text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Particles in the same representation under unbroken symmetries can mix with each other. The neutral gauge bosons, quarks, and massive neutrinos in the Standard Model (SM) are well-known examples. New particles in extensions of the Standard Model also show the mixings. For example, in the minimal supersymmetric (SUSY) standard model (MSSM) , a very promising extension, superpartners of most SM particles show the mixing . The mixing of particles is expressed in terms of the mixing matrix, which represents the relations between the gauge eigenstates and the mass eigenstates of the particles. The mixing matrices always appear at the couplings of these particles in the mass eigenbasis.

Because of the fact that mass eigenstates at the tree-level mix with each other by radiative corrections, the mixing matrices have to be renormalized  to obtain ultraviolet (UV) finite amplitudes. Denner and Sack have proposed  a simple scheme to renormalize the mixing matrix of Dirac fermions at the one-loop level, which is usually called the on-shell renormalization scheme. They have required the counterterm for the renormalized mixing matrix to completely absorb the anti-hermitian part of the wave function correction $`\delta Z_{ij}`$ for the external on-shell fields. This definition works very well for the subtraction of the ultraviolet divergence and dependence on the renormalization scale. The renormalization procedure is universal for any processes with the particles as external states. It also absorbs the $`𝒪(1/(m_i^2m_j^2))`$ terms which are singular for the case $`m_im_j`$. The on-shell scheme was also applied to the mixing of other fields, such as Majorana fermions  and complex scalar particles .

However, it has recently been pointed out  that in the on-shell scheme of Ref.  the counterterms for the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix  is dependent on the gauge fixing parameter and that, as a consequence, the amplitudes of charged current interactions of quarks are also gauge dependent in this scheme. This fact motivated these authors to introduce other ways for the UV finite renormalization of the CKM matrix . However, their method cannot be directly applied to mixings of other particles.

In this paper we study the gauge parameter dependence of the on-shell renormalized mixing matrices in general cases. We demonstrate that this gauge dependence is a general feature for the on-shell mixing matrices. Nevertheless, at the one-loop level the on-shell mixing matrices by Ref.  can be modified to be gauge independent by the following procedure. First, we split the gauge-dependent parts of the wave function corrections in the similar way to the “pinch technique” . They are then rearranged into the corresponding vertex corrections in the amplitudes and cancelled. Next, we give the counterterm for the on-shell renormalized mixing matrices in terms of the remaining, gauge-independent part of $`\delta Z_{ij}`$. The subtraction of the UV divergence and of the $`𝒪(1/(m_i^2m_j^2))`$ singularity is not affected by this modification. This method can be applied in a similar manner both for mixings of fermions and of scalars.

This paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we review the one-loop on-shell renormalization of the mixing matrices for scalars and fermions in general case. In section 3 their gauge dependences are analyzed by using the Nielsen identities  for self energies of scalars and fermions. We then show that the gauge dependences of the off-diagonal wave function corrections and, in consequence, of the on-shell mixing matrices can be split by the rearrangement of the loop corrections. Sections 4 and 5 present two explicit calculations of the gauge dependence of mixing matrices; CKM matrix of quarks in the SM and left-right mixing of scalar quarks (squarks) in the MSSM. Section 6 gives our conclusion.

## 2 On-shell renormalization of mixing matrices

Let $`\psi _\alpha `$ (with index $`\alpha `$) be fields in gauge eigenstates, either real or complex scalars, or chiral components of Dirac or Majorana fermions. The fields in common representation under unbroken symmetries may mix with each other to form mass eigenstates. The relation between gauge eigenstates $`\psi _\alpha `$ and tree-level mass eigenstates $`f_i`$ with masses $`m_i`$ is expressed by an unitary matrix $`U`$ as

$$f_i=U_{i\alpha }\psi _\alpha ,\psi _\alpha =U_{i\alpha }^{}f_i.$$
(1)
The mixing matrix $`U`$ is determined such that the tree-level mass matrix for $`f_i`$ is diagonal. The couplings of $`f_i`$ are always multiplied by $`U`$. For example, an amplitude $`_i`$ with one incoming external $`f_i`$ is expressed as

$$_i=\underset{\alpha }{}_\alpha U_{i\alpha }^{},$$
(2)
where $`_\alpha `$ has no $`U`$ dependence. $`U`$ is therefore very important parameter for $`f_i`$. Note that, when $`f`$ are fermions, the mixing matrices $`U^L`$ and $`U^R`$ for chiral components $`f_L`$ and $`f_R`$, respectively, are generally different from each other.

By radiative corrections, the wave functions of $`f_i`$ should be renormalized. The on-shell renormalized fields $`f_i`$ are related to the unrenormalized $`f_i^{(0)}`$ by, at the one-loop level

$$f_i^{(0)}=\left(\delta _{ij}+\frac{1}{2}\delta Z_{ij}\right)f_j.$$
(3)
The off-diagonal parts of $`\delta Z_{ij}(ij)`$ represent the mixing between $`f_i`$ and $`f_j`$. For the relation (1) is modified as

$$\psi _\alpha =U_{i\alpha }^{(0)}f_i^{(0)}=U_{i\alpha }^{(0)}\left(\delta _{ij}+\frac{1}{2}\delta Z_{ij}\right)f_j,$$
(4)
the wave function correction to the amplitude (2) is expressed as the replacement of $`U`$ by

$$U_{i\alpha }^{}U_{j\alpha }^{(0)}\left(\delta _{ji}+\frac{1}{2}\delta Z_{ji}\right).$$
(5)
This correction is universal in any processes involving on-shell external $`f_i`$.

The explicit form of $`\delta Z_{ij}`$ for $`ij`$ is given in terms of the off-diagonal, flavor-mixing parts of the self energy111We assume that the absorptive part of the self energy is negligible. For its correct inclusion one has to treat $`f`$’s as unstable intermediate states. of the fields $`f`$. For scalars with unrenormalized, dimensionally regularized self energy $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{ij}(p^2)`$, we have

$$\frac{1}{2}\delta Z_{ij}=\frac{1}{m_i^2m_j^2}\mathrm{\Pi }_{ij}(m_j^2).$$
(6)
For Dirac fermions with self energy

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ij}(p)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Lij}(p^2)p/P_L+\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Rij}(p^2)p/P_R+\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DLij}(p^2)P_L+\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DRij}(p^2)P_R,`$ (7)
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Lji}^{}(p^2)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Lij}(p^2),\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Rji}^{}(p^2)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Rij}(p^2),\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DRij}(p^2)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DLji}^{}(p^2),`$ (8)
the corrections to chiral components of the wave functions ($`f_{iL}`$, $`f_{iR}`$) are

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta Z_{ij}^L={\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_i^2m_j^2}}\left[m_j^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Lij}(m_j^2)+m_im_j\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Rij}(m_j^2)+m_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DLij}(m_j^2)+m_j\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DRij}(m_j^2)\right],`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta Z_{ij}^R={\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_i^2m_j^2}}\left[m_im_j\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Lij}(m_j^2)+m_j^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Rij}(m_j^2)+m_j\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DLij}(m_j^2)+m_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DRij}(m_j^2)\right],`$ (9)
respectively. Both of Eqs. (6,9) have the factor $`1/(m_i^2m_j^2)`$ which is unique for the off-diagonal wave function corrections. These $`\delta Z_{ij}`$ are UV divergent and depend on the gauge fixing parameters $`\xi `$ for the massive gauge bosons. Note also that $`\delta Z_{ij}`$ superficially diverge when the masses ($`m_i`$, $`m_j`$) of $`f_i`$ and $`f_j`$, respectively, become close to each other. For the case of Majorana fermions , the self energy (7) obeys additional conditions

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Lij}(p^2)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Rij}^{}(p^2),\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DLij}(p^2)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DLji}(p^2),\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DRij}(p^2)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DRji}(p^2).$$
(10)
The condition for the wave function corrections, $`\delta Z_{ij}^L=\delta Z_{ij}^R`$, which is necessary for keeping Majorana condition $`U^L=U^R`$ after renormalization, then follows from Eqs. (9, 10). All subsequent discussions in this and the next sections remain unchanged by the conditions (10).

For the cancellation of the UV divergence of off-diagonal $`\delta Z_{ij}`$ in Eq. (5), the mixing matrix $`U`$ has to be renormalized . Assume that the renormalized $`U`$ is related to the bare $`U^{(0)}`$ by

$$U_{i\alpha }^{(0)}=(\delta _{ij}+\delta u_{ij})U_{j\alpha }.$$
(11)
Since both $`U^{(0)}`$ and $`U`$ are unitary, the counterterm $`\delta u`$ should be anti-hermite. The correction factor (5) is then rewritten as

$$U_{j\alpha }^{(0)}\left(\delta _{ji}+\frac{1}{2}\delta Z_{ji}\right)=U_{j\alpha }^{}\left(\delta _{ji}+\frac{1}{2}\delta Z_{ji}\delta u_{ji}\right).$$
(12)
The UV divergent part of $`\delta u`$ is determined  such as to cancel that of the anti-hermitian part of $`\delta Z`$. For fermions, also the UV divergence of the diagonal CP-violating part

$$\frac{i}{2}\mathrm{Im}(\delta Z_{ii}^L)=\frac{i}{2}\mathrm{Im}(\delta Z_{ii}^R)=\frac{i}{2m_i}\mathrm{Im}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DLii}(m_i^2)),$$
(13)
in the convention222For Dirac fermions, one may make the shift ($`\delta Z_{ii}^L`$, $`\delta Z_{ii}^R`$)$``$ ($`\delta Z_{ii}^L+i\theta _i`$, $`\delta Z_{ii}^R+i\theta _i`$) by an arbitrary imaginary number $`i\theta _i`$. This is equivalent to the phase rotation ($`f_{iL}`$, $`f_{iR}`$)$``$ ($`e^{i\theta _i}f_{iL}`$, $`e^{i\theta _i}f_{iR}`$) in Eq. (3). This freedom is killed by Majorana condition. See Ref.  for details. which is valid both for Dirac and Majorana fermions, has to be cancelled by $`\delta u_{ii}^{L,R}`$. The earlier UV divergence of $`\delta u`$ is consistent with the running of the mass matrix of $`f`$ in the gauge eigenbasis . The renormalized mixing matrix $`U`$ is then given by specifying the finite part of $`\delta u`$.

The modified minimal subtraction ($`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ ) scheme is simplest and proven to give gauge-independent renormalized parameters . However, the decoupling of heavy particles is not manifest in this scheme. The cancellation of the dependence on the renormalization scale $`Q`$ between running parameters and different parts of the amplitude is often quite delicate and complicated. In addition, the $`𝒪(1/(m_i^2m_j^2))`$ singularity for $`m_im_j`$ remains in the amplitudes. These properties make the $`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ scheme inconvenient in realistic studies. On the other hand, the renormalized mixing matrices may also be defined directly in terms of the physical observables. This method is manifestly independent of the gauge fixing and renormalization scale. However, the form of the counterterm strongly depends on the chosen observables and is often very complicated.

It is therefore natural to investigate the method to define the renormalized mixing matrices which are independent of the renormalization scale and of the specific processes. In the study of the radiative correction to the CKM matrix, Denner and Sack  proposed to cancel the total anti-hermitian part of $`\delta Z_{ij}`$ by $`\delta u`$, choosing

$$\delta u_{ij}=\frac{1}{4}(\delta Z_{ij}\delta Z_{ji}^{}).$$
(14)
This is usually called the on-shell renormalization of the mixing matrix. Equation (5) is then rewritten as

$$U_{j\alpha }^{(0)}\left(\delta _{ji}+\frac{1}{2}\delta Z_{ji}\right)=(U^{\mathrm{OS}})_{j\alpha }^{}\left(\delta _{ji}+\frac{1}{4}(\delta Z_{ji}+\delta Z_{ij}^{})\right).$$
(15)
One important feature of Eq. (15) is that all $`𝒪(1/(m_i^2m_j^2))`$ singularities in $`\delta Z_{ij}`$ are absorbed into the renormalized $`U^{\mathrm{OS}}`$. Also, $`U^{\mathrm{OS}}`$ is independent of the $`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ renormalization scale. These properties are equally valid both for fermions and scalars.

The mixing of quarks in different generations needs a special care for there is no unique “gauge eigenbasis” for them. Instead, one can discuss only the difference between the mixing of left-handed up-type quarks and that of down-type quarks, namely the CKM matrix $`V_{ij}=(U^{u_L})_{i\alpha }(U^{d_L})_{j\alpha }^{}`$. The counterterm for the on-shell CKM matrix is then given by

$$\delta V_{ij}=\delta u_{ik}^{u_L}V_{kj}+\delta u_{jk}^{d_L}V_{ik},$$
(16)
where $`\delta u^{q_L}`$ are given by Eq. (14).

## 3 Gauge dependence of wave function corrections and on-shell mixing matrices

Since the proposal in Ref. , however, the dependence of the on-shell mixing matrix on the gauge fixing parameters $`\xi `$ has not been examined for a long time. Recent studies  showed that the on-shell renormalization of the CKM matrix introduces gauge dependence into one-loop amplitudes for the $`W^+u_i\overline{d}_j`$ decays through the counterterm $`\delta V_{ij}`$. They proposed alternative definitions for quark mixing matrix which are independent of the renormalization scale. References  used a modified process-independent definition for the CKM matrix. As shown in this section, their definition strongly relies on the gauge representation of quarks. Reference  fixed the renormalized CKM matrix by using the amplitudes of the decays $`W^+u_i\overline{d}_j`$ (or $`tW^+d_j`$). To keep the renormalized CKM matrix unitary, four processes have to be selected out of nine possible ones. As a result, the forms of the corrected amplitudes become very asymmetric with respect to generation indices $`(i,j)`$. Thus, both methods cannot be directly applied for the renormalization of other mixing matrices. In this section we show another way to avoid the problem of gauge dependence of the on-shell scheme of Ref. .

We first investigate the gauge parameter dependences of the wave function correction $`\delta Z`$ and of the counterterm $`\delta u`$ for the on-shell mixing matrix in general cases. We use the fact that, in the $`R_\xi `$ gauge, the dependence of the one-particle irreducible Green functions on the gauge parameters $`\xi `$ is controlled by the Nielsen identities , a kind of the Slavnov-Taylor identities which follow from the extended Becchi-Rouet-Stora (BRS) symmetry  of the theory. The identity for the gauge parameter dependence of the inverse propagator $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}(p)`$ for the transition $`f_jf_i`$ takes the following form

$$_\xi \mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}(p)\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}(p)/\xi =\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\chi \overline{f}_iK_l}(p)\mathrm{\Gamma }_{lj}(p)\mathrm{\Gamma }_{il}(p)\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\chi K_{\overline{l}}f_j}(p).$$
(17)
Here $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\chi \overline{f}_iK_l}(p)`$ is the vertex function with $`\overline{f}_i`$, $`\chi `$, the “BRS variation” of the gauge parameter $`\xi `$ , and $`K_l`$, the source associated with the BRS variation of $`f_l`$. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\chi K_{\overline{l}}f_j}(p)`$ is its conjugate. Since the identity (17) is determined by the form of the gauge-fixing terms , it holds for general gauge theories in the $`R_\xi `$ gauge fixing. In Eq. (17) $`f`$’s are assumed to be physical fields with gauge-independent masses, not the would-be Nambu-Goldstone (NG) bosons, Fadeev-Popov ghosts, or longitudinal modes of gauge bosons. Under this condition $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\chi \overline{f}_iK_l}(p)`$ has no tree level contribution. It is also required that the renormalization does not introduce additional gauge dependence . Especially, the shift of the vacuum expectation values (VEVs) of Higgs bosons by tadpole graphs should be cancelled in a gauge-independent way.

The gauge dependence of the one-loop two-point functions $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ij}(p)`$ of fermions is, in the tree-level mass basis, derived from general result (17) as

$$_\xi \mathrm{\Sigma }_{ij}(p)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ij}(p)(p/m_j)+(p/m_i)\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{ij}(p),$$
(18)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(p)`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(p)`$ are some one-loop Dirac spinors. After the decomposition

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ij}(p)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Lij}(p^2)p/P_L+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Rij}(p^2)p/P_R+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{DLij}(p^2)P_L+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{DRij}(p^2)P_R,$$
(19)
and similar one for $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, the $`\xi `$ dependence of the components of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in Eq. (7) is

$`_\xi \mathrm{\Sigma }_{Lij}`$ $`=`$ $`m_j\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Lij}m_i\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Lij}+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{DRij}+\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DLij},`$
$`_\xi \mathrm{\Sigma }_{Rij}`$ $`=`$ $`m_j\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Rij}m_i\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Rij}+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{DLij}+\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DRij},`$
$`_\xi \mathrm{\Sigma }_{DLij}`$ $`=`$ $`p^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Rij}+p^2\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Lij}m_j\mathrm{\Lambda }_{DLij}m_i\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DLij},`$
$`_\xi \mathrm{\Sigma }_{DRij}`$ $`=`$ $`p^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Lij}+p^2\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Rij}m_j\mathrm{\Lambda }_{DRij}m_i\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DRij}.`$ (20)
The relations

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Lij}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Lji}^{},\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Rij}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Rji}^{},\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DLij}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{DRji}^{},\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DRij}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{DLji}^{},$$
(21)
follow from the hermiticity of the effective action.

By substituting them into Eq. (9), we obtain  for $`ij`$

$$\frac{1}{2}_\xi (\delta Z_{ij}^L)=m_j\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Rij}(m_j^2)\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DLij}(m_j^2),$$
(22)
and similar result for $`\delta Z_{ij}^R`$. As a result, the original definition of the on-shell renormalized fermion mixing matrices in Eq. (14) has gauge parameter dependence. Explicit calculation shows that the gauge dependence of the counterterm $`\delta u_{ij}^L`$ is equal to

$$\frac{1}{4}_\xi (\delta Z_{ij}^L\delta Z_{ji}^L)=\frac{1}{2}\left[m_j\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Rij}(m_j^2)\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DLij}(m_j^2)+m_i\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Rji}^{}(m_i^2)+\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DLji}^{}(m_i^2)\right],$$
(23)
which does not vanish in general. This is also the case for $`\delta u_{ij}^R`$ and $`\delta u_{ii}`$.

A remarkable fact in Eq. (22) is that the factor $`1/(m_i^2m_j^2)`$, which characterizes the off-diagonal $`\delta Z_{ij}`$, is cancelled for the gauge dependence. This is expected from the gauge independence of the total amplitudes  with gauge-independent renormalization of the couplings. Since the gauge dependence of Eq. (22) has to be cancelled by that from other parts of the amplitudes which do not have the factor $`1/(m_i^2m_j^2)`$, the factor cannot remain in Eq. (22). Similar cancellation occurs in the gauge dependence of the diagonal part $`\delta u_{ii}^L=\delta u_{ii}^R`$, which is equal to

$$\frac{i}{2}_\xi (\mathrm{Im}\delta Z_{ii}^L)=\frac{i}{2}\mathrm{Im}\left[m_i\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Rii}(m_i^2)+m_i\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Lii}(m_i^2)+\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DRii}(m_i^2)\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DLii}(m_i^2)\right].$$
(24)
The factor $`1/m_i`$ in Eq. (13), which characterizes $`\mathrm{Im}(\delta Z_{ii})`$, is cancelled in Eq. (24). Another important point is that Eqs. (23, 24) are UV finite.

The mixing matrices of the scalars can be analyzed in the similar way. The one-loop two-point function $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{ij}(p^2)`$ for scalars in the tree-level mass basis obeys the relation

$$_\xi \mathrm{\Pi }_{ij}(p^2)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ij}(p^2)(p^2m_j^2)+(p^2m_i^2)\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ji}^{}(p^2),$$
(25)
from the Nielsen identity. We assume that there are no mixings with unphysical modes. By substitution we obtain for $`ij`$

$$\frac{1}{2}_\xi (\delta Z_{ij})=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ji}^{}(m_j^2).$$
(26)
The gauge dependence of the counterterm (14) for the on-shell mixing matrix for scalars is therefore

$$_\xi (\delta u_{ij})=\frac{1}{2}\left[\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ji}^{}(m_j^2)\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ij}(m_i^2)\right],$$
(27)
which is UV finite but does not cancel in general. However, the factor $`1/(m_i^2m_j^2)`$ is again cancelled in Eq. (27).

According to the earlier observation, we can define the gauge-independent one-loop on-shell mixing matrices for fermions and scalars as follows. First, we split gauge-dependent parts without the factor $`1/(m_i^2m_j^2)`$ from $`\delta Z_{ij}`$ and regard them as parts of the corrections to the attached vertex. They are eventually cancelled by the gauge dependence of the vertex and other corrections. Second, we give the counterterms for mixing matrices in terms of the remaining, gauge-independent part of $`\delta Z_{ij}`$. This procedure gives the one-loop corrected amplitudes which are expressed in terms of the on-shell mixing matrices and manifestly gauge independent. Of course, the choice of the gauge-independent parts of $`\delta Z_{ij}`$ has arbitrariness. For example, we can regard the results in the $`R_\xi `$ gauge with a given $`\xi `$ as the gauge-independent parts.

Here we propose a method to specify the gauge-invariant parts of $`\delta Z_{ij}`$, inspired by the pinch technique  to define gauge-independent form factors for gauge bosons. We consider a general process with the external on-shell particle $`f_j`$ which is either a fermion or a scalar, with incoming momentum $`p`$. One source of the gauge dependence of $`\delta Z_{ij}`$ is the graph of Fig. 1(a). As pointed out in Refs. , the longitudinal part of the propagator of the (massive) gauge boson $`A`$ triggers the Ward identity at the vertex $`\mu `$ as

$$k/=(p/m_i)+(k/+p/M)+(Mm_i),$$
(28)
for fermions, or

$$k^\mu (k+2p)_\mu =(p^2m_i^2)+((k+p)^2M^2)+(M^2m_i^2),$$
(29)
for scalars, respectively. The first two terms of Eqs. (28, 29) cancel the propagators of $`f_i`$ and of the intermediate particle $`F`$ with a mass $`M`$, respectively, and yield the contributions of Figs. 1(b, c) (pinching). The last terms of Eqs. (28, 29) are the effect of the spontaneous breaking of the gauge symmetry for $`A`$ and are proportional to the couplings to the associated NG boson. The part of Fig. 1(a) where the last terms are picked up at the vertex $`\mu `$ is further decomposed into three parts by the Ward identity (28, 29) at $`\nu `$. The part which cancels $`f_j`$ propagator vanishes in on-shell amplitudes, while that which cancels $`F`$ propagator is included in the type of Fig. 1(c). The remaining part where the last terms of the Ward identity are picked up at both vertices does not fit into Figs. 1(b, c). To satisfy the Nielsen identities (18, 25), this part has to be combined with the contribution from Fig. 1(d) by the NG boson $`\varphi _A`$ to yield a gauge-independent sum. This result should be thus equal to the contribution of Fig. 1(d) in the $`\xi =1`$ gauge.

The contribution of Fig. 1(b) is manifestly consistent with the Nielsen identity. In contrast, the remaining gauge-dependent part, Fig. 1(c), cannot satisfy the identity by itself because of its $`p`$ independence. This part has to be cancelled by the contributions from the Higgs VEV shift \[Fig. 1(e)\] by the loops of unphysical modes for $`A`$ and, in the case of scalars, by the “seagull” contributions with four-point couplings $`f_i^{}f_jA^\mu A_\mu `$ \[the same topology as Fig. 1(c)\] and $`f_i^{}f_j\varphi _A\varphi _A`$. Again, the result should be gauge-independent and therefore equal to the one in the $`\xi =1`$ gauge. We have verified that, for the cases discussed in Sections 4 and 5, the earlier cancellation of the gauge dependence really occurs and that the contribution of Fig. 1(b) is equal to the difference from the result in the $`\xi =1`$ gauge.

It is then natural to identify the contribution of Fig. 1(b) to $`\delta Z_{ij}`$ as the gauge-dependent pinch term, in analogy to Ref. , and to regard this as a part of the vertex corrections. Then, in this manner, we may regard the on-shell mixing matrices in the $`\xi =1`$ gauge as the gauge-independent ones. The cancellation of the UV divergence, renormalization scale dependence, and the $`𝒪(1/(m_i^2m_j^2))`$ singularity is not affected by this modification of the original definition of the on-shell mixing matrices. Note that the agreement of the $`\xi =1`$ and the pinch technique results has been observed for the QCD correction to the off-shell quark propagator . Note also that we have not considered, for scalars, the possible trigger of the Ward identity (29) at the vertex $`\mu `$ by the momentum $`(k+2p)_\nu `$ at the vertex $`\nu `$ in Fig. 1(a), which was done for the couplings of the gauge and NG bosons  to satisfy the Ward identities among corrected vertices.

We finally comment on other definitions for the UV finite and process-independent mixing matrices for fermions. As the first example, Ref.  proposed a definition of the UV finite and momentum-dependent effective mixing matrices \[$`\overline{U}^L(p^2)`$, $`\overline{U}^R(p^2)`$\] for fermions. The counterterms for $`\overline{U}`$ are given by, instead of Eq. (9),

$`\delta \overline{u}_{ij}^L(p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_i^2m_j^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(m_i^2+m_j^2)\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Lij}(p^2)`$ (30)
$`+m_im_j\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Rij}(p^2)+m_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DLij}(p^2)+m_j\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DRij}(p^2)],`$
and similar form for $`\delta \overline{u}_{ij}^R(p^2)`$. Similar to the on-shell $`U`$ by Ref. , $`\overline{U}(p^2)`$ absorb the $`𝒪(1/(m_i^2m_j^2))`$ singularity when the couplings of $`f_i`$ are expressed in terms of $`\overline{U}_{i\alpha }(p^2=m_i^2)`$. Unfortunately, this definition also shows gauge dependence. From Eq. (20) we obtain

$$_\xi [\delta \overline{u}_{ij}^L(m_i^2)]=\frac{1}{2}\left(m_j\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Lij}+m_i\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{Lij}+2m_i\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Rij}+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{DRij}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{DLij}\right)(p^2=m_i^2).$$
(31)
In Eq. (31) the factor $`1/(m_i^2m_j^2)`$ is again cancelled. To avoid this gauge dependence, the gauge-dependent term of the self energy (7) has to be rearranged such that it vanishes in the counterterm (30). As the second example, Ref.  proposed to renormalize the CKM matrix in terms of the zero-momentum self energies for quarks. The counterterm is then

$$\delta u_{ij}^L([7])=\frac{1}{m_i^2m_j^2}\left[\frac{1}{2}(m_i^2+m_j^2)\mathrm{\Sigma }_{Lij}(0)+m_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DLij}(0)+m_j\mathrm{\Sigma }_{DRij}(0)\right].$$
(32)
This definition gives the renormalized CKM matrix which is gauge-independent and UV finite. However, its validity relies on the fact that quark couplings to $`W^\pm `$ are purely left-handed. Moreover, Eq. (32) does not absorb the $`𝒪(1/(m_i^2m_j^2))`$ singularity. Thus, this definition has to be greatly modified for the renormalization of other mixing matrices.

## 4 CKM matrix: example for fermion mixing

In this and the next sections we show the explicit form of the gauge dependence of the on-shell mixing matrices, both for fermions and for scalars. In this section we discuss the on-shell CKM matrix, following previous studies .

The off-diagonal parts of the one-loop self energies $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ij}^q(p)`$ of the quarks receive gauge-dependent contribution from the $`W^\pm `$ loops . The $`\xi _W`$ dependent part of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ij}^u(p)`$ for up-type quarks $`u_i=(u,c,t)`$, namely the difference from the result in the $`\xi _W=1`$ gauge, takes the following form;

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ij}^u(p)|_{\xi _W}`$ $`=`$ $`(1\xi _W){\displaystyle \frac{g_2^2}{32\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}V_{ik}V_{jk}^{}\{(p/m_{u_i})\beta _{Wd_k}^{(1)}(p^2)p/P_R(p/m_{u_j})`$ (33)
$`(p/m_{u_i})P_L[m_{d_k}^2\beta _{Wd_k}^{(0)}(p^2)m_{u_j}\beta _{Wd_k}^{(1)}(p^2)p/+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\alpha _W]`$
$`[m_{d_k}^2\beta _{Wd_k}^{(0)}(p^2)m_{u_i}\beta _{Wd_k}^{(1)}(p^2)p/+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\alpha _W]P_R(p/m_{u_j})\}.`$
Here we define

$`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{16\pi ^2}}\alpha _i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^nq}{(2\pi )^n}\frac{1}{(q^2m_i^2)(q^2\xi _im_i^2)}},`$ (34)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{16\pi ^2}}\beta _{ij}^{(0)}(p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{1}{(q^2m_i^2)(q^2\xi _im_i^2)((q+p)^2m_j^2)}},`$ (35)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{16\pi ^2}}\beta _{ij}^{(1)}(p^2)p_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{(q+p)_\mu }{(q^2m_i^2)(q^2\xi _im_i^2)((q+p)^2m_j^2)}},`$ (36)
where $`n=42ϵ`$. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ij}^d(p)|_{\xi _W}`$ for down-type quarks $`d_i=(d,s,b)`$ is obtained by replacing ($`u_i`$, $`u_j`$, $`d_k`$, $`V_{ik}V_{jk}^{}`$) in Eq. (33) by ($`d_i`$, $`d_j`$, $`u_k`$, $`V_{ki}^{}V_{kj}`$). Equation (33) is equivalent to the results in Refs. , except that Eq. (33) includes the gauge-dependent part of the Higgs VEV shift in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ii}^u`$, by tadpoles with $`W^\pm `$ and associated unphysical modes. This corresponds to defining renormalized Higgs VEV as the minimum of the tree-level potential , which is gauge-independent in the $`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ scheme. By the addition of the Higgs VEV shift, Eq. (33) manifestly satisfies the Nielsen identity (18). Instead, one may also add the counterterms for pole masses of quarks to the diagonal elements to satisfy Eq. (18). This difference does not affect the present discussion.

The counterterm for the on-shell CKM matrix in the original definition , without separating Eq. (33), has gauge dependence as

$$(\delta V_{ij})_\xi =X_{ik}^uV_{kj}+V_{il}X_{jl}^d.$$
(37)
$`X_{ik}^u`$ ($`ik`$) is obtained from Eq. (33) as

$`X_{ik}^u`$ $`=`$ $`(1\xi _W){\displaystyle \frac{g_2^2}{64\pi ^2}}V_{il}V_{kl}^{}[m_{u_k}^2\beta _{Wd_l}^{(1)}(m_{u_k}^2)+m_{u_i}^2\beta _{Wd_l}^{(1)}(m_{u_i}^2)`$ (38)
$`+m_{d_l}^2\beta _{Wd_l}^{(0)}(m_{u_k}^2)m_{d_l}^2\beta _{Wd_l}^{(0)}(m_{u_i}^2)].`$
$`X_{jl}^d`$ has a similar form. Equation (37) causes gauge-dependent amplitudes for the $`W\overline{u}_id_j`$ interactions . Numerically, Eq. (37) is greatly suppressed, partly by the Glashow-Iliopoulos-Maiani (GIM) mechanism , and completely negligible in practice . The relative corrections are largest to ($`V_{cb}`$, $`V_{ub}`$, $`V_{td}`$, $`V_{ts}`$), but are at most $`𝒪(10^6)`$. Nevertheless, this is not satisfactory for theoretical point of view. The study in previous section shows, however, that one can give the counterterm $`\delta V`$ in terms of $`\xi =1`$ parts of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ij}^u`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ij}^d`$. The original calculation in Ref.  is thus interpreted as a gauge-independent one after the rearrangement.

## 5 Left-right mixing of squarks: example for scalar mixing

We next consider the renormalization of the left-right mixing of squarks in the MSSM, for an example for the mixing of scalar particles. For simplicity, we treat the mixing of two eigenstates of the top squarks, ignoring CP violation and mixing with different generations.

The gauge eigenstates ($`\stackrel{~}{q}_L`$, $`\stackrel{~}{q}_R`$) of squarks, which are the superpartners of a quark $`q`$, mix with each other by spontaneous breaking of SU(2)$`\times `$U(1) gauge symmetry . Their mass eigenstates $`\stackrel{~}{q}_i(i=1,2)`$ are related to the gauge eigenstates $`\stackrel{~}{q}_\alpha (\alpha =L,R)`$ by $`\stackrel{~}{q}_i=R_{i\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{q}}\stackrel{~}{q}_\alpha `$ with the left-right mixing matrix

$$R_{i\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{q}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}& \mathrm{sin}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}\\ \mathrm{sin}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}& \mathrm{cos}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}\end{array}\right).$$
(39)
The renormalization of the squark sector is often performed by specifying the poles masses of ($`\stackrel{~}{q}_1`$, $`\stackrel{~}{q}_2`$) and the mixing angle $`\theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$, as in Refs. . Following the result in section 2, the counterterm $`\delta \theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$ is given by

$$\delta \theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}=\delta r_{12}=\frac{1}{2(m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_1}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_2}^2)}\left[\mathrm{\Pi }_{12}^{\stackrel{~}{q}}(m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_1}^2)+\mathrm{\Pi }_{12}^{\stackrel{~}{q}}(m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_2}^2)\right],$$
(40)
with $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{12}^{\stackrel{~}{q}}(p^2)`$ the off-diagonal self energy of squarks in the tree-level mass basis. Although many other on-shell definitions  have been used in the studies of the SUSY QCD corrections, they are either unable to be applied for other loop corrections, or too specific for the squark processes considered there.

We consider the on-shell mixing matrix for top squarks $`\stackrel{~}{t}_i`$. The gauge-dependent part of the unrenormalized two-point function $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{ij}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(q^2)`$, namely the difference from the results in the $`\xi _Z=\xi _W=1`$ gauge , takes the following form:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_{ij}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(p^2)|_\xi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g_Z^2}{16\pi ^2}}(1\xi _Z){\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}(R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{k1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}T_{3t}\delta _{ik}s_W^2Q_t)(R_{k1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}T_{3t}\delta _{kj}s_W^2Q_t)`$ (41)
$`\times [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(2p^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2)\alpha _Z+\{(p^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)(p^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2)`$
$`+(p^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_k}^2)+(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_k}^2)(p^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2)\}\beta _{Z\stackrel{~}{t}_k}^{(0)}(p^2)]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{g_2^2}{32\pi ^2}}(1\xi _W)R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(2p^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2)\alpha _W`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}(R_{k1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}})^2\{(p^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)(p^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2)+(p^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_k}^2)`$
$`+(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_k}^2)(p^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2)\}\beta _{W\stackrel{~}{b}_k}^{(0)}(p^2)].`$
Here $`T_{3t}=1/2`$, $`Q_t=2/3`$, and $`s_W^2=\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W`$. As before, Eq. (41) includes the gauge-dependent shifts of the two Higgs VEVs for gauge-independent renormalization of the VEVs. In contrast to the SM case, they also contribute to the $`ij`$ parts. The result (41) satisfies the Nielsen identity (25).

The magnitude of the gauge dependence of the on-shell $`\delta \theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ is very sensitive to squark parameters. For a parameter choice ($`M_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}`$, $`M_{\stackrel{~}{U}}`$, $`M_{\stackrel{~}{D}}`$)$`=`$(350, 300, 400) GeV, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =4`$, ($`\mu `$, $`A_t`$, $`A_b`$)$`=`$($`400`$, 300, 0) GeV, and $`0<\xi <10`$, $`\xi _W`$ and $`\xi _Z`$ dependent parts of $`\delta \theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ may be as large as 0.008 and 0.003, respectively. Although too small for realistic phenomenology, they are much larger than the $`\xi _W`$ dependence of the on-shell CKM matrix. This is partly due to the absence of the GIM cancellation, following from that $`\stackrel{~}{t}_L`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{t}_R`$ have different gauge representations. As is already shown, these gauge dependence of $`\theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ can be avoided by removing the contribution of Eq. (41) from off-diagonal wave function corrections $`\delta Z_{12}`$ for top squarks, cancelling it by other gauge dependences of the amplitude, and then giving $`\delta \theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ by the remaining part of $`\delta Z_{12}`$.

## 6 Conclusion

In this paper, we investigated the gauge parameter dependence of the on-shell renormalized mixing matrices for scalars and fermions at the one-loop level. It has been shown recently that the on-shell renormalization of the CKM matrix in the definition by Ref.  is gauge dependent. By using the Nielsen identities for self energies, we demonstrated that this gauge dependence exists for the on-shell mixing matrices in general cases. We also showed that this gauge dependence can be avoided by the following procedure; split the gauge-dependent parts from the off-diagonal wave function corrections in the manner similar to the pinch technique, and then giving the counterterm for the mixing matix in terms of the remaining, gauge-independent parts. The subtraction of the UV divergence and $`𝒪(1/(m_i^2m_j^2))`$ singularity is not affected by this modification. The on-shell scheme in Ref.  in the $`\xi =1`$ gauge can be then regarded as gauge-independent one. Finally, we presented explicit calculation of the gauge-dependence of the mixing matrices in two cases, CKM matrix and left-right mixing of squarks, and verified the result from the Nielsen identities.

We did not treat the mixings of the gauge bosons and of the Higgs bosons. In principle, our method would also be applicable for these mixings. When applied for the mixing of the gauge bosons $`\gamma `$ and $`Z`$, the square of the renormalized mixing angle $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W(\mathrm{OS})`$ agrees with the effective angle $`s_{}^2(m_Z^2)`$ defined in Ref. , at the one-loop level. But the inclusion of the absorptive part of the $`Z`$ boson propagator is necessary for realistic studies. The correction to the mixing of the MSSM Higgs bosons in diagrammatic calculation  is a very interesting subject. However, due to the mixing of physical Higgs bosons with unphysical modes, a separate consideration is necessary. We expect to study the case of the MSSM Higgs bosons in future.

## Acknowledgements

The author thanks Helmut Eberl and Wolfgang Hollik for useful discussions. This work was supported in part by the Grant-in-aid for Scientific Research Nos. 12740131 and 12047201.


format: text

text:
# Observation of two-magnon bound states in the two-leg ladders of (Ca,La)14Cu24O41

\[

## Abstract

Phonon-assisted 2-magnon absorption is studied at T=4 K in the spin-1/2 2-leg ladders of Ca14-xLaxCu24O41 ($`x`$=5 and 4) for $`Ec`$ (legs) and $`Ea`$ (rungs). Two peaks at about 2140 and 2800 cm-1 reflect van-Hove singularities in the density of states of the strongly dispersing 2-magnon singlet bound state, and a broad peak at $``$ 4000 cm-1 is identified with the 2-magnon continuum. Two different theoretical approaches (Jordan-Wigner fermions and perturbation theory) describe the data very well for $`J_{}10501100`$ cm-1, $`J_{}/J_{}11.1`$. A striking similarity of the high-energy continuum absorption of the ladders and of the undoped high $`T_c`$ cuprates is observed.

\]

Low-dimensional quantum spin systems display a fascinating variety of low-energy excitations. Prominent examples are the fractional quantum states of one-dimensional (1D) chains, the $`S`$=1/2 spinons, or the variety of bound states in gapped spin liquids such as, e.g., dimerized chains or even-leg ladders. In 2D, the magnetic excitations of the undoped high-$`T_c`$ cuprates are usually discussed in more conventional terms, namely renormalized spin waves. But these fail to describe the short-wavelength high-energy excitations probed by optical 2-magnon-plus-phonon absorption. The nature of incoherent high-energy excitations is currently under intensive debate.

In this light, the study of other cuprates with related topologies is very instructive. As far as high-energy excitations are concerned, the Cu2O3 2-leg ladders realized in (Ca,La)14Cu24O41 (Ref. ) provide a bridge between 1D physics and the 2D CuO2 layers. Antiferromagnetic $`S=1/2`$ 2-leg Heisenberg ladders are represented by the Hamiltonian

$$=\underset{i}{}\left\{J_{}(𝐒_{1,i}𝐒_{1,i+1}+𝐒_{2,i}𝐒_{2,i+1})+J_{}𝐒_{1,i}𝐒_{2,i}\right\},$$
(1)
where $`J_{}`$ and $`J_{}`$ denote the rung and leg couplings, respectively. For $`J_{}`$=0 one can excite local rung singlets to rung triplets which become dispersive on finite $`J_{}`$. For $`J_{}`$=0 the $`S`$=1 chain excitations decay into asymptotically free $`S`$=1/2 spinons. An intuitive picture of the “magnons” (elementary triplets) for $`J_{}`$, $`J_{}`$ 0 can be obtained from both limits: the elementary excitations are either dressed triplet excitations or pairs of bound spinons with a finite gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ as long as $`J_{}>0`$. In a gapped system it is particularly interesting whether bound states occur. Theoretical studies of 2-leg ladders show that both singlet and triplet 2-magnon bound states always exist. However, in the $`S`$=1/2 copper oxides their experimental observation is a difficult task. Inelastic neutron scattering directly probes the spin gap, but cannot determine the high-energy excitations to a sufficient extent due to the large exchange interactions. Magnetic Raman scattering  is restricted to $`k`$=0 excitations, but for the relevant values of $`J_{}/J_{}`$ the singlet bound state appears only for finite wave vector (see Fig. 3 and Ref. ). In this case, optical spectroscopy is the appropriate tool. Two-magnon-plus-phonon absorption  is able to probe magnetic excitations throughout the entire Brillouin zone (BZ), since the simultaneous excitation of a phonon takes care of momentum conservation.

In this paper, we present optical conductivity data of Ca14-xLaxCu24O41 and identify the 2-magnon singlet bound state by two peaks reflecting van-Hove singularities in the density of states (DOS) of the bound state. Our theoretical results for bound states in the experimentally relevant parameter range are based on two different approaches, namely Jordan-Wigner fermions  and perturbation expansion about the strong dimer coupling limit up to 13th order using unitary transformations. Both yield an excellent description of the optical data for $`J_{}10501100`$ cm-1 and $`J_{}/J_{}11.1`$.

Single crystals with $`x`$=5 and 4 were grown by the travelling solvent floating zone method. Their single phase structure and stoichiometry have been verified by x-ray, energy dispersive x-ray and thermogravimetric analyses. The La content $`x`$ determines the average oxidation state of Cu. A nominally undoped sample is obtained for $`x`$=6, which probably is beyond the La solubility limit. Single phase crystals could only be synthesized for $`x5`$. The samples with $`x`$=5 and 4 on average contain $`n`$=1/24 and 2/24 holes per Cu, respectively. But x-ray absorption data show that at least for $`n4/24`$ the holes are located within the chains, which agrees with previous considerations. Thus we consider the ladders to be undoped which is supported by the similarity of our results for $`x`$=5 and $`x`$=4.

The optical conductivity $`\sigma (\omega )`$ was determined by collecting both transmission  and reflection data between 500 and $`\mathrm{12\hspace{0.17em}000}`$ cm-1 on a Fourier spectrometer. In Fig. 1 we display $`\sigma (\omega )`$ of Ca14-xLaxCu24O41 at T=4 K for polarization of the electrical field parallel to the legs, $`Ec`$, and to the rungs, $`Ea`$. Phonon and multi-phonon absorption dominates $`\sigma (\omega )`$ below $``$ 1300 cm-1 (see inset). A steep increase of the electronic background, probably due to interband excitations of charge-transfer type, is observed above 6000 cm-1 for $`Ea`$ (3000 cm-1 for $`Ec`$). Our analysis focuses on the two peaks between 2000 and 3000 cm-1 and the broad feature at 4000 cm-1. Also plotted in Fig. 1 is $`\sigma (\omega )`$ of YBa2Cu3O6 (Ref. ), a typical example of the 2-magnon-plus-phonon absorption spectrum of the undoped 2D cuprates. This comparison gives a first motivation to interpret the peaks in $`\sigma (\omega )`$ of the ladders as magnetic excitations. Note that in the ladders both the exchange constants and the relevant Cu-O bond stretching phonon frequencies are comparable to those found in the 2D cuprates. Since the exchange coupling in the chains is much smaller, $`J_{\mathrm{chain}}14`$ cm-1 (Ref. ), their magnetic excitations do not contribute to $`\sigma (\omega )`$ in this frequency range. Reducing the La content $`x`$ from 5 to 4 causes a slight blue-shift of the magnetic absorption that is opposite to the red-shift of the electronic background. We attribute the blue-shift to an increase of the exchange constants caused by the reduction of the lattice parameters (Ca is smaller than La), and the red-shift of the background to an increased hole density in the chains.

Since spin is conserved, infrared absorption is sensitive to $`\mathrm{\Delta }S`$=0, singlet excitations, e.g., the excitation of two $`S`$=1 magnons coupled to $`S_{\mathrm{tot}}`$=0. Direct excitation of two magnons is Raman active  but infrared forbidden due to the inversion symmetry on a 180 Cu-O-Cu bond. We can effectively avoid this selection rule by simultaneously exciting a Cu-O bond stretching phonon that breaks the symmetry. Hence the lowest order infrared-active magnetic absorption is a 2-magnon-plus-phonon process. The low values of $`\sigma (\omega )2\mathrm{\Omega }^1`$cm-1 indeed indicate a weak higher-order absorption process.

The 2-magnon-plus-phonon contribution to $`\sigma (\omega )`$ was evaluated by Jurecka and Brenig  in the extreme case of strong rung coupling $`J_{}0`$. They found a single sharp peak reflecting the singlet bound state. In order to gain quantitative control over the experimentally relevant coupling regime of $`J_{}/J_{}1`$ we use two different approaches to calculate the dynamical 4-point spin correlation function, namely Jordan-Wigner fermions and perturbation theory. In the former, we make use of the Jordan-Wigner transformation  to rewrite the spins as fermions with a long-ranged phase factor. Expanding the phase factor yields new interaction terms between the fermions which we treat in RPA (random phase approximation). The second approach is perturbative in nature. It is performed by a continuous unitary transformation. The 1-particle energies and the 2-particle bound state energies are extrapolated by standard techniques (Padé and Dlog-Padé); the spectral densities are computed by optimized perturbation. Details will be given elsewhere. The magnon (elementary triplet) dispersion, the 2-particle continuum and the dispersion of the singlet bound state obtained for $`J_{}=J_{}`$ are given in the two left panels of Fig. 3. The results of the two techniques agree well even though there is a quantitative discrepancy ($`10\%`$) in some energies (dispersion at $`k`$=0 and $`\pi `$, bound state energy). The magnon dispersion of extrapolated perturbation (mid panel) reproduces previous results very well. We focus on the singlet bound state which shows a considerable dip at $`k=\pi `$. This has gone unnoted thus far because it occurs only for $`J_{}/J_{}0.5`$ (see right panel in Fig. 3 and Ref. ).

To compare with experiment we consider the effect of the phonons. The total spectral weight is obtained by taking into account a dependence of the exchange constants on the external electric field E and the displacements of O ions $`𝐮`$, $`J_,J_,(𝐄,𝐮)`$ (Refs. ). The phonons modulate the intersite hopping and the on-site energies on both Cu and O sites. We expand $`J(𝐄,𝐮)`$ to order $`d^2J/d𝐮d𝐄`$ which entails the coupling of a photon to a phonon and two neighboring spins. This determines how to integrate the spin response in the BZ. Here, the weight factor is a mixture of $`\mathrm{sin}^4(k/2)`$ (Ref. ) and of an isotropic ($`k`$-independent) form factor, where the former dominates. For simplicity we consider a pure form factor $`\mathrm{sin}^4(k/2)`$ and Einstein phonons with $`\omega _{ph}=600`$ cm-1 as is common for the cuprates. Our findings depend only very weakly on the precise phonon energy.

In Fig. 2 we compare the theoretical results with the experimental data. For the former an artificial broadening of $`J_{}/20`$ is used. For the latter, the magnetic part of $`\sigma (\omega )`$ was obtained by subtracting the electronic background (dotted lines in Fig. 1). For $`Ea`$, the background was determined unambiguously by an exponential fit for $`\omega >6500`$ cm-1. The $`\sigma _a(\omega )`$ curves for $`x`$=5 and 4 nearly coincide after subtraction of the background. This corroborates the assumption that the ladders are undoped. For $`Ec`$, the measurable range of transmission was limited to below $`4500`$ cm-1 by the higher absorption, and the precise shape and spectral weight of the highest peak at $``$ 4000 cm-1 cannot be determined unambiguously.

The two peaks at 2140 and 2800 cm-1 ($`x`$=5) can be identified with the 1D van-Hove singularities in the DOS of the singlet bound state. The lower peak corresponds to the singlet energy at the BZ boundary, $`E(k=\pi )`$, the higher one to the maximum of the singlet dispersion $`E_{\mathrm{max}}`$ at about $`k\pi /2`$ (see Fig. 3). These two energies determine the two free magnetic parameters $`J_{}`$ and $`J_{}`$. The experimental $`\sigma (\omega )`$ is well described by both theories for $`J_{}`$ 1050 - 1100 cm-1 and $`J_{}/J_{}1`$ (see Fig. 2) providing an unambiguous identification of the experimental features. The quantitative analysis can be pushed a step further  based on the values of $`E_{\mathrm{max}}`$ and $`E(k=\pi )`$ computed by extrapolated perturbation (right panel of Fig. 3). The strong dependence of $`E_{\mathrm{max}}`$ on $`J_{}/J_{}`$ allows to pinpoint the exchange constants, yielding the same value for $`J_{}`$ 1050 cm-1 and a slightly larger ratio of $`J_{}/J_{}1.1`$. Our interpretation of the experimental features is confirmed by the good agreement between theory and experiment concerning the line shape of the bound states in $`\sigma (\omega )`$. Excellent justification for this interpretation is also provided by the selection rule stemming from reflection symmetry about the $`a`$ axis (RS$`a`$). Both theories show that the bound singlet at $`k=\pi `$ is even under RS$`a`$. But the excitations at $`k=\pi `$ are odd under RS$`a`$ for $`Ea`$ and even for $`Ec`$. Thus the weight of the bound state varies as $`(k\pi )^2`$ for $`Ea`$ whereas it is prevailing for $`Ec`$. This explains the low spectral weight of the lower peak for $`Ea`$. It is reduced to a weak shoulder.

Shortcomings of the theory are the overestimation of the spectral weight of the 2800 cm-1 peak for $`Ea`$ and that the onset of $`\sigma (\omega )`$ around 2000 cm-1 is sharper than observed experimentally. However, the agreement is better than one may have expected since we neglected both the frustrating coupling between neighboring ladders and the ring exchange. A finite inter-ladder coupling will produce a dispersion of the bound state along $`k_a`$ and thereby broaden the features in $`\sigma (\omega )`$, which can explain a smearing out of the onset at 2000 cm-1. Without the ring exchange, the analysis of experimental data of various other techniques suggested a larger leg coupling $`J_{}/J_{}1.5`$ (for a detailed discussion, see Ref. ). One finds a 1-magnon gap of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ 280 cm-1 and a dispersion extending up to $``$ 1550 cm-1 (Ref. ). For $`J_{}/J_{}`$=1 the dispersion extends from $`\mathrm{\Delta }0.5J_{}`$ up to $`2J_{}`$ (see Fig. 3). One obvious way to reduce $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with respect to the maximum is to increase the ratio $`J_{}/J_{}`$, in this case to $``$ 1.5. Such a large value is difficult to reconcile with the microscopic parameters, in particular with the similar Cu-O bond lengths along the legs and the rung which has provoked a controversial discussion. Our analysis shows that any values of $`J_{}/J_{}`$ larger than $`1.2`$ can be excluded. Recently, it was pointed out that the neutron data are also consistent with an isotropic exchange $`J_{}/J_{}11.1`$ and $`J_{}`$ 900 cm-1, if a ring exchange of $``$ 0.15 $`J_{}`$ is taken into account. Considering the fact that the ring exchange will renormalize $`J_{}`$ and $`J_{}`$, this is in perfect agreement with our findings.

Judging the weight of the high-energy continuum one should note that it increases by taking into account an admixture of an isotropic form factor to the $`\mathrm{sin}^4(k/2)`$ form factor used here. Second, the 2-particle excitations considered here carry only $``$ 75% of the total spectral weight. In the 2D cuprates, Lorenzana et al.  argued that ring exchange increases the spectral weight at high energies. It will be most interesting to check the influence of ring exchange on the continuum of the ladders, since these provide a technically much better controlled ground. Note that the theoretical curves in Fig. 2 describe the frequency range of continuum absorption very well, which gives strong support to our interpretation.

Finally, we address the similarity of $`\sigma (\omega )`$ of the ladder (Ca,La)14Cu24O41 and of the undoped 2D cuprates (see Fig. 1). The 2D case does not show a truly bound state, the sharp peak at 2800 cm-1 in $`\sigma (\omega )`$ of YBa2Cu3O6 is caused by a resonance, an almost bound state lying within the continuum. This main peak is well described in terms of 2-magnon-plus-phonon absorption, but the high-energy peak at 3800 cm-1 is absent in spin-wave theory. Note that this discrepancy is particular for the 2D $`S`$=1/2 case, the high-energy excitations are absent in the comparable $`S`$=1 system La2NiO4 (Refs. ). In the cuprates, the magnetic origin of both peaks has been confirmed by absorption and Raman measurements under high pressure. It has been suggested  that the high-energy weight in 2D $`S`$=1/2 compounds is due to strong quantum fluctuations that go beyond spin-wave theory. The intriguing similarity of the 2-particle continuum of the $`S`$=1/2 quasi-1D ladder (Ca,La)14Cu24O41 with the 3800 cm-1 peak of YBa2Cu3O6 strongly indicates that the high-energy spectral weight is indeed a signature of strong quantum fluctuations in this compound.

In conclusion, the existence of the singlet bound state and the 2-particle continuum was demonstrated experimentally in the optical conductivity spectrum $`\sigma (\omega )`$ of the $`S`$=1/2 2-leg ladder compound (Ca,La)14Cu24O41. By two independent theoretical approaches we confirmed that the two sharp peaks plus the important broad continuum seen in experiment are the unambiguous signature of a 1D dispersive bound singlet with strong incoherent quantum fluctuations. The experimental spectral weight distribution reflects the theoretical selection rules perfectly. Quantitative analysis yields $`J_{}10501100`$ cm-1 and $`J_{}/J_{}11.1`$. Our findings indicate that the similar experimental results for the high-energy excitations of the undoped high-$`T_c`$ materials are also due to strong quantum fluctuations.

We acknowledge fruitful discussions with E. Müller-Hartmann. This project is supported by the DFG in FR 754/2-1, SP 1073 and SFB 484, by the BMBF 13N6918/1 and by the DAAD in the frame of PROCOPE.


text:
# References

Landau Tmp/02/01.

February 2001

BRST CONSTRUCTION OF $`D`$-BRANES IN $`SU(2)`$ WZW MODEL.

S. E. Parkhomenko

Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics

142432 Chernogolovka,Russia

spark@itp.ac.ru

Abstract

BRST construction of $`D`$-branes in $`SU(2)`$ WZW model is proposed.

PACS: 11.25Hf; 11.25 Pm.

Keywords: Strings, D-branes, Conformal Field Theory.

1. Introduction

The role of $`D`$-branes  in the description of certain non perturbative degrees of freedom of strings is by now well established and the study of their dynamics has lead to many new insights into string and $`M`$-theory . Much of this study was done in the large volume regime where geometric techniques provide reliable information. The extrapolation into the stringy regime usually requires boundary conformal field theory (CFT) methods. In this approach $`D`$-brane configurations are given by conformally invariant boundary states or boundary conditions. However the geometric properties of these configurations are well understood only for the case of flat and toric backgrounds where the CFT on the world sheet is a theory of free fields. Due to this reason many calculations concerning the scattering and emission of closed strings from $`D`$-branes can be given exactly (see for example , ). In particular, geometric features of the $`D`$-brane solutions of supergravity in flat 10-dimensional space-time were recovered from the boundary states in .

The class of rational CFT’s gives the examples of curved string backgrounds where the construction of the boundary states leaving the whole chiral symmetry algebra or its subalgebra unbroken can be given in principle and the interaction of these states with closed strings can be calculated exactly. However the extraction of geometric features of boundary states is a problem as against the flat string background, because the boundary states are given in purely algebraic dates of the rational CFT of interest. One of the most important examples of this situation is given by Gepner models , where the boundary state approach developed in , ,  has been used to get some of the geometric features of $`D`$-branes at small volume of the Calabi-Yau manifold.

WZW models on the compact groups is a subclass of rational CFT’s where the chiral symmetry algebra is given by a Kac-Moody algebra and the space of states is given by the direct sum of integrable representations of the algebra . $`D`$-branes in these models have been intensively studied in the last few years . In particular, geometry of the boundary states which left unbroken Kac-Moody algebra of symmetries has been investigated in .

There is well known free field realization of WZW models  which allows to describe the irreducible representations of the Kac-Moody algebras, vertex operators and calculate the correlation functions. It is natural to ask whether we can extend the free field realization for boundary WZW models. To answer this question one needs to find first a free field construction of the boundary states.

This problem has been treated recently in . In this work the known expression of a character of the irreducible representation of $`su(2)`$ Kac-Moody algebra via an alternating sum of the characters of Fock modules  has been used to represent Ishibashi state of the irreducible $`\widehat{su}(2)`$ representation as a superposition of Isibashi states of the Fock modules. But this is certainly not the end of the construction because one needs to check that the boundary states constructed this way do not emit non-physical closed string states which are present originally in the free field realization. Similar to the bulk situation, the condition that non-physical states are not radiated by the boundary state is equivalent to BRST invariance of the state, with respect to the sum of BRST charges of Felder’s resolution in the left- and right-moving sectors of the model. This condition which is of crucial importance in the free field construction of boundary states was not taken into account in .

In this note we study this problem for $`SU(2)`$ WZW model. In Section 2 we follow closely to the Section 3 of  and construct $`\widehat{su}(2)`$ invariant Ishibashi states in the tensor product of Wakimoto modules from left- and right-moving sectors. Section 3 is the main part of the present note. In this section we construct Ishibashi state for each irreducible integrable $`\widehat{su}(2)`$ representation using the superpositions of Ishibashi states of Wakimoto modules from Felder’s resolution. We find the coefficients of the superposition imposing the BRST invariance condition which is similar to that of the bulk theory. Then we show that Ishibashi state constructed this way is not BRST exact and hence, represents a nontrivial homology class. At the end of Section 3 the boundary states in $`SU(2)`$ WZW model are constructed using the solution found by Cardy . In Section 4 we consider briefly free field realization of the twisted boundary states and construct twisted BRST invariant boundary state for the case of Weyl reflection automorphism. Section 5 is devoted to discussions.

2. Ishibashi states in $`\widehat{sl}(2)`$ Wakimoto modules

The standard $`\widehat{sl}(2)`$-Wakimoto representation  in the left-moving sector is given by the set of free scalar fields $`a(z)`$, $`a^+(z)`$, $`\varphi (z)`$:

$`a^+(z_1)a(z_2)=z_{12}^1+reg.,`$
$`\varphi (z_1)\varphi (z_2)=\mathrm{ln}z_{12}+reg.,`$ (1)
$`F=a^+,`$
$`H=2aa^++ı\sqrt{2}\nu \varphi ,`$
$`E=a^2a^++kaı\sqrt{2}\nu a\varphi ,`$ (2)
$`T=T_\varphi +T_a,`$
$`T_\varphi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\varphi )^2+ı{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\nu }}^2\varphi ,T_a=a^+a`$ (3)
The parameter $`\nu `$ is related with the level $`k`$ of the $`\widehat{sl}(2)`$, $`\nu ^2=k+2`$. Similar to (1), (2), Wakimoto representation in the right-moving sector is given by the set of analogous formulas with the opposit sign in front of $`\overline{}\overline{\varphi }`$ . The OPE’s (1) give the commutation relations for the modes of the left-moving fields:

$`[a(n),a^+(m)]=\delta _{n+m,0},`$
$`[\varphi (n),\varphi (m)]=n\delta _{n+m,0}.`$ (4)
(the similar relations are valid for the modes in the right-moving sector). Let us denote by $`|P,l>`$ the vacuum state of the fields $`a,a^+,\varphi `$ which fulfills the relations

$`a(n)|P,l>=0,n>P,`$
$`a^+(n)|P,l>=0,n>P1,`$ (5)
$`\varphi (n)|P,l>=0,n>0`$
$`\varphi (0)|P,l>=ı{\displaystyle \frac{l}{\sqrt{2}\nu }}|P,l>`$ (6)
( P is a picture number ). This state has the following properties:

$`F(n)|P,l>=0,n>1P,`$
$`E(n)|P,l>=0,n>P,`$
$`H(n)|P,l>=0,n>0,H(0)|P,l>=(2Pl)|P,l>,`$
$`L(n)|P,l>=0,n>0,`$
$`L(0)|P,l>=({\displaystyle \frac{P(P1)}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{l(l+2)}{4\nu ^2}})|P,l>.`$ (7)
The state in the right-moving sector $`|\overline{P},\overline{l}>`$ fulfills the relations

$`\overline{a}(n)|\overline{P},\overline{l}>=0,n>\overline{P},`$
$`\overline{a}^+(n)|\overline{P},\overline{l}>=0,n>\overline{P}1,`$ (8)
$`\overline{\varphi }(n)|\overline{P},\overline{l}>=0,n>0`$
$`\overline{\varphi }(0)|\overline{P},\overline{l}>=ı{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{l}}{\sqrt{2}\nu }}|\overline{P},\overline{l}>.`$ (9)
This state has the following properties:

$`\overline{F}(n)|\overline{P},\overline{l}>=0,n>\overline{P}1,`$
$`\overline{E}(n)|\overline{P},\overline{l}>=0,n>\overline{P},`$
$`\overline{H}(n)|\overline{P},\overline{l}>=0,n>0,\overline{H}(0)|P,l>=(2\overline{P}+\overline{l})|\overline{P},\overline{l}>,`$
$`\overline{E}(n)|\overline{P},\overline{l}>=0,n>\overline{P},`$
$`\overline{L}(n)|\overline{P},\overline{l}>=0,n>0,\overline{L}(0)|\overline{P},\overline{l}>=({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{P}(\overline{P}+1)}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{l}(\overline{l}2)}{4\nu ^2}})|\overline{P},\overline{l}>.`$ (10)
The states with nonzero picture numbers can be described explicitly using the following representation of the fields $`a,a^+`$ . Let $`\alpha (z),\beta (z)`$ be the scalar free fields with the OPE’s

$$\beta (z_1)\beta (z_2)=\alpha (z_1)\alpha (z_2)=\mathrm{ln}z_{12}+r.$$
(11)
Then

$`a=\mathrm{exp}(\alpha \beta ),a^+=\mathrm{exp}(\alpha )\mathrm{exp}(\beta ),`$ (12)
and the state $`|P,l>`$ corresponds to the vertex operator

$$A_P(z)V_l(z)=\mathrm{exp}(P\alpha (z))\mathrm{exp}(ı\frac{l}{\sqrt{2}\nu }\varphi (z)).$$
(13)
A similar formula is valid for the state $`|\overline{P},\overline{l}>`$.

Let $`W_{P,l}`$ be the Fock module generated from $`|P,l>`$ by the creation operators. Analogously, we denote by $`\overline{W}_{\overline{P},\overline{l}}`$ the Fock module generated from $`|\overline{P},\overline{l}>`$ by the creation operators of the right-moving fields $`\overline{a},\overline{a}^+,\overline{\varphi }`$.

In the tensor product $`W_{P,l}\overline{W}_{\overline{P},\overline{l}}`$ we are going to construct Ishibashi state $`|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>`$ fulfilling on the boundary $`z\overline{z}=1`$ the relations ($`g`$-Ward identities)

$`(dzE(z)d\overline{z}\overline{E}(\overline{z}))|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0,`$
$`(dzH(z)d\overline{z}\overline{H}(\overline{z}))|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0,`$
$`(dzF(z)d\overline{z}\overline{F}(\overline{z}))|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0.`$ (14)
Thus, boundary CFT under consideration lives on the unit disc in $`z`$-plane.

It follows from the Sugawara formula that boundary conditions (14) are conformally invariant

$`((dz)^2T(d\overline{z})^2\overline{T})|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0,or`$
$`(L(n)\overline{L}(n))|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0.`$ (15)
Let us solve (14) in terms of the free fields. Using (2), the similar formulas for the right-moving sector the third relation from (14) can be written as

$`(a^+(z)+\overline{a}^+(z))|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0.`$ (16)
The second equation from (14) impose a relation between $`a,\overline{a},\varphi ,\overline{\varphi }`$. The equations which are consistent with (4), (16) are given by

$`(a(z)\overline{a}(\overline{z}))|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0,`$
$`(dz(\varphi ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}(P+\overline{P})z^1)+d\overline{z}\overline{}\overline{\varphi })|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0,`$ (17)
The relations (17) can be rewritten in terms of the modes:

$`(a^+(n)+\overline{a}^+(n))|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0,`$
$`(a(n)\overline{a}(n))|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0,`$
$`(\varphi (n)\overline{\varphi }(n)ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}(P+\overline{P})\delta _{n,0})|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0.`$ (18)
The solution of (18) is given by

$`\overline{P}=1P,\overline{l}=l+2,`$
$`|P,1P,l,l+2>>=\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{m=P}a(m)\overline{a}^+(m)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_{m=1+P}a^+(m)\overline{a}(m))`$
$`\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{m=1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}\varphi (m)\overline{\varphi }(m))|P,1P,l,l+2>.`$
(19)
and it fulfills the equations (14).

One needs also to make a consistency check of the relations (18) and (15). Due to the commutation relations

$`[L(n),a^+(m)]=ma^+(n+m),`$
$`[L(n),a(m)]=(n+m)a(n+m),`$
$`[L(n),\varphi (m)]=+ı{\displaystyle \frac{m(m1)}{\sqrt{2}\nu }}\delta _{n+m,0}m\varphi (n+m),`$
$`[\overline{L}(n),\overline{\varphi }(m)]=ı{\displaystyle \frac{m(m1)}{\sqrt{2}\nu }}\delta _{n+m,0}m\overline{\varphi }(n+m)`$ (20)
we see that (15) is consistent with the relations (18) for the fields $`a,a^+`$. For the field $`\varphi `$ we have

$`[L(n)\overline{L}(n),\varphi (m)\overline{\varphi }(m)+ı\sqrt{2}\nu \eta \delta _{m,0}]|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=`$
$`m(\varphi (n+m)\overline{\varphi }(nm)+ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}\delta _{n+m,0})|P,\overline{P},l,\overline{l}>>=0`$ (21)
which is consistent with (18) and (19).

The boundary state (19) is a coherent state in the tensor product $`W_{0,l}\overline{W}_{1,l+2}`$. In what follows we shall omit the right-moving indexes in the notation of Ishibashi states (19) because they are determined by the left-moving ones.

For each pair of Ishibashi states $`|P,l>>`$, $`|P^{},l^{}>>`$ one can calculate the cylinder partition function

$$Z_{(P^{},l^{}),(P,l)}(\tau ,\theta )=<<P^{},l^{}|q^{(L(0)c/24)}u^{H(0)}|P,l>>,$$
(22)
where $`q=\mathrm{exp}(ı2\pi \tau )`$, $`u=\mathrm{exp}(ı\pi \theta )`$, $`\tau `$ and $`\theta `$ are the complex numbers ($`Im\tau >0`$). After the calculation of the contractions we obtain

$`Z_{(P^{},l^{}),(P,l)}=\delta _{(P,l),(P^{},l^{})}`$
$`q^{\mathrm{\Delta }(P,l)c/24}u^{2Pl}\mathrm{\Pi }_{m=P}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1q^mu^2)}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{m=P+1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1q^mu^2)}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{m=1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1q^m)}},`$ (23)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }(P,l)=\frac{P(P+1)}{2}+\frac{l(l+2)}{4\nu ^2}`$. It can be rewritten as the character $`Ch(W_{0,l})`$ of the Wakimoto module $`W_{0,l}`$

$`Z_{(P^{},l^{}),(P,l)}=(1)^P\delta _{(P,l),(P^{},l^{})}`$
$`q^{\frac{l(l+2)}{4\nu ^2}}u^l\mathrm{\Pi }_{m=0}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1q^mu^2)}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{m=1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1q^mu^2)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1q^m)}}=`$
$`(1)^P\delta _{(P,l),(P^{},l^{})}Ch(W_{0,l}).`$ (24)
3. Ishibashi states in irreducible $`\widehat{su}(2)`$-modules

and boundary states in $`SU(2)`$ WZW model

In this section we represent the free field construction of Ishibashi and boundary states for irreducible integrable $`\widehat{su}(2)`$ representations. Thus we restrict the level $`k`$ and the momentum $`l`$ to be nonnegative integer numbers such that $`l<k+1`$.

To begin with the known BRST construction of the irreducible $`\widehat{su}(2)`$ representations.

For each module $`W_{0,l}`$ one can associate the complex (Felder’s resolution)

$`\mathrm{}C_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}2}C_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}1}C_l^\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}C_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+1}C_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+2}\mathrm{},`$
$`C_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+2n}=W_{0,l_{2n}},l_{2n}=l2n\nu ^2,`$
$`C_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+2n+1}=W_{0,l_{2n+1}},l_{2n+1}=l22n\nu ^2,nZ,`$ (25)
with the differentials (BRST operators)

$`d_{2n}=Q_{l+1},d_{2n+1}=Q_{\nu ^2l1},`$
$`Q_m=\kappa _m{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}}dz_iS(z_i),\kappa _m={\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}(ı2\pi \frac{m}{\nu ^2})1}{\mathrm{exp}(ı2\pi \frac{1}{\nu ^2})1}},`$ (26)
where

$`S(z)=a^+(z)\mathrm{exp}(ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}\varphi )(z)`$ (27)
and the integration contours $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are chosen similar to : the integrations contours over the variables $`z_2,\mathrm{},z_m`$ form a set nonintersecting curves going counterclockwise from $`z_1`$ to $`\mathrm{exp}(ı2\pi )z_1`$ and are localized in the neighborhood of the circle of radius $`|z_1|`$ centered at the origin, which is the $`z_1`$ integration contour.

The irreducible $`\widehat{su}(2)`$-module $`M_l`$ is given by the cohomology groups of the complex (25)

$`H^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+i}=\delta _{i,0}M_l.`$ (28)
Thus the left-moving part of the Hilbert space of $`SU(2)`$ WZW model is given by BRST invariant states (modulo BRST exact). A similar statement takes place for the right-moving sector.

Due to this result one can write the character $`Ch_l(q,u)`$ of the module $`M_l`$ as the Euler characteristic of the complex (25)

$`Ch_l(q,u)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{kZ}(Ch(W_{0,l2k\nu ^2})Ch(W_{0,l22k\nu ^2}))(q,u).`$ (29)
Hence, it is natural to suggest the free-field construction of the Ishibashi state $`|M_l>>`$ for the module $`M_l`$ as a superposition of the states (19) with $`P=0`$

$`|M_l>>=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{kZ}(c_{2k}|0,l2k\nu ^2>>+c_{2k+1}|0,l22k\nu ^2>>),`$ (30)
The coefficients $`c_n`$ can be fixed partly from the condition

$`<<M_{l_1}|(1)^fq^{(L(0)c/24)}u^{H(0)}|M_{l_2}>>=\delta _{l_1,l_2}Ch_{l_1}(q,u),`$ (31)
where $`f`$ is the ”ghost” number operator associated with the complex (25) and determined by

$$f|v_n>=n|v_n>,|v_n>C_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+n}.$$
(32)
Indeed, using (24) we obtain

$`<<M_{l_1}|(1)^fq^{(L(0)c/24)}u^{H(0)}|M_{l_2}>>=`$
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{kZ}(c_{2k}^2Ch(W_{0,l_12k\nu ^2})c_{2k+1}^2Ch(W_{0,l_122k\nu ^2}))(q,u).`$ (33)
Comparing with (29) we obtain

$$c_n=\pm 1,nZ.$$
(34)
Thus the state (30) is a good candidate for the free field realization of the Ishibashi state in $`SU(2)`$ WZW model . It would be a genuine Ishibashi state for the module $`M_l`$ if it did not radiate nonphysical closed string states which are present in the free field representation of the model. In other words, the overlap of this state with an arbitrary closed string state which does not belong to the Hilbert space of the WZW model should vanish. As we will see this condition can be formulated as a BRST invariance condition of the state (30) and it will fix the coefficients $`c_n`$ up to the common sign.

To investigate BRST invariance of the state (30) one needs to consider the structure of the Wakimoto modules. We start with the module $`W_{0,l}`$. Its vacuum vector $`|0,l>`$ has the properties

$`F(0)|0,l>=0,`$
$`H(0)|0,l>=l|0,l>,`$
$`E(0)|0,l>=la(0)|0,l>,`$
$`(E(0))^2|0,l>=l(l1)(a(0))^2|0,l>,`$ (35)
where we have used the relation

$$[E(n),a(m)]=(a)^2(n+m).$$
(36)
Thus we see that

$`(a(0))^{l+1}|0,l>isacosingularvector,(E(0))^{l+1}|0,l>=0.`$ (37)
We have also

$`(F(1))^{\nu ^2l1}|0,l>=`$
$`(a^+(1))^{\nu ^2l1}|0,l>isasingularvector.`$ (38)
The whole structure of singular and cosingular vectors can be read of from the determinant formula for the module $`W_{0,l}`$

$`D_\mu =\mathrm{\Pi }_{m,n>0}[l+m\nu ^2(n+1)]^{p(\mu n(m\delta \alpha ))},`$
$`C_\mu =\mathrm{\Pi }_{m,n>0}[l+(m1)\nu ^2(n1)]^{p(\mu n((m1)\delta +\alpha ))},`$ (39)
where $`\mu =r\delta +s\alpha ,r=0,1,\mathrm{},sZ`$ is a positive root of $`\widehat{sl}(2)`$, $`\delta `$ is the imaginary root, $`\alpha `$ is the positive root of $`sl(2)`$, $`p(\mu )`$ is the number of partitions of $`\mu `$ into the sum of positive roots of $`\widehat{sl}(2)`$. The zeroes of $`C_\mu `$ correspond to the cosingular vectors, while the zeroes of $`D_\mu `$ correspond to the singular vectors. The complex (25) gives the structure of submodules of $`W_{0,l}`$.

Let us consider the structure of $`\overline{W}_{1,\overline{l}}`$, $`\overline{l}=l+2`$. Its vacuum vector $`|1,\overline{l}>`$ has the properties

$`\overline{E}(0)|1,\overline{l}>=0,`$
$`\overline{H}(0)|1,\overline{l}>=(2+\overline{l})|1,\overline{l}>=l|1,\overline{l}>,`$
$`\overline{E}(1)|1,\overline{l}>=(k+2\overline{l})\overline{a}(1)|1,\overline{l}>,`$
$`(\overline{E}(1))^2|1,\overline{l}>=(k+2\overline{l})(k+2\overline{l}1)|1,\overline{l}>.`$ (40)
So we find that

$`(\overline{a}(1))^{\nu ^2\overline{l}+1}|1,\overline{l}>=(\overline{a}(1))^{\nu ^2l1}|1,\overline{l}>isacosingularvector,`$
$`(\overline{E}(1))^{\nu ^2l1}|1,\overline{l}>=0.`$ (41)
We have also

$`(\overline{F}(0))^{l+1}|1,\overline{l}>=`$
$`(\overline{a}^+(0))^{l+1}|1,\overline{l}>isasingularvector.`$ (42)
The determinant formula for the module $`\overline{W}_{1,\overline{l}}`$ is given by

$`C_\mu =\mathrm{\Pi }_{m,n>0}[l+m\nu ^2(n+1)]^{p(\mu n(m\delta +\alpha ))},`$
$`D_\mu =\mathrm{\Pi }_{m,n>0}[l+(m1)\nu ^2(n1)]^{p(\mu n((m1)\delta \alpha ))}.`$ (43)
Hence, we see that $`\overline{W}_{1,l+2}`$ is dual to $`W_{0,l}`$  and its Felder’s complex can be written as follows

$`\mathrm{}\overline{C}_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+2}\overline{C}_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+1}\overline{C}_l^\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}\overline{C}_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}1}\overline{C}_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}2}\mathrm{},`$
$`\overline{C}_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+2n}=\overline{W}_{1,\overline{l}_{2n}},\overline{l}_{2n}=2+l+2n\nu ^2,`$
$`\overline{C}_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+2n1}=\overline{W}_{1,\overline{l}_{2n1}},\overline{l}_{2n1}=l+2n\nu ^2,nZ,`$ (44)
where the differentials are given by

$`\overline{d}_{2n1}=\overline{Q}_{l+1},\overline{d}_{2n}=\overline{Q}_{\nu ^2l1},`$
$`\overline{Q}_m=\kappa _m{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Gamma }^1}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}}d\overline{z}_i\overline{S}(\overline{z}_i),`$ (45)
where $`nZ`$,

$`\overline{S}(\overline{z})=\overline{a}^+(\overline{z})\mathrm{exp}(ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}\overline{\varphi })(\overline{z}),`$ (46)
and the integration contours $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^1`$ have opposite orientation and opposite ordering with respect to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Next we form a tensor product of the complexes (25) and (44):

$`\mathrm{}A_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}2}A_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}1}A_l^\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}A_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+1}A_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+2}\mathrm{},`$
$`A_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+p}={\displaystyle \underset{n+m=p}{}}C_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+n}\overline{C}_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+m}`$ (47)
with the differential $`D`$ defined by

$$D_p(v_n\overline{v}_m)=d_nv_n\overline{v}_m+(1)^nv_n\overline{d}_m\overline{v}_m,n+m=p$$
(48)
where $`v_n\overline{v}_m`$ is an arbitrary element from $`A_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+p}`$.

The cohomology groups of the complex (47) are given by

$`𝐇^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+i}=\delta _{i,0}M_lM_l^{},`$ (49)
where $`M_l^{}`$ is dual module to $`M_l`$.

The Ishibashi state we are looking for can be considered as a linear functional on the Hilbert space of $`SU(2)`$ WZW model, then it has to be an element from homology group $`𝐇_\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}`$. Therefore, the BRST invariance condition for the state can be formulated as follows.

Let us define the action of the differential $`D`$ on the state $`|M_l>>`$ by the formula

$$<<D^{}M_l|v_n\overline{v}_{pn}><<M_l|D_p|v_n\overline{v}_{pn}>,$$
(50)
where $`v_n\overline{v}_{pn}`$ is an arbitrary element from $`A_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}+p}`$. Then, BRST invariance condition means that

$$D^{}|M_l>>=0.$$
(51)
Proposition.

The superposition (30) satisfy the BRST invariance condition (51) if the coefficients $`c_n`$ obey the following equation

$$(1)^nc_n+c_{1n}=0.$$
(52)
Note that the last relation is consistent with (34) and we obtain two sets of solutions of (52)

$`c_{2m}=(1)^m,c_{2m+1}=(1)^m,or`$
$`c_{2m}=(1)^m,c_{2m+1}=(1)^m,mZ.`$ (53)
Now we move on to the prove of the Proposition.

Let us consider an arbitrary state

$$|w_n\overline{w}_m>A_l^{\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}nm}$$
(54)
from the complex (47). In view of (30) only the states from $`A_l^\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}`$ have nonzero overlap with Ishibashi state $`|M_l>>`$. Because of the differential $`D`$ rises the ghost number by one we have to put in (54) $`nm=1`$. So one needs to show that

$`<<M_l|D_1|w_n\overline{w}_{1+n}>`$
$`<<M_l|d_n+(1)^n\overline{d}_{1+n}|w_n\overline{w}_{1+n}>=0.`$ (55)
We will imply in the following that the state (54) corresponds to the field $`(D_1(w_n\overline{w}_{1+n}))(z,\overline{z})`$ which is placed at the center $`z=\overline{z}=0`$ of the disk.

Let us consider the first term of (55).

$`<<M_l|d_n|w_n\overline{w}_{1+n}>=\kappa _n<<M_l|{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}dz_iS(z_i)|w_n\overline{w}_{1+n}>=`$
$`\kappa _n<<M_l|{\displaystyle _{\gamma _1}}𝑑z_1S(z_1){\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=2}{\overset{N}{}}}dz_iS(z_i)|w_n\overline{w}_{1+n}>.`$ (56)
In this formula $`N`$ is determined by (26). Recall also that we can chose $`z_1`$ integration contour $`\gamma _1`$ as the unit circle centered at $`z=\overline{z}=0`$ (so it coincide with the boundary of the disk) such that the integration contours $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ form a set of non-intersecting nested curves going counterclockwise from $`z_1`$ to $`\mathrm{exp}(ı2\pi )z_1`$ and are localized in the neighborhood of the contour $`\gamma _1`$. When acting on $`|w_n\overline{w}_{1+n}>`$ the BRST current

$$J(z_1)=S(z_1)_\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\underset{i=2}{\overset{N}{}}dz_iS(z_i)$$
(57)
is single valued around the center of the disk.

To prove (55) we change first $`dz_1S(z_1)`$ taking into account normal ordering in the $`\mathrm{exp}(ı\frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }\varphi )`$ and using the relations (18)

$`<<M_l|dz_1S(z_1)=`$
$`<<M_l|dz_1a^+(z_1)\mathrm{exp}(ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}\varphi _<(z_1))\mathrm{exp}(ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}\varphi _0)z_1^{ı\frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }\varphi (0)}\mathrm{exp}(ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}\varphi _>(z_1))=`$
$`<<M_l|\mathrm{exp}(ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}(\varphi _0+\overline{\varphi }_0))d\overline{z}_1\overline{S}(\overline{z}_1).`$ (58)
Then, deform the first integration contour from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ towards the boundary $`z\overline{z}=1`$ and apply the relations (18). Note that we have no relations for the modes $`\varphi _0`$, $`\overline{\varphi }_0`$ canonically conjugated to the momentum modes $`\varphi (0)`$, $`\overline{\varphi }(0)`$. So we keep the $`\varphi _0`$ unchanged during this process. Thus we obtain

$`<<M_l|dz_1J(z_1)|w_n\overline{w}_{1+n}>=`$
$`\kappa _n<<M_l|\mathrm{exp}(ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}2(\varphi _0+\overline{\varphi }_0))d\overline{z}_1\overline{S}(\overline{z}_1){\displaystyle _{\gamma _2}}𝑑\overline{z}_2\overline{S}(\overline{z}_2){\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime }}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=3}{\overset{N}{}}}dz_iS(z_i)`$
$`|w_n\overline{w}_{1+m}>.`$ (59)
Now we can deform the integration contour $`\gamma _2`$ towards the origin such that $`|\overline{z}_2|<|z_N|`$.

Repeating the same procedure for other contours we obtain

$`<<M_l|d_n|w_n\overline{w}_{1+n}>=`$
$`\kappa _n<<M_l|\mathrm{exp}(ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}N(\varphi _0+\overline{\varphi }_0)){\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Gamma }^1}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=N}{\overset{1}{}}}d\overline{z}_i\overline{S}(\overline{z}_i)|w_n\overline{w}_{1+m}>=`$
$`c_{1n}<<\overline{l}_{1+n},l_{1n},1,0|\mathrm{exp}(ı{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}N(\varphi _0+\overline{\varphi }_0))|w_n\overline{d}_{1+n}\overline{w}_{1+n}>,`$ (60)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^1`$ denotes the set of nested contours with opposite orientation and opposite ordering.

The operator $`\mathrm{exp}(ı\frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }N(\varphi _0+\overline{\varphi }_0))`$ only shifts the ghost numbers of the state $`|w_n\overline{d}_{1+n}\overline{w}_{1+n}>`$, such that the only nonzero pairing appears for $`<<\overline{l}_{1+n},l_{1n},1,0|`$. From the other hand

$`<<M_l|\overline{d}_{1+n}|w_n\overline{w}_{1+n}>=`$
$`c_n<<\overline{l}_n,l_n,1,0|w_n\overline{d}_{1+n}\overline{w}_{1+n}>.`$ (61)
Comparing these formulas we conclude that (55) will be satisfied iff (52) is fulfilled. It proves the Proposition.

To complete the free field construction of the Ishibashi state one needs to check that $`|M_l>>`$ is not BRST exact state. It can be done by projecting the state $`|M_l>>`$ onto an element from the cohomology class $`𝐇^\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}`$. Let us consider the case when $`l>0`$ and choose the representative from the zero-level states of $`M_l^{}M_l^{}^{}`$. It can be written as $`(E(0))^n(\overline{F}(0))^m|0,1,l^{},l^{}+2>`$. Then

$`<<M_l|(E(0))^n(\overline{F}(0))^m|0,1,l^{},l^{}+2>=`$
$`(1)^nl(l1)\mathrm{}(ln+1)\delta _{n,m}\delta _{l,l^{}}c_0.`$ (62)
For the case $`l=0`$ we choose $`(F(1))^n(\overline{E}(1))^m|0,1,l^{},l^{}+2>,n<kl^{}+1`$ as a representative from $`M_l^{}M_l^{}^{}`$. Projecting $`|M_0>>`$ onto the representative we find the expression like (62). Therefore, we see that result is not zero and hence the Ishibashi state $`|M_l>>`$ defines a homology class. Moreover, similar to  the projection is given by the calculation of diagonal matrix elements in the irreducible $`su(2)`$\- representation if we put

$$c_0=1.$$
(63)
In view of the Proposition we can obtain free field representation of the boundary states in $`SU(2)`$-WZW model just applying the formula found by Cardy :

$`|B_l>>={\displaystyle \underset{jI}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{S_{lj}}{\sqrt{S_{0j}}}}|M_j>>,`$ (64)
where $`S_{lj},j,lI`$ is the matrix of modular transformation of $`\widehat{su}(2)`$-characters:

$`S_{lj}={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\nu }}\mathrm{sin}(\pi (j+1)(l+1)/\nu ^2).`$ (65)
Using (64), (62) and (63) it is easy to recover the wave function of the $`SU(2)`$ boundary state found in .

4. Free field realization of twisted boundary states.

In this section we consider briefly the twisted boundary conditions of automorphism type. The theory treating such boundary conditions for arbitrary CFT’s has been developed in  and some applications of these results to WZW models has been considered in . The automorphisms which are interested to us here are induced by automorphisms of the algebra $`su(2)`$. They are all inner automorphisms and can be represented by the adjoint action of the group $`SU(2)`$. We consider here only the case when it is given by the Weyl reflection $`r`$ of $`su(2)`$. The generalization is straightforward.

Hence, we have to construct first the twisted Ishibashi states $`|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r`$ fulfilling on the boundary $`z\overline{z}=1`$ the relations

$`(dz(r.E)(z)d\overline{z}\overline{E}(\overline{z}))|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r=0,`$
$`(dz(r.H)(z)d\overline{z}\overline{H}(\overline{z}))|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r=0,`$
$`(dz(r.F)(z)d\overline{z}\overline{F}(\overline{z}))|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r=0,`$ (66)
where

$$(r.E)(z)=F(z),(r.H)(z)=H(z),(r.F)(z)=E(z).$$
(67)
The relations (66) are equivalent to

$`(\overline{a}^+(z)+a^2a^+(z)+ka(z)ı\sqrt{2}\nu a\varphi (z))|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r=0,`$
$`(\overline{a}(z)+a^1(z))|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r=0,`$
$`(\overline{\varphi }(z)\varphi (z)ı\sqrt{2}\nu (a^1a(z)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\nu ^2}}z^1))|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r=0,`$ (68)
where $`a^1(z)\mathrm{exp}(\alpha +\beta )(z)`$. In terms of the modes these equations are given by

$`(\overline{a}^+(n)E(n))|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r=0,`$
$`(\overline{a}(n)+a^1(n))|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r=0,`$
$`(\overline{\varphi }(n)\varphi (n)ı\sqrt{2}\nu ((a^1a)(n)+\delta _{n,0}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\nu ^2}}))|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r=0.`$ (69)
One can easily check that

$`\mathrm{exp}(E(0))\mathrm{exp}(F(0))\mathrm{exp}(E(0))a(z)=a^1(z),`$
$`\mathrm{exp}(E(0))\mathrm{exp}(F(0))\mathrm{exp}(E(0))a^+(z)=F(z),`$
$`\mathrm{exp}(E(0))\mathrm{exp}(F(0))\mathrm{exp}(E(0))\varphi (z)=\varphi (z)+ı\sqrt{2}\nu a^1a(z).`$ (70)
Thus the Ishibashi state we are going to construct has to act on the fields $`\overline{a},\overline{a}^+,\overline{\varphi }`$ as the composition

$$(\overline{a},\overline{a}^+,\overline{\varphi })(a,a^+,\varphi )r(a,a^+,\varphi ),$$
(71)
where

$$r=\mathrm{exp}(E(0))\mathrm{exp}(F(0))\mathrm{exp}(E(0)).$$
(72)
Then, in according to (71) we can write

$$|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r=(r1)|0,l>>.$$
(73)
It is obvious that we can use instead of $`r`$ defined by (72) the operator $`\overline{r}`$ which acts in the right-moving sector and defined by

$$\overline{r}=\mathrm{exp}(\overline{F}(0))\mathrm{exp}(\overline{E}(0))\mathrm{exp}(\overline{F}(0)).$$
(74)
Then one can rewrite (73) in the equivalent form

$$|0,1,l,\overline{l}>>^r=(1\overline{r})|0,l>>.$$
(75)
It is easy to see also that operators $`r`$ and $`\overline{r}`$ change the pictures, the picture of the state $`r1|0,l>>`$ is $`(1,1)`$ and the picture of the state $`1\overline{r}|0,l>>`$ is $`(0,0)`$. It enables us to conclude that

$`(r1)|0,l>>W_{1,2l}\overline{W}_{1,l+2},`$
$`(1\overline{r})|0,l>>W_{0,l}\overline{W}_{0,l}.`$ (76)
The next step is to construct twisted Ishibshi states for the irreducible $`\widehat{su}(2)`$ modules. Because of the differentials of the Felder’s complexes are invariant with respect to the left-moving and right-moving $`\widehat{su}(2)`$ algebras one can easily extend the construction of the Section 3 to the case of twisted boundary conditions.

Let us consider for example the representation (75) for the twisted Ishibashi state in Wakimoto modules. In this case the structures of modules $`W_{0,l}`$ and $`\overline{W}_{0,l}`$ coincide so that complex in the right-moving sector coincides with the complex (25) in the left-moving sector. Similar to (47) we can form the double complex which calculates the tensor product of irreducible representations. Thus it is easy to see that state

$$(1\overline{r})|M_l>>,$$
(77)
where $`|M_l>>`$ is given by (30), (52), is BRST invariant and gives free field realization of twisted Ishibashi state in $`SU(2)`$ WZW model. It is obvious also that the state

$$(1\overline{r})|B_l>>,$$
(78)
where $`|B_l>>`$ is given by (64) represents twisted boundary state of the model.

5. Discussion

In this note we have constructed $`\widehat{su}(2)`$ and BRST invariant Ishibashi states in $`SU(2)`$ WZW models using free field realization of the bulk WZW model. Each Ishibashi state of the model is given by infinite superposition of Ishibashi states of Wakimoto modules, forming Felder’s complex for irreducible $`\widehat{su}(2)`$ module. It is shown that coefficients of the superposition are fixed uniquely by the BRST invariance condition and the Ishibashi state constructed this way is not BRST exact and hence represents nontrivial homolgy class. We group these free field realized Ishibashi states into the boundary states of $`SU(2)`$ WZW model using the solution found by Cardy. Due to BRST invariance the boundary states do not radiate non-physical closed string states (which are present originally in the free field realized WZW model) and its wave functions coincide with the wave functions of conjugacy classes found in .

Using free field representation of the automorphism group of $`su(2)`$ algebra we have constructed also the twisted automorphism type boundary states when the automorphism is given by Weyl reflection.

Note also that free field representation for the character of the irreducible $`\widehat{su}(2)`$ module (33)

very close to the open-string Witten index  which has been widely discussed in the literature in context of $`D`$-branes on Calabi-Yau manifolds. Indeed, using (33, 64) and Verlinde formula one can obtain:

$`<<B_{l_1}|(1)^fq^{(L(0)c/24)}u^{H(0)}|B_{l_2}>>=`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{jI}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{S_{l_1j}}{S_{0j}}}{\displaystyle \frac{S_{l_2j}}{S_{0j}}}S_{0j}Ch_j(q,u)={\displaystyle \underset{j,lI}{}}N_{l_1l_2}^lS_{lj}Ch_j(q,u)=`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{lI}{}}N_{l_1l_2}^lCh_l(Sq,Su).`$ (79)
Thus in the open string sector we have

$`Tr_{\mathrm{\Omega }_{l_1l_2}}(1)^{f^{op}}\stackrel{~}{q}^{(L^{op}(0)c/24)}\stackrel{~}{u}^{H^{op}(0)}={\displaystyle \underset{lI}{}}N_{l_1l_2}^lCh_l(\stackrel{~}{q},\stackrel{~}{u}),`$ (80)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{l_1l_2}`$ is Hilbert space in the open string sector, $`f^{op}`$, $`L^{op}(0)`$, $`H^{op}(0)`$, are the corresponding operators, and $`\stackrel{~}{q}=\mathrm{exp}(ı\frac{2\pi }{\tau })`$, $`\stackrel{~}{u}=\mathrm{exp}(ı\frac{\pi \theta }{\tau })`$.

The right hand side of this equality is given by the character-valued index of the BRST operator in the space $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{l_1,l_2}`$. This expression is similar to that obtained for example in , ,  for $`N`$=2 superconformal field theories. It would be interesting to find geometric interpretation of (80).

We close with a brief discussion of some directions to develop. The first one is a generalization of BRST construction of Ishibashi states for higher rank groups. It would also be interesting to join BRST construction of Ishibashi states in WZW models and quantum Drinfeld-Sokolov reduction  to give free field realization of Ishibashi and boundary states in the CFT’s with $`W`$-algebra of symmetries . The next obviously important direction is an extension of the construction to the case of supersymmetric WZW models and $`N`$=2 coset models.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by grants RBRF-01-0216686, RBRF-96-1596821, INTAS-OPEN-97-1312, INTAS-00-0005 and RPI-2254.