text:
# Thermodynamics of pseudospin-electron model in mean field approximation

## 1 Introduction

The Hubbard model  is a fundamental one in the theory of strongly correlated electron systems. After the discovery of high-temperature superconductors it has been intensively studied, because the HTSC-compounds necessarily possess planes with strong correlation between electrons described by this model. Amongst the most laborious but promising approaches to study the Hubbard model there is a diagrammatic expansion with respect to atomic limit, which essentially differs from the diagrammatic technique for Fermi-systems . One of recently worked out developments is the GRPA proposed by Izyumov et.al. in order to study the Hubbard model with Coulomb repulsion $`U=\mathrm{}`$ -. Application of the GRPA approach to a pseudospin-electron system can be found in -. However, this approach, being developed for investigation of correlation functions, is not a self-consistent theory. Therefore, lattice instabilities within it are treated as a result of singularities of susceptibilities that cannot suffice when the model undergoes the first order phase transition. The question how to calculate the thermodynamic quantities within the GRPA remains open as well.

Returning to the possible approaches to a description of models with strong electron correlation, one should note that due to a success in obtaining exact results for simple models (Falicov-Kimball model ,, pseudospin-electron model with $`U=0`$ , etc), the approximation of the infinite dimension of space becomes very popular. However, there are some problems here, too. The single-site problem for the Hubbard model remains analytically unsolved; there are some difficulties with obtaining the higher order expansions in powers of $`1/d`$.

In this paper we use the mean field approximation, proposed in  for investigation of the $`tJ`$ model. We show using as an example the Hubbard model that the diagrammatic series, summed over in this approximation expands the diagrammatic series of the GRPA, and, hence, we can talk about the self-consistent approach within the GRPA. The approximation is applied to the two-sublattice pseudospin-electron model which, being derived for description of ferroelectric type effects in HTSC of YBaCuO type (see -), takes into account the two-sublattice structure of an apex oxygen subsystem in such superconductors. Coupling between the electron and pseudospin subsystems ( pseudospin variables are used to describe the local strongly anharmonic vibrations of apex oxygens) is performed via an interaction of the $`gn_iS_i^z`$ type proposed by Müller .

The paper is composed as follows. In Section 2 the method of construction of mean field approximation within the GRPA scheme for the Hubbard model with $`U=\mathrm{}`$ is presented. Application of the method to the two-sublattice pseudospin-electron model is given in Section 3. Sections 4 and 5 contain the results of numeric calculations and conclusions, respectively.

## 2 MFA approximation applied for Hubbard model with infinite Coulomb repulsion

In this section we show how to obtain the MFA equations in example case of one-band Hubbard model and discuss the accuracy of that approach. The Hamiltonian of the Hubbard model without taking into account the influence of magnetic field reads

$$H=\mu \underset{i,s}{}n_i^s+U\underset{i}{}n_i^{}n_i^{}+\underset{i,j,s}{}t_{ij}a_{is}^+a_{js},$$
(1)
where $`\mu `$ is the chemical potential; $`U`$ is a Coulomb repulsion of electrons on the same orbital; $`t_{ij}`$ describes an electron transfer from the site $`j`$ to the site $`i`$ of a real lattice. $`a_{is}`$ is the annihilation operator of an electron with spin $`s`$ ($`s`$ takes two values – $``$ and $``$), $`n_i^s=a_{is}^+a_{is}`$ is the electron number operator.

Usually near the atomic limit the model is considered using the basis of four states $`R_in_i^{},n_i^{}`$

$$\begin{array}{c}1=0,0\hfill \\ 2=1,1\hfill \\ 3=0,1\hfill \\ 4=1,0\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
and Hubbard operators which are defined as follows $`X_i^{RS}=R_iS_i`$.

Let us introduce the “bare” (zero-order) Matsubara Green’s function as

$`\begin{array}{c}g_{ij}^{pq}(\tau \tau ^{})=\delta _{ij}\frac{TX_i^{pq}(\tau )X_j^{qp}(\tau ^{})_0}{[X_i^{pq},X_j^{qp}]_\pm _0}=\delta _{ij}\mathrm{e}^{\epsilon ^{pq}(\tau \tau ^{})}\{\begin{array}{c}\pm n_\pm (\epsilon ^{pq}),\tau >\tau ^{}\hfill \\ \pm n_\pm (\epsilon ^{pq})1,\tau <\tau ^{},\hfill \end{array}\hfill \\ n_\pm (\epsilon ^{pq})=\frac{1}{\mathrm{e}^{\beta \epsilon ^{pq}}\pm 1},\epsilon ^{pq}=\epsilon ^p\epsilon ^q\hfill \end{array}`$ (7)
where $`T`$ means $`T`$-product, $`X_i^{pq}(\tau )=\mathrm{e}^{\tau H_0}X_i^{pq}\mathrm{e}^{\tau H_0}`$ is an operator in interaction representation and $`\mathrm{}_0`$ is the average with the Gibbs distribution with the zero-order Hamiltonian. $`\epsilon ^p`$ are the single-site energy levels of the zero-order Hamiltonian (at $`t_{ij}=0`$):

$$\epsilon ^1=0,\epsilon ^2=2\mu +U,\epsilon ^3=\epsilon ^4=\mu .$$
(8)
The upper sign is chosen when the operators $`X_i^{pq}`$ are of the Fermi-type $`(X^{41}`$, $`X^{23}`$, $`X^{31}`$, $`X^{24}`$ and complex conjugate); otherwise, the lower sign should be taken. Correspondingly, \[ … \]+ is an anticommutator, and \[ … \]- is a commutator.

The results of perturbation theory and applying of Wick’s thorem  can be presented by elements which are denoted in the following way

$$\begin{array}{c}g_{ij}^{pq}(\tau \tau ^{})=\text{}\hfill \\ X_i^{pp}_0=\text{},X_i^{pp}X_i^{qq}_0^c\frac{}{(\beta \epsilon ^p)}X_i^{qq}_0=\text{}\hfill \\ X_i^{pp}X_i^{qq}X_i^{mm}_0^c\frac{}{(\beta \epsilon ^p)}\frac{}{(\beta \epsilon ^q)}X_i^{mm}_0=\text{}\hfill \\ g_{ij}^{pq}(\tau \tau ^{})X_i^{pp}+X_i^{qq}g_{ij}^{pq}(\tau \tau ^{})B_i^{pq}=\text{}\hfill \\ t_{ij}=\text{}\hfill \end{array}$$

Let us write here the diagrammatic expansion for the average of $`X`$-operator in Heisenberg representation $`T\stackrel{~}{X}_i^{11}(\tau )=T\mathrm{e}^{\tau H}X_i^{11}\mathrm{e}^{\tau H}`$, $`i=1`$:

(9)
Retaining the diagrams with only simple loops, we can neglect the diagrams which contain the Green’s functions $`g_{ij}^{43}(\tau \tau ^{})`$. In the limiting case $`U=\mathrm{}`$, which we shall consider hereafter, we can neglect the Fermi-type Green’s functions $`g_{ij}^{24}`$, $`g_{ij}^{23}`$ and the Bose-type Green’s function $`g_{ij}^{21}`$ as well. Discarding the mentioned class of diagrams, one can show that the results of the application of Wick’s theorem do not depend on the so-called priority rules .

Classifying the obtained result, we treat the diagrams 2, 4, 6, 7 as a “thickening” of the zero-order average $`X^{11}_0`$ by the insets of the mean field type. The three last diagrams in 9 should be discarded from the reasons presented above.There are also other two important type of diagrams: the diagrams 9, 10 renormalize the vertex parts of the Green’s function of the initial diagram 3, whereas the diagrams like 11, 12, 13 can be interpreted as an complication of self-energy parts in the more simple diagram 3. After Fourier transformation all of the mentioned diagrams (unlike the diagrams 14-17) correspond to the one sum (or to a certain power of the one sum) over the wavevector k and frequency $`\omega `$. As one can see from the figure, the diagrams 3, 5, 9-13 are those which are summed over within the GRPA when an equation of the Bete-Salpeter type is solved ,.

Let us introduce a set of diagrams corresponding to the generalized Hubbard-I approximation (in the simplified version that is valid in the case of independent subbands ), denoting it by a “thickened” Green’s function.

$$\text{},$$
(10)
where $`\text{}\stackrel{~}{g}^{pq}(\omega )\stackrel{~}{B}^{pq}`$ is the “dressed” Green’s functions with the renormalized vertex part. We shall consider only the uniform phase in which all sites are equivalent. Then the equation for the vertex part $`\stackrel{~}{B}^{pq}`$ can be written as

(11)
Via $`\overline{pq}`$ we denoted the change of a spin projection in diagrams. Thus $`\overline{41}=31`$, and vice versa, $`\overline{31}=41`$. “Dressed” Green’s functions with semiinvariants are of $`\stackrel{~}{g}^{41}(\omega )\stackrel{~}{B}^{41}`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{g}^{31}(\omega )\stackrel{~}{B}^{31}`$ type. They creates loops with spin $``$ or $``$, respectively. The series in the right hand side of the equation is analogous to the series which arises in the mean field theory for the Ising or Heisenberg model.

Formally, expression (11) can be presented as

$`\stackrel{~}{B}^{pq}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z}}Sp\left(\widehat{B}_i^{pq}\mathrm{e}^{\beta H_{eff}^i}\right)\stackrel{~}{L}^{\overline{pq}},`$ (12)
where

$`H_{eff}^i`$ $`=`$ $`H_0+\stackrel{~}{Q}^{41}\widehat{B}_i^{41}+\stackrel{~}{Q}^{31}\widehat{B}_i^{31}H_0+{\displaystyle \underset{\{pq\}}{}}\stackrel{~}{Q}^{pq}\widehat{B}_i^{pq},\{pq\}=41,31;`$
$`Z`$ $`=`$ $`Sp\left(\mathrm{e}^{\beta H_{eff}^i}\right),\stackrel{~}{Q}^{pq}\text{},\stackrel{~}{L}^{pq}\text{}.`$ (13)
The renormalized Green’s functions $`\stackrel{~}{g}^{pq}(\omega )`$ is defined by the equation

(14)
$`\mathrm{Hence}`$
$`\stackrel{~}{g}^{pq}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{i\omega \epsilon ^{pq}+\stackrel{~}{Q}^{\overline{pq}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{i\omega \stackrel{~}{\epsilon }^{pq}}},\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }^{pq}=\epsilon ^p\epsilon ^q\stackrel{~}{Q}^{\overline{pq}}`$ (15)
That corresponds to the summation of diagrams of the 11, 12, 13 type. The expression (15) describes a renormalization of the single-electron excitation spectrum. $`\stackrel{~}{Q}^{pq}`$ plays the role of the irreducible self-energy part, by which the levels of the single-electron transitions are shifted. Using the renormalized Green’s functions one can construct the loops $`\stackrel{~}{Q}^{pq}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{L}^{pq}`$ and, thereby, derive an expression for the irreducible part and equation for the auxiliary quantity $`\stackrel{~}{L}^{pq}`$:

$`\stackrel{~}{Q}^{pq}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}t_kn_+(\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }^{pq}+t_k\stackrel{~}{B}^{pq})\left(n_+(\epsilon )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+\mathrm{e}^{\beta \epsilon }}}\right),`$ (16)
$`\stackrel{~}{L}^{pq}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}n_+(\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }^{pq}+t_k\stackrel{~}{B}^{pq})n_+(\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }^{pq}).`$ (17)
The expression for the free energy was obtained with making use of the analogy between the diagrammatic series for $`\stackrel{~}{B}^{pq}`$ and series for the magnetization in the mean field theory for spin systems. Then so called one-tail diagrams correspond to simple loops in current approximation. One can show that the free energy can be written as

$`F`$ $`=`$ $`\mu nT\mathrm{ln}Sp\left(\mathrm{e}^{\beta H_{eff}}\right){\displaystyle \underset{\{pq\}}{}}\stackrel{~}{Q}^{pq}\stackrel{~}{B}^{pq}+{\displaystyle \underset{\{pq\}}{}}\stackrel{~}{D}^{pq},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{D}^{pq}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\begin{array}{c}\text{}\hfill \end{array}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\begin{array}{c}\text{}\hfill \end{array}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\begin{array}{c}\text{}\hfill \end{array}+\mathrm{}=`$ (21)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta N}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\mathrm{ln}\left(1+\mathrm{e}^{\beta \stackrel{~}{\epsilon }^{pq}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta N}}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\mathrm{ln}\left(1+\mathrm{e}^{\beta (\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }^{pq}+t_k\stackrel{~}{B}^{pq})}\right).`$ (22)
One can test this result by introducing additional fields $`h_{pq}\widehat{B}^{pq}`$ into Hamiltonian (1). Then condition $`\frac{F}{h_{pq}}_{|h_{pq}=0}=\stackrel{~}{B}^{pq}`$ will be fulfilled, if one takes into account (16) and (17).

In the paramagnetic phase $`\stackrel{~}{B}^{41}=\stackrel{~}{B}^{31}\stackrel{~}{B}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{Q}^{41}=\stackrel{~}{Q}^{31}\stackrel{~}{Q}`$. Hence, the full set of simultaneous equations defining the mean field approximation for thermodynamic quantities of Hubbard model consists of the equations (12) and (16) as well as of the condition for mean number of electrons per site

$$X^{33}+X^{44}=n.$$
(23)
One can show that standard condition for Hubbard operators

$$X^{11}+X^{33}+X^{44}=X^{44}+\stackrel{~}{B}=1$$
(24)
is fulfilled automatically.

Considered this result within the wide class of approximation for Hubbard model we noted that in the limit $`U\mathrm{}`$ it is equivalent to results obtained within the moment technique  (see also ) which describes the shift of Hubbard bands on value depended on spin $`\sigma `$

$$B_\sigma =\frac{1}{n_\sigma (1n_\sigma )}\underset{ij}{}t_{ij}a_{i\sigma }^+a_{j\sigma }(2n_{i\sigma }1).$$
(25)
with $`n_\sigma =\widehat{n}_\sigma `$. One can show that there is clear correspondence between $`B_\sigma `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Q}^{pq}`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{Q}^{41}=n_{}B_{},\stackrel{~}{Q}^{31}=n_{}B_{}.$$

But in MFA approach we have also equations for end parts for Green functions $`\stackrel{~}{B}^{pq}`$ ($`n_\sigma `$) which is needed for consideration of processes where ordered phase takes place as well as the equation for free energy (22) required for investigation of phase transitions of first order.

## 3 Two-sublattice Hubbard model with local anharmonicity

The Hamiltonian of the two-sublattice Hubbard model with local anharmonicity which includes also an interaction of electrons with local anharmonic vibrations, described within the pseudospin formalism, reads ()

$`H=H_e+H_s+H_{es}+H_{ss}`$
$`H_e=\mu {\displaystyle \underset{i,s}{}}(\widehat{n}_{i1}^s+\widehat{n}_{i2}^s)+U{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}(\widehat{n}_{i1}^{}\widehat{n}_{i1}^{}+\widehat{n}_{i2}^{}\widehat{n}_{i2}^{})+{\displaystyle \underset{ij}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{s\alpha }{}}t_{ij}a_{is\alpha }^+a_{js\alpha }`$
$`H_s=h{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}(S_{i1}^zS_{i2}^z)`$
$`H_{es}=g{\displaystyle \underset{is}{}}(\widehat{n}_{i1}^sS_{i1}^z\widehat{n}_{i2}^sS_{i2}^z)`$
$`H_{ss}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha \beta }{}}J_{ij}^{\alpha \beta }S_{i\alpha }^zS_{j\beta }^z`$ (26)
Here $`H_e`$ is the Hubbard Hamiltonian for two sublattices (subplanes in the case of the YBa2Cu3O7-δ structure), $`H_s+H_{ss}`$ is a pseudospin part of the Hamiltonian similar to the Mitsui model used in the ferroelectrics theory; $`H_{es}`$ describes the interaction between the electron and pseudospin subsystems. The operators $`\widehat{n}_{i\alpha }^s`$ and $`S_{i\alpha }^z`$ act at the site $`i`$ of the plane $`\alpha `$ ($`\alpha `$=1,2). $`h`$ describes the asymmetry of a two-minima potentials.

Similarly to that performed for the standard Hubbard model (1), let us introduce a cluster basis of states $`R_in_{i1}^{},n_{i1}^{},n_{i2}^{},n_{i2}^{}`$ $``$ $`S_{i1}^z,S_{i2}^z`$, or $`R_i`$ $``$ $`n_{i1}^{},n_{i1}^{},n_{i2}^{},n_{i2}^{},S_{i1}^z,S_{i2}^z`$ (here $`n_{i\alpha }^{},n_{i\alpha }^{}`$ denote eigenvalues of the operators $`\widehat{n}_{i\alpha }^{}`$ and$`\widehat{n}_{i\alpha }^{}`$), consisting of 64 vectors of state

$$\begin{array}{c}1=0,0,0,0,,\hfill \\ \mathrm{}\hfill \\ 64=1,1,1,1,,.\hfill \end{array}$$
(27)
Analysis of the thermodynamics of the model (26) without taking into account the electron transfer has been performed in , where the regions of ferroelectric pseudospin ordering were found and phase diagrams where built. Now we will investigate the influence of electron transfer on thermodynamic properties and phase transitions. Let us consider a pseudospin part of the Hamiltonian within the mean field approximation and an electron subsystem via the presented in the previous Section selfconsistent GRPA scheme.

The cluster basis of states consists of a direct product of two single-sublattice $`i,\alpha ,R`$ $``$ $`\widehat{n}_{i\alpha }^{},\widehat{n}_{i\alpha }^{},\widehat{S}_{i\alpha }^z`$ ($`\alpha =1,2`$) ones. Each single-sublattice set of states includes eight components at a given site $`i`$ and sublattice $`\alpha `$:

$$\begin{array}{cc}1=0,0,\hfill & \stackrel{~}{1}=0,0,\hfill \\ 2=1,1,\hfill & \stackrel{~}{2}=1,1,\hfill \\ 3=0,1,\hfill & \stackrel{~}{3}=0,1,\hfill \\ 4=1,0,\hfill & \stackrel{~}{4}=1,0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(28)
Let us introduce the Hubbard operators $`X_{i\alpha }^{RS}=i,\alpha ,Ri,\alpha ,S`$ in this basis. Then the operators $`a_{i\alpha }`$, $`a_{i\alpha }`$, $`S_{i\alpha }^z`$ are related to the X-operators as

$`a_{i\alpha }=X_{i\alpha }^{14}+X_{i\alpha }^{32}+X_{i\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{1}\stackrel{~}{4}}+X_{i\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{3}\stackrel{~}{2}},a_{i\alpha }=X_{i\alpha }^{13}X_{i\alpha }^{42}+X_{i\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{1}\stackrel{~}{3}}X_{i\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{4}\stackrel{~}{2}}`$
$`S_{i\alpha }^z={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{4}{}}}(X_{i\alpha }^{RR}X_{i\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{R}\stackrel{~}{R}})`$ (29)
Then Hamiltonian (26) can be easily rewritten as

$`H=H_0+H_{int}+H_{ss},`$ (30)
where $`H_0=\underset{p=1}{\overset{\stackrel{~}{4}}{}}\underset{i,\alpha }{}\epsilon _\alpha ^pX_{i\alpha }^{pp}`$ with

$`\begin{array}{cc}\epsilon _1^{1,\stackrel{~}{1}}=\frac{h}{2},\hfill & \epsilon _2^{1,\stackrel{~}{1}}=\pm \frac{h}{2}\hfill \\ \epsilon _1^{2,\stackrel{~}{2}}=2\mu +U\frac{h}{2}\pm g,\hfill & \epsilon _2^{2,\stackrel{~}{2}}=2\mu +U\pm \frac{h}{2}g\hfill \\ \epsilon _1^{3,\stackrel{~}{3}}=\epsilon _1^{4,\stackrel{~}{4}}=\mu \frac{h}{2}\pm \frac{g}{2},\hfill & \epsilon _2^{3,\stackrel{~}{3}}=\epsilon _2^{4,\stackrel{~}{4}}=\mu \pm \frac{h}{2}\frac{g}{2}\hfill \end{array}`$ (34)
and

$`H_{int}={\displaystyle \underset{ij,\alpha }{}}t_{ij}(X_{i\alpha }^{41}+X_{i\alpha }^{23}+X_{i\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{4}\stackrel{~}{1}}+X_{i\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{2}\stackrel{~}{3}})\times (X_{j\alpha }^{14}+X_{j\alpha }^{32}+X_{j\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{1}\stackrel{~}{4}}+X_{j\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{2}\stackrel{~}{3}})+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{ij\alpha }{}}t_{ij}(X_{i\alpha }^{31}X_{i\alpha }^{24}+X_{i\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{3}\stackrel{~}{1}}X_{i\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{2}\stackrel{~}{4}})\times (X_{j\alpha }^{13}X_{j\alpha }^{42}+X_{j\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{1}\stackrel{~}{3}}X_{j\alpha }^{\stackrel{~}{4}\stackrel{~}{2}}),`$ (35)
$`H_{ss}`$ is left unchanged.

It should be noted that the model (26) does not take into account the transfer of electrons between the planes. Therefore, if the interplane interaction between pseudospins is absent $`(J_{ii^{}}^{12}=J_{ii^{}}^{21}=0)`$, and also owing to the system symmetry, the problem is reduced to two identical single-sublattice subproblems.

Due to the relation

$$[S_{i\alpha }^z,X_{j\beta }^{pq}]=0,$$
(36)
and also when a splitting of the mean field type $`S_{i\alpha }^zS_{j\beta }^z=S_{i\alpha }^zS_{j\beta }^z+S_{j\beta }^zS_{i\alpha }^z\frac{1}{2}S_{i\alpha }^zS_{j\beta }^z`$ is used, the effective Hamiltonian of the problem reads

$$H_{eff}=H_0+\underset{\{pq\}}{}\underset{i\alpha }{}\stackrel{~}{Q}_\alpha ^{pq}\widehat{B}_{i\alpha }^{pq}\underset{i\alpha \alpha ^{}}{}J_{\alpha \alpha ^{}}S_\alpha ^{}^zS_{i\alpha }^z,$$
(37)
where $`J_{\alpha \alpha ^{}}=\underset{i}{}J_{ii^{}}^{\alpha \alpha ^{}}`$.

When writing equations of self-consistent GRPA approach for the two-sublattice model (26) in the approximation of independent subbands  and at $`U=\mathrm{}`$, we can use expressions of the previous Section. All the quantities $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_\alpha ^{pq}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{B}_\alpha ^{pq}`$, etc. get an auxiliary index indicating the subplane $`\alpha =1,2`$. For instance, owing to the presence of pseudospin degrees of freedom, in addition to $`B_\alpha ^{pq}`$ we also have $`B_\alpha ^{\stackrel{~}{p}\stackrel{~}{q}}`$. Then the summation $`\underset{\{pq\}}{}`$ means the summation over $`pq=41,\stackrel{~}{4}\stackrel{~}{1},31,\stackrel{~}{3}\stackrel{~}{1}`$. An additional contribution to the free energy $`\stackrel{~}{D}^{pq}`$ we should change by $`\stackrel{~}{D}_\alpha ^{pq}`$, where

$$\stackrel{~}{D}_\alpha ^{pq}=\frac{1}{\beta N}\underset{k}{}\mathrm{ln}\left(1+\mathrm{e}^{\beta \stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_\alpha ^{pq}}\right)\frac{1}{\beta N}\underset{k}{}\mathrm{ln}\left(1+\mathrm{e}^{\beta (\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_\alpha ^{pq}+t_k\stackrel{~}{B}_\alpha ^{pq})}\right).,$$
(38)
with

$$\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_\alpha ^{pq}=\epsilon _\alpha ^p\epsilon _\alpha ^q\stackrel{~}{Q}_\alpha ^{\overline{pq}}.$$

The expression for a free energy now reads

$$F=\mu nT\mathrm{ln}Sp\left(\mathrm{e}^{\beta (H_{eff})}\right)\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\{pq\}}{\alpha }}{}\stackrel{~}{Q}_\alpha ^{pq}\stackrel{~}{B}_\alpha ^{pq}+\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\{pq\}}{\alpha }}{}\stackrel{~}{D}_\alpha ^{pq}+\frac{1}{2}\underset{\alpha \alpha ^{}}{}J_{\alpha \alpha ^{}}S_\alpha ^zS_\alpha ^{}^z.$$
(39)
The system of equations to be solved

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{B}_\alpha ^{pq}=\frac{Sp(\widehat{B}_\alpha ^{pq}\mathrm{e}^{\beta H_{eff}})}{Sp(\mathrm{e}^{\beta H_{eff}})}\stackrel{~}{L}^{\overline{pq}}\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{Q}_\alpha ^{pq}=\frac{1}{N}\underset{k}{}t_kn_+(\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_\alpha ^{pq}+t_k\stackrel{~}{B}_\alpha ^{pq})\hfill \end{array}$$

should be supplemented by a standard identity for Hubbard operators $`\underset{p=1}{\overset{\stackrel{~}{4}}{}}X_\alpha ^{pp}=1`$, by the equation for the pseudospin mean value $`S_\alpha ^z=Sp(\widehat{S}_\alpha ^z\mathrm{e}^{\beta H_{eff}})/Sp(\mathrm{e}^{\beta H_{eff}})`$, the equation for the chemical potential $`\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{2}{}}X_\alpha ^{33}+X_\alpha ^{44}+X_\alpha ^{\stackrel{~}{3}\stackrel{~}{3}}+X_\alpha ^{\stackrel{~}{4}\stackrel{~}{4}}_{H_{eff}}=n`$ as well as by the equalities $`X_\alpha ^{33}=X_\alpha ^{44}`$, $`X_\alpha ^{\stackrel{~}{3}\stackrel{~}{3}}=X_\alpha ^{\stackrel{~}{4}\stackrel{~}{4}}`$ in paramagnetic case.

## 4 Numerical calculations and results

In paper , where the pseudospin-electron model with zero transfer was studied, the existence of the phase separation resulting from the direct interaction between pseudospins was revealed. This effect takes place, as it was shown, in the certain region of the model parameters values in the regime of the fixed electron concentration ($`n=const`$). On the other hand, the simple pseudospin-electron model or the more complicated model (26) introduced for a description of possible phase instabilities in HTSCs of the YBaCuO type do not take into account explicitly the existence of CuO chains which are a reservoir supplying a charge carriers into the superconducting planes.

Therefore, the model can be considered in two regimes: a) constant concentration, and b) constant chemical potential (the fixed value of the chemical potential $`\mu `$ is sustained by structural elements which are not taken into account within the model).

The ground state diagram in absence of direct pseudospin-pseudospin interaction and transfer ($`J_{\alpha \beta }=0,t_{ij}=0`$) is shown in Fig.1. At $`T=0`$ the chemical potential coincide with the line ABCD at any value of concentration $`n`$. When temperature is different from zero, the chemical potential lies to the right of ABCD at $`n0`$ and to the left of it at $`n2`$. In the $`\mu =const`$ regime, the chemical potential is given by the line parallel to the ordinate axis.

Analysis performed in the spirit of the mean field theory  has shown that in the regime of a fixed value of the chemical potential, the region of ferroelectric type ordering of pseudospins lies in the vicinity of the FCBE curve. This curve is a boundary between the ground states with the pseudospin configurations $`|`$ and $`|`$. If the interplane interaction $`J_{12}`$ is different from zero, the mean value $`\eta =S_1^z+S_2^z`$ is the order parameter: $`\eta =0`$ in the paraphase and $`\eta 0`$ in the ferroelectric phase. At $`J_{12}=0`$ we deal with two independent single-sublattice problems, and the order parameter is zero; however, a jump of the parameter $`\xi =S_1^zS_2^z`$ takes place.

Figs.2,3 illustrate the influence of electron subsystem on a appearance of the phase diagrams. Let us note that in the Mitsui model (to which one can pass by putting $`g=0`$ and $`t_{ij}=0`$) the phase diagram has a form of a curve symmetric with respect to $`h`$. At “switching on” the interaction between the electron and pseudospin subsystems $`g`$, the center of a region with ferroelectric ordering shifts from $`0`$ to $`g`$ in accordance with the broken line FCBE position when the chemical potential is changed (Fig.1). Besides, the phase diagram becomes asymmetric with respect to the center of the pseudospin ordering region. As it has been already noted, at $`J_{12}=0`$ the ferroelectric phase does not exist (figs.2b,3b,3c), a discontinuous change of $`\xi `$ takes place.

Let us now consider the influence of electron transfer on the phase transitions in the simplest approximation Hubbard-I. It has been shown in  that at $`U\mathrm{}`$ in a one-sublattice case for the Hubbard model with local anharmonicity, one has in Hubbard-I approximation two subbands, separated by the gap equal to $`g`$: $`\epsilon ^{31}(𝐤)=\epsilon ^{41}(𝐤)=\frac{g}{2}+t_𝐤X^{44}+X^{11}_0`$ and $`\epsilon ^{\stackrel{~}{3}\stackrel{~}{1}}(𝐤)=\epsilon ^{\stackrel{~}{4}\stackrel{~}{1}}(𝐤)=\frac{g}{2}+t_𝐤X^{\stackrel{~}{4}\stackrel{~}{4}}+X^{\stackrel{~}{1}\stackrel{~}{1}}_0`$. In the considered in this paper approximation, these subbands are shifted by $`\stackrel{~}{Q}^{pq}`$; the mean values of the Hubbard operators are not calculated in the zero-order approximation but found self-consistently. In the case shown on Fig.2 ($`\mu =0`$), the chemical potential lies right in between of the mentioned bands. The number of charge carriers slightly changes with temperature and parameter $`h`$. The transfer can facilitate, but by itself is not able to cause the phase transition.

At $`\mu =g`$ (Fig.3) the chemical potential lies near the edge of the lower band. Even unsignificant change in the spectrum can make the chemical potential leave the band (Fig.4b) and provokes jump of parameter $`\xi `$ (Fig.4a). In this case, interaction via electron transfer alone can cause the phase transition in the system. Fig.4c indicates that the phase transition of the first order takes place. The behaviour of electron concentration here is quite specific (Fig.4d), when it jumps from a certain value at $`T=0`$ up to $`0`$ when the chemical potential leaves the band. On the other hand, the existence of instable and metastable branches in Fig.4 indicates that the chemical potential is complicated function of concentration. Therefore the situation when at a certain value of $`n`$ the function $`\mu (n)`$ has a jump becomes possible. In this case we have separation to two phases with different concentration, similarly to a seen in the $`P(V)`$ diagram separation of vapour into gas and liquid in the gas-liquid phase transition.

Fig.5 shows that even though the solution of the system of equations indicates that the ferroelectric phase arose (Fig.5a), the separation takes place before that (Fig.5b). It is also indicated by a certain concavity in the free energy behaviour (tangent dashed lines in Fig.5c link the points with concentration values $`n_1`$, $`n_2`$ and $`n_3`$, $`n_4`$ on which the separation take place). Hence, in the $`n=const`$ regime we can talk only about the separation on the paraelectric and ferroelectric phases at concentration values $`n_1<n<n_2`$ and $`n_3<n<n_4`$. The ferroelectric phase exists (in the case considered in Fig.5) in the concentration range $`n_2<n<n_3`$. Fig.6a and 6b show the boundaries of the separated phase with and without transfer, positions of which are temperature dependent. At $`T=0`$ the region of phase separations reaches the sides of the $`0h/g1`$, $`0n^{}2`$  rectangle. The transfer influence is ambiguous. In the first case (6a) it narrows the region of separations, whereas in the second case (6b), the transfer only changes the shape of the region boundaries. It should be noted that in the presented figures, the high temperature is taken; therefore, at chosen values of model parameters and in the absence of direct pseudospin-pseudospin interaction, the separation does not exist.

## 5 Conclusions

The mean field approximation, being the simplest one in the theory of many-particle systems, is not trivial for the models with strong correlations of charge carriers. In this case, the effective field is created by transfer of electrons from site to site, not by regular averaging of a direct interaction. In contrast to the case of Fermi-systems, we have to solve here not only the equation for the self-energy part, but also some extra equations for the averages of the Hubbard operators . In this paper we show that this approach means a selection of diagrams with only one sum over the wavevector k and frequency $`\omega `$ in expressions for the self-energy part and averages and is a generalization of the GRPA. Obtained shift of lower Hubbard band corresponds to results of the moment technique  in paraphase and in the limit $`U\mathrm{}`$. The MFA equations for self-consistency parameters and expressions for thermodynamic functions allow one to analyze the equilibrium states and phase diagrams for the systems with strong correlation.

In  it has been shown how to obtain an equation of the dynamic mean field approximation ($`d=\mathrm{}`$) for the Falicov-Kimball model by means of summation of diagrams and selecting the single-site contributions. Nevertheless, the question of analytical consideration of such contributions remains in general still open. Hence, we hope that a self-consistent approach, similar to the presented one, will give us a clue how to solve a single-site problem in the infinite dimensions for the another examples of models with short-range electron interaction.

The mean field approximation applied to the two-sublattice model with local anharmonicity indicates a possibility of the phase separation in the system. It has been shown in  that the direct pseudospin-pseudospin interaction is sufficient to make a system divide into regions with different concentration of charge carriers. Instabilities with respect to phase separation were found in the ferromagnetic Condo model (see for example ), single-sublattice pseudospin-electron model with $`U=0`$ and without direct interaction between pseudospins . From this point of view, our paper shows that the electron transfer not only does not destroy the separation regions, but facilitates process separation and even is able to form separated phases by itself. This effect takes place when the chemical potential $`\mu `$ lies near the band edge, and the change of energy spectrum (due to ordering of pseudospins) in the $`\mu =const`$ regime moves the chemical potential into or out of the band. One can conclude that the electron (hole) transfer in the pseudospin-electron model creates an effective interaction between pseudospins. It is qualitatively different from the standard one $`J_{ij}S_i^zS_j^z`$ , but its role is similar.

The problem of applicability of the approach proposed in this paper, as well as of the GRPA itself, requires a thorough analysis. The approach can be improved at the expense of complication of loop diagrams and vertices. Here the magnon Green function $`g^{43}(𝐤,\omega )`$ arise. Taking into account the magnon contributions is especially important at $`U\mathrm{}`$, since without them the system of equations for the averages of the Hubbard operators becomes dependent on the priority rules. These problems are the subject of our subsequent studies.


format: text

text:
# Cosmic String Production Towards the End of Brane Inflation

## I Introduction

With the support of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) data , the new inflationary universe scenario  is generally recognized to be the most likely explanation of the origin of the big bang. However, the origin of the inflaton and its potential is not well understood. Recently, the brane world scenario suggested by superstring theory was proposed, where the standard model of the strong and electroweak interactions are open string (brane) modes while the graviton and the radions are closed string (bulk) modes. Natural in the brane world is the brane inflation scenario , in which the inflaton is a brane mode identified with an inter-brane separation, while the inflaton potential emerges from the exchange of closed string modes between branes; the latter is the dual of the one-loop partition function of the open string spectrum, a property well-studied in string theory . Inflation ends when the branes collide, heating the universe that starts the big bang. This brane inflationary scenario may be realized in a number of ways . The scenario is simplest when the radion and the dilaton (bulk) modes are assumed to be stabilized by some unknown non-perturbative bulk dynamics. Since the inflaton is a brane mode, and the inflaton potential is dictated by the brane mode spectrum, it is reasonable to assume that the inflaton potential is insensitive to the details of the bulk dynamics. As a consequence, the overall brane inflationary picture is very robust .

Because the inflaton and the ground state open string modes responsible for defect formation are different, and that the ground state open string modes become tachyonic and develop vacuum expectation values only towards the end of the inflationary epoch, various types of defects (lower-dimensional branes) may be formed. (The tachyonic modes themselves are in general not good inflaton candidates because their potentials are typically too steep for enough e-foldings.) Apriori, defect production after inflation may be a serious problem. Fortunately, it is argued in Ref. that, following the properties of superstring/brane theory and the cosmological evolution of the universe, the only defects copiously produced are cosmic strings. (Cosmic string properties in the early universe is a well-studied topic ) Here, we elaborate on this point and consider some of its observational consequences:

* Topologically, a variety of defects may be produced. Because they have even codimensions with respect to the branes that collide, they have specific properties .
* Cosmologically, since the compactified dimensions tangent to the brane is smaller than the Hubble size, the Kibble mechanism works only if all the codimensions are tangent to the uncompactified dimensions. As a consequence, only cosmic strings may be copiously produced .
* The cosmic strings may be D$`1`$-branes, but most likely, they are D$`p`$-branes wrapping around $`(p1)`$-cycles in the compactified dimensions. In this case, the cosmic string tension $`\mu =M_s^2/(4\alpha \pi )2M_s^2`$, where $`\alpha `$ is the gauge coupling, with $`\alpha 1/25`$.
* Dynamically, open superstring field theory analysis  strongly indicates that the tachyon potential has the form that gives a second order phase transition. This allows one to estimate the initial cosmic string density, which is close to one string segment per Hubble volume. The resulting cosmic string network is expected to evolve to the scaling solution .
* Using the density perturbation in the CMB data from COBE , the superstring scale is estimated to be $`M_s2\times 10^{15}`$ GeV . With $`G`$ being the Newton’s constant, this yields $`G\mu 10^7`$.
* This implies that the anisotropy in the CMB comes mostly from the inflationary epoch, while a component of order $`10^6G\mu 10\%`$ comes from cosmic strings. This is perfectly consistent with all present CMB data , but will be tested by MAP and PLANCK. Gravitational waves from this cosmic string network is likely to be measured by gravitational wave interferometers like LIGO II/VIRGO and LISA.
* Although the production of defects other than cosmic strings are suppressed, it is possible that the level of their production may be detectable.

Although hybrid inflationary models with cosmic string production after inflation can be constructed, they are just possible scenarios among many others. The difference here is that the production of cosmic strings towards the end of inflation seems inevitable in brane inflation. The detection of cosmic string signatures will fix the string scale. Since the string scale is determined by the amplitude of the anisotropy in CMB, we can learn a lot about the superstring/braneworld realization of our universe from cosmological observations.

## II Tachyon Condensation and Defect Formation

The topological properties of defect formation in tachyon condensation is understood in superstring theory . Suppose we have $`U(N)`$ Chan-Paton bundles on one stack of D$`p`$-branes and $`U(N+M)`$ Chan-Paton bundles on a second stack of D$`p`$-branes, which is at an angle $`\theta `$ with respect to the first stack. They are also separated by a distance $`y`$ in some orthogonal directions. In brane inflation, $`y`$ is essentially the inflaton. Figure 1 shows a schematic view of the collision of branes at a fixed angle. As these two stacks of D$`p`$-branes approach each other towards the end of the inflationary epoch, the ground state open string mode $`T`$ becomes tachyonic. Open strings ending on all possible pairs of branes will give rise to a $`U(M+N)\times U(N)`$ gauge fields, and the tachyon field $`T`$ is in the $`(M+N,\overline{N})`$ (bi-fundamental) representation of the gauge group. Together with $`T^{}`$, they form the ”superconnection”, and the defect properties may be elegantly described by K-theory . Upon collision, the Higgs mechanism takes place as $`T`$ develops a vacuum expectation value $`T_0`$ :

$$U(N)\times U(N+M)U(N)\times U(M)$$

To simplify the problem, we may take $`M=0`$. The minimum of the tachyon potential corresponds to the vacuum manifold

$$\mathrm{}(N)=\frac{U(N)\times U(N)}{U(N)}$$
(1)
which is topologically equivalent to $`U(N)`$. In the simplest situation where the angle between the two stacks of branes is $`\theta =\pi `$, we have a stack of $`N`$ D$`p`$-brane and a stack of anti-D$`p`$-branes (which have opposite RR charges); so their collision results in annihilation.

The spontaneous symmetry breaking will support defects in codimension $`2k`$, classified by the homotopy groups $`\pi _{2k1}(\mathrm{}(N))=𝐙`$ (for stable values of $`N`$). These defects are simply D$`(p2k)`$-branes (and anti-D$`(p2k)`$-branes) inside the D$`p`$-branes. In the compactified case, the net RR-charge must be conserved. They may appear as, respectively, monopoles, cosmic strings or domain walls if 3, 2 or 1 of the codimensions are tangent to the 3 uncompactified spatial dimensions. To be specific, let us consider D5-branes wrapping a 2-cycle, with the remaining 3 dimensions uncompactified (spanning our observable universe). The collision of these D5-branes allows the formation of D$`(52k)`$-branes. For $`k=1`$, the defects are D3-branes with all possible orientations. Those that wrap around the same 2-cycles will appear as cosmic strings, while those that do not wrap the 2-cycles appear as blobs. If there are non-trivial 1-cycles inside the 2-cycles, D3-branes can wrap around that and appear as domain walls. For $`N=1`$, these are the only defects. Here, the cosmic strings are akin to the vortices in Abelian Higgs model.

For $`N>1`$, D1-branes (for $`k=2`$) will also be produced and they may appear as cosmic strings. If there are non-trivial 1-cycles inside the 2-cycles, then they may wrap around the 1-cycles and will appear as monopoles in our universe. For $`N>1`$, textures may also be formed topologically.

## III Cosmological Production of Cosmic Strings

Imagine a string model that describes our universe today. In the early universe, our universe contains branes of all types. The higher-dimensional branes collide to produce lower-dimensional branes and branes that are present today. Consider the last two branes with 3 uncompactified spatial dimensions that are not in today’s string model ground state. As they approach each other, the universe is in the inflationary epoch. After inflation ends, the collision of these two branes may produce lower-dimensional branes, which appear as defects.

A large density of such defects produced after inflation may destroy the nucleosynthesis or even overclose the universe (like the old monopole problem). Fortunately, the fact that they can be produced topologically does not necessarily imply that they will be produced cosmologically. To see what types of defects are produced towards the end of inflation, let us assume second order phase transition (a point we shall come back) and estimate the production rate using the Kibble mechanism. During the brane collision, the tachyon acquires the value $`T_0`$. Since the vacuum manifold is non-trivial, $`T`$ can take different values at different spatial point. The existence of the particle horizon implies that $`T`$ cannot be correlated on scales larger than the horizon length $`H^1`$, where $`H`$ is the Hubble constant. Therefore, non-trivial vacuum configurations, i.e., defects, will be produced, with a density of order one per Hubble volume.

At this time, the particle horizon size $`H^1`$ is given by

$$H^2\frac{8\pi GV}{3}\frac{V}{3M_P^2}$$
(2)
where $`M_P=2.4\times 10^{18}`$ GeV. Here $`1/H`$ is typically much bigger than the compactification sizes that the branes wrap around,

$$\frac{1}{H}\frac{M_P}{M_s^2}\frac{(2\pi )^{3/2}}{\theta }\frac{10^5}{M_s}\mathrm{}_{}$$
(3)
where $`V_{}\mathrm{}_{}^{p3}`$, $`\theta 1/10`$ and $`M_s\mathrm{}_{}10`$. In Figure 2, we show schematically two (large) uncompactified dimensions and one small compactified dimension. As a consequence of the smallness of $`\mathrm{}_{}`$, the Kibble mechanism does not happen in the compactified directions. That is, the codimensions of the defects must lie in the uncompactified dimensions. Since the codimension is always even, and there are only 3 uncompactified dimensions, only the defects with codimension 2 ($`k=1`$), i.e., cosmic string-like defects, can be formed via the Kibble mechanism (see Figure 2). They are D$`(p2)`$-branes wrapping the same compactified space as the original D$`p`$-branes, with one uncompactified dimension. If the D$`p`$-brane collision can produce D$`(p4)`$-branes, their production will also be suppressed since there is less than one Hubble volume in the compactified directions. This implies that the production of domain walls and monopole-like objects by the Kibble mechanism are heavily suppressed, while the production of cosmic strings is not. Generically, there may be closed and stretched cosmic strings, and they form some sort of a cosmic string network that evolves to the scaling solution. In Ref., it is argued that thermal production of any defect is probably negligible.

## IV Cosmic String Tension

If the D$`1`$-brane is the cosmic string (i.e., $`p=3`$), its tension is simply the cosmic string tension:

$$\mu =\tau _1=M_s^2/(2\pi g_s)$$
(4)
However, we expect the string coupling generically to be gs>

 1subscript𝑔𝑠>

1g_{s}{\ \lower-1.2pt\vbox{\hbox{\hbox to0.0pt{$>$\hss}\lower 5.0pt\vbox{\hbox{$\sim$}}}}\ }1. To obtain a theory with a weakly coupled sector in the low energy effective field theory (i.e., the standard model of strong and electroweak interactions with weak gauge coupling constant $`\alpha `$), it then seems necessary to have the brane world picture . This argument leads us to consider the D$`p`$-branes for $`p>3`$, where the $`(p3)`$ dimensions are compactified to volume $`V_{}\mathrm{}_{}^{p3}`$. Now the cosmic strings are D$`(p2)`$-branes, with the $`(p3)`$ dimensions compactified to the same volume $`V_{}`$. Noting that a D$`p`$-brane has tension $`\tau _p=M_s^{p+1}/(2\pi )^pg_s`$, the tension of such cosmic strings is

$$\mu =\frac{M_s^{p1}V_{}}{(2\pi )^{p2}g_s}=\frac{M_s^2v_{}}{2\pi g_s}=\frac{M_s^2}{4\alpha \pi }2M_s^2$$
(5)
where

$$g_s2v_{}\alpha ,\alpha 1/25$$
(6)
For $`v_{}10`$, $`g_s1`$ while $`\alpha `$ is small. For $`N=1`$, only this type of cosmic strings are produced topologically. For $`N>1`$, the D$`1`$-branes may also be allowed topologically, but they are not produced cosmologically. So $`\mu 2M_s^2`$ is quite generic.

To get an order of magnitude estimate of $`M_s`$, we may use the small $`\theta `$ case, which is argued to be the most likely inflationary scenario. In Ref., the string scale is determined by the anisotropy in CMB

$$\delta _H1.9\times 10^5M_s2\times 10^{15}GeV$$
(7)
This gives

$$G\mu 10^7$$
(8)
Note that the determination of $`M_s`$ is somewhat sensitive to the details of the brane inflationary scenario and the specific string model realization. It is easy for $`M_s`$ to vary by a factor of 2 or more. As we shall see, the observability of the cosmic string effect can be very sensitive to this uncertainty. Let us estimate the range of $`\mu `$ within the brane inflationary scenario. For the brane-anti-brane scenario, $`M_s`$ determined by the COBE data is somewhat smaller. However, the force between the brane-anti-brane system is stronger than that for branes at a small angle. As a consequence, the brane-anti-brane system will need some fine-tuning (so they are separated far enough apart) to give enough inflation. Such fine-tuning is avoided if branes are at a small angle $`\theta `$, where $`\theta `$ is fixed by the wrapping of the branes. Allowing the various possibilities, we have

$$10^6G\mu 10^{10}$$
(9)
## V Tachyon Potential and The Initial Cosmic String Density

That the Kibble mechanism allows the production of cosmic string in the early universe is only a necessary condition. To see if cosmic strings are dynamically produced towards the end of inflation, we have to examine the tachyon potential more carefully. Fortunately, our understanding of superstring theory and open superstring field theory allows us to address this issue.

* In the full superstring theory, does the tachyon potential have the shape that yields second-order phase transition? Apriori, this is not clear. Tachyon couplings to excited string states will induce higher powers of $`T^{}T`$ (after integrating out the heavy string modes) into the tachyon potential, resulting in a tachyon potential that depends on $`T^{}T`$ to all orders. Naively, the potential can develop non-trivial shapes such that the phase transition may be first order (or even more complicated). However, recent open superstring field theory analysis strongly suggests that this is not the case . That is, the superstring corrections change the smooth potential only quantitatively.
* Even with a smooth potential that monotonically decreases towards the minimum at $`T_0`$, the evolution of $`T`$ as a function of time can have unusual behaviors, since the full superstring field theory action involves time derivatives of $`T`$ to all orders. Again, as shown by Sen , naive field theory properties essentially hold for the tachyon model here. This allows us to make an order of magnitude estimate of the production of cosmic strings.

To simplify the problem, let us consider the brane-anti-brane ($`\theta =\pi `$) case here. Let the $`U(M+N)`$ brane positions be ($`(M+N)\times (M+N)`$ matrix) $`\varphi ^I`$ and the $`U(N)`$ anti-brane positions be ($`N\times N`$ matrix) $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }^I`$, where $`I=1,2,\mathrm{}`$ is the transverse coordinate. The matrix property of $`\varphi `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }`$ is the origin of the non-commutative geometry in string theory. The tachyon potential has the form:

$`V(\varphi ,\stackrel{~}{\varphi },T)`$ $`=`$ $`V_l+(M+2N)\tau _p+{\displaystyle \frac{M_s^2}{2(2\pi )^2}}Tr\left[\varphi ^ITT^{}\varphi ^I+T\stackrel{~}{\varphi }^I\stackrel{~}{\varphi }^IT^{}2\varphi ^IT\stackrel{~}{\varphi }^IT^{}\right]`$ (11)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{M_s^2}{4}}Tr(TT^{})+O(T^4)`$
where $`V_l`$ is the potential due to the closed string exchange. It is essentially the inflaton potential. We shall ignore it here. Also, to avoid the complication due to the non-commutative geometry, let $`M=0`$ and $`N=1`$; then $`y=\varphi \stackrel{~}{\varphi }`$ is the brane-anti-brane separation in the compactified dimensions orthogonal to the branes. Recall also that $`(p3)`$ dimensions of the brane is compactified with volume $`V_{}`$. At $`y=0`$, when the brane is on top of the anti-brane, we have, for a single complex scalar field $`T`$,

$$V(T)=2\tau _pV_{}\frac{M_s^2T^{}T}{4}+\frac{\lambda }{4}(T^{}T)^2+\mathrm{}$$
(12)
where $`\lambda `$ and the higher terms may be calculated in open superstring field theory . For our purpose, we shall truncate it to the fourth order term, but demand that the potential is zero at its minimum $`T=T_0`$ . That is $`V(T_0)=0`$. This condition fixes $`\lambda `$,

$$\lambda =\frac{M_s^4}{32\tau _pV_{}}=\frac{\pi ^3\alpha }{2}0.62$$
(13)
where we have used Eq.(6). This resulting tachyon potential has the same shape as that obtained from open superstring field theory  and should be well within a factor of 2 of the true potential for $`TT_0`$. For generic $`y`$, we now have

$$V(T,y)=\frac{M_s^4}{16\lambda }\frac{1}{2}(\frac{M_s^2}{2}\frac{M_s^4y^2}{(2\pi )^2})T^{}T+\frac{\lambda }{4}(T^{}T)^2$$
(14)
Now we would like to make an order of magnitude estimate of the initial density of cosmic strings, following an approach in condensed matter physics . Let us introduce a length scale $`\xi _S`$, so that the initial density is $`1/\xi _S^2`$. The effective thickness of a cosmic string (as a function of $`y`$) is simply the correlation length $`\xi _C`$ given by the inverse of the tachyon mass $`M_T(y)`$:

$$\xi _C(y)=\frac{1}{M_T(y)}=\frac{1}{M_s}(\frac{1}{2}(\frac{M_sy}{2\pi })^2)^{1/2}$$
(15)
As $`T`$ approaches $`T_0`$, a cosmic string may be locked in if the vacuum configuration is non-trivial. When $`T`$ can easily fluctuate back to zero, the vacuum configuration, and so the cosmic string, is not locked in. Let $`\xi _G`$ be the largest length scale on which quantum fluctuations from $`T_0`$ to $`T=0`$ are probable; that is, the Ginsburg length $`\xi _G`$ measures the “fuzziness” factor. When the fuzziness is larger than the thickness of the cosmic string, i.e., $`\xi _G>\xi _C`$, the cosmic string can simply fluctuate away and disappear; that is, it is not really formed. A cosmic string is truly formed when $`\xi _C>\xi _G`$. Initially, $`\xi _G>\xi _C`$; but, as $`y`$ decreases, $`\xi _G`$ decreases faster than $`\xi _C`$, so at some $`y`$, $`\xi _C>\xi _G`$ and the formation of cosmic strings is locked in. This allows us to estimate the initial cosmic string density by demanding $`\xi _S=\xi _G`$ when $`\xi _C=\xi _G`$. Now, to estimate $`\xi _G`$, we note that the quantum fluctuation during this epoch is close to that in deSitter space, namely $`\stackrel{~}{H}/(2\pi )`$, where the Hubble constant $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ is given by

$$\stackrel{~}{H}^2=\frac{V(T_{min},y)}{3M_P^2}$$
(16)
This allows us to define $`\xi _G`$ as given by:

$$\xi _G^3(y)V_o(y)=\frac{\stackrel{~}{H}}{2\pi }$$
(17)
where $`V_o(y)`$ is the height of the unstable maximum of the tachyon potential (at $`T=0`$) taken with respect to the minimum of the potential, i.e., $`V_o(y)=V(T=0,y)V(T_{min},y)`$. (For $`y=0`$, $`T_{min}=T_0`$). Using the potential (14) for both $`V_o`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$, we obtain

$`\xi _G^3(y)\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{M_s^2}{2\pi M_P}}\xi _C^4(y)`$ (18)
For large lengths, $`\xi _G(y)>\xi _C(y)`$, but $`\xi _G(y)`$ decreases faster than $`\xi _C(y)`$ as the branes approach each other. Now the length scale $`\xi _S`$ is determined by the condition $`\xi _G(y)=\xi _C(y)`$, giving,

$$\xi _S1.6\times 10^4M_s^1$$
(19)
This happens at $`y=y_S`$, where $`M_sy_S=4.442752`$, which is very close to the critical value of $`M_sy=M_sy_c=\sqrt{2}\pi =4.442879`$ (when $`T`$ just becomes tachyonic). Around these values of $`y`$, the reheating process has yet to begin, so the temperature of the universe is essentially zero. This justifies the above approach where only quantum fluctuation is considered. Also, $`V_l`$ is not big at $`y=y_S`$, so it may be ignored, as we have done in the estimate. During this epoch, the branes are moving towards each other quite rapidly. The time it takes for the branes to move from $`y_c`$ to $`y_S`$ is of order $`\mathrm{\Delta }t1/M_s`$. So both $`\xi _C(y)`$ and $`\xi _G(y)`$ decrease rapidly from the value $`\xi _S`$ as the branes move closer.

The Hubble (or particle horizon) size is given by Eq.(2):

$$H^16\times 10^3M_s^1$$
(20)
So the cosmic string density scale set by the tachyon potential and the scale set by the Kibble mechanism are comparable. This initial cosmic string density (somewhere between $`1/\xi _S^2`$ and $`H^2`$) is high enough for the cosmic string network to to evolve towards the scaling solution .

## VI Observational Consequences

The evolution of the cosmic string network after its initial production is well-studied . After the initial production of cosmic strings, they continue to interact among themselves. When two cosmic strings intersect, they reconnect or intercommute (see Figure 1, where the diagrams are reinterpreted for cosmic strings in the uncompactified dimensions). When a cosmic string intersects itself, a closed string loop is broken off. Such a loop will oscillate quasi-periodically and gradually lose energy by gravitational radiation. Its eventual decay transfers the cosmic string energy to gravitational waves. Higher initial string density brings higher interaction rate so, not surprisingly, the cosmic string network evolves towards a scaling solution. As a consequence, the physics is essentially dictated by the single parameter $`G\mu `$.

In this brane inflationary scenario, we see that the density perturbation (and the CMB anisotropy) comes from two sources: the inflaton fluctuation during inflation and the cosmic string network. Here, let us get a crude estimate of the magnitude of these two components. The COBE data roughly yields $`G\mu 10^6`$ if the scaling solution of the cosmic string network is the sole source of the density perturbation. Since $`\mathrm{\Delta }T/TG\mu `$, we have, in terms of the spectrum of the CMB, namely, $`C_l`$ ($`l`$ the partial wave integer);

$`C_l`$ $`=`$ $`(1a)C_l^I+aC_l^S`$ (21)
$`a`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G\mu }{10^6}}10\%`$ (22)
where $`C_l^I`$ comes from inflation while $`C_l^S`$ comes from cosmic strings. So, with $`G\mu 10^7`$, the cosmic string network contributes of order 10 $`\%`$ of the anisotropy in the CMB data. As shown in Ref., the present CMB data  can easily accommodate up to $`a=`$ 20$`\%`$, so the cosmic string production towards the end of brane inflation is perfectly compatible with the present CMB data , while future data from MAP and PLANCK will be able to test this scenario. It is obviously very important to estimate $`a`$ more carefully in the cosmic string network in a phenomenologically realistic superstring model. Since $`a`$ is most sensitive to the string scale $`M_s`$, the CMB data may be a very good way to eventually determine the value of $`M_s`$.

The cosmic string network also generates gravitational waves that may be observable. This has been studied extensively in the literature. The gravitational wave spectrum has an almost flat region that extends from $`f10^8`$ Hz to $`f10^{10}`$ Hz. Within this frequency range, both LIGO II/VIRGO (sensitive at around $`f10^2`$ Hz) and LISA (sensitive at around $`f10^3`$ Hz) are expected to reach the sensitivity of $`G\mu 10^7`$. Other possible detections of cosmic strings may be pulsar timing experiments, CMB polarization measurements etc.

If the cosmic string network of oscillating loops involve cusps and kinks of the cosmic strings, then strong beams of high-frequency gravitational waves are emitted by these cusps and kinks. This scenario is studied by Damour and Vilenkin . In this scenario, the sharp bursts of gravitational waves should be easily observable. LIGO II/VIRGO and LISA may detect them for values down to $`G\mu 10^{13}`$. Although present pulsar timing measurement is compatible with $`G\mu 10^6`$, a modest improvement on the accuracy can detect a network of cuspy cosmic string loops down to $`G\mu 10^{11}`$. To conclude, if cusps and kinks happen to a small but reasonable fraction of the cosmic strings, gravitational wave detection will be able to critically test the brane inflationary scenario. If detected, it will further shed light on the specific brane inflationary scenario.

## VII Summary

Brane inflation is a natural realization of inflation in the brane world scenario. For the string scale close to the GUT scale (the case we are interested in), presumably any phenomenologically realistic string model is dual to another string model that has a brane world interpretation. In this sense, brane inflation is generic. In Ref., it is shown that the brane inflation scenario is robust, that is, the probability that the universe has an extended inflationary epoch before big bang is of order unity. This excludes the scenarios where the tachyon is the inflaton (which may evade the production of defects, but typically the potential is far too steep for enough e-foldings). The bottom line is that cosmic strings will be copiously produced in any robust brane inflationary scenario. Other defects, if exist topologically, may also be produced, though with suppressed rates. In conclusion, we find that brane inflation has interesting predictions beyond that of the slow-roll inflationary scenario, and provides a testing ground for superstring theory to confront experiments. Existing data is perfectly compatible with brane inflation. It is exciting that future experiments will likely provide non-trivial tests of the scenario.

The key is the determination of the string scale $`M_s`$. The observability of the cosmic string effect in brane inflation is very sensitive to the value of $`M_s`$. Although we use $`M_s2\times 10^{15}`$ GeV in this paper, there is easily a factor of 2 or 3 uncertainty in its extraction from the CMB data. A more careful analysis of the CMB data in the framework of more realistic superstring models will be very important.

We thank Mark Bowick, Csaba Csaki, Eanna Flanagan, Nick Jones, Yasunori Nomura, Ashoke Sen, Gary Shiu, Horace Stoica, Mark Trodden, and Ira Wasserman for discussions. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY-0098631.


text:
# Brown Dwarfs and the TW Hya Association

## 1 Introduction

The Two Micron All-Sky Survey (2MASS), the Deep Near-Infrared Survey (DENIS), and the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) have identified large numbers of cool dwarfs in the field. This has led to the development of the new L dwarf spectral class (Kirkpatrick et al., 1999; Martín et al., 1999), corresponding to temperatures in the range $`14002200`$K. The observed numbers of L dwarfs imply that isolated field brown dwarfs are common though even if the details of the substellar mass function remains uncertain (Reid et al., 1999). Observations of rich star-forming regions have also identified numerous young brown dwarf candidates (see the review of Basri 2000).

Recent work has identified nearby ($`d100`$ pc) associations of very young ($`<100`$ Myr) stars (Jayawardhana & Greene, 2001). The most notable of these new associations is the TW Hya association (TWA), a loose group of T Tauri stars with an age of $`10`$ Myr (Webb et al., 1999; Makarov & Fabricius, 2001). These nearby T Tauri and post-T Tauri stars allow unique studies of star formation processes due to their proximity and brightness. Furthermore, they offer insights into star formation in a low-density enviroment that differs from the dominant star formation process observed in dense star regions like Orion.

The identification of young brown dwarfs in TWA and similar associations promises to advance substellar astronomy — confirming that isolated brown dwarfs form in a low-density star formation environment and providing bright, nearby prototypes for follow-up studies. Current optical and X-ray surveys were only sensitive to ordinary stars ($`M0.2M_{}`$). Nevertheless, one young TWA brown dwarf is known: TWA 5B is an M8 secondary identified by Hubble Space Telescope imaging about 100 A.U. from its primary star (Lowrance et al., 1999). The apparent magnitude, $`H=12.1`$, of TWA 5B is well above the 2MASS magnitude limits ($`H15.1`$ for signal-to-noise 10, Cutri et al. 2000); any similar, isolated TWA brown dwarfs will therefore appear in the 2MASS survey. Furthermore, TWA is in a relatively clean field away from the Galactic plane and without background reddened sources.

I present the results of a 2MASS-based search for isolated, very-low-mass brown dwarfs in the TW Hya association. I present the search criteria and follow-up spectroscopy in Section 2. The results are discussed in Section 3.

## 2 Sample Selection and Spectroscopy

### 2.1 Photometric Selection

The 2MASS survey provides precise and accurate photometry in the J, H, and Ks bands. Kirkpatrick et al. (1999) and Gizis et al. (2000) discuss the selection of late-M and L dwarfs using the 2MASS surveys. M dwarfs in the range M0-M7 have similar near-infrared colors ($`JK_s0.9`$) which makes it difficult to efficiently select M6 and M7 dwarfs. In contrast, M8 through late-L dwarfs are characterized by redder 2MASS colors ($`JK_s>1.0`$) which distinguish them from most background stars. The addition of optical colors from the POSS and other optical surveys allow nearly all contaminating populations (mostly extragalactic at high galactic latitude) to be eliminated. I therefore chose to concentrate on these M8 and cooler L dwarfs in this initial search for TWA candidates. Because the hydrogen burning limit at this age will lie near spectral class M6 (Luhman, 1999), this strategy allows only the cooler and hence lower mass brown dwarfs to be detected, roughly corresponding to masses $`M<0.03M_{}`$.

Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the initial sample selection using the 2MASS Working Database. This database includes the entire sky but represents only the preliminary processing of the 2MASS dataset. The area searched (Figure 1) was chosen to encompass the TWA members listed by Webb et al. (1999), Sterzik et al. (1999) and Zuckerman et al. (2001). The photometric selection (Figure 2) was designed to include potential late-M and L dwarfs members on the basis of their $`JK_s`$ colors. The position of TWA 5B is marked in Figure 2 as a T. Luhman (1999) has found that the young brown dwarfs in IC 348 (age $`10`$ Myr) have J-H,H-K colors similar to the field population. The limiting magnitude for targets was a function of J-Ks:

$$K_s<2.5\times (JK_s)+9.5$$
(1)
As shown in Figure 2, this selection would include any other M/L dwarfs that follow the observed field M/L dwarf sequence slope found by Gizis et al. (2000) and extends 1.1 magnitudes fainter at $`K_s`$ than TWA 5B. This allows for the inclusion of brown dwarfs further away than TWA 5B, or the possibility that TWA 5B is overluminous due to being an unresolved double. The limiting magnitude for the survey corresponds to $`0.013M_{}`$ assuming bolometric corrections similar to field dwarfs (Chabrier et al., 2000) — this limiting mass is of course uncertain due to both theoretical and observational limitations. Each 2MASS source was examined on the DSS sky survey scans at the CADC web site. Those with bright optical counterparts ($`B19`$) were excluded since M8 and later dwarfs will be red. The targets are listed in Table 4. The J2000 positions encoded in the official 2MASS names are accurate to an arcsecond.

### 2.2 Other Field Dwarfs

Late in the night, the TWA region was not accessible during the CTIO observing run. I therefore selected candidate nearby field M and L dwarfs using the 2MASS Working database. The targets observed are listed in Table 4. All targets are required to have $`JK_s>1.0`$ and no bright optical counterpart. A number of other known field M and L dwarfs were observed, most notably the recent discovery DENIS-P J104814.7-395606.1 (Delfosse et al., 2001). I find a spectral type of M8 for this star, slightly earlier than the M9 previously estimated in the discovery paper from high resolution observations. TVLM 868-53850, an M dwarf discovered by Tinney (1993), is a near-infrared standard star (Persson et al., 1998; Nikolaev et al., 2000) that has not been previously observed spectroscopically. It is an M5.0 with strong H$`\alpha `$ emission (7.0Å). A careful examination of the 2MASS calibration observations of this star might reveal if the high chromospheric activity leads to any near-infrared variability. The standards VB8, LHS 2397a, LHS 2065, and 2MASSW J1507476-162738 as well as some earlier M dwarfs were also observed. No flares were noted in these dwarfs.

### 2.3 Spectroscopy

The targets were observed using the R-C spectrograph on the CTIO 4-meter Blanco telescope on UT Dates 30 April to 3 May 2001. Despite the faintness of the targets, even the L dwarfs were visible in the acquisition camera. The wavelength coverage was 6430 to 9700 Å with a FWHM resolution of $`2.8`$Å. Flux standards from Hamuy et al. (1994) were observed. The spectral extraction and calibration was made using standard IRAF routines.

To aid in spectral classification, spectral indices were measured. These included TiO5 (Reid, Hawley & Gizis, 1995; Gizis, 1997), PC3 (Martín et al., 1999), CrH, TiO-b, Cs-a, VO-a and VO-b (Kirkpatrick et al., 1999). Spectral types were adopted based on these indices and visual inspection of the spectra. All spectral types are on the Kirkpatrick, Henry, & McCarthy (1991) and Kirkpatrick et al. (1999) M and L dwarf scale. The equivalent width of H$`\alpha `$ was measured when emission was present. The adopted spectral types and equivalent widths are included in Tables 4 and 4. The measured indices are given in Table 4, where multiple measurements of the same object have been averaged. In Figure 3, some of the measured indices are plotted as a function of adopted spectral type. The signal-to-noise and resolution of the spectra are not adequate to search for lithium.

## 3 Discussion

### 3.1 Two TW Hya Association Late-M Brown Dwarfs?

Young brown dwarfs, particularly TWA brown dwarfs, will have low surface gravity. Luhman, Liebert, & Rieke (1997) and Martín, Rebolo, & Zapatero-Osorio (1996) discuss the characteristics of young late-M brown dwarfs. They are characterized by stronger VO and weaker hydrides and Na lines than ordinary field M dwarfs. In Figure 4, the surface gravity sensitive indices are plotted against spectral type. Only two late-M objects show both strong VO and weak Na and CaH. This can be seen in Figure LABEL:figure-comp, where the specrtra of these two objects are compared to the ordinary field M8 dwarf LHS 2397a and the llrl97 $`\rho `$ Oph brown dwarf. A few objects show an anomalous VO index but their other indices and the overall appearance of their spectra do not support low surface gravity; I attribute these anomalies to noise and do not consider them further. The two candidate TW Hya brown dwarfs are discussed below.

2MASSW J1207334-393254: This M8 dwarf shows signatures of low surface gravity, which indicates that it is a young ($`100`$ Myr) brown dwarf. Confirmation of TW Hya membership requires space motion information. I have examined the United States Naval Observatory Image and Catalogue Archive for sky survey images of 2MASSW J1207334-393254. The oldest image, taken in 1964, has the poorest detection. The images show motion of 100 mas yr-1 west and 30 mas yr-1 south relative to other stars in the field; this motion is consistent with TWA membership (Mamajek, private comm.). On the basis of this proper motion and the spectroscopy, 2MASSW J1207334-393254 therefore may be regarded as a probable member of the TW Hya association, although CCD astrometry is needed to strengthen this conclusion.

In any case, the proper motion is considerably smaller than most 2MASS late-M dwarfs (Gizis et al., 2000), supporting a young age.

2MASSW J1207334-393254’s most notable characteristic, however, is its extremely strong H$`\alpha `$ emission (Figure 5). The equivalent width of H$`\alpha `$ emission in two consecutive 900 second exposures was $`300`$Å. Helium emission at 6678Å is also detected with an equivalent width of 3Å. A powerful flare such as the one observed by Liebert et al. (1999) could account for the H$`\alpha `$ emission, but would have weakened by the second exposure and produced additional atomic emission lines. Since these characteristics are not observed, it is unlikely that this emission is caused by a flare.

Strong but persistent H$`\alpha `$ emission is not seen in field 2MASS late-M dwarfs (Kirkpatrick et al., 1999; Gizis et al., 2000), but is known in three late-M systems. Two of these systems, the M8 brown dwarf $`\rho `$ Oph 162349.8-242601 (Luhman, Liebert, & Rieke, 1997) and the M7 brown dwarf CFHT-BD-Tau J043947.3+260139 (Martín et al., 2001), are young brown dwarfs whose emission is attributed to an accretion disk. If due to the same cause, then 2MASSW J1207334-393254’s emission supports a young age and probable TW Hya membership. Figure 5

Strong H$`\alpha `$ emission is also known in another, still mysterious, M9 dwarf. The dwarf PC 0025+0447 was discovered by Schneider et al. (1991) due to its H$`\alpha `$ emission ($`EW300`$Å) which has persisted for a decade. 2MASSW J120733-393254’s H$`\alpha `$ and HeI emission are very similar to Martín, Basri & Zapatero Osorio (1999)’s spectra of PC 0025+0447 in its relatively inactive, unveiled state. Martín, Basri & Zapatero Osorio (1999) argue that PC0025+0447 is a young brown dwarf with an age between 10 and 100 Myr and that the emission is due to chromospheric/coronal activity. Such a scenario might also apply for 2MASSW J1207334-393254 and would be consistent with TWA membership.

2MASSW J1139511-315921: A second M8 dwarf, 2MASSW J1139511-315921, is also a low surface gravity brown dwarf and therefore a candidate TWA member. The $`H\alpha `$ emission is weaker, with $`EW=9.7`$Å, but He 6678Å emission is present with $`EW1.9`$Å. Weak emission is typical of young brown dwarfs. Examination of the USNO scans reveals a proper motion consistent with $`110`$ mas yr-1 to the south and $`110`$ mas yr-1 to the west. This motion is inconsistent with the TWA and other young clusters, except perhaps the Pleiades (Mamajek, private comm.). Nevertheless, given the weak detections and resulting astrometric uncertainty 2MASSW J1139511-315921 may still be a TWA member. Comparison to the Chabrier et al. (2000) models suggests that both 2MASSW J1207334-393254 and 2MASSW J1139511-315921 have masses $`0.025M_{}`$ if members; Lowrance et al. (1999) finds the same result for the similar TWA 5B.

### 3.2 L Dwarf Candidates

Seven L dwarfs were detected in the TWA search. If any of these L dwarfs were TWA members, they would have very low mass and low surface gravity. Martín et al. (1999) have compared the L2 dwarf G196-3B, believed to have an age of $`100`$ Myr, with older field L dwarfs of similar spectral type. It shows weaker TiO, CrH, FeH, Na, K, Cs and Rb. It is likely that $`10`$ Myr old early-L dwarfs will show similar, but greater, anomolies. No later very low-surface gravity L dwarfs are known, but it seems likely they would have also have significant differences with respect to ordinary field L dwarfs. Since none of the observed L dwarfs show compelling evidence for low surface gravity, I conclude they are not TWA members, but three deserve special discussion. Measurement of the proper motions of the L dwarfs would be relatively easy over the next few years and would indicate if any are actually TWA members.

2MASSI J1315309-264951: The L5 dwarf 2MASSI 1315309-264951 is an intriguing object because it shows strong H$`\alpha `$ emission (Figure 6). Because of the very low continuum levels, the equivalent width of $`100`$Å is highly uncertain. The relative energy in H$`\alpha `$ is $`\mathrm{log}(H\alpha /L_{bol})=3.9`$. This L dwarf is $`100`$ times more active than the upper limits for late-L dwarfs in Gizis et al. (2000). It was observed with six consecutive 600 second exposures on 01 May and two consecutive 900 second exposures on 02 May. The emission is constant over those time periods and it is therefore unlikely that the emission is due to a flare. The J-Ks color of 1.7 is not unusual for the spectral type of L5.

2MASSI J1315309-264951 was independently discovered by Hall (2002), who discribes two spectra. Hall (2002) found strong emission on 30 March 2001 with EW$`100`$Å, but much weaker emission (EW $`25`$Å) in a lower-quality spectrum in August 2001.111Note that Hall (2002) assigns a spectral type of L3, but the spectra reported are nearly identical to the L5 2MASSW J1507476-162738. Hall (2002) gives a discussion of the possible analogs and explanations for the emission. Hall favors the explanation that the March emission is due to a flare. Given the match of the emission in the May spectra, this now appears to be an unlikely possibility. Confirmation of the low activity state seen in August is desirable. Hall discusses the possibility that 2MASSI J1315309-264951 may be an analog to the Te dwarf 2MASSW 1237392+652615 (Burgasser et al., 2000). Since, like the Te dwarf, 2MASSI J1315309-264951 does not show signs of low surface gravity, it is likely a hotter analog of the still not-yet- understood Te dwarf rather than a very young (TW Hya) brown dwarf. As noted by Hall (2002), analogies to the active late-M dwarfs with persistent emission (such as LHS 2397a) may also be appropriate. The correlations found by Gizis et al. (2000) would then suggest that 2MASSI J1315309-264951 may be a relatively old L dwarf (perhaps even burning hydrogen!). I note that Mullan & MacDonald (2001) have presented nonstandard interior models with strong magnetic fields in which magnetically active L dwarfs might actually be stars. The possible proper motion noted by Hall would be inconsistent with TW Hya membership and would suggest a relatively old kinematic age. Further study – particularly astrometry – of this intriguing L dwarf is needed to understand its evolutionary status. If, despite the arguments already given, this L dwarf is a TWA member, comparison of Chabrier et al. (2000)’s model calculations to its $`K_s`$ magnitude and effective temperature would suggest a mass of $`0.013M_{}`$, near the deuterium burning limit.

Kelu-1: The TWA search criteria selected the well-known L dwarf Kelu-1 (Ruiz, Leggett, & Allard, 1997), which is known to lie above other dwarfs in the HR diagram, but whose astrometric distance and motion (Dahn et al., 2002) is inconsistent with the TW Hya association.

2MASSW J1155395-372735: The L2 dwarf, like Kelu-1, shows weak H$`\alpha `$ emission. The emission was present with similar strength on two different nights. It is brighter than Kelu-1 and may serve as a useful L dwarf for further study.

### 3.3 The Mass Function

There are five known TW Hya members in the range 0.5 to 0.9 $`M_{}`$ and 10 in the range 0.2 to 0.5 $`M_{}`$, consistent with a power-law mass function ($`\frac{dN}{dM}M^\alpha `$) with slope $`\alpha =1`$. Extrapolation of this mass function, which is consistent with field and cluster studies, predicts $`4`$ brown dwarfs in the range 0.015 to 0.025 $`M_{}`$. The observations of two strong candidate isolated brown dwarf in this mass range are consistent with this distribution. (Note that one might also count the wide companion TW Hya 5B.) In contrast, a mass function slope of $`\alpha =0`$ would predict only 0.1 such brown dwarfs. Within the very large uncertainties due to the small sample size, there is no evidence for an IMF in the TW Hya association that differs from richer star formation regions (typically $`\alpha 0.51.0`$). Studies of the outskirts of the TWA area and searches of other associations are needed to build up useful statistics.

### 3.4 Comments on Field Dwarfs

Most of the field M and L dwarfs observed in this program have properties consistent with those observed in previous 2MASS surveys. The unusual emission of the L dwarf was discussed in Section 3.2. Two other systems deserve special discussion.

2MASSW J1004392-333518: This L4 dwarf, discovered in the TWA search, is 7.4 arcsec east and 9.6 arcsec south of the high proper motion star LHS 5166. The relationships in Kirkpatrick et al. (2000) predict $`M_J=12.940`$ and $`M_K=11.326`$ for an L4 dwarf, both consistent with a distance of 21 pc. At this distance, the separation of the two components is 250 A.U. No proper motion is available for the L dwarf since it is not detected on the sky survey plates, so companionship is not confirmed. The CTIO 4-meter spectrum reveals that LHS 5166 is an M4 dwarf with H$`\alpha `$ emission of 2.6Å. The 2MASS photometry is $`J=9.859`$, $`H=9.336`$, and $`K_s=9.035`$. This spectral type is at the position of a kink in the main sequence: at LHS 5166’s TiO5 index value of 0.39, the main sequence covers the range $`6.5<M_K<8.5`$ (Gizis & Reid, 1996). The L dwarf’s distance estimate implies $`M_K=7.43`$ (if the components are single), which is consistent with the large uncertainties for M4 dwarfs. At spectral type M4, 31% of stars have $`H\alpha `$ emission (Hawley et al., 1996); if star formation is constant over 10 Gyr, then the system is probably no older than $`3.1`$ billion years old.

2MASSW J1510478-281817: An M9 dwarf, 2MASSW J151047-281823, is 3.3 arcseconds west and 5.9 arcseconds south of the M8 dwarf 2MASSW J151047-281817. The proximity suggests that this may be a binary system, although the differences in magnitude ($`\mathrm{\Delta }J=1.16`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }H=1.22`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }K_s=1.07`$) are surpisingly large given the one class difference in spectral type. The M8 has $`H\alpha `$ emission ($`EW=2.5`$Å) while the M9 does not, but this is consistent with fall-off in activity with spectral type (Gizis et al., 2000) and does not rule out binarity. The M8 has a photometric distance estimate of 20 parsecs ($`M_K=10.19`$, assuming it is on the main sequence) while the M9’s estimate is 30 parcsecs ($`M_K=10.39`$); the corresponding orbital separation would then be 135 or 200 A.U. If the M8 is an equal luminosity double then the discrepency would be explained. Approximately 20% of 2MASS-selected late-M dwarfs are doubles when imaged by Hubble Space Telescope (Gizis et al., in prep.), so this scenario is plausible. The USNO scans do not have a clear detection of the M9 dwarf, and therefore do not reveal whether the proper motions are consistent. Additional data are required to show that this a physically related system rather than a chance alignment. If confirmed by common proper motions and radial velocities, this would be widest known system composed only of M8 or later components.

## 4 Summary

A 2MASS-based search for isolated TWA brown dwarfs has found two late-M brown dwarfs which are candidate TWA members. None of the L dwarfs observed appear to be TWA members. These observations are consistent with the substellar mass function seen in richer star formation regions. One young M8 dwarf shows very strong emission features and is an ideal candidate for more detailed study of this rare phenomenon; a number of other dwarfs identified in this search are also unusual and deserve additional follow-up.

This pilot study has confirmed that 2MASS is useful for identifying young brown dwarf members of nearby associations. Extension of this study to either higher mass brown dwarfs of spectral type M6-M7 and very-low-mass brown dwarfs of spectral type T (below the deuterium burning limit) is practical but requires additional imaging and spectroscopy.

I thank the 2MASS Rare Objects Team, including Neill Reid, Jim Liebert, Dave Monet, Davy Kirkpatrick, and Patrick Lowrance for many useful discussions. This publication makes use of data products from 2MASS, which is a joint project of the University of Massachusetts and IPAC/Caltech, funded by NASA and NSF. J.E.G. was a Guest User, Canadian Astronomy Data Centre, which is operated by the Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics, National Research Council of Canada. This research has made use of the USNOFS Image and Catalogue Archive operated by the United States Naval Observatory, Flagstaff Station (http://www.nofs.navy.mil/data/fchpix/).