format: text

text:
# Comparison of the Fermi-surface topologies of 𝜅-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 and its deuterated analogue

## Abstract

We have measured details of the quasi one-dimensional Fermi-surface sections in the organic superconductor $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 and its deuterated analogue using angle-dependent millimetre-wave techniques. There are significant differences in the corrugations of the Fermi surfaces in the deuterated and undeuterated salts. We suggest that this is important in understanding the inverse isotope effect, where the superconducting transition temperature rises on deuteration. The data support models for superconductivity which invoke electron-electron interactions depending on the topological properties of the Fermi surface.

today

The nature of the superconducting groundstate in quasi-two-dimensional charge-transfer salts such as $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 has attracted much recent experimental  and theoretical  interest. The majority of the experimental data suggest that the superconductivity is not describable by a simple BCS-like, phonon-mediated approach (for a review, see Refs.  and refs. therein). Consequently, a number of the theoretical treatments invoke pairing mediated by electron-electron interactions and/or antiferromagnetic fluctuations . In such a scenario, the “nestability” of the Fermi surface is an important consideration; it is expected that alterations of the Fermi-surface topology will affect the superconducting transition temperature .

In this context, the observation of a “negative isotope effect” in $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 may be of great importance ; on replacing the terminal hydrogens of the BEDT-TTF molecule in $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 by deuterium, it was found that an increase ($`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}0.3`$ K) in the superconducting critical temperature $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ occurred . By contrast, isotopic substitutions of other atoms in the BEDT-TTF molecule or in the anion layer produce a very small, normal isotope effect or no significant isotope effect at all, respectively . In this paper we describe millimetre-wave measurements which compare the Fermi surfaces of deuterated and conventional samples of $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2. The data suggest that it is primarily the changes in the topology of the Fermi surface brought about by deuteration that cause the observed isotope effect, supporting models for superconductivity involving pairing via electron-electron interactions .

The Fermi surface of $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 comprises a quasi-two-dimensional (Q2D) pocket (the $`\alpha `$ pocket) and a pair of quasi-one-dimensional (Q1D) sheets ; it is similar to that used by Pippard to predict magnetic breakdown . It is known that the $`\alpha `$ pocket is hardly affected by deuteration , and so our measurement concentrates on the Q1D sheets. Fermi-surface traversal resonances (FTRs)  (i.e. resonances in the high-frequency conductivity caused by magnetic-field-induced motion of quasiparticles across the Fermi sheets) are used to infer the corrugations of the sheets.

The experiments involved single crystals of $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 ($`0.7\times 0.5\times 0.1`$ mm3; mosaic spread $`\stackrel{<}{}0.1^{}`$), produced using electrocrystallization . In some of the crystals, the terminal hydrogens of the BEDT-TTF molecules were isotopically substituted by deuterium; we refer to the deuterated samples as d8, and conventional hydrogenated samples as h8. A single sample is mounted at the centre (in a magnetic field antinode) of a rectangular cavity of inner dimensions $`1.55\times 3.10\times 6.00`$ mm3 resonating at 72 GHz in the $`TE_{102}`$ mode ; the oscillating $`H`$-field lies within the sample’s Q2D (bc) planes. In this configuration, the effective skin depth is very large, and the GHz fields penetrate the bulk of the sample . The cavity can be rotated with respect to the external quasistatic magnetic field B so as to vary the angle $`\theta `$ between B and the normal to the sample’s Q2D planes ; the normal to the Q2D planes is the $`𝐚^{}`$ direction of the reciprocal lattice . In addition, the sample can be turned about $`𝐚^{}`$ within the cavity, so as to vary the plane of rotation, defined by the azimuthal angle $`\varphi `$ . The angles $`\theta `$ and $`\varphi `$ and their relationship to the Q1D sheet of the Fermi surface are given in the inset to Fig. 1.

Experiments were carried out on samples of d8 $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2for angles $`70^{}\theta 70^{}`$ for four different azimuthal angles $`\varphi `$. Fig. 1 shows results for an azimuthal angle of $`\varphi =5^{}`$ for $`\theta `$ values between $`0^{}`$ and $`70^{}`$ in $`5^{}`$ steps, at a temperature of 1.5 K. At low fields (around 4 T at $`\theta =0^{}`$) one absorption can be seen (thick dashed line in Fig. 1). This is related to the superconducting to normal transition of the sample ; it follows the $`\theta `$ dependence of the upper critical field, $`\mu _0H_{\mathrm{c2}}`$, which varies approximately as $`1/\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ . At high field magnetic quantum oscillations are observed, indicating that the sample is pure; the angular behaviour of the frequency $`F`$ of the oscillations ($`F1/\mathrm{cos}\theta `$) provides a check of the angle $`\theta `$ . At some $`\theta `$, magnetic breakdown oscillations, caused by tunnelling between the Q2D and Q1D Fermi-surface sections, are superimposed on the lower frequency oscillations caused by the Q2D pocket . At intermediate fields there are two broad absorptions  (fine dashed lines); their $`(\theta ,\varphi )`$ dependence (see below) allows them to be unambigously attributed to FTRs caused by the Q1D sheets.

The field positions of the FTRs were recorded for all angles studied. In order to analyse the FTRs, the experimental coordinates B, $`\theta `$ and $`\varphi `$ must be converted into the component of the field $`𝐁_{||}`$ within the plane of the Q1D Fermi-surface sheets, and the angle $`\psi `$ between the normal to the sample’s Q2D planes and $`𝐁_{||}`$ (see Fig. 1, inset) . This done via the equations

$`B_{||}`$ $`=`$ $`B\sqrt{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{cos}^2\varphi +\mathrm{cos}^2\theta },`$
$`\mathrm{tan}\psi `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{tan}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi .`$ (1)
Each corrugation of the Q1D Fermi sheets is expected to give rise to a FTR with the $`\psi `$ dependence ,

$$\frac{\omega }{B_{||}}=A\mathrm{sin}(\psi \psi _0).$$
(2)
Here, $`\omega `$ is the angular frequency of the millimetre-waves, $`A`$ is a constant depending on details of the Fermi surface , and $`\psi _0`$ defines the axis of the corrugation $`𝐑`$ (Fig. 1, inset). As the millimetre-wave frequency is held constant, the FTRs should lie on sinusoidal “arches” when $`1/B_{||}`$ is plotted as a function of $`\psi `$ .

Fig. 2 shows the FTR positions plotted in terms of $`1/B_{||}`$ and $`\psi `$. Apart from a region close to $`\psi =+100^{}`$ where the feature associated with the superconducting to normal transition obscures the FTRs at some $`\varphi `$, making the exact position difficult to gauge, the data lie on two “arches”, shown as curves (Fig. 2); the curves were obtained by fitting the data to Eqn. 2. This indicates that the Q1D Fermi surface of d8 $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 has two distinct corrugations, with their axes $`𝐑_1`$ and $`𝐑_2`$ at angles $`\psi _0=17.9^{}\pm 2.0^{}`$ and $`39.8^{}\pm 2.0^{}`$ to $`𝐚^{}`$ respectively.

Equivalent experiments were carried out in h8 $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2. (Some representative data are shown in Ref. ). Again, the resonance positions lie on two “arches” (shown in Fig. 2), implying that the Q1D Fermi surface of h8 $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 has two distinct corrugations . In this case, the corrugation axes $`𝐑_1`$ and $`𝐑_2`$ are at angles $`\psi _0=21.2^{}\pm 2.0^{}`$ and $`20.8^{}\pm 2.0^{}`$ to $`𝐚^{}`$ respectively. The data for both samples are summarised in Table 1.

$`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 has a monoclinic crystal structure with the crystallographic a-axis at an angle of 20.3 to the normal to the Q2D planes ($`𝐚^{}`$; in this respect, the crystal structures of d8 and h8 $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 appear identical . Within tight-binding bandstructure, the corrugation axes of a Fermi surface usually relate to the primitive lattice translation vectors of the real-space lattice . Rather than work in terms of the angle $`\psi _0`$, which defines the directions of the corrugation axes with respect to $`𝐚^{}`$, it is more useful to use the angle $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$, which relates to the real-space vector a. Once this is done (Table 1), it is plain that the corrugation axis $`𝐑_1`$ in both the d8 and h8 samples lies very close to the a (interlayer) direction. By contrast, the direction of $`𝐑_2`$, the second corrugation axis, differs; with reference to the primitive lattice translation vectors

$$𝐓_{mn}=m𝐚+n𝐜$$
(3)
where $`m`$ and $`n`$ are integers, we find that in d8, $`𝐑_2`$ is very close in direction to $`𝐓_{21}`$, whereas in h8, it is close in direction to $`𝐓_{11}`$ (Table 1). The reasons for the dominance of these particular directions are unclear; however, interlayer coupling through the anion layer is presently poorly understood at a molecular-orbital level. It is possible that a variety of overlap-pathways may be operative and that the choice of dominant overlap-pathway through the anion layer depends very sensitively on the exact coordinates of the terminal end of the BEDT-TTF molecule. In this context, it will be very useful to have high-resolution structural experiments which address the detailed differences between h8 and d8 at low temperatures .

Finally, it is interesting to work out the relative amplitudes of the corrugations in h8 and d8 $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2. Models of FTR allow one to relate the intensity of the FTR to the amplitude of the Fermi-surface corrugation . Measurements of the d.c. transport properties of d8 and h8 $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 suggest that the transfer integral $`t_{}`$ in the a direction is very similar in the two materials ($`t_{}0.04`$ meV) . This implies that the Fermi-surface corrugations along $`𝐑_1`$ should be very similar in d8 and h8 ; in d8 and h8 samples with equal volume the corresponding FTRs should have the same intensity . The average intensities $`I`$ of each FTR for $`\theta =0^{}`$ are shown in Table 1. As the samples are of different size, the intensities of the FTRs have been normalised to that of the FTR corresponding to $`𝐑_1`$.

Using the periodicity in $`k`$-space , the relative intensities of the FTRs, and the orientations $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ of $`𝐑_1`$ and $`𝐑_\mathrm{𝟐}`$, it is possible to make a comparison of the Q1D Fermi sheets for both materials. Fig. 3 shows these representations, with the corrugations, assumed sinusoidal, shown at the same scale. This scale is chosen so that the differences between d8 and h8 are clear; in reality, the small measured value of $`t_{}`$  suggests that the corrugations will be on an extremely small scale.

Despite an intensive search, no features attributable to cyclotron resonance (CR) due to the Q2D Fermi-surface pocket were observed in either d8 or h8, in agreement with previous studies . The response of our cavity system is dominated by the interlayer component of the sample’s high-frequency conductivity . Fermi-surface sections with more complex corrugations in the interlayer direction will dominate the high-frequency interlayer conductivity ; recent resistivity measurements of $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 suggest that the corrugations of the Q2D pocket are simpler and more regular than those of the Q1D sheets , perhaps explaining the absence of CR. Similarly, the in-plane corrugations of the Q1D sheet (Fig. 3(c)) will have little effect on the high-frequency interlayer conductivity , and therefore do not result in detectable FTRs.

It is obvious that there is a difference between the Q1D Fermi sheets of the two materials, with the corrugations in h8 being stronger; the dominant corrugation has axis $`𝐑_2`$, at -41.1 to a. By contrast, the corrugations in d8 $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 are weaker, and are dominated by that with axis $`𝐑_1`$ lying along a. This suggests that the Fermi surface of d8 $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 would be more amenable to nesting than that of h8.

Our data support models for superconductivity such as those of Refs. . In these, the pairing of electrons is mediated by electron-electron interactions which depend on the “nestability” of the Fermi-surface; hence they predict a $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ which is sensitive to the details of the Fermi-surface topology. The difference between the Q1D Fermi sheets of d8 and h8 $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 measured using FTR can thus explain the isotope effect; the Q1D Fermi sheets in the d8 samples are less corrugated (and therefore more nestable), leading to a higher $`T_\mathrm{c}`$.

In summary, we have measured details of the Fermi-surface topology of the deuterated organic superconductor $`\kappa `$-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2, and compared them with equivalent measurements of the undeuterated salt. We find that the quasi-one-dimensional Fermi-surface sheets are significantly more corrugated in the undeuterated salt, perhaps explaining the “inverse isotope effect” observed on deuteration. Our data support models for exotic d-wave superconductivity in the organics which invoke electron-electron interactions depending on the topological properties of the Fermi surface.

This work is supported by EPSRC (UK). NHMFL is supported by the US Department of Energy (DoE), the National Science Foundation and the State of Florida. Work at Argonne is sponsored by the DoE, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Division of Materials Science under contract number W-31-109-ENG-38. We thank Stephen Hill and Stephen Blundell for constructive comments.


text:
# High-energy neutrino conversion into electron-W pair in magnetic field and its contribution to neutrino absorption

## I Introduction

The study of creation, propagation, energy loss, and absorption of neutrinos in magnetic field is important in several astrophysical contexts and in the early cosmology . Neutrino self-energy and dispersion relation is modified in magnetized media , and processes where neutrinos radiate electron-positron pairs ($`\nu \nu +e^++e^{}`$ or gammas ($`\nu \nu +\gamma `$ have been investigated in the range of energies where it is possible to use an effective four-fermion interaction and rates have been obtained in the limits of weak and strong magnetic fields. As an example of the importance of macroscopic magnetic field as an effective source of energy loss for energetic neutrinos, we recall that the estimate  for the rate $`\nu \nu +e^++e^{}`$ in the strong magnetic field near the surface of a neutron star is about ten times the rate of pair production in the Coulomb field near the nucleus of metallic iron.

Conversion of neutrinos in $`W`$-lepton pairs in the presence of magnetic fields ($`\nu _lW+l`$) should be considered when studying the propagation of neutrinos of sufficiently high energies: we shall show that in this limit this process gives an important contribution to neutrino absorption. A similar process, $`\nu \gamma lW^+`$, has been studied by Seckel , who shows that at energies above the threshold for $`W`$ production this process is competitive with $`\nu \nu `$ scattering at the same center of mass energies.

The process we are considering, where an extremely energetic neutrino creates a real $`W`$, is a second order process in the weak coupling constant $`g`$, while the radiation of a $`e^+e^{}`$ pair through a virtual $`W`$ or a virtual $`Z`$ is a fourth order process. Therefore, there is an energy above which the conversion into an electron-$`W`$ pair becomes the dominant process. In addition, since we use the electro-weak lagrangian and not an effective low-energy theory, our result is valid also at very high energies, much higher than the $`W`$ mass; actually, the $`W`$-electron decay rate contributes significantly to neutrino absorption only in this limit. Notice that eventually the real $`W`$ decays and that in about 10.5% of cases the final state contains a neutrino of the same flavor (e.g., $`\nu _eW+e\nu _ee^+e^{}`$), so that the process can be thought of as the radiation of a lepton pair; in about 21% of cases the final state contains a neutrino of different flavor (e.g., $`\nu _eW+e\nu _\mu \mu e`$), and in the remaining 68.5% of cases the final state contains hadrons.

In this paper we use Schwinger’s proper time method  to calculate the neutrino self-energy in homogeneous magnetic fields and then we obtain the probability of decay into $`W`$-electron pair by extracting the imaginary part of the self-energy. A similar strategy was used by Tsai and Erber  to extract the photon pair creation probability from the vacuum polarization in intense homogeneous magnetic fields.

In Section 2 we briefly review the notation and derive the one-loop neutrino self-energy in constant magnetic field , in Section 3 we obtain the imaginary part of the self-energy and the rate of $`W`$-electron pairs creation in magnetic field. The ensuing discussion and conclusions are in Section 4.

## II  Neutrino self-energy in a constant magnetic field

In this section we review the calculation of the one-loop neutrino self-energy in a homogeneous magnetic field, using the exact fermion and gauge boson propagators in a constant magnetic field . We consider a magnetic field with magnitude $`B`$ pointing along the positive $`z`$-direction. The only non-vanishing components of the electromagnetic field strength tensor $`F^{\mu \nu }`$ are $`F^{12}=F^{21}=B`$. The exact expression for the electron $`S(x^{},x^{\prime \prime })`$  and $`W`$ boson $`G^{\mu \nu }(x^{},x^{\prime \prime })`$  propagators in a constant magnetic field are obtained using Schwinger’s proper time method:

$$S(x^{},x^{\prime \prime })=\varphi ^{}(x^{},x^{\prime \prime })\frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}e^{ik(x^{}x^{\prime \prime })}S(k),$$
(1)
$$G^{\mu \nu }(x^{},x^{\prime \prime })=\varphi (x^{},x^{\prime \prime })\frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}e^{ik(x^{}x^{\prime \prime })}G^{\mu \nu }(k),$$
(2)
where the translationally invariant parts of the propagators are

$`S(k)=`$ $`i{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{ds}{\mathrm{cos}eBs}}`$ (3)
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left[is\left(m^2iϵ+k_{}^2+k_{}^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{tan}eBs}{eBs}}\right)\right]\left[(m\overline{)}k_{})e^{ieBs\sigma _3}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{)}k_{}}{\mathrm{cos}eBs}}\right],`$ (4)
and

$`G^{\mu \nu }(k)`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{ds}{\mathrm{cos}eBs}}\mathrm{exp}[is(k_{}^2+k_{}^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{tan}eBs}{eBs}})]\{e^{is(M^2iϵ)}[g_{}^{\mu \nu }+(e^{2eFs})_{}^{\mu \nu }]`$ (7)
$`+\left[\left(k^\mu +k_\lambda F^{\mu \lambda }{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{tan}eBs}{B}}\right)\left(k^\nu +k_\rho F^{\rho \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{tan}eBs}{B}}\right)+i{\displaystyle \frac{e}{2}}\left(F^{\mu \nu }g_{}^{\mu \nu }B\mathrm{tan}eBs\right)\right]`$
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{e^{is(M^2iϵ)}e^{is(xM^2iϵ)}}{M^2}}\right)\}.`$
In the rest of the paper we shall drop the infinitesimal imaginary contribution to the masses $`iϵ`$, which determines the correct boundary conditions; if necessary it can be easily reintroduced: $`m^2m^2iϵ`$ and $`M^2M^2iϵ`$. In our notation, $`e`$ and $`m`$ are the charge and mass of the electron, $`M`$ the $`W`$-mass, $`x`$ the gauge parameter, $`\sigma _3=\sigma ^{12}=\frac{i}{2}[\gamma ^1,\gamma ^2]`$, and the metric is $`g^{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{diag}(1,+1,+1,+1)`$. We choose the electromagnetic vector potential to be $`A_\mu =\frac{1}{2}F_{\mu \nu }x^\nu `$ and, therefore, the phase factor in Eqs. (1) and (2), which is independent of the integration path, is

$$\varphi (x^{},x^{\prime \prime })=\mathrm{exp}\left[ie_{x^{\prime \prime }}^x^{}𝑑x_\mu A^\mu (x)\right]=\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{e}{2}x_\mu ^{\prime \prime }F^{\mu \nu }x_\nu ^{}\right).$$
(8)
For any 4-vector $`a^\mu `$ we use the notation $`a_{}^\mu =(a^0,0,0,a^3)`$ and $`a_{}^\mu =(0,a^1,a^2,0)`$; it is easy to show that

$$\left(e^{2eFs}\right)^{\mu \nu }=(g^{\mu \nu })_{}\mathrm{cos}(2eBs)+\frac{F^{\mu \nu }}{B}\mathrm{sin}2(eBs).$$
(9)
Note that the $`W`$ and Goldstone scalar propagator were obtained in Ref.  by introducing a new gauge fixing term (EGF) which is manifestly invariant under electromagnetic gauge transformations. The advantage of the EGF gauge is that the electromagnetic potential has no cross couplings with the $`W`$ and Goldstone fields and, therefore, these two fields do not mix in the presence of a magnetic field.

In the remainder of this paper we focus our attention on electron-type neutrinos, the generalization to $`\mu `$ and $`\tau `$-neutrino is straightforward. For the purpose of this work, it would seem convenient to work in the unitary gauge ($`x\mathrm{}`$), where the unphysical scalars disappear. However, the $`W`$-propagator is quite cumbersome in this gauge. We prefer to work in the Feynman gauge ($`x=1`$), where the expression of the propagator is much simpler. In principle the choice of the Feynman gauge carries the price of calculating an additional bubble diagram: the one with the Goldstone scalar. But this scalar bubble diagram does not contribute to leading order, since it is suppressed by a factor of $`m^2/M^24.0410^{11}`$, and can be neglected. Therefore, we only need to calculate the bubble diagram with a $`W`$-boson:

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(x^{},x^{\prime \prime })=\frac{ig^2}{2}\gamma _R\gamma _\mu S(x^{},x^{\prime \prime })\gamma _\nu \gamma _LG^{\mu \nu }(x^{},x^{\prime \prime })$$
(10)
where

$$\gamma _R=\frac{1+\gamma _5}{2}\gamma _L=\frac{1\gamma _5}{2}.$$
(11)
This expression is translationally invariant, since the $`W`$ and the electron carry opposite charge and therefore the phase factor $`\varphi `$ in the $`W`$-propagator cancels the phase factor $`\varphi ^{}`$ in the electron propagator. We can write $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)`$ in momentum space using

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(x^{},x^{\prime \prime })=\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}e^{ip(x^{}x^{\prime \prime })}\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)$$
(12)
as

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ig^2}{2}}{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{ds_1}{\mathrm{cos}z_1}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{ds_2}{\mathrm{cos}z_2}}e^{is_1(m^2+q_{}^2+q_{}^2\frac{\mathrm{tan}z_1}{z_1})}e^{is_2(M^2+k_{}^2+k_{}^2\frac{\mathrm{tan}z_2}{z_2})}\times `$ (14)
$`\gamma _R\gamma _\mu \left[(m\overline{)}q_{})e^{iz_1\sigma _3}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{)}q_{}}{\mathrm{cos}z_1}}\right][g_{}^{\mu \nu }+(e^{2eFs_2})_{}^{\mu \nu }]\gamma _\nu \gamma _L`$
where

$$q=pk,z_1=eBs_1,z_2=eBs_2.$$
(15)
We now do the straightforward $`\gamma `$-algebra, change variables from $`s_i`$ to $`z_i`$, translate the $`k`$ variables of integration as follows

$$(k_{},k_{})(k_{}+\frac{z_1}{z_1+z_2}p_{},k_{}+\frac{\mathrm{tan}z_1}{\mathrm{tan}z_1+\mathrm{tan}z_2}p_{})$$
(16)
and, finally, perform the four gaussian integrals over the shifted variables $`k`$. The result is:

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dz_1dz_2}{(z_1+z_2)\mathrm{sin}(z_1+z_2)}}e^{i(m^2/eB)[z_1+z_2M^2/m^2+(z_1+z_2)\phi _0]}\times `$ (18)
$`[{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{z_1+z_2}}\overline{)}p_{}e^{i\sigma _3(z_1+2z_2)}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}z_2}{\mathrm{sin}(z_1+z_2)}}\overline{)}p_{}]\gamma _L+(\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{t}.)`$
where

$$\phi _0=\frac{z_1z_2}{(z_1+z_2)^2}\frac{p_{}^2}{m^2}+\frac{\mathrm{sin}z_1\mathrm{sin}z_2}{(z_1+z_2)\mathrm{sin}(z_1+z_2)}\frac{p_{}^2}{m^2}.$$
(19)
and the appropriate counter-terms (c.t.) are defined such that

$$(\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{t}.)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)|_{B=0,\overline{)}p=0}\overline{)}p[\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)}{\overline{)}p}]_{B=0,\overline{)}p=0}.$$
(20)
The $`B`$-independent counter-terms are unimportant for the purpose of this work, since they do not contribute to the imaginary part of the self-energy.

In order to more easily isolate the range of variables that give most of the contribution to the integrals and the terms in the integrand that are negligible, we also find it convenient to change integration variables from $`(z_1,z_2)`$ to $`(z,u)`$

$$z=\frac{m^2}{eB}(z_1+z_2)\frac{1}{\beta }(z_1+z_2)\mathrm{and}u=\frac{M^2}{m^2}\frac{z_2}{z_1+z_2}\frac{1}{\eta }\frac{z_2}{z_1+z_2},$$
(21)
where we have introduced the two parameters $`\beta =eB/m^2`$ and $`\eta =m^2/M^2=4.037610^{11}`$; the resulting expression is:

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{eB}{M^2}}\right){\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{\mathrm{sin}\beta z}}{\displaystyle _0^{M^2/m^2}}due^{iz[1\eta u+u+\phi _0]}\times `$ (23)
$`[\eta u\overline{)}p_{}e^{i\sigma _3\beta z(1+\eta u)}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}[\beta z\eta u]}{\mathrm{sin}\beta z}}\overline{)}p_{}]\gamma _L+(\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{t}.)`$
with

$$\phi _0=u(1\eta u)\frac{p_{}^2}{M^2}+\frac{\mathrm{sin}[\beta z(1\eta u)]\mathrm{sin}[\beta z\eta u]}{\eta \beta z\mathrm{sin}\beta z}\frac{p_{}^2}{M^2}.$$
(24)
## III  Rate of $`W`$-electron pair creation

Because of the oscillating phase $`\mathrm{exp}(iz)`$, the main contribution to the integral over $`z`$ comes from the region where $`z1`$. If we are only interested in neutrinos that travel through a “moderate” magnetic field $`eBm^2=eB_{cr}`$, this means $`\beta 1`$, we can expand the terms in the integrand in power series of $`\beta z1`$. Furthermore, since $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_W`$ is quite small, of order $`g^2eB/M^2`$, as it can be inferred from the expression (23) or from the explicit calculation in Ref. , we can set $`\overline{)}p=0`$ in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_W`$.

After this is all done, we obtain

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{eB}{M^2}}\right)^2\overline{)}p_{}\gamma _L{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑zz{\displaystyle _0^{M^2/m^2}}𝑑uu\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}+\eta u+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}(\eta u)^2\right]`$ (26)
$`\times e^{iz[1+u\eta u+\frac{1}{3}\frac{p_{}^2}{m^2}(\frac{eB}{M^2})^2z^2u^2(1\eta u)^2]}.`$
Notice that the term in the exponential proportional to $`z^3`$ cannot be dropped in general, in spite of the fact that $`\beta z1`$: the coefficient of $`(\beta z)^2`$, i.e. $`(mp_{}/M^2)^2`$, could be very large when the neutrino is very energetic. In fact, there are two physically interesting regimes that are discriminated by the dimensionless field dynamical parameter

$$\xi \frac{eBp_{}}{mM^2},$$
(27)
which can be read from the ratio of the $`z`$ and $`z^3`$ term in the exponential of Eq. (26) or inferred from kinematical considerations and the momentum change of a virtual $`eW`$ pair in a magnetic field.

At low energies, $`\xi 1`$, the $`z^3`$ term in the exponential can be dropped, the self-energy is real and we obtain the result of Ref. ; at high energies, $`\xi 1`$, the self-energy acquires an imaginary part that we shall calculate in the following. In this last case we write $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_W`$ as

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)=\frac{2}{3}\frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}\left(\frac{eB}{M^2}\right)^2\overline{)}p_{}\gamma _L_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑uue^{iz[1+u+\frac{1}{3}\xi ^2z^2u^2]}$$
(28)
where we have dropped all nonleading terms in $`\eta u`$ and extended the integration in $`du`$ to $`\mathrm{}`$, due to the fact that the main contribution to the integral in $`du`$ comes from the region $`u1`$ because of the oscillating phase $`\mathrm{exp}(izu)`$ and that $`\eta =m^2/M^2`$ is extremely small.

The integral in $`dz`$ of the imaginary part of the self-energy can be performed with the substitution $`z=y\sqrt{1+u}/(\xi u)`$ in terms of the modified Bessel function

$$K_{2/3}(w)=\sqrt{3}_0^{\mathrm{}}y\mathrm{sin}\left[\frac{3}{2}w(y+\frac{1}{3}y^3)\right]𝑑y$$
(29)
obtaining

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)=\frac{2}{3}\frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}\left(\frac{eB}{M^2}\right)^2\overline{)}p_{}\gamma _L\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}\xi ^2}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑u\frac{1+u}{u}K_{2/3}\left[\frac{\sqrt{3}}{\xi }\frac{2}{u}\left(\frac{1+u}{3}\right)^{3/2}\right].$$
(30)
The final integration in $`du`$ yields

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)=\frac{g^2}{24\pi }\left(\frac{eB}{M^2}\right)^2\left(1+\sqrt{3}\frac{mM^2}{eBp_{}}\right)e^{\sqrt{3}\frac{mM^2}{eBp_{}}},$$
(31)
and, therefore, the absorption coefficient, $`\alpha =2p_{}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_W(p)`$, is

$$\alpha =\frac{g^2}{12\pi \mathrm{}c}\frac{p_{}c}{\mathrm{}c}\left(\frac{m}{M}\right)^4\left(\frac{B}{B_{cr}}\right)^2\left(1+\sqrt{3}\frac{M}{m}\frac{Mc}{p_{}}\frac{B_{cr}}{B}\right)e^{\sqrt{3}\frac{M}{m}\frac{Mc}{p_{}}\frac{B_{cr}}{B}}.$$
(32)
From the exponential in Eq. (32) we can read the threshold for the process ***The kinematical threshold is obviously given by the sum of the masses $`M+m`$, below which the rate is rigorously zero: this threshold is lost in our expansion, but it is unimportant as long as the effective threshold, below which the process is exponentially suppressed, is very much larger than $`M+m`$.: if we define $`\xi ^{(th)}=\sqrt{3}`$ then

$$cp_{}^{(th)}=\sqrt{3}Mc^2\frac{M}{m}\frac{B_{cr}}{B}2.210^{16}\mathrm{eV}\left(\frac{B_{cr}}{B}\right).$$
(33)
For energies well above the threshold, the absorption coefficient has the asymptotic behavior

$$\alpha =\frac{g^2}{12\pi \mathrm{}c}\frac{p_{}c}{\mathrm{}c}\left(\frac{eB}{M^2}\right)^2=\frac{g^2}{12\pi \mathrm{}c}\frac{p_{}c}{\mathrm{}c}\left(\frac{m}{M}\right)^4\left(\frac{B}{B_{cr}}\right)^2=0.935\left(\frac{p_{}c}{10^{16}\mathrm{eV}}\right)\left(\frac{B}{B_{cr}}\right)^2\mathrm{m}^1,$$
(34)
where we have used the numerical value $`G_F/(\mathrm{}c)^3=g^2/[\sqrt{2}(2Mc^2)^2\mathrm{}c]=1.1663910^5\mathrm{GeV}^2`$.

In case we consider $`\nu _\mu `$ ($`\nu _\tau `$) instead of $`\nu _e`$ the corresponding threshold energies are higher by a factor $`m_\mu /m_e206.8`$ ($`m_\tau /m_e3478`$), while the asymptotic behavior does not change, since it depends only on $`M`$ and not on $`m`$ In principle the full result would have additional dependences on the lepton mass coming from terms that contain $`\eta =(m/M)^2`$ and that we have disregarded being extremely small for electrons; these corrections are larger for muons and especially taus, but still small..

## IV Discussion and conclusions

In Figure 1 we show the absorption coefficient for $`\nu _eW+e`$ as function of the neutrino transverse energy $`Ep_{}c`$ for several values of the magnetic field $`B`$: $`B=10^1B_{cr}`$, $`B=10^2B_{cr}`$, $`B=10^3B_{cr}`$, $`B=10^4B_{cr}`$, and $`B=10^5B_{cr}`$ with $`B_{cr}=m^2/e=4.410^{10}`$ Gauss. It is evident that the process has an energy threshold that grows for smaller values of $`B`$, as quantitatively described by Eq. (33). If we consider the angular coefficient, which is one, and the spacing between the curves above the threshold, we find that $`\alpha `$ grows linearly with $`E`$ and quadratically with $`B`$, in agreement with Eq. (34). The same Figure 1 is valid for $`\nu _\mu `$ ($`\nu _\tau `$), if one multiplies both the horizonal and the vertical scale times $`(m_\mu /m_e)=206.768266`$ ($`(m_\tau /m_e)=3477.6`$).

In Figure 2 we compare the process $`\nu _eW+e`$ with the process $`\nu \nu +e^++e^{}`$ that has a much lower threshold; this threshold can be estimated from the dimensionless field dynamical parameter characteristic to this process $`\kappa eBp_{}/m^3`$, which is analogous to $`\xi `$ of Eq. (27) with the substitution $`Mm`$: the threshold is smaller by a factor of about $`m^2/M^2410^{11}`$. The curves plotted as function of $`\kappa `$ show clearly that the thresholds of both processes are function only of the product $`Bp_{}`$, see Eq. (33). For the process $`\nu \nu +e^++e^{}`$ we use the result shown in Eq. (8) of Ref. :

$$\alpha (\nu \nu e^+e^{})=\frac{G_F^2(g_V^2+g_A^2)}{(3\pi )^3}m^4E\left(\frac{B}{B_{cr}}\right)^2\left(\mathrm{ln}(\kappa )\frac{\mathrm{ln}(3)}{2}\gamma _E\frac{29}{24}\right),$$
(35)
which the authors claim valid for $`EM^3/eB`$ ($`\kappa (M/m)^3410^{15}`$): we plot Eq. (8) of Ref. , see Eq. (35), up to $`\kappa =10^{15}`$. We show results only for $`B=0.1B_{cr}`$ (top curves) and $`B=0.001B_{cr}`$ (bottom curves). We see that the process $`\nu \nu +e^++e^{}`$ (dashed curves) dominates below the threshold of $`\nu W+e`$ (solid curves), but above this threshold $`\nu W+e`$ is almost two orders of magnitude larger (about a factor 50). Therefore, above the threshold $`E(mM^2)/eB`$ ($`\kappa (M/m)^2210^{10}`$), the effective lagrangian (four fermion interaction) cannot be used. The rate of $`\nu \nu +e^++e^{}`$ can instead be estimated using the rate of $`\nu W+e`$, which gives the total adsorption, times the branching ratio of $`W\nu _e+e`$, which is $`(10.66\pm 0.20)\%`$.

In conclusion, we have calculated the absorption rate of very high energy neutrinos in magnetic field. Our main result is given by the compact formula in Eq. (32) valid for electron neutrinos. The result for muon or tau neutrinos can be obtained by substituting the electron mass $`m`$ with the muon or tau mass remembering that the electron mass $`m`$ appears also in $`B_{cr}=m^2/e`$.

This process is exponentially suppressed, and, therefore, it can be disregarded, for energies below a threshold energy inversely proportional to the magnetic field; for a field one tenth of the critical field this energy is of the order of $`10^{17}`$ eV, see Eq. (33) and Fig. 1.

Above this threshold the absorption coefficient grows linearly with energy and quadratically with the field as shown in Eq. (34): for a field one tenth of the critical field and an energy of $`10^{18}`$ eV the absorption coefficient is about one inverse meter (see Fig. 1).

Above the threshold this process substitutes the radiation of $`e^+e^{}`$ pairs as dominant mechanism for $`\nu `$ absorption in magnetic field (see Fig. 2).

###### Acknowledgements.

A. Erdas wishes to thank Gordon Feldman for helpful discussions and the High Energy Theory Group of the Johns Hopkins University for the hospitality extended to him during his several visits. This work is partially supported by M.I.U.R. (Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca) under Cofinanziamento P.R.I.N. 2001.


text:
# Intersection numbers of twisted cycles and the correlation functions of the conformal field theory II

## 1 Observation of 2D and 3D cases

### 1.1 2D: Geometry of a pentagon (\[MiY\])

In the $`(x,y)`$-space, we consider the lines

$$x=0,y=0,x=1,y=1,x=y,$$

with exponents $`a,a,b,b,g^2`$, respectively. The non-normally crossing points are the two points

$$x=y=0,x=y=1.$$

These lines cut the real $`(x,y)`$-plane into $`4!/2!=12`$ non-empty chambers

$$t_0<t_1<t_2<t_3<t_4\{t_0,t_1,t_2,t_3\}\{0,x,y,1\},$$

among which are $`2!`$ bounded chambers defined by $`0<x<y<1`$ and $`0<y<x<1`$. We blow-up the $`(x,y)`$-plane at the two singular points. Let us consider the triangle $`0xy1`$ bounded by the three edges

$$0=x,x=y,y=1,$$

with the three vertices

$$0=x=y,x=y=1,\{0=x,y=1\}.$$

By the blowing-up, the triangle $`0xy1`$ is truncated to be a penatagon bounded by the five segments

$$0=x(a),0=x=y(a^2g^2),x=y(g^2),x=y=1(g^2b^2),y=1(b),$$

where the corresponding exponents are given in the parentheses. Here $`0=x=y`$ is regarded as the exceptional curve coming from the singular point $`0=x=y`$, through which three lines $`0=x,0=y,x=y`$ with exponents $`a,a,g^2`$ pass; the exponent along this exceptional curve is just the product of these three exponents. We will also call this pentagon $`0xy1`$. As we explained in \[KY\] the intersection number $`0xy10xy1`$ is the sum of the local contributions at the baricenters of all the possible faces of the pentagonal cell $`0xy1`$, where the contribution of the 2-cell is 1, that of the 1-face $`x=0`$ is $`\frac{1}{a1}`$, that of the 1-face $`y=1`$ is $`\frac{1}{c1}`$, that of the vertex $`\{x=0\}\{y=1\}`$ is $`\frac{1}{(a1)(c1)}`$, and so on. The intersection number $`0xy10yx1`$ of the two pentagons is $`\frac{g}{g^21}`$ times the intersection number of the common edge.

For notational simplicity, we introduce some functions:

$$F(x):=\frac{1}{x1},S(x,y):=1+F(x)+F(y)\left(=\frac{xy1}{(x1)(y1)}\right),$$

$$\begin{array}{cc}P(x_1,\mathrm{},x_5):=1\hfill & +F(x_1)+\mathrm{}+F(x_5)\hfill \\ & +F(x_1)F(x_2)+\mathrm{}+F(x_4)F(x_5)+F(x_5)F(x_1).\hfill \end{array}$$

(Note that $`S`$ and $`P`$ are initials of segment and pentagon, while $`F`$ means nothing special.) Then we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\frac{J_2}{2}\hfill & =0xy1(0yx1+0xy1)\hfill \\ & =gF(g^2)S(a^2g^2,g^2b^2)+P(a,a^2g^2,a^2,g^2b^2,b).\hfill \end{array}$$

We evaluate this. Before directly computing

$$\begin{array}{cc}\frac{J_2}{2}\hfill & =\frac{g}{g^21}\left(\frac{1}{a^2g^21}+1+\frac{1}{g^2b^21}\right)\hfill \\ & +1+\frac{1}{a1}+\frac{1}{a^2g^21}+\frac{1}{g^21}+\frac{1}{g^2b^21}+\frac{1}{b1}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{(a1)(a^2g^21)}+\frac{1}{(a^2g^21)(g^21)}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{(g^21)(g^2b^21)}+\frac{1}{(g^2b^21)(b1)}+\frac{1}{(b1)(a1)},\hfill \end{array}$$

let us reflect a little: The summands above tell that the donominator of $`J_2`$ divides

$$(a1)(a^2g^21)(g^21)(b1)(b^2g^21).$$

On the other hand, the exponents along the lines at infinity (after blowing-up to make the singular lines cross normally) tell that the numerator divides

$$(ag^2b1)(a^2g^2b^21).$$

The numerator and the denominator have the same degree with respect to each of $`a,b`$ and to $`g`$; they are symmetric with respect to $`a`$ and $`b`$. These conditions are not enough to determine $`J_2`$; we do not know a priori which factor is needed among $`\{(g1),(g+1)\}`$, among $`\{(ag1),(ag+1)\}`$, among $`\{(gb1),(gb+1)\}`$ and among $`\{(agb1),(agb+1)\}`$.

Let us add the terms above. First the terms free of $`a`$ and $`b`$:

$$1+\frac{1}{g^21}\frac{g}{g^21}=\frac{g}{g+1}.$$

Next the terms with the factor $`a^2g^21`$ as denominators:

$$\frac{1}{a^2g^21}\left(1+\frac{1}{a1}+\frac{1}{g^21}\frac{g}{g^21}\right)=\frac{1}{(a1)(ag1)(g+1)}.$$

Finally,

$$\begin{array}{cc}\frac{J_2}{2}\hfill & =\frac{g}{g+1}+\frac{1}{a1}+\frac{1}{b1}+\frac{1}{(a1)(b1)}\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{(a1)(ag1)(g+1)}+\frac{1}{(b1)(gb1)(g+1)}\hfill \\ & \\ & =\frac{abg+a+b1}{(a1)(b1)(g+1)}+\frac{1}{(a1)(ag1)(g+1)}+\frac{1}{(b1)(gb1)(g+1)};\hfill \end{array}$$

we know the denominator already. The numerator is a symmetric polynomial in $`a`$ and $`b`$; writing this as a polynomial in $`ab`$ and $`a+b`$, we can easily check that the coefficients of the power of $`a+b`$ are $`0.`$ The result is

$$\frac{J_2}{2!}=\frac{(agb1)(ag^2b1)}{(a1)(ag1)(b1)(gb1)(g+1)}.$$

### 1.2 3D: Geometry of Terada-3

In the $`(x,y,z)`$-space, we consider the planes

$$x,y,z=0;x,y,z=1;x=y,y=z,z=x,$$

with exponents $`a,b,g^2`$, respectively. The non-normally crossing loci are the lines

$$x=y=0,1;y=z=0,1;z=y=0,1;x=y=z$$

and the points

$$x=y=z=0,1.$$

These planes cut the real $`(x,y,z)`$-space into $`5!/2!`$ chambers defined by

$$t_0<t_1<t_2<t_3<t_4\{t_0,t_1,t_2,t_3,t_4\}\{0,x,y,z,1\},$$

among which are $`3!`$ bounded chambers defined by

$$0<t_1<t_2<t_3<1\{t_1,t_2,t_3\}\{x,y,z\};$$

these six tetrahedra fill the cube $`0<x,y,z<1`$. These chambers are encoded as $`t_0\mathrm{}t_4`$; and $`0t_1t_2t_31`$ is often abbreviated as $`t_1t_2t_3`$. Note that two such chambers are adjacent if and only if these codes can be changed from one to the other by a permutaion of adjacent two letters, and that two chambers $`0xyz1`$ and $`01zyx`$ are antipodal with center $`(1,1,1)`$.

We blow-up the $`(x,y,z)`$-space at the singular points and then along the singular lines. We describe the resulting object by the truncation of the chambers. Let us consider the tetrahedron $`0xyz1`$ bounded by the four planes

$$0=x,x=y,y=z,z=1,$$

with the six edges

$$0=x=y,x=y=z,y=z=1;\{0=x,y=z\},\{0=x,z=1\},\{x=y,z=1\},$$

and with the four vertices

$$0=x=y=z,x=y=z=1;\{0=x,y=z=1\},\{0=x=y,z=1\}.$$

The first three edges and the first two vertices above are in the singular loci. Such an edge is truncated to be a rectangle, and such a vertex is truncated to be a pentagon. As a result, the tetrahedron $`xyz1`$ is truncated to be a Terada-3, which is bounded by six pentagons and three rectangles.

This Terada-3 is adjacent to $`0yxz1`$ through the pentagon $`x=y`$, to $`0zyx1`$ through the (exceptional) rectangle born from the edge $`x=y=z`$, and to $`01zyx`$ through the (exceptional) pentagon born from the vertex $`x=y=z=1`$. These faces will be denoted by

$$\{xy\},\{xyz\},\{xyz1\},$$

respectively. In this way, we can easily know the codes of the adjacent (blown-up) chambers.

Once the faces of the truncated chambers and the adjacency through the faces are known, we can compute the intersection numbers following the recipe shown in \[KY\].

Let the exponents be given as follows:

$$x,y,z=0\mathrm{}a,x,y,z=1\mathrm{}b,x=y\mathrm{}f^2,y=z\mathrm{}g^2,z=x\mathrm{}h^2.$$

The Terada-3 obtained from the tetrahedron $`0xyz1`$ has nine faces: the six penatagons

$$\{0x\},\{xy\},\{yz\},\{z1\},\{0xyz\},\{xyz1\},$$

and the three rectangles

$$\{0xy\},\{xyz\},\{yz1\},$$

and 21 edges and 14 vertices (see Figure 3).

Let us evaluate the intersection numbers of the $`S_3`$ (acting as permutations of $`\{x,y,z\}`$) orbits of the simplex $`0xyz1`$. The simplex $`0xyz1`$ (for simplicity we write $`xyz`$ for the time being) is truncated to be a Terada-3, which is also denoted by $`xyz`$. The Terada-3 touches other Terada-3s in the $`S_3`$-orbit along the following faces:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}xyzyxz\hfill & =\text{pentagon}\hfill & \{xy\},\hfill \\ xyzxzy\hfill & =\text{pentagon}\hfill & \{yz\},\hfill \\ xyzzyx\hfill & =\text{rectangle}\hfill & \{xyz\},\hfill \\ xyzzxy\hfill & =\text{segment}\hfill & \{xy\}\{xyz\},\hfill \\ xyzyzx\hfill & =\text{segment}\hfill & \{yz\}\{xyz\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

We compute the intersection number

$$\frac{J_3}{3!}=xyz(yxz+xzy+zyx+zxy+yzx+xyz).$$

Notation for Terada-3: $`Q(p_1,q_1,r_1;p_2,q_2,r_2;p_3,q_3,r_3)`$

$$=Q\left(\begin{array}{ccc}p_1& & q_1\\ & r_1& \\ p_2& & q_2\\ & r_2& \\ p_3& & q_3\\ & r_3& \end{array}\right)=\begin{array}{c}1+F(r_i)S(p_i,q_{i+1})S(p_{i+1},q_i)\hfill \\ \\ +F(p_i)+F(q_i)+F(p_i)F(p_{i+1})+F(q_i)F(q_{i+1})\hfill \\ \\ +F(p_1)F(p_2)F(p_3)+F(q_1)F(q_2)F(q_3)+F(p_i)F(q_i).\hfill \end{array}$$

(summation on $`i`$ is modulo 3.) Then, taking account of orientation (see \[KY\] §3), we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}J_3/3!\hfill & =fF(f^2)P(b,a^2f^2,a^3f^2g^2h^2,f^2g^2h^2,f^2g^2h^2b^3)\text{pentagon }yxz\hfill \\ & +gF(g^2)P(a,g^2b^2,f^2g^2h^2b^3,f^2g^2h^2,a^3f^2g^2h^2)\text{pentagon }xzy\hfill \\ & fghF(f^2g^2h^2)S(a^3f^2g^2h^2,f^2g^2h^2b^3)S(f^2,g^2)\text{rectangle }zyx\hfill \\ & +fghF(f^2g^2h^2)fF(f^2)S(a^3f^2g^2h^2,f^2g^2h^2b^3)\text{segment }zxy\hfill \\ & +fghF(f^2g^2h^2)gF(g^2)S(a^3f^2g^2h^2,f^2g^2h^2b^3)\text{segment }yzx\hfill \\ & Q(f^2g^2h^2b^3,g^2g^2b^2;b,a,a^2f^2;f^2,a^3f^2g^2h^2,f^2g^2h^2),xyz\text{ itself}\hfill \end{array}$$

putting $`f=h=g`$, this is equal to

$$\begin{array}{cc}& gF(g^2)P(b,a^2g^2,a^3g^6,g^6,g^6b^3)+gF(g^2)P(a,g^2b^2,g^6b^3,g^6,a^3g^6)\text{pentagons}\hfill \\ & g^3F(g^6)S(a^3g^6,g^6b^3)S(g^2,g^2)\text{rectangle}\hfill \\ & +g^3F(g^6)gF(g^2)S(a^3g^6,g^6b^3)+g^3F(g^6)gF(g^2)S(a^3g^6,g^6b^3)\text{segments}\hfill \\ & Q(g^6b^3,g^2,g^2b^2;b,a,a^2g^2;g^2,a^3g^6,g^6),xyz\text{ itself}\hfill \end{array}$$

where the last term $`Q`$ is equal to $`1+`$

$$\begin{array}{cc}& F(g^2b^2)S(g^2,b)S(a,g^6b^3)+F(a^2g^2)S(g^2,a)S(b,a^3g^6)+F(g^6)S(g^2,g^2)S(a^3g^6,g^6b^3)\hfill \\ & +F(g^2)+F(g^2)+F(a)+F(b)+F(a^3g^6)+F(g^6b^3)\hfill \\ & +F(a^3g^6)(F(g^2)+F(a)+F(g^2))+F(g^6b^3)(F(g^2)+F(b)+F(g^2))\hfill \\ & +F(a)F(g^2)+F(b)F(g^2)+F(a)F(b)+F(a)F(g^2)F(a^3g^6)+F(b)F(g^2)F(g^6b^3).\hfill \end{array}$$

Let us add these terms. First the terms free of $`a`$ and $`b`$:

$$\begin{array}{cc}2gF(g^2)12F(g^2)\hfill & \\ +F(g^6)[2gF(g^2)+2g^4F(g^2)g^3S(g^2,g^2)S(g^2,g^2)]\hfill & \\ =1\frac{2g}{g+1}\frac{1}{(g+1)(g^2+g+1)}.\hfill & \end{array}$$

Next the terms with the factor $`a^3g^61`$ as denominators: $`(a^3g^61)^1`$ times

$$\begin{array}{cc}F(a^2g^2)[gF(g^2)S(g^2,a)]+F(g^6)[\text{as above}]\hfill & \\ +F(a)(gF(g^2)F(g^2)1)+2gF(g^2)2F(g^2)1\hfill & \\ =\frac{a^2g^4+ag^2+1}{(a1)(ag1)(g+1)(g^2+g+1)}.\hfill & \end{array}$$

Among the remaining terms, the terms with the factor $`a^2g^21`$ as denominators: $`(a^2g^21)^1`$ times

$$\left(1+\frac{1}{b1}\right)\frac{ag+1}{(a1)(g+1)}.$$

Finally left are

$$F(a)(gF(g^2)F(g^2)1)+F(b)(gF(g^2)F(g^2)1)F(b)F(a).$$

So we know the denominator of $`J_3`$; the numerator can be computed without difficulty and we get

$$J_3=\frac{3!(g^2ba1)(g^3ba1)(g^4ba1)}{(a1)(ag1)(ag^21)(b1)(gb1)(g^2b1)(g+1)(g^2+g+1)}$$

## 2 $`n`$D case

In the real $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$-space, we consider the hyperplanes

$$x_i=0,1,x_j(ji),i=1,\mathrm{},n.$$

They cut the space into $`(n+2)!/2!`$ chambers (simplices) defined by

$$a_1<\mathrm{}<a_{n+2},\{a_1,\mathrm{},a_{n+2}\}=\{0,x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,1\},$$

among which are $`n!`$ bounded chambers defined by

$$0<x_{\sigma (1)}<\mathrm{}<x_{\sigma (n)}<1,\sigma S_n.$$

Now we blow-up along the non-normally crossing loci of the union of these hyperplanes. Each simplex is transformed into an $`n`$-polygon called Terada-$`n`$. (A Terada-2 is a pentagon, and a Terada-3 appeared in the previous subsection.) We encode the Terada-$`n`$ coming from the simplex $`0<x_{\sigma (1)}<\mathrm{}<x_{\sigma (n)}<1`$ by the word

$$0\sigma (1)\mathrm{}\sigma (n)(n+1)(n+2),$$

which will be called an $`(n+3)`$-juzu; note that point $`1`$ is coded by $`n+1`$.

### 2.1 Shape of Terada-$`n`$ and Juzus

A $`k`$-juzu is a sequence of $`k`$ numerals coding a Terada-$`(k3)`$; two juzus are identified if one is obtained from the other by a cyclic permutation and/or inversion. For example, a $`3`$-juzu

$$012=120=\mathrm{}=210$$

is a point, a $`4`$-juzu

$$0123=1230=\mathrm{}=3210$$

is a segment, and a $`5`$-juzu is a pentagon. To make the formulae looks nicer, we often abbreviate $`n\pm 1`$ and $`n\pm 2`$ as

$$n2={}_{}{}^{\prime \prime }n,n1={}_{}{}^{}n,n+1=n^{},n+2=n^{\prime \prime }.$$

Let us describe the boundary of the Terada-$`n`$ $`T:=01\mathrm{}nn^{}n^{\prime \prime }`$ coming from the $`n`$-simplex

$$0<x_1<\mathrm{}<x_n<1.$$

The Terada-$`(nk)`$ coming from the $`(nk)`$-simplex defined by

$$0<x_1<\mathrm{}<x_{i1}<x_i=\mathrm{}=x_{i+k}<x_{i+k+1}<\mathrm{}<x_n<1,$$

which is part of the boundary of the $`n`$-simplex above, will be coded by the $`(nk+3)`$-juzu

$$\mathrm{0\; 1}\mathrm{}{}_{}{}^{}i\left(i\mathrm{}i+k\right)(i+k)^{}\mathrm{}nn^{}n^{\prime \prime },$$

regarding the $`k+1`$ numerals in the parentheses as a single numeral. The $`(n1)`$-faces of the Terada-$`n`$ $`T=01\mathrm{}nn^{}n^{\prime \prime }`$ are direct products of Terada-$`(ni)`$ and Terada-$`(i1)`$:

$$\begin{array}{c}(0\mathrm{}i)i^{}\mathrm{}n^{\prime \prime }\times 0\mathrm{}i(i^{}\mathrm{}n^{\prime \prime }),(1\mathrm{}i^{})i^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}n^{\prime \prime }0\times 1\mathrm{}i^{}(i^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}n^{\prime \prime }0),\mathrm{}\hfill \\ (n^{\prime \prime }0\mathrm{}{}_{}{}^{}i)i\mathrm{}n^{}\times n^{\prime \prime }0\mathrm{}{}_{}{}^{}i(i\mathrm{}n^{}).i=1,\mathrm{},\left[\frac{n+3}{2}\right];\hfill \end{array}$$

they will be abbreviated as

$$(0\mathrm{}i)\text{ or }(i^{}\mathrm{}n^{\prime \prime }),(1\mathrm{}i^{})\text{ or }(i^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}n^{\prime \prime }0),\mathrm{},(n^{\prime \prime }0\mathrm{}{}_{}{}^{}i)\text{ or }(i\mathrm{}n^{}),$$

respectively. The $`(nk)`$-faces are intersections of $`k`$ of these $`(n1)`$-faces, say

$$(a_1a_1^{}\mathrm{}z_1),(a_2a_2^{}\mathrm{}z_2),\mathrm{},(a_ka_k^{}\mathrm{}z_k)$$

such that for any $`i`$ and $`j`$, $`\{a_i,a_i^{},\mathrm{},z_i\}\{a_j,a_j^{},\mathrm{},z_j\}`$ and either

$$\{a_i,a_i^{},\mathrm{},z_i\}\{a_j,a_j^{},\mathrm{},z_j\}=\mathrm{}\text{ or}$$

$$\{a_i,a_i^{},\mathrm{},z_i\}\{a_j,a_j^{},\mathrm{},z_j\}\text{ or }\{a_j,a_j^{},\mathrm{},z_j\}\{a_i,a_i^{},\mathrm{},z_i\}.$$

Terminology: In the sequel, in place of saying ‘for any $`i`$ and $`j`$, $`\mathrm{}`$’, we say ‘the sets

$$\{a_1,a_1^{},\mathrm{},z_1\},\{a_2,a_2^{},\mathrm{},z_2\},\mathrm{},\{a_k,a_k^{},\mathrm{},z_k\}$$

have the disjoint/include property.’

Note that this definition fits the two alternative expression of an $`(n1)`$-face above.

* When $`n=1`$, Terada-1 $`0123`$ is a segment. Its boundary consists of two points:

$$(01)=(23),(12)=(30).$$
* When $`n=2`$, Terada-2 $`012345`$ is a pentagon. Its boundary consists of

+ five edges:

    $$(01),(12),(34),(45),(50)$$
    + and five vertices

    $$(01)(34),(34)(51),(50)(12),(12)(45),(45)(01).$$
* When $`n=3`$, the boundary of the Terada-3 $`012345`$ consists of

+ 2D faces of 2 kinds

    $$(01),\mathrm{},(50);(012)=(345),(123)=(456),(234)=(501),$$
    + 1D faces of 2 kinds

    $$(01)(23);(01)(012),$$
    + 0D faces of 2 kinds

    $$(01)(23)(45),(12)(34)(50);(01)(12)(012).$$

Let us see how this Terada-$`n`$ $`T`$ touches other Terada-$`n`$’s. Through every face

$$(a_1a_1^{}\mathrm{}z_1)(a_2a_2^{}\mathrm{}z_2)\mathrm{}(a_ka_k^{}\mathrm{}z_k)$$

with

$$a_1,a_1^{},\mathrm{},z_1;a_2,a_2^{},\mathrm{},z_2;\mathrm{};a_k,a_k^{},\mathrm{},z_k\{1,\mathrm{},n\}$$

touches $`T`$ the Terada-$`n`$

$$0\sigma (1)\mathrm{}\sigma (n)n^{}n^{\prime \prime },$$

where $`\sigma S_n`$ is the product of the commutative $`k`$ cyclic permutaion of elements

$$\{a_1,a_1^{},\mathrm{},z_1\},\{a_2,a_2^{},\mathrm{},z_2\},\mathrm{},\{a_k,a_k^{},\mathrm{},z_k\}.$$

Note that not all of the $`n!`$ Terada-$`n`$’s touches the Terada-$`n`$ $`T`$.

* When $`n=2`$, the Terada-2 $`01234`$ touches the Terada-2 $`02134`$ through the edge $`(12)`$. Note that if you perform the cyclic permutaion of $`\{3,4,0\}`$ you get also the juzu $`02134`$.
* When $`n=3`$, the Terada-3 $`012345`$ touches the five others

+ through 2D faces: $`(12),(23);(123),`$
    + through 1D faces: $`(12)(123),(23)(123).`$
* When $`n=4`$ already, among the $`4!`$ Terada-4’s, there are Terada-4’s which do not touch $`0123456`$; they are $`0241356`$ and $`0314256`$.

### 2.2 Exponents along the hyperfaces

Since

$$u=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}t_i^\alpha (1t_i)^\beta \underset{1i<jn}{}(t_it_j)^{2\gamma },$$

the exponents along the hyperplanes in the $`t`$-space are given as follows

$$t_i=0\mathrm{}a,t_i=1\mathrm{}b,x_i=x_j\mathrm{}g^2,$$

where $`a=\mathrm{exp}2\pi i\alpha ,b=\mathrm{exp}2\pi i\beta ,g=\mathrm{exp}2\pi i\gamma `$. Through the $`(nk)`$-simplex

$$0=x_1=\mathrm{}=x_k<x_{k+1}<\mathrm{}<x_n<1,$$

pass the hyperplanes

$$0=x_i,1ik\text{ and }x_i=x_j,1i<jk;$$

through the $`(nk)`$-simplex

$$0<x_1<\mathrm{}<x_{p1}<x_p=\mathrm{}=x_{p+k}<x_{p+k+1}<\mathrm{}<x_n<1,$$

pass the hyperplanes

$$x_i=x_j,pi<jp+k;$$

through the $`(nk)`$-simplex

$$0<x_1<\mathrm{}<x_{nk}<x_{nk+1}=\mathrm{}=x_n=1,$$

pass the hyperplanes

$$x_i=x_j,nk+1i<jn\text{ and }x_i=1,nk+1in.$$

Thus, after necessary blowing-up, the exponents along the hyperfaces ($`(n1)`$-faces) of the Terada-$`n`$ $`T=01\mathrm{}nn^{}n^{\prime \prime }`$ are give as

$$(01\mathrm{}k)\mathrm{}a^kg^{k(k1)},(p\mathrm{}p+k)\mathrm{}g^{k(k+1)},(nk+1\mathrm{}n^{})\mathrm{}b^kg^{k(k1)},$$

where $`1k,p,k+pn.`$

### 2.3 Intersection numbers

The self-intersection number of an $`n`$-polygon bounded by normally crossing hyperplanes is the sum of the local contributions of all the possible faces, where the contribution of the $`n`$-face (the plygon itself) is $`1`$, that of a hyperface with exponent $`e`$ is $`\frac{1}{e1}`$, and that of a $`p`$-codimensional face (which is the intersection of exactly $`p`$ hyperfaces) is the product of the contributions of the $`p`$ intersecting hyperfaces.

Notation: For a hyperface $`(qq^{}\mathrm{}r)0q<rn^{}`$ with exponent $`e`$, we set

$$[q\mathrm{}r]:=\frac{1}{e1}.$$

Thus, taking the Terada-$`n`$ as a plygon, we have

###### Proposition 1

The self-intersection number $`TT`$ of the Terada-$`n`$ $`T`$ is the sum of all the possible product

$$[a_1a_1^{}\mathrm{}z_1][a_2a_2^{}\mathrm{}z_2]\mathrm{}[a_ka_k^{}\mathrm{}z_k],$$

$`0a_1,\mathrm{},z_1,a_2,\mathrm{},z_2,\mathrm{},a_k,\mathrm{},z_kn^{}=n+1,`$ $`0kn^{}`$, such that $`[a_ia_i^{}\mathrm{},z_i][01\mathrm{}n^{}]`$ and,

$$\{a_i,a_i^{},\mathrm{},z_i\}i=1,\mathrm{},k$$

have the disjoint/include property. When $`k=0`$ the product is regarded as $`1`$.

###### Proposition 2

Let a Terada-$`n`$ $`T^{}`$ touches $`T`$ along the hyperface $`H:=(p,p^{},\mathrm{},p+q)`$ $`(1p,p+qn)`$. The intersection number of the Terada-$`n`$’s $`T`$ and $`T^{}`$ is given by

$$TT^{}=()^qg^{q(q+1)/2}[pp^{}\mathrm{}p+q]HH,$$

where the self-intersection number $`HH`$ of $`H`$ is the sum of all the possible product

$$[a_1a_1^{}\mathrm{}z_1][a_2a_2^{}\mathrm{}z_2]\mathrm{}[a_ka_k^{}\mathrm{}z_k],$$

$`0a_1,\mathrm{},z_1,a_2,\mathrm{},z_2,\mathrm{},a_k,\mathrm{},z_kn^{}=n+1,`$ $`0kn^{}`$, such that $`[a_ia_i^{}\mathrm{}z_i][01\mathrm{}n^{}]`$ and,

$$\{p,p^{},\mathrm{},p+q\},\{a_i,a_i^{},\mathrm{},z_i\}i=1,\mathrm{},k$$

have the disjoint/include property.

###### Corollary 1

Let a Terada-$`n`$ $`T^{}`$ touches $`T`$ along a face $`F`$ which is the intersection of the hyperfaces $`H_l:=(p_l,p_l^{},\mathrm{},p_l+q_l)`$ $`(1p_l,p_l+q_ln)`$. The intersection number of the Terada-$`n`$’s $`T`$ and $`T^{}`$ is given by

$$TT^{}=\underset{l}{}()^{q_l}g^{q_l(q_l+1)/2}[p_lp_l^{}\mathrm{}p_l+q_l]FF,$$

where the self-intersection number $`FF`$ of $`F`$ is the sum of all the possible product

$$[a_1a_1^{}\mathrm{}z_1][a_2a_2^{}\mathrm{}z_2]\mathrm{}[a_ka_k^{}\mathrm{}z_k],$$

$`0a_1,\mathrm{},z_1,a_2,\mathrm{},z_2,\mathrm{},a_k,\mathrm{},z_kn^{}=n+1,`$ $`0kn^{}`$, such that

$$\{p_l,p_l^{},\mathrm{},p_l+q_l\},\{a_i,a_i^{},\mathrm{},z_i\}$$

have the disjoint/include property.

## 3 Evaluation

For $`\sigma S_n`$, let $`T^\sigma `$ denote the Terada-$`n`$ $`0\sigma (1)\mathrm{}\sigma (n)n^{}n^{\prime \prime }`$. We would like to evaluate the sum

$$\frac{J_n}{n!}=\underset{\sigma S_n}{}TT^\sigma ;$$

when $`T`$ and $`T^\sigma `$ do not touch, their intersection number is $`0`$, of course. Proposition 1 and Corollary 1 imply that $`()^nJ_n/n!`$ is the sum of all the possible product

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}()^{q_i}g^{q_i(q_i+1)/2}[p_ip_i^{}\mathrm{}p_i+q_i]{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}[a_ja_j^{}\mathrm{}z_j],`$ (1)
where $`1p_i,p_i+q_in,0a_j,\mathrm{},z_jn+1,`$ and $`[a_ia_i^{}\mathrm{},z_i][01\mathrm{}n^{}]`$ and,

$$\{p_i,p_i^{},\mathrm{},p_i+q_i\},\{a_j,a_j^{},\mathrm{},z_j\}$$

have disjoint/include property. Empty products are regarded as $`1`$.

Notation: For $`1p,p+qn,`$ put

$$\begin{array}{cc}pp^{}\mathrm{}p+q\hfill & :=[pp^{}\mathrm{}p+q](1+()^qg^{(q+1)q/2})\hfill \\ & =\frac{1+()^qg^{\left({\scriptscriptstyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{q+1}{2}}\right)}}{g^{2\left({\scriptscriptstyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{q+1}{2}}\right)}1}=\frac{1}{1()^qg^{\left({\scriptscriptstyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{q+1}{2}}\right)}}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Terminology: $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`[\mathrm{}]`$ are called sequences. A monomial in $`0,1,\mathrm{},n,n+1`$ is a product of sequences

$$\underset{i}{}p_ip_i^{}\mathrm{}p_i+q_i\underset{j}{}[a_ja_j^{}\mathrm{}z_j],$$

where

$$\{p_i,p_i^{},\mathrm{},p_i+q_i\},1p_i,p_i+q_in,$$

and

$$\{a_j,a_j^{},\mathrm{},z_j\},0a_j,\mathrm{}n+1,0=a_j\text{ or }z_j=n+1$$

have disjoint/include property. The length of a monomial is the length of the longest sequence.

For example, when $`n=4`$,

$$[0123]23123[45],12341234[12345]$$

are monomilas of length 4 and 5.

Let $`U`$ be a family of subsets of $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},n^{}\}`$ with disjoint/include property, and $`J(U)`$ the sum of possible products in the form (1), where

$$U=\{p_i,\mathrm{},p_i+q_i\}\{a_j,\mathrm{},z_j\}.$$

The sum $`J(U)`$ can be computed as follows: Divide $`U`$ into three subsets:

$$\begin{array}{cc}{}_{1}{}^{}U_{n}^{}\hfill & :=\{\{p_i,\mathrm{},p_i+q_i\}U1p_i,p_i+q_in\},\hfill \\ {}_{0}{}^{}U\hfill & :=\{\{0,\mathrm{},z_i\}Uz_in\},\hfill \\ U_n^{}\hfill & :=\{\{a_i,\mathrm{},n^{}\}U1a_i\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Then the sum $`J(U)`$ can be factorized as

$$J(U)=\underset{{}_{1}{}^{}U_{n}^{}}{}p_i\mathrm{}p_i+q_i\underset{{}_{0}{}^{}U}{}[0\mathrm{}z_i]\underset{U_n^{}}{}[a_i\mathrm{}n^{}].$$

We hope that the reader readily guess the reason of the above claim by the following example for $`n=3`$ and $`U=\{\{1,2\},\{1,2,3\}\}`$ (cf. §4.2):

$$[12][123]+g[12][123]g^3[123][12]+g[12](g^3[123])$$

$$=(1g)[12](1+g^3)[123]=12123.$$

Letting $`U`$ vary all the families of subsets of $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},n^{}\}`$ with disjoint/include property, we have

###### Proposition 3

The quantity $`()^nJ_n/n!`$ is the sum of the possible monomials in $`0,1,\mathrm{},n,n+1`$ of length at most $`n+1`$.

For each monomial, notice the longest sequence including $`0`$, and the longest sequence including $`n+1`$. Then we are led to

###### Proposition 4

For $`k=1,\mathrm{},n,`$ put

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill X_k& :=\text{sum of the possible monomilas in }1,2,\mathrm{}k,\hfill \\ \hfill A_k& :=[01\mathrm{}k]\times \{\text{sum of the possible monomilas in }0,1,\mathrm{}k\text{ of length at most }k\},\hfill \\ \hfill B_k& :=[nk+1\mathrm{}nn+1]\times \{\text{sum of the possible monomilas}\hfill \\ & \text{ in }nk+1,\mathrm{},n+1\text{ of length at most }k\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Then we have

$$()^n\frac{J_n}{n!}=\underset{i,j0,i+jn}{}A_iX_{nij}B_j.$$

### 3.1 Evaluation of $`X_n`$

We found that the sum $`X_n`$ of the terms free of $`a`$ and $`c`$ is the sum of monomials in $`1,\mathrm{},n`$. Indeed we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill X2& =1+12,\hfill \\ \hfill X3& =(1+123)(1+12+23),\hfill \\ \hfill X4& =(1+1234)(1+12+23+34+1234\hfill \\ & +(1+12+23)123+(1+23+34)234),\hfill \\ & \mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}$$

These can be evaluated as

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill X_2& =\frac{g}{g+1},\hfill \\ \hfill X_3& =\frac{g^3}{\left(g+1\right)\left(g^2+g+1\right)},\hfill \\ \hfill X_4& =\frac{g^6}{\left(g+1\right)\left(g^2+g+1\right)\left(g^3+g^2+g+1\right)},\hfill \\ & \mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`Y(k,n)`$ be the sum of the monomials in $`1,\mathrm{},n`$ of length exactly $`k`$, and $`X(k,n)`$ be the sum of the monomials in $`1,\mathrm{},n`$ of length at most $`k`$. Then we have

$$X(k,n)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}Y(j,n),X_n=X(n,n),$$

where we put $`Y(1,2)=Y(1,3)=\mathrm{}=1`$, so we have $`X(1,2)=X(1,3)=\mathrm{}=1.`$

Notation:

$$\begin{array}{cc}[n]\hfill & :=[n]_g=1+g+g^2+\mathrm{}+g^{n1},\hfill \\ [n]!\hfill & :=[n]_g!=[n][n1]\mathrm{}[1],\hfill \\ \left[\begin{array}{c}n\\ m\end{array}\right]\hfill & :=\left[\begin{array}{c}n\\ m\end{array}\right]_g=\frac{[n]!}{[m]![m]!},0mn,\hfill \\ (a)_n\hfill & :=(a;g)_n=(1a)(1ag)\mathrm{}(1ag^{n1}).\hfill \end{array}$$

Since we have, by definition,

$$Y(n,n)=1\mathrm{}nX(n1,n),X(n,n)=Y(n,n)+X(n1,n)$$

and

$$1\mathrm{}n=\frac{1}{1+()^ng^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}\right)}},$$

###### Lemma 1

$$X(n1,n)=\frac{g^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}\right)}+()^n}{[n]!},n=2,3,\mathrm{}$$

implies

###### Proposition 5

$$Y(n,n)=\frac{()^{n+1}}{[n]!},X(n,n)=\frac{g^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}\right)}}{[n]!}.$$

Proof. We prove this Lemma (as well as this Proposition) by induction on $`n`$. For each monomial of length at most $`n1`$ in $`\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}`$, we notice the longest sequence including 1, and divide the sequences in two parts: those which are part of the longest one, and those which are disjoint with the longest one. In this way, we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}X(n1,n)\hfill & =1\mathrm{}n1X(n2,n1)\hfill \\ & +1\mathrm{}n2X(n3,n2)X(2,2)\hfill \\ & \mathrm{}\hfill \\ & +1\mathrm{}nkX(k1,k)X(nk,nk)\hfill \\ & \mathrm{}\hfill \\ & +12X(12)X(n2,n2)+X(n1,n1).\hfill \end{array}$$

By the induction hypothesis of the Lemma and the Proposition, we have

$$1\mathrm{}nkX(k1,k)X(nk,nk)=\frac{()^{k+1}}{[k]!}\frac{g^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{nk}{2}\right)}}{[nk]!},$$

and so

$$X(n1,n)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\frac{()^{k+1}}{[k]!}\frac{g^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{nk}{2}\right)}}{[nk]!}=\frac{1}{[n]!}\underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}()^{k+1}\left[\begin{array}{c}n\\ k\end{array}\right]g^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{nk}{2}\right)}.$$

On the other hand, the $`g`$-binomial theorem (cf. \[GR\])

$$(x)_n=\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\left[\begin{array}{c}n\\ k\end{array}\right]g^{1+\mathrm{}+(k1)}(x)^k$$

with $`x=1`$ yields

$$\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\left[\begin{array}{c}n\\ k\end{array}\right]g^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k}{2}\right)}()^k=0\text{ or }\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\left[\begin{array}{c}n\\ k\end{array}\right]g^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{nk}{2}\right)}()^{nk}=0.$$

This leads to

$$X(n1,n)=\frac{g^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}\right)}+()^n}{[n]!},$$

proving the Lemma, and so the Proposition.

### 3.2 Evaluation of $`A_k`$

###### Proposition 6

$$\begin{array}{cc}A_k\hfill & =[01\mathrm{}k]\times \{\text{sum of the monomials in }0,1,\mathrm{},k\text{ of length at most }k\}\hfill \\ & =[01\mathrm{}k]\underset{p=0}{\overset{k1}{}}A_pX_{kp},\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`A_0=1`$.

For example

$$\begin{array}{cc}A_1\hfill & =[01],\hfill \\ A_2\hfill & =[012](X_2+[01]),\hfill \\ A_3\hfill & =[0123](X_3+[01]X_2+A_2),\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Proposition 7

$$A_k=\frac{()^k(1g)^k}{(a)_k(g)_k},k=0,1,\mathrm{}$$

$`B_k`$ is given from this formula by replacing $`a`$ by $`b`$.

Proof. We compute

$$\underset{k=0}{\overset{n1}{}}A_kX_{nk}=X_n\left[1+A_1\frac{X_{n1}}{X_n}+\mathrm{}+A_k\frac{X_{nk}}{X_n}+\mathrm{}+A_{n1}\frac{X_1}{X_n}\right].$$

Since we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}X_k=\frac{\left(1g\right)^kg^{\left({\scriptscriptstyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k}{2}}\right)}}{\left(g\right)_k}\hfill & =\frac{1}{\left(1+g^1\right)\mathrm{}\left(1+g^1+\mathrm{}+g^{k+1}\right)}\hfill \\ & =\frac{\left(1g^1\right)^k}{\left(1g^1\right)\left(1g^2\right)\mathrm{}\left(1g^k\right)}=\frac{\left(1g^1\right)^k}{\left(g^k\right)_k},\hfill \end{array}$$

and so

$$\begin{array}{cc}\frac{X_{nk}}{X_n}\hfill & =(1g^1)^k\frac{\left(g^n\right)_n}{\left(g^{nk}\right)_{nk}}\hfill \\ & =(1g^1)^k(1g^n)\mathrm{}(1g^{n+k1})=\frac{\left(g^n\right)_k}{\left(1g^1\right)^k}=g^k\frac{\left(g^n\right)_k}{\left(g1\right)^k},\hfill \end{array}$$

by the induction hypothesis, we have

$$A_k\frac{X_{nk}}{X_n}=\frac{(g^n)_k}{(a)_k(g)_k}g^k.$$

On the other hand, the reversed $`q`$-Chu-Vandermonde formula (cf. §6.2) on the basic hypergeometric function $`\phi `$:

$$\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{(q^n)_k(b)_k}{(q)_k(c)_k}=:{}_{2}{}^{}\phi _{1}^{}(\begin{array}{c}q^n,b\\ c\end{array};q,q)=\frac{(c/b;q)_n}{(c;q)_n}b^n$$

with $`qg,ca,`$ and $`b0`$ yields

$$\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{(g^n)_k}{(a)_k(g)_k}g^k=\frac{(a)^ng^{1+\mathrm{}+(n+1)}}{(a)_n}=\frac{(a)^ng^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}\right)}}{(a)_n}.$$

Thus we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}1+A_1\frac{X_{n1}}{X_n}+\mathrm{}+A_k\frac{X_{nk}}{X_n}+\mathrm{}+A_{n1}\frac{X_1}{X_n}\hfill & =\frac{\left(a\right)^ng^{\left({\scriptscriptstyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}}\right)}}{\left(a\right)_n}\frac{\left(g^n\right)_ng^n}{\left(a\right)_n\left(g\right)_n}\hfill \\ & =\frac{a^ng^{\left({\scriptscriptstyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}}\right)}g^{\left({\scriptscriptstyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}}\right)}}{\left(a\right)_n}()^n,\hfill \end{array}$$

and so

$$\begin{array}{cc}_{k=0}^{n1}A_kX_{nk}\hfill & =X_n\left[1+\mathrm{}+A_n\frac{X_1}{X_n}\right]\hfill \\ & =\frac{\left(1g\right)^ng^{\left({\scriptscriptstyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}}\right)}}{\left(g\right)_n}\frac{a^ng^{\left({\scriptscriptstyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}}\right)}g^{\left({\scriptscriptstyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}}\right)}}{\left(a\right)_n}()^n=\frac{\left(g1\right)^n\left(a^ng^{2\left({\scriptscriptstyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}}\right)}1\right)}{\left(a\right)_n\left(g\right)_n}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Therefore we have

$$A_n=[01\mathrm{}n]\underset{k=0}{\overset{n1}{}}A_kX_{nk}=\frac{(g1)^n}{(a)_n(g)_n},$$

ending the proof.

### 3.3 Evaluation of $`J_n`$, end of the proof of Theorem 1

###### Proposition 8

$$\underset{i,j0,i+jn}{}A_iX_{nij}B_j=\frac{(g1)^n(abg^{n1})_n}{(a)_n(b)_n(g)_n}.$$

Proof. In the course of the proof of the previous Proposition, we proved

$$\underset{i=0}{\overset{m}{}}A_iX_{mi}=\frac{(g1)^ma^mg^{2\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m}{2}\right)}}{(a)_m(g)_m}=:C_m.$$

We compute

$$\underset{j=0}{\overset{n}{}}\underset{i=0}{\overset{nj}{}}A_iX_{nij}B_j=\underset{j=0}{\overset{n}{}}C_{nj}B_j=C_n\underset{j=0}{\overset{n}{}}B_j\frac{C_{nj}}{C_n}.$$

Since we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}(a)_n\hfill & =(1a)(1ag)\mathrm{}(1ag^{n1})\hfill \\ & =(a)^ng^{1+\mathrm{}+(n1)}(1a^1)(1a^1g^1)\mathrm{}(1a^1g^{1n}),\hfill \end{array}$$

and so

$$\frac{(a)_n}{(a)_{nj}}=(a)^j\frac{g^{1+\mathrm{}+(n1)}}{g^{1+\mathrm{}+(nj1)}}(a^1g^{1n})_j,\frac{(g)_n}{(g)_{nj}}=(g)^j\frac{g^{1+\mathrm{}+(n1)}}{g^{1+\mathrm{}+(nj1)}}(g^n)_j,$$

we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\frac{C_{nj}}{C_n}\hfill & =(g1)^ja^j\frac{\left(a\right)_n\left(g\right)_n}{\left(a\right)_{nj}\left(g\right)_{nj}}g^{(nj)(nj1)g^{n(n1)}}\hfill \\ & =(a^1g^{1n})_j(g^n)_j(g1)^jg^j,\hfill \end{array}$$

and so

$$B_j\frac{C_{nj}}{C_n}=\frac{(g^n)_j(a^1g^{1n})_j}{(b)_j(g)_j}g^j.$$

On the other hand the reversed $`q`$-Chu-Vandermonde formula above yields

$$\underset{j=0}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{(g^n)_j(a^1g^{1n})_j}{(b)_j(g)_j}g^j=\frac{(abg^{n1})_n}{(b)_n}(a^1g^{1n})^n.$$

Now we finish the proof:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\underset{j=0}{\overset{n}{}}\underset{i=0}{\overset{nj}{}}A_iX_{nij}B_j\hfill & =C_n\underset{j=0}{\overset{n}{}}B_j\frac{C_{nj}}{C_n}=C_n\frac{(abg^{n1})_n}{(b)_n}(a^1g^{1n})^n\hfill \\ & =\frac{\left(g1\right)^na^ng^{n\left(n1\right)}}{\left(a\right)_n\left(g\right)_n}\frac{\left(abg^{n1}\right)_n}{\left(b\right)_n}(a^1g^{1n})^n\hfill \\ & =\frac{\left(g1\right)^n\left(abg^{n1}\right)_n}{\left(a\right)_n\left(b\right)_n\left(g\right)_n}.\hfill \end{array}$$

## 4 Review of 2D and 3D cases

### 4.1 2D case

The Pentagon $`T:=xy=0xy1`$ is a Terada-2 with code $`01234`$. It has

1D faces

$$(01),(12),(23),(34)=(012),(40)=(123),$$

0D faces

$$(01)(23),(01)(34),(12)(34),(12)(40),(23)(40).$$

Exponents of the 1D faces are

$$(01)\mathrm{}a,(12)\mathrm{}g^2,(23)\mathrm{}b,$$

$$(34)=(012)\mathrm{}a^2g^2,(40)=(123)\mathrm{}g^2b^2;$$

put

$$[01]=\frac{1}{a1},[12]=\frac{1}{g^21},[34]=[012]=\frac{1}{a^2g^21},$$

and so on. Then we have the self-intersection number of $`T=xy=01234`$:

$$\begin{array}{cc}xyxy\hfill & =1+[01]+[12]+[23]+[34]+[40]\hfill \\ & +[01][23]+[01][34]+[12][34]+[12][40]+[23][40].\hfill \end{array}$$

Since $`yx=02134`$ is adjacent to $`T`$ along the edge $`(12)`$, computing the self-intersection number of the edge $`(12)`$, we have

$$xyyx=g[12]\{1+[34]+[40]\}.$$

Let us add these:

$$\begin{array}{cc}1+(1g)[12]\hfill & +[01]+[012](1+(1g)[12]+[01])\hfill \\ & +[23]+[123](1+(1g)[12]+[23])+[01][23].\hfill \end{array}$$

Note that the sum of the terms free of $`a`$ and $`b`$ is $`1+(1g)[12]`$, and the sum of the terms with the factor $`a^2g^21`$ is $`[012](1+(1g)[12]+[01])`$.

### 4.2 3D case

The Terada-3 $`T:=0xyz1`$ is now coded by $`012345`$. It has

2D faces of 2 kinds

$$(01),\mathrm{},(50);(012)=(345),(123)=(456),(234)=(501),$$

1D faces of 2 kinds

$$(01)(23);(01)(012),$$

0D faces of 2 kinds

$$(01)(23)(45),(12)(34)(50);(01)(12)(012).$$

Exponents of the 2D faces are

$$(01)\mathrm{}a,(12),(23)\mathrm{}g^2,(34)\mathrm{}b,$$

$$(45)=(0123)\mathrm{}a^3g^6,(50)=(1234)\mathrm{}g^6b^3,$$

$$(012)\mathrm{}a^2g^2,(123)\mathrm{}g^6,(234)\mathrm{}g^2b^2.$$

Recall the notation:

$$[01]:=F(a),[12]:=F(g^2),\mathrm{},[50]:=F(g^6b^3),\mathrm{},[234]:=F(g^2b^2).$$

The faces touching the $`3!`$ T3’s are $`xyz=123`$ itself and

through 2D faces:

$$(12),(23);(123),$$

through 1D faces:

$$(12)(123),(23)(123).$$

Then counting all the faces of $`012345`$, we have the self-intersection number of $`T`$:

$$xyzxyz=\{1+[01]+\mathrm{}+[50]+[012]+[123]+[234]+[01][23]+\mathrm{}\}.$$

Through the face $`(12)`$, $`T`$ is adjacent to $`yxz=021345`$; evaluating the self-intersection number of the face $`(01)`$, we have

$$xyzyxz=g[12]\{1+[34]+[45]+[50]+[123]+[012]+[34][50]+[34][012]+\mathrm{}\}$$

Through the face $`(123)`$, $`T`$ is adjacent to $`zyx=032145`$; evaluating the self-intersection number of the face $`(123)`$, we have

$$xyzzyx=g^3[123]\{1+[12]+[23]+[45]+[50]+[12][45]+\mathrm{}\}$$

Along the face $`(12)(123)`$, $`T`$ touches $`zxy=031245`$; evaluating the self-intersection number of the face $`(12)(123)`$, we have

$$xyzzxy=g[12]g^3[123]\{1+[45]+[50]\}.$$

Let us add these terms. First the sum $`X_3`$ of the terms free of $`a`$ and $`b`$:

$$\begin{array}{cc}X_3\hfill & :=1+[12]+[23]+[123]+[12][123]+[23][123]\hfill \\ & g[12]\{1+[123]\}g[23]\{1+[123]\}+g^3[123]\{1+[12]+[23]\}\hfill \\ & g[12]g^3[123]\{1\}g[23]g^3[123]\{1\}\hfill \\ & =(1[12](g1)[23](g1))(1+[123](1+g^3))\hfill \\ & =\frac{g^3}{\left(g+1\right)\left(g^2+g+1\right)}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Next sum of the terms with the factor $`[0123]=(a^3g^61)^1`$ is $`[0123]`$ times

$$\begin{array}{c}X_3([01]+[01][23]+[012](1+[01]+[12])+g[12][012]+g[23][01]\hfill \\ =X_3[01](1[23](g1))[012](1[12](g1)+[01])\hfill \\ =X_3\frac{1}{a1}\frac{g}{g+1}\frac{1}{a^2g^21}\frac{ag+1}{(a1)(g+1)}\hfill \\ =\frac{\left(a^3g^61\right)}{\left(a1\right)\left(ag1\right)\left(ag^21\right)\left(g+1\right)\left(g^2+g+1\right)}.\hfill \end{array}$$

## 5 Proof of Theorem 2

Evaluation of intersection of cohomology is simpler than that of homology. Especially the evaluation of the self-intersection number of the form corresponding to a chamber is the sum of the contribution of every vertices. Let us see for example the $`n`$-beta function

$$B(\alpha _0,\mathrm{},\alpha _n):=_{t_j>0,t_1+\mathrm{}+t_n<1}t_1^{\alpha _11}\mathrm{}t_n^{\alpha _n1}(1t_1\mathrm{}t_n)^{\alpha _01}𝑑t_1\mathrm{}𝑑t_n.$$

The quadratic relation reads

$$B(\alpha _0,\mathrm{},\alpha _n)B(\alpha _0,\mathrm{},\alpha _n)=\frac{1_0^na_i}{_0^n(1a_i)}(2\pi i)^n\frac{\alpha _0+\mathrm{}+\alpha _n}{\alpha _0\mathrm{}\alpha _n},$$

where the first factor of the right hand-side is the self-intersection of the loaded simplex

$$\mathrm{\Delta }:t_j>0,t_1+\mathrm{}+t_n<1$$

and the second factor is the self-intersection of the twisted form

$$\frac{dt_1\mathrm{}dt_n}{t_1\mathrm{}t_n(1t_1\mathrm{}t_n)}.$$

The former is the sum of the contributions of all faces of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ :

$$1+\underset{i}{}\frac{1}{a_i1}+\underset{i<j}{}\frac{1}{(a_i1)(a_j1)}+\mathrm{}+\underset{i}{}\frac{1}{_{ji}(a_j1)},$$

and the latter is the sum of the contribution of just the vertices of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$:

$$\underset{i}{}\frac{1}{_{ji}\alpha _j}\text{at the point }x_j=0(ji).$$

Now we consider Terada-$`n`$ $`T`$ as a polyhedron. The self-intersection number

$$\omega :=\frac{dt_1\mathrm{}dt_n}{_{i=1}^nt_i(1t_i)}$$

is $`(2\pi i)^nn!`$ times the sum of the local contribution at every vertex of $`T`$ not touching another Terada-$`n`$, because $`\omega `$ has no poles of type

$$\frac{dt_1}{t_1}\mathrm{}\frac{dt_n}{t_n}$$

at vertices touching another Terada-$`n`$. Such a vertex will be said to be admissible. Let us work in this line.

* 2D case: admissible vertices are (in Figure 1, they are marked)

$$(012)(01),(01)(34),(34)(234);$$

so the sum of the contributions are

$$\frac{1}{2\alpha +2\gamma }\frac{1}{\alpha }+\frac{1}{\alpha }\frac{1}{\beta }+\frac{1}{\beta }\frac{1}{2\beta +2\gamma }=\frac{1}{2}\frac{(\alpha +\beta +\gamma )(\alpha +\beta +2\gamma )}{\alpha (\alpha +\gamma )\beta (\beta +\gamma )}.$$
* 3D case: admissible vertices are (in Figure 3, they are marked)

$$(0123)(012)(01),(012)(01)(45),(01)(45)(345),(45)(345)(2345);$$

so the sum of the contributions are

$$\frac{1}{3\alpha +6\gamma }\frac{1}{2\alpha +2\gamma }\frac{1}{\alpha }+\frac{1}{2\alpha +2\gamma }\frac{1}{\alpha }\frac{1}{\beta }+\frac{1}{\alpha }\frac{1}{\beta }\frac{1}{2b+2g}+\frac{1}{\beta }\frac{1}{2\beta +2\gamma }\frac{1}{3\beta +6\gamma }$$

$$=\frac{1}{3!}\frac{(\alpha +\beta +2\gamma )(\alpha +\beta +3\gamma )(\alpha +\beta +4\gamma )}{\alpha (\alpha +\gamma )(\alpha +2\gamma )\beta (\beta +\gamma )(\beta +2\gamma )}.$$
* $`n`$D case: admissible vertices are, for $`k=0,\mathrm{},n,`$

$$(01)(012)\mathrm{}(01\mathrm{}k)(k^{}\mathrm{}n^{})\mathrm{}({}_{}{}^{}nnn^{})(nn^{});$$

so the sum of the contributions are

$$\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{1}{_{i=1}^k(i\alpha +i(i1)\gamma )_{j=1}^{nk}(j\beta +j(j1)\gamma )}.$$

Theorem 2 claims that this is equal to

$$=\frac{1}{n!}\frac{(\alpha +\beta +(n1)\gamma )(\alpha +\beta +n\gamma )\mathrm{}(\alpha +\beta +(2n2)\gamma )}{\alpha (\alpha +\gamma )\mathrm{}(\alpha +(n1)\gamma )\beta (\beta +\gamma )\mathrm{}(\beta +(n1)\gamma )}.$$

Proof. In this proof $`(\alpha )_n:=\alpha (\alpha +1)\mathrm{}(\alpha +n1).`$ The sum in question equals

$$\begin{array}{cc}& =\frac{1}{n!}\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{k}\right)\frac{1}{{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}}(\alpha +(i1)\gamma ){\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{nk}{}}}(\beta +(j1)\gamma )}\hfill \\ & =\frac{1}{n!}\frac{1}{{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(\beta +(j1)\gamma )}\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{k}\right)\frac{{\displaystyle \underset{j=nk+1}{\overset{n}{}}}(\beta +(j1)\gamma )}{{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}}(\alpha +(i1)\gamma )}\hfill \\ & =\frac{1}{n!}\frac{1}{{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(\beta +(j1)\gamma )}\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{(n)_k\left({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{\gamma }}n+1\right)_k}{k!\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\gamma }}\right)_k}.\hfill \end{array}$$

On the other hand, the Chu-Vandermonde formula (a special case of Gauss’s summation formula) for the value of the hypergeometric function $`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}`$ at $`1`$:

$${}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(\begin{array}{c}n,\beta \\ \gamma \end{array};1)=\frac{(\gamma \beta )_n}{(\gamma )_n}$$

implies that the sum above equals

$$\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{(n)_k\left({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{\gamma }}n+1\right)_k}{k!\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\gamma }}\right)_k}=\frac{{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(\alpha +\beta +(n1+j1)\gamma )}{{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(\alpha +(j1)\gamma )},$$

which ends the proof.

## 6 Appendix

### 6.1 Standard loading

For a set of hyperplanes $`f_j(t)=0`$ in the complex affine $`n`$-space and complex numbers (called exponents) $`\alpha _j`$, we consider a (multi-valued) function

$$u=\underset{j}{}f_j(t)^{\alpha _j}$$

on $`X:=𝐂^n_j\{f_j=0\}.`$ The function $`u`$ determines the local system $`𝒮=𝒮_u`$ on $`X`$. When every $`f_j`$ is defined over $`𝐑`$, the real locus $`X_𝐑`$ breaks into simply connected chambers. For each chamber $`D`$ we load

$$\underset{j}{}(\epsilon _jf_j(t))^{\alpha _j},\mathrm{arg}\epsilon _jf_j(t)=0,$$

where $`\epsilon _j=\pm `$ is so determined that $`\epsilon _jf_j(t)`$ is positive on $`D`$. This way of loading is said to be standard. This loading is already used in \[MiY\], though the terminology ‘standard’ is not used.

In all the other publications of the authors, chambers are loaded in a different way: each chamber is loaded with a branch (result of analytic continuation along a fixed path) of a fixed function element of $`u`$ at a specific base point. This loading is often convenient in practical computation. But it has a fatal disadvantage: it depends on the choice of the base point and the paths. As a result, the intersection matrices are not symmetric.

On each chamber, the old loading and the standard loading differ only by a multiplicative constant, and their global monodromy representation (of the fundamental group) coincides, of course. So the differnce might look minor, but this standard loading has apparent advantages: it does not require any base point nor fixed paths, and the intersection matrices are symmetric.

Here we present the simplest example. In the $`x`$-space, we consider

$$u=x^\alpha (1x)^\beta (2x)^\delta .$$

Let us load the interval $`I_0:=(0,1)`$ and $`I_1:=(1,2)`$ in a standard way, that is, we load $`I_0`$ with $`u_0:=x^\alpha (1x)^\beta (2x)^\delta `$, and $`I_1`$ with $`u_1:=x^\alpha (x1)^\beta (2x)^\delta `$, where the aregument of positive numbers are supposed to be 0. By making regularizations (by putting kintamas), we evaluate the intersection numbers as:

$$(\mathrm{reg}I_1)\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_0=(\mathrm{reg}I_0)\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_1=\frac{e^{\pi i\beta }}{e^{2\pi i\beta 1}}.$$

If we choose a base point in the lower half $`x`$-space, and load these intervals with the result of analytic continuations of u along paths in the lower half-space connecting the base point and the intervals, and if we write the loads on the intervals $`I_0`$ and $`I_1`$ by $`u_0^{}`$ and $`u_1^{}`$, respectively, they are related as

$$u_0^{}=Cu_0,u_1^{}=Ce^{\pi i\beta }u_1,$$

where $`C`$ is a constant depending on the choice of the branch of $`u`$ at the base point. Their intersection numbers are now evaluated as

$$(\mathrm{reg}I_1)\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_0=\frac{e^{2\pi i\beta }}{e^{2\pi i\beta }1},(\mathrm{reg}I_0)\stackrel{ˇ}{I}_1=\frac{1}{e^{2\pi i\beta }1}.$$

These non-symmetric formulae are commonly presented, for instance in \[Yo1\] (Chap 4 §7).

### 6.2 $`q`$-Chu-Vandermonde formulae

We give a proof of the reversed $`q`$-Chu-Vandermonde formula

$`{}_{2}{}^{}\phi _{1}^{}(\begin{array}{c}q^n,b\\ c\end{array};q,q)={\displaystyle \frac{(c/b)_n}{(c)_n}}b^n.`$ (4)
Reversing the order of the finite sum

$${}_{2}{}^{}\phi _{1}^{}(\begin{array}{c}q^n,b\\ c\end{array};q,x)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}A_i,A_i=\frac{(q^n)_i(b)_i}{(q)_i(c)_i}x^n,$$

as

$$A_n\left(1+\frac{A_{i1}}{A_n}+\mathrm{}+\frac{A_i}{A_n}+\mathrm{}+\frac{A_n}{A_n}\right),$$

we have

$`{}_{2}{}^{}\phi _{1}^{}(\begin{array}{c}q^n,b\\ c\end{array};q,x)=()^nq^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+1}{k}\right)}{\displaystyle \frac{(b)_n}{(c)_n}}x^n{}_{2}{}^{}\phi _{1}^{}(\begin{array}{c}q^n,c^1q^{1n}\\ b^1q^{1n}\end{array};q,{\displaystyle \frac{c}{b}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^{n+1}}{x}}).`$ (9)
Indeed since

$$\frac{(q^n)_{ni}}{(q^n)_n}\frac{(q)_n}{(q)_{ni}}=q^{(n+1)i}\frac{(q^n)_i}{(q)_i}\text{ and }\frac{(c)_n}{(c)_{ni}}\frac{(b)_{ni}}{(b)_n}=\left(\frac{c}{b}\right)^i\frac{(c^1q^{1n})_i}{(b^1q^{1n})_i}$$

hold, we have

$$\frac{A_{ni}}{A_n}=\frac{(q^n)_{ni}(q)_n}{(q)_{ni}(q^n)_n}\frac{(q)_{ni}(c)_n}{(c)_{ni}(b)_n}x^i=\frac{(c^1q^{1n})_i}{(b^1q^{1n})_i}\frac{(q^n)_i}{(q)_i}\left(\frac{c}{b}\frac{q^{n+1}}{x}\right)^i,$$

which proves the above formula (9). Putting $`x=cq^n/b`$ in this formula, we have

$`{}_{2}{}^{}\phi _{1}^{}(\begin{array}{c}q^n,b\\ c\end{array};q,{\displaystyle \frac{cq^n}{b}})=()^n\left({\displaystyle \frac{c}{b}}\right)^nq^{\frac{1}{2}n(n1)}{\displaystyle \frac{(b)_n}{(c)_n}}{}_{2}{}^{}\phi _{1}^{}(\begin{array}{c}q^n,c^1q^{1n}\\ b^1q^{1n}\end{array};q,q).`$ (14)
On the other hand the $`q`$-analogue of the Gauss’s sum due to Heine (cf. \[GR\]) reads

$${}_{2}{}^{}\phi _{1}^{}(\begin{array}{c}a,b\\ c\end{array};q,\frac{c}{ab})=\frac{(c/b)_{\mathrm{}}(c/b)_{\mathrm{}}}{(c)_{\mathrm{}}(c/ab)_{\mathrm{}}}.$$

This yields ($`a=q^n`$) the $`q`$-Chu-Vandermonde formula

$`{}_{2}{}^{}\phi _{1}^{}(\begin{array}{c}q^n,b\\ c\end{array};q,{\displaystyle \frac{c}{b}}q^n)={\displaystyle \frac{(c/b)_n}{(c)_n}}.`$ (17)
Since the left hand-sides of (14) and (17) coincide, we have

$${}_{2}{}^{}\phi _{1}^{}(\begin{array}{c}q^n,c^1q^{1n}\\ b^1q^{1n}\end{array};q,q)=\frac{(c/b)_n}{(b)_n}()^n\left(\frac{b}{c}\right)^nq^{\frac{1}{2}n(n1)}.$$

If we put $`c^1q^{1n}b`$ and $`b^1q^{1n}c`$, then this leads to (4).

Acknowledgement. The second author is grateful to Joichi Kaneko for his encouragement.