text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In the last 3 years increasing interest has been manifest on higher-dimensional space-times with large extra dimensions. The ability of the proposed scenarios to answer the question: why the extra dimension is not observable?, rests on the brane construct; the standard model (SM) particles are confined to a three-brane embedded in the higher-dimensional ”bulk” space-time, meanwhile gravity can propagate in the bulk. With the help of the brane scenarios some disturbing problems of high-energy physics, notably the mass hierarchy problem, can be succesfully treated. Some difficulties with fine tunning and recovering of standard Friedmann cosmology on the brane seem to be the most undesirable features of these scenarios, although some alternatives have been investigated.

The role of scalar fields in brane models has been extensivelly discussed in the bibliography. Usually scalars play the role of the modulus for the extra dimension, i. e., they are bulk fields. In recent papers, however, the role of scalars in modeling thick (smooth) brane structures has been pointed out. In this case, although we have gravity coupled to scalars, these fields do not play the role of bulk fields but they provide the ”material” from which the thick branes are made of.

An interesting feature of thick brane models based on gravity coupled to scalars is that one can obtain these space-time structures (branes) naturaly, i. e., without introducing them by hand in the action of the theory (by means, for instance, of delta functions).

The aim of the present work is to generalise former models based on gravity coupled to scalars by considering a non-Riemannian modification of 5-dimensional KK-theory. In our proposal the Riemannian structure of the 5-dimensional manifold is replaced by a Weyl-integrable one. Weyl-integrable geometry is a generalisation of Riemann geometry to allow for possible variations in the lenght of vectors during parallel transport. Riemann geometry is recovered when the scalar(Weyl)field is ”frozen”. One of the most exciting features of Weylian structures is that these mimic classically quantum behavior. These are, precisely, the main reasons why we use these structures in the present paper.

In the present set-up the 4-dimensional scalar matter degrees of freedom and the massless graviton arise from pure geometry in five dimensions due to breaking of invariance of the theory under Weyl rescalings. Due to the simplicity of the model, we don’t expect to recover the rich structure of matter of the standard model, instead we expect to show how, in a simple setup, several space-time structures with thick branes occur, in which the graviton and scalar matter degrees of freedom can be accommodated. The model we want to present is not intended to be a fundamental theory. Our action is purely 5d and, we expect, it could be the result of compactification of a more fundamental theory to five dimensions.

The picture that emerges from the description we are about to present is exciting. If one imposes 4-dimensional Poincar$`\stackrel{`}{e}`$ invariance, the structure of the 5-dimensional Weyl-integrable manifold $`M_5^W`$, that is consistent with the equations of our formalism, is non-trivial. The four-dimensional graviton and the scalar matter degrees of freedom are confined to several smooth thick branes with some separation in the extra dimension, depending on the region in the parameter space of the theory. The solution found respects, also, orbifold symmetry ($`yy`$).

In this paper we draw our attention to a particular case in which two thick branes are obtained; one with negative tension and the other with a positive one. In this case the graviton is concentrated near the origin in the extra coordinate, meanwhile the scalar matter is located in the second brane some distance away. The small overlap of the two ”diffuse” thick branes accounts for a resolution of the mass hierarchy problem a la Randall-Sundrum (the precise form in which this mechanism works is not explored in detail in this paper). One of the most remarkable results is that, although we make no initial assumptions on the topology of the extra dimension, all the fields in the theory (including the massive KK-excitations) are confined to live within a subspace shaped by a potential well with infinite (rigid) walls. Therefore, $`M_5^W`$ is effectively compact. Besides, the spectrum of massive KK-modes is discrete (quantized). There exists a gap between the massless KK-mode (properly the graviton) and the lowest KK-excitation. In consequence, 4-dimensional gravity can be recovered by properly choosing one of the two free parameters of the theory. A preliminary study, not including perturbations of the scalar field, shows that the solution found is free of tachyonic modes so it is stable against small perturbations of the background metric.

In what follows Riemannian magnitudes and operators, i. e., those which are defined in respect to the Christoffel symbols of the metric $`\{_{AB}^C\}=\frac{1}{2}g^{CN}(g_{AN,B}+\mathrm{})`$, are denoted with a hat. Then, for instance: $`\widehat{R}_{AB}=\{_{AB}^N\}_{,N}\{_{NA}^N\}_{,B}+\mathrm{}`$, $`\widehat{}_AV_B=V_{B,A}\{_{AB}^N\}V_N`$, etc. Upper case latin indexes $`A,B,\mathrm{}=0,1,2,3,5`$, meanwhile, lower case ones $`a,b,\mathrm{}=0,1,2,3`$. We use the following signature of the metric $`g_{AB}=(,+,+,+,+)`$.

## 2 The Model

We will study a non-Riemannian modification (generalization) of Kaluza-Klein theory that is based on the following pure five-dimensional action,

$$S_5^W=_{M_5^W}\frac{d^5x\sqrt{|g|}}{16\pi G_5}e^{\frac{3}{2}\omega }\{R+3\xi (\omega )^2+6U(\omega )\},$$
(1)
where $`M_5^W`$ is a 5-dimensional Weyl-integrable manifold specified by the pair $`(g_{AB},\omega )`$, $`g_{AB}`$ being a 5-dimensional metric and $`\omega `$\- a Weyl (scalar) function. The Weylian Ricci tensor $`R_{AB}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB,N}^N\mathrm{\Gamma }_{NA,B}^N+\mathrm{}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB}^C=\{_{AB}^C\}\frac{1}{2}(\omega _{,A}\delta _B^C+\omega _{,B}\delta _A^Cg_{AB}\omega ^{,C})`$ are the affine connections of $`M_5^W`$. $`\xi `$ is a coupling parameter and $`U(\omega )`$ is a ”self-interaction” potential for $`\omega `$. In general, the self-interaction potential breaks invariance of the action (1) under Weyl rescalings,

$`g_{AB}\mathrm{\Omega }^2g_{AB},\omega \omega +\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Omega }^2,`$
$`\xi \xi /(1+_\omega \mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^2,`$ (2)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2`$ is a smooth function on $`M_5^W`$. $`U(\omega )=\lambda e^\omega `$, where $`\lambda `$ is a constant parameter, is the only functional form in which this potential does not break scale invariance of (1). Breaking of Weyl invariance is the mechanism through which the Weyl scalar is transformed into physically observable matter degrees of freedom from which the smooth branes we obtain are made out. I. e., $`\omega `$ is not a bulk field playing the role of the modulus for the extra dimension.

We will look for solutions to the theory (1) that respect 4-dimensional Poincar$`\stackrel{`}{e}`$ invariance, and we propose the following (warped) ansatz for the line-element:

$$ds_5^2=e^{2A(y)}\eta _{nm}dx^ndx^m+dy^2,$$
(3)
where $`e^{2A}`$ is the ”warp” factor, $`\eta _{ab}`$ is the (flat) Minkowski metric, and $`y`$ stands for the extra coordinate. We will make no assumptions on the topology of the extra dimension so, in principle, $`\mathrm{}<y<+\mathrm{}`$. In this sense our set-up is much like to the one by Wesson. Recall that (1) is of pure geometrical nature since, the scalar function $`\omega `$ enters in the definition of the manifold affine connections.

We expect that, in this particular case, thick brane structures should arise since similar 5-d actions with scalar fields (but on Riemannian manifolds) yielding thick brane 5-d spacetimes have been studied, for instance, in Ref.. The nobel feature here is that, spacetime structures with several (one, two, four, etc.) thick smooth branes arise, depending on the region one chooses in parameter space of the solution.

## 3 The Solution

In the search for a 4-dimensional Poincare-invariant solution to the theory given by equations (1) and (3), we will use the conformal technique, which beneficts have been pointed out, for instance, in Ref. \[faraoni\]. Under the conformal transformation $`\widehat{g}_{AB}=e^\omega g_{AB}`$, the Weylian affine connections $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{AB}^C\widehat{\{_{AB}^C\}}`$ and, in general, $`M_5^WM_5^R`$\- a five-dimensional manifold of Riemannian structure. Besides,

$$S_5^WS_5^R=_{M_5^R}\frac{d^5x\sqrt{|\widehat{g}|}}{16\pi G_5}\{\widehat{R}+3\xi (\widehat{}\omega )^2+6\widehat{U}(\omega )\},$$
(4)
where $`\widehat{U}(\omega )=e^\omega U(\omega )`$ and, as pointed out in Sect. 1, hatted magnitudes and operators refer to Riemann structures. The action (4) has been studied recently in thick brane contexts and, in general, a similar action but with domain walls explicitely introduced, has been investigated fairly extensively in Ref.. In this case, however, the scalar field plays the role of a modulus field for the extra dimension (it is a bulk field). We recall that, in the case presented here, the scalar field is not a modulus field. What we want is, precisely, to obtain smooth brane structures without introducing them explicitely in the action.

Under $`g_{AB}e^\omega \widehat{g}_{AB}`$, the line-element (3) is mapped into,

$$ds_5^2=e^{2\sigma (y)}\eta _{nm}dx^ndx^m+e^{\omega (y)}dy^2,$$
(5)
where, $`2\sigma =2A+\omega `$. If one introduces new variables $`X\omega ^{}`$ and $`Y2A^{}`$ (the comma denotes y-derivative), then the field equations that are derivable from (4), taking into account the ansatz (5), reduce to the following pair of coupled equations:

$`X^{}+2YX{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}X^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{U}}{d\omega }}e^\omega ,`$
$`Y^{}+2Y^2{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}XY=({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{U}}{d\omega }}+4\widehat{U})e^\omega .`$ (6)
This set of equations can be easily solved if one uses the symmetry of the left-hand side (LHS) of the above equations under the restriction $`X=kY`$, where $`k`$ is some constant parameter. This restriction is, in fact, a constrain on the kind of potentials for which our solutions hold:

$$\widehat{U}=\lambda e^{\frac{4k\xi }{1k}\omega }.$$
(7)
After the restriction $`X=kY`$ and taking into account (7), both equations in (3) reduce to a single differential equation,

$$Y^{}+\frac{43k}{2}Y^2=\frac{4\lambda }{1k}e^{(\frac{4k\xi }{1k}1)\omega }.$$
(8)
There is a particular case in which this equation is easily solvable. If we choose $`\xi =\frac{1k}{4k}`$, then the self-interaction potential in the action (1) $`U=\lambda `$, obviusly breaks invariance under Weyl rescalings (including conformal symmetry). This choice is further responsible for transformation of the geometrical Weyl scalar $`\omega `$ into an observable scalar field. In what follows we will study this symmetry breaking potential. As a consequence the field equation (8) simplifies to,

$$Y^{}+\frac{43k}{2}Y^2=\frac{4\lambda }{1k}.$$
(9)
Subsequent integration of (9) yields,

$$Y=ab\mathrm{tanh}(ay),$$
(10)
where,

$$a=\sqrt{\frac{43k}{1k}2\lambda },b=\frac{2}{43k}.$$
(11)
In consequence, the solution to our set-up is given by the following expresssions:

$$e^{2A(y)}=[\mathrm{cosh}(ay)]^b,$$
(12)
$$\omega =kb\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{cosh}(ay).$$
(13)
As seen from (12) and (13), the solution found respects, besides, $`Z_2`$ symmetry ($`yy`$). This means that, in the $`y`$-direction, one half of the manifold (say the lower half) is a mirror reflection of the other one and, consequently, only this part of the manifold is physically relevant.

We should stress that we have, in fact, a class of solutions depending on the region in parameter space:

(A) $`\lambda >0`$, $`k>4/3`$

In this case, $`a\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{}<y<+\mathrm{}`$, i. e., we have a non-compact manifold in the extra-dimension (we recall that, due to orbifold symmetry of the solution, only one half of the extra dimension, say $`0y<+\mathrm{}`$, is physically relevant). On the other hand $`b<0`$ is negative and the warp factor (in fact the wave-function of the graviton up to a positive power of $`b`$ as it will be shown later on), is concentrated near of the origin $`y=0`$ as seen in Fig. 1. Since the 5d stress-energy tensor is given by,

$$T_{AB}=\frac{1}{8\pi G_5}(R_{AB}\frac{1}{2}g_{AB}R),$$
(14)
then, its 4d and pure 5d parts are given through the following expressions,

$$T_{ab}=\frac{3\lambda }{8\pi G_5}[\mathrm{cosh}(ay)]^b\{1+\frac{k}{43k}\mathrm{tanh}^2(ay)\}\eta _{ab},$$
(15)
and,

$$T_{55}=\frac{3\lambda }{8\pi G_5}\{1\frac{k}{43k}\mathrm{tanh}^2(ay)\},$$
(16)
respectively. The energy density of the scalar matter (in fact the null-null component of $`T_{ab}`$ in Eq. (15)) looks like,

$$\mu (y)=3\lambda [\mathrm{cosh}(ay)]^b\{1+\frac{k}{43k}\mathrm{tanh}^2(ay)\}.$$
(17)
For $`4/3<k<2`$ this energy-density function shows a minimum at $`y=0`$ where $`\mu `$ is negative and a maximum at some $`y0`$ where $`\mu `$ is positive. It asymptotes zero for $`y\pm \mathrm{}`$ (see Fig. 2). The fact that we have both negative and positive values for $`\mu `$ can be compared with the standard (Randall-Sundrum) thin brane case, where one of the branes has a positive brane tension meanwhile the second brane has a negative one. The 5d curvature scalar,

$$R_5=2\lambda \{5+\frac{3k}{43k}\mathrm{tanh}^2(ay)\},$$
(18)
is always bounded as seen from Fig. 3, meaning that the five-dimensional manifold is non-singular.

(B) $`\lambda >0`$, $`1<k<4/3`$

In this case, $`a\mathrm{}`$, $`b>0`$. Consequently, in the above equations we should replace $`ai\overline{a}`$, $`\mathrm{cosh}(ay)\mathrm{cos}(\overline{a}y)`$ and $`\mathrm{tanh}(ay)i\mathrm{tan}(\overline{a}y)`$, where $`\overline{a}=\sqrt{\frac{43k}{k1}2\lambda }`$, i. e., we have a manifold that is periodic in the $`y`$-direction so $`\pi \overline{a}y\pi `$ and we can treat the compact case. Besides, since our solution respects $`Z_2`$ symmetry, we can take the physically relevant part of the manifold to be $`0y\pi /\overline{a}`$. The shape of the warp factor is shown in Fig. 4.

The 4d and pure 5d parts of the 5d stress-energy tensor (14) are given through the following expressions,

$$T_{ab}=\frac{3\lambda }{8\pi G_5}[\mathrm{cos}(\overline{a}y)]^b\{1\frac{k}{43k}\mathrm{tan}^2(\overline{a}y)\}\eta _{ab},$$
(19)
and,

$$T_{55}=\frac{3\lambda }{8\pi G_5}\{1+\frac{k}{43k}\mathrm{tan}^2(\overline{a}y)\},$$
(20)
respectively. The energy density of the scalar matter is therefore,

$$\mu (y)=3\lambda [\mathrm{cos}(\overline{a}y)]^b\{1\frac{k}{43k}\mathrm{tan}^2(\overline{a}y)\}.$$
(21)
The shape of the scalar energy density is shown in Fig. 5. It shows a series of smooth thick branes with both positive and negative energy densities interpolated between the boundaries of the manifold. The ones at $`y=0`$ and $`y=\pi /\overline{a}`$ are of negative energy density, meanwhile, there are two smooth branes with positive energy density located in between them. The 5d curvature scalar,

$$R_5=2\lambda \{5\frac{3k}{43k}\mathrm{tan}^2(\overline{a}y)\},$$
(22)
is singular at $`y=\pi /2\overline{a}`$ (see Fig. 6).

The other physically relevant case: $`\lambda <0`$, $`k>4/3`$ coincides with case (B). Other possible situations, for instance: $`\lambda >0`$, $`k<1`$, are not physically relevant since, in this case, $`a\mathrm{}`$ and $`b>0`$, meaning that the graviton wave function is a minimum at $`y=0`$ and infinitely increases while $`y\mathrm{}`$. In other words, it is not normalizable.

## 4 Kaluza-Klein Modes

We now turn to the question about the chance for our set-up to describe 4-dimensional gravity. For this purp se we will examine fluctuations of the metric around the classical background solution (3), (12),

$$ds_5^2=e^{2A(y)}(\eta _{nm}+ϵh_{nm}(x,y))dx^ndx^m+dy^2,$$
(23)
where $`ϵ<<1`$. In general, in gravity coupled to scalars, one can not avoid fluctuations of the scalar while treating fluctuations of the background metric. However, mathematical treatment of these coupled fluctuations is rather complicated. In this case it is used to treat a sector of the metric fluctuations that decouples from the scalar and metric fluctuations can be studied analytically . This simplification is based on a method developed in Ref. . Following this method, we consider only the transverse traceless components of $`h_{ab}`$. Besides, as before, we ”jump” to the conformal frame ($`g_{AB}e^\omega \widehat{g}_{AB}`$), where the field equations are simpler. We are left with the following wave-equation for the metric fluctuations,

$$(_z^2+4\sigma ^{}_z+e^{2\sigma }\mathrm{}^\eta )\widehat{h}_{ab}^T=0,$$
(24)
where $`\widehat{h}_{ab}^T`$ is the transverse, traceless mode that decouples from the scalar. Besides, we have introduced a new $`z`$-coordinate: $`dz=e^{\frac{\omega }{2}}dy`$, and $`\mathrm{}^\eta `$ is the (flat) Minkowski wave operator. In Ref. , it has been shown that the above equation supports a naturally massless and normalizable 4-dimensional graviton given by $`\widehat{h}_{ab}^T=C_{ab}e^{ipx}`$, where the $`C_{ab}`$ are constants and $`p^2=0`$. Going back to the original frame ($`h_{ab}^T=e^\omega \widehat{h}_{ab}^T`$), we obtain for the massless graviton of our set-up: $`h_{ab}^T(x,y)=C_{ab}\psi _0(y)e^{ipx}`$, where $`\psi _0(y)=e^{2kA}=[\mathrm{cosh}(ay)]^{kb}`$, is the wave-function of the graviton in the extra dimension. The fact that this wave-function, in the case (A) of Sec. 3 ($`\lambda >0`$, $`k>4/3`$), is normalizable will be evident later on, when we show that the five-dimensional manifold we are dealing with is effectively compact in this case. For the sake of brevity, the other (physically less interesting) cases of our solution, including case (B) of Sec. 3, will not be studied in this section. For the massive KK-excitations we obtain the following wave equation in Schr$`\ddot{o}`$dinger form:

$$(_r^2+[m^2V(r)])\psi =0,$$
(25)
where we have dropped the subscripts in $`\psi `$, $`m`$ is the mass of the KK-excitation and the following coordinate change has been considered: $`dr=e^\sigma dz`$. The shape of the potential $`V(r)`$ in the case of interest here ($`\lambda >0`$, $`k>4/3`$) is given by the following expression:

$$V(r(y))=3\lambda [\mathrm{cosh}(ay)]^b[1+\frac{3k5}{2(43k)}\mathrm{tanh}^2(ay)].$$
(26)
Much can be extracted from the analysis of the form of this potential, even without trying to solve explicitely Eq. (25)111It is behind the scope of the present work to solve explicitely Eq. (25). A first intent to solve it analitically was unsuccesful.. In effect, Eq. (25) with the potential given by Eq. (26), is an analog of a quantum mechanics situation with a potential well of infinite (rigid) walls (see Fig. 7). Therefore, unlike the original thin-brane models  and some other thick-brane models , the spectrum of massive KK-excitations is discrete. Consequently, there is a gap between the massless (graviton) mode and the first excited KK-mode. Hence, by properly choosing the free parameter $`\lambda `$, we can put the first massive KK-excitation out of the reach of the low-energy experiments and so, we are able to recover 4-dimensional gravity in our set-up. A rather crude estimate of the situation discussed here could be given if we approach the complicate potential $`V(r)`$ in Eq. (26) by a parabolic potential $`V(r)y^2`$, typical in the quantum treatment of the linear harmonic oscillator. In this case the mass spectrum is given by $`m_n=\overline{m}_0\sqrt{n+\frac{1}{2}}`$, where $`n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$. The mass of the first massive KK-excitation $`m_0=\overline{m}_0/\sqrt{2}`$ is a function of $`\lambda `$. With increasing $`\lambda `$, $`m_0`$ increases (the shape of the potential well is narrower as shown in Fig. 7). Since the mass $`m\sqrt{n+\frac{1}{2}}`$ then, a continuum KK-spectrum is obtained in the $`n`$-large limit (the classical limit). Although, only by solving exactly the Schr$`\ddot{o}`$dinger equation (25) one could find the exact dependence of $`m`$ on the parameter $`\lambda `$, i. e., to obtain by inversion $`\lambda =\lambda (n)`$, one can speculate that in the $`n`$-large limit a thin-brane picture could be recovered.

Finally, we want to stress that all the KK-modes in our set-up, are non-spacelike so, our solution is tachyon-free, thus warranting its stability. Besides, due to the shape of the potential well $`V(r)`$ in Eq. (26) (see Fig. 7), all the matter degrees of freedom, including the KK-modes, are confined to a subspace in $`M_5^W`$ whose boundaries are fixed by $`V(r(y))`$222The wave function for the KK modes are different from zero only within the potential well. In consequence, all the KK-states in our set-up (including the massles ”graviton” mode) are normalizable. We recall, however, that our study is just a preliminary one since a more accurate treatment should include fluctuations of the scalar field $`\omega `$ as well.

## 5 Conclusions and Comments

In this conclusive Section we will just enumerate the relevant features of the present model and, briefly, to comment on them.

* Since we start from the action (1), that has pure geometrical nature (including the Weyl symmetry breaking term $`U=\lambda `$), the graviton and scalar matter degrees of freedom, being accomodated within a five-dimensional manifold with the non-trivial structure discussed above, arise from pure geometry in $`M_5^W`$.
* In the subspace of our solution $`\lambda >0`$, $`k>4/3`$ (case (A) of Sec. 3), the non-trivial structure of $`M_5^W`$ emerging from our set-up, in which the graviton wave-function $`\psi _0(y)=e^{2kA}=[\mathrm{cosh}(ay)]^{kb}`$ is concentrated near of the origin, and has a small overlap with the mass density function $`\mu (y)`$ (which is a maximum at some $`y0`$), can take account for a resolution of the mass hierarchy problem a la Randall-Sundrum. However, this point deserves further investigation since, it is not clear which criterium to use for exactly fixing the overlapping point in $`y`$-coordinate, where the correct hierarchy is generated. One criterium could be to take as the intersection point the value $`y`$ where $`\mu (y)`$ is a maximum. However, other criteria may be discussed.
* Since the KK-spectrum supported by the potential $`V(r(y))`$ in Eq. (26) is quantized, i. e., there exists a gap between the massless (graviton) mode and the first excited KK-mode, we can succesfully describe 4-dimensional (low-energy) gravity by a proper choice of the free parameter $`\lambda `$. However, in the present paper we have not atempted at such a proper choice. It could be desirable that this choice would be consistent with generation of the correct mass hierarchy (see the former point).
* It is nice that there are not tachyon modes in the KK-spectrum so, the solution found is stable against small perturbations of the background metric. However, this point should be further investigated since we have not considered perturbations of the scalar (Weyl) function $`\omega `$ as it could be.
* The fact that a discrete (quantized) spectrum of KK-states arises naturally (espontaneously), could be taken as just another confirmation of the claim that Weylian structures mimic, classicaly, quantum behavior. However, it could be of interest to investigate whether the quantized KK-spectrum, naturally obtained in the present model, is really a consequence of the Weylian structure assumed for our 5-dimensional manifold $`M_5^W`$, or is due to another considerations in the present set-up. We could, for instance, to start with the present action (1) but considering Riemannian manifolds $`M_5^R`$. In this case the action (1) is just the low-energy (dilatonic) string action in five dimensions\[wands\].
* One of the most remarkable features of our set-up is that it contains (naturally) a mechanism of effective (spontaneous) compactification of the extra space that could be further investigated.

Finally, we want to enumerate some points that deserve further investigation. First, other solutions to our model can be found. For instance, by using the generosity of conformal techniques, one can find solutions that are conformal to the ones encountered in the bibliography to the action (4). These represent solutions to our set-up as well, but with different self-interaction potentials (possibly breaking the original symmetry of the theory under the Weyl rescalings too). Second, it could be desirable to solve explicitely the Schr$`\ddot{o}`$dinger equation (25) with the potential (26). This could yield more insight into the present model and its possible modifications. Finally, it could be of interest to extend our set-up to higher dimensions.

We acknowledge the MES of Cuba by financial support of this research.


format: text

text:
# Existence and order of the phase transition of the Ising model with fixed magnetization

## 1 Introduction

In a recent paper, $`2d`$ and $`3d`$ Ising models with fixed magnetization are investigated numerically and signatures are found in the microcanonical caloric curves of finite systems which hint a first-order phase transition. From the numerical data, however, it is not clear if the observed signatures scale appropriately to persist in the thermodynamic limit, and hence properties of the infinite system cannot be inferred from the data.

Although an exact solution is known only for the zero-field case of the $`2d`$ Ising model without any constraints on the magnetization, there are a number of exact results which can be used to tackle the questions of existence and order of a phase transition at fixed magnetization analytically. As a convenient thermodynamic function to discuss this topic, the entropy as a function of the interaction energy and the magnetization is chosen.

An important ingredient in the following discussion is the equivalence of ensembles, which holds for Ising systems of arbitrary spatial dimension. This allows to combine the known exact results, which are typically obtained in the canonical ensemble, with some simple geometrical arguments on the microcanonical entropy.

Sec. 2 gives a definition of the Ising model. In Sec. 3, several thermodynamic quantities are defined and implications of some known exact results of the $`2d`$ Ising model on these quantities are discussed. Then, only elementary analysis is needed to establish the existence of a phase transition of the Ising model with fixed magnetization in Sec. 4 and to identify the transition as a continuous one in Sec. 5. Modifications of this results for the case of spatial dimension $`d>2`$ are discussed in Sec. 6.

## 2 The $`2d`$ Ising model

Consider an even222This is only for notational simplicity. number $`N=L^2`$, $`L2`$, of classical spins $`\sigma _i\{1,+1\}`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},N`$, on a two dimensional quadratic lattice $`\{1,\mathrm{},L\}^2`$ with periodic boundary conditions. Then the nearest-neighbor Ising model is defined by the Hamiltonian

$$:\mathrm{\Gamma }_N,\sigma (\sigma )h(\sigma )$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_N\{1,+1\}^N`$ is the configuration space of the system, $`\sigma (\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _N)\mathrm{\Gamma }_N`$ are called configurations, and $`h`$ is an external magnetic field.

$$:\mathrm{\Gamma }_N(2)[N,+N],\sigma \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\sigma _i$$
(2)
is the magnetization and

$$:\mathrm{\Gamma }_N(4[2N,+2N])\{2N+8,2N8\},\sigma \underset{i,j}{}\sigma _i\sigma _j$$
(3)
is the interaction energy. $`i,j`$ denotes a summation over all pairs of spins which are neighbors on the lattice.

## 3 Thermodynamic quantities

We follow Ref.  to define the entropy density333The term “density” will be omitted in the following $`s`$ of the $`2d`$ Ising model in the thermodynamic limit $`N\mathrm{}`$ as a function of the interaction energy density22footnotemark: 2 $`\epsilon `$ and the magnetization density22footnotemark: 2 $`m`$. Let

$$B_\varrho (\epsilon ,m):=\{(\epsilon ^{},m^{})^2:(\epsilon \epsilon ^{})^2+(mm^{})^2\varrho ^2\}$$
(4)
be the ball of center $`(\epsilon ,m)`$ and radius $`\varrho `$. Then the entropy can be defined as

$`s`$ $`:`$ $`𝒟(s),`$
$`(\epsilon ,m)\underset{\varrho >0}{\mathrm{min}}\underset{N\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\mathrm{ln}\left|\{\sigma \mathrm{\Gamma }_N:({\displaystyle \frac{(\sigma )}{N}},{\displaystyle \frac{(\sigma )}{N}})B_\varrho (\epsilon ,m)\}\right|`$
where $`||`$ denotes the cardinality of a set. The domain

$$𝒟(s):=\left\{(\epsilon ,m)\right|\epsilon [2,+2],|m|\frac{2\epsilon }{4}\}$$
(6)
of the entropy has the shape of a triangle. This is due to the fact that a given value of the interaction energy $`\epsilon `$ is equivalent to a given proportion of “antiparallel” neighboring spins $`\sigma _i=\sigma _j`$ ($`i,j`$ neighbors), which implies an upper bound on the absolute value of the magnetization for configurations of the given energy. Due to the spin inversion symmetry of the Ising Hamiltonian, the entropy $`s(\epsilon ,m)`$ is symmetric with respect to the magnetization $`m`$.

Fig. 1 is intended to give an idea how the graph of $`s`$ approximately looks like. An exact closed form expression for $`s`$ is not known. Via Legendre transformation, this would be equivalent to a closed form expression of the free energy density of the $`2d`$ Ising model for arbitrary external field $`h`$.

The variable thermodynamically conjugate to the magnetization $`m`$ is $`\beta h`$, the product of the inverse temperature $`\beta `$ and the external field $`h`$. An expression of the magnetization

$$\stackrel{~}{m}:[2,+2]\times (\{0\})[1,+1],(\epsilon ,\beta h)\stackrel{~}{m}(\epsilon ,\beta h)$$
(7)
as a function of $`\beta h`$ and the interaction energy $`\epsilon `$ is obtained from the entropy implicitly via the Legendre transformation

$$\underset{m}{sup}[s(\epsilon ,m)+\beta hm]=:s(\epsilon ,\stackrel{~}{m}(\epsilon ,\beta h))+\beta h\stackrel{~}{m}(\epsilon ,\beta h)$$
(8)
The spontaneous magnetization $`m_\pm `$ is defined444This is not entirely in accordance with the standard terminology, where one speaks of spontaneous magnetization only where $`m_\pm (\epsilon )0`$. as the zero-field limit

$$m_\pm :[2,+2][1,+1],\epsilon \underset{\beta h\pm 0}{lim}\stackrel{~}{m}(\epsilon ,\beta h)$$
(9)
The domain of the entropy $`s`$, the triangle $`𝒟(s)`$, will be used in the schematic picture of Fig. 2 to illustrate some properties of the entropy. The bold curve in the triangle is the spontaneous magnetization of the $`2d`$ Ising model, for which an exact expression is known from combining Yang’s result with the caloric curve obtained from Onsager’s solution. For the spontaneous magnetization the condition

$$m_\pm (\epsilon )=0\epsilon \sqrt{2}$$
(10)
holds, and the value $`\sqrt{2}`$ is called the critical energy.

The region of $`𝒟(s)`$ bounded by the non-zero spontaneous magnetization and the line $`\epsilon =2`$,

$$C:=\left\{(\epsilon ,m)𝒟(s)\right||m|<|m_\pm (\epsilon )|\}$$
(11)
is called the coexistence region (hatched in Fig. 2). Inside the closure $`\overline{C}`$ of the coexistence region, $`s`$ is constant with respect to the magnetization, i.e.,

$$s(\epsilon ,m)=s(\epsilon ,m_\pm (\epsilon ))(\epsilon ,m)\overline{C}$$
(12)
which is the signature of the field-driven first-order phase transition of the $`2d`$ Ising model at low energies and zero external field. In Fig. 2, some parallel lines are drawn inside the coexistence region to symbolize lines of constant entropy. Outside the coexistence region $`C`$, the concavity of the entropy combined with the definition of the spontaneous magnetization (9) implies the strict inequality

$$s(\epsilon ,m)<s(\epsilon ,m_\pm (\epsilon ))(\epsilon ,m)\overline{C},m0$$
(13)
Now, from the two-variable function $`s`$, we define the one-variable function

$$s_{\mathrm{zf}}:𝒟(s_{\mathrm{zf}}),\epsilon s(\epsilon ,m)|_{m=m_\pm (\epsilon )}$$
(14)
on the domain $`𝒟(s_{\mathrm{zf}})=[2,+2]`$, which is the entropy of the $`2d`$ Ising model in the zero-field limit, and the family of one-variable functions

$$s_{m_0}:𝒟(s_{m_0}),\epsilon s(\epsilon ,m)|_{m=m_0}$$
(15)
on the domain $`𝒟(s_{m_0})=[2,24|m_0|]`$, which is the entropy of the $`2d`$ Ising model with fixed magnetization $`m_0`$. In the following, existence and order of a phase transition in the $`2d`$ Ising model with fixed magnetization are discussed by making use of these two functions.

## 4 Existence of a phase transition

For all values of the fixed magnetization $`|m_0|<1`$, the entropy $`s_{m_0}`$ is non-analytic for at least one value of $`\epsilon 𝒟(s_{m_0})`$. This is a consequence of:

1. The fact that every line $`\left\{(\epsilon ,m)\mathrm{int}𝒟(s)\right|m=m_0\}`$ of constant magnetization $`m_0(1,+1)`$ in the interior of $`𝒟(s)`$ has at least one point of intersection with the spontaneous magnetization (as sketched in Fig. 2),
2. $`s_{m_0}(\epsilon )=s_{\mathrm{zf}}(\epsilon )`$ for all $`(\epsilon ,m_0)\overline{C}`$ \[from Eq. (12)\],
3. $`s_{m_0}(\epsilon )<s_{\mathrm{zf}}(\epsilon )`$ for all $`(\epsilon ,m_0)\overline{C}`$, $`m_00`$ \[from Eq. (13)\],
4. The entropy $`s_{\mathrm{zf}}(\epsilon )`$ of the Ising model in zero field is analytic for all $`\epsilon <\sqrt{2}`$ and non-analytic for $`\epsilon =\sqrt{2}`$ \[Otherwise $`\beta (\epsilon )=\frac{s_{\mathrm{zf}}(\epsilon )}{\epsilon }`$ would show a non-analyticity for $`\epsilon <\sqrt{2}`$. Due to the equivalence of ensembles, this would be in contradiction to the analytic result for the caloric curve $`\epsilon (\beta )`$ below the critical temperature obtained from Onsager’s solution.\],
5. $`s_{m_0=0}(\epsilon )=s_{\mathrm{zf}}(\epsilon )`$ for all $`\epsilon `$ \[from Eqs. (10) and (12)\].

Case $`𝐦_\mathrm{𝟎}\mathrm{𝟎}`$: Item (a) guarantees that, for all values of the fixed magnetization $`|m_0|<1`$, the line of constant $`m_0`$ crosses the boundary of the coexistence region once, and the corresponding energy $`\epsilon _0(m_0)`$ is given by the inverse function of the spontaneous magnetization $`m_\pm `$. From conditions (b) and (c), we know that $`s_{\mathrm{zf}}`$ and $`s_{m_0}`$ are identical on the interval $`[2,\epsilon _0(m_0)]`$, but different elsewhere. According to (d), $`s_{\mathrm{zf}}`$ is analytic on the interval $`(2,\sqrt{2})`$, and, as the analytic continuation of a function is unique, it follows that $`s_{m_0}(\epsilon )`$ is non-analytic at $`\epsilon =\epsilon _0(m_0)<\sqrt{2}`$ for all $`0<|m_0|<1`$.

Case $`𝐦_\mathrm{𝟎}=\mathrm{𝟎}`$: In this case, according to item (e), the entropy function of the Ising model with fixed magnetization is identical to that of the zero field case on the entire interval $`[2,+2]`$. Hence, also the non-analyticity of $`s_{\mathrm{zf}}(\epsilon )`$ at $`\epsilon =\epsilon _0(0)=\sqrt{2}`$ \[item (d)\] is present in $`s_{m_0=0}`$.

From Yang’s result for the spontaneous magnetization of the $`2d`$ Ising model, the inverse temperature $`\beta _0`$ corresponding to $`\epsilon _0(m_0)`$ via the caloric curve is known to be

$$\beta _0:[1,+1][\beta _c,\mathrm{}],m_0\frac{1}{2}\text{arcsinh}\left[\left(1m_0^8\right)^{1/4}\right]$$
(16)
where $`\beta _c=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}(1+\sqrt{2})`$ is the critical temperature of the $`2d`$ Ising model. Hence, we conclude that the $`2d`$ Ising model with fixed magnetization $`m_0`$ shows a phase transition at the inverse temperature $`\beta _0(m_0)`$.

## 5 Order of the phase transition

In this section, we show that the phase transition of the Ising model with fixed magnetization is a continuous one.

A temperature-driven first-order phase transition is characterized by the appearance of latent heat, i.e., a discontinuity in the caloric curve $`\epsilon (\beta )`$, where $`\beta `$ is the inverse temperature. In the Ising model with fixed magnetization, due to the thermal equation of state

$$\beta (\epsilon ,m)=\frac{s(\epsilon ,m)}{\epsilon }$$
(17)
such a discontinuity corresponds to a linear piece in the entropy $`s_{m_0}`$. In the following, by proving the absence of a linear piece in $`s_{m_0}`$, the phase transition of the $`2d`$ Ising model with fixed magnetization $`m_0`$ is shown to be continuous for all values of $`m_0[1,+1]`$. For this discussion we distinguish between the two cases of a linear piece inside and outside the coexistence region, respectively.

### 5.1 No linear piece of $`s_{m_0}`$ inside the coexistence region

From Eq. (12) it follows that a linear piece of $`s_{m_0}`$ inside the coexistence region implies a linear piece in $`s_{\mathrm{zf}}`$. It is known from Onsager’s solution that there is no temperature-driven first-order phase transition in the $`2d`$ Ising model in zero field, hence there is no linear piece of $`s_{m_0}`$ inside the coexistence region.

### 5.2 No linear piece of $`s_{m_0}`$ outside the coexistence region

This result can already be found in the literature. For an Ising system of arbitrary spatial dimension in non-zero external field or at temperatures above the critical temperature, there exists a unique, translation invariant equilibrium state. It is shown in Ref.  that this implies strict concavity of the entropy outside the phase coexistence region $`C`$. This strict concavity of course does not allow for a linear piece in the entropy $`s_{m_0}`$ of an Ising system with fixed magnetization $`m_0`$ outside $`C`$.

Additionally, another proof of the absence of a linear piece in $`s_{m_0}`$ outside the coexistence region is given by showing a stronger result on the analyticity properties of the entropy $`s`$. It will be argued that a linear piece of $`s_{m_0}`$ outside the coexistence region is in contradiction to the analyticity properties of the Gibbs free energy

$$g:𝒟(g),(\beta ,\beta h)\underset{N\mathrm{}}{lim}(\beta N)^1\mathrm{ln}\underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Gamma }_N}{}\mathrm{e}^{\beta (\sigma )}$$
(18)
$`𝒟(g):=^+\times `$, of the $`2d`$ Ising model. It follows from the circle theorem of Lee and Yang and a result from Lebowitz and Penrose on analyticity properties, that $`g`$ is analytic for all non-zero values of the external field $`h`$ or for all inverse temperatures $`\beta `$ smaller than the critical inverse temperature.555Actually, this result is valid for arbitrary spatial dimension. The Gibbs free energy $`g`$ and the entropy $`s`$ are connected by means of a Legendre transformation

$$s(\epsilon ,m)=\underset{\beta ,\beta h}{sup}\left[\beta g(\beta ,\beta h)+\beta \epsilon \beta hm\right]$$
(19)
For regions where $`g`$ is differentiable, $`\epsilon `$ and $`m`$ can be expressed in terms of the Gibbs free energy as

$$m(\beta ,\beta h)=\beta \frac{g(\beta ,\beta h)}{(\beta h)}$$
(20)
and

$$\epsilon (\beta ,\beta h)=g(\beta ,\beta h)+\beta \frac{g(\beta ,\beta h)}{\beta }$$
(21)
For regions where $`g`$ is strictly concave, the inversions $`\beta (\epsilon ,m)`$ and $`\beta h(\epsilon ,m)`$ exist, and Eq. (19) can be rewritten as

$`s(\epsilon ,m)=\beta (\epsilon ,m)[\beta (\epsilon ,m){\displaystyle \frac{g(\beta (\epsilon ,m),\beta h(\epsilon ,m))}{\beta (\epsilon ,m)}}`$
$`+\beta h(\epsilon ,m){\displaystyle \frac{g(\beta (\epsilon ,m),\beta h(\epsilon ,m))}{\beta h(\epsilon ,m)}}]`$ (22)
This implies analyticity of $`s(\epsilon ,m)`$ for all pairs $`(\epsilon (\beta ,\beta h),m(\beta ,\beta h))P`$ for which $`g(\beta ,\beta h)`$ is analytic, and

$$P=\left\{(\epsilon ,m)𝒟(s)\overline{C}\right|\frac{s(\epsilon ,m)}{\epsilon }>0\}$$
(23)
is the set of pairs $`(\epsilon ,m)`$ outside the closure of the coexistence region corresponding to positive temperatures. Then, also $`s_{m_0}(\epsilon )`$ is analytic for all pairs $`(\epsilon ,m_0)P`$.

The entropy $`s`$ is zero on the boundary of its domain and continuously differentiable on its entire domain. Together with the analyticity properties discussed above, this rules out the possibility of a linear piece in $`s_{m_0}`$ outside the coexistence region.

## 6 Spatial dimension greater than two

Some remarks are in order concerning the validity of the arguments of Secs. 4 and 5 for Ising models of spatial dimension $`d>2`$. The crucial difference to the $`2d`$ Ising model is that, to the knowledge of the author, it is not clear if there exists more than one temperature-driven phase transition in the Ising model in zero field for $`d>2`$. If this is not the case, the results of this paper are valid for Ising systems of higher spatial dimension. If there is more than one such transition, some modifications of the results on the Ising model with fixed magnetization arise:

* For values of $`(\epsilon ,m_0)`$ inside the coexistence region $`C`$, the Ising model with fixed magnetization shows identical thermal behavior (in the sense of identical caloric curves) as the Ising model in zero field, including phase transitions possibly existing in the zero-field case.
* The results used in Sec. 5.2 are valid for Ising systems of arbitrary spatial dimension. Hence, there is no linear piece in the entropy of the Ising model with fixed magnetization outside the coexistence region $`C`$.
* In general the arguments of Sec. 4 are also valid for $`d>2`$ and the Ising model with fixed magnetization shows a phase transition when crossing the boundary of $`C`$. However, when crossing this boundary at an energy for which the zero-field entropy $`s_{\mathrm{zf}}`$ is non-analytic, it might be the case that the entropy of the Ising model with fixed magnetization is the analytic continuation of $`s_{\mathrm{zf}}`$ across the locus of the non-analyticity. Then, for this particular value of the fixed magnetization $`m_0`$, the Ising model with fixed magnetization does not show a phase transition when crossing the boundary of the coexistence region.

## 7 Conclusion

In the $`2d`$ Ising model with fixed magnetization, for all values of the fixed magnetization $`|m_0|<1`$, there is a continuous phase transition. This phase transition is unique in the sense that there are no further non-analyticities in any thermodynamic function or in the caloric curve. The inverse temperature at which the phase transition occurs is given by $`\beta _0(m_0)=\frac{1}{2}\text{arcsinh}\left[\left(1m_0^8\right)^{1/4}\right]`$. Hence, in the thermodynamic limit, the S-shape reported for the microcanonical caloric curve of finite Ising systems with fixed magnetizations in Ref. 1, does not converge to a straight line signalling a first order phase transition, but to a single point at which a continuous phase transition occurs.

For spatial dimensions $`d>2`$, a first-order transition can occur in the Ising model with fixed magnetization only if there is a first order transition in the $`d`$-dimensional zero-field case. Although, to the knowledge of the author, a proof is lacking, this is expected to be not the case for the $`3d`$ Ising model.

## Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Alfred Hüller for stimulating discussions, and Michael Promberger and Simone Warzel for helpful comments on the manuscript. Some references cited were pointed out by Charles-Edouard Pfister and unknown referees. The data of Fig. 1 were kindly supplied by Michael Waasner.


text:
# Stress relief as the driving force for self-assembled Bi nanolines

## Abstract

Stress resulting from mismatch between a substrate and an adsorbed material has often been thought to be the driving force for the self-assembly of nanoscale structures. Bi nanolines self-assemble on Si(001), and are remarkable for their straightness and length – they are often more than 400 nm long, and a kink in a nanoline has never been observed. Through electronic structure calculations, we have found an energetically favourable structure for these nanolines that agrees with our scanning tunneling microscopy and photoemission experiments; the structure has an extremely unusual subsurface structure, comprising a double core of 7-membered rings of silicon. Our proposed structure explains all the observed features of the nanolines, and shows that surface stress resulting from the mismatch between the Bi and the Si substrate are responsible for their self-assembly. This has wider implications for the controlled growth of nanostructures on semiconductor surfaces.

Nanowires are of enormous importance for nanoelectronics: recently, various devices have been constructed from semiconductor nanowiresY.Huang et al. (2001) and carbon nanotubesA.Bachtold et al. (2001), to name but two. These approaches require assembly on the surface, whether by fluidics and patterning or use of scanning probes; self-assembled nanowires would be a compelling alternative for fabricating a large number of devices. However, the microscopic understanding of the underlying physical and chemical mechanisms for self-assembly of nanoscale features has been limited. Surface stress resulting from lattice mismatch in heteroepitaxial growth has often been thought to be responsible for self-assembly of nanoscale features (such as the growth of Ge ”hut” clustersD.J.Eaglesham and M.Cerullo (1990)). For the case of self-assembled nanowires on semiconductor surfaces, there has been much recent work on rare-earth silicides (e.g. ErSi2), where there is a large strain along one axis ($`7\%`$) and almost none along another, leading to the formation of extended nanowiresChen et al. (2000). These wires, however, are far from being uniform or perfect at the atomic scale. In contrast, Bi nanolines, formed when a Bi-covered Si(001) surface is annealed at around $`570600^{}`$CK.Miki et al. (1999a, b), are quite striking in their uniformity. These nanolines are always 1.5 nm wide, and extend for hundreds of nanometres without a kink or a defect. As well as this, they repel defects and down B-type step edges to a distance of 3-4nm. Further, they are resistant to attack by radical hydrogen or oxygen (hence hydrogen can be used as a mask and oxygen used to isolate them electrically from the substrate)J.H.G.Owen et al. (2002), making them promising as templates for nanowires of other materials. However, the structure of these Bi nanolines, a prerequisite to a microscopic understanding of their unique properties and hence control of their nucleation and growth, remains unknown.

Earlier, we proposed a structure based upon a 3-dimer wide modelK.Miki et al. (1999a); D.R.Bowler (2000). However, recent atomic resolution scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) images of the Bi nanolineJ.H.G.Owen et al. (2002); M.Naitoh et al. (2000), have revealed that the structure in fact occupies the space of 4 dimers in the Si(001) surface. A proposed four dimer modelM.Naitoh et al. (2000) has the wrong spacing of features in the nanoline (ca. 5.4 Å), and is energetically very poor (more than 0.6 eV/Bi dimer worse than the 3-dimer modelD.R.Bowler (2000)). Moreover, neither model has a large kinking energy. Accordingly, we have conducted an exhaustive search for a new structure and tested many candidates against experimental criteria, which we detail below. For this purpose, semi-empirical tight binding (tb) calculations are invaluable, as they allow us to run large simulations of hundreds of atoms quickly on modest hardware(a desktop computer), while achieving relaxed energies very close to those obtained from ab initio density functional theory (DFT) calculationsD.R.Bowler (2000); D.R.Bowler and J.H.G.Owen (2002). In this paper, we propose a new structure for these nanolines that is energetically favourable and agrees with all experimental observations (size, stability, registry with Si dimers, straightness, repulsion of defects). We note that it is related to a structure recently proposed for B-type steps on As-terminated Ge(001) surfaces, and that our findings may well have implications for group V elements on group IV surfaces in general.

The Si(001) substrate was cleaned using a standard processK.Miki et al. (1998) before being transferred into vacuum. The Si surface was prepared by flashing repeatedly to 1100C for a few seconds, until there was only a small pressure rise. The clean surface was checked with STM before Bi deposition began. Bi was evaporated from an effusion cell, a typical dose being Bi at 470C for 10 mins. STM images were taken at the deposition temperature between 570-600C, and at room temperature, using a JEOL 4500 XT UHV STM. The high-resolution Bi 5d core-level photoemission spectra, taken at 65 eV photon energy, were measured on the new high-resolution vacuum ultraviolet beam line BL-1C at Photon Factory, KEK, Japan. The overall energy resolution was better than 100 meV. The relative stabilities of the proposed structures were calculated using two electronic structure techniques: for a swift search of possible motifs, tight binding; for accurate energies and structures, density functional theory(DFT). The tight binding calculations were performed with a linear scaling code (an implementation of the Density Matrix MethodX.-P.Li et al. (1993)) using a parameterisation which has been previously validated for Bi-Si interactionsD.R.Bowler (2000); this allowed the large unit cells necessary to model the long range strain effects seen in our STM data. The DFT calculations were performed using the VASP codeG.Kresse and J.Furthmüller (1996), using ultrasoft pseudopotentials, a plane wave cutoff of 150 eV (sufficient for energy difference convergence) and a Monkhurst-Pack k-point mesh with 4$`\times `$4$`\times `$1 points. The unit cell used had ten layers of Si, with sixteen atoms in each layer (forming a single dimer row with the p(2$`\times `$2) reconstruction) with the bottom two layers constrained to remain fixed and dangling bonds terminated in hydrogen. When comparing energies with different amounts of Bi, we use unit cells of the same surface area, and compare the excess surface energy plus bismuth adsorption energy per Bi dimerD.R.Bowler (2000).

The Bi nanolines have several notable and unusual features. First, their straightness and perfection. Hundreds of lines have been observed, many over 400 nm long, without a kink being seen, and defects are extremely rare (their straightness can be seen in Fig. 1 and also in previous workK.Miki et al. (1999a, b)). This would suggest that the nanoline has a large kinking energy. Second, the “defect exclusion zone” (DEZ). Low concentrations of Bi embedded in the top layer of Si(001) cause compressive surface stress, and ordered trenches of missing dimer defects form every 8-12 dimers to relieve the stress. Despite being highly mobile at high temperatures, these defects do not come within 3-4 nm of the nanolines – the DEZ. Since the strain field of a missing dimer defect is tensile, the repulsive interaction between the defect and the nanolines suggests that the nanoline strain field should also be tensile, and hence is also a source of stress relief for the embedded Bi. It is likely therefore that the stress induced by the Bi in the top layer of the Si is the driving force for the formation of this unusual structure. Having formed, the nanolines remain after epitaxial islands of Bi have evaporated, indicating increased stability (RHEED experiments found the difference in desorption barrier to be 0.25eVK.Miki et al. (1999a)). However, the local structure of the Bi in the nanoline appears to be in a simple dimerized form, in the top surface layer. Recent high resolution STM images, such as in Fig.2 (a), and previous workM.Naitoh et al. (2000); J.H.G.Owen et al. (2002) show that the nanolines are 4 dimers or 15.4Åwide. The bright dimer-like features making up the nanoline lie between the underlying Si dimers, in line with the Si dimer rows. As marked, the spacing between the nanoline features is 6.3 Å. Photoemission spectroscopy experiments, shown in Fig.3, find that the Bi 5d core-level spectra of the Bi nanowire is essentially identical to the spectra of the (2$`\times `$n) phase composed of Bi ad-dimers, with a single well defined spin-orbit doublet. This suggests that the local chemical state and registry of Bi adsorbates for both phases are the same, i.e. that the Bi is in the form of dimers in the top layer of the structure. X-ray photo-electron diffraction (XPD) experimentsM.Shimomura et al. (2000) confirm the presence of Bi dimers parallel to the Si dimers and find the spacing between them to be $``$6.3Å. Hence, the observed properties of the Bi nanoline must result not from a novel Bi structure, such as a square of Bi atoms, but from an unusual Si substructure, stabilised by the presence of Bi.

A simple model for the line, with two Bi ad-dimers sitting on top of the dimer row, but between two Si dimers, as shown in Fig. 4(a), reproduces most of the aspects of the detailed STM data, and is consistent with the PES and XPD data, but is 0.53 eV/Bi dimer less stable than the (2$`\times `$n) phase, and has no energetic reason to grow long and straight; nor, indeed, is there any reason for the two ad-dimers to remain adjacent. However, our proposed structure may be reached from this simple structure by rearrangement of only a few atoms, illustrated in Fig. 4. A simple 2-dimer wide core (equivalent to half of our proposed structure) can be formed by rotation of the 2nd/3rd layer atoms, so that they lie on the same level. The resulting 2-dimer structure is quite similar to that proposed for the structure of As-Ge double-height B-type stepsS.B.Zhang et al. (2001). The energy of this structure is lower than the simple ad-dimer model, but the strain field of the core is compressive, the wrong sign for stress relief, and two such cores close together, necessary to form a 4-dimer unit, as shown in Fig. 4(b), repel each other. Removal of four central atoms and rebonding of 1st and 4th-layer Si atoms makes the overall strain field tensile, while keeping all bonds saturated (The terminating species is important; replacement of the two Bi ad-dimers by Si ad-dimers raises the total energy by $``$2eV/dimer). This gives our new proposed structure, shown in Fig. 4(c).

Our proposed structure is energetically very favourable and gives good agreement with all aspects of our experimental findings. In DFT calculations, the energy/Bi dimer is -10.9 eV/Bi dimer, 0.25 eV/Bi dimer lower than the high coverage Bi-($`2\times `$n) phase. This energy difference agrees very well with the difference in stability as measured by RHEED. Comparison of the structure to an STM profile yields extremely good agreement. A cross-section of the nanoline matched up with the ball-and-stick model is shown in Fig. 2(b). The position of the peaks of the Bi dimers line up perfectly with the STM profile. The spacing found from our calculations (6.25Å) and the direction of the Bi dimers (parallel to Si dimers) agree extremely well with photoemission spectroscopy and with XPD resultsM.Shimomura et al. (2000). Moreover, our proposed structure stands out from others that we have tested, in that it explains the other observed features of the Bi nanolines very naturally. The importance of surface strain relief in the formation of this structure is underlined by its increased stability in a surface terminated by Bi dimers. In this case, the total energy of a long tightbinding unit cell was further lowered by $``$0.1 eV/dimer, due to relaxation of the compressive stress in the surface Bi dimers. As expected, the tensile strain field of the nanoline also provides a driving force for the DEZ. Tightbinding calculations on a 32-dimer cell found that single missing dimer defects and step edges interact repulsively with the nanoline out to a range of $``$3 nm, in agreement with the observed DEZ width of 3-4 nm. The extensive distortion down to the fifth layer leads to a large kinking energy (3.75 eV/kink (tb)) and destabilises the dimers adjacent to the end of the line. The excess energy is 2.6 eV/line end in tightbinding calculations for an isolated line segment. We plan to report detailed calculations on all these features of the nanolines in future work.

In conclusion, we have found an extraordinary structure for the Bi nanoline, which involves extensive reconstruction down to the fifth layer below the surface. Not only is this structure more stable than any other we have calculated, and matches extremely well with criteria drawn from a variety of experimental data, it also has an impressive ability to explain the notable and unusual properties of the Bi nanolines, such as the straightness (high kinking energy) and the defect repulsion (DEZ). The large tensile strain in one direction and zero strain in the other is very similar to the situation seen in the silicide nanowiresChen et al. (2000), and accounts for the invariant width and extreme length of the nanowire. Also of note are the 5-membered and 7-membered rings of Si, marked in Fig. 4 (b) and (c). Such odd-membered rings are also present in the proposed As-Ge step structure, suggesting that this structural motif may be of general interest in structures involving Group V layers on Group IV surfaces, particularly in situations where there is either compressive or tensile stress. Finally, the properties of these nanolines demonstrate the importance of surface stress in the formation and phenomenonology of nanoscale structures.

###### Acknowledgements.

The authors would like to thank Prof. Andrew Briggs(Oxford University) for useful discussions, and Bill McMahon for help with understanding the As-Ge structures. We are also happy to acknowledge Dr. Masaru Shimomura and Prof. Shozo Kono(Tohoku University) for detailed discussions about their XPD experiments. DRB acknowledges support from the EPSRC and from the Royal Society through fellowships, and the HiPerSPACE Centre (UCL) for computer time for DFT calculations. JHGO is supported by the Japanese Science and Technology Agency (JST) as an STA Fellow. This study was performed through Special Coordination Funds of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of the Japanese Government (Research Project on active atom-wire interconnects).


text:
# DOUBLE SPIN ASYMMETRY IN SEMI-INCLUSIVE DEEP INELASTIC SCATTERING11footnote 1Talk given at the 3^{𝑟𝑑} Circum Pan-Pacific Symposium on High Energy Spin Physics, Beijing, China, Oct., 8-13, 2001

## 1 Introduction

The transversity function, $`h_1`$, may yield nontrivial information on the nucleon structure. However, such a distribution is quite difficult to determine experimentally. In fact, in the last years, the problem has been debated at length; moreover, the data analysis of the recent HERMES experiment has met serious difficulties. In this situation any observable sensitive to $`h_1`$ should be taken into account. The aim of the present talk is to illustrate one such observable, consisting of a double spin asymmetry in Semi-Inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering (SIDIS), using a transversely polarized proton and a longitudinally polarized charged lepton. We shall also review the various methods proposed in the literature for determining $`h_1`$, referring in particular to SIDIS, which presents some advantages over the other kinds of reactions.

In sect. 2 we recall the definition of $`h_1`$ and illustrate the kind of information we may extract from this function. In sect. 3 we show the difficulties concerning the measurement of the transversity function. Moreover we give a short review of the various methods suggested in the literature, referring, in particular, to the SIDIS single spin asymmetry measured in the HERMES experiment. As an alternative, in sect. 4, we examine the possibility of a SIDIS double spin asymmetry. We consider two different cases, according as to whether the direction of the final hadron is fixed or not. We treat in detail the former case, suggesting an alternative experiment for extracting $`h_1`$. Lastly in sect. 5 we present numerical estimates of the asymmetry illustrated in sect. 4 and give a short summary.

## 2 Definition of the transversity function

The transversity function is defined (see e. g., Jaffe and Ji) in terms of the tensor Dirac operator $`\sigma _{\mu \nu }`$. In order to understand the physical meaning of this distribution function, it is convenient to decompose the quark field into terms of given transversity. In a reference frame where the proton has a very large momentum directed perpendicularly to its polarization, it results that, for a given flavor $`f`$ and longitudinal fractional momentum $`x`$, $`h_1^f(x)`$ is the difference between the number density of quarks with spin aligned along the proton spin and the number density of quarks with opposite spin. Using different projection operators, we can establish two important properties of the transversity function, i. e., that

(i) $`h_1^f(x)`$ is a twist-two distribution function, which amounts to saying that it survives in the scaling limit;

(ii) $`h_1^f(x)`$ is chiral-odd, which makes it difficult to determine experimentally this function, as we shall see in the next section.

This distribution is different from the helicity distribution $`\mathrm{\Delta }q^f(x)`$, for which one has to consider a proton travelling in the direction of its spin. The reason is that generally a Lorentz boost does not commute with a rotation. This would be the case, and the two distributions $`h_1`$ = $`_fe_f^2h_1^f`$ and $`g_1`$ = $`_fe_f^2\mathrm{\Delta }q^f`$ (where $`e_f`$ is the fractional charge of the quark) would coincide, if the dynamics of the quarks inside the proton were non-relativistic. But we know that it is not so, because of the quark confinement and of the Heisenbrg principle; furthermore some predictions of the non-relativistic quark model fail, like the value of the axial charge. Therefore we may really expect nontrivial information on the nucleon structure from the determination of $`h_1`$. Indeed, some authors have stressed the importance of transverse momentum in the difference between $`h_1`$ and $`g_1`$. They have shown, in the framework of the constituent quark model, that the quark tranverse momentum induces nontrivial Melosh-Wigner rotations, owing to the boost from the proton rest frame to the infinite momentum frame. This causes a spin dilution both in $`g_1`$ and in $`h_1`$. This dilution, in turn, may explain, at least partially, the so-called spin crisis, consisting of a surprisingly small value, found by the EMC collaboration in 1987, of the first moment of $`g_1`$. But according to the model the dilution is less marked in $`h_1`$ than in $`g_1`$. Therefore the determination of $`h_1`$, compared with $`g_1`$, may shed indirectly some light on the spin crisis.

Furthermore, this determination could allow an important test for a QCD prediction on the $`Q^2`$ dependence of the two distribution functions. Indeed, while the QCD evolution of the singlet part of $`g_1`$ is coupled to the gluon polarization, which may produce sensible scaling violations, such an effect should be absent in $`h_1`$.

## 3 Difficulties in determining $`h_1`$

The difficulties in determining the transversity function are connected with its chiral-odd character. Indeed a massless quark conserves its chirality under any type of interactions, either electroweak or strong. It follows that, if a given asymmetry is sensitive to this function, it must depend on the product of $`h_1`$ by another chiral-odd function. Therefore we have to consider reactions in which two hadrons are involved, either in the initial or in the final state. Totally inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering (DIS) is by no means suitable for determining $`h_1`$.

The double spin asymmetry in Drell-Yan (DY), with two transversely polarized proton beams, results to be proportional to $`_fe_f^2h_1^f(x_a)h_1^{\overline{f}}(x_b)`$, where $`x_a`$ and $`x_b`$ are the longitudinal fractional momenta of, respectively, the active quark and antiquark that annihilate into a timelike photon. Here the drawback is that this asymmetry is quite small (1-2 % at most), moreover, presumably, $`|h_1^{\overline{f}}|`$ $`<<`$ $`|h_1^f|`$, since the antiquark necessarily belongs to the sea. Something we could gain using a polarized antiproton beam instead of one of the two proton beams, but for the moment this kind of experiment looks quite unrealistic.

More promising look asymmetry experiments based on SIDIS, that is, on reactions of the type

$$\mathrm{}p\mathrm{}^{}hX,$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{}`$ is a charged lepton and $`h`$ a hadron. The proton target is polarized, which yields information on the polarization of the initial active quark. If also the lepton beam is polarized, or if the final hadron is a spinning, unstable particle, whose decay may be detected, we are faced with a double spin asymmetry. This allows to get information on the final quark polarization and, in principle, to extract $`h_1`$. But even a single spin asymmetry, i. e., with an unpolarized lepton beam, may be sensitive to the the final quark polarization, provided we are able to exploit the so-called Collins effect in the angular distribution of $`h`$.

A single spin asymmetry is proportional to a mixed product of the type $`𝐒\times 𝐩_a𝐩_b`$, where $`𝐒`$ is the proton spin and $`𝐩_a`$ and $`𝐩_b`$ are any two (non collinear) momenta of the particles involved in the reaction. This object is invariant under parity inversion, but changes sign under time reversal. In other words, the cross section contains a $`T`$-odd term. This can only come from the interference between two amplitudes with different phases. In reaction (1), this interference is produced by the final-state interaction between $`h`$ and other hadrons in the final state. Therefore in this case it is the fragmentation function of $`h`$ that has a $`T`$-odd part, sensitive to the polarization of the fragmenting quark, as follows from the above mixed product. Here we identify $`𝐩_a`$ and $`𝐩_b`$ with the momenta, respectively, of the final quark and of $`h`$, and approximate the quark momentum by the momentum $`𝐪`$ of the virtual photon. Then the problem amounts to determining the $`T`$-odd part of the fragmentation function.

To this end, consider the transverse momentum dependent (t.m.d.) fragmentation function of the final hadron, $`\phi ^f(z,𝐏_{})`$, where $`z`$ and $`𝐏_{}`$ are, respectively, the longitudinal fractional momentum and the transverse momentum of the pion with respect to the fragmenting quark. While the usual fragmentation function, $`D^f(z)`$, is obtained simply by integrating $`\phi ^f`$ over the tranverse momentum, the $`T`$-odd part can be extracted by weighing $`\phi ^f`$ with the above mixed product, that is,

$$D_{odd}^f(z)=d^2P_{}\phi ^f(z,𝐏_{})sin\mathrm{\Phi },sin\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{𝐒\times 𝐪𝐩_h}{|𝐒\times 𝐪||𝐩_h|}.$$
(2)
Here $`𝐩_h`$ is the momentum of the hadron $`h`$. Moreover $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, the so-called Collins angle, is defined as the azimuthal angle between the ($`𝐪,𝐒`$) plane and the ($`𝐩_h,𝐒`$) plane. Notice that the $`T`$-odd fragmentation function is also chiral-odd. The Collins effect has been exploited in the recently realized HERMES experiment, where a longitudinally polarized proton has been used, and it is also invoked for the planned HERMES experiment with a transversely polarized target. The asymmetries, respectively twist-3 and twist-2, are both sensitive to the product $`h_1^f(x)D_{odd}^f(z)`$. Therefore the transversity function may be determined, provided we are able to extract the Collins fragmentation function from an independent experiment. In any case, a confirmation of the effect predicted by Collins comes both from HERMES data on the SIDIS single spin asymmetry and from $`Z^0`$ decay into two jets.

Variants of the Collins effect are the jet transversity determination in DIS and the two-pion interference method, applicable both to SIDIS and to proton - proton collisions.

## 4 Double spin asymmetry in SIDIS

Alternatively we can, in principle, extract $`h_1`$ from a SIDIS double spin asymmetry experiment, employing a transversely polarized proton target and a longitudinally polarized lepton beam, and detecting a pion in the final state. The asymmetry is defined as

$$A=\frac{d\sigma _{}d\sigma _{}}{d\sigma _{}+d\sigma _{}},$$
(3)
where the arrows denote the the proton and lepton polarizations. Two kinds of experiments are possible, that is, fixing the final pion direction, or integrating the cross section over the pion transverse momentum with respect to the fragmenting quark. The latter possibility has been considered by Jaffe and Ji (JJ). The asymmetry they calculate contains twist 3 and twist 4 terms, the latters including the product $`h_1^f(x)\widehat{e}_\pi ^f(z)`$; here $`\widehat{e}_\pi ^f(z)`$ is the twist-3 fragmentation function of the pion, a chiral-odd function. Therefore, again, the determination of $`h_1`$ is subordinated to the knowledge, from an independent experiment, of another nonperturbative (and rather unusual) function.

If we keep the final pion direction fixed, the asymmetry contains one more twist 3 term, which disappears upon integration over the pion transverse momentum. This term survives for $`𝐒𝐪`$ = 0, where the other terms - corresponding to the JJ asymmetry - vanish. Moreover, under this condition, such a term is sensitive to the t.m.d. transversity function, $`\delta q^f(x,𝐩_{})`$. This can be intuitively seen by observing that, in this case, owing to the transverse momentum of the parton inside the hadron, the transverse polarization of the proton induces a longitudinal polarization in the active quark, which may be related to $`\delta q^f(x,𝐩_{})`$. In principle there could be cancellations due to symmetries (e. g., under rotation, parity inversion, etc.), but under the conditions we shall impose this does not occur. The situation is quite analogous to the one described in ref.. There we considered a DY reaction of the type

$$pp^{}\mu ^+\stackrel{}{\mu }^{}X,$$
(4)
where we assumed to have one transversely polarized proton beam and to detect the longitudinal polarization of one final muon. In that case the asymmetry - which turns out to be the polarization of one of the muons - is non-zero, provided we consider nonvanishing, fixed values of the transverse momentum of the virtual photon with respect to the proton beams in the laboratory frame. Since a SIDIS reaction is kinematically isomorphic to DY, a similar effect occurs in the case considered, as we are going to show.

To this end we calculate the double spin asymmetry (3), taking $`𝐒𝐪`$ = 0. In one-photon exchange approximation the differential cross section is of the type

$$d\sigma L_{\mu \nu }H^{\mu \nu },$$
(5)
where $`L_{\mu \nu }`$ and $`H_{\mu \nu }`$ are the leptonic and the hadronic tensor respectively. The leptonic tensor reads, in the massless approximation,

$$L_{\mu \nu }=k_\mu k_\nu ^{}+k_\mu ^{}k_\nu g_{\mu \nu }kk^{}+i\lambda _{\mathrm{}}\epsilon _{\alpha \mu \beta \nu }k^\alpha k^{}_{}{}^{}\beta .$$
(6)
Here $`k`$ and $`\lambda _{\mathrm{}}`$ are respectively the four-momentum and the helicity of the initial lepton, $`k^{}`$ = $`kq`$ the four-momentum of the final lepton and $`q`$ the four-momentum of the virtual photon.

As regards the hadronic tensor, we use a QCD-improved parton model. The generalized factorization theorem in the covariant formalism yields, at zero order in the QCD coupling constant,

$$H_{\mu \nu }\underset{f}{}e_f^2d^2p_{}\underset{T}{}q_T^f(x,𝐩_{})\phi ^f(z,𝐏_{}^2)Tr(\rho ^T\gamma _\mu \rho ^{}\gamma _\nu ).$$
(7)
Here $`q_T^f`$ is the probability density function of finding a quark or an antiquark in a pure spin state, whose third component along the proton spin is $`T`$. Moreover the $`\rho `$’s are the spin density matrices of the initial and final active parton, i. e.,

$$\rho ^T=\frac{1}{2}\text{/}p[1+2T\gamma _5(\eta _{}+\text{/}\eta _{})],\rho ^{}=\frac{1}{2}\text{/}p^{}.$$
(8)
$`p`$ and $`p^{}`$ = $`p+q`$ are, respectively, the four-momenta of the initial and final parton; moreover $`2T\eta _{}`$ is component of the parton polarization along its momentum and $`2T\eta _{}`$ the quark transverse Pauli-Lubanski four-vector. $`\eta _{}`$ is a Lorentz scalar, such that $`|\eta _{}|`$ $``$ 1. It is immediate to check that eqs. (8) are consistent with the Politzer theorem in parton model apporoximation. Moreover we have

$$𝐏_{}=𝚷_{}z𝐩_{},$$
(9)
where $`𝚷_{}`$ is the transverse momentum of the pion with respect to the photon momentum. We keep $`𝚷_{}`$ fixed, therefore $`𝐏_{}`$ is a function of $`𝐩_{}`$. Furthermore we set $`|𝚷_{}|`$ $``$ 1 $`GeV`$, which is the condition for the factorization theorem to hold true.

To calculate the asymmetry (3), we substitute eqs. (5) to (8) into that expression, resulting in

$$A(Q,x;y;z,𝚷_{})=\frac{_{f=1}^3e_f^2(\delta Q^f+\delta \overline{Q}^f)}{_{f=1}^3e_f^2(Q^f+\overline{Q}^f)},=\frac{y(2y)}{1+(1y)^2}.$$
(10)
Here we have set $`y=1E^{}/E`$, where $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$ are, respectively, the initial and final energy of the lepton. Moreover we have introduced the quantities

$`Q^f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^2p_{}q^f(x,𝐩_{}^2)\phi ^f(z,𝐏_{}^2)},`$ (11)
$`\delta Q^f`$ $`=`$ $`2Q^1{\displaystyle d^2p_{}𝐩_{}𝐒\delta q^f(x,𝐩_{})\phi ^f(z,𝐏_{}^2)},`$ (12)
$$q^f=\underset{T=1/2}{\overset{1/2}{}}q_T^f,\delta q^f=\underset{T=1/2}{\overset{1/2}{}}2Tq_T^f.$$
(13)
$`q^f`$ is the t.m.d. unpolarized quark distribution. We have slightly changed our notation, considering separately, for each flavor, the quark ($`Q^f`$, $`\delta Q^f`$) and antiquark ($`\overline{Q}^f`$, $`\delta \overline{Q}^f`$) contribution, the barred quantities being defined analogously to eqs. (11) and (12). Some remarks are in order.

(i) Invariance of strong interactions under parity, time reversal and rotations (in particular rotations of $`\pi `$ around the proton momentum) implies

$$\delta q^f(x,𝐩_{})=\delta q^f(x,𝐩_{}).$$
(14)
This relation has two important consequences. First of all the integral at the r. h. s. of eq. (12) vanishes for $`𝚷_{}`$ = 0, therefore $`\delta Q^f`$ is proportional to the the scalar product $`𝚷_{}𝐒`$. Secondly, if we consider totally inclusive DIS - which amounts to replacing $`\phi ^f`$ $``$ 1 -, the integral (12) is washed out by integration over transverse momentum.

(ii) It is worth observing that, owing to the non-collinearity of the quark with respect to the proton, the t.m.d. transversity function includes, unlike $`h_1`$, a chiral-even term, which can be calculated by changing the quantization axis from the proton momentum to the quark momentum. It is just such a chiral-even function that appears in formula (12); this is why our asymmetry formula (10), unlike the other asymmetries considered in the literature, does not contain any chiral-odd distribution or fragmentation functions.

(iii) Gauge invariance implies that QCD first order corrections, in particular graphs with one gluon exchange, contribute to the above mentioned asymmetry. However a calculation in the light cone gauge assures that such contributions are about $`10\%`$ of the zero order terms.

(iv) Lastly the twist-3 character of the asymmetry (10) - which can be immediately checked from eq. (12) - forces us to pick up not too large values of $`Q^2`$ ($``$ 10 $`GeV^2`$). However this is not a serious limitation with respect to the twist-2 azimuthal asymmetries, which are plagued by a strong Sudakov suppression at large $`Q^2`$.

## 5 Numerical results and summary

Here we calculate the order of magnitude of the asymmetry (10). To this end we assume $`q^f`$, $`\delta q^f`$ and $`\phi ^f`$ to have a gaussian transverse momentum dependence, with the same width parameter. Then eq. (10) results in

$$A(Q,x;y;z,𝚷_{})=\frac{𝐒𝚷_{}}{Q}\frac{2z}{1+z^2}\frac{_fe_f^2\left[h_1^f(x)D^f(z)+\overline{h}_1^f(x)\overline{D}^f(z)\right]}{_fe_f^2\left[q^f(x)D^f(z)+\overline{q}^f(x)\overline{D}^f(z)\right]}.$$
(15)
Taking into account eq. (15) and the second eq. (10), we see that the optimal conditions for measuring the asymmetry are (i) $`y`$ and $`z`$ as close to 1 as possible and (ii) the pion transverse momentum relative to the photon parallel to the proton polarization. Under such conditions, and taking $`|𝚷_{}|1`$ $`GeV`$ and $`Q`$ = 2.5 $`GeV`$, we have $`A0.4R`$, where $`R=h_1^f(x)/q^f(x)`$ has been determined by HERMES, $`|R|=(50\pm 30)\%`$.

To summarize, first of all, we have shortly reviewed the methods proposed in the literature for determining $`h_1`$. Then we have suggested a SIDIS experiment, with a longitudinally polarized lepton and a transversely polarized proton, detecting a pion in the final state. We demand to pick up events such that the lepton scattering plane is orthogonal to the proton polarization; moreover we select pions produced in a fixed direction and at not too large angles with respect to the virtual photon momentum. The relative asymmetry is sensitive to the t.m.d. transversity function, but, unlike the other methods proposed in the literature, it does not involve any other unknown functions. The t.m.d. functions $`q^f`$ and $`\phi ^f`$ involved in asymmetry (10) can be parametrized in a well determined way. This asymmetry is estimated to be, for not too large values of $`Q^2`$ and under favourable kinematic conditions, at least $`10\%`$. The experiment could be performed at some facilities, like CERN (COMPASS coll.), DESY (HERMES coll.) or Jefferson Laboratory, where similar asymmetry measurements have been realized or planned.