text:
# To appear in Journal of Mathematical Physics (2002) Extensive form of equilibrium nonextensive statistics

## I Introduction

In this paper we will discuss some problems of nonextensive statistical mechanics (NSM) relevant to the factorization of compound probability into product of single body probability :

$`\rho ={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\rho _n,`$ (1)
where $`N`$ is the number of subsystems in the system of interest, $`\rho `$ is the $`q`$-exponential distribution (QED) : $`\rho [1(1q)\beta H]^{\frac{1}{1q}}`$ ($`[.]0`$), as given by the maximization of Tsallis entropy $`S_q=\text{Tr}\frac{\rho \rho ^q}{1q}`$ (Boltzmann constant $`k_B=1`$ and $`q>0`$) under some constraints. This factorization Eq.(1) has been viewed as a result of the independence of noninteracting subsystems having additive energy, just as in Boltzmann-Gibbs statistics (BGS) supposing short range interactions, and caused confusions in some theoretical studies of NSM and its applications to many-body problems. On the basis of a new idea relating Eq.(1) to thermodynamic equilibrium, we will argue that these confusions can be avoided if we introduce suitable nonadditive thermodynamic variables satisfying Eq.(1). Some theoretical consequences for quantum distributions of this “equilibrium version” of NSM will be studied.

Due to the necessity of defining additive average value of some extensive $`q`$-deformed thermodynamic variables, the discussions will be made within the formalism of incomplete statistics (IS) with $`\text{Tr}\rho ^q=1`$ and normalized average $`\overline{x}=\text{Tr}\rho ^qx`$. The reader will find that the quantum distributions of IS indeed show some particular properties already noticed with strongly correlated electrons.

## II About incomplete normalization

IS as a alternative version of NSM was originally motivated by some theoretical peculiarities in the last Tsallis version of NSM based on the conventional normalization and unnormalized expectations.

The basic assumption of IS is that our knowledge about physical systems is in general incomplete due to unknown space-time correlations or the effects of known interactions which can not be exactly studied (such as chaos). In this case, probability distributions are incomplete, i.e., $`\text{Tr}\rho =Q1`$ (or $`_{i=1}^wp_i=Q`$ where $`w`$ is only the number of accessible states in phase space). One can only write $`\text{Tr}F(\rho )=1`$ where $`F`$ is certain function of $`\rho `$. In the case of complete or approximately complete distribution (such as in BGS), $`F`$ is identity function. Recently, in order to overcome some of theoretical difficulties of NSM in keeping the framework prescribed by Tsallis entropy, we proposed $`F(\rho )=\rho ^q`$ so that

$$\text{Tr}\rho ^q=1,$$
(2)
where $`q`$ is the incompleteness index. Since $`\rho <1`$, we have to set $`q[0,\mathrm{}]`$. $`q=0`$ should be avoided because it leads to $`\rho =0`$ for all states. We note that Eq.(2) has been successfully employed to deduce some power laws based on Rényi’s entropy.

This kind of incomplete normalization is possible whenever the phase space is partially known or accessible. With a fractal or chaotic phase space, e.g., a complete calculation of probability becomes in general impossible. In this sense, a plausible justification of Eq.(2) may be inspired by a work of Tsallis discussing nonadditive energy and probability distributions on fractal supports, although at that stage the work was not connected to anomalous normalization like Eq.(2). In that work, considering some simple self-similar fractal structures (e.g. Cantor set), one can obtain :

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{W}{}}[\frac{V_i(k)}{V(0)}]^{d_f/d}=1$$
(3)
where $`V_i(k)`$ may be seen as the segments of the fractal structure at a given iteration of order $`k`$, $`V(0)`$ a characteristic volume of the fractal structure embedded in a $`d`$-dimension Euclidean space, $`d_f=\frac{\mathrm{ln}n}{\mathrm{ln}m}`$ is the fractal dimension, $`n`$ the number of segments replacing a segment of the precedent iteration, $`m`$ the scale factor of the iterations and $`W=n^k`$ the total number of segments at the $`k^{th}`$ iteration. If we suppose that the fractal structure with $`k\mathrm{}`$ is a phase space containing homogeneously distributed points, the exact microcanonical probability distribution of the $`k^{th}`$ iteration can be defined as

$$p_i=\frac{V_i(k)}{V}=\frac{V_i(k)}{_i^WV_i(k)}$$

where $`V`$ is the total volume of the phase space. This distribution obviously sums to one. The problem is that $`V`$ is an indefinite volume as $`k\mathrm{}`$ and impertinent for exact probability definition. In addition, $`V`$ is not differentiable and contains inaccessible points. Thus exact summation in $`V`$ would be impossible. Now if we define $`p_i=\frac{V_i(k)}{V_0}`$ as a physical or effective distribution, then we have

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{W}{}}p_i^{d_f/d}[V_0/V(0)]^{d_f/d}=1,$$

where $`V_0`$ is a completely accessible and infinitely differentiable support on which the calculation of $`p_i`$ is possible. If we choose $`V_0=V(0)`$, we can write Eq.(2) with $`q=d_f/d`$. The conventional normalization $`_{i=1}^Wp_i=1`$ can be recovered when $`d_f=d`$.

The above example is only a case of equiprobable distribution on simple fractal structure, but it illustrates very well the possibility that, in complex cases, a physical probability may not sum to one and may sum to unity only through a kind of power normalization, which, pertinent and useful for incomplete distributions, is consistent with the discussions of reference  on the mass calculation and the information consideration in porous structures.

## III Factorization of compound probability and thermodynamic equilibrium

In NSM, there are two major problems connected tightly to the factorization of compound probability. The first concerns the application of NSM to many-body systems via one-body distribution. NSM is originally intended to describe complex systems with long range interactions or fractal structure of space-time showing nonextensive phenomena. So from the beginning of this theory, Eq.(1) is supposed for composite systems containing $`N`$ statistically independent subsystems in order to elicit the nonextensive character by following relation :

$`\mathrm{ln}[1+(1q)S_q]={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{ln}[1+(1q)S_q(n)]`$ (4)
For $`N=2`$, $`S_q=S_q(1)+S_q(2)+(1q)S_q(1)S_q(2)`$ as one often finds in the literature. Due to this $`independence`$, it has been believed by many that exact calculations within NSM should use the additive hamiltonian $`H_0=_{n=1}^NH_n`$, where $`H_n`$ is the hamiltonian of $`n^{th}`$ subsystem. However, this hamiltonian is not compatible with neither Eq.(1) nor Eq.(4) since these equations applied to QED mean:

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}H_n+{\displaystyle \underset{k=2}{\overset{N}{}}}[(q1)\beta ]^{k1}{\displaystyle \underset{n_1<n_2<\mathrm{}<n_k}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}}H_{n_j}`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`H_0+H_c,`$ (6)
where $`\beta `$ is the inverse temperature. In order to reconcile $`H_0`$ and Eq.(1), a so called factorization approximation is proposed by neglecting the second term at the right hand side of Eq.(5). This approximation has been, explicitly or not, employed in most of the applications of NSM via one-body QED. These applications certainly shows the usefulness of one-body QED, but the approximation neglecting the correlation energy by supposing sometimes weak interacting dilute particles is not a reassuring basis. Indeed, some recent works show that the correlation energy ($`H_c`$) given by the second term of Eq.(5) is in general not negligible and that the partition function given by using additive energy is completely different from that given by using Eq.(5) when $`N`$ is large. So a doubt arises about the connection between independence of subsystems and additive energy. Recently, an interesting idea is forwarded to define a “quasi-independence” according to nonadditive energy Eq.(5) in order to apply NSM to turbulence flow problems. As a matter of fact, this proposal implies rejection of classical independence for Eq.(1).

The second problem connected to probability factorization is the establishment of zeroth law and the definition of temperature for NSM. It was believed that the zeroth law of thermodynamics was absent within NSM due to the paradox between Eq.(1) and the additive energy. Recently, a series of works have been published on this issue claiming the establishment of zeroth law and the definition of a generalized temperature on the basis of additive hamiltonian $`H_0`$ and Eq.(4) by neglecting $`H_c`$. It is evident that the paradox mentioned above persists behind this approximate zeroth law.

The central question is : Eq.(1) certainly implies independence of noninteracting systems for $`BGS`$, but does it mean the same thing for NSM? Very recently, Abe proposed a general pseudoadditivity for entropy required by the existence of thermal equilibrium in composite nonextensive systems. For a system containing $`N`$ subsystems, the pseudoadditivity is :

$`\mathrm{ln}[1+\lambda _Sf(S)]={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{ln}[1+\lambda _Sf(S_n)],`$ (7)
where $`f`$ is certain differentiable function satisfying $`f(0)=0`$ and $`\lambda _S`$ a constant depending on the nature of the system of interest. On the other hand, Eq.(7) applied to Tsallis entropy means $`f(S)=S`$ and $`\lambda _S=1q`$, which directly leads to $`\mathrm{ln}\text{Tr}\rho ^q=_{i=1}^N\mathrm{ln}\text{Tr}\rho _i^q`$ or Eq.(1) (i.e. with classical probability $`p_i`$ of the state $`i`$, $`(p_ip_j)^q=p_{ij}^q`$ means $`p_ip_j=p_{ij}`$). So Eq.(1) has nothing to do with statistical independence of subsystems. It is a consequence of the existence of thermodynamic equilibrium and must be rigorously respected by all exact calculations. Equilibrium energy has been proved to satisfy the same kind of pseudoadditivity as Eq.(7) ($`S`$ is replaced by $`H`$). If we choose $`f(H)=H`$ and $`\lambda _H=(q1)\beta `$, we get

$`\mathrm{ln}[1+(q1)\beta H]={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{ln}[1+(q1)\beta H_n]`$ (8)
which is just Eq.(5) satisfying Eq.(1). In this way, the zeroth law becomes evident and a temperature can be straightforwardly defined at maximum entropy and minimum energy.

## IV Additive formalism of NSM

### A Information measure

The $`g`$-logarithmic information measure

$`I_\nu ={\displaystyle \frac{(1/\rho )^\nu 1}{\nu }}`$ (9)
is a nonadditive generalization of Hartley formula $`I=\mathrm{ln}(1/\rho )`$ and can be employed to deduce Tsallis entropy . $`I_g`$ or $`I`$ is the information needed to specify at which state the system is localized. $`\nu `$ equals $`1q`$ or $`q1`$, depending on the normalization procedures of $`\rho `$. Using Eq.(1), we get :

$`\mathrm{ln}(1+\nu I_\nu )={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{ln}(1+\nu I_\nu ^{(n)})`$ (10)
where $`I_\nu ^{(n)}`$ is the information needed to specify the $`n^{th}`$ subsystem. This pseudoadditivity is evident if we recast the generalized Hartley formula Eq.(9) as follows

$`I_\nu ={\displaystyle \frac{e^{\nu \mathrm{ln}\rho }1}{\nu }}={\displaystyle \frac{e^{\nu I}1}{\nu }}`$ (11)
where

$`I=\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}(1+\nu I_\nu )}{\nu }}.`$ (12)
can be referred to as $`q`$-deformed information measure and is additive supposed Eq.(1). It is noteworthy that this $`I`$ is not the quantity of Hartley information if $`\rho `$ is a nonextensive distribution for $`\nu 0`$.

### B Canonical ensemble

Now let us define an additive entropy $`S`$ as follows :

$`S=\text{Tr}\rho ^q\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}`$ (13)
and an additive $`q`$-deformed “hamiltonian”

$`h={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}[1+(q1)\beta H]}{(q1)\beta }}.`$ (14)
So Eq.(8) becomes

$`h={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}h_n.`$ (15)
This means following transformations :

$`H={\displaystyle \frac{e^{(q1)\beta h}1}{(q1)\beta }},H_n={\displaystyle \frac{e^{(q1)\beta h_n}1}{(q1)\beta }}`$ (16)
and

$`\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z}}[1+(q1)\beta H]^{1/(1q)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z}}e^{\beta h},`$ (17)
where $`Z^q=\text{Tr}e^{q\beta h}`$. It should be noticed that, when addressing a system of $`N`$ particles, we have to write $`H_n=\frac{p_n^2}{2m}+V_n`$ for single particle so that $`h_n=\frac{\mathrm{ln}[1+(q1)\beta (\frac{p_n^2}{2m}+V_n)]}{(q1)\beta }`$ where $`\frac{p_n^2}{2m}`$ is the classical kinetic energy and $`V_n`$ is the potential energy. It is clear that $`H_n`$, instead of $`h_n`$, is the physical energy. When $`q=1`$ ($`H_c=0`$), we recover $`H_n=h_n`$ and $`H=h=_{n=1}^N\frac{p_n^2}{2m}`$. The $`q`$-deformed internal energy $`u`$ is defined as follows :

$`u=\text{Tr}\rho ^qh.`$ (18)
We can easily show that the distribution Eq.(17) can be yielded by the maximum of the additive “entropy” $`S`$ (which surely exists due to the monotonic relation between $`I`$ and $`I_\nu `$) under the constraints of Eq.(18) and incomplete normalization $`\text{Tr}\rho ^q=1`$. It is easy to verify that $`S=\mathrm{ln}Z+\beta u`$ and, via the zeroth law, $`\frac{S}{u}=\beta =1/T`$. The “first law” is given by $`du=TdSpdV`$ where $`p`$ is $`q`$-deformed pressure and $`V`$ the volume of the system which is chosen to be additive here. The $`q`$-deformed Helmholtz free energy $`f`$ is defined as $`f=uTS=T\mathrm{ln}Z`$ and can be connected to the nonadditive one $`F_q=T\frac{Z^{1q}1}{1q}`$ as follows :

$`f={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}[1+(q1)\beta F_q]}{(q1)\beta }}.`$ (19)
So $`p=(\frac{f}{V})_T=P/Z^{1q}`$ where $`P=(\frac{F_q}{V})_T`$ is the real pressure. In this scenario, the thermodynamic equilibrium of a system $`C`$ containing two equilibrium systems $`A`$ and $`B`$ satisfying $`V(C)=V(A)+V(B)`$ corresponds to $`\beta (A)=\beta (B)`$ and $`p(A)=p(B)`$. This implies that $`P(A)P(B)`$ if $`Z(A)Z(B)`$. This is because we have supposed nonadditive energy and additive volume. As a matter of fact, in this formalism, if we want that $`P(A)=P(B)`$ at equilibrium, we must accept nonadditive volume and additive $`q`$-deformed volume $`v`$ with which the first law becomes $`du=TdSPdv`$. This means : $`P=(\frac{F_q}{V})_T=(\frac{f}{v})_T`$. This relation can help to deduce $`vV`$ relation. We also have $`v=(\frac{g}{P})_T`$ where the $`q`$-deformed Gibbs energy is given by $`g=f+Pv`$. Since $`v`$ is additive, $`V`$ will be nonadditive if $`v`$ is not a linear function of $`V`$. We will come back to this issue later in this paper.

### C Grand canonical ensemble

It is known that the grand canonical ensemble $`QED`$ has been given by :

$`\rho [1(1q)\beta (H\mu N)]^{\frac{1}{1q}}`$ (20)
for $`N`$ identical particle systems, where $`\mu `$ is chemical potential. This distribution has been widely used for quantum particle systems. But the zeroth law has never been rigorously established for this ensemble. In a previous work, one of the authors of present paper deduced exact quantum distributions on the basis of Eq.(20) and following relation suggested by Eq.(1) :

$`\rho [1(1q)\beta (H_n\mu )]^{\frac{N}{1q}}.`$ (21)
In the framework of IS, the exact distributions are given by

$`\overline{n}_k={\displaystyle \frac{1}{[1+(q1)\beta (e_k\mu )]^{\frac{q}{q1}}\pm 1}}`$ (22)
where $`e_k`$ is the energy of one-particle state $`k`$ and“+” and “-” correspond to fermions and bosons, respectively. Now we show that this distribution can be written in exponential form just as for conventional noninteracting quantum gases and that the zeroth law can be rigorously verified.

Let us suppose $`\beta =\frac{\beta ^{}}{1+(q1)\beta ^{}\mu }=\beta ^{}[1(q1)\beta ^{}\mu ^{}]`$ (or $`\beta ^{}=\frac{\beta }{1(q1)\beta \mu }`$) and $`\mu =\frac{\mu ^{}}{1+(1q)\beta ^{}\mu ^{}}`$ (or $`\mu ^{}=\frac{\mu }{1+(q1)\beta ^{}\mu }=\mu [1(q1)\beta \mu ]`$) which imply $`\beta ^{}\mu ^{}=\beta \mu `$. Eq.(21) can be recast as :

$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z}}[1(1q)\beta ^{}H_n]^{\frac{N}{1q}}[1+(1q)\beta ^{}\mu ^{}]^{\frac{N}{1q}}`$ (23)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z}}e^{N\beta (h_n\omega )}`$ (24)
where $`\omega =\frac{\mathrm{ln}[1+(1q)\beta ^{}\mu ^{}]}{(1q)\beta ^{}}`$ and $`h_n=\frac{\mathrm{ln}[1+(q1)\beta ^{}H_n]}{(q1)\beta ^{}}`$. $`Z^q=\text{Tr}[1(1q)\beta (H\mu N)]^{\frac{q}{1q}}=\{\text{Tr}[1(1q)\beta ^{}H_n]^{\frac{q}{1q}}[1+(1q)\beta ^{}\mu ^{}]^{\frac{q}{1q}}\}^N=(\text{Tr}e^{q\beta (h_n\omega )})^N=z^N`$ and where $`z`$ is one-particle partition function. Just as for canonical ensemble, this exponential distribution can be shown to be the result of the maximization of $`S`$ under the constraint $`\overline{N}=\text{Tr}\rho ^qN`$ in addition to Eq.(18) and incomplete normalization. Now Eq.(22) can be written as

$`\overline{n}_k=\text{Tr}\rho ^qn_k={\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^{q\beta ^{}(ϵ_k\omega )}\pm 1}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{[1+(q1)\beta ^{}e_k]^{\frac{q}{q1}}[1(q1)\beta ^{}\mu ^{}]^{\frac{q}{q1}}\pm 1}}`$ (25)
where $`ϵ_k`$ is the eigenvalue of $`h_n`$. From Eq.(22), we see that, for free particles (in the sense that we do not write the energy of interaction between particles in the hamiltonian and let it be “absorbed” in the nonextensive part of energy $`H_c`$ and related to $`q`$ different from unity), we have to set $`q<1`$ to ensure positive $`[1+(q1)\beta (H_n\mu )]`$ for fermions when $`T0`$. This means that, at low temperatures, there will be few fermions beyond Fermi-energy. For bosons with $`\mu <0`$, we have to put $`q>1`$.

It is straightforward to write $`S=\mathrm{ln}Z+\beta ^{}u+\beta ^{}\omega \overline{N}`$ and, with the method employed in references , to show that, for a system $`C`$ containing two equilibrium systems $`A`$ and $`B`$ satisfying $`\overline{N}(C)=\overline{N}(A)+\overline{N}(B)`$, $`\beta ^{}(A)=\beta ^{}(B)`$ and $`\omega (A)=\omega (B)`$ thus $`\mu ^{}(A)=\mu ^{}(B)`$, $`\mu (A)=\mu (B)`$ and $`\beta (A)=\beta (B)`$ or $`T(A)=T(B)`$. The zeroth law is verified. One may ask why we identify $`\beta `$, instead of $`\beta ^{}`$, to real temperature. The possible reasons are the following : 1) $`\beta `$ is the Lagrange multiplier of the constraint on real energy in entropy maximization; 2) if $`\beta ^{}`$ is inverse temperature, then $`\mu ^{}`$ must be chemical potential, which makes it impossible to get distribution Eq.(23) by real entropy maximization with the constraint on $`\overline{N}`$; 3) $`e_f`$ would be different from the chemical potential $`\mu ^{}`$ and equal to $`\frac{\mu ^{}}{1+(1q)\beta ^{}\mu ^{}}`$ which inevitably drops to zero when $`T0`$.

Now we will focus the discussion on 2D fermion distribution. According to Eq.(22) the Fermi energy $`e_{f_0}`$ at $`T=0`$ is given by $`e_{f_0}=\frac{2\pi \mathrm{}^2\sigma }{m}`$ where $`\sigma `$ is the particle density and $`\mathrm{}`$ Planck constant.

When $`T>0`$, the summation $`\overline{N}=_k\overline{n}_k`$ can not be calculated for arbitrary $`q`$ to give explicit expression of $`e_f`$. So we have recourse to numerical calculation of $`q`$-dependence of $`e_f`$ for given temperatures (Figure 1) and $`T`$-dependence for given $`q`$ values (Figure 2). We see that, for the approximate distributions functions (ADF) $`n_k=1/\{[1+(q1)\beta (e_k\mu )]^{\frac{1}{q1}}+1\}`$ deduced from Eq.(20) with factorization approximation and additive energy, $`e_f`$ depends only slightly on $`q`$. On the other hand, the $`e_f`$ of IS in the present work shows a strong increase with decreasing $`q`$ up to two times $`e_{f_0}`$ of conventional Fermi-Dirac distribution (CFD). This $`e_f`$ increase has been indeed noticed through numerical calculations for strongly correlated heavy electrons on the basis of tight-binding Kondo lattice model. In Figure 2, we show that $`e_f`$ of IS does not monotonically decrease with increasing temperature, in contrast with the $`e_f`$ behavior of CFD. This kind of non monotonic temperature evolution of $`e_f`$ was also seen through numerical work for correlated electrons in two-dimensional $`tJ`$ model

The IS distribution given by Eq.(22) is plotted in Figure 3 for $`T=100K`$. The particle density $`\sigma `$ is chosen to given $`e_{f_0}=1`$ eV. As expected, the distribution changes drastically with $`q`$. When $`q`$ decreases, we notice a flattening of the distribution with always a sharp drop of occupation number $`n`$ at $`e_f`$ which increases. This flattening is also noticed in numerical calculations for strong coupling electrons.

The grand canonical partition function $`Z`$ can be calculated to give the $`q`$-deformed grand potential $`\overline{\omega }=T^{}\mathrm{ln}Z=\frac{T^{}}{q}_k\mathrm{ln}(1\overline{n}_k)`$ as usual, where $`T^{}=1/\beta ^{}=T+(1q)\mu `$. The grand potential is given by :

$`\mathrm{\Omega }={\displaystyle \frac{e^{(q1)\beta ^{}\overline{\omega }}1}{(q1)\beta }}=T{\displaystyle \frac{_k(1\overline{n}_k)^{\frac{q1}{q}}1}{(q1)}}.`$ (26)
In this $`q`$-deformed extensive formalism, Euler theorem applies just as in BGS. So we have $`g=\omega \overline{N}=u+pVT^{}S`$. Compare this with $`S=\mathrm{ln}Z+\beta ^{}u\beta ^{}\omega \overline{N}`$ to obtain the following equations of state :

$`pV=T^{}\mathrm{ln}Z={\displaystyle \frac{T^{}}{q}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\mathrm{ln}(1\overline{n}_k).`$ (27)
## V Discussion and conclusion

The formalism of NSM presented here is required by the existence of thermodynamic equilibrium or by Eq.(1) for nonextensive systems described by Tsallis entropy. Theoretically the formalism is self-consistent. Experimental or numerical evidences are needed to verify the thermodynamic relations. In this framework, all the successful applications of NSM conforming with Eq.(1) are still valid. But the approximate applications carried out for many-body systems using additive energy as exact hamiltonian (not consistent with the existence of thermodynamic equilibrium) should be carefully reviewed.

As mentioned above, we have noticed similar properties between the IS fermion distribution and that of strongly correlated electrons. This similarity shows the merit of NSM in describing strong interacting systems. On the other hand, we noticed that a flattening of $`n`$ drop at $`e_f`$ with increasing correlation, observed experimentally and numerically with weakly correlated electrons, is absent within NSM fermion distributions which always show very sharp $`n`$ drop at $`e_f`$ at low temperatures. A detailed study of this problem will be presented in another paper of ours.

It is worth mentioning that, in the present work, energy is nonadditive to satisfy the requirement of thermodynamic equilibrium. Nonadditive energy can happen if interaction is no longer of short-range and not localized only between the containing walls of subsystems. But in the literature, there are rarely explicit expressions of nonadditive energy. One of explicit examples is the long-range Ising model where the internal energy $`U(N,T)`$ may proportional to $`N^c`$ ($`c`$ is a constant), instead of $`N`$, the number of spins in the system. This energy can be shown to satisfy Abe’s pseudoadditivity for energy if we choose f(U) to be proportional, e.g., to $`N`$ (with $`\lambda _H=0`$) or to $`e^N1`$ (with $`\lambda _H=1`$).

Indeed, theoretically, nonadditive physical quantities (energy, volume … ) is not evident within the statistics with complete distributions because all possible states (all points in phase space) are counted and summed here. But from the viewpoint of incomplete statistics, nonadditivity may be interpreted as a consequence of incomplete summation of state points in phase space due to the incompleteness of our knowledge about the physical systems.

Nevertheless, the fact that the correlation energy $`H_c`$ of NSM depends on temperature, as shown in Eq.(5) or Eq.(8), is not an easy aspect to be understood. A possible interpretation is that these nonadditive equations are required or prescribed by thermal equilibrium with Tsallis entropy and so naturally change with temperature. This implies that the effect of correlations may depend on temperature.

Summing up, within the framework of incomplete statistics, it is argued that the nonextensive thermostatistics should be based on the factorization of compound probability suggested, not by “independence” of noninteracting systems, but by existence of thermodynamic equilibrium in interacting systems having Tsallis entropy. So this factorization must be viewed as a fundamental hypothesis of NSM and rigorously satisfied by all exact calculations relative to equilibrium systems. On this basis, we have elaborated an additive formalism of NSM based on the maximization of an additive deformed entropy subject to constraints on additive particle number and additive $`q`$-deformed energy. The IS quantum distributions of this formalism are compared with the distributions previously obtained by using complete probability and additive energy in factorization approximation and also with numerical results for strongly correlated electrons. It is shown that some effects of strong correlations : the flattening of the fermion distribution and the sharp cutoff of occupation number at $`e_f`$ which shows strong increase with increasing interaction, can be observed in IS fermion distribution with decreasing $`q`$ value.

Figures:


format: text

text:
# s-Process Nucleosynthesis in Low-Metallicity Stars

## 1 Introduction

One of the important mechanisms by which heavy elements are produced in Nature is the slow neutron capture process (s-process). In the s-process, the typical neutron capture timescale is longer than the beta-decay timescale. Thus, heavy element synthesis from iron peak nuclei proceeds along beta stability line and finally reaches lead (Pb) and bismuth.

An extensive survey of metal deficient stars in the Galactic Halo has recently been completed .$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ One of the most exciting discoveries to emerge from this survey is that many stars show enhancements of neutron capture element .$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ Of particular relevance to this paper is a recently reported detailed abundance analysis of LP625-44 and LP706-7 by Aoki et al. .$`^{\text{?}\text{}\text{?}\text{)}}`$ These stars have almost identical metallicity as \[Fe/H\] $`2.7`$. However, unlike most metal deficient stars, these two stars appear to have an almost pure s-process abundance distribution. The LP625-44 star is observed to be in a binary system. Thus, this star probably experiences mass transfer from a companion star during its asymptotic giant branch (AGB) phase. By now, the companion star has evolved into a white dwarf and can not be observed directly.

Regarding the $`s`$-process, it is of particular interest to study the $`s`$-process abundances in metal-poor stars. It is now commonly accepted that 13C($`\alpha `$, n)16O is the dominant major neutron source reaction in low mass AGB stars. This reaction operates at temperatures greater than $`9\times 10^7`$K. Therefore, 13C burns radiatively in a narrow region at the top of the He intershell layer during a long interpulse phase near $`10^410^5`$ yr .$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$

Naively, one expects that the 13C abundance produced in a star should be independent of its metallicity. This is because 13C is produced by proton capture on newly synthesized 12C. Furthermore, since the abundance of seed nuclei is low, it is expected that these stars should show an abundance distribution characterized by many neutron captures per seed. Accordingly, theoretical model calculations made before the observations of these two stars predicted Pb/Ba $`>100`$ and Ba/Sr $`1`$ at \[Fe/H\] $`=2.7`$ .$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$

LP625-44 and LP706-7 show, however, a peculiar distribution of s-process elements. In particular, Pb/Ba $`1`$ and Ba/Sr $`10`$ .$`^{\text{?, ?)}}`$ These large differences between observation and theoretical prediction may indicate that the most popular current interpretation $`^{\text{?)}}`$ of the nature of the $`s`$-process in metal-deficient AGB stars is not enough. Although Ryan et al. $`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ found a good fit to \[Pb/Fe\] and \[Ba/Fe\] for LP625-44, it was necessary to postulate an exceedingly low 13C abundance in order to reproduce the observation. This eliminates any predictive power of the model.

On the other hand, Fujimoto et al. $`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ have proposed that a new $`s`$-process paradigm may be at work in these low-metallicity AGB stars. In that work it was found that the He convective shell which developed during a thermal pulse could mix protons from the H-rich layer for stars with $`M3M_{}`$ and \[Fe/H\] $`2.5`$. This mixing event allows the production of 13C in the He convective shell via the 12C($`p`$, $`\gamma `$)13N($`\beta ^+\nu `$)13C reaction chain.

Quite recently, Van Eck et al. $`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ reported on abundances in three new metal-deficient stars (\[Fe/H\] $`=2.45,1.7,`$ and $`1.65`$). These stars, indeed, show an enhanced Pb abundance in comparison with other heavy elements. This is consistent with the high neutron-to-seed ratio expected in the standard theoretical model with partial mixing from H-rich convective envelope .$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$

However, the metallicities of these three stars are larger than \[Fe/H\] $`=2.5`$, which is the critical value for the occurrence of the Fujimoto et al. $`^{\text{?)}}`$ $`s`$-process paradigm. Thus, the Van Eck et al. $`^{\text{?)}}`$ AGB stars may have evolved differently from two metal-deficient stars, LP625-44 and LP706-7. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the physical environment of the s-process in these two peculiar metal-deficient AGB stars.

## 2 Results

### 2.1 Parametric Studies of s-Process Nucleosynthesis

We calculated s-process nucleosynthesis, using a schematic pulsed-neutron-source model $`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ with updated neutron-capture reaction rates .$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ We assumed a fixed temperature of $`10^8`$ K during each neutron irradiation, consistent with 13C($`\alpha `$, n)16O as the dominant reaction for the neutron production. We characterize each pulse with a constant average neutron number density ($`N_n`$) and a neutron exposure duration ($`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$). The neutron exposure per pulse $`\tau `$ is defined by

$$\tau =N_nv_T𝑑tN_nv_T\mathrm{\Delta }t,$$
(1)
where $`v_T`$ is the average neutron thermal velocity. The initial abundances of seed nuclei lighter than Fe group elements are taken to be solar-system abundances scaled to a metallicity of \[Fe/H\] $`=2.7`$. For elements heavier than the Fe group, we use solar-system r-process abundances also scaled to \[Fe/H\] $`=2.7`$.

Figures 1 and 2 show the best fit results for LP625-44 and LP706-7, respectively. The s-process environment for these models is characterized by an overlap factor of $`r=0.1`$, where $`r`$ is a fraction of material from one neutron irradiation which survives to the next neutron irradiation. The best fit neutron exposures per pulse are $`\tau =0.71\pm 0.08`$ and $`0.80\pm 0.09\mathrm{mb}^1`$ for LP625-44 and LP706-7, respectively, corresponding to mean neutron exposures $`(\tau _0=\tau /\mathrm{ln}r`$) of $`\tau _0=(0.58\pm 0.06)(T_8/3.48)^{1/2}`$ and $`(0.65\pm 0.07)(T_8/3.48)^{1/2}`$, respectively.

Such neutron exposures are quite high compared to parameters characterizing solar-system abundances for which the main $`s`$-process component is fit with $`\tau _0=(0.30\pm 0.01)(T_8/3.48)^{1/2}`$. Achieving such a high mean neutron exposure implies that very few thermal pulses could have contributed to make the s-process abundances for these two stars. In fact, in our model calculations, almost all elements except for Pb, are made in the first neutron irradiation with the adopted exposure. Although Pb abundance is more sensitive to the number of pulses, it too converges to its equilibrium abundance after only a few episodes. Indeed, a nearly equivalent fit to these data can be made in a model with only a single neutron exposure. However, one can not distinguish from the mean neutron exposure value whether the thermal pulse or interpulse phase site is more viable. This is because there is a degeneracy in neutron number density times irradiation time. Either site is equivalent as long as $`N_n\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ gives the same neutron exposure (see the definition Eq. (1)),

### 2.2 s-Process in AGB Stars

These findings are of interest because this is exactly the behavior anticipated by Fujimoto et al. .$`^{\text{?)}}`$ They proposed that only a few episodes of proton mixing into the He intershell layer occur in metal-deficient stars with \[Fe/H\] $`<2.5`$. This mixing is invoked by an upward extension of the He convective shell triggered by a thermal runaway of He shell burning. Therefore, only a few neutron exposures can be obtained. The metallicity for LP625-44 and LP706-7 (\[Fe/H\] $`sim2.7`$) enters exactly this metallicity range. It is thus possible that the s-process elements observed in these two stars are produced by this peculiar mechanism.

In the present work we have further investigated the time evolution of the He convective shell. We have calculated the stellar evolution of a 2$`M_{}`$ model star with \[Fe/H\] $`=2.7`$ .$`^{\text{?}\text{)}}`$ We found that the penetration of He convective shell into the H-rich envelope takes place at the second thermal pulse and that the convective shell separates into two parts. One is sustained by H-burning and the other is sustained by He-burning (Fig. 3). The prompt third dredge-up then follows after the thermal runaway of both H and He burning terminates. In this way newly synthesized elements like CNO elements and lithium are brought into outer convective envelope. Thus, we see these stars as carbon-rich stars. These are usual third dredge-up events. However, as seen in Fig. 3, after the first two pulses no more proton mixing occurs although third dredge-up events continue to repeat.

Let us consider when the outward extending He convective shell penetrates into H-rich outer layer. In the He convective shell, the CN cycle operates and produces 13C and 14N from the proton capture on 12C which has been synthesized by the triple $`\alpha `$ reaction. Under these circumstances 13C can easily capture an alpha particle and produce neutrons via 13C($`\alpha `$, n)16O. We have used the neutron exposure evaluated in this way to estimate the influence of this proton mixing on the s-process. We used a stellar evolution code which included all neutron capture reactions up to Si isotopes. Note that we do not introduce protons into He layer artificially (i.e., no 13C pocket is assumed). The resultant neutron exposure with time is illustrated in Fig. 4. The first sharp rise in neutron exposure at the second thermal pulse is due to rapid neutron production by alpha capture on 13C at both mass coordinates A and B (see Fig. 3). Inside the He convective shell (lower panel A in Fig. 4) this neutron exposure dominates over the subsequent ones. However, at the mass coordinate B (upper panel in Fig. 4) all successive neutron irradiations have a significant influence. The neutron production reaction gets activated during the interpulse phases as well as during thermal pulses, as the number of thermal pulse cycle increases.

## 3 Conclusion and Discussions

The two metal-deficient stars, LP625-44 and LP706-7, show a strong enhancement of s-process elements. Therefore, the abundance ratios of Ba/Sr and Pb/Ba provide a precious opportunity to understand the s-process mechanism in metal-deficient AGB stars. First, we used a schematic pulsed s-process model to estimated the neutron exposure per pulse for these stars. We found neutron exposures $`\tau 0.71`$ and 0.80 mb-1 for LP625-44 and LP706-7, respectively. We recognized that these abundance ratios can be explained by high neutron number density as well as low one, which means that a true site for s-process, interpulse or thermal pulse, cannot be distinguished by this schematic model. Nevertheless, it seems likely that the implied high mean neutron exposures probably indicate that very few pulses contribute to the observed s-process abundances.

Secondly, we have calculated the evolution of $`2M_{}`$ metal-deficient (\[Fe/H\] $`=2.7`$) stars up to the AGB phase. We found that these low-mass, metal-deficient stars experience proton mixing into the He intershell convection zone. Therefore, an H-flash occurs early in the thermally pulsing AGB phase. This brings about a large change in the surface chemical composition. Significant amounts of 12C and 13C are dredged-up during a single deep convective-mixing episode. The surface composition then changes from being oxygen-rich to carbon-rich.

We have estimated the neutron exposure in the H-flash convective zone using a detailed stellar evolution model and a reaction network extending up to Si isotopes .$`^{\text{?)}}`$ We obtained a distribution of exposures for various mass zones which can be even higher than $`\tau 1`$ mb-1. Thus the high neutron exposures necessary to account for s-process abundances observed in the low-metallicity stars, LP 625-44 and LP706-7 ,$`^{\text{?)}}`$ are easily explained in this model.

In our stellar evolution models, material experiencing the s-process in the H-flash convective zone is dredged-up by the immediate penetration of the convective envelope. The s-process occurs in the He-flash convective shell, too. The neutron exposure in the He-flash convective shell is higher than the neutron exposure in the H-flash convective shell. The flash-driven convective shell at the next thermal pulse mixes the previously processed material within the He layer. After the thermal pulse the third dredge-up brings this material to the surface. Thus, material exposed to high neutron irradiation appears at the stellar surface. In the interpulse period 13C remains to be burnt. As the evolution proceeds, 13C is consumed rapidly in both the interpulse phase and in the next thermal pulse. The s-process in these conditions is, thus, somewhat complicated and we will need further investigation to fully understand the detailed abundance profiles produced in such low-mass, metal-deficient AGB stars.

## Acknowledgment

This work has been supported in part by the Grant-in-Aid for Science Research (10044103, 10640236, 12047233, 13640313) of the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and

Culture of Japan, and also in part by DoE Nuclear Theory Grant (DE-FG02-95-ER40394 at UND).