text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Type IIB orientifolds  provide a promising framework for semi-realistic model building. $`D=4`$, $`𝒩=1`$ type IIB orientifolds are well studied by now . In contrast to heterotic orbifolds, the action of the orbifold group on the gauge degrees of freedom of orientifolds is rather constrained and in many cases even uniquely determined due to the RR tadpole cancellation conditions. For some discrete groups that lead to $`D=4`$, $`𝒩=1`$ heterotic orbifolds there is no consistent supersymmetric orientifold at all. Some of the tadpole conditions vanish in the limit where the internal orbifold space gets very large. This allows for many additional consistent orientifolds. An important subset of non-compact orientifolds were classified in . The action of the orientifold group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\times \{1\mathrm{I},\mathrm{\Omega }\}`$ on the Chan-Paton matrices is specified by choosing a projective real representation $`\gamma `$ of the orbifold group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ . If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ contains elements $`g`$ of even order, i.e. the smallest positive integer $`N`$, such that $`g^N=e`$, is even, where $`e`$ is the neutral element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, then there are two inequivalent choices for the representation matrix: $`\gamma _g^N=\mu \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{I}`$, with $`\mu =\pm 1`$. Orientifold models with $`\mu =+1`$ ($`\mu =1`$) have been called to have (no) vector structure in . If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ contains two generators $`g`$, $`h`$ of even even order, then it is possible to have non-commuting $`\gamma `$ matrices: $`\gamma _g\gamma _h=ϵ\gamma _h\gamma _g`$. Orientifolds with $`ϵ=1`$ have discrete torsion in the sense of . Thus, to each orbifold group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with two generators of even order, there correspond eight non-compact orientifold models, characterised by the three signs $`\mu _g`$, $`\mu _h`$ and $`ϵ`$. If the internal space is compact and only $`D`$-branes with positive RR charge are present, then only the choice $`\mu _g=\mu _h=ϵ=1`$ is consistent . It is not possible to cancel the tadpoles for the remaining seven models.

A striking feature of orientifolds is the existence of a natural mechanism to break supersymmetry by introducing antibranes . The negative RR charge changes the GSO projection for open strings stretched between branes and antibranes, and in the antibrane-antibrane R sector it changes the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-projection. As a consequence, the fermionic spectrum generically differs from the bosonic spectrum in the antibrane sectors of the orientifold. This has led to orientifold models that come very close to the non-supersymmetric Standard Model . The presence of two types of $`D`$-branes, with positive and negative RR charge, gives rise to many new consistent orientifolds. Indeed, the tadpoles of most of the non-compact models constructed in  can also be cancelled in the compact case if antibranes are introduced. The non-supersymmetric $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$ orientifold models have been analysed in . A supersymmetric version of these orientifolds is possible if $`D5`$-branes with negative NSNS and RR charge inside $`D9`$-branes with positive charges are introduced .

The aim of this paper is to classify the possible $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orientifolds with $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetry in the closed string sector and to determine their spectra explicitely. This can be viewed as a generalisation of the work of  to type IIB orientifolds. For discrete groups $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$, with $`N`$ and $`M`$ odd, there is only one compact orientifold: the supersymmetric $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_3\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_3`$ constructed in the second ref. of . For each of the two discrete groups $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_3`$ and $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_3\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6`$, there are two orientifold models, with and without vector structure. The cases without vector structure contain only positively charged $`D`$-branes. They have been constructed in . The $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_3\text{/}\text{\_Z}_6^{}`$ orientifold with vector structure has been analysed in . Therefore, we restrict ourselves to even $`N`$ and $`M`$ in this article.

As stated above, there are eight orientifold models for each discrete group. However only six of them are inequivalent for $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ and $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6`$, and only four of them are inequivalent for $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$, $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$, $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6^{}`$ and $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_6\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6`$. The orbifold groups containing a $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ factor are special in some respects. It is not possible to build the corresponding orientifolds if only positively charged $`D`$-branes are present . The reason is that there exists no projective representation of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ on the $`D9`$-branes and $`D5_i`$-branes, $`i=1,2,3`$, that respects all the consistency constraints. We will see below that the the tadpole amplitudes only factorise if the charges $`\alpha _i`$ of the three sets of $`D5_i`$-branes satisfy $`\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3=1`$. Thus, all consistent $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ orientifolds necessarily involve $`D5_i`$-branes with negative RR charge. Surprisingly, we find that even if antibranes are introduced, only the models with vector structure in the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ factor have a solution to the tadpole equations.111This statement is valid if no Wilson lines are present. There might well be consistent $`𝐙_N\times 𝐙_4`$ orientifolds without vector structure in the $`𝐙_4`$ factor when appropriate Wilson lines are added. In this article we only consider models without Wilson lines.

There are many phase factors (more precisely, signs) that appear in type IIB orientifolds. In section 2, we explain their significance and classify the inequivalent models. In particular, we discuss the relations between vector structure, discrete torsion, $`D`$-brane charges and $`O`$-plane charges. In section 3, we review and generalise a straightforward method to construct supersymmetric and non-supersymmetric type IIB orientifolds. The closed string spectrum is determined using the orbifold cohomology . To obtain the open string spectrum, we generalise the algorithm developed in  based on quiver theory  and on the formalism of . We also give the general formulae for the tadpole cancellation conditions including all the possible sign factors. The algorithm described provides a useful tool for orientifold model building, especially if implemented in a computer algebra program. The complete spectra of the models discussed are presented in section 4. In two appendices, we explain how to obtain the Hodge numbers of orbifolds with and without discrete torsion using the cohomology and the closed string spectrum using the shift formalism.

## 2 Phase factors in orientifolds

Due to the fact that the $`\gamma `$ matrices form a projective representation of the orbifold group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ , there appear many phase factors in the expressions relevant to type IIB orientifolds. These phases are normally chosen to take some convenient values.

In this section, we want to answer the question how many inequivalent choices there are. To this end, we first include all possible phase factors and then identify the factor systems that lead to equivalent models.

### 2.1 Discrete torsion on orbifolds and orientifolds

We briefly review some basic results about discrete torsion.222For a recent geometric treatment of discrete torsion, see . In the closed string sector of orbifold theories, discrete torsion appears as phases $`\beta _{g,h}`$ in the one-loop partition function :

$$Z=\frac{1}{|\mathrm{\Gamma }|}\underset{g,h\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}\beta _{g,h}Z(g,h),$$
(2.1)
where $`Z(g,h)`$ is the contribution of the $`(g,h)`$-twisted sector and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the orbifold group. The discrete torsion phases must satisfy

$$\beta _{g,g}=1,\beta _{g,h}=\beta _{h,g}^1,\beta _{g,hk}=\beta _{g,h}\beta _{g,k}g,h,k\mathrm{\Gamma },$$
(2.2)
to be consistent with modular invariance . If we restrict ourselves to Abelian orbifold groups and to complex three-dimensional internal spaces, then discrete torsion is only possible for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$. Let $`g_1,g_2`$ be the generators of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N,\text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ respectively, $`p=\mathrm{gcd}(N,M)`$ and $`ϵ=e^{2\pi im/p}`$, with $`m=1,\mathrm{},p`$. If we choose $`\beta _{g_1,g_2}=ϵ`$, then all the other phases $`\beta _{g,h}`$ are fixed by (2.2). Introducing the notation $`(a,b)=g_1^ag_2^b`$ for the elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, they read

$$\beta _{(a,b),(c,d)}=ϵ^{adbc}.$$
(2.3)
In the following, we will characterise the discrete torsion either by the parameter $`ϵ`$ of (2.3) or by the number $`s`$, defined as the smallest positive integer such that $`ϵ^s=1`$.

The matrices $`\gamma _g`$ that represent the action of the elements $`g`$ of the orbifold group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on the Chan-Paton indices of the open strings form a projective representation:

$$\gamma _g\gamma _h=\alpha _{g,h}\gamma _{gh},$$
(2.4)
where $`\alpha _{g,h}`$ are arbitrary non-zero complex numbers. They are called the factor system of the projective representation of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Discrete torsion in the open string sector means that the matrices $`\gamma _g`$ do not commute. More precisely , this non-commutativity is controlled by the phases $`\beta _{g,h}`$ defined above

$$\gamma _g\gamma _h=\beta _{g,h}\gamma _h\gamma _g.$$
(2.5)
Two matrices $`\gamma _g`$ and $`\widehat{\gamma }_g`$ are considered projectively equivalent if there exists a non-zero complex number $`\rho _g`$ such that $`\widehat{\gamma }_g=\rho _g\gamma _g`$. In general, the projective representations $`\gamma `$ and $`\widehat{\gamma }`$ have different factor systems, but they have the same discrete torsion phases $`\beta _{g,h}`$. From (2.4) and (2.5), we find

$$\beta _{g,h}=\alpha _{g,h}\alpha _{h,g}^1.$$
(2.6)
To perform explicit calculations, it is convenient to choose a specific factor system. We choose the $`\alpha _{g,h}`$ in (2.4) such that

$$(\gamma _{g_1})^a(\gamma _{g_2})^b=\gamma _{g_1^ag_2^b},a=1,\mathrm{},N,b=1,\mathrm{},M,$$
(2.7)
where $`g_1`$, $`g_2`$ are the generators of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$. This choice is possible for each equivalence class of factor systems. Moreover, all the remaining phases $`\alpha _{g,h}`$ are then determined by the parameter $`ϵ`$. We find

$$\gamma _{g_1^ag_2^b}\gamma _{g_1^cg_2^d}=ϵ^{bc}\gamma _{g_1^{a+c}g_2^{b+d}}.$$
(2.8)
We conclude that for a $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N`$ orbifold all the possible choices of factor systems $`\alpha _{g,h}`$ in (2.5) are equivalent. For $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orbifolds, there are $`p/2+1`$ (if $`p`$ is even) or $`(p+1)/2`$ (if $`p`$ is odd) non-equivalent choices, parametrised by $`ϵ=e^{2\pi im/p}`$, $`m=0,\mathrm{},p/2`$, where $`p=\mathrm{gcd}(N,M)`$. (Note that $`ϵ`$ and $`ϵ^1`$ lead to equivalent orbifolds.)

In orientifold models, the matrices $`\gamma _g`$ have to satisfy the additional constraint

$$\gamma _\mathrm{\Omega }\gamma _g^{}\gamma _\mathrm{\Omega }^1=c\delta _g\gamma _g,$$
(2.9)
where $`\gamma _\mathrm{\Omega }=c\gamma _\mathrm{\Omega }^{}`$ is the matrix that represents the action of the world-sheet parity $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ on the Chan-Paton indices and $`\delta _g`$ is a new phase, defined by

$$\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega }g}^1\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega }g}^{}=\delta _g(\gamma _g^{})^2.$$
(2.10)
It is easy to see that one can always choose $`\delta _g=cg`$. Consider the redefinition $`\gamma _g\widehat{\gamma }_g=\rho _g\gamma _g`$, where the phases $`\rho _g`$ satisfy $`\rho _g\rho _h=\rho _{gh}`$. This redefinition leaves (2.4) and (2.7) invariant and therefore does not modify the factor system $`\alpha _{g,h}`$. Now, choosing $`\rho _g=\sqrt{c\delta _g}`$ and using $`c=\pm 1`$, we find from (2.9) that $`\widehat{\delta }_g=c`$.

The condition (2.9) together with $`c\delta _g=1`$ tells us that the matrices $`\gamma _g`$ form a real or pseudo-real projective representation of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ .

In general, there are several sets of $`Dp`$-branes, $`p=9,5_1,5_2,5_3`$, and correspondingly several sets of $`\gamma `$ matrices, $`\gamma _{g,p}`$, $`\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}`$. It turns out (e.g. when considering tadpole cancellation) that the discrete torsion parameter $`ϵ`$ cannot be chosen independently for the different sets of $`\gamma `$ matrices. There is only one $`ϵ`$ which is the same for all $`p`$. Furthermore, the coefficients $`c_p`$, defined by $`\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}^{}=c_p\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}`$, cannot be chosen at will. Tadpole cancellation requires333if no anti-$`D9`$-branes are present $`c_9=1`$ and a consistent coupling of the strings stretching between 9- and $`5_i`$-branes implies

$$c_{5_1}=c_{5_2}=c_{5_3}=c_9.$$
(2.11)
These constraints can be circumvented in models similar to the one proposed by the authors of . However, such models are only consistent if all matter at integer mass levels in the $`95_i`$ sectors is projected out. We will therefore discard this possibility in the following.

As a consequence of the reality condition (2.9), the discrete torsion parameter $`ϵ`$ can only take the real values $`\pm 1`$ in the orientifold case . At this point, we might conclude that there are only two non-equivalent orientifold models corresponding to each discrete group $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$. But we will see in the next subsection that there are more possibilities.

### 2.2 Vector structure

For $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N`$, the identity $`g_1^N=e`$, where $`g_1`$ is the generator and $`e`$ the neutral element of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N`$, translates to

$$(\gamma _{g_1})^N=\mu \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{I},\mathrm{with}\mu \mathrm{C}\text{ }^{}(\mathrm{orbifold})\mathrm{or}\mu \mathrm{IR}^{}(\mathrm{orientifold}).$$
(2.12)
In the orbifold case, this can be brought to the form $`(\widehat{\gamma }_{g_1})^N=1\mathrm{I}`$ by redefining the $`\gamma `$ matrices. In the orientifold case, such a redefinition is only possible for odd $`N`$ ($`\gamma _{g_1}\widehat{\gamma }_{g_1}=\mathrm{sgn}(\mu )|\mu |^{1/N}\gamma _{g_1}`$). If $`N`$ is even, the two cases $`\mu =+1`$ and $`\mu =1`$ are not equivalent because $`(\gamma _{g_1})^N=1\mathrm{I}`$ cannot be brought to the form $`(\widehat{\gamma }_{g_1})^N=1\mathrm{I}`$ by multiplying $`\gamma _{g_1}`$ with a real number. For the factor system of (2.7), this means that $`\gamma _{g_1^N}=\mu \gamma _e`$. If $`\mu =1`$, then the matrices $`\gamma _g`$ represent the elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ only 2:1. This class of orientifolds has been called to have no vector structure in .

For $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orientifolds, the notion of vector structure can be defined for each of the two factors of the discrete group separately.444Strictly speaking, a $`𝐙_N\times 𝐙_M`$ orientifold only has vector structure in the sense of  if $`(\gamma _{g_1})^N=(\gamma _{g_2})^M=1\mathrm{I}`$ and $`ϵ=1`$. We use the word ‘vector structure’ in a generalised sense. There are four inequivalent models, characterised by $`\mu _{3,p}=\pm 1`$, $`\mu _{1,p}\pm 1`$, where

$$(\gamma _{g_1,p})^N=\mu _{3,p}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{I},(\gamma _{g_2,p})^M=\mu _{1,p}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{I}.$$
(2.13)
The indices $`i=1,3`$ on $`\mu _{i,p}`$ refer to the fact that, in our conventions, $`g_1`$ fixes the third complex plane and $`g_2`$ fixes the first complex plane. The index $`p=9,5_1,5_2,5_3`$ indicates which set of $`Dp`$-branes is considered. We will see below that the signs $`\mu _{i,p}`$ cannot be chosen independently for each set of $`Dp`$-branes. Indeed, the choice of $`\mu _{1,9}`$ and $`\mu _{3,9}`$ fixes all other $`\mu _{i,p}`$.

We conclude that to each $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orientifold there correspond eight distinct models characterised by the three signs $`\mu _{1,9}`$, $`\mu _{3,9}`$ and $`ϵ`$.

### 2.3 Phases in the open string one-loop amplitudes

The three open string one-loop amplitudes that contribute to the tadpoles — the cylinder, the Klein bottle and the Möbius strip — contain additional signs. However, the requirement of tadpole cancellation relates these signs to $`\mu _{1,9}`$, $`\mu _{3,9}`$ and $`ϵ`$.

In the following, we label the elements of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ by the two-vector $`\overline{k}=(a,b)`$, $`a=0,\mathrm{},N1`$, $`b=0,\mathrm{},M1`$. We define $`s_i=\mathrm{sin}(\pi \overline{k}\overline{v}_i)`$, $`c_i=\mathrm{cos}(\pi \overline{k}\overline{v}_i)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{s}_i=\mathrm{sin}(2\pi \overline{k}\overline{v}_i)`$, as in section 3.3 below.

The RR part of the cylinder amplitude can be written in the form :

$$𝒞=\underset{\overline{k}=(0,0)}{\overset{(N1,M1)}{}}𝒞_{(\overline{k})}=\underset{\overline{k}=(0,0)}{\overset{(N1,M1)}{}}\frac{1}{8s_1s_2s_3}\left[Tr\gamma _{\overline{k},9}+4\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\alpha _is_js_kTr\gamma _{\overline{k},5_i}\right]^2,$$
(2.14)
where we suppressed the volume dependence.555In sectors with fixed planes, this formula has to be modified as explained in appendix B of . The indices $`j`$, $`k`$ take values such that $`(ijk)`$ is a permutation of $`(123)`$. The signs $`\alpha _i`$ weight the $`95_i`$ sectors relative to the 99 and $`5_i5_i`$ sectors. They are related to the $`D`$-brane charges. If the $`D9`$-branes have positive RR charge, then $`\alpha _i`$ is the RR charge of the $`D5_i`$-branes.

The RR part of the Klein bottle amplitude can be written in the form:

$$𝒦=\underset{\overline{k}=(0,0)}{\overset{(N1,M1)}{}}𝒦_{(\overline{k})}=\underset{\overline{k}=(0,0)}{\overset{(N1,M1)}{}}\left[16\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\frac{2c_i^2}{\stackrel{~}{s_i}}16\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}ϵ_i\frac{2c_i^2}{\stackrel{~}{s}_i}\right].$$
(2.15)
The sign $`ϵ_i`$ weights the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ order-two twisted sector relative to the untwisted sector.666These signs were introduced in the twisted Klein bottle amplitude by the authors of . Note that the $`ϵ_i`$ of  are $`ϵ_i`$ in our notation. It is related to the $`O`$-plane charges. If the $`O9`$-planes have negative RR charge, then $`ϵ_i`$ is (half) the RR charge of the $`O5_i`$-planes.

The RR part of the Möbius strip amplitude can be written in the form:

$``$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{k}=(0,0)}{\overset{(N1,M1)}{}}}_{(\overline{k})}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{k}=(0,0)}{\overset{(N1,M1)}{}}}\left[8\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2s_i}}Tr\left(\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega }\overline{k},9}^1\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega }\overline{k},9}^{}\right)8\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{2c_jc_k}{s_i}}(\alpha _i)Tr\left(\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega }\overline{k},5_i}^1\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega }\overline{k},5_i}^{}\right)\right].`$
From the interpretation of these open string one-loop amplitudes as closed string tree-level exchange between $`D`$-branes and $`O`$-planes, it is clear that the tadpoles must factorise, i.e. $`𝒞+𝒦+`$ can be written as a sum of squares. More precisely, we need

$$𝒞_{(2\overline{k})}+𝒦_{(\overline{k})}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}𝒦_{(\overline{k}+\overline{k}_i)}+_{(\overline{k})}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}_{(\overline{k}+\overline{k}_i)}=[\mathrm{}]^2,$$
(2.17)
where $`\overline{k}_i`$ denotes the order-two twist that fixes the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ complex plane. This implies a relation between the $`ϵ_i`$ and the vector structures and discrete torsion, defined above. We find

$$ϵ_i=\mu _{i,9}=\mu _{i,5_i}=\mu _{i,5_j},i=1,3,ji,ϵ_2=ϵ_1ϵ_3ϵ^{MN/4}.$$
(2.18)
A further constraint on the signs arises from the requirement of tadpole cancellation in the untwisted sector:

$$ϵ_i=\alpha _i,i=1,2,3.$$
(2.19)
This means that the tadpoles can only be cancelled if the RR charge of the $`O5_i`$-planes ($`ϵ_i`$) is opposite to the RR charge of the $`D5_i`$-branes ($`\alpha _i`$).

We conclude that the signs $`\alpha _i`$, $`ϵ_i`$ are not independent parameters. As stated above, there are eight distinct $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orientifolds. They can be characterised by $`\mu _{1,9}`$, $`\mu _{3,9}`$ and $`ϵ`$. Note that the three signs $`ϵ_i`$ are only independent if $`N`$ and $`M`$ are not multiples of four.

## 3 Construction of the models

We consider compact orientifolds of the form $`T^6/(\mathrm{\Gamma }\times \{1\mathrm{I},\mathrm{\Omega }\})`$, with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$, $`N,M`$ even. The six-torus is defined as $`T^6=\mathrm{C}\text{ }^3/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ a factorisable lattice, i.e. it is the direct sum of three two-dimensional lattices. The world-sheet symmetry $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is of the form

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }_0JT,$$
(3.1)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ is the world-sheet parity and the operator $`J`$ exchanges the $`k^{\mathrm{th}}`$ and the $`(Nk)^{\mathrm{th}}`$ twisted sector . The operator $`T`$ acts as $`ϵ_i\mathrm{𝟏}`$ on the $`g`$-twisted states if $`g`$ is an order-two twist that fixes the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ complex plane and as the identity on the remaining states.777The analogous operator in $`D=6`$ was discussed by the authors of  when analysing a new $`𝐙_2`$ orientifold. The signs $`ϵ_i`$ are defined in (2.15).

The action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on the coordinates $`(z_1,z_2,z_3)`$ of $`\mathrm{C}\text{ }^3`$ can be characterised by the twist vectors $`v=(v_1,v_2,v_3)`$, $`w=(w_1,w_2,w_3)`$:

$$g_1:z_ie^{2\pi iv_i}z_i,g_2:z_ie^{2\pi iw_i}z_i,$$
(3.2)
where $`g_1,g_2`$ are the generators of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`_{i=1}^3v_i=_{i=1}^3w_i=0`$ to ensure $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetry of the closed string sector in $`D=4`$. Not all possible shifts correspond to a symmetry of some lattice. Indeed, there is a finite number of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orbifolds . For even $`N`$ and $`M`$, there are only 6 models: $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$, $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$, $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$, $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6`$, $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_6\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6`$, with twist vectors $`v=1/N(1,1,0)`$, $`w=1/M(0,1,1)`$, and $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6^{}`$ with twist vectors $`v=1/N(1,1,0)`$, $`w=1/M(2,1,1)`$. We chose the twist vectors such that $`g_1^{N/2}`$ fixes the third complex plane and $`g_2^{M/2}`$ fixes the first complex plane.

Supersymmetric compact $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orientifolds have been discussed in . The author of  found that the models with discrete groups $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ and $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ are not consistent because the algebra of $`\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}`$ and $`\gamma _{g,p}`$, where $`p=9,5_i`$, seems to imply that $`\gamma _{R,9}`$ is antisymmetric, where $`R`$ is an order-two twist. It turns out that there is no projective representation of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$, with $`\gamma _{R,9}`$ antisymmetric, if $`N`$ and/or $`M`$ is a multiple of four . However, the condition that $`\gamma _{R,9}`$ be antisymmetric can be escaped if the action of the operator $`T`$ (i.e. the signs $`ϵ_i`$) in (3.1) is modified. We will see that there are solutions to the tadpole equations for all orbifold groups $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ if one chooses the appropriate signs $`ϵ_i`$.

In this section, we sketch the basic steps to construct $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orientifolds. We explain how to obtain the closed string spectrum, the open string spectrum and the tadpole cancellation conditions. This is very similar to, and in fact a straightforward generalisation of, the method presented in .

### 3.1 Closed string spectrum

The closed string spectrum can be obtained from the cohomology of the internal orbifold space . In appendix A, we explain in detail how to obtain these numbers and the explicit contribution from each twisted sector. The results are shown in tables 1 and 2. For completeness, we also give the Hodge numbers of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_3\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_3`$ and $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_3\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6`$. An alternative method to obtain the closed string spectrum is presented in appendix B.

Let us remark that the Hodge numbers of tables 1 and 2 directly give the closed string spectrum of the orbifold. It is obtained by dimensionally reducing to $`D=4`$ the massless spectrum of type IIB supergravity in $`D=10`$: the metric $`g`$, the NSNS 2-form $`B`$, the dilaton $`\varphi `$, the RR-forms $`C^{(0)}`$, $`C^{(2)}`$, $`C^{(4)}`$. (We only give the bosons, the fermions are related to them by supersymmetry.) The Lorentz indices of the 10D fields are contracted with the differential forms of the internal space. The resulting spectrum has $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry in $`D=4`$. For a general configuration one finds (see e.g. ):

* a gravity multiplet (consisting of the graviton, a vector and fermions)
* a double tensor multiplet (consisting of two 2-forms, two scalars and fermions)
* $`h^{1,1}`$ tensor multiplets (consisting of a 2-form, three scalars and fermions)
* $`h^{2,1}`$ vector multiplets (consisting of a vector, two scalars and fermions)

To obtain the orientifold spectrum, one has to perform the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-projection. In the following, we will denote an element $`g=g_1^ag_2^b`$ of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ by the two-vector $`\overline{k}=(a,b)`$, i.e. $`(0,0)`$ is the neutral element, $`(1,0)`$ is the generator of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N`$, $`(0,1)`$ the generator of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$, etc. As explained in , it is convenient to split the sectors into three different types:

(i) The untwisted sector ($`\overline{k}=(0,0)`$), it is invariant under $`J`$ and $`T`$. The bosonic fields in $`D=4`$ are found contracting the Lorentz indices of the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-even 10D fields $`g_{\mu \nu }`$, $`\varphi `$, $`C_{\mu \nu }^{(2)}`$ with the harmonic forms corresponding to $`h^{0,0}`$, $`h^{3,0}`$, $`h_{\mathrm{untw}}^{1,1}`$, $`h_{\mathrm{untw}}^{2,1}`$.

(ii) The order-two sectors ($`\overline{k}_1=(0,M/2)`$, $`\overline{k}_2=(N/2,M/2)`$, $`\overline{k}_3=(N/2,0)`$), they are invariant under $`J`$ but acquire an extra sign $`ϵ_i`$ under the action of $`T`$. In the sector $`\overline{k}_i`$, one has to distinguish the two cases $`ϵ_i=\pm 1`$. If $`ϵ_i=1`$, then the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-even 10D fields $`g_{\mu \nu }`$, $`\varphi `$, $`C_{\mu \nu }^{(2)}`$ are contracted with $`h_{\overline{k}_i}^{1,1}`$, $`h_{\overline{k}_i}^{2,1}`$. If $`ϵ_i=+1`$, then the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-odd 10D fields $`B_{\mu \nu }`$, $`C_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }^{(4)}`$ are contracted with $`h_{\overline{k}_i}^{1,1}`$, $`h_{\overline{k}_i}^{2,1}`$.

(iii) The remaining sectors. To get the fields in $`D=4`$, one forms linear combinations of the harmonic forms that belong to the $`k^{\mathrm{th}}`$ and $`(Nk)^{\mathrm{th}}`$ twisted sector. The $`J`$-even forms are contracted with the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-even 10D fields and the $`J`$-odd forms are contracted with the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-odd 10D fields.

The spectrum fits into $`𝒩=1`$ supermultiplets. In total, one finds:

(i) the gravity multiplet, a linear multiplet, $`(h^{1,1}+h^{2,1})_{\mathrm{untw}}`$ chiral multiplets.

(ii) for each $`i=1,2,3`$: $`h_{\overline{k}_i}^{1,1}`$+$`h_{\overline{k}_i}^{2,1}`$ chiral multiplets if $`ϵ_i=1`$ and $`h_{\overline{k}_i}^{1,1}`$ linear multiplets and $`h_{\overline{k}_i}^{2,1}`$ vector multiplets if $`ϵ_i=+1`$.

(iii) if the $`\overline{k}`$-twisted sector has fixed planes, then there are $`\frac{1}{2}h_{\overline{k}}^{1,1}`$ linear multiplets, $`\frac{1}{2}h_{\overline{k}}^{2,1}`$ vector multiplets and $`\frac{1}{2}(h_{\overline{k}}^{1,1}+h_{\overline{k}}^{2,1})`$ chiral multiplets, else one has $`h_{\overline{k}}^{1,1}`$ linear multiplets.

As explained in , orbifolds with non-real discrete torsion have twisted sectors $`\overline{k}`$, where $`h_{\overline{k}}^{2,1}h_{\overline{k}}^{1,2}`$. The world-sheet symmetry $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, eq. (3.1), is not a symmetry of such orbifolds. Therefore, consistent orientifolds can only be constructed from orbifolds with discrete torsion $`ϵ=\pm 1`$.

### 3.2 Open string spectrum

There are 32 $`D9`$-branes and 32 $`D5_i`$-branes for each $`i=1,2,3`$. The index $`i`$ indicates that the $`5_i`$-branes fill the four non-compact directions and the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ complex plane.

The action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on the Chan-Paton indices of the open strings is described by a projective representation $`\gamma ^{(p)}`$ that associates a $`(32\times 32)`$-matrix $`\gamma _{g,p}`$ to each element $`g`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where $`p=9,5_i`$ denotes the type of $`D`$-brane the open strings end on:

$`\gamma ^{(p)}:\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ $``$ $`GL(32,\mathrm{C})`$ (3.3)
$`g`$ $``$ $`\gamma _{g,p}`$
Because of the orientifold projection, this representation must be real or pseudo-real. In general, $`\gamma ^{(p)}`$ can be decomposed in irreducible blocks of real ($`R^r`$), pseudo-real ($`R^p`$) and complex ($`R^c`$) representations :

$$\gamma ^{(p)}=\left(\underset{l_1}{}n_{l_1}^rR_{l_1}^r\right)\left(\underset{l_2}{}n_{l_2}^pR_{l_2}^p\right)\left(\underset{l_3}{}n_{l_3}^c(R_{l_3}^c\overline{R}_{l_3}^c)\right).$$
(3.4)
In this expression, the notation $`n_lR_l`$ is short for $`R_l1\mathrm{I}_{n_l}`$, i.e. $`n_l`$ is the number of copies of the irreducible representation (irrep) $`R_l`$ in $`\gamma ^{(p)}`$ .

Let us first consider the 99 and $`5_i5_i`$ sectors. The projection on invariant states of the Chan-Paton matrices $`\lambda ^{(0)}`$ that correspond to gauge bosons (NS sector) and their fermionic partners (R sector) in $`D=4`$ imposes the constraints (see e.g. )

$$\lambda ^{(0)}=\gamma _{g,p}\lambda ^{(0)}\gamma _{g,p}^1,g\mathrm{\Gamma },\lambda ^{(0)}=\alpha _p\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}\lambda _{}^{(0)}{}_{}{}^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}^1,$$
(3.5)
where $`\alpha _p`$ is the charge of the $`Dp`$-branes. More precisely, if we consider the fermionic (bosonic) components of $`\lambda ^{(0)}`$ in (3.5), then $`\alpha _p`$ is the RR (NSNS) charge. The sign $`\alpha _p`$ in (3.5) can be explained as follows. In , it was found that the action of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ acquires an additional minus sign in the R sector if the RR charge of the $`Dp`$-branes is reversed. This change in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ manifests itself in the Möbius strip amplitude which is proportional to the RR charge of the $`Dp`$-branes. It is easy to see that a sign flip in the NSNS charge leads to an additional minus sign for the action of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ in the NS sector.

Let us make some further comments on $`\alpha _p^{\mathrm{NS}}`$. Supersymmetry breaking is a consequence of the fact that the RR charge of the antibranes differs from their NSNS charge. In , it was shown that a supersymmetric version of the orientifolds discussed in  is possible if instead of antibranes one introduces a new type of $`D`$-branes with negative NSNS and RR charge. These objects — called $`D5^{}`$-branes in  — live inside $`D9`$-branes with positive NSNS and RR charge. It is not yet clear, whether $`D5^{}`$-branes exist in string theory. However, we would like to stress that once the possibility of a sign flip in the NSNS charge is accepted everything fits nicely together. Orientifolds involving $`D5^{}`$-branes have the same fermionic spectrum as their non-supersymmetric analogues based on antibranes. The sign flip in the NSNS charge leads to modified projection conditions for the bosons which results in a supersymmetric spectrum.

The constraints (3.5) are easily solved. One finds that the gauge group on the $`Dp`$-branes is

$$G_{(p)}=\underset{l_1}{}SO(n_{l_1}^r)\times \underset{l_2}{}USp(n_{l_2}^p)\times \underset{l_3}{}U(n_{l_3}^c)$$
(3.6)
if $`\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}=\alpha _p^{\mathrm{NS}}\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}^{}`$ and

$$G_{(p)}=\underset{l_1}{}USp(n_{l_1}^r)\times \underset{l_2}{}SO(n_{l_2}^p)\times \underset{l_3}{}U(n_{l_3}^c)$$
(3.7)
if $`\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}=\alpha _p^{\mathrm{NS}}\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}^{}`$. The fermions transform in the same representation as the gauge bosons if the gauge group is unitary or $`\alpha _p^\mathrm{R}=\alpha _p^{\mathrm{NS}}`$, else they transform in the symmetric (antisymmetric) representation if the the gauge bosons transform in the antisymmetric (symmetric) representation.

In our case, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$. There are $`NM/s^2`$ irreps, all of them $`s`$-dimensional, where $`s`$ is the smallest positive integer such that $`ϵ^s=1`$ . In the case without discrete torsion, $`ϵ=s=1`$, they are of the form

$`R_{k,l}(g_1)=e^{\pi i(2k+\eta _1)/N},R_{k,l}(g_2)=e^{\pi i(2l+\eta _2)/M},`$ (3.8)
$`\mathrm{with}k=0,\mathrm{},N1,l=0,\mathrm{},M1,`$
where $`\eta _{1/2}=0`$ or 1, depending on whether the first/second factor of the discrete group has vector structure or not. One has $`\eta _1=(1\mu _{3,p})/2`$, $`\eta _2=(1\mu _{1,p})/2`$, where the $`\mu _{i,p}`$ are defined in (2.13). In the case with discrete torsion, $`ϵ=1`$, $`s=2`$, the irreps are of the form (see e.g. )

$`R_{k,l}(g_1)=e^{\pi i(2k+\eta _1)/N}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right),R_{k,l}(g_2)=e^{\pi i(2l+\eta _2)/M}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),`$ (3.13)
$`\mathrm{with}k=0,\mathrm{},N/21,l=0,\mathrm{},M/21.`$
The action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on the internal $`\mathrm{C}\text{ }^3`$ is described by a representation $`R_{C^3}`$:

$`\gamma :R_{C^3}`$ $``$ $`SU(3)`$ (3.14)
$`g`$ $``$ $`R_{C^3}(g)`$
We write $`R_{C^3}=R_{C^3}^{(1)}R_{C^3}^{(2)}R_{C^3}^{(3)}`$ (this decomposition is possible whenever $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is Abelian), where $`R_{C^3}^{(i)}`$ corresponds to the action of $`R_{C^3}`$ on the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ coordinate of $`\mathrm{C}\text{ }^3`$. In the notation of eq. (3.2), we have

$$R_{C^3}^{(i)}(g_1)=e^{2\pi iv_i},R_{C^3}^{(i)}(g_2)=e^{2\pi iw_i}.$$
(3.15)
The matter fields corresponding to the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ complex plane are obtained from the projections (see e.g. )

$`\lambda ^{(i)}=R_{C^3}^{(i)}(g)\gamma _{g,p}\lambda ^{(i)}\gamma _{g,p}^1,g\mathrm{\Gamma },`$ $`\lambda ^{(i)}=\alpha _pR_\mathrm{\Omega }^{(i)}\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}\lambda _{}^{(i)}{}_{}{}^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}^1,`$ (3.16)
$`\mathrm{with}R_\mathrm{\Omega }^{(i)}=\{\begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & \mathrm{if}p=9\mathrm{or}p=5_i\hfill \\ +1\hfill & \mathrm{if}p=5_j\mathrm{and}ji\hfill \end{array}`$ $`\mathrm{and}\alpha _p=\text{charge of }Dp\text{-brane}.`$ (3.19)
In general, the fermionic spectrum (R sector) may differ from the bosonic spectrum (NS sector). In the R sector (NS sector) $`\alpha _p`$ is the RR (NSNS) charge of the $`Dp`$-branes. These equations can be solved using quiver theory , as explained in appendix A of .

Let us now consider the $`95_i`$ and $`5_i5_j`$ sectors. The projection of the open strings $`\lambda ^{(95_i)}`$, stretching from 9-branes to $`5_i`$-branes, on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant states reads (see e.g. ):

$`\text{R sector:}\lambda ^{(95_i)}=(R_{C^3}^{(i)}(g))^{\alpha _i^\mathrm{R}/2}\gamma _{g,9}\lambda ^{(95_i)}\gamma _{g,5_i}^1,`$
$`\text{NS sector:}\lambda ^{(95_i)}=(R_{C^3}^{(j)}(g))^{\alpha _i^\mathrm{R}/2}(R_{C^3}^{(k)}(g))^{\alpha _i^{\mathrm{NS}}/2}\gamma _{g,9}\lambda ^{(95_i)}\gamma _{g,5_i}^1,`$ (3.20)
where $`\alpha _i^\mathrm{R}`$ ($`\alpha _i^{\mathrm{NS}}`$) is the RR (NSNS) charge of the $`D5_i`$-branes and $`(ijk)`$ is a cyclic permutation of $`(123)`$.888In contrast to , we choose all fermions to have positive chiralities, the fermions with negative chiralities being their antiparticles. In the supersymmetric case $`\alpha _i^\mathrm{R}=\alpha _i^{\mathrm{NS}}`$, the conditions on the fermionic and bosonic spectrum coincide as they should.999Note that $`R_{C^3}^{(i)}(g)R_{C^3}^{(j)}(g)R_{C^3}^{(k)}(g)=1`$ is a consequence of $`R_{C^3}^{(1)}(g)R_{C^3}^{(2)}(g)R_{C^3}^{(3)}(g)SU(3)`$ in (3.14). $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ relates the $`95_i`$ sector with the $`5_i9`$ sector and does not impose extra conditions on $`\lambda ^{(95_i)}`$. Similarly, the projection on the open strings $`\lambda ^{(5_i5_j)}`$, stretching from $`5_i`$-branes to $`5_j`$-branes, on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant states reads

$`\text{R sector:}\lambda ^{(5_i5_j)}=(R_{C^3}^{(k)}(g))^{\alpha _i^\mathrm{R}\alpha _j^\mathrm{R}/2}\gamma _{g,5_i}\lambda ^{(5_i5_j)}\gamma _{g,5_j}^1,`$
$`\text{NS sector:}\lambda ^{(5_i5_j)}=(R_{C^3}^{(i)}(g))^{\alpha _i^\mathrm{R}\alpha _j^\mathrm{R}/2}(R_{C^3}^{(j)}(g))^{\alpha _i^{\mathrm{NS}}\alpha _j^{\mathrm{NS}}/2}\gamma _{g,5_i}\lambda ^{(5_i5_j)}\gamma _{g,5_j}^1,`$ (3.21)
The spectrum is easiest obtained using quiver theory, as explained in appendix A of .

### 3.3 Tadpoles

In this subsection we give the tadpole cancellation conditions including all the possible signs that may appear in the different contributions.101010We restrict ourselves to the RR tadpoles. The formulae are valid if $`D9`$-branes and $`D5_i`$-branes or anti-$`D5_i`$-branes are present. The NSNS tadpoles have exactly the same form if the signs $`\alpha _i`$, $`ϵ_i`$ are now interpreted as the NSNS charges of the $`D5_i`$-branes, $`O5_i`$-planes respectively. It is straightforward to obtain these conditions from the eqs. (2.14) – (2.3) using the methods described in .

The elements of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ are labelled by the two-vector $`\overline{k}=(a,b)`$, $`a=0,\mathrm{},N1`$, $`b=0,\mathrm{},M1`$. We define $`s_i=\mathrm{sin}(\pi \overline{k}\overline{v}_i)`$, $`c_i=\mathrm{cos}(\pi \overline{k}\overline{v}_i)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{s}_i=\mathrm{sin}(2\pi \overline{k}\overline{v}_i)`$, where $`\overline{v}=(v,w)`$ combines the two twist vectors of (3.2). Let us comment on the various signs appearing in the tadpole contributions (see also section 2).

* In the cylinder amplitude, $`\alpha _i`$ weights the $`95_i`$ sector relative to the 99 and $`5_i5_i`$ sectors. It gives the RR charge of the the $`D5_i`$-branes.
* In the Klein bottle amplitude, $`ϵ_i`$ is related to the choice between the standard and alternative $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-projection, eq. (3.1). It gives (half) the RR charge of the $`O5_i`$-planes.
* The signs $`\mu _{i,p}`$ and $`c_p`$ are related to the symmetry properties of the $`\gamma `$ matrices. They are defined by $`(\gamma _{(1,0),p})^N=\mu _{3,p}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{I}`$, $`(\gamma _{(0,1),p})^M=\mu _{1,p}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{I}`$ and $`\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}^{}=c_p\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega },p}`$.
* The discrete torsion parameter $`ϵ`$ can only take the values $`\pm 1`$. It is defined in section 2.1.
* The sign $`\beta _i`$ depends on the discrete torsion (2.3) via $`\beta _i=\beta _{\overline{k}_i,\overline{k}}`$, where $`\overline{k}_i`$ is the order-two twist that fixes the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ complex plane.

Factorisation of the twisted tadpoles requires

$$ϵ_i=\mu _{i,9}=\mu _{i,5_i}=\mu _{i,5_j},i=1,3,ji,ϵ_1ϵ_2ϵ_3=ϵ^{MN/4}.$$
(3.22)
The untwisted tadpoles can only be cancelled if

$$\alpha _i=ϵ_i,i=1,2,3.$$
(3.23)
This is the statement that the $`D`$-brane charges must be opposite to the $`O`$-plane charges in order to cancel the RR tadpoles. If the RR flux can escape to infinity (non-compact cases), this condition can be absent.

Furthermore, it is easy to see  that the action of $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2`$ on the oscillator part of strings stretching from 9-branes to $`5_i`$-branes is related to $`c_9`$ and $`c_{5_i}`$ by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^2|_{95_i}=c_9c_{5_i}=1$$
(3.24)
The last identity follows from an argument given in . In special orientifold models with no massless matter in the $`95_i`$ sectors, it is possible to have $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2|_{95_i}=+1`$, as shown in . But in this article, we will stick to the standard $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-action. Moreover, in order to avoid the introduction of anti-$`D9`$-branes, we choose $`c_9=1`$.

We are still free to choose the signs $`\mu _{1,9}`$, $`\mu _{3,9}`$ and $`ϵ`$. All the other signs are then fixed by the above conditions:

$`\mathrm{\Omega }^2|_{95_j}=c_9=c_{5_j}=1,j=1,2,3`$
$`\mu _{i,9}=\mu _{i,5_i}=\mu _{i,5_j}=\alpha _i=ϵ_i,i=1,3,ji`$
$`\alpha _2=ϵ_2=ϵ_1ϵ_3ϵ^{MN/4}.`$ (3.25)
The tadpole cancellation conditions are:

a) untwisted sector

$$Tr\gamma _{(0,0),9}=32,\alpha _iTr\gamma _{(0,0),5_i}=32c_{5_i}ϵ_i,i=1,2,3.$$
(3.26)
b) twisted sectors without fixed tori, i.e. $`\overline{k}\overline{v}_i0\mathrm{mod}\text{/}\text{\_Z}`$:

* odd $`\overline{k}`$:

$$Tr\gamma _{\overline{k},9}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}4\alpha _is_js_kTr\gamma _{\overline{k},5_i}=0,$$
(3.27)
where $`(ijk)`$ is a permutation of $`(123)`$.
* even $`\overline{k}=2\overline{k}^{}`$:

$$Tr\gamma _{2\overline{k}^{},9}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}4\alpha _i\stackrel{~}{s}_j\stackrel{~}{s}_kTr\gamma _{2\overline{k}^{},5_i}=32ϵ^{k_1^{}k_2^{}}(c_1c_2c_3\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}ϵ_i\beta _ic_is_js_k),$$
(3.28)
where $`s_i`$, $`c_i`$, $`\stackrel{~}{s}_i`$ and $`\beta _i`$ are evaluated with the argument $`\overline{k}^{}=(k_1^{},k_2^{})`$.

c) twisted sectors with fixed tori, i.e. $`\overline{k}\overline{v}_i=0\mathrm{mod}\text{/}\text{\_Z}`$:

* odd $`\overline{k}`$:

$`Tr\gamma _{\overline{k},9}+4\alpha _is_js_kTr\gamma _{\overline{k},5_i}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$
$`\alpha _jTr\gamma _{\overline{k},5_j}`$ $`=`$ $`\pm \alpha _kTr\gamma _{\overline{k},5_k}`$ (3.29)
The sign in the second line depends on whether $`\overline{k}\overline{v}_i`$ is even (upper sign) or odd (lower sign).
* even $`\overline{k}=2\overline{k}^{}`$, with $`\overline{k}^{}\overline{v}_i=0`$:

$`Tr\gamma _{2\overline{k}^{},9}+4\alpha _i\stackrel{~}{s}_j\stackrel{~}{s}_kTr\gamma _{2\overline{k}^{},5_i}`$ $`=`$ $`32ϵ^{k_1^{}k_2^{}}(c_jc_kϵ_i\beta _is_js_k)`$ (3.30)
$`\alpha _jTr\gamma _{2\overline{k}^{},5_j}\alpha _kTr\gamma _{2\overline{k}^{},5_k}`$ $`=`$ $`8ϵ^{k_1^{}k_2^{}}(ϵ_j\beta _jϵ_k\beta _k)`$
* even $`\overline{k}=2\overline{k}^{}`$, with $`\overline{k}^{}\overline{v}_i=\pm \frac{1}{2}`$:

$`Tr\gamma _{2\overline{k}^{},9}+4\alpha _i\stackrel{~}{s}_j\stackrel{~}{s}_kTr\gamma _{2\overline{k}^{},5_i}`$ $`=`$ $`32ϵ^{k_1^{}k_2^{}}(ϵ_j\beta _jc_j^2+ϵ_k\beta _kc_k^2)`$ (3.31)
$`\alpha _jTr\gamma _{2\overline{k}^{},5_j}+\alpha _kTr\gamma _{2\overline{k}^{},5_k}`$ $`=`$ $`\pm 8ϵ^{k_1^{}k_2^{}}(1ϵ_i\beta _i)`$

From (3.3), we see that the orientifolds corresponding to the discrete groups $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ fall into two classes: (i) neither $`N`$ nor $`M`$ is a multiple of four, (ii) $`N`$ and/or $`M`$ is a multiple of four. If we want to introduce only standard $`D5_i`$-branes with positive RR charge (i.e. $`\alpha _i=1`$, $`i=1,2,3`$), then the unique solution to the type (i) orientifolds is characterised by $`\mu _{1,9}=\mu _{3,9}=1`$ and $`ϵ=1`$. These are the $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetric models discussed in . They have discrete torsion in the sense of  which is evident from the fact that the rank of their gauge groups is reduced by a factor two. There are no models of type (ii) with only positively charged $`D5_i`$-branes . However, many more consistent $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orientifolds are possible if one allows for antibranes. In these orientifolds, supersymmetry is broken by the open strings ending on antibranes.

The $`D5_i`$-branes may be distributed over different points in the $`j^{\mathrm{th}}`$ and $`k^{\mathrm{th}}`$ internal torus. Of course the tadpole equations depend on the location of the 5-branes and not all configurations are consistent. The Klein bottle contribution to the tadpoles of the $`\overline{k}`$-twisted sector consists of an untwisted part $`𝒦_0(\overline{k})`$ and three twisted parts $`𝒦_i(\overline{k})`$ corresponding to the three order-two twists $`\overline{k}_1=(0,M/2)`$, $`\overline{k}_2=(N/2,M/2)`$, $`\overline{k}_3=(N/2,0)`$. The $`𝒦_0`$ contribution gives the term proportional to $`c_1c_2c_3`$ in (3.28), the $`𝒦_i`$ contributions give the terms proportional to $`ϵ_i\beta _ic_is_js_k`$. (Note that these terms are combined with the cylinder contribution to the $`2\overline{k}`$-twisted sector.) At each point of the internal space, the contribution $`𝒦_0(\overline{k})`$ is only present if this point is fixed under $`\overline{k}`$ and the contribution $`𝒦_i(\overline{k})`$ is only present if this point is fixed under $`\overline{k}+\overline{k}_i`$. Thus, the above tadpole cancellation conditions are strictly valid only at the points that are fixed under the whole $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$. At points which are only fixed under some subgroup of $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$, these conditions have to be modified accordingly.

One has to analyse the tadpoles at all the fixed points in each twisted sector. If the twisted sector under consideration has fixed tori extended in the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ direction, one has to analyse the tadpoles at each fixed point in the remaining two directions (i.e. the points where the fixed tori are located). At each fixed point all the $`D9`$-branes contribute but only those $`D5_i`$-branes that have this point inside their world-volume. The Klein bottle contribution to this fixed point is determined as explained in the preceding paragraph. We will see how this works in the examples below. In the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ and $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ models it is not possible to put all the $`D5_i`$-branes at the origin.

## 4 Description of the models

All the models contain 32 $`D9`$-branes and three sets of 32 $`D5_i`$-branes wrapping the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ internal torus, $`i=1,2,3`$. In general there are eight different models for each orbifold group $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$, with $`N`$ and $`M`$ even. They can be characterised by the three signs $`\mu _{1,9}`$, $`\mu _{3,9}`$ (vector structures) and $`ϵ`$ (discrete torsion). If neither $`N`$ nor $`M`$ is a multiple of four (type (i) models), one can alternatively choose the signs $`\alpha _1`$, $`\alpha _2`$, $`\alpha _3`$ (RR charges of $`D5_i`$-branes), whereas only two of the three $`\alpha _i`$’s are independent if $`N`$ and/or $`M`$ is a multiple of four (type (ii) models), eq. (3.3). If $`N=M`$, only four of the eight possible models are inequivalent, corresponding to the number of negative $`\alpha _i`$’s. As explained in the paragraph below eq. (3.31), the orientifolds involving only standard $`D9`$-branes and $`D5_i`$-branes, i.e. $`(\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\alpha _3)=(+1,+1,+1)`$, are quite restricted. Only the type (i) models are possible. All of them are supersymmetric and have discrete torsion. They have been constructed by the authors of . More possibilities arise if one introduces antibranes . The $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$ orientifolds with supersymmetry broken on antibranes have been discussed in . In this section, we construct the remaining $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orientifolds for all possible values of $`(\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\alpha _3)`$. Interestingly enough, some of the models are inconsistent (in the absence of Wilson lines) because it is impossible to cancel the twisted tadpoles at all fixed points. The inconsistent models are $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ with $`(\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\alpha _3)=(+1,1,+1)`$ and $`(+1,+1,1)`$ and $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ for all $`(\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\alpha _3)(1,1,1)`$. This inconsistency does not depend on the discrete torsion. As we will see it is related to the vector structure in each $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ generator. Most probably, there exists a solution to the tadpole conditions for the above models if appropriate Wilson lines are added. But we did not consider models with Wilson lines in this article.

If $`D5^{}`$-branes with negative NSNS and RR charge exist, then replacing the anti-$`D5`$-branes by $`D5^{}`$-branes in the non-supersymmetric models discussed below leads to a supersymmetric version for each of these models. The fermionic spectrum of the supersymmetric orientifolds coincides with the fermionic spectrum of the orientifolds containing antibranes. The complete spectrum is obtained by replacing in the antibrane sectors $`USp`$ gauge group factors by $`SO`$ and changing the bosons such that they form $`𝒩=1`$ multiplets with the corresponding fermions.

### 4.1 $`𝐙_2\times 𝐙_2`$, $`v=\frac{1}{2}(1,1,0)`$, $`w=\frac{1}{2}(0,1,1)`$

These orientifolds have been constructed in . The eight possible models can be characterised by the RR charges $`(\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\alpha _3)`$ of the $`D5_i`$-branes. Of course, two models $`(\alpha _i,\alpha _j,\alpha _k)`$ and $`(\alpha _i^{},\alpha _j^{},\alpha _k^{})`$ are equivalent if $`(i^{}j^{}k^{})`$ is a permutation $`(ijk)`$. There are only four inequivalent $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$ orientifolds , corresponding to $`n=0,1,2,3`$ negative $`\alpha _i`$’s. From (3.3), we find that $`\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3=ϵ`$. Thus, the models with even (odd) $`n`$ have (no) discrete torsion.

Using the method described in the previous section, it is very easy to construct the two $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$ orientifolds with discrete torsion. From (3.13), we find that there is a unique projective irreducible representation, which is pseudo-real if $`(\mu _3,\mu _1)=(1,1)`$ and real else. From (3.3) and (3.6), (3.7), one then finds that the $`(+1,+1,+1)`$ model has gauge group $`USp(n_0)`$ on the $`D9`$-branes and gauge group $`USp(n_i)`$ on the $`D5_i`$-branes, whereas the $`(+1,1,1)`$ model has gauge group $`SO(n_0)`$ on the $`D9`$-branes, gauge group $`SO(n_1)`$ on the $`D5_1`$-branes and gauge group $`USp(n_j)`$ on the $`D5_j`$-branes, $`j=2,3`$. The tadpole conditions (3.3) for the three twisted sectors $`(0,1)`$, $`(1,1)`$, $`(1,0)`$ are trivially satisfied because the $`\gamma `$ matrices are of the form (3.13), i.e. they are traceless. The untwisted tadpole conditions (3.26) imply that the rank of all gauge groups is 8, i.e. $`n_0=n_1=n_2=n_3=16`$. We consider the situation where all the $`D5_i`$-branes are located at the origin in the internal space.

The quiver diagrams for these two models are trivial. As there is a unique projective irrep, they consist only of one node. For each of the sectors 99, $`5_i5_i`$, $`i=1,2,3`$, one finds 3 matter fields111111In the supersymmetric sectors, these are $`𝒩=1`$ chiral multiplets. In the non-supersymmetric sectors, these are pairs of fermions and bosons which may transform in different representations. transforming as second rank tensors under the gauge group. To decide whether these are symmetric or antisymmetric tensors, one needs to evaluate the index defined in eq. (A.9) of . For each of the six mixed sectors $`95_i`$, $`5_i5_j`$, one finds one matter field in the bifundamental representation.

The complete spectrum of these two models is displayed in tables 3, 4.

The two $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$ orientifolds without discrete torsion — $`(1,1,1)`$ and $`(+1,+1,1)`$ — are slightly more complicated. In this case, there are four projective irreps, eq. (3.8). If $`(\mu _3,\mu _1)=(+1,+1)`$, then all of them are real, else they are all complex. From (3.3) and (3.6), (3.7), one then finds that the $`(1,1,1)`$ model has a gauge group of the form $`SO\times SO\times SO\times SO`$ on the $`D9`$-branes and a gauge group of the form $`U\times U`$ on the $`D5_i`$-branes, whereas the $`(+1,+1,1)`$ model has a gauge group of the form $`U\times U`$ on the $`D9`$-branes and on the $`D5_j`$-branes, $`j=1,2`$, and a gauge group of the form $`USp\times USp\times USp\times USp`$ on the $`D5_3`$-branes. The untwisted tadpole conditions (3.26) fix the rank of the gauge group to be 16 for each of the four sets of $`D`$-branes. Now, the twisted tadpole conditions (3.3) impose additional constraints because, generically, the $`\gamma `$ matrices are not traceless. For the three order-two sectors $`\overline{k}_1=(0,1)`$, $`\overline{k}_2=(1,1)`$, $`\overline{k}_3=(1,0)`$, these conditions are

$$Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k}_i,9})=Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k}_i,5_j})=0,i,j=1,2,3.$$
(4.1)
Here, we used the fact that eq. (3.3) must be imposed at each of the 16 $`\overline{k}_i`$ fixed points (more precisely, fixed tori extended in the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ complex plane). As all $`D5_i`$-branes are located at the origin, their contribution to (3.3) vanishes at some fixed points. In the $`\overline{k}_i`$ sector, the $`D5_i`$-branes only contribute to the fixed point at the origin in the $`j^{\mathrm{th}}`$ and $`k^{\mathrm{th}}`$ complex plane, where $`(ijk)`$ is a permutation of $`(123)`$. The $`D5_j`$-branes contribute to the four fixed points at the origin in the $`k^{\mathrm{th}}`$ complex plane. Therefore, the tadpole conditions take the form given in (4.1). The complete spectrum of these two models is displayed in tables 5, 6.

### 4.2 $`𝐙_2\times 𝐙_4`$, $`v=\frac{1}{2}(1,1,0)`$, $`w=\frac{1}{4}(0,1,1)`$

This orientifold is not symmetric under a permutation of the three sets of $`D5_i`$-branes. The three order-two twists $`\overline{k}_i`$ that fix the world-volume of the $`D5_i`$-branes are $`\overline{k}_1=(0,2)`$, $`\overline{k}_2=(1,2)`$, $`\overline{k}_3=(1,0)`$. Only $`\overline{k}_1`$ is of even order. As a consequence, the tadpole conditions for the $`D5_1`$-branes differ from those for the $`D5_2`$\- and $`D5_3`$-branes. In contrast to the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$ orientifold, we expect that six of the eight possible $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ models are inequivalent. However, only for the models with vector structure in the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ factor, i.e. $`\mu _1=+1`$, does a consistent solution to the tadpole equations exist, at least in the absence of Wilson lines.

From (3.3), we find that $`\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3=1`$. Thus, only an odd number of negative $`\alpha _i`$’s is allowed. We found a solution for $`(1,1,1)`$ and $`(1,+1,+1)`$ both with and without discrete torsion.

Let us first analyse the cases with discrete torsion. Most of the twisted tadpole conditions are trivially satisfied because the matrices $`\gamma _{(1,0),p}`$ and $`\gamma _{(0,1),p}`$ are traceless, eq. (3.13). The only non-trivial tadpole conditions are (3.26) and (3.30), corresponding to the untwisted sector and the $`(0,2)`$ sector. The former fixes the rank of the gauge group to be 8 for each of the four sectors 99, $`5_i5_i`$. If $`\alpha _1=1`$, then the latter reads

$$Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),9})=0,Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_1,n})=8,Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_2})=Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_3})=0,$$
(4.2)
where $`n=0,1,2,3`$ denotes the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ fixed points in the second and third complex plane. We assumed that there are no $`D5_1`$-branes at the 12 remaining $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$ fixed points and we located all $`D5_2`$\- and $`D5_3`$-branes at the origin. By a similar reasoning to the one used at the end of section 4.1, the tadpole equations (3.30) simplify to the form given in (4.2). One can verify that the $`D5_2`$\- and $`D5_3`$-branes have $`\mu _1=1`$ if $`\alpha _1=1`$, which implies, using (3.13), that the matrices $`\gamma _{(0,2),5_{2/3}}`$ are traceless. Therefore the last two conditions in (4.2) are trivially satisfied. The second condition in (4.2) forces us to put some $`D5_1`$-branes at each of the four $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ fixed points. In the following, we will consider the most symmetric situation where eight $`D5_1`$-branes sit at each of the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ fixed points. It is straightforward to obtain the spectrum of this orientifold using the methods described in section 3.

The two cases without discrete torsion are slightly more complicated. But it is easy to see that again some $`D5_1`$-branes are needed at the four $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ fixed points. The simplest consistent brane configuration is the one described in the previous paragraph. The tadpole conditions of the $`(0,2)`$ sector are again given by (4.2) and the last two of these conditions are again trivially satisfied. The untwisted tadpole conditions now imply that the rank of the gauge group is 16 for each of the four sectors 99, $`5_i5_i`$. The complete spectrum was computed with the help of a computer algebra program. The results are displayed in tables 712.

Surprisingly, we found no consistent solution for the $`(+1,+1,1)`$ model with or without discrete torsion and without Wilson lines.121212The $`(+1,+1,1)`$ and $`(+1,1,+1)`$ models are equivalent up to a permutation of $`D5_2`$\- and $`D5_3`$-branes. This is due to the impossibility of cancelling the tadpoles in the $`(0,2)`$ sector. To write down the tadpole conditions, let us label the four $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$ fixed points in the second and in the third complex plane by $`n_2`$ and $`n_3`$. From (3.30) we find

$`Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),9})=Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_1})=0,`$ (4.3)
$`Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_2,n_3})+Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_3,n_2})=16ϵ\text{if }(n_2,n_3)\text{ is fixed under }\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4,`$
$`Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_2,n_3})+Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_3,n_2})=0\text{if }(n_2,n_3)\text{ is not fixed under }\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4.`$
The two equations in the first line of (4.3) are trivially satisfied, because both $`D9`$\- and $`D5_1`$-branes have no vector structure in the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ factor. However, the last two equations are incompatible, i.e. there is no possible brane configuration that satisfies both of them. To see this, denote the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ fixed points by $`n_{2/3}=0,2`$ and the remaining two $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$ fixed points by $`n_{2/3}=1,3`$. Summing the two equations for the fixed points $`(0,1)`$ and $`(1,0)`$ and subtracting the equation for the fixed point $`(1,1)`$, one finds $`Tr(\gamma _{5_2,0})+Tr(\gamma _{5_3,0})=0`$ which contradicts the second line in (4.3). To derive this result, it was crucial that $`Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_2})`$ does only depend on $`n_3`$ but not on $`n_2`$. This is no longer true if Wilson lines in the second complex plane are added. Probably, there is a solution to the tadpole conditions if appropriate Wilson lines in the second and third complex plane are added.

As we will see, a similar problem arises in the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ orientifold. Indeed, it is easy to see that a $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orientifold with $`N=4`$ and/or $`M=4`$ is only consistent if its $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ has vector structure.

### 4.3 $`𝐙_4\times 𝐙_4`$, $`v=\frac{1}{4}(1,1,0)`$, $`w=\frac{1}{4}(0,1,1)`$

This orientifold is symmetric under a permutation of the three sets of $`D5_i`$-branes. Thus, only four of the eight possible $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ models are inequivalent. However, only for the models with vector structure in each of the two $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ factors, i.e. $`\mu _3=\mu _1=+1`$, does a consistent solution to the tadpole equations exist, at least in the absence of Wilson lines. From (3.3), we find that $`\alpha _1\alpha _2\alpha _3=1`$. Thus, only an odd number of negative $`\alpha _i`$’s is allowed. We found a solution for $`(1,1,1)`$ with and without discrete torsion.

The only tadpole conditions with non-vanishing Klein bottle contribution are (3.26) and (3.30), corresponding to the untwisted sector and the the three order-two sectors $`\overline{k}_1=(0,2)`$, $`\overline{k}_2=(2,2)`$, $`\overline{k}_3=(2,0)`$. The untwisted tadpoles fix the rank of the gauge group to be 8 (16) for each of the four sectors 99, $`5_i5_i`$ in the case with (without) discrete torsion. For the $`(1,1,1)`$ model, the tadpole conditions of the $`\overline{k}_i`$ sector read

$$Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k}_i,9})=0,Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k}_i,5_i,n_i})=ϵ^{k_{i,1}k_{i,2}/4}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8},Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k}_i,5_j,n_i})=Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k}_i,5_k,n_i})=0,$$
(4.4)
where $`k_{i,1}`$, $`k_{i,2}`$ are the components of the two-vector $`\overline{k}_i`$ and $`n_i=0,1,2,3`$ denotes the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ fixed points in the $`j^{\mathrm{th}}`$ and $`k^{\mathrm{th}}`$ complex plane.131313Here, $`(ijk)`$ is a permutation of $`(123)`$. We assumed that there are no $`D5_i`$-branes at the 12 remaining $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$ fixed points. The sign $`ϵ^{k_{i,1}k_{i,2}/4}`$ is $`1`$ for the $`(2,2)`$ sector in the model with discrete torsion and $`+1`$ else. The conditions (4.4) were obtained from (3.30) by analysing the contributions of the $`D5_i`$-branes to the 16 fixed points and using the arguments given at the end of section 4.1. Generalising the argument showing that in the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ orientifold $`\gamma _{(0,2),5_2}`$ is traceless, one can verify that in the present case the matrices $`\gamma _{\overline{k}_i,5_j}`$ are traceless for $`ij`$. Therefore the last two conditions in (4.4) are trivially satisfied. The second condition in (4.4) forces us to put some $`D5_i`$-branes at each of the four $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ fixed points in the $`j^{\mathrm{th}}`$ and $`k^{\mathrm{th}}`$ complex plane. In the following, we will consider the most symmetric situation where eight $`D5_i`$-branes sit at each $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ fixed point. This leads to a unique solution of the tadpole equations. The complete spectrum is displayed in tables 1315.

It is straightforward to generalise the argument for the impossibility of cancelling the RR twisted tadpoles in the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ $`(+1,+1,1)`$ model. In the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ $`(+1,+1,1)`$ model141414The three models $`(+1,+1,1)`$, $`(+1,1,+1)`$ and $`(1,+1,+1)`$ are equivalent up to a permutation of the $`D5_i`$-branes., the incompatibility between the tadpole equations appears in in the sectors $`(0,2)`$ and $`(2,2)`$, independently of the value of discrete torsion. The problem appears in order-two sectors that fix a set of branes without vector structure. Only the $`(1,1,1)`$ model with and without discrete torsion is found to be consistent.

### 4.4 $`𝐙_2\times 𝐙_6`$, $`v=\frac{1}{2}(1,1,0)`$, $`w=\frac{1}{6}(0,1,1)`$

This orientifold is not symmetric under an arbitrary permutation of the three sets of $`D5_i`$-branes. The only even twist, $`\overline{k}=(0,2)`$, fixes the world-volume of the $`D5_1`$-branes. As in the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ case, only the $`D5_2`$\- and $`D5_3`$-branes appear on the same footing. Therefore, we expect that six of the eight possible $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6`$ models are inequivalent. The $`(+1,+1,+1)`$ model has already been constructed in .

Let us first concentrate on the cases with discrete torsion. The only non-trivial tadpole conditions are (3.26) and (3.30), corresponding to the untwisted sector and the $`(0,2)`$ sector. The former fixes the rank of the gauge group to be 8 for each of the four sectors 99, $`5_i5_i`$. The latter read

$$Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),9})=Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_1})=\alpha _1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8},Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_2})=Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_3})=\alpha _1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}.$$
(4.5)
We assumed that all $`D5_i`$-branes are located at the origin. To see that the tadpole conditions (3.30) indeed simplify to the form (4.5), we need to consider the Klein bottle contributions to the various fixed points of the $`(0,2)`$ sector, using the method described at the end of section 3.3. Label the three $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_3`$ fixed points in the second plane by $`n_2=0,1,2`$ and the three $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_3`$ fixed points in the third plane $`n_3=0,1,2`$, where $`0`$ denotes the origin. The Klein bottle contribution $`𝒦_0`$ (the term proportional to $`c_2c_3`$ in (3.30)) is only present at the origin $`(0,0)`$, $`𝒦_1`$ (the term proportional to $`ϵ_1\beta _1s_2s_3`$) is present at all nine $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_3`$ fixed points $`(n_2,n_3)`$, $`𝒦_2`$ (the term proportional to $`ϵ_2\beta _2`$) is present at the three fixed points $`(0,n_3)`$ and $`𝒦_3`$ (the term proportional to $`ϵ_3\beta _3`$) is present at the three fixed points $`(n_2,0)`$. Using this and $`\alpha _1=\alpha _2\alpha _3`$, it is easy to see that (3.30) reduces to (4.5). These equations have a unique solution. The results are displayed in tables 1618.

In the cases without discrete torsion, the tadpole conditions for the $`(0,2)`$ sector are identical to eq. (4.5) if all $`D5_i`$-branes sit at the origin. Now, the remaining twisted sectors give additional conditions because, in general, the $`\gamma `$ matrices are not traceless. The tadpole equations have 25 distinct solutions for each of the three possible models. We display the complete spectrum of the $`(1,1,1)`$ model in tables 19 and 20 and restrict ourselves to give the 99 and $`5_i5_i`$ spectrum of the two remaining models in tables 21 and 22. We determined also the $`95_i`$ and $`5_i5_j`$ spectrum of the last two models and verified that the complete spectrum is free of non-Abelian gauge anomalies.

### 4.5 $`𝐙_2\times 𝐙_6^{}`$, $`v=\frac{1}{2}(1,1,0)`$, $`w=\frac{1}{6}(2,1,1)`$

This orientifold is similar to the previous one. However, there are only four inequivalent models. This is because the only even twist, $`\overline{k}=(0,2)`$ has no fixed planes. Therefore, all three sets of $`D5_i`$-branes appear on the same footing. The $`(+1,+1,+1)`$ model has already been constructed in . It is of some phenomenological interest because it contains a gauge group $`SU(6)`$ with three generations of matter fields in the antisymmetric tensor representation.

The only non-trivial tadpole conditions for the models with discrete torsion are (3.26) and (3.28), corresponding to the untwisted sector and the $`(0,2)`$ sector. The former fixes the rank of the gauge group to be 8 for each of the four sectors 99, $`5_i5_i`$. The latter reads

$$Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),9})=Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_1})=\alpha _1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4},Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_2})=Tr(\gamma _{(0,2),5_3})=\alpha _1\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}.$$
(4.6)
We assumed that all $`D5_i`$-branes are located at the origin. The 27 fixed points of the $`(0,2)`$ sector can be labelled by the triples $`(n_1,n_2,n_3)`$, where $`n_i=0,1,2`$ denotes the fixed points in the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ complex plane and $`0`$ is the origin. One finds that the Klein bottle contribution $`𝒦_0`$ is present at the three fixed points $`(n_1,0,0)`$, the contribution $`𝒦_1`$ is present at all 27 fixed points, the contribution $`𝒦_2`$ is present at $`(0,0,n_3)`$ and the contribution $`𝒦_3`$ is present at $`(0,n_2,0)`$. This leads to the tadpole equations 4.6. They have a unique solution. The results are displayed in tables 23 and 24.

In the cases without discrete torsion, the tadpole conditions for the $`(0,2)`$ sector are identical to eq. (4.6) if all $`D5_i`$-branes sit at the origin. Now, the remaining twisted sectors give additional conditions because, in general, the $`\gamma `$ matrices are not traceless. The tadpole equations have many solutions, 1590 for the $`(1,1,1)`$ model and 1295 for the $`(+1,+1,1)`$ model. In general, the three sets of $`D5_i`$-branes have different gauge groups. However, if we impose an additional symmetry between the $`D5_i`$-branes, e.g. $`Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k},5_1})=Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k},5_2})=Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k},5_3})`$ for odd $`\overline{k}`$ without fixed planes, then there is a unique solution. We display the 99 and $`5_i5_i`$ spectrum of these models in tables 25 and 26. We determined also the $`95_i`$ and $`5_i5_j`$ spectrum of these models and verified that the complete spectrum is free of non-Abelian gauge anomalies.

### 4.6 $`𝐙_6\times 𝐙_6`$, $`v=\frac{1}{6}(1,1,0)`$, $`w=\frac{1}{6}(0,1,1)`$

This orientifold is symmetric under a permutation of the three sets of $`D5_i`$-branes. Thus, only four of the eight possible $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_6\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6`$ models are inequivalent. The $`(+1,+1,+1)`$ model has already been constructed in .

The only non-trivial tadpole conditions for the models with discrete torsion are (3.26), (3.30) and (3.28), corresponding to the untwisted sector, the the three sectors twisted by $`\overline{k}_1=(0,2)`$, $`\overline{k}_2=(2,2)`$, $`\overline{k}_3=(2,0)`$ and the $`(2,4)`$ sector respectively.151515In contrast to the notation used in the rest of this paper, the three twists $`\overline{k}_i`$ defined in this paragraph are not of order two. The untwisted tadpoles fix the rank of the gauge group to be 8 for each of the four sectors 99, $`5_i5_i`$. The tadpole conditions of the $`\overline{k}_i`$ and $`(2,4)`$ sectors read

$`Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k}_i,9})=Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k}_i,5_i})=Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k}_i,5_j})=Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k}_i,5_k})=\alpha _iϵ^{k_{i,1}k_{i,2}/4}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8},`$
$`Tr(\gamma _{(2,4),9})=Tr(\gamma _{(2,4),5_1})=Tr(\gamma _{(2,4),5_2})=Tr(\gamma _{(2,4),5_3})=\alpha _3\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4},`$ (4.7)
where $`k_{i,1}`$, $`k_{i,2}`$ are the components of the two-vector $`\overline{k}_i`$ and $`(ijk)`$ is a permutation of $`(123)`$. We assumed that all $`D5_i`$-branes are at the origin. The sign $`ϵ^{k_{i,1}k_{i,2}/4}`$ is $`1`$ for the $`(2,2)`$ sector in the models with discrete torsion and $`+1`$ else. In the case without discrete torsion, these equations are still valid. But in addition, one has to take into account the tadpole conditions for all the remaining twisted sectors. The tadpole equations can be solved with a computer algebra program. The complete spectrum of the two models with discrete torsion is displayed in tables 27 and 28. For the two models without discrete torsion, we restrict ourselves to give the 99 and $`5_i5_i`$ spectrum in tables 2932. We determined also the $`95_i`$ and $`5_i5_j`$ spectrum of these models and verified that the complete spectrum is free of non-Abelian gauge anomalies. In the case without discrete torsion, the tadpole equations have many solutions. However, if we impose an additional symmetry between the $`D5_i`$-branes, e.g. $`Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k},5_1})=Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k},5_2})=Tr(\gamma _{\overline{k},5_3})`$ for odd $`\overline{k}`$ without fixed planes, then there is a unique solution. The ranks of the gauge group factors for this solution are as follows:

$`[n_1,n_2,\mathrm{},n_{20}]`$ $`=`$ $`[2,1,1,2,1,0,1,1,0,1,1,1,0,1,1,0,2,1,1,2]`$
$`[m_1,m_2,\mathrm{},m_{18}]`$ $`=`$ $`[1,1,0,1,1,0,2,1,1,2,1,1,1,0,1,1,0,1]`$ (4.8)
## 5 Conclusions

We have constructed a large number of compact $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$ orientifold models, with $`N`$, $`M`$ even. These models are labelled by three signs: the vector structure associated to the two generators of the orbifold group and the discrete torsion, i.e. eight models for each $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_N\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_M`$.

Some of these models can be supersymmetric, i.e. only $`D`$-branes need to be added in order to cancel the tadpoles. All supersymmetric models have discrete torsion and no vector structure in both generators of the orbifold group. These models are the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_2`$, $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6`$, $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6^{}`$, $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_6\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_6`$.

We have extended the list of consistent orientifolds adding some models that need antibranes to cancel the RR tadpoles, along the lines of . For most of these models there is at least one solution. However in one of the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ models and in one of the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_4\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ models without Wilson lines, there is an incompatibility between the twisted tadpoles related to different fixed points.

Acknowledgements

It is a pleasure to thank Luis Ibáñez, Augusto Sagnotti and Angel Uranga for many helpful discussions. The work of M.K. is supported by a TMR network of the European Union, ref. FMRX-CT96-0090. The work of R.R. is supported by the MEC through an FPU Grant.

Appendix

## Appendix A How to obtain the Hodge numbers of orbifolds with and without discrete torsion

In this section, we explain how to compute the Hodge numbers of compact orbifold spaces $`T^6/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where the six-torus $`T^6`$ is of the form $`\mathrm{C}\text{ }^3/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is an Abelian finite group. The Hodge number $`h^{p,q}`$ is defined as the number of independent harmonic $`(p,q)`$-forms that can be defined on this space.

An element $`g\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts on the three complex coordinates of $`\mathrm{C}\text{ }^3/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ as

$$g:(z_1,z_2,z_3)(e^{2\pi iv_g^{(1)}}z_1,e^{2\pi iv_g^{(2)}}z_2,e^{2\pi iv_g^{(3)}}z_3),\mathrm{with}0v_g^{(i)}<1.$$
(A.1)
We will be interested in the separate contributions of each twisted sector to $`h^{p,q}`$:

$$h^{p,q}=h_{\mathrm{untw}}^{p,q}+\underset{g\mathrm{\Gamma }\{e\}}{}h_g^{p,q}.$$
(A.2)
The contribution of the untwisted sector is just the number of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant harmonic $`(p,q)`$-forms that can be defined on $`T^6`$. The forms on $`T^6`$ are generated by

$$\begin{array}{cccccccc}& & & & 1& & & \\ & & & dz_i& & d\overline{z}_i& & \\ & & dz_idz_j& & dz_id\overline{z}_j& & d\overline{z}_id\overline{z}_j& \\ & dz_idz_jdz_k& & dz_idz_jd\overline{z}_k& & dz_id\overline{z}_jd\overline{z}_k& & d\overline{z}_id\overline{z}_jd\overline{z}_k\\ & & & & \mathrm{}& & & \end{array}$$

The contributions of the twisted sectors are due to the singularities of the orbifold which arise because $`T^6`$ has fixed points or fixed planes under the action of the elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. We split the twisted sectors into two sets:

a) Sectors twisted by $`g`$, where $`g`$ is a group element that only has fixed points, but no fixed planes. This sector only contributes to $`h^{1,1}`$ or $`h^{2,2}`$. If $`_{i=1}^3v_g^{(i)}=1`$, then

$$h_g^{1,1}=\frac{1}{|\mathrm{\Gamma }|}\underset{h\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}\beta _{g,h}\chi (g,h),h_g^{2,2}=0,$$
(A.3)
where $`|\mathrm{\Gamma }|`$ is the number of elements of the discrete group, $`\beta _{g,h}`$ is the discrete torsion phase and $`\chi (g,h)`$ is the Euler characteristic of the subspace (i.e. the set of fixed points) left simultaneously fixed by $`g`$ and $`h`$. In our case, $`\chi (g,h)`$ is the number of points that are simultaneously fixed by $`g`$ and $`h`$. If $`_{i=1}^3v_g^{(i)}=2`$, then this sector contributes the same value, but to $`h_g^{2,2}`$, and $`h_g^{1,1}=0`$.

The sector twisted by $`g^1`$ gives the same contribution to $`h^{2,2}`$ as the $`g`$-twisted sector to $`h^{1,1}`$ and vice versa:

$$h_{g^1}^{2,2}=h_g^{1,1},h_{g^1}^{1,1}=h_g^{2,2}.$$
(A.4)
b) Sectors twisted by $`g`$, where $`g`$ is a group element that has fixed planes. This sector gives a contribution to $`h^{1,1}`$, $`h^{1,2}`$, $`h^{2,1}`$ and $`h^{2,2}`$ of the following form :

$`h_g^{2,2}=h_g^{1,1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{|\mathrm{\Gamma }|}}{\displaystyle \underset{h\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}}\beta _{g,h}\stackrel{~}{\chi }(g,h),`$
$`h_g^{1,2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{|\mathrm{\Gamma }|}}{\displaystyle \underset{h\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}}\beta _{g,h}\stackrel{~}{\chi }(g,h)e^{2\pi iv_h(g)},`$ (A.5)
$`h_g^{2,1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{|\mathrm{\Gamma }|}}{\displaystyle \underset{h\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}}\beta _{g,h}\stackrel{~}{\chi }(g,h)e^{2\pi iv_h(g)}.`$
where $`v_h(g)=v_h^{(i)}`$ if the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ plane is fixed by $`g`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }(g,h)`$ is the Euler characteristic of the subspace that is simultaneously fixed under $`g`$ and $`h`$ and that is contained in the two internal complex planes which are not fixed under $`g`$ (see  for a proper definition). The phase that appears in the formulae for $`h_g^{1,2}`$ and $`h_g^{2,1}`$ corresponds to the phase acquired by the forms $`dz_i`$ and $`d\overline{z}_i`$ (defined on the plane that is fixed by $`g`$) under a twist by $`h`$. Note that in the case with discrete torsion the contributions to the Hodge numbers $`h^{1,2}`$ and $`h^{2,1}`$ can be different. But one always has: $`h_g^{1,2}+h_{g^1}^{1,2}=h_g^{2,1}+h_{g^1}^{2,1}`$.

To illustrate this method, let us analyse the $`\text{/}\text{\_Z}_2\times \text{/}\text{\_Z}_4`$ orbifold. From the untwisted sector, one has the universal contribution (i.e. present in any orbifold): $`h^{0,0}=h^{3,3}=h^{3,0}=h^{0,3}=1`$. The contribution of each sector to $`h^{1,1}`$, $`h^{2,2}`$, $`h^{1,2}`$ and $`h^{2,1}`$ in the cases with and without discrete torsion is shown in table 33.

## Appendix B Closed string spectrum from shifts

In this appendix we shall confirm the result on the closed string spectrum of type IIB and type I orbifolds that was obtained by analysing the cohomology as described in section 3.1. Let us consider the RR part of the spectrum.

We divide the twisted sectors into two sets:

a) Sectors without fixed tori:

Let $`v=(0,v_1,v_2,v_3)`$ be the shift vector corresponding to this sector, with $`0v_i<1`$ . The vacuum energy corresponding to this sector is

$$E_0=\frac{1}{2}\underset{i}{}v_i(1v_i).$$
(B.1)
The RR states are characterised by $`SO(8)`$ weight vectors of the form $`r=(\pm \frac{1}{2},\pm \frac{1}{2},\pm \frac{1}{2},\pm \frac{1}{2})`$, with an odd number of minus signs because of the GSO projection. The mass of a state characterised by the weight vector $`r_v`$ is given by

$$M^2=\frac{(r_v+v)^2}{2}\frac{1}{2}+E_0.$$
(B.2)
There is only one massless state (having imposed the GSO projection): $`r_v=(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})`$.

In type IIB string theory, there is only one RR state in this sector $`r_{v,L}r_{v,R}`$, with helicity $`\chi =r_{v,L}^0r_{v,R}^0=0`$. This is a scalar or its dual 2-form. From the sector with shift $`v`$, one obtains another solution: $`r_v=(\frac{1}{2},+\frac{1}{2},+\frac{1}{2},+\frac{1}{2})`$. This gives another scalar (or a 2-form). The degeneracy of these states can be obtained from the partition function, as explained in . For the total number of states, one finds:

$$n_{\mathrm{scal}}(v)=\frac{2}{|\mathrm{\Gamma }|}\underset{h\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}\beta _{v,h}\chi (v,h),$$
(B.3)
where it is understood that we only sum over half the shifts to get the total number of scalars (because we combined $`v`$ and $`v`$). This corresponds to the $`h_v^{1,1}`$ scalars and 2-forms (see the formula (A.3) for the Hodge numbers $`h_g^{1,1}`$) coming from the reduction of the RR 2-form and 4-form. Adding the scalars from the NSNS sector and the corresponding fermions, we obtain $`h_v^{1,1}`$ $`𝒩=2`$ tensor multiplets, as predicted by the cohomology computation.

In type I string theory, there is an $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ projection that exchanges left-movers and right-movers. It acts together with a $`J`$ operation that exchanges $`v`$ and $`v`$. As we are in the RR sector, we must take the antisymmetric combinations: $`r_{v,L}r_{v,R}r_{v,L}r_{v,R}`$. Only a scalar (or a 2-form) remains. The degeneracy is again $`h_v^{1,1}`$, i.e. half the value of (B.3), and coincides with the result from the cohomology computation. Together with the NSNS and fermionic states, one finds $`h_v^{1,1}`$ $`𝒩=1`$ linear multiplets.

b) Sectors with a fixed torus:

Let $`v=(0,0,v_2,v_3)`$ be the shift corresponding to this sector, with $`0v_i<1`$ . The first torus is fixed.

There are two massless states: $`r_+=(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})`$ and $`r_{}=(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})`$. (The GSO projection has been imposed.)

In type IIB string theory, there are four RR states in this sector:

* $`r_{+,L}r_{+,R}`$ with helicity: $`\chi =r_L^0r_R^0=0`$,
* $`r_{,L}r_{,R}`$ with helicity: $`\chi =r_L^0r_R^0=0`$,
* $`r_{+,L}r_{,R}`$ with helicity: $`\chi =r_L^0r_R^0=1`$,
* $`r_{,L}r_{+,R}`$ with helicity: $`\chi =r_L^0r_R^0=1`$.

This is a pair of scalars (or 2-forms) and a vector. The number of scalars is:

$$n_{\mathrm{scal}}(v)=\frac{2}{|\mathrm{\Gamma }|}\underset{h\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}\beta _{v,h}\stackrel{~}{\chi }(v,h).$$
(B.4)
This corresponds to the $`h_v^{1,1}`$ scalars and 2-forms (see the formula (A) for the Hodge numbers $`h_g^{1,1}`$) coming from the reduction of the RR 2-forms and 4-forms, as predicted by the cohomology computation. The number of vectors is:

$$n_{\mathrm{vec}}(v)=\frac{1}{|\mathrm{\Gamma }|}\underset{h\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}\beta _{v,h}\stackrel{~}{\chi }(v,h)e^{2\pi iv_h^{(1)}},$$
(B.5)
where $`v_h^{(1)}`$ is the first component of the shift vector corresponding to the twist $`h`$ (in general one has to take $`v_h^{(i)}`$ if the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ torus is fixed). These are $`h_v^{1,2}`$ vectors from the reduction of the RR 4-form.

In type I string theory, one must distinguish between the sectors of order different from two and of order two. The latter are mapped onto themselves under $`J`$. For sectors that are not of order two, the sectors $`v`$ and $`v`$ are combined under the $`J`$ operation, leading to four linear combinations of type IIB RR states:

* $`r_{+,L}^vr_{+,R}^vr_{,L}^vr_{,R}^v`$ with helicity: $`\chi =r_L^0r_R^0=0`$,
* $`r_{,L}^vr_{,R}^vr_{+,L}^vr_{+,R}^v`$ with helicity: $`\chi =r_L^0r_R^0=0`$,
* $`r_{+,L}^vr_{,R}^vr_{+,L}^vr_{,R}^v`$ with helicity: $`\chi =r_L^0r_R^0=1`$,
* $`r_{,L}^vr_{+,R}^vr_{,L}^vr_{+,R}^v`$ with helicity: $`\chi =r_L^0r_R^0=1`$.

Note that, because of the $`J`$ operation, the pairing of states we have performed above is only possible if $`h_v^{1,2}=h_v^{2,1}`$. From (B.5), one finds that this is equivalent to the statement that the discrete torsion $`\beta _{v,h}`$ only takes real values, i.e. $`\beta _{v,h}=\pm 1`$.

If the sector is of order two, then $`v`$ is identical to $`v`$. Of the four states that survive in the general case only one remains:

* $`r_{+,L}^vr_{+,R}^vr_{,L}^vr_{,R}^v`$ with helicity: $`\chi =r_L^0r_R^0=0`$.

This corresponds to the $`h_v^{1,1}`$ scalars from the reduction of the RR 2-form.

We see that the results from the shift formalism coincide with those obtained from the cohomology computation.