text:
# The number of plane conics 5-fold tangent to a given curve

## 1. Relative Gromov-Witten invariants

In this section we will show how to compute the relative Gromov-Witten invariant that corresponds to the number of conics that are 5-fold tangent to a given smooth plane curve. We will use the notations and results from \[Ga1\], to which we also refer for further details.

###### Definition 1.1.

Let $`Y^2`$ be a smooth curve of degree $`d`$, and let $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_n`$ be non-negative integers. We denote by $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}=\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}^Y(^2,2)`$ the moduli space of $`n`$-pointed relative stable maps of degree 2 to $`^2`$ relative to $`Y`$ with multiplicities $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_n`$, as defined in \[Ga1\] definitions 1.1 and 1.18. Its virtual fundamental class is denoted $`[\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}]^{virt}`$.

###### Remark 1.2.

The moduli space $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ can be thought of as a compactification of the space of irreducible plane conics together with $`n`$ distinct marked points on them at which the conic has the prescribed local intersection multiplicities $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_n`$ with $`Y`$. In particular, the moduli space $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ corresponds to conics 5-fold tangent to $`Y`$.

###### Remark 1.3.

For future reference let us recall the precise definition from \[Ga1\]. Consider the degree-$`d`$ Veronese embedding $`i:^2^D`$ with $`D=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{D+2}{2}\right)1`$. We have $`i(Y)=i(^2)H`$ in $`^D`$ for a suitable hyperplane $`H^D`$. The inclusion morphism $`i`$ induces an inclusion of moduli spaces $`\overline{M}_{0,n}(^2,2)\overline{M}_{0,n}(^D,2d)`$. Moreover, let $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}^H(^D,2d)`$ be the closure in $`\overline{M}_{0,n}(^D,2d)`$ of all stable maps $`(C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,f)`$ such that $`C`$ is irreducible, $`f(C)H`$, and the divisor $`f^{}Y`$ on $`C`$ contains the points $`x_i`$ with multiplicities $`m_i`$. Then we define

$$\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}:=\overline{M}_{0,n}(^2,2)\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}^H(^D,2d)$$

(with the intersection taken in $`\overline{M}_{0,n}(^D,2d)`$). The virtual fundamental class is the corresponding refined intersection product

$$[\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}]^{virt}:=[\overline{M}_{0,n}(^2,2)][\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}^H(^D,2d)]A_{}(\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}).$$

The virtual dimension of $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ is $`5_i(m_i1)`$. By abuse of notation, we will always drop the superscript $`virt`$ from the notation of the virtual fundamental class from now on, as we do not need the ordinary fundamental classes of these spaces.

###### Remark 1.4.

From remark 1.3 we get immediately the following statement: let $`𝒞=(C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,f)\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ be an automorphism-free stable map such that $`C^1`$ is irreducible and $`f(C)Y`$. Then, locally around this point, $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ is scheme-theoretically the subscheme of $`\overline{M}_{0,n}(^2,2)`$ given by the $`_im_i`$ equations that describe the vanishing of the $`m_i`$-jets of $`ev_i^{}Y`$ at the points $`x_i`$, where $`ev_i:\overline{M}_{0,n}(^2,2)^2`$ are the evaluation maps. If moreover $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ has the expected dimension at this point $`𝒞`$, then this point lies on a unique irreducible component of $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$, and the virtual fundamental class on this component is just the ordinary scheme-theoretic fundamental class, i.e. the length of the scheme $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ at this irreducible component.

###### Remark 1.5.

There is an easier description of $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ *as a set*. Namely, $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ is the subspace of $`\overline{M}_{0,n}(^2,2)`$ of all $`n`$-pointed rational stable maps $`(C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,f)`$ of degree 2 to $`^2`$ such that the following two conditions are satisfied:

1. $`f(x_i)Y`$ for all $`i`$ such that $`m_i>0`$,
2. $`f^{}Y_im_ix_iA_0(f^1(Y))`$ is effective.

As mentioned above, the moduli space $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ has virtual dimension zero and corresponds to conics 5-fold tangent to $`Y`$ (together with a labeling of the five tangency points). Hence we define:

###### Definition 1.6.

The number

$$N_d:=\frac{1}{5!}\mathrm{deg}[\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}]$$

will be called the virtual number of conics 5-fold tangent to $`Y`$.

The number $`N_d`$ is only virtual because it receives correction terms from double covers of lines (see sections 2 and 3). In the rest of this section we will show how to compute the number $`N_d`$. Obviously, we can assume that $`d5`$.

The computation is done using the main theorem 2.6 of \[Ga1\] that tells us “how to raise the multiplicities of the moduli spaces”: it says that

$$(ev_n^{}Y+m_n\psi _n)[\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}]=[\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_{n1},m_n+1)}]+\text{correction terms},$$
(1)
where $`ev_n:\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}^2`$ is the evaluation map at the last marked point, and $`\psi _n`$ is the first Chern class of the cotangent line bundle $`L_n`$, i.e. of the bundle whose fiber at a stable map $`(C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,f)`$ is the cotangent space $`T_{C,x_n}^{}`$. The correction terms are as follows. Every correction term corresponds to a moduli space of reducible curves with $`r+1`$ components $`C_0,\mathrm{},C_r`$, where $`C_0`$ is contracted111This uses the fact that the curve $`Y`$ has positive genus, and that therefore every rational stable map to $`Y`$ must be constant. In general, $`C_0`$ can be a curve with any homology class in $`Y`$. to a point of $`Y`$, and the other components $`C_i`$ intersect $`C_0`$ in a point where they have local intersection multiplicity $`\mu _i`$ to $`Y`$. We get such a correction term for every $`r`$, every choice of the $`\mu _i`$, and every splitting of the total homology class and the marked points onto the components $`C_i`$, such that the following two conditions are satisfied:

1. the last marked point $`x_n`$ lies on the component $`C_0`$,
2. the sum of all the $`\mu _i`$ is equal to the sum of those $`m_i`$ such that $`x_iC_0`$.

These correction terms appear in the above equation with multiplicity $`_{i=1}^r\mu _i`$.

###### Example 1.7.

Here is an example of equation (1). In the case

$$(ev_5^{}Y+\psi _5)[\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,1)}]=[\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}]+\text{correction terms}$$

we want to figure out the correction terms. As this is an equation in (virtual) dimension 0, the contracted component $`C_0`$ must have exactly 3 special points (it would not be stable if it had fewer, and it would have moduli if it had more). Hence the correction terms fall into these two categories:

1. $`r=1`$ (in the above notation), $`C_1`$ is a conic, and $`C_0`$ is a contracted component with three special points $`x_5`$, the intersection point with $`C_1`$, and one other $`x_i`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},4`$,
2. $`r=2`$, $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ two lines, and $`C_0`$ is a contracted component with three special points $`x_5`$ and the two intersection points with $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$.

Actually, case (ii) cannot occur, because condition (b) above cannot be satisfied: the sum $`\mu _1+\mu _2`$ is at least 2, whereas $`m_5`$ is only 1. Hence the only correction terms are of type (i). We get four of them: one for each choice of the point $`x_i`$ that is to lie on the contracted component $`C_0`$. We have $`\mu _1=m_i+m_5=3`$ in each of these cases by condition (b). All four correction terms appear with multiplicity $`\mu _1=3`$. Pictorially, the equation reads

Here, the dotted curve is the fixed curve $`Y`$, and the solid curve is the moving conic $`C`$. In the four correction terms, the component with $`x_5`$ on it is meant to be contracted. Written down as an equation of virtual fundamental classes of moduli spaces, the formula reads

$`(ev_5^{}Y+\psi _5)[\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,1)}]=`$ $`[\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}]+3[\overline{M}_{(3,2,2,2)}]`$ (2)
$`+3[\overline{M}_{(2,3,2,2)}]+3[\overline{M}_{(2,2,3,2)}]+3[\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,3)}].`$
###### Remark 1.8.

The correction terms in equation (1) are themselves products of moduli spaces of relative stable maps of the form $`\overline{M}_{(m_1^{},\mathrm{},m_k^{})}^Y(^2,d^{})`$ with $`d^{}2`$ and $`m_1^{}+\mathrm{}m_k^{}m_1+\mathrm{}m_n`$. In other words, this equation expresses invariants (i.e. intersection products of $`ev_i^{}H`$ and $`\psi _i`$ classes, where $`H`$ is a line in $`^2`$) on the relative moduli space $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n+1)}`$ in terms of other invariants on relative moduli spaces $`\overline{M}_{(m_1^{},\mathrm{},m_k^{})}^Y(^2,d^{})`$ whose “total multiplicity” $`_im_i^{}`$ is smaller than the total multiplicity $`1+_im_i`$ of $`M_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n+1)}`$. Hence, applying equation (1) recursively $`m_1+\mathrm{}+m_n`$ times, we can express every invariant on $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ in terms of invariants on $`\overline{M}_{(0,\mathrm{},0)}`$, which are just ordinary Gromov-Witten invariants of $`^2`$. As the Gromov-Witten invariants of $`^2`$ are well-known, we can thus compute all relative Gromov-Witten invariants recursively, in particular $`N_d`$. Example 1.7 is the first step in this recursion process; it expresses the invariant $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ (with total multiplicity 10) in terms of invariants with total multiplicity 9.

Without actually carrying out the recursion, we can see the following.

###### Lemma 1.9.

The function $`dN_d`$ is a polynomial of degree 10 with leading coefficient $`\frac{1}{5!}`$.

###### Proof.

Using equation (1) it is easy to show by induction that every invariant (i.e. intersection product of $`ev_i^{}H`$ and $`\psi _i`$ classes) on a moduli space $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ is a polynomial in $`d`$ of degree (at most) $`m_1+\mathrm{}+m_n`$. In fact, this is obvious for $`m_1+\mathrm{}+m_n=0`$, as we then just have ordinary Gromov-Witten invariants of $`^2`$ (that do not depend on $`Y`$). Equation (1) reads

$$[\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_{n1},m_n+1)}]=(dev_n^{}H+m_n\psi _n)[\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}]\text{correction terms}.$$

All correction terms have total multiplicity at most $`m_1+\mathrm{}+m_n`$, so by induction hypothesis they contribute a polynomial in $`d`$ of degree at most $`m_1+\mathrm{}+m_n`$. The same is true for the $`\psi _n`$ summand on the right hand side. Hence, as every invariant on $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ is a polynomial in $`d`$ of degree at most $`m_1+\mathrm{}+m_n`$ by assumption, it follows that every invariant on $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n+1)}`$ is a polynomial in $`d`$ of degree at most $`m_1+\mathrm{}+m_n+1`$.

It can be seen from the same recursive formula that the $`d^{10}`$ coefficient of the invariant $`\mathrm{deg}[\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}]`$ is just

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{5}{}}ev_i^{}H^2[\overline{M}_{0,5}(^2,2)],$$

i.e. the number of conics through 5 general points in the plane. This number is 1, proving the statement of the lemma about the leading coefficient. ∎

The precise form of the polynomial $`N_d`$ is quite complicated and can only be obtained by carrying out the full recursion as described above. We only give the result here; a Maple program to compute it can be obtained from the author on request.

###### Proposition 1.10.

For $`d5`$, the virtual number of conics 5-fold tangent to $`Y`$ is

$$N_d=\frac{1}{5!}d(d3)(d4)(d^7+12d^618d^5540d^4+311d^3+5457d^22133d12690).$$

###### Remark 1.11.

The first few values of $`N_d`$ are given in the following table.

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}& & & & & & \\ d& 5& 6& 7& 8& 9& 10\\ & & & & & & \\ N_d& 1985& 71442& 687897& 3893256& 16180398& 54679380\end{array}$$

###### Remark 1.12.

In this section we have only used equation (1) in the Chow ring of the moduli space of stable maps $`\overline{M}_{0,n}(^2,2)`$. In fact, there is a refined version of this equation that we will need in section 3. If $`𝒫_k`$ denotes the rank-$`(k+1)`$ bundle of (relative) $`k`$-jets of $`ev_n^{}𝒪(Y)`$, there is a section $`\sigma `$ of the line bundle $`𝒫_{m_n}/𝒫_{m_n1}`$ on $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ whose vanishing describes precisely the condition that the map $`f`$ of a stable map $`(C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,f)`$ has multiplicity (at least) $`m_n+1`$ to $`Y`$ at $`x_n`$. The first Chern class of this line bundle is $`ev_n^{}Y+m_n\psi _n`$. (In fact, this is the idea how equation (1) is proven.) The refined version of equation (1) now states that this equation also holds in the Chow group of the zero locus of the section $`\sigma `$ on $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$.

## 2. The components of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$

Having just computed the invariant $`N_d`$, we will now study its enumerative significance. To do this, we have to identify the components of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ and compute their virtual fundamental classes. We will assume from now on that $`Y`$ is generic of degree $`d5`$. The equation of $`Y`$ is $`F=_Ia_Iz^I=0`$, where $`I`$ runs over all multi-indices $`(i_0,i_1,i_2)`$ with $`i_0+i_1+i_2=d`$, and $`z_0,z_1,z_2`$ are the homogeneous coordinates on $`^2`$. We start with irreducible stable maps whose image is a smooth conic.

###### Lemma 2.1.

Let $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_n`$ be non-negative integers such that $`m_i10`$, and let $`𝒞\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ be an irreducible stable map that is not a double cover of a line. Then:

1. The moduli space $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ is smooth of dimension $`5_i(m_i1)`$ at $`𝒞`$ (which is the expected dimension).
2. If this expected dimension is negative, then there is no such point $`𝒞`$.

###### Proof.

The plane degree-$`d`$ curves are parametrized by a projective space $`^D`$ with $`D=\frac{1}{2}d(d+3)`$, whose coordinates are the coefficients $`a_I`$ of $`F`$. Let $`Z\overline{M}_{0,n}(^2,2)\times ^D`$ be the closed substack of pairs $`((C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,f),Y)`$ such that the pull-back by $`f`$ of the equation of $`Y`$ vanishes at the points $`x_i`$ to order $`m_i`$ for all $`i`$. We claim that $`Z`$ is smooth of the expected dimension at every point $`((C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,f),Y)`$ such that $`C`$ is irreducible and $`f`$ is not a double cover of a line.

To prove this, we have to show that the matrix of derivatives of the equations describing $`Z`$ has maximal rank at the given point $`((C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,f),Y)`$. By a projective coordinate transformation of $`^2`$ and choosing homogeneous coordinates on $`C^1`$, we can assume that the map $`f`$ is given by $`(s:t)(s^2:st:t^2)`$, and the $`n`$ marked points are $`(1:\lambda _i)`$ with pairwise distinct $`\lambda _i`$.

Let us now write down the derivatives of the multiplicity equations with respect to the first $`m:=_im_i`$ of the variables $`a_{(d,0,0)}`$, $`a_{(d1,1,0)}`$, $`a_{(d1,0,1)}`$, $`a_{(d2,1,1)}`$, $`a_{(d2,0,2)}`$, $`a_{(d3,1,2)}`$, $`a_{(d3,0,3)}`$, $`a_{(d4,1,3)}`$, $`a_{(d4,0,4)}`$, $`a_{(d5,1,4)}`$ (remember $`m10`$ and $`d5`$). These coordinates are chosen to be the coefficients of $`s^{2di}t^i`$ for $`i=0,\mathrm{},9`$ when we substitute the map $`f`$ into $`F`$.

Multiplicity $`m_i`$ at the point $`(s:t)=(1:\lambda _i)`$ means that $`F|_{s=1,t=\lambda _i+ϵ}`$ has no $`ϵ`$ terms of order less than $`m_i`$. So the rows of the derivative matrix are just $`(\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i}{k}\right)\lambda _j^{ik})_{i=0,\mathrm{},m1}`$, for $`0k<m_j`$ and $`1jn`$. For example, for $`m_1=m_2=m_3=m_4=m_5=2`$ we get the matrix

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}1& \lambda _1& \lambda _1^2& \mathrm{}& \lambda _1^9\\ 0& 1& 2\lambda _1& \mathrm{}& 9\lambda _1^8\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 1& \lambda _5& \lambda _5^2& \mathrm{}& \lambda _5^9\\ 0& 1& 2\lambda _5& \mathrm{}& 9\lambda _5^8\end{array}\right).$$

By subtracting $`\lambda _1`$ times the $`i`$-th column from the $`(i+1)`$-st column for $`1i<m`$ and using induction, we see that the determinant is $`_{i<j}(\lambda _i\lambda _j)^{m_im_j}`$. In particular, it is not zero, so $`Z`$ is smooth of the expected dimension at $`((C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,f),Y)`$.

By remark 1.4, the statement of the lemma is just that the fiber of $`Z`$ over a general point of $`^D`$ is smooth of the expected dimension around a point considered above. This follows now from the Bertini theorem. ∎

Using remark 1.4 again, the following two corollaries are immediate.

###### Corollary 2.2.

Every irreducible stable map in $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ whose image in $`^2`$ is a smooth conic lies in a unique irreducible component of $`\overline{M}_{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_n)}`$ of the expected dimension. The virtual fundamental class of this component is equal to the usual one.

###### Corollary 2.3.

The number of smooth plane conics 5-fold tangent to $`Y`$ is finite. We denote it by $`n_d`$.

We will now study the additional non-enumerative contributions to the virtual invariant $`N_d`$.

###### Lemma 2.4.

The moduli space $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ has the following connected components:

1. $`5!`$ points for every smooth conic 5-fold tangent to $`Y`$.
2. $`5!(d4)(d5)`$ points for every bitangent of $`Y`$, corresponding to double covers of the bitangent, with marked points as in the picture below on the left, i.e. the map is ramified over two transverse intersection points of the bitangent with $`Y`$, and the five marked points are the two ramification points, both inverse image points of one bitangency point, and one inverse image point of the other bitangency point.
3. $`\frac{1}{4}5!(d4)`$ smooth rational curves for every bitangent of $`Y`$, corresponding to double covers of the bitangent, with marked points as in the picture above on the right, i.e. (for a general stable map in this smooth rational curve) the map is ramified over one transverse intersection point of the bitangent with $`Y`$ and one other arbitrary point, and the five marked points are the first ramification point, and the four inverse image points of the two bitangency points.

###### Proof.

Case 1: the image of the stable map is a smooth conic. If the five marked points are distinct in $`^2`$, we get the components (A) by lemma 2.1, with the $`5!`$ corresponding to the labeling of the marked points. If two of the points coincide in $`^2`$ (i.e. lie on a contracted component of the stable map), then by the description of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ in remark 1.5 the conic must have contact of order (at least) 4 to $`Y`$ at this point, i.e. it lies in $`\overline{M}_{(4,2,2,2)}`$. But this space is empty by lemma 2.1.

Case 2: the image of the stable map is a union of two (distinct) lines. It is easy to see that the conditions of remark 1.5 cannot be satisfied in this case.

Case 3: the stable map is a double cover of a line. There are six possible points of tangency to $`Y`$: the four inverse image points of the bitangency points, and the two ramification points if they are mapped to points of $`Y`$. For the stable map in $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ we can pick any five of these six points. If we leave out one of the points over the bitangency points, we arrive at the components (B), otherwise we get the components (C).

In case (B) we get a factor of $`5!`$ for the choice of labeling of the marked points, a factor of $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{d4}{2}\right)`$ for the choice of two transverse intersection points of $`Y`$ with the bitangent, and a factor of 2 for the choice of bitangency point over which we take only one inverse image point to be marked. In case (C) the second ramification point is not fixed, so we get one-dimensional families of such curves. Every such family has a 2:1 map to the bitangent given by the image of the moving ramification point; the two stable maps in a fiber of this map differ by exchanging the marked points over one bitangency point. The map is simply ramified over the two stable maps where the moving ramification point is one of the bitangency points. Hence every such family is a $`^1`$. The number of such families is $`d4`$ (for the choice of transverse intersection point of the bitangent with $`Y`$) times $`\frac{1}{4}5!`$ (for the labeling of the marked points, taking into account that exchanging the marked points over the bitangency points does not give us a new family). ∎

Of course, the virtual fundamental class of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ splits naturally into a sum of virtual fundamental classes on each of the connected components that we have just identified. As it is well-known that the number of bitangents of $`Y`$ is $`\frac{1}{2}d(d+3)(d2)(d3)`$ (see e.g. \[H\] exercise IV.2.3 f), we get the following corollary.

###### Corollary 2.5.

We have

$$N_d=n_d+\frac{1}{2}d(d+3)(d2)(d3)(d4)(d5)b_d+\frac{1}{8}d(d+3)(d2)(d3)(d4)c_d,$$

where $`b_d`$ is the degree of the part of the virtual fundamental class of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ supported on the point $`\overline{M}_B\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ below, and $`c_d`$ is the corresponding degree supported on the smooth rational curve $`\overline{M}_C\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ below.

## 3. Computation of the virtual fundamental classes

In this section we will do the necessary computations to determine the numbers $`b_d`$ and $`c_d`$ of corollary 2.5. Most of them are simple calculations in local coordinates, so we will only sketch these parts and leave the details to the reader.

The computation of $`b_d`$ is quite simple, as the component $`\overline{M}_B`$ of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$ has the expected dimension.

###### Lemma 3.1.

$`b_d=1`$ for all $`d`$.

###### Proof.

By remark 1.4 we just have to show that the 10 equations of vanishing of the 1-jets of$`ev_i^{}F`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},5`$ locally cut out the point $`\overline{M}_B`$ in $`\overline{M}_{0,5}(^2,2)`$ scheme-theoretically with multiplicity 1. Let us start with the 1-jets at the points $`x_1,x_2,x_3`$, i.e. with the space $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2)}`$. We can choose the coordinates on $`^2`$ such that the bitangent is $`\{z_2=0\}^2`$ and the bitangency points are $`(1:0:0)`$ and $`(0:1:0)`$. This means that

$`a_{(d,0,0)}=a_{(d1,1,0)}=0,`$ $`a_{(d1,0,1)},a_{(d2,2,0)}0\text{(tangency at }(1:0:0)\text{),}`$
$`a_{(0,d,0)}=a_{(1,d1,0)}=0,`$ $`a_{(0,d1,1)},a_{(2,d2,0)}0\text{(tangency at }(0:1:0)\text{).}`$
Moreover, we can choose coordinates on the source $`^1`$ such that the stable map $`\overline{M}_B`$ is given by $`(s:t)(s^2t^2:st:0)`$, and the marked points are $`x_1=(1:0)`$, $`x_2=(0:1)`$, $`x_3=(1:1)`$. Local coordinates of $`\overline{M}_{0,3}(^2,2)`$ around this point are then $`ϵ_1,\mathrm{},ϵ_8`$, where the stable map is given by

$$(s:t)(s^2t^2+ϵ_1s^2+ϵ_2st+ϵ_3t^2:st+ϵ_4s^2+ϵ_5t^2:ϵ_6s^2+ϵ_7st+ϵ_8t^2).$$

The three tangency equations are that $`F|_{s=1,t=\xi }`$, $`F|_{s=\xi ,t=1}`$, and $`F|_{s=1,t=1+\xi }`$ have no constant and linear $`\xi `$ terms. It is an easy computation to see that these 6 equations, linearized in the $`ϵ_i`$, give

$$ϵ_1+ϵ_2+ϵ_3=ϵ_4=ϵ_5=ϵ_6=ϵ_7=ϵ_8=0,$$

so $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2)}`$ is smooth of dimension 2 at the point $`\overline{M}_B`$ (with the points $`x_4`$ and $`x_5`$ forgotten).

Now let us consider the two other tangency conditions at the points $`x_4`$ and $`x_5`$. As the four coordinates of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,0,0)}`$ around $`\overline{M}_B`$ we can choose the images of the ramification points and a point in the domain of the stable map in the neighborhood of each ramification point. Considering only one ramification point for now, the two corresponding local coordinates are $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_2`$, where the stable map is given locally in affine coordinates as $`tt^2+\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_1`$, and the marked point is $`t=\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_2`$. Tangency means that the constant and linear $`\xi `$ terms of $`(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_2+\xi )^2+\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_1`$ vanish, so linearly in the $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_i`$ we get $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_1=\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_2=0`$. The same is true for the other ramification point, so we see that $`\overline{M}_B`$ is a smooth point of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,2)}`$. ∎

To study the space $`\overline{M}_C`$, we need a lemma that tells us how the stable maps in $`\overline{M}_C`$ can be deformed if we relax some of the multiplicity conditions.

###### Lemma 3.2.

Let $`H`$ be a line in $`^2`$, and let $`PH`$ be a point where $`Y`$ is simply tangent to $`H`$. Let $`𝒞=(C,x_1,x_2,f)\overline{M}_{(2,2)}`$ be a (possibly reducible) double cover of $`H`$, such that $`f^1(P)=\{x_1,x_2\}`$. Then every stable map in $`\overline{M}_{(2,2)}`$ in a neighborhood of $`𝒞`$ is also a double cover of a (maybe different) line.

###### Proof.

It is obvious that $`𝒞`$ cannot be deformed into a union of two distinct lines in $`\overline{M}_{(2,2)}`$. So we have to show that $`𝒞`$ cannot be deformed to an irreducible smooth conic in $`\overline{M}_{(2,2)}`$.

We use the classical space of complete conics (which is isomorphic to $`\overline{M}_{0,0}(^2,2)`$). Recall that this space is the closure in $`^5\times (^5)^{}`$ of the set $`(C,C^{})`$, where $`C`$ is an irreducible conic and $`C^{}`$ its dual. For our given point $`𝒞`$ (with the two marked points forgotten for the moment), $`C`$ is the double line $`H`$, and $`C^{}`$ is the union of the two lines in $`^{}`$ that correspond to the two ramification points of $`f`$ in $`^2`$. Assume that we can deform $`(C,C^{})`$ in the space of complete conics to an irreducible conic that is still tangent to $`Y`$ at two points in the neighborhood of $`P`$. In particular, we would then deform $`C^{}`$ to an irreducible conic that is tangent to the dual of $`Y`$ (or more precisely if $`H`$ is a bitangent of $`Y`$: to the branch of the dual of $`Y`$ that corresponds to the point $`P`$) at two points in this neighborhood. By the continuity of intersection products this means that both lines of $`C^{}`$ must actually be the line corresponding to the point $`P`$. Hence both ramification points of $`f`$ would have to be $`P`$. This means that $`𝒞`$ must have a contracted rational component over $`P`$, in contradiction to the assumption $`f^1(P)=\{x_1,x_2\}`$. ∎

We want to reduce the computation of $`c_d`$ to spaces that have the expected dimension. To do this, we use equation (2) from example 1.7. Note that by remark 1.12 this equation is true in the Chow group of the geometric zero locus of the section $`\sigma `$ (that describes the tangency condition and whose zero locus has class $`ev_5^{}Y+\psi _5`$), so it makes sense to restrict the equation to a connected component of this zero locus. Using lemma 3.2 it is easy to see that $`\overline{M}_C`$ is such a connected component, so we will restrict equation (2) to $`\overline{M}_C`$ and denote this restriction by $`|_{\overline{M}_C}`$.

Note first that on $`\overline{M}_C`$ the point $`x_5`$ can only come close to $`x_4`$, but never to the other three marked points. Hence equation (2) restricted to $`\overline{M}_C`$ reads

$$\left((ev_5^{}Y+\psi _5)[\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,1)}]\right)|_{\overline{M}_C}=c_d+3[\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,3)}]|_{\overline{M}_C}.$$
(3)
Let us first compute the virtual fundamental classes occurring in this equation.

###### Lemma 3.3.

1. The (one-dimensional) virtual fundamental class of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,1)}`$ on $`\overline{M}_C`$ is twice the usual one.
2. The degree of the (zero-dimensional) virtual fundamental class of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,3)}`$ on $`\overline{M}_C`$ is 3.

###### Proof.

We will only sketch the computations.

(i): It is enough to do the computation at a general point of $`\overline{M}_C`$. We have seen in the proof of lemma 3.1 that $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,0)}`$ is smooth of dimension 2 at a general point of $`\overline{M}_C`$. But requiring multiplicity 1 at the point $`x_5`$ gives us a factor of 2 (i.e. $`ev_5^{}Y`$ cuts out $`\overline{M}_C`$ in $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,0)}`$ with multiplicity 2) because $`x_5`$ lies on a tangency point of the stable map with $`Y`$.

(ii): The only point of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,3)}`$ in $`\overline{M}_C`$ is the stable map in the following picture on the left:

Its multiplicity can be computed using remark 1.4. Let us study the space $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2)}`$ at this point first. By lemma 3.2 every stable map in $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2)}`$ in a neighborhood of this point must also be a double cover of a line. It follows easily that, locally around this point, $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2)}`$ is reducible, with two smooth one-dimensional components coming together: one of them is keeping the image line $`f(C)`$ to be the bitangent and moving the ramification point at $`x_4`$, while keeping $`x_4`$ on an inverse image point of the bitangency point (picture in the middle). A local coordinate for this component is $`ϵ`$, where the stable map is given locally in affine coordinates as $`tz=t(t+ϵ)`$, and the marked point $`x_4`$ has coordinate $`t=0`$. Now the equation $`F`$ of $`Y`$ vanishes on the bitangent with multiplicity 2 in $`z`$, so this equation pulled back to the curve is locally $`t^2(t+ϵ)^2`$. Its $`t^2`$ coefficient vanishes to order 2 in $`ϵ`$, so this component contributes 2 to the virtual fundamental class of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,3)}`$. The other component is deforming the line in $`^2`$ away from the bitangent, with marked points as in the picture above on the right. Requiring multiplicity 3 at $`x_4`$ now restricts the line back to the bitangent with multiplicity 1. Hence the total degree of the virtual fundamental class of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,3)}`$ on $`\overline{M}_C`$ is $`2+1=3`$. ∎

To evaluate the left hand side of equation (3) it is not enough to compute the integral of $`ev_5^{}Y+\psi _5`$ on $`\overline{M}_C`$. There may also be contributions from components of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,1)}`$ that just intersect $`\overline{M}_C`$, if the section $`\sigma `$ above (whose zero locus has class $`ev_5^{}+\psi _5`$) vanishes on them at a point of $`\overline{M}_C`$. Let us compute these contributions.

###### Lemma 3.4.

The only component $`Z`$ of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,1)}`$ that meets $`\overline{M}_C`$ but is not $`\overline{M}_C`$ itself corresponds to double covers of simple tangent lines of $`Y`$, with ramification and marked points as in the picture on the left:

Its virtual fundamental class is equal to the usual one. It intersects $`\overline{M}_C`$ in the point $`𝒞`$ in the picture on the right. The section $`\sigma `$ on $`Z`$ vanishes at $`𝒞`$ with multiplicity 4.

###### Proof.

By lemma 3.2 (applied to the two marked points $`x_1`$ and $`x_2`$) no stable map in $`\overline{M}_C`$ can be deformed into an element in $`\overline{M}_{(2,2)}`$ that is not itself a double cover of a line. So the only possible deformation is that we still have a double cover, however not of the bitangent but rather a nearby line. It is now easy to see that such a deformation is only possible for the stable map $`𝒞\overline{M}_C`$ in the picture above on the right, and that the deformation has to be the one in the picture on the left.

The computation of the virtual fundamental class on this component $`Z`$ is completely analogous to similar calculations in previous lemmas and is therefore omitted. It remains to compute the order of vanishing of the section $`\sigma `$ on $`Z`$ at $`𝒞`$. Let us forget for a moment that the stable map splits off a contracted rational component at this point. Let $`P=f(x_4)=f(x_5)`$ be the bitangency point of $`𝒞`$. Choose local affine coordinates $`z_1,z_2`$ of $`^2`$ around $`P`$ such that the local equation of $`Y`$ is $`z_2=z_1^2+O(z_1^3)`$, and $`z_2=0`$ is the bitangent. As a local coordinate for $`Z`$ around $`𝒞`$ we can choose $`ϵ`$, where the stable map is given locally around $`P`$ by $`t(z_1=t^2\frac{1}{2}ϵ^2,z_2=\frac{1}{4}ϵ^4+O(ϵ^5)+t^2O(ϵ^4))`$, and the marked points $`x_4`$ and $`x_5`$ are $`t=0`$ and $`t=ϵ`$. (Note that this stable map is still a double cover of a line, $`t=0`$ is a ramification point that maps to $`Y`$, and $`t=ϵ`$ another point that maps to $`Y`$.)

Now actually the stable map splits off a rational contracted component at $`𝒞`$, which corresponds to blowing up the point $`(ϵ=0,t=0)`$ in our family of stable maps. Hence the true local coordinates of this family of stable maps are the coordinates of this blow-up, i.e. $`t/ϵ`$ and $`ϵ`$ instead of $`t`$ and $`ϵ`$. So the marked points $`x_4`$ and $`x_5`$ have coordinates $`t=0`$ and $`t/ϵ=1`$; in particular they do not coincide any more at $`ϵ=0`$.

The vanishing of the section $`\sigma `$ is the condition of tangency of $`f`$ to $`Y`$ at $`x_5`$. So to compute its order of vanishing at $`𝒞`$ we have to look at the linear $`\xi `$ coefficient of the equation of $`Y`$ evaluated at the point $`t/ϵ=1+\xi `$, i.e. of

$$z_2z_1^2+O(z_1^3)=\frac{1}{4}ϵ^4(\frac{1}{2}ϵ^2+\xi ϵ^2)^2+O(ϵ^5)=\xi ϵ^4\xi ^2ϵ^4+O(ϵ^5).$$

Hence the linear $`\xi `$ coefficient vanishes with multiplicity 4 at $`ϵ=0`$, which proves the lemma. ∎

We can now assemble the results of our local calculations to compute the number $`c_d`$.

###### Lemma 3.5.

$`c_d=1`$ for all $`d`$.

###### Proof.

We will evaluate equation (3)

$$\left((ev_5^{}Y+\psi _5)[\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,1)}]\right)|_{\overline{M}_C}=c_d+3[\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,3)}]|_{\overline{M}_C}.$$

The right hand side is $`c_d+9`$ by lemma 3.3 (ii). The left hand side gets a contribution from the components of $`\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,1)}`$ that intersect $`\overline{M}_C`$, and a contribution from $`\overline{M}_C\overline{M}_{(2,2,2,2,1)}`$ itself. The former is 4 by lemma 3.4. The latter is twice the degree of $`ev_5^{}Y+\psi _5`$ on $`\overline{M}_C`$ by lemma 3.3 (i). Note that the degree of $`ev_5^{}Y`$ on $`\overline{M}_C`$ is zero, as the image point of $`x_5`$ is fixed in $`\overline{M}_C`$.

To compute the integral of $`\psi _5`$ on $`\overline{M}_C`$, we will give a section of the cotangent line bundle $`L_5`$ and compute its zero locus. Let $`z`$ be a local coordinate around the bitangency point $`f(x_4)=f(x_5)`$. Then $`f^{}dz`$ defines a section of $`L_5`$. This section vanishes only at the point where the moving ramification point comes to $`x_4`$ and $`x_5`$, i.e. at the point $`𝒞`$ in the picture of lemma 3.4 on the right. The computation of the order of vanishing is very similar to the calculation in lemma 3.4. Ignoring the fact that $`𝒞`$ splits off a rational contracted component for $`x_4`$ and $`x_5`$, a local coordinate for $`\overline{M}_C`$ around $`𝒞`$ is $`ϵ`$, where the stable map is given locally by $`tz=t(tϵ)`$, the points $`x_4`$ and $`x_5`$ are $`t=0`$ and $`t=ϵ`$, and the moving ramification point is at $`t=\frac{1}{2}ϵ`$. Now, as in the proof of the previous lemma, taking into account the contracted rational component of $`𝒞`$ means that we have to blow up the point $`(t=0,ϵ=0)`$, and the coordinates are actually $`t/ϵ`$ and $`ϵ`$. Now we see that

$$f^{}dz=\frac{}{\frac{t}{ϵ}}\left(ϵ^2\frac{t}{ϵ}\left(\frac{t}{ϵ}1\right)\right)d\frac{t}{ϵ}=ϵ^2\left(2\frac{t}{ϵ}1\right)d\frac{t}{ϵ},$$

which vanishes with multiplicity 2 in $`ϵ`$ around 0 at the point $`x_5`$. Hence the integral of $`\psi _5`$ over $`\overline{M}_C`$ is 2.

Putting everything together, we get $`4+22=c_d+9`$, and therefore $`c_d=1`$. ∎

We can now insert the values for $`N_d`$, $`b_d`$ and $`c_d`$ from proposition 1.10, lemma 3.1, and lemma 3.5, respectively, into the equation from lemma 2.5, and get the following final result.

###### Corollary 3.6.

For $`d5`$, the enumerative number of conics 5-fold tangent to $`Y`$ is

$$n_d=\frac{1}{5!}d(d3)(d4)(d^7+12d^618d^5540d^4+251d^3+5712d^21458d14580).$$

###### Remark 3.7.

The first few values of $`n_d`$ are given in the following table.

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}& & & & & & \\ d& 5& 6& 7& 8& 9& 10\\ & & & & & & \\ n_d& 2015& 70956& 684222& 3878736& 16137873& 54575640\end{array}$$

## 4. Application to rational curves on K3 surfaces

Let $`X`$ be a K3 surface, and let $`\beta H_2(X,)`$ be the class of a holomorphic curve in $`X`$. The moduli space of stable maps to $`X`$ of class $`\beta `$ has virtual dimension $`1`$, so there is no corresponding Gromov-Witten invariant of $`X`$. However, we have chosen $`X`$ such that it contains rational curves of class $`\beta `$, and we would like to count them. The reason for the mismatch in the virtual dimension is that, in the space of all K3 surfaces, only a 1-codimensional subset of K3 surfaces contains curves in the class $`\beta `$ at all. So, if $`𝒳`$ is a general 1-dimensional family of K3 surfaces with $`X`$ as central fiber, and $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }H_2(𝒳,)`$ is the class induced by $`\beta `$ via the inclusion $`X𝒳`$, then the only rational curves in $`𝒳`$ of class $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$ are in fact curves of class $`\beta `$ in $`X`$. But now the virtual dimension of the space of stable maps to $`𝒳`$ of class $`\beta `$ is 0, hence there is a corresponding Gromov-Witten invariant. This invariant counts curves in $`𝒳`$ of class $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$ and therefore curves in $`X`$ of class $`\beta `$; so we would like to call this number $`n_\beta `$ “the number of rational curves in $`X`$ of class $`\beta `$”. A rigorous definition of the invariant $`n_\beta `$ of $`X`$ along these lines has been given in \[BL\]. The number $`n_\beta `$ does not depend on a family $`𝒳`$ chosen to define it.

The numbers $`n_\beta `$ have been computed in various papers (\[YZ\], \[B\], \[G\], \[BL\]) under the assumption that the class $`\beta `$ is primitive, i.e. not a non-trivial multiple of a smaller integral homology class. The result is that $`n_\beta `$ is equal to the $`q^d`$ coefficient in the series

$`G(q)={\displaystyle \underset{i>0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1q^i)^{24}}}`$ $`=1+24q+324q^2+3200q^3+25650q^4+176256q^5+\mathrm{}`$
$`=:{\displaystyle \underset{d0}{}}G_dq^d.`$
where $`d=\frac{1}{2}\beta ^2+1`$. It is not known yet what the numbers are if $`\beta `$ is not primitive.

The results of this paper allow us to compute the number $`n_\beta `$ explicitly in a case where $`\beta `$ is not primitive. Let $`Y^2`$ be a general sextic curve, and let $`\pi :X^2`$ be the double cover of $`^2`$ branched along $`Y`$. It is well-known that $`X`$ is a K3 surface. Let us start by considering curves on $`X`$ in the (primitive) class $`\beta =\pi ^{}\mathrm{}`$, where $`\mathrm{}`$ is the class of a line. The pull-back of a general line in $`^2`$ will be a 2:1 cover of $`^1`$, branched along the 6 intersection points of $`Y`$ with the line, hence it is a curve of genus 2. We get a rational curve (with 2 nodes) on $`Y`$ as a pull-back of a line if and only if the line is a bitangent of $`Y`$: the pull-back is then again a 2:1 cover, but with 2 nodes (the bitangency points), and only 2 ramification points (the remaining 2 intersection points of $`Y`$ with the line). So we see that $`n_\pi ^{}\mathrm{}`$ has to be the number of bitangents of $`Y`$. In fact, this number is 324 (see e.g. \[H\] exercise IV.2.3 f), which is equal to $`G_2`$ (note that $`\frac{1}{2}(\pi ^{}\mathrm{})^2+1=2`$).

Now let us consider rational curves in $`X`$ of class $`2\pi ^{}\mathrm{}`$, i.e. pull-backs of conics — this class is not primitive any more. The pull-back of a general conic will be a 2:1 cover of the conic ramified at 12 points, so it is a curve of genus 5. We can get rational curves in the following ways:

1. Pull-backs of (smooth) conics that are 5-fold tangent to $`Y`$. These will be 2:1 covers of the conic, with 5 nodes over the tangency points, and only 2 ramification points (the remaining 2 intersection points of $`Y`$ with the conic). By corollary 3.6, there are $`70956`$ such curves.
2. Pull-backs of unions of two distinct lines: these give a rational curve only if the pull-backs of both lines are rational, i.e. they are both bitangents. The pull-back is then a union of two (2-nodal) rational curves on $`X`$ that intersect in 2 points. To make this into a rational stable map we can glue these two components at either intersection point. Hence there are $`2\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{324}{2}\right)=104652`$ such stable maps.
3. Double covers of pull-backs of a line, necessarily again of a bitangent. The pull-back of such a bitangent is a 2-nodal rational curve $`C`$. There are two possible ways of double covers of such a curve:

1. Double covers that factor through the normalization of $`C`$. The space of these curves is the same as that of double covers of a smooth rational curve; it has dimension 2.
    2. Double covers that do not factor through the normalization. They have two components that are both mapped to $`C`$ with degree 1, and glued over one of the nodes of $`C`$ in such a way that, locally around this node, the morphism of the stable map is an isomorphism onto $`C`$. There are $`2324=648`$ such curves.

Adding up just the numbers from (i), (ii), and (iii b), we get

$$70956+104652+648=176256,$$

which is exactly $`G_5`$ (and $`\frac{1}{2}(2\pi ^{}\mathrm{})+1=5`$). So we see that, for our non-primitive class $`\beta `$, the corresponding invariant from the series $`G(q)`$ does give the correct number, *except* for a correction (iii a) for double covers of curves of class $`\frac{1}{2}\beta `$ that factor through the normalization of these curves. Let us compute what this correction term is.

###### Lemma 4.1.

With notations as above, the double covers of type (iii a) of the pull-back of a bitangent contribute $`\frac{1}{8}`$ to the invariant $`n_{2\pi ^{}\mathrm{}}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`D^1`$ be the normalization of the nodal rational curve in $`X`$. The moduli space of the double covers that factor through the normalization is then just $`\overline{M}_{0,0}(D,2)`$, which has dimension 2. As the normal bundle of the (local) immersion $`DX`$ is $`𝒪(2)`$, the rank-3 obstruction bundle for the corresponding Gromov-Witten invariant would be $`R^1\pi _{}f^{}𝒪(2)`$, where $`\pi :\overline{M}_{0,1}(^1,2)\overline{M}_{0,0}(^1,2)`$ is the forgetful map and $`f:\overline{M}_{0,1}(^1,2)^1`$ the evaluation.

As explained above, the K3-invariants of $`X`$ are defined as the ordinary Gromov-Witten invariants of a 1-dimensional family $`𝒳`$ of K3 surfaces in which $`X`$ is the only surface that contains rational curves in the given homology class. This means that the obstruction bundle for the K3 invariants is obtained from the usual Gromov-Witten obstruction bundle by taking the quotient with $`\pi _{}f^{}N_{X/𝒳}=\pi _{}f^{}𝒪=𝒪`$. So the integral that we want to compute is

$$c_{top}(R^1\pi _{}f^{}𝒪(2)/𝒪)[\overline{M}_{0,0}(^1,2)].$$

This is easily done: from the two exact sequences on $`\overline{M}_{0,1}(^2,2)`$

$$0f^{}𝒪(1)f^{}𝒪f^{}𝒪_P0$$

$$0f^{}𝒪(2)f^{}𝒪(1)f^{}𝒪_P0$$

(where $`P^1`$ is a point) we get the exact sequences of vector bundles on $`\overline{M}_{0,0}(^2,2)`$

$$0𝒪\pi _{}f^{}𝒪_PR^1\pi _{}f^{}𝒪(1)0$$

$$0\pi _{}f^{}𝒪_PR^1\pi _{}f^{}𝒪(2)R^1\pi _{}f^{}𝒪(1)0$$

from which it follows that

$$c_2(R^1\pi _{}f^{}𝒪(2)/𝒪)=c_2(R^1\pi _{}f^{}(𝒪(1)𝒪(1))),$$

i.e. the contribution of the double covers under consideration is the same as the double cover contribution for rational curves on Calabi-Yau threefolds with balanced normal bundle. This contribution is well-known to be $`\frac{1}{8}`$, see e.g. \[Ga2\] example 6.3. ∎

So we see that

$$n_{2\pi ^{}\mathrm{}}=G_5+\frac{1}{8}G_2.$$

We conjecture that this pattern continues, i.e. that the numbers $`n_\beta `$ receive multiple cover corrections similarly to the case of Gromov-Witten invariants of Calabi-Yau threefolds:

$$n_\beta =\underset{k}{}\frac{1}{k^3}G_{\frac{1}{2}(\frac{\beta }{k})^2+1},$$

where the sum is taken over all $`k>0`$ such that $`\frac{\beta }{k}`$ is an integral homology class.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In quantum field theory, fluctuations of the vacuum give rise to the production of pair quanta which tend to screen (or antiscreen) the charge of a heavy test particle. If one perturbatively calculates the non-relativistic potential $`V(r)`$ between two unlike static charges, say, in QED, the usual Coulomb-like behaviour is modified by the photon self-energy $`\mathrm{\Pi }(K^2)`$ such that

$$V(r)=\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}e^{i\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{r}}\frac{e^2}{k^2+\mathrm{\Pi }(K^2=k^2)},$$
(1)
where $`k=|\stackrel{}{k}|`$ and $`K=(k^0,\stackrel{}{k})`$. Inserting the text-book result for $`\mathrm{\Pi }(K^2)`$ and expanding for small distances $`k^2m_e^2`$, the quantum fluctuations lead to an effective coupling constant

$$\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}(k)=\frac{\alpha }{1{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{3\pi }}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}\right)},$$
(2)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{exp}(5/3)m_e`$ is a scale related to the electron mass $`m_e`$. This is, of course, the familiar result of the running coupling in QED which is commonly obtained using renormalization group methods. In refs., it has been shown that the running of a coupling constant at $`T=0`$ can be understood in physical terms by the polarizability of the vacuum. The effects of fluctuations can be incorporated to a certain extent in a scale dependent dielectric permittivity $`ϵ`$ that defines an effective charge $`\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}=\alpha /ϵ`$. In vacuum, Lorentz invariance dictates that

$$\mu ϵ=1,$$
(3)
where $`\mu `$ is the magnetic permeability. Calculating $`\mu (k)`$ at the momentum scale $`k`$ and extracting the leading log contribution, one finally recovers the familiar expressions for the running couplings in QED and QCD. Then, asymptotic freedom can be interpreted in terms of a paramagnetic ground state.
In this work, we extend the approach of  to finite temperature and calculate an effective coupling constant $`\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}(k,T)`$. Instead of a loop expansion, we evaluate the energy shift of the vacuum to order $`e^2`$ after applying an external (chromo)magnetic field $`H`$. The connection of magnetic permeability and dielectric permittivity at finite temperature is made by invoking a renormalization group argument. QCD with a magnetic background field at finite temperature has been studied in a number of works . In contrast to previous approaches, we lay out a non-technical calculation of charge screening without reference to propagators or self-energies, resorting to entities that have an immediate physical interpretation (energy densities and susceptibilities). Our work then allows an alternative, though slightly more phenomenological, view on screening at high temperature.
A possible dissolution of bound quarkonia states, e.g. $`J/\psi `$, was proposed long ago as an experimental signature of the quark-gluon plasma in heavy-ion collisions. The $`T`$-dependence of the interquark potential in QCD is therefore of great interest, and simulations of the potential in lattice gauge theory do indeed show a strong screening . In perturbation theory, the quantity that enters the Fourier transform of the potential at finite temperature is the static limit of the longitudinal gauge boson self-energy $`\mathrm{\Pi }_L(k^0,k;T)`$ :

$$V(r,T)=\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}e^{i\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{r}}\frac{e^2}{k^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_L(0,k;T)}.$$
(4)
Equivalently, one can define a dielectric permittivity by

$$ϵ(k,T)=1+\frac{\mathrm{\Pi }_L(0,k,T)}{k^2}.$$
(5)
The perturbative one-loop thermal contribution to $`\mathrm{\Pi }_L`$ has been calculated long ago as :

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_L(0,k,T)=\frac{e^2T^2}{3}(m_D^e)^2\text{for QED,}$$
(6)
and

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_L(0,k,T)=\left(N_c+\frac{N_f}{2}\right)\frac{g^2T^2}{3}(m_D^c)^2\text{for QCD,}$$
(7)
which defines screening masses $`m_D`$. Here, $`e`$ and $`g`$ are the electromagnetic and strong coupling, respectively, $`N_c`$ is the number of colours and $`N_f`$ the number of thermally active flavours. Since the static limits of the self-energies are momentum-independent, the poles of the expression in (4) are simply the gauge invariant Debye masses $`m_D`$ defined in eqs.(6) and (7) and lead to an exponential damping of the potential $`V(r)\mathrm{exp}(m_Dr)/r`$. In particular, this form of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_L`$ has the consequence that gluons screen the strong interaction, in contrast to the zero temperature case, over long distances. However, the formula for the running QCD coupling constant commonly used in finite temperature calculations assumes that typical momentum transfers are of the order of the temperature, hence

$$\alpha _s(T)\frac{1}{(11N_c2N_f)\mathrm{log}(T)}.$$
(8)
In this expression, gluons therefore retain their antiscreening property, reflecting the ultraviolet sector of the theory. The transition to Debye screening is not obvious. Another troublesome feature of QCD screening at finite temperature is the behaviour of the Debye mass at next-to-leading order, which reads

$$m_D^{(2)}(T)=m_D^{(1)}+\frac{N_cg^2T}{4\pi }\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{C}{g}\right),$$
(9)
with $`m_D^{(1)}`$ given by eq.(7). Here $`C`$ is a constant arising from the ad hoc removal of infrared singularities involving chromomagnetic static modes. The appearance of the non-perturbative logarithmic term questions the applicability of loop calculations somewhat. Furthermore, whereas in QED the self-energy tensor $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mu \nu }`$ is gauge independent, this is not the case in QCD, which makes the very definition of a Debye mass conceptually difficult. Finally, due to the nonlinear coupling of the gluons, relation (5) remains valid only within certain gauges (like temporal axial gauge) . An evaluation of the effective charge and its possible screening not relying on a Feynman graph expansion is therefore desirable.

## 2 The zero temperature case

In this section, we define our notation and briefly review the calculation of refs.. To obtain a scale-dependent $`\mu `$, let us look at the change in the energy $`E`$ of the vacuum when an external magnetic field $`H`$ is applied:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E=\frac{1}{2}\left[4\pi \chi (H)\right]VH^2E_{\mathrm{vac}},$$
(10)
where $`\mu (H)=1+4\pi \chi (H),`$ and $`\chi (H)`$ is the field-dependent magnetic susceptibility. As soon as the energies at $`H=0`$ and finite $`H`$ are known to some approximation, a field-, or equivalently, scale-dependent $`\mu (H)`$ can be extracted. Later, the external field $`2eH`$ is identified with the scale $`K^2`$ at which the physical process is probed.
For charged scalar fields, the general expression for the energy spectrum of a single Fourier mode reads

$$E_{n,k}^\pm =\omega _k\left(n_k^\pm +\frac{1}{2}\right),$$
(11)
distinguishing between particles (+) and antiparticles ($``$). The dispersion relation $`\omega _k=k`$ follows from the positive energy solution of the Klein-Gordon equation for massless, non-interacting particles. At $`T=0`$, the occupation number $`n_k^\pm `$ for the ground state is zero. Summing over particle and antiparticle states, we recover the familiar divergent zero-point vacuum energy $`E_0=_k\omega _k`$. For massless spin-$`\frac{1}{2}`$ fermions, the energy without an external field becomes

$$E_0^f=2\underset{k}{}\omega _k.$$
(12)
The factor 2 arises from the spin summation, the factor $`1`$ stems from the anti-commutation relation fermionic annihilation and creation operators obey. In the presence of the magnetic field $`H`$, we substitute $`_\mu D_\mu =_\mu igqA_\mu `$, where $`q`$ is the charge of the (anti)particle in units of the coupling $`g`$. Choosing the orientation of the $`H`$-field along the $`z`$-axis, we construct a vector potential as $`A_\mu =(0,0,x_1H,0)`$. This choice for $`A_\mu `$ obeys $`_\mu A^\mu =0`$. In the following, we treat QED and QCD in parallel and define $`e=qg`$. We have to solve for the energy spectrum of $`i/D\psi (x)=0`$, which is basically a relativistic version of the Landau theory for the diamagnetic properties of an electron gas. The solution for the energy of a single Fourier mode becomes

$$E_{n,k_3,s_3}=\sqrt{k_3^2+2eH\left(n+1/2+s_3\right)}.$$

In addition, the $`x_1`$ space variable is shifted by $`k_2/(eH)`$. Note that the energy depends only on two quantum numbers. The third is ’hidden’ in the mentioned $`x_1`$ shift. Here $`s_3=\pm \frac{1}{2}`$, the $`z`$-component of the spin. The $`Hs_3`$ term clearly shows the coupling of the spin to the external field, and hence, if the spin of the fermion is anti-parallel to the $`H`$-field, the energy is lowered. For QCD, there is also an implicit sum over the colour charges $`q`$ hidden in $`e=gq`$. Finally, for a vector gauge boson the $`H`$-independent energy is the same as for a scalar field, except that there is an additional factor of 2 counting the transverse spin degrees of freedom:

$$E_0^g=2\underset{k}{}\omega _k.$$
(13)
The sum over colour degrees of freedom yields an additional multiplicative factor of $`N_c^21`$. In presence of the magnetic field, we separate the field $`A_\mu `$ into the classical background part $`A_\mu ^b`$ and the fluctuating quantum part $`A_\mu ^q`$. The equations of motion become $`D_\mu G^{\mu \nu }=0`$, where $`G^{\mu \nu }`$ is the gluon field strength tensor. With a suitable choice of background gauge, the energy for the two physical degrees of freedom of $`A_\mu `$ can be written as

$$E_{n,k_3,s_3}=\sqrt{k_3^2+2eH\left(n+1/2+s_3\right)},$$
(14)
the same as in the fermionic case, but now with $`s_3=\pm 1`$. Again, summation over the colour charges is implicitly assumed.
We want to extract the leading log($`H`$) contribution to the energy shift induced by the external field. With the total spin $`s`$ of the particle considered and $`i=f,g`$:

$`\mathrm{\Delta }E^i`$ $`=`$ $`(1)^{2s}\left({\displaystyle \underset{n,k_2,k_3,s_3}{}}E_{n,k_3,s_3}^i{\displaystyle \underset{k_1,k_2,k_3,s_3}{}}\omega _k\right),\text{where}`$ (15)
$`E_{n,k_3,s_3}^i`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{k_3^2+2eH\left(n+1/2+s_3\right)}.`$ (16)
Introducing a quantization volume $`V=L^3`$, we replace the sum over $`k_2`$ and $`k_3`$ by an integral weighted with the density of states. Taking into account that the $`x_1`$ variable was shifted, $`k_2`$ is restricted to $`0k_2LeH`$. Then,

$$\underset{k_2,k_3}{}\frac{L}{2\pi }𝑑k_3\frac{L}{2\pi }(eHL)=\frac{V}{4\pi ^2}(eH)𝑑k_3.$$

To regularize the divergence, we will use a UV cut-off $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ such that $`0n\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{2eH}=n_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`k_3^2\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$. The first idea would be to replace the sum over $`n`$ by an integral. However, if we perform the shift $`n^{}=2eHn`$, we find that the integral would be independent of $`H`$ to leading order. That is, we would have recovered the vacuum result, in the absence of the field $`H`$. So what we need is the correction to the replacement of a sum with an integral. Such a correction term suitable for our case here is provided by a specific Euler’s sum rule

$$\underset{n=n_1}{\overset{n_2}{}}f(n+1/2)=_{n_1}^{n_2}f(x)𝑑x\frac{1}{24}f^{}(x)|_{n_1}^{n_2}.$$

We may now re-define the energy shift as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E^i=(1)^{2s}\underset{s_3}{}\left\{\underset{n=0}{\overset{n_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}}f(n+1/2+s_3)_0^{n_\mathrm{\Lambda }}𝑑nf(n+1/2+s_3)\right\},$$

where

$$f(x)=\frac{V}{2\pi ^2}(eH)_0^\mathrm{\Lambda }𝑑k_3\sqrt{k_3^2+2eHx}.$$

Since we are not interested in the soft modes of the order of $`eH`$ (the leading-log behaviour is dominated by the UV behaviour of the theory), we split the sum into two pieces ($`Nn_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$)

$$\underset{n=0}{\overset{n_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}}=\underset{n=0}{\overset{N}{}}+\underset{n=N}{\overset{n_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}}.$$

Let us treat $`s_3`$ formally as a continuous variable. Taylor expanding in $`s_3`$ (since $`nNs_3`$), we are left with

$`\mathrm{\Delta }E^i`$ $`=`$ $`(1)^{2s}{\displaystyle \underset{s_3}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=N}{\overset{n_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}}}\left(f(n+1/2)s_3f^{}(n+1/2)+{\displaystyle \frac{s_3^2}{2}}f^{\prime \prime }(n+1/2)+\mathrm{}\right)+`$
$`+\mathrm{\Phi }(eH,N).`$
Now $`\mathrm{\Phi }(eH,N)`$, which represents the contributions from soft modes only, does not depend on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. It is thus proportional to $`(eH)^2`$ for dimensional reasons, a small non-leading log contribution, and may be safely neglected. The linear term in $`s_3`$ vanishes upon summation, and re-substituting $`e=gq`$, we find

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E^i=\frac{1}{2}V(gH)^2\left[\frac{q^2(1)^{2s}}{2\pi ^2}\underset{s_3}{}\left(\frac{s_3^2}{2}\frac{1}{24}\right)\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{2eH}\right)\right].$$

The sum over a $`SU(N_c)`$ multiplet of the squared charges $`q^2`$ is $`N_f/2`$ for the fundamental representation ($`N_f`$ quark flavours) and $`N_c/2`$ for the adjoint representation (the gluons). For QCD, the susceptibility becomes

$$4\pi \chi g^2\frac{11N_c2N_f}{48\pi ^2}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{2eH}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\right),$$

which reproduces the expression obtained by renormalization group calculations if we identify $`2eH=K^2`$. For QED, the sum over the charge(s) is simply 1, so we obtain

$$4\pi \chi +\frac{e^2}{12\pi ^2}\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{2eH}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\right),$$

again in accordance with eq.(2). Having outlined the calculation of , we now proceed to the main part of the paper and switch on temperature.

## 3 The temperature-dependent part

At finite temperature $`T`$, the occupation number $`n_k^\pm `$ appearing in eq.(11) does not vanish anymore for the thermal ground state, instead $`n_k=(\mathrm{exp}(\beta \omega _k)1)^1=n_{BE}`$, the usual Bose-Einstein distribution function ($`\beta =1/T`$). For fermions, $`n_k=(\mathrm{exp}(\beta \omega _k)+1)^1=n_{FD}`$, the Fermi-Dirac distribution function. Thus, when summing over the infinitely many degrees of freedom, we find for the total vacuum energy of a charged scalar field

$$E_0^s=\underset{k}{}\omega _k\left(1+2n_{BE}(\omega _k)\right).$$
(18)
The result clearly separates into the divergent vacuum part already treated and a finite, $`T`$-dependent part. In the case of a finite magnetic field $`H`$, the higher energy modes (16) are occupied with their respective thermal probabilities, and we can write ($`i=f,g`$):

$`\mathrm{\Delta }E^i`$ $`=`$ $`E^iE_0^i,`$ (19)
$`E^i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n,k_2,k_3,s_3}{}}E_{n,k_3,s_3}^i\left[(1)^{2s}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{exp}(\beta E_{n,k_2,s_3}^i)(1)^{2s}}}\right]\text{and}`$ (20)
$`E_0^i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k_1,k_2,k_3,s_3}{}}\omega _k\left[(1)^{2s}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{exp}(\beta \omega _k)(1)^{2s}}}\right].`$ (21)
Again, we need to extract the leading thermal contribution to $`\mu (k)`$. However, at finite temperature, relation (3) does not hold any more. One could imagine to start with

$$\mu (k)ϵ(k)=n(k)^2,$$
(22)
where $`n`$ is the index of refraction. This quantity is related to the photon or gluon phase velocity by $`v_p=1/n`$, and $`v_p`$ could be extracted from the (full) dispersion relation of the corresponding gauge boson since $`v_p=\omega _k/k`$. However, eq.(22) holds only for ”on-shell” propagating gauge bosons. Since Lorentz invariance is formally broken by the presence of the heat bath, $`\mu `$ and $`ϵ`$ become functions of $`k^0`$ and $`k`$, and eq.(22) reads, more explicitly, $`\mu (\omega _k,k)ϵ(\omega _k,k)=n(k)^2`$. Here, we consider an off-shell external field, so a relation between $`\mu (0,k)`$ and $`ϵ(0,k)`$ is required.
The total energy density of the system can be written as the sum of the field and the induced medium energy density:

$$_{\mathrm{tot}}=\frac{1}{2}H^2+\frac{1}{V}\underset{i}{}\mathrm{\Delta }E^i.$$
(23)
Introducing an effective field $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, we rewrite $``$ as

$$_{\mathrm{tot}}=\frac{1}{2}H_{\mathrm{eff}}^2=\frac{1}{2}\frac{(eH)^2}{e_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}.$$

In the last step we made use of the fact that $`eH`$ has to be a renormalization group invariant, so $`eH=e_{\mathrm{eff}}H_{\mathrm{eff}}`$. The effective coupling constant is now defined by

$$\frac{1}{e_{\mathrm{eff}}^2}2\frac{_{\mathrm{tot}}}{(eH)^2}=\frac{1}{e^2}[14\pi \chi (2eH,T)],$$

using (10) and (23). Replacing $`2eH`$ by $`k^2`$, as at $`T=0`$, our master formula hence reads

$$\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}(k,T)=\frac{\alpha }{ϵ(k,T)}=\frac{\alpha }{14\pi \chi (k,T)}.$$
(24)
The thermal piece of eq.(20) can be compactly re-written as

$$E^{th}(T,b,s,s_3)=VT^4\left(\frac{b}{2\pi ^2}\underset{s_3}{}\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x\frac{\sqrt{x^2+b(n+1/2+s_3)}}{\mathrm{exp}\left(\sqrt{x^2+b(n+1/2+s_3)}\right)(1)^{2s}}\right),$$
(25)
where $`x`$ is dimensionless and $`b=2eH/T^2`$ is a measure for the ratio of quantum and thermal effects. We consider the high-temperature limit $`b1`$ in the rest of the paper.

### 3.1 A first (incomplete) approximation

The sum appearing in expression (25) obviously cannot be evaluated exactly. It is instructive to work out the first intuitive approximation to the sum although we will show in the next section that it is too crude.
Consider the fermionic part. Note that the factor $`b(n+1/2+s_3)`$ plays the role of a mass term in the integral in eq.(25), so the contribution of the terms in the sum becomes exponentially suppressed as $`n`$ increases. In contrast to the $`T=0`$ case we are therefore interested in the behaviour of the sum at small $`n`$ where the $`s_3`$ spin component is not negligible. Thus we cannot apply a Taylor expansion in $`s_3`$, as done in (2), and need an exact summation over $`s_3`$. Isolating then the lowest lying Landau mode ($`n=0,s_3=1/2`$) and combining the remaining expressions into a single sum, we find

$$\frac{E^f}{VT^4}\stackrel{~}{E}^f=\frac{b}{24}+\frac{b}{\pi ^2}\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x\frac{\sqrt{x^2+b(n+1)}}{\mathrm{exp}\left(\sqrt{x^2+b(n+1)}\right)+1}.$$
(26)
Since $`b1`$, the terms in the sum vary slowly with $`n`$, so we can again try to trade the sum for an integral over $`n`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{E}^f=\frac{b}{24}+\frac{2}{\pi ^2}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑r\frac{r^2\sqrt{r^2+b}}{\mathrm{exp}\left(\sqrt{r^2+b}\right)+1}.$$
(27)
Neglecting terms of order $`b`$ in the integral, we obtain as a first approximation

$$E_{(0)}^f=\frac{1}{2}VH^2\left[\frac{(m_D^e)^2}{2eH}\right]+\frac{7}{4}\frac{\pi ^2}{15}VT^4$$
(28)
for QED with the HTL Debye mass defined in eq.(6). The second term is simply the energy $`E_0^f(T)`$ of a thermally excited, non-interacting massless fermion-antifermion pair, i.e. the thermal energy of the unperturbed vacuum that has to be subtracted, cf. eq.(19). This means that we have recovered within our simple framework the perturbative one-loop HTL result from the lowest Landau level contribution to the energy of the magnetically perturbed thermal vacuum. The energy difference that enters in (10) already yields $`4\pi \chi (H,T)`$ as the expression in square brackets, and the effective coupling constant reads, following eq.(24),

$$\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}(k,T)=\frac{\alpha }{ϵ(k,T)}=\frac{\alpha }{1+{\displaystyle \frac{(m_D^e)^2}{k^2}}},$$

as within HTL perturbation theory, eq.(5).
For QCD with $`N_f`$ flavours, we obtain

$$E_{(0)}^f=\frac{1}{2}VH^2\left[\frac{m_{D,f}^2}{2eH}\right]+N_f\frac{7\pi ^2}{60}VT^4$$
(29)
with the fermionic part of the squared QCD Debye mass (7), $`m_{D,f}^2=N_f/6g^2T^2`$. For the total evaluation of the QCD susceptibility, we need to add the contribution from the gauge bosons. At zero temperature, contributions from “unphysical” gluon states in the calculation of the energy spectrum, eq.(14), are exactly cancelled by Fadeev-Popov ghost contributions within the background gauge condition used here. Since we only consider excitations of energy levels that were evaluated at $`T=0`$, no ambiguity arises and we still work only with physical gluon degrees of freedom with two polarization states. We proceed in close analogy to the fermionic case: first, we sum over $`s_3=\pm 1`$. A subtlety arises since the combination $`n=0`$ and $`s_3=1`$ in eq.(25) issues a negative value under the square root for small $`x`$. This ’tachyonic’ mode is related to a possible instability of the vacuum . Its effect on the magnetic field over large distances, however, is negligible, the sum over $`n`$ for $`s_3=1`$ therefore starts only at $`n=1`$. Isolating again the lowest lying physical Landau level ($`n=1,s_3=1`$) contribution to the sum, we are left with

$$\frac{E^g}{VT^4}\stackrel{~}{E}^g=\frac{b}{2\pi ^2}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x\frac{\sqrt{x^2+b/2)}}{\mathrm{exp}\left(\sqrt{x^2+b/2}\right)1}+\frac{b}{\pi ^2}\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x\frac{\sqrt{x^2+b(n+3/2)}}{\mathrm{exp}\left(\sqrt{x^2+b(n+3/2)}\right)1}.$$
(30)
Replacing the sum by an integration, setting $`b=0`$ in the integrals and summing over colour, the result becomes

$$E_{(0)}^g=\frac{1}{2}VH^2\left[\frac{m_{D,g}^2}{2eH}\right]+2(N_c^21)\frac{\pi ^2}{15}VT^4.$$
(31)
Again, the last term is the thermal energy $`E_0^g(T)`$ of the unperturbed SU(N<sub>c</sub>) gluon vacuum. The expression in square brackets exactly corresponds to the gluonic part of the squared QCD Debye mass, $`m_{D,g}^2=N_c/3g^2T^2`$. Putting all pieces together, the effective coupling becomes

$$\alpha _{s,\mathrm{eff}}(k,T)=\frac{\alpha _s}{1+{\displaystyle \frac{(m_D^c)^2}{k^2}}},$$

very similar to the QED case. In our model, the Hard Thermal Loop (chromo)electric Debye masses therefore appear as the lowest Landau level contribution to the energy difference that arises when one probes the thermal vacuum by a (chromo)magnetic field. It is worth noting that, in this approximation, the alignment of an external field always increases the thermal energy of the vacuum, regardless of the non-abelian structure of the theory. Therefore $`\chi (k,T)`$ is always negative and we conclude, using eq.(24), that the static potential would become screened by both fermions and by gauge bosons.

### 3.2 A better approximation

However, additional contributions to eqs.(28), (29) and (31) of the same order in $`e^2`$ arise from two sources. First, the expansion of the integrals (27) and (30) in $`b`$ is similar to the high temperature expansion of loop integrals with massive particles in the small quantity $`m_0/T`$. The appendix contains the relevant formulae. Second, the correction to the replacement of the sum by an integral yields terms to order $`b`$ and $`b^2`$ that are provided by the Euler-MacLaurin formula

$$\underset{n=0}{\overset{N}{}}f(n)=\underset{0}{\overset{N}{}}f(x)𝑑x+\frac{1}{2}\left[f(N)+f(0)\right]+\frac{1}{12}\left[f^{}(N)f^{}(0)\right]+\mathrm{},$$
(32)
where the dots denote terms with higher derivatives in $`f(n)`$. For our purposes, eq.(32), taking $`N\mathrm{}`$, is sufficient, as long as $`f(x)𝒞^2`$ for $`x[0,N]`$. When calculating the thermal contribution to the vacuum energy, we include these correction terms to the integral in the following and expand all integrals in the small parameter $`b`$, using the relations presented in the appendix. The summation of all terms to order $`e^2`$ then alters the results in (29) and (31) qualitatively.

### 3.3 Results for QED

For fermions, we start with eq.(26). Defining $`\delta ^2=b`$, we obtain to order $`\delta ^4`$

$`\stackrel{~}{E}_{(1)}^f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2}{24}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑r{\displaystyle \frac{r^2\sqrt{r^2+\delta ^2}}{\mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{r^2+\delta ^2})+1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2}{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑r{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{r^2+\delta ^2}}{\mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{r^2+\delta ^2})+1}}\right]+`$ (33)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^4}{2\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑x\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2+\delta ^2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+\mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{x^2+\delta ^2})}}\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{x^2+\delta ^2})+1}}\right]`$
Using the functions $`f_i(y)`$ and $`g^+(y)`$ defined in the appendix, we re-write

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_{(1)}^f=\frac{\delta ^2}{24}+\frac{2}{\pi ^2}f_5(\delta )+\frac{5\delta ^2}{2\pi ^2}f_3(\delta )+\frac{\delta ^4}{2\pi ^2}f_1(\delta )\frac{\delta ^4}{24\pi ^2}g^+(\delta ).$$
(34)
Expanding in $`\delta `$ and keeping all terms up to $`𝒪(\delta ^4)`$, surprisingly all terms of order $`\delta ^2`$ cancel, and we are left with

$$\stackrel{~}{E}_{(1)}^f=\frac{7\pi ^2}{60}+\frac{\delta ^4}{96\pi ^2}\mathrm{log}\left(𝒜_f\delta ^2\right)$$
(35)
with $`\gamma =0.5772\mathrm{}`$ and the constant $`𝒜_f=\mathrm{exp}(2\gamma 1)/\pi ^20.12`$. The first term is the well-known thermal part of the vacuum energy in the absence of the field $`H`$. Since $`\delta ^21`$, the alignment of a magnetic field hence decreases the energy of the vacuum at finite temperature, in contrast to the result of the previous section. The susceptibility in QED therefore becomes

$$4\pi \chi (H,T)=\frac{\alpha }{3\pi }\mathrm{log}\left(𝒜_f\frac{2eH}{T^2}\right).$$
(36)
Note that the pre-factor of the logarithm is the same as in the zero-temperature case! Including this pure quantum correction for the QED running coupling, eq.(2), all momentum dependence drops out, and we finally obtain with (24)

$$\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}(k,T)=\frac{\alpha }{1{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{3\pi }}\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{T^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_T^2}}\right)}\text{with }\mathrm{\Lambda }_T=m_e\frac{e^{\gamma +7/6}}{\pi }\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3},$$
(37)
which is valid to order $`e^2`$ and for momenta

$$m_ekT.$$
(38)
Using the zero-temperature coupling $`\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}(k)`$ from eq.(2), the effective coupling can, to this order, be rewritten as

$$\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}(k,T)=\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}(T)=\alpha _{\mathrm{eff}}(k3T).$$
(39)
So the common practice used in perturbation theory to simply take the running of the coupling at zero temperature and set as the scale the thermally averaged momentum scale $`k3T`$ does indeed find support from our calculation for QED.

### 3.4 Results for QCD

For QCD, the fermionic contribution takes a form similar to the QED result,

$$4\pi \chi (H,T)=\frac{g^2N_f}{24\pi ^2}\mathrm{log}\left(𝒜_f\frac{2eH}{T^2}\right).$$
(40)
Note that the pre-factor of the logarithm is again the same as at zero temperature. The calculation of the gluonic part of $`\chi `$ runs along the same lines. Starting with eq.(30) and setting $`\delta ^2=b/2`$, we obtain by use of the functions $`h_i(y)`$ and $`g^{}(y)`$

$$\stackrel{~}{E}^g=\frac{2}{\pi ^2}h_5(\sqrt{3}\delta )+\frac{\delta ^2}{\pi ^2}\left[7h_3(\sqrt{3}\delta )+h_3(\delta )\right]+\frac{\delta ^4}{\pi ^2}\left[h_1(\delta )+3h_1(\sqrt{3}\delta )\frac{1}{6}g^{}(\sqrt{3}\delta )\right].$$
(41)
Expanding, we find that all terms of order $`\delta ^3`$ cancel and the result becomes

$$\stackrel{~}{E}^g=\frac{2\pi ^2}{15}\frac{b}{12}\frac{5b^2}{128\pi ^2}\mathrm{log}\left(𝒜_gb\right),$$
(42)
with the constant $`𝒜_g=\mathrm{exp}(2\gamma 13/10+11/5\mathrm{log}3)/(32\pi ^2)0.03`$. Similar to the fermionic part, the alignment of a chromomagnetic field hence always lowers the energy of the gluonic vacuum, however, this time the difference goes linearly in $`b`$ and not only logarithmically. Finally summing over colour, the gluonic susceptibility reads

$$4\pi \chi (H,T)=\frac{N_c}{3}\frac{g^2T^2}{2eH}+5N_c\frac{g^2}{48\pi ^2}\mathrm{log}\left(𝒜_g\frac{2eH}{T^2}\right).$$
(43)
In this expression the sign is reversed as compared to eq.(40), and $`4\pi \chi `$ is always positive. The total thermal result for QCD, excluding the $`T=0`$ contribution, becomes

$$\alpha _{s,\mathrm{eff}}(k,T)=\frac{\alpha _s}{1\alpha _s{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi N_c}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{T^2}{k^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{12\pi }}\left[5N_c\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_gk^2}{T^2}}\right)2N_f\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_fk^2}{T^2}}\right)\right]}.$$
(44)
Since the gluon contribution dominates by far over the logarithmic fermionic, there is antiscreening at high temperature and long distances. This result is in contrast to expectation and lattice results on the interquark potential . Extrapolating eq.(44) beyond the kinematical region $`gk/T1`$ where our approximations are valid, a Landau pole appears in the infrared region $`k/Tg`$. Figure 1 shows the ratio $`\alpha _{s,\mathrm{eff}}/\alpha _s`$ as a function of $`k/T`$ for a weak coupling $`g=0.1`$, compared to the usual HTL result. A similar behaviour is also found in more sophisticated renormalization group analyses of the running coupling at finite temperature (see, e.g., ). We note that our results compare quite well with the numerical solutions obtained in ref.. Since eq.(44) depends only on the dimensionless quantity $`k/T`$, taking the limit $`T\mathrm{}`$ at large $`k`$ is in a sense equivalent to probing the infrared region $`k0`$ at smaller $`T`$, indicating that non-perturbative physics plays an important role even at high $`T`$. The necessity for a soft magnetic mass $`g^2T`$ as an infrared regulator in loop calculations (see eq.(9)) supports this line of reasoning.

## 4 Conclusions

We have presented an alternative way to calculate the screening of the static potential between two charges in (non)abelian gauge theories at finite temperature by looking at the magnetic properties of the vacuum. Instead of a loop expansion, we have calculated the energy shift of the vacuum at finite temperature to order $`e^2`$ after applying an external (chromo)magnetic field $`H`$ as a probe. Magnetic permeability and dielectric permittivity have been connected by a renormalization group argument.

Using a high-temperature expansion $`H/T^21`$, the gluon and photon Debye masses appearing in the HTL calculation have been recovered in a first, though incomplete approximation, originating from the lowest lying Landau level contribution to the thermal energy. Taking into account all contributions to order $`e^2`$ in QED, the final expression in the kinematic region (38) shows a logarithmic, momentum-independent running of $`\alpha `$ with temperature, as expected from simply inserting the average thermal momentum $`k3T`$ in the zero-temperature running coupling.

In QCD, we have found indications for a Landau pole at small $`k/T`$ that arises, as in more sophisticated thermal renormalization group calculations, from the sign of the gluon contribution, despite well controlled approximations and a completely different approach as compared to conventional perturbation theory. Our calculation may serve as yet another indication that an expansion in a presumably small coupling $`g`$ at high temperatures ceases to yield sensible results for some quantities, and that this failure is not specific to a Feynman graph expansion. Truly non-perturbative input that is probably linked to the understanding of confinement is then called for.

## 5 Appendix

Here we present the formulas used to evaluate the $`\delta `$-dependent integrals appearing in eqs.(41) and (34). Fermionic integrals of the form

$$f_n(y)=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x\frac{x^{n1}}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}}\frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{x^2+y^2})+1}$$

can be expanded for small $`y`$ (note our slightly different convention compared to ). Especially,

$`f_1(y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{y}{\pi }}\right)+\gamma \right]+\mathrm{},`$ (45)
$`f_3(y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{12}}+{\displaystyle \frac{y^2}{4}}\left[\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{y}{\pi }}\right)+\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right]+\mathrm{}\text{and}`$ (46)
$`f_5(y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{7\pi ^4}{120}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{8}}y^2{\displaystyle \frac{3}{16}}y^4\left[\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{y}{\pi }}\right)+\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}\right]+\mathrm{}`$ (47)
where $`\gamma =0.5772\mathrm{}`$ is the Euler-Mascheroni constant. For bosons,

$$h_n(y)=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x\frac{x^{n1}}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}}\frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{x^2+y^2})1}.$$

The corresponding expansions read

$`h_1(y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2y}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{y}{4\pi }}\right)+\gamma \right]+\mathrm{},`$ (48)
$`h_3(y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{6}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}y{\displaystyle \frac{y^2}{4}}\left[\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{y}{4\pi }}\right)+\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right]+\mathrm{}\text{and}`$ (49)
$`h_5(y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^4}{15}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{4}}y^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}y^3+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{16}}y^4\left[\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{y}{4\pi }}\right)+\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}\right]+\mathrm{}`$ (50)
For the evaluation of derivative terms, we need the leading log($`y`$) behaviour of integrals such as

$$g^\pm (y)=g_1^\pm (y)+g_2^\pm (y)=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}}\frac{1}{1\pm \mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{x^2+y^2})}\right)\frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{x^2+y^2})\pm 1}.$$
(51)
The expansion of the first term in brackets, $`g_1^\pm `$, is known since $`g_1^+=f_1`$ and $`g_1^{}=h_1`$. For the evaluation of the second a trick is convenient. Introduce a parameter $`\alpha `$ to write

$$g_2^\pm (y;\alpha )=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x\frac{\mathrm{exp}(\alpha \sqrt{x^2+y^2})}{(\mathrm{exp}(\alpha \sqrt{x^2+y^2})\pm 1)^2}.$$
(52)
Obviously, $`g_2^\pm (y;1)`$ is the sought quantity. Now $`g_2^\pm (y;\alpha )`$ can also be written as

$$\frac{}{\alpha }\left[\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x\frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}}\frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}(\alpha \sqrt{x^2+y^2})\pm 1}\right]=\frac{d}{d\alpha }g_1^\pm (\alpha y).$$
(53)
Expanding eq.(52) for small $`y`$ hence yields

$`g_2^{}(y;\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2y}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\alpha }}+\mathrm{}\text{for bosons and}`$ (54)
$`g_2^+(y;\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\alpha }}+\mathrm{}\text{for fermions.}`$ (55)
Setting $`\alpha =1`$ and putting the pieces together, the leading-log behaviour of eq.(51) is

$`g^+(y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{y}{\pi }}\right)+\gamma +1\right]+\mathrm{}\text{for fermions and}`$ (56)
$`g^{}(y)`$ $`=`$ $`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{y}{4\pi }}\right)+\gamma +1\right]+\mathrm{}\text{for bosons.}`$ (57)