format: text

text:
# Anomalous magneto-oscillations and spin precession

(October 17, 2001)

## Abstract

A semiclassical analysis based on concepts developed in quantum chaos reveals that anomalous magneto-oscillations in quasi two-dimensional systems with spin-orbit interaction reflect the non-adiabatic spin precession of a classical spin vector along the cyclotron orbits.

If in a solid the spatial inversion symmetry is broken, spin-orbit (SO) interaction gives rise to a finite spin splitting of the energy bands even at magnetic field $`B=0`$. In quasi two-dimensional (2D) systems this $`B=0`$ spin splitting is frequently analyzed by measuring the magnetoresistance oscillations at small magnetic fields $`B>0`$, known as Shubnikov-de Haas (SdH) oscillations. Following a semiclassical argument due to Onsager Onsager (1952) it has long been assumed Eisenstein et al. (1984); Grundler (2000), that the frequencies $`f_\pm ^{\mathrm{SdH}}`$ of these oscillations are proportional to the unequal occupations $`N_\pm `$ of the spin-split subbands,

$$N_\pm =(e/2\pi \mathrm{})f_\pm ^{\mathrm{SdH}},$$
(1)
where $`e`$ is the electron charge and $`\mathrm{}`$ is Planck’s constant. Recently, experiments and numerical quantum mechanical calculations have shown that, in general, these oscillations are not simply related to the $`B=0`$ spin-subband densities Winkler et al. (2000). However, it has remained unclear when and why Onsager’s semiclassical argument fails. Here we use a semiclassical trace formula for particles with spin, which was only lately developed Bolte and Keppeler (1998, 1999) in the context of quantum chaos, in order to show that the anomalous magneto-oscillations reflect the nonadiabatic spin precession along the cyclotron orbits. Currently great efforts are made to obtain a deeper understanding of spin-related phenomena in semiconductor quantum structures, in particular due to possible applications in spintronics pas . While spin is a purely quantum mechanical property with no immediate analogue in classical physics, the present analysis reveals that our understanding of spin phenomena can be greatly improved by investigating equations of motion for a classical spin vector.

In the presence of a magnetic field perpendicular to the plane of a 2D electron system the electrons condense in highly degenerate Landau levels that are regularly spaced in energy. With increasing field $`B`$ these Landau levels are pushed through the Fermi surface causing magneto-oscillations which reflect the oscillating density of states (DOS) at the Fermi energy $`E_F`$, see, e.g., Ashcroft and Mermin (1976). Onsager’s semiclassical analysis of magneto-oscillations was based on a Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization of cyclotron orbits. However, for systems with spin there is no straightforward generalization of Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization Littlejohn and Flynn (1991); Emmrich and Weinstein (1996). The Gutzwiller trace formula Gutzwiller (1990) provides an alternative and particularly transparent semiclassical interpretation of magneto-oscillations that is applicable even in the presence of SO interaction. Rather than giving individual quantum energies, the trace formula relates the DOS of the quantum mechanical system to a sum over all periodic orbits of the corresponding classical system. As a function of energy $`E`$ the individual terms oscillate proportional to $`\mathrm{cos}[S(E)/\mathrm{}]`$ where $`S(E)`$ is the action of the orbit.

First we briefly discuss magneto-oscillations of electrons with effective mass $`m^{}`$ in a 2D system without SO interaction. Here, the sum over $`k`$-fold repetitions of the classical periodic cyclotron orbits corresponds to a Fourier decomposition of the DOS as a function of the energy $`E`$, where the action of the $`k`$-fold revolution corresponds to the $`k`$th harmonic $`2\pi kE/(\mathrm{}\omega )=2\pi km^{}E/(\mathrm{}eB)`$ of the DOS with cyclotron frequency $`\omega =eB/m^{}`$. Thus we see that the DOS for a fixed energy $`E=E_F`$ oscillates as a function of the reciprocal magnetic field $`1/B`$ which is the origin of magneto-oscillations. In particular, we get Onsager’s formula from the first harmonic $`k=1`$. Longer orbits $`k>1`$, giving rise to higher harmonics in the oscillating DOS, are exponentially damped for small but nonzero temperatures Richter (2000) so that here it suffices to consider $`k=1`$. In general, the Gutzwiller trace formula is an asymptotic relation that holds in the semiclassical limit $`\mathrm{}0`$. However, in the particular case discussed above it is an identity.

Recently it has been shown Bolte and Keppeler (1998, 1999) that in leading semiclassical order the SO interaction results in weight factors $`2\mathrm{cos}(k\alpha /2)`$ for the orbits in the trace formula where the angle $`\alpha `$ characterizes the spin precession $`\dot{𝒔}=𝒔\times 𝓑`$ of a classical spin vector $`𝒔`$ along the classical orbit alp . Here $`\dot{𝒔}`$ is the time derivative of $`𝒔`$ and $`𝓑`$ is an effective magnetic field including the contributions of both SO coupling and the Zeeman interaction due to the external magnetic field $`B`$ felt by the spin along the orbit. After $`k`$ periods of the cyclotron motion the spin vector $`𝒔`$ has been rotated by the angle $`k\alpha `$ about an axis $`𝒏`$, see Fig. 1. We remark that the axis $`𝒏`$ (but not $`\alpha `$) depends on the starting point of the cyclotron orbit. Like the effective field $`𝓑`$, the angle $`\alpha `$ depends on the external field $`B`$. It contains a dynamical as well as a geometric phase similar to Berry’s phase Berry (1984). Apart from higher harmonics the oscillating part of the DOS at the Fermi energy $`E_F`$ is proportional to

$$\mathrm{cos}(\alpha /2)\mathrm{cos}\left[2\pi m^{}E_F/(\mathrm{}eB)\right].$$
(2)
We have analyzed magneto-oscillations for quasi 2D electron systems in semiconductors such as GaAs where we have two contributions to the SO coupling. The Dresselhaus term Dresselhaus (1955) reflects the bulk inversion asymmetry of the zinc blende structure of GaAs. If the inversion symmetry of the confining potential of the quasi 2D system is broken, we get an additional SO coupling given by the Rashba term Bychkov and Rashba (1984). While the Dresselhaus term is fixed, the Rashba SO coupling can be tuned by applying an electric field $`E_{}`$ perpendicular to the plane of the quasi 2D system Grundler (2000).

In Fig. 2 we compare the Fourier spectra of the magneto-oscillations of the DOS calculated by means of a diagonalization of the quantum mechanical Hamiltonian with the spectra obtained from Eq. (2) based on an integration of the classical equations of motion for the precessing spin. We consider here a 2D electron system in a 100 Å wide GaAs-Al0.5Ga0.5As quantum well (QW) grown in the crystallographic direction  with constant total density $`N=N_++N_{}=5\times 10^{11}`$ cm-2 and with varying $`E_{}`$. For comparison, the circles mark the peak positions which one would expect according to Eq. (1) for the spin subband densities $`N_\pm `$ calculated quantum mechanically at $`B=0`$. The Fourier spectra are in strikingly good agreement. On the other hand, the peak positions deviate substantially from the positions expected according to the $`B=0`$ spin splitting. In particular, the semiclassical analysis based on Eq. (2) reproduces the central peak that is not predicted by Eq. (1). The asymmetry in Fig. 2 with respect to positive and negative values of $`E_{}`$ reflects the low-symmetry growth direction  (Ref. Winkler et al. (2000)).

An analysis of the classical spin precession along the cyclotron orbit reveals the origin of anomalous magneto-oscillations. The spin-split states at $`B=0`$ correspond to fixing the direction of spin parallel and antiparallel to the effective field $`𝓑(𝒑)`$ along the cyclotron orbit, where $`𝒑`$ is the kinetic momentum. However, in general the precessing spin cannot adiabatically follow the momentary field $`𝓑(𝒑)`$. This can be seen in Fig. 1 where we have plotted the momentary field $`𝓑(𝒑)`$ as well as the precessing spin $`𝒔`$ along a cyclotron orbit. Both the direction and the magnitude of $`𝓑`$ change along the orbit. In particular, the Dresselhaus term reverses the direction of $`𝓑`$ when $`|𝓑|`$ has a minimum. A spin vector that is no longer parallel or antiparallel to $`𝓑`$ implies that the system is in a superposition of states from both spin subbands so that the magneto-oscillations are not directly related to the $`B=0`$ spin splitting.

For the spin, in order to be able to follow the momentary field $`𝓑(𝒑)`$ adiabatically, the orbital motion must be slow compared to the motion of the precessing spin, i.e., we must have $`B|𝓑(𝒑)|`$ for all points $`𝐩`$ along the cyclotron orbit. Therefore, it is the smallest value $`_{\mathrm{min}}=\mathrm{min}|𝓑(𝒑)|`$ along the cyclotron orbit which determines whether or not the spin evolves adiabatically. This is illustrated in Fig. 1 where the parameters were chosen such that initially the spin is parallel to the effective field $`𝓑`$. First $`𝒔`$ can follow $`𝓑`$, but after a quarter period of the cyclotron orbit the effective field $``$ reaches its minimum $`_{\mathrm{min}}`$ and $`𝒔`$ starts to “escape” from $`𝓑`$. Subsequently, the spin vector $`𝒔`$ is no longer parallel to $`𝓑`$ also in those regions where $``$ becomes large again. We remark that adiabatic spin precession does not imply $`\alpha =0`$ but only that the rotation axis $`𝒏`$ is approximately parallel to the initial (and final) direction of the effective field $`𝓑`$.

For many years, anomalous magneto-oscillations have been explained by means of magnetic breakdown Cohen and Falicov (1961); de Andrada e Silva et al. (1994). Underlying this approach is a rather different semiclassical picture where each spin-split subband is associated with an energy surface with separate classical dynamics. In our treatment, on the other hand, there is only one energy surface complemented by the dynamics of a classical spin vector. It is the essential idea within the concept of magnetic breakdown that in a sufficiently strong external magnetic field $`B`$ electrons can tunnel from a cyclotron orbit on the energy surface of one band to an orbit on the energy surface of a neighboring band separated from the first one by a small energy gap. For spin-split bands the separation of these bands is proportional to the effective field $``$, i.e., magnetic breakdown occurs most likely in regions of a small effective field $``$. This approach implies that the anomalous magneto-oscillations are essentially determined by the breakdown regions only. (These breakdown regions can be identified with mode conversion points Littlejohn and Flynn (1991).) We want to emphasize that here our approach differs fundamentally from these earlier models: In the present ansatz spin continuously precesses along the cyclotron orbit, i.e., the angle $`\alpha `$ in Eq. (2) is affected by the nonadiabatic motion of $`𝒔`$ in the regions of both small and large $``$ (see Fig. 1).

In the adiabatic regime $`B_{\mathrm{min}}`$ the angle $`\alpha `$ is given by the integral of the modulus of the momentary field $`𝓑`$ along the orbit plus a Berry phase Berry (1984),

$$\alpha =_0^T|𝓑|dt+\alpha _B,$$
(3)
where $`T=2\pi /\omega `$ is the period of the cyclotron motion. In the limit of small external fields $`(B0)`$ the Berry phase $`\alpha _B`$ converges towards a constant and the integrand in Eq. (3) can be expanded with respect to a small Zeeman term, $`|𝓑|_0+_1B`$, where the coefficients $`_0`$ and $`_1`$ are $`T`$-periodic in time. Thus in the limit of small external fields we obtain $`\alpha (B)\alpha _0/B+\alpha _1`$ with constants $`\alpha _0`$ and $`\alpha _1`$ independent of $`B`$. Inserting the last relation in Eq. (2) we thus retrieve Eq. (1), i.e., only in the limit of adiabatic spin precession magneto-oscillations are directly related to the $`B=0`$ spin splitting. By changing the crystallographic growth direction of the QW, it is possible to tune the value of $`_{\mathrm{min}}`$. In particular, for a QW grown in the crystallographic direction $`[110]`$ the Dresselhaus term vanishes for $`𝒑`$ parallel to the in-plane directions $`[001]`$ and $`[00\overline{1}]`$. Thus for a symmetric QW without Rashba SO coupling we have $`|𝓑(𝒑)|=B`$ for these values of $`𝒑`$ which implies that there is no adiabatic regime and one always observes anomalous magneto-oscillations.

For a system with Rashba SO coupling but no Dresselhaus term both the classicsal equations of motion for the precessing spin and the quantum mechanical problem can be solved analytically. Here the Gutzwiller trace formula exactly reproduces the quantum mechanical density of states for $`B>0`$. For this system, the effective magnetic field $`𝓑(𝒑)`$ along the cyclotron orbit has a constant magnitude $``$ and for small external fields $`B0`$ the exact solution turns into the adiabatic solution so that we get no anomalous magneto-oscillations in agreement with an earlier quantum mechanical analysis Winkler et al. (2000).

Finally, we note that the concepts developed here are rather general and, in particular, are not restricted to spin-1/2 systems. Indeed, an analogous semiclassical analysis can be carried out for any system with (nearly) degenerate subbands. These bands can be identified with a single band with a SO coupling acting on an effective spin degree of freedom similar to Lipari and Baldareschi’s treatment Lipari and Baldereschi (1970) of the multiply degenerate valence band edge in semiconductors with diamond or zinc blende structure. In particular, we expect that our approach can be applied to the interpretation of de Haas-van Alphen experiments on ultrahigh-purity samples Eddy, Jr. and Stark (1982) that had called in question the established concepts of magnetic breakdown.

SK was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) under contract no. Ste 241/10-1.


text:
# Anatomy of Isolated Monopole in Abelian Projection of 𝑆𝑈(2) Lattice Gauge Theory KANAZAWA 01-06

## Abstract

We study the structure of the isolated static monopoles in the maximal Abelian projection of $`SU(2)`$ lattice gluodynamics. Our estimation of the monopole radius is: $`R^{mon}0.06fm`$.

1. The monopole confinement mechanism in $`SU(2)`$ lattice gauge theory is confirmed by many numerical calculations (see e.g. reviews ). In the maximal Abelian projection monopole currents form one big cluster and several small clusters. The big cluster, infrared (IR) cluster, percolates and has a nontrivial fractal dimension, $`D_f>1`$ . The properties of small, ultraviolet (UV), clusters differs much from those of the IR cluster, it can be shown that the IR monopole cluster is responsible for the confinement of quarks . As it was shown in the recent publication  the structure of IR and UV monopoles is completely different, and monopoles in IR clusters are condensed due to their special anatomy. In this publication we study the structure of Abelian monopoles in $`SU(2)`$ lattice gauge theory in a different way than it was done in ref. . We study the structure of the isolated monopoles, the results show that nontrivial monopole anatomy plays crucial role in the confinement phenomenon.

2. The plaquette action of the compact electrodynamics (cQED),

$$S_{cQED}^P=\beta _{U(1)}\mathrm{cos}\theta _P,$$
(1)
is close to the action of $`SU(2)`$ lattice gauge theory in the maximal Abelian projection at small values of the bare charge $`g`$ (in the continuum limit of gluodynamics). The proof is as follows. By definition the maximal Abelian projection corresponds to the maximization of the functional $`R`$ with respect to all gauge transformations $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$:

$$\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\mathrm{max}}R[U_l^\mathrm{\Omega }],U_l^\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }^+U_l\mathrm{\Omega },R[U_l]=\underset{l}{}Tr[\sigma _3U_l^+\sigma _3U_l]=\underset{l}{}\mathrm{cos}2\phi _l.$$
(2)
here we use the standard parametrization of the link matrix, $`U_{l,11}=U_{l,22}^{}=\mathrm{cos}\phi _le^{i\theta _l},U_{l,12}=U_{l,21}^{}=\mathrm{sin}\phi _le^{i\chi _l}`$. Thus, the maximization of $`R`$, eq. (2), corresponds to the maximization of the modules of the diagonal elements $`U_{l,11},U_{l,22}`$. The $`SU(2)`$ plaquette action is $`S_{SU(2)}^P=\beta \frac{1}{2}TrU_P=\beta \mathrm{cos}\theta _l\mathrm{cos}\phi _l`$, and at large values of $`\beta `$ in the maximal Abelian projection $`\mathrm{cos}\phi _l`$ is close to unity (due to (2)), $`\phi _l`$ is small and $`SU(2)`$ plaquette action has the form:

$$S_{SU(2)}^P=\beta \left[\mathrm{cos}\theta _P\mathrm{cos}\phi _1\mathrm{cos}\phi _2\mathrm{cos}\phi _3\mathrm{cos}\phi _4+O(\mathrm{sin}\phi _l)\right].$$
(3)
3. The larger value of $`\beta `$, the smaller $`\mathrm{sin}\phi _l`$, and $`S_{SU(2)}^P`$ (3) coincides with $`S_{cQED}^P`$ (1) in the limit $`\beta \mathrm{}`$. On the other hand at small values of the bare charge (at large values of $`\beta _{U(1)}`$) the compact electrodynamics is in the deconfinement phase, and gluodynamics is in the confinement phase; on the other hand the actions of both theories are close to each other. The explanation of this paradox was given in Refs. , it was shown that the action of the non-diagonal gluons, $`S^{off}`$, on the plaquettes near the monopole from IR clusters is negative, and the full non-Abelian action, $`S^{SU(2)}=S^{off}+S^{Abel}`$, is smaller than the Abelian part of the action. The standard qualitative proof of the existence of the deconfinement phase transition in cQED is the representation of the partition function as the sum over the monopole trajectories of length $`L`$:

$$𝒵=\underset{L}{}exp\{\beta Lc\}(7)^L,$$
(4)
here $`c`$ is the action of the unit length of the monopole trajectory, $`7^L`$ is the entropy of the line of the length $`L`$ drawn on $`4D`$ hypercubic lattice. It is clear that at $`\beta =\beta _c\mathrm{ln}7/c`$ there exists the phase transition in the sum (4). This phase transition is absent in lattice gluodynamics since in this case the monopoles have nontrivial structure and the action of the unit of monopole trajectory in lattice units depends on $`\beta `$: $`c=c(\beta )`$ the sum (4) is always divergent, the monopoles are condensed and form the percolating cluster. The monopole condensation was proven in gluodynamics by several independent calculations .

4. In ref.  the average nonabelian action on the plaquettes near the monopole trajectory in IR clusters has been measured. Since the lattice spacing $`a`$ depends on $`\beta `$ the calculations at various $`\beta `$ correspond to the measurement of the field strength at various distances, $`a(\beta )/2`$, from the monopole center. Below we present the results of another measurement, we calculate the average field strength on the plaquettes closest to the monopole center for monopoles which satisfy the following two conditions:

(i) the link with the monopole current has the same direction as the previous and subsequent monopole current links;

(ii) there are no other monopoles at the distance less than $`2a`$ from the considered monopole, except of monopoles discussed at point (i).

Thus we study “static” and “standing along monopoles”, we call such monopoles as isolated monopoles. The results of the calculations are shown on Figure 1 where we plot the dependence of $`S_{SU(2)}^i=6\beta \frac{1}{2}(<\text{Tr}U_P^{imon}><\text{Tr}U_P>)`$, on $`a/2`$; $`U_P^{imon}`$ are the plaquette matrices corresponding to plaquettes closest to the isolated monopole, the normalization of $`S_{SU(2)}^i`$ is such that it exactly corresponds to the action of the unit length of the monopole trajectory. If $`S_{SU(2)}^i<\mathrm{ln}7`$ the isolated monopoles are condensed (see the discussion of the partition function (4)). On Figure 1 we also show the quantity $`S_{SU(2)}^{all}=6\beta \frac{1}{2}(<\text{Tr}U_P^{allmon}><\text{Tr}U_P>)`$, here $`U_P^{allmon}`$ is the matrix corresponding to plaquettes closest to all monopoles (isolated and not isolated).

The main conclusion from Figure 1 is that the action of isolated monopoles decreases when we approach the monopole center, and that these monopoles are condensed. Our numerical results also show that the abelian part of the action of the isolated monopoles increases when we approach the monopole center. Thus the contribution of nondiagonal gluons to nonabelian action of monopole is negative, and just due to that these monopoles differs from monopoles in cQED and are condensed at any value of $`\beta `$.

5. Following ref.  we can estimate the radius of the isolated monopole, $`R_m`$, as the point of the maximal derivative of the function $`S_{SU(2)}^i(a/2)`$, we thus get: $`R_m0.065fm`$. Note that other dimensional numbers which characterize the gluodynamic vacuum are an order of magnitude larger. For example, the average intermonopole distance , which can be estimated from the results of ref.  is: $`R_m0.5fm`$; the width of the abelian confining flux tube is: $`R_t0.3fm`$ ; the average instanton radius is: $`R_I0.3fm`$ (see  and references therein). Thus we see that in the QCD vacuum there exists a rather small scale, $`0.065fm`$, such small scale was already discussed in various studies of QCD vacuum .

6. M.I.P. and A.I.V. acknowledge the kind hospitality of the staff of the Institute for Theoretical Physics of Kanazawa University, where the work was initiated. The work was partially supported by grants, RFBR 01-02-17456, RFBR 00-15-96786, INTAS 00-00111, JSPS Grant in Aid for Scientific Research (B) (Grant No. 10440073 and No. 11695029) and CRDF award RP1-2103.


text:
# I Introduction

## I Introduction

The search for the light neutral Higgs boson is a crucial test of Supersymmetry (SUSY) that can be performed with the present and the next generation of high-energy colliders. The data taken during the final year of LEP running at $`\sqrt{s}206\mathrm{GeV}`$, while establishing a 95% C.L. exclusion limit for the Standard Model (SM) Higgs boson of $`m_H>114.1`$ GeV, showed at about the $`2.1\sigma `$ level an excess of signal-like events over the background expectation which is in agreement with the expectation for the production of a SM Higgs boson of about 115 GeV LEPHiggs . Within the MSSM, the LEP excess can be interpreted as the production of the lightest $`𝒞𝒫`$-even Higgs boson, which over a wide parameter range has SM-like couplings, or of the heavier $`𝒞𝒫`$-even Higgs boson, in a region of parameter space where the $`𝒞𝒫`$-odd Higgs boson $`A`$ is light and the ratio of the vacuum expectation values of the two Higgs doublets, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, is relatively large.

In this work we investigate the predictions in the Higgs sector arising from the three SUSY-breaking scenarios: minimal Supergravity (mSUGRA) sugra , minimal Gauge Mediated SUSY Breaking (mGMSB) gmsb  and minimal Anomaly Mediated SUSY Breaking (mAMSB) amsb . We relate the high energy input from these scenarios in a uniform way to the predictions for the low-energy phenomenology in the Higgs sector, allowing thus a direct comparison of the predictions arising from the different scenarios. The MSSM Higgs masses and couplings are calculated using the program FeynHiggs feynhiggs . We analyze the consequences of the results obtained from the Higgs search at LEP on the parameter space of the three scenarios. For the case where LEP excess is interpreted as a possible Higgs signal, we furthermore discuss the corresponding spectra of the SUSY particles in each scenario in view of the SUSY searches at the next generation of colliders. For details of the calculations, see asbs1 .

## II Input parameters and phenomenological restrictions

For the numerical analysis we have scanned over about $`50000`$ models each for mSUGRA, mGMSB and mAMSB, where the parameters have been randomly chosen in the intervals as listed in Table 1.

We also take into account some further constraints when determining the allowed parameter values. We require the contribution to the $`\rho `$-parameter to be smaller than $`3\times 10^3`$ pdg . We impose the lower limits on the SUSY particle masses based on the negative search results of Run I of the Tevatron and at LEP pdg . For the top-quark mass, throughout this paper we use the value $`m_t=175\mathrm{GeV}`$. A variation of $`m_t`$ by $`\pm 1\mathrm{GeV}`$ would results in a change in $`m_h`$ of about $`\pm 1\mathrm{GeV}`$ tbexcl . The GUT or high-energy scale parameters are taken to be real and $`R`$-parity symmetry is taken to be conserved. We require successful radiative electroweak symmetry breaking (REWSB) and parameter sets that do not fulfill the Charge-Color-Breaking constraints are discarded. We have imposed relatively mild naturalness upper bounds: $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}1.5\mathrm{TeV},m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}2\mathrm{TeV}`$. We furthermore demand that the lightest SUSY particle is uncolored and uncharged. On the other hand, we do not demand a relic density in the region favored by dark matter constraints. As a conservative approach, we do not apply any further constraints from $`g_\mu 2`$ or $`bs\gamma `$ (details can be found in asbs1 ).

For our numerical analysis we will focus on three different cases implying different restrictions on the MSSM parameter space.

* We investigate the full parameter space which is allowed in the three scenarios when taking into account the exclusion bounds from the Higgs search LEPHiggs ; mssmhiggs  and the further constraints discussed above.
* The LEP excess is interpreted as production of the lightest $`𝒞𝒫`$-even Higgs boson of the MSSM: $`m_h=115\pm 2\mathrm{GeV}`$. In order to allow this interpretation, $`h`$ has to have SM-like couplings to the $`Z`$, i.e. $`\mathrm{sin}^2(\beta \alpha _{\mathrm{eff}})0.8`$. We also require that the decay of the light $`𝒞𝒫`$-even Higgs boson is SM like, i.e. the dominating decay channel is $`hb\overline{b}`$. The $`hb\overline{b}`$ coupling is mainly altered in two ways compared to the SM: it has an extra factor $`\mathrm{sin}\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}/\mathrm{cos}\beta `$ and it receives a correction $`1/(1+\mathrm{\Delta }m_b)`$. Therefore we demand $`\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}/\mathrm{cos}^2\beta 0.8`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Delta }m_b|<0.5`$.
* The LEP excess is interpreted as production of the heavy $`𝒞𝒫`$-even Higgs boson of the MSSM: $`m_H=115\pm 2\mathrm{GeV}`$. To have SM-like $`ZZH`$ and $`Hb\overline{b}`$ coupling, we require $`\mathrm{cos}^2(\beta \alpha _{\mathrm{eff}})0.8`$ and $`\mathrm{cos}^2\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}/\mathrm{cos}^2\beta 0.8`$. In addition, we apply a bound of $`m_h+M_A>206\mathrm{GeV}`$ as the associated production $`e^+e^{}Ah`$, being $`\mathrm{cos}^2(\beta \alpha _{\mathrm{eff}})`$, has to be beyond the kinematic reach of LEP.

## III Numerical analysis

In Fig. 1 we show the variation of the light Higgs boson mass with respect to $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ for the three cases defined in Sect. II. $`m_h`$ sharply increases with $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ in the region of low $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, while for $`\mathrm{tan}\beta 10`$ the $`m_h`$ values saturate. Values of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta 60`$ are not allowed due to the REWSB constraint. The LEP2 Higgs boson searches exclude the models with $`m_h113\mathrm{GeV}`$ for $`\mathrm{tan}\beta 50`$. Case (III) can only be realized in the mSUGRA scenario in a small parameter region: $`50\mathrm{tan}\beta 55`$, $`103\mathrm{GeV}m_h,M_A113\mathrm{GeV}`$ and $`m_H=115\pm 2\mathrm{GeV}`$, where a significant suppression of $`\mathrm{sin}^2(\beta \alpha _{\mathrm{eff}})`$ (i.e. the $`ZZh`$ coupling) occurs. Table 2 shows the upper bound on $`m_h`$ and the exclusion limit on $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ for the three different scenarios. The upper bound on $`m_h`$ is lower than the one in the unconstrained MSSM mssmhiggs ; mhiggslong , and the exclusion limit on $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ is also more restrictive. This is caused by the fact that not all parameter combinations of the unconstrained MSSM can be realized in the three SUSY-breaking scenarios that we discussed here.

In the mSUGRA scenario, cases (II) and (III) result in similar allowed regions of parameter space. While for $`M_0`$ the whole range up to $`1\mathrm{TeV}`$ is allowed, $`M_{1/2}`$ is restricted to $`M_{1/2}650\mathrm{GeV}`$ and $`|A_0|`$ is restricted to $`|A_0|2M_0`$. A significant enhancement of the $`hb\overline{b}`$ coupling due to large values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}/\mathrm{cos}^2\beta `$ is possible over a wide range of the mSUGRA parameter space. Values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2(\beta \alpha _{\mathrm{eff}})1`$ are always correlated in the mSUGRA scenario with negative values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_b`$ in the range of $`0.2\mathrm{\Delta }m_b0.4`$, giving rise to an enhancement of the $`hb\overline{b}`$ coupling. Positive values for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_b`$ are only possible if the Higgs boson couples with full strength to $`W`$ and $`Z`$ (see asbs1  for details.).

Concerning the underlying mGMSB parameters, $`M_{\mathrm{mess}},N_{\mathrm{mess}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, no severe restrictions can be deduced for the cases (I) and (II). The region of low $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}`$ and low $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are excluded by the experimental and theoretical constraints imposed in our analysis. Lower values of $`N_{\mathrm{mess}}`$ correspond to higher values of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and we only find allowed parameter regions for $`N_{\mathrm{mess}}7`$. In contrast to the mSUGRA case, no values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}/\mathrm{cos}^2\beta <1`$ exist. In particular, a significant enhancement of the $`hb\overline{b}`$ coupling is possible in the region of the highest values of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$. The absolute value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_b`$ is smaller in the mGMSB scenario than in the mSUGRA case and does not exceed $`|\mathrm{\Delta }m_b|=0.2`$. Values of $`|\mathrm{\Delta }m_b|>0.1`$ are only realized for $`\mathrm{tan}\beta 35`$.

In the mAMSB scenario, the experimental and theoretical constraints imposed in our analysis affect in particular the region of large $`m_0`$ and $`m_{\mathrm{aux}}`$. We find no allowed models with $`m_{\mathrm{aux}}70`$ TeV, mostly due to the imposed naturalness bound. Concerning the $`hb\overline{b}`$ coupling, $`\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}/\mathrm{cos}^2\beta `$ is always larger than 0.9, and values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}/\mathrm{cos}^2\beta >10`$ are possible for large $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$. Positive values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_b`$, are bounded from above by $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_b0.5`$. On the other hand, we obtain negative contributions as large as $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_b0.8`$, giving rise to a strongly enhanced $`hb\overline{b}`$ Yukawa coupling.

We also studied the mass spectra in the three soft SUSY-breaking scenarios assuming that the LEP excess is due to the production of the $`h`$ or $`H`$ boson in the MSSM (cases (II) and (III)), which are shown in Table. 3. At Run II of Tevatron, neutralino and chargino searches would be sensitive to part of the parameter space. For the LHC, on the other hand, the third generation squarks and gluinos can always be produced. A LC with $`\sqrt{s}1\mathrm{TeV}`$ will offer a good opportunity to observe part of the gaugino and slepton spectra.

## IV Conclusion

We have discussed the implication of Higgs searches at LEP2 in the scenarios of mSUGRA, mGMSB and mAMSB. We have found upper bounds on $`m_h`$, exclusion limits on $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ and constraints on the parameter space of the three different scenarios. For case (II) and (III), we furthermore investigated the corresponding spectra of the SUSY particles in view of future SUSY searches.

###### Acknowledgements.

It is pleasure to thank S. Ambrosanio for his collaboration and the contributions to the works reviewed here. S.S. has been supported by the DOE grant DE-FG03-92-ER-40701. A.D. would like to acknowledge financial support from the Network RTN European Program HPRN-CT-2000-00148 “Physics Across the Present Energy Frontier: Probing the Origin of Mass”.


text:
# Atmospheric parameters for non-interacting eclipsing binaries: preliminary results from synthetic photometry

## 1. Introduction

A small sample of detached EBs provide accurate individual mass and radius (Andersen 1991). As stressed by many authors (see e.g. Clausen 1993), \[Fe/H\] is the main remaining uncertainty of these stars, and their Teff are inhomogeneously determined (Lastennet et al. 1999, LLWB99). The determination of these two last parameters is motivating because the knowledge of all possible stellar parameters for such stars is the basis of the modelling of the global physical properties and evolution of star clusters or galaxies. In this context, the present work follows LLWB99 to determine metallicity-dependent Teffs of non-interacting EBs from Strömgren photometry.

## 2. Sample of eclipsing binaries and method

Table 1 gives the individual Strömgren photometry and surface gravity we used for our working sample. This sample covers a wide mass range, from 1.198 (UX Men B) to 27.27 M (V3903 Sgr A). To be consistent with the LLWB99 work we only kept EBs with (b$``$y), m1 and c1 data. The other commonly used Strömgren index $`\beta `$ \- not affected by interstellar reddening or the distance of the stars - would provide another observational constraint, however we decided to exclude it from our study. The reason is twofold: first, determinations for both components of a system are not always available (mainly due to the narrow bandpass of the Hβ filters), and secondly, the synthetic $`\beta `$ index from the BaSeL models is not reliable because - by construction - the resolution of flux distributions is 10-20 $`\AA `$ (see Lastennet 1998 for a proposed correction).

### Photometric errors

While only binaries with photometric errors were considered in LLWB99, here we consider systems with no photometric errors published, except for HS Hya and V906 Sco. For the case were these errors are supplied111 i.e. HS Hya, V906 Sco and the binaries listed in LLWB99, excluding IQ Per and YZ Cas because their B components are much fainter than the A components, implying large errors in their colour indices measurements, the mean values are $`\sigma `$(b-y)$`=`$0.013, $`\sigma `$(m1)$`=`$0.022 and $`\sigma `$(c1)$`=`$0.027. We adopt these mean errors for the systems reported with no photometric errors in Tab. 1.

### Method

We apply a $`\chi ^2`$-minimization method on the BaSeL models (Lejeune et al. 1998, see also Lastennet, Lejeune & Cuisinier, these proceedings) to derive the Teff and \[Fe/H\] values matching simultaneously the observed Strömgren photometry, the surface gravity (log g) being fixed to its accurately determined value (see LLWB99 for details).

## 3. Discussion

### Results derived from (b$``$y), m1 and c1

The surprising result is that BaSeL is unable to match simultaneously b$``$y, m1 and c1, independently of the value of reddening adopted.

All the $`\chi ^2`$-scores are bad ($`>`$ 10), except for both components of the system $`\chi ^2`$ Hya: its primary component gives a very good agreement with previous Teff determinations, but we favour a Teff larger by $``$ 700K for $`\chi ^2`$ Hya B (see Fig. 1). Of course, the $`\chi ^2`$-scores are related to the assumed photometric errors, so largest errors should give better (i.e. smaller) $`\chi ^2`$ values. The 2 binaries with published photometric errors (HS Hya and V760 Sco) give bad fit as well. Further study is needed, as well as more information on the observed Strömgren data before definitive conclusion. Reasons for these discrepancies could be that: 1) the BaSeL models are not fit to predict Strömgren indices. This explanation is possible because some problems due to the m1 and c1 indices were detected for F-type stars with the BaSeL Strömgren synthetic photometry (Lastennet et al. 2001). However, only UX Men and HS Hya contain F-type stars, so this cannot be a general explanation for our sample. Moreover, only $``$17% (7 over 40) of the stars studied by LLWB99 presented a similar bad fit (and this was not correlated with a particular Teff range) against $``$91% (20 over 22) in the present sample. Another convincing point against unreliable results from the BaSeL Strömgren synthetic photometry is that among the 9 F-type stars studied by LLWB99, only 2 stars show bad fits. 2) the differential reddening in the direction of these stars is strongly different from the standard values that we adopt. A comparison between the reddening found in the literature and derived from BaSeL (Tab. 1) show a good agreement, except for SZ Cen A but even in this case the disagreement is only of 0.058 mag. 3)  the choice of b$``$y, m1 and c1 is not critical enough for the purpose of this work. When it is true that b$``$y becomes increasingly insensitive to Teff for the hotter stars (for (b$``$y)0$`<`$0), it appears that even in this defavorable range BaSeL is able to predict good results (e.g. EM Car or CW Cep in LLWB99). It is worth noting that even bad fits give results in agreement with previous studies. Another unexpected (because badly fitted) but interesting result is obtained for QX Car: we predict a rich metallicity (\[Fe/H\]$`>`$0.30 (0.15) from the primary (secondary)) which is in agreement with previous estimates: Lastennet (1998) (Z$`=`$0.04 from 2 different stellar models, i.e. \[Fe/H\]$``$0.39), and the extrapolated result of Ribas et al. (2000) (Z$`=`$0.035, i.e. \[Fe/H\]$``$0.32). 4) the observed colors of these stars are in some way erroneous and should be carefully re-determined from new photometric observations.

### Teff and/or \[Fe/H\] from 1 or 2 photometric constraints

When bad fits were obtained using all the photometric data (3 colours), LLWB99 considered the solutions derived from the combination of 2 colours. In this case, the results match - all with success - (b$``$y) and c1 simultaneously (e.g. Fig. 1, right upper panel). A comparison of Teff(BaSeL) with previous studies shows a general good agreement, but Teff(BaSeL) are slightly but systematically lower. Unfortunately, few information is derived for \[Fe/H\], all the range considered being virtually possible inside the 1-$`\sigma `$ contours. Finally, we show in Fig. 1 (lower panels) the solutions obtained from the b$``$y index alone for the 2 only systems with photometric errors. The Teff determinations show a perfect agreement with previous works. A precise spectroscopic determination of the HS Hya metallicity is needed but if one assumes the value of \[Fe/H\]$`=`$0.17 (Torres et al., 1997), then we predict Teff in the range 6380-6440 K (primary) and 6320-6380 K (secondary). These Teffs are slightly lower than the results of Torres et al.: 6450-6550 (primary) and 6350-6450 K (secondary).

## References

Andersen J., 1991, ARA&A, 3, 91

Clausen J.V., 1993, ASP Conf. Series 40, 177

Clausen J.V., Grønbech B., 1977, A&A, 58, 131

Jordi C., Ribas I., Torra J., Giménez A., 1997, A&A, 326, 1044

Lastennet E., 1998, Ph-D thesis, Univ. L. Pasteur, Obs. de Strasbourg, France

Lastennet E., Lejeune Th., Westera P., Buser R., 1999, A&A, 341, 857, (LLWB99)

Lastennet E., Lignières F., Buser R., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, 535

Lejeune Th., Cuisinier F., Buser R., 1998, A&AS, 130, 65

Ribas I., Jordi C., Torra J., Giménez A., 2000, MNRAS, 313, 99

Torres G., et al. 1997, AJ, 114, 2764


text:
# Generalized parity transformations in lattice Chern-Simons theory

## Abstract

Regularization modifies the (odd) behaviour of the Abelian Chern-Simons (CS) action under parity. This effect happens for any sensible regularization; in particular, on the lattice. However, as in the chiral symmetry case, there exist generalized parity transformations such that the regularized theory is odd, and the corresponding operator verifies a Ginsparg-Wilson (GW) like relation. We present a derivation of such a relation and of the corresponding symmetry transformations.

It has been shown by Lüscher , that an action defined in terms of a Dirac operator obeying the GW relation  will be invariant under some symmetry transformations, ‘deformed’ versions of the usual chiral transformations. Moreover, those deformed transformations will tend to the usual ones when the cutoff is removed (continuum limit). The existence of this symmetry is more than a mere curiosity: it has consequences, for example, for the proper formulation of index theorems and anomalous Jacobians on the lattice . The symmetry transformations may also be used to understand the anomaly in a different way: performing a transformation which is a symmetry of the regularized action, one derives the anomalous conservation law for a regularized current. The anomalous contribution comes from the non-trivial Jacobian due to the non-local nature of the transformations, and requires no additional regularization. The survival of a generalized version of the symmetries in a regularized action (not necessarily on the lattice) is a phenomenon that has also been explored in other systems .

We shall here discuss the case of the CS action, where, as recently pointed out in , the classical transformation properties of the action are spoiled by the lattice (in fact, by any regularization). Our aim is to show that there are generalized transformations in the regularized theory such that the action has the same parity as the classical one , and also to present the corresponding GW like relation for the kinetic operator of the CS action.

To fix our notation and conventions, we shall define the (Euclidean) CS action $`S_{CS}`$ by

$$S_{CS}[A]=i\frac{\kappa }{2}d^3xϵ_{\mu \lambda \nu }A_\mu _\lambda A_\nu ,$$
(1)
where $`A_\mu `$ is an Abelian gauge field. $`A_\mu (x)`$ will be regarded as the ‘coordinate representation’ of a vector field $`|A_\mu `$ in a Hilbert space, namely, $`A_\mu (x)x|A_\mu `$. In terms of this notation, the CS action is, of course, written as a quadratic form:

$$S_{CS}[A]=i\frac{\kappa }{2}A_\mu |R_{\mu \nu }|A_\nu i\frac{\kappa }{2}A|R|A,$$
(2)
completely determined by the kinetic operator $`R_{\mu \nu }=iϵ_{\mu \lambda \nu }_\lambda `$.

Rather than considering the usual parity transformations, we will follow , and use the more symmetric (full) spacetime inversion $`I`$:

$$|x|x^I=|x,x||y=\delta (x+y).$$
(3)
The effect of this transformation on the gauge field is 111Since $`I`$ is just a time reversal times a $`\pi `$ rotation, everything we do for the $`I`$ transformations has an immediate analogy for the parity transformations.:

$$x^I|A_\mu ^I=x|A_\mu 𝐈|A_\mu =|A_\mu ^I=|A_\mu ,$$
(4)
where $`𝐈=`$; hence, the odd nature of the CS action: $`S_{CS}[A^I]=S_{CS}[A]`$, follows from

$$𝐈^tR𝐈=R𝐈R+R𝐈=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0},$$
(5)
(we used $`𝐈^t=𝐈^{}=𝐈`$). As shown in , the minimal addition one can make to improve the UV behaviour of the CS propagator, is to include a Maxwell term. This leads us to the Maxwell Chern Simons (MCS) action

$$S_{MCS}[A]=\frac{1}{2}A_\mu |\left[\kappa R_{\mu \nu }\frac{\kappa ^2^2}{M^2}\delta _{\mu \nu }^{}\right]|A_\nu $$

$$=\frac{\kappa }{2}A_\mu |\stackrel{~}{R}_{\mu \nu }|A_\nu $$
(6)
where $`\delta _{\mu \nu }^{}=\delta _{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{_\mu _\nu }{^2}}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{R}R(1\frac{\kappa }{M^2}R)`$. A generalized inversion $`\stackrel{~}{𝐈}`$ may then be obtained by proposing a general linear transformation of $`|A_\mu `$,

$$|A_\mu ^{\stackrel{~}{I}}=\stackrel{~}{𝐈}|A_\mu =(f\delta _{\mu \nu }^{}gR_{\mu \nu })|A_\nu $$
(7)
with the unknown coefficients $`f`$ and $`g`$ to be determined by the condition:

$$\stackrel{~}{𝐈}^t\stackrel{~}{R}_{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{𝐈}=\stackrel{~}{R}_{\mu \nu }.$$
(8)
(this fixes the transverse part of the transformation; a longitudinal piece may be added to $`\stackrel{~}{𝐈}`$ in (7) without affecting (8)). The scalar functions $`f`$ and $`g`$ are found to be:

$$f=\sqrt{1\xi ^2\frac{^2}{M^2}},g=\frac{\kappa }{M^2}\sqrt{1\xi ^2\frac{^2}{M^2}},$$
(9)
with $`\xi \frac{\kappa }{M}`$. Choosing for the longitudinal part of the gauge field the simplest form, we may write

$$\stackrel{~}{𝐈}|A_\mu =(f\delta _{\mu \nu }gR_{\mu \nu })|A_\nu .$$
(10)
It is interesting to realize that the generalized inversion defined by (7), may also be written as:

$$\stackrel{~}{𝐈}=𝐈\sqrt{\frac{1\xi \frac{1}{M}R}{1+\xi \frac{1}{M}R}}$$
(11)
where the property (8) becomes evident. The operator $`\stackrel{~}{𝐈}`$, also shares with $`𝐈`$ the property of being hermitian and idempotent:

$$\stackrel{~}{𝐈}^2=𝐈^2=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},$$
(12)
thus the spectrum of $`𝐈`$ is unchanged by our proposed generalization to $`\stackrel{~}{𝐈}`$. There are striking similarities between the properties verified by the regularized operator $`\stackrel{~}{R}`$ and the Ginsparg-Wilson Dirac operator (in an even number of dimensions). Indeed, it is just a matter of some algebra to verify that the operator $`\stackrel{~}{R}`$ fulfills a relation:

$$𝐈\stackrel{~}{R}+\stackrel{~}{R}𝐈=2\frac{\xi }{M}\stackrel{~}{R}𝐈(1\frac{\xi ^2}{M^2}^2)^1\stackrel{~}{R}$$
(13)
which looks like a GW relation, if one makes the identifications: $`𝒟\stackrel{~}{R}`$, $`\gamma _5𝐈`$, and the (exponentially local) factor $`(1\frac{\xi ^2}{M^2}^2)^1`$ is interpreted as a diagonal matrix.

Moreover, the hermitian operator $`\widehat{R}=𝐈\stackrel{~}{R}`$ anticommutes with $`\stackrel{~}{𝐈}`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{𝐈}\widehat{R}+\widehat{R}\stackrel{~}{𝐈}=0,$$
(14)
hence, $`\stackrel{~}{I}`$ may be regarded as the equivalent of the ‘$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_5`$’ matrix of GW fermions, introduced to study the index theorem for chiral fermions on the lattice .

The introduction of a parity even term is a feature of any sensible regularization implementable at the Lagrangian level. Indeed, we may write a general regularized action $`S^{reg}`$ as

$$S^{reg}[𝒜]=S_{PV}[𝒜]+S_{PC}[𝒜]$$
(15)
where $`S_{PV}`$ and $`S_{PC}`$ denote parity violating and conserving terms, respectively. For example,

$$S^{reg}[𝒜]=\frac{\kappa }{2}A_\mu |u(\frac{^2}{M^2})R_{\mu \nu }|A_\nu $$

$$+\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }|v(\frac{^2}{M^2})|F_{\mu \nu },$$
(16)
where $`u`$ and $`v`$ are chosen in order to obtain the desired behaviour for the propagator. However, to preserve gauge invariance, we cannot just set $`v0`$, since that would spoil the gauge invariance of the Chern-Simons action under large gauge transformations .

Everything we have just mentioned has an immediate analogy in lattice CS. We first recall a result presented in : the most general form of a local gauge invariant CS action in three dimensions must include a Maxwell-like term $`S_M`$ if the action is assumed to be local, gauge invariant, and free of doublers:

$$S_M=\underset{x,y}{}A_\mu (x)M_{\mu \nu }(xy)A_\nu (y)$$
(17)
where

$$M_{\mu \nu }(xy)=\mathrm{}\delta _{\mu \nu }+d_\mu \widehat{d}_\nu ,$$
(18)
with $`\mathrm{}=_{\mu =0}^2d_\mu \widehat{d}_\mu `$ the lattice Laplacian in three dimensions (see  for details).

As in the continuum, parity and inversion are violated. However, as we have shown for the continuum case, a generalized version of that transformation survives. On the lattice, they are more conveniently formulated in the Fourier representation: with the lattice Fourier transformation of the gauge field $`A_\mu `$ defined by

$$A_\mu (x)=_{}\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}e^{ipx}e^{i\frac{p_\mu }{2}}\stackrel{~}{A}_\mu (p),$$
(19)
where the integration region is the first Brillouin zone $``$, the Fourier space representation of the Chern-Simons action becomes

$$S_{CS}=_{}\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\stackrel{~}{A}_\mu (p)\stackrel{~}{G}_{\mu \nu }(p)\stackrel{~}{A}_\nu (p)$$
(20)
with $`\stackrel{~}{G}_{\mu \nu }(p)=e^{i\frac{p_\mu }{2}}G_{\mu \nu }(p)e^{i\frac{p_\nu }{2}}`$.

The lattice MCS action can be written as

$$S=_{}\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\stackrel{~}{A}_\mu (p)\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \nu }(p)\stackrel{~}{A}_\nu (p)$$
(21)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \nu }(p)=f(p)\delta _{\mu \nu }^{}(p)+ig(p)Q_{\mu \nu }(p)`$, with

$$f(p)=\frac{4}{e^2}\underset{\alpha =0}{\overset{2}{}}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{p_\alpha }{2},$$
(22)
$$g(p)=2h(p)\sqrt{\underset{\alpha =0}{\overset{2}{}}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{p_\alpha }{2}}$$
(23)
and

$$\delta _{\mu \nu }^{}=\delta _{\mu \nu }\frac{\mathrm{sin}(\frac{p_\mu }{2})\mathrm{sin}(\frac{p_\nu }{2})}{_{\alpha =0}^2\mathrm{sin}^2(\frac{p_\alpha }{2})},Q_{\mu \nu }=ϵ_{\mu \alpha \nu }\frac{\widehat{p}_\alpha }{\sqrt{\widehat{p}^2}}.$$
(24)
We obtain the generalized parity transformations following the same steps as in the continuum case. In the Fourier representation, the gauge field transformation is given by

$$A_\mu ^I(p^I)=i\frac{f(p)}{\sqrt{f^2(p)+g^2(p)}}Q_{\mu \rho }A_\rho (p)$$

$$\frac{g(p)}{\sqrt{f^2(p)+g^2(p)}}\delta _{\mu \rho }^{}A_\rho (p)$$
(25)
that tends to the usual inversion when $`f0`$. Therefore , this is the new parity transformation under which the Chern-Simons action is still odd but the kernel is integrable, and whose existence was suggested in reference .

Thus we conclude that in $`2+1`$ dimensions there exists an identity, analogous to GW relation, involving the inversion (or parity) operator and the kinetic operator which defines the CS action. Also, this relation allows for the definition of a generalized inversion operator, under which the regularized action has the same properties as the unregularized one.


text:
# Evolution of the Ionizing Radiation Background and Star Formation in the Aftermath of Cosmological Reionization

## 1 Introduction

The conventional wisdom based on the standard theory of structure formation says that the universe was reionized sometime in the redshift range $`z=612`$ (Barkana & Loeb 2001). The relatively large uncertain range in redshift reflects our imperfect knowledge of the density fluctuations on small scales, star formation processes (e.g., efficiency, IMF, etc.) and feedback processes at high redshift. The latest observations of high redshift quasars (e.g., Fan et al. 2001) are beginning to probe the lower bound of that window and suggestions have been made that we may be witnessing the end phase of the cosmological reionization process at $`z6`$, based solely on the appearance of a precipitous drop of transmitted flux at the rest-frame Ly$`\alpha `$ wavelength near $`z6`$ in a single quasar spectrum (Becker et al. 2001, hereafter B01; Barkana 2001).

In this Letter we present an analysis of the ionizing background radiation field in the redshift range $`z=4.96.1`$, using the absorption measurements in B01. Combining with previous data at lower redshift, we find that, coming from high redshift, the ionizing radiation intensity displays a sharp rise at $`z6`$ peaking at $`z=5.6`$, a significant downturn from $`z5.6`$ to $`5.2`$ by a factor of $`0.6`$, and subsequently a consistent ascent from $`z=5.0`$ to $`z=2.4`$ by a factor of $`4`$. All these three features are consistent with a picture that the cosmological reionization was near completion at $`z6`$.

The first feature (i.e., the initial sharp rise) has been predicted by several authors previously (Cen & Ostriker 1993; Gnedin 2000a; Miralda-Escudé, Haehnelt, & Rees 2001). At present, the primary uncertainty for its determination observationally is the possibility that the high level of absorption in the single observed quasar at $`z=6.28`$ is some kind of anomaly (we show that it cannot be a simple statistical fluctuation in the absorption level). Additional observed quasars at $`z6.3`$ will be critical in this regard. Here we focus our attention on the relatively more robust measurements of the ionizing radiation field at $`z<6`$ and show that the observed pause in the rise of the amplitude of the ionizing radiation field from $`z5.6`$ to $`5.0`$ could be due to suppression of star formation following reionization at $`z6`$.

## 2 Reionization and the Evolution of the Ionizing Background

Assuming the model in which the IGM is almost completely ionized and the radiation background is uniform, we infer the evolution of the H I ionization rate by requiring that the mean flux decrement in simulated spectra matches the observed values in the upper panel of Figure 2 of B01. This method was pioneered by Rauch et al. (1997) and extended in McDonald et al. (2000,2001) and McDonald & Miralda-Escudé (2001). We apply the standard procedure using a hydrodynamic simulation of a flat universe dominated by a cosmological constant and cold dark matter ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM), with CDM density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.3`$, Hubble parameter $`h=0.67`$ ($`H_0=100h\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1/\mathrm{Mpc}`$), baryon density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b=0.035`$, power spectrum normalization $`\sigma _8=0.9`$, and large-scale primordial power spectrum slope $`n=1`$. The simulation is Eulerian, with box size $`25h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ divided into $`768^3`$ cells (see Cen et al. 2001 for a more complete description). We use outputs from the simulation at $`z=5`$ and $`z=6`$, interpolating linearly between them when necessary. We start by assuming the model in the simulation correctly represents the universe, and then consider whether or not our results are self-consistent.

Figure 1 shows the results for the evolution of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}(z)`$, the hydrogen ionization rate in units of $`10^{12}\mathrm{s}^1`$.

The open squares are the old results from McDonald & Miralda-Escudé (2001). The filled squares are the new results, leaving out the highest redshift point, which we analyze differently than the others because the detected transmission is not significant and the detector noise needs to be taken into account carefully (this last point is represented by the triangle with 1 and 2 $`\sigma `$ upper limit bars). The equally spaced bins in redshift are chosen to coincide with the majority of the points in Figure 2 of B01. As discussed below, the results have been rescaled to apply for the value of the baryon density favored by big bang nucleosynthesis, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2=0.02`$ (Burles & Tytler 1998), instead of the value in the simulation, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2=0.0157`$.

In detail, we determine a value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ and its error for each B01 point using the simulation as follows: First, we construct the optical depth field, $`\tau (v)`$ (i.e., the spectrum is $`F(v)=\mathrm{exp}[\tau (v)]`$) along a large number of lines of sight through the simulation cube ($`256^2`$ for each face), normalized using an arbitrary value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ (i.e., $`\tau \mathrm{\Gamma }^1`$ for low density gas in ionization equilibrium). We then randomly choose many sets of five $`12.5h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$-long segments of spectrum, so that each set forms a combined spectrum of the length of our redshift bins, $`\mathrm{\Delta }z=0.167`$ (note that this length depends slightly on cosmology and redshift, i.e., the spectra should be shorter by 26% at $`z=6`$ in our model, corresponding to a 13% increase in the estimated error bars, which we account for in the plot). For each $`62.5h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ chunk, we determine the value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ that produces the observed value of the mean transmitted flux fraction, $`\overline{F}(z)`$ \[$`T(z)`$ in the notation of B01\]. The mean of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ values for all the chunks is the inferred value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ for this observed data point, and the dispersion is the estimated error. Most redshift bins in B01 have several measured values of $`\overline{F}`$ in them, so we combine the inferred values of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ within the bin using an error weighted average which takes into account fractional overlap when necessary (because of the overlapping points, our error bars are correlated, in the sense that point-to-point differences are more significant than the error bars seem to indicate).

To test that the treatment of $`12.5h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ segments as independent does not underestimate the error by ignoring correlation along the lines of sight on larger scales, we repeat this procedure using $`6.25h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ segments, and find almost identical error bars.

We now turn to the highest redshift point in B01. The given value and error are $`\overline{F}=0.0038\pm 0.0026`$; however, B01 state that the sky subtraction has an uncertainty of order 1$`\sigma `$, so we use $`\sigma =0.0052`$ when interpreting this point. B01 also give the measured transmitted flux fraction in the region of the spectrum corresponding to Ly$`\beta `$ absorption by gas at this redshift, $`\overline{F}=0.00024\pm 0.0024`$, and point out that the implied constraint on the Ly$`\alpha `$ optical depth is actually stronger than the direct one. We assume the same sky subtraction error for this point as for the Ly$`\alpha `$ region.

We start by analyzing the Ly$`\alpha `$ region. We use the method described above to create chunks of spectra of the appropriate length. For each value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ we compute $`\overline{F}`$ for many different chunks, and compute the mean likelihood of producing $`\overline{F}=0.0038`$ given the error $`\sigma =0.0052`$. The relative likelihood function peaks at $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}=0.059`$, but does not decrease significantly for arbitrarily small $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$. The likelihood has dropped by factors of 0.61 and 0.14 at $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}=0.096`$ and 0.135, respectively, so we call these the 1 and 2$`\sigma `$ upper limits.

We analyze the Ly$`\beta `$ region in two ways. First we repeat the above procedure assuming a constant factor 0.13 suppression of the continuum by Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption corresponding to gas at $`z5`$ (see the lowest redshift point in B01). The inferred 1 and 2$`\sigma `$ upper limits on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ are 0.032 and 0.056. These constraints are stronger than the ones from the Ly$`\alpha `$ region; however, they are not as realistic as possible because they ignore fluctuations in the Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption in the Ly$`\beta `$ region, which might either weaken the constraints, by completely obscuring substantial portions of the Ly$`\beta `$ region, or strengthen the constraints, by providing regions of significantly less than average absorption where residual transmission through the Ly$`\beta `$ forest could be observed. We simulate this effect by creating Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption spectra to serve as the continua for the Ly$`\beta `$ region, using the $`z=5`$ simulation output and our inferred value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ from the lowest redshift B01 point. This procedure results in essentially identical constraints to the assumption of a flat continuum: $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}<0.032`$ and 0.062 at 1 and 2$`\sigma `$, respectively.

It may be possible to obtain even stronger constraints by using Ly$`\gamma `$, as suggested by B01 (X. Fan, private communication), or by considering the limits imposed by individual pixel values (D. Weinberg, private communication). However, if reionization is on-going or just completed at $`z=6.1`$, the detailed constraints on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ obtained from any kind of analysis based on a simulation in which reionization happened much earlier probably are not very meaningful ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ is not well defined if the radiation background is inhomogeneous). Our formal constraints on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ near $`z=6`$ should be taken simply as an indication that something dramatic is happening at this redshift and we think it likely indicates the end of the cosmological reionization process.

The overall amplitude of our $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ results (but not the evolution over a short redshift interval) is sensitive to the cosmological model and gas temperature-density relation in the simulation, as one can see from the equation for optical depth at a point in real space (i.e., ignoring peculiar velocities and thermal broadening) with baryon overdensity $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\rho _b/\overline{\rho _b}`$ and gas temperature $`T`$:

$$\tau \frac{\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2\right)^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2}{T^{0.7}H(z)\mathrm{\Gamma }},$$
(1)
where $`H(z)`$ is the Hubble parameter at redshift $`z`$ \[$`H(z)100h\mathrm{\Omega }_m^{1/2}(1+z)^{3/2}`$ at high $`z`$ in a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM universe\]. Sensitivity of the inferred value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to the power spectrum of density perturbations enters through the $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$ term, as well as the peculiar velocities, and additional sensitivity to temperature can arise from the thermal broadening. The effect of changing $`\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2`$ or $`H(z)`$ on the inferred value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is easy to correct for, but the effect of changing the temperature-density relation or the input power spectrum generally must be investigated by running additional simulations. We do this using approximate Hydro-PM simulations (hereafter HPM, Gnedin & Hui 1998), after checking that they give similar results to our fully hydrodynamic simulation (to $`10`$% in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$) when performed using the same model and initial conditions. First, we analyze HPM simulations with a variety of different temperature-density relations and find that the thermal broadening is not very important to the derivation of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, so the dependence $`\mathrm{\Gamma }T^{0.7}`$ is accurate (to $`\pm 0.1`$ in the power law index), as long as the temperature is specified at the most relevant density for the transmission features that determine $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, which we find to be $`\mathrm{\Delta }0.35`$. The temperature in our hydrodynamic simulation at this density is $`5400`$ K, but in the aftermath of reionization the temperature of the gas would be higher than this (e.g., Miralda-Escudé & Rees 1994), requiring a correction. The amplitude of the initial density fluctuations in our hydrodynamic simulation is higher by a factor $`1.5`$ on the scale of the Ly$`\alpha `$ forest than the measurement of McDonald et al. (2000), which was independently confirmed by Croft et al. (2001). By varying the amplitude, $`A`$, in HPM simulations, we determine that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }A^{1.5}`$ (roughly). The required ionizing background decreases when $`A`$ increases because the voids where transmission is observed become deeper (i.e., $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ becomes smaller). In the end, the corrections for power spectrum amplitude and temperature may roughly cancel (if we use $`T10000`$ K), so the points in Figure 1 should be reasonably accurate; however, we emphasize that the temperature at this redshift is unknown, so significant uncertainty in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ remains.

The reader may be wondering at this point “could the inferred decrease in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ from $`z5.6`$ to $`z5.2`$ possibly be real”? It appears to be a 3$`\sigma `$ effect and we think it could be real. The same trend is clearly visible to the eye in the bottom panel of Figure 2 of B01, once we consider that the value of their $`\tau _{eff}`$ is generally expected to increase with time. The signal is almost equally strong in the spectra of two different quasars. These two are at almost identical redshift so a continuum-related effect might be the same in both; however, the observed $`30`$% increase in transmission fraction between $`z5.2`$ and $`z5.6`$ would require an increase $`\lambda ^4`$ in the quasar continuum. Finally, we have every reason to believe that our statistical error calculation is correct. The scatter in the inferred values of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ for different B01 points in each redshift bin is in perfect agreement with our estimated error bars (e.g., $`\chi ^2=13.0`$ for 10 degrees of freedom when we treat the three average values of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ for the bins in the range $`5.2z5.6`$ as fitting parameters to be estimated from the individual points with error bars). Note that, while it may look small to the eye, the fractional error on the $`z=5.25`$ point is actually larger than the fractional errors on the following two points. Purely adiabatic temperature evolution $`(1+z)^2`$, which constitutes the steepest possible evolution in temperature (by ignoring the subsequent photo-heating), instead of the essentially constant temperature in the simulation, would only cause a 7.5% relative change in the values of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$s.

We think that the sharp rise of the radiation intensity at $`z6.1`$ may be a fairly strong case for the completion of cosmological reionization at that epoch. However, note that a value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}0.03`$ is not inconsistent in principle with a fully ionized IGM, since the neutral fraction near the mean density is still only $`0.0007`$. One is hampered by the high optical depth of an IGM that is still mostly ionized. It will be extremely valuable to look for additional signatures of cosmological reionization in its aftermath, where more flux is transmitted. We will therefore focus our discussion on the radiation field at $`z6`$.

## 3 Discussion

In the standard hierarchical structure formation theory smaller structures began to form earlier than larger structures, simply because the amplitude of density fluctuations is a decreasing function of scale and in linear theory density fluctuations on all scales grow at the same rate. Under this general picture the universe is conventionally thought to be reionized mostly by photons from stellar systems more massive than $`10^8\mathrm{M}_{}`$, where atomic line cooling provides an efficient energy sink for gas that is collected and heated during gravitational collapse of halos (Haiman, Rees & Loeb 1997; Gnedin & Ostriker 1997). Less massive systems, after having produced an insufficient amount of stars (Pop III) to reionize the universe at an earlier epoch, can no longer form stars due to lack of cooling processes (Haiman, Thoul, & Loeb 1996; Haiman, Rees & Loeb 1997; Tegmark et al. 1997).

After reionization, the temperature of the intergalactic gas is raised to $`10^4`$K (Cen & Ostriker 1993; Miralda-Escudé & Rees 1994; Gnedin & Ostriker 1997). The subsequent effect of suppression of gas accretion onto small halos has been noted by many authors (Efstathiou 1992; Thoul & Weinberg 1996; Quinn, Katz, & Efstathiou 1996; Kepner, Babul, & Spergel 1997; Navarro & Steinmetz 1997; Kitayama & Ikeuchi 2000; Gnedin 2000b). The extent of this effect somewhat varies among the studies and it is clear that our current treatment of the reionization process is far from ideal. Obviously, a sufficiently adequate study would require simulations that include an accurate treatment of three-dimensional radiative transfer process and have high enough spatial and mass resolution. We do not have simulations of this caliber at present and attempt to only make a semi-quantitative calculation to illustrate a consequence of reionization on star formation and the background radiation field, which we believe captures a primary feature of this process in a simple and intuitive fashion.

Figure 2 shows the nonlinear mass $`M_{\mathrm{nl}}`$ and linear Jeans mass $`M_{\mathrm{Jeans}}`$ as a function of redshift. The nonlinear mass $`M_{\mathrm{nl}}`$ is the mass within a top-hat window at which the linear rms density fluctuation is unity, and $`M_{\mathrm{Jeans}}=1.5\times 10^{10}(\frac{T}{10^4\mathrm{K}})^{3/2}(1+z)^{3/2}\mathrm{\Omega }_M^{1/2}h^1\mathrm{M}_{}`$ (Peebles 1993), where $`T`$ is the gas temperature and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ is the present matter density parameter. The assumption of instantaneous reionization is just for the sake of plotting convenience and is not required to make our point. In a real universe the reionization phase is complicated and is thought to progress on a time scale of a Hubble time, during which the mean (volume weighted) radiation field builds up slowly up to a value of approximately $`10^{24}`$erg/cm2/hz/sec/sr at Lyman limit, followed by a brief phase, when the majority of the baryons are ionized and a sudden jump in the amplitude of the mean radiation field intensity at Lyman limit to $`10^{22}10^{21}`$erg/cm2/hz/sec/sr occurs within a redshift interval of a fraction of unity (Miralda-Escudé et al. 2000; Gnedin 2000a). We simply call this epoch of a sudden rise in radiation field the reionization epoch, marking the completion of the reionization process.

We see, in Figure 2, that gas is able to accrete onto halos with mass greater than the Jeans mass $`10^5\mathrm{M}_{}`$ prior to $`z6`$. Stars formed inside halos with $`M=10^85\times 10^8\mathrm{M}_{}`$ are presumably primarily responsible for producing most of the ionizing photons immediately prior to $`z6`$, where atomic line cooling provides an efficient cooling process. Right after reionization, there is a dramatic inversion of the situation from $`z6`$ to $`z4.6`$, where Jeans mass surpasses the nonlinear mass. Such a switch has some interesting consequences: gas accretion onto the most abundant halos (about the nonlinear mass) is suddenly suppressed, simply because the ambient gas has a temperature that is higher than the virial temperature of the typical halos and is incapable of cooling to a lower temperature. Gas accretion and thus star formation may be brought to a halt in typical halos (larger halos with higher virial temperature may still be able to form stars with a somewhat reduced rate due to the same effect). Below $`z4.6`$, nonlinear mass again becomes larger than the Jeans mass and gas is once again capable of accreting onto typical halos with mass $`4\times 10^9\mathrm{M}_{}`$, and star formation rate bounces back. We note that the cosmological model adopted may not be correct in fine details and is used only to illustrate the process. Therefore, the exact crossing redshift of the two curves at $`z=4.6`$ should not be taken at its face value, but rather as a generic feature.

Let us now relate the star formation rate to the ionizing background radiation field. Our treatment is intended to be simple but we think it contains the essence of the relevant physical processes. For gas immersed in a meta-galactic ionizing radiation background, locally hydrogen photoionization is balanced by hydrogen recombination (to levels $`n=2`$ or higher):

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }n_{HI}=n_{HII}n_e\alpha (T),$$
(2)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the photoionization rate (see Figure 1), $`n_{HI}`$, $`n_{HII}`$ and $`n_e`$ are the neutral hydrogen, ionized hydrogen, and electron number densities, respectively, and $`\alpha (T)`$ is the hydrogen recombination rate. Averaging spatially both sides of equation (1) gives

$$<n_{HI}>=\frac{C<n_H>^2\alpha (T)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }},$$
(3)
where $`C`$ is the clumping factor of all gas participating in receiving ionizing photons (i.e., excluding gas in optically shielded regions). For simplicity we have assumed that the gas is composed entirely of hydrogen. Since the neutral hydrogen fraction is much less than unity, we have simply replaced both the ionized hydrogen and electron number densities by the total hydrogen number density $`n_H`$. The mean free path of an ionizing photon in comoving length units is then

$$\lambda =\frac{1+z}{<n_{HI}>\sigma _H}=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+z)}{C(z)<n_H>^2\sigma _H\alpha },$$
(4)
where $`\sigma _H`$ is the hydrogen photoionization cross-section. Using $`\alpha =4\times 10^{13}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{sec}^1`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.5\times 10^{13}`$sec-1 (see Figure 1) and $`\sigma _H=2\times 10^{18}`$cm2 we obtain $`\lambda `$ in comoving megaparsecs:

$$\lambda =74C(z)^1\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2}{0.02}\right)^2\left(\frac{1+z}{7}\right)^5\mathrm{comoving}\mathrm{Mpc}.$$
(5)
Evidently, at $`z6`$, the mean free path of an ionizing photon is much smaller than the Hubble radius and radiative processes may be treated “locally”, by ignoring cosmological effects. But the mean free path is much greater than the typical separation between ionizing sources ($`1`$comoving Mpc). In this case we may relate the mean comoving specific emissivity of ionizing radiation $`ϵ_\nu `$ (in units of erg/sec/hz/comoving cm3) to the mean ionizing radiation intensity $`J_\nu `$ (in units of erg/sec/hz/sr/cm2) by

$`J_\nu `$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_\nu \lambda (1+z)^2}{4\pi }}`$ (6)
$`=8.9\times 10^{26}C(z)^1ϵ_\nu ({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2}{0.02}})^2({\displaystyle \frac{1+z}{7}})^3.`$
The evolution of $`C(z)`$ is complicated and currently undetermined without detailed simulations that ionized the universe at $`z6`$. However, simple estimates may be made to gauge the range of variation. In the linear regime we have $`C(z)(1+z)^2`$ and in the extreme nonlinear regime $`C(z)(1+z)^0`$; the actual situation is likely to be between these two limiting cases, parameterized as $`C(z)(1+z)^{2+\beta }`$ with $`\beta >0`$. Inserting $`C(z)`$ into equation (5) yields

$$J_\nu ϵ_\nu (1+z)^{1\beta }$$
(7)
with $`\beta >0`$. Clearly, in order for $`J_\nu `$ to increase with redshift, as indicated by observations in the redshift range $`z=5.25.6`$ as shown in Figure 1, the comoving specific emissivity or comoving star formation rate has to increase with redshift. Taking the values shown in Figure 1 in the range $`z=5.65.2`$, we obtain $`J_\nu (1+z)^{9.8\pm 3.4}`$. (This fit used the 3rd through 5th filled squares in Figure 1. We obtain a flatter slope, $`5.3\pm 2.1`$, with an acceptable $`\chi ^2`$, if we add the 2nd point, at $`z5.1`$.) This requires a decrease in star formation rate from $`z=5.6`$ to $`z=5.2`$ as $`ϵ(1+z)^{10.8\pm 3.4\beta }`$. Our analysis is in qualitative agreement with Barkana & Loeb (2000), who pointed out that the decrease in star formation subsequent to cosmological reionization may be detectable in the evolution of number counts of faint galaxies by NGST. It may be that we have detected this signature in the evolution $`J_\nu `$ or $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

## 4 Conclusions

In hierarchical structure formation theory the evolution of the meta-galactic ionizing radiation background may be characterized by five distinct phases: 1) from $`z1520`$ to $`z_{ri}`$ (which marks the end of reionization) the radiation field builds up slowly before individual ionizing HII regions overlap (“pre-overlap period”; Gnedin 2000a) 2) in a brief period up to $`z_{ri}`$ the majority of baryons are ionized in a short time scale and the radiation field jumps up by about two to three orders of magnitude, completing the reionization process (“reionization epoch”); 3) from $`z_{ri}`$ to $`z_{Jeans}`$ the radiation field pulls back significantly due to a decrease in star formation rate as a result of reionization (we call this “aftermath of reionization”); 4) $`z_{Jeans}`$ to $`z_{peak}12`$ the radiation field rises steadily with contributions from both stars in larger galaxies and quasars; 5) $`z_{peak}12`$ to $`z=0`$ the radiation field drops off sharply due to the combined effect of decreasing star/quasar formation rate and cosmological effects. Consistent with theoretical calculations, observations have confirmed phases (4) (e.g., McDonald & Miralda-Escudé 2001; shown in Figure 1 of this paper) and (5) (e.g., Shull et al. 1999).

In this paper we have interpreted the absorption in the spectra of the latest high redshift quasars in the redshift range $`z=4.96.1`$, searching for salient features pertaining to the “reionization epoch” (phase 2) and the “aftermath of reionization” (phase 3). Quite intriguingly, we appear to be seeing the “aftermath of reionization” and the end of the “reionization epoch” in these spectra, both of which seem to point to a cosmological reionization redshift of $`z_{ri}6`$. Specifically, a predicted decrease of star formation rate in the aftermath of the reionization is indicated by the observations. While a few more high redshift quasars are required to check that the complete absorption at $`z=6.1`$ is not some kind of anomaly (e.g., a rare leftover neutral patch in an almost completely ionized universe), it appears that our conclusion with regard to the “aftermath of reionization” is more secure due to its independence of any single spectrum. It is still very urgent to enlarge the observational data sets to greatly firm up the conclusion and sharpen up the rate of evolution. If confirmed by future observations, this may be indication that our current understanding of galaxy formation may be approximately valid up to redshift $`z6`$. Furthermore, as suggested by Barkana & Loeb (2000), it will be important to independently detect this “aftermath of reionization” signature in the evolution of number counts of faint galaxies by NGST.

Since we appear to be observing the period directly after reionization, it becomes more important to perform dedicated simulations that achieve reionization at the appropriate redshift $`z6`$. This paper should be understood as an attempt to guide that effort by making some preliminary comparisons between data and an existing simulation in which reionization occurred somewhat earlier. Such future simulations are quite demanding, because not only high resolutions are required but also an accurate treatment of three-dimensional radiative transfer must be implemented.

This research is supported in part by grants AST93-18185 and ASC97-40300. We thank Xiaohui Fan, Vijay Narayanan and David Weinberg for useful discussion, and Nick Gnedin for his HPM code.