text:
# Deformation and Recursion for the 𝑁=2 𝛼=1 Supersymmetric KdV-hierarchy

## 1. Introduction

The $`N=2`$ supersymmetric $`\alpha =1`$ KdV-equation was originally introduced in  as a Hamiltonian equation with the $`N=2`$ superconformal algebra as a second Hamiltonian structure, and its integrability was conjectured there due to the existence of a few additional nontrivial bosonic Hamiltonians. Then its Lax–pair representation has indeed been constructed in , and it allowed an algoritmic reconstruction of the whole tower of highest commutative bosonic flows and their Hamiltonians belonging to the $`N=2`$ supersymmetric $`\alpha =1`$ KdV-hierarchy.

Actually, besides the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ KdV-equation there are another two inequivalent $`N=2`$ supersymmetric Hamiltonian equations with the $`N=2`$ superconformal algebra as a second Hamiltonian structure (the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =2`$ and $`\alpha =4`$ KdV-equations ), but the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ KdV-equation is rather exceptional . Despite knowledge of its Lax–pair description, there remains a lot of longstanding, unsolved problems which resolution would be quite important for a deeper understanding and more detailed description of the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ KdV hierarchy. Thus, since the time when the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ KdV-equation was proposed, much efforts were made to construct a tower of its noncommutative bosonic and fermionic, local and nonlocal symmetries and Hamiltonians, bi-Hamiltonian structure as well as recursion operator (see, e.g. discussions in  and references therein). Though these rather complicated problems, solved for the case of the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =2`$ and $`\alpha =4`$ KdV-hierarchies, still wait their complete resolution for the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ KdV- hierarchy, a considerable progress towards their solution arose quite recently. Thus, the puzzle , related to the ”nonexistence” of higher fermionic flows of the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ KdV-hierarchy, was partly resolved in  by explicit constructing a few bosonic and fermionic nonlocal and nonpolynomial flows and Hamiltonains, then their $`N=2`$ superfield structure and origin were uncovered in . A new property, crucial for the existence of these flows and Hamiltonians, making them distinguished compared to all flows and Hamiltonians of other supersymmetric hierarchies constructed before, is their nonpolynomiality. A new approach to a recursion operator treating it as a form–valued vector field which satisfies a generalized symmetry equation related to a given equation was developed in . Using this approach the recursion operator of the bosonic limit of the N=2 $`\alpha =1`$ KdV-hierarchy was derived in , and its structure, underlining relevance of these Hamiltonians in the bosonic limit, gives a hint towards its supersymmetric generalization.
The organisation of this paper is as follows.
First the general notions from the mathematical theory of symmetries, nonlocalities, deformations and form-valued vector fields are exposed to some detail in Section 2 and its subsections for the classical KdV-equation. For full details the reader is referred to e.g. .
In Section 3 we expose all results obtained for the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ supersymmetric KdV-equation in great detail.
In Section 4 we present conclusions, while in Section 5, arranged as an Appendix, results of the Poisson bracket structure are given.

## 2. Nonlocal Setting for Differential Equations, the KdV-equation

### 2.1. Nonlocalities

As standard example, to illustrate the notions we are going to discuss for the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ supersymmetric KdV-equation in Section 3, we take the KdV-equation

$`u_t`$ $`=uu_x+u_{xxx}.`$ (1)
For a short theoretical introduction we refer to , while for more detailed expositions we refer to .

We consider $`YJ^{\mathrm{}}(x,t;u)`$ the infinite prolongation of (1), c.f., where coordinates in the infinite jet bundle $`J^{\mathrm{}}(x,t;u)`$ are given by $`(x,t,u,u_x,u_t,\mathrm{})`$ and $`Y`$ is formally described as the submanifold of $`J^{\mathrm{}}(x,t;u)`$ defined by

$`u_t`$ $`=uu_x+u_{xxx},`$
$`u_{xt}`$ $`=uu_{xx}+u_x^2+u_{xxxx},`$ (2)
$`\mathrm{}.`$
As internal coordinates in $`Y`$ one chooses $`(x,t,u,u_x,u_{xx},\mathrm{})`$ while $`u_t,u_{xt},\mathrm{}`$ are obtained from (2.1).

The Cartan distribution on $`Y`$ is given by the total partial derivative vector fields

$`\begin{array}{ccccc}\stackrel{~}{D}_x\hfill & =& _x\hfill & +& \underset{n0}{}u_{n+1}_{u_n},\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{D}_t\hfill & =& _t\hfill & +& \underset{n0}{}u_{nt}_{u_n}\hfill \end{array}`$ (5)
where $`u=u_0,u_1=u_x,u_2=u_{xx},\mathrm{};u_{1t}=u_{xt};u_{2t}=u_{xxt}\mathrm{}`$.

Classically the notion of a *generalized* or *higher symmetry* $`Y`$ of a differential equation $`\{F=0\}`$ is defined as a vertical vector field V

$$V=\mathrm{\Lambda }_f=f_u+\stackrel{~}{D}_x(f)_{u_1}+\stackrel{~}{D}_x^2(f)_{u_2}+\mathrm{}$$
(6)
where $`fC^{\mathrm{}}(Y)`$ are such that

$$\mathrm{}_F(f)=0.$$
(7)
Here, $`\mathrm{}_F`$ is the *universal linearisation operator*  which is Fréchet derivative of $`F`$, and it reads in the case of the KdV-equation (2.1)

$$\stackrel{~}{D}_t(f)u\stackrel{~}{D}_x(f)u_1f(\stackrel{~}{D}_x)^3(f)=0.$$
(8)
Let now $`W^m`$ with coordinates $`(w_1,\mathrm{}w_m)`$.
The Cartan distribution on $`YW`$ is given by

$`\begin{array}{ccccc}\overline{D}_x\hfill & =& \stackrel{~}{D}_x\hfill & +& \underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}X^j_{w_j},\hfill \\ \overline{D}_t\hfill & =& \stackrel{~}{D}_t\hfill & +& \underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}T^j_{w_j}\hfill \end{array}`$ (11)
where $`X^j,T^jC^{\mathrm{}}(YW)`$ such that

$$[\overline{D}_x,\overline{D}_t]=0$$
(12)
which yields the so called *covering condition*

$$\stackrel{~}{D}_x(T)\stackrel{~}{D}_t(X)+[X,T]=0$$

whereas in (12) \[\*,\*\] is the Lie bracket for vector fields $`X=_{j=1}^mX^j_{w_j},T=_{j=1}^mT^j_{w_j}`$ defined on $`W`$.

A *nonlocal symmetry* is a vertical vector field on $`YW`$, i.e. of the form (6), which satisfies $`(fC^{\mathrm{}}(YW))`$

$$\overline{\mathrm{}}_F(f)=0$$
(13)
which for the KdV-equation results in

$$\overline{D}_t(f)u\overline{D}_x(f)u_1f(\overline{D}_x)^3(f)=0.$$
(14)
Formally, this is just what is called the *shadow* of the symmetry, i.e., not bothering about the $`_{w^j}`$ $`(j=1\mathrm{}m)`$ components.
In effect the full symmetry should also satisfy the invariance of the equations governing the nonlocal variables $`w_j`$ $`(j=1,\mathrm{},m)`$; i.e.,

$`(w_j)_x`$ $`=X^j,`$
$`(w_j)_t`$ $`=T^j.`$
The construction of the associated $`_{w^j}`$ $`(j=1,\mathrm{},m)`$ components is called the *reconstruction problem* . For reasons of simplicity, we omit this reconstruction problem, i.e. reconstructing the complete vector field or full symmetry from its shadow.
The classical Lenard recursion operator $``$ for the KdV-equation,

$$=D_x^2+\frac{2}{3}u+\frac{1}{3}u_1D_x^1$$
(15)
which is just such, that

$`f_0`$ $`=u_1,`$
$`f_0=f_1`$ $`=uu_1+u_3,`$ (16)
$`f_1=f_2`$ $`=u_5+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{3}}u_3u+{\displaystyle \frac{10}{3}}u_2u_1+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{6}}u_1u^2,`$
i.e., creating the $`(x,t)`$–independent hierarchy of higher symmetries, has an action on the vertical symmetry $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{f}_1}`$ (Gallilei-boost)

$`\overline{f}_1`$ $`=(1+tu_1)/3,`$
$`\overline{f}_1`$ $`=\overline{f}_0=2u+xu_1+3t(u_3+uu_1),`$ (17)
$`\overline{f}_1=\overline{f}_0`$ $`=3tf_2+xf_1+4u_2+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}u^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}u_1D_x^1(u).`$
If we introduce the variable $`p`$ $`(=w_1)`$ through

$`p_x`$ $`=u,`$
$`p_t`$ $`=u_2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u^2,`$ (18)
$`\text{i.e.}D_t(u)`$ $`=D_x(u_2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u^2),`$
then $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\overline{f}_1}`$ is the shadow of a nonlocal symmetry in the one-dimensional covering of the KdV-equation by

$$p=w_1,X_1=u,T_1=u_2+\frac{1}{2}u^2.$$

So, by its action the Lenard recursion operator creates nonlocal symmetries in a natural way.
More applications of nonlocal symmetries can be found in e.g..

### 2.2. A Special Type of Covering: the Cartan-covering

We discuss a special type of the nonlocal setting indicated in the previous section, the so called Cartan-covering. As mentioned before we shall illustrate this by the KdV-equation.
Let $`YJ^{\mathrm{}}(x,t;u)`$ be the infinite prolongation of the KdV-equation (2.1). Contact one forms on $`TJ^{\mathrm{}}(x,t;u)`$ are given by

$`\alpha _0`$ $`=duu_1dxu_tdt,`$
$`\alpha _1`$ $`=du_1u_2dxu_{1t}dt,`$ (19)
$`\alpha _2`$ $`=du_2u_3dxu_{2t}dt,\mathrm{}.`$
From the total partial derivative operators of the previous section we have

$$\stackrel{~}{D}_x(\alpha _0)=\alpha _1,\stackrel{~}{D}_x(\alpha _1)=\alpha _2,\mathrm{},\stackrel{~}{D}_x(\alpha _i)=\alpha _{i+1},\mathrm{},$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \stackrel{~}{D}_t(\alpha _0)& =& \alpha _0u_x+\alpha _1u+\alpha _3=\alpha _t,\hfill \\ \hfill \stackrel{~}{D}_t(\alpha _i)& =& (\stackrel{~}{D}_x)^i(\alpha _t).\hfill \end{array}$$
(20)
We now define the Cartan-covering of $`Y`$ by $`Y^{\mathrm{}}`$

$`D_x^C`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{D}_x+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}(\alpha _{i+1}){\displaystyle \frac{}{\alpha _i}},`$
$`D_t^C`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{D}_t+{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}(\stackrel{~}{D}_x)^i\alpha _t{\displaystyle \frac{}{\alpha _i}}`$ (21)
where local coordinates are given $`(x,t,u,u_1,\mathrm{},\alpha _0,\alpha _1,\mathrm{})`$.

It is a straightforward check, and obvious that

$$[D_x^C,D_t^C]=0,$$
(22)
i.e. they form a Cartan distribution on $`Y^{\mathrm{}}`$.
Note 1:
Since at first $`\alpha _i`$ ($`i=0,\mathrm{}`$) are contact forms, they constitute a Grassmann algebra (graded commutative algebra) $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\alpha )`$, where

$$\alpha _i\alpha _j=\alpha _j\alpha _i,$$

i.e.,

$$xy=(1)^{|x||y|}yx$$

where $`x,y`$ are contact $`()`$-forms of degree $`|x|`$ and $`|y|`$, respectively. So in effect we are dealing with a *graded* covering.
Note 2:
Once we have introduced the Cartan-covering by (2.2) we can forget about the specifics of $`\alpha _i`$ ($`i=0,1,\mathrm{}`$) and just treat them as (odd) ordinary variables, associated with their differentiation rules.
One can discuss nonlocal symmetries in this type of covering just as in the previous section, the only difference being:

$$fC^{\mathrm{}}(Y)(\alpha ).$$

In the next section we shall combine constructions of the previous subsection and this one, in order to construct the recursion operator for symmetries.

### 2.3. The Recursion Operator as Symmetry in the Cartan-covering

We shall discuss the recursion operator for symmetries of the KdV-equation as a geometrical object, i.e., a symmetry in the Cartan-covering.
Our starting point is the four dimensional covering of the KdV-equation in $`Y^4`$ where

$`\overline{D}_x`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{D}_x+u_{w_1}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u^2_{w_2}+(u^33u_1^2)_{w_3}+w_1_{w_4},`$
$`\overline{D}_t`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{D}_t+({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u^2+u_2)_{w_1}+({\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}u^3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u_1^2+uu_2)_{w_2}`$ (23)
$`+({\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}u^46u_1u_3+3u^2u_26uu_1^2+3u_2^2)_{w_3}+(u_1+w_2)_{w_4}.`$
$`\overline{D}_x,\overline{D}_t`$ satisfy the covering condition (12), and note, that due to the fact that the coefficients of $`_{w_i}`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$) in (2.3) are independent of $`w_j`$ ($`j=1,2,3`$), these coefficients constitute local conservation laws for the KdV-equation.
The coefficients $`w_1`$ and $`u_1+w_2`$ of $`_{w_4}`$ constitute the first nonlocal conservation law of the KdV-equation.
We have the following “formal” variables:

$`w_1`$ $`={\displaystyle u𝑑x},`$
$`w_2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}u^2𝑑x},`$
$`w_3`$ $`={\displaystyle (u^33u_1^2)𝑑x},`$ (24)
$`w_4`$ $`={\displaystyle w_1𝑑x}`$
where $`w_4`$ is of a higher or deeper nonlocality.

We now build the Cartan-covering of the previous section on the covering given by (2.3) by introduction of the contact forms $`\alpha _0,\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\mathrm{}`$ (2.2) and

$`\alpha _1`$ $`=dw_1udx({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u^2+u_2)dt,`$
$`\alpha _2`$ $`=dw_2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u^2dx({\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}u^3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u_1^2+uu_2)dt`$ (25)
as well as similarly for $`\alpha _3,\alpha _4`$. It is straightforward to prove the following relations

$`\overline{D}_x(\alpha _1)=\alpha _0,`$ $`\overline{D}_t(\alpha _1)=u\alpha _0+\alpha _0,`$
$`\overline{D}_x(\alpha _2)=u\alpha _0,`$ $`\overline{D}_t(\alpha _2)=u^2\alpha _0u_1\alpha _1+u\alpha _2+u_2\alpha _0,`$ (26)
$`\overline{D}_x(\alpha _3)=3u^2\alpha _06u_1\alpha _1,`$ $`\mathrm{}.`$
We are now constructing symmetries in this Cartan-covering of the KdV-equation which are linear w.r.t. $`\alpha _i`$ ($`i=4,\mathrm{},0,1,\mathrm{}`$).

The symmetry condition for $`fC^{\mathrm{}}(Y^4)\mathrm{\Lambda }^1(\alpha )`$ is just given by (8)

$$\overline{\mathrm{}}_F^C(f)=0$$
(27)
which for the KdV-equation results in

$$\overline{D}_t^C(f)u\overline{D}_x^C(f)u_xf(\overline{D}_x^C)^3f=0.$$

As solutions of these equations we obtain

$`f^0`$ $`=\alpha _0,`$
$`f^1`$ $`=({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}u)\alpha _0+\alpha _2+({\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}u_1)\alpha _1,`$
$`f^2`$ $`=({\displaystyle \frac{4}{9}}u^2+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}u_2)\alpha _0+(2u_1)\alpha _1+({\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}u)\alpha _2+\alpha _4`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}(uu_1+u_3)\alpha _1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{9}}(u_1)\alpha _2.`$
As we mentioned above we are working in effect with form-valued vector fields $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{f^0},\mathrm{\Lambda }_{f^1}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{f^2}`$. For these objects one can define Frölicher-Nijenhuis and (by contraction) Richardson-Nijenhuis brackets , Without going into details, for which the reader is referred to , we can construct the contraction of a (generalized) symmetry and a form-valued symmetry e.g.

$$R=(\frac{2}{3}u\alpha _0+\alpha _2+\frac{1}{3}u_1\alpha _1)\frac{}{u}+\mathrm{}.$$
(28)
The contraction, formally defined by

$$V\mathrm{}R_u=\underset{\alpha }{}V_\alpha R_u^\alpha $$

where $`\alpha `$ runs over all local and nonlocal variables, is given by

$$(V\mathrm{}R)=(V\mathrm{}R_u)_u+\overline{D}_x^C(V\mathrm{}R_u)_{u_1}+\mathrm{}.$$
(29)
Start now with

$$V_1=u_1\frac{}{u}+u_2\frac{}{u_1}+\mathrm{}$$
(30)
whose prolongation in the setting $`Y^4`$ is

$`\overline{V}_1=u_1{\displaystyle \frac{}{u}}+u_2{\displaystyle \frac{}{u_1}}+\mathrm{}+u{\displaystyle \frac{}{w_1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{w_2}}`$ $`+(u^33u_1^2){\displaystyle \frac{}{w_3}}`$
$`+w_1{\displaystyle \frac{}{w_4}}`$ (31)
then

$`(\overline{V}_1\mathrm{}R)`$ $`=[({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}u)u_1+1u_3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}u_1u]{\displaystyle \frac{}{u}}+\mathrm{}`$
$`=(u_3+uu_1){\displaystyle \frac{}{u}}+\mathrm{}=V_3`$ (32)
and similarly

$$(\overline{V}_3\mathrm{}R)=(u_5+\frac{5}{3}u_3u+\frac{10}{3}u_2u_1+\frac{5}{6}u^2u_1)\frac{}{u}+\mathrm{}=V_5.$$
(33)
The result given above means that the well known Lenard recursion operator for symmetries of the KdV-equation is represented as a *symmetry*, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{f_1}`$ , in the Cartan-covering of this equation and in effect is a geometrical object.

## 3. The $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ Supersymmetric KdV-equation

In this section we shall discuss all computations leading at the end to the complete integrability of the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ supersymmetric KdV-equation.
The $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ supersymmetric KdV-equation is described by

$$J_t=\{J_{zz}+3J[D,\overline{D}]J+J^3\}_z$$
(34)
in the $`N=2`$ superspace with a coordinate $`Z=(z,\theta ,\overline{\theta })`$z denotes derivative with respect to $`z`$ and $`D,\overline{D}`$ are the fermionic covariant derivatives of the $`N=2`$ supersymmetry, governed by definitions

$`D={\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\theta }{\displaystyle \frac{}{z}},\overline{D}={\displaystyle \frac{}{\overline{\theta }}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta {\displaystyle \frac{}{z}},D^2=\overline{D}^2=0,\{D,\overline{D}\}={\displaystyle \frac{}{z}}.`$
Formally, the nonlocal setting for differential equations of the previous section was done for classical equations, but applies too for supersymmetric equations .
In order to discuss conservation laws, symmetries and deformations we choose local coordinates in the infinite jet bundle $`Y((z,\theta ,\overline{\theta });J)`$, where we choose as local even coordinates

$$z,t,J,D\overline{D}J,J_z,D\overline{D}J_z,J_{zz},D\overline{D}J_{zz},J_{zzz},\mathrm{}$$

and odd coordinates

$$\theta ,\overline{\theta },DJ,\overline{D}J,DJ_z,\overline{D}J_z,DJ_{zz},\overline{D}J_{zz},\mathrm{}.$$

In order to have a complete setting we first describe the construction of conservation laws and the associated introduction of nonlocal variables.
In effect we construct an abelian covering of the equation structure.
In the first subsection we shall discuss conservation laws and the associated nonlocalities.
In the next subsection we obtain nonlocal symmetries associated to these nonlocalities, which turn out to be $`(\theta ,\overline{\theta })`$ \- dependent and arise in so called quadruplets, similar to the nonlocalities.
In the subsection 3.3 we derive an explicit deformation of the equation structure leading to the recursion operator for symmetries.
Finally in the last subsection we obtain the factorization of the recursion operator as product of the second Hamiltonian operator and the inverse of the zero-th Hamiltonian operator.

### 3.1. Conservation laws and nonlocal variables

Here we shall construct conservation laws for (34) in order to arrive at an abelian covering.
So we construct $`X=X(z,t,J,\mathrm{}),T=T(z,t,J,\mathrm{})`$ such that

$`D_z(T)=D_t(X)`$ (35)
and in a similar way we construct nonlocal conservation laws by the requirement

$`\overline{D}_z(\overline{T})=\overline{D}_t(\overline{X})`$ (36)
where $`\overline{D}_z,\overline{D}_t`$ are defined by

$`\overline{D}_z=_z`$ $`+J_z_J+D\overline{D}J_z_{D\overline{D}J}+\mathrm{}`$
$`+DJ_z_{DJ}+\overline{D}J_z_{\overline{D}J}+\mathrm{}`$
$`\overline{D}_t=_t`$ $`+J_t_J+D\overline{D}J_t_{D\overline{D}J}+\mathrm{}`$
$`+DJ_t_{DJ}+\overline{D}J_t_{\overline{D}J}+\mathrm{}.`$ (37)
Moreover $`\overline{X}`$,$`\overline{T}`$ are dependent on local variables $`z`$, $`t`$, $`J,\mathrm{},`$ as well as the already determined nonlocal variables, denoted here by $`p_{}`$, which are associated to the conservation laws $`(X,T)`$ by the formal definition

$`D_z(p_{})`$ $`=(p_{})_z=X,`$
$`D_t(p_{})`$ $`=(p_{})_t=T.`$
Proceeding in this way, we obtained a number of conservation laws, which arise as multiplets of four conservation laws each. The corresponding nonlocal variables are

$`P_0,`$ $`DP_0,\overline{D}P_0,D\overline{D}P_0,`$
$`Q_{\frac{1}{2}},`$ $`DQ_{\frac{1}{2}},\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}},D\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}},`$
$`\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}},`$ $`D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}},\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}},D\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}},`$ (38)
$`P_1,`$ $`DP_1,\overline{D}P_1,D\overline{D}P_1`$
where their defining equations are given by

$`(P_0)_z`$ $`=J,`$
$`(Q_{\frac{1}{2}})_z`$ $`=e^{(+)}DJ,`$
$`(\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})_z`$ $`=e^{()}\overline{D}J,`$ (39)
$`(P_1)_z`$ $`=e^{(+)}(\overline{D}J)(DP_0)+e^{()}(\overline{D}J)(Q_{\frac{1}{2}}).`$
In (3.1) $`e^{(+)}`$ and $`e^{()}`$ refer to $`e^{(+2P_0)}`$ and $`e^{(2P_0)}`$ respectively.
It should be noted that the quadru-plet $`P_0`$ satisfies differentiation rules as follows:

$`D(P_0)`$ $`=DP_0,`$
$`D(DP_0)`$ $`=0,`$
$`D(\overline{D}P_0)`$ $`=D\overline{D}P_0,`$
$`D(D\overline{D}P_0)`$ $`=0,`$
$`\overline{D}(P_0)`$ $`=\overline{D}P_0,`$
$`\overline{D}(DP_0)`$ $`=(P_0)_zD\overline{D}P_0,`$
$`\overline{D}(\overline{D}P_0)`$ $`=0,`$
$`\overline{D}(D\overline{D}P_0)`$ $`=\overline{D}(P_0)_z,`$
and similarly for other quadru-plets $`Q_{\frac{1}{2}},\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}},P_1`$.
It should be noted that for the two other $`N=2`$ KdV-hierarchies ($`\alpha `$=4 and
-2), despite their original $`N=2`$ supersymmetric structure, their conservation laws do not form supersymmetric multiplets.
So in effect we have at this moment sixteen local and nonlocal conservation laws leading to a similar number of new nonlocal variables.
They perfectly match with those ones obtained previously  (page 340, eq. (7.78)).
If we arrange them according to their respectively degrees we arrive at:

$`0:`$ $`P_0;`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}:`$ $`DP_0,\overline{D}P_0,Q_{\frac{1}{2}},\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}};`$
$`1:`$ $`D\overline{D}P_0,DQ_{\frac{1}{2}},D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}},\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}},\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}},P_1;`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}:`$ $`D\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}},D\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}},DP_1,\overline{D}P_1;`$
$`2:`$ $`D\overline{D}P_1.`$
In Subsection 3.2 we shall discuss local and nonlocal symmetries of eq. (34) while in Subsection 3.3 we construct the recursion operator or deformation of the equation structure.

### 3.2. Local and nonlocal symmetries

In this section we shall present results for the construction of local and nonlocal symmetries of (34). In order to construct these symmetries, we consider the system of partial differential equations obtained by the infinite prolongation.
First we present the local symmetries as they are required for explicit formulae for the coefficients which arise in the form-valued vector field of the next subsection leading to the recursion operator for symmetries.

$`Y_1:=J_z,`$

$`Y_3:=\{J_{zz}+3J[D,\overline{D}]J+J^3\}_z,`$

$`Y_5:=10\overline{D}JDJ_{zz}J20\overline{D}JDJ_zJ^210\overline{D}JDJ_zJ_z10DJ\overline{D}J_{zz}J+20DJ\overline{D}J_zJ^210DJ\overline{D}J_zJ_z+40DJ\overline{D}JJJ_z+5J^4J_z+20J^3D\overline{D}J_z+10J^3J_{zz}+60J^2D\overline{D}JJ_z+30J^2J_z^2+10J^2J_{zzz}+80JD\overline{D}JD\overline{D}J_z+40JD\overline{D}JJ_{zz}+5JJ_{zzzz}+40JJ_zD\overline{D}J_z+50JJ_zJ_{zz}+10JD\overline{D}J_{zzz}+40D\overline{D}J^2J_z+40D\overline{D}JJ_z^2+10D\overline{D}JJ_{zzz}+J_{zzzzz}+15J_z^3+20J_zD\overline{D}J_{zz}+15J_zJ_{zzz}+20D\overline{D}J_zJ_{zz}+10J_{zz}^2,`$

$`Y_7:=(42\overline{D}J_zDJ_{zzz}J126\overline{D}J_zDJ_{zz}J^228\overline{D}J_zDJ_{zz}J_z42DJ_z\overline{D}J_{zzz}J+126DJ_z\overline{D}J_{zz}J^228DJ_z\overline{D}J_{zz}J_z+364DJ_z\overline{D}J_zJJ_z28\overline{D}JDJ_{zzzz}J70\overline{D}JDJ_{zzz}J^242\overline{D}JDJ_{zzz}J_z70\overline{D}JDJ_{zz}J^3168\overline{D}JDJ_{zz}JD\overline{D}J350\overline{D}JDJ_{zz}JJ_z28\overline{D}JDJ_{zz}J_{zz}84\overline{D}JDJ_zJ^4336\overline{D}JDJ_zJ^2D\overline{D}J378\overline{D}JDJ_zJ^2J_z168\overline{D}JDJ_zJD\overline{D}J_z294\overline{D}JDJ_zJJ_{zz}168\overline{D}JDJ_zD\overline{D}JJ_z238\overline{D}JDJ_zJ_z^214\overline{D}JDJ_zJ_{zzz}28DJ,12)J+70DJ\overline{D}J_{zzz}J^242DJ\overline{D}J_{zzz}J_z70DJ\overline{D}J_{zz}J^3168DJ\overline{D}J_{zz}JD\overline{D}J+182DJ\overline{D}J_{zz}JJ_z28DJ\overline{D}J_{zz}J_{zz}+84DJ\overline{D}J_zJ^4+336DJ\overline{D}J_zJ^2D\overline{D}J42DJ\overline{D}J_zJ^2J_z168DJ\overline{D}J_zJD\overline{D}J_z+126DJ\overline{D}J_zJJ_{zz}168DJ\overline{D}J_zD\overline{D}JJ_z+70DJ\overline{D}J_zJ_z^214DJ\overline{D}J_zJ_{zzz}+336DJ\overline{D}JJ^3J_z+336DJ\overline{D}JJ^2D\overline{D}J_z+168DJ\overline{D}JJ^2J_{zz}+672DJ\overline{D}JJD\overline{D}JJ_z+336DJ\overline{D}JJJ_z^2+84DJ\overline{D}JJJ_{zzz}+140DJ\overline{D}JJ_zJ_{zz}+7J^6J_z+42J^5D\overline{D}J_z+21J^5J_{zz}+210J^4D\overline{D}JJ_z+105J^4J_z^2+35J^4J_{zzz}+504J^3D\overline{D}JD\overline{D}J_z+252J^3D\overline{D}JJ_{zz}+35J^3J_{zzzz}+252J^3J_zD\overline{D}J_z+350J^3J_zJ_{zz}+70J^3D\overline{D}J_{zzz}+756J^2D\overline{D}J^2J_z+756J^2D\overline{D}JJ_z^2+224J^2D\overline{D}JJ_{zzz}+21J^2J_{zzzzz}+315J^2J_z^3+406J^2J_zD\overline{D}J_{zz}+315J^2J_zJ_{zzz}+420J^2D\overline{D}J_zJ_{zz}+210J^2J_{zz}^2+840JD\overline{D}J^2D\overline{D}J_z+420JD\overline{D}J^2J_{zz}+98JD\overline{D}JJ_{zzzz}+840JD\overline{D}JJ_zD\overline{D}J_z+1148JD\overline{D}JJ_zJ_{zz}+196JD\overline{D}JD\overline{D}J_{zzz}+147JJ_{zzzz}J_z+14JD\overline{D}J_{zzzzz}+7JJ_{zzzzzz}+742JJ_z^2D\overline{D}J_z+735JJ_z^2J_{zz}+98JJ_zD\overline{D}J_{zzz}+420JD\overline{D}J_zD\overline{D}J_{zz}+210JD\overline{D}J_zJ_{zzz}+210JJ_{zz}D\overline{D}J_{zz}+245JJ_{zz}J_{zzz}+280D\overline{D}J^3J_z+420D\overline{D}J^2J_z^2+84D\overline{D}J^2J_{zzz}+14D\overline{D}JJ_{zzzzz}+350D\overline{D}JJ_z^3+364D\overline{D}JJ_zD\overline{D}J_{zz}+266D\overline{D}JJ_zJ_{zzz}+336D\overline{D}JD\overline{D}J_zJ_{zz}+168D\overline{D}JJ_{zz}^2+42J_{zzzz}D\overline{D}J_z+56J_{zzzz}J_{zz}+42D\overline{D}J_{zzzz}J_z+28J_{zzzzz}J_z+J_{zzzzzzz}+105J_z^4+182J_z^2D\overline{D}J_{zz}+210J_z^2J_{zzz}+280J_zD\overline{D}J_z^2+448J_zD\overline{D}J_zJ_{zz}+280J_zJ_{zz}^2+70J_{zz}D\overline{D}J_{zzz}+70D\overline{D}J_{zz}J_{zzz}+35J_{zzz}^2).`$

It should be noted that the symmetries $`Y_5`$ and $`Y_7`$ are rather massive, containing 28 and 104 terms respectively. We made our choice for a presentation as shown above, in order to have expressions, which are quite huge, as readable as possible.

Now, we present the four multiplets of nonlocal $`(\theta ,\overline{\theta })`$–dependent symmetries as they were constructed in the above described nonlocal setting.

The nonlocal $`(\theta ,\overline{\theta })`$–dependent symmetries at level $`0,1/2,1,3/2,2`$ are given as follows:
This represents the first quadru-plet associated to $`P_0`$
$`Y_{P_0,\theta \overline{\theta }}:=\theta \overline{\theta }J_z+\theta DJ\overline{\theta }\overline{D}J,`$

$`Y_{P_0,\overline{\theta }}:=\overline{\theta }J_z+DJ,`$

$`Y_{P_0,\theta }:=\theta J_z+\overline{D}J,`$

$`Y_{P_0}:=J_z`$.

The second quadru-plet associated to $`Q_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ is represented by
$`Y_{Q_{\frac{1}{2}},\theta \overline{\theta }}:=(2\theta \overline{\theta }e^{(+)}(2DP_0D\overline{D}J2DP_0J_zDJ_z+2DJDP_0\overline{D}P_0+DJD\overline{D}P_0)+2\theta \overline{\theta }(Q_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+\overline{D}JDQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJ\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}})2\theta e^{(+)}DJDP_0+2\theta DJQ_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{\theta }e^{(+)}(DJ\overline{D}P_0+D\overline{D}J+J_z)2\overline{\theta }\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}e^{(+)}DJ)/2,`$

$`Y_{Q_{\frac{1}{2}},\overline{\theta }}:=\overline{\theta }e^{(+)}(2DP_0D\overline{D}J2DP_0J_zDJ_z+2DJDP_0\overline{D}P_0+DJD\overline{D}P_0)+\overline{\theta }(Q_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+\overline{D}JDQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJ\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}})e^{(+)}DJDP_0+DJQ_{\frac{1}{2}},`$

$`Y_{Q_{\frac{1}{2}},\theta }:=\theta e^{(+)}(2DP_0D\overline{D}J2DP_0J_zDJ_z+2DJDP_0\overline{D}P_0+DJD\overline{D}P_0)+\theta (Q_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+\overline{D}JDQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJ\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}})+e^{(+)}(DJ\overline{D}P_0+D\overline{D}J+J_z)+\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}},`$

$`Y_{Q_{\frac{1}{2}}}:=e^{(+)}(2DP_0D\overline{D}J2DP_0J_zDJ_z+2DJDP_0\overline{D}P_0+DJD\overline{D}P_0)+Q_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+\overline{D}JDQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJ\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}`$.

The third quadru-plet associated to $`\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ is represented by

$`Y_{\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}},\theta \overline{\theta }}:=(2\theta \overline{\theta }e^{(+)}(\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+\overline{D}JD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJ\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+2\theta \overline{\theta }(2\overline{D}P_0D\overline{D}J+\overline{D}J_z+2\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}P_0\overline{D}JJ\overline{D}JD\overline{D}P_0)+2\theta e^{(+)}DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2\theta (\overline{D}JDP_0+D\overline{D}J)2\overline{\theta }e^{(+)}\overline{D}J\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2\overline{\theta }\overline{D}J\overline{D}P_0\overline{D}J)/(2e^{(+)}),`$

$`Y_{\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}},\overline{\theta }}:=(\overline{\theta }e^{(+)}(\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+\overline{D}JD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJ\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+\overline{\theta }(2\overline{D}P_0D\overline{D}J+\overline{D}J_z+2\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}P_0\overline{D}JJ\overline{D}JD\overline{D}P_0)+e^{(+)}DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+\overline{D}JDP_0+D\overline{D}J)/e^{(+)},`$

$`Y_{\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}},\theta }:=(\theta e^{(+)}(\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+\overline{D}JD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJ\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+\theta (2\overline{D}P_0D\overline{D}J+\overline{D}J_z+2\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}P_0\overline{D}JJ\overline{D}JD\overline{D}P_0)+e^{(+)}\overline{D}J\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}J\overline{D}P_0)/e^{(+)},`$

$`Y_{\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}}:=(e^{(+)}(\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+\overline{D}JD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJ\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+2\overline{D}P_0D\overline{D}J+\overline{D}J_z+2\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}P_0\overline{D}JJ\overline{D}JD\overline{D}P_0)/e^{(+)}.`$

The fourth quadru-plet associated to $`P_1`$ is represented by

$`Y_{P_1,\theta \overline{\theta }}:=(\theta \overline{\theta }e^{2(+)}(4DP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J+4DP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+2DJ_z\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DJD\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0+2DJ\overline{D}P_0D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}4DJDP_0\overline{D}P_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJDP_0\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2D\overline{D}JD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2J_zD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+\theta \overline{\theta }e^{(+)}(2Q_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z2\overline{D}J\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}+2DJQ_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DJ\overline{D}J+2JJ_z+2D\overline{D}J_z+J_{zz})+\theta \overline{\theta }(4\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J+2\overline{D}J_zQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+\overline{D}JD\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}J2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0+2\overline{D}J\overline{D}P_0DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+4\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2D\overline{D}J\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}})+\theta e^{2(+)}(2DJDP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+\theta e^{(+)}(DP_0J_z+DJ_z2DJQ_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJJDJD\overline{D}P_0)+\theta (2Q_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J+2\overline{D}JDP_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}JDQ_{1over2})+\overline{\theta }e^{2(+)}(2\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J+2\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+2DJ\overline{D}P_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJ\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+\overline{\theta }e^{(+)}(\overline{D}P_0J_z+\overline{D}J_z+2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}JJ\overline{D}JD\overline{D}P_0)+\overline{\theta }(2\overline{D}J\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}J\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}})+e^{2(+)}DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+e^{(+)}(\overline{D}JDP_0DJ\overline{D}P_0)\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}})/e^{(+)},`$

$`Y_{P_1,\overline{\theta }}:=(\overline{\theta }e^{2(+)}(4DP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J+4DP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+2DJ_z\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DJD\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0+2DJ\overline{D}P_0D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}4DJDP_0\overline{D}P_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJDP_0\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2D\overline{D}JD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2J_zD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+\overline{\theta }e^{(+)}(2Q_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z2\overline{D}J\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}+2DJQ_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DJ\overline{D}J+2JJ_z+2D\overline{D}J_z+J_{zz})+\overline{\theta }(4\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J+2\overline{D}J_zQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+\overline{D}JD\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}J2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0+2\overline{D}J\overline{D}P_0DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+4\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2D\overline{D}J\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}})+e^{2(+)}(2DJDP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+e^{(+)}(DP_0J_z+DJ_z2DJQ_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+DJJDJD\overline{D}P_0)+2Q_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J+2\overline{D}JDP_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}JDQ_{\frac{1}{2}})/e^{(+)},`$

$`Y_{P_1,\theta }:=(\theta e^{2(+)}(4DP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J+4DP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+2DJ_z\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DJD\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0+2DJ\overline{D}P_0D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}4DJDP_0\overline{D}P_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJDP_0\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2D\overline{D}JD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2J_zD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+\theta e^{(+)}(2Q_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z2\overline{D}J\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}+2DJQ_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DJ\overline{D}J+2JJ_z+2D\overline{D}J_z+J_{zz})+\theta (4\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J+2\overline{D}J_zQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+\overline{D}JD\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}J2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0+2\overline{D}J\overline{D}P_0DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+4\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2D\overline{D}J\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}})+e^{2(+)}(2\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J2\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z2DJ\overline{D}P_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DJ\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+e^{(+)}(\overline{D}P_0J_z\overline{D}J_z2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2\overline{D}JJ+\overline{D}JD\overline{D}P_0)2\overline{D}J\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}+\overline{D}J\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}})/e^{(+)},`$

$`Y_{P_1}:=(e^{2(+)}(4DP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J+4DP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+2DJ_z\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DJD\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0+2DJ\overline{D}P_0D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}4DJDP_0\overline{D}P_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJDP_0\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2D\overline{D}JD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2J_zD\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}})+e^{(+)}(2Q_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z2\overline{D}J\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}+2DJQ_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DJ\overline{D}J+2JJ_z+2D\overline{D}J_z+J_{zz})+4\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J+2\overline{D}J_zQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+\overline{D}JD\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}J2\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0+2\overline{D}J\overline{D}P_0DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+4\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}2D\overline{D}J\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}})/e^{(+)}.`$

Note that in previous formulas $`e^{2(+)}`$ refers to $`e^{4P_0}`$.

### 3.3. Recursion operator

Here we present the recursion operator $``$ for symmetries for this case obtained as a higher symmetry in the Cartan covering of equation (34) augmented by equations governing the nonlocal variables (3.13.1). As explained in the previous section, the recursion operator is in effect a deformation of the equation structure.
As demonstrated there, this deformation is a form-valued vector field and has to satisfy

$`\overline{\mathrm{}}_F^C()=0.`$ (41)
In order to arrive at a nontrivial result as was explained for the KdV equation, we have to introduce associated to the nonlocal variables

$$P_0,DP_0,\overline{D}P_0,D\overline{D}P_0,Q_{\frac{1}{2}},\mathrm{}$$

their Cartan forms

$$\omega _{P_0},\omega _{DP_0},\omega _{\overline{D}P_0},\omega _{D\overline{D}P_0},\omega _{Q_{\frac{1}{2}}},\omega _{DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}},\omega _{\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}},\omega _{D\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}},$$

$$\omega _{\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}},\omega _{D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}},\omega _{\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}},\omega _{D\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}},\omega _{P_1},\omega _{DP_1},\omega _{\overline{D}P_1},\omega _{D\overline{D}P_1}.$$

These forms can straightforwardly be constructed using eqs. (34) and (3.1,3.1) in the line as explained for the case of KdV-equation (see e.g. eqs. (2.2) and (2.3)) and we shall present here just a few of the associated explicit expresssions for their differentiation rules

$`D\omega _J`$ $`=\omega _{DJ},D\omega _{DJ}=0,D\omega _{\overline{D}J}=\omega _{D\overline{D}J},`$
$`\overline{D}\omega _J`$ $`=\omega _{\overline{D}J},\overline{D}\omega _{DJ}=\omega _{D\overline{D}J}\omega _{J_1},\overline{D}\overline{D}\omega _J=0,`$
$`D_x\omega _J`$ $`=\omega _{J_1},D_x\omega _{DJ}=\omega _{DJ_1},D_x\omega _{\overline{D}J}=\omega _{\overline{D}J_1},`$
and similar for other Cartan forms, while additional signs arise due to odd vector fields $`D,\overline{D}`$.

Motivated by the results of the previous subsections and the grading of the equation our search is for a one-form-valued vector field whose defining function is of degree 3.
So besides the Cartan forms associated to the nonlocal variables $`P_0,\mathrm{}`$ which will account for the pseudo differential part of the recursion operator, we also have to introduce the local Cartan forms

$$\omega _J,\omega _{DJ},\omega _{\overline{D}J},\omega _{D\overline{D}J},\omega _{J_z},\omega _{DJ_z},\omega _{\overline{D}J_z},\omega _{D\overline{D}J_z},\omega _{J_{zz}},\omega _{DJ_{zz}},\omega _{\overline{D}J_{zz}},\omega _{D\overline{D}J_{zz}}$$

which will represent the pure differential part of the recursion operator.
We have to remark that the coefficients of the one-form-valued vector field are just functions dependent on all local and nonlocal variables.
Moreover it should be noted that the representation of the vector field with respect to its form part is to be understood as to be equipped with a right-module structure. This will account for the correct action of contraction.
Since the coordinate $`P_0`$ is of degree zero, this procedure requires the introduction of approximately 2400, yet free, functions dependent on this variable .
Now this quite extensive one-form-valued vector field has to satisfy eq. (41). Although this is just the deformation condition which should be satisfied, we decided, in order to reduce the already extremely extensive computations, first to require that the resulting recursion operator performs its “duties”, sending symmetries to symmetries.
In order to achieve these goals we required the operator to satifies the following requirements

$`(Y_1)=Y_3,(Y_3)=Y_5,(Y_5)=Y_7.`$ (42)
Due to these conditions it has been possible to fix all 2400 free functions in the defining function $`R`$ of the one-form-valued vector field $``$.
In effect the condition $`(Y_5)=Y_7`$ was itself sufficient to fix all coefficients.
After this, the result has been substituted into (41), satisfying it completely.
So, the final result is the following:
Starting form the defining function $`R`$ for the form-valued vector field $``$, given by

$`R={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}\omega _\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha `$ (43)
where $`\alpha `$ runs over $`D\overline{D}J_{zz},\mathrm{},DJ,J,P_0,DP_0,\mathrm{},D\overline{D}P_1`$, the coefficients are given by

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{D\overline{D}P_1}`$ $`:=0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{P_1}`$ $`:=J_z,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}}`$ $`:=e^{(+)}DJDP_0DJQ_{\frac{1}{2}},`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}}`$ $`:=(\overline{D}JDP_0+D\overline{D}J)e^{()},`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}}`$ $`:=(e^{(+)}DJ\overline{D}P_0+e^{(+)}D\overline{D}J+e^{(+)}J_z+\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}),`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}}`$ $`:=e^{()}\overline{D}J\overline{D}P_0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{D\overline{D}P_0}`$ $`:=\overline{D}JDP_0+3J_z,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{P_0}`$ $`:=DJ\overline{D}J+2JJ_z+2D\overline{D}J_z+J_{zz},`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{D}P_1}`$ $`:=DJ,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{DP_1}`$ $`:=\overline{D}J,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{D\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}}`$ $`:=e^{(+)}DJ/2,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{D\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}}`$ $`:=e^{()}\overline{D}J/2,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}}`$ $`:=2e^{(+)}DP_0D\overline{D}J+2e^{(+)}DP_0J_z+e^{(+)}DJ_z2e^{(+)}DJDP_0\overline{D}P_0`$
$`e^{(+)}DJD\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z\overline{D}JDQ_{\frac{1}{2}}DJ\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}},`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{Q_{\frac{1}{2}}}`$ $`:=e^{()}(2\overline{D}P_0D\overline{D}J\overline{D}J_z2\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}P_0+\overline{D}JJ+\overline{D}JD\overline{D}P_0),`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{D}P_0}`$ $`:=DP_0J_zDJ_zDJJ+DJD\overline{D}P_0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{DP_0}`$ $`:=\overline{D}J_z2\overline{D}JJ,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{J_{zz}}`$ $`:=1,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{D\overline{D}J_z}`$ $`:=0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{J_z}`$ $`:=2J,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{D\overline{D}J}`$ $`:=4J,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_J`$ $`:=J^2+3D\overline{D}J+3J_z,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{D}J_z}`$ $`:=0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{DJ_z}`$ $`:=0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{D}J}`$ $`:=0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{DJ}`$ $`:=(\overline{D}J)/2.`$
This now finishes the longstanding problem of the existence of the recursion operator for the $`N=2`$ supersymmetric $`\alpha =1`$ KdV-equation.
Transformation of the formvaluedness to the Fréchet derivatives leads to the presentation of the recursion operator in classical form (). We have checked, as mentioned before, that the form-valued vector field (43) satisfies eq. (41) and so indeed gives the proper recursion operator for symmetries of the $`N=2`$ $`\alpha =1`$ KdV-hierarchy.

### 3.4. Factorization of the Recursion Operator and the Bi-Hamiltonian structure

Here we shall present the factorization of the recursion operator obtained in last section.
Factorization in this respect means

$`R=J_2J_0^1`$ (44)
where $`J_2`$ is the second Hamiltonian structure

$`J_2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[D,\overline{D}]+\overline{D}JD+DJ\overline{D}+J+J`$ (45)
and $`J_0`$ will be the zero Hamiltonian structure.
We assume $`J_0^1`$ to be a one-form-valued function, i.e., in effect a pseudo–differential operator, the pseudo–part of which is realized through the Frechet derivatives of the nonlocal variables.
So we describe $`J_0^1`$ in a similar way as the defining function of the deformation structure

$`J_0^1={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}\omega _\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha ^0`$ (46)
where $`\alpha `$ runs over local and nonlocal variables and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha ^0`$ being function of appropriate degree.
A rather straightforward computation does lead to the following result:
$`\alpha `$ and the associated $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\alpha ^0`$ are given by

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{P_1}^0`$ $`:=1,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}}^0`$ $`:=e^{()})/2,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}}^0`$ $`:=e^{(+)}/2,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{D\overline{D}P_0}^0`$ $`:=3,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{P_0}^0`$ $`:=J,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}}^0`$ $`:=(e^{(+)}DP_0+Q_{\frac{1}{2}}),`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{Q_{\frac{1}{2}}}^0`$ $`:=e^{()}\overline{D}P_0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{D}P_0}^0`$ $`:=DP_0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_J^0`$ $`:=3/2.`$
If we use now Frechet derivatives associated to the occurring nonlocal variables in the presentation, we arrive at

$`J_0^1=[D,\overline{D}]^1+^1J_2^1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{f}_{\frac{1}{2}}^{}{}_{}{}^{T}^1f_{\frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}f_{\frac{1}{2}}^T^1\overline{f}_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ (47)
where $`f_{\frac{1}{2}},\overline{f}_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ are the Fréchet derivatives of $`Q_{\frac{1}{2}},\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ respectively.
The factorization of the recursion operator for symmetries has wider applicability in the construction of Hamiltonian operators and will be discussed more deeply elsewhere.

## 4. Conclusion

We gave an outline of the theory of deformations of the equation structure of differential equations, leading to the construction of recursion operators for symmetries of such equations. The extension of this theory to the nonlocal setting of differential equations is essential for getting nontrivial results. The theory has been applied to the construction of the recursion operator for symmetries for a coupled KdV–mKdV system, leading to a highly nonlocal result for this system. Moreover the appearance of nonpolynomial nonlocal terms in all results, e.g., conservation laws, symmetries and recursion operator is striking and reveals some unknown and intriguing underlying structure of the equations.

Acknowledgments. A.S. is grateful to University of Twente for the hospitality extended to him during this research. This work was partially supported by the grants NWO NB 61-491, FOM MF 00/39, RFBR 99-02-18417, RFBR-DFG 02-02-04002, RFBR-CNRS 98-02-22034, PICS Project No. 593, Nato Grant No. PST.CLG 974874 and the Heisenberg-Landau program.

## 5. Appendix: The Second layer of Nonlocalities

Here we present the second set of sixteen nonlocal variables, conservation laws and Hamiltonians.
We shall present here the results for

$`P_2,DP_2,\overline{D}P_2,D\overline{D}P_2;`$
$`Q_{\frac{5}{2}},DQ_{\frac{5}{2}},\overline{D}Q_{\frac{5}{2}},D\overline{D}Q_{\frac{5}{2}};`$
$`\overline{Q}_{\frac{5}{2}},D\overline{Q}_{\frac{5}{2}},\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{5}{2}},D\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{5}{2}};`$
$`P_3,DP_3,\overline{D}P_3,D\overline{D}P_3.`$
The explicit formulae for $`(P_2)_z,(Q_{\frac{5}{2}})_z,(\overline{Q}_{\frac{5}{2}})_z`$ are

$`(P_2)_z:=((2)(e^{2(+)}DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}Je^{2(+)}DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0e^{2(+)}DJ\overline{D}P_0D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2e^{2(+)}DJDP_0\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+e^{(+)}\text{}ot\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+e^{(+)}\overline{D}JDP_0J+e^{(+)}\overline{D}JDP_0D\overline{D}P_0+e^{(+)}DJ\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}e^{(+)}DJ\overline{D}P_0D\overline{D}P_02e^{(+)}DJ\overline{D}J+\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}))/e^{(+)},`$

$`(Q_{\frac{5}{2}})_z:=(2(e^{2(+)}DP_1D\overline{D}Je^{2(+)}DP_1J_z+e^{2(+)}DP_0D\overline{D}JD\overline{D}P_0+e^{2(+)}DP_0J_zD\overline{D}P_02e^{2(+)}DJ\overline{D}P_0DP_1e^{2(+)}DJJ2e^{2(+)}DJJD\overline{D}P_02e^{2(+)}DJD\overline{D}J2e^{2(+)}DJJ_z+e^{(+)}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}JD\overline{D}J+e^{(+)}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}JD\overline{D}P_0e^{(+)}\overline{D}P_0D\overline{D}JDQ_{\frac{1}{2}}+2e^{(+)}\overline{D}JDP_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}J+2e^{(+)}\overline{D}JDP_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0e^{(+)}\overline{D}JJDQ_{\frac{1}{2}}2e^{(+)}\overline{D}JD\overline{D}P_0DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}2e^{(+)}DJ\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_02e^{(+)}DJ\overline{D}JQ_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}J\overline{D}P_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}))/e^{(+),}`$

$`(\overline{Q}_{\frac{5}{2}})_z:=(2(e^{(+)}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}JD\overline{D}P_0e^{(+)}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_zD\overline{D}P_0+2e^{(+)}DP_0\overline{D}P_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J_z+2e^{(+)}\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_0+2e^{(+)}DJ\overline{D}P_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}J2e^{(+)}DJ\overline{D}P_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}P_02e^{(+)}DJ\overline{D}J\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}e^{(+)}DJD\overline{D}P_0\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}P_1D\overline{D}J\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}+Q_{\frac{1}{2}}D\overline{D}J\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}J_zD\overline{D}P_02\overline{D}J\overline{D}P_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}DQ_{\frac{1}{2}}2\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}P_12\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}Q_{\frac{1}{2}}+2\overline{D}JDP_0Q_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}+2\overline{D}JDP_0\overline{D}P_0J+3\overline{D}JJD\overline{D}P_0\overline{D}JDQ_{\frac{1}{2}}\overline{D}\overline{Q}_{\frac{1}{2}}))/e^{(+).}`$
Other quantities can be obtained by action of $`D`$ and $`\overline{D}`$.

The nonlocal variable $`P_3`$ results from the Poisson bracket of other Hamiltonians, i.e.,

$`\{Q_{\frac{1}{2}},\overline{Q}_{\frac{5}{2}}\}.`$
The general Poisson algebra structure of the Hamiltonians will be discussed elsewhere .


format: text

text:
# Modeling Deep Inelastic Cross Sections in the Few GeV Region

## Appendix A Appendix

In leading order QCD (e.g. GRV94 LO PDFs), $`F_2`$ for the scattering of electrons and muons on proton (or neutron) targets is given by the sum of quark and anti-quark distributions (each weighted the square of the quark charges):

$`F_2(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_ie_i^2\left[xq_i(x)+x\overline{q}_i(x)\right].`$ (1)
Thus, our modified $`F_2`$ to describe low energy data down to photoproduction limit is given by

$`F_2(x)={\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{Q^2+0.188}}F_2(x_w),`$ (2)
where $`x_w=x(Q^2+0.624)/(Q^2+1.735x)`$.

In neutrino scattering we use the same modified scaling variable and the same correction factor in $`F_2`$ and $`xF_3`$.

In the extraction of original GRV94 LO PDFs, no separate longitudinal contribution was included. The quark distributions were directly fit to $`F_2`$ data. A full modeling of electron and muon cross section requires also a description of $`2xF_1`$. We use a non-zero longitudinal $`R`$ in reconstructing $`2xF_1`$ by using a fit of $`R`$ to measured data. Thus, $`2xF_1`$ is given by

$`2xF_1(x)`$ $`=`$ $`F_2(x)(1+4Mx^2/Q^2)/(1+R).`$ (3)
In reality, a reconstruction of $`2xF_1`$ from the values of $`R`$ and $`F_2`$ in neutrino scattering is not as simple as in the case of charged lepton scattering (because of charm production). For charm production, the Bjorken scaling variable $`x`$ no longer represents the fractional momentum carried by the struck quark in the infinite momentum frame due to the non-zero heavy mass of the charm quark ($`m_c1.3`$ GeV). For charm production processes, the variable $`x`$ is replaced by the slow rescaling variable $`\xi =(1+m_c^2/Q^2)x`$. Therefore, the structure functions for the charm production (cp) and non-charm production (ncp) components are given by the following expressions.

$`F_2^{cp+ncp}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`F_2^{ncp}(x)+F_2^{cp}(\xi )`$ (4)
$`2xF_1^{cp+ncp}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1+4M^2x^2/Q^2}{1+R^{ncp}(x)}}F_2^{ncp}(x)`$ (5)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1+4M^2\xi ^2/Q^2}{1+R^{ncp}(\xi )}}F_2^{ncp}(\xi )`$
In this model, the $`R_{world}`$ fit  is used for $`R^{ncp}`$ and $`R^{cp}`$, $`R_{world}`$ is parameterized by:

$`R_{world}(x,Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{0.0635}{log(Q^2/0.04)}}\theta (x,Q^2)`$ (6)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{0.5747}{Q^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{0.3534}{Q^4+0.09}},`$
where $`\theta =1.+\frac{12Q^2}{Q^2+1.0}\times \frac{0.125^2}{0.125^2+x^2}`$.

The $`R_{world}`$ function provides a good description of the world’s data in the $`Q^2>0.5`$ and $`x>0.05`$ region (where most of the $`R`$ data are available). Fig 5 shows a comparison of all available data on $`R`$ and $`R_{world}`$. $`R_{world}`$ is shown as the dotted line. Because of the effect of the charm quark final state mass in charm production in neutrino scattering, the effective $`R`$ for neutrino scattering in the very low $`x`$ region ( $`R_{eff}`$ \- solid line) is somewhat higher than $`R_{world}`$ (which is a fit to electron and muon scattering data). We use Eq. 4 and 5 to construct $`R_{eff}`$ for neutrino scattering. However, this effect is not important at low neutrino energies (which are below charm production threshold). We include this effect because we want our formalism to be also correct at high energies (e.g. in the CCFR/NuTeV region).

Note that the $`R_{world}`$ function breaks down below $`Q^2=0.3`$. Therefore, we freeze the function at $`Q^2=0.35`$ and introduce the following function for $`R`$ in the $`Q^2<0.35`$ region. The new function provides a smooth transition from $`Q^2=0.35`$ down to $`Q^2=0`$ by forcing $`R`$ to approach zero at $`Q^2=0`$ as expected in the photoproduction limit (while keeping a $`1/Q^2`$ behavior at large $`Q^2`$ and matching to $`R_{world}`$ at $`Q^2=0.35`$).

$`R(x,Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`3.207\times {\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{Q^4+1}}`$ (7)
$`\times R_{world}(x,Q^2=0.35).`$
In neutrino scattering the value of $`R`$ is required to approach zero at $`Q^2=0`$ only for the vector part of the interaction. However, the overall contribution from $`R`$ is expected to be small in this region. Therefore, it is reasonable to use Eq. 7 for $`R`$ in both the electron/muon and neutrino scattering cases.

In the comparison with CCFR charged-current differential cross section on iron, a nuclear correction for iron targets is applied. We use the following parameterized function, $`f(x)`$ (fit to experimental electron and muon scattering data for the ratio of iron to deuterium cross sections, shown in Fig 6), to convert deuterium structure functions to (isoscalar) iron structure functions ;

$`f(x)`$ $`=`$ $`1.0960.364x0.278e^{21.94x}`$ (8)
$`+2.772x^{14.417}`$
For the ratio of deuterium cross sections to cross sections on free nucleons we use the following function obtained from a fit to SLAC data on the nuclear dependence of electron scattering cross sections .

$`f(x)`$ $`=`$ $`(0.985\pm 0.0013)\times (1+0.422x2.745x^2`$ (9)
$`+7.570x^310.335x^4+5.422x^5).`$
This correction shown in Fig. 7 is only valid in the $`0.05<x<0.75`$ region. In neutrino scattering, we use the same nuclear correction factor for $`F_2`$, $`xF_3`$ and $`2xF_1`$.

The $`d/u`$ correction for the GRV94 LO PDFs is obtained from the NMC data for $`F_2^D/F_2^P`$. Here, Eq. 9 is used to remove nuclear binding effects in the NMC deuterium $`F_2`$ data. The correction term, $`\delta (d/u)`$ is obtained by keeping the total valence and sea quarks the same.

$`\delta (d/u)(x)`$ $`=`$ $`0.0161+0.0549x+0.355x^2`$ (10)
$`0.193x^3,`$
where the corrected $`d/u`$ ratio is $`(d/u)^{}=(d/u)+\delta (d/u)`$. Thus, the modified $`u`$ and $`d`$ valence distributions are given by

$`u_v^{}={\displaystyle \frac{u_v}{1+\delta (d/u)\frac{u_v}{u_v+d_v}}}`$ (11)
$`d_v^{}={\displaystyle \frac{d_v+u_v\delta (d/u)}{1+\delta (d/u)\frac{u_v}{u_v+d_v}}}.`$ (12)
The same formalism is applied to the modified $`u`$ and $`d`$ sea distributions. Accidently, the modified $`u`$ and $`d`$ sea distributions (based on NMC data) agree with the NUSEA data in the range of $`x`$ between 0.1 and 0.4. Thus, we find that any futher correction on sea quarks is not necessary.


text:
# Low-energy electron scattering in a strong Coulomb field

## I Introduction

The explicit form of the cross section for electron scattering in a strong Coulomb field at arbitrary energy was obtained many years ago Mott29 . This form contains the infinite series with respect to the angular momentum. Though various approaches to the summation over the angular momentum were developed in numerous papers, the numerical calculation of the cross section with the use of the results of Mott29  still rather complicated problem. The detailed review of the papers devoted to the problem under discussion can be found in Uberall . In the papers Bartlett40 ; Doggett56 ; Sherman56  the numerical calculations of the cross section were performed for various scattering angles, the nuclear charge numbers $`Z`$, and the kinetic electron energy above $`0.023`$MeV. For $`Z=80`$ in the case of backward electron scattering, it was shown that the ratio of the exact cross section and the Rutherford cross section increases from $`0.15`$ to $`2.35`$ when the electron kinetic energy decreases from $`1.675`$MeV to $`0.023`$MeV. Such big deviation from the non-relativistic result stimulate the interest to the investigation of the exact cross section at very small energy. In the present paper we have solved this problem calculating the asymptotic form of the cross section for arbitrary $`Z`$ and small kinetic electron energy.

## II Cross section

A simple way to derive the scattering amplitude is the use of the Green function $`G(𝐫_2,𝐫_1|\epsilon )`$ of the Dirac equation in the external field. The wave function $`\psi _{\lambda 𝐩}(𝐫)`$ can be obtained with the help of the relation

$$\underset{r_1\mathrm{}}{lim}G(𝐫_2,𝐫_1|\epsilon )=\frac{\mathrm{exp}(ipr_1)}{4\pi r_1}\underset{\lambda =1,2}{}\psi _{\lambda 𝐩}^{(+)}(𝐫_2)\overline{u}_{\lambda 𝐩},u_{\lambda 𝐩}=\sqrt{\epsilon +m}\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _\lambda \\ \frac{𝝈𝒑}{\epsilon +m}\varphi _\lambda \end{array}\right),$$
(1)
where $`p=\sqrt{\epsilon ^2m^2}`$, $`m`$ is the electron mass, $`\psi _{\lambda 𝐩}^{(+)}(𝐫)`$ denotes a solution of the Dirac equation containing at the infinity a plane wave with the momentum $`𝐩=p𝐧_1`$ ($`𝐧_{1,2}=𝐫_{1,2}/r_{1,2}`$) and a diverging spherical wave, $`\lambda `$ is the helicity, $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$. In the Coulomb field the right-hand-side of (1) contains the additional factor $`(2pr_1)^{iq}`$, where $`q=Z\alpha \epsilon /p`$ , $`\alpha =1/137`$ is the fine-structure constant. In MS82  a convenient integral representation was obtained for the electron Green function in the Coulomb field. Using Eqs. (19)-(22) of that paper, we arrive at the following result:

$`\psi _{\lambda 𝐩}^{(+)}(𝐫_2)=\sqrt{\epsilon +m}{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}f_1\\ {\displaystyle \frac{p𝝈𝒏_2}{\epsilon +m}}f_2\end{array}\right),`$
$`f_{1,2}=[(R_1A+i{\displaystyle \frac{mZ\alpha }{p}}R_2B)M_1iR_2BM_2]\varphi _\lambda ,`$
$`A=l{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}}(P_l(x)+P_{l1}(x)),B={\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}}(P_l(x)P_{l1}(x)),`$
$`x=𝒏_1𝒏_2,R_{1,2}=1(𝝈𝒏_2)(𝝈𝒏_1)`$
$`M_{1,2}=i{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}(ipr_2i\pi \nu )}{pr_2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}t^{(12iq)}e^{it^2}J_{2\nu }(2t\sqrt{2pr_2})𝑑t.`$ (2)
Here $`P_l(x)`$ is the Legendre polynomial, $`J_{2\nu }`$ is the Bessel function, $`\nu =\sqrt{l^2(Z\alpha )^2}`$. The integral in the expression for $`M_{1,2}`$ are expressed via the confluent hypergeometric function. The result (II) is in agreement with the well-known solution of the Dirac equation in the Coulomb field.

When $`r_2\mathrm{}`$ then the coefficient $`W_\lambda `$ at the diverging spherical wave

$$\mathrm{exp}[ipr_2+iq\mathrm{ln}(2pr_2)]/r_2$$

in $`\psi _{\lambda 𝐩}^{(+)}(𝐫_2)`$ is determined by the asymptotics of the function $`M_1`$ in (II) coming from the region of integration $`t1`$. We have

$`W_\lambda =\sqrt{\epsilon +m}{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}f\\ {\displaystyle \frac{p𝝈𝒏_2}{\epsilon +m}}f\end{array}\right),`$
$`f={\displaystyle \frac{ie^{i\pi \nu }\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu iq)}{2p\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu +1+iq)}}[R_1A+i{\displaystyle \frac{mZ\alpha }{p}}R_2B]\varphi _\lambda .`$ (3)
As a result we obtain the cross section

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }}}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{p^2}}\left\{(1+x)|F^{}|^2+\left({\displaystyle \frac{mZ\alpha }{p}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{|F|^2}{1x}}\right\},`$
$`F={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}le^{i\pi (l\nu )}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu iq)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu +1+iq)}}[P_l(x)P_{l1}(x)],x=\mathrm{cos}\vartheta .`$ (4)
that coincides with the Mott result Mott29 .

## III Low-energy scattering

Let us consider now the cross section (II) in the limit $`q=Z\alpha \epsilon /p1`$ , $`Z\alpha 1`$ corresponding to the low-energy electron scattering in the strong Coulomb field. In the first Born approximation the cross section reads Mott29 :

$$\frac{d\sigma _B}{d\mathrm{\Omega }}=\frac{q^2}{p^2(1x)^2}[1\frac{p^2}{2\epsilon ^2}(1x)].$$
(5)
Using the asymptotics of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-function in (II) we represent the ratio $`S=d\sigma /d\sigma _B`$ in the following form:

$`S=1+{\displaystyle \frac{(1x)}{q}}\text{Im}\{\mathrm{exp}[iq\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1x}{2}}\right)]`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}l(1)^l[P_l(x)P_{l1}(x)](e^{2i\pi \nu }1)e^{il^2/q}\}.`$ (6)
If $`(1+x)1/q`$ then it is possible to neglect the factor $`\mathrm{exp}(il^2/q)`$ in (III). We obtain

$`S=1+{\displaystyle \frac{(1x)}{q}}\text{Re}\{\mathrm{exp}[iq\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1x}{2}}\right)]`$
$`\times \{\pi (Z\alpha )^2(\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{1+x}}}1)i\pi ^2(Z\alpha )^4\mathrm{ln}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1+x}{2}}}`$
$`i{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}l(1)^l[P_l(x)P_{l1}(x)][e^{2i\pi \nu }1{\displaystyle \frac{i\pi (Z\alpha )^2}{l}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2(Z\alpha )^4}{2l^2}}]\}\}.`$ (7)
Thus, at $`(1+x)1/q`$ the correction to the cross section $`1/q`$. Note that the sum in (III) converges very rapidly for any $`x`$. When $`(1+x)1/q`$ (backward scattering), then the main contribution to the sum in (III) comes from $`l\sqrt{q}1`$. Using the asymptotics of the Legendre polynomials at $`x1`$ and replacing the summation by the integration we get

$`S=1+(1x){\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^{3/2}(Z\alpha )^2}{\sqrt{q}}}\mathrm{cos}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{q(1+x)}{4}}\right]J_0\left({\displaystyle \frac{q(1+x)}{4}}\right).`$ (8)
We see that at $`(1+x)1/q`$ the correction to the cross section $`1/\sqrt{q}`$. Therefore, for the low-energy scattering the biggest difference between the exact in $`Z\alpha `$ cross section and $`d\sigma _B/d\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is in the case of backward scattering. For arbitrary $`q`$ and $`x=1`$ the function $`S`$ reads (see (II)):

$`S=4\left|{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}le^{i\pi \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu iq)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu +1+iq)}}\right|^2.`$ (9)
In Fig. 1 we show the dependence of $`S`$ on $`v=p/\epsilon `$ for $`x=1`$ and various values of $`Z`$, and compare it with the low-energy asymptotics $`S=1+\sqrt{2}\pi ^{3/2}(Z\alpha )^{3/2}\sqrt{v}`$.

We see that for backward scattering the exact in $`Z\alpha `$ cross section differs essentially from $`d\sigma _B/d\mathrm{\Omega }`$ up to rather small $`v`$ , and this difference decreases very slowly ($`\sqrt{v}`$). Strictly speaking, the asymptotics are valid when $`(S1)1`$. Nevertheless, it is seen from Fig.1 that the difference between the exact result and the asymptotics is small starting from $`v<0.2`$. For $`(1+x)1/q`$ one can check that $`(S1)1`$ starting from $`q>10`$.

This work was supported through Grant RFBR 01-02-16926.


text:
# 1 Feynman diagrams describing a self energy insertion in the photonic one-loop corrections to the μe vertex.

MZ-TH/01-40

hep-ph/0203125

March 2002

Hadronic corrections to the muon decay*** Talk presented by A. D. at the 16th International Workshop on High Energy Physics and Quantum Field Theory (Moscow, Russia, September 2001). Supported by the DFG and by the Graduiertenkolleg “Eichtheorien” at the University of Mainz.

A. I. Davydychev$`^{a,b,}`$ Email: davyd@thep.physik.uni-mainz.de , K. Schilcher$`^a`$ and H. Spiesberger$`^{a,}`$ Email: hspiesb@thep.physik.uni-mainz.de

a Institut für Physik, Johannes-Gutenberg-Universität,

Staudinger Weg 7, D-55099 Mainz, Germany

b Institute for Nuclear Physics, Moscow State University,

119992 Moscow, Russia

## Abstract

We consider the $`𝒪(\alpha ^2)`$ hadronic corrections to the energy spectrum of the decay electron in muon decay. We find that the correction can be described, within good approximation, by a linear function in the electron energy. Explicit expressions for the form factors needed in an approach based on dispersion integrals are given.

At present, the best value of the muon life time is $`\tau _\mu =(2.19703\pm 0.00004)\mu s`$ . In fact, experimental data have reached such a precision that quantum corrections have to be taken into account when comparing this experimental result with theoretical predictions. To match this accuracy from the theory side, two-loop radiative corrections to the muon decay in the full electroweak Standard Model are needed. To perform the required calculations is a formidable, but not impossible, task. A step in this direction is the calculation of the purely electromagnetic corrections to the total decay rate at order $`\alpha ^2`$ in the Fermi theory, which has been performed by van Ritbergen and Stuart  (see also ). Besides that, also the $`𝒪(N_f\alpha ^2)`$ corrections in the Standard Model have been considered in Refs. . The decay spectrum is known to order $`\alpha `$ since long; however, the corresponding corrections for polarized muon decay were calculated only recently in . The leading logarithmic QED corrections of order $`𝒪\left(\alpha ^2\mathrm{ln}^2(m_\mu /m_e)\right)`$ to the muon decay spectrum were considered in Ref. .

The spectrum calculation is different from the one for the life time since the Kinoshita-Lee-Nauenberg theorem  is not in effect. Consequently, powers of the large logarithm $`\mathrm{ln}(m_\mu /m_e)`$ do not cancel in the calculation of the electromagnetic corrections to the spectrum. This becomes obvious when fitting the spectrum corrected to order $`𝒪(\alpha )`$ to the Michel spectrum: the resulting effective Michel parameter differs by about $`6\%`$ from its lowest-order value , a correction which is more than 10 times larger than the corresponding correction to the muon life time. At order $`𝒪(\alpha ^2)`$ the radiative corrections may be expected to be of the order of several per-mille and will become important for future high-precision experiments.

Given this perspective we review the calculation of the hadronic contribution to the energy spectrum of the final-state electron in muon decay. This contribution is not expected to be logarithmically enhanced, but nonetheless is required for an eventual complete second-order calculation. Further details of the calculation are given in Ref. .

We consider the decay of a muon in its rest system,

$$\mu ^{}(p)e^{}(p^{})+\nu _\mu (q_1)+\overline{\nu }_e(q_2),$$
(1)
and define momenta as shown in (1). It is convenient to introduce the dimensionless variable $`x=2E_e/m`$ to denote the ratio of the energy of the decay electron $`E_e`$ with respect to the muon mass $`m_\mu m`$. Neglecting the electron mass, $`p^2=0`$, the kinematically allowed range is $`0x1`$, and the momentum transferred from the charged particles to the neutrino pair, $`q=q_1+q_2=pp^{}`$ is determined by $`q^2=(1x)m^2`$.

The matrix element $``$ for (1) in the Fermi theory can be calculated most conveniently after a Fierz rearrangement factorizing the amplitude into a current $`J_\mu `$ which describes the $`\mu e`$ transition and a current for the $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ interaction. After squaring and summing (averaging) over spins, one can write $`||^2`$ as a product of two corresponding tensors. The one pertaining to the neutrino interaction can be integrated over the unobserved momenta of the neutrinos independently, leading to

$$N_{\mu \nu }=q_\mu q_\nu g_{\mu \nu }q^2.$$
(2)
This tensor will be contracted with $`C_{\mu \nu }=J_\mu ^{}J_\nu `$, with $`J_\mu =\overline{u}_e(p^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mu (q)u_\mu (p)`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mu (q)`$ is the effective vertex of the four-fermion interaction. At the lowest order, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mu (q)`$ is identified with

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mu ^0=\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\gamma _\mu \left(1\gamma _5\right),$$
(3)
where $`G_F=(1.16637\pm 0.00001)\times 10^5`$ GeV-2 is the Fermi coupling constant.

Hadronic contributions to the radiative corrections to the current $`J_\mu `$ at order $`𝒪(\alpha ^2)`$ are described by the Feynman diagrams shown in Fig. 1. The hadronic vacuum polarization

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mu \nu }^{\mathrm{had}}(k^2)=\frac{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Pi }^{\mathrm{had}}(k^2)}{k^2+\mathrm{i0}}\left(g_{\mu \nu }\frac{k_\mu k_\nu }{k^2}\right)$$
(4)
is inserted in a one-loop vertex correction. The vacuum polarization can be related to the measured cross section for $`e^+e^{}hadrons`$ with the help of a dispersion relation

$$\mathrm{\Pi }^{\mathrm{had}}(k^2)=\frac{\alpha }{3\pi }_{s_{\mathrm{thr}}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}s}{s}R(s)\frac{k^2}{k^2s+\mathrm{i0}},R(s)=\frac{\sigma (s;e^+e^{}hadrons)}{\sigma (s;e^+e^{}\mu ^+\mu ^{})},$$
(5)
where the integration starts at the two-pion threshold, $`s_{\mathrm{thr}}=4m_\pi ^2`$. Therefore, the calculation corresponds to a one-loop vertex with a photon of mass $`\sqrt{s}`$, i.e. using a propagator

$$\frac{\mathrm{i}}{k^2s+\mathrm{i0}}\left(g_{\mu \nu }\frac{k_\mu k_\nu }{k^2}\right).$$
(6)
The result can be written in the form

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mu (q)=\frac{\alpha }{3\pi }_{s_{\mathrm{thr}}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}s}{s}R(s)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_\mu (s;q,m^2)$$
(7)
where the vector function $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_\mu `$ can be decomposed into Lorentz-covariants as

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_\mu (s;q,m^2)=\gamma _\mu \omega _L\left[1+\stackrel{~}{f}(s;q^2,m^2)\right]+\frac{p_\mu +p_\mu ^{}}{m}\omega _R\stackrel{~}{g}_+(s;q^2,m^2)+\frac{q_\mu }{m}\omega _R\stackrel{~}{g}_{}(s;q^2,m^2),$$
(8)
with $`\omega _{R,L}=(1\pm \gamma _5)/2`$. The calculation is straightforward and corresponds to that of the one-loop vertex correction in QED, with the difference that (i) the exchanged “photon” is massive with mass $`\sqrt{s}`$, (ii) the coupling is purely left-handed, and (iii) the two fermion lines have different masses. In fact, except for small $`q^2`$ the electron mass can safely be neglected. After contraction with the neutrino tensor $`N_{\mu \nu }`$, Eq. (2), only the form factors $`\stackrel{~}{f}(s;q^2,m^2)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{g}_+(s;q^2,m^2)`$ will remain in the final result.

Explicit results for the relevant form factors $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{g}_+`$ are

$`\stackrel{~}{f}(s;q^2,m^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{4\pi }}\{2(m^2q^2s)[1+{\displaystyle \frac{q^2s}{(m^2q^2)^2}}]C_0`$ (9)
$`+\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2q^2s}{(m^2q^2)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{2q^2}{(m^2q^2)}}+1\right]B_0(q^2;m^2,0)`$
$`+[{\displaystyle \frac{2q^2}{m^2q^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{s(m^2+q^2)}{(m^2q^2)^2}}]B_0(m^2;m^2,s)+({\displaystyle \frac{1}{s}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m^2q^2}})A(s)+2\}`$
$`+\stackrel{~}{f}_{\mathrm{SE}}(s;q^2,m^2),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{g}_+(s;q^2,m^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{q^2}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{2q^2s}{m^2q^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{3q^2s}{(m^2q^2)^2}}+2]C_0`$ (10)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{q^2}{m^2q^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{6q^2s}{(m^2q^2)^2}}+1\right]B_0(q^2;m^2,0){\displaystyle \frac{q^2}{m^2q^2}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{q^2}{m^2q^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{6m^2s}{(m^2q^2)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{s(4m^2q^2)}{m^2(m^2q^2)}}+2\right]B_0(m^2;m^2,s)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{q^2}{m^2q^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{3}{m^2q^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m^2}}]A(s)+[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m^2q^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m^2}}]A(m^2)\},`$
where $`C_0=C_0(m^2,0,q^2;m^2,s,0)`$ is the three-point integral (cf. Fig. 1a), whereas $`B_0`$ and $`A`$ denote the tadpole and two-point integrals , respectively (see Eqs. (12)–(14) below). The complete set of results, including that for $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{}`$, is presented in .

Self-energy diagrams (Fig. 1b,c) contribute to the coefficient of $`\gamma _\mu `$ only. The result is

$`\stackrel{~}{f}_{\mathrm{SE}}(s;q^2,m^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{8\pi }}\{2(s+2m^2){\displaystyle \frac{B_0(p^2;m^2,s)}{p^2}}|_{p^2=m^2}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m^2}}B_0(m^2;m^2,s)`$ (11)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{s+m^2}{sm^2}}A(s)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m^2}}A(m^2)+1+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\},`$
where the last term, $`\frac{3}{2}`$, comes from the self energy on the massless (electron) leg. Using recurrence relations  (see also Appendix A of ), the derivative in (11) can be represented as

$$\frac{B_0(p^2;m^2,s)}{p^2}|_{p^2=m^2}=\frac{1}{m^2(s4m^2)}[m^2(s3m^2)B_0(m^2;m^2,s)+A(m^2)(1\frac{2m^2}{s})A(s)].$$

The required tadpole and two-point integrals are

$`A(m^2)`$ $`=`$ $`m^2\left[\mathrm{\Delta }1+\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mu _{\mathrm{DR}}^2}}\right],`$ (12)
$`B_0(m^2;m^2,s)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }+2\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mu _{\mathrm{DR}}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2m^2}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2m^2}}\beta \mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+\beta }{1\beta }}\right),`$ (13)
$`B_0(q^2;m^2,0)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }+2\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{\mu _{\mathrm{DR}}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{m^2q^2}{q^2}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m^2q^2}{m^2}}\right),`$ (14)
where $`\beta \sqrt{14m^2/s}`$, and $`\mu _{\mathrm{DR}}`$ is the scale parameter of dimensional regularization. In Eqs. (12)–(14), terms containing $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1/\epsilon \mathrm{ln}\pi \gamma _\mathrm{E}`$ represent the ultraviolet singularities which cancel in the final results (9)–(10).

Finally, we need the three-point scalar function $`C_0`$  for positive values of $`q^2`$. For arbitrary values of $`m_\mu `$ and $`m_e`$, it can be presented in the following symmetric form:

$`C_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda (m_e^2,m_{\mu }^{}{}_{}{}^{2},q^2)}}}\{\text{Li}_2(1{\displaystyle \frac{cm_e}{m_\mu }})\text{Li}_2(1{\displaystyle \frac{cm_\mu }{m_e}})`$ (15)
$`+\text{Li}_2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{cb_\mu }{b_e}}\right)+\text{Li}_2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{cb_e}{b_\mu }}\right)+\text{Li}_2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{c}{b_eb_\mu }}\right)+\text{Li}_2\left(1cb_eb_\mu \right)`$
$`+\mathrm{ln}^2b_e+\mathrm{ln}^2b_\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2c{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{m_e}{m_\mu }}\mathrm{ln}c\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_em_\mu }{s}}\},`$
where

$`b_e\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1\beta _e}{1+\beta _e}}},b_\mu \sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1\beta _\mu }{1+\beta _\mu }}},\beta _e\sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{4m_e^2}{s}}},\beta _\mu \sqrt{1{\displaystyle \frac{4m_{\mu }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{s}}},`$ (16)
$`c\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{m_e^2+m_{\mu }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}q^2\sqrt{\lambda (m_e^2,m_{\mu }^{}{}_{}{}^{2},q^2)}}{m_e^2+m_{\mu }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}q^2+\sqrt{\lambda (m_e^2,m_{\mu }^{}{}_{}{}^{2},q^2)}}}}`$ (17)
and $`\lambda (x,y,z)x^2+y^2+z^22xy2yz2zx`$ is the standard notation for the Källen function. This expression is regular in the limit $`m_e0`$. A compact result for this case is given in Eq. (34) of .

Performing the dispersion integral one obtains the form factors

$$f(q^2,m^2)=\frac{\alpha }{3\pi }_{s_{\mathrm{thr}}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}s}{s}R(s)\stackrel{~}{f}(s;q^2,m^2),g_+(q^2,m^2)=\frac{\alpha }{3\pi }_{s_{\mathrm{thr}}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}s}{s}R(s)\stackrel{~}{g}_+(s;q^2,m^2).$$
(18)
Since we are interested in the $`𝒪(\alpha ^2)`$ correction, it is sufficient to keep only terms of first order in $`f`$ and $`g_+`$ in the decay spectrum which then can be written in the form

$$\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0}\frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{d}x}=2x^2\left[(32x)\left(1+2f(x)\right)+xg_+(x)\right]=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0}\frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{d}x}|_{\mathrm{Born}}(1+r(x)),$$
(19)
with

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_0=\frac{G_F^2m^5}{192\pi ^3},\frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{d}x}|_{\mathrm{Born}}=2x^2(32x)\mathrm{\Gamma }_0,r(x)=2f(x)+\frac{x}{32x}g_+(x),$$
(20)
where $`f(x)f((1x)m^2,m^2)`$ and $`g_+(x)g_+((1x)m^2,m^2)`$.

For our purpose, the function $`R(s)`$ describing the hadronic cross section of $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation can be modeled by a combination of experimental data and analytical results from perturbative QCD. Since we are going to calculate a small correction, it is not necessary to invoke the most sophisticated treatment as needed, for example, when calculating the hadronic contribution to the fine structure constant $`\alpha (m_Z)`$. At low $`s<2.5`$ GeV2 we use experimental data from ALEPH parametrized in  or provided directly by ALEPH  from a measurement of the isovector $`\tau `$ spectral function. These data are complemented by the resonance contributions from the isospin-0 light mesons $`\omega `$ and $`\varphi `$. Above $`s=2.5`$ GeV2 we use the QCD prediction for $`R(s)`$ due to light quarks at order $`𝒪(\alpha _\mathrm{s})`$.

Since the data in the $`c\overline{c}`$-channel published by various groups are in a large part of the energy range inconsistent, we apply in this case the QCD-based approach of analytic continuation by duality . The data region can be chosen to extend only over the sub-threshold resonances, i.e. one can calculate the contribution coming from the $`c\overline{c}`$-channel by a combination of data describing the $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }(1S)`$ and $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }(2S)`$ resonances and the prediction of perturbative QCD. We checked that the results obtained this way are consistent with those of the standard approach using the new BES data .

The correction to the total decay rate, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }=_0^1dx\left(\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Gamma }/\mathrm{d}x\right)`$, was calculated before in . Our result,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{had}}0.0421\left(\alpha /\pi \right)^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_0,$$
(21)
agrees perfectly with the corresponding number $`0.042`$ given in . The resulting corrections to the spectrum (19) are shown in Fig. 2. At small $`x`$, the corrections are positive, but the correction to the total decay width is dominated by the negative values at $`x\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.18}`$. The dependence of the form factors on $`x`$ is to a very good approximation linear:

$`f(x)`$ $``$ $`\left(0.00710.0378x\right)\left(\alpha /\pi \right)^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_0,`$
$`g_+(x)`$ $``$ $`0.0067\left(\alpha /\pi \right)^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_0,`$ (22)
$`r(x)`$ $``$ $`\left(0.01480.0813x\right)\left(\alpha /\pi \right)^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_0.`$
For $`g_+`$, the coefficient of the term linear in $`x`$ is very small and is therefore omitted. Note that this behaviour cannot be described by a simple redefinition of the Michel parameter. Since $`G_F`$ is a free parameter in the Fermi theory, the correction to the total decay width is not observable; it can be absorbed by a suitable redefinition of the Fermi constant. However, the modification of the spectrum is, in principle, observable.

The correction to the total decay rate can be split up into the various contributions to the hadronic vacuum polarization, as shown in Table 1. The form factor $`f`$ of the $`\gamma _\mu `$ term contributes $`0.0387`$, whereas the correction due to $`g_+`$, $`0.0033`$, is smaller by one order of magnitude. The total correction (the contributions due to $`f`$ and $`g_+`$) is saturated to 81 % (80.8 % and 89 %, respectively) by the contributions from small $`s`$ below 2.5 GeV2. Only 5 % of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{had}}`$ is due to charmed states, and the bottom sector is completely negligible.

The numerical results given here take into account the $`𝒪(\alpha _\mathrm{s})`$ QCD corrections in $`R(s)`$. Using the leading-order expression for $`R(s)`$, i.e. without the correction factor $`(1+\alpha _\mathrm{s}/\pi )`$ in the light-quark contribution at large $`s`$ and the charm-quark contribution, the final result would be $`0.04149`$, i.e. changed by 1.4 %. We conclude that a more refined treatment which would include higher orders of perturbative QCD and mass-dependent corrections in the heavy-quark sector is not required for our purpose.

The evaluation of the dispersion integrals has been performed using standard numerical integration routines up to a value $`s_{\mathrm{max}}`$ of several hundred GeV2. The contribution above this value was obtained with the help of Maple using the asymptotic expansion of the form factors for large $`s`$ (see in the Appendix of Ref. ). For intermediate values of $`s`$, good consistency of both procedures has been verified.

The same set of formulae can be used to calculate the contributions from a $`\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ or a $`\tau ^+\tau ^{}`$ loop insertion. We find that the tau loop gives a very small contribution, about $`1.5\%`$ of the one from the muon loop, in agreement with Ref. . Therefore we give only results for the muon loop, where one has to insert in Eq. (18)

$$R(s)\left(1+\frac{2m^2}{s}\right)\sqrt{1\frac{4m^2}{s}}\mathrm{and}s_{\mathrm{thr}}4m^2.$$
(23)
With this input we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{muon}}0.0364\left(\alpha /\pi \right)^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_0,$$
(24)
which perfectly agrees with the exact result given in Ref. . The results of a linear fit of the form factors for the muon-loop insertion are:

$`f_{\mathrm{muon}}(x)`$ $``$ $`\left(0.01300.0414x\right)\left(\alpha /\pi \right)^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_0,`$
$`g_{+,\mathrm{muon}}(x)`$ $``$ $`\left(0.0090+0.0005x\right)\left(\alpha /\pi \right)^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_0,`$ (25)
$`r_{\mathrm{muon}}(x)`$ $``$ $`\left(0.02670.0898x\right)\left(\alpha /\pi \right)^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_0.`$
When analysing the similar contribution with an $`e^+e^{}`$ loop insertion (which represents one of the pure QED contributions), one should carefully treat logarithmic singularities occurring in the limit $`m_e0`$. For $`m_e0`$, the general result (15) can be used.

One can see that the energy spectrum in the decay of an unpolarized muon is corrected by a smooth function in $`x`$ due to hadronic contributions at order $`𝒪(\alpha ^2)`$. At both ends of the spectrum no particularly outstanding enhancement or suppression is observed.

The calculations described in this paper constitute only the most straightforward part of a full calculation which would be necessary before the expected future high-precision data can be confronted with theoretical predictions. This will not only be necessary for a meaningful test of the electroweak Standard Model, but also when searching for physics beyond the Standard Model .