text:
# ADP-02-66/T506 ? Quark propagator in a covariant gauge

## 1 INTRODUCTION

In QCD, asymptotic freedom states that at short distances the effective coupling constant vanishes. In that regime the interaction between quarks and gluons is largely reduced. The dynamics of these particles can be studied through their propagators in momentum space. The quark propagator is really a description of how the quark propagates in the QCD vacuum and is one of the most fundamental building blocks of QCD. By studying the momentum dependent quark mass function in the infrared region, the scalar part of the propagator, we can gain some insights into the mechanism of chiral symmetry breaking. Chiral symmetry is dynamically broken in the QCD vacuum. This gives rise to mass generation in the infrared.

In the deep infrared region, artifacts associated with the finite size of the lattice spacing become small. This is the most interesting region as nonperturbative physics lies here. However, the ultraviolet behaviour of the propagator at large momenta will in general strongly deviate from the correct continuum behaviour. This behaviour will be action dependent.

In this brief report we compare the quark propagators of Wilson and overlap fermions. Additional details may be found in Ref. .

### 1.1 The Quark Propagator

In the continuum, it is possible to study dynamical chiral symmetry breaking (DCSB) using the renormalized quark Dyson–Schwinger equation (quark–DSE) in Euclidean space. In this equation, information about the renormalized dressed gluon propagator and dressed quark–gluon vertex is embodied. The quark propagator has the general form

$`S(p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{i\gamma pA(p^2;\zeta ^2)+B(p^2;\zeta ^2)}}`$ (1)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Z(p^2;\zeta ^2)}{i\gamma p+M(p^2;\zeta ^2)}},`$
where $`M=B/A`$ and $`Z=1/A`$. Here, the parameter $`\zeta `$ represents the renormalization point. The functions $`A(p^2;\zeta ^2)`$ and $`B(p^2;\zeta ^2)`$ carry all the effects of vector and scalar quark dressing induced by the quark interactions with the gluon field.

Through this simple form we can extract the quark mass function $`M(p)`$ and renormalization function, $`Z(p)`$.

## 2 QUARK PROPAGATOR ON THE LATTICE

On the lattice we expect the bare quark propagators, in momentum space, to have a similar form as in the continuum . Hence, the dimensionless inverse lattice bare quark propagator takes the general form of

$`S^1(p)`$ $``$ $`i\left({\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}C_\mu (p)\gamma _\mu \right)+B(p)`$ (2)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i\left(_\mu 𝒞_\mu (p)\gamma _\mu \right)+(p)}{𝒞^2(p)+^2(p)}},`$
with $`𝒞^2(p)=_\mu (𝒞_\mu (p))^2`$. The discrete momentum values for a $`t`$–antiperiodic lattice of size $`N_i^3\times N_t`$, with $`n_i=1,..,N_i`$ and $`n_t=1,..,N_t`$, are given by $`p_i=\frac{2\pi }{N_ia}\left(n_i\frac{N_i}{2}\right)`$ and $`p_t=\frac{2\pi }{N_ta}\left(n_t\frac{1}{2}\frac{N_t}{2}\right)`$. The quark propagator is

$$S(p)i\left(\underset{\mu }{}𝒞_\mu (p)\gamma _\mu \right)+(p).$$
(3)
Taking the trace we obtain

$`𝒞_\mu (p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{4N_c}}\mathrm{Tr}[\gamma _\mu S(p)],\mathrm{and}`$
$`(p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4N_c}}\mathrm{Tr}[S(p)],`$ (4)
which we use to construct the $`C_\mu (p)`$ and $`B(p)`$

$`C_\mu (p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒞_\mu (p)}{𝒟(p)}},\mathrm{and}B(p)={\displaystyle \frac{(p)}{𝒟(p)}},`$ (5)
where $`𝒟(p)=𝒞^2(p)+^2(p)`$. At tree–level the lattice quark propagator takes the same form as in Eq. (1) and we know that the free propagator $`(S^{(0)}(p))^1(Z^{(0)}(p))^1[ik/+M^{(0)}(p)]`$, where $`k_\mu p_\mu `$ as $`p_\mu 0`$. It is then possible to extract the momentum directly from the lattice by calculating

$`q_\mu C_\mu ^{(0)}(p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒞_\mu ^{(0)}(p)}{(𝒞^{(0)}(p))^2+(^{(0)}(p))^2}}.`$ (6)
Results are displayed in Fig. 1.

### 2.1 Mass and Renormalization Functions

The dimensionless inverse lattice bare quark propagator takes the form

$`S^1(p)`$ $``$ $`iaq/A(p)+B(p)`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`[Z^\mathrm{L}(p)]^1(iaq/+M^\mathrm{L}(p)),`$
where $`M^\mathrm{L}(p)=B(p)/A(p)`$ is the lattice quark mass function and $`Z^\mathrm{L}(p)=1/A(p)`$ the lattice renormalization function. The functions $`A(p)`$ and $`B(p)`$ may be written as:

$`A(p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒜(p)}{𝒟(p)}},\mathrm{and}B(p)={\displaystyle \frac{(p)}{𝒟(p)}},`$ (8)
where $`𝒟(p)=𝒜^2(p)q^2+^2(p)`$. Hence an equivalent definition for the quark propagator is $`S(p)iaq/𝒜(p)+(p)`$. Extracting the functions $`𝒜(p)`$ and $`(p)`$ is done via:

$`𝒜(p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{4N_caq^2}}\mathrm{Tr}[q/S(p)],\mathrm{and}`$
$`(p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4N_c}}\mathrm{Tr}[S(p)].`$ (9)
In Fig. 2 we show the uncorrected mass function for Wilson fermions, where we can see a large divergence in the ultraviolet region.

### 2.2 Tree–Level Correction

The tree-level multiplicative correction is given by

$`A^{(c)}(p)={\displaystyle \frac{A(p)}{A^{(0)}(p)}}1,B^{(c)}(p)={\displaystyle \frac{B(p)}{B^{(0)}(p)}}m_q,`$ (10)
where $`A^{(0)}(p)`$ and $`B^{(0)}(p)`$ are obtained from $`S^{(0)}(p)`$. Then tree-level corrected mass and renormalization functions are constructed using Eq.(10)

$`M^{(c)}(q^2)=\left({\displaystyle \frac{B^{(c)}(p)}{A^{(c)}(p)}}\right),Z^{(c)}(q^2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{A^{(c)}(p)}}.`$ (11)
## 3 FERMIONS ON THE LATTICE

### 3.1 Wilson Fermions

The Wilson fermion  action on the lattice is defined as,

$`S_W[U,\overline{\psi },\psi ]={\displaystyle \underset{xy}{}}\overline{\psi }(x)D_W(x,y)\psi (y),`$
with $`D_W(x,y)`$ the usual Wilson fermion operator. The lattice bare mass is related to the hopping parameter via $`\kappa =1/(2m_qa+8r)`$ and $`m_q(1/2a)(1/\kappa 1/\kappa _c)`$.

### 3.2 Overlap Fermions

The overlap fermion  realizes exact chiral symmetry on the lattice

$`D(\mu )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[1+\mu +(1\mu ){\displaystyle \frac{D_W}{\sqrt{D_W^{}D_W}}}\right]`$
with $`0\mu 1`$ describing fermions with a positive mass from 0 to $`\mathrm{}`$. The hopping parameter is given by $`\kappa =1/(2m+8r)`$ and $`m(1/2\kappa _c1/2\kappa )`$. To describe a single massless Dirac fermion for $`D(0)`$ we must have $`0m2`$ at tree–level. The overlap propagator is given by

$`\stackrel{~}{D}^1(\mu )=(1\mu )^1[D^1(\mu )1],`$ (12)
and is related to the continuum propagator by $`D_c^1(m_q)=𝒵_\psi \stackrel{~}{D}^1(\mu )`$, and similarly for the quark mass $`m_q=𝒵_m^1\mu `$.

At tree-level  it is found that $`𝒵_\psi ^{(0)}=𝒵_m^1=2m`$, and the free propagator becomes

$`\left[D_c^{(0)}(m_q)\right]^1=\left[𝒵_\psi ^{(0)}\stackrel{~}{D}^{(0)}(\mu )\right]^1,`$
and when the interactions are turned on we have

$`\left[D_c(m_q)\right]^1=\left[𝒵_\psi \stackrel{~}{D}(\mu )\right]^1,`$
where $`𝒵_\psi =𝒵_m^1`$.

## 4 NUMERICAL RESULTS

Using fifty improved gauge field configurations, on a $`12^3\times 24`$ lattice with $`a=0.125(1)`$ fm, the overlap quark propagator is calculated for ten different masses, $`m_q=𝒵_\psi \mu =\{126,147,168,210,252,315,420,524,629,734\}`$ MeV. Results are illustrated in Figs. 3 and 4.

For Wilson fermions, using a hundred configurations, five masses are considered, namely $`m_q=\{221,181.5,138.3,99.91,62.04\}`$ MeV. Results are displayed in Figs. 5 and 6.

A linear extrapolation is used to compare the two actions. In Fig. 7

we show the linearly extrapolated quark mass function for both actions plotted versus the discrete momentum $`p`$. When plotting $`M`$ and $`Z`$ versus the lattice momentum, $`q`$, the points are pushed away from the origin in the case of overlap fermions as opposed to Wilson fermions where the points are pulled towards the origin. The overlap action (plotted as $`\mathrm{}`$) produces in the deep infrared $`M(0)=297(11)`$ MeV. Comparing with the Wilson fermion action ($`\times `$) we see a clear superiority of the overlap action over the Wilson action. Wilson fermions show a significant dip between 0.8 GeV and 2.0 GeV.

The linearly extrapolated renormalization function is shown in Fig. 8.

In the deep infrared for the overlap action we have $`Z(0)=0.48(2)`$ with the renormalization point located at $`\zeta =3.9`$ GeV.

## 5 SUMMARY

Tree-level correction represents a crucial step and a powerful tool for correcting the Wilson action results. The division method produces a smooth quark mass function throughout the momentum spectrum. We are able to gain some insights into the analytic structure of the overlap quark propagator: $`B^{(0)}(p)=𝒵_\psi ^{(0)}\mu `$ and $`A^{(0)}(p)=1`$. The overlap produces very good results for $`M(p)`$ and $`Z(p)`$. No tree-level correction is required for overlap fermions.


format: text

text:
# Quasiconformal Mappings and Solutions of the Dispersionless KP hierarchy B. Konopelchenko is supported in part by COFIN 2000 ”Sintesi”. L. Martinez Alonso is supported by the Fundación Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria . E. Medina is supported in part by CICYT proyecto PB98–0821

## 1 Introduction

Dispersionless or quasiclassical integrable hierarchies form an important part of the theory of integrable systems . They are the main ingredients of various approaches to different problems arising in physics and applied mathematics (see e.g. -) . In this sense, it is worth-mentioning their connections  with some classical problems of the theory of conformal maps. Furthermore, we have recently proposed a $`\overline{}`$-method - for studying dispersionless integrable hierarchies which reveals an intimate relation between these hierarchies and the theory of quasiconformal mappings -.

The basic element of our analysis is the nonlinear $`\overline{}`$-equation

$$S_{\overline{z}}=W(z,\overline{z},S_z),$$
(1)
where $`z`$, $`S(z,\overline{z},𝒕)`$ is a complex-valued function depending on an infinite set $`𝒕`$ of parameters (times), $`S_{\overline{z}}:=\frac{S}{\overline{z}},S_z:=\frac{S}{z}`$ and $`W`$ is an appropriate function of $`z,\overline{z}`$ and $`S_z`$.

As a consequence of (1) the first-order derivatives of $`S`$ with respect to the $`𝒕`$ parameters satisfy the family of Beltrami equations

$$f_{\overline{z}}=\mu (z,𝒕)f_z,$$
(2)
where

$$\mu :=W^{}(z,\overline{z},S_z),W^{}=W_\xi (z,\overline{z},\xi ).$$
(3)
This fact provides us with the link between the $`\overline{}`$-method and the theory of quasiconformal mappings, in which Beltrami equation is of fundamental importance. It should be mentioned that equation (1), in turn, is also well-known in the theory of quasiconformal mappings (see e.g. -).

Our method is based on the determination of solutions of (1) by means of the classical schemes for solving first-order PDE’s of Hamilton-Jacobi type . The objective of the present paper is to illustrate our approach by presenting some exact explicit solutions of the dKP hierarchy. We also prove that the simplest of this solutions (Example 1 of Section 4) can not be reached by the standard methods based on the hodograph transformation technique -.

## 2 The dKP hierarchy

The dKP hierarchy can be introduced as the following *classical version* of the Lax-pairs equations of the standard KP theory -

$$\frac{z}{t_n}=\{\mathrm{\Omega }_n,z\},\mathrm{\Omega }_n(p,𝒕):=(z^n)_+,n1.$$
(4)
Here $`z=z(p,𝒕)`$ is a complex function depending on a complex variable $`p`$ and an infinite set $`𝒕:=(t_1,t_2,\mathrm{})`$ of complex parameters, which is assumed to posses a Laurent expansion of the form

$$z=p+\underset{n1}{}\frac{a_n(𝒕)}{p^n},$$
(5)
near $`p\mathrm{}`$. We denote by $`(z^n)_+`$ the polynomial part of the expansion of $`z^n`$ in powers of $`p`$

$$(z)_+=p,(z^2)_+=p^2+2a_1,(z^3)_+=p^3+3pa_1+3a_2,$$

and the Poisson bracket is defined as

$$\{F,G\}:=\frac{F}{p}\frac{G}{x}\frac{F}{x}\frac{G}{p},x:=t_1.$$

The compatibility conditions for (4) are of the form

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_m}{t_n}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_n}{t_m}+\{\mathrm{\Omega }_m,\mathrm{\Omega }_n\}=0,mn,$$
(6)
Two interesting examples of nonlinear equations of the dKP hierarchy are:

1) For $`n=2`$, equation (4) leads to the Benney moment equations

$$\frac{a_{n+1}}{t}+\frac{a_{n+2}}{x}+na_n\frac{a_1}{x}=0,t:=2t_2.$$
(7)
2) The compatibility equations (6) for $`n=2`$ and $`m=3`$ imply the dKP equation (Zabolotskaya–Khokhlov equation)

$$(u_t\frac{3}{2}uu_x)_x=\frac{3}{4}u_{yy},u:=2a_1,t:=t_3,y:=t_2.$$
(8)
From (6) it follows  that for any solution $`z=z(p,𝒕)`$ of the dKP hierarchy, there exists an associated function $`S=S(z,𝒕)`$, such that

$$\frac{S(z,𝒕)}{t_n}=\mathrm{\Omega }_n(p(z,𝒕),𝒕),n1.$$
(9)
Here $`p=p(z,𝒕)`$ is obtained by inverting the solution $`z=z(p,𝒕)`$. Without loss of generality it can be assumed that $`S`$ has a Laurent expansion

$$S(z,𝒕)=\underset{n1}{}z^nt_n+\underset{n1}{}\frac{S_n(𝒕)}{z^n},z\mathrm{\Gamma },$$
(10)
on a certain circle $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{z:|z|=r\}`$. Observe that by setting $`n=1`$ in (9) and using (10) one characterizes $`p=p(z,𝒕)`$ in the form

$$p=\frac{S(z,𝒕)}{x}=z+\underset{n1}{}\frac{b_n(𝒕)}{z^n},b_n:=\frac{S_n}{x},$$
(11)
Reciprocally, given a function $`S=S(z,𝒕)`$ which satisfies (9) and (10), it can be proved  that the inverse function $`z=z(p,𝒕)`$ of the function $`p=p(z,𝒕)`$ of (11) determines a solution of the dKP hierarchy.

Henceforth, functions verifying conditions (9) and (10) will be referred to as $`S`$-functions of the dKP hierarchy. They turn out to be related to the $`\tau `$-functions  according to

$$S(z,𝒕)=\underset{n1}{}z^nt_n+\underset{n1}{}\frac{1}{nz^n}\frac{\mathrm{ln}\tau (𝒕)}{t_n},z\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$

We notice that the system (9) for a dKP $`S`$-function constitutes a set of compatible Hamilton-Jacobi type equations

$$\frac{S}{t_n}=\mathrm{\Omega }_n(\frac{S}{x},𝒕),n2,$$
(12)
which represents the *semiclassical limit* of the linear system for the wave function of the standard KP hierarchy.

Several methods for constructing solutions of the dKP hierarchy through $`S`$-functions have been devised . We will be here concerned with the $`\overline{}`$-method proposed in -, which aims to characterize $`S`$-functions by means of solutions of $`\overline{}`$-equations of the form (1). A main feature of this approach is that the symmetries of (1) (first order variations $`f:=\delta S`$) are determined by the family of Beltrami equations (2)-(3). This property implies, in particular, that all the first-order derivatives $`\frac{S}{t_n}`$ of a solution of (1) satisfy (2).

Given any fixed local solution $`f`$ of a Beltrami equation, if $`f`$ has non-zero Jacobian at a certain point $`z_0`$, then all the smooth local solutions $`F`$ near $`z_0`$ are given by analytic functions $`F=F(f)`$ of $`f`$ . This property suggests that, under *appropriate conditions*, solutions $`S`$ of a $`\overline{}`$-equation (1) which admit expansions of the form (10), satisfy conditions (12) as well. Therefore, they provide $`S`$-functions for the dKP hierarchy. In what follows a rigorous basis for this scheme is proposed.

## 3 Quasiconformal mappings

Quasiconformal mappings are a natural and very rich extension of the concept of conformal mappings. For the sake of convenience we remind here some of their basic properties (see e.g. -).

Let $`\mu =\mu (z)`$ be a measurable function on a domain $`G`$ of the complex plane such that for some $`0<k<1`$ it verifies $`|\mu (z)|<k`$ almost everywhere in $`G`$ . Then, a function $`f=f(z)`$ is said to be a *quasiconformal mapping (qc-mapping) with complex dilatation $`\mu `$* in $`G`$ if

$`f`$ is a homeomorphism $`f:DD^{}`$

$`f`$ is a generalized solution of the linear Beltrami equation

$$f_{\overline{z}}=\mu f_z,$$
(13)
on $`D`$, with locally square-integrable partial derivatives $`f_{\overline{z}}`$ and $`f_z`$.

The properties of solutions of the Beltrami equation (13) are rather well studied (see e.g. ). Some of them are particularly important for our discussion. Before presenting these results we introduce the Calder’on-Zygmund operator

$$(Th)(z):=\frac{1}{2\pi ı}_{}\frac{h(z^{})}{(z^{}z)^2}\mathrm{d}z^{}\mathrm{d}\overline{z}^{},$$
(14)
where the integral is taken in the sense of the Cauchy principal value. Then one has the following fundamental result :

###### Theorem 1.

For any $`p2`$ the operator $`T`$ defines a bounded operator in $`L^p()`$. Moreover, $`T_p`$ is continuos with respect to $`p`$ and satisfies

$$\underset{p2}{lim}T_p=1.$$

As a consequence of this theorem it follows that for any $`0k<1`$ there exists $`\delta (k)>0`$ such that

$$kT_p<1,$$

for all $`2<p<2+\delta (k)`$.

The next theorem provides us with a property of qc-mappings which will be useful in the $`\overline{}`$-method .

###### Theorem 2.

Let $`\mu `$ be a measurable function with compact support inside the circle $`|z|<R`$ and such that $`\mu _{\mathrm{}}<k<1`$. Then, for any $`p>2`$ such that $`kT_p<1`$, it follows that the only generalized solution of Beltrami equation (5) verifying

$$f(z)=O(\frac{1}{z}),z\mathrm{},$$
(15)
and $`f_{\overline{z}},f_zL^p()`$ is $`f0`$.

This result is the uniqueness part of the existence theorem for the so-called normal solutions of Beltrami equations -. Its proof relies on the fact that the operator $`T`$ represents the action of $`_z_{\overline{z}}^1`$ on $`L^p()`$, so that under the hypothesis of the theorem we have that Beltrami equation for $`f`$ becomes the integral equation

$$\varphi \mu T\varphi =0,\varphi :=f_{\overline{z}},$$

on $`L^p()`$. Thus, by taking into account that $`\mu T_pkT_p<1`$, we have $`\varphi 0`$ and then, in view of (15), $`f0`$.

Let us go back to our $`\overline{}`$-equation (1) and let us assume that $`W(z,\overline{z},S_z)`$ vanishes for all $`z`$ outside a certain circle $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{z:|z|=r\}`$. Suppose that we are able to find a solution $`S=S(z,\overline{z},𝒕)`$ of (1) in the disk $`D=\{z:|z|<r\}`$ with a boundary value $`S|_\mathrm{\Gamma }:=S(z,\frac{r^2}{z},𝒕)`$ of the form (10), and such that for a certain $`0<k<1`$ the set

$$\mathrm{\Omega }:=\{𝒕:\underset{zD}{sup}|W^{}(z,\overline{z},S_z(z,𝒕)|k\},$$

is not empty. In this case we can apply Theorem 2 to the Beltrami equation (2)-(3). Moreover, by taking into account that

$$\frac{S}{t_n}=z^n+\underset{m1}{}\frac{S_m(𝒕)}{t_n}z^m,z\mathrm{\Gamma },$$

these functions can be continuously extended from $`D`$ to analytic functions outside $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Thus, they become solutions of (2)-(3) on the whole complex plane. On the other hand, it is clear that

$$\frac{S}{t_n}(z^n)_+=\frac{S}{t_n}\mathrm{\Omega }_n(\frac{S}{x},𝒕)=O(\frac{1}{z}),z\mathrm{},$$

so that from Theorem 2 we conclude that (9) is satisfied and, consequently, $`S=S(z,\overline{z},𝒕)`$ determines an $`S`$-function of the dKP hierarchy for $`𝒕\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

## 4 Solutions of the dKP hierarchy

In order to construct explicit solutions of the dKP hierarchy we consider $`\overline{}`$-equations of the form

$$S_{\overline{z}}=\theta (r|z|)V(z,\overline{z},S_z),$$
(16)
where $`r>0`$, $`\theta (\xi )`$ is the usual Heaviside function and $`V`$ is an analytic function of $`z`$, $`\overline{z}`$ and $`S_z`$. Our scheme of solution is as follows

Firstly, we generate solutions $`S=S(z,𝒂)`$ of (16)

$$S_{\overline{z}}=V(z,\overline{z},S_z),|z|<r,$$
(17)
depending on a set of free parameters $`𝒂:=(a_0,a_1,\mathrm{})`$.

Then we select those solutions whose boundary value on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{z:|z|=r\}`$ is of the form (10).

Equation (17) is a PDE of Hamilton-Jacobi type , so that several powerful methods for generating solutions are available. For example, if $`V=V(S_z)`$ depends only on $`S_z`$ then (17) implies

$$m_{\overline{z}}=V_m(m)m_z,m:=S_z.$$

This equation can be solved at once by applying the methods of characteristics. So the general solution (17) is implicitly characterized by

$$\begin{array}{c}S=V(m)\overline{z}+mzf(m),\\ \\ V_m\overline{z}+z=f_m(m),\end{array}$$
(18)
where $`f=f(m)`$ is an arbitrary function. Notice that according to the second equation in (18), we have

$$f_m(m_0)=z,m_0:=m(z,\overline{z})|_{\overline{z}=0},$$

so that $`f_m(m_0)`$ is the inverse function of $`m_0=m_0(z)`$.

As we are aiming to get explicit solutions some simplifying assumptions are required. For instance, we consider cases in which only a finite set of $`N+1`$ parameters $`𝒂=(a_0,a_1,\mathrm{},a_N)`$ are involved. Therefore we are facing the problem of selecting solutions $`S`$ in which no terms $`z^nt_n`$ with $`n>N`$ in (10) appear. Other type of solutions of the $`\overline{}`$-equation would have time-parameters $`t_n(n>N)`$ which are functions of $`(t_1,\mathrm{},t_N)`$ and no solution of the dKP hierarchy would arise in that way.

In order to explore the possible favorable cases, let us consider the class of $`\overline{}`$-equations (17) of the form

$$S_{\overline{z}}=\overline{z}^s\underset{m0}{\overset{M}{}}p_m(z)(S_z)^m,|z|<r,$$
(19)
where $`s0`$, $`M2`$, the coefficients $`p_m=p_m(z)`$ are polynomials in $`z`$ and $`p_M0`$. Let us look for a series solution of (19) of the form

$$S=\underset{n0}{}c_n(z)\overline{z}^{n(s+1)},$$
(20)
with $`c_0`$ being set as an arbitrary $`N`$-degree polynomial ($`N2`$)

$$c_0(z)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{N}{}}a_nz^n,a_N0.$$
(21)
Substitution of (20) in (19) provides the recursion relation

$$c_{n+1}=\frac{1}{(n+1)(s+1)}\underset{m0}{\overset{M}{}}p_m(z)\left(\underset{r_1+\mathrm{}r_m=n}{}c_{r_1}^{}\mathrm{}c_{r_m}^{}\right),n0,$$
(22)
which shows that all coefficients $`c_n(z)`$ of (20) are polynomials. We need to know their degree in order to be able to examine the form of $`S`$ on the boundary $`|z|=r`$.

###### Lemma 1.

If the degrees of the coefficients $`p_m`$ in (19) verify

$$deg(p_m)(Mm)(N1),m=0,1,\mathrm{},M,$$

then

$$\text{deg}(c_n)=n[M(N1)N]+N,n0.$$
(23)
Proof

We apply the induction principle. It is obvious that (23) is true for $`n=0`$. Suppose now that it holds for $`n^{}n`$, and consider the terms in the expression (22) for $`c_{n+1}`$. By taking into account that $`r_1+\mathrm{}+r_m=n`$ we get

$`deg(p_mc_{r_1}^{}\mathrm{}c_{r_m}^{})`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}}\left[r_i\left(M(N1)N\right)+N1\right]+deg(p_m)`$
$`=n\left[M(N1)N\right]+m(N1)+deg(p_m)`$
$`n\left[M(N1)N\right]+M(N1)`$
$`=(n+1)[M(N1)N]+N.`$
Moreover, as $`p_M`$ is a non-zero constant, it is clear that the corresponding terms in (22) verify

$`deg(p_Mc_{r_1}^{}\mathrm{}c_{r_M}^{})`$ $`=n\left[M(N1)N\right]+M(N1)`$
$`=(n+1)\left[M(N1)N\right]+N.`$
Thus, one concludes that (23) is verified for $`c_{n+1}`$ too and, therefore, the statement is proved (QED).

If we assume that the series (20) converges for a certain $`r0`$, then under the hypothesis of the above lemma the continuous extension of $`S`$ to the boundary $`|z|=r`$ is of the form

$$S=\underset{n0}{}r^{2n(s+1)}\frac{c_n(z)}{z^{n(s+1)}},\frac{c_n(z)}{z^{n(s+1)}}=O\left(z^{d_n}\right),$$
(24)
where

$$d_n=n[M(N1)Ns1]+N.$$
(25)
Since the solution corresponding to (21) depends on $`N+1`$ free parameters $`(a_0,\mathrm{},a_N)`$, only those cases for which $`d_nN`$ for all $`n0`$ are of interest. From (25) it is obvious that this happens only if

$$N\frac{M+s+1}{M1}.$$
(26)
For example if we set $`s=0`$, this means that we have only the three possibilities exhibited in the following table:

$`(M,N)`$ $`V(z,S_z)`$ $`S|_{\overline{z}=0}`$             (2,2) $`\alpha (S_z)^2+(_{i=0}^1\beta _iz^i)S_z+_{i=0}^2\gamma _iz^i`$ $`_{i=0}^2a_iz^i`$             (3,2) $`\alpha (S_z)^3+(_{i=0}^1\beta _iz^i)(S_z)^2+(_{i=0}^2\gamma _iz^i)S_z+_{i=0}^3\eta _iz^i`$ $`_{i=0}^2a_iz^i`$             (2,3) $`\alpha (S_z)^2+(_{i=0}^2\beta _iz^i)S_z+_{i=0}^4\gamma _iz^i`$ $`_{i=0}^3a_iz^i`$

Example 1. The simplest case in the class $`(2,2)`$ corresponds to

$$S_{\overline{z}}=\theta (1|z|)(S_z)^2,$$
(27)
with $`S|_{\overline{z}=0}`$ being a quadratic polynomial. This yields to

$$S=\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}\frac{(zb)^2}{a2\overline{z}}c,|z|1\hfill \\ \\ \frac{1}{2}\frac{z(zb)^2}{az2}c,|z|1.\hfill \end{array}$$

Notice that the regularity of $`S`$ inside the unit circle requires

$$|a|>2.$$
(28)
On the boundary $`|z|=1`$ we have

$$S=\frac{1}{2a}z^2+(\frac{1}{a^2}\frac{b}{a})z+\frac{2}{a^3}+\frac{b^2}{2a}\frac{2b}{a^2}c+O(\frac{1}{z}).$$

So, in order to fit with the required form of an $`S`$-function of the dKP hierarchy we have to identify

$$x=\frac{1}{a^2}\frac{b}{a},t_2=\frac{1}{2a},c=\frac{2}{a^3}+\frac{b^2}{2a}\frac{2b}{a^2}.$$

On the other hand, the complex dilatation for the corresponding Beltrami equation (1)-(2) is given by

$$\mu (z,\overline{z}):=2\theta (1|z|)\frac{zb}{a2\overline{z}}.$$
(29)
We observe that the following bound follows

$$|\mu (z,\overline{z})|<2\frac{|b|+1}{|a|2},z.$$

In this way, for any $`0<k<1`$ we have $`|\mu (z)|k`$ provided $`k|a|>2(|b|+k+1)`$. Thus, there is a non empty domain in the space of parameters on which the Beltrami equation (1)-(2) satisfies the conditions assumed in our discussion of Section 3.

It follows that

$$p:=S_x=\frac{z^24t_2z+2(x+4t_2^2)}{z4t_2},|z|=1,$$

so one gets the following solution of the $`t_2`$-flow (Benney flow) of the dKP hierarchy

$$z=\frac{p}{2}+2t_2+\sqrt{(\frac{p}{2}2t_2)^22x8t_2^2}.$$
(30)
We notice that this solution depends on the time-parameters trough the pair of functions $`u_1:=2t_2,u_2:=2x8t_2^2`$. Indeed, we can rewrite it as

$$z=\frac{p}{2}+u_1+\sqrt{(\frac{p}{2}u_1)^2+u_2}.$$

In case this solution could be obtained by the hodograph methods -, it would correspond to a reduction of the dKP hierarchy in which the functions $`𝒖=(u_1,u_2)`$ would satisfy a diagonalizable hydrodynamic type system with Riemann invariants provided by the zeros of the function $`\frac{z(p,𝒖)}{p}`$. But this function has no zeros for $`u_20`$ as

$$\frac{z(p,𝒖)}{p}=\frac{\frac{p}{2}u_1+\sqrt{(\frac{p}{2}u_1)^2+u_2}}{2\sqrt{(\frac{p}{2}u_1)^2+u_2}}.$$

Therefore, we conclude that the solution (30) of the dKP hierarchy can not be reached from the hodograph technique approach.

Example 2. The $`\overline{}`$-equation

$$S_{\overline{z}}=\theta (1|z|)(S_z)^3,$$
(31)
with $`S|_{\overline{z}=0}`$ being a quadratic polynomial, is an example of the $`(3,2)`$ case. One finds the $`S`$-function

$$S=\overline{z}m^3+(zb)m\frac{a}{2}m^2c,|z|<1,$$

where

$$m=\frac{1}{6\overline{z}}\left(a\sqrt{a^212(zb)\overline{z}}\right).$$

The defining relations for the dKP parameters $`(x,t_2)`$ are

$$x=\frac{b}{6}\left(\sqrt{a^212}a\right),t_2=\frac{1}{108}\left(18aa^3+(a^212)^{3/2}\right).$$
(32)
The corresponding solution of the $`t_2`$-flow of the dKP hierarchy can be written as

$`z`$ $`=a(a\sqrt{a^212}){\displaystyle \frac{p}{12}}+{\displaystyle \frac{3x}{\sqrt{a^212}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}[(a(a\sqrt{a^212})p+{\displaystyle \frac{36x}{\sqrt{a^212}}})^2`$
$`12((a\sqrt{a^212})p+{\displaystyle \frac{3(a+\sqrt{a^212})x}{\sqrt{a^212}}})^2]^{\frac{1}{2}},`$
where $`a=a(t_2)`$ is to be obtained from (32).

Example 3. The class $`(2,3)`$ is the most interesting one as it provides solutions of the dKP hierarchy depending of $`(x,t_2,t_3)`$. Let us consider

$$S_{\overline{z}}=\theta (1|z|)(S_z)^2,$$
(33)
with a cubic polynomial $`S|_{\overline{z}=0}`$. If we take $`m_0:=S_z|_{\overline{z}}=az^2+bz+c`$, then from (18) we get

$$\begin{array}{c}f(m)=\frac{b}{2a}m+\frac{1}{12a^2}(4am+b^24ac)^{\frac{3}{2}}+d\\ =\frac{b}{2a}m+\frac{1}{12a^2}(4a\overline{z}m+2az+b)^3+d,\end{array}$$
(34)
and

$$m=\frac{1}{8\overline{z}^2}\left(\frac{1}{a}4(z+\frac{b}{2a})\overline{z}\sqrt{\frac{4}{a}(\frac{b^2}{a}4c)\overline{z}^2\frac{8}{a}(z+\frac{b}{2a})\overline{z}+\frac{1}{a^2}}\right).$$
(35)
Hence we have

$$S=(z+\frac{b}{2a})m+\overline{z}m^2\frac{1}{12a^2}(4a\overline{z}m+2az+b)^3d,|z|<1.$$
(36)
It is clear that in order to ensure $`S`$ to be continuous we have to require

$$\frac{4}{a}(\frac{b^2}{a}4c)\overline{z}^2\frac{8}{a}(z+\frac{b}{2a})\overline{z}+\frac{1}{a^2}0,|z|<1.$$

Notice also that $`S`$ is regular at the origin as

$$\underset{z0}{lim}m=c.$$

Let us outline the calculation of $`u=2\frac{S_1}{x}`$. We need to compute the first few terms of the expansion of $`S`$ on $`|z|=1`$. To do that it is helpful to use the following identity

$$S_z=m\left(\frac{m}{z}\right)^2,|z|=1.$$
(37)
Thus, from the expansion of $`m`$ on $`|z|=1`$ and by setting

$$S_z=3t_3z^2+2t_2z+x\frac{S_1}{z^2}+\mathrm{},|z|=1,$$

in (37), we get

$$\begin{array}{c}3t_3=\frac{3}{4}+\frac{3}{8a}+\frac{1}{32a^2}\left((18a)^{3/2}1\right),2t_2=\frac{b}{8a^2}(14a\sqrt{18a}),\\ \\ x=\frac{b^2}{8a^2}\left(1+\frac{4a1}{2\sqrt{18a}}\right)+\frac{c}{4a}(1\sqrt{18a}),\end{array}$$

and

$$S_1=\frac{\left(2b^2+(18a)c\right)^2}{(18a)^{5/2}}.$$
(38)
From these expressions it can be computed that $`u=2\frac{S_1}{x}`$ is given by ($`t:=t_3,y:=t_2`$)

$$u=\frac{4\left(512t+4\sqrt{112t}\right)^2\left((1+12t)x4y^2\right)}{3(1+4t)(112t+2\sqrt{112t})^3},$$
(39)
which satisfies (8). We notice that according to , (39) belongs to the class of solutions of the dKP equation which yield Einstein-Weyl structures conformal to Einstein metrics .

More general cases corresponding to (19) with $`s0`$ and $`z`$-dependence on its right-hand side will be considered elsewhere .

Acknowledgements

B. Konopelchenko is grateful to the organizers of the programme ”Integrable Systems” for the support provided. L. Martinez Alonso wish to thank the *Fundación Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria* for supporting his stay at Cambridge University as a BBV visiting professor.


text:
# Untitled Document

ON LOCAL PERTURBATIONS OF SHRÖDINGER OPERATOR IN AXIS

Rustem R. GADYL’SHIN111The author is supported by RFBR (grants No. 02-01-00768, 00-15-96038) and Ministry of Education of RF (grant No. E00-1.0-53).

> *Bashkir State Pedagogical University, October Revolution St. 3a, 450000, Ufa, Russia, E-mail:* gadylshin@bspu.ru

Abstract

> We adduce the necessary and sufficient condition for arising of eigenvalues of Shrödinger operator in axis under small local perturbations. In the case of eigenvalues arising we construct their asymptotics.

1. Introduction

The questions addresses the existence of bound states and the asymptotics of associated eigenvalues (if they exist) for Shrödinger operator with small potential in axis are have been studied in –. The technique employed in these works based on the self-adjointness of the perturbed equation. In present paper it is considered a small perturbation which is arbitrary localized second-order operator and the necessary and sufficient conditions for arising of eigenvalues of perturbed operator are adduced. In the case of eigenvalues arising we construct their asymptotics. The main idea of the technique suggested giving a simple explanation of ”non-regular” (optional) arising of eigenvalues under, obviously, regular perturbation is as follows. Instead of spectral parameter $`\lambda `$ we introduce more natural frequency parameter $`k`$ related to spectral one by the equality $`\lambda =k^2`$, where $`k`$ lies in a complex half-plane $`\mathrm{Re}k>0`$. The solutions of both non-perturbed and perturbed equations are extended w.r.t. complex parameter on all complex plane. Under such extension the solution of non-perturbed problem has a pole at zero that moves under perturbation, while the residue at this pole (for both non-perturbed and perturbed problems) is a solution of corresponding homogeneous equation. For non-perturbed this residue is a constant which is considered as exponent with index $`kx`$, where $`k=0`$. Depending on side to which this pole moves, we obtain exponential increasing or decreasing residue for perturbed problem. As a result, if pole moves into the half-plane $`\mathrm{Re}k>0`$ then the eigenvalue arises, while pole moving to the half-lane $`\mathrm{Re}k0`$ do not produce pole. The direction of moving is determined by the operator of perturbation.

The structure of the paper is as follows. In the second section we state the main result, in the third is adduced its proof. In the fourth section we demonstrate some examples illustrating the main statement of the paper.

2. Formulation of the main result

Hereinafter $`W_{2,loc}^j()`$ is a set of functions defined on $``$ whose restriction to any bounded domain $`D`$ belongs to $`W_2^j(D)`$, $`_G`$ and $`_{j,G}`$ are norms in $`L_2(G)`$ and $`W_2^j(G)`$, respectively. Next, let $`Q`$ be an arbitrary fixed interval in $``$, $`L_2(;Q)`$ be the subset of functions in $`L_2()`$ with supports in $`\overline{Q}`$, $`_\epsilon `$ be linear operators mapping $`W_{2,loc}^j()`$ into $`L_2(;Q)`$ such that $`_\epsilon [u]_QC()u_{2,Q}`$, where constant $`C()`$ does not depends on $`\epsilon `$, $`0<\epsilon <<1`$,

$$\begin{array}{c}g=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}g𝑑x,H_0=\frac{d^2}{dx^2},H_\epsilon =\left(\frac{d^2}{dx^2}+\epsilon _\epsilon \right).\hfill \end{array}$$

We define linear operators $`A(k):L_2(;Q)W_{2,loc}^2()`$ and $`T_\epsilon ^{(0)}(k):L_2(;Q)L_2(;Q)`$ in the following way:

$$A(k)g=\frac{1}{2k}\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{k|xt|}g(t)𝑑t,T_\epsilon ^{(0)}(k)g=_\epsilon [A(k)g]+\frac{g}{2k}_\epsilon [1].$$

Denote by $`(X,Y)`$ the Banach space of linear bounded operators mapping Banach space $`X`$ into Banach space $`Y`$, $`(X)\stackrel{def}{=}(X,Y)`$. We indicate by $`^h(X,Y)`$ (by $`^h(X)`$) the set of holomorphic operator-valued functions whose values belongs to $`(X,Y)`$ (to $`(X)`$). We use the notation $`I`$ for identity mapping and the notation $`S^t`$ for a circle in $``$ of radius $`t`$ with center at zero. Since by definition of $`T_\epsilon ^{(0)}(k)`$ we have that $`T_\epsilon ^{(0)}(k)^h(L_2(;Q))`$,

$$T_\epsilon ^{(0)}(k)g=\frac{1}{2}_\epsilon \left[\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}g(t)|xt|𝑑t\right]+kT_\epsilon ^{(1)}(k)g,T_\epsilon ^{(1)}(k)^h(L_2(;Q)),$$

then we arrive at the following statement.

Lemma 2.1. Let $`S_\epsilon (k)=(I+\epsilon T_\epsilon ^{(0)}(k))^1`$. Then for all $`R>0`$ there exist $`\epsilon _0(R)>0`$, such that for $`\epsilon <\epsilon _0(R)`$ and $`kS^R`$ the operator-valued function $`S_\epsilon (k)^h(L_2(;Q))`$, $`S_\epsilon (k)\underset{\epsilon 0}{}I`$ uniformly on $`k`$, and the equation

$$k\frac{\epsilon }{2}S_\epsilon (k)_\epsilon [1]=0$$
$`(2.1)`$
has a unique solution $`k_\epsilon S^R`$, and also,

$$k_\epsilon =\epsilon \frac{1}{2}\left(m_\epsilon ^{(1)}+\epsilon m_\epsilon ^{(2)}+O(\epsilon ^2)\right),$$
$`(2.2)`$
where

$$m_\epsilon ^{(1)}=_\epsilon [1],m_\epsilon ^{(2)}=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}_\epsilon \left[\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|xy|_\epsilon [1](y)𝑑y\right](x)𝑑x.$$
$`(2.3)`$
Let us call the operator $`_\epsilon `$ the real one, if $`\mathrm{Im}<\overline{g}_\epsilon [g]>=0`$ for all $`gW_{2,loc}^2()`$. We denote $`\mathrm{\Pi }_s(t)=\{k:|\mathrm{Im}k|<sC(),\mathrm{Re}k>t\}`$, and we indicate by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )`$ the set of eigenvalues of operator $`H_\epsilon `$. The aim of this paper is to prove the following statement.

Theorem 2.1. If $`\mathrm{Re}k_\epsilon 0`$, then there exist $`t(\epsilon )\underset{\epsilon 0}{}\mathrm{}`$, such that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )\mathrm{\Pi }_\epsilon (t(\epsilon ))`$. If, in addition, the operator $`_\epsilon `$ is real, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )(t(\epsilon ),\mathrm{})`$.

If $`\mathrm{Re}k_\epsilon >0`$, then there exist $`t(\epsilon )\underset{\epsilon 0}{}\mathrm{}`$, such that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )\backslash \mathrm{\Pi }_\epsilon (t(\epsilon ))=\{\lambda _\epsilon \}`$,

$$\lambda _\epsilon =k_\epsilon ^2,$$
$`(2.4)`$
and the associated single eigenfunction $`\varphi _\epsilon `$ has the form

$$\varphi _\epsilon =A(k_\epsilon )S_\epsilon (k_\epsilon )_\epsilon [1].$$
$`(2.5)`$
If, in addition, the operator $`_\epsilon `$ is real, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )\backslash (t(\epsilon ),\mathrm{})=\{\lambda _\epsilon \}`$.

Remark 2.1. The statements of Theorem 2.1 does not excludes the situation when $`\mathrm{Re}k_\epsilon 0`$ for some values of $`\epsilon `$ and $`\mathrm{Re}k_\epsilon >0`$ for other those of $`k_\epsilon `$ (see example 4.3).

Directly from Lemma 2.1 (namely, from equation (2.1)) and Theorem 2.1 it follows

Corollary 2.1. If $`_\epsilon [1]0`$, then there exists $`t(\epsilon )\underset{\epsilon 0}{}\mathrm{}`$, such that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )\mathrm{\Pi }_\epsilon (t(\epsilon ))`$. If, in addition, the operator $`_\epsilon `$ is real, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )(t(\epsilon ),\mathrm{})`$.

3. Proof of Theorem 2.1

Let us denote by $`^m(X,Y)`$ (by $`^m(X)`$) the set of meromorphic operator-valued functions with values in $`(X,Y)`$ ( $`(X)`$). The set of linear operators mapping Banach space $`X`$ into $`W_{2,loc}^2()`$ such that their restriction to any bounded set $`D`$ belongs to $`(X,W_2^2(D))`$ is indicated by $`(X,W_{2,loc}^2())`$. Similarly, we use the notation $`^h(X,W_{2,loc}^2())`$ ( $`^m(X,W_{2,loc}^2())`$) for the set of operator-valued functions with values in $`(X,W_{2,loc}^2())`$ such that for all bounded $`D`$ they belongs to $`^h(X,W_2^2(D))`$ (to $`^m(X,W_2^2(D))`$). Next, let $`P_\epsilon (k)`$ be the operator defined by the equality

$$P_\epsilon (k)f=\epsilon \frac{S_\epsilon (k)fS_\epsilon (k)_\epsilon [1]}{2k\epsilon S_\epsilon (k)_\epsilon [1]}+S_\epsilon (k)f,$$

$`_\epsilon (k)\stackrel{def}{=}A(k)P_\epsilon (k)`$, $`_+\stackrel{def}{=}\{z:\mathrm{Re}z>0\}`$.

Theorem 3.1. For all $`R>0`$ there exists $`\epsilon _0(k)>0`$ such that

1. $`_\epsilon (k)^m(L_2(;Q),W_{2,loc}^2())`$ as $`\epsilon <\epsilon _0`$ and $`kS^R`$, and also, in $`S^R`$ there is the only pole $`k_\epsilon `$ being a solution of the equation (2.1) and it is a first order pole; if, in addition, $`k_+`$, then $`_\epsilon (k)^m(L_2(,Q);W_2^2())`$;
2. for all $`fL_2(;Q)`$ the function $`u_\epsilon =_\epsilon (k)f`$ is a solution of the equation

$$H_\epsilon u_\epsilon =k^2u_\epsilon +f\text{ };$$
$`(3.1)`$
3. the residue of the function $`u_\epsilon `$ at the pole $`k_\epsilon `$ is defined by the equality (2.5) up to a multiplicative factor, moreover, this factor is nonzero if $`f0`$.

Proof. By definition, $`A(k)^m(L_2(;Q),W_{2,loc}^2())`$, and also, $`A(k)`$ has a unique pole of first order at zero and $`A(k)^h(L_2(;Q),W_2^2())`$ for $`k_+`$. Then bearing in mind the definition of $`_\epsilon (k)`$ and Lemma 2.1, we get consecutively $`_\epsilon (k)`$ having no pole at zero and validity of statement 1) of Theorem being proved.

Let us proceed to the proof of the statement 2). We seek the solution of the equation (3.1) in the form

$$u_\epsilon =A(k)g_\epsilon ,$$
$`(3.2)`$
where $`g_\epsilon `$ is some function belonging to $`L_2(;Q)`$. Substituting (3.2) into (3.1), we deduce that (3.2) is a solution of (3.1) in the case

$$(I+\epsilon T_\epsilon (k))g_\epsilon =f,$$
$`(3.3)`$
where

$$T_\epsilon (k)=_\epsilon A(k).$$
$`(3.4)`$
It follows from (3.4) and the definition of $`_\epsilon `$ and $`A(k)`$ that the result of the action of the operator $`T_\epsilon (k)`$ is as follows:

$$T_\epsilon (k)g=\frac{g}{2k}_\epsilon [1]+T_\epsilon ^{(0)}(k)g.$$
$`(3.5)`$
Let $`R>0`$ be an arbitrary number and $`\epsilon `$ satisfies all assumptions of Lemma 2.1. Applying the operator $`S_\epsilon (k)`$ to both hands of the equation (3.3) and taking into account (3.5), we obtain that

$$\left(g_\epsilon \epsilon \frac{g_\epsilon }{2k}S_\epsilon (k)_\epsilon [1]\right)=S_\epsilon (k)f.$$
$`(3.6)`$
Having integrated (3.6), we deduce

$$g_\epsilon \left(1\frac{\epsilon }{2k}S_\epsilon (k)_\epsilon [1]\right)=S_\epsilon (k)f.$$
$`(3.7)`$
The equality (3.7) allows us to determine $`g_\epsilon `$; substituting its value into (3.6), we easily get the formula

$$g_\epsilon =P_\epsilon (k)f.$$
$`(3.8)`$
The assertions (3.2) and (3.8) yield the validity of the statement 2). In its turn, the correctness of statement 3) is the implication from 1) and 2) and the definition of $`_\epsilon (k)`$. The proof is complete.

We will use the notation $`R_\epsilon (\lambda )`$ for the resolvent of the operator $`H_\epsilon `$. It is well known fact that the set of eigenvalues coincide with the set of poles of the resolvent, while the coefficient of the pole (of highest order) is a projector into the space that is a span of eigenfunctions associated with this eigenvalue.

Lemma 3.1. The number of poles of the resolvent $`R_\epsilon (\lambda )`$, their orders and the dimensions of the residues at them are completely determined by the functions belonging to $`L_2(;Q)`$.

Proof. Let $`F`$ be an arbitrary function with compact support $`D`$. There is no loss of generality in assuming that $`\{0\}Q`$. We use symbols $`R_+(\lambda )`$ and $`R_{}(\lambda )`$ for the resolvents of the Dirichlet problem for $`H_0`$ in the positive $`^+`$ and negative $`^{}`$ real semi-axises respectively, by $`F_+`$ and $`F_{}`$ we denote the restrictions of $`F`$ to these axises. We use symbol $`\chi C^{\mathrm{}}()`$ for the cut-off function vanishing in a neighbourhood of zero and equalling to one outside $`Q`$. Let $`_+`$ be the nonnegative imaginary semi-axis, we also set $`^+=_+_+`$. Since the function $`\lambda =k^2`$ establishes one-to-one correspondence from $`^+`$ onto $``$, then for $`\lambda `$ (or, equivalently, for $`k^+`$)

$$R_\pm (\lambda )F_\pm (x)=R_\pm (k^2)F_\pm (x)=\pm \frac{1}{2k}\underset{0}{\overset{\pm \mathrm{}}{}}\left(e^{k|xt|}e^{k|x+t|}\right)F(t)𝑑t.$$

On the other hand,

$$U_\pm (x;k)=\pm \frac{1}{2k}\underset{0}{\overset{\pm \mathrm{}}{}}\left(e^{k|xt|}e^{k|x+t|}\right)F(t)𝑑t$$

are holomorphic functions in $``$ with values in $`W_{2,loc}^2(^\pm )`$ (i.e., their restrictions to all bounded domains $`G`$ are holomorphic functions with values belonging to $`W_{2,loc}^2(G)`$). For this reason the function $`\chi (R_+(k^2)F_++R_{}(k^2)F_{})`$ can be extended in $``$ as holomorphic function with values in $`W_{2,loc}^2()`$. The solution of the equation

$$(H_\epsilon \lambda )U=F\text{ }$$
$`(3.9)`$
is sought in the form

$$U=u+\chi (R_+(k^2)F_++R_{}(k^2)F_{}),$$
$`(3.10)`$
where $`k^2=\lambda `$, $`k^+`$. Substituting (3.10) into (3.9), we obtain the equation $`(H_\epsilon \lambda )u=f`$ for $`u`$, where the function $`f(x;\lambda )=f(x;k^2)`$ can be extended w.r.t. $`k`$ in $``$, that is a holomorphic function with values in $`L_2(;Q)`$. Since the second term in (3.10) can be extended holomorphically in $``$, then it implies the validity of the lemma being proved.

Theorem 3.2. Let $`R>0`$ be an arbitrary number, $`\epsilon _0`$ and $`k_\epsilon `$ to satisfy Theorem 3.1, $`\lambda =k^2`$. Then

$$_\epsilon (k)f=R_\epsilon (\lambda )f$$
$`(3.11)`$
for all $`fL_2(;Q)`$ and for all $`k^+S^R`$ (or, equivalently, for all $`\lambda S^{R^2}`$).

If $`\mathrm{Re}k_\epsilon 0`$, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )S^{R^2}=\mathrm{}`$.

If $`\mathrm{Re}k_\epsilon >0`$, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )S^{R^2}=\{\lambda _\epsilon \}`$, where $`\lambda _\epsilon `$ and the associated single eigenfunction are determined by the equalities (2.4) and (2.5).

Proof. Since the function $`\lambda =k^2`$ establishes one-to-one correspondence from $`^+S^R`$ onto $`S^{R^2}`$, then the validity of the equality (3.11) follows from the statement 2) of Theorem 3.1 and the definition of the resolvent. The correctness of the rest statement of the theorem begin proved follows from Theorem 3.1 and Lemma 3.1. The proof is complete.

Lemma 3.2. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )\mathrm{\Pi }_\epsilon (\epsilon C())`$. If the operator $`_\epsilon `$ is real, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )[\epsilon C(),\mathrm{})`$.

Proof. Let

$$\lambda _\epsilon \mathrm{\Sigma }(H_\epsilon )\backslash \left(^+\{0\}\right).$$
$`(3.12)`$
Since $`H_\epsilon u=H_0u`$ outside $`\overline{Q}`$, then there exists normalized in $`L_2()`$ function $`\varphi _\epsilon W_2^2()`$, such that

$$H_\epsilon \varphi _\epsilon =\lambda _\epsilon \varphi _\epsilon .$$
$`(3.13)`$
Multiplying both hands of (3.13) by $`\overline{\varphi _\epsilon }`$ and integrating by part, we obtain the equality

$$\varphi _\epsilon ^{}_{}^2\epsilon \overline{\varphi _\epsilon }_\epsilon \varphi _\epsilon =\lambda _\epsilon .$$
$`(3.14)`$
Calculating the real and imaginary part of (3.14), employing the estimate $`_\epsilon \varphi _\epsilon _QC()\varphi _\epsilon _{2,Q}`$ and bearing in mind (3.12), we conclude the statement of the lemma being proved is true.

It is easily seen that Theorem 2.1 is a direct implication of Theorem 3.2 and Lemma 3.2.

4. Examples

Example 4.1. Let $`_\epsilon [g]=Vg`$, where $`VC_0^{\mathrm{}}(Q)`$. Then in view of (2.2), (2.3) and Theorem 2.1 we obtain, that an inequality $`\mathrm{Re}V<0`$ yields $`\mathrm{Re}k_\epsilon <0`$ and, therefore, the operator $`H_\epsilon `$ has no eigenvalue converging to zero, while opposite inequality $`\mathrm{Re}V>0`$ implies that such eigenvalue exists and satisfies the asymptotics

$$\lambda _\epsilon =\epsilon ^2\frac{V}{4}+O(\epsilon ^3).$$
$`(4.1)`$
In the case when $`V=0`$, taking into account that (in this case)

$$\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|xy|V(x)V(y)𝑑y𝑑x=2\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{x}{}}V(y)𝑑y\right)^2𝑑x,$$
$`(4.2)`$
by the assertion (2.3), we get that

$$m_\epsilon ^{(1)}=<V>=0,m_\epsilon ^{(2)}=2\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{x}{}}V(y)𝑑y\right)^2𝑑x.$$
$`(4.3)`$
If, in addition, $`\mathrm{Im}V=0`$, then due to (4.1), (4.3) and Theorem 2.1 the eigenvalue exists and has the asymptotics

$$\lambda _\epsilon =\epsilon ^4\left(\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{x}{}}V(y)𝑑y\right)^2𝑑x\right)^2+O(\epsilon ^5).$$
$`(4.4)`$
For real $`V`$ the asymptotics (4.1), (4.4) have been derived in . So, the asymptotics (4.1) is a generalization for the case of complex-valued potentials. Observe that for real $`V`$ the inequality $`V0`$ is an necessary and sufficient condition of the existence of eigenvalue of $`H_\epsilon `$ (what was proved in ). However, if $`V`$ is a complex-valued function, then the assumption $`V=0`$ is not sufficient for the existence of the eigenvalue. Indeed, it is easy to see that if $`V=u^{}+i2u^{}`$, where $`uC_0^{\mathrm{}}(Q)`$ is a real function then

$$m_\epsilon ^{(1)}=<V>=0,\mathrm{Re}m_\epsilon ^{(2)}=6\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}u^2(x)𝑑x<0,$$

and by the assertion (2.2) and Theorem 2.1 the eigenvalue of $`H_\epsilon `$ does not exist.

Example 4.2. Let $`_\epsilon [g]=V_\epsilon g`$, where $`V_\epsilon =V+\epsilon V_1`$, and $`V,V_1`$ are real functions with supports in $`Q`$. Due to (2.2), (2.3), (4.2) and Theorem 2.1 the condition $`V_\epsilon 0`$ is sufficient for existence of eigenvalue which has the asymptotics (4.1) as $`V>0`$ and the asymptotics

$$\lambda _\epsilon =\epsilon ^4\left(\frac{1}{2}V_1+\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{x}{}}V(y)𝑑y\right)^2𝑑x\right)^2+O(\epsilon ^5),$$

as $`V=0`$. However, in distinction to classic case (real $`V_\epsilon =V`$) the condition $`V_\epsilon <0`$ is not sufficient for absence of eigenvalue. Indeed if $`Q=(\pi /2,\pi /2)`$ and $`V_\epsilon =\mathrm{sin}x\epsilon \mathrm{cos}x`$ then in view of (2.2), (2.3) $`V_\epsilon =2<0`$, but $`k_\epsilon =\epsilon ^2\frac{\pi 2}{2}+O(\epsilon ^3)`$. Hence, by Theorem 2.1 the eigenvalue exists.

Example 4.3. Let $`_\epsilon [g]=\mathrm{exp}\{i\epsilon ^1\}Vg`$, where $`VC_0^{\mathrm{}}(Q)`$ is a real function and $`V>0`$. Then by (2.2), (2.3) and Theorem 2.1 we obtain that, for all sufficient large $`n`$ and any $`0<\delta <\pi /2`$, the eigenvalues are absent as $`\left(3\pi /2+2\pi n\delta \right)^1<\epsilon <\left(\pi /2+2\pi n+\delta \right)^1`$ while an eigenvalue exists as $`\left(\pi /2+2\pi n\delta \right)^1<\epsilon <\left(\pi /2+2\pi n+\delta \right)^1`$ for each fixed $`\delta >0`$ and satisfies the asymptotics

$$\lambda _\epsilon =\left(\epsilon \mathrm{cos}\frac{1}{\epsilon }\right)^2\frac{1}{4}V^2+O(\epsilon ^3).$$

Example 4.4. Let

$$_\epsilon =a_2\frac{d^2}{dx^2}+a_1\frac{d}{dx}+V_\epsilon ,$$

where $`a_j,V_\epsilon C_0^{\mathrm{}}(Q)`$. Since $`_\epsilon [1]=V_\epsilon `$, then in the case $`V_\epsilon 0`$ an eigenvalue is absent due to Corollary 2.1 and the equality $`_\epsilon [1]=V_\epsilon `$ implies that

1) if $`V_\epsilon =V`$ and $`\mathrm{Re}V0`$, then $`k_\epsilon `$ has asymptotics derived in Example 4.1;

2) if $`V_\epsilon =\mathrm{exp}\{i\epsilon ^1\}V`$ and $`V>0`$, then $`k_\epsilon `$ has asymptotics derived in Example 4.3.

Example 4.5. Let $`_\epsilon [g]=\varkappa (Q)\rho g`$ where $`\rho C_0^{\mathrm{}}(Q)`$, and $`\varkappa (Q)`$ is a characteristic function for $`Q`$, (i.e., this function equals to one for $`xQ`$ and vanishes for other $`x`$). Then by (2.2), (2.3), Theorem 2.1 ad Corrolary 2.1 an eigenvalue is absent if $`\rho =0`$ or $`\mathrm{Re}\rho <0`$, and, if $`\mathrm{Re}\rho >0`$, then an eigenvalue exists and has asymptotics

$$\lambda _\epsilon =\epsilon ^2\frac{1}{4}\left(|Q|\rho \right)^2+O(\epsilon ^3).$$
$`(4.5)`$
Example 4.6. Let

$$_\epsilon [g]=\varkappa (Q)\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{x}{}}\rho (t)g(t)𝑑t,$$

where $`\rho C_0^{\mathrm{}}(Q)`$. Then the assertions (2.2), (2.3) imply

$$k_\epsilon =\epsilon \frac{1}{2}\left(|Q|\rho x\rho \right)+O(\epsilon ^2),$$
$`(4.6)`$
and, therefore, the eigenvalue exists if $`\left(|Q|\rho x\rho \right)>0`$, and it is absent if $`\left(|Q|\rho x\rho \right)<0`$. In particular, if $`\rho `$ is an even function and $`\rho >0`$, then due to (2.4), (4.6) the eigenvalue has asymptotics (4.5).

References

1. B. Simon. Ann. Phys. 1976. V. 97. P. 279.
2. M. Klaus. Ann. Phys. 1977. V. 108. P. 288.
3. R. Blankenbecler, M.L. Goldberger, B. Simon. Ann. Phys. 1977. V. 108. P. 69.
4. M. Klaus, B. Simon. Ann. Phys. 1980. V. 130. P. 251.