+
^F^(k)cip^iljve2ik-XL^
+ r 2 {k)cd
(6.41)
and show that free equations of motion for the component fields are usual Maxwell equations for the massless vector field plus some relations between the other fields. The (6.41) contains all possible excitations in picture 0 on levels LQ = — 1 and LQ = 0. There are several unexpected properties of this formula: • First, we find that the level LQ = — 1 is not empty — it contains one field u(k); • Second, we find that there are two candidates for the Maxwell field: A^ and 1?M; • Third, we find that there are too many fields as compared with the massless spectrum of the first quantized string. m
In this section we use the convention a ' = 2.
104
As it will be shown in Section 6.8 the field B^ is physical one, while all other fields are auxiliary ones. Let us first examine the equations that follow from QB\A) = 0. We have d26k
u(k) (2k2 - 1) dec + crje^ik • -0 +
\k2dccdX»
+ A^k)
- 1 i ktid2cc +^cd
+ \ crje^ik • tpdX» + ^ d ^ e ^ S X " \k2dcj]e't'i)tl
+ B»(k) + liWd
8
•* ILV
-dm*?4.
02ik-XL(w)
(i/e V )
p2ik-XL(w)
- \cd (yje'V) - J c t / e V * * • dX
(9we 2 *) - ldr1r]e2
8
k2dcc^ij}v
4
- -cd(r] e^ik^ip,,} + -cqe^ik P
4
+ ri(fc)
2
^,/,^/,"
v
• ^ ^
2«*-Xx,(iu)
o
<92cc - dec 2iJfc • 3X + deqe^ik • ip + jd (drjrje2'1')
+ r2(k) -d2cc+2k2dccd(f> + ci]de't'2ik • tp + \d^de2^
8
- -crje^xp • dX - ce^d^ik + -bcdrjrje2
2
2
02ikXL(w)
• ip) 2ik-XL(w)
\d2r]r]^
From {QB, A} = Q one gets the following equations for component fields: u =0, Btl = All ,
r2 = 0 ,
(6.42a)
FM„ = - ih^Av] ,
r1 = --ikllAll
k2A„ = 4ifcMri .
,
(6.42b) (6.42c)
Note that we get Maxwell equation for B^ after excluding n in (6.42c) via (6.42b) k2 B^ = kf, ku Bv .
(6.43)
Eqs. (6.42a) exclude fields u and r2 and (6.42b) leave only one vector field.
105
Now let us present the result of computations of the action (6.40) on the string field (6.41):
f d™k 2
J
(2TT)26
u(-k)u(k)
- ^(-fc)AM(fc) -
ifi M (-fc)5 M (fc)
+ -A p (-fc)B M (fc) - iFM„(-fc)FM„(fc) + - 2ir2(-k)kliBfl(k)
ikllFliV{-k)B„{k)
- 10r2(-fc)r2(fc) - 4n(-fc)r 2 (fc)
One can check that the equations of motion following from this action are precisely the eqs. (6.42). Moreover, free equations of motion following from Qs|.4) = 0 and from Y-IQB\-A) — 0 are the same for any string field A. 6.7. Scattering
Amplitudes
6.7.1. Gauge Fixing Before proceeding with the investigation of tree graphs in the theory with the action (6.40), we should specify a gauge fixing procedure. It is convenient to choose the Siegel gauge 216 b0\A) = 0.
(6.44)
To find the propagator we have to invert the operator Y- 2 Q on the space of states satisfying (6.44). The propagator can be presented in a number of forms: A=
b
fWQ^
Li
= ^WLi
b
iwb-±Q
XJ
LI
+ Qb-^Wbi
= W^
LI
LI
LI
.
(6.45)
LI
One can prove that AY_ 2 Q = 1 in the space (6.44) by a simple calculation based on the following set of equalities: [L,Q} = 0,
6.7.2. ^Point
{b0,Q} = L,
[W,Q} = 0,
[y_ 2 ,Q] = 0 ,
Y_2W = 1 . (6.46)
On-Shell Amplitude
Now we turn to the calculation of the four-boson scattering amplitude in the cubic theory. We shall proceed as close as possible to the analogous calculation in the usual Witten theory. In the bracket representation for two- and threepoint vertices one can write h(i)
lii)
AA = 4ii(V3\ i23(V3\Y$Y$^WQ^\V2)ii\A\U\A1)1\A2)a\A3)3
. (6.47)
106
In comparison with the usual formula (5.61), we evidently find in (6.47) the additional midpoint insertions of Y_l , Y_^ a n d the new propagator (6.45). The string fields \Ar) = X\A) is a field in the —1 picture defined by the expression like (6.29). Taking into account the BRST invariance of the vertices and the on-shell condition for \Ar), we can rewrite eq. (6.47) in the form 1,(0 A4 = 41i(V3| i 23
(6-48)
where one of the two potentially dangerous Y-2's is cancelled by the operator W in the propagator. In the conformal formulation this expression corresponds to r°°
"Wo
dT
r dz dz
-
-
-
-
f^id-p{0^°^bY^-
(6 49)
-
where Z{p) is the Giddings map for N = 4. To be more rigorous we can consider first the regularized expression f dz
°°
/
dT
j2ridp
dz
-
-
-
-
(0i0203C46K.2) ,
(6.50)
with the regularization parameter T . We will prove that: i) the correlation function (6.50) is well-defined in the limit r —> 0; ii) in the limit r —> 0 the correlation function (6.49) after summation over all channels is equal to the Koba-Nielsen amplitude. We will proceed in the same way as described for Witten's diagram in Section 5.4 above. The first step is to move two of the X(0), say X^ and X^ , to the midpoint via the famous rule l " » ( 0 ) - I w ( i ) = {Q,
(6.51)
107
and we find A$ in the form Ai = A° + A\ + A\
(6.52) In the RHS of eq. (6.52) the first term contributes to the Koba-Nielsen amplitude A°A= T d T ^ ^ -
{O^OzOib)
.
(6.53)
The last two terms in (6.52), A\ and A\ , are contact terms with cancelled propagator A\ = (YS^O^OsO^b)
,
(6.54)
and A\ = ( y _ 2 ^ ( 1 ) O i 6 2 6 3 0 4 6 ) •
(6.55) 142
In contrast to the usual calculation (see Appendix A in for details) we have not obtained any singularity in contact terms (see Appendix 6.9.3) so there is no need to look for a regularization to define A4 correctly. Therefore, the limit T —1 0 does exist . Finally note that the amplitudes A\ and A\ after summation over all channels are identically zero. For illustration we will prove this for A\. The explicit formula for A\ in the s-channel reads fOO
A\{s)
=1
C A
A
dTJ^.-^(01(z1)d2(z2)d3(z3)Oi(z4)b(z)mzi)-azoW(z0)). (6.56)
108 In the t-channel we get A\{t)
=J dTJ^-.-^(d2(z1)d3(Z2)0A(z3)01(zi)b(z)((az3)
-
&o))Y(z0)). (6.57)
Making a SL(2, C) transformation of the form z -> z' = Z—^- , z+1
(6.58) '
K
which gives (Zi, Z2,Zz,Zi)
-¥ (z2,Z3,Zi,Zi)
,
and using the fact that OT are anticommuting operators we find that and so the sum of (6.56) and (6.57) is equal to zero. In the oscillator language this corresponds to the cancellation of 4-point contact terms by cyclic symmetry arguments. The term (6.53) is also well-defined in the limit r -> 0 and gives the s-channel contribution in the total Koba-Nielson amplitude 215 ' 217 ' 218 . As in a usual gauge theory the issue of finiteness of 4-point off-shell amplitudes crucially depends on the choice of a gauge. One can use the alternative gauge bo(Y_2A) = 0, which leads to the propagator W(i) -±Y_2Q-± Li
W(i) = W(i) -°- - W(i) y- F_ 2 ^ W(i)Q . Li
LI
(6.59)
Li
LI
In this gauge the NS 4-point function (off-shell NS amplitude) is obviously finite. 6.7.3. N-Point On-Shell Amplitudes Let us start with the example of the 5-point amplitude. From now on we choose the propagator in the form (see eq. (6.45)) A =
hW(i)-bj-W(i)bj-Q,
(6.60)
then the 5-point function is given by the sum of two Feynman graphs 2
3
4
2
3
4
(6.61)
109 where the line with a dot stands for the second term in eq. (6.60). To analyze the graphs of this type, which also appear in N-point amplitudes, we adopt the following regularization
A -* ATur2
b
^e~^W(i)-b^e-^LW(i)e-^Q
= Li
Li
/»00
= bo
/*00
dre-TLW(i)
-b0
Li /»00
dTe-TLW{i)b0
/
dre~TLQ
.
(6.62)
This regularization is a lagrangian one and it's special case was used previously for the 4-point function. Adopting the regularization eq. (6.62) we find that in the limit n -> 0 the operator Q in the second term of (6.61) directly cancels the right-standing propagator thus leading to the diagram with the contact 4-vertex. 2 3 4
W (6.63) According to the Lemma in Appendix 6.9.3 we cannot remove the regularization parameter r 2 in this diagram. However, literally reproducing the arguments of the previous subsection, we conclude that after summation over all the channels these contact terms give zero. Hence we find that only the first graph in (6.61) contributes on-shell. Reproducing once again the arguments of the previous subsection, we finally conclude that the first graph in (6.61) gives the Koba-Nielsen formula. Following just the same device one can analyze any N-point on-shell amplitude and demonstrate the total agreement with the Koba-Nielsen formulae. The off-shell analysis of N-point functions is much more subtle. The key point is the behavior of multi-factor OPEs of the form y_ 2 • W • Y-2 • • • Y-i • 6.8. Restriction
on String
Fields
The aim of this section is to try to reduce the number of excitations appearing in the zero picture string field. Such reductions can be made if we have degenerate quadratic part of the action. But the reduction we describe is not of this sort. In this construction we use only the fact that the expectation value of the operator on the complex plane in super conformal two dimensional field theory is non-vanishing only if it compensates all background charges of the theory.
110
Let us decompose the string field A according to the (^charge q: J\. — y ^ J\q
7
J\q c Vq ,
qez where [jo , Ag] = q Ag
with
j0 = ^- j> d( d4>(() .
(6.64)
The BRST charge QB has also the natural decomposition over (^-charge: QB = QO + QI + Q2-
(6.65)
Since QB2 = 0 we get the identities: Qo2 = 0 , g2
2
=0
{Q0,Qi} and
= 0,
{Qi,Q2} = 0 , (6.66)
{<5o,<32} + <5i2 = 0 .
The non-chiral inverse double step picture changing operator Y-2 has ^-charge equal to —4. Therefore to be non zero the expression in the brackets ((Y^2 \ • • •)) must have (^-charge equal to +2. Hence the quadratic S2 and cubic S3 terms of the action (2.7) read: 5
2 = ~\ Y^((Y-2\A2-q , QoAq)) - \ Yjy-*\Al-* q€l
> QlAq))
q&
-\52((Y-2\A-q,Q2Aq)). 53
= ~\
E
(6.67a)
((y-2\A2-q-q' , Aql,Aq)) .
(6.67b)
q,q'eZ
We see that all the fields Aq , q ^ 0,1, give only linear contribution to the quadratic action (6.67a). We propose to exclude such fields. We will consider the action (6.67) with fields that belong to the space Vo© Vi only. To make this prescription meaningful we have to check that the restricted action is gauge invariant. The action restricted to subspaces Vo and V\ takes the form S2,restricted = -\{{Y.2\A0
, Q2Ao)) ~ ((Y-Mo
-^«r_2L4i,Q04i»,
^3, restricted
=
-{{Y^Ao^AuAx))
.
, Q1A1)) (6.68a)
(6.68b)
111
The action (6.68) has a nice structure. One sees that since the charge Q 2 does not contain zero modes of stress energy tensor the fields A) play a role of auxiliary fields. On the contrary, all fields Ax are physical ones, i.e. they have non-zero kinetic terms. Let us now check that the action (6.68) has gauge invariance. The action (6.40) is gauge invariant under SA = QBA. + [A, A] .
(6.69)
But after the restriction to the space Vb © Vi it might be lost. Decomposing the gauge parameter A over ^-charge A = ^,Aq we rewrite the gauge Q
transformation (6.69) as: SAq = Q0Aq + QiAq-i + Q 2 A,_ 2 + ] T [Ag_,«, A,,] .
(6.70)
Assuming that Aq — 0 for q ^ 0,1 from (6.70) we get SA-2
= <2oA_2 ;
(6.71a)
6A-x
= Q 0 A - i + [ A ) , A _ i ] + QiA_2 + [>li > A_2];
(6.71b)
6Ao
= QoAQ + [Ao , A0] + QiA_i + [Ax, A_i] + Q 2 A_ 2 ;
(6.71c)
SAi
=Q0A1
(6.71d)
6A2
= QxAi + [Ax, Ax] + Q 2 A 0 ;
(6.71e)
SA3
= Q2A1 .
(6.71f)
+ [Ao,A1] + Q1AQ + [A1,A0]
+ Q2A-1]
To make the restriction consistent with transformations (6.71) the variations of the fields A-2 , A-x, A2 and A% must be zero. Since the gauge parameters cannot depend on string fields we must put A_ 2 = A-x = Ai = 0. So we are left with the single parameter Ao, but to have zero variation of A2 we must require in addition Q2A0 = 0. Therefore the gauge transformations take the form 6A0 = Q0A0 + [Ao , A0] , (6.72) 5Ax = QxA0 + [Ax, A0] ,
with
Q2A0 = 0 .
It is easy to check that (6.72) form a closed algebra. It is also worth to note that the restriction Q2A0 = 0 leaves the gauge transformation of the massless vector field unchanged.
112
6.9.
Appendix
6.9.1. Cyclicity Property The proof of the cyclicity property is very similar to the one given in 187 . But there is one specific point — insertion of the double step inverse picture changing operator Y_2 (6.34). So we repeat the proof with all necessary modifications. Let Tn and R denotes rotation by — ^ and — 2TT respectively: Tn(w) =e-^w
R(w) = e-2niw
,
.
These transformations have two fixed points namely 0 and oo. Let us apply the transformation Tn to the maps fjf1' (5.27b) and we get the identities: T„ o / W = / £ £ ,
k
T„o/W=i?o/W,
n = 2,3.
(6.73)
Since the weight of the operator Y_2 is zero and 0 and 00 are fixed points of Tn and R, the operator Yl 2 remains unchanged. Due to SL(2, M)-invariance of the correlation function we can write down a chain of equalities (Y_2 F[n) oA,...
F^
=
OV i ^ "
1
° Oh)
j n n \ o An^f^ o oh)
= (Y-2 Tn o f[n) oAx...Tno
f(nn\ o An^Tn
= e- 2 ; r i / l (y_ 2 F^ n ) o OhF2(n) oA1...
o /(») o Oh)
F | n ) o An.!)
.
(6.74)
In the last line we assume that Oh is a primary field of weight h and use the transformation law of primary fields under rotation: {R o Oh) (w) = e-2*ih Oh (e-^w)
.
Also we change the order of operators in correlation function without change of a sign, because the expression inside the brackets should be odd (otherwise it will be equal to zero) and therefore no matter whether $ odd or even. So the cyclicity property reads ((Y„2\AU...
,An))=e-2*ih»((Y„2\An,A1,...,An_1))
(6.75)
EXAMPLES. NOW we consider some applications of the cyclicity property (6.75). GSO+ sector consists of the fields with integer weights and therefore their exponential factor is equal to 1, while G S O - sector consists of the fields
113
with half integer weights and therefore their exponential factor is —1. Now we give few examples <(y_21.4+ , QB A+))
= «y_ 2 | Q B A+ ,A+)) ,
((Y_2\A-,QBA-))
=-((Y-2\QBA-,A-))
«X-2\A+,A-,A-))
= - ((Y-2\A-
(6.76a) ,
,A+,A-))
(6.76b) = ((Y.2\A-
,A- ,A+)) . (6.76c)
6.9.2. Twist Symmetry The proof of the twist symmetry is similar to the one given in 187 . But there is one specific point — insertion of the operator Y_ 2 . So we repeat this proof here with all necessary modifications. A twist symmetry is a relation between correlation functions of operators written in one order and in the inverse one: <(F_ 2 |0i,... , 0 „ » = ( - l ) ? « y _ 2 | O n ) . . . , Oi» .
(6.77)
We are interesting in this relation for n = 3. 1) Let us consider the following transformations M(w) = e~l*w and I(w) = el0/w. The transformation I has the following properties: J ( z i ) I ( z 2 ) = I(zlZ2)
l(z2'z)
and
= (/(*))^ •
The pair of points 0 and oo is not affected by M and I, therefore the doublestep inverse picture changing operator Y-2 remains unchanged. For the maps (5.27b) we have got the following composition laws /{3> o M = / o / | 3 ) ,
/ 2 (3) o M ^ / o / f
and
/f ) o M = I o f[3) . (6.78)
2) Since there is an identity M o O{0) = e _i7r/l 0(O) we can apply it to (6.77) ((YL2IO1,02 ,03)> = e " E fc' (F_ 2 A{3) o M o O ^ f o M o 02 / 3 (3) o M o 0 3 ) = eiv S ^
{Y_2
f
Q fW
o 0
J
0
f) o02U
/<3> o 0 3 )
= e " S h* (Y-2 /< 3 > o Oi / f ' o C?2 /< 3) o Os>
(6.79)
in the last line we use the invariance with respect to SL(2,R). Let N0dd and Neven be a number of odd or euen respectively fields in the set { 0 i , 0 2 , 0 3 } . After rearranging the fields one gets «y_ 2 |01 , 0 2 ,03» = J*^hl
(-l)N°dd{N*°dd~l)
«K- 2 |03 , 0 2 ,Ol» •
(6.80)
114
3) Since the correlation function is non zero only for odd expression, number N0dd is odd and N0dd — 2m + 1 for some integer m. Also we have an identity JVCTen + N0(id — 3. It's not difficult to check that (-l)"-"^"-1)
=
(_ir
= (
-i)^^ +^
+
^ " -
3
= (_i)JV^
+^ - . (6.81)
Combining (6.80) and (6.81) we get the twist property
«y_ 2 |Oi, o2,03» =fiin2 n3 «y_ 2 |o 3 , o2, 0$ , where
f(-1)^'+! , = < , , | (_l)^+i ,
fl,-
hj£Z
(i.e. GSO+)
(6.82)
1 hj€z+
(i.e. G S O - ) .
EXAMPLES
i) Let A+ = A\ + A2. Each term in A3+ = Al + {AiA\ + A\AX) + A2AXA2
+ (A^
+ AXA22) + A1A2Al
+ A\
should be twist invariant to be nonzero. Therefore we get fii — 1 and !72 = 1ii) Let we have fields A+ and A- = a\ + a2. Using cyclicity property (6.76) one gets 2(A+,ai +a2,ai
+ a2) = (A+aj + a\A+) + (A+a\ + a\A+) + (A+aia2 + a2aiA+)
+ {A+a2a\ + a\a2A+)
.
So we get il+ = 1 and Cl+fliCl2 = 1. If ill = 1 (tachyon's sector) then fl2 = 1 too. Therefore we can consider a sector with 0 = 1 only. 6.9.3. Power-Counting Lemma Lemma 1. Consider an off-shell N-point tree graph with V = N — 2 threestring vertices, and with LQ internal lines corresponding to the usual propagator Ao = i;W and Li internal lines corresponding to W-propagator term ^W^g-. In such a graph there is L = LQ + 2L\, V — LQ and L\ operators b(z), Z{z) and W(z) respectively. Let us denote the power of the leading singularity in the product (b(z))L(Z{z))y-L°(W(z))Ll by s, i.e. L
V-L0
L,
Y[b{zo + ate) J J Z {z0 + atf
J J W (z0 + afc) = - [O1 (z0) + o(e)} ,
n=l
k=l
j=\
where ai,a'j,a'^ are some constants. The amplitude is non-singular if s < 2L, it can contain a logarithmic singularity if s = 2L and it is divergent in the case s > 2L .
115
Proof. Note that we consider only the case when there are no cancelled propagators in the tree or, in other words, all the Q-s from the propagators ^W^Q sit on external legs. Going to the z-plane one can represent the amplitude in the form A=Y\[
^
/ poo
dTn )B(T1,...,TL)
,
(6.83)
where
-n(/£
6(T1,...,r1)=||(^s^
!
x
n=l
x (n °r M n ^ n (*°<) n ^) • (6-84) IN
L
b
V-L0
n=l
\r=l
z
Li
j=l
w
i=l
\
I
In the space of modular variables {Tn} we choose the spherical coordinates: Tn = Tan(il)
,
where r is the radius and Q, is the set of n — 1 angular variables. Then /*oo
T L _ 1 dTdniB(T,n) ,
A=
(6.85)
Jo where B(T, fi) = jB(rai,... , ran). To analyze the question of finiteness of the amplitude A let us estimate the behavior of the integrand TL~1B(T, fi) when r tends to zero. Let us denote by ZQ the common limit of the points zoi and z'oi when r —> 0. If we put e = zoi — ^o for some i then for every j one has: ZQJ = z0 + a^e. In this notation it is possible to write the OPE for the product of the operators b, Z, and W in eq. (6.84) as f[b(wn)
f[Z(zoi)f[W(z'oi)
n= 1
i= 1
= YtO'a(zo)ek°i[(u>n-zoy°-"
i=l
ct
.
n= 1
(6.86) By using eq. (6.86) one can write eq. (6.84) in the form
B{e) = ( ft Or W £ ^ (*) £fc° ft f ^ 7 5 (»» - *)'"" ) • (6-87) \r=l
a
n=l
"
/
116
Because the conformal map defined by equation (5.63) we have
/ | £ ^ ( « * - * ) ' " - ~ *-* + '"- +1 •
(6-88)
In summary we conclude that when e —>• 0, B(e) has a behavior:
\r=l
n=l
a
/
~ r ^ - O ^ B a e * ' J J c*"-.
(6.89)
71=1
If s is the maximal power of singularity for the OPE (6.86) near the point ZQ (one must also put wn — ZQ ~ e in eq. (6.86) then L n=l
and eq. (6.89) takes the form B{e) ~
e-(£-i)£-*
.
(6.90)
Next we change the variables in (6.90) from e to r. As it is obvious from (5.63) when r -> 0 : r ~ e^+1 .
(6.91)
In terms of r eq. (6.90) looks like B ~
T-£+vT2(2£-s)
.
(692)
That is why the entire integrand in (6.85) behaves as Th-\
T-L+v^(2L-s)
= T-l+v^(2L-s)
^
when r ->• 0. From (6.93) we can derive the statement of our Lemma.
^g3^
117
6.9.4. Table of Notations, Correlation Functions and OPE
X£(z)X£(w)
~ -—rf a' 2
log(z - w)
a' 2 if"
dX>i(z)dXv(w)
1 z—w
c(z)b(w) ~ b{z)c(w)
•y(z)P(w)
P(z)y{w) •
£(z)r)(w) ~ ??(z)£(iu) ~
(c(zi)c(z 2 )c(z 3 )) = - ( z x - z 2 )(z 2 - z 3 )(z 3 - zi)
(e-2*(»>> = 1
TB
i> =
2 —W 1 -6 — w
= ——dX
• dX - — dip • \j>
a'
a'
2{z-w)4
dx -v lpdl _ I a / 3 7
Tbc = -Ibdc - 96c
TB(z)rs(w).
+ ,
2
^TBH +
(z-u>)2
-^~arB(w)
TB(Z)7>(«O ~ , 3/2,,?>(™) + — L _ d r F ( » (z — u))'! z—w 5/2 1/2 m , . TP(Z)TF(«J) • ' iu) 3 +—zL— (z — — w TB{w) 7 = Jje*'
7> 7 = T4> + <j> — charge:
7 2 = J7S7je2*
T
ii 1 2iti
-JdCd
=
qAq
QB = ^ -
1 (z-w)2
118
7. Cubic (Super)String Field Theory on Branes and Sen Conjectures 7.1. Sen's
Conjecture
As we have seen in Section 5 there is a tachyon mode in the spectrum of bosonic open string. There is also a tachyon mode in GSO— sector of fermionic string. Normally we impose GSO+ projection on superstring spectrum and obtain tachyon free spectrum. But there are objects in the string theory such as nonBPS branes or brane-anti-brane pairs, which necessarily contain both GSO+ and GSO— sector 144 . Therefore, it becomes important to explore the tachyon phenomenon. The existence of the tachyon mode does not necessarily signify a sickness of the theory, but may simply indicate an existence of a ground state with the energy density lower than in the starting configuration. One can compare this situation with Higgs phenomenon. The Higgs field has a potential looking like a Mexican hat. On the top of the potential the Higgs field has negative mass square, while at the bottom it has positive mass square. To find a new vacuum in the theory of strings one has to be able to calculate the effective tachyon potential, that is a functional on a constant field configuration. Since a non zero constant tachyon field is far away from its on-shell value one has to use an off-shell formulation of string theory to do this. As we know from sections 4-6 string filed theories give such off-shell formulations of the string theory. There are also so-called background independent string filed theories (BSFT) which are also used to calculate the effective tachyon potential 234 - 236 ' 237 . First attempts to find a stable vacuum in the bosonic string using SFT was made by Kostelecky and Samuel 138 . They have computed tachyon potential using level truncation scheme and shown that there is another vacuum, in which there is no tachyonic state. About two years ago A. Sen 233 suggested to interpret tachyon condensation as a decay of unstable D-branes. Let us consider one non-BPS D9-brane. As it is mentioned above the string attached to this brane has a tachyon in the spectrum. For this case, the Sen's conjecture says 144 : (1) The tachyon potential Vc(t) looks like Mexican hat with minimum at the point tc. The difference V(0) — V(tc) is precisely the tension fg of the non-BPS D9-brane. (2) The theory around the new vacuum does not contain any open string excitation. Therefore, this new vacuum can be also considered as a vacuum of a closed string. (3) All D-branes in type IIA (IIB) string theory can be regarded as classical
119 solutions in the open string field theory living on a system of non-BPS D9-branes (or D9-anti-D9-brane pair). In this section we will show how one can use SFT to check these conjectures. We will mainly concentrate on the first conjecture and will say only few words about others. Before proceed let us summarize what was obtained in the literature. The first Sen's conjectures was numerically verified almost in all SFTs listed in the Introduction. In Table below we collect results of the computations of the ratio ( V ( 0 ) - V ( £ C ) ) / T performed in different SFTs using the level truncation scheme. S F T Type Cubic SFT
V(0) -
V(tc)
level
number of the fields
10
102
0.9991
1
1 (exact) 0.944
BI SFT
T
Nonpolynomial SSFT
4
70
Modified Cubic SSFT
2
10
1.058
1
1 (exact)
BISSFT
These results were presented in 148,234,232,183 a n ( j 237 correspondingly. See also 187>188>232 about calculations of the tachyon potential in nonpolynomial SSFT 185 ' 186 and 189 about calculations in the Witten cubic SSFT. One sees that Background Independent SFTs give exact results for the minimum of the tachyon potential. The formulation of Background Independent SFT can be found in 220>234, and for further developments related to tachyon see 223,221,222,224,225,226,235,227,228,229,230,231
The
second
Sen's
conjecture
SFTs238,239,240,241,242,243,244,245,246,247
was also a n d
248
por
verified
almost
superstringS
in all
the Solution
representing, for example, a decay non-BPS D9 -> BPS D8 (D8) is a kink (anti-kink) solution. There are also solutions which represent a decay Dp —> Dq. Such solutions can be obtained by combining several kink solutions representing the decay Dp -> D(p - 1). This chain relations between the solutions are called the brane descend relations 144 ' 145 . In the case of the bosonic strings the solution representing a decay Dp —> Dq is called lump solution of codimension (p — q). Below we summarize some numeric results concerning lump solutions. The third conjecture implies that there are different solutions of the equations of motion of the SFT which can be identified with different objects ap-
120 pearing in the string theory. For example, the vortex and kink solutions in the Super SFT represent lower dimensional D-branes (of various types) in IIA (B) theory. Another example is lump solutions in the Bosonic SFT, which also represent lower dimensional D-branes. 7.2. CFT on
Branes
Dp-brane is incorporated into the string field theory by considering boundary CFT. This boundary CFT is constructed by p + 1 bosons Xa(z,z) (a = 0 , . . . ,p) with Neumann boundary conditions and 25 — p bosons X'l(z,z) (i = p+ 1 , . . . ,25) with Dirichlet boundary conditions. But to be able to use vertex operators we need to consider T-dual CFT. This CFT consist of 26 bosons Xfl(z,'z) with Neumann boundary conditions, but part of them is related to Xn(z,~z) by T-duality transformation: Xi(z,z)=XiL(z)+XR(z)
=U
X'i(z,z)=XiL(z)-XR(z).
7.3. String Field Theory on Pair of
(7.1)
Branes
To incorporate more than one brane into string field theory one can use ChanPaton factors. We will consider the string field theory for a pair of Dp-branes. To this end we need to introduce 2 x 2 Chan-Paton factors: 1 0' 0,
p 0
p CD 0
0 0' p 1 0 0' 1 0
denotes a string that begins and ends on the first brane; denotes a string that begins on the first and ends on the second brane; denotes a string that begins and ends on the second brane;
denotes a string that begins on the second and ends on the first brane.
For these matrices the following compositions are true:
'0 A /0 0\
(\
0
o o/ vi oy ~ vo oj '
(7 2a)
i o
(7 2b)
o o = (o i •
'
-
121
The string field is modified in the following way:
• - • " ' • ( J ! ! + -i'!!W.nw:;?
(7.3)
The action is of the form 1 $ Tr | « * , Q B # » + | « 4 , * , *»
9l
9l
\((*W,QB*{1)))
+ \W,QB
+ ^ ( ( * ( 1 ) , Q B $ ( 3 ) ) > + \w,QBci>))
+ i«* (1) ,* (1) ,$ (1) )) +
\{{^M2\^))
2 + \ ( ( ( f W . f ^ H c p . ) + \ ( « * < \ 0 , O + c.p.)
(7.4)
The dimensionless coupling constant g2, is the same as in the action (5.36). The expression (7.4) can be simplified if we employ cyclic symmetry of the odd bracket:
$( 1 ),$( 2 ), < A,«A*1=-4^(($ ( 1 ) ,Q B $ ( 1 ) )) + J(($ (2) J Q B * (2) )> (1) (1) (1) 2 2 2 + u\QB
(7.4') Let us consider the following string fields (7.5a)
* ^
=
/ (2TT)P+1 ^ f c ° ^ V f ( ^ ' ^ ' 2 ^ ) +iui(ka)Vlv
(w,ka,
2^rJ , (7.5b)
(7.5c) where V^ is a primary operator representing the vector field (5.47) and Vt is the tachyon vertex operator. And we introduce additional restrictions blUi(ka) — 0 and blu*(ka) = 0. We are interested in the following action S[6xi,t,Ui]
= —r- l((*(1),QB*{1))) 9o L
• (7-6) + ((f,QB)) + {(*{1},
122
The quadratic action can be easily read from (5.52) and it is of the form
<5 M
*
+1
1
1
f
dP dV '
/J.2 a'A;,
k
r )P+i
- [a'k2a+a'ml
•*Xi(-*)*x'(*)
+ [a'k2a + a'm2b] «,*(-*)«'(*)
- l] t*(-k)t(k)
(7.7)
where m2. = ( ^ ) . To compute the interaction terms we need to know the following correlation functions: ((«Xi(*i)V{,(fci,0), t*(k2)Vt {k2, -&.) =
i6xj(h)t*(k2)t(h)i x (cdX'Ux)
x8(k1
,ia'k\-l J2
c(/ 2 ) c(/ 3 ) e «*i-^(/»)
2 e
.ioc'k\ h
^ - ^ ( / 2 ) e 2i*s-x L (/ 3 )^
k2 + k3) (A - f 2 ) 2 a ' h k * (fl - f 3 ) 2 a ' k ^
+
~~bj
x (fi ~ h) (f2 - h) (f3 - fi) ibj6xj(ki) ria'kk x
J2
— 1 , I a' k\ — l i t
f3
-i a 2ira'
•
, ~lCt
fi — fi
(f2 -
> ^tr'tife / r
l/i - h)
f3)2a'k>k*
/ bj
2~™P
fi - h
(2irr+1a'-^S(ki+k2
t*(k2)t(k3)
2lT
—l
2 f,a'k lf^a'kl-lf,a'kl-lpiry+la,-2±l
Sxj(k1)t*(k2)t(k3)
=
r>a'k\ J\
, t(k3)Vt {k3, ^ T ) ) )
+
t \2a'k\ki. i r
(h - 73)
k3)f;a'kt
t \2a' k2k3+2
(h - h) (7.8)
Substitution of the maps (5.35) into (7.8) leads to the following expression
ibj6x3(ki) 2n x7
i*(A; 2 )i(A;3)(27r) p+1 a'-^J(fci + k2 + k3)
a'k\+a'k\+a'k\-2
(7.9)
123
Now we consider the correlation functions ( ( « * ( * i ) V V ( * i , 0 ) , iu*(k2)VJv {k2 , -^r)
, iuk(k3)Vkv
-8Xi{k1)u*Ak2)uk{h)}[alkh2,a'klfla'kl
=
x /cdX* e2ikl-XLUl)cdXj
{k3 , 5 ^ ) ) )
a'
e2ik2-XL{h)cdXk
e2ik3XL(-hA
.
(7.10)
Using the fact that Ui(ka)bl = u*{ka)bl — 0 we get the following expression 2_ a' x (/s -
/ 1 ' a ' f c ? / 2 ' a '* a 2 /3 a ' * ' (/i - / 2 ) (/ 2 - /s)
5xi(h)u*(k2)uk(kz) _2_ a1
h)
J*
n
(/2 - / 3 ) 5
(-ia')
X (/l - / 2 ) 2 a *1,la (/l - / 3 ) 2 Q ^ ^ (/2 -
2na'
•
/i — h
27ra'
h —h
hf
-^W6^u;{k2)u]{k3)f;a^f,a-klf,a^ X (/i - / 2 ) 2 Q ' * l f c a (/i - /a)2"'*1*8 (/2 -
(7.11)
/3)2Q'fc2fc3
Substitution of the maps (5.35) into (7.11) leads to the following expression ttMxi(fci)u*(k2)UJ(k3)(2ny+1
a'-^6(k1+k2+k3)r'k*+a'k>+a'kl
• (7.12)
Combining (7.9) and (7.12) we get the interaction term of the action (7.6) S3[5Xi,t,Ui] =
2a r v ' '
9o
x
r 2 1 - f dp+ik1dp+ik2dp+ik3
stu
?\
^+fc^+fc3)
J
(2^(2^+1
»6i^x'(fci) 7 a . f c ; + a > t g + a > t g [ 7 - 2 t . ( t 2 ) t ( f c 3 ) _ u*(fe2)ui(jb3)] ,
where 7 = -4= . Let us choose Sxl(x)
(7.13)
to be a constant
*X<(*) = (27r) lH - 1 «x i *(*) and let t, t* and u*, ttj be on mass shell. This simplifies the action (7.13). The
124 whole action S (7.6) is of the form p +l f ddP ~k
1
S[t Ui] =
>
^¥JW
a'kl-a'
)p+i
5
xt*{-k)t(k)
a'kl+a'
i bj S xl
2ita<
2TT
ibidx*
+ 1+
2ira
2TT
a'
<(-*)«'(*).
(7.14)
One sees t h a t the t e r m proportional to Sxi has n a t u r a l interpretation as a shift of mass of the fields t and Uj. B u t we want t o interpret the t e r m with S Xi as a shift of &;. Therefore, we have t o compare two shifts of the mass: one produced by Sxi and another produced by a shift of fy: , u
2
47r a
ibi6xi
2
2bi6V
a
/2
7
(7.15)
2-K
So we get 5
Sx'=i
6V
(7.16)
ira'
This expression can be obtained in a more simple way. Let us consider the following operator product expansion: e2i%j-X'L(z)
e2i£Xl(w)
(z _
= 1
/ Sbjb
= (z-w) z — w)
w^<*
(Sija-
i
e2i^-X'L(z)+2i^X'L
i
!>)
2
( ^ e2i^£h_X L(w)+2i^dX (w)(z-w)+0(z-w)
<2*> e
1 + (s - tu) —
0X*(u;) + 0(z -
wf
7T
(7.17) T h e state |0, b) is generated by the vertex operator Vt(0,
- ^ T ) , there-
fore, the change of this operator under a small shift of bi must be equal t o * X i V £ ( O , ^ ) . So we get ibj
c W e ^ ^ W
ibi
i<56
=
c(w)-^dXJ(w)e^x^
iva 2
-i a' 2
2
ifl>,- . 2 ' —7« 7ra' .a 7 .
2
c(itf)dJf'(tt;)
e^^
( t u )
i 2
7ra'
'
2w a1)
'
(7.18)
125 which is equal to the previously obtained expression up to the vertex operator of the auxiliary field. So we can now identify 6xl by using 5
i6Xl
=
Sbj_ ira'
(7.19)
One sees that up to the sign (that is easily explained) we get the same result as in (7.16). Now we substitute (7.16) or (7.19) into (7.7) and get for the field 8b1 the following action
r
_i
S2[Sbi] = 2TT
2 5
2Q"^ J
(7.20)
(2TT)H-I
2
As a consequence we get the brane's tension: _
1
(7.21)
2
2ir g„a'
7.4. Superstring
2
Field Theory on Non-BPS
D-Brane
To describe the open string states living on a single non-BPS D-brane one has to add G S O - states 144 . G S O - states are Grassmann even, while GSO+ states are Grassmann odd (see Table 6). Table 6.
Parity of string fields and gauge parameters in the 0 picture.
Name
Parity
GSO
Superghost number
•4+
odd
+
1
heZ,
A-
even
-
1
hei+
Weight (h)
Comments
/i > - 1
string
-,h>-2
A+
even
+
0
h e Z, h ^ 0
A_
odd
-
0
heZ+-,h>2
fields
2 gauge
2
parameters
The unique (up to rescaling of the fields) gauge invariant action unifying GSO+ and GSO— sectors is found to be
S[A+,A-] = ±
\{{Y^\A+
+ -({Y-2\A-
,QBA+))
, QBA-))
+ \{iX-2\A+
, A+ , ^ »
- ((Y-2\A+ , A- , A-)) . (7.22)
126
Here the factors before the odd brackets are fixed by the constraint of gauge invariance, that is specified below, and reality of the string fields A± . Variation of this action with respect to A+ , A- yields the following equations of motion" QBA+ + A+ * A+ - A- * AQBA-
= 0, (7.23)
+ A+ * A- - A- * A+ - 0 .
To derive these equations we used the cyclicity property of the odd bracket (6.76) (see Section 6.9.1). The action (7.22) is invariant under the gauge transformations SA+ = QBA+ + [A+, A+] + {A-, A_ } , SA-
= Q B A_ + [A-,A+] + {A+, A_} ,
where [, ] ({ , }) denotes ^-commutator (-anticommutator). To prove the gauge invariance, it is sufficient to check the covariance of the equations of motion (7.23) under the gauge transformations (7.24). A simple calculation leads to S {QBA+
+ A+
* A+ - A-
* A-)
= [QBA+
+ A+ * A+ - A-
* A-
- [QBA- + A+ * A- - A-*A+ 8 {QBA-
+ A+ * A- - A- * A+) =
[QBA-
+
, A+]
, A_] ,
+ A+ * A- - A- • A+ , A+]
[QBA+
+ A+*A+-A-*A-,
A_] .
Note that to obtain this result the associativity of ^-product and Leibnitz rule for QB must be employed. These properties follow from the cyclicity property of the odd bracket. The formulae above show that the gauge transformations define a Lie algebra. 7.5. Computation
of Tachyon Potential
in Cubic
SSFT
Here we explore the tachyon condensation on the non-BPS D-brane. In the first subsection, we describe the expansion of the string field relevant to the tachyon condensation and the level expansion of the action. In the second subsection we calculate the tachyon potential up to levels 1 and 4, and find its minimum. 7.5.1. Tachyon String Field in Cubic SSFT The useful devices for computation of the tachyon potential were elaborated j n 147,146,186 -^ye e m p i 0 y these devices without additional references. "We assume that r.h.s. is zero modulo ker Y_2 •
127
Denote by Hi the subset of vertex operators of ghost number 1 and picture 0, created by the matter stress tensor Tg, matter supercurrent 2> and the ghost fields b, c, d£, 77 and cf>. We restrict the string fields A+ and A- to be in this subspace Hi. We also restrict ourselves by Lorentz scalars and put the momentum in vertex operators equal to zero. Next we expand A± in a basis of LQ eigenstates, and write the action (2.7) in terms of space-time component fields. The string field is now a series with each term being a vertex operator from Hi multiplied by a space-time component field. We define the level K of string field's component Ai to be h + 1, where h is the conformal dimension of the vertex operator multiplied by Ai, i.e. by convention the tachyon is taken to have level 1/2. To compose the action truncated at level (K, L) we select all the quadratic and cubic terms of total level not more than L for the space-time fields of levels not more than K. Since our action is cubic, L < SK. To calculate the action up to level (2,6) we have a collection of vertex operators listed in Table 7. Note that there are extra fields in the 0 picture as Table 7. Vertex operators in pictures —1 and 0 . Level L0 + l
Weight Lo
GSO
0
-1
+
even
u
—
c
1/2
-1/2
-
even
t
ce_*
e*r7
1
0
+
odd
r;
cdcdt,e-2,t>
dc, cd<j>
3/2
1/2
-
odd
Si
cdc/>e~*
Twist
Name
n
Picture — 1 Picture 0 Vertex operators
cTF ,
d {ne't')
bcrje'f', Tide*' 2
1
+
even
Vi
T),
TF<XT*
2
d c,
cTB,
cTiv
2
c T 0 , cd 4>, d2^cdce~2'tl
TF^
bcdc, dcd(f>
dicdcde-2
compared with the picture —1 (see Section 6.4). Surprisingly the level LQ = — 1 is not empty, it contains the field u. One can check that this field is auxiliary. In the following analysis it plays a significant role. Only due to this field in the next subsection we get a nontrivial tachyon potential (as compared with one given in 189 ) already at level ( 1 / 2 , 1). As it is shown in Appendix 6.9.2 the string field theory action in the restricted subspace Hi has Z2 twist symmetry. Since the tachyon vertex operator
128 has even twist we can consider a further truncation of the string field by restricting A± to be twist even. Therefore, the fields ri,Si can be dropped out. Moreover, we impose one more restriction and require our fields to have the (/•-charge (see 6.64) equal to 0 and 1. String fields (in GSO± sectors) up to level 2 take the form0 A+(z) = uc(z) + v1 d2 c(z) + v2 cTB(z) + v3cT^(z)
+ vA
+ v5cd2(j>(z)+v6TFrje'l'(z)+v7bcdc(z)+
cT^z)
v8dcd(j>(z) ,
(725)
D 0(z ]
A-(z) =
v(z) •
7.5.2. Tachyon Potential Here we give expressions for the action and the potential by truncating them up to level (2, 6). Since the field (7.25) expands over the levels 0, \ , and 2 we can truncate the action at levels (1/2, 1) and (2, 6) only. All the calculations have been performed on a specially written program on Maple. All we need is to give to the program the string fields (7.25) and we get the following lagrangians
£(i.D =
u2 + -t2 + 2-ut 4 37
9l*>^ £(2,6) _
9 +
4w
2
(7.26)
u2 + -t2 + (4wi - 2v3 - 8v4 + 8v5 + 2v7) u ^
15 77 i + y u 2 + vl + Yv*
+ 22v
%
+ l0v
e +
8viV3
~~ Mvxvi
+ 24viw5 + 4vx v7 — I6U3V4 + 4vsv5 — 2v$v7 + 12u3i>8 — 52V4U5 — 8V4V7 - 20w4w8 + 8v5v7 + 8v5v8 + (-30v 4 + 20w5 + 30v2) v6 + 4v7v8
+
1 U 372
+
-V\
/40
I —7 u + 4 5 73 V 215 7 3
8O73
25 V2 32
9_ V3 16
4573
^-v2
.
59 32^
+
43 2AV5
+
ZV7]t
4573 29573 -V4 -v3 -
2
"The stringfieldsare presented without any gaugefixingconditions.
(7.27)
129
where 7 = -^ choice
. To simplify the suscceeding analysis we use a special gauge
3V2 - 3^4 + 2«5 = 0
(7.28)
This gauge eliminates the terms linear in VQ and drastically simplifies the calculation of the effective potential for the tachyon field. We will discuss an issue of validity of this gauge in Section 8. The effective tachyon potential is defined as V(t) = —C(t,u(t),Vi(t)), where u(t) and Vi(t) are solution to equations of motion duC = 0 and dViC = 0. In our gauge the equation dV6C = 0 admits a solution i>6 = 0 and, therefore, the tachyon potential computed at levels (2, 4) and (2, 6) is the same. The potential at levels (1/2, 1) and (2, 6) has the following form:
vi|'1)(*) = 9oOi'
1
81 A 2 t -\t 1024 (7.29) 5053 4 t -^2 69120
6)
vil' (t) =
9i<x-
One sees that the potential has two global minima, which are reached at points tc = ± 1.257 at level (1/2, 1) and at points tc = ± 1.308 at level (2, 6) (see also Figure 14 and Table 8).
7.6. Tension of Non-BPS Conjecture
Hp-Brane
in Cubic SSFT and Sen's
To find a tension of Dp-brane following 187 one considers the SFT describing a pair of Dp-branes and calculates the string field action on a special string field. This string field contains a field describing a displacement of one of the S7\ * ~ *• branes and a field describing arbitrary V-' /R\ excitations of the strings stretched between the two branes. For simplicity one can use low-energy excitations of the strings stretched between the branes. The cubic SSFT describing a pair of non-BPS Dp-branes includes 2 x 2 ChanPaton (CP) factors 187 - 198 and has the Figure 13. The system of two non-BPS Dp-branes and strings attached to them.
f 0 u o w i n g form
130
S[A\,A-} = ± \{(X-2\A+ , QBA+)) + l((Y„2\A+ , A+ , A+l JO
+ i((Y-_2|i- , QBA-)) - ((Y-2\A+
,A-,A.
(7.30)
Here g0 is a dimensionless coupling constant. The hatted BRST charge QB and double step inverse picture changing operator Y-2 are QB and Y-2 tensored by 2 x 2 unit matrix. The string fields are also 2 x 2 matrices
(7.31) and the odd bracket includes the trace over matrices. The action is invariant under the following gauge transformations: SA+ = QBA+ + [A+ , A+] + {A- , A_} , (7.32) 5A- = QBA-
+ [A- , A+] + {A+ , A_} .
The fields A± describe excitations of the string attached to the first brane, (2) while A± describe excitations of the string attached to the second one. Excitations of the stretched strings are represented by the fields B± and B*± (see Figure 13). The action for a single non-BPS D-brane (2.7) that we have used above is derived from the universal action (7.30) by setting A± , B± and B± to zero. Note also that we have not changed the value of the coupling constant g0. The "±" subscript specify the GSO sector. Let us take the following string fields A± : A+ = A^
+ B*+ + B+ ,
A- = B*_+B_
where
r dp+lk
/
-> \
,
(7.33)
131
*--=/^«-wv. (*.-*)« (21)Here bi is a distance between the branes, a = 0 , . . . ,p and i = p + 1 , . . . ,9 and VJ, and Vt are vertex operators of a massless vector and tachyon fields respectively defined by V„(A;a,fcj) — -
' 2'
1/2
V.
cax" +
Vt(fca,fci) = - c2ik-ip-
O2ik-XL(0)
(7.34) O2ifc-XL(0)
-r/e*
These vertex operators are written in the 0 picture and can be obtained by applying the picture changing operator (6.27) to the corresponding operators in picture — 1. The Fourier transform of Ai(ka) has an interpretation of the Dp-brane's coordinate up to an overall normalization factor 198 . Further we will assume that blBi(ka) = 0. The action for the field (7.33) depending on the local fields Bi(ka), B,*(fcQ), t(ka), t*(ka) and Ai(ka) is given by S[Ai,Bi,t]
= -i ^((Y^lA^UV1')) 9o L^ 2\AV,B*+ + ((Y({Y-2
,B+))
+ ((Y-2\K,B+)) + ({Y-2\B*_,B-)) - ((r_ 2 |4 1 ) ,s*,£_»]
x [*«+TAA + **(-*)*(*) [ki+(A* dP+1p r dp-
-M
2a'(*2+p2+P.fc+?^7^)
+ I (2*) p + l x [ B ? ( - p - * ) # ( * ) H ^ f f - P "*)*(*)]
MJ'(P) 27ra'v / 2a 7 (7.35)
where 7 = -z^ • Let us now consider the constant field Ai(£) = const, where £Q are coordinates on the brane. Its Fourier transform is of the form Ai(p) = (2ny+1Ai6(p). Let also B^k), B*{k) and t(p), t*(p) be on-shell, i.e.
kl +
6? A2 (27TQ')
= 0
132 and b2
PI +
1
(27ra')
2
= 0.
2a'
In this case the action (7.35) is simplified and takes the form: dp+1k .shell
9o'
*2 +
(2TT)H-1
6?
1
(27ra') 2
2a'
biA*
+
27ra'v'2a'
t*(-k)t(k)
rfP+1fc
+ s2
,E±±
mass shell (2TT)IH-I
6?
k A
ki + (27ra') :
+ 27ra'V2a'
B*(-k)Bj(k)
.
(7.36)
T h e terms proportional to Aj have n a t u r a l interpretation as shifts of masses of the fields t and Bi. We want to interpret the term with Ai as a shift of brane coordinate &,. Therefore, we have t o compare two shifts of the mass: one produced by Ai and another produced by a shift of bi 6(m2)
=
biAi
2bi5V 2
2
a'
A-K
(7.37)
27ra'V2a'
So one gets A% =
-
(7.38)
J6*
7T
This formula determines the normalization of the field Ai. Therefore, we we can introduce the profile of the first non-BPS Dp-brane as Xi (£) = 7r
MO-
Substitution of t h e Aj(£) into t h e first t e r m of t h e action (7.35) yields 5
° = ~
2
/
,E±I /
^
^ ( 0 ^ ( 0
•
(7-39)
T h e coefficient before the integral is t h e n o n - B P S Dp-brane tension fp: f
p =
2
2 2 )£±i 71 a 2
•
(7-40)
ffo "
As compared with t h e expression for t h e tension given in 1 8 7 we have t h e addition factor 4. T h e origin of this factor is the difference in the normalization of the superghosts /?, 7.
133
_2
-1
\l
i t
1
1
\\ 2 i.i
i
fi.2 /-0.4: /
-0.6
/
-0.8 ~1
y
Legenc1 level 1 level 4
Figure 14. Graphics of the tachyon potential at the levels (1/2, 1) and (2, 6). "—1" is equal to the minus tension of non BPS Dp-brane fp = —=TIJ- . 7r29?a'Hi-
Now we can express the coupling constant gl in terms of the tension fp. Hence the potential (7.29) at levels (1/2 1) and (2, 6) takes the form (see also Figure 14)
•UV ( 2i l l )
•eff
( * ) = ^
V £ . . )\t), * _
81 1024 5053 69120
1 , 4
4
4
1 4
(7.41) 2
The critical points of these functions are collected in Table 8. One sees that the potential has a global minimum and the value of this minimum is 97.5% at level (1/2, 1) and 105.8% at level (2, 6) of the tension fp of the non-BPS Dp-brane.
134 Table 8. The critical points of the tachyon potential at levels (1/2, 1) and (2, 6). Potential (4.D •eft
*c=0
V
Vc = 0
4C = ± - 5 — v(
Critical values
Critical points
2 6
. )
Vc fa -0.975 fp
w ±1.257
tc-0
Vc = 0 94
tc = ±
x/75795 «
Vc « -1.058 fp
±1.308
5053
7.7. Test o / A b s e n c e o / Kinetic Vacuum
Terms
Around
Tachyon
In this section we perform calculations of the effective potential at level 0, i.e. we take only low levels fields: dp+lk
/
2ik-XL(w)
— — ^ u(k) U(w, k)\w=Q JP+1 k
,
/
(2^r*(*)TKt)U ,
V(w, k) = c(w)e 1 c(w)2ik
T(«,,A) = --T,(w)e+M
• ip(w) e2ik-XL(w)
_
(7.42) Note t h a t the expression for the tachyon field can be obtained by applying rasing picture changing operator X to the tachyon vertex operator in picture — 1. T h e action in the m o m e n t u m representation is of the form p+1
f dv~ k
1
1
f
t(-k)u(k) - h(-k)t(k)
dP+lp
-^/^'Hfe-p)'(p)«(*>Mte'
[a'kl - 1/2] (7.43)
(P2+k2+kP)
This expression can b e shortly rewritten in t h e ^-representation
S[«.*] = V ^ 5 i r [dP+h 1 37 :2
u(x)u(x)
u{x) t(x) t(x)
~\t{x)
(-a'dada
- 1/2) t(x)
(7.44)
135
where 0(a;) = exp ( - a ' log 7 dada)
(7.45)
The operation " has the following properties • to = *o if to = const, •
/ dx i(x) =
dx t(x),
•
I dx a(x)b(x) = I dx a(x) b(x).
Using the second property we can move " from u(x) on the term i(x)i(x). this one can integrate over u(x) and gets an effective action SeffM =
*
9
1}
(-a'dada
fd^x\-\t{x)
After
- 1/2) t ( x ) - - 4 - 4 f ^ ) 2 (*) • (7.46)
Expanding t(a;) = to + *i(a;) and keeping only terms that are quadratic in t\ and linear in a' we get ^2,shifted\P\
— 2 /
X
'1
10
2
*b,
ti(a;)a'aaaati(x) .
(7.47)
So to vanish the kinetic terms for t\ we have to have to — 1.099, which is not far from the critical value t0 = 1.257 for the minimum of the tachyon potential at level ( | , 1). 7.8. Lump
Solutions
Here we give a brief review of the numeric computations of lump solutions (see review 240 and 2 4 1 ~ 2 4 8 for more details'3). First, let us define what is the lump solution. Let us denote by <J>0 the string field representing the solution of momentum independent equations of motion. In other words, $ 0 is a tachyon condensate. We want to find a lump solution $ of codimension one, which represents a decay D25 —> D24. This means that string field $ is a static configuration depending on one space coordinate, say x25 = x. This configuration has nontrivial boundary conditions $(a;) ->• $0
as
x -> ± 0 0 .
Physically this condition means that we want to have true string vacuum at plus and minus infinity. We expect that the solution is concentrated near the PSee
249 250
'
for relations with p-adic
strings
14 251 252 253 254
'
'
'
'
.
136 origin and, therefore, it distinctly differs from $ 0 only in small domain around the origin. Second, to be able to find a solution numerically we have to have finite number of fields. To this purpose we use level truncation scheme for the computations of the tachyon potential. To find the lump solution authors of the paper 241 proposed to use a modified level truncation scheme. Their idea consists of two steps: (1) We compactify the direction a; on a circle of radius Ry/a'. This allows us to represent component fields (j>i(x) of the string field $(a;) by Fourier series rather than Fourier integral:
^2
(7.48)
(2) We modify the level grading: lvlij(0i,») = - ^ + i V i + l ,
(7.49)
where JVj is oscillator number operator evaluated on the vertex operator corresponding to the field 4>i a n d the normalization of the grading was chosen in such a way that it is equal to 1 on the zero momentum tachyon field. Using this level grading we can define (M, N)-\evel approximation of the action. This means that we get all fields with lvljj ^ M from the string field $ and keep only the terms in the action for which lvl^ ^ N. Third, we have to choose the Hilbert space % in which we are going to find our solution. The analysis performed in 241 shows that without loss of generality we can consider the following reduced space: (7.50)
H ~ ^ m a t t e r ® rlghost © rlmatter (x)
where ^^"atter i s a universal (background independent) Hilbert space'241 gen,24 erated by matter Virasoro generators restricted to the directions x1,... , x" ^ghost is a Hilbert space spanned by all ghost operators and ^matter (x) is a Hilbert space generated by all oscillators a 2 5 . Now consider a simple example of the computations. Let us choose R = \/3 and assume that we have only tachyon field t(x). Since it has to be even we can write t(x) = y2tncos
( -^L== 1
(7.51)
137
The terms tn have the following grading: n2 l v l ^ tn = 1 + — . Now substitution into the cubic action (5.52), (5.59') yields the following expressions at levels (0,0) and ( | , | ) : (7.52a)
0
(7.52b)
27 "3"
where 7 = -4= and V is related to S by formula _ 27r-RvVVol 2 4
(7.53) 2 Tni " 9oa The solution of the equations of motion obtained from (7.52) is presented on the left pane on Figure 15. —
*
W 0.5
0.6
~=
0.4
\
0.4
0.3
\
0.2
\ -3
0.2
01
-2
Vo.1
/
x
2
3
-2
-4
\
/
2
4 X
Figure 15. Plot of t(x) for R = V3 on different levels. On the left pane the solid line represents t(x) at level ( | , | ) . On the right pane the dashed line shows a plot of t(x) at level (^ , ^4-) and solid line shows a plot of t(x) at level (3,6).
One can also compute the ratio of tension of the lump solution and the tension of original D25-brane. One expect that the tension of the lump solution of codimension 1 is equal to the tension of D24-brane. Therefore, we expect that r (lump) TD24
= 1
where
T(lump) =
2
^ ^ f (V($)-V(g 0 )) •
9Za
(7.54)
138
There are several ways to check this equality numerically. We can express the tension of D25 brane through the coupling constant g0 as 147 1 TU25
=
27r2ff2a/13
Substitution in (7.54) yields _ r (lump) _ 7rj25 TD24
2-KRVO1
2TT2 (V($) - V($ 0 ))
TD24
= R (2TT2 V(*)
- 2TT2 V ( * O ) )
•
(7.55)
So, now we can compute the value of r for our approximate solution and check how accurately it approaches unity. Since we know that 27r2V($o) = —1> we can write two expressions for r: rW=ii[27r2V^JV)(*) + l ] )
(7.56a)
r<2> = 2TT 2 J R[V( M ^($) - V ^ J ^ o ) ] •
(7.56b)
By adding more fields one can increase the level and make computations of the solution more and more accurate. Now we present the results of such computations, which were obtained in 241 for radius R = \ / 3 . On the right pane of Figure 15 we present a plot of t(x) at levels ( | , y-) and (3,6). In the Table below one can find the values of r' 1 ) and A2^ depending on the level. Level 11
1)
\3
' 3/
r(D
r (2)
1.32002
0.77377
1.25373
0.707471
(2,4)
1.11278
1.02368
11
1.07358
0.984467
1.06421
0.993855
(1 !} \3
\3
' 3)
'
I!) 3 /
(3,6)
So, it seems that r' 1 ' and A2^ converge to unity from top and bottom correspondingly. 8. Level Truncation and Gauge Invariance 8.1. Gauge Symmetry
on Constant
Fields
In this section we restrict our attention to scalar fields at zero momentum, which are relevant for calculations of a Lorentz-invariant vacuum. The zero-
139
momentum scalar string fields ,4+ and A- can be expanded as oo
oo
A+ = ^2f^i
.4_=J]£ Q T a ,
and
i=0
(8.1)
a=0
where conformal operators $ ; and T a are taken at zero momentum and
i,j
a,b
i,j,k
(8.2) where Mij = « y _ 2 | * i , Q B *,-» ,
Sijfc = « r _ 2 | * i , *,-, **)> .
(8.3a)
?ab = ((Y_ 2 |T a , Q B T 6 » ,
SM = « ^ - 2 | * i , T a , T 6 » .
(8.3b)
For the sake of simplicity we consider the gauge transformations with GSO— parameter A_ equal to zero. The scalar constant gauge parameters {<5Aa} are the components of a ghost number zero GSO+ string field A+ = ^ < 5 A a A + , a .
(8.4)
a
Assuming that the basis {$.,, T^} is complete we write the following identities: QBA+,a = ^ V * Q * i )
(8.5a)
* j * A + l a - A+, a * $j = ^2 Wja$i ,
(8.5b)
i
T6*A+,a-A+,0*T,, = ^ 3 V T
a
.
(8.5c)
a
The variations of the component fields <j>1 and ta with respect to the gauge transformations (7.24) generated by 6Xa can be expressed in terms of the "structure constants" 80 a
6t
= 80P + Sift = (K + S'jaP) a
a
b
= 6xt = d bat 5\
a
SXa ,
.
(8.6a) (8.6b)
The constants V„ solve the zero vector equation for the matrix My: M«V£ = 0
(8.7)
140
and therefore the quadratic action is always invariant with respect to free gauge transformations. In the bosonic case one deals only with the gauge transformations of the form (8.6a) and finds Slja 258 using an explicit form of ^-product in terms of the Neumann functions 204 . In our case it is more suitable to employ the conformal field theory calculations by using the following identity: «y_2|*i, $ 2 * $ 3 » = «y-2|*i, * 2 , *3» •
(8.8)
To this end it is helpful to use a notion of dual conformal operator. Conformal operators {$*, T a } are called dual to the operators { $ j , Tj} if the following equalities hold «r_2|*\*,->>=<^
and
«r_2|f°,T6»=(JV
(8.9)
Using (8.8), (8.9) and (8.5) we can express the structure constants 2lja and 3aba in terms of the correlation functions: fja
= « r _ 2 | $ \ $,-, A+, a » - ( ( r - 2 | $ \ A + , Q , $,-» ,
daba = « K - 2 | f a , Tb, A+, a » - « F _ 2 | f \ A+,a, T 6 » .
(8.10a) (8.10b)
In the next section these formulae are used to write down gauge transformations explicitly.
8.2. Calculations
of Structure
Constants
In Section 7.5.2 we have computed 184 the restricted action (6.68a) up to level (2,6). The relevant conformal fields with 0-charge 1 and 0 are $0 = U = c
^3 = V3= cTni
$ 6 = Vi, = TFT)e+
(8.11a)
$1 = Vi = d2c
$4 = V4 = cT>
$ 7 = V7 = bcdc
(8.11b)
$ 2 = V2 = cTB
2
$ 8 = V8 = dcd(j>
(8.11c)
*S = V6 = cd 4> T0 = ^e*r)
(8.11d)
141
with <j>% — {u, vi,...,
vs} and ta — {t}. For this set of fields we have got
S(2'4) = u2 + i* 2 + {Avx - 2v3 - 8v4 + 8v5 + 2v7) u + Av\ + ^-v\ 77 + v3 + YV*
+ 22V
5
+
10U
8v y
6 +
l 3 ~ 32vlVi + 24^5
+ 4viV7
- I6113W4 + 4:V3v5 — 2v3v7 + 12t; 3 ii 8 — 52t;4?;5 — 81*4^7 - 20u4V8
+ 8v5v7 + 8v5vs + (-30u 4 + 20i;5 + 30u2) v6 + 4v7vs , 0(2,6) 53
M
9 U +
= VW
25 Vl
V2
8 ~V
9
59 3
~ Irf ~ 3 2 *
( 407 „ , 457 3 + I — j p u - 457^1 + -J-V2 215 7 3 j-vh
43 +
2
\
(8.12) 2
V7 l
+
24^ 3 )
457 3 2957 3 + -y-"3 + ^ ^ u 4
807 3 \ 2 - - y - v r j v2 .
,„„„. (8.13)
Here 7 = -4= . There is no gauge transformation at level zero. At level 2 the gauge parameters are zero picture conformal fields with ghost number 0 and the weight h = 1, see Table 7. There are two such conformal fields with 0 (/(-charge be and d
+ 5\2d(l) .
(8.14)
The zero order gauge transformation (6.69) of level 2 fields has the form 60A+(w) = QBk+{w)
= (-6X2 + p\i
+ SXi cT^w)
J d2c(w) + <5Ai cTB(w) + SXi cTin{w)
+ 6X2 cd2(j)(w) - SX2 rie^TF(w) + SXX bcdc(w)
+ SX2 dcd<j)(w) + 1 (<5Ai - 2<5A2) brjdrie2^
.
(8.15)
We see that in accordance with (6.71e) one gets the field $9 = br)dr)e2^ from the sector with q — 2. To exclude this field from the consideration we impose the condition <22A+ — 0, which links parameters SX\ and JA2 appearing in (8.14): Q 2 A+ = i (5\i - 2SX2) br)dr)e2*{w) = 0 ,
<JAi = 2<5A2 = 2SX .
(8.16)
142
We are left with the following zero order gauge transformations of the restricted action on level 2: S0vi = 25X ,
S0V4 = 26X ,
Sovj = 2SX ,
60v2 = 26X ,
S0v5 = 8X ,
80v8 = SX ,
S0V3 = 2<5A ,
S0v6 = —SX ,
5QU — 0 .
(8.17)
Transformations (8.17) give the vector V\ = V1 in (8.6a) in the form V = {0,2,2,2,2,1,-1,2,1}.
(8.18)
One can check that the quadratic action at level (2,4) (8.12) is invariant with respect to this transformation, 9
AC
<5052 = < 5 A ^ ^ V
i
= 0,
(8.19)
or in other words 9-component vector V1 (8.18) is the zero vector of the matrix Mtj defined by (8.12). Now we would like to find the nonlinear terms in the transformations (8.6). At level 2 we have 3)\ = 3] • The dual operators (8.9) to the operators (8.11) are the following $1 = ^-r)dr][l + dbc]e2'l' ,
$ 5 = - J L ^ [ 4 - d2
,
(8.20a) #2 =
** =
6^9r?e20TB'
I 3 = j-[dr]d2T] 48
- &r)dr)]e2^ ,
$ i = -lr]drid
,
~cTFdr)e+,
(8.20b)
<|7 = lr]dr][l + bdc\e2't' , 8
(8.20c)
<£8 = \ndr)bcd^>e2^ ,
(8.20d)
8
o
$0 = ^r]dT][6-d(bc)-2d2
+ l-drld2rie2
,
T ° = \ce4>dr)
.
(8.20e) It is straightforward to check that ((Y-2\&,*i))=&i
and
« r _ 2 | T ° , T„» = 1 .
(8.21)
We find the coefficients 3) in (8.6) up to level (2,4) and this gives the
143
following gauge transformations Sxu = (—-73
+ 327 j vi - - 7 3 w 4 + (-197 3 + 167)^5 3
+ (-y7 it *.
(8.22a)
- 3 2 7 ) v8 SX ,
(8.22b)
= | t SX , - 3 V
27 ,
|-y7
S1V1 =
3
8 \
/
11 ,
4 \
/
17
4 \
3
+ 37J v, + ( - - ^ + 777J -5 + ( - ^ 7 + 37J
(lb3 - b)V8.
+ Siv2
3
+ I 6 7 ) v7 + f ^ 7
O 0
d o
6X ,
oO
(8.22c)
V 0
O
0
Q
- 3 7 ^ 1 - 7 777 7 7 ^"5- -7 7777 «7 + r A <5A , 0 O 3
-
<17 y7
6iv3 =
3
16 \ /17 - y 7 J -1 + ( T 7 16 \
-?73 \ 3
+
r
+
3
(8.22d)
8 \ /17 - 737 ) ^5 + ( y 7
3
8 \ - 737 ) ^7 (8.22e)
<5A ,
y 7 j ^8
K
(8.22f)
777 Vl + -77-7 "4 - -77-7 ^5 - 777 ^7 + 777 «8 SX , 3 3 D D O
"4 $lV5
=
/61 , 7
+
32 \ 25 , 7 Wl + 7 W2
3 -3™ IT ~ y J
/
31 3
16 \
y
" i2~ "
/ 14 ±<± , —7
5 , 481 , 7 3+ 7 U4
16 \ - — 7 ) "7 +
v
IT
52 7
3
+
T3
32 \ SX, T 7 « 8 (8.22g) (8.22h)
<^i«6 = - 777^6 ^A , Ji«7
16 7 u + / 3 87 33 + 16 \
7 j n - y-7 " 2 + 7J7 v U ^ +^v T
+ ( f 73 + § 7 )
«B
3
+ ( 8 7 3 + §77 )J
v
7 + h1673
- — 7 u4 - -3-7] "8 SX, (8.22i)
I"4 dlW8 =
4
3 3
25
w
5
3
3
95
v
3
11
V
777" + -77-7 l - -77-7 2 + — 7 V3 + W7T 4 + T l
3
o
8
12
24
0
3
A V
, v
5 + ^T 7
1 „ SX ,
J (8-22J)
144
where 7 = j±= « 0.770. 8.3. Breaking
of Gauge Invariance
by Level
Truncation
As it has been mentioned above (see (8.7)) the quadratic restricted action (6.68a) is invariant with respect to the free gauge transformation (8.17). In contrast to the bosonic case 258 already the first order gauge invariance is broken by the level truncation scheme. Explicit calculation shows that = — -t26\ + {quadratic terms in Vi} S\ .
#5|first order = $iS2 ' + SoS3 '
(8.23) Note that the terms in the braces belong to level 6 and therefore we neglect them. The origin of this breaking is in the presence of non-diagonal terms in the quadratic action (8.12). More precisely, in the bosonic case the operators with different weights are orthogonal to each other, while in the fermionic string due to the presence of Y-2 this orthogonality is broken. Indeed, the substitution of {
2 = -/ ~ E "*** * TA - \ E 3^ TA TB - 1 Y, M « ^
A,B
s
* = ~\ E S«* * W + E i,j,k
Si
« * + E (SiM + SiAt) VtrA
i
i,A
SiAB P TA TB .
+ E
(8.24a)
i,j
(8.24b)
i,A,B
For the gauge transformations (6.72) with A + in the form (8.14), (8.16) we have 80t = 0 ,
S0TA = 0 ,
(M = - t (JA
and
and
SQW1 = 0 ,
Si TA = (3Att + 3ABTB)
(8.25a)
6X .
(8.25b)
The first order gauge transformation of the action produces the following quadratic in ta terms (6iS2 + <5 o5 , 3 )| t a t i,_ terms fdS2x N
t
dS2x
A
dS3,
dS3, %
\ /
, a b
t t — terms
N
145
Here we take into account that due to (8.25a) " 0 ^3 I contributions from higher levels
=
^ •
(8.27)
The exact gauge invariance means that (8.26) equals to zero. In the presence of non-diagonal terms in £2 we have ^6!TA
= -?M2Att2
- (?tA2AB
+ 3AB3At)tTB
-7AB3BCTATC
. (8.28)
2
Generally speaking, "JAt # 0 and (8.28) contains t term. Therefore, if we exclude fields TA from 52 we break the first order gauge invariance. We can estimate the contribution of higher level fields {TA} to (8.28). Let us consider only t2 terms in (8.26):
^t2 - 7tA 3At A 6X + But 6m = 0 .
(8.29)
One can check that Sitt&oVi = — 1 a n d hence 7tA3At = — §• Therefore, we see that the contribution of the higher levels into equality (8.29) is only 33%. This gives us a hope that the gauge invariance rapidly restores as level grows. For the bosonic case this restoration was advocated at 258 . 8.4. The
Orbits
In this section we discuss the method of checking the validity of gauge fixing condition. Let us consider the simplest case then we have only one gauge degree of freedom and therefore only one gauge fixing condition. For this case one can find orbits of gauge transformations. Using this technique we will analyze the validity of the Feynman-Siegel gauge q used in bosonic SFT computations 150 and the validity of the gauge G ( ^ ) = 3v2 - 3v4 + 2v5 = 0
(8.30)
used in Section 7.5 on level 2 in computations in Super SFT. Since all our computations are based on level truncation scheme our study of the validity of a gauge will be also based on level truncation scheme. The statement that gauge is valid means that for any field configuration {$)} o n e c a n find the gauge equivalent configuration {>'*} such that G((f>") = 0. In general a given field configuration {<$,} defines gauge orbit {^>J(A;
146
c/>l(0;(j)o) —
_
Vi
+
3ij
^(A)
^i(0)
w i t h
dX dta(X) = 3attb(X) dX
with
=
^
;
*°(0) = t g .
(g
3 1 a )
(8.31b)
Here we use notations from (8.5). To write down explicit solutions of (8.31a) and (8.31b) we will use a basis for fa in which the matrices 3 have the canonical Jordan form. 8.4.1. Orbits in Bosonic String Field Theory As a simple example of the gauge fixing in the level truncation scheme let us consider the Feynman-Siegel gauge at level (2,6) in bosonic open string field theory. Here we use notations of 150 . Up to level 2 the string field has the expansion: 4
#=
]C ^#i
with
^ = {*' v>u'w^
( 8 - 32 )
1
and $ ! = c , $ 2 = cTB , $ 3 = \ d2c , $ 4 = bcdc .
(8.33)
Li
The Feynman-Siegel gauge &o$ = 0 restricted to level 2 gives the condition =
GFSm
(8.34)
l
To compute structure constants 3 ji using method described in Section 8.1 one has to know the dual operators to (8.33). One can check that the set f2 = - cdcTB , $ 3 == - dcd2c , $ 4 = - d3cc . 2 6 satisfies the required properties (8.9) $ x =cdc,
((¥,*j))=5ij,
(8.36)
i,3 = !,-•• , 4 .
The gauge parameter at level 2 is: A = £AiAi ,
where
Ai = be
and
(8.35)
5Xi = SX .
147 In this case the vector V1 defined by (8.5) is of the form 0 1/2 -3 -1
V*
(8.37)
The structure constants of the gauge transformation are given by the matrix
3i Jl
— ni = O 3
ffj = «**, 9j ,A1))-
« $ \ Ax, *,•>> .
(8.38)
%
The matrix 2 j has the following entries 1 7 5 16
IFj] =
7
11
l67 21
65 167
29 167
581 256 7
145 , 256 '
15 3 327
715 256
703 256
II 73
r
"27
3 7
(8.39)
"32
31
, 63 , 7 16 7 128 ' where 7 = —%= . This result coincides with the one obtained in eq. (9) of 258 1356 " 128
with obvious redefinition of the fields >\ To solve equation (8.31a) it is convenient to rewrite it in eigenvector basis of matrix 3lj • The characteristic polynomial 7 of the matrix 2lj 819200 335 3584 A 11869696 VZu3 \/3w + T(3,w)=w4 + u + 531441 4782969 324 6561 has the following roots {w} = {-2.565, -0.332, 0.553 ± i 1.226} .
(8.40)
The corresponding four eigenvectors are /
0.131w3 + 1.661w 2 -0.804 w + 4.655\ 0.464 UJ3 + 0.687 w2 - 0.532 w + 2.276
(8.41)
-0.249w 3 - 0.127CJ2 + 0.298w - 1.189
V
1 We solve system (8.31a) in the basis of these eigenvectors and get the following dependence of GFS (8.34) on A (see Figure 16): GFS(X)
= G F S ( 0 * ( A ) ) = [asin(1.23A) + bcos(1.23A)]e°' 553A +
c e-°-
332A
+ d e- 2 - 87A + 2.89 ,
(8.42)
148
^fessa^v
G._a> 300 200 1
100 0
(
-c \
-100
^
'•"<&<&
-^•r~:r Lai t i i a l
1.5
, Figuiv 10.
C/.'i(i/>"(A;)o)) restricted to level 2 in bosonic string field theory.
where a = 1.13Jo - 2.13 u0 + 0.997 u 0 + 0.921 w0 - 0.0861 ,
(8.43a)
b - 0.172*o - 0.939uo - 0.346u 0 + 1.04i«o - 1-49 ,
(8.43b)
c = 0.0466 tn f 0.300 vn - 0.0149 u0 - 0.00958 w0 - 0 74 i ,
(8 43c)
d = - 0 218 *0 + 0.639 u0 + 0.360 u0 - 0.0337 w0 - 0.657
(8.43d)
It is obvious that if one takes an initial data fa = \t0, Vo, u0, <(;t)} such that a — 6 = 0 and r,d ^ 0 then the function GVs(0l(^i
+
451911090176W ^48678440T j [u
+
256 /-\ 4 729 ^ ) »
IOAd. {8M
149
has the following eigenvalues
{CJ} = {0, 0, 0, 0 , -0.608, T)}
where
TJ = ± 3.274 ± i 0.814 .
(8.45)
The the corresponding eigenvectors are
* 1}
" 1 " 0 0 -5.4 0 = 0 0 0 0
'
!
i/2> 0 —
V
0 ' 0 0 39.3 1 2 0 -6 -2
„(3)_
"0" 0 1 7.5 0 0 0 0 0
"
„(4)_
0 1 0 155.6 0 0 0 -18 -8 (8.46)
O.Ollt]3-
^-0.608
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 . 1 7 ^ + 0 . 1 2 77 - 1 . 7 7 '
3
-0.015 rj + 0.022 rf - 0.161] - 0.28 0.5 1 3
0.038 ri + 0.26 r)2 + 0.39 r) - 0.044
(8.47)
1
-0.03 rf + 0.044 rj + r) + 1.95 0 3
0.29 T? + 0.995 rf - 2.27r\ - 7.33 0.12 rf + 0.54rj1 - 0.13 rj - 2.97
The solution of (8.31) yields the following dependence on A of the gauge fixing condition G (8.30)
G(X) = G(4>(\;<j)o)) = [asin(0.814A) + 6cos(0.814A)]e3'27A + [csin(0.814A) + dcos(0.814A)]e^ 327 * + 4.15A + / ,
(8.48)
150
where a = -l.Oouo - 2.81^1,0 + 1.46w2,o - 0.195 u 3i0 •I- 5.82IM,O - 4.81 vr>]0 - 2.13?;7,o + 0.614w8,o - 0.177
(8.49a)
b :--• - 0.406 u 0 - 1-04 u,. 0 + 0.559 v2fi - 0.0754 u3,0 - 0.03 u4,o - 0.59 v5.o - 0.64 v7.0 - 0.155 vs.0 - 0.924
(8.49b)
c ------ ~ 0.0933 u 0 - 1.38'Ui.o + 0.13()u2lo - 0.0174v^ 0 -1-1,06^4,0 - 0.572 v5.0 + 0.166 u7.o - 0.885-<;8:0 -f 0.516
(8.49c)
d =-- -0.0636 uQ + 0.104 u li0 + 0.088 v2fi - 0.0118 u3,„ -(- 0.552?;,,,o - 0.195w5,o + 0.085 u7,o - 0.407v e , 0 - 0.i86
(8.49d)
/ = 0.465 u 0 + 0.939 wi.o + 2.35 v2,a + 0.0867 v3.o - 3.51 v4,o + 2.77W5.0 + 0.56u7,o + 0.563?;8i0 f 1.12
(8.49e)
and U(\,v1i0 ate initial data for the corresponding differential equations (8.31). A simple analysis shows that there are no restrictions on the range of validity of the gauge (8.30). So the gauge condition (8.30) is a valid choice tor the computations of the tachyon potential. The 2-dimensional plot on the Figure 17 corresponds to the special initial data a — b = c —. d ~ 0.
30]
Figure J7.
G(
It is mteiesting to note that there is another gauge which strongly simplifies the effective potential. Namely, this is the gauge v6 = 0. The orbits of this
151 gauge condition have t h e form v6(X) = (1.64 + „ 6>0 ) e - ° - 6 0 8 A - 1.64 . It is evident t h a t this gauge condition is not always reachable and cannot b e used in the calculation of t h e tachyon potential.
Acknowledgments We would like t o t h a n k B. Dragovic, J. Lukierski and I. Volovich for discussions. LA. t h a n k s the organizing committee of the Swieca Summer School, Summer School in Sokobanja, M a x Born Symposium in Karpacz and Workshop "Noncommutative Geometry, Strings and qRenormalization" in Leipzig for warmest hospitality. A.K. would like t o t h a n k E. Kiritsis and the H E P theory group of the University of Crete for the warmest hospitality where the final stage of this work has been done. This work was supported in p a r t by R F B R grant 99-01-00166 and by R F B R grant for leading scientific schools. LA., D.B., A.K. and P.M. were supported in p a r t by INTAS grant 99-0590. A.K. was supported in p a r t by the N A T O fellowship program.
References 1. E. Witten, "Noncommutative geometry and string field theory", Nucl. Phys. B268, 253 (1986). 2. A. Connes, "Noncommutative Geometry", Academic Press (1994). 3. J. Madore, "An Introduction to Noncommutative Differential Geometry and its Physical Applications", 2nd ed., Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge University Press (1999). 4. M.A. Markov, JETF 10 1313 (1940); 2 1 , 11 (1951). 5. H. S. Snyder, "Quantized Space-Time", Phys. Rev. 7 1 , 38 (1947). 6. H. S. Snyder, "The Electromagnetic Field in Quantized Space-Time", Phys. Rev. 72, 68 (1947). 7. C. N. Yang, "Are Mesons Elementary Particles", Phys. Rev. 72, 38 (1947). 8. H. Yukawa, "On the Radius of the Elementary Particle", Phys. Rev. 76, 300 (1949). 9. V. L. Averbach and B. V. Medvedev, " On the Theory of Quantized SpaceTime", DAN SSSR, LXIV, 41 (1949). 10. D. Finkelstein, Phys. Rev. 9 1 , 1261 (1969). 11. Yu. A. Golfand, Journ. Exp. Th. Phys. 37, 504 (1959). 12. V. G. Kadyschevsky, Journ. Exp. Th. Phys. 4 1 , 41 (1961); V. G. Kadyschevsky, R. M. MirKasimov, N. B.Skachkov, Nuovo Cim. 55A, 233 (1968). 13. I. E. Tamm, In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Elementary Particles, Kyoto, 1965. I.E. Tamm, V.B. Vologodsky, Trudi FIAN, 57, 5 (1972).
152 14. I. V. Volovich, "p-adic String", Class. Quant. Grav. 4, L83 (1987); I. V. Volovich, "Number Theory as the Ultimate Physical Theory", CERN preprint, CERN-TH.4781/87; V. S. Vladimirov, I. V. Volovich and E. I. Zelenov, "P-Adic Analysis and Mathematical Physics", World Scientific (1994); I. Ya. Arefeva, B. Dragovich, P. H. Frampton, I. V. Volovich, "Wave function of the universe and p-adic gravity". Int. J. Mod. Phys. A6, 4341 (1991). 15. J. Wess and B. Zumino, "Covariant Differential Calculus on the Quantum Hyperplane", Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 18B, 302 (1990). 16. I. Ya. Aref'eva and I. V. Volovich, "Quantum group particles and nonarchimedean geometry", Phys. Lett. B268, 179 (1991). 17. S. Doplicher, K. Fredenhagen, J. E. Roberts, "The Quantum Structure of Spacetime at the Planck Scale and Quantum Fields", Commun. Math. Phys. 172, 187 (1995). 18. A. Kempf, "Minimal Length Uncertainty Relation and Ultraviolet Regularisation", Phys. Rev. D55, 7909 (1997). 19. J. Lukierski, "Deformed Quantum Relativistic Phase Spaces — an Overview", hep-th/9812063. 20. T. Yoneya, "On The Interpretation Of Minimal Length In String Theories", Mod. Phys. Lett. A4, 1587 (1989); T. Yoneya, "Space-Time Uncertainty and Noncommutativity in String Theory", Int. J. Mod. Phys. A16, 945 (2001), hep-th/0010172. 21. I.Ya. Aref'eva and I.V. Volovich, "Noncommutative Gauge Fields on Poisson Manifolds", in New Symmetries and Integrable Models, eds. A. Frydryszak, J. Lukierski, Z. Popowicz, World Scientific, 2000, hep-th/9907114. 22. T. Filk, "Divergences in a field theory on quantum space", Phys. Lett. B376, 53 (1996). 23. M. Chaichian, A. Demichev, P. Presnajder, "Quantum Field Theory on Noncommutative Space-Times and the Persistence of Ultraviolet Divergences", Nucl. Phys. B567, 360 (2000), hep-th/9812180. 24. C. P. Martin, D. Sanchez-Ruiz, "The one-loop UV Divergent Structure of U(l) Yang-Mills Theory on Noncommutative i? 4 ", Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 476 (1999). 25. M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, "Renormalizability of Super Yang-Mills Theories on Noncommutative Torus", J. High Energy Phys. 9906, 015 (1999). 26. T. Krajewski and R. Wulkenhaar, "Perturbative Quantum Gauge Fields on the Noncommutative Torus", hep-th/9903187. 27. I. Ya. Arefeva, D. M. Belov, A. S. Koshelev, "Two loop diagrams in noncommutative <j>\ theory", Phys. Lett. B476, 431 (2000), hep-th 9912075. 28. I. Chepelev and R. Roiban, "Renormalization of Quantum Field Theories on Noncommutative R, I. Scalars", hep-th/9911098; I. Chepelev, R. Roiban, "Convergence Theorem for Non-commutative Feynman Graphs and Renormalization", JHEP 0103, 001 (2001), hep-th/0008090. 29. S. Minwalla, M. Raamsdonk and N. Seiberg, "Noncommutative Perturbative Dynamics", hep-th/9912072. 30. M. Hayakawa, "Perturbative analysis on infrared aspects of noncommutative QED on R4", hep-th/9912094; M. Hayakawa, "Perturbative analysis on infrared and ultraviolet aspects of noncommutative QED on R ', hepth/9912167; M. Hayakawa, "Perturbative ultraviolet and infrared dynamics
153 of noncommutative quantum field theory", hep-th/0009098. 31. H. Grosse, T. Krajewski, R. Wulkenhaar, "Renormalization of noncommutative Yang-Mills theories: A simple example", hep-th/0001182. 32. I. Ya. Aref'eva, D. M. Belov and A. S. Koshelev, "A Note on UV/IR for Noncommutative Complex Scalar Field", hep-th/0001215. 33. A. Matusis, L. Susskind and N. Toumbas, "The IR/UV Connection in the NonCommutative Gauge Theories", hep-th/0002075. 34. S. Ferrara, M. A. Lied, "Some Aspects of Deformations of Supersymmetric Field Theories", JHEP 0005, 008 (2000), hep-th/0002084. 35. M. V. Raamsdonk, N. Seiberg, "Comments on Noncommutative Perturbative Dynamics", hep-th/0002186. 36. J. M. Gracia-Bondia, C. P. Martin, "Chiral Gauge Anomalies on Noncommutative fl4", hep-th/0002171. 37. B. A. Campbell, K. Kaminsky, "Noncommutative Field Theory and Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking", hep-th/0003137. 38. I. Ya. Aref'eva, D. M. Belov, A. S. Koshelev, O. A. Rytchkov, "UV/IR Mixing For Noncommutative Complex Scalar Field Theory, I", Phys. Lett. B487, 357365 (2000). "II. (Interaction With Gauge Fields)", Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 102, 11 (2001). In Kharkov 2000, Supersymmetry and Quantum Field Theory 1, p.l, hep-th/0003176. 39. K. Furuta, T. Inami, "Ultraviolet Property of Noncommutative Wess-ZuminoWitten Model", Mod. Phys. Lett. A15, 997-1002 (2000), hep-th/0004024. 40. F. Zamora, "On the Operator Product Expansion in Noncommutative Quantum Field Theory", JHEP 0005,002 (2000), hep-th/0004085. 41. J. Gomis, K. Landsteiner, E. Lopez, "Non-Relativistic Non-Commutative Field Theory and UV/IR Mixing", Phys. Rev. D62, 105006 (2000), hep-th/0004115. 42. A. Armoni, "Comments on Perturbative Dynamics of Non-Commutative YangMills Theory", Nucl. Phys. B593, 229-242 (2001), hep-th/0005208 43. H. O. Girotti, M. Gomes, V. O. Rivelles, A. J. da Silva, "A Consistent Noncommutative Field Theory: the Wess-Zumino Model", Nucl. Phys. B587, 299 (2000), hep-th/0005272; V. O. Rivelles, "Noncommutative Supersymmetric Field Theories", Braz. J. Phys. 31 255-262 (2001), hep-th/0103131; I. L. Buchbinder, M. Gomes, A. Yu. Petrov, V. O. Rivelles, "Superfield Effective Action in the Noncommutative Wess-Zumino Model", Phys. Lett. B 5 1 7 191-202 (2001), hep-th/0107022. 44. S. S. Gubser, S. L. Sondhi, "Phase structure of non-commutative scalar field theories", Nucl. Phys. B605, 395-424 (2001), hep-th/0006119. 45. J. Gomis, T. Mehen, M. B. Wise, "Quantum Field Theories With Compact Noncommutative Extra Dimensions", JHEP 0008, 029 (2000), hepth/0006160. 46. L. Alvarez-Gaume, J. L. F. Barbon, "Non-linear Vacuum Phenomena in Noncommutative QED", Int. J.Mod.Phys. A16 1123-1146 (2001), hep-th/0006209. 47. A. Micu, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, "Noncommutative $ 4 Theory at Two Loops", JHEP 0001, 025 (2001), hep-th/0008057. 48. W.-H. Huang, "Two-loop effective potential in noncommutative scalar field theory", Phys. Lett. B496 206-211 (2000), hep-th/0009067.
154 49. F. Ardalan, N. Sadooghi, "Anomaly and Nonplanar Diagrams in Noncommutative Gauge Theories", hep-th/0009233. 50. M. Chaichian, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, A. Tureanu, "Hydrogen Atom Spectrum and the Lamb Shift in Noncommutative QED", Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 2716 (2001), hep-th/0010175 51. L. Bonora, M. Salizzoni, "Renormalization of noncommutative U(N) gauge theories", Phys. Lett. B504, 80-88 (2001), hep-th/0011088. 52. V. V. Khoze, G. Travaglini, "Wilsonian Effective Actions and the IR/UV Mixing in Noncommutative Gauge Theories", JEEP 0101, 026 (2001), hepth/0011218. 53. D. Zanon, "Noncommutative M = 1, 2 super U(N) Yang-Mills: UV/IR mixing and effective action results at one loop", Phys. Lett. B502, 265-273 (2001), hep-th/0012009. 54. C. P. Martin, D. Sanchez-Ruiz, "The BRS invariance of noncommutative U(N) Yang-Mills theory at the one-loop level", Nucl. Phys. B598, 348-370 (2001), hep-th/0012024. 55. P. Ruiz Ruiz, "Gauge-fixing independence of IR divergences in noncommutative U(l), perturbative tachyonic instabilities and supersymmetry", Phys. Lett. B502, 274-278 (2001), hep-th/0012171. 56. B. A. Campbell, K. Kaminsky, "Noncommutativity and Spontaneously Broken Gauge Theories", hep-th/0101086. 57. F. J. Petriello, "The Higgs Mechanism in Non-commutative Gauge Theories", Nucl. Phys. B601, 169-190 (2001), hep-th/0101109. 58. B. A. Campbell, K. Kaminsky, "Noncommutative Linear Sigma Models", hepth/0102022. 59. A. A. Bichl, J. M. Grimstrup, L. Popp, M. Schweda, R. Wulkenhaar, "Perturbative Analysis of the Seiberg-Witten Map", hep-th/0102044. 60. H. O. Girotti, M. Gomes, V. O. Rivelles, A. J. da Silva "The Noncommutative Supersymmetric Nonlinear Sigma Model", hep-th/0102101; H.O. Girotti, M. Gomes, A.Yu. Petrov, V.O. Rivelles, A.J. da Silva "The Three-Dimensional Noncommutative Nonlinear Sigma Model in Superspace", hep-th/0109222. 61. Guang-Hong Chen, Yong-Shi Wu, "On Critical Phenomena in a Noncommutative Space", hep-th/0103020. 62. L. Alvarez-Gaume, J. L. F. Barbon, R. Zwicky, "Remarks on Time-Space Noncommutative Field Theories", JEEP 0105 057 (2001), hep-th/0103069. 63. A. Bichl, J. Grimstrup, H. Grosse, L. Popp, M. Schweda, R. Wulkenhaar, "Renormalization of the noncommutative photon self-energy to all orders via Seiberg-Witten map", JEEP 0106, 013 (2001), hep-th/0104097. 64. S. Sarkar, B. Sathiapalan, "Comments on the renormalizability of the Broken Phase in Noncommutative Scalar Field Theory", JEEP 0105, 049 (2001), hepth/0104106. 65. L. Griguolo, M. Pietroni, "Wilsonian Renormalization Group and the NonCommutative IR/UV Connection", JEEP 0105, 032 (2001), hep-th/0104217. 66. Y. Kinar, G. Lifschytz, J. Sonnenschein, "UV/IR connection, a matrix perspective", JEEP 0108 001 (2001), hep-th/0105089. 67. M. ChaicmaiTJTr Presnajder, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, A. Tureanu, "Noncommutative Standard Model: Model Building", hep-th/0107055.
155 68. R. Amorim, J. Barcelos-Neto, "Remarks on the canonical quantization of noncommutative theories", J.Phys. A34, 8851-8858 (2001), hep-th/0108186. 69. I. L. Buchbinder, I. B. Samsonov, "Noncommutative N = 2 Supersymmetric Theories in Harmonic Superspace", hep-th/0109130; I. B. Samsonov, "On Low-Energy Effective Action of Noncommutative Hypermultiplet Model", hepth/0110203. 70. R. J. Szabo, "Quantum Field Theory on Noncommutative Spaces", hepth/0109162. 71. I. Jack, D. R. T. Jones, "Ultra-violet Finiteness in Noncommutative Supersymmetric Theories", hep-th/0109195. 72. G. Arcioni, J. Barbon, Joaquim Gomis, M. Vazquez-Mozo, "On the stringy nature of winding modes in noncommutative thermal field theories", JHEP 0006, 038 (2000), hep-th/0004080. 73. Adi Armoni, Ruben Minasian and Stefan Theisen, "On non-commutative N=2 super Yang-Mills", hep-th/0102007. 74. B. Zumino, "Euclidean Supersymmetry and the Many-Instanton Problem", Phys. Lett. B69, 369 (1977). 75. A. V. Belitsky, S. Vandoren, P. van Nieuwenhuizen "Instantons, Euclidean supersymmetry and Wick rotations", Phys. Lett. B477, 335-340 (2000), hepth/0001010. 76. X. Calmet, B. Jurco, P. Schupp, J. Wess, M. Wohlgenannt, "The Standard Model on Non-Commutative Space-Time", hep-ph/0111115. 77. Branislav Jurco, Lutz Moller, Stefan Schraml, Peter Schupp, Julius Wess, "Construction of non-Abelian gauge theories on noncommutative spaces", hepth/0104153. 78. Yi Liao, "One Loop Renormalization of Spontaneously Broken U(2) Gauge Theory on Noncommutative Spacetime", hep-th/0110112. 79. T. Eguchi and H. Kawai, "Reduction of dynamical degrees of freedom in the large n gauge theory", Phys. Rev. Lett. 48, 1063 (1982). 80. A. Gonzalez and C.P. Korthals, "Reduced Model for Large-N continuum Field Theories", Phys. Lett. B 1 3 1 , 396 (1983). 81. N. Ishibashi, H. Kawai, Y. Kitazawa, A. Tsuchiya, "A Large-N Reduced Model as Superstring", Nucl. Phys. B498, 467 (1997), hep-th/9612115. 82. N. Ishibashi, S. Iso, H. Kawai, Y. Kitazawa, "Wilson Loops in Noncommutative Yang Mills", Nucl. Phys. B573, 573 (2000), hep-th/9910004. 83. J. Ambjorn, Y. M. Makeenko, J. Nishimura and R.J. Szabo, "Nonperturbative Dynamics of Noncommutative Gauge Theory", hep-th/0002158; J. Ambjorn, Y. M. Makeenko, J. Nishimura, R. J. Szabo, "Lattice Gauge Fields and Discrete Noncommutative Yang-Mills Theory", JHEP 0005, 023 (2000), hepth/0004147. 84. I. Ya. Aref'eva, I. V. Volovich "The master field for qcd and q deformed quantum field theory", Nucl. Phys. B462, 600 (1996), hep-th/9510210. 85. A. Connes, M. R. Douglas, A. Schwarz, "Noncommutative Geometry and Matrix Theory: Compactification on Tori", JHEP 02, 003 (1998), hep-th/9711162. 86. T. Banks, W. Fischler, S. H. Shenker and L. Susskind, "M Theory as a Matrix Model: a Conjeture", Phys. Rev. D55, 5112 (1997); L. Susskind, "Another Conjecture about Matrix Theory", hep-th/9704080.
156 87. A. Bilal, "M(atrix) theory: a pedagogical introduction", hep-th/9710136. 88. M. R. Douglas, C. Hull, "D-Branes and Noncommutative Torus", JEEP 02, 008 (1998), hep-th/9711165. 89. B. de Wit, J. Hoppe and H. Nicolai, "On the quantum mechanics of supermembranes", Nucl. Phys. B305, 545 (1988). 90. J. Frohlich, G. M. Graf, D. Hasler, J. Hoppe, S.-T. Yau, "Asymptotic Form of Zero Energy Wave Functions in Supersymmetric Matrix Models", hepth/9904182. 91. I. Ya. Aref'eva, A. S. Koshelev, P. B. Medvedev, "On Stable Sector in Supermembrane Matrix Model", Nucl. Phys. B579, 411-436 (2000), hep-th/9911149. 92. W. Taylor, "D-brane field theory on compact spaces", Phys. Lett. B394, 283 (1997), hep-th/96110427; W. Taylor, "M(atrix) Theory: Matrix Quantum Mechanics as a Fundamental Theory", Rev. Mod. Phys. 73, 419 (2001), hepth/0101126. 93. A. Konechny, A. Schwarz, "Introduction to M(atrix) theory and noncommutative geometry", hep-th/0012145; A. Konechny, A. Schwarz, "Introduction to M(atrix) theory and noncommutative geometry, Part II", hep-th/0107251. 94. P.-M. Ho, Y.-S. Wu, "Noncommutative Gauge Theories in Matrix Theory", hep-th/9801147. 95. M. Li, "Comments on Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theory on a Noncommutative Torus", hep-th/9802052. 96. T. Kawano and K. Okuyama, "Matrix Theory on Noncommutative Torus", hep-th/9803044. 97. M. Berkooz, "Non-local Field Theories and the Noncommutative Torus", hepth/9802069. 98. M. R. Douglas, "Two Lectures on D-Geometry and Noncommutative Geometry", hep-th/9901146. 99. D. Bigatti, "Non commutative geometry and super Yang-Mills theory", hepth/9804120. 100. H. Garcia-Compean, "On the Deformation Quantization Description of Matrix Compactifications", Nucl. Phys. B 5 4 1 , 651 (1999), hep-th/9804188. 101. G. Landi, F. Lizzi, R. J. Szabo, "String geometry and the noncommutative torus", hep-th/9806099. 102. B. Morariu, B. Zumino, "Super Yang-Mills on Noncommutative Torus", hepth/9807198. 103. C. Hofman, E. Verlinde, "U-Duality of Born-Infeld on Noncommutative TwoTorus", JEEP 9812, 010 (1998), hep-th/9810116. 104. A. Konechny and A. Schwarz, "Supersymmetry algebra and BPS states of super Yang-Mills theories on noncommutative tori", hep-th/9901077. 105. J. Madore, "The Fuzzy Sphere", Class. Quant. Grav. 9, 69 (1992). 106. H. Grosse, J. Madore, H. Steinacker, "Field Theory on the q-deformed Fuzzy Sphere II: Quantization", hep-th/0103164. 107. H. Grosse, A. Strohmaier, "Towards a Nonperturbative Covariant Regularization in 4D Quantum Field Theory", Lett. Math. Phys. 48, 163 (1999), hepth/9902138; G. Alexanian, A. P. Balachandran, G. Immirzi, B. Ydri, "Fuzzy CP2", hep-th/0103023.
157 108. S. Aoyama, T. Masuda, "The Fuzzy Kaehler Coset Space with the Darboux Coordinates", hep-th/0109020. 109. J. E. Moyal, "Quantum Mechanics as a Statistical Theory", Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 45, 99 (1949); F. Bayen, M. Flato, C. Fronsdal, A. Lichnerowicz, D. Sternheimer, "Deformation Theory and Quantization. I. Deformation of Symplectic Structures", Ann. Phys. I l l (1978). 110. F. A. Berezin and M. Shubin, "The Schrodinger Equation", Nauka (1983). (in Russian). 111. F. A. Berezin, "Method of the Second Quantization", Nauka, (1965), (1986). (in Russian). 112. D. Bigatti and L. Susskind, "Magnetic fields, branes and noncommutative geometry" , hep-th/9908056. 113. R. Jackiw, "Physical Instances of Noncommuting Coordinates", hepth/0110057. 114. L. Susskind, "The quantum hall fluid and non-commutative chern simons theory", hep-th/0101029. 115. A. P. Polychronakos, "Quantum Hall States as Matrix Chern-Simons Theory", hep-th/0103013. 116. N. Seiberg and E. Witten, "String Theory and Noncommutative Geometry", JEEP 9909, 032 (1999), hep-th/9908142. 117. Y.-K. E. Cheung, M. Krogh, "Noncommutative Geometry from 0-Branes in a Background B Field", Nucl. Phys. B528, 185 (1998), hep-th/9803031. 118. C.-S. Chu, P.-M. Ho, "Noncommutative Open String and D-brane", hepth/9812219. 119. M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, "Open Strings in a B-field Background as Electric Dipoles", hep-th/9901080. 120. V. Schomerus, "D-Branes and Deformation Quantization", hep-th/9903205. 121. C. S. Chu, P.-M. Ho and Y.-C. Kao, "Worldvolume Uncertainty Relations for D-Branes", hep-th/9904133. 122. M. Anazawa, "DO-branes in a H-field Background and Noncommutative Geometry", hep-th/990505. 123. F. Ardalan, H. Arfaei, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, "Dirac Quantization of Open Strings and Noncommutativity in Branes", hep-th/9906161. 124. K. Okuyama, "A Path Integral Representation of the Map between Commutative and Noncommutative Gauge Fields", hep-th/9910138. 125. Y. Okawa and H. Ooguri, "An Exact Solution to Seiberg-Witten Equation of Noncommutative Gauge Theory", hep-th/0104036. 126. H. Liu, "*-Trek II: * n Operations, Open Wilson Lines and the Seiberg-Witten Map", hep-th/0011125. 127. H. Liu, J. Michelson, "Ramond-Ramond Couplings of Noncommutative Dbranes", hep-th/0104139. 128. R. Gopakumar, S. Minwalla and A. Strominger, "Noncommutative Solitons", hep-th/0003160. 129. S. Minwalla, "Lectures at the Swieca Summer School", Brazil, January 2001. 130. J. A. Harvey, "Komaba Lectures on Noncommutative Solitons and D-Branes", hep-th/0102076.
158 131. N. Nekrasov, A. Schwarz, "Instantons on noncommutative R , and (2,0) superconformal six dimensional theory", Commun. Math. Phys. 198 689-703 (1998), hep-th/9802068; N. A. Nekrasov, "Trieste Lectures on Solitons in Noncommutative Gauge Theories", hep-th/0011095. 132. G.'t Hooft, "Rigorious construction of planar diagram field theories in four dimensional Euclidian space", Comm. Math. Phys. 88, 1 (1983); V. Rivasseau, "Construction and Borel Summability of Planar 4-Dimensional Euclidean Field Theory", Cornm. Math. Phys. 95, 445 (1984). 133. N. N. Bogoliubov and D. V. Shirkov, "Introduction to the Theory of Quantum Fields", third edition, Nauka (1976). 134. S. J. Gates, M. T. Grisaru, M. Rocek and W. Siegel, "Superspace or One Thousand and One Lesson in Supersymmetry", The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company (1983). 135. E. Witten, "Interacting field theory of open superstrings", Nucl. Phys. B276, 291 (1986). 136. G. Horowitz, J. Lykken, R. Rohm and A. Strominger, "A purely cubic action for string field theory", Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 283 (1986). 137. G. Horowitz and A. Strominger, "Translations as inner derivations and associative anomalies in open string field theory", Phys. Lett. B185, 45 (1987). 138. V. A. Kostelecky and S. Samuel, "The static tachyon potential n the open bosonic string theory", Phys. Lett. B207, 169 (1988); V. A. Kostelecky and S. Samuel, "The tachyon potential in string theory", DPF Conf., 813 (1988); V. A. Kostelecky and S. Samuel, "On a nonperturbative vacuum for the open bosonic string", Nucl. Phys. B336, 286 (1990). 139. I. Ya. Aref'eva, P. B. Medvedev and A. P. Zubarev, "Nonperturbative vacuum for superstring field theory and supersymmetry breaking", Mod. Phys. Lett. A6, 949 (1991). 140. I. A. Aref'eva, P. B. Medvedev and A. P. Zubarev, "Background formalism for superstring field theory", Phys. Lett. B240, 356 (1990). 141. C. R. Preitschopf, C. B. Thorn and S. A. Yost, "Superstring Field Theory", Nucl. Phys. B337, 363 (1990). 142. I. Ya. Aref'eva, P. B. Medvedev and A. P. Zubarev, "New representation for string field solves the consistency problem for open superstring field", Nucl. Phys. B341, 464 (1990). 143. A. Sen, "Stable non BPS bound states of BPS D-branes", JHEP 08 010 (1998), hep-th/9805019; A. Sen, "Descent relations among bosonic D-branes", Int. J. Mod. Phys. A14, 4061 (1999), hep-th/9902105; A. Sen, "50(32) spinors of type I and other solitons on brane-anti-brane pair", JHEP 09 023 (1998), hep-th/9808141. 144. A. Sen, "Non-BPS States and Branes in String Theory", hep-th/9904207. 145. A. Lerda and R. Russo, "Stable non-BPS states in string theory: a pedagogical review", hep-th/9905006. 146. A. Sen, "Universality of the Tachyon Potential", JHEP 9912, 027 (1999), hepth/9911116. 147. A. Sen, B. Zwiebach, "Tachyon condensation in string field theory", JHEP 0003, 002 (2000), hep-th/9912249.
159 148. N. Moeller, W. Taylor, "Level truncation and the tachyon in open bosonic string field theory", Nucl. Phys. B583, 105 (2000), hep-th/0002237. 149. A. Iqbal, A. Naqvi, "Tachyon Condensation on a non-BPS D-brane", hepth/0004015. 150. L. Rastelli and B. Zwiebach, "Tachyon potentials, star products and universality", hep-th/0006240. 151. W. Taylor, "Mass generation from tachyon condensation for vector fields on D-branes", JHEP 0008, 038 (2000), hep-th/0008033. 152. K. Ohmori, "A Review on Tachyon Condensation in Open String Field Theories" , hep-th/0102085. 153. B. Zwiebach, "Trimming the tachyon string field with SU(1,1)", hepth/0010190. 154. A. Sen, "Fundamental Strings in Open String Theory at the Tachyonic Vacuum" , hep-th/0010240. 155. P. Mukhopadhyay and A. Sen, "Test of Siegel gauge for the lump solution", JHEP 0102, 017 (2001), hep-th/0101014. 156. V. A. Kostelecky and R. Potting, "Analytical construction of a nonperturbative vacuum for the open bosonic string", Phys. Rev. D 6 3 , 046007 (2001), hepth/0008252. 157. L. Rastelli, A. Sen, B. Zwiebach, "String field theory around the tachyon vacuum", hep-th/0012251. 158. L. Rastelli, A. Sen, B. Zwiebach, "Classical Solutions in String Field Theory Around the Tachyon Vacuum", hep-th/0102112. 159. I. Ellwood, W. Taylor, "Open string field theory without open strings", hepth/0103085. 160. I. Ellwood, B. Feng, Y.-H. He and N. Moeller, "The Identity String Field and the Tachyon Vacuum", hep-th/0105024. 161. D. J. Gross and W. Taylor, "Split string field theory. I", JHEP 0108, 009 (2001), hep-th/0105059. 162. D. J. Gross and W. Taylor, "Split string field theory. I F , JHEP 0108, 010 (2001), hep-th/0106036. 163. L. Rastelli, A. Sen and B. Zwiebach, "Half-strings, projectors, and multiple D-branes in vacuum string field theory", hep-th/0105058. 164. L. Rastelli, A. Sen and B. Zwiebach, "Boundary CFT construction of D-branes in vacuum string field theory", hep-th/0105168. 165. T. Kawano and K. Okuyama, "Open string fields as matrices", hep-th/0105129. 166. L. Rastelli, A. Sen and B. Zwiebach, "Vacuum string field theory", hepth/0106010. 167. I. Bars, "Map of Witten's * to Moyal's *", Phys. Lett. B517, 436 (2001). 168. J. R. David, "Excitations on wedge states and on the sliver", hep-th/0105184. 169. D. J. Gross, V. Periwal, "String field theory, non-commutative Chern-Simons theory and Lie algebra cohomology", JHEP 0108, 008 (2001), hep-th/0106242. 170. K. Furuuchi and K. Okuyama, "Comma vertex and string field algebra", hepth/0107101. 171. Y. Matsuo, "BCFT and sliver state", hep-th/0105175; Y. Matsuo, "Identity projector and D-brane in string field theory", hep-th/0106027; Y. Matsuo, "Projection operators and D-branes in purely cubic open string field theory",
160 hep-th/0107007. 172. N. Moeller, "Some exact results on the matter star-product in the half-string formalism", hep-th/0110204. 173. H. Hata and T. Kawano, "Open string states around a classical solution in vacuum string field theory", hep-th/0108150. 174. P. Mukhopadhyay, "Oscillator representation of the BCFT construction of Dbranes in vacuum string filed theory", hep-th/0110136. 175. I. Kishimoto, "Some properties of string field algebra", hep-th/0110124. 176. H. Hata and S. Moriyama, "Observables as twist anomaly in vacuum string field theory", hep-th/0111034. 177. G. Moore and W. Taylor, "The singular geometry of the sliver", hepth/0111069. 178. K. Okuyama, "Siegel Gauge in Vacuum String Field Theory", hep-th/0111087. 179. A. Hashimoto and N. Itzhaki, "Observables of String Field Theory", hepth/0111092. 180. D. Gaiotto, L. Rastelli, A. Sen and B. Zwiebach, "Ghost Structure and Closed Strings in Vacuum String Field Theory", hep-th/0111129. 181. L. Rastelli, A. Sen and B. Zwiebach, "A Note on a Proposal for the Tachyon State in Vacuum String Field Theory", hep-th/0111153. 182. I. Ya. Aref'eva and P. P. Kulish, "Representations of canonical commutation relations in the limit of infinite volume", Teor. Math. Phys. 17, 3 (1973). 183. I. Ya. Arefeva, D. M. Belov, A. S. Koshelev and P. B. Medvedev, "Tachyon Condensation in the Cubic Superstring Field Theory", hep-th/0011117. 184. I. Ya. Arefeva, D. M. Belov, A. S. Koshelev and P. B. Medvedev, "Gauge Invariance and Tachyon Condensation in Cubic Superstring Field Theory", hepth/0107197. 185. N. Berkovits, "Super-Poincare Invariant Superstring Field Theory", Nucl. Phys. B450, 90 (1995), hep-th/9503099. 186. N. Berkovits, "The Tachyon Potential in Open Neveu-Schwarz String Field Theory", JEEP 0004, 022 (2000), hep-th/0001084. 187. N. Berkovits, A. Sen, B. Zwiebach, "Tachyon Condensation in Superstring Field Theory", hep-th/0002211. 188. P. De Smet, J. Raeymaekers, "Level Four Approximation to the Tachyon Potential in Superstring Field Theory", JEEP 0005, 051 (2000), hep-th/0003220. 189. P. De Smet, J. Raeymaekers, "The Tachyon Potential in Witten's Superstring Field Theory", hep-th/0004112. 190. I. Ya. Aref'eva and I. V. Volovich, "Two-dimensional gravity, string field theory and spin glasses", Phys. Lett. B255, 197 (1991). 191. J. Bordes, Chan H.-M., L. Nellen, Tsou S.-T., "Half-string oscillator approach to string field theory", Nucl. Phys. B351, 441 (1991); Chan H.-M. and Tsun S.T., "String theory considered as a local gauge theory of an extended object", Phys. Rev. D35, 2474 (1987); "Yang-Mills formulation of interacting strings", Phys. Rev. D39, 555 (1989). 192. A. Abdurrahman, F. Anton and J. Bordes, "N-string vertices in string field theory", hep-th/9306029. 193. A. Abdurrahman and J. Bordes, "The relationship between the comma theory and Witten's string field theory", Phys. Rev. D58, 086003 (1998).
161 194. A. Abdurrahman and J. Bordes, "Witten's cubic vertex in the comma theory (I)", hep-th/9902176. 195. F. Anton, A. Abdurrahman and J. Bordes, "Half string oscillator approach to string field theory (ghost sector 2) ", Nucl. Phys. B411, 693 (1994); F. Anton, A. Abdurrahman and J. Bordes, "Half string approach to closed string field theory", Nucl. Phys. B397, 260 (1993). 196. A. Abdurrahman and J. Bordes, "Witten's cubic vertex in the comma theory. II.", RAL-TR-1999-021, Mar 1999. 197. M. B. Green, J. H. Schwarz and E. Witten, "Superstring theory", Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England (1987). 198. J. Polchinski, "Introduction to Superstrings", Vols. I and II, Cambridge University Press. 199. C. B. Thorn, "String field theory", Phys. Rept. 175, 1 (1989). 200. D. Friedan, E. Martinec and S. Shenker, "Conformal Invariance, Supersymmetry, and String Theory", Nucl. Phys. B271, 93 (1986). 201. D. Friedan, "Notice on String Theory and Two Dimensional Conformal Field Theory", preprint EFI 85-99 (1986). 202. S. Giddings, "The Veneziano amplitude from interacting string field theory", Nucl. Phys. B278, 242 (1986). 203. R. Bluhm and S. Samuel, "The Off-Shell Koba-Nielsen Formula", Nucl. Phys. B323, 337 (1989). 204. D. Gross and A. Jevicki, "Operator Formulation of Interacting String Field Theory", (I), (II), Nucl. Phys. B283, 1 (1987); Nucl. Phys. B287, 225 (1987). 205. E. Cremmer, A. Schwimmer and C. Thorn, "The vertex function in Witten's formulation of string field theory", Phys. Lett. B179, 57 (1986). 206. S. Samuel, "The physical and ghost vertices in Witten's string field theory", Phys. Lett. B181, 255 (1986). 207. N. Ohta, "Covariant interacting string field theory in the Fock space representation", Phys. Rev. D34, 3785 (1986); Phys. Rev. D35, 2627 (E) (1987). 208. A. LeClair, M. E. Peskin and C. R. Preitschopf, "String field theory on the conformal plane I", Nucl. Phys. B317, 411 (1989). 209. A. LeClair, M. E. Peskin and C. R. Preitschopf, "String field theory on the conformal plane II", Nucl. Phys. B317, 464 (1989). 210. B. V. Urosevic, A. P. Zubarev, "On the component analysis of modified superstring field theory actions", Phys. Lett. B246, 391 (1990). 211. M. V. Green, N. Sieberg, "Contact interactions in superstring theory", Nucl. Phys. B299, 559 (1988). 212. J. Greensite, F. R. Klinkhamer, "Superstring scattering amplitudes and contact interactions", Nucl. Phys. B304, 108 (1988). 213. I. Ya. Aref'eva, P. B. Medvedev, "Anomalies in Witten's field theory of the NSR string", Phys. Lett. B212, 299 (1988). 214. C. Wendt, "Scattering amplitudes and contact interactions in Witten's superstring field theory", Nucl. Phys. B314, 209 (1989). 215. T. Kugo, H. Kunitomo and K. Suehiro, "BRS Invariance of String Vertex on General Ghost Vacuum", Preprint KUNS-864, HE-TH-87/06; Prog. Theor. Phys. 78, 923 (1987).
162 216. A. Hosoya and H. Itoyama, "The Vertex as a Bogolyubov Transformed Vacuum State in String Field Theory", Nucl. Phys. B313, 116 (1989). 217. E. Cremmer and J. L. Gervais, "Combining and Splitting Relativistic Strings", Nucl. Phys. B76, 209 (1974); B90, 410 (1975). 218. W. Siegel, "Covariantly Second Quantized String I and II", Phys. Lett. 151B, 391, 396 (1985). 219. I. Ya. Arefeva, P. B. Medvedev, "Truncation, picture changing operation and space time supersymmetry in Neveu-Schwarz-Ramond string field theory", Phys. Lett. B202, 510 (1988). 220. E. Witten, "On background-independent open-string field theory", Phys. Rev. D46, 5467 (1992). 221. D. Kutasov, M. Marino and G. Moore, "Remarks on Tachyon Condensation in Superstring Field Theory", hep-th/0010108. 222. P. Kraus and F. Larsen, "Boundary String Field Theory of the DD System", hep-th/0012198. 223. D. Ghoshal and A. Sen, "Normalisation of the background independent open string field theory action", JEEP 0011, 021 (2000), hep-th/0009191. 224. S.P. de Alwis, "Boundary String Field Theory, the Boundary State Formalism and D-Brane Tension", hep-th/0101200. 225. M. Marino, "On the BV formulation of boundary superstring field theory", JHEP 0106, 059 (2001), hep-th/0103089. 226. K. S. Viswanathan and Y. Yang, "Tachyon Condensation and Background Indepedent Superstring Field Theory", hep-th/0104099. 227. K. Bardakci and A. Konechny, "Tachyon condensation in boundary string field theory", hep-th/0105098. 228. T. Lee, "Tachyon Condensation, Boundary State and Noncommutative Solitons", hep-th/0105115. 229. G. Arutyunov, A. Pankiewicz and B. Stefanski Jr, "Boundary Superstring Field Theory Annulus Partition Function in the Presence of Tachyons", hepth/0105238. 230. J. Kluson, "Proposal for background independent Berkovits superstring field theory", hep-th/0106107. 231. S. Viswanathan, Y. Yang, "Unorientable Boundary Superstring Field theory with Tachyon field", hep-th/0107098. 232. P. De Smet, "Tachyon Condensation: Calculations in String Field Theory", hep-th/0109182. 233. A. Sen, "Tachyon Condensation on the Brane Antibrane System", JHEP 9808, 012 (1998), hep-th/9805170. 234. A. A. Gerasimov, S. L. Shatashvili, "On Exact Tachyon Potential in Open String Field Theory", JHEP 0010, 034 (2000), hep-th/0009103. 235. S. L. Shatashvili, "On Field Theory of Open Strings, Tachyon Condensation and Closed Strings", hep-th/0105076. 236. Oleg Andreev, "On one loop corrections to the tachyon potentials", hepth/0109187. 237. D. Kutasov, M. Marino, G. Moore, "Some Exact Results on Tachyon Condensation in String Field Theory", JHEP 0010, 045 (2000), hep-th/0009148.
163 238. B. Zwiebach, "A Solvable Toy Model for Tachyon Condensation in String Field Theory", JHEP 0009, 028 (2000), hep-th/0008227. 239. S. Dasgupta and T. Dasgupta, "Renormalization Group Analysis of Tachyon Condensation", JHEP 0106, 007 (2001), hep-th/0010247. 240. K. Ohmori, "Survey of the tachyonic lump in bosonic string field theory", hepth/0106068. 241. N. Moeller, A. Sen, B. Zwiebach, "D-branes as Tachyon Lumps in String Field Theory", JHEP 0008, 039 (2000), hep-th/0005036. 242. Y. Michishita, "Tachyon Lump Solutions of Bosonic D-branes on SU(2) Group Manifolds in Cubic String Field Theory", Nucl. Phys. B614, 26-70 (2001), hep-th/0105246. 243. N. Moeller, "Codimension two lump solutions in string field theory and tachyonic theories", hep-th/0008101. 244. R. de Mello Koch, J. P. Rodrigues, "Lumps in level truncated open string field theory", Phys. Lett. B495, 237-244 (2000), hep-th/0008053. 245. R. de Mello Koch, A. Jevicki, M. Mihailescu, R. Tatar, "Lumps and P-branes in Open String Field Theory", Phys. Lett. B 4 8 2 , 249-254 (2000), hep-th/0003031. 246. J. A. Harvey, P. Kraus, "D-Branes as Unstable Lumps in Bosonic Open String Field Theory", JHEP 0004, 012 (2000), hep-th/0002117. 247. D. P. Jatkar, R. Vathsan, "Stable Solitons in Field Theory Models for Tachyon Condensation", JHEP 0106, 039 (2001), hep-th/0104229. 248. K. Ohmori, "Tachyonic Kink and Lump-like Solutions in Superstring Field Theory", JHEP 0105, 035 (2001), hep-th/0104230. 249. D. Ghoshal and A. Sen, "Tachyon Condensation and Brane Descent Relations in p-adic String Theory", Nucl. Phys. B584, 300-312 (2000), hep-th/0003278. 250. J. A. Minahan, "Mode Interactions of the Tachyon Condensate in p-adic String Theory", JHEP 0103, 028 (2001), hep-th/0102071. 251. L. Brekke, P. G. O. Freund, M. Olson, E. Witten, "Nonarchimedean string dynamics", Nucl. Phys. B302, 365 (1988). 252. I. Ya. Arefeva, B. G. Dragovic, I. V. Volovich, "Open and closed p-adic strings and quadratic extensions of number fields", Phys. Lett. B212, 283 (1988); I. Ya. Arefeva, B. G. Dragovic, I. V. Volovich, "P-adic superstrings", Phys. Lett. B214, 339 (1988). 253. P. H. Frampton, H. Nishino, "Stability analysis of p-adic string solitons", Phys. Lett. B242, 354 (1990). 254. V. S. Vladimirov, "Adelic formulas for gamma and beta functions of one class quadratic fields: applications to 4- particle scattering string amplitudes", mathph/0004017. 255. H. Hata, Sh. Teraguchi, "Test of the Absence of Kinetic Terms around the Tachyon Vacuum in Cubic String Field Theory", JHEP 0105, 045 (2001), hepth/0101162. 256. H. Hata, Sh. Shinohara, "BRST Invaxiance of the Non-Perturbative Vacuum in Bosonic Open String Field Theory", JHEP 0009, 035 (2000), hep-th/0009105. 257. A. Minahan, B. Zwiebach, "Field theory models for tachyon and gauge field string dynamics", JHEP 0009, 029 (2000), hep-th/0008231. 258. I. Ellwood, W. Taylor, "Gauge Invaxiance and Tachyon Condensation in Open String Field Theory", hep-th/0105156.
This page is intentionally left blank
I N T R O D U C T I O N TO S U P E R S T R I N G THEORY
NATHAN BERKOVITS Institute de Fisica Teorica, Universidade Estadual Paulista Rua Pamplona 145, 01405-900, Sao Paulo, SP, BRASIL E-mail: nberkoviQift.unesp.br
In these proceedings, a brief introduction is given to superstring theory and its duality symmetries.
1. Introduction and Motivation Instead of giving references in these proceedings, I will refer the reader to two excellent books for graduate students wanting to study superstring theory which are Superstring Theory (Vols. I and II) by M.B. Green, J.H. Schwarz and E. Witten (Cambridge University Press, 1987) and String Theory (Vols. I and II) by J. Polchinski (Cambridge University Press, 1998). There is also a popular book written for a general audience, The Elegant Universe by B.R. Greene (Norton Press, 1999), as well as two colloquia available on the hep-th bulletin board: hep-th 9607067 by J.H. Schwarz and hep-th 9607050 by J. Polchinski. There are various motivations for studying superstring theory, both mathematical and physical. Since I am a physicist, I will only mention the physical motivations. When string theory was discovered in the early 1970's, it was origninally intended to be a model for describing strong interactions. The basic discovery was that by extending the pointlike nature of particles to onedimensional extended objects called strings, one could obtain S-matrix scattering amplitudes for the fundamental particles which contained many of the properties found in scattering experiments of mesons. As will be discussed in section 2, the action for string theory is proportional to the area of a twodimensional worldsheet, as opposed to the action for point-particles which is based on the length of a one-dimensional worldline. Amazingly, the masses and coupling constants of the fundamental particles in string theory are not inputs in the theory, but are instead fixed by consistency requirements such as Lorentz invariance and unitarity. In fact, unlike theories based on point particles, string theory not only predicts the masses
165
166 of the fundamental particles, but also predicts the dimension of spacetime. In the simplest string theory, this dimension turns out to be 26, rather than the experimentally observed spacetime dimension of 4. However, as will be discussed in section 5, it is possible to 'compactify' all but four of the dimensions to small circles, in which case only four-dimensional spacetime is observable at low energies. For open string theory (where particles are represented by one dimensional objects with two ends), the particle spectrum contains a massless 'gluon', as well as an infinite number of massive particles whose masses and spins sit on 'Reggae trajectories'. These Reggae trajectories of massive particles are welcome for describing strong interactions since they are needed for producing scattering amplitudes with the properties seen in experiments. Unfortunately, string theory also predicts fundamental particles which are not needed for describing strong interactions. One of these particles is tachyonic, i.e. its (mass) 2 is negative implying that it travels faster than the speed of light. The presence of such a particle makes the vacuum unstable, which is not acceptable in a physical theory. The resolution of this tachyon problem was found in a series of remarkable discoveries which led to the concept of supersymmetry, a symmetry relating bosonic and fermionic particles. The first discovery was the existence of a new consistent string theory whose spacetime dimension turns out to be 10 rather than 26. The second discovery was that the action for this new string theory depends on a two-dimensional worldsheet containing both bosonic and fermionic parameters, and the action is invariant under a worldsheet supersymmetry which transforms the bosonic and fermionc parameters into each other. The third discovery was that, after performing a projection operation which removes half the particles but leaves a unitary S-matrix, the particle spectrum and interactions of this 'superstring' theory are invariant under a tendimensional spacetime-supersymmetry which transforms bosons into fermions. This projection operation removes the problematic tachyon from the spectrum but leaves the massless gluons, as well as an infinite number of massive particles. Superstring theory also contains fermionic counterparts to the gluon (called the gluino), as well as an infinite number of massive fermions. Another particle which survives the projection operation is a massless spintwo particle called the graviton (as well as its fermionic counterpart, the massless spin-3/2 particle called the gravitino). Although this massless spin-2 particle comes from closed string theory (where particles are represented by onedimensional circles), unitarity implies that the two ends of an open string can join to form a closed string, so these massless spin-two particles are produced in the scattering of gluons. Since the only consistent interactions of massless
167
spin-two particles are gravitational interactions, string theory 'predicts' the existence of gravity. Therefore, without prior intention, superstring theory was found to give a unified description of Yang-Mills and gravitational interactions. Since the energy scale of gravitational interactions is much larger than the energy scale of strong interactions, a unification of these interactions implies that the massive particles predicted by superstring theory contain masses of the order of the Planck mass ( about 1019 GeV), and are therefore unrelated to meson particles found in experiments. So the original motivation for using string theory as a model for strong interactions is no longer viable, assuming that one interprets the massless spin-two particle as the graviton of general relativity. Instead, superstring theory can be used as a model for a unified theory which includes all four of the standard interactions: gravitational, strong, weak, and electromagnetic (the last three are described by a spontaneously broken Yang-Mills theory). The usual obstacle to constructing a quantum unified theory (or even a quantum theory of gravity) is that the Einstein-Hilbert action for general relativity is non-renormalizable. This is easily seen from the fact that the gravitational coupling constant (Newton's constant) is dimensionful, unlike the coupling constant of Yang-Mills theory. So for a scattering amplitude of three gravitons at L loop-order, power counting arguments imply that the amplitude diverges like A 2L where A is the cutoff. The only way to remove this divergence is if there is some miraculous cancellation of Feynmann diagrams. One way to cancel divergences in Feynmann diagrams is to introduce fermions into the theory with the same interactions and masses as the bosons. Since internal loops of fermions contribute with an extra minus sign as compared with internal loops of bosons, there is a possibility of cancellations. If a theory is supersymmetrized (i.e. fermions are introduced in such a manner that the theory is symmetric under a transformation which exchanges the bosons and fermions), then the above conditions are satisfied. The supersymmetrization of gravity is called supergravity, and for a few years, it was hoped that such a theory might be free of non-renormalizable divergences. However, it was later realized that even after supersymmetrizing gravity to a theory with the maximum number of supersymmetries (which is called N=8 supergravity), the non-renormalizable divergences are still present. As already mentioned, the fundamental particles of superstring theory include the graviton and the gravitino (like supergravity), but also include an infinite set of massive bosons and fermions. It turns out that after including the contributions of the infinite massive particles, the non-renormalizable divergences in the loop amplitudes completely cancel each other out. Although the explicit proof of the preceding statement is rather technical, there are var-
168
ious 'handwaving' arguments which are convincing. One of these arguments involves the nature of superstring interactions which are 'smoother' than the interactions of point-particles. For example, the three-point diagram for pointparticles has a vertex where the three external point-particles coincide. But the three-point diagram for closed strings is like a pair of pants, where the two cuffs and the waist are the external strings. Unlike the vertex in a point-particle diagram, there is no singular point on a pair of pants. So superstring theory provides a consistent theory of quantum gravity which, unlike all other attempts, does not suffer from non-renormalizable divergences. However, it requires an infinite set of massive particles which are unobservable in any foreseeable experiment. In addition, the theory includes a set of massless particles such as the gluons and gluinos of super-Yang-Mills and also a scalar massless boson called the dilaton. If superstring theory really describes nature (and is not just a model for a unified quantum theory of gravity and Yang-Mills), these massless particles must become the leptons, quarks, and gluons of the standard model where the masses of the above particles come from spontaneous symmetry breaking. One important unsolved problem in superstring theory is that it is very difficult to give a mass to the dilaton in a natural way, so one needs to explain why noone has observed massless scalars in experiments. Although superstring theory is the only candidate for a renormalizable quantum theory of gravity, only a few researchers worked in this field between 1975 (when it was realized that string theory could not serve as a model for strong interactions) and 1985. One reason for the lack of interest was that there appeared to be different versions of superstring theory (called Type I, Type IIA and Type IIB), none of which resembled very closely the structure of the standard model. In the Type I theory, the gauge group for superYang-Mills was thought to be arbitrary, and in the Type IIA and Type IIB theories, the gauge group had to be abelian. However, in 1985, it was learned that absence of anomalies restricted the gauge group of the Type I theory to be 50(32)/Z 2 . Although this gauge group is not very interesting for phenomenology, it was soon realized that there is another type of superstring theory, called the 'heterotic' superstring (since it combines features of the bosonic string and superstring), which has two possible gauge groups: 5 0 ( 3 2 ) / ^ 2 or E$ x Es (Eg is one of the exceptional groups). The Eg x Es version of the heterotic superstring was very attractive for phenomenologists since it is easy to construct grand unified theories starting from the exceptional subgroup E$. For this reason (and because of peer pressure), the next five years attracted many researchers into the field of superstring theory. However, it was soon clear that without understanding non-perturbative effects, superstring theory would
169
not be able to give explicit predictions for a grand unified model (other than vague predictions, such as supersymmetry at a suitably high energy scale). The problem was that four-dimensional physics depends crucially on the type of compactification which is used to reduce from ten to four dimensions. Although there is a symmetry called T-duality which relates some compactifications in superstring theory, there is a large class of compactifications which are not related by any symmetry. In principle, the type of compactification is determined dynamically, however, the selection of the correct compactification scheme requires non-perturbative information. So, for this reason (and because of problems in finding jobs), many researchers left the field of string theory after 1989 to work in other areas such as supercollider phenomenology. Recently, it has been learned that many non-perturbative features of fourdimensional supersymmetric Yang-Mills theories can be understood without performing explicit instanton computations. Although this had been conjectured in 1977 for N=4 super-Yang-Mills, the conjecture was treated skeptically until 1994 when convincing evidence was presented for the case of N=2 superYang-Mills. One of these non-perturbative features is an '5-duality' symmetry which relates the super-Yang-Mills theory at large values of the coupling constant with a super-Yang-Mills theory at small values of the coupling constant. For N=4 super-Yang-Mills, 5-duality maps the theory at strong coupling into the same theory at weak coupling, while for N=2 super-Yang-Mills, 5-duality maps the theory at strong coupling into a different theory at weak coupling. These 5-duality symmetries are also believed to be present in superstrings and relate superstring theory at large values of the coupling constant with a theory at small values of the coupling constant. 5-duality maps the Type IIB superstring at strong coupling into the same Type IIB superstring at weak coupling, and maps the Type I superstring at strong/weak coupling into the heterotic superstring at weak/strong coupling with gauge group 50(32)/Z2There is also believed to a duality symmetry which maps the Type IIA superstring at strong coupling into a new eleven-dimensional theory called Mtheory, and which maps the heterotic superstring with gauge group E8 x E8 at strong coupling into a version of M-theory with boundaries. M-theory is known to contain the massless particle of eleven-dimensional supergravity (which is the maximum possible dimension for supergravity) as well as massive particles which are still not understood. It is believed to be related to a theory constructed from two-dimensional extended objects called membranes (as opposed to the one-dimensional extended objects called strings). So by studying the perturbative regime of superstring theory where the coupling constant is small, one can use 5-duality symmetry to obtain nonperturbative information where the coupling constant is large. Furthermore,
170
duality symmetries relate the five different superstring theories, suggesting that these five theories can be understood as perturbative vacua of some unique underlying non-perturbative theory which would be the 'Theory of Everything'. This has attracted renewed interest in superstring theory, and there is optimism that by studying M-theory, one will gain a greater understanding of duality symmetries. However, the problem of getting explicit predictions out of superstring theory is probably still far from being resolved. Although S'-duality symmetries may help in understanding superstring theory at very small and very large values of the coupling constants, it is not clear if it will be possible to extrapolate these results to the physically interesting values of the coupling constants which is somewhere between the two extremes. In section 2 of this paper, I will discuss classical relativistic strings. In section 3, I will show how to quantize the relativistic string and compute the spectrum. In section 4, I shall introduce the Type IIA and Type IIB superstrings in the light-cone Green-Schwarz approach. In section 5, I shall discuss compactification and T-duality. In section 6,1 will describe eleven-dimensional supergravity and give a simple argument for the 5-duality symmetry of the Type IIB superstring. 2. Classical Relativistic Strings As is well known, the action for relativistic point-particles moving in D dimensions is given by S = M [
F
drL (X»(T))
= M f " dr yJdTxv-dTx^
(1)
and the equation of motion is MdT (dTx^/^(dTx)2 1 = 0. In the above action, fi = Oto D — 1, M is a dimensionful constant, and L(x) is defined as the length of the path traversed by ^ ( T ) between the times r/ and rp. The momentum is defined by P» = M Q / f L
, = M
fTX>i
,
(2)
so P M P M = M2 where M is identified with the mass of the particle. The above action is invariant under reparameterizations of the worldline, T —> f ( r ) , allowing the gauge choice 3ra;M9rarM = 1. In this gauge, the equation of motion becomes Md^x^ = 0, which has the solution z"(r) where F"P M = M 2 .
=x%+TP>i
171
For a relativistic one-dimensional object with the topology of a closed string (i.e. the topology of a circle), the obvious generalization of (1) is rp
pTF
S=— (•TF rTF
rp
=
/>27r
daA{xll{T,a))
drj
2W
/•27T r^lT
^ f
,
d
- (drX^X^)2
yi^^rX^id^X^X^)
(3)
where T is a dimensionful constant, a is a parameter ranging from 0 to 2TT which measures the position on the circle, d^x1* = dx^/dcr, and A(x) is the area of the cylindrical surface traversed by xM (r, a) between the times T/ and TF- (The formula for the area is easily found by dividing the surface into infinitesimal parallelograms whose sides are given by drdrX11 and dad^x11.) This action is invariant under reparameterization of the world surface, M T -¥ T(T,CT) and a —> d-(r,a), which allows one to choose the gauge 9 r x drXfi = daX^daXf,, and drX^d^x^ = 0. In this gauge, it is easy to show that the equation of motion from (3) is
&TxP =
fix"
(4)
and the momentum is defined by
p =T
r =
dA
" ^^ ) £i
r27T
dadTX
»-
(5)
So the general solution to the equation of motion is x»(T,a)=xZ
+ -TP»+
J2
(o^ew(r+ff)+a^e^-')).
(6)
JV=-oo,jV^0
The gauge-fixing conditions drX^drX,,
- drSfdvXn
= d^BaX^
= 0
(7)
imply that two of the D components of xM can be related to the other D — 2 components and that oo
P»P„ = T 2
£
TV2 (a^atN
+ ai,alN)
(8)
where j=l to D — 2. Since P^P^ gives the (mass) 2 of the string, the mass of the string depends on the a°N and a3N variables, and therefore depends on the way that the string is resonating. Each distinct resonance of the string corresponds to a different particle whose mass can be computed from (8). Although the classical
172
relativistic string has a continuous mass spectrum, the spectrum will become discrete after quantization. Note that T corresponds to the tension of the string since (4) and (5) imply that dTPj = Td^xi where Pj is the momentum density (i.e. Pj = ^ §Q n daPj). In natural units for describing gravitational interactions, T is approximately (1019 GeV) 2 . 3. Quantization of the Closed String In the previous section, it was seen that oo
PP(T,(T)
=TdTa?
= P* + iT
N(a%eiN^+,T)+a%eiN^-^y
£
(9)
N=-oo,N^tO
Using (6) and the canonical commutation relations ^(r.ffj.rfry)]
=i71»"d(a-<7'),
(10)
one finds that o ^ and a^ satisfy the commutation relations [<&.<*&] = ^M+N.OvT
,
[&M,avN] = ^ < W v , o r f " .
(11)
As in the harmonic oscillator, one can define a ground state |0) which is annihilated by a1^ and a^ for N < 0. So using (8), the state
j=l
N>0
2
has (mass) given by the formula of (8), M2 = T2($| £ >
2
(2a>Na>_N + [aL^]
+ 2~ajNalN + [ a i „ , < ] ) |*> .(13)
N>0
Plugging (12) into (13) and using the commutation relations of (11), one finds D-2
2
M = 2T"£J2N
(nN + »ir) + 2T E N& ~ 2)
JV>O i = i
(14)
JV>O
where the second term comes from normal-ordering (as in the ground-state energy of the harmonic oscillator). To compute this normal-ordering term, one uses zeta-function regularization to remove the divergence. This means defining ^ N as the analytic continuation as s -> - 1 of J2 N~s. iV>0
JV>0
This analytic continuation gives
173
Y^ N = -j^,
so the normal-ordering term (which gives M 2 for the ground-
N>0
state) is equal to 2T(2 - D)/12. So when D > 2, the ground-state has negative (mass) 2 and is tachyonic as described in the introduction. This means that the vacuum is unstable, implying that closed string theory is inconsistent. As shown in the following section, this inconsistency is not present in closed superstring theory. Note that the spin-two state in closed string theory is described by l ^ " ) = {a^avx + a^)\0), which has M 2 = 2T(26 - D)/12 using the formula of (14). So when D = 26 this spin-two state is massless and describes a graviton. 4. Type II Superstrings in the Light-Cone Green-Schwarz Approach There are many equivalent descriptions of the Type IIA and Type IIB superstrings, but the only one which will be described in these notes is the formalism of Green and Schwarz in the light-cone gauge. Light-cone gauge means that the constraints of (7) have been used to eliminate two of the spacetime variables so one is left with the variables X3(T, a) for j — 1 to D — 2. Unitarity and Lorentz invariance imply that D = 10 for the superstring, so j takes the values 1 to 8. However, unlike the string theory of the preceding section, the Type II superstring also contains fermionic variables, 8a(T,a) and 9A{T,G), where a and d are the chiral and anti-chiral eight-dimensional spinor representations of SO (8), A is in the d representation for the Type IIA superstring, and A is in the a representation for the Type IIB superstring. The chiral and anti-chiral eight-dimensional spinor representations, a and d, are denned using SO(8) Pauli matrices, a3 &, which satisfy the anti-commutation relations
<&
+ * W d = 2*'*<W
(15)
(j — 1 to 8, a = 1 to 8, and a = 1 to 8). Note that a and a resemble the twocomponent spinor representations of SO(3,l), however in the case of SO(8), they are independently real ((a)* = a and (d)* = d) as opposed to the case of S0(3,l) where (a)* = a. Also, SO(8) spinor indices can be raised and lowered using the trivial metric 8al3 and Sal3. In light-cone gauge, the action for the Type II superstring is given by S=Y where d± —
f
F
dT±da.
dr I
da (d+xjd-xj
+ 6ad_9a + 6Ad+6A)
(16)
174
The equations of motion for xi are the same as before, and the equations of motion for 6a and 6A are d-6a = d+6A = 0, which has the general solution 6a (r, a) = J2b% e iJV(r+CT) ,
6A (r, a) = ^ If, e ^ ' ^
N
.
(17)
N
The anti-commutation relations {6a(T,a),T6f>(j,tT,)}=8af>5(tT-a'),
{9A{T,O),T9B{T,
= 8AB5(a-a')
(18)
imply that {baM,4} = T-^Su+w
,
{bij,bBN] =
T-'S^SM+^O
.
(19)
For the Type II superstring, the ground state |0) is defined to be annihilated by a3N, aJN, bf^ and b^ for TV < 0. To determine the spectrum, one uses the superstring version of the gauge-fixing constraints of (7) which implies that the spectrum for the superstring is given by oo
M 2 = P»P„ =T2
J2
[N2 (a>-N + <°~N)
+ N fab"* + bi~bAN)] .(20)
JV=-oo,AT#0
For a state
i*>=n n (
oc,A=l M>0
the (mass) 2 is
N>0
+" N (2b%ba_N -
{ba_N,b%} + 2bAbAN
- {b*N,b&})]
I*) - (22)
Since
J > 2 [ a i ^ J + ^ / V 2 [&LN,a>N] =52N{b1N,b%}+'£N{bAN,bAr} , 3
j
a
A
the normal-ordering contribution from the aJN and 5 ^ modes is precisely cancelled by the normal-ordering contribution from the b°^ and bjy modes. Therefore, the superstring ground-state has zero mass and the excited states carry 8 2
M = 2T^2 N>0
E
N(n^+njN+m% + rhAy
(23)
j,a,A=l
Actually, there is more than one massless state of the superstring since hitting |0) with b% and/or bA does not change the mass. Since 6Q a n d bA
175
satisfy the same anti-commutation relations as the SO (8) Pauli matrices in (15), the massless state is not a scalar of SO(8) but is actually a 256-component multipletofSO(8). This multiplet is described by the states |0) j *, \0)jA, \0)"k, and |0) a where j , k are SO(8) vector representations and A is the opposite spinor representation of A. The action of 6g a n d bA on these states is defined by
b«\0)jk = af\ofk ,
b%\0)jA =af\0fA ,
b%\0)ak = af\0)jk
b%\Q)aA =
,
af\0)jA (24)
bA\0)jk
= aAA\0)jA
,
bA\0)jA
=
aAA\0)jk
^ | 0 > a * = *AA\0)aA
,
bA\0)aA
= aAA\0)c
Note that b% and bA are anti-commuting, so |0)"' and |0) a are bosonic states while |0) afc and \0)]A are fermionic states. Decomposing |0) J into its symmetric, anti-symmetric, and trace parts, one finds a graviton g3k, a 'Kalb-Ramond' field B]k, and a scalar dilatonfield
176
radius R to compactification on a circle of radius (RT)~1 where T is the string tension. This means that the radius of compactification can always be chosen larger that T ~ 5 ; which has important implications for gravity at the Planck scale since T~2 is approximately 10~ 32 cm. First, note that the wave-function e1*"'*1' should be single-valued when 9 x —> x9 + 2ITR if x9 is a compactified direction. So the momentum P9 must be equal to nR_1 for some integer n. Next, note that x9(r,a + 2n) must equal X9(T, a) + 2irmR where m is an integer which counts the number of times that the closed string winds around the compactified direction. This means that the solution to the equation of motion of (4) is oo
x9{T,a)=x9 + ^R+omR+
(a9NeiN^») + a%eiN^)
£
. (25)
AT=-oo,iV^O
Plugging into the M 2 formula coming from (7), one learns that Ml = (P0)2 - (PO 2
(P8f = P»P» + (P9f = M 2 0 + Q ) 8
2
=
(l)
2
+ ( m TR)2
+ 2T
2 N>0
S
N (n% + n% + m% + m^)(26)
j,a,A=l
where M 9 is the mass measured by a nine-dimensional observer, Mw is the mass measured by a ten-dimensional observer, and the (m TR)2 term comes from the T^daX^daX^ contribution to M 2 0 . It is easy to see from (26) that the nine-dimensional mass spectrum is invariant under switching R with {TR)~l if one also switches momentum excitations n with winding-mode excitations m. Note that T-duality, unlike S-duality discussed in the following secton, does not transform the string coupling constant and can therefore be verified perturbatively. For the Type II superstring, T-duality states that the Type IIA superstring compactified on a circle of radius R is equivalent to the Type IIB superstring compactified on a circle of radius (TR^1. The reason Type IIA and Type IIB switch places is that switching momentum excitations with winding excitations is only a symmetry of the Type II superstring if 9A switches its SO (8) chirality. 6. D = l l Supergravity and iVf-Theory Eleven dimensions is the maximum dimension in which gravity can be supersymmetrized in a consistent manner. The bosonic fields of D = l l supergravity are a graviton CJMN and an anti-symmetric three-form AMNP where M = 0
177
to 10. Although this supergravity theory is not renormahzable, its classical action can be constructed and the bosonic contribution to this action is
Su = ^ J dn x ^teTg (i? + FMNPQ + e
1
'"
" FMl...M4 FM5...MS
FMNpQ)
^MgMioMu
(27)
where A is the gravitatonal coupling constant and FMNPQ = 9[MANPQ} is the field-strength for AMNPAfter compactification on a circle of radius R\o, these fields reduce to the massless bosonic fields of the Type IIA superstring, [g^v, B^u,(f), A^^A^p] where g^ = e-Wg^, g10 io = e 4 */ 3 , £M io = e 4 ^ 3 ^ , i M i , 10 = B^ and A^vp = A^p. With this identification, the Einstein-Hilbert part of the D = l l action j? f d11 x y/det g R reduces to ^ / d10 x e" 2 * ^det g R. This means that the string coupling constant can be absorbed into a redefinition of <j) ->• (f> + log A. After this redefinition, the vacuum expectation value for e* becomes (e^) — A. Since the compactification radius is proportional to 1/310 10 = e 2 ^ 3 , i?io is proportional to A 2 / 3 . Therefore, the Type IIA superstring at weak coupling and low energies (i.e. the massless sector with A -C 1) is equivalent to compactification of D = 11 supergravity on a circle of small radius. However, the Type IIA superstring is a renormahzable theory, so it also makes sense at high energies. This suggests that there is a renormahzable version of D = l l supergravity with massive fields which makes sense at highenergies. This eleven-dimensional theory is called M-theory and it will now be shown how eleven-dimensional Lorentz invariance of M-theory implies a strong-weak duality of the Type IIB superstring. The classical low-energy effective action for the Type IIB superstring (i.e. the classical action for ten-dimensional Type IIB supergravity) is known to contain a classical symmetry called S-duality which transforms the massless bosonic Type IIB fields as: p -»•
-. ,
B^v -> aB^v + bA^v , 9pv
~^ 9HV !
A-^vpu
A^v -»• cB^ + dA^ —> Ap,vp
K^-1)
where p = A + ie~^ and a, b, c, d are integers satisfying ad — bc= 1. When a = d — A(x) = 0 and b = — c = 1, this 5-duality symmetry transforms e"^ to e*, and since (e*) = A, it takes A -4 A - 1 which switches strong and weak coupling. This strong-weak duality symmetry of the classical action
178
can be proven to be a symmetry of the full quantum Type IIB superstring action using the following argument: Suppose one compactifies two of the eleven dimensions of M-theory on small circles of radius Ri and R2. If R\ is identified with the eleventh dimension, this corresponds to a Type IIA superstring with A = (R1/R2)3/2 which is compactified on a small circle of radius R2. By T-duality, this corresponds to a Type IIB superstring with A = (-Ri/i^) 3 / 2 which is compactified on a large circle of radius ( T i ^ ) - 1 But by eleven-dimensional Lorentz covariance of M-theory, one could also have identified R2 with the eleventh dimension. In this case, the M-theory compactification corresponds to a Type IIA superstring with A' = (R2/R1)3/2 which is compactified on a small circle of radius R\. By T-duality, this corresponds to a Type IIB superstring with A' = (.R2/.R1)3/2 which is compactified on a large circle of radius (Ti?i) _ 1 . If Rx -> 0 and R2 ->• 0 with Rx/R2 = C held fixed, the two Type IIB superstrings become uncompactified but their coupling constants remain fixed at the value A = A'~ = C 3 / 2 . Since these two descriptions come from the same compactification of M-theory, the uncompactified Type IIB superstring is invariant under an 5-duality symmetry which exchanges A and A - 1 , and therefore exchanges strong and weak couplings.. Acknowledgments I would like to thank the organizers of the summer school for a very enjoyable week of lectures. This work was financially supported in part by FAPESP grant 99/12763-0, by CNPq grant 300256/94-9, and by Pronex grant 66.2002/1998-9.
SELECTED TOPICS IN I N T E G R A B L E MODELS
ASHOK DAS Department
of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester, New York, 14627-0171
Rochester,
In these talks, I discuss a few selected topics in integrable models that are of interest from various points of view. Some open questions are also described.
1. Introduction The subject of integrable models now encompasses a very large area of research involving many seemingly different topics. It is not at all possible to give a detailed exposition of the subject in just a few lectures. Therefore, when the organizers of the Andre Swieca summer school asked me to choose a few topics on which to speak at the school, I agreed with a lot of trepidation. In order to make the lectures self-complete, I, of course, had to start with some basics. The subsequent topics that I talked about, naturally, represent a personal choice according to my interests. There are many other interesting areas that are being pursued by many active groups, but I simply could not have done justice to all, in the limited time available. Similarly, the literature on the subject is vast and it would have been totally impossible for me to even pretend to have a complete list of references. Consequently, I have only chosen a handful of references, for my talks, that I have absolutely used in the preparation of my lectures. I apologize to all whose works I have not been able to mention in my talks or references that I have not been able to list.
2. Historical D e v e l o p m e n t Let me begin with some introduction to the historical development of the subject. Let us begin with the simple, working definition of an integrable model as a physical system that is described by nonlinear partial differential equations, which can be exactly solved. We will make the definition more precise as we go along. There are quite a few systems of equations of this kind that arise in various physical theories. For example, in 0 + 1 dimensions, the Toda lattice is described by the set of equations
179
180
Qi =Pi ,
i=
px
-
PN
=
pa
= e - « . - < 3 . - i ) _ e-(Qa+i-Qa) ^
l,2,...,N
_e-«?2-Qi)
(1)
e-(QN-QN-i) a
= 2 , 3 , . . . , iV - 1
and consists of a chain of N particles on a one dimensional lattice at the coordinates Qi, with P$ representing the conjugate momenta. In 1 + 1 dimensions, similarly, there is the celebrated KdV equation described by du(x,t) dt
du d3u dx dx3
_
.
where u, for example, may describe the height of a water wave from the normal surface. The variables of the KdV equation can be scaled to have arbitrary coefficients in front of all the terms. As a consequence, another form in which the KdV equation is also known corresponds to du
„ du =6u
M
d3u
,„.
+
(3)
dX- W-
In 1 + 1 dimensions, there is also the non-linear Schrodinger equation described by dip(x,t) -
d2ip -
n
, ,,„ , (4)
where K is a constant measuring the strength of the nonlinear interaction and can be both positive or negative corresponding to an attractive or repulsive interaction. There are several other integrable systems in 1 + 1 dimensions, but these two are the ones that have been widely studied. There are fewer integrable systems in 2 + 1 dimensions, which include the Kadomtsev-Petviashvelli (KP) equations and the Davey-Stewartson (DS) equations. One of the most important features that all integrable models have is that they possess soliton solutions to the equations of motion. Solitons are defined as localized, non-dispersive solutions that maintain their shape even after being scattered. Historically, of course, research in this area grew out of J. Scott Russel's observation, in 1834, of a solitary wave travelling for miles maintaining its shape. It was only in 1895 that Korteweg and de Vries gave a mathematical description of such shallow water waves, which is known as. the KdV equation. Being nonlinear and difficult to solve, these equations, however, did not
181
generate a lot of interest. In 1965, Kruskal and Zabusky undertook a "computer" experiment, namely, they wanted to numerically study the evolution of the solutions of the KdV equation. What they found was impressive, namely, when certain solutions of the KdV equation were scattered off each other, they maintained their shape even after going through the scattering region. Kruskal coined the term "solitons" for such solutions in 1969 and the presence of such solutions generated an enormous interest in such systems from then on. 2.1. Non-Dispersive
Solutions
Most physical linear equations have dispersive solutions and the presence of non-dispersive solutions in such systems is quite interesting. To appreciate the origin of such solutions and to see their relation to the nonlinear interactions of the theory, let us analyze the KdV equation, du _
d3u
du
As we have noted, such a system describes shallow water waves, where we can think of u(x, t) as representing the height of the water wave from the normal surface of water. The first term on the right hand side represents the nonlinear term. Let us, for a moment, look at the KdV equation without the nonlinear term, namely, du
=
d3u
(6)
m w-
It is easy to write down the dispersion relation following from this equation, E(k) = k3 .
(7)
This immediately tells us that the phase and the group velocities, associated with a wave packet, in this case, are different, namely, ^phase —
,
— "-
j
^group —
,.
— ""•
-
\°J
Thus, we see that if the KdV equation contained only the linear term on the right hand side, solutions will disperse. On the other hand, let us next assume that the KdV equation does not contain the linear term on the right hand side, namely, du
du
u
m= Tx-
(9)
This is also known as the Riemann equation. This can be solved by the method of characteristics and the solution has the general form u{x,t) = f(x + ut)
(10)
182
which is quite interesting, for it says that the velocity of propagation is directly proportional to the height of the wave. Namely, the higher points of the wave will travel faster than those at a lower height. This is what leads to the breaking of waves etc. However, from our point of view, we see that this has a localizing effect, opposite of what the linear term leads to. The linear and the nonlinear terms, on the right hand side of the KdV equation, therefore, have opposing behavior and if they can balance each other exactly, then, we can have solutions that will travel without any dispersion. The presence of nonlinear interactions, therefore, is quite crucial to the existence of non-dispersive solutions. In the KdV equation, this indeed happens and we have non-dispersive solutions. For example, let us consider
,2 yfi
u{x,t) = 3usech -—(x + vt).
(11)
This gives -r- = - ov2 sech — (x + vt) tanh — (a; + vt) au . s l 4 y/v ,. , \/v . . u —— = — 9v2 sech ——(x + vt) tanh —— (a; + vt) ox 2 2 33
dx3
= - Zv 2 sech — (x + vt) tanh -— (x + vt) + 6v2 sech4 ¥— (x + vt) tanh ^— (x + vt) .
With trigonometric identities, it is easy to check now that du
du
d3u
dt
dx
dx3
holds so that this represents a solution of the KdV equation. From the form of the solution, it is clear that it maintains its shape as it travels (non-dispersive) and such a solution is known as a one soliton solution. One can also construct multi-soliton solutions through what is known as Backlund transformations, which I will not go into.
2.2. Conserved
Charges
Given the KdV equation, one can immediately construct three conserved charges, namely, it is easy to check that
183
Hi =
dxu dxu2
H2 = -
(12)
are conserved under the evolution of the KdV equation. Several people had also constructed up to 13 conserved charges for the system when Kruskal conjectured that the KdV system has an infinite number of functionally independent conserved charges. This was subsequently proved and the conserved charges constructed through the Miura transformation (as well as through the method of inverse scattering). However, in retrospect, the presence of an infinite number of conserved charges associated with a system possessing soliton solutions is intuitively quite clear. As we have noted, solitons scatter through each other maintaining their shape. This implies that there must be conservation laws which prevents the solution from deformations. Since the soliton is an extended solution, there must, therefore, be an infinity of such conservation laws for the solution to maintain its shape through collisions. The important thing is that such a system has an infinite number of conserved charges, which also means that the system is integrable.
2.3. Bi-Hamiltonian
Structure
Integrable systems are Hamiltonian systems. For example, in the case of the KdV equation, we note that if we define {u(x),u(y)}1
= 85{x - y) = — 6(x - y)
(13)
then, the KdV equation can be written in the Hamiltonian form as du
. . , „ ,
d (I
H
d2u\
2
d3u
du
u
M=^ ^ = ^x{r+w)= irx + w-
(14)
However, what is even more interesting is the fact that the same set of equations can also be written in the Hamiltonian form if we define
Mx)My)h =(^
+\(^
+ « £ ) ) *(* - v)
(is)
so that du . . . - ={ u { x
. , H
TT )
2 h
/ d3 = ^
+
I ( d -(-u
+
d\\ u-^u
du = u-
+
d3u — .
(16)
184
Namely, the KdV equation is Hamiltonian with respect to at least two distinct Hamiltonian structures. Representing the two Hamiltonian structures as (operators acting on delta function) Vx
=d
1 (17) o we note that the first structure is what is normally called the Abelian current algebra, while the second structure is known as the Virasoro algebra. As a result, we do not have to worry about these structures satisfying the Jacobi identity, which they do. This is another general feature of integrable models, namely, the Hamiltonian structures of integrable models are generally associated with symmetry algebras. In fact, some of the nonlinear algebras, such as the W algebras, were studied from the point of view of integrable models. Looking at the structure of the two Hamiltonian structures of the KdV equation, it is clear that not only does this system have two distinct Hamiltonian structures, but that that
V2 = d3 + - (du + ud)
V = V2 + aVx
(18)
also represents a genuine Hamiltonian structure (not necessarily of the system). This is a nontrivial statement, considering that a structure must satisfy the Jacobi identity - a nontrivial relation - in order to qualify as a Hamiltonian structure. In this case, it follows from the fact that T>2 is a genuine Hamiltonian structure for any variable u and that 3 V2(u + -a) = V2{u) + aVx . (19) When two Hamiltonian structures have such a relation (namely, if two structures are Hamiltonian, then, a linear combination of the two is also), they are said to be compatible. When a Hamiltonian system can be described by two distinct Hamiltonian structures that are compatible, the system is said to be a bi-Hamiltonian system. The existence of two Hamiltonian descriptions for the same equation, of course, implies that du
m
5H2
^
SH3
This is a prototype of the recursion relation that exists between conserved charges in such systems. One can define a recursion operator 1l = Vl-lV2
(21)
185
which will relate the successive conserved charges as
—f±L =n—^.
22)
ou ou Furthermore, if the two Hamiltonian structures are compatible, one can further show that these conserved charges are also in involution with respect to either of the Hamiltonian structures, thereby proving that the system is integrable. The phase space geometry of integrable systems is quite interesting. These are, of course, symplectic manifolds, but because there are at least two distinct Hamiltonian structures (symplectic structures), these are very special symplectic manifolds. Let us call the two symplectic structures as u\ and u^. Then, on this manifold, one can naturally define a nontrivial (1,1) tensor as S = wf 1 w 2 •
(23)
The evolution of this equation can be thought of as the Lax equation and, therefore, this gives a geometrical meaning to the Lax equation. Furthermore, one can show that if the Nijenhuis torsion tensor, associated with this (1,1) tensor, vanishes, then, the conserved charges will be in involution. Consequently, the vanishing of the Nijenhuis torsion tensor can be thought of as a sufficient condition for integrability in this geometrical description. Let me also note here that since the KdV system has an infinite number of conserved quantities Hn, n — 1,2,..., each of this can be thought of as a Hamiltonian and will lead to a flow as
£=*^-*£-
M
<>
Thus, with every integrable system is a hierarchy of flows and these represent the higher order flows of the system. The entire hierarchy of flows shares the same infinite set of conserved quantities and are integrable. 2.4. Initial
Value
Problem
An interesting question, in connection with these nonlinear integrable systems, is how can one solve the initial value problem. Namely, given the initial values of the dynamical variables, in such systems, how does one determine their values at any later time. In linear systems, we are familiar with techniques such as the Fourier transformation or the Laplace transformation, which help by transforming differential equations into algebraic ones. However, these methods are not very useful in dealing with nonlinear equations. The method that is useful (and, therefore, which can be thought of as the analog of the Fourier transformation in the case of nonlinear equations) is the method of inverse scattering. Let me explain this in some detail.
186
Let us consider the linear Schrodinger equation (&> + ±u(x,t)>)il> =
ty
(25)
where d stands for -^ and u(x,t) is the dynamical variable of the KdV equation. Here t is just a parameter that the potential in the Schrodinger equation depends on and not the evolution parameter of the Schrodinger equation. Since the potential u(x,t) depends on the parameter t, it follows that both ip and A will depend on t as well. However, what Gardner, Greene, Kruskal and Miura observed was that, if u(x,t) satisfied the KdV equation, then, the eigenvalues, A, were independent of t, namely, the evolution is isospectral in such a case, or, At = 0 .
(26)
Furthermore, in such a case, the dependence of tp on t is very simple, namely, V* = - (QUX+CA
rp+ U A + - u J V* •
(27)
In such case, the evolution of the scattering data, such as the reflection coefficient, the transmission coefficient etc, with t is easy to determine and, in fact, take a simple form. Thus, the strategy for solving the initial value problem can be taken as follows. Let us choose the linear Schrodinger equation with the potential u(x,0) and determine the scattering data. Next determine the scattering data at an arbitrary value of t from the simple evolution of the scattering data. Once we have the scattering data for an arbitrary t, we can ask what is the potential, u(x,t), which would give rise to those scattering data. This is essentially the method of inverse scattering. The reconstruction of the potential from the scattering data is done through the Gel'fand-LevitanMarchenko equation, fOO
K(x,y)
+ B(x,y) +
dz K{x,z)B(y
+ z) = 0 ,
y >x
(28)
JX
where i
N
/-oo
B{x) = — /
27r /
dk R(k) eikx + Y
•—
cne-K"x
.
(29)
tl
Here, R is the coefficient of reflection, /t n 's represent the eigenvalues for the bound states and c n 's correspond to the normalization constants for the bound state wave functions. Once the solution of the Gel'fand-Levitan-Marchenko equation is known, the potential is determined from
187
Let us see explicitly how the method works, in an example. However, let me also note that, while one can, in principle, find a solution to the GLM equation, in practice it may be difficult unless the starting potential were very special. One such class of potentials are solitonic potentials which are known to be reflectionless. In such a case, R =0
(31)
and this makes calculations much simpler. Let us, therefore, consider u(x, 0) = 12 seen2a; .
(32)
We recognize, from our earlier discussion, that this is the one soliton solution of the KdV equation. Such a potential leads to no reflection. It supports only one bound state, for which K= 1,
ip(x,0) = - s e c h x .
(33)
dxi>2(x,0yj
(34)
Therefore, we obtain c(0)=(f
=2.
From the equation for the "time" evolution of the wave function, it is easy to determine that c(t) = c ( 0 ) e - 8 ' = 2 e - 8 t
(35)
so that we have B(x, t) = c(t) e~x = 2 e-8t~x
.
(36)
In this case, the GLM equation becomes, K(x, y,t)+2
e-8t~x-y
dz K(x, z, t) e-u-v~z
+2 /
=0.
(37)
Jx
This determines 2e
K(x,y,t) =
-8t-x-y
1 + e -8t-2x
u(x,t) = 12 dK{P>x) = 12sech2(x + At) . (38) ox This is, of course, the solution that we had determined earlier (corresponding to a specific choice of v) and this explains how the method of inverse scattering works. (It is worth noting here that the inverse scattering method was also independently used by Faddeev and Zakharov to solve the KdV equation.) or,
188
2.5. The Lax
Equation
In some sense, the Lax equation is a formal generalization of the ideas of Gardener, Greene, Kruskal and Miura. Let us consider a linear operator, L(i) that depends on a parameter t through the potential. Let us assume the eigenvalue equation L(t)i/> = \il>
(39)
along with the evolution of the wave function
where B represents an anti-symmetric operator. It follows now that dL(t) , T, ,dip , , sdip
or,
— V + LBrp = \ttp + XBtp = A(V + BLtp at
or,
— ^ = [B,L]0 + A ^ .
(41)
It follows, therefore, that At = 0
(42)
provided % = IB,L).
(43)
This is known as the Lax equation and L, B are called the Lax pair. What this equation says is that the evolution of the linear equation with respect to the parameter t will be isospectral, provided the Lax equation is satisfied (A is commonly referred to as the spectral parameter.). Furthermore, if a Lax pair is found such that the Lax equation yields a given nonlinear equation, then, this says that one can associate a linear Schrodinger equation with it and the method of inverse scattering can be carried out for this system leading to the integrability of the nonlinear system. This is the power of the Lax equation and, as we have mentioned earlier, the geometrical meaning of the Lax equation is that it represents the evolution of a special (1,1) tensor in the phase space (symplectic manifold) of the system. As an example, let us analyze the KdV equation in some detail. Let us note that if we choose,
L(t) =d2 + lu(x,t) 1 B(t) - 4d3 + - (du + ud)
(44)
189 then, with some straight forward computation, we can determine that
[B,L] =
1 6
du
d3u\
dx
dx3J
(45)
so that the Lax equation
d
-k = ™
leads to 1 du
du
d3u\
6 at
dx
dx3J
du d3u (46) dx dx3 We recognize this to be the KdV equation and, having a Lax representation for the equation, then, immediately determines the linear Schrodinger equation associated with it, which we have described earlier, in connection with the method of inverse scattering. This is, however, a general procedure that applies to any integrable model and that is why the Lax equation plays an important role in the study of integrable systems.
du
2.6. Zero Curvature
Formalism
There is an alternate method of representing integrable systems, which brings out some other properties associated with the system quite nicely. Let us continue with the example of the KdV equation and consider the following vector potentials
(l
-c
--c n
A0 =
O
^xx
s» c -f c * \ ' Ox
A, =
VA
c
(47)
Vx
There are several things to note here. First, C = C[u, A] and that the vector potentials belong to the Lie algebra of SL(2, R), namely, Ao, A\ £ SL(2, R). The curvature (field strength) associated with these potentials can be easily calculated and one recognizes that the vanishing of the curvature yields the equations associated with the KdV hierarchy. This is seen as follows. Foi = d0A! - dA0 - [Ao, Ax] = 0
(48)
190
gives ut = Cxxx + ^ (Ou + ud) C - 4XCX .
(49)
For A = 0 and C — u, this coincides with the KdV equation. In general, we can expand in a power series of the form N
C=Y/(W~nCn[u}.
(50)
Substituting this into the equation and matching the corresponding powers of (4A), we obtain C0 = l d3 + ^(du + ud)\Cn=dCn+1
,
n = 0,l,2,...,JV-l
(51)
ut = (d3 + | (du + ud)\ CN . We recognize these as giving the recursion relation between the conserved charges (which we have discussed earlier) as well as the N th equation of the hierarchy. This is known as the zero curvature representation of the integrable system and brings out the recursion relation between the conserved charges, the current algebra etc quite nicely. 2.7. Drinfeld-Sokolov
Formalism
Thus, we see that an integrable model can be represented as a scalar Lax equation as well as a matrix zero curvature condition. The natural question that arises is whether there is any connection between the two. To analyze this question, let us note that the scalar Lax equation for KdV is described by the Lax pair which leads to the linear equations
Li> = (d2 + I u ) V = A^ V
6
^
(52)
= BV = Ud3 + ^ (du + ud)\ The scalar Lax equation can be thought of as the compatibility condition for these two equations when the spectral parameter is independent of t. We note that, while the second equation may appear to be third order in the derivatives, with the use of the Schrodinger equation, the higher order derivatives can, in fact, be reduced. As a result, this pair of equations appears to be at the most quadratic in the derivatives.
191
We know that a second order equation can be written in terms of two first order equations. Keeping this in mind, let us define Ifc = W )
(53)
as well as a two component column matrix wavefunction
•
=
(
$
)
•
< « >
It is clear now that the linear Schrodinger equation 14 = (d2 + ^u\ i/> = \ip can be written in the matrix form as 0
*--»,.,.
(55)
Similarly, the time evolution equation (depending on B) can also be written as a matrix equation of the form ft* - A0
(56)
The compatibility of these two matrix linear equations leads to the zero curvature condition dtA1-dxAo-[Ao,A1]=0.
(57)
These potentials, however, do not resemble the potentials that we studied earlier. However, it is easy to check that the two sets of potentials are related by a global (A is a constant independent of t) similarity transformation. For example, note that
i
) '
(58)
This, therefore, establishes the connection between the two formalisms and tells us how to go from one to the other or vice versa. 3. Pseudo-Differential Operators With the basics of the previous section, we are now ready to discuss some of the integrable models in some detail. The first thing that we note is that the Lax formalism and the Lax pair is quite crucial in the study of integrable models. However, finding a Lax pair, for a given integrable model, seems like a formidable task. This is where the Gel'fand-Dikii formalism comes to rescue.
192
Let us consider a general operator of the form P = J T (H di
(59)
i
where d = -Q- ,
a. = a,i(x) .
(60)
If i > 0, namely, if the operator P only contains non-negative powers of d, then, it is a differential operator (i = 0 term is a multiplicative operator) On the other hand, if i takes also negative values, then, the operator P is known as a pseudo-differential operator (Formally, d~x is denned from dd~x = 1 = d~1d). There are some standard nomenclature in using pseudo-differential operators. Thus, for example, P+ = ( Y^ Oi & )
= • • • + °i 9 + a0
(61)
/ i>0
\ *
and, correspondingly, P- = (^aiz,^) V »
= a1d-1+a2d-2+
••• .
(62)
/ j
By construction, therefore, we have P = P+ + P- .
(63)
We can also define, in a corresponding manner,
(p)>* = ( E a ^ J
(64)
V i J i>k Let us now note the standard properties of the derivative operator, namely, Qigj _ gi+j
91
(65)
f =E(I)/ ( * ) « < -
which holds true for any i, j , positive or negative, where 'i\_ k
i(i-l)(i-2)---(i-k
+ l) k\
1 VO '
1
(66)
and /(*) denotes the k th derivative of the function / . It is worth noting here from the above formulae that positive powers of the derivative operator acting to the right cannot give rise to negative powers of the derivative and vice versa.
193
Using these properties of the derivative operators, we note that we can define a multiplication of pseudo-differential operators. The product of two pseudo-differential operators defines a pseudo-differential operator and they define an algebra. We can define a residue of a pseudo-differential operator to be the coefficient of d _ 1 , in analogy with the standard residue, namely, Residue
P = Res
P = a_i(a;) .
(67)
This allows us to define a concept called the trace of a pseudo-differential operator as Trace
P = Tr
P = j dxRes
P=
J dxa-X(x)
.
(68)
Let us note that, given two pseudo-differential operators, P,P', Res
[P,P'] = (df(x))
.
(69)
In other words, the residue of the commutator of any two arbitrary pseudodifferential operators is a total derivative. This, therefore, immediately leads to the fact that Tr
PP' = Tr
P'P
(70)
since the "trace" of the commutator would vanish with the usual assumptions on asymptotic fall off of variables. This shows that the "Trace" defined earlier satisfies the usual cyclicity properties and justifies the name. Let us also note that, given a pseudo-differential operator
p = Y,aidi
( 71 )
i
we can define a dual operator as
Q = J29~iq-i
(72)
i
where, the qt's are independent of the a^'s. This allows us to define a linear functional of the form FQ(P) = Tr
PQ=
fdxj^ai •*
(73)
i
The Lax operators, as we have seen earlier in the case of the KdV equation, have the form of differential operators. However, in general, they can be pseudo-differential operators. Thus, there exist two classes of Lax operators. Operators of the form Ln = dn + u1dn-1+u2dn-2+
••• +un
(74)
194
are differential operators and lead to a description of integrable models called the generalized KdV hierarchy. On the other hand, Lax operators of the form A„ = dn + u j d " - 1 + . . . + « „ + un+1d~l
+
(75)
correspond to pseudo-differential operators and lead to a description of integrable models, commonly called the generalized KP hierarchy. Let us consider the Lax operator for the generalized KdV hierarchy, for the moment. Thus, Ln = dn +
n
Uld
+ •• •
(76)
+uh
We can now formally define the n th root of this operator as a general pseudodifferential operator of the form (77) i=0
such that (78)
I Ln J — Ln .
This allows us to determine all the coefficient functions, ai(x), iteratively and, therefore, the n th root of the Lax operator. Let us next note that, since -n 1 J n ) Ln = 0
(79)
for any k, it follows that 9Ln dtk
[Ln 1 , Ln
— — [Ln J , Ln
k ^ mn
(80)
defines a consistent Lax equation. This can be seen as follows. First, if k = mn, then, (i|)
=(L-)+=L-
and, therefore, the commutator will vanish and we will not have a meaningful dynamical equation. For k ^ mn, we note, from the structure of the first commutator, that it will, in general, involve powers of the derivative of the forms gn+k-l
gn+k-2 ^
;(90
On the other hand, the terms in the second commutator will, in general, have powers of the derivative of the forms n 6 an- 2, d an—3 ~,
do nn - 4
195
However, if the two expressions have to be equal, then, they can only have nontrivial powers of the derivative of the forms dn-2dn-3^
^ QO
This is precisely the structure of the Lax operator (except for the term with dn~l), which says that the above equation represents a consistent Lax equation. This equation also will imply that du\
~5t
= 0
which is why, often, this constant is set to zero (as is the case in, say, the KdV equation). This result is very interesting, for once we have a Lax operator, the other member of the pair can now be identified with Bk = ( i | )
(81)
+
up to a multiplicative constant. Such a Lax representation of a dynamical system is known as the standard representation. Furthermore, we note that the Lax equation also implies that (82)
(L|)+> dtk It is straight forward to show, using this, that dtkdtmLn
= dtmdtkLn
.
(83)
Namely, different flows commute. This is equivalent to saying that the different Hamiltonians corresponding to the different flows are in involution. Therefore, if we have the right number of conserved charges, the system is integrable. The construction of the conserved charges, therefore, is crucial in this approach. However, we note from
-g^-[{^)+,LR
(84)
that d
i
(Ll)
(85) — Tr LZ = T r + T" = 0 dtk which follows from the cyclicity of the "trace". Therefore, we can identify the conserved quantities of the system (up to multiplicative factors) with Hm = — Tr
(L%
\ ,
m^ln
.
(86)
This naturally gives the infinite number of conserved charges of the system, which, as we have shown before, are in involution. Therefore, in this description, integrability is more or less automatic.
196
3.1. Hamiltonian
Structures
In the Lax formalism, we can also determine the Hamiltonian structures of the system in a natural manner. These are known in the subject as the Gel'fandDikii brackets and they are determined from the observation that the Lax equation looks very much like Hamilton's equation, with (L„ I playing the role of the Hamiltonian and the commutator substituting for the Hamiltonian structure. Analyzing this further, one ends up with two definitions of Gel'fandDikii brackets, which give rise to the two Hamiltonian structures of the system. With the notation of the linear functional defined earlier, they can be written as {FQ(Ln),Fv(Ln)}1=Ti {FQ(Ln),Fv(Ln)}2
(Ln[V,Q}) = Tr
(LnQ (LnV)+
- QLn (VLn)+)
.
The second bracket is particularly tricky if the Lax operator has a constrained structure and the modifications, in such a case, are well known and I will not get into that. It is worth noting that these brackets are, by definition, anti-symmetric as a Hamiltonian structure should be. While the first bracket is manifestly anti-symmetric, the second is not. However, it is easy to see that the second is also anti-symmetric in the following way {FQ(Ln),Fv(Ln)}
=
= Tr
(LnQ (LnV)+
= Tr
{LnQLnV
= Tr
( - (LnQ)+ (-LnV)_
= Tr
( - (LnQ)+ LnV + (QLn)+
= -Tr = -{Fv(Ln),FQ(Ln)}
- QLn
(VLn)+)
- LnQ (LnV)_
- QLnVLn
+ (QLn)+
+ QLn
(VLn)_)
(VLn)_)
VLn)
{LnV(LnQ)+-VLn(QLn)+) .
(88)
Thus, the two brackets indeed satisfy the necessary ant-symmetry property of Hamiltonian structures. Furthermore, it can also be shown (I will not go into the details) that these brackets satisfy Jacobi identity as well and, therefore, constitute two Hamiltonian structures of the system. Without going into details, I would like to make some general remarks about the Lax operators of the KP type. Let us consider a Lax operator of the type A n = dn + Uldn~l + ••• +un+
un+1 d~l+
••• .
(89)
197
This is a pseudo-differential operator, unlike the earlier case, and, as we have already remarked, such Lax operators describe generalized KP hierarchies. In this case, it can be shown that a Lax equation of the form
dAn dtk
(A*) V
, An
(90)
/ >m
is consistent, only for m = 0,1,2. This is, therefore, different from the generalized KdV hierarchy that we have already studied. For m = 0, the Lax equation is called, as before, a standard representation, while for m = 1,2, it is known as a non-standard representation. All the ideas that we had developed for the standard representation go through for the non-standard representation as well and we will return to such an example later. 3.2.
Example
As an application of these ideas, let us analyze some of the integrable models from this point of view. First, let us consider the KdV hierarchy. In this case, we have already seen that L = L2 = d2 + \u . (91) o As we had noted earlier, we note that the coefficient of the linear power of d has been set to zero (which is consistent with the Lax equation). In this case, we can determine the square root of the Lax operator, following the method described earlier, and it has the form, L\
+ - L ^ " 1 - ±uxd~2
= d
+ 1 (tiM - ^
d-3 + • • • .s
(92)
It is easy to check that the square of this operator leads to L up to the particular order of terms. In this case, we have
(iJ)+-
a
(93)
which gives dL \=[(Ll)+1L]=[e,L] dt du OT
'
du (94)
Wr = & •
This is the chiral boson equation and is known to be the lowest order equation of the KdV hierarchy. Let us also note that (it)
-
(LL*)
=d3 + \ud + ^ux =d3 + ^(du + xtd) =
\ B
(95)
198 where B is the second member of the Lax pair for the KdV equation that we had talked about earlier. It is clear, therefore, that
("I-
(96) L + will lead to the KdV equation. Similarly, one can derive the higher order equations of the KdV hierarchy from the higher fractional powers of the Lax operator. We note from the structure of the square root of L that ^ = 4
at
Tr
Li = -!- f dxu(x) .
(97)
Similarly,
^=Jdx\^{uxx-\u2)+^-u2
Tr
72
= ^jdxu2(x).
(98)
Up to multiplicative constants, these are the first two conserved quantities of the KdV hierarchy and the higher order ones can be obtained similarly from the "trace" of higher fractional powers of the Lax operator. Prom the form of the Lax operator, in this case, L = d2 + \u o we note that we can define the dual operators Q = d-2q2 + d^q-i ,
V = d~2v2 + 0 - 1 wi •
(99)
Here qt and Vi are supposed to be independent of the dynamical variable u, so that the linear functionals take the forms FQ{L) = Tr
LQ=-
j dxuqi ,
FV{L) = -
dxuvx .
(100)
s case, we can work out {FQ{L),FV{L)}1
= ^ j dxdyq1{x)v1(y){u(x)My)h
•
(101)
On the other hand, Tr
L[V,Q}=
dx (qiVitX - qi,xvx) = - 2 /
dxqi^vi
(102)
Thus, comparing the two expressions, we obtain {u(x),u(y)}1
= 72 —S(x-y).
(103)
199
We recognize this to be the correct first Hamiltonian structure for the KdV equation (except for a multiplicative factor). The derivation of the second Hamiltonian structure is slightly more involved since the structure of the KdV Lax operator has a constrained structure (the linear power of d is missing). However, the construction through the Gel'fand-Dikii brackets, keeping this in mind, can be carried through and gives the correct second Hamiltonian structure for the theory. Let me note in closing this section that the generalization of the method of inverse scattering as well as the generalization of the Lax formalism (or the Gel'fand-Dikii formalism) to higher dimensions is not as well understood and remain open questions.
4. Two Boson Hierarchy In this section, I will describe another integrable system in 1 + 1 dimensions, which is very interesting. The study of this system is of fundamental importance, since this system can reduce to many others under appropriate limit/reduction. It is described in terms of two dynamical variables and has the form — = {2h + u* — = (2uh + ahx)x
-aux) .
Here a is an arbitrary constant parameter and we can think of h as describing the height of a water wave from the surface, while u describes the horizontal velocity of the wave. This equation, therefore, describes general shallow water waves. This system of equations is integrable and, as we have mentioned, reduces to many other integrable systems under appropriate limit/reduction. To name a few, let us note that, when the parameter a = 0, this system reduces to Benney's equations, which also represents the standard, dispersionless long water wave equation. For a = — 1 and h = 0, this gives us the Burger's equation. When a = 1 and we identify u —
Qx
,
h = qq
q we obtain the non-linear Schrodinger equation from the two boson equations. Similarly, both the KdV and the mKdV equations are contained in this system as higher order flows. Thus, the study of this system is interesting because once we understand this system, properties of all these systems are also known.
200
Conventionally, the two boson equation is represented with the identifications a = 1,
u = Jo ,
h = Ji
(105)
which is the notation we will follow in the subsequent discussions. In these notations, therefore, the two boson equations take the form -—— = (2Ji + JQ - Jo,x)x * ^ l = (2J0J1 + J1,x)x .
(106)
Being integrable, this system of equations can be described by a Lax equation. Let us consider the Lax operator L = d-J0
+ d-1J1
(107)
so that it is a pseudo-differential operator. Let us note that, for this operator, {L2)>1=d2-2J0d ( z , 3 ) ^ = a 3 - 3 j 0 a 2 + 3(Ji + jg -
(108) j0,x)d
and so on. It is now straight forward to compute and show that L, ( L 2 ) ^ ] = - (2Ji + J02 - Jo, x ) x + d-1 (2J 0 Jj + JltX)
.
(109)
It is, therefore, clear that the non-standard Lax equation
# = [* •<*%,]
<"°>
gives as consistent equations the two boson equations. The higher order flows of the two boson (TB) hierarchy can be obtained from
£-[*.<*%]•
(I11)
Of particular interest to us is the next higher order equation coming from dL dt3
.(£3)>J •
(H2)
These have the forms — Jo,xxx — 3 (JQJO,X)X ~ 6 (JoJi)x — (Jo) dt dJx "ST dt = - (*,** + 3 (JoJi)x + 3 {Ji{Ji + Ji - Jo,x)))a
(113)
201
This equation is interesting, for we note that if we set J 0 = 0 and identify J\ = | u , the equations reduce to the KdV equation. That is, as we had mentioned earlier, the KdV equation is contained in the higher flows of the TB hierarchy. Furthermore, it is also interesting to note that this provides a nonstandard representation of the KdV equation, unlike the earlier example where it was described by a standard Lax equation. Given the Lax representation, the conserved charges are easily constructed by the standard procedure from Ln
(114)
Hi = Tr
L=
H2=Tr
L2 = f dxJoJir
(115)
H3 = Tr
L3 = f dx (J? - J 0 ,»Ji +
# „ = Tr so that we have f
dxh
Jitf)
and so on. It is clear that if we set J 0 = 0 and identify Ji = | u all the even conserved charges vanish and the odd ones coincide with the conserved charges of the KdV equation. 4.1. Hamiltonian
Structures
Let us denote the generic Hamiltonian structure associated with this system as
({Jo,Jo}
{Jo,Ji}\
Then, it can be shown that the TB equation has three Hamiltonian structures. But, let me only point out the first two here.
v2 =
2d Jod + d2
a Jo - d2 \ dJx + Jid,
so that we can write the two boson equations as
202
fSH2\ SJo = Vo SH2
(118)
It is now easily checked that, under Jo —> Jo + a, where a is an arbitrary constant, D 2 ->• V2 + aT>i
(119)
which proves that these two Hamiltonian structures are compatible and that the system is integrable (which we already know from the Lax description of the system). Normally, the second Hamiltonian structure of an integrable system is related to some symmetry algebra. To see this connection, in this case, let us redefine (this is also known as changing the basis) 1 (120) J(x) = J0(x) , T(x) = Ji - -Jo,x(x) In terms of these new variables, the second Hamiltonian structure takes the form {J(x),J(y)}2
=
{T(x),J(y)}2
=
2dxS(x-y) J(x)dx6(x-y)
(121)
{T(x), T(y)}2 = (T(x) + T(y)) dj(x
-y) + \ d3J(x - y)
We recognize this as the Virasoro-Kac-Moody algebra, which is the bosonic limit of the twisted N = 2 superconformal algebra. 4.2. Non-linear
Schrodinger
Equation
Since the TB system reduces to the non-linear Schrodinger equation, we can also find a Lax description for that system from the present one. We note that with the identification ,
Jo
J\
-qq
(122)
the Lax operator for the TB system becomes, L = d- j 0 + a _ 1 J i ^d+^+d-'qq = q-1(d =
+
GLG-1
qd-1q)q (123)
203
where we have defined G = q~1 ,
L = d + qd-^q .
(124)
Namely, the two Lax operators L and L are related by a gauge transformation. The adjoint of this transformed Lax operator is determined to be C = D = - (d + qd-1q) .
(125)
It is straightforward to check that both the standard Lax equations
f=N*)+]
<•*>
f -[(*)••*]
< 127 >
and
give rise to the non-linear Schrodinger equation. (However, supersymmetry seems to prefer the second representation.) Furthermore, if we identify q=q=u
(128)
then, the standard Lax equations 8L dt
(129)
and DC give the mKdV equation. Thus, we see that the TB system is indeed a rich theory to study. 5. Supersymmetric Equations Given a supersymmetric integrable system, we can ask if there also exist supersymmetric integrable systems corresponding to it. It turns out to be a difficult question in the sense that the supersymmetrization turns out not to be unique and we do not yet fully understand how to classify all possible supersymmetrizations of such systems. Let me explain this with an example. Let us consider the KdV equation du — = Quux + uxxx at
.
204
Then, a supersymmetric generalization of this system that is also integrable is given by — = 6uux + uxxx - Sipipxx
Z
(13l)
— = 3 (uip)x + ipxxx . Here ip represents the fermionic superpartner of the bosonic dynamical variable u of the KdV equation. It is easy to check that these equations remain invariant under the supersymmetry transformations, 8tjj = eu ,
Su = et/jx
(132)
where e is a constant Grassmann parameter (fermionic parameter) of the transformation, satisfying e2 = 0. We can, of course, determine the supersymmetry charge (generator of supersymmetry) associated with this system and it can be shown that the supersymmetry algebra satisfied by this charge is [Q,Q]+ = 2P.
(133)
This can also be checked by taking two successive supersymmetry transformations in opposite order and adding them. There are several things to note from this system. First, the second Hamiltonian structure associated with this system, T>2, is the superconformal algebra, which is the supersymmetrization of the Virasoro algebra. Second, just as this represents a J V = l supersymmetric extension of the KdV equation, there also exists a second N = 1 supersymmetric extension, c\, — OUUx "r Uxxx
Z
,
(m)
— = 6uipx + tpxxx which is integrable. This second supersymmetric extension was originally discarded as being a "trivial" supersymmetrization, since the bosonic equations do not change in the presence of fermions. However, it generated a lot of interest after it was realized that it is this equation that arises in a study of superstring theory from the point of view of matrix models. Such a supersymmetric extension now has the name -B supersymmetrization. Thus, we see that even at the level of N — 1 supersymmetrization, there is no unique extension of the integrable model. The problem becomes more and more severe as we go to higher supersymmetrizations. For N = 2, it is known that there are at least four distinct "nontrivial" supersymmetrizations of the KdV equation that are
205
integrable. Understanding how many distinct supersymmetrizations are possible for a given integrable equation, therefore, remains an open question. In addition, there are also fermionic extensions of a given integrable model (not necessarily supersymmetric) that are also integrable and there does not exist any unified description of them yet. 5.1. Lax
Description
Since the supersymmetric KdV equation (super KdV) is an integrable system, let us determine a Lax description for it. The simplest way to look for a Lax description is to work on a superspace, which is the natural manifold to study supersymmetric systems. Let us consider a simple superspace parameterized by (x, 6), a single bosonic coordinate x and a single real fermionic coordinate 6, satisfying 92 = 0. Supersymmetry, then, can be shown to correspond to a translation, in this space, of the fermionic coordinate 0. On this space, one can define a covariant derivative
c
= l + "|:
<135>
which transforms covariantly under a supersymmetry transformation and can be seen to satisfy D2 = d . (136) On the superspace, a function is called a superfield and, since the fermionic coordinate is nilpotent, has a simple representation of the form (in the present case) $(x,6>) = V(a;) + 0u(x) .
(137)
The Grassmann parity of the components is completely determined by the parity of the superfield. For our discussion of the super KdV system, let us choose the superfield $ to be fermionic so that we can think of it as the bosonic dynamical variable of the KdV equation and x[> as its fermionic superpartner. In terms of this superfield, the super KdV equations can be combined into one single equation of the form ^
= (I> 6 $) + 3 {D2 (*(£>*))) .
(138)
It is now easy to check that if we choose, as Lax operator on this superspace, L = D* + D$
(139)
(if)+.
(140)
then, the Lax equation dL dt
206
gives the super KdV equation. The structure of this Lax operator and the Lax equation is, of course, such that they reduce to the KdV equation in the bosonic limit, which is nice. It is worth making a few remarks about operators on the superspace. First, a pseudo-differential operator on this space is defined with powers of D. Correspondingly, various decompositions are done with respect to powers of D. Thus, we define super Residue
P — sRes
P = coefficient of D"1 f
super Trace
P
= sTr
P =
(141) dx d6 sRes
P.
The conserved quantities, for the super KdV system, for example, are obtained as Hn = sTr
L^1
.
(142)
These are all bosonic conserved quantities and there is an infinite number of them. They all reduce to the infinite set of conserved charges of the bosonic integrable model in the bosonic limit. The Gel'fand-Dikii brackets can be generalized to this space as well and lead to the correct Hamiltonian structures of the theory. An interesting feature of the Lax description on a superspace is that the same integrable system can be described in terms of a Lax operator that is either bosonic or fermionic. Furthermore, in the supersymmetric models we can define non-local conserved charges from the Lax operator by taking, say, for example in the super KdV case, powers of quartic roots of the Lax operator. Finally, let me also point out that a supersymmetric -B system has fermionic Hamiltonians (conserved charges) with corresponding odd (fermionic) Hamiltonian structures. 5.2. Super TB
Hierarchy
As we have seen, the TB hierarchy consists of two dynamical variables, JQ,JXTherefore, the supersymmetrization of this system will involve two fermionic partners, say V'OiV'i- From our experience with the super KdV system, let us combine them into two fermionic superfields of the forms $o = ipo + 6Jo ,
$ i = ipi + 9Ji .
(143)
With a little bit of algebra, we can check that if we choose the Lax operator L = D2-(D$0)
+ D-1$1
(144)
then, we obtain (L2)>1=Di-2(D$0)D2-2$1D
(145)
207
which gives L,{L2)^]
{D{(D^o)-D(D^0)2-2(D2^)))
=
+ D'1 ((D 4 $i) + 2D2($1(D$Q)))
•
(146)
It is clear, therefore, that the Lax equation
leads to consistent equations and gives 9*o
= -(£> 4 $o) + 2(D$o)(£ 2 $o) + 2(£> 2 $i) (148) 4
2
^ . = (D $ 1 ) + 2 ( ^ ( $ i ( r > * o ) ) ) . The Lax operator as well as the Lax equation (and the equations following from it are easily seen to reduce to the TB equations in the bosonic limit. These, therefore, represent a supersymmetric extension of the TB hierarchy that is integrable. The higher order flows of the hierarchy are obtained from dL
L m dfk = [ >W»]-
^
Once we have the Lax description of the system, we can immediately construct the conserved charges from # n = sTr
Ln=
J cted0sR.es
Ln ,
n=l,2,3,....
(150)
Explicitly, we can construct the lower order conserved charges as
Hi = - Jdxde®! #2 = 2 / d x d 6 (£>$o)$i H3 = 3 f dxd6 ((£>3$o) - {D*i) - (D$0)2)
(151) $i
and so on. Thus, we see that the system has an infinite number conserved charges, which are in involution (follows from the Lax description) and, therefore, is integrable. 5.3. Hamiltonian
Structures
Just like the bosonic system, the super TB equations also possess three Hamiltonian structures, although they are not necessarily local unlike the structures in the bosonic case. Let me only describe the first two here. Defining, as in the bosonic case, a generic Hamiltonian structure as,
208
/{$0,$o} { $ 0 , $ i r
= VS(z - z') = VS(x - x')6(8 - 6')
(152)
V{*l,$o}{*l,*l}, we note that Vi =
-D
-D 0
(153)
as well as -2D - 2D~1$1D-1 + D-1(D2^o)D~1 Vo = -D3 - (D$0)D - D$i£>-
D3 - £>(D$o) + 2 > - 1 * i 2 ? \ - D 2 $ i - ^D2
J (154)
define the first two Hamiltonian structures of the super TB hierarchy. These structures have the necessary symmetry property and it can be checked using the method of prolongation that these structures satisfy the Jacobi identity. They give rise to super TB equation, say for example, through s 5 0 dt = v2 6$o (155) X>i 6H2
/a* \
f Jk\
( Jk\
\~dTJ Although it is not obvious, the second Hamiltonian structure corresponds to the twisted N = 2 superconformal algebra, which can be seen as follows. Let us look at the second Hamiltonian structure in the component variables. Let us define £=2^1.
f = - j j W'o.x-V'i) •
(156)
In terms of these variables, the nontrivial elements of the second Hamiltonian structure take the local form {Jo(x), J0(y)}2 = 2dx8{x - y) {J0(x), A (y)}2 = dx (J0S(x - y)) - d28(x - y) {Ji{x),Ji(y)h
{Mx),ay)h {Jo(x), i(y)}2 Ui(x), t(y)h {Ji(x),ay)h { £ » , ZMh
= (Ji{x) + Ji(y))dxS(x
- y)
=Z8(x-y) =-t8(x-y) = (^(x) + t(y))dx6(x - y) =ax)dx8(x-y) = ~JiS(x
-y) + \dx (J0S(x - y)) - \d2J{x - y).
(157)
209
We recognize this to be the N = 2 superconformal algebra. 5.4. N = 2
Supersymmetry
Although the super TB system that we have constructed, naively appears to have N = 1 supersymmetry, in fact, it does possess a, N = 2 supersymmetry. This is already suggested by the fact that the second Hamiltonian structure of this system corresponds to the N = 2 superconformal algebra. Explicitly, this can be checked as follows. Let us note that the super TB equations, in terms of the redefined components, take the forms ~H7~ = —Jo.xx + dt
2JQJQ x
+ 2J\
x
r\ j
(158)
QI -QJ: = £xx + 2 (£Jo)x
§ =S*x+2(U)x • It is now straight forward to check that this system of equations is invariant under the following two sets of supersymmetric transformations, 6J0 = 2e£ SJj, = 2e£x
S£
K
(159)
= 0 1 e (^o,i 2
—
^l)
and 6J0 =
2et
SJi = 0
k = -i« si = 0 . 5.5. Nonlocal
(160)
Charges
As we have already noted, in supersymmetric integrable systems, in addition to the local bosonic conserved charges, we also have nonlocal conserved charges. Let us study this a little within the context of the super TB hierarchy.
210
Let us recall that the Lax operator for the system is given by L = D2-(D$0)
+
D-1$1
and the infinite set of local, bosonic conserved charges are obtained as Ln ,
Hn=sTr
n=l,2,3,....
(161)
On the other hand, let us also note that in this system, we can also define a second infinite set of conserved charges as Q2n=i=sTr
L ^
,
n = l,2,3,....
(162)
2
There are several things to note from this definition. First of all, unlike the earlier set, these conserved charges are fermionic in nature. Second, they are nonlocal. Let me write down a few lower order charges of this set. Qx = - J dxdd (D-1^) <3| =
-fdz
<9f =
dz
"3
(D-1^)
= - J dz
{D-1^)'
- $0$i -
(D-^Dfco)*!)) (163)
~J
^ {D-1^)3
- {5(D'H1)^1
- 2$o$i - 3(Z?$!)-
- ( D - 1 ^ ) 2 ) (D$0) + {D-1 ((!>*!)*! + ^(DZo)2
- (£>$i)(£> 2 $o)))]
and so on. There are several things to be noted about these charges. First, as we have already mentioned and as can be explicitly seen, these charges are fermionic in nature and are conserved. Second, even though they are defined on the superspace, they are not invariant under supersymmetry (it is the nonlocality that is responsible for this problem). This infinite set of charges satisfies an algebra which appears to have the structure of a Yangian algebra, which arises in the study of supersymmetric nonlinear sigma models, namely,
to> t l to•«i} = Q
=0
1
= ffi
l
2
,Ql}i-
i
2
'«*},= = 2tf
2
{Qi V.
2
(164)
2
{Qs. ,Ql}iL
~-H2
'Olh-
= 1 *+ kH>
i",/fi
= 3H4-
211
and son on. The role of the fermionic nonlocal charges as well as the meaning of the Yangian algebra, however, are not fully understood. 6. Dispersionless Integrable Systems Let us consider again the KdV equation as an example. du _ du d3u dt dx dx3 As we have noted earlier, it is the linear term on the right hand side that is the source of dispersion for the solutions. Let us, therefore, get rid of the dispersive term, in which case, the equation becomes
m = &ud~x
(165)
This is known as the Riemann equation and we see that it corresponds to the dispersionless limit of the KdV equation. Given a nonlinear, bosonic equation, the systematic way in which the dispersionless limit is obtained is by scaling
at -* £di'
di -> edx-
(166)
in the equation and then taking the limit e —> 0. This leads to the dispersionless limit of the original system of equations. It is important to note here that the dynamical variable is not scaled (although in supersymmetric systems, as we will see, it is necessary to scale the fermionic variables to maintain supersymmetry). Let us recall that the Lax description for the KdV equation is obtained from the Lax operator
L = a2 + u through the Lax equation dL
a,=4 (i§)+.
As we will now see, the Lax description for the dispersionless model is obtained in a much simpler fashion. Let us consider a Lax function, on the classical phase space, of the form Up) =p2+u.
(167)
Here p represents the classical momentum variable on the phase space and, therefore, this Lax function only consists of commuting quantities. However, we can think of this as consisting of a power series in p and formally calculate
(i§)+ =
P3 + \up
(168)
212
where the projections are defined with respect to the powers of p. It is now simple to check, with the standard canonical Poisson bracket relations,
{x,p} = l,
{x,x}=0{p,p}
that the Lax equation
f=4{i,(il)+ }
(I69)
leads to the Riemann equation, which is the dispersionless limit of the KdV equation. Thus, we see that given a Lax description of an integrable model in terms of Lax operators, the dispersionless limit is obtained from a simpler Lax description on the classical phase space through classical Poisson brackets. Let us also note that the conserved quantities of the dispersionless model can be obtained from this Lax function as (in this model) tf„ = Tr
L^1
= J dx, Res
L^1
,
n = 0,1,2,...
(170)
where "Res" is defined as the coefficient of the p~x term. All of our discussions in connection with pseudo-differential operators carries through to this case where the Lax function has a polynomial structure in the momentum variables. (When I gave these talks, I had mentioned that the construction of the Hamiltonian structure from the GeFfand-Dikii was an open question. Since then, this problem has been solved and we know now that these can be constructed rather easily from a Moyal-Lax representation of integrable models.) Let me say here that dispersionless models encompasses a wide class of systems such as hydrodynamic equations, polytropic gas dynamics, Chaplygin gas, Born-Infeld equation, Monge-Ampere equation, elastic medium equation etc, some of which show up in the study of string theory, membrane theory as well as in topological field theories. Let us study an example of such systems in some detail, namely, the polytropic gas dynamics. These are described by a set of two equations ut + uux + v~<~2vx = 0 , vt + (uv)x
7 ^ 0,1
=0.
(171)
These equations are known to be Hamiltonian with
^M-!"2-^!))
(172)
213
and V
( 1 7 3)
= \ I nI
so that we can write the polytropic gas equations as
(174)
V ( : ) •
\ 6v J In fact, this system has three distinct Hamiitonian structures, but I will not get into the details of this. Let us next consider a Lax function, on the classical phase space, of the form L=pr-i+u+_^ri_
P-(7-D
.
(175)
Then, it is straight forward to check that the classical Lax equation dL _ 7
dt
7
" {(L^T)>i,La}
(176)
gives rise to the equations for the polytropic gas. The higher order equations of the hierarchy are similarly obtained from
dL U«.{(L-*)SI,L}. dt
(177)
Thus, we see that the polytropic gas dynamics is obtained as a nonstandard Lax description on the classical phase space. (At the time of the school, this was the only Lax description for the system that was known. Subsequently, a standard Lax description has been obtained, which brings out some interesting connection between this system and the Lucas polynomials.) Once we have the Lax description, we can, of course, obtain the conserved quantities from the "Trace". However, in this case, unlike in the case of Lax operators, we observe an interesting feature, namely, the residue can be obtained from expanding around p = 0 or around p = oo. Thus, there are two series of conserved charges that we can construct for this system. Expanding around p — oo, we obtain fl-„+i=C„+iTr
Ln+1~^
,
where C„+i's are normalization constants. charges have the forms
n = 0,1,2,...
(178)
Explicitly, the first few of the
214
dxi ,.7-1
(179)
;« 3 + ( _ 1 ) ( _ 2 ) 7 7 / and so on. On the other hand, an expansion around p — 0 leads to Hn = CnTr
Ln+^
,
(180)
n = 0,1,2,... .
The first few charges of this set have the explicit forms, H0 = I dxv Hx = Jdxuv H2 =
(181)
dx ( —u2v
+ 7(7 -
1)
and so on. The two sets of conserved quantities can, in fact, be expressed in closed forms. Let us also note that if we define two functions as u+X
»7-l
X=A
(7-I)
2
+ _+_
„7-i
X= A
(7-I)
(182)
u+X 2
where A is an arbitrary constant parameter, it can be shown that these two functions generate the two sets of conserved quantities as the coefficients of distinct powers of A. Let me also note that the second Hamiltonian structure for the polytropic gas has the form _ ( dv~t~2 + v^-2d Vo = (7 - 2)du + ud 6.1. Dispersionless
Supersymmetric
0u + (7 - 2)ud\ dv + vd J'
(183)
KdV
Let us recall that the super KdV equation can be described by the Lax operator L = Di + D $
215 and the Lax equation dL 8t=4
(L%
Here,
° = li< represents the covariant derivatiove on the superspace. In trying to obtain the dispersionless limit of this supersymmetric system, let us recall what we have learnt from the dispersionless limit of a bosonic model. We noted that the Lax operator goes over to the Lax function with d —> p. However, our Lax operator, in the supersymmetric case, is described in terms of super covariant derivative D. Therefore, the natural question is what this object goes over to in the dispersionless limit. Let us note that the classical super phase space is parameterized by (x,8,p,pg) . From these we can define a variable n = -(pe+6p)
(184)
whose action on any phase space variable, through the Poisson brackets is {II, A} = (DA),
{n,n} = -2p
(185)
Therefore, it would seem natural to let D —> II in the dispaersionless limit. However, this leads to a serious problem. For example, we know that D2 = d —> p whereas n 2 = 0 since it is a classical fermionic variable. To analyze this problem a little more, let us recall that the dispersionless limit is obtained by scaling dt —> edt ,
d —> ed .
Therefore, since D2 — d, consistency would require that we scale
This implies that the fermionic coordinate needs to be scaled as 0 -» e - 5 0 .
(187)
On the other hand, let us recall that the basic fermionic superfield of the theory is given as $(x,0) = ip + 9u .
(188)
Since the dynamical variable u does not scale and 0 scales, it follows that supersymmetry can be maintained under such a scaling only if ij) ->• e~5 V ,
$ -> e"^ $ .
(189)
216
This shows that, unlike in the bsoonic theory, in a supersymmetric theory, fermions scale in going to the dispersionless limit. With this scaling, we can go to the super KdV equation and note that, in the dispersionless limit, the equation becomes $ t = 3D2 ($(£>$))
(190)
which can be thought of as the super Riemann equation. Obtaining a Lax function and, therefore, a Lax description of a supersymmetric theory reamins an open question. However, through brute force construction it is known that the Lax function L = p2 + i(Z)*) + ^ - ((£>$)2 - 2 $ $ , ) - ^ - * ( £ * ) * .
(191)
leads through the classical Lax equation (the projection is with respect to powers of p)
gives the dispersionless limit of the super KdV equation (super Riemann equation). It is worth emphasizing here that, although the Lax description for afew supersymmetric dispersionless models have been constructed through brute force, a systematic understanding of them is still lacking. The conserved charges can be obtained from this Lax description immediately. Thus,
Hn = Cn Tr L^1
= J dz ($(£>$)" - n^D*)""1*.,,)
(193)
where n = 0 , 1 , 2 , . . . and it is clear that these are bosonic conserved charges. The supersymmetric dispersionless model has the Hamiltonian structure V=-\
(3$£>2 + (D$)D + 2(£>2$))
(194)
which can be recognized as the centerless superconformal algebra. With this Hamiltonian structure, it is straight forward to check that the conserved charges are in involution, {Hn,Hm}
= Jdz6-^VSJ^
=0
(195)
which also follows from the Lax description of the system. Let me note in closing that this supersymmetric model has two infinite sets of nonlocal charges of the forms
217
Fn=
Idz{D-^)n
Gn= f dzQiD-1®)"
(196)
where n = 1,2,... . (Note that Go = .Ho-) These charges have been constructed by brute force, since it is not clear how to obtain nonlocal quantities from a classical Lax function. This remains an open question. Second, of the two sets of nonlocal charges, we see that Fn is fermionic while Gn is bosonic. Furthermore, all these conserved charges satisfy a very simple algebra, {Hn,Hm}
= 0 = {Fn,Hm}
{Fn,Gm}
=0 = {Gn,Gm}
{Fn,Fm}
= nmGn+m_2 •
=
{Gn,Hm} (197)
In connection with dispersionless supersymmetric integrable models, several questions remain. For example, it is not clear how to systematically construct the Lax description for them. It is not at all clear how nonlocal charges can be obtained from a classical Lax function. Neither is it clear what is the role played by these charges within the context of integrability. Acknowledgments It is a pleasure to thank the organizers of the Swieca School for the warm hospitality. This work was supoported in part by US DOE Grant no. DE-FG02-91ER40685. References 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
A. Das, "Integrable Models", World Scientific (1989). A. Das and W. J. Huang, J. Math Phys. 33, 2487 (1992). J. C. Brunelli and A. Das, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A10, 4563 (1995). J. C. Brunelli and A. Das, Phys. Lett. A235, 597 (1997). J. C. Brunelli and A. Das, Phys. Lett. B438, 99 (1998). J. Barcelos-Neto, A. Constandache and A. Das, Phys. Lett. A268, 342 (2000). A. Das and Z. Popowicz, Phys. Lett. B510, 264 (2001); J. Phys. A34, 6105 (2001). 8. A. Constandache, A. Das and F. Toppan, "Lucas Polynomials and a Standard Lax Representtaion for Polytropic Gas Dynamics", hep-th/0110097.
This page is intentionally left blank
M O N T E CARLO SIMULATION: A R O A D F R O M THEORETICAL MODELS TO E X P E R I M E N T A L OBSERVABLES
R. ZUKANOVICH FUNCHAL Institute de Fisica, Universidade de Sao Paulo, C.P. 66.318, 05315-970 Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil E-mail: [email protected]
This is a crash course that aims to serve as a guide for students who wish to learn the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique and its applications to particle physics. The general ideas about the Monte Carlo Method of Integration is discussed but emphasis is given to the use of Monte Carlo to theoretically predict the value of observables and compare the theoretical prediction with experimental data.
1. I n t r o d u c t i o n A Monte Carlo simulation is a calculation based on any technique which finds an answer to a given problem using random numbers. In principle, the Monte Carlo method can be applied to solve any problem, as long as it can be formulated in a way that random numbers can be used to obtain the solution. The problem to be solved may either be probabilistic or deterministic in nature. In the former case its Monte Carlo formulation is a direct simulation, in the latter one has to find a stochastic system having an expected behavior equivalent to the desired result. Monte Carlo simulations find many different applications in physics, specially when one needs to estimate the value of a multi-dimensional integral for which an analytic answer is unknown. The value of an integral is clearly non-random but it is also a solution to a related stochastic problem. In high energy physics one often wants to compute differential or integral cross-sections involving many particles, which amounts to calculate an integral in a very complicated multi-dimensional space, involving kinematical cuts, angular cuts, etc.. To find the correct algorithm capable of giving a numerical estimate of the integral of interest together with a reliable error estimate in a reasonable amount of time (efficiently) is the great challenge. Simulation of high energy particle collisions by means of the Monte Carlo Method is one of the most important techniques in particle physics, almost
219
220
always it is the only way to make reliable theoretical predictions and compare these predictions with experimental results. 2. Brief Review of Elementary Statistics 2.1. Random
Variables
and Probability
Density
Functions
One learns in elementary statistics that even though the value of a random variable is unpredictable, the probability of a given value or of a range of values, may be well known 1 ' 2 . In the case of a continuous random variable X, one may define the probability density function (PDF) of a; (fixed value), p(x), as p{x)dx = P(x < X < x + dx) ,
(1)
the probability of finding the random variable X within dx of a given value x. Clearly p(x) > 0 is normalized so that its integral over all x is one. This defines completely how X is distributed. Two random variables X and Y are said to be independent when the distribution of X does not depend on the value of Y and vice-versa. A function of a random variable is clearly itself a random variable. Although the PDF describes everything about a random variable, sometimes it is enough to know some numerical parameters which characterize the main features of the random variable, such as its expectation value and its variance. 2.2. Expectation
Value
The expectation value of a random variable X is defined as the average (or the mean) of this variable as +oo
/ where p(x) is the PDF of X. [£1,2:2] then
x p{x)dx ,
(2)
-oo
If X is uniformly distributed in the interval rX2
1 E{X) = -
/
xdx .
(3)
{X2-Xl)JXl
2.3. Variance and Standard
Deviation
The variance of a random variable X is the average of the squared deviation from its mean defined as +00
/
[x - E{X)fp{x)dx -00
,
(4)
221
being cr(X) = y/V(X), the squared root of the variance, called standard deviation. In general, the variance of a sum of random variables is not the sum of the variance of each of the random variables. This is because the variance is not a linear operator as can be seen directly from Eq.( 4). Nevertheless, for two independent random numbers x and y V(x + y) = V(x) +
V(y),
which means that x and y are two uncorrected random numbers. 2.4. Law of Large
Numbers
This law establishes the convergence in probability of random variables into constant values. When a large number of random processes happen, the particularities of each random action practically does not influence the mean result which is no longer random, that is, the random deviations from the mean have no net effect so that the mean becomes stable. This is the physical meaning of the Law of Large Numbers. Suppose we choose n numbers xt randomly with uniform PDF in the interval [ x i , ^ ] and for each Xi we evaluate f(xt). The Law of Large Numbers tell us that the sum of these function values, divided by n will converge to the expectation value of / ,
st/w^srbo £"«*••
<5)
This means that the sum in the the left-hand side of Eq.( 5) is a consistent estimator of the integral in the right-hand side, under certain conditions *'2 it will converge to the exact value of the integral as n —> oo. It is the fact that random variables can behave, under certain conditions, as a constant quantity. That allows us to use them to solve problems and to estimate the precision of the so found results. The standard deviation of the estimate is given by a = y/V(f)/n. The convergence to a certain result as the random sample becomes large is only given with a certain probability, which is an inherent property of the method.
2.5. Central Limit
Theorem
The sum of a sufficiently large number n (in practice n > 6, see FIG. 1) of random variables {X\,X2,... ,Xn} is a random variable X that can be
222
200
^
150
Xl
M
100
Y
50
iC! . i , , , i , , , i . , . i . r\
0
0.2
(e)
300
0.6
0.8
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
I
1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
I
J\
f \
200 100
0.4
0
: 0
J \
0.1
0.4
0.6
0.8
Figure 1. Distribution of the sum of n uniformly distributed random numbers (a) n — 1, (b) n = 2, (c) n = 3, (d) n = 5, (e) n = 6, (f) n = 8, 10 000 random numbers were generated in each case. described by a Gaussian P D F following the normal law 1 ' 2 , p(x)
(x - E{X)f
= 2TT
a(X)
exp
2 a2(X)
(6)
where E(X) and cr(X) are respectively, the expectation value and the standard deviation of X. These quantities depend on the expectation values and variances of the individual distributions. This theorem allow us to build Gaussian random number generators from any kind of random number generator, simply by taking the sum of random numbers. The law of large numbers and the central limit theorem provide the formal foundations for the validity of the Monte Carlo method. 3. The Monte Carlo Technique The class of algorithms that solve problems probabilistically, making use of random numbers, are known by the general name of Monte Carlo algorithms. There are two types of Monte Carlo methods: the direct modeling of a truly random process and the recast of a deterministic problem in probabilistic terms 3 . We will focus here on the latter, which is the one most commonly used
223
in particle physics where we often want to perform multidimensional integrations. The Monte Carlo method provides a way to estimate difficult integrals that may be intractable by ordinary numerical methods such as the "trapezoid rule" or the n-point Gaussian formula 4 . In particle physics this difficulty may arise from the large number of integration variables, from folding a predicted cross section with complicated geometrical factors, kinematical and efficiency cuts, or from both. As a general rule Monte Carlo methods are advantageous whenever the problem involves a large number of dimensions, complicated boundaries or other special conditions which may be difficult to implement in a deterministic algorithm. Perhaps the first major use of the Monte Carlo technique was in solving neutron diffusion problems during World War II for the making of the atomic bomb. Although the advent of high-speed computers greatly encouraged the use of Monte Carlo for solving problems this technique was first used long before the twentieth century. In 1777 Buffon in his "Essai d'Arithmetique Morale", used a hit-or-miss Monte Carlo, known as Buffon's needle, to calculate the value of 7r. The idea is quite simple. Suppose you draw on the floor two parallel line separated by a distance d (see FIG. 2). You now throw a needle of length I on the floor several times, each time the needle crosses one of the boundary lines you count a "hit", otherwise you count a "miss". If the angle between the perpendicular to the lines and the needle is a, 0 < a < 2ir, the needle projection on the perpendicular to the parallel lines is /| cos(a)| and all values of a equally probable so that one has to calculate the average projection. For a given value of a, the probability of a hit is the ratio l\ cos(a)\/d. Clearly the probability that the needle will cross one of the lines, p, is simply p= - /
l\ cos(a)|da = — ,
(7)
so that after a large number of tries, one can estimate it by twice the number of tries divided by the number of hits multiplied by the ratio l/d.
d! * Figure 2. Buffon's needle.
224
One can calculate the accuracy of this method after n tries by recalling that the number of hits follows a binomial distribution with variance np(l —p), considering now / = d, the standard deviation of the hit-or miss Monte Carlo calculation is \ / p ( l — p)/n = 2.37/y/n. This means that to get an uncertainty of about 2% on the value of •K one needs to through about 1 million needles. This is an amusing way to calculate 7r, but it is neither practical nor very accurate. 3.1. Crude Monte
Carlo
The crude Monte Carlo way to calculate 7r, for instance, is the direct application of Eq. (5) to calculate the integral given in Eq. (7). This can be easily done in a computer by choosing randomly n values of a and calculating ^ | cos(a)|/n. This will reduce the standard deviation by a factor of 0.82 with respect to the hit-or-miss way but still convergence goes only as 1/^/n. 3.2. Variance Reduction
Techniques
One of the main advantages of Monte Carlo integration is that its error estimate scales like \j^/n, independent of the dimension of the integral. However the price to pay is that that the integral converges relatively slow to the true value at a rate of 1/^/n. To build efficiency Monte Carlo algorithms it is important to devise ways to speed-up convergence. To improve the crude Monte Carlo method one either has to significantly increase n, which means to perform more calculations increasing the computer processing time, or to diminish the variance V(f) using some smart technique. There are several variance reduction techniques, we will describe the most important ones. For other methods see, for instance, Refs. 7 , s . 3.2.1. Stratified Sampling Here the idea is to choose the random points more uniformly in order to reduce fluctuations. To implement this one splits the full interval of integration into several sub-intervals and choose n; random points in the i—th. sub-interval of volume Vi. Mathematically this is based on the fundamental property of the Riemann integral /•l
I =
ra
p\
dxf{x) = / dxf(x) + / dxf(x) JO
JO
Ja
Explicitly, for the integral / we use the estimate
,
0< a< 1.
(8)
225
where we have sub-divided the interval in j regions of volume Vj, i — 1,2,.., j , and in each region i performed a Monte Carlo integration of rn random points. Now the variance becomes
y
= EjCT^)' 8=1
(10)
%
where
It is clear from the above that if the number of points of each sub-interval is chosen carefully this can lead to a dramatic reduction of V, but it can also increase V if the choice is not appropriate. It can be not trivial to know how to correctly sub-divide the space to calculate arbitrarily complicate multidimensional integrals. It can be shown, nevertheless, that if we perform a uniform stratification (divide the space in equal volumes and choose equal number of points in each volume), this can never increase the variance given in Eq. (10). This is a safe way do stratified sampling, but it may also lead to a negligible improvement in variance. 3.2.2. Importance Sampling The importance sampling technique is really about a change of integration variables in order to force that each point has approximatively the same function value (weight): I = £dxf(x)
= j ^)9(x)dx
= j J^dG(x)
(12)
where
G(x) = f g(y)dy ,
(13)
Jo and g(x) > 0 and normalized to unity in order to be interpreted as a PDF. Suppose now we have a set x\, x?, • •. , xn of n random numbers generated according to the distribution G(x) (not uniformly), in this case, we can now estimate / as: 71
i^i
9
(14)
^
and the statistical error is now given by
V = «fM,
(15)
226
where
'<"»> = £ t ( ^ ) ' - * -
™
If this is done correctly the re-weighted function values become nearly constant and the effective variance is reduced. Since the relevant quantity now if the ratio f/g, it is advantageous to choose g similar in shape to / . What do we do in practice? We choose a g(x) that approximates \f(x)\ reasonably well in shape and such that we can generate random numbers according to G(x). Note that it is dangerous to choose functions g which become zero, or which approach zero quickly. This is on the other hand the only general method for removing infinite singularities (poles) in / , by choosing g with a similar singularity in the same place as / . In multidimensional problems this method should be applied to one dimension at a time. 3.2.3. Control Variates As for the previous method one looks for an integrable function g similar to / , but this time the two functions are subtracted rather than divided / = £ > / ( * ) = j(f(x) - g(x))dx + Jg{x)dx .
(17)
If we know the integral of g the error comes only from the integral of ( / — g) which can, in principle, have a smaller variance than / . This method cannot induce singularities in ( / — g) and g does not need to be inverted analytically as in the Importance Sampling technique. 3.2.4. Adaptive Techniques The great disadvantage of all the variance reduction methods presented up to now is that they require some previous knowledge of the general behavior of the function / to be integrated. In most cases this previous knowledge is simply not available and one needs to use the so called adaptive techniques, where the algorithm learns about the function as it proceeds. An example of such algorithm, widely used in high energy physics, is VEGAS 5 . VEGAS combines the ideas of importance sampling and stratified sampling into an iterative code, which automatically concentrates evaluations of the integrand where it is largest. There are two phases in VEGAS, an exploratory phase and a second phase where the integral is computed with high precision. In the exploratory phase VEGAS starts by subdividing the integration space into a rectangular grid, performing an integration in each
227
sub-space. These first results are then used to adjust the grid for the next iteration, according to where the integral has dominant contributions. VEGAS uses importance sampling trying to approximate the optimal PDF ffOOopt =
rlf(X){
,
(18)
jdx\f{x)\ by a step function. After a few iterations the optimal grid is eventually found and frozen. This ends the exploratory phase. In the second phase VEGAS evaluates the integral with high precision according with the frozen optimized grid. An comprehensive introduction to VEGAS can be found in Ref. 5 , some discussion on how to treat ill-behaved integrands can be found in Ref. 6 . There are many other programs designed for multidimensional integration of a general function / , some information about a few of them can be found in Ref. 3 . 3.3. Monte
Carlo versus Numerical
Quadrature
Here just a brief comment on the advantages of Monte Carlo over classical numerical quadrature methods (trapezoidal rule, Simpson's rule, Gauss rule) when we want to calculate multidimensional integrals. The main point here is that there is always a dimension at which Monte Carlo will converge faster than any numerical quadrature method, since the former converges as l/y/n, independent of the dimension, and the latter converges slower as the number of dimensions increase according to Tab. 1. For more details on this see Refs. 3 ' 4 . Table 1. Comparison among different methods of multidimensional integration from the point of view of the speed of convergence. Here n is the number of points used in each calculation and d is the dimension of the integral. Method
d= 1
d
Monte Carlo
1/V«
1/Vn
Trapezoidal Rule
1/n 2
l/n2/d
Simpson's Rule
1/n4
Gauss Rule
2
1
l/n " "
1
l/n4/d l/n(2m-l)/d
We see that as d increases the number of points that one has to evaluate a function if we use any of the numerical quadrature methods in order have an
228
accurate result also increases. In fact, after d > 5 even the Gaussian method becomes inefficient from the point of view of computer time. In high energy physics we normally deal with integrations in the relativistic phase space of many particles.If one has for instance, k final particles (this can be easily 20 at LEP, 100 at the Tevatron and 1000 at the LHC) to integrate over, the phase space volume element will be proportional to
3fc-4, where the minus 4 comes from <^ 4 '(Sift ~ J2fPf)> t n e delta function which assures that momentum-energy is conserver between the i initial particles and the / final particles. 4. Pseudo-Random Number Generators To solve a problem using Monte Carlo one needs to generate a sequence of random numbers. Truly random numbers are unpredictable, irreproducible and can only be produced by some random physical processes such as a radioactive decay. Fortunately there is a solution to this problem. It is possible to produce in a computer large sequences of pseudo-random numbers using deterministic algorithms. As long as the some requirements are satisfied these numbers can be used in Monte Carlo calculations to produce the same result that truly random numbers would. These computer algorithms which produce pseudorandom sequences are called pseudo-random number generators or simply random number generators (RNG). There are a few general properties that a good RNG must have in order to be reliable for Monte Carlo calculations: • a good distribution; • long period; • repeatability; • portability (machine independence); • good efficiency (be fast). A good random number generator must reasonably represent a known PDF (uniform, Gaussian, etc.). One does not want to build in trends, biases or correlations. One wants fast, machine independent codes that produce very long and reproducible pseudo-random number sequences. You can find some useful cooking recipes of how to generate samples of pseudo-random numbers for some special distributions in Refs. 14>15. A very good review on RNG can be found in Ref. 9 .
229 There are many quality tests one can devise to check a RNG. A report on a number of tests applied to a variety of generators is available in Ref. 13 . But a good general rule is that the final test for a RNG is, in fact, the Monte Carlo calculation we need it for, this is the only test that is relevant ! It is highly recommended to check your Monte Carlo integration with different random number generators. There is no way one can completely and absolutely test a RNG. We will briefly discuss, in what follows, a few popular RNG which can be used to generate uniformly distributed pseudo-random numbers in the interval [0,1]. 4.1. Multiplicative
Linear
Congruential
This generator, suggested by Lehmer in 1951, produces a sequence of at most m integers XQ,X\,... ,xm, is based on the recurrence relation Xi = mod[(aXi-i
+ c), m] ,
(19)
where a and m are relatively prime, x0 is the initial seed, a, c, X\ are integers in [0,m — 1]. One usually implements this by using m = 2t, where t is the number of bits for the integer representation in a machine. As an example take m = 2 4 , a = 3 , c = l and XQ = 2. One can easily use Eq. (19) to compute the sequence: 2,7,6,3,10,15,14,11,2,7,..., which clearly has period equal to 8 < m. The maximal period m is only achieved in some special circumstances 3 ' 9 . Remember the important point: the period has to be much bigger than the number of pseudo-random numbers you are going to need for your Monte Carlo application. The IBM generator R A N D U used in the 60's and 70's was of this type, having a = 65539, c = 0 and m = 2 29 . The R A N F generator one can find in the CERNLIB is also a Lehmer-type generator of period 2 4 6 . These generators have a big drawback: the set (xn, xn+\,... , xn+d-i) of consecutive numbers in d-dimensional space lie in hyperplanes. This feature was discovered by Marsaglia in 1968 10 , it was found that the maximal number of hyperplanes is (d!2 t ) 1 / d , this is only a few hundred hyperplanes for d = 10 and t = 60 and much less if d > 10. These generators are not recommended by today's standards. 4.2.
Lagged-Fibonacci
Here each number of the sequence is obtained by the formula xt — mod[(xi-p
0 Xi-q),
m] ,
(20)
230
where 0 is some arithmetic operation (addition, subtraction, . . . ) , p, q and m are integers. A common choice is Xi = mod [(ZJ_24 + Xi-55), 232] ,
(21)
proposed in the end of the 50's and having period 2 32 (2 55 — 1). This type of generators also suffer from the hyperplane problem mentioned before. Dieter-Ahrens in 1979 proposed to use Xi = mod[(axi-i
+ &Xj_2), m] ,
(22)
instead of Eq. (20) increasing the number of hyperplanes by 2t/d with the right choice of a and b. 4.3. Shift
Register
This generator is based on the recurrence relation Xi — Xi—p © Xi—p-^-q ,
\"d)
where © is the bitwise exclusive o r ( 0 © 0 = l © l = 0, 1 © 0 = 0 © 1 = 1). In the case p = 250, q = 103 the period will be 2 2 5 0 - 1. 4.4.
RANMAR
RANMAR 11 combines a Lagged Fibonacci generator, Si = mod[(si-97
- Sj_33), 2 24 ] ,
(24)
with the sequence n = n-i - 7654321 ,
n-i
> 7654321 ,
(25)
otherwise, r{ = n-! - 7654321 + 2 24 - 3 ,
(26)
into Xi = mod[(Si -n),
224] .
(27)
This generator has period 2 1 4 4 , it is portable and highly recommended. It is also possible, using RANMAR, to generate independently disjoint sequences of pseudo-random numbers.
231
4.5.
RANLUX
Another very good generator by today's standards is RANLUX. It is based on
with xn = sn,cn = 0 if
sn > 0 ,
xn = sn + b, cn = 1 otherwise .
(29) (30)
RANLUX after generating j numbers, discards the following 223 - j as proposed by Liischer12 to avoid correlations between successive vectors of j random numbers. This is also a very good generator by today's standards. 5. Event Generators Collisions between elementary particles at high energies give rise to complex final states, generally having a large multiplicity of particles (hadrons, leptons and photons). The relation between each possible final state and the underlying physics description is hard and can only be implemented via Monte Carlo methods. In general what we want to compute in particle physics is some cross-section (total or partial)
a = j f(ft>)d4>,
(31)
where
££/(&)-•*,
(32)
i
as long as N, the number of points, is large. Here S is the integration volume. In fact, each random point fa is a possible physical configuration of the system, similar to a real physical event. If, for instance, a certain configuration fa belongs to a zero efficiency region (due to kinematical cuts, detector geometry etc.), this is easily implemented simply by setting f(fa) = 0 in the sum in Eq. (32). The use of the Monte Carlo method to compute a for a certain
232
physical process implies the generation of a random sample of "real events", i.e. possible final states completely specified. This is why we call the computer algorithms that perform this task Event Generators. There are a variety of Event Generators available today, they make it possible to simulate all main aspects of physical events by means of Monte Carlo methods, such as hard-process selection, initial-state and final-state radiation, beam remnants, fragmentation, decays etc.. These generated events can than be used to extract physics from direct comparison with experimental data, to help to study the perspectives of future experiments, devise cuts to reveal new physics from background, optimize detector configurations to study certain physics channels and so on. These algorithms permit to collect weighted events in bins describing event distributions just like in actual data collection. One can easily build histograms of event distribution for just about any physical observable, little extra effort is needed to add an extra distribution. Here we will give a general overview of the main ingredients of Event Generators for: • e + e~ collisions; • ep collisions; • pp and pp collisions. Event generators are computer programs typically of 1 to 50 thousand lines of code, generating events that are expected to predict or reproduce the average behavior and fluctuations of real data. They normally have as output some listing for each event giving for each particle produced: the particle type (7r, p, e~, 7, etc.), the particle 4momentum, the particle history (how it was created, where, when, etc.), and so on. At the end of a run, that is, after a simulation of a certain number of events of a given process, they give the computed total cross-section. They can be used to predict event rates and topologies, simulate possible backgrounds, study detector requirements, so we can estimate the feasibility of some experimental searches, devise new analysis strategies, optimize detector design, evaluate acceptance corrections. Ultimately they are a tool to compare theoretical predictions with real data and extract physics from it, see Fig. 3 for a schematic representation of this comparison. 5.1. e+e~
Generators
In Fig. 4 we see a scheme of a typical e+e~ hadronic event that one may want to simulate. The main components of this type of event generators are:
233 MONTE CARLO SIMULATION
EVENT EVENT PRODUCTION
GENERATION
EVENT SIMULATION
EVENT OBSERVATION
(GEANT)
EVENT RECONSTRUCTION
PHYSICS ANALYSIS
Figure 3.
Analysis chain: real life versus Monte Carlo.
matrix element calculations, initial and final state radiation, parton shower, fragmentation and decay. One can divide Standard Model e+e~~ Event Generators in two main types: Electroweak Generators and QCD Generators, in the former events are dominated by electroweak interactions, in the latter by strong interactions. The precision these generators need to have is dictated by theory and experiment: a Monte Carlo generator should not be more accurate than perturbation theory and at least as accurate as experimental measurements. For further details on these type of generators see Ref. 27 . 5.1.1. Electroweak Generators These are generators mainly designed for precision measurements of the electroweak parameters at LEP and SLC e + e~ collision experiments. Here everything is, in principle, completely calculable at any given order of perturbation theory. Theory is well understood and capable of providing
234
Figure 4.
Scheme of a hadronic e+e
event.
unambiguous predictions as accurate as one wishes. One generally requires that to be consider a good electroweak generator the Monte Carlo prediction must agree with data to less than 1%, this means J> 106 events must be generated, so the algorithms must be precise and fast. How to implement radiative corrections at 1-loop and beyond is, in fact, a technical problem. To tackle this problem one may arbitrarily divide the radiative corrections in: electroweak-type corrections and infra-red QED corrections. The electroweak-type corrections are corrections to propagators and vertices which exclude the infra-red QED corrections. They consist of propagator and vertex insertions such as the ones shown in Fig. 5. They can either be implemented by stand-alone programs which give the exact Standard Model prediction at a given order of perturbation theory as a function of the input parameters {Mz, GF, MH, mt, etc.) or by the so-called "QED dressers" where one writes the Born approximation in a particular way transferring most of the effects of the radiative corrections to the numerical value of the parameters. The former give the exact Standard Model predictions, deviations from these predictions can not be modeled in these programs. They are also rather slow. The latter are a very good approximation, they allow to independently vary the Standard Model parameters (such as Mz and Yz) and are fast codes. In any case the electroweak-type interactions do not present any complications to be implemented in a Monte Carlo code.
235
Y/Z
^
Y/Z
\
Y
Y
Y (Z)
^
Y (Z)
Y (Z) _ S
Figure 5.
^z,
Y(Z)
Z
Y
Y (Z)
Y ( Z ) ^ Y ( Z ) ^ Y (Z)
s
S
^ >
S
^(Z) s
Electroweak type corrections.
On the other hand the infra-red-type QED corrections are not so trivial to implement in a Monte Carlo program. They are basically represented in Fig. 6 by the Born Feynman diagram accompanied by a virtual or bremsstrahlung photon. The main characteristic of these corrections is the appearance of infrared divergences in the real and virtual photon cross sections which exactly cancel each other out. The problem in Monte Carlo comes from the fact that we would like to separate final states without a photon (crnt>rem) from final states with a photon (obrem)- We cannot generate these type of events with relative probabilities given by °nbrem = ^ 0 + ^virtual >
(33)
and O-brem = <7soft +
CT
hard .
(34)
since (T^hrem and cr£rem are both divergent. The way to overcome this is to define, instead, a crSOft (to generate events without a photon) and a a w d (to generate events with a photon) as Csoft = (To + C v i r tual + C so ft i
(35)
O-hard = Ohard ,
(36)
and
where one has to introduce a cutoff fco between the "soft" and "hard" bremsstrahlung parts of the phase space. On one hand we want fco to be small since we have to compare our Monte Carlo with experiments that can detect photons of relatively low energy. On the other hand fc0 cannot be too
236
small, otherwise, our Monte Carlo calculation will give rise to a < 0. This is, in fact, a technical problem caused by the fact that we want to compute very precise quantities using the Monte Carlo technique. There are a few ways to solve this situation, the best known technique is the so-called exponentiation.
Figure 6. QED type corrections: 1) virtual, 2) real "soft" and 3) real "hard" photon type corrections.
5-1.2. QCD Generators These generators must simulated the effects of perturbative and nonperturbative QCD. We have a limited knowledge of quark confinement and of the process of fragmentation, these Monte Carlo codes must carry this lack of knowledge and so they are more descriptive than predictive models. No one expect a QCD Monte Carlo to be accurate to the level of 1%. Agreement between data and several Monte Carlo QCD models can be forced by adjusting some parameters a somehow artificial way. The underlying physics being different but the effective result more or less the same. How do we go from the colored quarks, anti-quarks and gluons to the colorless hadronic final states which are experimentally measured in the detectors? The simulation of a hadronic e+e~ event can be divided in three parts: 1) perturbative regime, 2) fragmentation and 3) particle decays. For the first part the theory is well understood, it is calculable in principle, to any given order of perturbation theory. There are two main approaches used by e + e Monte Carlo generators: matrix element calculations and the parton shower. Fragmentation, on the other hand, is a non-perturbative process that has to be modeled. The main techniques used by Monte Carlo codes are: string fragmentation (PYTHIA), independent fragmentation (IS A JET) and cluster fragmentation (HERWIG). We will comment more on this in Sec. 5.3.
237
Figure 7.
5.2. ep
Typical jet structure produced in a e + e~ hadronic event.
Generators
To be able to generate a ep event such as the one that can be visualized in Fig. 8 these type of generators must include: initial and final photon radiation, structure functions, initial state radiation in the parton shower, matrix element calculations for the hard process, final state radiation in the parton shower, fragmentation and decays. For further details on these type of generators see Ref. 2 8 .
5.3. pp/pp
Generators
The components of pp and pp generators are: structure functions, initial and final state radiation, matrix element calculations for the hard process, beam jet structure which include minijets and rapidity gaps (these are non-perturbative effects that have to be modeled), fragmentation and decays. A typical pp event is displayed in Fig. 9. We will describe here the main points for the simulation of perturbative and non-perturbative QCD which are in fact common to the QCD parts of the e + e~ and ep event generators mentioned previously. To model perturbative QCD (as(Q2) small regime) and fragmentation is the main goal of any QCD event generator. For more information see Ref. 22 and references therein.
238
Figure 8.
Scheme of a ep event.
5.3.1. Perturbative QCD Hard QCD processes are those in which there is an invariant momentum transfer squared (Q2) much larger than the characteristic scale A2 of quantum chromodynamics, so that the running coupling constant as{Q2) is small enough for perturbation theory to be relevant. Some examples of such hard processes are e + e~ annihilation at large center-of-mass energies, deep inelastic ep scattering, the production of dileptons and hadronic jets of high invariant mass in pp or pp collisions. Hard hadronic processes are particularly interesting since they probe the structure of matter at very short distances. They provide insight into the transition from perturbative to non-perturbative QCD regime. They are also the main area in which the Standard Model of strong and electroweak interactions can be tested quantitatively using perturbation theory. There are two main methods to perform perturbative QCD calculations in Monte Carlo describing the multijet structure of events. There are two main methods: matrix element and parton shower calculations. Most Monte Carlos algorithms try to combine these two descriptions so that the parton shower
239
Figure 9.
Scheme of a typical pp event.
description sets the sub-jet structure and at the same time recovers the matrix element results for widely separated partons. In the matrix element calculation Feynman diagrams are explicitly calculated order by order. This offers a systematic expansion in orders of as and a powerful machinery to handle multi-parton configurations in the Born level. This is, in principle, the correct way to take into account the exact kinematics, full interference among diagrams and the helicity structure of each contribution to the final process. An important point is that the as calculation can only be done in this way. The drawback here is that calculations become increasingly difficult in higher orders of perturbation theory. In general, QCD Monte Carlo algorithms include the matrix element calculations for the Born term in the case of 2 -* 2, 2 —» 3, 2 —>3 transitions. In some cases up to 1-loop corrections for parton interactions are also included. For e+e~ Monte Carlo event generators complete second order corrections exist. In lowest-order perturbation theory, hard scattering consists of an interaction between partons at the relevant large momentum transfer scale Q2. Although this is enough to describe some broad features of the data, the lowest order treatment is hardly a useful basis for a detailed simulation since higherorder terms are enhanced by large logarithms arising from the singularities
240
Figure 10. Branching Scheme.
of QCD radiative corrections. It turns out that leading logarithms in higher orders can be generated by a classical Markov branching process very suited to the Monte Carlo technique of computer simulation. This is can occur in two ways: in the hard processes that produce outgoing jets of hadrons, these hadrons may be seen as the fragmentation products of jets of partons, each generated from a single, highly virtual timelike parton originating from the hard subprocess. The evolution of such parton cascades may be followed perturbatively until the typical parton virtuality q2 falls from the hard process scale Q2 to some cutoff value QQ, bellow which as(q2) becomes too large for perturbation theory to be valid and non-perturbative hadronization steps in. There will be also parton cascades associated with QCD initial-state bremsstrahlung. The incoming partons at the hard subprocess have large spacelike virtualities, up to order Q2, resulting from parton branching that starts from the relatively soft constituent partons of the colliding hadrons. Here a cutoff Q2, not necessarily the same as the timelike Ql one, may be denned as the earliest point from which we can follow the evolution of a spacelike parton cascade perturbatively. The dynamics prior to this stage must be absorbed into the structure functions that specify the parton distributions in the incoming hadrons when they are probed at scale Q2. These main ideas are contemplated by the parton shower Monte Carlo algorithms. The parton shower way to implement perturbative QCD is based on an improved leading-log (almost next-to-leading-log) approximation, and so cannot be accurate for well separated partons. The idea here is that initial and final state parton showers may be seen as a treelike structure, where successive breaking of one parton into two (q —tqg,g—> gg, g —> qq), an arbitrary
241
number of times, lead to the emergence of complicated multiparton states and to the appearance of multijet events as pictorially described in Fig. 10. There is no explicit upper limit on the number of partons involved in the branching. The probabilities of partons a branching into partons b and c are given by the Altarelli-Parisi evolution equations,
"IT - J dz~^rP^»+c(z) ,
(37)
where z specifies the sharing of momentum between b and c, the three possible 1 -¥ 2 splitting functions Pq-+q+g(z), Pg^g+g(z) and Pg-+q+q-(z) can be found, for instance, in Ref. 17 and t is the evolution parameter * - In (Q^ vol /A 2 ) .
(38)
The structure of initial and final state showers is different as already mentioned above. The latter is timelike. In PYTHIA 20 all partons have masssquared m2 > 0. The parton that emerges from the hard interaction has the largest mass, successively branching into partons with smaller masses and energies, until eventually all partons end up on the mass shell. The initial state parton shower, is spacelike: the sequence of partons leading up from the shower initiator to the parton entering the hard interaction is characterized by Q 2 = - m 2 > 0; only the side branches are timelike. HERWIG 23 , PYTHIA 20 and ISAJET 24 do a backward evolution for the initial state shower, that is, by starting at the hard subprocess and working back to the partons of low virtually that merge into the initial hadrons. These algorithms take the known hadron structure functions into account at each stage of the branching process. The evolution variable Q 2 vol is not the same in all Monte Carlo implementations of the parton shower, for instance, PYTHIA 20,21 performs a mass evolution with Q 2 vol = m 2 an( ^ HERWIG 22,23 an angular evolution with Q 2 vo , = E 2 ( l - cos#), where E is the energy of the branching parton and 6 is the angle between the daughters. In the parton shower branching the conservation of momentum, energy, color, etc., are imposed at each branching. This procedure allows one to include the effects of exact kinematics in the branching process, and of angular correlations due to gluon polarization, which are beyond the scope of the singleparticle evolution equations. One may also incorporate an important class of higher-order correction via a rescaling of the argument of the strong coupling constant as. It was found that color coherence effects, in particular, the destructive interference in the soft gluon emission probability for color connected partons can be correctly accounted for by imposing angular ordering: this is done explicitly by construction in HERWIG 23 and forced in PYTHIA 20,21 by imposing angular ordering at each branching. The angular ordering slows down
242
the multiplicity growth of partons and consequently of hadrons, it also depletes particle production at small x. Color coherence simulated by angular ordering was confirmed by CDF dijet data 3 3 . PYTHIA matches the result of the first shower branching with what is expected from matrix element calculations for three jets. 5.3.2. Fragmentation In order to simulate real events, which after all involve hadrons not partons, one has finally to deal with hadronization. The hadronization of partons is a non-perturbative QCD effect which must be modeled since we do not know how to calculate it from first principles. The phenomenological models of hadronization/fragmentation must represent well the existing data and have some predictive power at high energies. These models are of probabilistic and iterative nature. Three main fragmentation schools exit: independent fragmentation (IF), string fragmentation (SF) and cluster fragmentation (CF). IF is the earliest and most primitive fragmentation model. In IF, it is assumed that the fragmentation of any system of partons can be described as an incoherent sum of independent fragmentation procedures for each parton separately, see Fig. 11. Since the problem factorizes the implementation is straight forward, one uses an iterative picture for each jet separately. IF algorithms are simple, flexible, fast and provide an adequate description of the broad features of the higher-momentum components of hadron jets but they have many parameters to be adjusted. ITERATIVE ANSATZ q,w 'qqi
C
C C
}qlq2 "} q2q3 remainder
Figure 11. IF picture.
IF is based on the Field-Feynman Model 29 , which was designed to reproduce the limited transverse momenta and approximate scaling of energy fraction distributions observed in quark jets. The fragmented quark is combined with an antiquark from a qq pair created out of the vacuum to give a first generation meson with energy fraction z. The leftover quark, with energy fraction (1 — z),
243
is fragmented in the same way, and so on until the leftover energy falls below some cutoff. Scaling follows from the energy independence of the distribution assumed for z, which is known as the fragmentation function. The limited transverse momenta come from the relative transverse momenta of the created qq pair, which are given a Gaussian distribution. The gluon fragmentation is done by splitting a gluon into a quark-antiquark pair, either assigning all the gluon momentum to one or the other with equal probability, or using the g -» qq Altarelli-Parisi splitting function. The weakness of the IF scheme are that the fragmentation of a parton is supposed to depend on its energy rather than its virtuality, the fragmenting parton is usually supposed to remain on its mass shell, leading to violations of momentum conservation that has to be corrected by some rescaling at the end of hadronization. So IF is not Lorentz covariant, and energy, momentum, flavor or color are not explicitly conserved so that it can only be a crude approximation. There is an ambiguity in the way jets are put together. Here gluon jet properties do not automatically follow from those of quarks. Indeed, e+e~~ data disfavor this model, but this approach is still adopted in some of the most widely used Monte Carlo simulation programs such as ISAJET. For simulations where more precise predictions are required dynamical models such as SF and CF, where hadronization is a collective phenomenon involving more than one parton are preferable. This permits a more correct treatment of color, flavor, and momentum conservation also reducing the number of arbitrary parameters. SF is the LUND fragmentation model 30 , it is considered a sort of "standard model of fragmentation". The main idea behind this model is that one assumes that the partons emerging after the hard interaction are connected by a color string. So that the linear confinement of QCD expected a large distances corresponds to a color flux tube being stretched between partons as shown in Fig. 12. This is mathematically represented as a massless relativistic string with a tension of about 1 GeV/fm. The string breaks up into hadron-size pieces through spontaneous qq pair production in its intense color field. SF is in agreement with lattice QCD results, has a well defined space-time picture but has many parameters, especially for flavors. The linear confinement force is introduced by construction, so that the energy stored in the string rises as the distance between partons increases, the string can then break producing a new pair of quark-antiquark. The string may be broken up starting at either the quark or the antiquark end, or both simultaneously, and it proceeds iteratively by qq pair production, just as IF. This mechanism, which is explicitly Lorentz covariant, is understood in terms of tunneling effect. The breaking process continues until we have only on-shell
244 r - ( 1 - 5 ) fm
q
~
~
^
q
Tunneling Effect
Figure 12.
Scheme of the color string mechanism.
hadrons. Quarks and diquarks correspond to string endpoints whereas gluons, correspond to energy and momentum carrying kinks of these strings. The fragmentation of the kinked string leads to an angular distribution of hadrons in e + e~ three-jet final state events that differ from IF predictions and agree with experimental data. Occasionally a pair quark-antiquark is produced at the end of the string giving rise to baryons. SF is used in many Monte Carlo programs such as PYTHIA and FRITIOF. An important property of the parton branching process is the so-called pre-confinement of color, which implies that the pairs of color-connected neighboring partons have an invariant mass distribution that falls rapidly at high masses and is asymptotically Q2 independent and universal 3 2 . This suggests a class of hadronization models, CF models, in which color-singlets clusters of partons form after the perturbative phase of jet development and decay into observed hadrons. CF is also Lorentz covariant, conserves flavor, energy, momentum explicitly, and is somewhat simpler than SF (has fewer parameters). All gluons remaining at the end of the parton shower evolution are non-perturbatively split into qq pairs. These may be grouped into color singlets, usually a quark from one gluon branching and a antiquark from an adjacent gluon forming clusters. The resulting cluster mass spectrum is universal and steeply falling at high masses. Its precise form is determined by the QCD scale A, the perturbative cutoff <3o, and the gluon-splitting mechanism. Typical cluster masses are normally two to three times QQ. The cluster is then allowed to decay isotropically in its rest frame, normally producing two hadrons, according to phase space.
245
The reduced phase space for clusters decaying into heavy mesons and baryons is sufficient to account for the multiplicities of the various kinds of hadrons observed in e + e _ final states. The hadronic energy and transverse momentum distributions agree quite well with experiment without the introduction of any adjustable fragmentation functions. As in SF it describes well the angular distribution in e + e~ three-jet events provided soft gluon interference is taken into account. CF has no clear connection with lattice QCD. CF is used by the Monte Carlo simulation program HERWIG 23 . 5.4. Most Popular
Ready-to- Use Event
Generators
There are a variety of general purpose generators. Here we list some of the most used generators 18 : • COJETS : p-p and p-p collisions; • HERWIG : mostly hadron collisions; • ISAJET : p-p , p-p and e+e~ collisions; • PYTHIA/JETSET : Lund Monte Carlo, multiparticle generator; • LEPTO : Lund Monte Carlo for deep inelastic lepton-nucleon scattering; • TWISTER : QCD high-p T scattering; • FRITIOF : hadron-hadron, hadron-nucleus, nucleus-nucleus interactions; • ARIADNE : Lund Monte Carlo for QCD cascades in color dipole approximation. Some of these generators have also a beyond the standard model version, such as ISASUSY25 which includes SUSY particles to ISAJET and SPYTHIA 31 which includes SUSY particles to PYTHIA. ISAWIG26 is an interface which allows SUSY spectra and decay tables generated by ISAJET to be read into HERWIG. A brief summary of the physics one can study with the most popular event generators ISAJET, HERWIG and PYTHIA is given in Tab. 2. Simple examples of the use of ISAJET, HERWIG and PYTHIA can be found in Refs. 35 > 34 ' 21 , respectively. One important point when doing calculations with ready-to-use Event Generators is to understand their limitations. It is always advisable to cross-check your result with some (semi-)analytical calculation or/and to compare it with the result of a different generator. Remember also that a Monte Carlo Generator result may be crazy for many different reasons such as incorrect theories
246 Table 2. PYTHIA.
Physics
Simulated
Physics Process
by
ISAJET
ISAJET,
HERWIG
HERWIG
PYTHIA
QCD jets
yes
yes
yes
minimum bias
yes
yes
yes
heavy flavor
yes
yes
yes
prompt 7
yes
yes
yes
single W/Z
yes
yes
yes
W/Z
yes
yes
yes
pairs
VV -> VV (heavy H)
yes
yes
yes
SUSY
yes
yes
yes
W'/Z'
no
no
yes
4th generation
yes
no
yes
contact int.
no
no
yes
leptoquarks
yes
no
yes
strongly int.
W/Z
and
no
no
yes
excited fermions
no
no
yes
technicolor
yes
no
yes
baryon number violation
no
yes
no
extra-dimensions
yes
no
no
or formulae or simply due to the wrong usage of the generator by the user. Use common sense: check that you results are reasonable! Finally, if one wants to build one's own event generator one generally needs to be able to generate multiparticle phase space 16 . There are two well known general phase space generators: FOWL and GENBOD. Another tool one often needs in this case is provided by the CERN PDFLIB, there we can access several parameterizations of nucleon, ir and 7 parton density functions 19 . For some general hints on how to build event generators with some simple examples see Ref. 17 . 6. Detector Simulation In order to perform a precise comparison between experimental data and theoretical predictions one need to use the Monte Carlo technique to carry out yet another simulation: the detector simulation. What one actually measures is the final result of the interaction of the particles produced by the hard collision (primary interaction), generated by the Event Generators described in Sec. 5, with the material from which the parti-
247
cle detectors are made of (secondary interactions). To compute this we need to convolute the events generated by the Event Generator with the detector description, including detector material, geometry, calibration and efficiency cuts. When the high energy particles produced in the primary interaction encounter the many layers of detector material, a typical situation for high energy experiments, new particles may be produced due to secondary interactions caused by Bremsstrahlung, pair production, photo-electric effect, Rayleigh effect, Compton collision, multiple scattering, ionisation and J-ray production, generation of Cherenkov light, nuclear interactions, hadronic interactions, etc. Since 1974 the CERN has developed a library known as GEANT 36 containing a series of routines to help in the task of detector simulation. This library, which is the most widely known library for detector simulation, permits to describe a complex detector geometry, attribute a different material/medium to each detector part, do the tracking of particles through the detector and simulate the detector response. Events generated by a external event generator such as PYTHIA or ISAJET can be read into GEANT and the primary particles tracked through the simulated detector setup, taking into account particle interactions with detector material as well as particle decays. GEANT was primary conceived to be used in high energy detector simulation, but for many years it has also been used for other types of simulations such as the simulation of nuclear physics experiments, nuclear reactors, radio-protection equipment and even satellites. The programs which are used for detector simulation generally give as output for each event simulated through the detector, the digitized detector response just like real data. These simulated data can than be processed by a reconstruction program to finally produce distributions of physical observables that can be compared with reality.
7. Conclusions and Remarks These lectures were devoted to present Monte Carlo techniques and some of their use in particle physics. In order to discuss Monte Carlo as a road from theoretical models to experimental observables in particle physics we first had to discuss the general ideas behind the Monte Carlo method. We started this course by giving a brief review of elementary statistics which allowed us to discuss the theoretical basis of the Monte Carlo integration, and in which situations Monte Carlo should be preferred over the various types of classical numerical integration methods. We described some types of Monte Carlo Techniques: hit-or-miss, crude Monte
248
Carlo and various ways to perform variance reduction. Since random number generators are fundamental ingredients for any Monte Carlo code, we spent a little time discussing the main features and drawbacks of pseudo-random number generators, describing some of the most common ones. Finally we tackled the main use of Monte Carlo technique in particle physics: the construction of event generators. We discussed the important points in building e + e~, ep and pp/pp event generators, specially the difference between generators for electroweak precision measurements and QCD generators, which are more of a qualitative kind. Detector simulation, which is also an important use of Monte Carlo in particle physics, in fact, the last step to be able to do a precise comparison between theoretical predictions and data, is briefly mentioned in the last lecture. Hopefully it became clear to the reader that Monte Carlo techniques are very powerful methods that have great number of applications in physics, specially in the domain of high energy particle physics, where in many cases it would be impossible to perform reliable calculations without them. Acknowledgments I would like to thank Walter Jose da Costa Teves for his technical help in making some of the figures used in my lectures and the organizers of the XI Jorge Andre Swieca Summer School on Particles and Fields for inviting me to give this course. I am also thankful to Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientffico e Tecnologico (CNPq) and by Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) for their financial support. References 1. J. M. Hammersley and D. C. Handscomb, "Monte Carlo Methods", London, Chapman and Hall (1979). 2. N. P. Buslenko, D. I. Golenko, Yu. A. Shreider, I. M. Sobol' and V. G. Sragovich, "The Monte Carlo Method; the Method of Statistical Trials", New York, Pergamon Press (1966). 3. F. James, Rep. Prog. Phys. 43, 1145 (1980). 4. P. J. Davis and P. Rabinowitz, "Methods of Numerical Integration", New York, Academic Press (1975). 5. G. P. Lepage, J. Comp. Phys. 27, 192 (1978). 6. T. Ohl, Comp. Phys. Coram. 120, 13 (1999). 7. F. James, J. Hoogland and R. Kleiss, Comp. Phys. Comm. 99, 180 (1997) and references therein. 8. R. Kleiss and R. Pittau, Comp. Phys. Comm. 83, 141 (1994) and references therein.
249 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.
F. James, Comp. Phys. Coram. 60, 329 (1990). G. Marsaglia, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 61, 25 (1968). G. Marsaglia, A. Zaman and W. -W. Tsang, Comp. Phys. Comm. 60, 345 (1990). M. Liischer, Comp. Phys. Comm. 79, 100 (1994). I. Vattulainen et al., Comp. Phys. Comm. 86, 209 (1995). S. Weinzierl, hep-ph/006269. See the Monte Carlo Virtual Library at http://random.mat.sbg.au.at/links/index.html. D. C. Carey and D. Drijard, J. Comp. Phys. 28, 327 (1978). V. Barger and R. Phillips, "Collider Physics", (Frontiers in Physics), Redwood City, Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. (1987). See the CERN Monte Carlo page at http://wwwinfo.cern.ch/asd/cernlib/mc.html. See the CERN program library document page at http://wwwinfo.cern.ch/asdoc/Welcome. ht ml. T. Sjostrand, Comp. Phys. Comm. 82, 74 (1994). See the PYTHIA homepage at http://www.thep.lu.se/ torbjorn/Pythia.html. B. R. Webber, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 36, 253 (1986). G. Marchesini et al., Comp. Phys. Comm. 67, 465 (1992); G. Corcella et al., JEEP 01, 010 (2001). H. Baer et al., hep-ph/0001086. See http://duflot.home.cern.ch/duflot/GDR/outils/isajet/isajetO.html and references therein. See http://www-thphys.physics.ox.ac.uk/users/PeterRichardson/HERWIG/isawig.html. Z. Physics at LEP I, G. Altarelli, R. Kleiss, C. Verzegnassi, eds., CERN 89-08, vol.3. Physics at HERA, W. Buchmiiller, G. Ingelman, eds., DESY 1992, vol. 3. R. D. Field and R. P. Feynman, Phys. Rev. D15, 2590 (1977); Nucl. Phys. B138, 1 (1978). X. Artru and G. Mennessier, Nucl. Phys. B70, 93 (1974); M. G. Bowler, Z. Phys. C l l , 169 (1981); B. Andersson, G. Gustafson, G. Ingelman, T. Sjostrand, Phys. Rep. 97, 33 (1983); B. Andersson, G. Gustafson, B. Soderberg, Nucl. Phys. B264, 29 (1986); X. Artru, Phys. Rep. 97, 147 (1983). See http://hep.uchicago.edu/cdf/spythia.html. D. Amati, G. Veneziano, Phys. Lett. 83B, 87 (1979); G. Marchesini, L. Trentadue, G. Veneziano, Nucl. Phys. B 1 8 1 , 335 (1981). See http://www.hep.phy.cam.ac.uk/theory/webber/. See http://hepwww.rl.ac.uk/theory/seymour/herwig/herwig63.html. See http://nlc.physics.upenn.edu/nlc/software/generators/isajet.html. See http://wwwinfo.cern.ch/asdoc/geant_html3/geantall.html.
This page is intentionally left blank
RENORMALIZATION IN N O N C O M M U T A T I V E FIELD THEORY
M. GOMES Instituto de Fisica, Universidade de Sao Paulo Caixa Postal 66318, 05315-970, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
1. Introduction Recently, a great amount of interest has been devoted to the subject of noncommutative field theory. There are various motivations behind such interest. I would like to mention three of them: At very short distances, distances of the order of the Planck length, _33 10 cm, the measurements of the coordinates loose all their meanings, because of the appearance of strong gravitational fields which prevent light or any other signal to transmit information. The heuristic argument leading to this conclusion proceeds as follows *. The measurement of a coordinate with an accuracy a leads an indeterminacy in the momentum of the order of 1/a. An energy of the same order may be transmitted to the system and the corresponding energy-momentum tensor then generates a gravitational field r]^, which is a solution of the Einstein equation R»» ~
\B*)»V
= 87rTM„ .
(1.1)
The more precise the measurement of the coordinates the bigger will be the gravitational field coming from the referred measurement. Whenever this field is so strong as to prevent light or other signs to come out from the region under observation, no operational meaning can be given to the idea of strict localization. Another motivation is related with the ultraviolet divergences of the perturbative approach. In the forties of the last century, due to the difficulties with the infinities of the perturbative series, there was some interest in postulating the existence of a minimum length beyond which nothing effectively could be said. In such situation, the field interactions would be smeared at small distances, thus eliminating the divergences of the perturbative approach.
251
252
The actual proposal dates from 19473, but there are indications that the idea was in the mind of Heisenberg long before2. However, it never became popular and was abandoned after the stupendous success of the renormalization program. More recently, a vigorous interest in noncommutative field theories came from the string theory 4 . It was shown that the dynamics of an open string in the presence of an antisymmetric B field can be described, in certain limits, in terms of a gauge field theory deformed by a Moyal product (see later). A noncommutative space is introduced by postulating the existence of position operators satisfying the algebra [?, qv] = %&>"
(1.2)
M
where 0 " is an antisymmetric matrix, which we will assume commutes with the q's (more general linear algebras have been studied 5 ' 6 but here we will only consider the simplest case proposed in *).
Figure 1.
One loop contribution to the two point function in <j>4 model.
One first remark concerns the entanglement of scales: small distances in one direction imply large distances in the others. Therefore, it is not clear that theories renormalizable in the usual commutative context will preserve this property in noncommutative spaces. Usually, the ultraviolet behavior of a field theory is unrelated to the infrared one. Thus, in massive >4 there are quadratic and logarithmic ultraviolet divergences coexisting with infrared finiteness. In the noncommutative case matters are more subtle. As one example, take the one-loop seagull graph shown in Fig. 1. In the noncommutative case the corresponding amplitude is given by
,4 cos^e^p.) /
The appearance of trigonometric factors is one of characteristics of the noncommutative situation. It provides an oscillating factor which effectively
253
damps the ultraviolet behavior. The integral turns out to be finite but, in a way different from the usual situation, it depends on the external momentum. If this momentum were zero (or if @ were zero) the integral would be quadratically divergent. This argument leads to the conclusion that for small p the integral should behave as
*(4 •
< L4 >
Thus when multiple insertions of this graph are made into a large diagram, they generate non integrable infrared singularities. This feature, known in the literature as the ultraviolet/infrared (UV/IR) mixing, produces the breakdown of the perturbative scheme in many of the renormalizable theories. Noncommutative field theories are nonlocal field models where the nonlocality is a well defined consequence of the noncommutativity. There, it could happen that the ultraviolet divergences do not preserve the nonlocal structure of the bare vertices and the model turns out to be nonrenormalizable even though the theory happens to be renormalizable in ordinary space. Renormalizability do not exhausts the difficulties one mets when formulating noncommutative field theories. We should also verify up to what extent the properties of the usual models are shared by its noncommutative counterparts. In this respect, we would like to mention that the 0(N) symmetry of the noncommutative linear sigma model can not be spontaneously broken for N > 2 while, at least up to one loop, the same does not apply for the noncommutative U(N) linear sigma model when the field ordering of the quartic interaction is gauge invariant 7 . The above comments illustrate some of difficulties posed by the noncommutativity of the underlying space. Another source of problems comes from the fact that ordinary spacetime noncommutative field theories in general display acausal behavior; they could be also nonunitary 8 . A satisfactory, unitary and causal, quantum theory seems to emerge only if the noncommutativity does not affect the time coordinate 9,10,11 . Thus, to evade these kind of problems, we shall restrict most of our discussions to the cases where ©oi = 0. We would like to remark however that in some special limits unitarity may be recovered12. The presence of infrared divergences in ordinary field theory signals that one may be expanding around a point of nonanaliticity of the exact solution. It may indicate the existence of nonperturbative effects that can not be reached by a power series expansion on the perturbative coupling. In such case, two possibilities may be envisaged. One may try resummations to rearrange the perturbative series to get a better behaved expansion. A difficulty in this method is the absence of a perturbative parameter to control different orders of the new series. Another possible procedure is to enlarge the theory with
254
new interactions, which, hopefully, will cancel the UR divergences leading to a new expansion without the mentioned singularities. Both methods have been considered in the literature 13 ' 14 . In fact, it has been argued that the resummation may be efficiently controlled by the the Wilsonian renormalization group 15 , a la Polchinski 16 . On the other side, it has been shown that there exists a special class of theories, namely supersymmetric models, which are natural candidates to be consistent on noncommutative space at least as far renormalization is concerned. The occurrence of the infrared singularities suggests that the usual noncommutative theories may be effective field theories in a range interval which does not include the origin in momentum space 6 . In this lectures, I will discuss this last possibility by considering the cases of the supersymmetric nonlinear sigma model and the Wess-Zumino model. The works in which they are mainly based was done in collaboration with H. 0 Girotti, V. 0 . Rivelles and A. J. da Silva. In section 2, noncommutative field theories are introduced via the Weyl/Moyal correspondence relating classical functions to noncommutative operators. As examples of this construction the real (f>3 model and a U(l) pure gauge theory are considered. In section 3, we present and discuss basic properties of the 0(N) symmetric Gross-Neveu and nonlinear sigma models, which indicate a breakdown of the 1/iV expansions in the noncommutative case. The supersymmetric extension of the nonlinear sigma model to noncommutative space is considered in section 4, where it is proven that it is free of the dangerous UV/IR mixing and, actually, using superspace techniques, that it is renormalizable to all orders of 1/N. Section 5 contains an analysis of the noncommutative Wess-Zumino model. By explicit calculations, it is shown that the model is one-loop renormalizable and contains only mild logarithmic divergences. After that, Ward identities are used to prove that the result holds for an arbitrary finite order. Some good review articles analyzing many aspects of this interesting subject a r e i n
17,18,19.
2. The Weyl-Moyal Correspondence We begin by constructing operators in the above noncommutative space. Weyl20 indicated how can this could be done in a systematic fashion: Introduce the operator T{k) = eik»q" ,
(2.1)
255
which obeys the rules: 1. T*(k) = T(-k)
if q^
=q".
2. T(k)T{k') = T(k + k')e-^k"k'-@'"' which follows immediately after the application of the Baker-Hausdorf formula eAeB=eA+Be^A^
,
(2.2)
for [A, B] = c number. 3. I t T(fc) = (27r)»n M *(*/.)• Following Weyl, in the spirit of Fourier integral, to a classical function (p(x) we may now associate an operator (for notational simplicity dx = dnx and dk = dnk) #
= (2^T
/
dxdk
T(k)eik^"
4>{x) ,
(2.3)
or dk
/
j2^nk)m,
(2.4)
in terms of the Fourier transform <j>(k) of (j)(x), 4>(k)= f dxeikx(j)(x)
.
(2.5)
We may verify that dk —e-ik*Tr[*THk)]
/
.
(2.6)
This formula relates in a very precise way a classical function <j)(x) to a given operator $(). It can be used to construct the so called Moyal product of the classical functions
e - t t ^ ^ r t ^ ) ]
.
(2.7)
/ The Moyal product is a highly nonlocal function involving an arbitrary number
256 of derivatives. In fact, from the definition (2.7) one sees that
M*)*
Mh)Mk2)
(27r)„y (2?r)n y (27r)n e
= lim e i
0
" " ^ ^ My)Mx)
•
(2-8)
We now observe that /,dz0i(z)*02(s)*"-*^n(a;) = Tr[$i$2...$n] ,
(2-9)
Thus, the star product is not modified under cyclical permutation of the fields. Furthermore,
J dxM*) * &(*) = Tr [*i
^
Tr [ 7 ^ ) % ) ]
= JdxfaWhW •
Therefore, the quadratic part of the action of a field theory does not change under the replacement of the ordinary by the Moyal product. Similarly, Jdx Ms) *
MhHMMh) = J ^ Mki)Mk2)Mks)
^
T ^ T r [T (h)T (k2)T (k3)}
(^^)"*^ +fc2+
,
fc3 e ifclA 12
)" '
(2.11)
where we have defined k\ Afc2= |&iMA;2„0'"/ . More generally, we have 21 / dxfaix) * 4>2(x) * ••• * 4>n{x) =
JII T^k M^ih +ha+...+kn) Mh)fa(k2) ... K(kn) exp
-i^AjAij
,
(2.12)
To keep track of the fields ordering at a vertex, it is sometime convenient to introduce a double line notation:
(2-10
257
^ 1
If there are not crossing of lines the graph is said planar, for it can be drawn in a plane. In this situation, up to a phase depending only on the external momenta, it is associated to the same analytic expression as in the commutative case. Otherwise, the diagram is nonplanar and contains oscillatory factors which improve the UV behavior of the Feynman integrals. The next figure illustrates the use of the double line notation for the lowest order radiative correction to the two point function in the
Some simplifications occur whenever some of the fields in (2.12) are equal. In that situation, we may symmetrize on the arguments of those fields so that, in the resulting expression all fields of the same type are equivalent (there is
258
no need to keep track of the initial ordering). Thus, for bosonic theories,
cosfa A k2] MkiWMfafo)
(2.13)
and the same formula holds if all fields are equal (i.e., if >i(x) = <j)2(x)). For a product of four fields we have f 4 dkdx(j>i(x) * (pi(x) *
/
cos
t*1 A k^cos
(2ir)n6 (h + k2 + k3 + h) Mh)Mk2)4>2(k3)Mk4)
t^3 A
ki
\
(2.14)
and
/
/• 4 fife. dx<j>i(x) *
(27r)"<5(A:1+A;2 + fc3+A:4)^(fci)02(fc2)0i(A;3)02(fc4) ,
(2.15)
which, after symmetrization leads to 3 ^C0S ffcl A
/ dx <j>(x) * 4>{x) * 4>(x) * <j){x) = / I I W^
k2 + kl A
^3
+fc2 A £3] + cos [ki Ak2 + ki Ak3 — k2 A k3] + cos [ki A k2 — ki A k3 -k2 A k3}) (2ir)nS(ki +k2 + k3+ k4)j>(ki)4>(k2)4>(k3)4>(k4) .
(2.16)
Peculiar formulas emerge if one consider products of fermionic fields. Thus, for a Dirac Field, denoting by a subscript the Lorentz index,
/
I" 4 dk dxipi (x) * Vi (x) * 1P2 {x) * fa (x) = - / Y[ TT^b s i n [fci (27r)n 6 (ki +k2 + k3 + h) ^ ( k S i i k ^ i k ^ i h )
/
dxipi (x) * fa (x) * tpi (x) * tp2 {x) - i (2Tv)nd(ki+k2
f * dkYl T^pb
sin
A
fo] sin [k3 A k4] (2.17)
ikl hk2 + k3A k4]
+ k3+k4)^i(ki)4>2(kS1(k3)rp2(ki)
and the left hand side of these equations does not vanish.
(2.18)
259 As a simple example illustrating one of the basic aspects of noncommutative field theory, let us consider a real scalar field theory described by the Lagrangian density £ = i d M < W + ^ < £ 2 + !<£*<£*<£•
(2.19)
The momentum space Feynman rules associated to this model are: 1. Scalar field propagator: A
^(P) = 1
(2-2°)
W - •
z
z
p — m 4- it 2. Cubic vertex: igcos(pi AP2) • Let us now compute the first correction to the self-energy of the 4>field.It is given by d4k /
cos2(fcAp) 2
4
2
(2.21)
2
2
(2TT) [(jfc + p) - m p - m ] Introducing Feynman's parameters in the usual way, one arrives at
2
2
rf4fc
f
I =
dx
J JW
2
cos2(fcAp)
[fc 2 -a 2 ] 2 '
(2 22)
'
2
where a = m —p x(l—x).
As cos a — (l + cos2a)/2, we obtain for spacelike
PM
I = II + 1% h
where
= 2(d)m r P - D / 2 ] / ^(« 2 ) D / 2 " 2
(2-23)
1 /• d4fc cos(2fcAp) h
-2jj^r~—^) 4
(2 24)
-
[A: 2 -a 2 ] 2 22
and the last integral may be performed with the help of dnk /
eik*P
(2Tr)n (k2 + M2)x
M"/ 2 ~ A 2 A -!(27r)"/ 2 r[A]
[\/-M2popJ
^n/2-A
(7=p~^p) n / 2 ~ A
where Kx is the modified Bessel function of order x and pop = Therefore, in our case =
lk*Ko(^-4a2pop)
•
(2.25)
p*1pvQliaQv
(2 26)
-
260
For small p this expression diverges logarithmically. Being integrable, such divergence is harmless. However, it indicates the existence of low energy excitations. In the Wilsonian effective action approach, in which a cutoff is introduced no IR singularities appear, it seems necessary to introduce new fields23 as to reproduce the correct IR behavior. The <^ model has been analyzed in 24 , where it was shown that in spite of the UV/IR mixing the model is two-loop perturbatively renormalizable. This has been extended to all orders in the context of the Wilsonian renormalization group 13 . Because of the noncommutativity, special care must be taken when extending theories with local symmetries to the noncommutative setting. As one example we consider the case of a C/(l) gauge theory. If one assumes that the matter field tp transforms like ip(x) -> U(x) * tp(x)
(2.27)
U = (e i A ), = l - H A + ^ - A * A + •••
(2.28)
where
then the gauge field must transform as A'li = U*Ali*U'1
+ ^- {dpU) * U~x . (2.29) l 9 We see that the transformation is similar to the one for the commutative Yang-Mills field. The extension of the pure Maxwell theory to the noncommutative space is given by the action SNCMaxWell(A) = ~ where F^„ = d^A,, - dvA,j, - ig [A,,^,,]^
fdDXF»v
* F„u ,
(2.30)
.
(2.31)
in which
[A„ , Au]t = AI1*AI/-AU*AM For a gauge fixing action of the Lorentz type
SGF = ^JdDx(dflAfi)2
(2.32)
the inclusion of a Faddeev-Popov term SFP = ^ j dDx (g * 5 " I V - <9"ZV * c)
(2.33)
is also necessary. Here D^c = d^c- ig [A^ , c ] t . The total action S = SNC Maxwell + SGF + SFP is highly nonlinear and presents the UV/IR mixing mentioned before. It has been studied separately in 25,23 and also together with the noncommutative U(N) Yang-Mills model in
261
26,27,28,29 There are indications that here also supersymmetry eliminates the dangerous infrared divergences associated with the UV/IR mixing 26 . Interesting enough, these theories are asymptotically free even for N = 1. 3. T h e G r o s s - N e v e u M o d e l In the present lectures, it will be shown that some supersymmetric theories in noncommutative spaces are renormalizable and free of the catastrophic UV/IR mixing. As said before, we will discuss the cases of the susy nonlinear sigma model and Wess-Zumino model. We start by analyzing the Gross-Neveu (GN) model whose supersymmetric version turns out to be the susy nonlinear sigma model. The GN model is specified by the Lagrangian 30 C
9_ 47V ( ^ M ^ ) • are two-components Majorana fields.
=2^^+AN
where V'i,
i = l,...N
(3 1}
-
At this point, I would like to digress a little bit to recall some important points on Majorana fermions. Majorana fermions satisfy V = i'C (from which i/> = V C _ 1 ) , where the charge conjugation matrix satisfies C-SC = -7J
e
CT = -C.
(3.2)
We, therefore, have 1. Contraction of one ip with one ip £W(P)
i
= S(p) = -r-^j
jJ-Af
.
(3.3)
2. Contraction of two ^ ' s : SW = (iPalpfi) = (^a^p)Cp0
= SapCpP = {SC)ai3 •
(3.4)
3. Contraction of two 0's:
% = (Mp) = WxC^jp) = C^Sxp = -(C-'SU
.
(3.5)
The above results are useful to derive Feynman rules associated to Majorana fermions. Let T ^ stand for one of the matrices:
262
a. / , the identity matrix 7M with fi = 0,1,2 in two or three dimensions (in two dimensions 7 2 must be identified with the 7 5 matrix). b. I,
7M, <^ = |[7M,7l,
75 = i 7 V 7 2 7 3
and
7
V,
(3-6)
in four dimensions. Let Va and ipp denote "external" fields. We have
. (3.7)
Thus, for T = / , 7 5 , 7^7 5 the result is twice the first term. In the remaining cases the result is zero (notice that the "current" •ip-y^tfj is zero but
Only in two dimensions the GN model is perturbatively renormalizable. Although perturbatively nonrenormalizable, in 2+1 dimensions the model is I/TV expandable and presents some interesting aspects such as dynamical mass generation. From now on our discussion will be restricted to 2 < D < 4 (whenever necessary we will use 7 0 = a2, 7 1 = ial in D = 2; in D = 3 we may need also 7 2 = ia3) To implement the 1/iV expansion it is usual to introduce an auxiliary field cr and to subtract from (3.1) the term N/4g f (a + jyipip) . The theory can therefore be equivalently written as j
AT
n
C = -i)W--{W)--o2
.
(3.8)
At the quantum level one should integrate over a which can develop a nonvanishing vacuum expectation value (VEV). We replace a by a + M where M is the VEV of the original a. The new Lagrangian is
c=%-$W>- fw - f (MO - ^-/ - YgMa • ( 3 - 9 ) Since, by construction, the field a now has zero VEV, the gap equation M
f dDk
Mi
tn
N
must be obeyed. After a Wick rotation, we should have M M _ f dDkk 2 D kl + M =°2g J {2v) D
<3"n>
263
The ultraviolet divergence in the above integral may be eliminated by a coupling constant renormalization. Indeed, defining the renormalized coupling constant by f dDk
1 _ 1
+
9"m
9
1
[
I (^FfcW
}
the divergence is canceled.
In 2+1 dimension one finds 1
=
9R
/J~|M|
(3.13)
2TT
and therefore only for — — + ^ > 0 it is possible to have M ^ 0. Otherwise M is necessarily zero.
It remains now to compute the propagator for the auxiliary field. It is given by -l/F(p) where W _
2-7
J (2n)D ( i f c 2 - M 2 ) [ ( f c + p ) 2 - M 2 ] '
l
}
The integral in the above expression is divergent but, taking into account (3.10), we get ^
F
KP)
=
(P 2 ~4M 2 )JV f dDk 1 D 2 2 2 J (2ir) ( f c - M ) [ ( f c + p ) 2 - M 2 ] '
*•
;
which is finite for D < 4. We see that the above cancellation of divergences results from a fine tuning between the divergence in the integral in (3.15) and the one in the gap equation. Let us turn our attention to the noncommutative version of the model. By introducing Moyal products we arrive at M-,
SON
1
,-
,,
N
= / L ^ ^ ~ y ^ - ^ * (V' * VO ~
2
N
It can be checked that functional integrating on a leads to a noncommutative version of (3.1) in which the four-fermion interaction is V»j * V>i * i>j * ^Pj • Notice that ipi * xpj * tpi * rpj is another quartic, O(N) symmetric, ordering for the fermionic fields. However, this last possibility does not have a simple 1/iV expansion, as it requires the use of tensorial auxiliary fields.
264
Since the Moyal product does not affect the quadratic part, the propagator for ij) is the same as before. However, in momentum space the cubic vertex has to be multiplied by cos(pi AP2) where p\ and pi are the momenta through the fermion lines. Therefore, the gap equation is not modified whereas for the proper two point function of the
F
+l
. f dDk
(kAp
M = -rg J w^
k-(k + p) + M2
,
2/I
\*-wm+pr-M>]-
.„,„.
(3 17)
-
2
By using cos (fc Ap) — | [ 1 + cos(2/i Ap) the integral in the above expression may be written as a sum of a planar part
i f dDk
k-(k+p) 2
+ M2
2
2 J {2-K)D ( f c - M ) P + p ) 2 - M 2 ]
K
'
and a nonplanar one » f
d k
°
C
2 J (2^ °
,nL
s(2/tA
,
k-(k+p) 2
+ M2 2
, ,„. 2
^(F-M )[(fc;p) -M ]
< 3 " 19 >
Because of the oscillating factor the nonplanar part is UV finite but the planar has the same divergence as in the commutative space. However, because the extra | this divergent parts do not match that of the - term anymore. The model is no longer renormalizable 38 ' 39 . It is worthwhile to remark that, up to the leading order of 1/N, no inconsistency would arise had we employed Dirac instead of Majorana spinors. This is so because in that case the exponentials characteristics of the Moyal product, cancel for the one-loop contribution to the self-energy. Nevertheless, this property does not hold at higher orders of 1/N; the difficulty was just shifted to the next order calculations.
Figure 2. Order 1/N contributions to the self-energy of the ip field. Dashed and wavy lines represent, respectively, the propagators of tp and A fields.
Before embarking into the discussion of the supersymmetric extension of the GN model, we would like to examine the noncommutative version of the
265
nonlinear sigma model. It is described by the Lagrangian density 1 I C = --
N ,
(3.20)
where ipi, i = 1 , . . . , N are real scalar fields and A is the Lagrange multiplier field which implements the constraint
where A\(k),
cos (k /\p) r A A (fc) , {k+p)2-M2
(3.21)
the propagator for the A field, is given by the inverse of
1 f 2 J
dDq
2
(kAq) * (qcos + k) - M 2
(2TT)
C
1 2
2
q - M2
(3.22)
As before, both (3.21) and (3.22) can be written as a sum of planar piece and a nonplanar one. Irrespective of the cosine factors, A^(A;) behaves as (k2f~D/2 when k —t oo and therefore the planar part of (3.21) for large k diverges quadratically. This ultraviolet divergence is partially canceled if one generalizes the definition of I P l diagram to incorporate in the calculation graphs which are not proper with respect the A lines. If this is done one should consider the graph of Fig. 2.b which corresponds to d q cos2 fcA( 1 ,-A ffi\ f d°k ° ( Z) A m ro0o^ 2 2 2 (3 23) / W? W (* + Q) ~ M (q - M2)2 A A ( A ° " Concerning the nonplanar part of (3.21) we notice that it is ultraviolet finite, but diverges quadratically for small momenta. This divergence (UV/IR mixing), which is not present in (3.23), will invalidate the 1/N expansion of the model. _ I A A ( 0 )
4. The Super-symmetric Noncommutative Nonlinear Sigma Model We will show now that the supersymmetric version is however consistent as far as renormalization is concerned 38 . The supersymmetric nonlinear sigma model has been studied in two 3 1 ' 3 2 ' 3 3 , 3 4 ' 3 5 and in three 36 ' 37 spacetime dimensions. The nonlinear sigma model is the supersymmetric partner of the Gross-Neveu model, i. e., supersymmetry blends the two models. To keep supersymmetry under control, it is convenient to use the superspace formulation. The superspace consists of the usual spacetime coordinates and of a two-component
266
Majorana variable, 6i, i = 1,2. The operator
(4-1)
G = Jr+Wfy, d6a T
where 6 = 0 7°, is the generator of the superspace transformation: x* -> x^+ie-y^O 6> -»• 0 + e .
(4.2) (4.3)
Notice that §i = i#2 and #2 = —iQ\. Thus
l
*wa=eawa-
(4 4)
-
M
Therefore eQx = i £7^ 0 and eQfl = e, in accordance with (4.3). We now introduce a N component superfield ^ *,=?;+H,+
\0BFj,
(4.5)
where ip is a N component Majorana spinor and
and
e9 = 0e
(4.6)
we may check that the supersymmetry transformation e Q $ = 5
(4.7)
are given by S
(4.8)
Sip = -i(7 M e)d^ip + Fe
(4.9)
(4.10)
SF = ei pip In the commutative setting, the susy nonlinear sij the action
s-\
JM»;*;,
(4.11)
subject to the constraint N *,** =
9
(4.12)
In (4.11) D2 = \DD, where
°-h-
-MP,
(4.13)
267
is the supercovariant derivative and D = joD. The appendix A contains some important properties of the D operators. In terms of the superfield's components, the constraint (4.12) is equivalent to N
(4.15)
iPiFi = ^ .
(4.16)
(4.14)
The first of these equations is the usual nonlinear sigma model constraint. Introducing a Lagrangian multiply superfield S by S = a + §£ + ^X
,
(4.17)
the constraint may be implemented directly in the Lagrangian. This leads to the action /
dDxd2e
2
2
V
(4.18)
g
As shown in the appendix, after performing the 8's integrations, the Lagrangian takes the form
+ g A V2 - 2 *
~ WW ~ Y
X
"
(4J9)
We now carry out the F integration and, to give a more symmetric form to C, make a "translation" A— > A + 2Ma where M is the vacuum expectation value of a. We get C = --
N
(4.20)
- W M - ^ X - J M V .
It is convenient to redefine A and a so that the new fields have zero vacuum expectation value. Thus making a —> a + M and A —> A + Ao where Ao = (A) we are led to a Lagrangian whose quadratic nonderivative terms are Quadratic
= - y M V
+ g W
+
M
V
~ y
V>$ •
(4-21)
This shows that M is the fermionic mass. We require the bosonic field to have the same mass in order to keep susy unbroken. We therefore have Ao = —2M2.
268
We now consider the terms linear in the auxiliary fields a and A. They are given by linear
= ~ ^np
°
+
2^
~ 2~
(
^
The condition that both a and A have zero vacuum expectation value gives the same gap equation: dDk D
(2TT)
/
i k -M2 2
1 g'
(4 23)
'
After a Wick rotation we obtain the same gap equation as before. Thus, up to here, everything is like the usual non susy Gross-Neveu model.
If Ao ^ - 2 M 2 susy is broken. In such situation the tp field have mass 2 = — (M 2 + A0) and the gap equations for the fields a and A
I
dPk iM (27r)D k2~M2
M g
(4.24)
and /
dPk i D 2 (2n) k + M2+X0
1 g
(4.25)
become clearly incompatible. The possibility M = 0 and Ao < 0 does not lead to consistent theory because the propagator for the a field would diverge.
We shall now proceed to the calculation of the propagators for the auxiliary fields. Besides the kinetic, linear and quadratic terms the Lagrangian density has 2
Lint = ~V2
\
+ 2
(4-26)
Thus we have: Propagator for the A field: —1/Fi(p) where
1 L_ (427) Fi(p) = K [ ^ 2 2 2 2 ( C 2 J (2TT) (k+p) -M k -M " ' Propagator for the a field: In this case there are two graphs that contribute: the seagull and the bubble diagrams. In the effective action they give F2{P) = N I ^ — l 2W J (2TT)C k2~M2
N [-<-*Mfc+?) + M2 J (2w)D [(k+p)2 - M2][k2 - M2] "
l
;
269
The propagator is then - 1 / F 2 . The great difference with respect to the nonsusy situation is that the first term arises from the contribution of the seagull and not of the tadpole graph. Above we have described the points that we want to stress in the usual susy sigma model. We now turn to the noncommutative susy model. It is described by the following action
Fj * (
a * ift * ip
(£ *ip*ip + £*(p*ip)
- - A - — } .
(4.29)
In the preceding Lagrangian we kept the auxiliary field F whose propagator in momentum space is just i. Otherwise, we could have integrated on F as we did before. If this is done one should replace the third and fifth terms in the above action by
— / -(a * a * (fj * (fj + a *
(4.30)
We now list all propagators: 1- ^ field: Aip = Aij(p) =
2. tp field: SF(p) =
id^ - ^ .
jf-M
3. Auxiliary field F: Ap = iSij . 4. Auxiliary field A: A* = — 1/A, where
Plip)
=
N f
^/(0
dnk C
°
s 2 ( f c A p )
2 ^ +' p) ^2 - M ^2" »™ [(Jfe ][fc»2 - M ] •'
(4 31)
"
270
5. Auxiliary field a: ACT = -I/F2, dDk
fM N
where
cos2 (fcAp)
= lw?
k2-M2
f dDk k-(k+p) + M2 2 N I " "DcCo sS 2 ( (fcAp) P) 2 2 J (2TT) ° [(fc + p) - M ][fc2 - M 2 ] (p2-4M2)
y
rf^fc
7 (2TT) D C ° S
2
(
A P}
1 [(fc + p) 2 - M2][fc2 - M 2 ] (4.32)
6. Auxiliary field £. The propagator, S^, is minus the inverse of r./ x
*T
F3(p) = Ar
f dDk
y (2^FC0S
2„
(fcAp)
.
.(j*+2M) /• dDfc
= AT-
- #+ M
[(fc +P ) 2 -M 2 ][fc 2 -M 2 ] 2
2—/(2^ C ° S ( f c A p ) I(fcT
1 p) 2 - M2][fc2 - M 2 ] ' (4.33)
To go from the first to the second line in the above formula we have taken into consideration that the result should be of the form a jf + b; to fix a we then multiply the integral by rf and take the trace; afterwards one use that p • k = |[(p + fc)2 —fc2— p2] and that after a shift of integration only the term proportional to p2 contributes. A graphical representation for these propagators is provided in the next figure Ap
Ap
A* * v v \ ^ v w v
The vertices are the same as before but will have cosines factors: ifipX vertex:
icos(piAp 2 )
(4-34)
arptjj vertex:
—icos(pi AP2)
(4.35)
£V"/>
vertex:
icos(pi Ap 2 )
(4.36)
aipF
vertex:
i cos(pi A p 2 ) •
(4-37)
271
Using the above rules one can verify that in 2+1 dimensions the degree of superficial divergence for a generic graph is d(7) =3-N^,-^Nv-Na-
|jVc - 2NX ,
(4.38)
where No is the number of external lines associated to the field O. Let us examine some of the divergent graphs.
yZ^V y Figure 3.
iT\
V-
1/JV corrections to the ip field self-energy.
In lowest order there are three graphs contributing to the
and
respectively. By adding these expressions, we get ^ ^
=
. / 9 , ro\ f dPk -,(^-M^)y^ F [ ( f c
+p )
cos2(k/\p) 2 _ ^ _ 4 M
2 ]
A
A
(
. ... f c ) .
, , ,„. (4.42)
Individually each of the graphs is quadratically divergent but the sum diverges only logarithmically. This divergence can be eliminated by a wave function renormalization of the
(¥+^M)co^kAP)
~ J (2*)*> [(fc+p) 2 -M 2 p 2 -4M 2 ]
( 4 4 3 )
272
and • f ddPkk
(¥+2M)coSHkAp) ^(fc) \{k + p)2 - M2][k2 - AM2}
(444)
so that f dDk
__. l
~~ ~ J
(p'-M)cos2(kAp) D
(2TT)
2
[(k + p)
- M2][k2 -
Ax(k)
AM2]
.
(4.45)
We see that the leading divergence is canceled and just remains a logarithmic divergence which may be absorbed by a wave function renormahzation of the V field which is the same as in the case of the ip field propagator. Up to this point, the renormahzation is therefore supersymmetric.
I
I
w 4,a Figure 4.
I
I
!
J
f
J
^::.:::| i:::.vl £zzi 4,b
4,c
4,d
Leading order contributions to the three point function
T\^^.
To complete our discussion, we need to examine the N > 2 point functions: Taking the three point function, r \ w , as an example, it can be seen from Fig. 4 that, at leading order, there are two sets of diagrams to be analyzed. The first set contains just the diagram 4a which exhibits three cosine factors. In the other set are grouped graphs which contains five cosine factors, namely, the diagrams 4fe, 4c and Ad. Hence the divergent part of each set of graphs becomes altered with respect to the commutative regime 36 in such a way that it can no longer be absorbed by just a wave function renormahzation of the (p field. In contrast with the commutative situation, a renormahzation for the auxiliary field is also needed. The four point function of the scalar field, Tili2i3i4(pi,P2,P3,P4), receives contribution from the graphs shown in Fig. 5. They are superficially linearly divergent and are so potentially dangerous, as, if needed, the counterterms will not have the form of the vertices present in the original Lagrangian. The
273 amplitudes associated to the graphs of Fig. 5 are (4) a
r _d°k_ J (2n)D
(k + P1)2- M2 (-fc + p 2 ) 2 - M 2
A A (*)
Ax{k+Pl-p3)C(k)
F(4)
dDk
., A
f d°k
Tr
(4.46)
(*)Aff (fc + Pi-ps)C(fc) ,
[ ( y + i / l ) _M 5 « ( f c + P l
(4.47)
P3) (4.48)
5?(fc) C(A), where C(fc) = cos(fc A pi) cos(fc A P2) cos[(A; + pi) A P3] cos[(fc - P2) A P4] .
(4.49)
I 5.
5.c
5.6
Leading order contributions to the four point function of the scalar field ip.
In D = 3 the above integrals are linearly divergent. However, as far as the sum of these amplitudes is concerned, it is readily seen that the leading divergence cancels and that the subleading one vanishes under symmetric integration. These considerations hold irrespective of the presence of the cosine factors in the function C(k). Thus, there is no UV/IR mixing that would eventually give rise to infrared divergences. The above discussion can be generalized to other Green function leading to the conclusion the the susy GN model is one-loop renormalizable. In the sequel, using superspace techniques we shall demonstrate that this result actually holds for arbitrary order 40 . Our starting point is (4.18) in which we assume S has a non zero vacuum expectation value. Thus, replacing S -> S + m where m is the vacuum expectation value of the original S, we obtain the new action / '
xd2e
1
^>j{D2-m)^j
S * [ $j * $j
9 J.
(4.50)
274
Using this expression it is straightforward to verify that the propagator for the basic superfields $ is <*i(pi,0i)*>(P2,02)> = i^^6ij63(p1
-p2)812
,
(4.51)
p\ — m^
where we have introduced the notation 812 = 8(§i — 82)8(61 — 62)- The interaction vertex is given by
= fd2e f
rj?zE*$j*$i
d3k1d3k2 (2TT)6
Afc2)S(-fci -k2,e)$i{ku6)$i{k2,6)
= COS(*I
.
(4.52)
To find the effective propagator for the auxiliary field, let us consider the supergraph shown in Fig. 6, where the wavy and continuous lines are associated to the E field and to the $ propagator. This graph contributes as d3l
?/*W?S
cos 2 (A; A / )
(2TT) 3 (I2 - m 2 ) ((A + I)2 -
m2)
X(k,61)X(-k,92){{D2+m2)812){{D2+m2)812)
,
(4.53)
which may be simplified, if we perform partial integrations, transferring a D2 operator in one line to the others. This frees one of the 8 and, using the results quoted in the appendix we arrive at the expression N f d29 ±{k, 6) (D2 + 2m) Z(-k, 6) I~l (AT2) ,
(4.54)
where
j-i (tf) {
=
'
l f J!L 2 J
cos2(A; A 0
(2TT) 3 (I2 - m2)
((Jfe + I)2 - m 2 )
'
l
;
From (2.25) it follows then
•^-£1
dx 1 - i y/Ak o k (m2 - k2x(l - x)) yjra2 — A;2a;(l — a;) .
x J-K_1/2
(y/4kok(m2-k2x(l-x)))
(4.56)
For large k the last term either exponentially decreases or strongly oscillates; in both cases, its presence in a Feynman integral will lead to a finite result. For practical purposes, the dominant asymptotic behavior is given by
275
Since we are interested just in the UV behavior of the Feynman amplitudes, we find convenient to replace I~1(k2) by the expression i j - i ft*) ~ V ' 32 V - k2 + Am2
(4. 5 8) '
V
which has the same asymptotic behavior at k -> oo as (4.57). Of course, such replacement does not alter the leading UV behavior of Feynman integrals. Proceeding in this way, we obtain
/xsvf Figure 6.
-
j w
Leading contribution to the two point function of the S field.
-
1 16i
D2 — 1m I? 2 - 2m
iV V-fc 2 + 4m2
53 (h - k2) S12 .
(4.59)
We can now fix the superficial degree of divergence for an arbitrary supergraph. Denoting by n and n s the number of internal $ and S lines, we have d(7) = 3L - 2n$ - n E + iVD2 ,
(4.60)
where L is the number of loops and ND2 is the maximum number of D2 factors which turn into loop momenta after the 0 integration. Since, to obtain a nonzero result, one D2 has to be associated to each loop this number turns out to be ND* = n* + n E - L = V - 1 ,
(4.61)
where V is the number of vertices. Thus, from the counting identities, relating the number of external and internal lines no and No and the number vo of lines associated to the field O which ends at the interaction vertex, 2nQ + Na = v0V
(4.62)
276
we obtain d(7) = 2 - JVE - ^
,
(4.63)
By comparison with (4.38), one immediately see that in the superfield language the Feynman graphs present less divergences than the usual ones of the component formalism. Indeed, it follows that there is no quadratic divergences except for vacuum diagrams and, as we shall see shortly, there are neither linear divergences; hence this theory is free of the nonintegrable infrared divergences which spoil the usual perturbative expansions. One should also stress that (4.61) is actually an upper limit on the number of available D2 factors since, after taking one D2 factor for each loop, the number of those that may be converted into momentum must be even. Because we have already discussed the leading 1/iV renormalization problem before we will not consider it here again. Nevertheless the superfield formalism is very powerful allowing us to prove that the model is renormalizable to all orders. We begin this analysis by proving that there are only logarithmic singularities and, therefore, no IR/UR occurs. The first observation is that supergraphs with two external E lines have negative degree of divergence. Indeed, the number of vertices V in such graphs is always even, V — 1 is odd and, then, the number of D2 factors that may be turned into momenta decreases by one from the value specified in (4.61). Hence, these supergraphs are superficially convergent. By the same reason, all supergraphs with two external $ lines are at most logarithmically divergent. Indeed, the number of vertices is also even leading to the conclusion that one of the D2 factors is superfluous and can not be converted into momentum. Thus, the superficial degree of divergence decreases from one to zero. Analogous reasoning applied to the four point function of the $ field shows that there is no overall divergence associated to the ultraviolet behavior of the graph as whole. We may conclude that there are at most logarithmic divergences and, therefore, only a mild integrable infrared singularity will appear. This result is necessary but not sufficient to guarantee that the model is renormalizable.lt still remains to prove that the needed counterterms have the same Moyal product structure of those vertices already present in the original action. Specifically, one needs to show that, at any given order of 1/N, the divergent parts of the supergraphs with two $ and one E external lines generate a counterterm of the form J d 5 z S * $ j * # i . Actually, this result follows from the property cos a\ cos a-i ... cos an =
)
cos (a\ ± a,2 ... ± an) ,
(4.64)
where the sum is taken over all possible combinations of the ± signs. The above expression allows one to demonstrate that for any graph with an arbitrary
277
number of loops there is one planar contribution, i.e., containing a cosine factor depending only on the external momenta. In fact, this result holds for an arbitrary (having any number of external lines) one-loop graph. To see that, consider the one-loop graph depicted in Fig. 7. From (4.64) we extract the following term
Figure 7.
COs[k Api + (k+pi)
One loop graph with n external lines.
Ap2 + ••• + (k+pi
+ ...+
Pn-i)
A pn] ,
(4.65)
which, after taking into account external momentum conservation, turns out not to depend on the loop momentum, as stated. We now assume that the result holds for an arbitrary n-loop graph. We may then increase the number of loops by one unity by joining two external lines through a tree diagram consisting of one line with possibly other external lines attached to it (see Fig. 8). Using the same procedure as in the one-loop case, we can verify again that there is one term whose cosine factor does not depend on the new loop momenta. This proves our statement. 5. The Noncommutative Wess—Zumino Model As yet another example where supersymmetry is essential to prevent a catastrophic UV/IR mixing in noncommutative field theory, we will consider now the four dimensional Wess-Zumino model described by 41 C =
\A{-02)A Zt
+
\B{-02)B £
+ \i>{i @-m)i> + Zi
\F2
+
Zi
+ mGB + g (FA2 - FB2 + 2GAB - iiipA - i^j5ipB)
\G2
+ mFA
£
,
(5.1)
where A is a scalar field, B is a pseudo scalar field, tp is a Majorana spinor field and F and G are, respectively, scalar and pseudoscalar auxiliary fields.
278
Figure 8. (a) An n-loop contribution. The dashed circle stands for an arbitrary graph, (b) The n + 1-loop graph obtained by joining two external lines through a tree structure.
By extending the above model to a noncommutative space one is led to the Lagrangian density C = \A{-d2)A
+ \B{-d2)B
+ \^{i
+ mGB + g{F
@-m)iP+
\F2 + l-G2 + mFA
*A*A-F*B*B+G*A*B+G*B*A
— ip *ip * A — ip * i"f5ip * B) .
(5.2)
The Lagrangian (5.2) was also written using the superspace formalism in 42>43. However, we will work with components fields in order to trace the effects of noncommutativity in the divergent Feynman integrals 14 . The propagators for the A and F fields are obtained by calculating minus the inverse of the matrix p2 m m 1 This gives (see Fig. 9 ) &AA(P)
2
yr
(5.3)
— m 2 + ie
A F F ( P ) =P2&AA(P)
(5.4)
,
&AF(J>) = &-FA{P) = -mAAA(p)
,
(5.5)
whereas the propagators involving the B and G fields have identical expression (i.e., they are get by replacing A by B and F by G). For the ip field we have
279
AAA
(P)
P
AFF
(P)
—- P -
AAF
(P)
p
-
p
A BB (P) AQG (P)
— -p-
A ^ (p)
P_
Figure 9.
Notation for the propagators in the Wess-Zumino model.
The analytical expressions associated to the vertices are:
FA2
vextex:
ig cos (pi Ap2)
,
(5.7)
FB
2
vextex:
-ig cos (pi Ap 2 ) ,
(5.8)
GAB
vertex:
2ig cos (pi A p2) ,
(5.9)
•ipipA vertex:
-ig cos (px Ap 2 ) ,
(5.10)
-ipipB vertex:
-ig75 cos (pi Ap2) .
(5.11)
Due to the oscillating factors provided by the cosines some of the integrals constructed with the above rules will be finite but in general divergences will survive, the degree of superficial divergence for a generic 1PI graph 7 being d( 7 ) = 4 - IAF - IBF -NA-NB-
2NF - 2NG - ^
,
(5.12)
where as before No denotes the number of external lines associated to the O field and IAF and IBF represent the number of internal lines associated to the indicated mixed propagators. In all cases we will regularize the divergent Feynman integrals by using the supersymmetric regularization method proposed in 44
280
Using the above rules it is easy to verify that contributions of the tadpoles add to zero (remember: the tadpoles are not modified by the noncommutativity of the underlying space).
Here we will use the Ward identities to prove that (F) = 0, a result that will important later on. A convenient way to derive the Ward identities is to introduce external sources for all fields. Thus the action is replaced by S = f {C + JAA + JBB + JFF + JGG - irpl>) .
(5.13)
Under a supersymmetry transformation 5A = iaxp ,
(5-14)
6B = ia
(5.15)
6ij>= @(A + j5B)a
+ {F + f5G)a
(5.16)
SF = ia ftp ,
(5.17)
SG = iaj5 ftp ,
(5.18)
it can be checked that the actions associated to the kinetic terms, mass terms and interaction terms are separately invariant. We suppose that the sources are changed in such a way to keep (5.13) invariant, i. e., 8JA = -i{dtf)'fa
(5.19)
8JB = -i{dllri)l5Ya
(5.20)
SJF = irja
(5.21)
SJG=irj^5a
(5.22)
Sv = dM (JF -
T&JG)
7 M a + (JA + iM
a
(5.23)
Thus, modifying the variables of integration by a supersymmetry transformation we get (since the transformations are linear the Jacobian turns out to be constant) 0 = f D[
(SJ0) O ,
(5.24)
where Jo is the external source associated to the field O. Therefore . i 2 , . _, ,, . SZ .„ _. „ . SZ _ . SZ _ - i j j - (9 M ??)T +1 jj~ (d»V)IsT + * jj- V + * JJ-Vls - — [dp {JF - 75Jo)
^
+ JA+
75JB]
=0
(5.25)
281
In a more formal level we suppose that the model has been regularized in such way that these Ward identities preserved (Ref. 44 has provided an explicit susy preserving regularization). Taking the derivative of Eq. (5.25) with respect to 7] (more precisely, applying the operator / dy A, •.) and letting all sources vanish we get (F) = 0 (Notice that by parity conservation (G) = 0). The Ward identities are preserved when the ordinary product is replaced by the Moyal product. This is so because the susy transformations commutes with translations so that
6(A *B) = (5 A) *B + A* {6B) .
(5.26)
Let us now examine the contributions to the self-energy of the A field. The corresponding graphs are those shown in Fig. 10a—lOe. In that figure diagrams a, b and c are quadratically divergent whereas graphs d and e are logarithmically divergent .We shall first prove that the quadratic divergences are canceled. In fact, we have that
k
a
-
/
•
e Figure 10.
One loop graphs contributing to the two point function of the A field.
282
rio.-c(^) = - 9
2
J ^
cos 2 (* A p) {4fc2 + 4* a
- 2Tr[(#+ p/+m)(jt
+ m)]} A(k+p)A(k)
,
(5.27)
where the terms in curly brackets correspond to the graphs a, b and c, respectively. After calculating the trace we obtain j ^
{p-k + m2) cos2(k A p)A{k)A{k+p).
(5.28)
This last integral is, at most, linearly divergent. However, the would be linearly divergent term vanishes by symmetric integration thus leaving us with an integral which is, at most, logarithmically divergent. Adding to Eq. (5.28) the contribution of the graphs lOd and lOe one arrives at r i o a - e ( ^ ) = 8 » 2 / -0^cos2{pAk){p-k)A(k)A(k+p)
.
(5.29)
To isolate the divergent contribution to Fi0a_e(AA) we Taylor expand the 2 coefficient of cos (p A k) with respect to the variable p around p — 0, namely, j ^
cos2(p A fc)^1' (p) [(p • k)A(k)A(k
+ p)] p=0
= 162 / ^ 4
cos2
(P A *) ,}?'k)l3
,
(5-30)
where t^(p) denotes the Taylor operator of order r. Since cos2 (A; A p) = (1 + cos(2fc Ap))/2 the divergent part of (5.30) is found to read 1 1 2 / ^ (5-31) a = i h 9 P , 4 2 2 J (27r) (k - m ) where the subscript £ remind us that all integrals are regularized through the procedure indicated in 44 . In the commutative Wess-Zumino model this divergence occurs with a weight twice of the above. As usual, it is eliminated by the wave function renormalization A = Zx/2Ar, where Ar denotes the renormalized A field. Indeed, it is easily checked that with the choice Z = 1 — I^g2 the contribution (A.4) is canceled. We turn next into analyzing the term containing cos{2k Ap) in (5.30). For small values of p it behaves as p2ln(p2/m2). Thus, in contradistinction to the nonsupersymmetric <j>\ case 23 , there is no infrared pole and the function actually vanishes at p = 0. One may check that at one-loop the B field self-energy is the same as the self-energy for the A field, i. e., T(BB) = T(AA). Therefore the divergent
Tmv (AA) = 2 gV
283
part of T(BB) will be eliminated if we perform the same wave function renormalization as we did for the A field, B = Zll2Br. We also found that the mixed two point Green functions do not have one-loop radiative corrections, T(AF) = T(BG) = 0. The one-loop corrections to the two point of the auxiliary field F are depicted in Fig. 11. The two graphs give identical contributions leading to the result /
HAk ^cos2(kAp)A(k)A(k+p),
(5.32)
whose divergent part is
^ ( M ^ t f / l ^ j p J ^ = »,,>.
(5.33)
involving the same divergent integral of the two point functions of the basic fields. It can be controlled by the field renormalization F — Zx/2Fr, as in the case of A and B. Analogous reasoning applied to the auxiliary field G leads to the conclusion that G = Zxl2Gr. However, things are different as far as the term containing cos(2fc Ap) is concerned. It diverges as ln(p 2 /m 2 ) as p goes to zero. Nevertheless, this is a harmless singularity in the sense that its multiple insertions in higher order diagrams do not produce the difficulties pointed out
• / • • "I
Figure 11.
I • • • ( • • •
I B B m/m a l £
C a wimm
m
One-loop correction to the two point function of the auxiliary field F.
Let us now consider the corrections to the self-energy of the spinorfieldif) which are shown in Fig. 12. The two contributing graphs give
/ /
dAk ^cos2(fcAp)A(fc)A(fc+p)[(#-m)+75(m-#)] dAk -—cos2(k
A p) ft A(k)A(k+p),
(5.34)
so that for the divergent part we get Tniv (V'VO = W2 i> h leading to the conclusion that the spinor field presents the same wave function renormalization
284
Figure 12.
One-loop corrections to the self-energy of the spinor field.
of the bosonic fields, i. e., ip = Zxl2tl)T. As for the term containing cos(2A: Ap) it behaves as fHn(p2/m2) and therefore vanishes as p goes to zero. All one-loop potentially divergent diagrams were examined and the final result is that the theory may be ultraviolet finite by just making a wave function renormalization of the basic and auxiliary fields We shall prove now that no mass and coupling constant counterterms are needed at any finite order of perturbation theory. As in the commutative case, our proof relies heavily on the Ward identities. We start by noticing that from Eq. (2.12) it follows that favJlr^ [d4x 0(x) * 0{x) *•••* 0(x) = n[d*x Ofx) * 0(x) *•••* 0(x) . J o(J(y)J > ' J > „ v n factors
n—1 factors
(5.35) In turns, this enables one to find
L z «=-^Itj^ d , "-i ) ! J M d , <' z l J ] •
(5 36)
-
which looks formally identical to the corresponding relation in the commutative case 44 . Here, Z( J) is the Green function generating functional. By collectively denoting the fields by cp, Z(J) can be cast as Z(J) = JD
f dtx J(j> J ,
(5.37)
where S = J dAxC and C is the regularized Lagrangian.
The derivation of (5.36) is as follows: 9
.JefiJ[C+J4>] i nr.j-.iM
=
1^1 Jf eiJ[c-c i t\r.-r t+J4,] -i-.iM J f ^ ^ S S^ j c ^ ^
^
(538)
dm where Cg = g(F*A*A-F*B*B
+
+ G*B*A-lp*ij;*A-:i!)*ij5ip*B)
G*A*B .
(5.39)
285 Integrating by parts we then arrive at
- % J eiS+ifU J Fd4y D[(I>]-Y9IeiS+i
fH 3AdSm
1
• (5-40)
In terms of the 1PI generating functional T(R), the Legendre transform of the connected Green function generating functional W(J), T{R) = W{J)-
f JoRo
(5.41)
the identity (5.36) becomes
lw-% J „*»,+! I'm?,.
(,42,
By taking the functional derivative with respect to RF and then putting all R's equal to zero we obtain m = T(FA) =o
= Z'1 Tr(FA)
n
,
(5.43)
p*=0
where Tr(AF) is the renormalized 1PI Green function of the indicated fields. We take as normalization conditions those specified in 4 4 . Specifically, r r (i r 'A)| 2 = mr , where mr is taken to be the renormalized mass. Hence, mr = Zm implying that there is no additive mass renormalization. Through similar steps one also finds that gr = Z3/2g, where gr is the renormalized coupling constant. This implies the absence of coupling constant counterterms. We stress the fact that, by exploiting the Ward identities, we have succeeded in generalizing to all orders of perturbation theory the one loop result concerned with the absence of counterterms different from those already present in the original Lagrangian. This result has been re-obtained by using the superspace formalism in 45 . The one and two loops action for the noncommutative Wess-Zumino model has been calculated in 4 6 .
Acknowledgements This work was partially supported by Pundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq).
286
Appendix A. In this appendix we shall collect some properties of the supercovariant operators D = ^ - i 9 0,
(A.l)
D = L-i$>e
(A.2)
= 1°D.
With these definitions it is straightforward to verify the (anti) commutation relations {Qa,
D0} = {Qa,D0}=O
(A.3)
Using these formula, we may define the invariant operator, D2 — ^DD, which has the form D2 = \DD = \ 2 2
eeadda
MUOp^r + iOx-Hs-Wxc+wa? Kr p ' "dea "dea
-\w».-m",'k+T*
= -\Dt>
(A 4)
-
The supercovariant derivatives satisfy DXDD = - 2 * ?>aX Da
(A.5)
DXDD = 2» 0Xa Da
(A.6)
(DD)2
(A.7)
= -4D .
Integration with respect the #'s is defined in the usual way. For convenience, we normalize such integrals so that I d2d 66 = - 2 ,
I d26=
f d2661 = f d2662 = 0 .
(A.8)
With the above definition, one may check that, for an arbitrary superfield
fd26F
= V[D2f]
(A.9)
where the operator V projects its argument at 6 = 6 = 0 i.e., V[0(9,S)] = 0(0,0). The above properties provides a very efficient tool to perform calculations in supersymmetric theories. Thus, for example, with the help of (A.4-A.9), we
287
may be derive that f d 3 x d 2 0 £ $ 2 = i f d3xV{D[{DY,)$2
+ 2Y,$D$]}
= f
d3xV[D2^2
- DS(Z)$)$ + L>E$L>$ + £ £ $ £ > $ + 2 E $ D 2 $ ] =
d?x[-
Xip2 + liup - £(p$ - aipip - 2a
(A.10)
where, to obtain the last equality, we used V[$] = y ,
V[D&] = 7 V = - ^ ,
2
V[D $] = -F , V[DY] = £ ,
P[S] = a ,
V[D$\ = *l> ,
7>[DE] = 7 °C = - f ,
V[D2Y] = - A .
(A.ll) (A.12) (A.13)
To compute Feynman's diagrams in superspace some useful simplifications are &H — 9 ( ^ ~ ^ ) C* ~ ^o)
(A.14)
{hf = o
(A.15)
£>2^- = 1
(A.16)
Sij D S^ = 0
S^ D Sij = 0 .
(A.17)
The general procedure is to integrate by parts (remember: D2 is a differential operator in superspace) "freeing" as many S as possible. Because of the above properties, at the end of this process a nonvanishing contribution must be such that, each loop in superspace has an odd number of D2 operators acting on a single line of the loop. Thus, after separating one D2 for each loop, the the number of the remaining D2 factor must be even. These can be converted into momenta, using (A.7). References 1. S. Doplicher, K. Fredenhagen, J. E. Roberts, "The Quantum Structure of Spacetime at the Planck Scale and Quantum Fields", Commun. Math. Phys. 172, 187 (1995). 2. R. Jackiw, "Physical Instances of Noncommuting Coordinates", talk at School on String Theory, Istanbul, Turkey, 2001, hep-th/0110057. 3. H. Snyder, Phys. Rev. 71, 38 (1947). 4. N. Seiberg and E. Witten, "String Theory and Noncommutative Geometry," JHEP 9909, 032 (1999), hep-th/9908142. 5. P. Kosinski, J. Lukierski and P. Maslanka, "Noncommutative Parameters of Quantum Symmetries and Star Products", hep-th/0012056.
288 6. G. Amelino-Camelia, L. Doplicher, S. Nam and Yun-Seok Seo, "Phenomenology of Particle Production and Propagation in String-Motivated Canonical Noncommutative Sapacetime", hep-th/0109191. 7. B. A. Campbell and K. Kaminsky, "Noncommutative Field Theory and Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking", Nucl. Phys. B581, 240 (2000), hep-th/0003137; "Noncommutative Linear Sigma Models", Nucl. Phys. B606, 613 (2001), hepth/0102022; F. J. Petriello, "The Higgs Mechanism in Noncommutative Gauge Theories, Nucl. Phys. B601, 169 (2001), hep-th/0101109. 8. N. Seiberg, L. Susskind and N. Toumbas, "Space/Time Noncommutativity and Causality", JHEP 0006:044 (2000), hep-th/0005015. 9. J. Gomis and T. Mehen, "Space-Time Noncommutative Field Theories and Unitarity", Nucl. Phys. B591, 265 (2000), hep-th/0005129. 10. L. Alvaxez-Gaume, J. L. F. Baxbon and R. Zwick, "Remarks on Time-Space Noncommutative Field Theories", JHEP 0105, 057 (2001), hep-th/0103069. 11. A. Bassetto, L. Griguolo, G. Nardelli and F. Vian, "On the Unitarity of Quantum Gauge Teories in Noncommutative Spaces", JHEP 0107, 008 (2001), hepth/0105257. 12. H. O. Girotti, M. Gomes, A. Yu. Petrov, V. O. Rivelles and A. J. da Silva, "The Low-Energy Limit of the Noncommutative Wess-Zumino Model", hepth/0101159. 13. L. Griguolo and M. Pietroni, "Wilsonian Renormalization Group and the Noncommutative IR/UV Connection", JHEP 0105, 032 (2001), hep-th/0104217. 14. H. O. Girotti, M. Gomes, V. O. Rivelles and A. J. da Silva, "A Consistent Noncommutative Field Theory: the Wess-Zumino Model", Nucl. Phys. B587, 299 (2000), hep-th/0005272. 15. K. G. Wilson and J. Kogut, Phys. Rep. 12, 265 (1974). 16. J. Polchinski, Nucl. Phys. B231, 269 (1984). 17. V. O. Rivelles, "Noncommutative Supersymmetric Field Theories", Braz. J. Phys. 31, 255 (2000), hep-th/0107022. 18. M. R. Douglas and N. A. Nekrasov, "Noncommutative Field Theory", hepth/0106048. 19. R. J. Szabo, "Quantum Field Theory on Noncommutative Spaces", hepth/0109162. 20. H. Weyl, Z. Physik 46, 1 (1949). 21. T. Filk, "Divergences in a Field Theory on Quantum Space", Phys. Lett. B376, 53 (1996). 22. I. M. Gel'fand and G. E. Shilov, "Generalized Functions", Vol. 1, Academic Press, 1964. 23. S. Minwalla, M. V. Raamsdonk and N. Seiberg, "Noncommutative Perturbative Dynamics", JHEP 02, 020 (2000), hep-th/9912072. 24. I. Ya. Aref'eva, D. M. Belov and A. S. Koshelev, "Two-Loop Diagrams in Noncommutative (pi Theory", Phys. Lett. B476, 431 (2000), hep-th/9912075. 25. M. Hayakawa, "Perturbative Analysis on Infrared Aspects of Noncommutative QED on R4, Phys. Lett. B478, 394 (2000), hep-th/9912094; "Perturbative Analysis on Infrared and Ultraviolet Aspects of Noncommutative QED on i? 4 ", hep-th/9912167. 26. A. Matusis, L. Susskind and N. Toumbas, "The IR/UV Connection in Noncom-
289 mutative Gauge Theories", JEEP 0012, 002 (2000), hep-th/0002075. 27. L. Bonora, M. Schnabl and A. Tomasiello, "A Note on Consistent Anomalies in Noncommutative YM Theories", Phys. Lett. B485, 311 (2000), hep-th/0002210. 28. M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, "Renormahzability of the Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theories on the Noncommutative Torus", JEEP 9906, 015 (1999), hepth/9903107. 29. A. Armoni, "Comments on Perturbative Dynamics of Noncommutative YangMills Theory", Nucl. Phys. B593, 229 (2001), hep-th/0005208. 30. D. Gross and A. Neveu, Phys. Rev. D 10, 3235 (1974). 31. O. Alvarez, Phys. Rev. D17, 1123 (1978). 32. E. Witten, Phys. Rev. D16, 2991 (1977). 33. I. Ya. Aref'eva, V. K. Krivoshchikov and P. B. Medvedev, Theor. Math. Phys. 40, 55 (1979). 34. A. D'Adda, P. Di Vechia and M. Luscher, Nucl. Phys. B152, 125 (1979). 35. A. C. Davis, J. A. Gracey, A. J. Macfarlane and M. G. Mithcard, "Mass Generation and Renormalization of Supersymmetric Sigma-Models and Some Other Two-Dimensional Theories", Nucl. Phys. B314, 439 (1989). 36. V. G. Koures andK. T. Mahanthappa, "Renormalization of a (2+1) Dimensional Supersymmetric Nonlinear a model in 1/JV Expansion", Phys. Rev. D 4 3 , 3428 (1991). 37. T. Matsuda "Tadpole Method and Supersymmetric O(N) Sigma Model", J. Phys. G22, 1127 (1996). 38. H. O. Girotti, M. Gomes, V. O. Rivelles and A. J. da Silva, "The Noncommutative Supersymmetric Nonlinear Sigma Model", hep-th/0102101. 39. E. T. Akhmedov, P. DeBoer and G. Semenoff, "Noncommutative Gross-Neveu Model at Large N", JEEP 0106:009 (2001), hep-th/0103199. 40. H. O. Girotti, M. Gomes, A. Yu. Petrov, V. O. Rivelles and A. J. da Silva, "The Three Dimensional Noncommutative Nonlinear Sigma Model in Superspace, Phys. Lett. B 5 2 1 , 119 (2001), hep-th/0109222. 41. J. Wess and B. Zumino, Nucl. Phys. B70, 39 (1974); Phys. Lett. B49, 52 (1974). 42. S. Ferrara and M. A. Lledo, "Some aspects of Deformations of Supersymmetric Field Theories", JEEP 0005, 008 (2000), hep-th/0002084. 43. S. Terashima, "A Note on Superfields and Noncommutative Geometry", Phys. Lett. B482, 276 (2000), hep- th/0002119. 44. J. Iliopoulos and B. Zumino, Nucl. Phys. B76, 310 (1974).
290 45. A. A. Bichl, J. M. Grimstrup, H. Grosse, L. Popp, M. Schweda and R. Wulkenhaar, "The Superfield Formalism Applied to the Noncommutative Wess Zumino Model", JHEP 0010:046 (2000), hep-th/0007050. 46. I. L. Buchbinder, M. Gomes, A. Yu. Petrov and V. Rivelles, "Superfield Effective Action in the Noncommutative Wess-Zumino Model", Phys. Lett. B517, 191 (2001), hep-th/0107022.
W H A T IS B E H I N D T H E TRICKS OF DATA ANALYSIS IN HIGH E N E R G Y P H Y S I C S
PHILIPPE GOUFFON Instituto de Fisica, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Caixa Postal 66318, 05315-970, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil E-mail: pgouffonQij.usp.br
This series of lectures on data analysis in HEP is by no means a complete course of statistics. The intention was to point to common tricks used in data analysis and the errors that come from ignoring the conditions that are assumed when the tricks are applied. Very often, "black box" programs or formulae are used blindly, without knowledge of their restrictions.
1. Introduction In order to go over a few of those tricks, some basic statistics knowledge is required so a summary is given here. This text follows what was presented in the transparencies. The outline of the talks was: • Basics — — — —
Probability x statistics Basic concepts Probability density functions (PDF) Measurement model
• Test of hypothesis • Confidence intervals • Fits — — — —
Maximum Likelihood Least squares Test of hypothesis Confidence intervals
When one reads an experimental article, one finds words like • good fit, good x2 (or bad x 2 ) • upper limit (upper bound) • 95% confidence interval or a 3 a effect
291
292 • • • • • • •
bump d.o.f, degrees of freedom, or a 2 c fit systematics (or statistics) dominated conservative estimate Bayesian approach non Gaussian tails etc...
One can even find these words in theoretical papers, since theoretical calculations do have uncertainties (besides errors). What is the meaning of those words, what are the assumptions behind them, how to read between the lines? 2. Bibliography There are many good textbook on statistics, data analysis. Most of them are not really suited for particle physicists. The following list was used for the preparation of the talks and is divided in decreasing order of complexity. • Hard core statistics - "Advanced Theory of Statistics", Kendall, Stuart., 5th ed, Oxford University Press, NY 1991 This one is for those who like the subject and want to go deep into it. • Related to HEP - "Statistical Methods in Experimental Physics", Eadie et al., North Holland 1971 - "Probability and Statistics in Particle Physics", Frodesen, Skjeggestad, Tofte, Universitetsforlaget 1979 • Crash course, emergency situation - Particle Data Group review (full listing) • Others - BIPM (and NIST) publications and standards 3. The basics In this section, we discuss some basic concepts and models needed to understand the underlying hypothesis on which the data analysis methods are built.
293 3.1. Basic
Concepts
• Random events and random variables - Random events are events that have more than one outcome, which is not predictable. - Random variables are associated with random events, they carry a value (measurement) related to the event. For example, the number of background counts measured by a Geiger-Miiller counter during 5 seconds. Its value is not predictable. • Probability distribution - Related to the probability that a random variable has a given value (discrete) or a value that falls between two limits (continuous). - The distribution reflects the properties of the random events. - The knowledge of the properties of the events allows one, in principle, to derive a probability distribution and thus calculate probabilities. In practice, most of the time one has to do Monte Carlo simulations in order to get a good idea of the distribution and compare it with data. • Independence - A very important concept that is implied in many data analysis methods and ignored, leading to wrong conclusions - Events are dependent when the knowledge of some error on one allows predictions to be made for another event. In other words, two events (and the values associated with them) are independent if a correction made on one does not affect the other. For example, if several laboratories use the same standard of calibration then their measurements are not independent: if the standard is found wrong and re-calibrated, all the values will be changed in a predictable manner. - The independence is measured by the correlation (or covariance). Independent data have a null covariance. The converse is not true, however. - Very often, the so called "systematic" errors (see below) are in fact due to dependence between measured values. 3.2. A Measurement
Model
In order to better understand data analysis and its limits, a simple model for the measurements is very helpful.
294 Let's suppose we want to measure a variable X, associated with a random event, for example the position of a detector. In order to make sense, the measured value must correspond to a so called true value fj, that is the real thing, that will not change during the experiment. If there is not such a true value, as for example, the number of particle with spin up in a sample of N particles, there is still the probability of having n particles in a given state, and this probability is fixed and can be associated with this concept of true value. The next assumption is that it is impossible to measure X without making some error. Error, in this context, is not an experimental wrong doing. It is just that one can't perfectly, with infinite precision, measure a value. The model says that one makes an infinite number of infinitesimal errors, the sum of which, the total error, is e. These e have equal chance of moving the value up or down, none is much larger than the other. Thus, the expected (mean) error is null: (e)=0 and the variance is not:
In this model, each measurement Xi has then a different value: Xi = n + t{ but the average value tends to the true value (i and the variance is a2: (Xi) = (fJ.) + (£;) = fl
((Xi - M) 2 ) = (e2) = ex2 . The main point here is that if we repeat a measurement, we should get different values that can't be guessed. However, if we make an histogram, they should accumulate around fx. This is so because it is very unlikely that most of the errors add up in the same direction, as they have individually the same probability of being positive or negative. In fact, it can be shown that this model leads to a Gaussian distribution with a central value equal to /*, as a consequence of both the Central Limit Theorem and the law of large numbers. If we reverse the reasoning, a non Gaussian histogram of measurements means that al least one the hypothesis is not verified, for example that there is some "error" that dominates. Does it mean that if one repeats the measurements a very large number of times, n will be reached? The answer is no. One limit is the precision of the instrument. Even if the average of the measurements is known to a large
295
precision, the calibration of the instruments becomes a cause of uncertainty that can't be removed by further measurements with the same instruments or different ones calibrated the same way. This has to do with two type of errors (separated just for didactic purpose): the random error, related to precision (how reproducible is a result) and the systematic error, related to the accuracy (how calibrated is the instrument). Systematic errors should be treated as covariance between measurements. An example of this is given at the end, under "error propagation". Finally, the existence of few errors that dominate the measurements can lead to distributions that are not Gaussian (the so called non-Gaussian tails). 3.3. Probability
Density
Functions
Probability Density Functions (PDF), also known as distributions, are functions that show how the values of a random variable are distributed. From them one can calculate expectation values (average), standard deviation, asymmetries, etc. But the main use is to calculate the probability that a random variable will have a value in a given range. This can be used in two ways: as a forecast, to evaluate how many values will happen to be in that range (in order to design an experiment, for example), or to compare it with experimental values to look for anomalies. From the characteristics of one event, it is possible to deduce the PDF that will represent the values of the associated random variable. Any textbook will give the formulas for the binomial distribution, the Poisson distribution, the Gaussian (or normal) distribution so there is no reason to do that here. However, it may be interesting to look at the characteristics of events that correspond to these distributions. Binomial events are characterized by having only two possible outcome, A and B, mutually exclusive (both can't happen at the same time) and complementary (there is no other possibility). The probability of A happening is p, fixed and known. Thus, B has a probability q = 1 — p of happening. Also, there is a known and fixed number of candidates for this event (called trials). The number of successes (NA) is counted, that is, the number of times that one (A) of the two possible outcome happened. One important detail also is that if one outcome happens, it does not affect the probability of that (or the other) outcome happen later. So if all these conditions are met, the event follows a binomial distribution. One example is be the number of events in one histogram bin. It may be binomial because either it falls in the bin or out of it. However, it will only be so if the total number of events is known before and fixed! Poisson events are more subtle to characterize. Very often one uses a limit
296 of the binomial in which the probability of observing the event goes to zero but the number of trials goes to infinity in such a way that the product is finite (it will be the average number of observations). But this does not encompass all the possible Poisson events. In fact, the Poisson distribution gives the probability of finding exactly r events in a given length of some quantity (like time, length, surface, etc..) if the events occur independently from each other at a constant rate (per unit of that quantity). The conditions for Poisson events are: 1) the probability of finding one event is independent of the origin (in the sense of coordinate) chosen, 2) the probability of finding one event is proportional to the length of the interval (p oc XI) and 3) the occurrence of one event has no effect on the others. There 3 conditions must be respected. If not, one may get into wrong results. Such an example is given below. One interesting consequence of the second requirement is that the probability of finding no events decreases exponentially with the quantity. For example, if an event rate is A events/second, then the probability of getting no events is proportional to e~xt. That means that Poisson events tend to come in chunks, many together followed by long intervals without any event. This is easily observed in background radiation, cars along a highway and the well known Murphy's law. An example of mis-identification of what is a Poisson event is discussed in some details in Eadie et al. (p. 53), a false indication of a free quark finding (McCusker, PRL 23(1969)658), which consisted in counting the number of droplets per unit length in a cloud chamber. The probability of a relativistic particle causing condensation by ionization is constant per unit length and if it causes ionization at a given place, it does not change the probability of doing it again anywhere else. This satisfies all 3 conditions above. The first analysis assumed that each interaction created one droplet, so the probability of finding a track with 110 droplets/u.l. when the average was 229 was virtually zero (1.6 10~ 18 ). However, this was questioned by (Adair, PRL 23(1969)1355) with the argument that the ionization process is Poisson, yes, but each interaction yields 4 droplets. This brings the probability of seeing the signal (27.5 ionizations/u.l.) to 6.7 10~ 6 , to be compared with the experimental 1 in 55000. A further analysis, using the fact that the production of droplets is also Poisson with an average of 4 droplets per interaction yields a probability of getting 110 droplets/u.l. or less to 4.7 1 0 - 5 , not significant at all. The final distribution is called a compound Poisson distribution. This example shows how critical it is to properly identify the characteristics of the underlying events that affect the measurements, in order to choose the right distribution.
297 4. Confidence Intervals 4.1.
Introduction
From the measurement model discussed above, if one assumes that there are no systematic errors and if a measurement is repeated many times and histogrammed, the histogram should show a concentration of values in a small region (if the bins are properly chosen). What can be extracted from that histogram? • the number of events N (if it was not known before) • the average of the measurement, x "1
"I
^bins
i=l
j=l
2
• the variance <7 (and standard deviation a) 2 °~ ~
1
L
~TT
N
W 7X /
N-1*-^
i=i
N
x
\i
JV —\2 - X) = —
'
N-l
dl
N
V^ 2 —2 —- > Xil — X
L
N ^
«=i
a is related to the precision of the measurement and represents the RMS value of the random error. The larger iV is, the better x is known:
This indicates an apparently contradictory requirement: in order to improve the result (to lower a^) the random error is necessary. But one must remember that as N increases and thus a^ decreases, there is a point where this so called statistical error becomes smaller than the accuracy of the instrument, which is related to the systematic error, unknown. There is usually no use in improving the result by increasing the number of measurement beyond this point. So, what can be said about Xi and x (and also a and er^)? • we can estimate P(a < Xi < b), the probability of measuring X{ between a and b • we can accept a value Xk as belonging to the same set of values as {x^} (compatibility test) • we can compare the estimated a (precision, resolution) with what we expect (from vendor specifications, Monte Carlo simulation, e t c . ) . If we repeat the experiment over and over again and calculate x and then histogram x, what should we get? Is P(a <x
298
have a theoretical value for /i, the true value of x, how can we compare it to xi and x? =>• We need to discuss intervals. 4.2.
Intervals
An interval [a, b] has a probability contents or a confidence level /? if the probability of finding the value fx in it is /?: ^ ( o < M < &) = /
/(a;)da; = £ .
•/ a
=>• One should know /(a;), the P.D.F. However, if /(a;) is known functionally but its parameters are not, one can get an interval for them: P(fj, + c<x
+ d) — P(x — d < /j, < x — c)
= P =>• a measurement of x yields an interval for /x. Intervals can be one sided or two sided, it depends on what is wanted. For example, the calibration of a weigh scale, for physics, needs a two sided interval, as the important information is whether it is calibrated or not, while for commercial purposes, the interval is single sided, the important information being if the quantity is not less than the marked one. 4.2.1. Example Suppose a density measurement yields d = (1.35 ± 0.33)g/cm3. There are two expected values for that material, /ii — 1.7g/cm3 and fii = 2.0g/cm3. From a cumulative normal distribution table, one gets that a 90% two sided interval goes from — 1.645CT to +1.645
299 (3) 2.0 ± 1.645 x 0.33 = [1.46; 2.54], the interval based on the theoretical value / ^ and the standard deviation from the data (0.33). This interval does not contain the experimental average x — 1.35. It corresponds to an interval that has a 90% probability of measuring x if the true value is fa • All three intervals have the same probability contents (90%). From the distributions, one can compute an interval where the measurements have a probability /3 of falling. In fact there is an infinite number of such intervals (if /? ^ 1) and usually the smallest one is chosen. One must take seriously the meaning of /?: (1 — /?) of the times, x will be out of the interval even if the correct values for the parameters of the distribution are known (and used) A very good example of this fact can be seen in the introduction of the Long Listing of the PDG, in the plots of some published values as a function of the publication date. 4.3. Confidence
Belts
We have seen that from the parameters of a distribution it is possible to compute intervals for measured values and vice versa. In order to build confidence belts, that will define limits on parameters given a measurement, one calculates limits t\ and t2 for a given value 9 of the parameter, varying this parameter 6: 0 = P(ti =
= f2 f(t(6))dt . Figure 1 shows the process of building confidence belts. 5. Test of Hypothesis In the example of intervals above, there were two theoretical values fi\ and fa that were compared with an interval defined by the experimental result. An alternative method of dealing with this problem is the test of hypothesis, described here. 5.1. Basic
Concepts
• Null hypothesis (Ho) This is the hypothesis against which a value is tested, for example, is
300
e2
e 9!
r
v?
t2(Q)
*l(©)
Figure 1. Building a confidence belt (solid lines). Varying 0, one gets the corresponding limits t\(6) and £2(0), shown as a dashed line. Later on, when tmeas if measured, the corresponding limits on 6, B\ and 02 are found (dotted lines).
x = (j, = 4?. Usually, the test is chosen in such a way that the rejection of Ho is the desired result - a theory is never confirmed, it is "not rejected". Alternate hypothesis (Hi) (can be "not i?o") Used when there are two competing possibilities to be tested against each other. Assuming one variable x (called statistics), fi is the space of x values, that is, all the values that x can take. The critical region u (also known as rejection region) is the range of values of x that would invalidate the null hypothesis HQ. Thus, Q — UJ is the acceptance region, in which a value x would not invalidate the hypothesis HQ. The level of significance a, also known as the size of the test, is the probability of rejecting H0 when H0 is true: P(x
€ CJ\H0) = a
301
• The alternative, (1 — /?), is called power of the test: P(x £ w|ffi) = 1 - / 3 or
P(x e il-w\Hi)
= /3
5.2. Errors In an ideal world, one would accept Ho when it is true and reject it when it is false. But this does not happen and it is possible to make mistake, in fact it is impossible not to make them: there are two type of errors defined for a test of hypothesis: • The type I error, also known as loss, is the rejection of HQ when Ho is true. It is related to the level of significance a mentioned above. As soon as a is fixed to a non zero value, then in a of the cases, the value of x will fall in u, forcing the rejection of HQ even though it is true. • The type II error, also known as contamination, is the acceptance (or the lack of rejection) of H0 when HQ is false. It is related to the power of the test /J.Even if the alternate hypothesis is true and Ho is false, there is a chance /? of accepting HoFigure 2 shows the meaning and compromise of a and /?. The choice of a and i
•
'
'
'
'
i
•
•
'
•
i
H,
Figure 2. Plot of a null hypothesis Ho and an alternate Hi probability distributions. When a is defined, it also defines /?, eventhough it is possible to make the critical value different for each.
(3 is very much subjective and depends on how much one may loose (a) or
302
accept a contaminated sample (/?). It is clear that a small value for a in order to minimize the loss will increase the chance of accepting Ho when it is false
5.3. Where is the test of hypothesis
used
Very often, when dealing with situation where a decision has to be made, there is a test of hypothesis hidden, with a level of loss and contamination to be chosen. In Particle Physics, the most common situations are: • Particle identification: in a detector that should separate particles according to some criteria (momentum, mass, dE/dx, ...) there is usually a region of overlap between two particles (/i vs e, p vs w, e t c . ) . The choice of where to set a value below which a particle is called Pi and above which it will be Pi is clearly a question of loss and contamination, thus a test of hypothesis. • Cuts, which are very much like the particle identification: to choose events with a certain physical characteristic (mass, for example). If the region fl — w is small, the loss is large but the purity is improved. • Fits (x2 tests, see later) are also a good example of test of hypothesis. If one uses a standard (5-95)% \ 2 interval to accept a fit, then a — 10% is the risk of rejecting a fit that should have been accepted, the loss that usually one accepts to have in order to avoid accepting bad datasets or the wrong function. However, if one has 100 fits to do, rejecting 10 sets may be too "expensive" and a lower a may be more reasonable. 5.4.
Subtleties
There are several subtleties in the test of hypothesis, which become obvious when one goes into the real world. First, the PDF must be known in order to optimize the test power (the ideal balance between a and /?)• There is the same danger as discussed above, of not knowing the correct nature of the event. There is also the problem of mis-identifying fi and w, thus discarding more events than expected. Very often, the chosen method is simulation. Second, there are several tests and statistics that are available. Which one is the best? There are the power functions, discussed in many text books, that can give some mathematical comfort, but very often only practice will dictate the proper choice. Third, there is a great deal of subjectivity in setting a and j3, as mentioned above. Loss is also called cost and can be counted in $. For example, the
303
quality control in a factory can lead to a production loss (a large) but also to the loss of costumers if too many bad products pass the control (a small). Another example would be nuclear power plants shielding and emergency protection. The risk must be pretty small because the cost of an accident will be astronomical. Finally, a lighter example would be of a young physicist having a result that would not be accepted by a well established theory using a reasonable a value and be perfectly compatible with a new, untested one: he would have to evaluate the risk of breaking his future career against his chance of going to Sweden. What has been discussed above is for a one-dimension variable x. However, there are techniques for 2D, 3D . . . nD (composite hypothesis test) that are available, very similar in concept to what was said above. In dimensions larger than 1, f2 can be made of small disconnected domains, which make tests harder to visualize. A final note: as for the intervals, where events could — and will — fall out of the desired regions, errors I and II are unavoidable, so it is impossible to make a decision based on a test of hypothesis without being wrong a of the time.
6. F i t s One of the most frequent use of statistical methods is to fit curves to data, in order to extract values for the parameters of a model that should represent the data. Together with the values, its uncertainties are also wanted. The sentences above touch many subjects that were discussed before: hypothesis test for values of a model, confidence intervals for values, even the quality of a fit. In what follows, the values obtained in the fit are called estimates and the formulas used are estimators. We will first discuss the so called point estimators, introducing the concept of maximum likelihood and the properties of estimators. Then we will move to the least-squares method (linear and non-linear) and finally to some tests of goodness of fit. Point estimators are "formulas" that give one value (point) from a series of measured values (the data). Examples would be the average, the standard deviation, the skewness, the parameters of a function, etc... There are many estimators for the same quantity. For example, the position of an histogram can be evaluated by the mean, the median or the mode (maximum). Each estimator has its qualities and problems. One of the most frequently used is the maximum likelihood estimator, which we will discuss now. Its properties will be discussed afterwards.
304
6.1. The Maximum
Likelihood
Let's suppose we measure a set of values N {xi}, corresponding to a quantity X whose true value is \i. We use an instrument that is well calibrated and the whole process has an uncertainty (precision) a. According to the simple model described above, the measurement process samples Xi from a Gaussian distribution of average fi and variance a1. If we histogram the data we should get a Gaussian shape distribution, centered around fi with a standard deviation a. Now, in fact, we don't know the values of fi and a (otherwise, why measure X?). How can we extract values from the data, that is, how can we get estimates for these parameters? In order to derive a method (estimator) for that, let's first suppose we know their values and the PDF (in this case a Gaussian, but it could be any distribution, as we will see later in the examples). Let F(£i\0 ) be the PDF of x given the true value of the parameters 9. Here, we use a vector because this discussion can be extended to multidimensional data points, not only ID measurements. Also, 6 is a vector of parameters, in the case of a Gaussian, the vector has two components, the average /x and the standard deviation a. F{xi\6 ) gives the (density of) probability of measuring the data point Xi given the values 0 of the parameters. We could compute the (density of) probability of having measured the set {xl} of N points: N
Now, this is only possible if we know the value of the parameters. But we don't! The concept of maximum likelihood is to state that what has been measured ({xi}) is what was most likely to happen given the real value of n and a. Thus, the method of maximum likelihood consists in maximizing £ with respect to the parameters. The formulas obtained are the maximum likelihood estimators and the values the estimates. For example, in the case above (gaussian),
F(x-i\9)=F(xi\»,o-) = -L^e-hC-^)2
.
V2ira Thus, -,
£
1
1 / « 1 - M \2
1
g 2^ " '
=
\F2SKO = —__
1 I *2-M-,2
y/2ira e
1
e 2^ " ' • • •
2 z-.-=U
„
y/2na ;
1 /^JV-^-,2
e 2^ * '
305
C can be maximized relative to n and o~: N
\n£ = -JVln ( v & ) - I £ d\n£ 0/i
= 0
feliiY
; ^=^E N
n
d\nC xi 2 = 0 ^2 = jj da N Y,( - ft The last equation needs some comments. In statistical books, the denominator for a2 is not N but N — 1. In fact, this formula would be correct if /x was known and we didn't use /Z instead. To use N instead of N — 1 will give values for a that are a little smaller than it should, because p, is a better value for the data that were collected than the true value p . The N — 1 corrects this tendency. This discussion leads to the properties of estimators. 6.1.1. Properties of Estimators Ideally, a good estimator should yield correct values and not be too sensitive to errors in measurements. Let's see what properties an estimator can have and what the maximum likelihood have. (1) Consistency The estimates tend to the correct value as the number of data points (N) increases: 0 -> 0O
when
N -> oo
(P(\§ - 0O\ > e) < rj) .
For example, the law of large numbers with respect to the average. (2) Bias The bias is the difference between the expected value E{6) and the true value 6Q: bN{0) = E{0) -0O = ((0 - 0O)) . An estimator is said to be unbiased if for all N, b^f(0) = 0. An estimator may be asymptotically unbiased if 6jy —> 0 as N increases. This is the case for the maximum likelihood estimate of
306 (a): consistent, unbiased, like:
i!
= ^B
Xi
XI
(b): consistent, biased, like:
(c): inconsistent, unbiased (d): inconsistent, biased
Figure 3. increases.
How bias and consistency
reflects on the P D F when the number of entries JV
(4) Efficiency An estimator is more efficient than another if it has a smaller variance. For example, the variance of teh average is smaller than the variance of the median. In fact, there is only one estimator that has the minimum variance. If one can write the derivative of £ as a function that depends only on the parameter 6 times the difference between the estimator 0 and the parameter, dlnC de
=
A{9)
[e - e]
then the estimator 6 has a minimum variance (and is unique). The variance is
V{0) = { E
dlnC 86 -l
H a ? 2 ) e=ei A(d) For example, in the Gaussian case discussed above, In
r = -*_(,/&)-IWs^V
307
dlnC de
= E: N ~75 JV
vE 1 *- M
"
N
So /t = -^ ^ Z j has a variance CT2/AT and it is the minimum one. However, for the variance a2, it does not work: 6>m£=
N
|
E(^i-M)2
5CT
7V
N because the form is not as required: 8 — *"^XiN **' depends also on the other parameter, \x. The maximum likelihood estimators are consistent and asymptotically unbiased It is possible to get a good estimate of a2 from In C by plotting In C against 9 as seen in figure 4.
Figure 4. Plot of In £ as a function of a parameter. The line situated at — 1/2 below the maximum of In C defines an interval of 2
308
Having found the maximum of InC, the values of 6 that correspond to In CM AX — 0.5 define a la region (68%) and In CM AX — 2 define a 4
Estimators
The least squares (LS) method can be seen as a particular case of the maximum likelihood method, in which the data PDF is a Gaussian. Thus, the LS estimators are consistent and asymptotically unbiased. The general formula
can always be used, even if the data are not Gaussian, but in that case, since they did not come from the maximum likelihood function, the estimators may not have the good properties just mentioned. Least squares are use routinely and usually blindly, leading to wrong results and wrong decisions. It is critical to understand what LS means in order to be able to interpret results correctly. In the following sections, we will discuss in some details: • • • •
straight line fit (to see the passage from maximum likelihood to LS) generalized linear function (with covariance) non linear fits a estimates, \ 2 distribution and test, residuals, etc...
6.2.1. Straight Line Fit Let's suppose that the data have a linear dependence. The model for the fit is yt = a + bx, + Ci where Cj is the error, distributed according to a Gaussian distribution of average H = 0 (no systematic error) and variance of. The likelihood function and its
309 logarithm are then
C(x\a,b)-l['7f^-e~2{
"
i=l V(27r)ai
\n£ =
]
-N\nV^-^\nai-\(jryi-a-bXi)2 \i=l
i=X
°l
)
To maximize C (or l n £ ) is equivalent to minimize Q in the expression (1) above. The solution of the system ^ =0 ^ =0 da db will give the estimators a and b for the line. This system can be written in a matrix notation: MA = D where
»=i
*
k-\
N
Dk = E ^ V Ai
=a
A2-b
The solution is A=M~1D M _ 1 is the covariance matrix of a and b. What would be the meaning of the covariance between a and b (
GaOb
En
5
Ir^x? °t V o\
W
pab is an adimensional number between —1 and + 1 that tells how much a and b are correlated, that is, after the fit, how much changing a will affect b and vice versa (aba — Gab)- For a straight line, it is easy to understand. If
310
the all positive, then if the angular coefficient increases, the linear one will tend to decrease, so the correlation is negative (thus the minus sign in the equation (2)). If the x^s are all negative, an increase of the angular coefficient will lead to an increase of the linear one. And... if the X{ are balanced between negative and positive (with weight 1/of) in such a way that the barycenter is at x = 0, then any change in one coefficient will have no effect on the other. A very interesting aspect of this fit is that M depends only on Xi and
^2ak9k(x)
y=
k=0
where a^ are the parameters we want to fit, gk a function that does not depend on ai and x is a set of independent variables (abscissae) in the case of multidimensional fit. If we make a set of N measurements of j/j at convenient values of £$, we can write the model as 2/1 = a0#oO?i) + a1g1(xi)
+ ••• + aM gM{xi) + ex
2/2 = ao 0oO?2) + ai 9\ {x2) + ••• + aM 9M 0?2) + £2
2/iv = ao 9O(XN) + ax giixw) + ••• + aM 9M{XN)
+ ejv
where e* is the error, from a Gaussian with mean fi = 0 and standard deviation Cfc. This system can be rewritten as (Vi\ 2/2
\ynj
( go{xi)
ai 01(11)
«M5M(^I)
ffo0?2) ai 51(12)
a.M9M{x2)
\9O{XN)
ai#i(zjv) ••• aMgM{xN))
\
f a0 \ a\ \OM/
£2
\ZN)
311
which can be rewritten in a matrix form: Y = XA + e X is called the design matrix because it comes from the model. In this method, we can also introduce the variance matrix of the measurements, where the covariances between values (systematic errors?) can be included:
/*?
v=
012
^13
0~1N\
021
-I
023
02JV
(731
032
V 0AT1
0^2
0~3N 0JV3
Now, the sum of the squares Q becomes
Q = (Y- XA)1 V'^Y - XA) which, when minimized, has the solution A=(XtV-1X)-1XtV~1Y and VJ4 = ( X * V - 1 X ) - 1
is the variance matrix of the fitted parameters A. This is the most general linear fit one can do with correlated data (and uncorrelated data too). Just for information, if we want to estimate confidence intervals for the parameters Ao, assuming the distribution is a Gaussian, it will be a multivariate normal distribution, whose PDF is f(A)
=£exp
-I^-^v-1^-^)
where B is a normalizing factor. 6.2.3. Example (from O.Helene) An experimenter wants to estimate the signal So and the background BQ from 3 measurements: Meas. 1
What was measured only background
Duration h = 10s
Counts 2/i = 5 8
2
signal + background
t2 = 5s
2/2=36
3
signal only (!)
h = 10s
2/3=31
312
(1) Covariance matrix V: using a from a Poisson distribution: a = *Jn and assuming that the measurements are independent: V =
/ 58 0 \ 0
0 36 0
0 \ 0 J 31 /
(2) Design matrix the model is: yield = B0h + Sots + error, where h is the duration of the background measurement time and ts is the duration of the signal measurement time (they could be different)
©-(; 3 <»•(:)• (3) Solution
X*V_1X =
1/58 0 0
10 0
0 1/36 0
0 \ / 10 0 5 1/31 / \ 0
0 \ 5 10 /
_ / 2.419 0.694 \ _
V °- 694
3 920
-
/
v^ _ (x v x) - ^ _Qm
Q 26Q
j
1 = vA = (x'v-ix^x'v-V = ( 52f8 ) (4) Results: B0 = (5.39 ± 0.66) counts/s S0 = (2.88 ± 0.52) counts/s (TBoSo = -0.077 Notes: • The third measurement is not very realistic (no background) but the idea here is to show the potential of the method
313
• This method allows the simultaneous use of the background only and background+signal data, that will give a better estimate of the background: all the information is used! • Also, each measurement is independent of the other, so the covariance between the data is zero. If we subtract the average of the background from the signal+background measurements, the data points would be correlated! • From this analysis the covariance between the fitted signal and the background comes naturally and can be used in further computations. By the way, why is it negative? 6.2.4. Non Linear Least Squares This is unfortunately the most frequent situation and the one most prone to errors. Let's assume we have a generic function F(x,a), not linear in a (here also, x could be a vector). The sum of the squares Q is written as usual
^ (y{ -
F(xi,a)
Q = Y,
2
o-i
However, the system formed by the derivatives, -$*- = 0 will not be linear in the parameters. One has to use numerical methods such as grid search, gradient search, linearization or any minimization recipe (applied directly to Q). One very convenient method now available is the "solver' tool in spreadsheets like MS Excel. Or well known packages like Cern's Minuit. Once the parameters that minimize Q are found, we need the uncertainties. There are two ways of getting them: (1) Like the maximum likelihood method, one can plot Q as a function of one parameter and this time, find the parameter values that will increase Q by one unit to define a 2
_,
f
N
1
dF
3F So
9a
r>
and then invert it. The derivatives must be calculated at the point of minimum Q. It will be the variance matrix for the parameters. This is an approximate method that will give symmetrical uncertainties, even
314
though very often in non linear fits the "error bars" are not symmetrical. The first method will give asymmetrical uncertainties. As mentioned above, non linear fits are tricky. There are several dangers that will hit unexperienced people: (1) Local minima: very often, Q has more than one single minimum. This is easy to understand in the case of a periodical function but it happens also in other cases. The way out is to use the fact that most of the minimization methods are interactive and need a starting guess: repeat the fit starting from different initial guesses and see if it converges to the same solution. (2) Convergence: the iterative process can miss the minimum if the starting point is not chosen very well. Some methods converge faster if the guess is close to the minimum, others if it is far away. Also, the minimum may be very flat so the program may consider it converged even though it is far from the real minimum. This "feature" shows up in the uncertainty of the parameter, which will be very large. A frequent cause of difficulty to reach convergence is a badly built function. A typical example is to fit an exponential F(x) = Ae~Xx + B and considering the fit almost good, decide that adding a constant C in the exponent will be better: F{x) = Ae~Xx+c
+ B
C and A have the same effect on the exponential: they define the amplitude: F(x) = Ae-xce~Xx
+ B = A'e-Xx+C
+B .
A robust fitting program will decrease A while increasing C and then reverse the process and will never converge. A weak program will just crash. The correlation matrix will have a nice —1 at the position PAC ! (3) Bias: if the measurement errors are not Gaussian then a non linear fit may be biased. The way of checking that is by simulation, generating datasets that are fitted and the results compared with the "true value" that in this case is well known. Sometimes the bias can be corrected. (4) Uncertainties: they may be wrongly estimated by the matrix method above. For nonlinear fits, the intervals may be formed by disconnected small intervals or the interval not be symmetrical with respect to the fitted value. These are non Gaussian errors that are hard to deal with
315
in further calculations. Once again, simulation is the right tool to see what the fit gives back. 6.3. The x2 Test and Residuals
Analysis
Both maximum likelihood and least squares methods will give back numbers for the fitted parameters and their uncertainties. What many people forget is that these methods give the answer to what was asked, that is, what parameters will maximize In C (or minimize Q) for the function selected and the assumed PDF. If the question does not make sense, like to fit a constant to a parabola, there will be an answer, probably a correct one, that also does not make sense. In order to evaluate how well the function represents the data after it has been fitted, several methods can be used, of which two will be discussed: the \2 test and the analysis of residuals. However, there is a level 0 method that is often ignored (by black box users at least) but is probably the best for a quick check: plain old plot of the fitted function overlaid on the data. 6.3.1. The x2 Test First of all, what is a x 2 ? If a random variable Zi is normally (Gaussian) distributed with mean fi = 0 and standard deviation a = 1, then N
X%=Y: i-l
is a x
with N degrees of freedom. Its average is (XN) — N and its variance
What is its relation with least squares, to the point that very often we hear the expression "chi squared fit"? Well, the definition of Q above (equation (1)) is a sum of terms of the type I y'~f\x<> j . If • f(xi) is the true value of j / , • the PDF of the errors of yt is a Gaussian with average /i = 0 and variance a\ • of is indeed the variance of yi then Zi = Vi
is normally distributed with mean /j, = 0 and standard deviation a = 1, that is, Q is a x 2 variable with N — p degrees of freedom, p is the number of
316
parameters. There are N - p degrees of freedom because of the N terms in Q, p are not "free" as there were already p data points used in the fit. So, yes, there is a link between the least squares method and the x 2 . If, and only if, the conditions laid above are true, Q is a x 2 random variable. Now, the x2 PDF, shown in figure 5, can be used to perform a test of hypothesis. As 0.125
0.100
0.075
i£ 0.050
0,028
0.000 C
Figure 5. x2 distribution for 10 degreses of freedom. Exclusion regions of 5% on each side are shown
said in the test section, the strength of such a test is to reject an hypothesis. So, Ho will be the function fitted represents well the data, a represents the chance of rejecting this hypothesis when it is true. Usually, a = 10%, 5% on each side. The real meaning of the x2 comes from the fact that it is a random variable, that is, if the measurements axe repeated, they will be slightly different (each data point will fluctuate according to a normal distribution) so the fit will be different (that's the meaning of the uncertainty of the fitted coefficients) and so will be the x 2 - So, even if the true function is the one that is being fitted, once in a while the x 2 will be too high or too low to be accepted, an error type I. • A x 2 that falls between the limits set by the 5% limits on each side will just mean that the hypothesis is not rejected. It does not mean that the function is the good one. • If the x 2 Wis above the upper limit, the hypothesis is rejected. In 5% of the times, this is wrong, that is, this is an accident. If the cost of such an accident is high, one can raise the limit. • If the x 2 is below the lower limit, the fit is too good to be true and should be also rejected.
317
The three cases are standard interpretation and are the right ones IF all the assumptions about the data and the function are correct. Now, let us revisit these cases, but not in the same order: • The x2 is too high. Assuming it is not an accident, which will be true 95% of the time, what can make a x 2 too high? Either a large numerator or a small denominator. Respectively, the function does not represent the data or the uncertainties Oi are underestimated. The two options can be separated by looking at the residuals (see below). It may be also that the error PDF is not a Gaussian and have large tails that allow the values to fluctuate more than the cr* in a Gaussian would allow. • The x2 is too low. Assuming it is not an accident, which will be true 95% of the time, what can make a x2 too low? Either a small numerator or a large denominator. The large denominator is an easy one: uncertainties are overestimated, not unfrequent for conservative experimenters. The small numerator, if not an accident, tells a lot about someone's attitude towards data picking rather than data collecting. The only way of having a small numerator is by removing points that do not behave like expected. No further comments on that except that statistics only works when there is no human interference with the experimental results. Besides removing "bad" measurements, a practice that is often used is data smoothing. If the so called "error propagation" is not properly handled, the effect will be small fluctuations. Data smoothing introduces correlations between the data points and more often than not they are not taken into account. If this is the case, including the covariances in the fit will recover the right value for the X2• The x 2 is in the acceptance region. Well, it is perfectly possible to have an acceptable x 2 with the wrong function if the uncertainties are large enough to accommodate the deviation between the data and the curve. In this case again, the analysis of the residuals can tell a lot.
6.3.2. The Reduced x2 Very often, the reduced x2 (x2ed — X2 lvi where v is the number of degrees of freedom) is used for a quick test. Since the average of the x 2 distribution is equal to the number of degrees of freedom, the expected value for x2red *s o n e Thus the common expression "the x2 is close to one". But how close? As said
318 above, a22 = 2N so
X-red
\j J\f
An acceptable range (~ 95%) for "one" would be interval is not symmetrical, except for large N.
l±2,/£
However, the
6.3.3. The Use of Q to Compare Fitted Functions All that was said up to now is for "serious" statistics, using the value of the X2 as a valid number. However, the x2 c a n D e used even if the uncertainties are wrong or the distribution not Gaussian. In fact, in that case, formally Q is not a, x2- It should not be used for testing purpose (rejecting or accepting a fit), but as a comparison between several possibilities. In that sense, the lower the x2 the better, taking into account the differences of degrees of freedom (a fit of a function of N parameters to N data points will yield a null x2 and basically no information). An increase of the number of parameters to be fitted should decrease the x2 • There is a test of significance for that, called the "Fisher F test", that evaluates how relevant is the additional parameter based on how much the x2 diminishes (the expectation, obviously, is one per additional parameter — one less degree of freedom — so a decrease larger than one per degree of freedom may be significant). A secondary, undesirable effect of increasing the number of parameters is a large increase in the uncertainty of all the parameters.
6.3.4. Residuals The residuals or pull variables measure the difference between the measured value and the fitted value in units of its standard deviation 3 T%
Vi =
F(xi\a) o-i
If the errors are Gaussian and the function is the right one, r^ has a normal distribution with mean zero and standard deviation one. If we make a plot of rj vs Xi, we expect • half the points above zero and half below • 68% within [ - ! ; + ! ] , 95.4% within [-2;+2] a
Some authors use the word residual to designate only the numerator.
319 • since r, are random, each have a 50% chance of being positive (or negative) so it is very unlikely that more than 3 or 4 in sequence be positive (or negative). Thus, we don't expect many points in sequence on the same side of the axis.
From this, it is clear that the points must be scattered around the axis and there should be no pattern like some points above followed by a series below and then again several above. This pattern would indicate that there is a difference of shape between the data and the function, even if the x2 is acceptable, a hint that the standard deviations of the points are overestimated. This plot gives much more information than the regular yi vs X{ plot, as it deals with the differences rather than the absolute value. Also, being normalized by (Tj, point that are far away from the curve but with a corresponding large uncertainty will not show up as an outlier, while a point close to the curve with a tiny uncertainty will be easy to spot and may explain a large x2 • By the way, x2 = I > 2 .
7. "Error" Propagation Once a curve has been fitted to data and parameters extracted, very often these parameters are fed into some calculations in order to finally get to the physical quantity of interest. What to do with the uncertainties? In particular, together with the fit, we get the covariance matrix with the parameters uncertainties and covariances. Formally, to go from the fitted parameters to the final value is called a change of variables but it is more often called error propagation, which is not such a bad expression because if the fit is wrong, the errors (not the uncertainties) will be propagated too. The correct expression would be uncertainties propagation. The procedure is well known to any student so here we will see a more advanced version, that takes care of covariance and even of systematic errors. Let's assume we have a set of N variables Xi with their covariance matrix Vz. This could be the outcome of a fit. Also, we have M functions Fi of these variables Xj, forming a vector F. We compute the matrix elements
r
dFk OXl
320
( Fx (xi,x2,-.. F =
F2(xi,x2,-..
\FM(xi,x2,...
xN)
\
xN)
( dF\ dxx dF2 dxi G =
dF\ dx2 dF2 dx2
dxpj
dFM \ dx\
dFM dx2
dF M BXN
xN)J
dF\_\ 8XN
dF2
I
The covariance matrix for the new variables in vector F is VF = GVzG* Two examples will show what we can get out of this. First, suppose a parabola was fitted to data and now we want to know the interpolated values at two abscissae x± and x2. Then we have F =
ai + a2xi + a3xf a± + a2x2 + a3x2
VF
I"1
=
<7l2
^23
a2\ \^31
CTl3^
oz2
(l X\
°l ) \X\
l X2
\
X2 J
Vi? will be a 2x2 matrix with the covariance between «/j and y2. y\ and y2 are dependent since they came from the same fit. How many people remember that when they use yi and y2 in further calculations? VF = 'J/23/1
The detailed calculations for a^. and o"yiy2 are left to the reader. The second example is about "systematic errors". Let's suppose we have 2 measurements x\ and x2 of a quantity xo- Each has an error 6j, coming randomly from a normal distribution with null average and variance of. e* are independent. The measurements also share a common source of error, Gaussian too, whose average could be null or not, it does not matter here, and variance G\. The value of this error is S for both measurements. Xi can be modeled as a function which is the sum of 4 parts: a constant without error XQ, two random values e, and a random value 5.
321 The measured values are: X\ = X0 + €1 + S X2 = XO + £2 + S .
Thus,
G = (Q V =
v=
0
0 \
(l
l
\
0 a\
0
0
0
0
0 1
\0
0
o2.)
Vi i /
1 0
'°l+°2s 4 + °2s ,
This example shows very clearly why the so called systematic errors are, and should be treated as, covariances. The variance terms of + o\ are what the common practice does, to sum in quadrature the "statistical error" with the "systematic error". The covariance between the measurements is the variance of the common error as8. Conclusion The statistical treatment of experimental data is the only way of extracting the physical quantities that will be compared with predictions or other measurements. Many physicists treat their data with "black box" programs or methods without the knowledge of what goes inside, of what assumptions were made by the designers. This can lead to wrong answers and from that, wrong decisions, wrong discoveries and lots of headaches. These few hours of classes were aimed at calling attention to the underlying assumptions that are common to most of the data analysis practices. A good part of this comes from classes of "Advanced Topics in Statistics", a course offered once a year at the Institute of Physics, University of Sao Paulo. Examples were taken from the notes of this course and should be credited also to V. Vanin and O. Helene.
This page is intentionally left blank
T H E P H Y S I C S OF H A D R O N COLLIDERS
DAN GREEN Fermilab — CMS
Department
"Science is an integral part of culture. It's not this foreign thing, done by an arcane priesthood. It's one of the glories of the human intellectual tradition." Stephen Jay Gould (1990)
1. Questions Unanswered by the SM (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
(6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)
How do the Z and W acquire mass and not the photon? (Chapter 1) What is MH and how do we measure it? (Chapters 4, 5) Why are there 3 and only 3 light "generations"? (Chapter 6) What explains the pattern of quark and lepton masses and mixing? Why are the known mass scales so different? (AQCD ~ 0.2 GeV (strong interaction field) •C (<j>) ~ 174 GeV (electroweak scale) < MGUT ~ 1016 GeV (Grand Unified scale)
2. Overview The Standard Model (SM) of high energy physics has been one of the great syntheses of the human intellect. It began about a century ago with the discovery
323
324
of the electron, which was the first fundamental pointlike particle discovered. In the last decade, the elusive top quark and the neutrino have been discovered. Thus, the last remaining particle predicted by the SM, but as yet not discovered, is the Higgs particle, whose vacuum field gives mass to all the particles in the Universe. This text concentrates on the search for the Higgs particle at proton-(anti)proton colliders, those accelerators which collide proton and (anti)protons with one another. This Higgs particle is rather weakly coupled to matter. Thus, enormous efforts are required involving going to a new high energy frontier and dealing with greatly increased beam intensities in order to search for this object with the expectation of discovery within a reasonable period of time. The search is to be carried out at collider facilities at major international accelerator complexes. This text concerns itself almost exclusively with the search, as it will be carried out at proton-antiproton and proton-proton colliders. Indeed, there are complementary efforts at electron - positron colliders, but they are outside the scope of this book. The primary materials for this set of lectures is a set of six POWERPOINT "Chapters" posted by the author at the site: http://uscms.fnal.gov/uscms/dgreen with labels 1 through 6. In outline, Chapter 1 concerns itself with a summary of the Standard Model (SM), giving the particles comprising the SM and their interactions. The next four Chapters are concerned with the two initial questions which concern electroweak symmetry breaking and the Higgs boson mass. In Chapter 2 we explore a "generic" general purpose detector which is representative of those in use at proton-(anti)proton colliders. Specifically, we examine the extent to which the SM particles introduced in Chapter 1 can be cleanly identified and measured. The accuracy with which their vector momenta and positions can be measured is very important, as it will influence search strategies for the Higgs. Chapter 3 is concerned with the specific issues of particle production at a proton-(anti) proton collider. The relevant formulae are given that will enable the student to estimate reaction rates for any process. In addition, the COMPHEP program can be used to then refine the initial estimates. However, students are strongly encouraged to start with the 'back of the envelope" estimate before invoking COMPHEP or any other Monte Carlo program. Chapter 4 follows up with a discussion of how recent data taken at such colliders informs on the predictions of the SM. This section is a snapshot of the present state of the art in the physics of high transverse momentum phenomena as explored at hadron colliders. In Chapter 5 we start to venture beyond the bounds of current data. This
325
entire section is devoted to the upcoming search for the elusive Higgs boson. Much of the presentation concerns itself with the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at the European Center for Nuclear Research (CERN) because this facility, slated to become operational in 2006, was specifically designed to search for, and discover the Higgs scalar (spin zero). Nevertheless, we will see that the search may be long and arduous. Finally, in the last Chapter, we return to the remaining ten fundamental questions raised in the first, and listed above. Some hint of theories beyond the SM and their consequences is given. In particular, the possibility that a new symmetry of Nature, a super-symmetry (SUSY) relating space-time and spin, might be discovered in the near future is discussed. 3. Scope The mathematical complexity used here is no more than calculus. However, the concepts used require a good knowledge of quantum mechanics and special relativity with some acquaintance of field theory. Some knowledge of Feynman diagrams will be helpful but not essential, in part because examples are given in the text and because COMPHEP gives diagrams for any process which is specified. Thus, the student should be able to build up experience with Feynman diagrams using the tools supplied here. The intended audience is then very advanced undergraduates in physics or first year graduate students. Too often the wonderful story of the Standard Model is left to be told only to advanced graduate students who wish to pursue this specialty. Surely, this great intellectual structure deserves a wider, but still scientifically literate, audience. Full theoretical rigor has been sacrificed in an attempt to reach a wide and young group of students. 4. Tools In this book we have used a single computational tool extensively both in the examples given in the text proper, and in the problems. The aim was to expand the range of the text from a slightly formal academic presentation to a more interactive mode for the student. The hope was that the student could work the examples given in the text and then be fully enabled to do problems on her own. The COMPHEP program is freeware which is available to do calculations and to make graphs of results. We have taken the approach in the Chapters of first working through the algebra. That way, the reader can make a "back of the envelope" calculation of the desired quantity. Then she can use COMPHEP for a more detailed examination of the question. The web address where the
326
executable code(zipped) — b76i.zip and a users manual (Users_Manual.ps) for COMPHEP are posted by the author at the site given above. The use of Internet archives is rather advanced in high energy physics. One of the best places to search is at the Los Alamos site: http://xxx,lanl.gov. Looking under Physics to High Energy Physics — Experiment allows us to search on new preprints, recent preprints, abstracts or on topics of our choice using the find feature. Another large database of preprints and articles is at http://www-spires.slac.stanford.edu/find/hep. These sites allow you to find and download a host of interesting review articles. In fact, many of the figures used in this text, those not created by the author, were taken from articles pulled off these sites. Below is a short list of other references which may prove useful.
References for the Standard Model Review of Particle Properties, Phys. Rev D. Particles and Fields 50, August 1 (1994). D. Green, Lectures in Particle Physics, World Scientific (1994). J. D. Bjorken and S. D. Drell, "Relativistic Quantum Fields", McGraw-Hill, New York (1965). F. Halzen and A. D. Martin, "Quarks and Leptons", John Wiley, New York (1984). W. Cottingham and D. Greenwood, "An Introduction to the Standard Model of Particle Physics", Cambridge University Press (1998). J. R. Aitchison and A. J. G. Hey, "Gauge Theories in Particle Physics", 2nd ed., Adam Hilger, Philadelphia (1989). C. Quigg, "Gauge Theories of the Strong, Weak, and Electromagnetic Interactions", Benjamin/Cummings, Reading, Massachusetts (1983). K. Gottfried and V. Weisskopf, "Concepts of Particle Physics", Vol. 11, Oxford University Press, New York (1986). D. Green, "The Physics of Particle Detectors", Cambridge University Press (2000). K. Kleinknecht, "Detectors for Particle Radiation", Cambridge University Press (1987). T. Ferbel, "Experimental Techniques in High Energy Physics", AddisonWesley Publishing Co., Inc. (1987).
327
F. Sauli, ed., "Instrumentation in High Energy Physics", World Scientific (1992). J .C. Anjos, D. Hartill, F. Sauli and M. Sheaf, "Instrumentation in Elementary Particle Physics", Rio de Janeiro 1990, World Scientific Publishing Co. (1992). C. W. Fabjan and J. E. Pilcher, "Instrumentation in Elementary Particle Physics", Trieste 1987, World Scientific Publishing Co. (1988). C. W. Fabjan and H. F. Fisher, "Particle Detectors", Repts. Progr. Phys. 43, 1003 (1980). V. D. Barger and R. J. N. Phillips, "Collider Physics", Addison-Wesley, New York (1987). G. Altarelli and L. Dilella, "Proton-Antiproton Collider Physics", World Scientific (1989). L. Dilella, "Jet Production in Hadronic Collisions", Ann. Rev. Nucl. Sci. 35, 107 (1985).
Part.
M. Shapiro and J. Siegrist, "Hadron Collider Physics", Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 4 1 , 97 (1991). J. Huth and M. Mangano, "QCD Tests in Proton-Antiproton Collisions", Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science (1993). S. Wimpenny and B. Winer, "The Top Quark", Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science (1996). K. Tollefson and E. Varnes, "Direct Measurement of the Top Quark Mass", Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science (1999). G. Blazey and B. Flaugher, "Inclusive Jet and Dijet Production at the Tevatron", Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science (1999). D. Glenzinski and U. Heinz, "Precision Measurement of the W Boson Mass", 50, 207 (2000). I. Hinchliffe and A. Manohar, "The QCD Coupling Constant", 50, 643 (2000). J. Gunion, H. Haber, G. Kane and S. Dawson, "The Higgs Hunters Guide", Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. (1990). R. Donaldson and J. Marx, "Physics of the Superconducting Supercollider Snowmass 1986", World Scientific Publishing Company (1986). N. Ellis and T. Virdee, "Experimental Challenges in High Luminosity Collider Physics", Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science (1994).
328
"Compact Muon Solenoid", Technical Proposal, CERN/LHCC 94-38 (1994). ATLAS Collaboration, Technical Proposal, CERN/LHCC 94-43 (1994). P. Fisher, B. Kayser and K. McFarland, "Neutrino Mass and Oscillation", Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science (1999). A. Riotto and M. Trodden, "Recent Progress in B ary genesis", Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science (1999). G. Ross, "Grand Unified Theories", Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co. (1985). D. Bailin and A. Love, "Supersymmetric Gauge Field Theory and String Theory", Institute of Physics Publishing (1994).
LECTURES O N N O N C O M M U T A T I V E THEORIES
SHIRAZ MINWALLA Jefferson Physical Laboratory, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138
I review the UV-IR mixing in scalar non commutative field theories, solitons in these theories and the construction of theories with space time noncommutaivity (NCOS theories and OM theory).
1. Lecture 1: Perturbative Dynamics 1.1.
Introduction
In this lecture we analyse scalar field theory on a noncommutative space. This lecture closely follows the paper 14 . Related work has appeared in 1 _ 2 6 . For simplicity we focus on the case of the noncommutative lZd. Although noncommutative gauge theories appear in string theory 27 (see 28 and references therein for recent developments), through most of the lecture our discussion will be field theoretic. The underlying lZd is labeled by d noncommuting coordinates satisfying [x»,xv] = iQitv .
(1.1)
Here 0 M " is real and antisymmetric. By a choice of coordinates 0 can be brought to the form /
0 -0i
0! 0
\ .
(1.2)
Thus a 0 matrix of rank r describes a spacetime with | pairs of noncommuting coordinates and d — r. coordinates that commute with all others. The algebra of functions on noncommutative Tld can be viewed as an algebra of ordinary functions on the usual ~Rd with the product deformed to the noncommutative, associative star product, defined by {fa*
= e * ® " " ^ <M2/)>2(*)|y=2=x •
329
(1.3)
330
Thus, we will study theories whose fields are functions on ordinary TZd, with actions of the usual form S = f ddx£[
Rules
For any noncommutative theory, the quadratic part of the action is the same as in the commutative theory, since / ddx(j> *(/> = / ddx
(2.1) d
d
f d xd(j) * <9c/> = / d xd<j>d
(we have dropped total derivatives assuming suitable boundary conditions on 4>). Therefore propagators take their usual form, as in commutative theories.
331
The interactions are modified. We consider a polynomial interaction (perhaps with derivatives) L
5>„ 9 "- 2
(2.2)
n=3
where the powers of the coupling constant g are introduced for convenience, the coefficients an are arbitrary numbers, and the products of <(> are star products. In momentum space the interaction vertex of <j)n has an additional phase factor relative to the commutative theory V(h,k2,...,kn)
= e-i^
,
(2.3)
where ki is the momentum flowing into the vertex through the ith
This is the only modification to the Feynman rules. V is not invariant under arbitrary permutations of ki and so one must keep track of the order in which lines emanate from vertices in a Feynman diagram. (Using momentum conservation, it is easy to see that V(fci,..., kn) is invariant under cyclic permutations of fcj.) One way to keep track of the order of the lines is to view
Graphs
In a planar graph it is always possible to regard momentum as an additional index flowing along the double lines. That is, given an L loop planar graph, the momenta of all lines in the graph may be written in terms of 'momenta' l\,..., li-\-i that flow unchanged along an index line (see Fig. 1) of the graph. Like fundamental U(N) matrix indices, the index line momenta along adjacent edges of a given propagator flow in opposite directions. Therefore, the momentum through any propagator (or external line) in the graph is given by k - lj, where /j and lj are the index line momenta that flow along the adjacent edges
332
of the propagator. Since index line momenta are always conserved, this construction automatically implements momentum conservation at vertices. Note that such a construction is not possible in nonplanar graphs.
Figure 1. A planar graph in double line notation. T h e phase associated with, say, t h e middle propagator is I2 X I3 from the vertex V\ and -I2 x I3 from the vertex V2, adding to zero.
For any vertex of the graph, let the momenta entering the vertex through the n propagators be fci,fe,... ,kn, in cyclic order. Then hi = kt — h2 , &2 = h2 -h3,---,kn = hn - hx , in terms of which ( £ i < ? - h x kj) = lix x h2 +h2 x h3 + ' • • + hn x 'ti • Thus the phase factor at any interaction point may be expressed as the product of n terms, one for each incoming propagator, n
V = JJe - *(''' x,i »-+i) .
(2.5)
3=1
We see that the phase associated with any internal propagator is equal and opposite at its two end vertices, and so cancels. We conclude that the phase factor associated with the planar diagram is V(Pl,P2,...,Pn)=e-iZ«iPiXp>
,
(2.6)
where the sum is taken over all external momenta (in the original variables) in the correct cyclic order. This result is originally due to 1 and this derivation follows n . We note that this phase factor is exactly the one found in 2 8 by computing disk amplitudes in string theory. It is important that this phase factor is independent of the details of the internal structure of the graph. Thus, the contribution of a planar graph to the noncommutative effective action is precisely the contribution of the same graph in the 0 = 0 theory multiplied by V (pi,p2,.. .,p„). Such a 0 dependent
333
phase factor is present in all interaction terms in the bare Lagrangian and in all tree graphs computed either with the bare Lagrangian or with the effective Lagrangian computed with planar graphs. At 0 = 0, divergent terms in the effective action are products of local fields. V (pi,p2,. • • ,pn) modifies these to the star product of local fields. Divergences (due to planar graphs) in the effective action at 0 ^ 0 may therefore be absorbed into redefinitions of bare parameters, if and only if the 0 = 0 theory is renormalizable. We stress that this renormalization procedure is not obtained by adding local counterterms. The added counterterms are of the same form as the original terms in the Lagrangian but they are not local. 2.3. Nonplanar
Graphs
Nonplanar diagrams have propagators that cross over each other, or over external lines as in Fig. 2.
Akj
Figure 2. Two lines crossing in a nonplanar graph.
If, instead of crossing, the two lines in Fig. 2 had met at a (4 point) vertex, the graph would have had an additional phase factor of _ e~ikjxki j ^ w o m c i t, n e n have been planar e-%(.kjXki-kjXki-kixkj+kjXki) (as far as this crossing was concerned). Therefore, any nonplanar graph will have an extra phase e+ikjxki
^2.7)
for each crossing of momenta ki and kj in addition to the phase associated with the ordering of external momenta. The complete phase for a general graph may be written 1 V(p1,p2,...,Pn)e-i^^c^xk^
,
(2.8)
334
where V is as in (2.6), and dj, the intersection matrix, counts the number of times the ith (internal or external) line crosses over the j i h line. Crossings are counted as positive if fcj crosses kj with kj moving to the left.
Figure 3. ways.
The overlaps in a nonplanar Feynman diagram can be chosen in several different
The matrix dj corresponding to a given graph is not unique, since different ways of drawing the graph will lead to different intersections (see Fig. 3). However, all of these yield identical Feynman integrands; the ambiguity corresponds to the fact that the internal momenta ki of the graph are not all independent but are constrained by momentum conservation at each vertex. As the 0 dependence of nonplanar graphs does not factor out of the integral, nonplanar graphs at 0 ^ 0 behave very differently from their 0 = 0 counterparts. For instance, as we will see in section 3, all nonplanar one loop diagrams are finite. The improved convergence of nonplanar graphs is a result of the damping effects of rapid oscillations of internal momentum dependent phase factors in the integrand. Since each nonplanarity in a Feynman diagram results in a new internal momentum dependent phase factor in the Feynman integrand, one is tempted to guess that every nonplanar graph is convergent. More precisely, one might conjecture that, with the exception of divergent planar subgraphs, there are no new divergences associated with nonplanar graphs. This would imply that, after the planar graphs have been renormalized, no further renormalization is needed. In fact, it turns out that nonplanar graphs (with no divergent planar subgraphs) are not all finite in theories with quadratic or higher divergences (including all scalar theories), as we will see in section 5. This would appear to threaten renormalizability of these theories, since the nonplanar counterterms that cancelled these divergences would be complicated functions of 0 and external momenta, and have a very nonlocal and complicated form in position space. At higher orders such counterterms would generate new divergences of increasingly complicated form. It seems unlikely that this process would termi-
335
nate with a finite number of terms written in terms of star products. However, we will interpret these divergences as IR rather than UV divergences and will suggest a procedure to deal with them without introducing counterterms. 3. One Loop in Scalar Field Theory In this section we explicitly compute several one loop nonplanar graphs in >4 theory in four dimensions and <j>3 theory in six dimensions. We find that one loop nonplanar graphs in noncommutative field theories are convergent at generic values of external momenta. This is a consequence of the rapid oscillations of the phase factor eipxk where p is an external momentum and k is the loop momentum. As this phase factor is zero when p M 0 M " vanishes (i.e. when either 0 or pnc , the projection of p onto the noncommutative subspace, vanishes), the nonplanar graph is singular at small |p /x 0 / " / |- Indeed, the effective cutoff for a one loop graph in momentum space is , * where p is some combination of the external momenta in the process. Therefore turning on 0 replaces the UV divergence with singular IR behavior. This effect has interesting dynamical consequences for noncommutative field theories, some of which are explored below. 3.1. Quadratic
Effective
Action
in
We begin with <j>4 theory in four dimensions with the Euclidean action S
= / d 4 a : ( | ( a ^ ) 2 + ^"»V2 + ^ 2 0 * 0 * ^ * ^ •
(3-1)
Consider the 1PI two point function, which at lowest order is simply the inverse propagator T^=p2
+ m2.
(3.2)
In the noncommutative theory, this receives corrections at one loop from the two diagrams of Fig. 4, one planar and the other non-planar. The two diagrams k
k
Figure 4. Planar and nonplanar one loop corrections to r ' 2 ' in 0 4 theory.
336 (which are identical in the 0 = 0 theory up to a symmetry factor) give 2
(2) 1 planar
^ n ) 3(2TT)
r (2)
44
1 nonplanar
2
J
92
=
d4k
r
_
k
<3 3
^
f
({(ITT^
+ TU2
' >
0ikxp
2
k +'
I
The planar diagram is proportional to the one loop mass correction of the commutative theory, and is quadratically divergent at high energies. In order to see the effect of the phase factor in the second integral we rewrite the expressions for the two integrals in terms of Schwinger parameters k2 + m2
J0
The k integrals are now Gaussian, and may be evaluated to yield
r<2>
da 2 = -iL/ f — ~„am a" e 2
2 (2)
_
g2
(3.5)
f da ^_am2_E£E
= J— f — e-
r< )
1 nonplanar
QQ-jr2 I
a2
where we have introduced new notation poq = -PllQlvqv
= \PuQlM
(3.6)
(note that pop has dimension of length squared). In order to regulate the small a divergence in (3.5) we multiply the integrands in the expressions above by exp(—l/(A 2 a)) to get r (2)
=
92
[da
48TT2 7
1 planar r (2)
=
1 nonplanar
92 96^2
-am»-^-
a2
(3.7)
[da
,_'^±
fa2
Therefore,
ifu
-M"'-mH^)+om)
^Inrtanar ~ , 2 \ Kffef? " m 3 to M 1 nonplanar = 7967T
£
+
(3.8)
0(1)
where A
e / / = TTTT-, • IJ 1/A2 + pop
(3-9) '
K
337
In the limit L -> oo, the nonplanar one loop graph remains finite, effectively regulated by the noncommutativity of spacetime. In this limit the effective cutoff L 2 f f = •— goes to infinity when either 0 —> 0 or pnc —> 0. The one loop 1PI quadratic effective action is
? (2)
/
-i«\
p2 + M2 + 96ir2
\
[p°p-\—J \
g2M2
In
96TT2
V 2T
JM2 [pop +
2
2
2
h)
+
4
+ O (ff )
/ (3.10)
/ j 2 \
where M 2 = m 2 + ^ y — ^ ^ r In f ^ J • • • is the renormalized mass. Consider the two cases a)
pop
= Jd4p\
(P2 + M ' 2 ) ^(P)^(-P).
where M' 2 = M 2 + 3 {£*£ - ^ f £ In (K\
(3-n)
- • • . If M is fine tuned to
be cutoff independent, then M' and also S[pj diverge as L —^ oo. b)
p o p ^> i ?e//
and in particular the limit L —> oo. Here Le//
= /''K'
?+M2 +
2 ff2A/f2 M
96TT 2
— 1 m
~S~ > an<^
5rl 9o7r^
In
=
pop
) + ---+0 p o pJ
{g*)) <j>(p)J>(-p) • (3-12) J
The fact that the limit L —>• oo does not commute with the low momentum limit pnc -> 0 demonstrates the interesting mixing of the UV (L ->• 0) and IR (p —• 0) in this theory. We will say more about this below. 3.2. Quadratic
Effective
Action
in (j)3 Theory in d = 6
We repeat the computation performed above for
338
Let Q ( c ^ ) 2 + \m24>2 + §4>*) -
S = Jcfx
(3.13)
As in >4 theory, I?(2) receives contributions both from a one loop planar and a one loop nonplanar diagram (Fig. 5). The contribution of the nonplanar
Figure 5.
Planar and nonplanar one loop corrections to r ( 2 ) in 4>3 theory.
diagram may be written as an integral over Schwinger parameters as
r<2>
daida2
= -JiL. f S
1 nonplanar
2
1 planar
TT3 J
e-™2^^^)-^-^
( t t i + OJ 2 ) 3
1 nonplanar^
(3.14)
' '
The planar graph has a quadratic divergence from the region where both Q'S are small. As above, this divergence is effectively cutoff in the nonplanar graph, producing a (L —r oo) quadratic effective action
S[% = fd6P1-(p2
+ M2
r.2
9
2 8 7T 2 p op
where M is the planar renormalized mass, and
Validity of the 1-Loop
Approximation
Although nonplanar contributions to (3.12) and (3.15) are subleading in g2, they are singular as pnc-^0, and so cannot be ignored. In particular, the nonplanar term significantly modifies S{pj for (jp2 + M2)pop < 0(g2). Since the singular dependence of r j j
. o n o r on pop replaces the divergent
2
dependence of r ' ' on Lat 0 = 0, the leading singularity in r ^ ; n
lanar
at nth
order in perturbation theory is g2n-\- (ln(popM 2 )), n - i (we will study n = 2 in section 5). These higher order contributions are significant when compared
339
to the first order effect only for momenta such that g2n~- (in (p o pM2))n 2
-^—, i.e. for M pop
ft)
< O (e ^ J ( c i s a positive constant). Thus the 1-loop
approximation to r „ o n p l a n a r is both important and valid for 0 ( e - ^ ) < M2(pop) < 0(g2) .
(3.16)
The p dependence can be trusted at low momentum except for nonperturbatively small values of p. 3.4. Stability of the Perturbative Fermions
Vacuum:
with and without
Both (3.12) and (3.15) take the form S[% = [d*p ^Hp)
(3.17)
The constant h is positive for the <^>4 theory in d = 4, but negative for the 4>3 theory in d = 6, leading to a qualitative difference between the dynamics of the two examples. When h is positive, the coefficient of |>(p)|2 in (3.17) is positive for all p. The nonplanar one loop contribution to (3.17) modifies the <j> propagator at small momenta, inducing long range interactions (see the next subsection). When h is negative, the coefficient of |>(p)|2 in (3.17) is negative for momenta so small that [p2 + M2) pop < 0(g2). In order to minimize the effective action, (j>(p) attains a vacuum expectation value, at these low momenta. In other words, the perturbative vacuum is unstable. Since the perturbative vacuum for (/>3 theory is unstable anyway, the observation of the previous paragraph may not seem too dramatic. However, a similar effect occurs in a suitably modified
340
3.5. Poles in the
Propagator
The propagator derived from (3.17) has two poles. The first is the continuation to weak coupling of the zero coupling pole at p2 + m2 — 0, and occurs at p2+m2=0{g2)
.
(3.18)
It corresponds to the fundamental
341
for small g, and the small g corrections lead to exponential decay, but with decay constant of order g. We should stress that all this is only for positive h. Otherwise, the theory is tachyonic and suffers from the instability discussed above. 3.6. Wilsonian
Lagrangian
Consider a Wilsonian action with a cutoff L, of the form Seff(L)
^jd'x^-
( W ) 2 + m2(L)«£2) +
g 2 ( L ) 4
f
( L )
(<^*^).
(3.20)
The statement that the noncommutative >4 theory is renormalizable would normally imply that it is possible to choose the functions Z(L), m(L) and g2 (L) in such a way that a) Correlation functions computed with this Lagrangian have a limit as L—>oo. b) Correlation functions computed at finite Ldiffer from their limiting values by terms of order ^ for all values of momenta. Property b) is manifestly untrue of the noncommutative scalar theories under consideration. While it is presumably possible to choose Z(L), m(L) and g2 (L) in such a way that the L —> oo limit of all correlation functions exists, the various correlation functions (at various values of momenta) do not converge uniformly to their limiting values. As we have seen above, the two point function computed using (3.20) at any finite value of Ldiffers significantly from its L —>• oo value for small enough momentum pnc (for poph2
S[jf(L) = Sef}{L) + jd'x^-dxodx
+ ^idodxf+i^^gx^
• (3.21)
342
X appears quadratically in (3.21) and so may be integrated out, yielding
S'eff(L) = Seff(L) + J ^ W ( _ p ) J -2
pop
96vr
1
(3.22)
pop+ — Li
As we have seen above, Seff leads to the quadratic IPI effective action (3.10) at 0(g2). Therefore, the quadratic IPI effective action at O (g2) resulting from S'eff is r ^4 / ^ P ( 2
s1PJ = j
„2 »
M2
967r2 pop
2 \
^ 92M2
\
(
\
1
(3.23) + •
3.7.
Logarithms
So far the effects we have been discussing arose from what started as quadratic divergences in the commutative theory. These turned into poles, -£— in the noncommutative theory, which we interpreted as the \ P°l e m the Wilsonian action. Logarithmic divergences are more common than quadratic divergences. They occur even when the quadratic divergences are absent as is the case in supersymmetric theories or in gauge theories. They also occur in the scalar theories which we have been discussing. The logarithmic UV divergences in the nonplanar graphs of the commutative theory turn into terms of the form In p o p , which are nonanalytic around p = 0. Rather than a pole, -£— we now have a cut, lnp op, which is also an IR singularity. Unfortunately, we do not fully understand the implications of the logarithmic singularity in (3.12). Consider the Wilsonian effective action at small L. The dynamics of cj> freezes out at these energies (as (j> is massive), and so <j> is effectively classical. \ is a free light quantum field (its four derivative kinetic term is negligible at low energies). The low energy Wilsonian effective action should correctly reproduce the low energy correlation functions of
343
reproduce the logarithm. The correct small Ineffective action must contain new dynamics, absent in (3.21). We see two possibilities for the missing dynamics: a) The classical field (p can couple to two massless particles, resulting in a cut in its two point function. b) The classical field <> / can couple to a low energy conformal field theory, with operators of dimensions of order g2; the logarithm represents the first term in the expansion of
(poprn2)C9
2_i
Clearly, these logarithms need better understanding. We should point out, however, that regardless of the details, just like the poles, they demonstrate an IR singularity due to a UV phenomenon! 3.8. Vertex
Corrections
We end this section with a brief look at the contribution of one loop nonplanar graphs to vertex corrections. The graphs we will compute are logarithmically divergent in the commutative theory, and so will depend logarithmically on pl opi, where pl and p 7 are external momenta. Since we are primarily interested in low momentum singularities, we will ignore all terms regular in pl at pl = 0. In particular, external momentum dependent phase factors that factor out of the integral will be ignored. Noncommutative
_ J _ r dad{3d7 26 W (a + p + j)3
^E_m2(Q+/3+7) K
'
The planar graph is given by the same expression, but with 0 set to zero. The logarithmic divergence of the planar graph is effectively cutoff in the nonplanar graph by L ^ ( r ) = r o * t . Summing up the contribution of the graphs, in
344
Figure 6.
Planar and nonplanar one loop corrections to T^ 3 ' in <j>3 theory.
the limit L —> oo, we find ^3 y s
2 it + ln
y
m
\
/
\mzqot
\m'popj
(3.25)
+ ••
mzr or
Noncommutative <^>4 in /owr dimensions The graphs that contribute to the 1-loop renormalization of the coupling constant in ^>4 theory are shown schematically in Fig. 7.
Figure 7.
Planar and nonplanar one loop corrections to T^ 4 ' in >4 theory.
For small external momenta we find r
„4
T< 4 > = <72
3-2
5
2
7r \
/A2'
\m?
+ ln
1 m* pop
+ ln
1 m* qoq/
345
\m2(q + s) o (q + s)J
\m2(r
+ s) o (r + s) J / (3.26)
For both >4 and <^>3 theories, each nonplanar graph has an effective cutoff \jP o P where P is the combination of external momenta which crosses the loop. 4. A Stringy Analogue Consider the nonplanar one loop mass correction diagram for
Figure 8. tion.
The nonplanar mass correction graph for
Consider, however, the 1-loop open string diagram (called the double twist diagram) that may also be drawn as in Fig. 8. In string perturbation theory we integrate over the moduli of the diagrams. The region of moduli space that corresponds to high energies in the open string loop describes also the tree level exchange of a closed string state as in Fig. 9. It leads to a singularity proportional to — y — , (g is the closed string metric). UV in the open string channel corresponds to IR in the closed string channel. This matches exactly with the behavior of the field theory diagram of Fig. 8, if we identify the closed string metric as being proportional to — Q ^ . In fact this identification is very natural. In 28 , it was emphasized that the analysis of D-branes in the presence of a B field involves two metrics that are related to each other. The noncommutative gauge theory propagating on the brane "sees" the open string metric. The closed string metric governs the propagation of closed string states in the bulk. When the open string metric is the identity
346
Figure 9.
The double twist diagram in the closed string channel.
(as in our lecture), the closed string metric reduces (in the decoupling limit)
to ~a'@lv! This close analogy between a one loop effect in a rather ordinary looking (though nonlocal) field theory and an open string theory is quite surprising, and is not completely understood. It is an indication of the stringy behavior of noncommutative field theories. Other hints of the stringy nature of noncommutative theories are the T-duality symmetry of noncommutative gauge theories on tori, and the dominance of planar graphs in a perturbative expansion at high momentum. We will elaborate on these in section 7. 5. Higher Order Diagrams In this section we examine the effects of noncommutativity in higher order nonplanar diagrams. In subsection 5.1 we find examples of nonplanar diagrams (in scalar field theories) that diverge, and interpret these as IR divergences. In subsection 5.2 we illustrate various other effects of noncommutativity at higher orders in a two loop example. In subsection 5.3 we present the expression for the Feynman integral of an arbitrary noncommutative diagram in the Schwinger parameter representation, and comment on the structural features of this formula. Finally in subsection 5.4, we point out the stringy nature of 'maximally noncommutative' theories obtained by taking G —> oo. 5.1. Persistence
of Divergences
Figure 10.
in some Nonplanar
Graphs
Divergent higher loop graphs in >4 theory.
347
Figure 11. An equivalent way of representing the Feynman integral for the graph of Fig. 10. The mass like vertex v(k) for this graph has been computed in section 3.
Consider the diagram G of Fig. 10 in noncommutative 0 4 theory in four dimensions. This graph has n insertions of the nonplanar one loop mass correction that we have computed in (3.8), and so may equivalently be represented as in Fig. 11, where o2 v(k) = -- „ „
1
s- + less singular . kok H—K 1/ The Feynman integral for the diagram is
(5.1)
The contribution to 1(G) from the infrared singularities of v(k) is proportional to dr knc /
,
,
_1_ \
f L2n~r
In > r
I const
2n < r
oc i
-
(5.3)
(knc is the projection of k on the noncommuting subspace in the case where the rank r of 0 is not maximal). As L —> oo, 1(G) diverges for n > [r/2]. This divergence occurs at small knc, and high qi in the loops of Fig. 10. It is a combination of UV and IR divergence. The presence of an IR divergence in a massive theory is surprising, but is in accord with the other IR phenomena we have seen earlier. If we first integrate over k, the divergence in 1(G) appears like a UV divergence in the integrals over qi. If, however, we first integrate over qi, the divergence appears like an IR divergence in the integral over k. We prefer the latter interpretation, and propose to deal with the divergence in 1(G) in a fashion similar to the standard treatment of IR divergences. We postpone the integral over k and first sum over n to shift the location of the pole in the propagator to be outside the integration region. More specifically, summing the infinite series of increasingly divergent graphs of Fig. 10
348
for all n as in Fig 12, (and also including planar one loop mass corrections) yields
I=
<5-4>
Jm»-
where r^2'(fc) is derived from (3.12) and is given by
As a result, the integral over k in (5.4) is finite (up to a standard UV divergence) . P ^>
^—^
P -^
-e— * o o—+Figure 12. An infinite series of divergent graphs sums up to a single graph with the dressed one loop propagator.
This procedure cannot be used in theories with negative h because the dangerous pole in the propagator is shifted to become tachyonic. Then, the proper procedure is to compute the low energy effective action of the x field and to find its minimum. We will not attempt to perform such a calculation here. We suggest that UV divergences occur only in planar graphs and all other divergences can be treated as IR divergences, yielding finite, physically sensible answers. We have not proved this assertion. It will be very interesting to have an explicit proof of this fact. 5.2. Other Effects at Two Loops In this subsection we examine all two loop graphs that contribute to the self mass of (for simplicity) cf>3 theory in six dimensions. This will illustrate further effect of noncommutativity present in higher order graphs. Noncommutative
349
Figure 13. The two loop contributions to the self mass of commutative 0 3 theory in six dimensions.
Diagrams in the first class reduce to the graph of Fig. 13a at © = 0. These diagrams are members of an infinite set of graphs that correct the propagators in the graphs of Fig. 5, as in the previous subsection. The analysis of these graphs parallels that given in the previous section for the (f>4 theory.
Figure 14. Representatives of the three categories of graphs in noncommutative >3 theory that reduce to the diagram of Fig. 13b at G = 0.
The diagrams that reduce to the graph of Fig. 13b at 0 = 0 fall into three categories, representatives of which are shown in Fig. 14. Fig. 14a shows the single planar graph. The corresponding Feynman integral does not depend on 0 , and evaluates to | times the result for the graph of Fig. 13b in the commutative theory. As in the commutative theory, this graph contains overlapping divergences. These are dealt with in the usual way, by combining it with the counterterm graphs of Fig. 15a and Fig. 15b, whose contributions are also suppressed by a factor | relative to the commutative theory. Thus, as in the commutative theory, the graphs of Figs. 14a, 15a and 15b combine to give a result whose divergence may be cancelled by counterterms.
a) Figure 15.
b)
c)
d)
One loop mass correction graphs with one loop vertex correction counterterms.
Fig. 14b represents a set of three nonplanar graphs, each of which is nonplanar only because an external line overlaps with an internal line. Two of these graphs contain divergent planar vertex correction subgraphs and should
350
respectively be combined with the one loop graphs containing counterterms shown in Figs. 15c and 15d. Once their subdiagrams have been renormalized, these diagrams, as well as the third diagram in this set, are finite, effectively cut off by Leff = - 7 = - At large L e /y, these graphs are all proportional to <74LL* ln(L e //), providing a logarithmic correction to the leading singularity in (3.15). The proportionality of these diagrams to L ^ ln(L e //) (rather than L^y) is a consequence of the fact that fewer counterterms are added in the noncommutative theory than in the commutative theory. The four remaining two loop mass correction graphs, which include the diagram of Fig. 14c, are nonplanar due to the crossing of internal lines. As we will show in the next subsection, these graphs are finite, effectively cutoff by 1/V0 where 9 is the largest eigenvalue of 0^". In contrast to the nonplanar one loop graphs and the graphs considered in the previous paragraph, these diagrams are nonsingular at low momenta, since the effective cutoff is independent of external momenta. This is a consequence of the fact that the noncommutative phase factor responsible for removing the divergence depends only on internal momenta, which are integrated over. 5.3. General Higher Order
Graphs
14
In an appendix of we express the Feynman integral for an arbitrary graph (G) in terms of an integral over Schwinger parameters. Up to overall constants, the result (part of which has been independently reported in 12 ) is
^(Ew)^(p;)/^
„2
-«imi
e
1
X[PG{a,ea) "'"{pal-.*2)
J
p
"
p
"\
P G (°.e 2 ) )
P
»
Here P, S, and A are homogeneous polynomials in {QJ, 0 } , described in terms of graph theoretic properties of G in the Appendix, the phase V (p1) is as in (2.6), and 6a are the eigenvalues of 0 . Four terms in this expression involve the noncommutativity parameter 0 : 1) The first factor V (p1) is the overall phase, present for any graph. It depends on the cyclic order of the external momenta p. This is the sole effect of non-commutativity for planar graphs. 2) The denominator PQ is a homogeneous polynomial in { a j , 0 } (independent of external momenta) of degree L, where L is the number of loops in G. Divergences of a graph are associated with regions of
351
parameter space where PQ —• 0. Crossing internal lines of G give rise to 0 dependent terms in P