text:
# References

Holography between type II string theory on a singular Calabi-Yau manifold and superconformal field theory provides a useful tool for studying strong coupling physics of supersymmetric gauge theories . This string theory in the decoupling limit describes a field theory on the NS fivebranes wrapped on cycles on Calabi-Yau manifolds. When a Calabi-Yau manifold becomes singular, the field theory becomes an interacting superconformal field theory. Giveon, Kutasov and Pelc  studied the type II superstrings on a singular hypersurface and calculated the mass spectrum in the Neveu-Schwarz-Ramond (NSR) formalism.

It is an interesting problem to add the Ramond-Ramond (RR) flux in this system. The superstring theory including the RR flux is recognized more important to understand the phase structure of related supersymmetric gauge theories. Since the RR vertex operators are represented by spin fields in the NSR formalism, it is difficult to quantize the superstring theories in this formulation. Green-Schwarz formalism, on the other hand, includes the RR fields naturally. But it is difficult to quantize covariantly due to its non-linearity.

Hybrid superstrings proposed by Berkovits  and Berkovits and Vafa  is a useful approach to quantize the superstrings compactified on Calabi-Yau manifolds in a manifestly supersymmetric manner. This is defined by using only mutually local spin fields which are obtained by field redefinition of the NSR formalism. The worldsheet topological $`N=4`$ superconformal algebra plays an important role for the construction of physical states. One can also introduce the RR flux in this formalism.

In this paper we will investigate the hybrid superstrings on singular Calabi-Yau manifolds. In particular we study the two dimensional hybrid superstrings compactified on Calabi-Yau fourfolds. This model is recently studied . Singular Calabi-Yau manifolds are described by tensor products of the $`N=2`$ super-Liouville theory and $`N=2`$ Landau-Ginzburg models.

The space-time sector of this model includes two scalar fields $`(\rho ,f)`$ in addition to the superspace coordinate fields. By combining this space-time sector and the $`N=2`$ Liouville theory with background charge $`Q=\sqrt{\frac{2}{k}}`$, we can naturally obtain the free field realization of the affine Lie superalgebra $`sl(2|1)^{(1)}`$ at level $`k`$. From this superalgebra, we construct a space-time $`N=2`$ superconformal algebra with central charge $`c=6kp`$ for integer $`p`$. For nonzero $`k`$, however, we will find generators of this space-time superconformal symmetry do not commute with the BRST operators obtained by the field redefinition of the NSR superstring. We propose a model defined by a new topological $`N=4`$ superconformal algebra including BRST currents. This topological algebra is consistent with space-time $`N=2`$ superconformal symmetry.

We begin with reviewing the hybrid superstrings on Calabi-Yau fourfolds. We consider the NSR formalism of type II superstrings on $`R^{1,1}\times X^8`$, where $`R^{1,1}`$ is two-dimensional Minkowski space-time and $`X^8`$ is a Calabi-Yau fourfold. The flat space-time $`R^{1,1}`$ is described by worldsheet free bosons $`X^m(z)`$ and real free fermions $`\psi ^m(z)`$ ($`m=0,1`$) with operator product expansions (OPEs)

$$X^m(z)X^n(w)\eta ^{mn}\mathrm{ln}(zw),\psi ^m(z)\psi ^n(w)\eta ^{mn}/(zw).$$
(1)
Here $`\eta ^{mn}=diag(1,1)`$. Introduce the light-cone basis $`X^\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\pm X^0+X^1)`$, $`\psi ^\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\pm \psi ^0+\psi ^1)`$. We have

$$X^+(z)X^{}(w)\mathrm{ln}(zw),\psi ^+(z)\psi ^{}(w)\frac{1}{zw}.$$
(2)
The energy-momentum tensor $`T_M`$ and $`N=1`$ worldsheet supercurrent $`G_M`$ is given by

$`T_M`$ $`=`$ $`X^+X^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\psi ^+\psi ^{}+\psi ^{}\psi ^+\right),`$
$`G_M`$ $`=`$ $`i\psi ^+X^{}+i\psi ^{}X^+`$ (3)
The Calabi-Yau part is described by $`N=2`$ superconformal field theory (SCFT) with central charge $`c_C=12`$ $`(\widehat{c}_C=c_C/3=4)`$. Denote $`J_C,G_C^\pm ,T_C^{N=2}`$ for the generators of $`N=2`$ superconformal algebra with OPEs

$`T_C^{N=2}(z)T_C^{N=2}(w)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\frac{c_C}{2}}{(zw)^4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2T_C^{N=2}(w)}{(zw)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{T_C^{N=2}(w)}{zw}},`$
$`T_C^{N=2}(z)J_C(w)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{J_C(w)}{(zw)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{J_C(w)}{zw}},T_C^{N=2}(z)G_C^\pm (w){\displaystyle \frac{\frac{3}{2}G_C^\pm (w)}{(zw)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{G_C^\pm (w)}{zw}}`$
$`J_C(z)J_C(w)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{c}_C}{(zw)^2}},J_C(z)G_C^\pm (w){\displaystyle \frac{\pm G_C^\pm (w)}{zw}}`$
$`G_C^+(z)G_C^{}(w)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{c}_C}{(zw)^3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{J_C}{(zw)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{T_C^{N=2}(w)+\frac{1}{2}J_C(w)}{zw}}`$ (4)
We need fermionic ghosts $`(b,c)`$ and bosonic ghosts $`(\beta ,\gamma )`$ with conformal weights (2,-1) and $`(\frac{3}{2},\frac{1}{2})`$, respectively. They satisfy

$$b(z)c(w)\frac{1}{zw},\beta (z)\gamma (w)\frac{1}{zw}.$$
(5)
These fields are bosonized such as $`(b,c)=(e^{i\sigma },e^{i\sigma })`$, $`(\beta ,\gamma )=(\xi e^\varphi ,\eta e^\varphi )`$ and $`(\eta ,\xi )=(e^{i\chi },e^{i\chi })`$ . Here $`\sigma `$, $`\varphi `$ and $`\chi `$ are free bosons with OPEs $`\sigma (z)\sigma (w)\mathrm{ln}(zw)`$, $`\varphi (z)\varphi (w)\mathrm{ln}(zw)`$ and $`\chi (z)\chi (w)\mathrm{ln}(zw)`$, respectively. The ghost sector has $`N=1`$ superconformal symmetry. The energy-momentum tensor and the supercurrent are

$`T^{gh}(z)`$ $`=`$ $`T_{bc}+T_{\beta \gamma },`$
$`T_{bc}(z)`$ $`=`$ $`2bcbc,T_{\beta \gamma }(z)={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\beta \gamma {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\beta \gamma ,`$
$`G^{gh}(z)`$ $`=`$ $`2c\beta +3c\beta +\gamma b.`$ (6)
We discuss the BRST structure of the superstring theory. The BRST charge $`Q_{BRST}`$ is defined by

$$Q_{BRST}=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}J_{BRST}(z),$$
(7)
where $`J_{BRST}`$ is the BRST current:

$$J_{BRST}=c(T_m+\frac{1}{2}T_{bc}+T_{\beta \gamma })\gamma G_m\gamma ^2b+^2c+(c\xi \eta )$$
(8)
and

$$T_m=T_M+T_C^{N=2},G_m=G_M+G_C^++G_C^{}.$$
(9)
$`Q_{BRST}`$ is a nilpotent operator when a total central charge is zero. In fact, $`T_m(z),G_m(z)`$ satisfy $`N=1`$ superconformal algebra with $`c_m=15`$, while $`T^{gh}(z),G^{gh}(z)`$ satisfy $`N=1`$ superconformal algebra with $`c_{gh}=15`$. The Hilbert space $`_{phys}`$ is characterized by the BRST cohomology; $`_{phys}=\mathrm{Ker}Q_{BRST}/\mathrm{Im}Q_{BRST}`$. Here $`Q_{BRST}`$ acts on the small Hilbert space $`_{small}`$ spanned by the ghost sector $`(b,c,\beta ,\gamma )`$ and the matter part. When we study the BRST cohomology, it is convenient to consider the large Hilbert space $`_{large}`$ rather than $`_{small}`$. The large Hilbert space is obtained from the small Hilbert space by adding the zero mode $`\xi _0`$ of fermionic ghost $`\xi `$. In the large Hilbert space, the physical state condition becomes

$`Q_{BRST}|\psi `$ $`=`$ $`0,|\psi |\psi +Q_{BRST}|\mathrm{\Lambda },`$
$`\eta _0|\psi `$ $`=`$ $`\eta _0|\mathrm{\Lambda }=0,`$ (10)
where $`\eta _0`$ is the zero-mode of $`\eta `$ which is conjugate to $`\xi _0`$.

It has been noticed in  that the BRST symmetry in superstring theory can be regarded as a part of topological $`N=4`$ superconformal symmetry. The physical state conditions are translated into the chiral state conditions in superconformal field theory. In the hybrid formalism, this world-sheet symmetry comes from a part of $`\kappa `$-symmetry. The topological $`N=4`$ superconformal algebra is generated by the currents

$`J(z)`$ $`=`$ $`cb\xi \eta ,J^{++}(z)=c\eta ,J^{}(z)=\xi b,`$
$`G^+(z)`$ $`=`$ $`J_{BRST}=c(T_m+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}T_{bc}+T_{\beta \gamma })\gamma G_m\gamma ^2b+^2c+(c\xi \eta ),`$
$`G^{}(z)`$ $`=`$ $`b,`$
$`\stackrel{~}{G}^+(z)`$ $`=`$ $`\eta ,`$
$`\stackrel{~}{G}^{}(z)`$ $`=`$ $`\xi (T_m+T_{bc}+T_{\beta \gamma })+e^\varphi G_mb\eta e^{2\varphi }(b)bbc\xi +^2\xi ,`$
$`T(z)`$ $`=`$ $`T_m+T_{bc}+T_{\beta \gamma }.`$ (11)
The untwisted energy-momentum tensor $`T^{N=2}=T\frac{1}{2}J`$ has central charge $`c=6`$. Now the physical state conditions (10) become

$`G_0^+|\psi `$ $`=`$ $`0,|\psi |\psi +G_0^+|\mathrm{\Lambda },`$
$`\stackrel{~}{G}_0^+|\psi `$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{G}_0^+|\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.`$ (12)
Since the $`\stackrel{~}{G}_0^+`$-cohomology is trivial, i.e. for a state $`|\psi `$ satisfying $`\stackrel{~}{G}_0^+|\psi =0`$ there is a state $`|V_{large}`$ such that $`|\psi =\stackrel{~}{G}_0^+|V`$. The physical state conditions for $`|V`$ become

$`G_0^+\stackrel{~}{G}_0^+|V=0,|V|V+G_0^+|\mathrm{\Lambda }+\stackrel{~}{G}_0^+|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}.`$ (13)
We now investigate the space-time supersymmetry. In order to introduce space-time spinor, we bosonize the worldsheet fermions $`\psi ^+=e^{iH_1}`$, $`\psi ^{}=e^{iH_1}`$, where $`H_1(z)H_1(w)\mathrm{ln}(zw)`$. The space-time supercharges are given by $`Q_\alpha ^\pm =\frac{dz}{2\pi i}q_\alpha ^\pm (z)`$ ($`\alpha =1,2`$) where $`q_\alpha ^\pm (z)`$ are the supercurrents in the $`\frac{1}{2}`$ picture:

$$q_\alpha ^\pm =e^{\frac{\varphi }{2}+\frac{iϵ_\alpha H_1}{2}\pm \frac{i}{2}H_C},$$
(14)
where $`H_C`$ is defined by $`J_C=iH_C`$ and $`ϵ_1=1`$, $`ϵ_2=1`$. From the GSO projection, we may take $`q_1^\pm (z)`$ for mutually local operators. The supersymmetry algebra is

$$\{Q_1^+,Q_1^{}\}=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}e^\varphi \psi ^+(z).$$
(15)
Due to the picture number, supersymmery is not manifest in the NSR formalism.

In order to realize the space-time supersymmetry manifestly, we change the picture number of $`q_1^+`$ from $`\frac{1}{2}`$ to $`+\frac{1}{2}`$ by applying the picture changing operator $`Z=Q_{BRST}\xi `$;

$$Z=c\xi e^\varphi G_m\eta e^{2\varphi }b+(\eta e^{2\varphi }b).$$
(16)
Then $`q_1^+`$ becomes

$$q_1^+=\eta be^{\frac{3\varphi }{2}+\frac{iH_1}{2}+\frac{iH_C}{2}}+iX^+e^{\frac{\varphi }{2}\frac{iH_1}{2}+\frac{iH_C}{2}}G_C^{}e^{\frac{\varphi }{2}+\frac{iH_1}{2}+\frac{iH_C}{2}}.$$
(17)
The new space-time supercharges

$$Q_1^\pm =\frac{dz}{2\pi i}q_1^\pm (z)$$
(18)
obey the anti-commutation relation

$$\{Q_1^+,Q_1^{}\}=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}iX^+.$$
(19)
In this realization, certain linear combinations of the fields $`\varphi `$, $`H_1`$ and $`H_C`$ are important. We define the new variables

$$p_1=e^{\frac{1}{2}\varphi +\frac{i}{2}H_1\frac{i}{2}H_C},p_2=\eta be^{\frac{3}{2}\varphi +\frac{i}{2}H_1+\frac{i}{2}H_C},$$
(20)
and their conjugate fields

$$\theta ^1=e^{\frac{1}{2}\varphi \frac{i}{2}H_1+\frac{i}{2}H_C},\theta ^2=c\xi e^{\frac{3}{2}\varphi \frac{i}{2}H_1\frac{i}{2}H_C},$$
(21)
satisfying $`p_a(z)\theta ^b(w)\frac{\delta _a^b}{zw}`$. Then the supercurrents become

$`q_1^{}`$ $`=`$ $`p_1,`$
$`q_1^+`$ $`=`$ $`p_2+iX^+\theta ^1G_C^{}e^{\frac{\varphi }{2}+\frac{iH_1}{2}+\frac{iH_C}{2}}.`$ (22)
The fermionic system $`(p_a,\theta ^a)`$ has conformal weights $`(1,0)`$ and regarded as fundamental fields in the hybrid superstrings. The fermions $`\theta ^a`$ are fermionic coordinates of target superspace. Let us express them in the bosonized form $`p_a=e^{i\varphi _a}`$ and $`\theta ^a=e^{i\varphi _a}`$ ($`a=1,2`$), where

$`i\varphi _1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}H_1{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}H_C,`$
$`i\varphi _2`$ $`=`$ $`i\sigma +i\chi +{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}H_1+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}H_C.`$ (23)
Since $`(p_a,\theta ^a)`$ are not orthogonal to the $`U(1)`$ scalar field $`H_C`$ and the ghost fields, we define the new $`U(1)`$ field $`\widehat{H}_C`$ and the free bosons$`(\rho ,f)`$.

$`i\widehat{H}_C`$ $`=`$ $`iH_C+4(\varphi +i\chi ),`$
$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`2\sqrt{2}\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\sqrt{2}}}i\chi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}iH_C+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}i\sigma ,`$
$`if`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(\varphi i\chi +iH_1i\sigma ).`$ (24)
These are orthogonal to $`(p_a,\theta ^a)`$. Due to the change of the $`U(1)`$ current $`J_C`$, the generators of $`N=2`$ superconformal algebra are modified as

$`\widehat{J}_C`$ $`=`$ $`i\widehat{H}_C,\widehat{T}_C^{N=2}=T_C^{N=2}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}iH_C(\varphi +i\chi )+2(\varphi +i\chi )^2,`$
$`\widehat{G}_C^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`e^{\pm (\varphi +i\chi )}G_C^\pm .`$ (25)
The hybrid superstrings are described by the free fields $`X^\pm `$, $`(p_a,\theta ^a)`$ ($`a=1,2`$), $`\rho `$, $`f`$ and $`N=2`$ SCFT $`(\widehat{J}_C,\widehat{G}_C^\pm ,\widehat{T}_C^{N=2})`$. In terms of these new variables, the space-time supercurrents take the form

$$q_1^{}=p_1,q_1^+=p_2+iX^+\theta ^1e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\rho +if)}\widehat{G}_C^{}.$$
(26)
The last term in $`q_1^+`$ is removed by the similarity transformation $`𝒪(𝒪)^Re^R𝒪e^R`$ with the operator $`R=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}c\widehat{G}_C^{}`$:

$`(q_1^{})^R`$ $`=`$ $`p_1,`$
$`(q_1^+)^R`$ $`=`$ $`p_2+iX^+\theta ^1.`$ (27)
Further similarity transformation by the operator $`U=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}\frac{i}{2}\theta ^1\theta ^2X^+`$ leads to the supercurrennts realized in a more symmetric way:

$`(q_1^{})^{R+U}`$ $`=`$ $`p_1+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}X^+\theta ^2,`$
$`(q_1^+)^{R+U}`$ $`=`$ $`p_2+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}X^+\theta ^1.`$ (28)
It is easy to see that the supercharges $`Q_1^\pm =\frac{dz}{2\pi i}(q_1^\pm )^{R+U}`$ satisfy the anticommutation relation (19). Combining these with the anti-holomorphic part, we get $`N=(2,2)`$ supersymmetry for type IIA or $`N=(4,0)`$ supersymmetry for type IIB.

We study the topological $`N=4`$ structure in the hybrid superstrings. When we perform the similarity transformation by $`R+U`$, we may check that the energy-momentum tensor $`T`$ and $`SU(2)`$ current $`J`$, $`J^{\pm \pm }`$ are invariant. In the currents $`G^\pm `$, the Calabi-Yau part and the flat space-time part decouple after the transformation. In terms of hybrid variables $`(X^m,p^a,\theta _a,\rho ,f,\widehat{J}_C,\widehat{G}_C^\pm ,\widehat{T}_C^{N=2})`$ the generators (11) are shown to be expressed as follows:

$`(J)^{R+U}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{2}\rho +i\widehat{H}_C,(J^{\pm \pm })^{R+U}=e^{\pm (\sqrt{2}\rho +i\widehat{H}_C)},`$
$`(T)^{R+U}`$ $`=`$ $`X^+X^{}p_1\theta ^1p_2\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\rho )^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(f)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}^2(\rho if)`$
$`+\widehat{T}_C^{N=2}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\widehat{J}_C^{N=2},`$
$`(G^+)^{R+U}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\rho +if)}\left[\left(iX^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\theta ^1\theta ^2\theta ^1\theta ^2)\right)\left(p_1{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^2X^+\right)i\sqrt{2}f\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}^2\theta ^2\right]`$
$`+e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\rho if)}(p_1{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^2X^+)+\widehat{G}_C^+,`$
$`(G^{})^{R+U}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}(\rho +if)}(p_2{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^1X^+)+\widehat{G}_C^{}.`$ (29)
In the supercurrents $`\stackrel{~}{G}^\pm `$, the flat space-time part and the Calabi-Yau part do not decouple. One finds that

$`(\stackrel{~}{G}^+)^{R+U}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(3\rho +if)+i\widehat{H}_C}(p_2{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^1X^+)+e^{\sqrt{2}\rho +i\widehat{H}_C}\widehat{G}_C^{},`$
$`(\stackrel{~}{G}^{})^{R+U}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(3\rho +if)i\widehat{H}_C}\left[\left(iX^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\theta ^1\theta ^2\theta ^1\theta ^2)\right)\left(p_1{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^2X^+\right)i\sqrt{2}f\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}^2\theta ^2\right]`$ (30)
$`+e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(3\rho if)i\widehat{H}_C}(p_1{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^2X^+)+e^{\sqrt{2}\rho i\widehat{H}_C}\widehat{G}_C^+.`$
In the following we shall use the variables after the similarity transformations. We use $`𝒪`$ instead of $`𝒪^{R+U}`$ for simplicity.

As in the case of four or six dimensional superstrings, these currents are written in terms of supercovariant derivatives. Let $`d_a`$ ($`a=1,2`$) be supercovariant derivatives which anticommute with $`q_1^\pm (z)`$

$`d_1`$ $`=`$ $`p_1{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^2X^+,`$
$`d_2`$ $`=`$ $`p_2{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^1X^+.`$ (31)
We introduce also

$`\pi ^+`$ $`=`$ $`iX^+,`$
$`\pi ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`iX^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\theta ^1\theta ^2\theta ^1\theta ^2),`$
$`\omega ^1`$ $`=`$ $`\theta ^1,\omega ^2=\theta ^2.`$ (32)
They satisfy the following algebra:

$`d_1(z)d_2(w)`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^+(w)}{(zw)^2}},\pi ^+(z)\pi ^{}(w){\displaystyle \frac{1}{(zw)^2}},`$
$`d_1(z)\pi ^{}(w)`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^2(w)}{zw}},d_2(z)\pi ^{}(w){\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^1(w)}{zw}},`$
$`d_1(z)\omega ^1(w)`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(zw)^2}},d_2(z)\omega ^2(w){\displaystyle \frac{1}{(zw)^2}}.`$ (33)
Then the generators of the topological $`N=4`$ algebra become

$`J`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{2}\rho +i\widehat{H}_C,J^{\pm \pm }=e^{\pm (\sqrt{2}\rho +i\widehat{H}_C)},`$
$`T`$ $`=`$ $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}d_1\theta ^1d_2\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\rho )^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(f)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}^2(\rho if)`$
$`+\widehat{T}_C^{N=2}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\widehat{J}_C,`$
$`G^+`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\rho +if)}\left(\pi ^{}d_1i\sqrt{2}f\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}^2\theta ^2\right)+e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\rho if)}d_1+\widehat{G}_C^+,`$
$`G^{}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\rho +if)}d_2+\widehat{G}_C^{},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{G}^+`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(3\rho +if)+i\widehat{H}_C}d_2+e^{\sqrt{2}\rho +i\widehat{H}_C}\widehat{G}_C^{},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{G}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(3\rho +if)i\widehat{H}_C}\left(\pi ^{}d_1i\sqrt{2}f\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}^2\theta ^2\right)+e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(3\rho if)i\widehat{H}_C}d_1+e^{\sqrt{2}\rho i\widehat{H}_C}\widehat{G}_C^+.`$
The space-time supersymmetry generators (28) commute with $`G_0^+`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{G}_0^+`$. The space-time supermultiplet of a observable belongs to the BRST cohomology. We note that $`G^+`$ can be decomposed in three mutually anticommuting parts:

$$G^+=G_{(1)}^++G_{(2)}^++G_C^+,$$
(35)
where $`G_{(1)}^+=e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\rho +if)}\left((\pi ^{}d_1)i\sqrt{2}f\theta ^2\frac{3}{4}^2\theta ^2\right)`$ and $`G_{(2)}^+=e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\rho if)}d_1`$.

Now we will study the hybrid superstrings on singular Calabi-Yau fourfolds. A singular Calabi-Yau manifold $`X^8`$ is described by $`R_\phi \times S^1\times LG`$, where $`R_\phi \times S^1`$ denotes the $`N=2`$ supersymmetric Liouville theory with the central charge $`c_L=3+3Q^2`$. $`LG`$ is an $`N=2`$ Laundau-Ginzburg model associated with $`ADE`$ type singularity and has the central charge $`c_{LG}=12c_L=93Q^2`$.

The $`N=2`$ Liouville part is realized by two complex boson $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\phi +iY)`$, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\phi iY)`$ and complex fermions $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\mathrm{\Psi }^1+i\mathrm{\Psi }^2)`$, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\mathrm{\Psi }^1i\mathrm{\Psi }^2)`$, where $`\phi `$ is a Liouville field with background charge $`Q`$ and $`Y`$ is a free boson compactified on $`S^1`$. The OPEs are given by $`\phi (z)\phi (w)\mathrm{ln}(zw)`$, $`Y(z)Y(w)\mathrm{ln}(zw)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^a(z)\mathrm{\Psi }^b(w)\delta ^{ab}/(zw)`$ $`(a,b=1,2)`$. The worldsheet $`N=2`$ algebra with the central charge $`c_L=3+3Q^2`$ can be obtained from the generators:

$`T_L`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{2\sqrt{2}}}^2(\mathrm{\Phi }+\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Psi }\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }},`$
$`G_L^+`$ $`=`$ $`i\mathrm{\Psi }\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{iQ}{\sqrt{2}}}\mathrm{\Psi },G_L^{}=i\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Phi }+{\displaystyle \frac{iQ}{\sqrt{2}}}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }},`$
$`J_L`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}+iQY.`$ (36)
For the Landau-Ginzburg part, we write the generators of $`N=2`$ algebra as $`J_{LG},G_{LG}^\pm ,T_{LG}^{N=2}`$ Then we have

$`\widehat{J}_C`$ $`=`$ $`J_L+J_{LG},\widehat{T}_C^{N=2}=T_L^{N=2}+T_{LG}^{N=2}`$
$`\widehat{G}_C^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`G_L^\pm +G_{LG}^\pm .`$ (37)
In , it is argued that the superstrings on singular Calabi-Yau manifolds correspond to the space-time $`N=2`$ superconformal field theory with central charge $`c=6kp`$ in the decoupling limit. Here $`k`$ is related to the Liouville background charge $`Q`$ by the formula $`k=2/Q^2`$ and $`p`$ is an integer.

We expect that the space-time $`N=2`$ supersymmetry (28) is enhanced to $`N=2`$ superconformal symmetry generated by $`_n`$, $`_n`$ $`(n𝐙)`$ and $`𝒢_r^\pm `$ $`(r𝐙+\frac{1}{2})`$. Their algebra is

$`[_n,_m]`$ $`=`$ $`(nm)_{n+m}+{\displaystyle \frac{c}{12}}n(n^21)\delta _{n+m,0},`$
$`[_n,𝒢_r^\pm ]`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}r\right)𝒢_{n+r}^\pm ,`$
$`[_n,_m]`$ $`=`$ $`m_{n+m},`$
$`\{𝒢_r^+,𝒢_s^{}\}`$ $`=`$ $`_{r+s}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(rs)_{r+s}+{\displaystyle \frac{c}{6}}\left(r^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\right)\delta _{r+s,0},`$
$`[_n,𝒢_r^\pm ]`$ $`=`$ $`\pm 𝒢_{n+r}^\pm ,`$
$`[_n,_m]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{c}{3}}n\delta _{n+m,0}.`$ (38)
$`𝒢_{\frac{1}{2}}^\pm `$ generate the $`N=2`$ supersymmetry and $`_1`$ corresponds to the translation: $`𝒢_{\frac{1}{2}}^\pm =Q_1^\pm `$, $`_1=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}iX^+`$.

We discuss a finite dimensional subalgebra of $`N=2`$ superconformal symmetry. In terms of zero-modes of superspace coordinates $`(X^{},\theta ^a)`$, the $`N=2`$ space-time superconformal generators $`_0,_{\pm 1},𝒢_{\pm \frac{1}{2}},\overline{𝒢}_{\pm \frac{1}{2}},_0`$ are given by

$`_1`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{}{X^{}}},`$
$`_0`$ $`=`$ $`X^{}{\displaystyle \frac{}{X^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\theta ^1{\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^1}}+\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^2}}\right),`$
$`_1`$ $`=`$ $`i(X^{})^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{X^{}}}iX^{}\left(\theta ^1{\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^1}}+\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^2}}\right),`$
$`𝒢_{\frac{1}{2}}^+`$ $`=`$ $`iX^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^1{\displaystyle \frac{}{X^{}}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta ^1\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^2}},`$
$`𝒢_{\frac{1}{2}}^+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^1{\displaystyle \frac{}{X^{}}},`$
$`𝒢_{\frac{1}{2}}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`iX^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^1}}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{X^{}}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta ^1\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^1}},`$
$`𝒢_{\frac{1}{2}}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^1}}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{X^{}}},`$
$`_0`$ $`=`$ $`\theta ^1{\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^1}}\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta ^2}}.`$ (39)
To realize the infinite dimensional algebra, it is convenient to introduce $`(\beta ,\gamma )`$ system instead of $`(X^+,X^{})`$ by

$$\beta =iX^+,\gamma =iX^{}.$$
(40)
which has the OPE $`\beta (z)\gamma (w)(1)/(zw)`$. The space-time $`N=2`$ superconformal algebra is now realized in terms of hybrid variables $`(\beta ,\gamma )`$, $`(p_a,\theta ^a)`$ and $`(\rho ,f)`$. In addition, $`_0`$ corresponds to the $``$-charge of the theory and is characterized by the $`U(1)`$ current $`iY`$. In the $`AdS_3`$ case, we need the Liouville field to construct the space-time Virasoro algebra. In the present case, $`\phi `$ plays a similar role. These field contents lead to the free field realization of currents of affine Lie superalgebra $`sl(2|1)^{(1)}`$ at level $`k`$:

$`\widehat{J}^{++}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma ^2\beta \gamma \left(\theta ^1p_1+\theta ^2p_2(Ra\mathrm{\Phi })+(\overline{R}+a\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }})\right)`$
$`+(k1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\theta ^1\theta ^2\theta ^1\theta ^2){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta ^1\theta ^2\left((Ra\mathrm{\Phi })+(\overline{R}+a\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }})\right)k\gamma ,`$
$`\widehat{J}^3`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma \beta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\theta ^1p_1+\theta ^2p_2(Ra\mathrm{\Phi })+(\overline{R}+a\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }})\right),`$
$`\widehat{J}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta ,`$
$`\widehat{I}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\theta ^1p_1\theta ^2p_2(Ra\mathrm{\Phi })(\overline{R}+a\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }})\right),`$
$`\widehat{j}^{+(+)}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma (p_2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta ^1\beta )(k{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})\theta ^1\theta ^1(\overline{R}+a\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta ^1\theta ^2p_2,`$
$`\widehat{j}^{+()}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma (p_1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta ^2\beta )(k{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})\theta ^2+\theta ^2(Ra\mathrm{\Phi })+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta ^1\theta ^2p_1,`$
$`\widehat{j}^{(+)}`$ $`=`$ $`p_2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta ^1\beta ,`$
$`\widehat{j}^{()}`$ $`=`$ $`p_1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta ^2\beta .`$ (41)
where $`a=\sqrt{k}=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{Q}`$ and

$$R=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\rho +if),\overline{R}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\rho if).$$
(42)
From the affine Lie superalgebra, one may construct the space-time $`N=2`$ superconformal algebra as discussed in the $`AdS_3`$ case:

$`_n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}\left(\frac{1}{2}n(n+1)\gamma ^{n1}\left(\widehat{J}^{++}+\frac{k}{2}(\theta ^1\theta ^2)\right)+(n^21)\gamma ^n\widehat{J}^3+\frac{1}{2}n(n1)\gamma ^{n+1}\widehat{J}^{}\right)},`$
$`𝒢_r^+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}\left((r+\frac{1}{2})\gamma ^{r\frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{j}^{+(+)}+k\theta ^1)(r\frac{1}{2})\gamma ^{r+\frac{1}{2}}\widehat{j}^{(+)}\right)},`$
$`𝒢_r^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}\left((r+\frac{1}{2})\gamma ^{r\frac{1}{2}}\widehat{j}^{+()}(r\frac{1}{2})\gamma ^{r+\frac{1}{2}}\widehat{j}^{()}(r^2\frac{1}{4})\gamma ^{r\frac{3}{2}}\frac{k\frac{1}{2}}{2}\theta ^1\theta ^2\theta ^2\right)},`$
$`_n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}}(2\gamma ^n\widehat{I}n\gamma ^{n1}((k{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})\theta ^1\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta ^1\theta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\theta ^1\theta ^2((Ra\mathrm{\Phi })(\overline{R}+a\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}))).`$
These generators satisfy $`N=2`$ space-time superconformal algebra with the central charge $`c=6kp`$, where

$$p=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}\frac{\gamma }{\gamma }.$$
(44)
We must, however, examine consistency of this space-time $`N=2`$ superconformal symmetry with the topological $`N=4`$ structure of the theory. Since the physical symmetry have to (anti-)commute with the BRST charge, the space-time charges (LABEL:eq:gen1) must (anti-) commute with operators $`G_0^+=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}G^+(z)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{G}_0^+=\frac{dz}{2\pi i}\stackrel{~}{G}^+(z)`$. For $`sl(2|1)`$ currents, however, it is shown that the currents $`\widehat{J}^{++}`$ and $`\widehat{j}^{+(+)}`$ are not $`G_0^+`$-invariant. Moreover, $`\widehat{J}^{++}`$ and $`\widehat{j}^{+()}`$ are not $`\stackrel{~}{G}_0^+`$-invariant. This implies that the original model proposed in  does not have the space-time superconformal symmetry in their physical spectrum. Here we modify the model in order to allow the space-time superconformal symmetry.

We will solve the above problem by modifying both the worldsheet topological currents and the space-time currents. After some calculations, we are able to find the following solution. Firstly, the $`sl(2|1)`$ currents are modified as

$$\widehat{J}^{(new)++}=\widehat{J}^{++}+aie^R\theta ^1\mathrm{\Psi },\widehat{j}^{(new)+()}=\widehat{j}^{+()}aie^R\mathrm{\Psi },$$
(45)
and other currents are invariant. The space-time $`N=2`$ superconformal generators are obtained by replacing the affine currents to the new ones in (LABEL:eq:gen1). But $`𝒢_r^{}`$ and $`_n`$ receive further corrections:

$`𝒢_r^{new}`$ $`=`$ $`𝒢_r^{old}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}\left((r^2\frac{1}{4})\gamma ^{r\frac{3}{2}}\frac{ai}{2}\theta ^1\theta ^2e^R\mathrm{\Psi }\right)},`$
$`_n^{new}`$ $`=`$ $`_n^{old}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{2\pi i}ain\gamma ^{n1}e^R\theta ^1\mathrm{\Psi }}.`$ (46)
The BRST currents which is consistent with these space-time currents take the form

$`G^{new+}`$ $`=`$ $`G_{(1)}^++\mathrm{\Delta }G_{(1)}^++G_L^++G_{LG}^+,`$
$`\stackrel{~}{G}^{new+}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{G}^{old+}+\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{~}{G}^+,`$ (47)
where

$`\mathrm{\Delta }G_{(1)}^+`$ $`=`$ $`e^R\left\{(R+a\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }})\theta ^2+^2\theta ^2\right\},`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{~}{G}^+`$ $`=`$ $`aie^{\sqrt{2}\rho +i\widehat{H}_C}(\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}R+\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}).`$ (48)
In $`G^+(z)`$, the term $`G_{(2)}^+`$ is eliminated in order to keep the OPE with $`G^{}(z)`$. The energy-momentum tensor $`T`$ and $`SU(2)`$ currents $`J^{\pm \pm },J^3`$ do not change. The supercurrents $`G^{}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{G}^{}`$ are modified due to the change of $`G^+`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{G}^+`$. To summarize, the worldsheet $`N=4`$ currents are

$`T`$ $`=`$ $`\beta \gamma p_1\theta ^1p_2\theta ^2\overline{R}R^2\overline{R}`$
$`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}\mathrm{\Phi }{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{\sqrt{2}}}^2\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }+T_{LG}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}J_{LG},`$
$`G^+`$ $`=`$ $`e^R\left(\pi ^{}d_1+(\overline{R}+a\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }})\theta ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}^2\theta ^2\right)+i\left(\mathrm{\Psi }\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}\mathrm{\Psi }\right)+G_{LG}^+,`$
$`G^{}`$ $`=`$ $`e^Rd_2+i\left(\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}(\mathrm{\Phi }aR)\left(a{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}\right)\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\right)+G_{LG}^{},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{G}^+`$ $`=`$ $`e^{2R\overline{R}+iH_L+iH_{LG}}d_2+e^{R\overline{R}+iH_L+iH_{LG}}\left(\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}(\mathrm{\Phi }aR)+\left(a{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}\right)\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\right)`$
$`e^{R\overline{R}+iH_L+iH_{LG}}G_{LG}^{},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{G}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{2R+\overline{R}iH_LiH_{LG}}(\pi ^{}d_1+(\overline{R}+a\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }})\theta ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}^2\theta ^2)`$
$`+e^{R+\overline{R}iH_LiH_{LG}}\left(\mathrm{\Psi }\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}\mathrm{\Psi }\right)e^{R+\overline{R}iH_LiH_{LG}}G_{LG}^+,`$
$`J`$ $`=`$ $`(R+\overline{R})+iH_L+iH_{LG},`$
$`J^{++}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{R\overline{R}+iH_L+iH_{LG}},`$
$`J^{}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{R+\overline{R}iH_LiH_{LG}},`$ (49)
where $`J_L=iH_L`$ and $`J_{LG}=iH_{LG}`$. New $`N=2`$ superconformal generators (LABEL:eq:gen1), (45) and (46) are consistent with this $`N=4`$ topological structure. The new model allows the space-time superconformal symmetry in the physical spectrum. Based on these currents, we may study the BRST cohomology since it is not clear that the new BRST current reproduces the consistent physical spectrum with that in . In the following paper, we will investigate the BRST cohomology and physical spectrum in detail.

In this paper, we have constructed the space-time $`N=2`$ superconformal algebra in the superstrings compactified on singular Calabi-Yau fourfolds. We find that the original BRST operator (7) does not (anti-)commute with the superconformal generators. The space-time supersymmetry of the original model , therefore, does not extend to the superconformal. We construct a new topological $`N=4`$ superconformal algebra including the new BRST operator which commute with the space-time superconformal generators. These generators nontrivialy mix the two-dimensional and Liouville parts as expected.

It is an interesting problem to generalize the present approach to the case of $`4`$ or $`6`$ dimensional hybrid superstrings on a singular Calabi-Yau three or two-fold, respectively. We would be able to study higher dimensional superconformal field theory in terms of hybrid superstring formalism. It is also interesting to apply the present approach to the case of the superstrings with RR backgrounds  and the theory compactified on $`G_2`$ and $`Spin(7)`$ holonomy manifolds. These subjects will be discussed elsewhere.

Acknowledgments: We would like to thank the organizers of the Summer Institute 2001 at Yamanashi, where a part of this work was done. The research of KI and HK is supported in part by the Grant-in-Aid from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japan, Priority Area 707 “Supersymmetry and Unified Theory of Elementary Particles” and Priority Area No.13135213, respectively. HK is also supported in part by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research No.11640276 from Japan Society for Promotion of Science.


format: text

text:
# The broad band X–ray spectrum of the black hole candidate GRS 1758–258

## 1 Introduction

The hard X–ray source GRS 1758–258 was discovered in 1990 (Mandrou m:90 (1990); Sunyaev et al. s:91 (1991)) during the observations of the Galactic Center region performed with the GRANAT satellite. This source and the more famous “microquasar” 1E 1740.7–2942 (e.g. Churazov et al. c:94 (1994)) were found to be the only persistent sources of hard X-rays (E$`>`$40 keV) present within a few degrees from the Galactic Center direction.

Also GRS 1758–258 can be considered a “microquasar” due to its association with a radio source with double-sided relativistic jets (Rodriguez et al. r:92 (1992)). Recent $`Chandra`$ observations determined the X–ray position of GRS 1758–258 with a sub-arcsecond error radius, confirming the association with the radio point source at the center of the two radio jets (Heindl & Smith hs:01 (2001)).

Monitoring in the X–ray band with the RossiXTE satellite revealed a periodicity of 18.45$`\pm 0.03`$ days (Smith et al. s:00 (2000)). Two possible IR candidate counterparts were found by Martí et al. (m:98 (1998)) compatible with the position of the central radio source. However, Eikenberry et al. (e:01 (2001)), based on a different astrometry to link the radio and IR data sets, excluded the objects proposed by Martí et al. (m:98 (1998)) and found that there are no stars brighter than KS=20.3 compatible with the radio position (KS is centered at $`2.15\mu `$m). If confirmed, this strong limit on the IR emission implies a low mass companion star that makes unlikely the interpretation of the above periodicity as an orbital period.

Although a dynamical mass measurement is not available, GRS 1758–258 is considered a black hole candidate on the basis of its hard emission extending above 100 keV and its spectral similarities with Cyg X-1. Most of the X–ray observations of GRS 1758–258 determined a power-law spectrum (photon index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$1.7–2) with a cut-off above $``$30 keV (e.g. Churazov et al. c:94 (1994); Keck et al. k:01 (2001)), typical of the so called low/hard state of black hole candidates.

Here we report the results of the first observation of GRS 1758–258 covering simultaneously the broad energy range from 0.1 up to 200 keV. The wide spectral coverage achieved with BeppoSAX is especially important when searching for the presence of a soft excess.

## 2 Observations and Data Reduction

GRS 1758–258 was observed with BeppoSAX from 1997 April 10 15:20 to April 11 05:09 UTC. Here we report the results from the Low-Energy Concentrator Spectrometer (LECS; 0.1–10 keV; Parmar et al. p:97 (1997)), the Medium-Energy Concentrator Spectrometer (MECS; 1.8–10 keV; Boella et al. b:97 (1997)), and the Phoswich Detection System (PDS; 15–300 keV; Frontera et al. f:97 (1997)) instruments.

The net exposure times in the LECS, MECS, and PDS instruments were 9.0 ks, 28.3 ks, and 12.7 ks, respectively. For this observation all the three MECS units were available. The MECS and LECS field of view (see Fig. 1 for the MECS) was contaminated by the stray light contribution from the bright Low Mass X–ray Binary GX 5–1, located about 40 away from GRS 1758–258. In order to minimize this contamination, the GRS 1758–258 counts for the spectral analysis have been extracted from circular regions with radius (2 for the MECS and 4 for the LECS) smaller than that used in standard analysis. We used the appropriate response matrices that take into account the size of the extraction region. To estimate the background for the spectral analysis, we used an ad hoc procedure in order to properly correct for a background as similar as possible to that induced by the stray light: the regular shape and the radial symmetry of the stray light contamination led us to consider the two circular regions with radius 2 shown in Fig. 1. Both regions have practically the same spectrum that represents well the contribution from the GX 5–1 at the position of GRS 1758–258. We verified that similar results in the fitting parameters (within the 90% confidence range) were found also using a different choice for the LECS and MECS background regions (a standard annular region around the source position). This indicates that the background is not critical for this bright source.

The non-imaging PDS instrument consists of four independent units arranged in pairs, each having a separate collimator. Each collimator was alternatively rocked on- and 210 off-source every 96 s during the observation. These two off-source fields, free from contaminating sources, were used for the PDS background subtraction. However, the PDS on–source data were affected by the GX 5–1 emission. This effect was relevant only at low energies, due to the very soft spectrum of GX 5–1 (Gilfanov et al. g:93 (1993), see their Fig. 6). We therefore neglected the PDS channels from 15 to 40 keV in the spectral analysis. For the same reason, the non–imaging data from the HPGSPC instrument, covering the intermediate energy range between MECS and PDS, could not be used for the spectral analysis and will not be considered here.

## 3 Results

The broad-band spectrum of GRS 1758–258 was investigated by simultaneously fitting data from the LECS, MECS and PDS. The data were selected in the energy ranges 0.1–4.0 keV (LECS), 1.8–10 keV (MECS), and 40–200 keV (PDS) and rebinned using standard procedures. The resulting background-subtracted count rates were 0.74, 3.5, and 3.0 counts s-1 for the LECS, MECS, and PDS, respectively. In the spectral fitting, constant factors were included to account for normalization uncertainties between the instruments. These factors were constrained to be within their usual ranges during the fitting. All spectral uncertainties and upper-limits are given at 90% confidence. Spectral analysis has been performed with xspec v.11 software package.

Initially, an absorbed power-law model was tried, resulting in photon index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$=1.66 and column density NH=1.85$`\times `$$`10^{22}`$ cm-2 ($`\chi ^2`$=150.3 for 111 degrees of freedom, dof). Inspection of the residuals showed that a cut-off in the spectrum is needed above $``$100 keV. The inclusion of a high energy cut-off in the power-law model resulted in a significantly better fit ($`\chi ^2`$/dof=123.7/109), with the following parameters: NH=$`(1.81_{0.05}^{+0.08})`$$`\times 10^{22}`$ cm-2, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$=1.65$`\pm 0.02`$, cut-off energy Ec=73$`\pm `$20 keV and e-folding energy Efold=$`180_{80}^{+120}`$ keV. The flux in the 0.1–200 keV range, corrected for the absorption, is $`1.95\times 10^9`$ erg cm-2 s-1, which corresponds to an X–ray luminosity of $`1.4\times 10^{37}`$ erg s-1 (at 8 kpc). About 33% of this unabsorbed flux is emitted in the 0.1–10 keV band. In order to have a more physical picture of the emission spectrum, we also fitted a Comptonization model (compst in xspec; Sunyaev & Titarchuk st:80 (1980)), for which we obtained a similar good statistical result ($`\chi ^2`$/dof=125.3/110). The resulting parameters are listed in Table LABEL:tab:spec and the spectrum is shown in Fig. 2.

Another model often used to fit the low/hard state spectrum of black-hole candidates is the Comptonization of soft photons in a hot plasma which includes relativistic effects (comptt model in xspec, Titarchuk t:94 (1994)). The best fit with this model gave a slightly worse $`\chi ^2`$ value than the compst model with the parameters reported in Table 1.

The addition of a Gaussian line (centroid energy fixed at 6.4 keV) to the Comptonization best-fit resulted in a line width $`\sigma `$=700 $`{}_{440}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+600}`$ eV and in an equivalent width, EW=67 $`{}_{40}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+80}`$ eV. The parameters of the continuum remained consistent with those reported in Table LABEL:tab:spec and the $`\chi ^2`$ value decreased to 116.2 for 108 dof. An F-test indicates that the probability of such a decrease occurring by chance is 1.7%. Fixing the energy of the line at 6.7 keV resulted in a $`\chi ^2`$ value of 119.0 for 108 dof.

The possible presence of a fluorescent iron line from neutral material is suggestive of X–ray irradiation of cold iron close to the central compact object; however, the exclusion from the spectral fitting of the energy range from 15 to 40 keV due to the nearby contaminating source, prevents us to establish the presence of another important signature of reflection, the “Compton reflection hump”. In fact, the fit with an exponentially cut-off power-law spectrum reflected from neutral material (pexrav model in xspec, Magdziarz & Zdziarski mz:95 (1995)) plus a Gaussian line with energy fixed at 6.4 keV resulted in an unconstrained reflection scaling factor frefl$`\text{ }<`$1.2 (frefl=1 for an isotropic source above an infinite flat disk), a power-law with a photon index of $``$1.8 and an iron line with EW$`\text{ }<`$110 eV.

We searched for the possible presence of a soft excess in the BeppoSAX spectrum, obtaining a negative result: adopting a two-component model composed of a power-law and a blackbody with temperature in the range 0.2–0.5 keV, we can place the upper limits shown in Fig. 3 to the flux contributed by the blackbody.

## 4 Discussion

The BeppoSAX observation reported here has allowed us to study the black-hole candidate GRS 1758–258 covering simultaneously the broad energy range from 0.1 to 200 keV. Previously, only Mereghetti et al. (m:94 (1994)) and Lin et al. (l:00 (2000)) reported broad band spectral studies of GRS 1758–258 . Both studies were based on nearly simultaneous observations with different satellites and, unfortunately, lacked a complete covering of interesting portions of the spectrum. Mereghetti et al. (m:94 (1994)) used ROSAT ($`<`$2 keV) and SIGMA ($`>`$40 keV) observations, while Lin et al. (l:00 (2000)) analyzed multi-wavelength data from the radio band to $``$500 keV, but lacked the information for the soft X–rays below 2 keV, a particularly interesting region in order to establish the possible presence of a soft spectral component.

This is a particularly interesting point, in view of previous reports of a soft spectral component in GRS 1758–258, possibly coming from the inner regions of the accretion disk. The question is, first, whether such a component is really present in this source and, second, whether it is associated to a particular spectral state, as seen in other black hole candidates.

We have collected from the literature all the observations of GRS 1758–258 and summarized the main spectral results in Fig. 4. It appears that most observations found GRS 1758–258 in a typical state characterized by a hard power-law spectrum extending to $``$100 keV followed by a cut-off. The luminosity in this state is not constant: variability on different timescales is present (see,e.g., Keck et al. k:01 (2001) for a long term monitoring with the XTE/ASM and CGRO/BATSE). In Fig. 4 we have reported two broad band spectra that bracket the observed range of values: the XTE/OSSE spectrum (Lin et al. l:00 (2000)) and our BeppoSAX results.

During this spectral state, at least two reliable observations demonstrate the absence of a soft component: the one obtained with ASCA in March 1995 (Mereghetti et al. 1997) and the BeppoSAX one reported here. Both missions provided a good coverage of the region around $``$1 keV with imaging instruments that minimized the contamination with the nearby source GX 5–1. The possible presence of a soft component suggested by a comparison of ROSAT PSPC (E$`<`$2 keV) and SIGMA (E$`>`$40 keV) data obtained in 1993 (Mereghetti et al. (1994)) is controversial, since it was not confirmed by different analysis of the same data (Grebenev et al. g:97 (1997), Keck et al. k:01 (2001)).

Recently (2001, February 27) GRS 1758–258 entered an “off” state, with a 2–20 keV flux reduced by a factor ten, smaller time variability and a spectrum dominated by a thermal component with blackbody temperature kTbb$``$0.4 keV (Smith et al. s:01 (2001)). This is the first clear evidence of a different spectral state, although it is possible that GRS 1758–258 was in a similar state in 1992–1992 when only an upper limit could be obtained at energies above 40 keV (Gilfanov et al. (g:93 (1993)); the upper limits obtained with SIGMA are indicated in Fig. 4, no simultaneous observations were available at lower energies).

An observation during this “off” state (March 22, 2001) with the XMM–Newton Reflection Grating Spectrometer (RGS) showed a spectrum dominated by a blackbody component with kTbb$``$0.3 keV and with a steep power-law ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$2.9) contributing to less than 2% of the total flux in the 0.6–2.3 keV band (Miller et al. mw:01 (2001)). Similar results were obtained in an observation performed two days later with Chandra (Heindl & Smithhs:01 (2001)). Preliminary results of an observation performed in September 2000 with the EPIC instrument on XMM–Newton seem to indicate that GRS 1758–258 was in an “intermediate” state, in which both a thermal component and a power-law were required to fit the 0.2-10 keV spectrum (Goldwurm et al. g:01 (2001)). In conclusion, it seems that the soft thermal component has been significantly detected only when GRS 1758–258 is in a low intensity state.

Keck et al. (k:01 (2001)) have interpreted the long-term behavior of GRS 1758–258 in term of an advection-dominated accretion flow model (ADAF), finding that 1990-1993 nearly simultaneous observations support the ADAF predictions. This interpretation is based on a comparison of the soft (1-20 keV) and hard (20-200 keV) luminosities (see Barret et al. bmg:96 (1996)). From our BeppoSAX observation we can measure for the first time really simultaneously these quantities, that, assuming as Keck et al. (k:01 (2001)) a distance of 8.5 kpc, are $`L_{120}=5.4\times 10^{36}`$ erg s-1 and $`L_{20200}=9.7\times 10^{36}`$ erg s-1. Taking into account the uncertainties of $`\text{ }<`$10%, these luminosity values place GRS 1758–258 well inside the so-called “burster box” in the $`L_{120}L_{20200}`$ plane, and are not consistent with the ADAF model for a 10.6 $`M_{}`$ black-hole. This confirms that BHCs in low-state are not spectrally distinguishable from neutron stars.

## 5 Conclusions

The BeppoSAX 0.1–200 keV spectrum of GRS 1758–258 is adequately fit with a Comptonized emission model with an electron temperature of $``$30 keV or, alternatively, with a power-law with a high energy cut-off at $``$70 keV. This spectral model is typical of black-hole candidates in their low/hard state. The luminosity in the range 0.1–200 keV is 1.4$`\times 10^{37}`$ erg s-1, and the measured column density is almost model-independent in the range $``$$`1.81.9`$$`\times 10^{22}`$ cm-2.

No soft excess is evident from this observation, and we can put stringent upper limits to the flux contributed by a soft component. A blackbody component at a level similar to that reported by Goldwurm et al. (g:01 (2001)), would have been clearly detected in our BeppoSAX observation, being a factor $``$7.5 larger than our upper limits.

We have marginally detected (98.3% confidence level) a broad line from cold iron (6.4 keV). The presence of this line possibly indicates the existence of reflection from the accretion disk of hard X–rays coming from the central source. Another signature of the existence of such a component is a hump in the energy range 20–30 keV (e.g., George & Fabian gf:91 (1991)). Unfortunately, the X–ray data from 15 to 40 keV could not be used in our spectral analysis due to the contamination from a bright off-axis source. Thus, the presence of reflection in GRS 1758–258 deserves further investigations with imaging instruments covering the hard X–ray region, such as those that will be soon available with the INTEGRAL satellite.