text:
# Determining the sign of Δ₃₁ at long baseline neutrino experiments

## Abstract

Recently it is advocated that high intensity and low energy $`(E_\nu 2\mathrm{GeV})`$ neutrino beams should be built to probe the $`(13)`$ mixing angle $`\varphi `$ to a level of a few parts in $`10^4`$. Experiments using such beams will have better signal to background ratio in searches for $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillations. We propose that such experiments can also determine the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ even if the beam consists of neutrinos only. By measuring the $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ transitions in two different energy ranges, the effects due to propagation of neutrinos through earth’s crust can be isolated and the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ can be determined. If the sensitivity of an experiment to $`\varphi `$ is $`\epsilon `$, then the same experiment is automatically sensitive to matter effects and the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ for values of $`\varphi 2\epsilon `$.

Neutrino oscillations provide an elegant explanation for the observed deficits in solar and atmospheric neutrino fluxes. Both these deficits can be accounted for in a three flavor oscillation scheme. In this scheme, the oscillation probabilities, in general, depend on six paramaters: two independent mass-squared differences $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{21}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$, three mixing angles $`\omega ,\varphi `$ and $`\psi `$ and a CP violating phase. Given the distance and energy scale of solar neutrinos, their oscillations depend only on one mass-squared difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{21}10^5`$ eV2 and two mixing angles $`\omega `$ and $`\varphi `$ . Atmospheric neutrino oscillations are insensitive to a mass-squared difference as small as $`10^5`$ eV2. Hence $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{21}`$ can be set to zero in the analysis of atmospheric neutrinos. In this approximation, the oscillation probabilities of atmospheric neutrinos depend on $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}|(17)\times 10^3`$ eV2  and two mixing angles $`\varphi `$ and $`\psi `$ . The results of CHOOZ experiment  give the strong constraint $`\mathrm{sin}^22\varphi 0.1`$. This implies that either $`\varphi 9^{}`$ or $`\varphi 81^{}`$. The second possibility is ruled out by the constraints from both solar neutrino  and atmospheric neutrino analyses . Thus $`\varphi `$ is small and the atmospheric neutrino oscillations are almost $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillations with a small $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ component. To explain the observed deficit of muon neutrinos, the mixing angle $`\psi `$ should be close to $`\pi /4`$ .

Combining the data from solar, atmospheric neutrino experiments and CHOOZ we have the following pattern of neutrino masses and mixings: Two mass eigenstates are very close together and the third mass eigenstate is a little apart. This third state contains approximately equal admixture of $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ and a small admixture of $`\nu _e`$. From a model building point of view, the crucial question is whether this third state is more massive than the two nearly degenerate states ($`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ positive) or less massive ($`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ negative).

Long baseline experiments are designed to observe $`\nu _\mu `$ oscillations under controlled conditions. The baselines and energies of these experiments are chosen such that significant deficit of $`\nu _\mu `$ flux will be observed if the neutrino parameters are in the range determined by Super-Kamiokande atmospheric neutrino analysis. Two different long baseline neutrino beams, one from Fermilab to Soudan  and another from CERN to Gran Sasso , are being constructed. In both cases the baseline length is 730 km and the beam consists of neutrinos only. The experiments downstream expect to observe neutrino oscillations via i) $`\nu _\mu `$ disappearance ii) $`\nu _\tau `$ appearance and iii) $`\nu _e`$ appearance. The high stastistics of these experiments allow them to determine the energy distribution of $`\nu _\mu `$ charged current (CC) events. By locating the minimum of $`\nu _\mu `$ CC event distribution, one can determine $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}|`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\psi `$ independently and to a precision of $`10\%`$ . But neither $`\nu _\mu `$ disappearance nor $`\nu _\tau `$ appearance data can give us information on the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$.

$`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation probability in long baseline experiments is modified by the propagation of neutrinos through the matter of earth’s crust. Matter effects  boost the oscillation probability for neutrinos if $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ is positive and suppress it if $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ is negative. The situation is reversed for anti-neutrinos. At neutrino factories, where $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\overline{\nu }_\mu `$ beams from muon storage rings will be available, one can measure $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ and $`\overline{\nu }_\mu \overline{\nu }_e`$ oscillation probabilities, isolate the difference induced by the matter effects and determine the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ . However, the neutrino beam energies at these factories will be very high ($`E_\nu 20`$ GeV) and hence one needs a very long baseline (of about $`7000`$ km) so that the oscillation probability will not be too small. It may be a long time before this ambitious program is realized. Recently it was proposed that high intensity, low energy neutrino beams can be built with conventional techniques . If these beams have peak flux around $`E_\nu 2`$ GeV, then a 20 Kiloton detector at a distance of about $`730`$ km will be capable of measuring values of $`\varphi `$ as small as a few parts in $`10^4`$. In this letter we show that such a detector can determine the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ even if the beam consists of neutrinos only.

In three flavor scheme, $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation probability is given by

$$P_{\mu e}=\mathrm{sin}^2\psi \mathrm{sin}^22\varphi \mathrm{sin}^2\left(\frac{1.27\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}L}{E}\right),$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ is in eV2, the baseline length $`L`$ is in km and the neutrino energy $`E`$ is in GeV. From CHOOZ constraint, we see that this probability is atmost a few percent. In the long baseline experiments, the neutrinos propagate through earth’s crust which has constant density of about $`3`$ gm/cc. The oscillation probability with the inclusion of matter effects is given by

$$P_{\mu e}^m=\mathrm{sin}^2\psi \mathrm{sin}^22\varphi ^m\mathrm{sin}^2\left(\frac{1.27\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}^mL}{E}\right).$$
(2)
Comparing Eq. (1) with Eq. (2), we note that the mixing angle $`\psi `$ is unaffected by matter term and $`\varphi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ are replaced by their matter modified values $`\varphi ^m`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}^m`$ respectively . These are given by

$`\mathrm{sin}2\varphi ^m`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}\mathrm{sin}2\varphi }{\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}^m}},`$ (3)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}^m`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{(\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}\mathrm{cos}2\varphi A)^2+(\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}\mathrm{sin}2\varphi )^2}.`$ (4)
Here $`A`$ is the matter term and is given by

$$A=2\sqrt{2}G_FN_eE=0.76\times 10^4\rho (\mathrm{in}\mathrm{gm}/\mathrm{cc})E(\mathrm{in}\mathrm{GeV}).$$
(5)
If $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ is positive, a resonance will occur for neutrinos at the energy

$$E_{res}=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}\mathrm{cos}2\varphi }{2.3\times 10^4}.$$
(6)
At this energy, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}\mathrm{cos}2\varphi =A`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}2\varphi ^m=1`$ . Unfortunately, for a baseline of $`730`$ km, $`P_{\mu e}^m`$ at $`E_{res}`$ is not significantly greater than $`P_{\mu e}`$ at the same energy. This occurs because, at resonance, $`\mathrm{sin}2\varphi ^m`$ is maximized but simultaneously $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}^m`$ is minimized . Hence nothing is gained by tuning the neutrino flux to peak around $`E_{res}`$. Away from the resonance, the energy dependence of $`\mathrm{sin}^22\varphi ^m`$ is different from that of $`\mathrm{sin}^2(1.27\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}^mL/E)`$. So, in general, we can expect $`P_{\mu e}^m`$ to be different from $`P_{\mu e}`$. In Figure 1, we plotted $`P_{\mu e}`$ (middle line), $`P_{\mu e}^m`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ positive (upper line) and $`P_{\mu e}^m`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ negative (lower line). We chose $`L=730`$ km, $`\varphi =9^{}`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}|=3.5\times 10^3`$ eV2, which is Super-Kamiokande best-fit value. We see that for both signs of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$, the maximum of $`P_{\mu e}^m`$ occurs close to the energy where $`P_{\mu e}`$ is maximum, that is where the phase of the oscillating term $`1.27|\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}|L/E=\pi /2`$. We call this energy to be

$$E_{\pi /2}=\frac{2.54|\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}|L}{\pi }.$$
(7)
For $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}|=3.5\times 10^3`$ eV2, $`E_{\pi /2}=2`$ GeV, if $`L=730`$ km.

Long baseline experiments will first measure $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}|`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\psi `$ to about $`10\%`$ precision. The next goal of neutrino experiments is to probe small values of $`\varphi `$ by looking for $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillations. In such a search, the neutrino beam energy should be tuned such that the oscillation signal to background ratio is maximized. Neutrino crosssections increase linearly with neutrino energy and neutrino beam flux increases with the energy of the intial accelerated particle so neutrino event rates increase as $`E^p`$ where $`p>1`$. So, it seems as if high energy beams are more favorable to do neutrino physics than low energy beams. However, $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation probability falls as off as $`E^2`$ at energies much greater than $`E_{\pi /2}`$. Hence the increase in signal event rate, if any, is moderate. The background events come primarily from the neutral current events of neutrinos in the beam and the CC events of the $`1\%`$ $`\nu _e`$ contamination of the beam. Both these are proportional to total event rate and increase as $`E^p`$. Hence the $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ signal to background ratio worsens as $`E^2`$ if one goes to energies $`E>>E_{\pi /2}`$. In order to maximize this signal, it is advantageous to tune the energy such that flux of the neutrino beam peaks around $`E_{\pi /2}`$. A recent paper by B. Richter  also proposes such a tuning, where it is also advocated that construction of high intensity and low energy neutrino beams can be the next step in the effort to measure small neutrino parameters. At such beams the signal to background ratio for $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillations, will be much larger than in the case of high energy beams. Such beams can be used to probe values of $`\varphi `$ as small as a few parts in $`10^4`$. They can also be used to determine the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$, even if they consist of neutrinos only.

We note from Figure 1 that $`P_{\mu e}^m`$ peaks close to where $`P_{\mu e}`$ peaks, that is close to $`E=E_{\pi /2}`$. In addition, we can make three important observations:

1. Above $`4`$ GeV (or above $`2E_{\pi /2}`$), matter effects have negligible effect on $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation probability. For both signs of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$, $`P_{\mu e}^m`$ is very close to $`P_{\mu e}`$ for energies above $`2E_{\pi /2}`$. Hence by selecting events with $`E>2E_{\pi /2}`$, one can directly measure $`\varphi `$ without worrying about matter effects.
2. Matter effects are most dominant in the neighbourhood of $`E_{\pi /2}`$. In this neighbourhood, $`P_{\mu e}^m`$ is about $`25\%`$ greater than $`P_{\mu e}`$ if $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ is positive and is smaller by about the same factor if $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ is negative. This is true for all values of $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}|`$ and $`\varphi `$ .
3. For fixed value $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}|/E`$, matter effects cause a larger change for larger values of $`L`$. This occurs for the following reason. In the neighbourhood of $`E_{\pi /2}`$, the phase of the oscillating term is $`\pi /2`$. However, $`E_{\pi /2}`$ is larger if $`L`$ is larger and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\varphi _m`$ is larger for larger energies. So matter term causes a larger change in $`P_{\mu e}^m`$ around $`E_{\pi /2}`$ for larger values of $`L`$.

To observe the differences induced by matter effects, one needs to measure $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation probability in the lower energy range $`0<E_\nu <2E_{\pi /2}`$. Using the value of $`\varphi `$ measured from the data of the higher energy range $`E_\nu >2E_{\pi /2}`$, one can predict the expected number of events for the lower energy range, for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ positive and for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ negative. By comparing the results of the lower energy range with the predictions, one can determine the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$. Since the vacuum value of $`\varphi `$ is unknown, one needs a minimum of two measurements to determine the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$. Usually these are taken to be $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ and $`\overline{\nu }_\mu \overline{\nu }_e`$ oscillation probabilities. But, as we argued above, $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ event samples in the lower and higher energy ranges also can be used to distinguish between the two possible signs of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$. The neutrino beam should have reasonable width in energy (say $`0<E_\nu <4E_{\pi /2}`$) so that there will be substantial number of events both in the lower and higher energy regions.

The following procedure may be used to determine the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$. From the experiment we will get two pieces of data, $`N_{eh}`$ from the higher energy region and $`N_{el}`$ from the lower energy region. We wish to check whether the hypothesis of positive or negative $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ fits the data better. Let $`N_{eh}^{m+}(\varphi )`$ and $`N_{eh}^m(\varphi )`$ are the theoretical expectation for the number of electron events in the higher energy region for positive and negative $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ respectively. These two numbers will be functions of the mixing angle $`\varphi `$ which, as yet, is unknown. Similarly, $`N_{el}^{m+}(\varphi )`$ and $`N_{el}^m(\varphi )`$ are the theoretical expectations for the lower energy region. Now we define two different $`\chi ^2`$s,

$`\chi _+^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(N_{eh}N_{eh}^{m+})^2}{N_{eh}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(N_{el}N_{el}^{m+})^2}{N_{el}}},`$ (8)
$`\chi _{}^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(N_{eh}N_{eh}^m)^2}{N_{eh}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(N_{el}N_{el}^m)^2}{N_{el}}}.`$ (9)
Both these $`\chi ^2`$s are functions of $`\varphi `$ and by varying $`\varphi `$ they can be minimized. If $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ is positive, we will have $`\chi _+^2|_{min}<<\chi _{}^2|_{min}`$ and vice-verse if $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ is negative. This strong inequality between the respective minima of the two $`\chi ^2`$s must occur if our present understanding of effect of matter term on the propagation of neutrinos is correct.

Let us briefly consider the ability of long baseline neutrino experiments to determine the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$. Suppose the minimum value of $`\varphi `$ an experiment can measure is $`\epsilon `$. In the following, we assume that the neutrino beam has the same spectrum as that of the low energy option of MINOS . We will also take $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}|=3.5\times 10^3`$ eV2 and the baseline length to be $`L=730`$ km, so that $`E_{\pi /2}=2`$ GeV. In such a case, the $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation signal events are split $`3:1`$ between the lower energy range ($`04`$ GeV) and the high energy range ($`>4`$ GeV). The $`\nu _\mu `$ flux, and hence the background events, are split in the ratio $`4:6`$ for the same two ranges. The signal to background ratio in the lower energy range is about 5 times better than in the higher energy range. This illustrates our earlier point that neutrino beams with energy tuned to $`E_{\pi /2}`$ are better than high energy beams for observing $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillations. Let us assume that, to be sensitive to $`\varphi =\epsilon `$, the experiment must be capable of observing $`N`$ $`\nu _e`$-CC events above the background. Of these, $`3N/4`$ will be in the lower energy range and $`N/4`$ will be in the higher energy range. If the value of $`\varphi `$ is $`2\epsilon `$, then this experiment will see $`4N`$ $`\nu _e`$-CC events in case of vacuum $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillations. Of these, $`3N`$ will be in the lower energy range and $`N`$ will be in the higher energy range. The number of events in the higher energy range is not affected by matter effects and this number, $`N`$, is large enough to be detectable above the background. Matter effects boost the events in the lower energy range to $`3.75N`$ if $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ is positive and suppress them to $`2.25N`$ if $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ is negative. In each case, the difference induced by the matter effects is larger than the background in this energy range, which is less than half the total background. Hence, any long baseline neutrino experiment which sensitive to $`\varphi \epsilon `$ is automatically sensitive to the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ if $`\varphi 2\epsilon `$.

In conclusion, we showed that neutrino beams with energy tuned to $`E_{\pi /2}`$ have better signal to background ratios than the high energy neutrino beams. We also showed that a future high intensity and low energy neutrino experiment, which can measure values of $`(13)`$ mixing angle $`\varphi `$ as small as a few parts in $`10^4`$, can automatically measure the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}`$ for values of $`\varphi `$ greater than double the sensitivity of the experiment even if the beam consists of neutrinos only.

We would like to thank Prof. A. Bettini and K.R.S. Balaji for discussions. We would also like to thank the Department of Science and Technology, Govt. of India for supporting this research.


format: text

text:
# References

Neutrino flux in the rotating reference frame

D.L. Khokhlov

Sumy State University, R.-Korsakov St. 2,
Sumy 40007, Ukraine
E-mail: khokhlov@cafe.sumy.ua

## Abstract

It is considered neutrino flux in the rotating reference frame. Due to the rotation of the frame, neutrino is observed as a superposition of two states P-transformed one from another. Since P-transformation is forbidden for neutrino, in the rotating reference frame one can detect a half of neutrino flux. Due to the rotation of the earth, the detector of neutrinos can measure a half of the solar neutrino flux predicted by the SSM that may provide a solution for the solar neutrino puzzle.

Weak interactions violate P-invariance and C-invariance but conserve CP-invariance . The operations of C-transformation and of P-transformation are forbidden for neutrinos, but the operation of CP-transformation is allowed for neutrinos.

Take the rotating reference frame. Turnover of the frame at the angle $`\pi `$ corresponds to P-transformation of the frame. Under rotation, the positions of the frame in the range from $`\pi `$ to $`2\pi `$ are P-transformed from the positions of the frame in the range from $`0`$ to $`\pi `$. Neutrino in the rotating frame is observed in the superpositional state

$$|\psi >=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|\nu >+\mathrm{P}|\nu >).$$
(1)
However P-transformation is forbidden for neutrino thereforer it is forbidden to detect neutrino in the state P$`|\nu >`$. Hence when measuring neutrino flux in the rotating frame it is forbidden to detect a half of neutrino flux.

As known ,  experiments measured solar neutrino fluxes significantly smaller than those predicted by the standard solar model (SSM), e.g. , . Discrepancy between the theoretical and experimental neutrino flux from the sun presents the solar neutrino puzzle.

The Homestake experiment measured  an average 37Ar production rate by solar neutrinos in 37Cl of

$$\mathrm{Rate}(\mathrm{Chlorine})=2.55\pm 0.17(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.18(\mathrm{syst})SNU$$
(2)
which is $`32\pm 5\%`$ of the $`8.1_{1.2}^{+1.0}SNU`$ predicted by the SSM .

The Kamiokande II and III experiment reported  the data consistent with 8B solar neutrino flux of

$$\varphi _\nu _{}=[2.9\pm 0.2(stat)\pm 0.3(syst)]\times 10^6cm^2s^1$$
(3)
which is $`51\%\pm 9\%`$ of that predicted by the SSM .

The GALLEX experiment measured  a 71Ge production rate by solar neutrinos in 71Ga of

$$\mathrm{Rate}(\mathrm{Gallium})=79\pm 10(\mathrm{stat})\pm 6(\mathrm{syst})SNU$$
(4)
which is $`60\%\pm 10\%`$ of the $`131.5_6^{+7}SNU`$ predicted by the SSM .

The SAGE experiment measured  an average 71Ge production rate by solar neutrinos in 71Ga of

$$\mathrm{Rate}(\mathrm{Gallium})=74_{12}^{+13}(\mathrm{stat})_7^{+5}(\mathrm{sys})SNU$$
(5)
which is $`56\%\pm 11\%`$ of the $`131.5_6^{+7}SNU`$ predicted by the SSM .

Due to the rotation of the earth, the detector of neutrinos can measure a half of the solar neutrino flux predicted by the SSM. This is consistent with the data of the Kamiokande, GALLEX, SAGE experiments and significantly reduces the discrepancy between the theoretical and experimental data for the Homestake experiment. So the effect under consideration may provide a solution for the solar neutrino puzzle.


text:
# Logarithmically rising ℎℎ and 𝛾ℎ cross-sections : some features of model versus experimental data.

## Abstract

A Regge model of the Pomeron with intercept equal to one, leading to rising cross-sections is considered. Analysis of the experimental data on hadron and photon induced interactions is performed within the model. It is shown that the available pure hadronic data as well as data on DIS are compatible with a high energy logarithmic behaviour of cross-sections and do not require a Pomeron intercept above one. The very important rôle of the preasymptotic contributions is especially emphasized.

In this talk I would like to discuss the importance of preasymptotic terms when the available data are analyzed and described in the framework of Regge approach. These terms strongly influence the conclusions about properties of the asymptotic term, the Pomeron. I shall explicit as an example the soft Pomeron model, not violating the Froissart-Martin bound, in which the contribution of secondary Reggeons, in particular $`f`$ Reggeon, can not be neglected, even at the highest accelerator energies. The model describes the hadron elastic scattering as well as the proton structure function.

The elastic scattering amplitude in Regge approach is given by the sum of Pomeron and secondary Reggeons

$`A(s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`P(s,t)+R(s,t)`$
$``$ $`P(s,t)+f(s,t)+[\pm \omega \pm \rho \pm a_2,\mathrm{}]`$
where the signs of terms in square brackets depend on the process under consideration.

I concentrate here firstly on two aspects : the exchange degeneracy of various Reggeons and the phenomenological separation between the Pomeron and the $`f`$ Reggeon.

$``$ Exchange degeneracy. The hypothesis is based on the fact that $`f,\omega ,\rho ,a_2`$ trajectories seem to coincide on a Chew-Frautschi plot.

The linear parameterization

$`\alpha _{ed}(m^2)=\alpha _{ed}(0)+\alpha _{ed}^{}m^2`$
of the single exchange-degenerate trajectory, fitted to the data, gives

$`\alpha _{ed}(0)=0.449,\alpha _{ed}^{}=0.901\mathrm{GeV}^2`$
and an extremely high $`\chi ^2`$, namely $`\chi ^2/dof118`$.

Fitting in isolation each of the trajectories, we obtain the result shown in Fig. 1. Numerically we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\alpha _f(0)=0.697\pm 0.041,\hfill & \\ \alpha _f^{}=(0.801\pm 0.002)\mathrm{GeV}^2,\hfill & \chi ^2/dof=6.01,\hfill \\ \alpha _\omega (0)=0.436,\hfill & \\ \alpha _\omega ^{}=0.923\mathrm{GeV}^2,\hfill & \text{(not fitted)},\hfill \\ \alpha _\rho (0)=0.478\pm 0.001,\hfill & \\ \alpha _\rho ^{}=(0.880\pm 0.002)\mathrm{GeV}^2,\hfill & \chi ^2/dof=3.31,\hfill \\ \alpha _{a_2}(0)=0.512\pm 0.041,\hfill & \\ \alpha _{a_2}^{}=(0.857\pm 0.023)\mathrm{GeV}^2,\hfill & \chi ^2/dof=0.42.\hfill \end{array}$$

The bad $`\chi ^2`$ for the $`f`$ trajectory is due to its evident nonlinearity (see below).

Thus the first conclusion is the following :

the available data on mesons lying on the $`f`$, $`\omega `$, $`\rho `$ and $`a_2`$ Regge trajectories contradict the exchange degeneracy assumption.

It should be noted that, in accordance with the conclusion derived in  111Because of the very restricted size of the talk I give only the references to our papers where further references can be found., the hypothesis of exchange degenerate trajectories is not supported also by the forward scattering data.

Fig.1 Chew-Frautschi plot for $`f`$, $`\omega `$, $`\rho `$ and $`a_2`$ Regge trajectories taken separately assuming linearity (the figure below is an enlargement for small masses).

$``$ $`f`$ trajectory. The nonlinearity of the $`f`$ trajectory is illustrated unambiguously in Fig. 2, where the above mentioned linear fit is shown together with the parabola passing exactly through the three known resonances.

Fig.2 Real part of the $`f`$ trajectory versus the squared mass of the resonance, $`m^2`$. Solid line is the parabola passed through the known resonances. Dashed straight line is the result of a linear fit.

Certainly, trajectories must rise slower than first power of $`t`$ at $`t\mathrm{}`$. A more realistic $`f`$ trajectory chosen for example in the form

$`\alpha _f(t)=\alpha _f(0)`$ $`+`$ $`\beta _1(\sqrt{4m_\pi ^2}\sqrt{4m_\pi ^2t})`$
$`+`$ $`\beta _2(\sqrt{t_1}\sqrt{t_1t})`$
leads to $`0.77<\alpha _f(0)<0.87`$.

Thus, we obtain a very interesting and important phenomenological consequence of the nonlinearity : a higher intercept of the $`f`$ trajectory. Coming to the next conclusion :

the intercept of the $`f`$ trajectory is $`0.7`$, but most probably, the lower bound is larger than this value.

$``$ Separation of Pomeron and $`f`$ Reggeon. Generally, there is an evident correlation between the intercept of the $`f`$ Reggeon and the model for the Pomeron. This is due to the fact that in all known processes Pomeron and $`f`$ Reggeon contribute additively. As a rule, a higher $`f`$ intercept is associated with a slower growth with energy due to the Pomeron contribution . In Fig. 3 we illustrate this observation and show how $`\alpha _f(0)`$ is correlated with a power of $`\mathrm{}ns`$ in the behaviour of the total cross-section, if the forward $`pp(\overline{p}p)`$ scattering amplitudes are parametrized in the form

$`A^{(hh)}(s,0)`$ $`=`$ $`i\left[C_1+C_2\mathrm{}n^\gamma (is/s_0)\right]`$
$`+`$ $`f(s,0)\pm \omega (s,0),`$
with the standard form of secondary Reggeons contribution.

Fig.3 Intercept of the $`f`$ trajectory correlated with the power $`\gamma `$ of $`\mathrm{}ns`$ in $`\sigma _{tot}(s)`$. Intervals for intercept of some trajectory parameterizations are shown.

Taking into account the restriction $`\alpha _f(0)>0.7`$, revealed from spectroscopy data, one can conclude that $`\gamma <2`$ or that total cross-section rises slower than $`\mathrm{}n^2s`$.

On the other hand it is known  from a comparison of various Pomeron models that the ”best” description (or $`\chi ^2`$) is obtained if the Pomeron contribution to the total cross-section has the form $`\sigma _P=C_1+C_2\mathrm{}n(s/s_0)`$. The difference in $`\chi ^2`$ is quite small ($``$ a few percents) if $`\sqrt{s}\sqrt{s_{min}}=9`$ GeV. An additional advantage of the logarithmic model is its stability (of the parameters as well as the $`\chi ^2`$) when $`\sqrt{s_{min}}`$ is decreasing down to 5 GeV.

It is interesting to note two points concerning the logarithmic model :

1.Intercept of the $`f`$ Reggeon takes approximately its maximal value of Fig. 3, $`\alpha _f(0)0.8`$.

2.If the well known Supercritical Pomeron $`\stackrel{~}{P(s,0)}=iC(i\frac{s}{s_0})^\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is generalized for two components $`i[\stackrel{~}{C}_1+\stackrel{~}{C}_2(is/s_0)^\mathrm{\Delta }]`$ (provided the Regge trajectories are non exchange degenerate) then a fit to the total cross-sections leads to a very small value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0.001)`$. Hence, one can approximate

$`\stackrel{~}{C}_1+\stackrel{~}{C}_2(is/s_0)^\mathrm{\Delta }C_1+C_2\mathrm{}n(is/s_0),`$
$`C_1=\stackrel{~}{C}_1+\stackrel{~}{C}_2,C_2=\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{~}{C}_2`$
with all parameters ($`C_1,C_2`$ as well as couplings and intercepts of the secondary Reggeons) coinciding with those obtained in the logarithmic Pomeron model.

This observation is valid not only for $`pp`$ and $`\overline{p}p`$ cross-sections but also for all hadronic, $`\gamma p`$ and $`\gamma \gamma `$ cross-sections.

It is necessary to emphasize that in this model the preasymptotic $`f`$ term gives quite a large part of the total cross-section even at the Tevatron energy, $`\sigma _f(\sqrt{s}=1.8TeV)3`$ mb. It cannot be neglected at the available energies.

The third conclusion follows :

the available data on the total cross-sections of hadron and photon induced processes are better described in the model yielding a moderate (logarithmic) rise of the cross-sections.

$``$ Dipole Pomeron model and elastic scattering. I present here, without any details and references for an history of the subject, that can be found in , only the final results concerning the differential cross-sections of elastic $`pp`$ and $`\overline{p}p`$ interactions in the so-called Modified Additive Quark Model (MAQM).

In the MAQM, we have assumed that the Pomeron can be coupled not only with a single quark but also with a pair of quarks, giving rise to a small ($`10\%`$) but important correction. Also, some counting rules for the Reggeons contribution based on their quark contents have been suggested.

The above mentioned logarithmic Pomeron model can be named as ”Dipole Pomeron” (DP) model because in the complex momentum plane ($`j`$-plane) a double pole at $`j=\alpha _P(t)`$ with $`\alpha _P(0)=1`$ is the dominating contribution in the amplitude and leads asymptotically at $`s\mathrm{}`$ to $`\sigma _{tot}\mathrm{}n(s)`$.

Applying the MAQM and DP (adding at $`t0`$ an Odderon contribution), we obtain a quite good description (with $`\chi ^2/dof2.38`$) of the total cross-sections for $`pp`$, $`\overline{p}p`$, $`\pi ^\pm p`$, $`\gamma p`$ and $`\gamma \gamma `$ and of the differential cross-sections of $`pp`$ and $`\overline{p}p`$ elastic scattering in a wide kinematical region ($`\sqrt{s}`$5 GeV for $`t=0`$  and $`\sqrt{s}`$19 GeV for $`0<|t|14`$ GeV2 ).

Thus :

not only the forward scattering data but also the elastic scattering at small and large $`|t|`$ can be described with a high quality in the Dipole Pomeron model with the intercept $`\alpha _P(0)`$ equal to one.

$``$ Dipole Pomeron model and deep inelastic scattering. Another example demonstrating the importance of preasymptotic terms, when the properties of Pomeron are derived from the experimental data, is the Dipole Pomeron model for the forward $`\gamma ^{}p`$ amplitude.

Defining the Dipole Pomeron model for DIS, we start from the expression connecting the transverse cross-section of $`\gamma ^{}p`$ interaction to the proton structure function $`F_2`$ and the optical theorem for forward scattering amplitude

$`\sigma _T^{\gamma ^{}p}(W,Q^2)=\mathrm{}mA(W^2,Q^2;t=0)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2\alpha }{Q^2(1x)}}(1+4m_p^2x^2/Q^2)F_2(x,Q^2),`$
where $`\sigma _L^{\gamma ^{}p}=0`$ is assumed. The forward scattering at $`W^2=Q^2(1/x1)+m_p^2`$ being far from the threshold $`W_{th}=m_p`$ is dominated by the Pomeron and the $`f`$ Reggeon 222We ignored an $`a_2`$ Reggeon considering the $`f`$ term as an ”effective” one at $`W3`$ GeV.

$`A(W^2,Q^2;t=0)=P+f,P=P_1+P_2,`$
$`P_1=iG_1(Q^2)\mathrm{ln}({\displaystyle \frac{iW^2}{m_p^2}})(1x)^{B_1},`$
$`P_2=iG_2(Q^2)(1x)^{B_2}.`$
$`f=iG_f(Q^2)({\displaystyle \frac{iW^2}{m_p^2}})^{\alpha _f(0)1}(1x)^{B_f}.`$
It evidently follows from the experimental data that $`Q^2\sigma ^{\gamma ^{}p}(W,Q^2)`$ decreases with $`Q^2`$, at least at high $`Q^2`$. We choose

$`G_i(Q^2)={\displaystyle \frac{g_i}{(1+Q^2/Q_i^2)^{D_i}}},`$
expecting $`D_i>1`$ at high $`Q^2`$. As it follows from the fit, $`D_i`$ and $`B_i`$ should be functions of $`Q^2`$. The details of the parameterization of the real functions $`D_i(Q^2),B_i(Q^2)`$ are given in .

A fit to the 1389 experimental points in the region $`W3`$ GeV2, $`0x0.85`$, $`Q^20`$ was performed and a quite good description of data was obtained : $`\chi ^2/dof=1.07`$.

Again, as for the pure hadron case, the preasymptotic contributions in $`\sigma ^{\gamma ^{}p}`$, the constant (negative) component of the Pomeron term as well as the $`f`$ term are very important in the whole considered kinematical region.

To illustrate this statement, let us consider the ”experimental” data on the ”effective” Pomeron intercept and its dependence on $`Q^2`$. This quantity, $`\alpha _{eff}=1+\mathrm{\Delta }_{eff}`$ (or $`1+\lambda _{eff}`$) is extracted from the data on $`F_2`$ in accordance with the parametrization $`F_2(x,Q^2)=C(1/x)^{\lambda _{eff}}`$. Strictly speaking a more correct definition of an effective intercept (or $`x`$-slope of the structure function) is as follows

$`F_2(x,Q^2)=G(Q^2)(1/x)^{\mathrm{\Delta }_{eff}(x,Q^2)},`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{eff}(x,Q^2)=F_2/\mathrm{}n(1/x).`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{eff}(x,Q^2)`$ coincides with $`\lambda _{eff}`$ only if it does not depend on $`x`$. For an accurate comparison of a model with experiment we need the data on the local $`x`$-slope333An attempt to extract such a local slope as a function of $`x`$ and $`Q^2`$ is given in . rather than $`\lambda _{eff}`$ averaged in wide intervals of $`x`$. The investigated Dipole Pomeron has an intercept exactly equal to one. Nevertheless, due to interferences Pomeron-$`f`$ Reggeon, the model is able to describe well the data on averaged $`x`$-slope as it is shown in Fig. 4.

Fig. 4 The effective intercept calculated in the Dipole Pomeron model  (triangles and solid line) compared with the experimental data.

We have shown that a careful account of the preasymptotic contributions allows to describe the available data within the model that does not violate the asymptotic bounds on the cross-sections.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Although all experimentally observed particles are either bosons or fermions, the general principles of quantum mechanics do not prohibit existence of particles obeying other types of statistics . The motivation to consider an exotic statistics is that it may provide an effective description of the dynamics of particles if their interaction is so strong that the available occupancy for a given state depends on the number of particles already present in the state . An exotic statistics can also arise if particles possess a hidden internal degree of freedom that is invisible in the Hamiltonian but that can become dynamically relevant. Finally, an exotic statistics can emerge in description of physical models in one or two spatial dimensions. The reason is that in this case the multi-particle wave function is not necessarily even or odd and particles (anyons) may obey a fractional statistics . Moreover, in low-dimensional theories the exchange statistics of the fields present in a Hamiltonian is not directly related to the exclusion statistics of the corresponding particles. For instance, although particles in the one-dimensional real coupling affine Toda field theories (ATFT) are bosons, one has to impose the Pauli principle on their momenta in the thermodynamic Bethe ansatz analysis in order to obtain correct values of corresponding central charges . Another example is the conformal field theory, where quasi-particle spectra can be constructed with use of an exotic exclusion statistics .

The first attempt to introduce an exotic statistics is attributed to G. Gentile , who proposed an intermediate statistics, in which at most $`G`$ indistinguishable particles can occupy a given state. This intermediate statistics interpolates between fermions and bosons, that are recovered for $`G=1`$ and $`G=\mathrm{}`$. A decade after Gentile’s work H.S. Green introduced the parafermi statistics  that also fixes maximal occupancy for a given state. Since then, various aspects of systems governed by the Gentile or parafermi statistics were discussed in the literature, among them possible applications to the elementary particles theory  and to the quark confinement problem in the QCD .

Many authors discussed thermodynamic properties of an ideal gas obeying the Gentile or parafermi statistics . In the present paper we will study the thermodynamic limit of one-dimensional relativistic integrable field models governed by a Gentile-like statistics. More precisely, the main purpose of this manuscript is to implement systematically a generalized extensive exclusion statistics into the thermodynamic Bethe ansatz (TBA) analysis of systems where the interaction of particles is relativistic, short-range and characterized by a factorizable scattering matrix.

The TBA was originally developed in the seminal papers by Yang and Yang  for treating a one-dimensional ideal gas. In later works  this technique was adopted to one-dimensional relativistic models. The boundary condition for a many-particle wave function leads to what is commonly referred to as the Bethe ansatz equation, that provides the quantization condition for possible momenta of the system. The TBA constitutes an interface between massive integrable models and conformal field theories. From the TBA one can extract information about the ultraviolet limit of the underlying massive model, in particular, find the corresponding (effective) central charge.

In the derivation of the TBA equation the underlying exclusion statistics is usually taken to be either of bosonic or fermionic type . In the present paper the TBA equation will be derived and studied for significantly more general situation. Namely, let $`W(N,n)`$ denote the total dimension of the Hilbert space for a system of $`n`$ indistinguishable particles that can occupy $`N`$ different states in the Fock-space. Assume that there exists a function such that its $`N`$-th power is a generating function for the dimensions $`W(N,n)`$, i.e.

$$\left(f(t)\right)^N=\underset{k0}{}W(N,k)t^k.$$
(1)
In the statistical mechanics, if the variable $`t`$ is understood as fugacity, the sum on the right hand side is the grand partition function of the system. The property of a grand partition function to be an $`N`$-th power of a function independent of $`N`$ is called extensivity. As we are going to demonstrate below, this property allows us to develop the TBA analysis for a rather general choice of $`f(t)`$. Let us stress that for the purpose of deriving the TBA equation even asymptotical extensivity suffices, i.e., equation (1) should hold in the large $`N`$ limit.

Of course, if the explicit form of $`f(t)`$ is known, we can use it to simplify the general formulae. For instance, an instructive example is the Gentile statistics of order $`G`$ which is defined by the following choice of $`f(t)`$:

$$f_G(t)=1+t+t^2+\mathrm{}+t^G.$$
(2)
For $`G=1`$ and $`G=\mathrm{}`$ this statistics describes ordinary fermions and bosons, respectively. Although $`f_G(t)`$ is the simplest non-trivial choice of $`f(t)`$, it has all features of a generalized extensive statistics. Therefore, the Gentile statistics will be our main working example below.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we describe possible types of a generalized extensive statistics and study properties of the corresponding entropy densities in the thermodynamic limit. The Gentile statistics and the $`\gamma `$-ons statistics are discussed in this context. In Section 3 we compare properties of the Gentile statistics and the Haldane-Wu statistics. In Section 4 we derive the thermodynamic Bethe ansatz equation and the finite-size scaling function for a relativistic multi-particle system in which statistical interaction is governed by a generalized extensive statistics. In Section 5 we derive the Y-system related to such a generalized statistics. In Section 6 we study the ultraviolet limit of the generalized TBA equation and obtain an expression for the corresponding effective central charge. In Section 7 we compute finite-size scaling functions and central charges related to some affine Toda models for the Gentile statistics and the $`\gamma `$-ons statistics and compare them with their counterparts for the Haldane-Wu statistics. Our conclusions are stated in Section 8.

## 2 Types of extensive statistics and entropy density

Consider a system of $`n`$ indistinguishable particles that can occupy $`N`$ different states in the Fock-space. Assume that the particles obey the Gentile statistics of order $`G`$, i.e., that each state can be occupied by at most $`G`$ particles (with $`G`$ being a positive integer number). There are several combinatorial ways to compute the total dimension of the Hilbert space for such a system. For instance, we first choose $`m_1`$ states which are occupied by at least one particle, then among these $`m_1`$ states we choose $`m_2m_1`$ states which are occupied by at least two particles, etc. This way of counting yields the following expression for the total dimension of the Hilbert space

$$W_G(N,n)=\underset{Nm_1\mathrm{}m_{G1}0}{}C_N^{m_1}C_{m_1}^{m_2}\mathrm{}C_{m_{G2}}^{m_{G1}}C_{m_{G1}}^{nm_1\mathrm{}m_{G1}},$$
(3)
where $`C_k^m=k!/(m!(km)!)`$ are binomial coefficients (and $`C_k^m=0`$ if $`m>k`$ or if $`m<0`$). Now, let us compute $`N`$-th power of the polynomial $`f_G(t)`$ defined in (2). Thanks to the obvious recursive relation $`f_G(t)=1+tf_{G1}(t)`$, we can do this by $`G`$ consecutive applications of the binomial formula. Then it is easy to see that $`N`$-th power of $`f_G(t)`$ is a generating function for the dimensions $`W_G(N,n)`$, i.e.

$$\left(f_G(t)\right)^N=\underset{n=0}{\overset{GN}{}}W_G(N,n)t^n.$$
(4)
Thus, the Gentile statistics is a particular case of an extensive statistics.

Let us stress that the order $`G`$ of the Gentile statistics must be a positive integer. Although we could try to extend it to other values by formal replacement of (2) with

$$f_G(t)=\frac{1t^{G+1}}{1t},$$
(5)
the resulting function $`f_G(t)`$ will not satisfy the important positivity property (see below).

Consider now a more general system of $`n`$ indistinguishable particles that possesses, at least for large $`N`$, the extensivity property (1) with

$$f(t)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{d}{}}P_kt^k,$$
(6)
where $`d`$ can be a finite positive number or infinity. The Taylor coefficients $`P_k`$ are fractional dimensions of levels in a single-state Hilbert subspace and can be regarded as probabilities of occupation of the given state by $`k`$ particles (see related discussions in ). The total dimension of the single-state subspace is $`f(1)`$. It is natural to require positivity of the quantities $`P_k`$:

$$P_0=1\mathrm{and}P_k0\mathrm{for}k1.$$
(7)
The first condition here implies that the vacuum is realized with probability one independently of the size $`N`$ of the system. Furthermore, we assume that the series (6) converges in the complex plane for $`0|z|<R`$, where $`R\mathrm{}`$. This implies that $`f(t)`$ belongs to one of the following types:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{I}.& d<\mathrm{},R=\mathrm{};\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{II}.& d=\mathrm{},R=\mathrm{};\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{IIIa}.& d=\mathrm{},1<R<\mathrm{};\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{IIIb}.& d=\mathrm{},0<R1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
The types I, II, and III consist of finite degree polynomials, analytic functions with infinite Taylor series, and meromorphic functions, respectively. For example, a finite order Gentile statistics belongs to the type I, the Boltzmann statistics ($`f(t)=\mathrm{exp}t`$) belongs to the type II, and the bosonic statistics ($`f(t)=(1t)^1`$) is of the type IIIb. The reason we divided the type III into two subtypes will become clear below.

Let us remark that, in addition to (7), one may require that $`P_1=1`$ with the motivation that the statistics should not be deformed if only one particle is present in the system. Although all the concrete cases which we consider below do fulfill this requirement, it does not seem to be crucial for the general considerations.

The entropy of the system under consideration is $`S=k\mathrm{ln}W(N,n)`$, where $`k`$ is the Boltzmann constant. We need to compute the entropy in the thermodynamic limit, i.e., when $`N\mathrm{}`$ and $`n/N`$ is fixed. The extensivity property (1) allows us to express $`W(N,n)`$ as the following contour integral

$$W(N,n)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_{|z|=\rho }𝑑z\left(f(z)\right)^Nz^{n1}=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_{|z|=\rho }\frac{dz}{z}\mathrm{exp}\{N(\mathrm{ln}f(z)\mu \mathrm{ln}z)\},$$
(9)
where $`\rho <R`$, and we denoted $`\mu =n/N`$. Now we can find an asymptotic expression for the entropy in the thermodynamic limit by application of the saddle point method to the integral (9). The saddle point of the exponent in (9), denote it $`x`$, is found as the positive root of the equation (prime stands for a derivative)

$$xf^{}(t)|_{t=x}=\mu f(x).$$
(10)
Choosing $`\rho =x`$ in (9), so that the saddle point belongs to the integration contour, we apply the standard result (see, e.g., ) for the Laplace integral:

$$W(N,\mu N)=\frac{\mathrm{exp}\{N(\mathrm{ln}f(x)\mu \mathrm{ln}x)\}}{\sqrt{2\pi Nh_\mu (x)}}\left(\frac{1}{x}+O(1/N)\right)\mathrm{as}N\mathrm{},$$
(11)
where $`h_\mu (t)=f^{\prime \prime }(t)/(\mu f(t))+(1\mu )/t^2`$. For any $`f(t)`$ satisfying (7) and $`x`$ obeying (10) we have $`h_\mu (x)>0`$ due to the Hadamard theorem . From (11) we obtain the entropy density $`s(\mu )`$ for a given value of $`\mu `$

$$\underset{N\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{ln}W(N,\mu N)s(\mu )=\mathrm{ln}f(x)\mu \mathrm{ln}x,$$
(12)
where $`x`$ is positive and satisfies (10).

Two remarks are in order here. Strictly speaking, if $`f(t)`$ is degenerated, i.e., if there exists integer $`p>1`$ such that $`f(t)=_kP_{pk}t^{pk}`$, then the above derivation modifies since $`f(t)`$ has $`p`$ saddle points. However, the corresponding physical interpretation is simply that particles can be added only in $`p`$-tuples. Therefore, it is natural to introduce cluster variables $`t^{}=pt`$, $`n^{}=pn`$, etc. In terms of these new variables formulae (9)-(11) remain valid.

More important remark is that for deriving (12) the property $`P_k0`$ is crucial. In general, without the positivity property (9) does not have a real and uniform in $`\mu `$ limit. Moreover, if we allow $`f(t)`$ to have negative Taylor coefficients, then some $`W(N,n)`$ in the expansion of $`(f(t))^N`$ may also be negative. This leads to an immediate problem with the definition of the entropy as a logarithm of $`W(N,n)`$. However, if the first negative coefficient in the expansion of $`(f(t))^N`$ appears only at sufficiently large power $`n_0`$ (of order $`O(N)`$), then $`f(t)`$ violating the positivity condition can still have well defined entropy density for certain range of $`\mu `$. For instance, such is the case of the Haldane-Wu statistics with statistical interaction $`g`$ (see Section 3), where $`n_0N/g`$. However, in the present paper we will restrict our consideration, for simplicity, only to partition function strictly obeying the positivity condition.

The entropy density is a key quantity for developing the TBA analysis. From the definition of $`\mu `$ it is clear that $`0\mu d`$ for $`f(t)`$ of the type I and $`0\mu \mathrm{}`$ for the other types. Formally this follows from equation (10) which shows that $`\mu `$ varies from $`\mu (x=0)`$ to $`\mu (x=R)`$. Moreover, $`\mu (x)`$ is a strictly increasing function because $`_x\mu =x\mu h_\mu (x)>0`$ for $`x>0`$.

Since $`f(t)`$ is regular at zero, it is easy to see that $`\mu \mathrm{ln}x`$ tends to zero for small $`\mu `$. Together with the condition $`P_0=1`$ this yields $`s(0)=0`$. In order to analyze further behaviour of $`s(\mu )`$, we employ (10) and derive from (12) that

$$_\mu s(\mu )=\mathrm{ln}x.$$
(13)
Since $`_x\mu >0`$, we conclude that $`_\mu ^2s(\mu )<0`$, that is $`s(\mu )`$ is a convex up function. Furthermore, (13) implies that $`\mathrm{max}s(\mu )=\mathrm{ln}f(\mathrm{min}\{1,R\})`$. Note, however, that $`s(\mu )`$ is not guaranteed to be positive for the whole range of $`\mu `$. More precisely, $`s(\mu )`$ may have one root at the interval $`\mu (1)<\mu \mu (R)`$. Indeed, for $`f(t)`$ of the type I we derive from (10) and (12) that

$$s(d)=\mathrm{ln}P_d.$$
(14)
That is, $`s(\mu )`$ is non-negative everywhere at $`0\mu d`$ only if the last Taylor coefficient $`P_d`$ is greater or equal to one. For the other types of $`f(t)`$ we have the following properties

$`s(\mathrm{})=\mathrm{}\text{for type IIIb},`$ (15)
$`s(\mathrm{})=\mathrm{}\text{for types II and IIIa}.`$ (16)
Indeed, in the first case $`xR1`$, hence, according to (13), $`s(\mu )`$ is strictly increasing. In the second case we have $`s(\mathrm{})=\mathrm{ln}f(1)_{\mu (1)}^{\mathrm{}}d\mu \mathrm{ln}x`$. The integral here apparently diverges since it exceeds $`_{\mu (R_0)}^{\mathrm{}}d\mu \mathrm{ln}R_0`$, where we can choose any $`R_0`$ such that $`1<R_0<R`$.

Investigation of thermodynamic properties of models in which the entropy density becomes negative is rather problematic. Therefore eqs. (14)-(16) suggest that we should restrict the choice of $`f(t)`$ to the type I with $`P_d1`$ (the Gentile-like statistics) and to the type IIIb (the bose-like statistics). However, let us notice that in the TBA framework the variable $`x`$ depends on the rapidity $`\theta `$. For some relativistic models with factorizable scattering the typical picture  is that $`x(\theta )`$ falls off as $`|\theta |`$ grows (for instance, $`x(\theta )=\mathrm{exp}\{mr\mathrm{cosh}\theta \}`$ for the trivial S-matrix). In this case $`x(\theta )<x(0)`$ and we can consider $`f(t)`$ of the types II and IIIa if $`s(\mu )`$ remains non-negative for $`\mu \mu (x(0))`$.

In the context of this discussion it is instructive to consider the so-called $`\gamma `$-ons . These are particles with statistics interpolating between fermions ($`\gamma =1`$) and bosons ($`\gamma =1`$) in the following simple way

$$\mu (x)=\frac{x}{1+\gamma x}.$$
(17)
Solving equation (10) for this choice of $`\mu `$ it is easy to find the corresponding single-state partition function:

$$f_\gamma (t)=(1+\gamma t)^{1/\gamma }=1+t+\underset{k2}{}[k1]_\gamma \frac{t^k}{k!},$$
(18)
where $`[k]_\gamma =_{m=1}^k(1m\gamma )`$. For $`\gamma >0`$ the positivity condition (7) is fulfilled only if $`\gamma =1/d`$, with $`d`$ positive integer. In this case $`f_\gamma (t)`$ is of the type I, the corresponding maximal occupancy is $`\mu =d`$. Since $`\mathrm{ln}P_d<0`$ for $`d>1`$, the entropy density becomes negative for certain range of $`\mu `$. The case of $`\gamma =0`$ describes the Boltzmann statistics. Here $`f_\gamma (t)=\mathrm{exp}t`$ belongs to the type II and $`s(\mu )`$ is negative for $`\mu >e`$. Finally, for $`\gamma <0`$ the positivity condition (7) is always fulfilled and $`f_\gamma (t)`$ is of the type IIIa or IIIb depending on the value of $`\gamma `$.

Returning to the Gentile statistics, we can summarize the properties of the corresponding entropy density $`s_G(\mu )`$ as follows (see Fig. 1 for illustration). $`s_G(\mu )`$ is a convex up function defined for $`0\mu G`$ and vanishing at the end points of this interval. It attains the maximum at $`\mu =G/2`$:

$$s_G(G/2)=\mathrm{ln}(G+1).$$
(19)
Furthermore, $`s_G(\mu )`$ possesses the following symmetry

$$s_G(G\mu )=s_G(\mu ).$$
(20)
This is a consequence of the equality $`W_G(N,GNn)=W_G(N,n)`$ which, in turn, follows from the relation (4).

## 3 Comparison with Haldane-Wu statistics

It is interesting to compare thermodynamic properties of a system of particles obeying the Gentile statistics with those of a system obeying the so-called Haldane-Wu statistics. For the latter, the total dimension of the Hilbert space is postulated to be

$$\widehat{W}_g(N,n)=\frac{(N+(1g)n+g1)!}{n!(Ngn+g1)!}.$$
(21)
This expression interpolates between the bosonic ($`g=0`$) and the fermionic ($`g=1`$) statistics. Introduction of such an interpolating statistics was motivated by Haldane’s generalization  of the Pauli exclusion principle to the form

$$\mathrm{\Delta }D/\mathrm{\Delta }n=g.$$
(22)
Here $`D`$ is the number of available states (holes) before the $`n`$-th particle has been added to the system. The parameter $`g`$ is called the statistical interaction. Properties of an ideal gas obeying the Haldane-Wu statistics were actively discussed in the literature . The corresponding TBA equation for relativistic integrable models was obtained in  and investigated in .

A direct comparison of the quantities $`W_G(N,n)`$ and $`\widehat{W}_g(N,n)`$ is problematic if the system contains a finite number of particles. Indeed, formula (3) has a bulky form for generic $`G`$ (i.e., for $`2G<\mathrm{}`$). Moreover, it requires additional conventions to make exact sense of expression (21) for generic $`g`$ (i.e., for $`0<g<1`$). Actually, there exists no prescription for counting of states on the microscopical level that would lead to (21) (see related discussions in ). To overcome these difficulties we can compare the two statistics in the thermodynamic limit. More precisely, let us compare the entropy density $`s_G(\mu )`$ with its counterpart $`\widehat{s}_g(\mu )lim_N\mathrm{}\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{ln}\widehat{W}_g(N,\mu N)`$ that is readily derived from (21) with the help of the Stirling formula

$$\widehat{s}_g(\mu )=(1+\mu (1g))\mathrm{ln}(1+\mu (1g))\mu \mathrm{ln}\mu (1g\mu )\mathrm{ln}(1g\mu ).$$
(23)
Let us notice that the Haldane-Wu statistics is extensive but the corresponding function $`f_g(t)`$ does not satisfy the positivity property (7). Indeed, we can reconstruct $`f_g(t)`$ first as a function of $`\mu `$ by the following formula

$$f(\mu )=\mathrm{exp}\{s(\mu )\mu _\mu s(\mu )\},$$
(24)
that follows from (12) and (13). For $`\widehat{s}_g(\mu )`$ given by (23) this yields

$$f_g(\mu )=\frac{1+(1g)\mu }{1g\mu },$$
(25)
which is a well-defined function. But reexpressing it in terms of $`t`$ with the help of (10) we will always obtain a function that breaks the positivity property (7). For instance, for $`g=1/2`$ we find (which coincides with the result of ) $`f_g(t)=1+t^2/2+t\sqrt{1+t^2/4}=`$  $`1+t+t^2/2+t^3/8t^5/128+\mathrm{}`$. However, the first negative term in expansion of the $`N`$-th power of this series appears for $`n=2N+3`$. This implies that in the large $`N`$ limit thermodynamic quantities are well-defined for $`\mu 2`$.

For our purposes we can regard (23) as a definition of the Haldane-Wu statistics. Then we have a finite maximal occupancy $`N/g`$ for a given number of particles $`N`$ simply because $`\widehat{s}_g(\mu )`$ is defined for $`0\mu 1/g`$. Furthermore, $`\widehat{s}_g(\mu )`$ is a convex up function vanishing at the end points of this interval. Thus, we see that properties of the entropy density $`\widehat{s}_g(\mu )`$ are similar to those of a type I extensive statistics and, specifically, to those of the Gentile statistics. Therefore, it is natural to ask how much the behaviour of $`s_G(\mu )`$ differs from $`\widehat{s}_g(\mu )`$ if $`g=1/G`$ (when the corresponding maximal occupancies coincide).

First, notice that the function $`\widehat{s}_{1/G}(\mu )`$ cannot coincide with $`s_G(\mu )`$ identically for generic $`G`$ since $`\widehat{s}_g(\mu )`$ does not possess a symmetry like (20) if $`g0,1`$. Next, we can compare the mid-point value $`\widehat{s}_{1/G}(G/2)=\frac{G+1}{2}\mathrm{ln}(G+1)\frac{G}{2}\mathrm{ln}G`$ with the corresponding value of $`s_G(\mu )`$ given by (19). Taking into account the inequalities

$$\begin{array}{c}t\mathrm{ln}t>(t1)\mathrm{ln}(t+1)\mathrm{for}t>1,\hfill \\ t\mathrm{ln}t<(t1)\mathrm{ln}(t+1)\mathrm{for}0<t<1,\hfill \end{array}$$
(26)
we establish that $`s_G(G/2)>\widehat{s}_{1/G}(G/2)`$ for $`G>1`$. Actually, numerical computations for various values of $`G>1`$ show that $`s_G(\mu )`$ majorizes $`\widehat{s}_{1/G}(\mu )`$ everywhere at $`0<\mu <G`$,

$$s_G(\mu )>\widehat{s}_{1/G}(\mu )\mathrm{for}G>1.$$
(27)
For illustration, the case of $`G=2`$ is presented in Fig. 1.

Thus, we see that for generic $`G`$ the difference between $`\widehat{s}_{1/G}(\mu )`$ and $`s_G(\mu )`$ is not small if $`\mu `$ is not close to $`\mu =0`$ or $`\mu =G`$. It is instructive to compare these functions also near the end points (in particular, this will provide an additional support to the assertion (27)).

In a vicinity of $`\mu =0`$ equation (10) is solved as $`x=\mu +(2\delta _{G,1}1)\mu ^2+O(\mu ^3)`$, and we find that $`s_G(\mu )=(1\mathrm{ln}\mu )\mu +(1/2\delta _{G,1})\mu ^2+O(\mu ^3)`$, where $`\delta _{m,n}`$ stands for the Kronecker symbol. Comparing this expansion with $`\widehat{s}_g(\mu )=(1\mathrm{ln}\mu )\mu +(1/2g)\mu ^2+O(\mu ^3)`$ which follows from (23), we infer that for small $`\mu `$ functions $`\widehat{s}_g(\mu )`$ and $`s_G(\mu )`$ take close values (up to the order $`\mu ^2`$) for any choice of $`G`$ and $`g`$. Actually, employing (10), it is easy to derive the following expansion for the entropy density of an arbitrary extensive statistics with $`f(t)`$ satisfying (7):

$$s(\mu )=(P_1\mathrm{ln}\mu )\mu +O(\mu ^2).$$
(28)
Thus, for small $`\mu `$ in the thermodynamic limit, the Haldane-Wu and Gentile statistics are close not only to each other but to any extensive statistics for which two first Taylor coefficients of $`f(t)`$ are $`P_0=P_1=1`$. For instance, for small $`\mu `$ the Haldane-Wu and Gentile statistics are close also to the statistics of $`\gamma `$-ons (18).

Consider now $`\mu =Gϵ`$ for small positive $`ϵ`$. Then, employing (28) and the symmetry (20), we derive: $`s_G(Gϵ)=(1\mathrm{ln}ϵ)ϵ+O(ϵ^2)`$. On the other hand, setting $`\mu =1/gϵ`$ in (23), we obtain $`\widehat{s}_g(1/gϵ)=(12\mathrm{ln}g\mathrm{ln}ϵ)gϵ+O(ϵ^2)`$. We see that in a vicinity of $`\mu =G`$ the difference between $`s_G(\mu )`$ and $`\widehat{s}_{1/G}(\mu )`$ is not even of first order in $`ϵ`$ but of order $`ϵ\mathrm{ln}ϵ`$ (so that the corresponding plots are visibly different here, see Fig. 1).

Summarizing, it appears plausible that the Gentile statistics of order $`G>1`$ majorizes the Haldane-Wu statistics with parameter $`g=1/G`$ and these statistics are not close except for small values of $`\mu =n/N`$.

## 4 Thermodynamic Bethe ansatz equation

Now we will consider a relativistic multi-particle system of $`l`$ different species of particles confined to a finite region of the size $`L`$. We denote by $`n_a`$ the number of particles and by $`N_a`$ the dimension of the Fock-space related to the species $`a`$. In the thermodynamic limit both the dimensions of the Fock-space and the size $`L`$ of the region were the system is confined approach infinity but the ratios $`n_a/L`$ remain finite . For the fraction of particles with rapidities between $`\theta \mathrm{\Delta }\theta /2`$ and $`\theta +\mathrm{\Delta }\theta /2`$ it is convenient to introduce densities

$$\mathrm{\Delta }N_a=\rho _a(\theta )\mathrm{\Delta }\theta L,\mathrm{\Delta }n_a=\rho _a^r(\theta )\mathrm{\Delta }\theta L.$$
(29)
As usual, the rapidity $`\theta `$ parameterizes the two-momentum $`P=m(\mathrm{cosh}\theta ,\mathrm{sinh}\theta )`$ and the total energy of the system is given by

$$E\left[\rho ^r\right]=L\underset{a=1}{\overset{l}{}}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}d\theta \rho _a^r(\theta )m_a\mathrm{cosh}\theta .$$
(30)
According to (29) the variable $`\mu `$ in (12) is now related to the particle densities

$$\mu _a(\theta )=\rho _a^r(\theta )/\rho _a(\theta ).$$
(31)
Thus, we can express the entropy as the following functional

$$S[\rho ,\rho ^r]=kL\underset{a=1}{\overset{l}{}}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}d\theta \rho _a(\theta )s(\mu _a)=kL\underset{a=1}{\overset{l}{}}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}d\theta \left\{\rho _a(\theta )\mathrm{ln}f_a(x_a(\theta ))\rho _a^r(\theta )\mathrm{ln}x_a(\theta )\right\},$$
(32)
where each $`x_a(\theta )`$ satisfies (10) and hence it is a function of $`\rho _a^r(\theta )/\rho _a(\theta )`$. The subscript of $`f_a`$ means that different species may have different single-state partition functions.

In the formulation of the TBA equation for ordinary statistics it is common to introduce the so-called pseudo-energies $`ϵ_a(\theta )`$ such that bosonic (upper sign) and fermionic (lower sign) distributions are $`\rho _a^r(\theta )/\rho _a(\theta )=\left(\mathrm{exp}(ϵ_a(\theta ))1\right)^1`$. In view of (10), it is natural to define the pseudo-energies for an arbitrary extensive statistics as follows

$$ϵ_a(\theta )=\mathrm{ln}x_a(\theta ),$$
(33)
so that $`\rho _a^r(\theta )/\rho _a(\theta )=_{ϵ_a(\theta )}\mathrm{ln}f_a(e^{ϵ_a(\theta )})`$. For instance, the distribution for the Gentile statistics acquires the following form in terms of the pseudo-energies (with a slightly different meaning it was introduced by Gentile  for an ideal gas)

$$\frac{\rho _a^r(\theta )}{\rho _a(\theta )}=\frac{_{k=1}^{G_a}k\mathrm{exp}\{(G_ak)ϵ_a(\theta )\}}{_{k=0}^{G_a}\mathrm{exp}\{kϵ_a(\theta )\}}.$$
(34)
According to the fundamental principles of thermodynamics the equilibrium state of a system is found by minimizing the free energy $`F`$. Hence, keeping the temperature constant we obtain the equilibrium condition by minimizing $`F[\rho ,\rho ^r]=E\left[\rho ^r\right]TS[\rho ,\rho ^r]`$ with respect to $`\rho _a^r`$. The equilibrium condition reads

$$\frac{\delta F}{\delta \rho _a^r}=\frac{\delta E}{\delta \rho _a^r}T\frac{\delta S}{\delta \rho _a^r}T\underset{b=1}{\overset{l}{}}\frac{\delta S}{\delta \rho _b}\frac{\delta \rho _b}{\delta \rho _a^r}=0.$$
(35)
The admissible momenta in the system are restricted by the boundary conditions. To derive the corresponding quantization equations one takes a particle in the multi-particle wave function on a trip through the whole system . The particle will scatter with all other particles, which yields the following set of equations determining admissible rapidities

$$\mathrm{exp}(iLm_i\mathrm{sinh}\theta _i)\underset{ji}{\overset{N}{}}S_{ij}(\theta _i\theta _j)=\kappa _i,i=1,\mathrm{},N,$$
(36)
where $`N=_aN_a`$, and $`S_{ij}(\theta )`$ is a two-particle scattering matrix. The constant phases $`\kappa _i`$ on the r.h.s. of (36) may depend on the particle’s species; for our purposes their exact values are irrelevant. Taking the logarithmic derivative of (36) and employing densities as in (29), we obtain

$$m_a\mathrm{cosh}\theta +2\pi \underset{b=1}{\overset{l}{}}\left(\phi _{ab}\rho _b^r\right)(\theta )=2\pi \rho _a(\theta ).$$
(37)
Here $`(uv)(\theta )1/(2\pi )d\theta ^{}u(\theta \theta ^{})v(\theta ^{})`$ stands for the convolution and we introduced as usual the notation $`\phi _{ab}(\theta )=i_\theta (\mathrm{ln}S_{ab}(\theta ))`$.

Employing equations (10), (12) and (31), we compute variations of the entropy (32):

$$\delta S/\delta \rho _a^r=\mathrm{ln}x_a(\theta ),\delta S/\delta \rho _a=\mathrm{ln}f_a(x_a(\theta )).$$
(38)
Substitution of these relations into the equilibrium condition (35) together with (37) yields the desired thermodynamic Bethe ansatz equations for a system in which statistical interaction between particles of $`a`$-th species is described by a single-state partition function $`f_a`$,

$$\frac{1}{kT}m_a\mathrm{cosh}\theta =\mathrm{ln}x_a(\theta )+\underset{b=1}{\overset{l}{}}\left(\phi _{ab}\mathrm{ln}f_b(x_b)\right)(\theta ).$$
(39)
In general, this set of integral equations cannot be solved analytically. However, one can try to solve these TBA equations numerically with the help of the iteration method (as we will do for some examples in Section 7). For the ordinary statistics and the Haldane-Wu case it is known that such an iterative procedure converges provided that $`\phi _{ab}(\theta )`$ falls off sufficiently fast. The most complete proof of this assertion is presented in  and is based on the fixed point theorem. Presumably this proof extends to the case of (39) (although some further restrictions on $`f_a(t)`$ may be required), but we will not discuss this here. Let us notice only that if (39) can be solved iteratively and $`\phi _{ab}(\theta )`$ is symmetric in $`\theta `$ (which is always the case for a unitary S-matrix), then $`x_a(\theta )`$ is also symmetric in $`\theta `$.

We now substitute the expressions for the total energy (30) and the entropy (32) together with equations (37) and (39) back into the expression for the free energy, and obtain

$$F(T)=\frac{LkT}{2\pi }\underset{a=1}{\overset{l}{}}m_a_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}d\theta \mathrm{cosh}\theta \mathrm{ln}f_a(x_a(\theta )).$$
(40)
The relation between the free energy and the finite-size scaling function is well-known to be $`c(T)=6F(T)/(\pi LT^2)`$ . As usual we introduce a variable $`r=1/T`$ and set now the Boltzmann constant to be one. Then the finite-size scaling function acquires the form

$$c(r)=\underset{a=1}{\overset{l}{}}\frac{6m_ar}{\pi ^2}_0^{\mathrm{}}d\theta \mathrm{cosh}\theta \mathrm{ln}f_a(x_a(\theta )).$$
(41)
Here we assumed that $`x_a(\theta )=x_a(\theta )`$. Once more for $`f(t)=1+t`$ and $`f(t)=1/(1t)`$ we recover the well-known expressions for the fermionic and bosonic scaling functions.

It is instructive to compare the above TBA equation (39) and the finite-size scaling function (41) with those for the Haldane-Wu statistics :

$$\frac{1}{kT}m_a\mathrm{cosh}\theta =\mathrm{ln}(1+y_a(\theta ))+\underset{b=1}{\overset{l}{}}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_{ab}\mathrm{ln}(1+y_b^1)\right)(\theta ),$$
(42)
$$c_g(r)=\underset{a=1}{\overset{l}{}}\frac{6m_ar}{\pi ^2}_0^{\mathrm{}}d\theta \mathrm{cosh}\theta \mathrm{ln}(1+y_a^1(\theta )).$$
(43)
Here $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ab}(\theta )=\phi _{ab}(\theta )2\pi g_{ab}\delta (\theta )`$, and $`g`$ is a matrix which appears on the r.h.s. of (22) if we consider a system of several species. As was discussed in , the TBA equation (42) leads to an equivalence principle: two systems having the same mass spectra and identical quantities $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ab}(\theta )`$ are thermodynamically equivalent (as seen from (43), their finite-size scaling functions coincide). Our TBA equation (39) does not possess such a feature. More precisely, for (39) there exists no way to compensate a difference in statistics by a change of $`\phi _{ab}(\theta )`$ independent of the explicit form of the S-matrix.

## 5 Y-systems

For some class of models it is possible to carry out certain manipulations on the TBA equations such that the original integral TBA equations acquire the form of a set of functional equations in new variables $`Y_a`$ . These functional equations (commonly referred to as Y-systems) have the further virtue that unlike the original TBA equations they do not involve the mass spectrum. In the $`Y`$-variables certain periodicities in the rapidities are exhibited more clearly. These periodicities may then be utilized in order to express the quantity $`Y_a(\theta )`$ as a Fourier series, which in turn is useful to find solution of the TBA equations and expand the scaling function as a power series in the scaling parameter $`r`$. We will now demonstrate that similar equations may be derived for a multi-particle system in which the dynamical scattering is governed by the scattering matrix related to the ADE-affine Toda field theories and the statistical interaction is of a general type considered above.

Consider the minimal part (i.e., independent of the coupling constant) of the scattering matrix of the ADE-affine Toda field theories. As was shown in , upon appropriate choice of CDD-ambiguities, these S-matrices satisfy the identity

$$\phi _{ab}\left(\theta +\frac{i\pi }{h}\right)+\phi _{ab}\left(\theta \frac{i\pi }{h}\right)=\underset{c=1}{\overset{l}{}}I_{ac}\phi _{cb}(\theta )2\pi I_{ab}\delta (\theta ),$$
(44)
where $`h`$ denotes the Coxeter number, $`l`$ the rank and $`I`$ the incidence matrix of the corresponding Lie algebra. It is then straightforward to derive the “Y-system”

$$Y_a\left(\theta +\frac{i\pi }{h}\right)Y_a\left(\theta \frac{i\pi }{h}\right)=\underset{b=1}{\overset{l}{}}\left(z_b(Y_b(\theta ))\right)^{I_{ab}},$$
(45)
where $`Y_a(\theta )=x_a^1(\theta )`$ and

$$z_a(t)=tf_a(t^1).$$
(46)
Equations (45) follow upon first adding (39) at $`\theta +\frac{i\pi }{h}`$ and $`\theta \frac{i\pi }{h}`$ and subtracting $`I`$ times (39) at $`\theta `$ from the sum. Thereafter we employ the fact  that the masses of an ADE affine Toda field theory are proportional to the Perron-Frobenius vector of the corresponding Cartan matrix, i.e., $`_bC_{ab}m_b=4\mathrm{sin}^2(\pi /(2h))m_a`$. Then, with the help of (44), equations (45) follow.

In comparison with (39) equations (45) have already the virtue that they are simple functional equations and do not involve the mass spectrum. For the Gentile statistics we have $`z(t)=t+1+t^1+\mathrm{}+t^{1G}`$. In particular, for $`G=1`$ we have $`z(Y)=1+Y`$ and recover the known fermionic Y-system. The bosonic case ($`G=\mathrm{}`$) corresponds to $`z(Y)=Y^2/(Y1)`$. And the case of $`G=2`$ seems to be particularly interesting since here $`z(Y)=1+Y+Y^1`$ possesses an additional symmetry $`z(Y)=z(Y^1)`$ or, equivalently, $`z(ϵ_a(\theta ))=z(ϵ_a(\theta ))`$.

## 6 Ultraviolet limit

In the small $`r`$ limit the scaling function $`c(r)`$ becomes the effective central charge of a conformal field theory  which describes the ultraviolet limit of a given massive model. That is, $`lim_{r0}c(r)=c_{\mathrm{eff}}c24h^{}`$, where $`c`$ is the conformal anomaly and $`h^{}`$ is the lowest conformal weight in the corresponding conformal field theory.

In order to evaluate $`c(r)`$ in the $`r0`$ limit we substitute the derivative of (39) into (41), replacing in both equations $`\mathrm{cosh}\theta `$ by $`\frac{1}{2}e^\theta `$. Then we integrate the resulting equation by parts, assuming that $`\phi _{ab}(\theta )`$ is symmetric and falls off sufficiently fast (typically, $`\phi _{ab}(\theta )=O(e^\theta )`$ as $`\theta \mathrm{}`$). Next we substitute back equation (39). Finally we change variables from $`\theta `$ to $`x(\theta )`$, taking into account that $`x(\mathrm{})=0`$ (as follows from (39)), and again integrate by parts. All this yields

$$c_{\mathrm{eff}}=\frac{6}{\pi ^2}\underset{a=1}{\overset{l}{}}c_a,$$
(47)
$$c_a=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}x_a\mathrm{ln}f_a(x_a)+_0^{x_a}\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{t}\mathrm{ln}f_a(t).$$
(48)
Here we denoted $`x_ax_a(\theta =0)`$. These quantities can be determined from the constant TBA equations that follow from (39) when $`r0`$ (this derivation requires that $`x_a(\theta )`$ become constant in a region of $`\theta `$ of order $`\mathrm{ln}r`$ when $`r`$ is small; see more detailed explanations in )

$$\mathrm{ln}x_a=\underset{b=1}{\overset{l}{}}N_{ab}\mathrm{ln}f_b(x_b),a=1,\mathrm{},l,$$
(49)
where $`2\pi N_{ab}=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}d\theta \phi _{ab}(\theta )`$.

As a simple example we consider the statistics of $`\gamma `$-ons (18), assuming for simplicity that $`\gamma `$ is the same for all species (generalization to different $`\gamma _a`$ is obvious). Here the integral in (48) can be computed explicitly in terms of the Euler dilogarithm which is defined for $`t1`$ as $`Li_2(t)=_{k1}t^k/k^2`$. We have

$$_0^x\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{t}\mathrm{ln}f_\gamma (t)=\frac{1}{\gamma }_0^x\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{t}\mathrm{ln}(1+\gamma t)=\frac{1}{\gamma }\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(\gamma x)^k}{k^2}=\frac{1}{\gamma }Li_2(\gamma x)$$

and hence

$$c_a=\frac{1}{\gamma }Li_2(\gamma x_a)\frac{1}{2\gamma }\mathrm{ln}x_a\mathrm{ln}(1+\gamma x_a),$$
(50)
where $`x_a`$ satisfies (49). Since $`Li_2(t)=\frac{1}{2}Li_2(t^2)Li_2(t)`$, we can rewrite (50) for positive $`\gamma `$ employing the Rogers dilogarithm which is defined as $`L(t)=Li_2(t)+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}t\mathrm{ln}(1t)`$ for $`0t1`$. Then, using the Abel identity $`L(t^2)=2L(t)2L(\frac{t}{1+t})`$, we obtain

$$c_a=\frac{1}{\gamma }L\left(\frac{\gamma x_a}{1+\gamma x_a}\right)+\frac{1}{2\gamma }\mathrm{ln}\gamma \mathrm{ln}(1+\gamma x_a).$$
(51)
Notice that this expression does not diverge for small $`\gamma `$; $`lim_{\gamma 0}c_a=x_a(1\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}x_a)`$ is the value corresponding to the Boltzmann statistics.

Consider now the Gentile statistics, assuming that the order $`G`$ is the same for all species. In this case we also can compute the integral in (48) explicitly:

$$_0^x\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{t}\mathrm{ln}f_G(t)=_0^x\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{t}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{1t^{G+1}}{1t}\right)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{k^2}\left(x^k\frac{x^{k(G+1)}}{G+1}\right)=Li_2(x)\frac{Li_2\left(x^{(G+1)}\right)}{G+1},$$

and we see that for the Gentile statistics expression (48) acquires the following nice form involving only the Rogers dilogarithms:

$$c_a=L\left(x_a\right)\frac{1}{G+1}L\left(x_a^{G+1}\right).$$
(52)
Introducing, in agreement with (33), the constants $`ϵ_a=\mathrm{ln}x_a`$, we obtain from (52) for $`G=\mathrm{}`$ and $`G=1`$

$$c_a=L(e^{ϵ_a})\mathrm{and}c_a=L(e^{ϵ_a})\frac{1}{2}L(e^{2ϵ_a}).$$
(53)
These are the well-known values for the bosonic and fermionic statistics . Notice that in the latter case one usually derives $`c_a=L(\frac{1}{1+e^{ϵ_a}})`$. This is equivalent to our formula (53) due to the Abel identity. In fact, the Abel identity can be used in a similar way for any $`G`$ of the form $`G=2^m1`$. In this case we can rewrite (52) as follows

$$c_a=\underset{k=1}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{1}{2^{k1}}L\left(\frac{(x_a)^{2^{k1}}}{1+(x_a)^{2^{k1}}}\right).$$
(54)
In this form $`c_a`$ is a manifestly positive and monotonic function of $`x_a`$ (the dilogarithm $`L(t)`$ grows monotonically for $`0t1`$). Actually, this property holds not only for the Gentile statistics but in general case as well. To prove this statement we take a derivative of (48) and use (10) and the formula (12) for the entropy density. This yields

$$_{x_a}c_a=\frac{s(\mu _a(x_a))}{2x_a}.$$
(55)
As we discussed in Section 2, we should consider only such models where $`s(\mu (x))>0`$. In this case the r.h.s. of (55) is positive. Hence, $`c_a`$ is always a monotonically increasing function of $`x_a`$ (and therefore a monotonically decreasing function of $`ϵ_a`$). Moreover, taking into account (7), we infer from (48) that $`c_a(0)=0`$, thus we also proved positivity of $`c_a(x_a)`$. Since these properties are crucial for a physical interpretation of $`c_a`$, let us underline that they hold only if the first condition in (7) is fulfilled. Let us notice also that the properties of $`c_a`$ together with (49) imply that for any model such that $`N_{ab}0`$ (which is the case, for instance, for all the ADE-affine Toda models ) the value of $`c_a`$ does not exceed that of the corresponding free model (where all $`N_{ab}=0`$ and consequently all $`x_a=1`$). Hence, (48) evaluated for $`x_a=1`$ yields the upper bound on $`c_a`$,

$$c_a_0^1\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{t}\mathrm{ln}f_a(t).$$
(56)
Notice, however, that for a statistics of the type IIIb with $`R<1`$ we have $`x_a<1`$, so that in this case the upper bound on $`c_a`$ will be lower than (56). From a physical point of view this implies that such a statistics cannot emerge in models with weak interaction and, in particular, in a free model.

It was argued in  that the quantity $`\frac{6}{\pi ^2}c_a`$ (for the ordinary statistics) can be interpreted as a massless degree of freedom associated to the $`a`$-th species in the massive model. The properties of $`c_a`$ which we proved above show that the interpretation of $`\frac{6}{\pi ^2}c_a`$ can be extended to the case of a generalized extensive statistics as well. In this context, it is important to remark that for the ordinary statistics (actually, for the Gentile statistics of any order) we have $`\frac{6}{\pi ^2}c_a1`$ as follows from (52) (recall that $`L(1)=Li_2(1)=\pi ^2/6`$) if all $`N_{ab}`$ are non-negative. However, for a general statistics the upper bound (56) on $`\frac{6}{\pi ^2}c_a`$ depends on the choice of $`f_a`$ and may not equal to one. For instance, taking $`f_a(t)=(1t)^m`$ with $`m>1`$, we obtain $`\frac{6}{\pi ^2}c_a=m`$ for the corresponding free theory. In such a case, the massless degree of freedom of the corresponding free particle exceeds that of a free boson. This can possibly imply that we have to restrict the choice of statistics to such $`f_a`$ that $`c_a\frac{\pi ^2}{6}`$.

## 7 Examples related to affine Toda models

### 7.1 Ising and Klein-Gordon models

The most simple examples which illustrate the features outlined above more concretely are the Ising model ($`A_1`$-minimal affine Toda field theory) with $`S(\theta )=1`$ and the Klein-Gordon model with $`S(\theta )=1.`$ In both cases equation (39) is solved trivially, $`x(\theta )=\mathrm{exp}\{rm\mathrm{cosh}\theta \}`$. Then for the Gentile statistics (2) we can compute the entire scaling function (41):

$`c_G(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{6rm}{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}d\theta \mathrm{cosh}\theta \left(\mathrm{ln}(1e^{(G+1)rm\mathrm{cosh}\theta })\mathrm{ln}(1e^{rm\mathrm{cosh}\theta })\right)`$ (57)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{6rm}{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}\left(K_1(krm)K_1((G+1)krm)\right),`$
where $`K_1(t)`$ is the modified Bessel function. We depict $`c_G(r)`$ in Fig. 2, referring to them by a slight abuse of notation as $`A_1`$. One observes that the difference in statistics affects most severely the ultraviolet region. The scaling functions for different $`G`$ converge relatively fast towards each other in the infrared regime. These appear to be common features of a general deformed statistics.

As seen from Fig. 2, the behaviour of $`c_G(r)`$ in the ultraviolet region (there is no first order term in the small $`r`$ expansion of $`c_G(r)`$) is similar for any finite $`G`$ to that of the fermionic scaling function and is different from the bosonic case (where the first order term is present). To explain this we observe that, as follows from (57),

$$c_G(r)=c_\mathrm{b}(r)\frac{1}{G+1}c_\mathrm{b}((G+1)r),$$
(58)
where $`c_\mathrm{b}(r)`$ is the bosonic scaling function. Now it is obvious that the first order terms on the r.h.s. of (58) cancel each other for any finite $`G`$.

The well-known property of the asymptotic behaviour of the modified Bessel function, $`lim_{t0}tK_1(t)=1`$, allows us to derive from (57)

$$c_G^{\mathrm{eff}}=\underset{r0}{lim}c_G(r)=\frac{6}{\pi ^2}\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{k^2}\left(1\frac{1}{G+1}\right)=\frac{G}{G+1},$$
(59)
which is in agreement with (52) since $`x_a=1`$ now. It is worth noticing that $`c_G^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ can be identified for every positive integer $`G`$ as the effective central charge of a minimal conformal model $`(s,t)`$ (such that $`st=6(G+1)`$). In particular, $`G=1,2,3,4`$ correspond to the $`(3,4)`$, $`(2,9)`$, $`(3,8)`$, $`(5,6)`$ minimal models, respectively.

For the $`\gamma `$-ons (18) the scaling function related to the $`A_1`$-models can also be computed:

$$c_\gamma (r)=\frac{6rm}{\gamma \pi ^2}_0^{\mathrm{}}d\theta \mathrm{cosh}\theta \mathrm{ln}(1+\gamma e^{rm\mathrm{cosh}\theta })=\frac{6rm}{\pi ^2}\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{k}(\gamma )^{k1}K_1(krm).$$
(60)
Using again the asymptotic behaviour of the modified Bessel function, we obtain $`c_\gamma ^{\mathrm{eff}}=lim_{r0}c_\gamma (r)=\frac{6}{\gamma \pi ^2}Li_2(\gamma )`$ in agreement with (50). Here, unlike in the Gentile case, it is not easy to see whether the effective central charge $`c_\gamma ^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ has rational value for a given $`\gamma `$. As we discussed in Section 2, positive $`\gamma `$ is to be of the form $`\gamma =1/d`$ with $`d`$ positive integer. It appears then that the only $`d`$ leading to rational value of $`c_\gamma ^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is $`d=1`$. On the other hand, $`\gamma `$ varies continuously in the range $`1\gamma 0`$, so that any rational value of $`c_\gamma ^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ not exceeding $`\frac{6}{\pi ^2}`$ occurs here. For the Boltzmann statistics $`c_0^{\mathrm{eff}}=\frac{6}{\pi ^2}`$ is irrational. Finally, $`\gamma <1`$ is the case of a type IIIb statistics with $`R<1`$, which, as we discussed above, cannot emerge in a free model.

### 7.2 Scaling Potts and Yang-Lee models

Next we consider the scaling Potts model, which was studied previously in the TBA framework for the fermionic statistics in  and for the Haldane-Wu statistics in . The two particles in the model are conjugate to each other and consequently their masses are the same, $`m_1=m_2=m`$. The conjugate particle occurs as a bound state when two particles of the same species scatter. The S-matrix of the scaling Potts model equals the minimal S-matrix of the $`A_2`$-affine Toda field theory. The corresponding quantities $`\phi _{ab}(\theta )`$ that enter the TBA equation are given by

$$\phi _{11}(\theta )=\phi _{22}(\theta )=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2\mathrm{cosh}\theta +1}\mathrm{and}\phi _{12}(\theta )=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{12\mathrm{cosh}\theta }.$$
(61)
Consider the scaling Potts model with both species of particles obeying the Gentile statistics of the same order $`G`$. In this case the $`Z_2`$-symmetry of the model is preserved so that $`x_1(\theta )=x_2(\theta )x(\theta )`$ and (39) reduces to a single integral equation. It appears to be impossible to find an analytic solution $`x(\theta )`$ to this equation, but it is straightforward to solve it numerically. Taking $`x^{[0]}(\theta )=\mathrm{exp}\{rm\mathrm{cosh}\theta \}`$ as the first approximation, we can iterate (39) as follows

$$\mathrm{ln}\left(x^{[n+1]}(\theta )\right)=rm\mathrm{cosh}\theta \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}d\theta ^{}\frac{\mathrm{cosh}(\theta \theta ^{})}{1+2\mathrm{cosh}2(\theta \theta ^{})}\mathrm{ln}\left(f_G\left(x^{[n]}(\theta ^{})\right)\right).$$
(62)
Convergence is achieved relatively quickly (it depends on the value of $`mr`$). The results for $`G=1`$ (which is in complete agreement with the calculation in ) and for $`G=2`$ are shown in Fig. 3. To make contact with the literature, we introduced the quantity $`L(\theta )=\mathrm{ln}f_G(x(\theta ))`$. One observes the typical plateau $`L(\theta )=const`$ for some region of $`\theta `$ when $`mr0`$, which is required to derive (49). We see also that for the same value of $`mr`$ the functions $`L(\theta )`$ corresponding to different $`G`$ have similar profiles but different heights of the plateau.

Having solved the generalized TBA equation, we can substitute $`x(\theta )`$ into (41) and compute the entire scaling function $`c_G(mr)`$. The result of the numerical computation is shown in Fig. 4. The behaviour of the scaling functions is similar to what we have already observed in the $`A_1`$ case.

Due to the fact that the scattering matrices of the scaling Potts model and the scaling Yang-Lee model are related as $`S^{YL}(\theta )=S_{11}^{A_2}(\theta )S_{12}^{A_2}(\theta )`$, the generalized TBA equations for the two models coincide. The only difference is that the scaling Yang-Lee model has only one particle. Therefore its scaling function equals a half of that for the scaling Potts model.

### 7.3 Comparison with Haldane-Wu statistics

In Section 3 we have seen that the entropy density corresponding to the Gentile statistics majorizes that for the Haldane-Wu statistics. It appears (at least for certain models) that an analogous relation holds for the corresponding finite-size scaling functions. Specifically, if $`c_G(r)`$ is the scaling function (41) of $`A_1`$ or $`A_2`$ minimal affine Toda model where all species obey order $`G`$ Gentile statistics and $`c_g(r)`$ is the scaling function (43) of the same model where the Haldane-Wu statistical interaction is of the form $`g_{ab}=\frac{1}{G}\delta _{ab}`$, then for all $`r0`$ we have

$$c_G(r)>c_g(r),\mathrm{where}g_{ab}=\frac{1}{G}\delta _{ab}\mathrm{and}G>1.$$
(63)
For the $`A_1`$ case we can rigorously prove relation (63) since the solutions of the generalized TBA equations (39) and (42) are found explicitly:

$$g\mathrm{ln}y(\theta )+(1g)\mathrm{ln}(1+y(\theta ))=mr\mathrm{cosh}\theta =\mathrm{ln}x(\theta ).$$
(64)
This equation allows us to express $`x(\theta )`$ in terms of $`y(\theta )`$:

$$x(\theta )=y^g(\theta )(1+y(\theta ))^{g1}.$$
(65)
Moreover, since $`mr\mathrm{cosh}\theta >0`$, we infer from (64) that

$$y(\theta )>y_0,\mathrm{where}y_0^g=(1+y_0)^{g1}.$$
(66)
As seen from (41) and (43), in order to establish (63) it suffices to show that $`f_{G=1/g}(x(\theta ))>1+y^1(\theta )`$. The latter relation is equivalent to the inequality

$$1(1+y(\theta ))^{\frac{1}{g}}>y^g(\theta )(1+y(\theta ))^g,$$
(67)
as can be verified by simple algebraic manipulations using formula (65). Now it is elementary to check that (67) is valid provided that (66) holds. Thus, we proved the assertion (63) in the $`A_1`$ case. For illustration, the scaling function $`c_g(r)`$ for $`g=1/2`$ Haldane-Wu statistics is shown in Fig. 2. It lies everywhere below $`c_G(r)`$ for $`G=2`$ Gentile statistics with the maximal difference reached in the ultraviolet region.

For a higher rank case, already for $`A_2`$, the generalized TBA equations are integral and it is not clear whether we can compare $`x_a(\theta )`$ and $`y_a(\theta )`$ analytically. However, numerical computations for various $`G`$ show that (63) holds in the $`A_2`$ case as well. For illustration, we present in Fig. 4 the scaling function $`c_g(r)`$ for the Haldane-Wu statistics with $`g_{ab}=\frac{1}{2}\delta _{ab}`$.

A particular consequence of (63) is the following inequality for the corresponding central charges:

$$c_G^{\mathrm{eff}}>c_g^{\mathrm{eff}},\mathrm{for}g_{ab}=\frac{1}{G}\delta _{ab}\mathrm{and}G>1.$$
(68)
Here $`c_G^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is found from (47), (49) and (52) whereas $`c_g^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is the effective central charge related to the Haldane-Wu statistics with $`g_{ab}=\frac{1}{G}\delta _{ab}`$ and is given by

$$c_g^{\mathrm{eff}}=\frac{6}{\pi ^2}\underset{a=1}{\overset{l}{}}L\left(\frac{1}{1+y_a}\right),\mathrm{where}\mathrm{ln}(1+y_a)=\underset{b=1}{\overset{l}{}}(N_{ab}+g\delta _{ab})\mathrm{ln}(1+y_a^1).$$
(69)
Again, in the $`A_1`$ case we can prove relation (68) directly. Here $`c_G^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ has a simple form (59) and therefore (68) reduces to

$$\frac{1}{1+g}>\frac{6}{\pi ^2}L\left(\frac{1}{1+y_0}\right),$$
(70)
where $`y_0`$ is defined as in (66). Notice that $`g<y_0<1`$ for $`g0,1`$ (since $`y_0g`$ would contradict (26)). Therefore, $`\frac{1}{2}<\frac{1}{1+y_0}<\frac{1}{1+g}`$. Using now a property of the dilogarithm,

$$L(t)<\frac{\pi ^2}{6}t\mathrm{for}\frac{1}{2}<t<1;L(t)>\frac{\pi ^2}{6}t\mathrm{for}0<t<\frac{1}{2},$$
(71)
we establish the desired inequality (70).

As we discussed above, the order $`G`$ of the Gentile statistics is to be a positive integer. However, if we regard (47), (49) and (52) as a definition of the quantity $`c_G^{\mathrm{eff}}`$, then (70) extends to any $`G>1`$ (since the proof does not require that $`G`$ be an integer) as shown in Fig. 5. Furthermore, considering $`G`$ in the range $`0<G<1`$, we can prove with the help of (26) that here $`y_0<g`$ and hence $`\frac{6}{\pi ^2}L(\frac{1}{1+y_0})>\frac{1}{1+g}`$ due to (71). Thus, for this range of $`G`$ we have a reverse inequality, i.e.,

$$c_G^{\mathrm{eff}}<c_g^{\mathrm{eff}},\mathrm{for}g_{ab}=\frac{1}{G}\delta _{ab}\mathrm{and}0<G<1.$$
(72)
As we will see below, this inequality holds for higher rank cases as well. But let us stress again that $`c_G^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ in (72) is a formally defined quantity which is not related directly to the Gentile statistics.

The inequality for the central charges (68) is a weaker statement than the inequality for the scaling functions (63). Furthermore, (68) involves dilogarithms, which makes its proof more complicated (already in the $`A_1`$ case we used a rather subtle property (71)). But the advantage of (68) for a numerical verification is that it relates numbers and not functions as (63). Moreover, since $`c(r)`$ is a continuous function, validity of (68) implies that (63) holds at least in some ultraviolet region. Therefore, we will discuss below validity of (68) for several affine Toda models. As a mathematical by-product, this provides us with interesting dilogarithm inequalities.

In the $`A_2`$ case, eq. (68) contains dilogarithms in a more involved way. As seen from (49), (52) and (69), it is equivalent to the following inequality

$$L(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)\frac{g}{1+g}L\left(\stackrel{~}{x}_0^{1+\frac{1}{g}}\right)>L\left(\frac{1}{1+\stackrel{~}{y}_0}\right),\mathrm{for}0<g<1.$$
(73)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{x}_0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{y}_0`$ are determined from the following equations that follow from (49) and (69) upon noticing that $`N_{11}+N_{12}=1`$

$$\stackrel{~}{x}_0f_{1/g}(\stackrel{~}{x}_0)=1\mathrm{and}\stackrel{~}{y}_0^{1+g}=(1+\stackrel{~}{y}_0)^g.$$
(74)
It is worth remarking that, as was noticed in , $`\frac{6}{\pi ^2}L(\frac{1}{1+\stackrel{~}{y}_0})`$ coincides with the effective central charge of the Calogero-Sutherland model with the coupling constant $`\lambda =g`$.

Numerical computations show that (73) indeed holds for any $`0<g<1`$, that is for any $`G>1`$ (here again we need not to restrict $`G`$ to be an integer). Furthermore, like in the $`A_1`$ case, inequality (73) reverses for $`0<G<1`$, i.e., for $`g>1`$. For illustration, we depict the corresponding $`c_G^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ and $`c_g^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ in Fig. 5. This result provides an additional support to our claim that in the $`A_2`$ case the entire scaling function $`c_G(r)`$ majorizes $`c_g(r)`$ for $`G>1`$.

It is interesting to remark that, as follows from (52) and (69), the bosonic version ($`G=\mathrm{}`$ or, equivalently, $`g=0`$) of the $`A_2`$-minimal affine Toda model has $`c_a=\frac{1}{2}`$. That is, then each species in the scaling Potts model (or the only species in the scaling Yang-Lee model) appears to be a free fermion, whereas the entire central charge is that of a free boson (see also related comments in ). That is why all curves on Fig. 5 converge to the same value $`c=1`$.

### 7.4 Higher rank cases

Now we discuss briefly the simplest minimal affine Toda models which have particle species with different masses. We will compare numerical values of $`c_G^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ and $`c_g^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ again setting $`g_{ab}=\frac{1}{G}\delta _{ab}`$. For this purpose we use (49) and (69), taking into account  that the $`N`$-matrix in these equations is given by $`N_𝐠=I_𝐠(2I_𝐠)^1`$, where $`I_𝐠`$ stands for the incidence matrix of the corresponding Lie algebra g.

In the $`A_3`$ case the masses of the three species are $`m_1=m_3=m_2/\sqrt{2}`$. Then, computing $`c_G^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ by formulae (49) and (52), we find: $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}0.77`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}=1`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.12`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.16`$ for $`G=\frac{1}{2},1,2,\mathrm{}`$, respectively. The values of $`c_g^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ corresponding to the Haldane-Wu statistics with $`g_{ab}=\frac{1}{G}\delta _{ab}`$ were found in : $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}0.89`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}=1`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.07`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.16`$ for $`g=2,1,\frac{1}{2},0`$, respectively. Carring out analogous computations for the $`A_4`$ case, where the masses of the four species are $`m_1=m_4`$, $`m_2=m_3=m_1(\sqrt{5}+1)/2`$, we find (Gentile statistics): $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}0.92`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}=8/7`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.25`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.28`$ for $`G=\frac{1}{2},1,2,\mathrm{}`$, respectively; and (Haldane-Wu statistics): $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.05`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}=8/7`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.20`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.28`$ for $`g=2,1,\frac{1}{2},0`$, respectively.

One can also consider a folded algebra case with two different masses, namely $`A_4^{(2)}`$, where $`m_2=m_1(\sqrt{5}+1)/2`$. In general, one assigns to the $`A_{2n}^{(2)}`$ minimal affine Toda model a tad-pole graph  such that the corresponding incidence matrix differs from that of $`A_n`$ only by 1 in the lower-right entry. Then one can check that $`x_a`$ in (49) and $`y_a`$ in (69) coincide with those for the $`A_{2n}`$ case (a well-known fact for the fermionic statistics ). Consequently, for any statistics we have $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}(A_{2n}^{(2)})=\frac{1}{2}c^{\mathrm{eff}}(A_{2n})`$. Therefore, the data for $`A_4^{(2)}`$ follow from the above results for $`A_4`$.

Finally, in the $`D_4`$ case, where the masses of the four species are $`m_1=m_3=m_4=m_2/\sqrt{3}`$, we obtain for the Gentile statistics: $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}0.82`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}=1`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.08`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.09`$ for $`G=\frac{1}{2},1,2,\mathrm{}`$, respectively; and for the Haldane-Wu statistics: $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}0.93`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}=1`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.04`$, $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}1.09`$ for $`g=2,1,\frac{1}{2},0`$, respectively.

We see that all the above results are in agreement with (68) and (72). This, together with the more detailed results we obtained in the $`A_1`$ and $`A_2`$ cases, allows us to conjecture that these inequalities and the inequality (63) for the scaling functions hold actually for all simply-laced minimal affine Toda models.

We remark also that in all the computations of $`c^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ in this subsection we always have the rule that the value of $`c_a`$ is smaller for the species which has heavier particle (this was known for the fermionic statistics ). This observation provides an additional support to the above discussed interpretation of $`\frac{6}{\pi ^2}c_a`$ as a massless degree of freedom of the corresponding particle.

## 8 Conclusion

Summarizing, we considered possible types of a generalized extensive statistics and established properties of the corresponding entropy densities. In particular, we established numerically (and gave some supporting analytical arguments) that the entropy density for the Gentile statistics of order $`G>1`$ majorizes that for the Haldane-Wu statistics if they correspond to the same maximal occupancy. Further, we derived the thermodynamic Bethe ansatz equation and the finite-size scaling function $`c(r)`$ for a relativistic multi-particle system obeying a generalized extensive exclusion statistics. We put particular emphasis on the ultraviolet limit of such a system. We derived an expression for an effective central charge in the general case and showed that for the Gentile statistics it acquires an elegant form involving dilogarithms. We discussed a physical interpretation of the ‘partial’ central charges $`c_a`$ and argued that it possibly leads to restrictions on the choice of statistics. Finally, we observed (and partially proved) that the majorizing properties of the Gentile statistics with respect to the Haldane-Wu statistics extend also to finite-size scaling functions and central charges related to the minimal simply-laced affine Toda models.

In the presented analysis of thermodynamic properties of a relativistic multi-particle system the single-state partition function $`f(t)`$ played a key role. For a given model, if we know $`f(t)`$ (at least in the thermodynamic limit) and the quantities $`\phi _{ab}(\theta )`$, then we can compute, at least in principle, the entire scaling function which provides complete thermodynamic description of a system. In principle, $`f(t)`$ should be determinable from the corresponding Hamiltonian. However, this might be a non-trivial task since the exclusion statistics of particles can differ from the exchange statistics of the fields present in the Hamiltonian. Therefore, it may be more practical for a given system to fix an exotic statistics a-priory and investigate whether it leads to realistic physical properties. In particular, one can obtain information about the ultraviolet limit and see if it corresponds to an appropriate conformal field theory. As we have seen above, the different types (8) of $`f(t)`$ lead to significantly different thermodynamic properties. The question, which of these statistics can emerge in physical models, remains open.

Another open problem is to prove rigorously the assertion (27) that the entropy density for the Gentile statistics majorizes that for the Haldane-Wu statistics. Such a proof will probably provide a deeper insight into general properties of exotic exclusion statistics. Also it would be interesting to verify the majorizing inequalities for the scaling functions (63) and central charges (68) related to the affine Toda models and to understand whether such a majorization is a model independent feature of the two involved statistics.

Acknowledgements: I am grateful to A. Fring for proposing the problem and participation in the initial stage of the research. This work was supported in part by INTAS grant 99-01459 and by Russian Fund for Fundamental Investigations grant 99-01-00101.

$`s\left(\mu \right)`$

$`\mu `$

Fig. 1: Entropy densities for $`G=2`$ Gentile statistics (the upper curve), for $`g=1/2`$ Haldane-Wu statistics (the middle curve) and for the fermionic statistics (the lower curve).

$`c\left(mr\right)`$

$`mr`$

Fig. 2: Scaling functions of the $`A_1`$-minimal affine Toda model for the Gentile statistics of order $`G=1,2,3,4`$ (solid curves, from down to up), for $`g=1/2`$ Haldane-Wu statistics (the dashed curve) and for the bosonic statistics (the dotted curve).

$`L\left(\theta \right)`$

$`\theta `$

Fig. 3: Solution $`L(\theta )`$ of the TBA equation for the $`A_2`$-minimal affine Toda model for the scaling parameter $`mr=0.1`$ (dotted curves), $`mr=0.01`$ (dashed curves), and $`mr=0.001`$ (solid curves). For the same value of $`mr`$ the lower curve corresponds to the fermionic statistics and the upper curve to $`G=2`$ Gentile statistics.

$`c\left(mr\right)`$

$`mr`$

Fig. 4: Scaling functions of the $`A_2`$-minimal affine Toda model for the Gentile statistics of order $`G=1,2,3,4`$ (solid curves, from down to up) and for the Haldane-Wu statistics with $`g_{ab}=\frac{1}{2}\delta _{ab}`$ (the dashed curve).

$`c_{\mathrm{eff}}`$

$`G`$

Fig. 5: Effective central charge of the $`A_1`$ and $`A_2`$-minimal affine Toda models for the Gentile statistics of order $`G`$ (lower and upper solid curves) and for the Haldane-Wu statistics with $`g_{ab}=\frac{1}{G}\delta _{ab}`$ (lower and upper dashed curves).


text:
# Fluid Particle Accelerations in Fully Developed Turbulence

## Acknowledgments

This research is supported by the Physics Division of the National Science Foundation. We thank Reginald Hill, Mark Nelkin, Stephen B. Pope, Eric Siggia, and Zellman Warhaft for stimulating discussions and suggestions throughout the project. We also thank Curt Ward, who assisted in the initial development of the strip detector. EB and ALP are grateful for support from the Institute of Theoretical Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara, where parts of the manuscript were written.