text:
# Anomaly-Free Flavor Symmetry and Neutrino Anarchy

\[

IUHET-428 October 2000

## Abstract

We show that one can describe the quark and lepton masses with a single anomaly-free $`U(1)`$ flavor symmetry provided a single order one parameter is enhanced by roughly $`45`$. The flavor symmetry can be seen to arise from inside the $`E_6`$ symmetry group in such a way that it commutes with the $`SU(5)`$ grand unified gauge group. The scenario does not distinguish between the left-handed lepton doublets and hence is a model of neutrino anarchy. It can therefore account for the large mixing observed in atmospheric neutrino experiments and predicts that the solar neutrino oscillation data is consistent with the large mixing angle solution of matter-enhanced oscillations.

\]

Introduction:  The traditional approach to expressing the CKM matrix and the quark and lepton matrices is to expand in the small parameter, $`\lambda |V_{us}|0.22`$. This is well-justified because the experimental data for the mass ratios and CKM elements appears to be well-described by integer exponents of this expansion parameter,

$`|V_{us}|\lambda ,|V_{cb}|\lambda ^2,|V_{ub}|\lambda ^4.`$ (1)
One also has a constraint on the CKM elements from $`B_d^0\overline{B}_d^0`$ mixing,

$`|V_{tb}^{}V_{td}|=0.0084\pm 0.0018,`$ (2)
which implies that

$`|V_{td}|\lambda ^3.`$ (3)
In the quark sector, one has the mass ratios

$`{\displaystyle \frac{m_u}{m_c}}\lambda ^4,{\displaystyle \frac{m_c}{m_t}}\lambda ^4{\displaystyle \frac{m_d}{m_s}}\lambda ^2,{\displaystyle \frac{m_s}{m_b}}\lambda ^2,`$ (4)
while in the lepton sector, the mass ratios

$`{\displaystyle \frac{m_\mu }{m_\tau }}\lambda ^2,{\displaystyle \frac{m_e}{m_\tau }}\lambda ^4.`$ (5)
These mass ratios are valid at a high (grand unified) scale and are consistent with the experimental constraints near the electroweak scale after including renormalization group scaling. The remaining constraints on leptons involve the neutrino masses and mixings. The most interesting aspect of the neutrino data is that the atmospheric neutrino mixing appears to be large, perhaps even maximal. If the neutrino masses also obey some hierarchical relations, it seems at first sight to be difficult to understand such a pattern for the neutrino masses, since large mixing should result when the neutrino masses are of roughly the same order of magnitude. The Super-Kamiokande data suggest that

$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^22.2\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2,\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{23}^\nu 1,`$ (6)
where the subscripts indicate the generations of neutrinos involved in the mixing (We assume the mixing is between $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$, and not some sterile neutrino. We are also not using the LSND data.).

The solar neutrino flux can be accounted for by distinct solutions. Two of these involve matter-enhanced oscillation (MSW), while the third involves vacuum oscillations (VO). The two MSW solutions are differentiated by the size of the mixing angle, so one is usually called the small mixing angle (SMA) solution, and the other is called the large mixing angle (LMA) solution. The most recent data disfavors the VO and SMA solution at the 95% confidence level. The rough values required for the mixing parameters in the two MSW cases are shown in the table below.

$`\begin{array}{ccc}& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{1x}^2[eV^2]& \mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{1x}\\ \mathrm{MSW}(\mathrm{SMA})& 5\times 10^6& 6\times 10^3\\ \mathrm{MSW}(\mathrm{LMA})& 2\times 10^5& 1\end{array}`$ (7)
Since the most recent data favors the LMA solution for solar neutrinos, there has been a great deal of effort recently to explain the neutrino data with various approaches like bimaximal mixing models or neutrino anarchy. The LMA solution is the most interesting from the standpoint of neutrino factories, but requires us to understand how the lepton sector differs in terms of hierarchies (of masses and mixing angles) from the quark sector. In this note we present a model that exhibits neutrino anarchy.

Flavor symmetries have been useful tools for modeling the patterns of fermion masses and mixings. The Froggatt-Nielsen mechanism is a popular method for systematically generating a hierarchy in the Yukawa couplings. Conside a horizontal $`U(1)_\theta `$ symmetry under which the Standard Model fields carry charges. Yukawa interactions are now required to respect this horizontal (or flavor) symmetry, and they can arise in two ways: (1) as renormalizable interactions $`\mathrm{\Psi }_i\mathrm{\Psi }_jH`$, or (2) as nonrenormalizable interactions involving a gauge singlet superfield $`\theta `$ which we can assume without loss of generality has a flavor charge $`1`$,

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_i\mathrm{\Psi }_jH\left({\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{M}}\right)^{n_{ij}}.`$ (8)
For this effective term to respect the flavor symmetry, the charges of the fields must sum to zero. The assumed smallness of the parameter $`ϵ=\frac{<\theta >}{M}`$ can give rise then to a hierarchy of masses from factors of the form $`ϵ^{n_{ij}}`$. Following the reasoning given in the previous section, we take $`ϵ\lambda ^2`$ where again $`\lambda `$ is identified with the (sine of) Cabibbo angle, $`0.22`$. The Froggatt-Nielsen mechanism does not by itself determine the order one coefficients. A fundamental theory would presumably fix their values.

A flavor symmetry can suppress the entries in a systematic way compared to order one entries. By assigning charges to the various fields one can obtain Yukawa matrices in reasonable agreement with the experimentally measured values.

We suggest in this note that the true expansion parameter is actually $`ϵ\lambda ^2`$, and the largeness of $`|V_{us}|`$ in comparison to $`ϵ`$ comes about because of a presumably order one coefficient, $`C`$, that turns out to be of order $`45`$. The same large coefficient can contribute to $`|V_{td}|`$ yielding a value $`(45)ϵ^2`$ which is consistent with previous expansions in terms of $`\lambda `$, Eq. (3). This also resolves the problem of the discrepancy between the relative sizes of $`|V_{ub}|`$ and $`|V_{td}|`$ where the former is best described by $`\lambda ^4`$ and the latter is best described by $`\lambda ^3`$; this mismatch has proven to be a challenge to model builders employing a $`U(1)`$ flavor symmetry. In most unified models the quark charges are related to the lepton charges and odd exponents appear in the mixing angles in the neutrino sector, in disagreement with the data. It can be overcome but usually requires a more complicated flavor symmetry than might otherwise be the case.

If one takes the hierarchy in Eq. (1) seriously and insists on obtaining $`|V_{us}|\lambda `$ and $`|V_{td}|\lambda ^3`$, then there is a unique solution implementing a $`U(1)`$ flavor symmetry. This solution is the one found by Elwood, Irges, and Ramond. The lepton sector can be given charge assignments, and neutrino masses and mixings can be derived. We emphasize here that the neutrino data prefers even exponents of $`\lambda `$ to best describe the experimental data. The data suggests that $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{1x}\lambda ^0`$ (which henceforth we will denote simply by 1) for the LMA solution, or $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{1x}\lambda ^2`$ for the SMA solution. The model gives, however, that $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{1x}\lambda ^3`$, a value that is somewhat small compared to the MSW(SMA) solution. It can be shown that this odd exponent results from grand unified relations between quarks and leptons and the insistence that there are odd exponents in the CKM elements. We show below that the odd exponents in the quark sector can be seen as arising from just one order one coefficient that has fluctuated upward enough to disturb the naive hierarchy by one inverse power of $`\lambda `$. Furthermore it seems likely that if any of the undertermined order one coefficients does fluctuate to a large value, it is most likely to be ones arising in the lighter two generations.

Large mixing for neutrinos is problematic for two reasons: (1) it seems that without fine tuning, large mixing should be associated with mass eigenvalues of the same order of magnitude, and (2) the CHOOZ data indicates that one of the three mixing angles is small ($`|U_{e3}|<0.15`$, where $`U`$ is the neutrino mixing matrix), of order $`\lambda `$ or smaller. Both of these issues have been discussed recently in Refs.  where it was shown that it is not so unnatural for a neutrino mass matrix with all entries of order one to give acceptable mixing angles in agreement with the neutrino data.

The Anomaly-Free Abelian Flavor Symmetry:  Our approach is to find an anomaly-free flavor symmetry. We assume that this $`U(1)`$ symmetry breaks, despite the absence of a Green-Schwarz mechanism, so as to give a hierarchical mass matrix pattern according to the Froggatt-Nielsen mechanism. The large mixing angles for neutrinos can be achieved by having the lepton electroweak doublets be indistinguishable under the flavor symmetry. Embedding these doublets into the $`\mathrm{𝟓}^{}`$ multiplet of $`SU(5)`$ and assigning flavor charges to the $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}`$ multiplet, one can then assign charges that yield the correct mass ratios for the quarks, Eq. (4). The charges for the quark fields in $`SU(5)`$ multilplets are as follows ($`i=1,2,3`$) where we use $`\lambda `$ as the expansion parameter and require the flavor charges to be even integers:

$`\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}_i(4,2,0),`$ (9)
$`\mathrm{𝟓}_{}^{}{}_{i}{}^{}(0,0,0).`$ (10)
This gives rise to the Yukawa matrices

$`𝐔\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^8& \lambda ^6& \lambda ^4\\ \lambda ^6& \lambda ^4& \lambda ^2\\ \lambda ^4& \lambda ^2& 1\end{array}\right)𝐃\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^4& \lambda ^4& \lambda ^4\\ \lambda ^2& \lambda ^2& \lambda ^2\\ 1& 1& 1\end{array}\right),`$ (11)
for the quark sector. This set of matrices has been suggested previously as giving a reasonable fit to the data apart from the measured values of $`|V_{us}|`$ and $`|V_{td}|`$ seemed to be enhanced by roughly one inverse power of $`\lambda `$.

The enhancement of $`|V_{td}|`$ and $`|V_{us}|`$ can easily arise from the same large order one coefficient. Given the down-type Yukawa matrix in Eq. (11), one finds the following expression for the leading contribution to the CKM matrix elements

$`s_{12}^d`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{d_{12}}{\stackrel{~}{d}_{22}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d_{13}d_{32}}{\stackrel{~}{d}_{22}}}\right)`$ (14)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{d}_{22}^2}}\left(d_{11}d_{21}d_{11}d_{31}(d_{23}+d_{22}d_{32})\right)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{d}_{22}^2}}(d_{32}d_{12}+d_{13})\left(d_{21}d_{31}+d_{31}^2(d_{23}+d_{22}d_{32})\right),`$
where $`d_{ij}=𝐃_{ij}/𝐃_{33}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{d}_{22}=d_{22}d_{23}d_{32}`$. In Eq. (14), $`s_{12}^d`$ is expressed for the case in which all of the mixing angles in the right-handed transformation matrix needed to diagonalize $`𝐃`$ are large as in Eq. (11). This generalized expressions given in the literature for which only the mixing angle in the second and third generation is of order one. The CKM matrix can be characterized by four mixing angles which are given to leading order by

$`|V_{us}|=s_{12}^ds_{12}^u,`$ (15)
$`|V_{cb}|=s_{23}^ds_{23}^u,`$ (16)
$`|V_{ub}|=s_{13}^ds_{13}^us_{12}^u|V_{cb}|,`$ (17)
$`|V_{td}|=s_{13}^d+s_{13}^u+s_{12}^d|V_{cb}|.`$ (18)
There are phases in the Yukawa entries which do not affect the expansion in terms of $`\lambda `$, and so we omit them here. A large order one coefficient that enhances $`s_{12}^d`$ from its expected magnitude of $`\lambda ^2`$ to order $`\lambda `$ will enhance just those CKM elements that the data tells us are large. One can easily see that the large order one coefficient $`C`$ contributes to $`|V_{us}|`$ and $`|V_{td}|`$ by looking at the constraints from the unitarity of the CKM matrix. Consider the following unitarity relation

$`V_{ud}V_{ub}^{}+V_{cd}V_{cb}^{}+V_{td}V_{tb}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (19)
From this relation one immediately sees that an enhancement of $`|V_{cb}|`$ by a factor $`45`$ that doesn’t at the same time enhance $`|V_{ub}|`$ must be compensated by an enhancement of $`|V_{td}|`$.

Figure 1: Unitarity triangle corresponding to Eq. (19).

The Yukawa matrix for the charged lepton sector can be deduced from the charge assignments in Eq. (10),

$`𝐄\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^4& \lambda ^2& 1\\ \lambda ^4& \lambda ^2& 1\\ \lambda ^4& \lambda ^2& 1\end{array}\right),`$ (20)
which yields good agreement with the known mass ratios. The indistinguishability of the $`\mathrm{𝟓}^{}`$ multiplets with respect to the $`U(1)`$ flavor symmetry gives rise to large mixing in the lepton sector.

Embedding in $`E_\mathrm{𝟔}`$ In the usual chain of embedding $`SO(10)`$ inside $`E_6`$ and $`SU(5)`$ inside $`S0(10)`$, there arise two $`U(1)`$ symmetries:

$`E_6SO(10)\times U(1)_\psi ,`$ (21)
$`SO(10)SU(5)\times U(1)_\chi .`$ (22)
Both of these $`U(1)`$ symmetries as well as any linear combination is guaranteed to be anomaly free by virtue of that fact that $`E_6`$ is an anomaly free group. We can assign charges to the fields in a way that is $`SU(5)`$-symmetric, and that also respects the $`U(1)`$ flavor symmetry.

The charges of the SU(5) multiplets under the $`U(1)_\psi `$ and $`U(1)_\chi `$ are

$`\begin{array}{ccccccccc}& \mathrm{𝟏𝟎}_𝐚& \mathrm{𝟓}_𝐚^{}& \mathrm{𝟏}_𝐚& & \mathrm{𝟓}_𝐛& \mathrm{𝟓}_𝐛^{}& & \mathrm{𝟏}_𝐜\\ 2\sqrt{10}Q_\chi & 1& 3& 5& & 2& 2& & 0\\ 2\sqrt{6}Q_\psi & 1& 1& 1& & 2& 2& & 4\end{array}.`$ (26)
The charges are grouped into the $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟔}`$, $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ representations of $`SO(10)`$ inside a $`\mathrm{𝟐𝟕}`$ representation of $`E_6`$. Now it is easy to see that the charge assignments given in the previous section are obtained by taking the linear combination $`Q_\theta =3\times (2\sqrt{6}Q_\psi )/16(2\sqrt{10}Q_\chi )/16`$. This yields the $`U(1)_\theta `$ charges

$`\begin{array}{ccccccccc}& \mathrm{𝟏𝟎}_𝐚& \mathrm{𝟓}_𝐚^{}& \mathrm{𝟏}_𝐚& & \mathrm{𝟓}_𝐛& \mathrm{𝟓}_𝐛^{}& & \mathrm{𝟏}_𝐜\\ 4Q_\theta & 1& 0& 2& & 2& 1& & 3\end{array}.`$ (29)
The charge assignments in Eq. (10) can now be identified as $`(16Q_\theta ,8Q_\theta ,0)`$. This does not then represent a strict embedding of the representations inside $`E_6`$, but since each generation has $`U(1)_\theta `$ charges that are multiples (modings) of the $`SU(5)\times U(1)_\theta `$ inside $`E_6`$, the gauge anomalies are guaranteed to be absent as long as the extra matter content of the $`\mathrm{𝟐𝟕}`$ is present (either near the electroweak scale or at some higher scale). The construction of the flavor charge from the two $`U(1)`$ subgroups of $`E_6`$ guarantees that the couplings $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}_𝐚\mathrm{𝟓}_𝐚^{}\mathrm{𝟓}_𝐛^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟓}_𝐛\mathrm{𝟓}_𝐛^{}\mathrm{𝟏}_𝐜`$ are allowed by the $`U(1)_\theta `$ flavor symmetry.

As is well-known, supersymmetric gauge coupling unification requires that in addition to complete multiplets of $`SU(5)`$ with masses at the electroweak scale, there must be a pair of states with the quantum numbers of the two Higgs doublets of the Minimal Supersymmetric Model (MSSM). These should arise outside of three generations of $`\mathrm{𝟐𝟕}`$ giving rise to the Standard Model matter multiplets and the exotic $`\mathrm{𝟓}_𝐛`$, $`\mathrm{𝟓}_𝐛^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟏}_𝐜`$. These Higgs fields could arise as components from either a $`\mathrm{𝟐𝟕}+\mathrm{𝟐𝟕}^{}`$ or a $`\mathrm{𝟕𝟖}`$. A particularly interesting possibility for the $`U(1)_\theta `$ charges occurs in the former case where one can choose these Higgs fields from the $`\mathrm{𝟓}_𝐚^{}(\mathrm{𝟓}_𝐚)`$ of $`SU(5)`$ inside the $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟔}(\mathrm{𝟏𝟔}^{})`$ of $`SO(10)`$. Then the (unnormalized) $`Q_\chi `$ and $`Q_\psi `$ charges are $`\mathrm{𝟓}_𝐚^{}(3,1)`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟓}_𝐚(3,1)`$, so that the Higgs fields have vanishing $`Q_\theta `$ charge (like the lepton doublets in Eq. (29)).

From the charge assignment for the $`SU(5)`$ singlet state inside the $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟔}`$ of $`SO(10)`$, one obtains the Majorana mass matrix of the right handed neutrinos

$`𝐌_𝐑\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^{16}& \lambda ^{12}& \lambda ^8\\ \lambda ^{12}& \lambda ^8& \lambda ^4\\ \lambda ^8& \lambda ^4& 1\end{array}\right)M_P,`$ (30)
and the Yukawa matrix for the Dirac masses of the neutrinos

$`𝐘_\nu \left(\begin{array}{ccc}\lambda ^8& \lambda ^4& 1\\ \lambda ^8& \lambda ^4& 1\\ \lambda ^8& \lambda ^4& 1\end{array}\right).`$ (31)
(This strong hierarchy in the Majorana mass matrix is useful in explaining the baryon asymmetry of the universe via the process of leptogenesis.) Finally via the seesaw mechanism $`𝐦_\nu =𝐘_{\nu }^{}{}_{}{}^{T}𝐌_{𝐑}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}𝐘_\nu v_2^2`$, where $`v_2`$ is the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs field that couples to the up-type quarks, one obtains the mass matrix of the light neutrinos

$`𝐦_\nu \left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 1& 1\\ 1& 1& 1\\ 1& 1& 1\end{array}\right){\displaystyle \frac{v_2^2}{M_P}}.`$ (32)
Of course, it is not necessary that the right handed neutrinos have the charge assignment in Eq. (29) to obtain this light neutrino mass matrix. It is determined solely by the universal flavor charge assigned to the $`\mathrm{𝟓}_𝐚^{}`$ multiplets in Eq. (10).

Neutrino Oscillations:  Large mixing in the atmospheric neutrino data and LMA solution for solar neutrinos together with the constraint from CHOOZ indicates that the neutrino mixing matrix is of the form

$`U\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 1& \lambda ^k\\ 1& 1& 1\\ \lambda ^k& 1& 1\end{array}\right).`$ (33)
when expanded in powers of $`\lambda `$. However the naive expectation from power counting for the $`U(1)_\theta `$ symmetry indicates that the exponent is $`k=0`$. The model seems to suggest that all three mixing angles are large, and the largeness of $`U_{e3}`$ element is problematic in light of the CHOOZ reactor data, which places an upper limit on the mixing $`U_{e3}`$ from the constraints on $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ disappearance. It appears that, in terms of the expansion in terms of $`\lambda `$, this element of the mixing matrix in Eq. (33) should be of order $`\lambda `$ or smaller to account for the lack of $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ disappearance in the reactor neutrino experiment.

Additionally it seems that such a neutrino mixing matrix implies large mixing between all three generations and neutrinos with masses which do not exhibit a hierarchy. One approach to remedy this situation is to introduce an additional discrete component to the flavor symmetry which can enhance or suppress mass eigenvalues or mixing angles in comparison to their values in a model in which the flavor symmetry is simply $`U(1)`$. However it has been argued recently that it is not so improbable that experimentally acceptable values for neutrino masses and mixings can result, even when naively on the basis of power counting the neutrino mixing matrix appears to give $`U_{e3}`$ typically of order one. This scenario has been dubbed neutrino anarchy. It is argued in Ref. , where a proper weighting of the random order one coefficients has been justified on the assumption of basis-independence of the neutrino states, one can, without much fine tuning, find a result where $`U_{e3}`$ is just below the current experimental limit. Indeed, this can be considered the most characteristic feature of neutrino anarchy that can be experimentally tested in the near future. While an acceptable value for $`U_{e3}`$ occurs only in a 10% tail of its probability distribution, the other observables do not need any fine-tuning, and the argument that has developed is that this situation is not an improbable one.

Conclusions:  We have suggested in this note that if one is willing to give up the assumption that $`|V_{us}|\lambda `$ is the correct expansion parameter for the hierarchies evidenced in the fermion masses and mixings, then one can get a complete description of the masses and mixings in the quark, charged lepton, and neutrino sectors. A particular model in which the $`U(1)`$ horizontal symmetry is nonanomalous is easily constructed by taking the appropriate linear combination of the $`U(1)_\psi `$ and $`U(1)_\chi `$ subgroups of $`E_6`$. The CKM elements satisfy $`|V_{us}|C\lambda ^2`$ and $`|V_{ts}|C\lambda ^4`$ where $`C`$ is a relatively large order one parameter of $`45`$, and the neutrino sector that results falls into the class exhibiting the neutrino anarchy of Refs. .

More generally we feel an interpretation of the hierarchy in terms of a expansion parameter $`ϵ\lambda ^2`$ is quite reasonable and makes the resulting model-building much easier since only even powers of $`\lambda `$ will appear.

The set of $`U(1)`$ flavor charges for the Standard Model particles has appeared in the literature. Here we have shown how to embed this $`U(1)`$ flavor symmetry as a subgroup of the $`E_6`$ symmetry that commutes with the standard $`SU(5)`$ subgroup. Together with recent insights on the viability of models where the three lepton doublets are indistinguishable, the model is in reasonable agreement with all the current experimental data.

This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy under Grant No. No. DE-FG02-91ER40661.


format: text

text:
# Macroscopically large antimatter regions in the baryon asymmetric universe

## Introduction

Since a long time the generally accepted motivation for baryon asymmetric Universe were the direct observations, which claim to exclude the macroscopic amount of antimatter within the distance up to 20Mpc from the solar system exl . Moreover, if larger than 20Mpc regions of matter and antimatter coexist, then it would be impossible to keep them out of the close contact during an early time, because the uniformity of CMBR excludes the existence of any significant voids. The annihilation, which would take place at the border between matter and antimatter region, during the period $`1100>z>20`$, would disturb the diffuse $`\gamma `$ – ray background crg , if the size of matter or antimatter regions does not exceed $`10^3`$Mpc. Thus the baryon symmetric Universe is practically excluded. However, such arguments cannot exclude the case when the Universe is composed almost entirely of matter with relatively small insertions of primordial antimatter. Thus we could expect the existence of macroscopically large antimatter regions in the baryon asymmetric universe as a whole. We call such a region the local antimatter area (LAA).

Any primordial LAA having initial size up to $`1`$pc or more at the end of radiation dominated (RD) stage is survived the boundary annihilation with surrounding matter until the contemporary epoch we  and in the case of successive homogeneous expansion has the critical surviving size $`l_c1kpc`$ or more. The smaller LAA’s will be eaten up by the annihilation. This fact makes problematically to apply any model with usual thermal phase transition to modulate primordial matter antimatter distribution over the size exceeding $`ł_c`$ dolg ; zil . We could think about a possible inflational blow upping of the correlation length of a usual phase transition dolsil , but one should also take care about some unwanted topological defects, which could accompany phase transitions and significantly contribute to the energy density of the universe. Mostly, to get rid from unwanted topological defects some mechanisms of symmetry restoration should be invoked dolsil . Here we present the issue for inhomogeneous baryogenesis zil , which is free from the difficulties connected with usual phase transition approach and able to generate a considerable number of above – critical LAAs, what makes reasonable to discuss the existence of primordial LAA in our galactic volume.

## Formation and evolution of LAA’s

### The Formation scenario.

Our antimatter generation scenario zil  is based on the spontaneous baryogenesis mechanism sb , which implies the existence of complex scalar field $`\chi =(f/\sqrt{2})\mathrm{exp}(\theta )`$ carrying baryonic charge with explicitly broken $`U(1)`$ symmetry. The explicit breakdown of $`U(1)`$ symmetry is coming from the phase depended term, which tilts the bottom of the Nambu – Goldstone (NG) potential. We suppose zil  that the radial mass $`m_\chi `$ of field $`\chi `$ is larger then the Hubble constant $`H`$ during inflation, while for the angular mass of $`\chi `$ just the opposite condition $`m_\theta H`$ is satisfied at that period. It makes sure that $`U(1)`$ symmetry is already broken spontaneously at the beginning of inflation, but the background vacuum energy is still so high, that the tilt of the potential is vanished. This implies that the phase $`\theta `$ behaves as ordinary massless NG boson and the radius of NG potential is firmly established by the scale $`f`$ of spontaneous $`U(1)`$ symmetry breaking. Owing to quantum fluctuations of effectively massless angular component $`\theta `$ at the de Sitter background linde  the phase $`\theta `$ is varied in different regions of the Universe. Actually, such fluctuations can be interpreted as the one – dimensional Brownian motion linde  along the circle valley corresponding to the bottom of the NG potential. When the vacuum energy decreases the tilt of potential becomes topical, and pseudo NG (PNG) field starts oscillate. Let us assume that the phase value $`\theta =0`$ corresponds to South Pole of NG field circle valley, and $`\theta =\pi `$ corresponds to the opposite pole. The positive gradient of phase in this picture is routed as counterclockwise direction, and the dish of PNG potential would locate at the South Pole of circle. The possible interaction of field $`\chi `$ that violates the lepton number can have such a structure zil ; dolgmain , that as the $`\theta `$ rolls down in clockwise direction during the first oscillation, it preferentially creates baryons over antibaryons, while the opposite is true as it rolls down in the opposite direction during the first oscillation. Thus to have the globally baryon dominated Universe one must have the phase sited in the range $`[\pi ,0]`$, just at the beginning of inflation (when the size of the modern Universe crosses the horizon). Then subsequent quantum fluctuations move the phase to some points $`\overline{\theta }_i`$ at the range $`[0,\pi ]`$ causing the antibaryon excess production. If it takes place not later then after 15 e – folds from the beginning of inflation zil , the size of LAA’s will exceed the critical surviving size $`l_c`$. Let set the phase at the point $`\theta _{60}`$ in the range $`[\pi ,0]`$, where for simplicity we suggest that the total number of inflational e – folds is 60. The phase makes Brownian step $`\delta \theta =H/(2\pi f)`$ at each e–fold. Because the typical wavelength of the fluctuation $`\delta \theta `$ generated during such timescale is equal to $`H^1`$, the whole domain $`H^1`$, containing $`\theta _{60}`$, after one e–fold effectively becomes divided into $`e^3`$ separate, causal disconnected domains of radius $`H^1`$. Each domain contains almost homogeneous phase value $`\theta _{601}=\theta _{60}\pm \delta \theta `$. In half of these domains the phase evolves towards $`\pi `$ (the North Pole) and in the other domains it moves towards zero (the South Pole). To have LAA’s with appropriate sizes to avoid full annihilation one should require that the phase value crosses $`\pi `$ or zero not later then after $`15`$ steps. The numerical calculations zil  of the domain size distribution filled with appropriate phase values $`\overline{\theta }_i`$ show that a volume box corresponding to each galaxy can contains 1–10 above – critical regions with appropriate phase $`\overline{\theta }_i`$ at the condition that the fraction of the universe containing $`\overline{\theta }_i`$ is many orders of magnitude less then 1 zil . The last conclusion makes sure that the universe will become baryon asymmetric as a whole. At the some moment after the end of inflation deeply at the Friedman epoch the condition $`m_\theta H`$ is violated and the oscillations of $`\theta `$ around the minima of PNG potential are started. Then the stored energy density $`\rho _\theta \theta ^2m_\theta ^2f^2`$ will convert into baryons and antibaryons. All domains where the phase starts to oscillate from the values $`\overline{\theta }_i`$ will contain antimatter. The density of antimatter depends on the initial value $`\overline{\theta }_i`$ and can be different in the different domains zil . The average number density of surrounding matter should be normalised on the observable one $`n_B/s310^{10}`$. This normalisation sets the condition $`f/m_\theta 10^{10}`$ for the PNG potential zil .

### Anti – star globular cluster formation.

At the condition $`fH10^{13}`$GeV zil  we can have a considerable number of high density above – critical LAA’s that makes sense to discuss the possible evolution of such a LAA in our galaxy. It is well known glob  that clouds, which have temperature near $`10^4`$K and densities several ten times that of the surrounding hot gas, are gravitationally unstable if their masses are of the order of $`10^5M_{}10^6M_{}`$. These objects are identified as the progenitor of globular cluster (GC) and reflect the Jeans mass at the recombination epoch. From the other side the typical size of that mass is close to the $`l_c`$ at the end of RD epoch. Thus if the primordial antibaryon density inside a LAA was one order of magnitude higher then surrounding matter density, that LAA can evolve into antimatter GC khl . Moreover, to imprint a characteristic Jeans mass the proto – GC must cool slowly glob  after the recombination, so the heating of dense antimatter might be supported by annihilation with surrounding matter. Thereby GC at the large galactocentric distance is the ideal astrophysical objects which could be made out of antimatter, because GC’s are the oldest galactic system to form in the universe, and contain stars of the first population. The existence of one of such anti – star GC with the mass $`10^3M_{}10^5M_{}`$ will not disturb observable $`\gamma `$ – ray background khl , but the expected fluxes of $`\overline{{}_{}{}^{4}He}`$ and $`\overline{{}_{}{}^{3}He}`$ from such an antimatter object bgk  are only factor two below the limit of AMS–01 (STS–91) experiment ams  and definitely accessible for the sensitivity of coming up AMS–02 experiment.

### Topological defects and black holes (BH).

The angular term of $`\chi `$ potential $`m_\theta ^2f^2(1\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$, which breaks $`U(1)`$ symmetry explicitly has a number of discrete degenerate minima bh . The equation of motion with such a potential admits a kink – like, domain wall (DW) solution, which interpolates between two adjacent vacua, for example between $`\theta =0`$ and $`\theta =2\pi `$. From the other side our scenario zil  deals with the situation when at the beginning of inflation the universe contains the uniform $`\theta `$ in the interval $`[\pi ,0]`$ and hence the final vacuum state of baryon asymmetric part is $`\theta =2\pi `$. On the contrary, there will be the island with $`\theta `$ in the range $`[0,\pi ]`$ where the phase came trough the North Pole due to the fluctuations. The phase inside that islands will produce preferentially antimatter and come to the vacuum state $`\theta =0`$. Thus both states $`\theta =2\pi `$ and $`\theta =0`$ are separated by closed DW’s. The collapse of such a DW is unavoidable bh , and DW’s which are generated before 20 inflation e – folds will form BH’s. The density profile, concentration and observable central cusp in the stars velocity dispersion of the collapsed – core clusters GC NGC 7078 (M15) consist with the hypothesis of the massive $`10^3M_{}`$ central BH existence glob . This mass corresponds to the 33 inflation e – folds. It means that the DW was originally already encompassed the size $`ł_c`$ giving rise the central BH formation, which could induce the collapsed – core properties of M15.

### Acknowledgments.

S.R. and M.K. work at the project “Cosmoparticle Physics” and acknowledge support from Cosmion – ETHZ collaboration.


text:
# The KPNO International Spectroscopic Survey. II. H𝛼-selected Survey List 1.

## 1. Introduction

The KPNO International Spectroscopic Survey (KISS) is an ongoing objective-prism survey which targets the detection of large numbers of extragalactic emission-line sources. The survey method is patterned after previous surveys for these types of objects carried out with Schmidt telescopes and photographic plates (e.g., Markarian 1967, Smith et al. 1976, MacAlpine et al. 1977, Pesch & Sanduleak 1983, Wasilewski 1983, Markarian et al. 1983, Zamorano et al. 1994, Popescu et al. 1996, Surace & Comte 1998). The primary characteristic that distinguishes KISS from these previous surveys is that we utilize a CCD as our detector. With the advent of large format CCDs, the areal coverage possible with the combination of Schmidt telescopes and CCDs makes digital surveys like KISS both possible and highly desirable. The obvious advantages of CCDs over photographic plates include much higher quantum efficiency, lower noise, good spectral response over the entire optical portion of the spectrum, and large dynamic range. In addition, CCDs give us the ability to use automated selection methods to detect emission-line galaxies (ELGs), and allow us to quantify the selection function and completeness limit directly from the survey data. The combination of increased depth and large areal coverage is a powerful one, and allows for substantial improvements compared to the previous photographic surveys listed above.

The primary goal of KISS is to produce a high-quality survey whose selection function and completeness limits can be accurately quantified so that the resulting catalog of ELGs will be useful for a broad range of studies requiring statistically complete galaxy samples. We also want to reach substantially deeper than previous objective-prism surveys.

A complete description of the survey method employed for KISS is given in the first paper in this series (Salzer et al. 2000, hereafter Paper I). As described there, the first survey strip was observed in two distinct spectral regions. One covered the blue portion of the spectrum (4800 – 5500 Å), while the second covered the wavelength range 6400 – 7200 Å in the red part of the spectrum. The first blue survey list is given in Salzer et al. (2001, hereafter KB1). The present paper presents the initial KISS list of H$`\alpha `$-selected ELG candidates. In addition to listing the ELGs, we provide substantial observational data for each object. This includes accurate photometry and astrometry for each source, as well as estimates of each galaxy’s redshift, line flux, and equivalent width. These data are used to examine the properties of the KISS ELGs in Section 4.

## 2. Observations

All survey data were acquired using the 0.61-meter Burrell Schmidt telescope111Observations made with the Burrell Schmidt of the Warner and Swasey Observatory, Case Western Reserve University. During the period of time covered by the observations described here, the Burrell Schmidt was operated jointly by CWRU and KPNO.. The detector used for all data reported here was a 2048 $`\times `$ 2048 pixel STIS CCD (S2KA). This CCD has 21-$`\mathrm{\mu m}`$ pixels, which yielded an image scale of 2.03 arcsec/pixel. The overall field-of-view was 69 $`\times `$ 69 arcmin, and each image covered 1.32 square degrees. The red survey spectral data were obtained with a 4$`\mathrm{°}`$ prism, which provided a reciprocal dispersion of 24 Å/pixel at H$`\alpha `$. The spectral data were obtained through a special filter designed for the survey, which covered the spectral range 6400 – 7200 Å (see Figure 1 of Paper I for the filter transmission curve).

The survey data consist of the spectral images, obtained with the objective-prism on the telescope, plus direct images taken without the prism through standard B and V filters. The first survey strip was initially observed only in the blue spectral region (KB1). The primary emission line detected in the blue survey data is \[O III\]$`\lambda `$5007. This first blue survey consists of a contiguous strip of fields observed at a constant declination ($`\delta `$(1950) = 29$`\mathrm{°}`$ 30$`\mathrm{}`$). The R.A. range covered is 8h 30m to 17h 0m. This area was chosen to overlap completely the Century Redshift Survey (Geller et al. 1997). After experiments with spectral observations in the red indicated great promise, we began reobserving the same fields, obtaining spectral images with the prism and filter combination listed above. The red survey used the existing direct images obtained for the blue survey strip. Limited observing time prevented us from reobserving the entire strip in the red; only 54 of the 102 fields of the initial blue strip were observed in the red. These fields fall in the R.A. range 12h 15m to 17h 0m, but exclude three fields near the middle of this strip from 14h 30m to 14h 45m.

The spectral data used for this paper were obtained during two observing runs. The first occurred in 1997 May 3–6, when objective-prism images of 20 survey fields were obtained, and the second in 1997 June 5–12, when an additional 34 fields were observed. The observations of the direct images will be described more completely in KB1; the same set of direct images was used for both KB1 and the current red spectral survey. The CCD used on the Burrell Schmidt was replaced after the 1997 June run, making additional red spectral observations of the existing survey fields less desirable. Subsequent observations with the new CCD have focused on new survey regions.

All red spectral data consist of four 720 s exposures of each field, for a total exposure time of 48 minutes per field. The telescope is dithered by $``$10 arcsec between exposures in order to move sources off of bad columns/pixels on the CCD. Data processing procedures are detailed in Paper I. The analysis of the survey data is carried out using an IRAF222IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatories, which are operated by AURA, Inc. under cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation.-based software package written by members of the KISS team. This package is described in Herrero et al. (2000).

## 3. List 1 of the KPNO International Spectroscopic Survey

### 3.1. Selection Criteria

The KISS reduction software selects ELG candidates by searching the extracted objective-prism spectra for objects possessing 5$`\sigma `$ emission features. That is, objects must possess one or more pixels with a flux level more than five times the total noise (Poissonian plus instrumental) above the neighboring continuum level in order to be selected for inclusion. This is the primary selection criterion of the survey. After the automated selection process is completed, the candidate ELGs are checked manually by examining both their extracted spectra and their appearance in the spectral and direct images. Many spurious sources are rejected at this stage. These often consist of objects in which spikes have been introduced during spectral overlap corrections (see Herrero et al. 2000), bright stars which possess spectral breaks within the KISS bandpass that can mimic an emission line (e.g., M stars), and very faint objects with residual cosmic rays present. Typically, $``$80 objects per field are identified as ELG candidates by our automated software, but roughly 70% are rejected as spurious during this checking process. When the nature of a potential ELG is not clear from examination of its spectrum, we also consider other information to help assess whether or not it should be retained in the sample. Useful parameters in this process include the B$``$V color and the object classification. For example, objects classified as stars that also have very red colors are usually rejected as being spurious sources. We stress that we do not require that an object be classified as a galaxy in order for it to be included in the final ELG list. Many of the objects included in the current list are unresolved in the direct images (which have an effective resolution of $``$4–5 arcsec).

The visual examination of the spectral images also yields a number of objects that are missed by the automatic selection software but which do possess 5$`\sigma `$ emission features. These are typically objects with lines very close to the red end of the spectra, or bright galaxies with lower equivalent width lines where the continuum fitting process overestimates the continuum level slightly and hence underestimates the line strength. These objects are flagged manually as ELGs in the KISS tables. For the current survey list, 17.8% of the objects were added to the final catalog during this visual search. The combination of the automatic software and this visual checking ensures that the sample is quite complete for objects with $``$5$`\sigma `$ lines. A formal assessment of the survey completeness will be presented in Gronwall et al. (2000).

The 5$`\sigma `$ threshold level for inclusion in the survey is a conservative value, one that was arrived at after substantial testing. While we wished to survey as deeply as possible, and include as many potential ELGs as possible, we also placed a high premium on the quality of the final survey lists. Early tests involving follow-up spectroscopy carried out on fields where objects were selected to lower thresholds showed that 5$`\sigma `$ detections were nearly always real sources, while objects between 4$`\sigma `$ and 5$`\sigma `$ tended to be real but also included a fair number ($``$25%) of spurious sources. Below 4$`\sigma `$ the fraction of spurious sources increased dramatically. Hence, we selected 5$`\sigma `$ as the detection threshold for the survey. Objects with emission lines between 4$`\sigma `$ and 5$`\sigma `$ are also flagged in the database tables and retained as possible ELGs. However, this sample of $`<`$5$`\sigma `$ sources is not statistically complete, and hence is not included in the main survey lists. Rather, we will include these additional lower probability sources in a secondary list of ELG candidates which should be thought of as a supplement to the main KISS catalog.

### 3.2. The Survey

The list of ELG candidates selected in the first red survey is presented in Table 1. Because of the nature of the survey data, we are able to include a great deal of useful information about each source, such as accurate photometry and astrometry and estimates of the redshift and emission-line flux and equivalent width. Only the first page of the table is printed here; the complete table is available in the electronic version of the paper.

The contents of the survey table are as follows. Column 1 gives a running number for each object in the survey with the designation KISSR XXXX, where KISSR stands for “KISS red” survey. This is to distinguish it from the blue KISS survey (KB1). Future red survey lists will continue with this numbering scheme. Columns 2 and 3 give the object identification from the KISS database tables, where the first number indicates the survey field (FXXXX), and the second number is the ID number within the table for that galaxy. This identifier is necessary for locating the KISS ELGs within the survey database tables. Columns 4 and 5 list the right ascension and declination of each object (J2000). The formal uncertainties in the coordinates are 0.25 arcsec in RA and 0.20 arcsec in declination. Column 6 gives the B magnitude, while column 7 lists the B$``$V color. For brighter objects the magnitude estimates have uncertainties of typically 0.05 magnitude, increasing to $``$0.10 magnitude at B = 20. Paper I includes a complete discussion of the precision of both the astrometry and photometry of the KISS objects. An estimate of the redshift of each galaxy, based on its objective-prism spectrum, in given in column 8. This estimate assumes that the emission line seen in the objective-prism spectrum is H$`\alpha `$. Follow-up spectra for $`>`$400 ELG candidates shows that this assumption is correct in the vast majority of cases. Only 8 ELGs with follow-up spectra are high redshift objects where a different line (typically \[O III\] and/or H$`\beta `$) appears in the objective-prism spectrum. For objects with redshifts above z = 0.07 the observed value is corrected as described in Paper I. The formal uncertainty in these redshift estimates is $`\sigma _z`$ = 0.0028. Columns 9 and 10 list the emission-line flux (in units of 10-16 erg/s/cm2) and equivalent width (in Å) measured from the objective-prism spectra. The calibration of the fluxes is discussed in Section 4.1.2. These quantities should be taken as being representative estimates only. A simple estimate of the reliability of each source, the quality flag (QFLAG), is given in column 11. This quantity, assigned during the line measurement step of the data processing, is given the value of 1 for high quality sources, 2 for lower quality but still reliable objects, and 3 for somewhat less reliable sources. Column 12 gives alternate identifications for KISS ELGs which have been cataloged previously. This is not an exhaustive cross-referencing, but focuses on previous objective-prism surveys which overlap part or all of the current survey area: Markarian (1967), Case (Pesch & Sanduleak 1983), Wasilewski (1983), and UCM (Zamorano et al. 1994). Also included are objects in common with the Uppsala General Catalogue of Galaxies (UGC, Nilson 1973).

A total of 1128 ELG candidates are included in this first list of KISS galaxies. The total area covered by the survey is 62.2 deg2, meaning that there are 18.1 KISS ELGs per deg2. This compares to the surface density of 0.1 galaxies per deg2 from the Markarian survey, and 0.56 galaxies per deg2 from the UCM survey; the present survey is much deeper! Of the total, 578 were assigned quality values of QFLAG = 1 (51.2%), 388 have QFLAG = 2 (34.4%), and 162 have QFLAG = 3 (14.4%). Based on our follow-up spectra to date, 100% (263 of 263) of the sources with QFLAG = 1 are bona fide emission-line galaxies, compared to 93% (111 of 119) with QFLAG = 2 and only 61% (28 of 46) with QFLAG = 3. The properties of the KISS galaxy sample are described in the next section.

Figure 1 shows an example of the finder charts for the KISS ELGs. These are generated from the direct images obtained as part of the survey. Figure 2 displays the extracted spectra derived from the objective-prism images for the first 24 ELGs in Table 1. Finder charts and spectral plots for all 1128 objects in the KISS survey are available in the electronic version of this paper.

A supplementary table containing an additional 189 ELG candidates is included in the appendix of this paper (Table 2). These galaxies are considered to be lower probability candidates, having emission lines with strengths between 4$`\sigma `$ and 5$`\sigma `$. Follow-up spectra of a limited number of these objects suggests that $``$75% are real ELGs, compared to $``$94% for the main KISS catalog. These additional galaxies do not constitute a statistically complete sample, and should therefore be used with caution. However, there are likely many interesting objects contained in this supplementary list, hence we include them for the sake of completeness.

## 4. Properties of the KISS ELGs

A large amount of important observational information is available for each KISS ELG candidate from the survey data. This is due to the survey method employed for KISS, which includes the acquisition of photometrically-calibrated B and V direct images in addition to the objective-prism spectra. Furthermore, the digital nature of the spectral data allows us to more readily measure quantitative information from the spectra than was possible in previous photographic objective-prism surveys. Hence, a fairly complete picture of the survey constituents can be developed without the need for follow-up observations. Of course, the spectral information available from the objective-prism data is extremely coarse. One cannot, for example, distinguish between active galactic nuclei and star-forming galaxies based on the survey data alone. Follow-up spectra will be required in order to gain a more complete understanding of the nature of the KISS ELGs. Still, the available data can be used to investigate the properties of the survey constituents.

### 4.1. Observed Properties

#### 4.1.1 Magnitude & Color Distributions

Figure 3a plots the histogram of B magnitudes for the 1128 KISS ELGs in the current survey list. The median apparent magnitude is 18.08. This compares to median apparent magnitudes of B = 16.9 for the \[O III\]-selected Michigan (UM) survey (Salzer et al. 1989) and B $``$ 16.1 for the H$`\alpha `$-selected UCM survey (Pérez-González et al. 2000). Also indicated in the figure is the completeness limit of the Markarian survey, B = 15.2 (Mazzarella & Balzano 1989). Clearly, the survey goal of creating a deep sample of ELGs has been achieved.

The distribution of B$``$V colors exhibited by the KISS sample is shown in Figure 3b. The median color of 0.67 is indicated. This median value, which is the typical color of an Sb galaxy (Roberts & Haynes 1994), is significantly redder than the median of B$``$V = 0.54 for the UM survey (Salzer et al. 1989). This is most likely due to the differing selection criteria for the two surveys. The \[O III\]-selected UM survey preferentially detected lower luminosity ELGs with low amounts of reddening. While the H$`\alpha `$-selected KISS sample contains a large number of dwarf galaxies as well (see Section 4.2.1), it has a larger proportion of more luminous starburst galaxies and AGN. There is also a significantly weaker bias against heavily reddened ELGs with KISS compared to the UM or other blue-selected surveys. Hence the color range exhibited by the KISS sample is closer to that of the overall galaxian population. The color distribution appears to be similar to that of the UCM galaxies (Pérez-González et al. 2000), which have a mean B$``$r color of 0.71. This mean value is comparable to the mean color of an Sbc galaxy (Fukugita et al. 1995).

It is difficult at this time to assess the significance of the extended tail of very red ELGs. A total of 50 KISS galaxies in the current list possess B$``$V colors $`>`$ 1.2 (i.e., redder than any normal galaxy). Most of these objects are very faint: the median apparent magnitude of these red objects is B = 20.6. At these magnitudes the uncertainties in the photometry are substantial (typical errors in the B$``$V color are 0.2 to 0.3 magnitude). Furthermore, the proportion of spurious sources increases at these faint magnitudes. Follow-up spectra will be required to confirm the nature of these very red objects. During our early spectroscopic follow-up observations, 14 of these red ELG candidates were observed, and only five have been confirmed as ELGs. The remainder are stars or faint galaxies with no emission lines. Hence, many of these red candidates are probably false detections. Of the five true ELGs mentioned above, three are Seyfert galaxies, which suggests that this red population of KISS objects harbors some interesting objects.

#### 4.1.2 Line Strength Distributions

As described in Paper I and Herrero et al. (2000), we are able to measure the position and strength of the emission line that is seen in the objective-prism spectrum of each KISS ELG. The line strength measurements, both line flux and equivalent width, yield useful quantitative information. This allows us to use the survey data to assess the completeness of the survey. Since KISS is a line-selected survey, its completeness limit must be defined in terms of line strengths, not continuum apparent magnitudes (Salzer 1989). We discuss this issue further in Gronwall et al. (2000).

Given the low-dispersion nature of our spectra plus the low spatial resolution of the images, the measured line strengths are not as precise as those obtained from slit spectra. In particular, the nature of the objective-prism spectra makes the equivalent width estimate highly uncertain, due to the variable amount of underlying continuum flux present at the location of the line. Since light from all portions of the object gets dispersed by the prism, the location occupied by the emission line in the spectrum can have continuum contributions from a large area of the galaxy. Hence, for extended sources, the equivalent width measured from the survey spectra will tend to be significantly underestimated. This is not an important issue for compact objects. Partially compensating for this effect is the fact that our extracted spectra, which sum the flux over four pixels ($``$8$`\mathrm{}`$), tend to include all of the line emission from each source. This is in contrast to slit spectroscopy, where the 1–2$`\mathrm{}`$ slits typically employed can miss a large fraction of the line emission. Thus, the KISS line fluxes should yield fairly accurate estimates of the total H$`\alpha `$ \+ \[N II\] emission.

The distribution of equivalent widths seen in our survey galaxies is plotted in Figure 4. We assume that the line we are measuring is H$`\alpha `$ \+ \[N II\]. Based on our follow-up spectra to date (see Section 3.2), this appears to be a reasonable assumption. Due to our low spectral resolution, the \[N II\]$`\lambda \lambda `$6584,6548 lines are always seen blended with H$`\alpha `$; there is no way to determine the contribution from the individual lines using our survey data. We note in passing that the \[S II\]$`\lambda \lambda `$6731,6717 doublet is well resolved from the H$`\alpha `$ \+ \[N II\] complex, and is often seen in the objective prism spectra of strong-lined objects. The median equivalent width found from the current sample of ELGs is 41.0 Å. As can be seen in Figure 4, the vast majority of the galaxies have equivalent widths less than 100 Å. The distribution of EWs peaks in the 20–30 Å bin, suggesting that KISS is fairly complete for objects with EWs above $``$30 Å.

Calibrating the fluxes measured from the objective-prism spectra is crucial for scientific analyses such as determining the star formation rate of the local universe (Gronwall et al. 2000), as well as for establishing the completeness limit of the survey. The KISS line fluxes are calibrated in a two-step method. First, the objective-prism spectra for each field are corrected for throughput variations and atmospheric extinction (see Herrero et al. 2000). This places all line fluxes on the same relative flux scale. Then, the fluxes are calibrated using information obtained from our early follow-up spectra. Since the measured objective-prism line fluxes are often of low precision, due to the coarse nature of the spectra, the goal of the following calibration procedure was not necessarily to achieve high precision. Rather, an uncertainty of between 10 to 20% was considered acceptable.

We have obtained high-resolution follow-up spectra for 428 KISS candidates from the sample of 1128 presented in this paper. The spectroscopic observations will be described in Gronwall et al. (2001). For the purposes of calibrating the objective-prism spectra, we selected galaxies that are starbursting (i.e., not AGN), that had been observed with a longslit spectrograph under photometric conditions, and for which high quality spectra were obtained. Galaxies observed through optical fibers were not used, since such spectra are notoriously difficult to use for accurate spectrophotometry. This limited our calibration sample to 65 galaxies. All data used were obtained using slit widths of either 1.7 or 2.0 arcsec. This guarantees that we recorded most of the emission-line flux from the sources, as long as the emission regions were not spatially extended. Since the fluxes measured from the objective-prism spectra are a combination of the H$`\alpha `$ and \[N II\] lines, we used the fluxes from our slit spectra for the sum of these three lines. Figure 5 shows a plot of the ratio of objective-prism flux (in counts) to spectroscopic flux versus the equivalent width measured from the follow-up spectra. Data from three different observing runs on two different telescopes are plotted, and there are no obvious systematic trends in this ratio with either equivalent width or observing run. There are, however, a number of galaxies with large ratios, particularly at low equivalent width. A visual inspection of the survey images showed that these galaxies are of large angular extent and exhibit extended line emission. The high flux ratios for these objects indicate that our longslit measurements do not include all of the H$`\alpha `$ emission from these sources. Thus, we restricted our analysis to those galaxies with an objective-prism-to-spectroscopic flux ratio of less than 12.5 and an equivalent width greater than 40 Å, leaving us with a calibration sample of 42 galaxies. These galaxies all possess emission regions that are essentially point sources. The median ratio of this sample was 6.72; the mean was 6.91 with a standard deviation of 2.48 and an error in the mean of 0.38. We have adopted as our calibration value the reciprocal of the median value, or 0.1488 $`\times 10^{16}`$ ergs/sec/cm-2 per count.

To check our calibration, we performed a similar analysis using the 17 galaxies from the UCM survey with spectral data in Gallego et al. (1996) that fall within our survey region. The KISS and UCM line fluxes are plotted in Figure 8 of Paper I. The resulting flux-ratio analysis for the UCM galaxies yields a median ratio of 6.62 and a mean ratio of 7.05, with a standard deviation of 1.09 and an error in the mean of 0.30. Thus the value agrees quite well (within 1.5%) with our derived calibration factor. Given the necessarily coarse nature of the objective-prism line fluxes, we feel that the accuracy of our flux calibration method (formal error of 6%) is quite acceptable.

Figure 6 displays the histogram of observed H$`\alpha `$+\[N II\] line flux values for the 1128 KISS ELGs. The median value of 8.7 $`\times `$ 10-15 erg/s/cm2 compares to that from the UCM sample of 2.9 $`\times `$ 10-14 erg/s/cm2 (based on follow-up spectra of Gallego et al. 1996). A galaxy with this latter flux level would fall at the extreme right edge of the figure, which illustrates the increased depth of KISS relative to the UCM survey in terms of line flux.

#### 4.1.3 Redshift Distributions

The other parameter that we measure from the objective-prism spectra is the redshift of each object. The precision of the KISS redshifts is detailed in Paper I, where we show that the formal uncertainty in the KISS redshifts is 0.0028 (830 km s-1). The distribution of the measured redshifts is illustrated in Figure 7. The upper panel shows the KISS ELGs, while the lower panel shows the distribution for 486 galaxies from Zwicky et al. (1961–1968; hereafter CGCG). The redshifts for the CGCG galaxies are taken from Falco et al. (1999); this is essentially the portion of the CfA2 redshift survey that covers the same area on the sky as the KISS ELGs. Because the surface density of the CGCG catalog is fairly low, we have actually included objects lying in a four-degree-wide declination strip, rather than the one degree covered by KISS. The Falco et al. redshift catalog sample is complete to mB = 15.5. This same comparison sample is used in the following section as well.

Compared to the CGCG sample, the KISS ELGs are detected in large numbers to much higher redshifts. The median redshift for the ELGs is more than double that of the magnitude-limited CGCG galaxies. There is a large void present between z = 0.038 and 0.054 (see also Figure 9). Beyond this void, the number of KISS ELGs increases, while the CGCG galaxies remain sparse. Only a handful of luminous galaxies are present in the CGCG sample beyond z = 0.04. In contrast, the KISS ELGs increase in number out to the redshift limit imposed by the survey filter. The implications of this are (1) that the survey technique employed by KISS would be sensitive to galaxies at distances well beyond the distance limit imposed by the filter, if the filter was either not used or was replaced with one that extended to redder wavelengths, and (2) for the high-luminosity portion of the ELG luminosity function, the KISS sample is effectively volume-limited rather than flux-limited.

### 4.2. Derived Properties

#### 4.2.1 Luminosity Distribution

We compare the luminosities of the KISS ELGs with those of the CGCG galaxies located in the same area of the sky in Figure 8. Absolute magnitudes are computed using the redshifts and apparent magnitudes listed in Table 1 and assuming a value for the Hubble Constant of Ho = 75 km/s/Mpc. Corrections for Galactic absorption (AB) have been applied by averaging the values for all UGC galaxies in each survey field from the compilation of Burstein & Heiles (1984). Since the majority of the survey strip is at high Galactic latitude, this correction is typically small: 31 of the 54 fields (57%) have AB $`<`$ 0.05, and 48 of 54 (89%) have AB $`<`$ 0.10. The maximum correction of AB = 0.22 occurs in the easternmost survey field (F1655). The median blue absolute magnitude of the KISS ELGs is $``$18.96, which is roughly one magnitude fainter than M, the “characteristic luminosity” parameter of the Schechter (1976) luminosity function. As seen in the lower portion of the figure, the majority of the CGCG galaxies are more luminous than the KISS ELGs. The median absolute magnitude of the CGCG sample is $``$20.08 (i.e., very close to M). Only 9.6% of the CGCG galaxies have luminosities below the median KISS luminosity.

Figure 8 reveals much about the KISS sample. It is dominated by intermediate- and low-luminosity galaxies. The typical luminosity is comparable to the Large Magellanic Cloud. There is also a significant population of higher luminosity galaxies, but the high-luminosity end of the distribution is truncated relative to the CGCG sample. This is due to the volume-limited nature of the luminous end of the sample. Due to the filter-induced cut-off in the redshift distribution, the KISS sample lacks the high luminosity tail that is commonly seen in magnitude-limited samples.

Even though there are large numbers of lower luminosity ELGs present in KISS, the proportion of dwarf star-forming systems is significantly lower than in \[O III\]-selected surveys like the UM survey. The median absolute magnitude for the UM ELGs is MB = $``$18.1 (Salzer et al. 1989). Due to two factors – the way that the \[O III\] line strength varies with metallicity, and the luminosity-metallicity relation – \[O III\]-selected surveys have a selection function that peaks near MB = $``$17. More luminous galaxies with starbursts tend to have weaker \[O III\] lines. In addition, \[O III\]-selected surveys tend to be biased against luminous galaxies due to the higher amounts of reddening present in these more metal-rich systems. Since KISS selects by H$`\alpha `$, it does not suffer from these biases. Hence, the KISS sample should be a more representative catalog of AGN and star-forming galaxies.

Despite the difference in the median luminosities of the UM and KISS samples, one should not conclude that the KISS sample is deficient in dwarf galaxies relative to the UM survey. Rather, the UM survey is missing a large fraction of the more luminous star-forming galaxies, which KISS recovers. This can be understood by consideration of the ELGs discovered in the first blue survey list (KB1). The luminosity distribution of the KB1 sample is nearly identical to that of the UM ELGs of Salzer et al. (1989). However, as discussed in Paper I, there is a tremendous overlap between the KB1 and current samples. In the regions where they overlap, 92% of the KB1 ELGs are also cataloged in the current paper (87% in the main catalog, and 5% in the supplementary list). Hence, the H$`\alpha `$ survey technique is just as efficient at finding dwarf ELGs as is the \[O III\]-selection method. In addition, the H$`\alpha `$-selected samples detect many more higher-luminosity galaxies.

#### 4.2.2 Spatial Distribution

Because of the depth and good redshift coverage of the KISS ELGs, it is also relevant to consider the spatial distribution of the sample. This is illustrated in Figure 9, which shows two cone diagrams for the KISS and CGCG galaxies. The redshifts plotted for the KISS galaxies are those from Table 1. Figure 9a shows all galaxies from both samples out to 15,000 km s-1(z $``$ 0.05). The general impression obtained from examination of the figure is that the KISS ELGs tend to fall along the same large-scale structures seen at lower redshifts in the CGCG galaxies. However, the ELGs appear to be less tightly confined to the structures than are the “normal” galaxies. Because of the limited precision of the KISS redshifts ($`\pm `$830 km s-1; see Paper I), it is possible that the appearance of lower clustering is an artifact of the data. However, the large numbers of galaxies located well into some of the voids present within this volume of space suggest that the lower level of clustering is in fact real. Previous studies of the spatial distribution of ELG samples have found similar results (Salzer 1989, Rosenberg et al. 1994, Pustil’nik et al. 1995, Popescu et al. 1997, Lee et al. 2000). The lower level of clustering seen in Figure 9a is due primarily to lower-luminosity ELGs. We are currently analyzing the relative clustering strengths of the ELGs and CGCG galaxies, using more accurate redshifts from our follow-up spectra when available (Lee, Salzer & Gronwall 2001).

Figure 9b shows the galaxian distribution out to z = 0.10. At redshifts beyond about 12,000 km s-1, the CGCG sample thins out drastically, and can no longer be used to delineate large-scale structure. The KISS galaxies, however, are found in great numbers out to $``$27,000 km s-1, beyond which the survey is truncated abruptly by the filter. The ELGs in the cone diagram appear to indicate the presence of a number of filaments and voids at these higher redshifts. In fact, a comparison of Figure 9b with the similar diagram for the Century Redshift Survey (Geller et al. 1997) reveals that these apparent structures are real. The ELGs map out large-scale structures, albeit only roughly, out to z = 0.09 without the need for follow-up spectra! While the limited velocity resolution, together with the tendency for the ELGs to be less clustered, prevents the use of these data for detailed definition of large-scale structures at these redshifts, they certainly provide a reasonable picture of the gross details. Furthermore, since the KISS galaxies are selected due to their strong line emission, follow-up spectroscopy of these faint galaxies is relatively easy. Thus, using ELGs to trace out the main features in the spatial distribution of galaxies is an efficient use of telescope time.

### 4.3. Comparison with Previous Surveys

Table 1 lists cross-references for KISS ELGs which are also cataloged in other surveys for active and star-forming galaxies. Four major surveys overlap the first red KISS strip: Markarian (1967), Case (Pesch & Sanduleak 1983), Wasilewski (1983), and UCM (Zamorano et al. 1994). It is instructive to consider the degree of overlap between these previous photographic surveys and KISS.

Two of the four surveys mentioned above are strictly line selected. The Wasilewski survey is \[O III\] selected, while UCM is H$`\alpha `$ selected. The Markarian survey is UV-excess selected, while the Case survey is a hybrid of the two types: both line and UV-excess selected. One might then expect that KISS has the highest degree of overlap with the Wasilewski and UCM surveys. This is in fact the case. There are 8 Wasilewski galaxies within the area surveyed by KISS, and all 8 are recovered by KISS. Twenty five UCM galaxies reside in the KISS area, but follow-up spectroscopy by Gallego found that seven of these do not possess emission lines. Hence, there are only 18 UCM galaxies with emission in the KISS area, and all 18 are found by KISS. Oddly enough, one of the seven UCM non-ELGs was recovered by KISS (KISSR 185 = UCM 1300+2959); a follow-up spectrum for this object has not yet been obtained.

While our first H$`\alpha `$-selected KISS list includes 100% of the ELGs from the previous line-selected surveys, it did not do as well with the UV-excess-selected surveys. There are seven Markarian galaxies in the survey area. Only four of these were recovered by KISS in the main survey (i.e., Table 1), while two additional objects are included in the supplementary list of 4$`\sigma `$ to 5$`\sigma `$ objects. The one Markarian survey galaxy not detected at all by KISS is Mrk 655 (B = 15.5). Examination of its objective-prism spectrum shows no hint of an emission line. The redshift of Mrk 655 is less than the limit set by our survey filter, meaning that we did not miss it because the H$`\alpha `$ line is redshifted beyond our spectral window. Since the Markarian survey is not line-selected, it is perhaps no surprise that not all of the objects from this survey were found by KISS. Of the 55 Case galaxies in the KISS area, 39 were recovered by KISS (72%). We examined the 16 Case galaxies not recovered by KISS, and found that 11 are listed in the Case Survey papers as being color-selected, while the remaining five are all listed as having questionable (w? or w:) line detections. Spectroscopy of 61 Case galaxies by Salzer et al. (1995) in the red portion of the spectrum found that 31% had H$`\alpha `$ equivalent widths less than 30 Å. Hence, it would appear that the non-detected Case galaxies are simply the weak-lined subsample of the Case survey, to which KISS is not sensitive.

## 5. Summary

We present the first list of emission-line galaxy candidates from the KPNO International Spectroscopic Survey. KISS is an objective-prism survey, similar in nature to a number of important surveys carried out in the past using Schmidt telescopes and photographic plates. The crucial improvement incorporated into KISS is the use of a CCD as the detector. This allows us to detect fainter ELGs than previous surveys. Our specially chosen filters also allow us to detect emission lines out to higher redshifts than did most previous line-selected surveys. The combination of higher sensitivity, lower noise, and larger volumes surveyed yield huge improvements in the depth of the resulting survey. KISS finds 181 times more AGN and starburst galaxy candidates per unit area than did the Markarian (1967) survey, and 32 times more than the UCM survey (Zamorano et al. 1994).

This first installment of KISS includes 1128 ELG candidates selected from 54 red survey fields covering a total of 62.2 deg2. The KISS catalog has a surface density of over 18 galaxies per deg2. The primary emission line we are sensitive to is H$`\alpha `$. The survey follows a narrow strip across the sky at a declination of $`\delta `$(1950) = 29$`\mathrm{°}`$ 30$`\mathrm{}`$ and spanning the RA range 12h 15m to 17h 0m. This region was chosen to overlap the Century Redshift survey (Geller et al. 1997). For each object in the catalog we tabulate accurate equatorial coordinates, B & V photometry, and estimates of the redshift and line strength measured from the objective-prism spectra. Also provided are finder charts and extracted spectral plots for all galaxies. In addition to the main survey list, we include a supplementary list of 189 ELG candidates with weaker (lower significance) emission lines.

Since the survey data themselves provide such a large amount of observational data for each KISS ELG, we are able to develop a fairly complete picture of the survey constituents even before follow-up spectral information is available. The median apparent magnitude of the sample is B = 18.08, which is substantially fainter than previous ELG surveys. Objects fainter than B = 20 are routinely cataloged. Measurement of the line strengths in the objective-prism spectra show that KISS is sensitive to objects with H$`\alpha `$ \+ \[N II\] equivalent widths of less than 20 Å, and that most objects with EW $`>`$ 30 Å are detected. The median line flux of the KISS sample is more than three times lower than that of the UCM survey (Gallego et al. 1996). The luminosity distribution of the KISS ELGs is dominated by intermediate- and low-luminosity galaxies, although luminous AGN and starbursting galaxies are also represented. The median absolute magnitude of MB = $``$18.96 is characteristic of a small spiral galaxy or large Magellanic irregular, and underscores the fact that strong-lined galaxies of the type cataloged by KISS tend to be less luminous than the types of objects found in more traditional magnitude-limited samples.

Despite the fact that one can learn a great deal about each KISS object from the survey data alone, detailed follow-up spectra are still required to get a more complete picture. For example, one cannot distinguish between AGN and star-formation activity in the KISS galaxies based on the objective-prism spectra. Further, the redshifts derived from the KISS spectral data are too coarse to be used in detailed spatial distribution studies (e.g., Lee, Salzer & Gronwall 2001). We are in the process of obtaining spectra for a large number of KISS ELGs in order to better assess the nature of the individual galaxies, as well as to allow for a wide range of science applications, many of which are outlined in Paper I.

We gratefully acknowledge financial support for the KISS project through NSF Presidential Faculty Award to JJS (NSF-AST-9553020), which was instrumental in allowing for the international collaboration. Additional support for this project came from NSF grant AST-9616863 to TXT, and from Kitt Peak National Observatory, which purchased the special filters used by KISS. Summer research students Michael Santos, Laura Brenneman, and Erin Condy, supported by the Keck Northeast Astronomy Consortium student exchange program, helped to reduce the survey data presented in the current paper. We are grateful to Vicki Sarajedini and Laura Chomiuk, who assisted in so many ways during the final production of this paper, and to Katherine Rhode for her critical reading of the manuscript. Several useful suggestions by the anonymous referee helped to improve the presentation of this paper. We thank the numerous colleagues with whom we have discussed the KISS project over the past several years, including Jesús Gallego, Rafael Guzmán, Rob Kennicutt, David Koo, and Daniel Kunth. Finally, we wish to thank the support staff of Kitt Peak National Observatory for maintaining the telescope and instrument during the early years of the project, and the Astronomy Department of Case Western Reserve University for taking over this role after 1997.

## Appendix A Supplementary Table of 4$`\sigma `$ Objects

As explained in Section 3, the main selection criterion used to decide whether or not an object is included in the KISS catalog is the presence of a 5$`\sigma `$ emission feature in its spectrum. Because of the high sensitivity of the survey data, many objects were detected with emission lines which were slightly weaker than this level. We made the decision to exclude such objects from the main survey lists, in order to preserve the statistically complete nature of the sample. It was felt that the high degree of reliability of the sample would be compromised somewhat if these objects were included. However, rather than ignore these weaker-lined ELG candidates entirely, we are publishing them in a supplementary table.

Listed in Table 2 are 189 ELG candidates that have emission lines detected at between the 4$`\sigma `$ and 5$`\sigma `$ level. The format of Table 2 is the same as for Table 1, except that the objects are now labeled with KISSRx numbers (‘x’ for extra). The full version of the table, as well as finder charts for all 189 KISSRx galaxies, are available in the electronic version of the paper.

The characteristics of the supplementary ELG sample are similar to those of the main survey ELGs, although with some predictable differences. The median H$`\alpha `$ equivalent width is 19.3 Å, a factor of two below the value for the main sample. The KISSRx galaxies are somewhat fainter (median B magnitude of 18.6) and significantly redder (median B$``$V = 0.80). Their median redshift is slightly higher than that of the main sample (0.070), and their median luminosity is slightly lower ($``$18.6). Hence, the supplementary ELG list appears to be dominated by intermediate luminosity galaxies with a significantly lower rate of star-formation activity (lower equivalent widths, redder colors) than the ELGs in the main sample.


text:
# The charmed and bottom meson spectrum from lattice NRQCD

## 1 MOTIVATION

The masses of the ground state doublets of S-wave heavy-light mesons ($`D^{()}`$, $`D_s^{()}`$, $`B^{()}`$ and $`B_s^{()}`$) are well known experimentally, and thus provide a testing ground for the lattice method. In particular, they can be used to examine the convergence properties of the heavy quark expansion in nonrelativistic QCD (NRQCD), which is the most economical lattice action available for heavy quark physics.

The spectrum of P-wave heavy-light mesons is not yet understood, experimentally nor theoretically, so here the lattice can offer predictions. Do the masses follow the ordering that is observed in the hydrogen atom? What are the magnitudes of the mass splittings among P-waves — tens of MeV or hundreds?

Lattice studies of the P-wave spectrum have been performed for an infinitely-heavy quark. A subset of the P-wave states have also been observed by using a relativistic (clover) action in the charmed region, and extrapolating to the bottom region. Recently, the lattice NRQCD approach has been used to work directly with $`B^{}`$ mesons as well as $`D^{}`$ mesons.

In the following sections, the lattice NRQCD method is briefly reviewed and the results of numerical simulations are presented. Implications for the convergence of the lattice NRQCD expansion are discussed, and predictions for the $`B^{}`$ and $`D^{}`$ mass spectra from various lattice simulations are compared to theoretical models.

## 2 LATTICE NRQCD METHOD

The application of lattice NRQCD to heavy-light mesons entails an expansion of the action in inverse powers of the heavy quark mass $`M`$,

$$S=S_{q,G}+\mathrm{d}^4xQ^{}\left(iD_t+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }^{(2)}}{2M}\delta H\right)Q,$$
(1)
where $`S_{q,G}`$ has no heavy quark fields, and

$$\delta H=\delta H^{(1)}+\delta H^{(2)}+\delta H^{(3)}+O(1/M^4),$$
(2)
$`\delta H^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{c_4}{u_s^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2M}}𝝈\stackrel{~}{𝐁}+c_5{\displaystyle \frac{a_s^2\mathrm{\Delta }^{(4)}}{24M}},`$ (3)
$`\delta H^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{c_2}{u_s^2u_t^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{ig}{8M^2}}(\stackrel{~}{𝚫}\stackrel{~}{𝐄}\stackrel{~}{𝐄}\stackrel{~}{𝚫})`$ (4)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{c_3}{u_s^2u_t^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{g}{8M^2}}𝝈(\stackrel{~}{𝚫}\times \stackrel{~}{𝐄}\stackrel{~}{𝐄}\times \stackrel{~}{𝚫})`$
$`c_6{\displaystyle \frac{a_t(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(2)})^2}{16nM^2}},`$
$`\delta H^{(3)}`$ $`=`$ $`c_1{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(2)})^2}{8M^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{c_7}{u_s^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{g}{8M^3}}\{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{(2)},𝝈\stackrel{~}{𝐁}\}`$ (5)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{c_9ig^2}{8M^3}}𝝈\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{𝐄}\times \stackrel{~}{𝐄}}{u_s^4u_t^4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{𝐁}\times \stackrel{~}{𝐁}}{u_s^8}}\right)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{c_{10}g^2}{8M^3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{𝐄}^2}{u_s^4u_t^4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{𝐁}^2}{u_s^8}}\right)`$
$`c_{11}{\displaystyle \frac{a_t^2(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(2)})^3}{192n^2M^3}}.`$
The chromoelectric and chromomagnetic fields are $`E_i=F_{4i}`$ and $`B_i=ϵ_{ijk}F_{ijk}/2`$ respectively, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ denotes the lattice derivative. The coefficients $`c_i`$ are usually set to their classical values ($`c_i=1`$) in lattice NRQCD simulations. This assumes that perturbative corrections at momentum scales beyond the lattice cutoff (i.e. the inverse lattice spacing) are small. Nonperturbative contributions to the $`c_i`$ coefficients are not neglected, and appear explicitly in Eqs. (1-5) via the tadpole factors, mentioned below.

A tilde on any quantity indicates that the leading classical discretization errors have been removed. Besides this classical improvement, a mean-field form of quantum improvement is also implemented through the introduction of two “tadpole factors”, $`u_s`$ and $`u_t`$, following the well-known suggestion of Lepage and Mackenzie. Notice that the action of Eqs. (1-5) allows different lattice spacings, $`a_s`$ and $`a_t`$, in the spatial and temporal directions; hence two tadpole factors are required.

Various choices for the light quark and gauge field action, $`S_{q,G}`$ of Eq. (1), have been considered. In the lattice NRQCD simulations of Refs. , the gauge field portion is classically and tadpole-improved, whereas the authors of Refs.  chose the unimproved Wilson gauge field action. For the fermion portion, Refs.  employ the tadpole-improved clover action while Ref.  uses a more highly improved D234 action. When the heavy quark mass is sufficiently large and the lattice spacing sufficiently small (but not small compared to the inverse heavy quark mass), one expects the predictions of these actions to agree.

## 3 S-WAVE HEAVY-LIGHT MASSES

Lattice NRQCD simulations typically produce a clear signal for the S-wave heavy-light meson masses, so they are convenient observables to use for testing the heavy quark expansion. Since the leading contribution to the heavy quark mass does not appear explicitly in the NRQCD action, only mass differences (or more generally energy differences) can be computed. The absolute mass scale can be extracted from the kinetic energy of a meson,

$$E_𝐩E_0=\frac{𝐩^2}{2M_{\mathrm{kin}}}\frac{𝐩^4}{8M_{\mathrm{kin}}^3}+\mathrm{},$$
(6)
to the desired order in $`1/M_{kin}`$, where $`E_𝐩`$ and $`E_0`$ are taken from lattice simulations, and the “kinetic” mass $`M_{kin}`$ is thus obtained.

The first three orders in the $`1/M`$ expansion of Eqs. (1-5) have been studied in Refs.  for two different light quark actions. The charmed results of Ref.  are displayed in Fig. 1. In this plot, subleading corrections to the $`D_sD`$ splitting are insignificant, and the physical result agrees well with the experimental result,

$$\left[D_sD^+\right]_{\mathrm{expt}}=104\mathrm{MeV}.$$
(7)
The $`D^{}D`$ splitting of Fig. 1 has $`O(1/M^2)`$ and $`O(1/M^3)`$ corrections which are roughly equal, at about 20% each, and the $`D_s^{}D_s`$ splitting acquires 20% and 10% corrections at $`O(1/M^2)`$ and $`O(1/M^3)`$ respectively. Firm statements about convergence, or lack thereof, for the $`1/M`$ expansion are difficult to support with only these data. The first correction terms are not far from their expected size, $`O(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}/M_{\mathrm{charm}})`$, but the $`O(1/M^3)`$ corrections are perhaps larger than might have been hoped. These spin splittings are clearly smaller than the experimental values

$`\left[D^+D^+\right]_{\mathrm{expt}}`$ $`=`$ $`141\mathrm{MeV},`$ (8)
$`\left[D_s^{}D_s\right]_{\mathrm{expt}}`$ $`=`$ $`144\mathrm{MeV},`$ (9)
as typical of quenched lattice calculations.

The $`1/M`$ expansion is nicely suited to the bottom mesons and, even with 2000 gauge field configurations, the simulations of Ref.  found the nonleading contributions to be smaller than statistical uncertainties. The quenched results are shown beside the experimental data in Table 1.

## 4 P-WAVE HEAVY-LIGHT MASSES

It is more difficult to extract a signal for the P-wave masses from lattice simulations. Creation operators which extend over more than a single lattice site need to be tuned to enhance the signal.

In Ref. , the P-wave masses were studied at $`O(1/M)`$, $`O(1/M^2)`$ and $`O(1/M^3)`$ for both charmed and bottom mesons. Subleading contributions were found to be smaller than the statistical uncertainties. Fig. 2 compares the splitting between two P-wave masses (J=0 and J=2) as obtained from lattice calculations and from various models. For the $`B^{}`$ system, most methods predict a splitting between zero and 80 MeV.

The discrepancy between the two lattice results is somewhat disconcerting. Both computations employed quenched lattice NRQCD and both had a temporal lattice spacing of about 0.1 fm. Ref.  used an improved gauge action with a spatial lattice spacing of 0.2 fm, a highly-improved (D234) light-quark action and an ensemble of 2000 configurations. Ref.  used the unimproved (Wilson) gauge action with a spatial lattice spacing near 0.1 fm, the improved clover action for light quarks and an ensemble of 102 configurations.

In Ref. , the ratio of $`P_2/P_0`$ correlation functions falls monotonically as Euclidean time increases, and of course statistical uncertainties grow as Euclidean time increases. Thus, if the meson mass is extracted from a region which begins too near the initial time, the predicted mass splitting would be too large. With this in mind, it is noted in Ref.  that, even at the smallest Euclidean times, those lattice data cannot reproduce the large splitting of Ref. . Instead, Ref.  arrives at a plateau-independent upper bound of 100 MeV for the $`B_2^{}B_0^{}`$ splitting. Lattice efforts are ongoing, and we look forward to a clearer understanding of the $`D^{}`$ and $`B^{}`$ spectra.

In Fig. 3, the splitting between S and P-wave mesons is shown. The lattice results of Boyle are interesting in that they do not rely on NRQCD.

## 5 SUMMARY

The convergence of lattice NRQCD has been studied up to $`O(1/M^3)`$ for both S and P-wave heavy-light mesons. The only cause for concern seems to be the S-wave spin splitting for charmed mesons, where a definitive statement cannot yet be made about convergence.

The P-wave masses have recently come under study with lattice NRQCD. The results of Ref.  indicate that the $`D^{}`$ splittings are $`O(50\mathrm{MeV})`$ or smaller, while the $`B^{}`$ splittings are $`O(10\mathrm{MeV})`$ or smaller. However, the lattice work reported in Ref.  is not consistent with this, so further studies will be instructive.

This work was supported in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.