text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In a previous paper, we developed a method for dynamical mass generation in asymptotically free quantum field theories. It was applied to the ordinary Gross-Neveu model, , and a mass gap was found, , which agreed very well with the exact result, . In this paper we will apply the same method to the non-abelian Thirring model (NATM) or chiral Gross-Neveu model (CGNM), . It is another one of those rare quantum field theories where exact results, like the mass gap, can be obtained. In  the mass gap is calculated exactly in terms of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ which is the non-perturbative mass parameter which sets the scale for the running coupling in a certain scheme. Comparing our results with  will provide another check on the accuracy of our method.

The idea behind the method is very simple. A source term, $`J\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }`$, is added to the NATM-Lagrangian and then we calculate the mass gap using ordinary perturbation theory to obtain the perturbative expansion for $`m(J)`$. As a consequence of asymptotic freedom, this expansion is only valid for large values of $`J`$. If we let $`J`$ approach zero, the coupling constant grows too large, and the perturbative expansion for $`m(J)`$ becomes invalid. Therefore, we cannot take the limit $`J0`$. If instead we consider the perturbative expansion for the inverted relation $`J(m)`$, perturbation theory remains valid in the limit $`J0`$, provided that a solution $`m`$ exists for $`J(m)=0`$, which is not too small. As in ordinary perturbation theory, the result for the mass gap $`m`$ is renormalization scheme (RS) and scale dependent. To eliminate the mass renormalization dependence we use the scheme and scale independent quantity $`\widehat{J}`$, instead of $`J`$. Exchanging $`g^2(\mu )`$ for $`1/(\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\frac{\mu ^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2})`$ as the expansion parameter, reduces the remaining dependence to one single number $`d`$, which can be fixed by some external physical condition, or in a more self-consistent approach, by the principle of minimal sensitivity.

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we will present the results necessary for application of the source inversion for the NATM. In order to avoid unnecessary repetition, we shall refer to the paper  for the derivation of the general formula. The outcome of our calculations will be discussed in section 3. As a bonus we will show that reparametrization of the $`d`$-dependence will enable us to solve the mass gap equation exactly. Details of the exact evaluation of the finite parts of the two loop Feynman integrals which occur in the sunset topology are given in an appendix.

## 2 The non-abelian Thirring model

The $`U(N)`$ invariant NATM describes the interaction of $`N`$ single flavor Dirac fermions $`\mathrm{\Psi }_a`$, $`a=1,\mathrm{},N`$ in two dimensions with the (massless) Lagrangian

$$=i\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}/\mathrm{\Psi }\frac{1}{2}g^2(\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\gamma ^\mu T^i\mathrm{\Psi })^2$$
(2.1)
where $`T^i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},N^21`$, are the generators of $`SU(N)`$ with the normalization $`\text{Tr}(T^iT^j)=\frac{1}{2}\delta ^{ij}`$. (Note that our coupling constant $`g^2`$ is two times the coupling constant $`g^2`$ of .) This model is also known as the CGNM because a Fierz-transformation of the interaction term leads to the equivalent Lagrangian

$$=i\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}/\mathrm{\Psi }+\frac{g^2}{4}\left((\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi })^2(\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\gamma ^5\mathrm{\Psi })^2\right)+\frac{g^2}{4N}(\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\gamma ^\mu \mathrm{\Psi })^2.$$
(2.2)
The NATM is asymptotically free,  and possesses, apart from the $`U(N)`$ invariance, a chiral $`U(1)`$ symmetry. In ordinary perturbation theory this symmetry remains unbroken and no mass gap is generated.

We begin by perturbing (2.1) with a $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }`$ composite operator to produce the new Lagrangian

$$_J=i\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}/\mathrm{\Psi }J\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }\frac{g^2}{2}(\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\gamma ^\mu T^i\mathrm{\Psi })^2.$$
(2.3)
The detailed three loop renormalization of this model using dimensional regularization has been given in  which built on the one and two loop calculations of . The results for the $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$-functions in the $`\overline{MS}`$-scheme are $`(g^2=g^2(\mu ))`$:

$`\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{\mu }}J|_{J_0,g_0,ϵ}`$ $``$ $`J\gamma (g^2)J(\gamma _0g^2+\gamma _1g^4+\gamma _2g^6+\mathrm{})`$
$`=`$ $`J({\displaystyle \frac{(N^21)}{2\pi N}}g^2+{\displaystyle \frac{(N^21)(N4)}{16\pi ^2N}}g^4`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{(N^21)(16N^212N^3+3N^4+5N^226)}{128\pi ^3N^3}}g^6+\mathrm{})`$
and

$`\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{\mu }}g^2|_{g_0,ϵ}`$ $``$ $`\beta (g^2)=2(\beta _0g^4+\beta _1g^6+\beta _2g^8+\mathrm{})`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}({\displaystyle \frac{N}{4\pi }}g^4{\displaystyle \frac{N}{8\pi ^2}}g^6+{\displaystyle \frac{5N+\frac{3}{2}N^3\frac{11}{2}N+\frac{39}{2}\frac{1}{N}}{64\pi ^3}}g^8+\mathrm{}).`$
To apply the source inversion at two loop order we also require the two loop perturbative result for the mass gap. To determine this we have computed the fermion two point-function at two loops and extracted the finite part exactly after performing the renormalization. The values for the integrals we obtained have been checked against the numerical results of  for the mass gap of the ordinary Gross Neveu model. We find

$`m(J)`$ $`=`$ $`J[1{\displaystyle \frac{(N^21)}{N}}(\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{J^2}{\mu ^2}}+1){\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{4\pi }}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{(N^21)}{2N}}(2\zeta (2)(3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}})+{\displaystyle \frac{(3N^22N4)}{N}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{(7N^2+4N6)}{N}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{J^2}{\mu ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(2N^21)}{N}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{J^2}{\mu ^2}}){\displaystyle \frac{g^4}{16\pi ^2}}+\mathrm{}]`$
where $`\zeta (n)`$ is the Riemann zeta function. From this one easily arrives at the expansion for the inverted relation

$`J(m)`$ $`=`$ $`m[1+{\displaystyle \frac{(N^21)}{N}}(\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mu ^2}}+1){\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{4\pi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{(N^21)}{2N}}(2\zeta (2)({\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}3)`$ (2.7)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{(3N^2+2N2)}{N}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(N^24N2)}{N}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mu ^2}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mu ^2}}){\displaystyle \frac{g^4}{16\pi ^2}}+\mathrm{}].`$
We define $`X_0`$ and $`Y_0`$ as the coefficients which do not multiply a logarithm

$$J(m)m(1+g^2(m)X_0+g^4(m)Y_0+\mathrm{}).$$

The expansion (2.7) is highly scheme and scale dependent. This dependence is reduced drastically if we replace $`J(\mu )`$ with $`\widehat{J}`$ which is the scheme and scale independent quantity associated with $`J`$, and then expand in powers of $`1/\left(\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\frac{\mu ^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\right)`$ rather than in $`g^2(\mu )`$. Starting with the expansion for $`J(m)`$ in a general scheme, we found

$`\widehat{J}`$ $`=`$ $`m(\beta _0\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}}+d)^{\frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}\times `$
$`[1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}+d\right)}}[A_0+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0\beta _1}{2\beta _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{d}{\beta _0}}){\displaystyle \frac{d\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}+d\right)^2}}[B_0+A_0({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}1){\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1}{\beta _0}}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{d}{\beta _0}})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1^2}{\beta _0^2}}(\left[\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{d}{\beta _0}})\right]^2{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{4\beta _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{d}{\beta _0}}))`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\beta _2}{\beta _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{\beta _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}\right)+d^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{4\beta _0}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}1\right)\right)`$
$`+d(A_0(1{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}){\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0\beta _1}{2\beta _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0\beta _1}{2\beta _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{d}{\beta _0}})(1{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}))]+𝒪\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}+d}}\right)^3]`$
with

$`A_0`$ $``$ $`X_0{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1}{\beta _0}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0\beta _1}{\beta _0^2}}\right)`$
$`B_0`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{X_0}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0\beta _1}{\beta _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1}{\beta _0}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _2}{4\beta _0}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1\beta _1}{4\beta _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{4\beta _0}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1}{\beta _0}}\right)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0\beta _2}{4\beta _0^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1^2}{8\beta _0^2}}`$ (2.9)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1\gamma _0\beta _1}{4\beta _0^3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0^2\beta _1^2}{8\beta _0^4}}+Y_0.`$
All the scheme and scale dependence now resides in $`d`$ $`\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\frac{\mu ^2}{m^2}\right)`$ and we can recover the original NATM, by putting the naked source $`J_0`$ equal to zero

$$J_0(m)\widehat{J}(m)=0.$$
(2.10)
We find a non-perturbative mass gap which is a solution of

$`1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}+d)}}\left[\mathrm{}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}+d)^2}}\left[\mathrm{}\right]+\mathrm{}=0.`$ (2.11)
The total series is of course $`d`$-independent but one can only calculate it up to a certain order in perturbation theory which will give us a mass gap that depends on $`d`$. One can check that the $`d`$-dependence of the order $`n`$ truncated series is $`𝒪\left(\frac{1}{\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}+d}\right)^{n+1}`$. We will consider two possible ways of fixing $`d`$. The first one reduces to a choice for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, that corresponds to a physical scheme. The second one fixes $`d`$ by the principle of minimal sensitivity. In  we used the value of the expansion parameter $`1/\left(\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}+d\right)`$ as a source of error estimation. This works if the coefficients are of order one. Assuming that the series is asymptotic, a rather large value of the expansion parameter can still give reasonable results, as long as the complete terms in the series are small. In the next section we will show that this is indeed the case. For the $`2`$-loop results it is better to estimate the error from the second order term, than from the expansion parameter.

## 3 Numerical results

The exact result for the mass gap was obtained in ,

$$m=\frac{e^{\frac{1}{2N}}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1\frac{1}{N}\right)}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{PV},$$
(3.12)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{PV}`$ is defined as the scale parameter for the running coupling, with a condition on the normalized four point function, calculated with a Pauli-Villars regularization. To obtain $`m/\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}`$ we need to determine the relationship between the renormalized coupling $`g`$ of the dimensional regularization $`\overline{MS}`$-scheme and the coupling $`g_{PV}`$ used in the Pauli-Villars scheme. This can be achieved by comparing the normalized fermion four-point function to one loop order in both schemes. We find

$$g^2=g_{PV}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left[1+\frac{g_{PV}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{4\pi }\left(\frac{N}{2}+1\right)+\mathrm{}\right]$$
(3.13)
and hence

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{PV}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}e^{(\frac{1+\frac{N}{2}}{2N})}.$$
(3.14)
(See, for example, .) So we finally arrive at

$$m=\frac{e^{\frac{1}{4}}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\frac{1}{N})}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}=e^{\frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}\left[1\frac{\gamma }{N}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{N}\right)^2\right]$$
(3.15)
where $`\gamma `$ is the Euler-Mascheroni constant.

### 3.1 Physical scheme

As in , we will define a physical RS on the normalized 4-point function of $`_J`$, to obtain a physical value $`d_f`$ for $`d`$. Demanding that $`g_f^2`$ coincides with the 4-point function at zero external momentum (see equation (5.5) of ), one arrives at

$$g^2=g_f^2\left(1+\frac{3N}{8\pi }g_f^2+\mathrm{}\right)$$
(3.16)
Taking $`\mu ^2=m^2`$ leads to $`d_f=\frac{3N}{8\pi }`$.***As in , one can show that every physical value for $`d`$ $`(N)`$ gives the correct $`N\mathrm{}`$ limit.

We now find the one and two loop mass gaps $`m_{f1}`$ and $`m_{f2}`$ as the solutions of the one and two loop truncation of (2.11) with $`d=d_f`$. The deviations from the exact result for $`m_{f1}`$ and $`m_{f2}`$ for the $`N\mathrm{}`$ limit and the first order result in $`1/N`$ have been displayed in table 1 in terms of a percentage. We also provided the value of the two loop expansion parameter $`1/(2\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\frac{m_{f2}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}}+d_f)y`$ and the second order term II of the series in (2.11). For $`N=2,3`$ we find no one-loop mass gap. All the other results lie somewhere between the $`N\mathrm{}`$ and $`1/N`$ approximations. We also observe convergence. In other words the comparison with the exact result improves for the two loop truncation. From the $`y/\pi `$ and the II columns we learn that II clearly gives a better indication on the size of the error.

### 3.2 Minimal sensitivity

The equation for $`m(d)`$ (2.11) can only be solved numerically. If we consider instead the expansion parameter $`y`$ as the free parameter one can solve it analytically to find $`m(y)`$. Indeed, we can rewrite (2.11) as

$`1+y(A_0{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}k(m,y))+y^2(B_0{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}({\displaystyle \frac{\beta _2}{\beta _0}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1}{\beta _0}}\right)^2)`$
$`+k(m,y)\left(A_0\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0\beta _1}{2\beta _0^2}}\right)`$
$`+k(m,y)^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{4\beta _0}}({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0}{2\beta _0}}1)\right))+\mathrm{}=0`$ (3.17)
with

$$k(m,y)d(m,y)+\frac{\beta _1}{\beta _0}\mathrm{ln}(\beta _0y)=\frac{1}{y}\beta _0\mathrm{ln}\frac{m^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}^2}+\frac{\beta _1}{\beta _0}\mathrm{ln}(\beta _0y).$$
(3.18)
The one- and two-loop truncation of (3.17) is now solved easily. At one loop it is a linear equation in $`k`$ and one finds $`k=\frac{2\beta _0}{\gamma _0}(\frac{1}{y}+A_0)`$. After substituting this into (3.18) we find the one loop mass gap to be

$$m_1(y)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}(\beta _0y)^{\frac{\beta _1}{2\beta _0^2}}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{y}\left(\frac{1}{2\beta _0}\frac{1}{\gamma _0}\right)\frac{A_0}{\gamma _0}\right]$$
(3.19)
The 2-loop truncation gives a quadratic equation in $`k`$, with two roots $`k_1(y),k_2(y)`$. Hence, the two solutions for the mass gap are

$$m_{2i}(y)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{MS}}(\beta _0y)^{\frac{\beta _1}{2\beta _0^2}}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2\beta _0}\left(\frac{1}{y}k_i(y)\right)\right].$$
(3.20)
The behavior of $`m_1(y)`$ is more or less the same for all values of $`N`$. One observes a sharp maximum, followed by an asymptotic descent to zero. There is no region of minimal sensitivity. For $`N>2`$ the situation changes at two loops. One of the two solutions $`m_{2i}(y)`$ has, in addition to the sharp maximum, a rather flat minimum. This is the point of minimal sensitivity. In figures 2 and 2 we plot the one- and two-loop solutions for the generic $`N=5`$ case.

The other 2-loop solution is not physical since it varies enormously in the region of interest, defined as the region with acceptable estimated error, and no minimal sensitivity is found. For $`N=2`$ the two-loop solution has no minimum with instead only a rather sharp maximum at $`68\%`$ deviation. No true minimal sensitivity point can be identified. The results for $`N>2`$ are displayed in table 2. They are slightly better than the two-loop physical scheme. Again we find II to provide a better indication on the error then $`y/\pi `$. We finally remark that also the minimal sensitivity condition can be solved exactly, to give an analytic form of the 2-loop mass gap. We will not present it here, however, since it is a large expression and does not give any new insights.

## 4 Conclusions

We have successfully applied the source inversion method to the chiral Gross-Neveu model. This required a two-loop calculation of the mass gap in the massive NATM which we carried out exactly. Comparison with the exact result for the non-perturbative mass gap gives a satisfying match. For the physical scheme, there is convergence of the 2-loop result versus the 1-loop result. The 2-loop results are good for $`N>2`$ with a $`10\%`$-deviation for N=3 and $`5\%`$ for $`N>3`$. The minimal sensitivity condition gives a slight improvement. As in the case of the ordinary Gross-Neveu model, the $`N`$ $`=`$ $`2`$ result is poor. The two-loop physical scheme gives a $`46\%`$ deviation. The success/failure of the method for $`N>2/N=2`$ is fairly consistent with the error estimation one obtains from the second order term in the mass gap equation. Finally, it would be worthwhile to apply the technique discussed here to other models where exact mass gaps are also available. This would have the long term aim of applying the procedure to theories where the only information on the dynamical generated mass comes from say Schwinger Dyson or lattice methods in order to ascertain how competitive the results would be.

Acknowledgement. The two loop calculations were performed with the use of Form, .

## Appendix A Computation of two loop integrals.

In this appendix we discuss the evaluation of the basic Feynman integrals which underly the exact value of our mass gap at two loops. At one loop there is only one basic integral which is defined by

$$I=i_k\frac{1}{[k^2m^2]}$$
(A.1)
in Minkowski space where $`_k`$ $`=`$ $`d^\omega k/(2\pi )^2`$ and it has the exact value in $`\omega `$-dimensions

$$I=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\omega /2)m^{(\omega 2)/2}}{(4\pi )^{\omega /2}}.$$
(A.2)
Therefore, if $`\omega `$ $`=`$ $`2`$ $``$ $`ϵ`$ then $`I`$ has a simple pole in $`ϵ`$ which is the foundation of the one loop renormalization. At two loops all contributions to the $`2`$-point function can be reduced to several basic Feynman integrals. These are $`I^2`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mu \nu }(p^2)`$ where

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)=i^2_k_l\frac{1}{[(kp)^2m^2][l^2m^2][(kl)^2m^2]}$$
(A.3)
and

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mu \nu }(p^2)=i^2_k_l\frac{k_\mu k_\nu }{[(kp)^2m^2][l^2m^2][(kl)^2m^2]}$$
(A.4)
and these latter functions only occur in the sunset topology. Other integrals with an obvious definition such as $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu (p)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mu \nu \sigma }(p)`$ also arise but the relevant $`2`$-point function contributions can be related to (A.3) and (A.4), . For instance,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu (p)=\frac{2}{3}p_\mu \mathrm{\Delta }(p^2),p^\nu \mathrm{\Delta }_{\mu \nu }^\mu (p)=2p^\mu p^\nu \mathrm{\Delta }_{\mu \nu }(p^2)\frac{2}{3}p^2(p^2m^2)\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2).$$
(A.5)
It is elementary to observe that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)`$ is finite in two dimensions. Hence, for the mass gap we only need to evaluate it in two dimensions when $`p^2`$ $`=`$ $`m^2`$. To do this we follow the Feynman parameter approach of  which gives

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(3\omega )}{(4\pi )^\omega }_0^1𝑑x_0^1𝑑y\frac{[xy(1y)]^{1\omega /2}}{[y(1y)(x(1x)p^2(1x)m^2)xm^2]^{3\omega }}$$
(A.6)
in $`\omega `$-dimensions after carrying out the momentum integrations. Restricting to two dimensions the $`y`$-integration can be performed from an integral representation of the hypergeometric function, $`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;c;z)`$, giving

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)|_{\omega =2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^2}}{\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{[x(1x)p^2(1+3x)m^2]}}`$ (A.7)
$`\times {}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(1,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}};{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}};{\displaystyle \frac{[x(1x)p^2(1x)m^2]}{[x(1x)p^2(1+3x)m^2]}}).`$
Next we set $`p^2`$ $`=`$ $`m^2`$ in the two dimensional integral to obtain

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)|_{\omega =2,p^2=m^2}=\frac{1}{(2\pi m)^2}_0^1\frac{dx}{(1+x)^2}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(1,\frac{1}{2};\frac{3}{2};\frac{(1x)^2}{(1+x)^2})$$
(A.8)
which reduces to

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)|_{\omega =2,p^2=m^2}=\frac{1}{8\pi ^2m^2}_0^1𝑑x\frac{\mathrm{ln}x}{(1x^2)}.$$
(A.9)
The final integral can now be calculated exactly, , to produce

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)|_{\omega =2,p^2=m^2}=\frac{3\zeta (2)}{32\pi ^2m^2}.$$
(A.10)
The remaining integral which arises in the sunset topology occurs with two Lorentz contractions. First, in $`\omega `$-dimensions without setting the on-shell condition it is straightforward to show that, ,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu ^\mu (p^2)=I^2+\frac{1}{3}(p^2+3m^2)\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2).$$
(A.11)
Although the contraction of (A.4) with $`p_\mu p_\nu `$ is also divergent it cannot be written in a similar closed form. However, its divergent part is known to be $`p^2I^2/\omega `$, . Therefore,

$$F_\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)=\omega p^\mu p^\nu \mathrm{\Delta }_{\mu \nu }(p^2)p^2\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu ^\mu (p^2)$$
(A.12)
will be finite in two dimensions and can be evaluated exactly when the on-shell condition is set similar to the derivation of (A.10). With the same Feynman parametrization as (A.6) we have

$`F_\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\omega 1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(3\omega )(p^2)^2}{(4\pi )^\omega }}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle _0^1}dx{\displaystyle _0^1}dy{\displaystyle \frac{(1x)^2[xy(1y)]^{1\omega /2}}{[y(1y)(x(1x)p^2(1x)m^2)xm^2]^{3\omega }}}.`$
Hence, using the properties of the hypergeometric function again we find

$$F_\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)|_{\omega =2,p^2=m^2}=\frac{m^2}{8\pi ^2}_0^1𝑑x\frac{(1x)}{(1+x)}\mathrm{ln}x$$
(A.14)
leading to, ,

$$F_\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)|_{\omega =2,p^2=m^2}=\frac{m^2}{8\pi ^2}[1\zeta (2)].$$
(A.15)
Hence, all integrals in the full $`2`$-point function can be written in terms of $`I^2`$, (A.10) and (A.15).

We have checked that the values obtained here for the finite parts of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(p^2)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mu \nu }(p^2)`$ agree with the numerical values given in . For instance, repeating the calculation which leads to equation (4.5) of  we find that $`[0.737775`$ $``$ $`\pi ^2/96]`$ corresponds to $`[\zeta (2)/2`$ $``$ $`3/16]`$.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

BPS branes play an important role in string and M-theory. Certain supergravity solutions provide an explicit demonstration of various properties in dual gauge theories. However, in most cases such a solution exhibits a singularity at the origin of the brane, which imposes a severe restriction on the range of validity. It is expected that higher-order stringy terms or non-perturbative effects can resolve these singularities, while maintaining a fixed mass/charge ratio.

A typical $`p`$-brane or intersecting $`p`$-brane solution makes use of only the kinetic terms of the form fields, with zero contribution from the interacting terms. The interactions between form fields modify their Bianchi identities and/or equations of motion, e.g.

$$dF_{\left(n\right)}=F_{\left(p\right)}F_{\left(q\right)}\text{and/or}dF_{\left(n\right)}=F_{\left(s\right)}F_{\left(t\right)}.$$
(1)
In many cases, the inclusion of such a contribution can resolve brane singularities at the level of supergravity. An early example of this is the heterotic 5-brane constructed in , where the 5-brane source is the matter $`SU(2)`$ Yang-Mills instanton living in the four-dimensional Euclidean transverse space. This construction makes use of the Bianchi identity $`dF_{\left(3\right)}=\frac{1}{2}F_{\left(2\right)}^iF_{\left(2\right)}^i`$ of the heterotic string theory. The solution is expected to be valid at all orders of string perturbation. This construction can also be extended to the case where the transverse space is K3, since one can equate the $`SU(2)`$ Yang-Mills fields to the self-dual spin connection of the K3 . An alternative resolution makes use of the well-known fact that the K3 manifold can be constructed from the orbifold $`T^4/Z_2`$, with the sixteen fixed points each blown up using the Eguchi-Hanson metric . The Eguchi-Hanson metric has one normalisable self-dual 2-form, which can be set equal to a $`U(1)`$ 2-form field strength associated with one of the sixteen Cartan generators of the heterotic string. The resulting 5-brane on the K3 is then regular everywhere .

Recently, a resolution procedure which makes use of interacting terms in the Bianchi identity or equations of motion has been extensively discussed for the D3-brane solutions of type IIB theory  and branes in type IIA and M-theory . These non-singular examples may provide important supergravity dual solutions of supersymmetric field theories on the worldvolume of the branes, with the conformal symmetry typically broken by the resolution.

So far, the study of brane resolution has focused on a single brane or, more precisely, on coincidental branes of the same type. Branes can also intersect with each other . For standard intersections, the harmonic functions corresponding to each brane depend on the overall transverse space. For non-standard intersections, which are also called overlapping branes, the harmonic functions depend only on the relative transverse spaces .

In this letter, we find that, for the overlap of two heterotic 5-branes as well as that of two D4-branes, the two relative transverse spaces are four-dimensional Ricci-flat spaces, and hence can be replaced by the Eguchi-Hanson or Taub-NUT metrics. Since the Eguchi-Hanson and Taub-NUT metrics both support one normalisable self-dual (or anti-self-dual, depending on the orientation) 2-form, we can resolve these two overlapping branes by making use of the corresponding Bianchi identities. We obtain resolved overlapping heterotic 5-brane and D4-brane solutions in sections 2 and 3 respectively. In section 4, by performing the T-duality on the D4/D4 system, we obtain a resolved 5-brane overlap in type II theories. In addition, we obtain regular 5-brane, D5-brane and D4-brane wrapped on an $`S^1`$, which is fibred over the transverse Eguchi-Hanson or Taub-NUT spaces. We conclude our paper in section 5. In the appendix, we present certain properties of Eguchi-Hanson and Taub-NUT metrics that are used extensively throughout the letter.

It should be emphasised that, although results are presented here mostly using the Eguchi-Hanson metric, the construction also works when it is replaced with the Taub-NUT metric of an appropriate orientation.

## 2 Overlapping heterotic 5-branes

The Lagrangian for the bosonic sector of ten-dimensional heterotic supergravity is given by

$$_{\mathrm{het}}=R\text{1}\mathrm{l}\frac{1}{2}d\varphi d\varphi \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{e}^\varphi F_{\left(3\right)}F_{\left(3\right)}\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{e}^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi }F_{\left(2\right)}^iF_{\left(2\right)}^i,$$
(2)
where

$`F_{\left(3\right)}`$ $`=`$ $`dA_{\left(2\right)}+\frac{1}{2}A_{\left(1\right)}^idA_{\left(1\right)}^i+\frac{1}{6}f_{ijk}A_{\left(1\right)}^iA_{\left(1\right)}^jA_{\left(1\right)}^k,`$
$`F_{\left(2\right)}^i`$ $`=`$ $`dA_{\left(1\right)}^i+\frac{1}{2}f_{jk}^iA_{\left(1\right)}^jA_{\left(1\right)}^k.`$ (3)
Consider the solution describing a non-standard intersection of two heterotic 5-branes  for the case in which the Yang-Mills fields $`A_{\left(1\right)}^i`$ are set to zero:

$`ds_{10}^2`$ $`=`$ $`(H\stackrel{~}{H})^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{4}}}(dt^2+dw^2+Hdy_i^2+\stackrel{~}{H}d\stackrel{~}{y}_i^2),`$
$`\mathrm{e}^\varphi F_{\left(3\right)}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{H}dtdwd^4\stackrel{~}{y}dH^1+Hdtdwd^4yd\stackrel{~}{H}^1,`$
$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}(H\stackrel{~}{H}),`$ (4)
where

$$\text{    }\text{ }H=0,\stackrel{~}{\text{    }\text{ }}\stackrel{~}{H}=0,$$
(5)
and $`\text{    }\text{ }`$ ($`\stackrel{~}{\text{    }\text{ }}`$) is taken over the $`y_i`$ ($`\stackrel{~}{y}_i`$) directions. The solution can be represented diagrammatically as follows:

$`t`$ $`w`$ $`y_1`$ $`y_2`$ $`y_3`$ $`y_4`$ $`\stackrel{~}{y}_1`$ $`\stackrel{~}{y}_2`$ $`\stackrel{~}{y}_3`$ $`\stackrel{~}{y}_4`$     het 5 $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $``$ $``$ $``$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$  het 5 $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $``$ $``$ $``$ $``$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`H`$

Diagram 1. The overlapping of two 5-branes.

This solution can be resolved by introducing two sets of $`SU(2)`$ Yang-Mills instantons living in the Euclidean 4-spaces $`dy_i^2`$ and $`d\stackrel{~}{y}_i^2`$ . Here we demonstrate that it can also be resolved by a gravitational instanton together with matter $`U(1)`$ contributions. Since the solution (4) requires only that $`dy_i^2`$ and $`d\stackrel{~}{y}_i^2`$ are Ricci-flat, we can replace each of them with an Eguchi-Hanson metric, which we discuss in the appendix. Since the Eguchi-Hanson metric admits a self-dual (or anti-self-dual) normalisable harmonic 2-form, we can turn on the matter $`U(1)`$ fields. The solution now becomes

$`ds_{10}^2`$ $`=`$ $`(H\stackrel{~}{H})^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{4}}}(dt^2+dw^2+Hds_{EH}^2+\stackrel{~}{H}d\stackrel{~}{s}_{EH}^2),`$
$`\mathrm{e}^\varphi F_{\left(3\right)}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{H}dtdw\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{\left(4\right)}dH^1+Hdtdw\mathrm{\Omega }_{\left(4\right)}d\stackrel{~}{H}^1,`$
$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}(H\stackrel{~}{H}),F_{\left(2\right)}^1=mL_{\left(2\right)},F_{\left(2\right)}^2=\stackrel{~}{m}\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)},`$ (6)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\left(4\right)}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{\left(4\right)}`$ are the volume forms for the metric $`ds_{EH}^2`$ and $`d\stackrel{~}{s}_{EH}^2`$ respectively. Here we have turned on two $`U(1)`$ Cartan field strengths, labeled as $`F_{\left(2\right)}^1`$ and $`F_{\left(2\right)}^2`$, living on $`ds_{EH}^2`$ and $`d\stackrel{~}{s}_{EH}^2`$ respectively. Now the Bianchi identity $`dF_{\left(3\right)}=\frac{1}{2}F_{\left(2\right)}^1F_{\left(2\right)}^1+\frac{1}{2}F_{\left(2\right)}^2F_{\left(2\right)}^2`$ implies that

$$\text{    }\text{ }H=\frac{1}{4}\eta m^2L_{\left(2\right)}^2,\stackrel{~}{\text{    }\text{ }}\stackrel{~}{H}=\frac{1}{4}\stackrel{~}{\eta }\stackrel{~}{m}^2\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)}^2,$$
(7)
where $`\eta ^2=1=\stackrel{~}{\eta }^2`$ are the orientation parameters of the Eguchi-Hanson metrics (see the appendix). The equations of motion for $`F_{\left(3\right)}`$ and $`F_{\left(2\right)}^i`$ are straightforwardly satisfied. The dilaton equation and the Einstein equation imply that $`\eta =1=\stackrel{~}{\eta }`$. In other words, although the equations of motion and Bianchi identity for the form fields imply that the $`L_{\left(2\right)}^2`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)}^2`$ source terms can contribute both negatively or positively, depending on whether they are self-dual or anti-self-dual, they are restricted to a positive contribution due to the dilaton equation and Einstein equation. Thus, the Eguchi-Hanson instanton has to be such that its normalisable harmonic 2-form is self-dual. The generic solution for $`H`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ has a logarithmic divergent term, which vanishes for appropriate integration constants , giving

$$H=1+\frac{m^2}{2a^4r^2},\stackrel{~}{H}=1+\frac{\stackrel{~}{m}^2}{2\stackrel{~}{a}^4\stackrel{~}{r}^2},$$
(8)
where $`a`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ are the sizes of the two Eguchi-Hanson instantons. Since the coordinates $`r`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{r}`$ run from $`a`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ to infinity respectively, it follows that the functions $`H`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ are regular everywhere for non-vanishing $`a`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$.

We have seen that the orientation of the Eguchi-Hanson metric has a significant consequence in the resolution of the 5-branes. The positive orientation with $`\eta =1`$ leads to resolution whilst the negative orientation does not solve all of the equations of motion. We could have replaced $`dy_i^2`$ and $`d\stackrel{~}{y}_i^2`$ by a Taub-NUT metric, in which case we would require the negative orientation with $`\eta =1`$ for resolution, since the normalisable harmonic 2-form has to be self-dual. The corresponding harmonic functions for the regular solution become

$$H=1+\frac{m^2}{4a(r+a)},\stackrel{~}{H}=1+\frac{\stackrel{~}{m}^2}{4\stackrel{~}{a}(\stackrel{~}{r}+\stackrel{~}{a})}.$$
(9)
For vanishing $`m`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{m}`$, the solution reduces to the resolution of the heterotic 5-brane obtained in .

One can add a string along the common worldvolume of the above configuration. The corresponding “harmonic” function $`K`$ satisfies the equation

$$\stackrel{~}{H}\text{    }\text{ }K+H\stackrel{~}{\text{    }\text{ }}K=0,$$
(10)
which holds in our case as well. The general solution of $`K`$ depends on $`H`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$. A natural special solution is $`K=h\stackrel{~}{h}`$, where $`h`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ are the harmonic functions of the two relative four-dimensional transverse spaces respectively. If the transverse spaces are Euclidean, for the limit in which the gravitational instanton sizes $`a`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ vanish, then the three-component solution has the near-horizon structure AdS$`{}_{3}{}^{}\times S^3\times S^3\times E^1`$ . The non-vanishing entropy of this configuration disappears from the metric contribution once the gravitational instanton is present. This suggests a phase transition associated with the vanishing gravitational instanton; this is analogous to the one associated with the Yang-Mills instantons for overlapping heterotic 5-branes, discussed in . Note that it is also possible to add a pp-wave component .

The present resolution of overlapping 5-branes incorporates Yang-Mills fields, which are available only for heterotic string theory. On the other hand, unresolved overlapping 5-branes exist also in type II theories. While the resolution for the NS-NS and R-R overlapping 5-branes of type II theories is also possible, there are subtleties involved which will be discussed in section 4.

## 3 Overlapping D4/D4 system

The D4-brane is a solution of type IIA supergravity, whose bosonic Lagrangian is given by

$`_{\mathrm{IIA}}`$ $`=`$ $`R\text{1}\mathrm{l}\frac{1}{2}d\varphi d\varphi \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{e}^\varphi F_{\left(3\right)}F_{\left(3\right)}\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{e}^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi }F_{\left(4\right)}F_{\left(4\right)}`$ (11)
$`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{e}^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{3}{2}}\varphi }F_{\left(2\right)}F_{\left(2\right)}\frac{1}{2}dA_{\left(3\right)}dA_{\left(3\right)}A_{\left(2\right)},`$
where

$$F_{\left(4\right)}=dA_{\left(3\right)}dA_{\left(2\right)}A_{\left(1\right)},F_{\left(3\right)}=dA_{\left(2\right)},F_{\left(2\right)}=dA_{\left(1\right)}.$$
(12)
The solution for a non-standard intersection of two D4-branes is given by

$`ds_{10}^2`$ $`=`$ $`(H\stackrel{~}{H})^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{3}{8}}}(dt^2+Hdy_i^2+\stackrel{~}{H}d\stackrel{~}{y}_i^2+H\stackrel{~}{H}dz^2),`$
$`\mathrm{e}^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi }F_{\left(4\right)}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{H}dtd^4\stackrel{~}{y}dH^1+Hdtd^4yd\stackrel{~}{H}^1,`$
$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{log}(H\stackrel{~}{H}),`$ (13)
where

$$\text{    }\text{ }H=0,\stackrel{~}{\text{    }\text{ }}\stackrel{~}{H}=0,$$
(14)
and $`\text{    }\text{ }`$ ($`\stackrel{~}{\text{    }\text{ }}`$) is taken over the $`y_i`$ ($`\stackrel{~}{y}_i`$) directions. This solution can be illustrated by the following diagram:

$`t`$ $`y_1`$ $`y_2`$ $`y_3`$ $`y_4`$ $`\stackrel{~}{y}_1`$ $`\stackrel{~}{y}_2`$ $`\stackrel{~}{y}_3`$ $`\stackrel{~}{y}_4`$ $`z`$     D4 $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $``$ $``$ $``$ $``$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{H}_4`$  D4 $`\times `$ $``$ $``$ $``$ $``$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $`\times `$ $``$ $`H_4`$

Diagram 2. The overlap of two D4-branes.

As with the heterotic 5-brane overlap, we replace the Euclidean 4-spaces $`dy_i^2`$ and $`d\stackrel{~}{y}_i^2`$ by Eguchi-Hanson metrics $`ds_{EH}^2`$ and $`d\stackrel{~}{s}_{EH}^2`$ respectively. By making use of the Bianchi identity, $`dF_{\left(4\right)}=F_{\left(3\right)}F_{\left(2\right)}`$, we can consider the following ansatz

$`ds_{10}^2`$ $`=`$ $`(H\stackrel{~}{H})^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{3}{8}}}(dt^2+Hds_{EH}^2+\stackrel{~}{H}d\stackrel{~}{s}_{EH}^2+H\stackrel{~}{H}dz^2),`$
$`\mathrm{e}^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi }F_{\left(4\right)}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{H}dt\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{\left(4\right)}dH^1+Hdt\mathrm{\Omega }_{\left(4\right)}d\stackrel{~}{H}^1,`$ (15)
$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{log}(H\stackrel{~}{H}),F_{\left(3\right)}=(mL_{\left(2\right)}\stackrel{~}{m}\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)})dz,F_{\left(2\right)}=mL_{\left(2\right)}+\stackrel{~}{m}\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)}.`$
$`L_{\left(2\right)}`$ is a normalisable self-dual harmonic 2-form in $`ds_{EH}^2`$, which hence has positive orientation $`\eta =1`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)}`$ is a normalisable anti-self-dual harmonic 2-form in $`d\stackrel{~}{s}_{EH}^2`$, which hence has negative orientation $`\eta =1`$. Since we have

$$F_{\left(4\right)}=(\stackrel{~}{}_4d\stackrel{~}{H}+_4dH)dz,$$
(16)
where $`\stackrel{~}{}_4`$ and $`_4`$ are the Hodge duals in $`d\stackrel{~}{s}_{EH}^2`$ and $`ds_{EH}^2`$ respectively, the Bianchi identity for $`F_{\left(4\right)}`$ implies that

$$\text{    }\text{ }H=\frac{1}{2}m^2L_{\left(2\right)}^2,\stackrel{~}{\text{    }\text{ }}\stackrel{~}{H}=\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{m}^2\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)}^2.$$
(17)
It should be mentioned that the different choice of sign in $`F_{\left(3\right)}`$ and $`F_{\left(2\right)}`$ ensures that the cross term in $`F_{\left(3\right)}F_{\left(2\right)}`$ cancels out. Due to the minus sign of $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)}`$ in $`F_{\left(3\right)}`$, it contributes to $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ in the same way that $`L_{\left(2\right)}`$ contributes to $`H`$, even though $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)}`$ is anti-self-dual and $`L_{\left(2\right)}`$ is self-dual.

To check the rest of the equations of motion, it is useful to present the following:

$`\mathrm{e}^\varphi F_{\left(3\right)}`$ $`=`$ $`H^1\stackrel{~}{H}dt\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{\left(4\right)}L_{\left(2\right)}+H\stackrel{~}{H}^1dt\mathrm{\Omega }_{\left(4\right)}\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)},`$
$`\mathrm{e}^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{3}{2}}\varphi }F_{\left(2\right)}`$ $`=`$ $`H^1\stackrel{~}{H}dt\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{\left(4\right)}dzL_{\left(2\right)}H\stackrel{~}{H}^1dt\mathrm{\Omega }_{\left(4\right)}dz\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)},`$
$`d\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{4}H^1\stackrel{~}{H}dt\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{\left(4\right)}_4dHdz+\frac{1}{4}H\stackrel{~}{H}^1dt\mathrm{\Omega }_{\left(4\right)}\stackrel{~}{}_4d\stackrel{~}{H}dz.`$ (18)
We verify that all of the equations of motion for the form fields and the dilaton are satisfied. We did not verify the Einstein equation due to its complexity for these cases, although past experience leads us to believe that it is satisfied. The regular solution for (17) is given by

$$H=1+\frac{m^2}{a^4r^2},\stackrel{~}{H}=1+\frac{\stackrel{~}{m}^2}{\stackrel{~}{a}^4\stackrel{~}{r}^2}.$$
(19)
Each of the Eguchi-Hanson metrics can also be replaced by a Taub-NUT metric with proper orientation such that it has the required normalisable self-dual or anti-self-dual harmonic 2-forms. The resulting regular solutions for $`H`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ are given by

$$H=1+\frac{m^2}{2a(r+a)},\stackrel{~}{H}=1+\frac{\stackrel{~}{m}^2}{2\stackrel{~}{a}(\stackrel{~}{r}+\stackrel{~}{a})}.$$
(20)
If $`m`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{m}`$ vanishes, then the solution becomes that of a single resolved D4-brane with the transverse space $`ds_5^2=ds_4^2+dz^2`$, where $`ds_4^2`$ is a Ricci-flat manifold that admits normalisable self-dual or anti-self-dual harmonic 2-forms $`L_{\left(2\right)}`$. In this case, we have $`F_{\left(2\right)}=mL_{\left(2\right)}`$ and $`F_{\left(3\right)}=m_5L_{\left(2\right)}`$. Thus, we see that $`F_{\left(3\right)}F_{\left(2\right)}`$ always contributes positively to the Bianchi identity for the $`F_{\left(4\right)}`$. Both orientations of Eguchi-Hanson instanton or Taub-NUT can be used to resolve the D4-brane. This is very different from the case of the heterotic 5-brane, in which only one orientation can be used to resolve the brane. In order to cancel out the cross term in $`F_{\left(3\right)}F_{\left(2\right)}`$, we find that $`ds_4^2`$ and $`d\stackrel{~}{s}_4^2`$ must have opposite orientations such that they admit normalisable self-dual and anti-self-dual harmonic 2-forms respectively.

## 4 Overlapping type II 5-branes

Overlaps of type II NS-NS or R-R 5-branes share the same metric structure as that of overlapping heterotic 5-branes, illustrated in Diagram 1. However, the resolution of the heterotic 5-brane is rather unique, since it makes use of multiple matter Yang-Mills fields which are absent in the type II theories. For this reason, the resolution of the type II 5-brane was previously unknown. A regular solution of the 5-brane wrapped around $`S^2`$ was obtained in  by lifting the four-dimensional $`SU(2)`$ gauged black hole . This solution can apply for both type II and heterotic 5-branes. In this section, we obtain a resolved type II 5-brane overlap by performing T-duality on the D4/D4 system of the previous section. By turning off one component, we obtain a resolved 5-brane wrapped on $`S^1`$.

The resolved D4/D4 solution (18) has a $`U(1)`$ isometry in the $`z`$ direction. By performing T-duality on this direction, we obtain the overlap of two (R-R) D5-branes of type IIB supergravity:

$`ds_{10}^2`$ $`=`$ $`(H\stackrel{~}{H})^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{4}}}(dt^2+(dz+𝒜_{\left(1\right)})^2+Hds_{EH}^2+\stackrel{~}{H}d\stackrel{~}{s}_{EH}^2),`$
$`F_{\left(3\right)}^{\mathrm{RR}}`$ $`=`$ $`_4dH+\stackrel{~}{}_4d\stackrel{~}{H}(mL_{\left(2\right)}+\stackrel{~}{m}\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)})(dz+𝒜_{\left(1\right)}),`$
$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}(H\stackrel{~}{H}),d𝒜_{\left(1\right)}=mL_{\left(2\right)}\stackrel{~}{m}\stackrel{~}{L}_{\left(2\right)}.`$ (21)
The resolved NS-NS overlapping 5-brane can be easily obtained by performing the S-duality of the type IIB theory, with the $`F_{\left(3\right)}^{\mathrm{RR}}`$ replaced by $`F_{\left(3\right)}^{\mathrm{NS}}`$ and the sign of the dilaton changed. Since the solution involves only the metric, dilaton and the 3-form field strength, it is also valid for resolving the 5-branes in type IIA or heterotic strings (without a Yang-Mills source). It is interesting to note that there is a twist along the direction $`z`$. The topology of a spatial slice of the solution can be viewed as a $`U(1)`$ fibration of the product space of two Eguchi-Hanson instantons with opposite orientations. The solution describes that a regular effective string, as common worldvolume of two 5-branes, wraps on the fibre circle $`z`$. Note that unlike the previous examples this resolution makes use of only the interaction between the gravity and the 3-form field strength, instead of the interactions associated with the Bianchi identities or the equations of motion of the form fields.

If $`m`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{m}`$ vanishes, then the solution becomes a resolved single 5-brane. Without the loss of generality, we set $`\stackrel{~}{m}=0`$. The metric solution becomes

$`ds_{10}^2`$ $`=`$ $`H^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{4}}}(dt^2+dx_1^2+\mathrm{}+dx_4^2+(dz+𝒜_{\left(1\right)})^2)+H^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{3}{4}}}ds_{EH}^2,`$ (22)
with $`d𝒜_{\left(1\right)}=mL_{\left(2\right)}`$. The expressions for the 3-form field strength and the dilaton can be easily read off from (21). The solution describes 5-branes wrapped around $`S^1`$, which is fibred over the transverse space $`ds_{EH}^2`$. It is regular everywhere, providing a well-behaved supergravity dual of a certain $`D=5`$ super Yang-Mills theory.

It is important to note that the resolved NS-NS 5-brane as well as the resolved overlap of two NS-NS 5-branes are invariant under a T-duality transformation along the $`z`$ direction. This is rather different from the usual situation where T-duality would untwist the fibration . (Analogous phenomenum was observed in the NS-NS dyonic string .) Invariance under T-duality is a property of NS-NS 5-branes. Since T-duality is a symmetry at all orders of perturbative string theory, we would expect that the invariance should hold for the resolved solution, and that is indeed the case.

If instead the resolved 5-brane (22) carries the type IIB R-R $`F_{\left(3\right)}^{\mathrm{RR}}`$ charge, we can perform T-duality on $`x_4`$ and obtain the resolved D4-brane of type IIA

$`ds_{10}^2`$ $`=`$ $`H^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{3}{8}}}(dt^2+dx_1^2+dx_2^2+dx_3^2+(dz+𝒜_{\left(1\right)})^2)+H^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{5}{8}}}(ds_{EH}^2+d\stackrel{~}{z}^2),`$ (23)
$`F_{\left(4\right)}`$ $`=`$ $`(_4dHmL_{\left(2\right)}(dz+𝒜_{\left(1\right)}))d\stackrel{~}{z},\varphi =\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{log}(H),d𝒜_{\left(1\right)}=mL_{\left(2\right)}.`$
Since this solution describes D4-brane wrapped on $`S^1`$, which is fibred over the tranverse space $`ds_{EH}^2+d\stackrel{~}{z}^2`$, it has an effective four-dimensional world-volume. Thus we find a new well-behaved supergravity solution dual to a certain $`𝒩=2`$, $`D=4`$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory.

## 5 Conclusions

The resolution of singularities in supergravity BPS brane solutions provides a convenient way of extending the validity of these solutions. In this letter, we have considered the resolutions of two overlapping heterotic 5-branes, type II 5-branes or D4-branes. The relative transverse spaces in these overlapping solutions are all four-dimensional and hence can be replaced by either Eguchi-Hanson or Taub-NUT spaces, both of which admit normalisable self-dual or anti-self-dual harmonic 2-forms, depending on the orientation. Terms corresponding to interactions between form fields modify Bianchi identities and equations of motion. It follows that these normalisable harmonic 2-forms provide regular sources for the branes.

When each of the two relative transverse Euclidean 4-spaces is replaced by the Eguchi-Hanson or the Taub-NUT instanton, half of the supersymmetry is broken. Introducing a brane configuration will not break the supersymmetry any further. Thus our resolved overlapping brane solutions preserve $`\frac{1}{4}`$ of the supersymmetry.

We have also obtained resolved 5-branes and D4-branes wrapped on $`S^1`$, which is fibred over the transverse Eguchi-Hanson or Taub-NUT spaces. This provides a regular supergravity dual to a certain $`D=5`$ and $`D=4`$ super Yang-Mills theory.

The resolved solution are regular everywhere in the spacetime, with a stable dilaton and hence a stable string coupling constant. Furthermore, unlike a typical brane solution that requires a brane source term that is beyond supergravity, the resolved ones are complete purely within supergravity. Not all the BPS branes can be resolved at the level of supergravity. It is interesting to find those that can be resolved and study the special role they play in string and M-theory.

## Appendix

## Appendix A Normalisable harmonic forms in $`D=4`$

### A.1 Eguchi-Hanson Instanton

Let us consider the Eguchi-Hanson solution

$`ds_4^2`$ $`=`$ $`W^1dr^2+\frac{1}{4}r^2W(d\psi +\eta \mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi )^2+\frac{1}{4}r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2),`$
$`W`$ $`=`$ $`1{\displaystyle \frac{a^4}{r^4}},`$ (24)
The radial coordinate $`r`$ lies in the range $`ar\mathrm{}`$, and $`\psi `$ has period $`2\pi `$  to ensure regularity at $`r=a`$. Thus, the metric is asymptotically locally Euclidean (ALE), with the periodicity condition on $`\psi `$ implying that constant $`r`$ surfaces are $`RP^3=S^3/Z_2`$ . The coordinate $`\psi `$ can have two orientations of the fibration, corresponding to $`\eta =\pm 1`$. The metric is Kähler with the vielbein basis

$$e^0=W^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}dr,e^1=\frac{1}{2}rd\theta ,e^2=\frac{1}{2}r\mathrm{sin}\theta d\varphi ,e^3=\frac{1}{2}rW^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}(d\psi +\eta \mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi ),$$
(25)
and with a Kähler form given by

$$J=e^0e^3\eta e^1e^2.$$
(26)
It is anti-self-dual for $`\eta =1`$ and self-dual for $`\eta =1`$. The metric is also admits a harmonic 2-form, given by

$$L_{\left(2\right)}=\frac{2}{r^4}(e^0e^3+\eta e^1e^2),$$
(27)
which is self-dual for $`\eta =1`$ and anti-self-dual for $`\eta =1`$. The square of $`L_{\left(2\right)}`$ is given by $`L_{\left(2\right)}^2=16/r^8`$, and hence this 2-form is normalisable. Note that we have

$$L_{\left(2\right)}L_{\left(2\right)}=\frac{1}{2}\eta L_{\left(2\right)}^2\mathrm{\Omega }_{\left(4\right)},$$
(28)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\left(4\right)}`$ is the volume form of the metric (24). It follows that the sign of $`\eta `$ is not merely a choice of convention but rather it has a non-trivial physical consequence.

### A.2 Taub-NUT instanton

The metric of the Taub-NUT instanton is given by

$$ds_4^2=\left(\frac{r+a}{ra}\right)dr^2+4a^2\left(\frac{ra}{r+a}\right)(d\psi +\eta \mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi )^2+(r^2a^2)(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2),$$
(29)
where the radial coordinate runs from $`r=a`$ to $`r=\mathrm{}`$, and $`\psi `$ has period $`4\pi `$ to guarantee that the solution is regular at $`r=a`$. Note that $`\eta =\pm 1`$ are the two orientation choices. The Taub-NUT manifold has the topology $`\text{I}\mathrm{R}^4`$ but, even though the metric at large $`r`$ is asymptotically flat, it approaches the cylinder $`\text{I}\mathrm{R}^3\times S^1`$ rather than Euclidean space. The orthonormal frame is given by

$`e^0=\left({\displaystyle \frac{ra}{r+a}}\right)^{1/2}dr,e^1=(r^2a^2)^{1/2}d\theta ,e^2=(r^2a^2)^{1/2}\mathrm{sin}\theta d\varphi ,`$
$`e^3=2a\left({\displaystyle \frac{ra}{r+a}}\right)^{1/2}(d\psi +\eta \mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi ).`$ (30)
There is one normalisable harmonic 2-form, given by

$$L_{\left(2\right)}=\frac{1}{(r+a)^2}(e^0e^3\eta e^1e^2),$$
(31)
which is self-dual for $`\eta =1`$ and anti-self-dual for $`\eta =+1`$. It is normalisable since

$$(L_{\left(2\right)})^2=\frac{4}{(r+a)^4}.$$
(32)
## Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Xavier Bekaert, Nicolas Boulanger, Mirjam Cvetič and Chris Pope for useful conversations.