text:
# One loop gauge couplings in AdS₅

## I Introduction

Models with extra dimension have provided a new insight on the large scale hierarchy between the Weak scale $`M_W10^2`$ GeV and the Planck scale $`M_{Pl}10^{18}`$ GeV. In this regard, the Randall-Sundrum model (RS1) is particularly interesting as it explains the Weak to Planck scale ratio using the warped 5D geometry:

$$ds^2=G_{MN}dx^Mdx^N=e^{2kR|y|}g_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +R^2dy^2,$$
(1)
where $`\pi y\pi `$, $`k`$ is the AdS curvature and $`R`$ is the orbifold radius. In this spacetime background, 4-dimensional (4D) graviton is localized near the UV brane at $`y=0`$ whose cutoff mass scale $`M_{UV}`$ is of order the 5D Planck scale. On the other hand, in the original RS1 model, all the standard model (SM) fields are assumed to be confined on the IR brane at $`y=\pi `$ whose cutoff scale $`M_{IR}e^{\pi kR}M_{UV}`$. Then with a moderately large value of $`kR`$ ($`12`$), the model can generate the large scale hierarchy $`M_{Pl}/M_WM_{UV}/M_{IR}10^{16}`$ without any severe fine tuning of the fundamental parameters.

An apparent drawback of the original RS1 model is that one has to abandon the attractive possibility that the SM gauge couplings $`g_a^2`$ ($`a=1,2,3`$) are unified at high energy scale through the quantum corrections calculable within the model. Experimental data show that $`g_a^2`$ at $`M_W`$ differ from each other by order unity:

$$\frac{1}{g_a^2(M_W)}\frac{1}{g_b^2(M_W)}=𝒪(1)(ab).$$
(2)
On the other hand, the size of quantum corrections to $`1/g_a^2`$ which are calculable within the RS1 model is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\frac{1}{g_a^2}\right)=𝒪\left(\frac{1}{8\pi ^2}\mathrm{ln}(M_{IR}^2/M_W^2)\right)=𝒪\left(\frac{1}{8\pi ^2}\right),$$
(3)
so the RS1 model does not give any insight on why the SM gauge couplings at $`M_W`$ differ from each other by order unity.

It has been noted recently  that one can achieve the gauge unification, while still solving the hierarchy problem, within the 5D effective field theory on $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ if the SM gauge bosons propagate in 5D bulk spacetime. In such case, the size of quantum corrections calculable within the model is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\frac{1}{g_a^2}\right)=𝒪\left(\frac{1}{8\pi ^2}\mathrm{ln}(M_{Pl}^2/M_W^2)\right)=𝒪(1),$$
(4)
as in the case of conventional 4D grand unified theories (GUT). This allows that the observed differences of gauge couplings are explained in terms of quantum corrections which are calculable within the model.

Calculation of the 1-loop corrections to gauge coupling in $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ was first attempted in  for a GUT model in which all gauge-charged matter fields are confined on the UV brane. The computation involves a Pauli-Villars regulator with regulator mass $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{PV}k`$, so could catch only the corrections at scales significantly below $`k`$. In , a momentum cutoff depending on the position in 5-th dimension was proposed to regulate the 1-loop corrections. Though intuitively sensible, it is difficult to isolate the regulator-independent part from the regulator-dependent total corrections in this regularization, which makes the interpretation of the results unclear. In , the 1-loop corrections have been computed for generic supersymmetric gauge theory on $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ using the gauged $`U(1)_R`$ symmetry and chiral anomaly in 5D supergravity (SUGRA) and also the known properties of gauge couplings in 4D effective SUGRA. In this approach, one could obtain the 1-loop corrections (including those from scales between $`k`$ and the 5D cutoff scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>k`$) in obviously regulator-independent manner. In , 1-loop corrections in 5D scalar QED on $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ have been computed (using dimensional regularization and also Pauli-Villars regularization) and the results are nicely interpreted in terms of AdS/CFT correpondence.

In this paper, we present the full 1-loop corrections to the low energy coupling of bulk gauge boson in a slice of $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ which are induced by generic 5D scalar, Dirac fermion and vector fields with arbitrary $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold boundary condition. To be explicit, we adopt dimensional regularization, but the results should be independent of the used regularization scheme as they correspond to the scheme-independent corrections calculable within 5D effective field theory. When applied to supersymmetric case, our results correctly reproduce the expressions which are obtained in a completely independent approach based on 4D effective SUGRA. This provides a nontrivial check of our results, and also assures the scheme-independence of the results. We also note that the subtraction scales of log divergences at two orbifold fixed points, i.e. $`y=0`$ and $`\pi `$, differ by the warp factor $`e^{\pi kR}`$. This is physically expected, and can be confirmed by comparing the results with those of Pauli-Villars regularization as well as with the results of 4D SUGRA calculation.

The organization of this paper is as follows. In section II, we set up the notations for 5D gauge theory on a slice of $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ including the Kaluza-Klein (KK) analysis for generic 5D scalar, Dirac fermion, and vector fields with arbitrary $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold boundary condition. In section III, we present our main results, i.e. 1-loop gauge couplings in $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ induced by generic 5D fields, obtained using the background field method with dimensional regularization. In section IV, we consider the supersymmetric limit in order to confirm that our results correctly reproduce the results from 4D SUGRA calculation, and conclude in section V.

## II Gauge theory on a slice of $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$

The model we study is a 5D gauge theory defined on a slice of $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ with spacetime metric (1), containing generic gauge-charged 5D scalar, fermion and vector fields with arbitrary $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ boundary condition. The lagrangian is given by

$`{\displaystyle d^4x𝑑y\sqrt{G}\left[\frac{1}{4g_{5a}^2}F^{aMN}F_{MN}^a\frac{1}{2}D_M\varphi D^M\varphi \frac{1}{2}m_\varphi ^2\varphi ^2i\overline{\psi }(\gamma ^MD_M+m_\psi )\psi \right]},`$ (5)
where $`D_M`$ is the covariant derivative containing the gauge connections as well as the spin connection of $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$. We parametrize the masses of scalar and fermion fields as

$`m_\varphi ^2=A^2k^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2k}{R}}\left[B_0\delta (y)B_\pi \delta (y\pi )\right],m_\psi `$ $`=`$ $`Ckϵ(y),`$ (6)
where $`ϵ(y)=y/|y|`$, $`B_0`$ and $`B_\pi `$ are the brane mass parameters at $`y=0`$ and $`y=\pi `$, respectively, and $`c`$ is the fermion kink mass parameter. The 5D fields in the model can have arbitrary $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold boundary condition,

$`\varphi (y)=Z_\varphi \varphi (y),\varphi (y^{})=Z_\varphi ^{}\varphi (y^{}),`$ (7)
$`\psi (y)=Z_\psi \gamma _5\psi (y),\psi (y^{})=Z_\psi ^{}\gamma _5\psi (y^{}),`$ (8)
$`A_\mu ^a(y)=Z_aA_\mu ^a(y),A_\mu ^a(y^{})=Z_a^{}A_\mu ^a(y^{}),`$ (9)
with $`Z_\mathrm{\Phi }=\pm 1`$ and $`Z_\mathrm{\Phi }^{}=\pm 1`$ for $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\{\varphi ,\psi ,A_M^a\}`$ and $`y^{}=y\pi `$. Though we are interested in the low energy coupling of $`A_\mu ^a`$ having $`Z_a=Z_a^{}=1`$, there can be 5D vector fields having other $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parity which are charged for the gauge fields with $`Z_a=Z_a^{}=1`$. Note that the brane mass of scalar field at $`y=0`$ ($`y=\pi `$) is relevant only when $`Z_\varphi =1`$ ($`Z_\varphi ^{}=1`$).

The KK specturm of bulk fields on a slice of $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ has been discussed in detail in . It is rather straightforward to generalize the analysis of  to the field with arbitrary $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parity. A generic 5D field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ can be decomposed as

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(x,y)=\mathrm{\Phi }_n(x)f_n(y),$$

where the KK wavefunction $`f_n`$ satisfies

$$\left[e^{skR|y|}_y\left(e^{skR|y|}_y\right)+R^2k^2\widehat{M}_\mathrm{\Phi }^2\right]f_n=R^2e^{2kR|y|}m_n^2f_n$$
(10)
for the KK mass eigenvalue $`m_n`$. Here

$`s=\{2,4,1,1\}`$ (11)
and the bulk mass parameters

$`\widehat{M}_\mathrm{\Phi }^2=\{0,A^2,C(C+1),C(C1)\}`$ (12)
for

$`\mathrm{\Phi }=\{A_\mu ,\varphi ,e^{2kR|y|}\psi _L,e^{2kR|y|}\psi _R\}(\psi _{L,R}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(1\pm \gamma _5)\psi ).`$ (13)
This determines $`f_n`$ to be

$$f_n(y)=e^{skR|y|/2}\left[J_\alpha \left(\frac{m_n}{k}e^{kR|y|}\right)+b_\alpha \left(m_n\right)Y_\alpha \left(\frac{m_n}{k}e^{kR|y|}\right)\right],$$
(14)
where

$$\alpha =\sqrt{(s/2)^2+\widehat{M}_\mathrm{\Phi }^2}.$$
(15)
To determine the corresponding KK mass spectrum, one needs to impose the orbifold boundary condition. Parity-even condition under the reflection at $`y=0`$ or $`\pi `$ leads to

$$\frac{df_n}{dy}=rkRf_n\mathrm{at}y=0\mathrm{or}\pi ,$$
(16)
where

$`r=\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},B_0\mathrm{or}B_\pi ,C,C\}`$ (17)
for

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\{A_\mu ,\varphi ,e^{2kR|y|}\psi _L,e^{2kR|y|}\psi _R\}.$$

Then using Eqs. (14) and (16), one finds

$$b_\alpha (m_n)=\frac{(\frac{s}{2}r)J_\alpha \left(\frac{m_n}{k}e^{kR\stackrel{~}{y}}\right)+\frac{m_n}{k}e^{kR\stackrel{~}{y}}J_\alpha ^{}\left(\frac{m_n}{k}e^{kR\stackrel{~}{y}}\right)}{(\frac{s}{2}r)Y_\alpha \left(\frac{m_n}{k}e^{kR\stackrel{~}{y}}\right)+\frac{m_n}{k}e^{kR\stackrel{~}{y}}Y_\alpha ^{}\left(\frac{m_n}{k}e^{kR\stackrel{~}{y}}\right)},$$
(18)
where $`\stackrel{~}{y}=0`$ or $`\pi `$. Parity-odd condition under the reflection at $`y=0`$ or $`\pi `$ leads to

$$f_n=0\mathrm{at}y=0\mathrm{or}\pi ,$$
(19)
yielding

$$b_\alpha (m_n)=\frac{J_\alpha \left(\frac{m_n}{k}e^{kR\stackrel{~}{y}}\right)}{Y_\alpha \left(\frac{m_n}{k}e^{kR\stackrel{~}{y}}\right)}.$$
(20)
With the above results, the KK spectrum of 5D field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ can be determined by the so-called $`N`$-function $`N(q)=N(q)`$ which has simple zeros at $`q=\pm m_n0`$:

$`N(m_n)=0.`$ (21)
If there exists a massless mode, $`N`$ has a double zero at $`q=0`$. For later use, here we summarize the $`N`$-functions for all $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ boundary conditions of the corresponding 5D field. Let $`r_0`$ and $`r_\pi `$ denote the mass parameters at $`y=0`$ and $`\pi `$, respectively, given by

$`r_0=\{0,B_0,C,C\},r_\pi =\{0,B_\pi ,C,C\}`$ (22)
for

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\{A_\mu ,\varphi ,e^{2kR|y|}\psi _L,e^{2kR|y|}\psi _R\}.$$

The $`N`$-function for $`(Z_\mathrm{\Phi },Z_\mathrm{\Phi }^{})=(+,+)`$ is given by

$`N_{++}(q)`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_0)J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\right\}\left\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_\pi )Y_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}Y_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)\right\}`$ (24)
$`+\left\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_\pi )J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)\right\}\left\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_0)Y_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}Y_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\right\}`$
where $`T=ke^{\pi kR}`$. As for the fields with other boundary conditions, i.e. $`(Z_\mathrm{\Phi },Z_\mathrm{\Phi }^{})=(+,),(,+),(,)`$, we find

$`N_+(q)`$ $`=`$ $`Y_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)\left[({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_0)J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\right]`$ (26)
$`+J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)\left[({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_0)Y_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}Y_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\right],`$
$`N_+(q)`$ $`=`$ $`J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\left[({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_\pi )Y_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}Y_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)\right]`$ (28)
$`Y_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\left[({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_\pi )J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)\right],`$
$`N_{}(q)`$ $`=`$ $`J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)Y_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)Y_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right).`$ (29)
As we will see in the next section, one can choose an appropriate gauge fixing to make that the KK spectrum of $`A_5`$ is determined by the $`N`$-function of 5D scalar field $`\varphi `$ with a specific mass:

$`N_{A_5}=N_\varphi \mathrm{for}m_\varphi ^2=4k^2+{\displaystyle \frac{4k}{R}}(\delta (y)\delta (y\pi )).`$ (30)
In fact, one needs to know the asymtotic bahaviors of these $`N`$-functions at $`|q|\mathrm{}`$ to regulate the UV divergence and also the behaviors at $`|q|0`$ to find the 1-loop couplings in the IR limit. Some properties of the $`N`$-functions including those asymtotic behaviors are summarized in Appendix A.

## III one loop effective couplings

In this section, we calculate the 1-loop effective coupling of gauge field zero mode in $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ using the background field method with dimensional regularization. Let us first describe the calculation scheme. We split the gauge field as

$`A_M^a=\overline{A}_M^a+\stackrel{~}{A}_M^a,`$ (31)
where $`\overline{A}_M^a`$ denotes the background gauge field in the gauge $`\overline{A}_5^a=0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{A}_M^a`$ is the quantum fluctuation. We choose the gauge fixing term

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g_{5a}^2}}{\displaystyle d^5x\sqrt{G}\left[e^{2kR|y|}g^{\mu \nu }D_\mu \stackrel{~}{A}_\nu ^a+\frac{e^{2kR|y|}}{R^2}_y(e^{2kR|y|}\stackrel{~}{A}_5)\right]^2}`$ (32)
where $`D_\mu `$ is defined by the background gauge field $`\overline{A}_\mu ^a`$. The corresponding ghost action is given by

$`{\displaystyle d^5x\sqrt{G}\left[e^{2kR|y|}\overline{\xi }^aD^2\xi ^a+\frac{e^{2kR|y|}}{R^2}\overline{\xi }^a_y(e^{2kR|y|}_y\xi ^a)\right]},`$ (33)
where $`D^2=g^{\mu \nu }D_\mu D_\nu `$. It is then straightforward to find the following gauge-fixed action which are quadratic in $`\stackrel{~}{A}_\mu ^a,\stackrel{~}{A}_5^a`$ and $`\xi ^a`$:

$`{\displaystyle d^5x}`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4g_{5a}^2}}(2R\stackrel{~}{A}_\mu ^aD^2\stackrel{~}{A}^{a\mu }+4Rf_{abc}\overline{F}_{\mu \nu }^a\stackrel{~}{A}^{b\mu }\stackrel{~}{A}^{c\nu }{\displaystyle \frac{2}{R}}\stackrel{~}{A}_\mu ^a_y(e^{2kR|y|}_y)\stackrel{~}{A}^{a\mu }`$ (36)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{R}}e^{2kR|y|}\stackrel{~}{A}_5^aD^2\stackrel{~}{A}_5^a{\displaystyle \frac{2}{R^3}}e^{2kR|y|}\stackrel{~}{A}_5^a_y^2(e^{2kR|y|}\stackrel{~}{A}_5^a))`$
$`+e^{2kR|y|}R\{\overline{\xi }^aD^2\xi ^a{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R^2}}\overline{\xi }^a_y(e^{2kR|y|}_y\xi ^a)\}]`$
The action of scalar and fermion fields can be written as

$`{\displaystyle d^5x}`$ $`[e^{2kR|y|}R{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi (D^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R^2}}e^{2kR|y|}_ye^{4kR|y|}_ye^{2kR|y|}m_\varphi ^2)\varphi `$ (39)
$`e^{3kR|y|}R(\overline{\psi }_Li\gamma ^\mu D_\mu \psi _L+\overline{\psi }_Ri\gamma ^\mu D_\mu \psi _R)e^{4kR|y|}(\overline{\psi }_Li\gamma ^5_y\psi _R+\overline{\psi }_Ri\gamma ^5_y\psi _L)`$
$`iRe^{4kR|y|}m_\psi (\overline{\psi }_L\psi _R+\overline{\psi }_R\psi _L)]`$
Note that the quadratic action of $`\stackrel{~}{A}_5^a`$ has the same form as the action of 5D real scalar $`\varphi `$ with $`m_\varphi ^2=4k^2+4kR^1(\delta (y)\delta (y\pi ))`$, justifying the relation (30).

One-loop effective action of the gauge field zero mode can be obtained by integrating out all quantum fluctuation fields at 1-loop order. This procedure yields

$`S_{eff}={\displaystyle d^4x\left(\frac{\pi R}{4g_{5a}^2}F^{a\mu \nu }F_{\mu \nu }^a\right)}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_\varphi [A_\mu ]+\mathrm{\Gamma }_\psi [A_\mu ]+\mathrm{\Gamma }_A[A_\mu ],`$ (40)
where the first term is obviously the tree level action, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\varphi `$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\psi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_A`$ represent the 1-loop corrections due to the loops of $`\varphi `$, $`\psi `$, and $`A_M^a`$ (and also the ghost fields $`\xi ^a`$, $`\overline{\xi }^a`$), respectively:

$`i\mathrm{\Gamma }_\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}_\varphi \mathrm{ln}\left(D^2+M^2(\varphi )\right),`$ (41)
$`i\mathrm{\Gamma }_\psi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}_\psi \mathrm{ln}\left(D^2+M^2(\psi )+F_{\mu \nu }J_{1/2}^{\mu \nu }\right),`$ (42)
$`i\mathrm{\Gamma }_A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}_{A^\mu }\mathrm{ln}\left(D^2+M^2(A_\mu )+F_{\mu \nu }J_1^{\mu \nu }\right),`$ (44)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}_{A_5}\mathrm{ln}\left(D^2+M^2(A_5)\right)+\mathrm{Tr}_{\xi ,\overline{\xi }}\mathrm{ln}\left(D^2+M^2(\xi )\right).`$
Here we replace the background gauge field $`\overline{A}_\mu ^a`$ by un-barred $`A_\mu ^a`$, and $`M^2(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ is the mass-square operator whose eigenvalues $`m_n^2`$ are determined by the zeros of the corresponding $`N`$-function. $`J_j^{\mu \nu }`$ is the 4D Lorentz spin generator normalized as $`\mathrm{tr}(J_j^{\mu \nu }J_j^{\rho \sigma })=C(j)(g^{\mu \rho }g^{\nu \sigma }g^{\mu \sigma }g^{\nu \rho })`$ where $`C(j)=(0,1,2)`$ for $`(j=0,1/2,1)`$.

The above 1-loop effective action is divergent, so need to be regulated. As in the case of flat 5D orbifold, the UV divergence structure of 5D gauge theory on $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ is given by

$`{\displaystyle d^5x\sqrt{G}\left[\frac{\gamma _a}{96\pi ^3}\mathrm{\Lambda }F_{MN}^aF^{aMN}+\frac{\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda }}{32\pi ^2}\left(\lambda _0\frac{\delta (y)}{\sqrt{G_{55}}}+\lambda _\pi \frac{\delta (y\pi )}{\sqrt{G_{55}}}\right)F_{\mu \nu }^aF^{a\mu \nu }\right]}`$ (45)
where the coefficient of linear divergence ($`\gamma _a`$) is highly sensitive to the used regularization scheme, while those of log divergences at fixed points ($`\lambda _{0,\pi }`$) are scheme-independent. In dimensional regularization, $`\gamma _a=0`$, however this does not have any special physical meaning. As for the coefficients of log divergences, it is straightforward to find

$`\lambda _0=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24}}\left[T_a(\varphi _{++})+T_a(\varphi _+)T_a(\varphi _+)T_a(\varphi _{})\right]`$ (47)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{23}{24}}\left[T_a(A_{++}^M)+T_a(A_+^M)T_a(A_+^M)T_a(A_{}^M)\right],`$
$`\lambda _\pi =`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24}}\left[T_a(\varphi _{++})T_a(\varphi _+)+T_a(\varphi _+)T_a(\varphi _{})\right]`$ (49)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{23}{24}}\left[T_a(A_{++}^M)T_a(A_+^M)+T_a(A_+^M)T_a(A_{}^M)\right],`$
where $`T_a(\mathrm{\Phi })=\mathrm{Tr}(T_a^2)`$ for the gauge group representation given by $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, $`\varphi _{zz^{}}`$ ($`z,z^{}=\pm `$) is 5D real scalar field with $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parity $`(z,z^{})`$, and $`A_{zz^{}}^M`$ is 5D real vector field.

With the UV divergences given by (45), the low energy effective gauge coupling can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_a^2(p)}}=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_{5a}^2(\mathrm{\Lambda })}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _a\mathrm{\Lambda }}{24\pi ^3}}\right]\pi R+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_{0a}^2(\mathrm{\Lambda })}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_{\pi a}^2(\mathrm{\Lambda })}}`$ (51)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}}\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_a(p,A,B_0,B_\pi ,C,k,R,\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda })+𝒪(1/\mathrm{\Lambda })`$
where $`p`$ is the 4D momentum of the external gauge boson zero mode, $`g_{0a}^2(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and $`g_{\pi a}^2(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ denote the bare brane gauge couplings at the orbifold fixed points $`y=0`$ and $`y=\pi `$, respectively, and $`𝒪(1/\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ stands for the part suppressed by $`1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Here the log-divergent piece of (45) and also the conventional momentum running and finite KK threshold corrections are all encoded in $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_a`$. The bare brane couplings $`g_{0a}^2(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and $`g_{\pi a}^2(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ can be interpreted as the Wilsonian brane couplings at $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the metric frame of $`G_{MN}`$ (see Eq. (1)). However, when measured in the metric frame of 4D massless graviton $`g_{\mu \nu }=e^{2kR|y|}G_{\mu \nu }`$, they should be interpreted as the Wilsonian couplings at different scales, $`g_{0a}^2`$ at the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`g_{\pi a}^2`$ at the rescaled scale $`e^{\pi kR}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. One can then assume that $`g_{0a}^2`$ and $`g_{\pi a}^2`$ are of order $`8\pi ^2`$ , so

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_a^2(p)}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi R}{\widehat{g}_{5a}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}}\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_a(p,A,B_0,B_\pi ,C,k,R,\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Lambda }))+𝒪\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}}\right),`$ (52)
where

$$\frac{1}{\widehat{g}_{5a}^2}=\frac{1}{g_{5a}^2}+\frac{\gamma _a\mathrm{\Lambda }}{24\pi ^3}$$

are the bare bulk couplings which are not calculable within 5D effective field theory. In the low momentum limit $`pm_{KK}`$ where $`m_{KK}`$ is the KK threshold scale which corresponds to the lowest nonzero KK mass, the calculable one-loop correction $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_a`$ can be written as

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_a(p,A,B_0,B_\pi ,C,k,R,\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ (53)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }_a(A,B_0,B_\pi ,C,k,R,\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda })+b_a\mathrm{ln}\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }/p\right)+𝒪\left({\displaystyle \frac{p^2}{m_{KK}^2}}\right),`$ (54)
where $`b_a`$ are the 4D one-loop beta function coefficients determined by the zero mode spectrum. In $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ background, $`A_{++}^M`$ gives a massless 4D vector, $`A_{}^M`$ a massless 4D real scalar, and $`\psi _{zz}`$ ($`z=\pm `$) a massless 4D chiral spinor for any values of $`k,R`$ and $`C`$. However 5D scalar field $`\varphi _{zz^{}}`$ can give a zero mode for any value of $`R`$ only when $`z=z^{}=+`$ and its bulk and brane masses satisfy

$`B_0=B_\pi ,\sqrt{4+A^2}=|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}B_0|.`$ (55)
Then $`b_a`$ are given by

$$b_a=\frac{11}{3}T_a(A_{++}^M)+\frac{1}{6}T_a(A_{}^M)+\frac{1}{6}T_a(\varphi _{++}^{(0)})+\frac{2}{3}T_a(\psi _{++})+\frac{2}{3}T_a(\psi _{}),$$
(56)
where $`\varphi _{++}^{(0)}`$ denotes 5D real scalar field having a zero mode. Note that the conditions of (55) are automatically satisfied in supersymmetric theories as it should be. In the following, we compute $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_a`$ induced by generic 5D scalar, Dirac fermion and vector fields with arbitrary $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ boundary condition.

Regularizing a field theory on compact space involves the regularization of the KK summation. It is then convenient to convert the KK summation into an integral by introducing a pole function $`P(q)`$  having the following properties: (i) $`P(q)`$ has poles at $`q=m_n`$, (ii) each pole has the residue 1, (iii) there exists $`\delta >0`$ such that $`PB`$ for $`|\mathrm{Re}(q)|\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{Im}(q)>\delta `$, while $`PB`$ for $`|\mathrm{Re}(q)|\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{Im}(q)<\delta `$, where $`B`$ is an imaginary constant. These conditions uniquely determine the pole function. In our case, it is given by

$$P(q)=\frac{N^{}(q)}{2N(q)},$$
(57)
for which

$$\underset{m_n}{}d^4pf(p,m_n)=_{}\frac{dq}{2\pi i}d^4pP(q)f(p,q),$$
(58)
where $``$ denotes the contour depicted in Fig. 1.

To obtain the 1-loop effective action of gauge field zero mode, one needs to compute

$`\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{ln}\left(D^2+M^2(\mathrm{\Phi })+F_{\mu \nu }J_j^{\mu \nu }\right)`$ (59)
which contains the following two-point amplitude:

$`{\displaystyle _{}}{\displaystyle \frac{dq}{2\pi i}}P(q){\displaystyle \frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}A_\mu ^a(p)A_\nu ^a(p)T_a(\mathrm{\Phi })}`$ (60)
$`\times [d(j){\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{g^{\mu \nu }\left((p+k)^2+q^2\right)\frac{1}{2}(p+2k)^\mu (p+2k)^\nu }{\left(k^2+q^2\right)\left((p+k)^2+q^2\right)}}`$ (61)
$`2C(j)(p^2g^{\mu \nu }p^\mu p^\nu ){\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(k^2+q^2\right)\left((p+k)^2+q^2\right)}}]`$ (62)
$`i{\displaystyle \frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}𝒢_a(p)A_\mu ^a(p)\left(p^2g^{\mu \nu }p^\mu p^\nu \right)A_\nu ^a(p)},`$ (63)
where $`d(j)=(1,4,4)`$ and $`C(j)=(0,1,2)`$ for $`j=(0,1/2,1)`$. For the computation of the above integral, it is convenient to split the pole function into two parts:

$$P(q)=\stackrel{~}{P}(q)+P_{\mathrm{}}(q),$$
(64)
where $`\stackrel{~}{P}𝒪(q^2)`$ at $`|q|\mathrm{}`$. Then $`P_{\mathrm{}}`$ can be written as

$$P_{\mathrm{}}(q)=\frac{A}{q}Bϵ(\mathrm{Im}(q)),$$
(65)
where $`ϵ(x)=x/|x|`$ and $`A`$ and $`iB`$ are some real constants, which gives

$$\stackrel{~}{P}(q)=\frac{N^{}(q)}{2N(q)}+\frac{A}{q}+Bϵ(\mathrm{Im}(q)).$$
(66)
With the decomposition (64), all UV divergences appear in the contribution from $`P_{\mathrm{}}`$ in a manner allowing simple dimensional regularization, while the contribution from $`\stackrel{~}{P}`$ is finite.

The 4D momentum integral $`d^4p`$ in (63) exhibits a branch cut on the imaginary axis of $`q`$. For the contribution from $`\stackrel{~}{P}`$, one can change the contour as in Fig. 2 since the contribution from the infinite half-circle vanishes. After integrating by part, we find that the part of $`𝒢_a`$ from $`\stackrel{~}{P}`$ is given by

$`\mathrm{\Delta }𝒢_a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{T_a(\mathrm{\Phi })}{8\pi ^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}d(j)2C(j)\right)(q)|_{qi\mathrm{}}`$ (68)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑x\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}d(j)(12x)^22C(j)\right)(q)|_{q=i\sqrt{x(1x)p^2}},`$
where

$$(q)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}N+A\mathrm{ln}(iq)+Bq.$$

The contribution from $`P_{\mathrm{}}`$ includes the log divergence from the pole term $`1/q`$. This can be regulated by the standard dimensional regularization of 4D momentum integral, $`d^4pd^Dp`$, yielding a $`1/(D4)`$ pole. On the other hand, the step-function contribution from $`ϵ(\mathrm{Im}(q))`$ involves a 5D momentum integral which is linearly divergent, but it simply gives a finite result in dimensional regularization. Adding the divergent contribution from $`P_{\mathrm{}}`$ to the finite part from $`\stackrel{~}{P}`$, we obtain

$`𝒢_a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{T_a(\mathrm{\Phi })}{8\pi ^2}}[({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}d(j)2C(j))(q)|_{qi\mathrm{}}`$ (71)
$`+{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑x\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}d(j)(12x)^2+2C(j)\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}N\right)|_{q=i\sqrt{x(1x)p^2}}`$
$`+A{\displaystyle _0^1}dx({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}d(j)(12x)^2+2C(j))\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{D4}}\right)].`$
In fact, the values of $`A`$ and $`(q)`$ at $`qi\mathrm{}`$ depend only on the $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parity of the corresponding 5D field, not on the spin of the field. We then find

$$A=(1/2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}/2)$$

for $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parity $`(Z_\mathrm{\Phi },Z_\mathrm{\Phi }^{})=(++,+,+,)`$ and

$$|_{qi\mathrm{}}=(\frac{1}{4}\pi kR\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}k,\frac{1}{4}\pi kR,\frac{1}{4}\pi kR,\frac{1}{4}\pi kR+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}k)$$

for the same $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parity.

In order to get a physical result from (71), we still need to subtract the $`1/(D4)`$ pole. When written in the position space of 5-th dimension, $`1/(D4)`$ term in (71) eventually leads to a term $`(\lambda _0\delta (y)+\lambda _\pi \delta (y\pi ))F_{\mu \nu }^aF^{a\mu \nu }/(D4)`$ in the 1-loop effective action. (See Eqs. (45) and (47) for the definition of $`\lambda _0`$ and $`\lambda _\pi `$.) Then the subtraction procedure should take into account that the cutoff scales at $`y=0`$ and $`\pi `$ differ by the warp factor $`e^{\pi kR}`$. The correct subtraction scheme is to add a counter term

$`{\displaystyle d^4x𝑑y\sqrt{G}\frac{1}{32\pi ^2}}`$ $`[\lambda _0({\displaystyle \frac{1}{(D4)}}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Lambda })){\displaystyle \frac{\delta (y)}{\sqrt{G_{55}}}}`$ (73)
$`+\lambda _\pi ({\displaystyle \frac{1}{(D4)}}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{\pi kR})){\displaystyle \frac{\delta (y\pi )}{\sqrt{G_{55}}}}]F^a_{\mu \nu }F^{a\mu \nu },`$
which gives an extra $`R`$-dependent contribution $`\lambda _\pi \pi kR`$ to the low energy gauge coupling. This can be considered in principle as a different choice of the bare IR brane coupling $`g_{\pi a}^2(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$. However if the 5D orbifold field theory is regulated in $`R`$-independent manner, which is the most natural choice in view of that $`R`$ is a dynamical field in 5D theory, this extra piece should be considered as a part of calculable correction. Also the strong coupling assumption on the bare brane couplings, $`g_{0a}^2(\mathrm{\Lambda })g_{\pi a}^2(\mathrm{\Lambda })=𝒪(8\pi ^2)`$, applies for the $`R`$-independent part. As we will see in the next section, our subtraction scheme correctly reproduces the results in supersymmetric case which can be obtained by a completely independent method based on 4D effective SUGRA whose regulator mass is $`R`$-independent. We also explicitly show in Appendix B that our subtraction scheme gives the precisely same result as the $`R`$-independent Pauli-Villars regularization for the case of 5D scalar QED.

With the prescription to compute the regularized one-loop gauge coupling which has been discussed so far, it is now straightforward to compute $`\mathrm{\Delta }_a`$ induced by generic 5D fields with arbitrary $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ boundary condition. The correction due to 5D scalar fields is given by

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_a(\varphi )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}`$ $`[T_a(\varphi _{++})\{\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{k}}\right)3{\displaystyle _0^1}duF(u)\mathrm{ln}N_{\varphi _{++}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)\}`$ (77)
$`3T_a(\varphi _+){\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑uF(u)\mathrm{ln}N_{\varphi _+}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)`$
$`3T_a(\varphi _+){\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑uF(u)\mathrm{ln}N_{\varphi _+}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)`$
$`T_a(\varphi _{})\{\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{k}}\right)+3{\displaystyle _0^1}duF(u)\mathrm{ln}N_\varphi _{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)\}]`$
where the part with coefficient $`T_a(\varphi _{zz^{}})`$ represents the contribution from the loops of 5D scalar field $`\varphi _{zz^{}}`$ and

$$F(u)=u(1u^2)^{1/2}.$$

Here $`N_{\varphi _{zz^{}}}`$ ($`z=\pm ,z^{}=\pm `$) are the $`N`$-functions of Eqs. (24) and (29) for

$$(Z_\mathrm{\Phi },Z_\mathrm{\Phi }^{},s,r_0,r_\pi ,\alpha )=(z,z^{},4,B_0,B_\pi ,\sqrt{4+A^2}).$$

The 1-loop corrections due to 5D fermion and vector fields are similarly obtained to be

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_a(\psi )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}`$ $`[T_a(\psi _{++})\{2\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k}{p}}\right)\pi kR+3{\displaystyle _0^1}duG(u)\mathrm{ln}N_{\psi _{++}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)\}`$ (81)
$`+T_a(\psi _+)\left\{\pi kR+3{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑uG(u)\mathrm{ln}N_{\psi _+}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)\right\}`$
$`+T_a(\psi _+)\left\{\pi kR+3{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑uG(u)\mathrm{ln}N_{\psi _+}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)\right\}`$
$`+T_a(\psi _{})\{2\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k}{p}}\right)\pi kR+3{\displaystyle _0^1}duG(u)\mathrm{ln}N_\psi _{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)\}],`$
$`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_a(A)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}`$ $`[T_a(A_{++})\{23\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\right)+21\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p}{k}}\right)+22\pi kR+{\displaystyle _0^1}duK(u)\mathrm{ln}N_{A_{++}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)\}`$ (85)
$`+T_a(A_+)\left\{\pi kR+{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑uK(u)\mathrm{ln}N_{A_+}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)\right\}`$
$`+T_a(A_+)\left\{\pi kR+{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑uK(u)\mathrm{ln}N_{A_+}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)\right\}`$
$`+T_a(A_{})\{23\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{k}}\right)+2\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k}{p}}\right)\pi kR+{\displaystyle _0^1}duK(u)\mathrm{ln}N_A_{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iu}{2}}\sqrt{p^2}\right)\}],`$
where

$$G(u)=u(1u^2)^{1/2}u(1u^2)^{1/2},$$

$$K(u)=9u(1u^2)^{1/2}+24u(1u^2)^{1/2}.$$

Here $`N_{\psi _{++}},N_{\psi _+},N_{\psi _+}`$ and $`N_\psi _{}`$ are the $`N`$-functions of Eqs. (24) and (29) for

$`(Z_\mathrm{\Phi },Z_\mathrm{\Phi }^{},s,r,\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`(,,1,C,|C1/2|),(+,,1,C,|C+1/2|),`$ (87)
$`(,+,1,C,|C+1/2|),(,,1,C,|C+1/2|),`$
where $`r=r_0=r_\pi `$, and $`N_{A_{++}},N_{A_+},N_{A_+}`$ and $`N_A_{}`$ are the $`N`$-functions for

$`(Z_\mathrm{\Phi },Z_\mathrm{\Phi }^{},s,r,\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`(,,4,2,0),(+,,2,0,1),`$ (89)
$`(,+,2,0,1),(,,2,0,1).`$
Note that $`N_{\psi _{++}}`$ and $`N_{A_{++}}`$ are given by $`N_{}`$ in Eq. (29), not $`N_{++}`$ in Eq. (24).

For a practical application of the above results, one may consider the low momentum limit $`pm_{KK}`$ where $`m_{KK}`$ denotes the lowest KK mass which can be determined by the corresponding $`N`$-function. In such limit, one-loop gauge couplings can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_a(p)^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi R}{\widehat{g}_{5a}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}}\left[\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_a(p,A,B_0,B_\pi ,C,k,R,\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda })+𝒪(1)\right]`$ (90)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi R}{\widehat{g}_{5a}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}}\left[\mathrm{\Delta }_a(A,B_0,B_\pi ,C,k,R,\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda })+b_a\mathrm{ln}\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }/p\right)+𝒪\left({\displaystyle \frac{p^2}{m_{KK}^2}}\right)\right].`$ (91)
The results on $`\mathrm{\Delta }_a`$ are summarized in Table I. We also provide in Table II the expressions of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_a`$ induced by a scalar field with particular values of bulk and brane mass parameters, i.e. $`B_0=B_\pi `$ and $`\sqrt{4+A^2}=|2B_0|`$, which corresponds to the scalar field in supersymmetric theory.

## IV 4d supergravity calculation

In , 1-loop low energy gauge couplings in $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ have been obtained in supersymmetric case using the gauged $`U(1)_R`$ symmetry and chiral anomaly in 5D SUGRA in $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ and also the known properties of gauge couplings in 4D effective SUGRA. In this section, we confirm that the results of the previous section correctly reproduce the SUGRA results when applied in supersymmetric case.

To proceed, let us briefly discuss supersymmetric 5D theory on $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$. The theory contains two types of 5D supermultiplets other than the SUGRA multiplet, one is the hypermultiplet $`H`$ containing two 5D complex scalar fields $`h^i`$ ($`i=1,2`$) and a Dirac fermion $`\psi `$, and the other is the vector multiplet $`V`$ containing a 5D vector $`A_M`$, real scalar $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and a symplectic Majorana fermion $`\lambda ^i`$. In supersymmetric model, all scalar fields have $`B_0=B_\pi B`$ and $`\sqrt{4+A^2}=|2B|`$ (see Eqs. (6) for the definitions of $`B_{0,\pi }`$ and $`A`$) and their superpartner fermion has a kink mass parameter $`C=\pm (32B)/2`$. Also the $`U(1)_R`$ symmetry is gauged with the graviphoton $`B_M`$ in the following way:

$`D_Mh^i=_Mh^ii\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(\sigma _3)_j^iC\delta _j^i\right)kϵ(y)B_Mh^j+\mathrm{}`$ (92)
$`D_M\psi =_M\psi +iCkϵ(y)B_M\psi +\mathrm{}`$ (93)
$`D_M\lambda ^i=_M\lambda ^ii{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(\sigma _3)_j^ikϵ(y)B_M\lambda ^j+\mathrm{},`$ (94)
where $`\psi `$ has a kink mass $`Ckϵ(y)`$ and the ellipses stand for the couplings with other gauge fields. Taking into account the $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parity, the supermultiplet structure is given by

$`H_{zz^{}}(C)=(h_{zz^{}}^1(B={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}C),h_{\stackrel{~}{z}\stackrel{~}{z}^{}}^2(B={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}+C),\psi _{zz^{}}^{\mathrm{Dirac}}(C)),`$ (95)
$`V_{zz^{}}=\left(A_{zz^{}}^M=(A_{zz^{}}^\mu ,A_{\stackrel{~}{z}\stackrel{~}{z}^{}}^5(B=2)),\lambda ^i=\lambda _{zz^{}}^{\mathrm{Dirac}}(C={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}),\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\stackrel{~}{z}\stackrel{~}{z}^{}}(B=2)\right),`$ (96)
where the subscripts $`z,z^{}`$ denote the $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parity, $`\stackrel{~}{z}=z`$, $`\stackrel{~}{z}^{}=z^{}`$, $`B`$ is the brane mass parameter and $`C`$ is the kink mass parameter.

Let us assume that our 5D theory is compactified in a manner preserving $`D=4`$ $`N=1`$ supersymmetry. This allows the low energy physics to be described by 4D effective SUGRA whose action can be written as

$$S_{4D}=d^4x[d^4\theta \{3\mathrm{exp}(\frac{K}{3})\}+(d^2\theta \frac{1}{4}f_aW^{a\alpha }W_\alpha ^a+h.c.)],$$
(97)
where $`W_\alpha ^a`$ is the chiral spinor superfield for the 4D gauge multiplet and we set the 4D gravity multiplet by their vacuum values. The Kähler potential $`K`$ can be expanded in powers of generic gauge-charged chiral superfield $`Q`$:

$$K=K_0(𝒯,𝒯^{})+Z_Q(𝒯,𝒯^{})Q^{}e^VQ+\mathrm{},$$
(98)
where $`𝒯`$ denotes the radion superfield whose scalar component is given by

$$𝒯=R+iB_5,$$

and the gauge kinetic function $`f_a`$ is a holomorphic function of $`𝒯`$. Then the 1-loop gauge couplings in effective 4D SUGRA can be determined by $`f_a`$ containing the 1-loop threshold correction from massive KK modes and also the tree-level Kähler potential $`K`$ :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_a^2(p)}}`$ $`=`$ $`\text{Re}(f_a)+{\displaystyle \frac{b_a}{16\pi ^2}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_{Pl}^2}{e^{K_0/3}p^2}}\right)`$ (100)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{Q}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{T_a(Q)}{8\pi ^2}}\mathrm{ln}\left(e^{K_0/3}Z_Q\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{T_a(\mathrm{Adj})}{8\pi ^2}}\mathrm{ln}\left(\mathrm{Re}(f_a)\right),`$
where $`b_a=T_a(Q)3T_a(\mathrm{Adj})`$ is the 1-loop beta function coefficient and $`M_{Pl}`$ is the Planck scale of $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ which defines $`p^2=g^{\mu \nu }_\mu _\nu `$.

Let us consider the 4D effective SUGRA of a 5D theory which contains $`H_{++},H_+,H_+,H_{}`$ as well as $`V_{++},V_+,V_+,V_{}`$. The 5D vector multiplet $`V_{++}`$ gives a massless 4D gauge multiplet containing $`A_{++}^\mu `$ whose low energy couplings are of interest for us, while $`V_{}`$ gives a massless 4D chiral multiplet containing $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{++}+iA_{++}^5`$. $`H_{++}`$ and $`H_{}`$ also give massless 4D chiral multiplets containing $`h_{++}^1`$ and $`h_{++}^2`$, respectively, whose tree level Kähler metrics are required to compute the 1-loop gauge coupling (100). Other 5D multiplets, i.e. $`V_+,V_+,H_+`$ and $`H_+`$ do not give any massless 4D mode. Let $`Y_Q=e^{K_0/3}Z_Q`$ where $`Z_Q`$ ($`Q=H_{++},H_{},V_{}`$) denote the Kähler metric of the 4D massless chiral superfields coming from the 5D multiplets $`H_{++},H_{}`$ and $`V_{}`$, respectively. Following Refs. , it is straightforward to find the tree level $`Z_{H_{++}},Z_H_{}`$ and also $`f_a`$ containing the 1-loop threshold corrections from massive KK modes:

$`M_{Pl}^2=e^{K_0/3}M_5^2={\displaystyle \frac{M_5^3}{k}}(1e^{k\pi (𝒯+𝒯^{})}),`$ (101)
$`Y_{H_{++}}={\displaystyle \frac{M_5}{(\frac{1}{2}C_{++})k}}(e^{(\frac{1}{2}C_{++})\pi k(𝒯+𝒯^{})}1),`$ (102)
$`Y_H_{}={\displaystyle \frac{M_5}{(\frac{1}{2}+C_{})k}}(e^{(\frac{1}{2}+C_{})\pi k(𝒯+𝒯^{})}1),`$ (103)
$`Y_V_{}={\displaystyle \frac{k}{M_5}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^{\pi k(𝒯+𝒯^{})}1}},`$ (104)
$`f_a={\displaystyle \frac{\pi 𝒯}{\widehat{g}_{5a}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{z^{}}{8\pi ^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{V_{zz^{}}}{}}T_a(V_{zz^{}}){\displaystyle \underset{H_{zz^{}}}{}}C_{zz^{}}T_a(H_{zz^{}})\right)k\pi 𝒯,`$ (105)
where $`M_5`$ is the 5D Planck scale, and $`C_{zz^{}}`$ is the kink mass of $`H_{zz^{}}`$. As was noted in , the KK threshold correction to $`f_a`$ can be entirely determined by the chiral anomaly w.r.t the following $`B_5`$-dependent phase transformation:

$`\lambda ^{ai}\left(e^{3ik|y|B_5\sigma _3/2}\right)_j^i\lambda ^{aj},\psi e^{iCk|y|B_5}\psi .`$ (106)
Using the above results, we find the one-loop gauge couplings at low momentum limit $`pm_{KK}`$ :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_a(p)^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi R}{\widehat{g}_{5a}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}}\left[\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_a\right)_{\mathrm{SUSY}}+\left(b_a\right)_{\mathrm{SUSY}}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Lambda }/p)\right],`$ (107)
where

$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_a\right)_{\mathrm{SUSY}}`$ $`=`$ $`T_a(H_{++})\left[\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{k}}\right)+C_{++}\pi kR+\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{e^{(12C_{++})\pi kR}1}{12C_{++}}}\right)\right]`$ (113)
$`+C_+T_a(H_+)\pi kRC_+T_a(H_+)\pi kR`$
$`T_a(H_{})\left[\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{k}}\right)C_{}\pi kR+\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{e^{(1+2C_{})\pi kR}1}{1+2C_{}}}\right)\right]`$
$`+T_a(V_{++})\left[\mathrm{ln}\left(M_5\pi R\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\pi kR\right]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}T_a(V_+)\pi kR+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}T_a(V_+)\pi kR`$
$`+T_a(V_{})\left[\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{M_5}{k}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}k\pi R+\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1e^{2\pi kR}}{2}}\right)\right]`$
and

$`\left(b_a\right)_{\mathrm{SUSY}}=3T_a(V_{++})+T_a(V_{})+T_a(H_{++})+T_a(H_{}).`$ (114)
A rough estimate of $`m_{KK}`$ yields

$$m_{KK}ke^{\pi kR}$$

for the bulk fields other than $`H_+`$ or $`H_+`$. On the other hand, $`H_+`$ has

$$m_{KK}ke^{(\frac{1}{2}+C_+)\pi kR}(C_+1/2)\mathrm{or}ke^{\pi kR}(C_+1/2),$$

while $`H_+`$ has

$$m_{KK}ke^{(\frac{1}{2}C_+)\pi kR}(C_+1/2)\mathrm{or}ke^{\pi kR}(C_+1/2).$$

The above result (113) obtained by 4D SUGRA analysis perfectly agrees with the result that one would obtain using the results of Tables I and II when $`M_5`$ is replaced by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. This provides a nontrivial check for the results obtained in the previous section and assures that our results are truely scheme-independent.

## V conclusion

In this paper, we have calculated the full 1-loop corrections to the low energy coupling of bulk gauge boson in $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ induced by generic 5D scalar, fermion and vector fields with arbitrary $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ orbifold boundary condition. The used calculation scheme is the background field method with dimensional regularization. We noted that the subtraction scale for the log divergence at the IR brane ($`y=\pi `$) should be taken to be $`\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{\pi kR}`$ where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the subtraction scale for the UV brane ($`y=0`$). We also considered supersymmetric case to assure that our results correctly reproduce the results obtained by a completely independent method based on 4D effective supergravity analysis.

Acknowledgement: We thank H. D. Kim for useful discussions. This work is supported in part by BK21 Core program of MOE, KRF Grant No. 2000-015-DP0080, KOSEF Sundo-Grant, and KOSEF through CHEP of KNU.

Note added: While this work was in completion, we received  discussing the 1-loop gauge coupling renormalization due to 5D scalar loops in $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ background and its interpretation in the context of AdS/CFT correspondence and also  discussing the 1-loop renormalization in the context of deconstructed $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$.

Appendix A. Some properties of the $`N`$-functions

In this appendix, we present some properties of the $`N`$-functions, $`N_{zz^{}}`$ ($`z,z^{}=\pm `$), given in Eqs. (24) and (29). Using $`Y_\alpha (x)=(\mathrm{cos}\alpha \pi J_\alpha (x)J_\alpha (x))/\mathrm{sin}\alpha \pi `$ and also the fact that $`N_{zz^{}}`$ are antisymmetric under the exchange of $`J_\alpha `$ and $`Y_\alpha `$, one can rewrite the $`N`$-functions as

$`N_{++}(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}\alpha \pi }}[\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_0)J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\}\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_\pi )J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)\}`$ (116)
$`\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_\pi )J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)\}\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_0)J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\}],`$
$`N_+(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}\alpha \pi }}[\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_0)J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\}J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)`$ (118)
$`J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_0)J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\}],`$
$`N_+(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}\alpha \pi }}[\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_\pi )J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)\}J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)`$ (120)
$`J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\{({\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}r_\pi )J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}J_\alpha ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)\}],`$
$`N_{}(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}\alpha \pi }}\left[J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{T}}\right)J_\alpha \left({\displaystyle \frac{q}{k}}\right)\right],`$ (121)
where $`T=ke^{\pi kR}`$. Then using $`J_\alpha (x)=x^\alpha f(x^2)`$, one can easily see that all $`N`$-functions are even-functions:

$$N_{zz^{}}(q)=N_{zz^{}}(q).$$

We already know $`N_{zz^{}}(q)`$ is analytic near $`q=0`$, allowing an expansion around $`q=0`$:

$$N_{zz^{}}(q)=Q_{zz^{}}+\frac{q^2}{k^2}R_{zz^{}}+𝒪\left(q^4\right),$$
(122)
where

$`Q_{++}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi \alpha }}\left[(\alpha +r_\pi {\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})(\alpha r_0+{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}+(\alpha +r_0{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})(\alpha r_\pi +{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}\right],`$ (123)
$`Q_+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi \alpha }}\left[(\alpha r_0+{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}+(\alpha +r_0{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}\right],`$ (124)
$`Q_+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi \alpha }}\left[(\alpha r_\pi +{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}+(\alpha +r_\pi {\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}\right],`$ (125)
$`Q_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi \alpha }}\left[e^{\alpha \pi kR}e^{\alpha \pi kR}\right],`$ (126)
$`R_{++}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi }}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha (\alpha 1)}}\{(2\alpha r_0+{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})(\alpha r_\pi +{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}`$ (130)
$`+(2+\alpha +r_\pi {\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})(\alpha r_0+{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{(2\alpha )\pi kR}\}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha (\alpha +1)}}\{(\alpha r_\pi +{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})(2+\alpha r_0+{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}`$
$`+(\alpha +r_0{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})(2+\alpha r_\pi +{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{(\alpha +2)\pi kR}\}],`$
$`R_+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi }}[+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha (\alpha 1)}}\{(2+\alpha +r_0{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}+(\alpha r_0+{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{(2\alpha )\pi kR}\}`$ (132)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha (\alpha +1)}}\{(2+\alpha r_0+{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}+(\alpha +r_0{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{(2+\alpha )\pi kR}\}],`$
$`R_+`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi }}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha (1\alpha )}}\{(2+\alpha +r_\pi {\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{(2\alpha )\pi kR}+(\alpha r_\pi +{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}\}`$ (134)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha (1+\alpha )}}\{(2+\alpha r_\pi +{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{(2+\alpha )\pi kR}+(\alpha +r_\pi {\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}})e^{\alpha \pi kR}\}],`$
$`R_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi }}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha (\alpha 1)}}\left\{e^{(\alpha 2)\pi kR}e^{\alpha \pi kR}\right\}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha (\alpha +1)}}\left\{e^{\alpha \pi kR}e^{(\alpha +2)\pi kR}\right\}\right].`$ (135)
The KK mass eigenvalue $`m_n`$ is determined by the zeros of $`N`$-function: $`N(m_n)=0`$. Obviously a 5D field has a massless 4D mode iff $`Q_{zz^{}}=0`$. Generically, a nonzero KK mass eigenvalue starts to appear from $`m_n=𝒪(T)`$. However in some special case, there can be nonzero mass eigenvalues much smaller than $`T=ke^{\pi kR}`$. For instance, if $`\alpha =\frac{s}{2}r_0`$ and $`\alpha `$ has a large value, $`Q_+e^{\alpha \pi kR}`$ and $`R_+e^{\alpha \pi kR}`$, giving a very light state of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_+`$ with $`m_nke^{\alpha \pi kR}`$. Similarly, if $`\alpha =r_\pi \frac{s}{2}`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_+`$ can also have a very small $`m_n`$. However $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ does have neither a massless state nor a very light state with $`m_nke^{\pi kR}`$.

The asymptotic behavior of $`N`$-function at $`|q|\mathrm{}`$ is essential for regularizing the 1-loop gauge coupling. Using the asymptotic formulae of Bessel functions:

$`J_\alpha (x)`$ $``$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi x}}}\mathrm{cos}\left[x\left(\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)\right],`$ (136)
$`Y_\alpha (x)`$ $``$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi x}}}\mathrm{sin}\left[x\left(\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)\right],`$ (137)
we find

$`N_{++}(q)`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2qe^{\pi kR/2}}{\pi k}}\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(1e^{\pi kR})q}{k}}\right),`$ (138)
$`N_+(q)`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}e^{\pi kR/2}\mathrm{cos}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(1e^{\pi kR})q}{k}}\right),`$ (139)
$`N_+(q)`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}e^{\pi kR/2}\mathrm{cos}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(1e^{\pi kR})q}{k}}\right),`$ (140)
$`N_{}(q)`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2k}{\pi q}}e^{\pi kR/2}\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(1e^{\pi kR})q}{k}}\right).`$ (141)
Appendix B. Comparison with Pauli-Villars Regularization

A natural regularization in 5D theory is to cut off 5D momentum in the 5D metric frame of $`G_{MN}`$: $`G^{MN}_M_N<\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$. In AdS background, this would correspond to an effective $`y`$-dependent cut-off of 4D momentum in the 4D metric frame of $`g_{\mu \nu }`$: $`p^2=g^{\mu \nu }_\mu _\nu <e^{2kR|y|}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$. In dimensional regularization, such feature is not manifest, but can be taken into account by choosing the subtraction scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{kR\stackrel{~}{y}}`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{y}=0`$ or $`\pi `$ is the location of log divergence. On the other hand, such feature is rather manifest in Pauli-Villars (PV) regularization in which $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ corresponds to a 5D regulator mass. In this appendix, we compare our result using the dimensional regularization with the subtraction scheme (73) to the PV result for scalar QED. For simplicity, we consider the massless scalar QED with $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ parity $`(++)`$.

In PV scheme, the UV divergence is regulated by a PV regulator with 5D mass $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ which has the same $`Z_2\times Z_2^{}`$ boundary condition as $`\varphi `$ but opposite statistics:

$$\underset{n}{}\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}f(p,m_n)\underset{n}{}\left\{\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}f(p,m_n)\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}f(p,M_n)\right\},$$
(142)
where $`M_n`$ is the KK spectrum for the PV regulator. We convert the summation into an integral using the pole functions:

$$P_\varphi =\frac{N_\varphi ^{}}{2N_\varphi },P_{\mathrm{PV}}=\frac{N_{\mathrm{PV}}^{}}{2N_{\mathrm{PV}}},$$

and then the regulated amplitude is given by

$$_{}\frac{dq}{2\pi i}P_{\mathrm{reg}}(q)\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}f(p,q),$$
(143)
where $`P_{\mathrm{reg}}(q)P_\varphi (q)P_{\mathrm{PV}}(q)`$. Since $`N_\varphi `$ and $`N_{\mathrm{PV}}`$ are the same limiting behavior at $`|q|\mathrm{}`$, $`P_{\mathrm{reg}}(q)`$ vanishes at infinity. After a partial integration along $`q`$, we find

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\mathrm{PV}}`$ $`=`$ $`8\pi ^2{\displaystyle _C}{\displaystyle \frac{dq}{2\pi i}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}N_\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}N_{\mathrm{PV}}\right)`$ (145)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{d}{dq}}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x(12x)^2\frac{1}{(4\pi )^2}\mathrm{ln}\left(x(1x)p^2+q^2\right)}\right\}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x(12x)^2(\mathrm{ln}N_\varphi \mathrm{ln}N_{\mathrm{PV}})}|_{q=i\sqrt{x(1x)p^2}},`$ (146)
where $`C`$ is the contour line described in Fig. 2. For $`qke^{\pi kR}`$,

$`N_\varphi `$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{q^2}{k^2}}e^{\pi kR}\left({\displaystyle \frac{e^{\pi kR}e^{\pi kR}}{\pi }}\right),`$ (147)
$`N_{\mathrm{PV}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\alpha 2)(\alpha +2)}{\pi \alpha }}\left(e^{\alpha \pi kR}e^{\alpha \pi kR}\right),`$ (148)
where $`\alpha =\sqrt{4+\mathrm{\Lambda }^2/k^2}`$. For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }k`$, $`\alpha \mathrm{\Lambda }/k`$, so

$$\mathrm{ln}N_{\mathrm{PV}}\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi R+\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Lambda }/k).$$
(149)
After subtracting the power-law divergent part which is regularization scheme dependent, we find

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{PV}}\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\mathrm{PV}}b_a\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Lambda }/p)=\frac{1}{12}\left[\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Lambda }/k)+\pi kR+\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{e^{\pi kR}e^{\pi kR}}{2\pi }\right)\right],$$
(150)
which is precisely same as the result in Table II for a massless real $`\varphi _{++}`$ with $`A=B_0=B_\pi =0`$. In scalar QED, a charged scalar field should be complex, so gives a loop correction twice of the above result.


format: text

text:
# ON THE THEORY OF COHERENT PAIR PRODUCTION IN CRYSTALS IN PRESENCE OF ACOUSTIC WAVES

## 1 Introduction

The fundamental aspects of the high-energy electromagnetic processes in condensed media have been under discussion for a long time. In crystals, where the atoms are arranged in ordered rows, the cross-sections of the high-energy electromagnetic processes can change essentially compared with the corresponding quantities for a single atom (see, for instance,  and references therein). The cross-sections change because the kinematics of the processes dictate that the interactions be spread over a significant distance. The momentum transfer between a highly relativistic interacting particle and the crystal can be small, especially along the direction of particle motion. When this longitudinal momentum transfer is small, the uncertainty principle dictates that the interaction be spread out over a distance, known as the formation length for particle production or, more generally, as the coherence length. If the formation length exceeds the interatomic spacing the interference effects from all atoms within this length are important and they can essentially affect the corresponding cross-sections.

From the point of view of controlling the parameters of the high-energy electromagnetic processes in a medium it is of interest to investigate the influence of external fields, such as acoustic waves, temperature gradient etc., on the corresponding characteristics. The considerations of concrete processes, such as diffraction radiation , transition radiation , parametric X-radiation , channeling radiation , have shown that the external fields can essentially change the angular - frequency characteristics of the radiation intensities. In the present paper we investigate the influence of a hypersonic wave on the coherent creation of electron-positron pairs by high-energy photons in a crystal (for the analogous influence in the case of bremsstrahlung see ). We specify the conditions under which the external deformation field changes the pair creation cross-section compared to the case of an undeformed crystal and demonstrate the possibility for the positron yield enhancement. Electron-positron pair creation phenomena by high-energy photons passing through a crystal are interesting not only from the viewpoint of underlying physics (for a recent review see ) but also from the viewpoint of practical applications for generation of intense positron beams. The basic source to creating positrons for high-energy electron-positron colliders is the electron-positron pair creation by hard bremsstrahlung photons produced when a powerful electron beam hits an amorphous target. Another approach is to use a crystal, the atomic rows of which are aligned with the incident electron beam, instead of an amorphous target. Due to the coherent bremsstrahlung this gives more intense radiation of photons, and as a result higher positron intensity. To further improve the positron yield the channeling radiation can be used, which is more intense than coherent bremsstrahlung and gives more electron-positron pairs . An additional increase in the yield of positrons can be reached by using acoustic waves excited in crystals .

The paper is organized as follows. In the next section a formula is derived for the coherent part of the electron-positron pair creation by a photon in presence of the sinusoidal deformation field generated by a hypersound. The analysis of the general formula and numerical results in the special cases when the photon enters into the crystal at small angle with respect to crystallographic axes or planes is presented in Sec. 3. The main results are re-mentioned and discussed in Sec. 4.

## 2 Cross-section of the pair creation

The differential cross-section for the electron-positron pair creation in a crystal by a high-energy photon with the wave vector $`𝐤`$ can be written in the form (see, for example, )

$$\sigma (𝐪)\frac{d^4\sigma }{dE_+d^3q}=\left|\underset{n}{}e^{i\mathrm{𝐪𝐫}_n}\right|^2\sigma _0(𝐪),$$
(1)
with $`𝐫_n`$ being the positions of atoms in the crystal, $`\sigma _0(𝐪)`$ is the corresponding cross-section on an individual atom as a function of momentum transfer to the crystal $`𝐪=𝐤𝐩_+𝐩_{}`$. Here $`𝐩_+`$, $`E_+`$ and $`𝐩_{}`$, $`E_{}`$ are the momenta and energies for the craeted positron and electron respectively (hereafter the system of units $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$ is used). The interference factor in Eq. (1) is responsible for coherent effects arising due to periodical arrangement of the atoms in a crystal. After averaging on thermal fluctuations the cross-section takes the standard form

$$\sigma (𝐪)=\left\{N_0\left(1e^{q^2\overline{u_t^2}}\right)+e^{q^2\overline{u_t^2}}\left|\underset{n}{}e^{i\mathrm{𝐪𝐫}_{n0}}\right|^2\right\}\sigma _0(𝐪),$$
(2)
where $`𝐫_n=𝐫_{n0}+𝐮_{tn}`$, $`𝐮_{tn}`$ is the displacement of atoms with respect to the equilibrium positions $`𝐫_{n0}`$ (by taking into account the crystal deformation due to the hypersonic wave) due to the thermal vibrations , $`\overline{u_t^2}`$ is the temperature dependent mean-squared amplitude of the thermal vibrations of atoms in the crystal, $`N_0`$ is number of atoms in the crystal, $`e^{q^2\overline{u_t^2}}`$ is the Debye-Waller factor. When external influences are present the positions of atoms can be written as

$$𝐫_{n0}=𝐫_{ne}+𝐮_n,$$
(3)
with $`𝐫_{ne}`$ being the equilibrium positions of atoms in the situation without deformation, $`𝐮_n`$ are the displacements of atoms caused by the acoustic wave. We will consider deformations with the sinusoidal structure

$$𝐮_n=𝐮_0\mathrm{sin}\left(𝐤_s𝐫_{ne}+\phi _0\right),$$
(4)
where $`𝐤_s`$ is the wave vector of the hypersonic wave. Note that the dependence of $`𝐮_n`$ on time (through the phase $`\phi _0`$) we can disregard, as for particle energies we are interested in, the characteristic time for the change of deformation field is much greater than the passage time of particles through the crystal. For the deformation field given by Eq. (4) the sum over the atoms of a crystal in (2) can be transformed into the form

$$\underset{n}{}e^{i\mathrm{𝐪𝐫}_{n0}}=\underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}J_m(\mathrm{𝐪𝐮}_0)e^{im\phi _0}\underset{n}{}e^{i𝐪_m𝐫_{ne}},𝐪_m=𝐪+m𝐤_s,$$
(5)
where $`J_m(x)`$ is the Bessel function. For a lattice with a complex cell the coordinates of the atoms can be written as

$$𝐫_{ne}=𝐑_n+\rho _j,$$
(6)
with $`𝐑_n`$ being the positions of the atoms for one of primitive lattices, and $`\rho _j`$ are the equilibrium positions for other atoms inside $`n`$ \- th elementary cell with respect to $`𝐑_n`$ . Now the sum over atoms of the lattice can be presented as

$$\underset{n}{}e^{i𝐪_m𝐫_{ne}}=S(𝐪_m)\underset{n}{}e^{i𝐪_m𝐑_n},S(𝐪)=\underset{j}{}e^{i𝐪\rho _j},$$
(7)
where $`S(𝐪)`$ is the structure factor. By making use of the formulae given above the square of the modulus for the sum (5) takes the form

$$\left|\underset{n}{}e^{i\mathrm{𝐪𝐫}_{n0}}\right|^2=\underset{m,m^{}=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}J_m\left(\mathrm{𝐪𝐮}_0\right)J_m^{}\left(\mathrm{𝐪𝐮}_0\right)e^{i(mm^{})\phi _0}\underset{n,n^{}}{}e^{i𝐪_m𝐑_n}e^{i𝐪_m^{}𝐑_n^{}}S(𝐪_m)S^{}(𝐪_m^{}).$$
(8)
For thick crystals the sum over cells can be presented as a sum over the reciprocal lattice:

$$\underset{n}{}e^{i𝐪_m𝐑_n}=\frac{(2\pi )^3}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\underset{𝐠}{}\delta (𝐪_m𝐠),$$
(9)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the unit cell volume, and $`𝐠`$ is the reciprocal lattice vector. By taking into account the $`\delta `$ \- function the quantity $`𝐪_m^{}`$ can be written as $`𝐪_m^{}=𝐠+(m^{}m)𝐤_s`$. As for the lattice one has $`e^{i\mathrm{𝐠𝐑}_n}=1`$, we receive

$$\underset{n^{}}{}e^{i𝐪_m^{}𝐑_n^{}}=\underset{n^{}}{}e^{i(m^{}m)𝐤_s𝐑_n^{}}=\frac{(2\pi )^3}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\underset{𝐠}{}\delta ((m^{}m)𝐤_s𝐠).$$
(10)
Firstly let us show that in the sum over $`m`$ the main contribution comes from the terms for which $`m𝐤_s𝐮_0\mathrm{𝐠𝐮}_0`$, or equivalently $`m\lambda _s/a`$, where $`\lambda _s=2\pi /k_s`$ is the wavelength of the external excitation, and $`a`$ is the lattice constant. Indeed, due to the $`\delta `$-function in (9) the Bessel function enters in the form $`J_m(\mathrm{𝐠𝐮}_0m𝐤_s𝐮_0)`$. For terms with $`m𝐤_s𝐮_0\mathrm{𝐠𝐮}_0`$, by taking into account that for practically important cases $`u_0/\lambda _s1`$, and making use of the asymptotic formula for the Bessel function, for large values of the order we can see that $`J_m(m𝐤_s𝐮_0)(2\pi m)^{1/2}(\pi eu_0/\lambda _s)^m`$, $`m\lambda _s/a1`$, and the contribution of these terms is exponentially suppressed. This conclusion is also valid for the sum over $`m^{}`$. Now let us consider the contribution of the summands $`mm^{}`$ in the sum (8). It follows from formula (10) that $`\left|mm^{}\right|\lambda _s/a`$. As $`\lambda _s/a1`$, from here we see that one of the numbers $`m`$, $`m^{}`$ is large. Let it is the number $`m^{}`$, $`m^{}\lambda _s/a`$. For the argument of the Bessel functions one has the estimate $`\mathrm{𝐪𝐮}_0\mathrm{𝐠𝐮}_02\pi u_0/a`$, and, hence, the ratio of the Bessel function order to the argument is estimated as $`m^{}/\mathrm{𝐪𝐮}_0\lambda _s/2\pi u_0`$. As for the practically important cases $`u_0/\lambda _s1`$ , for the function $`J_m^{}(\mathrm{𝐪𝐮}_0)`$ we have

$$J_m^{}(\mathrm{𝐪𝐮}_0)\sqrt{\frac{a}{2\pi \lambda _s}}\left(\frac{\pi eu_0}{\lambda _s}\right)^{\lambda _s/a}$$
(11)
It follows from here that under the condition $`u_0/\lambda _s1`$ the contribution of the terms with $`mm^{}`$ in the sum (8) is small compared to the diagonal terms. In the case $`m=m^{}`$ the sum in the left hand side of (10) is equal to the number of cells, $`N`$, in a crystal and the square of the modulus for the sum on the left of Eq.(8) can be written as

$$\left|\underset{n}{}e^{i\mathrm{𝐪𝐫}_{n0}}\right|^2=N\frac{(2\pi )^3}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}J_m^2(\mathrm{𝐪𝐮}_0)\left|S(𝐪_m)\right|^2\underset{𝐠}{}\delta (𝐪_m𝐠).$$
(12)
Note that in this case we have no dependence on the phase $`\phi _0`$.

In formula (2) the first two terms in figure braces do not depend on the direction of the vector $`𝐪`$ and correspond to the contribution of incoherent effects. The third summand depends on the orientation of crystal axes with respect to the vector $`𝐪`$ and determines the contribution of coherent effects. The corresponding part of the cross-section is known as an interference term and, by taking into account the formula for $`\sigma _0(𝐪)`$ (see, e.g., ), can be written as

$$\sigma _c=\frac{e^2}{(2\pi )^3\omega ^2}\frac{q_{}^2}{q_{}^2}\left|u_𝐪\right|^2\left(\frac{\omega \delta }{m_e^2}1+\frac{2\delta }{q_{}}\frac{2\delta ^2}{q_{}^2}\right)e^{q^2\overline{u_t^2}}\left|\underset{n}{}e^{i\mathrm{𝐪𝐫}_{n0}}\right|^2,$$
(13)
where $`u_𝐪`$ is the Fourier-transform of the atomic potential, $`𝐪_{}`$ and $`𝐪_{}`$ are the parallel and perpendicular components of the vector $`𝐪`$ with respect to the direction of the photon momentum $`𝐤`$, $`\omega `$ is the photon frequency, $`\delta =1/l_c`$ is the minimum longitudinal momentum transfer, and $`l_c=2E_+E_{}/(\omega m_e^2)`$ is the formation length for the pair creation process. Usually one writes the quantity $`u_𝐪`$ as $`4\pi Ze^2\left[1F(q)\right]/q^2`$, where $`Z`$ is the number of electrons in an atom, and $`F(q)`$ is the atomic form-factor. For the exponential screening of the atomic potential one has $`u_𝐪=4\pi Ze^2/(q^2+R^2)`$ , with $`R`$ being the screening radius.

The general expression for the pair creation cross-section can be presented in the form

$$d\sigma =N_0(d\sigma _n+d\sigma _c),$$
(14)
where $`d\sigma _n`$ and $`d\sigma _c`$ are the cross-sections for the non-coherent and coherent processes of the electron-positron pair creation in a crystal per single atom. Using formulae (12) and (13) and integrating over $`𝐪`$ the cross-section for the coherent part can be presented as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma _c}{dE_+}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2N}{\omega ^2N_0\mathrm{\Delta }}}{\displaystyle \underset{m,𝐠}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{g_m^2}{g_m^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^2}{2E_+E_{}}}1+2{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{g_m}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{g_m}})]|u_{𝐠_m}|^2\times `$
$`\times J_m^2(𝐠_m𝐮_0)|S(𝐠)|^2e^{g_m^2\overline{u_t^2}},𝐠_m=𝐠m𝐤_s,`$
where the summation goes under the constraint

$$g_m\delta .$$
(16)
For the simplest crystal with one atom in the elementary cell one has $`N=N_0`$ and $`S(𝐠)=1`$. Formula (2) differs from the corresponding formula for the creation of pairs in an undeformed crystal (corresponding to the summand with $`m=0`$ and $`u_0=0`$, see, for instance, ) by replacement $`𝐠𝐠_m`$, and additional summation over $`m`$ with weights $`J_m^2(𝐠_m𝐮_0)`$. This corresponds to the presence of an additional one dimensional lattice with the reciprocal lattice vector $`m𝐤_s`$, $`m=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$. Note that by taking into account the $`\delta `$-function in Eq. (12) the momentum conservation law can be written down as

$$𝐤=𝐩_++𝐩_{}+𝐠m𝐤_s,$$
(17)
where $`m𝐤_s`$ stands for the momentum transfer to the external field.

## 3 Analysis of the general formula

In formula (2) for the pair creation cross-section the main contribution comes from the terms with $`g_m\delta `$. It follows from here that the external excitation with a wave vector $`𝐤_s`$ will influence on the process of pair creation if $`mk_s\delta `$. As a consequence of the well-known properties of the Bessel function, in the sum over $`m`$ the main contribution is due to the summands with

$$m𝐠_m𝐮_0gu_0\frac{2\pi u_0}{a}.$$
(18)
From the last two relations it follows that it is necessary to take into account the influence of external fields on pair creation by photons if

$$\frac{u_0}{\lambda _s}\frac{a}{(2\pi )^2l_c}.$$
(19)
It should be noted that at high energies $`a/l_c1`$ and condition (19) does not contradict to the condition $`u_0/\lambda _s1`$ . In view of the expression for the formation length, condition (19) can be also written as

$$\frac{u_0}{\lambda _s}\frac{am_e}{8\pi ^2}\frac{m_e\omega }{E_+E_{}}.$$
(20)
As for the process of pair creation $`\omega >E_\pm `$, this condition is stronger than in the case of bremsstrahlung (see ).

Let us consider the case of the simplest crystal with one atom in the elementary cell assuming that the photon enters into the crystal at small angle $`\theta `$ with respect to the crystallographic axis $`z`$ of the orthogonal lattice. The corresponding reciprocal lattice vector components are $`g_i=2\pi n_i/a_i`$, $`n_i=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$, where $`a_i`$, $`i=1,2,3`$ are the lattice constants in the corresponding directions. We can write

$$g_m=g_{mz}\mathrm{cos}\theta +\left(g_{my}\mathrm{cos}\alpha +g_{mx}\mathrm{sin}\alpha \right)\mathrm{sin}\theta ,$$
(21)
where $`\alpha `$ is the angle between the projection of the vector $`𝐤`$ on the plane $`(x,y)`$ and axis $`y`$. For small angles $`\theta `$ the main contribution into the cross-section comes from the summands with $`g_z=0`$ and we receive

$$\frac{d\sigma _c}{dE_+}\frac{e^2}{\omega ^2\mathrm{\Delta }}\underset{m,g_x,g_y}{}\frac{g_{}^2}{g_m^2}\left[\frac{\omega ^2}{2E_+E_{}}1+2\frac{\delta }{g_m}\left(1\frac{\delta }{g_m}\right)\right]|u_{g_m}|^2J_m^2(𝐠_m𝐮_0),$$
(22)
where $`g_{}^2=g_x^2+g_y^2`$, and the summation goes over the region $`g_m\delta `$ with

$$g_mmk_z+\left(g_y\mathrm{cos}\alpha +g_x\mathrm{sin}\alpha \right)\theta .$$
(23)
Note that in the argument of the Bessel function $`𝐠_m𝐮_0𝐠_{}𝐮_0`$. It follows from here that if the displacements of the atoms in the acoustic wave are parallel to the axis $`z`$ then the main contribution into the cross-section is due to the summand with $`m=0`$ and the influence of the acoustic wave is small. The most promising case is the transversal acoustic wave propagating along the $`z`$ \- direction. If the photon moves far from the crystallographic plane (the angles $`\alpha `$ and $`\pi /2\alpha `$ are not small) the expression under the sum is a smooth function on $`g_x`$ and $`g_y`$, and the summation over these variables can be replaced by integration:

$$\underset{g_x,g_y}{}\frac{a_1a_2}{(2\pi )^2}𝑑g_x𝑑g_y.$$
(24)
We now assume that the photon enters into the crystal at small angle $`\theta `$ with respect to the crystallographic axis $`z`$ and near the crystallographic plane $`(y,z)`$ ($`\alpha `$ is small). In this case with an increase of $`\delta `$ some sets of terms in the sum will fall out. This can essentially change the cross-section. Two cases have to be distinguished. Under the condition $`\delta 2\pi \theta /a_2`$ in Eq. (22) for the longitudinal component one has

$$g_mmk_z+\theta g_y\delta .$$
(25)
This relation does not depend on the component $`g_x`$ and the summation over this component can be replaced by integration $`_{g_x}(2\pi /a_1)𝑑g_x`$. When $`𝐮_0𝐚_1`$, for exponential screening the corresponding integral is expressed in terms of the hypergeometric functions. Here we will consider in detail the simpler case $`𝐮_0𝐚_2`$. For the exponential screening after the elementary integration over $`g_x`$ we obtain

$$\frac{d\sigma _c}{dE_+}\frac{4\pi ^2Z^2e^4}{\omega ^2a_2a_3}\underset{m,g_y}{}\frac{2g_y^2+R^2}{g_m^2(g_y^2+R^2)^{3/2}}\left[\frac{\omega ^2}{2E_+E_{}}1+2\frac{\delta }{g_m}\left(1\frac{\delta }{g_m}\right)\right]J_m^2(g_yu_0),$$
(26)
where the summation goes under the condition (25).

Now we will assume that $`\delta 2\pi \theta \alpha /a_1`$. The main contribution into the sum in Eq. (22) is due to the terms with $`g_y=0`$ and we have two sums: over $`m`$ and $`n_1`$, $`g_x=2\pi n_1/a_1`$. For the corresponding cross-section one receives:

$$\frac{d\sigma _c}{dE_+}\frac{e^2}{\omega ^2\mathrm{\Delta }}\underset{m,n_1}{}\frac{g_x^2}{g_m^2}\left[\frac{\omega ^2}{2E_+E_{}}1+2\frac{\delta }{g_m}\left(1\frac{\delta }{g_m}\right)\right]|u_{g_m}|^2J_m^2(g_xu_{0x}),$$
(27)
where

$$g_mmk_z+g_x\psi ,\psi =\alpha \theta ,$$
(28)
and summation goes over the values $`m`$ and $`n_1`$ satisfying the condition

$$\left|n_1\psi ma_1/\lambda _s\right|\frac{m_e^2a_1}{4\pi E_+(1E_+/\omega )}.$$
(29)
In this case the most favorable conditions to have an influence on the pair creation cross-section due to external fields are $`𝐮_0𝐚_1`$ (to have large values for $`m`$) and $`𝐤_s𝐚_3`$ (to have large values for $`mk_z`$). We have numerically evaluated the pair creation cross-section by making use of formula (27) for various values of parameters $`\psi `$, $`u_0`$, $`\lambda _s`$. The corresponding results show that, in dependence of these parameters, the external excitation can either enhance or reduce the cross-section. As an illustration in fig. 1 we have depicted the quantity $`(m_e^2\omega /Z^2e^6)d\sigma _c/dE_+`$ as a function of $`E_+/\omega `$ in the case of cubic lattice ($`a_1=a_2=a_3`$) and exponential screening of the atomic potential for $`u_0=0`$ (dashed curves (a)), $`2\pi u_0/a_1=4`$ (curves (b)), $`2\pi u_0/a_1=8`$ (curves (c)) and for $`\psi =0.0005`$ (left), $`\psi =0.0035`$ (right). The values for the other parameters are as follows: $`\omega =100`$ GeV, $`a_1/\lambda _s=510^4`$, $`a_1/2\pi R=1`$. As the cross-section is symmetric under the replacement $`E_+/\omega 1E_+/\omega `$ we have plotted the graphs for the region $`0E_+/\omega 0.5`$ only. In fig. 2 we have presented the cross section evaluated by Eq. (27) as a function of $`2\pi u_0/a_1`$ for the positron energy corresponding to $`E_+/\omega =0.4`$ and for $`\psi =0.0005`$ (full curve), $`\psi =0.0035`$ (dashed curve). The values for the other parameters are the same as in fig. 1.

## 4 Conclusion

In this paper we have investigated the electron-positron coherent pair creation by high-energy photons in a single crystal in the presence of a hypersonic wave. If the displacements of the atoms in the crystal under the influence of hypersound have the form (4), the coherent part of the corresponding cross-section per single atom, averaged on thermal fluctuations, is given by formula (2). To compared with the cross-section in an undeformed crystal this formula contains an additional summation over the reciprocal lattice vector $`m𝐤_s`$ of the one dimensional superlattice induced by the hypersonic wave. The contribution for a given $`m`$ is weighted by $`J_m^2(𝐠_m𝐮_0)`$, where the vector $`𝐠_m`$ is defined as in Eq. (2). We have substantiated that the influence of the hypersound on the cross-section can be remarkable under the condition (20). Note that for $`u_0a`$ this condition is less restrictive than the naively expected one $`l_c\lambda _s`$. In section 3 we have considered the most interesting case when the photon enters into the crystal at small angle with respect to a crystallographic axis (axis $`z`$ in our consideration). The main contribution into the coherent part of the cross-section comes from the crystallographic planes, parallel to the chosen axis. The behaviour of this cross-section as a function on the positron energy essentially depends on the angle between the projection of the photon momentum on the plane $`(x,y)`$ and a crystallographic plane. The corresponding numerical evaluations show that the presence of the hypersonic wave can either enhance or reduce the cross-section. This can be used to control the parameters of the positron sources for storage rings and colliders. Note that for the positron sources based on the channeling radiation the hypersound can also substantially influence on the corresponding intensity of the radiated photons (see Refs. ).

## Acknowledgment

The work has been supported by Grant no. 1361 from Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Armenia.