text:
# ABSORPTION PROBLEMS FOR QUANTUM WALKS IN ONE DIMENSION

## 1 Introduction

In this paper we consider absorption problems for quantum walks located on the sets $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},N\}`$ or $`\{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$. Before we move to a quantum case, first we describe the classical random walk on a finite set $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},N\}`$ with two absorbing barriers at locations $`0`$ and $`N`$ (see Grimmett and Stirzaker (1992), Durrett (1999), for examples). The particle moves at each step either one unit to the left with probability $`p`$ or one unit to the right with probability $`q=1p`$ until it hits one of the absorbing barriers. The directions of different steps are independent of each other. The classical random walk starting from $`k\{0,1,\mathrm{},N\}`$ at time $`n`$ is denoted by $`S_n^k`$ here. Let

$$T_m=\mathrm{min}\{n0:S_n^k=m\}$$

be the time of the first visit to $`m\{0,1,\mathrm{},N\}`$. Using the subscript $`k`$ to indicate $`S_0^k=k`$, we let

$$P_k^{(N)}=P_k(T_0<T_N)$$

be the probability that the particle hits $`0`$ starting from $`k`$ before it arrives at $`N`$. The absorption problem is well known as the Gambler’s ruin problem.

Recently, in quantum walks, various problems including absorption have been widely investigated by a number of groups in connection with quantum computing. Examples include Aharonov et al. (2001), Ambainis et al. (2001), Bach et al. (2002), Childs, Farhi and Gutmann (2002), Dür et al. (2002), Kempe (2002), Konno, Namiki and Soshi (2002), Konno (2002a, 2002b), Mackay et al. (2002), Moore and Russell (2001), Travaglione and Milburn (2002), Yamasaki, Kobayashi and Imai (2002). For a more general setting including quantum cellular automata, see Meyer (1996). A more mathematical point of view can be found in Brylinsky and Chen (2002).

The study of absorption problems in the classical case is important in many fields including physics, biology, and computer science. The behavior of quantum walks differs from that of classical random walks in several striking ways. Let $`X_n^\phi `$ be the quantum walk on a line with no absorbing boundaries at time $`n`$ starting from initial qubit state $`\phi `$. In the symmetric classical case the distribution of the scaled position $`S_n^0/\sqrt{n}`$ converges to $`N(0,1)`$, the standard normal, as $`(n\mathrm{})`$. However, a differently rescaled quantum walk $`X_n^\phi /n`$ converges to a random variable $`Z^\phi `$ where $`Z^\phi `$ has a density $`1/\pi (1x^2)\sqrt{12x^2}`$ for $`x(\sqrt{2}/2,\sqrt{2}/2)`$ (see Konno (2002a, 2002b)). As a corollary, it is shown that, whereas the standard deviation $`\sigma _n`$ at time $`n`$ in the classical case is $`\sqrt{n}`$, in the quantum case it $`\sqrt{(2\sqrt{2})}\times n(0.5412\times n)`$ for large $`n`$. It is hoped that quantum walks may have many new applications as in the classical case. The main interest of our paper is in studying quantum walks with one or two absorbing boundaries.

This paper is organized as follows. The quantum walk considered here is determined by a $`2\times 2`$ unitary matrix $`U`$. In Section 2, we give a definition of the quantum walk and introduce a new path integral approach based on an orthonormal basis $`P,Q,R,`$ and $`S`$ of the vector space of complex $`2\times 2`$ matrices which is called the PQRS method here. Section 3 provides some known results on absorption problems for classical and quantum cases. Section 4 is devoted to our new results. We summarize this paper in Section 5, which mentions a direction for further study.

## 2 Definition and PQRS Method

The time evolution of the one-dimensional quantum walk studied here is given by the following unitary matrix (see Nielsen and Chuang (2000), Brylinsky and Chen (2002), for examples):

$`U=\left[\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right]`$
where $`a,b,c,d𝐂`$ and $`𝐂`$ is the set of complex numbers. So we have

$`|a|^2+|b|^2=|c|^2+|d|^2=1,a\overline{c}+b\overline{d}=0,`$
$`c=\mathrm{}\overline{b},d=\mathrm{}\overline{a}`$
where $`\overline{z}`$ is a complex conjugate of $`z𝐂`$ and $`\mathrm{}=detU=adbc.`$ We should note that the unitarity of $`U`$ gives $`|\mathrm{}|=1.`$

The quantum walk is a quantum generalization of the classical random walk with an additional degree of freedom called the chirality. The chirality takes values left and right, and means the direction of the motion of the particle. The evolution of the quantum walk is given by the following way. At each time step, if the particle has the left chirality, it moves one unit to the left, and if it has the right chirality, it moves one unit to the right.

The unitary matrix $`U`$ acts on two chirality states $`|L`$ and $`|R`$:

$`|La|L+c|R`$
$`|Rb|L+d|R`$
where $`L`$ and $`R`$ refer to the right and left chirality state respectively. In fact, define

$`|L=\left[\begin{array}{cc}1& \\ 0& \end{array}\right],|R=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& \\ 1& \end{array}\right]`$
so we have

$`U|L=a|L+c|R`$
$`U|R=b|L+d|R`$
More precisely, at any time $`n`$, the amplitude of the location of the particle is defined by a 2-vector $`𝐂^2`$ at each location $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},N\}`$. The probability the particle is at location $`j`$ is given by the square of the modulus of the vector at $`j`$. If $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_j(n)`$ define the amplitude at time $`n`$ at location $`j`$ where

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }_j(n)=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\psi _j^L(n)& \\ \psi _j^R(n)& \end{array}\right]`$
with the chirality being left (upper component) or right (lower component), then the dynamics for $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_j(n)`$ in quantum walks is given by the following transformation:

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }_j(n+1)=|LL|U|\mathrm{\Psi }_{j+1}(n)+|RR|U|\mathrm{\Psi }_{j1}(n)`$
The above equation can be rewritten as

(2.4) $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_j(n+1)=P|\mathrm{\Psi }_{j+1}(n)+Q|\mathrm{\Psi }_{j1}(n)`$
where

$`P=\left[\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right],Q=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ c& d\end{array}\right]`$
We see $`U=P+Q.`$ The unitarity of $`U`$ ensures that the amplitude always defines a probability distribution for the location.

The simplest and well-studied example of a quantum walk is the Hadamard walk whose unitary matrix $`U`$ is defined by

$`H={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left[\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right]`$
The dynamics of this walk corresponds to that of the symmetric random walk in the classical case. In general, the following unitary matrices can also lead to symmetric walks:

$`U_{\eta ,\varphi ,\psi }={\displaystyle \frac{e^{i\eta }}{\sqrt{2}}}\left[\begin{array}{cc}e^{i(\varphi +\psi )}& e^{i(\varphi \psi )}\\ e^{i(\varphi \psi )}& e^{i(\varphi +\psi )}\end{array}\right]`$
where $`\eta ,\varphi ,`$ and $`\psi `$ are real numbers (see pp.175-176 in Nielsen and Chuang (2000), for example). In particular, we see $`U_{0,0,0}=H`$.

However symmetry of the Hadamard walk depends heavily on the initial qubit state, see Konno, Namiki and Soshi (2002). Another extension of the Hadamard walk is:

$`H(\rho )=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\sqrt{\rho }& \sqrt{1\rho }\\ \sqrt{1\rho }& \sqrt{\rho }\end{array}\right]`$
where $`0\rho 1`$. Note that $`\rho =1/2`$ is the Hadamard walk, that is, $`H=H(1/2)`$.

In the present paper, the study on the dependence of some important quantities (e.g., absorption probability) on initial qubit state is one of the essential parts, so we define the collection of initial qubit states as follows:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\{\phi =\left[\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & \\ \beta & \end{array}\right]𝐂^2:|\alpha |^2+|\beta |^2=1\}$$

Let $`X_n^\phi `$ be the quantum walk at time $`n`$ starting from initial qubit state $`\phi \mathrm{\Phi }`$ with $`X_0^\phi =0.`$ In contrast with classical random walks, $`X_n^\phi `$ can not be written as $`X_n^\phi =Y_1+\mathrm{}+Y_n`$ where $`Y_1,Y_2,\mathrm{}`$ are independent and identically distributed random variables. In our treatment of quantum walks, as well as the matrices $`P`$ and $`Q`$, it is convenient to introduce

$$R=\left[\begin{array}{cc}c& d\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right],S=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ a& b\end{array}\right]$$

We should remark that $`P,Q,R,`$ and $`S`$ form an orthonormal basis of the vector space of complex $`2\times 2`$ matrices $`M_2(𝐂)`$ with respect to the trace inner product $`A|B=`$ tr $`(A^{}B)`$. Therefore we can express any $`2\times 2`$ matrix $`A`$ conveniently in the form,

(2.9) $`A=\text{tr}(P^{}A)P+\text{tr}(Q^{}A)Q+\text{tr}(R^{}A)R+\text{tr}(S^{}A)S`$
We call the analysis based on $`P,Q,R,`$ and $`S`$ the PQRS method.

The $`n\times n`$ unit and zero matrices are written $`I_n`$ and $`O_n`$ respectively. For instance, if $`A=I_2`$, then

(2.10) $`I_2=\overline{a}P+\overline{d}Q+\overline{c}R+\overline{b}S`$
The next table of products of $`P,Q,R,`$ and $`S`$ is very useful in computing some quantities:

|  | $`P`$ | $`Q`$ | $`R`$ | $`S`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`P`$ | $`aP`$ | $`bR`$ | $`aR`$ | $`bP`$ |
| $`Q`$ | $`cS`$ | $`dQ`$ | $`cQ`$ | $`dS`$ |
| $`R`$ | $`cP`$ | $`dR`$ | $`cR`$ | $`dP`$ |
| $`S`$ | $`aS`$ | $`bQ`$ | $`aQ`$ | $`bS`$ |

where $`PQ=bR`$, for example.

Now we describe the evolution and measurement of quantum walks starting from location $`k`$ on $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},N\}`$ with absorbing boundaries (see Ambainis et al. (2001), Bach et al. (2002), and Kempe (2002) for more detailed information, for examples).

First we consider $`N=\mathrm{}`$ case. In this case, an absorbing boundary is present at location 0. The evolution mechanism is described as follows:

Step 1. Initialize the system $`\phi \mathrm{\Phi }`$ at location $`k`$.

Step 2. (a) Apply Eq. (2.1) to one step time evolution. (b) Measure the system to see where it is or is not at location 0.

Step 3. If the result of measurement revealed that the system was at location 0, then terminate the process, otherwise repeat step 2.

In this setting, let $`\mathrm{\Xi }_k^{(\mathrm{})}(n)`$ be the sum over possible paths for which the particle first hits 0 at time $`n`$ starting from $`k`$. For example,

(2.11) $`\mathrm{\Xi }_1^{(\mathrm{})}(5)=P^2QPQ+P^3Q^2=(ab^2c+a^2bd)R`$
The probability that the particle first hits 0 at time $`n`$ starting from $`k`$ is

(2.12) $`P_k^{(\mathrm{})}(n;\phi )=|\mathrm{\Xi }_k^{(\mathrm{})}(n)\phi |^2`$
So the probability that the particle first hits 0 starting from $`k`$ is

$`P_k^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )={\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}P_k^{(\mathrm{})}(n;\phi )`$
Next we consider $`N<\mathrm{}`$ case. This case is similar to the $`N=\mathrm{}`$ case, except that two absorbing boundaries are presented at locations 0 and $`N`$ as follows:

Step 1. Initialize the system $`\phi \mathrm{\Phi }`$ at location $`k`$.

Step 2. (a) Apply Eq. (2.1) to one step time evolution. (b) Measure the system to see where it is or is not at location 0. (c) Measure the system to see where it is or is not at location $`N`$.

Step 3. If the result of either measurement revealed that the system was either at location 0 or location $`N`$, then terminate the process, otherwise repeat step 2.

Let $`\mathrm{\Xi }_k^{(N)}(n)`$ be the sum over possible paths for which the particle first hits 0 at time $`n`$ starting from $`k`$ before it arrives at $`N`$. For example,

$`\mathrm{\Xi }_1^{(N)}(5)=P^2QPQ=ab^2cR`$
In a similar way, we can define $`P_k^{(N)}(n;\phi )`$ and $`P_k^{(N)}(\phi )`$.

## 3 Facts for the Classical and Quantum Cases

In this section we review some results and conjectures on absorption problems related to this paper for both classical and quantum walks in one dimension.

First we review the classical case. As we described in the Introduction, $`P_k^{(N)}=P_k(T_0<T_N)`$ denotes the probability that the particle hits $`0`$ starting from $`k`$ before it arrives at $`N`$. We may use conditional probabilities to see that $`P_k^{(N)}`$ satisfies the following difference equation:

(3.13) $`P_k^{(N)}=pP_{k1}^{(N)}+qP_{k+1}^{(N)}(1kN1)`$
with boundary conditions:

(3.14) $`P_0^{(N)}=1,P_N^{(N)}=0`$
The solution of such a difference equation is given by

(3.15) $`P_k^{(N)}=1{\displaystyle \frac{k}{N}}\text{if}p=1/2`$
(3.16) $`P_k^{(N)}={\displaystyle \frac{(p/q)^k(p/q)^N}{1(p/q)^N}}\text{if}p1/2`$
for any $`0kN`$. Therefore , when $`N=\mathrm{}`$, we see that

(3.17) $`P_k^{(\mathrm{})}=1\text{if}1/2p1`$
(3.18) $`P_k^{(\mathrm{})}=(p/q)^k\text{if}0p<1/2`$
Furthermore,

(3.19) $`\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}P_k^{(\mathrm{})}=1\text{if}1/2p1`$
(3.20) $`\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}P_k^{(\mathrm{})}=0\text{if}0p<1/2`$
Let $`T_0`$ be the first hitting time to 0. We consider the conditional expectation of $`T_0`$ starting from $`k=1`$ given the event $`\{T_0<\mathrm{}\}`$, that is, $`E_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0|T_0<\mathrm{})=E_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0;T_0<\mathrm{})/P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0<\mathrm{})=E_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0;T_0<\mathrm{})/P_1^{(\mathrm{})}`$

$`E_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0|T_0<\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \frac{2p}{\sqrt{14pq}}}1\text{if}1/2<p1`$
$`E_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0|T_0<\mathrm{})=\mathrm{}\text{if}p=1/2`$
$`E_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0|T_0<\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \frac{2q}{\sqrt{14pq}}}1\text{if}0p<1/2`$
Next we review the quantum case. In the case of $`U=H`$ (the Hadamard walk), when $`N=\mathrm{}`$, that is, when the state space is $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},\}`$ case, Ambainis et al. (2001) proved

(3.21) $`P_1^{(\mathrm{})}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])=P_1^{(\mathrm{})}({}_{}{}^{t}[1,0])={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}`$
and Bach et al. (2002) showed

$`\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}P_k^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )=\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)|\alpha |^2+\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)|\beta |^2+2\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)\mathrm{}(\overline{\alpha }\beta )`$
for any initial qubit state $`\phi ={}_{}{}^{t}[\alpha ,\beta ]\mathrm{\Phi }.`$ Furthermore, in the case of $`U=H(\rho )`$, Bach et al. (2002) gave

$`\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}P_k^{(\mathrm{})}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])={\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{1\rho }}({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}^1(12\rho )}{\pi }}1)+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi \sqrt{1/\rho 1}}}`$
$`\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}P_k^{(\mathrm{})}({}_{}{}^{t}[1,0])={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}^1(12\rho )}{\pi }}`$
The second result was conjectured by Yamasaki, Kobayashi and Imai (2002).

When $`N`$ is finite the following conjecture by Ambainis et al. (2001) is still open for the $`U=H`$ case:

$`P_1^{(N+1)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])={\displaystyle \frac{2P_1^{(N)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])+1}{2P_1^{(N)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])+2}}(N1),P_1^{(1)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])=0.`$
Solving the above recurrence gives

(3.22) $`P_1^{(N)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\times {\displaystyle \frac{(3+2\sqrt{2})^{N1}1}{(3+2\sqrt{2})^{N1}+1}}(N1)`$
However in contrast with $`P_1^{(\mathrm{})}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])=2/\pi `$, Ambainis et al. (2001) proved

$$\underset{N\mathrm{}}{lim}P_1^{(N)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])=1/\sqrt{2}$$

It should be noted that $`P_k^{(\mathrm{})}=lim_N\mathrm{}P_k^{(N)}`$ for any $`0kN`$ in the classical case (see Eqs. (3.8) - (3.11)).

We are not aware of results concerning $`E_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0|T_0<\mathrm{})`$ having been published, however we will give such a result in the next section.

## 4 Our Results

In the first half of this section, we consider a general setting including a hitting time to $`N`$ before it arrives at $`0`$ or a hitting time to $`0`$ before it arrives at $`N`$, when $`N`$ is finite. In the case of $`N=\mathrm{}`$, a similar argument holds, so we will omit it here.

Noting that $`\{P,Q,R,S\}`$ is a basis of $`M_2(𝐂)`$, $`\mathrm{\Xi }_k^{(N)}(n)`$ can be written as

$`\mathrm{\Xi }_k^{(N)}(n)=p_k^{(N)}(n)P+q_k^{(N)}(n)Q+r_k^{(N)}(n)R+s_k^{(N)}(n)S`$
Therefore Eq. (2.5) implies

$`P_k^{(N)}(n;\phi )=|\mathrm{\Xi }_k^{(N)}(n)\phi |^2=C_1(n)|\alpha |^2+C_2(n)|\beta |^2+2\mathrm{}(C_3(n)\overline{\alpha }\beta )`$
where $`\mathrm{}(z)`$ is the real part of $`z𝐂`$, $`\phi ={}_{}{}^{t}[\alpha ,\beta ]\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and

$`C_1(n)=|ap_k^{(N)}(n)+cr_k^{(N)}(n)|^2+|as_k^{(N)}(n)+cq_k^{(N)}(n)|^2`$
$`C_2(n)=|bp_k^{(N)}(n)+dr_k^{(N)}(n)|^2+|bs_k^{(N)}(n)+dq_k^{(N)}(n)|^2`$
$`C_3(n)=\overline{(ap_k^{(N)}(n)+cr_k^{(N)}(n))}(bp_k^{(N)}(n)+dr_k^{(N)}(n))`$
$`+\overline{(as_k^{(N)}(n)+cq_k^{(N)}(n))}(bs_k^{(N)}(n)+dq_k^{(N)}(n))`$
From now on we assume $`N3`$. Noting that the definition of $`\mathrm{\Xi }_k^{(N)}(n)`$, we see that for $`1kN1`$,

$`\mathrm{\Xi }_k^{(N)}(n)=\mathrm{\Xi }_{k1}^{(N)}(n1)P+\mathrm{\Xi }_{k+1}^{(N)}(n1)Q`$
The above equation is a quantum version of the difference equation, i.e., Eq. (3.6) for the classical random walk. As an example, see Eq. (2.4). Then we have

$`p_k^{(N)}(n)=ap_{k1}^{(N)}(n1)+cr_{k1}^{(N)}(n1)`$
$`q_k^{(N)}(n)=dq_{k+1}^{(N)}(n1)+bs_{k+1}^{(N)}(n1)`$
$`r_k^{(N)}(n)=bp_{k+1}^{(N)}(n1)+dr_{k+1}^{(N)}(n1)`$
$`s_k^{(N)}(n)=cq_{k1}^{(N)}(n1)+as_{k1}^{(N)}(n1)`$
Next we consider boundary condition related to Eq. (3.7) in the classical case. When $`k=N`$,

$$P_N^{(N)}(0;\phi )=|\mathrm{\Xi }_N^{(N)}(0)\phi |^2=0$$

for any $`\phi \mathrm{\Phi }`$. So we take $`\mathrm{\Xi }_N^{(N)}(0)=O_2`$, i.e.,

$$p_N^{(N)}(0)=q_N^{(N)}(0)=r_N^{(N)}(0)=s_N^{(N)}(0)=0$$

If $`k=0`$, then

$$P_0^{(N)}(0;\phi )=|\mathrm{\Xi }_0^{(N)}(0)\phi |^2=1$$

for any $`\phi \mathrm{\Phi }`$. So we choose $`\mathrm{\Xi }_N^{(N)}(0)=I_2`$. From Eq. (2.3), we have

$$p_0^{(N)}(0)=\overline{a},q_0^{(N)}(0)=\overline{d},r_0^{(N)}(0)=\overline{c},s_0^{(N)}(0)=\overline{b}$$

Let

$`v_k^{(N)}(n)=\left[\begin{array}{cc}p_k^{(N)}(n)& \\ r_k^{(N)}(n)& \end{array}\right],w_k^{(N)}(n)=\left[\begin{array}{cc}q_k^{(N)}(n)& \\ s_k^{(N)}(n)& \end{array}\right]`$
Then we see that for $`n1`$ and $`1kN1`$,

(4.28) $`v_k^{(N)}(n)=\left[\begin{array}{cc}a& c\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right]v_{k1}^{(N)}(n1)+\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ b& d\end{array}\right]v_{k+1}^{(N)}(n1)`$
(4.33) $`w_k^{(N)}(n)=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ c& a\end{array}\right]w_{k1}^{(N)}(n1)+\left[\begin{array}{cc}d& b\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right]w_{k+1}^{(N)}(n1)`$
and for $`1kN`$,

$`v_0^{(N)}(0)=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\overline{a}& \\ \overline{c}& \end{array}\right],v_k^{(N)}(0)=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& \\ 0& \end{array}\right]`$
$`w_0^{(N)}(0)=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\overline{d}& \\ \overline{b}& \end{array}\right],w_k^{(N)}(0)=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& \\ 0& \end{array}\right]`$
Moreover,

$`v_0^{(N)}(n)=v_N^{(N)}(n)=w_0^{(N)}(n)=w_N^{(N)}(n)=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& \\ 0& \end{array}\right](n1)`$
From now on we focus on $`1kN1`$ case. So we consider only $`n1`$ case. Moreover from the definition of $`\mathrm{\Xi }_k^{(N)}(n)`$, it is easily shown that there exist only two types of paths, that is, $`P\mathrm{}P`$ and $`P\mathrm{}Q`$. Therefore we see that $`q_k^{(N)}(n)=s_k^{(N)}(n)=0(n1)`$. So we have

###### LEMMA 1

$`P_k^{(N)}(\phi )={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}P_k^{(N)}(n;\phi )`$
$`P_k^{(N)}(n;\phi )=C_1(n)|\alpha |^2+C_2(n)|\beta |^2+2\mathrm{}(C_3(n)\overline{\alpha }\beta )`$
where $`\phi ={}_{}{}^{t}[\alpha ,\beta ]\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and

$`C_1(n)=|ap_k^{(N)}(n)+cr_k^{(N)}(n)|^2`$
$`C_2(n)=|bp_k^{(N)}(n)+dr_k^{(N)}(n)|^2`$
$`C_3(n)=\overline{(ap_k^{(N)}(n)+cr_k^{(N)}(n))}(bp_k^{(N)}(n)+dr_k^{(N)}(n))`$
To solve $`P_k^{(N)}(\phi )`$, we introduce generating functions of $`p_k^{(N)}(n)`$ and $`r_k^{(N)}(n)`$ as follows:

$`p_k^{(N)}(z)={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}p_k^{(N)}(n)z^n`$
$`r_k^{(N)}(z)={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}r_k^{(N)}(n)z^n`$
By Eq. (4.16), we have

$`p_k^{(N)}(z)=azp_{k1}^{(N)}(z)+czr_{k1}^{(N)}(z)`$
$`r_k^{(N)}(z)=bzp_{k+1}^{(N)}(z)+dzr_{k+1}^{(N)}(z)`$
Solving these, we see that both $`p_k^{(N)}(z)`$ and $`r_k^{(N)}(z)`$ satisfy the same recurrence:

$`dp_{k+2}^{(N)}(z)\left(\mathrm{}z+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z}}\right)p_{k+1}^{(N)}(z)+ap_k^{(N)}(z)=0`$
$`dr_{k+2}^{(N)}(z)\left(\mathrm{}z+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z}}\right)r_{k+1}^{(N)}(z)+ar_k^{(N)}(z)=0`$
From the characteristic equations with respect to the above recurrences, we have the same roots: if $`a0`$, then

$`\lambda _\pm ={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}z^2+1\sqrt{\mathrm{}^2z^4+2\mathrm{}(12|a|^2)z^2+1}}{2\mathrm{}\overline{a}z}}`$
where $`\mathrm{}=detU=adbc`$.

From now on we consider mainly $`U=H`$ (the Hadamard walk) case with $`N=\mathrm{}`$. Remark that the definition of $`\mathrm{\Xi }_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n)`$ gives $`p_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n)=0(n2)`$ and $`p_1^{(\mathrm{})}(1)=1`$. So we have $`p_1^{(\mathrm{})}(z)=z`$. Moreover noting $`lim_k\mathrm{}p_k^{(\mathrm{})}(z)<\mathrm{}`$, the following explicit form is obtained:

$`p_k^{(\mathrm{})}(z)=z\lambda _+^{k1}`$
$`r_k^{(\mathrm{})}(z)={\displaystyle \frac{1+\sqrt{z^4+1}}{z}}\lambda _+^{k1}`$
where

$`\lambda _\pm ={\displaystyle \frac{z^21\pm \sqrt{z^4+1}}{\sqrt{2}z}}.`$
Therefore for $`k=1`$,

$`r_1^{(\mathrm{})}(z)={\displaystyle \frac{1+\sqrt{z^4+1}}{z}}`$
From the above equation and the definition of the hypergeometric series $`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;c;z)`$, we have

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(r_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n))^2z^n=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\begin{array}{c}1/2\\ n\end{array}\right)^2z^{4n1}=\frac{{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(1/2,1/2;1;z^4)1}{z}$$

On the other hand, it should be noted that

$${}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;c;1)=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(c)\mathrm{\Gamma }(cab)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(ca)\mathrm{\Gamma }(cb)}(\mathrm{}(a+bc)<0)$$

where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)`$ is the gamma function defined by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)=_0^{\mathrm{}}e^tt^{z1}𝑑t(\mathrm{}(z)>0)$$

Therefore

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(r_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n))^2={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(3/2)^2}}1={\displaystyle \frac{4}{\pi }}1`$
since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(1)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(2)=1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(3/2)=\sqrt{\pi }/2.`$ By Lemma 1

$`P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{(p_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n))^2+(r_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n))^2\}`$
$`+p_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n)r_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n)(|\alpha |^2|\beta |^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{(p_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n))^2(r_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n))^2\}(\alpha \overline{\beta }+\overline{\alpha }\beta )]`$
Note that $`p_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n)r_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n)=0(n1)`$, since $`p_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n)=0(n2),p_1^{(\mathrm{})}(1)=1`$ and $`r_1^{(\mathrm{})}(1)=0`$. So we have

(4.37) $`P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}+2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}\right)\mathrm{}(\overline{\alpha }\beta )`$
for any initial qubit state $`\phi ={}_{}{}^{t}[\alpha ,\beta ]\mathrm{\Phi }`$. This result is a generalization of Eq. (3.14) given by Ambainis et al. (2001). From Eq. (4.18), we get the range of $`P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )`$:

$$\frac{4\pi }{\pi }P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )1$$

the equality holds in the following cases:

$$P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )=1\text{ iff }\phi =\frac{e^{i\theta }}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\ 1\end{array}\right]\text{ and }P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )=\frac{4\pi }{\pi }\text{ iff }\phi =\frac{e^{i\theta }}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\ 1\end{array}\right]$$

where $`0\theta <2\pi .`$

Moreover we consider the conditional expectation of the first hitting time to 0 starting from $`k=1`$ given an event $`\{T_0<\mathrm{}\}`$, that is, $`E_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0|T_0<\mathrm{})=E_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0;T_0<\mathrm{})/P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0<\mathrm{})`$. Let

$$f(z)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(r_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n))^2z^n\left(=\frac{{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(1/2,1/2;1;z^4)1}{z}\right)$$

In this case we have to know the value of $`f^{}(1)`$. It should be noted that

$$\frac{d}{dz}\left({}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;c;g(z))\right)=\left(\frac{ab}{c}\right){}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a+1,b+1;c+1;g(z))g^{}(z)$$

The above formula gives

$$f^{}(z)=\frac{z^4{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(1/2,1/2;2;z^4){}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(1/2,1/2;1;z^4)+1}{z^2}$$

Moreover noting

$${}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(1/2,1/2;1;1)={}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(1/2,1/2;2;1)=\frac{4}{\pi }$$

we have $`f^{}(1)=1`$. Therefore the desired conclusion is obtained:

$$E_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0|T_0<\mathrm{})=\frac{\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}nP_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0=n)}{_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0=n)}=\frac{1}{P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )}$$

since

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}nP_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0=n)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}n\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left\{(p_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n))^2+(r_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n))^2\right\}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left\{(p_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n))^2(r_1^{(\mathrm{})}(n))^2\right\}(\alpha \overline{\beta }+\overline{\alpha }\beta )\right]`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{1+f^{}(1)\}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{1f^{}(1)\}(\alpha \overline{\beta }+\overline{\alpha }\beta )=1`$
In a similar way we see that $`f^{\prime \prime }(1)=\mathrm{}`$ implies

$$E_1^{(\mathrm{})}((T_0)^2|T_0<\mathrm{})=\mathrm{}$$

so the $`m`$th moment $`E_1^{(\mathrm{})}((T_0)^m|T_0<\mathrm{})`$ diverges for $`m2.`$

Next we consider the finite $`N`$ case. Then $`p_k^{(N)}(z)`$ and $`r_k^{(N)}(z)`$ satisfy

$`p_k^{(N)}(z)=A_z\lambda _+^{k1}+B_z\lambda _{}^{k1}`$
$`r_k^{(N)}(z)=C_z\lambda _+^{kN+1}+D_z\lambda _{}^{kN+1}`$
since $`\lambda _+\lambda _{}=1`$. All we have to do is to determine the coefficients $`A_z,B_z,C_z,D_z`$ by using boundary conditions: $`p_1^{(N)}(z)=z`$ and $`r_{N1}^{(N)}(z)=0`$ come from the definition of $`\mathrm{\Xi }_k^{(N)}(n)`$. The boundary conditions imply $`C_z+D_z=0`$ and $`A_z+B_z=z`$, so we see

(4.38) $`p_k^{(N)}(z)=\left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{2}}+E_z\right)\lambda _+^{k1}+\left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{2}}E_z\right)\lambda _{}^{k1}`$
(4.39) $`r_k^{(N)}(z)=C_z(\lambda _+^{kN+1}\lambda _{}^{kN+1})`$
where $`E_z=A_zz/2=z/2B_z`$. To obtain $`E_z`$ and $`C_z`$, we use $`r_1^{(N)}(z)=(p_2^{(N)}(z)r_2^{(N)}(z))z/\sqrt{2}`$ and $`r_{N2}^{(N)}(z)=(p_{N1}^{(N)}(z)r_{N1}^{(N)}(z))z/\sqrt{2}=p_{N1}^{(N)}(z)z/\sqrt{2}`$. Therefore

$`C_z(\lambda _+\lambda _{})={\displaystyle \frac{z}{\sqrt{2}}}\left\{\left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{2}}+E_z\right)\lambda _+^{N2}+\left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{2}}E_z\right)\lambda _{}^{N2}\right\}`$
$`C_z(\lambda _+^{N2}\lambda _{}^{N2})={\displaystyle \frac{z}{\sqrt{2}}}\left\{\left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{2}}+E_z\right)(1)^{N1}\lambda _++\left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{2}}E_z\right)(1)^{N1}\lambda _{}+C_z(\lambda _+^{N3}\lambda _{}^{N3})\right\}`$
Solving the above equations gives

(4.40) $`C_z={\displaystyle \frac{z^2}{\sqrt{2}}}(1)^{N2}(\lambda _+^{N3}\lambda _{}^{N3})`$
$`\times \left\{(\lambda _+^{N2}\lambda _{}^{N2})^2{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\sqrt{2}}}(\lambda _+^{N2}\lambda _{}^{N2})(\lambda _+^{N3}\lambda _{}^{N3})(1)^{N3}(\lambda _+\lambda _{})^2\right\}^1`$
(4.41) $`E_z={\displaystyle \frac{z}{2(\lambda _+^{N2}\lambda _{}^{N2})}}[2(1)^{N3}(\lambda _+\lambda _{})(\lambda _+^{N3}\lambda _{}^{N3})`$
$`\times \left\{(\lambda _+^{N2}\lambda _{}^{N2})^2{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\sqrt{2}}}(\lambda _+^{N2}\lambda _{}^{N2})(\lambda _+^{N3}\lambda _{}^{N3})(1)^{N3}(\lambda _+\lambda _{})^2\right\}^1`$
$`+(\lambda _+^{N2}+\lambda _{}^{N2})]`$
By Lemma 1, we obtain

###### THEOREM 2

$`P_k^{(N)}(\phi )=C_1|\alpha |^2+C_2|\beta |^2+2\mathrm{}(C_3\overline{\alpha }\beta )`$
where $`\phi ={}_{}{}^{t}[\alpha ,\beta ]\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and

$`C_1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}|ap_k^{(N)}(e^{i\theta })+cr_k^{(N)}(e^{i\theta })|^2𝑑\theta `$
$`C_2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}|bp_k^{(N)}(e^{i\theta })+dr_k^{(N)}(e^{i\theta })|^2𝑑\theta `$
$`C_3={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}\overline{(ap_k^{(N)}(e^{i\theta })+cr_k^{(N)}(e^{i\theta }))}(bp_k^{(N)}(e^{i\theta })+dr_k^{(N)}(e^{i\theta }))𝑑\theta `$
with $`a=b=c=d=1/\sqrt{2}`$, here $`p_k^{(N)}(z)`$ and $`r_k^{(N)}(z)`$ satisfy Eqs. (4.19) and (4.20), and $`C_z`$ and $`E_z`$ satisfy Eqs. (4.21) and (4.22).

Therefore to compute $`P_k^{(N)}(\phi )`$, we need to obtain both $`p_k^{(N)}(z)`$ and $`r_k^{(N)}(z)`$, and calculate the above $`C_i(i=1,2,3)`$ explicitely.

Here we consider $`U=H`$ (the Hadamard walk), $`\phi ={}_{}{}^{t}[\alpha ,\beta ]`$ and $`k=1`$. From Theorem 2, noting that $`p_1^{(N)}(z)=z`$ for any $`N2`$, we have

###### COROLLARY 3

For $`N2`$,

$`P_1^{(N)}(\phi )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}|r_1^{(N)}(e^{i\theta })|^2𝑑\theta \right)(1+2\mathrm{}(\overline{\alpha }\beta ))`$
where $`r_1^{(2)}(z)=0,r_1^{(3)}(z)=z^3/(2z^2),`$

$`r_1^{(4)}(z)={\displaystyle \frac{z^3(1z^2)}{22z^2+z^4}},r_1^{(5)}(z)={\displaystyle \frac{z^3(23z^2+2z^4)}{46z^2+5z^42z^6}},r_1^{(6)}(z)={\displaystyle \frac{2z^3(1z^2)(1z^2+z^4)}{48z^2+9z^46z^6+2z^8}}`$
and in general for $`N4`$

$`r_1^{(N)}(z)={\displaystyle \frac{z^2J_{N3}(z)J_{N4}(z)}{\sqrt{2}(J_{N3}(z))^2zJ_{N3}(z)J_{N4}(z)\sqrt{2}(1)^{N3}}}`$
with

$$J_n(z)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\lambda _+^k\lambda _{}^{nk},\lambda _++\lambda _{}=\sqrt{2}\left(z\frac{1}{z}\right),\lambda _+\lambda _{}=1$$

In particular, when $`\phi ={}_{}{}^{t}[0,1]=|R,k=1`$ and $`N=2,\mathrm{},6`$ cases, the above corollary gives

$`P_1^{(2)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},P_1^{(3)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}},P_1^{(4)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])={\displaystyle \frac{7}{10}},`$
$`P_1^{(5)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])={\displaystyle \frac{12}{17}},P_1^{(6)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])={\displaystyle \frac{41}{58}}`$
It is easily checked that the above values $`P_1^{(N)}({}_{}{}^{t}[0,1])(N=2,\mathrm{},6)`$ satisfy the conjecture given by Eq. (3.15).

## 5 Summary

In this paper we consider absorption problems for quantum walks on $`\{0,1,\mathrm{}N\}`$ for both $`N<\mathrm{}`$ and $`N=\mathrm{}`$ cases by using the PQRS method. Here we summarize our main results.

First we describe $`N=\mathrm{}`$ case. In this case, we have

$`P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}+2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}\right)\mathrm{}(\overline{\alpha }\beta )`$
and

$`E_1^{(\mathrm{})}(T_0|T_0<\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )}}`$
$`E_1^{(\mathrm{})}((T_0)^m|T_0<\mathrm{})=\mathrm{}(m2)`$
for any initial qubit state $`\phi ={}_{}{}^{t}[\alpha ,\beta ]\mathrm{\Phi }`$, where $`P_1^{(\mathrm{})}(\phi )`$ is the probability that the particle first hit location 0 starting from location 1 and $`E_1^{(\mathrm{})}((T_0)^m|T_0<\mathrm{})`$ is the conditional $`m`$th moment of $`T_0`$ starting from location $`1`$ given an event $`\{T_0<\mathrm{}\}`$ with $`T_0`$ is the first hitting time to location 0.

Next we describe $`N<\mathrm{}`$ case. In this case, we obtain the following explicit expression of $`P_1^{(N)}(\phi )`$:

$`P_1^{(N)}(\phi )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}|r_1^{(N)}(e^{i\theta })|^2𝑑\theta \right)(1+2\mathrm{}(\overline{\alpha }\beta ))`$
for any initial qubit state $`\phi ={}_{}{}^{t}[\alpha ,\beta ]\mathrm{\Phi }`$, where $`P_1^{(N)}(\phi )`$ is the probability that the particle first hit location 0 starting from location 1 before it arrives at location $`N`$ and $`r_1^{(N)}(z)`$ is given by Corollary 3 in the previous section.

The above our result guarantees that the conjecture presented by Ambainis et al. (see Eq. (3.15)) is true for $`N=2,\mathrm{},6`$. However, their conjecture is still open for any $`N`$. So one of the future interseting problems is to find and prove an explicit form like Eq. (3.15) for any $`N(\mathrm{}),k\{1,\mathrm{},N1\}`$, and $`\phi \mathrm{\Phi }.`$

Acknowledgments. This work is partially financed by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) (No.12440024) of Japan Society of the Promotion of Science.

Department of Applied Mathematics

Faculty of Engineering

Yokohama National University

Hodogaya-ku, Yokohama 240-8501, Japan

norio@mathlab.sci.ynu.ac.jp

Division of Mathematics

Graduate School of Science

Hokkaido University

Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-0810, Japan

nami@math.sci.hokudai.ac.jp

Department of Mathematics and Statistics

Monash University

Clayton, Victoria 3168, Australia

Aidan.Sudbury@sci.monash.edu.au


format: text

text:
# Microscopic spectral density in random matrix models for chiral and diquark condensation

## I The random matrix models

To understand the form of the correlations induced by each symmetry, it is useful to provide a brief description of the models of Refs. VanJac99 , which we will refer to as I. In the present paper we will restrict our attention to a theory with $`N_f`$ light flavors, zero temperature, zero chemical potential, and zero quark mass. We start by recalling the basic form of chiral random matrix theory, in which only chirality is introduced, and then extend the model to include color.

We consider first a chiral random matrix model and work in the sector of zero topological charge for simplicity. The partition function has the form

$`Z={\displaystyle DW\underset{i=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}D\psi _i^{}D\psi _i^{}\mathrm{exp}\left[i\underset{i=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}\psi _i^{}𝒟\psi _i\right]\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{N\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }^2}{2}\mathrm{Tr}[WW^{}]\right)},`$ (1)
where $`\psi _i^{}`$ and $`\psi _i^{}`$ are independent Grassmann variables representing the quark fields and where the matrix $`𝒟`$ represents the Dirac operator. Its block structure reflects chiral symmetry. Working in a suitable basis of left and right states $`(1\pm \gamma _5)\varphi _n`$, $`𝒟`$ has the form chiRMM

$`𝒟`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& W\\ W^{}& 0\end{array}\right),`$ (4)
where $`W`$ is an $`N\times N`$ block matrix. The integral in Eq. (1) is over the matrix elements of $`W`$, $`DW`$ is a Haar measure, and Tr denotes a trace over the $`N`$ matrix indices. The model is thus a theory of $`2N`$ low-lying modes which respect chiral symmetry and whose interaction matrix elements $`W_{ij}`$ are drawn on a Gaussian distribution. The number of modes scales with the volume of the system; the thermodynamic limit is taken as $`N\mathrm{}`$.

For later comparisons, it is useful to understand how the gauge group is taken into account. In a model which implements the global symmetries of QCD with $`N_c=3`$, the matrix elements of $`W`$ are complex. For the analysis below, it is worth noting that their real and imaginary parts satisfy no particular relationship and are thus drawn independently. This case corresponds to a Dyson index $`\beta =2`$ and is described by the chiral unitary ensemble ($`\chi `$GUE). For $`N_c=2`$, the gauge group is pseudoreal as mentioned above. The Dirac operator then contains an additional antiunitary symmetry chiRMM , which allows one to choose a basis in which the matrix elements of $`W`$ are real. This case leads to the chiral orthogonal ensemble ($`\chi `$GOE). In short, the value of $`N_c`$ enters $`\chi `$RMT only through the reality of the matrix elements of $`W`$.

In model I, we included color directly in the interactions in a way which mimics single-gluon exchange. For two flavors, the partition function takes the form

$`Z={\displaystyle DHD\psi _1^{}D\psi _1^{}D\psi _2^{}D\psi _2^T\mathrm{exp}\left[i\left(\begin{array}{c}\psi _1^{}\\ \psi _2^T\end{array}\right)^T\left(\begin{array}{cc}𝒟_c& 0\\ 0& 𝒟_c^T\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\psi _1\\ \psi _2^{}\end{array}\right)\right]},`$ (11)
where $`\psi _1`$ and $`\psi _2^T`$ denote the quark fields for flavor $`1`$ and flavor $`2`$, respectively, $`DH`$ is a measure to be defined below, and $`𝒟_c`$ is the single-quark Dirac operator. Note that the subblock associated with flavor $`2`$ has been transposed in order to exhibit the possibility of forming $`\psi _2^T\psi _1^{}`$ condensates (see I).

The diagonal block $`𝒟_c`$ now reflects both chiral and color symmetries. In order to be able to define an order parameter which is antisymmetric under the permutation of an odd number of quantum numbers, spin has to be introduced together with color VanJac99 . The Dirac operator $`𝒟_c`$ then has the chiral structure of Eq. (4) where $`W`$ is exploded into a $`2N_c\times 2N_c`$ matrix of embedded spin and color subblocks,

$`W={\displaystyle \underset{\mu =0}{\overset{3}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N_c^21}{}}}(\sigma _\mu \lambda _a)A_{\mu a}.`$ (12)
Here $`\sigma _\mu =(1,i\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$ are $`2\times 2`$ spin matrices, $`\lambda _a`$ are the $`N_c\times N_c`$ matrices of $`\mathrm{SU}(N_c)`$ and $`A_{\mu a}`$ are $`n\times n`$ real matrices representing the gluon fields. Taking into account all substructures, each matrix $`W`$ is thus $`N\times N`$ with $`N=2N_cn`$. The matrix elements of $`A_{\mu a}`$ in Eq. (12) are distributed according to the measure $`DH`$, Eq. (11), which takes the form

$`DH=\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{\mu a}{}}DA_{\mu a}\right\}\mathrm{exp}\left(N\mathrm{\Sigma }_0^2{\displaystyle \underset{\mu a}{}}\mathrm{Tr}[A_{\mu a}(A_{\mu a})^T]\right),`$ (13)
where $`DA_{\mu a}`$ are Haar measures, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ is a constant, and the superscript $`T`$ denotes a transposition. Again, the thermodynamic limit corresponds to $`N\mathrm{}`$.

Evidently, these spin and color substructures impose strong constraints between the real and imaginary parts of the matrix elements of $`W`$. Consider, for example, the contributions to $`𝒟_c`$, Eqs. (11) and (12), of the random matrices $`A_{01}`$ ($`\mu =0`$ and $`a=1`$) and $`A_{02}`$. Their matrix elements are real and are drawn independently. When combined to form $`W`$ as prescribed in Eq. (12), the matrix elements of $`A_{01}`$ multiply $`\sigma _0`$, a real diagonal spin matrix, and $`\lambda _1`$, a real color matrix. Hence, $`A_{01}`$ contributes to the real part of $`W`$ only. Similarly, the matrix elements of $`A_{02}`$ combine with $`\sigma _0`$ (real) and $`\lambda _2`$, an imaginary color matrix. They thus contribute to the imaginary part of $`W`$. Hence, in contrast to ordinary $`\chi `$RMT, the matrix elements of $`W`$ are complex for both $`N_c=3`$ and $`N_c=2`$. The real and imaginary parts of $`W`$ arise from well-defined combinations of the matrix elements of $`A_{\mu a}`$. Their statistical distributions are then dictated by the content of the spin and color block matrices, which thus introduce well-defined correlations.

Do these additional correlations preserve those imposed in Eq. (4) by chiral symmetry? The $`W`$ matrix elements are complex for all $`N_c`$; their real and imaginary parts are no longer independent random variables. One might thus be concerned that the statistical properties of the eigenvalues of the Dirac operator would differ from those of the $`\chi `$GUE and $`\chi `$GOE. We now consider a number of spectral properties to indicate that this is not the case and that the additional color symmetries do not alter the statistical properties due to chiral symmetry.

## II The macroscopic spectral density

As an initial measure of the statistical properties, we consider the spectral density $`\rho (\lambda )`$, defined as

$`\rho (\lambda )`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{2N}{}}}\delta (\lambda \lambda _i),`$ (14)
where $`\lambda _i`$ are the $`2N`$ eigenvalues of the Dirac operator and $``$ denotes an ensemble average. While $`\rho (\lambda )`$ is not universal in the usual random matrix sense, we will focus on those symmetry properties which are expected to be protected. Consider first the chiral random matrix model defined in Eq. (1). Because of the block structure of $`𝒟`$, Eq. (4), the eigenvalues $`\lambda _i`$ occur in pairs of opposite signs. Moreover, Eq. (1) shows that the spectrum is $`N_f`$-fold degenerate. Consider next model I, Eq. (11), which may seem different at first glance because of its more elaborate structure. In fact, each flavor subblock has the same chiral substructure as in Eq. (4), and the eigenvalue spectrum remains symmetric about $`\lambda =0`$. Further, the eigenvalues of $`𝒟_c^T`$, Eq. (11), are degenerate with those of $`𝒟_c`$ so that the spectrum is again twofold degenerate ($`N_f=2`$). Hence, the same basic chiral and flavor symmetries prevail in the two models.

In order to facilitate numerical evaluation, we now consider the quenched limit $`N_f0`$. This limit is free from contributions from vacuum graphs (through powers of the determinant of the Dirac operator in the partition function; see reviewchiRMM ). The ensemble average of a given quantity then amounts to a mere counting of the contributions from the individual eigenvalues of $`𝒟`$ (or $`𝒟_c`$), distributed according to the normal laws of Eq. (1) or Eq. (13), as appropriate.

For large matrices, we find that the model I is numerically consistent with the (non universal) semicircle law familiar from the $`\chi `$GUE and $`\chi `$GOE,

$`\underset{N\mathrm{}}{lim}\rho (\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{\pi }\sqrt{1\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }\lambda }{2}\right)^2}& \text{if}|\lambda |2/\mathrm{\Sigma },\\ 0& \text{otherwise}.\end{array}`$ (17)
In the case of chiral random matrix models, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is the variance of the distribution in Eq. (1). In model I, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is proportional to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$, Eq. (13), in a manner that will be discussed shortly. Note that thanks to the Banks-Casher relationship BanCas80 , $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is in all cases to be identified with the chiral order parameter:

$`\overline{\psi }\psi =\underset{\lambda 0}{lim}\underset{N\mathrm{}}{lim}\pi \rho (\lambda )=\mathrm{\Sigma }.`$ (18)
Having obtained the semicircle distribution in model I is a natural result. The random matrix interactions of Eq. (12) mix a set of $`4\times (N_c^21)`$ independent real matrices, $`A_{\mu a}`$, in a democratic way. This ensemble naturally leads to the semicircle law familiar from most elementary random ensembles, including the chiral ones.

Further remarks can be made about the dependence of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with respect to $`N_c`$. For $`\chi `$RMT, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ does not depend on $`\beta `$, and hence does not depend on $`N_c`$. In model I, however, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a function of $`N_c`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ which can be easily determined by noting the following relationship 222This can be established by considering the resolvent operator $`G(z)=\mathrm{Tr}(zD)^1`$, and by matching its asymptotic expansion at large $`z`$ to the form it assumes for the spectral density of Eq. (17). between the radius of the semicircle $`2/\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and the variance $`\mathrm{Tr}[WW^{}]`$:

$`\mathrm{Tr}[WW^{}]={\displaystyle \frac{N}{\mathrm{\Sigma }^2}}.`$ (19)
From the definition of $`W`$, Eq. (12), and the distribution in Eq. (13), we have

$`\mathrm{Tr}[WW^{}]=4{\displaystyle \underset{\mu a}{}}\mathrm{Tr}[A_{\mu a}(A_{\mu a})^T]={\displaystyle \frac{2(N_c^21)}{N_c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{N}{\mathrm{\Sigma }_0^2}},`$ (20)
which gives

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N_c}{\sqrt{2(N_c^21)}}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_0=\{\begin{array}{cc}0.75\mathrm{\Sigma }_0& \text{if}N_c=3,\\ & \\ 0.8165\mathrm{\Sigma }_0& \text{if}N_c=2.\end{array}`$ (24)
The $`N_c`$ dependence of the chiral condensate reflects the fact that the strength of the interactions in the chiral channel varies with $`N_c`$. In fact, the $`N_c`$-dependent prefactor in Eq. (20) is directly proportional to the Fierz coefficient which appears when the random matrix interactions are projected onto the chiral condensation channel (Ref. VanJac99 ).

## III The microscopic spectral density

The structures that are characteristic of chiral symmetry are most clearly seen in the distributions of the eigenvalues near zero virtuality. It is thus worth considering the microscopic spectral density, defined at the level of single eigenvalues as

$`\rho _S(z)=\underset{N\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2N\mathrm{\Sigma }}}\rho \left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{2N\mathrm{\Sigma }}}\right),`$ (25)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is the chiral order parameter of the theory at hand. The microscopic spectral densities of the various chiral ensembles are strikingly different. In the quenched limit, $`\chi `$GUE gives

$`\rho _S(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{z}{2}}(J_0^2(z)+J_1^2(z))(\chi \text{GUE},N_f=0,z>0),`$ (26)
while $`\chi `$GOE gives reviewchiRMM ; ForNag99 ; KleVer00

$`\rho _S(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{z}{2}}\left(J_1^2(z)J_0(z)J_2(z)\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}J_0(z)\left({\displaystyle _0^z}𝑑uJ_2(u)1\right)`$ (27)
$`(\chi \text{GOE},N_f=0,z>0).`$
Figures 1 and 2 show the histograms obtained in the models of Refs. VanJac99 , plotted against Eq. (26) for the model with $`N_c=3`$ and against Eq. (27) for that with $`N_c=2`$. The data were obtained from an ensemble of $`2\times 10^5`$ matrices with blocks $`W`$ of size $`120\times 120`$ (i.e., $`2nN_c=120`$). As in $`\chi `$RMT, the behavior of the small eigenvalues depends strongly on whether $`N_c=3`$ or $`N_c=2`$. In fact, the data agree with the theoretical curves for the corresponding chiral ensembles to expected statistical accuracy. The microscopic spectral density thus appears to preserve the form dictated by chiral symmetry in spite of the presence of additional color symmetries. In particular, we observe the familiar depletion near $`z=0`$ for $`N_c=3`$.

The spectrum in Fig. 2 is flatter than that for $`N_c=3`$. This is a consequence of the greater motion of the individual eigenvalues in the model with $`N_c=2`$. This difference is familiar in chiral ensembles, where it is interpreted as a consequence of the fact that the spectrum of a real matrix ($`\chi `$GOE) is less rigid than that of a complex matrix ($`\chi `$GUE). It is interesting to see that the level motion in our model with $`N_c=2`$ agrees with that expected for $`\chi `$GOE even though the matrix elements of $`W`$ are no longer real. Again, the correlations induced by chiral symmetry are maintained in spite of the additional constraints introduced by the color structure of $`W`$.

Of course, the preservation of the $`N_c=2`$ microscopic spectral density in spite of the complexity of $`W`$ should not come as a surprise. The interactions in Eq. (11) are, in fact, pseudoreal when $`N_c=2`$ VanJac01 . Thus, we could have used an appropriate basis of states such that all matrix elements have vanishing imaginary parts. The model would then have displayed a greater similarity to a $`\chi `$RMT model with $`\beta =1`$, and it would thus be natural to find a spectrum which reproduces that of $`\chi `$GOE.

## IV Other spectral properties

We have also studied short range eigenvalue correlations by examining the distribution of level spacings, $`p(s)`$. Here, $`s`$ is the nearest neighbor spacing measured in units of the local average spacing. (Hence, the average value of $`s`$ is $`1`$ by definition.) Note that $`p(s)`$ is a bulk observable which is sensitive to chiral symmetry only for small $`s`$. Figure 3 shows the relative difference between the results obtained for the model of I with $`N_c=3`$ and those of the $`\chi `$GUE. The data were obtained from a set of nine independent series of diagonalizations of 10000 matrices of size $`N\times N=120\times 120`$. To avoid side effects due to the finite range of the random matrix support, we only kept a central portion of the spectrum (30th eigenvalue to 90th). The level spacing distribution for a given model is taken as a bin-by-bin average over the nine series of runs, with error bars corresponding to the variance in each bin. The plot shows $`\delta p(s)=[p_{\chi \mathrm{GUE}}(s)p_{N_c=3}(s)]/p_{\chi \mathrm{GUE}}(s)`$, where $`p_{\chi \mathrm{GUE}}(s)`$ is the level spacing distribution for $`\chi \mathrm{GUE}`$ and $`p_{N_c=3}(s)`$ is that for model I with $`N_c=3`$. \[Note that $`p_{\chi \mathrm{GUE}}(s)=p_{\mathrm{GUE}}(s)`$.\] The level spacing difference is everywhere consistent with zero. Similar results were obtained for a comparison with $`\chi `$GOE. Thus, the level spacing distribution reveals no statistically significant differences between the models of Refs. VanJac99  and their corresponding chiral ensembles.

It is also useful to construct the variance-covariance matrix $`D`$, defined as

$$D_{ij}=(\lambda _i\overline{\lambda }_i)(\lambda _j\overline{\lambda }_j),$$
(28)
where $`\overline{\lambda }_i`$ is the mean value of eigenvalue $`i`$. Numerical studies of the models of Refs. VanJac99  indicate that all eigenvalues of $`D`$ are greater than zero. Thus, the eigenvalues of the Dirac operator do not satisfy any linear constraints. The eigenvalues of $`D`$ are related to the statistically independent fluctuations of the eigenvalues of the Dirac operator about their mean values. (This relation would be exact if the joint probability distribution for the eigenvalues of the Dirac operator were strictly Gaussian.) Numerical studies reveal good agreement with the spectrum of normal modes known analytically for the $`\chi `$GOE and $`\chi `$GUE OswSpl01 . This provides an additional indication that the inclusion of color symmetry has not altered the statistical properties of the models of Refs. VanJac99  from those of the corresponding chiral ensembles.

## V Conclusions

We have investigated a number of properties of the eigenvalue spectrum of random matrix models which include both chiral and color symmetries. We find no deviation from the analytic results of $`\chi `$RMT for either the microscopic spectral density or the level spacing distribution. Given the relatively elaborate block structure of these models, such studies are most easily performed numerically. While more complicated spectral correlators have not been investigated, we find no grounds to doubt that they will also reflect the underlying chiral structure of the problem. (It should be emphasized that this extended block structure does not lead to complicated forms for the partition function and that studies of the macroscopic properties of these models are straightforward for all $`T`$ and $`\mu `$.) The spin and color block structures of the interactions do not seem to upset spectral features associated with chiral symmetry. Rather, these additional correlations appear to act in a channel which is “orthogonal” to the chiral channel. We do not regard this result as surprising. One may think of the models of Refs. VanJac99  as schematic lattice calculations which implement single-gluon exchange between discrete quark fields. This “lattice calculation” does not possess any other length scale than that introduced by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and is, hence, free of a Thouless energy. Because chiral symmetry is respected by the interactions, the results of $`\chi `$RMT should be anticipated at all small energies. This is indeed what our numerical analysis reveals.

The inclusion of color does, of course, introduce additional correlations in the spectrum of the Dirac operator. It would be of interest to construct new spectral measures which could probe these correlations. In particular, it would be valuable to find a color analogue of the Banks-Casher relation to facilitate the determination of the strength of the diquark condensate.

## Acknowledgments

We thank J. J. M. Verbaarschot for provocative questions which initiated this work and D. Toublan and K. Splittorff for useful discussions.


text:
# Fourth Generation Pseudoscalar Quarkonium Production and Observability at Hadron Colliders

## Abstract

The pseudoscalar quarkonium state $`\eta _4(^1S_0)`$, formed by the Standard Model (SM) fourth generation quarks, is the best candidate among the fourth generation quarkonia to be produced at the LHC and VLHC. The production of this $`J^{PC}=0^+`$ resonance is discussed and the background processes are studied to obtain the integrated luminosity limits for the discovery, depending on its mass.

The number of SM generations with light neutrinos are limited by the LEP data to $`N=3.0\pm \mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0.06}`$ pdg . On the other hand, there are serious democracy arguments favoring the existence of a heavy fourth SM generation, with members having almost equal masses celikel ; atag ; datta ; sultansoy . Typical mass range considered is $`300`$ GeV to $`700`$ GeV. Within a democratic mass matrix approach, small masses for the first three neutrinos are compatible with large mixing angles, assuming that neutrinos are of the Dirac type markos . Experimental lower bounds on the fourth SM generation fermions are as follows pdg : $`92.4`$ GeV for charged lepton, $`45(39.5)`$ GeV for Dirac (Majorana) neutrino and $`199(128)`$ GeV for down quark decaying via neutral (charged) current.

Latest precision electroweak data allow the existence of a fourth SM generation with heavy Dirac neutrinos He ; okun . Moreover, two or three extra generations with relatively light neutrinos ($`m_N50`$ GeV) are also allowed okun . The fourth generation quarks will be copiously produced at the LHC arik1 ; arik2 ; atlas-tdr . In addition, extra SM generations will yield an essential enhancement in Higgs production, via gluon-gluon fusion, at Tevatron and LHC cakir ; arik3 ; arik4 ; arik5 ; ginzburg . Future lepton colliders will give an opportunity to investigate the fourth generation leptons ciftci1 ; ciftci2 ; ciftci3 .

Due to small inter-generation mixing, another expectation is the formation of the fourth generation quarkonia ($`Q_4\overline{Q}_4`$) , provided that the condition

$$m_{Q_4}<(125GeV)|V_{qQ_4}|^{2/3}$$
(1)
is satisfied bigi . Here $`q`$ denotes the known quarks and $`V_{qQ_4}`$ is the extended Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element. The parametrization given in celikel ; atag , for the fourth SM generation, satisfies the above requirement. In hadron collisions, gluon-gluon fusion is the main process for the production of quarkonia barger . The $`J^{PC}=0^+`$ pseudoscalar quarkonium state $`\eta _4(^1S_0)`$ which is produced in the subprocess $`gg\eta _4`$, has a production cross section two orders of magnitude larger than the $`J^{PC}=1^{}`$ vector state $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, since $`ggg\mathrm{\Psi }`$ will be the mechanism for the vector quarkonium. For this reason, lepton colliders are more suitable for investigation of vector quarkonia ciftci2 ; ciftci3 , whereas hadron machines are best for the investigation of pseudoscalar quarkonia.

In this work, we consider the process $`pp\eta _4X`$ for the production of ($`u_4\overline{u}_4`$) pseudoscalar quarkonium at the LHC, including possible energy ($`\sqrt{s}=28`$ TeV) and luminosity ($`L=10^{35}`$ cm-2s-1) upgrades azuelos , and the VLHC Stage 1 (2) with $`\sqrt{s}=40`$ ($`175`$) TeV and $`L=10^{34}`$ ($`2\times 10^{34}`$) cm-2s-1 ambrossio . For completeness we also consider the RLHC with $`\sqrt{s}=100`$ TeV and $`L=10^{34}`$ cm-2s-1 dugan .

The decay modes of $`\eta _4`$ are $`gg,f\overline{f},\gamma \gamma ,ZZ,Z\gamma ,Zh,WW`$; where the $`\eta _4Zh`$ decay has the largest branching ratio (for $`m_{\eta _4}600`$ GeV). In Figure 1(2), we present the variation of the $`\eta _4`$ branching ratios as a function of the $`m_{\eta _4}`$ for the Higgs boson mass $`m_h=150(250)`$ GeV. The total decay width is presented in Fig. 3 which is calculated using Coulomb potential for the ($`u_4\overline{u}_4`$) bound state.

The cross section for $`\eta _4`$ production at hadron colliders, can be expressed as

$$\sigma (pp\eta _4X)=K\frac{\pi ^2}{8m_{\eta _4}^3}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta _4gg)\tau _\tau ^1\frac{dx}{x}g(x,Q^2)g(\frac{\tau }{x},Q^2)$$
(2)
where

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\eta _4gg)=8\alpha _s^2(Q^2)|R_S(0)|^2/(3m_{\eta _4}^2),$$
(3)
$`\alpha _s(Q^2)`$ is the strong coupling constant and $`\tau =m_{\eta _4}^2/s`$ with $`\sqrt{s}`$ being the center of mass energy of the collider. $`R_S(0)`$ is the radial wave function of the S-state evaluated at the origin barger . $`K2`$ is the enhancement factor for next-to-leading order QCD effects. For the gluon distribution function $`g(x,Q^2)`$ we have used CTEQ5L cteq  with $`Q^2=m_{u_4}^2`$.

In Figure 4, $`\eta _4`$ production cross section is plotted for the LHC, upgraded LHC, RLHC and VLHC. In Tables 1 and 2 the production cross sections and branching ratios for all the decay modes are given for different values of $`m_{\eta _4}`$. The most promising channels are $`\eta _4\gamma \gamma `$ and $`\eta _4Zh`$. For the background calculations we use PYTHIA 6.2 pythia .

$`\gamma \gamma `$ Channel. The dominant backgrounds to this channel are $`f\overline{f}\gamma \gamma `$ and $`gg\gamma \gamma `$ with cross sections $`2\times 10^4`$ pb and $`3\times 10^5`$ pb, respectively. In order to suppress the backgrounds we apply a cut $`p_T>0.4m_{\eta _4}`$ on transverse momentum of both photons. This requirement reduces the signal by $`40\%`$, whereas the background drops drastically. Furthermore, we use $`|\eta |<2.5`$ for pseudorapidity coverage, and also consider $`60\%`$ efficiency for two photon identification. Finally, we use a mass window $`m_{\gamma \gamma }\pm 2\sigma _m`$ for two photons invariant mass using:

$$\sigma _m=m_{\gamma \gamma }(\frac{0.07}{\sqrt{E_\gamma }}+0.005)$$
(4)
The number of signal and background events and the corresponding statistical significances satisfying the conditions above are given in Table 3 for $`L_{int}=100`$fb-1. In the last two columns of the Table, the integrated luminosities needed to achieve $`3\sigma `$ and $`5\sigma `$ discovery criteria are presented. One can see that LHC with $`\sqrt{s}=14`$ TeV and $`L_{int}=100`$fb-1 is able to explore the quarkonia with mass around $`400`$ GeV. The luminosity upgrade will allow the observation up to $`m_{\eta _4}=500`$ GeV. The same mass region could be covered by the energy upgraded LHC with $`L_{int}=100`$fb-1. With both the energy and luminosity upgrades LHC can reach $`m_{\eta _4}=600`$ GeV. The achievable upper mass limits at VLHC are $`600`$ GeV and $`800`$ GeV for stage 1 and stage 2, respectively.

Zh Channel. The decay $`\eta _4Zh`$ where both $`Z`$ and $`h`$ decaying into charged leptons has a negligible branching ratio. The final states with $`Zll`$ where $`l=e,\mu `$ and $`hb\overline{b}`$ have an overall branching ratio of about $`0.5\%`$. If $`m_h<160`$ GeV, this mode will be the best one, otherwise, $`hWW^{()},ZZ^{()}`$ final states may be preferable at LHC (for branching ratios of the Higgs boson decays see arik5 ). The main background comes from the pair production of $`t`$ quarks, associated $`Zh`$ production and $`Zb\overline{b}`$ with the cross sections $`23`$ pb, $`4\times 10^3`$pb and $`21`$ pb, respectively. We use the cuts on the invariant mass of two leptons and two $`b`$jets by requiring $`|m_{ll}m_Z|<5`$ GeV and $`|m_{bb}m_h|<10`$ GeV. These cuts reduce the $`t\overline{t}`$ and $`Zb\overline{b}`$ backgrounds by two orders, whereas the signal and $`Zh`$ background drop to $`85\%`$. Furthermore, we assume two $`b`$tagging efficiency as $`25\%`$ and two lepton identification efficiency $`\%80`$. For this channel, we define a variable mass window $`m_{llbb}\pm 2\sigma _m`$ where

$$\sigma _m=\sqrt{(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\eta _4}}{2.36})^2+(0.05m_{\eta _4})^2}.$$
(5)
Since the resolution for $`b`$jets is worse than that for leptons, we use an overall mass resolution of $`5\%`$ in Eq. (5) which is an average value for $`b`$jets.

The number of signal and background events and the corresponding statistical significances satisfying the conditions above are given in Table IV and for $`L_{int}=100`$fb-1. In the last two columns of the Table, the integrated luminosities needed to achieve $`3\sigma `$ and $`5\sigma `$ are presented. One can see that upgraded LHC with $`\sqrt{s}=14`$ TeV and $`L_{int}=1000`$fb-1 cover the quarkonia mass up to $`800`$ GeV. The same mass region could be covered by the energy upgraded LHC with $`L_{int}=100`$fb-1. With both the energy and luminosity upgrades LHC can reach $`m_{\eta _4}=1200`$ GeV. The same region will be covered by the VLHC stage 1. The whole predicted mass region for $`\eta _4`$ quarkonia will be covered by VLHC stage 2 and RLHC.

In conclusion, the fourth family pseudoscalar quarkonium $`\eta _4`$ will be copiously produced at future hadron colliders. However, attainable mass ranges are restricted by the large backgrounds. The vector partner of $`\eta _4`$ quarkonium, namely $`\psi _4`$ will clearly manifest itself as resonance in lepton collisions. In Table 5, we give the correspondence between the hadron azuelos ; ambrossio ; dugan  and lepton adolphsen ; andruszkow ; assmann  colliders in view of their potentials to observe the fourth family quarkonia.

This work is partially supported by Turkish State Planning Committee (DPT) under the Grant No 2002K102250.