text:
# THE CLEO-C PROJECT - A NEW FRONTIER OF OCQ PHYSICS

## 1 Introduction

In this article the hadronic and QCD part of the proposed CLEO-c physics program will be outlined. The proposal includes a broad program of measurements that will contribute to the understanding of important Standard Model processes as well as provide the opportunity to probe the physics that lies beyond the Standard Model. The dominant themes of this program are measurement of absolute branching ratios for charm mesons with the precision of the order of 1 - 2% (depending upon the mode), determination of charm meson decay constants and of the CKM matrix elements Vcs and Vcd at the 1 - 2% level and investigation of processes in charm and $`\tau `$ decays, that are expected to be highly suppressed within the Standard Model. Hence, a reconfigured CESR electron-positron collider operating at a center of mass energy range between 3 and 5 GeV together with the CLEO detector will give significant contributions to our understanding of fundamental Standard Model properties.

## 2 Run Plan and Data Sets

From the year 2003 to 2005 the CESR accelerator will be operated at center-of-mass energies corresponding to $`\sqrt{s}`$ 4140 MeV, $`\sqrt{s}`$ 3770 MeV ($`\psi `$”) and $`\sqrt{s}`$ 3100 MeV (J/$`\psi `$). Taking into account the anticipated luminosity which will range from 5$`\times 10^{32}`$ cm-2s-1 down to about 1$`\times 10^{32}`$ cm-2s-1 over this energy range, the run plan will yield 3 fb-1 each at the $`\psi `$” and at $`\sqrt{s}`$ 4140 MeV above $`D_s\overline{D_s}`$ threshold and 1 fb-1 at the J/$`\psi `$. These integrated luminosities correspond to samples of 1.5 million $`D_s\overline{D_s}`$ pairs, 30 million $`D\overline{D}`$ pairs and one billion J/$`\psi `$ decays. As a point of reference, these datasets will exceed those of the Mark III experiment by factors of 480, 310 and 170, respectively.

In addition, prior to the conversion to low energy a total amount of 4 fb-1 spread over the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(1S), $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(2S) and $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(3S) resonances is taken to launch the QCD part of the program. These data sets will increase the available $`b\overline{b}`$ bound state data by more than an order of magnitude.

## 3 Hardware Requirements

The conversion of the CESR accelerator for low energy operation will require the addition of 18 meters of wiggler magnets to enhance transverse cooling of the beam at low energies. In the CLEO III detector the solenoidal field will be reduced to 1.0 T and the silicon vertex detector will be replaced with a small, low mass inner drift chamber. No other requirements are necessary.

## 4 Physics Program

The following sections will outline the proposed CLEO-c physics program. Section 4.1 will focus on the Ypsilon spectroscopy, section 4.2 will describe the charm decay program and finally section 4.3 will give an overview about the gluonic matter studies.

### 4.1 Ypsilon Spectroscopy

From fall 2001 to summer 2002 CLEO will collect data on the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ resonances below the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(4S). During the resonance running CLEO anticipates in excess of 4 fb-1 of accumulated data.

So far, the only established states below $`B\overline{B}`$ threshold are the three vector singlet $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ resonances ($`{}_{}{}^{3}S_{1}^{}`$) and the six $`\chi _b`$ and $`\chi _b^{}`$ (two triplets of $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{J}^{}`$) that are accessible from these parent vectors via E1 radiative transitions. By collecting substantial data samples at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(1S), $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(2S) and $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(3S), CLEO will address a variety of outstanding physics issues.

* Discovery of $`\eta _b`$ and Observation of hb
The $`\eta _b`$ is the ground state of $`b\overline{b}`$. Most present theories indicate the best approach would be the hindered M1 transition from the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(3S), with which CLEO might have a signal of 5 $`\sigma `$ significance in 1 fb-1 of data. In the case of the hb, CLEO established an upper limit of $``$($`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(3S)$`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$hb) $`<`$ 0.18% at 90% confidence level $`^\mathrm{?}`$. This result, based on $``$ 110 pb-1, already tests the theoretical predictions $`^\mathrm{?}`$ for this transition which range from 0.1 - 1.0%. The resonance run program will measure the mass of the hb, assuming the predictions are valid, to $``$ 5 MeV.
* Observation of 13DJ states
The $`b\overline{b}`$ system is unique as it has states with L = 2 that lie below the open-flavor threshold. These states have been of considerable theoretical interest, as indicated by many predictions of the center-of-gravity of the triplet. Based on both theoretical estimates and previous CLEO data samples, CLEO should see 20 - 40 events in the four-photon cascade $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(3S)$`\gamma _1\chi _b^{}\gamma _1\gamma _2(^3`$D$`{}_{J}{}^{})\gamma _1\gamma _2\gamma _3\chi _b\gamma _1\gamma _2\gamma _3\gamma _4\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$
* Search for glueball candidates in radiative $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(1S) decays
The BES collaboration has reported signals for a glueball candidate $`^\mathrm{?}`$ in radiative J/$`\psi `$ decay - a glue-rich environment. Naively one would expect the exclusive radiative decay to be suppressed in $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ decay by a factor of roughly 40, which implies product branching fractions for $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ radiative decay of $``$ 10-6. With 1 fb-1 of data and efficiencies of around 30% one can expect $``$ 10 events in each of the exclusive channels, which would be an important confirmation of the J/$`\psi `$ studies.

### 4.2 Charm Decays

The observable properties of the charm mesons are determined by the strong and weak interactions. As a result, charm mesons can be used as a laboratory for the studies of these two fundamental forces. Threshold charm experiments permit a series of measurements that enable direct study of the weak interactions of the charm quark as well as tests of our theoretical technology for handling the strong interactions.

#### Semileptonic Charm Decays

The CLEO-c program will provide a large set of precision measurements in the charm sector against which the theoretical tools needed to extract CKM matrix information precisely from heavy quark decay measurements will be tested and honed.

CLEO-c will measure the branching ratios of many exclusive semileptonic modes, including $`D^0K^{}e^+\nu `$, $`D^0\pi ^{}e^+\nu `$, $`D^0K^{}e^+\nu `$, $`D^+\overline{K}^0e^+\nu `$, $`D^+\pi ^0e^+\nu `$, $`D^+\overline{K}^0e^+\nu `$, $`D_s^+\varphi e^+\nu `$ and $`D_s^+\overline{K}^0e^+\nu `$. The measurement in each case is based on the use of tagged events where the cleanliness of the environment provides nearly background-free signal samples, and will lead to the determination of the CKM matrix elements $``$Vcs$``$ and $``$Vcd$``$ with a precision level of 1.6% and 1.7%, respectively. Measurements of the vector and axial vector form factors V($`q^2`$), A1($`q^2`$) and A2($`q^2`$) will also be possible at the $``$ 5% level. Table 1 summarizes the proposed branching fractional errors.

HQET provides a successful description of the lifetimes of charm hadrons and of the absolute semileptonic branching ratios of the D0 and Ds $`^\mathrm{?}`$. Isospin invariances of the strong forces lead to corrections of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{SL}`$(D0) $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{SL}`$(D+) in the order of $`𝒪`$(tan$`{}_{}{}^{2}\mathrm{\Theta }_{C}^{}`$) $``$ 0.05. Likewise SU(3)Fl symmetry relates $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{SL}`$(D0) and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{SL}`$(D+), but a priori would allow them to differ by as much as 30%. However, HQET suggests, that they should agree to within a few percent. A charm factory is the best place to measure absolute inclusive semileptonic charm branching ratios, in particular $``$(D$`{}_{s}{}^{}`$ X$`\mathrm{}\nu `$) and thus $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{SL}`$(Ds).

#### Hadronic Charm Decays

Of the charm hadrons, the D0 is the best known. The CLEO and ALEPH experiments provide by far the most precise measurements for the decay D$`{}_{}{}^{0}`$ K$`{}_{}{}^{}\pi _{}^{+}`$. They use the same technique, where they look at $`D^+\pi ^+D^0`$ decays and take the ratio of the D0 decays into K$`{}_{}{}^{}\pi _{}^{+}`$ to the number of decays with only the $`\pi ^+`$ from the D∗+ decay detected. The dominant systematic uncertainty is the background level in the latter sample. In both experiments, the systematic errors exceed the statistical errors. By using $`D^0\overline{D}^0`$ decays and tagging both D mesons the background can be reduced to almost zero and the branching ratio fractional error can be improved significantly (see Table 2).

The D+ absolute branching ratios are determined by using fully reconstructed D∗+ decays, comparing $`\pi ^0`$ D+ with $`\pi ^+`$ D0 and using isotropic spin symmetry. Hence, this rate cannot be determined any better than the absolute D0 decay rate using this technique. By using D+D- decays and a double tag technique the background can be reduced again to almost zero which leads to a significant improvement of the branching ratio fractional error (see Table 2).

### 4.3 Gluonic Matter

With approximately one billion J/$`\psi `$ produced, CLEO-c will be the natural glue factory to search for glueballs and other glue-rich states using J/$`\psi `$ $``$ gg $`\gamma `$X decays. The region of 1 $`<`$ MX $`<`$ 3 GeV/c2 will be explored with partial wave analyses for evidence of scalar or tensor glueballs, glueball-$`q\overline{q}`$ mixtures, exotic quantum numbers, quark-glue hybrids and other new forms of matter predicted by QCD. This includes the establishment of masses, widths, spin-parity quantum numbers, decay modes and production mechanisms for any identified states, an in detail exploration of reported glueball candidates such as the tensor candidate fJ(2220) and the scalar states f0(1370), f0(1500) and fJ(1710), and the examination of the inclusive photon spectrum J/$`\psi \gamma `$X with $`<`$ 20 MeV photon resolution and identification of states with up to 100 MeV width and inclusive branching ratios above 1$`\times 10^4`$. In addition spectroscopic searches for new states of the $`b\overline{b}`$ system and for exotic hybrid states such as $`cg\overline{c}`$ will be made using the 4 fb-1 $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(1S), $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(2S) and $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(3S) data sets. Analysis of $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$(1S) $`\gamma `$X will play an important role in verifying any glueball candidates found in the J/$`\psi `$ data.

## 5 Summary

The high-precision charm and quarkonium data will permit a broad suite of studies of weak and strong interaction physics. In the threshold charm sector measurements are uniquely clean and make possible the unambigous determinations of physical quantities discussed above. CLEO-c will utilize a variety of tools, namely J/$`\psi `$ radiative decays, two-photon collisions (using almost real, as well as highly virtual space-like photons), deep inelastic Coulomb scattering and continuum production via $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation to obtain significant new information on the spectrum of hadrons, both normal and exotic, and their decay channels. A quantitative improvement can be expected not only from the large accumulated statistics, but also from combining the results obtained using all these tools together with the results from the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ resonance runs. The significance of this is better sensitivity, reduced systematics and a better chance to obtain a coherent picture of the hadron sector.

## Acknowledgments

I am delighted to acknowledge the invaluable contributions of many individuals to the development of the CLEO-c and CESR-c program and the outstanding contributions of my CLEO colleagues over the life of the experiment. The experimental aspects of this program are based on their effort and experience.

## References


format: text

text:
# Tomography of pairing symmetry from magnetotunneling spectroscopy — a case study for quasi-1D organic superconductors

## Abstract

We propose that anisotropic $`p`$-, $`d`$-, or $`f`$-wave pairing symmetries can be distinguished from a tunneling spectroscopy in the presence of magnetic fields, which is exemplified here for a model organic superconductor $`\text{(TMTSF)}_2X`$. The shape of the Fermi surface (quasi-one-dimensional in this example) affects sensitively the pairing symmetry, which in turn affects the shape (U or V) of the gap along with the presence/absence of the zero-bias peak in the tunneling in a subtle manner. Yet, an application of a magnetic field enables us to identify the symmetry, which is interpreted as an effect of the Doppler shift in Andreev bound states.

preprint: Organic

One of the most fascinating features of unconventional superconductors with anisotropic pairing symmetries is that Andreev reflection at surfaces can occur in a variety of ways Buch ; Hu . Namely, at surfaces and interfaces, interference takes place between incident and reflected quasiparticles, which, when the pairing is anisotropic, experience opposite signs of the pair potential depending on the situation, since an anisotropic pairing dictates that the BCS gap function has to have node(s). The interference then becomes constructive, and we end up with the Andreev bound states (ABS) at the surface, which should be observed as a zero-bias conductance peak (ZBCP) in tunneling spectroscopy. This is recognized as a clear signature of an anisotropic pairing TK95 ; FRS97 ; Honer98 ; Boss . The ZBCP is observed in various anisotropic superconductors such as the high-$`T_C`$ cuprates TK95 ; GXL88 ; Covin97 ; Alff ; Wei , another oxide $`\text{Sr}_2\text{RuO}_4`$ Laube ; Mao , and a heavy fermion system $`\text{UBe}_{13}`$ Walti . In this context, it is intriguing to investigate whether the ZBCP can be observed in organic superconductors, another class of candidates for anisotropic pairing, such as Bechgaard salts $`\text{(TMTSF)}_2X`$ ($`X=\text{PF}_6`$, $`\text{ClO}_4`$, etc.) Jerome ; Bechgaard .

For $`\text{(TMTSF)}_2X`$, a spin-triplet pairing has been suggested from an observation of a large $`H_{c2}`$ Lee01  and an unchanged Knight shift across $`T_c`$ Lee02 . Anisotropic pairing with nodes on the Fermi surface has been suggested from an NMR measurement Takigawa , while a thermal conductivity measurement has reported the absence of nodes on the Fermi surface BB97 . Theoretically, an anisotropic $`p`$-wave pairing in which the nodes of the pair potential can be made to avoid intersecting the (quasi-1D) Fermi surface has been proposed in an early stage Abrikosov ; HF87 ; Lebed . The triplet pairing itself, however, is puzzling in an electron mechanism for superconductivity, since the usual wisdom dictates that a triplet pairing should be an outcome of ferromagnetic spin-fluctuation exchange, whereas the superconductivity lies right next to a $`2k_\mathrm{F}`$ SDW in the pressure-temperature phase diagram for TMTSF GE80 . — naively, SDW spin fluctuations should favor spin-singlet $`d`$-wave-like pairing Shima01 ; KA99 ; KK99 . In order to solve this puzzle, three of the present authors have recently proposed KAA01  that the correct pairing may be a triplet $`f`$-wave, which can dominate over $`d`$\- and $`p`$-waves if we introduce $`2k_\mathrm{F}`$ CDW coexisting with the $`2k_\mathrm{F}`$ SDW, and a magnetic anisotropy in spin fluctuations in this quasi-1D material.

Motivated from the above mentioned experimental as well as theoretical controversies, we ask ourselves: can we identify the pairing symmetry ($`p,d,f`$) from the tunneling spectroscopy in general, and from the ZBCP in particular?Arai  Recently, it has been pointed out that these pairing symmetries in $`(\text{TMTSF})_2X`$ can be distinguished from the presence (for $`p`$ and $`f`$) or absence ($`d`$) of the ABS on the surface Sengupta . Subsequently we have pointed out Tanu02  that $`p`$ and $`f`$ can still be distinguished by looking at the shape of the gap in the surface density of states in which the zero-energy peak (ZEP) ZEP  resides Melo .

In real materials, however, the question is what will happen for a general shape of the Fermi surface. In $`(\text{TMTSF})_2X`$, the warping of the quasi-1D Fermi surface is actually controlled by the ratio between the transfer within the chains and several types of transfers across the chains. So, if the tunneling spectrum is sensitive to the warping, identification of the pairing symmetry will be marred, so we will have to devise some in situ way of probing the symmetry from the tunneling spectroscopy. In the present study, we first show that the tunneling spectrum is in fact sensitive to the warping. This is due to the degradation of the symmetry in the Fermi surface against $`k_ak_a`$ in $`k`$ space, and the appearance/disappearance of the ZEP may even be inverted between $`d`$ and $`f`$-waves by a small change in the hopping integral.

We then show that we can overcome this difficulty by applying a magnetic field as an in situ control. In a magnetic field screening current affects the ABS spectrum, which is called the Doppler shift, and this can split the ZBCP FRS97 ; Covin97 ; Aprili ; Krupke . We find that ZBCP splits into two for $`d`$-wave, while it does not for $`p`$ and $`f`$. The way in which the Doppler shift occurs reflects the shape of the Fermi surface, so the magnetotunneling spectrum provides a unique kind of tomography of the gap function symmetry on the Fermi surface.

Three of the present authors have derived in Ref. KAA01,  plausible pairing symmetries by considering pairing interactions arising from spin and charge fluctuations. For discussing the tunneling spectroscopy for a given pairing symmetry, it is more convenient to start from the extended Hubbard model that incorporates effective attractions for the given pairing symmetry. So we have

$``$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝒊\mathbf{,}𝒋,\sigma }{}}t_{𝒊𝒋}c_{𝒊\sigma }^{}c_{𝒋\sigma }{\displaystyle \underset{𝒊\sigma }{}}\mu c_{𝒊\sigma }^{}c_{𝒊\sigma }`$ (1)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{V}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{|𝒊𝒋|=m_l,\sigma ,\sigma ^{}}{}}c_{𝒊\sigma }^{}c_{𝒋\sigma ^{}}^{}c_{𝒋\sigma ^{}}c_{𝒊\sigma },`$
where $`c_{𝒊\sigma }^{}`$ creates a hole with spin $`\sigma =,`$ at site $`𝒊=(i_a,i_b)`$. $`V`$ is the effective attraction that is assumed to act on a pair of electrons when they are $`m_l`$ lattice spacing apart (along $`a`$ axis when the system is quasi-1D), where $`m_l=2(4)`$ for $`l=p,d(f)`$-wave pairing \[see Fig. 1(b)(c)\].

As for the lattice we take here an anisotropic ($`t_bt_a`$) 2D system. To warp the shape of the Fermi surface we introduce a diagonal transfer $`t^{}`$, so the system is an anisotropic triangular lattice. The sample edge is assumed to be $`a`$ axis. In what follows we vary $`t^{}(0)`$ in the range $`0|t^{}/t_a|0.2`$ with a fixed $`t_b/t_a=0.1`$, which covers three typical shapes of the Fermi surface (Fig. 3). In actual $`\text{(TMTSF)}_2X`$ salts, $`|t^{}|`$ may be similar to or even greater than $`t_b`$ for some anion $`X`$ at low temperatures Ducasse ; Yamaji . The chemical potential $`\mu `$ is set ($`\mu =1.41t_a`$) to make the band quarter-filled as in TMTSF.

In the latter half of the paper we apply a magnetic field parallel to the $`c`$-axis ($`a,b`$). Since the penetration depth $`\lambda 12000`$ ÅLe93  in $`\text{(TMTSF)}_2X`$ is much greater than the coherence length $`\xi 500`$ Å$`(=150a)`$ Le93 ; Yoshino , the vector potential can be taken to be $`𝑨=(0,H\lambda ,0)`$ FRS97 . Thus the quasiparticle momentum $`k_b`$ in the $`b`$ direction changes as $`k_b^{}=k_b+H/(\pi \xi H_c)`$, where $`H_c=\varphi _0/(\pi ^2\xi \lambda )`$ ($`=3.5\times 10^3`$ T for TMTSF) with $`\varphi _0=h/(2e)`$.

For the sample with an edge, a mean-field study is performed by introducing a site dependent pair potential. The symmetry of the pair potential is best represented with the $`𝒅`$ vector as Sigrist  $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝒊𝒋}^{\sigma \sigma ^{}}=_q^{0,x,y,z}\mathrm{i}d_{𝒊𝒋}^q(\widehat{\sigma }_q\widehat{\sigma }_y)_{\sigma \sigma ^{}}`$ with $`d_{𝒊𝒋}^q=\frac{V}{2}_{\sigma ,\sigma ^{}}(\widehat{\sigma }_q\widehat{\sigma }_y)_{\sigma ^{}\sigma }^{}c_{𝒊\sigma }c_{𝒋\sigma ^{}}`$, where $`\widehat{\sigma }_x`$,$`\widehat{\sigma }_y`$, $`\widehat{\sigma }_z`$ are Pauli matrices and $`\widehat{\sigma }_0=\mathrm{𝟏}`$. We consider only $`d_{𝒊𝒋}^z(F_{𝒊𝒋}^p)`$ with all the other $`d_{𝒊𝒋}^0=d_{𝒊𝒋}^x=d_{𝒊𝒋}^y=0`$ for triplet $`p`$-wave state, $`d^0(F_{𝒊𝒋}^d)`$ only for singlet $`d`$, and $`d^y(F_{𝒊𝒋}^f)`$ only for triplet $`f`$ KAA01 .

By solving the mean-field equation for a region with $`N_\mathrm{L}(=10^3)`$ sites in the $`a`$ direction and one site in the $`b`$ direction, we have obtained the eigenenergy $`E_\nu `$. In terms of the eigenenergy $`E_\nu `$ and the wave functions $`u_𝒊^\nu `$, $`v_𝒊^\nu `$, the Bogoliubov-de Gennes equation for the surface with the magnetic field applied field parallel to the $`c`$-axis is given by

$`{\displaystyle \underset{𝒋}{}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}H_{𝒊𝒋}& F_{𝒊𝒋}^l\\ F_{𝒊𝒋}^l& H_{𝒊𝒋}^{}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}u_𝒋^\nu \\ v_𝒋^\nu \end{array}\right)=E_\nu \left(\begin{array}{c}u_𝒊^\nu \\ v_𝒊^\nu \end{array}\right),`$ (8)
with $`H_{ij}(k_b)=_{\pm \widehat{a}}[t_a\delta _{j,i\pm \widehat{a}}+2t_b\mathrm{cos}(k_b^{}a)\delta _{ij}+t^{}e^{\mathrm{i}k_b^{}a}\delta _{j,i\pm \widehat{a}}]\mu \delta _{ij}`$.

The pair potential is determined self-consistently as

$`F_{𝒊𝒋}^l={\displaystyle \frac{V}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k_b,\nu }{}}u_𝒊^\nu v_𝒋^\nu \mathrm{tanh}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{E_\nu (k_b)}{2k_\mathrm{B}T}}\right].`$ (9)
The ABS is probed by the surface density of states calculated with the pair potential determined self-consistently. In order to compare our theory with scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) experiments, we assume that the STM tip is metallic with a constant density of states, and that the tunneling occurs only for the site nearest to the tip. This has been shown to be valid through the study of tunneling conductance of unconventional superconductors TK95 . The tunneling conductance spectrum is then given at low temperatures by the normalized surface density of states TK95 ,

$`\rho (E)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}d\omega \rho _\mathrm{S}(\omega )\mathrm{sech}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\omega +E}{2k_\mathrm{B}T}}\right)}{{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}d\omega \rho _\mathrm{N}(\omega )\mathrm{sech}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\omega 2\mathrm{\Delta }_l}{2k_\mathrm{B}T}}\right)}},`$ (10)
$`\rho _\mathrm{S}(\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k_b,\nu }{}}\left[|u_1^\nu |^2\delta (\omega E_\nu )+|v_1^\nu |^2\delta (\omega +E_\nu )\right].`$ (11)
Here $`\rho _\mathrm{S}(\omega )`$ denotes the surface density of states for the superconducting state while $`\rho _\mathrm{N}(\omega )`$ the bulk density of states in the normal state.

Let us first examine the case of zero magnetic field. The shape of the gap in the surface density of states displayed in Fig. 2 is U-shaped for $`p`$-wave, while V-shaped for $`d`$ and $`f`$. This is because the nodal lines (displayed in Fig. 3 by the dashed lines) in the pair potential intersect the Fermi surface for $`d`$ and $`f`$, while they do not for $`p`$-wave, as noted in Ref. Tanu02,  for the case of $`t^{}=0`$. If we turn to the ZEP, $`p`$ and $`f`$-waves have peak Sengupta ; Tanu02 , which is due to the fact that incident and reflected quasiparticles normal to the surface feel opposite signs of the pair potential, which results in a formation of the ABS (whereas oblique incidence is required for $`d`$-wave). The situation does not change when $`t^{}`$ is turned on because the nodes of the $`p`$-wave lies away from the Fermi surface, so the warping of the Fermi surface has little effect.

On the other hand, the situation is not so simple for $`d`$ and $`f`$-waves, where the nodes of the pair potential intersect the Fermi surface. For $`t^{}=0`$, the ZEP appears for $`f`$, and does not for $`d`$ as mentioned in Refs. Sengupta,  and Tanu02, . This is because when the Fermi surface is symmetric against $`k_ak_a`$, injected and reflected quasiparticles always feel opposite (same) signs of the pair potential for $`f(d)`$-wave \[see Fig. 3(a)\]. This time the situation does change when we turn on $`t^{}`$, which makes the Fermi surface asymmetric against $`k_ak_a`$, so that some of the Andreev reflection \[the blue area in Fig. 3(b), left panel\] lead to ZEP also for d-wave as seen in Fig. 2. For $`|t^{}/t_a|=0.15`$ in particular, the warping of the Fermi surface is such that injected and reflected quasiparticles mostly feel opposite (same) signs for $`d(f)`$ \[see Fig. 3(c)\], so the situation for the ZEP is inverted as seen in Fig. 2. Consequently, the surface density of states for $`d`$\- and $`f`$-wave pairings look similar (having V-shaped gap + ZEP) at around $`|t^{}/t_a|0.1`$, so that it should be difficult to distinguish the two by tunneling spectroscopy.

This is where the in situ control of the tunneling by magnetic field comes in. Namely, we now apply magnetic fields along the $`c`$-axis. In Fig. 4, we show the magnetic field dependence of the surface density of states for $`d`$ and $`f`$-waves for $`t^{}=0.08t_a`$. The ZEP for the $`d`$-wave is seen to split with the magnetic field, while that for $`f`$ (or $`p`$; not shown) does not. The magnitude of applied magnetic field here is $`H<30H_c`$, where $`30H_c`$ roughly corresponds to $`H_{c2}^c(0.1`$ T), i.e., the upper critical field parallel to $`c`$-axis, of $`\text{(TMTSF)}_2\text{PF}_6`$ Lee01 .

The result can be interpreted as follows. For $`d`$-wave, the ZEP is mainly formed by the quasiparticles having $`k_b\pi /2`$, where $`v_{\mathrm{F}b}(k_a)`$ and $`v_{\mathrm{F}b}(k_a)`$ have the same sign \[see Fig. 3(b), left panel\]. This situation is similar to those studied previously FRS97 ; Covin97 ; Aprili ; Krupke , where the ZEP is strongly affected by the Doppler shift. Namely, the magnetic field gives in this case the injected and reflected quasiparticles additional phase shifts with the same sign, which degrades the constructive interference for the formation of ZEP. By contrast, for $`p`$ and $`f`$-waves quasiparticles with $`k_b=0`$ mainly contribute to the formation of the zero-energy states Buch ; Kusakabe . For $`k_b=0`$, $`v_{\mathrm{F}b}(k_a)`$ and $`v_{\mathrm{F}b}(k_a)`$ have opposite signs regardless of the value of $`t^{}`$ \[see Fig. 3(b), right panel\]. In such a case, the magnetic field gives the injected and reflected quasiparticles additional phase shifts with opposite signs, which almost cancel out when added, so that the formation of ZEP is barely affected Tanaka-new . This is physically why we can distinguish $`d`$ and $`f`$-waves through the appearance/disappearance of ZEP splitting in the presence of magnetic field.

Although we have here exemplified the tunneling spectra for the quasi-1D model, the physics involved (i.e., the signs of the pair potential and the signs of $`v_\mathrm{F}`$ for the incident and reflected particles) is quite general, so that the principle for distinguishing various singlet and triplet pairing symmetries should apply for other, non-cubic (or non-tetragonal) systems.

Y.T. would like to thank K. Maki and K. Yamaji for pointing out the possible importance of the realistic shape of the Fermi surface. He also acknowledges a financial support of Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for Young Scientists. This work was in part supported by the Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology (CREST) of the Japan Science and Technology Corporation. The computations were performed at the Supercomputer Center of Institute for Solid State Physics, and the Computer Center in the University of Tokyo.


text:
# Einstein–Weyl spaces and dispersionless Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation from Painlevé I and II.

## 1 Introduction

Let $`𝒲`$ be a three-dimensional complex manifold, with a torsion-free connection $`D`$ and a conformal metric $`[h]`$. We shall call $`𝒲`$ a Weyl space if the null geodesics of $`[h]`$ are also geodesics for $`D`$. This condition is equivalent to $`Dh=\omega h`$ for some one form $`\omega `$. Here $`h`$ is a representative metric in the conformal class. If we change this representative by $`h\varphi ^2h`$, then $`\omega \omega +2\mathrm{d}\mathrm{ln}\varphi `$. A tensor object $`T`$ which transforms as $`T\varphi ^mT`$ when $`h\varphi ^2h`$ is said to be conformally invariant of weight $`m`$. The pair $`([h],D)`$ satisfies the Einstein–Weyl (EW) equations if the symmetrised Ricci tensor of of the Weyl connection is proportional to the conformal metric .

In  it has been demonstrated that if an Einstein–Weyl space admits a parallel weighted vector, then coordinates can be found in which the metric and the one-form are locally given by

$$h=\mathrm{d}y^24\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}t4u\mathrm{d}t^2,\omega =4u_x\mathrm{d}t,u=u(x,y,t)$$
(1.1)
and the Einstein–Weyl equations reduce to the dispersionless Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation

$$(u_tuu_x)_x=u_{yy}.$$
(1.2)
If $`u(x,y,t)`$ is a smooth real function of real variables then (1.1) has signature $`(++)`$. One can verify that the vector $`_x`$ in the EW space (1.1) is a null vector, covariantly constant in the Weyl connection, and with weight $`1/2`$.

The geometric approach based on the structure (1.1), and the associated twistor theory yielded some new explicit solutions to (1.2). Other solutions have been obtained in .

In this paper we aim to show a nontrivial relation between EW geometry and the dKP equation on one side and the first two Painlevé transcendents on the other. The non-triviality here means that the Painlevé equations do not arise as symmetry reductions of dKP.

Let $`:\mathrm{\Lambda }^i(𝒲)\mathrm{\Lambda }^{3i}(𝒲),i=1,2,3`$ be the Hodge operator corresponding to $`[h]`$. Using the relations

$$\mathrm{d}t=\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}y,\mathrm{d}y=2\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}x,\mathrm{d}x=\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}x+2u\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}t$$

we verify that equation (1.2) is equivalent to

$$\mathrm{d}\mathrm{d}u=0.$$
(1.3)
One needs to consider two classes of solutions:

1. The generic case $`|\mathrm{d}u|^2=\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}u0`$. The condition (1.3) implies the existence of a foliation $`𝒲=\times \mathrm{\Sigma }`$ of an EW space (1.1) by two-complex-dimensional symplectic manifolds $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with a holomorphic symplectic two-form $`\omega `$ such that

$$\mathrm{d}u=\omega .$$
(1.4)
We shall consider two cases: $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=^2,\omega =\mathrm{d}p\mathrm{d}q`$, and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=^1\times ^1,\omega =(1+pq)^2\mathrm{d}p\mathrm{d}q`$. The functions $`p,q:𝒲`$ are local holomorphic coordinates on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, and in the second case the symplectic two-form is defined on the complement of $`1+pq=0`$.

The idea is to use $`(u,p,q)`$ as local coordinates, and regard $`x=x(u,p,q),y=y(u,p,q),t=t(u,p,q)`$ as dependent variables.
2. The null case $`|\mathrm{d}u|=0`$. The existence of smooth $`p`$ and $`q`$ can not be deduced even locally.

In the next Section we shall see that Case (2) can be integrated completely (Proposition 2.6). In Section 3 we shall show that Case (1) leads to a hodograph transformation between solutions to (1.2) and solutions to the generalised $`\text{SDiff}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ (or so called $`SU(\mathrm{})`$) Nahm equation. The special case of $`SL(2,)`$ generalised Nahm’s equations turns out to be equivalent to the isomonodromy problem associated with the Painlevé I or Painlevé II equations. The level sets of corresponding solutions to the dKP equations are central quadrics in the $`(x,y,t)`$ space (Theorem 4.1). This will be established in Section 4. In Section 5 we shall discuss a converse construction: if a solution to dKP is constant on a central quadric in the sense that $`u(x,y,t)`$ is determined implicitly by an equation of the form

$$Q(x,y,t,u)=X^T𝐌(u)X=C,$$
(1.5)
where $`C`$ is a constant, $`X^T=(x,y,t)`$, and $`𝐌(u)`$ is a symmetric matrix whose components depend on $`u`$, then it is determined by one of the first two Painlevé equations (Theorem 5.1). Rational solutions to Painlevé II yield explicit new solutions to (1.2). Examples of these are worked out in Section 6. Finally in Section 7 we relate the Painlevé solutions of dKP to Einstein–Weyl and anti-self-dual null-Kähler geometries.

### 1.1 Users guide

Although the representation (1.4) which underlies the results of this paper has its roots in the EW structure (1.1), the EW geometry is by no means essential to follow the calculations. The reader who is merely interested in solutions to the dKP equation (1.2) could regard the constraint (2.6), the vanishing of differential forms (3), or the quadric ansatz (1.5) as starting points.

## 2  The null case

The condition $`\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}u=0`$ yields

$$u_x(u_tuu_x)=u_y^2.$$
(2.6)
We aim to find all solutions to the dKP equation (1.2) subject to the above constraint.

###### Proposition 2.1

The EW spaces (1.1) for which $`|\mathrm{d}u|=0`$ (or equivalently (2.6) holds ) are locally given by one of the two forms

$`h`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{d}y^2+4C\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}t+4(yC^{}+t+2tCC^{})\mathrm{d}r\mathrm{d}t+C^2\mathrm{d}t^2,`$
$`\omega `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{yC^{}+t+2tCC^{}}}\mathrm{d}t,`$ (2.7)
or

$`h`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{d}y^2+4(tP1)\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}s,`$
$`\omega `$ $`=`$ $`4{\displaystyle \frac{P}{tP1}}\mathrm{d}t,`$ (2.8)
where $`C(r)`$ and $`P(s)`$ are arbitrary functions, and $`{}_{}{}^{}=\mathrm{d}/\mathrm{d}r`$. The case (2.1) is characterised by the existence of a symmetry $`_y`$.

Proof. We first write equations (2.6), and (1.2) as a system of first order PDEs:

$`w_y`$ $`=`$ $`u_tuu_x`$
$`w_x`$ $`=`$ $`u_y`$
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`u_xw_yu_yw_x.`$
Eliminating $`w(x,y,t)`$ from the first two equations yields the dKP, and the third equation is equivalent to (2.6). The condition $`w_x=u_y`$ implies the existence of $`H(x,y,t)`$ such that $`u=H_x,w=H_y`$. The dKP equation becomes

$$H_{yy}H_{xt}+H_xH_{xx}=0,$$
(2.9)
and (2.6) is equivalent to the Monge equation

$$H_{xx}H_{yy}H_{xy}^2=0.$$
(2.10)
To solve (2.10) rewrite it as

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{d}H_x\mathrm{d}H_y\mathrm{d}t`$
$`\mathrm{d}H`$ $`=`$ $`H_x\mathrm{d}x+H_y\mathrm{d}y+H_t\mathrm{d}t`$
and perform the Legendre transform

$$r=H_x,F(t,y,r)=H(t,y,x(t,y,r))rx(t,y,r),$$
(2.11)
so that

$$H_y=F_y,H_t=F_t,x=F_r.$$

Differentiating these relation with respect to $`r`$ yields

$$H_{xx}=\frac{1}{F_{rr}},H_{xy}=\frac{F_{yr}}{F_{rr}},H_{yy}=F_{yy}\frac{F_{ry}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{F_{rr}}.$$
(2.12)
Equation (2.10) becomes $`F_{yy}=0`$ with the general solution

$$F=yA(r,t)+B(r,t).$$
(2.13)
Now we shall move on to equation (2.9). We write it as

$$0=\mathrm{d}H_x\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}\left(\frac{H_{x}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{2}\right)\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}y+\mathrm{d}H_y\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}t$$

and perform the Legendre transform (2.11) to $`(t,y,r)`$ coordinates. We need to consider two cases:

1. $`\mathrm{d}H_y\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}t0`$ (or $`u_y0`$). The resulting equation is

$$F_{rt}+F_{yy}F_{rr}F_{ry}^2=r.$$

Substituting the solution (2.13) yields

$$A=a(r)+c(t),B=\frac{r^2t}{2}+t(a^{})^2dr+b(t),\text{where}^{}=\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}r}.$$

To write down the EW structure (1.1) define $`C(r)=a^{}(r)`$, and use (2.12) together with $`u=H_x`$. This yields (2.1).
2. $`\mathrm{d}H_y\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}t=0`$ (or $`u_y=0`$). The resulting equation $`r=F_{rt}`$ implies

$$F=\frac{r^2t}{2}+m(t)+n(r).$$

Therefore

$$h=\mathrm{d}y^2+4(t+n_{rr})\mathrm{d}r\mathrm{d}t,\omega =\frac{4}{t+n_{rr}}.$$

If we now define $`s(r)`$ by $`\mathrm{d}s=(n_{rr})^1\mathrm{d}r`$, and put $`P(s)=(n_{rr})^1`$ then the EW structure becomes (2.1). This is precisely the EW structure on the $`S^1`$ bundle over a two-dimensional indefinite Weyl manifold constructed in  out of solutions to $`u_tuu_x=0`$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

## 3 The generic case: generalised Nahm’s equations

If $`|\mathrm{d}u|0`$ then (1.3) implies that there exist holomorphic (or smooth if we seek real solutions) symplectic form $`\omega =f(p,q)\mathrm{d}p\mathrm{d}q`$ such that

$$\mathrm{d}u=u_x\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}x+(u_t2uu_x)\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}y+2u_y\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}x=\omega .$$

This enables us to rewrite the dKP equation in terms of differential forms. Define three three-forms in an open set of $`^6`$ (or $`^6`$) by

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}t+\omega \mathrm{d}t,`$
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}(u^2)\mathrm{d}y\mathrm{d}t+\mathrm{d}x\omega ,`$ (3.14)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_3`$ $`=`$ $`2\mathrm{d}u\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}x\omega \mathrm{d}y.`$
The dKP equation with $`|\mathrm{d}u|0`$ is equivalent to

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_1=0,\mathrm{\Omega }_2=0,\mathrm{\Omega }_3=0.$$

Selecting a three dimensional surface (an integral manifold) in $`^6`$ with $`(x,y,t)`$ as the local coordinates, and eliminating $`p,q`$ by cross-differentiating would lead back to (1.2). We are however free to make another choice, and use $`(p,q,u)`$ as the coordinates. This leads to the following set of first order PDEs:

$`\dot{t}`$ $`=`$ $`\{t,y\}`$
$`\dot{x}`$ $`=`$ $`\{y,x\}+2u\{y,t\}`$ (3.15)
$`\dot{y}`$ $`=`$ $`2\{t,x\},`$
where the Poisson structure $`\{,\}`$ is induced by $`\omega `$, and $`\dot{}=/u`$.

Alternatively defining $`s=x+ut`$ yields

$`\dot{s}`$ $`=`$ $`\{y,s\}+t`$
$`\dot{t}`$ $`=`$ $`\{t,y\}`$ (3.16)
$`\dot{y}`$ $`=`$ $`2\{t,s\}.`$
### 3.1 Generalised Nahm’s equation

Equations (3) are contained in a generalisation of the Nahm system proposed in . Consider an n-dimensional complex Lie group $`G`$ with a Lie algebra $`𝐠`$. Let $`[,]_𝐠`$ be the Lie bracket in $`𝐠`$, and let $`\mathrm{\Phi }:𝐠^3`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i=\mathrm{\Phi }_{i\alpha }(u)\sigma ^\alpha `$ where $`u`$ is a coordinate on $``$, $`\sigma ^\alpha ,\alpha =1,\mathrm{},n`$ are generators of $`𝐠`$, and $`i=1,2,3`$. The Nahm equations are

$$\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}_i=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon _{ijk}[\mathrm{\Phi }_j,\mathrm{\Phi }_k]_𝐠.$$
(3.17)
(The summation convention is assumed, except where stated.) To generalise (3.17) introduce a a $`3\times 3`$ trace-free matrix $`B(u)`$ such that

$$\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}_i=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon _{ijk}[\mathrm{\Phi }_j,\mathrm{\Phi }_k]_𝐠+B_{ij}\mathrm{\Phi }_j.$$
(3.18)
Calderbank  claims that equations (3.18) are integrable iff $`B(u)`$ satisfies the matrix-Riccati equation

$$\dot{B}=2(B^2)_0,$$

where $`(B^2)_0`$ is the trace-free part of $`B^2`$. Consider the system (3.18) with $`𝐠=\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}(2,)`$, and rewrite $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$ as a symmetric matrix $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{AB}`$ where $`A,B`$ are two-dimensional indices, and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{AB}`$ is symmetric in $`A`$ and $`B`$

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_i\mathrm{\Phi }_{AB}(u)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Phi }_1+\mathrm{\Phi }_2& \mathrm{\Phi }_3\\ \mathrm{\Phi }_3& \mathrm{\Phi }_1\mathrm{\Phi }_2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2S(u)& Y(u)\\ Y(u)& 2T(u)\end{array}\right).$$

Equations (3.18) become

$$\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{AB}=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon ^{CD}[\mathrm{\Phi }_{AC},\mathrm{\Phi }_{BD}]+\mathrm{\Phi }_{CD}\beta _{}^{C}{}_{A}{}^{}\beta _{}^{D}{}_{B}{}^{}.$$
(3.19)
Here $`\epsilon ^{CD}`$ is a constant symplectic structure on $`^2`$ with $`\epsilon ^{01}=1`$, and $`\beta :\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}(2,)`$.

To write down a Lax pair for (3.19) we shall work with a homogeneous space for $`SL(2,)`$. This is the space $``$ of all pairs $`(\pi ^A,\eta ^B)`$, such that $`\epsilon _{AB}\pi ^A\eta ^B=1`$. We shall restrict ourself to (3.19) for which $`\beta `$ is nilpotent (and therefore constant as a consequence of the matrix Riccati equation), or $`\beta _{}^{A}{}_{B}{}^{}=\iota ^A\iota _B`$, where $`\iota _B=(1,0)`$ and $`\iota ^B=\epsilon ^{AB}\iota _B=(0,1)`$. Let

$`𝒜`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_{AB}\pi ^A\pi ^B}{(\pi _C\iota ^C)^4}}=2(S+\lambda Y+\lambda ^2T),`$
$``$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{AB}\pi ^A\eta ^B=Y+2\lambda T\text{where}\eta ^A={\displaystyle \frac{\iota ^A}{\pi _B\iota ^B}}.`$
Here $`\lambda =\pi _0/\pi _1`$ is the affine coordinate on $`^1`$, and we put $`\pi _1=1`$.

The Lax pair for (3.19) is in this case given by

$$L_0=\frac{}{\lambda }𝒜,L_1=\frac{}{u}.$$
(3.20)
The integrability $`[L_0,L_1]=0`$ of this distribution is equivalent to

$`\dot{S}`$ $`=`$ $`[Y,S]+T,`$
$`\dot{T}`$ $`=`$ $`[T,Y],`$ (3.21)
$`\dot{Y}`$ $`=`$ $`2[T,S],`$
which is (3.19).
Remark. The anonymous referee has pointed out that the generalised Nahm’s equations (3.18) arise as symmetry reductions of anti-self-dual Yang-Mills equations on $`^4`$ by three-dimensional abelian sub-groups of $`PGL(4,)`$. When the gauge group is $`SL(2,)`$, the corresponding reductions are the six Painlevé equations .

### 3.2 sdiff$`(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ generalised Nahms equation and dKP

Now assume that $`𝐠`$ is the infinite-dimensional Lie algebra sdiff$`(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ of holomorphic symplectomorphisms of a two-dimensional complex symplectic manifold $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with local holomorphic coordinates $`p,q`$ and the holomorphic symplectic structure $`\omega `$. Elements of sdiff$`(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ are represented by the Hamiltonian vector fields $`X_H`$ such that

$$X_H\text{}\omega =\mathrm{d}H$$

where $`H`$ is a $``$-valued function on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. The Poisson algebra of functions which we are going to use is homomorphic to sdiff$`(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$. We shall make the following replacement

$$[,]_𝐠\{,\}.$$

in formulae (3.19,3.1). The components of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{AB}`$ are therefore regarded as Hamiltonians generating the symplectomorphisms of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, and the generalised Nahm equations (3.19) with

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{AB}(u,p,q)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2s(u,p,q)& y(u,p,q)\\ y(u,p,q)& 2t(u,p,q)\end{array}\right),\beta _{}^{A}{}_{B}{}^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(3.22)
yield (3).

The Lax pair for (3) is therefore given by

$$L_0=\frac{}{\lambda }+X_{H_𝒜},L_1=\frac{}{u}+X_H_{},$$
(3.23)
where $`X_{H_𝒜}`$, and $`X_H_{}`$ are Hamiltonian vector fields with Hamiltonians

$$H_𝒜=2(s+\lambda y+\lambda ^2t),H_{}=y+2\lambda t.$$

To verify this claim we notice that the condition $`[L_0,L_1]=0`$ and the standard relation $`[X_f,X_g]=X_{\{f,g\}}`$ yield

$$_uH_𝒜_\lambda H_{}+\{H_𝒜,H_{}\}=0.$$

Therefore

$$\dot{s}+\lambda \dot{y}+\lambda ^2\dot{t}=t\{s,y\}2\lambda \{s,t\}\lambda ^2\{y,t\}$$

which is (3).

### 3.3 $`\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}(2,)`$ generalised Nahm’s equation and the central cone ansatz.

In this section we shall establish the following result

###### Proposition 3.1

The solutions of the $`SL(2,)`$ generalised Nahm’s equations (3.1) correspond to solutions of the dKP equation (1.2) which are constant on a central quadric, in the sense that $`u(x,y,t)`$ is determined implicitly by an equation of the form

$$Q(x,y,t,u)=X^T𝐌(u)X=C,$$
(3.24)
where $`C`$ is a constant, $`X^T=(x,y,t)`$, and $`𝐌(u)`$ is a symmetric matrix whose components depend on $`u`$.

Proof. Let

$$\sigma =\left(\begin{array}{cc}1/2& 0\\ 0& 1/2\end{array}\right),\sigma _+=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),\sigma _{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)$$

be a basis of $`\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}(2,)`$ such that

$$[\sigma _+,\sigma _{}]=2\sigma ,[\sigma ,\sigma _\pm ]=\pm \sigma _\pm .$$

Put

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`a_{11}\sigma _++a_{12}\sigma +a_{13}\sigma _{}`$
$`Y`$ $`=`$ $`a_{21}\sigma _++a_{22}\sigma +a_{23}\sigma _{}`$ (3.25)
$`T`$ $`=`$ $`a_{31}\sigma _++a_{32}\sigma +a_{33}\sigma _{},`$
where the coefficients $`a_{ij}`$ of the $`3\times 3`$ matrix $`𝐚=𝐚(u)`$ are functions of $`u`$ (in the next section they will be expressed by solutions to Painlevé I, or Painlevé II). We can construct an explicit embedding of $`\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}(2,)`$sdiff$`(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ where by considering the infinitesimal linear or Möbius action of $`SL(2,)`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. The Hamiltonians corresponding to matrices in $`\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}(2,)`$ are defined up to the addition of a function of $`u`$. Let

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right)SL(2,).$$

* $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=^2`$. The linear action

$$(p,q)(Ap+Bq,Cp+Dq)$$

preserves $`\omega =\mathrm{d}p\mathrm{d}q`$ and is generated by

$$H_\sigma =\frac{pq}{2},H_{\sigma _+}=\frac{q^2}{2},H_\sigma _{}=\frac{p^2}{2}.$$
(3.26)
The Hamiltonians satisfy the algebraic constraint

$$(H_\sigma )^2+H_{\sigma _+}H_\sigma _{}=0.$$
(3.27)
* $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=^1\times ^1`$. The group $`SL(2,)`$ acts on one Riemann sphere by Möbius transformation, and on the other by the inverse

$$(p,q)(\frac{Ap+B}{Cp+D},\frac{DqC}{Bq+A}).$$

Here $`p`$ and $`q`$ are independent holomorphic coordinates on both Riemann spheres, and the action preserves $`\omega =(1+pq)^2\mathrm{d}p\mathrm{d}q`$. The corresponding Hamiltonians

$$H_\sigma =\frac{1}{2}\frac{pq1}{pq+1},H_{\sigma _+}=\frac{q}{1+pq},H_\sigma _{}=\frac{p}{1+pq}$$
(3.28)
satisfy

$$(H_\sigma )^2+H_{\sigma _+}H_\sigma _{}=\frac{1}{4}.$$
(3.29)

In both case the matrices $`(T,Y,S)`$ are replaced by functions

$$t(u,p,q),y(u,p,q),s(u,p,q)=x(u,p,q)+ut(u,p,q).$$

Regard (3.3) as a system of equations for $`(H_{\sigma _+},H_\sigma ,H_\sigma _{})`$, and assume for the moment that $`det(𝐚(u))0`$. The algebraic constraints (3.27,3.29) imply

$`det\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a_{11}& x+ut& a_{13}\\ a_{21}& y& a_{23}\\ a_{31}& t& a_{33}\end{array}\right)^2+det\left(\begin{array}{ccc}x+ut& a_{12}& a_{13}\\ y& a_{22}& a_{23}\\ t& a_{32}& a_{33}\end{array}\right)det\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a_{11}& a_{12}& x+ut\\ a_{21}& a_{22}& y\\ a_{31}& a_{32}& t\end{array}\right)`$ (3.39)
$`=Cdet(𝐚(u))^2,`$ (3.40)
(where $`C=\text{const}`$) which is yields to (3.24).

$`\mathrm{}`$

Remarks.

* Note that a similarity transformation

$$Tg^1Tg,Yg^1Yg,Sg^1Sg,$$

where $`g=g(u)SL(2,)`$ does not change (3.39) or (3.24). This can be checked by an explicit (MAPLE) calculation. It also follows from the fact that the transformation $`H_KH_{\widehat{K}}`$ defined by the following diagram

$`K`$ $``$ $`H_K`$
$``$ $``$
$`g^1Kg`$ $``$ $`H_{\widehat{K}},`$
where

$`K`$ $`=`$ $`a\sigma _++b\sigma +c\sigma _{}\text{Map}(,\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}(2,)),`$
$`H_K`$ $`=`$ $`aH_{\sigma _+}+bH_\sigma +cH_\sigma _{}\text{Map}(\times \mathrm{\Sigma },)`$
is canonical and preserves the constraints (3.27, 3.29).
* Solutions to the dKP equations obtained from the ansatz (3.24) with const$`=0`$ (a central cone) are invariant under scaling transformations generated by $`x_x+y_y+t_t`$. In fact they form a subclass of all solutions with this symmetry. This subclass is charactrerised by a ‘general quadric’ ansatz

$$𝒬(\xi _1,\xi _2,u)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\xi _1& \\ \xi _2& \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}m_1& m_2\\ m_3& m_4\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\xi _1& \xi _2\end{array}\right)+2m_5\xi _1+2m_6\xi _2+m_7=0,$$

where $`\xi _1=t/y,\xi _2=x/y`$, and $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_7`$ depend on $`u`$.

## 4 dKP from the isomonodromy problem associated to PI and PII

In this section we shall relate the generalised Nahm equations (3.1) to the first two Painlevé transcendents, and construct the corresponding solutions to the dKP equation.

Consider the ODE

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Psi }}{\mathrm{d}\lambda }=\widehat{𝒜}(\lambda )\mathrm{\Psi },\text{where}\widehat{𝒜}(\lambda )=2(\lambda ^2\widehat{T}+\lambda \widehat{Y}+\widehat{S}),$$
(4.41)
anc $`\widehat{T},\widehat{Y},\widehat{S}`$ are constant elements of $`\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}(2,)`$. Here $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda )`$ is a matrix fundamental solution (it takes values in $`SL(2,)`$). Consider a one-parameter deformation $`(\widehat{T}(z),\widehat{Y}(z),\widehat{S}(z))`$ of this ODE. It is known  that monodromy data around the fourth-order pole at $`\lambda =\mathrm{}`$ remains constant if $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\lambda ,z)`$ satisfies

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{\lambda }=\widehat{𝒜}(\lambda )\mathrm{\Psi },\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{z}=\widehat{}(\lambda )\mathrm{\Psi },$$
(4.42)
for a certain matrix $`\widehat{}`$ whose exact form depends on whether $`\widehat{T}`$ is diagonalizable or nilpotent. For nilpotent (diagonalizable) $`\widehat{T}`$ the compatibility conditions $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\lambda z}=\mathrm{\Psi }_{z\lambda }`$, or

$$[_\lambda \widehat{𝒜}(\lambda ),_z\widehat{}(\lambda )]=0$$

reduce to the first (the second) Painlevé equation.

* Diagonalizable $`\widehat{T}`$. The explicit parametrisation of $`\widehat{T}(z),\widehat{Y}(z),\widehat{S}(z)`$ can be chosen so that

$$\widehat{T}=\sigma ,\widehat{Y}=\frac{\theta }{2}\sigma _+\frac{v}{\theta }\sigma _{},\widehat{S}=\left(v+\frac{z}{2}\right)\sigma \frac{\theta w}{2}\sigma _+\frac{wv\alpha +1/2}{\theta }\sigma _{}.$$

where $`w,v`$, and $`\theta `$ are functions of $`z`$, and $`\alpha `$ is a parameter. It this case $`\widehat{}(\lambda )=\lambda \widehat{T}+\widehat{Y}`$, and the compatibility conditions for (4.42) are

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}w}{\mathrm{d}z}=v+w^2+\frac{z}{2},\frac{\mathrm{d}v}{\mathrm{d}z}=2wv\frac{1}{2}+\alpha ,\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}z}\mathrm{ln}\theta =w,$$

and finally

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}^2w}{\mathrm{d}z^2}=2w^3+zw+\alpha ,$$
(4.43)
which is Painlevé II .
* Nilpotent $`\widehat{T}`$. Now

$$\widehat{T}=\frac{1}{2}\sigma _+,\widehat{Y}=\frac{w}{2}\sigma _++2\sigma _{},\widehat{S}=\frac{2w^2+z}{4}\sigma _+v\sigma 2w\sigma _{},$$

where $`w`$ and $`v`$ depend on $`z`$. The matrix $`\widehat{}`$ is given by $`\widehat{}(\lambda )=\lambda \widehat{T}+(1/2)\widehat{Y}+(w/2)\sigma _+`$, and the compatibility conditions for (4.42) are

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}w}{\mathrm{d}z}=v,\frac{\mathrm{d}v}{\mathrm{d}z}=6w^2+z,$$

and

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}^2w}{\mathrm{d}z^2}=6w^2+z,$$
(4.44)
which is Painlevé I .

Replace $`z`$ by $`2u`$, and put $`\widehat{}=\widehat{}_1/2`$. The matrices $`\widehat{𝒜},\widehat{}_1`$ are defined up to gauge transformations

$$\widehat{𝒜}𝒜=g^1\widehat{𝒜}gg^1_\lambda g,\widehat{}_1=g^1\widehat{}_1gg^1_ug,$$

where $`g=g(u,\lambda )SL(2,)`$.

* Diagonalizable $`\widehat{T}`$. Choose $`g=g(u)`$ such that $`g^1_ug=g^1\widehat{Y}g`$, (which implies $`g=\mathrm{exp}(\widehat{Y}du)`$).
* Nilpotent $`\widehat{T}`$. Choose $`g=g(u)`$ such that $`g^1_ug=w\sigma _+`$, (so $`g=\mathrm{exp}(f\sigma _+)`$, where $`\mathrm{d}f/\mathrm{d}u=w`$).

After all these transformations

$$\widehat{𝒜}𝒜=2(\lambda ^2T+\lambda Y+S),\widehat{}=2\lambda T+Y,$$

where $`T=g^1\widehat{T}g,Y=g^1\widehat{Y}g,S=g^1\widehat{S}g`$ and the isomonodromy Lax pair (4.42) becomes the Lax pair (3.20) for the generalised Nahm equations (3.19) with nilpotent $`\beta `$ (i.e. (3.1)). Moreover making the replacements (3.26,3.28), and using the results of the last subsection we deduce that any solution to Painlevé I, or II yields a solution to the dKP constant on a central quadric.

Keeping in mind the 1st remark after Proposition 3.1 we shall work out the details of this construction and find the matrix $`𝐌(u)`$ in (3.24).

* For PI we verify that $`det(𝐚)=v/20`$, and so the formula (3.39) can be used to read off the matrix $`𝐌(u)`$

$$x^2+w^2y^2w\left(\frac{\dot{w}^2}{4}4w^3\right)t^24xtw^2+2wxy+\left(\frac{\dot{w}^2}{4}4w^3\right)yt=\widehat{C}\dot{w}^2,$$
(4.45)
where $`w=w(u)`$ satisfies the rescaled PI equation

$$\ddot{w}/4=6w^2+2u,$$
(4.46)
and the constant $`\widehat{C}`$ can always be set to 0 or 1.
* For PII we find that $`det(𝐚)=wv(\alpha 1/2)/2`$. Imposing the constraint $`det(𝐚)=0`$ on PII leads to $`v=0`$ and $`\alpha =1/2`$. We shall examine this case later, and now we shall concentrate on the generic case $`v0`$. The quadric becomes

$`x^2vy^2w\left(wv(\alpha 1/2)\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}t^2\left(\left(\alpha 1/2\right)^2+4wv\left(wv(\alpha 1/2)\right)+2v^3\right)`$
$`+xy\left(\alpha 1/2\right)ytv\left(\alpha 1/2\right)2txv^2=\widehat{C}(2wv(\alpha 1/2))^2,`$ (4.47)
where

$$v=\frac{1}{2}\dot{w}(u)w(u)^2u,$$
(4.48)
$$\frac{1}{4}\ddot{w}=2w^3+2wu+\alpha ,$$
(4.49)
and $`\widehat{C}=0`$, or $`1`$.

We still have to consider $`det(𝐚)=0`$ (or $`v=0,\alpha =1/2`$). Putting $`w(u)=\dot{f}/(2f)`$ reduces (4.49) to the Airy equation

$$\ddot{f}+4uf=0.$$

We shall recover $`u(x,y,t)`$ explicitly from the matrices $`(\widehat{T},\widehat{Y},\widehat{S})`$. Applying the formula

$$e^gKe^g=K+[g,K]+\frac{1}{2!}[g,[g,K]]+\mathrm{}$$

which holds for any square matrices $`g`$ and $`K`$ we find

$$T=\sigma +\frac{1}{2}[fdu]\sigma _+,Y=\frac{1}{2}f\sigma _+,S=u\sigma +\left(\frac{1}{4}\dot{f}+\frac{u}{2}[fdu]\right)\sigma _+,$$

and the equations (3) are satisfied with

$$x=\frac{\dot{f}q^2}{8},y=\frac{fq^2}{4},t=\frac{pq}{2}\frac{[fdu]q^2}{4}$$

Differentiating the constraint $`2xf=y\dot{f}`$ we find that $`u_t=xu_x+yu_y=0`$, and $`u(\xi )`$ (where $`\xi =x/y`$) satisfies

$$2\xi ^2u_\xi +2uu_\xi +1=0.$$

This ODE is reducible to a special kind of Abel’s equation.

We can summarise the results of this section in the following theorem

###### Theorem 4.1

The $`SL(2,)`$ generalised Nahm equations (3.1) are equivalent to Painlevé I if $`T`$ is nilpotent and to Painlevé II if $`T`$ is diagonal. The corresponding solutions to the dKP equations are constant on a central quadrics $`Q(x,y,t,u)=X^T𝐌(u)X=C`$ where $`X^T=(x,y,t)`$, and $`𝐌(u)`$ can be read-off form (4.45) and (4).

## 5 The quadric ansatz

The solutions to dKP found in Proposition 3.1 have a form which is reminiscent of some solutions of the $`SU(\mathrm{})`$ Toda field equations constant on central quadrics found in .

We shall now present a converse to Proposition 3.1, and show that the existence of Painlevé solutions to dKP follows from what we may call the quadric ansatz, which may have a wider utility. This ansatz can be made whenever we have a non-linear PDE of the form

$$\frac{}{x^j}\left(b^{ij}(u)\frac{u}{x^i}\right)=0,$$
(5.50)
where $`u`$ is a function of coordinates $`x^i,i=1,\mathrm{},n`$. The ansatz is to seek solutions constant on central quadrics or equivalently to seek a matrix $`𝐌(u)=(M_{ij}(u))`$ so that a solution of equation (5.50) is determined implicitly as in (1.5) by

$$Q(x^i,u)=M_{ij}(u)x^ix^j=C.$$
(5.51)
(This ansatz is motivated by the work of Darboux  orthogonal curvilinear coordinates.) We differentiate (5.51) implicitly to find

$$\frac{u}{x^i}=\frac{2}{\dot{Q}}M_{ij}x^j,\text{where}\dot{Q}=\frac{Q}{u}.$$
(5.52)
Now we substitute this into (5.50) and integrate once with respect to $`u`$. Introducing $`g(u)`$ by

$$\dot{g}=\frac{1}{2}b^{ij}M_{ij}=\frac{1}{2}\text{trace}(\mathrm{𝐛𝐌})$$
(5.53)
we obtain

$$(g\dot{M}_{ij}M_{ik}b^{km}M_{mj})x^ix^j=0,$$

so that as a matrix ODE

$$g\dot{𝐌}=\mathrm{𝐌𝐛𝐌}.$$
(5.54)
This equation simplifies if written in terms of another matrix $`𝐍(u)`$ where

$$𝐍=𝐌^1$$
(5.55)
for then

$$g\dot{𝐍}=𝐛,$$
(5.56)
and $`g`$ can be given in terms of $`\mathrm{}=det(𝐍)`$ by

$$g^2\mathrm{}=\zeta =\text{constant}.$$
(5.57)
Restricting to three dimensions with $`(x^1,x^2,x^3)=(x,y,t)`$, the $`SU(\mathrm{})`$ Toda field equation

$$u_{xx}+u_{yy}+(e^u)_{tt}=0$$

is given by (5.50) with

$$𝐛(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& e^u\end{array}\right)$$

and as was shown in , in this case (5.56) can be reduced to Painlevé III.

###### Theorem 5.1

Solutions to the dKP equation (1.2) constant on the central quadric (1.5) are implicitly given by solutions to Painlevé I or II:

* If $`(𝐌^1)_{33}0`$ then

$`x^2vy^2w\left(wv(\alpha 1/2)\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}t^2\left(\left(\alpha 1/2\right)^2+4wv\left(wv(\alpha 1/2)\right)+2v^3\right)`$
$`+xy\left(\alpha 1/2\right)ytv\left(\alpha 1/2\right)2txv^2=\widehat{C}(2wv(\alpha 1/2))^2,`$ (5.58)
where $`\alpha `$ is a constant, $`v`$ is given by (4.48), and $`w`$ is a solution to the rescaled Painlevé II (4.49).
* If $`(𝐌^1)_{33}=0`$ and $`(𝐌^1)_{23}0`$ then

$$x^2+w^2y^2w\left(\frac{\dot{w}^2}{4}4w^3\right)t^24xtw^2+2wxy+\left(\frac{\dot{w}^2}{4}4w^3\right)yt=\widehat{C}\dot{w}^2,$$
(5.59)
where $`w(u)`$ satisfies the rescaled Painlevé I (4.46).
* If $`(𝐌^1)_{33}=(𝐌^1)_{23}=0`$ then

$$\frac{y^2}{4}+(\mathrm{sin}(u)^3\mathrm{cos}(u)u\mathrm{sin}(u)^2+\gamma ^2\mathrm{cos}(u)^4)t^2\mathrm{sin}(u)^2tx\gamma \mathrm{cos}(u)^2ty=\widehat{C}\mathrm{tan}(u)^2$$
(5.60)
where $`\gamma `$ is a constant.

The constant $`\widehat{C}`$ can always be set to $`0`$ or $`1`$.

Proof. For the dKP equation we have (5.50) with

$$𝐛(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}u& 0& 1/2\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 1/2& 0& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(5.61)
(Note that $`𝐛(u)`$ is the inverse of $`h`$ in (1.1)). Equation (5.56) implies that $`𝐍(u)`$ can be written as

$$𝐍(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}Y& \beta & Z\\ \beta & X& ϵ\\ Z& ϵ& \varphi \end{array}\right)$$
(5.62)
where $`\beta ,ϵ`$ and $`\varphi `$ are constants, while

$$\dot{Y}=g^1u,\dot{X}=g^1,\dot{Z}=\frac{1}{2}g^1.$$
(5.63)
Now

$$\eta =X+2Z=\text{constant}$$
(5.64)
and we can eliminate $`Z`$ in favour of $`X`$ and another constant. To eliminate $`Y`$ in favour of $`X,\dot{X}`$ and another constant we use (5.57) and (5.64):

$$\mathrm{}=(\varphi Xϵ^2)Y\frac{1}{4}X^3+\frac{1}{2}\eta X^2X(\frac{1}{4}\eta ^2+ϵ\beta )\beta ^2\varphi +ϵ\beta \eta =\zeta \dot{X}^2$$
(5.65)
so that, provided $`\varphi `$ and $`ϵ`$ are not both zero

$$Y=(\varphi Xϵ^2)^1(\zeta \dot{X}^2+\frac{1}{4}X^3\frac{1}{2}\eta X^2+X(\frac{1}{4}\eta ^2+ϵ\beta )+\beta ^2\varphi ϵ\beta \eta ).$$
(5.66)
If $`\varphi =ϵ=0`$ then (5.65) is a first order ODE for $`X`$

$$\zeta \dot{X}^2=\frac{1}{4}X(\eta X)^2$$

which is readily solved yielding (5.60). Otherwise we obtain $`\dot{Y}`$ from (5.66) and substitute it into the equation

$$\dot{Y}u\dot{X}=0$$
(5.67)
obtained form (5.63). This is the desired second order ODE for $`X`$ which we shall investigate below.

First we use some freedom of redefinition to absorb some of the constants. Note that the linear change of coordinates

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\widehat{x}& & \\ \widehat{y}& & \\ \widehat{t}& & \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& c_1& c_2\\ 0& 1& 2c_1\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}x& & \\ y& & \\ t& & \end{array}\right),\widehat{u}=uc_1^2\frac{1}{2}c_1\frac{1}{2}c_2$$
(5.68)
is a symmetry of the dKP equation . This transformation preserves the quadric ansatz but changes the constants as follows

$`\widehat{\varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi `$
$`\widehat{ϵ}`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ+2c_1\varphi `$ (5.69)
$`\widehat{\beta }`$ $`=`$ $`\beta +(c_2+2c_1^2)ϵ+2c_1c_2\varphi +c_1\eta `$
$`\widehat{\eta }`$ $`=`$ $`\eta +6c_1ϵ+(4c_1^2+2c_2)\varphi `$
* If $`\varphi 0`$, we can use this transformation to set $`ϵ=\eta =0`$. Now introduce functions $`v(u)`$ and $`w(u)`$ and a constant $`\alpha `$ by

$$X=2\varphi v,Y=2\varphi w(vw(\alpha \frac{1}{2}))+\varphi v^2,\alpha =\frac{1}{2}+\frac{\beta }{\varphi }$$
(5.70)
to find that the equations (5.65) and (5.67) with $`\zeta =\varphi /16`$ are equivalent to (4.49) with $`v`$ given by (4.48). This case reduces to Painlevé II. The quadric (1.5) can be written as (5.1), which is identical to the previously obtained (4).
* If $`\varphi =0`$, we can use the transformation (5) to set $`\beta =\eta =0`$. Now introduce $`w`$ by

$$X=2ϵw,Y=\frac{ϵ}{2}\left(\frac{\dot{w}^2}{4}4w^3\right)$$
(5.71)
to find that (5.65) and (5.67) with $`\zeta =ϵ/32`$ are equivalent to the rescaled Painlevé I (4.46). The quadric (1.5) is this time (5.59) (which is (4.45).

If $`\widehat{C}0`$, then we can set $`\widehat{C}=1`$ by (possibly complex) rescaling of $`(x,y,t)`$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

## 6 Examples

All solutions to PI are transcendental . On the other hand for certain values of $`\alpha `$ PII admits particular solutions expressible in terms of ‘known’ functions. For $`\alpha =n`$ (4.49) possesses rational solutions, and for $`\alpha =n+1/2`$ there exists a class of solutions expressible by Airy functions. For example if $`\alpha =1`$, then (4.49) is satisfied by $`w=1/(2u)`$. Now $`v=u`$, and (4) becomes cubic in u

$$8t^2u^3+16xtu^2+(8x^24yt)u(t^2+4xy)=c,c=\text{const}.$$

The three roots of this cubic give three solutions to dKP. A root which yields a real solution is

$`u(x,y,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt[3]{A+12t\sqrt{B}}}{12t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{6yt+4x^2}{3t\sqrt[3]{A+12t\sqrt{B}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{2x}{3t}},`$ (6.72)
$`A`$ $`=`$ $`144xyt+64x^3+108t^3108tc,`$
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`96y^3t48y^2x^2+216xyt^2+96x^3t+81t^4`$
$`96{\displaystyle \frac{cx^3}{t}}216cxy162ct^2+81c^2.`$
Other rational solutions of PII (or rational matrices $`𝐌`$) corresponding to different values of $`\alpha `$ can be generated by the following Bäcklund transformation (see for example )

$$w_\alpha =w_{(\alpha 1)}\frac{2\alpha +1}{\dot{w}_{(\alpha 1)}+2w_{(\alpha 1)}^2+2u}.$$

Here $`w_\alpha =w_\alpha (u)`$ is an arbitrary solution of PII with a parameter $`\alpha `$. We can therefore formulate the following

###### Corollary 6.1

If the quadric (1.5) is rational in $`u`$ then it is necessarily of the form (5.1) and it can be found explicitly.

For example if $`\alpha =2`$ and $`\widehat{C}=0`$ then $`w=1/(2u)3u^2/(1+2u^3),v=(1+2u^3)/(2u^2)`$, and (4) is

$`(8xt2y^2)+8t^2u\left(6yt4x^2\right)u^2\left(4y^216xt\right)u^3\left(12yx11t^2\right)u^4`$
$`\left(8x^2+12yt\right)u^5+16xtu^6+8t^2u^7=0.`$
## 7 Final comments on associated geometries

We can now look back at our initial motivation and use the solutions to the dKP equation we have obtained to construct the Einstein–Weyl structures. To write down the EW structures in a way which explicitly depends on solutions to PI or PII we shall change coordinates in (1.1) to $`(t,y,u)`$, and regard $`x`$ as a function. Both cones (5.59) and (5.1) can be written as

$$x^2+2ax+b=0,$$
(7.73)
where $`a=a(t,y,u),b=b(t,y,u)`$. For example

$$a=wy2tw^2,b=w^2y^2+(\dot{w}^2/44w^3)(ytwt^2)\widehat{C}\dot{w}^2.$$

in the case of PI. Now we choose one root of (7.73), and differentiate (7.73) with respect to $`x`$ to find an expression for $`u_x`$. The resulting EW structure is

$$h=\mathrm{d}y^24(u\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}(a+\sqrt{a^2b^2}))\mathrm{d}t,\omega =\frac{8\sqrt{a^2b^2}}{2(a+\sqrt{a^2b^2})a_ub_u}\mathrm{d}t.$$
(7.74)
There is a class of four-dimensional anti-self-dual geometries associated to (7.74).

###### Definition 7.1

A null-Kähler structure on a four-manifold $``$ consists of an inner product $`g`$ of signature $`(++)`$ and a real rank-two endomorphism $`N:TT`$ parallel with respect to this inner product such that

$$N^2=0,\text{and}g(NX,Y)+g(X,NY)=0$$

for all $`X,YT`$. A null-Kähler structure is anti-self-dual (ASD) if the self-dual part of the Weyl tensor vanishes.

In  it has been shown that all ASD null Kähler structures with a symmetry which preserves $`N`$ are locally given by solutions to the dKP equation (1.2) and its linearisation.

$$V_{yy}V_{xt}+(uV)_{xx}=0.$$
(7.75)
Given $`u`$ and $`V`$ the associated ASD null Kähler metric with a symmetry $`_z`$ is given by

$$g=V(\mathrm{d}y^24\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}t4u\mathrm{d}t^2)V^1(\mathrm{d}z+\beta )^2,$$
(7.76)
where the one-form $`\beta `$ is a solution to the monopole equation

$$(\mathrm{d}V+(1/2)\omega V)=\mathrm{d}\beta ,$$

and the null-Kähler two-form is $`\mathrm{\Omega }:=g(N,)=\mathrm{d}z\mathrm{d}t`$.

Now assume that $`u(x,y,t)`$ is given in terms of PI or PII, so that $`(h,\omega )`$ are of the form (7.74). A general $`V`$ will then lead to metrics (7.76) with just one symmetry. If $`V=\text{const}.u_x`$ then (7.75) reduces to (1.2) and $`g`$ is (pseudo) hyper-Kähler. Another particular solution of the monopole equation is picked out by the quadric ansatz: If u is a solution of dKP given by the quadric ansatz (1.5) then $`V=u/C`$ satisfies (7.75). However by implicit differentiation of (1.5) this is just

$$V=\frac{1}{X^T\dot{𝐌}X}.$$

There is a class of solutions to (7.75) such that the resulting ASD null-Kähler metrics are homogeneous of Bianchi type $`VIII`$. These Bianchi geometries will be characterised elsewhere.

## 8 Acknowledgements

We thank David Calderbank for drawing our attention to the generalised Nahm’s equations, and the anonymous referee for valuable comments. MD was partly supported by NATO grant PST.CLG.978984.