text:
# Spectra and power of relativistic jets

## 1 Introduction

The bulk of the radiation we observe from blazars is produced in a well localized region of their relativistic jets. This is, in my opinion, one of the most important results of the $`\gamma `$–ray observations performed by EGRET onboard the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory, and of the more recent observations performed by ground based Cherenkov telescopes. When observational campaigns were organized at $`\gamma `$–ray and other frequency bands, they proved that also the X–ray flux was varying at the same time of the $`\gamma `$–ray flux, even if with a smaller amplitude. By demonstrating that both fluxes are likely to be produced in the same region, this puts a strong limit on the local photon energy densities, which must be sufficiently small to avoid the absorption caused by the photon–photon pair production process. This implies that the observed flux is enhanced by beaming and therefore that the source is moving relativistically. The same transparency constraint requires also that the $`\gamma `$–ray emitting region of the jet is sufficiently far from the X–ray emitting corona sandwiching the accretion disk. On the other hand, the hour–day variability timescales poses an upper limit on the size of the emitting region. The jet region where most of the dissipation takes place must then be at a few hundreds of Schwartzchild radii from the black hole (Ghisellini & Madau 1996)

The other important result of the high energy data is that we now know the entire spectral energy distribution (SED) of blazars: since the $`\gamma `$–ray luminosity is often dominating the total radiation output, we now know the total radiated power. This is large. The total power in radiation only, accounting for beaming, equals $`L_{\mathrm{obs}}/\mathrm{\Gamma }^2`$, where $`L_{\mathrm{obs}}`$ is the bolometric luminosity calculated assuming isotropy and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the bulk Lorentz factor. Jets must carry a power larger than that, implying for instance that the jet of S5 0836+71 (which has $`L_{\mathrm{obs}}10^{49}`$ erg s-1, Tavecchio et al. 2000), should carry more than $`10^{47}/(\mathrm{\Gamma }/10)^2`$ erg s-1. The question is in what form. It can be purely electromagnetic, as advocated by Blandford (2002) and by Lyutikov & Blandford (2002), or largely in the form of bulk motion of matter, with a relatively weak Poynting flux. Also, the relevant “matter” can be protons, or instead mostly electron–positron pairs. And of course there can be all the combinations of the above ingredients, possibly changing weight at different distances from the black hole: this underlines the importance to find ways to measure the power of jets and their matter content at different scales. For instance, one can calculate the amount of the emitting particles and the magnetic field required to account for the radiation we see, and if also the size and the bulk Lorentz factor are known, one can set a lower limit to the jet power (it is a lower limit because there can be other cold, non emitting, particles). This can be done at the jet scale where most of the radiation is produced (i.e. $`10^{17}`$ cm from the black hole, see e.g. Ghisellini 1999 and Fig. 1), where superluminal motion is detected (i.e. at the parsec–scale, see e.g. Celotti & Fabian 1991); at the large jet scales (i.e. at hundreds of kpc, as recently observed by Chandra, VLA, HST, see e.g. Ghisellini & Celotti 2001; Tavecchio et al. 2000); and finally at the scale of the radio lobes, thought as calorimeters (e.g. Rawlings & Saunders 1991). These studies point to the important conclusion that the engine generating the jet can be even more efficient than accretion. This would become dramatically clear if also gamma–ray bursts (GRBs) are jetted sources.

## 2 Jet power

Fig. 1 (left panel) shows an updated version of the distribution of the jet power found in blazars (Celotti & Ghisellini 2003, in prep.). It is found, as mentioned before, by assuming a synchrotron inverse Compton model for the emission, which fixes the number of particles and the value of the magnetic field of the emitting region, together with its dimension and the value of the bulk Lorentz factor. The distribution of the emitting particles is assumed to extend down to $`\gamma _{\mathrm{min}}=1`$, and to derive the power in protons we have assumed one proton per emitting electrons (i.e. no pairs). We can see that the powerful blazars (i.e. the flat radio spectrum quasars, FSRQs for short) have the largest power in emitted radiation. The power carried by the relativistic electrons, $`L_\mathrm{e}`$, does not reach these levels. This is a consequence of the rapid cooling suffered by the emitting particles in FSRQs, which is shorter than the light crossing time: since they emit so rapidly, they have small average random energies, and their relativistic inertia is relatively small. Consider also that the relativistic electrons must be accelerated in situ (they would rapidly loose all their energy traveling in the dense photon environment close to the accretion disk), therefore we require the jet to carry additional power to energize the emitting electrons (see in Fig. 1 the power corresponding to only the electron rest–mass, $`L_{\mathrm{e},\mathrm{cold}}`$). Note that also the distribution of the Poynting flux, $`L_\mathrm{B}`$, has similar, but somewhat smaller, values than the radiative power. This is a consequence of the large dominance of the high energy peak shown by the SED of these sources, requiring the synchrotron being less important than the inverse Compton process, and then implying a relatively small value of the magnetic field. For FSRQs we are then forced to consider other forms of jet power. The simplest way to account for this “missing power” is to assume the presence of protons. As can be seen, one proton per electron implies a jet power a factor 10–30 larger than what it radiates, i.e. a radiative efficiency between 3 and 10 per cent. This level of efficiency is what one expects in the “internal shock” scenario, and is also demanded by the requirement that most of the power should not be dissipated, since it must survive all along the jet and be deposited to the radio lobes.

There are alternatives. The power could still be hidden in a component of the magnetic field different from what exists in the emitting region. This may appear contrived at first sight, but in reconnection regions we may have indeed values of the magnetic field smaller than the average (see e.g. Drenkhan & Spruit 2002 for an application to GRBs). Another possibility could be to have a very large amount of cold pairs. But this is unlikely, since they would suffer i) strong annihilation at the base of the jet and ii) a strong Compton drag in the acceleration phase (see Celotti 2002).

## 3 The blazar sequence: an update

Fossati et al. (1998) suggested that the emitted luminosity controls the overall shape of the SED of blazars, while Ghisellini et al. (1998), by applying a one–zone synchrotron inverse Compton model to EGRET blazars could find a strong correlation between the energy of the electrons emitting at the peaks of the SED ($`\gamma _{\mathrm{peak}}`$) and the energy density $`U`$ (radiative plus magnetic) in the comoving frame. At those times the low power BL Lacs detected by EGRET were only a few, with only Mkn 421 and Mkn 501 detected at TeV energies. More recently, other 4 BL Lacs have been detected at TeV energies \[namely 2155–304; 2344+514; 1426+428 and 1959+650, Aharonian et al. 2001 and references therein; Holder et al. 2002\]. These detections opened up the way to measure the poorly known far IR cosmic background through its influence on the high energy spectrum of TeV BL Blacs (see e.g. Stecker & de Jager 1997). If the TeV emission we see is partially absorbed by the far IR, it may be that all blazars (i.e. not only the powerful ones), have their SED dominated by the $`\gamma `$–ray emission. Also BeppoSAX made an important contribution to blazar studies, particularly through the PDS instrument, sensitive between 20 and 100 keV, detecting several BL Lacs in this band. These recent observations allowed to enlarge the original sample of EGRET blazars, and to explore the blazar sequence in the low power domain. The right panel of Fig. 1 shows that the correlation between $`\gamma _{\mathrm{peak}}`$ and $`U`$ is more complex than previously thought: it can be reproduced by assuming that in low power BL Lacs we have $`\gamma _{\mathrm{peak}}U^1`$, while for powerful blazars $`\gamma _{\mathrm{peak}}U^{1/2}`$, which was the correlation found previously, considering only EGRET blazars. This has been interpreted as the manifestation of a two–step acceleration process, with electrons pre–accelerated at a certain value of $`\gamma `$ (which equals $`\gamma _{\mathrm{peak}}`$ for high power blazars), and then accelerated at still higher energies, forming a broken power law distribution whose break is controlled by the radiative cooling after one light crossing time (this break equals $`\gamma _{\mathrm{peak}}`$ in low power BL Lacs).

## 4 Internal shocks and bulk Compton emission

The result on the jet power and on the spectral modelling of blazars mentioned above can have a satisfactory explanation in the internal shock scenario, in which the central engine works intermittently producing blobs moving at slightly different velocities and therefore colliding at some distance from the black hole, transforming a few per cent of the bulk kinetic energy in radiation (see e.g. Ghisellini 1999; Spada et al., 2001). The fact that most of the dissipation occurs at $``$hundreds of Schwartzchild radii is a natural consequence in this scenario (it is the distance of the first collisions between consecutive shells); variability is a built–in feature (but requires that the central engine works intermittently); acceleration of particles lasts for about one shell light crossing time, explaining the $`\gamma _{\mathrm{peak}}U`$ correlation; dissipation of bulk kinetic energy into radiation occurs all along the jet, but with a decreasing efficiency, due to the decreasing contrast in the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–values of two colliding shells. It can also account for the blazar sequence (Guetta et al. 2002) with the additional very reasonable assumption that the broad line region is located at a distance which correlates with the accretion disk luminosity (which in turn correlates with the jet power): in weak BL Lacs shell–shell collisions occur outside the broad line region, in a much less dense external photon environment, implying less severe cooling (i.e. large $`\gamma _{\mathrm{peak}}`$) and a relatively more important SSC emission. It is also a relatively simple scenario, allowing quantitative analysis (see Tanihata et al. 2002 for an application to Mkn 421). Besides all that, part of the appeal of this scenario lies on the possibility that $`all`$ relativistic jets work the same way, therefore including GBRs and galactic superluminal sources.

On the other hand, as explained above and presented by Blandford (2002) and by Lyutikov (2002) at this meeting, the jet could be purely electromagnetic. Electromagnetic instabilities could develop at some distance from the black hole, producing most of the blazar emission without violating the $`\gamma `$$`\gamma `$ constraints. This could equally well happen in all relativistic jets. We need thus a way to distinguish between the two scenarios, bearing in mind that also in the internal shock scenario an acceleration mechanism is required, which might use magnetic forces. However, the matter has to achieve its final bulk Lorentz factor quite rapidly, before the $`\gamma `$–ray dissipation zone.

One possibility to check for the presence of fastly moving large quantities of matter in the inner jet is through the interaction of this matter with the radiation produced by the accretion disk. As Sikora et al. (1997) and Sikora & Madejski (2002) pointed out, even if the matter is cold in the comoving frame, bulk Comptonization between jet matter and radiation can be a very powerful tool to test the inner jet content. The expected emission feature should be an X–ray excess at the frequency $`\nu _{\mathrm{disk}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^2`$1 keV ($`\nu _{\mathrm{disk}}`$ is the peak frequency of the disk radiation, in the UV band). The level of this emission measures the optical depth of the jet, hence its matter content. Up to now there have been no claims of detection of this feature, which however could be masked by the power law emission from the $`\gamma `$–ray emission zone. Therefore there is the hope that more detailed observations can either detect the feature or at least put strong upper limits on it. Note that also purely electromagnetic models could accomodate for some bulk Compton radiation, through some electron positron pairs created at the base of the jet, which would serve as scatterers without contributing much to the total jet power. But in this case the level of the bulk Comptonization feature is arbitrary. If instead the feature is detected at a level predicted by the bulk kinetic power estimated by other means, this should be considered as a severe problem for the purely electromagnetic scenario.


format: text

text:
# Gravitational diffusion in the intra-cluster medium

## 1 Introduction

In the equilibrium state of a multi-component plasma the number density, $`n_\mathrm{i}`$, of particles of mass $`m_\mathrm{i}`$, is $`n_\mathrm{i}\mathrm{e}^{m_\mathrm{i}\varphi (r)/kT}`$, where $`\varphi (r)`$ is the gravitational potential. In the high temperature intra-cluster medium (ICM), light elements, helium (He) and hydrogen (H), can diffuse fast enough to reach their equilibrium distribution in a Hubble time. Larger frictional drag forces work on heavier elements, but still we expect, at least partial segregation as a result of diffusion.

Diffusion can have important consequences. Fabian & Pringle (1977) suggested diffusion as a possible explanation for the observed gradients in the iron abundance inside galaxy clusters. In their calculations iron ions sediment by a distance comparable to the radius of the cluster within a Hubble time. For other elements they predicted the diffusion velocity to be proportional to $`AZ^2`$, where $`A`$ is the atomic number and $`eZ`$ is the charge of the ion. These calculations assumed that only protons apply appreciable drag forces on heavy elements. Rephaeli (1978) claimed that by neglecting helium drag Fabian & Pringle overestimated the iron diffusion rate.

Helium sedimentation can potentially change the global observational properties of X-ray emission from rich clusters. As has been noted by Qin & Wu (2000) current estimates of cluster masses from X-ray observations, which rely on the assumption of constant mean molecular weight, can be off by $`18\%`$ if helium is concentrated inside the core. Here we also point out that by steepening the baryonic density profile helium sedimentation increases the X-ray emissivity in hot clusters.

In this paper we revisit the calculation of element sedimentation in the ICM. We confirm the claim by Rephaeli that helium drag on iron is comparable to that of protons. However, instead of hindering the sedimentation of iron and other heavy elements we show that helium acts as a catalyst. Our analysis includes electric fields that are inevitably generated by segregation of charged elements. Although these fields reduce the diffusion rate, the sedimentation time-scales of heavy elements are still several times shorter than previous estimates.

The paper is organized as follows. In §2 we present the basic equations and estimate the sedimentation speeds and time-scales. In §3 we discuss the equilibrium distribution as a limiting case of element sedimentation. We conclude in §4.

## 2 The equations of element diffusion

We write the equations governing the evolution of individual species in an ICM of any composition. We do not consider magnetic fields in this paper, but include electric fields which must exist in any ionized plasma in a gravitational field (Eddington 1926). Let the ICM be made of any number of species each made of particles characterized by mass $`m_\mathrm{i}`$ and electric charge $`q_\mathrm{i}=eZ_\mathrm{i}`$. We denote the local number density and velocity of a patch of matter of each species by $`n_\mathrm{i}`$ and $`VVV_\mathrm{i}`$. Then, the mass density is $`\rho _\mathrm{i}=n_\mathrm{i}m_\mathrm{i}`$ and the pressure is $`P_\mathrm{i}=n_\mathrm{i}kT`$, where we have assumed that the ICM is in local thermal equilibrium so all species share the same temperature $`T`$. With this notation the equations are

$`{\displaystyle \frac{VVV_\mathrm{i}}{t}}+VVV_\mathrm{i}VVV_\mathrm{i}={\displaystyle \frac{P_\mathrm{i}}{\rho _\mathrm{i}}}+ggg+{\displaystyle \frac{q_\mathrm{i}EEE}{m_\mathrm{i}}}+{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}(VVV_\mathrm{i}VVV_\mathrm{j})/\tau _{\mathrm{ij}},`$ (1)
where $`E`$$`E`$$`E`$ is the electric field, and $`g`$$`g`$$`g`$ is the gravitational field (force per unit mass). The constants $`\tau _{\mathrm{ij}}`$ are the time-scales for the drag forces acting on the species $`i`$ as a result of Coulomb interactions with species $`j`$. Momentum conservation implies that $`\tau _{\mathrm{ij}}=(\rho _\mathrm{j}/\rho _\mathrm{i})\tau _{\mathrm{ji}}`$. If $`m_\mathrm{i}m_\mathrm{j}`$ then $`\tau _{\mathrm{ij}}`$ can be approximated by (Spitzer 1968)

$`\tau _{\mathrm{ij}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3(2\pi )^{1/2}(kT)^{3/2}}{8\pi Z_\mathrm{i}^2Z_\mathrm{j}^2e^4n_\mathrm{j}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{i}}{m_\mathrm{j}^{1/2}}}`$
$`=`$ $`9.4\times 10^6\left({\displaystyle \frac{T}{10^8\mathrm{K}}}\right)^{3/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda }}{40}}\right)^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{n_\mathrm{j}}{10^3\mathrm{m}^3}}\right)^1`$
$`\times `$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{i}}{m_\mathrm{p}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_\mathrm{j}}{m_\mathrm{p}}}\right)^{1/2}\left(Z_\mathrm{i}Z_\mathrm{j}\right)^2\mathrm{Yr},`$
where the $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the Coulomb logarithm. The equations (1) must be supplied by additional relations that specify the electric field. To create an electric force comparable with gravitational and pressure forces a tiny fractional charge excess ($`Gm_\mathrm{p}^2/e^210^{36}`$) is sufficient. The additional relations can then be obtained by assuming charge neutrality and zero electric currents, i.e.,

$$\underset{i}{}n_\mathrm{i}q_\mathrm{i}=0,\mathrm{and}\underset{\mathrm{i}}{}n_\mathrm{i}q_\mathrm{i}VVV_\mathrm{i}=0.$$
(3)
### 2.1 Sedimentation speeds and time-scales

Multiplying the equations (1) by $`n_\mathrm{i}m_\mathrm{i}/n_\mathrm{i}m_\mathrm{i}`$ and summing over all species yields

$`{\displaystyle \frac{P}{\rho }}=\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg},`$ (4)
where $`\rho =n_\mathrm{i}m_\mathrm{i}`$ is the total local density of all species, $`VVV=\rho _iVVV_\mathrm{i}/\rho `$ and $`P=P_\mathrm{i}`$ are, respectively, the mass-weighted mean velocity and total pressure, and $`\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}=gggVVV/tVVVVVV`$ is the gravitational field in the frame of reference moving with the velocity $`V`$$`V`$$`V`$. The terms involving the electric and drag forces have disappeared by virtue of charge neutrality and momentum conservation, respectively. Since $`|VVV_\mathrm{i}VVV|`$ is much smaller than the thermal velocities, the velocity dispersion term $`\rho _i(VVV_\mathrm{i}VVV)(VVV_\mathrm{i}VVV)/\rho `$ is negligible compared to the pressure and gravity terms we have not included it in the equation (4).

At the initial stage of the diffusion process the dominant light species have the same distribution, which gives $`(n_\mathrm{i}kT)/(n_\mathrm{i}m_\mathrm{i})=(\mu m_\mathrm{p}/m_\mathrm{i})\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}`$, where $`\mu =(1/m_\mathrm{p})n_\mathrm{i}m_\mathrm{i}/n_\mathrm{i}`$ is the mean molecular weight. Thus equations (1) yield

$`(\mu m_\mathrm{p}/m_\mathrm{i}1)\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}+{\displaystyle \frac{q_\mathrm{i}EEE}{m_\mathrm{i}}}+{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}(V_\mathrm{i}V_\mathrm{j})/\tau _{\mathrm{ij}}=0.`$ (5)
Using equations (3) and (5) we find that the electric field is $`EEE=\mu \stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}/e`$. From (2) $`\tau _{\mathrm{ij}}n_\mathrm{j}^1m_\mathrm{j}^{1/2}`$, so because of the low abundance of heavy ions and the low mass of electrons, only the drag terms from protons and helium ions is important. So we are left with a single equation for each element

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+Z_\mathrm{i}}{A_\mathrm{i}}}\mu 1\right)\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}+{\displaystyle \frac{VVV_\mathrm{p}VVV_\mathrm{i}}{\tau _{\mathrm{ip}}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{VVV_\alpha VVV_\mathrm{i}}{\tau _{\mathrm{i}\alpha }}}=0.`$ (6)
We can now estimate the velocity of each species relative to $`VVV_\mathrm{p}`$, the velocity of the proton fluid at each point. The advantage of using velocities relative to protons is the independence of the results from physical processes other than diffusion (radiative cooling, heating by supernovae etc). Even though these processes can have important dynamical effects on the cluster, they do not affect the expressions we develop for the relative velocities and element abundance.

From (6) the helium velocity is

$`VVV_\alpha VVV_\mathrm{p}=(3\mu /41)\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\tau _{\alpha \mathrm{p}}0.56\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\tau _{\alpha \mathrm{p}}.`$ (7)
The relative sedimentation speed of heavy elements, $`VVV_\mathrm{i}VVV_\mathrm{p}`$, can easily be related to that of helium $`VVV_\alpha VVV_\mathrm{p}`$. Heavy elements experience an upward proton drag and inward helium drag forces. According to (2), $`\tau _{\mathrm{ij}}Z_\mathrm{i}^2`$ and for large $`Z_\mathrm{i}`$ these drag terms dominate all others in (6). Thus we are left with

$`(VVV_pVVV_\mathrm{i})/\tau _{\mathrm{ip}}(VVV_\mathrm{i}VVV_\alpha )/\tau _{\mathrm{i}\alpha }.`$ (8)
Substituting $`\tau _{\mathrm{i}\alpha }`$ and $`\tau _{\mathrm{ip}}`$ from (2) in the last equation yields

$`{\displaystyle \frac{VVV_\mathrm{i}VVV_\mathrm{p}}{VVV_\alpha VVV_\mathrm{p}}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{n_\mathrm{p}}{8n_\alpha }}\right)^1=0.4,`$ (9)
where we have taken $`n_\alpha /n_\mathrm{p}=0.08`$. Thus, contrary to the prediction of Fabian & Pringle (1977), who by neglecting helium drag obtained $`(V_\mathrm{p}V_\mathrm{i})A_\mathrm{i}Z_\mathrm{i}^2`$, the diffusion speeds are approximately the same for all heavy elements. Including all forces in the calculation increases slightly this result (by a factor of $`1+4/Z_\mathrm{i}`$)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{VVV_\mathrm{i}VVV_\mathrm{p}}{VVV_\alpha VVV_\mathrm{p}}}=0.4\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{3A_\mathrm{i}}{Z_\mathrm{i}^2}}1.8\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z_\mathrm{i}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z_\mathrm{i}^2}}\right)\right].`$ (10)
There is also a correction of a similar magnitude if the initial distribution of heavy elements is different from that of light elements.

The relation (10) is independent of the physical state of the ICM. To obtain the relative velocities we have to know the temperature, the density and the gravitational acceleration. Taking in (2) $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda }40`$ as the typical value for the ICM, we find the helium velocity relative to protons to be

$$VVV_\alpha VVV_\mathrm{p}=5\times 10^4\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}_{_{9.5}}n_{\mathrm{p}}^{1}{}_{_3}{}^{}T__8\mathrm{ms}^1,$$
(11)
where $`\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}_{_{9.5}}=\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}\stackrel{~}{ggg}/(10^{9.5}\mathrm{ms}^2)`$, $`n_{\mathrm{p}}^{}{}_{_3}{}^{}=n_\mathrm{p}/(10^3\mathrm{m}^3)`$, and $`T__8=T/10^8`$ K. This is lower by $`40\%`$ than the result of Qin & Wu (2000), the main difference is the inclusion of electric field in our calculation. As seen from equation (11) the diffusion speeds depend on the local density and temperature. However, a single diffusion time-scale is obtained if the gas and dark matter both follow an isothermal spherical density profile $`\rho (R)R^2`$ and the gas is in hydrostatic equilibrium ($`\stackrel{~}{g}=g`$) with constant $`T`$. In this case $`V_\mathrm{i}V_\mathrm{j}g/n_\mathrm{p}R`$, which together with continuity equation, $`\mathrm{d}n_\mathrm{i}/\mathrm{d}t=R^2_R(R^2V_\mathrm{i})`$, yields,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n_\mathrm{i}}{n_\mathrm{j}}}\right)={\displaystyle \frac{3(V_\mathrm{j}V_\mathrm{i})}{R}}.`$ (12)
This motivates us to define the time-scale for diffusion between two species as

$$\tau _D=\frac{R}{3(V_\mathrm{i}V_\mathrm{j})},$$
(13)
which for helium relative to protons gives

$`\tau _D=3\times 10^9\left({\displaystyle \frac{f_\mathrm{b}}{0.1}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{T}{10^8\mathrm{K}}}\right)^{3/2}\mathrm{Yr},`$ (14)
where $`f_\mathrm{b}`$ is the baryonic mass fraction in the cluster.

## 3 The Equilibrium Distribution

The diffusion time-scale of helium as seen from (14) is comparable to the Hubble time. It is thus prudent to examine in detail the equilibrium distribution of hydrogen and helium, which is the final product of diffusion.

We assume a spherically symmetric cluster in which the dark mass inside a radius $`r`$ is given by (Navarro, Frenk & White 1997)

$`M_{_{\mathrm{dm}}}(r)=4\pi \rho _sr_s^3\left[\mathrm{ln}\left(1+r/r_s\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+r/r_s}}\right],`$ (15)
where $`\rho _s`$ and $`r_s`$ are constants. The gas density profile, $`\rho `$, is determined by the equation of hydrostatic equilibrium (see eq.4),

$`{\displaystyle \frac{kT}{\mu m_\mathrm{p}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}r}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{\mu }}\right)={\displaystyle \frac{GM_{_{\mathrm{dm}}}(r)}{r^2}},`$ (16)
where we have neglected the contribution of baryons to gravity and assumed constant temperature, $`T`$, throughout the ICM. In the absence of sedimentation $`\mu `$ is constant and the solution to (16) is (Makino, Sasati, & Suto 1998)

$`\rho (r)=\rho (0)e^{\mu \eta }(1+r/r_s)^{\mu \eta r_s/r},`$ (17)
where $`\eta =4\pi Gm_\mathrm{p}\rho _sr_s^2/kT`$. Sedimentation introduces a dependence of $`\mu `$ on $`r`$ and the above analytical solution is no longer valid. The abundances of the various elements are then determined by the equation of hydrostatic equilibrium for each element separately and the condition for local charge neutrality,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{kT}{m_\mathrm{i}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d(\mathrm{ln}n_\mathrm{i})}{dr}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{GM_{_{\mathrm{dm}}}(r)}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{q_\mathrm{i}E(r)}{m_\mathrm{i}}},`$ (18)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{i}}{}}n_\mathrm{i}(r)q_\mathrm{i}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (19)
Taking $`m_\alpha =4m_\mathrm{p}`$ and neglecting the electron mass, these equations have the solution

$`n_\mathrm{p}`$ $`=`$ $`6C_1\left[f(r)+f^1(r)1\right]/h^2(r),`$ (20)
$`n_\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`C_1\left[f(r)+f^1(r)1\right]^2/h^2(r),`$ (21)
where $`f(r)=\left[C_2h^5(r)1+\sqrt{(C_2h^5(r)1)^21}\right]^{1/3}`$, $`h(r)=(1+r/r_\mathrm{s})^{\eta r_\mathrm{s}/r}`$, and $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ constants. The behavior of the solution in the inner and outer regions is easily understood as follows. In the inner regions helium is dominant, thus $`\mu =4/3`$ and $`E=\mu g/e=4g/3e`$. From this follows $`n_p(1+r/r_s)^{\eta /3}`$ and $`n_\alpha (1+r/r_s)^{4\eta /3}`$. Note that, since the total force felt by protons becomes repulsive ($`eE>mg`$), their density is falling towards the center. The outer regions consist almost entirely of hydrogen plasma, thus $`\mu =1/2`$ and $`E=\mu g/e=g/2e`$. This gives $`n_p(1+r/r_s)^{\eta /2}`$ and $`n_\alpha (1+r/r_s)^{3\eta }`$, and so $`n_\alpha n_p^6`$, in agreement with Gilfanov & Syunyaev (1984).

The constants $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ in the analytic solution (21) are fixed by the boundary conditions imposed on the abundances. Here we require that the ratio of total helium to hydrogen abundances inside the virial radius is equal to the primordial value ($`0.08`$). We will present results for a cluster with gas temperature such that $`\eta =10`$ and a virial radius equal to $`3r_\mathrm{s}`$ in agreement with observations and N-body simulations of massive clusters (NFW 1997; Ettori & Fabian 1999). In Fig. 1 we show as the solid line the baryonic density obtained from the analytic solution. For comparison we also plot as the dashed curve the profile (17) which corresponds to equilibrium without diffusion. A proper estimation of the density profile from the observed X-ray emissivity ($`(n_\mathrm{i}Z_\mathrm{i}^2n_\mathrm{i}Z_\mathrm{i})`$) should take into account variations of the He/H abundance ratio throughout the ICM. Assuming constant He/H ratio can yield a biased estimate of the profile. To demonstrate this we plot as the dotted line in fig. 1 the estimated profile if a constant abundance ratio were assumed. In fig. 2 we show the baryonic mass fraction as a function of radius for the same three cases as in fig. 1. We see (solid line) that diffusion introduces distinct features in the behavior of the baryonic fraction as a function of radius. Finally fig. 3 shows the number density of helium and hydrogen in the case with diffusion.

## 4 Conclusions

We have seen that diffusion steepens the gas density profile near the center of hot clusters, increasing their X-ray luminosity (by factor of 5 in our example). In colder clusters ($`T10^7`$ K) the diffusion time-scale is larger than the Hubble time and their luminosity remains unchanged. This may explain the observed discrepancy between the observed $`LT^3`$ (Mushotzky 1984; Edge & Stuwart 1991; David et al. 1993) and $`LT^2`$ which is expected from self-similar arguments (e.g., Kaiser 1986).

If the inner regions of clusters are dominated by helium then the baryonic mass density as inferred from the X-ray emissivity can be underestimated by $`30\%`$ if constant He/H abundance ratio is assumed, while in the helium-deficient outer region it can be overestimated by $`7\%`$. Estimates of of the dark matter density can be affected by even a larger factor. These estimates assume hydrostatic equilibrium (eq. 16), so by taking $`\mu =0.59`$ (cosmic abundance) instead of 0.5 (pure hydrogen plasma) in the outer regions, we underestimate the total mass by $`18\%`$ (Qin & Wu 2000). In the helium dominated core the mass would be overestimated by a factor of $`2.3`$.

Our estimates of the sedimentation time-scales have neglected magnetic fields. Magnetic fields with coherence length comparable to the size of the cluster force the ions to move on longer orbits defined by the field lines. This can increase the sedimentation time-scales by factor of a few. Small-scale magnetic fields, however, can increase the time-scales by a factor ranging from a few in some estimates (Narayan & Medvedev 2001; Malyshkin 2001) to 100-1000 in others (Chandran & Cowley 1998).

## acknowledgment

We thank Marat Gilfanov for stimulating discussions. This research was supported by the Technion V.P.R Fund- Henri Gutwirth Promotion of Research Fund, the German-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Development, and the EC RTN network ’The physics of the intergalactic matter’.


text:
# Shape Coexistence in 186Pb: Beyond-mean-field description by configuration mixing of symmetry restored wave functions

Current address: \]Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439

(February 28 2003)

## Abstract

We study shape coexistence in 186Pb using configuration mixing of angular-momentum and particle-number projected self-consistent mean-field states. The same Skyrme interaction SLy6 is used everywhere in connection with a density-dependent, zero-range pairing force. The model predicts coexisting spherical, prolate and oblate $`0^+`$ states at low energy.

The behavior of shell effects away from the valley of stability is a topic of very active investigation, both theoretically and experimentally. For light nuclei, the spherical $`N=20`$ and $`N=28`$ shells disappear in neutron-rich isotopes, leading to strongly deformed ground states and large $`B(E2)`$ transition probabilities between the first $`2^+`$ state and the ground state Rei99 . In contrast, the magic proton number $`Z=82`$ is particularly strong and its influence persists even in very neutron-deficient nuclei. The ground state of Pb isotopes is known to be spherical down to 182Pb Wau94 . The weakening of the magicity of the $`Z=82`$ shell manifests itself through the appearance of low-lying $`0^+`$ states Jul01 . At least one low-lying, excited $`0^+`$ level has been observed in all even-even Pb isotopes between $`A=182`$ and 194 at excitation energies below 1 MeV, the most extreme cases being 188Pb and 186Pb Hee93 ; And00  with two excited $`0^+`$ states below 700 keV.

Two different kinds of models have been invoked to explain the coexistence of several $`0^+`$ states at low energy Woo92 . In a shell model picture And00 , the first excited $`0^+`$ level observed from 202Pb down to 186Pb is interpreted as a two-quasiparticle proton configuration $`(\pi h9/2)^2`$, while the second one in 188Pb and 186Pb as well as the first $`0^+`$ state in 184Pb are understood as a four-quasiparticle configuration $`(\pi h9/2)^4`$. In this picture, neutrons and protons outside the inert core interact through pairing and quadrupole interactions to generate deformed structures. Such a model requires a drastic truncation of the configuration space. Up to now, it has only been applied in rather schematic and qualitative ways.

In mean-field models, the $`0^+`$ states observed at low energies are associated with coexisting energy minima which appear for different values of the axial quadrupole moment naz93 . The ground state corresponds to the spherical minimum and the excited $`0^+`$ level to a deformed state with an oblate (in the heaviest Pb isotopes) or a prolate (in 184Pb up to 188Pb) shape.

However, shape coexistence in the neutron-deficient Pb region cannot be described on the level of mean-field models in a fully satisfactory way. The minima obtained as a function of the quadrupole moment are rather shallow and dynamical effects such as quadrupole vibrations may affect the very existence of these minima. Tajima *et al.* Taj93  and, more recently, Chasman *et al.* cha01  have studied the quadrupole dynamics of Pb isotopes by performing a configuration mixing of mean-field states with different axial quadrupole moments. Their results support the interpretation of the excited $`0^+`$ states as deformed minima. The lowest excited levels obtained in the configuration mixing calculation have average deformations close to that of the mean-field minima. However, the calculated excitation energies overestimate the experimental values. Diabatic effects have been studied by Tajima *et al.* who have included, for each axial quadrupole moment, the lowest Hartree-Fock+BCS (HFBCS) configuration and the two-quasiparticle deformed proton configurations $`(\pi h9/2)^2`$. Tajima *et al.* have shown that these configurations do not influence the configuration-mixing results significantly, and that they can be neglected.

The experimental data on neutron deficient Pb isotopes are not limited to a few $`0^+`$ states. Rotational bands have also been observed whose properties have served to interpret the excited $`0^+`$ state as associated with oblate and prolate deformations. Transition probabilities between the levels are also known in some cases. It seems, therefore, highly desirable to apply the configuration-mixing method that we have recently developed Val01  to Pb isotopes. This method treats simultaneously the most important symmetry restorations and the mixing with respect to a collective variable. Here, we present an application to 186Pb. This isotope has the unique property of having $`0^+`$ levels as its lowest three states, with the excitation energy of the second and third $`0^+`$ also being the lowest among the known Pb isotopes And00 . While the ground state is assumed to be spherical, the $`0^+`$ states observed at 532 keV and 650 keV are interpreted as corresponding to oblate and prolate configurations.

The “projected” configuration mixing of mean-field wave functions performed here has several goals. The particle-number projection removes unwanted contributions coming from states with different particle numbers, which are an artifact of the BCS approach. The angular momentum projection separates the contribution from different angular momenta to the mean-field states and generates wave functions in the laboratory frame with good angular momentum. Finally, the variational configuration mixing with respect to a collective coordinate, the axial quadrupole moment in this work, removes the contributions to the ground state coming from collective vibrations, and simultaneously provides the excitation spectrum corresponding to this mode.

The starting point of our method is a set of independent HFBCS wave functions $`|q`$ generated by mean-field calculations with a constraint on a collective coordinate $`q`$. Such mean-field states break several symmetries of the exact many-body states. Wave functions with good angular momentum and particle numbers are obtained by the restoration of rotational and particle-number symmetry on $`|q`$:

$$|JMq=\frac{1}{𝒩}\underset{K}{}g_K^J\widehat{P}_{MK}^J\widehat{P}_Z\widehat{P}_N|q,$$
(1)
where $`𝒩`$ is a normalization factor. $`\widehat{P}_{MK}^J`$, $`\widehat{P}_N`$, $`\widehat{P}_Z`$ are projectors onto the angular momentum $`J`$ with projection $`M`$ along the laboratory z-axis, neutron number $`N`$ and proton number $`Z`$, respectively. We impose axial symmetry and time reversal invariance and, therefore, $`K`$ can only be 0 and we shall omit the coefficient $`g_K^J=\delta _{K0}`$. This prescription excludes the description of $`\gamma `$ bands where $`K=2`$.

A variational configuration mixing on the collective variable $`q`$ is then performed for each angular momentum

$$|JMk=\underset{q}{}f_k^{JM}(q)|JMq.$$
(2)
The weight functions $`f_k^{JM}(q)`$ are determined by requiring that the expectation value of the energy

$$E_k^{JM}=\frac{JMk|\widehat{H}|JMk}{JMk|JMk}$$
(3)
is stationary with respect to an arbitrary variation $`\delta f_k^{JM}(q)`$. This prescription leads to the discretized Hill-Wheeler equation HW53 . Such a secular problem amounts to a restricted variation after projection in the set of states obtained for different values of the collective variable $`q`$. Collective wave functions in the basis of the intrinsic states are then obtained from the set of weight functions $`f_k^{JM}(q)`$ by a basis transformation Taj93 . In $`|JMk`$, the weight of each mean-field state $`|q`$ is given by :

$$g_k^{JM}(q)=JMk|q.$$
(4)
Since the collective states $`|JMk`$ have good angular momentum, quadrupole moments and transition probabilities can be determined directly in the laboratory frame of reference without further approximations.

The same effective interaction is used to generate the mean-field wave functions and to perform the configuration mixing calculation. We have chosen the Skyrme interaction SLy6 in the mean-field channel Cha98  and a density-dependent, zero-range force as defined in Rig99 , in the pairing channel. The pairing equations are solved using the Lipkin-Nogami prescription, as done in Val01 . The two-body center-of-mass correction is self-consistently included in the interaction SLy6 Cha98 . However, in the present calculations, it is included *a posteriori* at the mean-field level as well as in the projection and configuration-mixing calculations.

In figure 1 the deformation energy of 186Pb is plotted before and after projection on angular momentum. All curves are drawn versus the intrinsic axial quadrupole moment of the unprojected mean-field states. As projected $`J=0`$ states are spherical, this “quadrupole moment” is only a convenient way to label the projected states. The curve labeled “mean-field” plots the deformation energy after particle-number projection only. It exhibits a spherical global minimum as well as local minima at prolate and oblate deformations. While the deformation energy of the prolate minimum fortuitously reproduces the experimental value of 0.650 MeV for the prolate $`0^+`$ state, the 1.1 MeV deformation energy of the oblate minimum overestimates the experimental value of 0.532 MeV for the oblate $`0^+`$ level. A fourth, very shallow, minimum can be seen at a deformation $`\beta _20.5`$; it is too shallow to be safely associated with a physical state.

The energy curves obtained after angular momentum projection are also shown in figure 1. At moderate deformations, around the prolate and oblate minima, the mean-field states are dominated by angular momentum components with $`J8`$. This is reflected in the fact that all projected energy curves are far below the mean-field one. The spherical mean-field state is rotationally invariant and, therefore, contributes to $`J=0`$ only. Two minima appear at small deformations, around $`\beta _2=\pm 0.1`$. They do not correspond to two different states, but to the correlated spherical state (see below). For larger prolate and oblate deformations, the energy difference between the mean-field and $`J=0`$ curves stays nearly constant. The prolate and oblate mean-field minima are present in all the projected energy curves. Angular momentum projection reduces the energy difference between the spherical ($`|\beta _2|0.1`$) and deformed minima to 0.2 MeV for the prolate and 0.68 MeV for the oblate well. While the prolate potential well is pronounced for all angular momenta, the oblate one now becomes very shallow for $`J=0`$.

The excitation energies $`E_k^{JM}`$ of the collective states $`|JMk`$ obtained from the configuration mixing calculation are shown in figure 2. Each of these states is represented by a horizontal bar drawn at the average intrinsic deformation $`_q\beta _2(q)|g_k^{JM}(q)|^2`$, where $`\beta _2(q)`$ is the deformation of the mean-field state. The excitation spectrum is divided into bands associated with different deformations. Configuration mixing lowers the energy of the lowest collective states with respect to the projected energy curves. The energy gain is the largest for the ground state, hence increasing the excitation energies of the prolate and oblate $`0^+`$ levels.

The corresponding collective wave functions $`g_k^{JM}(q)`$ are presented in figure 3. Their square gives the weight of each mean-field state $`|q`$ in the collective state $`|JMk`$.

The ground state wave function is spread in a similar way on both oblate and prolate sides with a zero value for the average $`\beta _2`$ deformation. The wave functions of the first two excited $`0^+`$ states are strongly peaked at either prolate ($`0_2^+`$) or oblate deformation ($`0_3^+`$), with their tails extending into the spherical well. For higher $`J`$ values, the shape of the wave functions confirms their assignment to oblate and prolate bands, as already hinted so in figure 2. As there is no spherical well for $`J>0`$ states, their wave functions mix only prolate and oblate configurations. Starting with $`J=4`$, all levels are strongly localized and are predominantly either prolate or oblate. The shapes of the $`0_4^+`$, $`2_3^+`$, and $`4_3^+`$ wave functions suggest their interpretation as a rotational band built on a $`\beta `$ vibration within the prolate well, while the wave function of the $`2_4^+`$ state indicates that it corresponds to a vibrational state, which is spread over the entire potential well.

The calculated spectrum is compared with the experimental data in figure 4. The excitation energy of the prolate $`0^+`$ state at 0.55 MeV is very close to the experimental value. In contrast, the excitation energy of the oblate $`0^+`$ level is largely overestimated. The experimental data even suggest that the oblate state is slightly below the prolate one. A nice result from the calculations is that the structure of the first three $`0^+`$ levels is dominated by spherical, prolate and oblate configurations, respectively, and this supports the interpretation of the experimental data in terms of shape coexistence. This feature could not have been guessed from the deformation energy curves (see figure 1), where the oblate well has a depth of only 500 keV in contrast with the prolate one of 1 MeV. The excitation energies of the first two excited $`0^+`$ states are even quite close to the energy differences between the deformed minima and the spherical minimum of the mean-field deformation energy curve.

Both experimentally and theoretically, all bands exhibit a rotational behavior, with the exception of the $`E_{0^+}E_{2^+}`$ energy difference which is too small. This can be understood from the stronger state mixing for the $`J=0`$ than for higher $`J`$ values which is observed in the calculations. For the prolate band, however, the displacement from a rotational behavior remains too small. This is probably a consequence of the overestimated energy of the oblate band head which reduces the mixing between the deformed configurations.

Calculated transition probabilities for $`J>2`$ states confirm the separation of the excited states into rotational bands with very small $`B(E2)`$ transitions between them. While the transition quadrupole moments, $`Q_0`$, of the oblate ($`Q_0600`$ $`e`$ fm2 or $`\beta _20.2`$) and prolate ($`Q_01000`$ $`e`$ fm2 or $`\beta _20.34`$) bands slowly grow with angular momentum, the deformation of the third rotational band stays nearly constant at about $`Q_01400`$ $`e`$ fm2 ($`\beta _20.49`$), in agreement with the systematics of the minima in the projected energy curves of figure 1. The $`B(E2)`$ values for the in and out of band $`2^+0^+`$ transitions confirm that the low-lying $`0^+`$ states are indeed mixed.

Our results strongly support the interpretation of the Pb isotopes spectra as evidence for shape coexistence. There remains, however, a significant over-estimation of one of the band’s excitation energy. This could be due to several ingredients of the model:

$``$ the effective mean-field interaction; small differences between interactions (surface tension, spin-orbit strength …) shift the relative energies of the various coexisting minima at the mean-field level Ben02 ; Nik02 . In a calculation with the Skyrme SLy4 interaction, the prolate and oblate $`0^+`$ states are pushed up to 1.05 MeV and 1.39 MeV, respectively, as can be expected from the overall stiffer energy surface of this interaction Ben00 .

$``$ the strength and the form factor of the pairing interaction; a test with a reduced pairing strength ($`1100`$ MeV fm3) shows that the energies of the prolate and oblate minima of the deformation energy curves are reduced to 0.2 MeV and 0.65 MeV, respectively.

$``$ the configuration space used in the configuration mixing; to test this possible source of error, we have enlarged the space by including the oblate $`(\pi h9/2)^2`$ two-quasiparticle proton configurations, as was done by Tajima *et al.* Taj93 . As in this work, the results are changed by at most 100 keV.

$``$ the inclusion of triaxial quadrupole configurations; projection on $`J`$ becomes much heavier numerically, and this is still beyond present numerical possibilities.

$``$ generalized interaction for calculations beyond mean field; most mean-field interactions depend on the one-body density. It is known since the 70s that this density dependence can have two different origins: either a three-body force or a resummation of (short-range) correlations. To generalize this dependence for the non-diagonal matrix elements appearing beyond the mean-field approximation, we have chosen the generalisation stemming from a three-body interaction. Resummation of correlations beyond mean-field gives rise to another generalisation of the Skyrme force Dug02 . The study of shape coexistence in nuclei like the Pb isotopes could be a good place to determine the merits of both generalisations of the Skyrme force.

###### Acknowledgements.

This research was supported in part by the PAI-P5-07 of the Belgian Office for Scientific Policy. We thank M. Huyse, R. Janssens and P. Van Duppen for fruitful and inspiring discussions. M. B. acknowledges support through a European Community Marie Curie Fellowship.


text:
# The F/D Ratio and Meson-Baryon Couplings from QCD Sum Rules

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Recent developments in hypernuclear physics require us knowledges of the interactions among strange hadrons, such as hyperons ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, …) and kaons. Much efforts have been made to analyze experimental data to draw the consistent picture of the hyperon interactions. Yet the most fundamental quantities, i.e., the meson-baryon coupling constants, which are essential in constructing the meson exchange forces of baryons, have been treated as free parameters. There the SU(3) invariance of the coupling constants is often employed without foundation. Under these circumstances, it is highly desirable to calculate the meson-baryon coupling constants from the fundamental theory.

In this report, we present a QCD sum rule calculation of the coupling constants of the pseudoscalar mesons to the octet baryons. The QCD sum rule has been successful in determining the masses and couplings of various hadrons in terms of the QCD vacuum condensates and the other fundamental constants. In applying the sum rule technique, several technical points are carefully considered first. The soft pion (and other pseudoscalar mesons) is often used in deriving the sum rule for the coupling constants. We stress that the finite meson momentum should be considered in order to obtain reliable sum rule. We need to choose the Dirac structure of the correlation function carefully so that the sum rule is practically workable. It is also necessary to check dependence on the choice of the interpolating field operator for the baryon. The last point is especially important in deriving the F/D ratio for the coupling constants.

In section 2, we present the formulation for the sum rule of baryon-diagonal coupling constants and the results of the Borel sum rule analyses. We derive the F/D ratio in the analysis in the SU(3) limit. In section 3, we derive the sum rule for the $`\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ coupling constant as an example of the baryon-off-diagonal case, where we use the projection method to define the coupling constant unambiguously.

## 2 SUM RULE FOR THE MESON-BARYON COUPLING CONSTANTS

We analyze baryon-diagonal meson-baryon couplings $`BB`$ for meson $`=\pi ,\eta `$ and baryon $`B=N,\mathrm{\Xi },\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. We construct QCD sum rules from the two-point correlation function with an external meson field

$`\mathrm{\Pi }(q,p)=i{\displaystyle d^4xe^{iqx}0|\mathrm{T}[J_B(x)\overline{J}_B(0)]|(p)},`$ (1)
where $`J_B`$ is general baryon current without derivative. The explicit formula for $`J_N`$ is $`J_N(t)=2ϵ_{abc}[(u_a^TCd_b)\gamma _5u_c+t(u_a^TC\gamma _5d_b)u_c],`$ and $`J_\mathrm{\Xi }`$ and $`J_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ are obtained via SU(3) rotations of $`J_N`$. We note general currents have free mixing parameter $`t`$, which is essential to check the reliability of sum rules later. It is known that if one takes the soft-meson limit $`p0`$, the sum rule from Eq. (1) becomes equivalent to the chiral-rotated nucleon mass sum rule via the soft-meson theorem , and reduces to the Goldberger-Treiman relation with $`g_A=1`$ . Therefore, it is necessary to go beyond the soft-meson limit and determine the coupling constants independently of mass sum rule.

When going beyond the soft-meson limit, we have three distinct Dirac structures ($`i\gamma _5\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ p\hfill \end{array}`$, $`i\gamma _5`$ and $`\gamma _5\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\mu p^\nu `$) in the correlation function  as

$`\mathrm{\Pi }=i\gamma _5\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ p\hfill \end{array}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mathrm{PV}}+i\gamma _5\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mathrm{PS}}+\gamma _5\sigma ^{\mu \nu }q_\mu p_\nu \mathrm{\Pi }_\mathrm{T}.`$ (4)
From each Dirac structure, we obtain sum rules for the coupling constant $`g_B`$ as

$`g_B\lambda _B^2(t)\left[1+A_B(t)M^2\right]=f_\text{B}^{\text{OPE}}(M^2;t),`$ (5)
where $`M`$ denotes the Borel mass, $`\lambda _B(t)`$ overlap constant between the current and the corresponding baryon, $`A_B`$ unknown parameter. We calculate OPE term $`f_\text{B}^{\text{OPE}}(M^2;t)`$ up to dimension 8 at $`𝒪(p^2)`$ ($`i\gamma _5`$ structure), and up to dimension 7 at $`𝒪(p)`$ ($`i\gamma _5\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ p\hfill \end{array}`$ and $`\gamma _5\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\mu p^\nu `$ structures) . Considering $`m_q𝒪(p^2)`$ indicated by the Gell-Mann–Oakes–Renner relation, we include $`𝒪(m_q)`$ terms only in $`i\gamma _5`$ structure. By linearly fitting r.h.s. of Eq. (5) against $`M^2`$, we determine $`\left[g_B\lambda _B^2(t)\right]_{\text{fitted}}`$.

### 2.1 Pertinent Dirac structure for coupling sum rules

In principle, sum rules from any Dirac structure $`i\gamma _5\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ p\hfill \end{array}`$, $`i\gamma _5`$ and $`\gamma _5\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\mu p^\nu `$ can be used to determine the couplings. In practice, however, different prediction is derived because reliability of the sum rule varies depending on the Dirac structure. Therefore one must carefully choose pertinent Dirac structure.

First, we point out that the sum rules from $`i\gamma _5\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ p\hfill \end{array}`$ structure is highly sensitive to the continuum threshold $`S_0`$ and thus is not reliable. On the other hand, the sum rules from $`i\gamma _5`$ and $`\gamma _5\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\mu p^\nu `$ structure are insensitive to $`S_0`$ and more appropriate than those from $`i\gamma _5\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ p\hfill \end{array}`$ structure .

Second, we check the dependence on the choice of the baryon current. The $`t`$ dependence in Eq. (5) gives a new constraint. In the SU(3) limit (i.e. $`\lambda _N=\lambda _\mathrm{\Xi }=\lambda _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$), $`g_B\lambda _B^2(t)`$ has a common $`t`$ dependence and thus the ratios of different couplings are $`t`$ independent. We find that the sum rules from $`\gamma _5\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\mu p^\nu `$ structure satisfy the above constraint well, while the sum rules from $`i\gamma _5`$ structure do not. Therefore, we conclude that $`\gamma _5\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\mu p^\nu `$ structure is the most pertinent Dirac structure for coupling sum rules.

### 2.2 Determination of the $`F/D`$ ratio

In the SU(3) limit, we confirm that our sum rules satisfy the SU(3) relation between couplings. We first determine $`\left[g_B\lambda _B^2(t)\right]_{\text{fitted}}`$ by linear fitting Eq. (5) for every $`=\pi ,\eta `$ and $`B=N,\mathrm{\Xi },\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. We calculate the ratio between them and convert it into the $`F/D`$ ratio. Note that ambiguity of $`\lambda _B`$ cancels because $`\lambda _N=\lambda _\mathrm{\Xi }=\lambda _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in the SU(3) limit.

In figure 2, we show the $`F/D`$ ratio against the choice of baryon current. Here, we introduce a new parameter $`\theta `$, which is defined as $`\mathrm{tan}\theta =t`$. As discussed before, we confirm that the $`F/D`$ ratio is insensitive to both of the continuum threshold $`S_0`$ and the parameter $`\theta `$ in the realistic region ($`0.78\begin{array}{c}<\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}\mathrm{cos}\theta \begin{array}{c}<\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}0.61`$. Therefore, we can make a reliable estimate, $`F/D=0.60.8`$. This range includes the value from the SU(6) quark model ($`F/D=2/3`$), and is slightly higher than that extracted from semi-leptonic decay rates of hyperons ($`F/D0.57`$. Just as a comparison, we also show the $`F/D`$ ratio obtained from $`i\gamma _5`$ structure in figure 2. We find that the prediction highly depends on the choice of $`\theta `$, which prevents reliable estimate for the $`F/D`$ ratio.

## 3 THE $`\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ COUPLING AND THE SU(3) BREAKING EFFECT

We analyze the baryon-off-diagonal coupling $`\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, and its SU(3) breaking effect using a projection method . The advantages of this method are the followings: (1) The coupling constant is determined without referring to a priori effective Lagrangian, (2) baryon mass difference is taken into account properly, and (3) the single-pole terms and the continuum terms are well-defined in the correlation function. In this scheme, we calculate the projected correlation function defined as

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_+(q,p)`$ $``$ $`\overline{u}_\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝒒)\gamma _0\mathrm{\Pi }(q,p)\gamma _0u_\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒒𝒑),`$ (6)
where $`\mathrm{\Pi }(q,p)`$ is given by Eq. (1) and $`u(𝒒)`$ is the Dirac spinor for the plane wave with momentum $`q`$. In the phenomenological side, we obtain $`g_{\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$ (for $`\pi ^0\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }^0`$) as

$`\lambda _\mathrm{\Lambda }\lambda _\mathrm{\Sigma }g_{\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}\overline{u}_\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝒒)i\gamma _5u_\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒒𝒑)`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`\overline{u}_\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝒒)(\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ q\hfill \end{array}M_\mathrm{\Sigma })\mathrm{\Pi }(q,p)(\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ q\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{c}\text{/}\\ p\hfill \end{array}M_\mathrm{\Lambda })u_\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒒𝒑)|_{q^2=M_\mathrm{\Sigma }^2,(qp)^2=M_\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}`$
$`=`$ $`(q_0M_\mathrm{\Sigma })(q_0E_p)\mathrm{\Pi }_+(q),`$ (14)
where $`E_p\sqrt{M_\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+𝒑^2}+\sqrt{m_\pi ^2+𝒑^2}`$. We use the dispersion relation with respect to $`q_0`$ for $`\mathrm{\Pi }_+^{\mathrm{odd}}\frac{1}{2q_0}\left[\mathrm{\Pi }_+(q_0,𝒒)\mathrm{\Pi }_+(q_0,𝒒)\right]`$ to improve the sum rule. We note that though all Dirac structures in $`\mathrm{\Pi }(q,p)`$ are mixed in $`\mathrm{\Pi }_+(q,p)`$, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_+^{\mathrm{odd}}(q,p)`$ enhances the contribution from $`\gamma _5\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\mu p^\nu `$ structure in $`\mathrm{\Pi }(q,p)`$. We calculate the OPE up to dimension 7, including terms proportional to the quark mass. We use the baryon mass sum rules to eliminate $`\lambda _B`$, and extract $`g_{\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$ by operating $`(1M^2\frac{}{M^2})`$.

In figure 3, we show preliminary Borel plot from our result without continuum effect. We find that the Borel stability is obtained and we estimate $`g_{\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Sigma }}67`$. Further, we include the SU(3) breaking effects via $`m_sm_q`$, $`\overline{s}s\overline{q}q`$, $`g\overline{s}\sigma _{\mu \nu }G_{\mu \nu }sg\overline{q}\sigma _{\mu \nu }G_{\mu \nu }q`$, $`M_B(B=\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Sigma })M_N`$, where $`q`$ denotes u, d-quark. We show the Borel plot in figure 3. From this figure, we see that the SU(3) breaking effect is small. More conclusive study including the continuum effects is in progress now .


text:
# Superconductivity of SrTiO3-δ

## 1 Introduction

It is well known that doped SrTiO3 becomes superconducting with a transition temperature $`T_c`$ which strongly depends on the doping level Sch65 . Early theories of superconductivity in materials with small charge carrier densities considered a many-valley semiconductor band structure as beneficial for superconductivity due to an increased electron-phonon scattering rate Par69 . Indeed, first band structure calculations Kah64  predicted a Fermi surface of six disjoint ellipsoids for doped SrTiO3. However, later calculations Mat72 , which are in good agreement with experimental results Gre79 , exhibited a Fermi surface of two sheets at the zone center. Despite of the low charge carrier density of doped SrTiO3 and assuming no extraordinary electron-phonon scattering rate the appearance of superconductivity can be explained by a two-phonon mechanism Nga74 . Alternatively, a recent theoretical treatment predicts strong electron-phonon coupling due to reduced electronic screening at low doping Jar00 .
Due to the specific band structure and reduced interband scattering, so called two band superconductivity is possible in SrTiO3. This expression describes the formation of distinct superconducting order parameters on the two sheets of the Fermi surface. Evidence for two band superconductivity in Nb-doped SrTiO3, but not in SrTiO3-δ, was found by tunneling spectroscopy performed with an STM Bin80 . Recently two band superconductivity attracted considerable interest because it was proposed to be realized in the new superconductor MgB2 Gui01 .
Independently of the band structure considerations given above, doped SrTiO3 is regarded as a candidate material for bipolaronic superconductivity Mic90 . The basic idea is that two polarons form a local pair called bipolaron. These bipolarons are charged bosons which can condense into a superfluid-like state. The possibility of bipolaronic superconductivity was extensively discussed for high temperature superconductors, but presumably cannot be applied to these materials Cha98 . However, in doped SrTiO3 due to its huge dielectric polarizability ($`ϵ300`$) and low carrier density ($`10^{20}`$cm-1) Sch65  the possibility of polaron formation is obvious and experimental evidence for their formation exists Ger93 ; Eag96 ; Ang00 . However, pairing of polarons and the formation of itinerant bipolarons was not observed in any compound up to now.
In this paper we first describe the preparation of superconducting SrTiO3-δ. It is shown that the doping of our samples is inhomogeneous. However, from $`V(I)`$ curves we determine a current which is small enough to probe only the superconducting surface region. Thus it is possible to measure the temperature dependence of the upper critical field of SrTiO3-δ. $`B_{c2}(T)`$ curves of different samples are compared with the theories of bipolaron superconductivity and conventional superconductivity including Fermi surface anisotropy.

## 2 Preparation

The starting point of our preparation of SrTiO3-δ samples were commercially available single crystalline SrTiO3 (111) substrates of size $`10\times 10\times 1`$mm. The special substrate orientation was chosen because the generation of oxygen vacancies by annealing of (111) oriented SrTiO3 proved to be more effective than that of (001) oriented samples. To obtain a geometry suitable for resistance measurements the substrates were polished down to a thickness of $`300\mu \mathrm{m}`$ and cut into bars of width $`700\mu \mathrm{m}`$. Two small Mo contact pads were deposited in a MBE chamber on each end of the SrTiO3 stripes to allow 4-probe measurements of the sample resistance (see inset of Fig. 1).

The process of oxygen reduction was performed in a MBE chamber ($`p10^8`$mbar) at temperatures $`T1150`$K for 1h.
Varying the annealing temperature by the amount of $`\mathrm{\Delta }T50`$K it was possible to tune the properties of the samples continuously from semiconducting to metallic Jou02 . A typical temperature dependence of the resistance of a metallic sample is shown in Fig. 1. All samples which showed metallic properties down to lowest temperatures became superconducting and $`T_c`$ decreased with decreasing annealing temperature. Employing the results of ref. Sch65  from the obtained $`T_c`$ values the charge carrier density of our samples can by estimated to be between $`10^{18}`$cm-3 and $`10^{19}`$cm-3. This is equivalent to a number of oxygen deficiencies per site of $`\delta `$$`10^5`$ \- $`10^4`$. Because of this very small number of vacancies their clustering is not likely to appear and a rigid band shift of the Fermi level into the conduction band is expected Sha98 . The highest critical temperature obtained was $`T_c=230`$ mK. The excellent purity of our samples is reflected by residual resistance ratios of up to $`RRR=R_{300K}/R_{0.3K}=3000`$. If a homogeneous current distribution in the sample is assumed, specific residual resistances of $`\rho (0.3\mathrm{K})1\times 10^4\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cm}`$ are obtained.
However, recently it was pointed out that the doping level of reduced SrTiO3-δ is inhomogeneous Szo02 . Reducing the thickness of an annealed sample by mechanical polishing could show that its specific room temperature resistance was macroscopically constant over its volume. Nevertheless, we observed that superconductivity is limited to a surface layer. When $`50\mu \mathrm{m}`$ of SrTiO3-δ were removed from the backside (side closest to the heating element) of an annealed sample a strong reduction of $`T_c`$ was obtained. Removing an additional $`50\mu \mathrm{m}`$ layer from the front side destroyed superconductivity completely. However, removing only $`0.3\mu \mathrm{m}`$ from both sides of an annealed sample by ion beam etching does not change its superconducting critical temperature. Thus we conclude that the oxygen content of our SrTiO3-δ bars does not vary as strongly as in the samples of ref. Szo02 . Still, the doping level close to the surface is increased compared to the bulk volume.

## 3 V(I)-curves

For further investigation of the homogeneity of the superconducting state an increasing current was sent through the samples and the resulting voltage was measured. The obtained V(I)-curves are shown in Fig. 2. If a homogeneous current distribution in the SrTiO3-δ bars is assumed, the calculated critical current densities will become very small and will be only of the order of $`j_c100\mathrm{A}/\mathrm{cm}^2`$.

However, from the measured $`V(I)`$-curves it can be concluded that our samples consist of parallel normal conducting regions and superconducting regions. Thus the superconducting path for $`T<T_c`$ always remains in the critical regime and a current density and magnetic field dependent part of the total current flows in the normal conducting path. Qualitatively the measured $`V(I)`$-curves can be reproduced by a simple model: The sample is described by a parallel ohmic resistance $`R_N`$ and a type-II superconductor with a $`V(I)`$-characteristics governed by flux line dynamics. One of the simplest models for the description of these dynamics given by Anderson and Kim And64  is based on thermally activated motion of pinned flux lines. According to this description the electric field $`E`$ in the superconductor is given by equation 1 with the current density $`j`$, critical current density $`j_c`$, pinning potential $`U_P`$, specific normal resistance $`\rho _c`$ and temperature T.

$$E(j)=2\rho _cj_ce^{U_P/k_BT}\mathrm{sinh}\frac{jU_P}{j_ck_BT}.$$
(1)
Fig. 3 shows calculated $`V_{tot}(I_{tot})`$-curves of a parallel normal conductor of resistance $`R_N`$ and a superconductor of the resistance given by equation 1.

The qualitative agreement with the measured curves of Fig. 2 is obvious. Since neither the specific resistances of the normal and superconducting path nor the pinning potential of the flux lines is known, quantitative fits of the data cannot be performed.
However, the observed doping inhomogeneity has important implications for the measurement of the upper critical field as will be shown in the next section.

## 4 Upper critical field $`𝐁_{\mathrm{𝐜𝟐}}(𝐓)`$

From measurements of the upper critical field $`B_{c2}(T)`$ conclusions concerning Fermi surface and order parameter symmetry or even the mechanism of superconductivity are possible. Considering the inhomogeneities of the doping level of SrTiO3-δ these measurements have to be performed carefully. From the analysis given above it is known that the samples consist of parallel normal conducting and superconducting regions with a distribution of critical temperatures $`T_c`$. Thus when $`T_c(B)`$ is determined by measuring resistance curves $`R(T)`$ or $`R(B)`$ it is important that the probe current does not produce local critical current effects. Provided a small enough current, the resistance of the current path with the highest doping level, i.e. in our range of doping highest superconducting $`T_c`$, dominates the result.
$`B_{c2}(T)`$ curves were determined by measuring the temperature dependence of the sample resistivity $`R(T)`$ in various magnetic fields. The probe current was chosen to be always more than an order of magnitude below the critical current $`I_c`$ as estimated from the strong increase in the $`V(I)`$-curve shown in the inset of Fig. 2. Additionally it was checked that temperature and width of the superconducting transition did not change when the probe current was doubled. The measured $`R(T)`$ curves of samples with low doping level show a small residual resistance in the superconducting state. This observation has to be related to the inhomogeneous doping (see above) and the fact that the contact wires were bonded to the upper sample surface. With a low doping level only the lower sample surface is superconducting and the resistance of the bulk material between the contact pads and lower sample surface persists in the superconducting state.
Samples with low $`T_c`$ in zero field ($`T_c100`$ mK) showed broad superconducting transitions (Fig. 4).

The width of these transition slightly shrinks from $`\mathrm{\Delta }T45`$ mK to $`\mathrm{\Delta }T35`$ mK when the magnetic field is increased. $`B_{c2}(T)`$ can be determined either by choosing a midpoint, onset or downset criterion of the $`R(T)`$ curves. However, the choice of this criterion does only shift the upper critical field curve on the temperature axis but does not alter the qualitative features of its temperature dependence. In Fig. 5 $`B_{c2}(T)`$ curves are shown, which are determined by an onset (90%), midpoint (50%), and downset (10%) criterion. (B perpendicular (111): Only midpoint criterion shown for clarity). This SrTiO3-δ sample has a low doping level and the magnetic field orientation was parallel or perpendicular to the sample surface, i.e. perpendicular or parallel to the crystallographic (111)-direction.

The observed directional anisotropy may either reflect crystallographic anisotropy (cubic to tetragonal phase transition at $`T=110K`$ Mat72 ) or the depth profile of the doping level. However, the fact that the critical field oriented perpendicular to the polished sample surface is larger than oriented parallel to the sample proves that nucleation of superconductivity at the sample surface ($`B_{c3}`$) has no influence and that actually $`B_{c2}`$ is measured.
The most striking feature of the $`B_{c2}(T)`$ curves of samples with low doping level is their pronounced positive curvature. Such a positive curvature of the temperature dependence of the upper critical field is predicted by a theory of bipolaronic superconductivity. According to Alexandrov et al. Ale87  $`B_{c2}(T)`$ should be given by equation 2

$$B_{c2}(T)\frac{1}{T}\left(1\left(\frac{T}{T_c}\right)^{3/2}\right)^{3/2}.$$
(2)
The divergence at $`T=0`$K in this equation results from an approximation in ref. Ale87 . Fits according to equation 2 are plotted in Fig. 5. Reasonable agreement with the measured data is observed for magnetic fields $`B<150`$mT. For increased magnetic fields the fit deviates from the measured data which could be explained by the approximations of theory mentioned above. However, alternative explanations for the observed positive curvature in $`B_{c2}(T)`$ are possible as will be shown below.
More reliable $`B_{c2}(T)`$ data could be obtained for SrTiO3-δ samples with increased doping level due to a strongly reduced and magnetic field independent superconducting transition width of $`\mathrm{\Delta }T3`$ mK. Measured $`R(T)`$ curves in various magnetic fields of a sample with high doping level are shown in Fig. 6.

The foot of the resistive transition has to be related to the inhomogeneous doping as well. Obviously, the backside of the sample has an increased doping level, whereas the front side with the contact pads shows a reduced $`T_c`$ with broad transition (lower doping level). Based on the $`R(T)`$ data the temperature dependence of the upper critical field is determined by the midpoints of the sharp superconducting transitions (Fig. 7).

Only a weak positive curvature of $`B_{c2}(T)`$ is obtained, much less pronounced than from samples of reduced doping level. Thus it is not possible to fit this data with the bipolaron theory (Eq. 2).
The conventional theory of the upper critical field in isotropic weak coupling superconductors by Helfand and Werthammer Hel66  predicts a negative curvature of $`B_{c2}(T)`$ for all temperatures. However, this also is in contradiction to the $`B_{c2}(T)`$ data obtained for SrTiO3-δ. For an applicable theoretical description in the framework of conventional superconductivity the strongly anisotropic Fermi surface of SrTiO3-δ has to be taken into account.
For simplicity we consider only orbital pair breaking and a single sheet anisotropic Fermi surface. A formulation for this case on the basis of the linearized Gor’kov gap equation has been put forward by Youngner and Klemm You80 . In the clean limit, it reduces to the self-consistency equation

$$\mathrm{ln}t=\underset{\nu =\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left[\frac{1}{|2\nu +1|}\left(1+𝑑\widehat{\rho }N(\widehat{\rho })f(z_{\nu ,\widehat{\rho }})\right)\right],$$
(3)
where $`t=T_\mathrm{c}/T_{\mathrm{c0}}`$ is the dimensionless critical temperature,

$$f(z_{\nu ,\widehat{\rho }})=\sqrt{\pi }z_{\nu ,\widehat{\rho }}\mathrm{exp}(z_{\nu ,\widehat{\rho }}^2)\mathrm{erfc}(z_{\nu ,\widehat{\rho }}),$$
(4)
and

$$z_{\nu ,\widehat{\rho }}=\frac{t|2\nu +1|}{\sqrt{2h}}\frac{v_\mathrm{F}}{|v_{}(\widehat{\rho })|}.$$
(5)
Here, the dimensionless magnetic field

$$h=H_{\mathrm{c2}}e\mathrm{}v_\mathrm{F}^2/(2\pi k_\mathrm{B}T_{\mathrm{c0}})^2$$
(6)
is defined in terms of some average Fermi velocity $`v_\mathrm{F}`$ and the zero-field critical temperature; its absolute scale will be unimportant for the final results. Furthermore, $`v_{}(\widehat{\rho })`$ denotes the component of the Fermi velocity in direction $`\widehat{\rho }`$ which is perpendicular to the magnetic field. A simple model for an anisotropic Fermi surface with tetragonal symmetry (with the magnetic field in $`(001)`$ direction) is given in polar coordinates by

$$|v_{}(\widehat{\rho })|=v_F\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Theta })[1+b\mathrm{cos}(4\varphi )],$$
(7)
$$N(\widehat{\rho })\frac{1}{1+b\mathrm{cos}(4\varphi )},$$
(8)
where $`0b<1`$ is the anisotropy parameter and the density of states is normalized to unity: $`𝑑\widehat{\rho }N(\widehat{\rho })=1`$. We solve Eq. 3 for $`h`$ at fixed $`t`$ in a bracketing secant scheme until the error in $`t`$ (i.e., the difference between the exponentiated right hand side of Eq. 3 and $`t`$) is smaller than $`10^4`$. Within this scheme, we use the cutoff $`|\nu |300`$; the irreducible part of the Fermi surface ($`0\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }1`$, $`0\varphi \pi /4`$) is sampled by $`10^3`$ patches. The maximum relative error in $`h`$ introduced by cutoff and discretization is estimated as $`10^3`$. In order to avoid numerical instabilities, we use in equation 4 the asymptotic expansion $`f(z)1\frac{1}{2}z^2+\frac{3}{4}z^4`$ for $`z>20`$. A comparison between theory and experiment is shown in Fig. 8.

Here, the experimental data has been converted to a dimensionless temperature using $`T_{\mathrm{c0}}=214`$ mK. Furthermore, all magnetic fields have been rescaled so that the derivative $`dh^{}/dt|_{t=1}=1`$ for each curve; note that this rescaling procedure is somewhat ambiguous for the experimental data. Excellent agreement is observed between the data measured parallel to $`(111)`$ and the theory for a value $`b=0.67`$ of the anisotropy parameter. This value implies a ratio of 5 of the maximum to the minimum Fermi velocity which is well within the limits discussed in the literature Mat72 . The fact that the theory for magnetic field in $`(001)`$ direction agrees so well with the experimental observation for field in $`(111)`$ direction supports our assumption that the overall variation of the Fermi velocity (and of the density of states) is more important than the precise shape of its distribution. Less satisfactory agreement is seen when the magnetic field is in-plane, i.e., perpendicular to the $`(111)`$ direction. Here, a stronger anisotropy $`b=0.75`$ is required for matching the region $`t<0.6`$; larger discrepancies remain near $`t0.75`$. An application of this theory to the $`B_{c2}(T)`$ data of SrTiO3-δ samples with low doping level fails to reproduce the measured strong curvature in the same temperature range.
In principle the qualitative difference of the $`B_{c2}(T)`$ data of samples with low and high doping could be associated with a crossover of the mechanism of superconductivity. For bipolaronic superconductivity above some critical doping it is generally expected that superconductivity is destroyed Ale94 . However, the doping level of our samples is well below the doping level with maximum $`T_c`$ Sch65 . Thus if bipolaronic superconductivity is realized in doped SrTiO3, we would expect it to be realized in all of our samples. Assuming a doping independent mechanism of superconductivity in SrTiO3-δ, the bipolaron theory can not be applied at all.
One explanation for the discrepancies between samples with low and high doping is inhomogeneous doping of the samples with low charge carrier density resulting in domains with different $`T_c`$, which influence the curvature of $`B_{c2}(T)`$. However, the samples with increased charge carrier density show sharp superconducting transitions, i.e. a homogeneously doped sample region is probed. The $`B_{c2}(T)`$ curves of these samples could be fitted by a conventional theory including Fermi-surface anisotropy. Thus it appears likely that the mechanism of superconductivity of SrTiO3-δ is conventional independent of the doping level.
The observed positive curvature of $`B_{c2}(T)`$ is not unique to SrTiO3-δ. An alternative approach results in very similar curves and considers an effective two-band model, i.e. two groups of electrons with different superconducting energy gaps Shu98  (applied for borocarbides). Similar behavior was observed in the recently discovered superconductor MgB2 Lim01 ; Sol02 . There is strong evidence for the contribution of two different areas of the Fermi surface to the superconducting state of this compound Iav02 ; Bou02 . Very recently, $`B_{c2}(T)`$ curves of MgB2 with positive curvature were calculated considering superconducting gaps on two Fermi sheets as a particular case of gap anisotropy Mir03 .

## 5 Conclusions

Considering the properties of self doped, i.e. ultra high vacuum annealed, SrTiO3-δ it is necessary to take an inhomogeneous doping profile into account. Nevertheless, by careful adjustment of the probe current the upper critical field of high purity samples could be investigated. Samples with low doping level show a strong positive curvature of the $`B_{c2}(T)`$-curve, which is still present, but less pronounced for samples with increased doping level. The theory of bipolaronic superconductivity predicts a positive curvature of $`B_{c2}(T)`$ and can be used for a fit of reasonable agreement with the $`B_{c2}(T)`$-curves of samples with low doping level. However, more reliable data obtained from samples with increased doping level can not be fitted by the bipolaron theory, which discards its applicability. A conventional explanation for the observed temperature dependence of the upper critical field can be given by considering the strongly anisotropic Fermi surface of SrTiO3-δ. Good fits of $`B_{c2}(T)`$ were obtained using a concept which goes beyond the Helfand-Werthamer theory by taking this Fermi surface anisotropy into account. Thus the unusual superconducting properties of SrTiO3-δ can be explained in the framework of a conventional pairing mechanism.


text:
# The superconducting gap of in situ 𝑀𝑔𝐵₂ thin films by microwave surface impedance measurements

## Abstract

Precision measurements of the microwave surface resistance $`R_s`$ of in situ $`MgB_2`$ films directly reveal an exponential behavior of $`R_s`$ at low temperature indicating a fully-gapped order parameter. The entire temperature dependence of $`R_s`$ is well described by a Mattis-Bardeen formalism but with a small gap ratio of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0)/kT_c=0.72`$, corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0)=1.9meV`$.

Elucidation of the nature of the superconducting state in the novel binary compound $`MgB_2`$  is of importance both for fundamental understanding and for applications of this material in microwave communications. Two important issues that are relevant are the nature of the superconducting pairing mechanism and the symmetry of the order parameter. There is mounting experimental evidence from different spectroscopies, tunneling, specific heat and photoemission measurements that the superconducting order parameter does not follow a BCS s-wave symmetry, and presents a multicomponent gap. In the electromagnetic response, the characteristic signature of a gapped superconductor is an exponential behavior of the microwave absorption represented by the surface resistance $`R_s`$ at low temperatures.

We have measured the microwave properties of high quality $`MgB_2`$ films prepared by Pulsed Laser Deposition (PLD) with an in situ annealing using a new adaptation of a cavity perturbation technique for thin films in the perpendicular geometry. Our results yield a direct measurement of the superconducting gap and we find a value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0)/kT_c=0.72`$. This leads to a gap value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0)=1.92meV`$ consistent with the smaller of the two gaps typically observed in tunneling measurements. The entire temperature dependence of the $`R_s`$ data is well described by a BCS s-wave Mattis-Bardeen calculation with the same small gap ratio.

The films were grown by PLD deposition of $`MgB_2/Mg`$ mixture at 300 C followed by an in situ annealing at 600 C. The structural morphology of the films is nanocrystalline mixture of textured $`MgO`$ and $`MgB_2`$ with grain sizes around $`50\stackrel{_{\text{ }o}}{A}`$ (Fig.1). Zero-resistance transition temperature of $`34K`$ was obtained in the best samples using this technique, and the film used in this paper has a sharp superconducting transition at $`31K`$ with width of 1K.

The measurements were carried out in a $`Nb`$ superconducting cavity resonant at $`10GHz`$ using the “hot finger” technique which has been well established to yield results on bulk and single crystals. Using a new analysis method, the microwave properties were measured in the perpendicular geometry, i.e. $`H_\omega `$ film plane. The film is placed in the center of the cavity and the measurements are carried out in the $`TE_{011}`$ mode. The sample temperature can be varied over a wide range from $`300K`$ to $`4.2K`$ (or $`2K`$), while the $`Nb`$ cavity is maintained at $`4.2K`$ (or $`2K`$) ensuring a very high $`Q`$ and correspondingly low background, and the surface impedance $`Z_s=R_s+iX_s`$ is obtained as described below.

We have adapted the cavity perturbation method that has previously been exhaustively analyzed and used for bulk samples , to take into account the enhancement of the external fields at the sharp edges of the sample, we use a general theory by E. H. Brandt calculating the response to an applied perpendicular ac magnetic field $`H_\omega `$ of the thin film which is characterized by frequency dependent complex resistivity $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\omega `$. In this formalism one is able to calculate the sheet current $`J_\omega (y,z)`$ by solving a one-dimensional integral equation. The solution can be approximated with high precision by a finite sum and allows to calculate the magnetic moment and the complex magnetic permeability $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }=\mu ^{^{}}i\mu ^{^{\prime \prime }}`$ of the sample. $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }=_nc_n/(\mathrm{\Lambda }_n+\stackrel{~}{w})`$. The coefficients $`c_n`$ and the poles $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ were calculated by Brandt for both strip and disk geometry . The parameter $`\stackrel{~}{w}`$ is given by the expression, $`\stackrel{~}{w}=i\omega ad\mu _0\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_\omega (\omega )/2\pi `$ where $`2d`$ is the thickness of the sample and $`a`$ represents the dimension of a square strip or the radius for a disk. The frequency dependent complex conductivity is $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_\omega =`$ $`\sigma _1(\omega )i`$ $`\sigma _2(\omega )=1/\stackrel{~}{\rho }`$

The methodology of the experiment is similar to the bulk samples microwave measurements. At every temperature T, the cavity resonant frequency $`f_0(T)`$ and the width $`\mathrm{\Delta }f(T)`$ were measured .The complex cavity frequency $`\stackrel{~}{f}f_0+i\mathrm{\Delta }f/2`$ is related to the sample electromagnetic permeability $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_\omega `$ by the following equation: $`\stackrel{~}{f}_s\stackrel{~}{f}_e=g(1\stackrel{~}{\mu }_\omega )`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{f}_e`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{f}_s`$ are complex frequencies of the empty cavity and the loaded one respectively. From $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_\omega `$ the sample’s complex conductivity $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{s\omega }`$ can be determined by inverting the complex frequency shift equation using a MATLAB routine. The geometric factor $`g`$ was experimentally determined by assuming $`g=\alpha (f_{0s}(0K)f_{0s}(TT_c))`$, where $`f_{0s}(0K)`$ was determined by extrapolating $`f_{0s}`$ from the lowest measured temperature (usually $`2K`$ or $`4.2K`$) to $`T=0K`$. The coefficient $`\alpha `$ is determined such that the calculated value of $`\lambda (0)`$ matches the experimental value. Only the very low $`T`$ value of $`\lambda `$, viz.$`\lambda (0)`$ is sensitive to this choice - overall the results obtained are extremely robust over a wide range of $`T`$. From the measured complex conductivity $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{s\omega }`$ the surface impedance $`\stackrel{~}{Z}_s(\omega ,T)=R_s(T)+iX_s(T)=(\mu _0i\omega /\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{s\omega })^{1/2}`$ was obtained. Note that this is the bulk impedance of the thin film material, and not the actual thin film impedance which can be calculated using suitable thickness-dependent thin-film expressions.

The bulk superconducting microwave surface resistance $`R_s(T)`$ of the thin film material is shown in Fig.2. The normal state surface resistance is rather high $`0.4\mathrm{\Omega }`$, consistent with a normal state resistivity of $`230\mu \mathrm{\Omega }cm`$. Although the surface resistance starts at relatively high value above Tc, it starts to drop rapidly as temperature decreases. At $`T_c/2`$, $`R_s1m\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and below approximately $`15K`$ the drop becomes more rapid reaching values below $`50\mu \mathrm{\Omega }`$ as the temperature reaches $`4K`$. This last rapid decrease is characteristic of an exponential behavior as will be seen shortly.

The bulk surface impedance of a BCS s-wave superconductor can be derived using the relation between the impedance $`Z_s=(\mu _0i\omega /\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_s)^{1/2}`$ and the Mattis-Bardeen complex conductivity $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_s=\sigma _1i\sigma _2`$. The normalized conductivity can be calculated using

$`\sigma _1/\sigma _n=2/\mathrm{}\omega {\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Delta }^{\mathrm{}}}g(E)[f(E)f(E+\mathrm{}\omega )]𝑑E`$

, and

$`\sigma _2/\sigma _n=1/\mathrm{}\omega {\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{}\omega }^\mathrm{\Delta }}\left[12f\left(E+\mathrm{}\omega \right)\right]\left(E^2+\mathrm{\Delta }^2+\mathrm{}\omega E\right)/\left[\left(\mathrm{\Delta }^2E^2\right)(\left(E+\mathrm{}\omega \right)^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2)\right]^{1/2}𝑑E,`$

where $`g(E)`$ is the appropriate factor incorporating the density of states and BCS coherence factors, and $`f`$ $`(E)=[\mathrm{exp}(E/kT)+1]^1`$is the Fermi function. The gap temperature dependence of the form $`\mathrm{\Delta }(T)=\mathrm{\Delta }(0)[1(T/T_c)^2]`$ shown in the inset of Fig.2. We have used experimental parameters $`\omega =2\pi 10^{10}(\mathrm{sec})^1`$ and $`T_c=31K`$. Using a small gap ratio $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0)/kT_c=0.70\pm 0.02`$, the calculated $`R_s(T)`$, is in excellent agreement with the measured data over the entire temperature range (Fig. 2).

The low temperature data shows an exponential temperature dependance according to $`R_s\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Delta }(0)/kT)`$. To get a measure for the gap we plotted $`\mathrm{ln}R_s`$ vs $`T_c/T`$ as shown in Fig.3. A straight line behavior is clearly seen at low $`T`$, and is an unambiguous and direct signature of the superconducting gap. A fit for $`T15K`$ gives a value of the gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0)/kT_c`$ $`=0.72`$, resulting in a gap value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0)=1.92meV`$. (We stress that Fig.3 represents the actual data, and that a residual resistance was not subtracted , attesting to the high film quality). The data represented in Fig.3 represent the clearest evidence of a fully gapped superconductor from microwave measurements.

Although the gap ratio in the present work is smaller than the mean field value of $`1.76`$, it is in good agreement with a number of reports on this material . It appears fairly certain that $`MgB_2`$ is not a single gap s-wave superconductor - a tentative consensus appears to favor a 2-gap superconductor characterized by $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_{small}+\mathrm{\Delta }_{l\mathrm{arg}e}`$ or even a strongly anisotropic s-wave superconductor with $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{min}}(1+k\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )`$. Values for the smaller gap reported in the literature vary between $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{small}(0)=1.92.8meV`$ while for the larger gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{l\mathrm{arg}e}`$the values vary between $`6.29meV`$. The microwave measurements are sensitive to the smallest energy scale in the material and hence we are clearly measuring the smallest gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{small}`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{min}}`$. The good agreement with the calculations over the entire temperature range indicates that the smaller gap “turns on” at $`T_c`$ along with a possibly larger gap which is not directly seen. This is consistent with tunneling data which report that the small gap also appears at $`T_c`$ as the temperature is lowered. The temperature dependence of the gap indicated by our measurements is close to the mean-field temperature dependence.

$`MgB_2`$ is of great interest as a superconductor with moderately high $`T_c`$ that might be suitable for electronic applications at $`20K`$ and below. The $`R_s`$ values of the in situ film are quite low and competitive with the best values of Y-Ba-Cu-O compounds at $`4.2K`$ and approach $`Nb`$ values. We have measured other ex situ films which had much higher values of $`R_s`$ likely due to their polycrystallinity and poor texture. Thus far the present in situ films have yielded low $`R_s`$ and this may be attributed to their nanocrystalline and highly smooth texture. The nanocrystalline structure with $`MgO`$ contaminants may cause lower residual dc resistance ratios of typically 1.4 for such films than in the good bulk samples and may also result in the lower superconducting transition temperature than the bulk since the grain size is comparable to the coherence length. At the same time the nanocrystallinity appears to lead to some of the lowest microwave losses observed .

The gap reported here is largest among the metallic and bimetallic superconductors such as $`Nb`$ or $`Nb_3Sn`$ that are candidate materials for microwave applications. If the normal state values are reduced, as is implied by very low resistivities $`<1\mu \mathrm{\Omega }cm`$ observed in bulk materials, then combined with the corresponding exponential drop in $`R_s`$ due to the fully gapped nature, dramatically low microwave loss ($`10^9\mathrm{\Omega }10^6\mathrm{\Omega }`$) may be feasible at elevated temperatures ($`20K`$ and below) , not achievable with other high $`T_c`$ superconductors. The present results show great promise for applications of $`MgB_2`$ in microwave electronics at $`20K`$ and lower temperatures.

This work was supported at Northeastern by the Office of Naval Research under grant N000140010002, and the work at Penn. State was supported by the Office of the Naval Research under grant N00014-00-1-0294.