text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

There have been growing interest in leptogenesis  to account for the baryon asymmetry in the present universe since the Superkamiokande collaboration presented convincing evidence of the atmospheric neutrino oscillation . In fact, various mechanisms  for the leptogenesis have been proposed so far. Among them the leptogenesis by flat directions $`\varphi `$ in supersymmetric (SUSY) theories, i.e., Affleck-Dine (AD) mechanism , is expected to work even with relatively lower reheating temperatures $`T_R`$ (e.g., $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^8`$ GeV) and hence it seems cosmologically safer than others, since the number density of gravitinos produced in the reheating processes is proportional to the reheating temperature $`T_R`$ of inflation .111 The gravitinos may be also produced nonthermally . We neglect such an effect in this paper, since it depends on the details of inflation models.  However, it has been pointed out  that the flat direction fields $`\varphi `$ start their coherent oscillations at an earlier time than usually estimated due to interactions with thermal plasma of inflaton-decay products and that the resultant baryon asymmetry is strongly suppressed.

In this paper we perform a detailed numerical analysis on the AD leptogenesis taking into account the thermal plasma effects. It has been argued in Ref.  that a relatively low reheating temperature $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^6`$ GeV is necessary to escape from the thermal effects. We confirm that the baryon asymmetry is indeed suppressed for $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{>}10^5`$$`10^6`$ GeV due to the thermal effects, when the lightest neutrino mass is $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{>}10^9`$ eV. On the other hand, we find that the thermal effects become significant for a higher reheating temperature, $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{>}10^5`$$`10^6`$ GeV $`\times (m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}/10^9\text{eV})^1`$, if $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^9`$ eV.

Furthermore, we estimate how much the resultant baryon asymmetry is suppressed for such a high reheating temperature by analytical and numerical calculations. What we have found is that an ultralight neutrino of mass $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^8`$ eV is required to obtain the desired baryon asymmetry in the present universe, $`n_B/s(0.1`$$`1)\times 10^{10}`$, when we impose the reheating temperature $`T_R`$ to be $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^8`$ GeV to avoid the the overproduction of gravitinos . Here, $`n_B`$ and $`s`$ are the present baryon-number and entropy densities, respectively.

We note, however, that the above neutrino mass is not necessarily the same as the mass to be observed today, if effective Majorana masses for right-handed neutrinos in the early universe are different from the values in the true vacuum. To demonstrate this point we show an explicit model based on the Peccei-Quinn symmetry , which is one of the most attractive solutions to the strong CP problem. In this model we find that the mass for the lightest neutrino in the true vacuum can be as large as $`10^4`$ eV. This is very close to the masses of heavier two neutrinos, $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{2,3}{}^{}10^1`$$`10^3`$ eV, suggested from the recent Superkaimokande experiments .

## 2 Flat directions for the Leptogenesis

We adopt flat directions $`H_u=\stackrel{~}{L_i}=\varphi ^i/\sqrt{2}`$ (a family index $`i=`$ 1, 2, 3) originally proposed by Murayama and one of the authors (T.Y.)  as the Affleck-Dine flat direction field for leptogenesis, where $`\stackrel{~}{L_i}`$ are scalar components of the chiral multiplets $`L_i`$ of $`SU(2)_L`$-doublet leptons. We have effective dimension-five operators in the superpotential,

$`W={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2M_i}}\left(L_iH_u\right)^2={\displaystyle \frac{m_{\nu }^{}{}_{i}{}^{}}{2v_u^2}}\left(L_iH_u\right)^2.`$ (1)
Here, $`v_uH_u=\mathrm{sin}\beta \times 174`$ GeV and we have used the seesaw formula ,222$`\mathrm{tan}\beta H_u/H_d`$, where $`H_u`$ and $`H_d`$ are Higgs supermultiplets which couple to “up”-type and “down”-type quarks, respectively.

$`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{i}{}^{}={\displaystyle \frac{H_u^2}{M_i}}.`$ (2)
Hereafter, we take $`\mathrm{sin}\beta 1`$, and we suppress the family index $`i`$ for simplicity. As we will see later, the relevant flat direction $`\varphi `$ for the most effective leptogenesis corresponds to the first family (i.e., $`\varphi /\sqrt{2}\stackrel{~}{L_1}=H_u`$). The potential of the flat direction $`\varphi `$ is given by

$`V=m^2|\varphi |^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8M}}\left(A\varphi ^4+A^{}\varphi ^4\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4M^2}}|\varphi |^6,`$ (3)
where $`m`$ and $`A`$ are SUSY-breaking mass parameters and the last term is derived directly from the superpotential in Eq. (1). We choose $`m|A|1`$ TeV.

During inflation the energy density of the universe is dominated by the inflaton $`\chi `$. After the end of inflation the inflaton $`\chi `$ starts its coherent oscillation and the energy density of the universe is dominated by the inflaton $`\chi `$ also in this period. The non-zero vacuum energy of $`\chi `$ induces additional SUSY breaking effects. Therefore, the flat direction $`\varphi `$ receives an additional SUSY breaking mass of the order of $`H`$ in the $`\chi `$-dominated era. Here $`H`$ is the Hubble parameter of the expanding universe. There is also an $`A`$-term proportional to the Hubble parameter, $`V(H/M)\varphi ^4`$. Thus, we have the additional potential is given by

$`\delta V=c_HH^2|\varphi |^2+{\displaystyle \frac{H}{8M}}\left(a_H\varphi ^4+a_H^{}\varphi ^4\right),`$ (4)
where $`c_H`$ and $`a_H`$ are real and complex constants respectively, and we take $`c_H>0`$. (See the next section.) Hereafter, we assume $`c_H|a_H|1`$.333 The SUSY breaking effects due to the finite potential energy of the inflaton $`\chi `$ depend on the details of the Kähler potential. In fact, the coefficients of the Hubble-induced terms, $`c_H`$ and $`a_H`$ in Eqs. (4) and (6), can be much smaller than order unity. However, we simply assume here $`c_H|a_H|1`$ since the conclusion does not depend much on these parameters unless $`c_H1`$. (See, for example, Ref. .)

The crucial point in the following discussion is that the decay of the inflaton $`\chi `$ occurs during the coherent oscillation of $`\chi `$, while it completes much later than the beginning of the oscillation. Thus, even in the $`\chi `$ oscillation period, there is a dilute plasma with a temperature $`T=(T_R^2M_{}H)^{1/4}`$ ($`M_{}=2.4\times 10^{18}`$ GeV is the reduced Planck mass) arising from the inflaton decay , although most of the energy density of the universe is carried by the coherent oscillation. Notice that in this dilute plasma the temperature decreases as $`TH^{1/4}`$ rather than as $`TH^{1/2}`$ in the usual radiation dominated universe.

It is quite plausible that the fields $`\psi _k`$ which couple to the $`\varphi `$ are produced by the inflaton decay and/or by thermal scatterings if their effective masses $`f_k|\varphi |`$ are smaller than the temperature $`T`$,

$`f_k|\varphi |<T,`$ (5)
and hence they must be included in the plasma. Here, $`f_k`$ correspond to their Yukawa or gauge coupling constants of the flat direction $`\varphi `$ (we take $`f_k`$ real and positive).

As stressed in Refs.  the thermal effects from the dilute plasma may affect the dynamics of the $`\varphi `$ field. In fact, the flat direction $`\varphi `$ receives a thermal mass of order $`f_kT`$ if the condition Eq. (5) is satisfied. Then the total effective potential for $`\varphi `$ including the Hubble-induced terms and the thermal mass term is given by

$`V_{\mathrm{total}}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(m^2H^2+{\displaystyle \underset{f_k|\varphi |<T}{}}c_kf_k^2T^2\right)|\varphi |^2`$ (6)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{m}{8M}}(a\varphi ^4+h.c.)+{\displaystyle \frac{H}{8M}}(a_H\varphi ^4+h.c.)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4M^2}}|\varphi |^6,`$
where $`c_k`$ are real positive constants of order unity and $`a=A/m`$ is a complex constant of order unity. The summation of $`f_k`$ means that only the fields in thermal plasma \[i.e., their couplings $`f_k`$ satisfy the condition Eq. (5)\] can induce the thermal mass for $`\varphi `$.

We include all the couplings relevant for the flat direction $`H_u=\stackrel{~}{L}_1=\varphi /\sqrt{2}`$ in the SUSY standard model, i.e., the gauge couplings for the $`SU(2)_L`$ and $`U(1)_Y`$ gauge groups, and Yukawa couplings for up-type quarks and charged leptons. The couplings $`f_k`$, which are redefined so that the masses for the fields $`\psi _k`$ couple to $`\varphi `$ become $`f_k|\varphi |`$, are listed in Table.1 with the coefficients $`c_k`$ of the thermal mass for $`\varphi `$.

Among the gauge supermultiplets, the flat direction $`\varphi `$ does not couple to one $`U(1)`$ group which remains unbroken by the condensate of $`\varphi `$. Thus, there are one $`Z`$-like and two $`W`$-like massive gauge multiplets as in the SUSY standard model. For the couplings of the charged leptons, we should be careful. The flat direction $`\varphi `$ receives its thermal mass from only one linear combination of charged leptons. The effective Yukawa coupling $`y_{ł_1}`$ is determined by the Yukawa couplings for the charged leptons and the mixing matrix among gauge eigenstates of the neutrinos. (Note that the relevant $`\varphi `$ is the flat direction which corresponds to the first family $`\nu _1`$ of mass eigenstates.) Taking large mixing angles both for atmospheric and solar neutrino oscillations indicated by the recent Superkamiokande data , we find $`y_{l}^{}{}_{1}{}^{}𝒪(0.1`$$`1)\times y_\tau `$. Thus, $`f_k`$ are roughly $`10^5`$–1 in the SUSY standard model. We will see in Sec. 4 that the Yukawa coupling for the up quark induces relevant thermal effects, while other couplings turn out to be too large to satisfy the condition Eq. (5) in most of the cases.

## 3 Evolution of the flat direction

In this section we discuss the evolution of the flat direction $`\varphi `$, which is described by the equation of motion with the potential $`V_{\mathrm{total}}`$ in Eq. (6),

$`\ddot{\varphi }+3H\dot{\varphi }+{\displaystyle \frac{V_{\mathrm{total}}}{\varphi ^{}}}=0,`$ (7)
where the dot denotes the derivative with time.

During inflation the Hubble parameter $`H_{\mathrm{inf}}`$ is much larger than the soft SUSY breaking mass, $`H_{\mathrm{inf}}m`$. We assume that the additional mass squared is negative ($`c_H>0`$) and causes an instability of $`\varphi `$ at the origin, that is, $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}^2=m^2c_H(H_{\mathrm{inf}})^2<0`$. Then, the minima of the potential are given by

$`|\varphi |`$ $``$ $`\sqrt{MH_{\mathrm{inf}}},`$ (8)
$`\mathrm{arg}(\varphi )`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{arg}(a_H)+(2n+1)\pi }{4}}n=0\mathrm{}3.`$ (9)
Note that there is no plasma and hence no thermal mass term during the inflation. Because curvatures of the potential around the minimum along both the radius and phase directions are of the order of the Hubble parameter $`H_{\mathrm{inf}}`$, the flat direction $`\varphi `$ runs to one of the four minima ($`n=n_0`$) from any given initial value and is settled down it.

After the inflation ends, the inflaton $`\chi `$ starts to oscillate, and there appears a dilute plasma with a temperature $`T=(T_R^2M_{}H)^{1/4}`$. Then, the dynamics of the flat direction $`\varphi `$ is determined by the total potential $`V_{\mathrm{total}}`$ in Eq. (6).

In the period of the inflaton oscillation, the minimum of the $`\varphi `$ potential moves toward the origin $`\varphi =0`$ as the Hubble parameter $`H`$ decreases. As long as the potential for $`\varphi `$ is dominated by Hubble-induced (mass and $`A`$) terms and also $`|\varphi |^6`$ term, the flat direction field $`\varphi `$ always tracks the following instantaneous minimum of the potential ,

$`|\varphi |`$ $``$ $`\sqrt{MH},`$ (10)
$`\mathrm{arg}(\varphi )`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{arg}(a_H)+(2n_0+1)\pi }{4}}.`$ (11)
This is because the curvatures around the minimum along both radius and phase directions are of the order of $`H`$ also in this period, and hence the $`\varphi `$ always catches up the instantaneous minimum.

As the universe evolves, the field value $`|\varphi |`$ decreases with time. When the field value $`|\varphi |`$ satisfies the condition Eq. (5), the fields $`\psi _k`$ which couple to the $`\varphi `$ can enter in the dilute plasma so that they induce a thermal mass $`c_kf_k^2T^2`$ for $`\varphi `$. If this thermal mass exceeds the Hubble-induced mass, i.e.,

$`H^2<{\displaystyle \underset{f_k|\varphi |<T}{}}c_kf_k^2T^2,`$ (12)
the dynamics of the $`\varphi `$ fields is drastically changed. The equation of motion for $`\varphi `$ at this epoch is approximately given by

$`\ddot{\varphi }+3H\dot{\varphi }+c_kf_k^2T^2\varphi =0.`$ (13)
This equation can be solved analytically and the solution is given by

$`\varphi (t)`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _1\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z^{2/3}}}J_{2/3}(z)\right]+\varphi _2\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z^{2/3}}}J_{2/3}(z)\right]`$
$`z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}c_k^2f_k^4M_{}T_R^2t^3\right)^{1/4},`$ (14)
where $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ are constants and $`J_\nu `$ is the Bessel function. We see that the $`\varphi `$ oscillates around the origin $`\varphi =0`$. The time scale of the oscillation is $`\left(f_k^4M_{}T_R^2\right)^{1/3}`$ and the amplitude of the oscillation is damped as $`|\varphi |t^{7/8}H^{7/8}`$.

Now let us estimate the cosmic time $`t_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ when the flat direction $`\varphi `$ starts its oscillation due to the thermal mass term, since the time $`t_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ plays a crucial role in the production of the lepton-number asymmetry. First of all, we consider a simple case in which there is only one field $`\psi _1`$ with a coupling $`f_1`$. It is easily found from Eqs. (5) and (12) that the following two conditions must be satisfied in order to cause the $`\varphi `$’s oscillation,

$`H`$ $`<`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f_1^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{M_{}T_R^2}{M^2}},`$ (15)
$`H`$ $`<`$ $`\left(c_1^2f_1^4M_{}T_R^2\right)^{1/3},`$ (16)
where we have used the relations $`|\varphi |\sqrt{MH}`$ and $`T=(T_R^2M_{}H)^{1/4}`$. If the coupling $`f_1`$ is small enough, the $`\psi _1`$ can easily enter in the thermal plasma, but the induced thermal mass for $`\varphi `$ is smaller than the Hubble-induced mass $`H`$ at the beginning. However, since the temperature decreases more slowly than the Hubble parameter $`H`$ ($`TH^{1/4}`$) as the universe expands, the thermal mass eventually exceeds $`H`$. Then the $`\varphi `$’s oscillation starts at the time when the condition Eq. (16) is satisfied. On the other hand, if $`f_1`$ is very large, the would-be thermal mass can be large enough to exceed the Hubble mass. However, the thermal mass does not appear until the $`|\varphi |`$ becomes small enough to satisfy Eq. (5). In this case the $`\varphi `$ starts to oscillate at the time when the condition Eq. (15) is satisfied. Therefore, we find the Hubble parameter $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ at $`t=t_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ to be

$`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{min}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f_1^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{M_{}T_R^2}{M^2}},\left(c_1^2f_1^4M_{}T_R^2\right)^{1/3}].`$ (17)
Notice that in order to have a significant thermal effect, as discussed in Ref. , a coupling $`f_1`$ with intermediate strength is necessary. This is because too large $`f_1`$ can not satisfy the condition Eq. (5), while too small $`f_1`$ can not give a large thermal mass for $`\varphi `$ which satisfies the condition Eq. (12).

It is easy to apply the above discussion to the case of more than one couplings. If there is another coupling $`f_i`$ which can satisfy the both conditions Eqs. (15) and (16) earlier than $`f_1`$, the flat direction $`\varphi `$ starts its oscillation earlier. Therefore, the Hubble parameter $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ is given by444 We assume here hierarchical couplings and neglect effects of the summation.

$`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{i}{\mathrm{max}}\left[\mathrm{min}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f_i^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{M_{}T_R^2}{M^2}},\left(c_i^2f_i^4M_{}T_R^2\right)^{1/3}\}\right].`$ (18)
Thus, $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ becomes larger (i.e., the oscillation begins earlier) as we take the reheating temperature $`T_R`$ higher. One can see from Eq. (18) that it is nontrivial which coupling among $`f_i`$ makes the $`\varphi `$’s oscillation earliest, i.e., it is not always the coupling with strongest or weakest strength. If one takes the reheating temperature higher, a larger coupling makes the oscillation earlier and determines the time $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$.

As the universe becomes cooler, the thermal mass for the $`\varphi `$ becomes eventually smaller than the original mass $`m`$. Then, the evolution of $`\varphi `$ is described by the equation of motion

$`\ddot{\varphi }+3H\dot{\varphi }+m^2\varphi =0.`$ (19)
The flat direction oscillates around the origin with a time scale $`m^1`$, and the amplitude of the oscillation is damped as $`|\varphi |t^1H`$ as the universe evolves.

We have, so far, assumed that the thermal mass term dominates the potential when the oscillation of $`\varphi `$ starts. However, the expression of $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ in Eq. (18) could be smaller than the original mass $`m`$, depending on the parameters $`M`$ and $`T_R`$, which conflicts with the above assumption. If the thermal mass does not exceed the Hubble mass $`H`$ until $`Hm`$, the original mass term $`m^2|\varphi |^2`$ dominates the potential for $`H_{}^<m`$. Then, the thermal effects induced by $`\psi _k`$ in the dilute plasma do not affect the evolution of $`\varphi `$. In this case the $`\varphi `$ field begins its oscillation at $`Hm`$.

In summary, the oscillation of $`\varphi `$ starts when the Hubble parameter of the universe becomes $`HH_{\mathrm{osc}}`$, where

1. $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$, if the thermal mass term dominates the potential before $`Hm`$,
2. $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=m`$, if otherwise.

We show a schematic behavior of $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ in Fig. 1 for illustration.

One can see from Eq. (18) that the Hubble parameter $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ depends on the reheating temperature non-trivially. We consider three couplings $`f_\mathrm{I}`$, $`f_{\mathrm{II}}`$ and $`f_{\mathrm{III}}`$ assuming a hierarchy $`f_\mathrm{I}f_{\mathrm{II}}f_{\mathrm{III}}`$. The region of $`T_R`$ can be divided into three regions I, II and III as in Fig. 1, where $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ is determined by $`f_\mathrm{I}`$, $`f_{\mathrm{II}}`$ and $`f_{\mathrm{III}}`$, respectively. \[See the discussion below Eq. (18).\] The dependence of $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ on $`T_R`$ can be understood from Eq. (17) or (18). For example, if $`T_R`$ lies in the region II, $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ behaves as

$`H_{\mathrm{osc}}\{\begin{array}{cc}T_R^2\hfill & \text{for}T_R<T_{C}^{}{}_{\mathrm{II}}{}^{}\hfill \\ T_R^{2/3}\hfill & \text{for}T_R>T_{C}^{}{}_{\mathrm{II}}{}^{}\hfill \end{array},`$ (22)
where the critical temperature $`T_{C}^{}{}_{\mathrm{II}}{}^{}`$ is

$`T_{C}^{}{}_{\mathrm{II}}{}^{}=f_{\mathrm{II}}^4\left(c_{\mathrm{II}}M^3M_{}^1\right)^{1/2}.`$ (23)
We can also see the same behavior in the regions I and III. Furthermore, when the reheating temperature $`T_R`$ is low enough (i.e., in the region Ia), the thermal effects become negligible and the oscillation of $`\varphi `$ begins at $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=m`$. We see from Fig. 1 that the oscillation time $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}`$, which is crucial for the estimation of the lepton asymmetry (see the next section), depends on the reheating temperature and also the spectrum of the couplings $`f_k`$ in a very complicated way.

## 4 Lepton asymmetry

Now we are at the point to calculate the lepton asymmetry produced by the $`\varphi `$ field. Since the $`\varphi `$ field carries the lepton charge, its number density is related to the lepton number density $`n_L`$ as

$`n_L={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}i\left(\dot{\varphi }^{}\varphi \varphi ^{}\dot{\varphi }\right).`$ (24)
From Eqs. (6) and (7), the evolution of $`n_L`$ is described by the equation,

$`\dot{n}_L+3Hn_L={\displaystyle \frac{m}{2M}}\mathrm{Im}(a\varphi ^4)+{\displaystyle \frac{H}{2M}}\mathrm{Im}(a_H\varphi ^4).`$ (25)
Therefore, non-trivial motion of the $`\varphi `$ field generates the asymmetry in lepton number .

First we consider the case $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}>m`$. Suppose that the original $`A`$-term would vanish, i.e., $`A=ma=0`$. If this is the case, the flat direction $`\varphi `$ is always trapped in one of the valleys induced by the Hubble $`A`$-term during the both periods $`t<t_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ and $`t>t_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$, and the direction of the valley does not change with time. Therefore, there is no force which causes the motion of $`\varphi `$ along the phase direction and no lepton-number asymmetry is produced. However, we have the original $`A`$-term, and the phase of $`\varphi `$ is kicked by the relative phase difference between $`a`$ and $`a_H`$ in Eq. (6). The phase of $`\varphi `$ changes during its rolling towards the origin because the Hubble parameter $`H`$ decreases, and the direction of the true valleys changes with time. Therefore, the original $`A`$-term \[the first term in Eq. (25)\] plays a role of the source of the lepton asymmetry.

One might wonder if the Hubble $`A`$-term \[the second term in Eq. (25)\] gives a larger contribution to the lepton asymmetry since $`Hm`$ in the present situation. However, since the $`\varphi `$ almost traces one of the valleys determined mainly by the Hubble $`A`$-term, $`\mathrm{Im}(a_H\varphi ^4)`$ in Eq. (25) is highly suppressed compared with $`\mathrm{Im}(a\varphi ^4)`$. In fact, we have found numerically that the contribution of the second term in Eq. (25) is always comparable or less than that from the original $`A`$-term. Thus, we neglect the lepton asymmetry produced from the second term in Eq. (25) in our analytic calculation, for simplicity. By integrating Eq. (25), we obtain the resultant lepton number at the time $`t`$ as

$`\left[R^3n_L\right](t)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle ^t}𝑑t^{}R^3{\displaystyle \frac{m}{2M}}\mathrm{Im}\left(a\varphi ^4\right)`$ (26)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle ^{t_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}}}𝑑t^{}R^3{\displaystyle \frac{m}{2M}}\mathrm{Im}\left(a\varphi ^4\right)+{\displaystyle _{t_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}}^t}𝑑t^{}R^3{\displaystyle \frac{m}{2M}}\mathrm{Im}\left(a\varphi ^4\right),`$ (27)
where $`R`$ denotes the scale factor of the expanding universe, which scales as $`RH^{2/3}t^{2/3}`$ in the universe dominated by the oscillating inflaton $`\chi `$. Notice that the integrand of the first term in Eq. (27) is almost constant, since $`|\varphi |\sqrt{MH}`$ and $`RH^{2/3}`$. On the other hand, the second term gives only small contribution to the total lepton asymmetry because of the following two reasons; (i) $`\mathrm{Im}(a\varphi ^4)`$ changes its sign rapidly due to the oscillation of $`\varphi `$, and (ii) even if the sign would remain unchanged, the amplitude of $`\varphi ^4`$ is damped as $`|\varphi |^4t^{7/2}`$ (see Sec. 3).

Therefore, the production of lepton asymmetry is suppressed for $`tt_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$, and the resultant lepton asymmetry at $`tt_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ is given approximately by

$`n_L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m}{2M}}\mathrm{Im}\left[a\varphi ^4(t_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}})\right]t_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ (28)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}mMH_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}\delta _{\mathrm{eff}},`$
where $`\delta _{\mathrm{eff}}\mathrm{sin}(4\mathrm{arg}\varphi (t_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}})+\mathrm{arg}a)`$ represents an effective CP violating phase and we assume $`\delta _{\mathrm{eff}}𝒪(1)`$. Notice that we have used the fact $`|\varphi (t_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}})|\sqrt{MH_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}}`$.

The lepton-to-entropy ratio when the reheating process of inflation completes ($`T=T_R`$) is estimated as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_L}{s}}={\displaystyle \frac{MT_R}{12M_{}^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m}{H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}}}\right)\delta _{\mathrm{eff}}.`$ (29)
This ratio takes a constant value as long as an extra entropy production does not take place at a later epoch, since both $`n_L`$ and $`s`$ decrease at the same rate $`R^3`$ as the universe expands. In deriving Eq. (29) we have assumed that the $`\varphi `$ oscillation starts before the reheating process of inflation completes.

Next we turn to the case without thermal effects, i.e., $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=m`$. Detailed analysis for this case is found in Refs. . Even in this case, the production of the lepton asymmetry becomes ineffective after the $`\varphi `$ starts the oscillation (for $`HH_{\mathrm{osc}}=m`$). Thus, the lepton asymmetry can be estimated by replacing $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ with $`m`$ in Eq. (29) as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_L}{s}}={\displaystyle \frac{MT_R}{12M_{}^2}}\delta _{\mathrm{eff}}.`$ (30)
The produced lepton asymmetry is partially converted  into the baryon asymmetry through the “sphaleron” effects , since it is produced before the electroweak phase transition at $`T10^2\text{GeV}`$. Then, the present baryon asymmetry is given by 555 In the present analysis we neglect the sign of the produced lepton asymmetry. To be exact, the lepton asymmetry should be negative, since the present baryon asymmetry is given by     $`{\displaystyle \frac{n_B}{s}}={\displaystyle \frac{24+4N_H}{66+13N_H}}{\displaystyle \frac{n_L}{s}},`$  (31)  rather than Eq. (32). Here $`N_H`$ denotes the number of the Higgs doublets. Then, $`n_B/s=(8/23)n_L/s`$ in the minimal SUSY standard model with $`N_H=2`$.

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_B}{s}}={\displaystyle \frac{8}{23}}{\displaystyle \frac{n_L}{s}}.`$ (32)
Now we have formulae of the lepton asymmetry Eqs. (29) and (30). Notice that an additional suppression factor $`m/H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ ($`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}>m`$) appears in Eq. (29), compared with Eq. (30). This suppression clearly represents the effect of the early oscillation due to the thermal effects of the dilute plasma pointed out in Ref. . It should be also noted that the produced lepton asymmetry becomes larger as the scale $`M`$ increases, i.e., as the neutrino mass $`m_\nu `$ becomes smaller \[See Eqs. (18), (29) and (30)\]. Therefore, the leptogenesis is most effective for the flat direction corresponding to the lightest neutrino $`\nu _1`$, as mentioned in Sec. 2.

The produced lepton asymmetry depends on the reheating temperature $`T_R`$. We show again a schematic behavior of the lepton asymmetry in Fig. 2, where regions I, II, and III correspond to those in Fig. 1.

If the reheating temperature $`T_R`$ is low enough, i.e., there is no thermal effect ($`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=m`$), the lepton asymmetry $`n_L/s`$ is just proportional to $`T_R`$ as in Eq. (30),

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_L}{s}}`$ $``$ $`T_R^{+1}.`$ (33)
However, it is not the case when the reheating temperature becomes higher (i.e., $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$), since $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ depends on $`T_R`$ (see Fig. 1). Depending on the condition which determines $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$, the lepton asymmetry behaves as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_L}{s}}`$ $``$ $`T_R^1\mathrm{or}T_R^{1/3}.`$ (34)
The explicit formulae of the produced lepton asymmetry are easily derived from Eqs. (18) and (29). For example, if the reheating temperature lies in the region II, the resultant lepton asymmetry is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_L}{s}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{\mathrm{eff}}f_{\mathrm{II}}^4mM^3}{12M_{}^3T_R}}\mathrm{for}T_R<T_{C}^{}{}_{\mathrm{II}}{}^{},`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_L}{s}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{\mathrm{eff}}mMT_R^{1/3}}{12c_{\mathrm{II}}^{2/3}f_{\mathrm{II}}^{4/3}M_{}^{7/3}}}\mathrm{for}T_R>T_{C}^{}{}_{\mathrm{II}}{}^{},`$ (35)
where $`T_{C}^{}{}_{\mathrm{II}}{}^{}`$ is given by Eq. (23).

Now, we discuss how much lepton asymmetry is generated in the SUSY standard model. We have performed a numerical calculation to follow the evolution of the flat direction $`\varphi `$ for given $`M`$ and $`T_R`$, including all the terms in the potential in Eq. (6). As for the thermal mass term, we have included all the couplings listed in Table.1. In Fig. 3 we show the produced lepton asymmetry for the lightest neutrino mass $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}=10^6`$ eV. Here, we take $`m=1`$ TeV, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =3`$ and $`\mathrm{arg}(a/a_H)=\pi /3`$ (we take this parameter set, hereafter).

As shown by the dotted line in Fig. 3, the produced lepton asymmetry is proportional to the reheating temperature $`T_R`$, if one neglects the thermal effects (i.e., takes all the coupling $`f_k=0`$). In this case, we can derive from Eq. (30) the formula for the lepton asymmetry

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_L}{s}}=0.4\times 10^{10}\delta _{\mathrm{eff}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{T_R}{10^8\text{GeV}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^6\text{eV}}{m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}}}\right),`$ (36)
which is in a very good agreement with the result of the numerical calculation in Fig. 3. The above expression Eq. (36) is also consistent with that obtained in the previous works . Notice that the produced lepton asymmetry is proportional to the reheating temperature and inversely to the lightest neutrino mass. Therefore, in order to explain the baryon asymmetry in the present universe a high reheating temperature of $`T_R10^8`$ GeV is required for $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}10^6`$ eV. However, for such a high reheating temperature the effects of the thermal mass on the dynamics of $`\varphi `$ is significant, and hence the $`\varphi `$’s oscillation in fact begins at $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}`$ rather than $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=m`$. Thus, the formula Eq. (36) can not be applied to the case of $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}10^6`$ eV for the high reheating temperature.

The solid line in Fig. 3 represents the lepton asymmetry with the thermal effects. Even in this case, the produced lepton asymmetry is linear in $`T_R`$ for a low reheating temperature region of $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}4\times 10^5`$ GeV as in Eq. (36). However, we can see that the thermal effects become significant and the lepton asymmetry is suppressed for $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{>}10^5`$$`10^6`$ GeV, which is consistent with the argument in Ref. . This is because the thermal mass term makes the $`\varphi `$’s oscillation earlier ($`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}m`$), which reduces the lepton asymmetry. In fact, the behavior of the produced lepton asymmetry shown in Fig. 3 can be understood by our analytic formula Eq. (29) and Fig. 2.

Fig. 4 shows the contour plot of the produced lepton asymmetry $`n_L/s`$ in the $`M`$-$`T_R`$ plane.

We show both results by the numerical calculation and also from the analytic formulae Eqs. (29) and (30). We confirm that the analytic estimation discussed above reproduces very well the result obtained by the numerical calculation.

In the lower reheating temperature region where $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=m`$, the lepton asymmetry $`n_L/s`$ is proportional to $`MT_R`$ \[see Eq. (30)\]. On the other hand, in the region where $`H_{\mathrm{osc}}=H_{\mathrm{osc}}^{\mathrm{th}}m`$, $`n_L/s`$ is proportional to $`M^3T_R^1`$ or $`MT_R^{1/3}`$ \[see Eqs. (18), (29) and (4)\], depending on the condition which determines the cosmic time $`t_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ when the early oscillation of $`\varphi `$ starts.

In most of the region in Fig. 4 the lepton asymmetry behaves as $`n_L/sMT_R^{1/3}`$ and the thermal effects are controlled by only the Yukawa coupling constant for the up quark, which is roughly of order $`10^5`$. Only in the parameter region $`M_{}^<10^{21}`$ GeV and $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{>}10^8`$ GeV, larger couplings (say, the Yukawa coupling for the charm quark) become effective. Note that the result shown in Fig. 4 is almost independent of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ as long as $`\mathrm{sin}\beta 1`$ since the Yukawa coupling for the up quark is $`y_u=m_u/H_u=m_u/(174\mathrm{G}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}\times \mathrm{sin}\beta )`$, where $`m_u`$ is the mass for the up quark.

The crucial observation is that the resultant lepton asymmetry is suppressed by the thermal effects when the reheating temperature is high enough. The critical value of the reheating temperature, $`T_{R}^{}{}_{\mathrm{cr}}{}^{}`$, is estimated analytically from Eq. (18) as

$`T_{R}^{}{}_{\mathrm{cr}}{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c_uf_u^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{m^{3/2}}{M_{}^{1/2}}}=1\times 10^5\text{GeV}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m}{1\text{TeV}}}\right)^{3/2},`$ (37)
for the region of $`MM_{\mathrm{cr}}`$, and

$`T_{R}^{}{}_{\mathrm{cr}}{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`f_u^2{\displaystyle \frac{Mm^{1/2}}{M_{}^{1/2}}}=4\times 10^5\text{GeV}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M}{10^{23}\text{GeV}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{m}{1\text{TeV}}}\right)^{1/2},`$ (38)
for the region of $`MM_{\mathrm{cr}}`$, where $`M_{\mathrm{cr}}`$ is given by

$`M_{\mathrm{cr}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c_uf_u^4}}m=4\times 10^{22}\text{GeV}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m}{1\text{TeV}}}\right).`$ (39)
This critical value for the scale $`M`$ corresponds to the lightest neutrino mass of $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}=0.9\times 10^9`$ eV for $`m=`$ 1 TeV. Here we have used the fact that only the up-quark Yukawa coupling is effective for the thermal effects. Therefore, we find that the thermal effects from the dilute plasma is suppressed in the region $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^5`$$`10^6`$ GeV for $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{>}10^9`$ eV. This is consistent with the result obtained in Ref. . However, for the lighter neutrino mass region $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^9`$ eV, this upper bound on the reheating temperature in order to neglect the thermal effects increases as $`M`$ (i.e., inversely proportional to the lightest neutrino mass $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}`$). In fact, it helps us a lot with the discussion in the next section. We also confirm the result by a numerical calculation.

In this section, we show that the thermal effects on the AD leptogenesis is very significant. In fact, when we require the reheating temperature should be $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^8`$ GeV to avoid the gravitino problem , we need very a large value of $`M`$, say, $`M_{}^>3\times 10^{21}`$ GeV, in order to obtain the desired lepton asymmetry $`n_L/s10^{10}`$$`10^9`$. This large value $`M`$ corresponds to an extremely small neutrino mass $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^8`$ eV.

## 5 Large effective masses for right-handed neutrinos

Let us discuss the origin of the operators in Eq. (1) in the presence of the heavy right-handed Majorana neutrinos $`N_I`$ ($`I=1,2,3`$). The relevant superpotential is

$`W=h_{\nu }^{}{}_{I,i}{}^{}N_IL_iH_u+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}M_{R}^{}{}_{I}{}^{}N_IN_I,`$ (40)
where we have used a base where the mass matrix for the heavy neutrinos $`N_I`$ is diagonal. Then, through the see-saw mechanism the heavy Majorana neutrinos $`N_I`$ induce the effective operators in Eq. (1) at low energies,

$`W={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{h_{\nu }^{}{}_{i,I}{}^{T}h_{\nu }^{}{}_{I,j}{}^{}}{M_{R}^{}{}_{I}{}^{}}}L_iH_uL_jH_u.`$ (41)
These operators gives light neutrino masses as

$`(m_\nu )_{i,j}=v_u^2{\displaystyle \frac{h_{\nu }^{}{}_{i,I}{}^{T}h_{\nu }^{}{}_{I,j}{}^{}}{M_{R}^{}{}_{I}{}^{}}}.`$ (42)
It is quite natural to consider that the Majorana masses $`M_{R}^{}{}_{I}{}^{}`$ for $`N_I`$ are given by a vacuum expectation value (vev) of some field $`X`$, which is a singlet under the standard-model gauge groups, with the superpotential

$`W={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}h_{N}^{}{}_{I}{}^{}XN_IN_I.`$ (43)
If it is the case, masses of the heavy Majorana neutrinos $`N_I`$ in the early universe may be different from those in the present universe. Namely, the extremely small neutrino mass discussed in the previous section ($`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^8`$ eV) may not be the same as the observed mass. In particular, when the field $`X`$ is responsible to the Peccei-Quinn symmetry breaking , we have necessarily a flat direction containing the $`X`$ field. Thus, the $`X`$ field may have a large value as $`XM_{}`$ during the inflation whereas it has a vev of $`XF_a`$ in the true vacuum. Here, the Peccei-Quinn breaking scale $`F_a`$ is constrained by laboratory experiments, astrophysics, and cosmology as $`F_a10^{10}`$$`10^{12}`$ GeV .666 The upper bound on $`F_a`$ is relaxed as $`F_{a}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^{16}`$ GeV, when there is an extra entropy production after the QCD phase transition .  In this case, neutrino masses in the early universe are much smaller than those observed today (they are suppressed by the factor $`X/F_aM_{}/F_a10^6`$$`10^8`$). Therefore, the extremely small neutrino mass required for a successful leptogenesis may be naturally explained in this scenario.

To demonstrate our point, we consider the following superpotential for the Peccei-Quinn symmetry breaking sector,

$`W=\lambda Y(X\overline{X}F_a^2),`$ (44)
where $`\lambda `$ is a coupling constant, and $`Y`$, $`X`$, and $`\overline{X}`$ are supermultiples which are singlets under the standard-model gauge groups and have 0, +1, and $`1`$ Peccei-Quinn charges, respectively. From Eq. (44) we see that there exists a flat direction $`X\overline{X}=F_a^2`$. We parameterize this direction by the scalar field $`\sigma `$ called “saxion”. This saxion $`\sigma `$ receives a soft SUSY breaking mass of $`m_\sigma m_{3/2}`$ ($`m_{3/2}`$ is the gravitino mass), and the $`X`$ and $`\overline{X}`$ have vevs of the order of $`F_a`$ if the soft SUSY breaking masses for $`X`$ and $`\overline{X}`$ are almost the same. ($`=m_X^2|X|^2+m_{\overline{X}}|\overline{X}|^2`$ with $`m_Xm_{\overline{X}}m_{3/2}`$).

Along this flat direction the $`X`$ field may have a large value during the inflation, if the additional SUSY breaking effects induce a negative mass squared for $`X`$. In this case the supergravity effects prevent the $`X`$ field from running over $`M_{}`$ and give an initial value $`XM_{}`$ . We here assume $`XM_{}`$ and hence $`\overline{X}F_a^2/M_{}`$ at the end of inflation.777 In this case, the isocurvature fluctuation associated with the axion is very suppressed .

We turn to calculate the produced lepton asymmetry in the presence of the $`X`$ field. We see from Eq. (43) that the masses for $`N_I`$ are

$`M_{R}^{}{}_{I}{}^{}=h_{N}^{}{}_{I}{}^{}X.`$ (45)
Then, we find

$`(m_\nu )_{i,j}={\displaystyle \frac{v_u^2}{X}}h_{\nu }^{}{}_{i,I}{}^{T}h_{N}^{}{}_{I}{}^{1}h_{\nu }^{}{}_{I,j}{}^{}.`$ (46)
The vev of $`X`$ in the true vacuum, $`XF_a`$, is supposed to give the neutrino masses observed today. As discussed in the previous sections, the lightest neutrino $`\nu _1`$ ($`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}m_{\nu }^{}{}_{2}{}^{}m_{\nu }^{}{}_{3}{}^{}`$) is relevant for the AD leptogenesis.

As for the neutrino masses we adopt the recent data from the Superkamoikande experiments. The atmospheric neutrino oscillation is well explained by the $`\nu _\mu `$$`\nu _\tau `$ oscillation with $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{3}{}^{}5\times 10^2`$ eV . On the other hand, the large MSW solution to the solar neutrino problem is favored by the recent Superkamiokande data , which indicates that $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{2}{}^{}5\times 10^3`$ eV. However, it is very difficult to determine the lightest neutrino mass $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}`$. Here, we simply take $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}=1\times 10^4`$ eV for a representative value.

Then, the scale $`M`$ in the previous sections is estimated as

$`M=3\times 10^{17}\text{GeV}\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^4\text{eV}}{m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{X}{F_a}}\right).`$ (47)
Notice that as shown in Fig. 4 such a scale $`M`$ for $`XF_a`$ can not produce sufficient lepton asymmetry to explain the baryon asymmetry in the present universe. However, the large initial value of $`X`$ ($`X_0M_{}`$) gives

$`M=7\times 10^{25}\text{GeV}\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^4\text{eV}}{m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^{10}\text{GeV}}{F_a}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{X_0}{M_{}}}\right),`$ (48)
which is translated into the lightest neutrino mass in the false vacuum

$`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}=4\times 10^{13}\text{eV}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}}{10^4\text{eV}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{F_a}{10^{10}\text{GeV}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_{}}{X_0}}\right).`$ (49)
Thus, such a high scale $`M`$ in Eq. (48) can give a neutrino mass much smaller than that observed today. It should be noted that the flat direction saxion $`\sigma `$ stays at $`X_0M_{}`$ until $`Hm_\sigma m_{3/2}`$ due to the friction of the expansion of the universe. Furthermore, we find from Eqs. (37) and (38) that for such a high scale of $`M10^{26}`$ GeV we can estimate the lepton asymmetry without the thermal effects even if the reheating temperature is as high as $`T_R10^8`$ GeV.

Therefore, for the reheating temperature of $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^8`$ GeV, the produced lepton asymmetry is estimated by using Eq. (30) as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_L}{s}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{T_R}{12M_{}^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{v_u^2X_0}{m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}F_a}}\right)\delta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ (50)
$`=`$ $`1\times 10^4\delta _{\mathrm{eff}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{T_R}{10^8\text{GeV}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^4\text{eV}}{m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^{10}\text{GeV}}{F_a}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{X_0}{M_{}}}\right).`$
This shows that too large amount of the lepton asymmetry is produced through the AD mechanism. However, this asymmetry is sufficiently diluted, since there exists substantial entropy production at low energies. The saxion $`\sigma `$ is produced in the coherent oscillation after the lepton asymmetry is frozen, and the oscillation energy dominates the universe.888 The saxions are also produced by the thermal scatterings in the reheating period. However, the energy density of the saxions produced thermally is much smaller than that produced in the coherent oscillations, and hence we neglect it.  Then, the late decay of the saxion increases the entropy of the universe and dilutes the lepton (baryon) asymmetry substantially.

The saxion begins the coherent oscillation at $`Hm_\sigma m_{3/2}`$ with the initial amplitude $`X_0M_{}`$. The oscillation energy at that time is given by $`\rho _\sigma m_\sigma ^2X_0^2/2`$. Note that the saxion oscillation starts before the reheating process of the inflation takes place.999 It is the case for $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}2\times 10^{10}\text{GeV}(m_\sigma /1\text{TeV})^{1/2}`$.  Then, when $`T=T_R`$, the ratio of $`\rho _\sigma `$ to the entropy density of the universe is estimated as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _\sigma }{s}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}T_R\left({\displaystyle \frac{X_0}{M_{}}}\right)^2.`$ (51)
Notice that $`\rho _\sigma `$ decreases at the rate $`R^3`$ as the universe expands, while the radiation energy density decreases as $`R^4`$. Therefore, the oscillation energy of the saxion dominates the energy of the universe soon after the reheating process completes. This energy is transferred into thermal bath by the saxion decay. The saxion decays into two gluons with the partial decay rate

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\sigma 2g)={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s^2}{32\pi ^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_\sigma ^3}{F_a^2}}.`$ (52)
Through this decay the universe is reheated again, and its reheating temperature $`T_\sigma `$ is estimated as

$`T_\sigma =10\text{GeV}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_\sigma }{1\text{TeV}}}\right)^{3/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^{10}\text{GeV}}{F_a}}\right).`$ (53)
The saxion decay takes place far before the beginning of the big-bang neucleosynthesis (BBN), and hence is cosmologically harmless. It should be noted that the saxion might decay dominately into two axions. If it is the case, the extra energy of the axion at the BBN epoch raises the Hubble expansion of the universe, which leads to overproduction of 4He. To avoid this difficulty the branching ratio of the saxion decay into two axion should be smaller than about 0.1. Here, we simply assume that the dominant decay process of saxion is $`\sigma 2g`$.101010 This is realized when $`m_X^2m_{\overline{X}}^2`$ . Then the saxion decay increases the entropy of the universe by the rate

$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{T_R}{6T_\sigma }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{X_0}{M_{}}}\right)^2`$ (54)
$`=`$ $`2\times 10^6\left({\displaystyle \frac{T_R}{10^8\text{GeV}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{1\text{TeV}}{m_\sigma }}\right)^{3/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{F_a}{10^{10}\text{GeV}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{X_0}{M_{}}}\right)^2.`$
Because of this entropy production by the saxion decay, the primordial lepton asymmetry shown in Eq. (50) is also diluted by the rate $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Then the present baryon asymmetry is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_B}{s}}`$ $`=`$ $`4\times 10^4\delta _{\mathrm{eff}}{\displaystyle \frac{v_u^2m_\sigma ^{3/2}}{m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}F_a^2M_{}^{1/2}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_{}}{X_0}}\right)`$ (55)
$`=`$ $`0.2\times 10^{10}\delta _{\mathrm{eff}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^4\text{eV}}{m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^{10}\text{GeV}}{F_a}}\right)^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_\sigma }{1\text{TeV}}}\right)^{3/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_{}}{X_0}}\right).`$
Notice that the present baryon asymmetry is independent on the reheating temperature $`T_R`$. We see that the desired baryon asymmetry is just given by the lightest neutrino mass of $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}10^4`$ eV for $`F_a10^{10}`$ GeV.

Before closing this section, we should comment on the cosmological consequence of our model. The entropy production by the saxion in Eq. (54) ensures that we are free from the cosmological gravitino problem. The number density of gravitinos produced at the reheating process is diluted by the rate $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and hence the radiative decay of gravitino dose not disturb the BBN. Furthermore, we find that the model does not suffer from the cosmological problem of the axino which is a fermionic superpartner of the axion. The axinos are produced in the reheating process by the thermal scatterings and may lead to a cosmological difficulty . However, in our model, the interaction of axino at the reheating epoch is suppressed by $`X_0M_{}`$, not by $`F_a`$, and hence the production of axino is less effective. Furthermore, the entropy production by the saxion decay dilutes the axino abundance and hence the axino becomes completely cosmologically harmless.

## 6 Conclusions and discussion

In this paper we have performed a detailed analysis on the Affleck-Dine leptogenesis taking into account the thermal effects from the dilute plasma. We have first shown that the thermal effects change drastically the dynamics of the flat direction $`\varphi `$ and suppress the lepton-number asymmetry produced by the flat direction $`\varphi `$. In order to escape from the thermal effects, a relatively low reheating temperature of $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^5`$$`10^6`$ GeV is found to be required when the lightest neutrino mass is $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{>}10^9`$ eV. This is consistent with the result obtained in Ref. . On the other hand, we have found that this upper bound on $`T_R`$ is relaxed as $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^5`$$`10^6`$ GeV $`\times (m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}/10^9\text{eV})^1`$ for the lighter neutrino mass region of $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^9`$ eV. We have also estimated the resultant lepton asymmetry for the higher reheating temperature region where the thermal effects are important by both analytical and numerical calculations. We have found that an ultralight neutrino with a mass such as $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}10^8`$ eV is required to produce enough lepton asymmetry to account for the baryon asymmetry in the present universe. Here, we have assumed that the reheating temperature should be lower than about $`10^8`$ GeV to avoid the cosmological problem of the gravitino of mass $`m_{3/2}100`$ GeV–1 TeV. Such an ultralight neutrino seems to be very unlikely the case, since the recent Superkamiokande experiments  suggest the masses of heavier two neutrinos $`\nu _2`$ and $`\nu _3`$ to be in a range of $`10^1`$$`10^3`$ eV.

However, in the second part of this paper, we have pointed out that the above neutrino mass $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}10^8`$ eV is not necessarily the mass to be observed today, if the heavy Majorana masses of the right-handed neutrinos are dynamical valuables in the early universe. We construct a model based on the Peccei-Quinn symmetry to demonstrate our point. We find in this model that the neutrino mass $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}`$ in the true vacuum can be as large as $`m_{\nu }^{}{}_{1}{}^{}10^5`$$`10^4`$ eV to obtain $`n_B/s10^{10}`$$`10^{11}`$ for the reheating temperature of $`T_{R}^{}{}_{}{}^{<}10^8`$ GeV. Therefore, we have shown that the AD leptogenesis works well as long as the masses for the right-handed neutrinos are dynamical valuables in the early universe.

## Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (T.A. and K.H.) and “Priority Area: Supersymmetry and Unified Theory of Elementary Physics (# 707)” (T.Y.).


format: text

text:
# Many-body diagrammatic expansion in a Kohn-Sham basis: implications for Time-Dependent Density Functional Theory of excited states

## Abstract

We formulate diagrammatic rules for many-body perturbation theory which uses Kohn-Sham (KS) Green’s functions as basic propagators. The diagram technique allows to study the properties of the dynamic nonlocal exchange-correlation (xc) kernel $`f_{xc}`$. We show that the spatial non-locality of $`f_{xc}`$ is strongly frequency-dependent. In particular, in extended systems the non-locality range diverges at the excitation energies. This divergency is related to the discontinuity of the xc potential.

Time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT)  offers a possibility to extend the powerful density-functional formalism  to excited states of many-body systems . A substantial improvement of excitation energies with respect to KS eigenvalues was obtained for atoms and molecules  using a variety of approximations for a dynamic xc kernel $`f_{xc}=\delta v_{xc}(𝐫,t)/\delta n(𝐫^{},t^{})`$ ($`v_{xc}`$ is a xc potential). However in solids the wrong KS band gap remains unchanged regardless the approximation used, albeit the dielectric function is on average improved .

This situation, as we show below, reflects an extremely nonlocal behavior of $`f_{xc}`$ at excitation frequencies. The non-locality range is as large as the system size and hence diverges in extended systems. None of the up-to-date approximations account for this behavior as they all employ the adiabatic (frequency-independent) xc kernels.

In this paper we develop a perturbative technique with KS Green’s functions as the bare propagators. In essence, it is a diagrammatic expansion of Sham-Schlüter equation , which maintains a correct electron density in every order of the perturbation theory. We find that at resonant frequencies the kernel $`f_{xc}`$ is proportional to the discontinuity of $`v_{xc}`$. This explains the anomalous non-locality of $`f_{xc}`$, since a constant shift of a potential due to an extra particle is felt by another particle anywhere in the system.

In the framework of TDDFT the excitation energies are commonly calculated  from the poles of the linear response function $`\chi (𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega )`$. The latter is related to the KS susceptibility $`\chi _S(𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega )`$ by

$$\widehat{\chi }(\omega )=\widehat{\chi }_S(\omega )+\widehat{\chi }_S(\omega )\left[\widehat{V}_C+\widehat{f}_{xc}(\omega )\right]\widehat{\chi }(\omega ),$$
(1)
where $`V_C=e^2/|𝐫𝐫^{}|`$ is a bare Coulomb repulsion and the kernel $`f_{xc}`$ enters as an additional dynamic interaction.

Alternatively, the poles of $`\chi (𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega )`$ can be found as the eigenvalues of a linearized equation for density matrix

$`\left[\omega \widehat{H}_S(𝐫_1)+\widehat{H}_S(𝐫_2)\right]\delta \rho (𝐫_1,𝐫_2)`$ (2)
$``$ $`\rho _S(𝐫_1,𝐫_2){\displaystyle 𝑑𝐫\left[\stackrel{~}{V}_\omega (𝐫_1,𝐫)\stackrel{~}{V}_\omega (𝐫,𝐫_2)\right]\delta \rho (𝐫,𝐫)}=0`$ (3)
where $`\stackrel{~}{V}_\omega =V_C+f_{xc}(\omega )`$, $`\widehat{H}_S(𝐫)`$ is the KS Hamiltonian, and $`\rho _S(𝐫,𝐫^{})=_jn_j\psi _j^{}(𝐫)\psi _j(𝐫^{})`$ is the equilibrium KS density matrix with the KS orbitals $`\psi _j^{}(𝐫)`$. Equation (3) clearly shows that a correction to the KS excitation energies originates from the Hartree-type energy of the excitation-induced density fluctuation $`\delta n(𝐫)=\delta \rho (𝐫,𝐫)`$. In the KS basis equation (3) takes the form

$$(\omega \omega _{ij}^S)\delta \rho _{ij}\gamma _{ij}\underset{kl}{}\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}|\stackrel{~}{V}_\omega |\mathrm{\Phi }_{kl}\delta \rho _{kl}=0,$$
(4)
where $`\omega _{ij}^S=E_i^SE_j^S`$ is a KS excitation energy, $`\gamma _{ij}=n_in_j`$ is the difference of the occupation numbers and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}(𝐫)=\psi _i^{}(𝐫)\psi _j(𝐫)`$. The ordinary perturbation theory gives the energy shift $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _{ij}=\omega _{ij}\omega _{ij}^S`$ in the first order as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _{ij}^{(1)}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}(𝐫)|V_C(𝐫,𝐫^{})+f_{xc}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega _{ij}^S)|\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}(𝐫^{}),$$
(5)
which is identical to the result of the first-order Laurent expansion of $`\chi (𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega )`$ . The perturbation theory easily allows to obtain the higher-order corrections as well. It is worth noting that equations (3) and (4) and the perturbative result (5) are equally valid for finite and for extended systems.

Let us consider the dependence of the first-order correction (5) on the size of a system $`LV^{1/3}`$ at fixed average density $`N/V`$. As $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}(𝐫)`$ contains a normalization factor $`1/V`$, the first term in Eq. (5) is proportional to $`e^2/L`$. This is the Coulomb energy of the density variation due to an electron-hole excitation, which is infinitesimally small in extended systems. The second term crucially depends on the non-locality of $`f_{xc}`$ i.e. on the extension of a xc-hole. At $`\omega =0`$ the non-locality range is about the interparticle distance $`l(V/N)^{1/3}`$. This feature is reproduced by the popular OEP approximation  whereas in adiabatic LDA  $`f_{xc}`$ is a point interaction. Assuming that at resonance frequency $`f_{xc}(\omega _{ij})`$ has a similar non-locality we find that the second term in Eq. (5) is proportional to $`1/N`$ and vanishes as $`L^3`$ (see, however, ). Thus any xc-kernel which is finite and decays at infinity does not contribute to $`\omega _{ij}`$ in extended systems. Using the many-body perturbative approach formulated below, we show that a non-vanishing xc correction arises due to the divergence of the non-locality scale of $`f_{xc}(\omega _{ij})`$.

We employ the Matsubara formalism at nonzero temperature $`T`$ which enables us to obtain any physical retarded function through analytic continuation . Assuming that the xc-potential $`v_{xc}(𝐫)`$ and the ground state density are known, we represent the Hamiltonian of a system as a sum of the KS Hamiltonian $`\widehat{H}_S`$ and the perturbation $`\widehat{V}`$, where

$$\widehat{V}=\widehat{W}^{}\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑𝐫v_{xc}^{(k)}(𝐫)\widehat{n}(𝐫).$$
(6)
In Eq. (6) $`\widehat{W}^{}`$ is a two-particle interaction with the Hartree part being subtracted, $`\widehat{n}(𝐫)`$ is a density operator and we assume that the xc-potential $`v_{xc}`$ can be expanded in a power series $`v_{xc}=_{k=1}^{\mathrm{}}v_{xc}^{(k)}`$, where $`v_{xc}^{(k)}e^{2k}`$.

Following the standard procedure  we define the Green’s function

$$G(X,X^{})=T_\tau \mathrm{\Psi }_S(X)\mathrm{\Psi }_S^+(X^{})\widehat{\sigma }/\widehat{\sigma },$$
(7)
where $`X=(𝐫,\tau )`$ ($`\tau `$ is an imaginary time), $`\mathrm{\Psi }_S(X)`$ is a field operator in a KS interaction representation and $`\widehat{\sigma }`$ is a Matsubara S-matrix  which corresponds to the perturbation $`\widehat{V}`$ of Eq. (6). The angular brackets in Eq. (7) denote averaging over the KS equilibrium state.

A formal graphical expansion of $`G(X,X^{})`$ contains along with the pair interaction terms the diagrams related to the scattering by the “external” potentials $`v_{xc}^{(k)}`$. To achieve a closed scheme one needs a complementary graphical representation of $`v_{xc}(𝐫)`$, which can be obtained from the condition of density conservation . The Green’s function (7) can be written in the form $`G=G_S+_{k=1}^{\mathrm{}}G^{(k)}`$, where $`G_S`$ is a KS Green’s function and $`G^{(k)}`$ is a $`k`$-th order correction. As the KS system possesses an exact density, the variation of the density due to the interaction (6) must vanish. Applying this requirement to every order we arrive at the system of equations:

$$\delta n^{(k)}(𝐫)=T\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}G^{(k)}(𝐫,𝐫,\omega _n)=0,$$
(8)
where $`\omega _n=\pi T(2n+1)`$. This system is equivalent to well-known Sham-Schlüter equation  (see also ). A successive solution of Eq. (8) allows to construct $`v_{xc}^{(k)}`$ for every $`k`$. For example, the first-order correction $`G^{(1)}`$ is presented in Fig. 1a, where the solid line is the KS Green’s function and dashed line is the Coulomb interaction. Substituting $`G^{(1)}`$ into Eq. (8) we get $`v_{xc}^{(1)}`$ as shown in Fig. 2a, where the wiggled line stands for the inverse KS response function $`\chi _S^1(𝐫,𝐫^{})`$. The final first-order correction to the Green’s function is shown in Fig. 1b. Note that $`v_{xc}^{(1)}`$ (Fig. 2a) exactly corresponds to the x-only OEP $`v_x`$. Given $`v_{xc}^{(1)}`$ we solve Eq. (8) for $`k=2`$ and obtain eight graphs for $`v_{xc}^{(2)}`$ (Fig. 2b-i). From the further iterations we deduce the following diagrammatic rules for $`v_{xc}`$ in arbitrary order:
i. Draw all graphs for density according to the usual rules  and attach wiggled lines to external point of each graph.
ii. Whenever it is possible separate the graphs into two parts by cutting two fermionic lines. Join the external fermionic lines of these parts and connect them by the wiggled line. Do not cut lines attached to the external wiggled line.
iii. If a new graph is separable, repeat ii.
iv. If there are several possible cross sections repeat ii and iii for every cross-section.
v. Leave only nonequivalent graphs.
For example, graphs a-e in Fig.2 appear according to i. Graph f is obtained from d applying ii, whereas graphs g-i originate from the graph e by the successive application of ii-v.

Given a diagrammatic representation for $`v_{xc}`$ we can easily construct a graphical expansion for any quantity e.g. for one particle Green’s function, a response function or an energy. We find that the series for the energy coincides with the energy expansion obtained in a different context in Ref.  (see also Ref. ). As the diagrammatic expansion is derived maintaining the exact density in every order, the series for $`v_{xc}`$ is in fact a graphical representation of the Görling-Levy perturbation theory (GLPT) . An obvious advantage of the graphical method is a possibility to construct $`v_{xc}^{(k)}`$ for every $`k`$ in a transparent form.

An important feature of the KS-based diagram technique is that every irreducible self-energy insertion $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝐫,𝐫^{})`$ is accompanied by the local counter term with the opposite sign which has the structure of the average of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$: $`(G_S\mathrm{\Sigma }G_S)(G_SG_S)^1`$. This term guarantees the density conservation and locally reduces the effective field $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. The first-order correction (Fig. 1b) gives an example of this compensation. It is interesting to note that also the standard diagram technique can be reformulated in a similar fashion. One has to explicitly introduce the correction to the chemical potential to compensate the change of the total number of particles (i.e. the averaged density) in every order of the perturbation theory. This leads to similar, but spatially-averaged counter terms. However the local compensation in the KS-based technique is obviously more efficient. This means that KS particles are much closer to the true quasiparticles than bare electrons.

Our graphical method has an obvious connection to the GW approximation . Let us collect in every order of the perturbation theory only the bubble diagrams (e.g. the graph in Fig. 2c) and sum them up. The corresponding correction to the Green’s function is still given by Fig. 1b, but with the RPA-screened interaction. While the first graph in Fig. 1b is exactly the GW self-energy, the second one deviates from the common GW prescription. Instead of subtraction of the whole $`v_{xc}`$, one has to use an approximate $`v_{xc}`$, (even if the exact $`v_{xc}`$ is known!). This is necessary for the purpose of internal consistency and facilitates the density conservation. From this point of view it is clear that KS eigenvalues should describe well quasiparticles in metals (e.g. the shape of the Fermi surface), but not in semiconductors. Indeed, for a short-ranged screened interaction in metals the first (nonlocal) and the second (local) term in Fig. 2b almost cancel (they would cancel exactly for a point interaction). Conversely, in insulators there is no pronounced cancellation since the interaction is long-ranged. As a result, the correction to the KS energies gets larger the larger the gap is.

To study the electron-hole excitations one has to consider the linear response function $`\chi (𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega _n)`$. An integral equation for this function

$$\chi (\omega _n)=\stackrel{~}{\chi }(\omega _n)+\stackrel{~}{\chi }(\omega _n)V_C\chi (\omega _n),$$
(9)
contains irreducible polarization operator $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }(\omega _n)`$. We split $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }(\omega _n)`$ into two parts: $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }(\omega _n)=\chi _S(\omega _n)+\mathrm{\Pi }(\omega _n)`$, where $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\omega _n)`$ includes all (self-energy and vertex) corrections to the irreducible susceptibility $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }(\omega _n)`$. The first-order corrections to $`\chi (\omega _n)`$ are shown in Fig. 3, where the first four terms correspond to the first-order correction $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{(1)}(\omega _n)`$. Thus the total response function in the first order is

$$\chi (\omega _n)\chi _S(\omega _n)+\mathrm{\Pi }^{(1)}(\omega _n)+\chi _S(\omega _n)V_C\chi _S(\omega _n).$$
(10)
The graphs in Fig. 3 display the physical meaning of all corrections to the electron-hole excitation energy. The first two diagrams as well as the third and the fourth graphs are the self-energy corrections for an electron and a hole respectively. The fifth graph is the electron-hole Coulomb interaction, while the last term is the Coulomb energy of the excitation-induced charge density. Performing summation over frequencies and an analytic continuation in the first five diagrams in Fig. 3 we obtain $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{(1)}(\omega )`$ close to the excitation frequency $`\omega _{ij}^S`$:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }^{(1)}(\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma _{ij}\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}(𝐫)\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}^{}(𝐫^{}){\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{ij}\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}}{\left(\omega \omega _{ij}^S\right)^2}},`$ (11)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`\psi _i(𝐫)|v_F(𝐫,𝐫^{})v_x(𝐫)\delta (𝐫𝐫^{})|\psi _i(𝐫^{})`$ (12)
$``$ $`\psi _j(𝐫)|v_F(𝐫,𝐫^{})v_x(𝐫)\delta (𝐫𝐫^{})|\psi _j(𝐫^{})`$ (13)
$``$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ii}(𝐫)|V_C(𝐫,𝐫^{})|\mathrm{\Phi }_{jj}(𝐫^{}).`$ (14)
In Eq. (14) $`v_F(𝐫,𝐫^{})`$ is the Fock nonlocal potential and $`v_x(𝐫)`$ is the local exchange potential or OEP. Apparently $`\gamma _{ij}\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}`$ is a shift of the excitation energy due to the first five graphs in Fig. 3. The last graph gives a correction which is the first term in Eq. (5). The total correction $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _{ij}^{(1)}=\gamma _{ij}(\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}+\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}|V_C|\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij})`$ coincides with the first-order GLPT . With the increase of a system volume the last term in Eq. (14) (the energy of the electron-hole interaction) vanishes as $`e^2/L`$. Conversely, the first two terms remain finite (of the order of $`e^2/l`$) and describe e.g. an exchange shift of the band gap of a semiconductor.

The above results can be restated in terms of TDDFT. In the linear approximation, i.e. after the first iteration Eq. (1) yields

$$\chi (\omega _n)\chi _S(\omega _n)+\chi _S(\omega _n)\left[V_C+f_{xc}(\omega _n)\right]\chi _S(\omega _n).$$
(15)
A comparison to Eq. (14) leads to the following relation

$$f_{xc}(\omega )=\chi _S(\omega )^1\mathrm{\Pi }^{(1)}(\omega )\chi _S(\omega )^1.$$
(16)
As the linear approximation $`v_{xc}^{(1)}`$ is simply the x-only OEP (Fig. 2a), a linear expression Eq. (16) should provide a dynamical OEP kernel $`f_x^{OEP}(\omega )`$. Indeed, a direct functional differentiation of the graph Fig. 2a versus density yields Eq. (16).

At any non-resonant frequency, e.g. in statics $`\omega =0`$, the non-locality range of $`f_{xc}`$ Eq. (16) is about an interparticle distance $`l`$. The correction to the excitation energies Eq. (5) depends, however, on the kernel at resonance $`f_{xc}(\omega _{ij}^S)`$. Let us consider a spatial extension of this kernel using Eq. (16). To calculate $`\chi _S(\omega )^1`$ at resonance $`\omega _{ij}^S`$ one has to keep both a singular and a regular parts of $`\chi _S(\omega )`$. Following Ref.  we write $`\chi _S=\gamma _{ij}\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}(𝐫)\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}(𝐫^{})/(\omega \omega _{ij}^S)+\chi _r(𝐫,𝐫^{})`$, where $`\chi _r`$ is a regular part. Substituting $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{(1)}(\omega )`$ (11) to Eq. (16) and performing calculations we arrive at the following result

$`f_{xc}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega _{ij})=`$ (17)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}{\displaystyle \frac{𝑑𝐫_1𝑑𝐫_2\chi _r^1(𝐫,𝐫_1)\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}(𝐫_1)\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}^{}(𝐫_2)\chi _r^1(𝐫_2,𝐫^{})}{\left[𝑑𝐫_1𝑑𝐫_2\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}^{}(𝐫_2)\chi _r^1(𝐫_2,𝐫_1)\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}(𝐫_1)\right]^2}}.`$ (18)
It is seen from Eq. (18) that a spacial scale of $`f_{xc}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega _{ij})`$ is dictated by the functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}(𝐫)`$ which extend over the whole volume. Thus the non-locality range of the resonant $`f_{xc}`$ is simply a system size, which makes possible a finite xc contribution $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}|f_{xc}(\omega _{ij})|\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}`$ in Eq. (5). This result was considered in Ref.  as an indication of an equivalence of GLPT and TDDFT. We emphasize that this equivalence holds only for a dynamic xc-kernel at resonant frequency and is not fulfilled by any static approximation.

It is straightforward to construct a kernel $`f_{xc}^{GW}(\omega )`$ which reproduces the first-order GW result. One has to replace $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{(1)}(\omega )`$ in Eq. (16) by the function $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{scr}^{(1)}(\omega )`$ which is defined by the first four graphs in Fig. 3, but with the RPA-screened interaction. TDDFT formalism with this $`f_{xc}^{GW}(\omega )`$ exactly reproduces the GW approach. For a semiconductor with the band gap $`E_g`$ the xc-kernel at $`\omega =E_g`$, which is responsible for the band gap correction, is given by Eq. (18) with $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{N+1}\mathrm{\Delta }_{N1}`$. Here $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{N+1}`$ ($`\mathrm{\Delta }_{N1}`$) are the discontinuities of the xc-potential upon addition (removal) of a particle. The fundamental relation of $`f_{xc}`$ at resonant frequency to the discontinuity of $`v_{xc}`$ has a simple physical interpretation. The jump of $`v_{xc}`$ signifies a constant shift of a potential throughout the system due to addition of one particle. It means that another probe particle interacts with the first one anywhere in a system. This should be interpreted as a xc-interaction with a length scale of the size of a system and with an amplitude equal to the $`v_{xc}`$ discontinuity. Importantly, this results holds only at resonant frequency when a real creation of an electron-hole pair takes place. The arguments above show that not only any static approximation, but also any LDA-based dynamic approximation (including any gradient corrections) for $`f_{xc}`$ cannot provide a consistent results for excitation energies and a construction of explicit orbital- and frequency-dependent functionals similar to Eq. (16) is required. A possible alternative is a direct calculation of the irreducible polarization operator using the diagram method outlined above. This formally allows to express excitation energies as functionals of the KS orbitals and consequently of the ground state density.

The work of I.T. was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation and partly by the Russian Federal Program ”Integration”.


text:
# Discovery of a New Supernova Remnant in the Direction of G69.7+1.0

## 1. Introduction

Most galactic supernova remnants (SNRs) have been discovered and classified by observations in the radio band. Green’s present catalog (1998 September version; Green 1998) lists 220 SNRs. These remnants are classified into three types: “shell-type”, “filled-center”, and “composite”. Except for filled-center SNRs, they have radio shells. While some SNRs classified as shell-type in radio also have shells in X-rays, others show a centrally-brightened X-ray morphology.

SNRs are also classified according to their age. While Cassiopeia A and Tycho’s SNR, which are $``$ 300 yr (Fabian et al. 1980) and 430 yr old (Reid et al. 1982), are classified as young shell-type remnants, the Cygnus Loop, Vela, and Puppis SNRs with ages of between 4000 and 20000 yr (Ku et al. 1984; Gorenstein et al. 1974), are classified as evolved, middle-aged remnants. These evolved remnants typically appear as large radio shells containing many optical filaments. The radio emission is synchrotron radiation, which occurs when relativistic electrons move through a magnetic field, and the radio shell is considered to trace the blast wave. The X-ray emission comes from a thin thermal plasma heated either by the blast wave or by the reverse shock. Therefore, we can recognize evolved SNRs as X-ray emission well within a large radio shell (Seward et al. 1990; Green 1998).

The SNR G69.7+1.0 was discovered in the 2.7 GHz survey. The radio spectrum has an energy index, $`\alpha `$ ($`\mathrm{S}_\nu \nu ^\alpha `$ ), of 0.8 (Reich et al. 1988) and it is classified as a shell-type SNR with a diameter of 16. A $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$D relation suggests the distance to G69.7+1.0 to be 14.4 kpc (Case, Bhattacharya 1998).

In X-rays, the ROSAT all-sky survey discovered a bright X-ray arc in the direction of G69.7+1.0 (Asaoka et al. 1996). It was observed in 1993 October with the ROSAT position-sensitive proportional counter (PSPC) in the pointing mode. The spectral study of this X-ray arc has not been made yet, which can clarify its nature. In this paper, we present the results obtained with the ASCA satellite combined with the ROSAT PSPC data.

## 2. Observations and Data Analysis

Observations with the ASCA satellite (Tanaka et al. 1994) in the direction of G69.7+1.0 were performed on 1997 November 20–21. We selected 3 positions, listed in table 1, in order to cover the entire emission based on the ROSAT observation. ASCA has four detectors mounted in the focal plane of its telescope. Two of the detectors are solid-state imaging spectrometers (SIS 0 and SIS 1) (Yamashita et al. 1997), which were working in the 2-CCD Faint mode. The other two XRT are equipped with gas-imaging spectrometers (GIS 2 and GIS 3) (Ohashi et al. 1996; Makishima et al. 1996), which were working in the PH mode. While the GISs have a field of view (FOV) of 50 in diameter, the SISs have a rectangular $`11^{}\times 22^{}`$ FOV in the 2-CCD mode. Figure 1 shows the ASCA FOV superposed on the ROSAT PSPC image. Detailed information concerning the observation are also listed in table 1.

We rejected the data at the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA), the high-background regions with the geomagnetic cut-off rigidities of $`<`$ 6 GeV/c. We also excluded the data at low-elevation angles from the Earth rim. The data screening criteria are $`<5^{}`$ from the night earth rim, $`<25^{}`$ from the bright earth rim for the GIS, $`<45^{}`$ for the SIS 0, $`<20^{}`$ for the SIS 1. As for the GIS data, we applied a “flare-cut” to maximize the signal-to-noise ratio described in Y. Ishisaki et al. (1997 ASCA News 5, 26). SIS data were acquired in the 2-CCD mode in 1997, and hence the residual dark distribution (RDD) would become a problem. Therefore, we applied the RDD correction to the SIS data. Then, they were corrected for any dark-frame error, the echo effect and any charge-transfer inefficiency (T. Dotani et al. 1995 ASCA News 3, 25, 1997 ASCA News 5, 14). Hot and flickering pixels were also removed.

The background consists of the non-X-ray background and the cosmic X-ray background. For the GIS, the non-X-ray background was reproduced with a method introduced by Ishisaki (1996). The cosmic X-ray background data were extracted from the Large Sky Survey (Ueda et al. 1999) data observed during the ASCA PV phase. We subtracted these background data from the GIS data. For the SIS, we subtracted the blank-sky data as background. We estimated the contribution of the galactic ridge emission to be negligible (Yamauchi, Koyama 1993). In a spectral analysis, we binned the data into groups having a minimum of 20 counts per bin, and subtracted the background spectrum, which was grouped to match the source data.

As for the ROSAT PSPC observation, we retrieved the ROSAT archival data through the HEASARC/GSFC Online Service. The sequence ID of the data used here is RP500323. The pointing position was ($`\alpha `$, $`\delta `$)(J2000) = ($`20^\mathrm{h}02^\mathrm{m}40^\mathrm{s}.8`$, $`32^{}43^{}48.^{\prime \prime }0`$) and the net exposure time was 12 ks. The spectra were rebinned as well as those of the ASCA data. The background spectrum was determined from a circular region of radius 34 at the center of the PSPC FOV, excluding both the X-ray arc and the point sources.

## 3. Results

### 3.1. X-Ray Image

We generated exposure-corrected, background-subtracted images of the GIS. Figure 2 shows GIS mosaic images both in the soft band (0.7–1.5 keV) and in the hard band (1.5–5 keV). The soft band image (figure 2a) shows an extended X-ray emission which is similar to the extended source “A” seen in the ROSAT PSPC image (figure 1). The other brightest sources in figure 1 are point sources “B” and “C”. Source C is missing in the ASCA image. Since the PSPC count rate of source C is $`30`$% of that of source B, the expected fluxes of source C for the GIS and SIS are considered to be below the threshold. The hard band image (figure 2b) shows only two sources: the northern source is a point source from the ASCA PSF of the XRT, whereas the southern source is surely an extended source.

The northern point source in figures 2a and b was identical to source B seen in the ROSAT PSPC observation. Source B corresponds to the ROSAT All-Sky Survey Bright Source Catalogue (RASS-BSC) source 1RXS J200047.0+325708 at position ($`\alpha `$, $`\delta `$)(J2000) = ($`20^\mathrm{h}00^\mathrm{m}47^\mathrm{s}.0`$, $`32^{}57^{}08.^{\prime \prime }5`$), and it is within 20′′ from a K2 star, HD 189806 (TYC 2674$``$1400$``$1), to which the distance is 56 pc (Voges et al. 1999).

We extracted the spectra of this source from a 3 radius circle for the GISs, SISs and ROSAT PSPC. In order to subtract the component of extended emission from the data, the background spectra were determined from a 4–8 radius annular region for the GISs and PSPC, and from the FOV of the CCD chip S0C1/S1C3 excluding a 4 radius circle of the source for the SISs. Since it has been reported that SIS data tend to infer a higher column density (ASCA Guest Observer Facility’s home page at http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/asca/cal\_probs.html), we used SIS data above 0.8 keV.

We performed a combined-fit using five data sets, GIS 2, GIS 3, SIS 0, SIS 1, and PSPC data. Since we could expect coronal X-ray emission from the K2 star, we fitted them with a thin thermal model (MEKAL model, Mewe et al. 1985; Liedahl et al. 1995) of cosmic abundances (Anders, Grevesse 1989). We used the model of Morrison and McCammon (1983) for the interstellar absorption. The parameter values that provide a minimum $`\chi ^2`$ were taken as “best-fit” parameters, and errors on parameters were computed using $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2`$ = 2.7. Although the MEKAL model gave only a poor fit with $`\chi ^2`$/d.o.f = 198.8/99, we obtained the best-fit values for the absorption feature, $`N_\mathrm{H}`$ $`<3\times 10^{18}`$ cm-2 and the electron temperature, $`kT_\mathrm{e}`$ = 0.28$`\pm 0.01`$ keV, respectively. The obtained value for $`kT_\mathrm{e}`$ is typical for the temperature of the coronal plasma of late-type stars (Schmitt et al. 1990).

### 3.2. X-Ray Spectra

We extracted the spectra from those regions where the SIS observed. There are three regions: an eastern part, a northern part and a bright part. As for the data of the eastern part and the northern part, we excluded the regions (marked with circles inside the SIS rectangles in figure 2a) within $`4^{}`$ of sources B and C seen in the ROSAT PSPC image. In addition to these three regions, we obtained the spectrum of the region which corresponds to the bright region in radio, shown in figure 2a as a circle. The circle has a diameter of $`10^{}`$; since it is out of the SIS FOVs, we used the GIS data for this spectrum. The ASCA and ROSAT PSPC spectra of all regions are shown in figure 3.

We tried to fit spectra with a MEKAL model with variable metallicity, modified by the interstellar absorption. In this case, there are residuals at around 0.8–1.3 keV and 1.8 keV. Therefore, we used a VMEKAL model and allowed the abundances of Si and Fe to vary during the fitting. The abundances of other elements were set to be cosmic values. The best-fit curves are shown by the solid lines in figure 3, and table 2 summarizes the best-fit parameters. Although the eastern part has a slightly lower $`N_\mathrm{H}`$ value than other regions, there is no significant variation in the electron temperature over our FOV .

In figure 3, the remaining residuals above 2 keV can be seen at the spectrum of the bright part, which may indicate an additional non-thermal component. We then fitted the spectrum with a two-component model consisting of a thin thermal model and a power-law model. Since we could not determine all of the parameters when the electron temperature and the abundances of Si and Fe are free parameters, we fixed these parameters to the values which we obtained with the fitting using only a thin thermal model. However, this attempt could not produce a significant improvement to the fit.

### 3.3. Timing Analysis

We searched for pulsations using GIS data within $`4^{}`$ from the peak of the bright region. We used both high and medium bit-rate data. After barycentering the photon times of arrival, the power spectral density was calculated by the fast Fourier-transformation method. The Nyquist frequency was set at 8 Hz. We found no significant pulsation. Other regions in our FOV do not have sufficient counting statistics to perform a reliable timing analysis.

## 4. Discussion

We compared the X-ray emission with the radio emission in the direction of G69.7+1.0. Figure 4 shows the ROSAT PSPC image superimposed on the 4850 MHz radio contours. The radio map was obtained through the Skyview supported by HEASARC/GSFC. The X-ray emission observed by the PSPC extends beyond the radio shell of G69.7+1.0, which is centered at ($`\alpha `$, $`\delta `$)(J2000) = ($`20^\mathrm{h}02^\mathrm{m}42^\mathrm{s}`$, $`32^{}43^{}28^{\prime \prime }`$). The X-ray peak occurs roughly at ($`\alpha `$, $`\delta `$)(J2000) = ($`20^\mathrm{h}01^\mathrm{m}10^\mathrm{s}`$, $`32^{}35^{}`$), well outside the radio shell, at $`25^{}`$ from its center. Usually, the radio shell of an SNR appears to correspond to, or surround, its X-ray bright region (Seward 1990; Green 1998). Therefore, it is unlikely that the bright part of the X-ray emission is associated with G69.7+1.0, but it is still probably an SNR, because of its thermal emission and extended morphology. We suggest that the observed X-ray emission may be a new SNR, different from the radio SNR, G69.7+1.0, and have named it AX J2001$`+`$3235, or G69.4$`+`$1.2.

The radio map shows that a broken shell structure seems to surround the extended X-ray emission. This shell has a diameter of about $`1^{}`$, as shown in figure 4. We also found a corresponding optical shell in the Digitized Sky Survey image (retrieved from HEASARC/GSFC, figure 5). Even though additional observations would be required to establish whether the optical and radio emission is indeed an SNR, we note that this structure is remarkably similar to that observed in known SNR, as for instance, Cygnus Loop (Ku et al. 1984). Therefore, it cannot be excluded that this structure represents a shell of an evolved SNR. The X-ray emission with the temperature of about 0.4 keV supports that the SNR is in middle-aged. No association of the X-ray emission with this large shell has been reported so far. Asaoka et al. (1996) suggest that the X-ray emission is an SNR, and is a part of another shell with a radius of about $`3^{}`$, which is different from our conclusion. Our finding is that the $`1^{}`$ diameter shell at optical and radio wavelengths may be related to the extended X-ray emission of AX J2001$`+`$3235.

We note that the X-ray emission is elongated to the south-west direction where the radio and optical shells are broken. Both the elongation in X-rays and the breakout at optical and radio wavelengths may be due to the low density of the interstellar medium in the western part. This fact confirms that the X-ray emission in the direction of G69.7+1.0 is associated with an evolved SNR having both radio and optical shells, rather than G69.7+1.0. Follow-up radio and optical observations are needed to study more in detail the relationship between the X-ray emission and the $`1^{}`$ diameter shell.

We have estimated the distance of AX J2001$`+`$3235 using the measured column density. We extracted the GIS and PSPC spectra from the region shown as a dashed ellipse in figure 2a and fitted them with the same model as that described in subsection 3.2. The fitting result is shown in table 2. Although the poor fit suggests that the model is too simple, we employed this result to obtain the average SNR properties as a first-order estimate. We compared the column density of AX J2001$`+`$3235 with that of CTB 80 (G69.0+2.7) which is the SNR located $`1^{}`$ from AX J2001$`+`$3235. The distance to CTB 80 has been measured by various methods (dispersion measure of the central pulsar, kinematic estimates from the detected infrared shell, and the optical reddening estimates), and 2.5 kpc is commonly used (Blair et al. 1984; Case, Bhattacharya 1998). On the other hand, the best-fit value of the column density $`N_\mathrm{H}`$ of CTB 80 obtained with the ROSAT observation was $`3.0\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2 (Safi-Harb et al. 1995). The similar value of the column density of AX J2001$`+`$3235 $`N_\mathrm{H}`$ $`2\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2 suggests the similar distance of $``$ 2.5 kpc.

Employing the distance of 2.5 kpc, we calculated the parameters of AX J2001$`+`$3235. The fitting result of the spectra of a dashed elliptic region gives a lower limit of the thermal energy contained within the entire SNR. From the spectral fitting, we obtained $`kT_\mathrm{e}`$ of 0.42 keV and EM/(4$`\pi d^2)`$ 4.0$`\times 10^{16}`$ cm-5 where EM is the emission measure, $`n_\mathrm{e}n_\mathrm{H}𝑑V`$, $`n_\mathrm{e}`$ and $`n_\mathrm{H}`$ are the mean number density of electron and hydrogen, and $`d`$ is the distance to the SNR. Assuming that the object is an ellipsoid with a major axis of $`0^{}.51`$ ($``$ 22 pc) and a minor axis of $`0^{}.24`$ ($``$ 10 pc), and the number density of hydrogen is equal to that of electron, the derived mean number density of hydrogen $`n_\mathrm{H}`$ is $``$ 0.06 cm-3. The thermal energy $`E_\mathrm{t}`$ is calculated to be

$`E_\mathrm{t}`$ $``$ $`n_\mathrm{H}VkT_\mathrm{e}`$
$``$ $`2.6\times 10^{49}\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{2.5\mathrm{kpc}}}\right)^{2.5}\mathrm{erg},`$
where $`V`$ is the volume of the calculated region.

We compared the parameters of AX J2001$`+`$3235 with those of other evolved SNRs, the Cygnus Loop (Ku et al. 1984), Vela and Puppis SNRs (Gorenstein et al. 1974; Bocchino et al. 1999; Cha et al. 1999). The results are summarized in table 3. The age of AX J2001$`+`$3235 was derived using the Sedov model with an explosion energy of $`10^{51}`$ erg. We can see that all of the parameters (electron temperature, radius, thermal energy, age) of AX J2001$`+`$3235 have typical values of evolved SNRs. We also show the parameters with the assumption of the distance of 14.4 kpc, which was obtained with the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$D relation for G69.7+1.0. In this case, the size and the thermal energy of AX J2001$`+`$3235 are much larger than other evolved SNRs. Therefore, a distance as large as 14.4 kpc is very unlikely.

## 5. Summary

We have studied the X-ray emission of a large region around the known radio SNR G69.7+1.0, and found that the large extended X-ray source, AX J2001$`+`$3235, is not associated with G69.7+1.0. This source has an elongated shape with a size of $`1^{}`$, which is much bigger than that of G69.7+1.0. It is surrounded by another large shell at both optical and radio wavelengths. The column density and the electron temperature obtained by the ASCA and ROSAT PSPC data are $`N_\mathrm{H}2\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2 and $`kT_\mathrm{e}`$ $``$ 0.4 keV. The $`N_\mathrm{H}`$ value of AX J2001$`+`$3235 indicates that it is closer than 14.4 kpc, which is the distance to G69.7+1.0 derived from the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$D relation. We estimate the distance to AX J2001$`+`$3235 to be $``$ 2.5 kpc. The radio and optical shells and the derived parameters of AX J2001$`+`$3235 using the fitting results of the X-ray spectra are consistent with the idea that AX J2001$`+`$3235 is an evolved, previously unknown, SNR.

The authors are grateful to all the members of the ASCA team. We are also grateful to the referee, F. Bocchino, for his useful comments. K.Y. is supported by JSPS Research Fellowship for Young Scientists.

## 6. References

Anders E., Grevesse N. 1989, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 53, 197

Asaoka I., Egger R., Aschenbach B. 1996, MPE Report 263, 233

Blair W.P., Kirshner R.P., Fesen R.A., Gull T.R. 1984, ApJ 282, 161

Bocchino F., Maggio A., Sciortino S. 1999, A&A 342, 839

Case G.L., Bhattacharya D. 1998, ApJ 504, 761

Cha A.N., Sembach K.R., Danks A.C. 1999, ApJ 515, L25

Fabian A.C., Willingale R., Pye J.P., Murray S.S., Fabbiano G. 1980, MNRAS 193, 175

Gorenstein P., Harnden F.R. Jr, Tucker W.H. 1974, ApJ 192, 661

Green D.A. 1998, A Catalogue of Galactic Supernova Remnants (1998 September version) (Mullard Radio Astronomy Observatory, Cambridge)

Ishisaki Y. 1996, Ph.D. thesis, The University of Tokyo

Ku W.H.-M., Kahn S.M., Pisarski R., Long K.S. 1984, ApJ 278, 615

Liedahl D.A., Osterheld A.L., Goldstein W.H. 1995, ApJ 438, L115

Makishima K., Tashiro M., Ebisawa K., Ezawa H., Fukazawa Y., Gunji S., Hirayama M., Idesawa E. et al. 1996, PASJ 48, 171

Mewe R., Gronenschild E.H.B.M., van den Oord G.H.J. 1985, A&AS 62, 197

Morrison R., McCammon D. 1983, ApJ 270, 119

Ohashi T., Ebisawa K., Fukazawa Y., Hiyoshi K., Horii M., Ikebe Y., Ikeda H., Inoue H. et al. 1996, PASJ 48, 157

Reich W., Fürst E., Reich P., Junkes N. 1988, in Proc. 101st colloquium Supernova Remnants and Interstellar Medium, ed R.S. Roger, T.L. Landecker (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) p293

Reid P.B., Becker R.H., Long K.S. 1982, ApJ 261, 485

Safi-Harb S., Ögelman H., Finley J.P. 1995, ApJ 439, 722

Schmitt J.H.M.M., Collura A., Sciortino S., Vaiana G.S., Harnden F.R. Jr, Rosner R. 1990, ApJ 365, 704

Seward F.D. 1990, ApJS 73, 781

Tanaka Y., Inoue H., Holt S.S. 1994, PASJ 46, L37

Ueda Y., Takahashi T., Inoue H., Tsuru T., Sakano M., Ishisaki Y., Ogasaka Y., Makishima K. et al. 1999, ApJ 518, 656

Voges W., Aschenbach B., Boller Th., Bräuninger H., Briel U., Burkert W., Dennerl K., Englhauser J. et al. 1999, A&A 349, 389

Yamashita A., Dotani T., Bautz M., Crew G., Ezuka H., Gendreau K., Kotani T., Mitsuda K. et al. 1997, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 44, 847

Yamauchi S., Koyama K. 1993, ApJ 404, 620