text:
# Power-law correlation and discreteness in cosmological N-body simulations

(Received 2002 September 26)

## Abstract

We analyse with simple real-space statistics the Virgo consortium’s cosmological N-body simulations. Significant clustering rapidly develops well below the initial mean interparticle separation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$, where the gravitational force on a particle is dominated by that with its nearest neighbours. A power-law behaviour in the two point correlation function emerges, which in the subsequent evolution is continuously amplified and shifted to larger scales, in a roughly self-similar manner. We conclude that the density fluctuations at the smallest scales due to the particle-like nature of the distribution being evolved are thus essential in the development of these correlations, and not solely, as usually supposed, the very small continuous (fluid-like) fluctuations at scales larger than $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$.

galaxies: general; galaxies: statistics; cosmology: large-scale structure of the universe  slugcomment: Submitted to Astrophys. J. Letters

One of the central projects of contemporary cosmology is to explain within a single framework the small fluctuations observed in the temperature of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR) and the large fluctuations observed in the distribution of galaxies and other discrete objects. The current paradigm (Peebles, (1993); Padmanabhan, (1993)) for this framework is the cold dark matter (CDM) cosmology, in which it is (essentially) the growth under self-gravity of very tiny initial perturbations in a collisionless fluid which give rise to both kind of phenomena. The CMBR fluctuations are explained - with apparently great observational success - by the very tractable evolution of the fluid equations linearized in the perturbations. The extension to the formation of objects and their distributions is much more difficult, involving the highly non-linear regime of the equations. In practice the main theoretical instrument in this regime is numerical N-body simulation (NBS) (Hockney and Eastwood, (1981)). From some given initial conditions (IC - generally a Gaussian random field with small-amplitude correlated fluctuations) specified by the linear evolution (and thus in principle constrained by observations of the CMBR) these NBS are supposed to model the evolution of the continuous density field under gravity into the non-linear era. Ultimately catalogues of different objects are extracted for comparison with observations, and the idea is that significant information about the IC in the continuous density field can be extracted by such a comparison. In this letter we re-examine the dynamics in the non-linear regime of some of the most elaborate cosmological NBS performed to date, those of the Virgo consortium (Jenkins et al., (1998)). We conclude that the correlations which emerge at these scales are not correctly understood solely in terms of the amplification of the initial small fluctuations at large scales, but rather involve essentially the large fluctuations, associated with the discreteness of the simulated system, at the very smallest scales. We discuss the important consequences of this observation.

There are several widely used types of cosmological NBS (Hockney and Eastwood, (1981)): ‘particle-mesh’ ($`PM`$), ‘particle-particle, particle-mesh’ ($`P^3M`$), ‘adaptive mesh refinement’ and tree codes. The Virgo consortium’s NBS are of the adaptive $`P^3M`$ type, and our discussion here applies directly only to this type of NBS. The difference between the various methods has to do with how the gravitational force acting on a particle is modelled. The $`PM`$ type computes the force from a potential calculated on a mesh, typically of the same size as the initial mean interparticle separation, while the $`P^3M`$ and other methods add to this the direct contribution to the force from particles on scales smaller than this distance. With either algorithm the relation between the simulated system and the physical system which one is attempting to model - CDM particles evolving under their self-gravity - is not at all evident. In NBS the mass of the ‘particles’ is (very) macroscopic, typically of the order of a galaxy mass, and not the microscopic mass of a CDM particle. $`PM`$ NBS attempt to reproduce a treatment of the CDM as a continuous fluid, with the ‘particle’ putatively representing an element of the fluid. The other methods of NBS effectively describe the dynamics of point particles interacting through gravity in an expanding Universe. In particular for $`P^3M`$ the ‘particle-mesh’ part in the sum of the gravitational force can be understood simply as a sufficiently accurate and efficient numerical way of calculating the force due to points outside the mesh cell, inside of which the force is calculated exactly with a smoothed $`1/r`$ potential. This latter smoothing can be understood as an effective ‘smearing’ of the particles like in $`PM`$, but now at a characteristic scale $`\epsilon `$ which, as we will see further below, is always much smaller than the mesh size. Physical results are assumed to be those independent of this smoothing scale, and in fact it can be understood as a purely numerical artefact introduced to avoid the divergence of the numerical time step in the integration of the equations of motions.

In the cosmological context $`P^3M`$ algorithms have been widely used (Jenkins et al., (1998); Davis et al., (1985); Efsthathiou et al., (1987)) because they allow a much greater range of spatial resolution while remaining numerically feasible. Despite its evident importance the central issue of how this or indeed the $`PM`$ type of NBS describe CDM has received surprisingly little attention in the literature. Those few studies which have been undertaken of some of these issues (Melott, (1990); Khulman, Melott & Shandarin, (1986); Splinter et al., (1998)) clearly support the idea that discreteness can be very important indeed (although possibly less so in $`PM`$ simulations with a mesh size well above the interparticle separation). Our aim here is not to try to resolve this general question. Rather we are interested in understanding what the dynamics is which gives rise to the correlated structure in the non-linear regime which is observed to emerge in $`P^3M`$ NBS, which as we have remarked are simply simulations of self-gravitating particles subject to some particular initial perturbations.

Usually the main instrument for characterising the evolution of structure in NBS is the power spectrum $`P(k)=|\delta (k)|^2`$ where $`\delta (k)`$ is the Fourier transform (FT) of the density contrast field. In NBS it is calculated by assigning a local mass density on a grid, and then performing a fast FT. Here our approach is to look directly at real space quantities, calculated directly from the unsmoothed particle distributions. Given what we have said about the nature of the $`P^3M`$ NBS, this is a reasonable, and, as we will see, instructive approach. It is the one used in a recent study (Bottaccio et al., (2002)) through NBS of gravitational dynamics in a purely Newtonian (non-expanding) system of particles with Poissonian IC. In this case the method has been used to establish the essential role played by particle fluctuations in the formation of structures.

We have analyzed three cosmological NBS performed by the Virgo consortium (Jenkins et al., (1998)). They are all CDM models with $`N=256^3`$ particles and gravitational force smoothing length $`\epsilon =0.036Mpc/h`$ 111 With this smoothing the force is $`53.6\%`$ of the true $`1/r^2`$ force at $`\epsilon `$ and more than $`99\%`$ at $`2\epsilon `$ (Jenkins et al., (1998)).. They all have the same value of the cosmological parameters, with in particular total mass density $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$. The first two NBS, which we refer to as S-I and S-II, are of the “standard” CDM type, differing only in their resolution (number density): For S-I the volume $`V`$ of the simulation is a cube of side $`L=239.5Mpc/h`$, while for S-II $`L=84.5Mpc/h`$. The third NBS, S-III, is the same as S-I, except that its IC are (slightly) different as they are those prescribed by a $`\tau `$CDM model. In S-I and S-III each particle then represents a mass of $`m_p=2.27\times 10^{11}`$ solar masses while in S-II $`m_p=1.0\times 10^{10}`$. In S-I and S-III we find that the initial mean interparticle separation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i1Mpc/h`$, while in S-II $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i0.33Mpc/h`$. Hence $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i\epsilon `$ in all three NBS as noted above. The NBS are all run from a red-shift of $`z=50`$ until today ($`z=0`$), i.e. for a time which is essentially the age of the Universe 222In these matter dominated cosmologies the time is given by $`t=t_o/(1+z)^{3/2}`$ where $`t_o`$ is the age of the Universe today.. This means that the time of evolution is essentially one dynamical time $`\tau _{dyn}1/\sqrt{G\rho }`$, where the latter is simply the characteristic time scale associated with a mass density $`\rho =Nm_p/V`$. A particle typically moves by a distance of order the lattice spacing in this time.

Let us first consider S-I. The first statistic we consider is the conditional density (Sylos Labini, Montuori and Pietronero, (1998); Gabrielli, Joyce & Sylos Labini, (2002)) given by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)=n(r)n(0)/n`$ where $`n(r)`$ is the microscopic number density. It is simply the mean density of points at a distance $`r`$ from an occupied point. It is plotted in Fig.Power-law correlation and discreteness in cosmological N-body simulations for a sequence of time slices, beginning from the initial distribution at $`z=50`$ until today. Also shown is the pre-initial ‘glass’ configuration. This pre-initial distribution (often taken as a regular lattice in NBS) is obtained by evolving the simulation with the sign of gravity reversed, which makes the particles settle down to a “uniform” configuration in which the force on each particle is very close to zero (Jenkins et al., (1998)). This distribution is very isotropic but it is still characterized by long-range order similar to that of a regular lattice (Gabrielli, Joyce & Sylos Labini, (2002)). It has correlated fluctuations at all scales, and in particular large fluctuations (of order one) at scales of order $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$. The IC of the NBS at the initial redshift $`z=50`$ are obtained by applying small (compared to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$) displacements to the points in this pre-initial distribution, the displacement field being prescribed by the power spectrum of the (continuous) theoretical model 333A real space analysis of these IC complementary to that here is given in (Baertschiger & Sylos Labini, (2002)). Very significant differences between these and those expected from the theoretical input power spectrum are found even at large scales.. The behaviour of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)`$ for the glassy configuration and these IC at $`z=50`$ are very similar. This is because the perturbations are very small in amplitude compared to the initial interparticle separation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$. The highly ordered lattice-like nature of the initial distribution is manifest: there is an excluded volume around each point so that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)`$ is negligible until very close to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$, where it shows a small peak, with some oscillation about the mean density evident corresponding to the long-range order (Gabrielli, Joyce & Sylos Labini, (2002)). When the evolution under self-gravity starts the excluded volume feature is rapidly diluted, having almost completely disappeared by $`z=3`$ ($`t=0.125t_o`$). This corresponds to the development of power-law clustering at very small scales where it was completely absent in the IC.

Let us consider what is driving this dynamics. In Fig.Power-law correlation and discreteness in cosmological N-body simulations we show, for the pre-initial and initial perturbed configuration, the mean value of the magnitude of the gravitational force on a given point due to the mass inside a sphere of radius $`R`$ centred on it. In the pre-initial distribution the force is indeed zero within the errors, as expected. In the perturbed configurations one sees that the “long-range” contribution dominates only marginally (by a factor of about three) over that coming from the nearest neighbour (NN) (Baertschiger & Sylos Labini, (2002)). On the figure is shown also the force on a point due to a single other one at a distance $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$: it is, as expected, of order the force due to the nearest points. When points move towards their NN the first contribution grows as one over the distance squared while the latter changes, supposing that the validity of linear growth of fluctuations at larger scales, in proportion to the scale factor, i.e. as $`1/(1+z)`$. Thus at $`z=5`$ we would expect the latter to grow by a factor of $`10`$ and thus the NN force to dominate below about $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i/5`$. That this is indeed the case is very clearly confirmed by considering the evolution of the NN distribution during the simulation. In the insert panel of Fig.Power-law correlation and discreteness in cosmological N-body simulations the probability that the NN of a particle lies at a distance $`r`$ is shown, again in different time slices. The initial distribution (not shown) is extremely peaked about $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$, then broadens and develops a second peak at small scales. This second peak at small scales is a clear “fingerprint” for the dominance by NN interactions: it is approximately at the scale 2$`\epsilon `$ where the force is strongly cut off by the smoothing. The build-up of neighbours around this scale is due to the fact that the force which is driving their motion feels the lower cut-off in it at this scale.

Between $`z=5`$ and $`z=3`$ we see - in this range of scales completely dominated by NN interactions - the appearance of an approximately power-law behaviour in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)`$. At $`z=3`$ the amplitude of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)`$ over most of the range $`r<\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$ is greater than the mean density so that this power law is also now seen in the normalised correlation function $`\xi (r)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)/n1`$ shown in the inset of Fig. 1. At the next time slice, at $`z=1`$, the form of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)`$ up to approximately $`0.3\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$ is almost precisely the same, being simply amplified by an order of magnitude. At the same time the power law extends slightly further before flattening from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }3n`$ to a smooth interpolation towards its asymptotic value. The evolution in the remaining two time slices is well described over the range $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)>3n`$ as a simple amplification, and translation towards larger scales, of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)`$. At the final time the power law (with exponent $`\gamma 1.7`$) extends to $`2\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$.

Let us now also consider the other NBS: S-II and S-III. In both cases we find the same qualitative evolution (see Fig.Power-law correlation and discreteness in cosmological N-body simulations) as observed in the S-I simulation in the range of scales we are discussing. The principal difference is in the dependence of the amplitude and extent of the power-law type behaviour in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)`$ as a function of time. In S-II the clustering develops more rapidly initially at small scales, while S-III lags behind relative to S-I. The reason for this difference is simply traceable to the relative amplitude of the perturbations in each case to the pre-initial distribution: S-II has the same perturbation field superimposed on a distribution with a smaller initial interparticle separation $`0.33\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$, while the perturbation field at the scale of the lattice in S-III is smaller in amplitude than in S-I. Thus it takes shorter (or longer) for the NN contribution to the force to dominate and the evolution of clustering due to these forces starts faster or slower.

Apart from this difference the evolution is however strikingly similar. Note, for example, the almost perfect superposition of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)`$ for S-III at $`z=0`$ and S-I at $`z=0.3`$. The evolution of clustering in the non-linear regime thus appears to be almost independent of the IC, except trivially as represented by the difference in amplitude. Some dependence on the IC is evident at larger scales, but it is a weak residual dependence imposing a small deviation from the power-law which is formed at and then translated from the smallest resolved scales. In Bottaccio et al. (2002) a very similar behaviour is observed in the evolution of clustering of particles by Newtonian forces, without expansion and with simple Poissonian IC. The authors give a physical interpretation of this clustering in terms of the exportation of the initial “granularity” in the distribution to larger scales through clustering. The self-similarity in time of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(r)`$ is explained as due to a coarse-graining performed by the dynamics: one supposes a NN dynamics between particle-like discrete masses, with the mass and physical scale changing as a function of time as the clustering evolves (particles forming clusters, clusters forming clusters of clusters etc.). This would appear to provide a good explanation for the behaviour observed here as well, but further theoretical work is clearly needed to establish this and find a more quantitative description.

The primary conclusion we draw from our real space analysis of the Virgo NBS is therefore that the fluctuations at the smallest scales in these NBS - i.e. those associated with the discreteness of the particles - play a central role in the dynamics of clustering in the non-linear regime. In particular the power-law type correlations appear to be built up from the initial clustering at the smallest scales. The nature of the clustering (in particular the exponent of the power-law) seems to be independent (or at most very weakly dependent on) the IC and its physical origin should therefore be explained by the dynamics of discrete self-gravitating systems. The fluid-like statistical description (Gabrielli, Joyce & Sylos Labini, (2002)) and equation of motions, which is the framework used to describe a CDM universe, do not consider the non-analytical “particle” term of noise which is represented by NN interactions. The latter as we have seen are strongly present in the NBS we have analysed and appear to play a crucial role in the formation of the correlated structures observed to emerge. It is instructive to note that, in the paradigmatic example of stochastic (homogeneous and isotropic) point processes, the Poisson distribution, the gravitational force on an average point is due very predominantly to by its NN (Chandrasekhar, (1943)). Large-scale small-amplitude density fluctuations do not give rise to a significant contribution to the force acting a point, because of symmetry: i.e. large-scale isotropy (Chandrasekhar, (1943)).

This conclusion is in disagreement with the usual interpretation given of the origin of these correlations: they are supposed to represent solely the evolution in the non-linear regime described by a set of fluid equations, with the small fluctuations of the theoretical input model as IC. The dynamics we have described is essentially dependent on the gravitational forces at the smallest resolved scale in the NBS, and the small smooth component of the force added to this by the perturbations at larger scales appears to be irrelevant in the non-linear regime. What dominates the dynamics are the large fluctuations at small scales intrinsic to the discrete pre-initial distribution, and the imposed fluctuations play only a minor role in the non-linear regime where the fluctuations are large. In cosmology the link between the IC and the “predictions” for structure formation in the non-linear regime is very important, as it is through it that one tries to constrain models using observations of galaxy distributions. Our conclusions completely change the perspective on this problem. Power-law correlations of this type are the most striking and well established feature of such distributions (Peebles, (1993); Sylos Labini, Montuori and Pietronero, (1998)). The theoretical problem of their origin therefore must deal with the apparently crucial role in their formation of an intrinsically highly fluctuating (and thus non-analytic) density field. In particular the origin of the exponent in the correlations and the dependence of the extent of such correlations on the discretization (physical or numerical) needs to be understood. In particular we note that, despite the centrality of discreteness, the clustering found in the Virgo NBS (and those of Bottaccio et al., (2002)) is almost independent of the smoothing scale $`\epsilon `$ which cuts off the force at small distances. We will be studying this and other issues in future work.

We thank M. Bottaccio, H. De Vega, R. Durrer, A. Gabrielli, A. Melott, M. Montuori, L. Pietronero and N. Sanchez for useful discussions. F.S.L. acknowledge the support of the Swiss National Science Foundation.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

We consider a scenario where the NLC  is initially built for a lower beam energy than in the nominal design. The advantage is an earlier start of machine operation at a lower cost since only part of the full linac may be initially installed. However, the linac design has to be compatible with the low energy operation and upgrade to the nominal energy. A modification of the linac lattice suitable for the low energy option is discussed. Parameters of the modified lattice and ground motion tolerances are compared with the nominal design (based on linac version May 2000).

## 2 Optics

NLC linac optics (version May 2000) and $`\beta `$ functions for a 500 GeV beam are shown in Fig. 1. The linac has three sectors consisting of FODO cells with accelerator rf-structures placed between quadrupoles. Compensation of wakefield effects requires stronger focusing at the low beam energy. This is achieved using short FODO cells in the first sector where each half-cell contains three accelerator structures. Cells in the second and third sectors are longer and contain six and nine structures per half-cell, respectively. Phase advance per cell along the first and second sectors is gradually decreased to take into account reduced wakefield effects with energy.

Let’s consider a scenario where the NLC is initially built for a lower beam energy than in the nominal design. To reduce the initial machine cost, only the last part of the nominal linac may be installed for the low energy operation. We assume that injection can be provided at the beginning of the shorter linac. A schematic of the nominal (500 GeV) and low energy (125 GeV) linacs is shown in Fig. 2. In this scenario, the low energy linac would occupy part of the third sector of the full linac where the nominal cells are long. But for a wakefield compensation the low energy cells have to be about three times shorter, as in the first sector of the linac. It is also desirable to keep the same lattice for the low and nominal energy operations to reduce the cost of upgrade.

A compromise between the low and full energy optics can be achieved by a simple modification of the nominal cell in the third sector. The original long cell which is described schematically as

$`\mathrm{F}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{D}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f},`$ (1)
where F and D are focusing and defocusing quadrupoles, can be modified by placing a quadrupole after every three accelerator structure module (3rf) to generate either three identical short cells for a low energy linac:

$`\mathrm{F}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{D}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{F}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{D}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{F}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{D}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f},`$ (2)
or one long cell for the nominal energy beam:

$`\mathrm{F}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{F}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{F}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{D}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{D}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{D}3\mathrm{r}\mathrm{f}.`$ (3)
Although the same physical quadrupoles are considered for both regimes, their strengths will be different at low and high energy. Cells in the second sector may be modified similarly, if needed.

Modifications (2)-(3) add flexibility to the linac optics, but require many more quadrupoles. Based on the original design, it is clear that the modified short cell (2) is acceptable for the low energy beam since it’s practically identical to the nominal cell in the first sector. The modified long cell (3) for the full energy beam is similar to the nominal long cell (1) except that F and D quadrupoles are split in three pieces. The quadrupole splitting increases the combined quadrupole strength $`KL`$ and slightly reduces the maximum $`\beta `$ functions.

An example of the nominal and modified long cells in the third sector is shown in Fig. 3 and 4, where the cell phase advance of 90 degrees is used. The maximum $`\beta `$ functions are about 10% lower in the modified cell (3) in Fig. 4, but the combined quadrupole strength $`KL`$ is up $``$60% compared to the nominal cell. The individual quadrupoles in (3) are a factor of two weaker and therefore may be as twice as short (for the same $`K`$) compared to the nominal quadrupoles. Linear chromaticity $`\frac{1}{4\pi }\beta KL`$ in the nominal and modified cells is about the same: -0.318 and -0.310, respectively.

Using design lattice for a 500 GeV beam (version May 2000), we estimated linac length when quadrupoles are placed after every three structures (3rf). In this case, each 12.8 inches gap between 3rf modules in the nominal design is replaced by a quadrupole with 6.275 inches space on both sides. If the original quadrupoles are used, then the modified second and third sectors would be 77.7 m and 699.5 m longer, respectively, and the full linac would be longer by 777.2 m. However, if shorter quadrupoles are used in the modified lattice, the length increase could be reduced by a half.

To generate a 500 GeV linac with a quadrupole after every three structures, we used a specially written code: “Linac\_05” . It automatically generates matched lattice for a three sector linac with F-3rf-D-3rf cells in the first sector, F-3rf-F-3rf-D-3rf-D-3rf cells in the second sector, and F-3rf-F-3rf-F-3rf-D-3rf-D-3rf-D-3rf cells in the third sector, where realistic spaces between magnets and accelerator structures are used. For an estimate, we used phase advance of 90 degrees per cell in the modified lattice. Short 12.75 inches quadrupoles were used throughout the modified linac to minimize the total length. Some other linac parameters were updated as well compared to the original design. The resultant $`\beta `$ functions are shown in Fig. 5.

Linac parameters for the original and modified lattices are listed in Table 1. The nominal linac in Table 1 also includes a 114 m post-linac diagnostic section while the modified linac does not. The main disadvantage of the modified lattice is that it requires a larger number of individual quadrupoles. However, Table 1 represents a conservative approach where both sectors 2 and 3 are modified. In principle, the nominal optics could be kept unchanged in the second sector and beginning of the third sector which would reduce the number of additional quadrupoles.

## 3 Tolerances at 500 GeV/beam

To compare alignment tolerances in the nominal and modified lattices for a 500 GeV beam, we computed effects of ground motion on beam emittance and beam jitter using the “Tolerance” code . This code analytically calculates tolerances on quadrupole and rf-structure rms displacements for 6% emittance dilution and beam jitter amplitude of 25% of beam size. An approximation is used where the entire space between quadrupoles is filled with accelerator structures. This way, the total length of structures is slightly increased and the accelerator gradient is correspondingly reduced to maintain the same energy gain. The following beam parameters were used in the tolerance calculation:

* $`3\times 10^6`$ and $`3\times 10^8`$ m for $`x`$ and $`y`$ normalized emittance, respectively
* $`1.1\times 10^{10}`$ particles per bunch
* 150 $`\mu `$m for rms bunch length
* $`1.29\times 10^{20}`$ V/C/m3 for transverse wakefield slope in the structures.

The computed tolerances are shown in Table 2. One can see that difference between the nominal and modified linac tolerances are small. Therefore, the modified lattice is acceptable for running at the full beam energy. This lattice has more optical flexibility than the nominal lattice, but at the expense of using many more quadrupoles.

## 4 Summary

We described a modification of the NLC linac lattice suitable for initial low energy beam running as well as an upgrade to the nominal energy. In this lattice, the long cells in the last segment of the linac are replaced by shorter cells with quadrupoles placed after every three rf-structures. The modification is optimal for the low energy beam running and provides acceptable ground motion tolerances at the nominal energy. The main disadvantages of the modified optics are a larger number of quadrupoles needed for a full energy beam and up to 4% longer linac.


text:
# References

Can there be quantum correlations in a mixture of

two separable states?

Aditi Sen(De)111aditi@univ.gda.pl  and Ujjwal Sen222ujjwal@univ.gda.pl

Institute of Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics, University of Gdańsk, 80-952 Gdańsk, Poland

## Abstract

We use a recently proposed measure of quantum correlations (work deficit) to measure the strength of the nonlocality of an equal mixture of two bipartite orthogonal but locally indistinguishable separable states. This gives supporting evidence of nonzero value for a separable state for this measure of nonlocality. We also show that this measure of quantum correlations places a different order on the set of states, than the good asymptotic measures of entanglement. And that such a different order imposed on two states by the work deficit and any entanglement measure cannot be explained by mixedness alone.

Quantum correlations between separated parties can exhibit quite non-intuitive properties. And the usual belief was that these non-intuitive properties are due to the entanglement between the systems that the parties share.

It would not have been surprising therefore if even orthogonal multipartite states turned out to be indistinguishable if the sharing parties were allowed to operate only locally. However it was demonstrated that there exist sets of orthogonal product multipartite states which are indistinguishable if the parties apply only local operations and communicate classically (LOCC) . This phenomenon of indistinguishability in the case of a complete orthogonal product basis has been called ‘nonlocality without entanglement’ . Further it was shown that any two orthogonal multipartite states can always be distinguished locally irrespective of the entanglement in the states . Later on it was also shown that for two nonorthogonal states, the optimal discrimination protocols in the inconclusive as well as in the conclusive cases (in certain ranges) can be implemented locally .

There is another twist to these results. Namely, the three maximally entangled states

$$\psi _1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(|00+\omega |11+\omega ^2|22\right),\psi _2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(|00+\omega ^2|11+\omega |22\right),\psi _3=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(|01+|12+|20\right)$$

(where $`\omega `$ is a nonreal cube root of unity) in $`33`$ are distinguishable locally. But if the third maximally entangled state is swapped by the product state $`|01`$, the states are indistinguishable locally . Therefore, not only is there ‘nonlocality without entanglement’, there appears to exist ‘more nonlocality with less entanglement’ . All these results seem to imply that the concept of nonlocality (in the sense of local indistinguishability of orthogonal states) is independent of entanglement.

A set of multipartite orthogonal product states which are not distinguishable locally is clearly nonlocal in some sense. It would be interesting to quantify the amount of nonlocality of the set . But since the states in the set are product, a measure of entanglement cannot be used. The average entanglement in any such set is zero.

Meanwhile it was demonstrated  that there exists two orthogonal separable mixed states in $`22`$ ($`\rho ^0`$ and $`\rho ^1`$) which are indistinguishable locally, where $`\rho ^0`$ and $`\rho ^1`$ are given by

$$\rho ^0=\frac{1}{2}P\left[|0\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|0+|1\right)\right]+\frac{1}{2}P\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|0+|1\right)|0\right]$$

and

$$\rho ^1=\frac{1}{2}P\left[|1|1\right]+\frac{1}{2}P\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|0|1\right)\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|0|1\right)\right],$$

with $`P[|\psi ]=|\psi \psi |`$. Therefore, intuitively speaking, a mixture of $`\rho ^0`$ and $`\rho ^1`$, although separable, contains traces of nonlocality. And this leads us to consider, in a quantitative way, the strength of the nonlocality that Alice and Bob possess when they share a mixture of $`\rho ^0`$ and $`\rho ^1`$. There has been recent works  proposing a measure of quantum correlations (or nonlocality), which has been indicated to be a broader notion than just entanglement. In fact, it has been argued there that an unequal mixture of the pure product states exhibiting nonlocality without entanglement  would probably have a nonzero amount of this measure of nonlocality. It would therefore be interesting to find whether a mixture of $`\rho ^0`$ and $`\rho ^1`$ has a nonzero amount of that measure.

In this paper, we show that an equal mixture of the separable states $`\rho ^0`$ and $`\rho ^1`$, has a nonzero value for the measure of quantum correlations proposed in Refs. , when we restrict to one-way classical communication. This measure of quantum correlations places a different order on the set of states than the “good” asymptotic measures of entanglement. And such different order cannot be explained by different amounts of mixedness of the states.

The proposed measure of quantum correlations (called ‘work deficit’) for any bipartite state $`\rho `$ is

$$\mathrm{}(\rho )W_tW_l.$$

$$W_t(\rho )=nS(\rho )$$

is defined as the amount of ‘work’ that can be obtained by operations on the whole system. Here $`n=\mathrm{log}_2\left(dimH\right)`$, where H is the Hilbert space on which $`\rho `$ is defined and $`S(\rho )`$ is the von Neumann entropy of $`\rho `$. On the other hand, $`W_l(\rho )`$ is defined as the amount of ‘work’ that can be obtained if $`\rho `$ is acted upon by LOCC. But since one is dealing here with entropies, care must be taken so that all entropies transferred via ancillas are accounted for. To maximize the local work $`W_l`$, one can for example consider the following strategy. Suppose the bipartite state $`\rho `$ is shared between Alice and Bob. Alice makes the projection measurement on her part of the state $`\rho `$, in some orthogonal basis $`\left\{|i\right\}`$. And let the state produced at Bob, when Alice’s outcome is $`|i`$, be $`\xi ^i`$. That is $`\xi ^i=P\left[|i_A\right]I_B\rho _{AB}P\left[|i_A\right]I_B`$, where $`I_B`$ is the identity operator of Bob’s part of the Hilbert space on which $`\rho _{AB}`$ is defined. For the outcome $`|i`$ in Alice’s measurement, the total state is transformed into $`P\left[|i_A\right]\xi _B^i`$. We can think of this whole state to be at Bob’s side, once Alice has communicated her measurement result to Bob. We can therefore be sure of extracting an amount of work equal to

$$nS\left(\frac{1}{n_A}P\left[|i\right]\xi ^i\right)$$

by using the above local protocol, where $`n_A`$ is the dimension of Alice’s Hilbert space. One can think of other strategies and we refer the reader to Refs.  for a more detailed description.

As we have already noted, this measure has been proposed to be a broader notion of nonlocality than just entanglement and it seems that there could exist separable states which produce a nonzero value of this measure of nonlocality. A potential candidate for such an effect could be a mixture of $`\rho ^0`$ and $`\rho ^1`$. For definiteness, we consider the equal mixture of $`\rho ^0`$ and $`\rho ^1`$:

$$\rho =\frac{1}{2}\rho ^0+\frac{1}{2}\rho ^1.$$
(1)
We see that $`W_t\left(\rho \right)=21.81128=0.18872`$ (upto 5 decimal places). To find $`W_l\left(\rho \right)`$, one has to optimize over all LOCC protocols. If we restrict ourselves to projection measurements on say, Alice’s side (without adding any ancilla) and consider only one-way classical communication (from Alice to Bob), then the optimization over all such protocols yields

$$W_l=21.87852=0.12148$$

The corresponding optimal $`\mathrm{}`$ is $`0.06724`$, which is positive. However one can consider positive operator valued measurements (POVM) (or what is the same, consider projection measurements after adding an ancilla (cf. )) and there seems to be no indication as to how many outcomes should be considered. One may also consider protocols with two-way classical communication. We just remark here that the structure of the state $`\rho `$ may lead one to believe that a POVM on the states $`|0`$, $`|1`$, $`(1/\sqrt{2})\left(|0+|1\right)`$ and $`(1/\sqrt{2})\left(|0|1\right)`$ would be the best POVM for extracting the highest local work $`W_l`$ (and hence optimal $`\mathrm{}`$). However this measurement (supplemented by classical communication) surprisingly yields a lower value of $`W_l=0.09215`$ than the best projection measurement (with one-way classical communication). This seems to indicate that projection measurements produce the best value for $`\mathrm{}`$ when we restrict ourselves to one-way communication. This therefore supports the conjecture made in Refs.  that there exist separable states which exhibit some form of nonlocality, by producing a nonzero value of $`\mathrm{}`$ .

If the value of work deficit $`\mathrm{}`$ is indeed nonzero for the state $`\rho `$ given in eq. (1), one can make interesting comparisons with this measure of nonlocality with other entanglement measures.

There is an interesting work by Munro et al.  trying to find a reason for the different ordering being imposed on states by the entanglement of formation  and the (maximal) amount of violation of Bell inequality  (see also  in this regard). The demonstration of Werner  that among mixed states there are ones which are entangled and yet do not violate any Bell inequality, along with the nonexistence of such a phenomenon for bipartite pure states  (see  however) seems to indicate that mixedness could explain this anomaly. This intuition has however the following problem : there are states $`\rho _1`$ and $`\rho _2`$ such that keeping their entanglement of formation ($`E_F`$) equal,

$$E_F(\rho _1)=E_F(\rho _2),$$

but with

$$B(\rho _1)>B(\rho _2)$$

($`B`$ being the amount of violation of Bell inequality), one can have both

$$S(\rho _1)>S(\rho _2)$$

as well as

$$S(\rho _1)<S(\rho _2),$$

where $`S`$ is either the von Neumann or the linearised entropy . Further results were obtained in Ref. .

If the value of the work deficit $`\mathrm{}`$ is nonzero for the state $`\rho `$ (of eq. (1)), it is possible to make such an exercise to see the role played by mixedness in an ordering of states by $`\mathrm{}`$ and the measures of entanglement.

Let us take

$$\rho _1=P[a|00+|11];\rho _2=\rho $$

where $`ab0`$.

As $`\rho _1`$ is always entangled while $`\rho _2`$ is a separable state, we have

$$E(\rho _1)>E(\rho _2),$$
(2)
with respect to any measure of entanglement $`E`$. Suppose now that the work deficit $`\mathrm{}`$ for the state $`\rho _2=\rho `$ is nonzero, as we had tried to argue in this paper.

Now for pure states the work deficit is exactly equal to the unique asymptotic measure of entanglement for pure states . And for the class $`a|00+b|11`$, this entanglement (and therefore the work deficit) ranges continuously from $`0`$ to $`1`$. Therefore there are different examples of the pair $`\{\rho _1,\rho _2\}`$ (for different values of $`a`$ and $`b`$), for which

$$\mathrm{}(\rho _1)>\mathrm{}(\rho _2)$$

as well as

$$\mathrm{}(\rho _1)<\mathrm{}(\rho _2)$$

holds.

But $`\rho _1`$ has zero mixedness and so

$$S(\rho _1)<S(\rho _2)$$

with respect to any measure of mixedness.

Hence a different order between two states as given by their work deficits and the value of any entanglement measure cannot be explained by their different amounts of mixedness.

Note that the preceeding discussion cannot hold for separable states which does not have a nonzero value of the work deficit.

Note 1: Note here that for eq. (2) to be true, the entanglement $`E`$ can be any measure of entanglement, asymptotic or non-asymptotic.

Note 2: The above discussion shows, somewhat surprisingly, that the work deficit of an entangled state can be sometimes smaller than the work deficit for a separable state.

The previous discussion shows that in a specific case, the order of entanglement between two states, does not imply any definite order among their work deficit. And the considerations were essentially of a restricted nature due to the fact that we were able to consider the work deficit only in the situation where one-way classical communication is allowed (see the note added at the end). However we will now show that such a consideration can be made generic by extending the arguments in Ref. , even in the case of asymptotic work deficit under two-way classical communication (two-way work deficit).

Suppose that

$$(\varrho _1)(\varrho _2)\mathrm{}(\varrho _1)\mathrm{}(\varrho _2)$$
(3)
is true for arbitrary states $`\varrho _1`$ and $`\varrho _2`$. Here $``$ denotes any measure of entanglement which is defined for all states and reduces to von Neumann entropy of the single-party reduced density matrix for pure states. In particular, $``$ can be any “good” asymptotic measure of entanglement (see for example ). And $`\mathrm{}`$ is now the asymptotic two-way work deficit (where even POVMs are considered in the local measurements). Then following the argument in Ref.  (and remembering the fact that asymptotic two-way work deficit is equal to von Neumann entropy of local density martices, in the case of pure states ), one obtains that the condition in eq. (3) for arbitrary states $`\varrho _1`$ and $`\varrho _2`$, implies that (and also is implied by)

$$(\varrho )=\mathrm{}(\varrho ),$$
(4)
for all states $`\varrho `$. For mixed states, work deficit is potentially a different measure of quantum correlations than the measures of “entanglement”. In fact, in this paper, we have tried to argue for this conjecture. In any case, there are good asymptotic measures of entanglement, which differ for mixed states, although they coincide on pure states. For example, distillable entanglement and entanglement cost are provably different for certain states . Two-way work deficit cannot of course be equal to both of them. So there are examples of $`\varrho `$ and $``$ for which the relation in eq. (4) cannot hold. Correspondingly, there will exist examples of pairs, $`\{\varrho _1,\varrho _2\}`$, for which the relation in eq. (3).

To conclude, we have discussed on the possible nonzero value of a recently proposed measure of quantum correlations (work deficit) for an equal mixture of two separable states. These separable states are orthogonal (mixed) states (in $`22`$) and yet they are locally indistinguishable. The discussion gives supportive evidence to the conjecture that there exist separable states which possess a nonzero amount of nonlocality . We also show that a different order is imposed on the set of states by “good” asymptotic measures of entanglement and work deficit. And such different order cannot be explained by the different amounts of mixedness in the states.

Note added:

After completing this work, we have shown  that the amount of work deficit with one-way classical communication (one-way work deficit) for mixtures of Bell states (in $`22`$) is additive. Therefore the asymptotic one-way work deficit is equal to the single-copy one-way work deficit for such states. Furthermore, the optimal value of one-way work deficit for mixtures of Bell states, is attained for projection-valued measurements (applied only on the system, i.e., ancillas are not required). The equal mixture of two separable states $`\rho `$ (of eq. (1)) considered in this paper, is a mixture of Bell states upto local unitary transformations. Work deficit (one-way or two-way) is invariant under local unitary transformations. Therefore the value of one-way work deficit ($`0.06724`$) for the state $`\rho `$, obtained in this paper by considering only a single copy of the state and optimizing over projection measurements only, is actually the asymptotic work deficit by one-way classical communication (where POVMs are also included in the measurement before the classical communication).

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge useful discussions with David. P. DiVincenzo and Barbara M. Terhal (during the European Research Conference on Quantum Information at San Feliu de Guixols, Spain, March 2002), Sibasish Ghosh, Karol Horodecki, Michał Horodecki, Paweł Horodecki, Ryszard Horodecki and Jonathan Oppenheim. This work is supported by the EU Project EQUIP Contract No. IST-1999-11053 and by the University of Gdańsk, Grant No. BW/5400-5-0236-2.


text:
# Color Glass Condensate at RHIC ?

## I Introduction

Perturbative (short-distance) QCD predicts a double-logarithmic distribution of gluons in a hadron or nucleus at small $`x`$ (i.e., at rapidities far away from the valence quarks): $`dN_gdk_{}^2/k_{}^2dx/x`$. This result, however, is derived in the dilute limit where some effects, like gluon recombination, have been neglected. Therefore, as $`k_{}`$ decreases, the DGLAP approximation should eventually become invalid, and the predicted rise of the gluon density should flatten out.

Namely, at large distances (though still much smaller than the confinement scale) the non-linear terms in the Yang-Mills equations tame the growth of the color charge density in hadrons  as compared to the power-law growth predicted by the linearized DGLAP theory. The gluon density should saturate at distances where the color charge density $`\rho ^a`$ per unit transverse area becomes of order $`1/g^2`$, where $`g`$ is the coupling, and where therefore QCD-evolution becomes genuinely non-perturbative. Such large occupation numbers are characteristic of a condensate, and so classical methods may be useful in determining the color field in a hadron or nucleus at small $`x`$, i.e. at high density  (the “saturation effect” is expected to show up in large nuclei much “earlier”, at larger $`x`$, than for protons). The local color charge density is a stochastic variable (fluctuating randomly as one moves around in the transverse plane) and observables eventually have to be averaged over some distribution of $`\rho ^a`$. This is analogous to spin glasses, and hence the name “Color Glass Condensate”  for the structure of a nucleus at small $`x`$.

The Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collider (RHIC) at BNL is dedicated to the study of high-energy hadronic interactions, from $`p+p`$ over $`p+A`$ to $`A+B`$ collisions. One of the important issues to settle is whether the above-mentioned gluon saturation scale $`Q_s`$ at the values of $`x`$ that are relevant at RHIC energy is in fact (substantially) larger than the QCD confinement scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Optimistic estimates  do indeed yield $`Q_s^2(y=0)2`$ GeV2 for central Au+Au collisions at RHIC, that is $`Q_s^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }^250`$. If so, then perturbative estimates of particle production at leading twist  can not be employed to compute the dominant part of the inelastic cross section because one needs to resum all powers of $`\alpha _s`$ times the charge density squared per unit of transverse area (“higher twists”). In other words, particle production will be dominated by the decay of the classical non-abelian field, except at very short distances (truly high $`p_t`$) where gluon occupation numbers are small and one enters the region of applicability of perturbation theory. The initial conditions for the subsequent evolution, which possibly proceeds through a so-called Quark-Gluon Plasma, then have to be obtained from the Color Glass Condensate model . On the other hand, if it turns out that at RHIC energy $`Q_s`$ is not substantially larger than $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, as some conservative estimates indicate , then this means that leading-twist perturbation theory is safe at RHIC, and that it can be employed to describe the bulk of particle production . To understand particle multiplicities and energy densities in the central region one does not need to consider the soft classical field then .

Naturally, as RHIC started operation with collisions of gold ions, theoretical studies focused on the energy and centrality dependence of particle production from the CGC model versus that from leading twist perturbation theory with fixed infrared cutoff $`p_02`$ GeV . Within the CGC model, a rather mild increase of $`\mathrm{d}N_{ch}/\mathrm{d}\eta `$ both with centrality (or the number of participants) and with energy is expected. In contrast, phase space for particle production at $`p_{}>p_0`$ rapidly opens up in perturbation theory, and so the growth is faster. The energy dependence of particle production at RHIC turns out to be quite weak , approximately consistent with saturation models . However, to my opinion it is hard for both saturation models and soft-hard two-component models to make absolute predictions on the 10-20% level (at present), which would be required to falsify one or the other model using just the limited energy range of RHIC. Similar concerns apply to the centrality dependence of particle production . This observable is plagued in particular by the uncertainties in determining experimentally the number of participants for large impact parameter collisions. In that respect, it would be cleaner to determine $`\mathrm{d}N_{ch}/\mathrm{d}\eta /N_{part}`$ by using only central collisions but varying the mass number of the colliding nuclei. Of course, this will not be available within the near future, although it is doable in principle at RHIC, which can collide essentially any ions from $`p`$ to $`Au`$.

Is it possible then to verify or falsify the gluon saturation in nuclei at RHIC energies ? I think a good opportunity for that exists in $`pA`$ since protons are likely quite dilute at RHIC energy, while saturation may occur for large nuclei . In that case, distinct signatures emerge in the transverse momentum and rapidity distributions of secondaries, which are correlated (and so can be tested experimentally without necessarily relying on absolute predictions). Also, one might be able to test various scalings of observables like $`\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}y`$, $`p_{}`$ and so on. More detailed observables like the $`p_{}`$-broadening of minijets at forward rapidities , or diffractive single-jet production  may as well provide deeper insight.

## II Proton-Nucleus Collisions

$`pA`$ collisions at high energy are very interesting because one can actually compute the total multiplicity analytically , and also make some predictions for transverse momentum spectra and the scaling of $`p_{}`$ with the produced multiplicity $`dN/dy`$.

The key point is that the color charge density per unit transverse area is much smaller in a proton than in a big nucleus. Therefore, the saturation momentum of the proton is much smaller than that of the nucleus, $`Q_s^{(1)}Q_s^{(2)}`$. At $`p_{}Q_s^{(2)}`$ the fields of both the proton and of the nucleus are weak, and so one expects that ordinary perturbation theory is applicable. In particular, to compute single-inclusive gluon production at high $`p_{}`$ the well-known expressions from collinear factorization (with DGLAP evolution) can be employed.

On the other hand, the inelastic cross section (particle production) is dominated by the kinematic region $`Q_s^{(1)}<p_{}<Q_s^{(2)}`$. In that regime, the field of the proton is still weak, and so can be treated within perturbation theory; but the field of the nucleus is in the non-linear regime, and one must resum interactions of the radiated gluons with the background field of the nucleus to all orders. A simple way to understand why is to realize that while each additional gluon “line” from the produced gluon to the nuclear field comes with an additional power of the coupling $`\alpha _s`$, the occupation numbers of the nuclear field at (or below) the scale $`Q_s^{(2)}`$ are of order $`1/\alpha _s`$, and so additional “rescatterings” are not suppressed by powers of the coupling constant.

The calculation of gluon production essentially consists then of solving the Yang-Mills equations in the forward light-cone to all orders in the background field of the nucleus, but to leading order in the field of the weak proton. From the Fourier transform of the field at asymptotic times one reads off the amplitudes of the modes, which are then squared and averaged over the color charge distributions in the proton and in the nucleus, using a Gaussian weight . Finally, this leads to the gluon distribution

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}^2b\mathrm{d}^2k_{}\mathrm{d}y}=2g^2\chi _1(y)\frac{N_c^21}{(2\pi )^4}\mathrm{d}^2u_{}\underset{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}^2}{}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2p_{}}{2\pi }\frac{e^{i(p_{}k_{})u_{}}}{p_{}^2}\mathrm{exp}\left\{g^4N_c\gamma (u_{})\chi _2(y)\right\},$$
(1)
with

$$\gamma (x_{})=\underset{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}^2}{}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2q_{}}{(2\pi )^2}\frac{e^{iq_{}x_{}}}{q_{}^4}$$
(2)
the gluon propagator. $`\chi _i(y)`$ denote the effective densities of color charge as “seen” by the gluon produced at rapidity $`y`$. It is the integrated charge density of either one of the sources, from its beam rapidity down to $`y`$. Note that (1) is linear in $`\chi _1`$ but resums all orders in $`\chi _2`$. A numerical evaluation of the above result has not yet been performed, mainly because one needs to determine the dependence of $`\chi _2`$ on rapidity . One can nevertheless gain some insight by considering two limits. Namely, at asymptotically large $`k_{}`$, the exponential can be expanded to first non-trivial order, leading to the well-known pQCD result

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}^2b\mathrm{d}^2k_{}\mathrm{d}y}=\frac{4g^6N_c(N_c^21)}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{\chi _1(y)\chi _2(y)}{k_{}^4}\mathrm{log}\frac{k_{}}{Q_s^{(2)}},$$
(3)
where we introduced the shorthand notation $`Q_s^{(1,2)}(y)\sqrt{g^4N_c\chi _{1,2}(y)/8\pi }`$ . Thus, one recovers the standard perturbative $`\alpha _s^3/k_{}^4`$ behavior at very high $`k_{}`$, with a logarithmic correction analogous to DGLAP evolution. Note that $`\chi _1`$, $`\chi _2`$ scale as $`A_1^{1/3}`$ and $`A_2^{1/3}`$ , respectively , while the integral over $`\mathrm{d}^2b`$ gives a factor of $`\pi R_2^2A_2^{2/3}`$. Therefore, in this kinematic region $`\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}^2k_{}\mathrm{d}y`$ scales like $`A_1^{1/3}A_2`$, up to logarithmic corrections. This holds also for the integrated distribution $`\mathrm{d}N(k_{}>p_0)/\mathrm{d}y`$ above some fixed $`A_2`$-independent scale $`p_0`$, as in the soft-hard two-component model. On the other hand, when integrating over $`k_{}`$ from $`Q_s^{(2)}`$ to infinity, the contribution from large $`k_{}`$ to the rapidity density is

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}^2b\mathrm{d}y}=\frac{g^2(N_c^21)}{\pi ^2}\chi _1(y).$$
(4)
Again, the integral over $`\mathrm{d}^2b`$ gives a factor $`\pi R_2^2A_2^{2/3}`$, and so $`\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}y`$ scales like $`A_1^{1/3}A_2^{2/3}`$.

On the other hand, when $`Q_s^{(1)}(y)k_{}Q_s^{(2)}(y)`$, one finds that

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}^2b\mathrm{d}^2k_{}\mathrm{d}y}2g^2\chi _1(y)\frac{N_c^21}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{1}{k_{}^2}\mathrm{log}\frac{k_{}}{Q_s^{(1)}(y)}.$$
(5)
This form $`\alpha _s\chi _1/k_{}^2`$ is to be compared with that from eq. (3), $`\alpha _s^3\chi _1\chi _2/k_{}^4`$, valid at high $`k_{}`$. A schematic distribution in transverse momentum is shown in Fig. 1.

Although the figure does not provide a quantitative prediction for experiments at RHIC, one should notice non-trivial features. It is predicted that when strong-field effects set in around $`Q_s^{(2)}`$, the $`k_{}`$ distribution of secondaries flattens. Not only does the scaling with $`A_2`$ differ in the two regimes, as mentioned above, but more importantly the “turnover” point $`Q_s^{(2)}(y)`$ is a function of rapidity ! Experimentally, one can thus take the rapidity dependence of the saturation momentum from a parametrization of HERA data , which also seems to fit the observed rapidity dependence of $`\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}y`$ from $`Au+Au`$ at RHIC , and test whether the turnover in the transverse momentum distribution from fig. 1 moves as one changes the rapidity in a way consistent with those parametrizations.

From (5), the $`k_{}`$-integrated multiplicity in the nonperturbative regime $`Q_s^{(1)}(y)k_{}Q_s^{(2)}(y)`$ is

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}^2b\mathrm{d}y}=g^2\chi _1(y)\frac{N_c^21}{(2\pi )^2}\mathrm{log}^2\frac{Q_s^{(2)}(y)}{Q_s^{(1)}(y)}.$$
(6)
Thus, at fixed impact parameter, the multiplicity scales as $`A_1^{1/3}`$, up to the square of a logarithm of $`(A_2/A_1)^{1/3}`$.

The average transverse momentum in the saturation regime is given by

$$k_{}=2Q_s^{(2)}\frac{\xi 1\mathrm{log}\xi }{\mathrm{log}^2\xi },$$
(7)
where $`\xi (y)=Q_s^{(1)}(y)/Q_s^{(2)}(y)`$. From dimensional considerations, it has been suggested  that in symmetric $`A+A`$ collisions, and at central rapidity, $`k_{}^2`$ scales with the multiplicity per unit of transverse area and of rapidity, $`k_{}^2\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}^2b\mathrm{d}y`$. A similar scaling relation can be derived from eqs. (6,7) for the asymmetric case,

$$k_{}^2\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}^2b\mathrm{d}y}\frac{g^2}{\xi ^2}\frac{\left(\xi 1\mathrm{log}\xi \right)^2}{\mathrm{log}^6\xi }.$$
(8)
Thus, $`k_{}^2`$ is proportional to the multiplicity per unit of rapidity and transverse area, times a function of the ratio of the saturation momenta. If source one is very much weaker than source two, i.e. in the limit $`|\mathrm{log}\xi |1\xi `$, the third factor on the right-hand-side of (8) depends on $`\mathrm{log}\xi `$ only. Neglecting that dependence, and assuming as before that $`\chi _{1,2}`$ are proportional to $`A_{1,2}^{1/3}`$, one has the approximate scaling relation

$$k_{}^2\left(\frac{A_2}{A_1}\right)^{1/3}\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}^2b\mathrm{d}y}\left(\frac{1}{A_1A_2}\right)^{1/3}\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}.$$
(9)
In practice though one expects significant corrections to the simple scaling relation (9), as given by eq. (8). $`pA`$ collisions provide a natural testing ground for the scaling of $`p_{}`$ with $`\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}y`$ since distortions of the above scaling relations from final-state interactions (“hydrodynamic expansion”) should not be a major issue.

For rapidities far from the fragmentation region of the large nucleus, and for $`Q_s^{(1)}(y)k_{}Q_s^{(2)}(y)`$, $`\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}^2k_{}\mathrm{d}y`$ varies with rapidity like

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}y}\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}^2k_{}\mathrm{d}y}g^2\chi _1^{}(y).$$
(10)
Thus, an experimental measure for the evolution of the CGC density parameter in rapidity is

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}^2k_{}\mathrm{d}y}{\mathrm{d}y}=\frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{log}\chi _1(y)}{\mathrm{d}y}.$$
(11)
Now consider the case of high $`k_{}Q_s^{(2)}(y)`$ described by eq. (3). In that regime the rapidity distribution is proportional to $`\chi _1(y)\chi _2(y)`$, and so $`\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}^2k_{}`$ varies with rapidity like

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}^2k_{}\mathrm{d}y}{\mathrm{d}y}=\frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{log}\chi _1(y)}{\mathrm{d}y}+\frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{log}\chi _2(y)}{\mathrm{d}y}.$$
(12)
Subtracting (11) from (12) provides an experimental measure for the renormalization-group evolution of $`\chi _2(y)`$. This does not only provide an independent verification of the HERA fits , but also a consistency check on how the turnover point (where the distribution flattens) from fig. 1 moves as one goes to different rapidity ! In table I I have listed a few scaling relations of various quantities.

In fact, the results obtained above may even be relevant for collisions of equal-size nuclei, like $`Au+Au`$. Namely, if we consider a collision at non-zero impact parameter, as shown in fig. 2, it is easy to realize that near point A in that figure the situation is precisely the one considered above for $`pA`$ collisions: a low-density projectile colliding with a high-density target.

From the discussion above, the $`k_{}`$ distribution of gluons produced in the impact is harder near point A than near point B, due to saturation effects in the target. Now, if those gluons suffer from radiative energy loss as they interact with each other, it is clear that a detector positioned at the top of the page will detect less momentum flowing into it than a detector positioned at the right of the page. Thus, radiative energy loss will generate an azimuthal asymmetry

$$v_2(p_{})=\frac{p_{}^2p_{}^2}{p_{}^2}$$
(13)
at transverse momenta on the order of a few GeV . The point here is that $`v_2`$ will be larger if the $`p_{}`$-distribution of produced gluons is harder at A than at B as compared to the case when $`\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}^2p_{}`$ is the same at A and B. This might be important for understanding the large values of $`v_2`$ measured by STAR at RHIC at $`p_{}26`$ GeV , as it has been pointed out that large energy loss by itself (assuming the same $`p_{}`$-distribution throughout the overlap zone in fig. 2) does not lead to large enough $`v_2`$ , in particular for semi-central events (10% centrality class). Quantitative computations of $`v_2`$ from the gluon saturation model are presently under way .

So far, all attempts to understand the large $`v_2`$ at high-$`p_{}`$ invoke radiative parton energy loss

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E\frac{3\alpha _s}{\pi }E_{cr}\mathrm{log}\frac{2E}{Lm_{\mathrm{}}^2}.$$
(14)
Here, $`L`$ is the typical length of the medium traversed by the jet, $`m_{\mathrm{}}`$ is the IR cutoff provided by the mass of static electric gluons, $`E>E_{cr}`$ is the jet energy, and $`E_{cr}=m_{\mathrm{}}^2L^2/\lambda `$. $`\mathrm{\Delta }E/E`$ depends on the density of the medium via the mean-free path $`\lambda `$ of the radiation. Going down in $`\sqrt{s}`$, presumably this should reduce $`v_2`$ at high $`p_{}`$ (in the sense that the leading-twist prediction $`v_2=0`$ should be approached faster). Is this the case ?

Finally, if indeed $`v_2`$ at $`p_{}=26`$ GeV is generated by final-state interactions of the minijets, it might be sensitive to nearly critical scattering at $`T_c`$ , which would evidently be very exciting. QCD with 3 colors is not an ideal gas near $`T_c`$; rather, the pressure $`p(T)`$ is significantly smaller than the ideal-gas pressure $`p_{id}(T)`$. The transition from confinement to deconfinement appears to be nearly a second order transition , in which case $`(m_{\mathrm{}}/T)^2\sqrt{p/p_{id}}`$ drops rapidly as $`T_c`$ is approached from above . This behavior is quite different from a strong first-order transition, and can enhance energy loss (and $`v_2`$) near $`T_c`$.

## III Conclusions

$`Au+Au`$ collisions from RHIC may have offered a first glance at gluon saturation effects in large nuclei: experimentally, the energy and centrality dependence of particle production is quite weak. However, in my opinion it is too early yet to draw definite conclusions from the $`Au`$-runs at $`\sqrt{s}=130`$ AGeV and 200 AGeV. Collisions at lower energy and in particular with different projectile/target combinations should be analyzed in the future. Collisions of small projectiles on large targets, for which I use the generic acronym “pA”, could reveal distinct scaling laws predicted by the Color Glass Condensate model.

## Acknowledgement(s)

Support from DOE Grant DE-AC02-98CH10886 is gratefully acknowledged. I would like to thank M. Gyulassy, J. Jalilian-Marian, D. Kharzeev, L. McLerran, D. Teaney, and R. Venugopalan for many stimulating discussions. Many thanks also to the organizers of this very pleasant workshop for inviting me to present this work.