text:
# Non-antisymmetric versions of Nambu-Poisson and Lie algebroid brackets

## 1 Introduction

Two main directions have been suggested for the generalization of the notion of a Lie algebra. First, Filippov developed a proposal for brackets with more than two arguments, i.e., $`n`$-ary brackets. In \[Fi\] he proposed a definition of such structures (which we shall call Filippov algebras) with a version of the Jacobi identity for $`n`$-arguments (we shall call it Filippov identity, shortly FI):

$$\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},\{g_1,\mathrm{},g_n\}\}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}\{g_1,\mathrm{},\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},g_k\},\mathrm{},g_n\}.$$
(1)
Note that in the binary case ($`n=2`$), the Filippov identity coincides with the Jacobi identity. Independently, Nambu \[Na\], looking for generalized formulations of Hamiltonian Mechanics, found $`n`$-ary analogs of Poisson brackets and then Takhtajan \[Ta\] rediscovered the Filippov identity (and called it Fundamental Identity) for them. The Filippov brackets are assumed to be $`n`$-linear and skew-symmetric and Nambu-Poisson brackets, defined on algebras of smooth functions, satisfy additionally the Leibniz rule:

$$\{f_1f_1^{},\mathrm{},f_n\}=f_1\{f_1^{},\mathrm{},\mathrm{},f_n\}+\{f_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{},f_n\}f_1^{}.$$
(2)
On the other hand, Loday (cf. \[Lo\]), while studying relations between Hochschild and cyclic homology in the context of searching for obstructions to the periodicity of algebraic K-theory, discovered that one can skip the skew-symmetry assumption in the definition of a Lie algebra, still having a possibility to define appropriate (co)homology (see \[Lo, LP\] and \[Lo1\], Chapter 10.6). His Jacobi identity for such structures was formally the same as the classical Jacobi identity in the form of (1) for $`n=2`$:

$$\{f,\{g,h\}\}=\{\{f,g\},h\}+\{g,\{f,h\}\}.$$
(3)
This time, however, this is no longer equivalent to

$$\{\{f,g\},h\}=\{\{f,h\},g\}+\{f,\{g,h\}\},$$
(4)
since we have no skew-symmetry. Loday called such structures Leibniz algebras but, since we have already associated the name of Leibniz with the Leibniz identity, we shall call them Loday algebras. This is in accordance with the terminology of \[KS\], where analogous structures in the graded case are defined. Of course, there is no particular reason not to define Loday algebras by means of (4) instead of (3) (and in fact, it was the original Loday definition), but both categories are equivalent via transposition of arguments. Similarly, for associative algebras we can obtain associated algebras by transposing arguments, but in this case we still get associative algebras. It is interesting that Nambu-Poisson brackets lead to some Loday algebras and hence to the corresponding (co)homology (see \[DT\]).

It is now clear that we can combine both generalizations and define Filippov-Loday algebras as those which are equipped with $`n`$-ary brackets, not skew-symmetric in general, but satisfying the Filippov identity. We can also define a Loday version of Nambu-Poisson algebras or rings (we shall call them Nambu-Poisson-Loday, or simply Nambu-Loday, algebras (or rings)), assuming additionally that a Filippov-Loday structure is defined on a commutative associative algebra (resp. ring) and satisfies the Leibniz rule (with respect to all arguments separately, since we have no skew-symmetry).

In this short note we first deal with the problem of finding examples of new, i.e., non antisymmetric, Nambu-Poisson-Loday brackets. The result is, to some extend, unexpected. We show that for a wide variety of associative commutative algebras, including algebras of smooth functions, we get nothing more than what we already know, since Nambu-Loday algebras have to be skew-symmetric. In particular, we can skip the skew-symmetry axiom in the standard definition of Poisson bracket.

We obtain a similar negative result for a Loday-type generalization of Lie algebroids: they are locally, in principle, skew-symmetric, or they are bundles of Loday algebras.

## 2 Main Theorem

Definition. Let $`𝒜`$ be an associative commutative algebra. Let $`\{,\mathrm{},\}`$ be a $`n`$-ary bracket on $`𝒜`$, i.e., an operation with $`n`$-arguments.

$$𝒜\times \mathrm{}\times 𝒜(f_1,\mathrm{},f_n)\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_n\}𝒜$$
(5)
which is linear with respect to all arguments:

$$\{f_1,\mathrm{},\alpha f_i+\beta f_i^{},\mathrm{},f_n\}=\alpha \{f_1,\mathrm{},f_i,\mathrm{},f_n\}+\beta \{f_1,\mathrm{},f_i^{},\mathrm{},f_n\}.$$
(6)
We shall call such a bracket a Nambu-Loday bracket, if it satisfies the following two conditions:

(i) the Leibniz rule (with respect to each argument):

$$\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_if_i^{},\mathrm{},f_n\}=f_i\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_i^{},\mathrm{},f_n\}+\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_i,\mathrm{},f_n\}f_i^{},$$
(7)
for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$, and

(ii) the Filippov identity:

$$\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},\{g_1,\mathrm{},g_n\}\}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}\{g_1,\mathrm{},\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},g_k\},\mathrm{},g_n\}.$$
(8)
The commutative algebra $`𝒜`$, equipped with a Nambu-Loday bracket, will be called Nambu-Loday algebra. For Nambu-Loday algebras we have no direct inductive characterization as that for Nambu-Poisson and Nambu-Jacobi brackets \[GM1\], since the property saying that fixing an argument we get a bracket satisfying FI, but of one argument less, is based on skew-symmetry. However, we can prove the following.

###### Theorem 1

If $`𝒜`$ is an associative commutative algebra over a field of characteristic 0 and $`𝒜`$ contains no nilpotents, then every Nambu-Loday bracket on $`𝒜`$ is skew-symmetric.

Proof.  Let us assume that we have fixed a Nambu-Loday bracket on $`𝒜`$. First, observe that the skew-symmetry property is equivalent to the fact that the bracket vanishes, if only two arguments are the same. Explicitly, if

$$\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_n\}=0\mathrm{for}\mathrm{all}f_1,\mathrm{},f_n𝒜\mathrm{with}f_i=f_j=h\mathrm{for}\mathrm{some}ij,$$
(9)
then writing $`h=x+y`$ and using (9) for $`h=x`$ and $`h=y`$, we get

$`\{f_i,\mathrm{},f_{i1},x,f_{i+1},\mathrm{},f_{j1},y,f_{j+1},\mathrm{},f_n\}=`$ (10)
$`\{f_i,\mathrm{},f_{i1},y,f_{i+1},\mathrm{},f_{j1},x,f_{j+1},\mathrm{},f_n\}.`$
Second, since we can get the skew-symmetry (10) with respect to the transposition $`(i,j)`$ composing transpositions $`(i,n),(j,n)`$ and $`(i,n)`$ again, it is sufficient to prove (10) (or (9)) for $`j=n`$.

Fix $`i=1,\mathrm{},n1`$. Replacing $`f_i`$ in (8) by $`f_i^2/2`$, we get, due to the Leibniz rule,

$$f_i\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},\{g_1,\mathrm{},g_n\}\}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}\{g_1,\mathrm{},f_i\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},g_k\},\mathrm{},g_n\}.$$
(11)
Subtracting from (11) the Filippov identity (8) multiplied by $`f_i`$, we get

$$\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}\left(\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},g_k\}\{g_1,\mathrm{},g_{k1},f_i,g_{k+1},\mathrm{},g_n\}\right)=0,$$
(12)
which holds for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},n1`$

Now, for $`n1m1`$, we shall show inductively the following:

$$(S_m)\mathrm{𝐼𝑓}m\mathrm{𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠}\mathrm{𝑜𝑓}f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1}𝒜\mathrm{𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑙}h,\mathrm{𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑛}\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},h\}=0.$$
(13)
Of course, $`(S_1)`$ tells us just that the bracket is skew-symmetric with respect to all transpositions $`(i,n)`$, so it is totally skew-symmetric, according to the previous remarks.

We start with $`m=n1`$. Putting in (12) all $`f`$’s and $`g`$’s equal to $`h`$, we get $`n\{h,\mathrm{},h\}^2=0`$, which gives us $`\{h,\mathrm{},h\}=0`$, since there are no nilpotents in $`𝒜`$ , so the induction starts. To prove the inductive step, assume ($`S_m`$) for some $`n1m>1`$. We shall show ($`S_{m1}`$). Take $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_n𝒜`$ such that $`f_j=h`$ for $`j`$ from a subset $`I`$ of $`\{1,\mathrm{},n1\}`$ with $`(m1)`$ elements. Put $`f_k=g_k`$, $`k=1,\mathrm{},n1`$, and $`g_n=h`$. For a fixed $`i=1,\mathrm{},n1`$, we have (i) if $`kI`$, then $`\{g_1,\mathrm{},g_{k1},f_i,g_{k+1},\mathrm{},g_n\}=0`$ by the inductive assumption, and

(ii) if $`kI`$, then

$$\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},g_k\}\{g_1,\mathrm{},g_{k1},f_i,g_{k+1},\mathrm{},g_n\}=\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},h\}^2.$$

This implies that (12) reads in this case

$$m\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},h\}^2=0,$$
(14)
which gives

$$\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},h\}=0,$$
(15)
for any $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1}𝒜`$ such that $`(m1)`$ of them equal $`h`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Remark. The assumption that there are no nilpotents in $`𝒜`$ is essential. To see this, consider the commutative associative algebra $`𝒜`$ over $`𝔨`$ freely generated by $`x,y`$, with the constraint $`x^2=0`$, i.e., $`𝒜=𝔨[x,y]/x^2`$. It is easy to see that the bracket

$$\{f,g\}=x\frac{f}{y}\frac{g}{y}$$
(16)
satisfies the Leibniz rule and the Jacobi identity, but it is symmetric.

## 3 Generalized Lie algebroids

Every $`n`$-ary bracket on the algebra $`C^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ of smooth functions on a manifold $`M`$, which satisfies the Leibniz rule, is associated with a $`n`$-contravariant tensor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ according to

$$\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_n\}=\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{d}f_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{d}f_n.$$
(17)
The vector fields

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1})}=\{f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1},\}=i_{\mathrm{d}f_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{d}f_{n1}}\mathrm{\Lambda }$$
(18)
we can call (left) Hamiltonian vector fields of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. It is easy to see that the Filippov identity for the $`n`$-bracket is in this case equivalent to the fact that the Hamiltonian vector fields preserve the tensor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, i.e.,

$$_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(f_1,\mathrm{},f_{n1})}}\mathrm{\Lambda }=0,$$
(19)
where $``$ stands for the Lie derivative. Theorem 1 can be formulated in this case as follows.

###### Corollary 1

If a $`n`$-contravariant tensor field is preserved by its Hamiltonian vector fields, then it is skew-symmetric.

It is well known that with a $`n`$-ary bracket on a finite-dimensional vector space $`V`$ (over $``$) we canonically associate a linear contravariant $`n`$-tensor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ on the dual space $`V^{}`$ such that (17) is satisfied for linear functions on $`V^{}`$ (thus elements of $`V`$). Explicitly, if $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_k)`$ is a basis of $`V`$ (thus a coordinate system of $`V^{}`$), then

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\underset{i_1,\mathrm{},i_n=1}{\overset{k}{}}\{x_{i_1},\mathrm{},x_{i_n}\}_{i_1}\mathrm{}_{i_n}.$$
(20)
Lie algebras correspond in this way to linear Poisson tensors. This can be generalized to vector bundles as follows. By linear functions on a vector bundle $`E`$ over a manifold $`M`$ we understand the functions we get from sections of the dual bundle $`E^{}`$ by contraction, i.e., the linear function $`\iota _X`$ associated with a section $`X`$ of $`E^{}`$ is given by $`\iota _X(\alpha _p)=X(p),\alpha (p)`$, where $`\alpha (p)E_p`$ for $`pM`$. We say that a $`n`$-tensor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ on $`E^{}`$ is linear if linear functions on $`E^{}`$ are closed with respect to the $`n`$-ary bracket $`\{,\mathrm{},\}_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ generated by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Hence, we can define a $`n`$-ary operation $`[,\mathrm{},]_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ on sections of the bundle $`E`$ by

$$\iota _{[X_1,\mathrm{},X_n]_\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\{\iota _{X_1},\mathrm{},\iota _{X_n}\}_\mathrm{\Lambda }.$$
(21)
In \[GU1, GU2\] this idea was used to define general (binary) algebroid structures, and in \[GM2\] to define $`n`$-ary Lie algebroids. Let us concentrate now on the binary case and let us recall from \[GU2\] the following definition.

###### Definition 1

Let $`M`$ be a manifold. An algebroid on $`M`$ is a vector bundle $`\tau :EM`$, together with a bracket $`[,]:𝒜\times 𝒜𝒜`$ on the module $`𝒜=\mathrm{\Gamma }E`$ of global sections of $`E`$, and two vector bundle morphism $`a_l,a_r:ETM`$, over the identity on $`M`$, from $`E`$ to the tangent bundle $`TM`$, called the anchors of the Lie algebroid (left and right), such that

$$[fX,gY]=fg[X,Y]+fa_l(X)(g)Yga_r(Y)(f)X,$$
(22)
for all $`X,Y𝒜`$ and all $`f,g(M)`$.

It is clear that any finite-dimensional algebra structure can be viewed as an algebroid structure on a bundle over a single point. Note that in the case when the algebroid bracket is a Lie bracket, we have $`a_l=a_r=a`$ and $`a([X,Y])=[a(X),a(Y)]`$ for all $`X,Y𝒜`$. Such structures are called Lie algebroids. They were introduced by Pradines \[Pr\] as infinitesimal objects for differentiable groupoids, but one can find similar notions proposed by several authors in increasing number of papers (which proves their importance and naturalness). For basic properties and the literature on the subject we refer to the survey article by Mackenzie \[Ma\].

###### Theorem 2

(\[GU1\]) There is a one-one correspondence between linear 2-contravariant tensors $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ on the dual bundle $`E^{}`$ and algebroid brackets $`[,]_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ on $`E`$.

Note that, equivalently, we can think of algebroid structures on the vector bundle $`E`$ as morphisms of double vector bundles $`\epsilon :T^{}ETE^{}`$ (cf. \[GU2\]).

We can speak about Loday algebroids when we impose the Jacobi identity (3) but we skip the skew-symmetry assumption. One can think that imposing the Jacobi identity for an algebroid, we get the Jacobi identity for the bracket $`\{,\}_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of functions defined by the corresponding tensor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ on $`C^{\mathrm{}}(E^{})`$ and, in view of Theorem 1, that this implies that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a Poisson tensor, so our algebroid is a Lie algebroid. This reasoning, however, is wrong, since the Jacobi identity on sections of $`E`$ forces the Jacobi identity for the bracket $`\{,\}_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ only for linear functions. Such tensors may be non-skew-symmetric, i.e., clearly, Loday algebras do exist. A simple example is the following.

Example 1. Consider the 2-tensor on $`^3`$ given by

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=x_2_1_1+x_3_1_3x_3_3_1.$$
(23)
It is easy to see that the Hamiltonian vector fields of linear functions preserve $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, so we have the Jacobi identity for the associated bracket:

$$[x_1,x_1]=x_2,[x_1,x_3]=[x_3,x_1]=x_3,$$
(24)
where we assume the missing brackets to be zero. This example is also an example of a Loday algebroid over a single point, but we can obtain a Loday algebroid over $`M`$ just tensoring the above algebra with $`C^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$.

The anchors of the Loday algebroids from the above example are trivial. We shall show that this is not incidental and Loday algebroids can be reduced to Lie algebroids and bundles of Loday algebras.

###### Theorem 3

For any Loday algebroid bracket the left anchor is the same as the right anchor and the bracket is skew-symmetric at points where they do not vanish.

Proof.  Let $`[,]`$ be a Loday algebroid bracket on the space $`𝒜`$ of sections of a vector bundle $`E`$ over $`M`$. The Jacobi identity implies immediately

$$[[X,X],Y]=0,$$
(25)
for all $`X,Y𝒜`$. Putting $`X:=fX`$ in (25), we get

$`f(a_l(X)(f)a_r(X)(f))[X,Y]2fa_r(Y)(f)[X,X]`$ (26)
$`fa_r(Y)(a_l(X)(f)a_r(X)(f))X(a_l(X)(f)a_r(X)(f))a_r(Y)(f)X=0,`$
for all $`X,Y𝒜`$ and all $`fC^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$. Suppose that at $`pM`$ the right anchor does not vanish, i.e., there are $`Y𝒜`$ and $`fC^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ such that $`a_r(Y)(f)(p)0`$. We can additionally assume that $`f(p)=0`$ and then (26) implies that $`(a_l(X)(f)a_l(X)(f))(p)=0`$ for all $`X𝒜`$. Hence the vector $`(a_l(X)a_r(X))(p)`$ annihilates any covector from $`T_p^{}M`$ not annihilated by $`a_r(Y)(p)`$, thus it is zero. But if $`a_r`$ does not vanish at $`p`$, then it does not vanish in a neighborhood of $`p`$, so $`a_l(X)=a_r(X)`$ in a neighborhood of $`p`$ and (26) implies now that in this neighborhood

$$fa_r(Y)(f)[X,X]=0,$$
(27)
for all $`X,Y𝒜`$ and $`fC^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$. Since $`a_r`$ is nontrivial in this neighborhood, this in turn implies $`[X,X]=0`$, i.e., the bracket is skew-symmetric. In particular, the left anchor equals the right one.

Assume now that the right anchor vanishes at $`pM`$. By (26) we obtain now

$$f(p)a_l(X)(f)(p)[X,Y](p)=0,$$
(28)
for all $`X,Y𝒜`$ and $`fC^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$, so

$$a_l(X)(f)(p)[X,Y](p)=0.$$
(29)
Replacing $`X`$ in (29) by $`X+Z`$, we get

$$a_l(X)(f)(p)[Z,Y](p)+a_l(Z)(f)[X,Y](p)=0.$$
(30)
Multiplying the above equation by $`a_l(X)(f)(p)`$ and taking into account (29), we get

$$(a_l(X)(f)(p))^2[Z,Y](p)=0,$$
(31)
for all $`X,Y,Z𝒜`$ and $`fC^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ which clearly implies that the left anchor vanishes at $`p`$, since, if the bracket is trivial at $`p`$, then both anchors are trivial at $`p`$. Hence, the right anchor is the same as the left anchor and the bracket is skew-symmetric at points where they do not vanish. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 Conclusions

Poisson and Lie algebroid brackets are ones of the most fundamental algebraic structures in Classical and Quantum Physics. We have composed the two ways of generalizing Poisson bracket: the Nambu’s idea of $`n`$-ary bracket and the Loday’s observation that skipping the skew-symmetry assumption in the definition of a Lie algebra we still have a (co)homology theory. What we get is that no new structures appear in this way, since the Leibniz rule and the Filippov identity imply the skew-symmetry. A similar phenomena we find out when looking for a non-skew version of a Lie algebroid. This shows that skew-symmetry is in fact forced by other properties of these important algebraic structures.

It would be interesting to know whether the same is true for more general brackets, like Nambu-Jacobi brackets or brackets acting as multidifferential operators. If we skip skew-symmetry, then it is even not clear if the last ones have to be of first order. We can prove the skew-symmetry for binary Nambu-Jacobi-Loday brackets and hope that the methods used in the proof of an algebraic version of the well-known Kirillov’s theorem on local Lie algebras (\[Gr\], Theorem 4.2) can be of some help in proving a general result. We postpone these studies to a separate paper.


format: text

text:
# Elliptic flow in Au+Au collisions at √𝑠__{𝑁𝑁} = 130 GeV

## 1 Introduction

The goal of the ultra-relativistic nuclear collision program is the creation of a system of deconfined quarks and gluons . The azimuthal anisotropy of the transverse momentum distribution for non-central collisions is thought to be sensitive to the early evolution of the system. The second Fourier coefficient of this anisotropy, $`v_2`$, is called elliptic flow. It is an important observable since it is sensitive to the rescattering of the constituents in the created hot and dense matter. This rescattering converts the initial spatial anisotropy, due to the almond shape of the overlap region of non-central collisions, into momentum anisotropy. The spatial anisotropy is largest early in the evolution of the collision, but as the system expands and becomes more spherical, this driving force quenches itself. Therefore, the magnitude of the observed elliptic flow reflects the extent of the rescattering at early time .

Elliptic flow in ultra-relativistic nuclear collisions was first discussed in Ref.  and has been studied intensively in recent years at AGS , SPS  and RHIC  energies. The studies at the top AGS energy and at SPS energies have found that elliptic flow at these energies is in the plane defined by the beam direction and the impact parameter, $`v_2>0`$, as expected from most models.

The Solenoidal Tracker At RHIC (STAR)  measures charged particles, and due to its azimuthal symmetry and large coverage, it is ideally suited for measuring elliptic flow. The detector consists of several sub-systems in a large solenoidal magnet. The Time Projection Chamber (TPC) covers the pseudorapidity range $`|\eta |<1.8`$ for collisions in the center of the TPC. The magnet is operated at a 0.25 Tesla field, allowing tracking of particles with $`p_t>75`$ MeV/c. Two Zero Degree Calorimeters  located at $`\theta <`$ 2 mrad, which mainly detect fragmentation neutrons, are used in coincidence for the trigger. The TPC is surrounded by a scintillator barrel which measures the charged particle multiplicity for triggering purposes within $`|\eta |<1`$.

For this analysis, 120,000 events were selected with a primary vertex position within 75 cm longitudinally of the TPC center and within 1 cm radially of the beam line. For determination of the event plane, charged particle tracks were selected with $`0.1<p_t2.0`$ GeV/c. The tracks used to determine the event plane and the tracks correlated with the event plane passed within 2 cm of the primary vertex and had at least 15 measured space points. Also, the ratio of the number of space points to the expected maximum number of space points for that particular track was required to be greater than 0.52, suppressing split tracks from being counted more than once. The tracks used for the determination of the reaction plane were within $`|\eta |<1.0`$, and the tracks correlated with the reaction plane were within $`|\eta |<1.3`$. These cuts are similar to the ones used in Ref.  where it was shown that the analysis results are not sensitive to the cuts.

## 2 Charged-particle elliptic flow

The flow analysis method  involves the calculation of the event plane angle, which is an experimental estimator of the real reaction-plane angle.

The second harmonic event plane angle, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$, is calculated for two sub-events, which are independent subsets of all tracks in each event. Figure 2 shows the results for the correlation between the sub-events for the first and second harmonic as a function of centrality . The peaked shape of the centrality dependence of $`\mathrm{cos}[2(\mathrm{\Psi }_a\mathrm{\Psi }_b)]`$ is a signature of anisotropic flow. However, the correlation between the sub-events may not be due entirely to anisotropic flow. To estimate the magnitude of non-flow effects we have chosen the sub-events in three different ways: 1) Assigning particles with pseudorapidity $`1<\eta <0.05`$ to one sub-event and particles with $`0.05<\eta <1`$ to the other. Short range correlations, such as Bose-Einstein or Coulomb, are to a large extent eliminated by the “gap” between the two sub-events. 2) Dividing randomly all particles into two sub-events, sensitive to all non-flow effects. 3) Assigning positive particles to one sub-event and negative particles to the other, allowing an estimation of the contribution from resonance decays. In Fig. 2 the resulting $`v_2`$ versus centrality from each of these methods is shown. The charged particles were integrated over $`0.1<p_t<2.0`$ GeV/$`c`$ and $`|\eta |<1.3`$. The results from the three methods are for the central and mid-peripheral events very similar. However, for the most peripheral events the results vary among the methods by about 0.005.

Not all non-flow contributions might be known and the effects of others, such as jets, are difficult to estimate because of their long-range correlation. Recently new methods to estimate these non-flow effects have become available . In order to estimate the systematic uncertainty due to the effects of jets in this analysis, we assume that jets contribute at the same level to both the first and second order correlations. This assumption is verified by the Hijing  model. Taking the maximum observed positive first order correlation, 0.05, as being completely due to non-flow will reduce the calculated $`v_2`$ values. Figure 4 shows $`v_2`$ versus centrality, where the statistical uncertainties are smaller than the markers and the uncertainties shown are the systematic uncertainties due to this estimated non-flow effect.

Figure 4 shows the maximum $`v_2`$ value as a function of collision energy. It rises monotonically from about 0.02 at the top AGS energy , 0.035 at the SPS  to about 0.06 at RHIC energies . This increasing magnitude of the integrated elliptic flow indicates that the degree of thermalization, which is associated with the amount of rescattering, is higher at the higher beam energies. However, interpretation of the excitation function has to be done with care. The $`v_2`$ values used here are the maximum values as a function of centrality for each energy. The centrality where $`v_2`$ peaks can change as a function of beam energy, indicating different physics .

### 2.1 Differential elliptic flow

The differential elliptic flow is a function of particle mass, $`\eta `$ and $`p_t`$. Within $`|\eta |<1.3`$, $`v_2`$ is approximately constant. In this section the $`v_2`$($`p_t`$) will be discussed, the next section will discuss the mass dependence.

Figure 6 shows $`v_2`$($`p_t`$) for charged particles, the error bars shown are only the statistical uncertainties. The systematic uncertainties are 13% up to 2 GeV/c, increasing to 20% at 4.5 GeV/c. The data show that up to $`p_t<1.5`$ GeV/$`c`$, $`v_2`$($`p_t`$) increases almost linearly. This is consistent with a stronger “in-plane” expansion than the average radial expansion. In Fig. 6, a comparison is made with a full hydrodynamical model calculation , which describes the data up to $`p_t=1.5`$ GeV/$`c`$. Above $`p_t=1.5`$ GeV/$`c`$ the $`v_2`$($`p_t`$) starts to saturate and deviates from the hydro calculation. The $`v_2`$($`p_t`$) above 2 GeV/$`c`$ can be described by medium induced radiative energy loss of high $`p_t`$ partons (jet quenching) . However, one should note that the interplay between the “soft” physics and the onset of “hard” scattering without any energy loss could lead to a similar behavior. In the $`p_t`$ range around 2–3 GeV/$`c`$ both “soft” and “hard” physics are expected to contribute. Future measurements at $`p_t>`$ 6 GeV/$`c`$ should be able to disentangle these interpretations. Figure 6 shows one of the calculations , which contains a phenomenological soft “hydrodynamic” component combined with a hard “pQCD” component incorporating energy loss. Comparing this calculation using different initial gluon densities with the data, shows a qualitative agreement up to the highest measured $`p_t`$.

## 3 Identified-particle differential elliptic flow

Hydrodynamics assumes complete local thermalization at the formation of the system followed by an evolution governed by an Equation Of State (EOS). Studies of the mass dependences of elliptic flow for particles with $`p_t<`$ 1.5 GeV/$`c`$ provide important additional test of the hydrodynamical model.

The pions, protons and anti-protons, were selected according to specific energy loss ($`dE/dx`$) in the TPC in the momentum range of 0.175 – 0.75 GeV/$`c`$, 0.5 – 0.9 GeV/$`c`$ and 0.3 – 0.9 GeV/$`c`$ respectively. The protons up to a momentum of 0.5 GeV/$`c`$ were not used because of proton background from the beam pipe. The raw yields of the pions and protons + anti-protons were obtained from fitting the $`dE/dx`$ distributions for each $`y,p_t`$ bin with a multiple Gaussian fit and requiring greater than 90% purity.

In Fig. 8 the differential elliptic flow as a function of $`p_t`$ for pions and protons + anti-protons for minimum-bias collisions is shown. The uncertainties shown are statistical only. Using the same assumption to estimate the systematic uncertainties as in section 2 and in addition assuming they are independent of $`p_t`$, the systematic uncertainty for minimum-bias data is 13%. The positive and negative identified particles, used in this analysis, have the same $`v_2`$($`p_t`$) within statistical uncertainties. For $`v_2`$($`p_t`$) the pions were integrated over $`|y|1.0`$ and the protons + anti-protons over $`|y|0.5`$. The pions exhibit an almost linear dependence of $`v_2`$($`p_t`$), whereas the protons + anti-protons show a more quadratic behavior of $`v_2`$($`p_t`$). Such a behavior is the result of the interplay between the mean expansion velocity, the anisotropic component of the expansion velocity, and the thermal velocity of the particles. A similar effect was predicted for the case of directed flow  at AGS energies. The behavior is well described by a full hydrodynamical calculation . This indicates that the minimum-bias data can be described using a hydrodynamic description with one set of parameters.

The differential elliptic flow $`v_2`$ as a function of $`p_t`$ is plotted for pions for three different centrality selections in Fig. 8. The open triangles, represent the most central 11% of the measured cross section222The total measured cross section is estimated to correspond to about 80% to 90% of the geometric cross section, with losses mainly due to vertex finding inefficiencies for the low multiplicity events.. The open squares correspond to 11 – 45% and the open circles correspond to 45 – 85% of the measured cross section. The uncertainties on the points are statistical only. The systematic uncertainty is estimated to be 20% for the most central bin, 8% for the mid-central bin and 22% for the most peripheral bin. In Fig. 8 the lines show the comparison of the same hydrodynamical calculation for the different centralities. This comparison shows that the most central and the mid-peripheral data can be reasonably well described by this model. However, the most peripheral data clearly deviate from the hydrodynamical model predictions, indicating a lower degree of thermalization during the early stage of the collision for the most peripheral collisions.

## 4 Conclusions

We have made the first measurement of identified particle elliptic flow at RHIC. The measured elliptic flow as a function of $`p_t`$ and centrality differ significantly for particles of different masses. This mass dependence of $`v_2`$($`p_t`$) is in close agreement with full hydrodynamic model calculations, suggesting that the system for central and mid-peripheral collisions is close to early local thermal equilibrium followed by hydrodynamic expansion. The observed deviation from hydro calculations at $`p_t>`$ 1.5 GeV/$`c`$ indicates the transverse momentum region where thermal equilibrium is not reached. This region can be used to study parton energy loss in dense hadronic matter.


text:
# A BeppoSAX view of transient black hole candidates in quiescence

## 1 Introduction

Transient black hole binaries are characterised by bright outbursts lasting up to several months and recurring every 1–100 yr (with a clear preference for long recurrence times). In between these outbursts, sources are quiescent with very low X–ray luminosities. At the present time only five transient Black Hole Candidates (BHCs) have been detected in quiescence and upper limits exist for six other systems (Asai et al. 1998; Menou, Narayan & Lasota 1999a; Campana & Stella 2000; Garcia et al. 2001).

A 0620–00 was the first BHC to be detected in quiescence. Despite the small number of photons collected in the ROSAT observation the spectrum was determined to be soft. A 0.5–10 keV luminosity of $`L_X10^{31}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (for a distance of $`d=1.2`$ kpc) was obtained by extrapolating the ROSAT data (McClintock et al. 1995). Chandra detected the source at a level $`10`$ times lower (Garcia et al. 2001). GS 2023+338 (V 404 Cyg) was observed with ASCA at a 0.5–10 keV luminosity of $`L_X2\times 10^{33}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ ($`d=3.5`$ kpc; Narayan, Barret & McClintock 1997). The spectrum is well fit by a power law with photon index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }2.1_{0.3}^{+0.5}`$ or by a thermal bremsstrahlung with an equivalent temperature of $`kT_{\mathrm{br}}=4.6_{1.5}^{+3.6}`$ keV. Analysing the same dataset Asai et al. (1998) obtained $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.7_{0.2}^{+0.3}`$. Finally, GRO J1655–40 was detected again by ASCA at $`L_X2\times 10^{32}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ ($`d=3.2`$ kpc; Hameury et al. 1997). The spectrum could be described by a power law model with a quoted index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }1.5\pm 0.6`$ (Hameury et al. 1997). Asai et al. (1998) analysed the same dataset and found $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.7_{0.4}^{+2.1}`$. Chandra observed this source when it was a factor of $`10`$ (Garcia et al. 2001).

Since the discovery of their low X–ray quiescent luminosity, the study of BHCs in quiescence has attracted attention because this emission might be able to distinguish them from quiescent neutron star systems (for a review see Campana et al. 1998a). At the very beginning, Tanaka & Shibazaki (1996) argued that BHCs and neutron stars systems at low luminosities show similar soft spectra, well approximated by a single temperature black body ($`kT_{\mathrm{bb}}0.20.3`$ keV). This was based (and biased) on ROSAT results and only on a single BHC (A 0620–00). ASCA and BeppoSAX observations led to the discovery of hard tails in neutron star systems (Asai et al. 1996, 1998; Campana et al. 1998b, 2000) as well as the detection of non-thermal spectra in GS 2023+338 and GRO J1655–40, challenging this picture (however, GS 2023+338 and GRO J1655–40 have orbital periods longer than the great majority of low mass transients and, therefore, likely experience a higher time-averaged mass exchange rate). In a recent paper, Garcia et al. (2001) reported on deep Chandra observations of black hole transients in quiescence, detecting two new sources with short orbital period (GRO J0422+32 and GS 2000+25). Now three short orbital period BHCs have been detected all with 0.5–10 keV luminosities in the $`28\times 10^{30}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ range. These data confirm that black hole transients in quiescence are much less luminous than the corresponding neutron star transient systems in X–rays.

Advection dominated accretion flow (ADAF) models have become popular in explaining the low luminosity of quiescent BHCs as well as their spectral energy distribution (Narayan et al. 1996; Narayan, Garcia & McClintock 1997; Menou et al. 1999a, 1999b). In these models a large fraction of the gravitational energy is advected into the black hole, therefore lowering considerably the radiative efficiency of the accretion process. Observations show that the ratio of minimum X–ray luminosity in quiescence to maximum X–ray luminosity in outburst is significantly smaller (a factor of about 100) in black hole transients than in and neutron star transients (Narayan et al. 1997; Garcia et al. 1998; Garcia et al. 2001). Campana & Stella (2000) noted that in the latest ADAF models the optical/UV luminosity derives from synchrotron radiation produced by the ADAF itself and therefore must be included in the luminosity budget. Ascribing the bulk of the residual optical/UV flux to the ADAF removes much of the difference in luminosity swing between black hole and neutron star transients, weakening one of the main drives of ADAF models. Possible ways out are that a large fraction of the accreting matter is stopped/evaporated at the outer disk boundary with only a very small fraction leaking towards the compact object and/or ADAFs do not contribute to the optical luminosity as in the older ADAF models (Campana & Stella 2000).

In this paper we present a comprehensive view of black hole transients in quiescence observed with the Italian/Dutch satellite BeppoSAX complementing and improving current upper limits and existing spectra. In Section 2 we describe the data set and analysis. In Section 3 we discuss the results.

## 2 Observations and data reduction

We present the results of the observations of black hole transients in quiescence carried out with the BeppoSAX satellite (Boella et al. 1997a). We analysed the data from the Low Energy Concentrator Spectrometer (LECS; 0.1–10 keV, Parmar et al. 1997a) and the Medium Energy Concentrator Spectrometer (MECS; 1.3–10 keV, Boella et al. 1997b). As usual, LECS data were collected only during satellite night-time leading to shorter exposure times. Upper limits in the hard X–ray band were obtained with the Phoswich Detector System (PDS, 15–300 keV; Frontera et al. 1997). The PDS collimators rocked on and off the target in order to monitor the background. This also resulted in a shorter exposure time than the MECS.

BeppoSAX observed four BHCs in quiescence: GRO J0422+32, GRS 1009–45, 4U 1630–47 and GS 2023+338. XTE J1748–288 was serendipitously observed during a pointing toward the Galactic Center region. For a summary of the observations see Table 1.

The BeppoSAX images were searched for sources at the position of the BHCs’ optical counterpart. Only one out of five BHCs was detected (GS 2023+338) confirming the elusiveness of this kind of source in quiescence.

Upper limits for imaging instruments were determined counting the number of events within a specified box ($`4^{}`$ radius), correcting those counts for vignetting, exposure and point spread function and comparing them with the number of events in an outer background box free of sources. In the case of the PDS collimators source upper limits were derived by comparing the number of events collected on and off the the source.

GRO J0422+32 was observed by BeppoSAX on September 2, 1998, about 2,200 days after the previous outburst. The source was not detected and we place a $`3\sigma `$ upper limit of $`2\times 10^3`$ c s-1 on the MECS count rate, which translates to a flux limit of $`1.5\times 10^{13}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{cm}^2`$ (2–10 keV), assuming a power law spectrum with photon index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=2.1`$ (the same as observed in GS 2023+338 in quiescence; Narayan et al. 1997) and the galactic column density in the direction of the source $`N_H=1.7\times 10^{21}\mathrm{cm}^2`$. For a distance of 3.6 kpc (Shrader et al. 1994) we obtain an upper limit on the 2–10 keV luminosity of $`2\times 10^{32}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$. This is to be compared with the value derived by Garcia et al. (1998) of $`4\times 10^{31}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (0.5–10 keV) which was obtained by extrapolating over a much larger energy range the result of a deep ROSAT-HRI pointing. The BeppoSAX PDS data give an upper limit of $`6\times 10^{12}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{cm}^2`$ in the 15–50 keV energy band, which translates to $`9\times 10^{33}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$.

4U 1630–47 was observed on March 26, 1997, about one year after the 1996 outburst (this source in contrast with other transient BHCs shows recurrent outbursts, Parmar, Angelini & White 1995). The $`3\sigma `$ upper limit on the MECS count rate amounts to $`1.2\times 10^3`$ c s-1. This translates into an upper limit on the 2–10 keV unabsorbed luminosity of $`2\times 10^{33}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ for a distance of 10 kpc, a power law with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=2.1`$ and $`N_H=8\times 10^{22}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ (Oosterbroek et al. 1998). Even if this upper limit is in the range of those previously obtained with the ROSAT-HRI ($`8\times 10^{33}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ 0.2–2.4 keV) and ROSAT-PSPC ($`7\times 10^{32}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ 0.2–2.4 keV; Parmar et al. 1997b), the more extended energy range of the MECS makes the BeppoSAX limit less affected by interstellar absorption. At high energies, the PDS limit on the 15-50 keV flux was of $`9\times 10^{11}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{cm}^2`$ (corresponding to $`1\times 10^{36}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$). This relatively high value is due to the presence of a number of sources in the PDS field of view, which are clearly seen in the MECS.

GRS 1009–45 was observed on December 3, 1998, about 1,900 days after the previous outburst. We obtain a $`3\sigma `$ upper limit of $`1.6\times 10^3`$ c s-1 on the MECS count rate. This translates into an upper limit of $`1\times 10^{33}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ on the 2–10 keV unabsorbed luminosity for a distance of 3 kpc (Della Valle et al. 1997), a power law with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=2.1`$ and $`N_H=10^{21}\mathrm{cm}^2`$. The 15–50 keV upper limit from the PDS amounts to $`7\times 10^{33}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$. No previous upper limits exist on the 2–10 keV and 15–50 keV luminosities.

XTE J1748–288 was observed on April 5, 1997, about 400 d before its discovery. We obtain a $`3\sigma `$ upper limit on the MECS count rate of $`6\times 10^3`$ c s-1. Despite the relatively long exposure, this fairly high value is due to the source position right on the MECS “strongback” (Boella et al. 1997b). Using the appropriate response matrix we derive a flux of $`<6\times 10^{12}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{cm}^2`$ (i.e. $`<5\times 10^{34}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ at 8.5 kpc). No upper limits in the 15–50 keV energy band can be set due to the presence of strong sources in the field.

In passing we note that GX 339-4 has been observed and detected by BeppoSAX at a level of $`6\times 10^{33}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (Kong et al. 2000). This luminosity level is high when compared with the other BHCs, suggesting that the observed ‘off’-state of GX 339-4 may not correspond to the quiescent state of a transient system (note also that GX 339-4 is usually considered a persistent source). Another interesting system monitored by BeppoSAX is CI Cam (XTE J0421+560). This source was observed three times in quiescence (156, 541 and 690 d after the latest outburst, respectively) with very different outcomes: $`i`$) a very soft spectrum ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }4`$) with a low column density ($`N_H10^{21}\mathrm{cm}^2`$) and a 1–10 keV luminosity of $`2\times 10^{32}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (at 2 kpc); $`ii`$) a hard spectrum ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }2`$) with a high column density ($`N_H4\times 10^{23}\mathrm{cm}^2`$) and a luminosity of $`4\times 10^{33}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$; $`iii`$) undetected with an upper limit of $`4\times 10^{32}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (Parmar et al. 2000). However, the nature of the compact object of CI Cam is presently unclear.

### 2.1 Spectral analysis: GS 2023+338

The source spectrum of GS 2023+338 was extracted from the MECS data within a radius of $`4^{}`$ centered on the source position (LECS data were unavailable). We collected 433 photons within the full energy range. Background subtraction was performed using the standard background files. We used the publicly available calibration files at 2000 January and XSPEC 11.0. We rebinned the MECS spectrum in order to have at least 50 photons per spectral bin, resulting in seven bins. The lack of the LECS data forced us to adopt a value for the absorbing column density. Following Wagner et al. (1994) and Narayan et al. (1997) we used a value of $`N_H=10^{22}\mathrm{cm}^2`$. With this value of the column density a power law model provides an adequate description of the data with a photon index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.9_{0.5}^{+0.6}`$ (errors at 90% confidence level for one parameter of interest) with a $`\chi _{\mathrm{red}}^2=0.2`$ (for 5 d.o.f.). A bremsstrahlung model provides also a good fit with $`kT_{\mathrm{br}}=6.9_{3.7}^{+31.5}`$ keV and $`\chi _{\mathrm{red}}^2=0.3`$. A black body model instead fails to successfully describe the spectra with $`\chi _{\mathrm{red}}^2=1.4`$ ($`kT_{\mathrm{bb}}=1.0_{0.2}^{+0.3}`$ keV). This last model can be reconciled with the data only by assuming a very low column density (formally null) and $`kT_{\mathrm{bb}}=1.1_{1.1}^{+0.1}`$ keV ($`\chi _{\mathrm{red}}^2=1.1`$). The unabsorbed 1–10 keV flux as derived with the power law model amounts to $`7.1\times 10^{13}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{cm}^2`$. This is to be compared with the $`8.2\times 10^{13}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{cm}^2`$ value derived from the ASCA observation (Narayan et al. 1997). The 1–10 keV unabsorbed luminosity is $`L_X=1.2\times 10^{33}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (at 3.5 kpc). The PDS provides an upper limit to the 15–50 keV luminosity of $`3\times 10^{34}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$.

## 3 Conclusions

We report on the BeppoSAX view of transient BHCs in quiescence. We further confirm that BHCs in quiescence are X–ray faint with luminosities below $`10^{32}10^{33}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (at which neutron star transients are usually detected) and reporting for the first time upper limits in the 2–10 keV energy band for four sources GRO J0422+32, GRS 1009–45, 4U 1630–47 and XTE J1748–288. These limits improve and confirm existing extrapolations from lower energy bands (mainly ROSAT, 0.1–2.4 keV). Moreover, we quote the upper limits in the hard energy band 15–50 keV derived from the PDS data. These hard X–ray luminosity limits might be useful to constrain ADAF models, for which high energy tails are expected (current models easily satisfy these constraints, e.g. Menou, Narayan & Lasota 1999a). After the failure of ASTRO-E, these limits will remain unrivaled for years to come.

One exception to the above cases, that was confirmed also by BeppoSAX observation, is GS 2023+338 revealed at a level of $`10^{33}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (1–10 keV). The GS 2023+338 luminosity derived is at a level and with a spectrum similar to those of the ASCA observation five years before (Asai et al. 1998; Hameury et al. 1997). This indicates that, within the uncertainties, the spectrum and the flux level of GS 2023+338 in quiescence remains fairly constant.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank T. Mineo for making available to us off-axis MECS response matrices. This research has made use of SAXDAS linearised and cleaned event files (Rev.2.0) produced at the BeppoSAX Science Data Center. This work was partially supported through ASI grants.


text:
# Spectral Change of Hadrons and Chiral Symmetry

## 1 Introduction

One of the most intriguing phenomena in quantum chromo dynamics (QCD) is the dynamical breaking of chiral symmetry. This explains the existence of the pion and dictates most of the low energy phenomena in hadron physics. The dynamical breaking of chiral symmetry is associated with the condensation of quark - anti-quark pairs in the QCD vacuum, $`\overline{q}q`$, which is analogous to the condensation of Cooper pairs in the theory of superconductivity . As the temperature ($`T`$) and/or the baryon density ($`n_B`$) increase, the QCD vacuum undergoes a phase transition to the chirally symmetric phase where $`\overline{q}q`$ vanishes. Studying what are the possible phase structure and how the phase transition takes place are one of the main aims of the modern hadron physics .

When we talk about the phase structure, we need to fix appropriate variables to define the phases. Such variables in QCD are current masses of light quarks ($`m_{u,d,s}`$), $`T`$, and $`n_B`$. Since the following relation holds, neglecting $`m_{u,d}`$ in the first approximation and studying the phase structure in the $`m_s`$-$`T`$-$`n_B`$ space would give us a good insight into the real world:

$$m_{u,d}m_sT_cn_c^{1/3}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}.$$
(1)
Here $`T_c`$ ($`n_c`$) are the critical temperature (density). In Fig.1, possible phase structures in the $`m_s`$-$`T`$ plane (with $`n_B`$=$`0`$) and $`m_s`$-$`n_B`$ plane (with $`T`$=$`0`$) are shown. $`m_s`$=$`0`$ ($`m_s`$=$`\mathrm{}`$) corresponds to the limit of SU(3)$``$SU(3) (SU(2)$``$SU(2)) chiral symmetry. Recent lattice simulations show $`T_c175(155)`$ MeV for 3 (2) flavors . Furthermore, the first order transition for small $`m_s`$ turns into the second order one for large $`m_s`$ at the tricritical point . The precise value of $`m_s`$ at the tricritical point is not known yet.

The phase transition at finite baryon density is not well understood mostly because the information from lattice QCD is poor. Naive analysis based on the bag model shows the first order transition , which implies the existence of a mixed phase in the $`m_s`$-$`n_B`$ plane as shown in Fig.1 (right panel). However, the possibility of a smooth hadron-quark transition is not excluded. The bag model analysis also suggests the strange quark matter as the true ground state of matter for sufficiently small $`m_s`$ . The system at finite baryon density, which is intrinsically quantum, is obviously richer in physics than that at finite $`T`$ and has various phases such as the color superconductivity, meson condensations, and baryon superfluidity (see the reviews, ).

Now, what are the observables associated with the chiral transition? Model independent statement is that hadronic correlations in a same chiral multiplet (such as $`S`$ (scalar)$``$$`P^a`$ (pseudo-scalar) and $`V_\mu ^a`$ (vector)$``$$`A_\mu ^a`$ (axial-vector)) should be degenerate when $`\overline{q}q0`$, namely

$`S(x)S(y)P^a(x)P^a(y),A_\mu ^a(x)A_\nu ^b(y)V_\mu ^a(x)V_\nu ^b(y).`$ (2)
Thermal susceptibilities for hadronic operators $`𝒪`$ defined in the Euclidian space,

$$\chi __H=_0^{1/T}𝑑\tau d^3x𝒪^{}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{x})𝒪(0,\stackrel{}{0}),$$
(3)
may be used to check such chiral degeneracy. Shown in Fig.2 is the full QCD simulation of $`\sqrt{1/\chi __H}`$ on the lattice with 2 light flavors . One can see the degeneracy between the $`\sigma `$-channel ($`I`$=0, $`J^P`$=$`0^+`$) and the $`\pi `$-channel ($`I`$=1, $`J^P`$=$`0^{}`$) above the critical point. There remains a splitting between the $`\delta `$-channel ($`I`$=1, $`J^P`$=$`0^+`$) and the $`\pi `$-channel above the critical point, which reflects the breaking of $`U_A(1)`$ symmetry.

To make a direct connection with the experimental observables, however, one needs to go further and calculate the Minkowski (real-time) correlation and the hadronic spectral functions at finite $`T`$ and $`n_B`$ . The aim of this talk is to show some recent attempts toward this goal. In Sec.2 and Sec.3, the spectral function in the $`\sigma `$-channel will be discussed near 2$`\pi `$ threshold where almost model-independent argument is possible.

Experimentally, the resonances in the scalar and axial-vector channels have large width and are difficult to measure with possible exception discussed in Sec.2,3. For this reason, in-medium neutral vector-mesons which couple directly to the virtual photon have been studied both theoretically and experimentally as a probe of the chiral transition . Unfortunately, theoretical calculations of the spectral function in the vector channel on the basis of the effective Lagrangians are rather model dependent, and the first principle lattice QCD study has been called for. Recently, a new promising approach was proposed: it utilizes the maximum entropy method for extracting the spectral functions from lattice QCD data. We will discuss this new development in Sec.4.

## 2 Spectral enhancement in hot plasma

The fluctuation of the order parameter becomes large as the system approaches to the critical point of a second order or weak first order phase transition. In QCD, the fluctuation of the phase (amplitude) of the chiral order parameter $`\overline{q}q`$ corresponds to $`\pi `$ ($`\sigma `$). The vital role of such fluctuations in the dynamical phenomena near the critical point at finite $`T`$ was originally studied in .

It was suggested that the chiral restoration gives rise to a softening (the red-shift) of the $`\sigma `$, which in turn leads to a small $`\sigma `$-width due to the suppression of the phase-space of the decay $`\sigma 2\pi `$ . Therefore, $`\sigma `$ may appear as a narrow resonance at finite $`T`$ although it is at best a very broad resonance in the free space with a width comparable to its mass . (For the phenomenological applications of this idea in relation to the relativistic heavy ion collisions, see .)

Further theoretical analysis by taking account the coupling $`\sigma 2\pi `$ shows that (i) the spectral function is the most relevant quantity for studying the true nature of $`\sigma `$, and (ii) the spectral function of $`\sigma `$ has a characteristic enhancement at the 2$`\pi `$ threshold near $`T_c`$ . In Fig.3, shown are the spectral functions $`\rho _{\pi (\sigma )}`$ in the $`\pi `$ ($`\sigma `$)-channel at finite $`T`$ calculated in the $`O(4)`$ linear $`\sigma `$ model: Two characteristic features are the broadening of the pion peak (Fig.3(A)) and the spectral concentration at the 2$`\pi `$ threshold ($`\omega 2m_\pi `$) in the $`\sigma `$-channel (Fig.3(B)). The latter may be measured by the $`2\gamma `$ spectrum from the hot plasma created in the relativistic heavy ion collisions .

## 3 Spectral enhancement in nuclear matter

$`\overline{q}q`$ at finite baryon density obeys an exact theorem in QCD :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{q}q}{\overline{q}q_0}}=1{\displaystyle \frac{n_B}{f_\pi ^2m_\pi ^2}}\left[\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\pi N}+\widehat{m}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\widehat{m}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{E(n_B)}{A}}\right)\right],`$ (4)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\pi N}=45\pm 10`$ MeV is the pion-nucleon sigma term and $`E(n_B)/A`$ is the nuclear binding energy per particle with $`\widehat{m}=(m_u+m_d)/2`$. $`\overline{q}q_0`$ denotes the chiral condensate in the vacuum. The density-expansion of the right hand side of (4) gives a reduction of almost 35 % of $`\overline{q}q`$ already at the nuclear matter density $`n_0=0.17`$fm<sup>-3</sup>.

The near-threshold enhancement discussed in Sec.3 has been also studied at finite baryon density . Because of the decrease of the chiral condensate discussed above, the spectral function in the $`\sigma `$-channel, $`\rho _\sigma `$, has a following generic behavior at densities not far from $`n_0`$;

$`\rho _\sigma (\omega 2m_\pi ){\displaystyle \frac{\theta (\omega 2m_\pi )}{\sqrt{1\frac{4m_\pi ^2}{\omega ^2}}}},`$ (5)
which shows a spectral concentration at the $`2\pi `$ threshold.

Recently CHAOS collaboration  reported the data on the $`\pi ^+\pi ^\pm `$ invariant mass distribution $`M_{\pi ^+\pi ^\pm }^A`$ in the reaction $`A(\pi ^+,\pi ^+\pi ^\pm )A^{}`$ with the mass number $`A`$ ranging from 2 to 208: They observed that the yield for $`M_{\pi ^+\pi ^{}}^A`$ near the 2$`\pi `$ threshold is close to zero for $`A=2`$, but increases dramatically with increasing $`A`$. They identified that the $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ pairs in this range of $`M_{\pi ^+\pi ^{}}^A`$ is in the $`I`$=$`J`$=$`0`$ state. This experiment was originally motivated by a possibility of strong $`\pi \pi `$ correlations in nuclear matter . However, the state-of-the-art calculations using the nonlinear chiral Lagrangian together with $`\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ many-body dynamics do not reproduce the cross sections in the $`I`$=$`0`$ and $`I`$=$`2`$ channels simultaneously ; the final state interactions of the emitted two pions in nuclei give rise to a slight enhancement of the cross section in the $`I`$=$`0`$ channel, but is not sufficient to reproduce the experimental data. This indicates that an additional mechanism such as the partial restoration of chiral symmetry may be relevant for explaining the data .

To make a close connection between the idea of the spectral enhancement and the CHAOS data, the in-medium $`\pi `$-$`\pi `$ cross section has been calculated in the linear and non-linear $`\sigma `$ models . It was shown that, in both cases, substantial enhancement of the $`\pi `$-$`\pi `$ correlation in the $`I`$=$`J`$=$`0`$ channel near the threshold can be seen due to the partial restoration of chiral symmetry. Furthermore, an effective 4$`\pi `$-$`N`$-$`N`$ vertex responsible for the enhancement in the non-linear chiral Lagrangian is identified. In Fig.4, the in-medium $`\pi `$-$`\pi `$ cross section in the $`\sigma `$-channel calculated in the O(4) linear $`\sigma `$ model is shown.

Theoretically, it is of great importance to make an extensive analysis of the $`\pi `$-$`\pi `$ interaction in heavy nuclei with the effect of partial chiral restoration to understand the CHAOS data. Experimentally, it is definitely necessary to confirm the CHAOS result not only in the same reaction but also in other reactions. Measuring $`\sigma 2\pi ^04\gamma `$ is one of the clean experiments, since it is free from the $`\rho `$ meson background inherent in the $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ measurement. Measuring $`\sigma 2\gamma `$ is interesting because of the small final state interactions. Dilepton detection through the scalar-vector mixing in matter, $`\sigma \gamma ^{}e^+e^{}`$ and the formation of the $`\sigma `$ mesic nuclei through the nuclear reactions such as (d, t) are other possible experiments .

## 4 Spectral functions from lattice QCD

The lattice QCD simulations have remarkable progress in recent years for calculating the properties of hadrons as well as the properties of QCD phase transition . In particular, masses of light mesons and baryons in the quenched QCD simulation agree within 5-10 % with the experimental spectra . However, the lattice QCD had difficulties in accessing the dynamical quantities in the Minkowski space, because measurements on the lattice can only be carried out for discrete points in imaginary time. The analytic continuation from the imaginary time to the real time using the noisy lattice data is highly non-trivial and is even classified as an ill-posed problem.

Recently a new approach to extract spectral functions of hadrons from lattice QCD data by using the maximum entropy method (MEM) was started . MEM has been successfully applied for similar problems in image reconstruction in crystallography and astrophysics, and in quantum Monte Carlo simulations in condensed matter physics . There are three important aspects of MEM: (i) it does not require a priori assumptions or parametrizations of SPFs, (ii) for given data, a unique solution is obtained if it exists, and (iii) the statistical significance of the solution can be quantitatively analyzed.

### 4.1 Basic idea of MEM

The Euclidean correlation function $`D(\tau )`$ of an operator $`𝒪(\tau ,\stackrel{}{x})`$ and its spectral decomposition at zero three-momentum read

$`D(\tau >0)={\displaystyle 𝒪^{}(\tau ,\stackrel{}{x})𝒪(0,\stackrel{}{0})d^3x}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}K(\tau ,\omega )A(\omega )𝑑\omega ,`$ (6)
where $`\omega `$ is a real frequency, and $`A(\omega )`$ is the spectral function (or sometimes called the image), which is positive semi-definite. $`K(\tau ,\omega )`$ is a known integral kernel (it reduces to Laplace kernel $`e^{\tau \omega }`$ at zero $`T`$.)

Monte Carlo simulation provides $`D(\tau _i)`$ on the discrete set of temporal points $`0\tau _i/aN_\tau `$. From this data with statistical noise, we need to reconstruct the spectral function $`A(\omega )`$ with continuous variable $`\omega `$. This is a typical ill-posed problem, where the number of data is much smaller than the number of degrees of freedom to be reconstructed. This makes the standard likelihood analysis and its variants inapplicable unless strong assumptions on the spectral shape are made . MEM is a method to circumvent this difficulty through Bayesian statistical inference of the most probable image together with its reliability.

Let’s start with the Bayes’ theorem: $`P[X|Y]=P[Y|X]P[X]/P[Y]`$, where $`P[X|Y]`$ is the conditional probability of $`X`$ given $`Y`$. The most probable image $`A(\omega )`$ for given lattice data $`D`$ is obtained by maximizing the conditional probability

$$P[A|D]P[D|A]P[A].$$
(7)
The reliability of the obtained result can be checked by the second variation of $`P[A|D]`$ with respect to $`A(\omega )`$.

$`P[D|A]`$ in (7) is a standard $`\chi ^2`$, namely $`P[D|AH]=Z_L^1\mathrm{exp}(L)`$ with a likelihood function $`L=(1/2)_{i,j}(D(\tau _i)D^A(\tau _i))C_{ij}^1(D(\tau _j)D^A(\tau _j))`$ and a normalization factor $`Z_L`$. $`D(\tau _i)`$ is the lattice data averaged over gauge configurations and $`D^A(\tau _i)`$ is the correlation function obtained by given $`A`$. $`C`$ is a covariance matrix of the data.

$`P[D|A]`$ (the prior probability) in (7), can be written with parameters $`\alpha `$ and $`m`$ as $`P[A]=Z_S^1\mathrm{exp}(\alpha S)`$ by the combinatorial argument. Here $`S`$ is the generalized information entropy,

$`S={\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\left[A(\omega )m(\omega )A(\omega )\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{A(\omega )}{m(\omega )}}\right)\right]𝑑\omega ,`$ (8)
with $`Z_S`$ being a normalization factor. $`\alpha `$ is a real and positive parameter and $`m(\omega )`$ is a real and positive function called the default model.

The output image $`A_{out}`$ is given by a weighted average over $`A`$ and $`\alpha `$:

$`A_{out}(\omega )={\displaystyle A_\alpha (\omega )P[\alpha |Dm]𝑑\alpha },`$ (9)
where $`A_\alpha (\omega )`$ is obtained by minimizing the ”free-energy” $`FL\alpha S`$. $`\alpha `$ dictates the relative weight of the entropy $`S`$ (which tends to fit $`A`$ to the default model $`m`$) and the likelihood function $`L`$ (which tends to fit $`A`$ to the lattice data). Note that $`\alpha `$ appears only in the intermediate step and is integrated out in the final result.

One can prove that the solution of $`\delta F=0`$ is unique if it exits. The error analysis of the reconstructed image can be studied by evaluating the second derivative of the free energy $`\delta ^2F/\delta A(\omega )\delta A(\omega ^{})`$. The default model $`m`$ is chosen such that the error becomes minimum.

### 4.2 MEM with lattice data

In Fig.5, shown is an example of the spectral function in the pion and the rho meson channels at $`T=0`$ extracted from the quenched lattice QCD data . The lattice size is $`20^3\times 24`$ with $`\beta =6.0`$, which corresponds to $`a=0.0847`$ fm ($`a^1=2.33`$ GeV), and the spatial size of the lattice $`L_sa=1.69`$ fm. Hopping parameters are chosen to be $`\kappa =`$ 0.153, 0.1545, and 0.1557 with $`N_{conf}=161`$ for each $`\kappa `$. For the quark propagator, the Dirichlet (periodic) boundary condition is employed for the temporal (spatial) direction. We use data at $`1\tau _i/a12`$.

The obtained images have the low-energy peaks corresponding to $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$, and the broad structure in the high-energy region. The mass of the $`\rho `$-meson in the chiral limit extracted from the peak in Fig.5 is consistent with that determined by the asymptotic behavior of $`D(\tau )`$. Although the maximum value of the fitting range $`\tau _{max}/a=12`$ marginally covers the asymptotic limit in $`\tau `$, we can extract reasonable masses for $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$. The width of $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$ in Fig.5 is an artifact due to the statistical errors of the lattice data. In fact, in the quenched approximation, there is no room for the $`\rho `$-meson to decay into two pions.

As for the second peaks, the error analysis shows that their spectral “shape” does not have much statistical significance, although the existence of the non-vanishing spectral strength is significant. Under this reservation, we fit the position of the second peaks and made linear extrapolation to the chiral limit and obtain results consistent with experimental data on $`\pi ^{}`$ and $`\rho ^{}`$.

The error in Fig.5 indicates the uncertainty of the spectrum averaged over the interval in the frequency space. Better data with smaller $`a`$ and larger lattice volume will be helpful for obtaining spectral functions with smaller errors.

### 4.3 The future of MEM

MEM introduces a new way of extracting physical information from the lattice QCD data. It is now time to study how hadrons are modified in the medium using this new approach. The long-standing problem of in-medium spectral functions of vector mesons ($`\rho `$, $`\omega `$, $`\varphi `$, $`J/\psi `$, $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, etc) and scalar/pseudo-scalar mesons ($`\sigma `$, $`\pi `$, $`\mathrm{}`$, etc) can be studied using MEM combined with finite $`T`$ lattice simulations. The in-medium behavior of the light vector mesons  and scalar mesons  is intimately related to the chiral restoration in hot/dense matter, while that of the heavy vector mesons is related to deconfinement . Simulations with an anisotropic lattice is necessary for this purpose to have enough data points in the temporal direction at finite $`T`$, which is now under way . (See also an attempt on the basis of NRQCD simulation .) It is interesting to study the spectral functions with finite three-momentum $`𝐤`$ for treating moving-hadrons in the medium.

Non-perturbative collective modes above the critical temperature of the QCD phase transition speculated in  may be studied efficiently by using MEM, since the method does not require any specific ansätze for the spectral shape. Correlations in the diquark channels in the vacuum and in medium are interesting to be explored in relation to the $`q`$-$`q`$ correlation in baryon spectroscopy and to color superconductivity at high $`n_B`$ .

## 5 Summary

Although the light $`\sigma `$-meson does not show up clearly in the free space because of its large width due to the strong coupling with two pions, it may appear as a soft and narrow collective mode in the hadronic medium when the chiral symmetry is (partially) restored. A characteristic signal is the enhancement of the spectral function and the $`\pi `$-$`\pi `$ cross section near the $`2\pi `$ threshold. They could be observed in the hadronic reactions with heavy nuclear targets as well as in the heavy ion collisions through the detection of pion pairs and photon pairs. Finding such signal provides us with a better understanding of the non-perturbative structure of the QCD vacuum and its quantum fluctuations.

The maximum entropy method (MEM) opens the door to extract the spectral functions from the first principle lattice QCD data without making a priori assumptions on the spectral shape. The method has been tested at $`T`$=$`0`$ with reasonable success. The uniqueness of the solution and the quantitative error analysis make MEM superior to any other approaches adopted previously. The method has a promising future for analyzing in-medium properties of hadrons and its relation to chiral structure of matter.