text:
# Contents

## 1 Introduction

The representation of the symmetry groups in the functional space seems to be interesting in the applications of theory of integrable systems for construction of the Universal R-matrix , which intertwins two arbitrary representations, because it provides a unique approach to the representations regardless to their dimensions .
The representations of $`q`$-deformed (quantum) groups ,  for positive real values of deformation parameter are, in fact, the same as for non-deformed case. When $`q`$ takes arbitrary complex values q-deformed universal enveloping algebra becomes complex with non-unitary representations, which are less interesting from the physical point of view. However, the realization of the representation in the space of functions does not differ from the case of positive real values of $`q`$.
The only exception is the case of complex roots of unity, which has been considered at the early stage of studying of quantum groups . The new type of representations (cyclic) appears in this case. The unitary representations in this case exists and appear in physical applications . The complete set of irreducible representations of $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$ was presented in .
The eigenvalues and eigenvectors of Universal R-matrix were calculated using functional representations for Heisenberg magnet invariant with respect to $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$, $`s\mathrm{}(2|1)`$ and $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$ symmetry groups. The Universal R-matrix in mentioned cases was realized also as an integral operator .

## 2 The case of isotropic (XXX) Heisenberg model

It is reasonable to start the description of the proposed method with discussion of more simple case of the isotropic, i.e. $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$-invariant, Heisenberg spin chain. The integrability of that model is based on the fundamental Yang-Baxter relation (YBE):

$$R_{12}(uv)R_{13}(u)R_{23}(v)=R_{23}(v)R_{13}(u)R_{12}(uv),$$
(2.1)
here operators $`R_{ij}`$ act on tensor product of two representations of $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$ algebra: $`V_iV_j`$. In the simplest case, when all of spaces $`V_i`$ correspond to the fundamental (two-dimensional) representation, the solution to the Yang-Baxter equation is given by the $`R`$-matrix of minimal possible dimension $`4\times 4`$:

$$R(u)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}a& & & \\ & b& c& \\ & c& b& \\ & & & a\end{array}\right),$$
(2.2)
where non-zero matrix elements are:

$$a=u+\eta ,b=u,c=\eta .$$

Here $`u`$ is a spectral parameter of the theory and $`\eta `$ is some model parameter, which can be set equal to unity. The next in complexity solution is the Lax operator, which corresponds to the case when YBE (2.1) is defined on an arbitrary and two fundamental spaces.

$$R_{12}(uv)L_1(u)L_2(v)=L_2(v)L_1(u)R(uv).$$
(2.3)
Originally the Lax operator appeared in Korteveg-de Vries equation  and some other famous problems . In present context it has form:

$$L(u)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}u+\eta S& \eta S^{}\\ \eta S^+& u\eta S\end{array}\right)=u+\eta \sigma _aS^a,$$
(2.4)
where $`\sigma _a`$, $`a=1,2,3`$ are Pauli matrices. When spin of the operators $`S`$, entering into the $`L`$-operator, is equal to $`1/2`$, i.e. third space also is two-dimensional, they can be identified with Pauli matrices: $`S^a=\frac{1}{2}\sigma ^a`$ and that definition coincides with (2.2). The relation (2.4) takes place due to the commutation relations of the $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$ algebra for operators $`S^a`$.

$$[S,S^\pm ]=\pm S^\pm ,[S^+,S^{}]=2S.$$
(2.5)
An arbitrary representation of this algebra can be realized in the space of polynomials of one real or complex variable $`x`$. The general representation of $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$ is specified by one parameter $`\mathrm{}`$, which is the spin of the representation. The generators (2.5) can be realized as differential operators:

$$S^{}=,S=x\mathrm{},S^+=2\mathrm{}xx^2.$$
(2.6)
In this realization the lowest weight vector always exists. It is annihilated by the lowering generator $`S^{}`$ and is obviously given by a constant function. The representation space is given then by linear combinations of monomials:

$$\{x^n\}.$$
(2.7)
This monomials appear after repeating action of rising generator $`S^+`$ on the lowest weight vector. If parameter $`\mathrm{}`$ is specified by half integer number: $`2\mathrm{}=N`$, this procedure is ended on $`N`$-th step as it can be seen from definition (2.6). In this case the representation possesses also the highest weight vector and is finite-dimensional $`d=N+1`$. Otherwise the process of creating of new vectors is not finished and for general complex values of $`\mathrm{}`$ the representation $`V_{\mathrm{}}`$ is infinite-dimensional. The tensor product of two such representations can be built in similar way in the space of functions of two variables. The $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$ generators are given then by the sum of corresponding generators:

$$S^{}=_1+_2,S=x_1_1+x_2_2\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2,$$
(2.8)
$$S^+=2\mathrm{}_1x_1+2\mathrm{}_2x_2x^2_1x^2_2.$$

The lowest weight vector $`\phi _0(x_1,x_2)`$ is defined again as a solution to the equation:

$$S^{}\phi _0(x_1,x_2)=0,$$

and is given by the monomials of translational invariant difference: $`(x_1x_2)^n`$. The whole space of tensor product $`V_\mathrm{}_1V_\mathrm{}_2`$ is reduced to the space of polynomials of variable $`x_1`$ with degree not more than $`2\mathrm{}_1`$ and of variable $`x_2`$ with the degree no more than $`2\mathrm{}_2`$ if both parameters $`2\mathrm{}_i`$ are given by positive integer numbers. Otherwise it is infinite-dimensional and given by the linear space with basis:

$$\phi _n^m(x_1,x_2)=(S^+)^m\phi _n(x_1,x_2),\phi _n(x_1,x_2)=(x_1x_2)^n.$$
(2.9)
The next in complexity solution is related to the case when one of vector spaces in (2.3) corresponds to the fundamental representation of $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$ while two others are arbitrary ones. Corresponding Yang-Baxter equation can be used as a defining relation to determine the universal $`R`$-operator. Let third space to be fundamental. Lax operators are $`2\times 2`$ matrices with respect to the third space and are differential operators with respect to the first and the second spaces, while the Universal $`R`$-operator is inert (scalar) with respect to the third space and is complicated pseudo-differential operator acting on the second and third spaces. So YBE (2.3) has to be understood as a matrix relation $`2\times 2`$ both sides of which act on some function, belonging to tensor product $`V_1V_2`$.
The authors of  used this approach to determine a recurrent relation on the matrix elements of the universal $`R`$-matrix in finite-dimensional case. To carry out the same procedure in this case we shall use a manifest form of $`L`$-operator and shall separate dependence on $`u+v`$ and $`uv`$. Then YBE takes the form:

$$R_{12}(u)S^a=S^aR_{12}(u),$$

$$R_{12}(u)K(u)=\overline{K}(u)R_{12}(u),$$

where we denoted

$$K(u)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{u}{2}(S_2S_1)+S_1S_2+S_1^{}S_2^+& \frac{u}{2}(S_2^{}S_1^{})+S_1S_2^{}S_1^{}S_2\\ \frac{u}{2}(S_2^+S_1^+)S_1S_2^++S_1^+S_2& \frac{u}{2}(S_1S_2)+S_1S_2+S_1^+S_2^{}\end{array}\right),$$

and

$$\overline{K}(u)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{u}{2}(S_2S_1)+S_1S_2+S_1^+S_2^{}& \frac{u}{2}(S_2^{}S_1^{})+S_1^{}S_2S_1S_2^{}\\ \frac{u}{2}(S_2^+S_1^+)+S_1S_2^+S_1^+S_2& \frac{u}{2}(S_1S_2)+S_1S_2+S_1^{}S_2^+\end{array}\right).$$

The first relation expresses $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$-invariance of the $`R`$-operator. This fact has the number of important sequences: the action of the $`R`$-operator has to be defined on all vectors of basis $`(S^+)^m\phi _n(x_1,x_2)`$, $`(m,n=0,1,2,3\mathrm{})`$. However due to commutativity of $`R`$-operator with $`S^+`$ one can restrict oneself only to consideration of the lowest weight vectors $`\phi _n(x_1,x_2)`$, because on vectors created from the lowest weight ones by $`S^+`$ YBE will take place automatically. It follows from the symmetry relations that $`R`$-operator commutes with Casimir operator:

$$𝐂=(S_1^a+S_2^a)^2,$$

i.e. these operators have common set of eigenstates. In other words, the lowest weight vectors and vectors created from them by the action of rising generator $`(S^+)^m\phi _n(x_1,x_2)`$ are eigenstates of the $`R`$-operator with eigenvalues which independent on $`m`$. Then, the matrices $`K(u)`$ and $`\overline{K}(u)`$ transform covariantly with respect to the algebra $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$:

$$[\sigma ^aS^a,K(u)]=0,[\sigma ^a+S^a,\overline{K}(u)]=0.$$

This relation means the linear dependence of corresponding equations. In order to determine eigenvalues of the $`R`$-operator it is enough to solve the simplest equation corresponding to the right upper corner of matrices $`K`$ on lowest weight vectors. One has:

$$R(u)K^{}(u)(x_1x_2)^N=(\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1Nu)R(u)(x_1x_2)^{N1}=\overline{K}^{}R(u)(x_1x_2)^N,$$

and as vectors $`(x_1x_2)^N`$ are eigenstates of the $`R`$-operator one can deduce from here the following recurrent relation on eigenvalues of the $`R`$-operator:

$$R_N(u)=R_{N1}(u)\frac{\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1Nu}{\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1N+u},$$
(2.10)
$$R_N(u)=(1)^NR_0(u)\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1nu}{\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1n+u}.$$

Using this recurrent relation one can restore explicit form of the universal $`R`$-matrix for given value of parameters $`\mathrm{}_1`$ and $`\mathrm{}_2`$. Some simple examples are given in Appendix.

## 3 $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$ algebra.

Arguments presented in previous section work almost without any changes in other, more complicated cases. The case of usual so called $`q`$-deformation, which corresponds to violation of three-dimensional rotational symmetry of XXX Heisenberg model to cylindrical symmetry of XXZ model is considered below. The case of Heisenberg chain invariant with respect to the superalgebra $`s\mathrm{}(2|1)`$ was considered in . The work devoted to consideration of the model deformed by the dimensionful parameter, which is more interesting from the physical point of view is in progress .
Mentioned symmetry violation in XXZ model described by introduction a new parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{cos}\lambda `$ into Hamiltonian. This new model can be considered as deformation of isotropic model and namely in that context the notion of quantum group was appeared . However there exists another point of view , according to which general integrable two-dimensional quantum field theory at classic level is described by Yang-Baxter equation corresponding to rational dependence of the $`R`$-matrix on spectral parameter (analog of XXX chain), while upon quantization the quantum fluctuations leads to the appearance of quantum anomalies, describing violation, more correctly deformation of some classic symmetries of the initial theory. It is equivalent to deformation of the representation space structure, i.e. eigenvalues and eigenstates of the physical quantities such as anomalous dimensions.
So in this way, $`q`$\- or quantum deformation of $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$ has two aspects. The first one consists of deformation of algebra itself:

$$[S,S^\pm ]=\pm S^\pm ,[S^+,S^{}]=\frac{q^{2S}q^{2S}}{qq^1}.$$
(3.11)
In the space of polynomials $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$ generators can be realized through differential operators as follows:

$$S^{}=\frac{1}{x}\frac{q^xq^x}{qq^1},S=x\mathrm{},S^+=x\frac{q^{2\mathrm{}x}q^{x2\mathrm{}}}{qq^1}.$$
(3.12)
These operators more correctly should be called finite-difference rather than differential taking into account that on test function $`f(x)`$ these act according to formulae:

$$q^{aS}f(x)=q^a\mathrm{}f(q^ax),$$

$$S^{}f(x)=\frac{f(qx)f(q^1x)}{x(qq^1)},$$

$$S^+f(x)=x\frac{q^2\mathrm{}f(q^1x)q^2\mathrm{}f(qx)}{qq^1}.$$

One can pass from multiplicative action of these operators to the additive one using simple change of variables $`x=q^t`$:

$$q^S=q^{\mathrm{}}e^_tq^Sf(t)q^{\mathrm{}}f(t+1)$$

$$S^{}=q^t\frac{e^_te^_t}{qq^1},S^{}f(t)q^t\frac{f(t+1)f(t1)}{qq^1}$$
(3.13)
$$S^+=q^t\frac{q^2\mathrm{}e^_tq^2\mathrm{}e^_t}{qq^1},S^+f(t)q^t\frac{q^2\mathrm{}f(t1)q^2\mathrm{}f(t+1)}{qq^1}.$$

In this form the origin of name finite-difference operator becomes absolutely clear.
As for the case of non-deformed symmetry the representation of the algebra is realized in the space of polynomials. This argument was crucial for the choice (3.12) of spin generators. Indeed, the operator of finite-difference derivative $`S^{}`$ annihilates a constant function, which can be chosen as the lowest weight vector. Then acting repeatedly by rising generator one creates higher powers of variable $`x`$ and that process is ended only if parameter $`2\mathrm{}`$ is given by positive integer. In this case representation possesses also highest weight vector $`x^2\mathrm{}`$ and is finite-dimensional. Otherwise it is infinite-dimensional.
Algebra (3.11) possesses the central element, Casimir operator. (In this section we consider the case of general complex values of deformation parameter $`q`$ different from the roots of unity.)

$$𝐂=S^+S^{}+[S]_q[S1]_q=S^{}S^++[S]_q[S+1]_qf(x).$$
(3.14)
here notation $`[N]_q`$ is used for $`q`$-deformed numbers: $`[N]_q=\frac{q^Nq^N}{qq^1}`$. It is easy to see that in above mentioned realization of spin operators (3.12) the Casimir is proportional to unity:

$$𝐂f(x)=[\mathrm{}]_q[\mathrm{}+1]_q.$$

So, for the general values of deformation parameter $`q`$ the finite-dimensional representations are given by the same spaces $`𝐂^{2\mathrm{}+1}`$ as in non-deformed case. The case of arbitrary complex $`\mathrm{}`$ corresponds to the infinite-dimensional space of polynomials. The case $`|q|=1`$ requires more careful analysis, in particular for $`q^N=\pm 1`$, the new type representations appear. Those representations called cyclic ones and have no classic (non-deformed) analog. In this section we restrict ourselves to case $`|q|0`$. Such kind of deformation reduces complex plane to a strip. It becomes obvious by considering spin operators in terms of variable $`t`$ (3.13).
In order to construct the representation with lowest (highest) weight vector it is necessary to solve the following equation:

$$S^{}\phi _0=0,\left(S^+\phi _0=0\right),$$

for the lowest (highest) vector. One has:

$$S^{}\phi _0(t)=\frac{q^t}{qq^1}\left[\phi _0(t+1)\phi _0(t1)\right]=0,\phi _0(t+1)=\phi _0(t1).$$

In other words the lowest weight vector is given by functions of the form:

$$\phi _0(t)=\underset{k}{}a_ke^{i\pi kt},$$

with arbitrary complex coefficients $`a_k`$. Then the lowest weight vector creates the whole representation space :

$$\{\phi _n(t)\}=\{(S^+)^n\phi _0(t)\},$$
(3.15)
$$\phi _n(t)=(S^+)^n\phi _0(t)=[2\mathrm{}]_q[2\mathrm{}1]_q\mathrm{}[2\mathrm{}n+1]_q\underset{k}{}(1)^{nk}a_ke^{(i\pi k+n\mathrm{log}q)t}.$$

The lowest weight vectors $`\phi _0^{(k)}(t)a_ke^{i\pi kt}`$ appears to be eigenstates of operator of third projection of spin:

$$q^S\phi _0^{(0)}(t)=(1)^kq^{\mathrm{}}\phi _0^{(k)}(t).$$

These create the equivalent representations: $`\{\phi _0^{(k)}(t)\}=\{q^{nt}e^{i\pi kt}\}`$. However remaining in the frame of the strip $`\mathrm{arg}q[0,2\pi ]`$ one can ignore that difference and consider the representation realized in terms of variable $`x`$.
Another aspect of transition from $`s\mathrm{}(2)`$ to $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$ is related to deformation of tensor product. The simple rule of spin addition $`S^a=S_1^a+S_2^a`$ is not working, because the sum of generators does not satisfy to the algebra 3.11). The simple scaling arguments lead to the following modification:

$$S=S_1+S_2,$$

(this is because the symmetry with respect to rotations around the $`z`$-axis preserves)

$$S^+=q^{aS_1}S_2^++q^{bS_2}S_1^+,S^{}=q^{cS_1}S_2^{}+q^{dS_2}S_1^{}.$$

Then compound generators satisfy to commutation relations (3.11) upon conditions $`d=a`$, $`c=b`$ and $`ab=\pm 2`$. In this way two different co-product can be introduced (remaining parameter $`a`$ can be absorbed by redefinition of operators):

$$S^+=S_1^+q^{S_2}+q^{S_1}S_2^+,$$

$$\mathrm{\Delta }:S=S_1+S_2,$$
(3.16)
$$S^{}=S_1^{}q^{S_2}+q^{S_1}S_2^{},$$

and

$$\overline{S}^+=S_1^+q^{S_2}+q^{S_1}S_2^+,$$

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}:\overline{S}=S_1+S_2,$$
(3.17)
$$\overline{S}^{}=S_1^{}q^{S_2}+q^{S_1}S_2^{}.$$

Note that introduced co-products do not preserve symmetry with respect to exchange $`qq^1`$. It means that building the tensor product using of them one will deal with two equivalent but different realizations of the same space $`V`$ ($`\overline{V}`$), corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ ($`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$). The spaces $`V`$ and $`\overline{V}`$ built from linear combinations of vectors: $`(S^+)^m\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q)\phi _N^m(x_1,x_2|q)`$ and $`(\overline{S}^+)^m\overline{\phi }_N(x_1,x_2|q)\overline{\phi }_N^m(x_1,x_2|q)`$ correspondingly (so called Drinfel’d quantum double) . Here we introduce the lowest weight vectors

$$\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}(q^{\mathrm{}_1+1n}x_1x_2q^{n1\mathrm{}_2}),$$
(3.18)
which correspond to solutions to the equations:

$$S^{}\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q)=0,$$

and similarly for over barred quantities: $`\overline{\phi }_N(x_1,x_2|q)=\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q^1)`$. The vectors $`\phi _N^m(x_1,x_2|q)`$ ($`\overline{\phi }_N^m(x_1,x_2|q)`$), form basis in the space $`V`$ ($`\overline{V}`$) and are eigenstates of Casimir operators

$$𝐂^{(\mathrm{𝟐})}=q^{S_2S_1+1}S_1^+S_2^{}+q^{S_2S_11}S_1^{}S_2^+(qq^1)^2\left((q+q^1)\left(1+q^{2S_22S_1}\right)\right)+$$

$$q^{2S_2}[\mathrm{}_1]_q[\mathrm{}_1+1]_q+q^{2S_1}[\mathrm{}_2]_q[\mathrm{}_2+1]_q$$

and

$$\overline{𝐂}^{(\mathrm{𝟐})}=\left(q^{S_1S_21}S_1^+S_2^{}+q^{S_1S_2+1}S_1^{}S_2^+\right)(qq^1)^2\left((q+q^1)\left(1+q^{2S_12S_2}\right)\right)+$$

$$q^{2S_2}[\mathrm{}_1]_q[\mathrm{}_1+1]_q+q^{2S_1}[\mathrm{}_2]_q[\mathrm{}_2+1]_q,$$

correspondingly

$$𝐂(S^+)^m\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q)=[N\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2]_q[N\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_21]_q(S^+)^m\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q).$$

The same is true for over barred quantities. Note that like in non-deformed case the eigenstates are degenerate over index $`m`$.

## 4 Yang-Baxter relation

The solution to the YB relation for XXZ spin $`\frac{1}{2}`$ chain has the same form as for isotropic chain (2.2) but with trigonometric dependence on spectral parameter $`u`$:

$$a=q^{u+1}q^{u1},b=q^uq^u,c=qq^1,$$

. The deformation parameter $`q=e^{i\lambda }`$ enters here through anisotropy parameter of XXZ chain: ($`\mathrm{cos}\lambda =\mathrm{\Delta }`$). We use notations of article . The fundamental representation is again given by the Pauli matrices as for $`2\times 2`$ matrices the relations (3.11) coincide with non-deformed ones. The Lax operator of XXZ model is given by the expression

$$L_{\mathrm{},a}(u)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}q^{u+S}q^{uS}& (qq^1)S^{}\\ (qq^1)S^+& q^{uS}q^{u+S}\end{array}\right).$$
(4.19)
The Yang-Baxter relation for two fundamental and one arbitrary representation take place due to commutation relations (3.11) for spin operators. When $`q1`$ these relations go to the non-deformed (2.5).
In order to determine the universal $`R`$-operator we consider YBE for spins $`\mathrm{}_1`$, $`\mathrm{}_2`$ and $`\frac{1}{2}`$:

$$R_{\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2}(uv)(\begin{array}{cc}q^{u+S_1}q^{uS_1}& (qq^1)S_1^{}\\ (qq^1)S_1^+& q^{uS_1}q^{u+S_1}\end{array})(\begin{array}{cc}q^{v+S_2}q^{vS_2}& (qq^1)S_2^{}\\ (qq^1)S_2^+& q^{vS_2}q^{v+S_2}\end{array})=$$
(4.20)
$$(\begin{array}{cc}q^{v+S_2}q^{vS_2}& (qq^1)S_2^{}\\ (qq^1)S_2^+& q^{vS_2}q^{v+S_2}\end{array})(\begin{array}{cc}q^{u+S_1}q^{uS_1}& (qq^1)S_1^{}\\ (qq^1)S_1^+& q^{uS_1}q^{u+S_1}\end{array})R_{\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2}(uv).$$

As mentioned above, the main intertwining property of the $`R`$-operator consists in that it intertwines two different, corresponding to co-products $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ realizations of the spaces of representations $`V`$ and $`\overline{V}`$:

$$R(u)\mathrm{\Delta }=\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}R(u).$$
(4.21)
Separating in YBE dependence on $`uv`$ and $`u+v`$ one obtains that it equivalent to the following set of equations:

$$[R_{\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2}(u),q^{S_1+S_2}]=0,$$
(4.22)
$$R(u)\left(q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_1}S_2^{}+q^{\frac{u}{2}S_2}S_1^{}\right)=\left(q^{\frac{u}{2}S_1}S_2^{}+q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_2}S_1^{}\right)R(u),$$
(4.23)
$$R(u)\left(q^{\frac{u}{2}S_1}S_2^++q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_2}S_1^+\right)=\left(q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_1}S_2^++q^{\frac{u}{2}S_2}S_1^+\right)R(u),$$
(4.24)
$$R(u)\left(q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_2}S_1^{}+q^{\frac{u}{2}S_1}S_2^{}\right)=\left(q^{\frac{u}{2}S_2}S_1^{}+q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_1}S_2^{}\right)R(u),$$
(4.25)
$$R(u)\left(q^{\frac{u}{2}S_2}S_1^++q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_1}S_2^+\right)=\left(q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_2}S_1^++q^{\frac{u}{2}S_1}S_2^+\right)R(u),$$
(4.26)
?

$$R(u)\left(q^{u+S_1S_2}+q^{u+S_2S_1}(qq^1)^2S_1^{}S_2^+\right)=$$

$$\left(q^{u+S_1S_2}+q^{u+S_2S_1}(qq^1)^2S_1^+S_2^{}\right)R(u),$$
(4.27)
$$R(u)\left(q^{u+S_2S_1}+q^{u+S_1S_2}(qq^1)^2S_1^+S_2^{}\right)=$$

$$\left(q^{u+S_2S_1}+q^{u+S_1S_2}(qq^1)^2S_1^{}S_2^+\right)R(u).$$
(4.28)
One deduces from this set that it compatible with general unitarity property of $`R`$-operator:

$$R^1(u)=R(u).$$

Indeed, multiplying (4.25) by $`R^1(u)`$ from the right and from the left one sees that operator $`R^1(u)`$ satisfies to the relation (4.23) with exchange $`uu`$, i.e. $`R^1(u)`$ and $`R(u)`$ satisfy to the same equations (the same is true for eqs. (4.26) and (4.24), (4.27) and (4.28)).
Moreover, being physically observable quantity $`R`$-matrix has to be single-valued function of $`q`$, i.e. has to be periodic function of $`\mathrm{log}q`$. In other words $`R`$-matrix has to be inert to the choice of a strip $`\mathrm{arg}q`$ on complex plane.
It follows from the YBE (4.22-4.28) that algebra $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$ is realized by the spin operators which are in addition to definitions (3.16) and (3.17) twisted by spectral parameter:

$$S_u^{}=q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_2}S_1^{}+q^{\frac{u}{2}S_1}S_2^{},$$

$$S_u^+=q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_2}S_1^++q^{\frac{u}{2}S_1}S_2^+,$$
(4.29)
$$S_u=S_1+S_2,$$

and

$$\overline{S}_u^{}=q^{\frac{u}{2}S_2}S_1^{}+q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_1}S_2^{},$$

$$\overline{S}_u^+=q^{\frac{u}{2}S_2}S_1^++q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_1}S_2^+,$$
(4.30)
$$\overline{S}_u=S_1+S_2.$$

This extension is compatible with $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$-invariance of co-products. The Yang-Baxter equations in terms of these operators take more compact form:

$$[R(u),S]=0,$$

$$R(u)\overline{S}_u^{}=S_u^{}R(u),$$

$$R(u)\overline{S}_u^+=S_u^+R(u),$$

$$R(u)S_u^+=\overline{S}_u^+R(u),$$

$$R(u)S_u^{}=\overline{S}_u^{}R(u).$$

It allows to express the main intertwining property of $`R`$-operator as follows:

$$R(u)\mathrm{\Delta }_u=\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}_uR(u)$$
(4.31)
which implies

$$𝐂_uR(u)=R(u)\overline{𝐂}_u,\overline{𝐂}_uR(u)=R(u)𝐂_u.$$

These relations express $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$-invariance of $`R`$-operator, the eigenproblem for which can be formulated as follows:

$$R(u)\overline{\phi }_N^m(x_1,x_2|q,u)=R_N\phi _N^m(x_1,x_2|q,u),$$
(4.32)
$$R(u)\phi _N^m(x_1,x_2|q,u)=\stackrel{~}{R}_N\overline{\phi }_N^m(x_1,x_2|q,u),$$

where vectors $`\phi `$ are the eigenfunctions of Casimir operators constructed from spin operators (4.29) and (4.30). In other words, operator $`R(u)`$ acts on Drinfel’d quantum double $`V\overline{V}`$ in skew-symmetric way:

$$R(u)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\phi _N^m& \\ \overline{\phi }_N^m& \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \stackrel{~}{R}_N\\ R_N& 0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\phi _N^m& \\ \overline{\phi }_N^m& \end{array}\right).$$

If one arranges equations:

$$Rq^{\pm (S_1+S_2)}=q^{\pm (S_1+S_2)}R,$$
(4.33)
$$S_u^{}R=R\overline{S}_u^{},$$
(4.34)
$$S_u^+R=R\overline{S}_u^+,$$
(4.35)
to be the symmetry relations of the $`R`$-operator and denoting remaining equations as follows:

$$RK^{}=\overline{K}^{}R,$$
(4.36)
$$RK^+=\overline{K}^+R,$$
(4.37)
$$RK^+=\overline{K}^+R,$$
(4.38)
$$RK^+=\overline{K}^+R,$$
(4.39)
$$K^{}=S_u^{},\overline{K}^{}=\overline{S}_u^{},K^+=S_u^+,\overline{K}^+=\overline{S}_u^+,$$

$$K^+=q^{u+S_1S_2}+q^{u+S_2S_1}(qq^1)^2S_1^{}S_2^+,$$

$$\overline{K}^+=q^{u+S_1S_2}+q^{u+S_2S_1}(qq^1)^2S_1^+S_2^{},$$

$$K^+=q^{u+S_2S_1}+q^{u+S_1S_2}(qq^1)^2S_1^+S_2^{},$$

$$\overline{K}^+=q^{u+S_2S_1}+q^{u+S_1S_2}(qq^1)^2S_1^{}S_2^+.$$

one obtains:

$$[\overline{S}_u^{},K^{}]=0=[S_u^{},\overline{K}^{}],[\overline{S}_u^+,K^+]=0=[S_u^+,\overline{K}^+],$$

$$[\overline{S}_u^{},K^+]=(qq^1)^1\left(q^{S_1S_2}K^+q^{S_1+S_2}K^+\right),$$

$$[S_u^{},\overline{K}^+]=(qq^1)^1\left(q^{S_1S_2}\overline{K}^++q^{S_1+S_2}\overline{K}^+\right),$$

$$[\overline{S}_u^+,K^{}]=(qq^1)^1\left(q^{S_1S_2}K^++q^{S_1+S_2}K^+\right),$$

$$[S_u^{},\overline{K}^+]=(qq^1)^1\left(q^{S_1S_2}\overline{K}^+q^{S_1+S_2}\overline{K}^+\right).$$

So like in non-deformed case quantities $`K`$ ($`\overline{K}`$’s) are linearly dependent and one can restrict oneself to consideration of symmetry relations (4.33-4.35) and the simplest (4.36) equation among remaining ones.
Let us turn now to the ”eigenproblem” of the $`R`$-operator in sense of definition (4.32) or that is the same, to the problem of finding eigenstates of Casimir operators $`𝒞_u`$ and $`\overline{𝒞}_u`$. It follows from the relation (4.31) that mentioned eigenvectors have the form:

$$\phi _N^m(x_1,x_2|q,u)=(S_u^+)^m\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q,u),$$
(4.40)
and

$$\overline{\phi }_N^m(x_1,x_2|q,u)=\phi _N^m(x_1,x_2|q^1,u),$$

where the lowest weight vectors $`\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q,u)`$ are defined as solutions to the equation

$$S_u^{}\phi (x_1,x_2)=0,$$

in form of polynomials of degree not more than $`N`$ over variables $`x_1`$ and $`x_2`$:

$$\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q,u)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}(q^{\mathrm{}_1+1n\frac{u}{2}}x_1q^{\frac{u}{2}+n1\mathrm{}_2}),$$
(4.41)
$$\overline{\phi }_N(x_1,x_2|q,u)=\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q^1,u)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}(q^{\mathrm{}_11+n+\frac{u}{2}}x_1q^{\frac{u}{2}n+1+\mathrm{}_2}).$$

It is easy to see that functions $`\overline{\phi }(x_1,x_2|q,u)`$ differ from $`\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q,u)`$ by formal exchange $`(x_1,\mathrm{}_1)`$ $``$ $`(x_2,\mathrm{}_2)`$. It can be shown also

$$S_u^{}(\begin{array}{cc}\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q,u)& \\ \overline{\phi }_N(x_1,x_2|q,u)& \end{array})=(\begin{array}{cc}0& \\ (qq^1)[N]_q[\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1Nu]_q\overline{\phi }_{N1}(x_1,x_2|q,u)& \end{array}),$$

$$S_u^{}(\begin{array}{cc}\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q,u)& \\ \overline{\phi }_N(x_1,x_2|q,u)& \end{array})=(\begin{array}{cc}(qq^1)[u]_q[N]_qq^{\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2}\phi _{N1}(q^1x_1,qx_2|q,u)& \\ (qq^1)[N]_q[N1\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2]_q\overline{\phi }_{N1}(x_1,x_2|q,u)& \end{array}),$$

Another relations appearing in eigen-problem (4.32) can be obtained from this one by exchange $`qq^1`$ or $`uu`$. Taking into account that

$$R(u)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q,u)& \\ \overline{\phi }_N(x_1,x_2|q,u)& \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \stackrel{~}{R}_N\\ R_N& 0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q,u)& \\ \overline{\phi }_N(x_1,x_2|q,u)& \end{array}\right),$$
(4.42)
and acting by the relation (4.36) to $`\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q,u)`$ one obtains zero in both sides, while acting to $`\overline{\phi }_N(x_1,x_2|q,u)`$ one obtains desirable recurrent relation on eigenvalues $`R_N`$’s:

$$R_N=R_{N1}\frac{[\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1Nu]_q}{[\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1N+u]_q}$$
(4.43)
multiplied on $`\phi _{N1}(x_1,x_2|q,u)`$. Then acting by the relation (4.34) to $`\overline{\phi }_N(x_1,x_2|q,u)`$ one obtains identity $`0=0`$ and acting to $`\phi _N(x_1,x_2|q,u)`$ one obtains another relation:

$$\stackrel{~}{R}_N=\stackrel{~}{R}_{N1}\frac{[\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1Nu]_q}{[\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1N+u]_q},$$

multiplied on $`\overline{\phi }_{N1}(x_1,x_2|q,u)`$. Notice that due to the relation $`\phi _0(x_1,x_2|q,u)=\overline{\phi }_0(x_1,x_2|q,u)=1`$ the initial conditions of both recurrent relations are the same too $`R_0=\stackrel{~}{R}_0`$ so both quantities coincide for all values $`n`$

$$R_N=\stackrel{~}{R}_N=(1)^NR_0\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{[\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1nu]_q}{[\mathrm{}_1+\mathrm{}_2+1n+u]_q}.$$

That means that eigenvalues of universal $`R`$-operator are inert with respect to exchange $`qq^1`$. Notice also that (4.43) differs from corresponding non-deformed expression consist of the replacement of usual numbers to quantum ones.

## 5 Universal $`R`$-operator for the case of exceptional values of $`q`$.

In this section we consider the case of exceptional values of deformation parameter, corresponding to complex roots of unity of degree $`N`$. We set for definiteness $`q=\mathrm{exp}(2\pi i/N)`$ where $`N`$ is odd number.
In this case the center of algebra $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$ is extended and three more Casimir operator appear: $`q^NS`$ and $`(S^\pm )^N`$. Indeed the relation (3.11) in this case gives:

$$(q^S)^NS^\pm =q^{\pm N}S^\pm q^{NS}=S^\pm (q^S)^N,$$

$$q^S(S^{})^N=q^N(S^{})^Nq^S=(S^{})^Nq^S,$$

$$[S^+,(S^{})^N]=\underset{n=0}{\overset{N1}{}}(S^{})^{Nn1}[S^+,S^{}](S^{})^n=$$

$$\frac{1}{qq^1}\underset{n=0}{\overset{N1}{}}(S^{})^{Nn1}\left(q^{2n}(S^{})^nq^{2S}q^{2n}(S^{})^nq^{2S}\right)=$$

$$\frac{(S^{})^{N1}}{qq^1}\left(q^{2S}\underset{n=0}{\overset{N1}{}}q^{2n}q^{2S}\underset{n=0}{\overset{N1}{}}q^{2n}\right)=0.$$

Here we took into account that for mentioned values of $`q`$ the both sums turn to be zero due to the formula of geometric progression: $`_{n=0}^{N1}q^{2n}=\frac{q^{2N}1}{q^21}=0`$. Similarly one has:

$$[(S^+)^N,S^{}]=0,(S^+)^Nq^S=q^S(S^+)^N.$$

That means that for mentioned operators the relations:

$$(S^\pm )^N=\alpha ^\pm 𝐈,q^{NS}=q^{N\gamma }𝐈,$$
(5.44)
must take place on all vectors of representation. So the functions which form the representation specified by parameters $`\mathrm{}`$, $`\gamma `$ and $`\alpha ^\pm `$ are determined as the solutions to the set of equations:

$$(S^\pm )^Nf(t)=\alpha ^\pm f(t),$$
(5.45)
$$q^{NS}f(t)=q^{N\gamma }f(t).$$

So for exceptional values of deformation parameter the center of $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$ algebra is extended, i.e. the representations are specified by more number of parameters related to the eigenvalues of new Casimir operators, which are constrained by one algebraic condition. It was shown in famous work of Kac and De Concini  that in general case the representations of the $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$ algebra with deformation parameter $`q`$ is given by complex root of unity are specified by three parameters. Indeed definition (3.12) is not most general one. Commutation relations (3.11) can be realized by operators:

$$S^{}=q^{\frac{\lambda }{2}}\frac{1}{x}\frac{q^{x\beta }q^{\beta x}}{qq^1},q^S=q^{\frac{1}{2}(\alpha +\beta )}q^x,S^+=xq^{\frac{\lambda }{2}}\frac{q^{\alpha x}q^{x\alpha }}{qq^1}.$$
(5.46)
However in the case of general values of $`q`$ using of this expression is meaningless because algebra possesses only one free parameter $`2\mathrm{}=\alpha +\beta `$ related to the unique Casimir operator.
It follows from the definition (5.46) that Casimir operator $`q^{NS}`$ acts trivially in functional space:

$$q^{NS}f(x)=q^{\frac{\alpha +\beta }{2}}f(q^Nx)=q^{\frac{\alpha +\beta }{2}}f(x),$$

and is multiple to unity operator i.e. does not provide any restriction on the form of functions which form representation.
The condition $`\alpha ^+(\alpha ^{})=0`$ means that operator $`S^+(S^{})`$ is nilpotent, i.e. there exists vector, which annihilated by that operator and representation possesses highest (lowest) weight vector. Vise versa, if one supposes that highest (lowest) weight vector does not exist then it would contradict to nilpotency of operator $`S^+(S^{})`$. So the representation corresponding to the case $`\alpha ^+(\alpha ^{})=0`$ can be obtained by setting parameter $`q`$ equal to the root of unity in already considered case of representations with highest (lowest) weight vector for general values of $`q`$. So below we suppose that both parameters $`\alpha ^\pm `$ differ from zero. Consider first the equation for operator $`(S^{})^N`$ (equation for $`(S^+)^N`$ can be considered similarly). Commuting multipliers $`q^t=x^1`$ to the left one obtains:

$$(S^{})^Nf(x)=q^{Nt}\underset{n=0}{\overset{N1}{}}[x+n]_qf(x)=\alpha ^{}f(x).$$

Consider the function:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_N(\alpha )\underset{n=0}{\overset{N1}{}}[\alpha +n]_q.$$
(5.47)
From the simple identity

$$[\alpha +kN]_q=[\alpha ]_q,k𝐙$$

one can establish periodicity property:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_N(\alpha +1)=\mathrm{\Phi }_N(\alpha ).$$

It follows from this property that in expansion of the product (5.47) (for $`N`$ odd) to the sum only terms multiple to $`q^{\pm N\alpha }`$ can survive

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_N(\alpha )=(qq^1)^N(q^{\alpha N}q^{\alpha N}).$$
(5.48)
Then equations $`(S^\pm )^Nf(t)=\alpha ^\pm f(t)`$ take the following simple form:

$$(S^+)^Nf(t)=(qq^1)^Nq^{Nt}(q^{\alpha N}f(tN)q^{\alpha N}f(t+N),$$

and

$$(S^{})^Nf(t)=(qq^1)^Nq^{Nt}(q^{N\beta }f(t+N)q^{N\beta }f(tN)).$$

The shift $`tt\pm N`$ in terms of variable $`x`$ means multiplication of the argument by $`q^{\pm N}=1`$, i.e. identity transformation. So we come to the following restriction for functions realizing cyclic representation of the $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$ algebra in form of finite-difference equations:

$$x^{\pm N}f(x)=constf(x).$$
(5.49)
It is well known  that theta-functions possesses such kind quasi-periodicity property. Theta-functions play the role of building blocks for functions defining on Riemann surfaces, which is very similar to the role of monomials $`x^n`$ for building functions on complex plane. However in theory of Riemann surfaces dependence of theta-functions on the second argument $`\tau `$ has crucial significance, in this context the only meaning of second argument is that it provides convergence of corresponding series.
It is reasonable to start the construction of representation after little step back. $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$ algebra is closely related to the Weyl algebra which is formed by two generators $`X`$ and $`Z`$:

$$ZX=qXZ,$$
(5.50)
their arbitrary powers and unity. In the space of functions generators (5.50) can be realized in many ways. We mention two of them: using of our finite-difference operators the generators of Weyl algebra can be realized in most simple way as follows:

$$X=x,Z=q^x.$$
(5.51)
Another realization in which we are interested in related to the theory of theta-functions. Recall , that theta-function is the analytic, which determined by its Fourier series:

$$\theta (t,\tau )=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\mathrm{exp}i\pi (n^2\tau +2nt),Im\tau >0.$$
(5.52)
Theta-functions with characteristics are introduced using quasi-translation operators $`S_a`$ and $`T_b`$:

$$S_bf(t)=f(t+b),T_af(t)=e^{i\pi (a^2\tau +2at)}f(t+a\tau ),$$
(5.53)
which form following algebra:

$$S_aS_b=S_{a+b},T_aT_b=T_{a+b},S_bT_a=e^{2\pi iab}T_aS_b.$$

Then theta-functions with characteristics $`a`$, $`b`$ is defined as result of action of these operators on usual theta-function:

$$\theta _{a,b}(t,\tau )S_bT_a\theta (t,\tau )=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}e^{i\pi [(n+a)^2\tau +2(n+a)(t+b)]}.$$
(5.54)
Easy to see that quasi-translations operators (5.53) form the Weyl algebra if one sets $`q=e^{2i\pi ab}`$. Hence theta-functions with characteristics form the space of representation of the Weyl algebra. In the case when parameter $`q`$ is equal to the root of unity, the generators of Weyl algebra become nilpotent while algebra itself becomes cyclic. In matrix form in this case generator $`Z`$ is given by diagonal square matrix with powers $`q^k`$ $`k=0,1,2,\mathrm{}N1`$ while $`X`$ is square matrix with unities over diagonal and in lower left corner. The representation space is given by the set of $`N`$ theta-functions with characteristics $`b=0`$ and $`a_k=\frac{k}{N}`$. Indeed setting:

$$Z=S_{\frac{1}{N}},X=T_{\frac{1}{N}}$$
(5.55)
one can check that these operators obey to the Weyl algebra (5.50) with $`q=e^{2\pi i/N}`$ and act on mentioned set of theta-functions:

$$\theta _k(t,\tau )(T_{\frac{1}{N}})^k\theta (t,\tau )=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}e^{i\pi [(n+\frac{k}{N})^2\tau +2(n+\frac{k}{N})t]},$$
(5.56)
in following way:

$$Z\theta _k(z,\tau )=e^{\frac{2\pi i}{N}}\theta _k(t,\tau )=q\theta _k(t,\tau ),X\theta _k(z,\tau )=\theta _{k+1}(t,\tau ).$$

Choosing basis of representation as follows:

$$\theta _k(x|\tau )=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{i\pi \tau n^2}x^{Nn+k},$$
(5.57)
one can establish relations:

$$\theta _k(q^{\pm 1}x|\tau )=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{i\pi \tau n^2}x^{Nn+k}q^{\pm (Nn+k)}=q^{\pm k}\theta _k,$$

$$x^{\pm 1}\theta _k(x|\tau )=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{i\pi \tau n^2}x^{Nn+k\pm 1}=\theta _{k\pm 1}(x|\tau ).$$

It follows now that spin operators act on basis as:

$$S^{}\theta _k=q^{\frac{\lambda }{2}}[k\beta ]_q\theta _{k1},$$

$$q^S\theta _k+q^{k\frac{1}{2}(\alpha +\beta )}\theta _k$$
(5.58)
$$S^+\theta _k=q^{\frac{\lambda }{2}}[\alpha k]_q\theta _{k+1}.$$

It can be checked that basis theta-functions still unchanged upon multiplication by $`x^{\pm N}`$. This is because being multiplied to power function theta-function divides its power index by module $`N`$.

## 6 Tensor product of cyclic representations.

In order to determine an action of the $`R`$-operator it is necessary to realize tensor product of two representations on which Casimir operators corresponding to $`N`$’s power of operators (4.29), (4.30) would multiple of unit operator. The tensor products of finite-dimensional irreducible representations of $`s\mathrm{}_q(2)`$ at roots of unity were studied and decomposed into direct sum of irreducible representations by D.Arnaudon . However in present context we are interested in a little bit different approach. Let us define basis elements in this space as follows:

$$\theta _{k_1,k_2}=\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{i\pi n_i\tau ^{ij}n_j}x_1^{Nn_1+k_1}x_2^{Nn_2+k_2},$$
(6.59)
here symmetric matrix $`\tau _{ij}`$ is defined such that its imaginary part sets a negative defined quadratic form. The generators $`Z_i`$ and $`X_i`$ do not lead out from this set of functions:

$$Z_i\theta _{k_1,k_2}=q^{k_i}\theta _{k_1,k_2},X_1\theta _{k_1,k_2}=\theta _{k_1+1,k_2},X_2\theta _{k_1,k_2}=\theta _{k_1,k_2+1}.$$

In fact, as it was shown by V. Bazhanov and Yu. Stroganov , The form of L-operator (4.19) is not the most general one when deformation parameter is given by the root of unity $`q=e^{\frac{2\pi in}{N}}`$, where $`N`$ is primary number. However their extension, which depends on six free parameters was mainly intended to describe the Chiral Potts Model in the approach of Yang-Baxter equation do not leads to any significant changes in present context. The statement of Bazhanov and Stroganov consists of following: the Lax operator (4.19) with finite-difference operators subjected to Bogolyubov transformation for positive- and negative-frequency operators shifting additive variable $`t`$ in positive and negative direction with arbitrary coefficients also obeys to Yang-Baxter equation with standard $`r`$-matrix and $`q`$ given by a root of unity. So using of this more complicated Lax operator leads only to redefinition of eigenvalues of Casimir operators.
It is easy to see that our basis elements are eigenstates of new Casimirs. Indeed, one has

$$S_u^{}\theta _{k_1,k_2}=q^{\frac{1}{2}(u\lambda _1\alpha _2\beta _2)+k_2}[k_1\beta _1]_q\theta _{k_11,k_2}+q^{\frac{1}{2}(\alpha _1+\beta _1u\lambda _2)k_1}[k_2\beta _2]_q\theta _{k_1,k_21},$$

$$S_u^+\theta _{k_1,k_2}=q^{\frac{1}{2}(\lambda _1u\alpha _2\beta _2)+k_2}[\alpha _1k_1]_q\theta _{k_1+1,k_2}+q^{\frac{1}{2}(u+\alpha _1+\beta _1+\lambda _2)k_1}\theta _{k_1,k_2+1}.$$

Then for their $`N`$’s powers one obtains using arguments similar to those above:

$$(S_u^{})^N=q^{N(\frac{u}{2}+S_2)}(S_1^{})^N+q^{N(\frac{u}{2}+S_1)}(S_2^{})^N,$$
(6.60)
$$(S_u^+)^N=q^{N(\frac{u}{2}+S_2)}(S_1^+)^N+q^{N(\frac{u}{2}S_1)}(S_2^+)^N,$$

from which desirable statement is easily deduced:

$$(S_u^{})^N\theta _{k_1,k_2}=$$

$$=\left(q^{\frac{N}{2}(u\alpha _2\beta _2\lambda _1)}(q^{N\beta _1}q^{N\beta _1})+q^{\frac{N}{2}(u+\alpha _1+\beta _1\lambda _2)}(q^{N\beta _2}q^{N\beta _2})\right)\theta _{k_1,k_2},$$

and in similar manner for operators $`S_u^+`$ and $`\overline{S}_u^\pm `$.
So the set of $`N^2`$ functions (6.59) realize the space of tensor product of two representations. We are interested in construction of the eigenvalues of $`R`$-operator. Again, like as for general values of $`q`$ a crucial role play Yag-Baxter relations, which express commutativity of the $`R`$-operator with operators (4.29) and (4.30). Let us look for eigenstates of the $`R`$-operator as a linear combinations of the basis vectors (6.59)

$$\phi _m\underset{k=0}{\overset{N1}{}}a_k\theta _{mk,k}m=0,1,2\mathrm{}N1.$$

The operator $`S_u^{}`$ acts on these states as follows:

$$S_u^{}\phi _m=\underset{k=0}{\overset{n1}{}}a_k(q^{k+\frac{1}{2}(u\alpha _2\beta _2\lambda _1)}[mk\beta _1]_q\theta _{m1k,k}+$$

$$+q^{km+\frac{1}{2}(\alpha _1+\beta _1\lambda _2u)}[k\beta _2]_q\theta _{mk,k1}).$$

One can deduce that choosing:

$$a_{k+1}=a_kq^{u2+\frac{1}{2}(\beta _1+\beta _2\alpha _1+\lambda _2\lambda _1)},a_k=a_0q^{k[u2+\frac{1}{2}(\beta _1+\beta _2\alpha _1+\lambda _2\lambda _1)]},$$
(6.61)
one will obtain:

$$S_u^{}\phi _m(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i)=q^{1+\frac{1}{2}(u\lambda _1+\beta _2\alpha _2)}[m+1\beta _1\beta _2]_q\phi _{m1}(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i).$$
(6.62)
It is easy to check, that operator $`S_u^+`$ shifts the same combination to up by unity:

$$S_u^+\phi _m(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i)=$$
(6.63)
$$=q^{1\frac{1}{2}(u\lambda _1+\beta _2\alpha _2)}[\alpha _1+\alpha _2+1m]_qq^{1+\frac{1}{2}(u+\lambda _2+\beta _1\alpha _1)}\phi _{m+1}(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i).$$

The similar formulae take place also for operators $`\overline{S}_u^\pm `$:

$$\overline{S}_u^{}\overline{\phi }_m(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i,u)=q^{1\frac{1}{2}(u+\lambda _1+\beta _2\alpha _2)}[m+1\beta _1\beta _2]_q\overline{\phi }_{m1}(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i,u),$$
(6.64)
$$\overline{S}_u^+\overline{\phi }_m(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i,u)=q^{\frac{1}{2}(u+\lambda _1+\beta _2\alpha _2)1}[\alpha _1\alpha _2+1m]_q\overline{\phi }_{m+1}(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i,u),$$

where

$$\overline{\phi }_m(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i,u)\underset{k=0}{\overset{N1}{}}q^{k[2u+\frac{1}{2}(\alpha _1+\alpha _2\beta _1\beta _2+\lambda _2\lambda _1)]}\theta _{mk,k}.$$
(6.65)
So these relations are compatible each to other and to Yang-Baxter equations:

$$R_m(u)=q^{2u+\alpha _2\beta _2\lambda _1}R_{m1}=q^{m(2u+\alpha _2\beta _2\lambda _1)}R_0(u),$$
(6.66)
if one sets

$$R(u)\phi _m(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i,u)=R_m(u)\overline{\phi }_m(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i,u),$$

and

$$R(u)\overline{\phi }_m(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i,u)=R_m(u)\phi _m(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\lambda _i|x_i,u).$$

In fact the eigenvalues of the $`R`$-operator can be turn to unity by redefinition of eigenstates $`\phi _m`$ (by absorption of phase multipliers).

## 7 Acknowledgements

This work is supported by Volkswagen Foundation of Germany, by INTAS grants 00-561, 00-0390 and by Swiss SCOPE grant.

## 8 Conclusion

In this way realizing the generators of the $`sl_q(2)`$ algebra generators in form of differential, more precisely finite-difference operators (3.12) or (3.13) it is appears to be possible to construct the functional representation (LABEL:fk), which allows to deal with representations of any dimension and to construct tensor product of such representations and define the universal $`R`$-operator on this product. Also it is possible to find eigenstates of the $`R`$-operator in that space and corresponding eigenvalues for general and for exceptional values of deformation parameter. Presented method works both for finite-dimensional both for infinite-dimensional representations. In particular it is applicable to the cyclic representations at roots of unity, which have no classic analogs.

## 9 Appendix

In this appendix we show how obtained formulae can be used to construct $`R`$-matrix for given representations. For general values of deformation parameter the representations are given by the same spaces $`𝐂^{2\mathrm{}+1}`$, as in non-deformed case. So one has for $`\mathrm{}=\frac{1}{2}`$:

$$S^+=x\frac{q^{1x}q^{x1}}{qq^1}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),S^{}=\frac{1}{x}\frac{q^xq^x}{qq^1}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),$$

$$S=x1/2=1/2\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right),q^{aS}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}q^{\frac{a}{2}}& 0\\ 0& q^{\frac{a}{2}}\end{array}\right)$$

normalized vectors are:

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \\ 1& \end{array}\right)=1,\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& \\ 0& \end{array}\right)=x.$$

The tensor product of such representations is built to be:

$$1=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & \\ 0& & & \\ 0& & & \\ 1& & & \end{array}\right),x_1=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & \\ 1& & & \\ 0& & & \\ 0& & & \end{array}\right),x_2=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & \\ 0& & & \\ 1& & & \\ 0& & & \end{array}\right),x_1x_2=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& & & \\ 0& & & \\ 0& & & \\ 0& & & \end{array}\right),$$

the spin operators are:

$$S_u^+=S_1^+q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_2}+q^{\frac{u}{2}S_1}S_2^+=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& q^{\frac{u1}{2}}& q^{\frac{1u}{2}}& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& q^{\frac{u+1}{2}}\\ 0& 0& 0& q^{\frac{u+1}{2}}\\ 0& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)$$

$$S_u^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 0& 0& 0\\ q^{\frac{u+1}{2}}& 0& 0& 0\\ q^{\frac{u+1}{2}}& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& q^{\frac{u1}{2}}& q^{\frac{1u}{2}}& 0\end{array}\right),S=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right),q^{aS}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}q^a& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& q^a\end{array}\right).$$

Casimirs are calculated to be:

$$𝐂_u=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}q+q^1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& q^1& q^u& 0\\ 0& q^u& q& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& q+q^1\end{array}\right),\overline{𝐂}_u=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}q+q^1& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& q& q^u& 0\\ 0& q^u& q^1& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& q+q^1\end{array}\right).$$

and have following eigenvalues:

$$\phi _0=\overline{\phi }_0=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & \\ 0& & & \\ 0& & & \\ 1& & & \end{array}\right),\phi _1(u)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & \\ q^{\frac{1u}{2}}& & & \\ q^{\frac{u1}{2}}& & & \\ 0& & & \end{array}\right),\phi _0^1(u)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & \\ q^{\frac{u+1}{2}}& & & \\ q^{\frac{u+1}{2}}& & & \\ 0& & & \end{array}\right),\phi _0^2(u)=(q+q^1)\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& & & \\ 0& & & \\ 0& & & \\ 0& & & \end{array}\right).$$

Over barred quantities are obtained by replacement $`qq^1`$ and by simultaneous change of sign of argument $`\phi (u)`$. Looking at the form of eigenvectors it is easy to guess that $`R(u)`$-matrix has block-diagonal form:

$$R(u)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}g& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& a& b& 0\\ 0& c& d& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& h\end{array}\right).$$

The recurrence relation gives:

$$R_1=R_0\frac{[u1]_q}{[u+1]_q}$$

then relations $`R(u)\overline{\phi }_1(u)=R_1\phi _1(u)`$ and $`R(u)\phi _1(u)=\stackrel{~}{R}_1\overline{\phi }_1(u)`$ lead to the following conditions:

$$(q^{u1}q^{1u})b=(qq^1)R_1=(q^{u1}q^{1u})c,$$

$$(q^{u1}q^{1u})a=(q^uq^u)R_1=(q^{u1}q^{1u})d,$$

while $`R(u)\phi _0=R_0\phi _0`$ gives $`g=h=R_0`$. In this way:

$$R(u)=\frac{R_1}{q^{u1}q^{1u}}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}q^{u+1}q^{u1}& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& q^uq^u& qq^1& 0\\ 0& qq^1& q^uq^u& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& q^{u+1}q^{u1}\end{array}\right),$$

in accordance with the initial relation. This $`R`$-matrix could be obtained in other way too:

$$R(u)=[u+1]_q(\overline{\phi }_0(u)\times \phi _0^T(u)+\frac{1}{q+q^1}\overline{S}_u^+\overline{\phi }_0(u)\times \phi _0^T(u)S_u^{}+$$

$$\frac{1}{(q+q^1)^2}\overline{(}S_u^+)^2\overline{\phi }_0(u)\times \phi _0^T(u)(S_u^{})^2)\frac{[u1]_q}{q+q^1}\overline{\phi }_1(u)\times \phi ^T_1.$$

here we omitted the factor: $`\frac{R_0}{[u+1]_q}`$. Consider now the case $`\mathrm{}_1=\frac{1}{2}`$, $`\mathrm{}_2=1`$. Spin operators take form:

$$S_2=x_2_21=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right),q^{aS}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}q^a& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& q^a\end{array}\right),$$

$$S^+=x_2\frac{q^{2x_2_2}q^{x_2_22}}{qq^1}=\sqrt{q+q^1}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right),$$

$$S^{}=\frac{1}{x_2}\frac{q^{x_2_2}q^{x_2_2}}{qq^1}=\sqrt{q+q^1}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0\end{array}\right).$$

These act on tensor product according to formulae:

$$S^+=q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_2}S_1^++q^{\frac{u}{2}S_1}S_2^+=$$

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}0& q^{\frac{u}{2}}\sqrt{1+q^2}& 0& q^{1\frac{u}{2}}& & \\ 0& 0& q^{\frac{u}{2}}\sqrt{1+q^2}& & q^{\frac{u}{2}}& \\ 0& 0& 0& & & q^{1\frac{u}{2}}\\ & & & 0& q^{\frac{u}{2}}\sqrt{1+q^2}& 0\\ & & & 0& 0& q^{\frac{u}{2}}\sqrt{1+q^2}\\ & & & 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right),$$

$$S^{}=q^{\frac{u}{2}+S_2}S_1^++q^{\frac{u}{2}S_1}S_2^{}=$$

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}0& 0& 0& & & \\ q^{\frac{u}{2}}\sqrt{1+q^2}& 0& 0& & & \\ 0& q^{\frac{u}{2}}\sqrt{1+q^2}& 0& & & \\ q^{1+\frac{u}{2}}& & & 0& 0& 0\\ & q^{\frac{u}{2}}& & q^{\frac{u}{2}}\sqrt{1+q^2}& 0& 0\\ & & q^{1+\frac{u}{2}}& 0& q^{\frac{u}{2}}\sqrt{1+q^2}& 0\end{array}\right).$$

The lowest weight vectors are determined to be:

$$\phi _0=\overline{\phi }_0=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}0& & & & & \\ 0& & & & & \\ 0& & & & & \\ 0& & & & & \\ 0& & & & & \\ 1& & & & & \end{array}\right),\phi _1(u)=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}0& & & & & \\ 0& & & & & \\ \frac{q^{\frac{u}{2}}}{\sqrt{q+q^1}}& & & & & \\ 0& & & & & \\ \frac{q^{\frac{u}{2}}}{\sqrt{q+q^1}}& & & & & \\ 0& & & & & \end{array}\right).$$

Comparing with the non-deformed case one can see that matrix structure of the representation does not changed and all difference consist of the replacement of ordinary numbers to the quantum ones:

$$R_{\frac{1}{2},1}^q=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}g& 0& 0& 0& & \\ 0& a& 0& b& & \\ 0& 0& d& 0& b& 0\\ 0& b& 0& d^{}& 0& 0\\ & & b& 0& a^{}& 0\\ & & 0& 0& 0& g\end{array}\right).$$

The recurrence relation for present case takes form:

$$R_1=\frac{[u\frac{3}{2}]_q}{[u+\frac{3}{2}]_q}R_0,$$

Taking into account that $`\phi _0`$ and $`\phi _0^3`$ are constant vectors, i.e. are independent on $`u`$ and inert with respect to the replacement $`q`$ to $`q^1`$ one immediately obtains:

$$g=R_0.$$

Acting by the $`R`$-matrix on the lowest weight vectors one obtains the following set of equations:

$$d\frac{cq^{u1}}{\sqrt{1+q^2}}=q^1R_1,b\frac{aq^{u1}}{\sqrt{1+q^2}}=\frac{q^uR_1}{\sqrt{1+q^2}},$$

$$d\frac{cq^{1u}}{\sqrt{1+q^2}}=qR_1,b\frac{aq^{1u}}{\sqrt{1+q^2}}=\frac{q^uR_1}{\sqrt{1+q^2}},$$

which leads to

$$c=\frac{\sqrt{q+q^1}R_1}{[u\frac{3}{2}]_q}=c^{},d=\sqrt{q+q^1}R_1\frac{[u\frac{1}{2}]_q}{[u\frac{3}{2}]_q},a=\sqrt{q+q^1}R_1\frac{[u+\frac{1}{2}]_q}{[u\frac{3}{2}]_q}.$$

The remaining relations give:

$$R_{\frac{1}{2},1}^q(u)=\frac{R_1}{[u\frac{3}{2}]_q}\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}[u+\frac{3}{2}]_q& & & 0& 0& 0\\ & [u+\frac{1}{2}]_q& & \sqrt{q+q^1}& 0& 0\\ & & [u\frac{1}{2}]_q& 0& \sqrt{q+q^1}& 0\\ 0& \sqrt{q+q^1}& 0& [u\frac{1}{2}]_q& & \\ 0& 0& \sqrt{q+q^1}& & [u+\frac{1}{2}]_q& \\ 0& 0& 0& & & [u+\frac{3}{2}]_q\end{array}\right).$$

which is also coincides with non-deformed result under replacement of ordinary numbers to the quantum ones.
Let us consider then more consistent case $`\mathrm{}_1=\mathrm{}_2=1`$. The vectors $`\phi _N^m(u)`$ are given by the following matrix expressions:

$$\phi _0(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 1& & & & & & & & \end{array}\right),\phi _0^4(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}1& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \end{array}\right),\phi _0^1(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q^{\frac{u}{2}1}& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ \frac{u}{2}+1& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \end{array}\right),\phi _0^3(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & & & & & & & \\ q^{\frac{u}{2}1}& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q^{\frac{u}{2}+1}& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \end{array}\right),$$

$$\phi _1(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q^{1\frac{u}{2}}& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q^{\frac{u}{2}1}& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \end{array}\right),\phi _1^2(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & & & & & & & \\ q^{1\frac{u}{2}}& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q^{\frac{u}{2}1}& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \end{array}\right),\phi _1^1(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q^u& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ qq^1& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q^u& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \end{array}\right),$$

$$\phi _2(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q^{1u}& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 1& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q^{u1}& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \end{array}\right),\phi _0^2(u)=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q^{2u}& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q+q^1& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ q^{u+2}& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \\ 0& & & & & & & & \end{array}\right).$$

$`R`$-matrix again has the same block form as in non-deformed case as it can be seen from the form of its eigenvectors:

$$R_1(u)=[u2]_q[u+1]_q\frac{R_0(u)}{[u+1]_q[u+2]_q},R_2(u)=[u2]_q[u1]_q\frac{R_0(u)}{[u+1]_q[u+2]_q}.$$

From the condition $`R(u)\phi _0(u)=R_0(u)\overline{\phi }_0(u)`$ one obtains:

$$g=R_0(u).$$

The same is true for $`\phi _0^4`$. The next eigenvalue leads for $`\phi _1(u)`$ leads to the set of equations:

$$q^{1\frac{u}{2}}eq^{\frac{u}{2}1}f=q^{1\frac{u}{2}}R_1(u),q^{1\frac{u}{2}}fq^{\frac{u}{2}1}e=q^{1+\frac{u}{2}}R_1(u),$$

and the same for $`\phi _1^2(u)`$. One has:

$$e=[u]_q[u+1]_q\frac{R_0(u)}{[u+1]_q[u+2]_q},f=[2]_q[u+1]_q\frac{R_0(u)}{[u+1]_q[u+2]_q}.$$

The equations for $`\phi _0^1(u)`$ and $`\phi _0^3(u)`$ lead to the same values for $`e`$ and $`f`$. While equations for $`\phi _2(u)`$, $`\phi _1^1(u)`$ and $`\phi _0^2(u)`$ result to:

$$bq^{1u}d+cq^{u1}=q^{u1}R_2(u),$$

$$dq^{1u}a+dq^{u1}=R_2(u),$$

$$cq^{1u}d+bq^{u1}=q^{u+1}R_2(u),$$

$$bq^u+d(qq^1)cq^u=q^uR_1(u),$$

$$dq^u+a(qq^1)dq^u=(qq^1)R_1(u),$$

$$cq^u+d(qq^1)bq^u=q^uR_1(u),$$

$$bq^{u2}+d(q+q^1)+cq^u=q^{2u}R_0(u),$$

$$dq^{u2}+a(q+q^1)+dq^u=(q+q^1)R_0(u),$$

$$cq^{u2}+d(q+q^1)+bq^u=q^{u2}R_0(u).$$

This set is consistent and has following solution:

$$d=[u]_q[2]_q\frac{R_0(u)}{[u+1]_q[u+2]_q},c=[2]_q\frac{R_0(u)}{[u+1]_q[u+2]_q},$$

$$b=[u]_q[u1]_q\frac{R_0(u)}{[u+1]_q[u+2]_q},a=([u]_q[u+1]_q+[2]_q)\frac{R_0(u)}{[u+1]_q[u+2]_q}.$$

The final result has form:

$$R(u)=$$
(9.67)
$$\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}[u+1][u+2]& & & & & & & & \\ & [u][u+1]& & [2][u+1]& & & & & \\ & & [u][u1]& & [2][u]& & [2]& & \\ & [2][u+1]& & [u][u+1]& & & & & \\ & & [2][u]& & [u][u+1]+[2]& & [2][u]& & \\ & & & & & [u][u+1]& & [2][u+1]& \\ & & [2]& & [2][u]& & [u][u1]& & \\ & & & & & [2][u+1]& & [u][u+1]& \\ & & & & & & & & [u+1][u+2]\end{array}\right).$$


format: text

text:
# Semiclassical spin coherent state method in the weak spin-orbit coupling limit

## 1 Introduction

A new solution to the problem of how to include spin-orbit interaction in the semiclassical theory was recently proposed by Pletyukhov et al. . They use the spin coherent states to describe the spin degrees of freedom of the system. Then a path integral that combines the spin and orbital variables can be constructed, leading to the semiclassical propagator (or its trace) when evaluated within the stationary phase approximation. In such an approach the spin and orbital degrees of freedom are treated on equal footings. In particular, one can think of a classical trajectory of the system in the extended phase space, i.e., the phase space with two extra dimensions due to spin. (The spin part of the extended phase space can be mapped onto the Bloch sphere.) Like in the pure orbital systems, it is possible to construct a classical Hamiltonian that will be a function of the phase space coordinates. The trajectories of the system satisfy the equations of motion generated by this Hamiltonian.

In this letter we apply the general theory  to the limiting case of weak spin-orbit coupling. This limit is naturally incorporated in the theory proposed by Bolte and Keppeler  that based on the $`\mathrm{}0`$ expansion in the Dirac (or Schrödinger) equation. Bolte and Keppeler have shown that the semiclassical trace formula without spin-orbit interaction acquires an additional modulation factor due to spin, but otherwise remains unchanged. We obtain the same modulation factor using the spin coherent state method.

## 2 Classical dynamics and periodic
orbits

We begin with the classical phase space symbol of the Hamiltonian

$$H(p,q,z)=H_0(p,q)+\kappa \mathrm{}S𝝈(z)𝐂(p,q)H_0+\mathrm{}H_{\mathrm{so}}.$$
(1)
It includes the spin-orbit interaction term $`\mathrm{}H_{\mathrm{so}}`$ which is linear in spin, but otherwise is an arbitrary function of (possibly multidimensional) momenta and coordinates $`p`$ and $`q`$. The spin direction is described by a unit vector $`𝝈(z)\stackrel{def}{=}z\left|\widehat{𝝈}\right|z`$, where $`\widehat{𝝈}`$ are the Pauli matrices and the complex variable $`zuiv`$ labels the spin coherent states of total spin $`S`$ . At the end of our calculations we will set $`S=\frac{1}{2}`$. The Planck constant appears explicitly in this classical Hamiltonian and is treated as the perturbation parameter in the weak-coupling limit. The spin-orbit coupling strength $`\kappa `$ is kept finite. Thus the condition $`\mathrm{}0`$ provides both the semiclassical (high energy) and the weak-coupling limits.

The Hamiltonian (1) determines the classical equations of motion for the orbital and spin degrees of freedom

$`\dot{p}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H}{q}}={\displaystyle \frac{H_0}{q}}\kappa \mathrm{}S𝝈{\displaystyle \frac{𝐂}{q}},`$ (2)
$`\dot{q}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H}{p}}={\displaystyle \frac{H_0}{p}}+\kappa \mathrm{}S𝝈{\displaystyle \frac{𝐂}{p}},`$ (3)
$`\dot{𝝈}`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa 𝝈\times 𝐂.`$ (4)
Since

$$𝝈(z)=\frac{1}{1+|z|^2}(2u,2v,|z|^21)^\mathrm{T}$$
(5)
in the “south” gauge,111By the south gauge we mean the choice of parameterization of the spin coherent states by $`z`$ such that $`\sigma _z(|z|\mathrm{})=1`$. Eq. (4) is equivalent to two Hamilton-like equations

$`\dot{u}={\displaystyle \frac{\left(1+|z|^2\right)^2}{4\mathrm{}S}}{\displaystyle \frac{H}{v}}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{4}}\left(1+|z|^2\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{𝝈}{v}}𝐂,`$ (6)
$`\dot{v}={\displaystyle \frac{\left(1+|z|^2\right)^2}{4\mathrm{}S}}{\displaystyle \frac{H}{u}}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{4}}\left(1+|z|^2\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{𝝈}{u}}𝐂.`$ (7)
In the leading order in $`\mathrm{}`$ we keep only the unperturbed terms in Eqs. (2) and (3). It follows then that the orbital motion, in this approximation, is unaffected by spin. The spin motion is determined by the unperturbed orbital motion via Eq. (4), which does not contain $`\mathrm{}`$. It describes the spin precession in the time-dependent effective magnetic field $`𝐂(p_0(t),q_0(t))`$, where $`(p_0(t),q_0(t))`$ is an orbit of the unperturbed Hamiltonian $`H_0`$.

In order to apply a trace formula for the density of states, we need to know the periodic orbits of the system, both in orbital and spin phase space coordinates. The orbital part of a periodic trajectory is necessarily a periodic orbit of $`H_0`$. Assume that such an orbit with period $`T_0`$ is given. Then Eq. (4) generates a map on the Bloch sphere $`𝝈(0)𝝈(T_0)`$ between the initial and final points of a spin trajectory $`𝝈(t)`$. The fixed points of this map correspond to periodic orbits with the period $`T_0`$. Since Eq. (4) is linear in $`𝝈`$, for any two trajectories $`𝝈_\mathrm{𝟏}(t)`$ and $`𝝈_\mathrm{𝟐}(t)`$, their difference also satisfies this equation. But this means that $`|𝝈_\mathrm{𝟏}(t)𝝈_\mathrm{𝟐}(t)|=\mathrm{const}`$, i.e., the angles between the vectors do not change during the motion. Hence the map is a rotation by an angle $`\alpha `$ about some axis through the center of the Bloch sphere. The points of intersection of this axis and the sphere are the fixed points of the map (Fig. 1). Thus for a given periodic orbit of $`H_0`$, there are two periodic orbits of $`H`$ with opposite spin orientations (unless $`\alpha `$ is a multiple of $`2\pi `$, by accident). The angle $`\alpha `$ was mentioned in Ref. .

## 3 Modulation factor

### 3.1 Correction to the action

In order to derive a modulation factor in the trace formula, we need to determine the correction to the action and the stability determinant due to the spin-orbit interaction. The action along a periodic orbit is

$$𝒮=p𝑑q+2S\mathrm{}\frac{udvvdu}{1+|z|^2}𝒮_{pq}+\mathrm{}𝒮_{\mathrm{spin}}.$$
(8)
While the spin part contains $`\mathrm{}`$ explicitly, we need to extract the leading order correction to the orbital action. This is the only place where we implicitly take into account the influence of spin on the orbital motion. It is convenient for the following calculation to parameterize both the perturbed and unperturbed orbits by a variable $`s[0,1]`$, i.e.,

$$𝒮_{pq}=_0^1p\frac{dq}{ds}𝑑s.$$
(9)
The time parameterization would be problematic since the periods of the perturbed and the unperturbed orbits differ by order of $`\mathrm{}`$ (see Appendix A). The correction to the orbital part due to the perturbation is

$`\delta 𝒮_{pq}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^1}\left[\delta p{\displaystyle \frac{dq_0}{ds}}+p_0{\displaystyle \frac{d}{ds}}(\delta q)\right]𝑑s`$ (10)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^1}\left(\delta p{\displaystyle \frac{dq_0}{ds}}\delta q{\displaystyle \frac{dp_0}{ds}}\right)𝑑s+p_0\delta q|_0^1.`$
The boundary term vanishes for the periodic orbit, and the integration can be done over the period of the unperturbed orbit now:

$`\delta 𝒮_{pq}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{T_0}}\left(\delta p\dot{q}_0\delta q\dot{p}_0\right)𝑑t`$ (11)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{T_0}}\left(\delta p{\displaystyle \frac{H_0}{p}}+\delta q{\displaystyle \frac{H_0}{q}}\right)𝑑t={\displaystyle _0^{T_0}}\delta H_0𝑑t.`$
Since the perturbed and unperturbed orbits have the same energy, the variation of the Hamiltonian is $`\delta H_0=\mathrm{}H_{\mathrm{so}}`$. Taking into account Eq. (5), we can express the change in the orbital action as

$$\delta 𝒮_{pq}=\mathrm{}\kappa S_0^{T_0}𝐂𝝈𝑑t=\mathrm{}\kappa S_0^{T_0}𝐂\left(\begin{array}{c}2u\\ 2v\\ |z|^21\end{array}\right)\frac{dt}{1+|z|^2}.$$
(12)
We now turn to the spin action. Parameterizing the trajectory with time and then using the equations of motion (6), (7) and Eq. (5), we find

$`\mathrm{}𝒮_{\mathrm{spin}}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\kappa S}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{T_0}}𝐂\left(u{\displaystyle \frac{𝝈}{u}}+v{\displaystyle \frac{𝝈}{v}}\right)\left(1+|z|^2\right)𝑑t`$
$`=\mathrm{}\kappa S{\displaystyle _0^{T_0}}𝐂\left(\begin{array}{c}u\left(1|z|^2\right)\\ v\left(1|z|^2\right)\\ 2|z|^2\end{array}\right){\displaystyle \frac{dt}{1+|z|^2}}.`$ (16)
Summing up the orbital and spin contributions Eqs. (12) and (16), we obtain the entire change in action as

$$\delta 𝒮=\delta 𝒮_{pq}+\mathrm{}𝒮_{\mathrm{spin}}=\mathrm{}S_0^{T_0}F(t)𝑑t,$$
(17)
where

$$F(t)=\kappa 𝐂\left(\begin{array}{c}u\\ v\\ 1\end{array}\right).$$
(18)
### 3.2 Stability determinant

The stability determinant is derived from the second variation of the Hamiltonian $`H^{(2)}`$ about the periodic orbit . In the leading order in $`\mathrm{}`$, the orbital and spin degrees of freedom in $`H^{(2)}`$ are separated. This means that the spin phase space provides an additional block to the unperturbed monodromy matrix of the orbital phase space, which results in a separate stability determinant due to spin. The linearized momentum and coordinate for spin

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi \\ \nu \end{array}\right)=\frac{2\sqrt{\mathrm{}S}}{1+|z|^2}\left(\begin{array}{c}\delta u\\ \delta v\end{array}\right)$$
(19)
satisfy the equations of motion

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\dot{\xi }\\ \dot{\nu }\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{H^{(2)}}{\nu }\\ \frac{H^{(2)}}{\xi }\end{array}\right)=F(t)\left(\begin{array}{c}\nu \\ \xi \end{array}\right).$$
(20)
Solving these equations we find the spin block of the monodromy matrix to be (Appendix B)

$$M=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\phi & \mathrm{sin}\phi \\ \mathrm{sin}\phi & \mathrm{cos}\phi \end{array}\right),$$
(21)
where the stability angle is

$$\phi =_0^{T_0}F(t)𝑑t.$$
(22)
The proportionality between $`\phi `$ and $`\delta 𝒮`$ \[Eq. (17)\] will be exploited in a moment but, first, we find the stability determinant

$$\left|det(MI)\right|^{1/2}=2\left|\mathrm{sin}\frac{\phi }{2}\right|,$$
(23)
where $`I`$ is the $`2\times 2`$ unit matrix.

### 3.3 Trace formula

As was explained at the end of Sec. 2, for each unperturbed periodic orbit there are two new periodic orbits with opposite spin orientations $`𝝈(t)`$. It is easy to deduce, then, that for these two orbits both $`\delta 𝒮`$ and $`\phi `$ have the same magnitude but opposite signs. Now we are ready to write the trace formula for the oscillatory part of the density of states

$$\delta g(E)=\underset{po}{}\underset{\pm }{}\frac{𝒜_0}{2\left|\mathrm{sin}\frac{\phi }{2}\right|}\mathrm{cos}\left[\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}(𝒮_0\pm \delta 𝒮)\frac{\pi }{2}(\mu _0+\mu _\pm )\right],$$
(24)
where the first sum is over the unperturbed periodic orbits and the second sum takes care of the contribution of the two spin orientations; $`𝒜_0`$ is the prefactor for the unperturbed orbit, which depends on the stability determinant and the primitive period; $`𝒮_0`$ and $`\mu _0`$ are the unperturbed action and the Maslov index, respectively; $`\mu _\pm `$ are the additional Maslov indices due to spin. The nature of spin requires an additional Kochetov-Solari phase correction  that results in the shift $`SS+\frac{1}{2}`$ of the total spin parameter in $`\delta 𝒮`$ (Appendix C). Setting $`S=\frac{1}{2}`$, we end up with

$$\delta 𝒮\delta \stackrel{~}{𝒮}=\mathrm{}\phi .$$
(25)
With this relation and the additional Maslov index (Appendix D)

$$\mu _\pm =1+2\left[\pm \frac{\phi }{2\pi }\right]$$
(26)
($`[x]`$ is the largest integer $`x`$) the sum over the spin orientations in Eq. (24) becomes

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\pm }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_0}{2\mathrm{sin}\frac{\phi }{2}}}\mathrm{cos}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{𝒮_0}{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\mu _0\right)\pm \left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \stackrel{~}{𝒮}}{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\right)\right]`$
$`=2\mathrm{cos}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\phi }{2}}\right)𝒜_0\mathrm{cos}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{𝒮_0}{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\mu _0\right].`$ (27)
This is our main result: each term in the periodic orbit sum is the contribution of an unperturbed orbit $`𝒜_0\mathrm{cos}\left[\frac{𝒮_0}{\mathrm{}}\frac{\pi }{2}\mu _0\right]`$ times the modulation factor

$$=2\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\phi }{2}\right).$$
(28)
Note that no assumption was made on whether the unperturbed periodic orbits are isolated or not.

## 4 Comparison with another method

Bolte and Keppeler  derived the modulation factor in the weak-coupling limit by a different method. Their results222We reformulate the results of Ref.  for the south gauge. are expressed in terms of a spin trajectory with the initial condition

$$𝝈(0)=(0,0,1)^\mathrm{T}$$
(29)
that obeys Eq. (4). This trajectory, in general, is not periodic. As in our approach, the influence of spin on the orbital motion is neglected. The spin motion can be described by the polar angles $`(\theta (t),\varphi (t))`$ with $`\theta (0)=\pi `$. The modulation factor is then

$$_{BK}=2\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\theta }{2}\right)\mathrm{cos}\chi ,$$
(30)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta =\pi \theta (T_0)`$ and333Ref.  defines the phase $`\eta =\chi `$.

$$\chi =\frac{\kappa }{2}_0^{T_0}𝐂𝝈𝑑t+\frac{1}{2}_0^{T_0}\left[1+\mathrm{cos}\theta (t)\right]\dot{\varphi }(t)𝑑t.$$
(31)
In order to show that our modulation factor Eq. (28) is equal to $`_{BK}`$, let us express $`\phi `$ in terms of the polar angles. From Eq. (5) follows the coordinate transformation

$`u=\mathrm{cot}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}\mathrm{cos}\varphi ,`$
$`v=\mathrm{cot}{\displaystyle \frac{\theta }{2}}\mathrm{sin}\varphi .`$ (32)
Since $`\phi \delta 𝒮`$, we can represent it as a sum of two terms \[cf. Eqs. (12)-(17)\]

$$\frac{\phi }{2}=\frac{\kappa }{2}_0^{T_0}𝐂𝝈𝑑t+\frac{1}{2}_0^{T_0}\left[1+\mathrm{cos}\theta (t)\right]\dot{\varphi }(t)𝑑t.$$
(33)
There is a striking similarity between the expressions for $`\chi `$ and $`\frac{\phi }{2}`$. The only difference is that in Eq. (31) the integration is, in general, along a non-periodic orbit with the initial condition Eq. (29), while in Eq. (33) the integration is along the periodic orbit. Since the modulation factor should not depend on the choice of the $`z`$ direction, we can choose the $`z`$ axis to coincide with the spin vector $`𝝈(0)`$ for the periodic orbit at $`t=0`$, i.e., the $`z`$ axis will be the rotation axis in Fig. 1. Then one of the periodic orbits will satisfy the initial condition Eq. (29), and thus both $`\chi `$ and $`\frac{\phi }{2}`$ can be calculated along this orbit and are equal. Moreover, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta =0`$ in this case. Therefore the modulation factors derived within the two approaches coincide,

$$_{BK}=.$$
(34)
It was mentioned in Ref.  that $`_{BK}=2\mathrm{cos}\frac{\alpha }{2}`$, where $`\alpha `$ is the rotation angle defined in Sec. 2. Then, of course, we conclude that

$$\mathrm{cos}\frac{\alpha }{2}=\mathrm{cos}\frac{\phi }{2}.$$
(35)
To see that this is indeed the case, we can go back to Sec. 3.2 where we calculated the stability determinant. It follows from that calculation that the neighborhood of the periodic orbit is rotated by an angle $`\phi `$ during the period (Appendix B). Therefore the entire Bloch sphere is rotated by this angle. Clearly, the angle of rotation must be defined $`\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4}\pi `$, i.e., it depends on the parity of the number of full revolutions of the Bloch sphere around the periodic orbit during the period. It would be desirable to prove Eq. (35) without referring to the small neighborhood of the periodic orbit.

The same property can be also shown if one treats the spin quantum mechanically. The spin propagator for the choice of the $`z`$ axis along the rotation axis (so that $`\chi =\frac{\phi }{2}`$) is

$$d(T_0)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{i\frac{\phi }{2}}& 0\\ 0& e^{i\frac{\phi }{2}}\end{array}\right).$$
(36)
Applying this operator to a spinor $`(\psi _+,\psi _{})^\mathrm{T}`$ at $`t=0`$, we get the spinor $`(\psi _+e^{i\frac{\phi }{2}},\psi _{}e^{i\frac{\phi }{2}})^\mathrm{T}`$ at $`t=T_0`$, which corresponds to the initial spin vector rotated by the angle $`\phi `$ about the $`z`$ axis, i.e., $`\phi =\alpha `$.

## 5 Summary and conclusions

We have studied the case of weak spin-orbit coupling in the semiclassical approximation using the spin coherent state method. The limit is achieved formally by setting $`\mathrm{}0`$. The trajectories in the orbital subspace of the extended phase space then remain unchanged by the spin-orbit interaction. For each periodic orbit in the orbital subspace there are two periodic orbits in the full phase space with opposite spin orientations. The semiclassical trace formula can be expressed as a sum over unperturbed periodic orbits with a modulation factor. This agrees with the results of Bolte and Keppeler. The form of the modulation factor does not depend on whether the unperturbed system has isolated orbits or whether it contains families of degenerate orbits due to continuous symmetries.

We remark that in the semiclassical treatment of pure spin systems, a renormalization procedure is necessary in order to correct the stationary phase approximation in the path integral for finite spin $`S`$. Such a renormalization is equivalent to the Kochetov-Solari phase correction that we employed here without justification for a system with spin-orbit interaction. Although this correction worked well in our case, it may be necessary to develop a general renormalization scheme when the interaction is not weak.

## Acknowledgments

The author thanks M. Pletyukhov and M. Brack for numerous constructive discussions leading to this letter. This work has been supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.

## Appendix A Time parameterization

For pedagogical reasons we do the calculation in Eq. (10) with the time parameterization. In this case $`𝒮_{pq}=_0^Tp\dot{q}𝑑t`$, where $`T`$ is the exact period. Then the correction is

$`\delta 𝒮_{pq}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{T_0}}\left[\delta p\dot{q}_0+p_0\dot{(\delta q)}\right]𝑑t+p_0(T_0)\dot{q}_0(T_0)\delta T`$ (37)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{T_0}}\left(\delta p\dot{q}_0\delta q\dot{p}_0\right)𝑑t+p_0\delta q|_0^{T_0}+p_0(T_0)\dot{q}_0(T_0)\delta T.`$
Transforming the boundary term

$`p_0\delta q|_0^{T_0}`$ $`=p_0(T_0)\left[q(T_0)q_0(T_0)q(0)+q_0(0)\right]=p_0(T_0)\left[q(T_0)q(0)\right]`$
$`=p_0(T_0)\left[q(T_0)q(T)\right]p_0(T_0)\dot{q}_0(T_0)\delta T,`$ (38)
we see that it cancels the period correction term.

## Appendix B Monodromy matrix

We derive the monodromy matrix Eq. (21). In order to solve the equations of motion (20) we define $`\eta =\xi +i\nu `$. Then $`\dot{\eta }=i\eta F(t)`$, which solves to

$$\eta (t)=\eta (0)\mathrm{exp}\left[i_0^tF(t^{})𝑑t^{}\right].$$
(39)
It follows then that

$`\xi (T_0)=\xi (0)\mathrm{cos}\phi \nu (0)\mathrm{sin}\phi ,`$
$`\nu (T_0)=\xi (0)\mathrm{sin}\phi +\nu (0)\mathrm{cos}\phi ,`$ (40)
resulting in Eq. (21).

Note that according to Eq. (5),

$`\xi =\sqrt{\mathrm{}S}\left(\delta \sigma _x+{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _x\delta \sigma _z}{1\sigma _z}}\right),`$
$`\nu =\sqrt{\mathrm{}S}\left(\delta \sigma _y+{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _y\delta \sigma _z}{1\sigma _z}}\right).`$ (41)
If we choose the $`z`$ axis in such a way that the periodic orbit starts and ends in the south pole, i.e., $`𝝈(0)=𝝈(T_0)=(0,0,1)^\mathrm{T}`$, then at $`t=0`$ and $`t=T_0`$ we have

$`\xi =\sqrt{\mathrm{}S}\delta \sigma _x,`$
$`\nu =\sqrt{\mathrm{}S}\delta \sigma _y.`$ (42)
Comparing with Eqs. (40) we conclude that the neighborhood of the periodic orbit is rotated by the angle $`\phi `$ after the period.

## Appendix C Kochetov-Solari phase shift

The Kochetov-Solari phase shift  is given by

$$\phi _{KS}=\frac{1}{2}_0^{T_0}A(t)𝑑t,$$
(43)
where

$$A(t)=\frac{1}{2\mathrm{}}[\frac{}{\overline{z}}\frac{\left(1+|z|^2\right)^2}{2S}\frac{H}{z}+\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{c}.].$$
(44)
The spin-dependent part of the Hamiltonian is \[cf. Eq. (1)\]

$$\mathrm{}H_{\mathrm{so}}(z,\overline{z})=\frac{\mathrm{}\kappa S}{1+|z|^2}𝐂\left(\begin{array}{c}z+\overline{z}\\ i(z\overline{z})\\ |z|^21\end{array}\right).$$
(45)
We find

$$\frac{}{\overline{z}}\frac{\left(1+|z|^2\right)^2}{2S}\frac{H_{\mathrm{so}}}{z}=\kappa 𝐂\left(\begin{array}{c}\overline{z}\\ i\overline{z}\\ 1\end{array}\right),$$
(46)
therefore the phase shift becomes

$$\phi _{KS}=\frac{1}{2}\phi .$$
(47)
Comparing to Eq. (17) we see that it effectively shifts the spin $`S`$ by $`\frac{1}{2}`$. One should keep in mind that this phase correction was originally derived for a pure spin system. It has not been proven to have the same form for a system with spin-orbit interaction. In the special case of the weak-coupling limit we have a reason to believe that the result Eq. (47) is correct, since we were able to reproduce the modulation factor found with another method  (see Sec. 4).

## Appendix D Maslov indices

The additional Maslov indices $`\mu _\pm `$ are determined by the linearized spin motion about the periodic orbit. The second variation of the Hamiltonian reads \[cf. Eq. (20)\]

$$H^{(2)}(\xi ,\nu )=\frac{F(t)}{2}\left(\xi ^2+\nu ^2\right).$$
(48)
Following Sugita  we define its normal form

$$H_{\mathrm{norm}}=\frac{\phi }{2T_0}\left(\xi ^2+\nu ^2\right)$$
(49)
that has a constant frequency and generates the same phase change $`\phi `$ as $`H^{(2)}`$ after the period $`T_0`$. Then the spin block of the monodromy matrix can be classified as elliptic and its Maslov index is given by Eq. (26). $`\phi `$ is the stability angle of one of the two orbits with opposite spin orientations. Therefore, without loss of generality, we can assume that $`\phi >0`$. Then, explicitly,

$$\mu _\pm =\{\begin{array}{cc}\pm 1,\mathrm{if}\phi (0,2\pi )\hfill & \mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4}\pi \hfill \\ \pm 3,\mathrm{if}\phi (2\pi ,4\pi )\hfill & \mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4}\pi \hfill \end{array}.$$
(50)
On the other hand,

$$\mathrm{sign}\left(\mathrm{sin}\frac{\phi }{2}\right)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill 1,& \mathrm{if}\phi (0,2\pi )\hfill & \mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4}\pi \hfill \\ \hfill 1,& \mathrm{if}\phi (2\pi ,4\pi )\hfill & \mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4}\pi \hfill \end{array}.$$
(51)
Clearly, one can take $`\mu _\pm =\pm 1`$ and at the same time remove the absolute value sign from $`\mathrm{sin}\frac{\phi }{2}`$, as was done in Eq. (27).