text:
# Programmable Logic Devices in Experimental Quantum Optics

## I Introduction

Automatic controllers are pervasive in experimental physics. Servos typically play a role behind the scenes, stabilizing environmental conditions (e.g. temperature, frequency and amplitude of driving lasers) for the physical system of primary interest (e.g. quantum dots, trapped atoms or molecules). But the system of interest can itself be the explicit object of sophisticated control strategies. An increasing number of experimental quantum systems are developing to the point where coherent dynamics occur at a time scale longer than that of available detectors and actuators ion ; acm ; bec . This separation of time scales opens the door for real-time feedback control to be applied in quantum-mechanical scenarios.

New theoretical and experimental tools will be required to achieve quantum control objectives. Concerted efforts are currently being made to extend classical control theory to quantum problems where back-action cannot be ignored doherty ; adphi . Given the inherent nonlinearity of conditional quantum dynamics, optimal control laws cannot be practically implemented with analog circuits, necessitating fast digital control. Even for linear systems, programmable logic may be superior to analog methods when a precisely shaped transfer function is desired. For these reasons, one expects that programmable logic devices (PLD) with high processing speed and low latency will prove to be invaluable as quantum and classical controllers.

PLD’s are already a standard tool in industry and some areas of science, but they have yet to attain widespread use in fields such as quantum optics and quantum information science. Our aim in this paper will be to convey a base level of knowledge required to use these devices in representative experimental setups. First, we motivate the use of programmable logic with some potential applications. We then describe the details of practical implementation, from determining the required hardware specifications to completing the design flow. Finally, we demonstrate this process with a familiar example of classical optical control by using a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) to lock a Fabry-Perot cavity.

## II Applications

An outstanding feature of PLD’s is that they can implement complex non-linear logic with relatively low latency. Here ‘latency’ refers to the delay between the time that a signal is received as input and the time that a calculation based on it becomes available as output. This reaction time is of little consequence in many data-processing applications, but is critical in control loops. The control bandwidth of any servo is limited by the inverse of this delay.

In addition, most PLD’s can be completely re-programmed in a matter of minutes, allowing for a high degree of design flexibility in experimental situations. Given a PLD with these capabilities, it is not difficult to imagine a variety of control applications related to quantum optics. Here we summarize a few potential examples, some of which are currently being developed.

### II.1 Precise linear servos

In linear control tasks, PLD controllers have a distinct practical advantage over analog circuitry with regard to precision and flexibility. For example, it is a well known control problem to stabilize a plant over one of its resonances. An appropriate controller should precisely compensate the measured center frequency and quality factor of the resonance. When creating an analog servo the designer must work with discrete components (resistors, capacitors, etc.) whose impedances have a non-negligible error range. However a PLD transfer function can be specified digitally, making it much easier to closely match the system dynamics.

Figure 1 shows the near-compensation of a harmonic oscillator (HO) resonance with a PLD ‘anti-harmonic-oscillator’ (AHO) transfer function. (Actually, both transfer functions in the graph are implemented with a PLD by techniques described later.) Ideally, the HO transfer function will be transformed into an integrator transfer function (with a constant -90 degrees of phase) when multiplied by the AHO compensator. The deviation from a perfect integrator is due to a slight error in the assumed damping. Refinements to the AHO design could remove this non-ideality.

PLD’s will obviously not replace every linear servo in the typical laboratory, but the ability to optimize the stability of critical laser systems (for example) is a considerable resource. We detail the use of a PLD controller to optimally perform a linear control task in a later section.

### II.2 Optimal measurement

In quantum feedback scenarios, either the measurement operators or the system Hamiltonian can be modulated in real time according to the information gained from a continuous measurement record.

Consider the case where only the measurement operators are adjusted. The goal of the entire measurement may be to most accurately determine the initial state of the system. Other situations may call for the measurement of only a single state parameter, where all other state variables are either assumed or neglected. The authors are currently developing a system of this type where the goal is to optimally measure the phase of a single pulse of light. We constrain ourselves to measuring pulses that are long enough to have their phase be well defined and also long enough to allow us to feedback the measurement signal multiple times before the pulse has been completely destroyed by the detectors.

Wiseman *et al.* have determined close-to-optimal measurement schemes for this system based on quantum trajectory theory adphi . In short, they consider the signal to be measured in an adaptive homodyne set-up where the pulse is mixed with a strong local oscillator whose phase, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, is continuously adjusted (within the duration of each pulse) according to the measured homodyne current, $`I`$. To first order, the job of the algorithm is to lock to the side of the interference fringe, thus $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is adjusted until $`I`$ is zero.

Despite this simplistic description, the general optimal algorithm ($`f:I\mathrm{\Phi }`$) is a highly non-linear function based on state estimation. It has been shown that the estimated state at any time is a function of only two parameters and the initial conditions. In terms of a scaled time $`v`$, the parameters are

$`A_v={\displaystyle _0^v}I(u)e^{i\mathrm{\Phi }(u)}𝑑u`$ (1)
$`B_v={\displaystyle _0^v}e^{2i\mathrm{\Phi }(u)}𝑑u`$ (2)
The phase of the local oscillator is usually taken to be $`\mathrm{\Phi }(v)=\widehat{\varphi }(v)+\frac{\pi }{2}`$ where $`\widehat{\varphi }(v)`$ is the phase estimate to be used during the course of feedback. If one were to stop the feedback at any time, the best phase estimate would be $`\widehat{\varphi }_C(v)=arg(C_v)`$ where $`C_v=A_vv+B_vA_v^{}`$. However, for subtle reasons, $`\widehat{\varphi }_C(v)`$ should not be used as the estimate during the course of the feedback.

One simple algorithm uses $`\widehat{\varphi }(v)=arg(A_v)`$. With this choice, the algorithm simply reduces to a gain-scheduled integrator of the form

$$d\mathrm{\Phi }(v)=\frac{I(v)}{\sqrt{v}}$$
(3)
where $`v`$ is the time since the beginning of the pulse and the $`\sqrt{v}`$ factor represents the effective gain. Currently, this algorithm is being implemented with an FPGA that creates the $`\sqrt{v}`$ gain factor with a look-up table representation of the function as described in a later section.

More sophisticated algorithms (with optimal performance for certain squeezed states) have been proposed that use feedback of the form

$$\widehat{\varphi }(v)=arg(C_v^{1ϵ(v)}A_v^{ϵ(v)})$$
(4)
where $`ϵ(v)`$ is also a function of $`A_v`$ and $`B_v`$. In this case, the algorithm is sufficiently complex that any analog implementation would be extremely difficult to design.

In any case, the non-linear, low latency behavior of PLD’s suggest that they are a suitable tool for this task. Given that the form of a desired algorithm may change frequently with the introduction of realistic experimental complications, the rapid prototyping allowed by a PLD is also extremely convenient.

### II.3 Feedback control

When the goal is control rather than optimal measurement, a non-trivial Hamiltonian of the system will be controlled by the measurement record. Consider the case of an atom drifting through the light field of a small Fabry-Perot cavity. As has been demonstrated, the position of the atom may be imprinted onto the output light of the cavity acm . This information can potentially be mapped back onto the intensity and phase of the input laser with the goal of trapping the atom in the cavity for extended periods of time trap .

Optimal control of the atom’s position will require a complex predictor-corrector structure in the feedback loop at $`\mu `$sec time scales. If the associated calculations can be sufficiently reduced, a PLD with effective clocking speeds above a MHz will be able perform this task. Of course, the effectiveness of the control algorithm will depend on the assumed dynamics of the system from which it is derived. If the system needs to be described quantum mechanically, we should institute a conditional quantum state estimator. If a classical description is sufficient, we can use a less complicated algorithm. The performance of different controllers will be a strong indicator of the validity of our descriptions. The ability to quickly re-design the PLD will be particularly advantageous when exploring this boundary.

Hamiltonian feedback can also be used to manipulate the internal states of atomic and molecular systems. Numerous groups have become interested in shaping femtosecond laser pulses to drive transitions which may be inaccessible using traditional means chem . This includes the ability to synthesize rare molecular compounds. For example, by iteratively reading the fluorescence spectrum of the system and intelligently moving in the parameter space of the pulse shape, one attempts to land at a shape conducive to creating the desired state or compound.

This procedure can happen in two regimes, ‘learning control’ or ‘feedback control’. For learning control we consider using a new sample for every pulse, whereas for feedback control we consider using the same sample on every pulse. In the latter case, the algorithm assumes that the sample has a long enough dephasing time (memory) that a significant degree of coherence is retained between pulses. For either case, especially the second, a PLD based controller may have significant advantages over alternative controller architectures.

### II.4 Decision and control for quantum information processing

In a generic quantum computing architecture, there exist classical logic steps which involve performing a coherent quantum operation conditioned on the result of a measurement. For example, quantum error correcting codes can combat decoherence by mapping measured errors to appropriate correction operators book . In an experiment, this measurement-operation procedure should be performed much faster than the dephasing rate of the system. If the operations can be performed quickly upon command, PLD’s will be able to orchestrate these codes in a reliable and reconfigurable fashion with minimal delay.

Even for non-conditional algorithms, PLD’s can streamline the implementation of complex instruction sets. In particular, groups working on ion trap computing have developed means of performing entanglement algorithms ion , but with an extensive overhead of macroscopic equipment that requires detailed manual adjustment whenever the algorithm is changed. Without pushing its computational limits, a PLD can be made to streamline such logic networks. By using software defined algorithms, the users eliminate the time and risk of error associated with manual realignment of network components. Commercial magnetic resonance systems use PLD’s for similar reasons.

As quantum computing architectures grow to the point where conditional and non-conditional algorithms must be integrated in a way that is fast and flexible, programmable logic will be able to handle the task in a convenient manner.

The success of any PLD controller will depend on its dynamic range and effective bandwidth. Next we discuss in more practical terms what levels of system performance can be reasonably expected from currently available PLD’s.

## III Design

### III.1 Hardware

Once it is determined that a control algorithm needs to be implemented digitally, a designer is confronted with a wide array of possible controllers and corresponding acronyms. In addition to PLD’s, the options include conventional microprocessor systems, DSP’s (digital signal processors), and ASIC’s (application specific integrated circuits). Of course, the choice of controller is highly dependent on the algorithm being implemented because each device has its own trade-offs. Microprocessor systems are general enough to allow for a simple means of programming complex algorithms. However, these systems rely on a single bus architecture which forms a significant bottleneck in signal processing applications. Overall throughput may be high, but a large delay limits typical controllers to slow applications with kHz scale bandwidths. In addition, unreliable operating systems may present undesirable interrupt signals during critical stages of processing. DSPs are specialized microprocessor systems with a multiple bus design that are optimized for signal processing applications. Due to their parallel architecture, DSP’s can attain low-latency performance, but require a significant degree of high-level design expertise. ASIC’s are like PLD’s in that the user designs them from the gate level, but ASIC’s are irreversibly hardwired with a single application. While PLD’s generally have fewer resources available than ASIC’s, they offer an efficient parallel computation structure along with reprogrammability and a relatively simple design process dsp .

The market for PLD’s is currently dominated by two companies: Xilinx and Altera. Devices from both companies have had extensive product development in industry, thus a substantial support network is available to designers. In choosing between PLD companies, several factors beyond the chip performance need to be considered, including the quality of the associated software environments. To obtain the maximum control bandwidth, we chose to work with a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) from Xilinx.

The logic structure of a Xilinx FPGA is designed to handle arbitrary algorithm architectures. The FPGA mostly consists of a grid with thousands of Configurable Logic Blocks (CLB) connected by programmable interconnections. Each CLB contains a few small look-up tables which can serve as a simple logic elements (AND, OR, etc) when programmed. Also interspersed in this grid are larger blocks of RAM that can be programmed as user defined functions with a large domain and range. Since each logic element needs to be triggered to operate, the distribution of a uniform clock signal with constant frequency and phase is a considerable design issue. Thus FPGA architectures commonly have digital clock managers (DCM) or delay locked loops (DLL) that de-skew the clock signal across the device.

The performance of FPGA architectures has been impressively increasing in recent years. To give a current indication of their level of performance, we quote some of the characteristics of one of the top of the line devices available on the market today. The Xilinx Virtex II can contain up to 10 million system gates and have an internal clock frequency ($`f_C`$) up to 420 MHz. The input-output speed can be above 840 Mb/s which roughly matches the maximum speed of the best analog to digital converters (100 MSPS for a 12 bit sample Analog AD9432). This same FPGA has up to 192 SelectRAM blocks of 18 kbit each. Because a strong demand from industry drives the development of FPGA technology, these performance specifications will likely improve significantly in the short term future.

Of course these devices must be coupled to a board, introducing other practical issues. The system used in the cavity lock described below is a GVA-290 board (G.V. & Associates) with two Xilinx Virtex-E XCV1000E FPGA chips. Signals enter and exit the board through four input and four output SMA connectors. The signals are digitized by an ADC (Analog AD9432) at the input and converted back to analog by a DAC (Analog AD9762) at the output. Each ADC is located on a detachable daughter board, allowing for converter upgrades and the addition of customized components and filters. Both the ADCs and DACs have 12 bit resolution and are driven at the clock speed of 100 MHz. A crystal oscillator provides the clock signal to the FPGA, which distributes a synchronized signal internally with DLLs and also outputs the driving signal for the ADC and DAC at a controlled phase. Unlike standard models, the board was ordered with DC coupled inputs, allowing us to have broadband control to DC. Boards often come with anti-aliasing analog filters, but were not included here due to the substantial group delay a high-order filter can impose on the signal. The cost of this particular board including devices is approximately $10,000, but it should be stressed that functional systems could be assembled at far less cost.

Xilinx also offers a special academic program through which university researchers can obtain the necessary software environment and a limited range of hardware products.

We can now discuss the latency and throughput of our controller in more detail. The latency is defined as the amount of time for an algorithm to process a single sample all the way through. The throughput is defined as the number of samples (or bits) per second being output from the device. For example, consider a system of $`N`$ components in series, each with the same sampling rate $`f=\frac{1}{\tau }`$. Also assume the system is ‘pipelined’ meaning that a new sample is loaded every $`\tau `$ seconds and samples are registered (values held) in-between components. In this case, the latency is $`N\tau `$, while the throughput is $`f`$. If this were a controller, the bandwidth of control would be limited to the inverse of the latency $`\frac{1}{N\tau }`$, not the throughput.

One of the principle advantages of FPGA technology is that the delay can be quite small. Consider the case where the FPGA of the GVA-290 board is programmed to pass a signal through without any manipulation. Figure 2 shows the transfer function and delay of this configuration. The ADC, FPGA, and DAC are all clocked at 100 MHz and each one takes a certain number of cycles (10 ns/cycle) to perform its function. The ADC imposes a delay of 10 cycles, the buffers of the FPGA impose a delay of 4 cycles, and the DAC only delays the signal about 1 cycle. Adding all this to a small delay from other components, we find that below the Nyquist frequency ($`f_C/2=50`$ MHz) the signal passes through at unity gain with a constant overall delay of $``$ 160 ns. Thus the maximum control bandwidth for this device is $``$ 6 MHz, and bandwidths in the tens of MHz may be anticipated with newer versions. If the FPGA algorithm is simple enough that the ADC dominates the delay, it may be desirable to use Flash ADCs that have less latency at the expense of a larger power consumption and smaller number of output bits.

If the FPGA performs a complex calculation that requires multiple logical steps in series, the delay is increased by an integer number of cycles and the effective bandwidth suffers. A typical example is that of the FIR filter mentioned below where, for $`B_U`$ input bits, the sampling rate becomes $`f_C/B_U`$. For any general algorithm, care should be taken to minimize the number of serial elements before implementation. If possible, calculations should be performed in parallel and look-up tables should be used to evaluate complicated functions.

### III.2 Software

The design process for a particular algorithm has been largely automated with implementation software environments like Foundation ISE (Xilinx). Once the design is entered via one of the options described below, the program steps through a series of compilation tasks before downloading onto the device. In order, the design is analyzed for syntactic errors, synthesized into a generic circuit, and implemented into an optimal bit stream appropriate to the particular device and board. The bit stream is then downloaded onto the device to achieve a stand-alone realization of the desired algorithm. Simulation programs are available at intermediate stages for debugging purposes. The latest version of Foundation ISE (4.1) compiles up to 100,000 gates/min. For reasonable designs, an entire design flow can be expected to take about 10 minutes. This allows for a rapid prototyping cycle which is one of the most desirable features of this technology.

Numerous algorithm entry options are available. Using a library of primitive components, one can create a schematic of the desired circuit. Abstract finite state machine diagrams can also be interpreted. The third option is a text based design written in either Verilog or VHDL (VHSIC Hardware Design Language).

As is common in technology standards, the choice of Verilog vs. VHDL has become a religious one for everyday practitioners. It is worth pointing out some of the accepted differences between the languages. Verilog is generally regarded as being easier to learn. A strong majority of engineers implementing commercial systems use Verilog. Historically, VHDL was meant as a description language before being adopted as a means of synthesis. As a result, VHDL is a much more strongly ‘typed’ language. The range of abstraction is also different between the two languages. Although there is a considerable overlap, Verilog extends to a lower level of abstraction while VHDL extends to a slightly higher level. For non-critical reasons, we chose to design in VHDL, hence we will discuss the following designs in those terms. However, the discussion is abstract enough that most concepts apply to both languages.

To first order, VHDL is a text based description of a schematic design. The mapping between input and output bus variables consists of a series of abstractly defined components where output ports are connected to input ports with defined signal variables. Each component has an associated ‘entity’ and ‘architecture’, where an architecture is an instantiation of an entity. For example, a component with entity ‘op-amp’ (with only input and output ports defined) could have its functionality determined by the particular architecture ‘op27’. The internal workings of a particular architecture are can be specified in another VHDL file with more components that are defined elsewhere. In this way, the code lends itself nicely to nested level of detail and organized project design. Also one can easily swap out components by changing architectures, but not entities, within the code.

At some point in the hierarchy, primitive components must be called upon. The Xilinx software offers an extensive library of such components (AND, OR, etc.) for use with each particular device. In addition to these basic primitives, one can also create more complicated, but commonly used, components with the Xilinx ‘Core Generator’. These objects (adders, multipliers, filters, DSP elements) can be customized with user specified parameters.

Each component loads inputs and returns outputs triggered by an input clock signal. Hence, when designing in VHDL one thinks in terms of circuit diagrams where, on every clock cycle, events happen concurrently across the device. On the other hand, in traditional C-like computer languages events progress in a serial manner. At times, serial logic is convenient and in fact VHDL offers a restricted form of serial logic in a form known as a ‘process’. These processes are bits of C-like code that execute when triggered. Inside a process, variables can be manipulated with functions defined in other VHDL files. However, a signal can only be changed once within a process. For this and other reasons, processes are best used as referees to generate secondary triggering signals and logic. While processes can perform some level of math, the heavy lifting is best left to the components which have been streamlined for such purposes.

An appropriate use of a process is to initialize parameters and control timing. For example, Figure 3 demonstrates how the simple adaptive phase algorithm mentioned above is implemented. Both the VHDL and an equivalent schematic are shown. The photocurrent, $`I`$, enters the device and is multiplied by the time dependent gain factor, $`G(t)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}`$, which is created by sending the time signal, $`t`$, through a look-up table (described below). The resulting signal, $`d\mathrm{\Phi }(t)=\frac{I(t)}{\sqrt{t}}`$, is then sent to one port of an adder, with the other input port being wired to the output signal $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t)`$. Because the output is connected to the input with a delay, the adder serves as an integrator and executes the relation $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t)=\mathrm{\Phi }(t1)+d\mathrm{\Phi }(t)`$ at every time step. The ‘process’ plays an important role in this algorithm by initializing the integral value and creating the time signal. At the beginning of the pulse (integration), the process initializes $`t`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ to zero. Every subsequent clock signal, the process increments $`t`$ by one and lets the adder integrate up the signal. At the end of the pulse, the process waits for the next pulse then repeats the sequence. Figure 4 shows the algorithm in action. Through the integrator structure, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is adjusted until $`I`$ is locked to zero. The overshoot is a result of the FPGA delay.

A single measurement using this algorithm is shown in Figure 4. Here the ‘pulse’ is a 50 $`\mu `$sec long time slice of a weak cw coherent beam. The feedback algorithm is sampling at 100 MHz with a delay less than 1 $`\mu `$ sec. Because of the delay and other bandwidth limiting components in the loop, our effective feedback bandwidth is limited to $``$ 1 MHz.

As will be demonstrated below, Matlab plays a complementary role in the design process. It can be used to create the necessary coefficients and memory blocks used as parameters in the VHDL components. In particular, the Control and DSP toolboxes provide relevant functionality. Also, Simulink is a good tool for simulating the associated experiments, where delays and other realistic factors can complicate the dynamics. There exist software packages that attempt to directly translate from a Simulink design of an algorithm into equivalent VHDL, but these packages remain in early stages of development.

Due to their extensive utility, RAM look-up tables and filter components are worth discussing in greater detail.

#### III.2.1 Look-Up Tables

Most FPGA chips come equipped with large blocks of internal RAM that can be used as generalized functions or look-up tables (LUT). Given an amount of memory on a particular block, the user can decide on a certain number of input and output bits. During operation the RAM block returns the value held at the address specified by the input, effectively implementing the desired function. For example, on the XCV1000E, 160 blocks of 4096 = $`2^{12}`$ bits are available for internal use. (As noted above, the Virtex II devices have much larger 18 kbit blocks.) To make one block behave as the function $`f`$ with $`B_i`$ input bits, the designer would choose the output to be $`B_o=2^{12B_i}`$ bits. Possible partitions are $`(B_i,B_o)[(1,2048),(2,1024),(3,512)\mathrm{},(8,16),\mathrm{}(12,1)]`$. Once a partition is chosen, the designer would use Matlab to define a block of data consisting of $`2^{B_i}`$ values each of size $`B_o`$ bits, and use this block of data as a parameter in the VHDL LUT component. If the discretization is a problem, more RAM blocks can be used to represent the function. If desired, the memory of a RAM block can also be dynamically written during operation. With this ability, an algorithm could easily adapt itself according to the signals it receives. Both the read and write operations (from/to one RAM address) only take a single clock cycle.

As mentioned above, these LUT functions play an extremely important role in speeding the functionality of non-linear algorithms. The application may be as simple as non-linear gain-scheduling of a controller or as complicated as full quantum-mechanical state estimation with the LUT performing functions based on assumed system parameters. In general, it is a matter of judgment how to partition complex algorithms, but any optimal partition will likely involve the use of these LUTs to perform the difficult parts of the calculation with minimal time delay.

#### III.2.2 Filters

PLD’s have a clear edge over analog circuitry in non-linear processing, but they also have a potential advantage in implementing precise, generic linear filters and transfer functions.

A standard core element offered by Xilinx is the FIR (Finite Impulse Response) filter. The FIR is defined in discrete time as

$$y(n)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{N}{}}a(i)u(ni)$$
(5)
where $`y(n)`$ and $`u(n)`$ are the output and input at the discrete time $`n`$ respectively. With standard Matlab functions (firls, remez) one can specify an arbitrary amplitude response and get out the corresponding $`a(i)`$ vector. The sampling frequency for a FIR element is $`f_F=\frac{f_C}{B_U}=\frac{1}{\tau _F}`$ where $`B_U`$ is the number of bits chosen to represent $`u(n)`$. Of course, the filter is useless at shaping the response above this frequency. The group delay of the signal through the filter is approximately $`\tau _F\frac{N}{2}`$.

The range of attenuation is also a concern in the design of any filter. For an FPGA with $`B_F`$ bits entering and leaving, the dynamic range is $`20\mathrm{log}(2^{B_F})`$dB. For our board with 12 bit ADC/DAC inputs and outputs, this corresponds to 70 dB. The designer should also have a sense of the size of the input and output signals. If the input signal is too high, the FPGA will rail; if the input is too low, it will fail to rise above the smallest bit size. To avoid these types of problems, broadband gain elements can be used at the input and output of the FPGA board.

A drawback of the FIR design is that it cannot be used to control the phase response of its transfer function. On the other hand, a generic continous time linear transfer function

$$G_C(s)=\frac{c(N)s^N+c(N1)s^{N1}+\mathrm{}+c(1)}{d(N)s^N+d(N1)s^{N1}+\mathrm{}+d(1)}$$
(6)
where $`Y_C=G_CU_C`$, has phase control built in through the denominator. To approximate this function on a PLD, an Infinite Impulse Response (IIR) filter needs to be used.

One possible IIR design process illustrates this need. To generate a digital IIR design, first create $`G_C(s)`$ using standard control techniques (Nyquist, LQR, etc.). Next, convert from a continuous to a discrete transfer function

$$G_CG_D(z)=\frac{a(0)+a(1)z^1+\mathrm{}+a(N)z^N}{b(0)+b(1)z^1+\mathrm{}+b(N)z^N}$$
(7)
with the Matlab function c2d. We have used the definition $`Y_D=G_DU_D`$ in the discrete time representation. Apply a z-transform ($`z^1`$ unit delay) to create the discrete time difference equation

$$y(n)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{N}{}}a(i)u(ni)\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}b(i)y(ni)$$
(8)
with the definition $`b(0)=1`$. Finally, implement the difference equation in hardware as in Figure 5 with 2 FIR blocks and 1 adder.

With $`b(n>0)=0`$ the filter is just a FIR filter, however with $`b(n>0)0`$ the output is fed back to itself. Hence an impulse response will have an infinite effect on the output. Of course, with internal feedback loops, the system is potentially unstable to noise and rounding errors. For this reason, among others, the Xilinx ‘Core Generator’ does not create flexible IIR modules.

However, with careful consideration of the number of bits required at each stage, a stable IIR filter can be created as in Figure 5. The sampling frequency for this simple architecture is $`\frac{f_C}{2B_Y}`$ where $`B_Y`$ is the number of bits used to keep track of $`y(n)`$ internally. The factor of 2 results from the delay of both the adder and the FIR element. Because of the feedback, the IIR filter can achieve a given amplitude response with lower number of coefficients than the FIR filter. This means the filter delays the signal less. Even though the IIR has fewer coefficients than an analagous FIR filter, the coefficients of the IIR filter have to be specified to a greater degree of precision to achieve the same amplitude response.

## IV Specific Example: Cavity Lock

We now discuss the use of an FPGA to perform a classical task necessary for low-noise experiments. High precision optical measurements demand laser intensity noise be minimized as much as possible. In the adaptive phase experiment mentioned above, the input laser is a Lightwave Nd:YAG model 126 (1064 nm) with an inherent broad relaxation oscillation noise peak at $``$ 100 kHz. To perform broadband detection and control near 1 MHz, this intensity noise must be removed from the beam with a Fabry-Perot cavity.

A block diagram of the system is shown in Figure 6. The output intensity of the cavity is stabilized with the standard Pound-Drever-Hall method so that the error signal is created from a reflected carrier beam with sidebands. At low frequencies (below 100 Hz) the feedback loop is dominated by a piezoelectric element (PZT) which controls the length of the cavity. At higher frequencies and through the closing point of the servo, the feedback is from an AOM (Acousto-Optic Modulator) driven by a VCO (Voltage Controlled Oscillator) which adjusts the frequency of the input beam.

Given the control architecture of Figure 6, the design process can be made very systematic with the flexibility of the FPGA. Because the critical behavior of the servo will be dominated by the VCO-AOM loop, we concentrate on the design of $`T_U`$ (T\_upper). First, the transfer functions of the elements in the loop are measured. Here we find that the VCO-AOM combination behaves like a low-pass filter ($`T_V`$) with a corner at 100 kHz. The cavity itself can be modelled as a low-pass filter ($`T_C`$) with a corner at about 10 kHz (the cavity linewidth). The goal is to design $`T_U`$ such that the closed loop transfer function $`T_{CL}=\frac{T_CT_V}{1+T_CT_VT_U}`$ is stable.

At this point, we can use the Matlab Control Toolbox to design an optimal $`T_U`$. One option is to provide the function lqr with the state space representations of $`T_V`$ and $`T_C`$ and an appropriate cost function to create the optimal $`T_U`$. The result simply tells us to make the combination $`T_CT_VT_U`$ behave like an integrator ($`T_I=\frac{1}{s}=\frac{1}{j\omega }`$) such that the controller satisfies the Nyquist criterion with 90 degrees of phase margin.

There are practical problems with this approach. In particular, the gain of $`T_U`$ must be infinite for very low and very high frequencies. To remedy this, we flatten the response of $`T_U`$ below 100 Hz (where the PZT arm takes over) and roll off the response at 300 kHz, beyond the closing point of the servo. So instead of making $`T_U=\frac{T_I}{T_CT_V}`$ we use $`T_U=\frac{T_{LP1}T_{LP2}^2}{T_CT_V}`$ where $`T_{LP1}`$ is a low-pass filter with the corner at 100 Hz and $`T_{LP2}`$ is a low-pass filter with the corner at 300 kHz.

To get high gain at frequencies below 100 Hz, we make $`T_L`$ (T\_lower) behave as a low-pass filter with a corner at only a few Hz. A better choice would be to implement $`T_L`$ as a high-gain analog integrator, but we use the FPGA to implement $`T_L`$ here for demonstration purposes.

Next, we generate proper IIR coefficients for both paths by the method described previously, treating $`T_L`$ and $`T_U`$ as the continuous transfer function $`G_C`$. With a clock frequency of 100 MHz and an internal sample size of $`B_Y=32`$ bits, the IIR structure had an effective bandwidth of 1.5 MHz ($`\frac{f_C}{2B_Y}`$), which is adequate to generate the critical features of the transfer function.

Figures 7 and 8 show the desired and actual transfer functions of both arms. Each arm fails to match the desired phase and amplitude response in a similar way. First, because of the finite size of the sampling time, the actual phase response differs from the desired response as the frequency approaches the effective sampling frequency. In fact, this mismatch happens lower than the sampling frequency because of the delay of the IIR filter. Second, at low frequencies, the FPGA gives less gain than the desired result. This is due to the fact that we are dealing with finite precision coefficients. The price paid for having a large sampling frequency with small delay is that we have less control over the size of the low frequency gain. Finally, note that the PZT arm integrator achieves the full 70dB of expected range (input/output size is 12 bits).

The closed loop transfer function behavior for both arms matches our expectations for noise rejection at low frequencies. A mismatch at higher frequencies is due to inadequate modelling of the PZT and other components. (The PZT behaves more like a collection of oscillators with different resonances than a low pass filter.) Qualitatively, the FPGA lock was much more robust to high frequency noise than an analog version of the servo. This was likely due to the precise match to the plant dynamics near the unity gain point of the servo, achieved by the use of large FIR coefficients. However, the FPGA lock was unable to retain the lock over time scales more than a few hours due to the saturated gain at very low frequencies. This problem could easily be remedied by using an analog integrator with more DC gain to replace the FPGA PZT transfer function. The main advantage of the FPGA is its fast accurate response and, besides the demonstration presented here, there is no practical reason to use the FPGA for high-gain, low-frequency applications.

Finally, another feature of FPGA control is the possibility of adding logical automation to this system. Specifically, if the controller loses the lock, then the FPGA could be programmed to sense this condition, sweep for a signal, hone in, and re-acquire the lock. The abstract logical nature of VHDL code makes this task simple relative to the procedure needed to create an acquisition system using standard electronics.

## V Summary

To demonstrate the use of programmable logic technology in an otherwise familiar setting, we have concentrated on a linear control application. We have used this example to convey the issues associated with a digital controller, including design, latency, and discretization. However, we have only hinted at the more interesting advanced applications in experimental quantum optics which are sure to develop more quickly because of this technology. FPGAs and similar devices are particularly suited to any physical system where non-linear mappings are desired between output and input variables within the natural dynamical time-scale. With these devices and sufficiently protected quantum systems in hand, the field of coherent quantum control may soon have enough speed to match the intelligence of its proposed controllers.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

J.S. acknowledges the support of a Hertz Foundation Fellowship, and H.M. acknowledges the support of an A. P. Sloan Research Fellowship. This work was supported by the NSF under grant PHY-9987541, and by the ONR under Young Investigator Award N00014-00-1-0479.


format: text

text:
# Black holes and traversible wormholes: a synthesis

## 1 Introduction

Space-time wormholes, short cuts between otherwise distant or even unconnected regions of the universe, are now a familiar plot device in science fiction. As a theoretical possibility in General Relativity, they gained some scientific respectability after the article of Morris & Thorne . Apart from attracting public interest and young people to the field, one serious motivation is that wormholes can increase our understanding of gravity when the usual energy conditions are not satisfied, due to quantum effects such as the Casimir effect or Hawking radiation, or in alternative gravitational theories, such as the recently fashionable brane-world models.

## 2 Wormholes and black holes

The author’s interest in wormholes originated with the realization that they are very similar to black holes, if one thinks of local properties, rather than the global properties which are usually used to define them. Global traversibility is incompatible with event horizons, leading to the widespread view, even among proponents , that wormholes are quite distinct from black holes. However, in terms of local properties, both are characterized by the presence of marginal (marginally trapped) surfaces, and indeed may be defined by outer trapping horizons, types of hypersurface foliated by marginal surfaces . For a static black hole, the event horizons or Killing horizons are examples of outer trapping horizons, and for a static wormhole, the wormhole throat is an example of a double outer trapping horizon, composed of doubly marginal surfaces (Fig.1). The spatial topology of standard black-hole solutions and Morris-Thorne (static, spherically symmetric) wormholes is the same, $`R\times S^2`$, and the spatial geometry can be identical, as for the Schwarzschild black hole and the spatially Schwarzschild wormhole . In each case, a minimal surface connects two asymptotically flat regions.

The key difference is the causal nature of the trapping horizons. This, however, is locally determined by the field equations and so may change with time. Summarizing an earlier proposal , black holes and wormholes may be locally defined by outer trapping horizons which are respectively achronal (space-like or null) and temporal (time-like). This means that they are respectively one-way and two-way traversible, as desired in each case. The Einstein equation then shows that they occur respectively under positive and negative energy density, specifically referring to the null energy condition. This means that they are supported respectively by normal matter or vacuum, and what has been dubbed exotic matter . Given the preponderance of normal matter in the universe, this means that they respectively occur naturally and are unlikely to occur naturally, according to present knowledge. However, the possibility of constructing wormholes seems to be open, given the widespread appearance of negative energy densities in quantum field theory. Theoretically, if exotic matter can exist in sufficient concentrations, wormholes are as much a prediction of General Relativity as black holes.

A consequence of this synthesis is that black holes and wormholes are interconvertible. The trapping horizons evolve under positive or negative energy density, changing their causal type to locally characterize black holes or wormholes. A wormhole could be converted to a black hole if the supporting exotic matter disperses, or if normal matter is added. Looking at the geometry, the double trapping horizon constituting a static wormhole throat will bifurcate under generic perturbations, forming a trapped region. If the two horizons eventually become null, enclosing a future trapped region, this would be a black hole (Fig.2(i)). Conversely, a black hole could be converted to a wormhole by addition of exotic matter, which causes the two black-hole horizons to become time-like and, if circumstances allow, merge to form a wormhole throat (Fig.2(ii)). In fact, if one considers a Schwarzschild black hole evaporating semi-classically by Hawking radiation, the trapping horizons do indeed become time-like, due to negative-energy radiation absorbed by the black hole, created by pair production with the escaping radiation. The evaporating object is a traversible wormhole by any reasonable definition. This also suggests a wormhole as the endpoint of Hawking evaporation .

Finding concrete examples of wormhole and black-hole interconversion requires a specific exotic matter model, so that there are field equations to determine the evolution. Four such models are described below, beginning with a simple model in which analysis is complete, then more realistic models which are under development.

## 3 Two-dimensional dilaton gravity

The CGHS two-dimensional dilaton gravity model  was known to contain black-hole solutions analogous to Schwarzschild ones, and to share similar properties such as cosmic censorship . Generalizing the model to include a ghost massless Klein-Gordon field, i.e. with the gravitational coupling taking the opposite sign to normal, leads to static wormhole solutions analogous to Morris-Thorne ones . Moreover, the field equations are explicitly integrable, so it is possible to set initial data corresponding to dynamical perturbations of black holes or wormholes, then analytically find the evolved space-time. Four types of processes have been considered in detail , summarized as follows.

i. Wormhole collapse to a black hole. Initial data is set so that there is initially a static wormhole, with the supporting ghost radiation then switched off from both sides of the wormhole. The double trapping horizon bifurcates and each section becomes null, forming a black hole. Solutions were found for both sudden and gradual collapse (Fig.2(i)).

ii. Wormhole construction from a black hole. Initial data is set so that there is initially a static black hole, which is then irradiated from both sides with the ghost field. The two null trapping horizons of the black hole become time-like and, for appropriate radiation profiles, merge to form the throat of a static wormhole (Fig.2(ii)).

iii. Wormhole operation for transport or signalling, including the back-reaction on the wormhole. Initial data is set so that there is initially a static wormhole, with a pulse of normal Klein-Gordon radiation then sent through it. The double trapping horizon again bifurcates, but if the pulse energy is small, the wormhole remains traversible for a long time (Fig.2(iii)). This demonstrates the dynamic stability of the static wormhole.

iv. Wormhole maintenance of a static state. As above, but the pulse of normal radiation is preceded by an extra pulse of ghost radiation with equal and opposite energy. The double trapping horizon bifurcates and then merges again, returning the wormhole to its original static state (Fig.2(iv)).

## 4 Exotic matter models

An important shift from the Morris-Thorne approach  is to first specify an exotic matter model, then discover (suspiciously often) that wormhole solutions arise naturally. The following exotic matter models are under study in spherically symmetric Einstein gravity.

i. Ghost scalar fields. For the massless ghost Klein-Gordon field, there is a classic Morris-Thorne wormhole which was actually found previously by Ellis  and several other authors. It has recently been argued to be stable . A numerical code for spherically symmetric Einstein gravity with a massless ghost Klein-Gordon field has been written and used to study dynamical perturbations of the wormhole . Preliminary results suggest that the Ellis wormhole is unstable, with a weakening ghost field causing collapse to a black hole, and a strengthening ghost field causing an explosion to an inflating universe.

ii. Exotic fluids, i.e. fluids not obeying the usual energy conditions. In particular, the spatially Schwarzschild wormhole  is a solution for an anisotropic fluid with density zero, radial pressure $`\tau `$ and tangential pressure $`\tau /2`$, where the tension $`\tau `$ is positive. This model has vanishing energy trace, like the Maxwell electromagnetic field. Similar models have recently been proposed elsewhere .

iii. Pure ghost radiation, i.e. pure radiation (or null dust) with negative energy density. With both ingoing and outgoing radiation, static wormhole solutions were conjectured in the conference presentation and found shortly afterwards .

## 5 Conclusion

A unified theory of black holes and traversible wormholes has been proposed. Its development includes definitions of mass and surface gravity, and zeroth, first and second laws of black-hole dynamics and wormhole dynamics . This synthesis is useful even for existing problems such as black-hole evaporation, where the Hawking radiation converts a Schwarzschild black hole, at least semi-classically, into a traversible wormhole. It also raises the largely unexplored issue of wormhole thermodynamics.

Black holes are now generally accepted as astrophysical realities, whereas traversible wormholes are often regarded as unphysical theoretical curiosities, outside mainstream scientific research, just as black holes once were. The dual nature of black holes and wormholes, in particular their dynamic interconvertibility, forces new viewpoints. Wormholes are just black holes under negative energy density.

Research supported by Korea Research Foundation grant KRF-2001-015-DP0095. Thanks to the conference organizers for support and Hyunjoo Lee for preparing the figures.


text:
# Comment on: Weak Anisotropy and Disorder Dependence of the In-Plane Magnetoresistance in High-Mobility (100) Si Inversion Layers

In a recent paper Pudalov et al.  measured the in-plane magnetoresistance (MR) of high-mobility (100) Si-inversion layers and demonstrated that the magnetic field for MR saturation depends strongly on sample quality. The saturation field found in experiment ”varies for different samples by a factor of 2 at a given carrier density.” They concluded that ”the saturation of the MR cannot be identified with the complete spin polarization of free carriers”. We, however, describe in this comment the saturation of the MR in the data of Pudalov et al.  by complete spin polarization of non-localized carriers and the existence of local moments.

For the interpretation of measurements of the MR for strong disorder one must take into account the existence of localized states in the metallic phase. In Ref.  it was argued that the carrier density $`n`$ measured by Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations $`n_{SdH}`$ and the one measured by the Hall voltage $`n_H`$ are nearly identical. But this does not mean that localized states are not present in metallic samples. The conclusion one can draw from the relation $`n_{SdH}n_H`$ is that one cannot see localized states in the Hall resistivity: apparently the Hall resistivity is non-critical at the metal-insulator transition, which occurs at $`n=n_c`$ or at the Fermi energy $`E_F=E_c`$.

In the absence of a magnetic field extended states in a metal have a spin-degeneracy of two for spin-up and spin-down. Due to Coulomb interaction, localized states can be singly occupied or doubly occupied . At energies close to $`E_c`$ the density of singly occupied localized states $`n_{so}`$ will be small, far from $`E_c`$ all localized states are singly occupied. In a two-fluid model for localized and extended electrons, as already used for the strongly disordered three-dimensional electron gas in Phosphorous-doped Silicon , we assume Curie paramagnetism for the localized singly occupied states of density $`n_{so}`$ and Pauli paramagnetism for the extended states of density $`nn_{so}`$. The singly occupied localized states are treated as classical spins and are spin-polarized if the temperature $`T`$ is sufficiently small: $`g^{}\mu B>k_BT`$. The other electrons become completely spin-polarized for $`B>B_c`$ with $`g^{}\mu B_c(nn_{so})/\rho _F`$, where $`\rho _F`$ is the density of states of the spin-polarized free electron gas given in terms of the effective mass $`m^{}`$. We note that $`B_cB_{c0}=2E_F/(g^{}\mu )`$ and due to the existence of localized states one finds $`B_c=0`$ for $`n=n_{so}`$. By taking into account the modification of screening effects and the density of states due to spin polarization the MR of the two-dimensional electron gas for weak disorder was calculated in Ref. . The theory doesn’t contain localized states and the saturation field for the MR is $`B_{c0}`$. For strong disorder  the saturation field is $`B_c`$, as calculated above, and the resistance ratio $`R(B>B_c)/R(B=0)`$ is strongly increased compared to weak disorder.

In the experiments of Ref. the values for $`B_c=0`$ are extrapolated from finite $`B`$values. We find that the slope $`dB_c/dn=dB_{c0}/dn`$ does not depend on $`n_{so}`$, in agreement with experimental results , where $`dB_c/dn=5.7T/10^{11}cm^2`$ is found. According to Ref.  one expects that $`n_{so}n_c`$ for Silicon MOSFET’s with low peak mobility and $`n_{so}n_c`$ for more ideal samples, in agreement with experimental results . For one sample with very high mobility Pudalov et al.  also found a larger saturation field than predicted for an ideal electron gas without localized states. We don’t believe that this is a real effect; the small shift might be related to the definition of the saturation field as used to analyze the experimental data or related to the relatively high temperature of the experiment.

In conclusion we argue that the MR-experiments of Pudalov et al.  give indications for local moment formation in the two-dimensional electron gas in the metallic phase.

V.T. Dolgopolov acknowledges support of RFBR via grants 00-02-17294, 01-02-16424, and by program ”Nanostructures” from the Russian Ministry of Sciences.

V. T. Dolgopolov 1 and A.Gold 2

1 Institute of Solid State Physics, Chernogolovka, Moscow District 142432, Russia

2 Centre d‘Elaboration de Matériaux et d‘Etudes Structuales (CEMES-CNRS), 29 Rue Jeanne Marvig, 31055, Toulouse, France


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In the naive quark model picture with three flavours, quarks and antiquarks are assumed to be bound into states, the quantum numbers of which are determined by the spin $`S`$ and the relative orbital angular momentum $`L`$ of the $`\overline{q}q`$ system. This leads to the multiplet structures that can be elegantly described by the $`SU(3)`$ group of flavor symmetry. The masses of hadrons are then related to the constituent masses of the quarks and simple relations among them are found. For instance, the non-strange $`\rho `$ and $`\omega `$ vector mesons, both made out of up and down quarks, have roughly the same mass, whereas the $`\varphi `$, being a pure $`s\overline{s}`$ state has a mass approximately 300 MeV heavier. Furthermore, the mass of a meson like the $`\rho `$, made of two constituent quarks, is about 2/3 of the mass of a proton or a neutron, made of three such quarks. However, the simple and successful picture that the quark model delivers does not apply to the scalar meson sector: apparently scalars are different. First of all there are far more scalar mesons than can be accomodated in one conventional nonet, moreover their masses turn out to be hundreds of MeV lighter than one would simply deduce from the constituent structure of the mesons.

In Ref. , Tornqvist presented a model in which the central focus is to consider the loop contributions given by the hadronic intermediate states that each meson can access: it is via these hadronic loops that the bare states become “dressed” and, in the case of scalar mesons, hadronic loop contributions totally dominate the dynamics of the process. He shows that the mass shift, which is a direct consequence of the presence of strongly coupled hadronic intermediate states, is so dramatic that it completely spoils the one–to–one correspondence between the resonances we observe and the underlying constituent structure. Though we follow Tornqvist’s modelling quite closely, very similar models have been considered by van Beveren et al. , Geiger and Isgur  and by Oller and Oset  among others.

In this paper, following and extending the method of Tornqvist and Roos , we will investigate the possibility of generating, in the scalar sector, more than one state with the same quantum numbers, by initially inserting only one “bare seed”. We will show that the outcome depends on the kinematics of the intermediate channels: crucially, on the number and position of each threshold opening and on the strength of their individual couplings. Therefore, every case has to be considered separately and it is not possible to reach one common conclusion for all the members of the scalar meson family.

## 2 The model of hadronic dressing

We start by considering a simple model in which all bare meson states belong to ideally mixed quark multiplets. We call $`n\overline{n}`$ the nonstrange light state and suppose that substituting a strange quark for a light one increases the mass of the state by $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_s150`$ MeV.

The bare propagator for each of these bound states will be of the form

$$P=\frac{1}{_0^2s},$$
(1)
with a pole on the real axis, corresponding to a non decaying state; for example for the vector $`I=0`$ state

$$|\varphi _0=|s\overline{s}.$$

If we now assume that the experimentally observed hadrons are obtained from the bare states ($`n\overline{n}`$, $`s\overline{n}`$, $`s\overline{s}`$, …) by dressing them with hadronic interactions, the propagator becomes

$$P(s)=\frac{1}{^2(s)si(s)\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)},$$
(2)
where a sum over all hadronic interactions (in the loop) is implicit (see Fig. 1). The pole then moves in the complex $`s`$-plane.

The corresponding vector state can be decomposed as

$$|\varphi =\sqrt{1ϵ^2}|s\overline{s}+ϵ_1|K\overline{K}+ϵ_2|\rho \pi +\mathrm{}$$
(3)
where calculation would give $`ϵ^2=|ϵ_1|^2+|ϵ_2|^2+\mathrm{}1`$. The hadronic loop contributions allow the bare states ($`s\overline{s}`$ in this example) to communicate with all hadronic channels permitted by quantum numbers, and this enables the meson to decay, its lifetime being inversely proportional to the width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. However, in this case the switching on of interactions produces a relatively tiny effect and the physical $`\varphi `$ is still overwhelmingly an $`s\overline{s}`$ state. For this reason the naive quark model works very well; so from the observed hadron we can easily infer its quark structure. A similar picture works for the tensors.

For scalar mesons the situation is different and the one–to–one correspondence between the observed scalar mesons and their underlying quark content is distorted by dynamical effects. This is because they couple strongly to more than one meson-meson channel, creating overlapping and interfering resonance structures. Furthermore, since the interactions are $`S`$–waves, the opening of each threshold produces a more dramatic $`s`$-dependence in the propagator. At each threshold, there is a centrifugal barrier factor of $`k^L`$, where $`k`$ is the appropriate c.m. $`3`$-momentum of the decaying products and $`L`$ their relative orbital angular momentum. This means that the thresholds for higher spin states open more smoothly.

Let us now go into more detail about the model starting, for simplicity, from the case in which only one underlying bare state has to be considered. This is the case, for example, for the $`I=1/2`$ and $`I=1`$ sectors, the seeds of which are $`s\overline{n}`$ and $`n\overline{n}`$ respectively. We define a vacuum polarization function $`\mathrm{\Pi }(s)`$ which accounts for all the possible two pseudoscalar loop contributions to the propagator $`P(s)`$ . Referring to the pictorial representation of Eq. (2) in Fig. 1, we can easily write $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$’s imaginary part:

$$\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)=\underset{i}{}G_i^2(s)=\underset{i}{}g_i^2\frac{k_i(s)}{\sqrt{s}}(ss_{A,i})F_i^2(s)\theta (ss_{th,i})$$
(4)
where the index $`i`$ runs over the pseudoscalar channels and the $`k_i`$’s are the c.m. momenta of the two intermediate pseudoscalars. The $`g_i`$’s are the $`SU(3)`$ flavour couplings connecting the bare state to the two–pseudoscalar loop: $`g_i=\gamma \gamma _i`$, see Refs.  for more details. The terms $`(ss_{A,i})`$ give the Adler zeros, required for $`S`$–waves by chiral dynamics. $`F_i(s)`$ are the form factors, which take into account the fact that the interaction is not pointlike but has a spatial extension.

Since the vacuum polarization function, $`\mathrm{\Pi }(s)`$, is an analytic function, its real part can be deduced from the imaginary part by making use of a dispersion relation

$$\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)=\frac{1}{\pi }P_{s_{th,1}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑s^{}\frac{\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(s^{})}{s^{}s}.$$
(5)
No subtraction is needed, since the form factors are built in such a way that they decrease fast enough when $`|s|\mathrm{}`$.

At this point, we can write the propagator in terms of the vacuum polarization function:

$$P(s)=\frac{1}{m_0^2+\mathrm{\Pi }(s)s}$$
(6)
The mass and the width of the decaying hadron are determined, in a process independent way, by the pole of the propagator. Consequently, in order to find the pole position, we have to continue Eqs. (4, 5, 6) into the complex $`s`$–plane onto the appropriate unphysical sheets.

The contribution of this resonance pole to the $`ij`$ amplitude is then

$$A_{ij}(s)=\frac{G_i(s)G_j(s)}{m_0^2+\mathrm{\Pi }(s)s}.$$
(7)
which respects the unitarity requirement, $`AA^{}=2iAA^{}`$. As a consequence, for each elastic channel we can define a resonant phase-shift by

$$A_{ii}(s)=\frac{1}{2i}\left(\eta _ie^{2i\delta _i}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\right).$$
(8)
The amplitude $`A_{ij}`$ in Eq. (7) represents a generalization of the well-known Breit-Wigner formula, at least in the neighbourhood of the pole. This is readily seen by writing the vacuum polarization function in terms of its real and imaginary parts, then

$$A_{ij}(s)=\frac{G_i(s)G_j(s)}{m_0^2+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)s+i\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)}=\frac{m_R[\mathrm{\Gamma }_i(s)\mathrm{\Gamma }_j(s)]^{1/2}}{m^2(s)sim_R\mathrm{\Gamma }_{tot}(s)},$$
(9)
having identified

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{tot}(s)=\frac{\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)}{m_R}=\underset{i}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_i(s),$$
(10)
where

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_i(s)=\frac{G_i^2(s)}{m_R},$$
(11)
and

$$m^2(s)=m_0^2+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(s).$$
(12)
Here $`m^2(s)`$ is the running squared mass, given by the sum of the bare mass squared and the real part of the vacuum polarization function $`\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)`$, which is responsible for the mass shift. The imaginary part of the vacuum polarization function $`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)`$ is directly proportional to the width of the state. The mass shift function $`\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)`$ is generally negative and is approximately constant only in the energy regions far from any threshold. For $`S`$–waves the $`s`$–dependence becomes crucially important nearby thresholds, since $`\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)`$ has square root cusps at the opening of each of them.

Though the only correct way to calculate the mass of a particle is to find the position of the propagator pole in the complex $`s`$–plane, it is useful to define another quantity, again obtainable from the propagator, which we will call the Breit–Wigner mass $`m_{BW}`$. It corresponds to the intersection of the running mass $`m^2(s)`$ with the curve $`s`$, i.e. the particular value of $`s`$ where the function $`(m_0^2+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)s)`$ vanishes, with $`s`$ wholly real:

$$m_{BW}^2=m_0^2+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(m_{BW}^2).$$
(13)
This gives a rough estimate of what the physical mass is. As a matter of fact, moving into the complex plane the real coordinate of the pole position can change considerably if thresholds to strongly coupled channels are located nearby, and when the dynamics are particularly complicated. As $`m_{BW}`$ of Eq. (13) is defined as the energy at which the function $`m^2(s)`$ is equal to $`s`$, this is a point that we refer to as a crossing for reasons that will become clear in Fig. 2. Clearly at $`\sqrt{s}=m_{BW}`$, the amplitudes $`A_{ij}`$ of Eq. (9) become purely imaginary. It is this simple fact and its physical consequences that are the theme of this paper.

## 3 $`I=1`$ sector and the role of the Wigner condition

We now turn our attention to the issue of accomodating all the scalar meson states (which experiments deliver) in either one or more quark model multiplets. In Ref.  Tornqvist finds a scalar nonet composed of the $`K_0^{}(1430)`$, the $`a_0(980)`$, the $`f_0(980)`$ and the $`f_0(1370)`$. Furthermore, in Ref. , one extra low energy pole is found, which the authors identify with the much discussed broad $`\sigma `$ meson, called $`f_0(4001200)`$ in the Particle Data Tables . Nevertheless, this study leaves out the $`a_0(1430)`$, for instance, for which Crystal Barrel  finds clear evidence.

Consequently, we begin by examining the $`I=1`$ sector, since this is relatively simpler than the others. We ask: can we “generate” one or more extra physical states in the same sector, in the framework of our simple model, by starting from only one $`\overline{n}n`$ bare seed ?

By increasing the overall coupling $`\gamma `$ and the bare mass of the $`\overline{n}n`$ seed ($`\gamma =1.53`$, $`m_0=1.620`$ GeV, as opposed to $`\gamma =1.13`$, $`m_0=1.420`$ GeV used in Ref. ), we find it is possible to obtain a scenario in which more than one intersection between the mass function $`m^2(s)`$ and the $`s`$ curve appear in the mass plot, as shown in Fig. 2 (upper half). The first crossing, situated at approximately $`915`$ MeV, between the $`\pi \eta `$ and the $`K\overline{K}`$ threshold, corresponds to a state which can be identified with the $`a_0(980)`$. We treat the charged and neutral kaons as degenerate in mass and so neglect the possibility of isospin mixing between $`I=1`$ and $`I=0`$ states . The second crossing, occurring well above the $`\pi \eta ^{}`$ threshold, at $`m_{BW}=1430`$ MeV, is again a physical state and has the right features to represent the Crystal Barrel relatively broad $`a_0(1450)`$; the third intersection occurs at $`E=1.82`$ GeV. In the lower half of Fig. 2 we plot the curve $`\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{s})`$, which shows how the second state which we identify with the $`a_0(1450)`$ is much broader than the $`a_0(980)`$.

To know which state is physical we refer to the Wigner condition . This condition follows from the principle of causality, i.e. the requirement that the scattered wave does not leave the scatterer before the incident wave has reached it. In the present context, Wigner’s theorem limits the rate of fall of the phase-shift, $`\delta _{ij}`$. A physical resonance cannot occur if the phase shift falls through $`90^o`$. In fact, such a resonance would have a negative width and correspond to a pole on the upper half plane in the physical sheet. It would therefore represent a non-causal, exponentially increasing state. Since it is not possible to have a state with a lifetime greater than the period of scattering, Wigner’s condition requires

$$\frac{d\delta }{dk}\frac{1}{m_\pi }\frac{\sqrt{s}}{2k}.$$
(14)
where the phase-shift $`\delta `$ refers to the same channel as the c.m. 3-momentum $`k`$ and is defined by Eq. (8). The Wigner condition is particularly useful in the inelastic region, where resonances do not necessarily correspond to $`\delta =90^o`$, but more generally occur when $`\delta =n\pi /2`$ and the real part of the scattering amplitude is zero.

Fig. 3 shows the phases, $`\delta _{\pi \eta }`$ and $`\delta _{\pi \eta ^{}}`$, which tell us about the characteristics of the states we find: $`\delta _{\pi \eta }`$ goes through $`90^o`$ at $`E=915`$ MeV, in correspondence with the first physical resonance, the lighter $`a_0`$. Instead, $`\delta _{\pi \eta ^{}}`$ reaches zero twice: the first time rising from negative to positive values and giving the second physical $`a_0`$ state, the $`a_0(1450)`$; the second time quickly dropping from positive to negative values: the third crossing at 1820 MeV is unphysical as given by Eq.(14).

Finally, Fig. 4 shows the Argand plot of the amplitude $`A_{\pi \eta }`$: in the elastic region, Im$`A_{\pi \eta }`$ rises quickly anti-clockwise and Re$`A_{\pi \eta }`$ reaches zero at $`E=915`$ MeV, the lighter physical $`a_0`$. The second and third states occur above $`\pi \eta ^{}`$ threshold, as indicated by the two stars on the plot. Notice that the heavy unphysical state is situated immediately after an abrupt change of direction in the curve Im$`A_{\pi \eta }`$.

Our conclusions about yet heavier states are not reliable in the present model, since higher thresholds are not included which may well affect the picture at higher energies dramatically. Nevertheless just including the lightest two pseudoscalar channels we can definitely say that a scenario in which not only one but a series of scalar physical states with I=1 can easily be achieved, by fine tuning key free parameters of the model.

Generating more than one physical state with the same quantum number starting from one seed brings us closer to the picture emerging from experiment. Will this be the case for the other sectors as well ? And to what extent is the adjustment of the overall coupling and mass parameters permitted within this model? That is what we discuss in the following Sections.

## 4 The $`I=1/2`$ sector

In an analogous manner to the $`I=1`$ case, we now want to examine the possibility of dynamically generating more physical states with the same quantum numbers from only one bare seed, $`n\overline{s}`$ in this particular case. Here the main issue is to investigate whether it is possible to generate the light $`I=1/2`$ state called $`\kappa `$, advocated for example in Refs. .
The situation for the $`I=1/2`$ sector is rather different from the $`I=1`$ case. Here there are only two relevant thresholds and their positions and coupling strengths are such that the shape of the mass function curve, $`m^2(s)`$, is very rigid and varying the parameters changes this little. Nevertheless, by using the same changes we used for the $`I=1`$ sector ($`\gamma =1.53`$, $`m_0=1.620`$ GeV, with $`s_{A,\pi K}=1.0`$ GeV2) we obtain the plot shown in Fig 5.

The first interesting observation is that the first point of intersection between the mass function $`m^2(s)`$ and the curve $`s`$, is always bound to be below the $`K\pi `$ threshold and it corresponds to a pole on the real axis, i.e. to a state with zero width: in fact, the cusp signals the precise location of the threshold itself, so that varying the coupling strength only slightly alters the position of the crossing point, but never allows it to move above the threshold.

The second intersection point is not a physical state since it violates the Wigner condition, as is clearly shown by the phase shift and the Argand plot in Figs. 7 and 7. Notice once again that the conclusion that this state is not physical does not depend on the strength of the coupling to the $`K\pi `$ channel: varying this only produces a tiny shift in the position of the crossing point, and does not alter the characteristics of the state. Thus within this model having just one $`n\overline{s}`$ bare seed, it turns out to be impossible to generate a physical $`\kappa `$-like state. In contrast, the third intersection point corresponds to a physical state which can easily be interpreted as the $`K_0^{}(1430)`$, already found in Tornqvist results of Ref. . It is interesting to notice that the same kind of picture would emerge when using the parameterization proposed in Ref. : the first crossing point is again below threshold and the second one corresponds to a state which, violating the Wigner condition, is unphysical. Indeed, only the third intersection point is a physical one.

Moving to higher energies, we find two further crossing points between the $`s=E^2`$ curve and the mass function $`m(s)^2`$: according to the Wigner condition, only the last one, situated at $`E=1.96`$ GeV, corresponds to a physical state. As we mentioned in the previous Section, results concerning states with heavy masses are not completely reliable since the present model does not include higher meson-meson thresholds. Nevertheless, it is quite interesting to notice that the last physical state predicted by our calculation could be identified with the $`K_0^{}(1950)`$ reported by the PDG group (see table on p. 51 of Ref. ).

Compared with other results available in the literature, as far as the $`I=1/2`$ and $`I=1`$ sectors are concerned, ours are similar to those presented in the work of Minkowski and Ochs , where they claim the existence of two complete nonets in the light scalar meson spectrum, the first one characterised by the $`K_0^{}(1430)`$ and the $`a_0(980)`$, and the second one by the $`K_0^{}(1950)`$ and the $`a_0(1450)`$. To the isoscalar sector they assign the $`f_0(980)`$, $`f_0(1500)`$ and the $`f_0(1720)`$, $`f_0(2020)`$ respectively, with singlet-octet mixing angle (much as in the pseudoscalar nonet), having dismissed the $`\sigma `$ and the $`f_0(1370)`$.
In contrast, van Beveren et al.  find two lower mass nonets, given by

$$\kappa ,a_0(980),f_0(980),\sigma $$

$$K_0^{}(1430),a_0(1450),f_0(1370),f_0(1500),$$

whereas Shakin and collaborators  predict the existence of up to three scalar nonets, characterized by

$$a_0(980),K_0^{}(1430)$$

$$a_0(1450),K_0^{}(1730)$$

$$a_0(1857),K_0^{}(1950)$$

and keep the $`\sigma `$ and $`\kappa `$ mesons out, using their particular definition of “dynamically generated states” with no right to be classified into a nonet structure. Moreover the $`a_0(1857)`$ and the $`K_0^{}(1730)`$ are resonances which appear in their calculation but are not confirmed by experiment yet.

To complete our picture we now move to the $`I=0`$ sector.

## 5 The $`I=0`$ sector

This is the most complex and delicate sector, and drawing any kind of conclusion is particularly difficult: let’s see why. As discussed in the previous Sections, in the $`I=1`$ and $`I=1/2`$ sectors physical states originate from one “bare seed” only, either $`n\overline{n}`$ or $`n\overline{s}`$, and are then “dressed” by coupling to meson-meson channels. In contrast, in the $`I=0`$ case we already have two possible “bare seeds” to start with, $`n\overline{n}`$ and $`s\overline{s}`$, which not only get dressed but in fact do mix through hadronic loops. And mixing entangles the situation to such an extent that the one–to–one correspondence between the phase shift behaviour and the occurrence of physical states is lost: then the Wigner condition cannot be used to sort the physical states from the unphysical ones. Moreover, the couplings of the isoscalar bare seeds to the relative meson-meson channels, $`\pi \pi `$, $`K\overline{K}`$, $`\eta \eta `$ etc … are not calculated in a standard and unique way: there are several calculations in the literature, each of which is based on different (but in our opinion equally good or bad) assumptions (see for example Refs.  and ). So one has to make a choice of coupling scheme as well, and unfortunately the outcome strongly depends on this choice.

If we simply use for the parameters $`\gamma `$ and $`m_0`$ the same values as in Sections 3 and 4 and the coupling scheme as given by Tornqvist in Ref.  (with the $`\eta \eta ^{}`$ threshold coupling enhanced by a factor $`\beta =1.6`$) or by van Beveren et al. , we find scenarios in which multiple crossings do occur and many isoscalar states are generated. Unfortunately, we cannot tell them apart, because the phase shift behaviour does not help, especially in the region around and above $`1`$ GeV, where the mixing is maximal and the overlapping among resonances is crucial. And we cannot say which of them are physical states either, because the Wigner condition cannot be applied. Moreover, as we anticipated, the position and features of the crossing points are very strongly model dependent, and very different scenarios can be created by varying the coupling scheme, so that no robust model independent conclusion can be reached in this sector. For instance, if we apply purely $`SU(3)`$ pseudoscalar-pseudoscalar couplings, as presented in Refs.  without enhancing the $`\eta \eta ^{}`$ threshold, only two resonant states are found.

Nevertheless, it is a fact that a number of states larger than two can be created starting from just two bare seeds. For certain parameter configurations and with certain coupling schemes, the $`I=0`$ experimental candidates can be accounted for. This shows that the dynamical generation of physical states is a possible solution to the problem of accounting for more scalar mesons than can fit in one nonet. Notice, though, that this is a “democratic” model, in which we cannot distinguish which are the intrinsic (or pre-existing) states as opposed to the dynamically generated ones (a discussion about this issue was raised by van Beveren et al. in a comment  on a paper by Shakin and Wang ).

## 6 Scattering amplitudes

To what extent are we free to change the parameters of the model to allow the double crossing to occur that generates the $`a_0(1430)`$ as well as the $`a_0(980)`$? This question is addressed by considering the relationship of the propagators in Eqs. (1,2,6,7) to the corresponding physical scattering amplitudes. As noted in Section 2, knowing the propagator of $`s`$channel resonances determines a key part of the scattering amplitudes, Eqs. (7,9). For Tornqvist and Roos, this amplitude $`A_{ij}`$ is all there is to the hadronic scattering amplitude. However, $`s`$channel dynamics is not all that controls the scattering. So while the amplitude $`A`$ defined in Eq. (7) respects unitarity, it is not the most general amplitude that achieves this, having its numerator and denominator related by the same couplings $`G_i`$ (see Eq. (4)). Knowing the structure of the propagator $`P(s)`$, Eq. (6), we can write in complete generality the full scattering amplitude as

$$T(s)=\frac{N(s)}{m^2(s)s+\mathrm{\Pi }(s)},$$
(15)
where we drop the channel labels $`ij`$. The numerator $`N(s)`$ is an unknown complex function of the variable $`s`$, which can be re–expressed in terms of its modulus and phase as

$$N(s)=|N(s)|e^{i\alpha (s)}.$$
(16)
Imposing both elastic and inelastic unitarity one finds that

$$|N(s)|=[m^2(s)s+\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)]\mathrm{sin}\alpha (s)\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }(s)e^{i\alpha (s)},$$
(17)
which allows the most general hadronic amplitude to be written as

$$T(s)=A(s)e^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}i\alpha (s)}+\mathrm{sin}\alpha (s)e^{i\alpha (s)}$$
(18)
where $`\alpha (s)`$ is an unknown function of $`s`$ real along the right hand cut, and the second term in Eq. (18) can be regarded as a background contribution. It is important to note that if the phase-shift of the amplitude $`A`$ is $`\omega `$, then the phase-shift of the full amplitude $`T`$ is $`\delta =\omega +\alpha `$.
The model of Tornqvist and Roos is to set $`\alpha =0`$ everywhere.

In Ref.  we have improved on Tornqvist’s study by performing new fits to experimental data, based on the general amplitude $`T(s)`$ rather than the pole dominated amplitude $`A(s)`$. From this we conclude that very good solutions can be obtained by using relatively small values for the parameter $`\alpha `$ (we chose a constant value of $`15^o`$ as an example) and varying the $`m_0`$ and $`\gamma `$ parameters by a few hundred MeV. For instance, to fit $`\pi K`$ scattering data in terms of the pure pole amplitude $`A`$, Tornqvist requires the position of the Adler zero to be at $`s_{A,\pi K}=0.42`$ GeV2 far from its position in chiral perturbation theory (current algebra predicts $`(m_Km_\pi )^2s_{A,\pi K}(m_K+m_\pi )^2`$ with an average value of $`0.24`$ GeV2). In contrast, by a simple choice of $`\alpha `$ of about $`15^0`$ we can fit these same data with the full hadronic amplitude $`T`$ which has the Adler zero at the position required by chiral dynamics.

This puts our attempts to generate extra states with the same quantum numbers by varying the free parameters of the model on more solid ground. We know that small changes in the value of $`m_0`$ and $`\gamma `$ can give equally good fits using the full hadronic amplitudes, $`T`$. This gives us confidence in our general conclusions. The fact that there is more to a scattering process than $`s`$channel dynamics means that fitting data along the real axis cannot accurately determine the true pole position of a broad state without an analytic continuation, or a very specific model. This casts doubt on the determination of the position of the $`\sigma `$pole by Tornqvist and Roos. Their fit to $`\pi \pi `$ data in terms of the amplitude $`A`$ gives quite different parameters than using the full amplitude $`T`$ of Eq. (18). That there is more to dynamics than $`s`$-channel resonances has been noted by Isgur and Speth in this same context .

## 7 Conclusions

The present work focusses on the study of the $`I=1`$ and $`I=1/2`$ sector of the light scalar meson spectroscopy. Previous papers from Tornqvist and Roos  seemed to suggest that using a simple model based on the hadronic “dressing” of bare seeds, one could generate more than one, possibly a whole family of mesons, with the same quantum numbers, starting with one bare seed only. This is certainly a very interesting possibility, since we know that experiment has detected many more light scalar mesons that can be accomodated in one nonet. We started by investigating the $`I=1`$ sector, where two strong candidates have been found: the long known $`a_0(980)`$ and the heavier $`a_0(1450)`$, detected by the Crystal Barrel collaboration . By slightly increasing two crucial parameters of the model, the overall coupling $`\gamma `$ and the bare mass $`m_0`$, we have shown that it is possible to find a picture in which both states can easily be generated starting from one bare $`n\overline{n}`$ seed only. Due to the structure of the vacuum polarization function, the heavier of the two states is automatically broader than the lighter one. Drawing conclusions on further, heavier states would require detailed treatment of heavier thresholds, which are not included here.

Encouraged by these results we then moved to the $`I=1/2`$ sector, to try and see whether we could also give a legitimate place to the controversial $`\kappa `$ meson. Due to the nature of the $`n\overline{s}`$ couplings to pseudoscalar-pseudoscalar channels, it turns out to be impossible to generate such a light $`I=1/2`$ scalar meson in our framework. Further heavier states can be generated, one of which has the right features to be identified with the $`K_0^{}(1430)`$, whereas the others might only be an artifact of the poor treatment of heavy thresholds in the model. Again, only a more rigorous description of such heavier thresholds could enable us to rule out their existence or not.

To complete the study, we considered the $`I=0`$ sector: even though the heavily structured dynamics of the isoscalars make any clear–cut result far from robust, at least in the framework of our simple model, we can conclude that the multiple crossing mechanism is certainly active in this sector as well, and that dynamical generation of many states with the same quantum numbers but different masses can be a plausible explanation of the experimental occurence of many more $`0^{++}`$ states that can fit in one quark–model nonet.
We conclude that the detailed pole parameters of Ref.  are strongly model dependent, as previously suggested by the comments of Refs. .

As opposed to the work in Ref., we cannot tell which are intrinsic states and which are dynamically generated, nor can we state that we have definitely found enough strong candidates to complete two full nonets as in Refs. : we can find no way to produce the light $`\kappa `$ meson and no precise assignment can be made for the isoscalar sector. As far as the isovector and isodoublet states are concerned, our picture is similar to that of Ref. , with the occurrence of two $`a_0`$ and two $`K_0^{}`$ physical states and the possibility to produce a number of $`f_0`$’s, depending on the coupling scheme.

## Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part under the EU-TMR Programme, Contract No. CT98-0169, EuroDA$`\mathrm{\Phi }`$NE.