text:
# Instanton Contribution to the Pion Electro-Magnetic Formfactor at 𝑄²>1"GeV"²

## I Introduction

Bridging the gap between the non-perturbative and the perturbative sector of QCD is a central step toward our understanding of the strong interaction. In this context, the electro-magnetic formfactor of the charged pion $`F_\pi `$ is of great interest. It is, at low momenta, extremely well reproduced by the vector dominance model. In addition, at very high momentum transfer, it is constrained by perturbative (p)QCD predictions (for a review on hadronic formfactors, see e.g. sterman ). The asymptotic behavior for large space-like momentum transfer, $`Q^2=(pp^{})^2>0`$, is derived in a closed form in perturbation theory pQCDpionchern ; pQCDpionrad ; pQCDpionbrod ,

$`Q^2F_\pi (Q^2)\stackrel{Q^2\mathrm{}}{=}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}16}\pi f_\pi ^2\alpha _s(Q),`$ (1)
where $`f_\pi =92.4\text{MeV}`$ denotes the pion decay constant.

A comparison of the asymptotic behavior and the experimental data determines the momentum scale where the perturbative regime of QCD is reached. Recently, the charged pion formfactor has been measured very accurately at momentum transfers $`0.6\text{GeV}^2<Q^2<1.6\text{GeV}^2`$ by the Jefferson Laboratory (JLAB) $`F_\pi `$ collaboration jlab  and lead to quite surprising results. Not only are the data at highest experimentally accessible momenta still very far from the asymptotic limit, but the trend is away from the pQCD prediction (see Fig. 1).

Moreover, it is quite remarkable that the data are still completely consistent with the vector dominance monopole fit,

$`F_{\pi ,\text{mon.}}(Q^2)={\displaystyle \frac{M_\rho ^2}{M_\rho ^2+Q^2}},M_\rho =770\text{MeV},`$ (2)
at relatively high momentum transfer ($`Q^21\text{GeV}^2`$). Clearly, the measurements currently undertaken at JLAB in the region $`0.5\text{GeV}^2Q^26\text{GeV}^2`$ are very much needed and will provide information about whether the perturbative region is reached at that scale.

The charged pion formfactor has attracted a lot of attention from the theoretical side FFtheory1 ; FFtheory2 ; FFtheory3 ; FFtheory4 ; FFtheory5 ; FFtheory6 ; FFtheory7 . Despite this debate, we feel that there are still a number of open question. What are the leading non-perturbative effects responsible for the deviation from pQCD, Eq. (1), at intermediate momenta? Where can we expect the transition to pQCD, is it within experimentally accessible momentum transfers? Is there a *microscopic* explanation of the success of the monopole form? Can it be justified at so large momenta, where the vector dominance model should be inadequate?

In this work we suggest answers to these questions. In particular, we study the effects of the leading (i.e. zero-mode) interaction of light quarks with the intense classical vacuum fields (instantons) on the pion formfactor, for $`Q^2>1\text{GeV}^2`$. We show that, in this kinematic region, the pion formfactor is dominated by the interaction of quarks with a single instanton.

The pion plays a special role among the hadrons. Not only is it nearly massless (which is explained by the Goldstone theorem), but unusually compact as well. Phenomenologically, this is seen e.g., from the rather large electro-magnetic mass splittings between the charged and neutral pion. Theoretically, it was explained by studying instanton-induced effects on the two-point correlators, see shuryakrev  for a review. In the pion channel (as well as other scalar and pseudoscalar channels) the instanton contribution to the two-point correlator can be represented by the zero-mode terms in the quark propagators, and as a result the effect is enhanced (relative to e.g., the vector or axial channels) by a factor $`1/(m^{}\rho )^2`$, where $`\rho `$ denotes the typical instanton size, and $`m^{}`$ is an effective parameter with the dimension of a mass, defined and discussed in detail in sia . Numerically, such an enhancement factor is about 30, and parametrically it is the inverse diluteness of the instanton ensemble. Due to the presence of such a large factor, instanton-induced forces become dominant in the pion pseudoscalar correlator, starting from rather small distances. The same factor is present in the instanton contribution to the three-point function, which is related to the pion formfactor. Although, the final results we obtain are independent of the value of $`m^{}`$, the window of applicability of our method does depend on it.

This feature, however, is not generically related to the pion itself and depends on the particular three-point function under investigation. For example, the enhancement is absent, when one considers the pion contribution to the axial correlator. Similarly, there is no such enhancement of the $`\gamma \gamma ^{}\pi ^0`$ neutral pion transition formfactor. The relevant instanton effects for this process are not due to (enhanced) zero modes, but are either related to non-zero mode propagators in the instanton background or to multi-instanton effects, which are suppressed by the instanton diluteness. This conclusion is nicely supported by recent CLEO measurements of this formfactor, which indeed show that the asymptotic pQCD regime is reached much earlier, at $`Q^22\text{GeV}^2`$ CLEO .

The first calculation of the pion formfactor in the SIA was performed by Forkel and Nielsen forkel , who complemented QCD sum rules by the instanton-induced contribution. In such an approach, however, a model description of the continuum of excitations with the quantum numbers of the pion is needed, in order to connect the electro-magnetic three-point function to the pion formfactor 111Notice that in forkel  Forkel and Nielsen used the numerical value for the effective parameter $`m^{}`$, which was derived in the mean field approximation shuryak82 . However later a significantly smaller value (and larger enhancement) has been derived from numerical simulations of the Instanton Liquid Model sia .. In order to avoid such additional model dependence, Blotz and Shuryak proposed a different approach blotz , in which large-sized three-point functions obtained both from simulations in the Instanton Liquid Model (ILM) and from its spectral decomposition (which depends on the pion formfactor) were compared *directly in coordinate space*. This analysis revealed that, at large distances, the ILM results were completely consistent with the monopole fit.

In this work we follow a different approach, which is based on the mixed time-momentum representation widely used in lattice calculations (see e.g., draper89 ). We show that this way it is possible to isolate the pion pole and yet make predictions in momentum space (and therefore compare directly with experiments), without any model of the continuum contribution.

This approach has several other advantages. Firstly, the model dependence is maximally reduced: Our results depend only on one dimensional parameter, the average instanton size, $`\overline{\rho }1/3\text{fm}`$, which was proposed many years ago shuryak82  and checked a number of times by phenomenological studies shuryakrev  as well as lattice simulations smithandteper ; hasenfratz ; deForcrand ; chu94 ; Ivanenko . The calculation is independent of the properties of the instanton liquid ensemble such as the instanton-instanton interaction and the instanton density. Moreover, we will argue that the physical content of the calculation is more transparent and the dynamical effects of the instantons on the propagation of the quarks can be seen naturally.

The central prediction following from our SIA calculation is shown in Fig. 1 in comparison to the recent JLAB measurements.

The main physical point of our analysis is that, if the strongly attractive ’t Hooft interaction is taken into account, the asymptotic perturbative regime of the pion formfactor is reached much later than in other models, which do not include this force. Such a qualitative difference implies that the upcoming JLAB measurements will provide an important test of instanton forces in the pion. We also find the very intriguing result that the instanton contribution to the formfactor is completely consistent with the monopole form at intermediate momentum transfers, $`2\text{GeV}^2<Q^210\text{GeV}^2`$, where the vector dominance model has no justification. It is a first microscopic study showing that all other resonances with quantum numbers of the $`\rho `$ (except the $`\rho `$ itself) are not seen in the pion formfactor. For large momentum transfers, $`Q^2>20\text{GeV}^2`$, our SIA breaks down, as it is necessary to increase the distances in order to isolate the pion ground state. At these needed distances, however, the correlation functions will become sensitive to multi-instanton effects.

## II Instanton Contribution to the Formfactor

We consider the spatial Fourier transforms of the Euclidean three-point function and two-point function,

$`G_\mu (t,𝐩+𝐪;t,𝐩)={\displaystyle d^3𝐱d^3𝐲e^{i𝐩𝐱+i(𝐩+𝐪)𝐲}}`$
$`\times 0|j_5(t,𝐲)J_\mu (0,\mathrm{𝟎})j_5^{}(t,𝐱)|0,`$ (3)
$`G(2t,𝐩)={\displaystyle d^3𝐱e^{i𝐩𝐱}0|j_5(t,𝐱)j_5^{}(t,\mathrm{𝟎})|0},`$ (4)
where the pseudo-scalar current $`j_5(x)=\overline{u}(x)\gamma _5d(x)`$ excites states with the quantum numbers of the pion and $`J_\mu (0)`$ denotes the electro-magnetic current operator. In the large $`t`$ limit (at fixed momenta), both correlation functions are dominated by the pion pole contribution and the ratio of the three-point function to the two-point function becomes proportional to the pion formfactor draper89 . In the Breit frame, $`𝐩=𝐪/2`$ and $`Q^2=𝐪^2`$, one has simply

$`{\displaystyle \frac{G_4(t,𝐪/2;t,𝐪/2)}{G(2t,𝐪/2)}}F_\pi (Q^2).`$ (5)
Notice that the LHS of Eq. (5) should not depend on $`t`$, for $`t`$ large enough. Below we demonstrate that, for the pion, this is achieved already for $`t0.6\text{fm}`$.

We will evaluate the LHS of Eq. (5) in the SIA. In principle, it is not obvious that such an approach is justified, as the mean Euclidean distance between two instantons in the vacuum is about $`1\text{fm}`$. Therefore, if $`t1\text{fm}`$, one would expect many instanton effects to play a non negligible role. However, two of the authors showed that the pion and nucleon three-point functions, evaluated in the SIA, agree with the results of numerical simulations in the instanton liquid model up to distances of the order of $`1\text{fm}`$ sia . Moreover, they found that the ratio of three- to two-point function is dominated by single instanton effects to even larger distances 3ptILM . This result enables us to reliably evaluate this ratio in the SIA up to Euclidean distances of $`1.4\text{fm}`$. A possible physical interpretation of this fact is that in order for the scattered parton to recombine in the same final state (and therefore have an elastic formfactor), it is sufficient that the parton scatters off a single instanton during the process.

We expect that the main contribution to the time-momentum correlation functions comes from distances of the order of the inverse conjugate momenta, $`|𝐱|1/|𝐩|`$ and $`|𝐲|1/|𝐩+𝐪|`$. Therefore, in the Breit frame and with the choice $`t0.7\text{fm}`$, one obtains that the correlation functions under consideration can be evaluated in the SIA, for momenta $`|𝐪|0.61\text{GeV}`$. We note that one of the authors applied the same method to evaluate the pion and nucleon dispersion curves faccioli . Agreement between the SIA calculation and experiment was found for $`t0.7\text{fm}`$ and $`|𝐩|1\text{GeV}`$.

Having assessed the applicability of our approximation, we proceed to the calculation. The connected three-point and two-point functions are given by 222A discussion of the contribution from disconnected diagrams can be found in blotz .

$$\begin{array}{c}G_4(t,𝐩+𝐪;t,𝐩)=(e_ue_d)\hfill \\ \hfill \times d^3𝐱d^3𝐲e^{i𝐩𝐱+i(𝐩+𝐪)𝐲}\text{Tr}\{\gamma _5S(t,𝐲;0,\mathrm{𝟎})\\ \hfill \times \gamma _4S(0,\mathrm{𝟎};t,𝐱)\gamma _5S(t,𝐱;t,𝐲)\},\end{array}$$
(6)
$$\begin{array}{c}G(2t,𝐩)=d^3𝐱e^{i𝐩𝐱}\text{Tr}\{\gamma _5S(t,𝐱;t,\mathrm{𝟎})\hfill \\ \hfill \times \gamma _5S(t,\mathrm{𝟎};t,𝐱)\},\end{array}$$
(7)
where $`S(y,x)`$ denotes the quark propagator in the background of a gauge field, the Tr is over spin and color, and the brackets $``$ denote the average over all gauge field configurations.

We express Eqs. (6) and (7) in terms of “wall-to-wall” (W2W) correlators, defined as the spatial Fourier transforms of the quark propagators

$`S(t^{},𝐩^{};t,𝐩){\displaystyle d^3𝐱d^3𝐲e^{i𝐩^{}𝐲i𝐩𝐱}S(y,x)}.`$ (8)
This is achieved by insertions of appropriate delta functions at each vertex

$$\begin{array}{c}G_4(t,𝐩+𝐪;t,𝐩)=\frac{d^3𝐤}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3𝐥}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3𝐦}{(2\pi )^3}\hfill \\ \hfill \times \frac{d^3𝐧}{(2\pi )^3}\text{Tr}\{\gamma _5S(t,𝐤;0,𝐦+𝐧)\gamma _4S(0,𝐦;t,𝐥)\\ \hfill \times \gamma _5S(t,𝐥𝐩;t,𝐤𝐩𝐪)\},\end{array}$$
(9)
$$\begin{array}{c}G(2t,𝐩)=\frac{d^3𝐤}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3𝐥}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3𝐦}{(2\pi )^3}\hfill \\ \hfill \times \text{Tr}\{\gamma _5S(t,𝐤;t,𝐥)\gamma _5S(t,𝐦;t,𝐤𝐩)\}.\end{array}$$
(10)
These W2W correlation functions are completely general. Their graphical representation, as an example for the three-point function, Eq. (9), is given in Fig. 2 (A).

A model dependence is introduced, when we evaluate the gauge field average in the SIA. This is achieved by taking the quark propagators in the background of an instanton and averaging over the collective coordinates (instanton position, size and color orientation). The integration over the color orientation is trivial, while the integration over the instanton size is weighted by a distribution function. We use a distribution for the instanton size which takes into account the small-size limit. The latter has been calculated by ’t Hooft, by considering perturbative fluctuations around the instanton solution thooftzm1 ; thooftzm2 . For large-sized instantons, however, the distribution has to be cut off. We use a Fermi distribution function to account for the suppression of large-sized instantons, where we fit the width and the mean instanton size to lattice QCD results (for a summary on lattice QCD results, see e.g., Negele Negele ). This leaves for the single instanton density

$`n(\rho )=\overline{n}d_{\text{’t Hooft}}(\rho ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}\left((\rho \overline{\rho })/\sigma \right)+1}},`$ (11)
where $`\overline{n}`$ denotes the average instanton density and the QCD small-size limit is given by ’t Hooft

$$\begin{array}{c}d_{\text{’t Hooft}}(\rho )\rho ^{N_f5}\beta _1(\rho )^{2N_c}\hfill \\ \hfill \times \mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta _2(\rho )+(2N_c\frac{b^{}}{2b})\frac{b^{}}{2b\beta _1(\rho )}\mathrm{ln}\left(\beta _1(\rho )\right)\right\}.\end{array}$$
(12)
Here, $`\beta _1(\rho )`$ and $`\beta _2(\rho )`$ denote the one and two-loop beta functions 333This result was carried out in the Pauli-Villars regularization scheme and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{PV}`$ is the corresponding scale parameter. We use $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{PV}=250\text{MeV}.`$,

$`\beta _1(\rho )`$ $`=b\mathrm{ln}(\rho \mathrm{\Lambda }_{PV}),`$ (13)
$`\beta _2(\rho )`$ $`=\beta _1(\rho )+{\displaystyle \frac{b^{}}{2b}}\mathrm{ln}\left(2\mathrm{ln}(1/\rho \mathrm{\Lambda }_{PV})\right),`$ (14)
$`b`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{11}{3}}N_c{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}N_f,`$ (15)
$`b^{}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{34}{3}}N_c^2{\displaystyle \frac{13}{3}}N_cN_f+{\displaystyle \frac{N_f}{N_c}}.`$ (16)
For our analysis, we use a parameterization, which summarizes recent lattice QCD results Negele , $`\overline{\rho }=0.37\text{fm}`$ and $`\sigma =0.15\text{fm}`$. We will also contrast this size density to a much simpler model proposed by Shuryak shuryak82 , $`n(\rho )=\overline{n}\delta (\rho \overline{\rho })`$, where $`\overline{\rho }=1/3\text{fm}`$.

The quark propagator in the field of an instanton was evaluated exactly in singular gauge brown78  and consists of a zero-mode and a non zero-mode part,

$$S^I(x,y)=S_{zm}^I(x,y)+S_{nzm}^I(x,y).$$
(17)
The expression for $`S_{nzm}^I`$ is quite involved. However, at small distances, $`|xy|\rho `$, and if the instanton is far away, $`|xz|,|yz|\rho `$, the non zero-mode propagator reduces to the free one. For this reason, most calculations are carried out in the zero-mode approximation (ZMA) 444We note that, at large distances ($`|xy|\rho `$), the zero-mode approximation gives the same correlation functions as the ’t Hooft Lagrangian., in which one approximates the non zero-mode part with a free massless quark propagator,

$`S^I(x,y)S_0(x,y)+S_{zm}^I(x,y).`$ (18)
Let us discuss the accuracy of the ZMA for our calculation. We recall that, in the momentum range of interest, the contributing point-to-point correlators in Eqs. (II) and (4), are $`1\text{fm}`$ long. It is therefore sufficient to access the accuracy of the ZMA for our point-to-point correlators at those distances. In sia , two of the authors have evaluated several three- and two-point functions in the SIA with ZMA and compared them with the results of numerical simulations in the instanton liquid model (where non-zero mode effects are taken into account). Very good agreement was observed at distances relevant for our calculation. This result could either imply that multi-instanton and non-zero mode effects are individually small at that scale, or that both effects are not quite small, but that they happen to cancel.

In this approximation, the non-perturbative contributions to Eq. (9) are represented in Figs. 2 (C) and (D) and are straightforward, once the free and zero-mode W2W quark propagators are evaluated.

The massless free W2W quark propagator is given by

$`S_0(t^{},𝐩^{};t,𝐩)=(2\pi )^3\delta ^{(3)}(𝐩^{}𝐩){\displaystyle \frac{e^{|𝐩||t^{}t|}}{2}}u_\mu \gamma _\mu ,`$ (19)
where $`u_4=1`$ and $`u_l=ip_l/|𝐩|`$, for $`l=1,2,3`$. We note that the free W2W propagator is proportional to a delta function due to momentum conservation. The free contribution to $`G_4`$ and $`G`$ are then given by

$$\begin{array}{c}G_4^{(\text{free})}(t,𝐩+𝐪;t,𝐩)=\frac{3}{2}\frac{d^3𝐤}{(2\pi )^3}(\frac{𝐤(𝐤𝐪)}{|𝐤||𝐤𝐪|}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{𝐤(𝐤𝐩𝐪)}{|𝐤||𝐤𝐩𝐪|}\frac{(𝐤𝐪)(𝐤𝐩𝐪)}{|𝐤𝐪||𝐤𝐩𝐪|}+1)\\ \hfill \times e^{t(|𝐤|+|𝐤𝐪|+2|𝐤𝐩𝐪|)},\end{array}$$
(20)
$$\begin{array}{c}G^{(\text{free})}(2t,𝐩)=3\frac{d^3𝐤}{(2\pi )^3}\left(\frac{𝐤(𝐤𝐩)}{|𝐤||𝐤𝐩|}1\right)\hfill \\ \hfill \times e^{2t(|𝐤|+|𝐤𝐩|)}.\end{array}$$
(21)
The free W2W two-point function can be further simplified,

$$G^{(\text{free})}(2t,𝐩)=\frac{3}{(2\pi )^2}\frac{1+2t|𝐩|}{(2t)^3}e^{2t|𝐩|}.$$
(22)
Next, we calculate the zero-mode W2W quark propagator. Since we are eventually interested in a gauge invariant quantity, and we are working in the SIA, we can use the instanton solution in regular gauge 555When one considers many instanton effects, the use of the singular gauge is obligatory, as one desires the topological charge to be localized. In singular gauge, however, the expression of the zero-mode W2W quark propagator is more complicated., where we find the simple result:

$`S_{zm}^{I(A)}(t^{},𝐩^{};t,𝐩)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{2\rho ^2}{m^{}}}f(t^{},𝐩^{};t,𝐩)𝐖^{I(A)},`$ (23)
$`f(t^{},𝐩^{};t,𝐩)`$ $`e^{i(𝐩^{}𝐩)𝐳}K_0\left(|𝐩^{}|\sqrt{(t^{}z_4)^2+\rho ^2}\right)`$
$`\times K_0\left(|𝐩|\sqrt{(tz_4)^2+\rho ^2}\right),`$ (24)
$`𝐖^{I(A)}`$ $`\gamma _\mu \gamma _\nu {\displaystyle \frac{1\pm \gamma _5}{2}}\tau _\mu ^{}\tau _\nu ^\pm ,`$ (25)
where $`z_\mu =(𝐳,z_4)`$ denotes the instanton position, $`m^{}`$ is the effective parameter encoding many-instanton effects defined in sia  and $`\tau _\mu ^\pm =(𝝉,i)`$ are color matrices. We remark that the spatial instanton position appears only coupled to the quark momentum transfer in the background of the instanton field. This is intuitive: if the instanton is far away from the quark, there should be little momentum transfer. Due to this fact, the integration over the spatial instanton position leads to an overall momentum conserving delta function. As expected, the momentum conservation in the SIA is a consequence of the translational invariance of the spatial instanton position. Moreover, the modified Bessel functions exponentially suppress momentum transfers much larger than the inverse size of the instanton, $`1/\rho `$. This implies that large momentum transfers are driven by small instantons and directly probe the small-size limit of the ’t Hooft measure for the tunneling amplitude. This argument holds for all W2W correlation functions evaluated in the SIA and was applied by one of the authors to the pion and nucleon correlators faccioli . It was shown that at sufficiently large momenta, all the model-dependence in such a semi-classical approach is removed, and the physical observables can be expressed in terms of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\text{QCD}}`$. We shall similarly study at what momentum transfer the pion formfactor becomes sensitive to the small-sized instantons only.

The explicit evaluations of the zero-mode contributions, Figs. 2 (C) and (D), lead to

$$\begin{array}{c}G_{4zm}^{(C)}=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z_4\frac{d^3𝐤}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3𝐥}{(2\pi )^3}n(\rho )\hfill \\ \hfill \times \frac{512\rho ^4}{m^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}e^{|𝐤|t}K_0\left(|𝐤𝐪|\xi (z_4)\right)K_0\left(|𝐪/2𝐤|\xi (z_4t)\right)\\ \hfill \times K_0\left(|𝐥𝐪/2|\xi (z_4+t)\right)K_0\left(|𝐥|\xi (z_4+t)\right),\end{array}$$
(26)
$$\begin{array}{c}G_{4zm}^{(D)}=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z_4\frac{d^3𝐤}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3𝐥}{(2\pi )^3}n(\rho )\hfill \\ \hfill \times \frac{512\rho ^4}{m^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}K_0\left(|𝐤|\xi (z_4t)\right)K_0\left(|𝐪/2𝐤|\xi (z_4t)\right)e^{|𝐥|t}\\ \hfill \times K_0\left(|𝐥𝐪/2|\xi (z_4+t)\right)K_0\left(|𝐥+𝐪|\xi (z_4)\right),\end{array}$$
(27)
where $`\xi (x)\sqrt{x^2+\rho ^2}`$. We have labeled the momenta, flowing from left to right, for the case of Eq. (26) in Fig. 2 (C). We note that the presence of the (non-perturbative) instanton-induced interaction results in an integration over the momentum exchanged by the quarks through the instanton, similar to the presence of perturbative gluon exchanges leading to loop integrals, Fig. 2 (B). This analogy still holds when multi-instanton effects are taken into account: each instanton gives an additional “loop” integral over the instanton induced momentum transfer. Furthermore, we read off the “Feynman rules”: each free quark propagator contributes an exponential and each zero-mode a modified Bessel function. Combined, the W2W three-point function, Eq (9), in the SIA reads

$`G_4=G_4^{(\text{free})}+G_{4zm}^{(C)}+G_{4zm}^{(D)}.`$ (28)
Time reversal invariance imposes that the contributions from Figs. 2 (C) and (D) are equal, as can be seen from Eqs. (26) and (27) by substituting $`tt`$ and $`𝐪𝐪`$ (recall the absolute value in the exponential of the free W2W propagator, Eq. (19)). Finally, the W2W two-point function, Eq. (10), in the SIA, is given by

$$\begin{array}{c}G_{zm}=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\rho _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z_4n(\rho )\frac{\rho ^4}{4m^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}e^{|𝐪|/2\left(\xi (z_42t)+\xi (z_4)\right)}\hfill \\ \hfill \times \frac{(1+|𝐪|\xi (z_42t)/2)}{\xi (z_42t)^3}\frac{(1+|𝐪|\xi (z_4)/2)}{\xi (z_4)^3},\end{array}$$
(29)
and analogously

$`G=G^{(\text{free})}+G_{zm}.`$ (30)
The pion formfactor is now readily obtained by means of Eq. (5). At the distances we are considering ($`t=0.7\text{fm}`$), the free contribution to the correlation functions, $`G_4^{(\text{free})}`$ and $`G^{(\text{free})}`$, are at most $`30\%`$ corrections (at $`|𝐪|=5\text{GeV}`$) to the zero-mode three- and two-point functions. This can be seen by evaluating e.g., the zero-mode two-point function for large $`|𝐪|`$:

$`G_{zm}={\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\rho {\displaystyle \frac{n(\rho )\rho ^4}{16m^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}\rho }}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\xi ^5(t)}}}|𝐪|^{3/2}e^{|𝐪|\xi (t)},`$ (31)
by a saddle point analysis of the $`z_4`$ integration. In comparison to the free contribution, Eq. (22), this leads to a $`30\%`$ correction at $`|𝐪|=5\text{GeV}`$, for standard values of the average instanton density $`\overline{n}=1\text{fm}^4`$ and the quark effective mass $`m^{}=70\text{MeV}`$. We consider such a correction to be the edge of the window we work in 666Note, however, that similar corrections appear in the numerator and the denominator, and thus the real accuracy of the formfactor can actually be better.. Therefore, we may approximate the formfactor by 777We note that the free correlators do not have a pion pole. They are the leading order $`𝒪(\alpha _s^0)`$ continuum contributions. The relevance of these terms at higher momentum transfer demands larger times $`t`$. As discussed, however, then the SIA breaks down.

$`{\displaystyle \frac{G_4^{(\text{free})}(t,\frac{𝐪}{2};t,\frac{𝐪}{2})+G_{4zm}^{(C)+(D)}(t,\frac{𝐪}{2};t,\frac{𝐪}{2})}{G^{(\text{free})}(2t,𝐪/2)+G_{zm}(2t,𝐪/2)}}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_{4zm}^{(C)+(D)}(t,\frac{𝐪}{2};t,\frac{𝐪}{2})}{G_{zm}(2t,𝐪/2)}}F_\pi (Q^2).`$ (32)
Consequently, the effective parameter $`m^{}`$ and the average instanton density $`\overline{n}`$, which are multi-instanton induced model parameters, are irrelevant for the pion formfactor at intermediate momentum transfer. We stress that, in the approach presented here, we do not need to evaluate the pion wave function, since we obtain directly the relevant Green functions from the SIA. In other words, the pion wave function is implicitly included in our calculation through the large time extraction of the pion pole.

## III Numerical Results

Before comparing our results to the experimental data, we check that the ratio of the zero-mode three-point to two-point function, Eq. (32), does not depend on the distance $`t`$, which ensures that the pion pole contribution has been successfully isolated. For this purpose, we show this ratio for several distances $`t`$ in Fig. 3. We find that the pion pole contribution dominates for $`t>0.5\text{fm}`$, in agreement with shuryakrev ; faccioli .

Our central result for the pion formfactor is plotted in Fig. 1 in comparison to the JLAB data and the monopole formfactor fitted to the low $`Q^2`$ data. We observe that the SIA prediction agrees with the recent JLAB measurements. In addition, it is completely consistent with the monopole form in the kinematic region accessible to JLAB. These results complement the analysis of Blotz and Shuryak blotz , where the same agreement was found at small momentum transfer. Upcoming measurements at JLAB will be able to test the single instanton prediction as the microscopic mechanism at intermediate momentum transfer.

We find that the instanton contribution remains well above the pQCD scale set by Eq. (1) throughout the experimental region under investigation at JLAB, $`Q^26\text{GeV}^2`$.

As the momentum is increased, one requires larger times in order to isolate the pion pole from the higher excitations. In sum-rule approaches, contributions from the continuum are obtained from the free and perturbative gluon exchange correlation functions, e.g., Fig. 2 (B). Perturbative contributions will never develop a pion pole. Indeed, we observed that the free correlators, $`G_4^{(\text{free})}`$ and $`G^{(\text{free})}`$, become non negligible for $`|𝐪|45\text{GeV}`$. The presence of such continuum contributions destroys the time-independence of the ratio of three- to two-point functions around $`t0.6\text{fm}`$, shown in Fig. 3, and hence the method can no longer be used.

In principle, one could extend the range of validity of our approach by increasing the time. However we recall that, when $`t`$ becomes larger, multi-instanton effects are significant and the SIA breaks down. We conclude that our approach is not applicable to the study of the high momentum transfer region, $`Q^2>20\text{GeV}^2`$.

Let us now discuss, how one can get the transition to the pQCD limit from instantons. For large momentum transfer, where counting rules and factorization are justified, the evaluation of the formfactor requires non-perturbative information, encoded in the pion wave function $`\varphi `$, in addition to pQCD diagrams. This is shown diagrammatically in Fig. 4 (E). In the instanton liquid model, the pion is bound because the quark and antiquark feel a strong attraction from instantons. As we argued, at large momentum transfers, one has to incorporate multi-instanton effects in order to isolate the pion pole and the pion wave function. For example, we give a leading order multi-instanton diagram relevant in the asymptotic limit in Fig. 4 (F).

Since the pion formfactor may experimentally be rather accurately measured, it is instructive to ask whether such data may shed some light on the instanton size distribution. In Fig. 5, we have plotted the results of our theoretical predictions for $`Q^2F_\pi (Q^2)`$ obtained for different cases of $`n(\rho )`$. We contrast the simplest size distribution shuryak82 , $`n(\rho )\delta (\rho 1/3\text{fm})`$, to the results obtained from a lattice QCD parameterization. We notice that the presence of tails in the size distribution introduces only small corrections to the formfactor. Therefore, we conclude that the simplest distribution $`n(\rho )\delta (\rho 1/3\text{fm})`$ indeed captures the relevant features for the pion formfactor at intermediate momentum transfer. We observe that our result becomes closer to the perturbative limit, if the average instanton size is larger or possibly if there is an asymmetric tail toward larger-sized instantons in the distribution.

Next, we compare the results from distributions which have the same small-size limit, but cut off at different instanton sizes, $`\overline{\rho }=0.37\text{fm}`$ and $`0.47\text{fm}`$. We observe that, throughout the entire kinematic region we have considered, our predictions are quite sensitive to the average instanton size. This implies that the asymptotic region, where the pion formfactor probes the small-size ’t Hooft behavior, is not reached within the window, where our approach is justified.

Summarizing, we have shown that the presence of enhanced instanton-induced forces constitutes a large and clearly dominant contribution to the charged pion formfactor. The latter is so large that the perturbative regime will not be reached experimentally. This nicely contrasts the situation for the $`\gamma \gamma ^{}\pi ^0`$ neutral pion transition formfactor, where the asymptotic pQCD regime is reached much earlier, at $`Q^22\text{GeV}^2`$ CLEO . This striking difference is explained by instanton arguments as well, because the two corresponding three-point functions have a different chiral structure. Physically, this is the same reason why the vector and axial channels have a rather strong “Zweig” rule, forbidding flavor mixing, while for the pseudoscalars such a mixing is very strong.

## IV Conclusions

We have presented the first calculation of the instanton contribution to the charged pion electro-magnetic formfactor in the momentum range $`Q^2>1\text{GeV}^2`$. Technically, it is based on the ratio of three- to two-point correlators, in which the enhancement comes from the zero-mode quark W2W propagators. Because it is based on a representation in momentum space, the framework developed presents several quite direct analogies with ordinary perturbative calculus.

Our calculation shows that, when the non-perturbative instanton-induced forces are taken into account, the charged pion formfactor remains much larger than the asymptotic perturbative prediction, throughout the entire experimentally accessible region of JLAB. This result is in contrast to other model calculations, which do not include such a force FFtheory1 ; FFtheory2 ; FFtheory3 ; FFtheory4 ; FFtheory5 ; FFtheory6 ; FFtheory7 . Clearly, the upcoming JLAB measurements will provide a unique opportunity to test the role played by the instanton-induced ’t Hooft interaction in hadronic physics.

Moreover, we found that the SIA prediction coincides with the monopole form up to $`Q^210\text{GeV}^2`$. We emphasize that this does not represent a test of the validity of our model, since the monopole fit is a phenomenological parametrization exclusively of the low energy data. Nevertheless, such an agreement is interesting, because it suggests that the widely used vector dominance model for the pion is in fact a dynamic property of the QCD vacuum, and that its validity extends into the intermediate momentum regime.

We finally studied whether our results depend on the details of the instanton size distribution. We found that the pion formfactor is determined by the average instanton size up to rather large $`Q^2`$ and is insensitive to the details of the size distributions.

In addition, an application of the same method to the analysis of the proton electric formfactor has been carried out and leads to a dipole formfactor at intermediate momentum transfers protonFF .

###### Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank Thomas Schäfer and George Sterman for interesting discussions. The work is supported by the US DOE grant No. DE-FG02-88ER40388.


format: text

text:
# Unique representation bases for the integers11footnote 12000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 11B13, 11B34, 11B05. Key words and phrases. Additive bases, representation functions, density, Erdős-Turán conjecture.

## 1 Additive bases for the integers

Let $`A`$ be a set of integers, and let $`r_A(n)`$ denote the number of representations of $`n`$ in the form $`n=a+a^{},`$ where $`a,a^{}A`$ and $`aa^{}.`$ The function $`r_A(N)`$ is called the representation function of the set $`A`$. An unsolved problem of Erdős and Turán states that if $`A`$ is a subset of the semigroup $`𝐍`$0 of nonnegative integers and $`r_A(n)1`$ for all sufficiently large integers $`n`$, then the representation function $`r_A(n)`$ is unbounded. On the other hand, it is known (in the oral tradition, but, perhaps, not the written tradition of additive number theory) that the group of integers $`𝐙`$ contains sets $`A`$ with the property that $`r_A(n)1`$ for all $`n𝐙`$ and $`r(n)`$ is bounded.

A set $`A`$ of integers is called an additive basis for the integers if $`r_A(n)1`$ for all $`n𝐙`$, and a unique representation basis if $`r_A(n)=1`$ for all $`n𝐙`$. The purpose of this paper is to construct a family of arbitrarily sparse unique representation bases for $`𝐙`$. When a greedy algorithm is used in this construction, we obtain a unique representation basis $`A`$ whose growth is logarithmic in the sense that the number of elements $`aA`$ with $`|a|x`$ is bounded above and below by constant multiples of $`\mathrm{log}x`$. In the last section of this paper we state some open problems suggested by the additive bases that we have constructed.

## 2 Bases with arbitrarily slow growth

For sets $`A`$ and $`B`$ of integers and for any integer $`c`$, we define the sumset

$$A+B=\{a+b:aA,bB\}$$

and the translation

$$A+c=\{a+c:aA\}.$$

For the sumset

$$2A=A+A=\{a+a^{}:a,a^{}A\},$$

we have the representation function

$$r_A(n)=\text{card}\{(a,a^{})A\times A:aa^{}\text{ and }a+a^{}=n\}.$$

The counting function for the set $`A`$ is

$$A(y,x)=\text{card}\{aA:yax\}.$$

In particular, $`A(x,x)`$ counts the number of integers $`aA`$ such that $`|a|x.`$

###### Theorem 1

Let $`f(x)`$ be a function such that $`lim_x\mathrm{}f(x)=\mathrm{}.`$ There exists an additive basis $`A`$ for the group $`𝐙`$ of integers such that

$$r_A(n)=1\text{for all }n𝐙\text{,}$$

and

$$A(x,x)f(x)$$

for all sufficiently large $`x`$.

Proof. We shall construct an ascending sequence of finite sets $`A_1A_2A_3\mathrm{}`$ such that

$$|A_k|=2k\text{for all }k1,$$

$$r_{A_k}(n)1\text{for all }n𝐙,$$

and

$$r_{A_{2k}}(n)=1\text{for all }n\text{ such that }|n|k\text{.}$$

It follows that the infinite set

$$A=\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}A_k$$

is a unique representation basis for the integers.

We construct the sets $`A_k`$ by induction. Let $`A_1=\{0,1\}`$. We assume that for some $`k1`$ we have constructed sets

$$A_1A_2\mathrm{}A_k$$

such that $`|A_k|=2k`$ and

$$r_{A_k}(n)1\text{for all }n𝐙\text{.}$$

We define the integer

$$d_k=\mathrm{max}\{|a|:aA_k\}.$$

Then

$$A_k[d_k,d_k]$$

and

$$2A_k[2d_k,2d_k].$$

If both numbers $`d_k`$ and $`d_k`$ belong to the set $`A_k`$, then, since $`0A_1A_k`$ and $`d_k1,`$, we would have the following two representations of 0 in the sumset $`2A_k`$:

$$0=0+0=(d_k)+d_k.$$

This is impossible, since $`r_{A_k}(0)1`$, hence only one of the two integers $`d_k`$ and $`d_k`$ belongs to the set $`A_k`$. It follows that if $`d_kA_k,`$ then

$$\{2d_k,2d_k1\}2A_k=\mathrm{},$$

and if $`d_kA_k,`$ then

$$\{2d_k,(2d_k1)\}2A_k=\mathrm{}.$$

Define the integer $`b_k`$ by

$$b_k=\mathrm{min}\{|b|:b2A_k\}.$$

Then

$$1b_k2d_k1.$$

To construct the set $`A_{k+1}`$, we choose an integer $`c_k`$ such that

$$c_kd_k.$$

If $`b_k2A_k`$, let

$$A_{k+1}=A_k\{b_k+3c_k,3c_k\}.$$

We have

$$b_k=(b_k+3c_k)+(3c_k)2A_{k+1}.$$

If $`b_k2A_k`$, then $`b_k2A_k`$ and we let

$$A_{k+1}=A_k\{(b_k+3c_k),3c_k\}.$$

Again we have

$$b_k=(b_k+3c_k)+3c_k2A_{k+1}.$$

Since

$$d_k<3c_k<3c_k+b_k,$$

it follows that $`|A_{k+1}|=|A_k|+2=2(k+1)`$. Moreover,

$$d_{k+1}=\mathrm{max}\{|a|:aA_{k+1}\}=b_k+3c_k.$$

For example, since $`A_1=\{0,1\}`$ and $`2A_1=\{0,1,2\}`$, it follows that $`d_1=b_1=1.`$ For $`c_11`$ we have

$$A_2=\{(1+3c_1),0,1,3c_1\}.$$

Then

$$2A_2=\{(2+6c_1),(1+3c_1),3c_1,1,0,1,2,3c_1,1+3c_1,6c_1\}$$

and $`d_2=1+3c_1`$ and $`b_2=2`$.

We can assume that $`b_k2A_k`$, hence $`A_{k+1}=A_k\{b_k+3c_k,3c_k\}`$. (The argument in the case $`b_k2A_k`$ and $`b_k2A_k`$ is similar.) We shall show that the sumset $`2A_{k+1}`$ is the disjoint union of the following four sets:

$$2A_{k+1}=2A_k\left(A_k+b_k+3c_k\right)\left(A_k3c_k\right)\{b_k,2b_k+6c_k,6c_k\}.$$

If $`u2A_k`$, then

$$2c_k2d_ku2d_k2c_k.$$

Suppose that $`v=a+b_k+3c_kA_k+b_k+3c_k`$, where $`aA_k.`$ The inequalities

$$c_kd_kad_kc_k$$

and

$$1b_k2d_k12c_k1$$

imply that

$$2c_k+1v6c_k1<2b_k+6c_k.$$

Similarly, if $`w=a3c_kA_k3c_k`$, then

$$6c_k<4c_kw2c_k.$$

These inequalities imply that the sets $`2A_k`$, $`A_k+b_k+3c_k`$, $`A_k3c_k`$, and $`2\{b_k+3c_k,3c_k\}`$ are pairwise disjoint, unless $`c_k=d_k`$ and $`2d_k2A_k2(A_k3d_k)`$. If $`2d_k2A_k`$, then $`d_kA_k`$. If $`2d_k2(A_k3d_k)`$, then $`d_kA_k.`$ This is impossible, howev er, because the set $`A_k`$ does not contain both integers $`d_k`$ and $`d_k`$.

Since the sets $`A_k+b_k+3c_k`$ and $`A_k3c_k`$ are translations, it follows that

$$r_{A_{k+1}}(n)1\text{for all integers }n.$$

Let $`A=_{k=1}^{\mathrm{}}A_k`$. For all $`k1`$ we have $`2=b_2b_3\mathrm{}`$ and $`b_k<b_{k+2}`$, hence $`b_{2k}k+1`$. Since $`b_{2k}`$ is the minimum of the absolute values of the integers that do not belong to $`2A_{2k}`$, it follows that

$$\{k,k+1,\mathrm{},1,0,1,\mathrm{},k1,k\}2A_{2k}2A$$

for all $`k1`$, and so $`A`$ is an additive basis. If $`r_A(n)2`$ for some $`n`$, then $`r_{A_k}(n)2`$ for some $`k`$, which is impossible. Therefore, $`A`$ is a unique representation basis for the integers.

In the construction of the set $`A_{k+1}`$, the only constraint on the choice of the number $`c_k`$ was that $`c_kd_k`$. Given a function $`f(x)`$ that tends to infinity, we use induction to construct a sequence of integers $`\{c_k\}_{k=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that $`A(x,x)f(x)`$ for all $`xc_1.`$ We observe that

$`A(x,x)`$ $`=`$ $`A_{k+1}(x,x)`$
$`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}2k\hfill & \text{for }d_kx<3c_k\text{,}\hfill \\ 2k+1\hfill & \text{for }3c_kx<b+k+3c_k=d_{k+1}\text{.}\hfill \end{array}`$
We begin by choosing an integer $`c_1d_1`$ such that

$$f(x)4\text{for }xc_1\text{.}$$

Then

$$A(x,x)4f(x)\text{for }c_1xd_2\text{.}$$

Let $`k2`$, and suppose we have selected an integer $`c_{k1}d_{k1}`$ such that

$$f(x)2k\text{for }xc_{k1}$$

and

$$A(x,x)f(x)\text{for }c_1xd_k\text{.}$$

There exists an integer $`c_kd_k`$ such that

$$f(x)2k+2\text{for }xc_k$$

Then

$$A(x,x)=2kf(x)\text{for }d_kx<3c_k$$

and

$$A(x,x)2k+2f(x)\text{for }3c_kxd_{k+1}\text{,}$$

hence

$$A(x,x)f(x)\text{for }c_1xd_{k+1}\text{.}$$

It follows that

$$A(x,x)f(x)\text{for all }xc_1\text{.}$$

This completes the proof.

## 3 Bases with logarithmic growth

In Theorem 1 we constructed unique representation bases whose counting functions tend slowly to infinity. It is natural to ask if there exist unique representation bases that are dense in the sense that their counting functions tend rapidly to infinity. In the following theorem we use the previous algorithm to construct a unique representation basis $`A`$ whose counting function $`A(x,x)`$ has order of magnitude $`\mathrm{log}x`$.

###### Theorem 2

There exists a unique representation basis $`A`$ for the integers such that

$$\frac{2\mathrm{log}x}{\mathrm{log}5}+2\left(1\frac{\mathrm{log}3}{\mathrm{log}5}\right)A(x,x)\frac{2\mathrm{log}x}{\mathrm{log}3}+2.$$

Proof. We apply the method of Theorem 1 with

$$c_k=d_k\text{for all }k1\text{.}$$

This is essentially a greedy algorithm construction, since at each iteration we choose the smallest possible value of $`c_k`$. It is instructive to compute the first few sets $`A_k`$. Since

$$A_1=\{0,1\}\text{and}2A_1=\{0,1,2\},$$

we have $`b_1=1`$ and $`c_1=d_1=1`$. Then

$$A_2=\{4,0,1,3\}$$

and

$$2A_2=\{8,4,3,1,0,1,2,3,4,6\},$$

hence $`b_2=2`$, $`c_2=d_2=4`$. The next iteration of the algorithm produces the sets

$$A_3=\{14,4,0,1,3,12\}$$

and

$`2A_3`$ $`=`$ $`\{28,18,14,13,11,8,4,3\}`$
$`\{2,1,0,1,2,3,4,6,8,12,15,24\},`$
we obtain $`b_3=5`$, $`c_3=d_3=28,`$ and

$$A_4=\{84,14,4,0,1,3,12,89\}.$$

We shall compute upper and lower bounds for the counting function $`A(x,x)`$. For $`k1`$ we have $`1b_k2c_k1`$ and $`c_{k+1}=3c_k+b_k`$, hence

$$3c_k+1c_{k+1}5c_k1.$$

Since $`c_1=1,`$ it follows by induction on $`k`$ that

$$\frac{3^k1}{2}c_k\frac{35^k+5}{20}$$

and so

$$\frac{\mathrm{log}c_k}{\mathrm{log}5}+1\frac{\mathrm{log}((20c_k5)/3))}{\mathrm{log}5}k\frac{\mathrm{log}(2c_k+1)}{\mathrm{log}3}\frac{\mathrm{log}c_k}{\mathrm{log}3}+1$$

for all $`k1`$. We obtain an upper bound for $`A(x,x)`$ as follows. If $`c_kx<3c_k`$, then

$`A(x,x)`$ $`=`$ $`A_k(x,x)`$
$`=`$ $`2k`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}c_k}{\mathrm{log}3}}+2`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}x}{\mathrm{log}3}}+2.`$
If $`3c_kx<c_{k+1}`$, then

$`A(x,x)`$ $`=`$ $`A_{k+1}(x,x)`$
$`=`$ $`2k+1`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}c_k}{\mathrm{log}3}}+3`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}(x/3)}{\mathrm{log}3}}+3`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}x}{\mathrm{log}3}}+1.`$
Therefore,

$$A(x,x)\frac{2\mathrm{log}x}{\mathrm{log}3}+2\text{for all }x1\text{.}$$

We obtain a lower bound for $`A(x,x)`$ similarly. If $`c_kx<3c_k`$, then

$`A(x,x)`$ $`=`$ $`2k`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}c_k}{\mathrm{log}5}}+2`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}(x/3)}{\mathrm{log}5}}+2`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}x}{\mathrm{log}5}}+2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}3}{\mathrm{log}5}}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}x}{\mathrm{log}5}}+0.63\mathrm{}.`$
If $`3c_kx<c_{k+1}`$, then, since

$$c_{k+1}=d_{k+1}=b_k+3c_k5c_k1,$$

we have

$`A(x,x)`$ $`=`$ $`2k+1`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}c_k}{\mathrm{log}5}}+3`$
$`>`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}(x/5)}{\mathrm{log}5}}+3`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{log}x}{\mathrm{log}5}}+1`$
Therefore,

$$A(x,x)\frac{2\mathrm{log}x}{\mathrm{log}5}+2\left(1\frac{\mathrm{log}3}{\mathrm{log}5}\right)\text{for all }x1\text{.}$$

This completes the proof of the Theorem 2.

## 4 Heuristics and open problems

Let $`A`$ be a set of integers. If $`A`$ is a unique representation basis for $`𝐙`$, or, more generally, if $`A`$ is a set of integers with a bounded representation function, then $`A(x,x)\sqrt{x}`$. The following simple result gives an explicit upper bound.

###### Theorem 3

Let $`A`$ be a nonempty set of integers such that the representation function of $`A`$ is bounded. If $`r_A(n)r`$ for all $`n`$, then

$$A(x,x)\sqrt{8rx}$$

for all $`xr.`$

Proof. Let $`A(x,x)=k`$. The number of ordered pairs $`(a,a^{})A\times A`$ with $`xaa^{}x`$ is exactly $`(k^2+k)/2`$. For each of these ordered pairs we have $`2xa+a^{}2x`$. For each integer $`n[2x,2x]`$ there are at most $`r`$ such pairs $`(a,a^{})`$ with $`a+a^{}=n`$, and so

$$\frac{k^2+k}{2}r(4x+1).$$

It follows that

$$A(x,x)=k\sqrt{8rx+\frac{8r+1}{4}}\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{8rx}$$

for $`xr`$. This completes the proof.

Theorem 3 has a natural analogue for sets $`A`$ nonnegative integers.

###### Theorem 4

Let $`A`$ be a set of nonnegative integers such that every sufficiently large integer can be represented as the sum of two elements of $`A`$. If $`r_A(n)1`$ for all $`n>n_0`$, then

$$A(0,x)2\sqrt{x}1$$

for all $`xn_0^2.`$ If $`A`$ is a set of nonnegative integers such that $`r_A(n)r`$ for all $`n0`$, then

$$A(0,x)2\sqrt{rx}$$

for all $`x1.`$

Proof. Let $`A(0,x)=k`$. Suppose that $`r_A(n)1`$ for all $`n>n_0`$. The number of ordered pairs $`(a,a^{})A\times A`$ with $`0aa^{}x`$ is exactly $`(k^2+k)/2`$. For each such pair we have $`0a+a^{}2x`$. For each integer $`n`$ with $`n_0<n2x`$ there is at least one pair $`(a,a^{})`$ with $`a+a^{}=n`$, and so

$$\frac{k^2+k}{2}2xn_0.$$

It follows that

$$A(0,x)=k\sqrt{4x2n_0+\frac{1}{4}}\frac{1}{2}2\sqrt{x}1$$

for $`xn_0^2`$.

Suppose that $`r_A(n)r`$ for all $`n0`$. If $`a,a^{}A`$ and $`0a,a^{}x`$, then $`0a+a^{}2x.`$ Since $`r_A(0)1`$ and $`r_A(1)1`$, it follows, as in the proof of Theorem 3, that

$$\frac{k^2+k}{2}r(2x1)+2,$$

and so

$$A(0,x)=k\sqrt{4rx+\frac{178r}{4}}\frac{1}{2}2\sqrt{rx}$$

for $`x1`$. This completes the proof.

A set $`A`$ of nonnegative integers is called a basis (resp. an asymptotic basis) if every (resp. every sufficiently large) integer can be represented as the sum of two elements of $`A`$. By Theorem 1, there exist arbitrarily sparse sets of integers that are unique representation bases for $`𝐙`$. On the other hand, by Theorem 4, a set $`A`$ of nonnegative integers that is a basis or asymptotic basis for the set of nonnegative integers must have a counting function $`A(0,x)`$ that grows at least as fast as $`\sqrt{x},`$ and if the representation function of $`A`$ is bounded, then $`A(0,x)`$ cannot grow faster than a constant multiple of $`\sqrt{x}`$. This phenomenon can be interpreted as follows: If $`0nN`$, then there are infinitely many pairs $`(a,a^{})`$ of integers whose sum is $`n`$, and the summands $`a`$ and $`a^{}`$ can be arbitrarily large in absolute value. On the other hand, if $`a`$ and $`a^{}`$ are constrained to be nonnegative integers, then they must be chosen from the finite number of integers in the bounded interval $`[0,N]`$. If $`A`$ is an asymptotic basis, then $`A`$ is forced to contain many numbers in the interval $`[0,N]`$, and this increases the probability that some number has many representations. This phenomenon may underlie the Erdős-Turán conjecture.

Theorem 1 asserts that a unique representation basis $`A`$ for the integers can be arbitrarily sparse, while Theorem 3 states that $`A`$ cannot be too dense, since $`A(x,x)\sqrt{x}`$. In Theorem 2 we constructed a unique representation basis such that $`A(x,x)(2/\mathrm{log}5)\mathrm{log}x+0.63`$. It is not known what functions can be lower bounds for counting functions of unique representation bases. Here are some unsolved problems on this theme.

1. For each real number $`c>2/\mathrm{log}5`$, does there exist a unique representation basis $`A`$ such that $`A(x,x)c\mathrm{log}x`$ for all sufficiently large $`x`$?
2. Does there exist a unique representation basis $`A`$ such that

$$\underset{x\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{A(x,x)}{\mathrm{log}x}=\mathrm{}\mathrm{?}$$
3. Does there exist a number $`\theta >0`$ and a unique representation basis $`A`$ such that $`A(x,x)x^\theta `$ for all sufficiently large $`x`$?
4. Does there exist a number $`\theta <1/2`$ such that $`A(x,x)x^\theta `$ for every unique representation basis $`A`$ and for all sufficiently large $`x`$?


text:
# Quantum dilaton gravity as a linear dilaton conformal field theory

## I Introduction

In recent years many controversial features of the semiclassical and quantum theory of gravity have been studied using models in two spacetime dimensions. Two-dimensional(2D) theories of gravity not only are useful toy models but in some cases also have a direct physical meaning, since they may be obtained from dimensional reduction of higher dimensional gravity theories.

Basically, one can approach 2D gravity from two different points of view: as the theory of 2D random surfaces (a bosonic string theory in non-critical dimensions) pol ; kawai  or as a Einstein-like, Brans-Dicke theory of gravity (2D dilaton gravity) dilgra ; jt .

One crucial feature of 2D dilaton gravity is that it allows for interesting gravitational structures already at the classical level. The theory admits black hole solutions, which have been investigated both at the classical and semiclassical level kunca . Big progress in this direction has been achieved using the Anti-de Sitter(AdS)/Conformal field theory (CFT) correspondence in two-dimensions cami ; CCKM ; cacav ; med . The use of this correspondence made it possible to exactly reproduce the thermodynamical entropy of 2D black holes in terms of the degeneracy of states of a CFT.

It is obvious that one would like to go beyond the semiclassical approximation, in order to see how the results of the semiclassical approach are modified in a full 2D quantum theory of gravity. This program has been pursued using a variety of methods jack ; CAF  but the results have been in some sense astonishing: the quantum theory forgets almost completely the richness of the structure of the classical and semiclassical theory. The spectrum of the model (which in some cases is that of a CFT) is characterized only by two quantum numbers, which can be identified with the black hole mass and the constant mode of the dilaton. This feature appears even more puzzling when compared with the results of the AdS2/CFT1 correspondence cami , which predicts a huge degeneracy of states accounting for the thermodynamical entropy of the black hole.

The purpose of this paper is to go a step further in this direction. We will quantize exactly a 2D dilaton gravity model. We will focus our analysis on matter-coupled dilaton gravity where the gravitational sector is given by

$$S=\frac{1}{k}d^2x\sqrt{g}\left[\varphi R+\lambda V(\varphi )\right],$$
(1)
and we choose an exponential dilaton potential $`V(\varphi )=conste^{2\gamma \varphi }`$. We will approach the problem of the quantization of the model using nonperturbative methods. A natural way to introduce them is to relate the gravitational model to one of the several exactly solved quantum field theories in $`1+1`$ dimensions. The Liouville field theory (LFT) turns out to be, not surprisingly, the right choice. Fixing the diffeomorphism invariance of the action (1) and using suitable field redefinitions, we will show that the gravity model is classically equivalent to a LFT plus a decoupled free scalar with wrong sign kinetic energy.

We will then follow the common quantization procedure, imposing the positivity of quantum states energy (so, as usual in string theory, we will have ghosts in the spectrum). A consistent quantization can be performed provided the quantum anomaly vanishes. For this purpose, a simple mechanism may be used. It is well known that also at the classical level LFT has a central charge $`c_\gamma `$, depending on the parameter $`\gamma `$ appearing in the potential $`\mathrm{exp}(2\gamma \varphi )`$. In quantum LFT $`c_\gamma `$ is shifted by $`\gamma `$ dependent quantum corrections thorn . It will turn out that this shift is crucial: fixing $`\gamma `$ properly, we can achieve a vanishing total anomaly and remove the obstruction to quantization. If it were not for this shift, any dependence on the control parameter $`\gamma `$ would be lost and a nonvanishing anomaly would be unavoidable.

In a sense our approach is similar to that used by David, Distler and Kawai in a different context kawai . In Ref. kawai  the Weyl symmetry is used to determine the coefficients of a free action (the exponential interaction is canceled by fixing the cosmological constant of the string). Conversely, in this paper we will fix the parameter $`\gamma `$ appearing in the dilaton potential in order to ensure the conformal symmetry. It turns out that also in our case the whole theory, including matter fields, may be mapped onto a free field theory: a linear dilaton CFT (see for instance Ref. polc ) with energy-momentum tensor given by

$$T_{\pm \pm }=\frac{1}{\alpha ^{}}:_\pm X^\mu _\pm X_\mu :+V_\mu _\pm ^2X^\mu .$$
(2)
In our case $`V_\mu `$ is determined by the dilaton gravity action.

The theory described by (2) is not suitable as a string theory since the Lorentz invariance in the target space is explicitly broken by $`V_\mu `$. This is not important in our context, since internal symmetries of the fields are not relevant for us. The quantization of the theory then follows in a straightforward way.

The structure of the paper is the following. In sect. II we introduce the gravitational model we are going to investigate, we discuss the classical equivalence to constrained Liouville field theory plus a scalar free field and we calculate the central charge as a function of the parameter $`\gamma `$. In sect. III we briefly remind some basic feature of LFT and we map our model onto a linear dilaton CFT. In sect. IV the spectrum of the quantum theory is determined. Finally in sect. V we state our conclusions.

## II The gravitational model

Let us consider a general dilaton gravity model with $`N2`$ minimally coupled matter fields $`\phi _i`$, $`i=3,\mathrm{},N`$ ($`N2`$, $`N<14`$):

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}{\displaystyle }d^2x\sqrt{g}[\varphi R+K(\varphi )(_\mu \varphi )(^\mu \varphi )+`$ (3)
$`\lambda W(\varphi )+L(_\mu \phi _i)(^\mu \phi _i)],`$
where $`W(\varphi )`$ (the dilaton potential), $`K(\varphi )`$ are functions of the dilaton and $`\lambda `$ and $`L`$ are coupling constants. At the classical level, whereas the matter part of the action is both diffeomorphism and Weyl invariant, the gravitational sector looks invariant only under diffeomorphisms. However, it has been shown that also the gravitational sector is classically Weyl invariant c1 . Using this symmetry, the action (3) can be transformed, by means of a dilaton-dependent Weyl rescaling of the metric, into the action (1), with $`W(\varphi )=\mathrm{exp}(𝑑\varphi K(\varphi ))V(\varphi )`$. Owing to the conformal anomaly, the extension of the Weyl symmetry at the quantum level is in general problematic. But not in our case, since we tune to zero the conformal anomaly. (For the dilaton gravity model with an exponential potential we are considering in this paper, the quantum equivalence between the model (3) (with $`K=const.`$) and (1) can be also established showing that both can be mapped into the action (5), see below).

We fix the diffeomorphism invariance of the action (1) by choosing the conformal gauge for the metric,

$$ds^2=e^{2\gamma \rho (x)}dx^+dx^{},$$
(4)
where $`\gamma `$ is a real free parameter. A glance at the classical theory may be useful. For the moment we consider only the gravitational sector, matter fields will be reintroduced later. The equations of motion in the conformal gauge read:

$`8\gamma e^{2\gamma \rho (x)}_+_{}\rho (x)=\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{dV(\varphi )}{d\varphi }}`$
$`_+_{}\varphi (x){\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{4}}e^{2\gamma \rho (x)}V(\varphi )=0`$
$`_+^2\varphi 2\gamma _+\rho (x)_+\varphi (x)=0`$
$`_{}^2\varphi 2\gamma _{}\rho (x)_{}\varphi (x)=0,`$
where the last two equations are the constraints for the theory. Two choices for $`V(\varphi )`$ lead to integrable models suitable for our purposes: $`V(\varphi )=\varphi `$ and $`V(\varphi )=\alpha e^{2\gamma \varphi }+\beta e^{2\gamma \varphi }`$ fil . The first case was considered in Refs. jack2 ; jack . Classical solutions of the latter have been discussed in FN . Here we will focus on the second case. Later on, we will show that a quantum treatment of the model is not possible for generic values of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$. We choose $`\alpha =1`$ and $`\beta =0`$. Setting $`k=\pi \gamma `$, $`\lambda =\mu /(8\gamma )`$ and performing the field redefinitions:

$$\psi =2(\rho +\varphi )\chi =2(\rho \varphi ),$$

action (1) in the conformal gauge (4) becomes:

$$S=\frac{1}{4\pi }𝑑x^+𝑑x^{}\left(_+\psi _{}\psi _+\chi _{}\chi +\frac{\mu }{4\gamma ^2}e^{\gamma \psi }\right),$$
(5)
whereas the constraint equations are

$$T_{\pm \pm }=\frac{1}{2}(_\pm \psi )^2+\frac{1}{\gamma }_\pm ^2\psi (\frac{1}{2}(_\pm \chi )^2+\frac{1}{\gamma }_\pm ^2\chi )=0.$$
(6)
The action (5) is invariant, up to boundary terms, under transformations of the conformal group in two dimensions, given in light-cone coordinates by $`x^+w^+(x^+),x^{}w^{}(x^{})`$. Under these transformations the field $`\chi `$ transforms as a scalar, whereas $`\psi `$ transforms as a Liouville field $`\psi \psi +(1/\gamma )\mathrm{ln}[(dw^+/dx^{})(dw^{}/dx^{})]`$.

The physical content of the 2D field theory we have obtained can be immediately read from Eqs. (5) and (6). It is given by Liouville theory for the field $`\psi `$ and one decoupled free scalar field $`\chi `$ with wrong sign kinetic energy. Both fields have an improvement term in the stress-energy tensor. Alternatively, one can see the theory as a conformally improved bosonic string in 2D target space, with one of the fields self-interacting. Of course this is just a way to describe our theory and clearly no Lorentz structure does exist in the “target space”. The $`N2`$ matter fields $`\phi `$ can be straightforwardly introduced in the theory by adding to the previous Lagrangian the term $`_+\phi _i_{}\phi _i`$, $`i=3\mathrm{}N`$, and to the stress-energy tensor the term $`(1/2)(_\pm \phi _i)^2`$ (we fix for convenience in Eq. (3) $`L=\gamma /8`$).

### II.1 The conformal anomaly $`c(\gamma )`$

The quantization of the model (5) will be performed using the conventional quantization scheme, which preserves the Weyl symmetry. In this way we will have a contribution to the anomaly both from the gravitational and matter field sectors. A consistent quantization will require a cancellation of the two contributions.

Two different approaches have been proposed in the literature to realize this cancellation: the 2D quantum gravity a la David, Distler and Kawai kawai  and the string-inspired dilaton gravity of Cangemi, Jackiw et al. jack .

In Ref. kawai  the noncritical string theory is considered after Polyakov’s famous paper on the geometry of the bosonic string pol . The string in $`d`$ dimensions is viewed as a model of $`d`$ free bosons coupled to 2D quantum gravity. In the functional integral it is assumed that the measures can all be made independent of the Liouville mode by a field transformation. The Jacobian so introduced is supposed to be the exponential of a Liouville action. From these assumptions it follows the Weyl symmetry of the theory, and this is sufficient to determine the unknown parameters of the model. This approach is consistent for $`d1`$.

In Ref. jack , the authors considered a 2D dilaton gravity model (1) with $`V(\varphi )=\varphi `$. In absence of matter fields the crucial problem of the cancellation of the quantum anomaly has been solved resorting to an unconventional quantization procedure. The action (1) is viewed as a theory of two free scalars with two constraints, where the kinetic energy terms of the two scalars have opposite sign. Usually both positive and negative kinetic energy scalars are quantized imposing positivity of the energy of the quantum states. This leads to negative norm (ghost) states for the scalar with wrong sign of the kinetic energy and to the same central charge (+1) for both scalars. In Ref. jack  an opposite choice is made, positivity of the norm is required, leading to negative energy states. The two scalars contribute with opposite sign to the central charge and the total conformal anomaly cancels. Of course this method does not work when matter fields are present.

In this paper we are considering, as in Ref. jack , a dilaton gravity model, but we will use the conventional quantization procedure of Ref. kawai . Let us now evaluate the conformal anomaly for the model (5) as a function of $`\gamma `$. It is standard lore that a single scalar field $`\phi `$ with action $`S=(1/8\pi )d^2x\sqrt{|g|}(_\mu \phi ^\mu \phi +(2/\gamma )\phi R)`$ has a central charge $`c_\pm =1\pm 12/\gamma ^2`$, depending on the sign of the kinetic energy term (the plus sign holds in the positive case). $`c_+`$ is the classical central charge for LFT $`S=(1/4\pi )𝑑x^+𝑑x^{}(_+\psi _{}\psi +(\mu /4\gamma ^2)\mathrm{exp}(\gamma \psi ))`$. At the quantum level this charge is shifted thorn :

$$1+\frac{12}{\gamma ^2}1+\frac{12}{\gamma ^2}\left(1+\frac{\gamma ^2}{2}\right)^2.$$
(7)
It should be noticed that choosing a dilaton potential $`V(\varphi )=\alpha e^{2\gamma \varphi }+\beta e^{2\gamma \varphi }`$, the central charges for $`\psi `$ and $`\chi `$ (the ghost field) would be shifted by opposite amounts so that the total anomaly would no longer depend on $`\gamma `$. Therefore, there is no way to get a vanishing anomaly. A dilaton gravity model with such a potential cannot be, at least using our scheme, quantized.

Taking into account the shift (7), the well-known contribution from the reparametrization ghosts, and from the $`N2`$ matter fields, the total central charge is:

$`c_\psi +c_\chi +(N2)26`$
$`=`$ $`\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{12}{\gamma ^2}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma ^2}{2}}\right)^2\right]+\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{12}{\gamma ^2}}\right]+(N2)26`$
$`=`$ $`3(\gamma ^24)+N2=c(\gamma ).`$
It follows that

$$c(\gamma )=0\gamma =\pm \sqrt{\frac{14N}{3}}.$$
(8)
In the following only positive solution will be considered. Since $`\gamma `$ has to be real and non-vanishing, we find the upper bound $`N<14`$.

## III Mapping onto a linear dilaton CFT

We are now in a position to consistently quantize our model. We have already pointed out that our theory describes a Liouville field $`\psi `$, a decoupled free scalar field $`\chi `$ with the wrong sign kinetic energy an $`N2`$ free scalar matter fields. The only (self-)interacting field is the Liouville field, whose energy momentum tensor is the same as a free field with a conformal improvement. From Eq. (6) it is easy to see that also the field $`\chi `$ has an improvement. The energy momentum tensor for the quantum theory with $`N`$ fields is therefore given by

$$T_{\pm \pm }=\frac{1}{2}(_\pm X)^2+v_\mu _\pm ^2X^\mu ;v_\mu =(\frac{1}{\gamma },\frac{Q}{2},\mathrm{𝟎}),$$
(9)
where $`\mu =0,1,\mathrm{},N1`$. $`X^0`$ is the field $`\chi `$, $`X^1`$ is the Liouville field $`\psi `$ and the remaining are the matter fields. $`Q=(2/\gamma +\gamma )`$ and $`v_\mu `$ gives the conformal improvements. For the $`X^\mu `$ fields (the “target space”) we are using the flat metric $`\eta _{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,\mathrm{},1)`$. The energy-momentum tensor (9) can be also derived from the action:

$$S=\frac{1}{8\pi }d^2x\sqrt{g}\left(^aX^\mu _aX_\mu 2v_\mu X^\mu R\right).$$
(10)
This action describes a linear dilaton CFT. This is a free field theory whereas the theory described by Eqs. (5) and (6) is not. However, both theories have the same energy-momentum tensor and this property can be used to determine the spectrum of our model. Before doing so, we will briefly remind some basic features of LFT thorn ; bra , relying mainly on the picture proposed in Refs. do ; zz  (see also Ref. tesc ). In this approach LFT is viewed as a mild generalization of the standard 2D CFT structure. The older approach to LFT (see e.g. Ref. seib ) is much more involved and cannot be used for our purposes.

### III.1 Liouville Field Theory

LFT is quantized as a CFT generalizing the celebrated framework of Ref. bpz , henceforth referred to as BPZ. The space of the states forms a representation of the Virasoro algebra but, in contrast with the minimal model (BPZ scheme), the set of representations is continuous. This is due to the noncompactness of the space where the zero mode of the theory takes values.

A two dimensional CFT is characterized by a correspondence between fields, i.e. local operators, and states cft . The primary fields $`V_\alpha `$ acting on the $`SL(2,C)`$ invariant vacuum $`|0`$ generate the highest weight states of the Virasoro algebra. The descendant fields (states) are defined by the action of the energy-momentum tensor $`T(w)`$ (Virasoro modes $`L_n`$) on the primary fields (highest weight states). The theory is fully specified by vacuum expectation values (VEV) of the form:

$$0|\underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}T(w_p)\underset{q=1}{\overset{M}{}}\overline{T}(\overline{w}_q)\underset{r=1}{\overset{R}{}}V_{\alpha _r}(z_r,\overline{z}_r)|0.$$
(11)
LFT fits into this general scheme but there are some subtleties. If the central charge is given by $`c=1+3Q^2`$ (in our case $`Q=2/\gamma +\gamma `$), then $`e^{\alpha \varphi }`$ are spinless primary fields with conformal dimension

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(e^{\alpha \varphi })=\frac{1}{2}\alpha (Q\alpha ).$$
(12)
The correspondence exists only in the region

$$0<\mathrm{}(\alpha )\frac{Q}{2}.$$

A scalar product can be defined for states $`|\alpha `$, defined as usual by $`lim_{z0}V_\alpha (z)|0`$, if $`\alpha `$ is given by

$$\alpha =\frac{Q}{2}+iP,$$

where $`P`$ is real (we can take $`P>0`$). As a consequence, using Eq. (12) we find that a state $`|\alpha >`$ has a conformal dimension $`\mathrm{\Delta }(P)=Q^2/8+P^2/2`$. The Hilbert space the theory is given by

$$\underset{P>0}{}\text{Vir}_{\mathrm{\Delta }(P)}\text{Vir}_{\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}(P)},$$
(13)
where $`_{P>0}`$ is the direct sum over $`P>0`$ and $`\text{Vir}_{\mathrm{\Delta }(P)}`$ are irreducible representations of the Virasoro algebra of highest weight $`\mathrm{\Delta }(P)`$.

From Eq. (13) it is evident that, paradoxically, the vacuum $`|0`$ does not belong to the Hilbert space. Nevertheless the state-operator correspondence and VEV (11) still make sense. Owing to the CFT structure of LFT it is in principle possible to reconstruct all correlation functions starting from the three-point function, whose exact expression is given in Ref. do . VEV are obtained by suitable analytical continuations summing over intermediate states tesc .

### III.2 The quantization of the linear dilaton CFT

We have already shown that our dilaton gravity model has the same energy-momentum tensor of a linear dilaton CFT. The spectrum of the theory can be found by quantizing a sort of bosonic string with $`N`$ bosons $`X^\mu `$. The energy-momentum tensor and the action being given by Eqs. (9) and (10). We can simply follow the steps that are usual for the critical bosonic string, taking into account i) the presence of a conformal improvement and ii) the previously discussed structure of LFT. Concerning point ii), we take a ground state (oscillatory vacuum) $`|p;0`$ of momentum $`p`$ with component $`(p^1)^2>Q^2/8`$.

We follow the conventions of Ref. gsw . The worldsheet is parametrized by $`(\tau ,\sigma )`$, $`\mathrm{}<\tau <\mathrm{}`$, $`0\sigma \pi `$ and we use periodic boundary conditions. The modes for right ($`\alpha _n^\mu `$) and left ($`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^\mu `$) movers are independent. The commutation relations are as usual $`[\alpha _m^\mu ,\alpha _n^\nu ]=[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^\mu ,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^\nu ]=m\eta ^{\mu \nu }\delta _{m+n}`$. The Virasoro operators for $`m0`$ are given by:

$$L_m=\frac{1}{2}\underset{q}{}\alpha _{mq}\alpha _qimv\alpha _m.$$
(14)
Here, and in the following the expressions for the left modes operators are obtained substituting $`\alpha _n\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n`$. The normal ordered expression for $`L_0`$ is:

$$L_0=\frac{p^2}{8}+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\alpha _n\alpha _n.$$

The Hamiltonian is $`H=L_0+\stackrel{~}{L}_0`$. The normal ordering constant $`a`$ in the mass-shell conditions $`(L_0a)|\varphi =(\stackrel{~}{L}_0a)|\varphi =0`$ and the conformal anomaly are determined in a well-known way. From the relations for integer $`m`$

$$\frac{1}{12}[(N+12v^2)m^3Nm]+2ma+\frac{1}{6}(m13m^3)=0,$$

we read

$$v^2=\frac{26N}{12};a=\frac{N2}{24}.$$
(15)
As expected, the first equation above is the same as Eq. (8). From Eq. (15) it follows immediately that in the absence of matter fields ($`N=2`$) the ground state is massless ($`a=0`$). If matter fields are present ( $`3N<14`$) the ground state is tachyonic ($`a>0`$).

## IV The spectrum of the model

Let us now construct explicitly the spectrum of our model. We will first consider the case in which matter fields are present, $`N3`$. In this case, we can generate the spectrum and prove the unitarity of the theory, using a spectrum-generating algebra. This can be done adapting to our case the Brower construction br , a version of the covariant formalism of Del Giudice, Di Vecchia and Fubini DDF  (see also Ref. gsw ) used to prove the no-ghost theorem for the bosonic string.

We consider only the right movers sector (our results can be immediately extended to the left movers sector). We want to construct a spectrum generating set of operators $`A_n^\mu `$ commuting with the Virasoro generators $`L_m`$. Starting from the right moving solution at $`\sigma =0`$

$$X_R^\mu (\tau )=\frac{1}{2}x^\mu +\frac{1}{2}\tau p^\mu +\frac{1}{2}i\underset{n0}{}\frac{\alpha _n^\mu }{n}e^{2in\tau },$$

we first construct primary fields of conformal dimension $`1`$ from the vertex operators $`V(k,\tau )=:\lambda \dot{X}_R\mathrm{exp}(ikX_R):`$, where $`\lambda `$ is a proper polarization vector. Using Eq. (14) we find:

$`[L_m,:\lambda \dot{X}_Re^{ikX_R(\tau )}:]=`$
$`e^{2im\tau }\left({\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\tau }}+m(1+{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{2}}ikv)\right):\lambda \dot{X}_Re^{ikX_R}:`$
$`+e^{2im\tau }m^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{k\lambda }{2}}iv\lambda \right):e^{ikX_R(\tau )}:`$ (16)
Let us now take $`k`$ lightlike and orthogonal to $`v`$. This is always possible since from Eq. (15) it follows that $`v`$ is spacelike. It is convenient to use light-cone coordinates $`X^\mu =(X^+,X^{},X^i)`$ with $`X_\mu Y^\mu =X^+Y^{}X^{}Y^++X^iY^i`$. By means of a Lorentz rotation, we are free to take $`v_\mu =(0,0,v,0\mathrm{},0)`$, where $`v_\mu v^\mu =v^2`$. The kinematical setup is fixed as follows. The ground state momentum $`p_0^\mu `$ in $`|p_0;0`$ can be chosen such that $`p_0^\mu =(2,0,\beta ,\mathrm{})`$, $`\beta ^2=8a`$. The $`k`$ in $`V(k,\tau )`$ is $`k_n=(0,2n,\mathrm{𝟎})`$ for integer $`n`$. $`k_n^2=0`$, $`k_n^\mu v_\mu =0`$. At the level $`n`$ the mass-shell condition is satisfied: $`(p+k_n)^2+8(na)=0`$.

Let us first construct the operators that generate states describing excitations of the matter fields ($`N4`$). If $`\lambda ^i`$ is a vector pointing in the $`i`$ direction, we can find $`N4`$ operators,

$$V^i(k_n,\tau )=:\lambda ^i\dot{X}_Re^{ik_nX_R}:,i4,$$
(17)
which, from Eq. (IV), satisfy the commutation relations

$$[L_m,V^i(k_n,\tau )]=e^{2im\tau }\left(\frac{i}{2}\frac{d}{d\tau }+m\right)V^i(k_n,\tau ).$$
(18)
The operators of the spectrum-generating algebra $`A_n^\mu `$ are easily found to be

$$A_n^\mu =\frac{1}{\pi }_0^\pi 𝑑\tau V^\mu (k_n,\tau ).$$

Due to the kinematical setup, the vertex operators $`V^\mu `$ are periodic with period $`\pi `$. It follows that for $`i4`$, $`[L_m,A_n^i]=0`$ .

For $`i=3`$ a compensating term has to be added to the expression (17), since $`\lambda ^3v0`$ (see Eq. (IV)). The form of this term is well known br . If $`\widehat{v}`$ is the unit vector in the direction $`v_\mu `$, we have

$$V^3(k_n,\tau )=:\widehat{v}\dot{X}_Re^{ik_nX_R}:+v\frac{d}{d\tau }(\mathrm{ln}k_n\dot{X}_R)e^{ik_nX_R},$$

so that $`V^3`$ satisfies Eq. (18) and consequently $`A_n^3`$ commutes with $`L_m`$.

Let us now construct the operators $`A_n^+`$ and $`A_n^{}`$, which generate states describing excitations in the $`\pm `$ directions. From the equation $`V^+(k_n,\tau )=\dot{X}_R^+\mathrm{exp}(ik_nX_R)`$, it follows that $`A_n^+`$ is trivial, $`A_n^+=(1/\pi )_0^\pi V^+(k_n,\tau )=p^+/2=\delta _n`$. On the other hand $`V^{}`$ can be defined as

$$V^{}(k_n,\tau )=:\dot{X}_R^{}e^{ik_nX_R}:\frac{1}{2}in\frac{d}{d\tau }(\mathrm{ln}k_n\dot{X}_R)e^{ik_nX_R}.$$

We have completed the construction of the spectrum-generating operators $`A_n^\mu `$. They satisfy the algebra,

$`[A_m^i,A_n^j]=m\delta ^{ij}\delta _{n+m}i,j3`$
$`[A_m^{},A_n^j]=nA_{n+m}^ii>3`$
$`[A_m^{},A_n^3]=nA_{n+m}^3ivn^2\delta _{n+m}`$
$`[A_m^{},A_n^{}]=(mn)A_{m+n}^{}+2m^3\delta _{n+m}`$ (19)
Notice that the matter fields act as transverse “string” oscillators. As usual, instead with $`A_n^{}`$ it is convenient to work with the operators

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_n^{}=A_n^{}\frac{1}{2}\underset{p=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N2}{}}:A_{np}^iA_p^i:+\delta _n\frac{\beta ^2}{8}.$$

The operators $`\stackrel{~}{A}_n^{}`$ commute with $`A_m^i`$, by definition they annihilate the oscillator vacuum,

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_0^{}|p_0;0=0.$$
(20)
Furthermore $`\stackrel{~}{A}_n^{}`$ obey a Virasoro algebra:

$$[\stackrel{~}{A}_m^{},\stackrel{~}{A}_n^{}]=(mn)\stackrel{~}{A}_{m+n}^{}.$$

We have successfully completed our task of finding the spectrum of the model we are considering. From the algebra (IV) it follows that for $`N3`$ the spectrum is that of a bosonic string oscillating in a target space with $`N2`$ transverse direction. The gravitational sector is decoupled from the matter field sector. Eq. (20) implies that the states of this sector have zero norm, as expected for pure gauge states.

Until now we have considered only the case when matter field are present ($`N3`$). If matter fields are absent ($`N=2`$), we cannot use the previously explained construction. However, in this case all the excitation are pure gauge and it is evident that the Hilbert space consists of the ground state whereas all the excited states have zero norm. This conclusion is consistent with the results for pure (Jackiw-Teitelboim) dilaton gravity obtained in Ref. jack , using a different approach.

## V Conclusions

In this paper we have consistently quantized a model of matter-coupled dilaton gravity in two dimensions with exponential dilaton potential. A vanishing conformal anomaly has been achieved by tuning a parameter in the dilaton potential. The quantization has been performed by mapping the theory first onto a field theory with a Liouville interaction and then onto a linear dilaton CFT. The spectrum has been determined in a a straightforward way, analogous to that used for the bosonic string in critical dimensions.

We have found that the ground state is tachyonic (or massless in absence of matter). The spectrum has two decoupled sectors: the gravitational sector made of pure gauge, zero norm states and the matter field sector describing transverse physical excitations. This result confirms previous results jack  about quantization of pure dilaton gravity models.

The theory has a free field spectrum but it is not trivial, since as far as correlations are concerned, it has at least the same complexity as LFT. With our approach, establishing the equivalence with a sort of critical string, we have succeeded in what seems difficult using other methods: the quantization of matter-coupled dilaton gravity.

At first sight for pure 2D dilaton gravity our results seem to contradict the results of Ref. klw . In that paper the authors have shown, using path integral quantization, that for all 2D dilaton (pure) gravity models the quantum effective action coincides with the classical one. However, it is not difficult to realize that the results of our paper and those of Ref. klw  are not necessarily in contradiction. Using our approach we can make statements only about the spectrum not about the correlation function of the model, so that we cannot say anything about the quantum effective action. Moreover, as long as the spectrum is concerned, for pure gravity our result is the same as that of Ref. klw : the theory is locally trivial also at the quantum level, all the local excitations are pure gauge.

As a final point, we observe that the rich structure exhibited by the semiclassical analysis of 2D dilaton gravity has disappeared. The requirement of vanishing anomaly, i.e. the criticality of the theory, washes out the semiclassical structures. The gap between the semiclassical and the quantum theory has still to be filled. We believe this can be done only going off-criticality. In this way the theory would be equivalent to a noncritical string and needless to say would present severe difficulties.

###### Acknowledgements.

Discussions with R. Jackiw and M. Cavaglià are warmly acknowledged. P.C. is grateful to the Center for Theoretical Physics, MIT, for hospitality during part of this work.