text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In contrast to the quark sector, the present state-of-the-art neutrino experiments  demand large or even maximal mixings. An attempt to unification requires new physics beyond the standard model (SM). For instance, in SO(10) models, one can relate the spectra of both the charged and neutral fermions in agreement with known phenomenology . Broadly, most efforts to explain flavour physics are either (i) strongly model dependent (see e.g. ) or (ii) require initial assumptions on the neutrino spectra (see e.g. ). Another option is to explore the framework of dimensional deconstruction , where the effects of higher dimensions originate as a pure dynamical effect in the infrared limit. In this context, it is interesting to study the impact on the Yukawa sector of a model . Here, we recover the salient aspects of neutrino phenomenology, namely large mixings and light masses, from a completely massless four dimensional theory at some large scale. The lightness of the neutrino masses are an outcome of deconstruction which projects out the dimension-five seesaw operator . This scenario contains massless Nambu-Goldstone modes corresponding to a symmetry which can be associated with large mixings. All of these basic features can be easily understood by considering a simple two-site lattice model.

## 2 The two-site model

Consider a $`G=G_{SM}\times SU(m)_1\times SU(m)_2`$ gauge theory for deconstructed extra dimensions, where $`G_{SM}`$ denotes the SM gauge group. The left-handed lepton doublets are denoted by $`\mathrm{}_\alpha =(\nu _{\alpha L},e_{\alpha L})^T`$ and the corresponding right-handed charged leptons by $`E_\alpha `$, where the Greek indices denote the usual flavors $`(e,\mu \text{and}\tau )`$. We will assume that $`\mathrm{}_\alpha `$ and $`E_\alpha `$ transform as $`\overline{m}_1`$ under $`SU(m)_1`$ and $`\mathrm{}_\beta `$ and $`E_\beta `$ transform as $`m_2`$ under $`SU(m)_2`$. We introduce the right-handed neutrinos $`N_\alpha `$ and $`N_\beta `$, where $`N_\alpha `$ transforms as $`\overline{m}_1`$ under $`SU(m)_1`$ while $`N_\beta `$ transforms as $`m_2`$ under $`SU(m)_2`$. The scalar link field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ connects as the bi-fundamental representation $`(m_1,\overline{m}_2)`$ the neighboring $`SU(m)_i`$ groups. This field theory is summarized by the “moose” or “quiver”  diagram in Fig. 1.

The most general renormalizable Yukawa interactions for the neutrinos are then given by

$$_Y=Y_\alpha \overline{\mathrm{}_\alpha }\stackrel{~}{H}N_\alpha +Y_\beta \overline{\mathrm{}_\beta }\stackrel{~}{H}N_\beta +f\overline{N_\alpha ^c}\mathrm{\Phi }N_\beta +\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}..$$
(1)
The kinetic term for the link field is $`(D_\mu \mathrm{\Phi })^{}D^\mu \mathrm{\Phi };D_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }=(_\mu ig_1A_{1\mu }^aT_a+ig_2A_{2\mu }^aT_a)\mathrm{\Phi }`$, where $`A_{i\mu }^a`$ $`(i=1,2)`$ are the gauge fields and $`T_a`$ represent the group generators along with the dimensionless gauge couplings, $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$. In (1), $`\stackrel{~}{H}=i\sigma ^2H^{}`$ is the charge conjugated Higgs doublet and $`Y_\alpha ,Y_\beta ,f`$ are complex Yukawa couplings of $`𝒪(1)`$. Note that in (1) the bare Dirac and Majorana mass terms of the types $`\overline{N_\alpha ^c}N_\beta `$ and $`\overline{N_\alpha ^c}N_\alpha `$ or $`\overline{N_\beta ^c}N_\beta `$ are forbidden by invariance under the group $`G`$. For a suitable scalar potential the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ can acquire a VEV such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }=M_x`$, thereby generating a mass for the scalar field. $`M_x`$ is identified with the deconstruction scale at which the $`SU(m)_1\times SU(m)_2`$ symmetry is broken down to the diagonal $`SU(m)`$, thereby eating one adjoint Nambu-Goldstone multiplet in the process. The corresponding lattice spacing is $`a1/M_x`$. After spontaneous symmetry breaking, the light effective Majorana mass matrix takes the form

$$_\nu =Y_\alpha Y_\beta \frac{ϵ^2}{fM_x}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(2)
Here, $`ϵH10^2\mathrm{GeV}`$ is the electroweak scale and $`M_x10^{15}\mathrm{GeV}`$ is the seesaw scale. This simple analysis leads to our main observations. It is not difficult to identify the mass matrix in (2) as the one which arises from the usual dimension-five operator of the type $`\nu \nu HH`$. In other words, for length scales $`ra1/M_x`$, the renormalizable and gauge invariant Yukawa interaction in (1) reproduces the effects of the fifth dimension. Whereas, for $`ra`$, we retain a completely renormalizable four-dimensional interaction as defined in (1). In addition, contrary to the conventional seesaw operator, dimensional deconstruction can naturally lead to maximal mixings between the two active neutrino flavors, $`\nu _\alpha `$ and $`\nu _\beta `$. This is realized due to the $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ field which mediates a symmetry between each of the fermions $`(N_{\alpha ,\beta })`$. This symmetry can be interpreted as an interaction which conserves a charge $`L_\alpha L_\beta `$ which is reflected in the resulting mass matrix for $`N_{\alpha ,\beta }`$. This is retained after symmetry breaking as there exists the diagonal subgroup $`SU(m)`$ which respects the symmetry such that the $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ field would transform as $`(m,\overline{m})`$. In the gauge sector, this unbroken symmetry corresponds to the presence of a zero mode and is $`A_\mu ^{a(0)}(g_2A_{1\mu }^a+g_1A_{2\mu }^a)`$. The Dirac sector of the model remains diagonal due to the nature of this construction while maximal mixings are introduced from the heavy Majorana sector of the resulting seesaw operator. Equivalently, the qualitative features of this system are not altered even if one allows for both the fermions and scalars to be link variables. We use this freedom when we discuss the phenomenology for this mechanism in section 3.

Next, we would like to understand how generic is the interaction described in (2). To answer this question, we consider three possible modifications to Fig. 1 which are summarised in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 as cases (i)-(iii).

Clearly, in case (i), only higher-order terms of the form $`\overline{\mathrm{}_\alpha }\stackrel{~}{H}\mathrm{\Phi }N_\beta `$ are possible, but a priori, there is no information on mixings or masses. In case (ii), we have an interaction $`Y_\alpha \overline{\mathrm{}_\alpha }\stackrel{~}{H}N_\alpha +Y_\beta \overline{\mathrm{}_\beta }\stackrel{~}{H}N_\alpha +f\overline{N_\alpha ^c}\mathrm{\Phi }N_\beta `$ which leads to $`_\nu =0`$. Interestingly, for case (iii), depending on the representation of the fermionic fields, we can envisage two distinct interactions. The first one is of the type $`Y_\alpha \overline{\mathrm{}_\beta }\stackrel{~}{H}N_\alpha +Y_\beta \overline{\mathrm{}_\beta }\stackrel{~}{H}N_\beta `$ which gives Dirac masses with arbitrary masses and mixings. The second possibility is of the type $`Y_\alpha \overline{\mathrm{}_\beta }\stackrel{~}{H}N_\alpha +fM_x\overline{N_\alpha ^c}N_\beta `$ which again results in $`_\nu =0`$. Note that in the latter case, gauge invariance allows for a bare mass term which is in contrast to (1). From the different cases (i)-(iii) we observe a restrictive pattern for the allowed fermion masses; this is unlike (1) which ensures a renormalizable mass term for all of the resulting Dirac and Majorana fermions. This maximises the allowed Yukawa interactions and leads also to maximal mixings. In a realistic framework, the basic structure of (1) is always expected to be borne out as we shall demonstrate.

## 3 A realistic model

We examine a generalization to the case of a moose mesh . Consider a $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{i=1}^4SU(m)_i`$ gauge theory containing five scalar link variables $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$ $`(i=1,\mathrm{},5)`$ and the fermion fields $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha `$ is the set $`\{\mathrm{}_\alpha ,E_\alpha ,N_\alpha \}`$. This model is depicted in Fig. 4 and up to mass dimension six, we have

$`_Y`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}Y_\alpha \overline{\mathrm{}_\alpha }\stackrel{~}{H}N_\alpha +f_1\overline{N_e^c}\mathrm{\Phi }_2^{}N_\mu +f_2\overline{N_e^c}\mathrm{\Phi }_1N_\tau +{\displaystyle \frac{f_3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\overline{N_\mu ^c}(\mathrm{\Phi }_3)^2N_\mu `$ (3)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{f_4}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\overline{N_\tau ^c}(\mathrm{\Phi }_4^{})^2N_\tau +{\displaystyle \frac{f_5}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\overline{N_\mu ^c}\mathrm{\Phi }_3\mathrm{\Phi }_4^{}N_\tau +{\displaystyle \frac{f_6}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\overline{N_e^c}(\mathrm{\Phi }_5^{})^2N_e+\mathrm{}+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.,`$
where the dots represent non-renormalizable interactions of the leptons with effective scalar operators involving only the fields $`H`$ and/or $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$. In (3), $`Y_\alpha `$ and $`f_i`$ $`(i=1,\mathrm{},6)`$ are complex couplings and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\mathrm{\Phi }_i)`$ denotes the scale such that, for lattice spacing $`a1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, the theory is fully renormalizable. After symmetry breaking and giving universal VEVs $`\mathrm{\Phi }_iM_x`$, the Dirac and Majorana mass matrices take the form

$$_D=ϵ\left(\begin{array}{ccc}Y_e& \lambda ^2& \lambda ^2\\ \lambda ^2& Y_\mu & \lambda ^2\\ \lambda ^2& \lambda ^2& Y_\tau \end{array}\right),_R=M_x\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda f_6& f_1& f_2\\ f_1& \lambda f_3& \lambda f_5\\ f_2& \lambda f_5& \lambda f_4\end{array}\right),\lambda =\frac{M_x}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}<1,$$
(4)
where only the order of magnitude of the terms with mass dimension $`6`$ has been indicated. We note that in (4), as a consequence of the lattice geometry $`_D`$ is nearly diagonal while the Majorana sector carries the $`\overline{L}=L_eL_\mu L_\tau `$ symmetry which is softly broken by a nonzero $`\lambda `$. In the limit $`\lambda 0`$, both (1) and (3) reproduce similar features. Neglecting the small mixing in the Dirac sector111The contributions from the charged lepton sector are identical to $`M_D`$ and can be neglected. and setting $`Y_\mu Y_\tau `$ alongwith real couplings, $`f_1=f_2=f_3=f_4=f_5f`$, the effective light neutrino mass matrix comes to a familiar pattern  with

$$_\nu \frac{Y_\mu ϵ^2}{4f^3M_x}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 2\lambda Y_ef^2& 2\lambda Y_ef^2\\ 2\lambda Y_ef^2& Y_\mu f(\lambda ^2f_6f)& Y_\mu f(\lambda ^2f_6+f)\\ 2\lambda Y_ef^2& Y_\mu f(\lambda ^2f_6+f)& Y_\mu f(\lambda ^2f_6f)\end{array}\right)+𝒪(\lambda ^3).$$
(5)
The relations between the solar and atmospheric mass-squared differences, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{atm}}^2`$ respectively, and the solar mixing angle $`\theta _{12}`$ are

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{atm}}^2}}`$ $``$ $`2\sqrt{2}\lambda ^3\left({\displaystyle \frac{Y_e}{Y_\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{f_6}{f}}\right)+𝒪(\lambda ^4),`$
$`\mathrm{tan}\theta _{12}`$ $``$ $`1{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2\sqrt{2}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{Y_\mu }{Y_e}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_6}{f}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^2}{16}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{Y_\mu }{Y_e}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_6}{f}}\right)^2+𝒪(\lambda ^4).`$ (6)
For illustration, we choose $`\lambda =0.22`$, $`Y_e=f`$, $`Y_\mu =f_6`$, $`Y_\mu /Y_e=2.5`$ and we obtain an atmospheric mixing angle $`\theta _{23}\pi /4`$ and a reactor mixing angle close to zero, i.e., $`U_{e3}0`$. Such an allowed choice minimally alters the basic features of a renormalizable Lagrangian, leading to a soft breaking of the $`\overline{L}`$ symmetry. Furthermore, taking $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{atm}}^2=2.5\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$, we obtain a normal neutrino mass hierarchy with $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^27.5\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$ and $`\theta _{12}32^{}`$ which is in agreement with the MSW LMA-I solution . For the above values, the system predicts an effective neutrinoless double beta decay mass, $`m_{ee}10^3\mathrm{eV}`$.

We briefly outline two different variations to (3).

Let us first consider a $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{i=1}^3SU(3)_i`$ product gauge group with a representation content as specified in Fig. 5 where the arrows define as before the field transformations. We use the Froggatt-Nielsen mechanism  to break the $`\overline{L}`$ symmetry by putting on each of the sites $`SU(3)_1`$ and $`SU(3)_2`$ two extra SM singlet fields; these are two scalars $`(\varphi _e,\varphi _\mu )`$ and two heavy Dirac fermion fields $`(F_e,F_\mu )`$. To retain soft-breaking of the $`\overline{L}`$ symmetry, we need to impose a $`Z_4`$ symmetry $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha \mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha `$, $`\varphi _\alpha \varphi _\alpha `$, $`F_{\alpha L}\mathrm{i}F_{\alpha L}`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_3\mathrm{\Phi }_3`$, where $`\alpha =e,\mu `$. We assume that the $`SU(3)_1`$ and $`SU(3)_2`$ symmetries are broken by bare Majorana mass terms $`\overline{F_{\alpha R}^c}M_\alpha F_{\alpha R}`$ at some scale $`M_\alpha M_x`$. When the fields $`\varphi _\alpha `$ aquire the VEVs $`\varphi _\alpha =M_x`$ the heavy right-handed fermions $`F_{\alpha R}`$ are integrated out leading to the dimension-five terms $`\lambda f_3M_x\overline{N_\mu ^c}N_\mu `$ and $`\lambda f_6M_x\overline{N_e^c}N_e`$, where $`\lambda M_x/M_\alpha `$. The right-handed neutrino mass matrix is given by $`_R`$ in (4) with $`f_4,f_50`$ and hence one obtains the relations as in (3). Alternatively, if we perform the identification, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_20`$ and $`SU(3)_iU(1)_i`$ and the fields $`(\mathrm{}_\alpha ,N_\alpha )`$ $`(\alpha =e,\mu ,\tau )`$ are assigned appropriate $`U(1)`$ charges, it is not difficult to derive a model leading to (4).

In conclusion, we argue that upon deconstruction (i) a light neutrino mass is a general result and (ii) maximal mixing is inevitable due to the specific Yukawa interactions in (1). In the limit of a large lattice site model (of size $`N1`$), one can draw comparisons to the genuine extra-dimensional scenarios (of radius $`R`$) with the identifications to the five-dimensional gauge couplings, $`g_5(y_i)\sqrt{R/N}g_i`$, where $`y_i`$ denotes the fifth coordinate. In this analysis, we have limited ourselves to describing the physics of a periodic lattice where it is sufficient to examine the periodic interval of any one Brillouin zone. In general, we predict a small $`U_{e3}`$ which depends on the pattern of the underlying $`\overline{L}`$ symmetry breaking.

## Acknowledgments

K.B. was supported by the “Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technologie, Bonn” under contract no. 05HT1PEA9. M.L. and G.S by the “Sonderforschungsbereich 375 für Astroteilchenphysik der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft” (M.L. and G.S.). K.B. thanks the physics department (TUM) for hospitality during completion of this work.


format: text

text:
# Limits on thermal conduction in galaxy clusters

## 1 Introduction

For some time it has been believed that the strong excess of X-ray emission in the cores of many galaxy clusters represents a solid evidence of radiatively cooling gas which is in near hydrostatic equilibrium with a surrounding medium. As the cooling time of the core gas is rather short, a gentle inward flow of gas should replenish the cooled gas presumably condensing out. Fabian (1994) contains a review of this picture.

This conventional paradigm of cooling flows turned out to be grossly inconsistent with recent X-ray data on the central regions in galaxy clusters from XMM-Newton and Chandra (Tamura at al. 2001; Fabian et al. 2001; Böhringer et al. 2001; Peterson et al. 2002), which failed to find multi-temperature gas one expects in a cooling flow model. One of the possible explanations, — extra heating via thermal conduction flux — was proposed by Narayan & Medvedev (2001). This mechanism requires sufficiently high values of the thermal conductivity, close to the Spitzer limit. Thus, magnetic fields permeating hot cluster gas may not suppress conductivity by a large factor. Theoretical considerations and numerical simulations of conduction in a turbulent gas agree that the suppression factor, $`f=\kappa /\kappa _{Sp}`$, is near unity, typically around 1/3 (Narayan & Medvedev 2001; Malyshkin & Kulsrud 2001; Cho et al. 2003). There is an indication that intermittency in turbulence (if present) may decrease $`f`$ by an additional factor of few to ten (Chandran & Maron 2003).

The idea of conduction-heated intra-cluster gas has been tested using some available cluster data (Voigt at al. 2002; Fabian et al. 2002; Zakamska & Narayan 2003). The inferred suppression factor was typically in the range $`1<f<1/10`$, being consistent with the theoretical predictions. In the present paper we perform similar analysis using a much larger sample of cluster data.

## 2 The sample

We use a sample of 165 Abell clusters (Abell 1958; Abell et al. 1989) with archived ASCA observations. The clusters cover a wide range of richnesses ($`0\mathrm{R}3`$), redshifts ($`0.02z0.41`$) and bolometric luminosities ($`10^{43}`$ to $`10^{46}`$ ergs/s for $`H_0=50`$ km/s/Mpc). The data were analyzed in semi-automated fashion and the cluster temperatures were determined via spectral fits to the available ASCA data. We fit the spectra with a single temperature MEKAL plasma model using XSPEC. All four ASCA instruments (2 GIS + 2 SIS) were fit simultaneously with the model parameters for each fit constrained to be the same, except for the relative normalizations and the hydrogen column density. The column density was fixed at the Galactic value for the GIS since it is relatively insensitive below 1 keV but left as a free parameter for the SIS since radiation damage to the CCDs manifests itself as spuriously high column densities. For more information about the sample and the analysis, see Horner et al. (2003).

The temperatures were determined for broad-band (0.8-10.0 keV) fluxes measured within a specified extraction radius. The extraction radius was an estimate of the level at which the count rate rises to about 5 sigma above the background level. Note that this is the GIS extraction radius. The SIS extraction radius was chosen to be 0.72 times the GIS radius since the SIS has a smaller PSF and empirical tests showed that this resulted in a similar signal-to-noise ratio for the SIS data. A comparison between our temperatures and those obtained from independent measurements and presented in the literature shows excellent agreement. The temperatures derived for such clusters are generally agree very well with other isothermal fits, usually within about 10%. X-ray luminosities are bolometric, i.e., they are estimated from the best fit model over the 0.01-50 keV range. The luminosities that we derive for the ASCA catalog agree well with luminosities from ROSAT survey like the BCS or NORAS with a scatter about the mean of about 25%111 There is actually an offset with respect to older Einstein or EXOSAT luminosities. The ASCA luminosities are systematically higher by about 20%. This is probably due to some calibration issue. .

This cluster sample cannot be considered complete. The use of ASCA data puts some physical constraints on the types of clusters we have analyzed. For instance, the sensitivity of ASCA was such that no clusters with T $`<`$ 5 keV are expected above $`z0.4`$. Likewise, the size of the ASCA observing area prohibits the measurement of large (and usually high temperature) clusters that are nearby. At best, this sample can be considered a heterogeneous sampling of the Abell catalog.

As with any cluster sample, the Abell cluster catalog suffers from projection effects and incompletenesses. The purity of are sample is not an issue for this analysis, since all of our clusters have Xray and galaxy redshift information (to ensure the reality of the systems). In terms of completeness, we have decided to use only Abell clusters as their redshift and richness distributions are well studied in the literature (Peacock & West 1992; Postman et al. 1992; Ebeling et al. 1996; Jones & Forman 1999; Miller et al. 1999, 2002, among others).

We use the following cluster parameters available: the cluster redshift, $`z`$, the bolometric X-ray luminosity, $`L_X`$, the temperature with 90% confidence limits, $`T,T_{lo},T_{hi}`$, and the extraction radius used for the spectrum fits, $`R_{ext}`$.

## 3 The method

To estimate thermal conduction we use the following method: We assume that the cluster medium is static and is in thermal equilibrium, that is cooling of gas via Bremsstrahlung emission is compensated by the conductive flux of heat from outer parts of the cluster:

$$L(<r)=4\pi r^2\kappa (dT/dr),$$
(1)
where $`L(<r)`$ is the total luminosity within radius $`r`$. We assume that $`LL_X`$. For this sample we have no measurements of the temperature gradients. Therefore we use $`R_{ext}`$ to estimate it. The gradient scale may be larger or comparable to $`R_{ext}`$. This implies an upper limit to the temperature gradient, and accordingly a lower limit on the conductivity. Indeed, the larger the conduction, the closer the cluster to being isothermal and, hence, the smaller the temperature gradient. We use the following approximation to estimate the temperature gradient:

$$dT/dr0.4T/R_{ext}.$$
(2)
Here the factor 0.4 is an empirical factor obtained from clusters with high spatial resolution to ensure reasonable fits to the observed temperature gradients (Fabian 1994; Fabian et al. 2002). Note that since the numerical factor is smaller than unity, we obtain a more conservative lower limit on the effective $`\kappa `$. A similar technique has been used by Voigt at al. (2002) and Fabian et al. (2002) for smaller samples. Note that an upper limit to the temperature gradient will imply a lower limit on the thermal conductivity necessary to balance the energy losses due to the X-ray emission.

Finally, we calculate the suppression coefficient as

$$f=\kappa /\kappa _{Sp}$$
(3)
obtained from eqs. (1) and (2), and $`\kappa _{Sp}=8.2\times 10^{20}T_1^{5/2}`$ erg/cm/s/keV is the Spitzer thermal conductivity, and $`T_1=T/(10\mathrm{keV})`$. We estimated error-bars using $`T_{lo}`$ and $`T_{hi}`$ in place of $`T`$.

## 4 Results

The result is shown in Fig. 1. Suppression coefficients greater than unity would mean that thermal conduction is insufficient to balance radiative cooling; this sets a global constraint: $`f<1`$. In a static gas (i.e., without strong turbulent motions) with tangled magnetic fields, the constraint is more stringent, $`f1/3`$ (Narayan & Medvedev 2001). Apparently, not a single cluster violates the first one and only three violate the second one at the statistically significant level ($`>90`$%). The values of $`f`$ are clustered in the range $`10^2<f<0.4`$.

We examined the distribution of $`f`$ against $`z`$. We found a mild redshift dependence of $`f`$ over the range $`0<z<0.41`$, the slope is $`0.17\pm 0.03`$. This result may however be affected by several biases and selection effects. More distant clusters in the sample (i) tend to have larger $`R_{ext}`$, (ii) are more luminous, (iii) hence, have higher gas temperatures. The lack of strong $`z`$-dependence in our inferred values of $`f`$ may be interpreted as additional support for the hypothesis that cool cores are heated by thermal conductivity.

## 5 Discussion

Our lower limits on thermal conduction suppression are of course dependent on the assumption that the X-ray emission in the core is approximately balanced by heat flow from the surrounding medium. Of course, other explanations are possible, such as localized heating by compact objects in the cluster core. Therefore our results should be interpreted as a feasibility study for the thermal conductivity scenario.

Recently, numerical simulations with cooling (Motl et al. 2003) have been presented which suggest “cool cores” form in a complex, time-dependent merger process and do not require a steady flow. This view is further supported by Loken, Melott, & Miller (1999), who found that such objects lie preferentially in clusters with a high density supercluster environment, specifically having other clusters in high proximity. Such an environment would be expected to enhance the merger rate. Motl et al. (2003) comment that their cluster temperature profiles are too steep (the cores too cool). Since the cooling timescale is considerably shorter than the time between major mergers, thermal conductivity should help resolve this discrepancy.

It has been believed (based on results from ordered magnetic fields) that thermal conductivity is too weak to prevent runaway cooling and formation of bright, small-scale X-ray emitting regions in the cores of galaxy clusters. The proposal of Narayan & Medvedev (2001), for enhanced thermal conductivity in the presence of tangled magnetic fields is consistent with the large data set studied here. The data do not seem to require heat transport by strong turbulent motion, reconnection and turbulent resistivity, as proposed by Chandran & Maron (2003). The inclusion of thermal conductivity in numerical simulations of galaxy cluster formation should be given a high priority in order to realistically model the inner regions.

## 6 Acknowledgments

ALM wishes to acknowledge the support of the National Science Foundation through grant AST0070702.


text:
# Drift plasma instability near the edge as the origin of the microwave-induced zero-resistance states

## Abstract

We discuss a possible origin of the recently discovered microwave-induced zero-resistance states in very-high-electron-mobility two-dimensional electron systems. We suggest a scenario, in which two mechanisms, bulk and edge, contribute to the measured photosignal. Zero-resistance states are assumed to be due to a drift plasma instability, developing near the edge of the system under the microwave radiation. The proposed scheme qualitatively agrees with the microwave power, temperature, frequency, magnetic field, and mobility dependencies of the measured photosignal.

Recently discovered microwave induced zero-resistance states Mani et al. (2002); Zudov et al. (2003) in a two-dimensional (2D) electron system in moderate magnetic fields ($`B<0.5`$ T) attracted immediate attention of several theoretical groups Phillips ; Durst et al. ; Andreev et al. ; Anderson and Brinkman ; Shrivastava ; Shi and Xie ; Koulakov and Raikh ; Volkov  (precursory observations of negative microwave photoresistance have been reported in Zudov et al. (2001); Ye et al. (2001); Mani et al. (29 July - 2 August 2002)). A number of interesting scenarios were suggested, in which the effect is treated in terms of the influence of microwaves on the scattering probability of the electrons in the direction and opposite to the direction of a weak $`dc`$ field, which results in microwave-stimulated negative local longitudinal conductivity $`\sigma _{xx}`$ Durst et al. ; Anderson and Brinkman ; Shi and Xie  (a similar mechanism of the negative photoconductivity was suggested in Ryzhii (1970); Ryzhii et al. (1986)). It was then shown that the negative local $`\sigma _{xx}`$ should macroscopically manifest itself as the zero-resistance state Andreev et al. . Among other proposed mechanisms is the formation of charge-density waves Phillips ; Shrivastava  and the influence of the nonparabolicity of the electronic spectrum Koulakov and Raikh .

All the theoretical scenarios, proposed so far, imply the bulk of the sample as the origin of the zero-photoresistance effect. The aim of this Letter is to point to another possible scenario, based on the development of a microwave induced drift instability near the edge of the sample. We present a simple physical picture, which is in a qualitative agreement with the temperature, microwave power, magnetic field, frequency, and mobility dependencies of the microwave photo-resistance, experimentally observed in Refs. Mani et al. (2002); Zudov et al. (2003).

Before starting to discuss the essense of the proposed scenario, we briefly outline the most important and the most puzzling features of the experiments Mani et al. (2002); Zudov et al. (2003). First, the effect was observed under the conditions

$$\mathrm{}/\tau kT\mathrm{}\omega _c\mathrm{}\omega E_F,$$
(1)
which imply that it has, probably, a quasiclassical nature. Here, $`\tau `$ is the momentum relaxation time (estimated from the mobility), $`\omega `$ and $`\omega _c`$ are the microwave and the cyclotron frequencies, $`T`$ is the temperature, and $`E_F`$ is the Fermi energy. The Coulomb-interaction parameter $`r_s=(\pi n_sa_B^2)^{1/2}`$ ($`n_s`$ is the electron density, $`a_B`$ is the effective Bohr radius) was about 1 in the experiment, suggesting that electron-electron correlations should not play a decisive role in the effect. Second, the effect was seen in the longitudinal resistance $`R_{xx}`$ and no indications on the influence of microwaves on the Hall resistance was observed. Third, and the most intriguing feature of the new experiments Mani et al. (2002); Zudov et al. (2003) is that their results are in a strong contradiction with another, very similar experiment Vasiliadou et al. (1993), performed about 10 years ago. In Ref. Vasiliadou et al. (1993), the microwave photoresponse of Hall bars was studied under conditions, very similar to those of the new experiments. The density of electrons, the range of frequencies and magnetic fields, as well as the size of the samples in the new and the old experiments are very close. The only difference is the mobility, which is by more than one order of magnitude higher in the new samples. The photoresistance signal in the old samples Vasiliadou et al. (1993) had the form of a weak peak centered at the magnetoplasmon frequency $`\omega _{mp}=(\omega _p^2+\omega _c^2)^{1/2}`$, where the plasma frequency $`\omega _pw^{1/2}`$ was determined by the width of the sample $`w`$ and lay in the 60–100 GHz range. This is in a very good agreement with an intuitive physical picture of the variation of the photoresponse due to a heating of electrons at the absorption frequency. Contrary to that, in the new experiments huge oscillations, governed exclusively by the cyclotron frequency were observed. Although the estimated magnetoplasmon frequency in the new samples lies in the same frequency range, no indications of the magnetoplasmon resonance were seen in Mani et al. (2002); Zudov et al. (2003). Therefore, a theory should, ideally, explain, why the magnetoplasmon shift of the cyclotron frequency was seen in the old, relatively “dirty” samples, and why it is not seen in the new, extremely-high-quality samples. Theoretical scenarios proposed so far Phillips ; Durst et al. ; Andreev et al. ; Anderson and Brinkman ; Shrivastava ; Shi and Xie ; Koulakov and Raikh ; Ryzhii (1970); Ryzhii et al. (1986) assumed that the sample is infinite and did not address this puzzle at all.

The dramatic difference between results of the old and new experiments suggests that a principally different mechanism should be responsible for the impressive features discovered in Refs. Mani et al. (2002); Zudov et al. (2003). Therefore, we propose a scheme, in which two mechanisms contribute to the experimentally measured voltage between longitudinal contacts. The first contribution has a bulk origin and was seen in the old samples. The second contribution originates at the edge of the sample. We show that microwaves may induce a drift plasma instability near the edge of the sample. Intervals of frequencies and magnetic fields, in which the instability exists, coincide with those, where the zero-resistance states and minima in $`R_{xx}`$ were observed. The instability may thus be responsible for the zero-resistance states. Its existence requires low scattering rates, and therefore was not seen in the old, relatively “dirty” samples.

First, we consider the bulk effect. Under the conditions (1) the response of an infinite 2D electron gas on the microwave radiation can be described by the classical Boltzmann equation neglecting the scattering integral. The solution for the electron distribution function, valid for an arbitrarily strong microwave field, is $`f_{}(𝐩,t)=f_0(𝐩m𝐕(t))`$, where $`f_0`$ is the Fermi-Dirac distribution function, the velocity

$$V_x(t)+iV_y(t)=\frac{i(e/m)E_{}^{ext}}{\omega \omega _c+i\mathrm{\Gamma }}e^{i\omega t}$$
(2)
is the solution of classical equations of motion for one electron, $`E_{}^{ext}`$ is the amplitude of the incident electromagnetic wave, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=2\pi n_se^2/mc\sqrt{\kappa }`$ is the radiative decay Mikhailov (1996), which gives the dominant contribution to the cyclotron resonance linewidth in very-high-electron-mobility samples, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }1/\tau `$. Here $`n_s`$ and $`m`$ are the density and the effective mass of 2D electrons, $`c`$ is the velocity of light, and $`\kappa `$ is the dielectric constant of the surrounding medium. In (2) we have assumed that the incident wave is circularly polarised.

Averaging the function $`f_{}(𝐩,t)`$ over the period of the microwave field, one gets the time-independent, microwave-modified electron distribution function

$$F_0(E,W)=\frac{1}{\pi }_0^\pi \frac{dx}{1+\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{E\mu +W+2\sqrt{WE}\mathrm{cos}x}{kT}\right]},$$
(3)
shown in Figure 1. The function $`F_0`$ can be used for estimating the microwave-induced corrections to the $`dc`$ conductivity $`\sigma _{xx}`$, which appear due to the energy dependence of the momentum-relaxation time $`\tau (E)`$ not  (the Hall conductivity $`\sigma _{xy}`$ is not influenced by microwaves at $`\omega _c\tau 1`$). The microwave-related energy parameter

$$W=\frac{e^2|E_{}^{ext}|^2}{2m[(\omega \omega _c)^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2]}$$
(4)
is proportional to the microwave power and has the form of a peak centered at the cyclotron frequency. Taking into account finite dimensions of the sample \[the field $`E_{}^{ext}`$ should be screened by the dielectric function of a finite-size sample, $`E_{}^{ext}E_{}^{ext}/ϵ(q,\omega )`$, $`q\pi /w`$\] shifts the resonance position to the magnetoplasmon frequency. Estimates of the magnitude of the microwave electric field shows that the energy $`W`$ is always much smaller than the relevant bulk energy scale $`E_F`$, $`WE_F`$. These qualitative arguments show that the bulk contribution to the photoconductivity should have the form of a weak peak at the magnetoplasmon frequency $`\omega _{mp}`$. This is in obvious agreement with intuitive expectations, as well as with the results of the old experiment Vasiliadou et al. (1993).

Now, consider what happens near the edge of the system under the microwave radiation. The same estimates show that the energy $`W`$ can be comparable with or even substantially larger than the temperature,

$$WkT.$$
(5)
Hence, the microwave radiation can significantly change the distribution of electrons over the quantum states near the edge of the system. Accepting the standard picture of Landau levels bent up near the edge and crossing the Fermi level, we see that microwaves lead to the appearence of electrons near the edge which occupy higher energy levels and hence are running along the boundary (skipping orbits) with an increased (compared to the dark situation) velocity. Thus we have a situation, typical for the development of drift plasma instabilities. In the bulk of the system we have a 2D plasma, characterized by the dielectric function $`ϵ(q,\omega )`$, and near the edge an “electron beam”, which can move with respect to the bulk, with a sufficiently large velocity $`V`$ induced by the microwave radiation. The spectrum of plasma waves in this situation is described by the dispersion equation of the type Lifshitz and Pitaevskii (1981)

$$\omega qV=\pm \frac{\omega _p^{}}{\sqrt{ϵ(q,\omega )}},$$
(6)
and under certain conditions, namely if $`ϵ(q,\omega )<0`$, may have unstable solutions (here $`\omega _p^{}`$ is the plasma frequency in the beam). The dielectric function of a 2D system in a magnetic field has the form $`ϵ(q,\omega )=1+2\pi i\sigma _{xx}(q,\omega )q/\omega \kappa `$, where the wave-vector and frequency dependent conductivity is Chiu and Quinn (1974)

$$\sigma _{xx}(q,\omega )=\frac{n_se^2}{m\omega _c}\frac{\omega +i\gamma }{i\omega _c}\left(\frac{2}{qr_c}\right)^2\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{k^2J_k^2(qr_c)}{k^2[(\omega +i\gamma )/\omega _c]^2},$$
(7)
and $`r_c`$ is the cyclotron radius. As seen from here, the dielectric function is negative in certain frequency intervals above multiples of the cyclotron frequency (instability regions). Resolving Eq. (6) with respect to $`q`$ at fixed (real) frequency $`\omega `$ and at $`\omega _p^{}\omega _p`$, we get the imaginary part of the wave vector $`q^{\prime \prime }(\omega )`$, which characterizes the growth rate of the instability. Figure 2 shows $`q^{\prime \prime }(\omega )`$, as a function of magnetic field $`B`$, for parameters typical for the experiment Mani et al. (2002), and for a reasonable value of the drift velocity $`V`$ of 0.8 times the Fermi velocity $`V_F`$. The areas, where the growth rate $`q^{\prime \prime }(\omega )`$ is positive, correspond to the instability regions. Comparing Figure 2 with Figure 3a from Ref. Mani et al. (2002) one sees that these instability regions very well correspond to the intervals of $`B`$ where the zero-resistance states (and the negative photoresistance at higher cyclotron harmonics) were experimentally observed (a similar picture plotted for Figure 1 from Ref. Zudov et al. (2003) gave the same result). A remarkable feature of the instability plot of Figure 2 is that the “strength” of the instabilities decreases rather slowly with the harmonics number, in a qualitative agreement with experiment. Besides, two different curves in Figure 2, drawn for different scattering rates, show that the higher electron mobility favours the development of the instability, which also agrees with Mani et al. (2002); Zudov et al. (2003). Finally, we notice that the number of electrons, running along the edge with the microwave-increased velocity, is proportional to $`\mathrm{exp}(W/T)`$, which qualitatively agrees with the power and temperature dependencies of the photosignal at the minima of $`R_{xx}`$.

Thus, the microwave power, temperature, magnetic field, frequency and scattering rate dependencies of the growth rate of the instability qualitatively agree with such dependencies of the experimentally measured photoresistance $`R_{xx}`$. A detailed mechanism of how the instability is related with $`R_{xx}`$ is still to be understood, but it is clear that under the unstable conditions the distribution of electric current and potential in the sample will be very complicated, and the instability may macroscopically manifest itself via a vanishing potential difference between certain pairs of contacts. Ideas along these lines have been recently discussed in Ref. Andreev et al. . Although a more comprehensive analysis is certainly required to support the ideas of this work, we believe that the presented arguments catch the main physics of the phenomena, in particular, the fact that the instability exists in the intervals where $`ϵ(q,\omega )<0`$. Instabilities of the considered type are well known in a three-dimensional gaseous plasma, see e.g. Mikhailovskii (1992); Horton (1999). The effects observed in Refs. Mani et al. (2002); Zudov et al. (2003) is probably a manifestation of such an instability in the solid-state two-dimensional plasma.

The $`j\pm 1/4`$ law for the positions of the photoresistance minima/maxima Mani et al. (2002) can be qualitatively understood if to assume that the instability regions occupy approximately one half of the interval between $`\omega =j\omega _c`$ and $`\omega =(j+1)\omega _c`$ (see Figure 2). Then, in the regime of weak instability, when the photoresponse has a sinusoidal form, it should have the observed phase. On the other hand, if the instability regions occupy less or more than one half of the interval $`[j\omega _c,(j+1)\omega _c]`$ (this may depend on parameters of the system), the photoresistance minima/maxima should not necessarily be at the $`\omega /\omega _c=j\pm 1/4`$ positions. The $`j\pm 1/4`$ observation Mani et al. (2002), as follows from our approach, is thus not necessarily a universal law. Notice that the $`R_{xx}`$ maxima were seen at $`\omega /\omega _c=j1/4`$, according to Mani et al. (2002), and at $`\omega /\omega _c=j`$, according to Zudov et al. (2003).

The proposed scenario also allows us to resolve the paradox related with the non-manifestation of the magnetoplasmon resonance with $`q1/w`$ in the new experiments: while in Vasiliadou et al. (1993) the 2D plasmon wave vector was determined by the width of the sample $`w`$, in the new experiments the relevant wavevectors are fixed by the instability conditions (6), and the weak “bulk” magnetoplasmon resonance is not seen on the background of huge oscillations due to the edge contribution. Notice, that the weak bulk-magnetoplasmon resonance which was seen in Zudov et al. (2001) along with relatively weak sinusoidal oscillations of $`R_{xx}`$ (in moderate-mobility samples), supports our idea of two, bulk and edge, contributions to the measured photosignal.

To summarize, we have shown that the recently observed microwave-induced zero-resistance states and effects of the negative photoresistance in very-high-electron mobility 2D electron systems in strong ($`\omega _c\tau 1`$) magnetic fields can be related to the development of a drift plasma instability, arising near the edge of the system under the microwave radiation. This interpretation also allowed us to consistently explain the dramatic difference between results of the old Vasiliadou et al. (1993) and new Mani et al. (2002); Zudov et al. (2003) experiments, which were performed under the seemingly similar conditions. Our results are in a qualitative agreement with the microwave power, temperature, magnetic field, frequency, and electron-mobility dependencies observed in the experiments.

I would like to thank Ramesh Mani, Jurgen Smet, and Klaus von Klitzing for an opportunity to see experimental data prior to publication, and for numerous discussions of details of the experiment Mani et al. (2002). I am especially thankful to Klaus von Klitzing for critical discussions of different versions of the theory. I also thank Igor Kukushkin and Sergey Dorozhkin for very useful discussions of details of other microwave experiments, as well as Rolf Gerhardts for reading the manuscript and useful comments.


text:
# Edge reconstructions in fractional quantum Hall systems

## I Introduction

The physics of two-dimensional (2D) electron systems in a strong magnetic field has lead to the exploration and understanding of various strongly correlated states in the fractional quantum Hall regime.  The fractional quantum Hall effects (FQHE) at filling factors $`\nu =1/(2p+1)`$ were explained by Laughlin, using trial wavefunctions which lead to incompressible states with quasiparticle excitations having fractional charge $`e^{}=e/(2p+1)`$. Jain obtained a unified description of all principal filling factors $`\nu =p/(2ps+1)`$ by using the composite fermion picture, where each electron is dressed with $`2s`$ units of statistical flux and forms a composite fermion (CF).  At mean-field level, the composite fermions experience a uniform reduced magnetic field, $`B^{}=B/(2sp+1)`$, and fill an integer number $`p`$ of CF Landau levels. This approach, based on trial wavefunctions and numerical diagonalization, has been very successful in describing various properties of fractional quantum Hall states; however, it does not allow calculation of dynamic response functions and suffers from the inevitable finite-system-size limitations. These limitations are overcome by an approach based on the Chern-Simons transformation, which attaches flux to the electrons via a Chern-Simons gauge field, effectively transforming the fermions into (hard-core) bosons or fermions depending on the number of flux quanta attached.  This approach does start with a microscopic Hamiltonian, but after the Chern-Simon transformation it does not retain the lowest Landau level limit, and does not distinguish clearly between the high-energy (cyclotron) and the low-energy (guiding center) degrees of freedom. Most recently, the extended Hamiltonian theory developed by Shankar and Murthy  has been successful in obtaining a unified picture of the FQHE at various fillings. This approach has the advantage that it starts with a microscopic Hamiltonian, permits analytical calculations in the thermodynamic limit, and it also retains the lowest-Landau-level limit. This approach has also been applied successfully to study states with broken translational symmetries, such as a Wigner crystal of composite fermions.

In an ideal quantum Hall system, the bulk is uniformly incompressible and gapless excitations are available only at the edges leading to transport only at the edges as well. In experimental samples ubiquitous disorder leads to islands of incompressible quantum Hall fluid embedded in a compressible electronic background; the global Hall quantization occurs when these incompressible islands percolate. In either case, the transport occurs only the edges of incompressible regions.  The dynamics of the fractional quantum Hall edge states was first studied by Wen  who proposed that the edges behave effectively as Chiral Luttinger liquids (CLL). Later it was discovered that, due to electrostatic and exchange considerations, the edge of a fractional quantum Hall fluid divides into strips of compressible and incompressible fluids.  In particular, the edge of a quantum Hall fluid at filling factor $`\nu =1`$ undergoes a reconstruction, where a strip of charge about a magnetic-length wide separates away from the bulk as the confining potential created by the neutralizing background charge density softens.  The reconstructed edge consists of three counter-propagating channels; its dynamics are qualitatively different from those of a single CLL edge. This led to work on fractional edge-states using the composite fermion picture  and the effective-field-theory models which included the effects of disorder, multiple edge channels, and long-ranged interactions.  The first microscopic calculation of the edge-states at filling factor $`\nu =1/3`$, using exact diagonalization, showed that the edge of the Laughlin liquid also undergoes a reconstruction as the confining potential is softened.  However, there are various issues which neither the effective-field-theory models nor exact diagonalization methods address conclusively. For example, the number of edge modes present at various filling factors and their dependence on the system parameters is not clear. The question of whether long-ranged interactions are necessary for edge reconstruction is not clearly resolved, although the necessity has been implicitly assumed in the literature.  The phenomenological models of the edge-states provide various concrete predictions for the $`I(V)`$ characteristics of tunneling into the edge of the sample.  These predictions depend on the number and the nature of the edge channels. Recent experiments on tunneling into the edge of a fractional quantum Hall fluid show discrepancies between the theoretical predictions and the observed characteristics.  It is, therefore, crucial to have a microscopic understanding of the number of edge modes in the fractional quantum Hall systems at various filling factors and their dependence on the system parameters.

In this paper, we use the extended Hamiltonian theory to the study nature of edge states, and address some of the unresolved issues. This method is applicable at any principal filling factor and provides a tool for the microscopic analysis of the edge states. The outline of the paper is as follows: In the next section, we recall the essentials of the Hamiltonian theory and present the Hartree Fock mean-field approximation for the edge states. Section III contains results for the edge reconstructions at filling factors $`\nu =1/3`$, and $`\nu =2/5,3/7`$ for various system parameters, such as temperature, nature of interactions, and the range of the confining potential. Edge reconstruction is a purely quantum phenomenon. In a classical system, the electron density profile near the edge would follow the background charge profile to minimize the Hartree (electrostatic) energy cost. However, in a quantum treatment, the electron density deviates from the background charge density to take advantage of the exchange interactions, which lower the total energy of the system. The ratio of the effective exchange term and the electrostatic (Hartree) term, and consequently the possibility of edge reconstruction, naturally depends on the microscopic interaction. In this section we also explore this dependence by using different functional forms for the microscopic interaction. Section IV contains concluding remarks.

## II Hamiltonian Theory and Mean-field Approximations

We start this section with the basics of the extended Hamiltonian theory.  The fundamental difficulty in developing analytical approximations starting from a microscopic Hamiltonian for the FQHE is that there are more single-particle states available in the lowest Landau level than there are electrons. In the Extended Hamiltonian theory, this macroscopic degeneracy is removed by introducing extra degrees of freedom called the pseudo-vortices, which leads to an enlargement of the Hilbert space of the problem. This enlarged space is the space of CFs (composites of electrons and pseudo-vortices) in a reduced magnetic field $`B^{}=B/(2p+1)`$, where the composite fermions fill the first $`p`$ CF Landau levels. Thus the Hartree-Fock state of composite fermions with the first $`p`$ Landau levels filled provides a non-degenerate starting point for further systematic approximations, thereby eliminating the degeneracy problem. However, since we have introduced extra degrees of freedom, namely the pseudo-vortices, we then impose an equal number of constraints so that the dimensions of the physical Hilbert space are maintained. To this end we introduce two sets of guiding-center coordinates

$`\stackrel{}{R_e}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{r}{\displaystyle \frac{l^2}{1+c}}\widehat{z}\times \stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Pi }},`$ (1)
$`\stackrel{}{R_v}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{r}+{\displaystyle \frac{l^2}{c(1+c)}}\widehat{z}\times \stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Pi }},`$ (2)
where $`c^2=2\nu `$, and $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Pi }}`$ are the position and velocity operators of the composite fermions. The electron guiding center $`\stackrel{}{R_e}`$ and the pseudo-vortex guiding center $`\stackrel{}{R_v}`$ commute with each other and satisfy the algebra

$`[R_{e\alpha },R_{e\beta }]=il^2ϵ_{\alpha \beta },`$ (3)
$`[R_{v\alpha },R_{v\beta }]=+i{\displaystyle \frac{l^2}{c^2}}ϵ_{\alpha \beta }.`$ (4)
Thus, the electron guiding-center coordinates satisfy the magnetic algebra with charge $`e`$, whereas the pseudo-vortex guiding-center algebra represents an object with charge $`+ec^2`$. To calculate the matrix elements of these operators in the composite-fermions basis, we use the single-particle states of the composite fermions in the reduced effective field $`B^{}`$. In the Landau gauge, a single-particle state $`|nX`$ is characterized by the Landau level index $`n`$ and the guiding-center coordinate $`X`$. In the real-space representation, the (un-normalized) single-particle wavefunction is

$$\stackrel{}{r}|nX=e^{iXy/l^^2}e^{(xX)^2/2l^^2}H_n\left[(xX)/l^{}\right],$$
(5)
where $`H_n(x)`$ are the Hermite polynomials and $`l^{}=\sqrt{h/eB^{}}`$ is the magnetic length in the reduced field $`B^{}`$ seen by the composite fermions. Using this basis, it is straightforward to express the electron density $`\rho _e`$ and the pseudo-vortex density $`\rho _v`$ operators in second-quantized notation:

$`\rho _e(\stackrel{}{q})`$ $`=`$ $`e^{q^2l^^2(1c^2)/4}{\displaystyle \underset{n_i,X_i}{}}d_{n_1X_1}^{}d_{n_2X_2}n_1X_1|e^{i\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{R_e}}|n_2X_2,`$ (6)
$`\rho _v(\stackrel{}{q})`$ $`=`$ $`e^{q^2l^^2(1c^2)/4}{\displaystyle \underset{n_i,X_i}{}}d_{n_1X_1}^{}d_{n_2X_2}n_1X_1|e^{i\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{R_v}}|n_2X_2.`$ (7)
Here $`d_{nX}^{}`$ ($`d_{nX}`$) are the CF creation (annihilation) operators and the exponential prefactor $`e^{q^2l^^2(1c^2)/4}`$ arises from projecting the cyclotron coordinate on to the lowest Landau level.  We have now expressed the electron density operators, and hence the microscopic Hamiltonian for the fractional quantum Hall systems, in terms of composite fermion operators. Therefore the original problem of interacting electrons in the fractional quantum Hall regime is converted into a problem of composite fermions in the integer quantum Hall regime where various many-body approximations are applicable. This mapping, of course, must by accompanied by the constraint that the pseudo-vortex degrees of freedom are not physical; in other words, physics remains unchanged if $`\rho _e\rho _e+\alpha \rho _v`$ for arbitrary $`\alpha `$. This constraint is, by definition, trivially satisfied in the exact solution of the problem. For a uniform case, it was shown by Murthy  that the (time-dependent) Hartree-Fock approximation respects this constraint. Therefore Hartree-Fock mean-field approximation is a particularly good starting point  for the calculation of response functions.

Now let us apply this formalism to the edge problem. We assume that the sample-edge runs along $`x=0`$ breaking the translation invariance along the $`x`$-axis. Since the system is translationally invariant along $`y`$-axis, it is advantageous to use the Landau gauge single-particle states with guiding centers along the $`x`$-axis. The Hamiltonian of our system consists of two terms: the electron-electron repulsion $`H_e`$ and the electron-background attraction $`H_b`$,

$`H_e`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2A}}{\displaystyle \underset{\stackrel{}{q}}{}}V_{ee}(\stackrel{}{q}):\rho _e(\stackrel{}{q})\rho _e(\stackrel{}{q}):`$ (8)
$`H_b`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\stackrel{}{q}}{}}V_{eb}(\stackrel{}{q})\rho _e(\stackrel{}{q})`$ (9)
where $`V_{ee}(\stackrel{}{q})`$ is the electron-electron interaction, and $`V_{eb}`$ is the one-body potential created by the background charge-density $`\rho _b(x)`$ which is non-uniform near the edge $`x=0`$,

$$V_{eb}(x)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x^{}V_{eb}(xx^{})\rho _b(x^{}).$$
(10)
Notice that since the interaction Hamiltonian (8) and the background Hamiltonian (9) are expressed only in terms of the electron-density operators, it is possible to recast the Hamiltonian, using Eq.(6), entirely in terms of CF creation and annihilation operators. We consider a background charge-density which vanishes linearly over width $`W`$: $`\rho _b(x)=0`$ for $`x<0`$, $`\rho _b(x)=\frac{\rho _0}{2}\left[1+\frac{2x}{W}\right]`$ for $`|x|<W/2`$, and $`\rho _b(x)=\rho _0`$ for $`x>W/2`$ where $`\rho _0`$ is the CF density in the bulk (See Fig. 1). In general, the functional forms of the electron-electron and electron-background interactions may be different; for example, if the neutralizing background layer is a distance $`d`$ away from the 2D electron layer, for Coulomb repulsion, we will have $`V_{ee}(q)=2\pi e^2/q`$ and $`V_{eb}(q)=V_{ee}(q)e^{qd}`$.

The standard Hartree-Fock decoupling  of the interaction term (8) leads to the following mean-field Hamiltonian,

$`H_{HF}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n_iX_i}{}}n_1X_1|\widehat{U}_{HF}+\widehat{V}_{eb}|n_2X_2d_{n_1X_1}^{}d_{n_2X_2},`$ (11)
$`n_1X_1|\widehat{U}_{HF}|n_2X_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n_iX_i}{}}n_1X_1,n_3X_3|\widehat{V}_{ee}^A|n_2X_2,n_4X_4\sigma _{n_3n_4}(X_3,X_4),`$ (12)
where $`V_{ee}^A`$ are the anti-symmetrized matrix elements for the electron-electron interaction and $`\sigma _{n_3n_4}(X_3,X_4)=d_{n_3X_3}^{}d_{n_4X_4}`$ is the density matrix determined self-consistently. We introduce a finite temperature (much smaller than the bulk-gap between the CF Landau levels for a given interaction ) to achieve rapid convergence of the iterations which determine the density matrix $`\sigma `$. Although this leads to non-integer CF occupation numbers, we have checked that the results presented evolve continuously to integer CF occupation numbers as the temperature is lowered. We consider the mean-field solutions which are uniform along the $`y`$-axis, $`\sigma _{n_3n_4}(X_3,X_4)=\sigma _{n_3n_4}(X_3)\delta _{X_3X_4}`$. Since the Landau-gauge basis quantum numbers are good quantum numbers in the bulk, it is clear that the mixing between different CF Landau levels occurs only because of the non-uniform background charge density and is confined to a region near the edge. In the following section, we present the results of the Hartree-Fock mean-field theory for filling fractions $`\nu =1/3`$ and $`\nu =2/5,3/7`$. We assume that the electron-electron and the electron-background interactions differ only by a sign, $`V_{ee}(q)=V_{eb}(q)`$ (except when we compare the results with those of Wan et al. ). To investigate the effect of the nature of interactions on the edge dynamics, we consider Gaussian interaction, $`V_{ee}(q)=V_0\mathrm{exp}(\alpha q^2l^^2/2)`$, characterized by dimensionless real-space range $`\alpha `$ and screened Coulomb interaction, $`V_{ee}(q)=2\pi e^2/\sqrt{q^2+q_{TF}^2}`$, which becomes truly long-ranged as $`q_{TF}l^{}0`$.

## III Results

Let us start this section with results for filling factor $`\nu =1/3`$. In the Hamiltonian formalism, the $`\nu =1/3`$ system is mapped onto a CF system at filling factor $`p=1`$. In fact, if we take into account only the occupied CF Landau level and neglect the higher CF Landau levels since they are gapped in the bulk, this system is identical to the $`p=1`$ quantum Hall system studied by Chamon and Wen.  It is therefore not surprising that the quantum Hall edge at $`\nu =1/3`$ undergoes an edge reconstruction as the width $`W`$ of the background charge-density profile increases.  However, it is crucial to check the stability of this reconstruction when higher CF Landau levels are included (in an exact treatment, one must take into account all CF Landau levels).

Figure 2 shows the CF occupation number and the electron density for a system with $`q_{TF}l^{}=0.4`$ and with four CF Landau levels, $`N_{CF}=4`$. As we can see, the edge undergoes reconstruction which is manifest in a strip of charge moving away from the bulk. A systematic study with increasing number of CF Landau levels included in the Hartree-Fock iterations shows that the reconstruction is stable with increasing $`N_{CF}`$. The left panel in Fig. 3 shows the dependence of the reconstruction on the Thomas-Fermi cutoff $`q_{TF}`$. It is clear that as $`q_{TF}0`$, the reconstruction becomes easier and more pronounced; however, it is present even at $`q_{TF}l^{}=1`$. We find that the edge reconstruction is also obtained with a Gaussian interaction (Fig. 4). As is the case with the screened Coulomb interaction, the edge-reconstruction is facilitated by an increasing range (Right panel in Fig. 3). Note that as $`\alpha 0`$ the electron-electron interaction becomes local in real-space and the reconstruction disappears. The typical temperature dependence of the edge-reconstruction for both types of interactions is shown in Fig. 6. In each case, the edge-reconstruction disappears with increasing temperature. This is expected since the system becomes more and more classical with increasing temperature. We also verify that when the temperature is reduced, the self-consistent CF occupation numbers tend towards 0 or 1; however the qualitative evolution of edge-reconstruction with varying range of interaction, $`q_{TF}`$ or $`\alpha `$, remains unchanged down to $`T=0`$.

Next we compare the edge-reconstruction results obtained using this approach with those obtained by Wan et al. using exact diagonalization.  To this end, we assume that the background charge-density is offset by a distance $`d`$ from the 2D electron gas. Thus, we use $`V_{eb}(\stackrel{}{q})=V_{ee}(\stackrel{}{q})e^{qd}`$ and study the edge profile as a function of increasing $`d`$. Figure 5 shows the CF occupation numbers for $`q_{TF}l^{}=1.0`$ (left) and $`q_{TF}l^{}=0.4`$ (right). We see that the $`\nu =1/3`$ edge undergoes reconstruction as $`d`$ increases, and that the critical value $`d(q_{TF})`$ decreases with decreasing $`q_{TF}`$. These results, in the limit $`q_{TF}l^{}0`$, are quantitatively consistent with those obtained by Wan et al.  and show that the edge reconstructs even with a screened Coulomb interaction. As mentioned in the introduction, the edge-reconstruction is an inherently quantum phenomenon; pure electrostatic considerations require, at least for long-ranged interactions, that the electron-density profile follow the background-charge profile. The energy cost of deviations from the background charge-density is compensated by the exchange energy gained by the electrons because of the step-like profile. These results show that edge reconstructions at $`\nu =1/3`$ are generic and that the long-range nature of the electron-electron interactions is not instrumental to their existence.

Now we consider the edge states in a quantum Hall system at higher fractional filling factors, $`\nu =2/5`$ and $`\nu =3/7`$. These systems are mapped onto composite fermion systems at filling factor $`p=2`$ and $`p=3`$ respectively. In this paper, we assume that all electron spins are fully polarized due to the strong external magnetic field, and therefore, in the ground state, the first two (three) CF Landau levels are occupied. The top panel in Fig. 7 shows the self-consistent CF occupations, with $`N_{CF}=2`$, for Gaussian interaction with range $`\alpha =0.5`$ (left) and for Thomas-Fermi interaction with cutoff $`q_{TF}l^{}=0.7`$ (right). It appears from these figures that the edge reconstructs with increasing $`W`$ for different values of $`\alpha `$ and $`q_{TF}`$. This, however, is an artifact of the approximation. As the bottom panel in Fig. 7 shows, when we include the higher CF Landau levels, the spurious edge reconstruction disappears. Instead, the effect of increasing $`W`$ is manifest through the increasing width of the region where CF occupation number is unity, $`\rho _{CF}(x)=1`$. The same physics appears when we consider a system with displaced background layer (Fig. 8). The figure on the left shows that with increasing background-layer distance $`d`$, the region where $`\rho _{CF}=1`$ widens. The figure on the right illustrates how the spurious edge-reconstruction is suppressed with increasing $`N_{CF}`$, the number of Landau levels used in the Hartree-Fock iterations. In experimental samples, the background layer is situated at a distance $`d5l^{}`$ away from the 2D electron gas. It is very difficult to access this regime in the Hartree-Fock calculations due to numerical limitations. However, these results suggest that the spin-polarized $`\nu =2/5`$ state is robust against edge reconstruction. We obtain similar results of the spin-polarized $`\nu =3/7`$ edge. Figure 9 shows the CF occupations numbers for a screened Coulomb interaction with $`q_{TF}l^{}=0.5`$ (left) and $`q_{TF}l^{}=1.0`$ (right) for $`N_{CF}=5`$. It is obvious from the CF occupation numbers that the edge remains smooth with increasing $`W`$; however if we reduce the number of CF Landau levels used in the iterations to $`N_{CF}=3`$, the spurious edge reconstructions (similar to those seen in Fig. 7 top panel) reappear in this case as well. The results for $`q_{TF}l^{}=1.0`$ (right) show that there is a critical $`W`$ ($`8l^{}`$) when the system, instead of undergoing reconstruction, suddenly widens the regions where $`\rho _{CF}(x)=1`$ or $`\rho _{CF}(x)=2`$. This freedom of varying $`\rho _{CF}(x)`$ in steps of one to gain exchange energy, without undergoing reconstruction, is available only at higher filling factors where more than one CF Landau levels are occupied in the bulk. Thus, we find that spin-polarized quantum Hall liquids at $`\nu =2/5`$ and $`\nu =3/7`$ are more robust against reconstruction.

## IV Remarks

In this paper, we have presented a microscopic analytical calculation of the edge states in the fractional quantum Hall regime using the extended Hamiltonian theory.  This approach is particularly suited to the study of edge states at different filling factors and with different system parameters. Although we have only considered systems where the neutralizing background provides the confining barrier at the edge, It is easy to incorporate an external barrier in this formalism and it does not change the results qualitatively. In samples prepared with cleaved-overgrowth techniques, the edge is sharp and corresponds to a hard-wall for $`x<0`$. It is somewhat difficult to model this situation within the present formalism, since imposing the hard-wall constraint on the composite fermions does not impose the hard-wall constraint on the electrons; however, we believe that the results presented here have generic validity.

The two principal findings of this work are as follows: We find that at filling factor $`\nu =1/3`$, the edge reconstructions are generic and do not depend on the long-ranged nature of interactions, or the smoothness of the confining potential. In contrast to this result for $`\nu =1/3`$, we find that for higher filling factors $`\nu =2/5`$ and $`\nu =3/7`$, a spin-polarized edge is more robust against reconstruction. The results presented in this paper also show that the qualitative behavior of the edge profile is the same, irrespective of whether the confining potential is created by a neutralizing background which resides in the same plane as the electrons or by a background layer located at a distance $`d`$ away from the 2D electron layer, as is the case with experimental samples. In real samples, by tilting the external magnetic field, the ratio of the Zeeman energy to the CF Landau-level splitting can be varied and the $`\nu =2/5`$ system undergoes a phase-transition from a spin-polarized state to a spin-singlet state. In such a singlet state, the region of single-occupancy $`\rho _{CF}(x)=1`$ breaks the spin symmetry. This symmetry breaking and the additional energy cost associated with it suggest that the spin-singlet $`\nu =2/5`$ may undergo reconstruction and have spin-textures at the edge. The study of these spin-textures in a spin-singlet state is a topic of future work.

The results in this paper shed some light on the nature of edge states and their dependence on the background potential. These results are based on a Hartree-Fock mean-field approximation. The stability of these mean-field results can be checked by performing the time-dependent Hartree-Fock analysis of the collective excitations at the edge. For example, the onset of reconstruction at $`\nu =1/3`$ edge can be associated with the softening of the edge collective modes at a finite wave-vector.  For $`\nu =1/3`$ a comparison with actual sample parameters shows that the samples are most likely in the reconstructed-edge regime. This is a possible explanation  for the disagreement between the theoretical prediction  for the tunneling exponent, $`\alpha =\nu ^1=3`$, and the experimental results.  At higher filling factors, the effective field theory models, which are primarily based on Luttinger liquid description of the edge-modes, lead to various predictions for the tunneling exponent $`\alpha `$ into the edge of a fractional quantum Hall fluid . Similarly, numerical calculations based on wavefunctions show that, in contrast to the CLL prediction, the tunneling exponent $`\alpha `$ may depend on the range of electron-electron interactions . The disagreement between these predictions and recent experiments  requires us to re-examine the theoretical assumptions regarding edge modes. The formalism presented here provides a concrete method to calculate these modes at arbitrary filling factors from a microscopic theory, and therefore it can be used to determine the parameters which characterize various field theory models. To determine the tunneling exponent using the extended Hamiltonian theory presents a challenge since, to calculate $`\alpha `$, it is necessary to express electron creation and annihilation operators (not just densities) in terms of the CF operators. This is an open problem and its solution will lead to a microscopic method for the calculation of tunneling exponent and other electronic single-particle properties at the edge. Our results at higher filling factors, provided that they remain valid at realistic setback distances $`d5l^{}`$, suggest that the spin-polarized edge is more robust against reconstruction, and consequently that the number of edge modes remains unchanged. Therefore the resolution of the discrepancy between theory and experiments, if not attributable to edge reconstructions, may require new ideas and will deepen our understanding of the edge states in the fractional quantum Hall systems.

## Acknowledgments

We wish to thank Kun Yang for helpful comments. This work was supported by the NSF grant DMR-0071611 at the University of Kentucky and by the LDRD program at Los Alamos National Laboratory.


text:
# Exact solution for a matrix dynamical system with usual and Hadamard inverses

## 1 Introduction

A composition of two noncommuting involutions acting on square matrices generates sometimes an interesting dynamical system (more specifically: an algebraic dynamical system with discrete time). A good example can be found in paper  (see also references there), where block matrices $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right)`$ were considered, $`A`$, $`B`$, $`C`$ and $`D`$ being themselves matrices $`n\times n`$. The first involution consisted in taking the usual matrix inverse (of the whole block matrix), and the second one was the following block transposing: $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& C\\ B& D\end{array}\right)`$. Such a system (at least when considered to within some natural gauge freedom) was shown in  to be a typical solitonic system solved by usual algebraic-geometrical methods.

There is a natural desire to find solutions to more general (than just solitonic) dynamical systems. Note that the dynamical system generated by the following transformation: $`zz^2`$, where $`z`$ belongs to the unit circle in the complex plane, is obviously solvable but exhibits (as much obviously) a chaotic, not solitonic, behavior.

The aim of this paper is to present solutions to the following algebraic dynamical system (see  about its origin and some results for its particular cases). Let $`𝒜`$ be a $`n\times n`$ matrix whose entries $`a_{ij}`$ belong to the complex field $``$. We consider two involutive operations on such matrices: the matrix inversion $`I:𝒜𝒜^1`$ and the element-by-element (or Hadamard) inversion $`J:a_{ij}a_{ij}^1`$. Our dynamical system is generated by iterations of the product $`JI`$.

The case $`n=2`$ is trivial but serves us as a useful warm-up exercise. For the case $`n=3`$, we give the full explicit solution for this system in terms of the initial matrix $`𝒜`$. For the case $`n=4`$, we provide an explicit ansatz in terms of one-dimensional theta-functions. This ansatz provides a full solution in the sense that it encompasses a Zariski open set of matrices. For the case $`n5`$, the same ansatz also works but encompasses only a subvariety of matrices of nonzero codimension.

## 2 $`2\times 2`$ matrices

Despite the triviality of this system, its solution supplies us with some tool that will play a key role also in the case $`n=3`$. This is the multiplicative basis of evolution.

We denote the matrix and its elements as $`𝒜=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)`$, and the determinant of $`𝒜`$ as $`\mathrm{\Delta }=adbc`$. The crucial point is that both transformations $`I`$ and $`J`$ of the following six values:

$$a,b,c,d,\mathrm{\Delta }\text{ and }(1)$$
(1)
are described in purely multiplicative terms. Namely, $`I`$ act like this:

$$ad\mathrm{\Delta }^1,b(1)b\mathrm{\Delta }^1,c(1)c\mathrm{\Delta }^1,da\mathrm{\Delta }^1,\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^1,(1)(1);$$
(2)
and $`J`$ like this:

$$aa^1,bb^1,cc^1,dd^1,\mathrm{\Delta }(1)a^1b^1c^1d^1\mathrm{\Delta },(1)(1).$$
(3)
One can say that there are two matrices $`T_I,T_J\mathrm{GL}(6,)`$ which act multiplicatively (in the following sense: the number 2 acts on a variable $`x`$ multiplicatively by $`xx^2`$) on columns of values (1), where

$$T_I=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}0& 0& 0& 1& 1& 0\\ 0& 1& 0& 0& 1& 1\\ 0& 0& 1& 0& 1& 1\\ 1& 0& 0& 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)\text{and}T_J=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}1& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 1& 0& 0\\ 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$

Of course, the answer for values (1) after $`N`$ steps of evolution is given in the similar way by the matrix $`(T_JT_I)^N`$. This latter is given by two slightly different expressions for $`N`$ odd and even. For example, if $`N=2k`$, then

$$(T_JT_I)^N=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}k+1& k& k& k& 2k& k\\ k& k+1& k& k& 2k& k\\ k& k& k+1& k& 2k& k\\ k& k& k& k+1& 2k& k\\ 2k& 2k& 2k& 2k& 4k+1& 2k\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$

This means that the new value of $`a`$ after $`2k`$ steps is

$$a(2k)=a^{k+1}b^kc^kd^k\mathrm{\Delta }^{2k}(1)^k,$$
(4)
and similarly for $`b`$, $`c`$ and $`d`$. In the r.h.s. of (4), of course, the initial values of the variables are taken.

## 3 $`3\times 3`$ matrices: one special formula

This section provides a formula necessary for building the multiplicative basis for the evolution of $`3\times 3`$ matrices, in analogy with section 2.

For a matrix

$$𝒜=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& b& c\\ f& g& h\\ r& s& t\end{array}\right)$$
(5)
we denote $`dh𝒜`$ the determinant of its Hadamard inverse multiplied, for convenience, by the product of all elements of $`𝒜`$:

$$dh𝒜=agtbhr+fscagt+bhrfscrgcfbtfbtshashargc.$$
(6)
It turns out that $`dh𝒜`$ behaves very nicely under the (usual) inversion of $`𝒜`$:

$$dh𝒜^1=dh𝒜(det𝒜)^4.$$
(7)
The direct proof of formula (7) consists simply in applying computer algebra. This, however, does not explain how one can arrive at such formula. In the rest of this section we present heuristic argument which clearly shows that a formula of such kind must exist. Our argument was suggested by paper .

Let $`dh𝒜=0`$. This means that the matrix

$$=J(𝒜)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a^1& b^1& c^1\\ f^1& g^1& h^1\\ r^1& s^1& t^1\end{array}\right)$$

is degenerate (remember that we do not care about the rigor!). This means that $`\left(\begin{array}{c}\alpha \\ \beta \\ \gamma \end{array}\right)=0`$ for some (nonzero) column $`\left(\begin{array}{c}\alpha \\ \beta \\ \gamma \end{array}\right)`$. In terms of initial matrix $`𝒜`$, this yields:

$$𝒜\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\alpha ^{}& 0& 0\\ 0& \beta ^{}& 0\\ 0& 0& \gamma ^{}\end{array}\right)𝒜^\mathrm{T}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\alpha ^{\prime \prime }& 0& 0\\ 0& \beta ^{\prime \prime }& 0\\ 0& 0& \gamma ^{\prime \prime }\end{array}\right).$$
(8)
Here the superscript $`\mathrm{T}`$ means matrix transposing; the values $`\alpha ^{},\mathrm{},\gamma ^{\prime \prime }`$ are given by

$`\alpha ^{}={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{afr}},\beta ^{}={\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{bgs}},\gamma ^{}={\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{cht}},`$
$`\alpha ^{\prime \prime }=\alpha ^{}a^2+\beta ^{}b^2+\gamma ^{}c^2,\beta ^{\prime \prime }=\alpha ^{}f^2+\beta ^{}g^2+\gamma ^{}h^2,\gamma ^{\prime \prime }=\alpha ^{}r^2+\beta ^{}s^2+\gamma ^{}t^2.`$
It is clear that a relation similar to (8) holds for $`I(𝒜)=𝒜^1`$ as well. This means that $`(JI)(𝒜)=J(𝒜^1)`$ is degenerate. In other words,

$$dh𝒜=0dh(𝒜)^1=0.$$

There is no need to make this argument rigorous because, as has been said, formula (7) admits a direct verification.

## 4 $`3\times 3`$ matrices: the solution

We proceed along the same lines as in section 2, which is possible due to formula (7) from section 3. We use notation (5) for the entries of matrix $`𝒜`$.

The multiplicative basis of evolution comprises now 21 values: the matrix elements $`a`$, $`b`$, $`c`$, $`f`$, $`g`$, $`h`$, $`r`$, $`s`$, $`t`$; the determinant $`\mathrm{\Delta }=det𝒜`$; nine cofactors of matrix elements denoted by corresponding capital letters: $`A=\left|\begin{array}{cc}g& h\\ s& t\end{array}\right|`$, $`B=\left|\begin{array}{cc}f& h\\ r& t\end{array}\right|`$ and so on; the value $`\mathrm{\Xi }=dhA`$ defined by (6) and, finally, the value $`(1)`$. Here is how our two involutions act on these values.

The matrix inverse $`I`$:

$`aA\mathrm{\Delta }^1,bF\mathrm{\Delta }^1,\mathrm{},hH\mathrm{\Delta }^1;`$
$`Aa\mathrm{\Delta }^1,Bf\mathrm{\Delta }^1,\mathrm{},Hh\mathrm{\Delta }^1;`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^1,\mathrm{\Xi }(1)\mathrm{\Xi }\mathrm{\Delta }^4,(1)(1).`$
The element-by-element inverse $`J`$:

$`aa^1,\mathrm{},hh^1;`$
$`A(1)Ag^1h^1s^1t^1,\mathrm{},H(1)Ha^1b^1f^1g^1;`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Xi }a^1b^1c^1f^1g^1h^1r^1s^1t^1,`$
$`\mathrm{\Xi }\mathrm{\Delta }a^1b^1c^1f^1g^1h^1r^1s^1t^1,`$
$`(1)(1).`$
A matrix $`T_JT_I`$ corresponding to a step of evolution can now be calculated in analogy with section 2, but now it has sizes $`21\times 21`$, and we do not write it out here. Still, it makes no difficulty for a computer to handle such matrices. The remarkable fact is that all the eigenvalues of $`T_JT_I`$ are sixth roots of unity, as the following table shows:

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}& & & & & & \\ \text{eigenvalues}& \frac{1+\sqrt{3}}{2}& \frac{1\sqrt{3}}{2}& \frac{1+\sqrt{3}}{2}& \frac{1\sqrt{3}}{2}& 1& 1\\ & & & & & & \\ \text{multiplicity}& 1& 1& 4& 4& 7& 4\end{array}$$

Of course, $`T_JT_I`$ does have nontrivial Jordan boxes. An interesting thing with them is that they all correspond only to eigenvalues $`\pm 1`$.

Here is the explicit answer for the variable $`a`$ after $`3k`$ steps:

$$a(3k)=a^{2k+1}b^kc^kf^kr^k\mathrm{\Delta }^{2k}A^{2k}B^kC^kF^kR^k\mathrm{\Xi }^{2k}(1)^{3k(2k1)}.$$
(9)
Again, in the r.h.s. of formula (9) the initial values of all variables are taken.

## 5 $`4\times 4`$ matrices: the conservation laws and computer algebra results

In this section we describe the way that has actually led to the ansatz presented in subsequent sections. Formally, however, the construction of our ansatz does not rely on the material of this section.

First, the evolution of a $`4\times 4`$ matrix $`𝒜`$ can be considered to within the following gauge freedom: we can consider not $`𝒜`$ itself but its equivalence class with respect to its multiplication both from the left and from the right by some diagonal matrices $``$ and $`𝒞`$. Clearly, if

$$𝒜^{}=𝒜𝒞$$
(10)
then

$$(JI)(𝒜^{})=𝒞(JI)(𝒜).$$
(11)
Using a transformation (10), we can reduce (almost any) $`𝒜`$ to the following form:

$$𝒜=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 1& 1& 1\\ 1& a& b& c\\ 1& f& g& h\\ 1& r& s& t\end{array}\right).$$
(12)
So, in a sense, there remains in $`𝒜`$ nine parameters. If we find eight conservation laws this will be a strong argument suggesting that the evolution goes just along elliptic curves (because only elliptic and rational curves have infinite number of automorphisms).

Second, there are many conserved quantities which are, moreover, invariant under (10). Consider a decomposition of a $`4\times 4`$ matrix in four $`2\times 2`$ submatrices, for instance, one of the following:

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}& & & \\ & & & \\ & & \mathrm{\S }& \mathrm{\S }\\ & & \mathrm{\S }& \mathrm{\S }\end{array}\right)\text{or}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}& \mathrm{\S }& & \mathrm{\S }\\ & & & \\ & \mathrm{\S }& & \mathrm{\S }\\ & & & \end{array}\right),$$

where the entries denoted by the same symbol belong to the same submatrix.

For any such decomposition $`p`$, we construct the value $`\mathrm{\Pi }_p`$ — the product of four corresponding minors. One can verify that under one step of evolution, the ratio of any two such values $`\mathrm{\Pi }_p/\mathrm{\Pi }_q`$ goes into $`\mathrm{\Pi }_p^{}/\mathrm{\Pi }_q^{}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Pi }_p^{}`$ is the product of the cofactors of the minors of decomposition $`p`$ (in the new matrix $`𝒜`$). So, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_p/\mathrm{\Pi }_q`$ is invariant under two steps of evolution.

Computer experiments show that there are eight algebraically independent invariants of such kind. Moreover, given fixed values of these invariants and using the form (12) for the matrix, one can exclude all except two parameters in (12) from the equations and get the curve as given by just one equation in two variables. Its genus turns out to be one, as expected. Besides, one can see from that equation that, for example, there are four points in the curve where the function $`a(z)`$ ($`z`$ being a parameter for the elliptic curve) takes value $`1`$, and the function $`b(z)`$ takes value $`1`$ in exactly the same points, as well as some information about the coincidence of some poles and zeros of those functions.

This was exactly what led us to the ansatz presented in the following sections.

## 6 A determinant of theta-function ratios

The key formula for our ansatz is the formula for the determinant of the $`n\times n`$ matrix

$$𝒦=(k_{ij}),\text{where}k_{ij}=\frac{\vartheta (y\lambda _i\mu _j)}{\vartheta (x+\lambda _i+\mu _j)}.$$
(13)
Here $`i`$ stays of course for the number of a row and $`j`$ for the number of a column. So, there are complex variables $`x`$ and $`y`$ and, moreover, two arrays, $`(\lambda _i)`$ and $`(\mu _j)`$, each of $`n`$ complex variables. By $`\vartheta `$ we denote here the odd Jacobian theta-function:

$$\vartheta (u)=2q^{1/4}\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi u}{2K}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(12q^{2n}\mathrm{cos}\frac{\pi u}{K}+q^{4n})(1q^{2n}),$$

where $`q=\mathrm{exp}(\pi K^{}/K)`$; $`K`$ and $`K^{}`$ are called half-periods. Our formula states that

$`det𝒦=\left(\vartheta (x+y)\right)^{n1}\vartheta \left((n1)xy+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}\lambda _i+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}\mu _j\right)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{{\displaystyle \underset{1i_1<i_2n}{}}\vartheta (\lambda _{i_2}\lambda _{i_1}){\displaystyle \underset{1j_1<j_2n}{}}\vartheta (\mu _{j_2}\mu _{j_1})}{{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}\vartheta (x+\lambda _i+\mu _j)}}.`$ (14)
Proof of formula (14) goes by induction on $`n`$. Consider $`det𝒦`$ as a function of $`\lambda _n`$. It is obliged to have the following form:

$$det𝒦=F\frac{\vartheta (\lambda _nG)_{i=1}^{n1}\vartheta (\lambda _n\lambda _i)}{_{j=1}^n\vartheta (x+\lambda _n+\mu _j)},$$
(15)
where $`F`$ and $`G`$ are some quantities that do not depend on $`\lambda _n`$ but can depend on other variables. Here are the reasons why exactly such factors appear in formula (15), typical for proofs of the like formulas for theta-functions.

Each factor $`\vartheta (\lambda _n\lambda _i)`$ in the numerator is responsible for the fact that $`det𝒦`$ obviously vanishes when $`\lambda _n`$ coincides with any other $`\lambda _i`$ (because of two identical rows). The denominator of (15) is simply the common denominator of all elements of $`𝒦`$. Finally, the factor $`\vartheta (\lambda _nG)`$ is necessary to ensure that the whole expression has the same number of zeros and poles as a function of $`\lambda _n`$.

On the other hand, in the neighborhood of the value $`\lambda _n=x\mu _n`$, where $`k_{nn}`$ has a pole, our determinant behaves as

$$det𝒦det𝒦_{\mathrm{smaller}}\frac{\vartheta (x+y)}{\vartheta (x+\lambda _n+\mu _n)},$$
(16)
where $`𝒦_{\mathrm{smaller}}`$ is the same matrix $`𝒦`$ but without its $`n`$th row and $`n`$th column. Comparing (16) with (15) (where we at this moment also substitute $`\lambda _n=x\mu _n`$), we can get the quantity $`F`$ in the following form:

$$F=det𝒦_{\mathrm{smaller}}\frac{\vartheta (x+y)_{j=1}^{n1}\vartheta (\mu _n+\mu _j)}{\vartheta (x\mu _nG)_{i=1}^{n1}\vartheta (x\mu _n\lambda _i)}.$$
(17)
Now, substituting (17) in (15), we get the following, almost final, formula expressing $`det𝒦`$ through $`det𝒦_{\mathrm{smaller}}`$:

$`det𝒦=det𝒦_{\mathrm{smaller}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\vartheta (x+y)_{j=1}^{n1}\vartheta (\mu _n+\mu _j)}{\vartheta (x\mu _nG)_{i=1}^{n1}\vartheta (x\mu _n\lambda _i)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\vartheta (\lambda _nG)_{i=1}^{n1}\vartheta (\lambda _n\lambda _i)}{_{j=1}^n\vartheta (x+\lambda _n+\mu _j)}}.`$ (18)
It remains to calculate the value $`G`$. It can be deduced from the following reasoning. According to the inductive hypothesis, $`det𝒦_{\mathrm{smaller}}`$ contains the multiplier $`\vartheta \left((n2)xy+_{i=1}^{n1}\lambda _i+_{j=1}^{n1}\mu _j\right)`$, so it must have a zero at such $`\lambda _n`$ when the argument of that theta-function equals zero. On the other hand, $`det𝒦`$, generally, does not have a zero at such $`\lambda _n`$. So, the mentioned theta-function must cancel with the same factor in the denominator of (18), which role only $`\vartheta (x\mu _nG)`$ can assume. This implies

$$x\mu _nG=\pm \left((n2)xy+\underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\lambda _i+\underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\mu _j\right),$$

and the sign here, namely plus, can be fixed for example by considering the expression (18) as a function of $`x`$ (which must have the right difference, namely $`n`$, between the number of poles and zeros in a parallelogram of periods).

Once we have got the proper formula for transition from $`det𝒦`$ to $`det𝒦_{\mathrm{smaller}}`$, the inductive step is over. As for the induction basis, the formula (14) does obviously hold for $`n=1`$.

## 7 Expression for a matrix element of $`(JI)𝒜`$

Let us apply the transformation $`JI`$, i.e. one step of our evolution, to the $`n\times n`$ matrix $`𝒜=𝒦`$ given by formula (13). A matrix element $`a_{ji}^{\mathrm{new}}`$ of the obtained matrix $`𝒜^{\mathrm{new}}`$ is given by formula

$$a_{ji}^{\mathrm{new}}=\frac{det𝒜}{A_{ij}},$$
(19)
where $`A_{ij}`$ is the cofactor for the element $`a_{ij}`$ of $`𝒜`$. Both the numerator and denominator in (19) are determinants of the form (14). The calculation yields:

$$a_{ji}^{\mathrm{new}}=a^{\mathrm{global}}a_j^{\mathrm{row}}a_i^{\mathrm{column}}a_{ij}^{\mathrm{element}},$$
(20)
where

$$a^{\mathrm{global}}=\vartheta (x+y)\vartheta \left((n1)xy+\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}\lambda _k+\underset{l=1}{\overset{n}{}}\mu _l\right)$$
(21)
is a factor which depends neither on $`j`$ nor on $`i`$;

$$a_j^{\mathrm{row}}=\frac{_{l=1,lj}^n\vartheta (\mu _j\mu _l)}{_{k=1}^n\vartheta (x+\lambda _k+\mu _j)}$$
(22)
depends only on $`j`$ (the row number for $`a_{ji}^{\mathrm{new}}`$);

$$a_i^{\mathrm{column}}=\frac{_{k=1,ki}^{n1}\vartheta (\lambda _i\lambda _k)}{_{l=1}^n\vartheta (x+\lambda _i+\mu _l)}$$
(23)
depends only on $`i`$ (the column number); and the last factor

$$a_{ji}^{\mathrm{element}}=\frac{\vartheta (x+\lambda _i+\mu _j)}{\vartheta \left((n2)xy+_{k=1}^n\lambda _k+_{l=1}^n\mu _l\lambda _i\mu _j\right)}$$
(24)
has much the same form as the initial $`a_{ij}`$.

To be exact, the difference between the matrix $`(a_{ji}^{\mathrm{element}})`$ made of matrix elements (24) and the initial matrix $`𝒜=𝒦`$ can be described as follows: change

$$xx^{\mathrm{new}}=y(n2)x\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\lambda _i\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}\mu _j,yy^{\mathrm{new}}=x,$$

and then perform the matrix transposing. As for the factors (22) and (23), their effect consists in multiplying the matrix $`(a_{ji}^{\mathrm{element}})`$ from two sides by diagonal matrices, i.e. doing a gauge transformation (10). The main point is that if we have done not one but $`N`$ steps of evolution, the effect of all arising factors (22) and (23), as well as (21), consists just in the appearing of some products of theta-functions with their arguments changing according to a simple law. We do not write out here the corresponding obvious but bulky formulas. What we see already is that the evolution of a matrix of the form (13) can be described by an explicit formula. The same applies, obviously, to a matrix that was obtained from such one by a transformation (10).

Remark. Here we do not mean just the evolution of gauge equivalence classes as in section 5. Formula (11) shows that if we know what happens with $`𝒜`$, we also know what happens with $`𝒜𝒞`$ after any number of evolution steps.

## 8 Comparing different values of $`n`$

### 8.1 $`n=3`$

The ansatz (13) (taken together with the possibility of multiplying a matrix by two diagonal matrices as in formula (10)) is definitely superfluous for the case $`n=3`$ where we have presented, in sections 3 and 4, a more direct approach which, by the way, gives the exhaustive information about the cases where the evolution cannot go ahead because of a division by zero.

### 8.2 $`n=4`$

Here the ansatz (13) together with multiplication by two diagonal matrices contains exactly 16 independent parameters, i.e. gives a Zariski open set of matrices. To see this, note first that the 10 values $`x`$, $`y`$, $`\lambda _i`$ and $`\mu _j`$ produce really only 8 parameters, because nothing in (13) changes if we do one of the following translations ($`\alpha `$ being an arbitrary complex number):

$$\lambda _i\lambda _i+\alpha \text{ for all }i,\mu _j\mu _j\alpha \text{ for all }j$$

or

$$xx+\alpha ,yy\alpha ,\lambda _i\lambda _i\alpha \text{ for all }i.$$

Second, the modulus of the elliptic curve is the 9th parameter. And finally, the two diagonal matrices produce the 7 remaining parameters.

### 8.3 $`n5`$

Our ansatz works for any $`n`$, but when $`n>4`$ it corresponds only to a subvariety of a nonzero codimension in the space of all $`n\times n`$ matrices. For instance, for $`n=5`$, the calculation of parameters similar to that done in subsection 8.2 shows that we can describe in the same way the evolution of a 20-parameter family of matrices.

## 9 A special case with period 4

Although the parameterisation (13) together with the possibility of multiplying the matrices by two diagonal ones as in (10) encompasses in the case $`n=4`$ a Zariski open subset of all $`4\times 4`$ matrices, it does not include some interesting special cases (and it does not seem very easy to obtain them as any limiting cases). One specific feature of parameterisation (13) is that if some $`2\times 2`$ minor of the matrix equals zero, then all other minors also do so. We present here a matrix

$$𝒜=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 1& 1& 1\\ 1& 1& xy& x\\ 1& zt& 1& z\\ 1& t& y& 1\end{array}\right)$$
(25)
that does not obey such a requirement. Its interesting property is that if we consider its evolution up to gauge transformations (10), then after four steps we get back at the initial matrix (25). This statement is proved by a direct computer calculation.

Acknowledgements. I thank Claude Viallet for informing me about the paper . This work has been performed with the partial financial support from Russian Foundation for Basic Research, Grant no. 01-01-00059.