text:
# Coulomb Ordering in Anderson-Localized Electron Systems.

## a Introduction.

As was shown by Wigner long ago, slow decrease in the Coulomb electron-electron interaction potential $`v(r)=e^2/\kappa r`$ ($`e`$ is the free electron charge, $`r`$ is a distance between the interacting electrons, $`\kappa `$ is the permittivity) with an increase in the interelectron distance inevitably causes the Coulomb energy of free electron gas to exceed its kinetic energy at sufficiently low electron densities with the resulting transition of the gas into an electron crystal (Wigner crystal). In the wake of Wigner’s prediction a natural question was raised whether long-range (weakly screened) Coulomb forces can lead to ordering of charge carrier ensembles in conductors. However, a strong evidence of ”Wigner-crystal-in-crystal” existence has not been found yet. This suggests that the Wigner crystallization, at least in the convential conductors, is very difficult (if at all possible) to observe in pure form. Therefore, seeking mechanisms of charge carrier Coulomb ordering that are beyond the above Wigner’s scenario is of great interest.

At present much attention is being given to an electron/hole Coulomb self-localization in lattice systems with so small overlap intergal $`t`$ that tunnelling of charge carriers is supressed by their mutual Coulomb interaction. The self-localization brings about electron/hole ordering in two cases: i/the host lattice is regular (generally an incommensurate electron/hole structure is formed), ii/the host lattice is disordered, but the mean separation of its sites is much less than that of the charge carriers $`\overline{r}`$ (the so-called Wigner glass is formed, whose space structure, though disordered, is close to a Wigner crystal lattice (WCL) in a sense). Ordered self-localized charge carrier lattice systems (OSLCCLS) of both types are obviously not the same as Wigner crystal. In addition, unlike the Wigner crystallization, the higher is the electron/hole density the weaker are dynamic effects caused by the charge carrier tunnelling.

The present paper aims to draw attention to a new type of Coulomb ordering that occurs under conditions of a strong Anderson localization. Specifically, we deal with Anderson localized electron systems wherein the external random field localizing the electrons is a random set of potential wells that are sufficiently deep for the localization length $`r_L`$ to be $``$ the mean wells separation, $`r_0n_0^{1/d}`$ ($`n_0`$ is the density of the wells, $`d`$ is the dimension of the system). We show further that at sufficiently low electron densities, $`n_e`$, and sufficiently low temperatures, $`T`$, the mutual Coulomb repulsion of the localized electrons inevitably forces them to be arranged close to the WCL sites, provided $`d>`$ 1. Such Coulomb ordered Anderson localized electron system (COALES) differs qualitatively from both Wigner crystal and OSLCCLS for the following reason. An electron/hole self-localization underlying formation of Wigner crystal or OSLCCLS occurs only if the Coulomb energy of mutual charge carrier repulsion is the prevailing one. In the electron systems undergoing strong Anderson localization this is not the case, as the width of random spread of the electron levels in the wells, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ (the disorder energy) is much more than the mean Coulomb energy per electron $`\epsilon _cv(\overline{r})`$. Under these conditions a Coulomb self-localization is impossible since a shift of an electron over a small distance $`r_0\overline{r}`$ changes the electron energy much more than $`\epsilon _c`$. Below we describe a new mechanism by which Coulomb ordering occurs despite the inequality $`\epsilon _c\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

The smallness of $`\epsilon _c`$ as compared with $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is believed to be a good reason to describe an influence of Coulomb electron-electron interaction on the systems with strong Anderson localization in terms of Fermi glass, a random system of the electrons occupying all wells with the energies $``$ the Fermi energy $`\epsilon _F`$. Up to now, it is the Fermi-glass approximation modified with regard to existence of the so-called Coulomb gap (Efros-Shklovskii gap) at the Fermi energy has been the basic approach to the problem. COALES existence at low $`n_e`$ is beyond the scope of the Fermi-glass concept. This indicates that the convential line of reasoning should be revised.

COALES posseses a peculiar “duality”: similar to Wigner crystal, it arises as $`n_e0`$, while its space structure similar to that of Wigner glass. As will be seen from the following, such “duality” not only differs COALES from both Wigner crystal and Wigner glass but imparts it a number of new features that make COALES an appealing subject of investigation. We also show that with an increase in $`n_e`$ COALES turns into Fermi glass or OSLCCLS depending on a value of the parameter $`\gamma =\mathrm{\Delta }/v(r_0)`$, governing an interplay between the random spread of the electron levels and the Coulomb interelectron repulsion. The residual disorder inherent to COALES is described here in terms of dipole glass, a random system of interacting dipoles that issue from the WCL sites. The dipole representation of the disorder proves to be helpful for revealing a multi-valley degeneration of the COALES ground state reminiscent of that in the spin glasses.

## b The Basic Assumptions.

Owing to the inequality $`r_Lr_0`$ the radius-vectors $`\stackrel{}{R}`$ of the centers of the random-potential wells can be considered as quantum numbers of the one-electron localized states, $`|\stackrel{}{R}>`$. Their energies $`\epsilon (\stackrel{}{R})`$ are random values, the structure of the $`\stackrel{}{R}`$ set is assumed to be arbitrary, in particular, it can be regular. Without essential loss of generality, the density $`\nu `$ of the number of $`\epsilon (\stackrel{}{R})`$ with a given value $`\epsilon `$ can be presented in the form

$$\nu =n_0f(\epsilon )/\mathrm{\Delta },$$
(1)
where $`f(\epsilon )`$ is $`1`$ within the interval $`[\epsilon _{\text{min}},\epsilon _{\text{min}}+\mathrm{\Delta }]`$ and equals zero outside it; $`\epsilon _{\text{min}}`$ is the least of the $`\epsilon (\stackrel{}{R})`$. Further we put $`\epsilon _{\text{min}}=0`$, $`f(0)=1`$.

Here it is assumed that $`\overline{r}r_0`$. In particular, this allows to neglect perturbations produced in the eigenstates of the system by the electron-electron interaction (with accuracy to additions $`(r_0/\overline{r})^2\mathrm{exp}(r_0/r_L)1`$). In this approximation, the eigenstates can be identified with

$$|>=|\stackrel{}{R}_1>|\stackrel{}{R}_2>\mathrm{}|\stackrel{}{R}_N>.$$
(2)
where $`=\stackrel{}{R}_1,\mathrm{},\stackrel{}{R}_N`$ denotes a set of the wells occupied by the electrons, $`N`$ is the number of the electrons. The complete set of the eigenstates comprises all possible $``$ with different $`\stackrel{}{R}_1\mathrm{}\stackrel{}{R}_N`$. With the same accuracy, the eigenvalues $`E()`$ corresponding to the states $`|>`$ take the form

$$E()=E_c()+E_w(),$$
(4)
where $`E_c`$ and $`E_w`$ are the energy of the mutual electron repulsion and the energy of the non-interacting Anderson localized electrons in the wells, respectively:

$$E_c=\frac{1}{2}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i,k=1}{ik}}{\overset{N}{}}v(|\stackrel{}{R}_i\stackrel{}{R}_k|),E_w=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\epsilon (\stackrel{}{R}_i);$$
(5)
We aim to find the structure of the electron configuration $`_g`$ that minimizes $`E()`$.

## c Electron Ordering and Fermi-Glass Instability.

First let us discuss how mutual electron repulsion affects the ground state of the Fermi-glass in the limit $`n_e\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$. As follows from Eq.(1), $`n_e`$ is linear in $`\epsilon _F`$ at $`\epsilon _F\mathrm{\Delta }`$:

$$n_e=n_0\epsilon _F/\mathrm{\Delta },$$

On the other hand, $`\epsilon _c`$ is proportional to $`n_e^{1/d}`$. Hence, the ratio $`\epsilon _F/\epsilon _cn_e^{\frac{d1}{d}}`$ tends to zero (for $`d>1`$) with a decrease in $`n_e`$. What this means is that Fermi glass with sufficiently low $`n_e`$ is unstable with respect to mutual Coulomb repulsion of electrons.

If the electrons were free to move and $`\epsilon (\stackrel{}{R})=0`$, the ground-state configuration $`_g`$ would be a WCL. Since the electrons of Fermi glass are randomly arranged, the Coulomb energy per electron of the Fermi-glass exceeds that of the WCL, $`\epsilon _0\epsilon _c`$, significantly (i.e. by a value $`\epsilon _c`$). This suggests that for sufficiently low $`n_e`$ the configuration $`_g`$ falls into a class of $``$ that meet the folowing conditions: i/ for each WCL site there is an electron located in a small neighborhood of the site, ii/the upper bound $`\epsilon _b`$ of the electron energies in the wells $`\epsilon (\stackrel{}{R}_1),\mathrm{},\epsilon (\stackrel{}{R}_N)`$ satisfies the inequalities

$$\epsilon _F\epsilon _b\epsilon _c,$$
(6)
The energy per electron $`\epsilon _{}=E()/N`$ of such $``$ is near $`\epsilon _0`$. It cannot be less than $`\epsilon _0`$ as the mean electron energy in the wells $`\epsilon _w=E_w/N\epsilon _F`$.

Any configuration of the above class belongs to the set of points $`\stackrel{}{R}`$ for which $`\epsilon (\stackrel{}{R})\epsilon _b`$. The density of these points equals $`n_0(\epsilon _b/\mathrm{\Delta })`$, and their mean separation

$$\rho (\epsilon _b)r_0(\mathrm{\Delta }/\epsilon _b)^{1/d},$$
(7)
is much less than the WCL spacing $`a_0\overline{r}`$ owing to the first of the inequalities (6). Therefore, for each WCL site $`\stackrel{}{m}`$ there are inevitably several $`\stackrel{}{R}`$ of the set such that $`|\stackrel{}{R}\stackrel{}{m}|\rho `$. Populating these “proximate” states $`|\stackrel{}{R}>`$ (one electron per site) yields just the configurations of the class we are interested in. For such a configuration the energy $`\epsilon _{}`$ is the sum

$$\epsilon _{}=\epsilon _0+\delta \epsilon ,$$
(9)
where $`\delta \epsilon `$ is expected to be a small correction to $`\epsilon _0`$. It consists of two terms:

$$\delta \epsilon =a\left(\rho /\overline{r}\right)^2\epsilon _0+b(r_0/\rho )^d\mathrm{\Delta }$$
(10)
The first term is the deformation energy produced by electron displacements over distances $`\rho `$ from the WCL sites. The second term is $`\epsilon _w`$ expressed in terms of $`\rho `$ in view of Eq.(7) and the fact that $`\epsilon _w\epsilon _b`$. Factors $`a=a(),b=b()`$ depend on details of $``$, but they are both $`1`$ for any of the considered configurations.

The ground-state correction, $`\delta \epsilon _g`$, to $`\epsilon _0`$ is the least of the $`\delta \epsilon `$ values. Putting $`a,b=1`$ in the expression (10) and finding its minimum in $`\rho `$, we obtain the estimate

$$\delta \epsilon _g\gamma ^{\frac{2}{d+2}}\left(r_0/\overline{r}\right)^{\frac{2(d1)}{d+2}}\epsilon _0,$$
(11)
the minimum being reached at

$$\rho =\overline{\rho }\gamma ^{\frac{1}{d+2}}\left(r_0/\overline{r}\right)^{\frac{d1}{d+2}}a_0\left(\mathrm{\Delta }/\delta E_c\right)^{\frac{1}{d+2}}r_0,$$
(12)
where $`\gamma `$ is the parameter defined in item a; the physical sense of the energy $`\delta E_c=(r_0/\overline{r})^2\epsilon _c`$ will be explained below (item e). The quantity $`\overline{\rho }`$ characterizes deviation of $`_g`$ from WCL.

Expressions (11) and (12) show that $`\delta \epsilon _g/\epsilon _0`$ and $`\overline{\rho }/a_0`$ both go to zero when $`\overline{r}/r_0\mathrm{}`$. Hence, for sufficiently low $`n_e`$ the ground-state electron configuration is WCL slightly perturbed by random electron displacements from the WCL sites. This is just the COALES mentioned in the item a. The space structure of COALES differs from that of Wigner glass at an important point: the typical displacement of the electrons/holes from the WCL sites in Wigner glass is of order of the geometrical constant of the system, the mean host-lattice sites separation, while that in COALES, $`\overline{\rho }`$, depends not only on the geometrical parameter $`r_0`$ but also on both the disorder energy $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and the electron density.

## d Dipole Glass.

In order to do justice to the COALES ground state it is necessary to describe the residual disorder inherent to this system, extending the consideration to cover all $``$ that are close to $`_g`$. To this end, it is convenient to introduce the effective Hamiltonian $`H_{\text{eff}}`$ by the formula $`E()=N\epsilon _0+H_{\text{eff}}`$, expressing $`H_{\text{eff}}`$ in terms of dipoles $`\stackrel{}{d}_\stackrel{}{m}=\stackrel{}{R}\stackrel{}{m}`$ as independent variables ($`\stackrel{}{m}`$ are the radius-vectors of the WCL sites) whose moduli are $`a_0`$. Expanding $`E_c`$ in powers of $`d_\stackrel{}{m}^\alpha `$ (index $`\alpha `$ enumerates the components of vectors) and restricting to quadratic in $`\stackrel{}{d}_\stackrel{}{m}`$ terms, it is easy to obtain

$$H_{\text{eff}}=\underset{\stackrel{}{m}}{}\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }(\stackrel{}{d}_\stackrel{}{m})+\frac{1}{2}\underset{\stackrel{}{m},\stackrel{}{m}^{}}{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\alpha \alpha ^{}}(\stackrel{}{m}\stackrel{}{m}^{})d_\stackrel{}{m}^\alpha d_\stackrel{}{m}^{}^\alpha ^{},$$
(13)
where matrix $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\alpha \alpha ^{}}(\stackrel{}{m})=|\stackrel{}{m}|^3(\delta _{\alpha \alpha ^{}}3m_\alpha m_\alpha ^{}/|\stackrel{}{m}|^2)`$ determines the interaction of two dipoles issuing from sites $`0,\stackrel{}{m}`$; the function $`\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }(\stackrel{}{d}_\stackrel{}{m})=\epsilon (\stackrel{}{m}+\stackrel{}{d}_\stackrel{}{m})+\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{\alpha \alpha ^{}}d_\stackrel{}{m}^\alpha d_\stackrel{}{m}^\alpha ^{}`$, the matrix $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{\alpha \alpha ^{}}=_\stackrel{}{m}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\alpha \alpha ^{}}(\stackrel{}{m})`$; here and further on summation over repeated indexes $`\alpha ,\alpha ^{}`$ is implied, the sums of $`\stackrel{}{m},\stackrel{}{m}^{}`$ are taken over all WCL sites. The second term in $`\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }(\stackrel{}{d}_\stackrel{}{m})`$ is the energy of interaction of a given dipole with WCL; the second term in Eq.(13) is the energy of the dipole-dipole interaction.

The distinctive feature of $`H_{\text{eff}}`$ is that the dipoles are variables taking on their values on a given random set. This suggests that the considered dipole system has much in common with the spin glass . The analogy becomes clear for the simplest model in which $`\stackrel{}{d}_\stackrel{}{m}=d_0s_\stackrel{}{m}\stackrel{}{e}_\stackrel{}{m}`$, $`s_\stackrel{}{m}=\pm 1`$, $`d_0`$ is a constant, and unit vectors $`\stackrel{}{e}_\stackrel{}{m}`$ constitute a given random set, $`H_{\text{eff}}`$ taking the form

$$H_{\text{eff}}=\underset{\stackrel{}{m}\stackrel{}{m}^{}}{}J_{\stackrel{}{m}\stackrel{}{m}^{}}s_\stackrel{}{m}s_\stackrel{}{m}^{}+\underset{\stackrel{}{m}}{}h(s_\stackrel{}{m}),$$
(14)
where $`s_\stackrel{}{m}`$ are the independent variables, the “exchange integral” $`J_{\stackrel{}{m}\stackrel{}{m}^{}}=d_0^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\alpha \alpha ^{}}(\stackrel{}{m}\stackrel{}{m}^{})e_\stackrel{}{m}^\alpha e_\stackrel{}{m}^{}^\alpha ^{}`$ is a random matrix, and $`h(s_\stackrel{}{m})=\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }(d_0s_\stackrel{}{m}\stackrel{}{e}_\stackrel{}{m})`$ plays the role of an external random field. The system with the Hamiltonian (14), being a special case of spin glass , shares with the spin glasses their known general property: a multi-valley ground-state degeneration. It can be described in terms of “$`𝒩`$-excitations” that are $`s_\stackrel{}{m}`$ configurations differing from the ground-state one by a big number $`𝒩`$ of spin flips. The multi-valley degeneration implies that separation of the low bound of the $`𝒩`$-excitations energy spectrum from the ground-state energy is $``$ the typical separation between the neighboring energies of the spectrum, $`\delta E_𝒩𝒩/Z`$ ($`Z`$ is the total number of $`𝒩`$-excitations with a given $`𝒩`$, $`\mathrm{ln}Z𝒩`$), and in consequence of this, is exponentially small in $`𝒩`$.

The true dipole Hamiltonian (13) differs from the model one (14) only in that each dipole $`\stackrel{}{d}_\stackrel{}{m}`$ runs through a given finite random set containing more than two vectors. (The vectors of the set are such that their moduli are comparable with $`\overline{\rho }`$). Therefore, the above properties of the energy spectrum of the $`𝒩`$-excitations (they are dipole configurations with $`𝒩`$ dipoles other than in the ground state) hold in the general case. In other words, the multi-valley degeneration does take place in the dipole system, and hence, in COALES.

## e The Region of COALES Existence.

Expression (12) shows that with an increase in $`n_e`$ the ratio $`\overline{\rho }/a_0`$ increases, while $`\overline{\rho }`$ itself decreases. This brings about, depending on a value of the parameter $`\gamma `$, two different scenarios of what happens with COALES as $`n_e`$ increases. For sufficiently big $`\gamma `$ the ratio $`\overline{\rho }/a_0`$, increasing together with $`n_e`$, reaches inevitably some critical value $`\beta <1/2`$ at which the length of the space correlations in the system is $`\overline{r}`$, and COALES turns (supposedly, by a second order transition) into a glassy state. This occurs at

$$n_e=n_{e1}\beta _c^{\frac{d(d+2)}{d1}}\gamma ^{\frac{d}{d1}}n_0.$$

At this point the ratio $`\epsilon _F/\epsilon _c`$ is $`\beta ^{d+2}`$, i.e. it is significantly less than $`1`$. Therefore, for $`n_en_{e1}`$ there exists a $`n_e`$ range over which the glassy state cannot be adequately described in terms of the notion of Fermi energy. A further decrease in $`n_e`$ leads to transformation of such “non-Fermi”glass into conventional Fermi glass (modified by the Coulomb electron-electron interactions) only if $`\gamma 1`$. Otherwise, $`\epsilon _F/\epsilon _c\gamma (n_e/n_0)^{\frac{d1}{d}}`$ is less than $`1`$ for any $`n_e`$, and non-Fermi glass exists for all $`n_en_{e1}`$.

If $`\gamma `$ is sufficiently small, an increase in $`n_e`$ reduces $`\overline{\rho }`$ down to its least possible value, $`r_0`$, the ratio $`\overline{\rho }/a_0`$ remaining $`1`$. This takes place at $`\mathrm{\Delta }\delta E_c`$, or in terms of $`n_e`$, at $`n_e=n_{e2}\gamma ^{\frac{d}{3}}n_0`$. The parameter $`\delta E_c`$ is the typical change in the Coulomb energy of the system as an electron is shifted over distance $`r_0`$. Therefore, for $`\delta E_c>\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the mutual electron repulsion dominates the random spread of the electron levels, causing localization of the electrons by itself. In other words, in the considered case the state into which COALES turns as $`n_e`$ increases is nothing but the above-mentioned OSLCCLS whose host lattice is a regular or disordered $`\stackrel{}{R}`$ set.

It follows from the aforesaid that the region of COALES existence on the $`n_e,\gamma `$-plane is restricted by $`\gamma `$-axis and two curves, $`n_e=n_{e1}(\gamma ),n_e=n_{c1}(\gamma )`$ ($`n_{e1}(\gamma )\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$ as $`\gamma \mathrm{}`$; $`n_{e2}(0)=0`$). They intersect at point $`n_e=\overline{n}_e\beta ^dn_0,\gamma =\overline{\gamma }\beta ^3`$, the value $`\overline{n}_e`$ being the maximal $`n_e`$ at which COALES exists.

Heating affects COALES if $`T`$ exceeds $`\delta \epsilon _g`$, both terms in Eq.(10) ($`\rho =\overline{\rho }`$) being $`T`$. This gives the dipole thermal-fluctuations amplitude $`d_T\overline{r}(\epsilon _c/T)^{1/2}`$, the fluctuating dipole vector taking $`(T/\delta \epsilon _g)^{1+d/2}`$ values. As $`T`$ increases, $`d_T`$ becomes $`a_0`$, and at some critical $`T\epsilon _c`$ COALES turns into a glassy state.

## f Some General Features of COALES.

Macroscopically, COALES manifests both electron crystal and glassy-state features.

Due to the proximity of the COALES space structure to WCL the low bound of the energy spectrum of one-electron excitations produced by displacements of an electron over distances $`\overline{r}`$ is separated from the ground state energy by a big gap $`\epsilon _c`$. This renders one-electron variable-range hopping over COALES impossible. Low-temperature conduction in COALES is by multi-electron exchange processes of a creep type (a power dependence of the COALES conductivity $`\sigma `$ on $`T`$ is expected) or by transfer of charged point defects (positively charged WCL vacancies and interstitial electrons), $`\sigma `$ being proportional to their concentration that in its turn is $`\mathrm{exp}((\epsilon _v\epsilon _i)/T)`$ ($`\epsilon _v`$ and $`\epsilon _i>\epsilon _v`$ are the energies of vacancy and interstitial-electron formation respectively; $`\epsilon _i\epsilon _v<\epsilon _c`$). Thus, $`\sigma `$ by no means obeys the known Mott’s low  for Fermi glass.

The multi-valley degeneration of the dipole glass, similarly to that in spin glass , is bound to cause an infinite spectrum of relaxation times, and, in consequence of this, a non-ergodic behavior of COALES. This can be revealed by observation of different relaxation processes in COALES proceeding for anomalously long times. An example is relaxation of a non-equilibrium COALES polarization created in one way or another. This has much in common with relaxation of a non-equilibrium magnetic moment in spin glass.

As follows from the aforesaid, under moderate-disorder conditions ($`\mathrm{\Delta }v(r_0)`$) COALES can exist up to $`n_e`$ that are only several times less than $`n_0`$. The proper materials to observe COALES are various amorphous narrow-band conductors, superlattices, and inversion layers wherein $`n_e`$ can be varied within wide limits without affecting the disorder. Favorable conditions for two-dimensional COALES existence are expected to be realized in semiconductor superlattices with the so-called $`\delta `$-layers. Of special interest is a conductive sheet in a system $`metal`$$`n`$-type $`GaAs`$$`p`$-type $`GaAs`$ with charge transfer in an impurity band. It is distinguished by pronounced regular-type oscillations in $`n_e`$, which cannot be explained in conventional one-electron terms and most likely are a manifestation of two-dimensional COALES or OSLCCLS. We intend to provide new evidence to confirm the suggestion and to specify the electron structure in nearest future.

The main outlines of COALES mentioned here are to be issues of our further detailed publications.

We gratefuly acknowledge interesting and useful discussions with I.Lerner and I.Yurkevich. We are sincerely thankful to B.Shklovskii for helpful remarks.

The visit of A. Slutskin to the Cavendish Laboratory was supported by the Royal Society. AS would like to express his gratitude.


format: text

text:
# UTHEP-452UTCCP-P-117 Non-perturbative renormalization for a renormalization group improved gauge action Talk presented by K. Ide.

## 1 Introduction

Reliable lattice calculations of hadronic matrix elements and quark masses require both high precision numerical simulations and non-perturbative determinations of renormalization constants ($`Z`$-factors). The CP-PACS collaboration recently carried out a sophisticated spectrum calculation in $`N_f=2`$ full QCD  using a renormalization group (RG) improved gauge action and a tadpole improved clover quark action. However, non-perturbative $`Z`$-factors were not available for this action combination. Hence analyses had to rely on one-loop perturbative values.

As a first step toward a systematic study of non-perturbative renormalization for this action, we apply the Schrödinger functional method  to calculations of $`Z`$ factors for vector ($`Z_V`$) and axial-vector ($`Z_A`$) currents in quenched QCD with the same improved action. We examine in particular whether a large scaling violation of meson decay constants observed for this action  is improved with non-perturbative $`Z`$-factors. We report preliminary results in these proceedings.

## 2 Calculational Method

We follow the method developed by the ALPHA collaboration . Namely, we use a lattice geometry of $`L^3T`$ with $`T=2L`$ for $`Z_V`$ with a vector operator at $`t=L`$, and $`T=3L`$ for $`Z_A`$ with two axial vector operators at $`t=L`$ and $`t=2L`$, except at $`\beta =2.2`$ and 2.4 for $`Z_A`$ (see sec. 3 for details of this exception). Tree-level values are used for coefficients of boundary counter terms of the action. For improving the axial current, we use the one-loop perturbative value for the coefficient $`c_A`$.

Values of $`Z_V`$ and $`Z_A`$ are determined for $`\beta =2.2`$ – 8.0 which almost covers the range of the CP-PACS quenched spectrum calculation , $`\beta =2.187`$ – 2.575. Physical size is normalized at $`\beta =`$ 2.6 on an $`8^3`$ lattice. For other $`\beta `$ values, two lattice sizes are analyzed to match the physical size using the string tension. Our action has $`O(a)`$ errors since we employ a tadpole improved value of $`c_{\mathrm{sw}}=(10.8412/\beta )^{3/4}`$. Therefore we extrapolate/interpolate results linearly in $`1/L`$. We have analyzed 300–4000 configurations depending on $`\beta `$ value and lattice size.

## 3 Exceptional Configurations

It is straight-forward to calculate $`Z`$-factors for $`\beta >2.4`$ for $`Z_V`$ and $`\beta >2.8`$ for $`Z_A`$. We find reasonable plateaux in the ratio of Green functions for the $`Z`$-factors in spite of the $`O(a)`$ error of the action, which implies viability of the Schrödinger functional method for our action.

However, for lower $`\beta `$ values on a large lattice, anomalously large values appear in the ensemble of $`f_1`$, $`f_V`$ and $`f_{AA}`$ where $`Z_V=f_1/f_V`$ and $`Z_A=\sqrt{f_1/f_{AA}}`$. This is illustrated with a time history of $`f_1`$ and $`f_V`$ at $`\beta =2.4`$ in Fig. 1.

In order to estimate $`Z`$-factors at low $`\beta `$ values, we have investigated the properties of these “exceptional configurations”. We find : i) Large values of $`f_1`$ and $`f_V`$ for $`Z_V`$ and $`f_1`$ and $`f_{AA}`$ for $`Z_A`$ are strongly correlated (see Fig. 1). ii) Histograms of $`f`$’s have a long tail toward very large values as shown in Fig. 2. We then impose a cutoff in taking the average of the $`f`$’s, and find that $`Z`$-factors are stable against change of the cutoff as long as anomalously large values are discarded, as the numerator and denominator for $`Z`$-factors are correlated and effects mostly cancel out. See Fig. 3.

We then estimate $`Z`$-factors for low $`\beta `$ values taking a certain value of the cutoff. For $`Z_A`$ at $`\beta =2.2`$ and 2.4, the lattice geometry is also changed from $`T=3L`$ to $`T=2L`$ because “exceptional configurations” appear very frequently for the original geometry to the extent that the cutoff analysis above does not work. We have checked at $`\beta =2.6`$ that the change of geometry does not lead to any significant difference in $`Z_A`$.

## 4 Results for $`Z`$-factors

In Fig. 4 we show results of $`Z`$-factors together with Padé fits (solid curves in the figure) to them. Non-perturbative estimates give values smaller than the one-loop perturbative ones (dashed lines) by about 10 % (6%) for $`Z_V`$ ($`Z_A`$) at the largest coupling of the CP-PACS simulation, $`\beta =2.187`$.

## 5 Scaling Property of Decay Constants

We compare in Fig. 5 $`f_\pi `$ and $`f_\rho `$ determined with non-perturbative (filled circles) and perturbative (open circles) $`Z`$-factors. Also shown are the results from the standard plaquette and Wilson action (squares) using the perturbative $`Z`$-factors.

We observe that, even with the non-perturbative $`Z`$-factors, large scaling violation of meson decay constants remains for the range we have investigated. A possible reason is the necessity of non-perturbatively fixing the $`O(a)`$ and perhaps higher terms in the currents themselves. For the axial vector current, it will be worth investigating if non-perturbative estimates of the $`O(a)`$ coefficient $`c_A`$ yield a large value.

## 6 Conclusions

We have successfully applied the Schrödinger functional method to calculations of $`Z_V`$ and $`Z_A`$ for the combination of a RG-improved gauge action and a tadpole improved clover quark action down to the lattice spacings $`a^1=12`$ GeV where the quenched CP-PACS data for decay constants were taken.

While $`Z`$-factors estimated non-perturbatively are smaller by $`O(10\%)`$ than perturbative ones for this range, there still remain large scaling violations of $`O(a)`$ and higher in meson decay constants with non-perturbative $`Z`$-factors. Further work is needed to examine if hadronic matrix elements could be reliably extracted at lattice spacings much coarser than $`a^12`$ GeV with operators improved non-perturbatively at $`O(a)`$ and beyond.

This work is supported in part by Grants-in-Aid of the Ministry of Education (Nos. 10640246, 10640248, 11640250, 11640294, 12014202, 12304011, 12640253, 12740133, 13640260 ). VL is supported by the Research for Future Program of JSPS (No. JSPS-RFTF 97P01102).


text:
# The first close-up of the “flip-flop” phenomenon in a single starBased on the observations obtained at the Kitt Peak National Observatory, USA; the Automatic Photometric Telescope, Phoenix 10, Arizona, USA; the Nordic Optical Telescope, Observatorio Roque de los Muchachos, La Palma, Canary Islands, Spain.

## 1 Introduction

In order to study the spot evolution in cool active stars, two approaches are commonly used: photometric light curve modeling (or inversion) and Doppler imaging. The light curve analysis is evidently a much poorer source of information than Doppler imaging and, therefore, leaves more freedom for conclusions about the spot evolution. However, the amount, frequency and time scale of photometric observations exceed significantly those of Doppler images obtained to date (see the most recent compilation of Doppler imaging results given by Strassmeier str1 (2001)). Doppler images, in turn, reveal key properties of spots, such as their latitudes, actual motion, areas, etc., which could strongly constrain conclusions made from light curve modeling.

In this letter, using both techniques, we investigate a so-called “flip-flop” phenomenon, which was discovered a decade ago in light curve behaviour of a single, late-type giant FK Com (Jetsu et al. jetsu1 (1991), jetsu2 (1993), jetsu4 (1994)). In this phenomenon, the concentrated part of the spot activity shifts 180° in longitude over a short period of time and remains for some years at a new active longitude. Since its discovery, the “flip-flop” phenomenon has also been reported in some RS CVn binaries and in a single young dwarf LQ Hya (Jetsu jetsu5 (1996); Berdyugina & Tuominen ber1 (1998), ber5 (2001); Berdyugina et al. ber2 (1998), ber3 (1999), ber4 (2000); Rodonó et al. rodo (2000)), implying that the phenomenon is a significant pattern of the activity in different types of stars and requires a thorough investigation.

The active, late-type, giant FK Com itself is a prototype of a small group of rapidly rotating, single, giants (Bopp & Stencel bopp3 (1981)). It exhibits strong and variable chromospheric and photospheric activity. Small variations in FK Com’s visual magnitude were first reported by Chugainov (chu1 (1966)), and its spectral peculiarities include a strong and variable H$`\alpha `$ emission (e.g. Ramsey et al. ram (1981)), strong chromospheric UV emission (Bopp & Stencel bopp3 (1981)) and high X-ray luminosity (Walter wal (1981)).

Since in FK Com the “flip-flop” phenomenon was only observed as a shift of the light curve minimum, it was not clear whether the spots themselves move across the stellar surface. This could be only judged with the technique of Doppler imaging. The first hint came from the surface map for the year 1994 (Korhonen et al. kor1 (1999), from here-on Paper I), which seemed to present the star right at the moment of the “flip-flop”, when one active region was getting weaker and another, in the opposite active longitude 180° apart, was taking over. Also, photometric observations have indicated that the two active longitudes in FK Com can sometimes both be active at the same time (Jetsu et al. jetsu4 (1994)). This implies that the “flip-flop” in FK Com is caused by rearrangement of the spot activity at the active longitudes, and not by movement of the spots themselves.

Peculiar phase shifts of light curve minima due to “flip-flops” being interpreted as movements of spots can result in variations of the spot rotation period determined by e.g. the Fourier analysis. Further, such period variations are normally interpreted as indications of the stellar differential rotation (e.g. Hall hall (1991); Henry et al. hen (1995)), which can be therefore overestimated by few orders of magnitude. In FK Com, for instance, an interval of the period variations is from 2$`\stackrel{d}{.}`$3960 to 2$`\stackrel{d}{.}`$4047 (Paper I) which could indicate the differential rotation rate larger than 0.004, while our Doppler imaging results limited it to 0.0001$`\pm `$0.0002, i.e. in fact gave evidence for a rigid rotation of the stellar surface (Korhonen et al. kor2 (2000), from here-on Paper II).

The photometric behaviour of the other types of stars during the “flip-flop” phenomenon was found to be very similar to that of FK Com. Moreover, Doppler imaging results for two RS CVn binaries II Peg and IM Peg clearly demonstrated that in this type of stars the “flip-flop” is caused by diminishing spot area in one active longitude and simultaneous increasing spot area in the opposite longitude, i.e. switching the activity between the active longitudes due to relative spot area evolution rather than spot motion (Berdyugina et al. ber2 (1998), ber3 (1999), ber4 (2000)). This suggests that we could expect to observe something similar in FK Com.

It was also noted that the flipping in RS CVn stars happens periodically and can be predicted with a good accuracy (Berdyugina & Tuominen ber1 (1998); Rodonó et al. rodo (2000)). In FK Com, the full period of “flip-flops”, i.e. when the activity returns to the same active longitude, was determined to be 6.5 years (Paper I). This period has been confirmed by the period analysis of 35 years of photometric observations (Korhonen et al. 2001a , 2001b , from here-on Papers III & IV). The previous “flip-flop” has occurred during the summer 1994 (Papers I, III & IV) and the next had to be expected in about 3.3 years, i.e. in the end of 1997.

In this paper, we confirm the occurrence of the “flip-flop” in FK Com in the second half of 1997 and present the first temperature maps obtained right before and just after the “flip-flop”. These maps clearly show that the “flip-flop” in FK Com is caused by activity switching between the active longitudes without spot movement across the stellar surface, i.e. similarly to the RS CVn stars.

## 2 Observations

Two sets of spectroscopic observations of FK Com are used in this paper. The first set is from June 1997 and the details of these observations are given in Paper II. The second set was observed at the Kitt Peak National Observatory (KPNO) with the 0.9-m coudé feed telescope during 10 nights between 29th of December 1997 and 15th of January 1998. The TI-5 $`800\times 800`$ CCD detector was employed together with grating A, camera 5, the long collimator, and a 280-$`\mu `$m slit to give a resolving power of 38 000 at 6500 Å. The useful wavelength range was 80 Å and the exposure time was set to 900 s. The reductions were done with the Image Reduction and Analysis Facility (IRAF) distributed by KPNO/NOAO. A summary of the KPNO observations can be found in Table 1.

We also have simultaneous photometric observations in B and V from the Automatic Photometric Telescope (APT), Phoenix 10, Arizona, USA. For checking the reliability of the temperature map from January 1998 we have used 24 observations taken between the 28th of November 1997 and the 7th of January 1998. The observations obtained later than 7th of January are not included because of the very rapid change of the light curve in the beginning of 1998, especially for the earlier phases for which the spectroscopic observations have been obtained 8th of January or before. Observations with mean errors larger than $`0\stackrel{m}{.}02`$ were automatically excluded from the data set. These observations have been earlier published in Paper III.

## 3 The January 1998 temperature map

In Paper II, we found that during the years 1994–1997 the active region in FK Com was shifting $`0.22\pm 0.03`$ in phase within a year. This phase shift was most likely caused by a difference between the used photometric period $`2\stackrel{d}{.}4002466`$ (from 25 year observations, Jetsu et al. jetsu2 (1993)) and the real spot rotation period for this time, $`2\stackrel{d}{.}4037`$ (Paper II). The new map for January 1998 was first calculated with the old ephemeris given by Jetsu et al. (jetsu2 (1993)): $`2439252.895+2\stackrel{d}{.}4002466E`$. Then, cross-correlation between the maps for June 1997 and January 1998 revealed that the rate of $`0.22\pm 0.03`$ phase per year is still valid for the autumn 1997. To exclude the phase shift due to the period differences, the period $`2\stackrel{d}{.}4037`$ was used in this paper.

The inversions were done for all the lines in the spectral region between 6416 Å and 6444 Å using the Tikhonov Regularization method code, INVERS7, written by N. Piskunov and modified by T. Hackman (Piskunov pisk1 (1991), Hackman et al. hack (2001)). The stellar parameters adopted for surface imaging can be found in Table 2. More details on the method and the selection of the stellar parameters are given in Papers I & II. The model spectrum used in these calculations is the same as earlier used for the years 1996–1997 (Paper II).

The surface image and the fits to the observations are shown in Fig. 1. The mean deviation of the spectroscopic observations from the model is 0.458 %, which corresponds to an average S/N ratio of 218. The main feature is an extended cool area centered on phases $`0.40.6`$ in the latitude interval $`45^{}72^{}`$. This feature has a temperature of $`600`$ K below the unspotted surface. Another extended cool area with a temperature of $`500`$ K below the unspotted temperature can be seen around the phases $`0.81.1`$ at approximately the same latitudes as the other cool area.

Photometric observations and the photometry calculated from the map are also shown in Fig. 1. Note that they have not been used in the inversions as a constrain. As can be seen, the B-V colours and the V magnitudes calculated from the map fit the simultaneous photometric observations well. When looking at the V magnitude, the calculated curve seems to be very slightly shifted towards larger phases in comparison to the observations. Our photometry from the beginning of 1998 shows that the weaker active region at the phase $`0.81.1`$ evolves rapidly during January–March and becomes again stronger than it was in late 1997. The small shift in phase of the minimum of the calculated V magnitudes can most likely be explained by the fact that the spectroscopic observations were obtained over a time period of 17 nights, covering 7.1 rotations, during a time of a rapid light curve evolution. Due to the reasonably good reproduction of the shape and position of the light curve minimum, the position and structure of the main features in the map are considered to be reliable.

## 4 The new “flip-flop”

The photometric observations from the 1990’s (Papers III & IV) show that the “flip-flops” have occurred during the summer 1994 and again during autumn 1997, in accordance with the 3.3-year cycle. In Fig. 2 the photometric observations for 1997 and beginning of 1998 are shown together with the spot filling factor maps obtained by inversions from the light curves. The light curve inversions are done using a technique similar to that used by Rodonó et al. (rodo (2000)) and explained in more detail in Paper IV where the results of inversions for 35 years of photometric observations of FK Com are presented.

Fig. 2 clearly shows the “flip-flop” that occurred during the autumn 1997. In the second half of 1997, the old active region around the phase 1.0 has significantly diminished, while the new one near the phase 0.5 has appeared. In the beginning of 1998, the old active region becomes again rapidly stronger than it was during December 1997. The photometry for 1998–1999 (Papers III & IV) shows that from January 1998 till June 1999 both active regions are simultaneously active, resulting in a very flat and featureless light curve.

Fig. 3 shows the temperature maps obtained with surface imaging for June 1997 and January 1998. In June 1997, the spots are concentrated around the phase 1.0 and there is no evidence of spots at the phase 0.5. In January 1998, the most contrast spot group is seen at the phase 0.5 and a secondary group is around the phase 1.0. It is reasonable to assume that the spot group at the phase 1.0 during January 1998 is the same as the one in the June 1997 map at the same phase, the activity of the spot group has just diminished. The spot group, 0.5 in phase apart from the old active region, is a new active region which has appeared on the other side of the star, as predicted in the “flip-flop” phenomenon. The cross-correlation of the maps, done as described in Paper II, using latitudes 42$`\stackrel{}{.}`$75–83$`\stackrel{}{.}`$25, yields phase shifts of $`0.04`$ and $`0.50`$ for the old and new active regions, respectively.

In FK Com, usually only one of the active longitudes is active at a time, as can be seen, for example, from the temperature maps for the years 1995–1997 (Papers I & II). Anyhow, near the “flip-flop” both active longitudes become simultaneously active, like in summer 1994 (Paper I) and in 1997–1998 (Fig. 2), and the change of the relative strengths of the active regions causes the “flip-flop”.

## 5 Conclusions

With the Doppler imaging technique and light curve inversions we showed clearly that FK Com possesses the same spot activity pattern as observed in binary components of the RS CVn type and in a young dwarf LQ Hya, namely the “flip-flop” phenomenon caused by changing the relative strengths of the spot groups at the two active longitudes. The fact that different types of rapidly rotating stars show the same phenomenon in detail supports the idea that it is the rapid rotation that determines the principal component of the stellar activity, regardless of the origin of the rapid rotation.

Since during the “flip-flop” the light curve undergoes rapid and irregular changes, one should be careful in interpreting such changes as spot period variations and, as a consequence, the stellar differential rotation.

###### Acknowledgements.

The work of HK was supported by the Finnish graduate school in Astronomy and Space Physics and Vilho, Yrjö and Kalle Väisälä Foundation. KGS acknowledges the receipt of FWF grant S7301 from the Austrian Science Foundation.


text:
# AC-driven quantum spins: resonant enhancement of transverse DC magnetization

## I Introduction

Magnetic resonance effects have been long studied and used for various spectroscopic methods . Time-dependent external fields being an integral part of the physical setups, become also very interesting in their action when entering the field of spintronics and processing of quantum information . While the linear response of a system (probe) to external fields may be typically understood in a rather complete way, nonlinear and perhaps nonadiabatic response effects are usually much harder to be analyzed. Some studies have been devoted to the effect of second-harmonic generation. Much less is known about zeroth-harmonic generation, i.e. about the induction of static fields by pure ac fields. The understanding of such processes is very important in any application involving ac fields, as additional induced dc fields may strongly influence the desired effects.

The principal possibility of the zeroth-harmonic generation can be studied using symmetry considerations ,. Analytical approaches which may also estimate the magnitude of the induced fields are typically restricted to various perturbation techniques with a suitable small parameter involved. Two of us have recently applied these methods to the simplest cases of a spin $`s=1/2`$ coupled to an environment (heat bath) in the presence of an external magnetic dc field (in $`z`$-direction) . While an additional ac field applied in $`x`$-direction leads to the standard spin resonance setup used e.g. for nuclear spins, a tilt of the ac field direction in the $`xz`$-plane leads to a broken symmetry and to a generation of a nonzero magnetic moment in $`y`$-direction, i.e. perpendicular to the applied fields. Similar results have been also obtained for a spin $`s=1`$ where the external dc field in $`z`$-direction is replaced by a magnetic ion anisotropy in $`z`$-direction .

This work is devoted to the analysis of spin-spin interaction and its action on the above described effects. The first goal is to study the generalization of the symmetry considerations in the presence of an interaction. The second goal is to demonstrate that the interaction is capable of increasing the induced field strength by an order of magnitude, and to give an explanation for this result.

The paper is organized as follows. In the next section we introduce the density matrix approach. Section III is devoted to a reconsideration of the single spin problem. Section IV contains the central results on two interacting spins. Section V concludes the paper.

## II The density matrix approach

In this section we introduce the methods we are using. Let us assume that a single spin or a system of interacting spins is represented by a time-dependent Hamiltonian $`H(t)=H_0+H_1(t)`$ which includes both applied dc and ac magnetic fields. Here the static part is completely included in $`H_0`$ and the action of the ac fields is described by a time-periodic term $`H_1(t)=H_1(t+T)`$ with period $`T`$. In order to describe the time-dependent statistical evolution of such a system we use the quantum Liouville equation for the density matrix $`\rho (t)`$

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{t}}=i[H,\rho ]\nu (\rho \rho _e)`$ (1)
where $`[A,B]=ABBA`$. While the specifics of the internal dynamics of the system are described by the first term on the rhs of (1), the second term accounts for the interaction of our spin system with an environment. We will handle this interaction in a rather qualitative way. The principal request this coupling should fulfill is that its action should preserve all symmetries of $`H(t)`$ except time reversal symmetry. A second requirement is that the solution of (1) in the absence of ac fields $`H_1(t)=0`$ should be the Gibbs distribution

$`\rho _\beta (H_0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z_0}}e^{\beta H_0},Z_0=Tr(e^{\beta H_0}).`$ (2)
Finally we request that all solutions of (1) should approach a unique time-dependent state.

The choice $`\rho _e=\rho _\beta (H_0)`$ satisfies the above criteria. As shown in  for $`s=1/2`$ it leads to equations practically identical with the well known Bloch equations. However e.g. for adiabatically slow ac fields a much better choice would be $`\rho _e\rho _\beta (H(t))=\frac{1}{Z}e^{\beta H(t)}`$. We will discuss the subtle differences below. In general however we may state here that any of the two choices fulfills the above criteria. Note that the third criterium (unique asymptotic behaviour) is guaranteed, as a linear equation like (1) exhibits one and only one attractor, and the whole phase space serves as a region of attraction for this single attractor. Note that due to $`Tr\rho _\beta =1`$ any choice with $`Tr\rho (0)=1`$ implies $`Tr\rho (t)=1`$ for all $`t`$.

The value $`\overline{A}(t)`$ of an observable corresponding to the operator $`A`$ is defined by

$`\overline{A}(t)=Tr(A\rho (t))`$ (3)
and its time average is abbrevated by

$`\stackrel{~}{A}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}{\displaystyle _0^T}\overline{A}(t)𝑑t.`$ (4)
## III Revisiting a single spin $`s=\frac{1}{2}`$

We consider one spin $`s=1/2`$ in the presence of a constant magnetic field in $`z`$-direction and a time-periodic magnetic field with angle $`\varphi `$ to the $`z`$-axis in $`zx`$-plane. The Hamiltonian is given by

$`H(t)=h_0S_z+h(t)(\alpha S_x+\gamma S_z),`$ (5)
where $`\alpha =\mathrm{sin}\varphi `$ and $`\gamma =\mathrm{cos}\varphi `$. We assume that the field $`h(t)=h(t+T)`$ has zero mean $`_0^Th(t)𝑑t=0`$.

The spin component operators are given by the Pauli matrices: $`S_{x,y,z}=\frac{1}{2}\sigma _{x,y,z}`$. The density matrix $`\rho =R+iI`$ can be decomposed into a real symmetric $`2\times 2`$ matrix $`R`$ and a real antisymmetric $`2\times 2`$ matrix $`I`$ and has three independent variables. Using the relation (3), we rewrite the system (1) in terms of $`\overline{S}_{x,y,z}`$

$`\dot{\overline{S}}_x`$ $`=`$ $`(h_0+\gamma h(t))\overline{S}_y\nu \overline{S}_x`$ (6)
$`\dot{\overline{S}}_y`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha h(t)\overline{S}_z(h_0+\gamma h(t))\overline{S}_x\nu \overline{S}_y`$ (7)
$`\dot{\overline{S}}_z`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha h(t)\overline{S}_y\nu (\overline{S}_z+C)`$ (8)
where $`C=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tanh}(\beta h_0/2)`$. The structure of these equations is equivalent to the wellknown Bloch equations provided the relaxation times there would be chosen to be identical . Note that the symmetries of the equations (6) are identical with the ones of the corresponding Bloch equations.

Because of the presence of a time-periodic field, for times $`t1/\nu `$ all components $`\overline{S}_{x,y,z}`$ will be also time periodic with period $`T`$ or frequency $`\omega =2\pi /T`$. We can expand the solution of system (6) in a Fourier series

$`\overline{S}_{x,y,z}=A_{0x,y,z}+{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}e^{i\omega nt}A_{nx,y,z}.`$ (9)
After averaging over the period $`T`$, we have

$`\stackrel{~}{S}_{x,y,z}=A_{0x,y,z}.`$ (10)
The symmetry analysis of the equations (6) yields the following results  (we considered only operations which conserve $`Tr\rho `$):
1) $`\nu =0`$, $`\gamma =0,h(t)=h(t)`$:

$`\overline{S}_x\overline{S}_x,\overline{S}_y\overline{S}_y,\overline{S}_z\overline{S}_z,tt.`$ (11)
2) $`\nu =0`$, for all $`\gamma ,h(t)=h(t)`$:

$`\overline{S}_x\overline{S}_x,\overline{S}_y\overline{S}_y,\overline{S}_z\overline{S}_z,tt.`$ (12)
3) $`\nu 0`$, $`\gamma =0,h(t+T/2)=h(t)`$:

$`\overline{S}_x\overline{S}_x,\overline{S}_y\overline{S}_y,\overline{S}_z\overline{S}_z,tt+{\displaystyle \frac{T}{2}}.`$ (13)
If any of the above symmetries hold in a relevant parameter case, the corresponding components of $`\stackrel{~}{S}`$ will exactly vanish. E.g. for case 1) $`\stackrel{~}{S}_x=0`$, for case 2) $`\stackrel{~}{S}_y=0`$ and for case 3) $`\stackrel{~}{S}_x=\stackrel{~}{S}_y=0`$. The key idea now is that a proper choice of the parameters (including the time dependence of $`h(t)`$) may lead to a violation of all symmetries. As a consequence we expect nonzero values of the corresponding $`A_{0x,y}`$. This means that even if we do not apply an external magnetic field in $`y`$-direction, we can expect a nonzero $`\stackrel{~}{S}_y`$ component, which will be a function of the ac field frequency $`\omega `$. In order to quantify the zeroth harmonic generation we use the following definition of the strength of the effect $`I_{NL}`$:

$`I_{NL}={\displaystyle \frac{\underset{\omega }{\mathrm{max}}|\stackrel{~}{S}_y|}{\underset{\omega }{\mathrm{max}}|\stackrel{~}{S}_z|}}100\%`$ (14)
Let us emphasize here that the denominator in (14) is of nonresonant character, i.e. its value is determined by the maximum values of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_z`$ which is obtained for frequency values far from the magnetic resonance and practically coincides with the equilibrium value for zero ac fields. In contrast the enumerator gets its maximum (if nonzero et al) inside some resonance window in $`\omega `$.

In  a perturbation theory was developed for strong dissipation $`1/\nu 1`$. Here we will account for the effect assuming a small amplitude of the ac field $`h(t)=ϵ\mathrm{cos}(\omega t)`$, $`ϵ1`$ and $`ϵ<\nu `$:

$`A_{0x}`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha \gamma C(\nu ^2+\omega ^2h_0^2)}{2\mathrm{\Delta }}}+o(ϵ^3)`$ (15)
$`A_{0y}`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha \gamma \nu h_0C}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}+o(ϵ^3)`$ (16)
$`A_{0z}`$ $`=`$ $`C+ϵ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2C(\nu ^2+\omega ^2+h_0^2)}{2\mathrm{\Delta }}}+o(ϵ^3)`$ (17)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=(h_0^2\omega ^2)^2+\nu ^2(\nu ^2+2h_0^2+2\omega ^2)`$. The dependence of $`A_{0x,y,z}`$ on $`\omega `$ shows the expected resonant character. A nonzero component of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_y`$, being a nonlinear response result, appears in second order of the ac field amplitude $`ϵ`$.

For the case of the magnetic resonance $`\omega =h_0`$ we find

$`A_{0x}`$ $``$ $`ϵ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha \gamma C}{2h_0^2(4+\xi ^2)}}`$ (18)
$`A_{0y}`$ $``$ $`ϵ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha \gamma C}{\xi h_0^2(4+\xi ^2)}}`$ (19)
where $`\xi =\frac{\nu }{h_0}`$.

To test the possible magnitude of the effect, we compute the induced moments numerically following . The results are the solid lines in Fig.1. While the resonance character is clearly observable, the strength $`I_{NL}3.0\%`$ is rather small.

In addition, one can see that in the adiabatic limit $`\omega 0`$ $`\stackrel{~}{S}_y`$ keeps a small but nonzero value. This is in contrast to the expectation that for very slowly varying ac fields the spin system should momentarily adjust to the actual field value, which implies a zero average $`y`$-component of the induced moment. As already discussed above, a much better choice in this limit would be $`\rho _e=\rho _\beta (H(t))`$. A computation with this choice is shown also in Fig.1 (dashed lines). We find that while the overall difference in the results for the two choices for $`\rho _e`$ are small, the adiabatic limit is correctly reproduced by the second one as expected.

It is also instructive to study the dependence of the values of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_{x,y,z}`$ as a function of the dissipation $`\nu `$. In Fig.2 we plot this dependence for the subresonance case $`\omega =1.5`$ from Fig.1. We observe that $`\stackrel{~}{S}_z`$ shows a kink around $`\nu =0.1`$. The $`\stackrel{~}{S}_x`$ curve provides with the a $`1/\nu ^2`$ decay for large $`\nu `$, as expected from perturbation theory. Except for a small dip around $`\nu =2`$ it then saturates at a nonzero value for small $`\nu `$ values. This is in full agreement with the above symmetry statements. Finally the $`\stackrel{~}{S}_y`$ curve shows a $`1/\nu ^3`$ decay for large $`\nu `$, again as expected from perturbation theory. Notably $`\stackrel{~}{S}_y`$ tends to zero also for small dissipation values, in full accord with the above symmetry statements.

## IV Two interacting spins

In order to enhance the value of $`I_{NL}`$ we may either consider larger spins or effects of interactions between spins. In  the case of $`s=1`$ has been considered, with the result that $`I_{NL}`$ is not significantly changed as compared to $`s=1/2`$. Consequently we turn in this section to the consideration of spin interactions. In the following we will study a system of two interacting spins $`s=1/2`$, which could be realized through the interactions e.g. in a molecule. As we are interested in the qualitative effects such an interaction might induce, we choose the mathematically simple version of exchange interaction. We think that e.g. dipole-dipole interactions as realized between nuclear spins will not significantly alter the picture.

Our starting Hamiltonian is given by

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`h_0(S_z^1+S_z^2)+h(t)(\alpha (S_x^1+S_x^2)+\gamma (S_z^1+S_z^2))`$ (20)
$``$ $`J_xS_x^1S_x^2J_yS_y^1S_y^2J_zS_z^1S_z^2`$ (21)
with $`h(t+T)=h(t)`$, $`\alpha =\mathrm{sin}(\varphi )`$ and $`\gamma =\mathrm{cos}(\varphi )`$. For two spins $`s=1/2`$ the above operators $`S_{x,z}^{1,2}`$ take the form $`S_{x,z}^1=\frac{1}{2}\sigma _{x,z}\mathrm{𝟏}`$, $`S_{x,z}^2=\mathrm{𝟏}\frac{1}{2}\sigma _{x,z}`$ where $`\sigma _{x,z}`$ are Pauli matrices, $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ denotes the $`2\times 2`$ unity matrix and $``$ stands for the tensorial product of operators (matrices).

In this case the matrix $`\rho =R+iI`$ contains 15 independent variables.

We define the total components of spins as $`S_{x,y,z}=\frac{1}{2}(S_{x,y,z}^1+S_{x,y,z}^2)`$. With the help of (3) it follows

$`\overline{S}_x`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(R_{12}+R_{13}+R_{24}+R_{34})`$ (22)
$`\overline{S}_y`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(I_{12}+I_{13}+I_{24}+I_{34})`$ (23)
$`\overline{S}_z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(R_{11}R_{44})`$ (24)
The symmetry analysis of this system is identical to the case of one spin $`s=1/2`$ (13-12). The existence of additional parameters (exchange coefficients) does not reduce the symmetries nor add some. The only important additional point is that changes of signs of the expectation values of a given spin component operator have to be done simultaneously for both spins once the interaction is nonzero.

### A Isotropic exchange

Let us first consider the case of isotropic exchange $`J_x=J_y=J_zJ`$.

First we note that with the help of a unitary transformation we can transform the Hamiltonian (20) into a triplet-singlet representation. The singlet state (total spin $`s=0`$) decouples from the three triplet states (total spin $`s=1`$). The time-dependent part of (20) is contained in the triplet part. For a given value of the ac field the eigenvalues of the singlet state $`E_0`$ and the three triplet states $`E_{1,2,3}`$ are given by

$`E_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}J`$ (25)
$`E_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}J+\sqrt{a^2+4c^2},`$ (26)
$`E_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}J,`$ (27)
$`E_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}J\sqrt{a^2+4c^2}`$ (28)
where $`a=h_0+\gamma \mathrm{cos}(\omega t)`$ and $`c=\frac{1}{2}\alpha \mathrm{cos}(\omega t)`$.

On one side the singlet state is not interacting with the triplet states and all spin component expectation values in this singlet state are exactly zero. On the other side the singlet state is consuming statistical weight. Thus the dynamics of the system of two spins one-half interacting via isotropic exchange and coupled to a heat bath can be reduced to the dynamics of a single spin $`s=1`$ (triplet states) with a reduced statistical weight. For the case of $`\rho _e=\rho _\beta (H_0)`$ this reduced statistical weight is given by

$$C_1=\frac{Tr(e^{\beta H_0^{}})}{Tr(e^{\beta H_0})}$$
(29)
where $`H_0^{}`$ is obtained from $`H_0`$ by excluding the singlet state. Using $`Tr(e^{\beta H_0^{}})=2e^{\frac{\beta J}{4}}\mathrm{cosh}(\beta h_0)+e^{\frac{\beta J}{4}}`$ and $`Tr(e^{\beta H_0})=Tr(e^{\beta H_0^{}})+e^{\frac{3\beta J}{4}}`$ we find

$`C_1={\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{cosh}(\beta h_0)+1}{2\mathrm{cosh}(\beta h_0)+1+e^{\beta J}}}.`$ (30)
The coefficient (30) tends to $`1`$ for large ferromagnetic interaction $`J\mathrm{}`$ and to $`0`$ for large anti-ferromagnetic interaction $`J\mathrm{}`$.

As we know the value of $`I_{NL}`$ for $`J=0`$ (it is equivalent to the case of a single spin $`s=1/2`$ discussed in the previous section) we may obtain the values for $`I_{NL}`$ and all other numbers including curves as in Fig.1 using (30). First we note that antiferromagnetic interactions $`J<0`$ reduce the effect by making the singlet state energetically favourable. This is reasonable as for zero interaction both spins will on average point to some direction. Antiferromagnetic interaction will favour antiparallel spin orientations and thus reduce the induced moments. However ferromagnetic interaction, making the singlet state energetically unfavourable, will enhance the effect. An upper bound for the maximum enhancement can be easily obtained from (30). In the most favourable case the statistical weight of the triplet states will increase up to $`4/3`$ of the $`J=0`$ case. Thus the case of isotropic ferromagnetic exchange, while leading to an enhancement of the induced moments, does not change the results drastically as compared to zero interaction. We will now turn to anisotropic exchange interaction and see that the situation is going to change dramatically.

### B Anisotropic exchange

To provide with a systematics in the search for exchange values which may significantly enhance the induced magnetic moments we first mention that as for isotropic exchange, also the general case allows for a unitary transformation which separates a singlet state (total spin $`s=0`$) from three triplet states (total spin $`s=1`$). The singlet state will become unimportant if its consumed statistical weight is small. This can be typically obtained by choosing ferromagnetic exchange interactions. Second we recall that for isotropic exchange the dependence of the triplet eigenenergies for a given value of the ac field $`h`$ (frozen time, or adiabatic limit) as a function of this ac field value $`h`$ will show up with a pair of states performing an avoided crossing at $`h=0`$ and a third state being independent of $`h`$. This follows immediately from (28). The minimum distance between the two states $`E_1`$ and $`E_3`$ is given by the Zeeman splitting $`2h_0`$, as in the case of a single spin $`s=1/2`$ (up to the factor 2). Also we note that the ac field term induces interactions and thus transitions between these two states, leading to the standard magnetic resonance.

For anisotropic exchange the situation changes. The third level $`E_2`$, which was not participating in the resonance dynamics for isotropic exchange, now gets involved in the dynamics due to additional nonzero matrix elements for anisotropic exchange. As a consequence we may expect resonant response at different frequencies (energies) corresponding to the different level spacings $`E_1E_3`$ and $`E_2E_3`$. Especially important is, that we may consider e.g. a resonant response for transitions from the lowest level to the highest one of the triplet states, while having at the same time a narrowly avoided crossing between the lowest state and the intermediate one. The idea behind this scenario is that i) small energy differences in the vicinity of the avoided crossing will lead to small denominators in the equation for the density matrix and ii) an additional avoided crossing provides with a strong nonlinear dependence of the wavefunction of the lowest triplet state upon variation of $`h`$. So our strategy is to find exchange values which realize such a situation. Then we choose amplitudes of the ac field which will cover the avoided crossing, and temperatures small enough such that even in the point of the avoided crossing the statistical weight of the intermediate state is small as compared to the triplet ground state.

The example we will demonstrate corresponds to a ferromagnetic easy plane exchange interaction $`J_x=J_y=5.0`$ and $`J_z=0`$. The dependence of the levels on the amplitude of the frozen ac field is shown in Fig.3.

The minimum distance between the two lowest states in the avoided crossing region is $`0.5`$. We now expect a possible strong enhancement of the induced moments in the frequency range of the resonance indicated by the arrow $`\omega 5.8`$ which should be most effective if the temperature is smaller than the avoided crossing splitting, i.e. $`\beta >2`$. In addition we expect to see another resonance at frequencies corresponding to the smallest splitting between the two lowest lying states, i.e. around $`\omega =0.5`$.

In Fig.4 the results of numerical simulation for $`\stackrel{~}{S}_y`$ are shown for $`\beta =10`$ and $`\nu =0.1`$. We do not observe a strong response at the expected frequency value 5.8, but we do observe in addition to the standard response at $`\omega =h_0=3`$ a response at $`\omega 0.5`$ which corresponds to the resonant excitation in the region of the narrow avoided crossing in Fig.3. The value of $`I_{NL}`$ is already pretty large here, of the order of 7%.

In order to enhance the response at $`\omega 5.8`$, we decrease the value for the dissipation constant by two orders of magnitude to $`\nu =10^3`$. The resulting curve is shown in Fig.5. We clearly find a strong enhancement of the resonance at $`\omega 5.8`$. In this case the value of $`I_{NL}18\%`$, which is the largest value we achieved to find. To characterize the dependence of this strong resonance on the parameters $`\beta `$ and $`\nu `$ we plot different curves for additional values of $`\nu `$ (Fig. 6) and $`\beta `$ (Fig. 7). The dependence on the inverse temperature shows the expected saturation at low temperatures. The dependence on $`\nu `$ shows a surprising non-monotonic behaviour. While it would be tempting to discuss it in terms of so-called stochastic resonance, we think that a much simpler explanation is due to the fact that in the limit of zero dissipation time reversal symmetry (12) will be restored. Consequently in the limit $`\nu 0`$ the values of the $`y`$-component of the induced dc magnetic moment will vanish for all frequencies.

## V Conclusion

In conclusion we would like to stress once again that strong AC magnetic fields may generate zeroth harmonics in a spin system. This effect has resonant behaviour as a function of the AC field frequency and could be a new tool for the spectroscopic study of magnetic systems.

We have shown that the induction of a dc magnetic moment perpendicular to applied magnetic fields can be significantly enhanced for systems of interacting spin pairs as compared to single spins. This enhancement of the nonadiabatic nonlinear response effect is due to the presence of additional energy levels in a spin pair system, which allows to obtain additional avoided crossings between levels upon applying external fields. These avoided crossings strongly contribute to the nonlinear response through the dramatic change of wavefunctions as one sweeps through such a crossing. The presence of avoided crossings is typically associated with chaos and nonintegrability in corresponding classical systems. The case of isotropic exchange reduces the system to a single spin one and consequently does not lead to a strong enhancement of the induced moments.

The particular case of two interacting spins could be realized in stable biradicals, which provides us with the system of two spins located on the same molecule. Experimental possibility of observation of the above effect could be connected with diluted paramagnetic media at very low temperature, because only at low temperature the rate of dissipation of energy $`\nu `$ may become very small, thus, preventing the heating up of the system and narrowing the width of resonance, which is very important for the observation.

Other candidates for such an observation are dielectric glasses based on $`SiO_x`$. The low temperature properties of such glasses are connected with the existence of systems of double-well tunnel centers. The dynamics of these tunnel centers maps exactly onto the dynamics of spin systems. Thus, under the action of an AC electric field a permanent polarisability component could be induced. Again low temperatures are a key requirement for the observation of this effect.
Acknowledgements
We thank M. V. Fistul for helpful discussions and a critical reading of the manuscript. This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft FL200/8-1.


text:
# Contents

## 1 Introduction

A discovery of the neutrino oscillations by the SuperK experiment has changed the neutrino physics. The existence of the phenomenon is no longer in question and the focus of the experiments has changed from the ’discovery’ to the ’elucidation’. The next round of experiments, running or under construction, will provide an independent verification of the SuperK result and it is likely confirm that $`\nu _\mu `$ neutrinos oscillate mostly into $`\nu _\tau `$ with neutrinos with a characteristic frequency corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^21.54\times 10^3eV^2`$.

Questions related to neutrino masses and oscillations are of a fundamental nature therefore a significant effort is dedicated to a possible design of the future facilities: high intensity conventional neutrino beams, often referred to as ’superbeams’, and/or a novel facility, ’neutrino factory’, where a very intense mixed beam of $`\nu _\mu `$’s and $`\nu _e`$’s is produced from decay of muons circulating in a storage ring.

In this note we examine a potential extension of the utilization of the NuMI beam, being constructed at Fermilab, by addition of new detectors. These new detectors could offer a major enhancement of the physics reach of the MINOS detector, especially in conjunction with the anticipated improvements of the Fermilab’s accelerator complex.

## 2 The NuMI Beams

Neutrino beam constructed at Fermilab has a flexible design. Focusing elements, consisting of two parabolic horns, can be be moved with respect to the target and to each other thus focusing different momentum bytes of the produced pions and giving rise to the neutrino beams of different energies.

The resulting beams are presented in Fig.1 showing the event spectra for a nominal $`1kton\times year`$ exposure at the distance of 730 km from the target. In this paper we assume the proton flux on target to be $`3.8\times 10^{20}`$ per year.

The horn acceptance is defined in terms of the relative momentum spread $`\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }p}{p}`$ producing the neutrino beam with the energy spread increasing with the beam energy. The long tail of the high energy neutrinos in the low and medium energy beams is due to the bare target component of the beam created by high momentum pions traversing the opening in the magnetic horns.

## 3 The Principle of Off-axis Neutrino Beams

Most of the neutrinos in a conventional neutrino beam are produced in two-body decays $`\pi ^+\mu ^++\nu _\mu `$. A smaller contribution ti the beam is due to $`K_{\mu 3}`$ decays, $`K^+\mu ^++\nu _\mu `$, and to the decays of the muons, $`\mu ^+e^+\overline{\nu _\mu }\nu _e`$.

Energy and the flux of the neutrinos produced in two-body decays is uniquely determined by the decay angle $`\theta _{dec}`$. For small angles they can be expressed as:

$$E_\nu =\frac{0.43E_\pi }{1+\gamma ^2\theta _{dec}^2}$$
(1)
$$Flux=\left(\frac{2\gamma }{1+\gamma ^2\theta _{dec}^2}\right)^2\frac{A}{4\pi z^2}$$
(2)
where

* $`\gamma =\frac{E_\pi }{m_\pi }`$ is the Lorentz boost factor of a pion
* $`\theta _{dec}`$ is decay angle, i.e. the angle between the pion and the produced neutrino directions
* $`A`$ is the area of the detector and $`z`$ is the distance between the decay point and the detector.

Figs.2 and 3 illustrate the relationship between the neutrino fluxes, energies and the decay angles for the pions in the energy ranges relevant to the NuMI beam. Neutrino flux is maximal in the forward direction, $`\theta _{dec}=0`$, and the neutrino energy there is proportional to the energy of the parent pion, $`E_\nu =0.43E_\pi `$. This is the reason for placing the neutrino detector ’on-axis’.

Fig.3 shows that the sharp peak of the neutrino flux in the forward direction changes into a broad maximum for pions at low energies, $`E_\pi 5GeV`$. Low energy neutrino beam, $`E_\nu 23GeV`$, is very broad and the detector location is not very critical for the energy and intensity of the neutrino flux. This fact makes low energy neutrino oscillation experiments relatively insensitive to the details of understanding of the underlying neutrino beam.

The same fact enables a construction of improved, with higher intensity and smaller energy spread, low energy neutrino beams. This technique, pioneered in the Brookhaven neutrino oscillation experiment proposal, consists of placing a neutrino detector at some angle with respect to the conventional neutrino beam.

Such a detector records approximately the same flux of low energy neutrinos, as the one positioned ’on-axis’, originating from the decays of low energy pions. In addition, though, an ’off-axis’ detector records an additional contribution of low energy neutrinos from the decay of higher energy pions decaying at the finite angle $`\theta _{dec}`$.

An additional attractive feature of the neutrino flux observed at the ’off-axis’ detector is a kinematical suppression of high energy neutrino component. Detectors placed at different angles with respect to the neutrino beam direction are therefore exposed to an intense narrow-band neutrino with the energy defined by the detector position.

In contrast with the traditional narrow-band neutrino beams the off-axis detectors enable a simultaneous experiments with beams at different energies/locations. At the same time the ‘off-axis’ neutrino flux is much higher than the one achievable with the traditional narrow-band beam.

## 4 Off-axis Beams at NuMI

Neutrino beam described in the previous section is directed towards a MINOS detector located in the Soudan mine. This beam, especially in its low- and medium-energy version is very broad and its energy spectrum changes significantly with the position/angle of the neutrino detector.

We consider a hypothetical situation, where the ’on-axis’ MINOS detector is complemented by three additional detectors positioned at the transverse distance of 5, 10 and 20 km away from the central detector. For a sake of an example we examine a case of $`10kton\times year`$ exposure.

### 4.1 Low Energy Beam Case

Fig.4 shows the expected (in ’no oscillations’) case rates of $`\nu _\mu `$ CC events in the four detectors.

As expected, the neutrino spectrum is much narrower at the ’off-axis’ detectors than the one at the central detector, with the peak position shifting to the lower energies with the increasing distance from the beam axis. The high(er) energy tail of the spectrum is due to high momentum pions produced at relatively large angles and decaying shortly after the production target and due to kaon decays, as shown in Fig.5.

### 4.2 Medium Energy Beam Case

Expected neutrino events spectra at the ’off-axis’ detectors in the case of the medium energy NuMI beam are shown in Fig.6.

This configuration seems to be close to the optimal running conditions. The neutrino flux in the $`34GeV`$ region at the distance of $`5km`$ is higher than the peak of the low energy beam ’on-axis’, with the high energy tail greatly reduced. At the distance of $`10km`$ the flux of the neutrinos in $`12GeV`$ region is much higher, whereas the contribution of higher energy neutrinos is suppressed in comparison with the same detector exposed to the low energy beam in ’on-axis’ position.

### 4.3 High Energy Beam Case

High energy beam is derived from high energy pions produced in the target. At these high energies a sharp drop of the neutrino flux intensity, related primarily to the large factor $`\gamma =E_\pi /m_\pi `$ in the Eq.2 leads to the effective beam intensities at the ’off-axis’ detectors significantly reduced in comparison with the low and medium energy beams, as shown in Fig.7

## 5  $`\nu _\mu `$ Disappearance Experiment with the Off-axis Detectors

A disappearance experiment consisting of several detectors positioned at different distances from the neutrino beam axis has several attractive features:

* average energy of the neutrino beam can be selected by the position of the detectors. A suitable choice of the detectors location will enable detection of a oscillation pattern whereby the observed event rate goes down and up with the increasing distance of the detector from the beam and hence with the decreasing neutrino energy, as illustrated on Fig.8.
* measurement of the disappearance of $`\nu _\mu `$ CC events can be easily extended to very low energies, $`E_\nu 1GeV`$ . At these low energies the CC events will be primarily of quasi-elastic type, $`\nu _\mu +n\mu ^{}+p`$ and will consist of a single penetrating muon track. In case of a wide band beam in the ’on-axis’ detector such events will be contaminated by single pion events produced by the NC interactions of neutrinos at higher energies.
* a judicious choice of the detector location in conjunction with the small energy spread of the main peak of the neutrino flux enables a very precise determination of the mixing angle $`sin^22\theta _{23}`$. As an example, in case of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2=3\times 10^3GeV`$ a 10 kton detector positioned at the distance of 10 km and exposed to the neutrino beam produced by $`8\times 10^{20}`$ protons on target will observe 94 $`\nu _\mu `$ CC events instead of the expected $`821`$ events. The number of ’missing’ events provides a direct determination of the mixing angle $`sin^22\theta _{23}`$ with the statistical accuracy $`\mathrm{\Delta }sin^22\theta _{23}0.0014`$.
* the average energy of the neutrinos in the peak of the spectrum is determined from two-body kinematics and the detector position, independent of the detector resolution. This is a significant advantage over the wide-band neutrino beam, where the kinematical effect of the masses of the produced particles and nuclear effects introduce systematic difference between the observed (even with an ideal detector) total energy of the final state and the energy of the incoming neutrino. This effect is likely to limit the ultimate precision of the determination of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ by the neutrino oscillation experiments, baring a breakthrough in the understanding of the intra-nuclear cascades and other nuclear effects.

## 6 Systematics I: Understanding of the Beam Spectra

Well defined beam energy, determined completely by the detector position and a small energy spread make the ’off-axis’ beam potentially a very powerful tool for studies of neutrino oscillations. For this purpose it is necessary, however, to be able to predict the expected neutrino beam, its spectrum and the overall normalization with adequate precision.

The far detector spectra in the ’on-axis’ can be determined from the event spectra observed at the near detector. Does the experiment with ’off-axis’ detector require a dedicated near experiments near the neutrino source? Such an experiment would be complicated by the extended nature of the neutrino source.

Fortunately, such an experiment is not necessary. The neutrinos observed in the near detector and in any of the far detectors are derived from the same parent beam, formed by the focusing elements. This common origin implies strong correlations between the beams observed at different locations. The correlation matrix is primarily determined by the geometry of the neutrino beam and by the details of the focusing system, thus permitting an unambiguous prediction of the neutrino flux at the arbitrary position using the spectrum observed at the near detector. A residual dependence on the hadron production model is very small, both for the case of the low and medium energy beams, as indicated by the Figs.9 and 10.

## 7 Systematics II: Backgrounds

The principal limitation of a sensitivity of a possible $`\nu _e`$ appearance experiment will be related to the $`\nu _e`$ and $`\overline{\nu _e}`$ component of the beam. They are produced in $`K^+\pi ^0e^+\nu _e`$ and $`\mu ^+e^+\nu _e\overline{\nu _\mu }`$ decays. The angular distribution of these three-body decays is somewhat different from the decays producing the main component of the $`\nu _\mu `$ beam.

A relative fluxes of the $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _e`$ neutrinos at different detector positions are show in Fig.11 for the low energy beam case and in Fig.12 for the medium energy beam.

The $`\nu _e`$ flux in the ’off-axis’ detectors is of the order of $`0.5\%`$ of the $`\nu _\mu `$ flux and this background is somewhat reduced in comparison with the ’on-axis’ detector.

## 8 $`\nu _e`$ Appearance Experiment

The primary goal of the $`\nu _e`$ appearance experiments is a measurement of the $`U_{e3}`$ element of the MNS neutrino mixing matrix or the mixing angle $`sin\theta _{13}`$. The experiment is expected to detect a small number of $`\nu _e`$ CC interactions among the neutrino interactions registered at the far detector. In the following we assume that the experiment is carried out at such a combination of $`L`$ and $`E_\nu `$ that the oscillations generated by $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ dominate and that the value of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2`$ is measured precisely in the disappearance experiment. A number of the $`\nu _e`$ interactions is proportional to the neutrino mixing parameters via

$$N_{\nu _e}^{appear}=sin^22\theta _{e\mu }𝑑E\frac{dN_{\nu _\mu }}{dE}sin^2\frac{1.27\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2L}{E}=sin^22\theta _{e\mu }N_{\nu _\mu }^{disappear}$$
(3)
where

$$sin^22\theta _{e\mu }=\frac{1}{2}sin^22\theta _{13}=2\left|U_{e3}\right|^2$$
(4)
The $`\nu _e`$ CC interactions are characterized by an absence of a long, penetrating muon track and by a presence of an electromagnetic energy cluster due to the outgoing electron. There are several sources of backgrounds yielding events with very similar characteristics:

* high-y $`\nu _\mu `$ CC interactions with a significant fraction of the hadronic energy produced in a form of $`\pi ^0`$’s.
* NC interactions with a significant fraction of the hadronic energy produced in a form of $`\pi ^0`$’s
* CC interaction of $`\nu _\tau `$’s (resulting from $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillations) with a subsequent decay $`\tau e`$. This background is particularly troublesome if the mixing angle $`sin^22\theta _{e\mu }`$ is much smaller than $`sin^22\theta _{\tau \mu }`$.

An additional, irreducible, contribution to the sample of potential $`\nu _e`$ CC interactions is produced by an intrinsic $`\nu _e`$ component of the neutrino beam.

A sensitivity of the measurement of the mixing parameters will be limited by the statistical fluctuations of the background event sample, even if the overall normalization of the background is known. It is, therefore, very important to minimize the size of the background sample, while the sample of detected $`\nu _e`$ CC interactions due to the oscillations is maximized.

The optimization procedure involves several factors:

* a judicious choice of the beam energy and spectrum. An optimal neutrino beam would have a large flux concentrated around $`E_{opt}=\frac{2.54L\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2}{\pi }`$. Such a beam would have the following effects:

+ a number of $`\nu _\mu `$’s which have ’oscillated’ away, $`N_{\nu _\mu }^{disappear}`$, in Eq.3 would be maximized
    + background due to high-y $`\nu _\mu `$ CC interactions would be minimized
    + background from the NC interactions would be minimized if the neutrino spectrum does not extend beyond the region where the oscillation probability is very large
* a choice of the distance of the detector from the neutrino source. To eliminate the background due to CC $`\nu _\tau `$ interactions it is desirable that the optimal energy $`E_{opt}`$ is below the kinematical threshold for $`\tau `$ production.
* a suitable choice of the analysis cuts. Oscillations-induced $`\nu _e`$ events will be concentrated in a narrow energy range around $`E_{opt}`$. A large fraction of NC events will have an observed energy much lower than the neutrino energy due to the escaping neutrino, hence a requirement that the detected energy of the event exceeds a certain fraction of the $`E_{opt}`$ may significantly reduce the NC background. The intrinsic $`\nu _e`$ component of the beam tends to have much harder energy spectrum (see Figs. 11 and 12), hence a requirement that the observable energy does not exceed a certain value will significantly reduce this background.

A potential of the $`\nu _e`$ appearance experiment with the ’off-axis’ detectors is shown in Figs. 13 and 14 for the case of low and medium energy beams respectively. Sensitivity of the experiment to the $`\left|U_{e3}\right|^2`$ is taken to be equal to the 3 $`\sigma `$ fluctuation of the background. It is assumed that the $`\pi ^0`$ rejection power of the neutrino detector is sufficient to reduce the NC background to the level below the intrinsic $`\nu _e`$ component of the beam. The size of the exposure is taken to correspond to 20 kton\*years at the 100% electron identification efficiency.

A detector situated at the distance of 10 km from the beam axis offers the best opportunity for the measurement of the $`\left|U_{e3}\right|^2`$. Although a potential reach of the detector located at the distance of 5 km is somewhat better for larger values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{32}^2`$, the NC background would be much larger there, thus necessitating a substantially better detector to ensure the adequate background rejection.

An example of the actual event rates for the case of medium energy beam and oscillations corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2=0.003eV^2`$ is shown in Table 1.

## 9 Neutrino Detectors Issues

The NuMI neutrino beam is directed towards the MINOS detector located in the Soudan mine. Construction of underground facilities at the off-axis locations is not practical, therefore the design of the detectors and their locations must be optimized to enable precise measurements despite the presence of cosmic rays induced backgrounds.

Transverse distance of the detector from the beam axis determines the average energy of the neutrino beam. Thus the optimal detector position depends on the value of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ and on the nature of the desired measurement.

For example, if $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2=3\times 10^3eV^2`$ then a detector at the transverse distance of $`10km`$ from Soudan would be located at the maximum of the oscillation and it would be an optimal one for the measurement of the mixing angle and for the detection of $`\nu _e`$ appearance. An additional detector at the distance of $`20km`$ could be used to demonstrate the oscillation pattern.

Optimization of a possible detector location may include the variation of the distance of the putative detectors from Fermilab. Sensitivity of the neutrino oscillations appearance experiments does not depend on the experiment baseline as long as the beam energy is much higher than the one corresponding to the oscillation maximum, as $`\frac{1}{L^2}`$ reduction of the flux is compensated by the increased oscillation probability $`\left(\frac{L}{E}\right)^2`$.

The situation is different when the combination of the experiment baseline $`L`$ and the beam energy $`E`$ corresponds to the oscillation maximum. The change of the sensitivity of the appearance experiment with the reduction of the baseline of the experiment is a combination of an increase of the neutrino flux as $`\frac{1}{L^2}`$ and a reduction of the oscillation probability, if the detector is located at the same angle with the respect to the neutrino axis or a change of the neutrino flux with the increased angle if the detector is located at a larger angle to lower the neutrino energy to correspond to the oscillation maximum at the new location. This interplay between the detector longitudinal and transverse positions is illustrated in Fig.15.

The NuMI neutrino beam has an interesting property of passing, at the distance of about $`600km`$, under the large body of water, the Lake Superior. It allows for an unique neutrino oscillation experiment utilizing the same detector exposed to the narrow-band neutrino beam of different energies. Such an experiment mounted on a barge floating the the Lake Superior can be moved to an arbitrary position, thus permitting the optimization of the neutrino beam as the understanding of the neutrino oscillation progresses. An experiment can be also built as submerged module(s) towed by the barges to the requested positions. Such a scenario can significantly reduce the cosmic muon background.

## 10 Acknowledgments

Numerous discussions with our collegues from NuMI/MINOS have helped us to understand the issues presented in this paper.

This work was supported in part by grants from the Illinois Board of Higher Education, the Illinois Department of Commerce and Community Affairs, the National Science Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Energy.


text:
# Static three- and four-quark potentials

## 1 Introduction

There are many lattice studies of the $`q\overline{q}`$ potential emphasizing the important role it plays in our understanding of the structure of mesons. Despite the equally important role that the three-quark potential plays in the understanding of baryon structure it has, until recently, received little attention in lattice QCD studies. Now, two lattice studies of the three quark potential have appeared during the last year , which reach different conclusions for the area law behaviour of the baryonic Wilson loop. It must be stressed that the main difficulty to resolve the dominant area law for the baryonic potential is the fact that the maximal difference between the two ansätze is a mere 15% for $`SU(3)`$. In this work we reexamine the baryonic potential using state of the art lattice techniques . Since the same issues arise for any gauge group $`SU(N)`$ we corroborate our conclusions by also studying $`SU(4)`$, choosing lattice geometries which maximize the difference between the two ansätze to the 20% level.

## 2 Baryon Wilson loop

In $`SU(N)`$ we create a gauge invariant $`N`$-quark state at time $`t=0`$ which is annihilated at a later time $`T`$. In $`SU(3)`$ the baryon Wilson loop $`W_{3q}`$, shown in Fig. 1, is given by

$$\frac{1}{3!}ϵ^{abc}ϵ^{a^{}b^{}c^{}}U(𝐱,𝐲,1)^{aa^{}}U(𝐱,𝐲,2)^{bb^{}}U(𝐱,𝐲,3)^{cc^{}}$$
(1)
where

$$U(x,y,j)=P\mathrm{exp}\left[ig_{\mathrm{\Gamma }(j)}𝑑x^\mu A_\mu (x)\right],$$
(2)
$`P`$ is the path ordering and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(j)`$ denotes the path from $`x`$ to $`y`$ for quark line $`j`$.

The $`N`$-quark potential is then extracted from the long time behaviour of the Wilson loop:

$$V_{Nq}=\underset{T\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{T}\mathrm{ln}<W_{Nq}>.$$
(3)
## 3 Geometries in $`SU(3)`$ and $`SU(4)`$

Two ansätze exist in the literature regarding the area law behaviour of the baryon Wilson loop:

* $`Y`$ansatz: In the strong coupling limit, minimization of the static energy gives the flux tubes of shortest total length $`L_Y`$ joining the quarks. For $`SU(3)`$, if the three quarks are at positions $`𝐫_\mathrm{𝟏},𝐫_\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and $`𝐫_\mathrm{𝟑}`$, the flux tubes in that configuration will meet at an interior point , known as the Steiner point, where the angles between the flux tubes are $`120^0`$ independently of the vectors $`𝐫_k`$, provided that none of the angles of the triangle formed by the three quarks exceeds $`120^0`$. \[Otherwise, the configuration of minimal total length is made of two flux tubes meeting at the third quark location.\] Time evolution of the general case produces a three-bladed area similar to Fig. 1, known as the $`Y`$ area law.

For $`SU(4)`$, minimization of the static energy leads to two possibilities as shown in Fig. 2: namely, one configuration with two Steiner points, A and B ($`Y`$ansatz) and one with a single Steiner point ($`X`$ansatz). If, for simplicity, we assume that the double string between the two Steiner points has the same tension as the other four, single strings, then the $`Y`$ansatz always has lower energy. In fact, the tension of the double string is 1.357(29) times greater . Since this further increases the potential of the $`Y`$-ansatz, it will turn out to have no bearing on our conclusions. The two Steiner points are obtained by an iterative numerical procedure.
* $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-ansatz: The second possibility  for the relevant area dependence of the baryonic Wilson loop is that it is given by the sum of the minimal areas $`A_{ij}`$ spanning quark lines $`i`$ and $`j`$ which because of its shape in $`SU(3)`$ is known as the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$\- area law, with $`L_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the length of all interquark distances. The potential is then a sum of two-body potentials.

For $`SU(3)`$, the maximal difference of 15% between the two proposed area laws is obtained when the three quarks form an equilateral triangle.

For $`SU(4)`$, it turns out that the relative difference between the $`Y`$ energy and the two-body law is also maximal for the configuration of maximal symmetry among the four quarks. This entails putting the quarks on the vertices of a regular tetrahedron, which gives a relative difference of $`22\%`$ between the two ansätze. We make no attempt here to distinguish between the $`Y`$\- and $`X`$\- ansätze, since for the highly symmetric geometries that we choose the difference is on the few percent level.

The lattice results are thus compared to the two expected forms of the baryonic potential which in $`SU(N)`$ are

$$V_{Nq}(𝐫_\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{},𝐫_𝐍)=\frac{N}{2}V_0\frac{1}{N1}\underset{j<k}{}\frac{g^2C_F}{4\pi r_{jk}}+\sigma \{\begin{array}{c}\frac{L_\mathrm{\Delta }}{N1}\\ L_Y\end{array}\}$$
(4)
with $`C_F=(N^21)/2N`$ and $`\sigma `$ the string tension of the $`q\overline{q}`$ potential. The factor of 1/(N-1) in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ ansatz makes $`L_\mathrm{\Delta }/(N1)<L_Y`$. Note that, in contrast to Ref. , we do not vary $`\sigma `$. In addition, the three- or four-quark potential is compared directly with the sum of two-body potentials measured on the same gauge configurations, with no adjustable parameters.

## 4 Lattice techniques

We use the multi-hit procedure for the time-like links. For $`SU(3)`$, the mean-link integral is obtained analytically, whereas for $`SU(4)`$ a Monte Carlo integration is performed . In addition, we use a variational approach, and consider $`M`$ different levels of APE smearing for the spatial links, with optimized parameters as in ref. . Therefore, we obtain an $`M\times M`$ correlation matrix $`C(t)`$ of Wilson loops. To obtain the groundstate potential, we solve the generalized eigenvalue problem $`C(t)v_k(t)=\lambda _k(t)C(t_0)v_k(t)`$, taking $`t_0/a=1`$. In the first variant the potential levels are extracted via $`aV_k=\mathrm{Lim}_t\mathrm{}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\lambda _k(t+a)}{\lambda _k(t)}\right)`$ by fitting to the plateau. In the second variant we consider the projected Wilson loops $`W_P(t)=v_0^T(t_0)C(t)v_0(t_0)`$ and fit $`aV_0`$ to the plateau value of $`\mathrm{ln}\left(W_P(t+1)/W_P(t)\right)`$. Both procedures give consistent results. The energy for the first excited state was used to check, in the extraction of the ground state, that the contamination is less than $`e^2`$.

## 5 Results

For the baryonic loop in $`SU(3)`$ we used 220 configurations at $`\beta =5.8`$ and 200 at $`\beta =6.0`$ for a lattice of size $`16^3\times 32`$ from the NERSC archive. For $`SU(4)`$ we generated 100 configurations at $`\beta =10.9`$, which gives a similar string tension $`\sigma a^2`$ as $`SU(3),\beta =6.0`$.

## 6 Conclusions

Our results for the static three- and four-quark potentials in $`SU(3)`$ and $`SU(4)`$ are consistent with the sum of two-body potentials up to a distance of about $`0.8`$ fm, and inconsistent with the $`Y`$ ansatz. For larger distances, where our statistical and systematic errors both become appreciable, there appears to be a small enhancement due to an admixture of a many-body component. Nevertheless, for the distances up to 1.2 fm that we were able to probe in this work, the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ area law gives the closest description of our data. More refined noise-reduction techniques, such as the Lüscher-Weisz  algorithm, will be needed in order to clarify whether a genuine many-body component is present at large distances.