format: text

text:
# Spectral Slope Variability of BL Lac Objects in the Optical Band

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Multi-wavelength observations of active galactic nuclei (AGN) suggest the presence of various emission components with different relative weights in different AGN classes. The large number of parameters involved in physical models of emission mechanisms can hardly be constrained by single epoch observations. Multi-band variability studies are then crucial in identifying and constraining individual components. Moreover, active nuclei are not spatially resolved in general. For this reason variability time scales, delays and correlations between variations in different continuum components or emission lines provide the main information about the location of different components. The very definition of AGN classes is in part based on variability properties. In fact, while quasars (QSOs) and Seyfert galaxies vary, on average, less than 0.5 mag on time scales of months in the optical band, blazars (i.e. BL Lac objects and Optically Violent Variables, OVVs) may change their luminosities by more than one mag in a few days (Ulrich, Maraschi, and Urry, 1997). Quantifying spectral variability will then help understanding different AGN classes by comparison. Although monitoring campaigns, from radio to X-ray wavelengths, exist for a limited number of objects, they are difficult to realize with adequate time sampling and duration. For this reason we try to exploit multi-band variability studies limited to the optical range, which in some case are available for several objects and relatively long observing periods. In a previous paper Trevese & Vagnetti (2002) analyzed the spectral slope variability of a sample of PG QSOs on the basis of the light curves in the B and R bands, provided by the Wise Observatory group, who monitored 42 quasars for 7 years with a typical sampling interval of about one month (Giveon et al., 1999). A spectral variability parameter $`\beta \mathrm{\Delta }\alpha /\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{log}f_\nu `$, $`f_\nu `$ being the specific flux and $`\alpha \mathrm{log}f_\nu /\mathrm{log}\nu `$ the spectral slope, was defined by Trevese & Vagnetti (2002) who derived constraints on variability mechanisms from the average $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ values. In particular they showed that the variation of spectral slope implied by changes of the accretion rate are not able to explain $`\beta `$ values deduced from the observations, while “hot spots” on the accretion disc, possibly caused by instability phenomena (Kawaguchi et al., 1998), can easily account for the observed spectral variability. In the present study we analyze B, V, R, I light curves of eight BL Lac objects obtained by D’Amicis et al. (2002) in a monitoring campaign of about 5 years with an average sampling interval of $`25`$ days. We show that BL Lacs clearly differ from QSOs in their $`\alpha ,\beta `$ distribution. We show that a simple model representing the variability of a synchrotron component can account for the observed $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ values and we discuss constraints which can be derived from spectral variability on the amount of thermal radiation contributed by a disk component in the optical band.

## 2 DATA ANALYSIS

The sample consists of 8 radio selected BL Lac objects listed in Table 1. Observations were made in the period 1995-1999, in the standard Johnson-Cousins B, V, R, I bands and are described in D’Amicis et al. (2002). Typical photometric uncertainties range from 0.01 to 0.03 mag r.m.s.. In table 1 the following quantities are reported: Column 1 \- Name; Column 2 \- Coordinate Designation; Column 3 \- Number of observations; Column 4 \- average B magnitude; Column 5 \- redshift; Column 6 \- average spectral slope; Column 7 \- spectral variability index. For the present analysis we regard as “simultaneous” the observations in different bands taken during the same observing night. We considered the data dereddened as in D’Amicis et al. (2002). We then define for each object an “instantaneous” slope by a straight line fit through the B, V, R, I data points as a function of $`\mathrm{log}\nu `$, neglecting for the moment any curvature of the spectral energy distribution within the optical range. A positive correlation of the instantaneous spectral slope $`\alpha \mathrm{log}f_\nu /\mathrm{log}\nu `$ with flux changes $`\delta \mathrm{log}f_{\nu _R}`$ has been already discussed by D’Amicis et al. (2002). In the present paper we quantify spectral variations in two different ways. A first method considers, for each object, all the positions in the $`\alpha \mathrm{log}f_{\nu _B}`$ diagram, $`f_{\nu _B}`$ is the specific flux at the effective frequency $`\nu _B`$ of the blue band. These points, together with the relevant regression lines are shown in Figure 1 for each of the 8 objects. In the same figure the solid lines represent the average increase of $`\alpha `$ with $`\mathrm{log}f_{\nu _B}`$. Clearly this quantity is independent of the time at which $`\alpha `$ and $`\mathrm{log}f_{\nu _B}`$ values are measured. We refer to the blue band, instead of the red one used by D’Amicis et al. (2002) in their correlation analysis, for comparison with the study of QSO spectral variations by Trevese & Vagnetti (2002). The slopes $`b`$ of the regression lines of each object can be assumed as a first spectral variability index.

A second method, adopted by Trevese & Vagnetti (2002) considers, for each object, the quantity:

$$\beta _{ij}\beta (\tau _{ij})\frac{\alpha _j\alpha _i}{\mathrm{log}f_{\nu _B}(t_j)\mathrm{log}f_{\nu _B}(t_i)},\tau _{ij}\frac{(t_jt_i)}{(1+z)},i,j=1,N$$
(1)
which represents the change of spectral slope per unit variation of log flux as a function of the rest frame time lag $`\tau _{ij}`$ and again we refer to the flux changes in the blue band. We stress that $`\beta `$ is a very sensitive indicator of spectral changes but, for this reason, it is also a noisy quantity. For flux changes comparable or smaller than the photometric noise, $`\beta `$ values are randomly spread over a wide range. Thus we limit the computation to $`|\mathrm{log}f_{\nu _B}(t_j)\mathrm{log}f_{\nu _B}(t_i)|>0.03`$. In any case, instead of individual $`\beta _{ij}`$ values, it’s worth referring to average values, e.g. in bins of time lag $`\tau `$.

To constrain physical models of variability, it’s interesting to see whether spectral changes are different on different time scales. Figure 2 shows for each object $`\beta _{ij}`$ as a function of $`\tau _{ij}`$. The mean values of $`\beta _{ij}`$ in bins of 200 days are also shown. The errors represent the standard deviation of the mean, which has been computed according to Edelson & Krolik (1988), to take into account correlation among $`\beta _{ij}`$ values within each bin. For each object the value of the first spectral variability index $`b`$ is also shown for comparison. In general the larger variations of $`\beta `$ occur at larger time lags where, due to the worst statistic, they are less reliable. For $`\tau 500`$ d there are no evident systematic trends of $`\beta `$ as a function of $`\tau `$. Thus it makes sense to define a less noisy index taking the average of $`\beta `$ within the first 500 days:

$$\beta \beta _{ij},\tau _{ij}<500\mathrm{d}.$$
(2)
In the following we limit our analysis to the average variability index $`\beta `$ .

Besides the spectral slope $`\alpha `$ computed by a straight line fit through the $`\mathrm{log}f_{\nu _i}`$ versus $`\mathrm{log}\nu _i`$ (i=B,V,R,I) data points, we also computed two other slope values, towards the blue and red side of the spectral range:

$$\alpha _{BR}=\frac{0.4[(BR)(B_oR_o)]}{\mathrm{log}(\lambda _B/\lambda _R)}2,\alpha _{VI}=\frac{0.4[(VI)(V_oR_o)]}{\mathrm{log}(\lambda _V/\lambda _I)}2,$$

where $`B_o,V_o,R_o,I_o`$ and $`\lambda _B,\lambda _V,\lambda _R,\lambda _I`$ are the zero points and the effective wavelengths of the four photometric bands (Cox, 2000). For all but two objects the values of $`\alpha _{VI}`$ and $`\alpha _{BR}`$ are respectively slightly larger and slightly smaller, on average, than $`\alpha `$, indicating a little curvature of the spectrum, and the slopes of the linear regressions $`\alpha _{BR}`$ vs. $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha _{VI}`$ vs. $`\alpha `$ do not differ significantly from one. In the case of BL Lac and OQ 530, $`\alpha _{VI}`$ is almost equal to $`\alpha _{BR}`$, or slightly smaller, and becomes significantly smaller than $`\alpha `$ (and $`\alpha _{BR}`$) when $`\alpha `$ is small. A possible explanation is that the (constant) contribution of the host galaxy emerges in the faint phases causing a more marked softening of the spectrum on the red side of the wavelength interval considered. This is consistent with the fact that the host galaxy contribution, as reported by Urry et al. (2000), is relatively strong for these two objects.

### 2.1 Comparison with QSOs

The average values $`\beta `$ of the variability index, for all time lags smaller than 500 days rest-frame, are plotted in Figure 3 versus the relevant average $`\alpha `$ values. For comparison the values for the sample of 42 quasars discussed by Trevese & Vagnetti (2002) are also shown111$`\beta `$ values for QSOs are slightly different from those shown in Trevese & Vagnetti (2002) since they have been recomputed at a fixed rest-frame time lag interval, and taking the average over 500 instead of 1000 days for consistency.. BL Lacs and quasars are clearly segregated in the $`\alpha \beta `$ plane. BL Lacs show, on average, lower $`\alpha `$ values, consistently with the absence, or lower relative weight, of the thermal blue bump component. The new information in Figure 3 is that BL Lacs have $`\beta `$ values smaller, on average, than quasars. BL Lac variability is stronger, $`\alpha `$ changes are also larger, but their ratio $`\beta `$ is smaller. Moreover, using both $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ parameters together allows a clear distinction of the two classes. We want to discuss whether this behavior fits into the currently accepted models describing the different emission mechanisms of blazars and QSOs.

## 3 VARIABILITY OF THE SYNCHROTRON COMPONENT

### 3.1 A simple model

The continuum spectral energy distribution of blazars from radio frequencies to X and $`\gamma `$-rays can be explained by a synchrotron emission plus inverse Compton scattering (Ghisellini & Maraschi, 1992; Sikora, Begelman, & Rees, 1994). Variability can be produced by an intermittent channeling into the jet of the energy produced by the central engine. Spada et al. (2001) have considered a detailed model where crossing of different shells of material, ejected with different velocities, produce shocks which heat the electrons responsible for the synchrotron emission. The resulting spectra are compared with multi-band, multi-epoch observations of 3C 279 from radio to $`\gamma `$ frequencies, showing a good agreement. Similar computations have been done for Mkn 421 (Guetta et al., 2002). In the case of the eight objects of our sample, B, V, R, I bands are sampling variability of the synchrotron component. This component can be roughly described by a broken power law characterized by the break (or peak in $`\nu L_\nu `$) frequency $`\nu _p`$ and the asymptotic spectral slopes $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\alpha _2`$ at low and high frequency respectively, $`\alpha _1>1`$, $`\alpha _2<1`$ (Tavecchio, Maraschi, & Ghisellini, 1998). An equivalent representation is:

$$L_\nu =L_p2[(\frac{\nu }{\nu _p})^{\alpha _1}+(\frac{\nu }{\nu _p})^{\alpha _2}]^1L_pH(\nu /\nu _p;\alpha _1,\alpha _2)$$
(3)
where $`L_p`$ is the specific luminosity at $`\nu _p`$. We adopt this representation for a stationary component of the SED and we add to it a second (variable) component with the same analytical form but different peak frequency $`\nu _p^{}`$ and amplitude $`L_p^{}`$ to produce spectral changes:

$$L_\nu =L_pH(\nu /\nu _p;\alpha _1,\alpha _2)+L_p^{}H(\nu /\nu _p^{};\alpha _1,\alpha _2)$$
(4)
The addition of the second component mimics the behavior of the synchrotron emission of model spectra when shell crossing occurs, producing an increment of emission with $`\nu _p^{}>\nu _p`$, due to newly accelerated electrons. With such a representation we can compute $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ as a function of $`\nu _p^{}/\nu _p`$, for different values of $`\nu _p`$ and given values of $`\alpha _1`$, $`\alpha _2`$ and $`L_p^{}/L_p`$. We adopted typical values of the asymptotic slopes $`\alpha _1=0.5`$, $`\alpha _2=2`$, we assigned to $`\nu _p`$ different values in the range 2.5-10 $`10^{14}`$ Hz, and we made $`\nu _p^{}/\nu _p`$ vary in the range 0.8-4. We also adopted a ratio $`L_p^{}/L_p`$ corresponding to a 0.5 mag change in the blue band, which is representative of the r.m.s. variability. The results are shown in Figure 4, where we use as $`\alpha `$ the slope of the stationary component. The three different lines are computed for $`\mathrm{log}\nu _p=14.4,14.7,15.0`$ from left to right respectively. The computed curves fall naturally in the region occupied by the data, namely it is possible to account for the position of the objects in the $`\alpha \beta `$ plane with typical values of $`\alpha _1`$, $`\alpha _2`$, $`\nu _p^{}/\nu _p`$ and $`\nu _p`$, required to represent the overall SED of the objects considered (see Fossati et al., 1998).

### 3.2 The Thermal Bump

BL Lac objects can be classified according to the break frequency of synchrotron emission, from Low frequency peaked BL Lacs (LBL) which show a break in the IR/optical band to High frequency peaked BL Lacs (HBL) with the synchrotron break at UV/X-ray (or higher) energies (e.g. Padovani & Giommi, 1995). On average the blue bump (TB) produced by the accretion disk tends to be negligible in HBLs while in LBLs its contribution may be important. According to Cavaliere & D’Elia (2001) this can be interpreted in terms of higher accretion rate $`\dot{m}`$ in the case of LBLs, producing a stronger thermal emission from the disk, while HBLs are dominated by non-thermal energy, partly extracted from rotational energy of the central Kerr hole.

In particular the TB remains negligible during changes of the synchrotron component in the case of Mkn 421, a classic HBL, while emerges clearly during the faint phases in the case of 3C 279, a low frequency peaked object (see Spada et al., 2001; Guetta et al., 2002). We stress that the TB is relatively “narrow”, since its emission is mostly concentrated in the UV region, while the synchrotron emission extends from radio frequencies to the UV (or X-rays). Then the change of relative intensity of the two components can produce strong changes of the spectral slope in the optical-UV region, where the synchrotron and TB components have very different slopes ($`2`$ and $`+1.5`$ respectively). As a result, in the case of LBLs we could find strongly negative $`\beta `$ values in the faint phases, namely a hardening instead of a softening of the spectrum, at wavelengths smaller but close to the peak of the TB, as observed in the case of 3C 279, where we can estimate $`\beta 1`$ at $`\lambda 2500`$ Å on the basis of the data reported by Pian et al. (1999) (see their Figure 4). However these negative $`\beta `$ values do not seem to be typical in the case of our sample, although synchrotron breaks are distributed in the frequency range $`10^{13}10^{15}`$ Hz. Thus, in principle, we can set upper limits to contribution of the accretion disk to the overall SED on the basis of the observed $`\beta `$ values. For a rough estimate it is sufficient to approximate the TB with a black body emission. As already noted in §1, although the TB itself may vary, possibly due to instabilities which produce hot spots in the accretion disk (Trevese & Vagnetti, 2002), the amplitudes of its variations are smaller than those of blazars (e.g Trevese et al., 1994). Thus we can approximately consider TB emission as a constant during the much larger variations of the synchrotron component.

Thus we consider a specific luminosity $`L_sL(\nu ,t)`$ of the synchrotron component with a time dependent local slope $`\alpha _s(t)`$ at the observing frequency $`\nu =\overline{\nu }`$, and a constant thermal TB luminosity $`L_{TB}`$ with local slope $`\alpha _{TB}`$. The total specific luminosity at two times $`t`$ and $`t_o`$ will be $`L=L_s+L_{TB}`$ and $`L_o=L_{so}+L_{TB}`$ respectively. The local spectral slope $`\alpha `$ of the composite SED is:

$$\alpha \frac{\mathrm{log}L}{\mathrm{log}\nu }=\frac{L_s}{L}\alpha _s+\frac{L_{TB}}{L}\alpha _{TB}$$
(5)
Defining $`\chi =\frac{L_{TB}}{L_{so}}`$, $`\epsilon =\frac{L_s}{L_{so}}`$ and $`\delta =\alpha _s\alpha _{so}`$, where the subscript “o” indicates the initial time, we have $`\beta _s=\delta /\mathrm{log}\epsilon `$ for the “unperturbed” synchrotron component and:

$$\beta (\alpha \alpha _o)/\mathrm{log}\frac{L}{L_o}=\left[\frac{\epsilon }{\epsilon +\chi }\delta +\frac{\chi (\epsilon 1)}{(\epsilon +\chi )(1+\chi )}(\alpha _o\alpha _{TB})\right]/\mathrm{log}\frac{\epsilon +\chi }{1+\chi }$$
(6)
for the composite spectrum. In Figure 5 we report the spectral variability index $`\beta `$ as a function of $`\chi `$ for different values of the temperature $`T`$.

We assume a typical value $`\alpha _{so}=1.75`$ and we assume for the disk a black body temperature $`T=10^4K`$ or $`T=2\times 10^4K`$. In both cases we compute $`\beta `$ as a function of $`\chi `$, for two values of $`\epsilon `$ and a typical value $`\beta _s=1`$. The result is shown in Figure 5. For 3C 279 we can estimate (from Pian et al., 1999) $`\beta 1`$, $`\chi 1`$ and $`T2\times 10^4K`$ which is consistent with the relevant curve in the figure. It appears that e.g. the condition $`\beta >0.5`$ implies $`\chi 0.4`$ for $`T=10^4K`$, or $`\chi 0.2`$ for $`T=2\times 10^4K`$. Similarly $`\beta >0`$ implies $`\chi 1`$ for $`T=10^4K`$, or $`\chi <0.5`$ for $`T=2\times 10^4K`$. For a given $`\nu _p`$, the ratio between TB and synchrotron components may, in fact, vary from typical BL Lacs to flat spectrum radio quasars (FSRQ), which also show intense broad emission lines. This different behavior depends both on the intrinsic luminosity of these components and on the viewing angle. An estimate of the isotropic emission can be deduced from the broad line region luminosity $`L_{BLR}`$ (Celotti et al., 1997) and compared with the kinetic jet power (D’Elia et al., 2003), as done by Padovani et al. (2003). This information is crucial in studying the relation among different classes of objects and testing possible AGN “grand unified theories”. In this context, spectral variability indexes, possibly measured for stastistical samples at different time lags, luminosities, and rest-frame frequencies, will provide independent information on the relative importance of isotropic and beamed components.

## 4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

We have performed a new analysis of the light curves of eight BL Lac objects monitored in B,V,R,I bands for a total period of about 5 years with an average sampling interval of $`25`$ days.

Adopting a spectral variability index $`\beta `$, representing the average ratio between the change of spectral slope and the logarithmic luminosity change, we find that BL Lacs show smaller spectral variability with respect to quasars (analyzed in a previous paper). This happens despite the fact that both the spectral slope and luminosity variations of BL Lacs are larger then those of QSOs. BL Lacs and QSOs appear clearly segregated in the $`\alpha \beta `$ plane. Our analysis allows a quantitative comparison of the observations with a model based on variability of the synchrotron component. The model easily accounts for the observed position in the $`\alpha \beta `$ plane with a natural choice of the relevant parameters. Thus the segregation in the $`\alpha \beta `$ plane is a consequence of the different emission mechanism in the optical band: synchrotron in the case of BL Lacs and thermal hot spots on the accretion disk in the case of QSOs (see Trevese & Vagnetti, 2002). A strong thermal bump can produce negative $`\beta `$ values, which are not observed in our sample, while they do in fact appear in some typical LBL object, where the thermal bump emerges in the faint phases. Thus spectral variability, even restricted to the optical band, can be used to set limits on the relative contribution of the synchrotron component and the thermal component to the overall SED. Further studies of the spectral variability index $`\beta `$ in different objects will allow us to establish whether the thermal bump is significant only in the most extreme LBL, or to what extent its contribution, possibly correlated with the accretion rate $`\dot{m}`$, is related to total luminosity.

We wish to thank Alfonso Cavaliere and Enrico Massaro for discussions and comments, and Silvia Sclavi for providing details on photometric calibrations. This work was partly supported by MIUR under grant COFIN 2001/028773.


text:
# 1 Periodogram of the RV curve of H_𝛽 (left panel) and of the light curve of the BUSCA ’UV’ band (right panel). The power spectral density (psd) is a measure for the probability that a period is present in the RV or lightcurve. The horizontal line in both panels is the 3𝜎 confidence level.

The recently discovered new class of sdB pulsators (sdBV) offers a powerful possibility for the investigation of their interior and thus their evolutionary history. The first step towards applying asteroseismologic tools is the identification of pulsation modes. The best target for such an investigation is PG 1605$`+`$072 because of its outstanding properties among the sdBVs: it is the brightest object (B = 13 mag), it has the longest periods ($``$ 500 s) and the largest variations (0.2 mag in the optical) as well as the richest pulsation spectrum with more than 50 modes (see Kilkenny et al. 1999). The rather rapid rotation ($`\mathrm{v}\mathrm{sin}i=39km/s`$, Heber et al. 1999) complicates the interpretation of the pulsation spectrum due to non-linear mode splitting.

We want to accomplish the mode identification by measuring both the light and the radial velocity curve for PG 1605$`+`$072. The analysis of equivalent width changes of the Balmer lines and of line profile variations (as a future task in preparation) will support the aim of the project. Moreover, we want to determine light/velocity amplitude ratios and search for a wavelength dependence of photometric amplitudes which gives us information on limb darkening effects.

The interpretation of these measurements require sophisticated models. Phase dependent synthetic spectra will be calculated with a code developed by Falter (2001). As a prerequisite for these models the time dependent surface distribution of $`\mathrm{T}_{eff}`$, $`\mathrm{log}g`$ and the velocity field are determined using Townsend’s (1997) program BRUCE which also takes effects caused by rotation into consideration. Furthermore, detailed evolutionary pulsation models (Charpinet et al., these proceedings) are at hand for the comparison with the observational frequency pattern.

Feasibility studies:
As a first step we carried out a feasibility study in May 2001 by monitoring simultaneously the radial velocity (RV) curve for about 5.5 h and the light curve in four spectral bands for about 48 h at Calar Alto Observatory, Spain (for details see Falter et al. 2003).
Time resolved optical spectra (spectral resolution: $``$1 $`\mathrm{\AA }`$) were obtained at the 3.5 m telescope equipped with the TWIN spectrograph. The time resolution was achieved by trailing mode observations which is the tuning of the guiding system such that the star moves slowly along the slit in N-S direction (drift velocity: 270<sup>′′</sup>, 15 s time resolution). The periodogram analysis of the RV curves measured for $`\mathrm{H}_\beta `$ and $`\mathrm{H}_\gamma `$ reveal three dominant frequencies (see Fig. 1). These frequencies are consistent with previous photometry (Kilkenny et al. 1999). A comparison with other feasibility studies (O’Toole et al. 2000, 2002, Woolf et al. 2002) shows that the power of the modes around 2.1 mHz and 2.75 mHz has switched in the course of the years 1999, 2000 and 2001.
The light curves were measured with the new multi-band camera BUSCA (see Cordes et al. 2003) at the 2.2 m telescope in four wavelength bands simultaneously. Three beamsplitters split the incoming light into four beams feeding four 4k$`\times `$4k CCDs. In order to reduce the achievable S/N and the cycle time (51 s) no filters were inserted and, therefore, the beamsplitters served as broad wave band filters. Fig. 2 shows the transmission functions of the four bands. The photometric time series in the four wavelength bands confirm the three frequencies found in the RV curves and reveal two additional frequencies (see Fig. 1). These five detections are found in all wavebands. More frequencies are present but not consistent in the four bands. For all frequencies, we find a wavelength-dependent variation of the amplitudes. Fig. 3 shows the relative deviation of the amplitude in the passband from the mean value over all bands (for four example frequencies).

The Multi-Site Spectroscopic-Telescope project (MSST):
Our feasibility study as well as the previous ones (O’Toole et al. 2000, 2002, Woolf et al. 2002) were unable to resolve the rich power spectrum of the RV and light curves. A considerably longer period of monitoring with as little gaps as possible is required to reach this goal. The next step towards the identification of pulsation modes for PG 1605$`+`$072 is the MSST project. From the beginning of May until the end of June in 2002, an international collaboration involving more than 25 colleagues measured the light and radial velocity curves at 15 observatories around the world. More details about that project are described elsewhere (Heber et al., these proceedings). In the course of this project we additionally had the benefit of a contribution by the WET collaboration which observed PG 1605$`+`$072 as an alternate target during their Xcov22 campaign (see Schuh et al. 2003).


text:
# I Rates and invariant amplitudes for decays of 𝐵̄ mesons mesons to 𝐷𝜋 and related modes. Primed amplitudes are related to unprimed amplitudes by a factor of 𝜆𝑓_𝐾/[𝑓_𝜋(1-{𝜆²/2})]=0.275. Except where noted, the branching ratios are quoted from the Particle Data Group [].

ANL-HEP-PR-02-113

EFI-02-46-Rev

hep-ph/0212274

December 2002

FINAL-STATE PHASES IN $`BD\pi ,D^{}\pi `$, AND

$`D\rho `$ DECAYS 111To be submitted to Phys. Rev. D.

Cheng-Wei Chiang

High Energy Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60440

and

Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637

Jonathan L. Rosner

Enrico Fermi Institute and Department of Physics

University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637

ABSTRACT

> The final-state phases in $`\overline{B}D\pi ,D^{}\pi `$, and $`D\rho `$ decays appear to follow a pattern similar to those in $`D\overline{K}\pi `$, $`\overline{K}^{}\pi `$, and $`\overline{K}\rho `$ decays. Each set of processes is characterized by three charge states but only two independent amplitudes, so the amplitudes form triangles in the complex plane. For the first two sets the triangles appear to have non-zero area, while for the $`D\rho `$ or $`\overline{K}\rho `$ decays the areas of the triangles are consistent with zero. Following an earlier discussion of this behavior for $`D`$ decays, a similar analysis is performed for $`B`$ decays, and the relative phases and magnitudes of contributing amplitudes are determined. The significance of recent results on $`\overline{B}^0D^{()0}\overline{K}^{()0}`$ is noted. Open theoretical and experimental questions are indicated.

PACS codes: 13.25.Hw, 11.30.Hv, 14.40.Nd, 13.75.Lb

I. INTRODUCTION

The decays of $`B`$ mesons (those containing the $`b`$ quark) are potentially rich sources of information on CP violation. One such manifestation of this phenomenon involves an asymmetry $`A(f)`$ between the rate for a decay of a $`B`$ meson to a final state $`f`$ and the corresponding CP-conjugate process:

$$A(f)\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(Bf)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\overline{B}\overline{f})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(Bf)+\mathrm{\Gamma }(\overline{B}\overline{f})}.$$
(1)
Such an asymmetry requires there be at least two contributing amplitudes $`A_{1,2}`$, each characterized by distinct weak phases $`\varphi _{1,2}`$ and strong phases $`\delta _{1,2}`$. Under CP-conjugation, the weak phases change sign but the strong phases do not:

$$A(Bf)=|A_1|e^{i\varphi _1}e^{i\delta _1}+|A_2|e^{i\varphi _2}e^{i\delta _2},$$
(2)
$$A(\overline{B}\overline{f})=|A_1|e^{i\varphi _1}e^{i\delta _1}+|A_2|e^{i\varphi _2}e^{i\delta _2},$$
(3)
so that $`A(f)\mathrm{sin}(\varphi _1\varphi _2)\mathrm{sin}(\delta _1\delta _2)`$. In these decays the observation of a so-called “direct” CP asymmetry thus requires both the weak and the strong phases of the two contributing amplitudes to differ from one another. Thus it is of great importance to understand the patterns of strong final-state phases in as wide as possible a set of decays.

The strong final-state phases in decays of strange particles are appreciable. For example, in $`K_{S,L}\pi \pi `$ the final-state phases in the $`I_{\pi \pi }=0`$ and $`I_{\pi \pi }=2`$ channels differ from one another by many tens of degrees. Furthermore, they can be measured directly in elastic $`\pi \pi `$ scattering, and then applied to the decays $`K_{S,L}\pi \pi `$ using Watson’s Theorem . However, in the decays of charmed and heavier mesons to two-body final states, these states constitute only a small fraction of the available decays, and elastic phase shifts are no longer relevant .

In the limit of a very heavy decaying quark, certain nonleptonic decays are expected to be characterized by small final-state interactions. These are the ones such as $`\overline{B}^0D^{()+}\pi ^{}`$ to which the factorization hypothesis  applies: The decay amplitude can be regarded as the product of two color-singlet currents, one associated with the $`\overline{B}^0D^{()+}`$ transition and the other creating the $`\pi ^{}`$ from the vacuum. The large relative momentum of the two final-state particles leaves little time for them to interact with one another before they are safely out of each other’s range. This expectation is confirmed in recent analyses of the factorization hypothesis based on QCD , though the role of final-state interactions in other nonleptonic heavy quark decays is more open to question (see, e.g., ).

Some processes involve color-suppressed weak decays, in which the weak current produces a pair of quarks each of which ends up in a different meson. Other processes involve interactions in which the quark and antiquark in the initial meson annihilate with one another or exchange a $`W`$ boson. While these last processes are expected to be suppressed by a factor of (decay constant)/(heavy meson mass) in the amplitude relative to those to which factorization should apply, they have been found not to exhibit such suppression in charmed meson decays . As a result, charmed particle decays exhibit an interesting pattern of final-state phases, in which there are large relative phases between the amplitudes for the various charge states in $`D\overline{K}\pi `$ and $`D\overline{K}^{}\pi `$, but the amplitudes for $`D\overline{K}\rho `$ seem to be relatively real with respect to one another .

The decays $`\overline{B}D\pi ,D^{}\pi ,D\rho `$ now have been studied with sufficient accuracy that a similar pattern appears to be emerging. The rates for the three charge states in the first two processes favor relative phases between contributing amplitudes (e.g., those of definite isospin) , while the $`\overline{B}D\rho `$ rates favor amplitudes which are relatively real . In the present paper we perform an analysis parallel to that for charmed particles in Ref. , finding that the source of the final-state phases in the $`\overline{B}`$ decays under discussion is very similar to that in charm decays, but that the effects are diminishing as expected with increasing heavy quark mass. We point out open theoretical and experimental problems and indicate what further data would be useful in resolving them.

Now that the color-suppressed decays $`\overline{B}^0D^0\overline{K}^0`$ and $`\overline{B}^0D^0\overline{K}^0`$ have been observed , one can perform a similar analysis for $`\overline{B}D\overline{K}`$ decays. However, in contrast to a recent claim , we find that the experimental errors on these Cabibbo-suppressed decay modes are still too large to permit any firm conclusion about relative strong phases. We shall discuss the importance of such modes in reducing ambiguities in the Cabibbo-favored amplitudes.

We review the experimental situation for $`\overline{B}D\pi ,D^{}\pi ,D\rho `$ in Sec. II, performing a standard isospin analysis and confirming that the isospin amplitudes have a non-zero relative phase for the first two processes but not for the third. We then introduce a description of the decays in terms of topological amplitudes in Sec. III. The implications of the data for these amplitudes are discussed in Sec. IV, while we discuss missing pieces of the puzzle and experimental prospects in Sec. V. We summarize in Sec. VI.

II. EVIDENCE FOR RELATIVE PHASES IN (SOME) $`\overline{B}`$ DECAYS

We review the isospin decomposition for the decays $`\overline{B}D\pi `$, following closely the corresponding discussion for $`D\overline{K}\pi `$ . Similar decompositions then follow when one of the final-state particles is a vector meson, since in all cases there is a single partial wave in the decay.

The decays of interest are governed by the subprocess $`bcd\overline{u}`$, which has $`\mathrm{\Delta }I=1`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_3=1`$. Since the initial $`\overline{B}`$ state has $`I=1/2`$, the processes are characterized by two amplitudes $`A_{1/2}`$ and $`A_{3/2}`$ labeled by the total isospin of the final $`D\pi `$ state. The amplitudes are given by

$$𝒜(D^0\pi ^{})=A_{3/2},$$

$$𝒜(D^+\pi ^{})=\frac{2}{3}A_{1/2}+\frac{1}{3}A_{3/2},$$

$$𝒜(D^0\pi ^0)=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}A_{1/2}+\frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}A_{3/2},$$
(4)
where we omit the initial particle. They thus satisfy a triangle relation

$$𝒜(D^0\pi ^{})=𝒜(D^+\pi ^{})+\sqrt{2}𝒜(D^0\pi ^0).$$
(5)
A non-zero area of the triangle would signify non-trivial final-state phases between the two isospin amplitudes.

Letting $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$ denote kinematic factors which we shall specify shortly, where the subscript denotes the final state, we can define reduced partial widths with the kinematic factors removed, e.g.,

$$|A_{3/2}|^2=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(D^0\pi ^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }(D^0\pi ^{})/\mathrm{\Phi }_{D^0\pi ^{}},$$
(6)
$$|A_{1/2}|^2=\frac{3}{2}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(D^+\pi ^{})+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(D^0\pi ^0)]\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(D^0\pi ^{}),$$
(7)
and the relative phase $`\delta _I=\mathrm{Arg}(A_{3/2}/A_{1/2})`$ between isospin amplitudes satisfies

$$\mathrm{cos}\delta _I=\frac{3\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(D^+\pi ^{})+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(D^0\pi ^{})6\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(D^0\pi ^0)}{4|A_{1/2}A_{3/2}|}.$$
(8)
The search for relative phases in $`\overline{B}D\pi ,D^{}\pi `$, and $`D\rho `$ decays goes back at least as far as the unpublished work of Yamamoto , in which only upper limits existed at the time for the color-suppressed decays $`B^0D^0\pi ^0,D^0\pi ^0`$ and $`D^0\rho ^0`$. Belle and CLEO reported observation of the first two final states about a year and a half ago. The rate for $`\overline{B}^0D^0\pi ^0`$ was found to be large enough that the triangle of complex amplitudes for $`B^0\overline{D}^0\pi ^0`$, $`B^0D^{}\pi ^+`$, and $`B^+\overline{D}^0\pi ^+`$ appeared to have non-zero area. More recently, CLEO reported an analysis of a larger data sample of the last two modes , which strengthens the argument for a non-zero final state phase difference between the $`I=1/2`$ and $`I=3/2`$ amplitudes. With the new branching ratios $`(\overline{B}^0D^+\pi ^{})=(26.8\pm 2.9)\times 10^4`$, $`(B^{}D^0\pi ^{})=(49.7\pm 3.8)\times 10^4`$ as well as the Belle-CLEO average $`(\overline{B}^0D^0\pi ^0)=(2.92\pm 0.45)\times 10^4`$, one finds $`|A_{3/2}|=(7.70\pm 0.29)\times 10^7`$ GeV, $`|A_{1/2}|=(5.30\pm 0.58)\times 10^7`$ GeV, and $`\mathrm{cos}\delta _I=0.86\pm 0.05`$ or $`\mathrm{cos}\delta _I<1`$ at $`2.8\sigma `$.

The same formulae (4)–(8) can be readily applied to both $`D^{}\pi `$ and $`D\rho `$ decays by replacing the final state mesons with the appropriate ones. It is found that the $`D^{}\pi `$ decays have $`|A_{3/2}|=(3.32\pm 0.14)\times 10^7`$, $`|A_{1/2}|=(2.50\pm 0.20)\times 10^7`$, and $`\mathrm{cos}\delta _I=0.86\pm 0.06`$ or $`\mathrm{cos}\delta _I<1`$ at $`2.4\sigma `$. Similar conclusions were drawn for isospin amplitudes in $`\overline{B}D^{()}\pi `$ in Ref. .

$`D^{}\pi `$ decays thus have a phase structure very similar to that of the $`D\pi `$ decays. However, with the newly reported branching ratio $`(\overline{B}^0D^0\rho ^0)=(2.9\pm 1.0\pm 0.4)\times 10^4`$ , the $`D\rho `$ decays give $`|A_{3/2}|=(5.74\pm 0.39)\times 10^7`$, $`|A_{1/2}|=(4.00\pm 0.76)\times 10^7`$, and $`\mathrm{cos}\delta _I=0.99\pm 0.08`$, consistent with a vanishing strong phase.

The decays $`\overline{B}D^{()}\overline{K}^{()}`$ are governed by the quark subprocess $`bc\overline{u}s`$, which has $`\mathrm{\Delta }I=\mathrm{\Delta }I_3=1/2`$. Combining this interaction with the isospin $`I=1/2`$ of the initial $`\overline{B}`$, one has two amplitudes $`A_0^{DK}`$ and $`A_1^{DK}`$ labeled by total isospin. For example, for $`\overline{B}D\overline{K}`$, using the phase convention of Ref. ,

$$𝒜(\overline{B}^0D^+K^{})=\frac{1}{2}A_1^{DK}+\frac{1}{2}A_0^{DK},𝒜(\overline{B}^0D^0\overline{K}^0)=\frac{1}{2}A_1^{DK}\frac{1}{2}A_0^{DK},$$

$$𝒜(B^{}D^0K^{})=A_1^{DK}.$$
(9)
One thus has the sum rule

$$𝒜(\overline{B}^0D^+K^{})+𝒜(\overline{B}^0D^0\overline{K}^0)=𝒜(B^{}D^0K^{}),$$
(10)
with similar sum rules when one final pseudoscalar is replaced by a vector meson. (When both final mesons have spin 1, there are three helicity amplitudes or partial waves; the sum rule holds for each. We shall not consider such decays further here.)

Xing  has argued that the observed amplitudes for $`D\overline{K}`$ and $`D\overline{K}^{}`$ decays favor non-zero relative phases between the isospin amplitudes. We shall see that these amplitudes are consistent with being relatively real at better than $`1\sigma `$, and will identify the improvements in measurements that are likely to be needed in order to establish a non-zero relative phase.

III. TOPOLOGICAL AMPLITUDES

Meson wave functions are assumed to have the following quark content, with phases chosen so that isospin multiplets contain no relative signs :

* Beauty mesons: $`\overline{B}^0=b\overline{d}`$, $`B^{}=b\overline{u}`$, $`\overline{B}_s=b\overline{s}`$.
* Charmed mesons: $`D^0=c\overline{u}`$, $`D^+=c\overline{d}`$, $`D_s^+=c\overline{s}`$, with corresponding phases for vector mesons.
* Pseudoscalar mesons $`P`$: $`\pi ^+=u\overline{d}`$, $`\pi ^0=(d\overline{d}u\overline{u})/\sqrt{2}`$, $`\pi ^{}=d\overline{u}`$, $`K^+=u\overline{s}`$, $`K^0=d\overline{s}`$, $`\overline{K}^0=s\overline{d}`$, $`K^{}=s\overline{u}`$, $`\eta =(s\overline{s}u\overline{u}d\overline{d})/\sqrt{3}`$, $`\eta ^{}=(u\overline{u}+d\overline{d}+2s\overline{s})/\sqrt{6}`$, assuming a specific octet-singlet mixing  in the $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ wave functions.)
* Vector mesons $`V`$: $`\rho ^+=u\overline{d}`$, $`\rho ^0=(d\overline{d}u\overline{u})/\sqrt{2}`$, $`\rho ^{}=d\overline{u}`$, $`\omega =(u\overline{u}+d\overline{d})/\sqrt{2}`$, $`K^+=u\overline{s}`$, $`K^0=d\overline{s}`$, $`\overline{K}^0=s\overline{d}`$, $`K^{}=s\overline{u}`$, $`\varphi =s\overline{s}`$.

The partial width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for a specific two-body decay to $`PP`$ is expressed in terms of an invariant amplitude $`𝒜`$ as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(BPP)=\frac{p^{}}{8\pi M^2}|𝒜|^2,$$
(11)
where $`p^{}`$ is the center-of-mass (c.m.) 3-momentum of each final particle, and $`M`$ is the mass of the decaying particle. The kinematic factor of $`p^{}`$ is appropriate for the S-wave final state. The amplitude $`𝒜`$ will thus have dimensions of (energy)-1.

For $`PV`$ decays a P-wave kinematic factor is appropriate instead, and

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(BPV)=\frac{(p^{})^3}{8\pi M^2}|𝒜^{}|^2.$$
(12)
Here $`𝒜^{}`$ is dimensionless. These conventions agree with those of Chau et al. .

The amplitudes $`𝒜`$ are then expressed in terms of topological amplitudes of three types.

* Tree amplitudes $`T`$: These are associated with the transition $`bcd\overline{u}`$ (favored) or $`bcs\overline{u}`$ (suppressed) in which the light (color-singlet) quark-antiquark pair is incorporated into one meson, while the charmed quark combines with the spectator antiquark to form the other meson. We denote (favored, suppressed) amplitudes by (unprimed, primed) quantities, respectively.
* Color-suppressed amplitudes $`C`$: The transition is the same as in the tree amplitudes, namely $`bcd\overline{u}`$ or $`bcs\overline{u}`$, while the charmed quark and the $`\overline{u}`$ combine into one meson while the light quark and the spectator antiquark combine into the other meson.
* Exchange amplitudes $`E`$: The $`b`$ and spectator antiquark exchange a $`W`$ to become a $`c\overline{u}`$ pair, which then hadronizes through the creation of a light quark-antiquark pair.

We neglect a fourth type of (annihilation) transition in which a $`b`$ and a $`\overline{u}`$ annhiliate to form an $`s\overline{c}`$ or $`d\overline{c}`$ pair. Such transitions do not contribute in any case to $`\overline{B}D+X`$ decays.

For reference, the relation between isospin amplitudes and topological ones for Cabibbo-favored decays is

$$A_{3/2}=𝒜(D^0\pi ^{})=(T+C),A_{1/2}=\frac{3}{2}𝒜(D^+\pi ^{})\frac{1}{2}𝒜(D^0\pi ^{})=\frac{1}{2}CT\frac{3}{2}E,$$
(13)
with similar relations for $`D^{}\pi `$ and $`D\rho `$ decays. The corresponding relation for Cabibbo-suppressed decays is

$$A_1^{DK}=𝒜(D^0K^{})=(T^{}+C^{}),A_0^{DK}=𝒜(D^+K^{})𝒜(D^0\overline{K}^0)=C^{}T^{},$$
(14)
with similar relations for $`D^{}K`$ and $`DK^{}`$ decays.

IV. TOPOLOGICAL AMPLITUDES: MAGNITUDES AND PHASES

In Tables I–III we summarize the rates, invariant amplitudes, and their flavor-SU(3) representations for decays of $`\overline{B}`$ mesons to $`D\pi `$, $`D^{}\pi `$, and $`D\rho `$, respectively. Also shown are decays to other final states related by flavor SU(3). Branching ratios and lifetimes are taken from the compilation of Ref.  except where indicated otherwise. In particular, we take $`\tau (B^{})=(1.674\pm 0.018)\times 10^{12}`$ s, $`\tau (\overline{B}^0)=(1.542\pm 0.016)\times 10^{12}`$ s. For the $`D\pi `$ decays we use the updated values quoted in Refs. . The branching ratio for $`\overline{B}^0D_s^+K^{}`$ is based on our average of new values from Belle : $`=(4.6_{1.1}^{+1.2}\pm 1.3)\times 10^5`$ and BaBar : $`=(3.2\pm 1.0\pm 1.0)\times 10^5`$. The branching ratios and limits for $`\overline{B}^0D^{()0}\overline{K}^{()0}`$ are based on a recent report by the Belle Collaboration .

In Table I the amplitudes $`T`$, $`C`$, and $`E`$ were described above; in Tables II and III the amplitudes are labelled with subscripts which denote the meson containing the spectator quark: $`P`$ for pseudoscalar, $`V`$ for vector . We omit contributions of disconnected diagrams  in which $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ exchange no quark lines with the rest of the diagram, and couple through their SU(3)-singlet components.

Tables I–III contain several tests of flavor SU(3). The breaking of this symmetry is incorporated via ratios of decay constants: $`f_K/f_\pi =1.22`$, $`f_K^{}/f_\rho =1.04`$. For example, the decay $`B^{}D^0K^{}`$ is related to $`D^{}D^0\pi ^{}`$ by the U-spin substitution $`ds`$, and so one expects $`𝒜(B^{}D^0K^{})/𝒜(D^{}D^0\pi ^{})=(f_K/f_\pi )(\lambda /[1\frac{\lambda ^2}{2}])=0.275`$, where $`\lambda =0.22`$ describes the hierarchy of CKM matrix elements  and the small form factor difference is ignored throughout the paper. When one corrects for this factor, the derived values of $`|T+C|`$ are equal within errors. Similar results hold for the ratio $`𝒜(B^{}D^0K^{})/𝒜(D^{}D^0\pi ^{})=(f_K/f_\pi )(\lambda /[1\frac{\lambda ^2}{2}])=0.275`$ and $`𝒜(B^{}D^0K^{})/𝒜(D^{}D^0\rho ^{})=(f_K/f_\rho )(\lambda /[1\frac{\lambda ^2}{2}])=0.235`$.

The amplitudes for $`\overline{B}^0D^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\overline{B}^0D^+K^{}`$ (and similar modes with one final-state pseudoscalar replaced by a vector meson) would be related to one another by U-spin if one neglected the presence of the spectator quark. The spectator quark contributes an additional exchange amplitude, whose magnitude is seen to be small from the decay $`B^0D_s^+K^{}`$ in Table I and the upper limit on $`B^0D_s^+K^{}`$ in Table II. Thus, for example, one cannot tell the difference between $`|T+E|`$ extracted from $`\overline{B}^0D^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`|T|`$ extracted from $`\overline{B}^0D^+K^{}`$. A similar conclusion applies to $`|T_V+E_P|`$ versus $`|T_V|`$ in Table II and $`|T_P+E_V|`$ versus $`|T_P|`$ in Table III.

We now discuss the amplitude triangles for each set of processes. It is interesting to determine the individual magnitudes and phases of the contributing topological amplitudes $`T`$, $`C`$, and $`E`$, as was done for charmed particle decays . This can be important for understanding the systematics of $`B`$ decays involving two amplitudes with different weak and strong phases, for which direct CP violation can be observed. In the present case, of course, it is only the strong phases which may differ from one another. The decays $`\overline{B}D\pi `$ and those related to it by flavor SU(3) permit one to map out the amplitudes (up to a discrete ambiguity), while those involving one vector meson in the final state are missing key information which one hopes will be provided by BaBar, Belle, or hadron colliders.

A. $`\overline{B}D\pi `$ and related decays

The amplitudes $`A(B^{}D^0\pi ^{})=(T+C)`$, $`A(\overline{B}^0D^+\pi ^{})=(T+E)`$, and $`\sqrt{2}A(\overline{B}^0D^0\pi ^0)=EC`$ form a triangle in the complex plane, as shown in Fig. 1. Here we have arbitrarily taken $`T+C`$ to be real and positive. The favored area of the triangle is non-zero, as our earlier discussion of isospin amplitudes also implies.

The decay $`\overline{B}^0D_s^+K^{}`$  provides a value of $`|E|`$, whose central value is used to draw a circle of radius $`|E|`$ around the intersection of the two sides $`T+E`$ and $`CE`$. The decay $`\overline{B}^0D^0\eta `$ provides a value of $`|C+E|`$. Using the relation $`(CE)/2+E=(C+E)/2`$ for complex amplitudes, we draw a circle of radius $`|C+E|/2`$ about the midpoint of the side $`CE`$. The intersections $`O`$ and $`O^{}`$ of the two circles then denote the allowed phases of $`E`$. One can now identify the amplitudes $`T`$ and $`C`$ corresponding to each of these solutions.

In principle the value of $`|T|`$, provided through broken flavor SU(3) by the decay $`\overline{B}^0D^+K^{}`$, could help to resolve the discrete ambiguity. In the solution shown in Fig. 1, we have $`|T|5.6`$ (here and in the following analysis, we express topological amplitudes in units of $`10^7`$ GeV for $`PP`$ modes and $`10^7`$ for $`PV`$ modes), while in the solution in which $`T`$ points to $`O^{}`$, one has $`|T|6.6`$. The error on $`|T|=5.9\pm 0.9`$ from $`\overline{B}^0D^+K^{}`$ is at least a factor of three too large to permit any distinction between the two solutions.

Similarly, the value $`|C|=2.94\pm 0.41`$, obtained via flavor SU(3) from the recently reported decay  $`\overline{B}^0D^0\overline{K}^0`$, can be compared with that implied by Fig. 1, which is the same for the two discrete solutions. The measurements in Table I provide $`|C\pm E|`$ and $`|E|`$. One can then solve to find $`|C|=2.46\pm 0.25`$, consistent with the above value.

The solution shown has some similarity to that for $`D\overline{K}\pi `$ . In that solution, the amplitudes $`T`$, $`C`$, and $`E`$ all had distinctly different phases. Denoting $`\delta _{AB}`$ as the angle of rotation from the amplitude $`B`$ to $`A`$, then we have as the central values $`\delta _{CT}38^{}`$ and $`\delta _{ET}69^{}`$. The other solution (not shown) has $`T`$ and $`E`$ relatively real, both with a large phase relative to $`C`$. Explicitly, we obtain $`\delta _{CT}73^{}`$ and $`\delta _{ET}180^{}`$. In comparison, the phases in the corresponding $`D`$ decays are $`\delta _{CT}151^{}`$ and $`\delta _{ET}115^{}`$ . The sign flip in Re$`(C/T)`$ (negative for charm, positive for beauty) also occurs in a simplified analysis in which $`C/T`$ is taken to be real and the effects of the amplitude $`E`$ are not taken into account. In such a case the sign flip is merely a consequence of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(D^+\overline{K}^0\pi ^+)<\mathrm{\Gamma }(D^0K^{}\pi ^+)`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(B^{}D^0\pi ^{})>\mathrm{\Gamma }(\overline{B}^0D^+\pi ^{})`$.

It is interesting to compare the ratios $`|C/T|`$ and $`|E/T|`$ with those found for $`D\overline{K}\pi `$, where our favored solution  had $`|C/T|0.8`$ and $`|E/T|0.6`$. Here, the solution shown in Fig. 1 has $`|C/T|0.4`$ and $`|E/T|0.1`$. The amplitude $`E`$ is indeed vanishing faster than the others as the heavy quark mass $`m_Q`$ increases, in accord with expectations for heavy-quark systems, but as some power between $`m_Q^1`$ and $`m_Q^2`$.

We comment briefly on the claim by Xing  that the pattern of branching ratios in $`\overline{B}D\overline{K}`$ decays implies non-zero final-state phases between isospin amplitudes. This is certainly true for central values. However, the sum rule (10) when written for amplitudes which are relatively real reads

$$(2.43\pm 0.27)\times 10^7\mathrm{GeV}=(2.11\pm 0.17)\times 10^7\mathrm{GeV}$$
(15)
using the amplitudes in Table I. This is satisfied at the $`1\sigma `$ level. The errors are dominated by those for the color-favored processes; reduction by a factor of 2 would help considerably.

B. $`\overline{B}D^{}\pi `$ and related decays

The triangle formed by the amplitudes $`A(B^{}D^0\pi ^{})=(T_V+C_P)`$, $`A(\overline{B}^0D^+\pi ^{})=(T_V+E_P)`$, and $`\sqrt{2}A(\overline{B}^0D^0\pi ^0)=E_PC_P`$ is shown in Fig. 2. We have taken $`T_V+C_P`$ to be real and positive. Non-zero area again is favored.

Here the situation is much less satisfactory than for $`\overline{B}D\pi `$. We have only an upper bound on $`|E_P|`$ based on the non-observation of $`\overline{B}^0D_s^+K^{}`$. The decay $`\overline{B}^0D^+K^{}`$ tells us that $`|T_V|=2.7\pm 0.3`$, whereas on the basis of $`|E_P|0.27`$ and $`|T_V+E_P|=2.68\pm 0.10`$ (Table II) we could have any value of $`|T_V|`$ between 2.2 and 3.1. We also have no information on $`|C_P+E_P|`$, only a poor upper bound from $`\overline{B}^0D^0\eta `$ and a much worse one from $`\overline{B}^0D^0\eta ^{}`$. If the pattern in Fig. 2 is anything like that for the corresponding charm decays $`D\overline{K}^{}\pi `$, it should resemble that for the solution displayed in Fig. 1. Improved information on $`|C_P|`$, obtainable via flavor SU(3) from the decay $`\overline{B}^0D^0\overline{K}^0`$ for which only an upper limit is quoted , would also be helpful. This process also would be useful in implementing the suggestion of Xing  to search for relative final-state phases between isospin amplitudes in $`\overline{B}D^{}\overline{K}`$.

C. $`\overline{B}D\rho `$ and related decays

The triangle formed by the amplitudes $`A(B^{}D^0\rho ^{})=(T_P+C_V)`$, $`A(\overline{B}^0D^+\rho ^{})=(T_P+E_V)`$, and $`\sqrt{2}A(\overline{B}^0D^0\rho ^0)=E_VC_V`$, shown in Fig. 3, has a much smaller area than either of the previous two, and is consistent with the same phase for each of the three amplitudes. Here we have taken $`T_P+C_V`$ to be real and positive.

Additional information is available from the decay $`\overline{B}^0D^0\omega `$, which provides a value of $`|C_V+E_V|`$. As in Fig. 1, we draw a circle of radius $`|C_V+E_V|/2`$ from the midpoint of the line $`C_VE_V`$. The solution points $`O`$ and $`O^{}`$ would correspond to the intersection of this circle with one of radius $`|E_V|`$ whose center is the intersection of the lines $`T_P+E_V`$ and $`C_VE_V`$. We would need an improved upper bound on $`\overline{B}^0D_s^+K^{}`$ in order to draw a useful version of this last circle.

As in the two previous cases, an estimate of the tree amplitude ($`|T_P|`$ in this case) would also be helpful. From the decay $`\overline{B}^0D^0K^{}`$ we find $`|T_P|=4.3\pm 1.0`$, to be compared with $`|T_P+E_V|=4.57\pm 0.41`$. Obviously no conclusion can be drawn at present about the relative phase of $`T_P`$ and $`E_V`$.

Flavor SU(3) can be applied to the decay $`\overline{B}^0D^0\overline{K}^0`$, yielding the magnitude $`|C_V|=1.55\pm 0.19`$ quoted in Table III. An independent upper limit on this quantity can be obtained by combining information on $`|C_V+E_V|`$ from $`\overline{B}^0D^0\rho ^0`$ and $`|C_VE_V|`$ from $`\overline{B}^0D^0\omega `$ to obtain $`(|C_V|^2+|E_V|^2)^{1/2}=1.12\pm 0.15`$. There is clearly not very much room for $`|E_V|`$ at the upper limit quoted in Table III, and even the hint ($`<2\sigma `$) of an inconsistency. The most incisive test would probably be direct observation of the decay $`\overline{B}^0D_s^+K^{}`$, providing a value of $`|E_V|`$.

As in the case of $`\overline{B}D\overline{K}`$, the decays $`\overline{B}D\overline{K}^{}`$ in principle provide information on relative strong final-state phases . Here the sum rule (10), if written for relatively real amplitudes, would read

$$(1.38\pm 0.25)\times 10^7=(1.25\pm 0.23)\times 10^7$$
(16)
using the amplitudes in Table III. This is satisfied at considerably better than $`1\sigma `$. Again, the error is dominated by that in the color-favored processes.

If the pattern of $`\overline{B}D\rho `$ decays is similar to that for the corresponding $`D\overline{K}\rho `$ decays, the triangle in Fig. 3 would assume its squashed shape as a result of a negative largely imaginary contribution of $`E_V`$, so that the relative phase of $`T_P`$ and $`C_V`$ would be non-trivial. In the case of $`\overline{B}D^{}\pi `$ decays (Fig. 2), by contrast, the contribution of $`E_P`$ would be largely imaginary and positive, leading to a triangle with greater area as in the case of $`\overline{B}D\pi `$ (Fig. 1). This pattern is what occurs in charm decays . We now discuss what measurements might determine if a similar picture applies to $`\overline{B}`$ decays.

V. MISSING PIECES OF THE PUZZLE

We began by asking the question of whether the pattern of $`T`$, $`C`$, and $`E`$ amplitudes in the decays $`\overline{B}D\pi ,D^{}\pi `$, and $`D\rho `$ bore any relation to that in $`D\overline{K}\pi ,\overline{K}^{}\pi `$, and $`\overline{K}\rho `$. We see that there is some resemblance of the two cases in that the decay amplitudes for the first two processes appear to have non-trivial relative phases which could well be absent for each of the third processes. However, we are frustrated in our quest for the topological amplitudes by the fragmentary nature of the data. We believe this situation could well improve in the near future.

One key element responsible for the pattern in charm decays is the flip of the sign of the exchange amplitude when one interchanges which particle in the final state is a pseudoscalar and which is a vector. Thus, for charm, we found that the relation $`E_V=E_P`$, which could be justified if the exchange amplitude really proceeded through a quark-antiquark state , was responsible for the very different pattern of amplitudes in $`D\overline{K}^{}\pi `$ and $`D\overline{K}\rho `$. We do not yet have enough information to draw such a conclusion for $`\overline{B}D^{}\pi `$ and $`\overline{B}D\rho `$ decays.

In Table IV we summarize some useful decays that would help to sort out the question of the topological amplitudes. We quote in each case the present error and a desirable error in $``$, in units of $`10^5`$. We see that improvements by factors of three in branching ratios or roughly a ten-fold increase in the data sample would permit a fairly clear pattern to emerge. There may be some short-cuts to this procedure which would be less demanding in data. We now briefly justify each of the entries in Table IV.

It would be helpful to have the error on $`|T|`$ from the decay $`\overline{B}^0D^+K^{}`$ small enough that one could tell the difference between $`|T+E|`$ and $`|T|`$ at least for the case of maximal constructive or destructive $`T`$$`E`$ interference. Thus, we ask for the error on $`|T|`$ to be less than 1/3 the value of $`|E|`$, or $`\mathrm{\Delta }|T|0.2`$. (Our convention for units was mentioned in Sec. IV A.) This is a factor of $`4.5`$ increase in present accuracy, both in $`𝒜`$ and in branching ratio. We also require $`\mathrm{\Delta }|T+C|0.2`$ as obtained from $`\overline{B}^0D^0\pi ^{}`$ and, therefore, the error on the branching ratio should be reduced by roughly a factor of $`1.5`$. We ask for similar errors in $`|T+C|`$ and $`|C|`$ as obtained via flavor SU(3) from $`B^{}D^0K^{}`$ and $`\overline{B}^0D^0\overline{K}^0`$, respectively, and in $`|C+E|`$ obtained from $`\overline{B}^0D^0\eta `$. Demanding that $`\mathrm{\Delta }|T+C|=\mathrm{\Delta }|C|=\mathrm{\Delta }|C+E|0.2`$ we find that the corresponding branching ratios should be specified to an error of $`\pm (2,0.7,2)\times 10^5`$. The proposed errors on $`|T|`$, $`|T+C|`$, and $`|C|`$ also would allow one to draw a useful conclusion about the relative strong phases of isospin amplitudes in $`\overline{B}D\overline{K}`$.

If $`\overline{B}^0D^+K^{}`$ is to provide a useful value of $`|T_V|`$ to compare with $`|T_V+E_P|`$ from $`\overline{B}^0D^+\pi ^{}`$, we need $`\mathrm{\Delta }|T_V|`$ to be no more than 1/3 of $`|E_P|`$, or at most $`0.1`$. This, again, represents a three-fold improvement in the error on the branching ratio. The color-suppressed decay $`\overline{B}^0D^0\overline{K}^0`$ would provide a useful value of $`|C_P|`$ via flavor SU(3) if measured with an error similar to that desired for $`\overline{B}^0D^0\overline{K}^0`$, or $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0.7\times 10^5`$.

The decay $`\overline{B}^0D^0\eta `$ is very poorly measured, corresponding only to a rather weak upper bound. An error on its branching ratio comparable to that for $`\overline{B}^0D^0\eta `$ would be highly desirable.

Evidence for the exchange amplitude $`E_P`$ at something approaching the $`3\sigma `$ level would be useful for the present program. Thus, if the branching ratio for $`\overline{B}^0D_s^+K^{}`$ is close to its present upper limit of $`2.5\times 10^5`$, an error of no more than $`1\times 10^5`$ would be desirable.

The likelihood that $`E_V=E_P`$ sets the scale of useful errors in decays related to $`\overline{B}D\rho `$. One would like errors in $`|T_P|`$ (from $`\overline{B}^0D^+K^{}`$) and $`|E_V|`$ (from $`\overline{B}^0D_s^+K^{}`$) no larger than $`0.1`$, leading to the rather stringent demands in Table IV. A similar error requirement on $`|T_P+C_V|`$ as obtained directly from $`B^{}D^0\rho ^{}`$ means only a four-fold improvement in the branching ratio. It may be worth searching for alternative strategies to constrain these amplitudes. The proposed error on $`B^{}D^0K^{}`$, when combined with other proposed measurements, will be more than sufficient to check the relative phases of isospin amplitudes in $`\overline{B}D\overline{K}^{}`$.

Effects of the exchange amplitudes $`E,E_P`$, and $`E_V`$ (indeed, also of $`C,C_P`$, and $`C_V`$) may be generated by rescattering effects , as has been emphasized in reports of the decay $`\overline{B}^0D_s^+K^{}`$ . In this case we may not be able to justify the assumption  $`E_V=E_P`$. However, this relation does appear consistent with charm decays , and for the moment with beauty decays as well.

VI. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

We have compared the decays $`\overline{B}D\pi ,D^{}\pi `$, and $`D\rho `$ with the corresponding charmed particle decays $`D\overline{K}\pi ,\overline{K}^{}\pi `$, and $`\overline{K}\rho `$. In the first two of each set, there appear to be non-trivial final-state phases between the decay amplitudes, while in the third case in each set, the decay amplitudes appear to be relatively real.

In the case of charm decays, we traced the apparent relative reality of $`D\overline{K}\rho `$ amplitudes to an accidental cancellation of non-trivial final-state phases among the tree ($`T`$), color-suppressed ($`C`$), and exchange ($`E`$) amplitudes. Our analysis of $`\overline{B}`$ decays suggests that while the exchange amplitude is diminishing in importance, with $`|E/T|0.1`$ for $`\overline{B}D\pi `$ as compared with about 0.6 for $`D\overline{K}\pi `$, it still can play a significant role in contributing to the observed final-state phases, at least for $`\overline{B}D\pi `$. We have identified a number of measurements which could determine whether the apparently different shapes of the amplitude triangles for $`\overline{B}D^{}\pi `$ (Fig. 2) and $`\overline{B}D\rho `$ (Fig. 3) are due to a simple sign flip of the exchange amplitude, as occurs for charm. We have also indicated improvements in accuracy likely to be needed to identify non-zero final-state phases between amplitudes in $`\overline{B}D\overline{K}`$ and related decays.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank A. Bondar, S. Olsen, A. A. Petrov, V. Sharma, and S. F. Tuan for helpful correspondence. This work was supported in part by the United States Department of Energy, High Energy Physics Division, under Contract Nos. DE-FG02-90ER-40560 and W-31-109-ENG-38.


text:
# WFPC2 CTE Characterization

## 1 Introduction

Several obstacles inhibit the obtaining of accurate photometry from WFPC2 images. The most severe of these is charge loss during readout, commonly known as CTE loss. While no CCD is likely to be perfect, the effect is pronounced on WFPC2, where initial measurements showed that a star at the top of the chip ($`y=800`$) would lose approximately 10% of its charge while being read out. This loss was reduced by cooling the camera from $`76^{}`$C to $`88^{}`$C, and Holtzman et al. (1995) found that the CTE loss could be corrected to acceptable levels with a correction of $`0.04y/800`$ magnitudes to photometry. Unfortunately, this has increased over time, and faint stars at the top of the chip now can lose well over half their light to CTE loss.

Improved characterizations of the charge loss were produced by Stetson (1998), Whitmore, Heyer, & Casertano (1999), and Saha, Labhardt, & Prosser (2000) by analysis of larger data sets using DAOPHOT, IRAF apphot, and DoPHOT, respectively. While there were several issues of agreement between these studies, there were also significant discrepancies. For example, Stetson (1998) found no significant time dependence, while Whitmore et al. (1999) did. Likewise, Saha et al. (2000) found no X-CTE loss and no nonlinearity, while both were observed in the other studies. The fact that a different photometry package was used in each study raised the possibility that the observed CTE loss was partly a function of the package used.

Another possible source of photometric error was reported from measurements of the same fields in long and short exposures, in which objects appeared fainter in the short exposure than in the long exposure. This was independent of the position on the chip, and the phenomenon has become known as the “long vs. short anomaly”. Casertano & Mutchler (1998) characterized this effect using short and long observations of NGC 2419, and found it to be a function of counts rather than exposure time. The effect they found was a very large one; rather than the 5% effect reported previously, their correction is 0.18 magnitudes at 280 electrons (50 ADU at gain of 7). However, Stetson (1998) solved for a position-independent effect as part of his CTE study and found none. Given that his data set included the NGC 2419 observations, this only added to the questions about how well these effects were really understood.

Dolphin (2000a; hereafter D00) presented a study of the WFPC2 CTE based on reductions of 843 WFPC2 images of $`\omega `$ Cen and NGC 2419 using his HSTphot photometry package (Dolphin 2000b). In addition to providing yet another CTE solution based on yet another photometry package, this work shed light on the discrepancies noted above. The lack of time dependence seen by Stetson was observed to be primarily the result of an insufficient time baseline and the fact that all of his high-background data were obtained at the end of the time baseline. The lack of a nonlinearity in the study of Saha et al. was found to result from their background measurements, which contained significant amounts of starlight. This meant that their CTE correction (explicitly a function of background only) was implicitly a function of brightness as well. Finally, it was demonstrated that the long-short anomaly is primarily a result of poor background measurements, as my reductions of the NGC 2419 data showed no significant discrepancies after the CTE loss was corrected.

In this paper, I describe ongoing efforts to improve upon D00 and present the latest results.

## 2 Observations

The basis of my CTE study (both D00 and the present work) has been the comparison of instrumental magnitudes of WFPC2 images with ground-based photometry. This allows the use of the ground-based data as the standard stars, and any discrepancy is understood as resulting from a combination of CTE loss and calibration. This is not the only way to do such a work; Whitmore et al. (1999) based their study on relative photometry of stars as they were moved around the chips. Both techniques have their drawbacks; the main drawback of the route I chose is that errors in the functional form can be harder to find. Most notably, a position-independent nonlinearity such as the long-short anomaly could be fit out as CTE loss. I address this concern in the next section.

In D00, I used images of the $`\omega `$ Cen standard field and of NGC 2419. The mixture of two fields was necessary because, at the time, no images of the $`\omega `$ Cen standard field had high background levels; however this introduced the possibility of errors in the CTE correction caused by inconsistent calibrations of the two ground-based data sets. This compromise is no longer necessary, as high-background images of $`\omega `$ Cen have been taken, and thus in this work I use only those data. The ground-based photometry is that of Walker (1994), which I have transformed to the expected WFPC2 flight system magnitudes by using the Holtzman et al. (1995) transformations.

A total of 1216 images were photometered in this project, covering all observations of the $`\omega `$ Cen field in $`B,V,R,I`$ filters through August 2002. The majority of the images (800) were taken in the F555W and F814W filters. All images were photometered with HSTphot. Because of the huge number of stars observed, I eliminated all data I considered suspect because the aperture corrections were unusual or were based on too few stars.

After matching the stars on the WFPC2 images to the list of ground-based standards, many of the standards were eliminated because they were resolved into multiple stars or small extended objects by WFPC2. A few other standards were deemed to be poorly photometered because no CTE correction was capable of producing photometry that agreed at the 10% level; these were also eliminated from the sample.

The end result was a list of 36983 stars on the WFPC2 images that had been matched to any of 202 of Walker’s standard stars. From this list, the magnitude differences between the WFPC2 magnitudes and ground-based magnitudes were fit as functions of CTE loss and zero point differences. Since this contribution describes CTE results, the zero points will not be discussed further. They are, however, available from the author’s web site.

## 3 Characterization

It is important to bear in mind that the correction formulae below are based on the functional forms that best fit the data, and are not based on a physical understanding of the charge transfer process. It is likely that a “perfect” correction would be much more complex; what is presented below is the best fit using a minimum number of parameters.

A feature of the CTE correction procedure is that it includes the effect of CTE loss on the CTE loss. That is, as a star reads out and becomes fainter, CTE loss (in magnitudes per pixel) increases. This leads to a more complex functional form, but gives a correction that is accurate down to about 60 electrons ($`<10`$ ADU at gain 7) instead of only to about 100 electrons. At much fainter levels ($`2030`$ electrons), it is clear that the CTE loss is less than what is predicted, since otherwise noise peaks in the background level itself (which can be thought of as faint stars) would be truncated. The improvement can be seen in Figures 1 and 2, which show count ratios between observations in short and long images as a function of $`y`$ position and counts. It is clear that the corrections above 100 electrons work well either way, but that the newer correction (Figure 2) is much better for stars between 60 and 100 electrons.

It should also be noted that the ground-based standard magnitudes were not used in creating Figures 1 and 2; rather they are based entirely on instrumental WFPC2 magnitudes. It is clear that the corrections performed well, dispelling any concern that the use of absolute photometry comparisons rather than relative photometry comparisons impaired the solution. Most notably, had a long-short anomaly been present, the $`y`$ intercept of the uncorrected photometry (the diagonal line in each panel) would have been lower than 0.14, while the CTE correction would have overcorrected stars with high $`y`$ values and undercorrected those with low $`y`$ values since the long-short anomaly would have been fit by CTE loss. We can clearly see from the figure that this is not the case. If long-short anomaly were at the level seen by Casertano & Mutchler (1998), the $`y`$ intercept would have been at 0.11 in the $`100400e^{}`$ panel and at 0.13 in the $`4001000e^{}`$ panel. (A comparison with the bottom panel is unwarranted, as their correction was only valid to 200 electrons.) Thus it is clear that any long-short error is at least an order of magnitude smaller than what they reported.

## 4 CTE Correction Recipe

The procedure for correcting for CTE loss is outlined below. The XCTE correction depends only on $`x`$ and the background (in electrons). Note that the background value used should be the true background at the position of the star, rather than the background measured nearby a star (which contains some starlight). In images with variable background, this requires a knowledge of the amount of starlight contained in the background measurement.

$$bg\sqrt{1+\text{background}^2}10$$
(1)
$$\text{XCTE}=0.0194e^{0.00085bg}x/800$$
(2)
The YCTE loss depends on $`y`$, background, brightness (also in electrons), and the date of the observation.

$$lbg0.5\mathrm{ln}(1+\text{background}^2)1$$
(3)
$$lct\mathrm{ln}(\text{brightness})+0.921\text{XCTE}7$$
(4)
$$yr(\text{MJD}50193)/365.25$$
(5)
$$c_10.0143(0.729e^{0.397lbg}+0.271e^{0.0144bg})(1+0.267yr0.0004yr^2)y/800$$
(6)
$$c_22.99e^{0.479lct}$$
(7)
$$\text{YCTE}=\mathrm{ln}[(1+c_2)e^{c_1}c_2]/0.441$$
(8)
Both XCTE and YCTE corrections are in magnitudes, and should be subtracted from instrumental magnitudes to make the correction.

Figures 3, 4, 5, and 6 show the magnitude differences between the WFPC2 magnitudes and the ground-based standard magnitudes before and after correction. In all figures, the top panel shows the uncorrected WFPC2 minus ground-based magnitude and the bottom panel shows the corrected difference.

## 5 Background Measurement

Although this work focuses on CTE corrections, another critical issue in obtaining accurate photometry is background measurement. If the background is mismeasured, one will introduce a nonlinearity into the photometry. In fact, it is likely that the Casertano & Mutchler (1998) study of the long vs. short anomaly was influenced by background determination. Two pieces of evidence point to this. First, their residuals are better fit by such a function than by their reported correction formula. Second, their discrepancies were larger when using larger photometry apertures. In addition, Hill et al. (1998) noted that the short vs. long error they measured could be explained by a $`2e^{}`$ per pixel loss only in pixels containing stars, which is the same as a $`2e^{}`$ per pixel overestimation of the sky.

The reason special care must be taken in calculating background levels is the very low background levels of WFPC2 observations. The commonly-used IRAF packages were designed for reducing ground-based data, for which the histogram of background pixel levels can be approximated as a Gaussian or other smooth function. However, when the noise in the background is less than 1 ADU, the histogram is dominated by digitization. A sample histogram of sky values from a 14 second exposure is shown in Figure 7.

Naturally any sky-measuring algorithm that assumes a smooth distribution is prone to failure when handling these data. Figure 8 show measurements made by various IRAF sky algorithms on this image, with most of the default parameters left in place. This analysis is similar to the examination done by Ferguson (1996) on simulated data. In all panels, the $`x`$ values of the sky are taken from HSTphot measurements, which use a sigma-clipped mean algorithm that has been verified to work in cases like these.

From a comparison of the plots, it is clear that not all of the algorithms function as intended when facing digitization-dominated sky histograms. The Gaussian and median routines appear to be affected by the histogram peak at $`0.6`$ ADU, the cross-correlation algorithm is extremely unstable, and the optimal filtering algorithm is biased. The “mode” calculation is not a true mode, but rather a calculation including the median routine and is thus not suitable. Additional tests have been made involving simulated images with known background levels, and these routines handle the simulated data no better than the real data.

In more detailed tests, it is observed the centroid algorithm is also prone to small biases, while a straight mean will be overly affected by deviant pixels (uncorrected bad pixels or faint stars). The errors in the centroid algorithm affect measurements at only the 0.03 ADU level, however, which is acceptable for most purposes. Likewise, the stability of the mean calculation can be increased by use of sigma clipping. Thus the recommendation is that either routine can be used successfully, but that a sigma-clipped mean is preferable.

## 6 Ongoing Work

While the current CTE corrections work very well down to extremely faint count levels, there are two key problems yet to be addressed in a comprehensive manner. First is the issue of extremely faint stars. An examination of the CTE correction equations shows that the expected CTE loss becomes very large for faint stars. Specifically, the noise peaks in the background itself should be destroyed by CTE loss, as those peaks should be treated as 1 or 2 ADU stars. The histogram in Figure 7 indicates that CTE does affect the background but not at the level predicted by the CTE correction equations. The dilemma is that it is prohibitively difficult to obtain accurate photometry of stars of brightness 4 ADU (28 electrons at gain of 7). Recent calibration data have been obtained that should allow this issue to be addressed, however, with repeated short exposures of NGC 2419 that can be coadded to improve the photometry.

A second problem affecting photometry is that the star’s profile is not dimmed uniformly. In a fractional sense, the highest charge loss comes from the bottom edge and sides of the star, while the top edge can actually have charge added. Furthermore, the ratio of dimming of the wings to the dimming of the peak will be a function of the star brightness. An example of this is shown in Figure 9, which shows the difference between a short and long image, scaled so that they should cancel out. The trail above the star in the image is the light that was lost by the star and released from the trap several readout steps later.

The result of this is that PSF-fitting photometry will have some trouble dealing with faint stars, which will have different PSFs from the bright stars. Furthermore, the possibility exists for small systematic differences between PSF-fitting and aperture photometry. While both errors are dwarfed by the random error in measuring faint stars, there are some applications for which they are significant. More significantly, the effects of CTE loss on the profiles of extended objects can be quite large. Riess (2000) created a simple model for trapping and recreate the CTE effects on the profiles of extended sources. The challenge will be to improve such a model so that it can quantitatively reproduce the CTE loss measured in stellar photometry. Given the complexity of the correction equations, it is clear that this is not a trivial task. However, once this is achieved, one can invert the charge loss model to obtain the true image prior to readout, effectively correcting the image for CTE loss rather than the photometry.

## 7 Summary

I have developed and described a CTE correction procedure to supersede that of D00. There are several significant improvements over the previous corrections. First, a single uniform set of ground-based photometry is used to provide the comparisons. Second, HSTphot has been improved several times over the intervening time. Third, more stringent cuts were applied to the data to eliminate bad points. Finally, an improved functional form of the CTE correction accounts for the changing CTE loss as a star becomes fainter during readout.

I have also examined a commonly-overlooked aspect of stellar photometry, background measurement. In short images, the background value is sufficiently low that the digitization effects dominate the histogram. If not handled correctly, this can result in significant artificial nonlinearities added to the data. After exploring the options offered by IRAF, the recommendation is that one use the “mean” algorithm with sigma clipping.

Finally, I conclude by describing ongoing efforts to improve the CTE corrections for faint sources and to obtain an image-based CTE correction. My WFPC2 calibration web site (http://www.noao.edu/staff/dolphin/wfpc2\_calib/) will be kept updated with improvements to the CTE corrections and photometric zero points as they become available.

## References

Casertano, S. & Mutchler, M. 1998, WFPC2 ISR 98-02

Dolphin, A. E. 2000a, PASP, 112, 1397

Dolphin, A. E. 2000b, PASP, 112, 1383

Ferguson, H. C. 1996, WFPC2 ISR 96-03

Hill, R. J. et al. 1998, ApJ, 496, 648

Holtzman, J. A. et al. 1995, PASP, 107, 156

Riess, A. 2000, WFPC2 ISR 00-04

Saha, A., Labhardt, L., & Prosser, C. 2000, PASP, 112, 163

Stetson, P. B. 1998, PASP, 110, 1448

Walker, A. R. 1994, PASP, 106, 828

Whitmore, B., Heyer, I., & Casertano, S. 1999, PASP, 111, 1559


text:
# Effects of Vector Coupling on Chiral and Color-superconducting Phase Transitions – interplay among the scalar, pairing and vector interaction –

## 1 Introduction

It is one of the central issues in hadron physics to determine the phase diagram of strongly interacting matter in finite temperature $`T`$ and density. Recent renewed interst in color superconductivity (CS)  has stimulated intensive studies in this field, which have been revealing a rich phase structure at finite density quark matter .

However, although many works on CS have been carried out with the use of effective chiral models, an important interaction in the vector channel

$`_V=G_V(\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu \psi )^2`$ (1)
has been scarcely considered. The purpose of this article is to reveal new characteristics of the chiral to CSC transition based on a simple effective model incorporating $`_V`$ and explore how the vector interaction affect the phase structure.

The significance to incorporate $`_V`$ may be understood as follows. First of all, the instanton-anti-instanton molecule model, as well as the renormalization-group equation, show that $`_V`$ appears as a part of the effective Lagrangians. Furthermore, since the vector interaction $`_V`$ includes the term $`(\overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi )^2`$, it gives rise to a repulsive energy proportional to the density squared. Notice that the chiral transition at finite density is necessarily accompanied by a change in quark densty. Then one expects naturally that $`_V`$ causes large effects on the chiral transition; in fact, $`_V`$ is known to weaken the chiral phase transition and postpone the transition to a larger chemical potential $`\mu `$.

## 2 Thermodynamic Potential

To investigate the effects of the vector interaction, we use a simple Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model with two flavors and three colors,

$``$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }(i\gamma 𝒎)\psi +_V`$ (2)
$`+G_S\left\{(\overline{\psi }\psi )^2+(\overline{\psi }i\gamma _5\tau \psi )^2\right\}+G_C(\overline{\psi }i\gamma _5\tau _2\lambda _2\psi ^C)(\overline{\psi }^Ci\gamma _5\tau _2\lambda _2\psi ).`$
Here, $`𝒎=\text{diag}(m_u,m_d)`$ is the current quark mass of up and down quarks, $`\psi ^CC\overline{\psi }^T`$, with $`C=i\gamma ^2\gamma ^0`$ being the charge conjugation operator, and $`\tau _2`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ are the second component of the Pauli and the Gell-Mann matrices, representing the flavor SU$`(2)_F`$ and the color SU$`(3)_C`$, respectively.

The scalar coupling constant $`G_S`$ and the three momentum cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are chosen so as to reproduce the pion mass $`m_\pi `$ and the pion decay constant $`f_\pi `$ with the current quark mass $`m_u=m_d=5.5`$ MeV. The $`G_C/G_S=0.6`$ is adopted, which gives a similar results for CSC obtained with the instanton-induced interaction . As for the vector coupling, we shall vary it as a free parameter within a range given in the literature to clarify the effects of the vector coupling on the phase diagram.

To determine the phase diagram, we shall calculate the thermodynamic potential $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ in the mean-field approximation(MFA), assuming the chiral condensate, $`M_D=2G_S\overline{\psi }\psi `$ and diquark condensate, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\overline{\psi }^Ci\gamma _5\tau _2\lambda _2\psi `$. The optimal values of these condensates at given $`T`$ and $`\mu `$ are determined so that $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ has the minimum value. We notice that $`_V`$ in MFA reduces to $`2G_V\overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi \overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi +G_V\overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi ^2`$. Owing to the first term, it is found convenient to introduce a shifted chemical potential as $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }=\mu 2G_V\rho _q`$. Here, $`\rho _q\overline{\psi }\gamma ^0\psi `$ is the quark number density: In the following, we shall show the results in terms of the baryon density $`\rho _B=1/3\rho _q`$ and the baryon chemical potential $`\mu _B=3\mu `$.

## 3 Phase Diagrams

As preliminary to the discussion on the effects of the vector interaction, we first present the phase structure without the vector interaction.

In Fig. 1(a), the phase diagram in the $`T`$-$`\mu _B`$ plane is shown. One can see that there are four different phases, i.e. the $`\chi `$SB phase, the Wigner phase, the CSC phase, and the coexisting phase of $`\chi `$SB and CS111 The chiral condensate has a finite value even in the CSC phase, because of the finite current quark mass. However, the chiral condensate vanishes in the CSC phase in the chiral limit. On the other hand, there exists a region in which $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ becomes finite in the $`\chi `$SB phase even in the chiral limit. We call this phase the coexisting phase. ; as seen from the upper small panel, which is an enlargement of the part around the solid line near $`T=0`$. The figure also shows that the chiral transition is first-order at low temperatures and there is an endpoint at finite $`T`$ and $`\mu _B`$. The phase transition from the CSC to the Wigner phase is second order in our model. These features are qualitatively the same as that in  except for the existence of the coexisting phase. We have checked that the appearance of the coexisting phase with vanishing $`G_V`$ is sensitive to the parameters; if a slightly larger $`G_S`$ is used, the coexisting phase disappears.

The corresponding phase diagram in the $`T`$-$`\rho _B`$ plane is shown in Fig. 1(b).

Now, we switch on the vector interaction and discuss the effects of $`G_V`$. In Fig. 2(a)-(c), we show the phase diagram with $`G_V=0.2`$, $`0.35`$, and $`0.5`$ in the $`T`$-$`\mu _B`$ plane. From these figures, one can see that the phase structure is strongly affeted by $`G_V`$ especially near the critical line between the $`\chi `$SB and CSC phases:

(1) The endpoint of the first-order transition moves toward a lower temperature as $`G_V`$ is increased, and disappears eventually (Fig. 2(c)). One can also see that the vector coupling postpones the chiral restoration toward larger $`\mu _B`$ at low temperatures.

(2) The region of the coexisting phase becomes broader with finite $`G_V`$. We have checked that even with the large $`G_s`$ as used in , the coexisting phase comes to exist as $`G_V`$ is sufficiently increased. Intuitively, this is because the chiral restoration is shifted toward larger $`\mu _B`$ as $`G_V`$ is increased, then the system can have a large Fermi surface even with the large consitutent quark mass $`M`$ owing to the large chiral condensate; the larger the Fermi surface, the larger the diquark condensate.

(3) In Fig. 2(b), there appear two endpoints at both sides of the critical line of the first order transition. In our calculation, such two-endpoint structure gets to exist in a range of $`0.33G_V/G_S0.38`$.

It is also found that the thermodynamic potential has a shallow minimum in a wide region of the $`M_D`$-$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ plane near the two endpoints, which implies the large fluctuations of the chiral and diquark condensates. The underlying mechanism to make the first order transition to the second order in the low $`T`$ region is understood as follows: First of all, an enhanced coexisting phase is realized due to $`G_V`$. Then in the high $`\mu `$ region, the chiral condensate is suppressed owing to the CSC that makes the Fermi surface diffused. This works to weaken the phase transition as $`T`$ does with the Fermi-Dirac distribution function.

## 4 Summary

We have investigated effects of the vector interaction (VI) on the chiral and color superconducting phase transitions at finite density and temperature. We have shown that VI enhances the interplay between the $`\chi `$SB and CS phases and that the phase structure is strongly affected by VI especially near the critical line between the $`\chi `$SB and CS phases.

Although our analysis is based on a simple model, the nontrivial interplay between the $`\chi `$SB and CSC phases induced by VI is expected to be a universal phenomenon and should be confirmed and further studied with more realistic models including the random matrix model and on the lattice QCD. As a future task, the color neutrality condition (CNC) should be taken into account; although we believe that the present results for the effects of VI will not change qualitatively with CNC incoporated, the two-endpoint structure realized by a delicate interplay between $`\chi `$SB and CS through VI may disappear or persist in the mean-field approximation we employed.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

It is now generally accepted that the subluminous B (sdB) stars can be identified with models for Extreme Horizontal Branch (EHB) stars burning He in their core, but with a very tiny inert hydrogen envelope (Heber, 1986). An EHB star bears great resemblance to a helium main-sequence star of half a solar mass and its further evolution should proceed similarly (i.e. directly to the white dwarf graveyard) as confirmed by evolutionary calculations (Dorman et al. 1993). How stars evolve to the EHB configuration is controversial. The problem is how the mass loss mechanism in the progenitor manages to remove all but a tiny fraction of the hydrogen envelope at precisely the same time as the He core has attained the minimum mass ($`0.5`$M) required for the He flash.

There is growing evidence that close binary evolution is an important if not the dominant formation path of sdB stars (Maxted et al. 2001a, Heber et al. 2002). SdB stars can result from stable Roche lobe overflow or common envelope ejection models (Han et al. 2002). The companions are either low mass main sequence stars or white dwarfs. SdB stars may also result from the merger of two He white dwarfs (Webbink, 1984).

## 2 Masses of sdB stars

According to evolution theory the mass of an sdB star is fixed by the core mass of the giant progenitor at the core helium flash ($``$0.46$`\mathrm{}`$0.48$`𝖬_{}`$). The envelope ($`<`$ 0.02$`𝖬_{}`$) does not contribute to the total mass significantly. Therefore half a solar mass is generally assumed to be the appropriate mass of an sdB star. A binary system containing an sdB star may offer the opportunity to measure the mass of sdB star using Keplers third law from light and radial velocity curves. A direct solution for the masses of both components is possible for systems which are eclipsing and for which both radial velocity curves can be measured. Although many subluminous B stars in binaries are known, no such system has yet been found.

Today orbital periods have been determined for 38 sdB stars (Morales-Rueda et al. 2002 and references cited therein). In all cases the companions are invisible. For thirteen systems the companions have been identified as white dwarfs and only in five systems as low mass main sequence stars. Atmospheric parameters are available for 36 of them and are consistent with the predictions of evolutionary EHB models (Fig. 1a). Eclipses have been reported only for three of them: HW Vir, PG 1336-018 and HS 0705+6700. In all three cases the companions are low mass main sequence stars. Hence the mass function and the inclination angle can be determined. However, the masses of both components can be derived if the gravity of the sdB stars can be determined accurately from spectroscopy. The analysis of the light and radial velocity curve combined with the spectroscopic gravity measurement results in sdB masses of 0.54$`𝖬_{}`$(HW Vir), 0.5$`𝖬_{}`$(PG 1336-018) and 0.48$`𝖬_{}`$(HS 0705+6700) close to the canonical value of half a solar mass (see Drechsel et al. 2001).

Even in the case of a non-eclipsing system we may be able to determine the mass. If the system is sufficiently close, the rotation of the sdB star will be tidally locked to the orbit. The projected rotational velocity can be measured from high quality spectral line profiles and therefore the inclination angle can be derived. For HS 0705+6700 the inclination derived form v sin i is consistent with that derived from the light curve analysis. The method has also been applied successfully to the non-eclipsing system PG 1017$``$086 (Maxted et al. 2001b).

## 3 HD 188112

HD 188112 is a bright (V=10.2) nearby sdB star. Its distance is well determined by a parallax measurement of the HIPPARCOS satellite to be d=81$`{}_{11}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+13}`$pc. The spectral analysis is based on high resolution (0.1Å) optical spectra taken at the ESO 1.5m equipped with the FEROS spectrograph. Atmospheric parameteres are derived by matching the observed by synthetic spectra calculated from LTE model atmospheres. The results are Teff=19300$`\pm `$500 K, log g = 5.51$`\pm `$0.1 and a helium content of only He/H = 5$`\times `$10-5. These parameters are unusual for an sdB and place the star it below the zero age Horizontal Branch (see Fig. 1a). It cannot have evolved off the EHB either, since the evolution of the EHB stars leads to increasing temperatures and lower gravities than observed for HD 188112 (see Fig. 1a).

Combining the atmospheric parameters with the parallax measurement the mass of HD 188112 can be derived to be M = 0.23$`{}_{0.09}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.15}`$$`𝖬_{}`$, far below the canonical sdB mass. Therefore HD 188112 cannot be a core helium burning star. Such a low mass object, however, can be formed in a close binary system when the progenitor star fills its Roche lobe on the first giant branch (RGB) well before the core mass has increased to the critical mass for the core helium flash. The star will then evolve to become a helium core white dwarf. The evolution of such post-RGB stars has been calculated by Driebe et al. (1998) and evolutionary tracks for different masses are shown in Fig. 1. The position of HD 188112 in the (Teff, log g)-diagram is bracketed by the evolutionary tracks for M=0.195$`𝖬_{}`$ and M=0.234$`𝖬_{}`$; interpolation gives 0.22$`𝖬_{}`$, in perfect agreement with the parallax based mass estimate. The evolutionary time since departure from the RGB is of the order 108 years according to the models of Driebe et al. (1998).

If HD 188112 resulted from close binary evolution, the companion should be detectable from the spectral energy distribution or from radial velocity variations. The optical spectrum does not show any hint for a second spectrum. Combining optical photometry with UV fluxes measured by the IUE satellite and NIR fluxes from the 2MASS catalog we can construct the spectral energy distribution. The latter is well matched by the sdB model flux distribution. Hence there is no evidence for light from the companion. However, HD 188112 was indeed found to be radial velocity variable. In August 2002 we measured the radial velocity curve with the FEROS spectrograph at the ESO 1.5m telescope. The preliminary analysis reveals a period of 0.6066 days and an half amplitude of K=188.4km/s (Heber et al., in prep.). From the mass function we derive a lower limit to the companion mass of 0.72$`𝖬_{}`$. Hence the companion cannot be a main sequence star but must be a compact object, most likely a white dwarf, but we cannot rule out a neutron star companion. The mass of the sdB is rather low for a helium core white dwarf. Such low mass white dwarfs, however, have been observed as companions to neutron stars. The projected rotational velocity will be determined to constrain the inclination angle and, therefore, improve the estimate for the lower limit to the companion mass. A measurement of its light curve would also be very valuable.

## 4 Progenitors of helium core white dwarfs

HD 188112 was found to be a bona-fide progenitor of a helium core white dwarf. Only few other candidates are known, e.g. HZ 22 (Schönberner 1978), EGB 5 (Karl et al. these proceedings) and AA Dor (Rauch, 2000). Unlike HD 188112 these stars lie above the EHB in the (Teff, log g)-plane as can be seen from Fig. 1a for AA Dor. Hence their position can also be matched by post-EHB tracks. Alternatively, the position of AA Dor can be compared to post-RGB evolutionary tracks (Fig. 1b). Hence in the absence of a mass determination its evolutionary status cannot be assigned uniquely.

AA Dor is an eclipsing single lined binary consisting of a hot sdOB star (Teff=42000K, log g=5.2) and a low mass main sequence star or brown dwarf (Rauch, 2000). From the comparison to post-RGB tracks (Fig. 1b) one can read of the mass as 0.33$`𝖬_{}`$. However, this result is not consistent with the mass function and light curve (see Fig. 17 of Rauch, 2000).

HD 188112 remains the most compelling case of a progenitor for a helium core white dwarf.