text:
# Untitled Document

Power Spectra in Spacetime Noncommutative Inflation

Qing-Guo Huang and Miao Li

Institute of Theoretical Physics

Academia Sinica, P. O. Box 2735

Beijing 100080

huangqg@itp.ac.cn

mli@itp.ac.cn

The spacetime uncertainty relation, which deviates from general relativity, emerges in String/M theory. It is possible to observe this deviation through cosmological experiments, in particular through the measurements of CMB power spectrum. This paper extends some previous observations to more general inflation schemes. We find that the noncommutative spacetime effects always suppress the power spectrum of both the scalar and tensor perturbations, and may provide a large enough running of the spectral index to fit the results of WMAP in the inflation model.

November, 2003

Einstein’s general relativity is broken by the quantum effects at very short distances. If inflation happened before the hot big bang, it may be possible to observe these quantum effects through cosmological experiments, such as WMAP and SDSS, since the short distances are stretched to the cosmic ones by the accelerating expansion during inflation. If this is the case, it appears that we need to well understand quantum gravity before we can calculate the power spectrum of cosmological fluctuations accurately. Since String/M theory is the most attractive framework of quantum gravity, it is imperative to investigate the modification of the primordial fluctuation spectrum in string theory. However, there is no fundamental formulation of string theory in a time-dependent background yet. We need resort to some general intuitions gained from studying string theory. Spacetime uncertainty is one of such intuitions and we shall in this paper extend some previous observations concerning the effects caused by spacetime uncertainty in the CMB power spectrum to a more general situation.

The first year results of WMAP  put forward more restrictive constraints on cosmological models and confirm the emerging standard model of cosmology, a flat $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-dominated universe seeded by a nearly scale-invariant adiabatic Gaussian fluctuations. WMAP also brings about some new intriguing results, such as a running spectral index of the scalar fluctuations and an anomalously low quadrupole of CMB angular power spectrum . According to \[3--5\], spacetime noncommutative power-law inflation naturally produces a large enough running of the spectral index to match the results of WMAP. However the large suppression of $`C_2^{TT}`$ remains mysterious.

It is generally accepted that the large scale structures of the universe originated from some small seed perturbations , which over time grew to become all of the structures we observe today. Quantum fluctuations of the inflaton field are excited during inflation and stretched to cosmological scales with the expansion of our universe. At the same time, being the inflaton fluctuations, ripples in spacetime are also excited and stretched to cosmological scales. The physical wavelengths of these fluctuations are so short that they are sensitive to the physics at the very short distance during the period of inflation. Many authors have discussed how the spectra of fluctuations in inflationary cosmology depend on trans-Planckian physics and whether these trans-Planckian effects can be observed. In general, there are two ways to investigate them. One is that we can take the trans-Planckian physics into account by modifying the dispersion relation . The other is called the minimal trans-Planckian physics , in which we calculate the power spectrum of the fluctuations in inflationary cosmology, starting with initial conditions imposed on mode by mode when the physical wavelength of the fluctuation equals some critical length $`l_n`$ corresponding to a new energy scale $`M_n=l_n^1`$. In this model, a mode of fluctuation is created when its wavelength became equal to $`l_n`$, while the evolution equations of fluctuation modes are unmodified. Thus the change is entirely encoded in the initial conditions and there is no need to postulate some ad-hoc trans-Planckian physics. As a result, the corrections can be generally expanded in terms of some powers of $`H/M_n`$, where $`H`$ is the Hubble parameter during inflation. Thus we can probe new physics in this way only if the Hubble parameter $`H`$ during inflation is not much smaller than the new physical scale $`M_n`$.

In perturbative string theory, the fundamental degree of freedom is fundamental string with length scale $`l_s`$ as the minimal physical length scale, implying a stringy uncertainty relation : $`x_pp1+l_s^2p^2`$ or $`x_pl_s`$. Heuristically the minimal distance we can measure by using fundamental string must not be shorter than its length $`l_s`$ since the fundamental string is extensive. In nonperturbative string theory or M theory, new degrees of freedom such as D-branes and black holes must be taken into account, their effects are suppressed by a factor such as $`\mathrm{exp}(1/g_s)`$ ($`g_s0`$ in perturbative string theory), where $`g_s`$ is the string coupling. A D-brane probe with a sufficiently small velocity can be used to probe distances shorter than the string scale. In any physical process a new uncertainty relation ,

$$t_px_pl_s^2,$$

is observed, where $`t_p`$ and $`x_p`$ are the physical time and space. We believe that M theory should not favor a “hard” cut-off, but an uncertainty relation between space and time. However it is hard to incorporate this relation directly in string theory in a fundamental formulation. On a general ground, if inflation is affected by physics at a scale close to string scale or a related scale, one expects that spacetime uncertainty must leave traces in the CMB power spectrum \[11,,12\] (see also \[3--5\]). Indeed, an explicit calculation based on the model proposed in  shows that the effects can be observed .

Before we discuss the noncommutative inflation in detail, let us sketch the physics behind this scenario. As in the usual inflation model, we assume that the universe went through a slow-roll period during which cosmic perturbations were generated. The larger the scale of the perturbation, the earlier its generating time. The long wave-length perturbations were generated earlier and crossed out the horizon earlier, and re-entered the horizon later. For an earlier generating time, the spacetime uncertainty relation tells us that the uncertainty in creating time is smaller. Nevertheless, the ratio of the time uncertainty and the creation time is larger, so we expect that the correction of the power spectrum is larger for a smaller wave-number. In addition, the usual power-law of the spectrum tells us that a smaller wave-number comes with a smaller power, and due the the larger correction of the relative generating time, we expect that the noncommutative correction makes the power of a smaller wave-number even smaller, thus induces a larger spectral index. In the UV end, the story is reversed, so the spectral index for a larger wave-number is smaller, smaller than 1 when the wave-number is larger than a “critical value”.

The spacetime noncommutative effects can be encoded in a new product, start product, replacing the usual algebra product. The evolution of a homogeneous background will not change and the standard cosmological equation of the inflation based on Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) metric remains the same:

$$\ddot{\varphi }+3H\dot{\varphi }+V^{}(\varphi )=0,$$

$$H^2=\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)^2=\frac{1}{3M_p^2}\left(\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+V(\varphi )\right),$$

here $`M_p`$ is the reduced Planck mass and we assume the universe be spatially flat and the inflaton $`\varphi `$ be spatially homogeneous. If $`\dot{\varphi }^2V(\varphi )`$ and $`\ddot{\varphi }3H\dot{\varphi }`$, the scalar field shall slowly roll down its potential. Define some slow-roll parameters,

$$ϵ=\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2}=\frac{M_p^2}{2}\left(\frac{V^{}}{V}\right)^2,$$

$$\eta =ϵ\frac{\ddot{H}}{2H\dot{H}}=M_p^2\frac{V^{\prime \prime }}{V},$$

$$\xi ^2=7ϵ\eta 5ϵ^22\eta ^2+\zeta ^2=M_p^4\frac{V^{}V^{\prime \prime \prime }}{V^2},$$

where $`\zeta ^2=(d^3H/dt^3)/(2H^2\dot{H})`$, then the slow-roll condition can be expressed as $`ϵ,\eta 1`$.

As impressive successes, inflation model not only easily solves the flatness problem, the entropy problem and the horizon problem in hot big bang model, but also provides a reasonable primordial cosmological fluctuations. In order for structure formation to occur via gravitational instability, there must have been small preexisting fluctuations on physical length scales when they crossed inside the Hubble radius in the radiation-dominated and matter-dominated eras. We will consider small perturbations away from the homogeneous and isotropic reference spacetime, the spatially flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) spacetime in our case. These metric perturbations can be decomposed into different spin modes. The key issue is that general relativity is a gauge theory where the gauge transformations are general coordinate transformations from a local reference frame to another, thus we need to define some gauge invariant quantities, such as the tensor fluctuation $`h_{ij}`$ and the comoving curvature perturbation $``$, to describe the cosmological density perturbations.

We will focus on the scalar perturbation in the spacetime noncommutative inflation first. In the conformal coordinates, the linear scalar perturbations of the metric can be expressed most generally by two scalar degrees of freedom $`A`$ and $`\psi `$ and the line-element becomes

$$ds^2=a^2[(1+2A)d\chi ^2(12\psi )\delta _{ij}dx^idx^j],$$

where the conformal time $`\chi `$ is defined as

$$\chi =a^1𝑑t.$$

Since the stress tensor does not have any non-diagonal component, we have $`\psi =A`$. We define the comoving curvature perturbation as

$$=\psi +H\frac{\delta \varphi }{\dot{\varphi }},$$

which is gauge invariant, where $`\delta \varphi `$ is the quantum fluctuation of inflaton.

For convenience we introduce another time coordinate $`\tau `$ in the noncommutative spacetime such that the metric becomes

$$ds^2=dt^2a^2(t)d\stackrel{}{x}^2=a^2(\tau )d\tau ^2a^2(\tau )d\stackrel{}{x}^2.$$

Now the uncertainty relation (1) becomes

$$\tau xl_s^2,$$

where $`x`$ is the comoving spatial coordinate. Skipping the detailed discussions in , we simply write down the action of the perturbation which incorporates the noncommutative case in four dimensions

$$S=V_{k<k_0}𝑑\stackrel{~}{\eta }d^3k\frac{1}{2}z_k^2(\stackrel{~}{\eta })(u_k^{}u_k^{}k^2u_ku_k),$$

where

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill z_k^2(\stackrel{~}{\eta })& =z^2y_k^2(\stackrel{~}{\eta }),y_k^2=(\beta _k^+\beta _k^{})^{\frac{1}{2}},\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{d\stackrel{~}{\eta }}{d\tau }& =\left(\frac{\beta _k^{}}{\beta _k^+}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}},\beta _k^\pm =\frac{1}{2}(a^{\pm 2}(\tau +ł_s^2k)+a^{\pm 2}(\tau l_s^2k)),\hfill \end{array}$$

here $`l_s`$ is the string length scale, $`z=a\dot{\varphi }/H`$, $`_k=u_k(\stackrel{~}{\eta })/z_k(\stackrel{~}{\eta })`$, $`k_0=(\beta _k^+/\beta _k^{})^{1/4}l_s`$ and the prime denotes derivative with respect to the modified conformal time $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }`$. Thus the equation of the scalar perturbation can be written as

$$u_k^{\prime \prime }+\left(k^2\frac{z_k^{\prime \prime }}{z_k}\right)u_k=0.$$

After a lengthy but straightforward calculation, we get (up to the first order of the slow-roll parameters and $`\mu `$ defined as below to describe the spacetime noncommutative affects)

$$\frac{z_k^{\prime \prime }}{z_k}=2(aH)^2\left(1+\frac{5}{2}ϵ\frac{3}{2}\eta 2\mu \right),$$

where $`\mu =H^2k^2/(a^2M_s^4)`$, $`k`$ is the comoving fourier mode and $`M_s=l_s^1`$ is the string mass scale. In this paper we only consider the case in which the perturbations are generated inside the horizon. For the slow-roll inflation, the conformal time $`\chi `$ can be approximately integrated out from equation (1),

$$\chi =\frac{dt}{a}=\frac{da}{a^2H}\frac{1}{aH}(1+ϵ).$$

And from the third equation in (1), we get

$$\chi (1+\mu )^1\stackrel{~}{\eta },$$

therefore

$$aH\frac{1}{\chi }(1+ϵ)\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{\eta }}(1+ϵ+\mu ).$$

Using equation (1) and (1), we obtain from equation (1)

$$u_k^{\prime \prime }+\left(k^2\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{\eta }^2}\left(\nu ^2\frac{1}{4}\right)\right)u_k=0,$$

where $`\nu =\frac{3}{2}+3ϵ\eta `$. We notice that this equation is similar to the commutative case and the only difference is that the conformal time $`\chi `$ is replaced by the modified conformal time $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }`$. Next, we choose the initial conditions

$$u_k=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}}e^{ik\stackrel{~}{\eta }}.$$

The solution of equation (1) is

$$u_k=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\pi }e^{i(\nu +\frac{1}{2})\pi /2}(\stackrel{~}{\eta })^{1/2}H_\nu ^{(1)}(k\stackrel{~}{\eta }),$$

where $`H_\nu ^{(1)}`$ is the Hankel’s function of the first kind. At the superhorizon scales ($`k^2\frac{z_k^{\prime \prime }}{z_k}`$), the solution can be expressed as

$$u_k\frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}}(k\stackrel{~}{\eta })^{\frac{1}{2}\nu }\frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}}\left(\frac{k}{aH}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}\nu }(1+\mu )^{\frac{1}{2}\nu }.$$

After a simple calculation, we have, from the second and forth equation of (1),

$$y_k1+\frac{H^2k^2}{a^2M_s^4}=1+\mu .$$

Thus the power spectrum on superhorizon scales of the comoving curvature can be expressed as

$$P_s\frac{k^3}{2\pi ^2}\left|\frac{u_k}{z_k(\stackrel{~}{\eta })}\right|^2\frac{1}{2ϵ}\frac{1}{M_p^2}\left(\frac{H}{2\pi }\right)^2\left(\frac{k}{aH}\right)^{2\eta 6ϵ}(1+\mu )^{46ϵ+2\eta },$$

here $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }`$ is the time when the fluctuation mode $`k`$ crosses the Hubble radius ( $`z_k^{\prime \prime }/z_k=k^2`$ ). Plugging this condition into equation (1), we get

$$k^2=2(aH)^2\left(1+\frac{5}{2}ϵ\frac{3}{2}\eta 2\mu \right).$$

Or perturbatively up to the first of the slow-roll parameter $`ϵ`$, $`\eta `$ and the noncommutative parameter $`\mu `$, we get

$$d\mathrm{ln}k=(1ϵ+4ϵ\mu )Hdt,$$

and

$$\frac{d\mu }{d\mathrm{ln}k}=(1+ϵ4ϵ\mu )\frac{1}{H}\frac{d}{dt}\left(\frac{H^2k^2}{a^2M_s^4}\right)4ϵ\mu .$$

Using equation (1), (1) and (1), we find the spectral index of the scalar perturbation and its running

$$n_s1s=\frac{d\mathrm{ln}P_s}{d\mathrm{ln}k}=6ϵ+2\eta +16ϵ\mu ,$$

$$\frac{dn_s}{d\mathrm{ln}k}=24ϵ^2+16ϵ\eta 2\xi ^232ϵ\eta \mu .$$

When $`l_s0`$ or $`M_s+\mathrm{}`$, the noncommutative parameter $`\mu =H^2k^2/(a^2M_s^4)0`$, equation (1) and (1) reproduces the results in commutative case.

Inflation predicts that there are also tensor perturbations of the metric. Because the amplitude of primordial tensor perturbations of the metric during the period of inflation only depends on the energy scale of the inflation, we can determine the energy scale of a model by the measurement of the amplitude of the primordial gravitational wave perturbations. In general the linear tensor perturbations may be written as

$$ds^2=a^2(\chi )\left(d\chi ^2(\delta _{ij}+2h_{ij})dx^idx^j\right),$$

where $`|h_{ij}|1`$. The tensor $`h_{ij}`$ has six degrees of freedom, but the tensor fluctuations are traceless and transverse. With these four constraints, there remain two physical degrees of freedom, or polarizations. Notice that tensors $`h_{ij}`$ are gauge-invariant and therefore represent two physical degrees of freedom. Here the stress-energy momentum tensor is diagonal, as the one provided by the inflation potential. Thus the tensor mode does not have a source in its equation of motion and then, in the commutative case, the action of the tensor mode is simply

$$S=\frac{M_p^2}{2}d^4x\sqrt{g}_\sigma h_{ij}^\sigma h_{ij},$$

similar to the action of two independent massless scalar fields. Using the same argument as in the scalar perturbations in , in the noncommutative spacetime background, the gauge-invariant tensor amplitude can be expressed as

$$h_k=\frac{v_k}{a_kM_p},$$

where $`a_k=ay_k`$, where $`y_k`$ is given in equation (1). The motion equation of $`v_k`$ becomes

$$v_k^{\prime \prime }+\left(k^2\frac{(a_k)^{\prime \prime }}{a_k}\right)v_k=0.$$

After a lengthy calculation, we find

$$\frac{(a_k)^{\prime \prime }}{a_k}=2(aH)^2\left(1\frac{ϵ}{2}2\mu \right).$$

and

$$v_k^{\prime \prime }+\left(k^2\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{\eta }^2}\left(\nu ^2\frac{1}{4}\right)\right)v_k=0,$$

where $`\nu =3/2+ϵ`$. Similar to the scalar fluctuation, the tensor modes at superhorizon scales can be solved

$$v_k\frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}}\left(\frac{k}{aH}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}\nu }(1+\mu )^{\frac{1}{2}\nu }.$$

In the end, the amplitude of the metric tensor perturbations is found to be

$$P_T=2\times \frac{k^3}{2\pi ^2}|h_k|^2=2\times \frac{k^3}{2\pi ^2}\frac{1}{M_p^2}\left|\frac{v_k}{a_k}\right|^2=2\times \frac{1}{M_p^2}\left(\frac{H}{2\pi }\right)^2\left(\frac{k}{aH}\right)^{2ϵ}(1+\mu )^{42ϵ},$$

where the factor 2 comes from the number of the independent physical degrees of freedom of the tensor perturbation $`h_{ij}`$. Using eqs. (1) and (1), we find

$$P_T4ϵP_s.$$

In power-law inflation $`ϵ=1/p`$ where p is the power of the time in the scale factor of the universe, thus $`P_T=(4/p)P_s`$, the same as the result in . The spectral index $`n_T`$ of the tensor perturbations and its running $`dn_T/d\mathrm{ln}k`$ are

$$n_T=\frac{d\mathrm{ln}P_T}{d\mathrm{ln}k}=2ϵ+16ϵ\mu ,$$

and

$$\frac{dn_T}{d\mathrm{ln}k}=8ϵ^2+4ϵ\eta 32ϵ\eta \mu .$$

These two equations also reproduce the results in commutative case when $`\mu 0`$. The spectrum of the tensor perturbations in commutative case must be red ($`n_T<1`$), since the slow-roll parameter $`ϵ`$ is positive. In noncommutative spacetime, it can be blue when $`\mu >1/8`$. We find that the amplitude of the tensor perturbations are also suppressed in noncommutative spacetime.

From equation (1) and (1), we see that the spacetime noncommutative effects suppress the power spectrum of the primordial scalar and tensor perturbations approximately with a same factor $`(1+\mu )^4`$, leading to a more blue spectrum with a correction $`+16ϵ\mu `$ appearing in (1) and (1), where $`ϵ`$ must be positive by definition in (1). Using the argument in , we find that the only difference in the noncommutative case from the commutative case is replacing the conformal time $`\chi `$ with modified conformal time $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }`$ and $`\chi (1+\mu )^1\stackrel{~}{\eta }`$ in equation (1). And $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }`$ plays the role of the conformal time in the commutative case. Thus we can get the noncommutative result by replacing $`\chi `$ in the commutative case by $`(1+\mu )^1\chi `$ which means a delay of the time when the fluctuation mode cross outside the horizon, since both of the conformal and the modified conformal time are negative and $`(1+\mu )^1<1`$. After a simple calculation, we find that the Hubble constant becomes smaller in the noncommutative case than in the commutative case by a factor $`(1+\mu )^1`$. Since the power spectrum $`PH^2/(M_py_k)^2`$ and $`y_k=1+\mu `$ in eq.(1), we predict that the power spectrum in the noncommutative case is suppressed by a factor $`(1+\mu )^4`$.

We also note that in a de Sitter space, the noncommutative inflation is the same as the commutative one, since $`ϵ=0`$. The reason is that the Hubble constant is not varying with time and there are no time delaying effects due to the noncommutative effects.

Before we discuss how to match the results of the WMAP group , we briefly review their results. For the scalar modes, the spectral index and its running at two different scales are

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill n_s& =0.93\pm 0.03,\frac{dn_s}{d\mathrm{ln}k}=0.031_{0.017}^{+0.016}\text{at}k=0.05\text{Mpc}^1,\hfill \\ \hfill n_s& =1.20_{0.11}^{+0.12},\frac{dn_s}{d\mathrm{ln}k}=0.077_{0.052}^{+0.050}\text{at}k=0.002\text{Mpc}^1\hfill \end{array}.$$

Here we use the new results revised by Peiris et al. on 12, May. The data of the WMAP give rise to a maximum of the tensor/scalar ratio leading to a constraint on the slow-roll parameter $`ϵ<1.28/16=0.08`$ ($`95\%CL`$).

If we want to directly fit the data of WMAP by using the inflation model in noncommutative spacteime, we need to calculate the primordial power spectrum exactly, use some sophisticated techniques, such as running CMBfast, to compute the $`C_l^{TT}`$ etc and compare them with the data directly with taking the likelihood into account. In our paper, we want to show that we can produce the large enough running of the spectral index of the power spectrum in the best-fit results of WMAP group.

We have showed that the spacetime noncommutative power-law inflation can fit the spectral index and its running quite nicely in  and . Here we extend our previous discussions to a general slow-roll inflation model and discuss how to match the index of the power spectrum and its running by using our previous results. From equation (1), we have $`\eta =\frac{1}{2}s+3ϵ8ϵ\mu `$. With this substituted into (1), it becomes

$$\frac{dn_s}{d\mathrm{ln}k}=s^2+(1348\mu )sϵ+(28304\mu +512\mu ^2)ϵ^22\zeta ^2.$$

If spacetime is commutative ($`\mu =0`$), equation (1) becomes

$$\frac{dn_s}{d\mathrm{ln}k}=s^2+13sϵ+28ϵ^22\zeta ^2.$$

Thus in commutative case, $`\zeta ^2`$ must be very large in order to get a large enough negative value of $`dn_s/d\mathrm{ln}k`$ in (1), specially when the CMB power spectrum is blue $`(s>0)`$, to fit the WMAP data, since $`ϵ>0`$. However it is quite hard to get a large $`\zeta ^2`$ in the known typical inflation model  and has been also discussed in . If we take the noncommutative effects into account, the second or the third term of equation (1) will become negative for some suitable values of $`\mu `$, there is no longer the need of a large $`\zeta ^2`$. In practice, we shall ignore $`\zeta ^2`$ and show the constraint on values of $`ϵ`$ and of $`\mu `$ in order to fit the experimental data, in fig. 1.

Figure 1. The value of the solid line is $`n_s=1.20`$, $`dn_s/d\mathrm{ln}k=0.077`$ and the dash line is $`n_s=0.93`$, $`dn_s/d\mathrm{ln}k=0.031`$ by using equs.(1) and (1), here we neglect $`\zeta ^2`$.

Further, the constraints on the parameters $`ϵ`$ and $`\mu `$ are loosened after we take the contribution of $`\zeta ^2`$ into consideration. We see from fig.1 that it is possible to naturally realize a large enough running of spectral index of the scalar metric perturbations after we take the spacetime noncommutative effects into consideration.

In the following we shall check some typical inflation models. According to equation (1) (1) (1) and (1), we see that the noncommutative term $`\mu `$ always appears in a product with the slow-roll parameter $`ϵ`$. Thus, there is a significant effect in the models only when $`ϵ`$ is large. We will see that the noncommutative effects in cases of the power-law model and the chaotic model are large enough to realize the running of the index of the power spectrum.

Case 1.

The potential $`V=\lambda ^4\mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{2/p}(\varphi /M_p))`$ leads to power-law inflation with $`at^p`$ and the slow-roll parameters are $`ϵ=1/p`$, $`\eta =2/p`$ and $`\xi ^2=4/p^2`$. Since $`ϵ`$ is a constant, we can integrate equation (1) to get

$$\frac{d\mu }{d\mathrm{ln}k}=4ϵ\mu =\frac{4}{p}\mu ,$$

and

$$\mu =\left(\frac{k}{k_c}\right)^{4ϵ}=\left(\frac{k}{k_c}\right)^{4/p}.$$

Equations (1) and (1) become

$$n_s=1\frac{2}{p}+\frac{16}{p}\mu =\frac{2}{p}+\frac{16}{p}\left(\frac{k}{k_c}\right)^{4/p},$$

$$\frac{dn_s}{d\mathrm{ln}k}=\frac{64}{p^2}\mu =\frac{64}{p^2}\left(\frac{k}{k_c}\right)^{4/p}.$$

These formulas are exactly the same as in .

Case 2.

Potential $`V=\lambda ^4(\varphi /M)^p`$ ($`p2`$). The number of e-folds is $`N\frac{1}{M_p^2}_{\varphi _{end}}^{\varphi _N}\frac{V}{V^{}}𝑑\varphi \varphi _N^2/(2pM_p^2)`$, so $`\varphi _N=\sqrt{2pN}M_p`$. The slow-roll parameters are $`ϵ=(p^2/2)M_p^2/\varphi ^2=p/(4N)`$, $`\eta =(p1)/(2N)`$ and $`\xi ^2=(p1)(p2)/(4N^2)`$. Thus the spectral index and its running become

$$n_s1=s=\frac{1}{N}\left(1\frac{1}{2}(18\mu )p\right),$$

and

$$\frac{dn_s}{d\mathrm{ln}k}=\frac{1}{N^2}\left(1+\frac{p}{2}+4p(p1)\mu \right).$$

For $`N=50`$ and $`p=2`$, $`n_s=0.96`$ and $`dn_s/d\mathrm{ln}k=0.0008`$, the running is too small to fit the experimental data in the commutative case ($`\mu =0`$). Eq. (1) also tells us that the power spectrum must be red in this case. The situation changes in the noncommutative spacetime background. When $`\mu >(1+2/p)/8`$, the spectrum becomes blue. For a small $`k`$, the larger $`\mu `$ the earlier it crosses outside the horizon and thus produces a larger spectral index. First, we try to fit the data at $`k=0.05Mpc^1`$ in eq. (1). We show the fitting parameters in fig. 2 - 4.

Figure 2. where $`ϵ`$ is the slow-roll parameter with the constraints $`ϵ<0.08`$ from WMAP and p is the index of the inflaton in the potential.

Figure 3. where $`N`$ is the e-folding number and p is the index of the inflaton in the potential.

Figure 4. where $`\mu =H^2k^2/(a^2M_s^4)`$ is the noncommutative parameter and p is the index of the inflaton in the potential.

The blue lines in fig. 2 - 4 correspond to $`n_s=0.93`$ and $`dn_s/d\mathrm{ln}k=0.031`$ and the green lines show the range of the parameters to fit the likelihood of $`n_s`$ and $`dn_s/d\mathrm{ln}k`$. In general, the larger the slow-roll parameter $`ϵ`$, the larger the noncommutative effects. From fig. 2-4, we choose $`p=10`$ as an example in order to get a large e-folds number. According to the blue lines in these three figures, we can get $`N=35`$, $`ϵ=0.071`$ and $`\mu =0.089`$. Since $`\mu =0.0891`$, we can trust our perturbative results. We can also fit the data at the mode $`k=0.002Mpc^1`$ and the results are $`N=42`$, $`ϵ=0.060`$ and $`\mu =0.36`$. We can see that the spectrum runs from the blue one ($`n_s=1.20`$) at $`N=42`$ to the red one ($`n_s=0.93`$) at $`N=35`$. This example shows us that the chaotic inflation model can fit the results of WMAP in noncommutative spacetime.

Case 3.

Potential $`V=\lambda ^4[1(\frac{\varphi }{M})^p]`$ ($`p2`$). For $`p=2`$, the number of e-folds at $`\varphi _N`$ before the end of inflation is given by $`N=_t^{t_{end}}H𝑑t\frac{1}{M_p^2}_{\varphi _{end}}^{\varphi _N}\frac{V}{V^{}}𝑑\varphi (M^2/2M_p^2)\mathrm{ln}(M/\varphi _N)`$, or $`\varphi _NMexp(2NM_p^2/M^2)`$, where we put $`\varphi _{end}M`$. The slow-roll parameters are $`ϵ=2M_p^2\varphi _N^2/M^4=2(M_p^2/M^2)exp(4N(M_p^2/M^2))`$, $`\eta =2(M_p^2/M^2)`$ and $`\xi ^2=0`$. In this case, $`\eta <<1`$ implies $`M_p<<M`$. For instance assuming $`M=10M_p`$ and $`N=50`$, we have $`ϵ=0.0027`$, $`\eta =0.02`$, $`n_s=0.96`$ and $`dn_s/d\mathrm{ln}k=0.001`$. Because $`ϵ`$ is small, $`\eta <0`$ and $`32ϵ\eta \mu =0.0017\mu >0`$, The spacetime noncommutative effects can not improve this model. The same is true for $`p>2`$.

Case 4.

We consider the P-term inflation . In unit with $`M_p=1`$, the potential can be expressed as

$$V=\frac{g^2\chi ^2}{2}\left(1+\frac{g^2}{8\pi ^2}ln\frac{s^2}{\chi }+\frac{f}{8}s^4+\mathrm{}\right),$$

here $`0f1`$ and special case $`f=1`$ corresponds to F-term inflation, $`f=0`$ corresponds to D-term inflation. In P-term model the parameter $`f`$ is the contribution from supergravity which permits a controllable running of the scalar spectral index (no running in D-term case ). One should note that $`g^2`$ in this model is not necessarily related to the gauge coupling constant in GUTs. We have $`g2\times 10^3`$ and $`\chi 10^5`$  (constrained from CMB data), which is a natural assumption (if $`g<<2\times 10^3`$, one has exactly flat spectrum of density perturbations $`n_s=1`$. So we do not consider this case.). Now we check whether this model can fit the experimental data in noncommutative spacetime. For $`g2\times 10^3`$, the inflation is driven by the first term in (1) and we have

$$ϵ=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{g^2}{4\pi ^2s}+\frac{fs^3}{2}\right)^2,$$

$$\eta =\frac{g^2}{4\pi ^2s^2}+\frac{3fs^2}{2},$$

$$\xi ^2=\left(\frac{g^2}{2\pi ^2s^3}+3fs\right)\left(\frac{g^2}{4\pi ^2s}+\frac{fs^3}{2}\right),$$

and $`s_N^2=\frac{g^2N}{2\pi ^2}`$ where N is the number of e-folds. According to , for $`g>0.15`$, inflation in this model is too short, whereas for $`g<0.06`$ one can ignore the supergravity term $`fs^4/8`$ for the description of the last 60 e-folds of inflation. We expect that the spectral index $`n`$ runs from $`n<1`$ at small wavelengths to $`n>1`$ at large wavelengths in the intermediate regime $`0.06<g<0.15`$. For example, we show the spectral index and its running in the P-term inflation model in figs. 5 and 6, where we choose $`f=0.8`$ and $`g=0.08`$.

Figure 5. where $`n_s`$ in the spectral index and N is the number of e-folds.

Figure 6. where $`dn_s/dlnk`$ in the running of the spectral index and N is the number of e-folds.

From fig. 5 and 6, we see that P-term inflation can not provide a large enough running of the spectral index to fit the experiment data. A similar result is obtained in . And also since $`ϵ=2\times 10^6<<1`$, $`\eta =0.0036`$ for $`N=40`$ and then $`32ϵ\eta \mu =7.2\times 10^9\mu `$ which can be ignored, we cannot expect the noncommutative effects improve this model to fit the experiment data also.

To summarize, if we introduce the spacetime uncertainty relations into cosmology, the classical evolution of the inflaton and the universe is not different from the commutative case, since the classical inflaton is homogeneous and the universe is spatially isotropic and homogeneous. However this uncertainty relation leads to the nonlocal coupling in time between the background and the fluctuations. The time when the fluctuation mode crosses the Hubble horizon is delayed for a smaller Hubble constant. Thus the fluctuations will be smaller than those in the absence of the uncertainty relation. This suppression implies that the spectral index is larger than the one in the commutative case for a long wave-length. With the expansion of the universe, the cosmic scale becomes larger and larger and the effects of the uncertainty relation become smaller and smaller. So the fluctuations of the ultraviolet modes are not different from the prediction of the standard theory.

The observations of WMAP brings about some more radical suggestions, namely a running spectral index of the scalar perturbation, making a transition from $`n>1`$ on large scales to $`n<1`$ on small scales, and anomalously low quadrupole and octupole. These two results are not anticipated in the usual inflation models. In the last few months, many authors have extensively discussed these results in \[3--5,,13,,16--18\]. The results of the cosmological observations are still awaiting for further confirmation. In particular, the future precise observations, for example measurements of $`C_l^{TE}`$ , may be needed to show whether the anomalously low quadrupole and octupole can be trusted or not. We also expect that the future more precise measurements will provide a testing ground for whether spacetime uncertainty is a viable physical model, and for other new physics in the trans-Planckian regime.

Acknowledgments. This work was supported by a “Hundred People Project” grant of Academia Sinica and an outstanding young investigator award of NSF of China.

References

relax H. V. Peiris et AL., astro-ph/0302225; C. L. Bennett et AL., Astro-ph/0302207; D. N. Spergel et al., astro-ph/0302209. relax P. Mukherjee, Y. Wang, astro-ph/0303211; S. L. Bridle, A. M. Lewis, J. Weller and G. Efstathiou, astro-ph/0302306; G. Efstathiou, astro-ph/0306431; E. Gaztanaga, J. Wagg, T. Multamaki, A. Montana and D. H. Hughes, astro-ph/0304178; M. Kesden, M. Kamionkowski and A. Cooray, astro-ph/0306597. relax Q. G. Huang, Miao Li, JHEP 0306 (2003) 014, hep-th/0304203. relax S. Tsujikawa, R. Maartens, R. Brandenberger, astro-ph/0308169. relax Q. G. Huang, Miao Li, astro-ph/0308458, JCAP 0311 (2003) 001. relax A. Riotto, hep-ph/0210162; V. F. Mukhanov, H. A. Feldman and R. H. Brandenberger, Phys. Rep. 215 (1992) 203; E. D. Stewart and D. H. Lyth, Phys. Lett. B 302 (1993) 171-175; L. Wang, V. F. Mukhanov and P. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Lett. B 414 (1997) 18-27. relax R. H. Brandenberger, J. Martin, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 16 (2001) 999-1006; J. Martin, R. H. Brandenberger, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 123501; J. Martin, R. H. Brandenberger, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 103514; E. Keski-Vakkuri, M. S. Sloth, JCAP 0308 (2003) 001; S. F. Hassan, M. S. Sloth, Nucl. Phys. B 674 (2003) 434-458, hep-th/0204110; P. M. Ho, hep-th/0308103; Giovanni Amelino-Camelia, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 11 (2002) 35-60, gr-qc/0012051. relax U. H. Danielsson, JHEP 0207 (2002) 040, hep-th/0205227; K. Goldstein and D. A. Lowe, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2002) 063502, hep-th/0208167; L. Bergstrom and U. H. Danielsson, JHEP 0212 (2002) 038, hep-th/0211006; R. Easther, B. R. Greene, W. H. Kinney and G. Shiu, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 023518, hep-th/0204129; J. C. Niemeyer, R. Parentani and D. Campo, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 083510, hep-th/0206149; V. Bozza, M. Giovannini and G. Veneziano, JCAP 0305 (2003) 001, hep-th/0302184; C. Armendariz-Picon and E. A. Lim, hep-th/0303103; D. J. H. Chung, A. Notari and A. Riotto, hep-ph/0305074; N. Kaloper, M. Kleban, A. Lawrence, S. Shenker and L. Susskind, JHEP 0211 (2002) 037, hep-th/0209231; J. Martin, R. Brandenberger, hep-th/0305161; C. P. Burgess, J. M. Cline, F. Lemieux and R. Holman, astro-ph/0306236; O. Elgaroy and S. Hannestad, astro-ph/0307011; G. L. Alberghi, R. Casadio and A. Tronconi, gr-qc/0303035. relax G. Veneziano, Europhys. Lett. 2, 199 (1986); D. J. Gross and P. F. Mende, Nucl. Phys. B 303, 407 (1988); D. Amati, M. Ciafaloni and G. Veneziano, Phys. Lett. B 216, 41 (1989); R. Guida, K. Konishi and P. Provero, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 6, 1487 (1991). relax T. Yoneya, in ” Wandering in the Fields ”, eds. K. Kawarabayashi, A. Ukawa ( World Scientific, 1987), p. 419; M. Li and T. Yoneya, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1977) 1219, hep-th/9611072; T. Yoneya, Prog. Theor. Phys. 103, 1081 (2000), hep-th/0004074; J. Polchinski, ” String Theory ” volume 2. relax C-S. Chu, B. R. Greene and G. Shiu, hep-th/0011241; F. Lizzi, G. Mangano, G. Miele and M. Peloso, JHEP 0206 (2002) 049, hep-th/0203099. relax R. Brandenberger, P. M. Ho, Phys. Rev. D 66(2002) 023517, hep-th/0203119. relax D. J. H. Chung, G. Shiu, M. Trodden, astro-ph/0305193. relax S. M. Leach and A. Liddle, astro-ph/0306305. relax R. Kallosh, A. Linde, hep-th/0306058; A. Linde, A. Riotto, Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 1841-1844, hep-ph/9703209. relax M. Kawasaki, M. Yamaguchi, J. Yokoyama, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 023508, hep-ph/0304161; M. Yamaguchi, J. Yokoyama, hep-ph/0307373; B. Wang, Chi-Yong Lin, E. Abdalla, hep-th/0309175. relax B. Feng, M. Li, R. J. Zhang and X. Zhang, astro-ph/0302479; J. E. Lidsey and R. Tavakol, astro-ph/0304113; L. Pogosian, S. -H. Henry Tye, I. Wasserman and M. Wyman, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 023506, hep-th/0304188; E. D. Grezia, G. Esposito, A. Funel, G. Mangano and G. Miele, gr-qc/0305050; K. -I, Izawa, hep-ph/0305286; S. Cremonini, hep-th/0305244; E. Keski-Vakkuri and M. S. Sloth, hep-th/0306070; S. A. Pavluchenko, astro-ph/0309834; G. Dvali and S. Kachru, hep-ph/0310244. relax B. Feng and X. Zhang, astro-ph/0305020; M. Fukuma, Y. Kono and A. Miwa, hep-th/0307029; G. Efstathiou, astro-ph/0303127; C. R. Contaldi, M. Peloso, L. Kofman and A. Linde, astro-ph/0303636; J. M. Cline, R. Crotty and J. Lesgourgues, astro-ph/0304558; S. DeDeo, R. R. Caldwell and P. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 103509; A. D. Oliveira-Costa, M. Tegmark, M. Zaldarriaga and A. Hamilton, astro-ph/0307282; A. Lasenby and C. Doran, astro-ph/0307311; X. J. Bi, B. Feng and X. Zhang, hep-ph/0309195; J. Martin and C. Ringeval, astro-ph/0310382; Yun-Song Piao, B. Feng and X. Zhang, hep-th/0310206. relax O. Dore, G. P. Holder and A. Loeb, astro-ph/0309281.


format: text

text:
# ANNz: estimating photometric redshifts using artificial neural networks

## 1. Introduction

In its most general sense, the term *photometric redshift* refers to a redshift estimated using only medium- or broad-band photometry or imaging. Most commonly, photometric redshifts are determined on the basis of galaxies’ colours in three or more filters (thus giving a very coarse approximation to the spectral energy distribution, hereafter SED), but they could also be based on other properties which can be derived from images, such as the angular size or concentration index. The method has found successful application to deep-field and wide-field surveys, notably the Hubble Deep Field (e.g. Fernández-Soto, Lanzetta, & Yahil, 1999), and the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (Csabai et al., 2003).

The most commonly used approach to photometric redshift estimation is the *template-matching* technique. This requires a set of ‘template’ SEDs covering a range of galaxy types, luminosities and redshifts appropriate to the population for which photometric redshifts are required. For a particular target galaxy, the photometric redshift is chosen to be the redshift of the most closely matching template spectrum; this is usually defined as the template which minimizes the $`\chi ^2`$ between the template and actual magnitudes.

The template spectra are usually derived from a small set of SEDs representing different classes of galaxy at redshift $`z=0`$, which are then manually redshifted to give a discrete sampling along the redshift axis (note that this method does not account for *evolution* with redshift). Commonly used template sets are the Coleman, Wu, & Weedman (CWW; 1980) SEDs which are derived observationally, or those of Bruzual & Charlot (1993), derived from population synthesis models. The template-matching technique owes its popularity to the very few resources required for a basic implementation (i.e. a handful of template SEDs), but the accuracy of the technique strongly depends on the extent to which the template spectra are representative of the target populations: for example, template SEDs derived from observations of low-redshift galaxy populations may be a poor match for populations at higher redshifts.

The chances of success can be improved by increasing the number of templates, or by more carefully matching the templates to the populations being studied. For example, the spectroscopic catalogue of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS; York et al. 2000) could be used to produce a set of templates which are very well representative of the SDSS photometric catalogue (Csabai et al., 2003). However, in situations with such a large amount of prior redshift information about the sample, the template-matching technique is not the best approach: so-called *empirical* methods usually offer greater accuracy, as well as being far more efficient.

In essence, empirical photometric redshift methods aim to derive a parametrization for the redshift as a function of the photometric parameters. The form of this parametrization is deduced through use of a suitably large and representative training set of galaxies for which we have both photometry and a precisely known redshift. A simple example is to express the redshift as a polynomial in the galaxy colours (e.g. Connolly et al. 1995; Sowards-Emmerd et al. 2000). The coefficients in the polynomial are varied to optimize the fit between the predicted and measured redshift. The photometric redshift for the galaxies for which we have no spectroscopy can then be estimated by applying the optimized function to the colours of the target galaxy.

Ideally the training set would be a representative subset of the actual photometric target sample (this has the attractive side-effect of nullifying any systematics in the photometry). However, the training set could also be derived from a set of template spectra or from simulated catalogues (e.g. Vanzella et al. 2003). The photometry for the training set must be for the same filter set and should have the same noise characteristics as that for the target sample. The trained method can usually only be reliably applied to target galaxies within the ranges of redshift and spectral type adequately sampled by the training set.

In this paper we introduce ann*z*, a software package for photometric redshift estimation using Artificial Neural Networks (hereafter ANNs) to parametrize the redshift-photometry relation. It can be shown (e.g. Jones 1990; Blum & Li 1991) that a sufficiently complex ANN is capable of approximating to arbitrary accuracy any continuous functional mapping. ANNs have previously found a number of applications in astronomy, including morphological classification of galaxies (e.g. Lahav et al. 1996; Ball et al. 2003) star/galaxy separation (Bertin & Arnouts, 1996) and object detection (e.g. Andreon et al., 2000). Firth, Lahav, & Somerville (2003) previously demonstrated the feasibility of using ANNs for photometric redshift estimation, and more recently Vanzella et al. (2003) have applied the method to the Hubble Deep Fields.

The layout of this paper is as follows. In §2 Artificial Neural Networks are introduced, and the particular methods used by ann*z* are explained. In §3 ann*z* is applied to the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. The results are compared with rival photometric redshift estimators and various extensions to the basic technique are explained and illustrated. Finally, less ideal conditions are simulated to assess the impact on the accuracy of photometric redshift estimation. In §4 the results are summarised, and prospects for the application of ann*z* discussed.

## 2. Artificial neural networks

ann*z* uses a particular species of ANN known formally as a *multi-layer perceptron* (MLP). A MLP consists of a number of layers of *nodes* (Fig. 1; see e.g. Bishop 1995, and references therein, for background). The first layer contains the inputs, which in our application to photometric redshift estimation are the magnitudes, $`m_i`$, of a galaxy in a number of filters (for ease of notation we arrange these in a vector $`𝐦(m_1,m_2,\mathrm{},m_n)`$). The final layer contains the outputs; we will usually use just one output, the photometric redshift $`z_{\mathrm{phot}}`$, but see §3.2.2 for an example with multiple outputs. Intervening layers are described as *hidden* and there is complete freedom over the number and size of hidden layers used. The nodes in a given layer are connected to all the nodes in adjacent layers. A particular network architecture may be denoted by $`N_{\mathrm{in}}`$:$`N_1`$:$`N_2`$: $`\mathrm{}`$ :$`N_{\mathrm{out}}`$ where $`N_{\mathrm{in}}`$ is the number of input nodes, $`N_1`$ is the number of nodes in the first hidden layer, and so on. For example 9:6:1 takes 9 inputs, has 6 nodes in a single hidden layer and gives a single output.

Each connection carries a weight, $`w_{ij}`$; these comprise the vector of coefficients, $`𝐰`$, which are to be optimized. An *activation function*, $`g_j(u_j)`$, is defined at each node, taking as its argument

$$u_j=\underset{i}{}w_{ij}g_i(u_i),$$
(1)
where the sum is over all nodes $`i`$ sending connections to node $`j`$. The activation functions are typically taken (in analogy to biological neurons) to be sigmoid functions such as $`g_j(u_j)=1/[1+\mathrm{exp}(u_j)]`$, and we follow this approach here. An extra input node – the bias node – is automatically included to allow for additive constants in these functions.

For a particular input vector, the output vector of the network is determined by progressing sequentially through the network layers, from inputs to outputs, calculating the activation of each node (hence this type of neural network is often referred to as a *feed-forward* network).

### 2.1. Network training

Given a suitable training set of galaxies for which we have both photometry, $`𝐦`$, and a spectroscopic redshift, $`z_{\mathrm{spec}}`$, the ANN is trained by minimizing the *cost function*

$$E=\underset{k}{}(z_{\mathrm{phot}}(𝐰,𝐦_k)z_{\mathrm{spec},k})^2,$$
(2)
with respect to the weights, $`𝐰`$, where $`z_{\mathrm{phot}}(𝐰,𝐦_k)`$ is the network output for the given input and weight vectors, and the sum is over the galaxies in the training set. To ensure that the weights are *regularized* (i.e. that they do not become too large), an extra quadratic cost term

$$E_\mathrm{w}=\beta \underset{i,j}{}w_{ij}^2,$$
(3)
is added to equation 2.

ann*z* uses an iterative quasi-Newton method to perform this minimization. Details of the minimization algorithm and regularization may be found in Bishop (1995) and Lahav et al. (1996, Appendices).

After each training iteration, the cost function is also evaluated on a separate *validation* set. After a chosen number of training iterations, training terminates and the final weights chosen for the ANN are those from the iteration at which the cost function is minimal on the *validation* set. This is useful to avoid over-fitting to the training set if the training set is small. The trained network may then be presented with previously unseen input vectors, and the outputs computed.

### 2.2. Photometric noise

In real situations the inputs to the network (e.g. the magnitudes in this case of photometric redshift estimation) will usually have a measurement noise associated with them. We can assess the variance these errors effect in the output using the usual chain-rule approach:

$$\sigma _z^2=\underset{i}{}\left(\frac{z}{m_i}\right)^2\sigma _{m_i}^2,$$
(4)
where the sum is over the network inputs.

Given a trained network, the output is an analytic function of the network weights and the input vector: $`z=z(𝐰,𝐦)`$. Provided the activation functions, $`g_i(u_i)`$, are differentiable, the derivatives $`z/m_i`$ can be obtained through a simple and efficient algorithm (Bishop, 1995, pp.148–150). This method is used by ann*z* to estimate the variance in its photometric redshifts due to the photometric noise.

### 2.3. Network variance

Prior to training, ann*z* randomizes the initial values of the weights. Depending on the particular initialization state used, the training process will usually converge to different local minima of the cost function. A simple possibility is to train a number of networks and select one based on the best performance on the validation set. However, this is wasteful of training effort and, in fact, the sub-optimal networks can be used to improve overall accuracy: the mean of the individual outputs of a group of networks (known as a *committee*) will usually be a more accurate estimate for the true redshift than the outputs of any one committee member in isolation.

Using a committee also allows the uncertainty in the output due to the variance in the network weights to be estimated. For a particular target galaxy the photometric redshift prediction should ideally be robust to different intializations of the weight vector. However, it may be the case that the available photometry or training set does not constrain the redshift very well (even for high signal-to-noise photometry, so the error estimated by the method of §2.2 could be relatively small). These cases are more likely to show a large variance in the output for different initializations of the weight vector, hence using a committee may assist in their identification. ann*z* allows arbitrarily large committees to be used, and estimates the contribution of the network variance to the error in the photometric redshift for each target galaxy.

### 2.4. Using the ANN*z* package

We have made ann*z* available on the WWW at the following address: `http://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/~aac`. Full instructions are provided with the package, but we provide an outline of the procedure here. ann*z* comprises two main programs, annz\_train and annz\_test.

##### 1

When applying ann*z* to any data set for the first time it is strongly recommended that a portion of the available training data be set aside as an evaluation set. This is used as a mock target sample to assess and tune ann*z*’s performance on the data. The evaluation set should therefore be chosen to match the real target sample as closely as possible in terms of its magnitude and colour distributions.

##### 2

The remaining training data should be separated into training and validation sets which are supplied to the annz\_train program along with a description of the required network architecture. This program performs the network training as described in §2.1. The trained network weights are saved to file.

##### 3

Step *2* may be repeated several times using different network initialisations to obtain a committee of trained networks.

##### 4

The annz\_test program can now be used to apply the trained networks to the target data.

Before applying ann*z* to the actual photometric target sample, the whole procedure should be run several times using the evaluation set as the target data, and varying the parameters of the training (e.g. weight decay, training and validation set sizes, number of networks in the committee) so as to optimize the performance.

## 3. Application to SDSS data

The Sloan Digital Sky Survey111Funding for the creation and distribution of the SDSS Archive has been provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the Japanese Monbukagakusho, and the Max Planck Society. The SDSS Web site is http://www.sdss.org/
The SDSS is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium (ARC) for the Participating Institutions. The Participating Institutions are The University of Chicago, Fermilab, the Institute for Advanced Study, the Japan Participation Group, The Johns Hopkins University, Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA), the Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State University, University of Pittsburgh, Princeton University, the United States Naval Observatory, and the University of Washington.  (SDSS; York et al. 2000) combines a large, five-band ($`ugriz`$) imaging survey with a smaller spectroscopic follow-up survey. This is an ideal situation for the application of ann*z* since the spectroscopic survey represents an excellent training set for the imaging survey.

The selection algorithm for the SDSS spectroscopic survey results in two subsets of the data: a main galaxy catalogue and a luminous red galaxy catalogue (LRG; Eisenstein et al., 2001). The main galaxy catalogue is a flux-limited sample ($`r<17.77`$) with a median redshift $`z=0.104`$ (Strauss et al., 2002), while the LRG catalogue is flux- and colour-selected to be a very uniform and approximately volume-limited sample (it is volume limited to $`z0.4`$, but probes out to $`z0.6`$ at lower completion).

### 3.1. Comparison of ANN*z* with other techniques

The SDSS consortium have themselves applied a range of photometric redshift techniques to their commissioning data (Csabai et al., 2003). Table 1 lists the estimation errors they obtained. This commissioning data was made public in the Early Data Release (EDR; Stoughton et al., 2002). In order to allow a direct comparison of the accuracy of ann*z* with the methods used by Csabai et al. (2003) we selected the main galaxy and LRG samples from the EDR. From these $``$30,000 galaxies we randomly selected training, validation and evaluation sets with respective sizes 15,000, 5,000 and 10,000. The network inputs were the dereddened model magnitudes in each of the five filters and the overall architecture was 5:10:10:1. A committee of five such networks was trained on the training and validation sets, then applied to the evaluation set. Figure 2 shows the ann*z* photometric redshift against the spectroscopic value for each galaxy in the evaluation set. The rms deviation between these is $`\sigma _{\mathrm{rms}}=\sqrt{(z_{\mathrm{phot}}z_{\mathrm{spec}})^2}=0.0229`$, which compares well with the results in Table 1. For clarity the estimated errors on the photometric redshifts are not shown in Fig. 2. The results for a randomly-selected subset of 200 galaxies are shown with errorbars in Figure 3. Due to the high quality of the training data in this case, network variance makes only a small contribution and the errors are therefore dominated by the photometric noise.

Hyperz (Bolzonella, Miralles, & Pelló, 2000) is a widely used template-based photometric redshift package. In order to more directly compare ann*z* with the template-matching method, hyperz was applied to the same evaluation set using the CWW template SEDs (Coleman et al., 1980). It is clear from the results in Fig. 4 that not only is the rms dispersion in the photometric redshift considerably greater than that for ann*z*, but there are also systematic deviations in the hyperz results. The SDSS consortium obtained similar accuracies to hyperz in their implementation of the basic template-fitting technique (the results labelled *CWW* and *Bruzual-Charlot* in Table 1 are for the respective template sets). With more sophisticated template-based methods they were able to improve on these errors: the result labelled *Interpolated* was obtained by first tuning the templates using the spectroscopic sample as a training set, then producing a continuous range of templates by interpolating between the tweaked SEDs. However, even “hybrid” methods such as this still do not match the accuracy achieved by the purely empirical methods (in the table these are: *Polynomial*, which uses a second-order polynomial as the fitting function, and *Kd-tree*, in which the training set is partitioned in colour-space and a separate second-order polynomial is fitted in each cell).

### 3.2. Extensions to the basic method

In this section more advanced use of ann*z* is demonstrated. These examples use the LRG and main galaxy data from the SDSS Data Release 1 (DR1; Abazajian et al. 2003), split into training, validation and evaluation sets of respective sizes 50,000, 10,000 and 64,175. For these data the photometric redshift accuracy on the evaluation set when using the same basic method as in §3.1 was $`\sigma _{\mathrm{rms}}=0.0238`$.

#### 3.2.1 Using additional inputs

One of the great advantages of empirical photometric redshift methods is the ease with which we can introduce additional observables into our parametrization of the photometric redshift. This is particularly true for ann*z*; we simply add an extra input to our network architecture for each new parameter we wish to consider. ann*z* treats these new inputs in exactly the same way as it does the galaxy magnitudes.

If the additional inputs contain useful information then the ANN will use this to improve the accuracy of its predictions. However, increasing the number of inputs to the ANN generally leads to a reduction in the *generalization* capabilities of the network (that is, its ability to make predictions for data on which it has not been trained). Thus, the inputs should be chosen carefully as non-informative inputs may actually lead to a worsened ANN performance: due to the increased dimensionality of the input space, larger training sets may be required and there will be an increased likelihood of converging to a local rather than the global minimum.

By way of example, the $`r`$-band 50 and 90 per cent Petrosian flux radii were added as two extra inputs to our ANN. These are the angular radii (concentric with the galaxy brightness distribution) containing the stated fraction of the Petrosian flux, and therefore contain information on the angular size of the galaxy (clearly a strongly distance-dependent property) and the *concentration index* (essentially the steepness of the galaxy brightness profile, which may help break degeneracies in the redshift-colour relationship). Running this extended data set through ann*z* (using a committee of five 7:11:11:1 networks) produced a redshift estimation accuracy of $`\sigma _{\mathrm{rms}}=0.0230`$, an improvement of $``$3 per cent compared to the results based only on the magnitudes. In this example the improvement is small (mainly because the training sample already provided excellent redshift information), but it demonstrates well how straightforwardly the extra information could be included for consideration by ann*z*.

#### 3.2.2 Predicting spectral type

It is equally straightforward to train ann*z* to make predictions for properties other than the redshift. Template-matching photometric redshift techniques have the useful side effect of assigning an estimated spectral type to each galaxy, in addition to estimating the redshift. Firth et al. (2003) demonstrated the use of ANNs to determine spectral types from broad-band photometry.

The spectroscopic catalogue of the SDSS includes a continuous parameter (eClass) indicating spectral type which ranges from approximately $`0.5`$ (early types) to $`1`$ (late types). A 5:10:10:2 network architecture was used to attempt the simultaneous estimation of redshift and eClass from the photometry. The accuracy of the redshift estimation was very slightly poorer, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{rms}}=0.0241`$. The eClass was determined with an rms error of $`\sigma _{\mathrm{rms}}=0.0516`$ (Fig. 5).

### 3.3. More realistic conditions

Our example applications to the SDSS above are somewhat idealistic, since we are training and testing on samples with identical redshift, magnitude and galaxy species distributions. Furthermore, our training samples have thus far been very large. In this section less optimal training sets are used to investigate their impact on the photometric redshift accuracy.

#### 3.3.1 Smaller training sets

The size of training sample needed will be strongly dependent on the range of redshifts and galaxy types in the target sample. The same evaluation set of 64,175 galaxies was submitted to networks trained on randomly selected samples of (i) 2000 galaxies and (ii) 200 galaxies. In both cases these samples were split equally into the training and validation sets. Committees of five 5:10:10:1 networks were used.

The photometric redshift accuracies were respectively (i) $`\sigma _{\mathrm{rms}}=0.0263`$ and (ii) $`\sigma _{\mathrm{rms}}=0.0343`$. In the first case the loss of accuracy is small, while the second case demonstrates well the problems associated with small training sets. The rarer classes of object in the target sample (e.g. here, those at high redshift) feature very sparsely (if at all) in the training set and so the network is unable to sensibly deal with these objects when they appear in the testing data. This leads to an increased number of outliers and, potentially, the introduction of systematic errors.

#### 3.3.2 Biased training sets

For increasingly faint targets, acquiring good spectroscopy becomes increasingly difficult and eventually prohibitively expensive; this problem is the primary motivation for photometric redshifts. In practice then, the available spectroscopic training sample is likely to be somewhat brighter on average than the photometric target sets. However, the major stumbling block for empirical photometric redshift estimation techniques is the difficulty in applying them outside of the regions of parameter space which are well sampled by the training data: while the estimator ought to be able to interpolate *within* the training regime, extrapolating beyond is much more problematic. Ideally we would like to be able to train our estimator on bright galaxies, and then confidently apply it to faint galaxies.

We can improve the ANN’s prospects by careful pre-selection of the data set. The Luminous Red Galaxies are a very uniform sample with respect to spectral types, since these early-type galaxies show little spectral evolution with redshift; this might be expected to make extrapolation a more manageable task. To assess the effectiveness of ann*z* in this situation the LRG sample was split roughly in half by imposing a magnitude cut at $`r=18.5`$. The brighter subsample was further divided at random into training and validation sets of size 5000 and 2000 galaxies respectively. A committee of five 5:10:10:1 networks was trained on this data and then applied to the remaining $`6000`$ LRGs (for which the limiting magnitude is $`r19.6`$).

The results are shown in Fig. 6. The overall dispersion is $`\sigma _{\mathrm{rms}}=0.0327`$ which represents only a slight loss of accuracy when compared with results using a LRG training set selected over all magnitudes ($`\sigma _{\mathrm{rms}}=0.0294`$). Thus, in this particular case, ann*z* is able to extrapolate with some success to around a magnitude fainter than is sampled by the training data.

## 4. Conclusions

In appropriate circumstances, ann*z* is a highly competitive tool for photometric redshift estimation. However, it does rely on the existence of a sufficiently large training set which is representative of the particular populations being studied. The package’s utility therefore lies particularly with large photometric surveys such as the SDSS, GOODS (Dickinson et al., 2001) or the VIRMOS-VLT Deep Survey (Le Fevre et al., 2003), some of which include spectroscopic surveys for subsets of the photometric catalogues (for example, of the eventual 100 million photometric objects which the SDSS expect to catalogue, 1 million will also have spectroscopy, and hence accurate redshifts).

A major problem for empirical photometric redshift estimators is the difficulty in extrapolating to regions of the input parameter space which are not well sampled by the training data. Care should be taken to match the training data to the target sample as closely as possible in terms of the magnitude and colour distributions of each. Use of an evaluation set is essential when applying ann*z* to a new data set: the good performance demonstrated here on the SDSS data cannot be guaranteed on different data sets.

A potential solution to the problem of obtaining training sets when spectroscopy is difficult to obtain is to use simulated catalogues as training data (e.g. Vanzella et al. 2003). Since this requires the use of theoretical SEDs it introduces the disadvantages of the template-based methods, such as the need for precise calibration. However, the ANN approach has advantages over standard template-matching: simulated catalogues can contain galaxies representing a large range of complex star formation histories, dust extinction models and metallicities etc., giving fully Bayesian statistics, and ANNs allow much more flexible weighting to be applied to the filters than is possible with the simple $`\chi ^2`$-weighting of standard template-matching.

We acknowledge help and advice from Stefano Andreon, Andrew Firth, Rachel Somerville and Elizabeth Stanway. The ANN training program is based on code kindly provided by B. D. Ripley. AAC is supported by an Isle of Man Department of Education Postgraduate Studies Grant. OL acknowledges a PPARC Research Senior Fellowship. Comments on the ann*z* package are welcomed at `aac@ast.cam.ac.uk`.


text:
# GRB Afterglows in the Deep Newtonian Phase

## 1 Importance of Newtonian phase

GRBs have been recognized as the most relativistic phenomena in the Universe. In 1997, Wijers et al. (1997) once discussed GRB afterglows of the non-relativistic phase. However, for quite a long period, many authors were obviously beclouded by the powerfulness of GRBs and emission in the non-relativistic phase was generally omitted. In 1998, Huang et al. (1998) stressed the importance of Newtonian phase for the first time. In fact, the Lorentz factor of GRB blastwave evolves as

$$\gamma (200400)E_{51}^{1/8}n_0^{1/8}t_\mathrm{s}^{3/8},$$
(1)
in the ultra-relativistic phase. It is clear that the shock will enter the trans-relativistic phase within several months, and will become non-relativistic soon after that. Fig. 1a illustrates the condition clearly. Today, this point has been realized by more and more authors(Livio & Waxman 2000; Frail et al. 2000; Dermer et al. 2000; Dermer & Humi 2001; Piro et al. 2001; in’t Zand et al. 2001; Panaitescu & Kumar 2003; Zhang & Mészáros 2003).

## 2 Model

A refined generic dynamical model has been proposed by Huang et al. (1999), which is mainly characterized by

$$\frac{d\gamma }{dm}=\frac{\gamma ^21}{M_{\mathrm{ej}}+ϵm+2(1ϵ)\gamma m}.$$
(2)
Fig. 1b shows clearly that this equation is applicable in both the ultra-relativistic phase and the Newtonian phase. For a realistic description of the overall dynamical evolution of isotropic fireballs and collimated jets, we refer to Huang et al. (1999, 2000a, b).

GRB afterglows mainly come from synchrotron emission of shock-accelerated electrons. In the ultra-relativistic case, these electrons are generally assumed to distribute as $`dN_\mathrm{e}^{}/d\gamma _\mathrm{e}\gamma _\mathrm{e}^p`$, with $`\gamma _{\mathrm{e},\mathrm{min}}\xi _\mathrm{e}(\gamma 1)m_\mathrm{p}/m_\mathrm{e}`$. However, we noticed that $`\gamma _{\mathrm{e},\mathrm{min}}`$ will typically be less than 2.0 when $`t`$ a few months. This means most electrons will no longer be ultra-relativistic in the deep Newtonian phase (Huang & Cheng 2003).

We have suggested that the correct distribution function that is also applicable in the deep Newtonian phase should be (Huang & Cheng 2003),

$$\frac{dN_\mathrm{e}^{}}{d\gamma _\mathrm{e}}(\gamma _\mathrm{e}1)^p,(\gamma _{\mathrm{e},\mathrm{min}}\gamma _\mathrm{e}\gamma _{\mathrm{e},\mathrm{max}}).$$
(3)
In the deep Newtonian phase, most electrons are now non-relativistic and their cyclotron radiation cannot be observed in the optical bands. But there are still many relativistic electrons capable of emitting synchrotron radiation. With the help of Eq. (3), optical afterglows can be calculated conveniently by integrating synchrotron emission from those electrons with Lorentz factors above a critical value ($`\gamma _{\mathrm{e},\mathrm{syn}}`$, Huang & Cheng 2003).

## 3 Numerical results

We present our numerical results in Fig 2. Note that the light curves in Fig. 2a steepens slightly in the deep Newtonian phase. It is consistent with the analytical solution of,

$$S_\mathrm{R}\{\begin{array}{cc}t^{(33p)/4},\hfill & (\gamma 1),\hfill \\ t^{(2115p)/10},\hfill & (\beta 1).\hfill \end{array}$$
(4)
The light curve in Fig. 2b flattens in the deep Newtonian phase, which is also consistent with the analytical solution (Livio & Waxman 2000),

$$S_\mathrm{R}\{\begin{array}{cc}t^{(33p)/4},\hfill & (\gamma >1/\theta _0),\hfill \\ t^p,\hfill & (\gamma <1/\theta _0\mathrm{and}\beta 1),\hfill \\ t^{(2115p)/10},\hfill & (\beta 1).\hfill \end{array}$$
(5)
## 4 Implications on orphan afterglows

Orphan afterglows are regarded as a useful tool for measuring the beaming angle of GRBs (Rhoads 1997; Perna & Loeb 1998; Mészáros et al. 1999; Grindlay 1999; Lamb 2000; Totani & Panaitescu 2002; Levinson et al. 2002; Nakar et al. 2002; Granot et al. 2002; Rhoads 2003; Yamazaki et al. 2003). However, Huang et al. (2002) pointed out that there may exist large numbers of failed GRBs, i.e., fireballs with initial Lorentz factors $`1\gamma _0100`$, which fail to produce GRBs but are likely to give birth to X-ray flashes. The simple discovery of orphan afterglows then does not necessarily mean that GRBs are highly collimated.

To judge whether an orphan afterglow comes from a failed GRB or a jetted but off-axis GRB, a $`\mathrm{log}S_\mathrm{R}`$$`\mathrm{log}t`$ light curve will be helpful. However, such a log-log light curve is usually not available for orphan afterglows, since the trigger time is unknown. Fig. 3 illustrates the effect of the uncertainty of the trigger time on the light curve.

To overcome the problem, Huang et al. (2002) suggested that the most important thing is to monitor the orphan for a relatively long period. Obviously, the calculation of afterglows in the deep Newtonian phase is necessary in the studies of orphan afterglows.

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the FANEDD (Project No: 200125), the National 973 Project, and a RGC grant of Hong Kong SAR.

## 5 References

Dermer C.D., Böttcher M., Chiang J., 2000, ApJ, 537, 255
Dermer C.D., Humi M., 2001, ApJ, 556, 479
Frail D., Waxman E., Kulkarni S.R., 2000, ApJ, 537, 191
Granot J., Panaitescu A., Kumar P., Woosley S.E., 2002, ApJ, 570, L61
Grindlay J.E., 1999, ApJ, 510, 710
Huang Y.F., 2000, astro-ph/0008177
Huang Y.F., Cheng K.S., 2003, MNRAS, 341, 263
Huang Y.F., Dai Z.G., Lu T., 1998, A&A, 336, L69
Huang Y.F., Dai Z.G., Lu T., 1999, MNRAS, 309, 513
Huang Y.F., Dai Z.G., Lu T., 2002, MNRAS, 332, 735
Huang Y.F., Gou L.J., Dai Z.G., Lu T., 2000a, ApJ, 543, 90
Huang Y.F., Dai Z.G., Lu T., 2000b, MNRAS, 316, 943
in’t Zand J.J.M. et al., 2001, ApJ, 559, 710
Lamb D.Q., 2000, Phys. Report, 333, 505
Levinson A. et al., 2002, ApJ, 576, 923
Livio M., Waxman E., 2000, ApJ, 538, 187
Mészáros P., Rees M.J., Wijers R., 1999, New Astron., 4, 303
Nakar E., Piran T., Granot J., 2002, ApJ, 579, 699
Panaitescu A., Kumar P., 2003, MNRAS submitted (astro-ph/0308273)
Perna R., Loeb A., 1998, ApJ, 509, L85
Piro L. et al., 2001, ApJ, 558, 442
Rhoads J.E., 1997, ApJ, 487, L1
Rhoads J.E., 2003, ApJ, 591, 1097
Totani T., Panaitescu A., 2002, ApJ, 576, 120
Wijers R., Rees M.J., Mészáros P., 1997, MNRAS, 288, L51
Yamazaki R., Ioka K., Nakamura T., 2003, ApJ, 593, 941
Zhang B., Mészáros P., 2003, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A, in press (astro-ph/0311321)


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

For several decades the solution to the problem of the ancient Babylonian chronology was anchored to the belief in the existence of 56/64 year cycles in the Venus Tablet of Ammisaduqa. That belief had determined the choice of the possible chronologies, reducing them to those known as High, Middle and Low chronologies. The earlier chronological proposals had assumed a link between a fixed lunar calendar and the 56/64 year cycles of the visibility of Venus. One novelty of the astronomical background of the ”New” or ”Ultra-low” chronology advocated in recent years was the understanding that the 56/64 year cycles cannot in fact be accurately recognized in the Venus Tablet (Gasche et al. 1998; Gurzadyan 2000). This implied a definite change in the framework of chronological debate, since the 56/64 year cycles could no longer serve as a basis for argumentation.

We also addressed the possibility of astronomical arguments based on ancient observations, namely, the Enuma Anu Enlil Tablets 20 and 21. The approach depended upon extracting and analysing the astronomically most significant descriptors which interpreters of the tablets agreed had survived in the descriptions of the eclipses. The analysis was based on the data preserved concerning the exit position of the darkening of the lunar disk and the time recorded. These were relatively the most reliable and astronomically most informative since the reality of observations is that, the end of an astronomical event is generally better recorded than its beginning. The chronology of the Third Dynasty of Ur indicated that two lunar eclipses should have been separated by a period of 41-44 years. Therefore the search centered on two eclipses which could be related relatively in time. Along with the necessary gap, the exit positions and the watchtime information determined the choice of the eclipses of 1954 BC and 1912 BC as the most probable candidates for the Ur III events. This strategy, i.e. exploiting the known lunar eclipses from the omina together with the 8-year Venus-cycle from the Venus Tablet, revealed its value in the creation of a new chronology, suggesting that the fall of Babylon corresponded to 1499 BC (rather than 1531 or 1595 as posited by the Low and Middle Chronologies). This Ultra-Low chronology is also compatible with such independent data as pottery sequences, Assyrian king lists, and glyptic evidence.

## 2 Refraction

Here, we continue the discussion of astronomical effects which can influence the interpretation of the omens and even the choice of the chronology. Particularly, we will concentrate on the role of refraction in observations near the horizon. Observations near the horizon are the key ones for the Venus Tablet since the latter includes the dates of the first and last visibilities of the Venus. The consideration of refraction corrections had already led to the refutation of the megalithic lunar observatory idea (Schaefer and Liller 1990), due to the fact that refraction exhibits variations which are more than a magnitude higher than the values adopted previously by archaeoastronomers. Such variations are also difficult to predict based on the atmosphere models in the widely used programs of evaluation of refraction (Garfinkel 1967).

We will therefore inquire whether the role of refraction can be of such profound importance for the Venus Tablet interpretation as it was for megalithic astronomy. The refraction near the horizon $`R_0`$ is defined as

$$R_0=Z90^{}D,$$

where $`Z`$ is the angular distance of the planet or of the upper limb of the Sun from the zenith, $`D`$ is the correcting factor due to the altitude of the observer. The quantitative evaluation of refraction in a given site can be performed by several methods, for example, via the difference in the timing of the actual contact of the planet with the horizon and theoretical tables, or the calculation of the index via the known profile of the temperature using the corresponding formulae, or the software by Schaefer (1989).

The actual observations performed by Schaefer and Liller (1990) at two sites range for R0 from $`0^{}.234`$ to $`1^{}.678`$, with the conclusion of reasonable variation of $`R_0`$ for an unknown site about $`0^{}.64`$.

In March, 2001 we had a brief opportunity to perform observations from the Northern Palace in Babylon, particularly we checked that the apparent horizon in Babylon is close to the mathematical horizon due to the flatness of the site; nor can west-east asymmetry be observed. The altitude of our location was about h=20m above the level of Euphrates, which guarantees the smallness of the factor

$$D=arccos(1/(1+h/R_{Earth})).$$

Hence, one could expect that the estimations of refraction variation by Schaefer and Liller (1990) have to be valid for this site also. Although we did not have occasion for detailed observations, either to trace the systematic effects or to collect considerable statistics, our estimation on the site of $`R_0`$ based on the actual and theoretical timing, about $`0^{}.60^{}.8`$, was in accordance with those of Schaefer and Liller (1990); inaccuracies due to the variation of climatic conditions since the Old Babylonian period would hardly exceed that scatter.

Turning now to the Venus Tablet and the Venus-cycles, we recall that five synodic periods of Venus are almost equal to eight sidereal years, namely, after 8 years the coordinates of Venus are repeated with a shift of almost $`2^{}.5`$ which yields roughly a 4 day shift in the dating. Adopting the value of Schaefer and Liller (1990) as a typical refraction variation, $`0^{}.64`$, we see that it will introduce inaccuracies in the dating of the rise or set of Venus ranging from 1 to 4 or 5 days, i.e. in the dates of the first and last visibilities. This multiple-day inaccuracy is crucial for the link between the Venus Tablet data and the lunar calendar, and hence for chronological purposes.

According to the Omens 1 and 57 of the Venus Tablet, Venus had its last visibility on the 15th day and first visibility on the 18th day of month XI of the first year of Ammisaduqa, i.e. it was invisible for 3 days (Reiner and Pingree 1975). The comparison with modern calculations (Van der Waerden 1974), links this fact with the end of March of 1701 BC, which then, together with the assumed 56/64 periodicity became the basis of the fixing of 1702 BC, 1646 BC resp. 1638 BC, and 1582 BC, as the proposed dates for the first years of Ammisaduqa, i.e. the High, Middle and Low chronologies. As a result, subsequent discussion concentrated on the choice of the most probable chronology among these. Van der Waerden (1974), particularly, found the Short or Low the highest probable, while Huber (1987) advocated the High. However, as mentioned above, the elimination of the chronological anchors of the 56/64 year cycle liberated the search from those bounds. We can also now see further evidence for the absence of the former alleged bounds, due to the intrinsic inaccuracy introduced by refraction. The signature of refraction variations have to survive in the original core of the Venus Tablet, precisely because - in contrast to, say, weather conditions - it will have a more regular character. Moreover, one can consider it as a criterion for revealing the genuine part of the Tablet, i.e. by means of the consideration of refraction corrections on the dates of Venus visibilities given in the Tablet. Dates which fail to satisfy such regular distortions must be identified either as (a) not reflecting actual observations or (b) later addendums. More detailed studies of refraction in Babylonian conditions, along with the deeper analysis of the noise in the Venus Tablet, will be required for that purpose.

## 3 Solar eclipses

Let us also briefly discuss recent attempts to link the reference to a solar eclipse related to the birth of Shamshi-Adad to the various chronological schemes. Michel and Rocher (1997-2000) proposed the eclipse of November 19, 1795 BC. Michel (2002) subsequently proposed the eclipse of June 24, 1833 BC. Warburton (2002) has mentioned the eclipses of April 2, 1847 BC and October 8, 1764 BC.

We will particularly outline the ambiguities arising at such attempts for particular eclipses. Among the eclipses discussed, the solar eclipse of October 8, 1764 BC would have been observed at Mari, as well as in Babylon and in Assur with a close magnitude and a shift in time of only a few minutes, as an annular, non-central eclipse. The peculiarity of this historical eclipse is that the location of the shadow at its maximal phases makes the fact of the appearance of the eclipse in Mari independent of the time difference Delta T= ET-UT, i.e. on the principal uncertainty affecting most ancient eclipses due to the unknown rate of the variation of the Earth’s rotation period determined by tidal and non-tidal effects. For that eclipse only the magnitude of the maximal phase depends on that uncertainty, but not in a crucial way. The solar eclipse of April 2, 1847 BC also, would have been observed both in Mari and Assur, however its appearance, i.e. the magnitude and the duration, is affected more by the uncertainty in Delta T. The total eclipse of June 24, 1833 BC might have been observed in Assur, but only with a magnitude of about 0.4, quite low to be recorded as a presumably major historical event. The latter estimation corresponds to ET-UT=49010.8 sec, and at present there is no way for more precise theoretical estimations. Similarly, the total eclipse of November 19, 1795 BC would have observed as a partial eclipse with relatively higher maximum magnitude in Assur than in Mari (though both lower than those of the eclipse of October 8, 1764 BC), however the absolute values of the magnitudes again remain inaccurate.

## 4 Conclusion

The record of a single solar eclipse of Old Babylonian date, without description of details and/or unambiguous historical links, can hardly act as a reliable anchor. The relevance depends upon the ability to link the eclipse to another anchored astronomical event or to another similarly anchored chronological framework. Given the dates for the life and death of Shamshi-Adad and the various proposed chronologies, one could argue that the eclipse of 1847 BC is compatible with the Middle Chronology, or that of 1795 BC with the Low Chronology, or that of 1764 BC with the Ultra-Low Chronology. That of 1833 BC is not compatible with any other existing chronological framework. However, all of these potentially relevant eclipses suffer from the difficulty of trying to base chronologies on a single eclipse without additional information. The selection of a date cannot alone resolve the chronological debate unless the astronomical data are linked to the ancient sources. Refraction acts as an additional uncertainty, hitherto neglected in the interpretation of the Venus Tablet, in the fitting the data not only to fixed lunar calendar, but also to the moving lunar calendar. The only robust signal which can be extracted from the Venus Tablet, therefore, remains the 8-year cycle as argued in (Gasche et al. 1998; Gurzadyan 2000).

## References

GARFINKEL B., 1967: ”Astronomical Refraction in a Polytropic Atmosphere”, Astronomical Journal 72, 235-254.

Gasche et al. = GASCHE, H., ARMSTRONG, J.A., COLE, S.W., GURZADYAN, V.G., 1998: Dating the Fall of Babylon. A Reappraisal of Second-Millennium Chronology (= MHEM 4), Ghent, Chicago.

GURZADYAN, V.G., 2000: ”On the Astronomical Records and Babylonian Chronology”, Just in Time. Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Ancient Near Eastern Chronology (2nd Millennium BC). Ghent 7-9 July 2000 (= Akkadica 119-120), Bruxelles, 177-186.

HUBER, P.J., 1987: ”Astronomical Evidence for the Long and Against the Middle and Short Chronologies” in ASTR M, P. ( d.), High, Middle or Low ? Acts of an International Colloquium on Absolute Chronology Held at the University of Gothenburg 20th-22nd August 1987. Part 1 (= Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology and Literature. Pocket-book 56), Gothenburg, 5-17.

MICHEL, C., 2002: ”Nouvelles donn es pour la chronologie du IIe mill nair”, NABU 20).

MICHEL, C., ROCHER, P., 1997-2000: ”La chronologie du IIe mill naire revue l’ombre d’une clipse de soleil”, JEOL 35-36, 111-126.

REINER, E., PINGREE, D., 1975: Babylonian Planetary Omens. Part 1: The Venus Tablet of Ammisaduqa (= BiMes 2/1), Malibu.

SCHAEFER, B.E., LILLER, W., 1990: ”Refraction Near the Horizon”, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 102, 796-805.

SCHAEFER, B.E., 1989: ”Refraction by Earth’s Atmosphere”, Sky and Telescope 77, 311-313.

VAN DER WAERDEN, B.L., 1974: Science Awakening II. The Birth of Astronomy, Groningen.

WARBURTON, D.A., 2002: ”Eclipses, Venus-Cycles & Chronology”, Akkadica 123, 108-114.


text:
# On the spin evolution of neutron stars in pre-low-mass X-ray binaries

## 1 Introduction

The increased ability to observe very faint X-ray sources with modern X-ray observatories (XMM-Newton, Chandra) prompted new interest in systems with low accretion rates $`10^{10}`$$`10^{12}`$ g s-1 like isolated neutron stars (NSs) or NSs in detached binaries. Among isolated NSs the fraction of accreting objects is not expected to be high, and accretors are expected to be dim (see Popov et al. 2003 for a review and discussion).

Recently Willems & Kolb (2003) discussed evolution and observational appearance of pre-low-mass X-ray binaries (pre-LMXBs) (see also Belczynski & Taam 2003). Pre-LMXBs by definition represent an evolutionary state prior to LMXB. These systems are detached binaries in which NSs accrete matter from the stellar wind of its companion and have detectable accretion luminosity.

Willems and Kolb found two maxima in the distribution of accretion luminosity of NSs in pre-LMXBs at $`10^{31}`$ and $`10^{28}`$ erg s-1. The second maximum corresponds to very small accretion rates similar to those of isolated NSs accreting the interstellar medium. One can suspect that for such small mass flow a NS can avoid accretion at all. Willems & Kolb (2003) did not explore the evolutionary state of NSs in pre-LMXBs assuming, that all of them can accrete. Here in a very simple model we try to calculate if NSs in pre-LMXBs can reach the stage of accretion, or they are on the propeller or ejector stages (see Lipunov 1992 for detailed description of different stages and Popov et al. 2003 for a short introduction).

## 2 The Model

We assume that the evolution of a NS starts at the stage of ejection, then continues to the propeller stage (including subsonic propeller, see Davies & Pringle 1981) and finally a NS can reach the stage of accretion. Stages are separated by critical periods (see detailed derivation of them in Lipunov 1992). A NS is born as an ejector and starts to slow down. The ejector stage ends when $`P=P_\mathrm{E}`$:

$$P_\mathrm{E}=2\pi \left(\frac{2\mu ^2}{c^4V\dot{M}_{\mathrm{acc}}}\right)^{1/4}10\mu _{30}^{1/2}n^{1/4}V_6^{1/2}\mathrm{s},R_\mathrm{l}<R_\mathrm{G}.$$

Here $`R_\mathrm{l}=cP/2\pi =\mathrm{4.8\hspace{0.17em}10}^9P\mathrm{cm}`$ – light cylinder radius, $`R_\mathrm{G}=2GM_{\mathrm{NS}}/V^2=\mathrm{3.7\hspace{0.17em}10}^{14}V_6^2\mathrm{cm}`$ – radius of accretion, $`\mu _{30}=\mu /10^{30}`$ G cm3 – magnetic moment of a NS, $`V_6=V_{\mathrm{Total}}/10^6\mathrm{cms}^1`$, $`V_{\mathrm{Total}}=\sqrt{V_{\mathrm{wind}}^2+(V_{\mathrm{orb}})^2}`$, $`n`$ – number density of the stellar wind at the NS position. In all formulae here and below we assume NS’s moment of inertia to be equal to $`10^{45}`$ g cm2.

Note that the condition $`R_\mathrm{l}<R_\mathrm{G}`$ is not necessary fulfilled in the binaries we are going to study. We discuss this topic in the Sec. 4.

Subsonic and supersonic propellers are separated by the condition of equality of the co-rotation radius, $`R_{\mathrm{co}}=(GMP^2/4\pi ^2)^{1/3}`$, and radius of the magnetosphere, $`R_\mathrm{A}`$. It corresponds to a critical period:

$$P_{\mathrm{ss}}=2^{5/14}\pi (GM_{\mathrm{NS}})^{5/7}(\mu ^2/\dot{M}_{\mathrm{acc}})^{3/7}$$

$$300\mu _{30}^{6/7}n^{3/7}V_6^{9/7}\mathrm{s},R_\mathrm{A}<R_\mathrm{G}.$$

For some systems the relation $`R_\mathrm{A}<R_\mathrm{G}`$ can be violated. We discuss it below in the Sec. 4.

Accretion starts when $`P=P_{\mathrm{br}}`$ (unless a NS is not on a georotator stage).

$$P_{\mathrm{br}}=\mathrm{6\hspace{0.17em}10}^6\mu _{30}^{16/21}\dot{M}_8^{5/7}m^{4/21}\mathrm{s}.$$
(1)
Here $`\dot{M}_8=\dot{M}_{\mathrm{acc}}/10^8\mathrm{gs}^1`$ – accretion rate, $`m=M_{\mathrm{NS}}/M_{\mathrm{}}`$. We use numerical coefficient $`\mathrm{6\hspace{0.17em}10}^6`$ in eq.(1) following Davies & Pringle (but scaling it to the value of $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{acc}}`$ typical for pre-LMXBs). Ikhsanov (2003) suggested, that it should be a factor 7.5 larger. If it is correct, then the time scale of the subsonic propeller stage is longer. However, this stage is not well understood, and we try to be conservative, and whenever possible choose values to lower timescales of pre-accretion stages.

The output of our calculations consists of two timescales: ejector time scale, $`t_\mathrm{E}`$, and propeller timescale, $`t_\mathrm{P}`$ (see Prokhorov et al. 2002, Lipunov 1992 for more details).

At the ejector stage a NS is spinning down according to magneto-dipole formula (approximatelly $`P=\mathrm{3\hspace{0.17em}10}^4\mu _{30}t_{\mathrm{yrs}}^{1/2}`$). Propeller stage consists of two distinct phases: supersonic propeller and subsonic propeller (see Davies & Pringle 1981 and Ikhsanov 2003), so we define $`t_\mathrm{P}=t_{\mathrm{super}}+t_{\mathrm{sub}}`$. Actually, there should be also an intermediate stage between supersonic and subsonic propeller, when turbulence becomes supersonic above the magnetospheric radius, $`R_\mathrm{A}`$, but inside $`R_\mathrm{G}`$. Spin-down during this intermediate phase should be similar to the subsonic propeller rate, so they are united here. Supersonic propeller is a relatively short stage (normally shorter than each of ejector and propeller stages). For supersonic propeller we choose a very efficient spin-down (see Popov et al. 2000).

Taking all together we can write the following equations for durations of the ejector stage ($`t_\mathrm{E}`$), supersonic ($`t_{\mathrm{super}}`$) and subsonic ($`t_{\mathrm{sub}}`$) propeller stages:

$$t_\mathrm{E}=\mathrm{0.8\hspace{0.17em}10}^9\mu _{30}^1n^{1/2}V_6\mathrm{yrs},$$
(2)
$$t_{\mathrm{super}}=\mathrm{1.3\hspace{0.17em}10}^6\mu _{30}^{8/7}n^{3/7}V_6^{9/7}\mathrm{yrs},$$
(3)
$$t_{\mathrm{sub}}=10^3\mu _{30}^2mP_{\mathrm{br}}\mathrm{yrs}.$$
(4)
Eq. (2) is taken following Popov et al. (2000), eq. (3) – from Shakura (1975), and eq. (4) – from Davies & Pringle (1981).

To calculate orbital velocity, $`V_{\mathrm{orb}}`$, we assume circular orbits and equal masses $`M_{\mathrm{NS}}=M_{}=1.4M_{\mathrm{}}`$ (Willems and Kolb discuss $`M_{\mathrm{}}<M_{}<2M_{\mathrm{}}`$). In our calculations the orbital velocity is always smaller than the stellar wind velocity.

To calculate the accretion rate we use the following equation (see Willems & Kolb 2003):

$$\dot{M}_{\mathrm{acc}}=\frac{3}{16}\left(\frac{R_{}}{a}\right)^2\frac{q^2}{\beta ^4}\left(1+\frac{1+q}{2\beta ^2}\frac{R_{}}{a}\right)^{3/2}\dot{M}_{}.$$

Here $`R_{}`$ – stellar radius, $`q=M_{\mathrm{NS}}/M_{}`$, $`\dot{M}_{}`$ – the rate of stellar wind mass loss. We used several different values for $`\dot{M}_{}`$ and $`V_{\mathrm{wind}}=\beta \sqrt{2GM_{}/R_{}}`$ (see tables, 330 km s-1 corresponds to $`\beta =0.5`$, 660 km s-1 – to $`\beta =1`$ and 1320 km s-1 – to $`\beta =2`$). Note, that actual accretion rate can be lower than this value due to heating, magnetospheric and hydrodynamical effects (see discussion in Perna et al. 2003 and Popov et al. 2003).

To derive many equations in this paper we will use the following relation which parametrises the accretion rate by $`n`$ and $`V_{\mathrm{Total}}`$:

$$\dot{M}_{\mathrm{acc}}=\mathrm{7\hspace{0.17em}10}^{11}nV_6^3\mathrm{gs}^1.$$

$`n=\rho m_\mathrm{p}^1`$, $`\rho =\dot{M}_{}/(4\pi a^2V_{\mathrm{wind}})`$ – density of matter, $`m_\mathrm{p}`$ – proton mass.

For $`\dot{M}_{}`$ on the main sequence stage Willems & Kolb (2003) used the value $`10^{13}`$ $`M_{\mathrm{}}`$ yr-1. We follow them in that choice and also check higher value $`10^{12}`$ $`M_{\mathrm{}}`$ yr-1, which was also discussed by this authors. Definitely for smaller $`\dot{M}_{}`$ all timescales ($`t_\mathrm{E}`$, $`t_{\mathrm{super}}`$, $`t_{\mathrm{sub}}`$) become longer, for higher $`\dot{M}_{}`$ – shorter.

Mass loss can be increased significantly when a donor star leaves the main sequence, but we do not follow these stages in our analysis. Also we do not discuss the possibility of a formation of a binary system due to capturing of a companion (in that case the picture can be completely different, as far as an old evolved NS can be captured).

We want to note once again that our model is a very simple one as far as we want just to illustrate the importance of the effects of magnetorotational evolution of NSs in pre-LMXBs. Discussion on possible complifications can be found below in the Sec. 4.

## 3 Results

Our main results are presented in the figures. Each point represents a model with particular set of parameters (see tables). The three lines correspond to the total time of evolution prior to the stage of accretion ($`t_{\mathrm{Total}}=t_\mathrm{E}+t_\mathrm{P}`$) equal to 1, 5 and 10 billion years.

Note, that $`t_\mathrm{P}t_\mathrm{E}^a`$, $`a1.3`$. This happens because of the following reason. In eq. (2) $`t_\mathrm{E}\mu ^1n^{1/2}`$ and $`V_{\mathrm{Total}}`$ is not varied significantly in our modeling as far as $`V_{\mathrm{wind}}>V_{\mathrm{orb}}`$. If we substitute eq. (1) into eq. (4), then we have $`t_{\mathrm{sub}}\mu ^{26/21}n^{5/7}`$. (Remember, that in $`t_\mathrm{P}`$ we have $`t_{\mathrm{super}}<<t_{\mathrm{sub}}`$ \[see tables\].) As we see we have nearly $`t_\mathrm{P}t_\mathrm{E}^{1.3}`$.

Vertical line in the figures corresponds to $`t_\mathrm{E}=\mathrm{2.3\hspace{0.17em}10}^9`$ yrs – the main sequence lifetime of a star with $`M_{}=1.4M_{\mathrm{}}`$. (Roughly, the main sequence lifetime can be estimated as: $`\mathrm{log}t_{\mathrm{MS}}=9.93.8\mathrm{log}(M_{}/M_{\mathrm{}})+\mathrm{log}^2(M_{}/M_{\mathrm{}})`$, see for example Lipunov 1992.) If for some reason the propeller stage appears to be very short (for example, subsonic propeller is not operating) then NSs to the left of this line can accrete.

As one can see most of models from table 1 have $`t_{\mathrm{Total}}>\mathrm{2.3\hspace{0.17em}10}^9`$ yrs. It means that these NSs can not accrete. Accretion is more probable onto strongly magnetized NSs as far as their spin-down timescales are shorter on both ejector and propeller stages. To allow accretion with a rate $`10^{10}`$ g s-1 a NS with $`B10^{12}`$ G should be slowed down to very long periods $`10^5`$ s which takes a long time.

On the second figure we present models with $`t_{\mathrm{Total}}<\mathrm{5\hspace{0.17em}10}^9`$ yrs. These are systems with strongly magnetized NSs or/and with shorter orbital periods or/and with smaller wind velocity.

## 4 Discussion and conclusions

Our calculations were made for constant magnetic fields. As it was shown by Colpi et al. (1998), Livio et al. (1998), Popov & Prokhorov (2000) realistic parameters of decay in the case of isolated NSs normally make the propeller stage longer. Parameters of the magneto-rotational evolution of isolated NSs and NSs in pre-LMXBs are very similar (for example, there is no huge accretion to speed-up the process of field decay), so the results for the former ones can be applied to the latter (and vice versa). In that sense our estimates of $`t_\mathrm{E}`$ and $`t_\mathrm{P}`$ for $`B=const`$ should be lower limits if the field is decaying. For decayed fields most of NSs in pre-LMXBs can be expected to stay on the propeller stage. For high $`V_{\mathrm{wind}}`$ a NS instead of accretion can stay on the so-called georotator stage (Lipunov 1992). It happens for $`V_{\mathrm{Total}}470\mu _{30}^{1/5}n^{1/10}\mathrm{kms}^1`$ (see Popov et al. 2003).

In this short illustrative note we neglect several effects, which can change characteristic periods and radii or/and spin–down rates. Most of the time scales used above can be considered just as rough estimates (see discussion in Popov et al. 2003). However, we believe that qualitatively our results are valid as far as our main aim is only to illustrate importance of the effects of magneto-rotational evolution of NSs in pre-LMXBs.

Let us briefly discuss possible violations of the relations $`R_\mathrm{l}<R_\mathrm{G},R_\mathrm{A}<R_\mathrm{G}`$ (for details see Lipunov 1992). We start with the relation between $`R_\mathrm{l}`$ and $`R_\mathrm{G}`$. For high magnetic fields $`P_\mathrm{E}`$ becomes large. It necesserely means large $`R_\mathrm{l}`$. On the other hand $`V_{\mathrm{wind}}`$ is also large, which means small $`R_\mathrm{G}`$. For systems 3, 6, 8, 9 in the table 1 and for system 9 in the table 2 $`R_\mathrm{l}>R_\mathrm{G}`$ at the moment of transition from ejector to propeller. In that case equations for $`P_\mathrm{E}`$ and $`t_\mathrm{E}`$ are the following:

$$P_{\mathrm{E2}}180\mu _{30}^{1/3}n^{1/3}V_6^{1/3}\mathrm{s},$$
(5)
$$t_{\mathrm{E2}}\mathrm{3.5\hspace{0.17em}10}^{11}\mu _{30}^{4/3}n^{1/3}V_6^{2/3}\mathrm{yrs}.$$
(6)
For large velocities and magnetic fields normally $`t_\mathrm{E}>t_{\mathrm{E2}}`$, so the stage of ejection is shorter for $`R_\mathrm{l}>R_\mathrm{G}`$ (compare eqs. 2, 6). For our investigation it is crucial to know if this effect is strong enough to let the system to cross the line $`t_\mathrm{E}=\mathrm{2.3\hspace{0.17em}10}^9`$ yrs on the figures. Only for the model 9 from the table 1 it is so (in the figures all data point are plotted for $`R_\mathrm{l}<R_\mathrm{G}`$). For all others this shortening of $`t_\mathrm{E}`$ is not strong enough to change the conclusions made in this short note. Also we have to mention that if a system leaves the ejector stage after the violation $`R_\mathrm{l}<R_\mathrm{G}`$ then the accretion rate is expected to be very low.

Now let us discuss the relation between $`R_\mathrm{A}`$ and $`R_\mathrm{G}`$. Often $`R_\mathrm{A}<R_\mathrm{G}`$ (for example it is so for all observed bright X-ray binaries, for isolated NSs which can become accretors etc.). For systems with highly magnetized NSs and large wind velocities it is possible, that $`R_\mathrm{A}>R_\mathrm{G}`$. It is important for example to estimate the critical period $`P_{\mathrm{ss}}`$ and $`t_{\mathrm{sub}},t_{\mathrm{super}}`$. Alfven radius is determined by the following equations:

$$R_\mathrm{A}=\left(\frac{\mu ^2}{2\dot{M}_{\mathrm{acc}}\sqrt{GM_{\mathrm{NS}}}}\right)^{2/7}$$

$$\mathrm{8.2\hspace{0.17em}10}^9\mu _{30}^{4/7}n^{2/7}V_6^{6/7}\mathrm{cm},R_\mathrm{A}<R_\mathrm{G},$$

$$R_{\mathrm{A2}}=\left(\frac{4\mu ^2G^2M_{\mathrm{NS}}^2}{\dot{M}_{\mathrm{acc}}V^5}\right)^{1/6}$$

$$\mathrm{7.6\hspace{0.17em}10}^{11}\mu _{30}^{1/3}n^{1/6}V_6^{1/3}\mathrm{cm},R_{\mathrm{A2}}>R_\mathrm{G}.$$

In the later case the equation for the critical period is:

$$P_{\mathrm{ss2}}=2\pi \left(\frac{2\mu ^2}{\dot{M}_{\mathrm{acc}}V^5}\right)^{1/4}\mathrm{2.5\hspace{0.17em}10}^6\mu _{30}^{1/2}n^{1/4}V_6^{1/2}\mathrm{s}.$$

For systems with $`R_\mathrm{A}>R_\mathrm{G}`$ durations of the propeller substages are different from eqs.(3, 4). These systems later appear not as normal accretors but as georotators and so we do not take this effect into account. Study of georotators in binaries is a separate (and probably promissing) subject. At that stage there is a possibility of a particular ”magnetic accretion”, see Rutledge (2003).

In the discussed type of binaries there are possibilities for episodes of accretion. As far as low-mass stars can have episodes of eruptive activity it is possible that NSs can accrete matter due to fluctuations in the stellar wind. Post main sequence stages are relatively short, so no significant spin-down is expected. There is just a quick increase of the accretion rate: increase of $`\dot{M}_{}`$ and decrease of $`V_{\mathrm{wind}}`$ both work to increase $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{acc}}`$. Non-accreting systems, which are situated in $`t_\mathrm{E}`$-$`t_\mathrm{P}`$-plane close to the line $`t_\mathrm{E}=\mathrm{2.3\hspace{0.17em}10}^9`$ yrs (like model 1,5,9 in the fig. 1) can start to accrete if $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{acc}}`$ is increased when the star leaves the main sequence but the system is still detached. Systems with highly eccentric orbits can have episodes of accretion in periastron.

We conclude, that as in the case of isolated NSs many NSs in pre-LMXBs (at least on the main sequence) are not at the stage of stable wind accretion. Accretion is possible when the donor is on the stage of main sequence if a NS is strongly magnetized or in close binaries.

###### Acknowledgements.

The author thanks Roberto Turolla and Aldo Treves for discussions and detailed comments on the text and the unknown referee for helpful criticism.