text:
# Topological notions for Kauffman and Vogel’s polynomial

## 1 Introduction.

In  a polynomial invariant is described for 4-valent rigid vertex embedded graphs. This polynomial, denoted $`[G]`$ for a graph $`G`$, with variables $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`a`$ satisfies the skein relation

$$[\text{}]=A[\text{}]+B[\text{}]+[\text{}]$$

and restricted to a link gives the Dubrovnik polynomial with variables $`a`$ and $`AB`$. It is proved in  that this polynomial is invariant for regular isotopies and satisfies the conditions

$$[\text{}]=a[\text{}],[\text{}]=a^1[\text{}].$$

This means that the polynomials of graph diagrams are the same if we can change one graph diagram to the other by the Reidemeister moves for 4-valent graphs except for the first move (see ).

The non-invariance under the first Reidemeister move can be corrected using the twisting number of a graph. This is defined as the sum of the writhes over all knot-theoretic circuits of the graph. A knot-theoretic circuit of a graph is a closed walk on the graph which corresponds to a link component if we change all vertices into crossings, and its writhe is the sum of the signs of all its self-crossings. The twisting number of a graph is invariant under regular isotopies. Thus, defining $`t(G)`$ as the twisting number of a graph $`G`$, we have that $`a^{t(G)}[G]`$ is invariant under any isotopy since

$$t(\text{})=t(\text{})+1$$

and

$$t(\text{})=t(\text{})1$$

.

In  the following graphical calculus is proved.

###### Theorem 1

For 4-valent graph diagrams, differing only in the marked local picture, we have the following identities:

$`[\text{}]=\mu [\text{}]`$

$`[\text{}]=𝒪[\text{}]`$

$`[\text{}]=(1AB)[\text{}]+\gamma [\text{}](A+B)[\text{}]`$

$`[\text{}][\text{}]=AB([\text{}][\text{}]+[\text{}][\text{}]+[\text{}][\text{}])+\xi ([\text{}][\text{}])`$

where

$`\mu =\frac{aa^1}{AB}+1`$

$`𝒪=\frac{Aa^1Ba}{AB}(A+B)`$

$`\gamma =\frac{B^2aA^2a^1}{AB}+AB`$

$`\xi =\frac{B^3aA^3a^1}{AB}`$

As was shown in , this graphical calculus is sufficient to calculate the polynomial of a planar graph.

In  the author studied the case $`B=A^1`$ and $`a=A`$. In this case, the graphical calculus takes the form:

$`[\text{}]=2[\text{}]`$,

$`[\text{}]=(A+A^1)[\text{}]`$,

$`[\text{}]=(A+A^1)[\text{}]`$,

$`[\text{}][\text{}]=[\text{}][\text{}]+[\text{}][\text{}]+[\text{}][\text{}](A+A^1)([\text{}][\text{}])`$,

and for planar graphs we have:

###### Theorem 2

In the case $`a=A`$ and $`B=A^1`$ for any 4-valent planar graph $`G`$ we have $`[G]=2^{c1}(AA^1)^v`$, where $`c`$ is the number of connected components of $`G`$ and $`v`$ is the number of vertices of $`G.`$

This means that a necessary condition for a 4-valent rigid vertex embedded graph $`G`$ to be isotopic to a planar graph is that the polynomial of $`G`$ with $`B=A^1`$ and $`a=A`$ is $`[G]=2^{c1}(AA^1)^vA^{t(G)}`$ where $`c`$ is the number of connected components, $`v`$ is the number of vertices and $`t(G)`$ is the twisting number of $`G`$. This corollary is a consequence of the fact that the polynomial $`a^{t(G)}[G]`$ is an isotopy invariant.

Using the skein relation

$$[\text{}]=A[\text{}]+A^1[\text{}]+[\text{}]$$

and the previous theorem it is easy to prove the following result:

###### Corollary 3

If a graph diagram $`G`$ has only one crossing, and the removal of this crossing does not change the number of connected components, then the polynomial of $`G`$ vanishes in the case $`B=A^1`$ and $`a=A`$, and thus $`G`$ is not isotopic to a planar graph.

Thus we have a class of embedded graphs with polynomial equal to zero and therefore not isotopic to planar graphs. In the next section we will characterize the graphs with polynomial equal to zero.

## 2 Calculating the polynomial for embedded graphs.

Let a separating curve be a simple regular curve, on the plane, that intersects the diagram only at the crossings of the diagram and does so in the following way:  or  . A partition of the diagram is a choice of marks of the type  or  , at each crossing, such that there exists a collection of disjoint separating curves intersecting all crossings of the diagram in agreement with these marks. A partition without marks we call a null partition111This only exists for diagrams without crossings, i.e., planar graphs..

A graph diagram is called separable if it has a partition. We can show that this property is invariant under ambient isotopies. The planar graphs are clearly separable, since they have the null partition. Later we will see that any link is also separable.

###### Proposition 4

The polynomial, with variables $`B=A^1`$ and $`a=A`$, of a graph diagram is zero if and only if the graph diagram is not separable.

This result is a corollary of theorem 6.

There is a way to determine the partition of a graph. For that we need to introduce another definition.

A orientation on the edges of a graph will be called hyperbolic if at each vertex of the graph the orientation is of the type  .

###### Theorem 5

For a given graph diagram, we have that a choice of marks on the crossings is a partition if and only if there exists a hyperbolic orientation on the edges of the graph such that the mark on each crossing is in agreement with the orientation in the following way  or  .

In particular, we have that a graph is separable if and only if it has hyperbolic orientations.

Proof.  Given a partition there exists a collection of separating curves that cross the graph diagram in agreement with the marks of the partition. These curves, together with the diagram, form the skeleton of a map that is bicolorable222i.e. the regions delimited by the diagram and the curves can be colored with two colors (black and white) in such way that two adjacent regions to the same edge of the diagram or part of the curve have different colors (see ). since the vertices of the skeleton of the map have even degree (four in the case of the vertices of the diagram, and six in the case of the crossings of the diagram cut by the curves). Thus we can choose opposite orientations for the boundaries of the regions with different colors. This gives an orientation on the diagram that is constant on each edge (even when the edge through a crossing), is hyperbolic and such that at each crossing the separating curve cuts the diagram in the following way  or  .

,

Given a hyperbolic orientation on the edges of the graph, we want to see that the marks  or  form a partition. For that we take the regions delimited by the diagram. For each region the number of marks transversal to the boundary (i.e. such that the corresponding separating curve goes inside the region) is even since at each of this marks the orientation of the edges, along the boundary, is reverse, whereas on the other crossings and vertices adjacent to the region the orientation is preserved since the orientation is hyperbolic (see fig.).

Thus, it is possible to join up such marks two by two using paths without intersections.

$$\text{}\text{}$$

In the end we obtain a collection of separating curves for these marks, so we get a partition.

For a partition, we say that the crossing  has signature $`A`$ if its partition mark is vertical, and has signature $`A^1`$ if its partition mark is horizontal. The product of the signatures of all crossings of the partition we call the signature of the partition. By convention we fix the value $`1`$ for the signature of the null partition. For a graph diagram $`G`$ we denote by $`\{G\}`$ the sum of the signatures of all partitions of the diagram. If $`G`$ has no partition (it is non separable) we fix $`\{G\}=0`$.

Let $`G`$ be a graph diagram with a hyperbolic orientation on the edges, and let $`w(G)`$ be the writhe of G, that is, the sum of the signs of all crossings on this orientation. It is easy to see that the signature of the partition corresponding to the given orientation is $`A^{w(D)}`$.

A diagram component is a component corresponding to a connected component of the planar graph obtained by changing crossings into vertices. For example, a diagram of Hopf’s link has only one diagram component although Hopf’s link has two connected components.

We can also see that two hyperbolic orientations of the graph give us the same partition if and only if, on each diagram component, the orientations of the connected components of the graph are the same or opposite333This operation changes neither the writhe nor the hyperbolicity of the orientation.. Moreover, we have that, on each connected component of a graph, one hyperbolic orientation, if it exists, it is determined by the orientation of one edge in such a component.

Thus, calling $``$ the set of all hyperbolic orientations of the diagram $`G`$, and $`G^h`$ the diagram $`G`$ with a given hyperbolic orientation $`h`$, we have

$$\underset{h}{}A^{w(G^h)}=2^d\{G\}$$

where $`d`$ is the number of diagram components of $`G`$.

###### Theorem 6

The polynomial with variables $`B=A^1`$ and $`a=A`$ for a graph diagram $`G`$ is

$$\frac{1}{2}(AA^1)^v\underset{h}{}A^{w(G^h)}$$

where $``$ is the set of all hyperbolic orientations of the diagram $`G`$, $`G^h`$ is the diagram $`G`$ with a given hyperbolic orientation $`h`$ and $`v`$ is the number of vertices of the graph $`G`$.

Proof.  We only need to check that the polynomial

$$[G]=\frac{1}{2}(AA^1)^v\underset{h}{}A^{w(G^h)}$$

satisfies the skein relation and that, for planar graphs, it is equal to $`2^{c1}(AA^1)^v`$, where $`c`$ is the number of connected components of $`G`$ and $`v`$ is the number of vertices of $`G`$.

First of all, we check the skein relation (with $`B=A^1`$ and $`a=A`$).

Let \[  \], …, \[  \], … be the polynomials \[  \], \[  \], … considering only the hyperbolic orientation with the local form  , …,  , … .Then we have the following identities:

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccccc}[\text{}]& =& [\text{}]& +& [\text{}]& +& [\text{}]& +& [\text{}]& & & & \\ [\text{}]& =& [\text{}]& & & +& [\text{}]& & & +& [\text{}]& +& [\text{}]\\ [\text{}]& =& & & [\text{}]& & & +& [\text{}]& +& [\text{}]& +& [\text{}]\\ [\text{}]& =& & & & & & & & & [\text{}]& +& [\text{}]\end{array}$$

and

$$\begin{array}{cccc}[\text{}]& =& [\text{}]& \\ [\text{}]& =& [\text{}]& \\ [\text{}]& =& (A+A^1)& [\text{}]\\ [\text{}]& =& (A+A^1)& [\text{}]\\ [\text{}]& =& A[\text{}]& \\ [\text{}]& =& A^1[\text{}]& \\ [\text{}]& =& A[\text{}]& \\ [\text{}]& =& A^1[\text{}]& \end{array}$$

Thus we take:

$`A[\text{}]+A^1[\text{}]+[\text{}]=`$
$`=`$ $`A([\text{}]+[\text{}]+[\text{}]+[\text{}])`$
$`+A^1([\text{}]+[\text{}]+[\text{}]+[\text{}])`$
$`+[\text{}]+[\text{}]=`$
$`=`$ $`A([\text{}]+[\text{}])+A^1([\text{}]+[\text{}])+`$
$`A[\text{}]+A^1[\text{}]+[\text{}]+A[\text{}]+A^1[\text{}]+[\text{}]=`$
$`=`$ $`A([\text{}]+[\text{}])+A^1([\text{}]+[\text{}])=`$
$`=`$ $`[\text{}]+[\text{}]+[\text{}]+[\text{}]=`$
$`=`$ $`[\text{}]`$
Since, for a planar graph $`G`$, the writhe of any hyperbolic orientation is zero, we have that $`_hA^{w(G^h)}`$ is equal to the number of hyperbolic orientations which is $`2^c`$ where $`c`$ is the number of connected components of $`G`$. Thus the polynomial $`[G]=\frac{1}{2}(AA^1)^v_hA^{w(G^h)}`$ is equal to $`2^{c1}(AA^1)^v`$ for a planar graph $`G`$.

Since any orientation on a link is hyperbolic, we have that all links, including the knots, are separable.

In the case of the knots, we have only two orientations and these have the same writhe. Thus the polynomial for a knot $`K`$ is $`[K]=A^{w(K)}`$ where $`w(K)`$ is the writhe of $`K`$. In this way, the corrected polynomial $`A^{t(G)}[G]`$ become trivial for knots.

Another result that is easy to check is the following.

###### Corollary 7

If the graph admits a knot-theoretic circuit that passes through vertices an odd number of times then the graph is not separable.

This happens because a hyperbolic orientation reverses the orientations of the edges along a knot-theoretic circuit, whenever it passes through a vertex. This gives us a easy way to find non separable graphs (though it is not general).

## 3 Conjectures.

Now we consider the polynomial $`P`$ that for a graph $`G`$ gives the polynomial

$$P(G)=\frac{A^{t(G)}[G]}{2^{c1}(AA^1)^v}.$$

This polynomial is invariant under isotopies and for planar graphs takes the value 1. Moreover, this polynomial satisfies the following identities:

$`P(\text{})=P(\text{})`$;

$`P(\text{})=P(\text{})`$;

$`P(\text{})=P(\text{})`$, if  and  admit hyperbolic orientations and  has a hyperbolic orientation with the local form  or  ;

$`P(\text{})=P(\text{})`$.

We are interested in studying the class of the graphs with the polynomial $`P`$ equal to 1 (that is the class of graphs for which the polynomials $`P`$ or $`[]`$ does not detect non-planarity). This class contains the planar graphs and the knots. Moreover, it contains any graph that can be obtained from a planar graph or a knot by the moves:

$`\text{}\text{}`$;

$`\text{}\text{}`$;

$`\text{}\text{}`$, if  and  are hyperbolic and  has a hyperbolic orientation with the local form  or  ;

$`\text{}\text{}`$.

Let $`𝒞_1`$ be the set of the graphs isotopic to planar graphs, $`𝒞_2`$ the set of the graphs isotopic to graphs obtained from planar graphs by these last moves, $`𝒞_3`$ the set of the graphs isotopic to graphs obtained from knots444including the unknot. by these last moves, and $`𝒞_4`$ the set of the graphs with the polynomial $`P`$ equal to 1.

We have that $`𝒞_1𝒞_2`$, $`𝒞_2𝒞_4`$ and $`𝒞_3𝒞_4`$.

We have also that $`𝒞_2𝒞_3`$ because, by the lemma 2 of , any 4-valent planar graph can be transformed into a disjoint union of circles (that are the knots theoretic circuits of the graph) by the moves:

$$\text{}\text{}$$

,

$$\text{}\text{}$$

and

$$\text{}\text{}$$

and by the move

$$\text{}\text{}$$

we obtain the unknot.

> Question: Are any two of the sets $`𝒞_1`$, $`𝒞_2`$, $`𝒞_3`$ and $`𝒞_4`$ the same?

We have that $`𝒞_1𝒞_2`$, as the following example shows:

$$G:\text{}$$

###### Example 1

The graph in the picture is not planar, since it contains two disjoint linked cycles (indicated in the picture), but it can be obtained from a planar graph by the move $`\text{}\text{}`$.

###### Conjecture 8

$`𝒞_2𝒞_3`$.

It is hard to believe that any knot can be obtained from a planar graph by the moves:

$`\text{}\text{}`$;

$`\text{}\text{}`$;

$`\text{}\text{}`$, if  and  are hyperbolic and  has a hyperbolic orientation with the local form  or  ;

$`\text{}\text{}`$.

###### Conjecture 9

$`𝒞_3𝒞_4`$.

It is possible that the following example belongs to $`𝒞_4`$ but not to $`𝒞_3`$.

$$G:\text{}$$

###### Example 2

The graph in the picture is a representation of the complete graph $`K_5`$ (thus is not planar), and has polynomial $`P`$ equal to 1.

Acknowledgment -I wish to thank Prof. Roger Picken who encouraged me to write this paper and helped me to improve it.

This work was supported by the program Programa Operacional “Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovação” (POCTI) of the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), cofinanced by the European Community fund Feder.


format: text

text:
# Ghost Sector of Vacuum String Field Theory and the Projection Equation

## 1 Introduction

Witten’s open string field theory (OSFT)  has proven succesful in desribing the process of tachyon condensation on unstable brane configurations. The solution corresponding to the tachyon vacuum has been approximated to a high degree of accuracy using level truncation methods . However, an explicit analytic solution is still lacking. Such a solution would be desirable in order to describe the fluctuations around the tachyon vacuum, where interesting new physics is expected to emerge, possibly including closed strings . Vacuum string field theory (VSFT) was proposed as an ‘educated guess’ for the string field theory around the tachyonic vacuum. Various requirements for such a theory led the authors of  to propose an action of the same cubic form as in OSFT but with a different BRST-operator $`Q`$ depending only on the ghost modes. This makes it natural to look for solutions $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ in which the matter and ghost parts decouple:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }^m\mathrm{\Psi }^{gh}.$$
(1)
The equation of motion for the matter part then becomes the projection equation

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^m=\mathrm{\Psi }^m^m\mathrm{\Psi }^m$$
(2)
while the ghost part has to satisfy

$$Q\mathrm{\Psi }^{gh}=\mathrm{\Psi }^{gh}^{gh}\mathrm{\Psi }^{gh}.$$
(3)
Various checks of VSFT can be made without precise knowledge of $`Q`$ or the ghost part $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{gh}`$. The matter part of the D-25 brane solution is given by the ‘sliver state’  and lower dimensional D-branes correspond to generalizations thereof. These solutions reproduce the correct ratios of D-brane tensions . Multi-D-brane solutions have also been constructed .

A convenient formulation for finding solutions to the projection equation (2) is given in the split-string formalism . Here, it is possible to represent string fields as operators on an auxiliary ‘half-string Hilbert space’ $`^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ in such a way that the star product becomes the multiplication of operators. Numerous solutions to (2) can then be constructed in the form of projection operators on $`^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. This construction generalizes a familiar technique from noncommutative field theories . Another approach to constructing solutions to (2) uses surface states in conformal field theory .

In , Gaiotto, Rastelli, Sen and Zwiebach (GRSZ) presented convincing arguments that point to a specific choice for the BRST operator $`Q`$ in VSFT. It is given by a pure midpoint insertion

$`Q`$ $`=`$ $`c_0(c_2+c_2)+(c_4+c_4)\mathrm{}`$ (4)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(c^+(\pi /2)+c^{}(\pi /2)\right).`$
It was also argued that the overall multiplication constant in front of the action should diverge in order to have finite energy solutions.

Finding solutions to the ghost sector equation (3) of VSFT seems at first sight more difficult than in the matter sector because of the presence of $`Q`$ and the fact that $`^{gh}`$ contains a midpoint insertion. However, solutions were found in  which correspond to projectors in an auxiliary twisted ghost system. In this paper we further explore the relation between solutions to the ghost sector equation (3) with $`Q`$ given by the midpoint insertion (4) and projection operators. Our approach uses oscillator methods  and the bosonized form of the ghosts. After transforming to suitably chosen half-string variables, we show that there exists a field redefinition which takes the ghost equation of motion into a pure projection equation of the form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=\mathrm{\Psi }^{}^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}.$$
(5)
provided that $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ satisfies the constraint that the ghost number should be equally divided over the left- and right halves of the string. The star product $`^{}`$ in (5) is different from the original ghost sector product $`^{gh}`$ in that it no longer includes midpoint insertions: it is given by a pure delta-function overlap just as in the matter sector. This allows us to construct solutions from projection operators on half string Hilbert space as in the matter sector. In this way several well-known matter sector solutions have a direct counterpart in the ghost sector. As an illustration, we construct the ghost sector equivalent of various well-known matter sector projectors such as the sliver, butterfly and nothing states.

This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 deals with the transformation to half-string modes which we illustrate in the matter sector. We are careful to choose a half-string basis which gives well defined expressions for midpoint insertions. We discuss the Bogoliubov transformation relating full- and half-string oscillator modes and derive the relation between full-string and half-string vacua. We also find expressions for the Neumann matrices in the half-string basis. In section 3, we discuss several solutions to the matter sector projection equation which will turn out to have a direct counterpart in the ghost sector. In section 4, we turn to the transformation to half-string variables in the ghost sector. We derive the bosonized version of the VSFT BRST-operator which takes a simple form in terms of our half-string variables. In section 5, we discuss the field redefinition which turns the ghost sector equation of motion into a pure projection equation for string fields satisfying the constraint that the ghost number is equally divided into the left and right-parts. When this constraint is imposed, vacuum string field theory can be reformulated as a $`U(\mathrm{})`$ cubic matrix model. We comment on the construction of solutions and give several examples. We end with a discussion of some open problems.

## 2 Vacuum string field theory: matter sector

### 2.1 Mode expansions

We start this section by giving some conventions regarding mode expansions. The string is parametrized by $`\sigma [0,\pi ]`$ and mode expansions are obtained by expanding in orthonormal basis functions $`\psi _n(\sigma )`$ of $`L_2[0,\pi ]`$ obeying Neumann boundary conditions at the endpoints:

$$\psi _0=1;\psi _n=\sqrt{2}\mathrm{cos}n\sigma .$$
(6)
One obtains position and momentum modes by expanding (we will suppress Lorentz indices in the rest of the paper):

$`X(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}x_n\psi _n(\sigma )=x_0+\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}x_n\mathrm{cos}n\sigma `$
$`\pi P(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}p_n\psi _n(\sigma )=p_0+\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}p_n\mathrm{cos}n\sigma .`$
We represent the modes $`\{x_n\}_n`$ as a column vector $`|x)`$ and use the notation $`(x|y)_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}x_ny_n`$. Creation-annihilation operators are defined by:

$`|x)={\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}}E[|a)|a^{})]`$ $`|p)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}E^1[|a)+|a^{})]`$
$`|a)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[E|p)iE^1|x)]`$ $`|a^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[E|p)+iE^1|x)]`$ (7)
with $`E`$ the matrix with coefficients

$$E_{mn}^1=\sqrt{n}\delta _{mn}+\sqrt{2}\delta _{m0}\delta _{n0}$$

The canonical commutation relations are:

$$[a_m,a_n^{}]=\delta _{mn}$$

As usual, one builds up a Fock space by acting with the creation operators on a vacuum state $`|\mathrm{\Omega }`$ annihilated by all $`a_n`$ (including $`a_0`$) and normalized to $`\mathrm{\Omega }|\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$. Sometimes it is useful to work with the translationally invariant vacuum $`|0`$ satisfying $`p_0|0=a_n|0=0,n>0`$. Position basis states can be expressed in terms of oscillators as

$$|x|\{x_n\}_n=N^X\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}(x|E^2|x)\sqrt{2}i(a^{}|E^1|x)+\frac{1}{2}(a^{}|a^{})\right]|\mathrm{\Omega }$$
(8)
with $`N^X`$ an (infinite) normalization constant:

$$N^X=\left(\frac{2}{\pi }\right)^{26/4}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{n}{\pi }\right)^{26/4}.$$

### 2.2 Split-string formalism

In this section we set up the transition to the split-string formalism. This transition is usually  obtained by splitting $`X(\sigma )`$ into left and right parts

$`X^L(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`X(\sigma )0\sigma \pi /2`$ (9)
$`X^R(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`X(\pi \sigma )0\sigma \pi /2`$ (10)
and performing mode expansions of these functions on the interval $`[0,\pi /2]`$, where one chooses some boundary condition in the midpoint $`\sigma =\pi /2`$. However, this leaves some ambiguities in the treatment of the midpoint: for instance, it is not clear how to express $`X(\pi /2)`$ in terms of half-string modes. Our setup is slightly different in the sense that we will treat the transition to half-string modes as a change of basis in the full interval $`[0,\pi ]`$. The change of basis is chosen so as to diagonalize the projection operators on the left and right halves of the string. Various choices of orthonormal half-string bases are possible and the expansion of a string configuration $`X(\sigma )`$ in any such basis will converge with respect to the $`L_2`$ norm. However, even if $`X(\sigma )`$ is continuous in $`\sigma =\pi /2`$, pointwise convergence of the expansion in $`\sigma =\pi /2`$ is not guaranteed. Due to the importance of the midpoint in string field theory (especially in the ghost sector where midpoint insertions enter explicitly), we will impose pointwise convergence at the midpoint as an additional criterion for the half-string basis we will use. In a basis satisfying this criterion, $`X(\pi /2)`$ has a well-defined expansion in terms of half-string modes.

#### 2.2.1 Half-string projectors

Instead of working with the basis (6), one can also set up an expansion in a different orthonormal basis in which the projection operators $`P^L,P^R`$ on the left- and right parts of the string become diagonal. The coefficients in such an expansion are referred to as half-string modes. The matrix elements of $`P^L(\sigma ,\sigma ^{})=\theta (\pi /2\sigma )\delta (\sigma \sigma ^{})`$ with respect to the basis (6) are easily obtained. Splitting the component indices in even and odd ones (denoted by superscripts e and o respectively) and writing any matrix $`M`$ as $`M=\left(\begin{array}{cc}M^{ee}& M^{eo}\\ M^{oe}& M^{oo}\end{array}\right)`$, one finds

$$P^L=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1^{ee}& A\\ A^T& 1^{oo}\end{array}\right).$$

Here we have defined a matrix $`A`$ whose rows are labeled by even indices and whose columns are labeled by odd ones111The matrix $`X`$ defined in  is related to our $`A`$ by $`X=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0^{ee}& A\\ A^T& 0^{oo}\end{array}\right)`$.

$`A_{2m,2n+1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4(2n+1)(1)^{m+n}}{((2n+1)^2(2m)^2)\pi }}`$
$`A_{0,2n+1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{2}(1)^n}{(2n+1)\pi }}`$ (11)
The matrix $`A`$ satisfies $`AA^T=1^{ee},A^TA=1^{oo}`$, hence $`(P^L)^2=P^L`$.
Similarly, for the projection operator on the right half of the string $`P^R(\sigma ,\sigma ^{})=\theta (\sigma \pi /2)\delta (\sigma \sigma ^{})`$, one finds the component form

$$P^R=1P^L=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1^{ee}& A\\ A^T& 1^{oo}\end{array}\right).$$

#### 2.2.2 Half-string basis

The Hilbert space $`L_2[0,\pi ]`$ decomposes into the direct sum of $`P^L`$ and $`P^R`$-invariant subspaces. Our goal is to introduce a new orthonormal basis adapted to this decomposition. Consider the matrix

$$𝒪=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1^{ee}& A\\ 1^{ee}& A\end{array}\right).$$

It is orthogonal, $`𝒪𝒪^T=𝒪^T𝒪=1`$ and diagonalizes $`P^L,P^R`$:

$$𝒪P^L𝒪^T=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1^{ee}& 0^{ee}\\ 0^{ee}& 0^{ee}\end{array}\right),𝒪P^R𝒪^T=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0^{ee}& 0^{ee}\\ 0^{ee}& 1^{ee}\end{array}\right).$$

The matrix $`𝒪`$ defines a transformation to a new orthonormal basis $`\psi ^L(\sigma ),\psi ^R(\sigma )`$ satisfying $`P^L\psi _{2n}^L=\psi _{2n}^L,P^R\psi _{2n}^R=\psi _{2n}^R`$ and $`P^L\psi _{2n}^R=P^R\psi _{2n}^L=0`$ :

$`\psi _{2n}^L(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[\psi _{2n}(\sigma )+{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}A_{2n,2m+1}\psi _{2m+1}(\sigma )]`$ (12)
$`\psi _{2n}^R(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[\psi _{2n}(\sigma ){\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}A_{2n,2m+1}\psi _{2m+1}(\sigma )]`$ (13)
Explicitly, one has

$`\psi _0^L(\sigma )=\sqrt{2}\theta (\pi /2\sigma );`$ $`\psi _0^R(\sigma )=\sqrt{2}\theta (\sigma \pi /2)`$
$`\psi _{2n}^L(\sigma )=2\mathrm{cos}2n\sigma \theta (\pi /2\sigma );`$ $`\psi _{2n}^R(\sigma )=2\mathrm{cos}2n\sigma \theta (\sigma \pi /2)n0`$
where the step function in $`0`$ is to be interpreted as $`\theta (0)=\frac{1}{2}`$. Hence this choice of half-string basis corresponds to expanding $`X^L(\sigma ),X^R(\sigma )`$ in basis functions on $`[0,\pi /2]`$ obeying Neumann boundary conditions at the midpoint. The mode expansion in the new basis reads

$$X(\sigma )=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}x_{2n}^L\psi _{2n}^L(\sigma )+\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}x_{2n}^R\psi _{2n}^R(\sigma )$$
(14)
The transformation formulae for the position modes take the form:

$$|x^L)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}[|x^e)+A|x^o)]|x^R)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}[|x^e)A|x^o)]$$

The inverse transformations are:

$$|x^e)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}[|x^L)+|x^R)]|x^o)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}A^T[|x^L)|x^R)]$$

This half-string basis satisfies our criterion for pointwise convergence in the midpoint, indeed one has:

$$X(\pi /2)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x_0^L+x_0^R)+\underset{n}{}(1)^n(x_{2n}^L+x_{2n}^R)=x_0+\sqrt{2}\underset{n}{}(1)^nx_{2n}.$$

The same procedure can be followed for the decomposition of the conjugate momentum $`P(\sigma )`$ into half-string modes. One gets

$`|p^L)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|p^e)+A|p^o)]`$ $`|p^R)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|p^e)A|p^o)]`$
$`|p^e)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|p^L)+|p^R)]`$ $`|p^o)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}A^T[|p^L)|p^R)]`$ (15)
Due to the orthogonality of the transformation, the canonical commutation relations are unmodified:

$$[x_{2m}^L,p_{2n}^L]=i\delta _{mn},[x_{2m}^R,p_{2n}^R]=i\delta _{mn},[x_{2m}^L,p_{2n}^R]=[x_{2m}^R,p_{2n}^L]=0.$$

Other half-string bases can be obtained by making further orthogonal transformations that do not mix the left- and right basis vectors. For instance, one could diagonalize the projection operators $`P^L,P^R`$ with an orthogonal matrix $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}`$ defined by

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒪}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A^T& 0^{oe}\\ 0^{eo}& A^T\end{array}\right)𝒪=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}A^T& 1^{oo}\\ A^T& 1^{oo}\end{array}\right)$$

The corresponding basis functions are the odd cosines

$$\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{2n+1}^L(\sigma )=2\mathrm{cos}(2n+1)\sigma \theta (\pi /2\sigma );\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{2n+1}^R(\sigma )=2\mathrm{cos}(2n+1)\sigma \theta (\sigma \pi /2).$$

This corresponds to expanding $`X^L(\sigma ),X^R(\sigma )`$ in basis functions on $`[0,\pi /2]`$ obeying Dirichlet boundary conditions at the midpoint . An expansion in this basis will give zero at $`\sigma =\pi /2`$, hence this half-string basis does not satisfy the criterion of pointwise convergence at the midpoint. This is often remedied by introducing an extra ‘midpoint degree of freedom’. The role of such a degree of freedom is not completely clear since it doesn’t correspond to a basis vector of $`L_2[0,\pi ]`$. We will not follow this procedure here but instead use the previous half-string expansion (14) in the rest of the paper.

As has been noted in the literature , the matrix $`A`$ is not strictly invertible, but has a (nonnormalizable) zero mode:

$$A_{2m+1,0}^T\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}A_{2m+1,2n}^T(1)^n=0.$$
(16)
In the present context, we see from Eq. (2.2.2) that this means that the half-string mode defined by

$$x_0^L=x_0^R=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}x_{2n}^L=x_{2n}^R=(1)^n(n>0)$$
(17)
corresponds to full-string coefficients being equal to zero. It is not hard to see how this comes about. From the identity

$$1+2\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^n\mathrm{cos}(2n\sigma )=\pi \delta (\sigma \frac{\pi }{2})$$
(18)
it follows that the mode in question corresponds to $`X^L(\sigma )=X^R(\sigma )\delta (\sigma \pi /2)`$. The two delta functions cancel in taking the sum (14) for $`X(\sigma )`$. It is important to keep this over-parametrization in mind in the future.

#### 2.2.3 String fields as operators

The formulation of Witten’s cubic open string field theory action makes use of operations involving string fields, the star product $``$ and the integration $``$, which take a simple form when expressed in terms of half-string modes. When we regard the string field $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ as a functional of the half-string modes $`\{x_{2n}^L,x_{2n}^R\}`$ (we will use the notation $`\mathrm{\Psi }[x^L,x^R]`$), the $``$ and $``$ operations can be written as

$`\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Phi }[x^L,x^R]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle [Dy]\mathrm{\Psi }[x^L,y]\mathrm{\Phi }[y,x^R]}`$ (19)
$`{\displaystyle \mathrm{\Psi }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle [Dy]\mathrm{\Psi }[y,y]}`$ (20)
where $`[Dy]_ndy_{2n}`$. These operations can also be written in operator form as follows. To any state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ corresponds an operator $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ through the correspondence:

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle [Dx^LDx^R]\mathrm{\Psi }[x^L,x^R]|x^L|x^R}`$ (21)
$``$ (22)
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle [Dx^LDx^R]\mathrm{\Psi }[x^L,x^R]|x^Lx^R|}`$ (23)
Such an operator formally maps a state in the “right” half-string Hilbert space to a state in the “left” half-string Hilbert space. Since these spaces can be canonically identified, we will consider $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ to be an operator on “the” half-string Hilbert space which will be denoted by $`^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. We will use a subscript $`_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ to distinguish states in $`^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ from their full-string counterparts. Oscillator modes in $`^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ will be denoted by a superscript $`^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. In terms of operators on $`^{\frac{1}{2}}`$, star multiplication and integration reduce to operator multiplication and trace respectively:

$`\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }`$ $``$ $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ (24)
$`{\displaystyle \mathrm{\Psi }}`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{Tr}\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ (25)
The Hermitean inner product becomes:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }|\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{Tr}\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}^{}\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}$$
(26)
In string field theory, one works with string fields for which the Hermitean inner product $`\mathrm{\Phi }|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ becomes equal to the BPZ inner product $`\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }`$. This is guaranteed by a reality condition which becomes a Hermiticity condition in the operator formulation:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }[x^L,x^R]=\mathrm{\Psi }^{}[x^R,x^L]\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}=\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}$$

Summarized, under the assumption (1) that matter and ghost parts of the string field don’t mix, the matter part of a solution to the VSFT equations of motion can be represented as an operator satisfying:

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}`$ (27)
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^2`$ (28)
Numerous solutions can be found by taking $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ to be any Hermitean projection operator on half-string space. These can, at least in principle, be transformed back to full string variables using the transformation formulae (2.2.215). Some relevant examples will be discussed in 3.

#### 2.2.4 Half-string creation and annihilation operators

In order to get some feeling for the meaning of the transformation to half-string modes, it is useful to see how it acts on the creation and annihilation operators. In analogy with (7), we define the half-string creation and annihilation operators as

$`|x^L)={\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}}E^{ee}[|a^L)|a^L)]`$ $`|p^L)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(E^{ee})^1[|a^L)+|a^L)]`$
$`|a^L)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[E^{ee}|p^L)i(E^{ee})^1|x^L)]`$ $`|a^L)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[E^{ee}|p^L)+i(E^{ee})^1|x^L)]`$
and similarly for the right half-string modes.
From (7, LABEL:halfcreation, 2.2.2, 15) we find the transformation between oscillator modes:

$`|a^e)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|a^L)+|a^R)]`$
$`|a^o)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[C^+[|a^L)|a^R)]+C^{}[|a^L)|a^R)]]`$
$`|a^L)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|a^e)+C^{+T}|a^o)C^T|a^o)]`$
$`|a^R)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|a^e)C^{+T}|a^o)+C^T|a^o)]`$ (30)
where the matrices $`C^\pm `$ are defined as

$$C^\pm =\frac{1}{2}[E^{oo}A^T(E^{ee})^1\pm (E^{oo})^1A^TE^{ee}]$$

The half-string modes $`a_{2n}^L,a_{2n}^L,a_{2n}^R,a_{2n}^R`$ satisfy canonical commutation relations as can be seen from the definition (LABEL:halfcreation) or from the properties of $`C^\pm `$:

$`C^{+T}C^+C^TC^{}=1`$ , $`C^+C^{+T}C^{}C^T=1`$
$`C^{+T}C^{}C^TC^+=0`$ , $`C^+C^TC^{}C^{+T}=0`$ (31)
#### 2.2.5 Half-string vacuum

From (30) we see that, in terms of oscillators, the transformation to half-string modes is a Bogoliubov transformation under which creation and annihilation modes are mixed. Hence the vacuum $`|\mathrm{\Omega }_L|\mathrm{\Omega }_R`$ annihilated by the half-string annihilation modes is not the same as the original vacuum $`|\mathrm{\Omega }`$ which is annihilated by the full-string annihilation modes. From (30) it follows that they are related by:

$`|\mathrm{\Omega }=det\left(1(C^{+1}C^{})^2\right)^{26/4}\mathrm{exp}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(a^La^R|C^{+1}C^{}|a^La^R)|\mathrm{\Omega }_L|\mathrm{\Omega }_R`$
$`|\mathrm{\Omega }_L|\mathrm{\Omega }_R=det\left(1(C^{+T1}C^T)^2\right)^{26/4}\mathrm{exp}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(a^o|C^{+T1}C^T|a^o)|\mathrm{\Omega }`$ (32)
The components of the matrices $`C^{+1}C^{}`$ and $`C^{+T1}C^T`$ were already calculated in  where they enter as Neumann coefficients in the definition of the 4-point vertex. From definition (2.40b) in  of the matrix $`V+\overline{V}`$ we see that

$$(V+\overline{V})^{ee}=2C^{+1}C^{}(V+\overline{V})^{oo}=2C^{+T1}C^T$$

From equation (3.38a), the explicit matrix elements read:

$$(C^{+T1}C^T)_{2m+1,2n+1}=\frac{\sqrt{(2m+1)(2n+1)}}{2m+1+2n+1}\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}\\ m\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2}\\ n\end{array}\right)$$
(33)
It will also be useful to work out the transition between the vacua at zero momentum which we will denote by $`|0_L|0_R`$ and $`|0`$. In terms of full string modes, the state $`|0_L|0_R`$ satisfies:

$`p_0|0_L|0_R`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (34)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{2n+1}}(a_{2n+1}+a_{2n+1}^{})|0_L|0_R`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (35)
$`a_{2m}|0_L|0_R`$ $`=`$ $`0m0`$ (36)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(C_{2m,2n+1}^{+T}a_{2n+1}C_{2m,2n+1}^Ta_{2n+1}^{})|0_L|0_R`$ $`=`$ $`0m0`$ (37)
The state satisfying these conditions is given by:

$$|0_L|0_R=det\left(1(C^{+T1}C^T)^2\right)^{26/4}\mathrm{exp}\frac{1}{2}(a^o|C^{+T1}C^T|a^o)|0.$$
(38)
Conditions (34,36,37) are trivially satisfied so we only have to check (36). This condition is found to hold by using the identity

$$\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{2n+1+a}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+\frac{1}{2})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n+1)}=\frac{\pi }{a}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{a+1}{2})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{a}{2})}$$

In , the half-string vacuum $`|0_L|0_R`$ is also called the ”butterfly state” and the expression (6.42) in , derived using conformal field theory methods, agrees with (38).

#### 2.2.6 Half-string Neumann coefficients

Using the relations (30) we can express various quantities entering in the definition of the string field theory action in terms of half-string oscillators. In principle, one could start from the full-string oscillator expressions derived in  and perform the Bogoliubov transformation (30) to half string-oscillators but this is rather cumbersome. It is more convenient to start from the original position space expressions in  which are naturally expressed in terms of half string modes.
The identity state in the matter sector $`|^X`$ defined so that $`^X|\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }`$, has the position space expression

$$^X[x^L,x^R]=\delta (x^Lx^R)$$

where $`\delta (x^Lx^R)_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}\delta (x_{2n}^Lx_{2n}^R)`$. The oscillator expression of $`|^X`$ can be found by writing

$$|^X=[Dx^LDx^R][x^L,x^R]|x^L|x^R$$

and using the oscillator expression for the half-string position eigenstates

$$|\{x_{2n}^L\}=N_{\frac{1}{2}}^X\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}(x^L|(E^{ee})^2|x^L)\sqrt{2}i(a^L|(E^{ee})^1|x^L)+\frac{1}{2}(a^L|a^R)\right]|\mathrm{\Omega }_L$$
(39)
where

$$N_{\frac{1}{2}}^X=\left(\frac{2}{\pi }\right)^{26/4}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{2n}{\pi }\right)^{26/4}$$

(a similar expression holds for the right position eigenstates). Performing the Gaussian integral one finds

$$|^X=N_{}\mathrm{exp}(a^L|a^R)|\mathrm{\Omega }_L|\mathrm{\Omega }_R$$
(40)
with

$$N_{}=(N_{\frac{1}{2}}^X)^2det(\pi (E^{ee})^2)^{26/2}=1.$$

The two-point vertex $`|V_2^X_{12}`$ is defined by $`{}_{12}{}^{}V_2^X||\mathrm{\Phi }_{1}^{}|\psi _2=\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }`$. Its position space representation reads:

$$V_2^X(x_1^L,x_1^R;x_2^L,x_2^R)=\delta (x_1^Lx_2^R)\delta (x_1^Rx_2^L)$$

Again using (39) we get

$$|V_2^X_{12}=\mathrm{exp}\left[(a_1^L|a_2^R)+(a_2^L|a_1^R)\right](|\mathrm{\Omega }_L|\mathrm{\Omega }_R)_{12}$$
(41)
Equally simple is the expression for the three-point vertex $`|V_3^X_{123}`$ defined by $`{}_{123}{}^{}V_3^X||\mathrm{\Phi }_{1}^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }_2|\mathrm{\Xi }_3=\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Xi }`$. From the position-space expression

$$V_3^X(x_1^L,x_1^R;x_2^L,x_2^R;x_3^L,x_3^R)=\delta (x_1^Lx_3^R)\delta (x_2^Lx_1^R)\delta (x_3^Lx_2^R)$$

one gets

$$|V_3^X_{123}=\mathrm{exp}\left[(a_1^L|a_3^R)+(a_2^L|a_1^R)+(a_3^L|a_2^R)\right](|\mathrm{\Omega }_L|\mathrm{\Omega }_R)_{123}.$$
(42)
The state $`|V_3^X_{123}`$ can also be used to calculate star products in the oscillator representation. The star product of two real string fields $`|\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is given by

$$|\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }_1=_2\mathrm{\Phi }|_3\mathrm{\Psi }||V_3^X_{123}.$$
(43)
As a check on the normalization of $`|V_3^X_{123}`$ in (42), one can verify that the rank one projector $`|\mathrm{\Omega }_L|\mathrm{\Omega }_R`$ indeed star-multiplies to itself under (43).

Comparing (42) with the expression in terms of full-string modes derived in , we see that the transformation to half-string modes has drastically simplified the Neumann matrices $`V^{12}`$ and $`V^{21}`$, while the matrix $`V^{11}`$ now even vanishes.

## 3 Some solutions to the projection equation

In this section we review some solutions to the projection equation $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }`$ which have appeared in the literature. We will restrict attention to states $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ satisfying

$$p_0^L|\mathrm{\Psi }=p_0^R|\mathrm{\Psi }=0.$$
(44)
Such states are invariant under separate translations of the left and right halves of the string. The solutions satisfying this condition will turn out to have a direct counterpart in the ghost sector. They can all be written as the vacuum $`|0_L|0_R`$ acted on with creation operators of strictly positive mode number. Note that the identity state $`|`$ satisfies $`(p_0^L+p_0^R)|=0`$ but is not an eigenstate of $`p_0^Lp_0^R`$, hence it does not belong to the class of solutions we want to consider.

Of particular importance in the construction of D-brane solutions in VSFT are the projectors of rank one . These are constructed from any normalized state $`|\chi _{\frac{1}{2}}`$ in $`^{\frac{1}{2}}`$:

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}=|\chi _{\frac{1}{2}}_{\frac{1}{2}}\chi |.$$

Their position-space form is given by

$$\mathrm{\Psi }[x^L,x^R]=\chi [x^L]\chi ^{}[x^R]$$

and the corresponding Fock space state is

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }=|\chi _L|\chi ^{}_R$$

where $`|\chi ^{}`$ denotes the state with wavefunctional $`\chi [x]^{}`$.

### 3.1 Half-string vacuum

The simplest example of a rank one projector is provided by taking $`|\chi _{\frac{1}{2}}=|0_{\frac{1}{2}}`$. The corresponding solution is the half-string vacuum or butterfly state $`|B=|0_L|0_R`$, whose full-string form was given in in (38):

$$|B=|0_L|0_R=det\left(1(C^{+T1}C^T)^2\right)^{26/4}\mathrm{exp}\frac{1}{2}(a^o|C^{+T1}C^T|a^o)|\mathrm{\Omega }$$

### 3.2 D-25 brane sliver

This solution, which describes a single D-25 brane, was found initially  in full-string variables where it takes the form of a squeezed state

$$|\mathrm{\Sigma }=det(1S^2)^{26/4}\mathrm{exp}\frac{1}{2}((a^{}|S|a^{}))|0$$

here we have introduced a new notation for sums that exclude the zero mode: $`((a|b))_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}a_nb_n`$. The matrix $`S`$ is related to the Neumann matrix $`V^{11}`$  by:

$$CS=\frac{1}{2X}\left(1+X\sqrt{(1+3X)(1X)}\right)$$
(45)
where $`C`$ is the twist matrix $`C_{mn}=(1)^n\delta _{mn}`$ and $`X=CV^{11}`$. The sliver state $`|\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ was shown to satisfy (44) in . Evidence for the fact that it corresponds to a rank one projector in half-string space was found in  and a proof was given in . The corresponding half-string state $`|\chi _\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ is again a squeezed state:

$$|\chi _\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{exp}\frac{1}{2}((a^{\frac{1}{2}}|\frac{1D}{1+D}|a^{\frac{1}{2}}))|0_{\frac{1}{2}}$$

The D-25 brane sliver can be seen as the projector on the vacuum for a set of half-string oscillators related to the original ones by a Bogoliubov transformation. The matrix $`D`$ can be expressed in terms of previously defined matrices using (2.30-2.31) in . One finds

$$D=\stackrel{~}{E}^{ee}\stackrel{~}{A}(E^{oo})^1\sqrt{E^{oo}\stackrel{~}{A}^T(\stackrel{~}{E}^{ee})^2\stackrel{~}{A}E^{oo}}(E^{oo})^1\stackrel{~}{A}^T\stackrel{~}{E}^{ee}$$

where a $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ denotes the submatrix obtained by excluding the zero mode. One should be careful in trying to simplify this expression since operators like $`\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{E}^{ee}\stackrel{~}{A}(E^{oo})^1}`$ are ill-defined.

### 3.3 GRSZ projectors

In , a class of rank one projectors, including the D-25 brane sliver and the half-string vacuum as special cases, was constructed using CFT methods. These arise from surface states in CFT and they all satisfy the condition (44). In terms of oscillators, all these projectors are squeezed states of the form

$$|\mathrm{\Xi }=det(1V^2)^{26/4}\mathrm{exp}\frac{1}{2}((a^{}|V|a^{}))|0.$$

The condition (44) implies that the vector $`v`$ defined by

$$v_{2n+1}=\frac{(1)^n}{\sqrt{2n+1}};v_{2n}=0$$

is an eigenvector of $`V`$ with eigenvalue 1. The simplest example of this construction is provided by taking $`V`$ to be the identity matrix. The corresponding projector $`|𝒩`$ is called the nothing state in :

$$|𝒩=\mathrm{exp}\frac{1}{2}((a^{}|a^{}))|0.$$

The corresponding half-string state $`|\chi _N_{\frac{1}{2}}`$ is given by:

$$|\chi _𝒩_{\frac{1}{2}}=\mathrm{exp}\frac{1}{2}((a^{\frac{1}{2}}|a^{\frac{1}{2}}))|0_{\frac{1}{2}}.$$

## 4 Vacuum string field theory: ghost sector

### 4.1 Bosonization conventions

We will work in the bosonized formalism in which the $`b,c`$ ghosts are be expressed in terms of a scalar linear dilaton field $`\varphi (\sigma )`$ . The mode expansion is

$$\varphi (\sigma )=\varphi _0+\sqrt{2}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\varphi _n\mathrm{cos}(n\sigma ).$$
(46)
and similarly for the conjugate momentum $`\pi (\sigma )`$:

$$\pi (\sigma )=\frac{1}{\pi }\left(\pi _0+\sqrt{2}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\pi _n\mathrm{cos}(n\sigma )\right).$$
(47)
with

$$[\varphi _n,\pi _m]=i\delta _{mn}.$$

The momentum zero-mode $`\pi _0`$ plays the role of the ghost number and is quantized in half-integer units. The string field $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ entering in the VSFT action has ghost number $`\pi _0=\frac{1}{2}`$ while the string field parametrizing gauge transformations has $`\pi _0=\frac{3}{2}`$. Creation and annihilation operators $`d_n,d_n^{}`$ are defined by

$`|\varphi )={\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}}E[|d)|d^{})]`$ $`|\pi )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}E^1[|d)+|d^{})]`$
$`|d)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[E|\pi )iE^1|\varphi )]`$ $`|d^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[E|\pi )+iE^1|\varphi )]`$ (48)
with commutation relations:

$$[d_m,d_n^{}]=\delta _{mn}.$$

The ghost fields $`b_\pm ,c^\pm `$ with mode expansions

$`c^\pm (\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n𝐙}{}}c_ne^{\pm in\sigma }`$ (49)
$`b_\pm (\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n𝐙}{}}b_ne^{\pm in\sigma }`$ (50)
are bosonized according to:

$`c^+(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`:e^{i\varphi ^+(\sigma )}:=e^{i\varphi _0}e^{i\sigma (\pi _0+1/2)}e^{_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}e^{in\sigma }d_n^{}}e^{_{m=1}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{m}}e^{im\sigma }d_m}`$
$`c^{}(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`:e^{i\varphi ^{}(\sigma )}:=e^{i\varphi _0}e^{i\sigma (\pi _0+1/2)}e^{_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}e^{in\sigma }d_n^{}}e^{_{m=1}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{m}}e^{im\sigma }d_m}`$
$`b_+(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`:e^{i\varphi ^+(\sigma )}:=e^{i\varphi _0}e^{i\sigma (\pi _01/2)}e^{_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}e^{in\sigma }d_n^{}}e^{_{m=1}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{m}}e^{im\sigma }d_m}`$
$`b_{}(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`:e^{i\varphi ^{}(\sigma )}:=e^{i\varphi _0}e^{i\sigma (\pi _01/2)}e^{_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}e^{in\sigma }d_n^{}}e^{_{m=1}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{m}}e^{im\sigma }d_m}`$ (51)
Hermitean conjugation works on the ghost modes as $`c_n^{}=c_n`$, so the ghost fields $`c^\pm (\sigma ),b_\pm (\sigma )`$ are Hermitean. From (51) it follows that Hermitean conjugation acts on the bosonized ghosts modes as:

$$d_n^{}=d_n^{};\varphi _n^{}=\varphi _n;\pi _n^{}=\pi _n$$
(52)
This leads to slight differences with the matter sector so we proceed to give some further conventions in the ghost sector. As before, we define a vacuum $`|\mathrm{\Omega }`$ satisfying $`d_n|\mathrm{\Omega }=0`$, and its Hermitean conjugate $`\mathrm{\Omega }|=(|\mathrm{\Omega })^{}`$ satisfying $`\mathrm{\Omega }|d_n^{}=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }|\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$. Position eigenstates have the oscillator expression

$$|\varphi |\{\varphi _n\}=N^\varphi \mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}(\varphi |E^2|\varphi )\sqrt{2}i(d^{}|E^1|\varphi )+\frac{1}{2}(d^{}|d^{})\right]|\mathrm{\Omega },$$
(53)
with $`N^\varphi =(N^X)^{1/26}`$, while their Hermitean conjugates read

$$\varphi |(|\varphi )^{}=N^\varphi \mathrm{\Omega }|\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}(\varphi |E^2|\varphi )\sqrt{2}i(d|E^1|\varphi )+\frac{1}{2}(d|d)\right].$$
(54)
These satisfy

$$\varphi |\widehat{\varphi }_n=\varphi |(\varphi _n)$$

where $`\widehat{\varphi }_n`$ refers to the operator and $`\varphi _n`$ to its eigenvalue. The inner product reads

$$\varphi ^{}|\varphi =\delta (\varphi +\varphi ^{})$$

Hence one finds the completeness relation

$$\mathrm{𝟏}=[D\varphi ]|\varphi \varphi |$$

Similarly, for momentum eigenstates one has

$$\pi |\widehat{\pi }_n=\pi |(\pi _n);\pi ^{}|\pi =\delta (\pi +\pi ^{}).$$

One goes to the position-space representation by expanding

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }=[D\varphi ]\mathrm{\Psi }[\varphi ]|\varphi $$

where

$$\mathrm{\Psi }[\varphi ]=\varphi |\mathrm{\Psi }.$$

The inner product can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Phi }|\mathrm{\Psi }=[D\varphi ]\mathrm{\Phi }^{}[\varphi ]\mathrm{\Psi }[\varphi ].$$

### 4.2 Half-string modes

The formulae for the transition to half-string modes derived for the matter sector go through for the ghost sector as well under the substitutions:

$$x\varphi p\pi ad,a^{}d^{}.$$

Half-string modes are defined by

$`|\varphi ^L)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|\varphi ^e)+A|\varphi ^o)]`$ $`|\varphi ^R)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|\varphi ^e)A|\varphi ^o)]`$
$`|\pi ^L)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|\pi ^e)+A|\pi ^o)]`$ $`|\pi ^R)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|\pi ^e)A|\pi ^o)]`$ (55)
While the transformation between oscillator modes reads:

$`|d^e)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|d^L)+|d^R)]`$
$`|d^o)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[C^+[|d^L)|d^R)]+C^{}[|d^L)|d^R)]]`$
$`|d^L)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|d^e)+C^{+T}|d^o)C^T|d^o)]`$
$`|d^R)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[|d^e)C^{+T}|d^o)+C^T|d^o)]`$ (56)
Full- and half-string vacua are related through

$$|\mathrm{\Omega }_L|\mathrm{\Omega }_R=det\left(1(C^{+T1}C^T)^2\right)^{1/4}\mathrm{exp}\frac{1}{2}(d^o|C^{+T1}C^T|d^o)|\mathrm{\Omega }$$

### 4.3 Vertices and midpoint insertions

The states defining the one- and three-point vertices in the ghost sector differ from the pure delta-function overlaps of the matter sector through the presence of midpoint insertions. These have their origin in the fact that these vertices introduce delta-function curvature on the string world-sheet to which the linear dilaton couples. Let us first introduce states $`|^\varphi ,|V_2^\varphi _{12}`$ and $`|V_3^\varphi _{123}`$ defining pure delta-function overlaps analogous to the ones used in the matter sector:

$`^\varphi (\varphi ^L,\varphi ^R)`$ $`=`$ $`\delta (\varphi _1^L\varphi _2^R)`$ (57)
$`V_2^\varphi (\varphi _1^L,\varphi _1^R;\varphi _2^L,\varphi _2^R)`$ $`=`$ $`\delta (\varphi _1^L\varphi _2^R)\delta (\varphi _1^R\varphi _2^L)`$ (58)
$`V_3^\varphi (\varphi _1^L,\varphi _1^R;\varphi _2^L,\varphi _3^R;\varphi _2^L,\varphi _3^R)`$ $`=`$ $`\delta (\varphi _1^L\varphi _3^R)\delta (\varphi _2^L\varphi _1^R)\delta (\varphi _3^L\varphi _2^R).`$ (59)
In terms of oscillators, these are given by (cfr. (40, 41, 42))

$`|^\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}(d^L|d^R)|\mathrm{\Omega }_L|\mathrm{\Omega }_R`$ (60)
$`|V_2^\varphi _{12}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}[(d_1^L|d_2^R)+(d_2^L|d_1^R)](|\mathrm{\Omega }_L|\mathrm{\Omega }_R)_{12}`$ (61)
$`|V_3^\varphi _{123}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}[(d_1^L|d_3^R)+(d_2^L|d_1^R)+(d_3^L|d_2^R)](|\mathrm{\Omega }_L|\mathrm{\Omega }_R)_{123}`$ (62)
The ghost sector vertices $`|^{gh},|V_2^{gh}_{12}`$ and $`|V_3^{gh}_{123}`$ include midpoint insertions:

$`|^{gh}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{3}{2}i\varphi (\pi /2)}|^\varphi `$ (63)
$`|V_2^{gh}_{12}`$ $`=`$ $`|V_2^\varphi _{12}`$ (64)
$`|V_3^{gh}_{123}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{\frac{i}{2}(\varphi _1(\pi /2)+\varphi _2(\pi /2)+\varphi _3(\pi /2))}|V_3^\varphi _{123}.`$ (65)
In the last expression, we have to chosen to divide the midpoint insertion evenly over the three copies of the ghost Fock space labeled by $`{}_{1}{}^{},_{2}^{},_3`$. This is possible because of the delta-function character of $`V_3^\varphi `$. Note that, by making a field redefinition, one could absorb the midpoint insertions of the three-point vertex in the definition of the string field, but this would introduce a midpoint insertion in the two-point vertex. Hence it seems hard to get rid of the midpoint insertions in the string field theory action. However, we will see that if the quadratic term in the action contains the BRST operator proposed in , which is itself a midpoint insertion, it will be possible to effectively get rid of all the midpoint insertions in the action through a field redefinition.

### 4.4 BRST operator

In , it was proposed that the BRST operator governing the VSFT action is a pure midpoint insertion:

$$Q=\frac{1}{2}[c^+(\pi /2)+c^{}(\pi /2)].$$

Using (51) and the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula, we can rewrite $`Q`$ in the bosonized form

$$Q=\frac{\kappa _1}{2}e^{i\varphi (\pi /2)}\left[e^{i\frac{\pi }{2}(\pi _0+\frac{1}{2})}e^{i\sqrt{2}_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{(1)^n}{2n+1}\pi _{2n+1}}+e^{i\frac{\pi }{2}(\pi _0+\frac{1}{2})}e^{i\sqrt{2}_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{(1)^n}{2n+1}\pi _{2n+1}}\right]$$
(66)
where $`\kappa _1`$ is an (infinite) constant: $`\kappa _1=\mathrm{exp}_{n=1}\frac{1}{2n}`$. This constant can be absorbed into a redefinition of the string field and the overall normalization of the action. By definition, the states entering the string field theory action have fixed ghost number $`\pi _0=\frac{1}{2}`$. The factors $`e^{\pm i\frac{\pi }{2}(\pi _0+\frac{1}{2})}`$ in (66) act trivially on such states. The remaining dependence of $`Q`$ on the momentum modes becomes very simple in terms of half-string modes: using (55, 11) we have

$$\sqrt{2}\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^n}{2n+1}\pi _{2n+1}=\frac{\pi }{2\sqrt{2}}(\pi _0^L\pi _0^R)$$

Hence, when acting on states with $`\pi _0=\frac{1}{2}`$, $`Q`$ is equivalent to the operator $`\kappa _1e^{i\varphi (\pi /2)}Q^{}`$ where, for later convenience, we have defined

$$Q^{}=\mathrm{cos}\frac{\pi }{2\sqrt{2}}(\pi _0^L\pi _0^R).$$
(67)
## 5 Ghost sector projection equation

### 5.1 Field redefinition

In this section we propose a field redefinition which considerably simplifies the equation of motion in the ghost sector of VSFT. This equation arises from the action

$$S^{gh}[\mathrm{\Psi }]=\kappa _0\left[\frac{1}{2}_{12}V_2^{gh}||\mathrm{\Psi }_1Q|\mathrm{\Psi }_2+\frac{1}{3}_{123}V_3||\mathrm{\Psi }_1|\mathrm{\Psi }_2|\mathrm{\Psi }_3\right]$$
(68)
with $`\kappa _0`$ an overall normalization constant. Using the results of the previous section, the quadratic term can be rewritten as

$$\frac{1}{2}_{12}V_2^{gh}||\mathrm{\Psi }_1Q|\mathrm{\Psi }_2=\frac{\kappa _1}{2}_{12}V_2^\varphi ||\mathrm{\Psi }_1e^{i\varphi (\pi /2)}Q^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }_2.$$

We can use the fact that $`|V_2^\varphi `$ satisfies the overlap equations

$$(\varphi _{1,2n}\varphi _{2,2n})|V_2^\varphi _{12}=0$$
(69)
(this can be derived, e.g., from the oscillator expression (61)), to evenly distribute the $`e^{i\varphi (\pi /2)}`$ insertion over the two copies of the ghost Fock space labeled by 1 and 2:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_{12}V_2^{gh}||\mathrm{\Psi }_1Q|\mathrm{\Psi }_2={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _1}{2}}_{12}V_2|e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}|\mathrm{\Psi }_1e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}Q^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _1}{2}}_{12}V_2|e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}|\mathrm{\Psi }_1Q^{}e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}|\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ (70)
where, in the second line, we used the fact that $`[\varphi (\pi /2),(\pi _0^L\pi _0^R)]=0`$. Using the definition (65) of the three-point vertex, the action (68) reduces to

$`S^{gh}[\mathrm{\Psi }]`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _0[{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _1}{2}}_{12}V_2^\varphi |e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}|\mathrm{\Psi }_1Q^{}e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}|\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$ (71)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}_{123}V_3^\varphi |e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}|\mathrm{\Psi }_1e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}|\mathrm{\Psi }_2e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}|\mathrm{\Psi }_3]`$
We can now absorb the midpoint insertions $`e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}`$ into a field redefinition

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=\frac{1}{\kappa _1}e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}|\mathrm{\Psi }.$$
(72)
We get

$$S^{gh}[\mathrm{\Psi }^{}]=\kappa _0^{}\left[\frac{1}{2}_{12}V_2^\varphi |\left(|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}_1Q^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}_2\right)\frac{1}{3}_{123}V_3^\varphi |\left(|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}_1|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}_2|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}_3\right)\right]$$

where $`\kappa _0^{}=\kappa _0(\kappa _1)^3`$. The equation of motion becomes:

$$Q^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}$$
(73)
where $`^{}`$ is determined by the vertex $`|V_3^\varphi `$ without midpoint insertions and has the same form as the star product (43) in the matter sector.

Since $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ was restricted to have ghost number $`\frac{1}{2}`$, the new string field $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ is constrained to have ghost number zero:

$$(\pi _0^L+\pi _0^R)|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=0.$$
(74)
When we restrict attention to states which in addition are eigenstates of $`\pi _0^L`$ and $`\pi _0^R`$ separately, i.e. states satisfying

$$\pi _0^L|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=\pi _0^R|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=\lambda |\mathrm{\Psi }^{}$$
(75)
for some $`\lambda `$, the action of the operator $`Q^{}`$ in (73) reduces to multiplication by a constant. Note that, although the full-string ghost number $`\pi _0`$ was quantized, there is no a priori restriction on the value of the half-string ghost number $`\lambda `$. We should, however, make sure that the restriction (75) is compatible with the reality condition on the string field, which in the ghost sector reads

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{}[\varphi ^L,\varphi ^R]=\mathrm{\Psi }^{}[\varphi ^R,\varphi ^L].$$
(76)
This restricts the allowed values of $`\lambda `$ to $`\lambda =0`$. Indeed, for general $`\lambda `$, the zero-mode part of $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}[\varphi ^L,\varphi ^R]`$ is $`e^{i\lambda (\varphi _0^L\varphi _0^R)}`$. Hence the reality condition is satisfied only for $`\lambda =0`$.

In summary, a class of solutions to the equations of motion in the ghost sector of VSFT is provided by states $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ that satisfy the condition

$$\pi _0^L|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=\pi _0^R|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=0$$
(77)
and are solutions of the projection equation

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}.$$
(78)
In addition, they should satisfy the reality condition (76).

The condition (77) can be interpreted as stating that the ghost number of $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ (and hence the ghost number of the original field $`|\mathrm{\Psi }`$ as well) should be evenly distributed over the left- and right halves of the string.

### 5.2 Operator formulation

The absence of midpoint insertions in $`^{}`$ implies that we can write (78) in the form of a simple algebraic equation for operators in half-string space, just as in the matter case. The map between string fields $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ and half-string operators $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}`$ is slightly different from the one in the matter sector because $`\varphi `$ is antihermitean. It reads:

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle [D\varphi ^LD\varphi ^R]\mathrm{\Psi }^{}[\varphi ^L,\varphi ^R]|\varphi ^L|\varphi ^R}`$ (79)
$``$ (80)
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle [D\varphi ^LD\varphi ^R]\mathrm{\Psi }^{}[\varphi ^L,\varphi ^R]|\varphi ^L\varphi ^R|}`$ (81)
With this definition, $`^{}`$ multiplication reduces to ordinary multiplication of operators:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }^{}^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}^{}\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}.$$

The reality condition on the string field (76) again reduces to a Hermiticity condition on operators:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{}[\varphi ^L,\varphi ^R]=\mathrm{\Psi }^{}[\varphi ^R,\varphi ^L]\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}=\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}.$$

The operator form of the conditions (76, 77) and the equation of motion (78) is

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}`$ (82)
$`\pi _0^{\frac{1}{2}}\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}\pi _0^{\frac{1}{2}}=0`$ (83)
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^2`$ (84)
The ghost number condition (83), together with Hermiticity (82), restricts the zero mode part of $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}`$ to be $`|\pi _0=0_{\frac{1}{2}}_{\frac{1}{2}}\pi _0=0|`$. Hence we can decompose

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }^{}}=(|\pi _0=0_{\frac{1}{2}}{}_{\frac{1}{2}}{}^{}\pi _0=0|)\widehat{M}.$$
(85)
where $`\widehat{M}`$ works on the subspace orthogonal to the zero mode. The equations (82, 84) simply state that $`\widehat{M}`$ is a Hermitean projection operator.

With the ghost zero-mode part constrained as in (85), VSFT becomes, at least formally, equivalent to a cubic $`U(\mathrm{})`$ matrix model. Indeed, if we define the operator $`\widehat{P}`$ as the tensor product of $`\widehat{M}`$ with the matter string field $`\mathrm{\Psi }^m`$, $`\widehat{P}=\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^m\widehat{M}`$, the total matter and ghost action becomes

$$S[\widehat{P}]=\kappa _0^{}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\frac{1}{2}\widehat{P}^2\frac{1}{3}\widehat{P}^3\right]$$

which is invariant under the unitary transformations $`\widehat{P}U\widehat{P}U^{}`$. Here, $`U`$ works on the half-string subspace orthogonal to the ghost zero mode. A similar $`U(\mathrm{})`$ invariance is present in purely cubic string field theory .

### 5.3 Examples

It is now a simple matter to construct ghost sector solutions. Using the decomposition (85) any Hermitean projection operator $`\widehat{M}`$ in the subspace of $`^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ not involving the zero mode will give rise to a ghost sector solution. In section 3, we gave several examples of rank one projectors in the matter sector with half-string momenta equal to zero. These can all be mapped to projectors in the ghost sector satisfying (83, 84). Their wavefunctionals factorize into a product of half-string Gaussians so they also obey the reality condition (76).

A first example is the ghost butterfly state

$$|B^{}=|0_L|0_R=det\left(1(C^{+T1}C^T)^2\right)^{1/4}\mathrm{exp}\frac{1}{2}(d^o|C^{+T1}C^T|d^o)|0.$$

The matrix elements of $`C^{+T1}C^T`$ were given in (33).

From the D-25 brane sliver in the matter sector one can construct an analogous ghost sliver state given by

$$|\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}=det(1S^2)^{1/4}\mathrm{exp}\frac{1}{2}((d^{}|S|d^{}))|0.$$

with the matrix $`S`$ given by (45).

All projectors arising from surface states constructed in  have analogous solutions in the ghost sector. The simplest example is the ghost sector nothing state given by

$$|𝒩^{}=\mathrm{exp}\frac{1}{2}((d^{}|d^{}))|0.$$

Except for the ghost sector nothing state, which is not normalizable, the solutions discussed here are rank one projectors for which the ghost part of the action takes the value $`\kappa _0^{}/6`$. If we combine such a rank one ghost projector with a rank one matter solution, the total action will still be equal to $`\kappa _0^{}/6`$. This suggests the identification

$$\kappa _0^{}/6=𝒯_{25}$$

where $`𝒯_{25}`$ is the tension of the D-25 brane.

The fact that we find finite action solutions for finite values of $`\kappa _0^{}`$ seems in contradiction with , where it was found that the analogous constant $`\kappa _0^{GRSZ}`$ should diverge in order to have finite action solutions. However, one has to bear in mind that the normalization of the vertices in (65) in the string field theory action differs from the one used in  by singular factors . A more precise derivation of the relation between $`\kappa _0^{}`$ and $`\kappa _0^{GRSZ}`$ would require a careful regularization of such factors and is beyond the scope of the present work.

## 6 Discussion

In this paper we have focused on the ghost sector of VSFT with the BRST-operator $`Q`$ taken to be the pure midpoint insertion proposed in . We have shown that, for this particular choice of $`Q`$, the main obstacles to constructing ghost sector solutions, viz. the presence of $`Q`$ in the equations of motion and the midpoint insertion in the star product, can be dealt with simultaneously by making a field redefinition. This redefinition removes the midpoint insertion from the star product and the remaing kinetic operator $`Q^{}`$ depends, when expressed in half-string modes, only on the difference of the left- and right ghost numbers. Hence it can be rendered trivial by consistently truncating the string field to have its ghost number symmetrically divided over the left- and right halves of the string. The resulting equation of motion is a pure projection equation and solutions can be found by using the techniques developed for the matter sector. In the light of certain subtleties in the transition to half-string variables, hinted at in section 2.2.2 and discussed more extensively in , we should note that the use of half-string variables is not essential in our construction: it merely provides a simple interpretation of the operator $`Q^{}`$ in terms of half string zero modes and facilitates the construction of solutions as projection operators on half-string Hilbert space. We end with some observations and open problems.

* It seems that the relation between the ghost sector equation of motion and the projection equation is a feature special to the pure midpoint BRST-operator $`Q`$ in contrast to the other pure ghost operators considered previously . Indeed, it is unlikely that similar simplifications would go through with any of the other pure ghost BRST operators. It is quite remarkable that precisely this $`Q`$ has emerged as a likely candidate for the correct description of the ghost sector. It has been remarked in  that non-pure ghost BRST operators, obtained by tensoring $`Q`$ with a suitable matter part, could also be considered good candidates for describing VSFT. A generalization along these lines appears, in fact, to be necessary in order to obtain the correct structure of gauge transformations in VSFT . The simplifications in the ghost sector discussed in this paper would also go through for these operators.
* In this paper, we used the bosonized form of the ghost system. It remains to be seen whether a similar approach would work in terms of fermionic ghosts since the field redefinition (72) has no local expression in terms of $`(b,c)`$ fields.
* In , solutions in the ghost sector of VSFT were constructed by introducing new ‘twisted ghost’ variables, in terms of which these solutions reduced to pure projectors. The transition to twisted variables acts on the Virasoro generators as

$$L_n^{tw}=L_n+nj_n+\delta _{n,0}$$

with $`j_n`$ the modes of the ghost number current. One might wonder how this approach is related to the one used in the present paper. A first guess would be that our field redefinition (72) implements the transformation to the twisted ghost system:

$$L_n^{tw}={}_{}{}^{\mathrm{?}}L_{n}^{}e^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}L_ne^{\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\pi /2)}$$

This is not the case however as one can easily verify. It seems likely that both approaches are related but it is not yet clear how.
* In section 5.2, we found that, once one imposes the constraint (77) on the half-string ghost number, VSFT can be written as a $`U(\mathrm{})`$ matrix model. Such a $`U(\mathrm{})`$ symmetry was also also argued to be present in the tachyonic vacuum from the low-energy point of view in the presence of a large $`B`$-field . It would be interesting to see how both points of view are related.

###### Acknowledgments.

We are grateful to D. Ghoshal, T. Jayaraman and V. A. Kostelecký for stimulating discussions. J.R. gratefully acknowledges travel support from K.U.Leuven. J.R. also wishes to thank the University of the Algarve, the Strings Workshop at IMSc Chennai and the Harish-Chandra Research Institute for hospitality. R.P. acknowledges financial support from the Portuguese Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia under grant number CERN/P/FIS/40108/2000.


text:
# CP and T Trajectory Diagrams for a Unified Graphical Representation of Neutrino Oscillations

## I Introduction

Accumulating evidences for neutrino oscillation in the atmospheric , the solar , and the accelerator  neutrino experiments make it realistic to think about exploring the full structure of the lepton flavor mixing. One of the challenging goals in such attempt would be to measure the leptonic CP or T violating phase $`\delta `$ in the MNS matrix  ***In this paper we will assume that the light neutrino sector consists of only three active neutrinos.. It appears that the long baseline neutrino oscillation experiments are the most feasible way to actually detect these effects.

It has been known since sometime ago that the measurement of CP and T violating effects in the long baseline neutrino oscillation experiments can be either contaminated or enhanced by the matter effect inside the earth; see e.g., Refs.  and . Therefore, it is one of the most important issues to achieve a complete understanding of the interplay between the CP-phase and the matter effects in parameter regions relevant for such experiments.

Toward the goal, we have introduced in a previous paper  the “CP trajectory diagram in bi-probability space” as a useful tool for pictorial representation of the CP and the matter effects in neutrino oscillation. This diagram enables us to display three effects; (a) genuine CP violation due to the $`\mathrm{sin}\delta `$ term, (b) CP conserving $`\mathrm{cos}\delta `$ term, and (c) fake CP violation due to the earth’s matter, separately in a single diagram.

In this paper, we introduce a related but an entirely new diagram, “T trajectory diagram in bi-probability space”. We demonstrate that the T trajectory diagram is by itself illuminative and is complementary with the CP diagram. More importantly, when combined with the CP diagram, it completes and unifies our understanding of the interplay between the effects due to CP or T-violating phase and the matter. The intimate relationship between the T and the CP diagrams reflects the underlying CPT theorem. Although the CPT theorem itself is broken by the presence of matter, this breaking can be compensated by a change in the sign of all the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$’s.

## II CP and T trajectory diagrams in bi-probability space and their symmetries

Now we introduce the T trajectory diagram in bi-probability space spanned by $`P(\nu )P(\nu _e\nu _\mu )`$ and its T-conjugate T$`[P(\nu )]P(\nu _\mu \nu _e)`$. We fully explain in this section its notable characteristic properties, the relationship (or unity) with the CP trajectory diagram, and the symmetry relations obeyed by them.

Suppose that we compute the oscillation probability $`P(\nu )`$ and T$`[P(\nu )]`$ with a given set of oscillation and experimental parameters. Then, we draw a dot on the two-dimensional plane spanned by $`P(\nu )`$ and T$`[P(\nu )]`$. When $`\delta `$ is varied we have a set of dots which forms a closed trajectory, closed because the probability must be a periodic function of $`\delta `$, a phase variable. Let us remind the reader that the T trajectory diagram has very similar structure with the CP trajectory diagram introduced in Ref. ; the abscissa is the same and the ordinate for the CP diagram is CP$`[P(\nu )]P(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_\mu )`$.

In Fig. 1 the CP and the T trajectory diagrams, denoted as CP$`\pm `$ and T$`\pm `$, are plotted in the same figure. Here, the ordinate of the diagram is meant to be CP$`[P(\nu )]`$ for the CP and T$`[P(\nu )]`$ for the T diagrams, respectively. In the center there exist two vacuum diagrams, V$`\pm `$, one for each of the signs of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$. When the matter effect is turned on, the positive and the negative $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ trajectories split.

In vacuum, the CP and the T trajectories are identical with each other. This is because the CPT theorem tells us that T \[$`P(\nu )`$\] $`P(\nu _\mu \nu _e)=P(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_\mu )`$ = CP$`[P(\nu )]`$. Depending upon the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ we have two CP (or T) trajectories which are almost degenerate with each other in vacuum due to the approximate symmetry under the simultaneous transformation

$`\delta \pi \delta (\text{mod.}2\pi ),`$ (1)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2.`$ (2)
It was noticed that the CP and the T trajectories are elliptical exactly in vacuum and approximately in matter . Recently, it was shown in a remarkable paper by Kimura, Takamura, and Yokomakura  that it is exactly elliptic even in matter; the $`\delta `$-dependence of the oscillation probabilities in constant matter density can be written on general ground in the form

$`P(\nu )`$ $`=`$ $`A(a)\mathrm{cos}\delta +B(a)\mathrm{sin}\delta +C(a)`$ (3)
$`CP[P(\nu )]`$ $`=`$ $`A(a)\mathrm{cos}\delta B(a)\mathrm{sin}\delta +C(a)`$ (4)
$`T[P(\nu )]`$ $`=`$ $`A(a)\mathrm{cos}\delta B(a)\mathrm{sin}\delta +C(a)`$ (5)
where $`a`$ denotes neutrino’s index of refraction in matter, $`a=\sqrt{2}G_FN_e`$, with electron number density $`N_e`$ and the Fermi constant $`G_F`$. The dependence on other variables are suppressed. Throughout this paper, we use the standard parameterization of the MNS matrix.

Matter effects split the two trajectories in quite different manners. Namely, the T trajectories split along the straight line $`P(\nu )=`$ T$`[P(\nu )]`$ whereas the CP trajectories split in the orthogonal direction. While it may be easier for the readers to understand the following discussions by referring the KTY formula in Eq. (4), our subsequent discussion will be entirely independent from the constant density approximation. We however rely on the adiabatic approximation when we utilize perturbative formulas. The T trajectories must move along the diagonal line because the $`\delta =0,\pi `$ points on T trajectories must stay on the diagonal because T violation vanishes at $`\delta =0,\pi `$ for matter distributions which are symmetric about the mid-point between production and detection. In constant matter density, this stems from the Naumov-Harrison-Scott relation (i.e., the proportionality between the vacuum and the matter Jarlskog factors)  and the absence of $`\mathrm{sin}\delta `$ dependence  in the other parts of the oscillation probability, or simply from the KTY formula in Eq. (4).

On the other hand, the CP trajectories must split along the direction orthogonal to the diagonal line for small matter effect. This is because the first order matter correction, which is proportional to $`a=\sqrt{2}G_FN_e(x)`$, has opposite sign for the neutrino and the anti-neutrino oscillation probabilities; $`\mathrm{\Delta }P(\nu )=\mathrm{\Delta }P(\overline{\nu })`$ . No matter how large the matter effect the line connecting the two CP trajectories with opposite signs of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ is orthogonal to the diagonal line. As we will explain below this reflects a symmetry relationship obeyed by the oscillation probabilities, which we denote as the “CP-CP relation”.

One may also notice, as indicated by the eye-guided lines in Fig. 1 that the CP and the T trajectories have identical lengths when projected onto either the abscissa or the ordinate. It should be the case for the projection onto the abscissa because the abscissa is common for both of the CP and the T diagrams. What is nontrivial is the equality in length when projected onto the ordinate. It again represents a symmetry which we want to call the “T-CP relation”. We note that neither the CP-CP nor the T-CP relations are exact, as one may observe from Fig.1.

The precise statement of the CP-CP relation is (see Fig. 1)

$`P(\nu _e\nu _\mu ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\delta ,a)`$ $`=`$ $`P(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_\mu ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\delta ,a)`$ (6)
$``$ $`P(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_\mu ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,+\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\pi +\delta ,a).`$ (7)
Whereas the precise statement of the T-CP relation is

$`P(\nu _\mu \nu _e;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\delta ,a)`$ $`=`$ $`P(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_\mu ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,2\pi \delta ,a)`$ (8)
$``$ $`P(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_\mu ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,+\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\pi \delta ,a).`$ (9)
The equalities have the opposite sign for all the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$’s from the left hand side to the right hand side. But because of the hierarchy, $`|\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2||\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2|`$, changing the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2`$ produces only a small deviation whose precise origin and magnitude will be become clear in the derivation of these relations. These relations imply that when the CP+ trajectory winds counter-clockwise as $`\delta `$ increases the CP- and T- (T+) trajectories wind clockwise (counter-clockwise) as in Fig.1.

To derive the CP-CP and T-CP relationships we need a number of identities. The first set of identities comes from taking the time reversal and the complex conjugate of the neutrino evolution equation assuming that the matter profile is symmetric about the mid-point between production and detection;

$`P(\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\delta ,a)`$ $`=`$ $`P(\overline{\nu }_\beta \overline{\nu }_\alpha ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\delta ,a).`$ (10)
These identities are just CPT invariance in the presence of matter.

The second set of identities comes from taking the complex conjugate of the neutrino evolution equation for an arbitrary matter distribution, they are

$`P(\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\delta ,a)`$ $`=P(\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,2\pi \delta ,a)`$ (11)
$`=`$ $`P(\overline{\nu }_\alpha \overline{\nu }_\beta ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\delta ,a)`$ $`=P(\overline{\nu }_\alpha \overline{\nu }_\beta ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,2\pi \delta ,a)`$ (12)
These identities relate the (anti-) neutrino oscillation probabilities in matter to those in anti-matter with opposite signs for all the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$’s. They also relate the neutrino oscillation probabilities in matter to the anti-neutrino oscillation probabilities in matter with opposite signs for all the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$.

Combinations of these identities give the equalities in the CP-CP and the T-CP relations, the first lines in Eqs. (7) and (9). Now we will use the hierarchy that $`|\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2||\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2|`$ to get an approximate equality if we flip the sign of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2`$ with the appropriate change in the phase $`\delta `$. The probability for $`\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta `$ consists of three terms as in Eq. (4). The coefficients $`A`$ and $`B`$ vanish like $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2`$ as $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^20`$. Thus, a change in the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2`$ in these two coefficients can be compensated by replacing $`\delta `$ with $`\pi +\delta `$, whereas the change in the coefficients $`C`$ is further suppressed by an extra factor of $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{13}`$. This proves the approximate equalities in the CP-CP and the T-CP relations.

The CP-CP relation guarantees that the size and the shape of two sign-conjugate ($`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2=\pm |\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2|`$) diagrams are identical, whereas there is no such relation in T diagrams. The CP phase relation between two sign-conjugate CP diagrams implies, among other things, that the two-fold ambiguity in $`\delta `$ which still remains after accurate determination of $`\theta _{13}`$  are related by $`\delta _2=\delta _1+\pi `$ apart from the correction of order $`\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}`$.

Finally, we note that from the first line of Eq. (12) that

$$P(\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\delta ,a)P(\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta ;\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\pi \delta ,a)$$
(13)
which is a generalization of the approximate symmetry under the transformation (2) into the case in matter, from which the CP-CP and the T-CP relations also follow.

## III Further Examples

While Fig. 1 is for the preferred parameters of a neutrino factory  it is interesting to see how the T-CP trajectory diagram changes as we change the energy and path length of the experiment. In Fig. 2 we have increased the path length to 6000 km and given the CP-T diagram for neutrino energies of 13 and 26 GeV. Again one can see how well the CP-CP and T-CP relationships hold.

The next examples use an energy which is approximately half the resonance energy corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ as suggested by Parke and Weiler . At a distance of 3500 km this energy maximizes T-violation effects which is reflected in the size of ellipses. Halving the distance between source and detector for this energy produces a T-CP trajectory diagram which is similar to the neutrino factory diagram, Fig. 1 but with larger probabilities and asymmetries.

The final examples are using the energies and baselines of NUMI/MINOS and JHF/SK see Fig. 4. For NUMI/MINOS there is reasonable separation between the two $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ ellipse whereas for JHF/SK there is some overlap. From the viewpoint of simultaneous determination of $`\delta `$ and the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ the longer baseline of NUMI/MINOS would be more advantageous, while there are possibilities that it can be done at JHF/SK if $`P`$ and CP\[$`P`$\] are asymmetric ,

An another feature which is worth noting in the JHF/SK case in Fig. 4 is that the problem of parameter degeneracy in T violation measurements is milder than that in CP measurements. It is because the T (or CP) ellipse is flatter in the radial direction, i.e., along the movement of T trajectory due to matter effect. The underlying reason for the phenomenon is that the coefficient of the $`\mathrm{cos}\delta `$ term oscillates and hence is always smaller than the coefficient of the $`\mathrm{sin}\delta `$ term when averaged over energy width of a beam. In this sense, T measurement, if feasible experimentally, is more advantageous than CP measurement for simultaneous determination of $`\delta `$ and the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$.

## IV Parameter degeneracy in T-violation measurements

Armed by the T as well as the CP trajectory diagrams we are now ready to discuss the problem of parameter degeneracy with T-violation measurement. We do not aim at complete treatment of the problem in this paper but briefly note the new features that arise in T-violation measurement as compared to the CP-violation measurement. They arise because of the more symmetric nature of the T conjugate probability as apparent in Eq. (4).

We work in the same approximation as in Ref.  and write the oscillation probability in small $`s_{13}`$ approximation. We have four equations:

$`P(\nu )_\pm `$ $`=`$ $`X_\pm \theta ^2+Y_\pm \theta \mathrm{cos}\left(\delta {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}}{2}}\right)+P_{}`$ (14)
$`T[P(\nu )]_\pm `$ $`=`$ $`X_\pm \theta ^2+Y_\pm \theta \mathrm{cos}\left(\delta \pm {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}}{2}}\right)+P_{}`$ (15)
where $`X_\pm `$ and $`Y_\pm `$ are given in Ref. , $`P_{}`$ indicates the term which is related with solar neutrino oscillations, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2|L}{2E}`$. Note that $`\pm `$ here refers to the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ and $`\theta `$ is an abbreviation of $`\theta _{13}s_{13}`$.

It is easy to show that Eq. (15) can be solved to obtain the same-sign $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ degenerate solutions as

$$\delta _2=\pi \delta _1\text{and}\text{ }\theta _2\theta _1=\frac{Y_\pm }{X_\pm }\mathrm{cos}\delta _1\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}}{2}\right).$$
(16)
Notice that it is the degeneracy in matter though it looks like the one in vacuum .

Two T$`\pm `$ trajectories may overlap for a distance shorter than those in Fig.4, which would result in a mixed-sign degeneracy as in the case of CP measurement mentioned before. However, one can show that in the case of T violation measurement there is no more ambiguity in $`\delta `$ once $`\theta _{13}`$ is given;

$$\delta _2=\delta _1\text{and}\text{ }\mathrm{cos}\delta _1=\theta _{13}\frac{(X_+X_{})}{2Y_+\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{31}}{2}\right)}$$
(17)
apart from the computable higher order correction due to the matter effect. This is obvious from Fig.4(b). A fuller treatment of the parameter degeneracy with T violation measurement will be reported elsewhere .

## V Discussion and Conclusions

First, it is worth pointing out that in matter the sensitivity to the CP or T-violating phase, $`\delta `$, is larger for the T-violating pair ($`\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta `$, $`\nu _\beta \nu _\alpha `$) than for the CP-violating pair ($`\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta `$, $`\overline{\nu }_\alpha \overline{\nu }_\beta `$) of processes assuming $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2>0`$. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2<0`$ one should use the following T-violating pair, ($`\overline{\nu }_\alpha \overline{\nu }_\beta `$, $`\overline{\nu }_\beta \overline{\nu }_\alpha `$). This can be seen by comparing the size of the T ellipses to that of the CP ellipses in all of the previous diagrams. Unfortunately the experimental challenges associated with performing a T-violating experiment have yet to be overcome.

Due to the existence of the T-CP relationships for neutrino oscillations it is instructive and useful to add the T-violating trajectories to the CP-violating trajectories first proposed by Minakata and Nunokawa. The size and position of the T-violating ellipses can be easily estimated using simple arguments including the effects of matter and from them the CP-violating ellipses can be estimated. Thus, the combination of the CP and T trajectories form a unified picture of the CP-matter interplay in neutrino oscillations.

###### Acknowledgements.

HM thanks Theoretical Physics Department of Fermilab for warm hospitality extended to him during two visits when this work has been initiated and then further pursuit. He is grateful to Center for Theoretical Physics of MIT for hospitality and support. This work was supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research in Priority Areas No. 12047222, Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology. HN was also supported by the Brazilian FAPESP Foundation. SP would like to thank the Physics Department at the University of Auckland, New Zealand were part of this work was performed. Fermilab is operated by URA under DOE contract No. DE-AC02-76CH03000.