format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The non-perturbative physics of Witten’s cubic string field theory  has been enhanced a lot since the proposal of vacuum string field theory(VSFT) by Rastelli, Sen and Zwiebach in  to , see also the related works  to . The basic idea is to assume the universality of the BRST operator around the closed string vacuum after tachyon condensation such that the ghost and matter sector decompose and the classical solution of the matter string field is a projector, or the so called sliver state and its tachyonic lump generalization .

These projector states are understood as the non-perturbative D-brane soliton of the VSFT, so the ratio of the branes’ tension provide a nontrivial test of the VSFT proposal. The ratio is mainly determined by the spectrum of the Neumann matrix with and without the zero modes as following

$$R=\frac{T_p}{2\pi \sqrt{\alpha ^{^{}}}T_{p+1}}=\frac{3(V_{00}+\frac{b}{2})^2}{\sqrt{2\pi b^3}}\frac{det(1M^{^{}})^{\frac{3}{4}}(1+3M^{^{}})^{\frac{1}{4}}}{det(1M)^{\frac{3}{4}}(1+3M)^{\frac{1}{4}}},$$
(1)
where $`M`$ is the Neumann matrix in the oscillator basis without zero modes, and $`M^{^{}}`$ is the one with zero modes. The ratio has been first tested numerically to be almost one in  and then proved to be one analytically by Okuyama in . Since the spectrum of both $`M`$ and $`M^{^{}}`$ contain $`1/3`$ so that the ratio blows up and requires properly regularization related to the issue of twist anomaly investigated in .

The spectrum of the Neumann matrix $`M`$ is constructed in  which shows that it has an doubly degenerate continuous spectrum except at $`1/3`$ which is non-degenerate. Later on, the explicit calculation of the spectrum of the Neumann matrix $`M^{^{}}`$ is also carried out in . The result shows that there are additional discrete spectrum besides the continuous one found in . However, it also leads to further puzzle that $`M^{^{}}`$ has doubly degenerate eigenvectors at $`1/3`$ so that naively the ratio R could be zero instead of one as expected. More detailed study of the density of states is required to resolve the issue.

On the other hand, Witten’s cubic SFT is believed to be background independent although there is no general proof for the background independence except some general arguments based upon BCFT in the context of VSFT  to . It is then an issue to check the background independence case by case. A simple case is to turn on the constant background B field, some discussions for Witten’s SFT on this background have been discussed in , there they argue that the string vertexs can be obtained by an unitary transformation from the one without the B-field. Although this is the case, it is still interesting to understand the background independence issue in VSFT where the non-perturbative D-brane physics can be worked out.

The construction of the sliver state and the tachyonic lump state in the constant B field background based upon  is done in , and the ratio of the brane tension between $`Dp`$ and $`D(p+2)`$ branes is given by

$$=\frac{(DetG)^{\frac{1}{4}}}{(2\pi \sqrt{\alpha ^{^{}}})^2}\frac{T_p}{T_{p+2}}=(\frac{\theta ^2+12(V_{00}+\frac{b}{2})^2}{4\sqrt{2\pi b^3}(DetG)^{\frac{1}{8}}})^2\frac{det(1^{^{}})^{\frac{3}{4}}(1+3^{^{}})^{\frac{1}{4}}}{det(1M)^{\frac{3}{2}}(1+3M)^{\frac{1}{2}}},$$
(2)
where $`G`$ stands for the open string metric. $`^{^{}}`$ is the Neumann matrix with the zero modes in the oscillator basis, and due to the B field there is mixing between two coordinate directions so that the dimension of $`^{^{}}`$ is twice larger than the one of $`M`$. In order to determine the ratio one needs to have the spectrum of $`^{^{}}`$, at least one should make sure if $`^{^{}}`$ has a eigenvalue at $`1/3`$ in order for the ratio to be finite 111The finiteness of the ratio is more subtle since some regularization is required, moreover, in order to precisely determine the density states of the continuous spectrum. However, $`1/3`$ is at the end of the spectrum so that we believe the match of the degeneracy of $`1/3`$ for $`M`$ and $`^{^{}}`$ is essential for the ratio to be well-defined..

Another interesting issue to which our results will be relevant is the generalization of the recent proposed map of Witten’s star to Moyal’s star  to the case with zero modes in the constant B-field. There the Moyal conjugate pairs are the Fourier transform of the twist-even coordinate modes and twist-odd momentum modes, the Fourier basis are the eigenvectors of $`M`$ or $`^{^{}}`$ in our case, and the twist parity is defined with respect to left and right part of the open string in Witten’s cubic string field theory. So we need to construct the complete orthogonal eigenvector basis of $`^{^{}}`$ in order to find out the proper Moyal conjugate pairs such that the proposed map makes sense. If so, then Witten’s cubic string field theory can be reformulated in the language of the noncommutative field theory, for which the soliton is just a projector.

In section 2, we will summarize the basic of the VSFT by setting up our conventions and notations, and warm up by calculating the $`1+^{^{}}`$ part of the ratio $``$. Section 3 contains the main results of our paper in which we will calculate both the continuous and discrete spectrum of the Neumann matrix. In section 4 we will conclude our paper by discussing the implication of our results to the ratio $``$ and to the map of Witten’s star to Moyal star. In the appendix we compute the ratio $``$ explicitly and show that it is exactly one.

Note added: Upon finishing our paper we find that there appears two papers  and  dealing with the same topic, and the first one has substantial overlap with ours.

## 2 Neumann matrix in the constant B field background

### 2.1 3-string vertex in the constant B-field background

To construct the sliver state which is D25-brane in VSFT, we need to use the 3-string vertex for the star product in the constant B field background , which is given by

$`|V_3>`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }dp^{(1)}dp^{(2)}dp^{(3)}\delta (p^{(1)}+p^{(2)}+p^{(3)})\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{r,s3}{}}[{\displaystyle \underset{m,n1}{}}V_{mn}^{rs}a_m^{(r)}a_n^{(s)}`$ (3)
$`+2{\displaystyle \underset{m1}{}}V_{m0}^{rs}a_m^{(r)}p^{(s)}+V_{00}^{rs}p^{(r)}p^{(s)}]{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta {\displaystyle \underset{r<s}{}}p^{(r)}\times p^{(s)})`$
$`(|p^{(1)}>|p^{(2)}>|p^{(3)}>)`$
where

$$|p>=\frac{1}{(\pi )^{1/4}}\mathrm{exp}(\frac{1}{2}(pp)+\sqrt{2}(a_0^{}p)\frac{1}{2}(a_0^{}a_0^{}))|0>$$
(4)
satisfy $`\widehat{p}|k>=k|k>`$. The dot products are with respect to the closed string metric along directions without $`B`$ field and to the open string metric $`G_{\alpha \beta }`$ along directions with $`B`$ field. The $`\theta `$ is the noncommutative parameter and the cross product means the contraction with the anti-symmetric symbol $`ϵ^{\alpha \beta }`$.

As shown in  the B field will change the Neumann boundary conditions of the free open string to the mixed one and introduce the Moyal-like phase in the string vertex besides replacing the closed string metric by the open string one in the B-field directions. Obviously one can decompose the above vertex into the transverse part $`|V_3^{}>`$ and the parallel part $`|V_3^{}>`$ with respect to the $`B`$ directions.

To construct the lower dimensional brane to which the transverse directions is no longer translational invariant, we need to use the 3-string vertex in the oscillator basis as the star product, which can be obtained by integrating out the momentum in (3),

$$|V_3^{}>=\left(\frac{𝒩_\theta \pi ^{1/2}}{(1+V_{00})}\right)^{d^{}/2}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{1}{2}\underset{r,s3}{}\underset{m,n0}{}𝒱_{\alpha \beta ,mn}^{rs}a_m^{(r)\alpha }a_n^{(s)\beta }\right)(|\mathrm{\Omega }>|\mathrm{\Omega }>|\mathrm{\Omega }>),$$
(5)
where $`V_{00}V_{00}^{rr}`$.

The relations between $`𝒱`$ and $`V`$ is obtained in  and we summarize the results in the following

$`𝒱_{mn}^{\alpha \beta ,rs}`$ $`=`$ $`G^{\alpha \beta }V_{mn}^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{𝒩_\theta }{b}}{\displaystyle \underset{t,v=1}{\overset{3}{}}}V_{m0}^{rv}U^{\alpha \beta ,vt}V_{0n}^{ts}`$ (6)
$`𝒱_{0n}^{\alpha \beta ,rs}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒩_\theta }{\sqrt{b}}}{\displaystyle \underset{t=1}{\overset{3}{}}}U^{\alpha \beta ,rt}V_{0n}^{ts}`$ (7)
$`𝒱_{00}^{\alpha \beta ,rs}`$ $`=`$ $`G^{\alpha \beta }\delta ^{rs}𝒩_\theta U^{\alpha \beta ,rs}`$ (8)
where

$$U^{\alpha \beta ,rs}G^{\alpha \beta }\varphi ^{rs}iaϵ^{\alpha \beta }\chi ^{rs},$$
(9)
with

$$𝒩_\theta \frac{8b(V_{00}+\frac{b}{2})}{\theta ^2det(G)+12(V_{00}+\frac{\beta }{2})^2},a\frac{\theta }{4(V_{00}+\frac{b}{2})},$$
(10)
and

$$\chi ^{rs}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 1& 1\\ 1& 0& 1\\ 1& 1& 0\end{array}\right),\varphi ^{rs}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 1/2& 1/2\\ 1/2& 1& 1/2\\ 1/2& 1/2& 1\end{array}\right)$$
(11)
Instead of using $`V^{rs}`$ one defines the matrices $`M^{rs}`$ as following

$$M^{rs}=CV^{rs},$$
(12)
where $`C_{mn}=(1)^n\delta _{m,n},m,n1`$ is the twist matrix. The matrices $`M^{rs}`$ are commuting to each other so that it is useful to solve the algebraic equation for the projector states. Similarly, as shown in  the matrices

$$^{{}_{}{}^{}rs}=C^{^{}}𝒱^{rs}$$
(13)
are also commuting to each other. The generalized twist matrix $`C_{mn}^{^{}}=(1)^n\delta _{m,n},m,n0`$. Although there are nine Neumann matrices, only three of them are independent, in the following we will only focus on one of them, that is, $`MM^{11}`$, and the one with zero modes in the constant B-field background $`^{^{}}^{{}_{}{}^{}11}`$. These two are the only matrices appear in the ratio of brane tension in (2), and will be our focus to find out their spectrum.

### 2.2 The form of $`^{^{}}`$

In the following we write down the explicit form of $`^{^{}}`$ by adopting the basis introduced firstly in . After some calculations, we arrive

$`_{00}^{{}_{}{}^{}\alpha \beta }`$ $`=`$ $`G^{\alpha \beta }(1𝒩_\theta ),`$ (14)
$`_{0n}^{{}_{}{}^{}\alpha \beta }`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{b}}}𝒩_\theta (G^{\alpha \beta }<v_e|iϵ^{\alpha \beta }{\displaystyle \frac{2a}{\sqrt{3}}}<v_o|),`$ (15)
$`_{mn}^{{}_{}{}^{}\alpha \beta }`$ $`=`$ $`G^{\alpha \beta }(M_{mn}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{b}}𝒩_\theta (|v_e><v_e||v_o><v_o|))`$ (16)
$`+iϵ^{\alpha \beta }{\displaystyle \frac{2a}{\sqrt{3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{b}}𝒩_\theta (|v_e><v_o|+|v_o><v_e|),m,n1,`$
where the vectors $`|v_e>`$ and $`|v_o>`$ are the same as defined in  and . Note that $`(|v_{e,o}>)^T=<v_{e,o}|`$ and

$$C|v_e>=|v_e>,C|v_o>=|v_o>.$$
(17)
Explicitly,

$$<v_e|=(0,\frac{A_2}{\sqrt{2}},0,\frac{A_4}{\sqrt{4}},0,\mathrm{}),<v_o|=(A_1,0,\frac{A_3}{\sqrt{3}},0,\mathrm{}),$$
(18)
where

$$(\frac{1+iz}{1iz})^{1/3}=\underset{neven}{}A_nz^n+i\underset{nodd}{}A_nz^n.$$
(19)
Unlike the case without B field, the Neumann matrix $`^{^{}}`$ carries both space-time and level indices, and there are imaginary part associated with nonzero $`\theta `$. Moreover, the mixing of the space-time indices due to the nonzero $`\theta `$ will make the diagonalization of the Neumann matrix non-trivial.

Notice that, the open string metric

$$G_{\alpha \beta }=(1+(2\pi \alpha ^{}B)^2)\eta _{\alpha \beta }$$
(20)
is diagonal and proportional to $`\eta _{\alpha \beta }`$. And in the expression of the three-string vertex, the inner product is respect to this open string metric. However, since

$$[a_m^\alpha ,a_n^\beta ]=G^{\alpha \beta }\delta _{mn}$$
(21)
we can rescale either the oscillators or the metric such that we have normalized metric and commutator. This will give us the freedom to use the well-known results on sliver state construction and spectrum analysis, and the only effect is the overall normalization factor $`(DetG)^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ appearing in the ratio formula (2) and also in the normalization of the corresponding 3-string vertex and sliver state. From now on, we will work under the convention $`G_{\alpha \beta }=\eta _{\alpha \beta },[a^\alpha ,a^\beta ]=\eta ^{\alpha \beta }`$ with $`\eta ^{\alpha \beta }=\delta ^{\alpha \beta }`$.

### 2.3 The spectrum of $`M`$ and the ratio $`=1`$

The spectrum of M has been calculated in , and the result is that it has a continuous spectrum labelled by $`k`$ such that

$$M|k>=M(k)|k>,$$
(22)
where

$$M(k)=\frac{1}{2\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi k}{2}+1},$$
(23)
and the eigenvector

$$|k>=(v_1^k,v_2^k,v_3^k,\mathrm{})^T,$$
(24)
is generated by

$$f_k(z)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{v_n}{\sqrt{n}}z^n=\frac{1}{k}(1e^{k\mathrm{tan}^1z)},.$$
(25)
The eigenvectors constitute a set of complete orthogonal basis and

$$_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{|k><k|}{𝒦(k)}=1,$$
(26)
where

$$𝒦\frac{2}{k}\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi k}{2}.$$
(27)
However, $`k`$ is not an twist definite eigenstate but

$$C|k>=|k>.$$
(28)
Since $`C`$ commutes with $`M`$222However, C does not commute with $`M^{12}`$ and $`M^{21}`$. so that each eigenvalue has doubly degenerate twist-definite states except for $`|k=0>`$ which is twist odd .

Later on it is also useful to have the following facts  about $`|v_{e,o}>`$,

$$<k|v_e>=\frac{1}{k}\frac{\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi k}{2}1}{2\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi k}{2}+1},<k|v_o>=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{k}\frac{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi k}{2}}{2\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi k}{2}+1},$$
(29)
$`<v_e|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+3M}}|v_e>={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}V_{00},`$ (30)
$`<v_o|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1M}}|v_o>={\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}V_{00}.`$ (31)
Since there is an eigenvalue of $`M`$ at $`1/3`$ so that the ratio $``$ is not well-defined unless $`1/3`$ is also an eigenvalue of $`^{^{}}`$ with multiplicity two. In order to calculate $``$ we need to study the spectrum of $`^{^{}}`$, especially at $`1/3`$, this will be done in the next section.

However, it is straightforward to calculate the ratio of the tension. As for $`Det(1^{^{}})`$, based upon the above expression of $`^{^{}}`$ and the facts

$`det\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`detAdet(DCA^1B),`$ (34)
$`det(1+|u><v|)`$ $`=`$ $`1+<v|u>,`$ (35)
one obtains

$`{\displaystyle \frac{Det^{1/2}(1^{})}{det(1M)}}`$ $`=`$ $`𝒩_\theta det\left(1𝒩_\theta (1+{\displaystyle \frac{4a^2}{3}}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{1M}}|\nu _o><\nu _o|\right)`$ (36)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4b^2}{\theta ^2+12(V_{00}+\frac{b}{2})^2}}.`$
when $`\theta =0`$, this recovers the result in .

As for the calculation of $`Det(1+3^{^{}})`$ part, one has to introduce the regulator to overcome the difficulty brought by the existence of $`1/3`$ eigenvalue. It has been worked out in  and at last one find that the ratio of the brane tension is exactly $`1`$, as expected. For completeness, the detailed calculation is given in the appendix with a slightly different way of calculating the $`Det(1+3^{^{}})`$ from the one used in .

## 3 Finding the spectrum of $`^{^{}}`$

In this section we will find out the spectrum of $`^{}`$ by using the method in .

### 3.1 The eigen-equations

Let’s assume the form of the eigenstate as

$$v=\left(\begin{array}{c}g_1\\ g_2\\ h_1(k)|k>\\ h_2(k)|k>\end{array}\right)$$
(37)
where $`g_1,g_2`$ are some complex numbers corresponding to the zero modes and $`h_1(k),h_2(k)`$ are the coefficients of the expansion on the $`|k>`$ basis. Note that due to the complex elements in $`^{^{}}`$, we assume that $`h_i(k)`$ could be complex. Let $`\lambda `$ be the corresponding eigenvalue, then $`^{^{}}v=\lambda v`$ encodes the following relations:

$`\lambda g_1`$ $`=`$ $`(1𝒩_\theta )g_1\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{b}}}𝒩_\theta ({\displaystyle h_1(k)<v_e|k>}+{\displaystyle \frac{2ia}{\sqrt{3}}}{\displaystyle h_2(k)<v_o|k>}),`$ (38)
$`\lambda g_2`$ $`=`$ $`(1𝒩_\theta )g_2\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{b}}}𝒩_\theta ({\displaystyle h_2(k)<v_e|k>}{\displaystyle \frac{2ia}{\sqrt{3}}}{\displaystyle h_1(k)<v_o|k>}),`$ (39)
$`\lambda {\displaystyle h_1(k)|k>}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{b}}}𝒩_\theta (g_1|v_e>+{\displaystyle \frac{2ia}{\sqrt{3}}}g_2|v_o>)+{\displaystyle h_1(k)M(k)|k>}`$ (40)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2𝒩_\theta }{b}}(|v_e>{\displaystyle h_1(k)<v_e|k>}|v_o>{\displaystyle h_1(k)<v_o|k>})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{i4a𝒩_\theta }{\sqrt{3}b}}((|v_e>{\displaystyle }h_2(k)<v_o|k>+|v_o>{\displaystyle }h_2(k)<v_e|k>)`$
$`\lambda {\displaystyle h_2(k)|k>}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{b}}}𝒩_\theta (g_2|v_e>{\displaystyle \frac{2ia}{\sqrt{3}}}g_1|v_o>)+{\displaystyle h_2(k)M(k)|k>}`$ (41)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2𝒩_\theta }{b}}(|v_e>{\displaystyle h_2(k)<v_e|k>}|v_o>{\displaystyle h_2(k)<v_o|k>})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{i4a𝒩_\theta }{\sqrt{3}b}}((|v_e>{\displaystyle }h_1(k)<v_o|k>+|v_o>{\displaystyle }h_1(k)<v_e|k>).`$
Define

$`𝒞_e[h_1(k)]={\displaystyle h_1(k)<v_e|k>}`$ $`𝒞_o[h_1(k)]={\displaystyle h_1(k)<v_o|k>}`$ (42)
$`𝒟_e[h_2(k)]={\displaystyle h_2(k)<v_e|k>}`$ $`𝒟_o[h_2(k)]={\displaystyle h_2(k)<v_o|k>}.`$ (43)
And from the first two relations, we can rewrite $`g_1,g_2`$ as

$`g_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1𝒩_\theta \lambda }}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{b}}}𝒩_\theta (𝒞_e+{\displaystyle \frac{2ia}{\sqrt{3}}}𝒟_o)`$ (44)
$`g_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1𝒩_\theta \lambda }}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{b}}}𝒩_\theta (𝒟_e{\displaystyle \frac{2ia}{\sqrt{3}}}𝒞_o)`$ (45)
Put the above expressions into the Eqs.(40,41), and using the expansions

$`|v_e>`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_e>}{𝒦}|k>}`$ (46)
$`|v_o>`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_o>}{𝒦}|k>}`$ (47)
one have

$`{\displaystyle (\lambda M(k))h_1(k)|k>}`$ (48)
$`=`$ $`\left\{c_1𝒞_e+ic_2𝒟_o\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_e>}{𝒦}|k>}+\left\{c_3𝒞_o+ic_2𝒟_e\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_o>}{𝒦}|k>}`$
$`{\displaystyle (\lambda M(k))h_2(k)|k>}`$ (49)
$`=`$ $`\left\{c_1𝒟_eic_2𝒞_o\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_e>}{𝒦}|k>}+\left\{ic_2𝒞_e+c_3𝒟_o\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_o>}{𝒦}|k>}`$
where

$`c_1`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2𝒩_\theta }{b}}{\displaystyle \frac{1\lambda }{1\lambda 𝒩_\theta }}`$
$`c_2`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2𝒩_\theta }{b}}{\displaystyle \frac{2𝒩_\theta 1+\lambda }{1𝒩_\theta \lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{2a}{\sqrt{3}}}`$
$`c_3`$ $``$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{2𝒩_\theta }{b}})(1{\displaystyle \frac{4a^2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝒩_\theta }{1𝒩_\theta \lambda }})`$
From the argument in , one could expect

$`\delta (kk_0)r_1(k)`$ $`=`$ $`(\lambda M(k))h_1(k)+(c_1𝒞_e+ic_2𝒟_o){\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_e>}{𝒦}}+(c_3𝒞_o+ic_2𝒟_e){\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_o>}{𝒦}}`$
$`\delta (kk_0^{})r_2(k)`$ $`=`$ $`(\lambda M(k))h_2(k)+(c_1𝒟_eic_2𝒞_o){\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_e>}{𝒦}}+(c_3𝒟_oic_2𝒞_e){\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_o>}{𝒦}}`$
where $`r_i(k)`$ undetermined, with $`r_1(k_0)=0,r_2(k_0^{})=0`$. Now solve $`h_1(k),h_2(k)`$ from the above two relations, and applying the operations $`𝑑k<v_e|k>`$ and $`𝑑k<v_o|k>`$, we obtain

$`𝒞_e`$ $`=`$ $`A_{ee}(c_1𝒞_e+ic_2𝒟_o)+B_{1e}`$ (50)
$`𝒞_o`$ $`=`$ $`A_{oo}(c_3𝒞_o+ic_2𝒟_e)+B_{1o}`$ (51)
$`𝒟_e`$ $`=`$ $`A_{ee}(c_1𝒟_eic_2𝒞_o)+B_{2e}`$ (52)
$`𝒟_o`$ $`=`$ $`A_{oo}(c_3𝒟_oic_2𝒞_e)+B_{2o}`$ (53)
where

$`A_{ee}(\lambda )`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_e><v_e|k>}{𝒦(\lambda M(k))}}=<v_e|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda M(k)}}|v_e>,`$ (54)
$`A_{oo}(\lambda )`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{<k|v_o><v_o|k>}{𝒦(\lambda M(k))}}=<v_o|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda M(k)}}|v_o>,`$ (55)
$`B_{ie}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta (kk_0)r_i(k)<v_e|k>}{\lambda M(k)}}`$ (56)
$`B_{io}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta (kk_0)r_i(k)<v_o|k>}{\lambda M(k)}}`$ (57)
It’s easy to find that one can group the above equations into two sets:

$`(1c_1A_{ee})𝒞_eic_2A_{ee}𝒟_o`$ $`=`$ $`B_{1e}`$ (59)
$`ic_2A_{oo}𝒞_e+(1c_3A_{oo})𝒟_o`$ $`=`$ $`B_{2o}`$ (60)
and

$`(1c_3A_{oo})𝒞_oic_2A_{oo}𝒟_e`$ $`=`$ $`B_{1o}`$ (61)
$`ic_2A_{ee}𝒞_o+(1c_1A_{ee})𝒟_e`$ $`=`$ $`B_{2e}`$ (62)
### 3.2 Continuous spectrum

If the determinant factor

$$Det(1c_1A_{ee})(1c_3A_{oo})c_2^2A_{oo}A_{ee}$$
(63)
is not zero, then we can invert the above two sets of equation (59) to (62) and obtain the formal solutions

$`𝒞_e`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{B_{1e}(1c_3A_{oo})+ic_2A_{ee}B_{2o}}{Det}},`$ (64)
$`𝒞_o`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{B_{1o}(1c_1A_{ee})+ic_2A_{oo}B_{2e}}{Det}},`$ (65)
$`𝒟_e`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{B_{2e}(1c_3A_{oo})ic_2A_{ee}B_{1o}}{Det}},`$ (66)
$`𝒟_o`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{B_{2o}(1c_1A_{ee})ic_2A_{oo}B_{1e}}{Det}}.`$ (67)
In order to have nontrivial solutions, that is, the above $`B`$ functions are not all zero, we need to have $`\lambda M(k)=0`$ at $`k=k_0=k_0^{^{}}0`$ to cancel the zero of $`r_{1,2}(k)`$ at $`k=k_0`$. In this case, we will have a continuous spectrum $`\lambda =M(k_0)=\frac{1}{2\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi k_0}{2}+1}[1/3,0)`$. Explicitly,

$`\lambda M(k)`$ $`=`$ $`M(k_0)M(k)=M^{(1)}(k_0)(kk_0){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}M^{(2)}(k_0)(kk_0)^2+\mathrm{},`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi k_0}{2}}{(1+2\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi k_0}{2})^2}}(kk_0){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2+\frac{\pi ^2}{2}\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi k_0}{2}\pi ^2\mathrm{sinh}^2\frac{\pi k_0}{2}}{(1+2\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi k_0}{2})^3}}(kk_0)^2+\mathrm{}`$
where $`M^{(n)}(k_0)\frac{d^nM}{dk^n}|_{k_0}`$. Note that $`M^{(1)}(k_0)`$ is non-vanishing except at $`k_0=0`$, however, $`M^{(2)}(0)0`$. Therefore, if $`k_0=0`$ then $`\lambda M(k)\frac{1}{2}M^{(2)}(0)k^2`$, otherwise $`\lambda M(k)M^{(1)}(k_0)(kk_0)`$, to the leading order.

In this subsection we focus on the case of $`k_00`$ and will discuss the special case $`\lambda =1/3`$($`k_0=0`$) in the next subsection. Based upon the behavior of $`\lambda M(k)`$ near $`k=k_0`$ we will have three kind of choices for the behavior of $`r_i(k)`$ around $`k=k_0`$. The first one is to let $`r_i(k)d_i(kk_0)`$ for $`i=1,2`$, then we have nonzero

$`B_{ie}(k_0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d_i(\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi k_0}{2}1)}{k_0(2\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi \kappa _0}{2}+1)M^{(1)}(k_0)}},`$ (69)
$`B_{io}(k_0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d_i\sqrt{3}\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\pi k_0}{2}}{k_0(2\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\pi \kappa _0}{2}+1)M^{(1)}(k_0)}},`$ (70)
and the corresponding eigenvector is

$`v(k_0)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\sqrt{\frac{2}{b}}𝒩_\theta }{1\lambda 𝒩_\theta }\frac{(1+\frac{2(3+4a^2)𝒩_\theta }{3b}A_{oo})B_{1e}+i\frac{2a}{\sqrt{3}}(1+\frac{4𝒩_\theta }{b}A_{ee})B_{2o}}{Det}\\ \frac{\sqrt{\frac{2}{b}}𝒩_\theta }{1\lambda 𝒩_\theta }\frac{(1+\frac{2(3+4a^2)𝒩_\theta }{3b}A_{oo})B_{2e}i\frac{2a}{\sqrt{3}}(1+\frac{4𝒩_\theta }{b}A_{ee})B_{1o}}{Det}\\ \frac{(c_1(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{oo})B_{1e}+ic_2B_{2o}}{Det}\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_e>+\frac{(c_3(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{ee})B_{1o}+ic_2B_{2e}}{Det}\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_o>\frac{d_1}{M^{(1)}(k_0)}|k_0>\\ \frac{(c_1(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{oo})B_{2e}+ic_2B_{1o}}{Det}\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_e>+\frac{(c_3(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{ee})B_{2o}ic_2B_{1e}}{Det}\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_o>\frac{d_2}{M^{(1)}(k_0)}|k_0>\end{array}\right).`$ (75)
Note that $`v(k_0)`$ is degenerate with $`v(k_0)`$ which is in general different from $`v(k_0)`$ because

$$B_{ie}(k_0)=B_{ie}(k_0),B_{io}(k_0)=B_{io}(k_0)$$
(76)
and $`A_{ee}`$ and $`A_{oo}`$ are also even functions of $`k_0`$.

The second choice is $`r_1(k)(kk_0)`$ but $`r_2(k)(kk_0)^2`$ or higher power of $`(kk_0)`$ so that $`B_{1e}`$ and $`B_{1o}`$ are the same as the ones in (69) and (70) but

$$B_{2e}=B_{2o}=0.$$
(77)
In this case we can form a pair of ”twist-definite” states from $`v(\pm k_0)`$ as following,

$`v_+(k_0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(v(k_0)+v(k_0))|_{B_{2e}=B_{2o}=0}`$ (86)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{B_{1e}}{Det}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\sqrt{\frac{2}{b}}𝒩_\theta }{1\lambda 𝒩_\theta }(1+\frac{2(3+4a^2)𝒩_\theta }{3b}A_{oo})\\ 0\\ (c_1(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{oo})\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_e>\\ ic_2\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_o>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 0\\ \frac{1}{2M^{(1)}(k_0)}(|k_0>|k_0>)\\ 0\end{array}\right).`$
and

$`v_+(k_0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(v(k_0)v(k_0))|_{B_{2e}=B_{2o}=0}`$ (95)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{B_{1o}}{Det}}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ i\frac{2a}{\sqrt{3}}\frac{\sqrt{\frac{2}{b}}𝒩_\theta }{1\lambda 𝒩_\theta }(1+\frac{4𝒩_\theta }{b}A_{ee})\\ (c_3(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{ee})\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_o>\\ ic_2\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_e>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 0\\ \frac{1}{2M^{(1)}(k_0)}(|k_0>+|k_0>)\\ 0\end{array}\right).`$
Here the subscript indices $`+`$ or $``$ indicate the twist parity of the third and fourth components with respect to the twist matrix $`C_{mn}`$. Note that both $`v_+`$ and $`v_+`$ are the ”twist-definite” eigenstates although their third and fourth components have different twist parity, this implies that two spacetime directions cannot have the same twist parity for each ”twist-definite” eigenstate.

The third choice is $`r_2(k)(kk_0)`$ but $`r_1(k)(kk_0)^2`$ or higher power of $`(kk_0)`$ so that $`B_{2e}`$ and $`B_{2o}`$ are the same as the ones in (69) and (70) but

$$B_{1e}=B_{1o}=0.$$
(96)
We will then get the corresponding eigenvectors similar to (86) and (95),

$`u_+(k_0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(v(k_0)+v(k_0))|_{B_{1e}=B_{1o}=0}`$ (105)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{B_{2e}}{Det}}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ \frac{\sqrt{\frac{2}{b}}𝒩_\theta }{1\lambda 𝒩_\theta }(1+\frac{2(3+4a^2)𝒩_\theta }{3b}A_{oo})\\ ic_2\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_o>\\ (c_1(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{oo})\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_e>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 0\\ 0\\ \frac{1}{2M^{(1)}(k_0)}(|k_0>|k_0>)\end{array}\right).`$
and

$`u_+(k_0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(v(k_0)v(k_0))|_{B_{1e}=B_{1o}=0}`$ (114)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{B_{2o}}{Det}}\left(\begin{array}{c}i\frac{2a}{\sqrt{3}}\frac{\sqrt{\frac{2}{b}}𝒩_\theta }{1\lambda 𝒩_\theta }(1+\frac{4𝒩_\theta }{b}A_{ee})\\ 0\\ ic_2\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_e>\\ (c_3(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{ee})\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_o>\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 0\\ 0\\ \frac{1}{2M^{(1)}(k_0)}(|k_0>+|k_0>)\end{array}\right).`$
and it is easy to see that they are independent set from (86) and (95); moreover, the general state (75) is the linear combinations of the four independent ”twist-definite” eigenstates. We then conclude that there are four ”twist-definite” eigenstates for each eigenvalue except $`1/3`$. This is a natural generalization of the results for $`M`$  and $`M^{^{}}`$  since our $`^{^{}}`$ involves two spatial directions, also we have four independent parameters $`B_{ie}`$ and $`B_{io}`$ in the general eigenstate (75).

If we define the inner product of the vectors $`u,v`$ as $`u^{}v`$, then it is not hard to see that among the four independent eigenvectors, the ones with different twist parities are orthogonal to each other.

### 3.3 The $`\lambda =1/3`$ case

Now, let us take $`\lambda =1/3`$ as an eigenvalue in the continuous spectrum. Then we have $`k_0=0`$ such that $`M(k_0)=1/3`$. From the requirement that $`r_i(k)/(kM(k_0))`$ should have no poles at $`k_0`$, one can determine the form of the functions $`r_i(k)`$ up to a scale factor. Taking the freedom of choosing the scale factor and to the leading order, we set

$$r_1(k)=r_1k^2,r_2(k)=r_2k^2$$
(115)
where $`r_{1,2}`$ are arbitrary constants333There is a freedom to choose the value of $`r_{1,2}`$. In this paper, if we don’t let the $`r_i`$ vanishing, then we just choose $`r_i=1`$. Choosing one of $`r_i`$ vanishing equivalent to choosing higher order of $`k`$. . And

$`B_{2e}`$ $`=`$ $`B_{1e}=0`$
$`r_2^1B_{2o}`$ $`=`$ $`r_1^1B_{1o}={\displaystyle \frac{6\sqrt{3}}{\pi }}`$
Then we obtain

$`𝒞_e`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ic_2A_{ee}B_{2o}}{Det}}`$ (116)
$`𝒞_o`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(1c_1A_{ee})B_{1o}}{Det}}`$ (117)
$`𝒟_e`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ic_2A_{ee}B_{1o}}{Det}}`$ (118)
$`𝒟_o`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(1c_1A_{ee})B_{2o}}{Det}}.`$ (119)
Note that all of $`𝒞,𝒟s`$ are dependent on $`A_{ee}`$ explicitly but dependent on $`A_{oo}`$ only through $`Det`$.

It is straightforward to get the eigenvector for the $`\lambda =1/3`$ eigenvalue. The explicit form is

$$v=\left(\begin{array}{c}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3b}}\frac{6𝒩_\theta a}{43𝒩_\theta }\frac{iB_{2o}}{Det}(1+\frac{4𝒩_\theta }{b}A_{ee})\\ \sqrt{\frac{2}{3b}}\frac{6𝒩_\theta a}{43𝒩_\theta }\frac{iB_{1o}}{Det}(1+\frac{4𝒩_\theta }{b}A_{ee})\\ \frac{ic_2B_{2o}}{Det}\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_e>+\frac{(c_3(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{ee})B_{1o}}{Det}\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_o>\frac{36r_1}{\pi ^2}|k=0>\\ \frac{ic_2B_{1o}}{Det}\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_e>+\frac{(c_3(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{ee})B_{2o}}{Det}\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_o>\frac{36r_2}{\pi ^2}|k=0>\end{array}\right).$$
(120)
In , it has been argued that the $`1/3`$ eigenvalue is doubly degenerate, with two independent eigenvectors. At first looking, it seems that we have only one eigenvector. This is not the case. In fact, due to our freedom to choose $`r_i`$, we can set either $`r_1(k)`$ or $`r_2(k)`$ to have higher power expansion in terms of $`(kk_0)`$ such that one of $`B_{io},i=1,2`$ vanishes while the other finite. This will not spoil the whole story. On the contrary, we will find that the choice will lead to two independent eigenvectors and the above one is just the superposition of them.

First let $`B_{1o}=0`$, which could be achieved by choosing $`r_1(k)k^3`$ or higher power of $`k`$. In this case, the above eigenvector turns to be

$$v_{+,\frac{1}{3}}=\frac{B_{2o}}{Det}\left(\begin{array}{c}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3b}}\frac{6i𝒩_\theta a}{43𝒩_\theta }(1+\frac{4𝒩_\theta }{b}A_{ee})\\ 0\\ ic_2\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_e>\\ (c_3(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{ee})\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_o>\end{array}\right)\frac{36}{\pi ^2}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 0\\ 0\\ |k=0>\end{array}\right).$$
(121)
On the other hand, one could choose $`B_{2o}=0`$ by chooseing $`r_1(k)k^3`$ or higher power of $`k`$. Then the eigenvector has the form

$$v_{+,\frac{1}{3}}=\frac{B_{1o}}{Det}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ \sqrt{\frac{2}{3b}}\frac{6i𝒩_\theta a}{43𝒩_\theta }(1+\frac{4𝒩_\theta }{b}A_{ee})\\ (c_3(c_1c_3c_2^2)A_{ee})\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_o>\\ ic_2\frac{1}{\lambda M}|v_e>\end{array}\right)\frac{36}{\pi ^2}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 0\\ |k=0>\\ 0\end{array}\right).$$
(122)
It is not hard to see that the general eigenvector (120) is just the superposition of $`v_{+,\frac{1}{3}}`$ and $`v_{+,\frac{1}{3}}`$. Moreover $`v_{+,\frac{1}{3}}`$ and $`v_{+,\frac{1}{3}}`$ are kind of twist definite states as mentioned in the $`k_00`$ case.

One may wonder if (121) (122) are really the eigenvectors of $`^{}`$ with eigenvalue $`1/3`$. This could be checked directly with the explicit form of $`^{}`$. Unlike the matrix $`M`$ which has only one twist odd state $`|k=0>`$ at $`1/3`$, our $`^{^{}}`$ is doubly degenerate at $`1/3`$ in the continuous spectrum. However taking into account the space dimensions involved in our discussion, we find that the degeneracy at $`1/3`$ in the case with $`B`$ field is only half of the one in the case without $`B`$ field. Nevertheless, the degeneracy of $`^{^{}}`$ at $`1/3`$ matches the one of $`M`$.

A subtlety is about the discontinuity of $`A_{oo}`$ at $`1/3`$ discovered in . As shown there, $`A_{oo}((\frac{1}{3})^+)=\frac{3}{4}ln27`$ but $`A_{oo}((\frac{1}{3})^+)=\mathrm{}`$. Since in our (121) and (122) $`A_{oo}`$ only appears in $`Det`$ which blows up if $`A_{oo}\mathrm{}`$, in this case the vectors in (86) and (95)are just reduced to $`(0,0,|k=0>,0)^T`$ or $`(0,0,0,|k=0>)^T`$ which obviously cannot satisfy the eigen-equations. So the ambiguity is lifted and we should choose $`A_{oo}((\frac{1}{3})^+)`$ instead of $`A_{oo}((\frac{1}{3})^{})`$; therefore the degeneracy at $`1/3`$ is two.

### 3.4 Discrete spectrum

When the determinant factor $`Det`$ vanish, then one could have nontrivial solutions only if $`B_{ie}=B_{io}=0,i=1,2`$. The solutions of $`Det=0`$ correspond to the so-called discrete spectrum. Being the function of $`\lambda `$, the equation has an integral form, which make it very hard to solve analytically. However, what we are really interested in is to see if $`\lambda =1/3`$ is an eigenvalue or not. The reasons are twofold: on the one hand, from the form of the ratio of tension, the $`1/3`$ eigenvalue of $`^{}`$ is essential to cancel the zero from det(1+3M). In order to have the finite ratio, one should expect the degeneracy at $`\lambda =1/3`$ of $`^{}`$ match the one of $`M`$. On the other hand, from the experience of $``$ without $`B`$ field, $`1/3`$ exists as an eigenvalue in the discrete spectrum and make the degeneracy higher. Therefore, it is quite important to investigate the possibility of $`1/3`$ as an eigenvalue in the discrete spectrum. To this aim, taking $`A_{ee}=(3/4)V_{00},\lambda =1/3`$, we have

$$Det=\frac{\theta ^2[(\theta ^2+12(V_{00}+b/2)^2)^2384A_{oo}V_{00}b(V_{00}+b/2)]}{(\theta ^2+12(V_{00}+b/2)^2)^2(\theta ^2+12V_{00}(V_{00}+b/2))}$$
(123)
Obviously, $`\theta =0`$ is a solution. In fact, this recovers the well-known result that $`\lambda =1/3`$ belongs to the discrete spectrum, no matter what $`b`$ is, in the case of $`\theta =0`$. (see ). Certainly it is possible for specified values of $`\theta `$, $`Det(\lambda =1/3)=0`$. In this case, one find

$$\theta ^2=\sqrt{384A_{oo}V_{00}b(V_{00}+b/2)}12(V_{00}+b/2)^2.$$
(124)
Since $`\theta `$ is real, we have to require

$$8bA_{oo}V_{00}3(V_{00}+b/2)^20$$
(125)
The above relation set the range of $`b`$, in which it is possible to find a $`\theta `$ such that $`\lambda =1/3`$ is a discrete eigenvalue. However, one could expect that for generic value of $`\theta `$, $`\lambda =1/3`$ does not belong to discrete spectrum, although it exists in the continuous spectrum.

We will not discuss carefully the discrete spectrum here. In , the careful discussion on discrete spectrum and eigenvector has been worked out.

### 3.5 The spectrum of $`^{12}`$ and $`^{21}`$

Due to the fact that the matrices $`^{rs}`$ enjoy the same property as the usual matrices $`M^{}`$, it is straightforward to obtain the spectrum of $`^{12}`$ and $`^{21}`$, once we know the spectrum of $`^{^{}}`$. More precisely, since the matrices $`^{rs}`$ are commuting with each other and satisfy the relations

$$^{^{}}+^{12}+^{21}=(^{^{}})^2+(^{12})^2+(^{21})^2=1,^{12}^{21}=^{^{}}(^{^{}}1),$$
(126)
they share the same eigenvectors and their eigenvalues satisfy

$`\lambda ^{12}(k)\lambda ^{21}(k)`$ $`=`$ $`\pm \sqrt{(1\lambda (k))(1+3\lambda (k))}`$
$`\lambda ^{12}(k)+\lambda ^{21}(k)`$ $`=`$ $`1\lambda (k).`$
From the above two relations, it’s easy to read out the spectrum of $`^{12}`$ and $`^{21}`$.

## 4 Discussions and Conclusions

In this paper we have calculated the spectrum of the Neumann matrix with zero modes in the constant B field background. We find both the continuous and discrete spectrum. The existence of the discrete spectrum will set a constraint on $`b`$ for a given $`\theta `$; moreover, for the generic $`\theta `$ there is no $`1/3`$ in the discrete spectrum. We will take this as a good point to the finite and nonzero ratio of tension $``$.

The continuous one is similar to the one of $`M`$ but with four degenerate twist-definite eigenstates at each eigenvalue except at $`1/3`$ where it is only doubly degenerate. The doubling of the degeneracy at each eigenvalue compared to the one of $`M`$ is expected since the B field mixes two spatial directions and doubles the dimensions of the eigen-space; moreover, the double degeneracy at $`1/3`$ is required for the the ratio of the tension $``$ to be well-defined. However, to determine precisely the ratio from the spectrum requires the details of the density of states which is beyond the scope of this paper. On the other hand there is an analytic way to determine the ratio $``$ to be one a la the regularization method of Okuyama  as shown in . The agreement adds more weights to VSFT and its background independence.

Another issue on which our results are concerned is the new proposed map of Witten star to Moyal star  where the Moyal pair is the Fourier transform of a twist-even coordinate and the twist odd momentum. The Fourier basis are the twist-definite eigenstates of $`M`$. In  and  it is shown that at the zero slope limit, the star algebra factorizes into two subalgebras which was first proposed in : $`𝒜𝒜_0𝒜_1`$. The $`𝒜_0`$ corresponds to the subalgebra of zero-momentum sector and the $`𝒜_1`$ corresponds to the $`C^{}`$-algebra of spacetime functions. The 3-string vertex factorizes accordingly

$$|V_3>|V_3^{(0)}>|V_3^{(1)}>,$$
(127)
where $`<x_1|<x_2|<x_3||V_3^{(1)}>`$ can be identified as the the kernel for the usual Moyal product with zero noncommutativity .

In the presence of $`B`$ field, the directions without $`B`$ field could be treated along the above way, while the directions with $`B`$ field are a little different. It is easy to see that the factorization of the star algebra still works. However, one should replace commutative $`C^{}`$-algebra $`𝒜_1`$ with the noncommutative one. The zero slope limit is the equivalent to (set $`b=2`$)

$`𝒱_{mn}^{\alpha \beta ,rs}`$ $``$ $`G^{\alpha \beta }V_{mn}^{rs}+𝒪(ϵ^2)`$ (128)
$`𝒱_{0n}^{\alpha \beta ,rs}`$ $``$ $`0+𝒪(ϵ)`$ (129)
$`𝒱_{00}^{\alpha \beta ,rs}`$ $``$ $`G^{\alpha \beta }(\delta ^{rs}{\displaystyle \frac{16}{12+\theta ^2}}\varphi ^{rs})+iϵ^{\alpha \beta }{\displaystyle \frac{4\theta }{12+\theta ^2}}\chi ^{rs},`$ (130)
and we can obtain the $`𝒜_1`$ part of the longitudinal 3-string vertex $`|V_3^{}>`$, it is

$$\frac{\sqrt{\pi }}{2}\frac{1}{1+\frac{\theta ^2}{12}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{1}{2}(\frac{4+\theta ^2}{12+\theta ^2})\underset{r}{}a_0^{(r)}a_0^{(r)}(\frac{8}{12+\theta ^2})\underset{r<s}{}a_0^{(r)}a_0^{(s)}(\frac{4i\theta }{12+\theta ^2})\underset{r<s}{}a_0^{(r)}\times a_0^{(s)}\right)|0>$$
(131)
which is exactly the same444It is up to an overall constant factor $`3\pi /4`$. as the 3-string vertex for the canonical Moyal product(see (2.26) constructed in ). This confirms that the spacetime algebra is a noncommutative one, with Moyal product replacing the usual pointwise product.

Moreover, it deserves to mention that: in the recent paper  they show that the zero mode of the tachyonic lump state in the constant B field background is nothing but the usual noncommutative soliton as a projector discovered in . This is complimentary to our above observation that the low energy zero mode of the SFT in constant B field background is governed by the noncommutative $`C^{}`$-algebra.

It is interesting to generalize the proposed map of Moyal star to Witten star in  to the 3-string vertex with zero modes and with B field. This requires the eigenvectors of $`^{^{}}`$ to form a complete orthogonal set in order to obtain the proper Moyal conjugate pairs which are the twist-definite eigenvector by the Fourier transform based on these eigenvectors. Future work are required to carry out the program.

In this paper we did find the twist-definite eigenvectors of $`^{^{}}`$ , however, for each twist-definite eigenvector the twist parity is opposite among the two spatial components. This implies that we need to choose opposite twist parity assignments for the Moyal conjugate pairs between the two spatial directions parallel to the B field, that is, if we choose the twist-even coordinate modes and the twist-odd momentum modes as the Moyal conjugate pairs for one parallel direction to the B field, we should choose the twist-odd coordinate modes and the twist-even momentum modes as the conjugate pairs for another parallel direction. This kind of the flip of the twist parity for the Moyal pairs in two spatial directions is unexpected, and it deserves more study to understand its physical implication to the equivalence between Witten’s string field theory and the generalized noncommutative field theory.

## Acknowledgment

BC would like to thank ITP, Chinese Academy of Science for the hospitality during his visit. FLL would like to thank Pei-Ming Ho and Sanefumi Moriyama for helpful discussions, Hsien-Chung Kao for his kind support, and the courtesy of the CTP at NTU, the NCTS, and the CosPA project, Taiwan, he was supported by the NSC grant No. NSC89-2112-M-032-002.

## 5 Appendix: The calculation of the ratio $``$

In this appendix, we show how to get the ratio of tension $`=1`$, even in the case with $`B`$ field.

The formula for the ratio $``$ has been given in (2), and in section 2.3, we have found

$$\frac{Det^{1/2}(1^{^{}})}{det(1M)}=\frac{4b^2}{\theta ^2+12(V_{00}+\frac{b}{2})^2}.$$
(132)
As for the part involving $`(1+3^{^{}})`$, we need to use regulator as in  since there are double degenerate eigenvectors at $`1/3`$ as shown section 3.3. First we can rewrite

$$Det(1+3^{^{}})=(43𝒩_\theta )^2Det(\eta ^{\alpha \beta }(1+3M+Q)+iϵ^{\alpha \beta }P)$$
(133)
where

$`Q`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha |v_e><v_e|+\beta |v_o><v_o|`$
$`P`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma (|v_e><v_e|+|v_o><v_o|)`$
with

$`\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{48(V_{00}+{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2}})}{\theta ^2+12V_{00}(V_{00}+\frac{b}{2})}}`$
$`\beta `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{48V_{00}}{\theta ^2+12V_{00}(V_{00}+\frac{b}{2})}}`$
$`\gamma `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\sqrt{3}\theta }{\theta ^2+12V_{00}(V_{00}+\frac{b}{2})}}`$
It is easy to see that

$$\alpha \beta +\gamma ^2=\frac{4}{V_{00}}\beta ,$$
(134)
which will be useful later.

Further simplifying (133) we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{Det(1+3^{^{}})}{det(1+3M)^2}}`$ (135)
$`=`$ $`(43𝒩_\theta )^2det(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+3M}}Q)det\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+3M}}(QP{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+3M+Q}})P\right),`$ (136)
$`=`$ $`(43𝒩_\theta )^2(1\alpha H_{ee})(1+\beta H_{oo})(1(\alpha +q\gamma ^2)H_{ee})(1+(\beta p\gamma ^2)H_{oo}),`$ (137)
where

$`p`$ $`=`$ $`<v_e|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+3M+Q}}|v_e>={\displaystyle \frac{H_{ee}}{1\alpha H_{ee}}}`$
$`q`$ $`=`$ $`<v_o|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+3M+Q}}|v_o>={\displaystyle \frac{H_{oo}}{1+\beta H_{oo}}}`$
and

$`H_{ee}`$ $`=`$ $`<v_e|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+3M}}|v_e>={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}V_{00}`$ (138)
$`H_{oo}`$ $`=`$ $`<v_o|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+3M}}|v_o>.`$ (139)
Note that $`H_{oo}`$ is not well-defined as shown in  and it requires proper regularization. Here we just keep it formally and will regularize it later.

We then combine the 2st(3rd) and the 4th(5th) factors in the (137), and use (134) we get

$$\frac{Det(1+3^{^{}})}{det(1+3M)^2}=(43𝒩_\theta )^2\left(1\alpha H_{ee}+\beta (1\frac{4}{V_{00}}H_{ee})H_{oo}\right)^2.$$
(140)
The factor before $`H_{oo}`$ is formally zero, however, we know $`H_{oo}`$ is divergent. Using the proper regularization as done in , one has the final result as following

$$\left(1\frac{4}{V_{00}}H_{ee}\right)H_{oo}=\frac{\pi ^2}{12V_{00}}$$
(141)
In the end we get

$$\frac{Det(1+3^{^{}})}{det(1+3M)^2}=\left(\frac{\theta ^2+4\pi ^2}{\theta ^2+12(V_{00}+\frac{b}{2})^2}\right)^2$$
(142)
Combing with (142) and using the fact that $`DetG=(1+(\frac{\theta }{2\pi })^2)^2`$ which appears in the ratio formula (2), we obtain

$$=1$$
(143)
as expected.


text:
# Quantum moment maps and invariants for 𝐺-invariant star products 11footnote 1This research was supported by the Research Fellowships of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for Young Scientists.

## 1 Introduction

In classical mechanics, observables are smooth functions on a phase space, which constitute a Poisson algebra, while in quantum mechanics observables becomes a noncommutative associative algebra.

Deformation quantization introduced by Bayen, Flato, Fronsdal, Lichnerowicz and Sternheimer in 1970’s, is one of the important attempts aiming to establish a correspondence principle between these two mechanics. A classical phase space is usually a symplectic manifold $`M`$ and the set of observables of classical mechanics is $`N=C^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$. A deformation quantization, or more precisely a quantization based on a star product is to introduce a non-commutative associative multiplication $``$ on $`N[[\lambda ]]`$, the space of formal power series with coefficients in $`N`$.

In symplectic geometry, the notion of hamiltonian $`G`$-spaces, and in particular, of moment maps play a important role. There is a quantum analogue of a moment map . Under some suitable conditions, a quantum moment map can be defined on a $`G`$-invariant star product as a homomorphism from Gutt’s star product to a $`G`$-invariant star product $`N[[\lambda ]]`$. Fedosov showed that a special quantum moment map plays an important role in formulating the quantum reduction as an analogue of a symplectic reduction.

The classification of $`G`$-invariant star products as one of the important problems is described by $`G`$-invariant differential map $`T`$. This problem is completely represented by the $`G`$-invariant de Rham cohomology . The set of equivalence classes of star products is parametrized by a sequence of elements in the $`G`$-invariant second de Rham cohomology of $`M`$.

A quantum moment map has a close relationship to a $`G`$-equivalence map. An equivalence map $`T`$ mapping a quantum moment map associated with a $`G`$ -invariant star product to another one associated with another $`G`$ -invariant star product can be shown to be $`G`$-invariant as show later. If a star product enjoys the uniqueness property w.r.t. quantum moment maps to be associated with it, any $`G`$ -equivalence maps a quantum moment map to another quantum moment map.

An interesting problem about a star product is how to define a ‘quantum number’. When we try to do it, some difficulty arises. The most serious obstacle is that higher terms in $`\lambda `$ of an element of $`N[[\lambda ]]`$ have no direct meaning since they are easily changed by an equivalence map $`T`$ in Definition 2. So we should define a quantum number such that it is independent of the choice of equivalent star products.

In this paper, we define an invariant quantity for $`G`$-invariant star products which is invariant under the $`G`$-equivalence relation. It is defined in a simple way by using quantum moment maps. We give two examples of this invariant for the case of $`^2`$ and of $`S^2`$, which involve non-classical terms.

It is not clear whether the invariant defined in this paper fully characterize a $`G`$-invariant star product. We do not know either that there is a relation between this constant and the $`G`$-invariant de Rham cohomology.

*Plan of this paper*

First we recall the Fedosov quantization, which is one of the most important tool to compute some examples. In section 2, we give Gutt’s star product. This star product is a deformation of the Poisson algebra of the dual of a Lie algebra, and it plays a role of the ‘universal algebra’ of $`G`$-invariant star product. In section 3, a quantum moment map is studied. This section contains the definition of a quantum moment map and describes its properties. An explicit form of an quantum moment map for a given $`G`$-invariant star product has not been given yet. We provide here an equation for a quantum moment map for a given star product of Fedosov type. Using a quantum moment map, we define a new invariant for a $`G`$-invariant star product. This invariant is the main object of this paper. In the last section, we carry out computations of the invariant for two cases. One is the simple symplectic manifold $`^2`$. The other is the $`S^2`$, which is the $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$ coadjoint orbit in $`𝔰𝔬(3)^{}`$. These examples exhibit non-classical terms, which are invariant under $`G`$-equivalences.

### 1.1 Deformation of symplectic manifolds and equivalences

Let $`(M,\omega )`$ be a symplectic manifold and $`N=C^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ be the set of smooth functions on $`M`$. The Poisson bracket on $`N`$ associated with $`\omega `$ is denoted by $`\{,\}`$. Let $`N[[\lambda ]]`$ be the space of formal power series in a formal parameter $`\lambda `$ with coefficients in $`N`$.

###### Definition 1.

A star product is defined as an associative multiplication $``$ on $`N[[\lambda ]]`$ of the form

$`fg={\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}\right)^nC_n(f,g),\text{for any }f,gN,`$
such that

1. $`C_0(f,g)=fg`$ and $`C_1(f,g)C_1(g,f)=2\{f,g\};`$
2. $`C_k(1,f)=C_k(f,1)=0,\text{for }k1;`$
3. $`\text{each }C_k\text{ is a bidifferential operator.}`$

In the situation that a Lie group $`G`$ acts on $`M`$, a star product $``$ is said to be $`G`$-invariant if

$`g(uv)=gugv`$ (1)
holds for any $`u,vN_\lambda `$ and $`gG`$.

For any symplectic manifold $`(M,\omega )`$ there exists a star product .

###### Definition 2.

Two star products $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ defined on $`N[[\lambda ]]`$ are said to be formally equivalent if there is a formal series,

$`T=Id+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\lambda ^nT_n,`$ (2)
of differential operators on $`C^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ annihilating constants such that

$`f_2g=T(T^1f_1T^1g).`$
The formal operator $`T`$ is called an equivalence between $`_1`$ and $`_2.`$ In this situation $`_2`$ is denoted by $`_1^T`$.

And two $`G`$-invariant star products $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ are $`G`$-equivalent if these two star products are equivalent and the equivalence $`T`$ between $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ is $`G`$-invariant. In this case $`T`$ is called a $`G`$-equivalence.

The classification of star products on a symplectic manifold is represented by the de Rham cohomology as follows.

###### Theorem 1 ().

The set of equivalence classes of star products on $`(M,\omega )`$ is canonically parametrized by sequences of elements belonging to the second de Rham cohomology of the de Rham complex on $`M`$.

In the case of $`G`$-invariant star products, the following theorem holds.

###### Theorem 2 ().

Assume that there is a $`G`$-invariant symplectic connection on $`M`$. The set of $`G`$-equivalence classes of $`G`$-invariant star produts on $`(M,\omega )`$ is canonically parametrized by sequences of elements belonging to the second de Rham cohomology of the $`G`$-invariant de Rham complex on $`M`$.

### 1.2 Example of star product: Moyal-Weyl product

One of the most important star product is the Moyal product  . This is a star product on the symplectic vector space $`^{2n}`$ defined as follows.

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill u_\lambda v& ={\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}\right)^k{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k!}}\omega ^{i_1j_1}\mathrm{}\omega ^{i_kj_k}{\displaystyle \frac{^ku}{y^{i_1}\mathrm{}y^{i_k}}}{\displaystyle \frac{^kv}{y^{j_1}\mathrm{}y^{j_k}}},\hfill \\ \hfill \text{ for any }u,v& C^{\mathrm{}}(^{2n})[[\lambda ]],\hfill \end{array}`$ (3)
where $`y^1,\mathrm{},y^{2n}`$ are linear coordinates on $`^{2n}`$, $`\omega ^{ij}=\{y^i,y^j\}`$, and $`\{,\}`$ is the canonical Poisson bracket of $`^{2n}`$. It is simple to see that this definition is independent of the choice of linear coordinates.

### 1.3 Fedosov quantization

In the case of a general symplectic manifold, there is a simple construction of a star product, which is called Fedosov quantization. In this section, we will recall some basic facts about the Fedosov quantization on a symplectic manifold, as well as some useful notation. For details; see .

Let $`(M,\omega )`$ be a symplectic manifold of dimension $`2n`$. Then, for each point $`xM`$, $`T_xM`$ is equipped with a linear symplectic structure. Recall that the Moyal star product always exists on a symplectic vector space $`T_xM`$.

###### Definition 3.

A formal Weyl algebra $`W_x`$ associated with $`T_xM`$ is an associative algebra with a unit over $``$ defined as follows: Each element of $`W_x`$ is a formal power series in $`\lambda `$ with coefficients being formal polynomial in $`T_xM`$, that is, each element has the form

$`a(y,\lambda )={\displaystyle \underset{k,\alpha }{}}\lambda ^ka_{k,\alpha }y^\alpha ,`$
where $`y=(y^1,\mathrm{},y^{2n})`$ are linear coordinates on $`T_xM`$, $`\alpha =(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _{2n})`$ is a multi-index and $`y^\alpha =(y^1)^{\alpha _1}\mathrm{}(y^{2n})^{\alpha _{2n}}`$. The product is defined by the Moyal-Weyl rule (3).

Let $`W=_{xM}W_x`$. Then $`W`$ is a bundle of algebras over $`M`$, called the Weyl bundle over $`M`$. Each section of $`W`$ has the form

$`a(x,y,\lambda )={\displaystyle \underset{k,\alpha }{}}\lambda ^ka_{k,\alpha }(x)y^\alpha ,`$ (4)
where $`xM`$. We call $`a(x,y,\lambda )`$ smooth if each coefficient $`a_{k,\alpha }(x)`$ is smooth in $`x`$. We denote the set of smooth sections by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }W`$. It constitutes an associative algebra with unit under the fibrewise multiplication.

A differential $`q`$-form with values in $`W`$ is a smooth section of the bundle $`W^qT^{}M`$. For short, we denote the space of smooth sections of the bundle by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }W\mathrm{\Lambda }^q`$. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }W\mathrm{\Lambda }^q`$ forms an associative algebra under multiplication of tensor product algebra.

Let $``$ be a torsion-free symplectic connection on $`M`$ and $`:\mathrm{\Gamma }W\mathrm{\Gamma }W\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ be its induced covariant derivative. Consider a connection on $`W`$ of the form

$`Da=\delta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[\gamma ,a],\text{ for }a\mathrm{\Gamma }W`$ (5)
with $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }W\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$, where

$`\delta a=dx^k{\displaystyle \frac{a}{y^k}}.`$
Clearly, $`D`$ is a derivation with respect to the Moyal-Weyl product.

A simple computation shows that

$`D^2a={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[\mathrm{\Omega },a],\text{for any }a\mathrm{\Gamma }W,`$
where
$`\mathrm{\Omega }=\omega R+\delta \gamma \gamma +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}\gamma ^2.`$
Here $`R=\frac{i}{4}R_{ijkl}y^iy^jdx^kdx^l`$ and $`R_{ijkl}=\omega _{im}R_{jkl}^m`$ is the curvature tensor of the symplectic connection.

A connection of the form (5) is called Abelian if $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is a scalar 2-form, that is, $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Lambda }^2[[\lambda ]]`$. We call $`D`$ a Fedosov connection if it is Abelian and $`deg\gamma 3`$. For an Abelian connection, the Bianchi identity implies that $`d\mathrm{\Omega }=D\mathrm{\Omega }=0`$ , that is, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is closed. In this case, we call $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ Weyl curvature.

###### Theorem 3 ().

Let $``$ be any torsion-free symplectic connection, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\omega +\lambda \omega _1+\mathrm{}Z^2(M)[[\lambda ]]`$ a perturbation of the symplectic form $`\omega `$. There exits a unique $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }W\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ such that $`D`$ given by Equation (5) is a Fedosov connection, which has Weyl curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and satisfies $`\delta ^1\gamma =0`$.

The above theorem indicates that a Fedosov connection is uniquely determined by a torsion-free symplectic connection $``$ and a Weyl curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\omega +\lambda \omega _1+\mathrm{}Z^2(M)[[\lambda ]]`$. For this reason, we will say that the connection $`D`$ defined above is a Fedosov connection corresponding to the pair $`(,\mathrm{\Omega })`$.

We denote $`W_D`$ be the set of smooth and flat sections, that is, $`Da=0`$ for $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }W`$. The space $`W_D`$ becomes a subalgebra of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }W`$. Let $`\sigma `$ denote the projection from $`W_D`$ to $`N[[\lambda ]]`$ defined by $`\sigma (a)=a|_{y=0}`$.

###### Theorem 4 ().

Let $`D`$ be an Abelian connection. Then, for any $`a_0(x,\lambda )N[[\lambda ]]`$ there exists a unique section $`aW_D`$ such that $`\sigma (a)=a_0`$. Therefore, $`\sigma `$ establishes an isomorphism between $`W_D`$ and $`N[[\lambda ]]`$ as $`[[\lambda ]]`$-vector spaces.

We denote the inverse map of $`\sigma `$ by $`Q_D`$ and call it a quantization procedure. The Weyl product $``$ on $`W_D`$ is translated to $`N[[\lambda ]]`$ yielding a star product $`_D`$. Namely, we set for $`a,bN[[\lambda ]]`$

$`a_Db=\sigma (Q_D(a)Q_D(b)).`$
The explicit formula of the quantization procedure is given by

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill Q_D(a_0)& =a_0+_ia_0y^i+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_i_ja_0y^iy^j\hfill \\ & +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}_i_j_ka_0y^iy^jy^k{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24}}R_{ijkl}\omega ^{lm}_ma_0y^iy^jy^k+\mathrm{}.\hfill \end{array}`$ (6)
For $`G`$-invariant star products, there is a simple criterion as follows.

###### Proposition 1 ().

Let $``$ be a $`G`$-invariant connection, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ be a $`G`$-invariant Weyl curvature and $`D`$ be the Fedosov connection corresponding to $`(,\mathrm{\Omega })`$. Then the star product corresponding to $`D`$ is $`G`$-invariant.

In the previous proposition the $`G`$-invariant star product whose Weyl curvature is given by $`\omega `$ is called the canonical $`G`$-invariant star product.

### 1.4 Deformation of Lie algebras and Gutt’s star product

Let $`𝔤`$ be a finite dimensional Lie algebra and $`𝔤^{}`$ be its dual. $`𝔤^{}`$ has a Poisson structure called the linear Poisson structure that is defined for $`u,vC^{\mathrm{}}(𝔤^{})[[\lambda ]]`$ by

$`\{u,v\}=C_{ij}^k{\displaystyle \frac{u}{x_i}}{\displaystyle \frac{v}{x_j}}x_k,`$
where $`\{x_i\}`$ is a basis of $`𝔤`$ and $`C_{ij}^k`$ are structure constants of $`𝔤`$ with respect to $`\{x_i\}`$.

The Poisson algebra $`(C^{\mathrm{}}(𝔤^{})[[\lambda ]],\{,\})`$ has a canonical star product called Gutt’s star product. This star product is defined as follows: Let $`𝔤[[\lambda ]]`$ be the formal power series of $`\lambda `$ with coefficients in $`𝔤`$. We define a Lie algebra structure $`[,]_\lambda `$ on $`𝔤[[\lambda ]]`$ by

$`[\xi ,\eta ]_\lambda =\lambda [\xi ,\eta ]`$
for any $`\xi ,\eta 𝔤`$ and extend by $`\lambda `$-linear, where $`[,]`$ means the Lie bracket of $`𝔤`$. We denote it by $`𝔤_\lambda `$.

Let $`𝔘(𝔤_\lambda )`$ be the universal enveloping algebra of $`𝔤[[\lambda ]]`$. As a vector space, $`𝔘(𝔤_\lambda )`$ is canonically isomorphic to $`pol(𝔤^{})[[\lambda ]]`$. the space of formal power series of $`\lambda `$ with coefficients being polynomials on $`𝔤^{}`$. The isomorphism is established by symmetrization. Therefore, the algebra structure on $`𝔘(𝔤[[\lambda ]])`$ induces a star product on $`pol(𝔤^{})[[\lambda ]]`$, which give rise to a deformation quantization for the Lie-Poisson structure $`𝔤^{}`$.

## 2 $`G`$-invariant star products and quantum moment maps

Now we consider a quantum moment map for a $`G`$-invariant star product, as one of the main subjects in this paper.

A quantum moment map is a quantum analogue of a moment map. Fedosov defines a quantum moment map to show the quantum reduction theorem . But we adopt here the definition of quantum moment map from  since this definition contains the ones of Fedosov. While existence and uniqueness can be easily verified under suitable conditions, it is not easy to present in an explicit formula. Hence we present a new method of computing quantum moment maps for any star product of Fedosov type and discuss the relation between $`G`$-equivalents and quantum moment maps in this section. On the basis of these consideration, we propose here a new invariant for $`G`$-invariant star products and show that it remains unchanged under $`G`$-equivalence, because of which this invariant should be expected to play an important role in the classification of $`G`$-invariant star product. We present a few examples, which show that these invariant provides non-trivial results arising from quantum effect.

### 2.1 The definition and basic properties of quantum moment maps

Let $`(M,\omega )`$ be a hamiltonian $`G`$-space and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ be a moment map . From now on, we assume that any star product is $`G`$-invariant. Then, the corresponding infinitesimal action defines a Lie algebra homomorphism from $`𝔤`$ to the Lie algebra of derivations $`Der(N[[\lambda ]]`$,\*) with respect to $``$.

###### Definition 4.

A quantum moment map is a homomorphism of associative algebras

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}:𝔘(𝔤_\lambda )N[[\lambda ]],`$ (7)
$`[\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X),u]_{}=\lambda Xu,`$ (8)
where the right hand side of (8) means the infinitesimal action of $`X`$ $`𝔤`$ on $`N[[\lambda ]]`$. It is easy to see that the condition (7) is equivalent to

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}([X,Y]_\lambda )=[\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X),\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(Y)]_{}\text{ for any }X,Y𝔤.`$ (9)
Note that a quantum moment map usually depends on the choice of a star product.

As mentioned above, the algebra $`𝔘(𝔤_\lambda )`$ can be identified with Gutt’s star product on $`pol(𝔤^{})[[\lambda ]]`$.

###### Proposition 2 ().

Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}:pol(𝔤^{}[[\lambda ]])N[[\lambda ]]`$ be a quantum moment map. Then $`M`$ is a hamiltonian $`G`$-space. Moreover $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ satisfies

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(f)=\mathrm{\Phi }_0(f)+O(\lambda ),\text{ for any }fpol(𝔤^{}),$$

where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0:pol(𝔤^{})C^{\mathrm{}}(M)`$ denotes the corresponding classical moment map.

On the existence and the uniqueness of quantum moment maps, some simple criteria are known as follows.

###### Theorem 5 ().

Let $`\text{H}_{dR}^{}(M)`$ be de Rham cohomology group and $`\text{H}^{}(𝔤,)`$ be Lie algebra cohomology group with coefficients in $``$. There exists a quantum moment map if $`\text{H}_{dR}^1(M)=0`$ and $`\text{H}^2(𝔤,)=0`$.

###### Theorem 6 ().

The set of quantum moment maps of a $`G`$-invariant star product is parametrized by $`\text{H}^1(𝔤,)`$.

### 2.2 A local formula of quantum moment maps

Let $`f`$ be a diffeomorphism on $`M`$. Then $`f`$ acts on a section $`aC^{\mathrm{}}(W\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ by pull back

$`(f^{}a)(x,y,dx,\lambda )=a(f(x),{\displaystyle \frac{f}{x}}y,df(x),\lambda ).`$
If $`f`$ is a symplectomorphism, $`f^{}`$ is an automorphism of the algebra $`C^{\mathrm{}}(W\mathrm{\Lambda })`$. Thus, a Hamiltonian vector field $`X`$ defines a derivation on $`C^{\mathrm{}}(W\mathrm{\Lambda })`$,

$`L_Xa={\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}f_t^{}a|_{t=0}`$
called the Lie derivative, where $`f_t`$ is the Hamiltonian flow generated by $`X`$. One can show that there is a section $`A(X)C^{\mathrm{}}(W)`$ such that

$`L_Xa=(di(X)+i(X)d)a+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[A(X),a].`$ (10)
For instance, $`A(X)`$ is given as following

$`A(X)=\omega _{ik}\left(\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_t}{x}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{f_t}{x}}\right)^1\right)_j^ky^iy^j,`$
where $`\omega _{ik}`$ are coefficients of the symplectic form $`\omega `$ and $`f_t`$ is the Hamiltonian flow generated by $`X`$.

The following two Lemmas play important roles in determining the local form of any quantum moment map.

###### Lemma 1.

Let $`D`$ be a Fedosov connection whose Weyl curvature is $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`Q`$ be the quantization procedure corresponding to $`D`$.

Assume that there exists $`H(X)N[[\lambda ]]`$ for any $`X𝔤`$ such that

$`L_Xa=(i(X)D+Di(X))a+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[Q(H(X)),a]`$ (11)
holds for any section $`aC^{\mathrm{}}(M,W\mathrm{\Lambda })`$. Then, for any Abelian connection of the form $`D_1=D+\frac{1}{\lambda }[\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma ,]`$ with $`G`$-invariant $`\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }W^3\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ which has the same Weyl curvature as D, Equation (11) holds with $`D_1`$ and $`Q_1`$ replaced by $`D`$ and $`Q`$, respectively, where $`Q_1`$ is the quantization procedure corresponding to $`D_1`$.

###### Proof.

Since the addition of $`[\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma ,]/\lambda `$ to $`D`$ on the right hand side of (11) is cancelled by that of $`i(X)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma `$ to $`Q(H(X))`$, we have

$`L_Xa=(i(X)D_1+D_1i(X))a+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[Q(H(X))i(X)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma ,a].`$
It remains to show that $`Q(H(X))i(X)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma `$ is equal to $`Q_1(H(X))`$. Since

$`(Q(H(X))i(X)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma )|_{y=0}=H(X),`$
it is sufficient to show that $`Q(H(X))i(X)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma `$ is flat with respect to $`D_1`$.

$$\begin{array}{c}D_1(Q(H(X))i(X)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma )=\hfill \\ \hfill D(Q(H(X))i(X)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma )+\frac{1}{\lambda }[\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma ,Q(H(X))i(X)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma ]\\ \hfill =D(Q(H(X))i(X)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma )+\frac{1}{\lambda }[\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma ,Q(H(X))]+\frac{1}{\lambda }[i(X)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma ,\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma ]\\ \hfill =i(X)\left(D\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma +\frac{1}{\lambda }\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma ^2\right).\end{array}$$
(12)
Since the Weyl curvature of $`D_1`$ equals to $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, we obtain

$`D\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma ^2=0.`$
###### Lemma 2.

Under the conditions in Lemma 1 if

$`[Q(H(X)),Q(H(Y))]=\lambda Q(H([X,Y]))`$ (13)
holds for any $`X,Y𝔤`$, then Equation (13) holds with $`Q_1`$ replaced by $`Q`$ defined in Lemma 1.

###### Proof.

As we have seen in the proof of Lemma 1, the equation

$`Q_1(H(X))=Q(H(X))i(X)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma `$
holds. By Lemma 1, we have

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill [Q_1(H(X)),Q_1(H(Y))]& =[Q_1(H(X)),Q(H(Y))+i(Y)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma ]\hfill \\ & =\lambda L_XQ(H(Y))+\lambda L_Xi(Y)\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma \hfill \\ & =[Q(H(X)),Q(H(Y))]+\lambda (i(Y)L_X+i([X,Y]))\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma \hfill \\ & =\lambda (Q(H([X,Y]))+i([X,Y])\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma \hfill \\ & =\lambda Q_1(H([X,Y])).\hfill \end{array}`$
The star products defined below play important role to compute local form of quantum moment map.

###### Definition 5.

Let $`U`$ be a neighborhood of a symplectic manifold with Darboux coordinates, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ a perturbation of a symplectic form on $`U`$. A Fedosov connection $`D`$ corresponding to $`(,\mathrm{\Omega })`$ is called a semi-Moyal connection whose Weyl curvature is $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ if $`nabla`$ is a the exterior differential on $`U`$ and the star product corresponding to $`D`$ is called the semi-Moyal product on $`U`$.

The following proposition is a key for the computation of a local form of quantum moment map.

###### Proposition 3.

Let $`D`$ be the Fedosov connection corresponding to a symplectic connection $``$ and a Weyl curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, and $``$ be the star product corresponding to $`D`$. Take a local chart $`U`$ of $`M`$ and let $`D_1`$ be the semi-Moyal connection on $`U`$ whose Weyl curvature is $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ . If $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ is a quantum moment map of $``$, then $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ satisfies

$`L_Xa=(i(X)D_1+D_1i(X))a+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[Q_1(\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X)),a],`$ (14)
$`\lambda Q_1(\mathrm{\Phi }_{}([X,Y]))=[Q_1(\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X)),Q_1(\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(Y))],`$ (15)
for any $`X,Y𝔤`$ and $`aC^{\mathrm{}}(W\mathrm{\Lambda })`$.

###### Proof.

First note that equation (11) is holds with $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ replacing $`H`$. In fact, if we denote $`Da=da+[\gamma ,a]/\lambda `$ and use Equation (10), (11) is equivalent to

$`[\gamma (X)+Q(\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X))+A(X),a]=0\text{for any }aC^{\mathrm{}}(W\mathrm{\Lambda }).`$ (16)
By definition of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$, equation (11) holds for any flat section $`aW_D`$. Hence (16) holds any section $`a`$ since a section which commutes with any flat section is central(See Corollary 5.5.2 in ). Apply Lemma 1 and Lemma 2 with $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ replaced by $`H`$ and we have the proposition.

This proposition means that the computation of the local form of a quantum moment map for a Fedosov star product reduces to that of a quantum moment map for the semi-Moyal product whose Weyl curvature is the same as the corresponding Weyl curvature to Fedosov star product under consideration.

The following theorem which is proved by Fedosov() is obtained by using previous proposition in the case of the canonical $`G`$-invariant star product, that is, the Weyl curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\omega `$.

###### Theorem 7.

Assume $``$ is a canonical $`G`$-invariant star product. Then Equations (11) and (13) are valid if $`H`$ is a classical moment map.

We will give a method to compute a local form of quantum moment map for any $`G`$-invariant Fedosov star product. In the case of a canonical $`G`$-invariant star product, the above theorem provides a quantum moment map. In other cases, the computation is divided into two parts. Firstly, we give an explicit formula of semi-Moyal quantization. Secondly, we give a formula of a quantum moment map of a semi-Moyal product.

### 2.3 An explicit form of semi-Moyal products and their quantum moment maps

As we saw in the previous subsection, it is important to give an explicit formula of semi-Moyal products to compute a quantum moment map. Using the Fedosov quantization method, we have following formula.

Let $`U`$ be a Darboux neighborhood, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }W_U`$ be the Weyl algebra bundle on $`U`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is a perturbation of the symplectic form $`\omega `$, that is,

$`\mathrm{\Omega }=\omega +\lambda \omega _1+\lambda ^2\omega _2+\mathrm{},`$
where each $`\omega _i`$ is closed two form on $`U`$.

Using the Fedosov method (Theorem 3), we have the semi-Moyal connection whose Weyl curvature is $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ as follows;

$`Da=\delta a+da+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[\gamma ,a],\text{for any }a\mathrm{\Gamma }W_U`$ (17)
where

$`\gamma `$ $`=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{ij}y^idx^j+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}_i\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{jk}y^iy^jdx^k+\omega ^{ik}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{ij}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{kl}y^jdx^l\mathrm{},`$ (18)
$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ $`=\mathrm{\Omega }\omega .`$ (19)
Then, by Theorem 4, the semi-Moyal quantization of $`uC^{\mathrm{}}(U)`$ is given by

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill Q(u)=u& +(_iu+\omega ^{kj}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{ki}_ju+\omega ^{mj}\omega ^{kl}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{km}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{lj}_ju+\mathrm{})y^i\hfill \\ & +\omega ^{ij}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{il}_j_muy^ly^m+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\omega ^{ij}_k\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{im}_juy^ky^m+\omega ^{ij}\omega ^{kl}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{ki}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{ln}_j_ouy^ny^o\mathrm{}.\hfill \end{array}`$ (20)
For later use, we give all linear terms with respect to $`y^i`$s of a semi-Moyal quantization(20)

$`(I+\mu +\mu ^2+\mathrm{}+\mu ^k+\mathrm{})_i^j_juy^i,`$ (21)
where

$`\mu _j^i=\omega ^{ik}\gamma _{kj}^{(1)},`$ (22)
and $`\gamma ^{(1)}`$ denotes linear terms of $`\gamma `$ with respect to $`y^i`$.

Next, we give a differential equation in determining a quantum moment map of a semi-Moyal product. In the special case, the Moyal product, the following fact holds.

###### Lemma 3 ().

Let $`X`$ be a vector field on $`U`$ and $`H`$ be a generator function of $`X`$, that is $`Xf=\{H,f\}`$ . For any section $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }W_U`$,

$`L_Xa=(i(X)D_M+D_Mi(X))a+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[Q_M(H),a]`$ (23)
holds, where $`D_M`$ and $`Q_M`$ are the Moyal connection and Moyal quantization on $`U`$ respectively.

###### Proof.

It is a direct verification. ∎

For general semi-Moyal products, the following Lemma is important to determine a quantum moment map.

###### Lemma 4.

Let $`D`$ is the semi-Moyal connection whose Weyl curvature is $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\omega +\lambda \omega _1+\mathrm{}`$, $`Q`$ be the quantization procedure with respect to $`D`$ and $`H`$ be a generator function of a vector filed $`X`$ on $`U`$. If $`\overline{H}C^{\mathrm{}}(U)[[\lambda ]]`$ satisfies

$`L_Xa=(i(X)D+Di(X))a+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[Q(H+\overline{H}),a]\text{for any }a\mathrm{\Gamma }W_U,`$ (24)
then

$`_i\overline{H}=(2\mu +\mu ^2)_i^j_jH`$ (25)
holds, where $`\mu _i^j`$ is given by (22).

###### Proof.

Substituting $`Da=D_Ma+[\gamma ,a]/\lambda `$ into (24), we have

$`L_Xa=`$ $`(i(X)D_M+D_Mi(X))a+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[Q_M(H),a]+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[i(X)\gamma +(QQ_M)(H)+Q(\overline{H}),a].`$
Lemma 3 reduces this equation to

$`[i(X)\gamma +(QQ_M)(H)+Q(\overline{H}),a]=0.`$
Since this equation holds for any $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }W_U`$, we have

$`Q(\overline{H})=i(X)\gamma (QQ_M)(H)`$ (26)
up to central elements, functions in $`C^{\mathrm{}}(U)[[\lambda ]]`$. Equating linear terms with respect to $`y^i`$ of Equation (26) and using (20), we have

$`(1+\mu +\mu ^2+\mathrm{}+\mu ^k+\mathrm{})_i^j_j\overline{H}y^i=(2\mu +\mu ^2+\mathrm{}+\mu ^k+\mathrm{})_i^j_jHy^i.`$
Multiplying the above equation by $`(\mu 1)`$, we have (25). ∎

Let $``$ be a $`G`$-invariant Fedosov star product whose Weyl curvature is $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ is a quantum moment map of $``$. Then Proposition 3 and Lemma 4 imply

$`_i(\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X)\mathrm{\Phi }(X))=(2\mu +\mu ^2)_i^j_j\mathrm{\Phi }(X),`$
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the classical moment map. The above equation determines $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ up to constants, that is, elements in $`[[\lambda ]]`$.

To fix these constant terms of a quantum moment map, we use Equation (15). We can completely fix constants if $`H_1(𝔤,)=0`$.

### 2.4 G-equivalences, Quantum moment maps and invariants

In this subsection, we will give a relation between $`G`$-equivalence and quantum moment map.

###### Proposition 4.

Let $``$ and $`^{}`$ be two $`G`$-invariant star products on $`N[[\lambda ]]`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}`$ be the corresponding quantum moment maps. Assume that there exists an equivalence map $`T`$ between $``$ and $`^{}`$ such that

$`T\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}(X),\text{ for any }X𝔤.`$
Then $`T`$ is $`G`$-invariant. So $``$ and $`^{}`$ are formally $`G`$-equivalent.

###### Proof.

It is enough to show that for any $`fN`$, $`TXf=XTf`$ holds, which can be seen as

$`\lambda TXf`$ $`=T([\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X),f]_{})=[T\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X),Tf]_{^{}}`$
$`=[\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}(X),Tf]_{^{}}=\lambda XTf.`$
###### Proposition 5.

Assume $``$ is a $`G`$-invariant star product and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ is its quantum moment map. If a formal differential map $`T=Id+\lambda ^nT_n`$ on $`N[[\lambda ]]`$ is $`G`$-invariant, then $`^T`$ is also a $`G`$-invariant star product and $`T\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ is a quantum moment map with respect to $`^T`$.

###### Proof.

It is easy to see that $`^T`$ is $`G`$-invariant star product. Set $`\mathrm{\Psi }=T\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$, then $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is an algebra homomorphism between Gutt’s star product and $`(N[[\lambda ]],^T)`$. So it is enough to check the condition (9):

$`[\mathrm{\Psi }(X),f]_^T`$ $`=[T\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X),f]_^T=T([\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X),T^1f]_{})`$
$`=T(\lambda XT^1f)=\lambda Xf.`$
###### Corollary 1.

Assume $`\text{H}^1(𝔤,)=0`$, that is, there is a unique quantum moment map for each star product, if it exists. Let $``$ and $`^{}`$ be $`G`$-invariant star products and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}`$ be the corresponding quantum moment maps. If $`T`$ is a $`G`$-equivalence map between $``$ and $`^{}`$ then $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}=T\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$.

So we have shown that a $`G`$-equivalence maps a quantum moment map corresponding to a $`G`$-invariant star product to one for the corresponding product, and vice versa.

The following proposition determines the commutant of quantum moment maps.

###### Proposition 6.

Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ be a quantum moment map with respect to a star product $``$. If $`fN[[\lambda ]]`$ satisfies

$`[\mathrm{\Phi }(X),f]_{}=0\text{for any }X𝔤,`$ (27)
then $`f`$ is a $`G`$-invariant function.

###### Proof.

The equation,

$`Xf=[\mathrm{\Phi }(X),f]_{}=0`$
means that $`f`$ is a $`G`$ invariant function on $`M`$. ∎

###### Corollary 2.

Assume $`M`$ is a $`G`$-transitive space. The condition(27) implies $`f`$ is constant.

###### Proposition 7.

Assume $`M`$ be a $`G`$-transitive space. Let $``$ be the center of Gutt’s star product, $``$ be a $`G`$-invariant star product and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ be a quantum moment map of $``$. Then for any element $`l`$ in $``$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(l)`$ is constant, that is, there exist an element $`c_{}(l)[[\lambda ]]`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(l)=c_{}(l)`$.

###### Proof.

The equality

$`[\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(X),\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(l)]_{}=\mathrm{\Phi }([X,l]__G)=\mathrm{\Phi }(0)=0.`$
implies, by Proposition 6, that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(l)`$ is constant. ∎

This Proposition leads to the following definition.

###### Definition 6.

Let $`M`$ be a $`G`$-transitive symplectic manifold and $``$ be a $`G`$-invariant star product which has a quantum moment map $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$. Define a map $`c_{}`$ by

$`c_{}`$ $`:[[\lambda ]],`$
$`c_{}(l)`$ $`:=\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(l),\text{for any }l.`$
Then $`c_{}`$ is an algebra morphism, because $``$ is a subalgebra of Gutt’s star product and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ is an algebra morphism.

The map $`c_{}`$ has following properties.

###### Proposition 8.

Let $``$ and $`^{}`$ be $`G`$-invariant star products and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}`$ be the corresponding quantum moment maps. If $`\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}`$, then for any $`l`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(l)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}(l)`$ holds.

###### Proof.

Let $`c=\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(l)[[\lambda ]]`$. Then $`lc\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$. This means $`lc\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}`$. So $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}(lc)=0`$, that is, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}(l)=c`$. ∎

The following Theorem says that the map $`c_{}`$ depends only on a class of $`G`$-invariant $``$-products.

###### Theorem 8.

Let $``$ and $`^{}`$ be $`G`$-invariant star products and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}`$ be the corresponding quantum moment maps. If $``$ is $`G`$-equivalent to $`^{}`$ then $`c_{}`$ is equal to $`c_{^{}}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`T`$, a $`G`$-invariant differential map, be the $`G`$-equivalence between $``$ and $`^{}`$. By Corollary 1 it satisfies $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}=T\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$, so $`\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Phi }_{^{}}`$. This implies $`c_{}=c_{^{}}`$ by Proposition 8. ∎

## 3 Examples of $`c_{}`$

In this section, we present two examples of $`c_{}`$. The first one is the Moyal product on $`^2`$ on which $`\mathrm{SL}(2)`$ acts. The second one is the $`G`$-invariant star product on $`S^2`$, the coadjoint orbit of $`G=\mathrm{SO}(3)`$.

### 3.1 Moyal product on $`^2`$

Let $`^2`$ be the symplectic vector space with coordinates $`(x,p)`$, and the Poisson bracket is given by $`\{x,p\}=1`$. The group $`\mathrm{SL}(2)`$ acts on $`^2`$ by linear symplectomorphisms. Let $`\{E,F,H\}`$ be basis of $`𝔰𝔩(2)`$ with commutation relation,

$`[E,F]=H,[H,E]=2E,[H,F]=2F.`$
The Casimir element is given by $`Z=EF+\frac{1}{2}H^2+FE`$. The Moyal product is the canonical $`SL(2)`$-invariant star product. So we obtain a quantum moment map corresponding to Moyal product is given by classical moment map.

The classical moment map $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is given by

$`\mathrm{\Phi }(E)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}x^2,\mathrm{\Phi }(F)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}p^2,\mathrm{\Phi }(H)=xp.`$
So $`c_{}(Z)`$ is given by

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Phi }_{}(Z)& =\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(E)\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(F)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(H)\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(H)+\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(F)\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(E)\hfill \\ & =\mathrm{\Phi }(E)\mathrm{\Phi }(F)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Phi }(H)\mathrm{\Phi }(H)+\mathrm{\Phi }(F)\mathrm{\Phi }(E).\hfill \end{array}`$ (28)
All terms of (28) vanish except the $`\lambda ^2`$ term. A simple computation gives

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(Z)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}\right)^2(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(2)1)`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}\right)^2.`$
### 3.2 $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$-invariant star product on $`S^2`$

In this subsection, we give an example of $`c_{}`$ for the $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$-invariant star product on $`S^2`$, the coadjoint orbit of $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$, up to $`\lambda ^2`$. We should note that the $`G`$-invariant de-Rham cohomology space of $`S^2`$ is $``$. So $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$-equivalence class of $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$ invariant star product on $`S^2`$ is parametrized by $`H_{dR}^2(S^2,)[[\lambda ]]`$. We compute here $`c_{}`$ for the canonical invariant star product and the star product of Fedosov type whose Weyl curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\omega +\lambda \omega `$.

#### 3.2.1 canonical $`SO(3)`$-invariant star product on $`S^2`$

To use the formula (6), we need a $`SO(3)`$-invariant connection on $`S^2`$. To this end, the following results are fundamental (see ).

Let $`M=K/H`$ be a homogeneous space, where $`K`$ is a connected Lie group and $`H`$ is a closed subgroup of $`K`$. The coset $`H`$ is called the origin of $`M`$ and will be denoted by $`o`$. The group $`K`$ acts transitively on $`M`$ in a natural manner. The linear isotropy representation is by definition the homomorphism of $`H`$ into the group of linear transformations of $`T_o(M)`$ which assigns to each $`hH`$ the differential of $`h`$ at $`o`$.

Let $`n`$ be the dimension of $`M`$ and $`G`$ be a Lie subgroup of $`\mathrm{GL}(n;)`$. We recall that a $`G`$-structure on $`M`$ is a principal subbundle $`P`$ of the linear frame bundle $`L(M)`$ with structure group $`G\mathrm{GL}(n;)`$.

Unless otherwise stated we assume throughout this section that $`P`$ is a $`G`$-structure on $`M`$ invariant by $`K`$, i.e., $`K`$ acts on $`P`$ as an automorphism group. We also fix a linear frame $`u_oP`$ at $`o`$ throughout. If we identify $`T_o(M)`$ with $`^n`$ by the linear isomorphism $`u_o:^nT_o(M)`$, then the linear isotropy representation of $`H`$ may be identified with the homomorphism $`\rho :HG`$ defined by

$`\rho (h)=u_o^1h_{}u_o\text{for }hH,`$ (29)
where $`h_{}:T_o(M)T_o(M)`$ denotes the differential of $`h`$ at $`o`$.

We say that a homogeneous space $`K/H`$ is reductive if the Lie algebra $`𝔨`$ of $`K`$ may be decomposed into a vector space direct sum of Lie algebra $`𝔥`$ of $`H`$ and an $`\mathrm{Ad}(H)`$-invariant subspace $`𝔪`$, that is, if

1. $`𝔨=𝔥+𝔪,𝔥𝔪=0;`$
2. $`\mathrm{Ad}(H)𝔪𝔪.`$

Condition (2) implies

1. $`\mathrm{ad}(𝔥)𝔪𝔪,`$

and, conversely, if $`H`$ is connected, then (3) implies (2).

###### Theorem 9.

Let $`P`$ be a $`K`$-invariant $`G`$-structure on a reductive homogeneous space $`M=K/H`$ with decomposition $`𝔨=𝔥+𝔪`$. Then there is a one-to-one correspondence between the set of $`K`$-invariant connections in $`P`$ and the set of linear mappings $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_m:𝔪𝔤`$ such that

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_m(\mathrm{Ad}(h)(X))=\mathrm{Ad}(\rho (h))(\mathrm{\Lambda }_m(X))\text{for }X𝔨\text{ and }hH,`$ (30)
where $`\rho `$ denotes both the linear isotropy representation $`HG`$ and the Lie algebra homomorphism $`𝔥𝔤`$ induced from it, $`\mathrm{Ad}(h)`$ denotes the adjoint representation of $`H`$ in $`𝔨`$ and $`\mathrm{Ad}(\rho (h))`$ denotes the adjoint representation of $`G`$ in $`𝔤`$. To a $`K`$-invariant connection in $`P`$ with connection form $`\omega `$ there corresponds the linear mapping defined by

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)=\omega _{u_0}(\widehat{X})\text{for }X𝔨,`$
where $`\widehat{X}`$ denotes the natural lift to $`P`$ of a vector field $`X𝔨`$ of $`M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is defined by

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\rho (X)\hfill & \text{if }X𝔥,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Lambda }_m(X)\hfill & \text{if }X𝔪.\hfill \end{array}`$
We shall now express the one-to-one correspondence in Theorem 9 in terms of covariant differentiation. If $``$ is the covariant differentiation with respect to the affine connection on $`M`$ and if $`X`$ is a vector field on $`M`$, then the tensor field $`A_X`$ of type (1,1) on $`M`$ is defined by

$`A_X=L_X_X.`$ (31)
###### Corollary 3.

The one-to-one correspondence in Theorem 9 is also given by

$`u_o(\mathrm{\Lambda }_m(X))u_o^1=(A_X)_o\text{for }X𝔪.`$ (32)
Next, we provide useful facts of coadjoint orbits of $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$. We identify the $`𝔰𝔬(3)^{}`$ with the $`^3`$ by taking basis of $`𝔰𝔬(3)`$. Let $`\alpha `$ be a point on $`𝔰𝔬(3)^{}`$. A coadjoint orbit through the point $`\alpha `$ is nothing but the sphere with the radius $`r=\alpha `$ denoted by $`S_r^2`$.

Let $`dA`$ be the area element on the sphere $`S_r^2`$. Then the coadjoint symplectic structure is given by following $`2`$-form

$`\omega ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}dA.`$ (33)
We give local canonical coordinates around $`o=(r,0,0)^3`$. The spherical coordinates given by

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill x& =r\mathrm{cos}\phi \mathrm{sin}\theta \hfill \\ \hfill y& =r\mathrm{sin}\phi \mathrm{sin}\theta \hfill \\ \hfill z& =r\mathrm{cos}\theta ,\hfill \end{array}`$ (34)
constitute local coordinates in a neighborhood of $`o`$. In these coordinates the symplectic form $`\omega `$ can be written by

$`\omega `$ $`=r\mathrm{sin}d\theta d\phi .`$
If we define $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }=r\mathrm{cos}\theta `$, we have
$`\omega `$ $`=d\stackrel{~}{\theta }d\phi ,`$
and $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta },\phi )`$ are canonical coordinates.

Let $`\sigma _x,\sigma _y,\sigma _z𝔰𝔬(3)`$ be the generators of rotations around $`x,y`$ and $`z`$ axes, respectively. Note that $`\sigma _x`$ generates the isotropy group at $`o=(r,0,0)`$. Let $`𝔥`$ be a Lie subalgebra of $`𝔰𝔬(3)`$ and $`𝔪`$ be a linear subspace of $`𝔰𝔬(3)`$ generated by $`\sigma _y`$ and $`\sigma _z`$. It is easy to show that $`𝔰𝔬(3)=𝔥+𝔪`$ is a unique reductive decomposition.

Let $`P`$ be the principal $`\mathrm{Sp}(2)`$-subbundle of $`L(S_r^2)`$, that is, the bundle of symplectic frames. Using canonical coordinates $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta },\phi )`$, we set

$`u_o=(o,({\displaystyle \frac{}{\stackrel{~}{\theta }}},{\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}))P.`$
Let $`T_x,T_y`$ and $`T_z`$ be the fundamental vector fields of $`S_r^2`$ corresponding, respectively, to $`\sigma _x,\sigma _y`$ and $`\sigma _z`$. In canonical coordinates $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta },\phi )`$ we have

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill T_x& =r\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi {\displaystyle \frac{}{\stackrel{~}{\theta }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}\mathrm{cos}\phi {\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\hfill \\ \hfill T_y& =r\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi {\displaystyle \frac{}{\stackrel{~}{\theta }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}\mathrm{sin}\phi {\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}\hfill \\ \hfill T_z& ={\displaystyle \frac{}{\phi }}.\hfill \end{array}`$ (35)
We give here a $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$-invariant connection on $`S^2`$. In the present case, the linear isotropy representation (29) is nothing but the Jacobi matrix of the differential of $`hG`$ at $`o`$ in the canonical coordinates $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta },\phi )`$, so we easily obtain

$`\begin{array}{c}\hfill \rho (\sigma _x)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& {\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}}\\ r& 0\end{array}\right).\end{array}`$ (36)
Note that this $`\rho `$ means the induced Lie algebra homomorphism.

###### Lemma 5.

There is a unique $`SO(3)`$-invariant symplectic connection given by

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝔪(𝔪)=0,`$ (37)
where $`𝔪`$ is a linear subspace generated by $`\sigma _y,\sigma _z`$.

###### Proof.

It is easy to see that (37) defines invariant connection. On the other hand, if $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝔪`$ is a linear mapping which satisfies conditions in Theorem, then

$`[\rho (\sigma _x),[\rho (\sigma _x),\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝔪(\sigma _y)]]=\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝔪(\sigma _y),`$
which implies $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝔪(\sigma _y)=0`$, and similarly for $`\sigma _z`$. ∎

###### Lemma 6.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be the coefficients of the invariant connection corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝔪`$. Then

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}^k(o)=0,`$ (38)
with respect to the coordinates $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta },\phi )`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`T_X,T_Y,T_Z`$ be fundamental vector fields with respect to the action of $`SO(3)`$. For $`X`$ and $`Y`$ in $`𝔨`$

$`_{T_X}T_Y=\mathrm{\Lambda }(X)Y+[X,Y]`$ (39)
holds by (31) and (32). One obtains

$`_{T_Z}T_Y|_0`$ $`=\mathrm{\Lambda }(Z)Y+[T_Z,T_Y]|_0`$
$`=T_X|_0=0,`$
$`_{T_Z}T_Z|_0`$ $`=0,`$
$`_{T_Y}T_Y|_0`$ $`=0`$
and show the Lemma by direct computation. ∎

So we have a unique $`SO(3)`$ invariant connection on $`S_r^2`$ which is given by the usual partial differential with respect to canonical coordinates $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta },\phi )`$ at $`o`$. One can show that if there is an invariant torsion-free connection, there exists an invariant torsion- free *symplectic* connection. So the connection we have constructed is symplectic.

Now we can compute $`c_{}`$ for the canonical $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$-invariant star product. According to the theorem, the quantum moment map is given by the classical moment map. Let $`Z=\sigma _x^2+\sigma _y^2+\sigma _z^2`$ be a Casimir operator and the center of $`𝔘(𝔰𝔬(3))`$ is generated by $`Z`$. Our purpose is to compute $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(Z)`$ up to $`\lambda ^2`$ order. Since $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ is a homomorphism, we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Phi }_{}(Z)& =\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(\sigma _x)\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(\sigma _x)+\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(\sigma _y)\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(\sigma _y)+\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(\sigma _z)\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(\sigma _z)\hfill \\ & =\mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma _x)\mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma _x)+\mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma _y)\mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma _y)+\mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma _z)\mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma _z).\hfill \end{array}$$
(40)
Since $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(Z)`$ is a constant function and star product is local, we only concentrate on a reference point $`oS^2`$. Computation requires the values of covariant derivatives of functions at $`o`$.

The classical moment map is given by

$`\mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma _x)`$ $`=r\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\phi ,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma _y)`$ $`=r\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\phi ,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma _z)`$ $`=r\mathrm{cos}\theta .`$
A simple computation gives

$`_{\stackrel{~}{\theta }}_{\stackrel{~}{\theta }}\mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma _x)|_o`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}},`$ (41)
$`_\phi _\phi \mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma _x)|_o`$ $`=r,`$ (42)
and other combinations are $`0`$. Substituting these values into (40) and using the formula (6), we obtain

$`c_{}(Z)`$ $`=\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(Z)=r^2+2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}\right)^2+\mathrm{}`$
$`=r^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\lambda ^2+\mathrm{}.`$ (43)
The $`\lambda ^2`$ term in (43) is non-classical, and any $`G`$ -equivalence remains these values.

#### 3.2.2 $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$-invariant star product whose Weyl curvature is $`\omega +\lambda \omega `$

Let $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\omega +\lambda \omega `$. Since $`\omega `$ is a generator of $`H_{dR}^2(S^2,)`$, the star product of Fedosov type whose Weyl curvature is $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ gives another $`SO(3)`$-invariant star product which is not $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$-equivalent to the canonical one, and we denote this star product by $`_\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

Let $`D_0`$ be the semi-Moyal connection whose Weyl curvature is $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. A simple computation gives

$`D_0a=\delta a+da+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\lambda }}[\gamma ,a]\text{for any }a\mathrm{\Gamma }W\mathrm{\Lambda },`$
where

$`\gamma =(\lambda \lambda ^2+\mathrm{})\omega _{ij}y^idx^j.`$
Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }__\mathrm{\Omega }`$ be a quantum moment map corresponding to $`_\mathrm{\Omega }`$. If we denote

$`\mathrm{\Phi }__\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Phi }+\lambda \mathrm{\Phi }_1+\lambda ^2\mathrm{\Phi }_2+\mathrm{},`$
due to Lemma 4 we obtain

$`_i(\lambda \mathrm{\Phi }_1+\lambda ^2\mathrm{\Phi }_2+\mathrm{})=(2\lambda \lambda ^2+\mathrm{})_i\mathrm{\Phi }.`$
Then we have

$`\mathrm{\Phi }__\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Phi }+2\lambda \mathrm{\Phi }\lambda ^2\mathrm{\Phi }+\mathrm{},`$ (44)
up to constants. Because of Equation (15), a quantum moment map $`\mathrm{\Phi }__\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is exactly given by (44).

We can easily show that up to $`\lambda ^2`$ terms, $`_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is given by

$`u_\mathrm{\Omega }v`$ $`=uv+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}\{u,v\}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}\right)^2\left(\omega ^{i_1j_1}\omega ^{i_2j_2}_{i_1}_{i_2}u_{j_1}_{j_2}v2\{u,v\}\right)+\mathrm{}`$
$`=uv+\lambda ^2\{u,v\}+\mathrm{}.`$
So we have

$`c__\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Phi }__\mathrm{\Omega }(Z)=r^2+4r^2\lambda +(2r^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}})\lambda ^2+\mathrm{}.`$ (45)
This result gives $`c_{}c__\mathrm{\Omega }`$. It occurs to us that the class of $`G`$-invariant star products are parametrized by $`c_{}`$.

We end this section with the following problem:

Problem. What is the image of the mapping from $`G`$-invariant star products to $`c_{}`$ maps, and is this mapping one to one ?

#### Acknowledgement

I would like first of all to thank Izumi Ojima for many advices and his insistance that I complete and write this study, and Giuseppe Dito for many fruitful discussions on the subject. Thanks are also due to Daniel Sternheimer for helpful advices and to the referee for his patience and for important suggestions on the presentation of the results.