text:
# Superfluid density of high-𝑇_𝑐 cuprate systems: implication on condensation mechanisms, heterogeneity and phase diagram

## I Introduction

Muon spin relaxation ($`\mu `$SR) technique \[1-3\] has made significant contributions to studies of high-$`T_c`$ superconductors (HTSC). Measurements in transverse-fields (TF-$`\mu `$SR) provide a reliable way to determine the magnetic field penetration depth $`\lambda `$ of type-II superconductors and to infer details of the flux vortex lattice, while measurements in zero-filed (ZF-$`\mu `$SR) allow studies of static magnetism, leading to determination of the phase diagrams, local spin structures, and volume fraction of static magnetism. In this article, we provide a perspective view on development of these measurements in HTSC systems and their implications on condensation mechanisms, heterogeneity and phase diagrams, focusing on the behavior of $`n_s/m^{}`$ (superconducting carrier density / effective mass). Since the parameter $`n_s/m^{}`$ in HTSC systems plays a role similar to the superfluid density in superfluid He systems, we refer to it as “superfluid density” in the title and the text of this paper.

In the following section, Section II, we start with the results of the penetration depth measurements of hole-doped cuprate systems, which exhibit universal correlations between $`T_c`$ and $`n_s/m^{}`$. We discuss these correlations in terms of energy scales of superconducting carriers. Then, we look into the cases involving heterogeneity, i.e., (Cu,Zn) substitution and overdoping in Section III, and systems with coexisting superconductivity and static magnetism, with the formation of magnetic nano-islands, in section IV. In all these cases, the superfluid density has a trade-off with the volume of non-superconducting regions created by perturbation and/or phase separation. We shall see that the universal correlations between $`T_c`$ and the superfluid density $`n_s/m^{}`$ are followed not only by the simple hole doped cuprates but also by these HTSC systems with microscopic phase separation.

Thin films of superfluid 4He and 4He/3He mixtures represent another set of systems where the superfluid transition temperature $`T_c`$ is strongly correlated with the superfluid density. In section V, we compare the results of HTSC systems with superfluid He films in normal and porous media.

Based on the correlations between $`T_c`$ and $`n_s/m^{}`$ and the pseudogap phenomena in the underdoped region, some models/conjectures have been presented in terms of the condensation mechanisms of HTSC systems. To elucidate these models, in section VI, we will first consider differences and similarities among Bose-Einstein (BE) condensation, BCS condensation and Kosterlitz-Thouless (KT) transition. Then, we will compare models of BE-BCS crossover and phase fluctuations, taking into account relevance to the KT transition and distinction between pair-formation and dynamic superconductivity in the pseudo-gap regime. We will also introduce a phase diagram involving phase separation in the overdoped region in section VII, followed by a summary in section VIII.

## II Correlations between $`T_c`$ and $`n_s/m^{}`$ in hole-doped HTSC

In type-II superconductors, the external magnetic field, between $`H_{c1}`$ and $`H_{c2}`$, forms a lattice of flux vortices, resulting in inhomogeneous internal field distributions. The width of this distribution is proportional to the muon spin relaxation rate $`\sigma `$ in TF-$`\mu `$SR, which is related to the penetration depth $`\lambda `$ and $`n_s/m^{}`$ as

$$\sigma \lambda ^2=[4\pi n_se^2/c^2]\times [1/(1+\xi /l)]$$
$`(1),`$
as given by the London equation. In superconducting systems in the clean limit, where the coherence length $`\xi `$ is much shorter than the mean free path l, the relaxation rate $`\sigma `$ is proportional to $`n_s/m^{}`$. The inhomogeneity of the internal field is due to partial screening of the external field by the supercurrent. So, it is quite natural that the field width and $`\sigma `$ are proportional to the “supercurrent density” $`n_s/m^{}`$, in the same sense as the conductivity of normal metals is proportional to $`n_n/m^{}`$, where $`n_n`$ denotes the normal state carrier density.

Generally, TF-$`\mu `$SR studies in type-II superconductors provide information on: (a) the temperature dependence of $`\lambda `$; (b) absolute values of $`\lambda `$ at $`T0`$; (c) the coherence length $`\xi `$ via analyses of local field distribution; and (d) vortex lattice properties. Among these, use of single crystal specimens is essential in (a), (c) and (d). For example, early $`\mu `$SR results of $`\lambda `$ on ceramic samples of HTSC systems mostly exhibited behavior consistent with isotropic energy gap, and it is only after studies of high-quality single crystal specimens that the d-wave nature was confirmed in temperature dependence of $`\lambda `$. For details of (a), (c) and (d), readers are referred to refs. \[3-4\].

In contrast, the results on ceramic specimens have been very useful in comparing absolute values of $`n_s/m^{}`$ in different systems. Ceramic specimens provide advantages over single crystal specimens in homogeneity of doped hole concentrations and in being less affected by crossover from the 3-d to 2-d vortex lattice. In this article, we shall focus on the system and doping dependence of the superfluid density, i.e., (b). In HTSC systems with a large anisotropy, the relaxation rate $`\sigma `$ measured in ceramic specimens is determined predominantly by the supercurrent flowing in the conducting ab-planes . Thus, the results of $`\sigma `$ from ceramic specimens should be regarded as reflecting the in-plane penetration depth $`\lambda _{ab}`$ and the in-plane effective mass $`m_{ab}^{}`$.

Figure 1 shows a plot of $`\sigma (T0)`$ versus $`T_c`$ of various different HTSC systems \[6-11\]. In this figure, results from simple hole-doped HTSC systems  are shown with open symbols. With increasing hole concentration, $`T_c`$ increases linearly with $`n_s/m^{}`$ in the underdoped region, and then shows a saturation. The slope of this linear relationship in the underdoped region is common to various different series of HTSC systems. These results have also been confirmed in several other $`\mu `$SR measurements \[12-16\]. This observation alone already implies that $`n_s/m^{}`$ can be an important determining factor for $`T_c`$ in HTSC systems. We also find in Fig. 1 that the ratios of $`T_c`$ versus $`n_s/m^{}`$ for some other superconductors  are not quite far from the value for HTSC systems.

If an independent estimate for the effective mass $`m^{}`$ is available, the $`\mu `$SR measurements give the superconducting carrier density $`n_s`$. Then, one can calculate the number of carries existing in a region of coherence length squared on the conducting plane. For typical BCS superconductors, such as Sn or Pb, one finds more than 10,000 pairs overlapping with one another in the $`\pi \xi ^2`$ area. For superfluid He, which is the well-known case for Bose-Einstein condensation, we find that each boson exist without overlapping with each other: i.e., one pair per $`\pi \xi ^2`$. The systems following the linear relationship in Fig. 1 have 3 to 6 pairs overlapping within the $`\pi \xi ^2`$ area, as illustrated in Fig. 2. This feature encourages us to consider HTSC and some novel superconductors in a crossover from BE to BCS condensation.

By knowing the average distance $`c_{int}`$ between the conducting CuO2 planes, one can obtain $`n_{s2d}/m^{}`$ where $`n_{s2d}`$ denotes the 2-dimensional carrier density. We remind here that the Fermi energy $`ϵ_F`$ of 2-dimensional electron gas is proportional to $`n_{n2d}/m^{}`$. Thus, we can consider $`n_{s2d}/m^{}`$ as a parameter representing kinetic energy for translational motion of superconducting carries. For 3-d systems without phase separation, in which $`n_n=n_s`$, one can combine the muon relaxation rate $`\sigma n_s/m^{}`$ with the Sommerfeld constant $`\gamma (T=T_c)n_n^{1/3}m^{}`$, or Pauli susceptibility $`\chi (T=T_c)n_n^{1/3}m^{}`$, to deduce $`ϵ_Fn_s^{2/3}/m^{}`$. The “effective” Fermi energy $`ϵ_F`$ obtained in this way does not necessarily correspond to the real Fermi energy in band structure calculations. Since $`1/\lambda ^2`$ corresponds to the Drude spectral weight in optical conductivity which condenses into a delta function at $`\omega =0`$ below $`T_c`$, $`ϵ_F`$ might also be called as a Drude energy scale.

Figure 3 shows a plot of $`T_c`$ versus $`T_F=ϵ_F/k_B`$ thus obtained from the results of $`n_s/m^{}`$ . For A3C60 where a reliable value of l is not available, we used the clean-limit value of $`n_s/m^{}`$ without corrections regarding $`\xi `$/l . We find that HTSC, organic BEDT , and some other systems \[17-20\] have very high and nearly equal ratios of $`T_c/T_F`$. The $`T_B`$ line in this figure shows the Bose-Einstein condensation temperature for a non-interacting 3-d Bose gas having the boson density $`n_B=n_s/2`$ and mass $`m_B=2m^{}`$. Compared to $`T_B`$, the actual transition temperatures $`T_c`$ of HTSC systems are reduced by a factor of 4 to 5. This reduction is natural in view of overlapping pairs which would reduce $`T_c`$, and in view of 2-dimensional character of HTSC systems. However the parallel behavior of $`T_B`$ and the observed results of $`T_c`$ suggests that the origin of the linear relationship between $`T_c`$ and $`n_s/m^{}`$ could be deeply related to BE condensation. Figure 3 serves as an empirical way to classify various superconductors in a crossover from BE to BCS condensation.

## III HTSC Systems involving microscopic heterogeneity: Zn-doping and overdoping

### A (Cu,Zn) substitution

When a very small amount of Zn is substituted for Cu on the CuO2 planes of HTSC systems, $`T_c`$ is reduced. Figure 4(a) shows the reduction of $`\sigma (T0)`$ as a function of Zn concentration $`c`$ substituting in-plane Cu. The superfluid density $`n_s/m^{}`$ decreases with increasing $`c`$. To account for this reduction, we proposed “Swiss Cheese Model”  where each Zn is assumed to destroy superconductivity in the surrounding region with the area $`\pi \xi _{ab}^2`$, as illustrated in Fig. 4(a). The solid lines in Fig. 4(a), which represent predictions of this model, are obtained just from $`c`$ and $`\xi _{ab}`$ deduced from the upper critical field $`H_{c2}`$, without any fitting to the data. Sufficiently good agreement between these lines and the observed results indicate that carriers within the $`\pi \xi _{ab}^2`$ area around each Zn no longer contribute to the superfluid density $`n_s/m^{}`$. Subsequently, this picture was directly confirmed by Pan et al.  in Scanning Tunneling Microscopy studies, where the local density of states around Zn showed features characteristic to normal regions, as shown in Fig. 4(b). These $`\mu `$SR and STM results are consistent with the non-zero $`\gamma `$ term of the specific heat, which increases with increasing Zn concentration . In the plot of $`\sigma `$ versus $`T_c`$ in Fig. 1, the results of Zn-doped systems (closed triangle and star symbols) follow the trajectory of simple hole doped HTSC systems (open symbols).

### B overdoping

Tl2Ba2CuO6+δ (Tl2201) systems have been extensively studied by various experimental methods as a prototype of overdoped HTSC systems. Tl2201 compounds have very small residual resistivity, which assures that the system lies well within the clean limit. To our surprise, with increasing overdoping from the nearly optimal $`T_c`$ = 85 K sample, the relaxation rate $`\sigma (T0)`$ in TF-$`\mu `$SR decreased  as shown by the closed circle symbols in Fig. 1. This behavior is also shown in a plot of $`\sigma (T0)`$ versus doping factor $`\delta `$ in Fig. 5(a). In view of no anomaly in $`m^{}`$, the different behaviors of the normal state carriers $`n_n`$ and the superfluid density $`n_s/m^{}`$ suggest that carriers are spontaneously separated into those which are involved in superconductivity and those which remain unpaired fermions, as illustrated in Fig. 5(a).

By defining the “gapped” and “ungapped” responses in the specific heat measurements, as illustrated in Fig. 5(a), we plotted the $`\delta `$ dependence of the gapped response obtained from the data of Loram et al.  in Tl2201 in Fig. 5(a). The good agreement between the $`\mu `$SR superfluid density $`\sigma (T0)`$ (closed circles) and the “gapped” response in specific heat (open symbols) provides a support to our view  with spontaneous phase separation between superconducting and normal regions in overdoped HTSC systems.

The volume fraction of the superconducting region can also be estimated from the “specific heat jump” $`\mathrm{\Delta }C`$. In BCS superconductors $`\mathrm{\Delta }CC_n\gamma _nT`$, where $`C_n`$ denotes the normal-state specific heat, and $`\gamma _n`$ stands for the Sommerfeld constant derived in the normal state. Then, in the plot of $`C/T`$ versus $`T`$ as in the inset of Fig. 5(a), one would expect that the specific heat jump $`\mathrm{\Delta }C/T`$ should be independent of $`T_c`$, for systems having a common $`\gamma _n`$ value. In Loram’s specific heat results of Tl2201 , $`\gamma _n`$ does not depend on doping, while the jump $`\mathrm{\Delta }C/T`$ decreases with increasing doping. This observation further supports decreasing superfluid volume fraction with increasing doping (decreasing $`T_c`$) in Tl2201.

Residual normal response in the overdoped cuprate was also found in measurements of optical conductivity . Furthermore, we calculated an expected doping dependence of $`n_s/m^{}`$ based on a simple model assuming phase separation  (as described in section VII), and obtained a good agreement with the observed results in (Y,Ca)Ba2Cu3Oy , as shown in Fig. 5(b). So far, there is no direct observation reported regarding the size of these phase-separated regions in overdoped HTSC.

## IV HTSC systems with static SDW nano-islands

Magnetic order of the parent compound La2CuO4 of the 214 cuprates was first confirmed by ZF-$`\mu `$SR measurements . Figure 6(a) shows the time spectra obtained in the ZF measurements of antiferromagnetic La2CuO4 (AF-LCO) which has the N/’eel temperature $`T_N>250`$ K. As in most other magnetic systems, we find that muon spin precession sets in below $`T_N`$, with the precession amplitude independent of temperature, while the frequency increasing with decreasing temperature as the sub-lattice magnetization builds up. In the La214 systems with the hole concentration near 1/8 per Cu, incommensurate static spin correlations have been found by neutron scattering . Time spectrum of ZF-$`\mu `$SR in La1.875Ba0.125CuO4 (LBCO:0.125)  is shown in Fig. 6(b). In this case, we find a Bessel function line shape characteristic of ZF-$`\mu `$SR in incommensurate magnetic systems , such as the one observed in (TMTSF)2PF6 .

La2CuO4.11 (LCO:4.11) is a system with oxygen intercalated in a stage-4 structure. This system is superconducting with $`T_c`$ = 42 K, which is the highest among the La214 family, while also exhibiting static incommensurate magnetism below $`T_N`$ = 42 K  This incommensurate modulation has a very long correlation length ($`600`$ Å), as determined from a very sharp satellite magnetic Bragg peak in neutron scattering results. ZF-$`\mu `$SR spectra of this system , shown in Fig. 6(c), has a Bessel-function line shape, as expected for an incommensurate spin structure. The amplitude of this precession, however, increases gradually below $`T_N`$ with decreasing temperature, while the frequency is almost independent of temperature below $`T_N`$. Furthermore, the amplitude of precessing signal at $`T0`$ is less than half of that in LBCO:0.125 (Fig. 6(b)), which indicates that the static magnetism exists in less than a half of the total volume.

In Fig. 7(a) and (b), we show temperature dependences of the volume fraction $`V_M`$ of muons in the region with static magnetic freezing, derived from the precession amplitude, and the frequency $`\nu `$ observed in LCO:4.11, (La1.88Sr0.12)CuO4 (LSCO:0.12), LBCO:0.125 and (La1.475Nd0.4Sr0.125)CuO4 (LNSCO:0.125) . In LCO:4.11 and LSCO:0.12, where superconductivity coexists with static magnetism, the static magnetism is confined to a partial volume fraction. As shown in Fig. 7(c), the temperature dependence of the neutron Bragg intensity in LCO:4.11 is consistent with the behavior of $`V_M\nu ^2`$. Unlike usual magnetic systems, however, the $`T`$ dependence is mostly due to the change of the volume fraction $`V_M`$.

The internal field at the muon site in HTSC systems is due to dipolar field from neighbouring static Cu spins. Depending on the range of this field, the volume fraction of muons $`V_M`$ subject to static field is somewhat larger than the volume fraction $`V_{Cu}`$ of frozen Cu spins. Figure 8(a) shows our simulation results for the relationship between $`V_{Cu}`$ and $`V_M`$ for cases with incommensurate static magnetism in island regions having a radius $`R`$ . Here we see that about 70-80% population of static Cu spins is enough to create observable static fields at the sites of all the muons. Thus, our previous result  on La1.45Nd0.4Sr0.15CuO4 (LNSCO:0.15), which is a superconductor with $`T_c10K`$ with $`V_M>95`$% is still compatible with a picture that superconductivity and static magnetism occur in mutually exclusive regions of CuO2 plane.

Although the relationship between $`V_M`$ and $`V_{Cu}`$ is nearly independent of the radius $`R`$ of static SDW islands, the damping rate $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of the Bessel oscillation depends on $`R`$, as shown in Fig. 8(b). By converting observed $`V_M`$ into $`V_{Cu}`$ using Fig. 8(a), and then plotting observed $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in Fig. 8(b), we find that our ZF-$`\mu `$SR results in LCO:4.11 are consistent with the island size $`R`$ 15 - 30 Å. Note that this length scale is comparable to $`\xi _{ab}`$. This model of “static SDW nano islands” can be reconciled with the long range spin correlations found by neutron Bragg peaks, if we consider percolation of these islands via a help of interplaner correlations, as proposed in .

To study the relationship between the magnetic volume fraction $`V_{Cu}`$ and the superfluid density $`n_s/m^{}`$, we performed $`\mu `$SR measurements in (La1.85-yEuySr0.15)CuO4 (LESCO)  where the concentration of doped hole carriers is fixed to 0.15 per Cu, while the magnetic volume changes with increasing Eu concentration $`y`$. The volume fraction with static magnetism was determined by the ZF-$`\mu `$SR, while $`n_s/m^{}`$ was measured in TF-$`\mu `$SR. The results shown in Fig. 9 clearly demonstrate a trade-off between $`V_{Cu}`$ and the superfluid density $`n_s/m^{}`$. This implies that superconductivity does not exist in the volume which has static magnetism.

In the plot of $`\sigma (T0)`$ versus $`T_c`$ in Fig. 1, the results of these systems with static stripe magnetism, shown by the striped square symbols, follow the trajectory of simple hole-doped and Zn-doped systems. This indicates that $`n_s/m^{}`$ is again a determining factor of $`T_c`$ in HTSC systems where superconductivity and magnetism coexist. We also note that the results in overdoped Tl2201 can be viewed as following a monotonic relationship between $`T_c`$ and the superfluid density, with the slope roughly comparable to cuprates with/without other types of perturbations.

## V Analogy with superfluid He films

Superfluid He films represent another set of systems where $`T_c`$ is strongly correlated with the 2-dimensional superfluid density $`n_{s2d}`$ at $`T0`$. Using the published results, we made Fig. 10  which shows correlations between $`T_c`$ and $`n_{s2d}/m^{}`$ for 4He films on Mylar substrate (open circle symbol) , on Vycor Glass which represents a porous media (star symbol) , as well as for 4He/3He mixtures adsorbed on fine alumina powders (closed diamond symbol) . The results on Mylar films show linear relationship, consistent with the behavior expected for the KT transition  (see next section for details) as indicated by the solid line. With the lowest level of perturbation, this case corresponds to simple hole-doped HTSC systems in comparison between the cuprates and He films. The results on Vycor Glass is analogous to the Zn-doped cuprates: in both cases some normal regions are formed as a “healing region/layer”, while $`T_c`$ is still strongly correlated with the superfluid density despite non-trivial geometry of the superfluid.

Mixture of bosonic 4He and fermionic 3He liquids exhibits a phase diagram shown in the inset of Fig. 10. With increasing 3He fraction, $`T_c`$ decreases, being roughly proportional to the volume fraction of 4He. In bulk geometry, the mixture undergoes macroscopic phase separation into 4He-rich superfluid and 3He-rich normal fluid, the heavier superfluid existing underneath the lighter normal fluid in a container. This phase separation can be confined into a microscopic length scale by adsorbing the mixture onto porous media or fine powders , where superfluidity remains up to a large 3He fraction. The results for the 4He/3He mixture in Fig. 10 exhibit a behavior very similar to that of overdoped Tl2201 in the cuprates in Fig. 1. In both the He mixture and the overdoped HTSC, inclusion of too many fermions (doped holes and 3He) results in microscopic phase separation and reduction of both $`T_c`$ and the superfluid density. Thus, we find a remarkable similarities  in the plot of $`T_c`$ versus superfluid density in cuprates (Fig. 1) and He films (Fig. 10) for the cases with/without perturbation.

Figure 1 shows correlations between $`T_c`$ and 3-dimensional (3-d) superfluid density while Fig. 10 shows $`T_c`$ versus 2-d superfluid density. By knowing the average interlayer distance $`c_{int}`$ between the CuO2 planes, we can generate a plot of $`T_c`$ versus $`n_{s2d}/m^{}`$ for the cuprate systems. The resulting plot, Fig. 11, clearly indicates that in HTSC systems, $`T_c`$ is higher for shorter $`c_{int}`$ for a given 2-d superfluid density $`n_{s2d}/m^{}`$ . This observation is consistent with the variation of $`T_c`$ reported for multilayer films with alternating layers of superconducting YBa2Cu3O7 (YBCO) and insulating PrBa2Cu3O7 (PBCO) , as shown in the inset of Fig. 11. These results indicate that the interlayer coupling is essential for obtaining higher $`T_c`$ in HTSC systems. The observed variation of $`T_c`$ cannot be explained by the simplest version of KT transition where $`T_c`$ should be determined solely by $`n_{s2d}/m^{}`$.

## VI Condensation mechanisms

### A BE and BCS condensation and KT transition

Correlations between $`T_c`$ and the superfluid density shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 11 help consideration of condensation mechanisms in HTSC systems. In BE condensation , the bosons are pre-formed at a very high “paring” temperature $`T_p`$. At a given temperature $`T<T_p`$ each boson has kinetic energy of $`k_BT`$, which defines the thermal wave length $`\lambda _{th}`$ representing the spread of the wave function of this boson due to the uncertainty principle. With decreasing $`T`$, $`\lambda _{th}`$ increases. When $`\lambda _{th}`$ becomes comparable to the inter-particle distance $`n_B^{1/3}`$, the wave functions of neighbouring bosons start to overlap, as illustrated in Fig. 12(a). Thanks to the tendency of bosons to fall into the same state by building up phase coherence of wave functions, Bose condensation occurs at $`T`$ where $`\lambda _{th}n_B^{1/3}`$. From this, we have the BE condensation temperature $`T_Bn_B^{2/3}/m_B`$, where $`n_B`$ and $`m_B`$ denote the density and mass of the boson. In this way, the superfluid density and $`T_c`$ is directly related in BE condensation.

In BCS condensation , the energy scale of attractive interaction determines the energy gap and $`T_c`$. The effective Fermi energy $`ϵ_Fn_n^{2/3}/m^{}`$ is much larger than $`kT_c`$ in BCS condensation, i.e., there is a sufficient density of fermions above $`T_c`$. However, the system stays in the normal state until the temperature is reduced to the pairing energy scale $`T_p`$, where bosons are formed. Once pairs are formed, their boson density is high enough at $`T_c`$, and thus the condensation occurs immediately at $`T_cT_p`$. In BCS condensation, $`T_c`$ depends on carrier density through the density of states at the Fermi level which determines the strength of electron-phonon interaction. However, this dependence is rather indirect. Suppose we have a BCS superconductor with the carrier density $`n_s`$. If the Debye frequency is doubled, $`T_c`$ and the energy gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ would be doubled. However the carrier density stays unchanged, as can be found from the illustration of Fig. 12(b). This example shows that the superfluid density is not a direct determining factor for $`T_c`$ in BCS condensation.

Kosterlitz-Thouless transition  is a phenomenon in 2-dimensional superfluids / superconductors. The elementary excitation of superfluid He film is the formation of vortex anti-vortex pairs. The energy required for this is governed by the phase stiffness, which is proportional to the superfluid density. At the transition temperature $`T_{KT}`$, the thermal energy becomes sufficient to form un-bound vortices, which results in dissipation and destruction of superfluidity / phase coherence. Thermodynamic arguments lead to the universal relationship between the 2-d superfluid density at $`T=T_{KT}`$ and the value of $`T_c`$ as $`kT_{KT}n_{s2d}/m^{}(T=T_{KT})`$, which should be independent of material. This relationship was confirmed as the jump of the superfluid density at the superfluid transition of He films .

### B Evolution from 3-d to 2-d

Figure 13(a) illustrates evolution of various energy scales in superfluid He film and a thin film of BCS superconductor. The BE condensation temperature of He in the 3-d limit corresponds to the lambda temperature $`T_\lambda =2.2`$ K, which is close to $`T_Bn_B^{2/3}/m^{}`$, except for some reduction due to departure of real system from an ideal non-interacting Bose-gas limit. With decreasing film thickness $`d`$, $`T_c`$ starts to change when the thickness becomes comparable to a few times the coherence length $`\xi n_B^{1/3}`$. For $`d\xi `$, $`T_cn_{s2d}/m^{}`$. In superfluid He film on Mylar, the superfluid density at $`T0`$ is very close to that at just below $`T_c`$, as shown in Fig. 13(a). Thus the Kosterlitz-Thouless relation holds for $`n_{s2d}`$ at $`T0`$, as can be seen in Fig. 10. Between $`T_c`$ and $`T_\lambda =2.2`$ K, the order parameter exhibits phase fluctuations, i.e., superfluidity is dynamic. The pair formation energy scale is much higher than $`T_c`$ in He for any thickness value $`d`$.

In a thin film of a BCS superconductor, $`T_c`$ should show a similar reduction from the value $`T_{c3d}`$ in the bulk 3-d system, when the film thickness becomes comparable to or smaller than a few times $`\xi `$ in the clean limit (and l in the dirty limit), as shown in Fig. 13(b). The superfluid density $`n_s/m^{}`$ at $`T0`$ would follow a thickness dependence similar to that of $`T_c`$. Note that $`n_s/m^{}`$ is very large, as it is related to $`T_Fn_n^{2/3}/m^{}T_c`$ in the 3-d limit. There should be difference between $`n_n/m^{}`$ and $`n_s/m^{}`$ in the region $`d<\xi `$ (or l), due to difficulty in forming pairs in a restricted geometry. On the other hand, the general argument of KT relationship should still hold. This is possible only if $`n_{s2d}/m^{}`$ at $`T=T_c`$ for $`d<\xi `$ is much smaller than $`n_{s2d}/m^{}`$ at $`T0`$, as illustrated in Fig. 13(b). Therefore, the “jump” of the superfluid density at $`T_{KT}`$ is practically invisible in a BCS thin film. For $`d\xi `$, the region $`T_c<T<T_{c3d}`$ is characterized by phase fluctuations. However, the pair formation occurs at $`TT_{c3d}`$ for any thickness. Consequently, bosons exist only below $`T_{c3d}`$, as illustrated in Fig. 13(b).

### C BE-BCS Crossover and Phase Fluctuation Models

In 1989  and 1991 , we suggested the relevance of BE condensation to the universal relationship between $`T_c`$ and $`n_s/m^{}`$ in HTSC systems shown in Fig. 1 . By combining this phenomenon with the pseudogap behavior then observed by NMR and conductivity, we proposed a picture of BE to BCS crossover in 1993-94 , as illustrated in Fig. 14(a) . General concept of the BE-BCS crossover has been considered earlier by several scientists , including Randeria and co-workers  who adopted this concept to the interpretation of the susceptibility/NMR results for the pseudo gap. Within our knowledge, however, our proposal was the first to combine the results of superfluid density with the pseudogap behavior in the underdoped cuprates. As shown in Fig. 14(a), we regarded the pseudogap temperature $`T^{}`$ as the pair formation temperature $`T_p`$. The reduction of the c-axis dc conductivity below $`T^{}`$ can be interpreted as resulting from reduced interplaner tunneling probability for paired bosonic carriers having 2e charges, while reduction of magnetic susceptibility can be attributed to the formation of a spin singlet bosonic (pairing) state in this picture.

In 1995, Emery and Kivelson (EK)  proposed a model based on phase fluctuations, as illustrated in Fig. 14(b). The BE-BCS model and the phase fluctuation model share many features in common. However, there are several important differences. Based on the linear relationship between $`T_c`$ and the superfluid density at $`T0`$, EK presented arguments basically parallel to that for the KT transition in 2-d systems. They pointed out that $`T_c`$ of the underdoped cuprates is determined by the energy scale for the phase fluctuations. In their picture, the entire region of pseudogap below $`T^{}`$ is characterized by phase fluctuations. They argued that the 2-dimensional aspect is essential for obtaining high $`T_c`$.

In order to calculate $`T_\theta ^{max}`$ which denotes the energy scale for phase fluctuations to destroy superconductivity, EK multiplied $`\lambda ^2n_s/m^{}`$ to the interplaner distance $`c_{int}`$ for HTSC and some other 2-d systems. This is equivalent of obtaining $`n_{s2d}/m^{}T_F`$ in 2-d. For 3-d systems, EK multiplied $`n_s/m^{}`$ and the coherence length $`\xi `$, which leads to an energy scale much higher than $`T_F`$. This energy scale is unrealistically high, and irrelevant to condensation arguments. If one substitutes the interparticle distance $`n_s^{1/3}`$ instead of $`\xi `$, we recover $`T_F`$ for 3-d systems. Then, Table 1 in ref  by EK becomes essentially equivalent to Fig. 3 of our 1991 paper , shown as a part of Fig. 3 of this article, where we plotted $`T_c`$ versus $`T_F`$. We consider that the distinction between 2-d and 3-d systems by EK is an artefact resulting from the overestimate of $`T_\theta ^{max}`$ in 3-d systems. In general, the 2-dimensional aspect does not help increasing $`T_c`$ of any superconductor, as can be found in Fig. 13.

Figure 15 shows the current estimates of $`T^{}`$ from various methods as plotted versus hole concentration. If the entire region below $`T^{}`$ is supposed to have superconducting phase fluctuations, as conjectured by EK, the situation is rather similar to a thin-film BCS superconductor shown in Fig. 13(b). In contrast, if $`T^{}`$ is solely representing the pair formation, as proposed in our BE-BCS crossover picture, and if there is a 2-dimensional aspect remaining in HTSC systems, there should be two different energy scales above $`T_c`$, as we discussed in ref . They are the temperature $`T_{dyn}`$ at which the phase coherence of bosons completely disappear and dynamic superconductivity vanishes, in addition to the temperature $`T_p`$ at which pairs are dissolved into fermions. This situation is similar to the case of He films shown in Fig. 13(a). One of important differences between BE-BCS and EK conjectures lies in this point.

### D Pair formation and dynamic superconductivity

Since high-$`T_c`$ cuprates have a highly 2-dimensional electronic structure, several experiments have detected the “dynamic superconductivity” existing above $`T_c`$: (1) In YBCO-PBCO films with a thick PBCO layers separating a single layer YBCO, $`T_c`$ is reduced to 15-20 K. Between this temperature and the $`T_c90`$ K of the bulk YBCO, one observes reduction of the normal state conductivity, which follows the predictions of the Kosterlitz-Thouless theory . (2) Corson et al.  measured dynamic superfluid response in underdoped Bi2212, and found that the response depends on the measuring frequency $`\omega `$ above a certain “branch-off” temperature $`T_{off}`$, as shown in Fig. 16. Furthermore, the superfluid density $`n_s/m^{}`$ at $`T=T_{off}`$ agrees well with the universal value $`n_s/m^{}(T=T_{KT})`$ expected for the KT transition. The critical temperature $`T_c`$, at which $`n_s/m^{}=0`$, increases with increasing $`\omega `$, suggesting that this phenomenon corresponds to the “dynamic superfluidity” expected above $`T_c(\omega =0)`$ and below $`T_{dyn}`$. It should be noted, however, that $`T_{dyn}`$ for the measuring frequency of 600 GHz is limited to $`T100`$ K.

These results indicate that certain cuprate systems with high anisotropy, such as underdoped Bi2212 and single-layer YBCO film, exhibit dynamic superconductivity as expected from the KT theory. However, these results do not necessarily provide explanation to the origin of the pseudo gap at $`T=T^{}`$, since $`T_{dyn}`$ observed in Bi2212 is significantly lower than the pseudo-gap temperature $`T^{}`$. Namely, the phase fluctuations alone cannot explain the entire pseudo-gap phenomena.

Dependence to an external magnetic field should be quite different if these two distinct energy scales above $`T_c`$ correspond respectively to pairing and dynamic superconductivity. The former would not depend much on external fields, while the latter should be very sensitive to the field. Indeed, the pseudo gap below $`T^{}`$ was found to be insensitive to the applied field in tunneling measurements . Recently, Lavrov et al.  found that c-axis conductivity shows negative magneto-resistance upon cooling at a temperature well below $`T^{}`$ but above $`T_c`$. This negative magneto-resistance may be due to the onset of dynamic superconductivity below $`T_{dyn}`$.

The results of the Nernst effect , which appear in the underdoped region of La214 systems above $`T_c`$ but well below $`T^{}`$ can also be interpreted as possible evidence for dynamic superconductivity below $`T_{dyn}`$. Other phenomena potentially related to this energy scale include: (a) superfluid response of the ARPES coherence peak ; and (b) 41 meV neutron resonance mode .

Based on these considerations, we propose a new phase diagram, with two distinct lines of $`T^{}`$ and $`T_{dyn}`$ in the underdoped region as shown in Fig. 17. Note that the pair formation at $`T^{}`$ is necessary for superconductivity in cuprates, but is not enough to support any phase coherence. It is only when the thermal energy scale becomes less than the energy scale representing the number density of bosons that the phase coherence can set in. The onset temperature $`T_{dyn}`$ of dynamic superfluidity represents this energy scale. In highly 2-dimensional cases, one should further cool down below $`T_{dyn}`$ before achieving long-range phase coherence at $`T_c`$.

## VII Evolution from superconductor to normal metal

### A phase diagram for the overdoped cuprates

In BCS superconductors in the clean limit, all the carriers in the Fermi sphere contribute to superfluid. There should be no normal carriers remaining at $`T0`$. Therefore, neither the BE-BCS nor the phase fluctuation pictures can explain the reduction of $`n_s`$ with increasing hole doping observed in several overdoped cuprate systems  described in section III-B.

Tallon, Loram and co-workers  have noticed that the $`T^{}`$ line may be heading towards $`T=0`$ at a “critical hole concentration” around $`x_c0.19`$. $`\mu `$SR studies of Panagopoulos et al.  show that static magnetism, either spontaneously existing or induced by Zn doping, disappears at $`xx_c`$. Generally, increasing hole doping would tend to destroy magnetic interactions in the cuprates.

Let us make the following three assumptions: (a) the paring in HTSC systems is due to a magnetic interaction; (b) the $`T^{}`$ line represents the pair formation, and (c) the $`T^{}`$ line disappears at $`x=x_c`$. Then, no genuine superconducting pairing exists in the overdoped region at $`xx_c`$. However, if the energy loss for charge disproportionation is overcome by the gain of pairing and condensation energies, the system can spontaneously phase separate into a “hole-poor” superfluid with the local hole concentration $`xx_c`$ and a “hole-rich” normal fermion region with $`x>x_c`$. If this phase separation remains microscopic with the length scale comparable to $`\xi _{ab}`$, we can expect superconductivity in the overdoped region, similarly to the case of 4He/3He mixture.

The energy loss of charge disproportionation can be estimated following Coulomb blockade type calculation and/or formation of nano-islands serving as capacitor allays. Our crude estimate  shows that this energy becomes comparable to paring/condensation energy gain in the cuprates. Based on these considerations, we proposed a phase diagram shown in Fig. 17, with phase separation in the overdoped region. As shown in Fig. 5(b), the doping evolution of the superfluid density $`n_s`$, calculated using this model , shows a good qualitative agreement with the observed results. We also note that this model can reproduce a very sharp temperature dependence of $`n_s/m^{}`$ and $`H_{c2}`$ at $`T0`$ found in the heavily overdoped region of Tl2201 .

Tallon and Loram  presented a view that the existence of superconductivity in the overdoped cuprates at $`xx_c`$, where the $`T^{}`$ line does not exist, implies that the magnetic interaction below the $`T^{}`$ line is not required for superconductivity but rather is a competing factor which weakens superconductivity. The present model with phase separation provides an alternative view where the pseudogap phenomena, as a necessary factor (pair formation) for superconductivity, can be compatible with superconductivity in the overdoped cuprates.

### B analogous cases in other systems

In HTSC cuprates, as well as in 2-d organic (BEDT-TTF)2-X and 3-d A3C60 superconductors, superconductivity appears in the vicinity of the insulator to metal transition. Superconductivity is taken over by a presumably Fermi-liquid metallic state by increasing carrier doping in cuprates, or by application of chemical and/or external pressure in BEDT and A3C60. In all these cases, we expect that the normal state spectral density (or Drude weight) $`n_n/m^{}`$ to increase in the process towards a simple Fermi liquid. We showed that the superconducting spectral weight decreases in this process for the case of cuprates.

We performed magnetization measurements of the in-plane penetration depth in (BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 under applied pressure , and found that $`n_s/m^{}`$ decreases with increasing pressure as shown in Fig. 18(a), contrary to the behavior of $`n_n/m^{}`$ found in quantum oscillation measurements . This system is known to be well in the clean limit. These results indicate that not only in cuprates but also in BEDT, the crossover from superconducting to metallic ground state is associated with anomalous reduction of the superfluid spectral weight.

Similar behavior is also seen in A3C60 systems. As shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 18(b), the muon relaxation rate $`\sigma (T0)`$ measured in A3C60 decreases with decreasing lattice constant , in the approach towards a simple metallic state. In view of rather large residual resistivity in the normal state, the results for these fullerides might be subject to correction related to the mean free path. However, the un-corrected raw data indicate that $`1/\lambda ^2`$ again shows anomalous reduction when the system approaches presumably a simple metallic ground state.

These three systems exhibit similar phase diagrams: superconductivity appears in the evolution from magnetic and insulating ground state to presumably simple Fermi liquid state; in BEDT systems, a pseudo-gap like behavior near the magnetic phase was found in susceptibility. These features suggest a possibility that the anomalous results in the overdoped cuprates may be a generic behavior shared by a wider range of superconductors based on correlated electron systems. We note that all these systems follow the universal linear relationship in the plot of $`T_c`$ versus $`n_s/m^{}`$, with approximately the same slope as shown in Fig. 1 and in ref. .

## VIII Summary

In this paper, we showed that $`T_c`$ in HTSC cuprate systems exhibits universal correlations with the superfluid spectral weight $`n_s/m^{}`$, for the cases of simple hole doping, as well as for more complicated cases with Zn-doping, overdoping and static SDW nano island formation, where the system undergoes spontaneous phase separation between superconducting and normal regions with the length scale comparable to the in-plane coherence length. Robustness of this relation for the case with/without perturbation is analogous to the case of superfluid 4He and 4He/3He mixture films in non-porous and porous media. In all these cases, the superfluid density is the determining factor for $`T_c`$. This is the basic feature of BE condensation.

By slightly revising the BE-BCS crossover picture, we have proposed a new phase diagram for the cuprates which has (a) two separate lines of $`T^{}`$ and $`T_{dyn}`$ above $`T_c`$ in the pseudogap state in the underdoped region, (b) disappearance of the $`T^{}`$ line at the critical hole concentration $`x_c`$, and (c) phase separation in the overdoped region. In this model, the $`T^{}`$ line represents pair formation, whereas the $`T_{dyn}`$ line corresponds to the onset of dynamic superconductivity. Low dimensionality prevents formation of long-range phase coherence between $`T_{dyn}`$ and $`T_c`$. We also noted anomalous reduction of the superfluid spectral weight $`n_s/m^{}`$ in the overdoped cuprates as well as in the 2-d organic BEDT and 3-d fulleride superconductors, when the system approach simple metallic ground state.

## IX acknowledgement

The author would line to acknowledge collaboration with G.M. Luke, K.M. Kojima, S. Uchida, R.J. Birgeneau, K. Yamada and discussions with O. Tchernyshyov and M. Randeria. This work is supported by a grant from US NSF DMR-01-02752 and CHE-01-17752.


format: text

text:
# Particle Acceleration in the M87 Jet

## 1 Introduction

We know a great deal about the jet in M87. Radio (OHC, ) and optical (HST, ) images reveal ordered, filamentary structures whose synchrotron emission extends from radio at least to optical frequencies, and probably up to X-rays (Xray, ). Multi-epoch studies detect relativistic proper motion, at $`\gamma `$ of a few(Biretta, ).

The jet begins by expanding uniformly, out to $`2`$ kpc (we assume an angle $`40^{}`$ to the line of sight, and a distance of 17 Mpc). At that point, the location of the bright knot A, it recollimates, and continues for another 1-2 kpc before disrupting strongly and depositing its matter and energy in the larger radio halo. The minimum pressure required to produce the synchrotron emission remains approximately constant during the expansion. Because $`p_{min}`$ measures the energy density in relativistic electrons and magnetic field, $`p_{min}u_e^{4/7}u_B^{3/7}`$, we know that these quantities do not decay adiabatically during the expansion. This is clear evidence that in situ energization is occuring.

The broadband, slice-integrated synchrotron spectrum is nearly constant along the jet. This suggests that the electron energy distribution is also nearly constant along the jet, and supports the idea that it is maintained against losses by in situ energization. We must recall, however, that the jet is not internally homogeneous. The radio-bright filaments probably show us high-field regions. In addition, resolved two-dimensional images show that the optical knots are more concentrated than the radio knots.

We have enough information about this jet to justify detailed modelling of the turbulence and its effect on the particles. To be specific, we consider particle acceleration by Alfvenic turbulence. In this paper we summarize our analysis, which will be published elsewhere in more detailed form.

## 2 Physical picture of the jet

From the radio and optical data we determine the overall physical state of the jet. In a companion paper (LHE, ) we show that the jet has an underlying double helix structure, which can be traced in radio and optical emissivity from the jet origin out to and past knot A. The structure of the helical filaments is consistent with elliptical and helical normal modes, which could be excited by the Kelvin-Helmholtz (KH) instability. Some of the bright “knots” in the jet are the points where the two filaments rotate into the line of sight. Other bright regions are superimposed on this pattern, such as the inner knots D and F, and the more ordered complex at and beyond knot A. We think knot A is a shock, connected to the recollimation of the jet, with emissivity enhanced by shear-driven turbulence. Past knot A the helical mode grows to large amplitudes, creating the distortions which ultimately disrupt the flow.

We emphasize that the jet is not axisymmetric, despite the very well defined apparent “edges” to the flow inside of knot A. From the structure of the excited modes (Hardee, ), we know the plasma has localized high-pressure regions, close to the surface, which rotate through a helical pattern going along the jet. We propose that these regions, and other randomly placed local bright spots, are regions of enhanced, shear-driven MHD turbulence. We further speculate that this turbulence accelerates relativistic particles in situ, creating the radio and optical knots in the jet.

We can combine standard minimum-pressure analysis and KH stability analysis to estimate physical parameters within the jet. From the former (OHC, , e.g.), we scale to $`B100\mu `$G, and $`p10^9`$dyn/cm2. From stability analysis (LHE, ), we estimate the internal Mach number of the jet to be a few, and the specific enthalpy of the jet plasma to be $`h=\mathrm{\Gamma }p/(\mathrm{\Gamma }1)\rho c^21`$. Thus, the jet cannot contain only highly relativistic plasma, and must have total $`p>p_{min}`$.

The jet must be in pressure balance with its surroundings in order to apply KH analysis. This means that the inner few kpc of the Virgo core \[which contain the inner radio lobes (Hines, ) and the complex X-ray-loud plasma (WY, )\] must be at a higher pressure than earlier, low-resolution X-ray work suggested. This is consistent with the dynamic appearance of the central region (WY, ; OEK, ). It is also consistent with the jet power, which we know is at least $`3\times 10^{44}`$erg/s (OEK, ), and significant to the energy budget of the Virgo core.

## 3 Jet deceleration and plasma turbulence

We model the bright knots as localized sites of Alfvenic turbulence. This turbulence will accelerate relativistic particles. It will also trap the newly energized particles, so that they must diffuse away from the hot spots. The observation that the radio knots are more extended than the optical knots can be explained if the diffusion time, $`\tau _{diff}`$, is comparable to the optical synchrotron loss time, $`\tau _{sy,o}`$.

We begin by determining the turbulence level necessary to contain the optically loud electrons. Let $`\delta B^2/8\pi `$ be the energy density in MHD turbulence, and let the turbulence have a characteristic (outer) scale $`\lambda _t`$. We follow (GJ, ) and estimate the cross-field diffusion coefficient $`D_o(c\lambda _t/3)\delta B^2/B^2`$. We scale both the hot spot size and the turbulent scale to 10 pc. With these scalings, we estimate $`\tau _{diff}\tau _{sy,o}`$ if $`\delta B^2/B^20.1`$.

Is this a reasonable turbulence level for the M87 jet? If the turbulence is driven by shear instabilities, the energy must come from the jet power, $`P_j=\dot{M}\gamma _jc^2\left(1+h\right)`$ (where $`\dot{M}`$ is the mass flux). As friction and velocity shear decelerate the jet, energy is lost at a rate $`dP_j/dz`$. We assume a fraction $`ϵ`$ of this goes to drive the turbulence; the rest goes directly to heating the jet and ambient plasmas. The most important damping mechanism in this situation is jet expansion (which “adiabatically” damps the turbulence). Balancing this against the driving, with jet deceleration $`d\gamma /dz1`$/kpc, we find a very modest $`ϵ.01`$ can produce the required level of turbulence. We further note that wave-wave interactions, which modulate the turbulent spectrum and generate dissipative modes, probably set in at $`\delta B^2/B^20.1`$ (Spang, , e.g.). This also agrees with our estimate above.

## 4 Impact on relativistic particles

We next ask whether this turbulence level can accelerate the electrons. Alfven wave acceleration proceeds via the cyclotron resonance, which requires the wavelength and particle energy to match, as $`\gamma /\lambda eB/2\pi mc^2`$. Very small scales are involved: wavelengths $`\lambda 10^{11}`$ to $`10^{14}`$ cm resonate with radio-loud ($`\gamma 10^4`$) to X-ray loud ($`\gamma 10^7`$) electrons. The acceleration rate is determined by the turbulent energy at resonant scales. We expect turbulent power to cascade to smaller scales, but the resultant wavenumber spectrum, $`W(k)`$, is hard to predict. We follow tradition by assuming $`W(k)k^m`$, with total energy $`\delta B^2/8\pi =W(k)𝑑k`$. Stochastic acceleration is described by a Fokker-Planck equation; quasi-linear theory can be used to find the momentum diffusion coefficient $`D_p`$, and from that $`\tau _{acc}p^2/D_p\gamma ^{2m}`$ (JAE, , e.g.).

Can such turbulent acceleration offset radiative losses in the M87 jet? Do the accelerated particles produce a synchrotron spectrum like that observed? We have only begun this calculation. Our preliminary work suggests that wave spectra with $`m3/2`$, which is typical of MHD turbulence in other settings (Kraich, ), will offset synchrotron losses for electrons radiating at and below the optical range. This is pleasing, because it seems consistent with the observed synchrotron spectrum, which curves slowly between the radio to the optical, then steepens further while continuing to X-rays(OHC, ; Xray, ).

Our simple estimates must be extended before they can usefully be tested against the data. The particle energy distribution must be determined, and convolved with the magnetic field structure in the jet, in order to predict a synchrotron spectrum which can be compared to observations. We are in the midst of those calculations, and will report their results in a future paper.


text:
# 1 Recalling the difficulty

## 1 Recalling the difficulty

The discrepancy of the LCSR prediction for $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$ with the recent experimental result by CLEO is a striking and puzzling one. We recall the reader that the LCSR prediction made in ref.  reads $`g_{D^{}D\pi }=12.5`$, which got even smaller after the radiative corrections have been included , namely $`g_{D^{}D\pi }=10.5\pm 3.0`$. On the other hand the experimental value is $`g_{D^{}D\pi }=17.9\pm 0.3\pm 1.9`$ . Thus the discrepancy is large 111Notice that we speak here of the discrepancy of central values. Of course, there are errors in the sum rule estimate, but it is difficult to draw strict conclusions from them, since their estimate is itself, of course, uncertain.. The above LCSR result has been very carefully discussed, the calculation has been improved several times, and it has also been verified by using other sum rule techniques . Although the QCD sum rule approach certainly suffers from large uncertainties, in most cases a good agreement with experiment has been obtained. Therefore, we cannot be satisfied with concluding by a comfortable attitude of skepticism against the whole sum rule approach. Still more puzzling is the fact that this quantity does not seem a priori to have anything particularly exotic. In addition, the other theoretical approaches do not show such a discrepancy for this quantity. A careful discussion meant to reduce the uncertainties presented by quark models, and performed in the framework of Dirac equation , prior to the experimental measurement, has led to a result $`g_{D^{}D\pi }18`$. It should be stressed that this result has been obtained in the heavy quark limit (for the latest quark model discussion of $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$ see ref. ). The recent (quenched) lattice QCD calculation has led to $`g_{D^{}D\pi }=18.8\pm 2.3_{2.0}^{+1.1}`$ . It is therefore important to understand the specific difficulty which the standard sum rule approach seems to encounter in this case . In ref.  it has been noted that the simple quark-hadron duality ansatz which works in the one-variable dispersion relations might be too crude for the double dispersion relation.

## 2 An appealing solution: a large negative radial excitation contribution to the LCSR

In sum rule calculations it is usual to assume that the higher state contributions can be included in the perturbative estimate of a continuum 222Except for the critical case of quark masses in the pseudoscalar correlator method, or in general for some refined calculations like the ones discussed in ref. .. In other words, one does not include an explicit contribution of an isolated excited state. The first reason is probably pragmatical: it seems unnecessary to recourse to large excitation contributions if the stability criterion can be well satisfied without them. The other, more theoretical, reason is that the excitation contributions are exponentially suppressed with respect to the lowest state by the Borel procedure, so that one can sufficiently account for them by the rough procedure of the perturbative treatment of the continuum. Indeed, in the LCSR approach of ref. , this point of view has been adopted. We suggest, instead, that this neglect of an explicit radial excitation contribution may be the origin of the above discrepancy between the LCSR prediction and the experimental value for $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$. Of course, we are aware that, as explained in Belyaev et al. , in their method such contributions are suppressed by the Borel exponential. Our claim is that, in this particular case, the Borel suppression is not sufficient to allow to neglect them. The inclusion of the explicit radial excitation contribution to the hadronic side of the LCSR (often referred to as the left hand side –l.h.s.– of the sum rule) also offers an appealing explanation for the failure of the LCSR prediction.

A first indication in favor of this new proposal is that, after including a radial excitation, the stability of the sum rule, under the variation of the Borel parameter $`M^2`$, is improved. This criterion is however subject to an uncertainty since we do not really know what is the accuracy of the calculation of the theoretical r.h.s. It would be therefore good to present cross-checks of our assumption, which is what we will do in the next sections.

Before embarking on those issues, let us first explain why the assumption of a large radial excitation coupling to the sum rule, with a negative sign relative to the ground state contribution, seems so interesting. Since the purpose of this letter is to communicate our proposal, and not to make the best numerics, we leave apart for the moment the radiative corrections and write the sum rule of Belyaev et al. as:

$`g_{D^{}D\pi }={\displaystyle \frac{f(M^2)}{f_Df_D^{}}},`$ (1)
where the function $`f(M^2)`$ is the r.h.s. of eq. (44) of ref. , namely

$`f(M^2)={\displaystyle \frac{m_c^2}{m_D^2m_D^{}}}f_\pi \varphi _\pi (1/2)M^2\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_D^2+m_D^{}^2}{2M^2}}\right)\left[e^{m_c^2/M^2}e^{s_0/M^2}\right]+\mathrm{}`$ (2)
We do not write the higher twist terms since it would make the expression lengthy and would not help understanding our proposal. Those terms are numerically very important and are indeed included in our calculation. It is then found that, within the Borel window $`2\mathrm{GeV}^2<M^2<4\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ determined by the standard criteria, the function $`f(M^2)`$ is monotonously decreasing, and the variation is as large as $`20\%`$. Therefore, there is no truly good plateau. The authors quote an average

$`\overline{f}(M^2)|_{2\mathrm{GeV}^2<M^2<4\mathrm{GeV}^2}=0.51\pm 0.05\mathrm{GeV}^2,`$ (3)
which then yields the central value :

$`g_{D^{}D\pi }=12.5,`$ (4)
indeed much too low. Let us now introduce a radial excitation contribution to the hadronic l.h.s. of eq. (44) of ref. , or equivalently write:

$`g_{D^{}D\pi }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{f_Df_D^{}}}\left[f(M^2)R_D^{}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_D^{}^2m_D^2}{2M^2}}\right)R_D^{}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_D^{}^2m_D^{}^2}{2M^2}}\right)\right].`$ (5)
Note that we have two extra contributions: either the $`D`$ or the $`D^{}`$ is excited; they are denoted as $`(D^{},D^{})`$ and $`(D,D^{})`$, leading respectively to :

$`R_D^{}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_D^{}}{m_D}}\right)^2f_D^{}f_D^{}g_{D^{}D^{}\pi },R_D^{}={\displaystyle \frac{m_D^{}}{m_D^{}}}f_Df_D^{}g_{D^{}D\pi }.`$ (6)
We assume that the higher $`(D^{},D^{})`$, $`(D^{\prime \prime },D^{})`$, …contributions are still included in the continuum part of the model. The completion of the procedure requires also a new value of $`s_0`$, since the lowest radial contributions are no more comprised in the continuum part, but are handled separately.

For simplicity, since there is no sense in requiring too much precision, we will assume:

$`m_D^{}=m_D^{},f_D^{}=f_D^{},`$ (7)
the spin-spin effect being expected to decrease for higher states. We also assume that $`g_{D^{}D^{}\pi }=g_{D^{}D\pi }=g^{}`$, which is more questionable, since the ground state is present, and $`D`$ differ appreciably from $`D^{}`$. This, however, should not alter the qualitative conclusion that we obtain. Note also that the difference between the $`0^{}`$ and $`1^{}`$ states would disappear in the heavy quark limit. With these assumptions, we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{R_D^{}}{R_D^{}}}={\displaystyle \frac{m_D^{}m_D^{}}{m_D^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_D^{}}{f_D}}.`$ (8)
This equation (8) relates the two radial contributions since $`R_D^{}/R_D^{}`$ is directly calculable if we know the mass $`m_D^{}`$. The exponentials accompanying $`R_D^{}/R_D^{}`$ are the trace of the Borel suppression of radial excitations; they are increasing functions of $`M^2`$. Therefore, if we choose a negative $`R_{D^{},D^{}}`$, we can compensate for the decrease of $`f(M^2)`$ and thus simultaneously: (i) improve the stability of the sum rule and, (ii) increase the magnitude of $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$  (see fig. 1 for illustration). We have of course to take a rather large radial contribution in order to get a significant effect. To avoid adding more freedom, we fix the excitation spectrum by a model calculation which is completely independent. Using Dirac equation, with numbers taken from our previous treatment , we find in the heavy quark limit that the excitation energy is $`0.5\mathrm{GeV}`$, and therefore the mass of the excitation is $`2.5\mathrm{GeV}`$. Let us recall that the large width  expected for such a state makes it difficult to observe.

The remarkable fact is the following: taking a negative $`R_D^{}`$ ($`R_D^{}`$), and imposing that the variation of $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$ is $`5\%`$ or less in the allowed window for $`M^2`$, (instead of the previous $`20\%`$, in the same Borel window), we find that $`R_D^{}`$ must be in the range

$`0.25\mathrm{GeV}^2<R_D^{}<0.1\mathrm{GeV}^2.`$ (9)
Then, depending on the value of $`R_D^{}`$ in the above range (9) the predicted value of $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$ varies as

$`17<g_{D^{}D\pi }<25.`$ (10)
It increases with $`|R_D^{}|`$. It is much larger than before. We obtain at the same time a much better stability in $`M^2`$, and a much larger coupling constant, just in the desired range to agree with experiment.

For $`R_D^{}=0.15\mathrm{GeV}^2`$, we would obtain a perfect stability in $`M^2`$ (accuracy of the order of $`1\%`$) and the value $`g_{D^{}D\pi }=19.4`$, that is the value found in lattice QCD. But at the present stage, there is no sense in trying to get such an accuracy in stability, given the very rough precision of the calculation.

For the present note, we have adopted the parameters of ref.  for the allowed range of variation $`M^2`$ ; we choose also to keep the continuum threshold to be the same as $`s_0`$, the continuum threshold of the two-points annihilation sum rules proposed by these authors, although this may be questioned since we now take apart certain contributions of excited states; we do not indulge in any fine tuning. We have also not allowed the annihilation constants $`f_D`$, $`f_D^{}`$ to vary with $`M^2`$, but instead, we have taken the final value given in the same reference : indeed, we should check whether $`f_D`$ ,$`f_D^{}`$ as well as $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$ are independent of $`M^2`$. As we stated above, the inclusion of the radial excitation stabilizes the LCSR. This does not make the same effect in the sum rules for $`f_D`$, $`f_D^{}`$. As we shall see, the radial excitation contribution is neither stabilizing the sum rule (w.r.t. the variation of the Borel parameter $`M^2`$), nor it creates a difficulty: it simply gives a negligible contribution, and does not modify the previously estimated values for $`f_D,f_D^{}`$.

We note that the minus sign for the radial excitation contribution is crucial, and we would like therefore to have some argument for this from models. There is no very trustable model for radial excitation strong decay at the quantitative level. Nevertheless, it is indicative for our purpose that the rather standard model for strong interaction couplings, the non relativistic quark pair creation (QPC) model, used for calculational simplicity with harmonic oscillator wave functions, give precisely a stable negative sign for the product $`f_Df_D^{}g_{D^{}D\pi }`$ relative to the similar product for the ground state $`f_Df_D^{}g_{D^{}D\pi }`$. Hence, since, in the sum rule, the latter product is positive, this means that $`R_D^{}`$, which is precisely $`f_Df_D^{}g_{D^{}D\pi }`$ up to positive mass ratios, should be negative, as we have found in the sum rule.

## 3 Check of $`D\pi \mathrm{}\nu `$ semileptonic decay

We note that exactly the same quantity $`R_D^{}`$ will appear in a $`t`$-channel analysis of $`D\pi \mathrm{}\nu `$ decay. Indeed, using an unsubtracted dispersion relation, as required for the form factor , the addition of the residue of the pole corresponding to the radial excitation results in :

$`F_+(q^2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m_D^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_D^{}g_{D^{}D\pi }}{1q^2/m_D^{}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2f_Dm_D^{}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_D^{}R_D^{}}{1q^2/m_D^{}^2}}+\mathrm{}`$ (11)
So the question is whether our “large” contribution of radial states in the LCSR leads to effects in the $`D\pi \mathrm{}\nu `$ which are compatible with the facts. The answer is first that its impact is rather small, and anyway rather in the right direction. Indeed, we find that for $`R_D^{}=0.15\mathrm{GeV}^2`$, allowing $`g_{D^{}D\pi }19`$, the residue of the radial excitation is almost one order of magnitude smaller than the ground state one :

$`F_+(q^2)={\displaystyle \frac{1.15}{10.25q^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{0.14}{10.16q^2}}+\mathrm{}`$ (12)
It should be noted that the ground state contribution alone would lead to a too large rate (the numerator should be about $`0.8`$ at most instead of $`1.15`$ to get the correct rate with only the first pole). Therefore, the negative radial contribution is not worrisome but, quite the contrary, it is not sufficiently large to balance the excess of the lowest state contribution. Other radial excitations, as well as the continuum, must contribute, which is in agreement with the conclusions of ref. . Analogously, a negative contribution appears in the Becirevic–Kaidalov model , from remote singularities.

## 4 Check of annihilation constants and Adler–Weisberger sum rule

Another worry could be that this large contribution could contradict other sum rules concerning either the annihilation constants or the strong couplings. The annihilation constants $`f_D`$ and $`f_D^{}`$ are determined from the QCD sum rules by using the $`P`$-$`P`$ and $`V`$-$`V`$ correlation functions, respectively. At the same time, an Adler–Weisberger sum rule constrains the strong interaction coupling constants. Since the latter is stronger, as we shall see, we begin with it and write it, in the case of $`\pi +D\pi +D`$ scattering, as :

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_\pi ^2}{4m_{D^{(n)}}^2}}|g_{D^{(n)}D\pi }|^2+\text{orbitally excited states}=1,`$ (13)
where we have made explicit only the $`D^{}`$ ground state contribution and the one of its radial excitations ; the allowed orbital excitations are the $`0^+`$ and $`2^+`$. In ref. , we have estimated these contributions of the ground state and lowest orbitally excited states ($`D^{}`$) to be $`70\%`$, whence

$`|g_{D^{}D\pi }|{\displaystyle \frac{f_\pi }{2m_D^{}}}<\sqrt{0.3}=0.55.`$ (14)
Now, since we have $`|R_{D^{()}}|>0.1\mathrm{GeV}^2`$, we can deduce a lower bound on $`f_D^{}=f_D^{}`$ from eq. (6)

$`|f_D^{}|0.02\mathrm{GeV}.`$ (15)
This is one magnitude smaller than the ground state annihilation constant. Studying the QCD sum rules for $`f_D`$, $`f_D^{}`$, we find that the resulting contribution from the radially excited states is very small at the level of this lower bound. For the pseudoscalar sum rule, one has to change the l.h.s. according to

$`f_D^2f_D^2+\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_D^{}}{m_D}}\right)^4f_D^{}^2\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_D^{}^2m_D^2}{M^2}}\right).`$ (16)
Numerically, that change is completely negligible: it adds less than $`0.0016\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ (times the exponential factor, dependent on $`M^2`$, and which is smaller than $`0.25`$) to $`f_D^2=0.17^2=0.029\mathrm{GeV}^2`$. Therefore, we have much room left even if the bound (14) were to be lowered. For the vector sum rule, the conclusion is quite similar. The substitution to be made is

$`f_D^{}^2f_D^{}^2+\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_D^{}}{m_D^{}}}\right)^2f_D^{}^2\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_D^{}^2m_D^{}^2}{M^2}}\right).`$ (17)
The change is numerically even smaller in this case.

In contrast to the LCSR for $`f_Df_D^{}g_{D^{}D\pi }`$, the radial excitation term does not improve the stability of the sum rules for the annihilation constants: indeed, the r.h.s. is decreasing with $`M^2`$, and the contribution from the radially excited state increases, since it is positive. But it does not deteriorate the stability, since it is very small.

## 5 Conclusion

The result of the proposed modification of the sum rule calculation is very encouraging. Introducing the radial excitation contribution significantly improves the value of $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$, and at the same time the stability of the sum rule with respect to the Borel parameter $`M^2`$. This means that the effect of such a radial state is not properly accounted by the standard perturbative continuum contribution. Unless one imposes an unreasonable degree of stability, one is not able to fix the magnitude of the radial contribution accurately. The latter may vary by more than a factor of two, which induces an important variation of $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$, around $`30\%`$. This should not be viewed as a problem since our main goal is to prove that a large value for $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$, i.e. in the range allowed by experiment, is possible in the LCSR approach. At the very least, we can say that the old solution with the low value of $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$ and no explicit radial excitation, is not compelling, and alternative ones with large values of $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$ are favored. Of course, one should wonder whether the success survives when the calculation of the theoretical side is improved. In particular, does it survive the introduction of the radiative corrections, which are large? Our answer is positive, but we would like to present it within a more extensive discussion of the parameters involved in the sum rule calculation, especially because the threshold parameter $`s_0`$ should depend on the fact that we separate an explicit contribution of some excited states.

The main reason for having such a large effect of radial excitations without exceedingly large couplings is that the Borel exponential suppression effect is very weak in the LCSR: at most a factor $`0.5`$ (at the lower end of the allowed range) for the relative suppression of the radial excitation with respect to the ground state. The Borel suppression is much less effective than in the standard sum rules, e.g. for correlators leading to $`f_{D^{()}}`$. This is due to the additional factor of $`1/2`$ in the exponent and to the fact that $`M^2`$ is twice larger on the mean in the allowed range ($`2\mathrm{GeV}^2<M^2<4\mathrm{GeV}^2`$, instead of $`1\mathrm{GeV}^2<M^2<2\mathrm{GeV}^2`$). At the lower end of the range, the suppression is around eight times less effective in the LCSR.

Of course, it would be good to examine whether one gets similar improvement for the other sum rule approaches to $`g_{D^{}D\pi }`$. On the other hand, the situation encountered here underlines the usefulness of an alternative to the Borel transformation method, able to isolate with more efficiency various states. In some cases, the FESR proposed for the case of the quark mass sum rules by Kambor and Maltman  could be a good alternative.

## Acknowledgement

We thank Alexander Khodjamirian for discussions and precious comments on the manuscript. We acknowledge the partial support from the EC contract HPRN-CT-2002-00311 (EURIDICE).


text:
# Noncommutative Proj and coherent algebras

## 1. Preliminaries on $``$-algebras

In this section we review some basic constructions dealing with $``$-algebras.

Definition.(see ,) A $``$-algebra is an associative $`k`$-algebra $`A`$ of the form $`A=_{ij}A_{ij}`$, $`i,j`$, where $`A_{ii}=k`$ for all $`i`$; the only non-zero components of multiplication with respect to this decomposition are $`A_{jk}A_{ij}A_{ik}`$; moreover, the multiplications $`A_{jj}A_{ij}A_{ij}`$ and $`A_{ij}A_{ii}A_{ij}`$ are the identity maps.

We will always impose the following finiteness condition on a $``$-algebra: $`dim_kA_{ij}<\mathrm{}`$ for all $`ij`$. We consider the category $`\mathrm{GR}A`$ of graded right $`A`$-modules $`M=_iM_i`$ with an $`A`$-action of the form $`M_jA_{ij}M_i`$, such that $`M_iA_{ii}M_i`$ are the identity maps. The morphisms in $`\mathrm{GR}A`$ are homomorphisms of $`A`$-modules (they preserve the grading automatically). We denote by $`S_j`$ the unique irreducible $`A`$-module such that $`(S_j)_i=0`$ for $`ij`$, $`(S_j)_j=k`$ and by $`P_j=_iA_{ij}`$ its indecomposable projective cover. Let $`𝒫`$ be the family of modules consisting of the finite direct sums of $`P_j`$’s. We say that an $`A`$-module $`M`$ is finitely generated (resp., finitely presented) if there is a surjection $`PM`$ with $`P𝒫`$ (resp., $`M=\mathrm{coker}(P^{}P)`$, where $`P,P^{}𝒫`$). Note that our assumption on $`A`$ implies that for every finitely generated $`A`$-module $`M=_iM_i`$ the graded components $`M_i`$ are finite-dimensional.

As we already mentioned before, to a graded algebra $`A=_{i0}A_i`$ with $`dim_kA_i<\mathrm{}`$ one can associate the $``$-algebra $`A_{}=A_{ij}`$ with $`A_{ij}=A_{ji}`$. Note that the categories of graded right modules over $`A`$ and $`A_{}`$ are equivalent: the equivalence sends an $`A`$-module $`M=M_i`$ to an $`A_{}`$-module $`M_{}=M_i`$. Under this equivalence $`P_j`$ corresponds to the free module $`A(j)`$, where $`A(j)_i=A_{i+j}`$.

Let $`A`$ be a $``$-algebra. Henceforward, by an $`A`$-module we always mean a graded right $`A`$-module.

Definition. An $`A`$-module $`M`$ is called coherent if it satisfies the following two conditions:

(i) $`M`$ is finitely generated;

(ii) for every homomorphism $`f:PM`$ with $`P𝒫`$ the module $`\mathrm{ker}(f)`$ is finitely generated.

Of course, this definition is essentially a particular case of the general definition of coherent sheaves of modules given by Serre in . We denote by $`\mathrm{coh}A\mathrm{GR}A`$ the full subcategory of coherent modules. Some basic properties of coherent modules proved in  also hold in our situation with same proofs. Most notably, we have the following result.

###### Proposition 1.1.

$`\mathrm{coh}A`$ is an abelian subcategory of $`\mathrm{GR}A`$ closed under extensions.

Definition. A $``$-algebra $`A`$ is called weakly right coherent if all the modules $`P_j`$ are coherent. It is called right coherent if in addition all the modules $`S_j`$ are coherent.

Similarly, one defines the notion of a left coherent $``$-algebra. In this section and in the next one we work exclusively with right modules, so by coherence we mean right coherence. Considering graded algebras as a subcategory in the category of $``$-algebras we get a notion of coherence for them. Note that for a finitely generated graded algebra weak coherence and coherence are equivalent. Later we will prove that the tensor algebra $`T(V)`$ of a finite-dimensional space $`V`$ is coherent (see Corollary 3.2). This easily implies that the tensor algebra $`T(V)`$ of an infinite-dimensional vector space is weakly coherent (but not coherent).

###### Lemma 1.2.

Assume that $`A`$ is weakly coherent. Then every coherent module $`M`$ has a resolution $`\mathrm{}P^2P^1P^0M`$ with $`P^i𝒫`$.

Proof. Indeed, since $`M`$ is finitely generated, we can choose a surjection $`f:P^0M`$, where $`P^0𝒫`$. By Proposition 1.1 $`\mathrm{ker}(f)`$ is again coherent, so we can iterate this procedure. ∎

One can easily prove the following criterion: a $``$-algebra $`A`$ is weakly coherent (resp., coherent) iff there exists a full abelian subcategory $`𝒞\mathrm{GR}A`$ consisting of finitely generated modules, such that $`𝒫𝒞`$ (resp., $`𝒫𝒞`$ and $`S_j𝒞`$ for every $`j`$). This criterion can be used to prove the following result.

###### Proposition 1.3.

Let $`AB`$ be a homomorphism of $``$-algebras and $`\{Q_j,j\}`$ be the set of indecomposable projective $`B`$-modules (defined in the same way as $`P_j`$ for $`A`$). Assume that $`A`$ is coherent and all $`Q_j`$ are coherent as $`A`$-modules. Then $`B`$ is a coherent $``$-algebra.

Proof. This follows immediately from the above criterion applied to the subcategory of $`B`$-modules that are coherent over $`A`$. ∎

For example, the above proposition implies that the quotient $`A/J`$ of a coherent graded algebra $`A`$ by a two-sided (homogeneous) ideal $`J`$, such that $`J`$ is finitely generated as a right ideal, is again a coherent algebra.

A module $`M=_iM_i`$ over a $``$-algebra $`A`$ is called bounded (resp., bounded above) if $`M_i0`$ for only a finite number of indices $`i`$ (resp., $`M_i=0`$ for all sufficiently large $`i`$). Note that every finitely generated $`A`$-module is bounded above (since this is true for $`P_j`$). For an $`A`$-module $`M=_iM_i`$ and an integer $`n`$ we denote by $`M_n`$ the $`A`$-module $`_{in}M_i`$. For a coherent $``$-algebra $`A`$ we denote by $`\mathrm{coh}^bA`$ the category of bounded coherent modules. Note that since all the modules $`S_j`$ are coherent, $`\mathrm{coh}^bA`$ consists exactly of all finite-dimensional modules. Furthermore, $`\mathrm{coh}^bA`$ is a Serre subcategory of $`\mathrm{coh}A`$, so the quotient category

$$\mathrm{cohproj}A:=\mathrm{coh}A/\mathrm{coh}^b(A)$$

is still abelian. In particular, we can construct such a category (still denoted $`\mathrm{cohproj}A`$) for a coherent graded algebra $`A`$. If $`A`$ is Noetherian then $`\mathrm{cohproj}A`$ coincides with the category $`\mathrm{qgr}A`$ considered in .

## 2. Coherent sequences and an equivalence of categories

Let $`𝒞`$ be an abelian $`k`$-linear category, $`=(E_i,i)`$ be a sequence of objects of $`𝒞`$. We are going to show that under appropriate conditions on $``$ (that are combined below in the notion of a coherent sequence) certain quotient of the category $`𝒞`$ is equivalent to $`\mathrm{cohproj}A`$, where the $``$-algebra $`A=A()=_{ij}A_{ij}`$ is defined as follows: $`A_{ij}=\mathrm{Hom}_𝒞(E_i,E_j)`$ for $`i<j`$, $`A_{ii}=k`$, the multiplication is induced by the composition in $`𝒞`$. In the particular case of an ample sequence, we will obtain an equivalence of $`𝒞`$ with $`\mathrm{cohproj}A`$.

Using this technique we will show that for a coherent graded algebra $`A`$ generated by $`A_1`$ over $`A_0=k`$ there is an equivalence of categories $`\mathrm{cohproj}A\mathrm{cohproj}A^{(n)}`$, where $`A^{(n)}=_{i0}A_{in}`$ is a Veronese subalgebra of $`A`$. The similar result in the Noetherian case is due to Verevkin , Theorem (A-5) (see also , Prop. 5.10).

From now on we will always assume that the sequence $`=(E_i)`$ satisfies the following finiteness condition: for every object $`X𝒞`$ one has $`dim_k\mathrm{Hom}_𝒞(E_i,X)<\mathrm{}`$. In particular, the components $`A_{ij}`$ of the corresponding $``$-algebra $`A`$ are finite-dimensional.

Definition. A sequence $`=(E_i)`$ is called projective if for every surjection $`XY`$ in $`𝒞`$ there exists $`n`$ such that the corresponding map $`\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,X)\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,Y)`$ is surjective for $`i<n`$.

Every sequence $`=(E_i)`$ defines a functor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}:𝒞\mathrm{GR}A`$ sending $`X`$ to the right $`A`$-module $`_i\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,X)`$. More important for us are truncated versions of this functor

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX:=(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}X)_m=_{im}\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,X),$$

where $`m`$. If $``$ is projective then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}`$ (resp., $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$) is exact modulo the subcategory of bounded below (resp., bounded) modules. We define the subcategory $`𝒞_0=𝒞_0()𝒞`$ as the full subcategory consisting of objects $`X`$ such that $`\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,X)=0`$ for $`i<<0`$. If $``$ is projective then $`𝒞_0`$ is a Serre subcategory.

Definition. (i) A projective sequence $`=(E_i)`$ is called coherent if for every object $`X𝒞`$ and every $`m`$ there exists a set of integers $`i_1,\mathrm{},i_s`$ with $`i_jm`$ for all $`j`$, such that the canonical map

$$_{j=1}^s\mathrm{Hom}(E_{i_j},X)\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,E_{i_j})\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,X)$$

is surjective for $`i<<0`$.

(ii) A coherent sequence $`=(E_i)`$ is called ample if $`𝒞_0()=0`$.

The following lemma gives convenient reformulations of these conditions.

###### Lemma 2.1.

Let $`=(E_i)`$ be a projective sequence.

(i) $``$ is coherent iff for every object $`X𝒞`$ the $`A`$-modules $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX`$ are finitely generated for all $`m`$.

(ii) $``$ is ample iff for every $`X𝒞`$ and every $`m`$ there exists a surjection $`_{j=1}^sE_{i_j}X`$ for some $`i_1,\mathrm{},i_s`$ with $`i_jm`$ for all $`j`$.

Proof. (i) Assume first that $``$ is coherent. Note that for all $`im`$ the module $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_mE_i`$ contains $`P_i`$ as a submodule and the quotient is finite-dimensional, hence, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_mE_i`$ is finitely generated in this case. Now for an object $`X𝒞`$ and an integer $`m`$ we choose integers $`i_1,\mathrm{},i_sm`$ as in the definition and consider the morphism

(2.1)
$$f:_j\mathrm{Hom}(E_{i_j},X)E_{i_j}X,$$

such that $`\mathrm{coker}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}f`$ is bounded below. Since by our assumption on $``$ all spaces $`\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,X)`$ are finite-dimensional, this implies that $`\mathrm{coker}\mathrm{\Gamma }_mf`$ is finite-dimensional. On the other hand, as we observed above, the $`A`$-modules $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_mE_{i_j}`$ are finitely generated. It follows that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX`$ is finitely generated. Conversely, if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX`$ is finitely generated then there exists a surjection $`_{j=1}^sP_{i_j}\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX`$, where $`i_jm`$ for all $`j`$, hence, the condition in the definition of coherence is satisfied for $`m`$.

(ii) Assume that $``$ is ample. Then for every $`m`$ we can choose integers $`i_1,\mathrm{},i_sm`$ as in the definition of coherence and consider the morphism (2.1). We claim that $`\mathrm{coker}f=0`$. Indeed, since $``$ is projective, we have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_n(\mathrm{coker}f)\mathrm{coker}\mathrm{\Gamma }_nf=0`$ for $`n<<0`$. Hence, $`\mathrm{coker}f`$ belongs to $`𝒞_0=0`$. Conversely, assume that for every $`X𝒞`$ and $`m`$ there exists a surjection $`f:_{j=1}^sE_{i_j}X`$, where $`i_jm`$ for all $`j`$. Then by projectivity of $``$ the map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_nf`$ is surjective for $`n<<0`$ which implies that the sequence $``$ is coherent. On the other hand, it is clear that in this case $`𝒞_0=0`$. ∎

###### Corollary 2.2.

If $`A`$ is a coherent $``$-algebra then the sequence $`(P_i)`$ in $`\mathrm{coh}A`$ is coherent.

Proof. Indeed, all truncations of a coherent module are still coherent. ∎

Remark. The above lemma shows that our definition of ampleness is a direct generalization of the definition (4.2.1) of .

###### Proposition 2.3.

Let $`=(E_i)`$ be a coherent sequence, $`A=A()`$ be the corresponding $``$-algebra. Then

(i) for every $`X𝒞`$ and every $`m`$ the $`A`$-module $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX`$ is coherent;

(ii) the $``$-algebra $`A`$ is coherent.

Proof. (i) From Lemma 2.1(i) we know that the modules $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX`$ are coherent. Let $`f:_{j=1}^sP_{i_j}\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX`$ be any homomorpism of $`A`$-modules. We have to show that $`\mathrm{ker}f`$ is finitely generated. Clearly we can assume that $`i_jm`$ for all $`j`$. Then $`f`$ corresponds to a morphism $`\varphi :_jE_{i_j}X`$ in $`𝒞`$. Let $`n`$ be an integer smaller than all $`i_j`$. We have

$$(\mathrm{ker}f)_n=\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Gamma }_n\varphi \mathrm{\Gamma }_n(\mathrm{ker}\varphi ),$$

so by Lemma 2.1, this module is finitely generated. Hence, $`\mathrm{ker}f`$ is also finitely generated.

(ii) By part (i) the modules $`(P_j)_{j1}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{j1}E_j`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_jE_j`$ are coherent for every $`j`$. Therefore, the exact triple

$$0\mathrm{\Gamma }_{j1}E_j\mathrm{\Gamma }_jE_j\mathrm{Hom}(E_j,E_j)S_j0$$

implies that $`S_j`$ is a coherent $`A`$-module. But $`P_j`$ is an extension of $`S_j`$ by $`(P_j)_{j1}`$, so it is also coherent. ∎

Now we can prove our main theorem that generalizes the first part of Corollary 4.6 in .

###### Theorem 2.4.

Let $`=(E_i)`$ be a coherent sequence, $`A=A()`$ be the corresponding algebra. Then there is an equivalence of categories $`𝒞/𝒞_0\mathrm{cohproj}A`$. In particular, if $``$ is ample then $`𝒞\mathrm{cohproj}A`$.

Proof. Recall that according to Proposition 2.3 the $``$-algebra $`A`$ is coherent and for every $`X𝒞`$ and every $`m`$ the $`A`$-module $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX`$ is coherent. Now any of the functors $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_m:𝒞\mathrm{coh}A`$ induces an exact functor

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:𝒞/𝒞_0\mathrm{cohproj}A$$

such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(X)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_m(X)mod\mathrm{coh}^bA`$. To construct a functor in an opposite direction let us first consider for every $`M\mathrm{coh}A`$ the functor

$$h_M:𝒞\mathrm{Vect}_k:X\mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{GR}A}(M,\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}X),$$

where $`\mathrm{Vect}_k`$ is the category of vector spaces over $`k`$. We claim that $`h_M`$ is representable. Indeed, for every $`i`$ the functor $`h_{P_i}`$ is represented by $`E_i`$. Now every coherent module $`M`$ has a presentation in the form $`M=\mathrm{coker}(PQ),`$ where $`P,Q𝒫`$. We have an exact sequence of functors $`0h_Mh_Qh_P`$, where the functors $`h_P`$ and $`h_Q`$ are representable. Therefore, $`h_M`$ is also representable. Let us denote by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}M`$ the unique representing object for $`h_M`$. Note that the functor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}:\mathrm{coh}A𝒞`$ is right exact.

For every $`M\mathrm{coh}A`$ there is a natural homomorphism of $`A`$-modules $`M\mathrm{\Gamma }_m\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}M`$, where $`M`$ is concentrated in degrees $`m`$. We claim that the induced morphism in $`\mathrm{cohproj}A`$ is an isomorphism. Indeed, clearly this is true for $`M=P_i`$. Now using the fact that every coherent module is a quotient of a module from $`𝒫`$ one can easily prove the required statement by diagram chasing (one should check surjectivity first - see  (3.13)(i),(iii)).

It follows that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}M𝒞_0`$ for $`M\mathrm{coh}^bA`$, so $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ induces a functor

$$\mathrm{\Psi }:\mathrm{cohproj}A=\mathrm{coh}A/\mathrm{coh}^bA𝒞/𝒞_0$$

such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{Id}`$. Furthermore, for every $`X𝒞`$ and $`m`$ there is a canonical morphism $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_mXX`$ induced by the embedding $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}X`$ (considered as an element in $`\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX,\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}X)\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_mX,X)`$). This gives a natural transformation of functors $`\alpha :\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{Id}`$. We claim that $`\alpha `$ is an isomorphism. Indeed, let us denote by $`𝒫^{}`$ the collection of all objects of $`𝒞/𝒞_0`$ of the form $`_{j=1}^sE_{i_j}`$. One can easily check that $`\alpha _X:\mathrm{\Psi }(\mathrm{\Phi }(X))X`$ is an isomorphism in $`𝒞/𝒞_0`$ for $`X𝒫^{}`$. Now we claim that for every $`X𝒞/𝒞_0`$ there exists a surjection $`f:PX`$ in $`𝒞/𝒞_0`$ with $`P𝒫^{}`$. Indeed, as we have seen in the proof of Lemma 2.1(ii), for every $`X`$ there exists a morphism of the form $`f:_{j=1}^sE_{i_j}X`$ in $`𝒞`$ with $`\mathrm{coker}(f)𝒞_0`$. But such a morphism induces a surjection in $`𝒞/𝒞_0`$. Therefore, every $`X𝒞/𝒞_0`$ can be represented in the form $`\mathrm{coker}(PQ)`$ with $`P,Q𝒫^{}`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is right exact, this implies that $`\alpha _X`$ is an isomorphism for all $`X𝒞/𝒞_0`$. ∎

Remarks. 1. It should be not difficult to prove that the algebra $`A()`$ corresponding to an ample sequence $``$ satisfies an analogue of the condition $`\chi _1`$ of . Conversely, this condition for a coherent algebra $`A`$ should imply that $`(P_i)`$ is a projective (and hence, ample) sequence in $`\mathrm{cohproj}A`$. We leave the details for the reader.

2. It is easy to adapt the above theorem to the framework of graded algebras. Namely, if the category $`𝒞`$ is equipped with an autoequivalence $`\sigma `$ such that $`\sigma (E_i)=E_{i+1}`$, then the corresponding $``$-algebra comes from a graded algebra.

3. It should be possible to weaken the assumption that all spaces $`\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,X)`$ are finite-dimensional in the same way as it is done in Theorem 4.5 of . We leave for the reader to explore this.

In the remainder of the paper we leave the general context of $``$-algebras and work exclusively with graded algebras. Theorem 2.4 can be applied to derive the following result about Veronese subalgebras.

###### Proposition 2.5.

Let $`A=_{i0}A_i`$ be a graded coherent algebra, $`A^{(n)}=A_{in}`$ be its Veronese subalgebra for some $`n>0`$. Assume that $`A`$ is generated by $`A_1`$ over $`k`$. Then $`A^{(n)}`$ is coherent and $`\mathrm{cohproj}A\mathrm{cohproj}A^{(n)}`$.

Proof. The idea is to apply Theorem 2.4 to the sequence $`(A(in),i)`$ in $`\mathrm{coh}A`$. First, we claim that this sequence is coherent. Indeed, it is enough to check that for every coherent $`A`$-module $`M`$ and every $`m`$ the $`A^{(n)}`$-module $`_{im}M_{in}`$ is finitely generated. Clearly, it is sufficient to check this for $`M=A(j)`$, in which case this follows from the assumption that $`A`$ is generated by $`A_1`$ over $`k`$. It remains to prove that if $`M_{in}=0`$ for $`i>>0`$, where $`M`$ is a coherent $`A`$-module, then $`M_i=0`$ for $`i>>0`$. To this end we observe that every element $`xM`$ of such a module satisfies $`xA_i=0`$ for $`i>>0`$ (here we use the condition that $`A`$ is generated by $`A_1`$). Since $`M`$ is finitely generated it follows that $`M`$ is finite-dimensional. ∎

###### Proposition 2.6.

Let $`A`$ be a graded algebra generated by $`A_1`$ over $`k`$ with a finite number of defining relations. Then $`A`$ is coherent iff $`A^{(n)}`$ is coherent.

Proof. The “only if” part follows from Proposition 2.5. To prove the “if” part by Proposition 1.3 it suffices to verify that $`A`$ is finitely presented as a right $`A^{(n)}`$-module. Note that there is a direct sum decomposition

$$A=_{m=0}^{n1}P^m$$

in the category of $`A^{(n)}`$-modules, where $`P^m=_iA_{m+in}`$. Thus, it is enough to check that all the $`A^{(n)}`$-modules $`P^m`$, $`m=0,\mathrm{},n1`$, are finitely presented. First, we observe that they are finitely generated. Indeed, the fact that $`A`$ is generated by $`A_1`$ immediately implies that the $`A^{(n)}`$-module $`P^m`$ is generated by $`A_mP^m`$. Since there is a finite number of defining relations between generators of degree $`1`$ in $`A`$, we have an exact sequence of $`A`$-modules

$$_{i=2}^dV_iA(i)A_1A(1)Ak0,$$

where $`V_i`$ are finite-dimensional vector spaces. Therefore, we obtain exact sequences of $`A^{(n)}`$-modules of the form

$$_iV_iP^{mi}(a_{m,i})A_1P^{m1}P^m0,$$

$`m=1,\mathrm{},n1`$ (where $`a_{m,i}`$). Now we use a simple observation that for any homomorphism of modules $`f:M_1M_2`$, such that $`M_1`$ is finitely generated and $`M_2`$ is finitely presented, the module $`\mathrm{coker}f`$ is finitely presented. Therefore, from the above sequences we can derive by induction in $`m`$ that $`P^m`$ is finitely presented for $`0mn1`$. ∎

Remark. The condition that $`A`$ has a finite number of defining relations in Proposition 2.6 cannot be omitted. Indeed, let $`A`$ be the algebra generated by $`x`$ and $`y`$ with the defining relations $`x^2y=0`$, $`yx^2=0`$, $`yxy=0`$, $`xy^{2n+1}x=0`$ for $`n0`$. Clearly, $`A`$ is not coherent. On the other hand, it is easy to see that the algebra $`A^{(2)}`$ is defined by a finite number of monomial relations, hence it is coherent by the result of .

## 3. Examples of coherent and noncoherent algebras

Throughout this section $`A`$ denotes a finitely generated graded algebra.

We’ll start with two reformulations of the coherence condition for such an algebra.

###### Proposition 3.1.

The following conditions are equivalent:

(i) $`A`$ is right coherent;

(ii) for every finitely generated right (homogeneous) ideal $`JA`$ the space $`\mathrm{Tor}_1^A(J,k)`$ is finite-dimensional;

(iii) for every $`M\mathrm{GR}A`$ such that the spaces $`\mathrm{Tor}_0^A(M,k)`$ and $`\mathrm{Tor}_1^A(M,k)`$ are finite-dimensional, the space $`\mathrm{Tor}_2^A(M,k)`$ is also finite-dimensional.

Proof. Note that the condition $`dim_k\mathrm{Tor}_0^A(M,k)<\mathrm{}`$ simply means that $`M`$ is finitely generated.

(iii)$``$(ii) This follows from the isomorphism $`\mathrm{Tor}_i^A(J,k)\mathrm{Tor}_{i+1}^A(A/J,k)`$ for all $`i0`$.

(ii)$``$(i) Since $`A`$ is finitely generated over $`k`$, it is enough to check that for every homomorphism $`f:PA`$, where $`P𝒫`$, the module $`\mathrm{ker}f`$ is finitely generated. Let $`J`$ be the image of $`f`$. Then $`J`$ is finitely generated, hence $`\mathrm{Tor}_1^A(J,k)`$ is finite-dimensional. Now from the exact sequence

$$0\mathrm{Tor}_1^A(J,k)\mathrm{Tor}_0^A(\mathrm{ker}f,k)\mathrm{Tor}_0^A(P,k)\mathrm{}$$

we derive that $`\mathrm{Tor}_0^A(\mathrm{ker}f,k)`$ is finite-dimensional. Hence, $`\mathrm{ker}f`$ is finitely generated.

(i)$``$(iii) Let $`M`$ be a module with finite-dimensional $`\mathrm{Tor}_0^A(M,k)`$ and $`\mathrm{Tor}_1^A(M,k)`$. Then the minimal free resolution of $`M`$ has form

$$\mathrm{}P^1P^0M0$$

where $`P^0,P^1𝒫`$. It follows that $`M`$ is a coherent $`A`$-module, so it has resolution by modules in $`𝒫`$ (see Lemma 1.2). Hence $`dim_k\mathrm{Tor}_i^A(M,k)<\mathrm{}`$ for all $`i`$. ∎

###### Corollary 3.2.

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional vector space over $`k`$. Then the tensor algebra $`T(V)`$ is coherent.

Proof. Indeed, in this case $`\mathrm{Tor}_2^A(M,k)=0`$ for every $`M`$. ∎

It is not difficult to see that a finitely generated $`T(V)`$-module is coherent if and only if its sufficiently far truncation is a free $`T(V)`$-module. This implies that every object of the category $`\mathrm{cohproj}T(V)`$ is isomorphic to an object coming from $`𝒫`$. However, the morphism spaces in $`\mathrm{cohproj}T(V)`$ between $`P_i`$ and $`P_j`$ are infinite-dimensional. An amusing observation is that for every $`i`$ one has $`P_iP_{i1}^{dimV}`$ in $`\mathrm{cohproj}T(V)`$.

The next two propositions provide some examples of coherent and noncoherent algebras.

###### Proposition 3.3.

Assume that $`A`$ has a decomposition $`A=IB`$, where $`I`$ is a homogeneous left ideal, $`B`$ is a graded subalgebra. Assume also that $`B`$ is a right Noetherian ring and that $`I`$ is free as a left $`A`$-module. Then $`A`$ is right coherent.

Proof. We are going to use criterion (iii) of Proposition 3.1. For every right $`A`$-module $`M`$ there is spectral sequence with $`E_{p,q}^2=\mathrm{Tor}_q^B(\mathrm{Tor}_p^A(M,B),k)`$ converging to $`\mathrm{Tor}_{}^A(M,k)`$. On the other hand, the exact sequence $`0IAB0`$ of left $`A`$-modules shows that $`\mathrm{Tor}_p^A(M,B)=0`$ for $`p2`$. Now assume that $`\mathrm{Tor}_0^A(M,k)`$ and $`\mathrm{Tor}_1^A(M,k)`$ are finite-dimensional. Then $`dim_k\mathrm{Tor}_0^B(\mathrm{Tor}_0^A(M,B),k)<\mathrm{},`$ hence, $`\mathrm{Tor}_0^A(M,B)`$ is a finitely generated (right) $`B`$-module. This implies that all spaces $`E_{0,q}^2`$ are finite-dimensional. Therefore, from the assumption $`dim_k\mathrm{Tor}_1^A(M,k)<\mathrm{}`$ we derive that $`E_{1,0}^2=\mathrm{Tor}_0^B(\mathrm{Tor}_1^A(M,B),k)`$ is finite-dimensional. Hence, $`\mathrm{Tor}_1^A(M,B)`$ is a finitely generated $`B`$-module, which implies that all spaces $`E_{1,q}^2`$ are also finite-dimensional. ∎

###### Corollary 3.4.

Let $`B=kB_+`$ be a graded algebra and set $`A=Bz/(zB_+)`$, where $`Bz`$ is the free product of $`B`$ with $`k[z]`$, $`\mathrm{deg}(z)=1`$. If $`B`$ is right Noetherian then $`A`$ is right coherent. If $`B`$ is infinite-dimensional then $`A`$ is not right Noetherian.

Proof. To prove the first assertion apply the above proposition to the decomposition $`A=AzB`$. If $`V_1V_2\mathrm{}`$ is a strictly decreasing sequence of vector subspaces in $`B_+`$ then the right ideal $`_{n1}V_nz^n`$ in $`A`$ is infinitely generated. ∎

###### Proposition 3.5.

Let $`B=_{i0}B_i`$ be a graded algebra equipped with a decomposition $`B=IC`$, where $`I`$ is a homogeneous right ideal and $`C`$ is a graded subalgebra. Let us define the algebra $`A`$ as the quotient of the algebra $`Bz`$ (where $`z`$ has degree 1) by the relations $`zI=0`$ and $`zc=cz`$ for all $`cC`$. Assume that $`I`$ is not finitely generated as a right $`B`$-module. Then the algebra $`A`$ is not right coherent.

Proof. We have a decomposition $`A=_{n0}Bz^n`$ and an exact sequence of left $`A`$-modules

$$0A\stackrel{i}{}AB0,$$

where $`i(x)=xz`$. Let $`JA`$ be the right ideal generated by $`z`$, so that $`J=_{n1}Cz^n`$. By Proposition 3.1 it suffices to check that $`dim_k\mathrm{Tor}_1^A(J,k)=\mathrm{}`$. Consider the spectral sequence with $`E_{p,q}^2=\mathrm{Tor}_q^B(\mathrm{Tor}_p^A(J,B),k)`$ converging to $`\mathrm{Tor}_{}^A(J,k)`$. The above exact sequence shows that $`\mathrm{Tor}_i^A(J,B)\mathrm{Tor}_{i+1}^A(A/J,B)=0`$ for $`i1`$, so this spectral sequence degenerates in the term $`E_2`$ and we obtain an isomorphism

$$\mathrm{Tor}_1^A(J,k)\mathrm{Tor}_1^B(J_AB,k)\mathrm{Tor}_1^B(C,k).$$

But $`CB/I`$, so $`\mathrm{Tor}_1^B(C,k)\mathrm{Tor}_0^B(I,k)`$ which has infinite dimension. ∎

Examples. 1. The algebra $`A`$ with generators $`x,y,z`$ and relations $`xy=0,yz=0,xz=zx`$ is neither right nor left coherent. Indeed, this follows from Proposition 3.5 since we can represent $`A`$ in the form $`Bx/(xI,xzzx)`$, where $`B=ky,z/(yz)`$, $`I=ByB=_{n0}z^nyB`$, and in the form $`B^{}z/(I^{}z,xzzx)`$, where $`B^{}=x,y/(xy)`$, $`I^{}=B^{}yB^{}=_{n0}B^{}yx^n`$.

2. The algebra $`A`$ with generators $`x,y,z`$ and relations $`yz=0,xz=zx`$ is not left coherent (since the two-sided ideal generated by $`y`$ in $`kx,y`$ is infinitely generated as a left ideal). On the other hand, we claim that it is right coherent. Indeed, we can apply Proposition 3.3 to the decomposition $`A=Ik[x,z]`$, where $`I`$ is the two-sided ideal generated by $`y`$. The fact that $`I`$ is a free left $`A`$-module follows from the decomposition $`I=AyAyxAyx^2\mathrm{}`$.