text:
# A Tale of Two Mergers: Searching for Strangeness in Compact Stars

## I Introduction

Several proposals concerning the physical state and the internal constitution of matter at supra-nuclear densities have been put forth (see LP01 ; Alford01  for recent accounts). Figure 1 shows many exciting possibilities for the composition of compact stars including (1) strangeness-bearing matter in the form of hyperons, kaons, or quarks, (2) Bose (pion or kaon) condensed matter, and (3) so-called self-bound strange quark matter (SQM). Fermions, whether they are in the form of baryons or deconfined quarks, are expected to additionally exhibit superfluidity and/or superconductivity. In the case of quarks, this could occur either as two-flavor superconductivity (2SC) or in the Color-Flavor-Locked (CFL) phase in which all three flavors (up, down, and strange) participate.

The possibility of such exotic phases brings attendant changes to the predictions of maximum masses and radii, since the presence of multiple components or new phases of matter generally lessens the pressure for a given energy density. The fact that compact objects are the only objects in which such phases could occur underscores the importance of precise determinations of basic observables:

(i) masses and radii LP01 . Simply put, a precise determination of the mass and radius of the same neutron star would not only be a first achievement for observational astronomy, but would also hold the promise of delineating Quantum Chromo-Dynamics (QCD) in regimes of high baryon density heretofore not possible.

(ii) surface temperatures versus age PPLS00 . Detections of photons from cooling neutron stars could constrain the pairing gaps of baryons and the star’s mass. However, establishing the sizes of quark gaps or the presence of Goldstone bosons in the CFL phase of quarks in a hybrid star will be difficult PPLS00 ; JPS02  because the layers of normal matter surrounding the quark core continues to cool through significantly more rapid processes. In contrast, the mean energy of emitted photons from the bare surface of a strange quark star would be significantly larger than that from a normal cooling neutron star ($`30<E/\mathrm{keV}<500`$ versus $`0.1<E/\mathrm{keV}<2.5`$Page02b . Due to its distinctive spectrum and time evolution, such an observation would constitute an unmistakable detection of a strange quark star and shed light on color superconductivity at “stellar” densities.

(iii) anomalous behavior in the spin-down rates of ms radio pulsars GPW97 . Possible hysteresis (reversal) in the normal spindown rate of pulsars would signal the appearance of a mixed-phase of matter containing normal hadronic matter with more compressible Bose condensed or quark matter.

(iv) neutrino luminosities from future galactic core collapse supernovae. The main new feature that has emerged from studies of neutron stars at birth is the possible metastability and subsequent collapse to a black hole of a proto-neutron star containing quark matter, or other types of matter including hyperons or a Bose condensate, which could be observable in the neutrino signal Pons01b .

Examples of ongoing and planned observations of solar mass compact objects that could shed light on QCD at high baryon density include

(i) multi-wavelength photon observations with the HST, Chandra, XMM, Integral, etc.,

(ii) spectral and temporal studies of supernova neutrinos with the SuperK, SNO, UNO, etc., and

(iii) gravity wave detections from coalescing compact object binaries though LIGO, VIRGO, etc.

In this work, we contrast the evolution of binary star mergers for two distinct cases:

(1) A black hole (BH) and a normal star. For the discussion at hand, this refers to a star with a surface of normal matter in which the pressure vanishes at vanishing baryon density. The interior of the star, however, may contain any or a combination of the many exotica 111Not to be confused with the Canadian flick “Exotica.” depicted in Fig. 1.

(2) A BH and a self-bound star which is exemplified by Witten’s Strange-Quark Matter (SQM) star Witten ; see Alcock  for a review. Such a star has a bare quark matter surface in which the pressure vanishes at a finite but supra-nuclear baryon density 222In the context of the MIT bag model with first order corrections due to gluon exhange, the baryon density at which pressure vanishes is given by $`n_b(P=0)=(4B/3\pi ^{2/3})^{3/4}(12\alpha _c/\pi )^{1/4}`$, where $`B`$ is the bag constant and $`\alpha _c=g_c^2/(4\pi )`$ is the quark-gluon coupling constant PBP90 . This density is not significantly affected by the finite strange quark mass PBP90  or by pairing gaps in the CFL or 2SC phases JMad ..

Prototypes of the mass versus central baryon density $`(n_c)`$ and mass versus radius for these cases are shown in Fig. 2. Quantitative variations from these generic behaviors can be caused by uncertainties in the underlying strong interaction models (see the compendium of results in Fig. 2 of Ref. LP01 ). Qualitative differences in the outcomes of mergers with a black hole emerge, however, because of the gross differences in the mass-radius diagram.

A normal star and a self-bound star represent two quite different possibilities (see Fig. 3) for the quantity

$`\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{ln}R}{d\mathrm{ln}M}}\{\begin{array}{cc}0\hfill & \text{for a normal neutron star (NS)}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{for a self-bound SQM star}\hfill \end{array},`$ (3)
where $`M`$ and $`R`$ are the star’s mass and radius, respectively. For small to moderate mass self-bound stars, $`RM^{1/3}`$ so that $`\alpha 1/3`$; only for configurations approaching the maximum mass does $`\alpha `$ turn negative.

Our objective is to explore the astrophysical consequences of these distinctive behaviors in $`R`$ versus $`M`$ as they affect mergers with a black hole. Note that $`\alpha `$ is intimately connected with the dense matter equation of state (EOS), since there exists a one-to-one correspondence between $`R(M)`$ and $`P(n_B)`$, where $`P`$ is the pressure and $`n_B`$ is the baryon density. Gravitational mergers in which a compact star loses its mass (either to a companion star or to an accretion disk) during evolution is one of the rare examples in which the $`R`$ versus $`M`$ (or equivalently, $`P`$ versus $`n_B`$) relationship of the same star is sampled. Although we focus here on the coalescence of a compact star with a BH, the theoretical formalism and our principal findings apply also to mergers in which both objects are compact stars.

## II The Merger of a Compact Star with a Low-Mass Black Hole

The general problem of the origin and evolution of systems containing a neutron star and a black hole was first detailed by Lattimer & Schramm LSch ; thesisL . Compact binaries form naturally as the result of evolution of massive stellar binaries (e.g., BB ). The estimated lower mass limit for supernovae (which produce neutron stars or black holes) is approximately 8 M. Observationally, the number of binaries formed within a given logarithmic separation is approximately constant, but the relative mass distributions are uncertain. There is some indication that the distribution in binary mass ratios might also be flat. Most progenitor systems do not survive the first, more massive star becoming a supernova. In the absence of a “kick” velocity from the explosion, it is easily found that the loss of more than half of the mass from the system will unbind it. However, the fact that pulsars are observed to have mean velocites in excess of a few hundred km/s implies that neutron stars are usually produced with large kicks. In the cases that the kick, which is thought to be randomly directed, opposes the star’s orbital velocity, the chances that the post-supernova binary remains intact increases. In addition, the orbital separation in a surviving binary will be reduced significantly. Subsequent evolution then progresses to the supernova explosion of the companion. Those systems that survive the second explosion should both have greatly reduced separations and orbits with high eccentricity.

Gravitational radiation causes the binary’s orbit to decay HT , such that a system with masses $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$ with initial semimajor axes $`a`$ satisfying

$$a<2.8[M_1M_2(M_1+M_2)/\mathrm{M}_{}^3]^{1/4}\mathrm{R}_{},$$
(4)
will fully decay within the age of the Universe ($`10^{10}`$ yr). This limit is for circular orbits; those with highly eccentric orbits will decay much faster Peters . Ref. LSch  argued that (1) mergers of neutron stars and black holes coupled with the subsequent ejection of a few percent of the neutron star’s mass, could easily account for all the r-process nuclei in the cosmos, and (2) compact object binary mergers could be associated with gamma-ray bursts (see also eichler ).

When the less massive inspiralling compact star reaches its Roche limit (see Fig. 4), mass can be stripped from it. The radius of the compact object will quickly adjust to its new mass. If the radius increases more quickly than the Roche limiting radius, mass transfer to the BH will be stable, and the inspiral will be halted due to angular momentum conservation. The classical Roche limit is based upon an incompressible fluid of density $`\rho `$ and mass $`M_2`$ in orbit about a mass $`M_1`$. In Newtonian gravity, this limit is

$$R_{Roche,Newt}=(M_1/0.0901\pi \rho )^{1/3}=19.2(M_1/\mathrm{M}_{}\rho _{15})^{1/3}\mathrm{km},$$
(5)
where $`\rho _{15}=\rho /10^{15}`$ g cm-3. Using general relativity, Fishbone Fishbone  found that the number 0.0901 in Eq. (5) becomes 0.0664, even for rotating BHs. In geometrized units, $`R_{Roche}/M_1=13(14.4)(M_1^2\rho _{15}/\mathrm{M}_{}^2)^{1/3}`$, where the numerical coefficient refers to the Newtonian (GR) case. In other words, if the neutron star’s mean density is $`\rho _{15}=1`$, the Roche limit is encountered beyond the last stable orbit ($`R=6M_1`$ for a non-rotating BH) if $`M_1<5.9`$ M, leading to mass overflow and mass transfer. And, as now discussed, the mass transfer may proceed stably for some considerable time. This would lengthen the lifetime the BH would accrete matter from its companion, which, in itself, could be an observational signature.

## III EVOLUTION OF MERGERS

The final evolution of a compact binary is now discussed (see Fig. 5 for a schematic illustration). Define $`q=m_{cs}/M_{BH}`$, $`\mu =m_{cs}M_{BH}/M`$, and $`M=M_{BH}+m_{cs}`$, where $`m_{cs}`$ and $`M_{BH}`$ are the compact star (normal star or self-bound SQM star) and black hole masses, respectively. The orbital angular momentum is

$$J^2=G\mu ^2Ma=GM^3aq^2/(1+q)^4.$$
(6)
We can employ Paczyński’s pacz  formula for the Roche radius of the secondary:

$$R_{\mathrm{}}/a=0.46[q/(1+q)]^{1/3},$$
(7)
or a better fit by Eggleton eggleton :

$$R_{\mathrm{}}/a=0.49[0.6+q^{2/3}\mathrm{ln}(1+q^{1/3})]^1.$$
(8)
The orbital separation $`a`$ during mass transfer is obtained by setting $`R_{\mathrm{}}=R`$, the compact star radius. For stable mass transfer, the star’s radius has to increase more quickly than the Roche radius as mass is transferred 333Mass extraction from a self-bound SQM star has been estimated by Madsen JMad  by requiring that the gravitational tidal force exceeds that due to surface tension, i.e., $`Gm_{cs}M_{BH}R/a^3>\sigma R`$, where $`\sigma `$ is the surface tension of SQM. This leads to
$`A>\sigma a^3/(GM_{BH})=4\times 10^{38}(\sigma /20\mathrm{MeV}\mathrm{fm}^2)(a/30\mathrm{km})^3(\mathrm{M}_{}/M_{BH})`$,
upon using $`m_{cs}=Am_u`$, where $`m_u`$ is the atomic mass.. Thus, we must have, using Paczyński’s formula,

$$\frac{d\mathrm{ln}R}{d\mathrm{ln}m_{cs}}\alpha \frac{d\mathrm{ln}R_{\mathrm{}}}{d\mathrm{ln}m_{cs}}=\frac{d\mathrm{ln}a}{d\mathrm{ln}m_{cs}}+\frac{1}{3}$$
(9)
for stable mass transfer. If the mass transfer is conservative 444Some aspects of non-conservative mass transfer are discussed in LPsch ; PZ  and references therein., $`\dot{J}=\dot{J}_{GW}`$, where

$$\dot{J}_{GW}=\frac{32}{5}\frac{G^{7/2}}{c^5}\frac{\mu ^2M^{5/2}}{a^{7/2}}=\frac{32}{5}\frac{G^{7/2}}{c^5}\frac{q^2M^{9/2}}{(1+q)^4a^{7/2}}$$
(10)
and

$$\frac{\dot{J}}{J}=\frac{\dot{a}}{2a}+\frac{\dot{q}(1q)}{q(1+q)},$$
(11)
where the dots on various symbols denote time derivatives. This leads to

$$\dot{q}\left(\frac{\alpha }{2}+\frac{5}{6}q\right)\frac{32}{5}\frac{G^3}{c^5}\frac{q^2M^3}{(1+q)a^4}.$$
(12)
Since $`m_{cs}<M_{BH}`$, $`\dot{q}0`$, and the condition for stable mass transfer is simply

$$q5/6+\alpha /2.$$
(13)
This condition is achieved in all normal neutron star - BH or self-bound star - BH binaries. In both cases, the luminosities of gravity wave emission can be estimated using

$$L_{GW}=\frac{32}{5}\frac{G^4}{c^5}\frac{M^3\mu ^2}{a^5}.$$
(14)
## IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In addition to Eq. (13), a number of other conditions must hold for stable mass transfer to occur (cf. LPsch , and references therein). The discussion in LPsch  is relevant to the stellar merger of a self-bound star as well. We now compare the mergers of normal and self-bound stars with a BH. For definiteness, we choose $`m_{ns}=m_{SQM}=1.5\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and $`M_{BH}=3.5\mathrm{M}_{}`$. Results for other choices are straightforward to obtain. Fig. 6 (left panel) shows the time development of the orbital separation $`a`$ and the compact star’s mass and radius during the stable mass transfer (outspiral) phases. The time evolutions during stable mass transfer are obtained from Eq. (12), using $`\dot{m}_{cs}=\dot{q}M/(1+q)^2`$.

In the case of SQM, the inspiral continues to smaller separations since $`R_{SQM}<R_{NS}`$. As a consequence, mass transfer is accelerated and the duration of the stable mass transfer outspiral phase is shortened considerably. In the SQM case the star barely spirals out since $`1/3\alpha 0`$ (see Eq. (9)). The star eventually loses all its mass. In contrast, for a neutron star $`1/3\alpha >0`$ and the star outspirals significantly, until $`\alpha 5/3`$ when stable mass transfer terminates (Eq. (13)). This occurs above the minimum stable neutron star mass, $`0.08`$ M, so the remnant mini-neutron star will resume spiralling in, concluding in a final merger. In either case, if stable mass transfer occurs, it proceeds for much longer than an orbital period, perhaps up to a few tenths of a second. The merger of neutron star and self-bound star with a BH will significantly differ in their gravity wave signatures (shown in the right panel of Fig. 6). The self-bound star case will have a shorter timescale of emission, with probably higher peak luminosity, and will lack a final increase due to resumption of inspiral in the NS case.

An additional contrast between mergers involving only NSs or only SQM stars (but not BHs) is that the condition for stable mass transfer might not be generally achievable for binary NSs. Note that moderate mass NSs have $`\alpha 0`$, so Eq. (13) requires $`q<5/6`$. Had we used the more exact formula of Eggleton, Eq. (8), we would have found an even greater restriction $`q<0.78`$. For example, the binary pulsar PSR1913+16 has $`q=0.96`$. In contrast, for small to moderate mass self-bound SQM stars $`\alpha 1/3`$, so that stable mass transfer can occur for $`q<1`$, which is its entire domain!

The evolution of self-bound SQM star - black hole merger including the effects of non-conservative mass transfer, tidal synchronization, the presence of an accretion disk, etc., together with extensions to include further effects of general relativity, will be reported separately.

In conclusion, compact star mergers offer a tantalizing possibility for the detection via gravitational waves of strange quark matter in the form of self-bound stars.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank Jes Madsen for helpful communications. This work was supported by the US-DOE grants DE-FG02-88ER40388 (for M.P.) and DE-FG02-87ER40317 (for J.M.L.).


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Branes wrapping supersymmetric cycles of string/M-theory compactifications have been studied in many different contexts in recent years, using a variety of different methods. In this paper we will consider supergravity solutions for such brane configurations that take into account the full higher dimensional spacetime structure. In particular, we will study BPS solutions of $`D=11`$ supergravity describing $`M`$-branes wrapping supersymmetric cycles of Calabi-Yau manifolds.

The general forms of these spacetimes, which we will call FS spacetimes, and the constraints imposed on them by supersymmetry have been analyzed in the series of papers  . However, solving the combined system of supersymmetry constraints and gauge field equations of motion to obtain the actual spacetime fields for a specified brane configuration has proven to be quite difficult. Thusfar, explicit solutions have been found only in the near horizon regime  . In this limit, the global structure of the Calabi-Yau manifold drops out.

In this paper, we will study FS spacetimes in the opposing limiting case, the far field limit. Here, we will see, the topology of the Calabi-Yau manifold and the wrapped cycle dominate the structure of the solutions. In this limit, the solutions may be viewed as BPS black branes in the dimensionally reduced spacetime. We will study the examples of $`M2`$-branes and $`M5`$-branes wrapping respectively supersymmetric $`2`$-cycles and $`4`$-cycles of Calabi-Yau three-folds. These correspond to BPS black holes and black strings of $`D=5`$, $`N=2`$ supergravity. We compare the FS spacetimes in this limit with the $`D=5`$ black holes of reference  and black strings of reference . We will see that this comparison yields considerable insight into the system of equations governing FS spacetimes.

Additional motivation for this work comes from the following questions. The $`D=5`$ solutions of references  depend only on the homology class of the wrapped brane. One can ask whether $`D=11`$ spacetimes exist that depend on the detailed position of the cycle within the Calabi-Yau space, or is some sort of smearing of sources mandatory? Similarly, it should be interesting to see how the attractor mechanism  is manifest in the full higher dimensional metric.

We shall also see below that the comparison of the $`D=11`$ FS spacetime fields with the corresponding $`D=5`$ fields is complicated by the lack of a consistent truncation scheme. In the $`AdS_4\times S^7`$ compactification of $`D=11`$ supergravity to gauged $`D=4`$ supergravity, for example, explicit nonlinear expressions for the $`D=11`$ fields in terms of the massless $`D=4`$ fields have been given in references . Solutions to the $`D=4`$ equations of motion may be lifted to solutions to the $`D=11`$ equations of motion via these expressions. In contrast, the ansatze for dimensional reduction on Calabi-Yau manifolds, of $`D=10`$, or $`D=11`$ supergravities  are valid only to linear order in variations of the moduli. The detailed form of the correspondence between $`D=5`$ and exact $`D=11`$ solutions should provide useful clues towards a nonlinear form of the ansatz. One interesting feature of the $`D=11`$, FS spacetimes is that the metric on the internal Calabi-Yau space is not Kahler, so that even the proper definition of the moduli fields needs more careful treatment.

## 2 $`D=11`$ Supergravity on Calabi-Yau Three-folds

We begin by briefly recalling the dimensional reduction of $`D=11`$ supergravity on a Calabi-Yau three-fold $``$ to $`D=5`$, $`N=2`$ supergravity . Here we use the term Calabi-Yau manifold to mean a compact, Kahler manifold with vanishing first Chern class. In the present section, we additionally assume that the metric on $``$ is Ricci-flat and Kahler. However, in subsequent sections this will not be the case.

Ricci-flat, Kahler metrics on $``$ are parameterized by $`h_{(1,1)}`$ Kahler moduli and $`h_{(2,1)}`$ complex structure moduli . After dimensional reduction, the corresponding scalar fields become components of $`h_{(1,1)}1`$ vector multiplets and $`h_{(2,1)}+1`$ hypermultiplets. The vector multiplet scalars correspond to the Kahler moduli subject to the constraint of fixed volume for $``$. The overall volume modulus becomes part of the universal hypermultiplet. The hypermultiplets will not be relevant to our discussion of $`M`$-branes wrapping Kahler calibrated cycles, and we will ignore them in the following. They would be important for an analogous discussion of $`M`$-branes wrapping SLAG calibrated cycles.

The bosonic fields of $`D=11`$ supergravity are the metric $`G_{MN}`$111The conventions we use for coordinate indices are as follows: $`M,N=0,1,\mathrm{},10`$ are $`D=11`$ coordinate indices, $`m,n=1,2,3`$ are complex coordinate indices on $``$, and $`\mu ,\nu =0,1,2,3,4`$ are indices for the $`D=5`$ non-compact coordinates. and $`3`$-form gauge potential $`A_{MNP}`$. The action for the bosonic fields is given by

$$S=\frac{1}{2k_{11}^2}\left(d^{11}x\sqrt{G}\left(R[G]\frac{1}{48}F^{MNPQ}F_{MNPQ}\right)\frac{1}{6}AFF\right).$$
(1)
The dimensional reduction proceeds by taking the Ricci-flat metric on $``$ to depend on the $`D=5`$ coordinates through the Kahler moduli scalars $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I`$, $`I=1,\mathrm{},h_{(1,1)}`$. The Kahler $`(1,1)`$-form $`J`$ is given in terms of the Hermitian metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ on $``$ by $`J=ig_{m\overline{n}}dz^mdz^{\overline{n}}`$. If $`\alpha ^I`$ are a basis of homology $`2`$-cycles, then the moduli are given by $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I=_{\alpha ^I}J`$. Small variations in the metric on $``$ that preserve the Ricci-flatness condition and leave the complex structure fixed can then be expressed  in terms of small variations of the moduli fields by

$$\delta g_{m\overline{n}}=i\omega _{Im\overline{n}}\delta \mathrm{\Phi }^I,$$
(2)
where $`\omega _I`$ form a harmonic basis for $`H^{(1,1)}(,Z)`$ with respect to $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ normalized such that $`_{\alpha ^I}\omega _J=\delta _J^I`$. Within cohomology we then have the equality

$$J=\omega _I\mathrm{\Phi }^I.$$
(3)
A total of $`h_{(1,1)}`$ massless $`D=5`$, $`1`$-form gauge fields $`A_\mu ^I`$ arise from taking the $`D=11`$, $`3`$-form gauge potential to have the form

$$A_{\mu m\overline{n}}=A_\mu ^I\omega _{Im\overline{n}}.$$
(4)
One linear combination of these vector fields becomes the graviphoton, part of the graviton multiplet, leaving $`h_{(1,1)}1`$ vector fields, which combine with the constrained Kahler moduli to form the bosonic content of the $`h_{(1,1)}1`$ vector multiplets.

The bosonic action of $`D=5`$, $`N=2`$ supergravity that results from the dimensional reduction is then given by

$$S=\frac{1}{2\kappa _5^2}d^5x\sqrt{g}\left\{R\frac{1}{2}G_{IJ}_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^I^\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^J\frac{1}{2}G_{IJ}F_{\mu \nu }{}_{}{}^{I}F_{}^{\mu \nu J}+\frac{1}{24}ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma \lambda }C_{IJK}F_{\mu \nu }^IF_{\rho \sigma }^JA_\lambda ^K\right\}.$$
(5)
Here $`C_{IJK}`$ are a set of integer constants given by the integral

$$C_{IJK}=_{}\omega _I\omega _J\omega _K,$$
(6)
which is well-defined on cohomology. This computation can also be recast in terms of the intersection number of homology $`4`$-cycles. In this formulation the integer-valuedness of $`C_{IJK}`$ is immediately apparent. The volume form on $``$ is given by $`JJJ/6`$. By virtue of equations (3) and (6) the overall volume of $``$ is then given by $`V(\mathrm{\Phi })=\frac{1}{6}C_{IJK}\mathrm{\Phi }^I\mathrm{\Phi }^J\mathrm{\Phi }^K`$. The vector multiplet scalars are constrained to leave the overall volume of $``$ constant. If we fix this constant to unity, then the constraint on the scalars $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I`$ in the action (5) becomes

$$\frac{1}{6}C_{IJK}\mathrm{\Phi }^I\mathrm{\Phi }^J\mathrm{\Phi }^K=1.$$
(7)
The moduli space metric, which also serves as the gauge coupling matrix in (5), is given by

$$G_{IJ}=\frac{1}{2}_I_J\mathrm{ln}V(\mathrm{\Phi })|_{V=1}.$$
(8)
Finally we note that an alternate formulation of the dimensional reduction could be given in terms of dual moduli associated with the integrals of $`JJ`$ over a basis of homology $`4`$-cycles. Such a reformulation turns out to be useful for the reduction of wrapped M2-branes to $`D=5`$ black holes and will be discussed below in section (4).

## 3 M5-branes wrapping 4-cycles and $`D=5`$ Black Strings

An M5-brane wrapping a supersymmetric $`4`$-cycle of a Calabi-Yau 3-fold yields a BPS black string in $`5`$-dimensions. The resulting $`5`$-dimensional solutions have been given in reference . We want to see how these black string spacetimes emerge as appropriate limits of the $`11`$-dimensional FS spacetimes for M5-branes wrapping $`4`$-cycles that were given in reference .

### 3.1 Black strings

The $`D=5`$ black string spacetimes of reference  are given by

$`ds^2=f^{1/3}(dt^2+dy^2)+f^{+2/3}\delta _{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta `$ (9)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }^I=f^{1/3}f^I`$ (10)
$`F_{\alpha \beta }^I=ϵ_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\delta ^{\gamma \rho }_\rho f^I.`$ (11)
The string lies along the $`y`$ axis and $`x^\alpha `$ with $`\alpha =1,2,3`$ are the spatial directions transverse to the string. The functions $`f^I(x^\alpha )`$ are harmonic with respect to the flat metric on the $`3`$-dimensional transverse space, i.e. $`_{}^2f^I=0`$ with $`_{}^2=\delta ^{\alpha \beta }_\alpha _\beta `$. Finally, the metric function $`f`$ is determined by the relation

$$f=\frac{1}{6}C_{IJK}f^If^Jf^K$$
(12)
which implements the constraint (7) that the volume of the internal Calabi-Yau space is constant.

### 3.2 Wrapped M5-branes

The $`D=11`$, FS spacetimes for M5-branes wrapping $`4`$-cycles of Calabi-Yau 3-folds  are given by

$$ds^2=H^{1/3}(dt^2+dy^2)+H^{2/3}\delta _{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta +2H^{1/3}k_{m\overline{n}}dz^mdz^{\overline{n}},$$
(13)
$$A_{tzm\overline{n}r\overline{s}}=H^1(k_{m\overline{n}}k_{r\overline{s}}k_{m\overline{s}}k_{r\overline{n}}).$$
(14)
where $`z^m`$ with $`m=1,2,3`$ are complex coordinates on the Calabi-Yau space $``$. The function $`H`$ and the Hermitian metric $`k_{m\overline{n}}`$ depend both on position on $``$ and on the noncompact transverse coordinates. Note that the Hermitian metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ on $``$ is written as a conformal rescaling $`g_{m\overline{n}}=H^{1/3}k_{m\overline{n}}`$ of the Hermitian metric $`k_{m\overline{n}}`$. This rescaling is convenient because it simplifies the constraints imposed by supersymmetry on the spacetime fields. In particular, if we consider the metric on $``$ with fixed transverse coordinates $`x^\alpha `$, then supersymmetry requires that $`k_{m\overline{n}}`$ be a Kahler metric on $``$ 222In reference  it was simply assumed that the metric $`k_{m\overline{n}}`$ in (13) was Kahler. In reference  it was shown that this requirement is imposed by supersymmetry in the present case. However, for similarly constructed wrapped M2-brane spacetimes the condition imposed by supersymmetry turns out in some cases to be less restrictive . One instance of this will be discussed in the following section. This implies that the unrescaled metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}=H^{1/3}k_{m\overline{n}}`$ will also be Kahler only if the function $`H`$ is constant on $``$, i.e. if $`H`$ depends only on the transverse coordinates.

Supersymmetry also requires that the function $`H`$ and the Kahler metric $`k_{m\overline{n}}`$ satisfy the further constraints

$$_\alpha \mathrm{log}(k/H)=0$$
(15)
$$_m_{\overline{n}}\mathrm{log}(k/H)=0,$$
(16)
where $`k=det(k_{m\overline{n}})`$. We can now note that, since the complex dimension of $``$ is $`3`$, the determinant of the unrescaled metric is given by $`g=detg_{m\overline{n}}=k/H`$, which is the quantity that appears in (15) and (16). These constraints then have the following simple geometrical interpretations. Equation (15) implies that the volume element on $``$ is independent of the transverse coordinates. In particular, this implies that the total volume of $``$ is constant. This is in accordance with the overall volume constraint (7).

Equation (16) is a Ricci-flatness condition on $``$, but not for the usual Levi-Civita connection. Recall that a complex manifold $``$ with a Hermitian metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$, admits a unique, metric compatible, Hermitian connection given in components by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{mn}^p=g^{p\overline{r}}_mg_{n\overline{r}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\overline{m}\overline{n}}^{\overline{p}}=g^{\overline{p}r}_{\overline{m}}g_{\overline{n}r}`$. The Ricci tensor determined by this Hermitian connection has nonzero components given by

$$R_{m\overline{n}}=_m_{\overline{n}}\mathrm{log}g.$$
(17)
We then recognize the left hand side of (16) as minus the Ricci tensor of the Hermitian connection compatible with the unrescaled metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ on $``$. Finally, note that the Hermitian connection will be torsion free and hence coincide with the Levi-Civita connection only if the metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ is Kahler. We have noted above that this will not generally be the case. Hence, equation (16) does not generally imply that $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ is Ricci-flat with respect to the Levi-Civita connection. This makes sense, of course, because the gauge field stress-energy tensor has non-zero components in the directions tangent to $``$. It seems interesting that despite this a simple, alternative Ricci-flatness condition holds333The vanishing of the first Chern class of $``$ implies that the Ricci form associated with (17) must be trivial in cohomology. The condition $`R_{m\overline{n}}=0`$ is certainly consistent with this..

Finally, we examine the equations of motion for the $`7`$-form gauge field strength. After making use of the constraints imposed by supersymmetry, only the equation $`_AF^{Atym\overline{n}r\overline{s}}=0`$ yields a new constraint. If we define the rescaled Kahler $`(1,1)`$-form $`J_k=ik_{m\overline{n}}dz^mdz^{\overline{n}}`$ and consider the function $`H`$ to be a $`(0,0)`$-form on $``$, then this component of the gauge field equations takes the simple form

$$_{}^2J_k+2\overline{}H=0.$$
(18)
This says that acting with the transverse Laplacian on the Kahler form $`J_k`$ yields an exact form on $``$.

### 3.3 Dimensionally reducing the wrapped M5-brane spacetimes

We now want to see that the $`D=5`$ black string spacetimes (9) are indeed the dimensional reductions of the $`D=11`$ wrapped M5-brane spacetimes given in (13) and (14). We could a priori carry out this comparison in two different ways. We could try to lift the $`D=5`$ solutions to $`D=11`$, or we could try to reduce the $`D=11`$ solutions to $`D=5`$.

The lifting method is hampered by the lack of a nonlinear ansatz for $`D=11`$ fields in terms of the massless $`D=5`$ degrees of freedom. Ideally, given a configuration of the massless $`D=5`$ fields, which solve the $`D=5`$ equations of motion, we would have a formula that lifts it to a configuration of $`D=11`$ fields that solve the $`D=11`$ equations of motion. Such a nonlinear ansatz has recently been found for the $`AdS_4\times S^7`$ compactification of $`11`$-dimensional supergravity  . At present, however, for Calabi-Yau compactifications we can only do this with very limited accuracy, i.e. to linear order in small variations of the moduli and small $`D=5`$ gauge field strengths. This approximation is sufficient for deriving the dimensional reduction of $`D=11`$ supergravity to $`D=5`$, $`N=2`$ supergravity, as sketched in section (2). However, it ignores, for example, the backreaction of the gauge field stress-energy, which would enter at quadratic order, on the Calabi-Yau metric. If we do not ignore these terms, then the Calabi-Yau metric will not be Ricci-flat.

We could restrict our comparison to the region in which the linearized approximation is good, so that the metric on $``$ is Ricci-flat. In the $`D=5`$ spacetimes, it is straightforward to identify this region. The linearized approximation becomes increasingly good in the far field limit, i.e. far from the position of the brane in the transverse space, where the field strengths and derivatives of the moduli fields are small. However, $`D=5`$, $`N=2`$ supergravity governs the dynamics of the massless $`D=5`$ fields exactly. Moreover in the near filed region of the $`D=5`$ black string spacetimes, derivatives of the moduli fields become large as do the gauge field strengths. Therefore, we would like to be able to compare the $`D=5`$ and $`D=11`$ spacetimes throughout the transverse space.

Our strategy will be to start by making the comparison in the far field region, where the linearized approximation is valid and the metric on $``$ is approximately Ricci-flat. In this region, it is straightforward to extract the massless $`D=5`$ field content from the $`D=11`$ fields. Based on these results, we will see that there is a natural extension of this map from $`D=11`$ fields to massless $`D=5`$ fields that holds throughout the transverse space.

In order to begin, we need to identify the region of the $`D=11`$ FS spacetimes in which the linearized approximation holds and the metric on $``$ becomes approximately Ricci-flat. From the analysis of the supersymmetry constraints in section (3.2) we know that the metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ on $``$ becomes Ricci-flat in the limit that the function $`H`$ is constant on $``$. This must therefore be the case in the far field region of interest. Hence, in making our comparison we start by looking at the FS spacetimes with the assumption that $`H`$ is constant on $``$. Examining the FS spacetime metric (13), we see that the $`D=5`$ part of the metric matches the black string metric (9) if we simply identify $`H=f`$. The moduli of the Calabi-Yau part of the $`D=11`$ metic are given in this limit by $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I=H^{1/3}h^I`$, where the $`h^I`$ are moduli of the rescaled Kahler form $`J_k`$,

$$h^I(x^\alpha )=_{\alpha ^I}J_k.$$
(19)
Making the identification $`h^I=f^I`$, we see that the moduli of the FS spacetimes will have the same form as the moduli scalars of the black string spacetime (10), if we can show that the functions $`h^I`$ are harmonic in the transverse space. Turning to the gauge field equation of motion (18), we see that the second term vanishes since $`H`$ is constant along $``$ in the far field limit. Integrating equation (18) over a homology $`2`$-cycle $`\alpha ^I`$, then gives

$$_{}^2h^I=0$$
(20)
and we see the functions $`h^I`$ are indeed harmonic in the transverse space. We have not yet checked agreement for the gauge fields. We will see below that this works as well. Subject to this result, we have now seen that the massless fields extracted from the $`D=11`$ FS spacetimes agree with those of the $`D=5`$ black string in the far field, linearized regime where the Calabi-Yau metric is approximately Ricci-flat.

We now want to extend the identification of massless $`D=5`$ modes with quantities from $`D=11`$ throughout the transvere space. We start by recalling that the metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ on $``$ will not in general be Kahler. The associated Kahler form will consequently not be closed, and its integrals over $`2`$-cycles will not be invariant under deformations within a given homology class. Therefore, moduli cannot be defined with respect to $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ outside of the linearized approximation. The conformally rescaled metric $`k_{m\overline{n}}`$, however, is Kahler and its moduli $`h^I`$ defined above continue to be well defined even outside the linearized regime. Additionally, the $`h^I`$ continue to be harmonic functions throughout the transverse space, i.e. equation (20) continues to hold outside the linearized regime. The second term in (18) no longer vanishes. However, it is an exact form and its integral over a homology cycle $`\alpha ^I`$ necessarilly vanishes. Hence the moduli of the rescaled metric $`k_{m\overline{n}}`$ are harmonic functions even close to the brane in the transverse space where the $`D=5`$ fields are varying rapidly and the linearized approximaion fails. The identification $`h^I=f^I`$ between the harmonic functions can then be extended throughout the transverse space.

We now construct a $`D=5`$ function $`h(x^\alpha )`$ from the $`D=11`$ function $`H(z^m,z^{\overline{n}},x^\alpha )`$ by integrating over $``$ in the following way

$$h^1=\frac{1}{V_k}_{}H^1d(vol)_k,$$
(21)
where $`d(vol)_k`$ and $`V_k`$ are the volume element and the total volume of $``$ with respect to the conformally rescaled metric $`k_{m\overline{n}}`$. This extracts the harmonic component of $`H^1`$ with respect to $`k_{m\overline{n}}`$. Since the volume form associated with the Kahler metric $`k_{m\overline{n}}`$ is given by $`\frac{1}{6}J_k^{3}`$, we have the result $`V_k=\frac{1}{6}C_{IJK}h^Ih^Jh^k`$. Because the volume $`V`$ of the Calabi-Yau manifold $``$ with respect to the unrescaled metric $`g_{m\overline{n}}`$ is simply the right hand side of (21) without the $`1/V_k`$ prefactor, we then have the relation $`V=\frac{1}{6}h^1C_{IJK}h^Ih^Jh^k`$, together with the constraint (15) that $`V`$ is constant in the transverse space. We can then normalize the volume to one, $`V=1`$, and identify the function $`h`$ with the metric function $`f`$ in the black string spacetime (9).

Finally, we must see how the gauge field strength of the wrapped M5-brane in (14) dimensionally reduces to that of the $`D=5`$ black string in (9). To understand the correct way to proceed, note that if we regard an M5-brane as an electric object with $`7`$-form field strength, then its charge is computed by integrating the dual $`4`$-form field strength over a $`4`$-surface $`𝒩`$ that surrounds the brane. Similarly, the charge of a $`D=5`$ black string, regarded as an electric object, is obtained by integrating the $`2`$-form dual of its field strength over an $`S^2`$ that surrounds it. We reduce from $`D=11`$ to $`D=5`$ by decomposing the $`4`$-surface surrounding the M5-brane as $`𝒩=\mathrm{\Sigma }\times S^2`$, where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a $`2`$-surface in $``$ and the $`S^2`$ surrounds the $`D=5`$ black string. Only the homology class of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ within $``$ is important, so all the information about the $`M5`$-brane charge is contained in the integrals of the dual $`4`$-form field strength over the basis homology cycles $`\alpha ^I`$. Making use of equation (15) the $`(1,1)`$-form part of the dual field strength reduces to

$$F_{\alpha \beta m\overline{n}}=iϵ_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\delta ^{\gamma \lambda }_\lambda k_{m\overline{n}}.$$
(22)
Integration over the basis $`2`$-cycles $`\alpha ^I`$ then correctly gives the $`D=5`$, $`2`$-form field strengths

$`F_{\alpha \beta }^I`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\alpha ^I}}F_{\alpha \beta m\overline{n}}𝑑z^m𝑑z^{\overline{n}}`$ (23)
$`=`$ $`ϵ_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\delta ^{\gamma \lambda }_\lambda {\displaystyle _{\alpha ^I}}J_k`$ (24)
$`=`$ $`ϵ_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\delta ^{\gamma \lambda }_\lambda h^I`$ (25)
which match those of the black string spacetime as given in equation (11). This completes the identification of the black string spacetimes as the dimensional reduction of the $`D=11`$ wrapped M5-brane spacetimes. We have seen, in particular, that although the metric on the Calabi-Yau space is not Kahler, that an alternative set of moduli parameters can be definied in terms of the rescaled metric $`k_{m\overline{n}}`$ and that these coincide with the harmonic functions appearing in the $`D=5`$ massless scalars $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I`$.

## 4 M2-branes wrapping 2-cycles and $`D=5`$ Black Holes

We now turn to M2-branes wrapping supersymmetric $`2`$-cycles, which dimensionally reduce these to $`D=5`$ black holes. Because many of the important points arose already in section (3), the discussion in this section will be brief. However, we will see that there is an interesting interplay between the role played by dual moduli in the black hole solutions and the fact that supersymmetry of the $`D=11`$, FS spacetimes requires only that the square of the Kahler form $`J_k`$ be a closed form .

### 4.1 Black holes

The $`D=5`$ black hole spacetimes  are given by

$`ds_5^2=f^{4/3}dt^2+f^{2/3}\delta _{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta `$ (26)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_I={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}f^{2/3}f_I`$ (27)
$`G_{IJ}F_{0\alpha }^J={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}f^{4/3}_\alpha f_I,`$ (28)
where $`\alpha ,\beta =1,2,3,4`$, $`G_{IJ}`$ is the moduli space metric (8) and the functions $`f_I`$ satisfy $`_{}^2f_I=0`$. Here the fields $`\mathrm{\Phi }_I`$ are dual moduli that implicitly determine the moduli $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I`$ through the relation

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_I=\frac{1}{6}C_{IJK}\mathrm{\Phi }^J\mathrm{\Phi }^K.$$
(29)
The metric function $`f`$ is determined by the constraint (7) that the overall volume modulus be constant, which can also be rewritten as the condition $`\mathrm{\Phi }_I\mathrm{\Phi }^I=1`$.

The dual moduli determine the cohomology class of the square of the Kahler form on $``$. By Poincare duality, there exists a basis of homology $`4`$-cycles $`\beta _I`$, such that the oriented intersection numbers $`\mathrm{\#}(,)`$ of the $`\beta _I`$ with the homology $`2`$-cycles $`\alpha ^J`$ are given by $`\mathrm{\#}(\alpha ^I,\beta _J)=\delta _J^I`$. We can now choose a basis $`\lambda ^I`$ for $`H^4(M,Z)`$ such that $`_{\beta _J}\lambda ^I=\delta _J^I`$. We then also have the relation $`_{}\omega _J\lambda ^I=\delta _J^I`$. The dual moduli defined by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_I=\frac{1}{6}_{\beta _I}JJ$$
(30)
are then related to the moduli $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I`$ by equation (29).

The appearance of the moduli space metric $`G_{IJ}`$ in the expression for the electric field of the black hole (28) is another indication of the role played by $`4`$-cycles on $``$ in these solutions. One can formulate $`D=11`$ supergravity in terms of the dual $`7`$-form field strength and its $`6`$-form gauge potential. Massless $`D=5`$ gauge fields then corresponding to taking

$$A_{\mu \nu k\overline{l}m\overline{n}}=A_{I\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{\omega }_{k\overline{l}m\overline{n}}^I$$
(31)
where the $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }^I`$ are a basis for harmonic $`(2,2)`$ forms normalized such that $`_{\beta _J}\stackrel{~}{\omega }^I=\delta _J^I`$ and related to the basis of harmonic $`(1,1)`$-forms by $`{}_{}{}^{}\omega _{I}^{}=G_{IJ}\stackrel{~}{\omega }^J`$. The $`D=5`$, $`3`$-form field strengths corresponding to (28) are then given simply in terms of the functions $`f_I`$ by

$$F_{I\alpha \beta \gamma }=\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{\alpha \beta \gamma \rho }\delta ^{\rho \sigma }_\sigma f_I.$$
(32)
This form of the gauge field facilitates comparison with the $`D=11`$ spacetimes.

### 4.2 Wrapped $`M2`$-branes

The $`D=11`$, FS spacetimes for M2-branes wrapping 2-cycles of Calabi-Yau three-folds  are given by

$$ds_{11}^2=H^{4/3}dt^2+H^{2/3}d\stackrel{}{x}d\stackrel{}{x}+2H^{1/3}k_{m\overline{n}}dz^mdz^{\overline{n}},A_{tm\overline{n}}=iH^1k_{m\overline{n}}$$
(33)
As shown in reference , the rescaled Kahler form $`J_k`$ in this case need not be closed. Supersymmetry of (33) requires only the weaker condition

$$dJ_k^{2}=0,$$
(34)
where $`J_k^{2}J_kJ_k`$. The further constraints of supersymmetry are again given by equations (15) and (16), with the same geometrical interpretation discussed above. The gauge field equations of motion reduce to a single equation on $`(2,2)`$-forms444This equation is given incorrectly in reference . The correct gauge field equation for an M2-brane wrapping a supersymmetric $`2`$-cycle of a Calabi-Yau $`N`$-fold, for $`N=2,3,4,5`$ is given by $`_{}^2J_k^{N1}+2i(N1)\overline{}(HJ_k^{N2})=0.`$ It was found in  that supersymmetry requires that the Kahler form $`J_k`$ satisfy $`dJ_k^{N1}=0`$. Therefore dual moduli defined by integrals of $`J_k^{N1}`$ would be harmonic in the transverse space.

$$_{}^2J_k^{2}+4i\overline{}(HJ_k)=0.$$
(35)
We see in this case that the transverse Laplacian acting on $`J_k^{2}`$ gives an exact form on $``$.

### 4.3 Dimensionally reducing the wrapped M2-brane spacetimes

The condition $`dJ_k^{2}=0`$ dovetails nicely with the role played by dual moduli in the $`D=5`$ solutions. As in section (3), in this example we can only define moduli associated with the Kahler form $`J`$ in the far-field limit, where the Calabi-Yau metric becomes Ricci-flat and Kahler. Since $`dJ_k0`$, we also cannot define moduli associated with the rescaled Kahler form. However, we can define dual moduli associated with the closed form $`J_k^{2}`$ according to

$$h_I=\frac{1}{6}_{\beta _I}J_k^{2}.$$
(36)
Integrating equation (35) over a homology $`4`$-cycle $`\beta _I`$ then gives $`_{}^2h_I=0`$ and we can make the identification $`h_I=f_I/3`$ throughout the transverse space. Again we can define a $`D=5`$ function $`h`$ from the $`D=11`$ function $`H`$ by equation (21). In the far field limit, $`h=H`$ and the dual moduli of $``$ and the $`D=5`$ metric then reproduce equations (27) and (26) if we set $`f=h`$. It is also then straightforward to check in this limit that the $`D=11`$ gauge field reduces to (32).

## 5 Conclusions

We have shown that the $`D=11`$, FS spacetimes of reference  together with the conditions on teh Kahler form found in reference  dimensionally reduce to $`D=5`$ Calabi-Yau black hole and black strings. This lets us conclude that the $`D=11`$ spacetimes do indeed describe wrapped brane configurations. We are able to identify the $`D=5`$ massless fields with properties of the $`D=11`$ spacetimes throughout the transverse space. This includes regions in which the moduli vary rapidly and field strengths are large, in which the linearized approximation used to construct the dimensionally reduced theory breaks down. Further scrutiny of these results should provide useful clues towards constructing non-linear ansatze for Calabi-Yau reductions of $`D=11`$ supergravity. One could start by asking, for example, what class of metrics on the Calabi-Yau space are relevant for the dimensional reduction. This is similar to questions asked in recent discussions of compactifications with flux, e.g. reference  in which the condition $`dJ^{2}=0`$ on the Kahler form also arises.

In sections (3) and (4) we have discussed the geometrical significance of the supersymmetry constraints and gauge field equations of motion for FS spacetimes. This analysis should be useful in making progress on other questions raised in the introduction. It should also be helpful in organizing the search for further examples of FS spacetimes describing M-branes wrapping SLAG calibrated cycles in Calabi-Yau spaces, or supersymmetric cycles in spaces of exceptional holonomy.

## 6 Acknowledgements

I thank Hyunji Cho, Moataz Emam and Jennie Traschen for there helpful input on this subject. This work was supported in part by National Science Foundation grant PHY-9801875.


text:
# The Event as an Object-Relational Database: Avoiding the Dependency Nightmare

## I INTRODUCTION

Data within an event often relate to one another, e.g., tracks are often matched to showers in the electro-magnetic calorimeter. A simple object-oriented design for objects in an event has these data items containing pointers to one another. Unfortunately, this causes serious dependency problems: large compilation times, extremely long link times, and broken code affects more systems. Using an object-relational model avoids these problems and allows new possibilities.

## II SIMPLE OBJECT-ORIENTED APPROACH

A simple object-oriented design for data in an event is shown in Figure 1. This design has related data grouped into classes, e.g., Track and EM Shower classes. The data values are stored in objects of the appropriate class. For example, data describing one track is stored in one object of class type Track. Finally, links between objects are implemented by embedding pointers into the objects. For example, EM Shower objects hold pointers to any Track which is believed to be matched with that particular shower. The appeal of this design is that it is easy for users to navigate the relationships between objects.

Unfortunately, the simple object-oriented approach leads to many problems. The first problem arises in the software’s interfaces. Adding new relationships between objects means changing the classes involved. This change forces a recompilation of all code that uses those classes. In addition, published objects (objects that are made available to other parts of the code by placing the objects into the event) must be mutable. This is because we need to be able to change an object in order to set its relationship to another object. This design also raises the question of how to handle links in the case where multiple algorithms produce the same data. For example, tracks from different track-finders could be matched to the same EM Showers. Another question is where to put the data that describes the relationship. In the ”track-shower” matching example, where does the distance between the track and the shower live? A final question is, how do two people refer to the same object if each has made a sub-selection of a list? This often arises when people are comparing results from two different analyses that are looking for the same decay mode.

Another set of problems arise for compilation and linking of code. In highly coupled systems, if one piece of code breaks, the whole system can break. E.g., if tracking is broken a user may not be able to do EM shower work. There are standard ways to decrease dependencies in C or C++ large-scale-cpp  but the techniques may not be known by all developers. To avoid excess compilation dependencies in C or C++, you must forward declare data in the header files rather than including the data object header files. To avoid excess linking dependencies, associated objects can not internally access member functions of each other. E.g., we can not have a function that calculates the energy of an EM shower divided by momentum of the track. It is possible to relax this requirement if you organize your code so that the associated routines are in a separate object file. This works since many linkers force resolution of all symbols found in an object file. A further complication is that reference counting smart pointers cause strong compile and link-time dependencies which is unfortunate since they make memory management easier.

The last set of problems we will discuss occur in object storage. Direct references in objects complicate storage. This arises since the storage system needs to convert pointers to and from persistent values. If objects use bidirectional links, it is necessary to construct both objects before linking them. To simplify the storage system, developers often couple their objects directly to the storage system. Unfortunately, this coupling locks the developer into using only one storage mechanism even if that mechanism is not appropriate for all the experiment’s data. Reading and writing objects causes compile, link and runtime dependencies between classes. This is true even if objects only hold pointers to other types of objects. It is possible to avoid some of these dependencies if the developer is willing to read back unlinked objects. Unfortunately, use of such unlinked objects forces physicists who use the system to tell the system when the links should be made. So the user is burdened with the responsibility to be sure the link is made before she tries to use the link.

## III OBJECT-RELATIONAL APPROACH

The problems mentioned in the previous section led us to try an object-relational approach. In this approach, no objects have pointers to objects outside ’atomic’ storage boundaries. E.g., MC particles can hold pointers to their children if they are stored as a unit. A second requirement of this approach is that all objects in lists must have a unique identifier. Physicists can use the identifier when talking with other physicists about the objects. In our system, we use our own templated Table class to hold lists of objects which sort the objects via their identifier method. Also in our system, lists are identified via unique keys based on the type of the objects in the list plus two character strings. Therefore objects can be uniquely identified by what list it is in and by what identifier it has within the list. The final requirement of the object-relational approach is to define relationships via separate objects, which we call Lattices lattice .

A Lattice is an object which links relationship data (e.g., the distance between a Track and an EM Shower) to the identifiers of two different objects (denoted by Left and Right). The Lattice supports all 16 possible configurations for links. A configuration is defined by four separate sub-configurations where each sub-configuration has two choices. The four sub-configurations are:

* 1 or many Lefts per Link
* 1 or many Rights per Link
* 1 or many Links per Left
* 1 or many Links per Right

Figure 2 shows an example of the object-relational approach. The figure shows the Hit, Track and EM Shower objects with each object having a unique identifier within its respective list. Between the Hit and Track lists is the Hit-to-Track Lattice. Within the Lattice you can see the separate objects holding the different link information. For example, the first link in the Hit-to-Track Lattice says that Hit 1 (denoted by the left hand number) is connected with Track 1 (denoted by the right hand number). Similarly, the Track to EM Shower Lattice is shown between the Track and EM Shower lists.

The object-relational approach has many advantages. First, it shortens link times. In our experience, linking usually takes less than 30 seconds on a moderately powerful machine. However, we use dynamic loading so we only have to link to the libraries a module directly needs and this reduction in the number of libraries needed for linking also contributes to our short link times and allows compilation on very moderate machines. Second, this approach simplifies the code used for storage. Because the system is not coupled to one storage mechanism, it is easy to support many specialized storage formats. Third, this approach speeds up data read-back since we only retrieve data a user actually uses. E.g., we can ask if a Track is matched to an EM Shower without needing to construct the EM Showers. Fourth, it is possible to use multiple data sources (each with their own format) on read-back. E.g., our system can build an event by combining a physicist’s data skim with the experiment’s event database.

One disadvantage of this approach is it makes navigating the relationships between objects more complex. To offset this disadvantage, we have created ’Navigation’ objects that give direct access to related objects. These objects internally look up the relationship information in the appropriate Lattice and then use the regular data access mechanism to retrieve the appropriate related objects. Effectively, the Navigation objects do what users would have to do in order to obtain related objects. To avoid interdependencies in critical software, only analysis code is allowed to use Navigation objects. Additionally, we have taken special care so that only by accessing an object via Navigation does the users code become compile/link-time dependent on that object. E.g., if a user does not use EM Showers then you do not need to link to them, even though the Navigation tracks could access them. Finally, to make code maintenance easier, we only allow the one library that holds the Navigation objects to have interdependencies between objects. It also means that only the developer in charge of the Navigation library has to be an expert on how to minimize interdependencies in C++ code.

## IV CONCLUSION

The general wisdom when writing code is that compile/link/run-time dependencies make code less robust. We have found it possible to avoid unnecessary dependencies by encapsulating relationships between objects into a separate object. However, providing direct link objects only to analysis users works well. Their code usually accesses most high level data objects, and analysis code has the shortest usage lifetime so long-term maintenance issues are less important. By following the object-relational approach, we have seen our user’s productivity and satisfaction increase because they have gained shorter compile and run times.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation.