text:
# ISO far-infrared observations of rich galaxy clusters Based on observations with ISO, an ESA project with instruments founded by ESA member states (especially the PI countries: France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom) and with the participation of ISAS and NASA

## 1 Introduction

The first paper in this series (Hansen et al. han99 (1999), paper i) presented infrared data for the Abell 2670 cluster. We identified 3 far-infrared sources apparently related to star forming galaxies in the cluster. The present paper concerns the rich cluster Sérsic 159-03. The central part of the Sérsic 159-03 cluster was mapped by the Infrared Space Observatory (ISO) satellite, using the PHT-C camera (Lemke et al. lem96 (1996)) at $`60\mu \mathrm{m}`$, $`100\mu \mathrm{m}`$, $`135\mu \mathrm{m}`$, and $`200\mu \mathrm{m}`$. The observations were performed twice with slightly different position angles which gives an opportunity to do independent detections and to study possible instrumental effects.

The Sérsic 159-03 cluster (Abell S1101, z=0.0564) is of richness class 0, Bautz-Morgan type iii with a central dominant cD galaxy (Abell et al. abe89 (1989)). A cooling flow is present, and Allen and Fabian (all97 (1997)) found a mass deposition rate of $`\dot{\mathrm{M}}=231_{10}^{+11}\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ from ROSAT PSPC data. The cooling flow is centered on the cD galaxy which exhibits nebular line emission. Crawford and Fabian (cra92 (1992)) obtained optical spectra and found from line-ratio diagrams that the ratios obtained along the slit bridged the gap between class i and class ii in the scheme of Heckman et al. (hec89 (1989)). Their spectra had position angle $`90\mathrm{°}`$. West of the center they discovered a detached filament of emission having extreme class ii characteristics. They argued that the different line ratios are due to changes in ionization properties. Below in Fig. 4 we show the extent of the nebular emission. In a subsequent paper Crawford and Fabian (cra93 (1993)) included IUE data to obtain the optical-ultraviolet continuum. They announced that a strong Ly$`\alpha `$ line is present in the IUE spectrum.

## 2 Observations

### 2.1 The ISO data

A rectangular area centered on the cD galaxy of Sérsic 159-03 was mapped by ISO May 7, 1996 on revolution 173. The projected Z-axis of the spacecraft had a position angle of $`54\stackrel{}{.}4`$ on the sky (measured from north through east). The observation was repeated June 4, 1996, during revolution 200, but this time with position angle $`69\stackrel{}{.}5`$. The observing mode was PHT 32 as for Abell 2670 (paper i). The 9 pixel C100 detector was used for $`60\mu \mathrm{m}`$ and $`100\mu \mathrm{m}`$ to map an area of $`10\stackrel{}{.}0\times 3\stackrel{}{.}8`$. For $`135\mu \mathrm{m}`$ and $`200\mu \mathrm{m}`$ the 4 pixel C200 detector was applied to cover a mapped area of $`11\stackrel{}{.}0\times 4\stackrel{}{.}6`$. The target dedicated times were 1467 seconds for C100 and 1852 seconds for C200.

As described in paper i we apply the ISOPHOT Interactive Analysis software111The ISOPHOT data presented in this paper was reduced using PIA, which is a joint development by the ESA Astrophysics Division and the ISOPHOT consortium. (PIA) for the reduction work. We also perform parallel reductions using our own least squares reduction procedure (LSQ, cf. paper i). Although LSQ does not use sophisticated methods to correct for various effects – e.g. glitches from cosmic rays are simply discarded – we find it valuable for comparisons with the PIA reductions when evaluating the reality of features visible in the frames. The conclusion is that the PIA reduced images presented here (Fig. 1) do not contain noticeable artifacts from glitches. As in paper i we present the data maps with pixel sizes $`15\mathrm{}\times 46\mathrm{}`$ for C100 and $`30\mathrm{}\times 92\mathrm{}`$ for C200, but the instrumental resolution is only about $`50\mathrm{}`$ for C100 and $`95\mathrm{}`$ for C200 (paper i). The uncertainty of the maps increases towards the left and right borders due to the way the mapping was performed.

### 2.2 Optical data

Optical imaging and spectroscopy were performed September 1996 using the DFOSC instrument on the Danish 1.54m telescope at La Silla. The field around the central cD galaxy is shown in Fig. 2. The image was obtained by adding exposures in B (45 min), V (30 min), and Gunn I (30 min). The distribution of B-I colour for a $`70\mathrm{}\times 70\mathrm{}`$ area covering the central parts of the dominant cD galaxy is given in Fig. 3.

In order to image the distribution of the nebular emission we obtained narrow band exposures through a filter ($`\lambda 6908`$, FWHM = 98 Å, 1 hour) covering the redshifted H$`\alpha `$+\[N ii\] lines and an off-band filter ($`\lambda 6801`$, FWHM = 98 Å, 1 hour). After scaling and subtraction a H$`\alpha `$+\[N ii\] image is obtained. The central part of this image is shown in Fig. 4.

Details about the spectroscopy are found in Table 1. The slit was positioned on the cD nucleus with two different position angles. P.A.=$`270\mathrm{°}`$ covers the western filament, and P.A.=$`21\mathrm{°}`$ passes the object in the upper left corner of Fig. 4 and covers the jet-like emission to the northeast and southwest.

## 3 Results

The general brightness distribution in the maps is described most easily for the C200 maps. The $`135\mu \mathrm{m}`$ and $`200\mu \mathrm{m}`$ maps are rather similar. An enhancement is seen at the center in all four maps concordant with the position of the cD. A maximum is present in the upper left corners. After rotating the revolution 200 maps $`15\mathrm{°}`$ into coincidence with the rev. 173 maps we find these maxima to overlap suggesting the presence of one or more real sources. Similarly there are maxima in the upper right corners. Their positions and relative brightness in the maps can be understood if a source is present in the upper right corner of the rev. 200 maps, but just outside the rev. 173 field. A third characteristic feature is the brightness minimum to the lower left (i.e. south) of the center of the C200 maps. Again, when we compare the maps after rotation the reality of this minimum is confirmed. We conclude that the brightness distribution seen in the C200 maps is real.

The C100 maps have the advantage of better resolution which improves the possibility of identifying optical counterparts. However, the reality of the peaks in the $`100\mu \mathrm{m}`$ maps is not convincing when the maps are compared after rotation. Generally the peaks occur at different locations. Even the central source is doubtful: The rev. 200 map shows a weak enhancement slightly displaced to the right of the center, but the rev. 173 map shows a minimum at the same location.

A comparison between the $`60\mu \mathrm{m}`$ maps is more successful. Both show a central enhancement (C100-1) although slightly displaced to the right (north) in the rev. 173 map. The maximum brightness (object C100-2) occurs in both maps near the upper left corners and overlap after rotation. In Fig. 2 the approximate positions of overlap is marked by numbers for the off-center sources. The rev. 200 map has a peak (C100-3) in the upper right corner which may be related to the source present in the C200 maps. Furthermore, the peak (C100-4) in the right part of the rev. 200 $`60\mu \mathrm{m}`$ map overlaps with an enhancement in the rev. 173 map. There are disagreements as well, however. The peak obvious in the rev. 173 map below C100-4 (confirmed by the LSQ reductions) is not visible in the rev. 200 map. We conclude that the $`60\mu \mathrm{m}`$ sources C100-1, C100-2, C100-3, and C100-4 are likely to be real, but that the present reduction software still produces artifacts calling for caution in the interpretation.

In paper i we found that aperture photometry of the faint sources suffers significantly from the uncertainty in the evaluation of the background level. We therefore prefer to position, scale and subtract the PSF from the maps. The success in removing the source is then evaluated by eye. By varying the scaling we estimate the maximum and minimum acceptable flux. The median and its deviation from the limits are given in Table 2 for our identified infrared sources. We assume that the two sources in the upper corners of the C200 maps are identical to C100-2 and C100-3. The reality of C100-1 at $`100\mu \mathrm{m}`$ may be questionable. C100-3 is outside the field in the rev. 173 map.

## 4 Discussion

### 4.1 The cD galaxy

The central infrared source, C100-1, is detected in all maps except at $`100\mu \mathrm{m}`$. The measured fluxes in the two independent observations also agree within the limits. We therefore regard the source as real. A comparison with the list of Jura et al. (jur87 (1987)) shows that the luminosity of Sérsic 159-03 at $`60\mu \mathrm{m}`$ is larger than other early type galaxies detected by IRAS by an order of magnitude or more, except the extraordinarily bright galaxy NGC 1275 which is the center of the Perseus cluster cooling flow, and which is undergoing an encounter with an other galaxy (e.g. Nørgaard-Nielsen et al., noe93 (1993)).

In a previous paper (Hansen et al. han95 (1995)) we presented a model for the infrared emission from Hydra A measured by IRAS. We assumed that most of the mass cooling out of the cluster gas ends up in low mass stars forming in the flow. We further assumed that dust grains were able to grow in the cool pre-stellar clouds converting a fraction $`y`$ of the mass into grains. If the mechanism is effective we expect $`y1`$%. After a star has formed the remaining material is dispersed in the hot cluster gas. If a fraction $`f`$ is recycled to the hot phase a dust mass of $`y\times f\times \dot{\mathrm{M}}`$ is continuously injected into the cluster gas. At forehand we expect $`f`$ to be approximately $`150`$%. The grains are destroyed by sputtering on a time scale $`\tau _\mathrm{d}`$, and a steady state is obtained. At any time a dust mass of $`\mathrm{M}_\mathrm{d}=y\times f\times \dot{\mathrm{M}}\times \tau _\mathrm{d}`$ is present. The grains are heated by hot electrons (in the inner galaxy the photon field may also be important), and the infrared emission can be evaluated. The present data do not allow testing of more elaborate models having radial distributions of e.g. the dust temperature. We therefore only make a simple estimate using mean values.

For Hydra A we found that $`y=1\%`$ and $`f=11\%`$ reproduced the observed IRAS flux. In Table 3 giving calculated fluxes we repeat the calculations for Sérsic 159-03, but with $`f`$ reduced to 2%. Considering the crude model and the uncertainty of the measurements we find the agreement with the observed values in Table 2 satisfactory. This result has some significance although $`f`$ has been used as a free parameter to obtain concordance. If a value of $`f`$ much larger than unity had been necessary to fit the observations the model would have had to be rejected. Also, a value significantly lower than 1% would have made the model unconvincing.

A possible disagreement with the model is, however, the small extent of the source. One would expect the infrared emission to show some distribution within the cooling radius which is $`1\stackrel{}{.}89`$. Although the resolution at $`60\mu \mathrm{m}`$ is $`50\mathrm{}`$ C100-1 is indistinguishable from a point source in all our measurements. The reason could be that (1) the star formation is concentrated to the center (as seems to be the case for Hydra A, see Hansen et al. han95 (1995)), (2) the model does not apply, or (3) instrumental effects prevents detection of a faint, extended distribution of FIR emission.

Alternative possibilities are that C100-1 is related to the active nucleus as inferred by the presence of a radio source (Large et al. lar81 (1981), Wright et al. wri94 (1994)), or that dust has been introduced into the system by a recent merger event. A hint may be that all three measurable images of the revolution 173 maps show a tendency to be displaced from the center by $`10\mathrm{}`$ to the north where nebular line emission is seen (Fig. 4). The cD galaxy shows no signs of dust lanes, but exhibits a constant distribution in colour (Fig. 3). There are, however, two objects in the upper left part of Fig. 3 which are bluer than the cD. The brightest and bluest of these looks disturbed possibly due to tidal interaction. The spectra taken with P.A. = $`21\mathrm{°}`$ cover the object and contain emission lines. The emission is weak in Fig. 4 because the lines are shifted away from the peak transmission of the filter. Relative to the cD we find the velocity of the object to be $`+1800\pm 200\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$. The galaxy may have plumped through the cD and contains young stars.

The origin of the optical filaments in Fig. 4 is a puzzle. It may be captured material from mergers, related to radio plasma, or connected to the cooling flow. The relative velocities do not support any particular model. The velocities have been measured from our spectra, and they are quite low as seen from Table 4.

Donahue and Voit (don93 (1993)) obtained spectra of the nuclear emission from the Sérsic 159-03 cD galaxy. They argued that the lack of \[Ca ii\] $`\lambda 7291`$ emission indicates that Ca is depleted onto dust grains. We have added all our spectra of the center together and all of the filaments. No \[Ca ii\] emission was visible in any of the two resulting spectra. We then shifted the \[N ii\]$`\lambda 6583`$ to the expected position of \[Ca ii\] and added the shifted line after scaling with various constants. In this way we find that no \[Ca ii\] emission stronger than 0.20 times \[N ii\]$`\lambda 6583`$ is present. Figure 1 of Donahue and Voit (don93 (1993)) predicts (from ionization calculations) that this ratio should never be smaller than 0.24. Although marginal compared to the case of Hydra A the discrepancy can be explained by the condensation of Ca onto grains in accord with Donahue and Voit’s result.

The presence of dust in the nebular gas does not necessarily exclude that it originates from the cooling cluster gas. Dust may grow in dense, cool clouds in connection with star formation. For the nebular gas in Hydra A Donahue and Voit (don93 (1993)) found a much tighter limit on the \[Ca ii\] line strongly suggesting the presence of dust. In Hydra A the nebular gas is concentrated to a central disk-like structure of several kpc where vigorous star formation has taken place, and Hansen et al. (han95 (1995)) argue that it is a result of the cooling flow (see also McNamara, mcn95 (1995)). In Sérsic 159-03 the extended nature of the filaments and the presence of the blue, star forming object is more in favour of a merger scenario, however.

### 4.2 Off-center infrared sources

There are no striking optical identifications to the off-center sources. The position of C100-2 is relatively well determined by the overlap of the two observations. The nearest object visible in Fig. 2 is $`0\stackrel{}{.}5`$ to the south-west, is unresolved and of blue colour. It is not a known QSO (no QSO is closer than $`30\mathrm{}`$ in the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database222The NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration ), and it is just outside the overlap of the two observations. There are several faint optical objects in the area of C100-3, but no show up in our data with characteristics favouring a candidateship. The difficulties in pointing out candidates are even more pronounced for C100-4 which agrees poorly with the nearest faint objects in Fig. 2. However, C100-4 is also the most uncertain of the sources as it is only visible at $`60\mu \mathrm{m}`$.

## 5 Conclusion

The availability of two observations covering essentially the same field at several wavelengths allows us to identify 4 faint ($`0.1`$ Jy) far-infrared sources with some confidence. A central source, C100-1, is attributed to the cD galaxy which contains optical filaments, but our optical images do not reveal significant evidence of dust lanes. The fluxes measured for C100-1 are of the same order of magnitude as expected from dust related to star formation in the cooling flow. For the non-central sources we cannot point out any particular optical candidates in contrast to the results from the Abell 2670 field (paper i) where galaxies with enhanced star formation were found coincident with the infrared sources.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work has been supported by The Danish Board for Astronomical Research.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Kurt Haller has pursued fundamental issues in gauge theories. He has especially emphasized the importance of gauge invariant formulations of quantum electrodynamics and of quantum chromodynamics and of the implementation of Gauss’ law in these theories. Kurt uses operator methods rather than the more-popular path integral methods; this provides a good alternative to the usual point of view. I am happy to dedicate this paper to Kurt Haller.

Although there is a long history of the study of charged particles in gauge theories , there is still concern that the issue is not understood fully. For example, in a recent paper  the authors state “ the battle is not yet won and one could, in a provacative way, summarize the situation by saying that the question ‘what is an electron in QED’ is still open.”

The purpose of this pedagogical paper is to reconsider a very simple model of QED that illustrates one facet of the infrared issues connected with charged particles. At the end I will discuss what may carry over to more realistic models of QED as well as to QED itself. The model is due to W. Pauli and M. Fierz . They studied a simple, exactly soluble model of a single nonrelativistic electron in QED. P. Blanchard  studied this model in the interaction picture and showed that the transition operator is well-defined for finite times, but exhibits an infrared divergence for $`t\pm \mathrm{}`$. This model exhibits in an extremely simple context the divergence associated with infinite numbers of soft photons associated with a charged particle. The utility of this model is that explicit formulas valid to all orders in $`e`$ can be found for the transformation between the perturbative states and fields and the physical ones.

I reconsider this model using the exact eigenstates of the complete Hamiltonian. I find that the Heisenberg field of the model at finite times creates states that, because of the infrared divergence, are orthogonal to the exact eigenstates. When the Hamiltonian is expressed in terms of a field that creates the exact single-particle eigenstates associated with an electron in this model, the infrared divergence disappears. I suggest that at least part of the solution to the infrared problem is to replace the original Heisenberg field by one that creates the electron with the divergent part of its soft photon cloud.

There are three effects associated with the massless quanta in gauge theories: (1) the infinite number of low-momentum quanta associated with a charged particle, (2) the collinearity of low-momentum quanta, and (3) the long-range interaction due to the exchange of massless quanta between charged particles. Here I study only the first of these effects.

F. Bloch and A. Nordsieck  were the first to show how to remove infrared divergences by summing the cross sections for scattering into final states that have a charged particle together with any number of soft photons. D.R. Yennie, S.C. Frautschi and H. Suura  gave a general discussion of the removal of the divergences in the cross sections. P.P. Kulish and L.D. Faddeev  showed how to remove the divergences in the S-matrix. I want to show how to remove the divergences in the operator solution of the Pauli-Fierz model using modified asymptotic fields. In the charged single-particle model discussed here, the physical field and the modified asymptotic field are the same.

First I find the exact single-particle eigenstates of the model, which have coherent states of soft perturbative photons. Secondly, I solve the operator equations of motion of the model and find that the Heisenberg field acts in a space that is orthogonal to the space of the exact eigenstates. Thirdly, I find fields that diagonalize the Hamiltonian. Finally I discuss which of the properties of this model can be expected to be relevant to more realistic models of QED as well as to QED itself.

The exact eigenstates in this model should have the usual orthonormality properties and thus the operators that create and annihilate the exact eigenstates should have the usual free field commutation relations. This is guaranteed since the transformation between these two sets of fields is formally unitary. Thus, following Blanchard  and Contopanagos and Einhorn  I assume that the original field operators act in a Hilbert space associated with coherent states that is unitarily inequivalent to the usual Fock space, while the physical fields that create the particles together with their soft photon clouds are free fields acting in the usual Fock space. From the point of view of the usual canonical formalism this is a controversial choice. The implication of this choice is that in gauge theories and perhaps in other theories with massless particles or fields the states of relevance to observation are very distant from the states created by smeared polynomials in the fields in the original Hamiltonian or Lagrangian. We already know that in field theory the interacting fields create much more than just the particle with which they are associated. Further in theories with infinite field strength renormalization there is an infinite multiplicative constant relating the unrenormalized fields, which naively obey canonical commutation relations, and the renormalized fields whose equal-time commutators are ill-defined. The coherent state operator for soft photons that relates the original fields of the Hamiltonian to the fields that make the single-particle eigenstates in the Pauli-Fierz model can be viewed as an operator-valued analog of the field strength renormalization.

Another purpose of this paper is to find the proper extension of the variational principle proposed earlier  to gauge theories. I will argue that in the Pauli-Fierz model, one should first transform to the fields that incorporate the divergent part of the soft photon cloud associated with the electron in the exact single-particle eigenstates and then apply the non-gauge theory form of the variational principle.

## 2 Exact eigenstates in the Pauli-Fierz model

The Pauli-Fierz model is nonrelativistic quantum electrodynamics in the transverse gauge with the following approximations: (1) momentum conservation between the photon and the electron is neglected222This approximation is also made in , (2) the term quadratic in the vector potential is dropped, and (3) the Coulomb interaction between electrons is dropped. So the model is a single electron interacting with massless transverse photons. The Hamiltonian is

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`\psi ^{}(x)({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m}}^2+V(x))\psi (x)+{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle d^3kka_s^{}(k)a_s(k)}`$ (1)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{m}}{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle \psi ^{}(p)\psi (p)\frac{d^3k}{\sqrt{2k}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)pe_s(k)[a_s(k)+a_s^{}(k)]},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)`$ is a smooth function that prevents ultraviolet divergences but does not affect infrared divergences, in particular $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }(0)=1`$, and the fields are at time $`0`$. For much of the discussion I will suppress the external potential $`V`$.

It is straightforward to see that the exact single-electron eigenstates are

$$|P=\sqrt{Z(p)}exp\{\frac{e}{m}\underset{s=1}{\overset{2}{}}d^3k\frac{\stackrel{~}{\rho (k)}}{\sqrt{2k}k}pe_s(k)a_s^{}(k)\}\psi ^{}(p)|0,$$
(2)
$`\psi (p)`$ is the Fourier transform of $`\psi (x)`$, with energy

$$[\frac{1}{2m}\frac{2e^2}{3m^2}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑k\stackrel{~}{\rho }^2(k)]p^2\frac{p^2}{2m(\mathrm{})}.$$
(3)
(Fields and states in the physical space will be labelled with capital letters; vectors such as $`p`$ will be without bold type or arrows.) The field strength renormalization factor is

$$\frac{1}{Z(p)}=exp[\frac{e^2p^2}{m^2}_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dk}{k}\stackrel{~}{\rho }^2(k)]$$
(4)
At first sight the transformation between $`|P`$ and $`\psi ^{}(p)|0`$ does not seem to be even formally unitary. This first impression is misleading and is connected with the fact that annihilation operators disappear when acting on the vacuum. In fact the transformation between these states is

$$U=exp\{\frac{e}{m}d^3p\psi ^{}(p)\psi (p)d^3k\frac{\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)}{\sqrt{2k}k}\underset{s}{}pe_s(k)(a^{}(k)a(k))\}.$$
(5)
Using the Baker-Haussdorff theorem, we find

$`U`$ $`=`$ $`exp\{{\displaystyle \frac{e^2p^2}{2m^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dk\stackrel{~}{\rho }^2(k)}{k}}\}exp\{{\displaystyle \frac{e}{m}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)}{\sqrt{2k}k}pe^s(k)a_s^{}(k)}\}`$ (6)
$`exp\{{\displaystyle \frac{e}{m}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k\stackrel{~}{\rho }^2(k)}{\sqrt{2k}k}pe^s(k)a_s(k)}\}`$
Clearly when acting on the vacuum the factor with the annihilation operators becomes one and the remaining factors are not unitary. If one works in the algebra of operators rather than in the Hilbert space, one does not lose the annihilation parts of operators.

## 3 Calculation of the Heisenberg operator

The Heisenberg equations of motion are

$$i_t\psi ^{}(p,t)=\frac{p^2}{2m}\psi ^{}(p,t)\frac{e}{m}\underset{s=1}{\overset{2}{}}\frac{d^3k}{\sqrt{2k}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)\psi ^{}(p,t)pe_s(k)(a_s(k,t)+a_s^{}(k,t))$$
(7)
$$i_ta_s^{}(k,t)=ka_s^{}(k,t)\frac{e}{m}\frac{d^3p}{\sqrt{2k}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)\psi ^{}(p,t)\psi (p,t)pe_s(k)$$
(8)
Since the Hamiltonian commutes with the product $`\psi ^{}(p,t)\psi (p,t)`$, this product is conserved and the time can be dropped in the product when it appears in Eq.(8). Then the equation for $`a^{}`$ can be solved exactly,

$$a_s^{}(k,t)=e^{ikt}a_s^{}(k)i\frac{e}{m}\frac{d^3p}{\sqrt{2k}}pe_s(k)\psi ^{}(p)\psi (p)\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)t.$$
(9)
The term in $`a^{}`$ linear is $`t`$ is connected with the neglect of momentum conservation in the model. This linear term cancels in the sum $`a^{}+a`$ that appears in the equation of motion for $`\psi ^{}`$. The solution for $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(p,t)=Cexp\{i\frac{p^2}{2m}t\frac{e}{m}\underset{s=1}{\overset{2}{}}\frac{d^3k}{\sqrt{2k}k}\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)pe_s(k)[e^{ikt}a_s^{}(k)e^{ikt}a_s(k)]\}.$$
(10)
Requiring $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(p,0)=\psi (p)`$ gives

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(p,t)=\psi ^{}(p)exp\{i\frac{p^2}{2m}t\frac{e}{m}\underset{s=1}{\overset{2}{}}\frac{d^3k}{\sqrt{2k}k}[f_s(p,k,t)a_s^{}(k)f_s^{}(p,k,t)a_s(k)]\},$$
(11)
$$f_s(p,k,t)=\frac{\stackrel{~}{\rho }(p)}{\sqrt{2k}k}pe_s(k)(e^{ikt}1).$$
(12)
The expectation of the number operator $`N=_sd^3ka^{}(k)a(k)`$ for photons in the one electron state is

$$<N(t)>=\frac{e^2}{m^2}\underset{s}{}d^3k|f_s(k,p,t)|^2$$

$$=\frac{e^2}{m^2}\underset{s}{}\frac{d^3k}{2k^3}\stackrel{~}{\rho }^2(k)sin^2\frac{kt}{2}.$$
(13)
This is the same expression that Blanchard calls $`N^2(t)`$. As Blanchard shows, for all finite $`t`$, $`<N(t)>`$ is finite, but for $`t\pm \mathrm{}`$ $`<N(t)>`$ diverges as $`logt`$. Thus for all finite $`t`$ there is a finite expection value for the number of soft photons in the cloud associated with the Heisenberg field of the electron, but for $`t\pm \mathrm{}`$ the number diverges. A divergent value of $`<N>`$ is the signature for a space of vectors in an inequivalent representation of the commutation relations that is orthogonal to the original Fock space. The fact that the large-$`t`$ limit leads out of the usual Fock space has been identified as the cause of infrared divergences by several authors, starting with K.O. Friedrichs  and Blanchard .

The expectation value of the number operator also diverges in the exact eigenstates, Eq.(2). Thus the Heisenberg field acting on the vacuum creates states that are orthogonal to all the exact electron eigenstates in the model. This suggests that in this model one should introduce a field that makes the physical single particle state with its attached soft photons. In the single charged particle sector this should lead to diagonalization of the Hamiltonian.

## 4 Diagonalization of the Hamiltonian

We can invert the transformation $`U`$ given in Eq.(5) to express the Hamiltonian in terms of “physical” operators that create the charged particles together with their soft photon clouds. We introduce the physical photon operators (and their adjoints), $`A(k)=Ua(k)U^{}`$,

$$A(k)=a(k)\frac{e}{m}d^3p\psi ^{}(p)\psi (p)f_s(p,k)$$
(14)
as well as the transformed electron operators (and their adjoints), $`\mathrm{\Psi }(p)=U\psi (p)U^{}`$,

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(p)=exp\{\frac{e}{m}d^3k[f_s(p,k)a_s^{}(k)f_s^{}(p,k)a_s(k)]\}\psi (p).$$
(15)
In terms of the physical electron and photon field operators the Hamiltonian is

$`H=\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(x)({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m(\mathrm{})}}^2+V(x))\mathrm{\Psi }(x)+{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle d^3kkA_s^{}(k)A_s(k)}+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle d^3pd^3p^{}f_s^{}(p,k)f_s(p^{},k)\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(p^{})\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(p)\mathrm{\Psi }(p^{})\mathrm{\Psi }(p)}.`$ (16)
The bilinear terms in $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ correspond to scattering of the electron together with its soft photon cloud in the external potential $`V`$. No infrared divergences or other infrared effects are visible. The model is taken to be a one electron model, so we ignore the quartic terms in $`\mathrm{\Psi }(p)`$.

This result is similar to very old work on clothed operators in simple models of field theory , except in full QED we would propose to incorporate only the divergent part of the soft photons in the electron Heisenberg field, rather than eliminating all the trilinear terms in the original Hamiltonian.

## 5 Condition for the operator variational principle

In this model, the physical fields diagonalize the single-particle Hamiltonian. The asymptotic fields will be those that occur in scattering from the fixed potential $`V(x)`$. Thus the condition to be imposed on the Hamiltonian in the variational principle  based on choosing elements from the algebra of asymptotic fields should be to make the Hamiltonian as close to the free field Hamiltonian as possible. This condition is the analog of the condition chosen in theories without massless particles or fields.

## 6 What is relevant to QED?

Some issues suggested by this simple model may carry over to QED. The first is that one should express the observables of the theory in terms of a charged field that, acting on the vacuum, creates a state that is not orthogonal to the asymptotic states. The charged field should contain the soft photons in the neighborhood of zero energy that are responsible for the infrared divergence in the number of perturbative photons attached to the charged particle. This can be done by a formally unitary transformation. The same unitary transformation should be applied to the photon field. Secondly, as suggested by Contopanogos and Einhorn , one can take the charged states with their clouds of soft coherent state photons to be in Fock space and the perturbative states to be in an inequivalent representation of the commutation relations.

In the present model, if one introduces the clothed electron operators in the theory the infrared divergences disappear and in the absence of an external potential the Hamiltonian has free field form because the physical photons decouple from the physical electrons. This of course will not happen in QED, nor will there be a discrete mass associated with the single charged particle. Since the work of B. Schroer  on “infraparticles” we have known that particles that interact with massless quanta cannot have discrete mass.

Since in the present model the single-particle Hamiltonian is diagonalized by the physical field, the variational principle is trivial in this model. When the massless quanta have been absorbed the variational principle proposed earlier for the case where there are no massless particles or fields can be applied. This also will not apply to QED and shows that significant modifications must be made in this variational principle before it can be useful in studying gauge theories.

## 7 Qualitative remarks

Divergent field strength renormalization occurs both due to ultraviolet effects and to infrared effects. In the case of ultraviolet divergences, one introduces the renormalized fields, for example $`\psi _{ren}(p)=Z^{1/2}\psi (p)`$, where the multiplicative factor is fixed by requiring the coefficient of the $`\psi ^{as}(p)`$ term in the Haag expansion to be one; see references in . This, together with other renormalization effects makes the Haag expansion finite. By contrast in the case of infrared divergences (suppressing non-infrared effects), one should not introduce a field strength renormalization; rather one should exponentiate the soft photons of near zero energy into a new operator-valued multiplicative factor multiplying the charged field as we have done in Eq.(15). In the Pauli-Fierz model this explicitly removes the infrared divergences and produces a charged field that acting on the vacuum creates a state that is not orthogonal to all the asymptotic states. One can hope that in QED at least part of the infrared divergence can be removed using the physical charged field and that this field acting on the vacuum will produce asymptotic states.

One could argue 333Xiang-Dong Ji, private communication that given a Hamiltonian that has no trilinear term one could introduce trilinear terms in the transformed Hamiltonian and could then arrange to have any form of infrared divergence. My point of view is that, although highly simplified, this model does come from QED and does capture the type of soft photon infrared divergence that occurs in QED.

## 8 Outlook for future work

The idea of introducing physical charged fields that contain the infrared divergent part of the soft photons should be tried in more realistic models, such as the asymptotic Hamiltonian of Kulish and Faddeev , as well as in other models that have the same infrared divergences as QED.

Acknowledgements

I am happy to thank Ted Jacobson, Xiang-Dong Ji and especially Ching-Hung Woo for helpful discussions.


text:
# Signatures of spin pairing in a quantum dot in the Coulomb blockade regime

## Abstract

Coulomb blockade resonances are measured in a GaAs quantum dot in which both shape deformations and interactions are small. The parametric evolution of the Coulomb blockade peaks shows a pronounced pair correlation in both position and amplitude, which is interpreted as spin pairing. As a consequence, the nearest-neighbor distribution of peak spacings can be well approximated by a smeared bimodal Wigner surmise, provided that interactions which go beyond the constant interaction model are taken into account .

Recently, the Coulomb blockade (CB) of electronic transport through quantum dots, defined in two-dimensional electron gases in semiconductor heterostructures, has been of considerable interest . One reason is that such dots are model systems to investigate the interplay between chaos and electron-electron (e-e) interactions. Here, a key feature is the distribution of nearest-neighbor Coulomb blockade peak spacings (NNS), which random matrix theory  (RMT) predicts to follow a bimodal Wigner surmise $`P(s)`$ for a non-interacting quantum dot of chaotic shape, i.e.

$$P(s)=\frac{1}{2}\left[\delta (s)+P^\beta (s)\right]$$
(1)
$`P^\beta (s)`$ is the Wigner surmise for the corresponding Gaussian ensemble, i.e. $`\beta =1`$ for systems with time inversion symmetry (Gaussian orthogonal ensemble - GOE), and $`\beta =2`$ when time inversion symmetry is broken (Gaussian unitary ensemble - GUE). The peak spacing s is measured in units of the average spin-degenerate energy level spacing $`\mathrm{\Delta }=2\pi \mathrm{}^2/(m^{}A)`$, where $`m^{}`$ denotes the effective mass, and A the dot area. The $`\delta `$-function in $`P(s)`$ takes the spin degeneracy into account. RMT further predicts the standard deviation for $`P(s)`$ to be $`\sigma =0.62`$ for $`\beta =1`$, and $`\sigma =0.58`$ for $`\beta =2`$, respectively .
The comparison to experimental data is made by applying the constant-interaction model , which allows to separate the constant single-electron charging energy from the fluctuating energies of the levels inside the dot. In disagreement with the predictions of RMT, the experimentally obtained NNS distributions are usually best described by a single Gaussian with enhanced values of $`\sigma `$ . The data thus look as if spins are absent, although in Ref. , a spin pair has been observed. This apparent absence of spins and the different shape of $`P(s)`$ have triggered tremendous recent theoretical work. One possible explanation are additional e-e interactions inside the dot , which lead to “scrambling” of the energy spectrum  and can be characterized by the interaction parameter $`r_s`$, defined as the ratio between the Coulomb interaction of two electrons at their average spacial separation, and the Fermi energy. It is theoretically expected that the NNS distribution becomes Gaussian due to e-e interactions, and that $`\sigma `$ increases for $`r_s2`$. . However, all experiments so far have been carried out in a regime where an increase in $`\sigma `$ is not expected, i.e. in samples with $`0.93r_s1.35`$ , with the exception of Ref. , where $`r_s=2.1`$.
Gate-voltage induced shape deformations of the dot can modify the NNS distribution as well. The deformation can be described by a parameter $`x`$, which corresponds to the distance between avoided crossings induced by the deformation, measured in units of the CB peak spacing. For $`x`$ 1, the NNS distribution of partly uncorrelated energy spectra is measured, resulting again in a Gaussian shape with enhanced $`\sigma `$. Whether shape deformations or interactions dominate the shape of the NNS distribution is not clear, although there is experimental evidence that $`x<1`$ and interactions are more important.
Here, we report measurements on a quantum dot in which shape deformations as well as $`r_s`$ are reduced. We observe a pronounced pairwise correlation of both position and amplitude of the Coulomb blockade resonances, which is sometimes interrupted by kinks in the parametric evolution, among other features. We interpret the pairing as a spin signature: the energies of two states belonging to the same spatial wave function with opposite spin differ by an average interaction energy $`\overline{\xi }`$, which fluctuates with a standard deviation of $`\sigma _\xi `$, both of which are of the order of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. We conclude that in previous experiments, spin pairing was difficult to observe because it was frequently destroyed by avoided level crossings. Furthermore, we suggest that the measured NNS distribution can be fitted to a modified bimodal Wigner surmise, with $`\overline{\xi }`$ and $`\sigma _\xi `$ as fit parameters.
The sample is a shallow Ga\[Al\]As heterostructure with a two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) $`34`$ nm below the surface. The quantum dot is defined by local oxidation with an atomic force microscope  (inset in Fig.1(a)). The lithographic dot area is 280 nm x 280 nm. The dot can be tuned by voltages applied to a homogeneous top gate and to the planar gates I and II. In order to reduce $`r_s`$ as much as possible, we chose a heterostructure with a high electron density, further increased by a top gate voltage of $`+100`$ mV to $`n_e=5.910^{15}`$ m-2. This results in $`r_s=0.72`$, which is smaller than in all previous experiments. Additional screening is provided by the top gate . The sample was mounted in the mixing chamber of a 3He/4He-dilution refrigerator with a base temperature of 90 mK. The mobility of the cooled 2DEG was $`93`$ m2/Vs. A DC bias voltage of 10 $`\mu V`$ was applied across the dot, and the current is measured with a resolution of 500 fA. From capacitance measurements, we find the electronic dot area A=190 nm x 190 nm (the depletion length in such devices can be smaller than in structures defined by top gates) . The single-electron charging energy is $`E_c`$ =1.25 meV and the spin-edgenerate level spacing $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ = 200 $`\mu eV`$.

The measurements have been carried out in the weak coupling regime, $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }k_BT\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Here, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ denotes the coupling of the dot to source and drain. The conductance G was measured as a function of the voltage $`V_I`$ applied to the planar gate I (see inset in Fig. 1(a)). Magnetic fields B applied perpendicular to the sample surface and $`V_{II}`$ were used as parameters. The observed CB oscillations (Fig. 1(a)) are fitted to a thermally broadened line shape, i.e., $`G(V_I)=G_{max}cosh^2(\eta V_I/2k_BT)`$ , yielding an electron temperature of T=120mK, as well as the positions and amplitudes of the peaks. Here, $`\eta =0.11eV/V`$ is the lever arm. Fig. 1 (b) shows the peak spacing $`\mathrm{\Delta }V_I`$ as a function of $`V_I`$. Compared to conventional dots defined by top gates, we find a much smaller variation of the average peak spacing as $`V_I`$ is tuned, although the fluctuation of individual spacings is 15% of $`E_c`$. A linear fit gives a slope of $`\mathrm{\Delta }V_I/V_I=6.710^4`$. Hence, the capacitance between the dot and gate I varies only by 3% over the whole scan range, as compared to, for example, a factor of 3 in Ref. . This indicates that tuning gate I or II predominantly changes the energy of the conduction band bottom, while the dot is only slightly deformed. By applying the method of Ref.  to a hard-wall confinement, we estimate $`x`$ 0.15 for our dot as a lower limit.
In Fig. 2 (a), five consecutive CB peaks are shown as a function of B. A pronounced pairwise correlation of both amplitude and peak position is observed (peak b correlates with peak c, and peak d with peak e, respectively). Observation of a pairing has been reported previously and interpreted as spin pairing , but not been further investigated.
We interpret this parametric pair correlation in terms of a model recently developed by Baranger et al. . The constant interaction model is used to subtract $`E_c`$ from the peak spacings. The remaining individual energy separations equal $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2`$ on average and reflect the fluctuating level separations inside the quantum dot, which consist of two parts. We assume that two paired peaks belong to the same spatial wave function, labelled by i, of opposite spin, and are split by an interaction energy $`\xi _i`$, while the energy of consecutive states with different orbital wave functions differs by $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i\xi _i`$. Since the separations between the two levels of equal spin of spin pair i and (i+1), $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$, and possibly also $`\xi _i`$, vary as a function of B, levels may cross and the ground state of the dot can be either a singlet or a triplet state. At the singlet-triplet transitions, kinks in the parametric peak evolution occur and the pair correlation is interrupted. We can identify such kinks in our data, among other features. Fig. 2 (b) shows the amplitudes of peaks c, d and e. The correlation between peaks d and e is very strong around B=0. For 0.4T$`<`$B$`<`$0.61T, this correlation is interrupted, while the amplitudes of peaks c and e are correlated instead. In this regime, correlated kinks in the evolution of peaks c and d are observed (Fig.2 (c)). In Fig. 2 (d), a possible corresponding scenario for the parametric dependence of energy levels is sketched: (left) two avoided crossings occur between level pair i and level pair i+1 . This leads to the position of peaks c, d, and e as sketched in Fig. 2 (d), right, corresponding to the difference in energy upon changing the electron number in the dot. Consequently, positions and amplitudes of peaks c and e should be correlated in 0.4T$`<`$B$`<`$0.61T, as observed. Note that this correlation is interrupted around B=0.5T, possibly due to the influence of another energy level.
Also, $`\xi _{de}`$ is not constant over the full range of B. While $`\xi _{de}0.05\mathrm{\Delta }`$ for B$`<`$0.22T, the positions of peaks d and e are not detectable in 0.22T$`<`$B$`<`$0.32T, since their amplitudes vanish. As the peaks reappear, $`\xi _{de}`$ has jumped to $`\xi _{de}^{}0.25\mathrm{\Delta }.`$ We speculate that possibly a level crossing has occurred in the regime where the amplitudes are suppressed, and hence for B$`<`$0.22T, a different level pair is at the Fermi energy than for B$`>`$0.32T. In addition, we note that although $`\xi `$ fluctuates as B is varied, a systematic change of $`\xi `$ with B is not observed, which indicates that Zeemann splitting plays a minor role. From the data of Fig. 2, we estimate the average interaction energy to $`\overline{\xi }0.5\mathrm{\Delta }`$ by averaging over all peaks and magnetic fields. Baranger et al. have estimated $`\overline{\xi }0.6\mathrm{\Delta }`$ for $`r_s=1`$. Hence, our findings can be considered as being in agreement with existing theory, while we are not aware of a theoretical prediction for $`\sigma _\xi `$. From the above phenomenology, we conclude that for dots with stronger shape deformations, and hence more level crossings, or in dots with larger $`r_s`$ (and thus larger $`\overline{\xi }`$), the spin pairing is frequently interrupted and difficult to detect. Also, the Kondo effect  can occur in neighboring peaks  when spin pairing is interrupted.
We proceed by discussing the effect of spin pairing on the NNS distributions. In Fig. 3, the measured histograms of the normalized NNS distributions for GOE (a) and GUE (b) are shown. The ensemble statistics have been obtained by measuring $`G(V_I)`$, and either by changing the magnetic flux by one flux quantum $`\varphi _o=\frac{h}{e}`$ through the dot (GUE), or by stepping $`V_{II}`$ in units of one CB period (GOE). Each individual $`V_I`$-sweep contains 15 CB resonances in the low coupling regime. The total number of peak spacings used is 120 for GOE, and 210 for GUE, respectively. The individual level spacings $`s`$ in units of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are obtained by using the fit of Fig. 1b; its expectation value is $`\overline{s}`$=0.5. Both histograms are asymmetric and show no evident bimodal structure. By including the effect of spin pairing into the statistics, however, we can interpret them as modified bimodal distributions:
(i) The $`\delta `$-function in the non-interacting NNS distribution $`P(s)`$ with the expectation value of $`\overline{s_\delta }`$=0 (eq. (1)) is shifted to $`\overline{s_\delta }=\overline{\xi ^{}}`$ and, as a reasonable assumption , broadened according to a Gaussian distribution with the standard deviation $`\sigma _\xi ^{}`$. Here, $`\xi ^{}`$ denotes the interaction energy in units of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.
(ii) Since one level of a spin pair i is shifted upwards in energy by $`\xi _i`$, the separation between the upper level of spin pair i and the lower level of pair (i+1) is given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$-$`\xi _i`$. Consequently, $`P^\beta (s)`$ in eq. (1) is shifted to $`\overline{s_{P^\beta }}`$=1-$`\overline{\xi ^{}}`$ and convoluted with the Gaussian distribution function of $`\xi ^{}`$.
Combining these two components, the modified NNS distribution reads

$`P_{int}^\beta (\overline{\xi ^{}},\sigma _\xi ^{})=`$

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }\sigma _\xi ^{}}\left\{exp\left[\frac{(s\overline{\xi ^{}})^2}{2\sigma _\xi ^{}^2}\right]+exp\left[\frac{s^2}{2\sigma _\xi ^{}^2}\right]\times P^\beta (s+\xi ^{})\right\}$$
(2)
Here, the “$`\times `$” denotes the convolution. Since $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is determined by the dot size and the material parameters, we can fit $`P_{int}^\beta (\overline{\xi ^{}},\sigma _\xi ^{})`$

to the measured NNS distribution with the two fit parameters $`\overline{\xi ^{}}`$ and $`\sigma _\xi ^{}`$ (Fig.3). We obtain $`\overline{\xi ^{}}=0.65`$ and $`\sigma _\xi ^{}=0.35`$ for GOE, as well as $`\overline{\xi ^{}}=0.53`$ and $`\sigma _\xi ^{}=0.34`$ for GUE. Hence, we find that $`\overline{\xi }`$ is higher for GOE than for GUE, which is in agreement the theoretical prediction . The fluctuation of $`\xi `$ is found to be independent of the Gaussian ensemble, and does not vary continously with B
In these fits, we have assumed that two electrons are always successively filled in one spatial wave function, i.e. we have neglected situations in which $`\xi _i>\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$. Inclusion of avoided crossings would require more clearly pronounced kinks than those in our data (sometimes the pair correlation is lost while a kink is not clearly visible). More experiments as well as theoretical work is necessary to investigate this dependence, also with respect to fluctuations in $`\xi `$ with B.
Finally, we consider how our data can be modelled when complete absence of spin pairing is assumed. In this case, the mean level spacing would be $`\mathrm{\Delta }/2`$. Comparing a correspondingly normalized Wigner surmise to our data gives an extremely poor result (inset in Fig.3): the measured NNS distribution appears too wide by a factor of $``$ 2.
In summary, we have observed spin pairing effects in a - compared to dots investigated in earlier experiments - rigid quantum dot with reduced electron-electron interactions. We have observed spin pairing which persists as a magnetic field is varied, but is interrupted by kinks as well as other structures in the parametric evolution of the Colomb blockade peaks. We have extracted the average interaction energy $`\overline{\xi }`$ between states of identical spatial wave functions but opposite spin. Furthermore, we explain the measured distributions of nearest neighbor spacings as being composed of the two branches of a modified, bimodal Wigner-Dyson distribution, which takes $`\overline{\xi }`$ and its fluctuation into account.
It is a pleasure to thank H. U. Baranger, E. Mucciolo, K. Richter, and F. Simmel for stimulating conversations and discussions. Financial support from the Schweizerischer Nationalfonds is gratefully acknowledged.


text:
# The three-leptons signature from resonant sneutrino production at the LHC

## 1 Introduction

In extensions of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) where the so-called R-parity symmetry is violated, the superpotential contains some additional trilinear couplings which offer the opportunity to singly produce supersymmetric (SUSY) particles as resonances. The analysis of resonant SUSY particle production allows an easier determination of the these R-parity violating ($`\mathit{}_p`$ ) couplings than the displaced vertex analysis for the Lightest Supersymmetric Particle (LSP) decay, which is difficult experimentally especially at hadronic colliders.

In this paper, we study the sensitivity provided by the ATLAS detector at the LHC on singly produced charginos via the $`\lambda _{211}^{}`$ coupling, the main contribution coming from the resonant process $`pp\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu \stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm \mu ^{}`$. At hadron colliders, due to the continuous energy distribution of the colliding partons, the resonance can be probed over a wide mass range. We have chosen to concentrate on $`\lambda _{ijk}^{}L_iQ_jD_k^c`$ interactions since $`\lambda _{ijk}^{\prime \prime }U_i^cD_j^cD_k^c`$ couplings lead to multijet final states with large QCD background. Besides, we focus on $`\lambda _{211}^{}`$ since it corresponds to first generation quarks for the colliding partons and it is not severely constrained by low energy experiments: $`\lambda _{211}^{}<0.09`$ (for $`\stackrel{~}{m}=100`$ GeV) . We consider the cascade decay leading to the three-leptons signature, namely $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm \stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0l_p^\pm \nu _p`$ (with $`l_p=e,\mu `$), $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0\mu u\overline{d},\overline{\mu }\overline{u}d`$. The main motivation lies in the low Standard Model background for this three-leptons final state. The considered branching ratios are typically of order $`B(\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm \stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0l_p^\pm \nu _p)22\%`$ (for $`m_{\stackrel{~}{l}},m_{\stackrel{~}{q}},m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^0}>m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm }`$) and $`B(\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0\mu ud)40\%70\%`$.

## 2 Mass reconstruction

The clean final state, with only two hadronic jets, three leptons and a neutrino allows the reconstruction of the $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }`$ decay chain and the measurement of the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu `$ masses. We perform the full analysis for the following point of the MSSM: $`M_1=75`$ GeV, $`M_2=150`$ GeV, $`\mu =200`$ GeV, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =1.5`$, $`A_t=A_b=A_\tau =0`$, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{f}}=300`$ GeV and for $`\lambda _{211}^{}`$=0.09. For this set of MSSM parameters, the mass spectrum is: $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0}=79.9`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm }=162.3`$ GeV and the total cross-section for the three-leptons production is 3.1 pb, corresponding to $`100000`$ events for the standard integrated luminosity of 30 fb-1 expected within the first three years of LHC data taking.

The single chargino production has been calculated analytically and implemented in a version of the SUSYGEN MonteCarlo  modified to include the generation of $`pp`$ processes. The generated signal events were processed through the program ATLFAST , a parameterised simulation of the ATLAS detector response.

First, we impose the following loose selection cuts in order to select the considered final state and to reduce the Standard Model (SM) background (see Section 3.1): (a) Exactly three isolated leptons with $`p_T^1>20`$ GeV, $`p_T^{2,3}>10`$ GeV and $`|\eta |<2.5`$, (b) At least two of the three leptons must be muons, (c) Exactly two jets with $`p_T>15`$ GeV, (d) The invariant mass of any $`\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ pair must lie outside $`\pm 6.5`$ GeV of the $`Z`$ mass.

The three leptons come in the following flavour-sign configurations (+ charge conjugates): (1) $`\mu ^{}e^+\mu ^+`$ (2) $`\mu ^{}e^+\mu ^{}`$ (3) $`\mu ^{}\mu ^+\mu ^+`$ (4) $`\mu ^{}\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$, where the first lepton comes from the $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu `$, the second one from the $`W`$ and the third one from the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ decay. As a starting point for the analysis, we focus on configuration (1) where the muon produced in the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ decay is unambiguously identified as the one with the same sign as the electron. The distribution of the $`\mu `$-jet-jet invariant mass exhibits a clear peak over a combinatorial background, shown on the left side of Figure 1. After combinatorial background subtraction ( right of Figure 1) an approximately gaussian peak is left, from which the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ mass can be measured with a statistical error of $`100`$ MeV. The combinatorial background is due to events where one jet from $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ decay is lost and a jet from initial state radiation is used in the combination, and its importance is reduced for heavier sneutrinos or neutralinos. Once the position of the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ mass peak is known, the reconstructed $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ statistics can be increased by also considering signatures (2), (3) and (4), and by choosing as the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ candidate the muon-jet-jet combination which gives invariant mass nearest to the peak measured previously using events sample (1). For further reconstruction, we define as $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ candidates the $`\mu `$-jet-jet combinations with an invariant mass within 12 GeV of the measured $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ peak, yielding a total statistics of 6750 events for signatures (1) to (4) for an integrated luminosity of 30 fb-1 .

For $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm `$ reconstruction we consider only configurations (1) and (2), for which the charged lepton from $`W`$ decay is unambiguously identified as the electron. The longitudinal momentum of the neutrino from the $`W`$ decay is calculated from the missing transverse momentum of the event ($`p_T^\nu `$) and by constraining the electron-neutrino invariant mass to the $`W`$ mass. The resulting neutrino longitudinal momentum has a twofold ambiguity. We therefore build the invariant $`W\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ mass candidate using both solutions for the $`W`$ boson momentum. The observed peak, represented on the left side of Figure 2, can be fitted with a gaussian shape with a width of $`6`$ GeV. Only the solution yielding the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm `$ mass nearer to the measured mass peak is retained, and the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm `$ candidates are defined as the combinations with an invariant mass within 15 GeV of the peak, corresponding to a statistics of 2700 events.

Finally, the sneutrino mass is reconstructed by taking the invariant mass of the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm `$ candidate and the leftover muon (Figure 2, right). The $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }`$ mass peak has a width of $`10`$ GeV and 2550 events are counted within 25 GeV of the measured peak.

## 3 Analysis reach

### 3.1 Standard Model background

We consider the following SM processes for the evaluation of the background to the three-leptons signature: (1) $`\overline{t}t`$ production, followed by $`tWb`$, where the two $`W`$ and one of the $`b`$ quarks decay leptonically, (2) $`WZ`$ production, where both bosons decay leptonically, (3) $`Wt`$ production, (4) $`Wbb`$ production, (5) $`Zb`$ production. These backgrounds were generated with the PYTHIA Monte Carlo , and the ONETOP parton level generator , and passed through the ATLFAST package .

We apply to the background events the loose selection cuts described in Section 2, and in addition we reject the three same-sign muons configurations which are never generated by our signal. The background to the sneutrino decay signal is calculated by considering the events with a $`\mu `$-jet-jet invariant mass in an interval of $`\pm 15`$ GeV around the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ peak measured for the signal. In order to optimise the signal to background ratio only events containing three muons (configurations (3) and (4)), which are less likely in the Standard Model, are considered. In each event two combinations, corresponding to the two same-sign muons, can be used for the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ reconstruction. Both configurations are used when counting the number of events in the peak. In most cases, however, the difference in mass between the two combinations is such that they do not appear in the same peak region.

### 3.2 Supersymmetric background

The pair production of SUSY particles through standard $`R_p`$-conserving processes represents another source of background. A study based on the HERWIG 6.0 MonteCarlo  has shown that all the SUSY events surviving the cuts described in Section 3.1 are mainly from $`pp\stackrel{~}{\chi }+X`$ reactions ($`\stackrel{~}{\chi }`$ being either a chargino or a neutralino and $`X`$ any other SUSY particle), and that the SUSY background decreases as the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }^\pm `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }^0`$ masses increase. This behaviour is due to the combination of two effects: the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }+X`$ production cross-section decreases with increasing $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }`$ mass, and the probability of losing two of the four jets from the decays of the two $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ in the event becomes smaller as the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }^\pm `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ masses increase. The SUSY background is only significant for $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm `$ masses lower than $`200`$ GeV.

Besides, it can be assumed that the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ mass will be derived from inclusive $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ reconstruction in SUSY pair production as shown in  and . Hence, even in the cases where a significant $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ peak can not be observed above the SUSY background, we can proceed to the further steps in the kinematic reconstruction. The strong kinematic constraint obtained by requiring both the correct $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ mass and a peak structure in the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0W`$ invariant mass will then allow to separate the single sneutrino production from other SUSY processes.

Therefore, only the Standard Model background is considered in the evaluation of the analysis reach presented below.

### 3.3 Reach in the mSUGRA parameter space

In Figure 3, we show the regions of the $`m_0m_{1/2}`$ plane where the signal significance exceeds 5 $`\sigma `$ ($`\frac{S}{\sqrt{B}}>5`$ with $`S=Signal`$ and $`B=SMBackground`$) after the set of cuts described in Section 3.1 has been applied, within the mSUGRA model. The full mass reconstruction analysis of Section 2 is possible only above the dashed line parallel to the $`m_0`$ axis. Below this line the decay $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm \stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0W^\pm `$ is kinematically closed, and the $`W`$ mass constraint can not be applied to reconstruct the neutrino longitudinal momentum.

The basic feature in Figure 3 is a decrease of the sensitivity on $`\lambda _{211}^{}`$ as $`m_0`$ increases. This is due to a decrease of the partonic luminosity as $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\nu }}`$ increases. The sensitivity on $`\lambda _{211}^{}`$ is also observed to decrease as $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm }`$ approaches $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\nu }}`$. There are two reasons. First, in this region the phase space factor of the decay $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm \mu ^{}`$ following the resonant sneutrino production is suppressed, thus reducing the branching fraction. Secondly, as the $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu `$ and the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm `$ become nearly degenerate the muon from the decay becomes on average softer, and its $`p_T`$ can fall below the analysis requirements. In the region $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm }>m_{\stackrel{~}{\nu }}`$, shown as a hatched region in the upper left of the plots, the resonant sneutrino production contribution vanishes and there is essentially no sensitivity to $`\lambda _{211}^{}`$. Finally, the the sensitivity vanishes for low values of $`m_{1/2}`$. This region, below the LEP 200 kinematic limit for $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm `$ detection, corresponds to low values of the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ mass. In this situation the two jets from the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ decay are soft, and one of them is often below the transverse momentum requirement, or they are reconstructed as a single jet.

For high $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, the three-lepton signature is still present, but it may be produced through the decay chain $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm \stackrel{~}{\tau }_1\nu _\tau `$, followed by $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1\tau \stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$. The full kinematic reconstruction becomes very difficult, but the signal efficiency is essentially unaffected, as long as the mass difference between the lightest $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$ and the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ is larger than $`50`$ GeV. For a smaller mass difference the charged lepton coming from the $`\tau `$ decay is often rejected by the analysis cuts.

## 4 Conclusion

In conclusion we have shown that if minimal supersymmetry with R-parity violation is realised in nature, the three-leptons signature from resonant sneutrino production will be a privileged channel for the precisely measuring of sparticle masses in a model-independent way as well as for testing a broad region of the mSUGRA parameter space.

This signature can lead to an high sensitivity on the $`\lambda _{211}^{}`$ coupling and should also allow to probe an unexplored range of values for many other $`\mathit{}_p`$ couplings of the type $`\lambda _{1jk}^{}`$ and $`\lambda _{2jk}^{}`$.


text:
# Charge-density waves in the Hubbard chain: evidence for 4𝑘_𝐹 instability

\[

## Abstract

Charge density waves in the Hubbard chain are studied by means of finite-temperature Quantum Monte Carlo simulations and Lanczos diagonalizations for the ground state. We present results both for the charge susceptibilities and for the charge structure factor at densities $`\rho =1/6`$ and 1/3; for $`\rho =1/2`$ (quarter filled) we only present results for the charge structure factor. The data are consistent with a $`4k_F`$ instability dominating over the $`2k_F`$ one, at least for sufficiently large values of the Coulomb repulsion, $`U`$. This can only be reconciled with the Luttinger liquid analyses if the amplitude of the $`2k_F`$ contribution vanishes above some $`U^{}(\rho )`$.

\]

Charge-density waves (CDW’s) are present in a variety of strongly correlated electron systems, ranging from quasi-one-dimensional organic conductors to the more recently discovered manganites. In order to understand the influence of CDW formation on magnetic order and transport properties, a crucial issue is to establish the period of charge modulation in the ground state. This period, in turn, is primarily determined by the interplay between electron-phonon and electron-electron couplings. For the specific example of quasi-one dimensional organic conductors at quarter-filled band, both period-2 and period-4 modulations have been observed; these correspond, respectively, to $`4k_F`$ and $`2k_F`$, where $`k_F=\pi \rho /2`$ is the Fermi wave vector for a density $`\rho `$ of free electrons on a periodic lattice. The use of simplified effective models capturing the basic physical ingredients should therefore be extremely helpful in predicting the dominant instability. In this context, the Hubbard model can be thought of as a limiting case (of vanishing electron-phonon interaction), in which the influence of electronic correlations on CDW modulation can be monitored. However, even for this simplest possible model there has been a disagreement between analyses of the continuum (Luttinger liquid) version, and early finite temperature (world-line) quantum Monte Carlo (QMC) simulations. According to the former, the large-distance behaviour of the charge density correlation function is given by

$$n(x)n(0)=\frac{K_\rho }{(\pi x)^2}+A_1\frac{\mathrm{cos}(2k_Fx)}{x^{1+K_\rho }\mathrm{ln}^{3/2}x}+A_2\frac{\mathrm{cos}(4k_Fx)}{x^{4K_\rho }},$$
(1)
where the amplitudes $`A_1`$ and $`A_2`$, and the exponent $`K_\rho `$ are interaction- and density-dependent parameters; for repulsive interactions $`\frac{1}{2}K_\rho <1`$, so that charge correlations are expected to be dominated by the $`2k_F`$ term. By contrast, the simulations pointed towards $`4k_F`$ being the main correlations. Nonetheless, based on a Renormalization Group (RG) analysis, it was argued that the $`2k_F`$ instability should eventually dominate over the $`4k_F`$ one for sufficiently low temperatures. For infinite coupling the system becomes effectively a spinless fermion problem with a $`4k_F`$ instability, and there is no disagreement in this case.

Since present day computational capabilities allow one to reach much lower temperatures and larger system sizes than before, a numerical reanalysis of the model is certainly in order. Our purpose here is to present the results of such a study. The Hubbard Hamiltonian reads

$$=t\underset{i,\sigma }{}c_{i\sigma }^{}c_{i+1\sigma }^{}+U\underset{i}{}n_i^{}n_i^{},$$
(2)
where, in standard notation, $`U`$ is the on-site Coulomb repulsion; the hopping integral sets the energy scale, so we take $`t=1`$ throughout this paper. We probe finite temperature properties through determinantal QMC simulations for the grand-canonical version of (2), $`\widehat{}\mu \widehat{N}`$, where $`\widehat{N}_{i\sigma }n_{i\sigma }`$; the chemical potential $`\mu `$ is adjusted to yield the desired particle density. This analysis is supplemented by zero temperature calculations: the ground state of Eq. (2), for finite lattices of $`N_s`$ sites with periodic boundary conditions, is obtained through the Lanczos algorithm, in the subspace of fixed particle-density (canonical ensemble).

The signature of a CDW instability is a peak at $`q=q^{}`$ in the zero-temperature limit of the charge-density susceptibility,

$$N(q)=\frac{1}{N_s}_0^\beta 𝑑\tau \underset{i,\mathrm{}}{}n_i(\tau )n_{i+\mathrm{}}(0)e^{iq\mathrm{}},$$
(3)
where the imaginary-time dependence of the operators is given by $`n_i(\tau )e^{\tau \widehat{}}n_ie^{\tau \widehat{}}`$, with $`n_i=n_i+n_i`$. We recall that in simulations ‘time’ is discretized in intervals $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$, such that the size along this direction is $`L=\beta /\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$. The CDW instability should also show up as a cusp, again at $`q=q^{},`$ in the zero-temperature charge-density structure factor,

$$C(q)=\frac{1}{N_s}\underset{i,\mathrm{}}{}0|n_in_{i+\mathrm{}}|0e^{iq\mathrm{}},$$
(4)
where $`|0`$ is the ground state.

Let us first discuss results for an electronic density $`\rho =1/6`$, for which we found that the fermionic determinants in QMC simulations do not suffer from the ‘minus-sign problem’; this allowed us to reach inverse temperatures as large as $`\beta =25`$. ¿From Fig. 1 we see that the $`4k_F`$ charge susceptibility appears to be increasing with decreasing temperature, at a rate faster than that at $`2k_F`$, especially for $`U=6`$ and 9. The data in Fig. 1 were obtained for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau =0.125`$, but we have explicitly tested other values to ensure they do not change significantly as $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau 0`$; each datum point involves typically 20,000 QMC sweeps over all time slices. Further, in order to check if this increase is limited by finite-size or finite-temperature effects, we performed additional simulations on a ‘square space-time lattice’, i.e., we set $`N_s=L`$; the result is displayed in Fig. 2 for $`N_s=L96`$. While the charge susceptibility at $`2k_F`$ seems to saturate as $`N_s`$ increases, the one at $`4k_F`$ still scales with $`\mathrm{ln}N_s`$, up to the largest sizes considered. Thus, in spite of the very low temperatures reached, we were still unable to find indications of a crossover temperature below which the system is dominated by the $`2k_F`$ instability. Also, since $`N_s1/T`$ for the data in Fig. 2, the $`4k_F`$ charge susceptibility grows logarithmically with the temperature in this range, similarly to the infinite coupling limit.

We now discuss the charge structure factor at zero temperature, as obtained from Lanczos diagonalizations, still for $`\rho =1/6`$. Figure 3 shows $`C(q)`$ for several values of $`U`$; for clarity, the curves are shown after suffering successive displacements. For the free case, $`U=0`$, we see a sharp plateau beginning at $`q=2k_F=\pi /6`$, which is the signature of the Peierls instability. This behaviour is quite different from the one observed for $`U0`$: though somewhat rounded for $`U=2`$ and 4, the plateaux now start at $`q=4k_F=\pi /3`$. It is instructive to examine how these roundings evolve with system size. In Fig. 4, we single out data for $`C(q)`$ with $`U=3`$ and 12, and sizes $`N_s=12`$ and 24. For each value of $`U`$, the data below and above $`4k_F`$ respectively move down and up as $`N_s`$ increases, thus sharpening the cusp; in addition, the position of the latter shows no tendency of shifting from $`4k_F`$. Thus, the Lanczos results are consistent with those from QMC simulations, in the sense that a $`4k_F`$ instability is dominant, already for moderate values of $`U`$. At this point, it is worth pointing out that the charge structure factor for the Hubbard chain with second neighbour hopping has been calculated through density matrix renormalization group (DMRG). Though their interest was to extract $`K_\rho `$ from the slope of $`C(q)`$ at $`q=0,`$ if one reinterprets those data along the lines discussed here, a predominance of the $`4k_F`$ instability can be clearly inferred for the largest values of $`U`$ shown in Fig. 11 of Ref. . DMRG calculations for the two-leg Hubbard ladder have also led to $`4k_F`$-like charge correlations.

We now change the band filling to $`\rho =1/3`$; the average sign of the fermionic determinant is $`0.9`$ in the worst cases, thus posing no problems to the resulting averages. Figure 5 shows QMC data for the charge susceptibilities with $`U=6`$ and $`U=8`$. For $`U=6`$ an upturn at lower temperatures seems to be setting in for $`4k_F`$, while the $`2k_F`$ data show no noticeable change in growth rate. On the other hand, for $`U=8`$ the $`4k_F`$ susceptibility grows unequivocally faster with $`\beta `$ than the one at $`2k_F`$; see Fig. 5. The corresponding Lanczos data for the charge structure factor are shown in Fig. 6 and, similarly to Fig. 3, the cusp at $`q=4k_F=2\pi /3`$ gets visibly sharper as $`U`$ increases.

Unfortunately, for larger band fillings the ‘minus-sign problem’ prevents us from reaching very low temperatures. Nonetheless, down to the lowest temperatures probed with acceptable average signs of the fermionic determinant (i.e., $`\mathrm{sign}0.7`$ at $`T1/20`$), no indications of a $`2k_F`$ peak dominating the charge susceptibility were found for $`\rho =1/2`$ or 3/4. Accordingly, the charge structure factor at $`T=0`$, calculated through Lanczos diagonalizations on a 16-site chain at quarter filling, shown in Fig. 7, confirms the previous patterns: there is some rounding near $`q=4k_F=\pi `$, which sharpens as $`U`$ increases, consistently with a $`4k_F`$ instability setting in for finite $`U`$’s.

In summary, for all band fillings examined, the charge instability seems to be characterized by a $`4k_F`$ modulation, rather than by $`2k_F`$, at least for $`U`$ greater than some $`U^{}(\rho )`$. The question of how can these findings be reconciled with the analyses of the continuum model still remains. Since Lanczos data have been obtained at zero temperature, and QMC simulations reached much lower temperatures than before, the scenario of a temperature-driven crossover seems now unlikely; it should be recalled that this crossover was predicted based on a weak coupling RG analysis. We therefore envisage the following scenario. While analyses of the Luttinger liquid have so far provided detailed insight into the behaviour of the exponent $`K_\rho `$, little is known about the dependence of the amplitude $`A_1`$ of the $`2k_F`$ contribution \[see Eq. (1)\] with $`\rho `$ and with the coupling constant. Our results may be indicating that, for fixed density $`\rho `$, $`A_10`$ very fast with increasing $`U`$, either exponentially or, less likely, as $`\left(U^{}(\rho )U\right)^\psi ,`$ for $`UU^{}(\rho )`$, with $`\psi >1`$; a crude examination of the roundings near $`4k_F`$ in the structure factors is consistent with $`U^{}`$ growing with $`\rho `$. An alternative scenario could be that $`2k_F`$ charge correlations in the lattice model would suffer from unusually slow finite-size effects, thus hindering any present day numerical calculations to detect their predominance over the $`4k_F`$ ones; however, since one would need effects slower than those suggested by the logarithmic ‘correction’ in Eq. (1), this scenario is less appealing. Therefore, the presence of a $`4k_F`$ instability can be made compatible with Luttinger liquid picture through the behaviour of the amplitude of the $`2k_F`$ contribution. We hope our results stimulate more extensive work both on the Luttinger liquid and on the lattice model in order to extract a quantitative behaviour for the amplitude $`A_1(\rho ,U)`$.

###### Acknowledgements.

The authors are grateful to H. Ghosh, A. L. Malvezzi and D. J. Scalapino for useful discussions, to S. L. A. de Queiroz and R. T. Scalettar for comments on the manuscript, and to R. Bechara Muniz for computational assistance. Financial support from the Brazilian Agencies FAPERJ, FINEP, CNPq and CAPES is also gratefully acknowledged. The authors are also grateful to Centro de Supercomputação da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul for the use of the Cray T94, and to the Instituto de Física at Universidade Federal Fluminense, where this work initiated.