text:
# A SIMPLE MODEL FOR THE EVOLUTION OF EVOLUTION

## 1 Introduction: Punctuated equilibrium and self-organized criticality

Punctuated equilibrium is a well-documented extension of Darwinian evolutionary theory . On a population level, it has recently been observed in the laboratory: during its evolution, the average cell size of Escherichia coli bacteria showed long periods of stasis with rare beneficial mutations rapidly sweeping through the whole population . Presently, however, it is not yet clear, whether punctuations in the domain of populations and species, respectively, are unrelated, or consequences of the same evolutionary mechanisms at work. On the species level, some of the qualitative features of punctuated equilibrium have been successfully simulated by Bak and Sneppen  in a toy model on a lattice of sites, with each site representing a species, thereby drawing on earlier work on self-organized criticality (SOC) . Recently, exact results have been obtained for spatiotemporal evolutions in an extended SOC model of punctuated equilibrium with many internal degrees of freedom per site , for a model with neural-like rules , and for generating phylogenetic-like trees . However, the successful implementation of SOC models notwithstanding, there exists one important question which is hardly touched upon by these models, namely how evolution produces entities of increased complexity. In particular, it has been proposed by Kauffman and coworkers that the Darwinian process of mutation and environmental selection would have to be complemented by self-organizing processes in order to eventually decouple the strict link between mutation and selection .

In this paper we present a simple toy-model of evolution which is general enough to be compatible with SOC models of punctuated equilibrium, but in essential ways goes beyond them to encompass evolution towards higher complexity. For, if one considers the Bak-Sneppen model and its more recent versions, one is led to conclude that the SOC state is always a “quasi - steady state", i.e., “the evolution process always self-organizes into the same critical steady state having, as a consequence, the same appearance" . In other words, the analogy to the well-known sandpile model suggests that SOC describes evolution via punctuated avalanches of high mutation rates over a wide range of sizes, with long intermittent periods of stability, but without any (long term) time dependence of the avalanche sizes, the equilibrium periods, or their relative changes, respectively. This overall large-scale time symmetry is inherent in the model of Bak and Sneppen, as is easily seen from its results.

In their one-dimensional case that interests us here, each site on a lattice representing a species interacts with its two nearest neighbors (thus representing a food chain, for example). The individual species (sites) are assigned random numbers between 0 and 1 representing their fitness in the fitness landscape of the whole evolving pattern of lattice sites. At each time step, the site with the lowest fitness is chosen to be replaced by a different random number, thus mimicking Darwinian extinction of the least fit species and its replacement with another species in the same ecological niche. The same procedure is also applied to the two nearest neighbors of the least fit species to simulate coevolution, so that in sum the fitness values of three sites are changed per time step. The result of this procedure is that most species self-organize into uniform distribution above some critical fitness value, while the few below it produce said punctuated avalanches of various sizes. The resulting activity pattern for the mutations clearly shows punctuated equilibrium behavior which is time-symmetric over long periods of evolutionary time (cf. Fig. 6 in ). Moreover, as the model allows to add together only accumulated mutations at single sites, i.e., without differentiating between progress and regression in fitness over time, the accumulated activity pattern is also time-invariant (cf. Fig. 7 in ), and has recently been identified with the fractal pattern of a randomized devil’s staircase function .

In contrast, we design our toy model in such a way that four major problems are directly adressed to overcome some weak points in the existing models of punctuated equilibrium: 1) To potentially allow for the emergence of ever higher complexity, the implicit overall time-symmetry of the evolving patterns in state-space must be discarded. 2) Accordingly, a plot of evolutionary changes for a single species over time must not only add accumulated changes (producing a devil’s staircase function), but must be able to differentiate between progress and regression with regard to some measure of fitness or complexity (cf. Fig. 1 in  and Fig. 1A in ). 3) The strict coupling between mutation and selection, i.e. the ongoing and strictly time-ordered interplay of both mechanisms, which is often considered as a necessary prerequisite for evolution, has to be relaxed to allow for the self-organization of evolutionary patterns. In this way, coevolutionary processes can lead to an effective decoupling of mutation and selection. 4) As the model to be designed should depend even less on the concrete content of micro-evolution, it should be as abstract as possible to study potential trends in evolution with a high chance for universality, i.e., irrespective of the underlying detailed processes. We thus aim at a meta-macroevolutionary model in the sense that we disregard questions on the concrete evolutionary substrate, thereby concentrating on relative changes with respect to previous evolutions. In other words, we are interested in simulating the “evolution of evolution". Also, as far as the assumption holds that the same evolutionary mechanisms are at work at the levels of populations and species, respectively, our model for the species level will apply to the population level as well.

To implement the four points just mentioned, we propose the following simple toy-model for the evolution of evolution.

## 2 Hierarchically emergent fractal evolution (HEFE) with noise

### 2.1 Fractal evolution

We consider the evolution in time of a one-dimensional array of cells $`\rho _0(t,j)`$ with $`j=1,\mathrm{},N`$ representing the number of species on a coupled map lattice (CML). The nearest neighbor interaction implemented is of the form

$$\begin{array}{c}\rho _0(t,j)=\frac{1}{𝒩_0(t)}\{\rho _0(t1,j)+\delta [\rho _0(t1,j1)+\rho _0(t1,j+1)]\}\\ j=1,\mathrm{},N,\rho _0,\delta \end{array}$$
(1)
with $`\delta `$ as coupling constant and $`𝒩_0`$ as normalization factor yielding

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\rho _0(t,j)=1\text{for all}t.$$
(2)
To constrain the values of the sites within a realistic domain, we introduce a system’s internal precision limit $`\xi _{max}=10^6`$ with the effect that each site $`\rho _0(t,j)\xi _{max}`$ is replaced by a white noise term, generated by $`\xi _{max}RAN`$. The random number $`RAN`$ is uniformly distributed on the interval $`[0,1]`$.

In this way, $`\rho _0(t)`$ assumes values between zero and one representing the individual species’ fitness at time step t relative to the others in such a manner that the total fitness for the whole array is given by a constant which, without loss of generality, is defined to be equal to unity. In other words, just as in , we assume local interaction between the nearest neighbored species to affect relative fitness. However, as opposed to , we are not interested in implementing a very specific and thus extremely model-dependent mechanism of eliminating least fit species, or the like. Rather, we intend to study the relative frequency of deviations from some average evolution, the details of which are not supposed to matter. To do so, we need to have an evolution of the form of Eq. (1) upon which certain constraints can be imposed, such that some kind of statistically controllable but individually contingent deviation can be implemented.

With regard to this, a phenomenon is at hand which has been discovered and studied by us in some detail, called fractal evolution . It is a universal dynamic property shown for one-dimensional CMLs with (i) one or more temporal feedback operations (involving some memory of the system’s states) boosting certain sites to values far above the average ones, and (ii) a normalization procedure after each time step as given by Eq. (2). Fractal evolution is characterized by a power-law behavior of the system’s order parameter with regard to a resolution-like parameter which controls the deviation from an undisturbed (i.e., feedback-less) system’s evolution and provides a dynamically invariant measure for the emerging spatiotemporal patterns . It must be strictly distinguished from the phenomenon of fractal growth, which describes the accumulation of micro-patterns into a static structure with (self-similar or other scale invariant) fractal features. In contrast, fractal evolution is characterized by the fact that the dynamics of the evolution itself is scale invariant: instead of generating a “frozen" fractal object, the generation mechanism itself is “fractal", i.e. the chosen resolution itself finally generates the observed fractal properties. In reference  we showed that the phenomenon is very robust with respect to variation of the system’s variables and holds also if, instead of a temporal feedback condition, the deviations from the average evolution are implemented by randomly generating local boosts to high values for individual sites. In these cases, the only difference to the feedback situation is a different resulting fractal evolution exponent in the power law. This means that no matter how the detailed micro-evolutionary substrate is implemented, i.e. by either entirely deterministic temporal feedback loops with a memory, or by completely random boosts to produce patterns deviating from the average development of the system, fractal evolution will be observed in most cases .

In the following, we shall choose temporal feedback loops in our model because they introduce a quality of self-reference for the whole system which can be expanded upon later (cf. Sec. 2.2). As a concrete motivation for doing so, we consider a certain periodicity of constraining conditions for the whole evolutionary landscape. Again, the details are not supposed to matter, i.e., the periodicity may refer to relatively short-term cycles of constraints enforcing functional couplings within individual species, or externally, in the ecology or the like. However, the period of constraints should also not be too short, because otherwise internal fluctuations would merely produce spurious effects of the internal systems dynamics which are of no particular interest here.

In a “normal" evolution of our landscape that were unaffected by such cycles, the relative fitness values would gradually become adjusted to each other, thus gradually reaching an ever more smeared-out pattern representing stasis or equilibrium. However, if a species’ fitness value after such a cycle happens to be the same again as before it, within a certain degree of accuracy $`1/ϵ`$, then, even if the relative fitness value is low, some reproductive isolation must have been achieved (for example, via economic functional couplings) that amounts to an acquisition of a relative survival rate far above the average. In fact, “molecular cognition" within genomic dynamics  already suggests a certain cognitive ability for each individual site in that it can monitor its own “fitness" within that of its environment with a resolution $`1/ϵ`$. Maintaining constancy in fitness space within cycle periods with a constraining and eventually destructive potential, while most of the environment produces decreasing fitness values, means that an ecological niche has been found whose fitness potential can be consumed. (The overall relative fitness is thus decoupled from the individual and momentary survival rate: the former is a purely coevolutionary measure, while the latter refers to a concrete situation in the larger context of cyclically changing constraining conditions of the whole evolutionary landscape.) In these cases, then, the species’ site is a particularly favorable niche and therefore enhanced to some boost value, thus providing a fragmented overall pattern emerging in fitness space with particular elevated zones of highest survival rates (and, consequentially, also of fitness).

These zones represent a high possibility for reproductive isolation (for example on the population level) and thus also for protected change. Although in principle it can occur at any time or site, a species’ possible mutation, then, is most likely to accumulate into an evolutionarily conserved change (for example a morphological one) if occuring in such boosted niches of survival rates (and thus also new fitness values) far above the average. Naturally, if the accuracy $`1/ϵ`$ within which present and past relative fitness values are observed (i.e., to produce constancy with respect to the steadily evolving environment) is rather low, there will be a relatively high chance for various boosts to occur within short periods of time. If, on the other hand, $`1/ϵ`$ becomes higher and higher, i.e., if the cognitive requirements regarding the resolution become ever more demanding, then the chance for boosts gradually diminishes, and the actually boosted patterns will survive for longer periods of time.

To implement said temporal feedback operation in our model of Eq. (1), we install an enhancement (of strength $`A_{amp}`$) of each site $`\rho (t,j)>\xi _{max}`$ fulfilling an $`ϵ`$-condition

$$\begin{array}{c}\rho (t,j)=\frac{1}{𝒩(t)}\{[A_{amp}\rho _{0,\xi }(t,j)]\theta _ϵ\theta _{mem}\theta _\xi +\rho _{0,\xi }(t,j)\}\\ \text{with}\\ \rho _{0,\xi }(t,j)=[\rho _0(t,j)\xi ]\theta _\xi +\xi ,\rho _0(t,j)\text{defined in Eq. (}\text{1}\text{)},\\ \xi =\xi _{max}RAN,RAN[0,1],\theta _\xi =\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho _0(t,j)\xi _{max}),\\ \theta _ϵ=\mathrm{\Theta }\left(ϵ\left|\frac{\rho _{0,\xi }(t,j)}{\rho (tt_{mem},j)}1\right|\right),0ϵ1(=100\%),\theta _{mem}=\mathrm{\Theta }(tt_{mem}),\\ \text{and}\mathrm{\Theta }(x)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1:& x>0\hfill \\ \hfill 0:& x0.\hfill \end{array}\end{array}$$
(3)
As usual, we impose periodic boundary conditions. Also, we introduce a time span $`t_{mem}`$ during which the system’s memory is effective. (For example, the latter may reflect the maintainance of a particular molecular state during one cycle of the periodical constraining conditions.)

In other words, the enhancement for any site $`\rho _{0,\xi }(t,j)>\xi _{max}`$ takes place if $`t>t_{mem}`$ (i.e., the time span during which a system’s memory is effective) and if the condition $`\rho (tt_{mem},j)(1ϵ)<\rho _{0,\xi }(t,j)<\rho (tt_{mem},j)(1+ϵ)`$ is fulfilled. Note that this kind of feedback operation simulates a selection process enhancing the values and, consequently, the further evolutions of those sites which are comparable in fitness with their corresponding values in the past since they fulfill the $`ϵ`$-condition.

The whole normalized system is constrained to the range $`0\rho (t,j)1`$. Values of $`\rho (t,j)\xi _{max}`$ are, just for simplicity, replaced by white noise terms, i.e., in that case, whatever kind of noise existing in our system exceeds a signal generated by the system’s rules. Moreover, a further parameter is introduced as an external representation threshold $`L>>\xi _{max}`$: with it a background is defined against which the arising patterns obeying $`\rho (t,j)L`$ can easily be discerned. Otherwise, e.g. for $`L=\xi _{max}`$, the evolving systems’ pattern would appear as one connected stream and could not be discerned into the separated fragments of the landscape’s peaks needed for quantitative analysis.

For the further analysis and without loss of generality (cf. the discussion below) we choose a default set of parameter values:

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{Number of sites (dimension)}N=120\hfill \\ \text{Initial values (before normalization)}\rho (0,40)=0.1,\rho (0,60)=0.9,\rho (0,100)=0.3\hfill \\ \text{Mixing parameter (coupling constant)}\delta =0.03\hfill \\ \text{Boost value (enhancement)}A_{amp}=100\hfill \\ \text{Size of memory}t_{mem}=200\hfill \\ \text{Threshold value}L=10^2\hfill \end{array}$$
(4)
In Fig. (1) the time evolution due to Eq. (3) of one arbitrarily chosen site (i.e., site $`\mathrm{}48`$ in our case) is displayed together with the noise threshold (dotted line) and the external representation threshold used in the further graphical representation of the plots (dashed line). Due to Eq. (3), at time steps $`t=1046`$ and $`t=1108`$ the site is boosted up to a value of order $`O(1)`$ after normalization, whereupon the typical decrease due to the diffusion rule (1) is observed until the boost of some other site within the array suppresses it by the factor $`A_{amp}=100`$ due to the normalization procedure. The feature of repeated staircase-like increases of the site’s values comes from contributions of neighbored large-valued sites.

A spatiotemporal plot of all sites above the threshold value $`L`$ is shown in Fig. (2). Contrary to the signature of fractal evolution introduced in , the fragments gather around a narrow array and are not distributed over the whole spatiotemporal plane. This effect represents a certain “taming" of evolutionary chance and comes from the restriction requiring that all sites be larger than the noise threshold $`\xi _{max}`$ for their possible enhancement. (As stated above, eventual values below the noise threshold thus contribute only to the noise itself, but cannot be boosted to values dominating the whole evolution.) Since the range of those values which are checked by the $`ϵ`$-condition of (3) contains only six orders of magnitude, a boosted site will be placed in the spatial neighborhood of a fragment $`t_{mem}`$ time steps ago. As will be shown below, this “stream-like” feature in the fitness landscape is crucial for the punctuated equilibrium behavior during the systems evolution.

In Fig. (3) the system’s global property of fractal evolution is shown. The mean lifetime $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$ of the patterns which is estimated by the arithmetic mean of the maximal temporal extension of all fragments for a chosen $`ϵ`$ (cf. Fig. (2)) scales according to

$$\stackrel{~}{\tau }=aϵ^b,\text{with}a=2.69\pm 0.05,b=0.620\pm 0.005,$$
(5)
practically irrespective of variations of the systems variables or the initial conditions. The power-law behavior of the system’s order parameter $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$ with regard to the resolution-like parameter $`ϵ`$ provides a dynamically invariant measure for the emerging spatiotemporal patterns given by the fractal evolution exponent $`b`$. As will be discussed in Sec. 2.2, fractal evolution in its dynamic sense is obtained only if the restriction to one specific value of $`ϵ`$ is abolished. Note that the system evolving under a chosen $`ϵ`$ does not evolve automatically towards a critical state in the sense of the SOC theory  since the avalanches of the fragments’ sizes do not occur in our system on all scales.

Although the two concurring conditions in Eq. (3), i.e. the temporal $`ϵ`$-condition and the noise-threshold condition, constrain the evolving patterns to lie within a narrow range, the long-term behavior as shown in Fig. (4) exhibits a random-walk-like movement of the stream of fragments across the whole array. The invariance of this ergodic-like property under variation of the systems parameters has been checked empirically. Even the replacement of white noise values for sites below $`\xi _{max}`$ by a constant value (by $`10^7`$, for example), provides the observed ergodicity, although the stream of fragments then evolves symmetrically due to the totally symmetric evolution rule and the uniform background. Therefore, in the long run, practically each site/species gets the chance to obtain a high survival rate and, consequently, to evolve in a high fitness potential.

Any enhancement of a site represents a strong intervention for the system as a whole (due to the normalization) and for the represented species itself, of course, since it can be interpreted both as a drastic change in coevolutionary fitness or as a site-bound beneficial mutation, respectively. Consequently, the time span between two succeeding boosts for any site offers both the opportunity for further beneficial selection during its evolution, or towards ever decreasing fitness, and ultimately being swept below the noise limit (“detrimental extinction"). In Fig. (5) the accumulated boosts are displayed for a time interval of 50000 time steps. Similar to the SOC models , each site exhibits a punctuated equilibrium behavior with respect to the time plateaus indicating the time difference between two drastic evolutionary activities. Due to the chosen intial conditions and within the first 50000 time steps, site $`\mathrm{}30`$ happens to experience many more changes than site $`\mathrm{}10`$.

Since the stream of fragments and thus the main boost activities will reach also previously quiescent regions after some time (cf. Fig. (4)), the accumulated boosts of site $`\mathrm{}10`$ will eventually catch up with those of site $`\mathrm{}30`$. The dashed curve in Fig. (5) shows the effect of omitting only one boost (i.e., the 100th one in our case) during the site’s evolution. The observed dramatic change of the accumulation curve demonstrates just one example of the crucial role of contingency in the systems dynamics.

The analysis of the distributions of time plateaus for an arbitrarily chosen site yields a (discretized) shape as shown in Fig. (6). Each bin contains the relative frequency of ten succeeding plateau sizes. Apparently, practically all sizes of periods of stasis are present, the data for bin $`\mathrm{}2`$ up to about $`\mathrm{}20`$ even lying on a staight line in a log-log plot. The peaks around bin $`\mathrm{}20`$, i.e. for plateau sizes of order $`O(200)`$, and another, weaker one around bin $`\mathrm{}40`$ (plateau sizes of order $`O(400)`$) represent a direct effect of the chosen size of the system’s memory $`t_{mem}=200`$. Succeeding boosts occurring with temporal distances of order $`O(kt_{mem})`$, $`k=1,2,\mathrm{}`$ are causally related due to the evolution rule (3) and the values of the systems variables. The remaining boost distances are clearly not directly related and their distribution represents a genuine emergent property of the systems dynamics.

As long as we use a systems memory, this perturbation of causally unrelated boost distances by causally related ones seems to be inevitable, but the moment of the peak’s first occurrence can be shifted towards larger plateau sizes as shown in Fig. (7). In that case, a memory depth of $`t_{mem}=800`$ was chosen. Accordingly, the peak shows up at about bin $`\mathrm{}80`$. Up to this value, the frequency $`f(s)`$ of plateau sizes $`s`$ scales according to

$$f(s)s^{1.17\pm 0.01}$$
(6)
thus indicating a randomized devil’s staircase function . The exponent obtained above represents a robust property of the system in spite of its inherent contingency indicated by Fig. (5). For comparison, the circled data in Fig. (7) represent the distribution of boost distances due to our evolution rules used earlier , where no noise threshold condition had been incorporated. The observed fragments’ distribution all over the spatiotemporal plane in the noise-free model is reflected in the sharp cutoff of frequencies for plateau sizes beyond $`s10^4`$.

### 2.2 Self-organized evolution of fractal evolution

As has already been remarked in the previous section, fractal evolution in the true sense of the word is effectively realized only if the interval width $`ϵ`$ is allowed to acquire different values during the systems evolution. According to a recently introduced idea , to be further elaborated here, we impose an additional long-term control cycle leading to an adaptive change of $`ϵ`$ on the next higher level of the system’s hierarchical nesting of feedback loops.

We thus let the system be driven by fluctuations of $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{exp}`$ measured with the same $`ϵ`$ during two succeeding long time spans or generations $`(n,n+1)`$. The difference $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{exp}(n+1)\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{exp}(n)`$ is practically always nonzero due to the finite time interval of data taking. To implement an adaptive change of $`ϵ`$ or resolution $`1/ϵ`$, respectively, with regard to an ever changing ruggedness of the whole fitness landscape, this difference is fed back into the consecutive value of $`ϵ`$ via the difference quotient of the power-law (5)

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{~}{\tau }}{\stackrel{~}{\tau }}=b\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ}{ϵ},$$
(7)
leading to

$$\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ=ϵ_{n+1}ϵ_n=\frac{ϵ_n}{b}\frac{\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{n+1}\stackrel{~}{\tau }_n}{\stackrel{~}{\tau }_n}.$$
(8)
Since the last term of Eq. (8) is generally non-zero due to the fluctuations of the mean lifetime, a different relative interval width results governing the two succeding generations, and is determined by

$$ϵ_{n+2}:=ϵ_{n+1}=ϵ_n\left(1+\frac{1}{b}\frac{\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{n+1}\stackrel{~}{\tau }_n}{\stackrel{~}{\tau }_n}\right).$$
(9)
The geometrical analogy to the analytical determination of the next value of $`ϵ_{n+2}`$ or $`ϵ_{n+1}`$, respectively, is given as follows: the latter lies at the intersection of the tangent at $`(ϵ_n,\stackrel{~}{\tau }_n)`$ belonging to the theoretical curve $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_n=a^{}ϵ_n^b`$ on one hand, and the horizontal line through $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{n+1}`$ on the other.

As a main result, we obtain a progressive alteration of $`ϵ`$ or the resolution $`1/ϵ`$, respectively, within the system’s evolution which we denote as “hierarchically emergent fractal evolution” (HEFE). In effect, HEFE constitutes a fluctuation driven and adaptive mechanism for the gradual increase of the mean lifetimes of the emerging patterns, i.e. for the expansions of regions of high fitness in the fitness landscape.

In Fig. (8), three examples of temporal evolutions of the mean lifetime per generation are shown according to three different time spans of each generation during which the mean lifetime is determined. Although fluctuations are allowed with equal opportunity for decreasing and increasing lifetimes, respectively, a long-term increase of the mean lifetimes is observed practically in all cases and has its origin in the functional property of the power-law (5): Denoting the deviation of the mean lifetime by $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{n+1}\stackrel{~}{\tau }_n=:\eta ^\pm \stackrel{~}{\tau }_n`$, and assuming one positive-valued deviation $`\eta ^+`$ for the consecutive generations $`(n,n+1)`$ and a negative-valued one $`\eta ^{}`$ of about equal size $`\eta ^+\eta ^{}`$ for the succeeding ones $`(n+2,n+3)`$, one obtains altogether a clear tendency towards decreasing relative interval widths

$$ϵ_{n+4}ϵ_n(1|\frac{\eta ^\pm }{b}|^2)<ϵ_n,$$
(10)
leading to an average increase of the mean lifetime $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$ per generation. If $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$ would depend, e.g., exponentially on $`ϵ`$, like $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }e^ϵ`$, $`ϵ`$ would only oscillate between two fixed values.

For relatively small time spans, i.e. for curve a) with 2000 time steps per generation, the fluctuation of the lifetimes is larger, of course, than for 10000 time steps. Therefore, the observed drastic increase of the mean lifetimes will occur sooner. In sum, the systems dynamics makes possible a long-term growth of each species’ lifetime and thus also of its complexity: larger lifetimes of high fitness periods inrease, e.g. via “learning", both the cognitive performances as well as the probabilty for survival of the species and, consequently, also the probability for genetic improvement via mutational mechanisms. As far as the cognitive functions are concerned, their improvement increases the lifetimes of high fitness values, and so on. We reach the limits of our model when the mean lifetimes in Fig. (8) reach the size of the system’s memory $`t_{mem}`$, because then fractal evolution gets disturbed  and new boundary conditions would have to be considered that might constrain the further evolution effectively.

Finally, we briefly discuss the evolution of the system’s entropy, which measures the fitness of the whole ensemble of species, and is simply chosen as the relative Shannon information entropy

$$\frac{S}{S_{max}}=\frac{1}{\mathrm{ln}N}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\rho (t,j)\mathrm{ln}\rho (t,j).$$
(11)
We can allocate the various activities within the systems evolution with regard to their specific entropy behavior in the following way. A site’s enhancement, i.e., an increased single species’ fitness value, lowers the system’s entropy at that time step due to the enlargement of the values’ differences within the array. The effect of the noise threshold and the decay of the fragments due to Eq. (1) are entropy increasing processes. Since the systems evolution with a given fixed value of $`ϵ`$ yields a stationary pattern production characterized by the fractal evolution exponent, an average value of the above described entropy contributions summed up for an appropriate long time interval is obtained for that specific $`ϵ`$. The larger the value of $`ϵ`$, the shorter the mean lifetime of the fragments and, consequently, the more rugged the fitness landscape will appear, thereby lowering the normalized entropy per time interval (cf. Fig. (9)).

With respect to the HEFE-mechanism, this means that the total entropy per time interval increases on the average due to the growth of the mean lifetimes. That is, within the scenario of macroevolution this effect can be considered as tendency towards maximal fitness of the whole ensemble of species under constant boundary conditions. Thus, internal evolutions within a species towards higher complexity are accompanied by a complementary, external increase of the entropy of the fitness landscape.

## 3 Conclusions

The scaling behavior of certain observables in dynamical systems is of particular relevance in a wide range of systems, be they geophysical, economical or biological, for example. Within the theoretical framework of the SOC theory some features of macroevolution have recently also become testable via a kind of “experimental paleontology” . They are made plausible by the concept of a system’s critical state which is reached after a certain evolutionary time, and which thereby exhibits a power-law behavior of the frequency of mutation activities with regard to their sizes. Yet they suffer from being trapped within the steady-state property of the system’s dynamics.

In this paper we have proposed a model for macroevolution based on concepts differing from the SOC model. Apart from some basic qualitative similarities (cf. Figs. (4) and (5)), we obtain substantially different results, primarily with regard to the time-invariant behavior of the system’s emerging order parameter: the power-law obtained in our model reflects a universal feature named “fractal evolution", which can be based on a variety of underlying mechanisms, including the option of a memory-based feedback operation. The four major problems specified in the introduction in order to overcome some weak points in existing models of macroevolution are solved by the implementation of a second feedback operation. The latter transforms the mere functional property of “fractal evolution" of the system’s fitness landscape via a fluctuation-based iterative mechanism into the dynamical process called “hierarchically emergent fractal evolution” (HEFE). In this way, a self-organized potential growth emerges on a long-term scale, such that the internal complexity of each species may gradually increase. However, throughout this work we have deliberately avoided a narrow definition of the term “complexity”, or a choice among the proliferating definitions in the literature, respectively . Instead, we have merely considered beneficial fitness domains for each species in the sense of potentials to evolve towards higher complexity, irrespective of the underlying concrete (self-organized) mechanisms. One main result of our study is that in our model such potentials grow with elapsing time.

We also emphasize the important role of randomness in our model, which is effective on various hierarchical levels. At the basic level of pattern generation, we observe a strong sensitivity of the patterns’ signature to slight variations of the initial conditions, similar to the features of deterministic chaos. An emerging global measure, irrespective of local system fluctuations, has been obtained in the form of the fractal evolution exponent. The incorporation of a noise threshold constraining the range of operational fitness values for each species enables the systems’ patterns to walk randomly across the whole array (cf. Figs. (2) and (4)), thereby producing activity/mutation patterns obeying a randomized devil’s staircase function. As in the SOC model , small deviations in the order of mutation events produce significant deviations from the course of the accumulated activity pattern (cf. Fig. (5)). The globally invariant measure in this case is given by the slope of the distribution function for the frequency of the periods of stasis versus their sizes (cf. Figs. (6) and (7)). Moreover, at the level of the self-organized change of the resolution-like parameter $`ϵ`$, the natural fluctuation of the order parameter $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$ within two runs (“generations”) under the same conditions iteratively serves as driving force towards a changing $`ϵ`$. The direction of this change appears on small time scales as a random walk. However, the long-time tendency towards the irreversible decrease of $`ϵ`$, and thus towards the increase of the mean lifetimes of the high fitness domains for each species, respectively, is firmly anchored in the HEFE mechanism (cf. Fig. (8)). More generally speaking, it is rooted in the basic mathematical properties of the power-law describing fractal evolution, and it leads in the long run to a mutual positive enhancement of potential cognitive abilities for all species on one hand, and lifetimes with high fitness values on the other.

Finally, the potential development of individual species towards gradually higher complexity (as represented by an evolution towards ever lower values of $`ϵ`$) is accompanied by a tendency towards highest entropy values for the whole fitness landscape under constant boundary conditions (cf. Fig. (9)). The HEFE mechanism can thus be interpreted such that a single species is constantly engaged, via the possibilities of beneficial selection versus detrimental extinction, in a struggle for higher fitness values, whereas there exists a global tendency of ever higher fitness values to emerge for the whole ensemble of species.


format: text

text:
# Open Superstring Star as a Continuous Moyal Product

## 1 Introduction

During the last year it has been realized that the vacuum string field theory (VSFT) equations of motion - are similar to the non-commutative soliton equations in the large non-commutativity limit . Soliton equations in this limit are just projector-like equations. Solutions of these equations are obtained immediately using an identification of fields with symbols of operators so that a non-local Moyal product of two fields corresponds to an operator product. To find solutions of VSFT matter equation of motion

$$|\mathrm{\Phi }|\mathrm{\Phi }=|\mathrm{\Phi },$$

where $``$ is the Witten star product , it is also useful to identify the string field functionals with the symbols of operators or with matrices (see  for a review). Half-string formalism is rather suitable for this purpose ,. The Witten $``$ and Moyal $``$ were first identified by Bars using the half-string formalism ,.

Recently, it has been shown by Douglas, Liu, Moore and Zwiebach  that the open string star product in the zero momentum sector can be described as a continuous tensor product of mutually commuting two-dimensional Moyal star products. Non-zero momentum case has been studied in . A continuous parameter $`\kappa `$ parameterizing components of the continuous tensor product is nothing but a parameter specifying the eigenvalues of the Neumann matrices of the three-string vertex operator. The three-string Neumann matrices can be diagonalized ,  and there is a basis of oscillators  in which the three-string vertex has a simple form

$$\begin{array}{c}|V_{123}=\mathrm{exp}[_0^{\mathrm{}}d\kappa (\frac{1}{2}\mu (\kappa )(o_\kappa ^1o_\kappa ^1+e_\kappa ^1e_\kappa ^1)+\mu _s(\kappa )(o_\kappa ^1o_\kappa ^2+e_\kappa ^1e_\kappa ^2)\hfill \\ \hfill +i\mu _a(\kappa )(e_\kappa ^1o_\kappa ^2o_\kappa ^1e_\kappa ^2)+\text{cyc. per.})]|0_{123}.\end{array}$$
(1.1)
A crucial observation  is that each factor in (1.1) is a two-dimensional Moyal product in the oscillator representation with a parameter of noncommutativity depending on $`\kappa `$. Indeed, the Moyal product with a parameter of noncommutativity $`\theta `$ of functions $`f`$ and $`g`$ of two-dimensional variables $`x`$

$$(fg)(x^3)𝑑x^1𝑑x^2K(x^1,x^2,x^3)f(x^1)g(x^2),$$

can be rewritten in the oscillator basic as $`|fg_3=_1f|{}_{2}{}^{}g|V_3^\text{M}_{123}^{}`$, with $`|V_3^\text{M}_{123}`$ given by

$$\begin{array}{c}|V_3^\text{M}_{123}=\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{2}m(\theta )(o^1o^1+e^1e^1)m_s(\theta )(o^1o^2+e^1e^2)\hfill \\ \hfill im_a(\theta )(o^1e^2e^1o^2)+\text{cyc. per.}]|0_{123}.\end{array}$$
(1.2)
Here $`m(\theta )`$, $`m_s(\theta )`$, and $`m_a(\theta )`$ are given functions of the parameter of noncommutativity and $`a^i=(e^i,o^i)`$ are oscillators corresponding to two-dimensional Moyal coordinates $`x^i=(q^i,p^i)`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$). One gets this representation using a standard formula for an eigenvector of the operator of coordinate in the oscillator representation

$$x|=0|\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{2}xx+i\sqrt{2}ax+\frac{1}{2}aa].$$
(1.3)
In  it has been observed that the components of the three-string vertex (1.1) have the form (1.2) for each $`\kappa `$, since $`\mu (\kappa (\theta ))=m(\theta )`$, $`\mu _s(\kappa (\theta ))=m_s(\theta )`$ and $`\mu _a(\kappa (\theta ))=m_a(\theta )`$ for $`\theta (\kappa )=2\mathrm{tanh}(\frac{\pi \kappa }{4})`$.

The purpose of the present paper is a generalization of this result to the case of the matter sector of the Neveu-Schwarz superstring. The Neveu-Schwarz superstring star algebra and its projectors have been studied in -. The spectroscopy problem of Neumann matrices has been solved by Marino and Schiappa , see also appendix of  for a discussion of orthonormality and completeness of Neumann matrices eigenvectors. Note, that it is reasonable from the very beginning to expect a modification of an analog of formula (1.3) specifying a suitable coordinate representation for definition of the star product as a Moyal product, since supersting overlaps have a more complicated form in comparison with the bosonic string overlaps (due to half-integer weights).

We begin in section 2 by reminding the Moyal product for the functions of anti-commuting variables (see for example , ). In section 3 we diagonalize the three-string matter vertex. In section 4 we identify the matter part of open superstring star with a continuous Moyal product. An essential difference from the bosonic case is a non-trivial dependence of the coordinate representation on $`\kappa `$ parameter. Namely, the coordinate representation is

$$\eta |0|\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa (\frac{1}{4}\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\eta _{\kappa ,\beta }+\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }c_{\alpha \beta }\psi _{\kappa ,\beta }+\frac{1}{2}\tau (\kappa )\psi _{\kappa ,\alpha }ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\psi _{\kappa ,\beta })\right],$$
(1.4)
where $`\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }=(\eta _{\kappa ,e},\eta _{\kappa ,o})`$ and $`\psi _{\kappa ,\alpha }=(e_\kappa ,o_\kappa )`$ are two-dimensional vectors of anti-commuting variables, $`\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )`$ and $`\tau (\kappa )`$ are functions of $`\kappa `$ and $`ϵ_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`c_{\alpha \beta }`$ are defined in (3.20) and (3.13). In section 5 we rewrite the Neveu-Schwarz matter identity and sliver in this coordinate representation. In section 6 we give a relationship between the Moyal basis and the half-string fermionic variables. In section 7 we finish by giving an identification of the Moyal structures for some special Neveu-Schwarz superghost vertices.

## 2 Moyal product of functions of anti-commuting variables

Here we describe the Moyal product for functions of anti-commuting variables $`r`$ and $`s`$, $`\{r,s\}=0`$. Let us consider a pair of operators $`\widehat{q}`$, $`\widehat{p}`$, satisfying the anti-commutation relations

$$\{\widehat{q},\widehat{p}\}=\theta ,\{\widehat{q},\widehat{q}\}=0,\{\widehat{p},\widehat{p}\}=0,$$
(2.1)
and the Weyl operators depending on the anti-commuting variables $`r`$ and $`s`$

$$U(r,s)=\mathrm{exp}(ir\widehat{q}+is\widehat{p}).$$
(2.2)
These operators satisfy the identity

$$U(r^1,s^1)U(r^2,s^2)=U(r^1+r^2,s^1+s^2)\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\theta }{2}(s^1r^2+r^1s^2)\right].$$
(2.3)
If a function $`f(q,p)`$ of two anti-commuting variables $`q`$, $`p`$ is given in terms of its Fourier transform

$$f(q,p)=𝑑s𝑑r\mathrm{exp}(iqrips)\stackrel{~}{f}(r,s),$$
(2.4)
then one can associate it with an operator $`\widehat{f}`$ by the following formula

$$\widehat{f}=𝑑s𝑑rU(r,s)\stackrel{~}{f}(r,s).$$
(2.5)
This procedure represents the Weyl quantization and the function $`f(q,p)`$ is the symbol of the operator $`\widehat{f}`$ (see for example ,). One has a correspondence

$$\widehat{f}f=f(q,p)$$
(2.6)
If two operators $`\widehat{f}_1`$ and $`\widehat{f}_2`$ are given by symbols $`f_1(q,p)`$ and $`f_2(q,p)`$ then the symbol of product $`\widehat{f}_1\widehat{f}_2`$ is given by the Moyal product $`(f_1f_2)(q,p)`$. One has

$$\begin{array}{c}\widehat{f}_1(\widehat{p},\widehat{q})\widehat{f}_2(\widehat{p},\widehat{q})=𝑑s^1𝑑r^1𝑑s^2𝑑r^2U(r^1,s^1)U(r^2,s^2)\stackrel{~}{f}_1(r^1,s^1)\stackrel{~}{f}_2(r^2,s^2)\hfill \\ \hfill 𝑑s^3𝑑r^3U(r^3,s^3)(\stackrel{~}{f_1f_2})(r^3,s^3).\end{array}$$
(2.7)
Define $`k=(r,s)`$, $`dk=dsdr`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{\alpha \beta }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \theta \\ \theta & 0\end{array}\right)`$. In terms of these notations one finds

$$(\stackrel{~}{f_1f_2})(k^3)=𝑑k^4\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Theta }_{\alpha \beta }k_\alpha ^4k_\beta ^3\right]\stackrel{~}{f}_1(k^4+\frac{1}{2}k^3)\stackrel{~}{f}_2(k^4+\frac{1}{2}k^3).$$
(2.8)
Introducing notations $`x=(q,p)`$ and $`dx=dpdq`$ and taking into account that

$$\stackrel{~}{f}(k)=𝑑x\mathrm{exp}(ixk)f(x),f(x)=𝑑k\mathrm{exp}(ixk)\stackrel{~}{f}(k),$$
(2.9)
one can rewrite (2.8) in terms of Fourier components

$$(f_1f_2)(x^3)=𝑑k^3\mathrm{exp}(ix^3k^3)(\stackrel{~}{f_1f_2})(k^3)𝑑x^1𝑑x^2K(x^1,x^2,x^3)f_1(x^1)f_2(x^2).$$
(2.10)
Integrating one gets the following expression for the kernel K:

$$K(x^1,x^2,x^3)=\frac{\theta ^2}{4}\mathrm{exp}[2(x^2x^3)_\alpha \mathrm{\Theta }_{\alpha \beta }^1(x^3x^1)_\beta ].$$
(2.11)
Notice a similarity of this formula with a corresponding bosonic formula . One finds

$$\{q,p\}_{}=\theta .$$
(2.12)
Also one has $`lim_{\theta 0}fg=fg`$.

## 3 Open superstring star in the continuous oscillator basis

### 3.1 Review of spectroscopy of the vertices

The commuting real symmetric matrices $`F_{rs}`$ and $`(C\stackrel{~}{F})_{rs}`$ (twist matrix $`C_{rs}=(1)^{r+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\delta _{rs}`$, $`r,s\frac{1}{2}`$) that specify the Neveu-Schwarz vertices have the common set of eigenvectors $`v_s(\kappa )`$ which are labelled by a continuous parameter $`\kappa (\mathrm{},\mathrm{})`$,

$$\underset{s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}F_{rs}v_s(\kappa )=f(\kappa )v_r(\kappa ),\underset{s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}(C\stackrel{~}{F})_{rs}v_s(\kappa )=\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )v_r(\kappa ).$$
(3.1)
and are given by the generating function

$$f_\kappa (z)=\underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}v_r(\kappa )z^{r+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}=𝒩(\kappa )^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\frac{z}{\sqrt{1+z^2}}\mathrm{exp}(\kappa \mathrm{arctan}(z)),$$
(3.2)
with normalization factor $`𝒩(\kappa )=2\mathrm{cosh}\left(\frac{\pi \kappa }{2}\right)`$ . The eigenvalues are given by

$$f(\kappa )=\frac{1}{\mathrm{cosh}(\frac{\pi \kappa }{2})}=\frac{1\tau ^2(\kappa )}{1+\tau ^2(\kappa )},\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )=\mathrm{tanh}\left(\frac{\pi \kappa }{2}\right)=\frac{2\tau (\kappa )}{1+\tau ^2(\kappa )},$$
(3.3)
where $`\tau (\kappa )=\mathrm{tanh}(\frac{\pi \kappa }{4})`$. The twist matrix $`C_{rs}`$ acts on eigenvectors as follows

$$\underset{s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}C_{rs}v_s(\kappa )=v_r(\kappa ).$$
(3.4)
and therefore odd and even components of the eigenvectors satisfy the relations

$$v_{r_o}(\kappa )=v_{r_o}(\kappa ),v_{r_e}(\kappa )=v_{r_e}(\kappa ).$$
(3.5)
Here we defined even $`r_e=2n\frac{1}{2}`$ and odd $`r_o=2n\frac{3}{2}`$ indices ($`n1`$). The eigenvectors $`v_r(\kappa )`$ are orthogonal and complete

$$\underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}v_r(\kappa _1)v_r(\kappa _2)=\delta (\kappa _1\kappa _2),_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa v_r(\kappa )v_s(\kappa )=\delta _{rs}.$$
(3.6)
### 3.2 Diagonalization of the vertex

As in the bosonic case ,, instead of usual Neveu-Schwarz matter oscillators ($`\psi _r,\psi _r^{}=\psi _r`$, $`r\frac{1}{2}`$) it is convenient to introduce the continuous oscillators (Lorentz index is omitted)

$$\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa =\underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}v_r(\kappa )\psi _r,\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^{}=\underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}v_r(\kappa )\psi _r^{}.$$
(3.7)
Due to anti-commutation relations $`\{\psi _r,\psi _s^{}\}=\delta _{rs}`$ the continuous oscillators satisfy the following anti-commutation relation

$$\{\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ,\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^{}^{}\}=\delta (\kappa \kappa ^{}).$$
(3.8)
The inverse of relations (3.7) are

$$\psi _r=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa v_r(\kappa )\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ,\psi _r^{}=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa v_r(\kappa )\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^{}.$$
(3.9)
Using the equations (A.3), (3.9) and the completeness relations (3.6) the three-string vertex

$$|V_3_{123}=\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}\underset{a,b=1}{\overset{3}{}}\underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\psi _r^a(CM^{ab})_{rs}\psi _s^b\right]|0_{123}$$
(3.10)
can be rewritten in the continuous basis

$$|V_3_{123}=\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}\underset{a,b=1}{\overset{3}{}}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \mu ^{ab}(\kappa )C\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^a\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^b\right]|0_{123}.$$
(3.11)
Here the twist operator $`C`$ acts in the continuous basis as follows: $`C\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^{}=\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^{}`$. Let us introduce even and odd continuous oscillators $`e_\kappa ^{}`$ and $`o_\kappa ^{}`$ with respect to $`C`$ conjugation

$`e_\kappa ^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^{}+C\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^{})=\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \underset{r_e}{}}v_{r_e}(\kappa )\psi _{r_e}^{},`$ $`\psi _{r_e}^{}`$ $`=\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\kappa v_{r_e}(\kappa )e_\kappa ^{},`$ (3.12a)
$`o_\kappa ^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^{}C\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^{})=\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \underset{r_o}{}}v_{r_o}(\kappa )\psi _{r_o}^{},`$ $`\psi _{r_o}^{}`$ $`=\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\kappa v_{r_o}(\kappa )o_\kappa ^{}.`$ (3.12b)
In this basis the twist $`C`$ matrix has a diagonal form

$$c_{\alpha \beta }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$
(3.13)
Define the two dimensional variable $`\psi _{\kappa ,\alpha }^{}=(e_\kappa ^{},o_\kappa ^{})`$. In these notations the anti-commutation relation (3.8) takes the form

$$\{\psi _{\kappa ,\alpha },\psi _{\kappa ^{},\beta }^{}\}=\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta (\kappa \kappa ^{}),\kappa ,\kappa ^{}>0.$$
(3.14)
Note that $`C\psi _{\kappa ,\alpha }=c_{\alpha \beta }\psi _{\kappa ,\beta }`$. The BPZ conjugation of $`\psi _r`$ and $`\psi _r`$ are given by (bpz$`{}_{}{}^{2}=1`$)

$$\text{bpz}(\psi _r)=(1)^{r+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\psi _r,\text{bpz}(\psi _r)=(1)^{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\psi _r,r\frac{1}{2}.$$
(3.15)
The BPZ conjugation does not change ordering $`\text{bpz}(\psi _r\psi _s)=\text{bpz}(\psi _r)\text{bpz}(\psi _s)`$. Using (3.15) one finds the following BPZ conjugation of the continuous oscillators

$$\text{bpz}(\psi _{\kappa ,\alpha }^{})=c_{\alpha \beta }\psi _{\kappa ,\beta },\text{bpz}(\psi _{\kappa ,\alpha })=c_{\alpha \beta }\psi _{\kappa ,\beta }^{}.$$
(3.16)
Using the relations $`e_\kappa ^{}=e_\kappa ^{}`$ and $`o_\kappa ^{}=o_\kappa ^{}`$ one can rewrite the three-string vertex (3.11) in terms of oscillators $`\psi _{\kappa ,\alpha }^{}=(e_\kappa ^{},o_\kappa ^{})`$ as

$$|V_3_{123}=\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \psi _{\kappa ,\alpha }^aV_{\kappa ,\alpha \beta }^{ab}\psi _{\kappa ,\beta }^b\right]|0_{123},$$
(3.17)
where $`V_{\kappa ,\alpha \beta }^{ab}`$ is $`6\times 6`$ matrix defined by

$$V_{\kappa ,\alpha \beta }^{ab}=\mu (\kappa )ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\delta ^{ab}+\mu _a(\kappa )c_{\alpha \beta }\chi ^{ab}+\mu _s(\kappa )ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\epsilon ^{ab};$$
(3.18)
$$\mu \mu ^{11}=\tau \frac{1\tau ^2}{1+3\tau ^2},\mu _s\frac{1}{2}(\mu ^{12}+\mu ^{21})=\tau \frac{1+\tau ^2}{1+3\tau ^2},\mu _a\frac{1}{2}(\mu ^{12}\mu ^{21})=\frac{1+\tau ^2}{1+3\tau ^2}.$$
(3.19)
Also we use the notations of

$$\chi ^{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 1& 1\\ 1& 0& 1\\ 1& 1& 0\end{array}\right),\epsilon ^{ab}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 1& 1\\ 1& 0& 1\\ 1& 1& 0\end{array}\right),ϵ_{\alpha \beta }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(3.20)
Here and further the summation over $`a,b=1,2,3`$ is assumed.

### 3.3 Diagonalization of the identity and sliver

For the identity and sliver one finds the following expressions in the continuous basis

$`|I=\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}}\psi _r^{}I_{rs}\psi _s^{}\right]|0=\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\kappa \tau (\kappa )e_\kappa ^{}o_\kappa ^{}\right]|0,`$ (3.21)
$`|\mathrm{\Xi }=\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}}\psi _r^{}(CT)_{rs}\psi _s^{}\right]|0=\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\kappa T(\kappa )e_\kappa ^{}o_\kappa ^{}\right]|0,`$ (3.22)
where $`T(\kappa )=\mathrm{exp}(\frac{1}{2}\pi \kappa )={\displaystyle \frac{1\tau (\kappa )}{1+\tau (\kappa )}}`$. $`𝒩_I`$ and $`𝒩_\mathrm{\Xi }`$ are defined to be the norms of the surface states

$$𝒩_II|I=(det(1+(CI)^2))^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\text{and}𝒩_\mathrm{\Xi }\mathrm{\Xi }|\mathrm{\Xi }=(det(1+T^2))^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}.$$
(3.23)
Actually these norms are infinite and the inclusion of ghost sector will apparently cancel the singularities. A similar problem in the bosonic case is discussed for example in .

## 4 Identification of Moyal structures

In this section we identify the Moyal structures in the three-string vertex by finding an appropriate coordinate representation. In the first subsection we introduce the coordinate representation and find the partition of unity. In the second subsection we use this coordinate representation for identification of the three-string star with the Moyal product of functions of anti-commuting variables introduced in section 2.

### 4.1 Coordinate representation

Introduce the following continuous coordinate representation

$$\eta |0|\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa (\frac{1}{4}\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\eta _{\kappa ,\beta }+\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }c_{\alpha \beta }\psi _{\kappa ,\beta }+\frac{1}{2}\tau (\kappa )\psi _{\kappa ,\alpha }ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\psi _{\kappa ,\beta })\right],$$
(4.1)
where $`\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }=(\eta _{\kappa ,e},\eta _{\kappa ,o})`$ are anti-commuting variables. Actually these variables can be rescaled. We choose a fixed scale. The BPZ conjugated state $`\text{bpz}(\eta |)|\eta `$ is given by (use (3.16))

$$|\eta =\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa (\frac{1}{4}\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\eta _{\kappa ,\beta }\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }\delta _{\alpha \beta }\psi _{\kappa ,\beta }^{}\frac{1}{2}\tau (\kappa )\psi _{\kappa ,\alpha }^{}ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\psi _{\kappa ,\beta }^{})\right]|0.$$
(4.2)
The states $`\eta |`$ are eigenstates of the operators

$$\widehat{\eta }_{\kappa ,e}=e_\kappa ^{}+\tau (\kappa )o_\kappa ,\widehat{\eta }_{\kappa ,o}=\tau (\kappa )e_\kappa o_\kappa ^{},$$
(4.3a)
with eigenvalues $`\eta _{\kappa ,e}`$ and $`\eta _{\kappa ,o}`$. Also

$$\{\widehat{\eta }_{\kappa ,\alpha },\widehat{\eta }_{\kappa ^{},\beta }^{}\}=\theta (\kappa )\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta (\kappa \kappa ^{}),$$
(4.4)
where $`\theta (\kappa )=1+\tau ^2(\kappa )`$. To understand a meaning of the coordinates $`\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }`$ it is useful to rewrite them in the discrete basis:

$`\stackrel{~}{\eta }_\kappa `$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}}v_r(\kappa )\eta _r,`$ (4.5a)
$`\eta _{\kappa ,e}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(\stackrel{~}{\eta }_\kappa +C\stackrel{~}{\eta }_\kappa )=\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \underset{r_e}{}}v_{r_e}(\kappa )\eta _{r_e},`$ (4.5b)
$`\eta _{\kappa ,o}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(\stackrel{~}{\eta }_\kappa C\stackrel{~}{\eta }_\kappa )=\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \underset{r_o}{}}v_{r_o}(\kappa )\eta _{r_o}.`$ (4.5c)
In terms of these discrete variables the coordinate representation (4.2) takes the form

$$|\eta =\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{4}\underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\eta _r\stackrel{~}{F}_{rs}\eta _s\underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\eta _r\psi _r^{}+\frac{1}{2}\underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\psi _r^{}I_{rs}\psi _s^{}\right]|0.$$
(4.6)
One sees that $`|\eta `$ has an interpretation of a coherent state over the identity surface state. One finds

$$\eta |\lambda =𝒩_I\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \frac{1}{\theta (\kappa )}\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }c_{\alpha \beta }\lambda _{\kappa ,\beta }\right]=𝒩_I\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}\underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\eta _r((1F)C)_{rs}\lambda _s\right].$$
(4.7)
This provides the following partition of unit operator in continuous and discrete basis:

$$1=𝒩_I𝐝\eta 𝐝\lambda \mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \frac{1}{\theta (\kappa )}\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }c_{\alpha \beta }\lambda _{\kappa ,\beta }\right]|\eta \lambda |;$$
(4.8a)
$$1=𝒩_I𝐝\eta 𝐝\lambda \mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{2}_{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\eta _r((1F)C)_{rs}\lambda _s]|\eta \lambda |,$$
(4.8b)
where $`𝐝\eta _{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}d\eta _r`$.

### 4.2 Open superstring star as a continuous Moyal product

In this subsection we insert two partitions of unity (4.8) in the three-string star product and identify it with the Moyal product of functions of anti-commuting variables introduced in section 2. The string field functional corresponding to string field $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is given by $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\eta )\eta |\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }|\eta `$. Inserting two partitions of unity (4.8) in the three-string star product

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }^1\mathrm{\Psi }^2_3=_1\mathrm{\Psi }^1|{}_{2}{}^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^2|V_3_{123}^{}$$
(4.9)
and multiplying it with $`\eta ^3|`$ one obtains

$$\begin{array}{c}\eta ^3|\mathrm{\Psi }^1\mathrm{\Psi }^2=𝒩_I^2\underset{a=1,2}{}𝐝\eta ^a𝐝\lambda ^a\mathrm{\Psi }^a|\eta ^a\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \frac{1}{\theta (\kappa )}\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^ac_{\alpha \beta }\lambda _{\kappa ,\beta }^a\right]K(\lambda ^1,\lambda ^2,\eta ^3)\hfill \\ \hfill =𝐝\eta ^1𝐝\eta ^2\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\eta ^1)\mathrm{\Psi }^2(\eta ^2)\stackrel{~}{K}(\eta ^1,\eta ^2,\eta ^3).\end{array}$$
(4.10)
Here the kernel $`K(\eta ^1,\eta ^2,\eta ^3)`$ is given by

$$K(\eta ^1,\eta ^2,\eta ^3){}_{1}{}^{}\eta ^1|{}_{2}{}^{}\eta ^2|{}_{3}{}^{}\eta ^3|V_3_{123}^{}=𝒩_K\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{2}_0^{\mathrm{}}d\kappa \frac{1}{\theta (\kappa )}\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^ac_{\alpha \beta }\chi ^{ab}\eta _{\kappa ,\beta }^b],$$
(4.11)
where normalization $`𝒩_K`$ is of the form

$$𝒩_K=\left[det\left(\frac{1}{4}(1F)^2(2+F)\right)\right]^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}.$$
(4.12)
Integration over $`\lambda ^1`$ and $`\lambda ^2`$ in (4.10) yields

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{K}(\eta ^1,\eta ^2,\eta ^3)=𝒩_K𝒩_I^2𝐝\lambda ^1𝐝\lambda ^2\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \frac{1}{\theta (\kappa )}(\underset{a=1,2}{}\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^ac_{\alpha \beta }\lambda _{\kappa ,\beta }^a)\right]\hfill \\ \hfill \times \mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}d\kappa \frac{1}{\theta (\kappa )}(\lambda _{\kappa ,\alpha }^1c_{\alpha \beta }\lambda _{\kappa ,\beta }^2+\lambda _{\kappa ,\alpha }^2c_{\alpha \beta }\eta _{\kappa ,\beta }^3+\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^3c_{\alpha \beta }\lambda _{\kappa ,\beta }^1)\right]=K(\eta ^1,\eta ^2,\eta ^3).\end{array}$$
(4.13)
Finally one finds

$$\begin{array}{c}(\mathrm{\Psi }^1\mathrm{\Psi }^2)(\eta ^3)=𝐝\eta ^1𝐝\eta ^2\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\eta ^1)\mathrm{\Psi }^2(\eta ^2)K(\eta ^1,\eta ^2,\eta ^3)\hfill \\ \hfill =𝐝\eta ^1𝐝\eta ^2\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\eta ^1)\mathrm{\Psi }^2(\eta ^2)K(\eta ^1,\eta ^2,\eta ^3).\end{array}$$
(4.14)
Note that there is a minus sign in the argument of functional $`\mathrm{\Psi }^1`$ in the last line of (4.14). This is a mild (up to a sign) associativity anomaly which was found in  and has been recently discussed in . Note that this anomaly exist only in the GSO$``$ sector. The star product is associative in the GSO$`+`$ sector.

For the identification with the Moyal product obtained in section 2 instead of $`\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }=(\eta _{\kappa ,e},\eta _{\kappa ,o})`$ it is relevant to use the anti-commuting variables $`x_\kappa =(q_\kappa ,p_\kappa )`$

$$q_\kappa =\frac{1}{2}(\eta _{\kappa ,e}+\eta _{\kappa ,o}),p_\kappa =\frac{1}{2}(\eta _{\kappa ,e}\eta _{\kappa ,o}).$$
(4.15)
In terms of these variables the kernel (4.11) takes the form

$$K(x^1,x^2,x^3)K(\eta ^1,\eta ^2,\eta ^3)=\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \frac{2}{\theta (\kappa )}q_\kappa ^a\chi ^{ab}p_\kappa ^b\right].$$
(4.16)
Up to normalization this coincides for every $`\kappa `$ with the Moyal kernel (2.11). Further we will also use the notation $`x|`$ instead of $`\eta |`$ ($`x|\eta |`$). Note also that

$$\{q_\kappa ,p_\kappa ^{}\}_{}=\theta (\kappa )\delta (\kappa \kappa ^{}).$$
(4.17)
## 5 Sliver, identity and wedge states

Now we are going to rewrite the well known star algebra projectors, the identity (3.21) and sliver (3.22), in the $`x_\kappa =(p_\kappa ,q_\kappa )`$ basis. In the coordinate representation the sliver is given by

$$x|\mathrm{\Xi }=(det(1+CIT))^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \frac{2}{\theta (\kappa )}q_\kappa p_\kappa \right].$$
(5.1)
One expects this answer since $`f(x)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{exp}(\frac{2}{\theta }qp)`$ is a projector with respect to the Moyal product of functions of anti-commuting variables (2.10). In the coordinate representation the identity is given by

$$x|I=𝒩_I.$$
(5.2)
This is also an expected answer since $`f(x)=1`$ is a projector of the Moyal product (2.10). So we found that up to normalization the sliver and identity in the coordinate representation are the projectors with respect to the Moyal product.

A few comment on wedge states. It is known that the star algebra has a subalgebra of the wedge states $`|n`$, $`n1`$ with the multiplication rule  <sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1For algebraic construction of wedge states for Neveu-Schwarz string see .

$$|n|m=|n+m1,$$
(5.3)
where $`|1`$ corresponds to the identity $`|I`$ and $`|2`$ corresponds to the Neveu-Schwarz superstring vacuum $`|0`$. The wedge states subalgebra has a natural interpretation in terms of the Moyal product of wedge states in coordinate representation. The ground state and the identity functions are $`f^1(x)x|0`$ and $`f^0(x)x|I`$, respectively. It is known that the wedge states $`|n`$ can be obtained by multiplying the vacuum $`n1`$ times, i.e. $`|n=(|0)_{}^{n1}`$. In the functional language $`f^{n1}(x)x|n`$ and one gets a correspondence

$$\underset{n1}{\underset{}{|0|0\mathrm{}|0}}=|nf^{n1}(x)=\underset{n1}{\underset{}{f^1f^1\mathrm{}f^1}}(x)$$
(5.4)
for $`n2`$. This means that there is a subalgebra of algebra with a Moyal product. Basis elements of this subalgebra are $`f^n(x)`$; $`f^0(x)`$ is the identity and the multiplication rule is given by

$$(f^nf^m)(x)=f^{n+m}(x).$$
(5.5)
## 6 Relation with half-string fermionic variables

In this section we give a relationship between the continuous Moyal basis and the half-string fermionic variables. To work out half-sting fermionic variables it is more convenient to use $`x_\kappa =(q_\kappa ,p_\kappa )`$ basis. In this basis (4.14) takes the form

$$\begin{array}{c}(\mathrm{\Psi }^1\mathrm{\Psi }^2)(q^3,p^3)=𝒩_K𝐝q^1𝐝p^1𝐝q^2𝐝p^2\mathrm{\Psi }^1(q^1,p^1)\mathrm{\Psi }^2(q^2,p^2)\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \frac{2}{\theta (\kappa )}q_\kappa ^a\chi ^{ab}p_\kappa ^b\right].\hfill \end{array}$$
(6.1)
Often for simplicity we will omit index $`\kappa `$ in the coordinates. Performing Fourier transformation in $`p_\kappa `$ variable

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(q,u)𝐝p\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa p_\kappa u_\kappa \right]\mathrm{\Psi }(q,p),$$
(6.2)
where $`𝐝p_{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}dp_r`$ for discrete basis and introducing the notation

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(q,u)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}(q_\kappa \frac{\theta (\kappa )}{2}u_\kappa ,q_\kappa +\frac{\theta (\kappa )}{2}u_\kappa )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}(\psi ^l,\psi ^r)$$
(6.3)
one rewrites (6.1) as

$$(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }^1\mathrm{\Psi }^2})(\psi ^l,\psi ^r)=𝐝p\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa p_\kappa u_\kappa \right](\mathrm{\Psi }^1\mathrm{\Psi }^2)(q,p)=𝒩_H𝐝\xi \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^1(\psi ^l,\xi )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^2(\xi ,\psi ^r),$$
(6.4)
where $`𝒩_H`$ is normalization constant. The operators corresponding to the left and right fermionic variables $`\psi ^l`$ and $`\psi ^r`$ in the oscillator representation are given by

$$\widehat{\psi }_\kappa ^l=\widehat{q}_\kappa \frac{\theta (\kappa )}{2}\widehat{u}_\kappa =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}((\tau (\kappa )1)\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa +(\tau (\kappa )+1)C\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^{}),$$
(6.5a)
$$\widehat{\psi }_\kappa ^r=\widehat{q}_\kappa +\frac{\theta (\kappa )}{2}\widehat{u}_\kappa =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}((\tau (\kappa )+1)\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa (\tau (\kappa )1)C\stackrel{~}{\psi }_\kappa ^{}).$$
(6.5b)
Here $`\widehat{u}_\kappa =\frac{1}{\theta (\kappa )}(\widehat{\eta }_{\kappa ,e}^{}\widehat{\eta }_{\kappa ,o}^{})`$. In discrere basis (6.5) takes the form

$$\widehat{\psi }_\kappa ^l=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )}((C\psi ^{}+F\psi +\stackrel{~}{F}\psi ^{})_s+C_{sr}(C\psi +F\psi ^{}+\stackrel{~}{F}\psi )_r)v_s(\kappa ),$$
(6.6a)
$$\widehat{\psi }_\kappa ^r=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )}((C\psi ^{}+F\psi +\stackrel{~}{F}\psi ^{})_sC_{sr}(C\psi +F\psi ^{}+\stackrel{~}{F}\psi )_r)v_s(\kappa ).$$
(6.6b)
Formulae (6.6) suggest the following half-string fermionic variables

$$l_r=\frac{1}{\pi }_{\frac{\pi }{2}}^{\frac{\pi }{2}}𝑑\sigma e^{ir\sigma }\psi (\sigma ),r_s=\frac{1}{\pi }_{\frac{\pi }{2}}^{\frac{\pi }{2}}𝑑\sigma e^{is\sigma }i\psi (\pi \sigma ),$$
(6.7)
such that

$`l_{r_e}`$ $`=\psi _{r_e}+F_{r_es_e}\psi _{s_e}^{}+\stackrel{~}{F}_{r_es_o}\psi _{s_o},`$ $`l_{r_o}=\psi _{r_o}F_{r_os_o}\psi _{s_o}^{}\stackrel{~}{F}_{r_os_e}\psi _{s_e};`$ (6.8a)
$`r_{r_e}`$ $`=\psi _{r_e}^{}+F_{r_es_e}\psi _{s_e}+\stackrel{~}{F}_{r_es_o}\psi _{s_o}^{},`$ $`r_{r_o}=\psi _{r_o}^{}+F_{r_os_o}\psi _{s_o}+\stackrel{~}{F}_{r_os_e}\psi _{s_e}^{}.`$ (6.8b)
In this case the left operator $`\widehat{\psi }_\kappa ^l`$ and the right operator $`\widehat{\psi }_\kappa ^r`$ are expressed in terms of the left and right fermionic oscillators (6.8)

$$\psi _\kappa ^l=\underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )}(l_r+C_{rs}l_s^{})v_r(\kappa )\text{and}\psi _\kappa ^r=\underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )}(r_rC_{rs}r_s^{})v_r(\kappa ).$$
(6.9)
This gives a precise relationship between the half-string fermionic variables and the continuous Moyal basis.

## 7 Superghost vertex as Moyal kernel

The ghost vertex for the bosonic string was identified with the Moyal product in the bosonized form in ,  and in non-bosonized form in the Siegel gauge in . The most direct way for an identification of superghost vertex with the Moyal product will be to use the bosonized form of superghosts and picture changing operator $`Y_2=Y(i)Y(i)`$. However, in this section we use the non-bosonized language to give a diagonalization of the minus one picture three-string vertex, which can be identified with the continuous Moyal product in the manner analogous to the one which was used in the Neveu-Schwarz matter case. Similarly one can define the three-string vertex in picture minus two, so that the string fields are in picture zero. If all three vacua in the three-string vertex are in picture minus two then we can define the continuous variables making a shift in creation and annihilation operators that corresponds to a shift of all vacua from one picture to another. Such diagonalization is alike the one presented in this section but more cumbersome.

### 7.1 Diagonalization of vertex

In this subsection we introduce the continuous oscillators and diagonalize the three-string superghost vertex in the minus one picture. The Neveu-Schwarz superghost oscillators satisfy the following commutation relation and hermitian conjugation properties

$$[\gamma _r,\beta _s]=\delta _{r+s,0},\gamma _r^{}=\gamma _r,\beta _s^{}=\beta _s.$$
(7.1)
The minus one picture vacuum is defined so that

$$\gamma _r|1=0,r\frac{1}{2},\beta _s|1=0,s\frac{1}{2},$$
(7.2)
and $`1|1=1`$. For this vacuum the BPZ conjugation is (bpz$`{}_{}{}^{2}=1`$)

$$\text{bpz}(\gamma _r)=(1)^{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\gamma _r,r\frac{1}{2},\text{bpz}(\gamma _r)=(1)^{r+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}\gamma _r,r\frac{1}{2},$$
(7.3a)
$$\text{bpz}(\beta _s)=(1)^{s+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{3}{2}}}\beta _s,s\frac{1}{2},\text{bpz}(\beta _s)=(1)^{s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{3}{2}}}\beta _s,s\frac{1}{2}.$$
(7.3b)
Let us define oscillators in the continuous basis as follows

$$\stackrel{~}{\beta }_\kappa ^{}=\underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}v_r(\kappa )\beta _r,\stackrel{~}{\beta }_\kappa =\underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}v_r(\kappa )\beta _r,$$
(7.4a)
$$\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_\kappa ^{}=\underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}v_r(\kappa )\gamma _r,\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_\kappa =\underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}v_r(\kappa )\gamma _r.$$
(7.4b)
The commutation relations (7.1) in the continuous basis become

$$[\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_\kappa ,\stackrel{~}{\beta }_\kappa ^{}^{}]=[\stackrel{~}{\beta }_\kappa ,\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_\kappa ^{}^{}]=\delta (\kappa \kappa ^{}).$$
(7.5)
The twist operator $`C`$ acts in the continuous basis as follows: $`C\stackrel{~}{\beta }_\kappa ^{}=\stackrel{~}{\beta }_\kappa ^{}`$ and $`C\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_\kappa ^{}=\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_\kappa ^{}`$. Now introduce the even and odd under $`C`$ conjugation oscillators

$$\beta _{\kappa ,e}^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\stackrel{~}{\beta }_\kappa ^{}+C\stackrel{~}{\beta }_\kappa ^{}),\beta _{\kappa ,o}^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\stackrel{~}{\beta }_\kappa ^{}C\stackrel{~}{\beta }_\kappa ^{}),$$
(7.6a)
$$\gamma _{\kappa ,e}^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_\kappa ^{}+C\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_\kappa ^{}),\gamma _{\kappa ,o}^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_\kappa ^{}C\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_\kappa ^{}).$$
(7.6b)
We use the following notations: $`\beta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^{}=(\beta _{\kappa ,e}^{},\beta _{\kappa ,o}^{})`$ and $`\gamma _{\kappa ,\alpha }^{}=(\gamma _{\kappa ,e}^{},\gamma _{\kappa ,o}^{})`$. Using (7.3) one finds the following BPZ conjugation of the continuous oscillators

$$\text{bpz}(\beta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^{})=c_{\alpha \beta }\beta _{\kappa ,\beta },\text{bpz}(\gamma _{\kappa ,\alpha }^{})=c_{\alpha \beta }\gamma _{\kappa ,\beta }.$$
(7.7)
The Neveu-Schwarz superghost three-string vertex in the minus one picture in discrete and continuous basis is given by

$$|\stackrel{~}{V}_3_{123}=\mathrm{exp}\left[\underset{a,b=1}{\overset{3}{}}\underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\beta _r^a(C\stackrel{~}{M}^{ab})_{rs}\gamma _s^b\right]|1_{123};$$
(7.8)
$$|\stackrel{~}{V}_3_{123}=\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \beta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^a\stackrel{~}{V}_{\kappa ,\alpha \beta }^{ab}\gamma _{\kappa ,\beta }^b\right]|1_{123}.$$
(7.9)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{\kappa ,\alpha \beta }^{ab}`$ is $`6\times 6`$ matrix of the form

$$\stackrel{~}{V}_{\kappa ,\alpha \beta }^{ab}=\stackrel{~}{\mu }(\kappa )ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\delta ^{ab}+\stackrel{~}{\mu }_a(\kappa )c_{\alpha \beta }\chi ^{ab}+\stackrel{~}{\mu }_s(\kappa )ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\epsilon ^{ab};$$
(7.10)
and

$$\stackrel{~}{\mu }\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{11}=\stackrel{~}{\tau }\frac{1\stackrel{~}{\tau }^2}{1+3\stackrel{~}{\tau }^2},\stackrel{~}{\mu }_s\frac{1}{2}(\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{12}+\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{21})=\stackrel{~}{\tau }\frac{1+\stackrel{~}{\tau }^2}{1+3\stackrel{~}{\tau }^2},\stackrel{~}{\mu }_a\frac{1}{2}(\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{12}\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{21})=\frac{1+\stackrel{~}{\tau }^2}{1+3\stackrel{~}{\tau }^2},$$
(7.11)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }(\kappa )=\mathrm{coth}\left(\frac{\pi \kappa }{4}\right)`$.

### 7.2 Identification of Moyal structures

In this subsection we introduce the coordinate representation in which the three-string vertex becomes the Moyal kernel. We find the partition of unity and identify the Moyal structures. Introduce the continuous coordinate representation as follows

$$\eta |=1|\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa (\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\beta ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\eta _{\kappa ,\beta }^\gamma +\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\gamma c_{\alpha \beta }\beta _{\kappa ,\beta }\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\beta c_{\alpha \beta }\gamma _{\kappa ,\beta }+\stackrel{~}{\tau }(\kappa )\beta _{\kappa ,\alpha }ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\gamma _{\kappa ,\beta })\right],$$
(7.12)
where $`\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\beta =(\eta _{\kappa ,e}^\beta ,\eta _{\kappa ,o}^\beta )`$ and $`\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\gamma =(\eta _{\kappa ,e}^\gamma ,\eta _{\kappa ,o}^\gamma )`$. The BPZ conjugated state $`\text{bpz}(\stackrel{~}{\eta }|)|\stackrel{~}{\eta }`$ is given by

$$|\eta =\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa (\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{f}(\kappa )\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\beta ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\eta _{\kappa ,\beta }^\gamma \eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\gamma \delta _{\alpha \beta }\beta _{\kappa ,\beta }^{}\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\beta \delta _{\alpha \beta }\gamma _{\kappa ,\beta }^{}+\stackrel{~}{\tau }(\kappa )\beta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^{}ϵ_{\alpha \beta }\gamma _{\kappa ,\beta }^{})\right]|1.$$
(7.13)
Let us rewrite this coordinate representation in discrete basis. Introduce the discrete variables

$`\stackrel{~}{\eta }_\kappa ^\beta `$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}}v_r(\kappa )\eta _r^\beta ,`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }_\kappa ^\gamma `$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}}v_r(\kappa )\eta _r^\gamma ,`$ (7.14a)
$`\eta _{\kappa ,e}^\beta `$ $`=\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \underset{r_e}{}}v_{r_e}(\kappa )\eta _{r_e}^\beta ,`$ $`\eta _{\kappa ,e}^\gamma `$ $`=\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \underset{r_e}{}}v_{r_e}(\kappa )\eta _{r_e}^\gamma ,`$ (7.14b)
$`\eta _{\kappa ,o}^\beta `$ $`=\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \underset{r_o}{}}v_{r_o}(\kappa )\eta _{r_o}^\beta ,`$ $`\eta _{\kappa ,o}^\gamma `$ $`=\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \underset{r_o}{}}v_{r_o}(\kappa )\eta _{r_o}^\gamma .`$ (7.14c)
In terms of these discrete variables the coordinate representation (7.13) takes the form

$$|\eta =\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}\underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\eta _r^\beta \stackrel{~}{F}_{rs}\eta _s^\gamma \underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\eta _r^\gamma \beta _r\underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\eta _r^\beta \gamma _r+\underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}\beta _r\stackrel{~}{I}_{rs}\gamma _s\right]|1.$$
(7.15)
Notice that $`|\eta `$ has an interpretation of the coherent state over the identity surface state in the picture minus one. One finds in the continuous and discrete basis

$$\eta |\lambda =\stackrel{~}{𝒩}_I\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{\theta }(\kappa )}(\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\beta c_{\alpha \beta }\lambda _{\kappa ,\beta }^\gamma \eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\gamma c_{\alpha \beta }\lambda _{\kappa ,\beta }^\beta )\right],$$
(7.16a)
$$\eta |\lambda =\stackrel{~}{𝒩}_I\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}\underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}(\eta _r^\beta ((1+F)C)_{rs}\lambda _s^\gamma \eta _r^\gamma ((1+F)C)_{rs}\lambda _s^\beta )\right],$$
(7.16b)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }(\kappa )=1+\stackrel{~}{\tau }^2(\kappa )`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝒩}_I=det(1+(C\stackrel{~}{I})^2)^1`$. The partitions of unity in the continuous and discrete basis are given by

$$1=\stackrel{~}{𝒩}_I𝐝\eta ^\beta 𝐝\eta ^\gamma 𝐝\lambda ^\beta 𝐝\lambda ^\gamma \mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\kappa \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{\theta }(\kappa )}(\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\beta c_{\alpha \beta }\lambda _{\kappa ,\beta }^\gamma \eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^\gamma c_{\alpha \beta }\lambda _{\kappa ,\beta }^\beta )\right]|\eta \lambda |;$$
(7.17a)
$$1=\stackrel{~}{𝒩}_I𝐝\eta ^\beta 𝐝\eta ^\gamma 𝐝\lambda ^\beta 𝐝\lambda ^\gamma \mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}\underset{r,s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}(\eta _r^\beta ((1+F)C)_{rs}\lambda _s^\gamma \eta _r^\gamma ((1+F)C)_{rs}\lambda _s^\beta )\right]|\eta \lambda |.$$
(7.17b)
Here

$$𝐝\eta ^\beta \underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}d\eta _r^\beta ,𝐝\eta ^\gamma \underset{r{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}d\eta _r^\gamma .$$
(7.18)
The functional corresponding to string field $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ in the minus one picture is given by $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\eta )\eta |\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }|\eta `$. Inserting two partitions of unity (7.17) in the three-string superghost star product

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }^1\mathrm{\Psi }^2_3=_1\mathrm{\Psi }^1|{}_{2}{}^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^2|\stackrel{~}{V}_3_{123}^{}$$
(7.19)
one finally finds

$$(\mathrm{\Psi }^1\mathrm{\Psi }^2)(\eta ^3)=𝐝\eta ^{\beta \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}𝐝\eta ^{\gamma \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}𝐝\eta ^{\beta \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}𝐝\eta ^{\gamma \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}\mathrm{\Psi }^1(\eta ^1)\mathrm{\Psi }^2(\eta ^2)K(\eta ^1,\eta ^2,\eta ^3).$$
(7.20)
Here the kernel corresponding to the three-string vertex (7.9) is given by

$$K(\eta ^1,\eta ^2,\eta ^3){}_{1}{}^{}\eta ^1|{}_{2}{}^{}\eta ^2|{}_{3}{}^{}\eta ^3|\stackrel{~}{V}_3_{123}^{}=\stackrel{~}{𝒩}_K\mathrm{exp}[_0^{\mathrm{}}d\kappa \frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{\theta }(\kappa )}\eta _{\kappa ,\alpha }^{\beta a}c_{\alpha \beta }\chi ^{ab}\eta _{\kappa ,\beta }^{\gamma b}],$$
(7.21)
and

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒩}_K=det\left(\frac{1}{4}(1+F)^2(2F)\right).$$
(7.22)
## Acknowledgments

We would like to thank D. Belov, A. Koshelev and I. Volovich for useful discussions. This work was supported in part by RFBR grant 02-01-00695 and RFBR grant for leading scientific schools and by INTAS grant 99-0590.

## Appendices

## Appendix A The three-string matter vertex

The Neveu-Schwarz three-string matter vertex and identity Neumann matrices are expressed in terms of the real symmetric matrices $`F`$ and $`C\stackrel{~}{F}`$ as

$$M^{11}=\frac{FC\stackrel{~}{F}}{(1F)(2+F)},M^{12}=\frac{C\stackrel{~}{F}+(1F)}{(1F)(2+F)},M^{21}=\frac{C\stackrel{~}{F}(1F)}{(1F)(2+F)},CI=\frac{C\stackrel{~}{F}}{1F}.$$
(A.1)
They satisfy the following cyclic property

$$M^{a+1b+1}=M^{ab},a,b,a+1,b+1(\text{ mod }3).$$
(A.2)
These matrices are commuting and have the same as $`F`$ and $`C\stackrel{~}{F}`$ set of eigenvectors

$$\underset{s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}M_{rs}^{ab}v_s(\kappa )=\mu ^{ab}(\kappa )v_r(\kappa ),\underset{s{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}}{}(CI)_{rs}v_s(\kappa )=\tau (\kappa )v_r(\kappa ),$$
(A.3)
the eigenvalues (3.19) are given in . Note also that $`\mu ^{ab}(\kappa )=\mu ^{ba}(\kappa )`$.

The hermitian matrices $`F_{rs}`$ and $`(C\stackrel{~}{F})_{rs}`$ are defined by

$$F_{rs}=\frac{2}{\pi }\frac{ı^{rs}}{r+s},r=s\text{ mod }2,\stackrel{~}{F}_{rs}=\frac{2}{\pi }\frac{ı^{r+s}}{rs},r=s+1\text{ mod }2.$$
(A.4)
They have the following properties

$$F^2\stackrel{~}{F}^2=1,[F,\stackrel{~}{F}]=0,[F,C]=0,F^T=F,\{\stackrel{~}{F},C\}=0,\stackrel{~}{F}^T=\stackrel{~}{F}.$$
(A.5)
## Appendix B The three-string ghost vertex

The three-string Neveu-Schwarz superghost vertex in the minus one picture has the following Neumann matrices

$$\stackrel{~}{M}^{11}=\frac{FC\stackrel{~}{F}}{(1+F)(2F)},\stackrel{~}{M}^{12}=\frac{C\stackrel{~}{F}(1+F)}{(1+F)(2F)},\stackrel{~}{M}^{21}=\frac{C\stackrel{~}{F}+(1+F)}{(1+F)(2F)},C\stackrel{~}{I}=\frac{C\stackrel{~}{F}}{1+F}.$$
(B.1)
They have the same set of eigenvectors as the matter vertex matrices. The property $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{ab}(\kappa )=\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{ba}(\kappa )`$ is obeyed.