text:
# Configuration of the ATLAS Trigger System

## I INTRODUCTION

The Large Hadron Collider (LHC), which is currently being built at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Geneva, will collide proton beams at a centre-of-mass energy of 14 TeV and with a bunch-crossing rate of nominally 40 MHz. At the design luminosity of $`10^{34}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$ an average of about 25 proton proton interactions will take place in each of the bunch-crossings. An efficient and selective trigger system is needed to reduce the amount of data that will arise from these conditions and to select the relevant physics events from the background of soft interactions. The trigger of the ATLAS experiment atlas  is designed as a multi level system that reduces the event rate from 40 MHz to about 200 Hz at which events (that will have an average size of about 1.6 MB) can be written to mass storage. Fig. 1 gives an overview of the trigger system which is divided in three levels (from top to bottom in Fig. 1) :

* The Level-1 (LVL1) trigger is a hardware-based system that receives signals from the calorimeter and muon detectors of ATLAS. Its task is to reduce the event rate to 75 kHz within a latency of 2.5 $`\mu `$s. During that time the data from all detectors are stored in pipelined memories. LVL1-accepted events are transfered to the Read-Out Buffers.
* The Level-2 (LVL2) trigger, which forms part of the High-Level Trigger (HLT), is based on software selection algorithms running in processor farms. LVL2 can access data from all sub-detectors of ATLAS in so called ‘Regions-of-Interest’ that were identified by the LVL1 system. The average time budget of LVL2 is about 10 ms, hence a fast rejection strategy is needed using specialized trigger algorithms.
* The Event Filter (EF) is also based on software selection algorithms. In contrast to LVL2 it runs after the event building, such that the complete event information is available to the EF algorithms. In the EF, a thorough event selection and classification process will be performed within a time budget of a few seconds. The EF algorithms are foreseen to be based on offline reconstruction code using the full calibration and alignment information. Events accepted by the EF are written to mass storage.

In this paper, the concepts and mechanisms that are foreseen for configuring the ATLAS trigger selection are discussed. The task comprises the definition of so called ‘trigger menus’ (i.e., the definitions of the physics signatures the experiment should be triggered on), the set-up of the selection software for the HLT as well as the set-up of the LVL1 trigger hardware. Currently the latter part of the configuration is implemented only in a functional prototype of the LVL1 emulation software.

## II LVL1 TRIGGER CONFIGURATION

### II.1 A short Overview of the LVL1 Trigger

The LVL1 trigger lvl1cite  is a complex hardware system consisting of a calorimeter trigger, a muon trigger and the central trigger processor (CTP). An overview of the LVL1 system222Note that the Region-of-Interest Builder (RoIB) is formally not a LVL1 sub-system. is given in Fig. 2.

The calorimeter trigger receives as inputs 7̃200 analogue signals from a dedicated trigger-tower electronics that locally combines information from calorimeter cells in the various ATLAS calorimeters. A trigger tower has a typical granularity of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\eta \times \mathrm{\Delta }\varphi =0.1\times 0.1`$.

The task of the calorimeter trigger is to search for localized energy depositions that are a signals for high transverse energy electrons/photons, $`\tau `$ particles, hadrons or jets. The energy depositions are compared to a set of programmed transverse-energy thresholds and the multiplicity of objects passing each of the thresholds is counted. There are $`16N`$ thresholds for electrons/photons, $`N`$ for $`\tau `$ leptons or hadrons, eight for central jets, and four for forward jets. In addition, the calorimeter trigger provides global energy sums to measure the total and missing transverse energy in an event. These sums are discriminated against eight thresholds for missing transverse energy and four for total transverse energy.

The multiplicity for each threshold is sent to the CTP. In addition the type, position and threshold information about each candidate object is recorded in so called ‘Regions-of-Interest’ (RoIs). For selected events, these RoIs are sent to the HLT via the Region-of-Interest Builder (RoIB) in order to seed the LVL2 selection.

In analogy, the muon trigger, which is based on information from dedicated fast muon chambers, derives the multiplicity count for muon candidates passing six programmable thresholds. The multiplicities are again sent to the CTP, and the information on the candidates or RoIs is sent to the HLT.

The CTP receives all the multiplicity and energy-sum-threshold information from the calorimeter and muon triggers. It combines them according to the trigger menu to derive the LVL1 event decision. The CTP provides information to the HLT for selected events indicating which signatures were fulfilled.

### II.2 Configuration of the LVL1 Trigger

For the final system the task of the LVL1 configuration will be the preparation of the LVL1 hardware for data taking. Up to now only preliminary ideas exist on how to configure consistently the LVL1 sub-system hardware, the calorimeter and muon triggers and the CTP. Questions being addressed in this context range from storage of hardware configuration files, through keeping track of configuration changes, to checks for consistency and hardware compliance. These issues will not be touched upon in this article. However, the configuration of the LVL1 has a purely algorithmic aspect that defines the physics selection strategy. This part of the configuration, which is implemented in the LVL1 software prototype and is part of the ATLAS simulation chain, is described here.

The first task of the LVL1 configuration code is to translate the trigger menu, i.e. the collection of physics signatures LVL1 is supposed to trigger on, into something that the emulation of the CTP can understand and use in making the event decision based on the calorimeter and muon trigger inputs. A physics signature, a so called ‘trigger item’, is a logical combination of requirements formulated as ‘trigger conditions’ in terms of multiplicities of candidate objects delivered by the calorimeter and muon triggers. Such candidates are typically high-$`p_T`$ objects in the events that are a signature for interesting physics events. A simple example of a trigger item is:

$``$ electron/photon candidate with $`E_T>`$ 10 GeV
and
$``$ muon candidate with $`p_T>`$ 15 GeV

or, in the ATLAS LVL1 notation:

1EM10+1MU15

which combines two trigger conditions ‘1EM10’ and ‘1MU15’. In this notation the string ‘EM’ represents a candidate of type electron/photon and the integer numbers before and after the string symbolize the required multiplicity and transverse energy/momentum, respectively. The combination of a candidate string and a threshold value like ‘EM10’ is called a ‘trigger threshold’. The ATLAS LVL1 system distinguishes electron/photon (‘EM’), muon (‘MU’), tau/hadrons (‘HA’), (forward) jets (‘JT’, ‘FR’, ‘FL’), total and missing transverse energy (‘ET’, ‘TM’), and the transverse energy calculated as the sum of all jet transverse energies (‘SM’).

The second task of the configuration code is to set up the the calorimeter and muon trigger sub-systems such that they deliver the information required by the CTP in order to derive the event decision based on the trigger menu. The LVL1 sub-detector simulation has to be configured so that each sub-system delivers the multiplicities for the correct set of trigger thresholds. For the above example, the calorimeter trigger has to be configured such that it delivers to the CTP the multiplicity count for the threshold ‘EM10’, i.e. the number of electron/photon candidates with transverse energy above 10 GeV. It is obvious that the trigger menu and the trigger thresholds for the calorimeter and muon triggers have to be defined consistently. In particular, all thresholds used in the definition of any trigger condition in any trigger item must be delivered by the calorimeter and muon trigger simulations and thus need to be configured.

In the configuration process for the CTP simulation the restrictions imposed by limited abilities and resources of the real hardware have to be taken into account.

The LVL1 trigger configuration software is currently being adapted to configure as well the LVL1 trigger hardware by deriving the necessary look-up table and FPGA configuration files from the trigger menu and trigger threshold list. Such a common configuration scheme will allow for cross-checks between hardware and software.

### II.3 XML Definition of Trigger Thresholds

To configure LVL1 the trigger menu and the list of thresholds are defined using XML and are parsed into instances of C++ classes using the Xerces DOM API xerces . The chosen notation exploits the facility of XML to define logical structures by introducing user-defined tags. The tag structure used for the ‘trigger thresholds’ is:

```
<TriggerThresholdList>
   <TriggerThreshold name="..." type="...">
      <TriggerThresholdValue thresholdval="..." />
   </TriggerThreshold>
</TriggerThresholdList>

```

It is important to note that a trigger threshold contains one or more ‘trigger threshold values’. This concept allows to assign different threshold values (in GeV) to various topological regions of the detector using attributes that set limits to the validity in terms of $`\eta `$ and $`\varphi `$ in ATLAS. This concept is foreseen for the calorimeter trigger hardware and is subject to current detailed studies. The previous example using a set of trigger threshold values may look like:

```
<TriggerThresholdList>
   <TriggerThreshold name="..." type="...">
      <TriggerThresholdValue
          thresholdval="5" etamin="-2" etamax="0" />
      <TriggerThresholdValue
          thresholdval="10" etamin="-5" etamax="-2" />
      <TriggerThresholdValue
          thresholdval="5"  etamin="0" etamax="2" />
      <TriggerThresholdValue
          thresholdval="10" etamin="2" etamax="5" />
   </TriggerThreshold>
</TriggerThresholdList>

```

The $`<`$TriggerThreshold$`>`$ tag has several attributes, the most important ones are ‘name’ and ‘type’:

* The ‘name’ attribute assigns a unique label to the trigger threshold. It is needed to connect the threshold to the trigger condition. An example for a ‘name’ is ‘EM10’.
* The ‘type’ attribute is required mainly for technical reasons: The number of the different thresholds is limited - for example only up 6 muon thresholds can be implemented because of hardware limitations. The ‘type’ attribute helps in this book-keeping.

When the XML tags are parsed, the attributes are translated into data members of the corresponding C++ class instance.

When the XML tags are parsed, the attributes of the $`<`$TriggerThresholdValue$`>`$ tags are translated into data members of the corresponding C++ objects. Depending on the ‘type’ attribute of the $`<`$TriggerThreshold$`>`$ tag, different attributes for the $`<`$TriggerThresholdValue$`>`$ tags are expected (e.g., definition of isolation criteria). Only the ‘thresholdval’ attribute is common, which is used to define the threshold value (in GeV).

### II.4 XML Definition of the Trigger Menu

The XML definition of the trigger menu uses the $`<`$TriggerMenu$`>`$, $`<`$TriggerItem$`>`$ and $`<`$TriggerCondition$`>`$ tags. The basic structure of the XML file for the trigger menu is the following:

```
<TriggerMenu>
   <TriggerItem>
      <TriggerCondition threshold="..." mult="..."/>
   </TriggerItem>
</TriggerMenu>

```

In addition the special tags $`<`$AND$`>`$, $`<`$OR$`>`$ and $`<`$NOT$`>`$ are available to allow for logical combinations of trigger conditions for a given the trigger item, for example:

```
<TriggerMenu ...>
   <TriggerItem ...>
      <AND>
         <TriggerCondition ... />
         <OR>
            <TriggerCondition ... />
            <NOT>
               <TriggerCondition ... />
            </NOT>
         </OR>
      </AND>
   </TriggerItem>
</TriggerMenu>

```

The $`<`$TriggerMenu$`>`$ tag has as only attribute ‘TM\_ID’ to set a label for the trigger menu. The $`<`$TriggerItem$`>`$ has different attributes: ‘TI\_ID’ is used to set a name; ‘mask’ indicates via values ‘on’ or ‘off’ whether or not the item is to be used in the LVL1 decision; ‘priority’ is set to ‘low’ or ‘high’, depending on whether or not the item should have priority in the CTP dead-time algorithm; ‘prescale’ is an integer indicating the prescale factor to be used in the CTP simulation. The $`<`$TriggerCondition$`>`$ tag has two attributes: ‘threshold’ to give it a label and a ‘mult’ to specify the required mulitplicity for this trigger condition. The ‘threshold’ attribute has to be the same as the ‘name’ attribute of a corresponding $`<`$TriggerThreshold$`>`$ tag. An example of the logical structure of the XML tree of the trigger menu is shown in Fig. 3.

### II.5 Implementation of the LVL1 Configuration

Fig. 4 shows a sequence diagram of the configuration process. L1Config is the name of the algorithm in the ATLAS offline framework Athena, in which the HLT trigger configuration is implemented. The central class of the configuration is the so-called TriggerMenu. A single instance is created by the L1Config algorithm, that also calls the TriggerMenu::init method. The TriggerMenu contains or has access to all the information in the two XML files for the trigger menu and the trigger thresholds.

The LVL1 trigger menu basically is a collection of trigger items. Therefore the TriggerMenu has as a data member a vector of TriggerItem objects. In turn, each trigger item contains a vector of TriggerCondition objects. The logical structure of the item condition relations is not directly reflected in the C++ class structure, but is available from the XML tree that is created in memory in the parsing process (see Fig. 3).

The TriggerMenu::mapTriggerMenu method is used to translate the trigger menu XML file into TriggerItem and TriggerCondition objects. For each $`<`$TriggerItem$`>`$ or $`<`$TriggerCondition$`>`$ tag, a TriggerItem or TriggerCondition object is created and pushed into the corresponding vectors.

The TriggerMenu holds a map to combine the labels of the trigger thresholds with pointers to the TriggerThreshold objects that are created by the TriggerMenu::mapThresholds method. A TriggerThreshold in turn holds pointers to one or more TriggerThresholdValue objects that are created in the method TriggerMenu::mapThresholdValues. The connection between TriggerCondition and TriggerThreshold instances is needed for the CTP simulation. It is implemented using string comparisons between the data members that correspond to the ‘name’ and ‘threshold’ attributes of the $`<`$TriggerThreshold$`>`$ and the $`<`$TriggerCondition$`>`$ tags.

As a last step in the configuration, checks are performed on the TriggerMenu object in order to test its completeness and consistency (method TriggerMenu::checkTriggerMenu). The TriggerMenu is afterwards recorded in the so-called ‘Detector Store’ that is provided by the offline framework.

The configuration process also covers configuration of the calorimeter and muon trigger simulations. For this purpose CTPCaloConfig, CTPJetEnergyConfig and CTPMuonConfig objects are created that hold the thresholds to be delivered by the different triggers.

The next development step will be to use the software to configure the existing CTP demonstrator hardware. Once hardware and software are configured from the same source, detailed tests of the CTP hardware can be performed by comparing the simulated CTP result to the hardware result for arbitrary test input patterns.

## III HLT CONFIGURATION

### III.1 HLT Trigger Overview

Fig. 5 shows an overview of the HLT data flow hlttp . The LVL2 Supervisor sends the LVL1 result containing ‘Region-of-Interest’ information (e.g. geometrical position of interesting objects identified by LVL1) to a LVL2 Processing Unit. This unit performs the LVL2 selection for the event. It retrieves event data in ‘Regions-of-Interest’ from the Read-Out System (ROS). At the end of the selection process the LVL2 decision is passed back to the Supervisor. In case of a positive trigger decision, the LVL2 detailed result is sent to a dedicated LVL2 ROS. The LVL2 Supervisor sends the decision to the Event Builder, which assembles the full event. The complete event is sent to the Event Filter IO and from there to one of the Event Handlers, which performs the EF selection. EF-selected events are written to mass storage.

Fig. 6 shows a package view of the Event Selection Software elsing  which runs in the LVL2 Processing Unit and in the EF Event Handler. It has four building blocks: the Event Data Model defines the structure of the event; the Data Manager handles the event data and is used in LVL2 to retrieve the required raw data on demand from the ROS; the HLT Algorithms provide the algorithmic part of the selection; the Steering controls the full selection process. It is the task of the HLT configuration to configure the Steering.

### III.2 The Principle of the HLT Selection

The HLT selection software provides a common framework to implement the LVL2 and EF selection. The software is based on two concepts that are designed to minimize the latency and the amount of raw data to be moved and analyzed. LVL1 provides for each event a set of ‘Region-of-Interest’ coordinates via the RoI Builder. These RoIs are used by the LVL2 Steering to seed to algorithmic processing and to restrict the data access to the regions in the detector identified by the LVL1 system.

The 2nd concept is the so-called ‘step’ processing. The sequence of HLT algorithms to verify a given LVL1 RoI is sub-divided into several logical steps. This allows the Steering to execute in the first step for each RoI those algorithms giving a large rejection power for little data movement and processing. In each subsequent step it is the task of the HLT algorithms to refine the event information using an increasing amount of additional data from different ATLAS sub-detectors. It is important to note that the Steering will execute the first step for all RoIs in one go. Events may be rejected after each step; remaining events are passed to the next step for further processing. For events accepted after the final step a positive trigger decision is transmitted to the LVL2 Supervisior.

The implementation of the Steering of the HLT selection software must to be generic. The HLT selection is data driven by the LVL1 RoIs, while the list of possible HLT algorithm sequences will be configured at run time based on the criteria of the physics signatures in the trigger menu. It was found to be beneficial to abstract the selection process in terms of so-called ‘Trigger Elements’ (TEs). A TE represents a trigger relevant object in the event, for example a LVL1 RoI. In this picture, the HLT selection can be seen as a refinement process of TEs. Each TE implies by its label a physics interpretation, like for example an ‘isolated electron with $`p_T>20`$ GeV’ or ‘e20i’. Each physics signature in a trigger menu is defined as a combination of required TEs, for example ‘e20i + mu30i’.

The seeding of the HLT Algorithms is implemented by navigation from the TE to the relevant event data (RoI, clusters, tracks, …). Thereby the Steering only analyses the TE content of an event and requests algorithm processing to refine the information. The details of the specific event data related to each LVL1 RoI are only visible to the concrete HLT algorithm.

### III.3 Signatures and Sequence Tables

The basic unit of a step is a ‘sequence’. It consists of a list of input TEs, a list of HLT algorithms to be run on each set of matching input TE combinations found in an event, and one (and only one) output TE that represents the hypothesis of the expected reconstruction result. The complete set of sequences to be run in a given step is called the ‘sequence table’.

At the end of each step the Steering compares the list of validated TEs in an event to so-called ‘signatures’, which are formulated as required TEs or TE combinations. The set of signatures of a given step is called the ‘menu table’. The signatures in the menu table of the final step are called ‘physics signatures’. The physics signatures are defined according to the ATLAS physics program and are the ones that will be visible to the shift crew in the control room, whereas the intermediate ones are visible only for an expert with insight into the configuration scheme.

From the above it is clear that the trigger configuration has to provide a set of menu and sequence tables. This is achieved in a top-down approach starting from a list of physics signatures that is specified for a given ATLAS run. This list is used to derive, in a recursive way, all necessary sequence and menu tables.

The recursive procedure is illustrated for a simplified example in Fig. 7. The physics signature is ‘two isolated electron candidates with $`E_T>`$ 30 GeV’ or ‘2 e30i’. This signature requires the presence of two final TEs ‘e30i’ in an event. The configuration software has a list of all implemented sequence and checks which sequence has this TE as its output. From the matching sequence is determines the corresponding required input TEs. In the example the ‘e30i’ TE is made from an ‘e30’ TE using an isolation algorithm. Thereby the configuration can derive that two TEs ‘e30’ are required in the step that leads to the physics signature ‘2e30i’. The resulting intermediate signature is ‘2e30’. Similarly, the ‘2e30’ is composed of two ‘e30’ TEs which are made from TEs labeled ‘e’ in an algorithm that requires a minimum transverse energy. In this manner, all intermediate signatures and also the necessary sequences are derived recursively, until the configuration algorithm arrives at input TEs labeled ‘EM20’ that represent the LVL1 electromagnetic RoI objects.

It is worth mentioning that the HLT event decision is derived from the same logical structure, but now using it bottom-up: The HLT selection process starts from the input from LVL1. In the example it would search for two ‘EM20’ TEs. In case these TEs are not present, the signature of the first step (‘2EM20’) cannot be fulfilled and the event would be rejected. If the signature ‘2EM20’ is fulfilled, the sequence of algorithms is executed on each input TE to analyze the cluster shape of the candidate object. The task is to refine the electron selection, rejecting background (mainly jets) using clusters shape variables. In other words, for each ‘EM20’ TE that is considered to be due to an electron, the hypothesis of a TE ‘ecand’ (for ‘electron candidate’) needs to be validated. If an ‘ecand’ is validated for both ‘EM20’ TEs, the signature ‘2ecand’ is fulfilled and the selection will proceed. Otherwise the event will be rejected. In this way the selection is carried out up to the last step that ends with two TEs ‘e30i’.

### III.4 Implementation of the HLT Configuration

As in the case of the LVL1 trigger, two XML files are used to define the physics signatures and the list of available sequences for the HLT configuration. The signature file contains $`<`$SIGNATURE$`>`$ tags that have the a list of $`<`$TRIGGERELEMENT$`>`$ tags for the required TEs:

```
<SIGNATURE>
   <TRIGGERELEMENT te_name="..." />
   <TRIGGERELEMENT te_name="..." />
</SIGNATURE>

```

The ‘te\_name’ attribute assigns a label to the TE. The physics menu in the XML file is given by the list of all signatures. The second XML file contains a list of $`<`$SEQUENCE$`>`$ tags. Each sequence has three different attributes:

```
<SEQUENCE te_in="..." algo="..." te_out="..." />

```

to identify the input TEs (‘te\_in’), the algorithm(s) to be run on these trigger elements (‘algo’), and the output TE (‘te\_out’). The same ‘te\_in’ can appear in more than one sequence.

The XERCES DOM API xerces  is used to parse the $`<`$SIGNATURE$`>`$ and $`<`$SEQUENCE$`>`$ tags in the configuration XML files into an object tree. Afterwards the recursive algorithm described above starts to derive the full set of menu and sequence tables. In practice the menu and sequence tables need additional processing to allow for a realistic menu that consists of several physics signatures. Furthermore, the borderline between LVL2 and EF is defined by assigning the sequences of the first set of steps to LVL2 and the remaining ones to the EF.

Fig. 8 shows a UML class diagram of the HLT Configuration used to store the HLT configuration information. It is based on a collection of pairs, one instance per step. Each pair combines a MenuTable and a SequenceTable object, each of which holds a vector of Sequence or Siganture objects, respectively. A Signature combines several TriggerElements and a Sequence holds one output TriggerElement , one or more input TriggerElements and a list of Algorithms.

The HLT configuration has been tested as part of the HLT selection software in the offline and in dedicated online test-beds. In the future it is foreseen to combine the configuration of the HLT and LVL1, based on the input menu table of the first HLT step. Thereby a consistent configuration of the complete ATLAS trigger system will be achieved.

## IV CONCLUSION

An overview of the ATLAS trigger system has been given, with emphasis on the configuration of the various trigger levels, namely the LVL1 trigger and the HLT. For LVL1 efforts so far concentrated on the configuration of the trigger simulation, with the aim of a common configuration for both the hardware and the simulation software. In the case of the HLT, which is implemented as a software trigger running in processor farms, the configuration software has been tested successfully and used offline and in dedicated online test-beds. Work is now in progress to combine the configuration of the LVL1 trigger and the HLT in order to guarantee a consistent and efficient ATLAS trigger selection strategy.

###### Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank the ATLAS LVL1 Trigger and Data Acquisition Groups for their contributions to this work and their help in preparing this paper.

∗1 S. Armstrong, J.T. Baines, C.P. Bee, M. Biglietti, A. Bogaerts, V. Boisvert, M. Bosman, S. Brandt, B. Caron, P. Casado, G. Cataldi, D. Cavalli, M. Cervetto, G. Comune, A. Corso-Radu, A. Di Mattia, M. Diaz Gomez, A. dos Anjos, J. Drohan, N. Ellis, M. Elsing, B. Epp, F. Etienne, S. Falciano, A. Farilla S. George, V. Ghete, S. Gonz lez, M. Grothe, A. Kaczmarska, K. Karr, A. Khomich, N. Konstantinidis, W. Krasny, W. Li, A. Lowe, L. Luminari, H. Ma, C. Meessen, A.G. Mello, G. Merino, P. Morettini, E. Moyse, A. Nairz, A. Negri, N. Nikitin, A. Nisati, C. Padilla, F. Parodi, V. Perez-Reale, J.L. Pinfold, P. Pinto, G. Polesello, Z. Qian, S. Rajagopalan, S. Resconi, S. Rosati, D.A. Scannicchio, C. Schiavi, T. Schoerner-Sadenius, E. Segura, T. Shears, S. Sivoklokov, M. Smizanska, R. Soluk, C. Stanescu, S. Tapprogge, F. Touchard, V. Vercesi, A. Watson, T. Wengler, P. Werner, S. Wheeler, F.J. Wickens, W. Wiedenmann, M. Wielers, H. Zobernig


format: text

text:
# Linear Polarization Observations of Water Masers in W3 IRS 5

## 1 Introduction

Birth of massive stars is characterized by a collapse of molecular cloud core when self-gravity overwhelms the magnetic pressure in the core as a result of magnetic field dilution. In this situation, the core is not supported by the magnetic field pressure in the cloud core any more, and called to be magnetically super-critical (e.g., Shu, Adams, & Lizano 1987; Feigelson & Montmerle 1999, and references therein). Measurements of the magnetic field strengths and directions in star-forming regions have been made in a variety of spatial scales, from whole star-forming regions (1–10 pc) down to individual molecular cloud cores (e.g., Heiles et al. 1993; McKee et al. 1993; Evans II 1999, and references therein). In the smaller scale, the measurements were made mainly with radio interferometers with higher angular resolution. However, because of complicated structures of the magnetic fields expected from the presence of the dense clumps and outflows, and because of the uncertainty in calibration in the polarimetric interferometry, it is more difficult to map the magnetic field accurately in this scale.

Water maser emission is often associated with star-forming regions (SFRs) with energetic outflows from young stellar objects (YSOs) (e.g., Elitzur 1992a, b and references therein). VLBI observations have revealed that water maser emission consists of clusters of compact maser features with a typical size of 1 AU and a velocity width of 1 km s-1(e.g., Reid & Moran 1981). Measurements of Doppler velocities and proper motions of maser features have led to the conclusion that the spatial motions of maser features really reflect the true three-dimensional gas kinematics (e.g., Gwinn, Moran, & Reid 1992; Torrelles et al. 2001a, b). Previous observations have found expansion motions produced by outflows from YSOs or expanding HII regions (e.g., Imai et al. 2000, hereafter Paper I, and references therein). Shocks, which have velocities exceeding about 20 km s-1 and are running into high-density ($`n_{\text{H}\text{2}}`$ 3$`\times `$106 cm-3) magnetized material, successfully explain the water maser emission associated with energetic YSO outflows (e.g., Hollenbach & McKee 1989; Elitzur, Hollenbach, & McKee 1989, 1992; Hollenbach, Elitzur, & McKee 1993).

Polarimetric mapping of individual water maser features were made for the first time using VLBI data in W51 M by Leppänen, Liljeström, & Diamond (1998) (hereafter LLD). They found that the observed directions of linear polarization were well aligned along a stream of water maser features found in W51 M. It should be noted that the observed direction of the linear polarization does not straightly indicate the magnetic field direction of the cloud because it depends on the angle between the magnetic field and the photon propagation direction (toward an observer) (e.g., Goldreich, Keeley, & Kwan 1973; Deguchi & Watson 1986b, 1990). In the case of W51 M, the observed directions of linear polarization were interpreted to be parallel to the magnetic field vector projected on the sky plane because the field vector is expected to be roughly tangential to the line of sight due to coupling with the Sagittarius spiral arm. LLD concluded that the alignment of the water maser linear polarization was created by shocks caused by the nearby expanding HII region. The linear polarization of water masers as a tracer of the interstellar magnetic fields is indirectly supported by that the linear polarization directions in a maser region are stable on a timescale of several years despite of much shorter time scale of lifetimes and flux variability of maser features (Abraham & Vilas Boas 1994; LLD; Horiuchi, Migenes, & Deguchi 2000; Horiuchi & Kameya 2000; Horiuchi & Kemaya 2003 in preparation).

This paper discusses the results of magnetic field mapping of water maser clouds in the massive-star forming region W3 IRS 5 revealed by a VLBI observation. W3 IRS 5 is considered to be at the very early phase of star formation because of lack of high velocity components in the water masers, as suggested by Genzel & Downes (1977). Previous observations also supported this interpretation on W3 IRS 5 (e.g., Claussen et al. 1994; Tieftrunk et al. 1997; Roberts, Crutcher, & Troland 1997). In a 2″$`\times `$3″ field of W3 IRS 5, Claussen et al. (1994) and Tieftrunk et al. (1997) found the distribution of a cluster of centimeter-continuum emission sources. Imai et al. (2000) investigated the 3-D kinematics of the water masers in W3 IRS 5 and estimated a distance to this region to be 1.83$`\pm `$0.14 kpc. In the present paper, the value of 1.8 kpc is adopted as the distance to W3 IRS 5. Imai, Deguchi, & Sasao (2002) (hereafter Paper II) investigated the physical condition of the region where the water masers are excited. They found that turbulent motions dominate the morphology and kinematics on a microscopic scale (down to 0.01 AU). Figure 1 shows the distribution and proper motions of the water maser features found in Paper I.

Troland et al. (1989) and Roberts et al. (1993) (hereafter RCTG) measured the Zeeman effect of the HI line in W3 IRS 5. They revealed the magnetic field projected in the line of sight on a scale of $``$ 0.6 pc, and demonstrated an ”hourglass” model of the magnetic field. The above scale is roughly equivalent to the core size found in this cloud found in the 13CO line by Hayashi, Kobayashi, & Hasegawa (1989). A pinch of the hourglass was found to be located very close to W3 IRS 5 region and to have the magnetic field strength higher than 1 mG. Greaves, Murray, & Holland (1994) also made a polarimetric observation at sub-millimeter wavelengths and estimated the magnetic field in W3 IRS 5 on a scale of 0.1 pc; the result supports the hourglass model. Barvainis & Deguchi (1989) found that the W3 IRS 5 water masers were highly linearly polarized. Sarma, Troland, & Romney (2001) (hereafter STR) and Sarma et al. (2002) (hereafter STCR) measured the Zeeman effect of the bright components of the water masers and estimated the magnetic field strength along the line of sight to be $``$ 30 mG.

In the present paper, we focus on an issue whether or not the magnetic field measured in water masers traces that found on the larger scale. The cause that determines the shape of the large-scale magnetic field is also speculated: either the collapse of the parent molecular cloud or the formation of a magneto-hydrodynamical jet. Section 2 describes the polarimetic observations using the Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA) and the Very Large Array (VLA) of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO)111The NRAO is a facility of the National Science Foundation of USA, operated under a cooperative agreement by Associated Universities, Inc. and data reduction. The results are presented in §3. Section 4 discusses mainly the relation between the measured directions of maser linear polarization and possible directions and strength of the magnetic field in the observed scale ($`<`$5″) of W3 IRS 5.

## 2 Observations and data reduction

The polarimetric observation of water masers in W3 IRS 5 was made on 1998 November 21 using 10 telescopes of the VLBA. The water masers and calibrators (NRAO 150, JVAS 0212$`+`$735, and 0423$``$014) were observed for 10 hrs in total. The observed signals were recorded in a 4-MHz base band with both right and left circular polarization (RCP, LCP) in 2-bit sampling. The recorded data were correlated with the VLBA correlator in Socorro, which yielded parallel and cross-hand visibilities with 128 spectral channels. The correlated data covered a velocity range of $``$58 km s-1 $``$ $`V_{\text{LSR}}`$$``$ $``$5 km s-1 and a velocity spacing of 0.42 km s-1 per spectral channel.

Data calibration and imaging were made using the procedures in AIPS222The NRAO Astronomical Imaging Processing System. mostly. First, the data of the parallel-hand-polarization visibilities were reduced in the usual procedures (e.g., Reid 1995; Diamond 1995) and fringe-fitting, self-calibration, and complex bandpass solutions were obtained independently in RCP and LCP. Although the water maser emission was strong enough to apply the ”template method” to calibrate the visibility amplitudes (Diamond, 1995), the band width of 4 MHz was too narrow to obtain a sufficient number of emission-free velocity channels in the template total-power spectrum of the maser emission. Instead, we applied tables of the measured system noise temperatures and antenna gains. In the self-calibration, we obtained a Stokes I maser map of the velocity component (maser spot) at $``$40.2 km s-1 and complex gain solutions in every 6 s.

Second, the instrumental polarization parameters (D-terms) of the telescopes were obtained using the AIPS RUN script CROSSPOL and the task LPCAL with scans of 0420$``$014, which is well linearly polarized. The D-term solutions were applied to the maser data. After the D-term calibration, the Stokes I, Q, U maps of maser spots were obtained independently. The naturally-weighted synthesized beam was 0.68$`\times `$0.49 mas, with the major axis at a position angle (PA) $`PA=`$ 3.3. No smoothing in velocity channel was applied. The detection limit of about 30 mJy beam-1 at a 5-$`\sigma `$ noise was obtained in velocity channels without bright maser emission. Before making the final image cubes, we looked for the masers by making wider maps covering a 2″$`\times `$5″ field with a larger synthesized beam.

Third, each velocity component (maser spot, see e.g., Gwinn 1994a, b; Paper II) in the image cube was fitted by a two-dimensional Gaussian brightness distribution using the AIPS task JMFIT. The uncertainty of the estimated position due to thermal noise was 3 microarcseconds ($`\mu `$as) for a 1-Jy spot. On the other hand, positional accuracy of the brightness peak of a maser feature (a cluster of maser spots) depends on the distribution of maser spots in the feature and the brightness distributions of the maser spots and limited to be typically 10 $`\mu `$as. The electric vector position angle (EVPA, see LLD), EVPA $`=`$ arctan($`Q/U`$)/2 of each maser spot was calculated from the Stokes $`Q`$ and $`U`$ parameters. For each maser feature (a cluster of maser spots existing together within 1 mas and 1 km s-1 in position and velocity, Paper I and II), the degree of linear polarization and the EVPA were obtained from the Stokes parameters (I, Q, U) of the intensity peak in the maser feature.

The water masers were also observed with the VLA (26 antennas) in C-configuration on 1998 November 28, one week later the VLBA observation. The water masers and calibrators (3C 48, 0420$``$014, and 3C 138) were scanned for 2 hrs in total. The observed signals were recorded in a 3-MHz base band both in right and left circular polarization. The correlated data had 64 spectral channels with a velocity spacing of 0.63 km s-1 per spectral channel. The D-terms of the antennas were obtained from the scans of 3C 48, which covered a variation of parallactic angle over 180, assuming the intrinsic EVPA of $``$72.5. Then we confirmed that the obtained EVPAs of 3C 138 and 0420$``$024 were consistent with those previously obtained by Akujor et al. (1993) and Marscher et al. (2002), respectively.

The EVPA at $`V_{\text{LSR}}`$$`=`$ $``$42.2 km s-1 in the maser feature W3 IRS 5:I2003 5 (see table 1) was compared between the VLBA and VLBA data. At this velocity, the maser spot was most prominent and its polarimetric parameters were well determined. A correction ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$EVPA $`=`$ 39.3) was applied to the EVPAs obtained with the VLBA. Taking into account the variation of EVPA in the maser feature ($``$ 3), the ambiguity of the assumed EVPA of 3C 48 ($``$ 5), and the accuracy of the calibration of the VLA data (uncertainty in R$``$L phase determination, $``$ 0.3), the accuracy of EVPA was expected to be $``$6. Because the VLA observation was made 7 days after the VLBA observation, the estimated EVPAs might suffer from the EVPA time variation of the feature W3 IRS 5:I2003 5.

## 3 Results

We detected 61 maser features consisting of 290 maser spots. These numbers are smaller by factors of 2–3 and 4–7, respectively, than those in the previous VLBA observations (Paper I, see also Paper II) while the sensitivity of the present observation was better than the previous ones. The decrease of features was likely due to less activity in maser excitation, while the decrease of spots was due to less velocity resolution by a factor of 4 in the present observation.

Table 1 summarizes the parameters of water maser features in W3 IRS 5. Only for 15 of 61 features, the proper motions were measured previously in Paper I. It was difficult to identify the same features between the observations of Paper I and the present work because many features were likely to appear and disappear in the crowded regions during the epoch separation of 11 month. The highest degrees of polarization was 13% in the present observation, which was smaller than those (up to 30%) found in a previous single dish observation (Barvainis & Deguchi, 1989) and an unpublished VLBI observation with a 400-km baseline. As shown in figure 2, no correlation was found between a feature intensity and a degree of linear polarization. LLD found a systematic change of EVPAs in a single maser feature with the full velocity width $`\mathrm{\Delta }V=`$ 1.3 km s-1. On the other hand, as shown in figure 3, EVPAs were almost the same (within 15) in all of the features with measured linear polarization in W3 IRS 5.

Figure 4 presents the spatial distribution and the linear polarization directions of the maser features. The present maser map was easily overlaid on the previous ones in Paper I. We found that a cluster of maser features is elongated in the north–west and south–east direction and that the radial velocities have been almost the same among previous maser maps of Paper I and II and the present one (figure 4c). Very likely this cluster corresponds to the cluster of maser features with the measured Zeeman effect (the features in figure 1 of STR, see also STCR). As STR mentioned, the cluster was located very close to the radio continuum source ”c” (Claussen et al. 1994, see in figure 1). It was quite difficult, however, to exactly identify the same features from one observing epoch to another because of too large time spans between two observations ($``$ 14 months).

The observed EVPAs were roughly the same among distant maser features; see the features in figures 4b and c, within a separation of 3800 AU, as well as adjacent maser features within 100 AU. Figure 3 shows that 10 out of 16 polarized features exhibited this tendency. The EVPAs were also constant at $``$13$`\pm `$5 in the individual features. The exception was found in the cluster of features seen in figure 4e, in which EVPAs changed by 90. Only one feature at the south–west corner of the cluster, W3 IRS 5:I2003 40, had an EVPA roughly equal to those in other clusters.

In W51M (LLD) and, EVPAs of masers are well aligned along the direction of a highly collimated flow. In W3 IRS 5, on the other hand, EVPAs are not parallel to the direction of the whole outflows, which is oriented at $`PA`$10 (see figure 1 and figure 6 of Paper I). In addition, they are not aligned in the direction of the large-scale CO outflow ($`PA`$ 50, Mitchell, Maillard, & Hasegawa 1991; Hasegawa et al. 1994). Note that the alignment of EVPAs observed in the present paper appears more evidently than the alignment of proper motions observed in Paper I. This is probably because the random motions are dominant in the proper motions.

## 4 Discussion

### 4.1 Relation between the EVPA and the magnetic field

The present work has investigated for the first time the magnetic field of the whole water maser regions covering a large mapping area (2″$`\times `$5″) and the wide maser velocity range ($`\mathrm{\Delta }V=`$ 53 km s-1). Despite the proper motions that have quite different PAs among the maser features, we found the similar EVPA values ($``$13.7($`\pm `$3.7 in median) among 10 maser features widely distributed in the whole maser region. This position angle should be perpendicular or parallel to the magnetic field in the water maser region of W3 IRS 5.

A maser theory suggests that the directions of the linear polarization of saturated masers should be perpendicular (or parallel) to the magnetic field projection on the sky if the inclination angle of the magnetic field with respect to the line of sight is $`|\theta _M|`$ 55 (or $`|\theta _M|`$ 55) (Goldreich, Keeley, & Kwan, 1973; Deguchi & Watson, 1986b). This inclination angle was roughly estimated from the observable parameter $`Q/I`$ (see figure 2 of Deguchi & Watson 1986a). We estimated the inclination angle to be 45 $`\theta _\text{M}`$ 60 for the observed value $`|Q/I|`$ 0.15, which is close to the critical inclination angle mentioned above ($``$ 55). We expect that the feature at the south–west corner of the cluster, W3 IRS 5:I2003 40, exhibits a ”flip” of the linear polarization direction by $``$ 90 because the magnetic field has an inclination angle close to the critical value. However, in other features, we favor $`|\theta _M|`$ 55 because the magnetic field on the larger scale is almost tangential to the sky plane as mentioned above. Thus, the magnetic field projection was estimated to have a position angle $`PA`$ 76. In contrast, the directions of linear polarization in the W51 M water maser are considered to be parallel to the magnetic field (LLD).

Note that the linear polarization is affected more or less by Faraday rotation due to free electron in the interstellar medium along the line of sight. We evaluated Faraday rotation for the maser linear polarization at 1.35-cm wave length, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, using the following qeuation,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1.48}\times 10^2Dn_\text{e}H_{},$$
(1)
where $`D`$ (pc) is the size of an interstellar cloud, $`n_\text{e}`$ (cm-3) the number density of free electron, and $`H_{}`$ (G) the magnetic field strength along the line of sight. For the cases of a maser cloud ($`D`$ 10-4 pc, $`n_\text{e}`$ 1 cm-3, $`H_{}`$ 30 mG), a molecular cloud ($`D`$ 0.1 pc, $`n_\text{e}`$ 1 cm-3, $`H_{}`$ 100 $`\mu `$G), and the interstellar space between the W3 region and the Sun ($`D`$ 1.8 kpc, $`n_\text{e}`$ 10-2 cm-3, $`H_{}`$ 10 $`\mu `$G), we obtain $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ 4.4$`\times `$10-4 rad, 1.5$`\times `$10-3 rad, and 2.7$`\times `$10-2 rad, respectively, which are negligible effects. Although the hyper-compact HII regions found in the W3 IRS 5 region ($`D`$ 2$`\times `$10-3 pc, $`n_\text{e}`$ 1.3$`\times `$105 cm-3, $`H_{}`$ 30 mG, Claussen et al. 1994) might introduce the strongest Faraday rotation ($`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ 120 rad), they are not located in front or behind the water maser features with linear polarization.

### 4.2 The magnetic field on the arcsecond-scale in W3 IRS 5

Troland et al. (1989), RCTG, and Greaves, Murray, & Holland (1994) found a gradient of the magnetic field along the line of sight and proposed ”hourglass” models for the W3 IRS 5 magnetic field on a large scale (1′). In these models, an inclination angle of the hourglass major axis $`\theta `$ 2 was adopted with respect to the sky plane on the basis of the angular distribution of the magnetic field strength along the line of sight, which was obtained by RCTG. A position angle of the major axis, $`PA`$ 50, and a FWHM width of the pinch, $`FWHM=`$ 10″, were adopted on the basis of the spatial distribution of the EVPAs, which was obtained by Greaves, Murray, & Holland (1994) with an angular resolution of 13″.5.

In this paper, we propose an hourglass model of the magnetic field shown in figure 5. This model is made to explain the magnetic field on the small scale ($`<`$ 10″), and consistent the large scale magnetic field ($``$ 1′) observed by RCTG and Greaves, Murray, & Holland (1994). The modeled field is pinched-in at the peak of the 800-µmcontinuum emission. Ladd et al. (1993) observed the 450-µm/800-µmcontinuum emission with a 7″-beam (a pointing accuracy of 2″), and found that the peak of the emission has a position offset of $``$ $``$2″.5 in R.A. and $``$ $`+`$0″.5 in decl. with respect to the center of the maser cluster. Although the continuum emission peak should coincide with the 13CO and C18O emission peaks (Oldham et al., 1994; Tieftrunk et al., 1995; Roberts, Crutcher, & Troland, 1997), the observed position is somewhat uncertain because of the large beams. It is possible that the C13O emission peak observed by Roberts, Crutcher, & Troland (1997) traces a segment of the outflow while the continuum emission peak traces the densest part of the parent molecular cloud. Tieftrunk et al. (1995) found four gas clumps traced by C34S $`J=`$3–2 and $`J=`$5–4 emission, but none of the emission peaks coincides with the pinch center.

The magnetic field projection on the sky ($`PA`$ 76) mentioned in the previous sub-section is well consistent with that in the proposed magnetic field model (see figure 5b). Taking into account that the magnetic field vector is oriented toward the observer (a negative value of the measured Zeeman effect, STR; STCR), the maser region is likely located in front of the major axis of the hourglass (see figure 5c, d). The inclination of the magnetic field to the line of sight, however, cannot be completely consistent with the model, in which the inclination significantly varies from a point to another in the whole maser region.

The alignment of the magnetic field in the coverage of about 1″$`\times `$4″ in the water maser region provides a constraint on the pinch ratio of the hourglass model around $`A/B`$ 0.14, as well as on the pinch width around $`FWHM`$ 10″) (definitions of $`A`$ and $`B`$ are given in the caption of figure 5). As discussed by RCTG, one obtains a magnetic field strength of $``$1.3 mG at the pinch center when assuming a strength of the total undisturbed magnetic field of 25 $`\mu `$G and considering the $`r^2`$ dependence of the magnetic field. This value is one order of magnitude smaller than that obtained by STR and STCR ($``$ 30 mG) but one order of magnitude larger than that estimated by RCTG. Crutcher (1999) found an empirical relation of a magnetic field strength, $`Bn^{0.47}`$, over a large range of gas densities $`n`$ up to 107 cm-3. Therefore, it is expected that the field strength found in the water maser cloud ($`n`$ 108–109 cm-3) is consistent with the $`B`$$`n`$ law (c.f. STR). STCR also pointed out that the magnetic field in the interstellar space (preshock region) should be enhanced in the maser region (postshock region) by a factor of $``$ 20.

### 4.3 The magnetodynamically super-critical collapse of the parent molecular cloud of W3 IRS 5

The origin of the magnetic field pinch is still obscured. The direction of the whole magnetic field is almost parallel to a molecular outflow found in W3 A (Mitchell, Maillard, & Hasegawa, 1991; Hasegawa et al., 1994). Momose et al. (2001) pointed out that a magnetic field would control the direction of a molecular outflow rather than that the magnetic field is influenced by the outflow. In W3 IRS 5, however, although the magnetic field seems to along the molecular outflow on a larger scale ($``$ 1′), it may not necessarily be parallel to the outflows on a smaller scale ($``$ 5″) as seen in the water masers. We evaluated the energy densities of the magnetic field and of the outflow of W3 IRS 5 using the same equations described in Momose et al. (2001). The critical magnetic field strength, $`B_{\text{critical}}`$, at which the field has the same energy density as that of the cylindrical outflow, is expressed by

$$B_{\text{critical}}=\left(\frac{8E_{\text{flow}}}{r^2l}\right)^{1/2},$$
(2)
where $`E_{\text{flow}}`$, $`r`$ and $`l`$ are the kinetic energy, the radius, and the total length of the cylindrical outflow, respectively. Adopting the total outflow energy estimated by Hasegawa et al. (1994), $`E_{\text{flow}}`$ 1.2$`\times `$1046 erg, and the radius and the length of the outflow estimated by Mitchell, Maillard, & Hasegawa (1991), $`r`$ 4.1$`\times `$1017 cm and $`l`$ 2.5$`\times `$1018 cm, respectively (assuming the distance to W3 IRS 5 of 1.8 kpc here), we obtained $`B_{\text{critical}}`$ 0.48 mG, which is larger than the maximum strength observed in the HI Zeeman effect by RCTG ($``$ 0.22 mG). To obtain $`B_{\text{critical}}`$ for the water maser cloud, we converted equation (2) to,

$$B_{\text{critical}}=(8\pi \rho _{\text{maser}}v_{\text{maser}}^2)^{1/2},$$
(3)
where $`\rho _{\text{maser}}`$ 3.3$`\times `$10-14 g cm-3 (corresponding to $`n_{\text{H}\text{2}}=`$ 108 cm-3) is the gas density of the maser region necessary for maser excitation, $`v_{\text{maser}}`$ is the outflow velocity. Adopting the outflow velocity $`v_{\text{maser}}`$ 15 km s-1, we obtained $`B_{\text{critical}}`$ 250 mG. Thus, the magnetic field strength estimated on the basis of the Zeeman splitting ($``$ 30 mG, STR) is one order of magnitude lower than the critical strength. This suggests that the magnetic cannot control the outflow dynamics.

This evaluation is consistent with that made for the W51M region by LLD. On the other hand, there is no observational evidence that the outflow controls the magnetic field structure. Momose et al. (2001) suggested that the magnetic field is aligned more in the younger phase of star-formation than in the more evolved one so that the disturbance of the former magnetic field due to the small-scale turbulence is not significant yet. This suggestion supports that W3 IRS 5 should be at the very early stage of star formation. Oldham et al. (1994) and Tieftrunk et al. (1995) estimated the mass of the molecular cloud associated with W3 IRS 5 to be 800–900 $`M_{\mathrm{}}`$. This value is still larger than the magnetodynamically-critical mass of 510 $`M_{\mathrm{}}`$ for a cloud with a radius of 9000 AU (corresponding to 5″ at 1.8 kpc) and a magnetic field strength of 30 mG. This indicates that the magnetic field of the W3 IRS 5 cannot support the gravity of the molecular cloud, in other words, that a part of the W3 IRS 5 cloud is collapsing under the magnetodynamically super-critical condition (Shu, Adams, & Lizano, 1987).

Note that the above evaluation is still consistent with the suggestion that the magnetic field should control the water maser excitation (Elitzur, Hollenbach, & McKee 1989, 1992; STCR). To consider the maser excitation, the velocity dispersion of the postshock region where the masers are excited, $`\sigma _v`$ 0.6 km s-1, is inserted instead of $`v_{\text{maser}}`$ in equation 3 (Paper I, II; STCR). Then one can estimate $`B_{\text{maser}}`$ 10 mG, smaller than or equal to the observed magnetic field strength.

It is still unclear what kind of object exists in the pinch center of the magnetic field. Tieftrunk et al. (1995) found four molecular gas clumps in W3 IRS 5, but none of the clumps is located at the pinch center. It is likely that these clumps were formed in the common parent molecular cloud and are responsible for the observed magnetic field. The magnetic field which controlled the multiple clumps supports the mild pinch ratio $`A/B`$ 0.14 rather than the extremely small ratio $`A/B`$ 0.04 speculated by RCTG.

## 5 Summary

Polarimetric VLBI observations of water masers in W3 IRS 5 have revealed that observed EVPAs of water masers features are well aligned in the whole maser region except for a small number of maser features. The directions of the magnetic field projected on the sky in the maser region are estimated to be perpendicular to the directions of the linear polarization of the masers ($`PA`$ 76). The magnetic field estimated supports the hourglass magnetic field model proposed previously. Thus, water maser linear polarization may reveal in detail the magnetic fields of the interstellar medium in star-forming regions. The W3 IRS 5 water maser region has a position offset from the pinch center of the hourglass and its magnetic field is unlikely to control the outflow dynamics. All of these observational facts suggest that the W3 IRS 5 cloud is collapsing under magnetically super-critical condition and that the outflows are not yet developed enough to completely disturb the magnetic field in this cloud. The hourglass structure of the magnetic field is suggested to be formed as a result of the collapse of the parent molecular cloud that is magnetically super-critical.

Authors acknowledge to Dr. Chris Carilli for helping our VLBA and VLA observations as a technical contact person. Authors also thanks Drs. Tetsuo Sasao, Makoto Miyoshi, and Yoshiharu Asaki for helping the VLBA observation, and Dr. Motohide Tamura for providing fruitful information on interstellar polarimetric data. H. I. was financially supported by the Research Fellowship of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for Young Scientist.


text:
# Fifty-foldíimprovementíinítheínumberíofíquantumídegenerateífermionicíatoms

äöüÄÖÜß èëôêøò ííííííííííííííí \[í

í

## Abstract

Weíhaveíproducedíaíquantumídegenerateí6LiíFermiígasíwithíupíto $`7\text{í}\times \text{í}10^7`$íatoms,íaníimprovementíbyíaífactoríofífiftyíover allípreviousíexperimentsíwithídegenerateíFermiígases.íThisíwas achievedíbyísympatheticícoolingíwithíbosonicí23Naíinítheí$`F=2`$, upperíhyperfineígroundístate.íWeíhaveíalsoíachievedíBose-Einstein condensationíofí$`F=2`$ísodiumíatomsíbyídirectíevaporation.

\]

Overítheílastífewíyears,íthereíhasíbeenísignificantíprogressíin theíproductioníofíquantumídegenerateíatomicíFermiígases (40Kíand 6Li)íandídegenerateíBose-Fermi mixturesí(7Li-6Li, 23Na-6Li,íandí87Rb-40K). Theseísystemsíofferígreatípromiseíforístudiesíofínew, interaction-driveníquantumíphenomena.ííTheíultimateígoalíisíthe attainmentíofínovelíregimesíofíBCS-likeísuperfluidityíiníaígaseous system.íTheícurrentíeffortsíto induceíandístudyístrongíinteractionsíiníaíFermi gas areícomplementedíwithítheíongoingíeffortsítoíimproveífermion coolingímethods,íwhichíwouldíleadítoílowerítemperaturesíandílarger samples.

TheímainíreasoníwhyístudiesíofídegenerateíFermiígasesíareístill laggingíbehindítheístudiesíofíatomicíBose-Einsteinícondensates (BECs),íisítheícomplexityíofícoolingímethods.íTheíPauliíexclusion principleíprohibitsíelasticícollisionsíbetweeníidenticalífermions atíultra-lowítemperatures,íandímakesíevaporativeícoolingíof spin-polarizedífermionicísamplesíimpossible.íForíthisíreason, coolingíofífermionsímustírelyíonísomeíformíofímutualíor sympatheticícoolingíbetweenítwoítypesíofídistinguishable particles,íeitherítwoíspinístatesíofítheísame atom,íorítwoídifferent atoms.íAíkeyíelementíinífermion coolingíisítheídesigníofíbetterí“refrigerators”íforísympathetic cooling.

IníthisíLetter,íweíreportítheífirstíproductioníofídegenerateíFermi samplesícomparableíinísizeíwithítheílargestíalkali BECs.íWeísuccessfullyícooledíupítoí$`7\text{í}\times 10^7`$ímagneticallyítrappedí6LiíatomsítoíbelowíhalfítheíFermi temperatureí($`T_F`$).íThisíisíaníimprovementíiníatomínumberíbyía factoríofí50íoverítheílargestípreviouslyíreportedíFermi sea.íFurther,íinísamplesícontainingíupítoí$`3\text{í}\times 10^7`$íatoms,íweíobservedítemperaturesíasílowíasí$`0.05T_F`$,íthe lowestíeveríachieved.íAtítheseítemperatures,ítheífractional occupationíofítheílowestíenergyístateídiffersífromíunityíbyíless thaní$`10^8`$.

Asíiníourípreviousíwork6Liíatomsíwere magneticallyítrappedíinítheí$`F=3/2`$,íupperíhyperfineígroundístate, andísympatheticallyícooledíbyíbosonicí23Na.íTheícrucial improvementíwasíouríachievementíofíforcedíevaporationíofísodiumíin theí$`|F,m_F\text{í}=\text{í}|2,+2`$,íupperíhyperfineígroundístate, producingílargeíandístableíBECsíwithíupítoí$`10^7`$íatoms.íThis allowedíusítoícreateíaímagneticallyítrappedí23Na-6Li, Bose-Fermiímixtureíwhichíisístableíagainstíspin-exchange collisionsíatíallídensities,íandídramaticallyíboostedíourífermion atomínumber.

Theícriteriaíforídesigningísympatheticícoolingíexperimentsíinclude theíheatícapacityíofítheírefrigerator,íandítheíinter-species collisionalíproperties,íbothíelasticíandíinelastic.íLargeíand stableí23Naícondensatesíareíaníappealingíchoiceíforísympathetic coolingíofífermions.íFurther,íaífavorableímassíratioíallowsífor simultaneousíZeemaníslowingíofí23Naíandí6Li,íand forísimultaneousímagneticítrappingíwithoutílargeídifferencesíin theígravitationalísag.íTheíinter-speciesícollisionalíproperties areígenerallyínotípredictable,íandíhaveítoíbeítested experimentally.íIníorderítoíminimizeíallípossibleíinelastic processes,ítheínaturalíchoiceíisítoímagneticallyítrapíbothíspecies inítheiríloweríhyperfineígroundístates.íHowever,íatítemperatures reachableíbyílaserícoolingí($`\text{í}300\mu `$K),í6Liícaníbe efficientlyímagneticallyítrappedíonlyíinítheíupperíhyperfine state,í$`F=3/2`$íí(Fig. 1(a)).íOn theíotheríhand,íuntilínowísodiumíhasíbeenísuccessfullyíevaporated onlyíinítheílower,í$`F=1`$íhyperfineístate.ííThisíwasíaílimiting factoríforísympatheticícoolingíofí6Li,ísinceítheímixtureíof sodiumíinítheílower,íandílithiumíinítheíupperíhyperfineístateíis notístableíagainstíspin-exchangeícollisions.íTheíinelasticíloss rateíincreasesíasítheítemperatureíisíloweredíandítheídensity grows.íIníourípreviousíwork,íweípartiallyíovercame thisíproblemíbyítransferringílithiumíatomsíintoítheílower hyperfineístateíafteríaníinitialísympatheticícoolingístageíto $`\text{í}50\mu `$K.íByíachievingíforcedíevaporativeícoolingíand Bose-Einsteinícondensationíofísodiumíinítheí$`F=2`$ístate,íweíhave nowírealizedíaímoreírobustísympatheticícoolingístrategy,íand dramaticallyíimprovedítheísizeíandítemperatureíofíaídegenerate Fermiísystem.

Weíloadedí$`\text{í}3\text{í}\times \text{í}10^9`$ísodiumíandíupítoí$`10^8`$ílithium atomsíinítheiríupperíhyperfineístatesífromíaítwo-species magneto-opticalítrapí(MOT)íintoítheímagneticítrap.íTheíadverse effectíofílightíassistedícollisionsíiníaítwo-species MOTíwasíminimizedíbyíslightlyídisplacingíthe twoíMOTsíwithírespectítoíeachíother.íDuringítheítypicalí$`30`$síof evaporative/sympatheticícooling,íweíobservedínoísignificant inelasticílossíofílithiumíatomsí(byíthree-bodyícollisionsíor dipolarírelaxation),ítheífinalínumberíofídegenerateíatomsíbeingíat leastíhalfíofítheínumberíinitiallyíloadedíintoítheítrap.íOníthe otheríhand,íweíobservedíaífavorableírateíofíelasticícollisions betweenítheítwoíspecies,íwithítheíinter-speciesíthermalization timeíbeingíshorteríthaní$`1`$s.íTherefore,ísodiumíatomsíiníthe upperíhyperfineístateíhaveíidealípropertiesíasíaírefrigerantífor 6Li.

Sinceíouríprimaryíinterestíwasícoolingíofífermions,íweíevaporated allísodiumíatomsíiníorderítoígetílithiumítoítheílowestípossible temperatures.íEveníiníourílargestí6Liísamples,íofí$`\text{í}7\text{í}\times 10^7`$íatoms,íweíachievedítemperaturesíbelowí$`0.5T_F`$. Temperaturesíinítheírangeí$`0.05\text{í}\text{í}0.2T_F`$ícouldíbeíachievedíby reducingítheí6Liíatomínumbersíonlyíslightly,ítoí$`\text{í}3\text{í}\times 10^7`$.íSuchíbigícloudsíhadíaíhighíenoughíopticalídensityíforícrisp absorptioníimagingíeveníafteríballisticíexpansionítoíaísizeílarger thaníoneímillimeterí(Fig. 2(a)).

Temperaturesíwereíextractedífromíabsorptioníimagesíofíexpanding cloudsíreleasedífromítheítrap,íusingíaísemiclassical (Thomas-Fermi)ífitítoítheíFermi-Diracímomentumídistribution í(Fig. 2(b)).íTheíquoted temperatureírangeíreflectsíbothítheíshot-to-shotíandíday-to-day reproducibility,íandítheífactíthatítheíFermiídistributioníisívery insensitiveítoítheítemperatureíiníthisíultra-degenerateílimit.

Inítheseíexperiments,ítheí6Liíatomínumberíwasíadjustedíduring theíloadingíphase.íSomewhatílowerítemperaturesícouldípossiblyíbe achievedíifítheímaximumílithiumíatomínumberíwasíloadedíintoíthe magneticítrap,íandíthenítheíhottestípartíofítheícloudíwas selectivelyíremovedíbyídirectíevaporationíonceítheísodiumíatom numberídroppedítoítheípointíwhereítheíheatícapacitiesíofítheítwo speciesíbecomeícomparable.íHowever,íatíthisípointíitíappears unlikelyíthatítemperaturesíbelowí$`0.05T_F`$ícouldíbeíconclusively extractedíiníorderítoídifferentiateítheítwoístrategies.

Weíalsoíproducedítwo-speciesídegenerateíBose-Fermiímixturesíwith severalímillioníatomsíiníeachíspeciesí(Fig. 3).íThe mixtureíwasístable,íwithíaílifetimeíofíseveralíseconds,ílimited onlyíbyítheíthree-bodyídecayíofítheísodiumícloud.

Inítheírestíofítheípaper,íweísummarizeítheínumerousístepsíwhich wereíintroducedítoíprepareísodiumíinítheí$`F=2`$ístateíasía refrigerant.

Inícontrastítoí87Rb,ícondensationíofísodiumíbyíevaporative coolingíwasípreviouslyíachievedíonlyíinítheílower,í$`|1,1`$ hyperfineístate.í$`F=2`$ísodiumícondensatesícouldíthusíbeístudied onlyíbyítransferringíopticallyítrappedí$`F=1`$íBECsíintoíthis state.íCondensationíinítheíupperíhyperfine stateíofísodiumíisímoreídifficultíthaníinítheílowerístateíforítwo reasons:í(1)íTheírequirementíforíefficientíopticalípumpingíin denseílaser-cooledísamples,íandí(2)íaníorderíofímagnitudeíhigher three-bodyílossírateícoefficient.

Theíbasicísetupíofíouríexperimentíisídescribedíin.íIn 10 s,íweíícollectedítypicallyí$`\text{í}10^{10}`$í23Naíatoms,íand $`\text{í}10^8`$í6Liíatomsíiníaímagneto-opticalítrapí(MOT).íTypical MOTítemperaturesíwereí0.7-1 mK.íSodiumíwasícollectedíinía dark-SPOTívariantíofítheíMOT,íandíthereforeímostíof theíatomsíwereíinítheí$`F=1`$íhyperfineístate.íLithiumíwasícollected iníaí“bright”íMOT,íwithíaboutí2/3íofítheíatomsíinítheí$`F=3/2`$ state.

Beforeítheítransferíintoítheímagneticítrap,ítheíatomsíwere opticallyípumpedíintoítheístretchedíhyperfineígroundístates, $`|2,+2`$íforí23Na,íandí$`|3/2,+3/2`$íforí6Li.íA magneticíguideífieldíofí$`3`$Gíwasíapplied,íandítheíatomsíwere opticallyípumpedíforí$`2`$ms,íusingí$`\sigma ^+`$ípolarizedílight.íTo achieveíbothí$`F`$í(hyperfine)íandí$`m_F`$í(Zeeman)ípumping,ítwoílight beamsíwhereíusedíforíeachíspecies,íresonantíwithítheí$`|F=I\text{í}\pm 1/2\text{í}\text{í}|F^{}=\text{í}I\text{í}\pm \text{í}1/2`$ítransitions.íHere, $`I`$íisítheínuclearíspiní($`I=3/2`$íforí23Na,íandí$`I=1`$íforí6Li), andí$`F^{}`$íisítheítotalíspiníinítheíexcitedíelectronicístate.íIn thisíway,íalmostíallítheílithiumíatomsícouldíbeípumpedíintoíthe $`|3/2,+3/2`$ístate.íOnítheíotheríhand,ítheídensityíofísodium atomsíinítheídark-SPOTíisí$`\text{í}10^{11}`$cm-3,íandíZeeman pumpingíisínotoriouslyídifficultíatísuchíhighídensities.íIníour experiments,ítheífractioníofíatomsípumpedíintoítheí$`|2,+2`$ stateíwasílimitedítoíaboutí$`30\%`$,íwithímostíofítheíremaining atomsídistributedíamongítheíotherí$`m_F`$ísub-levelsíofítheí$`F=2`$ manifold.

Afterítheíopticalípumpingístage,ítheíatomsíwereíloadedíintoía Ioffe-Pritchardímagneticítrapíwithíaíradialígradientíof $`164`$G/cm,íandíaxialícurvatureíofí$`185`$G/cm2.íSodiumíatoms iníallíthreeí$`|F=2,\text{í}m_F\text{í}\text{í}0`$ístatesíareí(atíleast weakly)ímagneticallyítrappableí(Fig. 1(b)).íHowever, onlyípureí$`|2,+2`$ísamplesíareístableíagainstíinelastic spin-exchangeícollisions.íAícrucialístepíinípreparingítheísamples foríefficientíforcedíevaporationíwasítoíactivelyíremoveí$`|F=2,m_F=0,+1`$íatomsífromítheítrap,íbeforeítheyíengagedíin inelasticícollisionsíwithítheí$`|2,+2`$íatoms.íTheíatomsíwere loadedíintoíaíweakímagneticítrap,íwithíaíhighíbiasífieldíof $`80`$G.íThisífieldísplitsítheí$`F=2`$íZeemanísub-levelsíbyí$`k_B\text{í}\times \text{í}2.8`$mK.íSinceíthisísplittingíwasílargeríthaníthe temperatureíofítheícloud,ítheídifferentístatesícouldíbeíresolved inímicrowaveíorírfíspectroscopy,íandítheí$`|F=2,\text{í}m_F=0,+1`$ atomsícouldíbeíselectivelyítransferredítoítheíuntrappedí$`|F=1,m_F=0,+1`$íloweríhyperfineístates.íThisítransferíwasídone withíaímicrowaveísweepínearítheí23Naíhyperfineísplittingíof $`1.77`$GHz.íIníthisíway,íallítheí$`|2,+2`$íatomsíinitially loadedíintoítrapícouldíbeípreserved.íWeíwereíeveníableíto “recycle”ísomeíofítheíuntrappedíatomsíbyíopticallyípumpingíthem outíofítheí$`F=1`$ígroundístates,íthusígivingíthemíaí“second chance”ítoífallíintoítheí$`|2,+2`$ístate.íTheífinalísetup consistedíofítwoímicrowaveísweeps,ítheífirstíofí$`0.8`$síduration withítheíopticalípumpingílightíon,íandítheísecondíofí$`2.4`$s durationíwithoutítheílight.íIníthisíway,ítheíoverallítransfer efficiencyífromítheíMOTítoítheímagneticítrapíwasíimprovedítoíabout $`35\%`$,ícomparableítoíourístandardí$`F=1`$íBECíexperiments .

Afteríthisípurificationíofítheí$`|2,+2`$ísample,ítheímagnetic trapíwasítightenedíbyíreducingítheíbiasífieldítoí$`3.8`$Gíin 2.4 s.íResultingítrappingífrequenciesíwereí$`204`$Hz ($`400`$Hz)íradially,íandí$`34`$Hzí($`67`$Hz)íaxiallyíforíthe sodiumí(lithium)ístretchedístate.íThisíprovidedígoodíconditions foríforcedírunawayíevaporationíofísodium.íEvaporationíwasídoneíon theí$`|2,+2\text{í}\text{í}|1,+1`$ímicrowaveítransition nearí$`1.77`$GHz.íInícontrastítoíradio-frequencyíevaporation,íthis insuredíthatí6Liíwasífaríoffíresonance.ííFurther,ímicrowave evaporationíavoidedíanyíundesirableíaspectsíofí“incomplete evaporation”íintoítheí$`|F=2,\text{í}m_F=0,+1`$ístates,íwhichícould leadítoíinelasticílossesí.

Afterí$`15`$síofíevaporation,ítheísodiumíatomsíreachedía temperatureíofí$`T\text{í}\text{í}10\mu `$K.íAtíthisípoint,ítoíavoid three-bodyílossesíinítheí$`|2,+2`$ístate,íthe trapíwasíweakenedítoífrequenciesíofí$`49`$Hzí($`96`$Hz)íradially, andí$`18`$Hzí($`35`$Hz)íaxiallyíforísodiumí(lithium).íTheífinal evaporationítoíBECítookíanotherí$`15`$s.íIníthisíway,íiníthe absenceíofílithiumíatoms,íweícouldíproduceíalmostípure $`|2,+2`$íBECsícontainingíupítoí10ímillioníatoms.íThe lifetimeíofítheíBECíinítheíweakítrapíwasílongeríthaní$`3`$s.íIn contrastítoíourípreviousíwork,ístudiesíof $`F=2`$ícondensatesíareínowípossibleíwithoutítheíaddedícomplexityíof aníopticalítrap.

Iníconclusion,íbyícreatingíaísuperiorírefrigerantíforísympathetic coolingíofí6Li,íweíhaveíproducedítheícoldestíandíbyífaríthe largestíquantumídegenerateíFermiígasísoífar.íWithítheínumberíof atomsícomparableíwithítheílargestíalkaliíBECs,íandíthe temperaturesíreachingítheípracticalídetectionílimit,íweíhaveífully exploitedítheípotentialíofílaseríandíevaporativeícoolingíto engineerísamplesíofíultracoldífermions.íIníanalogyíwith Bose-Einsteinícondensates,íweíexpectítheseílargeísamplesítoíinsure sufficientísignal-to-noiseíratioíforíallítheístandardítechniques ofíBECíresearch,ísuchíasívelocimetryíusingílongíexpansionítimes, rfíspectroscopyíwithíStern-Gerlachíseparationíduringíballistic expansion,ídirectínon-destructiveíimagingíofítheítrappedíclouds, andíBraggíspectroscopy.ííTheínextíchallengeíisítoímaintainía similarícombinationíofínumberíandítemperatureíforíaníinteracting two-componentíFermiígas.

WeíthankíA.íE.íLeanhardtíforícriticalíreadingíofítheímanuscript. ThisíworkíwasísupportedíbyítheíNSF,íONR,íARO,íandíNASA.


text:
# Anyon exciton revisited

## 1 Review of anyon exciton model

The anyon exciton model  provides a full classification of the multiple-branch spectra of a four-particle anyon exciton, a neutral composite particle consisting of a valence hole and three anyons with charge $`e/3`$. This model is only applicable for large enough separation between a photoexcited hole and a two-dimensional electron gas at exact fractional filling factor, when the Coulomb field from the hole cannot destroy the incompressible quantum liquid.

As a neutral particle, the anyon exciton possesses an in-plane momentum $`𝐤`$. At $`k=0`$ it is also described by the angular momentum $`L_z=L`$, where $`L`$ is the degree of the polynomial symmetric with respect to interchange of anyon coordinates. There is an additional quantum number which enumerates different polynomials of the same degree. An important parameter of the problem is the separation $`h`$ between electron and hole confinement planes, measured in units of magnetic length $`l`$. Two examples of numerically calculated energy spectra for $`h=2`$ and $`3`$ are shown in Fig. 1. For $`h=2`$, the minimum of the spectrum occurs for non-zero $`k`$, which means that the exciton in the lowest energy state possesses a non-zero dipole moment. The negative dispersion in Fig. 1a arises because of the mutual repulsion of $`L=2`$ and $`L=3`$ branches. For higher values of $`h`$, the ground state is always at $`k=0`$, as in Fig. 1b, and the lowest-branch dispersion is always positive. The value of $`L`$ at $`k=0`$ for the lowest branch increases with increasing $`h`$, and thus direct optical transitions from the ground state are forbidden.

However, for $`k0`$ the wavefunction is a mixture of states with different $`L`$ values, and magnetoroton-assisted transitions become possible. Fig. 2, which shows the negative charge distribution around a valence hole for two different values of $`k`$, implies a simple qualitative picture of such a transition. A quasihole appears as a result of recombination of the hole with two negatively-charged anyons which are close to it. The quasihole and a split-off anyon form a magnetoroton. Notably, for the particular value of $`h=2`$ used in Figs. 1a and 2, the asymmetric $`k0`$ distribution has a lower energy than the symmetric one. Nevertheless, we wish to emphasise that the exciton remains neutral, contrary to the statements in Ref. .

Such features of the anyon exciton model as multiple-branch spectra, dark ground states, and absence of $`L=1`$ states coincide with the results of exact diagonalisation for a few-electron system in the spherical geometry . Similarities between the electron density distribution and pair correlation functions for low-lying states in planar and spherical geometries are discussed in Ref. . We wish to emphasise that such a comparison is only valid in the region of intermediate electron-hole separation, $`h2`$, where both approaches are applicable.

The presence of a ‘tight’ $`(L=0)`$ state in the upper part of the exciton energy spectrum, together with a magnetoroton-assisted transition from the lower part of the spectrum, may explain the double-line feature observed in the intrinsic spectroscopy of incompressible quantum liquids .

## 2 Classical limit in planar and spherical geometry

When the separation $`h`$ exceeds two magnetic lengths (which is a requirement for the anyon exciton model to be valid), the ground state at $`k=0`$ is formed by the states with angular momentum obeying the superselection rule $`L=3N`$, where $`N2`$. All these states are hard-core states, i.e. their wavefunctions are zero if any two of the anyon coordinates coincide. This means that the three anyons in the exciton form an equilateral triangle; this is in complete agreement with the classical picture. In fact, for large values of separation, the result of a quantum mechanical calculation for the ground state energy is the same as that obtained by a simple classical approach. This is true for quasielectrons obeying both anyonic and bosonic statistics .

It is natural to compare the results of classical calculations for anyon excitons and ions in both planar (Fig. 3) and spherical (Fig. 4) geometries. These calculations are based on minimising the classical potential energy of the system, and the hole and anyons are considered as point charges. Fig. 3a shows the ‘classical’ $`k=0`$ anyon exciton, the energy of which is given by

$$E=\frac{1}{3\sqrt{3}r}\frac{1}{\left(h^2+r^2\right)^{1/2}},$$
(1)
where $`r`$ is the distance from each anyon to the centre of negative charge. Here, and in what follows, charge is measured in units of electron charge $`e`$. Minimising this energy with respect to $`r`$ gives

$$E_{min}=\left(\frac{2}{3}\right)^{3/2}\frac{1}{h}\frac{0.544}{h}.$$
(2)
This result coincides exactly with quantum mechanical calculations in the limit of large $`h`$ . A similar calculation for an ion (Fig. 3b) gives a potential energy

$$E=\frac{1}{18r}\frac{2}{3\left(h^2+r^2\right)^{1/2}},$$
(3)
which, when minimised, leads to

$$E_{min}=\frac{(12^{2/3}1)^{3/2}}{18h}\frac{0.485}{h}.$$
(4)
Therefore, as expected, the neutral exciton is more energetically favourable than a positively-charged ion.

For a spherical geometry, with the valence hole at the north pole of the sphere, the anyon exciton corresponds to the configuration shown in Fig. 4a, whereas for the ion, one of the anyons goes to the south pole of the sphere (Fig. 4b), which corresponds to infinity on the plane. Note that the electron-hole separation is taken into account by introducing an effective interaction $`V=(r_c^2+h^2)^{1/2}/3`$, where $`r_c`$ is taken as the anyon-hole chord length. The expression for the energy (with the radius of the sphere taken as unity) is

$$E=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{9\left(1d^2\right)^{1/2}}\frac{1}{\left(h^22d+2\right)^{1/2}},$$
(5)
where $`d`$ is the distance between the centre of negative charge and the centre of the sphere. Minimising this expression in the limit of large electron-hole separation $`h`$, we obtain

$$E_{min}=\frac{1}{3\sqrt{3}}\frac{1}{h}+\frac{1}{h^3}\frac{3}{2h^5}+O\left(\frac{1}{h^6}\right).$$
(6)
A similar calculation for the configuration in Fig. 4b gives a potential energy

$`E`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{27\left(1+d\right)^{1/2}\left(13d\right)^{1/2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{27\left(1+d\right)^{1/2}}}`$ (7)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3\left(h^23d+1\right)^{1/2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3\left(h^2+4\right)^{1/2}}},`$
which, when minimised, yields

$$E_{min}=\frac{1}{3\sqrt{3}}\frac{1}{h}+\frac{1}{h^3}\frac{9}{4h^5}+O\left(\frac{1}{h^6}\right).$$
(8)
Comparing Eqs. 6 and 8, one can see that for large electron-hole separation in a spherical geometry, the positively-charged ion is energetically more favourable than the neutral exciton, which is not the case in the more realistic planar geometry.

Introducing realistic form factors , which reduce anyon-anyon repulsion at large distances, is unlikely to push one of the anyons to infinity and make the ion energetically favourable in the planar geometry.

In conclusion, we believe that the appearance of fractionally-charged anyon ions at the bottom of the numerically calculated excitation spectra  is an artefact caused by finite-size effects in the spherical geometry.

## References