text:
# Constraining Galaxy Mass Profiles with Strong Gravitational Lensing

## 1 Introduction

Gravitational lensing offers a potent tool for determining the cosmological distance scale (Refsdal 1964), but only if the mass distribution of the deflector is well constrained. Since the mass model predicts time delays between the lensed images up to a factor of $`h^1`$, where $`H_o=100h\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1`$, a simple comparison with measured time delays can yield the Hubble constant. This method is particularly tempting as it would determine $`H_o`$ directly out to cosmological distances, forgoing the calibration errors associated with traditional distance-ladder techniques (e. g. Mould et al. 2000). Much of the recent interest in finding arcsecond-scale gravitational lens systems through large, dedicated programs such as the Cosmic Lens All-Sky Survey (CLASS; Myers et al. 2000) has been motivated by this goal.

Measurements of $`H_o`$ from gravitational lenses are only as good as our understanding of the galaxies doing the lensing, as the model-predicted time delays contribute an equal fractional uncertainty to the derived Hubble parameter. Unfortunately, experience has shown that our knowledge of lensing mass distributions is not very good at all. This problem has been greatly exacerbated by the observation that a significant fraction of lenses, including several of those with measured time delays, are quite complex in structure (e. g. CLASS B1359+154, Rusin et al. 2000; QSO 0957+561, Barkana et al. 1999; PG 1115+080, Schechter et al. 1997; CLASS B1608+656, Koopmans and Fassnacht 1999). Mass models are difficult to construct for such systems due to limited constraints and parameter degeneracies (e. g. the mass-sheet degeneracy, Gorenstein et al. 1988).

Significant uncertainties in the mass model can remain even in systems lensed by a single isolated galaxy. This is because the positions and flux density ratios of the lensed images constrain derivatives of the potential, rather than the potential itself. Often a range of models can provide sufficient fits to the lens system while placing different potentials at the image positions. The predicted time delays will be greatly affected by model degeneracies, as they depend on the potential directly (Schneider, Ehlers and Falco 1992). This is particularly discouraging for many two-image lens systems, which do not offer a sufficient number of constraints to even attempt fits to the profile shape. For such systems the profile must be assumed, and is commonly taken to be isothermal. The uncertainty in the slope of the mass profile and its effect on Hubble constant determination are rarely included in most preliminary modeling analyses.

Attempts to constrain galaxy mass profiles through strong lensing generally focus on image positions, flux density ratios and, if available, the ratios of measured time delays. Studies of this type have thus far been performed in only a small handful of lens systems, and have had limited success in pinning down the mass profile. Assuming a power-law surface mass density ($`\mathrm{\Sigma }r^\gamma `$), it has been found that the merging lens galaxies of CLASS B1608+656 are best fit by $`0.8\gamma 1.2`$ (Koopmans and Fassnacht 1999), while the large elliptical galaxy in QSO 0957+561 is best fit by $`0.82\gamma 0.93`$ (Grogin and Narayan 1996). However, each of these systems is affected by complicated deflectors. A profile analysis has also been done for MG 1654+134 (Kochanek 1995), which is a radio ring system lensed by an isolated galaxy. Because the lensed extended emission probes a wide range of radii (as opposed to the images of a compact source), ring systems can produce tighter constraints on the mass profile ($`0.9\gamma 1.1`$ for MG 1654+134).

While isothermal ($`\gamma =1`$) mass profiles are largely compatible with lensing, a range of near-isothermal profiles ($`0.8\gamma 1.2`$) are equally feasible. In this Letter I outline the systematic effects of this uncertainty on the predicted time delays, and evaluate the possibility of measuring $`H_o`$ with the set of lens systems currently known. I then consider the largely-ignored reverse problem in lensing – namely, using measured time delays along with a well-determined value of $`H_o`$ to study galaxy mass profiles. The results offered by this technique have the potential to provide greatly improved constraints on the inner mass distribution for galaxies at intermediate redshift.

## 2 Power-law mass distributions

In this Letter I approximate the lensing mass of galaxies by a singular power-law ellipsoid (SPLE), with surface mass density

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(x_1,x_2)=q[x_1^2+f^2x_2^2]^{\gamma /2}$$

where $`\gamma `$ is radial profile, $`f`$ is the axial ratio and $`q`$ is the normalization. Only recently have power-law mass profiles for arbitrary $`\gamma `$ become a feasible alternative for studying and modeling gravitational lens systems. All calculations presented in this paper make use of the rapidly converging series solutions for the deflection angles and magnification matrices derived by Barkana (1998) and implemented in the “FASTELL” software package.

While even small core radii greatly affect lensing cross-sections, they do not significantly alter the properties of the images in a given system and can therefore be ignored in this analysis. The SPLE probably oversimplifies the overall mass distribution in galaxies, but may be a feasible approximation when limited to describing the inner few $`h^1`$ kpc that is probed by strong lensing. Moreover, it has been shown that a large number of gravitational lens systems can be successfully modeled using power-law mass profiles, isothermal or otherwise.

The lensing properties of the singular power-law ellipsoid depend strongly on the value of the profile slope $`\gamma `$. Here we summarize the possible image configurations produced by the SPLE for the range of profiles ($`0.7<\gamma <1.3`$) and axial ratios ($`f>0.5`$) that seem to be favored by most gravitational lens systems:

* For the familiar isothermal case ($`\gamma =1`$; Kormann, Schneider and Bartelmann 1994a), the SPLE will produce one, two or four images, as is typically observed in gravitational lens systems. The third image (for doubles) and fifth image (for quads) does not exist, as the radial critical curve that would enclose this image degenerates to a point at the lens center.
* For profiles steeper than isothermal ($`\gamma >1`$), the deflection angle diverges as $`r0`$, so the SPLE will multiply-image all source positions, producing either two or four images. The lensing cross-section for $`\gamma >1`$ is thus nominally infinite. However, the second image is highly demagnified if the source is sufficiently misaligned with the lens, which leads to a large flux ratio between the images. This results in a finite “observational cross-section” that depends on the dynamic range limits of a given survey. The CLASS survey, for example, can only identify lens systems in which the flux density ratio between the brightest images is $``$ 10:1.
* For profiles shallower than isothermal ($`\gamma <1`$), the radial critical curve exists, allowing for the creation of one, three or five images. The third image and fifth image will be sufficiently demagnified to escape detection if $`\gamma `$ is close to 1. For shallower profiles, however, the SPLE commonly produces two distinct classes of three-image systems that would be readily observable – (1) fold-imaged configurations in which the positive parity image enclosed by the radial critical curve is sufficiently bright (3F-type; Fig. 1a), and (2) naked-cusp configurations in which a source enclosed by the diamond caustic only is lensed into three bright images on the same side of the lens, with no counter images (3C-type; Fig. 1b). The paucity of observational evidence for three-image systems suggests that the typical mass profile of lens galaxies is unlikely to be much shallower than $`\gamma =0.75`$ (Rusin and Ma 2000).

## 3 Mass profiles and time delays

How well can we hope to constrain galaxy mass profiles using gravitational lensing? How does the remaining uncertainty affect the predicted time delays, and therefore the extracted Hubble constant? Analyses of this type have thus far been been performed for only a few specific lenses, and in many instances have been significantly complicated by the presence a complex deflector system. Here I consider the case of lens systems produced by a single isolated galaxy, and address the above questions for both two and four-image morphologies.

### 3.1 Two-image systems

Gravitational lenses consisting of two unresolved images comprise the majority of known lens systems. Such systems provide only five constraints to the lens model (four image coordinates and the flux density ratio). Even if the mass distribution can be fixed to a well known galaxy position, one must still solve for the axial ratio, position angle and normalization of the model, as well as the two coordinates of the unlensed source. Because there are no degrees of freedom, any mass profile can fit the data perfectly ($`\chi ^2=0`$). Such lens systems are thus not capable of constraining the galaxy mass profile, if only image positions and flux density ratios are used.

To study the effect of the mass profile on the predicted time delays, a series of fake two-image lens systems was generated using a range of SPLE mass models with $`0.7\gamma 1.3`$ and $`0.5f0.9`$. To limit the analysis to the types of lens systems that are actually observed, configurations with a flux density ratio of $``$ 10:1 between the two brightest images or with an observable third image (flux density ratio between the brightest and third brightest image of $``$ 50:1) were discarded. Next, the fake lens systems were remodeled using an isothermal ($`\gamma =1`$) mass profile. The mass distribution was fixed at the same position as the SPLE to constrain the model. Finally, the time delays of the isothermal and power-law distributions were compared.

The predicted time delay relative to the isothermal case ($`\mathrm{\Delta }t_{pred}(\gamma )/\mathrm{\Delta }t_{pred}(\gamma =1)`$) is displayed in Fig. 2.111The results described here were originally presented at the 195th AAS Meeting in January. Since then, an interesting paper has been submitted by Witt, Mao and Keeton (2000), which references a similar set of simulations describing the effect of the galaxy mass profile on time delays. These results agree well with those shown in Fig. 2.. The error bars indicate the range containing 95% of the Monte Carlo trials. The scatter in the results is remarkably small, given that the lens systems were created by placing sources at random locations behind the galaxy. The plot is shown for SPLEs with $`f=0.7`$, but the results are only dependent on axial ratio at the few percent level. The results are also independent of the angular separation of the gravitational lens system. (A simple calculation shows that the size of the caustics and critical curves scale as $`q^{1/\gamma }`$, and the absolute time delays scale as $`q^{2/\gamma }`$.)

For a two-image lens system, the predicted time delays vary almost linearly with $`\gamma `$, as found independently by Witt, Mao and Keeton (2000). Steeper mass profiles lead to longer predicted delays, since the ray paths traverse deeper potentials. Similar trends have been noted in several previous investigations (Barkana et al. 1999, Koopmans and Fassnacht 1999, Williams and Saha 2000). A longer predicted delay translates into a larger value of the Hubble constant. In almost all trials, the position angle of the SIE was recovered to within a few degrees of that of the original SPLE. The axial ratio required to fit the lens system decreases (becomes flatter) as the profile is made steeper. However, since there is no reason to assume that the axial ratio of the mass distribution must match that of the observed surface brightness distribution of the lensing galaxy, this does not provide a useful constraint on the model.

The range of profiles consistent with lensing ($`0.8\gamma 1.2`$) translates into a spread of $`20\%`$ in the predicted time delays. This uncertainty should be folded into preliminary modeling analyses of all two-image lenses. It is therefore doubtful whether any basic two-image gravitational lens system will produce a precision measurement of the Hubble constant.

In a fraction of radio-loud gravitational lens systems, VLBI imaging is able resolve milliarcsecond-scale substructure in the lensed components. Correlated substructure, such as a core and jet emission feature in each image, can provide additional constraints to the model. Images resolved into two subcomponents offer a total of ten constraints (eight image coordinates and two flux density ratios), but the number of free parameters also increases by two to account for a second set of unlensed source coordinates. For such systems a sufficient number of constraints are available to study different mass profiles. However, Monte Carlo results using sources consisting of two closely-spaced subcomponents show that in order to determine the profile to within 10%, the galaxy position must be fixed by observations and the subcomponents must be separated by several milliarcseconds (mas) in the lensed images.

Several radio lens systems are currently known to have image substructure. For example, QSO 0957+561 (Barkana et al. 1999) features unusually rich jet emission consisting of several correlated knots, which has allowed for the mass profile of the lensing galaxy to be determined to 5–10%. Each image of CLASS B0218+357 (Biggs et al. 1999) is resolved into two subcomponents separated by only $`1`$ mas, and the position of the lens galaxy is very poorly known. CLASS B2319+051 (Marlow et al. 2000) has well-resolved substructure, but thus far the lensed images have not been detected in the optical, so the relative position of the lensing galaxy must be left as a free parameter in the modeling process. The model is further complicated by the presence of a nearly shear contributor at a different redshift than that of the primary galaxy (Lubin et al. 2000).

### 3.2 Four-image systems

The situation with four-image lens systems is greatly improved, due to the fact that the images probe the mass distribution at four distinct locations. Image positions and flux density ratios provide a total of 11 constraints to the lens model, which allows the mass profile to be studied directly. Monte Carlo simulations using quads produced with power-law deflectors show that modeling can recover the true mass profile to within a percent in $`\gamma `$, while strongly excluding neighboring profiles. Therefore, quads lensed by an isolated galaxy offer the best possibility of precisely measuring the Hubble constant through gravitational lensing.

Unfortunately, a very large fraction of known four-image lens systems have lensing potentials that are significantly more complicated than that of a single galaxy, which again leads to large uncertainties on both $`H_o`$ and the profile. This is particularly true of the radio quads. Of the four-image systems in the CLASS sample, two have multiple galaxies inside the Einstein ring (B1359+154, Rusin et al. 2000; B1608+656, Koopmans and Fassnacht), and two more appear to be significantly perturbed by strong external shear contributors (B2045+265, Fassnacht et al. 1999; B1422+231, Kormann, Schneider and Bartelmann 1994b). Two additional systems are lensed by a relatively isolated galaxy (B0712+472, Jackson et al. 1998; B1933+507, Sykes et al. 1998) but have thus far not shown themselves to be variable, which would prevent the measurement of time delays. Finally, B1555+375 (Marlow et al. 1999) has an inverted radio spectrum and is likely to be variable, but the very small image separation ($`420`$ mas) makes a standard VLA monitoring program infeasible. It is therefore questionable whether any of the currently known set of four-image lens systems will provide tight constraints on $`H_o`$. A subset of the systems may still be useful in studying the mass profile, and advanced modeling of these lenses will be presented in a future paper (Rusin 2000).

## 4 Turning the problem around

Gravitational lensing now competes with new methods seeking to measure the Hubble constant. One technique in particular, combining the power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) with data from large galaxy redshift surveys, has the potential to determine $`H_o`$ to within a few percent (Eisenstein, Hu and Tegmark 1999) by the middle of the decade. Gravitational lensing is unlikely to match this precision, due to aforementioned problems with constraining the galaxy mass profiles. Witt, Mao and Keeton (2000) point out that the uncertainties can be beaten down by measurements of $`H_o`$ in a number of different lens systems. However, if the typical uncertainty is $`20\%`$ on any particular measurement (as is currently the case for most lenses), time delays for an unreasonably large number of systems ($`50`$) would be required to reduce the overall error down to a competitive level. This argument also assumes that the typical mass profile for lensing galaxies corresponds to some known value (such as isothermal) which is input to the lens models. If the wrong value is assumed, the derived Hubble constants will converge to a systematically incorrect result.

Should the Hubble constant be sufficiently well determined by some other means, however, the measured time delays become a direct and powerful constraint on the slope of the mass profile. This astrophysical application of the time delay method has been largely ignored, in favor of the cosmological one. However, this approach may provide the best tool for studying the inner part of galaxy mass profiles and directly testing the isothermal assumption. Two-image systems will be particularly important to this process, as the majority of doubles appear to be dominated by a single lensing galaxy, which will greatly ease the analysis.

One’s ability to constrain the galaxy mass profile using this method depends on the accuracy to which the image positions, flux density ratio and time delay, as well as the galaxy position, can be measured. Radio imaging can determine image positions to within a fraction of a milliarcsecond, so this contributes very little to the uncertainty. History has also shown that flux density ratios and time delays can measured from light curves to within a few percent, given some persistence and luck (Kundic et al. 1997).

Since two-image systems require that the deflector position be fixed to constrain the model, any uncertainty in the center of the galaxy surface brightness distribution will translate into a spread of predicted time delays, and therefore weaken constraints on the mass profile. Typically the brightness center of a lens galaxy can be determined to no better than $`1025`$ mas using the Hubble Space Telescope.222See the CASTLES webpage, http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/castles/, for imaging data on most of the currently known gravitational lenses. For a lens system with an image separation of $``$ 1 – 1.5 arcseconds, this translates to an uncertainty of $`10\%`$ in the predicted time delays when all the remaining galaxy parameters are allowed to float. The error can be reduced if the position angle of the mass model is constrained to be compatible with that of the observed surface brightness distribution of the lens galaxy. This position angle may be a good modeling constraint, as it is reasonable to believe that the light and mass distributions are similarly oriented.

If both the Hubble constant and time delay are known to within a few percent, the lens model is required to reproduce $`\mathrm{\Delta }t_{pred}=h\mathrm{\Delta }t_{meas}`$ (where $`\mathrm{\Delta }t_{pred}`$ is the predicted delay for $`h=1`$) to within $`5\%`$. Since Fig. 2 shows that $`\mathrm{\Delta }t_{pred}\gamma `$ for the parameter range of interest, the mass profile would be measured to this accuracy, assuming the position of the galaxy is perfectly known. Including the uncertainty in the galaxy position but using the orientation of the surface brightness distribution as a constraint will likely increase the error in the derived mass profile to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma =0.050.1`$ for most two-image lens systems.

## 5 Discussion

Gravitational lensing has already contributed to our knowledge of both galaxy mass distributions and the Hubble constant. The profiles of several lens galaxies have been constrained at the $`1020\%`$ level, while the ensemble of lenses with measured time delays may have determined the Hubble constant to $`10\%`$ (Koopmans and Fassnacht 1999). In this age of precision cosmology and astrophysics, however, new techniques and observations promise very accurate measurements of a wide range of quantities. It is therefore necessary to reassess the goals and merits of more familiar methods.

The traditional application of gravitational lensing seeks to measure the Hubble constant, and requires that the mass distribution of the lensing galaxy be modeled independently of the absolute time delays. Uncertainties in the mass profile dominate the error budget in $`H_o`$ for every system in which time delays are currently measured. At the same time, lensing must compete with new techniques that have the potential to determine the Hubble constant to within a few percent.

The time delay method, however, can be elegantly inverted to provide powerful constraints on galaxy mass profiles, once the Hubble constant has been accurately measured by some other means. Whereas highly constrained lens systems, such as quads or doubles with well-separated substructure, would be needed to derive $`H_o`$ independent of any assumptions regarding the mass profile for a given galaxy, time delay determinations in almost any simple two-image system can make interesting statements about the mass distribution present. In time this approach may provide the best tool for probing the inner few $`h^1`$ kpc in elliptical galaxies, and will nicely complement weak lensing techniques that are sensitive to the mass profile at large radius (Fischer et al. 2000). Because photometric studies by the CASTLES collaboration (Kochanek et al. 2000) have found that lensing galaxies appear to be consistent with an ordinary population of passively evolving ellipticals, the results derived from lensing can be applied to typical galaxies at intermediate redshift. In conclusion, the precision studies of galaxy mass profiles offered by lensing suggest that the most significant results from Refsdal’s method may be astrophysical in nature, rather than cosmological.

I would like to thank Max Tegmark for his careful reading of this manuscript, and Chung-Pei Ma and Dan Marlow for many interesting conversations on the topic of mass profiles in gravitational lensing. This research was partially funded by NASA grant NAG5-6034.


format: text

text:
# On toric varieties and algebraic semigroups

## 1. Introduction

In this paper we discuss two questions arising in the theory of toric varieties and their relation to the theory of algebraic semigroups. A toric variety is a normal algebraic variety which contains a torus as an open dense subset, such that the natural action of the torus on itself (by left multiplication) extends to an action of the torus on the variety. This definition is not very enlightening, so one needs a different description of a toric variety. It turns out that the geometry of toric varieties is closely related to such simple objects as polyhedral cones in Euclidean spaces. More precisely, given a fan in a Euclidean space, which is a collection of ”strongly convex rational polyhedral cones” satisfying a certain condition, there exists a natural way of associating a toric variety to this fan (for details, see section 2.3). In principle, all questions concerning the resulting toric variety may be reformulated in terms of simple geometric statements about the fan we have started with. This makes the study of toric varieties much easier than the study of arbitrary algebraic varieties. However, to be able to use this theory, we must solve the reverse problem: does there always exist a fan such that the associated toric variety is isomorphic to the given one?

In this paper, we will see that the answer is affirmative in the most important case when the toric variety is separated111The author is thankful to Professor S. Shatz for pointing out that there exist nonseparated toric varieties.. To justify the use of this assumption, we will show that a toric variety associated to a fan is necessarily separated, and we will give an example of a toric variety which is not separated (and hence cannot be constructed from a fan). Of course, this result is far from being original. For example, the book  gives a procedure222but without checking the details of recovering a fan from a toric variety. However, Fulton assumes that the given toric variety can be constructed from a fan, and then shows how the fan can be reconstructed. In general, it seems that in most of the literature on toric varieties, the authors try to avoid giving all the details of this reconstruction. In the second part of this paper, we will give a complete proof of the fact that a separated toric variety can always be constructed from a fan. For the only nontrivial result that we will state without a proof, the reader is referred to the paper .

It appears that our method differs essentially from the ones that may be found in the literature. There are many fewer technical details to check, and our argument makes it clear where the normality and separatedness assumptions are used.

We also address a question which connects the theories of toric varieties and algebraic semigroups. It is known that every affine toric variety has a natural structure of an algebraic semigroup such that the multiplication extends the multiplication on the torus.333We show this in Lemma 3.8. A natural question arises: is it true that every (separated) toric variety which is an algebraic semigroup whose multiplication is compatible with that on the torus is automatically affine?

The first part of the paper is devoted to proving that the answer is affirmative in the case when the ”toric semigroup” can be constructed from a fan. Combining this result with the second part, we see that every separated toric semigroup444For a formal definition, see 3.1. is affine. Thus, the study of separated toric semigroups reduces to the study of affine toric semigroups, or, in the usual terminology, toric monoids. For a complete description of toric monoids, the reader is referred to the paper .

The exposition is kept as self-contained as possible. All the relevant definitions from the theories of toric varieties and algebraic semigroups are given. We use several basic results from the general theory of algebraic varieties, all of which may be found in . We also use a few results on cones in Euclidean spaces. For the proofs the reader is referred to the book .

## 2. Basic Definitions

### 2.1. Algebraic semigroups and toric varieties.

In this paper, $`k`$ denotes an arbitrary algebraically closed field. We use the term algebraic variety in the sense of . In particular, we do not assume that varieties are irreducible or separated. If $`X`$ is a variety over $`k`$, $`k[X]`$ denotes its coordinate ring.

###### Definition 2.1.

An algebraic semigroup is an algebraic variety $`S`$ together with a morphism of algebraic varieties

$$\mu :S\times SS,$$

denoted multiplicatively:

$$(a,b)ab,$$

such that the usual associativity condition holds: for all $`a,b,cS`$,

$$(ab)c=a(bc).$$

A zero of an algebraic semigroup $`S`$ is such an element $`0S`$ (if it exists) that for all $`sS`$, $`0s=s0=0`$. If $`S`$ has a unit, $`G(S)`$ will denote the subgroup consisting of all invertible elements of $`S`$.

###### Definition 2.2.

A toric variety is a pair $`(X,T)`$ where $`X`$ is a normal algebraic variety and $`TX`$ is an open dense subset isomorphic to an (algebraic) torus, such that the multiplication $`T\times TT`$ extends to an action $`T\times XX`$ of $`T`$ on $`X`$.

###### Remark 2.3.

In this paper we are interested in algebraic semigroups containing a torus as an open dense subset, such that the multiplication on the semigroup is compatible with that on the torus. Let $`ST`$ be such a semigroup. Since the condition $`s_1s_2=s_2s_1`$ is closed and is satisfied for all $`s_1,s_2T`$, it must be satisfied for all $`s_1,s_2S`$. Similarly, if $`1`$ denotes the unit element of $`T`$, then the condition $`1s=s1=s`$, satisfied for all $`sT`$, must therefore be satisfied for all $`sS`$. Thus, $`S`$ is an irreducible commutative algebraic semigroup with a unit. Consequently, all elements of $`T`$ must be invertible. Now assume that $`S`$ is affine. We claim that, in fact, $`G(S)=T`$. To see this, note that for an affine semigroup $`S`$, there exists a closed embedding $`SM_n(k)`$ which is a homomorphism of semigroups555As usual, $`M_n(k)`$ denotes the set of $`n\times n`$ matrices with entries in $`k`$, and we make $`M_n(k)`$ into a semigroup under multiplication.. Moreover, if $`S`$ has a unit, we may assume that it maps to the identity matrix under this embedding (for details, see ). Hence $`G(S)`$ maps into $`GL(n,k)`$. In particular, $`G(S)`$ is itself an algebraic group (the map $`gg^1`$ is a morphism of algebraic varieties $`GG`$), and $`G(S)`$ is open in $`S`$. In our situation, this means that $`G(S)`$ contains $`T`$ as an open dense subgroup. Thus, $`T=G(S)`$ (see ).

### 2.2. Fans in euclidean spaces.

Let $`N`$ be a lattice of finite rank $`n`$, i.e. $`N^n`$. We denote by $`N_{}`$ the Euclidean space $`N_{}`$. Let $`M=\mathrm{Hom}(N,)`$ be the dual lattice and $`M_{}=M_{}`$ the corresponding dual space. Let $`\sigma N_{}`$ be a cone (a subset closed under multiplication by nonnegative real numbers). We say that $`\sigma `$ is strongly convex if it contains no real line, polyhedral if it is an intersection of finitely many closed half-spaces, and rational if there exist finitely many elements $`v_1,\mathrm{},v_kN`$ such that

$$\sigma =\{\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}\lambda _iv_i\lambda _i0\}.$$

We will denote by $`(,):M\times N`$ and $`(,):M_{}\times N_{}`$ the canonical pairings. Given a cone $`\sigma N_{}`$, we may form the dual cone $`\sigma ^{}:=\{uM_{}(u,v)0\mathrm{for}\mathrm{all}v\sigma \}`$. If $`uM_{}`$, we write $`u^{}=\{vN_{}(u,v)=0\}`$. Then a face of $`\sigma `$ is a subset which may be written as $`\tau =\sigma u^{}`$ for some $`u\sigma ^{}`$.

###### Definition 2.4.

A fan in $`N_{}`$ is a nonempty finite collection $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of strongly convex rational polyhedral cones in $`N_{}`$ satisfying the following two conditions:

1. If $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\tau `$ is a face of $`\sigma `$, then $`\tau \mathrm{\Delta }`$.
2. If $`\sigma ,\tau \mathrm{\Delta }`$, then $`\sigma \tau `$ is a face of both $`\sigma `$ and $`\tau `$.

If there exists a cone $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ consists of $`\sigma `$ together with all of its faces, we say that the fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is generated by the cone $`\sigma `$.

### 2.3. Fans and toric varieties.

Now we will show how to associate, to each fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in $`N_{}`$, a toric variety. First, for each $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }`$, we define an affine variety $`U_\sigma `$. Let $`\sigma ^{}`$ be the dual cone and let $`S_\sigma `$ be the subsemigroup of $`M`$ defined by $`S_\sigma =\sigma ^{}M`$. We may form the semigroup ring $`k[S_\sigma ]`$666It is the commutative $`k`$-algebra generated by the ”monomials” $`\{\chi ^vvS_\sigma \}`$ subject to the relation $`\chi ^v\chi ^w=\chi ^{v+w}`$. In the following discussion, we identify elements of $`S_\sigma `$ with the corresponding monomials in $`k[S_\sigma ]`$.. Clearly, it is a finitely generated $`k`$-algebra without zero divisors, so we set $`U_\sigma =\mathrm{Spec}(k[S_\sigma ])`$ (technically, we should write m-Spec here, since we consider only the closed points of the corresponding scheme). Thus $`U_\sigma `$ is an irreducible algebraic variety over $`k`$.

Next, we patch the affines $`U_\sigma `$ together to obtain a toric variety. For all $`\sigma ,\tau \mathrm{\Delta }`$, the inclusion maps $`\sigma \tau \sigma `$ and $`\sigma \tau \tau `$ correspond to maps $`\sigma ^{}(\sigma \tau )^{}`$, $`\tau ^{}(\sigma \tau )^{}`$, and hence to homomorphisms of semigroups $`S_\sigma S_{\sigma \tau }`$, $`S_\tau S_{\sigma \tau }`$. These induce homomorphisms of $`k`$-algebras $`k[S_\sigma ]k[S_{\sigma \tau }]`$, $`k[S_\tau ]k[S_{\sigma \tau }]`$, and, finally, dominant morphisms of algebraic varieties

$$U_{\sigma \tau }U_\sigma $$

and

$$U_{\sigma \tau }U_\tau .$$

It turns out that these morphisms are open embeddings, so we may glue the affines $`U_\sigma `$, $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }`$, along their open subvarieties $`U_{\sigma \tau }`$, to obtain an irreducible variety $`X`$. Note that $`\{0\}`$ is a face of every strongly rational cone, so by condition 1 of definition 2.4, $`\{0\}\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Moreover, for each $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }`$, the inclusion $`\{0\}\sigma `$ induces an open embedding

$$U_{\{0\}}U_\sigma .$$

But $`S_{\{0\}}=M`$, hence we have natural isomorphisms

$$k[S_{\{0\}}]k[T_1,T_1^1,\mathrm{},T_n,T_n^1]$$

and

$$U_{\{0\}}T=(k^{})^n.$$

Thus all the affines $`U_\sigma `$ contain the torus $`T`$ as an open dense subset, and hence so does $`X`$. It remains to define the action of $`T`$ on $`X`$. We first construct this action on each of the $`U_\sigma `$’s. To show that the multiplication morphism $`T\times TT`$ extends to a morphism $`T\times U_\sigma U_\sigma `$, it suffices to prove the corresponding statement on the level of coordinate rings, namely, that we have the commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}k[T]& & k[T]_kk[T]\\ & & \\ k[U_\sigma ]& & k[T]_kk[U_\sigma ]\end{array}$$

Note that the lattice $`M`$ is naturally isomorphic to the lattice of characters of $`T`$. Hence $`k[U_\sigma ]=k[S_\sigma ]`$ has a basis consisting of characters of $`T`$. But if $`\chi `$ is a character of $`T`$, then the homomorphism

$$k[T]k[T]_kk[T]$$

maps $`\chi `$ to $`\chi \chi `$. This argument shows that, in fact, we have a diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}k[T]& & k[T]_kk[T]\\ & & \\ k[U_\sigma ]& & k[U_\sigma ]_kk[U_\sigma ]\end{array}$$

Since the homomorphism in the top row of this diagram is coassociative, so is the homomorphism in the bottom row. Thus, $`U_\sigma `$ has a natural semigroup structure which is compatible with the multiplication on the torus.

It is easy to check that the actions of the torus on the different $`U_\sigma `$’s agree, and hence give an action of $`T`$ on $`X`$. This completes the construction of the toric variety $`X`$. For more details, see .

###### Definition 2.5.

Given a finite dimensional lattice $`N`$ and a fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in $`N_{}=N_{}`$, the toric variety $`X`$ constructed above will be called the toric variety associated with the fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, written $`X=X(\mathrm{\Delta })`$.

Observe that if the fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is generated by a single cone $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }`$, then the associated toric variety is affine. Later we will prove the converse of this statement (Corollary 3.9).

## 3. Main Results

In this section, we state and prove our main results and their corollaries.

### 3.1. Toric semigroups.

First, we define the main object of our study.

###### Definition 3.1.

A toric semigroup is a toric variety $`XT`$ which has a structure of an algebraic semigroup compatible with the multiplication on the torus.

###### Remark 3.2.

In modern literature (cf. ), affine toric semigroups are usually called toric monoids.

We intend to prove

###### Theorem 3.1.

Let $`N`$ be a finite dimensional lattice, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ a fan in $`N_{}`$ and $`X=X(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ the associated toric variety. If $`X`$ has a structure of a toric semigroup, then the fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is generated by a single cone $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }`$. In particular, $`X`$ is affine.

We will use several lemmas. We call a cone $`\sigma N_{}`$ nondegenerate if its interior is nonempty, or, equivalently, if $`N_{}`$, as a real vector space, is spanned by $`\sigma `$. In the previous section, we have shown that for all $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }`$, the corresponding affine variety $`U_\sigma `$ has a natural structure of a toric monoid. We have

###### Lemma 3.2.

The toric monoid $`U_\sigma `$ has a zero if and only if the cone $`\sigma `$ is nondegenerate.

Proof. See Appendix, section 4.1.

To use this result, we would like to be able to relate the semigroup structure on $`X`$ with those on the open affines $`U_\sigma `$. For this, we apply

###### Lemma 3.3.

The multiplication morphism $`X\times XX`$ maps $`U_\sigma \times U_\sigma `$ into $`U_\sigma `$, and its restriction to a morphism

$$U_\sigma \times U_\sigma U_\sigma $$

coincides with the natural monoid structure on $`U_\sigma `$. More generally, let $`XT`$ be a separated toric variety and let $`YX`$ be a $`T`$-invariant subvariety containing $`T`$ (so $`Y`$ is naturally a toric variety). If both $`X`$ and $`Y`$ have structures of toric semigroups, the two structures agree on $`Y`$.

Proof. See Appendix, section 4.2.

###### Corollary 3.4.

Under the assumptions of Theorem 3.1, the fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ contains at most one nondegenerate cone.

###### Proof.

Suppose, to obtain a contradiction, that there are two distinct nondegenerate cones $`\sigma ,\tau \mathrm{\Delta }`$. By Lemma 3.3, the semigroup structure on $`X`$ induces monoid structures on $`U_\sigma `$ and $`U_\tau `$, and by Lemma 3.2, both have zeroes, say $`0_\sigma U_\sigma `$ and $`0_\tau U_\tau `$. The relation $`x0_\sigma =0_\sigma x=0_\sigma `$, which holds for all $`xT`$ (because $`TU_\sigma `$), must therefore hold for all $`xX`$. Thus, $`0_\sigma `$ is a zero of $`X`$. Similarly, $`0_\tau `$ is also a zero of $`X`$. But a semigroup cannot have two distinct zeroes, so $`0_\sigma =0_\tau `$. Consequently,

$$0_\sigma U_\sigma U_\tau =U_{\sigma \tau },$$

and in particular $`U_{\sigma \tau }`$ has a zero. But $`\sigma ,\tau `$ are distinct cones, whence $`\sigma \tau `$ is a proper face of $`\sigma `$, and is therefore degenerate. This contradicts Lemma 3.2. ∎

This result already excludes many possibilities for the fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. It can be used indirectly to exclude even more possibilities. For example, suppose that all the cones in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are degenerate, and in fact are contained in a certain subspace $`VN_{}`$, where $`V`$ has a basis consisting of elements of $`N`$. Then, clearly, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ can be considered as a fan in $`V`$. Hence, if $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ contains two cones which are nondegenerate as cones in $`V`$, we may again apply Corollary 3.4.777We will work out the details of this argument after Lemma 3.5.

Still, observe that there do exist fans $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ which are not generated by one cone, and to which our previous argument does not apply. For example, think of a collection of degenerate cones in $`N_{}`$ whose union spans $`N_{}`$. To exclude such possibilities, we apply

###### Lemma 3.5.

Under the assumptions of Theorem 3.1, the union of all cones in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, viewed as a subset on $`N_{}`$, is closed under addition.

Proof. See Appendix, section 4.3.

Now we may finish the proof of Theorem 3.1. First, note that we may assume that the union of all the cones in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ span the whole space $`N_{}`$. Indeed, let

$$V=\mathrm{span}_{}\left(_{\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }}\sigma \right).$$

Since the cones in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are rational, $`V`$ has a basis consisting of elements on $`N`$. Thus, if we set $`N_\mathrm{\Delta }=NV`$, then $`V=N_\mathrm{\Delta }_{}`$, and we may consider $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ as a fan in $`V`$. Since $`V`$ is a vector space, $`N_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a saturated subsemigroup of $`N`$, i.e. if $`vN`$, $`m`$ and $`mvN_\mathrm{\Delta }`$, then $`vN_\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Therefore we may choose a sublattice $`N_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}N`$ such that $`N=N_\mathrm{\Delta }N_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$. Corresponding to this decomposition, we have $`T=T_\mathrm{\Delta }\times T_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ where $`T_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`T_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ are the tori associated to the lattices $`N_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`N_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$, respectively. Hence, $`X=Y\times T_\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ where $`Y`$ is the toric variety associated to the fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ viewed as a fan in $`V`$. Since $`T_\mathrm{\Delta }\times \{1\}`$ is dense in $`Y\times \{1\}`$, the multiplication morphism $`X\times XX`$ restricts to a morphism

$$(Y\times \{1\})\times (Y\times \{1\})(Y\times \{1\}),$$

thus making $`Y`$ into a toric semigroup. But now the fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ spans the corresponding space $`V`$, by construction.

Now write $`\sigma `$ for the union of all cones in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Then $`\sigma `$ is a cone, and it is convex because it is closed under addition (Lemma 3.5). Since $`\sigma `$ generates $`N_{}`$ as a real vector space, $`\sigma `$ must have nonempty interior. This already implies that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ contains at least one nondegenerate cone, $`\tau `$, since otherwise $`\sigma `$ is a finite union of nowhere dense sets. In fact, since $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ has at most one nondegenerate cone (Corollary 3.4), we must have $`\tau =\sigma `$, otherwise $`\sigma \tau `$ has nonempty interior (because $`\tau `$ is closed). But now for each $`\tau ^{}\mathrm{\Delta }`$, we have $`\tau ^{}\sigma =\tau `$ by construction, whence, by condition 2 of Definition 2.2.1, $`\tau ^{}`$ is a face of $`\tau `$. Consequently, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is generated by the cone $`\tau `$.

Q.E.D.

### 3.2. Construction of fans from toric varieties.

Here we consider the other problem mentioned in the introduction. Given a toric variety $`XT`$, does there exist a fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ such that $`XX(\mathrm{\Delta })`$? First let us show that it is necessary to assume that $`X`$ is separated:

###### Proposition 3.6.

If $`N`$ is a finite dimensional lattice and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a fan in $`N_{}`$, then the associated toric variety $`X(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is separated.

Proof. See Appendix, section 4.4.

On the other hand, there do exist nonseparated toric varieties. The easiest example to construct is the standard example of a nonseparated variety: the affine line with a doubled origin (see , the example after Lemma 3.3.4). We consider two copies of the affine line, $`𝔸_1^1`$ and $`𝔸_2^1`$, and glue them along their open subsets $`𝔸_1^1\{0\}`$ and $`𝔸_2^1\{0\}`$, with the identification morphism

$$𝔸_1^1\{0\}𝔸_2^1\{0\}$$

given by the identity map. The resulting nonseparated variety $`X`$ contains the one dimensional torus $`T=𝔸^1\{0\}`$, which acts by multiplication on both copies of the affine line, and hence on $`X`$.

###### Remark 3.3.

In the following discussion, we will implicitly assume the following criterion of separability:

an algebraic variety $`X`$ is separated if and only if a morphism $`UX`$ from

an open dense subset $`U`$ of a smooth curve $`C`$ extends in at most one way

to a morphism $`CX`$ (see , Proposition 7.2.2),

more precisely, the implication $`()`$ for the special case $`C=𝔸^1`$, $`U=𝔸^1\{0\}`$.

According to the discussion above, the best statement we can try to prove is

###### Theorem 3.7.

Let $`XT`$ be a separated toric variety. Let $`N=\mathrm{Hom}(k^{},T)`$ be the lattice of one-parameter subgroups of $`T`$, and $`M=N^{}=\mathrm{Hom}(T,k^{})`$ the dual lattice of characters of $`T`$. Then there exists a fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in $`N_{}=N_{}`$ such that the natural isomorphism

$$\mathrm{Spec}(k[M])\begin{array}{c}_{}\\ \end{array}T$$

extends to an isomorphism

$$X(\mathrm{\Delta })\begin{array}{c}_{}\\ \end{array}X.$$

First, let’s prove the theorem in the particular case when $`X`$ is affine. The key idea is to observe that $`X`$ has a unique structure of a toric monoid (NB: earlier we proved this statement only assuming that $`X=U_\sigma `$ for some strongly convex rational polyhedral cone $`\sigma `$) and look at the ”one-parameter subsemigroups” of $`X`$. We have

###### Lemma 3.8.

Let $`XT`$ be an affine toric variety. Then there exists a structure of a toric monoid on $`X`$.

Proof. See Appendix, section 4.5.

As a by-product of our discussion, we obtain a statement, which is not at all obvious from the definitions.

###### Corollary 3.9.

Let $`N`$ be a finite dimensional lattice and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ a fan in $`N_{}`$. The associated toric variety $`X=X(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is affine if and only if $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is generated by a single cone.

###### Proof.

The direction $`()`$ is clear. For $`()`$, combine Lemma 3.8 and Theorem 3.1.

Now we introduce an important

###### Definition 3.4.

If $`X`$ is an algebraic semigroup, a one-parameter subsemigroup of $`X`$ is a homomorphism of algebraic semigroups $`kX`$, where $`k`$ is viewed as an algebraic semigroup under multiplication. The set of all such is denoted by $`\mathrm{Hom}(k,X)`$. In case $`X`$ is commutative, $`\mathrm{Hom}(k,X)`$ has a natural structure of an abelian semigroup under pointwise multiplication.

###### Remark 3.5.

The notion of a one-parameter subsemigroup corresponds to the well-known notion of a one-parameter subgroup of an algebraic group (see, for example, ). In fact, if $`S`$ is an irreducible affine algebraic semigroup, so that the group of invertible elements of $`S`$, $`G(S)`$, is itself an algebraic group, then the restriction of every one-parameter subsemigroup $`kS`$ to $`k^{}`$ is a one-parameter subgroup of $`G(S)`$. Moreover, a subsemigroup $`kS`$ is determined by its restriction to $`k^{}`$ (since affine varieties are separated), and hence if $`S`$ is abelian, it is possible to view $`\mathrm{Hom}(k,S)`$ as a subsemigroup of $`\mathrm{Hom}(k^{},G(S))`$.

With these tools, we may complete the proof of Theorem 3.7 in the affine case. In fact, we prove a slightly more precise statement.

###### Proposition 3.10.

Under the conditions of Theorem 3.7, assume that $`X`$ is affine, and view $`X`$ as a toric monoid (cf. Lemma 3.8). Let $`\sigma `$ be the cone generated888That is, $`\sigma `$ is the convex hull of $`\mathrm{Hom}(k,X)`$. by the subsemigroup $`\mathrm{Hom}(k,X)`$ of the lattice $`N=\mathrm{Hom}(k^{},T)`$ (cf. Remark 3.2.1) and let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be the fan in $`N_{}`$ generated by the cone $`\sigma `$ (see Definition 2.2.1). Then the conclusion of Theorem 3.7 is valid for the fan $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

Proof. See Appendix, section 4.6.

Now we attack the general case. The following result is very useful for us

###### Proposition 3.11.

Let $`T`$ be a torus and let $`X`$ be a normal variety on which $`T`$ acts. Then, for any point $`xX`$, there is a $`T`$-invariant affine open neighborhood of $`x`$.

###### Proof.

See , Corollary 2 of Lemma 8. ∎

###### Corollary 3.12.

Under the assumptions of Theorem 3.7, there exists a finite open cover of $`X`$ by affine toric varieties $`V_iT`$.

###### Proof.

By Proposition 3.11, there exists a finite cover of $`X`$ by invariant open affine subsets. But every open subset of $`X`$ intersects $`T`$, since $`T`$ is dense in $`X`$, and an invariant subset of $`X`$ intersecting $`T`$ must contain $`T`$, because $`T`$ itself is an orbit under the action of $`T`$. ∎

Now we fix a finite open cover $`\{V_i\}`$ of $`X`$ by affine toric varieties as in Corollary 3.12. By Proposition 3.10, for each of the $`V_i`$ we have the corresponding strongly convex rational polyhedral cone $`\sigma _iN_{}`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be the finite set of cones consisting of the cones $`\sigma _i`$ together with all their faces. We claim that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a fan and that the conclusion of Theorem 3.7 is valid for $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

###### Remark 3.6.

One needs to be a little careful here. In this construction, we implicitly use the assumption that $`X`$ is separated. The reason is that it makes sense to consider the cones $`\sigma _i`$ simultaneously only if we know that every one-parameter subgroup of $`T`$ extends in at most one way to a one-parameter subsemigroup of some $`V_i`$. To illustrate this phenomenon, consider again the affine line with a doubled origin (see the example after Proposition 3.6). It has an open cover by affine toric varieties, namely, the two copies of the affine line that were used for gluing. But the cones corresponding to these two affine varieties coincide! So in the nonseparated case, intersection of cones does not necessarily correspond to intersection of open affine varieties. In a moment we’ll see that this phenomenon never occurs in the separated case.

To show that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a fan, it will suffice to see that for all $`i,j`$, $`\sigma _i\sigma _j`$ is a face of both $`\sigma _i`$ and $`\sigma _j`$. Consider $`V_{ij}=V_iV_j`$. It is certainly an open subset of $`X`$ containing $`T`$. But in fact, since $`X`$ is separated, $`V_{ij}`$ is affine, and the natural $`k`$-algebra homomorphism $`k[V_i]_kk[V_j]k[V_{ij}]`$ is surjective (see , Proposition 3.3.5). We know that $`k[V_i]=k[S_{\sigma _i}]`$ where we use the same notation as in section 2.3. We also have the cone $`\sigma _{ij}`$ corresponding to the affine toric variety $`V_{ij}`$ (Proposition 3.10). By separability, a one-parameter subgroup of $`T`$ extends to a one-parameter subsemigroup of $`V_{ij}`$ if and only if it extends to one-parameter subsemigroups both of $`V_i`$ and of $`V_j`$999Here we implicitly use the fact that the structures of toric semigroups on $`V_i`$ and $`V_j`$ agree on $`V_{ij}`$. In fact, this follows from the second statement of Lemma 3.3. That is,

$$\mathrm{Hom}(k,V_{ij})=\mathrm{Hom}(k,V_i)\mathrm{Hom}(k,V_j),$$

as subsemigroups of $`\mathrm{Hom}(k^{},T)`$. Consequently, $`\sigma _{ij}=\sigma _i\sigma _j`$. Say we already know that $`\sigma _{ij}`$ is a face of both $`\sigma _i`$ and $`\sigma _j`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a fan, and we are done, because the toric variety $`X(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ associated to $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is obtained by gluing the affine varieties corresponding to the cones $`\sigma _i`$ along their open subvarieties corresponding to the cones $`\sigma _{ij}`$, and the induced morphism $`X(\mathrm{\Delta })X`$ (which exists by the universal property of gluing) is clearly an isomorphism.

To see that $`\sigma _{ij}`$ must be a face of $`\sigma _i`$ (and hence also $`\sigma _j`$, by symmetry), we make the following observation. In any case, the inclusion $`\sigma _{ij}\sigma _i`$ corresponds to the inclusion $`\sigma _i^{}\sigma _{ij}^{}`$, hence to the inclusion $`S_{\sigma _i}S_{\sigma _{ij}}`$, which induces a dominant morphism $`U_{\sigma _{ij}}U_{\sigma _i}`$. We know that if $`\sigma _{ij}`$ is a face of $`\sigma _i`$, then this morphism is an open embedding. We conclude the proof with

###### Lemma 3.13.

If $`\sigma _{ij}`$ is not a face of $`\sigma _i`$, then the morphism $`U_{\sigma _{ij}}U_{\sigma _i}`$ is not an open embedding.

Note that this observation automatically implies that $`\sigma _{ij}`$ is a face of $`\sigma _i`$, because in our case the morphism $`U_{\sigma _{ij}}U_{\sigma _i}`$ is just the inclusion $`V_{ij}V_i`$. For the proof of the lemma, see Appendix, section 4.7.

## 4. Appendix

### 4.1. Proof of Lemma 3.2.

The key idea here is to write down the definition of a zero of an affine semigroup in terms of homomorphisms of coordinate rings. Since $`U_\sigma `$ is commutative, an element of $`U_\sigma `$ is a zero if an only if it is a left zero. Note that an element of $`U_\sigma `$ can be naturally viewed as a morphism $`\{\text{pt}\}U_\sigma `$ where $`\{\text{pt}\}=\mathrm{Spec}k`$ is the one-point variety. Therefore we may restate our definition of zero as follows: it is a morphism $`0:\{\text{pt}\}U_\sigma `$ such that the diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\{\text{pt}\}\times U_\sigma & & U_\sigma \times U_\sigma & & U_\sigma \\ & & & & \\ \{\text{pt}\}\times U_\sigma & & \{\text{pt}\}& & U_\sigma \end{array}$$

commutes, where the arrows are (from the left to the right) in the top row: $`0\times \mathrm{id}_{U_\sigma }`$, multiplication; in the bottom row: projection onto the factor $`\{\text{pt}\}`$, $`0`$. In terms of coordinate rings, a zero of $`U_\sigma `$ is such a homomorphism of $`k`$-algebras $`f:k[U_\sigma ]k`$ that the following diagram commutes:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}k_kk[U_\sigma ]& & k[U_\sigma ]_kk[U_\sigma ]& & k[U_\sigma ]\\ & & & & \\ k_kk[U_\sigma ]& & k& & k[U_\sigma ]\end{array}$$

and now the arrows are (from the left to the right) in the top row: $`f\mathrm{id}_{k[U_\sigma ]}`$, comultiplication; in the bottom row: natural inclusion of $`k`$ into a $`k`$-algebra, $`f`$.

We recall that $`k[U_\sigma ]=k[S_\sigma ]`$. I claim that the diagram above exists if and only if there exists a $`k`$-algebra homomorphism $`f:k[S_\sigma ]k`$ which kills all nonzero elements of $`S_\sigma `$. Indeed, let $`vS_\sigma `$, then in the top row it maps first to $`vv`$, and then to $`f(v)v`$. In the bottom row, it maps first to $`f(v)`$, and then to $`f(v)1`$. Clearly, $`f(v)v=f(v)1`$ in $`k_kk[S_\sigma ]`$ if and only if either $`v=0`$, $`f(v)=1`$, or $`f(v)=0`$. So if the diagram above commutes, then $`f`$ has the required property. Conversely, if $`f`$ has the required property, then the diagram commutes, because $`S_\sigma `$ is a basis of $`k[S_\sigma ]`$.

On the other hand, there exists a homomorphism $`f`$ with the required property if and only if there exists a map $`g:S_\sigma k`$ such that $`g(0)=1`$, $`g(v)=0`$ for all $`v0`$, and $`g(v+w)=g(v)g(w)`$ for all $`v,wS_\sigma `$. If $`\sigma `$ is degenerate, then there are nonzero elements $`v,wS_\sigma `$ such that $`v+w=0`$, and then such a map $`g`$ cannot exist (applying $`g`$ to the equality $`v+w=0`$ gives $`00=1`$, an absurd). On the other hand, if $`\sigma `$ is nondegenerate, then such elements $`v,w`$ do not exist, so if we define $`g`$ by $`g(0)=1`$, $`g(v)=0`$ for $`v0`$, then $`g`$ satisfies $`g(v+w)=g(v)g(w)`$ for all $`v`$, $`w`$. This completes the proof.

### 4.2. Proof of Lemma 3.3.

By Proposition 3.6 (whose proof does not depend on this lemma), $`X`$ is separated, so the first statement is a special case of the second. We have two morphisms

$$\varphi _1,\varphi _2:Y\times YX,$$

namely, $`\varphi _1`$ is the composition

$$Y\times YX\times XX,$$

the second morphisms being the multiplication on $`X`$, and $`\varphi _2`$ is the composition

$$Y\times YYX,$$

the first morphism being the multiplication on $`Y`$ 2.3. Since the multiplications on both $`X`$ and $`Y`$ agree with the multiplication on the torus, $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ agree on $`T\times T`$. But $`X`$ is separated and $`T\times T`$ is dense in $`Y\times Y`$, which implies that $`\varphi _1=\varphi _2`$. Thus, the diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}Y\times Y& & Y\\ & & \\ X\times X& & X\end{array}$$

commutes, which is exactly the statement of Lemma 3.3.

### 4.3. Proof of Lemma 3.5.

Choose $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and a point $`vN`$. Note that since we constructed the torus $`T`$ as $`\mathrm{Spec}k[M]`$, the lattice $`M`$ is naturally identified with the character lattice of $`T`$, and then $`N`$ is identified with the lattice of one-parameter subgroups of $`T`$. Thus, $`v`$ naturally corresponds to a one-parameter subgroup, $`s_v`$, of $`T`$. Let us first check that $`v\sigma `$ if and only if $`s_v`$ extends to a one-parameter subsemigroup of $`U_\sigma `$ (see Definition 3.2.1). On the level of coordinate rings, $`s_v`$ extends to a one-parameter subsemigroup of $`U_\sigma `$ if and only if under the homomorphism $`s_v^{}:k[T]k[k^{}]=k[x,x^1]`$, the subring $`k[U_\sigma ]`$ of $`k[T]`$ is mapped into $`k[x]`$. We also note that on elements of $`M`$ (naturally viewed as a subset of $`k[T]=k[M]`$), the homomorphism $`s_v^{}`$ is given by $`\chi x^{(\chi ,v)}`$. Thus $`s_v`$ extends to a one-parameter subsemigroup of $`U_\sigma `$ if and only if $`v`$ has nonnegative pairing with all elements of $`S_\sigma `$. By definition, this happens if and only if $`v(\sigma ^{})^{}`$. But $`\sigma =(\sigma ^{})^{}`$ (see ).

Now it’s not hard to complete the proof. We know that if elements $`v,wN`$ correspond to one-parameter subgroups $`s_v,s_w`$ of $`T`$, then $`v+w`$ corresponds to $`s_vs_w`$ (pointwise product of the subgroups). Now if $`v\sigma `$, $`w\tau `$ for some cones $`\sigma ,\tau \mathrm{\Delta }`$, we know that both $`s_v`$ and $`s_w`$ extend to one-parameter subsemigroups of $`U_\sigma `$ and $`U_\tau `$, respectively, and hence to subsemigroups of $`X`$, because the multiplication on $`X`$ is compatible with those on $`U_\sigma `$ and $`U_\tau `$ (see Lemma 3.3). We denote the extensions again by $`s_v`$ and $`s_w`$. Then, clearly, $`s_{v+w}`$ also extends to a subsemigroup of $`X`$, namely, $`s_vs_w`$. There is a cone $`\psi \mathrm{\Delta }`$ such that $`(s_vs_w)(0)U_\psi `$, and since $`s_{v+w}(k^{})T`$, the image of the extension, $`s_vs_w`$, of $`s_{v+w}`$ is contained in $`U_\psi `$. Thus, $`v+w\psi `$, completing the proof.

### 4.4. Proof of Proposition 3.6.

Write $`\mathrm{diag}:XX\times X`$ for the diagonal embedding. We must prove that $`\mathrm{diag}(X)`$ is closed in $`X\times X`$. By construction, $`X=X(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is covered by the affines $`U_\sigma `$. Hence, it is enough to show that for all $`\sigma ,\tau \mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`\mathrm{diag}(U_\sigma U_\tau )`$ is closed in $`U_\sigma \times U_\tau `$. We know that $`U_\sigma U_\tau =U_{\sigma \tau }`$ is affine, so it suffices to see that the induced $`k`$-algebra homomorphism

$$\mathrm{diag}^{}:k[U_\sigma ]_kk[U_\tau ]k[U_{\sigma \tau }]$$

is surjective. But, in the notation of section 2.3, $`k[U_\sigma ]=k[S_\sigma ]`$ and $`k[U_\tau ]=k[S_\tau ]`$, and since addition in the lattice $`M`$ corresponds to multiplication in the algebras $`k[S_\sigma ]`$, $`k[S_\tau ]`$, the image of $`\mathrm{diag}^{}`$ is $`k[S_\sigma +S_\tau ]`$. Since $`(\sigma \tau )^{}=\sigma ^{}+\tau ^{}`$, the proof is complete.

### 4.5. Proof of Lemma 3.8.

It suffices to prove that there exists a commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}k[T]& & k[T]_kk[T]\\ & & \\ k[X]& & k[X]_kk[X]\end{array}$$

because this will give a morphism $`X\times XX`$, compatible with the multiplication on the torus, and associativity will follow from the coassociativity of the bottom row of the diagram, which in turn is implied by the coassociativity of the top row. We know, by definition, that there exists a commutative diagram of the required form if we replace $`k[X]_kk[X]`$ by $`k[T]_kk[X]`$. But the torus is commutative, so the left action of $`T`$ on $`X`$ induces a right action of $`T`$ on $`X`$, which is also compatible with the multiplication on the torus. Hence, in the diagram above, $`k[X]_kk[X]`$ may also be replaced by $`k[X]_kk[T]`$. But, by simple linear algebra,

$$k[X]_kk[T]k[T]_kk[X]=k[X]_kk[X],$$

as subalgebras of $`k[T]_kk[T]`$. This completes the proof.

### 4.6. Proof of Proposition 3.10.

The left action of $`T`$ on itself (by multiplication) naturally induces an action of $`T`$ on the coordinate ring $`k[T]`$. The latter decomposes into a direct sum of one-dimensional $`T`$-invariant subspaces, namely, those spanned by the characters of $`T`$. Since the action of $`T`$ on itself extends to an action of $`T`$ on $`X`$, the subalgebra $`k[X]`$ of $`k[T]`$ is $`T`$-invariant, and hence itself is a direct sum of one-dimensional subspaces spanned by characters of $`T`$. Let $`S`$ denote the set of all characters of $`T`$ contained in $`k[X]`$, so that $`k[X]=k[S]`$. Since $`k[X]`$ is closed under multiplication, $`S`$ is closed under addition. Thus, if we let $`\sigma `$ be the cone in $`M_{}`$ generated by $`S`$ and $`\tau =\sigma ^{}`$, then $`\sigma =\tau ^{}`$ and therefore $`X=U_\tau `$. We already know (see the proof of Lemma 3.5) that $`\sigma `$ is generated by the set of one-parameter subsemigroups of $`U_\sigma `$. This completes the proof.

### 4.7. Proof of Lemma 3.13.

To simplify notation, write $`\sigma `$ for $`\sigma _i`$ and $`\tau `$ for $`\sigma _{ij}`$. We recall that, in general, given an affine variety $`V`$, every open affine subset of $`V`$ has the form $`\{xVf(x)0\}`$ for some $`fk[V]`$. For us, this says that $`U_\tau U_\sigma `$ is an open embedding if and only if the corresponding homomorphism of coordinate rings $`k[S_\sigma ]k[S_\tau ]`$ may be realised as an embedding $`k[S_\sigma ]k[S_\sigma ]_{(f)}`$ for some $`fk[S_\sigma ]`$, that is (if we now view $`k[S_\sigma ]`$ as a subalgebra $`k[S_\tau ]`$), if and only if

$$k[S_\tau ]=k[S_\sigma ,f^1]$$

for some $`fk[S_\sigma ]`$. Now we assume that such $`f`$ exists. Then, in particular, $`f`$ is nonzero on $`T`$, and hence, multiplying $`f`$ by a nozero constant, we may assume that $`f`$ is a character of $`T`$. Consequently, we have $`fS_\sigma `$. Now $`S_\tau =S_\sigma +f`$. Therefore,

$$\tau =\{v\sigma (f,v)0\}=\{v\sigma (f,v)=0\}$$

is a face of $`\sigma `$, completing the proof.


text:
# 1 Introduction.

## 1 Introduction.

The vortex condensation theory is one of the most promising ideas to explain the property of confinement. This idea was proposed by many authors at the end of 70’s  and has received a renewed interest in a set of recent works . A gauge dependent approach is used in  to study the relation between the confinement property and the vortex contain of the vacuum. By first going to the maximal center gauge and then center projecting, it is found evidence of a center vortex origin for the confinement property. In references  is presented another approach to the same problem, in this case relating the vortex contain of the vacuum and confinement in a gauge invariant way.

One of the problems of this idea is that it can not explain the behaviour of the string tension in the adjoint representation. This quantity shows casimir scaling for small distances and vanishes for large distances. Casimir scaling is a property of the ratio between the string tension in the adjoint representation, $`\sigma _A`$, and the string tension in the fundamental one, $`\sigma _F`$. This quantity $`\sigma _A/\sigma _F`$ is equal to the ratio between the casimirs of the two representations in the small distance region . In the large distance region the adjoint string breaks because quarks in the adjoint representation and gluons can mix to built a bound state. Nevertheless, in the limit of large number of colors it is expected that the property of confinement also holds. This fact is expected because of the factorization property for gauge invariant operators, which holds in the large N limit. The expected value of a Wilson loop along a path $`C`$ calculated in the adjoint representation $`W_A(C)`$ can be written as $`W_A(C)=W_F(C)W_F(C)^{}`$, being $`W_F(C)`$ the loop in the fundamental representation, and, using the factorization property, we obtain that $`W_A(C)=W_F(C)^2`$. Then, in the large N limit it is expected that the adjoint string tension is twice the fundamental one. These two things, casimir scaling of the string tension and confinement of adjoint quarks in the large N limit, could be in contradiction with the model of confinement based in physical objects carrying flux quantized in elements of the center of the group, because the adjoint representation is blind to these elements. The proposal presented in reference  to solve this problem is that the approximate casimir scaling is an effect due to the finite thickness of the vortex configuration, and also that the non vanishing adjoint string tension in the large N limit can be explained if this thickness grows with the number of colors. Following this idea, we study the behaviour with the number of colors of the vortex solution presented in  for the SU(2) and SU(3) groups, and we found that for $`N>3`$ the solution has the same properties and his size grows with the number of colors, N.

The paper is structured as follows. In section 2 we show the properties of the solution we have found and in section 3 we present our conclusions.

## 2 The solutions.

Following the same methods used in  we isolate solutions of the SU(N) Yang-Mills classical equations of motion on a four torus with sizes $`l_{L}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\times l_{S}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$, being $`l_Ll_S`$ (two large, $`t`$ and $`x`$, and two small, $`y`$ and $`z`$, directions). These solutions satisfy twisted boundary conditions given by the twist vectors $`\stackrel{}{k}=\stackrel{}{m}=(1,0,0)`$, have topological charge $`|Q|=1/N`$ and action $`S=8\pi ^2/N=8\pi ^2|Q|`$ (a review of the properties of Yang-Mills fields on the torus can be found in ). The choice of the twist vectors is based in the results presented in reference . In this article it is shown that the necessary condition to obtain a SU(2) solution which is localized in the two large directions, flat in the other two and having the properties of a vortex is that the twist in the small plane must be non trivial. The same property also holds for SU(3)  and we expect the same result for SU(N) groups, with $`N>3`$. For this reason we choose $`m_1=1`$, because this is the component of the twist linked with the small plane, the $`yz`$ plane.

We have isolated lattice configurations for values of the number of colors $`N=4,5,6,7,`$ $`8,9,10`$. As in  these configurations are obtained using standard cooling algorithms (our procedure is a local minimization of the Wilson action using the Cabbibo-Marinari-Okawa update ). Our criteria to stop the cooling procedure is that the Wilson action is stable up to the eight significant digit and close to the value $`S=8\pi ^2/N`$. In table 1 we give the set of studied solutions, specifying the number of colors, lattice size $`(N_L)^2\times (N_S)^2`$ and the values of the action S (in $`8\pi ^2/N`$ units), topological charge Q multiplied by N and the electric and magnetic parts of the action, $`S_e`$ and $`S_b`$ respectively (also in $`8\pi ^2/N`$ units). These quantities are calculated from the field strength $`𝐅_{\mu \nu }`$ obtained from the clover average of plaquettes $`1\times 1`$ and $`2\times 2`$, combined in such a way that the discretization errors are $`O(a^4)`$. The continuum expected values for these quantities are: $`SN/8\pi ^2=1`$, $`QN=\pm 1`$, $`S_e/8\pi ^2=0.5`$ and $`S_b/8\pi ^2=0.5`$. We observe that our lattice results are very near to the continuum values and also that the lattice corrections are smaller for larger values of N.

The choice of the sizes of the lattice is based in references . From the work  we learn that for the SU(2) case the obtained results show a very nice scaling towards continuum functions for lattice sizes $`(4N_S)^2\times (N_S)^2`$ with $`N_S=4,5,6,7`$. The SU(3) case is studied in  and it is shown in this reference that for lattice sizes $`(6N_S)^2\times (N_S)^2`$ with $`N_S=4,5,6`$ it is also found a very nice scaling towards continuum functions. Following these results we use lattices with sizes $`(2NN_S)^2\times (N_S)^2`$. For number of colors $`N=4`$ we isolate solutions with $`N_S=2,3,4`$ and study their scaling properties. We observe that with only two points in the small directions the obtained results show a very nice continuum behaviour (to set the scale we fix the length of the small direction, $`l_S`$, equal to $`1`$, being therefore the lattice spacing $`a=1/N_S`$). We illustrate this in figure 1 in which we show the energy profile $`ϵ(t)`$, defined as,

$$ϵ(t)=S(t,x,y,z)𝑑x𝑑y𝑑z,$$
(1)
where $`S(t,x,y,z)`$ is the action density, for these three SU(4) configurations. This is a property which also holds for bigger values of N and allows us to use lattices with sizes $`N_S=2`$ and still obtain good continuum results. In fact, we can use this lattice size because these solutions are almost flat in the small directions and then very few points are needed to describe it.

Now, we describe the shape and the N behaviour of the action density and the integrated quantity defined before, the energy profile. We start with the N behaviour of the energy profile. The result we get is that this function has a typical width which grows with the numbers of colors as the square root of this number. We illustrate this property in figure 2 in which we plot $`ϵ(t)`$ multiplied by $`N^{3/2}`$ as a function of $`\sqrt{N}`$. From this figure we can clearly see that the size of the solution grows with the square root of the number of colors, and also the scaling of the energy profile with $`N^{3/2}`$.

The properties of the action density $`S(t,x,y,z)`$ for our solutions are the following. The function $`S`$ is almost independent of the $`y`$ and $`z`$ coordinates, and has a instanton-like dependence in the $`t`$ and $`x`$ coordinates. The function in these coordinates, $`t`$ and $`x`$, has only one maximum, that we put at point $`t=x=0`$, and decreases with $`|t|`$ and $`|x|`$ up to the value $`S=0`$, showing an exponential behaviour at the tails. The size of the solution in these two directions, $`t`$ and $`x`$, is approximately the square root of the number of colors (remember that the length scale is set by the size of the small direction $`l_S=1`$).

The main result of this work is that these solutions have vortex properties for all the values of N studied and that the size of the object grows with the number of colors. To illustrate these properties we calculate the Wilson loop $`W_C(r)`$ around this object, being the path C a $`r\times r`$ square loop in the x,t plane centered at the maximum of the action density. We parametrize $`W_C(r)`$ by the functions $`L(r)`$ (its module) and $`\varphi (r)`$ (its phase). Now we describe the behaviour of these two functions with the size of the loop r. The module $`L`$ takes the value $`L=1`$ at point $`r=0`$, decreases with $`r`$ up to reach the minimum of the function, and then increases up to the value $`L1`$ at a point $`r`$ between $`\sqrt{N}`$ and $`N`$. The phase $`\varphi `$ takes the value $`\varphi =2\pi `$ at $`r=0`$ and then decreases up to the value $`\varphi =2\pi (1\frac{1}{N})`$ at a point $`r`$ between $`\sqrt{N}`$ and $`N`$. Then, for a enough big value of $`r`$ the Wilson Loop $`W_C(r)`$ takes the value of an element of the center of the group, $`W_Cexp(i2\pi /N)`$. We illustrate this property in figures 3 and 4. In figure 3 we show the phase $`\varphi `$ for the three SU(4) solutions as a function of the size of the loop r. First, we can see the nice scaling towards a continuum function of the points coming from different lattice sizes, $`N_s=2,3,4`$. And second, how the phase $`\varphi `$ rotate from the value $`\varphi =2\pi `$ at point $`r=0`$ to the value $`\varphi =3\pi /2`$ at point $`rN=4`$. Finally, we study the N behaviour of the phase $`\varphi `$. In figure 4 we show the quantity $`\mathrm{\Phi }=(2\pi \varphi )N`$ as a function of $`r/\sqrt{N}`$ for the solutions with $`N=4,7,10`$. If the Wilson loop $`W_C(r)`$ takes the value $`W_Cexp(i2\pi /N)`$ for a enough big value of $`r`$ then this phase $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ must take the value $`\mathrm{\Phi }=2\pi `$ for the same value of $`r`$. From this figure we can clearly see that this phase $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ reach the value $`\mathrm{\Phi }=2\pi `$, and that the value of $`r`$ in which this is happening, grows with the number of colors with a tendency a bit faster than the square root of the number of colors.

## 3 Conclusions.

In this work we have shown that there are solutions of the SU(N) Yang-Mills equations of motion having vortex properties and a size growing with the number of colors. These solutions live on a four torus $`T^4`$ with sizes $`l_{L}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\times l_{S}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$, being $`l_Ll_S`$, and satisfy twisted boundary conditions. Looking at the action density we have seen that are flat in the small directions and are localized in the two large directions, having a size which grows as the square root of the number of colors N. We calculate a square Wilson loop in the plane formed by the two large directions centered at the maximum of the solution, and observe that for a enough big size of the loop the value obtained is an element of the center of the group, $`exp(i2\pi /N)`$.

Note that, if we consider the limit $`l_L\mathrm{}`$ , we can say that the solutions live on $`R^2\times T^2`$. And further on, if we repeat the solutions in the small directions , we can say that we have a solution of the SU(N) Yang-Mills equations of motion in $`R^4`$. In this case the solution will have infinite action and infinite topological charge, will be flat in two of the coordinates and localized in the other two, in a region of size approximately equal to the square root of the number of colors.

The relevant point of these solutions is that they are presenting the expected behaviour described in  for a confining configuration. They are bidimensional objects carrying a flux quantized in elements of the center of the group, and have a thickness which grows with the number of colors. Remember that, as we mention in the introduction, this finite thickness may be the explanation for the casimir scaling of the string tension, and also, that the growing of this thickness with the number of colors may take into account the confinement property of quarks in the adjoint representation which holds in the limit of large number of colors.

Another interesting point is the one presented in reference . After going to the maximal center gauge and center projecting the configuration, the vortex solution for the SU(2) and SU(3) group appears as a projected vortex, the objects to which is attributed the confinement property. We expect that the same property holds for group SU(N) with $`N>3`$, and then, these solutions will be identified as projected vortices after going to maximal center gauge and center projecting the configuration.

Finally, we want to say that our claim in this paper is not that our solution is the basic ingredient to explain the confinement property. Nevertheless, we think that this kind of configurations may play a role in the confinement mechanism, and, in any model based in a bunch of classical solutions as, for example, the instanton liquid model, these solutions must be included. This kind of model has been presented in  and some favourable results have been reported in . In this model the object which was included is also a fractional charge solution, in this case having point-like properties.

## Acknowledgements

I acknowledge useful discussions with Margarita García Pérez, Antonio González-Arroyo, John Negele, Carlos Pena and Manuel Pérez-Victoria. This work has been supported by the spanish Ministerio de Educación y Cultura under a postdoctoral Fellowship.


text:
# Magnetic Field Dependent Optical Studies of a Layered Antiferromagnet Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3

\[

## Abstract

Magnetic field ($`H`$)-dependent optical conductivity spectra $`\sigma (\omega )`$ and dielectric constant spectra $`\epsilon (\omega )`$ of a layered antiferromagnet ($`A`$-type) Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 were presented. At 0.0 T in 4.2 K, the $`\sigma (\omega )`$ showed a small Drude-like peak in the far-infrared region and a broad absorption peak in the mid-infrared region. With increasing $`H`$, large spectral weights were transferred from high to low energy regions with increase of the Drude-like peak. We found that a polaron picture could explain most of the $`H`$-dependent spectral changes. By comparing with the $`H`$-dependent spectral weight changes and $`\epsilon (\omega )`$ of Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3, which has the $`CE`$-type spin ordering, we showed that a dimensional crossover from a 2-dimensional to a 3-dimensional metal occurs in Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3.

\]

Doped manganites with chemical formula R1-xAxMnO3 (R = La, Pr, Nd and A = Ca, Sr, Ba) have attracted much attention due to their exotic electrical and magnetic properties. Basic physics of doped manganites have been explained by the double exchange model based on the strong Hund coupling between itinerant eg and localized t2g electrons. However, additional degrees of freedom, such as a polaron due to the Jahn-Teller distortion of the Mn3+ ion and an orbital fluctuation, have been suggested to explain colossal magnetoresistance and charge/orbital ordering phenomena.

In addition to ferromagnetic metallic (x $``$ 1/3) and charge ordered insulating (x $``$ 1/2) ground states, another intriguing ground states were reported in a high doping region (i.e., x $``$ 1/2). It was proposed that some doped manganites, such as Nd0.45Sr0.55MnO3 and Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3, have metallic ground states where spins in a layer are ferromagnetically ordered but the coupling between the layers is antiferromagnetically ordered. This spin configuration is called the ”$`A`$-type” antiferromagnetic ordering. The realization of the layered antiferromagnetic metallic ground states was explained by a kinetic energy gain when the d$`_{x^2y^2}`$ orbitals form a 2-dimensional (2D) band. This intriguing ground state was experimentally demonstrated in a single domain Nd0.45Sr0.55MnO3 crystal by measuring anisotropic electric properties: a metallic conduction within the ferromagnetic layers and an insulating behavior along the antiferromagnetic directions below the Néel temperature. Under a high magnetic field ($`H`$), these manganites in the $`A`$-type antiferromagnetic ground state experience large resistivity changes with a strong hysteresis.

In spite of these fascinating physical phenomena, optical investigations on the layered antiferromagnetic materials have been rare. Recently, we reported temperature dependent optical conductivity spectra $`\sigma (\omega )`$ of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3. We demonstrated that the polaron scenario should be better to explain the temperature dependent optical spectra of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 than the orbital fluctuation scenario. We also suggested that some observed features of $`\sigma (\omega )`$ could be explained by a dimensional crossover from a 3D to a 2D metal near the Néel temperature. \[Note that the direct transport data which demonstrates Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 has a 2D metallic state are still lacking due to the unavailability of a single domain crystal.\]

In this paper, we will report $`H`$-dependent $`\sigma (\omega )`$ of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3. At 0.0 T in 4.2 K, $`\sigma (\omega )`$ show a Drude-like peak in the far-infrared region and a broad absorption peak in the mid-infrared region. With increasing $`H`$, the Drude-like peak increases and the large spectral weight changes are observed below 4.0 eV. These spectral weight changes can be explained within the polaron picture. Moreover, the $`H`$-dependences of the spectral weights and dielectric constant spectra $`\epsilon (\omega )`$ of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 are different from those of Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3, which has the $`CE`$-type antiferromagnetic spin ordering. These experimental observations provide further supports for the occurrence of the dimensional crossover in Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3.

A Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 single crystal was grown by the floating zone method. Details of sample growth and characterization were reported elsewhere. Its $`H`$-dependent dc resistivity was measured by the conventional four-probe method using a 20 T superconducting magnet. For optical measurements, the crystal was polished up to 0.3 $`\mu `$m using diamond paste. To remove surface damages due to the polishing process, we carefully annealed the sample again in an O2 atmosphere at 1000 oC just before optical measurements. The $`H`$-dependent reflectivity in the energy region between 5.0 meV and 4.0 eV were measured using the spectrophotometers at National High Magnetic Field Laboratory. \[All of the optical spectra reported in this paper were measured at 4.2 K.\] Using the Kramers-Kronig transformation, $`\sigma (\omega )`$ and $`\epsilon (\omega )`$ were obtained. For the high frequency extrapolations, the room temperature data between 4.0 and 30 eV were used.

The solid lines in Fig. 1 show the $`H`$-dependent dc resistivity curves of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3, which were taken at $`T`$ $`=`$ 4.2 K. With increasing $`H`$, the dc resistivity value ($``$ 10-2 $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ cm at 0.0 T) is nearly constant up to 7.0 T, and then it starts to decrease above 7.0 T. The dc resistivity value does not change at all above 11.5 T within our experimental error. With decreasing $`H`$, the dc resistivity becomes nearly constant down to 9.5 T and then starts to increase. Note that the dc resistivity shows a strong hysteresis.

For comparison, the $`H`$-dependent dc resistivity curves of Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3 are also shown as dotted lines in Fig. 1. Compared to the Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 case, the $`H`$-dependent dc resistivity change of Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3 is quite large. With increasing $`H`$, the high resistivity value ($``$ 102 $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ cm at 0.0 T) is sharply decreased near 13.0 T and also shows a very strong hysteresis. Note that the dc resistivity value at 0.0 T in Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3 in the $`H`$-decreasing run is quite smaller than that in the $`H`$-increasing run.

In Fig. 2(a), we show the $`H`$-dependent $`\sigma (\omega )`$ of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 during the $`H`$-increasing run. At 0.0 T, there are broad peaks around 1.0 and 4.0 eV. As $`H`$ increases, the spectral weights near 1.0 eV and 3.0 eV are transferred to a lower energy region. The gap-like feature in $`\sigma (\omega )`$ at 0.0 T changes into a Drude-like peak above 10.0 T. The low frequency details of transferred spectral weights below 0.1 eV can be seen in Fig. 2(b). At 0.0 T, there are sharp peaks due to the optic phonon modes and a hint of small rise in $`\sigma (\omega )`$ in the low frequency limit, suggesting the existence of the small Drude-like peak. As $`H`$ increases, the phonon peaks become screened and the Drude-like peak becomes more clear below 0.04 eV. The solid circle represents the dc conductivity value at 14.0 T. Therefore, $`\sigma (\omega )`$ below 0.1 eV at the high $`H`$ should be viewed as two parts, i.e., the Drude and the large incoherent absorption peaks.

In our earlier studies on the temperature dependent $`\sigma (\omega )`$ of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3, we observed similar spectral weight changes. In the high frequency region above 2.0 eV, there are two contributions. Around 4.0 eV, there is a peak due to the charge transfer transition from the O 2p level to the Mn 3d level. And, there is a broad peak due to the optical transition between the Hund’s rule split bands near 3.0 eV, however it is much weaker than the charge transfer transition. And, it was also shown that the polaron scenario was better to describe the optical spectra in the low frequency region than the orbital fluctuation scenario.

After subtracting the charge transfer transition contribution from the measured $`\sigma (\omega )`$, we analyzed $`H`$-dependent $`\sigma (\omega )`$ below 2.0 eV within the polaron picture:

$$\sigma (\omega <\text{2.0 eV})=\sigma _D(\omega )+\sigma _I(\omega )+\sigma _{II}(\omega )\text{,}$$
(1)
where $`\sigma _D(\omega )`$, $`\sigma _I(\omega )`$, $`\sigma _{II}(\omega )`$ represent the contributions due to free carriers, incoherent polaron absorption, and the inter-orbital transition between the Jahn-Teller split levels, respectively. The simple Drude model was used for $`\sigma _D(\omega )`$, and two Gaussian functions were used for $`\sigma _I(\omega )`$ and $`\sigma _{II}(\omega )`$. Then, we estimated the $`H`$-dependent optical strengths $`S_D`$, $`S_I`$, and $`S_{II}`$ by integrating $`\sigma _D(\omega )`$, $`\sigma _I(\omega )`$, and $`\sigma _{II}(\omega )`$, respectively. Details of this procedure were published elsewhere.

Figures 3(a), (b), and (c) show the $`H`$-dependence of $`S_I`$, $`S_{II}`$, and $`S_D`$ for Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 (solid circles) during the $`H`$-increasing run, respectively. \[For comparison, Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3 data were also shown as solid squares.\] With increasing $`H`$, $`S_I`$ and $`S_D`$ increase smoothly, but $`S_{II}`$ shows the opposite behavior. The $`H`$-dependences of $`S_I`$, $`S_{II}`$, and $`S_D`$ for Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3 are similar to those for Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3. And, at high $`H`$, the values of $`S_I`$ and $`S_D`$ are nearly the same for both samples. However, there are a few important differences between Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 and Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3 data. First, at $`H=`$ 0.0 T, $`S_D`$ of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 remains as a finite value, while that of Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3 becomes nearly zero. Second, the $`H`$-dependences of $`S_I`$ and $`S_D`$ are much weaker for Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3. These $`H`$-dependences agree with Fig. 1, where dc resistivity of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 is smaller than that of Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3 by four orders of magnitude at zero field but becomes nearly the same at high $`H`$.

Although there are no direct experimental evidences such as anisotropic transport measurements on a single domain crystal, Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 is believed to have a 2D metallic behavior in the $`A`$-type spin ordered states. On the other hand, the charge/orbital ordered state of Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3 with the $`CE`$-type ordering should be insulating. The weaker $`H`$-dependences of $`S_I`$ and $`S_D`$ for Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 can be easily understood. Moreover, $`\sigma (\omega )`$ of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3, shown in Fig. 2(b), show a weak Drude-like peak even at $`H=`$ 0.0 T. To get more informations on the ground state, we estimated the value of the total polaron absorption $`S_{tot}`$ ($`=`$ $`S_I+`$ $`S_D`$). It is found that the value of $`S_{tot}`$ at 0.0 T is by about 65 % ($``$ 2/3) smaller than that at 14.0 T. The existence of the Drude-like peak and the decrease of $`S_{tot}`$ by an amount of $``$ 1/3 at zero field support that the ground state of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 should be a 2D metal.

Further insights on Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 can be obtained from the $`H`$-dependent $`\epsilon (\omega )`$, shown in Fig. 4(a). At 0.0 T, $`\epsilon `$ is nearly $`\omega `$-independent, but the value of $`\epsilon `$ at the low frequency is less than zero. This result implies that Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 should be a metal at 0.0 T, which is consistent with the existence of the Drude-like peak in Fig. 2(b). With increasing $`H`$, $`\epsilon (\omega )`$ decrease further and clearly show a metallic behavior at 14.0 T. As a comparison, we also plot the $`H`$-dependent $`\epsilon (\omega )`$ for Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3 in Fig. 4(b). At 0.0 T, $`\epsilon `$ is positive and nearly $`\omega `$-independent at all frequencies, consistent with a typical insulator response. With increasing $`H`$ up to 13.0 T, $`\epsilon (\omega )`$ in the low frequency region increases. With increasing $`H`$ further, $`\epsilon (\omega )`$ suddenly become negative and finally show a typical metallic response at 17.0 T. In our earlier study for the $`H`$-dependent $`\epsilon (\omega )`$ of Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3, we demonstrated that the divergence behavior of $`\epsilon (\omega )`$ near the insulator-metal transition boundary, i.e., 13.0 T, could be explained by a dielectric anomaly near a percolation threshold. However, in Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3, such a dielectric anomaly of $`\epsilon (\omega )`$ cannot be observed near the 10.0 T region, where dc resistivity experiences a large change.

The dc resistivity change near the 10.0 T region can be understood in terms of a dimensional crossover from 2D to 3D metals. If the zero field ground state of Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3 is a 2D metal, the sample might be composed of multi-magnetic domains with their antiferromagnetic directions randomly pointing along x-, y-, and z\- directions. For such sample, the percolating metallic paths should be formed. That is the reason why we could observe the existence of the Drude-like peak and the absence of the dielectric anomaly in Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3. In optical measurements, the light will probe the average response of the multi-magnetic domains. Effectively, 2/3 of its response comes from the metallic response within the ferrimagnetically ordered layer and 1/3 comes from the insulating response along the antiferromagnetic direction. Since the metallic response dominates in the low frequency region, the value of $`S_{tot}`$ could be reduced approximately by 1/3 near the dimensional crossover, in agreement with our experimental observation. The detailed process of the dimensional crossover is not known yet. Using 55Mn NMR experiment, Allodi et al. suggested the percolative origin for the ferromagnetic transition in Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3. Compared with the Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3 case, such a percolative process is quite plausible. However, more studies are required to understand details of the dimensional crossover.

In summary, we investigated the magnetic field dependent optical conductivity spectra and dielectric constant spectra of an $`A`$-type spin ordered half-doped manganite Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3. In comparison with Nd1/2Sr1/2MnO3, which show the $`CE`$-type spin ordering, we showed that a dimensional crossover from a 2-dimensional to a 3-dimensional metal should occur in Pr1/2Sr1/2MnO3.

We acknowledge Dr. H. C. Kim and Dr. H.-C. Ri for help in magnetoresistance measurements. This work was supported by Ministry of Science and Technology through the Nanostructure Technology Project and by Ministry of Education through the BK-21 Program. The work by Y. M. was supported by a Grant-In-Aid for Science Research from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture. Part of this work was performed at the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, which is supported by NSF Cooperative Agreement No. DMR-9016241 and by the State of Florida.