format: text

text:
# Zeros of polynomials orthogonal on several intervals

## 1. Introduction

Let $`l,`$ $`a_k`$ for $`k=1,\mathrm{}2l`$, $`a_1<a_2<\mathrm{}<a_{2l}`$, and put

$$E_k=[a_{2k1},a_{2k}],E=_{k=1}^lE_k\text{ and }H(x)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{2l}{}}(xa_k),$$

and set

$$\frac{1}{h(x)}=\{\begin{array}{cc}(1)^{lk}/\pi \sqrt{H(x)}\hfill & \text{for}xE_k,\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{elsewhere}.\hfill \end{array}$$

The symbols $`R`$ and $`S`$ denote monic polynomials that satisfy the relation

(1)
$$R(x)S(x)=H(x).$$

In the following let $`W`$ be a function with the following properties: $`W(x)0`$ on $`E`$, $`R/(Wh)>0`$ on $`\mathrm{int}(E)`$ and $`WC^2(E)`$ with
$`lim_n\mathrm{}\omega _2(W,\frac{1}{n})\mathrm{ln}n=0`$, where $`\omega _2`$ is the modulus of continuity of order $`2`$, see . By $`p_n(x,R/Wh)=p_n(x)=x^n+\mathrm{}`$, $`n_0`$, we denote the monic polynomial orthogonal on $`E`$ to $`_{n1}`$ ($`_{n1}`$ denotes as usual the set of all real polynomials of degree less or equal $`n1`$) with respect to the weight function $`R/Wh`$, i. e.,

(2)
$$_Ex^jp_n(x)\frac{R(x)}{W(x)h(x)}𝑑x=0\text{for }j=0,\mathrm{},n1.$$

$`P_n(x)`$ denotes the orthonormal polynomial.

Polynomials orthogonal on several intervals have been studied already by old masters like A. Markoff , Faber , Shohat ,…then in the sixties and seventies asymptotic representations of the orthonormal polynomials have been derived by Achieser and Tomcuk , Widom  and Nuttal and Singh , where in the last two papers also arcs and curves are considered. Recent related results can be found in .

It is well known and easy to prove by the orthogonality property (2) that $`p_n`$ has all zeros in $`[a_1,a_{2l}]`$ and at most one zero in each gap $`[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}],j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$. Furthermore due to a result of Faber, see e.g. , we have the following rough information about the asymptotic zero distribution

(3)
$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\mathrm{\#}Z(p_n,(a_1,t))}{n}=_{a_1}^t𝑑\mu _e(x)$$

where $`t`$, $`\mu _e`$ denotes the equilibrium measure of $`E`$, $`Z(f,A)=\{xA:f(x)=0\}`$ the set of zeros of $`f`$ on the set $`A`$ and $`\mathrm{\#}Z(f,A)`$ the number of zeros on A. Recalling (see) that $`\mu _e(E_k)=\omega _k(\mathrm{})`$, where $`\omega _k(\mathrm{})`$ denotes the harmonic measure for $`\overline{}E`$ of $`E_k`$ at $`z=\mathrm{}`$ we have moreover by (3)

(4)
$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\mathrm{\#}Z(p_n,E_k)}{n}=\omega _k(\mathrm{})\text{for}k=1,\mathrm{},l.$$

In contrast to the single interval case where very detailed informations about the zeros are available, see e.g., for the several interval case such simple questions as how many zeros has $`p_n`$ precisely in each of the intervals $`E_k`$, when does there appear a zero in a gap, is the set of zeros of $`(p_n)`$ dense in the gaps are still open and will be settled in this paper. The interest in such questions became renewed in the last years, when it turned out that orthogonal polynomials play an important role in the solution of integrable systems, random matrices and combinatorics, see e.g. and the references therein. In many of these problems the spectrum of the associated Jacobi operator consists of several intervals and of foremost interest are the eigenvalues of the Jacobi operator and thus the zeros of the orthogonal polynomials which are the eigenvalues of the truncated tridiagonal Jacobi matrix. For the two interval case the questions on the zeros have been investigated by A. Markoff  in 1886 already. Recently we were able to settle them completely with the help of elliptic functions . Here we treat and settle the general case. For the special class of weights $`R/(\rho _\nu h)`$, where $`\rho _\nu `$ is a polynomial, called Bernstein-Szegö weights and by the russian community sometimes Akhiezer weights, the precise number of zeros in the intervals $`E_k`$ has been given (in somewhat weaker form) by A. Lukashov and the author in  using automorphic functions (for the special case when $`p_n`$ is supposed to have all zeros in $`E`$ see  also).

Let us briefly outline the organization and the main results of the paper. In the next Section polynomials orthonormal with respect to Bernstein-Szegö weights are studied. The main ingredient is a representation in terms of Green’s functions from which many important properties of the orthonormal polynomials and of their zeros follow. Note, when the weight $`R/Wh`$ is approximated by Bernstein-Szegö weights then the behaviour of the corresponding orthonormal polynomials will be the same asymptotically as has been shown in . In Section 3 the general case is considered and the main results are presented. With the help of the results of Section 2 a formula for the number of zeros in the intervals $`E_k`$ in terms of the harmonic measure and the mean value of the weight function is derived as well as a criteria for the appearance of a zero in a gap is given. Similarily as in the asymptotic description of orthonormal polynomials one of the key stones is an associated Jacobi inversion problem on the Riemann surface $`y^2=H`$. Loosley speaking, all the above desired informations about the zeros are hidden in the solutions of the inversion problem. For instance it turns out that a given point from a gap is an accumulation point of zeros of $`(p_n)`$ if and only if the point lies in the second (negative) sheet of the Riemann surface and is an accumulation point of the solution of the associated Jacobi inversion problems. As a consequence we obtain that for given $`l^{}`$, $`0l^{}l1`$, points in the gaps, at most one in each, there exists a subsequence $`(n_\kappa )`$ such that the points are limit points of the zeros of $`(p_{n_\kappa })`$, if the harmonic measures of the intervals $`E_k`$ are linearly independent over the rationals. In the opposite case when all harmonic measures are rational it turns out that there is a finite number of accumulation points in the gaps only.

## 2. Bernstein - Szegö polynomials and their representation in terms of Green’s functions

In the following $`\rho _\nu `$ denotes a real polynomial of degree $`\nu `$ which has no zero in $`E`$, that is

$$\rho _\nu (x)=c\underset{k=1}{\overset{\nu ^{}}{}}(xw_k)^{\nu _k},$$

where $`c\{0\}`$, $`\nu ^{}_0`$, $`\nu _k`$ for $`k=1,\mathrm{},\nu ^{}`$, $`\nu =_{k=1}^\nu ^{}\nu _k`$, $`w_kE`$ for $`k=1,\mathrm{},\nu ^{}`$, and the $`w_k`$ are real or appear in pairs of conjugate complex numbers. In this section we study polynomials, so-called Bernstein-Szegö polynomials, orthogonal on $`E`$ with respect to the weight function $`R/(\rho _\nu h)`$. As already mentioned above the reason why they are important is that polynomials orthogonal with respect to a weight function of the form $`R/Wh`$ behave asymptotically like those one orthogonal with respect to $`R/\rho _\nu h`$ if $`\rho _\nu `$ approximates $`W`$ sufficiently well.

In what follows we choose that branch of $`\sqrt{H}`$ for which $`\sqrt{H(x)}>0`$ for $`x(a_{2l},\mathrm{})`$. By $`\varphi (z,z_0)`$ we denote a mapping which maps $`\overline{}E`$ onto the exterior of the unit circle, which has a simple pole at $`z=z_0\overline{}E`$ and satisfies $`|\varphi (z,z_0)|1`$ for $`z\xi E`$ a.e.; or in other words $`\mathrm{log}|\varphi |`$ is the Green’s function. It is known \[42, Section 14\] that

(5)
$$\varphi (z,\mathrm{})=\mathrm{exp}(_{a_1}^zr_{\mathrm{}}(\xi )\frac{d\xi }{\sqrt{H(\xi )}}),$$

where $`r_{\mathrm{}}(\xi )=\xi ^{l1}+\mathrm{}`$ is the unique polynomial such that

(6)
$$_{a_{2j}}^{a_{2j+1}}r_{\mathrm{}}(\xi )\frac{d\xi }{\sqrt{H(\xi )}}=0\text{for}j=1,\mathrm{},l1,$$

and that for $`x_0E`$

(7)
$$\varphi (z,x_0)=\mathrm{exp}(_{a_1}^z\frac{r_{x_0}(\xi )}{\xi x_0}\frac{d\xi }{\sqrt{H(\xi )}})$$

where $`r_{x_0}_{l1}`$ is such that

(8)
$$r_{x_0}(x_0)=\sqrt{H(x_0)}$$

and

(9)
$$\mathrm{p}.\mathrm{v}._{a_{2j}}^{a_{2j+1}}\frac{r_{x_0}(\xi )}{\xi x_0}\frac{d\xi }{\sqrt{H(\xi )}}=0\text{for}j=1,\mathrm{},l1;$$

For the following let us note that $`r_{x_0}`$ can be represented as

$$r_{x_0}(\xi )=(\xi x_0)\left(r_{\mathrm{}}(\xi )M_{x_0}(\xi )\right)\sqrt{H(x_0)},$$

where $`M_{x_0}(\xi )=\xi ^{l1}+\mathrm{}_{l1}`$ is the unique polynomial which satisfies

(10)
$$\mathrm{p}.\mathrm{v}._{a_{2j}}^{a_{2j+1}}\frac{\sqrt{H(x_0)}}{x_0\xi }\frac{d\xi }{\sqrt{H(\xi )}}=_{a_{2j}}^{a_{2j+1}}M_{x_0}(\xi )\frac{d\xi }{\sqrt{H(\xi )}}\text{for}j=1,\mathrm{},l1.$$

###### Lemma 2.1.

Let $`R`$, $`\rho _\nu `$, $`\epsilon _j\{1,1\}`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},\nu ^{}`$, be given and assume that the polynomials $`(Rp_n)(x)=x^{n+R}+\mathrm{}_{n+R}`$ and $`(Sq_m)_{m+S}`$ have no common zero and satisfy the relations

(11)
$$Rp_n^2Sq_m^2=\rho _\nu g_{(n)}$$

with

(12)
$$(Rp_n)^{(k)}(w_j)=\epsilon _j(\sqrt{H}q_m)^{(k)}(w_j)\text{for}k=1,\mathrm{},\nu _j,$$

at the zeros $`w_j`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},\nu ^{}`$, of $`\rho _\nu `$ and $`g_{(n)}`$ a polynomial of degree at most $`l1`$ with simple zeros $`x_{j,n}`$ only at which, by (11),

(13)
$$Rp_n(x_{j,n})=\delta _{j,n}(\sqrt{H}q_m)(x_{j,n})\text{where}\delta _{j,n}\{1,1\}.$$

Then for $`2n+R\nu +g_{(n)}`$ the following representations hold on $`E`$

(14)
$$_1:=\frac{2Rp_n^2}{\rho _\nu g_{(n)}}1=\frac{1}{2}(\psi _n+\frac{1}{\psi _n})$$

and

(15)
$$\sqrt{H}_2:=\sqrt{H}\frac{2q_mp_n}{\rho _\nu g_{(n)}}=\frac{1}{2}(\psi _n\frac{1}{\psi _n})$$

where

(16)
$$\psi _n(z)=\varphi (z,\mathrm{})^{2n+R(\nu +g_n)}\underset{j=1}{\overset{\nu ^{}}{}}\varphi (z,w_j)^{\nu _jϵ_j}\underset{j=1}{\overset{g_{(n)}}{}}\varphi (z,x_{j,n})^{\delta _{j,n}}.$$

Furthermore for $`xE`$

(17)
$$_1(x)=\frac{1}{2}(\psi _n^++\psi _n^{})$$

and

(18)
$$_2(x)=\frac{\pi }{2}\frac{(\psi _n^+\psi _n^{})}{ih(x)}$$

where $`\psi _n^\pm `$ denotes the limiting values of $`\psi _n`$ from the upper and lower halfplane, respectively.

###### Proof.

Relation (11) squared can also be written in the form

(19)
$$_1^2H_2^2=1,$$

where $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ are given by the first expression in (14) and (15), respectively. Let us put on $`E`$

(20)
$$\psi _n=_1+\sqrt{H}_2=\frac{(Rp_n+\sqrt{H}q_m)^2}{R\rho _\nu g_{(n)}}$$

where the second equality follows with the help of (11). Again by (19) and (11)

(21)
$$\frac{1}{\psi _n}=_1\sqrt{H}_2=\frac{(Rp_n\sqrt{H}q_m)^2}{R\rho _\nu g_{(n)}}$$

from which it follows that the second equality holds in (14) and (15). Since

(22)
$$\psi _n^\pm (x)=_1(x)\pm i(1)^{lk}\sqrt{|H(x)|}_2(x)\text{on}E_k$$

representations (17) and (18) follow. Note that

(23)
$$|\psi _n^\pm (x)|=1\text{on}E.$$

Further

(24)
$$\begin{array}{cc}& \psi _n\text{has a pole of order}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}n+R(\nu +g_{(n)})\text{at}z=\mathrm{}\hfill \\ & \psi _n\text{has a pole(zero) at}w_j\text{of multiplicity}\nu _j\text{if}ϵ_j=1(ϵ_j=1)\hfill \\ & \psi _n\text{has a simple pole (zero) at}x_{j,n}\text{if}\delta _{j,n}=1(\delta _{j,n}=1)\hfill \end{array}$$

Thus the function

(25)
$$f(z):=\psi _n(z)\varphi (z,\mathrm{})^{(2n+R(\nu +g_{(n)})}\underset{j=1}{\overset{\nu ^{}}{}}\varphi (z,w_j)^{\nu _jϵ_j}\underset{j=1}{\overset{g_{(n)}}{}}\varphi (z,x_{j,n})^{\delta _{j,n}}$$

has neither zeros nor poles on $`\overline{}E`$ and by (23) and the definition of $`\varphi `$ we have $`|f^\pm |=1`$ on $`E`$. Hence $`\mathrm{log}|f(z)|`$ is a harmonic bounded function on $`\overline{}E`$ which has a continuous extension to $`E`$ and thus $`f=1`$. Hence the representation (16) is proved. ∎

###### Remark 2.2.

For the following let us note that relation (11) with $`g_{(n)}_{l1}`$ and $`R/\rho _\nu h>0`$ on $`\mathrm{int}(E)`$ imply that $`g_{(n)}`$ has exactly one zero $`x_{j,n}`$ in each gap $`[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}]`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$. This follows immediately from the fact that $`RS=H>0`$, and thus by (11) $`hg_{(n)}>0`$, on $`\mathrm{int}(E)`$.

###### Notation 2.3.

Let $`t(x)=d_nx^n+d_{n1}x^{n1}+\mathrm{}`$ be a polynomial with $`d_n0`$. Then $`\widehat{t}(x)=t(x)/d_n`$ denotes the monic polynomial.

###### Corollary 2.4.

Suppose that the assumptions of Lemma 2.1 are satisfied, put $`P_n=\sqrt{2/G_n}p_n`$ and $`Q_m=\sqrt{2/G_n}q_m`$, where $`G_n`$ denotes the leading coefficient of $`g_{(n)}`$ and assume that $`R/\rho _\nu h>0`$ on $`\mathrm{int}(E)`$. Then the following statements hold for sufficiently large n:

1. On each interval $`E_j`$ the zeros of $`RP_n`$ and $`SQ_m`$ strictly interlace.
2. $`P_n`$ has a zero in $`(a_{2j},a_{2j+1}),j\{1,\mathrm{},l1\}`$, if and only if $`Q_m`$ has a zero in $`(a_{2j},a_{2j+1})`$.
3. $`(P_n)`$ and $`(Q_m)`$ are unbounded at the zeros of $`R`$ and $`S`$, respectively.

###### Proof.

Ad a). First let us observe that by (14) and (15)

(26)
$$RP_n=0\text{ iff}\psi _n^+=1\text{and}SQ_m=0\text{ iff}\psi _n^+=1$$

where on $`E`$ $`\psi _n^+`$ is given in (22) and naturally coincides with $`\psi _n`$ outside $`E`$. By the representations (16) and (5) - (7) we have for $`xE`$

(27)
$$\psi _n^+(x)=e^{i\chi _n(x)},$$

where

$`\chi _n(x)`$ $`=`$ $`(2n+R(\nu +g_{(n)}))\pi {\displaystyle _{a_1}^x}{\displaystyle \frac{r_{\mathrm{}}(t)}{h(t)}}𝑑t`$
$`\text{+ bounded function with respect to x and n},`$
where we have used the fact that for $`x\mathrm{int}(E)`$

(28)
$$\underset{zx\text{,}Imz>0}{lim}r_{\mathrm{}}(z)/\sqrt{H(z)}=i\pi r_{\mathrm{}}(x)/h(x).$$

Concerning the boundedness with repect to $`x`$ and $`n`$ of the error in (27) let us note first that the polynomial $`r_{x_0}`$ from (7) is uniformly bounded with respect to $`x_0(a_{2j},a_{2j+1}),j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, since the Cauchy principal-value integral at the left hand side in (10) is uniformly bounded and that, if $`x_{j,n}`$ or a subsequence tends to a boundary point of $`E`$,

(29)
$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}_{a_1}^x\frac{\sqrt{H(x_{j,n})}}{tx_{j,n}}\frac{dt}{h(t)}$$

exists for $`xE`$, see e.g.. Since by (6) $`r_{\mathrm{}}`$ has exactly one zero in each gap $`(a_{2j},a_{2j+1}),j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, and thus $`r_{\mathrm{}}/h>0`$ on $`int(E)`$ it follows that for sufficiently large $`n`$ $`\chi _n`$ is strictly monotone on each interval $`E_k`$ which proves part a).

Ad b). As above by (18), (16) and (5) - (7) for $`x\mathrm{int}(E)`$

(30)
$$\frac{(P_nQ_m)(x)}{(\rho _\nu \widehat{g}_n)(x)}=\frac{\mathrm{sin}((2n+R(\nu +g_{(n)})\pi _{a_1}^x\frac{r_{\mathrm{}}(t)}{h(t)}dt+\mathrm{})}{(1)^{lk}\sqrt{H(x)}}$$

hence, note that by (26) $`\mathrm{sin}\chi _n(a_j)=0`$ at the zeros of $`H`$ and that $`n`$ is fixed,

(31)
$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{xa_j}{lim}\frac{(P_nQ_m)(x)}{(\rho _\nu \widehat{g}_n)(x)}=\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{cos}\chi _n(a_j)\left(\frac{(2n+R(\nu +g_{(n)})r_{\mathrm{}}(a_j)+\text{bounded function}}{H^{}(a_j)}\right)\end{array}$$

Using the facts that

(32)
$$\text{sgn}(r_{\mathrm{}}(a_{2j})H^{}(a_{2j}))=\text{sgn}(r_{\mathrm{}}(a_{2j+1})H^{}(a_{2j+1}))\text{for}j=1,\mathrm{},l1,$$

that $`\mathrm{cos}\chi _n(a_j)=\pm 1`$ and that by (11) $`R\rho _\nu \widehat{g}_n>0`$ on $`int(E)`$ (31) implies that

$$\text{sgn}(P_nQ_m)(a_{2j})=\text{sgn}(P_nQ_m)(a_{2j+1})\text{for}j=1,\mathrm{},l1$$

if $`n`$ is sufficiently large. Recalling that $`P_n`$ and $`Q_m`$ have at most one zero in the gap part b) is proved.

Ad c). The unboundedness of $`(P_n)`$ and $`(Q_m)`$ at the zeros of $`R`$ and $`S`$ follows immediately by (31). ∎

For the following the somewhat technical statements will be needed.

###### Corollary 2.5.

Under the assumptions and the notations of Corollary2.4 the following inequalities hold for $`nn_0`$

Put $`Z_ϵ(S)=_{a_jZ(S)}[a_jϵ,a_j+ϵ]`$, $`ϵ>0`$. Then

(33)
$$|P_n|const>0\text{on}Z(RQ_m,EZ_ϵ(S))$$

For such $`n`$’s for which $`|P_n|\stackrel{~}{const}>0`$ on $`Z(S)`$ we even have

(34)
$$|P_n|const>0\text{on}Z(HQ_m,E)$$

If $`|\widehat{g}_{(n)}|\stackrel{~}{const}>0`$ on $`E`$ then the inequality (34) as well as

(35)
$$|Q_m|const>0\text{on}Z(HP_n,E).$$

hold.

###### Proof.

Ad a). Since $`\widehat{g}_{(n)}`$ has all zeros in the gaps it follows that $`|\widehat{g}_{(n)}|const>0`$ on $`E(Z_ϵ(S)Z_ϵ(R))`$. Hence, by (11), it remains to be shown only that $`|P_n|const>0`$ on $`Z_ϵ(R)E_j,j\{1,\mathrm{},l\}`$. For instance, let us consider the case that $`a_{2j1}Z(R)`$ and $`a_{2j}Z(S)`$. Then by (11) the following estimate holds on $`E_j`$

(36)
$$|P_n|^2\stackrel{~}{const}|\rho _\nu ||\frac{xx_{j1,n}}{xa_{2j1}}||xx_{j,n}|\stackrel{~}{const}|\rho _\nu ||xx_{j,n}|$$

with $`\stackrel{~}{const}>0`$, which implies the desired inequality. If $`|P_n|\stackrel{~}{const}>0`$ on $`Z(S)`$ then by (11) the zeros of $`\widehat{g}_{(n)}`$ can not accumulate to $`Z(S)`$ which gives, again by (11), the second statement.

Ad b). Follows immediately from (11) and part c). ∎

Next let us recall (see the author’s paper  where a more general statement is proved even) that the polynomials which are orthonormal with respect to a measure of the form

(37)
$$d\mu _{R,\rho _\nu ,\epsilon }=\frac{R}{\rho _\nu h}dx+\underset{j=1}{\overset{\nu ^{}}{}}(1\epsilon _j)\frac{\sqrt{H(w_j))}}{\rho _\nu ^{}(w_j)}\delta (xw_j),$$

where $`R/\rho _\nu h>0`$ on $`\mathrm{int}(E)`$, $`\epsilon _j\{1,1\}`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},\nu ^{}`$, and if $`\epsilon _j=1`$ then $`w_j`$ is a simple real zero of $`\rho _\nu `$, and where $`\delta `$ denotes the Dirac measure, satisfy the assumptions of Lemma 2.1, i.e.,(11) - (13), resp. of Corollary 2.4. Indeed the following statement holds.

###### Lemma 2.6.

Let $`2n+R\nu +l1`$. Then $`P_n(Q_m)`$ is orthonormal to $`_{n1}`$ $`(_{m1})`$ with respect to $`d\mu _{R,\rho _\nu ,\epsilon }`$ $`(d\mu _{S,\rho _\nu ,\epsilon })`$ if and only if $`P_n(Q_m)`$ satisfies a representation of the form

(38)
$$RP_n^2SQ_m^2=2\rho _\nu \widehat{g}_{(n)}$$

with

(39)
$$(RP_n)^{(k)}(w_j)=\epsilon _j(\sqrt{H}Q_m)^{(k)}(w_j),\text{for}k=1,\mathrm{},\nu _j,$$

at the zeros $`w_j`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},\nu ^{}`$, of $`\rho _\nu `$ and $`g_{(n)}`$ is a polynomial of degree $`l1`$ which has exactly one zero $`x_{j,n}`$ in each gap $`[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}],j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$. Moreover,

(40)
$$RP_n(x_{j,n})=\delta _{j,n}(\sqrt{H}Q_m)(x_{j,n})\text{where}\delta _{j,n}\{1,1\}.$$

## 3. Main results

Let $``$ denote the hyperelliptic Riemann surface of genus $`l1`$ defined by $`y^2=H(z)`$ with branch cuts $`[a_1,a_2],[a_2,a_3],\mathrm{},[a_{2l1},a_{2l}].`$ The two sheets of $``$ are denoted by $`^+`$ and $`^{}`$, where on $`^+`$ the branch of $`\sqrt{H(z)}`$ is chosen for which $`\sqrt{H(x)}>0`$ for $`x>a_{2l}`$. To indicate that $`z`$ lies on the first resp. second sheet we write $`z^+`$ and $`z^{}`$. Furthermore let the cycles $`\{\alpha _j,\beta _j\}_{j=1}^{l1}`$be the usual canonical homology basis on $``$, i.e., the curve $`\alpha _j`$ lies on the upper sheet $`^+`$ of $``$ and encircles there clockwise the interval $`E_j`$ and the curve $`\beta _j`$ originates at $`a_{2j}`$ arrives at $`a_{2l1}`$ along the upper sheet and turns back to $`a_{2j}`$ along the lower sheet. $`^{}`$ denotes now the simple connected canonical dissected Riemann surface. Let $`\{\phi _1,\mathrm{},\phi _{l1}\}`$, where $`\phi _j=_{s=1}^{l1}d_{j,s}\frac{z^s}{\sqrt{H(z)}}dz,d_{j,s}`$, be a base of the normalized differential of the first kind i.e.

(41)
$$_{\alpha _j}\phi _k=2\pi i\delta _{jk}\text{and}_{\beta _j}\phi _k=B_{jk}\text{for}j,k=1,\mathrm{},l1$$

where $`\delta _{jk}`$ denotes the Kronecker symbol here. Note that the $`d_{j,n}`$’s are real since $`\sqrt{H(z)}`$ is purely imaginary on $`E_j`$ and since $`\sqrt{H(z)}`$ is real on $`E`$ the $`B_{jk}`$’s are also real.
In the following $`\eta _3(P,Q)`$ denotes the differential of the third kind which has simple poles at P and Q with residues 1 and -1, respectively, and is normalized such that

(42)
$$_{\alpha _j}\eta _3(P,Q)𝑑z=0\text{for}j=1,\mathrm{},l1$$

###### Lemma 3.1.

Let $`R`$, $`\rho _\nu `$ be such that $`R/\rho _\nu h>0`$ on $`\mathrm{int}(E)`$, let $`\epsilon _j\{1,1\}`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},\nu ^{}`$, and assume that the polynomials $`(Rp_n)(x)=x^{n+R}+\mathrm{}_{n+R}`$ and $`(Sq_m)_{m+S}`$ have no common zero and satisfy the relations

(43)
$$Rp_n^2Sq_m^2=\rho _\nu g_{(n)}$$

with $`g_{(n)}_{l1}`$ and

(44)
$$(Rp_n)^{(k)}(w_j)=\epsilon _j(\sqrt{H}q_m)^{(k)}(w_j),\text{for}k=1,\mathrm{},\nu _j,$$

at the zeros $`w_j`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},\nu ^{}`$, of $`\rho _\nu `$. Then for each $`nn_0`$, $`k=1,\mathrm{},l1`$,

(45)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}\delta _{j,n}_{x_{j,n}^{}}^{x_{j,n}^+}\phi _k& =(2n+R(\nu +g_{(n)}))_{\mathrm{}^{}}^\mathrm{}^+\phi _k\underset{j=1}{\overset{\nu ^{}}{}}\nu _j\epsilon _j_{w_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{}}^{w_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}}\phi _k\hfill \\ & +\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}(2\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n,E_j)+\mathrm{\#}Z(R,E_j))B_{kj},\hfill \end{array}$$

where the $`x_{j,n}`$’s, $`x_{j,n}[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}]`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, are the zeros of $`g_{(n)}`$ and the $`\delta _{j,n}`$’s, $`\delta _{j,n}\{1,1\}`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, are given by

(46)
$$Rp_n(x_{j,n})=\delta _{j,n}(\sqrt{H}q_m)(x_{j,n}),$$

that is, by relation (43), and where we integrate on $`^{}`$.

###### Proof.

As in Lemma 2.1 let us put

(47)
$$\psi _n=\frac{(Rp+\sqrt{H}q)^2}{R\rho g}$$

Note that by (43)

(48)
$$\frac{1}{\psi _n}=\frac{(Rp\sqrt{H}q)^2}{R\rho g}$$

Hence, in addition to (24) we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}& x=\mathrm{}^{}\text{is a zero of}\psi _n\text{of multiplicity}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}n+R(\nu +g_{(n)})\hfill \\ & x=w_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\text{ is a pole (zero) of}\psi _n\text{of multiplicity}\nu _j\text{if}\epsilon _j=1(+1)\hfill \\ & x=x_{j,n}^{}\text{is a simple pole (zero) of}\psi _n\text{if}\delta _{j,n}=1(+1).\hfill \end{array}$$

Now let us consider the differential

(49)
$$\eta _{(n)}:=d\mathrm{ln}\psi _n(z)$$

Then it follows that $`\eta _{(n)}`$ has a representation of the form

(50) $`\eta _{(n)}`$ $`=`$ $`(2n+R(\nu +g_{(n)}))\eta _3(\mathrm{}^{},\mathrm{}^+)+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{\nu ^{}}{}}}\nu _j\epsilon _j\eta _3(w_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{},w_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{+})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}}\delta _{j,n}\eta _3(x_{j,n}^{},x_{j,n}^+)+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}}c_{j,n}\phi _j`$
where $`c_{j,n}`$. By the normalization (42) of $`\eta _3`$ we obtain

(51)
$$_{\alpha _j}\eta _{(n)}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{l1}{}}c_{k,n}_{\alpha _j}\phi _k=2\pi ic_{j,n}$$

On the other hand it follows by shrinking $`\alpha _j`$ to $`E_j`$ and by $`|\psi _n(z)|=1`$ on $`E_j`$ that

(52)
$$_{\alpha _j}\eta _{(n)}=i\mathrm{\Delta }_{E_j}arg\psi _n=2\pi i(2\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n,E_j)+\mathrm{\#}Z(R,E_j))$$

where the last equality follows with the help of (26) and the facts that by (22) $`arg\psi _n^{}=arg\psi _n^+`$ and that we have shown in the proof of Corollary 2.4 a) that $`\chi _n=arg\psi _n^+`$ is strictly monotone for sufficiently large $`n`$. Since by the bilinear relation for abelian differentials of the first and third kind (see in particular \[23, pp.394-402\] or )

(53)
$$_{\beta _k}\eta _3(P,Q)=_P^Q\phi _k$$

we get, recall (41),

(54) $`{\displaystyle _{\beta _k}}\eta _{(n)}`$ $`=`$ $`(2n+R(\nu +g_{(n)})){\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}^{}}^\mathrm{}^+}\phi _k+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{\nu ^{}}{}}}\nu _j\epsilon _j{\displaystyle _{w_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{}}^{w_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}}}\phi _k`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}}\delta _{j,n}{\displaystyle _{x_{j,n}^{}}^{x_{j,n}^+}}\phi _k{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}}(2\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n,E_j)+\mathrm{\#}Z(R,E_j))B_{kj}`$
Now $`\psi _n`$ takes the same value at both sides of the cross point of $`\beta _k`$ and $`\alpha _k`$ and thus

(55)
$$_{\beta _k}\eta _{(n)}=2m_k\pi i,$$

where $`m_k`$. Since, by the Remark before 2.4 the $`x_{j,n}`$’s lie in the gaps and the $`w_j`$’s are real or appear in pairs of complex numbers, the right hand side of (54) takes on real values, recall that we integrate on the simple connected Riemann surface $``$’, and thus $`m_k=0`$ which is the assertion. ∎

Let us note that another version of Lemma 3.1 has been proved by A. Lukashov and the author in  with the help of automorphic functions.
Now we are able to improve Faber‘s result (4). In fact under some mild additional conditions we obtain a very presice estimate of the number of zeros in the intervals in terms of the harmonic measure and the mean value of the weight function. For the following let us recall that every $`\stackrel{}{v}^{l1}`$ can be represented in the form $`\stackrel{}{v}=2\pi i\stackrel{}{\mu }+B\stackrel{}{\lambda }+2\pi i\stackrel{}{n}+B\stackrel{}{m}`$, where $`\stackrel{}{n},\stackrel{}{m}^{l1}`$ and $`\mu _j,\lambda _j[0,1)`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$. The quotient space $`^{l1}/(2\pi i\stackrel{}{n}+B\stackrel{}{m})`$, $`\stackrel{}{n},\stackrel{}{m}^{l1}`$, called the Jacobi variety of the surface $``$ and denoted by $`𝒥ac`$, is a $`2(l1)`$ -dimensional real torus.

###### Theorem 3.2.

Let $`WC^2(E)`$ with $`lim_n\mathrm{}\omega _2(\frac{1}{n})\mathrm{ln}n=0`$ $`W0`$ on $`E`$ and $`R/Wh>0`$ on $`int(E)`$. Then the following statements hold:

1. For all $`nn_0`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},l`$,

(56)
$$\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/Wh),E_j)=n\omega _j(\mathrm{})+O(1),$$

where $`\omega _j(\mathrm{})`$ denotes the harmonic measure of the interval $`E_j`$.
2. Put $`\stackrel{}{\phi }(W)=(\frac{1}{\pi i}_E\phi _j^+\mathrm{log}|W|)_{j=1}^{l1}`$ and let
$`\stackrel{}{𝒱}_n=(2n+Rl+1)\frac{\stackrel{}{\omega }(\mathrm{})}{2}B^1\stackrel{}{\phi }(W)\frac{\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{}{Z}(R)}{2}`$. Then for the $`n`$’s, $`nn_1`$, for which $`|P_n(.,R/Wh)|\stackrel{~}{const}>0`$ at the zeros of $`S`$, the inequalities

(57)
$$|\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/Wh),E_j)[𝒱_{j,n}+\frac{1}{2}]|1,$$

$`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, hold. As usual, $`[.]`$ denotes the greatest integer not larger than . .

###### Proof.

. First let us prove that for weights of the form $`W=\rho _\nu `$ the difference between $`\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/Wh),E_j)`$ and $`[𝒱_{j,n}+\frac{1}{2}]`$ is at most one for all $`nn_0`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$. It’s known, see e.g.  and for a detailed proof , that

(58)
$$\frac{2}{\pi i}_E\phi _k^+\mathrm{log}|\widehat{\rho }_\nu |=\underset{j=1}{\overset{\nu ^{}}{}}\nu _j\left(_{w_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{}}^{w_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}}\phi _k_{\mathrm{}^{}}^\mathrm{}^+\phi _k\right)$$

and thus relation (45) becomes

(59)
$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}\delta _{j,n}_{x_{j,n}^{}}^{x_{j,n}^+}\phi _k=\frac{2}{\pi i}_E\phi _k^+\mathrm{log}|\widehat{\rho }_\nu |(2n+Rg_{(n)})_{\mathrm{}^{}}^\mathrm{}^+\phi _k\hfill \\ \hfill +\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}(2\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n,E_j)+\mathrm{\#}Z(R,E_j))B_{kj}\text{for}k=1,\mathrm{},l1\end{array}$$

Let us put $`z_{j,n}:=x_{j,n}^{\delta _{j,n}}`$, where $`x_{j,n}^{\pm 1}:=x_{j,n}^\pm `$. Hence the points $`z_{j,n}`$ and $`z_{j,n}^{}=x_{j,n}^{\delta _{j,n}}`$ lie above each other on $``$. Now the left hand side of (59) can be represented in the form

(60)
$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}\delta _{j,n}_{x_{j,n}^{}}^{x_{j,n}^+}\phi _k=\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}_{z_{j,n}^{}}^{z_{j,n}}\phi _k=\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}(\lambda _{j,n}+m_{j,n})B_{jk}$$

where $`\lambda _{j,n}(1,1)`$ and $`m_{j,n}`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$. In view of (50)-(54) we have that $`m_{j,n}=0`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$. Dividing (59) by $`n`$ and taking the limit as $`n\mathrm{}`$ gives

(61)
$$_{\mathrm{}^{}}^\mathrm{}^+\phi _k=\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}B_{kj}\omega _j(\mathrm{})$$

where we have used the known fact (see e.g.) that

(62)
$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{Z(P_n,E_j)}{n}=\omega _j(\mathrm{})$$

Thus (59) can be written as

(63)
$$\frac{\stackrel{}{\lambda }_n}{2}B^1\stackrel{}{\phi }(\rho _\nu )+(2n+Rg_{(n)})\frac{\stackrel{}{\omega }(\mathrm{})}{2}\frac{\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{}{Z}(R)}{2}=\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{}{Z}(P_n).$$

which proves our claim.

To prove part b) of the theorem for weight functions of the form $`R/Wh`$, let us first recall, see , that there is sequence of $`\rho _\nu `$’s such that

(64)
$$\stackrel{}{\phi }(\rho _\nu )=\stackrel{}{\phi }(W)$$

and

(65)
$$|\frac{W(x)}{\rho _\nu (x)}1|\frac{const.}{\nu ^2}\omega _2(\frac{1}{\nu })$$

where $`\omega _2`$ denotes the modulus of continuity of second order, and that for given $`ϵ`$ there exists a $`\nu _0`$ such that for $`\nu \nu _0`$ and for $`n2\nu `$

(66)
$$P_n(z,R/Wh)=P_n(z,R/\rho _\nu h)+O(ϵ_n)\text{on}E\text{with}|ϵ_n|ϵ.$$

Hence, by the assumption, (66) and Corollary2.5a) for $`\nu \nu _0`$, $`n2\nu `$,

(67)
$$|P_n(x,R/\rho _\nu h)|const>0\text{on}Z(HQ_m(x,R/\rho _\nu h),E).$$

Now by (66) again the sign of the two orthogonal polynomials $`P_n(x,R/\rho _\nu h)`$ and $`P_n(x,R/Wh)`$ at the boundary points of $`E`$ is the same, if $`n`$ is sufficiently large. Since each of the both polynomials has at most one zero in each gap they have the same number of zeros in each gap. Furthermore by Corollary 2.4a) $`P_n(x,R/\rho _\nu h)`$, and thus by (66) $`P_n(x,R/Wh)`$ also, has different sign on two consecutive zeros of $`SQ_m(x,R/\rho _\nu h)`$ lying in an interval $`E_j`$ which implies

(68)
$$\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/\rho _\nu h),E_j)=\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/Wh),E_j)\text{for}j=1,\mathrm{},l1$$

which gives by (64) the assertion.

Finally let us prove part a). The problem is to estimate the number of zeros of $`P_n(.,R/Wh)`$ in the neighbourhood of a boundary point of $`E_j`$ which is a zero of $`S`$ because $`P_n(.,R/Wh)`$ may accumulate to zero there and thus the asymptotics (66) gives no information now. The problem can be settled by switching to the polynomials $`P_m(.,S/Wh)`$. Recall that $`S`$ is given by (1).

It is known, see e.g. , that $`P_n(.,R/Wh)`$ can be expressed in terms of $`P_j(.,S/Wh)`$, essentially by Christoffel’s transformation, as follows: Put $`\kappa =R+S`$ then

(69)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill S(x)P_n(x,R/& Wh)=_{j=0}^\kappa \mu _{j,n}P_{n+Sj}(x,S/Wh)\hfill \\ & =A_{\kappa 1,n}(x)P_{nR+1}(x,S/Wh)B_{\kappa 2,n}(x)P_{nR}(x,S/Wh)\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`\mu _{j,n}`$ and $`A_{\kappa 1,n}`$ and $`B_{\kappa 2,n}`$ are polynomials of degree less or equal $`\kappa 1`$. The second equality follows by using the recurrence relation of the $`P_n`$’s succesively. Thus by (69), using the well known interlacing property of the zeros of two consecutive orthogonal polynomials, there is at least one zero of $`SP_n(.,R/Wh)`$ or $`A_{\kappa 1,n}`$ between two consecutive zeros of $`P_{nR}(.,S/Wh)`$. Hence, loosley speaking $`P_n(.,R/Wh)`$ has at most $`2\kappa `$ ”free zeros” on $`[a_1,a_{2l}]`$, i. e., , zeros which may lie in any $`E_j`$ or in a gap. Now let us consider an interval $`E_j=[a_{2j1},a_{2j}]`$ with $`a_{2j}`$ is a zero of $`S`$ and $`a_{2j1}`$ a zero of $`R`$. We have

(70)
$$\begin{array}{cc}& \mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/Wh),E_j)\hfill \\ & \mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/Wh),[a_{2j1},c])+\mathrm{\#}Z(P_{nR}(.,S/Wh),[c,a_{2j}])2\kappa \hfill \\ & \mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/\rho _\nu h),[a_{2j1},c])+\mathrm{\#}Z(P_{nR}(.,S/\rho _\nu h),[c,a_{2j}])(2\kappa +4)\hfill \\ & \mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/\rho _\nu h),E_j)(4\kappa +4)\hfill \end{array}$$

where in the second inequality we have used Corollary 2.4a) and (33), applied to $`R`$ and $`S`$, in conjunction with (66) and in the third one (69) again. Summing up the zeros of all intervals $`E_j`$ it follows by a very rough estimate that $`P_n(.,R/Wh)`$ has on $`[a_1,a_{2l}]`$ at most $`l(4\kappa +4)+l1`$ “free zeros”. Thus the number of zeros of $`P_n(.,R/\rho _\nu h)`$ and $`P_n(.,R/Wh)`$ on $`E_j`$ differ by a constant at most which gives the assertion by the first proved claim. ∎

In connection with the second statement of the above Theorem let us note that the closure of the set $`\{(|P_n(s_1,R/Wh)|,\mathrm{},|P_n(s_S,R/Wh)|):n\}`$, where $`s_1,\mathrm{},s_S`$ denote the zeros of $`S`$, is of the form $`𝖷_{𝗃=\mathrm{𝟣}}^𝖲[\mathrm{𝟢},\eta _𝗃],\mathrm{𝟢}<\eta _𝗃\mathrm{}`$, if the harmonic measures $`\omega _j(\mathrm{})`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, are linearly independent over the rationals. Indeed with the help of Kronecker’s Lemma it follows - see the proof of Theorem 3.9 \- that the zeros $`x_{j,n}`$ of $`g_{(n)}`$ are dense in the gaps which gives in conjunction with (38) and (66) the assertion.

For the important class of weight functions which vanish at the boundary points of $`E`$ Theorem 3.2b) becomes

###### Corollary 3.3.

For all $`nn_0`$ and $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$ the difference between the number of zeros of $`P_n(.,H/Wh)`$ on $`E_j`$ and $`[𝒱_{j,n}+\frac{1}{2}]`$ is at most one.

To get informations about the appearance of the zeros in the gaps and other informations on the zeros we will have to study the behaviour of the solutions of the so-called real Jacobi-inversion problem. The map
$`𝒜:_{symm}^{l1}𝒥ac`$, $`(z_1,\mathrm{},z_{l1})(_{j=1}^{l1}_{e_j}^{z_j}\phi _1,\mathrm{},_{j=1}^{l1}_{e_j}^{z_j}\phi _{l1})`$,
is the so-called Abel-map. Here $`_{symm}^{l1}`$ denotes the $`(l1)`$th symmetric power of $``$ and $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_{l1}`$ are given points on $``$ . It’s known that $`𝒜`$ is locally biholomorphic but not injective globally. The problem for given $`\stackrel{}{v}=(v_1,\mathrm{},v_{l1})𝒥ac`$ to find $`(z_1,\mathrm{},z_{l1})_{symm}^{l1}`$ such that

(71)
$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}_{e_j}^{z_j}\phi _k=v_kmod\text{periods}$$

is called the Jacobi-inversion problem. We will be interested in the real Jacobian inversion problem, that is, when the $`v_k`$’s are real. We need some notation.

###### Notation 3.4.

Let $`[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}]^+,[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}]^{}`$ denote the two copies of
$`[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}]`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$ in $`^+`$ and $`^{}`$, respectively, and let
$`_j=[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}]^+[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}]^{}`$ which is a closed loop on $``$. Furthermore put $`\mathrm{\Xi }=\{(\delta _1,\mathrm{},\delta _{l1}):\delta _j\{1,+1\}\}`$ and for $`\delta \{1,+1\}`$ set

$`(a_{2j},a_{2j+1})^\delta =\{\begin{array}{cc}& (a_{2j},a_{2j+1})^+^+\text{if}\delta =1,\hfill \\ & (a_{2j},a_{2j+1})^{}^{}\text{if}\delta =1.\hfill \end{array}`$
By $`z`$ and $`z^{}`$ we denote the points which lie above each other on $``$, that is, have the same image under the canonical projection $`\pi `$ of $``$ on the Riemann sphere. Finally denote by $`𝒥ac/_{}:=^{l1}/B\stackrel{}{m}`$ the Jacobi variety restricted to the reals.

As mentioned in  the real Jacobi inversion problem is uniquely solvable. More precisely

###### Lemma 3.5.

1. The restricted Abel map

(72)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝒜:& 𝖷_{𝗃=\mathrm{𝟣}}^{𝗅\mathrm{𝟣}}_𝗃𝒥\mathrm{𝖺𝖼}/_{}\hfill \\ & (z_1,\mathrm{},z_{l1})\frac{1}{2}(\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}_{z_j}^{z_j}\phi _1,\mathrm{},\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}_{z_j}^{z_j}\phi _{l1})\hfill \end{array}$$

is a bijection.
2. For each of the $`2^{l1}\stackrel{}{\delta }`$’s from $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ put $`C_\stackrel{}{\delta }:=𝒜\left(𝖷_{𝗃=\mathrm{𝟣}}^{𝗅\mathrm{𝟣}}(𝖺_{\mathrm{𝟤}𝗃},𝖺_{\mathrm{𝟤}𝗃+\mathrm{𝟣}})^{\delta _𝗃}\right)`$. Then
$`_{\stackrel{}{\delta }\mathrm{\Xi }}\overline{C}_\stackrel{}{\delta }=𝒥ac/_{}`$ ,where $`\overline{C}_\stackrel{}{\delta }`$ denotes the closure of $`C_\stackrel{}{\delta }`$.

###### Proof.

Ad a). The simplest way to prove part a) is to change the model of the Riemann surface by choosing now the canonical homology basis $`\{\alpha _j^{},\beta _j^{}\}_{j=1}^{l1}`$, where the curve $`\alpha _j^{}`$ originates at $`a_{2j}`$ arrives at $`a_{2j+1}`$ along the upper sheet and turns back to $`a_{2j}`$ along the lower sheet and $`\beta _j^{}`$ lies in the upper sheet and encircles clockwise the intervall $`[a_1,a_{2j}]`$, and then to proceed as in . Note that the $`\alpha ^{}`$ and $`\beta ^{}`$ periods can be expressed easily in terms of the $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ periods from (41). Another possibility, see , is to prove by a van der Monde argument that the derivative is nonsingular on $`𝖷_{𝗃=\mathrm{𝟣}}^{𝗅\mathrm{𝟣}}_𝗃`$ (which is homeomorphic to a $`l1`$ dimensional torus) and thus $`𝒜`$ is open. By continuity it follows that $`𝒜`$ is closed and thus surjective. Since $`z_j_j`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$ among $`z_1z_2\mathrm{}z_{l1}`$ there are no points which lie above each other or in other words $`z_1z_2\mathrm{}z_{l1}`$ is a so-called nonspecial divisor which implies by Lemma 4.3 in  or IX.7 and X.3 in  that $`𝒜`$ is injective also. The third possibility is (see ) to look at the solution of the Jacobi inversion problem in terms of Thetafunctions \[15, p.142\]. Indeed, by the representation it follows that the solutions $`z_j`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, have to lie in $`_j`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$ if all $`v_k`$ are real from which the assertion can be derived easily now.

Since $`𝒜`$ is holomorphic also part b) follows immediately. ∎

###### Theorem 3.6.

Suppose that $`W`$ satisfies the same assumptions as in Theorem 3.2 and let $`\stackrel{}{\phi }(W)`$ and $`\stackrel{}{𝒱}_n`$ be defined as there. Then the following statements hold:

For all $`nn_0`$ for which $`2B\stackrel{}{𝒱}_n\{B(\stackrel{}{\lambda }+\stackrel{}{m}):\stackrel{}{\lambda }[ϵ,1ϵ]^{l1},\stackrel{}{m}^{l1}\},ϵ>0`$, the following relations hold:

1. (73)
$$\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/Wh),E_j)=[𝒱_{j,n}+\frac{1}{2}]\text{for}j=1,\mathrm{},l1.$$
2. If $`\stackrel{}{𝒱}_nC_\stackrel{}{\delta },\stackrel{}{\delta }\mathrm{\Xi }`$, then

(74)
$$\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/Wh),(a_{2j},a_{2j+1}))=\frac{(1\delta _{j,n})}{2}\text{for}j=1,\mathrm{},l1,$$

###### Proof.

Let $`W=\rho _\nu `$. In the proof of Theorem 3.2 we have shown that the zeros $`x_{j,n}`$ resp. the $`z_{j,n}`$ defined after (59) are solutions of the Jacobi-inversion problem (59), taking into consideration (60). Since by assumption $`2B\stackrel{}{𝒱}_n\{B(\stackrel{}{\lambda }+\stackrel{}{m}):\stackrel{}{\lambda }[ϵ,1ϵ]^{l1},\stackrel{}{m}^{l1}\},ϵ>0`$, it follows first of all by (63) that

(75)
$$\mathrm{\#}Z(P_n(.,R/h\rho _\nu ),E_j)=[𝒱_{j,n}+\frac{1}{2}]\text{for}j=1,\mathrm{},l1$$

and furthermore with the help of Lemma 3.5 and continuity arguments that the $`z_{j,n}`$’s from (60) satisfy for $`nn_0`$ $`z_{j,n}[a_{2j}+\stackrel{~}{ϵ},a_{2j+1}\stackrel{~}{ϵ}]^\pm `$, $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}>0`$, for $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, that is, the projection $`\pi (z_{j,n})=x_{j,n}[a_{2j}+\stackrel{~}{ϵ},a_{2j+1}\stackrel{~}{ϵ}]`$. Hence $`|\widehat{g}_{(n)}|\stackrel{~}{const}>0`$ on $`E`$. Now part a) follows with the help of Corollary2.5b) and relation (66) by the same arguments used in the second part of the proof of Theorem3.2. Let us note for the next step of the proof that in particular the absolute values of $`P_n(.,R/\rho _\nu h)`$ and $`P_n(.,R/Wh)`$ have for $`nn_0`$ a positive lower bound and thus the same sign at the boundary points of $`E`$.

Ad b): Since by the last remark $`P_n(x,R/\rho _\nu h)`$ and $`P_n(x,R/Wh)`$ have the same number of zeros in each gap the assertion has to be proved for weights of the form $`W=\rho _\nu `$ only.

If $`\delta _{j,n}=1`$ , $`j\{1,\mathrm{},l1\}`$, then it follows by (16), using the facts that $`|\varphi (z,\mathrm{})|>1`$ on $`\overline{}E`$ and that the modulus of each other factor has a positive lower bound on $`[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}]`$, that $`|\psi _n|>1`$ on $`(a_{2j},a_{2j+1})`$ if $`n`$ is sufficiently large. Thus by (26) $`P_n(.,R/h\rho _\nu )`$ has no zero in $`(a_{2j},a_{2j+1})`$.

If $`\delta _{j,n}=1`$ then $`\psi _n`$ has by (16) exactly one zero in $`(a_{2j},a_{2j+1})`$, namely the simple zero $`x_{j,n}`$. Note that by (13) and (12) $`x_{j,n}`$ can not coincide with a zero of $`\rho _\nu `$. Since $`x_{j,n}[a_{2j}+\stackrel{~}{ϵ},a_{2j+1}\stackrel{~}{ϵ}]`$, $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}>0`$, it follows again by (16) and $`|\varphi (z,\mathrm{})|>1`$ on $`\overline{}E`$ that $`\psi _n`$ is unbounded with respect to $`n`$ on every compact subset of $`(a_{2j},a_{2j}+\delta ][a_{2j+1}\delta ,a_{2j+1})`$,$`\delta >0`$. Hence, using the facts that by (26) $`|\psi _n|=1`$ at the boundary points of $`E`$ and that $`\psi _n`$ is real and continuous on $`[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}]`$ up to the poles $`w_j`$ we conclude that $`\psi _n+1`$ or $`\psi _n1`$ has at least one simple zero in $`(a_{2j},a_{2j+1})`$. Since by Corollary 2.4 either both $`P_n`$ and $`Q_m`$ have exactly one or no zero on $`(a_{2j},a_{2j+1})`$ it follows by (26) that $`P_n(.,R/h\rho _\nu )`$ has exactly one zero in $`(a_{2j},a_{2j+1})`$ which proves the assertion. ∎

Thus the appearence of a zero of $`P_n`$ in a gap depends on the fact in which part of the Jacobian variety $`\stackrel{}{𝒱}_n`$ lies. Let us point out that the $`\delta _{j,n}`$’s from (74) coincide with the $`\delta _{j,n}`$’s from Lemma2.6, relation(40), if $`W=\rho _\nu `$.

If the harmonic measures are rational then for Bernstein-Szegö weights the number of zeros in the intervals can be determined easily.

###### Proposition 3.7.

Assume that $`\omega _j(\mathrm{})=k_j/N`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, where $`k_j\{1,\mathrm{},N1\}`$ and $`N\{1\}`$. Let $`P_n`$ be orthonormal to $`_{n1}`$ with respect to $`d\mu _{R,\rho _\nu ,ϵ}`$. Then for $`\kappa =0,\mathrm{},N1`$ and $`m`$ with $`2(\kappa +mN)\nu +lR1`$

(76)
$$\mathrm{\#}Z(P_{\kappa +(m+1)N},E_j)=\mathrm{\#}Z(P_{\kappa +mN},E_j)+k_j,j=1,\mathrm{},l1$$

###### Proof.

Obviously for $`m`$, $`\kappa \{0,\mathrm{},N\}`$,

(77)
$$(mN+\kappa )\stackrel{}{\omega }(\mathrm{})=(mk_1+\frac{\kappa k_1}{N},\mathrm{},mk_{l1}+\frac{\kappa k_{l1}}{N})$$

which gives by (61) and Lemma 3.5 that the $`x_{j,n}`$’s and $`\delta _{j,n}`$’s from Lemma 3.1 and thus from Lemma 2.6 satisfy

(78)
$$x_{j,\kappa +mN}=x_{j,\kappa +(m+1)N}\text{and}\delta _{j,\kappa +mN}=\delta _{j,\kappa +(m+1)N}.$$

which proves the assertion. Let us note that (78) has been shown already in  by different methods. ∎

Let us mention that the harmonic measures satisfy $`\omega _j(\mathrm{})=k_j/N`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$ if and only if there exists a polynomial $`𝒯`$ of degree $`N`$ such that $`E=𝒯_N^1([1,1])`$ (see ).

###### Theorem 3.8.

Suppose that W satisfies the assumptions of Thm.3.2. Let $`z_{j,n}(W)`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, be the points which solve the Jacobi inversion problem, $`k=1,\mathrm{},l1`$,

(79)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}_{z_{j,n}^{}(W)}^{z_{j,n}(W)}\phi _k& =\frac{1}{\pi i}_E\phi _k^+\mathrm{log}|W|\frac{(2n+Rl+1)}{2}_{\mathrm{}^{}}^\mathrm{}^+\phi _k\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}\mathrm{\#}Z(R,E_j)B_{kj}mod\text{periods}\hfill \end{array}$$

Furthermore let $`z_k`$, $`k\{1,\mathrm{},l1\}`$, be such that $`\pi (z_k)(a_{2k},a_{2k+1})`$,
where $`\pi `$ is the canonical projection of $``$ on $`\overline{}`$. Then $`\pi (z_k)`$ is a limit point of zeros of $`(P_{n_\kappa }(.,R/Wh))`$ if and only if $`z_k`$ is a limit point of $`(z_{k,n_\kappa }(W))`$ with $`z_k(a_{2k},a_{2k+1})^{}`$.

###### Proof.

First let us prove the assertion for $`W=\rho _\nu `$. Put $`z_{j,n}:=z_{j,n}(\rho _\nu )`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$ and let us observe first that by (79), Lemma 3.5, (58) and (45) the $`x_{j,n}`$’s, i. e., the zeros of $`g_{(n)}`$, and the $`\delta _{j,n}`$’s from Lemma 3.1 and thus from Lemma 2.6, are related to the $`z_{j,n}`$’s as follows:

(80)
$$\pi (z_{j,n})=x_{j,n}\text{and}\delta _{j,n}=\pm 1\text{if}z_{j,n}(a_{2j},a_{2j+1})^\pm .$$

Sufficiency. Since $`z_{k,n_\kappa }(a_{2k},a_{2k+1})^{}`$ for $`\kappa \kappa _0`$ we have by (80)

(81)
$$\delta _{k,n_\kappa }=1\text{and}\pi (z_{k,n_\kappa })=x_{k,n_\kappa }$$

Relation (16) implies that $`\psi _{n_\kappa }(x_{k,n_\kappa })=0`$, where $`\psi _{n_\kappa }`$ changes sign at $`x_{k,n_\kappa }`$. Since by (16) and $`|\varphi (z,\mathrm{})|>1`$ on $`\overline{}E`$ $`\psi _{n_\kappa }`$ is unbounded with respect to $`\kappa `$ on compact subsets of $`(a_{2k},a_{2k+1})\{x_k\}`$, where $`x_k:=\pi (z_k)`$, it follows that $`\psi _{n_\kappa }`$ takes on the value $`1`$ on $`(x_k\epsilon ,x_k+\epsilon )`$, $`\epsilon >0`$, if $`\kappa `$ is sufficiently large. By (26) the sufficiency is proved.

Necessity. Assume that $`x_k:=\pi (z_k)`$ is a limit point of zeros of the sequence $`(P_{n_\kappa }(.,R/h\rho _\nu ))`$ and that $`z_k`$ is no limit point of $`(z_{k,n_\kappa })`$. Then as before $`\psi _{n_\kappa }`$ is unbounded with respect to $`\kappa `$ on $`[x_k\epsilon ,x_k+\epsilon ],\epsilon >0`$, which implies by (14) that $`P_{n_\kappa }(.,R/h\rho _\nu )`$ is unbounded on this interval which is the desired contradiction.

Next let us prove the assertion for the general case. Let $`(\rho _\nu )`$ be the sequence given in (64) and (65) and thus for $`\nu \nu _0`$,$`n2\nu `$

(82)
$$z_{j,n}:=z_{j,n}(\rho _\nu )=z_{j,n}(W)\text{for}j=1,\mathrm{},l1$$

Let $`z_k(a_{2k},a_{2k+1})^{}`$ be a limit point of $`(z_{k,n_\kappa })`$ which is, by what has been proved just, equivalent to the fact that $`x_k:=\pi (z_k)`$ is a limit point of zeros of $`(P_{n_\kappa }(.,R/h\rho _\nu ))`$. Since, because of $`W0`$ on $`E`$, the zeros of $`\rho _\nu `$ stay away from the boundary points $`a_{2k}`$ and $`a_{2k+1}`$ for $`\nu \nu _0`$ as well as does the zero $`x_{k,n_\kappa }=\pi (z_{k,n_\kappa })`$ of $`g_{(n_\kappa )}`$, $`\kappa \kappa _0`$, it follows by (38) that

(83)
$$|P_{n_\kappa }(z,R/h\rho _\nu )|const>0\text{for}z\{a_{2k},a_{2k+1}\}$$

and by (14) and (16)

(84)
$$|\frac{P_{n_\kappa }(z,R/\rho _\nu h)}{\varphi (z,\mathrm{})^{n_\kappa }}|const>0\text{on}[a_{2k},a_{2k+1}](x_k\epsilon ,x_k+\epsilon )$$

for $`\kappa \kappa _0`$, $`\nu \nu _0`$. By (66) and (83) it follows that

(85)
$$\mathrm{sgn}P_{n_\kappa }(z,R/Wh)=\mathrm{sgn}P_{n_\kappa }(z,R/h\rho _\nu )\text{for}z\{a_{2k},a_{2k+1}\}$$

Hence, $`P_{n_\kappa }(z,R/hW)`$ has for each $`\kappa \kappa _0`$ exactly one zero in $`(a_{2k},a_{2k+1})`$. By the asymptotic representation on $`E`$, see  or ,

(86)
$$\frac{P_{n_\kappa }(z,R/Wh)}{\varphi (z,\mathrm{})^{n_\kappa }}=\frac{P_{n_\kappa }(z,R/\rho _\nu h)}{\varphi (z,\mathrm{})^{n_\kappa }}+O(ϵ_{n_\kappa })\text{with}ϵ_{n_\kappa }0\text{as}\kappa \mathrm{},$$

and (84) we conclude that every accumulation point of zeros of the sequence $`(P_{n_\kappa }(z,R/Wh))`$ in $`[a_{2k},a_{2k+1}]`$ has to coincide with $`x_k`$ which proves the sufficiency part.

Concerning the necessity part let us assume that $`x_k:=\pi (z_k)`$ is a limit point of zeros of $`(P_{n_\kappa }(.,R/Wh))`$ and that $`z_k`$ is no limit point of $`(z_{k,n_\kappa })`$. Then by (82) and the same arguments as above

(87)
$$|\frac{P_{n_\kappa }(z,R/\rho _\nu h)}{\varphi (z,\mathrm{})^{n_\kappa }}|const>0\text{on}[x_k\epsilon ,x_k+\epsilon ],\epsilon >0,$$

which gives by (86) a contradiction. ∎

###### Theorem 3.9.

Let W satisfy the assumptions of Thm.3.2.

1. Suppose that $`1,\omega _1(\mathrm{}),\mathrm{},\omega _{l1}(\mathrm{})`$ are linearly independent over the rationals. Let $`x_{j_\mu }(a_{2j_\mu },a_{2j_\mu +1})`$, $`\mu =1,\mathrm{},l^{}`$, $`l^{}l1`$, be given. Then there exists a sequence $`(n_\kappa )`$ such that each $`x_{j_\mu }`$ is a limit point of zeros of $`(P_{n_\kappa }(z,R/Wh))`$ and $`P_{n_\kappa }(z,R/Wh)`$, $`\kappa `$, has no zero in the other gaps $`[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}],j\{1,\mathrm{},l1\}\{j_\mu :\mu =1,\mathrm{},l^{}\}`$.
2. Suppose that $`\omega _j(\mathrm{})=k_j/N`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, where $`k_j\{1,\mathrm{},N1\}`$ and $`N\{1\}`$. Then $`(P_n(z,R/Wh))`$ has at most $`N+2`$ accumulation points in each gap $`[a_{2j},a_{2j+1}]`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$.

###### Proof.

Ad a) Put $`\stackrel{}{x}=(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{l1})`$, where $`x_j(a_{2j},a_{2j+1})`$ is arbitrary for $`j\{1,\mathrm{},l1\}\{j_1,\mathrm{},j_l^{}\}`$ and put

(88)
$$\delta _j=\{\begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & \text{for }j\{j_1,\mathrm{},j_l^{}\}\text{,}\hfill \\ +1\hfill & \text{for }j\{1,\mathrm{},l1\}\{j_1,\mathrm{},j_l^{}\}\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Since the harmonic measures are rationally independent it follows from Kronecker’s Lemma, see e.g.\[12, p.23\], and (61) that there exists a sequence $`(n_\kappa )`$ of natural numbers such that for $`k=1,\mathrm{},l1`$,

(89)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill & \frac{(2n_\kappa +Rl+1)}{2}_{\mathrm{}^{}}^\mathrm{}^+\phi _k+\frac{1}{\pi i}_E\phi _k\mathrm{log}|W|\hfill \\ & +\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}(\frac{\mathrm{\#}Z(R,E_j)}{2}+N_{j,n_\kappa })B_{kj}\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}\delta _j_{x_j^{}}^{x_j^+}\phi _k=\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{l1}{}}_{z_j^{}}^{z_j}\phi _k\hfill \end{array}$$

as $`\kappa \mathrm{}`$, where $`N_{j,n_\kappa }`$, $`z_j:=x_j^{\delta _j}`$. Now let $`z_{j,n_\kappa }`$ be the solutions of the Jacobi inversion problem (79) for $`n_\kappa `$, $`\kappa `$. Then it follows by Lemma 3.5 and continuity arguments that

(90)
$$z_{j,n_\kappa }z_j\text{as}\kappa \mathrm{}.$$

Since $`z_j^{\delta _j}`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, part a) follows by Theorem 3.8.

Ad b) In view of (77) and Lemma 3.5 the solutions of (79) satisfy

(91)
$$z_{j,\kappa +mN}(W)=z_{j,\kappa +(m+1)N}(W)$$

for $`j=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, $`n,m`$ and $`\kappa =0,\mathrm{},N1`$ which gives by Theorem 3.8 the assertion. ∎

If we put $`l^{}=0`$ in Theorem 3.9a) we obtain a recent result of S.P. Suetin  who has shown (even for arcs loosley speaking) that there exist a subsequence $`(n_\kappa )`$ such that the zeros of $`(p_{n_\kappa })`$ accumulate on $`E`$ only.

With the help of similar ideas used in this paper we are also able to give corresponding results for polynomials orthogonal with respect to varying exponential weights which are of particular interest in connection with random matrices (see ) as well as for polynomials orthogonal or extremal on more general sets in the complex plane. The results will be given elsewhere.


text:
# Transition form factors and light cone distribution amplitudes of pseudoscalar mesons in the chiral quark model

## 1. Introduction

Effective chiral quark models (ECQM) are very useful tools for the investigation of the nonperturbative sector of QCD. Of particular interest are the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio (NJL) model and its extensions , where the low-energy theorems are fulfilled, and the mechanism of spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry (SBCS) is realized in a simple and transparent way. The internal properties of the ground states of scalar, pseudoscalar, vector, and axial-vector mesons (such as masses, radii, polarizabilities, etc.) as well as all the main decays and other low-energy strong and electroweak interactions of mesons are satisfactorily described in NJL. Recently, a noticeable progress has been achieved also in constructing a $`U(3)\times U(3)`$ NJL model for the description of first radial excitations of scalar, pseudoscalar, and vector mesons, including even the lightest scalar glueball .

As a rule, the NJL model is used in the low-energy physics, in particular, for the description of processes with a low momentum transfer ($`1`$ GeV). And, in view of the above-mentioned success of the NJL model, it is quite interesting to extend the range of its application and to try, in particular, to describe some processes with a large momentum transfer. Indeed, for many of such processes, the factorization theorem  can be applied, which allows one to rewrite the amplitude of the process as a convolution of ”hard” and ”soft” parts. The ”hard” part is described by the perturbative QCD (pQCD), whereas the ”soft” part requires a nonperturbative approach. Usually, in QCD, the nonperturbative dynamics of quarks inside a meson is parameterized by distribution amplitudes (DA) , the exact form of which cannot be derived from pQCD. However, an approximation for DA can be obtained in the QCD sum rules approach (see e.g.). On the other hand, one can calculate the ”soft” part of the amplitude within a chiral quark model, where the dynamics of (constituent) quarks inside a meson is described by the corresponding quark-meson vertex instead of DA (however, one can restore the shape of DA on the base of quark-model calculations). The validity of this approach is investigated in the present work.

In our paper, we calculate the form factors that describe the transition processes $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma `$ or $`\gamma ^{}\gamma P`$, where $`P`$ is a pseudoscalar meson, for a wide range of transferred space-like momenta. Of interest is the kinematic region where one of the photons is not on mass-shell and has a large space-like virtuality. It is shown also that our results do not contradict both the experimental data and other theoretical models . As to experiment, we refer to the data on the $`\gamma ^{}\pi \gamma `$, $`\gamma ^{}\eta \gamma `$, and $`\gamma ^{}\eta ^{}\gamma `$ transition processes reported by the CLEO collaboration . For comparison with other theoretical models, we choose the results recently obtained in the framework of the instanton-induced chiral quark model (IQM) .

The structure of our paper is as follows. In Sect. 2, we introduce the $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma `$ transition form factor. In Sect. 3, the part of the NJL Lagrangian describing the quark-meson interaction as well as the Lagrangian derived in the instanton vacuum model are introduced and the asymptotic behaviour of the $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma `$ transition form factor for pseudoscalar mesons at high space-like virtuality of one the photons is investigated. In particular, the shapes of DA of $`\pi ,\eta `$, and $`\eta ^{}`$ mesons are found. In the last section, we discuss the obtained results and compare them with experimental data. There is also given an outlook of further possible applications of our approach.

## 2. The $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma `$ transition form factor

The transition process $`\gamma ^{}(q_1)P(p)\gamma ^{}(q_2)`$, where the final state mesons with the momentum $`p`$ are, respectively, $`P=\pi ^0,\eta ,\eta ^{}`$, and $`q_1`$ and $`q_2`$ are photon momenta, is described by the amplitude

$$𝒯\left(\gamma ^{}(q_1,e_1)P\left(p\right)\gamma ^{}(q_2,e_2)\right)=_P(q_1^2,q_2^2,p^2)ϵ_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }e_1^\mu e_2^\nu q_1^\rho q_2^\sigma $$
(1)
where $`e_i(i=1,2)`$ are the photon polarization vectors; $`_P(q_1^2,q_2^2,p^2)`$ is the transition form factor; and $`ϵ_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }`$ is the fully anti-symmetric tensor.

Theoretically, at zero virtualities, the form factor

$$_P(0,0,0)=\frac{1}{4\pi ^2f_P}$$
(2)
is related to the axial anomaly . Here $`f_P`$ is a pseudoscalar meson weak decay constant defined by the well known PCAC relation (for the pion, $`f_\pi =93`$ MeV). At asymptotically large photon virtualities, its behaviour is predicted by pQCD  and depends crucially on the internal meson dynamics parameterized by a nonperturbative DA, $`\phi _P^A(x)`$, with $`x`$ being a fraction of the meson momentum, $`p`$, carried by a quark.

Further, it is convenient to parameterize the photon virtualities as $`q_1^2=(1+\omega )Q^2/2`$ and $`q_2^2=(1\omega )Q^2/2`$, where $`Q^2`$ and $`\omega `$ are, respectively, the total virtuality of the photons and the asymmetry in their distribution:

$$Q^2=(q_1^2+q_2^2)0,\mathrm{and}\omega =(q_1^2q_2^2)/(q_1^2+q_2^2),|\omega |1$$
(3)
Recent analysis of the experimental data on the form factors $`_P`$ for small virtuality of one of the photons, $`q_2^20`$, with the virtuality of the other photon being scanned up to $`8`$ GeV2 for the pion, 22 GeV2 for the $`\eta `$, and 30 GeV2 for the $`\eta ^{}`$ mesons, respectively, has been published by the CLEO collaboration . According to this analysis, the process $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma `$ $`\left(|\omega |=1\right)`$ can be fitted by a monopole form factor:

$`_P(q_1^2=Q^2,q_2^20,p^2)|_{\mathrm{fit}}={\displaystyle \frac{g_{P\gamma \gamma }}{1+Q^2/\mu _P^2}},`$ (4)
$`g_{\pi \gamma \gamma }0.27\text{GeV}^1,g_{\eta \gamma \gamma }0.26\text{GeV}^1,g_{\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma }0.34\text{GeV}^1,`$
$`\mu _\pi 0.78\text{GeV},\mu _\eta 0.77\text{GeV},\mu _\eta ^{}0.86\text{GeV},`$
where $`g_{P\gamma \gamma }`$ are the two-photon meson decay constants.

In the lowest order of pQCD, the light-cone Operator Product Expansion (OPE) predicts the high $`Q^2`$ behaviour of the form factor as follows :

$$_P(q_1^2,q_2^2,p^2=0)|_{Q^2\mathrm{}}=J_P\left(\omega \right)\frac{f_P}{Q^2}+O\left(\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }\right)+O\left(\frac{1}{Q^4}\right),$$
(5)
with the asymptotic coefficient given by

$$J_P\left(\omega \right)=\frac{4}{3}\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}\frac{dx}{1\omega ^2(2x1)^2}\phi _P^A(x),$$
(6)
where $`\phi _P^A(x)`$ is the leading-twist meson light-cone DA normalized by $`\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑x\phi _P^A(x)=1`$.

In (6), the asymptotic coefficient is expressed in terms of DA. Alternatively, as it was mentioned in the Introduction, $`J_P(\omega )`$ can be calculated directly either from the NJL model or from IQM. In Sect. 3, one will see that, in both models, $`J_P(\omega )`$ can be rewritten in the form (6), and thus the shape of DA is extracted.

Since the meson DA reflects the internal nonperturbative meson dynamics, the prediction of the value of $`J_P\left(\omega \right)`$ is rather a nontrivial task, and its accurate measurement would provide quite valuable information. It is important to note that, for the considered transition process, the leading asymptotic term of pQCD expansion (5) is not suppressed by the strong coupling constant $`\alpha _s`$. Hence, the pQCD prediction (5) can become reasonable at the highest of the presently accessible momenta $`Q^210`$ GeV2. At asymptotically high $`Q^2`$, the DA evolves to $`\phi _P^{A,\mathrm{asympt}}(x)`$ $`=6x(1x)`$ and $`J_P^{\mathrm{asympt}}\left(\left|\omega \right|=1\right)=2`$. The fit of CLEO data for the pion corresponds to $`J_\pi ^{\mathrm{CLEO}}\left(\left|\omega \right|1\right)=1.6\pm 0.3`$, indicating that already at moderately high momenta this value is not too far from its asymptotic limit.

However, since the pQCD evolution of DA reaches the asymptotic regime very slowly, its exact form at moderately high $`Q^2`$ does not coincide with $`\phi _P^{A,\mathrm{asympt}}(x)`$. At lower $`Q^2`$, the power corrections to the form factor become important. Thus, the study of the behaviour of the transition form factor at all experimentally accessible $`Q^2`$ is the subject of nonperturbative dynamics. So, the theoretical determination of the transition form factor is still challenging, and it is desirable to perform direct calculations of $`_P(q_1^2,q_2^2,p^2)`$ without a priori assumptions about the shape of the meson DA.

The asymptotic coefficient of the light-cone transition form factor in the symmetric kinematics, $`q_1^2=q_2^2`$, $`(\omega =0)`$ at high virtualities, is given by the integral defining $`f_P`$. In the other extreme limit, where one photon is real $`(|\omega |=1)`$, the asymptotic coefficient is proportional to $`\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}\frac{dx}{x}\phi _P^A(x)`$ and thus is very sensitive to a detailed form of the DA.

In ref. , some progress was achieved by using a refined technique based on the OPE with nonlocal condensates , which is equivalent to the inclusion of the whole series of power corrections. By means of the QCD sum rules with nonlocal condensates, it was shown that this approach works in almost the whole kinematic region $`\left|\omega \right|1`$, and that for high values of the asymmetry parameter $`\left|\omega \right|0.8`$, the pion transition form factor is very sensitive to the nonlocal structure of the QCD vacuum.

## 3. The $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma `$ transition form factor in ECQM models

### 3.1. The NJL model Lagrangian

Let us consider the piece of the effective quark-meson Lagrangian that is necessary in our calculations. It has the following form:

$`L`$ $`=`$ $`L_0+L_{\mathrm{int}}`$ (7)
$`L_0`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{q}(i\overline{)}m)q,`$ (8)
$`L_{\mathrm{int}}`$ $`=`$ $`L_1+L_2+L_3+\delta L,`$ (9)
$`L_1`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{q}i\gamma _5\left(g_\pi {\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\lambda ^a\pi ^a+g_{\eta _u}\lambda _\mathrm{u}\eta _u+g_{\eta _s}\lambda _\mathrm{s}\eta _s\right)q,`$ (10)
$`L_2`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{q}i\overline{)}\gamma _5\left(f_\pi ^1(1Z_u^1){\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\lambda ^a\pi ^a+f_u^1(1Z_u^1)\lambda _\mathrm{u}\eta _u+f_s^1(1Z_s^1)\lambda _\mathrm{s}\eta _s\right)q,`$ (11)
$`L_3`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{q}\widehat{𝒬}\overline{)}𝒜q,`$ (12)
where $`m`$ is the diagonal $`3\times 3`$-flavor matrix of constituent quark masses, $`m=\mathrm{diag}(m_u,m_d,m_s)`$, (we consider the case of approximate isotopic symmetry $`m_u=m_d`$); $`\lambda _a`$ are the Gell-Mann matrices, $`\lambda _u=(\sqrt{2}\lambda _0+\lambda _8)/\sqrt{3}`$, $`\lambda _s=(\lambda _0+\sqrt{2}\lambda _8)/\sqrt{3}`$; $`q`$ and $`\pi `$ are, respectively, the quark and pion, and $`\eta _u`$ and $`\eta _s`$ are pure $`\overline{u}u`$ and $`\overline{s}s`$ pseudoscalar meson states.

The fields $`\eta _\mathrm{u}`$ and $`\eta _\mathrm{s}`$ in (10) and (11) are not physical, because they are subject to singlet-octet mixing. Here, it is assumed that the terms responsible for the singlet-octet mixing are accumulated in the term111 The singlet-octet mixing appears once the pseudoscalar gluon anomaly is taken into account . One can also obtain the mixing after introducing the ’t Hooft term into the quark Lagrangian .  $`\delta L`$ (see (9)), the account of which results in the following relation between ”nonphysical” $`\eta _u`$, $`\eta _s`$ and ”physical” $`\eta `$, $`\eta ^{}`$ meson fields:

$`\eta _s`$ $`=`$ $`\eta \mathrm{cos}(\theta _0\theta )\eta ^{}\mathrm{sin}(\theta _0\theta ),`$ (13)
$`\eta _u`$ $`=`$ $`\eta \mathrm{sin}(\theta _0\theta )+\eta ^{}\mathrm{cos}(\theta _0\theta ),`$ (14)
where $`\theta =19^{}`$ is the singlet-octet mixing angle, and $`\theta _035.5^{}`$ is the ideal mixing angle .

The quark-meson coupling constants (see ) are defined as follows:

$$g_\pi =g_u\sqrt{Z_\pi },g_{\eta _u}=g_\mathrm{u}\sqrt{Z_{\eta _u}},g_{\eta _s}=g_\mathrm{s}\sqrt{Z_{\eta _s}},$$
(15)
where we introduced $`g_\mathrm{u}`$ and $`g_\mathrm{s}`$:

$$g_a^2=\frac{4N_\mathrm{c}}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{\theta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}^2k^2)}{(k^2+m_a^2)^2}d_e^4k,(a=\mathrm{u},\mathrm{s}).$$
(16)
The integration is performed in the Euclidean metric. The divergence is eliminated by a simple $`O(4)`$-symmetric cut-off on the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}`$ that characterizes the domain of SBCS.

The terms with derivatives of meson fields in $`L_2`$ (see (11)) appear because of $`\pi a_1`$ transitions , which also results in additional renormalization factors $`Z_a`$ in $`g_\pi ,g_{\eta _u},g_{\eta _s}`$. Further, we assume that $`Z_a`$ for different mesons are approximately equal (see (15)):

$$Z_{\eta _s}Z_{\eta _u}Z_\pi Z=\left(1\frac{6m_u^2}{M_{a_1}^2}\right)^11.45.$$
(17)
Here, $`M_{a_1}=1.23`$ GeV is the mass of the $`a_1`$-meson .

The term $`L_3`$ in (12) describes the electromagnetic interaction of quarks. The photon fields are denoted by $`𝒜`$, and $`\widehat{𝒬}`$ stands for the charge matrix:

$$\widehat{𝒬}=\frac{e}{2}\left(\lambda _3+\frac{\lambda _8}{\sqrt{3}}\right),$$
(18)
where $`e`$ is the elementary electric charge ($`e^2=4\pi \alpha `$ where $`\alpha ^1137`$).

The values of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}`$ and $`m_u`$ are fixed by two equations : i) the Goldberger-Treiman relation $`m_u=g_\pi f_\pi `$ and ii) the $`\rho `$-meson decay constant

$$g_\rho =\sqrt{6}g_u$$
(19)
whose value $`6.1`$ is well known from the experimentally observed decay $`\rho \pi \pi `$. Taking into account these equations and the expression for $`Z`$ (see (17)), one finds the constituent $`u`$-quark mass:

$$m_u^2=\frac{M_{a_1}^2}{12}\left(1\sqrt{1\frac{4g_\rho ^2f_\pi ^2}{M_{a_1}^2}}\right)$$
(20)
with the value $`m_u=280`$ MeV. Equating the left-hand side of (19) to its experimental value and using the definition of $`g_u`$ (see (15)) with $`m_u=280`$ MeV, one obtains: $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}=1.25`$ GeV . The mass of the strange quark is fixed by the kaon mass222The strange quark mass can be fixed also from the $`\varphi `$-meson mass , $`m_s=425`$ MeV .

### 3.2. Meson transition $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma ^{}`$ form factor

Let us consider the $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma ^{}`$ invariant amplitude corresponding to the triangle diagrams shown in Fig. 1:

$$𝒯\left(\gamma ^{}(q_1,e_1)P\left(p\right)\gamma ^{}(q_2,e_2)\right)=t_{P\gamma \gamma }(q_1,e_1;q_2,e_2)+t_{P\gamma \gamma }(q_2,e_2;q_1,e_1),$$
(21)
$`t_{P\gamma \gamma }(q_1,e_1;q_2,e_2)=N_cg_P𝒬_P\times `$
$`\times {\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}}\text{tr}\{i\gamma _5S(k+p/2;m_a)\widehat{e}_1S(k(q_1q_2)/2;m_a)\widehat{e}_2S(kp/2;m_a)\}`$ (22)
where $`𝒬_P`$ depends on the electric charges and flavors of quarks that constitute the meson: $`𝒬_{\pi ^0}=1/3`$ for $`\pi ^0`$, $`𝒬_{\eta _u}=5/9`$ for $`\eta _u`$, and $`𝒬_{\eta _s}=\sqrt{2}/9`$ for $`\eta _s`$; $`S`$ is the quark propagator:

$$S^1(k;m_a)=\overline{)}km_a$$
(23)
with the constituent quark mass $`m_a=m_u`$ for $`P=\pi `$ or $`P=\eta _u`$ and $`m_a=m_s`$ for $`P=\eta _s`$. Comparing (3.2.) with (1), one obtains:

$$_P(q_1^2,q_2^2,p^2)=\frac{g_P}{2\pi ^2}m_aI_{P\gamma \gamma }(q_1^2,q_2^2,p^2).$$
(24)
The Feynman integral $`I_{P\gamma \gamma }(q_1^2,q_2^2,p^2)`$ is given (in Euclidean metric) by

$`I_{P\gamma \gamma }(q_1^2,q_2^2,p^2)=`$ (25)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{\pi ^2}\frac{\theta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}^2k^2)}{[m_a^2+(k+p/2)^2][m_a^2+(kp/2)^2][m_a^2+(k(q_1q_2)/2)^2]}}.`$
In the chiral limit $`p^2=0`$, when both photons are on-mass-shell ($`q_1^2=q_2^2=0`$), integral (25) becomes very simple. Formally, it is finite, and one can set the UV cut-off $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}`$ to infinity, and thus obtain that it is equal to $`1/(2m_a^2)`$. As a result, one reproduces the well-known result for the decay $`\pi ^0\gamma \gamma `$ (see (2)). For the $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ mesons, the result is similar, and the only difference is that the singlet-octet mixing should be taken into account:

$$_\eta (0,0,0)=\frac{1}{4\pi ^2\stackrel{~}{f}_\eta },_\eta ^{}(0,0,0)=\frac{1}{4\pi ^2\stackrel{~}{f}_\eta ^{}},$$
(26)
$`\stackrel{~}{f}_\eta ^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{5}{3f_u}}\mathrm{sin}(\theta _0\theta ){\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{3f_s}}\mathrm{cos}(\theta _0\theta )`$ (27)
$`\stackrel{~}{f}_\eta ^{}^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{5}{3f_u}}\mathrm{cos}(\theta _0\theta )+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{3f_s}}\mathrm{sin}(\theta _0\theta ).`$ (28)
Here, the meson weak decay constants are $`f_uf_\pi ,\text{and}f_s=m_s/g_s1.25f_u.`$ Thus, we have $`\stackrel{~}{f}_\eta =83`$ MeV and $`\stackrel{~}{f}_\eta ^{}=73`$ MeV. (For the discussion of singlet-octet mixing see )

Let us now consider the high virtuality region: $`Q^2\mathrm{}`$ (see (3) for definition) . We estimate the asymptotics of the transition form factor. Let us rewrite the expression for integral (25) by using the Feynman $`\alpha `$parameterization for the denominators and integrating over the angular variables. Then, the corresponding integral $`I_{P\gamma \gamma }`$ is given by

$`I_{P\gamma \gamma }(q_1^2,q_2^2,p^2)={\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}^2/m_q^2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{udu}{m_q^2+u\frac{p^2}{4}}}\times `$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}d\alpha [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{b^4a_+^4}\left(b^2+\sqrt{b^4a_+^4}\right)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{b^4a_{}^4}\left(b^2+\sqrt{b^4a_{}^4}\right)}}],`$ (29)
where $`u=k^2`$ and

$$b^2=m_a^2+u+\frac{1}{2}\alpha Q^2\frac{1}{4}\left(12\alpha \right)p^2,a_\pm ^4=2u\alpha Q^2\left(\alpha \pm \omega \left(1\alpha \right)\right)\left(12\alpha \right)up^2.$$
(30)
In this way, the expression (29) can be safely analyzed in the asymptotic limit of high total virtuality of the photons $`Q^2\mathrm{}`$. Moreover, the integral over $`\alpha `$ can be taken analytically, leading, in the chiral limit $`p^2=0`$, to the asymptotic expression given by (5), where (see )

$`J_P(\omega )J_{P,\mathrm{np}}\left(\omega \right)={\displaystyle \frac{g_P^2𝒬_PZ}{8\pi ^2\omega }}\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}^2/m_q^2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{du}{1+u}}\mathrm{ln}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1+u\left(1+\omega \right)}{1+u\left(1\omega \right)}}\right]\right\}`$ (31)
$`a=\mathrm{u}\text{if}P=\pi ,\eta _u,\text{and}a=\mathrm{s}\text{if}P=\eta _s.`$ (32)
The $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ mesons appear as mixed $`\eta _u`$ and $`\eta _s`$ states (see (14)), and for them, one has:

$`J_\eta (\omega )=c_1J_{\eta _u}(\omega )+c_2J_{\eta _s}(\omega ),`$ (33)
$`J_\eta ^{}(\omega )=c_3J_{\eta _u}(\omega )+c_4J_{\eta _s}(\omega ),`$ (34)
where the coefficients $`c_i`$ are:

$$\begin{array}{cc}c_1=\frac{5f_\mathrm{u}}{3f_\eta }\mathrm{sin}(\theta _0\theta ),\hfill & c_2=\frac{\sqrt{2}f_\mathrm{s}}{3f_\eta }\mathrm{cos}(\theta _0\theta ),\hfill \\ c_3=\frac{5f_\mathrm{u}}{3f_\eta ^{}}\mathrm{cos}(\theta _0\theta ),\hfill & c_4=\frac{\sqrt{2}f_\mathrm{s}}{3f_\eta ^{}}\mathrm{sin}(\theta _0\theta ),\hfill \end{array}$$
(35)
and the constants $`f_\eta `$ and $`f_\eta ^{}`$ are defined as 333 Note that the definition of $`f_\eta `$ and $`f_\eta ^{}`$ differs from that of $`\stackrel{~}{f}_\eta `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{f}_\eta ^{}`$ (see (27) and (28)).

$`f_\eta `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{5}{3}}f_\mathrm{u}\mathrm{sin}(\theta _0\theta ){\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}}f_\mathrm{s}\mathrm{cos}(\theta _0\theta )=95\text{MeV},`$ (36)
$`f_\eta ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{5}{3}}f_\mathrm{u}\mathrm{cos}(\theta _0\theta )+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}}f_\mathrm{s}\mathrm{sin}(\theta _0\theta )=135\text{MeV}.`$ (37)
One should also note an extra factor $`Z`$ in the expression of $`J_P(\omega )`$ in (31). Analogously, the factor $`Z`$ appears in the amplitude of the decay $`\pi \mu \stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu `$ that determines the pion weak coupling constant $`f_\pi `$. To obtain a correct result, one should take account of $`\pi a_1`$ transitions by considering additional contributions going from the diagrams with axial-vector type vertices (see the term $`L_2`$ in (11)). When calculating both the $`\pi \mu \stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu `$ amplitude and the $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma ^{}`$ transition form factor, the account of $`\pi a_1`$ transitions leads to cancelation of the factor $`Z`$.

### 3.3. Distribution amplitudes of pseudoscalar mesons.

The quark-meson interaction in the NJL model  is described by the vertices given in (7)–(12). One just has to calculate the integral (25). Formally, the integral (25) is convergent, and an UV cut-off is not necessary here, however, the extracting of its asymptotic behavior at large $`Q^2`$ would lead to logarithmic dependence $`(\mathrm{ln}Q^2)^2/Q^2`$, which is not expected, as it is known from QCD. Therefore, the UV cut-off in the NJL model should be treated not only as a trick to make the integrals convergent, but also as a way to take into account the nontrivial nonlocal vacuum structure. The UV cut-off also forbids the large momenta flow through meson vertices.

From (31) it is clear that the prediction of the nonperturbative approach to the asymptotic coefficient $`J_P(\omega )`$ is rather sensitive to the ratio of the ultra-violet cut-off $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}`$ to the value of the constituent mass $`m_a`$ and to the relative distribution of the total virtuality among photons, $`\omega `$. In particular, for the off-shell process $`\gamma ^{}\pi ^0\gamma ^{}`$ in the kinematic case of symmetric distribution of photon virtualities, $`q_1^2=q_2^2\mathrm{}`$ ($`\omega 0`$), the result $`J\left(\left|\omega \right|=0\right)=4/3`$ obtained from (31) is in agreement with the OPE prediction.

Integral (25) is similar in its structure to the integral arising in the lowest order of pQCD treating the quark-photon interaction perturbatively. In the latter case, its asymptotic behavior is due to the subprocess $`\gamma ^{}(q_1)+\gamma ^{}(q_2)\overline{q}(\overline{x}p)+q(xp)`$ with $`x`$ ($`\overline{x}=1x`$) being the fraction of the meson momentum $`p`$ carried by the quark produced at the $`q_1`$ ($`q_2)`$ photon vertex. The relevant diagram is similar to the handbag diagram for hard exclusive processes, with the main difference that one should use, as a nonperturbative input, a quark-meson vertex instead of the meson DA. As we see below, this similarity allows one to reconstruct the shape of the meson DA.

Both the expressions for $`J_P`$ derived within the quark-meson model (31) and from the light-cone OPE (6) can be put into the common form

$$J_P\left(\omega \right)=\frac{2}{3\omega }\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑\xi R_P(\xi )\mathrm{ln}\left[\frac{1+\xi \omega }{1\xi \omega }\right]$$
(38)
with

$`R_P^{\mathrm{pQCD}}(\xi )={\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\xi }}\phi _P^A\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+\xi }{2}}\right)\mathrm{and}R_{P,\mathrm{np}}(\xi )=16\pi ^2g_a^2\theta \left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\xi }{1\xi }}{\displaystyle \frac{m_a^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}^2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\xi }},`$ (39)
$`\text{where}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}\xi (2x1)1`$
and similar expressions for $`1\xi 0`$. Equating both the contributions, we find the meson DA

$$\phi _P^A(x)=\frac{g_a^2}{4\pi ^2}\underset{|2x1|}{\overset{1}{}}\theta \left(1\frac{y}{1y}\frac{m_a^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}^2}\right)\frac{dy}{1y}.$$
(40)
Thus, we show that (31) obtained within the NJL model is equivalent to the standard lowest-order pQCD result (6), with the only difference that the nonperturbative information accumulated in the meson DA $`\phi _P^A(x)`$ in pQCD is represented in NJL by the quark-meson vertex and is connected with the regularization procedure.

Within the NJL model, from (40) one can easily obtain analytic expressions for two special DA describing the distribution of $`u(d)`$\- and $`s`$-quarks, respectively,

$$\phi _u^A(x)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{\mathrm{ln}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1\xi _u}{1|2x1|}}\right|}{\xi _u+\mathrm{ln}\left|1\xi _u\right|},\hfill & |2x1|\xi _u\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & |2x1|>\xi _u\hfill \end{array}$$
(41)
where the constant $`\xi _u`$ is defined as follows:

$$\xi _u=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}^2+m_u^2};$$
(42)
$$\phi _s^A(x)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{\mathrm{ln}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1\xi _s}{1|2x1|}}\right|}{\xi _s+\mathrm{ln}\left|1\xi _s\right|},\hfill & |2x1|\xi _s\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & |2x1|>\xi _s\hfill \end{array},$$
(43)
$$\xi _s=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{NJL}}^2+m_u^2}.$$
(44)
For the pion, $`\eta `$, and $`\eta ^{}`$ mesons, one has:

$`\phi _\pi (x)`$ $`=`$ $`\phi _u^A(x),`$ (45)
$`\phi _\eta (x)`$ $`=`$ $`c_1\phi _u^A(x)+c_2\phi _s^A(x),`$ (46)
$`\phi _\eta ^{}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`c_3\phi _u^A(x)+c_4\phi _s^A(x),`$ (47)
where the coefficients $`c_i`$ are defined in (35). The DA calculated in the NJL are shown in Figs. 25.

### 3.4. Instanton-induced effective quark-meson Lagrangian

Let us consider now the piece of the effective quark-meson Lagrangian that appears in IQM. The effective quark-meson dynamics can be summarized in the covariant nonlocal action given by

$`S_{\mathrm{int}}={\displaystyle }d^4xd^4yF[x+y/2,xy/2;\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^2]\times `$
$`\times \overline{q}(x+y/2)i\gamma _5[g_{\pi \overline{q}q}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\lambda ^a\pi ^a(x)+g_{\eta _u}\lambda _u\eta _u(x)+g_{\eta _s}\lambda _s\eta _s(x)]q(xy/2).`$ (48)
The dynamic vertex $`F[x+y/2,xy/2;\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^2]`$ depends on the coordinates of the quark and antiquark and arises due to the quark-antiquark interaction induced by exchange of instanton with size $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^1\rho _c`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}0.742`$ GeV. The nonlocal vertex characterizes the coordinate dependence of order parameter for SBCS and can be expressed in terms of the nonlocal quark condensates.

We restrict ourselves to the approximation (see, e.g. )

$$F[x+y/2,xy/2;\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^2]F(y^2,\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^2),$$
(49)
when the dynamic quark-meson vertex depends only on the relative coordinate of the quark and antiquark squared, $`y^2`$, if neglecting the dependence of the vertex on the angular variable $`(yx)`$. The Fourier transform of the vertex function in the Minkowski space is defined as $`\stackrel{~}{F}(k^2;\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^2)=d^4xF(x^2;\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^2)\mathrm{exp}(ikx)`$ with normalization $`\stackrel{~}{F}(0;\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^2)=1`$, and we assume that it rapidly decreases in the Euclidean region ($`k^2=k_E^2u`$). As in the NJL model, we also approximate the momentum-dependent quark self-energy in the quark propagator $`S^1(k;m_a)=\overline{)}km_a`$ by a constant quark mass  and neglect meson mass effects. The quark masses are $`m_u=275`$ MeV, $`m_s=430`$ MeV, close to those obtained in the NJL model (see Sect. 3.1.). We have to note that the approximations used here are not fully consistent. Further, as the reader will see below, the choice of the model for the quark-meson vertex (49), depending only on the relative coordinate, induces a certain artifact in the $`x`$ behaviour of DA. However, these deficiencies of the chosen approximation are not essential for the present purpose and do not lead to large numericas errors.

The quark-meson coupling is given by the condition

$$g_q^2=\frac{N_c}{8\pi ^2}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑uu\stackrel{~}{F}^2(u;\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^2/m_q^2)\frac{3+2u}{\left(1+u\right)^3};$$
(50)
and the meson weak decay constants $`f_\pi f_u,\text{and}f_s`$ are expressed by

$$f_q=\frac{N_cg_q}{4\pi ^2}M_q\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑uu\stackrel{~}{F}(u;\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^2/m_q^2)\frac{1}{\left(1+u\right)^2}.$$
(51)
We have rescaled the integration variable by the quark mass squared. Within the instanton vacuum model, the size of nonlocality of the nonperturbative gluon field, $`\rho _c\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^10.3`$ fm, is much smaller than the quark Compton length $`m_q^1`$.

To calculate the transition form factors, one can use the same formulas that have been obtained above in the NJL model. The only exception is that the $`\theta `$-function should be replaced by the nonlocal quark-meson vertex function $`\stackrel{~}{F}(u,\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{IQM}}^2/m_q^2)`$. In the next section, we discuss numerical results obtained in IQM as compared with the NJL model calculation and experimental data.

Let us note that we use an approximation to the model with constant constituent quark masses for all three quark lines in the diagrams of the process (see Fig. 1). However, the asymptotic result (31) is independent of the mass in the quark propagator with hard momentum flow, as it should be. The other two quark lines remain soft during the process; thus, the mass $`m_a`$ can be considered as given on a certain characteristic soft scale in the momentum-dependent case $`m_a`$.

## 4. Discussion and conclusion

Within the two ECQM under consideration that describe the quark-meson dynamics, we calculated the $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma ^{}`$ transition form factor at moderately high momentum transfers squared in a wide kinematic domain. From the model calculations, the normalization coefficient $`J_P(\omega )`$ of the leading $`Q^2`$ term is found (see (31)). It depends on the ratio of the constituent quark mass to the UV cut-off $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and also on the kinematics of the process. From the comparison of the kinematic dependence of the asymptotic coefficient of the transition form factors, given by pQCD and NJL, the meson distribution amplitudes (40) are derived. Analogously, a relation between DA and the dynamic quark-meson vertex function is obtained in IQM. In the specific case of symmetric kinematics ($`q_1^2=q_2^2`$), our result agrees with the one obtained by OPE and also with the expression for the constant $`f_P`$ that determines the decay $`P\mu \stackrel{~}{\nu }_\mu `$ of meson $`P`$.

Let us discuss DA obtained in different approaches. In the NJL, we obtained explicit expressions for the DA of pion, $`\eta `$, and $`\eta ^{}`$ meson. They are plotted in Figs. 24 (solid line) from where one can see that the NJL model predicts a more flat distribution of quark momenta in a meson than IQM. To compare with other theoretical approaches, we also plotted, as a sample, the results obtained in IQM (dashed line). There are also given the asymptotic pQCD expression for DA: $`\varphi ^{\mathrm{asympt}}(x)=6x(1x)`$ (dashed-dotted line). One can see that for the most of $`x`$, the DA’s shapes are similar in different approaches. The difference can be noticed near $`x1/2`$ and at the edges. The cusp at $`x=1/2`$ and a very sharp decrease of DA near $`x=0`$ and $`x=1`$ are artifacts closely related to the UV regularization in the NJL model and to the shape of the nonlocal quark-meson vertex function in IQM. However, these deficiencies turned out to be not crucial in our calculations.

Now, we would like to make some notes regarding the definition of $`f_\eta `$ and $`f_\eta ^{}`$ used by authors of . In , $`f_P`$ are obtained from the tabulated data on the decays $`P\gamma \gamma `$, using the low-energy limit of the process amplitude

$$_P(0,0,0)1/(4\pi ^2\stackrel{~}{f}_P)$$
(52)
(see (6) in ). This works well for the pion, but the case of the $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ mesons is rather different because of the singlet-octet mixing. In the limit $`Q^2\mathrm{}`$, one should expect:

$$\underset{Q^2\mathrm{}}{lim}Q^2_P(q_1^2=Q^2,q^2=0,p^2=0)=2f_P,$$
(53)
where $`f_P`$ are not the same as $`\stackrel{~}{f}_P`$ except for $`f_\pi `$ as one can see from comparing (36) and (37) with (27) and (28). That is why the CLEO fit noticeably disagrees with the limit $`2f_\eta ^{}`$ (see (5) in ) drawn in Fig. 23 . Therefore, it is not correct to use the equation (7) in  to perform a fit. From our calculation, we see that, taking into account the singlet-octet mixing, one can avoid the discrepancy in the description of the $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma `$ interaction both at small and large $`Q^2`$.

Now we compare our results for the case $`\omega =1`$ ($`\gamma ^{}P\gamma `$) with those given by the CLEO collaboration  for large $`Q^2`$. We calculate the product of $`Q^2`$ and transition form factor:

$$_P(\omega )=\underset{Q^2\mathrm{}}{lim}Q^2_P(q_1^2,q_2^2,p^2).$$
(54)
Theoretically we have

$$_P(\omega )=J_P(\omega )f_P,$$
(55)
according to (5). In the NJL model, $`J_\pi (1)=1.97`$, $`J_\eta (1)=2.04`$, $`J_\eta ^{}(1)=1.9`$. Therefore, $`_\pi (1)0.184`$ GeV, $`_\eta (1)0.193`$ GeV, and $`_\eta ^{}(1)0.256`$ GeV. The IQM predicts $`J_\pi (1)=1.78`$, $`J_\eta (1)=1.83`$, $`J_\eta ^{}(1)=1.73`$ and $`_\pi (1)0.16`$ GeV, $`_\eta (1)0.17`$ GeV, and $`_\eta ^{}(1)0.23`$ GeV.

The infinite value of $`Q^2`$ cannot be reached in experiment, so we determine $`_P(\omega )`$ at the value of $`Q^2`$, maximum accessible in experiment. Thus, the CLEO collaboration gives $`_\pi (1)=0.17\pm 0.3`$ GeV at $`Q^2=7.09.0`$ GeV2, $`_\eta (1)0.16`$ GeV at $`Q^222`$ GeV2, $`_\eta ^{}(1)0.25`$ GeV at $`Q^230`$ GeV2. The monopole interpolation for the transition form factors (2.) obtained both theoretically and experimentally is shown in Figs. 68. One can see, that the experiment gives values for the transition form factors lower than models. The biggest difference (about 20 %) displays for the $`\eta `$ meson. The best agreement of models with the CLEO fit is obtained for $`\pi `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$.

The constants $`g_{P\gamma \gamma }`$ in the monopole Ansatz (2.) for the transition form factors are related with the $`P\gamma \gamma `$ decay width. It is interesting to compare their values predicted in different models with experimental data. According to (52), we obtain from NJL: $`g_{\pi \gamma \gamma }=0.27`$ GeV-1, $`g_{\eta \gamma \gamma }=0.31`$ GeV-1, and $`g_{\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma }=0.35`$ GeV-1. The same gives us IQM. From experiment we have $`g_{\pi \gamma \gamma }^{\mathrm{exp}}=0.26`$ GeV-1, $`g_{\eta \gamma \gamma }^{\mathrm{exp}}=0.26`$ GeV-1, and $`g_{\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma }^{\mathrm{exp}}=0.34`$ GeV-1. Again, the model prediction for $`\pi `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ better suits to the experimental values, whereas for the $`\eta `$ meson, one has a noticeable discrepancy.

The results presented in our paper are in accordance with the conclusions made in  within the QCD sum rules, which evidences that our approach is valid for the process under consideration and makes us hope that it can be applied to other processes with large momentum transfers, as well.

We plan to use the ECQM approach approved here on the process $`\gamma ^{}P\gamma `$, for the description of the following processes: $`\gamma ^{}P\rho `$, $`\gamma ^{}P\omega `$, $`\gamma ^{}P^{}\gamma `$ (with $`P^{}`$ being a radial excitation of a pseudoscalar meson), $`\gamma ^{}S\gamma `$ (with $`S`$ being a scalar meson), $`\gamma ^{}\gamma A`$ (with $`A`$ being an axial-vector meson), $`\gamma ^{}\gamma \pi \sigma `$, $`\gamma ^{}\gamma \pi \rho `$, $`\gamma ^{}\gamma ^{}\pi \pi `$ etc.

The work is supported by the Heisenber-Landau program and RFBR Grants 01-02-16231 and 02-02-16194 and by Grant INTAS-2000-366.

## Figure captions

1. The diagrams contributing to the process $`\gamma ^{}\gamma ^{}P`$ ($`\gamma ^{}P\gamma ^{}`$) amplitude.
2. The DA $`\phi _\mathrm{u}`$ in the NJL and IQM models and the asymptotic DA.
3. The DA $`\phi _\mathrm{s}`$ in the NJL and IQM models and the asymptotic DA.
4. The DA $`\phi _\eta `$ in the NJL and IQM models and the asymptotic DA.
5. The DA $`\phi _\eta ^{}`$ in the NJL and IQM models and the asymptotic DA.
6. The light-cone transition form factor for the pion. The solid line corresponds to the NJl-model calculation, the dashed line is a fit to the CLEO data, the dashed-dotted line is corresponds to IQM, and the dotted line is $`2f_\pi `$.
7. The light-cone transition form factor for the $`\eta `$ meson. The solid line corresponds to the NJl-model calculation, the dashed line is a fit to the CLEO data, the dashed-dotted line is corresponds to IQM, and the dotted line is $`2f_\eta `$.
8. The light-cone transition form factor for the $`\eta ^{}`$ meson. The solid line corresponds to the NJl-model calculation, the dashed line is a fit to the CLEO data, the dashed-dotted line is corresponds to IQM, and the dotted line is $`2f_\eta ^{}`$.

## Figures