format: text

text:
# ISOCAM observations of the Ursa Major cirrus:

## 1 Introduction

We know that interstellar dust plays an important role in the physics of the interstellar medium. For instance, dust grains heat the gas via the photoelectric effect Bakes & Tielens (1994) and provide the surfaces necessary to the formation of H2 Duley & Williams (1993). These processes are sensitive to the size distribution, the structure and composition of dust grains and, especially, to the abundance of the smallest particles. The IRAS images of nearby molecular complexes and bright cirrus clouds ($`A_V>1`$) have been extensively used to compare the spatial distribution of the mid-IR emission from the smallest stochastically heated grains and that of the far-IR emission from larger grains in thermal equilibrium. The color ratio between these two emissions has been related to the abundance ratio between small and large dust grains which was inferred to widely vary from cloud to cloud and within clouds Boulanger et al. (1990). The gain in brightness sensitivity and angular resolution provided since then by dedicated observations carried out with ISOCAM, the camera on board the Infrared Space Observatory (ISO), now allows us to carry on these IRAS investigations and in particular to extend them to the range of column densities ($`N_\mathrm{H}5\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2) where the transition from atomic to molecular gas takes place.

ISOCAM has provided low resolution spectra ($`\lambda /\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda 50`$) of the mid-IR interstellar emission over a wide range of environments including the diffuse Galactic emission and cirrus clouds. The emission in the 3-15 $`\mu `$m range is invariably associated with emission bands considered to be characteristic of aromatic hydrocarbon particles. To be heated to temperatures of a few 100 K by single stellar photons these particles have to be smaller than a few thousands carbon atoms. The exact nature, structure and origin of the emitting particles are still a matter of debate. The abundance variations revealed by IRAS images show that small dust grains might not be related to the particles released by evolved stars and could be formed within the interstellar medium Henning (1999). It is the motivation of this work to shed further light on the evolution of small dust grains within the diffuse interstellar medium in relation to gas physical conditions. To do this we have combined ISOCAM observations of the Ursa Major cirrus cloud with 21 cm, CO and IRAS data. The Ursa Major cirrus has a moderate opacity to stellar light ($`\mathrm{A}_\mathrm{V}<0.5`$) and an atomic and molecular sections traced by Hi and CO emission respectively. The comparison of these data sets allows us to measure the mid-IR emissivity per hydrogen which, in a cloud transparent to stellar light, is related to the abundance and the optical properties of small dust particles independently of any modelling of the penetration of the dust heating radiation.

The observations used in this investigation are presented in § 2. The structure and the kinematics of the Ursa Major cirrus is described in § 3. In § 4 we estimate the emissivity per H atom of small dust grains in the atomic part. Section 11 is devoted to the estimate of the abundance of small dust grains in an Hi filament with a particular kinematic and § 6 addresses the same question for the Hi-H2 interface. The relation between the spatial variations of the dust emission and the gas physical conditions are discussed in § 7. The main results of this analysis are summarized in § 8.

## 2 Observations and data processing

We present ISOCAM observations of the Ursa Major cirrus, a piece of the North Celestial Loop Heiles (1989) (see Fig. 1). This cirrus is composed of two connected parts, one predominantly atomic, detected only in the Hi line and one mostly molecular, detected in CO de Vries et al. (1987); Pound & Goodman (1997). For the sake of simplicity we will name these two sections of the cirrus atomic and molecular in the following. The atomic section of the cirrus is representative of the so called Hi clouds with a density $`n100`$ cm-3 and a temperature $`T200`$ K Joncas et al. (1992). It is illuminated by the mean solar neighbourhood interstellar radiation field (ISRF) and it is optically thin to this radiation; the Hi column densities range from 2 to $`6\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2. According to de Vries et al. (1987), the distance of the Ursa Major cirrus is $``$100 pc.

### 2.1 ISOCAM observations

Three small fields of 0.05 square degree have been mapped with ISOCAM (see Table 1 for the observation log). The location of the three fields is indicated in Fig. 1. These fields have been selected according to the following criteria. First, field $`A`$ crosses an Hi filament with a large transverse velocity gradient suggesting a rotation along the long axis Miville-Deschênes (1999). It provides the opportunity of studying the impact of this peculiar gas velocity distribution upon the spatial and size distributions of small dust particles. Secondly, fields $`B`$ and $`C`$ encompass an atomic-molecular interface, allowing the analysis of dust properties variations across this interface.

The ISOCAM observations were made in the LW2 (5 to 8.5 $`\mu `$m) and LW3 (12 to 18 $`\mu `$m) broad band filters. For diffuse clouds the emission in these filters is dominated by the zodiacal emission; the contrast of the cirrus is as small as a few 0.1 per cent in the LW3 filter. Furthermore, ISOCAM is affected by instrumental effects that can be one order of magnitude higher than the contrast we are looking for. To correct for these instrumental effects we have developed a data processing method based on the fact that a given point on the sky has been observed several times. This method is described in Miville-Deschênes et al. (2000). Without this particular data processing, the ISOCAM observations presented in this paper would have been useless. The LW2 and LW3 images of the three fields are shown in Figures 2, 3 and 4. The mid-infrared peak-to-peak fluctuations in these images are $`0.4`$ MJy sr-1 and the rms of the high frequency noise is $`0.02`$ MJy sr-1.

### 2.2 Hi and CO observations

We have combined the mid-infrared observations with CO and Hi observations to conduct our analysis. The Hi (21 cm) observations were obtained at the Dominion Radio Astrophysical Observatory of Penticton (Canada). Part of these data were published by Joncas et al. (1992) and the whole set will be the subject of a forthcoming paper Miville-Deschênes (1999); Miville-Deschênes et al. (2001). The spatial resolution of these 21 cm observations is 1’ and the spectral resolution is 0.66 km s-1.

In order to compare the dust emission with the whole gas content, we use 12CO observations of the Ursa Major cirrus in the J=(1-0) transition at 115.271203 GHz that were obtained by Pound & Goodman (1997). These authors kindly let us use their data obtained with a Gaussian beam of 100” and a velocity resolution of 0.27 km s-1. The images of the integrated Hi and CO emission of the three ISOCAM fields are also shown in Figures 2, 3 and 4.

## 3 General structure and kinematics

### 3.1 Field $`A`$ \- an Hi filament

#### 3.1.1 Comparison of dust and gas tracers

The field $`A`$ observed by ISOCAM is a small cut across a filament (length $`5`$ pc and width $`0.5`$ pc), observed in all IRAS bands (see the 100 $`\mu `$m emission in Fig. 1) and at 21 cm Joncas et al. (1992). As seen in Fig. 2, the filament is also well detected in the mid-infrared. The CO observations of Pound & Goodman (1997) do not include field $`A`$, but CO has been searched unsuccessfully at the 0.1 K level within this area by de Vries et al. (1987) and G. Lagache (private communication). Therefore we will consider that field as predominantly atomic and use the 21 cm data as a tracer of the spatial structure and kinematic of the gas.

On a large scale, the structure in the LW2 and LW3 broad band filters is very similar to the Hi emission. But a careful comparison of the spatial distribution of the mid-infrared and Hi emissions reveals significant discrepancies. In Fig. 5 we plot the total Hi column density, the LW2, LW3 and IRAS 100 $`\mu `$m brightness, averaged over $`\alpha _{2000}`$, as a function of the declination $`\delta _{2000}`$ in field $`A`$. In these profiles, the emission in the LW2 and LW3 filters and the 100 $`\mu `$m emission have been normalized to the Hi column density with a constant ratio. These profiles show that the Hi emission is very well correlated to the 100 $`\mu `$m emission, but the peak of the emission in the two ISOCAM filters does not coincide with that of the FIR and Hi; the mid-IR emission is shifted compared to the Hi and 100 $`\mu `$m emissions.

#### 3.1.2 Kinematics of the gas

The velocity structure of the Hi emission within field $`A`$ is described in Fig. 6. The central panel presents a velocity-position diagram of the 21 cm emission. Three representative Hi spectra of this field are also shown in the right panel. On most of the field, the 21 cm spectra are characterized by two components. The two components clearly overlap in velocity and it is impossible to separate them only by selecting velocity ranges. To estimate the column density of each component across the field, we decompose the spectra by a sum of two Gaussians. From this decomposition, we derive the integrated intensity, the velocity centroid and the velocity dispersion of each component on the line of sight. The two components correspond to spatially coherent structures which extend beyond the ISOCAM field Miville-Deschênes et al. (2001). The brightest structure seen in the position-velocity diagram (Fig. 6) at a velocity of $`8`$ km s-1corresponds to the filament observed in the IRAS 100 $`\mu `$m map (Fig. 1). The second component at a central velocity of $`4`$ km s-1is more diffuse; it is also observed beyond field $`A`$.

In Fig. 7 we show the mean integrated intensity and the velocity centroid of these two components across field $`A`$. The component associated with the filament (solid line in Fig. 7) contributes $``$ 40% of the total integrated emission of the field. It is characterized by two velocity gradients perpendicular to the filament; first there is a 2 km s-1 increase of the velocity from $`\delta _{2000}=70.15^{}`$ to $`70.35^{}`$ and then a decrease of 4 km s-1 from $`\delta _{2000}=70.35^{}`$ to $`70.54^{}`$. At a distance of 100 pc, these variations correspond respectively to gradients of $``$5 and -10 km s-1 pc-1. The velocity dispersion of this component measured on individual spectra is $`23`$ km s-1. The more diffuse component (dashed line in Fig. 7), which contributes $``$ 60% of the gas emission, is characterized by a north-south integrated emission gradient and an almost constant velocity centroid ($`4`$ km s-1). Its velocity dispersion is significantly larger than that of the filament, with values between $`6`$ and 10 km s-1.

### 3.2 Field $`B`$ and $`C`$ \- an Hi -H2 interface

The two other fields observed with ISOCAM cross an atomic/molecular gas interface as indicated by CO observations. In field $`B`$ (Fig. 3) there is a slight increase of the CO emission (up to $`T_B3`$ K km s-1) at the western edge of the field. The Hi emission in this field is very uniform; the contrast in the 21 cm line integrated emission is $``$10%.

In field $`C`$, Hi and CO observations are available for the whole region observed by ISOCAM. There is a slight north-south Hi emission gradient but again the contrast is very low ($`<10`$%). Most of the column density variations in field $`C`$ is associated with CO emission.

In Fig. 8 we show cuts across field $`C`$ in Hi, CO, IRAS 100 $`\mu `$m, IRAS 60 $`\mu `$m, LW2 and LW3. What is striking at first is the flatness of the Hi emission. There is a sharp rise of the CO emission near $`\alpha _{2000}=142.6^{}`$, not associated with any change in the Hi emission. In contrast, the dust emission in all 4 bands increases in the molecular region, but with less sharpness unrelated to the angular resolution. The infrared dust emission systematically peaks on the western side of the CO filament. Furthermore, we also notice that the peak position of the dust emission at shorter wavelength seems to be more shifted with respect to the CO emission than at longer wavelength.

In velocity space, the Hi and CO data are very simple to describe. CO and 21 cm spectra taken at the peak CO intensity in field $`C`$ are shown in Fig. 9. These spectra are representative of both fields $`B`$ and $`C`$. The CO emission is characterized by a single symmetric component centered at $`1.3`$ km s-1 with a velocity width at half power of $`0.7`$ km s-1. The Hi emission is much broader; the spectrum is clearly not symmetric with its peak intensity near $`2`$ km s-1. It can be fitted by two Gaussian components, one at $`v2.7`$ km s-1 with a width of $`2.7`$ km s-1 and a second one at $`v8.5`$ km s-1 with a width of $`2.0`$ km s-1.

## 4 Emissivity of the small dust particles

### 4.1 Correlation between the mid-infrared emission and the Hi integrated emission

A main goal of this work is to study the relation between the dust and gas emission. If the dust-to-gas ratio and the heating of the dust are uniform and constant, the mid-infrared emission $`I_{mir}(\alpha ,\delta )`$ may be described by:

$$I_{mir}(\alpha ,\delta )=e\times N_H(\alpha ,\delta )+I_{back}$$
(1)
where $`e`$ is the dust emissivity, $`N_H`$ the total column density of hydrogen (Hi and H2) and $`I_{back}`$ is the background level (assumed constant over the observed field). The total hydrogen column density is deduced from the integrated emission at 21 cm ($`W_{\text{Hi}}`$): $`N_{\text{Hi}}=1.823\times 10^{18}W_{\text{Hi}}`$ Spitzer (1978) when the atomic gas is optically thin, which we consider a reasonable assumption for this cloud. We did not look for a correlation between $`N_H`$ and $`I_{mir}`$ in fields $`B`$ and $`C`$ because of the very low contrast of the mid-infrared emission and because of the great uncertainty concerning the CO to H2 conversion factor (de Vries et al. (1987) give $`N_{H2}=0.5\pm 0.3\times 10^{20}W_{CO}`$ cm-2 K-1 (km/s)-1 for the Ursa Major cirrus).

The LW2 vs $`N_{\text{Hi}}`$ and LW3 vs $`N_{\text{Hi}}`$ plots in field $`A`$ are shown in Fig. 10. The mid-infrared emissions rise globally with the Hi column density; these relations are approximately linear (see Fig. 10). Nevertheless, the rms scatter in the LW2-$`N_{\text{Hi}}`$ and LW3-$`N_{\text{Hi}}`$ relations (0.05 MJy/sr for LW2 and 0.07 MJy/sr for LW3) is significantly larger than the noise level (0.02 MJy/sr).

### 4.2 Background emission in the ISOCAM images

The scatter around the LW2 vs $`N_{\text{Hi}}`$ and LW3 vs $`N_{\text{Hi}}`$ relations indicates that our description of the mid-infrared emission with Eq. 1 is probably too simple. This scatter may originate from a spatial variation of the emissivity or of the background emission. Here the background level is mainly due to the zodiacal light, which is uniform at the scale of our small fields. Therefore we conclude that the scatter of the LW2 vs $`N_{\text{Hi}}`$ and LW3 vs $`N_{\text{Hi}}`$ relations in field $`A`$ is due to spatial variations of the emissivity $`e`$.

In order to quantify the mid-infrared emissivity for each position ($`\alpha `$, $`\delta `$), the uniform background emission level of the ISOCAM images must be estimated. This is also essential to compare the emission between the LW2 and LW3 filters. We can estimate the background level by inspecting the relation between the mid-infrared fluxes and the total column density of hydrogen (see Fig 10). If the mid-infrared flux is, at first order, proportional to the total column density of hydrogen, the background level should be the mid-infrared flux for zero column density of hydrogen. If we apply this to the data the uncertainty on the background will be large because the dynamical range of the ISOCAM images is small ($`0.6`$ MJy/sr). Further, in fields $`B`$ and $`C`$, CO emission cannot be considered as a quantitative tracer of the H2 column density. In this context, we chose to work in relative brightness for all tracers. This means that, for each field and for gas and dust maps, we subtract an offset taken in a common region where the mid-IR emission is the lowest.

## 5 Variation of the mid-infrared emissivity with gas velocity

In this section we show that the spatial shift between the dust and gas tracers in field $`A`$, and therefore the dispersion in the LW2-$`N_{\text{Hi}}`$ and LW3-$`N_{\text{Hi}}`$ relations, can be accounted for by a difference in the small dust particles emissivity per H atom between the two Hi kinematic components (see § 3.1.2).

As seen in Fig. 7, the two Hi components identified earlier with the Gaussian decomposition have very different column density profiles across field $`A`$. If we consider the morphology of both components, the mid-infrared emission is more similar to the filament than to the diffuse Hi component. By giving different emissivity to these two Hi components we were able to reproduce rather well the mid-infrared profiles (see Fig 11 and 12). The LW2 and LW3 emissivities that best reproduce the mid-infrared observations are detailed in Table 2.

The comparison of the mean emissivity of typical Galactic cirrus of the solar neighborhood obtained at 12 $`\mu `$m by Boulanger & Pérault (1988) with the LW2 and LW3 emissivities ($`4\pi \nu e_\nu `$ in W/H) deduced here, shows that the diffuse component of field $`A`$ has an emissivity very similar to the average cirrus value. On the other hand, the filamentary component seems to have an emissivity $`5\pm 1`$ (LW2) and $`2.5\pm 0.5`$ (LW3) times higher than the average value. From the numbers of Table 2 we also conclude that the ratio of the LW2 and LW3 emissivity is $`0.9`$ in the diffuse gas and $`1.8`$ in the filament. Because of the good spatial correlation between the 100 $`\mu `$m and Hi column density (see Fig. 5), the large grains responsible for the 100 $`\mu `$m emission must have the same emissivity in the the filamentary and diffuse components.

## 6 Abundance variations of small dust grains in an Hi-H2 interface

Fields $`B`$ and $`C`$ cross an interface between a mainly atomic region and another one where significant CO emission is detected. The emission in field $`B`$ is very uniform; it is thus difficult to correlate variations in the dust and gas emissions. Therefore, our whole analysis of the Hi-H2 transition will be based on the observations of field $`C`$.

To estimate the dust mid-infrared emissivity, we usually rely on an estimate of the gas column density. In field $`C`$, the structure of the gas is dominated by the molecular component. Because the determination of the CO to H2 ratio is poorly constrained and because, in such diffuse clouds, it is known that CO is not such a good tracer of the molecular column density Reach et al. (1994), we prefer to compare the mid-infrared emission with the IRAS 100 $`\mu `$m band emission to estimate the abundance of the smallest dust particles, relative to that of bigger grains responsible for the emission at 100 $`\mu `$m.

In Fig. 13 (middle panel) we show the ratio $`(\nu I_\nu )_\lambda /(\nu I_\nu )_{(100\mu m)}`$ for LW2 ($`\lambda `$=6.5 $`\mu `$m), LW3 ($`\lambda `$=15 $`\mu `$m) and IRAS 60 $`\mu `$m, across the Hi-H2 transition. This way of presenting the data emphasizes the variation of dust emissivity at wavelength $`\lambda `$ compared to the emissivity at 100 $`\mu `$m. If the grain properties and the heating are homogeneous, this ratio reflects changes in the relative abundance of grains. For all three wavelengths a decrease in the $`(\nu I_\nu )_\lambda /(\nu I_\nu )_{(100\mu m)}`$ ratio is observed, correlated with the increase of the CO emission. Furthermore, for the three bands, the lowest $`(\nu I_\nu )_\lambda /(\nu I_\nu )_{(100\mu m)}`$ is observed near the CO peak emission.

By making the assumption that the 100 $`\mu `$m emissivity is that measured by Boulanger & Pérault (1988) for the high latitude clouds (see Table 2), which is in accordance with the 100 $`\mu `$m emissivity estimated in that cloud by Joncas et al. (1992), we were able to estimate the emissivity in the LW2 and LW3 bands from the $`(\nu I_\nu )_\lambda /(\nu I_\nu )_{(100\mu m)}`$ ratio. In Table 2 we list an estimate of the mean LW2 and LW3 emissivity values for the atomic and molecular regions of the Hi-H2 transition. We estimate that the ratio of the emissivity in the Hi region compared to the CO region is $`4.0\pm 0.8`$ and $`2.1\pm 0.4`$ in LW2 and LW3 respectively.

The ratio of the LW2 over LW3 emission for field $`C`$ is also shown in Fig 13. In the purely atomic part of the fields, the ratio is $`0.8`$ and it drops to $`0.3`$, in a few 0.1pc, as we enter the molecular region.

## 7 Discussion

The comparison of the mid-infrared, Hi, CO and IRAS observations has allowed us to highlight important spatial variations of the small dust particles emissivity in the Ursa Major cirrus.

### 7.1 Spatial variation of the mid-infrared emissivity

The Ursa Major cirrus is characterized by a low gas column density ($`6.0\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2\- corresponding to $`A_V0.3`$) and the absence of star formation. In this context, the spatial variations in the mid-infrared emissivity can result from either (1) the presence of molecular gas or very cold Hi gas or (2) an attenuation of the UV radiation field on scales smaller than the beam size or (3) variations in the small grains abundance or emission properties. The good correlation observed between the Hi and $`100\mu m`$ emissions in Fig. 5 puts constraints on hypothesis (1) and (2). Dust associated with molecular gas should produce an excess of IR emission with respect to the IR-Hi correlation. However, this excess could be reduced by an attenuation of the UV radiation field in the same regions since molecules are expected to be present in the most shielded parts of the cloud. But both effects would modify the mid-infrared and 100 $`\mu `$m emission in the same way. Therefore, variations of the dust size distribution or of emission properties (hypothesis (3)) are more directly traced by the mid-infrared to 100 $`\mu `$m emission ratio than the mid-infrared emissivity per H atom. However it is only with the Hi emission that we have access to the velocity information.

In field $`A`$, the emissivities in the LW2 and LW3 filters are enhanced by a factor $`5\pm 1`$ and $`2.5\pm 0.5`$ in the filament with respect to the more diffuse atomic gas. Since such a change is ruled out for large grain emission at 100 $`\mu `$m, we interpret the LW2 and LW3 emissivity variations as an evidence for variations in the small grains characteristics (abundance/emission properties). Elements are still lacking to identify whether the emissivity variations oberved here are due to variations in the abundance of the mid-infrared emitters or to their emission properties. We recall that this filament has a very peculiar kinematic: a large velocity gradient across the filament which could be a signature of a fast rotation around its long axis. We discuss below how large velocity gradients might enhance the abundance of small dust grains.

Based on the mid-infrared to 100 $`\mu `$m ratio, in field $`C`$, the abundance of the particles emitting in the LW2 and LW3 filters are found to be respectively $`4.0\pm 0.8`$ and $`2.1\pm 0.4`$ times lower in the molecular region than in the atomic gas. A similar effect is also observed with the IRAS 60 $`\mu `$m emission.

### 7.2 Turbulence and dust size distribution

We discuss here a possible link between the dust size distribution and the kinematics of the gas (i.e. the importance of the turbulent motions). The filament in field $`A`$, which has an aspect ratio of the order of 10 Miville-Deschênes (1999), is reminiscent of coherent structures of vorticity observed in turbulence and thought to be responsible for the phenomenon of intermittency Vincent & Meneguzzi (1994). Falgarone & Puget (1995) investigated the decoupling of dust and gas in a turbulent flow as a function of grain size. They showed that the intermittency of turbulence enhances the decoupling of small dust grains from the gas motions because of the non-Gaussian distribution of the velocity gradients. Thus the relative velocities of small dust particles can be significantly increased above that reached in a Kolmogorov turbulence. Qualitatively, the collision outcome is coagulation or grain fragmentation below and above some energy threshold. In these regions, the relative velocities might become sufficiently large that small dust grains are produced by grain fragmentation in grain-grain collisions. The high abundance of small dust particles in the filament of field $`A`$ could be a signature of such a fragmentation process. In the molecular gas, where the turbulent motions are smaller than in the Hi gas (Fig. 9), we may observe the reverse process: mutual coagulation of small grains could occur which would explain the drop of the mid-infrared emissivity.

The outcome of a grain-grain collision (coagulation, bouncing or fragmentation) depends on the kinetic energy of the colliding grains, on their respective masses and on their material. Based on a numerical simulation of aggregate growth, Dominik & Tielens (1997) have showed that two $`0.1`$ $`\mu `$m aggregates stick if their relative velocity is $`\delta v0.8`$ km s-1. But if it is higher than $`1`$ km s-1, the dust aggregates start to fragment.

Following Draine (1985), the typical relative velocity of two grains of size $`a_1`$ in a Kolmogorov turbulent flow characterized by a velocity dispersion $`v_{max}`$ at a scale $`l_{max}`$ is given by the following equation:

$$v_{rel}=\left(\frac{v_{max}^{3/2}}{l_{max}^{1/2}}\right)\left(\frac{a_1\rho _{gr}}{4n}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{2\pi }{\mu kT}\right)^{1/4},$$
(2)
where $`n`$ and $`T`$ are the gas density and temperature and $`\rho _{gr}`$ is the grain mass density. If we consider standard values for an Hi cloud like Ursa Major ($`n=100`$ cm-3, $`T=200`$ K) and Kolmogorov turbulence with $`l_{max}=10`$ pc and $`v_{max}=5`$ km s-1, the typical relative velocity for big grains ($`a_1=0.1`$ $`\mu `$m and $`\rho _{gr}=3`$ g cm-3) would be $`v_{rel}0.6`$ km s-1, which is close to the fragmentation threshold established by Dominik & Tielens (1997). But in field $`A`$, we observe velocity gradients of 5 and 10 km s-1 pc-1, which are larger than the gradients characteristic of Kolmogorov turbulence at the scale of the filament (0.3 pc). As shown by Falgarone & Puget (1995), these local large velocity gradients may increase the relative velocity between small grains. Considering the strength of the velocity gradient observed here, it is very likely that the relative velocity between large grains exceeds the fragmentation threshold.

In field $`C`$, the width of the CO line is $`1.5`$ km s-1 (see Fig. 9). If we consider that this width is mostly due to turbulence and that the thickness of the Ursa Major cirrus is $`2`$ pc, the typical velocity dispersion of 0.1 $`\mu `$m grains for the same temperature and density as in field $`A`$ is $`0.2`$ km s-1 . This is lower than the coagulation threshold determined by Dominik & Tielens (1997) and it could be even lower since the density in the molecular region is higher than the mean cirrus value.

This indicates that fragmentation and coagulation by grain-grain collisions in a turbulent flow may be at the origin of the abundance variations of small dust grains observed in the Ursa Major cirrus. To estimate the timescales over which the dust size distribution is significantly affected by this process, one should take into account the collisions between grains of all sizes and, in the case of fragmentation, make some hypothesis on the size distribution of the fragments. This is beyond the scope of the present paper. Draine (1985) has estimated the depletion time scale of small grains in interstellar clouds to be $`10^6`$ years by considering only sticking on large grains in Kolmogorov turbulence. Mutual coagulation of small grains actually occurs faster if we take intermittency into account Falgarone & Puget (1995).

### 7.3 Variations of the $`I_\nu (\mathrm{LW2})/I_\nu (\mathrm{LW3})`$ ratio

In addition to the spatial variations of the mid-infrared emissivity we have also observed spatial variations of the $`I_\nu (\mathrm{LW2})/I_\nu (\mathrm{LW3})`$ ratio. For example, it is twice larger in the Hi filament of field $`A`$ than in the diffuse gas that surrounds it. It is also observed to be twice larger in the atomic side of the Hi-H2 transition than in the molecular region. Similar variations of the $`I_\nu (\mathrm{LW2})/I_\nu (\mathrm{LW3})`$ ratio are observed across photo-dissociation regions from the photo-dissociated gas to the molecular gas Abergel et al. (2000).

Using broad-band filters and CVF observations of L1630, Abergel et al. (2000) showed that the emission in the LW2 filter is correlated to the intensity of the 7.7 $`\mu `$m aromatic band, and that the emission in the LW3 filter is correlated to the continuum level at 15 $`\mu `$m. These CVF data show that variations in the relative amplitude of the aromatic bands are minor and do not significantly affect the $`I_\nu `$(LW2)/$`I_\nu `$(LW3). It is unclear whether the aromatic bands and continuum at 15 $`\mu `$m come from the same dust particles. Within the present understanding of the nature and emission properties of small dust grains it is impossible to determine the origin of the $`I_\nu `$(LW2)/$`I_\nu `$(LW3) ratio variations.

### 7.4 Coagulation of small grains

Another example of the decrease of the small dust grain abundance in an Hi-H2 interface is given by Bernard et al. (1999) who characterize dust properties, in a section of the Polaris cirrus with moderate opacity (A$`{}_{V}{}^{}1`$), by combining IRAS and far-IR/sub-mm observations. In this cloud, there is no mid-IR emission, the 60/100 $`\mu `$m emission ratio is low and the large grain temperature, 13 K, is lower than the mean cirrus value 17.5 K. These dust properties are characteristic of dense gas within molecular clouds. Bernard et al. (1999) explain these observations by the formation of large fractal grains through the coagulation of small dust grains on large grains. The decrease of the small dust grains abundance in the Hi-H2 interface of the Ursa Major cirrus could be an intermediate step in the dust evolution, between the diffuse Hi and denser environments.

## 8 Conclusion

We have presented ISOCAM images (in two filters LW2 (5-8.5 $`\mu `$m ) and LW3 (12-18 $`\mu `$m )) of a high Galactic latitude cirrus transparent to stellar photons. The angular resolution and brightness sensitivity of these images improve by one order of magnitude those provided by the 12 and 25 $`\mu `$m IRAS images. We have compared the ISOCAM images with Hi, CO and $`100\mu m`$ observations to measure the mid-IR emissivity (mid-IR emission from small dust particles per hydrogen atom) for distinct gas velocity components and across an interface between atomic and molecular gas. We find significant variations in the mid-IR emissivity which we interpret as changes in the abundance of small grains within the cloud. The abundance of the small dust particles is larger by a factor 5 within a filament with a strong transverse velocity gradient, than in the surrounding diffuse Hi. We propose that this abundance enhancement results from the formation of small dust grains through the fragmentation of larger grains in energetic grain-grain collisions induced by turbulence. The abundance of small dust particles with respect to the larger grains is observed to be reduced (by a factor 4) in CO emitting molecular gas with respect to its value in diffuse Hi. In this gas the turbulent motions have a smaller amplitude than in the Hi gas. Within the proposed interpretation, we speculate that in such an environment grain/grain collisions are less energetic and they therefore lead to coagulation and not fragmentation.

Spectroscopic observations indicate that the LW2/LW3 color ratio measures the contrast of the aromatic bands with respect to the underlying continuum emission. A drop in the $`I_\nu `$(LW2)/$`I_\nu `$(LW3) ratio by a factor $`2`$ is observed from the Hi filament to the diffuse Hi gas and from the Hi to the H2 gas across the Hi -H2 interface. The LW2/LW3 color ratio is observed to decrease with the mid-IR emissivity. If the band contrast decreases for increasing particles sizes, a plausible assumption in terms of solid state physics, the mid-IR emissivity and color variations could both be related to a change in the small-sizes end of the dust size distribution.

## Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Marc W. Pound for the very helpful CO observations and the different teams at IAS, CEA-Saclay, ENS-Paris and ESA for their outstanding work and continuous support during all phases of the ISO project. The authors also thank the team at the DRAO observatory for their help in the data reduction, Claire O’Neil for her help with the writing and the referee, D. Hollenbach, for very helpful comments. The Fond FCAR du Québec and the National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada provided funds to support this research project.


text:
# On the structure of graded symplectic supermanifolds and Courant algebroids.

## 1. Introduction.

Graded symplectic supermanifolds have been known to physicists since the 70s, providing framework for the so-called BRST formalism. Such supermanifolds were obtained by adjoining odd generators (“ghosts” and “antighosts”) to the classical algebra of observables, and having them satisfy canonical Poisson bracket relations. In the simplest case, such supermanifolds are of the form $`M=\mathrm{\Pi }(𝔤𝔤^{})\times T^{}M_0`$, where $`M_0`$ is the configuration space acted upon by a Lie algebra $`𝔤`$, and $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ denotes parity shift. The symplectic form is $`\mathrm{\Omega }=dp_idq^i+d\theta _ad\xi ^a`$, where the coordinates $`(\xi ^a)`$ on $`\mathrm{\Pi }𝔤`$ are the “ghosts”, those $`(\theta _a)`$ on $`\mathrm{\Pi }𝔤^{}`$ – the “antighosts”. One assigns the ghost degree $`+1`$ to the ghost variables, while the antighosts are assigned degree $`1`$. The symplectic form $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ has total ghost degree zero, so that one can replace $`T^{}M_0`$ by an arbitrary symplectic manifold $`P`$ acted upon by $`𝔤`$. The classical BRST algebra is the graded Poisson algebra $`^{}(𝔤𝔤^{})C^{\mathrm{}}(P)`$ of functions on $`M`$. One then constructs an odd self-commuting Hamiltonian of ghost degree $`+1`$ (the “BRST charge”) which acts on the BRST algebra via the Poisson bracket as a differential; its cohomology (the BRST cohomology) is identified with the “physical” observables.

A detailed mathematical study of the above special case of classical BRST algebra and its quantization was undertaken by Kostant and Sternberg  who related the BRST cohomology with Lie algebra cohomology. They showed, in particular, that if the action of $`𝔤`$ on $`P`$ is “nice”, the BRST cohomology is concentrated in degree $`0`$ and is isomorphic to the algebra of functions on the reduced phase space.

The classical BRST formalism can be extended and generalized in various directions. For instance, to treat more complicated symmetries it is required to further extend the BRST algebra by including “ghosts for ghosts” etc. The homological algebra becomes quite involved in this case (see ). The purpose of this paper is to generalize the BRST formalism to the case of an arbitrary pseudo-Euclidean vector bundle $`E`$ over a manifold $`M_0`$, and to study the resulting geometric structures, Courant algebroids. Consider the special case $`M_0=\text{point}`$, treated in . Here we have a pseudo-Euclidean vector space $`(V,<,>)`$, $`M=\mathrm{\Pi }V`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\frac{1}{2}d\xi ^ag_{ab}d\xi ^b`$, where $`g_{ab}=<e_a,e_b>`$ for some basis $`(e_a)`$ of $`V`$. Not having a ghost-antighost splitting, we assign degree $`+1`$ to all $`\xi ^a`$’s, so that the degree of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is now $`+2`$. The exterior algebra $`^{}V^{}`$ becomes a graded Poisson algebra; the Poisson bracket has degree $`2`$. Hence, the space $`^2V^{}`$ of quadratic Hamiltonians becomes a Lie algebra, isomorphic to $`𝔰𝔬(V)`$. It acts on all Grassman polynomials $`^kV^{}`$ via the Poisson bracket. The situation is entirely analogous to the well-known realization of the Lie algebra $`𝔰𝔭(V)`$ of a symplectic vector space $`(V,\omega )`$ as the lie algebra of quadratic Hamiltonians $`S^2V^{}`$ under the canonical Poisson bracket.

If $`V`$ carries a Lie algebra structure such that $`<,>`$ is ad-invariant, one forms the *Cartan structure tensor* $`\mathrm{\Theta }^3V^{}`$ by setting $`\mathrm{\Theta }(X,Y,Z)=<[X,Y],Z>`$. It plays the role of a “BRST charge” for the standard complex of the Lie algebra $`V`$: it satisfies the structure equation $`\{\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{\Theta }\}=0`$ (equivalent to the Jacobi identity), and $`\delta =\{\mathrm{\Theta },\}`$ is the Chevalley-Eilenberg differential. The Lie bracket on $`V`$ is recovered as a so-called *derived bracket*: $`[X,Y]=\{\{X,\mathrm{\Theta }\},Y\}`$ (we have used $`<,>`$ to identify $`V`$ with $`V^{}`$). This formalism was exploited by Lecomte-Roger  and Kosmann-Schwarzbach  who used it to study the homological algebra of Lie bialgebras and quasi-Lie bialgebras, respectively.

If $`M_0\times V`$ is a trivial pseudo-Euclidean vector bundle over $`M_0`$, one sets $`M=\mathrm{\Pi }V\times T^{}M_0`$, with $`\mathrm{\Omega }=dp_idq^i+\frac{1}{2}d\xi ^ag_{ab}d\xi ^b`$. One needs to assign degree $`2`$ to the momenta $`p_i`$ so that $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is homogeneous of degree $`2`$. Thus it is proper to denote $`M=V[1]\times T^{}[2]M_0`$, to indicate the shift in grading. Note that with this choice of grading every homogeneous function on $`M`$ has a nonnegative degree compatible with its parity: $`M`$ is a so-called *N-manifold* . It turns out that one can canonically associate a symplectic N-manifold $`M`$ of degree $`2`$ to any, not necessarily trivial, pseudo-Euclidean vector bundle $`EM_0`$, and that conversely, every such manifold arisies in this way (Theorem 3.3). Local trivializations of $`E`$ (as a pseudo-Euclidean bundle) give rise to affine Darboux charts of the form $`V[1]\times T^{}[2]U`$, and $`M`$ is glued together from these by affine coordinate transformations (3.3) corresponding to changes of trivialization of $`E`$. An observation, often overlooked, is that all canonical constructions in the category of vector bundles should be equivariant with respect to the group of bundle automorphisms covering diffeomorphisms of the base (as opposed to just those that leave every point of the base fixed). The Lie algebra of this group is known as the *Atiyah algebra*, consisting of so-called covariant differential operators (CDO’s) on $`E`$. In case of pseudo-Euclidean vector bundles, one restricts to the subalgebra of operators preserving $`<,>`$. This algebra is realized as the Lie algebra $`𝒜^2`$ of quadratic Hamiltonians on $`M`$, under the Poisson bracket. It acts on all polynomial functions on $`M`$, preserving the degree.

Whereas in studying structures on vector spaces (such as Lie algebras, bialgebras, etc.) the use of supermanifold formalism is entirely optional and a matter of one’s taste, it offers significant advantages already when we go to vector bundles. The analogue of a Lie algebra in the world of vector bundles is a *Lie algebroid*. A Lie algebroid structure on a vector bundle $`AM_0`$ is usually described in terms of an anchor map $`ATM_0`$ and a Lie bracket of sections, but it can be equivalently described as a derivation $`d_A`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(^{}A^{})`$ of degree $`+1`$ and square zero. This differential can be viewed as a homological vector field on the N-manifold $`A[1]=\mathrm{\Pi }A`$ (in the terminology of , an *NQ-structure*). The standard example is the tangent bundle $`TM_0`$ with identity anchor and the commutator bracket of vector fields; the complex in this case is just the de Rham complex of $`M_0`$. This homological description facilitates an elegant and concise formulation of such important notions as modules and homomoprhisms of Lie algebroids. The classical definition of homomorphism is rather complicated, especially when different base manifolds are involved; the classical notion of a module, while certainly reasonable, fails to include perhaps the most important module of all, the adjoint module (see  for a thorough discussion). The homological formulation overcomes these difficulties . Its potential is yet to be fully realized.

As soon as a pseudo-Euclidean structure on a vector bundle $`EM_0`$ is introduced, one quickly realizes that any reasonable notion of “ad-invariance” is incompatible with the notion of Lie algebroid, except in the trivial case of a bundle of Lie algebras. One has to sacrifice the skew-symmetry of the bracket of sections by adding a symmetric part which is, in a suitable sense, infinitesimal (a coboundary), or else introduce anomalies into the Jacobi and other basic identities. Thus *Courant algebroids* are born. The first basic example (called *standard*), on $`E=TM_0T^{}M_0`$, is due to T. Courant , who used it to describe integrability of so-called *Dirac structures* on $`M_0`$ (including 2-forms, bivectors and distributions) in a unified way. The general definition appeared in  as a result of a “doubling” construction for *Lie bialgebroids* . This leads, for a Lie bialgebroid $`(A,A^{})`$, to a Courant algebroid structure on $`E=AA^{}`$, generalizing Courant’s example. Ševera  showed how Courant algebroids appear naturally in the context of two-dimensional variational problems. He also classified so-called *exact Courant algebroids*, deformations of the standard one by closed 3-forms. These were later used to describe twisted Poisson manifolds with a closed 3-form background (, see also ).

To describe Courant algebroids homologically, the (merely Poisson, not symplectic) N-manifold $`E[1]=\mathrm{\Pi }E`$ is not enough; one needs its minimal symplectic realization $`(M,\mathrm{\Omega })`$ mentioned above. It turns out (Theorem 4.5) that Courant algebroid structures on $`E`$ are in 1-1 correspondence with “BRST charges” on $`M`$, i.e. cubic Hamiltonians $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ satisfying the structure equation $`\{\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{\Theta }\}=0`$. The BRST differential $`D=\{\mathrm{\Theta },\}`$, acting on the algebra $`𝒜^{}`$ of polynomial functions on $`M`$, gives the standard complex for the Courant algebroid. For Lie bialgebroids this description (the “homological double”) was given in  (in that case $`M=T^{}\mathrm{\Pi }A`$ with an appropriate assignment of grading). In case $`M_0`$ is a point, we recover Cartan’s structure tensor. At this point we should remark that instead of N-manifolds we could consider general graded manifolds ; all our constructions extend to this case at the small extra cost of having to consider the even and odd symplectic forms separately, as the degree is no longer tied to parity. This way we would obtain even and odd Courant superalgebroids over supermanifolds. We stick with N-manifolds for simplicity of presentation.

One remarkable feature of Courant algebroids, apparent in the homological formulation, is that they can be used as target spaces for a general class of 3-dimensional topological field theories. Special cases include the Chern-Simons gauge theory (when $`M_0`$ is a point) and Park’s topological membrane theory  (when $`E`$ is an exact Courant algebroid). This fits in the general Batalin-Vilkovisky framework described in . The applications to the topology of 3-manifolds are beginning to be investigated; the program was outlined to us by Park , who also considers symplectic NQ-manifolds of higher degree (see  for application to deformation quantization).

When $`E=TM_0T^{}M_0`$ is the standard Courant algebroid, $`M=T^{}\mathrm{\Pi }TM_0`$, and $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\mathrm{\Theta }_0`$ is just the Hamiltonian corresponding to the de Rham vector field $`d`$ on $`\mathrm{\Pi }TM_0`$. The standard (BRST) complex gets decomposed into a series of subcomplexes $`(𝒜^{k,},D)`$ which we call the *higher de Rham complexes*. For $`k=0`$ this is just the de Rham complex of $`M_0`$, whereas $`𝒜^{1,}[1]`$ can be identified with vector fields on $`\mathrm{\Pi }TM_0`$, with $`D=[d,]`$; in general, $`𝒜^{k,l}`$ consists of the symbols of differential operators on $`\mathrm{\Pi }TM_0`$ of order $`k`$ and degree $`lk`$; $`(𝒜^{k,},D)`$ can be interpreted as the standard complex of the Lie algebroid $`TM_0`$ with coefficients in the $`k`$th exterior power of the adjoint module.

We prove (Proposition 5.1) that the higher de Rham complexes are acyclic for $`k>0`$ by constructing a chain homotopy for $`D`$ as a vector field $`\iota `$ on $`M`$ of degree $`1`$. This generalizes the classic result of Frölicher and Nijenhuis  on the structure of derivations of the ring of differential forms. Several corollaries, potentially of independent interest, follow immediately from this: Cor. 5.2 (the rigidity of the standard Lie algebroid structure on $`TM_0`$), Cor. 5.3 (any Lie algebroid structure on $`T^{}M_0`$ compatible with the standard one on $`TM_0`$ comes from a Poisson structure on $`M_0`$) and Cor. 5.4 (the cohomology of the standard Courant algebroid is isomorphic to the de Rham cohomology of $`M_0`$). This last corollary implies, in particular, that Ševera’s exact Courant algebroids are the only nontrivial deformations of the standard one.

This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we review the generalities on graded manifolds and N-manifolds, following  and ; in Section 3 we study the structure of symplectic N-manifolds of degree 1 and 2 in detail; Section 4 is devoted to the homological (BRST) description of Courant algebroids, their standard complexes and cohomology; finally, in Section 5 we concentrate on the special case of the standard Courant algebroid and its deformations.

We would like to thank Anton Alekseev, Jae-Suk Park, Pavol Ševera, Ted Voronov, Alan Weinstein and Ping Xu for useful discussions and advice. We also thank the Erwin Schrödinger Institute where some of this work was carried out, for hospitality.

## 2.  Graded Manifolds and N-manifolds.

A *graded manifold* is a (super)manifold with an additional grading in the structure sheaf. Specifically, it is a manifold $`M`$ that possesses a coordinate atlas (of so-called *affine charts*) in which each local coordinate is assigned a *degree* (or *weight*), and the coordinate transformations are required to preserve the total weight. In this note we shall require all weights to be integers, although it is not a necessary restriction, in principle. The grading can also be conveniently described by means of the *Euler vector field*

$$ϵ=w(x^i)x^i\frac{}{x^i},$$

where $`w(x^i)`$ denotes the weight of $`x^i`$. The weights are just the eigenvalues with respect to the action of $`ϵ`$: we say that a function $`f`$ is *homogeneous of weight* $`k`$ if $`ϵf=kf`$. We shall denote the space of all such functions by $`𝒜^k`$ and call the graded algebra $`𝒜^{}=_{k0}𝒜^k`$ the *algebra of polynomial functions* on $`M`$; the algebra of all smooth functions is a completion of $`𝒜^{}`$. The *degree of $`M`$* is by definition the highest weight of a local coordinate.

Any (super)manifold $`M`$ becomes a graded manifold if we assign zero weight to all the coordinates (i.e. set $`ϵ=0`$). The total space $`M_1`$ of any vector bundle $`A`$ over a base (super)manifold $`M_0`$ becomes a graded manifold if the base coordinates are assigned zero weight, while all the fibre coordinates are assigned the same weight $`n`$. The standard choice, of course, is $`n=1`$. In fact, any manifold of degree $`1`$ is easily seen to be a vector bundle.

In general, different local coordinates can have different weights, and the grading can be thought of as a generalization of a vector bundle structure; a comparison with physical units of measurement is also helpful. A general graded manifold $`M`$ has the following structure. Let $`𝒜_k`$ denote the (graded) subalgebra of $`𝒜^{}`$ locally generated by functions of weight $`k`$. Then $`𝒜^{}`$ is filtered by the $`𝒜_k`$’s:

$$𝒜_0𝒜_1𝒜_2\mathrm{}𝒜_d=𝒜^{},$$

where $`d`$ is the degree of $`M`$. Clearly, $`𝒜^k=𝒜_k/𝒜_{k+1}`$. Correspondingly, we have a tower of fibrations

$$M_0M_1M_2\mathrm{}M_d=M$$

Here $`M_0`$ is a (super)manifold, $`M_1`$ is a vector bundle over $`M_0`$, and for $`k1`$, $`M_kM_{k+1}`$ is an affine fibration. Each $`M_k`$ is itself a graded manifold (of degree $`k`$), and their Euler vector fields are related by the projections. $`M_0`$ also embeds into each $`M_k`$ as the set of zeros of the Euler vector field; it corresponds to the ideal $`𝒜^1`$.

In particular, $`𝒜_0=𝒜^0=C^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$, and all $`𝒜_k`$’s and $`𝒜^k`$’s are modules over $`𝒜_0`$. It is best to think of these as (locally free) sheaves of $`C^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$-modules over $`M_0`$, as they can be restricted to arbitrary open subsets of $`M_0`$. Thus, $`𝒜^1`$ is the sheaf of sections of some vector bundle over $`M_0`$, while $`𝒜_1=S^{}𝒜^1`$, etc. In what follows we shall frequently commit an abuse of notation by using $`𝒜^k`$ to refer to both the vector bundle and its sheaf of sections.

A (non-negatively integer) graded supermanifold $`M`$ is an *N-manifold* if the integer grading is compatible with parity (the underlying $`_2`$-grading in the structure sheaf). In plain English, this means that even coordinates have even weights, while odd ones have odd weights. The parity operator is related to the Euler vector field via $`\mathrm{\Pi }=(1)^ϵ`$. Thus we have an action of the multiplicative semigroup $`(,\times )`$ on $`M`$: $`1`$ acts as $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$, $`0`$ picks out $`𝒜^0`$, while $`\lambda >0`$ acts as $`\lambda ^ϵ`$. Then $`M_0=0M`$ is an ordinary manifold, while $`M_1=\mathrm{\Pi }A`$ for some ordinary vector bundle over $`M_0`$ (i.e. $`𝒜_1=\mathrm{\Gamma }(^{}A^{})`$). Conversely, given a vector bundle $`AM_0`$, we can define the N-manifold $`A[n]`$ by assigning degree $`n`$ to the fibre coordinates; it is equal to either $`A`$ or $`\mathrm{\Pi }A`$, depending on the parity of $`n`$. The *support* of an N-manifold $`M`$ is the ordinary graded submanifold $`M_{\text{even}}`$ corresponding to the ideal $`𝒜^{\text{odd}}`$.

###### Remark 2.1.

More generally, if $`N`$ is a graded manifold and $`EN`$ is a graded vector bundle, we denote by $`E[n]`$ the graded manifold obtained by shifting the fibre degrees by $`n`$. In particular, $`TN`$ and $`T^{}N`$ are graded vector bundles, where the Euler vector field acts as a Lie derivative. With respect to this induced grading, the “velocities” have the same degree as the corresponding coordinates on $`N`$, whereas the “momenta” have the opposite degrees. If $`N`$ is an N-manifold, we may also have to shift the parity in the fibers so that $`E[n]`$ is again an n-manifold. For example, if $`AM_0`$ is an ordinary vector bundle, $`T[1]A[1]`$ is $`\mathrm{\Pi }T(\mathrm{\Pi }A)`$ with coordinates $`(x^i,\xi ^a,dx^i,d\xi ^a)`$ of weights $`w(x^i)=0`$, $`w(\xi ^a)=1`$, $`w(dx^i)=1`$, $`w(d\xi ^a)=2`$, and $`T^{}[2]A[1]`$ is $`T^{}\mathrm{\Pi }A`$ with coordinates $`(x^i,\xi ^a,p_i,\theta _a)`$ of weights $`w(x^i)=0`$, $`w(\xi ^a)=1`$, $`w(p_i)=2`$, $`w(\theta _a)=1`$.

Graded manifolds form a category: the morphisms are required to be $`ϵ`$-equivariant (weight-preserving). N-manifolds form a full subcategory.

Given a graded manifold $`M`$, the Euler vector field $`ϵ`$ acts on all canonical objects (tensors, jets, etc.) on $`M`$ via the Lie derivative, whereby these objects also acquire weights. For example, an *NQ-manifold* is an N-manifold endowed with an integrable (homological) vector field $`Q`$ of weight $`+1`$. That is, $`[ϵ,Q]=Q`$ and $`[Q,Q]=2Q^2=0`$. Such a $`Q`$ is necessarily odd, so the integrability condition is nontrivial, and $`(𝒜^{},Q)`$ becomes a cochain complex. The classic example of an NQ-manifold is the anti-tangent bundle $`T[1]M=\mathrm{\Pi }TM`$ of an ordinary manifold $`M`$, where $`Q=d_M`$ is the exterior derivative. In fact, the assignment $`M(T[1]M,d_M)`$ is a functor that embeds ordinary manifolds into NQ-manifolds as a full subcategory. Thus, NQ-manifolds should be thought of as a natural enlargement of the category of smooth manifolds: much of the calculus carries over.

More generally, NQ-manifolds of degree $`1`$ are the same as Lie algebroids over the base $`M_0`$. For this reason it is natural to call NQ-manifolds of degree $`n`$ *$`n`$-algebroids*. Interesting results and conjectures concerning the integration of $`n`$-algebroids are contained in .

Other objects of interest are homogeneous symplectic and Poisson structures. For instance, a symplectic structure of degree $`n`$ is a closed non-degenerate 2-form $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ such that $`_ϵ\mathrm{\Omega }=n\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The corresponding Poisson tensor $`W`$ has weight $`n`$. We shall also consider symplectic NQ-manifolds for which we have the additional condition $`_Q\mathrm{\Omega }=0`$.

Let us conclude this section with the following simple observations, showing that a homogeneous symplectic form places severe restrictions on the structure of $`M`$:

###### Lemma 2.2.

Let $`M`$ be a graded manifold. Then

1. Any homogeneous symplectic form $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ on $`M`$ of weight $`n1`$ is exact; in fact,

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=d(\frac{1}{n}\iota _ϵ\mathrm{\Omega })$$
2. Any homogeneous vector field $`V`$ of weight $`m>n`$ preserving $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is Hamiltonian. In fact,

$$\iota _V\mathrm{\Omega }=\pm d\left(\frac{1}{m+n}\iota _V\iota _ϵ\mathrm{\Omega }\right)$$

###### Proof.

Both statements are easy consequences of Cartan’s homotopy formula. ∎

###### Example 2.3.

Given a manifold $`M_0`$, consider $`M=T^{}[1]M_0=\mathrm{\Pi }T^{}M_0`$, with $`\mathrm{\Omega }=d\theta _idx^i=d(\theta _idx^i)`$ of degree $`+1`$. Functions on $`M`$ correspond to multivector fields on $`M_0`$, and the Poisson bracket of degree $`1`$ given by $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the Schouten bracket. Vector fields on $`M`$ of degree $`1`$ correspond to 1-forms on $`M_0`$ via $`\alpha \iota _\alpha `$. Such a vector field preserves $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ if and only if $`\alpha `$ is closed; it is Hamiltonian if and only if $`\alpha `$ is exact. This example illustates that the second statement of the Lemma above generally fails if $`m=n`$.

###### Lemma 2.4.

If $`(M,\mathrm{\Omega })`$ is a graded symplectic manifold, the degree of $`M`$ cannot exceed $`w(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.

###### Proof.

In an affine chart, $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\frac{1}{2}dx^i\mathrm{\Omega }_{ij}(x)dx^j`$, and the total weight of each term is $`w(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. The statement immediately follows from the nondegeneracy of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. ∎

## 3.  Degree 1 and 2.

Now let us analyze symplectic manifolds of degree 1 and 2 in detail. We shall restrict our attention to N-manifolds, although the general case can be handled at the small additional cost of having to consider the even and odd cases separately.

As a warm-up exercise, let us do the degree $`1`$ case. So let $`(M,\mathrm{\Omega })`$ be a symplectic N-manifold with $`w(\mathrm{\Omega })=1`$. According to Lemma 2.4, the degree of $`M`$ is at most $`1`$, so $`M=M_1M_0`$ is a vector bundle. More precisely, $`M=M_1=A^{}[1]=\mathrm{\Pi }A^{}`$ for some vector bundle $`A`$ over a manifold $`M_0`$. It will be convenient to use the Poisson bracket defined by $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. It is odd, nondegenerate and has degree $`1`$. We have $`\{𝒜^0,𝒜^0\}=0`$, $`\{𝒜^1,𝒜^0\}𝒜^0`$ and $`\{𝒜^1,𝒜^1\}𝒜^1`$, hence the structure is determined by the Hamiltonian action of a Lie algebra $`𝒜^1=\mathrm{\Gamma }(A)`$ on $`𝒜^0=C^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$. According to the Leibniz rule, this action is given by a vector bundle map $`ATM_0`$, which is an isomorphism by the nondegeneracy of $`\{,\}`$. Finally, by Jacobi, the Poisson bracket on $`𝒜^1`$ corresponds under this isomorphism to the commutator of vector fields on $`M_0`$. Thus, we have shown that symplectic N-manifolds of degree $`1`$ are exhausted by Example 2.3:

###### Proposition 3.1.

Symplectic N-manifolds of degree $`1`$ are in one-to-one correspondence with ordinary smooth manifolds, via $`N(T^{}[1]N,\mathrm{\Omega })`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is determined by the Schouten bracket of multivector fields.

Let us notice two things. First, the Lie algebra of symmetries of $`(M,\mathrm{\Omega })`$ (Hamiltonian by Lemma 2.2) is $`𝒜^1`$, which is identified with the Lie algebra of vector fields on $`M_0`$. Second, a local coordinate chart $`\{x^i\}`$ on $`M_0`$ gives rise automatically to an affine Darboux chart $`\{x^i,\theta _i\}`$ on $`M`$, in which $`\mathrm{\Omega }=d\theta _idx^i=d(\theta _idx^i)`$.

Now let us tackle the degree $`2`$ case. By Lemma 2.4, such a manifold has the following structure:

$$M=M_2M_1M_0$$

Here $`M_0`$ is an ordinary manifold, and $`M_1=E[1]=\mathrm{\Pi }E`$ for some vector bundle $`EM_0`$. Let us analyze the graded Poisson algebra of functions. The Poisson bracket is even, nondegenerate and has weight $`2`$. Its structure is determined by the relations $`\{𝒜^0,𝒜^0\}=\{𝒜^0,𝒜^1\}=0`$, $`\{𝒜^1,𝒜^1\}𝒜^0`$, $`\{𝒜^2,𝒜^0\}𝒜^0`$, $`\{𝒜^2,𝒜^1\}𝒜^1`$, $`\{𝒜^2,𝒜^2\}𝒜^2`$. The first three relations, together with the symmetry and derivation properties of the Poisson bracket, imply that $`E`$ is equipped with a nondegenerate symmetric fiberwise bilinear form $`<,>`$. In fact, $`𝒜_1=\mathrm{\Gamma }(^{}E^{})`$ is a graded Poisson subalgebra of $`𝒜^{}`$: the Poisson bracket is just an extension of $`<,>`$ as a derivation in each argument. Hence, $`M_1`$ is a graded Poisson manifold whose symplectic leaves are the fibres of $`\mathrm{\Pi }E`$, and the projection $`M_2M_1`$ is a Poisson map. One says that $`M_2`$ is a *symplectic realization* of $`M_1`$.

The rest of the relations define a Lie algebra structure on $`𝒜^2`$ and its action on $`𝒜^0`$ and $`𝒜^1`$. We recall that $`𝒜^2`$ is a locally free sheaf of $`𝒜^0`$-modules, i.e. the sheaf of sections of a vector bundle $`𝔸`$ over $`M_0`$. The Leibniz rule implies that the action of $`𝒜^2`$ on $`𝒜^0`$ comes from a bundle map $`a:𝔸TM_0`$; furthermore, the Leibniz and Jacobi identities imply that $`𝔸`$ is actually a Lie algebroid. By nondegeneracy, the anchor $`a`$ is surjective; $`𝒜^1𝒜^1=\mathrm{\Gamma }(^2E^{})𝒜^2`$ acts trivially on $`𝒜^0`$, hence the kernel of $`a`$ contains $`^2E^{}`$. Furthermore, again by Leibniz and Jacobi, the action of $`𝒜^2`$ on $`𝒜^1`$ comes from a Lie algebroid action of $`𝔸`$ on $`E`$, preserving $`<,>`$, i.e. a Lie algebroid homomorphism from $`𝔸`$ into the gauge Lie algebroid of $`(E,<,>)`$; by nondegeneracy, this is an isomorphism. Therefore, $`𝔸`$ fits into the following exact sequence of vector bundles over $`M_0`$:

(3.1)
$$0^2E^{}𝔸\stackrel{a}{}TM_00,$$

and the Lie algebroid structure on $`𝔸`$ is that of the gauge Lie algebroid of
$`(E,<,>)`$. This is the so-called *Atiyah sequence* of the pseudo-Euclidean vector bundle $`(E,<,>)`$, and the Lie algebra $`𝒜^2`$ of sections of $`𝔸`$ is the *Atiyah algebra* of covariant differential operators (CDO’s) on $`E`$ preserving $`<,>`$. The kernel $`^2E^{}`$ is a Lie algebra bundle, identified with $`𝔰𝔬(E)`$, the endomorphisms of $`(E,<,>)`$ via the Poisson bracket. We conclude that the structure of $`(M,\mathrm{\Omega })`$ is completely determined by $`(E,<,>)`$.

###### Example 3.2.

() Let $`AM_0`$ be any vector bundle, and let $`M=T^{}[2]A[1]`$. The notation means that $`M=T^{}\mathrm{\Pi }A`$, with the degrees assigned in such a way that the weights of a base coordinate and its conjugate momentum add up to $`2`$ (Remark 2.1). Then the canonical symplectic form $`\mathrm{\Omega }=dp_idq^i+d\theta _ad\xi ^a`$ has degree $`2`$. It is evident that in this case $`E=AA^{}`$ , with the canonical $`<,>`$ given by $`<(X,\alpha ),(Y,\beta )>=\alpha (Y)+\beta (X)`$.

Conversely, suppose we are given a pseudo-Euclidean vector bundle $`(E,<,>)`$ over a manifold $`M_0`$. Then, of course, $`M_1=\mathrm{\Pi }E=E[1]`$ is a Poisson N-manifold (of degree $`2`$). We shall construct its minimal symplectic realization as follows. By Example 3.2, $`T^{}[2]E[1]`$ is the minimal symplectic realization of $`(EE^{})[1]`$. The map $`EEE^{}`$ given by $`X(X,\frac{1}{2}<X,>)`$ is an isometric bundle embedding and gives rise to a map of N-manifolds $`E[1](EE^{})[1]`$. We then let $`M`$ be the pullback of $`T[2]E[1]`$, i.e. complete the commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}M& & T^{}[2]E[1]\\ & & \\ E[1]& & (EE^{})[1]\end{array}$$

It is clear that $`M`$ is a symplectic N-submanifold of $`T^{}[2]E[1]`$, and a minimal symplectic realization of $`M_1=E[1]`$. Thus we have proved

###### Theorem 3.3.

Symplectic N-manifolds of degree $`2`$ are in one-to-one correspondence with pseudo-Euclidean vector bundles. The correspondence is given by the above construction. Under this correspondence, the Lie algebra of degree-preserving canonical transformations coincides with the Atiyah algebra of the bundle.

###### Example 3.4.

If the base $`M_0`$ is a point, then $`M=M_1=V[1]`$ for some pseudo-Euclidean vector space $`(V,<,>)`$. In this case the degree of $`M`$ is just $`1`$. Given a basis $`\{e_a\}`$ of $`V`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\frac{1}{2}d\xi ^ag_{ab}d\xi ^b`$, where $`g_{ab}=<e_a,e_b>`$. The algebra of symmetries in this case is $`𝒜^2=^2V^{}𝔰𝔬(V)`$, acting on $`𝒜^k=^kV^{}`$, $`k0`$, via the Poisson bracket.

In the general case, a choice of local coordinates $`\{x^i\}`$ on $`M_0`$ and a local basis $`\{e_a\}`$ of sections of $`E`$ such that $`g_{ab}=<e_a,e_b>`$ are constant gives rise to an affine Darboux chart $`(q^i,\xi ^a,p_i)`$ for $`M`$: the embedding of $`M`$ into $`T^{}[2]E[1]`$ is given locally by equations $`\theta _a=\frac{1}{2}g_{ab}\xi ^b`$, hence

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=(dp_idq^i+d\xi ^ad\theta _a)|_M=dq^idp_i+\frac{1}{2}d\xi ^ag_{ab}d\xi ^b.$$

That is, on a local chart $`UM_0`$ such that $`E|_UU\times V`$ as a pseudo-Euclidean vector bundle, $`M|_UT^{}[2]U\times V[1]`$, with $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ as above. A quadratic Hamiltonian $`H=v^i(q)p_i+\frac{1}{2}\xi ^ab_{ab}(q)\xi ^b𝒜^2`$ gives rise to infinitesimal transformations

(3.2)
$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\delta q^i& =& \{H,q^i\}& =& v^i\hfill \\ \delta \xi ^c& =& \{H,\xi ^c\}& =& \xi ^ab_{ab}(q)g^{bc}\hfill \\ \delta p_i& =& \{H,p_i\}& =& \frac{v^j}{q^i}p_j\frac{1}{2}\xi ^a\frac{b_{ab}}{x^i}\xi ^b\hfill \end{array}$$

Integrating these, we get canonical coordinate transformations

(3.3)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}q^i& =& q^i(q^{})\hfill \\ \xi ^a& =& T_a^{}^a(q^{})\xi ^a^{}\hfill \\ p_i& =& \frac{q^i^{}}{q^i}p_i^{}+\frac{1}{2}\xi ^a^{}\frac{T_a^{}^a}{x^i}g_{ab}T_b^{}^b\xi ^b^{}\hfill \end{array}$$

corresponding to bundle transformations

$$\begin{array}{ccc}x^i^{}& =& x^i^{}(x)\hfill \\ e_a^{}& =& e_aT_a^{}^a(x)\hfill \end{array}$$

of $`E`$ such that $`T_a^{}^ag_{ab}T_b^{}^b=g_{a^{}b^{}}=\text{const}`$. Notice the nonlinear (affine) term in the transformation law for $`p_i`$.

Let us now describe the global structure of the sheaf of graded $`𝒜^0`$-algebras $`𝒜^{}`$ in terms of $`(E,<,>)`$. According to the above analysis, it is generated by $`𝒜^1`$ in degree 1 and $`𝒜^2`$ in degree 2. As sheaves on $`M_0`$, $`𝒜^1E`$,<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1 We identify $`E`$ with $`E^{}`$ via $`<,>`$  while $`𝒜^2𝔸`$. This latter is the sheaf of infinitesimal bundle isometries of $`E`$, i.e. linear vector fields on $`E`$ preserving $`<,>`$, containing $`^2E𝔰𝔬(E)`$ as those vector fields that leave every point of the base fixed. Therefore,

$$𝒜^{}(^{}ES^{}𝔸)/I,$$

where $`I`$ is the homogeneous ideal generated by the embedding of $`^2E`$ into $`𝔸`$, i.e. by elements of the form $`\omega 11\omega `$, $`\omega ^2E`$. Moreover, $`^{}E`$ is a sheaf of graded Poisson algebras, and so is $`S^{}𝔸`$ (because $`𝔸`$ is a Lie algebroid), and $`I`$ is a Poisson ideal by definition of the embedding. This gives the (nondegenerate) graded Poisson algebra structure on $`𝒜^{}`$.

Each homogeneous component $`𝒜^n`$ has the structure of a filtered vector bundle over $`M_0`$. For $`n=2k`$, $`k0`$, we have

$$L_kL_{k1}\mathrm{}L_1L_0=𝒜^{2k},$$

where $`L_i/L_{i+1}^{2i}ES^{ki}TM`$, whereas for $`n=2k+1`$, $`k0`$,

$$L_kL_{k1}\mathrm{}L_1L_0=𝒜^{2k+1},$$

where $`L_i/L_{i+1}^{2i+1}ES^{ki}TM_0`$ (in both cases we set $`L_{k+1}=0`$). Thus, $`𝒜^1=E`$, $`𝒜^2=𝔸`$ fits in the Atiyah sequence (3.1), $`𝒜^3`$ fits in the exact sequence

$$0^3E𝒜^3ETM_00,$$

and so on. Such a description in terms of quotients and filtered bundles is clearly unwieldy to use in practice, so one usually has to resort to local coordinates. Another alternative is to split the Atiyah sequence (3.1) by fixing a linear connection $``$ on $`E`$, preserving $`<,>`$. Then $`𝒜^{}`$ can be identified with $`^{}ES^{}TM_0`$, with the nonzero Poisson brackets of generators $`fC^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ (degree $`0`$), $`X,Y\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)`$ (degree $`1`$) and $`v,w\mathrm{\Gamma }(TM)`$ (degree $`2`$) given as follows:

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}\{v,f\}& =& vf\hfill & & \{v,X\}& =& _vX\hfill \\ \{X,Y\}& =& <X,Y>\hfill & & \{v,w\}& =& [v,w]+\omega (v,w)\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`[,]`$ denotes the Lie bracket of vector fields and $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }^2(M_0,^2E)`$ is the curvature of $``$. The Jacobi identity for $`\{,\}`$ is then a consequence of the fact that $``$ preserves $`<,>`$, and of the Bianchi identity.

## 4.  Poisson manifolds and Courant algebroids.

Let us now turn our attention to NQ-structures on symplectic N-manifolds, i.e. homological vector fields of degree $`+1`$ preserving the symplectic form. By Lemma 2.2, such a vector field is necessarily Hamiltonian. Thus, if our manifold $`M`$ is of degree $`n`$, we can speak of *Hamiltonian $`n`$-algebroids*.

Consider the case $`n=1`$ first. By Proposition 3.1 $`M=M_1`$ is of the form $`T^{}[1]M_0`$ for some ordinary manifold $`M_0`$, with $`\mathrm{\Omega }=d\theta _idx^i`$, and the corresponding odd Poisson bracket is just the Schouten bracket $`[,]`$ of multivector fields. By the above, any NQ-structure on $`M`$ is determined by a quadratic Hamiltonian $`\pi =\frac{1}{2}\pi ^{ij}(x)\theta _i\theta _j`$ satisfying $`[\pi ,\pi ]=0`$, i.e. a Poisson bivector field on $`M_0`$. Thus,

###### Proposition 4.1.

Symplectic NQ-manifolds of degree $`1`$ are in 1-1 correspondence with ordinary Poisson manifolds.

The Poisson bracket of functions on $`M_0`$ can be expressed in terms of $`\pi `$ and the Schouten bracket as the so-called *derived bracket:*

$$\{f,g\}=[[f,\pi ],g]$$

By nondegeneracy of $`[,]`$ this completely determines $`\pi `$: $`\pi ^{ij}=\{x^i,x^j\}`$. The homological Hamiltonian vector field $`d_\pi =[\pi ,]`$ is the differential in the standard complex computing the Poisson cohomology of $`M_0`$.

Consider now the case $`n=2`$. By Theorem 3.3, such a manifold $`(M,\mathrm{\Omega })`$ corresponds to a pseudo-Euclidean vector bundle $`E`$ over some ordinary manifold $`M_0`$. By Lemma 2.2, an NQ-structure on $`M`$ is determined by a *cubic* Hamiltonian $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ (“BRST charge”) satisfying the *structure equation*

(4.1)
$$\{\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{\Theta }\}=0$$

where $`\{,\}`$ is the even Poisson bracket on $`M`$ of degree $`2`$. One should expect such a $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ to correspond to some structure on $`E`$, recoverable via derived brackets. This structure is called a *Courant algebroid*. It was first defined in . We give an equivalent definition from :

###### Definition 4.2.

A *Courant algebroid* is a pseudo-Euclidean vector bundle
$`(E,<,>)`$ over a manifold $`M_0`$, together with a bilinear operation $``$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)`$ and a bundle map $`a:ETM_0`$ (the anchor), satisfying the following properties:

1. $`e(e_1e_2)=(ee_1)e_2+e_1(ee_2)e,e_1,e_2\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)`$;
2. $`a(e_1e_2)=[a(e_1),a(e_2)]e_1,e_2\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)`$;
3. $`e_1(fe_2)=f(e_1e_2)+(a(e_1)f)e_2e_1,e_2\mathrm{\Gamma }(E),fC^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$;
4. $`<e,e_1e_2+e_2e_1>=a(e)<e_1,e_2>e,e_1,e_2\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)`$;
5. $`a(e)<e_1,e_2>=<ee_1,e_2>+<e_1,ee_2>e,e_1,e_2\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)`$.

One can think of sections of $`E`$ as acting on $`E`$ by “left multilications” $`e`$. Properties (1), (3) and (5) mean that this action preserves the whole structure, while property (2) says that the anchor is equivariant with respect to this action and the Lie derivative action on $`TM_0`$. Property (1) defines a Leibniz algebra structure on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)`$; if $``$ were skew-symmetric, it would be a Lie algebra. Property (4) says that the symmetric part of $``$ is “infinitesimal”. If we define the *co-anchor* $`a^{}:T^{}M_0E`$ by $`<a^{}\nu ,e>=\nu (a(e))`$, and set $`D=a^{}d`$, property (4) reads:

$$e_1e_2+e_2e_1=D<e_1,e_2>$$

Together with property (2), this implies the useful identity

(4.2)
$$aa^{}=0$$

implying that the image of $`a^{}`$ is isotropic. Other useful identities implied by the definition are

(4.3)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill eDf& =& D<e,Df>\hfill \\ \hfill Dfe& =& 0\hfill \end{array}$$

and more generally

(4.4)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill ea^{}\nu & =& a^{}L_{a(e)}\nu \hfill \\ \hfill a^{}\nu e& =& a^{}\iota _{a(e)}d\nu \hfill \end{array}$$

###### Example 4.3.

Let $`M_0=\text{point}`$. Then $`E`$ is just a pseudo-Euclidean vector space, and a Courant algebroid structure is just a Lie algebra such that $`<,>`$ is ad-invariant. More generally, any Courant algebroid with $`a=0`$ is a bundle of such Lie algebras. By (4.2), this must always be the case if $`<,>`$ is definite.

###### Example 4.4.

Let $`E=TM_0T^{}M_0`$ with the canonical $`<,>`$ as in Example 3.2. Define $`a`$ to be the projection onto $`TM_0`$, and $``$ by

(4.5)
$$(v,\xi )(w,\eta )=([v,w],L_v\eta \iota _wd\xi )$$

This operation (rather, its skew-symmetrization) was used originally by T. Courant  to describe integrable Dirac structures on $`M_0`$, including closed 2-forms, Poisson bivectors and foliations. This example is responsible for the term “Courant algebroid”, coined by the authors of  who considered generalizations of this example to dual pairs of Lie algebroids.

###### Theorem 4.5.

Symplectic NQ-manifolds of degree $`2`$ are in 1-1 correspondence with Courant algebroids.

###### Proof.

Let $`(M,\mathrm{\Omega })`$ be the symplectic N-manifold corresponding to
$`(E,<,>)`$, with $`(𝒜^{},\{,\})`$ its graded Poisson algebra of polynomial functions. Then $`𝒜^0`$ is identified with $`C^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$, $`𝒜^1`$ – with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)`$, and $`\{,\}`$ restricted to $`𝒜^1`$ is just $`<,>`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Theta }𝒜^3`$ satisfy the structure equation (4.1). Given arbitrary $`f𝒜^0`$ and $`e,e_1,e_2𝒜^1`$, define $`a`$ and $``$ as the derived brackets

(4.6)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill a(e)f& =& \{\{e,\mathrm{\Theta }\},f\}=\{\{\mathrm{\Theta },f\},e\}\hfill \\ \hfill e_1e_2& =& \{\{e_1,\mathrm{\Theta }\},e_2\}\hfill \end{array}$$

The proof that this defines a Courant algebroid is exactly the same as the proof of Theorem 3.7.3 in , which asserted the same statement for $`E=AA^{}`$, $`M=T^{}[2]A[1]`$. But the splitting plays no role in the argument, so we will not repeat it here. It is a straightforward derivation using the basic properties of $`\{,\}`$ and the structure equation.

Due to the nondegeneracy of $`\{,\}`$, the above derived brackets uniquely determine $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. In an affine Darboux chart $`(q^i,\xi ^a,p_i)`$ on $`M`$, corresponding to a chart $`\{x^i\}`$ on $`M_0`$ and a local basis $`\{e_a\}`$ of sections of $`E`$ such that $`<e_a,e_b>=g_{ab}=\text{const}.`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }=dp_idq^i+\frac{1}{2}d\xi ^ag_{ab}d\xi ^b`$, and $`\mathrm{\Theta }𝒜^3`$ is of the form

(4.7)
$$\mathrm{\Theta }=\xi ^aA_a^i(q)p_i\frac{1}{6}\varphi _{abc}(q)\xi ^a\xi ^b\xi ^c$$

It clearly follows from (4.6) that

(4.8)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill A_a^i& =& a(e_a)x^i\hfill \\ \hfill \varphi _{abc}& =& <e_ae_b,e_c>\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`e_a=g_{ab}\xi ^b`$. So, conversely, given a Courant algebroid structure on
$`(E,<,>)`$, we can define $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ in a Darboux chart by the formulas (4.7), (4.8). It is an easy check, using the coordinate transformations (3.3), that $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is in fact globally defined and obeys (4.1) due to the properties of a Courant algebroid. In fact,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \{\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{\Theta }\}& =& <a^{}dx^i,a^{}dx^j>p_ip_j+\xi ^a\xi ^bdx^j([a(e_a),a(e_b)]a(e_ae_b))p_j+\hfill \\ & +& \frac{1}{12}<(e_ae_b)e_c+e_b(e_ae_c)e_a(e_be_c),e_d>\xi ^a\xi ^b\xi ^c\xi ^d\hfill \end{array}$$

So $`\{\mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{\Theta }\}=0`$ if and only if $`(E,<,>,a,)`$ is a Courant algebroid. ∎

###### Example 4.6.

If $`M_0`$ is a point, $`\mathrm{\Theta }^3E^{}`$ is the Cartan structure tensor corresponding to a Lie algebra structure on $`E`$ making $`<,>`$ ad-invariant:
$`\mathrm{\Theta }(X,Y,Z)=<[X,Y],Z>`$.

###### Example 4.7.

For $`E=TM_0T^{}M_0`$ with the standard Courant algebroid structure, $`M=T^{}[2]T[1]M_0`$, and $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\mathrm{\Theta }_0`$ is the Hamiltonian corresponding to the de Rham vector field $`d`$ on $`T[1]M_0`$. This example will be studied in detail in the next section.

###### Example 4.8.

More generally, for $`E=AA^{}`$, the double of a Lie bialgebroid $`(A,A^{})`$ , $`M=T^{}[2]A[1]T^{}[2]A^{}[1]`$, and $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\mu +\gamma `$ where $`\mu `$ and $`\gamma `$ are the commuting Hamiltonians defining the Lie bialgebroid structure .

###### Example 4.9.

In particular, let a Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ act on a manifold $`M_0`$ (on the right). Endow the trivial bundle $`M\times 𝔤`$ with the transformation (semidirect product) Lie algebroid structure, the dual bundle with the zero structure, and let $`E=M\times (𝔤𝔤^{})`$ be the double. Then $`M=(𝔤𝔤^{})[1]\times T^{}[2]M_0`$, and the BRST charge is the classical one:

$$\mathrm{\Theta }=\xi ^av_a^i(q)p_i\frac{1}{2}\xi ^a\xi ^bC_{ab}^c\theta _c$$

where $`v_a=v_a^i(x)\frac{}{x^i}`$ are the infinitesimal generators of the action corresponding to a basis $`(e_a)`$ of $`𝔤`$, and $`(C_{ab}^c)`$ are the structure constants in this basis. Notice that our grading is different from the “ghost degree” grading. This leads to a different grading in the cohomology as well, only the parity remains the same. However, under sufficient regularity assumption, the total cohomology is isomorphic to the algebra of functions on the reduced phase space, as proved in , so this change in grading is of no consequence.

Given a Courant algebroid, $`(𝒜^{},D=\{\mathrm{\Theta },\})`$ becomes a differential complex, the *standard complex* of $`(E,<,>,a,)`$. Since $`D`$ is a Hamiltonian vector field and $`M`$ has degree $`2`$, it is completely determined by its action on $`𝒜^0=C^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ and $`𝒜^1=\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)`$. In fact, the formulas (4.6) imply that $`D:C^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)`$ is just $`D=a^{}d`$, while $`D:\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸)`$ is given by

$$(De_1)e_2=e_1e_2$$

where $``$ denotes the Lie algebroid action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸)`$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(E)`$. One interesting feature of this complex is that it is infinite in general.

The cohomology groups $`H^{}(M,D)`$ in low degrees have familiar structural interpretations. Thus, $`H^0`$ is the space of smooth functions on $`M_0`$ that are constant along the leaves of the anchor foliation; it is equal to $``$ for transitive Courant algebroids (those with surjective anchor). $`H^1`$ is the space of sections of $`E`$ acting trivially on $`E`$, modulo those of the form $`Df`$ for some function $`f`$. Further, $`H^2`$ is the space of linear vector fields on $`E`$ preserving the Courant algebroid structure, modulo those generated by sections of $`E`$ as $`e`$. $`H^3`$ is the space of infinitesimal deformations of the Courant algebroid structure, modulo the trivial ones generated by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸)`$, while $`H^4`$ houses the obstructions to extending an infinitesimal deformation to a formal one. For the purposes of deformation theory it is customary to shift the grading by $`2`$, the degree of $`\{,\}`$, so that $`H^3`$ and $`H^4`$ become, respectively, $`H^1`$ and $`H^2`$. Notice the analogy with Poisson manifolds, and with Lie algebras.

## 5.  Higher de Rham complexes and exact Courant algebroids .

Let us consider the case $`E=TM_0T^{}M_0`$. In this case $`M=T^{}[2]T[1]M_0=T^{}\mathrm{\Pi }TM_0`$, as in Example 3.2. Any local coordinates $`(x^i)`$ on $`M_0`$ give rise to affine Darboux coordinates $`(q^i,\xi ^i,p_i,\theta _i)`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Omega }=dq^idp_i+d\xi ^id\theta _i`$. This manifold has a rich additional structure. First of all, there is a canonical isomorphism, the *Legendre transformation*, that identifies $`T^{}\mathrm{\Pi }TM_0`$ with $`T^{}\mathrm{\Pi }T^{}M_0`$ by exchanging the momenta conjugate to the fibre coordinates on $`\mathrm{\Pi }TM_0`$ with the fibre coordinates on $`\mathrm{\Pi }T^{}M_0`$, and vice versa. This holds for any vector bundle $`AM_0`$ . Thus, $`M`$ is what is known as a *double vector bundle*:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}M& & T^{}[1]M_0\\ & & \\ T[1]M_0& & M_0\end{array}$$

This means that each arrow is a vector bundle; the horizontal pair of arrows is a morphism of the vertical vector bundles, while the vertical pair is a morphism of the horizontal bundles. Because of this structure, the algebra $`𝒜^{}`$ of polynomial functions on $`M`$ acquires a double grading; we shall use the notation $`𝒜^,=_{k,l0}𝒜^{k,l}`$. The Euler vector fields corresponding to the two gradings are, respectively,

$$ϵ_1=p_i\frac{}{p_i}+\theta _i\frac{}{\theta _i}$$

and

$$ϵ_2=p_i\frac{}{p_i}+\xi ^i\frac{}{\xi ^i}$$

The N-manifold structure on $`M=T^{}[2]T[1]M_0=T^{}[2]T^{}[1]M_0`$ corresponds to the total grading

$$ϵ=ϵ_1+ϵ_2=2p_i\frac{}{p_i}+\xi ^i\frac{}{\xi ^i}+\theta _i\frac{}{\theta _i}$$

Evidently, the canonical sympelctic form $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ has bi-degree $`(1,1)`$, the corresponding Poisson bracket – $`(1,1)`$.

There is another special canonical isomorphism: $`T^{}[2]T^{}[1]M_0=T^{}\mathrm{\Pi }T^{}M_0\mathrm{\Pi }T\mathrm{\Pi }T^{}M_0=T[1]T^{}[1]M_0`$. It comes from treating the conjugate momenta $`p_i,\xi ^i`$ as the differentials of the basic coordinates: $`p_i=d\theta _i`$, $`\xi ^i=dx^i`$.<sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2 For a thorough treatment of double vector bundle and canonical isomorphisms (without parity shifts), see   Correspondingly, on $`M`$ there is the canonical (de Rham) vector field

$$D=\xi ^i\frac{}{q^i}+p_i\frac{}{\theta _i}$$

This vector field is homological and Hamiltonian: $`D=\{\mathrm{\Theta }_0,\}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Theta }_0=\xi ^ip_i𝒜^{1,2}`$ obeys (4.1). With respect to the fibration $`M=T^{}\mathrm{\Pi }TM_0\mathrm{\Pi }TM_0`$, it is just the Hamiltonian lift of the de Rham vector field $`d=\xi ^i\frac{}{x^i}`$ on $`T[1]M_0`$. With respect to the other fibration $`M=T^{}\mathrm{\Pi }T^{}M_0\mathrm{\Pi }T^{}M_0`$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }_0`$ is quadratic and generates the canonical Schouten bracket on $`T^{}[1]M_0`$ as a derived bracket:

(5.1)
$$[X,Y]=\{\{X,\mathrm{\Theta }_0\},Y\}$$

for multivector fields $`X,Y`$.

The vector field $`D`$ has bi-degree $`(0,+1)`$. This can be expressed by the relations

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill [ϵ_1,D]& =& 0\hfill \\ \hfill [ϵ_2,D]& =& D\hfill \end{array}$$

This means that $`D`$ preserves the subspace $`𝒜^{k,}`$ for each $`k0`$, and the restriction to each $`𝒜^{k,}`$ is a differential. For $`k=0`$, $`(𝒜^{0,},D)=(\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(M_0),d)`$, the de Rham complex of $`M_0`$; we call the complexes $`(𝒜^{k,},D)`$ for $`k>0`$ the *higher de Rham complexes*. In particular, $`𝒜^{1,}[1]`$ is naturally identified with vector fields on $`T[1]M_0`$, i.e. derivations of $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(M_0)`$, with $`D=[d,]`$. In general, $`𝒜^{k,l}`$ is the space of symbols of differential operators on $`T[1]M_0`$ of order $`k`$ and degree $`lk`$.

What is important is that $`ϵ_1`$, viewed as a cocycle with respect to $`[D,]`$, is actually a coboundary. That is, there exists a vector field $`\iota `$ on $`M`$, of bi-degree $`(0,1)`$, such that

(5.2)
$$[D,\iota ]=D\iota +\iota D=ϵ_1$$

In coordinates,

$$\iota =\theta _i\frac{}{p_i}$$

It is clear that $`\iota `$ satisfies the above relation, and is homological. With respect to the symplectic structure $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ on $`M`$, $`\iota `$ is not Hamiltonian, but rather satisfies the relation:

$$L_\iota \mathrm{\Omega }+\omega =0,$$

where $`\omega =d\theta _idx^i`$ is the canonical odd symplectic form on $`T^{}[1]M_0`$, pulled back to $`M`$. This relates symplectic N-manifolds of degrees 1 and 2.

To show that $`\iota `$ is well-defined, one can check that it is invariant under coordinate transformations, but we shall provide a coordinate-free description instead. It suffices to describe the action of $`\iota `$ on $`𝒜^{0,}`$ and $`𝒜^{1,}`$. On $`𝒜^{0,}`$ it acts trivially; let $`V𝒜^{1,l}`$. Then $`V`$ is a derivation of $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(M_0)`$ of degree $`l1`$. The restriction of $`V`$ to $`\mathrm{\Omega }^0(M_0)=C^{\mathrm{}}(M_0)`$ is a derivation with values in $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{l1}(M_0)`$, i.e. a $`(l1)`$-form-valued vector field $`\overline{V}`$ on $`M_0`$. We set $`\iota (V)=\iota _{\overline{V}}`$, the contraction operator. Now, $`ϵ_1`$ acts on $`𝒜^{1,}`$ as the identity operator. Therefore, by (5.2), the operators $`\iota D`$ and $`D\iota `$ are complementary projections. This leads to the following decomposition:

(5.3)
$$𝒜^{1,}[1]=𝒜^{1,+1}=\text{Der}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }(M_0))𝒢[\tau ]=𝒢^{}[1]𝒢^{}$$

as graded vector spaces. Here $`𝒢^{}=\mathrm{\Gamma }(^{}T^{}M_0TM_0)`$, the space of vector-valued differential forms, and $`𝒢[\tau ]`$ denotes the adjunction of a formal odd variable of degree $`1`$; the differential $`D=[d,]`$ acts as $`\frac{d}{d\tau }`$. The space $`𝒢^{}`$ appears in the first summand as “contractions”, in the second – as “Lie derivatives”. The above decomposition (5.3) is a classic result of Frölicher and Nijenhuis . By viewing $`D`$ and $`\iota `$ as vector fields on $`M`$, we obtain the following generalization:

###### Proposition 5.1.

The higher de Rham complexes $`(𝒜^{k,},D)`$, $`k>0`$, are acyclic.

###### Proof.

Immediate from (5.2), since $`ϵ_1`$ acts on $`𝒜^{k,}`$as multiplication by $`k`$. This also gives rise to a decomposition of $`𝒜^{k,}`$ generalizing (5.3). ∎

The above proposition has several consequences. For example, in terms of the standard Lie algebroid structure on $`TM_0`$, the de Rham complex $`(𝒜^{0,},d)`$ is the standard complex with coefficient in the trivial module, whereas the higher complex $`(𝒜^{k,},D)`$ should be viewed as “the standard complex with coefficients in the $`k`$the exterior power of the adjoint module”, by analogy with Lie algebras. Thus, for instance, the complex $`(𝒜^{1,}[1],[d,])`$ is responsible for the deformation theory of this algebroid, and its acyclicity implies the rigidity of the standard Lie algebroid:

###### Corollary 5.2.

The standard Lie algebroid structure on $`TM_0`$ is rigid.

The complex $`(𝒜^{2,},D)`$ is also interesting. As shown in , 1-cocycles in that complex are responsible for Lie algebroid structures on $`T^{}M_0`$, compatible with the standard one on $`TM_0`$ in the sense that $`(TM_0,T^{}M_0)`$ is a Lie bialgebroid . More precisely, a $`\gamma 𝒜^{2,1}`$ gives rise to a Lie algebroid on $`T^{}M_0`$ if and only if $`\{\gamma ,\gamma \}=0`$, and it is compatible with $`TM_0`$ if and only if $`D\gamma =\{\mathrm{\Theta }_0,\gamma \}=0`$. By Proposition 5.1, $`\gamma =D\pi =\{\mathrm{\Theta }_0,\pi \}`$, where $`\pi 𝒜^{2,0}=\mathrm{\Gamma }(^2TM_0)`$ is some bivector field. Then by (5.1), $`\{\gamma ,\gamma \}=0`$ is equivalent to $`\{\mathrm{\Theta }_0,[\pi ,\pi ]\}=0`$; by Proposition 5.1 (with $`k=3`$), this can only happen if $`[\pi ,\pi ]=0`$. Therefore, we have another

###### Corollary 5.3.

Any Lie algebroid structure on $`T^{}M_0`$ compatible with the standard one on $`TM_0`$ comes from a Poisson structure on $`M_0`$.

Finally, let us consider $`(M,\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Theta }_0)`$ as a symplectic NQ-manifold. By Theorem 4.5, it must corresond to a Courant algebroid structure on $`E=TM_0T^{}M_0`$; it is easy to see that this Courant algebroid is the standard one, as in Example 4.4. Let us denote this structure by $`E_0`$. The standard complex of $`E_0`$ is the total complex $`(𝒜^{},D)`$. The Proposition 5.1 immediately implies

###### Corollary 5.4.

The cohomology of the standard complex of the Courant algebroid $`E_0`$ is isomorphic to the de Rham cohomology of $`M_0`$.

We can describe the action of the de Rham cohomology explicitly. Thus, 1-forms on $`M_0`$ act on any Courant algebroid over $`M_0`$ via (4.4), and closed 1-forms act trivially; in case of $`E_0`$, they are the only sections that do. Furthermore, a 2-form $`\beta 𝒜^{0,2}𝒜^2`$ acts by changing the isotropic splitting of $`E=TM_0T^{}M_0`$ via its graph: $`(v,\xi )(v,\xi +\iota _v\beta )`$. This does not change $`<,>`$ and $`a`$, but $``$ in (4.5) is modified by the term $`d\beta (v,w,)`$. So the Courant algebroid structure is preserved if $`d\beta =0`$; if $`\beta =d\alpha `$, the action is $`\alpha `$, as in (4.4).

Lastly, $`H^3(M_0,)`$ corresponds to nontrivial deformations of $`E_0`$. A 3-form $`\varphi `$ acts by adding the term $`\varphi (v,w,)`$ to the expression (4.5) for $``$. The corresponding structure is

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_\varphi =\mathrm{\Theta }_0\varphi =\xi ^ip_i\frac{1}{6}\varphi _{ijk}(q)\xi ^i\xi ^j\xi ^k$$

where $`\varphi =\frac{1}{6}\varphi _{ijk}(x)dx^idx^jdx^k`$. It is easy to check that $`\mathrm{\Theta }_\varphi `$ obeys the structure equation (4.1) if and only if $`d\varphi =0`$. Let us denote the corresponding Courant algebroid $`E_\varphi `$. Cohomologous 3-forms give rise to isomorphic Courant algebroids: if $`\varphi ^{}\varphi =d\beta `$, changing the splitting by $`\beta `$ maps $`E_\varphi `$ to $`E_\varphi ^{}`$. In particular, exact 3-forms yield trivial deformations of $`E_0`$. Corollary 5.4 implies that these $`E_\varphi `$’s are the only possible deformations of $`E_0`$.

In effect, we have recovered, via deformation theory, Ševera’s classification of so-called *exact Courant algebroids* . These are Courant algebroids such that the sequence

$$0T^{}M_0\stackrel{a^{}}{}E\stackrel{a}{}TM_00$$

is exact. Choosing and isotropic splitting $`\sigma :TM_0E`$ (a “connection”) identifies $`E`$ with $`E_\varphi `$, where $`\varphi `$ is the “curvature” of $`\sigma `$, given by $`\varphi (u,v,w)=<\sigma (u)\sigma (v),\sigma (w)>`$. The cohomology class of $`\varphi `$ is a characteristic class, the *Ševera class* of $`E`$.

###### Example 5.5.

(due to Anton Alexeev) As an example of an exact Courant algebroid with a nontrivial Ševera class, consider a Lie group $`G`$ with a bi-invariant metric $`K`$. Let $`E=(𝔤𝔤)\times G`$, where $`𝔤=\text{Lie}(G)`$. Define $`<,>`$ by

$$<(X,Y),(X^{},Y^{})>=K(X,X^{})K(Y,Y^{})$$

and an anchor $`a:ETG`$ by

$$a(X,Y)=X^lY^r$$

i.e. $`a(X,Y,g)=gXYg`$. Finally, define $``$ on constant sections by

$$(X,Y)(X^{},Y^{})=([X,X^{}],[Y,Y^{}])$$

By trivializing both $`TG`$ and $`T^{}G`$ as $`G\times 𝔤`$ by left translation and using $`K`$, it is easy to see that this defines an exact Courant algebroid over $`G`$. Let us split $`a`$ by $`\sigma (Z,g)=\frac{1}{2}(Z,\text{Ad}_gZ)`$. One computes the curvature to be $`\varphi (X,Y,Z)=\frac{1}{2}K([X,Y],Z)`$, the Cartan structure tensor. Thus, the Ševera class of this Courant algebroid is the canonical class of $`G`$.