text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The 26-dimensional open bosonic string has a tachyon in its spectrum with $`M^2=1/\alpha ^{}`$. The presence of this tachyon indicates that the perturbative vacuum of the theory is unstable. While some early work  indicated the possible existence of a more stable vacuum at lower energy (see also ), until fairly recently the significance of this other vacuum was not understood, and the tachyon was taken to be an indication of fundamental problems with the open bosonic string.

In 1999, Sen suggested that the open bosonic string should be interpreted as ending on an unstable space-filling D25-brane . Sen argued that the condensation of the tachyon should correspond to the decay of the D25-brane, and that it should be possible to give an analytic description of this condensation process using the language of Witten’s cubic open string field theory . In particular, Sen made three concrete conjectures:

1. The difference in the action between the unstable vacuum and the perturbatively stable vacuum should be $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=VT_{25}`$, where $`V`$ is the volume of space-time and $`T_{25}`$ is the tension of the D25-brane.
2. Lower-dimensional D$`p`$-branes should be realized as soliton configurations of the tachyon and other string fields.
3. The perturbatively stable vacuum should correspond to the closed string vacuum. In particular, there should be no physical open string excitations around this vacuum.

Conjecture (a) has been verified to a high degree of precision in level-truncated cubic open string field theory  and has been shown exactly using background independent string field theory . Conjecture (b) has been verified for a wide range of single and multiple D$`p`$-brane configurations, using both the cubic and background independent formulations of SFT (see  for a review and further references). To date, however, little concrete evidence has been put forth either for the decoupling of open strings in the perturbatively stable vacuum or for the interpretation of this state as the closed string vacuum. In this note we explicitly compute the scalar open string spectrum in the cubic open string field theory expanded around the perturbatively stable vacuum, using the level-truncation approximation. The results of this computation give strong evidence that there are no physical open string states in this vacuum, and that the open strings are removed from the spectrum by purely classical effects in the string field theory.

## 2 String Field Theory in the Stable Vacuum

We begin with a brief summary of Witten’s cubic formulation of open bosonic string field theory  (see  for reviews). The string field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ contains an infinite family of space-time fields, one field being associated with each state in the open string Fock space. Physical fields are associated with states in the Hilbert space of ghost number one. The string field may be formally written as

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\varphi (p)|\widehat{0};p+A_\mu (p)\alpha _1^\mu |\widehat{0};p+\mathrm{}$$
(1)
where $`|\widehat{0}`$ is the ghost number one vacuum related to the $`SL(2,R)`$-invariant vacuum $`|0`$ through $`|\widehat{0}=c_1|0`$. Witten’s cubic string field theory action is

$$S=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Phi }Q\mathrm{\Phi }\frac{g}{3}\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }$$
(2)
where $`Q`$ is the BRST operator of the string theory and the “star product” $``$ is defined by dividing each string evenly into two halves and “gluing” the right side of one string to the left side of the other through a delta function interaction. The action (2) is invariant under the stringy gauge transformations

$$\delta \mathrm{\Phi }=Q\mathrm{\Lambda }+g\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Phi }\right)$$
(3)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a ghost number zero string field.

While there are an infinite number of component fields in the string field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, for any particular component fields the quadratic and cubic interactions in (2) and the related terms in the gauge transformations (3) can be computed in a straightforward fashion using a Fock space representation of the BRST operator $`Q`$ and the star product . It has been found  that truncating the theory by including only fields up to a fixed level $`L`$ is an effective approximation technique for many questions relevant to the tachyon condensation problem. (By convention the tachyon is taken to have level zero). At fixed level $`L`$, the theory can be further simplified by only considering interactions between fields whose levels total to some number $`I<3L`$. Empirical evidence  indicates that truncating at level $`(L,I)=(L,2L)`$ is the most effective cutoff to maximize accuracy for a fixed number of computations and that calculations at truncation level $`(L,2L)`$ give similar results to calculations at truncation level $`(L,3L)`$.

Sen’s conjecture states that there is a Lorentz invariant solution $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ of the full string field theory equations of motion

$$Q\mathrm{\Phi }_0=g\mathrm{\Phi }_0\mathrm{\Phi }_0$$
(4)
corresponding to the closed string vacuum without a D25-brane. The existence of a nontrivial solution to (4) has been analyzed in the level-truncated theory . In the level (0, 0) truncation, the tachyon potential is simply $`\frac{1}{2}\varphi ^2+g\kappa \varphi ^3`$, where $`\kappa `$ is a numerical constant. This potential gives a locally stable vacuum at $`\varphi _0=1/(3g\kappa )`$. Evaluating the potential at this point gives 68% of Sen’s conjectured value $`T_{25}`$ for the energy gap between the unstable vacuum and the perturbatively stable vacuum. When other scalar fields are included in the string field by raising the level at which the theory is truncated, many of these fields couple to the tachyon $`\varphi `$ and take expectation values when $`\varphi `$ becomes nonzero, but similar solutions to the level-truncated string field theory equations of motion continue to exist. In the level (4, 8) truncation, the energy gap between the two vacua becomes $`98.6\%`$ of the predicted value , and in the level (10, 20) truncation the energy gap becomes $`99.91\%`$ of the predicted value . As the level of truncation is increased, the vacuum expectation values of the scalar fields converge rapidly, so that the level (10, 20) values for the field values in the vacuum appear to be within less than $`1\%`$ of their exact values for low-level fields. These results provide us with a close approximation to a field $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ satisfying (4), which we can use to study the perturbatively stable vacuum in the level truncated theory.

We can describe the physics around a nontrivial vacuum $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ satisfying the equation (4) by shifting the string field

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Phi }_0+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}.$$
(5)
In terms of the new field $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$, the action becomes

$$S=S_0\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\stackrel{~}{Q}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\frac{g}{3}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}$$
(6)
where the new BRST operator $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ acts on a string field $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ of ghost number $`n`$ through

$$\stackrel{~}{Q}\mathrm{\Psi }=Q\mathrm{\Psi }+g\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_0\mathrm{\Psi }(1)^n\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Phi }_0\right).$$
(7)
The identity

$$\stackrel{~}{Q}^2=0$$
(8)
for the new BRST operator follows from (4). The BRST invariance of the level-truncated approximation to the vacuum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ was studied in

We are interested in studying the physics of the new string field theory defined through (6,7). According to Sen, the vacuum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ should be the closed string vacuum, and should not admit open string excitations. To study the spectrum of excitations of the theory, we need to explicitly calculate the quadratic terms in the action, or equivalently to compute the action of the new BRST operator (7) on a general string field. This requires us to compute all cubic couplings in the original string field theory of the form

$$t_{ijk}(p)\varphi _i(0)\varphi _j(p)\varphi _k(p).$$
(9)
In this letter we restrict attention to scalar excitations, so we need to compute all terms of the form (9) where $`\varphi _i,\varphi _j`$ and $`\varphi _k`$ are scalar fields. Because $`\varphi _j,\varphi _k`$ are momentum-dependent, we must include among these fields longitudinal polarizations of all higher-spin tensor fields as well as the zero-momentum scalars $`\varphi _i(0)`$ which can take nonzero vacuum expectation values in $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$. We restrict attention in this letter to scalars at even levels, which decouple from odd-level scalars at quadratic order due to the twist symmetry of the theory .

With the assistance of the symbolic manipulation program Mathematica we have computed all 58,481 scalar interactions of the form (9) in the level (6, 12) truncation of the theory. There are 160 scalar fields $`\varphi _j(p)`$ at even levels $`6`$, including longitudinal polarizations of tensor fields, and 31 momentum-independent scalar fields $`\varphi _i(0)`$, each of which takes a nonzero value in the vacuum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$. (Actually, the vacuum lies in a subspace $`_1`$ of the full scalar field space , but we do not use this decomposition in our analysis). As a check on our calculations we have also computed all the coefficients associated with gauge transformations (3) where one of the three fields involved has vanishing momentum. We have verified that our terms of the form (9) give rise to an action (in the perturbative vacuum) which is invariant at order $`g^1`$ under arbitrary momentum-independent gauge transformations and a random sampling of momentum-dependent gauge transformations.

Using the complete set of terms of the form (9) in the level (6, 12) truncation, we have calculated all the quadratic terms for even-level scalars in the action (6) around the perturbatively stable vacuum. The details of this action are far too lengthy to appear in print, but will be made available in the future in electronic form. In the remainder of this note we summarize the results of using this quadratic action to study the spectrum of open string states in the theory (6). Earlier attempts to study the spectrum of physical states in a subset of the level (2, 6) truncation appeared in .

## 3 BRST Cohomology

The spectrum of physical states in the theory (6) is given by the BRST cohomology

$$\mathrm{Ker}\stackrel{~}{Q}_1/\mathrm{Im}\stackrel{~}{Q}_0,$$
(10)
where $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_n`$ describes the action of the BRST operator $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ on a string field of ghost number $`n`$. From (8), it follows that $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_1\stackrel{~}{Q}_0=0`$ in the full string field theory. The states associated with vanishing eigenvalues of the kinetic operator $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_1`$ at a fixed value of $`p^2`$ are the $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states in the theory. Two $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states are physically equivalent if they differ by a $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact state $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_0\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a string field of ghost number 0.

Level truncation of the open string field theory breaks the general gauge invariance (3) at order $`g^2`$, although gauge invariance is preserved at order $`g^0`$ and $`g^1`$. This breaking of gauge invariance means that the level-truncated BRST operator no longer squares to zero. In other words,

$$\stackrel{~}{Q}_1^{(L,I)}\stackrel{~}{Q}_0^{(L,I)}0$$
(11)
where $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_n^{(L,I)}`$ is the level $`(L,I)`$ truncated approximation to $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_n`$. The inequality (11) means that $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states which are also $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact in the full string field theory (6) will be approximated in the level truncated theory by $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states which are not precisely $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact. This fact makes the identification of physical states in the theory only possible in an approximate sense.

We have systematically computed $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states in the level-truncated theory by finding values of $`M^2=p^2`$ where

$$det\stackrel{~}{Q}_1^{(L,I)}=0$$
(12)
and then computing the eigenvectors associated with the vanishing eigenvalues.

As an example of this computation, consider the level (0, 0) truncation of the theory, which includes only the tachyon field $`\varphi `$. The quadratic term for the tachyon field in the nontrivial vacuum is

$$\varphi (p)\left[\frac{p^21}{2}+g\kappa \left(\frac{16}{27}\right)^{p^2}3\varphi \right]\varphi (p).$$
(13)
The determinant of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_1^{(0,0)}`$ is simply the quantity in square brackets. This quantity does not vanish for any real value of $`p^2`$, so there are no $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states in the spectrum at this level .

In the level (2, 6) truncation there are seven scalar fields to be considered, associated with the Fock space states

$`|0;p,`$ $`\left(\alpha _1\alpha _1\right)|0;p,`$
$`\left(\alpha _0\alpha _2\right)|0;p,`$ $`\left(\alpha _0\alpha _1\right)^2|0;p,`$ (14)
$`b_1c_1|0;p,`$ $`\left(\alpha _0\alpha _1\right)b_1c_0|0;p,`$
$`b_2c_0|0;p`$
At this level of truncation, using the vacuum expectation values determined in  with the level (10, 20) truncation, we found five values of $`p^2`$ where $`det\stackrel{~}{Q}_1^{(2,6)}=0`$, associated with states having

$$M^2=0.9067,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}2.0032},\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}12.8566},\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}13.5478},\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}16.5998}$$
(15)
in units where $`M^2=1`$ for the tachyon222Note: a similar calculation was done at level (2, 6) in Feynman-Siegel gauge by Kostelecky and Samuel . They did not check, however, whether their spectrum was associated with physical or exact states. Our calculation can be restricted to this gauge, where it agrees for the most part (but not exactly) with their calculation.. At level (4, 12) we found 18 $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states with $`M^2<20`$, of which the lightest has $`M^2=0.58817`$. At level (6, 12) we found 33 $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states with $`M^2<20`$, of which the lightest has $`M^2=0.85562`$. The complete set of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states we found333Our algorithm for locating momenta associated with $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states proceeded by calculating the determinant of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_1^{(L,I)}`$ at equally spaced values of $`p`$ (with $`\mathrm{\Delta }p=0.0001`$) and looking for changes of sign in the determinant. The spacing of our $`p`$ values was significantly less than the smallest distance we observed between $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states (0.0039), so we believe that we have found all the $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states at $`M^2<20`$. Some possibility remains that we have missed pairs of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states which are very close in momentum. It is remotely possible that physical states are hiding in such closely spaced pairs of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states. is graphed in Figure 1.

To test the $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exactness of a given $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed state at level $`(L,I)`$, we computed $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_0^{(L,I)}\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$ for each ghost number zero field $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$ with level $`L`$. The span of the fields $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_0^{(L,I)}\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$ gives an approximation to the subspace of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact states at each level. Suppose that $`\{e_i\}`$ is an orthonormal basis for this subspace and $`s`$ is one of the $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states we found. We can then measure the extent to which a state is $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact by the norm squared of its projection onto the $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact subspace. Explicitly,

$$\mathrm{fraction}\mathrm{in}\mathrm{exact}\mathrm{subspace}=\frac{_i(se_i)^2}{ss}.$$
(16)
There is no natural positive definite inner product defined on the single string Hilbert space $``$, so to compute (16) we had to make an ad hoc choice of such an inner product. We did the calculation using two choices for this inner product, and found similar results in both cases. The first choice, which seems most natural, is to take the inner product $`s|s`$ with $`p|p|`$ in the matter sector and a Kronecker delta function in the ghost sector. The second inner product we tried was simply defined by a Kronecker delta function on a basis of states spanned by all possible scalar products of matter and ghost operators (such as (14) at level (2, 6), giving a unit normalization to each of these states). Using these two definitions of the inner product, we find for example that the $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed state at $`M^2=0.9067`$ found in the (2, 6) truncation lies $`97.90\%`$ in the exact subspace using the first inner product, and $`95.24\%`$ in the exact subspace using the second inner product. In the remainder of this note all calculations use the first definition of the inner product.

In the full string field theory, there are continuous families of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states which are also $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact at all $`p`$, given by states of the form $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_0|s;p`$. In the level truncation approximation we expect these continuous families to be replaced by a discrete spectrum of almost-exact states, approaching a continuous distribution as the level of truncation is increased. The extent to which we see a continuous distribution of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact states arising in the level-truncation approximation to the theory around the vacuum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ is a measure of how well level truncation works in the new vacuum, and how close the level-truncation approximation comes to giving a BRST operator satisfying $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_1\stackrel{~}{Q}_0=0`$. A complete list of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states at $`M^2<20`$ and the exactness of these states is given in Table 1; qualitative results for the exactness of all $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states are depicted in Figure 1. As we would hope, as the level of truncation is increased we see a discrete distribution of almost-exact states which become both more exact and more closely spaced as the level of truncation is lifted. We interpret these almost-exact states as the remnant in the level-truncated theory of the continuous families of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact states in the full theory.

Physical states in the theory correspond to $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states satisfying $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_1|s;p=0`$ which are not $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact. Because states in the cohomology of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ will not be removed by a generic small perturbation, all physical states in the theory should appear in the level truncation as $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states with $`p^2`$ approaching some fixed value $`M^2`$ as the level of truncation is increased. To verify Sen’s conjecture, we would hope to find that the states lying below the cutoff $`M^2=L1`$ are all approximately $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact, to the precision allowed by the level-truncation approximation, so that no physical states appear in the limiting theory. Indeed, we find that beyond the level (2, 6) truncation all states below the cutoff lie more than $`99\%`$ in the exact subspace, using either choice of inner product described above. For example, the lowest lying states mentioned above in the level truncations (2, 6), (4, 12) and (6, 12) lie 97.90%, 99.990% and 99.997% in the exact subspace. We would expect physical states in the theory to appear consistently in each level truncation as states with significant components outside the exact subspace, since the average state in the level-truncated space lies less than $`35\%`$ in the exact space. We see no sign in our data of such physical open string states at low levels, even up to values of $`M^2`$ several times larger than the cutoff. We interpret this result as strong evidence for Sen’s conjecture that there are no physical open string excitations around the vacuum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$, and that this string field configuration should be identified with the closed string vacuum.

It may seem surprising that we expect to see the physical states in the cohomology of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$, which form a set of measure zero in the full space of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states, through this approach. The difference between the behavior of physical and exact states under level truncation of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ can be understood by considering the behavior of the zeros of the functions $`f(x)=x1`$ and $`g(x)=0`$ under a small perturbation by a noise function $`\eta (x)`$. In the first case, generically $`f(x)+\eta (x)`$ will have a single zero near $`x=1`$. In the second case, $`g(x)+\eta (x)`$ will develop a discrete spectrum of randomly spaced zeros. The physical states in the cohomology of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ are controlled by functions like $`f(x)`$, while the continuous families of exact states are controlled by functions like $`g(x)`$. While this argument suggests that physical states should indeed continue to be present in the level-truncation approximation, as a check on our methodology we have used the same method we used to compute the approximate cohomology of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ to compute the approximate cohomology of the BRST operator $`Q`$ in the perturbative vacuum, after adding a small random perturbation $`\widehat{Q}=Q+\eta `$. We find that unless the perturbation $`\eta `$ is large enough to dominate the system (e.g., by pushing the exactness of a generic $`\widehat{Q}`$-closed state below $`90\%`$), the physical states at $`M^2=1`$ and $`M^2=3`$ are easily distinguishable in a level (4, 12) truncation of the theory.

## 4 Discussion

We have explicitly calculated the quadratic terms in the open string field theory action around the nonperturbative vacuum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ in the (6, 12) level truncation. We computed the BRST cohomology by computing all closed states under the truncated BRST operator $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_1^{(L,I)}`$, and comparing with the subspace of exact states formed by the operator $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_0^{(L,I)}`$. We found evidence that all $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-closed states in the theory become $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-exact in the limit when fields of all levels are included.

There are several directions in which it would be interesting to proceed, given the results in this letter. For one thing, it would be very nice to have a better conceptual understanding of the decoupling of open string states in the perturbatively stable vacuum. While some interesting perspectives on this phenomenon have been given , a convincing picture which explains the classical decoupling of open strings in the cubic string field theory picture has yet to be given. An intriguing suggestion for the form of the string field theory in the nontrivial vacuum was made in , where it was suggested that the new BRST operator $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ can be related through a field definition to a pure ghost operator such as $`c_0`$ or more generally $`a_n(c_n+(1)^nc_n)`$. It would be very interesting to use the explicit form of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ which we have computed in level truncation to prove or disprove this conjecture. Finally, a question of fundamental importance is to what extent the cubic open string field theory in the perturbatively stable vacuum contains closed string excitations. Sen’s conjectures suggest that it might be possible to give a direct description of asymptotic closed string states in terms of the open string field theory degrees of freedom in the vacuum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$. If such a description could be made explicit, it would lead to new insight into the nature of closed string field theory and the structure of D-branes as closed string solitons.

## Acknowledgments

We would like to thank D. Gross, N. Moeller, J. Polchinski, A. Sen and B. Zwiebach for helpful discussions in the course of this work. Particular thanks to A. Sen and B. Zwiebach for constructive comments on an early version of this manuscript. WT would like to thank the Institute for Theoretical Physics in Santa Barbara for hospitality during the latter part of this work. The work of IE was supported in part by a National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship and in part by the DOE through contract #DE-FC02-94ER40818. The work of WT was supported in part by the A. P. Sloan Foundation and in part by the DOE through contract #DE-FC02-94ER40818.


format: text

text:
# Prediction of a surface state and a related surface insulator-metal transition for the (100) surface of stochiometric EuO

## Abstract

We calculate the temperature and layer-dependent electronic structure of a 20-layer EuO(100)-film using a combination of first-principles and model calculation based on the ferromagnetic Kondo-lattice model. The results suggest the existence of a EuO(100) surface state which can lead to a surface insulator-metal transition.

In the recent past many theoretical and experimental research works have been focussed on the intriguing properties of rare earth metals and their compounds. Among others, the extraordinary surface magnetic properties of the lanthanides DMIL97 , as e. g. an enhanced Curie temperature of the Gd(0001) surface compared to that of bulk Gd WAG+85 , have provoked numerous research activities. Concerning the interplay between electronic structure and exceptional magnetic properties at the Gadolinium surface a Gd(0001) surface state WF91 ; LHD+91  is believed to play a crucial role and its temperature dependent behaviour has been discussed intensely, e. g, DDN98 .

Rare-earth materials are so-called local-moment systems, i.e. the magnetic moment stems from the partially filled 4f-shell of the rare-earth atom being strictly localized at the ion site. Thus the magnetic properties of these materials are determined by the localized magnetic moments. On the other hand, the electronic properties like electrical conductivity are borne by itinerant electrons in rather broad conduction bands, e.g. 6s, 5d for Gd. Many of the characteristics of local-moment systems can be attributed to a correlation between the localized moments and the itinerant conduction electrons. For this situation the ferromagnetic Kondo-lattice model (FKLM) which is also referred to as the s-f model has been proven to be an adequate description. In this model, the correlation between localized moments and conduction electrons is represented by an intraatomic exchange interaction.

In this work we will introduce a multi-band FKLM and use it to calculate the temperature and layer-dependent bandstructure of EuO films. For all the calculations, the surfaces of the films are parallel to the fcc(100) crystal plane and the films will be referred to as EuO(100) films. These films consist of $`n`$ equivalent parallel layers. The lattice sites within the film are indicated by a greek letter $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`\gamma `$, $`\mathrm{}`$, denoting the layer, and by a latin letter $`i`$, $`j`$, $`k`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, numbering the sites within a given layer. The different subbands of the conduction bands of EuO will be denoted by the indices $`m`$, $`m^{}`$.

The Hamiltonian for the multi-band FKLM,

$$=_s+_f+_{sf},$$
(1)
consists of three parts. The first,

$$_s=\underset{ij\alpha \beta \sigma }{}T_{ij\alpha \beta }^{mm^{}}c_{i\alpha m\sigma }^+c_{j\beta m^{}\sigma },$$
(2)
contains the kinetic energy of the conduction band electrons. $`c_{i\alpha m\sigma }^+`$ ($`c_{i\alpha m\sigma }`$) is the creation (annihilation) operator of an electron with spin $`\sigma `$ from the $`m`$-th subband at the lattice site $`𝐑_{i\alpha }`$. The $`T_{ij\alpha \beta }^{mm^{}}`$ describe the hopping between the $`m`$-th subband at the lattice site $`𝐑_{i\alpha }`$ and the $`m^{}`$-th subband at the lattice site $`𝐑_{j\beta }`$. These hopping integrals have to be determined within a first-principles band-structure calculation.

The second part of the Hamiltonian represents the system of the localized f-moments and consists itself of two parts,

$$_f=\underset{ij\alpha \beta }{}J_{ij}^{\alpha \beta }𝐒_{i\alpha }𝐒_{j\beta }D_0\underset{i\alpha }{}\left(S_{i\alpha }^z\right)^2,$$
(3)
where the first is the well-known Heisenberg interaction. Here the $`𝐒_{i\alpha }`$ are the spin operators of the localized magnetic moments, which are coupled by the exchange integrals, $`J_{ij}^{\alpha \beta }`$. The second contribution is a single-ion anisotropy term which arises from the necessity of having a collective magnetic order at finite temperatures, $`T>0`$ SN99a . The according anisotropy constant $`D_0`$ is typically smaller by some orders of magnitude than the Heisenberg exchange integrals, $`D_0J_{ij}^{\alpha \beta }`$.

In addition to the contribution of the itinerant-electron system and the contribution of the localized f-moments we have a third contribution to account for an intraatomic interaction between the conduction electrons and the localized f-spins. The form of that contribution in the case of multiple conduction bands can be derived from the general form of the on-site Coulomb interaction between electrons of different subbands, with the restriction that electron scattering processes caused by the Coulomb interaction are restricted to two involved subbandsSchiller00 . By distinguishing between bands of localized and itinerant electrons, respectively, one gets the on-site Coulomb interaction between both groups of electrons. For the special situation of europium with an exactly half-filled localized 4f-shell and by assuming the inter-band exchange to be independent on the different subbands, one eventually gets the multi-band s-f interaction:

$$_{sf}=\frac{J}{\mathrm{}}\underset{i\alpha m}{}𝝈_{i\alpha m}𝐒_{i\alpha }.$$
(4)
where $`𝐒_{i\alpha }`$ is the local moment originating from the Hund’s rule coupling of the localized f-electrons, $`𝝈_{i\alpha m}`$ is the Pauli spin operator of an electron from the $`m`$-th band of itinerant electrons, both at the lattice site $`𝐑_{i\alpha }`$, and $`J`$ is the intraatomic s-f exchange interaction.

The many-body problem that arises with the Hamiltonian (1) is far from being trivial and a full solution is lacking even for the case of the bulk. In a previous paper we have presented an approximate treatment of the special case of a single electron in an otherwise empty conduction band SN99b . The presented approach applies to the situation in a model-type ferromagnetic semiconductor film containing a single-nondegenerated s-like band. However, the approach as well as the obtained results are directly transferable to the case of the multi-band Kondo lattice model applicable to a real ferromagnetic semiconductor film like $`\mathrm{EuO}`$.

Due to the empty conduction bands we are considering throughout the whole paper, the Hamiltonian (1) can be split into an electronic part, $`_s+_{sf}`$, and a magnetic part, $`_f`$, which can be solved separately SN99b . For the magnetic subsystem $`_f`$ we employ an approach based on the random phase approximation (RPA) which has been described in detail in SN99a . As the result one gets the layer- and temperature dependent magnetizations of the local-moment system. These are depicted for EuO(100) films of various thicknesses in Fig. 1. For the respective calculations, the Heisenberg interactions have been approximated within the tight-binding approximation, taking into account the nearest and the next nearest neighbour interactions, with values for EuO of $`J_1/k_B=0.625\mathrm{K}`$ and $`J_2/k_B=0.125\mathrm{K}`$, respectively quantmag2 . The calculated Curie temperature converges as a function of film thickness in a manner similar to that found experimentally for Gd(0001) films FBS+93 . Moreover, the calculated Curie temperature of a 20-layer EuO(100) film of $`66.7\mathrm{K}`$ approximates very well the experimental value of $`T_\mathrm{C}`$ for bulk EuO of $`69.33\mathrm{K}`$ Wac91 .

For the electronic part a moment-conserving decoupling approximation (MCDA) for suitably defined Green functions is employed SN99b . In the set of equations which constitute the solution for the electronic subsystem, there appear f-spin correlation functions which have to be evaluated within the magnetic subsystem (Eq. (3). These f-spin correlation functions mediate the temperature dependence of the electronic structure of the system.

For the limiting case of ferromagnetic saturation of the localized f-spin system ($`T=0`$), there exists an exact solution for the FKLM with empty conduction band ($`n=0`$) SMN97 . While the spin-$``$ spectrum exhibits strong correlation effects, the spectrum of the spin-$``$ electron is only rigidly shifted compared to the free solution obtained for the case of vanishing s-f interaction, $`J=0`$. This means, that the spin-$``$ spectra obtained within a ferromagnetic band-structure calculation provide the single-particle input (cf. Eq. (2)) for the FKLM model calculation. Since the solution of the FKLM for $`T=0`$ and $`n=0`$ is exact, the problem of double counting of relevant interactions, which would normally occur when superimposing the results of a band-structure calculation with a model calculation, is elegantly avoided in the presented approach.

To obtain the temperature-dependent band structure of a EuO(100) film, the $`T=0`$ band structures are needed as single-particle input for the model calculations. These have been calculated for the Eu-5d bands, which in EuO dominate the conduction band, using a standard TB-LMTO program And75 . To account for the film geometry, we defined a supercell consisting of 20 EuO(100) layers followed by 5 layers of empty spheres, all equidistantly spaced. The lattice constant for the EuO(100) film has been choosen to be the lattice constant of bulk EuO, $`a=5.142\mathrm{\AA }`$ Wac91 . In this approach we neglect surface relaxation and reconstruction, which might be present in EuO films.

Fig. 2 shows the temperature- and spin-dependent local densities of states of the first, the second and the center layer of a 20-layer EuO(100) film with an s-f exchange interaction of $`J=0.25\mathrm{eV}`$. Here, as in Figs. 3 and 4 the energy zero refers to the Fermi energy of the system Fermi\_energy . For $`T=0`$, the spin-$``$ and the spin-$``$ spectra occupy the lowest and the highest energy range, respectively. With increasing temperature, the spectra for the two spin-directions gradually approach each other until for $`T=T_C`$ ($`S_z/S=0`$, fat line) the spectra for both spin-directions become the same. As a result, the lower band edge of the spin-$``$ bands is shifted towards lower energies when decreasing the temperature below $`T_C`$. This effect is known as the red shift of the optical absorption edge in bulk EuO Wac91 . The spin-$``$ densities of state for $`T=0`$ ($`S_z/S=1`$) are, except for constant energy shift, those obtained within the band-structure calculations, which is due to the lack of possibility for the spin-$``$ electron to exchange its spin with the system of perfectly aligned local moments. However, the spin-$``$ electron can flip its spin even for $`T=0`$ by emitting a magnon and forming a polaron-like quasiparticle SN99b . Hence, the spin-$``$ spectra for $`T=0`$ already exhibit correlation effects and differ from those of the band-structure calculations.

In Fig. 2 the lower band edges of the local densities of states of the surface layer ($`\alpha =1`$) lie at lower energies than the respective local densities of state of the center layers and are even touching the Fermi energy, already indicating the existence of a surface state band at the lower edge of the $`\mathrm{Eu}`$-5d bands and a possible surface insulator-metal transition. In the following, these interesting indicative observations shall be investigated in more detail.

In Fig. 3 the $`T=0`$ local spectral density of the surface ($`\alpha =1`$) and the center ($`\alpha =10`$) layer of a 20-layer $`\mathrm{EuO}(100)`$ film can be seen for both spin directions. A surface state is a state which exists in the so-called forbidden region where no bulk states occur. For the bulk spectral density we take that of the center layer ($`\alpha =10`$) of the 20-layer film (see Fig. 3). The forbidden regions lie below and above the bulk bands but also includes “white regions” right in the middle of the bulk bands. In this respect, in Fig. 3, clearly the lowest bands of the spin-$``$ and of the spin-$``$ spectral densities of the surface layer ($`\alpha =1`$) around the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-point and the M-point constitute surface state bands. These surface states originate from the LSDA calculation. With the s-f model calculation one can now investigate the temperature dependence of the surface state.

Fig. 4 shows the spectral density of the surface layer of a 20-layer film at $`𝐤=\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$ and $`𝐤=\overline{\mathrm{M}}`$ for different temperatures. For comparison, the respective spectral densities of the center layer of the 20-layer films are plotted. The plotted spectral densities clearly indicate surface state bands. For $`T=0`$ ($`S_z/S=1`$) the lower band edge of these surface state bands lies at the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-point about $`0.8\mathrm{eV}`$ and at the $`\overline{\mathrm{M}}`$-point about $`0.45\mathrm{eV}`$ below the lower conduction-band edge of the “bulk” bands of the central layer (cf. dashed line in Fig. 4). These splittings between the surface states and the lower edges of the bulk band are almost independent on the temperature. With increasing temperature both the surface states and the lower band edges of the bulk bands for the two spin directions converge Stoner-like.

As a result, the surface state does not change the down shift of the lower band edge upon cooling below $`T_\mathrm{C}`$ (red shift) of the system. However, the lower band edge of the LDOS at the surface is lowered by about $`0.8\mathrm{eV}`$ compared to the bulk-like LDOS in the center of the film. Thus, for the 20-layer $`\mathrm{EuO}(100)`$ film, the band gap between the occupied $`\mathit{4}f^{}`$ bands and the unoccupied $`\mathit{5}d_{t_{2g}}`$ bands will be reduced by the same $`0.8\mathrm{eV}`$. When decreasing the temperature to $`T=0`$ the red shift will reduce the band gap further: by $`0.35\mathrm{eV}`$ according to our calculations and by $`0.27\mathrm{eV}`$ according to the experimental results Wac91 . The overall reduction of the 4f-$`\mathit{5}d_{t_{2g}}`$ gap will amount to $`1.15\mathrm{eV}`$ and $`1.07\mathrm{eV}`$, respectively. These values are exactly in the range of the experimental 4f-$`\mathit{5}d_{t_{2g}}`$ gap of bulk $`\mathrm{EuO}`$ at $`300\mathrm{K}`$ of $`1.12\mathrm{eV}`$ Wac91 . These results indicate a possible surface insulator-metal transition in $`\mathrm{EuO}(100)`$ films as a function of decreasing temperature, $`T0`$ (cf. Fig. 5). Due to the exchange splitting of the conduction bands into the lower-energetic spin-$``$ band and the higher-energetic spin-$``$ band the respective phase for $`T0`$ would be a half-metal. As a result, the resistivity of the $`\mathrm{EuO}(100)`$ films should be highly dependent on an applied magnetic field and a colossal magnetoresistance (CMR) effect would be observed.

We wish to acknowledge the financial support by the SFB 290 and by the German National Merit Foundation. One of us (R. S.) is indebted to Prof. A. J. Freeman from Northwestern University for his hospitality and many fruitful discussions.


text:
# Possible Detection of Baryonic Fluctuations in the Large-Scale Structure Power Spectrum

## 1 Introduction

We present a new analysis on the power spectra of density fluctuations ($`P(k)`$) as derived from three recently available independent cosmological redshift surveys; the Abell/ACO Cluster Survey as defined in Miller & Batuski (2001) and Miller et al. (2001a), the IRAS Point Source redshift catalog (PSCz; Saunders et al. 2000), and the Automated Plate Machine (APM) cluster catalog (Dalton et al. 1994). For the first time, the volumes traced by these surveys are large enough to accurately probe the power spectrum to wavenumbers of $`k=0.015`$ (Abell/ACO), $`0.025`$ (PSCz) and $`0.030h`$Mpc-1 (APM). Throughout, we use $`h=H_o/100`$km s-1Mpc-1.

Such information on the large–scale distribution of matter in the Universe is critical for constraining cosmological models of structure formation as well as determining the cosmological parameters. For example, the amplitude and shape of $`P(k)`$ below $`k0.05h`$Mpc-1 can be used to discriminate between a high and low value of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_mh`$, while a non-negligible baryon fraction ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_b`$) would produce noticeable oscillations in $`P(k)`$ at $`k<0.1h`$Mpc-1 (with the oscillations becoming broader, and more easily detectable, toward smaller $`k`$; see Eisenstein et al. 1998). Cosmological constraints based on the large–scale structure (LSS) in the Universe are independent and complementary to those derived from the Type Ia supernovae and Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) experiments (see Bond et al. 2000; Jaffe et al. 2000) and thus breaking key degeneracies inherent in these other cosmological measurements (see, for example, Tegmark, Zaldarriaga & Hamilton 2001).

In the past, cosmological studies of the power spectrum of density fluctuations have been hampered in three ways; i) uncertainties in the shape of the $`P(k)`$ on very large scales, ii) the form of the relative biasing between the luminous and dark matter, and iii) the possible existence of a narrow “bump” in the $`P(k)`$ (Landy et al. 1996; Einasto et al. 1997). As we will show in Sections 2 and 3, our new data-sets allow us to address these concerns and thus facilitate a more robust determination of the cosmological parameters from LSS measurements. Our work differs from other recent attempts to constrain cosmological models using LSS data (Novosyadlyj et al. 2000; Tegmark et al. 2001; Efstathiou & Moody 2000; Huterer, Knox & Nichol 2000) since we first focus on the detection and interpretation of features in the matter power spectrum, followed by parameter estimation based on the favored models that explain these features.

## 2 Biasing

In Figure 1 (top) we plot the $`P(k)`$ for our three samples. The Abell/ACO power spectrum is from Miller & Batuski (2001), the APM result is from Tadros, Efstathiou, and Dalton (1998), and the PSCz data are from Hamilton & Tegmark (2000). In all three plots, we exclude any data with errors $`>50`$% of the power for obvious reasons but we note that their inclusion makes no differences in our final results. The errors are all $`1\sigma `$ as quoted by the authors. In the bottom frame, we plot the same data for the three samples after shifting the amplitudes of the APM and PSCz surveys to match that of the Abell/ACO survey. We have applied various techniques to calculate this amplitude shift (e.g. a $`\chi ^2`$ minimization of the data with nearly identical $`k`$-values as well as using model fits to the data and re–normalizing them to the Abell/ACO data), but in all cases we obtain nearly identical results: the relative bias between the three samples over the range $`0.03k0.15h`$Mpc-1 is $`b=1.5`$ and $`b=3.6`$ for Abell/ACO versus APM and Abell/ACO versus the PSCz respectively.

A remarkable aspect of Figure 1 is the overall success of a simple linear biasing model in re-normalizing the amplitudes of these power spectra over nearly a decade of scale. A scale–independent biasing model, over the scales discussed herein, has already been predicted from recent numerical simulations (Narayanan, Berlind & Weinberg 2000) and therefore, allows us to confidently re-scale these three different power spectra, thus facilitating the detection of features in the combined $`P(k)`$ as discussed below.

## 3 The Shape of the Power Spectrum

The overall shape of our combined power spectrum is shown in Figure 1 and it is unique for two reasons. First, we see no evidence at small $`k`$ values for a turn–over in the $`P(k)`$ toward a scale-invariant spectrum as previously hinted at in other LSS analyses (Tadros & Efstathiou 1996; Peacock 1997; Gatzañaga & Baugh 1998). This large-scale power has also been witnessed in other recently reported $`P(k)`$ measurements (see Efstathiou & Moody 2000; Schuecker et al. 2001). Such large–scale power in the $`P(k)`$ indicates a low value for the shape parameter ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{\Omega }_mh<0.3`$) since this has the effect of sliding the matter power spectrum to the smaller $`k`$ values compared to a critical matter density universe. Secondly, we do not find a narrow “bump” in the $`P(k)`$ as reported by Einasto et al. (1997) and Landy et al. (1996) but instead witness “valleys” in the power spectrum. However, these previous surveys did not have the volume to see the large scale ($`k<0.03`$) power in $`P(k)`$ and thus only saw the down–turn of the “valley” giving the appearance of a “bump” in the power spectrum at $`k0.05`$ and therefore, our $`P(k)`$ may still be consistent with the Landy et al. and the Einasto et al. power spectra. For the remainder of this section, we focus on the the two “valleys” we see in Figure 1 at $`k0.035`$ and $`k0.090h`$Mpc-1.

### 3.1 False Discovery Rate

In this section, we investigate the statistical significance of the two features seen in Figures 1 and 2. We wish to determine if all of the data points are consistent with being drawn from a smooth, featureless, power spectrum. In the statistical literature, this is known as multiple hypothesis testing since one is testing, for each point, the null hypothesis that it was drawn from a featureless $`P(k)`$. The key issue then becomes choosing the threshold (in probability) which these null hypotheses are rejected.

Traditionally, this is done by rejecting all points that are above a certain $`\sigma _{rej}`$ threshold. Unfortunately, there is a major problem with this methodology since the number of data points that are mistakenly rejected depends on the size of the data-set. For example, if all our 37 data points were uncorrelated and truly drawn from a smooth $`P(k)`$, we would expect, on average, only 1.75 of these data points to be rejected (and thus in error) for a $`\sigma _{rej}=2`$ threshold. However, if we had one million data points, then the number mistakenly rejected data points at the $`\sigma _{rej}=2`$ level would be approximately 50,000. \[Note: this comparison only works if all of the real data were uncorrelated.\] To guard against the over-detection of false discoveries, one could arbitrarily increase the significance threshold to $`\sigma _{rej}=4`$, thus reducing the number of errors but would lead to a much more conservative test. This is not to say that all of the $`2\sigma `$ rejections would be wrong, but simply that you would have many more false rejections. Thus, any significance threshold is arbitrary and highly dependent on the data size. So, enforcing a $`\sigma _{rej}=3`$ threshold for small data-sets can be overly conservative. In summary, the more tests one does, the more stringent the required threshold becomes to avoid making too many false discoveries.

Ideally, we need a statistical technique that is more adaptive and whose interpretation does not depend on the data size. Instead of $`\sigma _{rej}`$, we will choose to control the false discovery rate ($`\alpha `$)– which is defined to be the percentage of mistakenly rejected points out of the total number of points rejected. This is clearly independent of the data size. Such an adaptive statistical tool is the False Discovery Rate (FDR; Benjamini & Hochberg 1995). Once we choose $`\alpha `$, then FDR defines an appropriate significance threshold to obtain this false discovery rate for the dataset in question. For example, if we choose $`\alpha =\frac{1}{4}`$ and reject eight data points, then on average, only two of these points are in error even though their significance (as implied by their $`\sigma `$’s) may appear low. Again, arbitrarily setting $`\sigma _{rej}=3`$ for our data-set may be too conservative. Instead, by a priori controlling the false discovery rate, we can state with statistical confidence that six out of eight rejected data points are true outliers against the null hypothesis. We briefly discuss FDR here and refer the reader to Nichol et al. 2000 and Miller et al. 2001b for further details.

Operationally, we first compute the $`p`$–value111The p–value is the probability that sampling from an ensemble of datasets would lead to a data value with an equal or higher deviation from the the null hypothesis. for each test. Herein we have used a a smooth CDM model based on our best-fit cosmological parameters (Section 4) but with the baryon oscillations removed (see Eisenstein & Hu 1998). However, the reader should note that this model is nearly an exact power-law over the range $`k>0.02h`$Mpc-1, and so our results would not change if we used a simple power-law fit to the data (without the valleys). We then rank, in increasing size, the $`p`$-values (for each test) and draw a line of slope $`\alpha `$ and zero intercept. Recall, $`\alpha `$ is the maximum acceptable false discovery rate. The first crossing of this line with a $`p`$–value (moving from larger to smaller $`p`$–values) defines the significance threshold $`\sigma _{rej}`$, below which all points are rejected based on our null hypotheses. On average, only $`\alpha \times 100\%`$ of these rejected points will be in error.

Figure 2 presents the result of applying FDR to our combined $`P(k)`$ using an uncorrelated dataset (as opposed to the correlated data in Figure 1). Specifically, we use the uncorrelated $`P(k)`$ given by Tegmark & Hamilton (2000) for the PSCz while Tadros et al. (1998) claim their APM $`P(k)`$ is uncorrelated and thus we use their data points directly. For the Abell/ACO catalog, Miller & Batuski (2001) have shown that their $`P(k)`$ is uncorrelated for separations of $`\mathrm{\Delta }k0.015h`$Mpc-1. Therefore, as can be seen from Figure 1, the data at $`k>0.04`$ is already uncorrelated while for smaller $`k`$ values we simply re–sample the data in such a way that the minimum separation between points is at least $`\mathrm{\Delta }k0.01h`$Mpc-1. In Figure 2, the circled points are rejected (based on our null hypotheses) with a false discovery rate of $`\alpha =0.25`$, while the points outlined with squares are rejected with a $`\alpha =0.10`$.

We detect the “valleys” at both $`k0.035h`$Mpc-1 and at $`k0.09h`$Mpc-1. The power of the false discovery rate is that it ensures that no more than $`25\%`$ of the eight rejections (circles) could be incorrect. If we apply the much more stringent constraint of $`\alpha =0.1`$, we only reject only one point (at $`k0.09h`$Mpc-1), but FDR limits the number of false rejections in this case essentially to zero. This allows us to state with statistical confidence that the fluctuations are true outliers against a smooth, featureless spectrum. Note that each of the three data sets contributes to the features, and so the detection is not dominated by one sample. In the next two sections, we review possible explanations for these observed features in our $`P(k)`$ including systematic uncertainties and cosmological effects.

### 3.2 Systematic Uncertainties

In this section, we consider both measurement error and sampling effects as possible explanations for the features seen in the power spectra shown in Figures 1 & 2. To address the first of these, we simply note that Miller & Batuski (2001) used several different methods of calculating the $`P(k)`$ for the Abell/ACO catalog and observed no significant differences in the measured $`P(k)`$ for $`k0.02h`$Mpc-1. Further evidence that the fluctuations seen in Figures 1 & 2 are not the result of the methodology comes from the fact that the authors of the three power spectra all used different methodologies to calculate their $`P(k)`$; the APM survey was analyzed using the method of Feldman et al. (1994), the analysis of the Abell/ACO catalog followed Vogeley et al. (1992) and Feldman et al. (1994), while the PSCz $`P(k)`$ was derived from a Karhunen - Loeve (KL) eigenmode analysis.

Next, we consider sampling effects e.g. could artifacts of the design and construction of these surveys have produced such features and are the surveys independent and representative of the whole Universe? We believe such effects are highly unlikely for two reasons. First, each of these three surveys was constructed in a different way and thus possess significantly different window functions. For example, the APM survey only covers a steradian of the sky centered on the Southern Galactic Cap, with a near constant number density of clusters/groups over the redshift range $`15000cz35000`$km s-1, while the Abell/ACO cluster sample covers over 2$`\pi `$ steradian with a near constant number density of rich clusters out to $`cz=42000`$km s-1 (in the north) and $`cz=30000`$km s-1 (in the south). These two cluster surveys are independent of each other since $`90\%`$ of the APM clusters used by Tadros et al. (1998) are non–Abell systems and are thus not in the Abell/ACO sample (Miller & Batuski 2001). In contrast, the PSCz galaxy redshift survey covers 10.6 steradian (84% of the entire sky) and has a number density that falls off steeply beyond $`cz=12000`$km s-1. Therefore, these three surveys sample different volumes of the Universe, use different tracers of the mass (from galaxies through to rich clusters) and are independent of each other.

We stress here that these features are seen in all of the individual power spectra at similar wavenumbers and therefore, not a artifact of combining the three $`P(k)`$’s, which we did simply to increase the overall statistical significance of these “valleys”. This concordance is a powerful consistency check which argues against statistical and systematic uncertainties producing these features. Moreover, the volume sizes of these three surveys are so large that we hope to have reached a “fair sample” of the Universe and thus these features can not be explained away as unusual and only present in our parts of the Universe. We therefore believe that these fluctuations in the $`P(k)`$ are physical and in the next section we review possible cosmological explanations for them.

### 3.3 Cosmological Explanations for the Fluctuations

One possible cosmological explanation for these “valleys” in the observed $`P(k)`$ is the existence of corresponding features in the initial power spectrum of density fluctuations coming out of Inflation. This explanation has been proposed for the excess power or correlations seen in several of previous surveys (Broadhurst et al. 1990; Landy et al. 1996; Einasto et al. 1997). Unfortunately, the physical mechanism for producing such features in the initial power spectrum remains unclear (see Atrio-Barandela 2000; Einasto 2000).

A more natural and well–understood explanation is the presence of a non-negligible baryon fraction in the Universe which leads to a coupling (at redshifts $`z1000`$) between the CMB photons and the baryonic matter thus resulting in acoustic oscillations which leave an imprint on the matter power spectrum (see Eisenstein & Hu 1998 and references therein). Recently, Eisenstein et al. (1998) examined this cosmological model and tested it against three LSS data sets; the APM de–projected $`P(k)`$ of Gaztañaga & Baugh (1998), the $`P(k)`$ compilation of Peacock & Dodds (1994), and $`P(k)`$ from the Abell/ACO sample from Einasto et al. (1997). Only the Einasto et al. $`P(k)`$ had a noticeable feature (“bump”) in the power spectrum and Eisenstein et al. (1998) were unable to find a satisfactory cosmological model that fitted these data. Their analysis indicated two equally likely fits to the data, one with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m<0.2`$ and the other with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m>0.7`$, while both models needed $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b/\mathrm{\Omega }_m0.3`$. The high $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ model was excluded by the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis upper limit of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2<0.026`$ (Burles, Nollett, and Turner 2000) while the low $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ model was rejected by the lack of large–scale power seen in the $`P(k)`$ for $`k<0.05h`$Mpc-1.

We present here new constraints on model $`P(k)`$ using much improved datasets than those used by Eisenstein et al. (1998). The improvement in the data comes from the larger volumes traced by these surveys, thus allowing smaller $`k`$’s to be probed with a higher resolution. In the next section, we re-examine this scenario and find that baryonic oscillations match with the power spectra in Figure 1. We note here that Tegmark et al. (2001) also hinted at the possible detection of baryon fluctuations in the PSCz $`P(k)`$ but a statistical analysis was not performed.

## 4 Cosmological Parameter Estimation

We have used the cosmological models of Eisenstein & Hu (1998) to perform a parameter estimation which can be compared with the recent CMB results (Tegmark et al. 2001; Jaffe et al. 2000; Bond et al. 2000). We begin by constructing a four-dimensional grid in the parameter space using $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b`$, $`n_s`$ the spectral index, and the Hubble constant. We apply a weak prior with $`H_0=69\pm 15`$km s-1Mpc-1, which is consistent and more conservative than the final results of the Hubble Space Telescope Key Project (Freedman et al. 2001). We then calculate the maximum likelihood via $`=e^{\chi ^2/2}`$ where $`\chi ^2`$ is calculated using the fitting formulae given in Eisenstein & Hu (1998). In fitting these power spectra, we restrict ourselves to the range of $`0.015<k<0.15`$ using the uncorrelated data of Figure 2.

The next issue is to find the global maximum in this multi–dimensional likelihood space. Unfortunately, it is highly possible that this global maximum does not lie on one of our grid points, so to guard against this, we use the simplex method (see Press et al. 1992). We then marginalize over each parameter separately by fixing it to the grid and allowing the other three parameters to vary until we find the corresponding maximum. Our methodology is very similar to that of Tegmark & Zaldarriaga (2000) except for our use of the simplex method to find the maximum likelihood. Tegmark & Zaldarriaga fit a cubic spline to their likelihood grid to find the maxima. However, this function can be ill–behaved if the surface is not smooth (i.e. if $`\chi ^2`$ varies rapidly in the region of the minimum which is often the case). Therefore, we advocate the use of the simplex method for future analyses since, in principle, it is less dependent upon the actual likelihood surface. We note that a proper marginalization requires integration over the likelihood function. Tegmark et al. (2001) have shown that this is the same as the maximization technique used herein if the likelihood functions are Gaussian, which appears to be a reasonable approximation for our likelihood functions (see Figure 3).

After marginalizing over the three power spectra separately, we combine the likelihoods together to arrive at our final results. For each of the samples, we allow the amplitude to be a free parameter. In this way, the bias parameter does not explicitly enter into the calculation. In Figure 3, we present the Cash statistic for each marginalized parameter (Cash 1979): $`\mathrm{Cash}_i=2ln\frac{_i}{_{max}}`$, where $``$ is the maximum likelihood determined as a function of the fixed parameter $`i`$ and allowing the other parameters to vary. $`_{max}`$ is the global maximum over all parameter space. If the $`log`$ likelihood functions can be well-approximated with a second order Taylor expansion, then the Cash statistic becomes analogous to a $`\chi ^2`$ distribution. Thus, when we marginalize (i.e. hold one parameter fixed allowing the others to vary), we have one degree-of-freedom and our 95% confidence limits are where our Cash statistic crosses a value of $`3.84`$. In Table 1, we present our final estimates for the three cosmological parameters, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_o,\mathrm{\Omega }_b,`$ and $`n`$. We also list similar recent results from latest CMB data (Tegmark et al. 2001; Jaffe et al. 2000; Novosyadlyj et al. 2000). This table clearly illustrates that our best fit values for these cosmological parameters are fully consistent with these other analyses.

In Figure 4, we present the data in Figure 1 along with our best fit model shown in Table 1. For comparison, we also show two favored zero baryon $`n_s=1`$ models with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.25`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.14`$. Clearly, the baryon model is the best representation given these three possibilities.

## 5 Conclusions

We present in this paper new evidence for the detection of statistically significant fluctuations in the matter power spectrum. The most natural explanation for these fluctuations are baryonic oscillations in a Cold Dark Matter universe as outlined in Eisenstein et al. (1998) and Eisenstein & Hu (1998). Using this cosmological model, we have measured $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b`$, and $`n_s`$, finding values that are fully consistent with those presently favored by the recent CMB experiments (see Table 1). This agreement is primarily due to the extra power seen on large scales (small $`k`$) as well as the features detected in all three power spectra. In the near future, surveys like the SDSS and 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey (2dFGRS; Colless et al. 2000) will allow for a more detailed analysis of these baryonic features as well as providing more powerful constraints on the cosmological parameters than those presented here (e.g. Percival et al. 2001). However, we do note that on large scales, the volume sampled by the Abell/ACO catalog discussed herein will remain unrivaled even after the main SDSS and 2dFGRS galaxy redshift surveys are completed and will thus remain, for some time, an important database for studying the large–scale structure in the Universe. However, the SDSS Bright Red Galaxy (BRG; York et al. 2000) redshift survey will supercede all these surveys in terms of volume since it will provide a pseudo–volume–limited sample of galaxies out to $`z0.45`$ carefully selected to sample the power spectrum of mass over as large a range of scales as possible.

Acknowledgments We are indebted to Chris Genovese and Larry Wasserman for their help with FDR. We thank Christopher Cantaloupo, Adrian Melott, Wayne Hu, Peter Coles, Alex Szalay, Daniel Eisenstein, Andrew Jaffe and John Beacom for helpful advise and suggestions throughout this work.