format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

hep-th/0008142  HUTP-00/A035

Superstrings and Topological Strings at Large N

Cumrun Vafa

Jefferson Physical Laboratory

Harvard University

Cambridge, MA 02138, USA

Abstract

We embed the large N Chern-Simons/topological string duality in ordinary superstrings. This corresponds to a large $`N`$ duality between generalized gauge systems with $`N=1`$ supersymmetry in $`4`$ dimensions and superstrings propagating on non-compact Calabi-Yau manifolds with certain fluxes turned on. We also show that in a particular limit of the $`N=1`$ gauge theory system, certain superpotential terms in the $`N=1`$ system (including deformations if spacetime is non-commutative) are captured to all orders in $`1/N`$ by the amplitudes of non-critical bosonic strings propagating on a circle with self-dual radius. We also consider D-brane/anti-D-brane system wrapped over vanishing cycles of compact Calabi-Yau manifolds and argue that at large $`N`$ they induce a shift in the background to a topologically distinct Calabi-Yau, which we identify as the ground state system of the Brane/anti-Brane system.

August 2000

1. Introduction

The idea that large $`N`$ gauge theories should have a phase described by perturbative strings, set forth by ‘t Hooft , has been beautifully realized by various examples. The first example of this kind was found by Kontsevich , which relates the bosonic string theory coupled to certain matter ($`(1,2)`$ minimal model, which is equivalent to pure topological gravity formulated by Witten ), to a matrix integral with cubic interaction (which can be viewed as a particular gauge theory in zero dimensions)1 This is not the same as the old matrix model which discretizes the worldsheet–rather it is the target space description exactly in line with ‘t Hooft’s conjecture.. Many more examples were also found in the context of non-critical bosonic strings. For example, it was found  that bosonic strings propagating on a circle with self-dual radius is equivalent to Penner matrix model .

More recently it was recognized that ‘t Hooft’s conjecture is also realized even for much more complicated and physically more interesting gauge theories . In particular certain gauge theories at large $`N`$ are equivalent to superstrings propagating on AdS backgrounds. Another example of a string/large $`N`$ duality was discovered in , where it was shown that large $`N`$ limit of Chern-Simons gauge theory on $`S^3`$ is equivalent to topological strings on a non-compact Calabi-Yau threefold which is a blow up of the conifold (given by $`O(1)+O(1)`$ bundle over $`𝐏^1`$). This duality was tested to all orders in the $`1/N`$ expansion including checks at the level of Wilson Loop observables of the Chern-Simons theory . It is also known  that in some limit (large $`N`$, fixed Chern-Simons coupling $`k`$) this theory has the same partition function as bosonic strings at the self-dual radius.

This paper was motivated by trying to connect the duality discovered in  with the dualities discovered in the context of AdS/CFT correspondences. The basic idea is to consider type IIA superstring propagating in the conifold background (which is symplectically the same as $`T^{}S^3`$) in the presence of $`N`$ D6 branes wrapped around $`S^3`$ and filling the spacetime. It has been known  that the topological string amplitudes for the internal theory on the non-compact Calabi-Yau compute superpotential terms on the left-over $`R^4`$ worldvolume of the $`D6`$ brane. On the other hand it is also known that the internal topological string theory with $`N`$ D-branes wrapped on $`S^3`$ is equivalent to Chern-Simons gauge theory on $`S^3`$ . Thus the duality found in  suggests that type IIA string on the conifold with $`N`$ D6 branes is equivalent to the blown up version of the conifold with no branes left over. At first sight this sounds strange, because having no D-branes left would naively suggest a theory with $`N=2`$ supersymmetry rather than $`N=1`$. Moreover Ramond fluxes should also be turned on in the blown up geometry corresponding to the flux generated by the D6 brane. The main puzzle was why in the dual topological string theory discovered in  there is no mention of RR fluxes? Indeed it is an ordinary topological string (the A-model) on the blown up conifold.

The resolution turns out to be that turning on the RR flux does not affect the topological string amplitudes, and the dual string theory does involve RR fluxes. Turning on RR flux, however, does generate an $`N=1`$ superpotential term , which can be computed in terms of the topological string amplitudes. Thus the duality found in  can be viewed as an all order check in the $`1/N`$ expansion for the $`N=1`$ superpotential computations in the context of this type IIA superstring/gauge theory duality. One can also consider the mirror symmetry acting on all these statements, which as noted in  give rise to similar dualities. In the superstring realization, the mirror case (in a certain limit) would correspond to considering type IIB string on the blow up of the conifold with $`N`$ D5 branes wrapped on $`𝐏^1`$ and we end up with type IIB on deformed conifold geometry $`T^{}S^3`$ but with RR flux turned on.

One can also consider wrapped D-brane in the context of compact Calabi-Yau manifolds. However in this case we also need to put anti-D-branes, in order to have no net D-branes. In this case we conjecture that the large $`N`$ limit will correspond to having a new Calabi-Yau with fluxes, which can decay as discussed in  to a theory with no fluxes left-over and with supersymmetry increased to $`N=2`$. The effect of the non-BPS states has been to shift the background to a new background. This is a novel way of deforming backgrounds, and as we will suggest later in the paper may have many interesting extensions.

The organization of this paper is as follows: In section 2 we review aspects of topological string amplitudes and what they compute in the corresponding superstring theory. In section 3 we revisit the duality of  and embed it in the context of Type IIA superstrings. In section 4 we apply mirror symmetry to the statements in section 3 and discuss the equivalent Type IIB superstring theory. In section 5 we discuss possible applications of $`c=1`$ non-critical bosonic strings to the question of generation of superpotential in the large $`N`$ limit of $`N=1`$ supersymmetric gauge theory. In section 6 we discuss wrapped brane/anti-brane systems in the context of compact Calabi-Yau manifolds and use the above duality to make new predictions about the shift in the background. In section 7 we discuss some generalizations of this work.

While preparing this paper, three papers appeared which have overlaps with different aspects of our work. In particular  have some overlap with our work in the context of large $`N`$ duals of $`N=1`$ gauge theories in the context of type IIB strings, which we will briefly comment on in section 4. Also the same configuration of wrapped D-branes/anti-D-branes considered in section 6 was also studied in  in a different context.

2. Topological Strings and Superstrings

In this section we discuss aspects of topological strings and their relevance for superpotential computations in the corresponding superstring compactifications. We will divide our discussion to two parts: Closed string case (i.e. without D-branes) and open string case (i.e. including D-branes). We also point out the relevance of topological string amplitudes for $`N=1`$ superpotential computations when RR-fluxes are turned on.

2.1. Closed topological string and superstring amplitudes in 4d

Consider A-model topological strings on a Calabi-Yau manifold $`K`$ (similar remarks apply to the mirror B-model). For simplicity of notation let us assume that the CY manifold has only one Kahler class, parameterized by the complexified Kahler parameter $`t`$. Then closed topological string amplitude on $`K`$ is given by

$$F(t,\lambda _s)=\underset{g}{}\lambda _s^{2g2}F_g$$

$$F_g=\underset{d}{}F_{d,g}e^{dt}$$

where, roughly speaking $`F_{d,g}`$ denote the “numbers” (Gromov-Witten invariants) of genus $`g`$ curves in class $`d`$. The topological strings compute certain amplitudes in the corresponding type IIA superstring compactifications on the Calabi-Yau . In particular they compute terms in the action of the form

$$d^4\theta 𝒲^{2g}F_g(t)=gR^2F^{2g2}F_g(t)+\mathrm{}$$

where $`𝒲_{\alpha \beta }`$ denotes the graviphoton field strength multiplet, $`R^2`$ and $`F^{2g2}`$ denote certain contractions of the self-dual part of the Riemann tensor and of the gravi-photon field strength, and $`t`$ denotes the vector superfield with the vev of the lowest component being the Kahler parameter $`t`$. One way to derive this formula is to note that with $`2g2`$ insertions of the spin operator, needed to compute the amplitude involving the $`F^{2g2}`$, the ordinary sigma model is topologically twisted. At genus $`0`$ what one gets is

$$d^4\theta F_0(t)=^2F_0(t)F^tF^t+\mathrm{}$$

where $`F^t`$ denotes the (self-dual part of the) $`U(1)`$ field strength in the same multiplet as $`t`$. In the type IIA this arises from the 4-form field strength $`G`$ by setting it to

$$G=F^t\omega _t$$

where $`\omega _t`$ denotes the Kahler form associated to $`t`$.

It is natural to ask what changes in the closed topological string computations when we turn on some RR flux in the target space. The choices are2 We can also include the 0-form field strength dual to 10 form field strength in type IIA, but since we will not deal with it in this paper we will not discuss it. It will give rise to an $`N=1`$ superpotential of the form $`G_0k^3`$. the 2-form field strength in the internal space $`F`$, 4-form field strength $`G_{int}`$ along the internal CY directions and the $`G`$ along the spacetime directions $`G_4`$, which we equivalently study in terms of the dual 6-form field strength $`G_6=G_4`$. It turns out that the topological string amplitudes in the presence of RR fields is not modified at all! This is particularly simple to show in the Berkovits formalism . Instead of demonstrating it in this way we follow a related idea, which we will need later in this paper, by studying the generation of $`N=1`$ superpotential terms in the presence of RR fluxes, which we will discuss next.

2.2. Generation of superpotential due to internal field strength

RR fluxes have been studied in the context of CY compactifications . In particular it has been shown in  that turning on internal field strength in the CY leads to generation of superpotential terms in 4d $`N=1`$ theory (see also similar situations considered in ). In the context of type IIA theory with RR fluxes corresponding to $`F`$ and $`G_{int}`$ and $`G_6`$ discussed above, the superpotential is given by

$$\lambda _sW=Fkk+iGk+G_6$$

where $`k`$ is the complexified Kahler class. To see this one considers the BPS charge in the presence of BPS domain walls which may be partially wrapped over the CY. For example, considering a D6 brane wrapped over 4-cycles of CY gives a domain wall with BPS tension $`\frac{1}{\lambda _s}kk`$ integrated over the internal part of the 6-brane. This in turn shifts the dual $`F`$ by one unit. This BPS formula should be captured by a $`\mathrm{\Delta }W`$ and we can see from the above form of (2.1) that the first term above precisely captures this term. More precisely what we mean by the formula (2.1) is the worldsheet quantum corrected formula for the kahler forms (as is well known in the context of mirror symmetry the mass of the D-branes receives corrections by the worldsheet instantons). In particular if $`t`$ denotes the complexified area of the basic $`2`$ cycle, then the volumes of the $`0,2,4`$ and $`6`$ cycles are given by

$$1,t,\frac{F_0}{t},2F_0t\frac{F_0}{t}$$

where $`F_0`$ is the genus zero topological string amplitude. So in particular suppose we have $`N`$ units of the $`F`$ flux through the basic $`2`$-cycle, where $`t`$ denotes the complexified area of this 2-cycle. Then the first term in (2.1) is equivalent to

$$Fkk=N\frac{F_0}{t}$$

Similarly if we considered $`D4`$ branes wrapped over 2 cycles and $`D2`$ branes with no wrappings, we deduce the existence of the second and third term in (2.1). In particular if we denote the fluxes of $`F`$, $`G_{int}`$, $`G_6`$ by integers $`N,L,P`$ relative to integral 2, 4 and 6 cycles, we have

$$\lambda _sW=N\frac{F_0}{t}+itL+P$$

Note that equation (2.1) can also be written in the form

$$\lambda _sW=(F+iG)k+G_6$$

where again here by $``$ we mean the worldsheet quantum corrected $``$ operation.

Now we come to the discussion of why turning on RR fluxes should not modify the topological amplitudes. We will concentrate on genus 0 amplitudes (similar arguments can be advanced for the higher genus amplitudes as well). The vector superfield with bottom component $`t`$ has an auxiliary field in the superspace of the form

$$t+\theta ^2(F+iG)+\mathrm{}$$

where $`F`$ and $`G`$ are the usual RR fluxes of the internal Calabi-Yau3 I have greatly benefited from discussions with Nathan Berkovits in connection with the auxiliary field structure of the superfields.. In the usual supersymmetric background they are set to zero. Now suppose we wish to turn them on. Suppose for example we wish to turn on $`N`$ units of $`F`$. Consider the topological string amplitude $`F_0(t)`$. We claim that this already yields the correct structure for the generation of $`N=1`$ superpotential precisely if $`F_0`$ is unmodified in the presence of RR flux. To see this note that using the expansion of $`t`$ in terms of the RR field strength auxiliary fields we have

$$d^4\theta F_0(t)=d^2\theta N\frac{F_0}{t}$$

which is exactly the expected answer if $`F_0`$ is unmodified. Similarly turning on the $`G_{int}`$ flux and using (2.1) we see that the term in (2.1) involving $`G_{int}`$ will also have the correct structure if $`F_0`$ is unmodified.

There is another auxiliary field in the vector multiplet which come from the NS-NS sector which is relevant for us. This corresponds to the field strength associated with the lack of integrability of complex structure. In particular if we write $`\overline{D}=\overline{}+A`$, where $`A`$ is an anti-holomorphic one form taking values in the tangent bundle, then

$$\overline{D}^2=(\overline{}A+[A,A])=$$

where $``$ is an anti-holomorphic 2-form with values in the tangent bundle which is equivalent, by lowering the vector index by the three form, to a $`(2,2)`$ form. If this is non-vanishing it also corresponds to making the $`(3,0)`$ form in the CY not to be annihilated by $`\overline{}`$. These turn out effectively to add to $`F`$ and $`G_{int}`$ complex pieces of the form $`iF^{NS}/\lambda _s`$ and $`iG_{int}^{NS}/\lambda _s`$. A similar $`NS`$ auxiliary field gives rise effectively to the complex part of $`G_6`$.4 Turning these fields on is mirror to turning on $`H_{NS}`$ on the mirror CY. In other words, even with these fields turned on, the formula (2.1) remains correct but now $`N,L,P`$ also include imaginary pieces of the form $`iN_I/\lambda _s,iL/\lambda _s,iP/\lambda _s`$. We will continue to denote the superpotential as (2.1) and keep in mind that $`N,L`$ and $`P`$ can have complex pieces given by an integer over $`\lambda _s`$.

Turning these vevs on breaks the $`N=2`$ supersymmetry to $`N=1`$. The field $`t`$ is now the bottom component of an $`N=1`$ chiral multiplet whose auxiliary field descends from another auxiliary field (which also comes from the NS sector) in the original $`N=2`$ multiplet which is not turned on.

Note also that the higher genus topological amplitudes also give rise to certain $`N=1`$ superpotential terms when the auxiliary field of the $`N=2`$ multiplet $`t`$ takes a vev. In particular with $`N`$ units of RR flux for $`F`$ we get

$$d^4\theta 𝒲^{2g}F_g(t)Nd^2\theta 𝒲^{2g}\frac{F_g}{t}$$

where we continue to denote by $`𝒲_{\alpha \beta }`$ the reduction of the $`N=2`$ multiplet to an $`N=1`$ multiplet with the self-dual part of the graviphoton field strength as its bottom component.

So in conclusion we have learned that the topological string amplitudes are not sensitive to turning on RR field strengths, but they are useful in determining the superpotential terms that will be generated once certain RR and NS fields take a vev. This is captured by equation (2.1).

2.3. Open Topological Strings and N=1 amplitudes in 4d

In the A-model, the open topological string corresponds to studying holomorphic maps from worldsheet with boundaries to the target space where the boundary lies on a 3-dimensional Lagrangian subspace of the CY, i.e. the 3-dimensional topological version of D-brane . Moreover, it was shown that topological string field theory in this case is just the Chern-Simons gauge theory on the corresponding Lagrangian submanifold (possibly corrected with non-trivial worldsheet instantons). The implications of these theories for superstring amplitudes has been studied as well. In particular if we consider type IIA superstring in the presence of a CY with $`N`$ D6 branes wrapping a lagrangian 3-cycle of CY and filling the rest of the spacetime we get an $`N=1`$ gauge theory with $`SU(N)`$ gauge group in 4d. Then it was shown in  that for example the genus 0 open topological string amplitudes compute corrections of the form

$$\lambda _sW=\underset{h}{}d^2\theta F_{0,h}[NhS^{h1}]+\alpha S+\beta $$

where $`F_{0,h}`$ is the partition function of the topological string at genus $`0`$ with $`h`$ holes, and $`S=\lambda _sTrW^2`$ where $`W_\alpha `$ is the chiral superfield with gaugino as its bottom component5 The coefficient of $`Nh`$ in front arises because, as discussed in , we have to choose $`h1`$ holes to put the $`trW^2`$ fields and this can be done in $`h`$ ways and also the trace over the hole without a field gives a factor of $`N`$. Note also that $`TrW^2`$ which is a fermion bilinear is nilpotent, in the sense that $`(TrW^2)^k=0`$ for $`k>N^2`$. It is relevant for us precisely because we are considering a large $`N`$ limit. Thus in the large $`N`$ limit the gaugino bilinear can even have a classical vev.. Here we have shown explicitly the contribution coming from $`h=2`$ in the form of $`\alpha S`$. This term, coming from annulus, is typically divergent, signifying the RG flow of the coupling constant of the gauge theory and needs regularization. Also we have added a constant $`\beta `$ to remind us that we cannot fix that from open topological string considerations. Here $`h`$ is the number of holes on the sphere and $`F_{0,h}`$ denotes the topological amplitude on the sphere with $`h`$ holes. If the target space has some Kahler moduli $`t`$ they will correspond to chiral fields in the $`N=1`$ theory in 4 dimensions and $`F_{0,h}`$ will depend on $`t`$. The case of $`h=1`$ in the above formula was recently discussed in . Some superstring implications of higher genus open topological strings, i.e. $`F_{g,h}`$ with arbitrary $`g`$, has also been noted in . In particular they compute terms of the form $`d^2\theta F_{g,h}𝒲^{2g}[NhS^{h1}]`$.

Let us define the open topological string amplitude summed over all holes at a fixed genus by

$$F_g^{open}(r)=\underset{h}{}F_{g,h}r^h.$$

Then, for example the genus 0 open topological string amplitude computes the following correction to the superpotential

$$\lambda _sW=Nd^2\theta \frac{F_0^{open}(S)}{S}+\alpha S+\beta $$

This is strikingly similar to the form obtained in (2.1) in the context of closed topological string amplitudes. Similarly the higher genus correction computes terms of the form

$$Nd^2\theta 𝒲^{2g}\frac{F_g^{open}(S)}{S}$$

which is also similar to the higher genus correction obtained in the closed string context in the presence of flux (2.1). The main difference being that $`S`$ is an operator for the open string amplitudes but $`t`$ is a parameter in the closed string setup. Nevertheless we will see in the next section why this is not an accidental similarity and provides the superstring interpretation of the duality found in , when $`S`$ takes an expectation value equal to $`t`$.

3. Embedding Large $`N`$ Topological String duality in Superstrings

Consider Type IIA strings in a non-compact CY 3-fold geometry of the form of the conifold times the Minkowski space $`M^4`$: The internal geometry is given by

$$f=x_1^2+\mathrm{}+x_4^2=\rho $$

where each $`x_i`$ parameterizes $`𝐂`$. The real subspace of the above geometry is $`S^3`$ (for real $`\rho `$) and the imaginary directions sweep the cotangent direction of $`S^3`$. The volume of $`S^3`$ in string units is given by $`\rho `$ (here we are taking the canonical 3-form $`\mathrm{\Omega }=dx_i/df`$, which scales as $`\rho `$ to give the volume). Thus symplectically the conifold is $`T^{}S^3`$. Consider $`N`$ D6 branes wrapped over the $`S^3`$ of the conifold and filling the rest of the spacetime. On the uncompactified worldvolume of the D-brane we have an $`N=1`$ supersymmetric $`SU(N)`$ gauge theory. Note that to leading order the action on the uncompactified worldvolume of the D-branes is given by the superpotential

$$\frac{1}{\lambda _s}d^2\theta SY$$

where $`S=\lambda _sTrW^2`$ and where $`Y`$ denotes the $`N=1`$ chiral superfield with its bottom component given by $`iC+\frac{\rho }{\lambda _s}`$, where $`C`$ is the vev of the 3-form gauge field on IIA (normalized with periodicity $`2\pi `$) and plays the role of the theta angle for the gauge theory and $`\rho `$ denotes the volume of the $`S^3`$.

The choice of this type IIA geometry is based on the desire to utilize the topological open/closed string duality. In particular as discussed in the previous section the open topological string in this case computes corrections to the superpotential of the form

$$\frac{N}{\lambda _s}d^2\theta _SF_0^{open}(S)$$

The topological A-model is insensitive to complex structure. In particular $`F^{open}`$ is independent of $`\rho `$ except for a linear terms in $`S`$ (coming from the annulus) written in (3.1), which is related to the ambiguity of open topological string at the level of annulus. There is also a divergence of the annulus amplitude corresponding to the running of the gauge coupling constant, which, in the regularized form, can be viewed as addition of a linear term in $`S`$. The corrections above to the simple $`YS=YTrW^2`$ involve higher dimension operators (more powers of $`S`$) and are captured by the open string amplitude which coincide with the large $`N`$ expansion of the Chern-Simon amplitudes on $`S^3`$ . Note also that the fact that they are independent of $`Y`$ implies that they survive no matter what the size of the $`S^3`$ is.

Now we wish to consider the limit where we consider the $`N\mathrm{}`$ limit keeping $`N\lambda _s`$ fixed. In this limit, the analog of ‘t Hooft coupling for the gauge system is given by

$$\frac{1}{Ng_{YM}^2}\frac{Y}{N\lambda _s}.$$

which remains fixed in this limit. We would like to consider the gravity dual of this gauge system. In the spirit of AdS/CFT correspondence we will have to consider the near horizon geometry. What the precise notion of “near” horizon geometry in this case should be is more subtle because the expectation value of $`Y`$ undergoes an RG flow, as noted above, and it will depend at which scale we are probing it. In other words we have to readjust the size of $`Y`$ depending on how close we are approaching the branes. The limit should be such that the $`S^3`$ has zero size when we probe it in the UV of the gravitational side but finite size in the IR. To avoid such subtleties we try to look for a consistent gravitational background which the branes create. In particular we should find an $`S^2`$ of finite size emerging, surrounding the $`S^3`$, with the D-branes completely disappeared and replaced by the corresponding fluxes. In the case at hand, since we have N $`D6`$ branes wrapping the $`S^3`$ in the geometry after transition we should get $`N`$ units of the 2-form RR flux $`F`$ through the dual $`S^2`$. We will now turn to studying this geometry.

3.1. Type IIA Superstring on the blown up geometry

We thus seek the dual large $`N`$ stringy description of the above gauge system, in the form of the Type IIA background with the blown up conifold geometry, i.e. the geometry corresponding to $`O(1)+O(1)`$ bundle over $`𝐏^1`$, with $`N`$ units of 2-form $`F`$ flux through $`𝐏^1`$. However we must also have internal $`4`$-form and $`6`$-form fluxes (in the form of NS and RR fields discussed before).

That there should be an NS $`4`$-form flux corresponds to the fact that the size of the $`S^3`$ is changing (i.e. that $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is no longer closed and $`\rho =_{S^3}\mathrm{\Omega }`$ changes), inducing a running of the gauge coupling constant. Moreover to preserve $`N=1`$ supersymmetry for a finite value $`t`$ of the complexified area of the blown up $`𝐏^1`$ we need both 4-form as well as 6-form fluxes. In fact, as discussed in the previous section and summarized in equation (2.1) we have a superpotential of the form

$$W=N_tF_0(t)+itL+P$$

where for the geometry at hand $`F_0(t)`$ is, up to a cubic polynomial, the tri-logarithm function, given by

$$F_0(t)=\frac{1}{6}t^3\underset{n>0}{}\frac{e^{nt}}{n^3}+P_2(t).$$

(where $`P_2(t)`$ is a polynomial of order $`2`$ in $`t`$ and is somewhat ambiguous). Similarly for higher genus $`F_g`$ we have

$$F_g(t)=\frac{B_{2g}}{2g(2g2)!}\underset{n>0}{}n^{2g3}e^{nt}+\frac{B_{2g}B_{2g2}}{2g(2g2)(2g2)!}g>1$$

$$F_1(t)=\frac{t}{24}+\frac{1}{12}\mathrm{log}(1e^t)$$

where $`B_{2g}`$ denotes the Bernoulli numbers. The terms involving $`e^{nt}`$ in the above formula reflects the corrections due to worldsheet instantons wrapping $`n`$ times over the $`𝐏^1`$.

The content of the duality obtained in  is that

$$F_g^{Open}(S)=F_g(t)$$

for all $`g`$ if we set $`S=t`$. We now try to interpret this statement in the superstring context. For this we need to study solutions to the gravitational equations.

Typically in physics and mathematics when we try to solve some system of equations, there are topological obstructions that have to be shown to be absent. Once they are shown to be absent then a solution exists. For example, when we are trying to find Ricci-flat metrics on Kahler manifolds we need the first chern class of the manifold to be zero. In fact this is also sufficient for being able to find a Calabi-Yau metric. Of course explicit solution for the metric has not been possible in almost all cases and in fact the Ricci-flat metric is only an approximate metric which gives rise to a conformal worldsheet theory. In a sense the topological condition, guaranteeing the existence of the solution is more fundamental than the solution itself.

Now we come to the case at hand. To preserve $`N=1`$ supersymmetry we need $`W=dW=0`$. Once these are satisfied, we expect physically that there must be a solution to the gravitational system. In fact a very similar example with the same number of supercharges (namely 4) was already studied from this point of view. Namely if we consider M-theory on Calabi-Yau 4-fold with G-flux turned on, the gravitational equations have been studied in . The topological conditions they find for the existence of the gravitational solution has been shown to be identical to the condition that $`W=dW=0`$ .

Of course the low energy gravitational equation in the present case can also be studied similar to what was done in  and will involve warped geometries mixing the spacetime with the Calabi-Yau. Even though solving the gravity equations would be interesting, we have to remember that due to worldsheet instantons wrapping the $`𝐏^1`$ there are important corrections to the gravity equations, and so at best we can trust the low energy gravity description in the limit of large $`t`$. Nevertheless, as already noted above, the superpotential terms including  the corrected string geometry, can be incorporated to all orders in the $`W`$ which is computable by topological string amplitudes.

Before even solving the conditions $`W=dW=0`$ we can already interpret the duality of  in the superstring context. If we compare the equation (3.1) with the superpotential given in the gauge theory side namely $`W=N_SF_0^{open}(S)+\alpha S+\beta `$ we see that they are identical in form with an appropriate identification of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ with $`L`$ and $`P`$. Therefore, since the vacuum in the gauge theory side, as well as the moduli in the gravity side correspond to $`W=dW=0`$, and $`W`$ has the same form for the gauge as well as the gravitational system, this will identify

$$S=\lambda _sTrW^2=tF_g^{open}(S)=F_g(t)$$

Thus the condition of vacuum configuration which sets $`S=t`$ also translates the duality found in  to the match between amplitudes in the gravity side and the gauge theory side to all orders in $`1/N`$ at least as far as superpotential terms are concerned!

Note that the idea that $`S0`$, i.e. that we have gaugino condensation, is very natural for the open string theory under discussion as it does have an $`N=1`$ Yang-Mills theory associated with it. Part of the above check involves, on the gauge theory side, the statement that gaugino condensation generates superpotential terms captured through topological open string amplitudes and in fact this was already pointed out in . Of course here we have a more refined gauge theory than just the $`N=1`$ Yang-Mills theory and in particular we have in the open string system, also the higher dimension operators present, which are captured by the topological string amplitude. At any rate, the result of  strongly suggests not only the existence of a large $`N`$ duality involving this $`N=1`$ brane system with this closed string background, but also that the gaugino condensation takes place.

We now come to finding solutions to the equations $`W=dW=0`$ on the gravity side, which should guarantee the existence of a solution. There are four parameters under control: the modulus $`t`$ and the fluxes $`N,L,P`$. The two equations $`W=dW=0`$

$$_tW=0NF_0^{\prime \prime }+iL=0L=iNF_0^{\prime \prime }$$

$$W=0P=NF_0^{}+NtF_0^{\prime \prime }$$

imply that two of these four quantities are fixed in terms of the other two. The $`N`$ is of course fixed for us by the number of D6 branes. As is clear from our description of the dual gauge system the choice of a shift in $`L`$ is related to a shift in the bare coupling constant of the gauge system. In particular in order to agree with the bare coupling constant of the gauge theory $`iL=\rho /\lambda _s`$, where $`\rho `$ is the volume of the $`S^3`$ where the D6 branes are wrapped around. Thus the value of $`t`$ (and also of $`P`$) is fixed and from (3.1) and $`_tW=0`$ the solution for $`t`$ is given by

$$[c(e^t1)]^N=\mathrm{exp}(\rho /\lambda _s)$$

The constant $`c`$ depends on the ambiguities hidden in the $`P_2(t)`$. As we will argue from the dual gauge theory description, it should be fixed in our case (by a suitable regularization of the one loop divergence of the gauge theory) to be $`cN\lambda _s`$.

Next we turn to the question of how the dynamics of the gauge system is reflected in the $`W`$ and the other superpotential terms. What do we expect for the dynamics of the $`N=1`$ supersymmetric theory living on the D6 brane? If we ignore the higher powers of $`S`$ in the superspace integral, i.e. if we ignore the higher order operators, as already discussed, the leading term with the lowest number of derivatives, is given by the superpotential term

$$\frac{1}{\lambda _s}d^2\theta SY$$

where $`S=\lambda _sTrW^2`$ and $`Y=iC+\frac{\rho }{\lambda _s}`$ where $`\rho `$ denotes the size of the $`S^3`$ in the string frame. In the usual geometric engineering of standard $`N=1`$ gauge theories, and in particular the ones discussed in  one considers the limit where $`\rho `$ is large, in which case the field $`Y`$ gets demoted to a parameter in the lagrangian (the corresponding D-term involving $`Y\overline{Y}`$ becomes very large). However here we are not necessarily interested only in a regime where $`Y`$ is very large. In other words we consider the field $`Y`$ to be a dynamical field. Thus we have a non-standard $`N=1`$ supersymmetric gauge theory with its coupling constant as a dynamical field. Even though it is somewhat unconventional, as we will now argue some of the basic features of this theory are similar to that of $`N=1`$ QCD, in the limit where we ignore the higher derivative terms of the form $`d^2\theta [trW^2]^k`$. In other words, if we consider the field space where $`S=trW^2<<1`$ (in string units) we have a theory which is more or less similar to $`N=1`$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory. Even though we do not have to restrict our attention only to this limit, and the duality with gravity holds regardless of which field configuration in $`S`$ we consider, it is first instructive to consider the small $`S`$ region to gain intuition for what this theory is.

In the dynamics of $`N=1`$ supersymmetric gauge theory, a prominent role is played by instantons. Here a similar effect exists: In particular if we consider Euclidean D2 brane instantons wrapping the $`S^3`$ the superpotential gets corrected. Moreover this can also be viewed as point-like instantons for the $`SU(N)`$ gauge theory. To have the right number of fermionic zero modes to lead to a chiral superspace potential we need $`1/N`$-th of this instanton. Since the action for this instanton is $`e^Y`$, the term that can appear in the action is $`e^{Y/N}`$. The coefficient in front of it should be of order $`N^2`$ (as argued in ). So we must have the effective superpotential given by

$$W=d^2\theta (\frac{1}{\lambda _s}SY+iN^2\alpha e^{Y/N})$$

where the constant $`\alpha `$, by a shift in $`YY+Y_0`$, can be identified with a shift in the bare coupling constant of $`S`$, i.e.,

$$\alpha =e^{Y_0/N}$$

(The choice of $`\alpha `$ is also related to how we regularize the one-loop divergence which corrects the action with a term $`ad^2\theta S`$).

This effective superpotential has the same structure as that encountered in the proof of mirror symmetry in 2 dimensions . This same superpotential structure was encountered in  in the context of $`N=1`$ domain walls in 4d, which we will also need in this paper, and we will discuss further below. Notice that here since $`Y`$ is a dynamical field, we can integrate it out by setting

$$_YW=0\frac{1}{\lambda _s}S=iN\alpha e^{Y/N}$$

which leads to

$$Y=\mathrm{log}(\frac{S}{iN\alpha \lambda _s})^N$$

plugging it back to the superpotential gives the effective superpotential for $`S`$:

$$W_{eff}(S)=\frac{1}{\lambda _s}[S\mathrm{log}(\frac{S}{iN\alpha \lambda _S})^N+NS]$$

This is the familiar effective superpotential expected for the gaugino bilinear $`S`$ in the standard $`N=1`$ supersymmetric gauge theory. Indeed setting $`_SW=0`$ leads to

$$[\frac{S}{iN\alpha \lambda _s}]^N=1S=iN\alpha \lambda _se^{2\pi il/N}=iN\lambda _se^{(Y_0+2\pi il)/N}$$

Note that we see the $`N`$ vacua of $`SU(N)`$ Yang-Mills, in the standard way.

Let us compare the vev we found for $`S=\lambda _sTrW^2`$ with the gaugino condensate for standard $`N=1`$ Yang-Mills, which is of the form

$$TrW^2=iN\mathrm{\Lambda }^3e^{[\frac{1}{Ng_{YM}^2}]+\frac{2\pi il}{N}}$$

In comparison with what we have above, note that this is in perfect agreement with (3.1), where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ corresponds to the string scale and $`1/g_{YM}^2Y_0`$.

Note that the effective superpotential we have found for $`S`$, for small $`S`$, also follows from either the open topological string amplitudes in the limit $`S0`$, or the dual closed topological string amplitude in the limit $`S=t0`$ which is given by

$$F_0(t)\frac{1}{2}t^2\mathrm{log}t+at^2+bt+c$$

and so

$$W(S)=\frac{1}{\lambda _s}[N_SF_0(S)+\alpha S+\beta ]=\frac{1}{\lambda _s}(S\mathrm{log}S^N+N\mathrm{const}.S+N\mathrm{const}.)$$

in perfect agreement with expectations based on the gauge theory analysis as well as with the contribution of the Euclidean D2 brane instantons in the string context. This comparison with gauge theory and recalling that $`t\lambda _sTrW^2`$, also fixes the value $`c`$ in (3.1) to be $`cN\lambda _s`$. Note that the choice of $`\alpha `$, the linear terms in $`S`$, on the gravity side is controlled by the 4-form fluxes dual to the $`𝐏^1`$, as discussed before.

Having discussed the geometry of the vacua of $`N=1`$ theory, we now turn to another important feature of $`N=1`$ theories, namely the domain walls interpolating between various vacua.

3.2. Domain Walls

$`N=1`$ Yang-Mills theory admits BPS domain walls interpolating between various vacua. As noted in  at large $`N`$ they behave as D-branes for QCD string. In particular their tension is of the order of $`N`$. Since in the present context the QCD string is realized by the fundamental string, ordinary D-branes of string theory should play the role of domain walls. This is indeed the case: On the gravity side we have a blown up $`𝐏^1`$. If we consider D4 branes wrapped over $`𝐏^1`$ they correspond to domain walls. Their tension goes as

$$T\frac{1}{\lambda _s}|t|=N\frac{|t|}{N\lambda _s}$$

As discussed before $`|N\lambda _s||t|`$ so we obtain the expected behavior. For the QCD domain wall the phase of the $`S`$ field should change as we go from one vacuum to another. In particular it should shift by $`\mathrm{exp}(2\pi i/N)`$ for domain walls interpolating adjacent vacua. Let us see how this is realized in the gravity setup. Since we have identified the domain wall with $`D4`$ brane wrapped over $`S^2`$ we should note that the value of the $`G`$ flux shifts as we cross the domain wall. Consider in particular the imaginary part of the $`Y`$ field introduced earlier, which was identified with

$$ImY=C_{S^3}$$

i.e. the vev of the $`C`$ field along the $`S^3`$. We now discuss how this changes from the left-side of the domain wall to the right-side. Since the G flux should be equal to one for the D4 brane, it implies that $`ImY`$ should shift by $`2\pi `$, i.e.

$$YY+2\pi i$$

as we go across the domain wall. In fact we can find the geometry of the BPS domain walls by the usual technique of the LG theory in 2d with $`N=2`$ susy . In fact for the case at hand similar BPS domain walls were considered in . These domain walls also featured in the discussion of $`N=1`$ generation of superpotential in . Note that since we have

$$S=\lambda _sN\mathrm{exp}((Y+Y_0)/N)$$

this implies that the phase of $`S`$ changes by $`\mathrm{exp}(2\pi i/N)`$ as expected. Of course this is suppressed at large $`N`$, in agreement with the fact that classically the wrapped D-brane does not change the value of $`t`$.

It is also easy to see from the form of the action (3.1) that the BPS tension, which is given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }W`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }W=\frac{1}{\lambda _s}S\mathrm{\Delta }Y$$

Since $`S`$ is identified with $`t`$, this corresponds to

$$\mathrm{\Delta }W=\frac{2\pi i}{\lambda _s}t$$

as expected for the tension of the BPS wrapped $`D4`$ brane.

3.3. Subleading Corrections in the $`1/N`$ Expansion

So far we have concentrated on the interpretation of the leading corrections in large $`N`$. In the context of topological strings also the subleading terms to all orders in $`1/N`$ were found to agree between the Chern-Simons gauge theory and the closed topological string expansion. What is the interpretation of these higher terms for the gauge theory system?

In the limit of small $`t`$ the topological string amplitudes is given by

$$F(t)=\underset{g}{}F_g\lambda _s^{2g2}t^{22g}$$

where $`F_g=\frac{B_{2g}}{2g(2g2)}`$ and $`B_{2g}`$ are the Bernoulli numbers ($`F_g`$ turns out to be equal to the Euler characteristic of the moduli space of genus $`g`$ Riemann surfaces). In this limit the topological string partition function coincides with that of non-critical bosonic strings on a circle with self-dual radius (this connection is well understood and will be reviewed in section 5). The $`N=2`$ amplitude that this computes is given by

$$d^4\theta 𝒲^{2g}F_gt^{22g}=gR^2F^{2g2}F_gt^{22g}+\mathrm{}$$

This correction has been physically understood by considering turning on constant graviphoton field strength in the Minkowski space and computing the effect of wrapped D2 branes on $`𝐏^1`$ to the $`R^2`$ term . In the present context the wrapped $`D2`$ branes correspond to the baryon vertex, as in the usual AdS/CFT correspondence . The Baryon fields are charged under the graviphoton field with charge proportional to their BPS mass $`t`$. Thus turning on graviphoton $`F`$ effectively turns on a background field strength for $`F_v`$, i.e. the $`U(1)U(N)`$ living on the D6 branes, which can be identified with a global $`U(1)`$ symmetry (the ‘Baryon number’ symmetry). Let us try to see how this can come about from the gauge theory side.

On the worldvolume of the $`D6`$ branes we have terms of the form

$$_{R^4}[G_4+FF_v](_{S^3}[CS(\omega )CS(A)])$$

where $`\omega `$ denotes the spin connection on $`S^3`$ and $`A`$ is the internal gauge field on $`S^3`$. This term arises (by integrating by parts) from the usual inducement of brane charge by gravitational and gauge curvature on the brane (see  and references therein). Thus shifting $`F`$ effectively shifts $`F_v`$ 6 Note that if we change the $`G_4`$ flux this is equivalent to turning on an internal Chern-Simons action for the supersymmetric system on the brane. It should be possible to derive directly the relation between generation of superpotentials on the brane and the Chern-Simons theory on $`S^3`$ from this fact..

There is another term that is also generated from (3.1) when we recall that $`t`$ has some auxiliary field turned on. In particular this gives rise to the term

$$Nd^2\theta 𝒲^{2g}_tF_g(t)=Nd^2\theta F^{2g}_tF_g(t)+\mathrm{}$$

Recalling that in the gauge theory setup $`t`$ is replaced by $`S`$, the gaugino bilinear superfield, the above term corresponds to the superpotential term

$$\lambda _sW=Nd^2\theta F^{2g}_SF_g(S)=Nd^2\theta \frac{B_{2g}}{2g}F^{2g}S^{12g}$$

So turning on the (self-dual) graviphoton field strength in 4 dimensions deforms the superpotential. What is the gauge theory interpretation of this? As noted above turning on $`F`$ has the effect of turning on the field strength $`F_v`$ in the $`U(1)U(N)`$, which is also equivalent to turning on $`B`$ field in spacetime. Thus this seems to be related to considering the non-commutative version of the above gauge system . In particular considering a self-dual non-commutativity in spacetime presumably generates a superpotential, as is predicted from the above formula. Note that this is consistent with the fact that in the UV where $`S`$ is smaller this modification of the superpotential is a more pronounced effect, and it disappears in the IR where $`S`$ is larger. It would be interesting to derive this result directly in the context of the non-commutative $`N=1`$ Yang-Mills theory. Moreover the dependence of the genus $`g`$ partition function on the non-commutativity parameter is identical7 We thank R. Gopakumar for pointing this out to us. to that obtained in . Namely, in the large $`N`$ expansion, there is no modification at the level of planar diagrams, i.e. at $`g=0`$. Moreover at genus $`g`$ the amplitudes are expected (when we have a self-dual non-commutativity) to scale (in the leading order) as $`\frac{1}{\theta ^{4g}}B^{4g}`$ which in our case translates to an $`F^{4g}`$ dependence. This is in agreement with the fact that $`|_SW|^2`$ indeed scales as $`F^{4g}`$.

3.4. More General Values of $`S`$

So far, in the context of gauge theory discussion we mainly considered the limit where $`<S>`$ is small compared to the string scale. However the duality we are proposing holds for arbitrary $`<S>`$. If $`<S>`$ is not small, on the gauge theory side we get modification to the form we have written above, which is computed by the Chern-Simons theory on $`S^3`$. What kind of gauge theory does this correspond to? The gravity side provides a hint: If we consider wrapped D4 brane domain walls, we have infinitely many species of domain walls. The reason for this is that we can consider the bound state of $`n`$ D2 branes with the D4 brane manifested through turning on $`n`$ units of $`U(1)`$ flux through the $`S^2`$ part of the worldvolume of the D4 brane. This can also be viewed as the effect of changing the B-field on the $`𝐏^1`$ by $`2\pi in`$. The effect of such domain walls is thus shifting $`t=SS\mathrm{exp}(2\pi i/N)+2\pi in`$. In other words we have the vev’s of $`S`$, not only taking values around a circle about the origin, but also circles about $`2\pi in`$ for any integer $`n`$. Moreover the BPS tension for such domain walls is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }W=\frac{1}{\lambda _s}(S+2\pi in)$$

The geometry of these domain walls can be recovered from an enlarged field content : We can introduce one variable $`Y_n`$ for each $`n`$, capturing the corresponding domain wall by its shift in the argument, and consider the superpotential

$$W=d^2\theta \underset{n}{}[(S+2\pi in)Y_n+iN^2\alpha e^{Y_n/N}]$$

the domain wall with 1 D4 brane wrapped over $`𝐏^1`$ bound to $`n`$ D2 branes will now correspond to shifting $`Y_nY_n+2\pi i`$. Integrating the $`Y_n`$’s out will give

$$W=\frac{1}{\lambda _s}\underset{n}{}(S+2\pi in)\mathrm{log}(S+2\pi in)^N+a(S+2\pi in)+b$$

which is indeed equal to

$$W=d^2\theta \frac{1}{\lambda _s}N\frac{F_0(S)}{S}.$$

The variables $`Y_n`$ were introduced to incorporate the kinks, but their appearance on the original gauge theory side, except for $`Y_0`$ seems mysterious. It would be interesting to see if one can find a direct interpretation of all the $`Y_n`$’s. We expect that to be related to the possibility of doing large $`SU(N)`$ gauge transformations on the $`S^3`$ part of the worldvolume of D6 brane.

The higher genus corrections in the case of large $`S`$ are also similar to the modification at the genus 0 case. In particular we get an infinite sum with $`S`$ replaced by $`S+2\pi in`$. This in particular is related to the fact that we can have a new baryon vertex for each wrapped D2 brane with D0 brane turned on .

3.5. Adding Matter

In the context of geometric engineering of $`N=1`$ supersymmetric gauge theories realized as D6 branes wrapped around $`S^3`$ cycles of CY manifolds  matter can be realized as extra $`D6`$ branes wrapped around other $`S^3`$’s intersecting the gauge theory $`S^3`$ along a circle (where the vev of the Wilson line around the circle on the probe brane plays the role of mass for the matter). How does our duality extend to this case? In fact in the topological string the duality does extend to this case . In particular in computation of Wilson loop observable for the Chern-Simons theory one adds extra topological branes intersecting the original $`S^3`$ along a knot, and it was shown that the closed topological string amplitudes agrees with the expected result for knot invariants for Chern-Simons theory. More checks have been made in  for a large number of distinct knots. In the context of embedding the topological string dualities in the superstring what this means is that the dual gravitational system will not only have a blown up $`S^2`$ but will also have additional $`D6`$ branes (which for algebraic knots will intersect the $`S^2`$ along a circle). The fact that the topological computations agree on both sides translates to the statement that the superpotential computations on both sides agree and is further evidence for this duality in the superstring context. Note that for each knot we obtain a different “matter” system for this generalized gauge theory, which in the limit of large $`Y`$ give rise to the same low energy physics, but are distinct theories in the context of generalized gauge theories we have been considering. The gauge theoretic interpretation of these results is currently under investigation .

4. The Mirror Type IIB Description

As is well known, type IIA on a CY is equivalent to type IIB on a mirror CY. This implies that everything we have said above in the context of type IIA has a type IIB counterpart.

For example instead of D6 branes of type IIA wrapped around $`S^3`$ we consider D5 branes of type IIB wrapped around $`S^2`$. Also turning on even-form fluxes in type IIA is mirror to turning on 3-form $`H_{RR}`$ and $`H_{NS}`$ flux in the type IIB side and the superpotential that gets generated in this context is given by

$$W=\frac{1}{\lambda _s}\mathrm{\Omega }[H_{RR}+\tau H_{NS}]$$

where $`\tau `$ is the complex coupling constant of type IIB, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the holomorphic 3-form of the CY. The above integral can be done and yields the formula in terms of the prepotential of the corresponding $`N=2`$ theory, as discussed in the Type IIA case. Note however, that the type IIB system is simpler in that by mirror symmetry the worldsheet instantons that were relevant in the context of type IIA theory in computing the prepotential, are absent for the type IIB case, and classical geometry already captures these corrections. In particular the B-topological theory (known as the Kodaira-Spencer theory of gravity) simply involves aspects of complex geometry of Calabi-Yau.

So as far as writing a classical gravitational background, the type IIB description would be more useful because the worldsheet instanton effects are absent. However, as far as the conformal theory on the string worldsheet, i.e. the large $`N`$ expansion description of the gauge system, the type IIA and type IIB theories are of course identical.

In the above context we would need to know the mirror of local CY: $`O(1)+O(1)𝐏^1`$. The mirror of this is known and it is essentially the conifold with one subtlety : The conifold has only one compact 3-cycle, whereas $`O(1)+O(1)𝐏^1`$ has two compact even cycles, namely $`0`$ and $`2`$ cycle. As was noted in  in the limit where the Kahler class of $`𝐏^1`$ approaches zero, i.e., $`t0`$, the mirror becomes effectively the conifold (the actual mirror differs from the conifold by having some variables being $`𝐂^{}`$ variables rather than $`𝐂`$ variables)8 The actual mirror is given by $`x_1+x_2+x_1x_2e^t+1uv=0`$ where $`x_1,x_2`$ are $`𝐂^{}`$ variables and $`u,v`$ are $`𝐂`$ variables.. Similar observations were made in . Even though in principle we can consider the full mirror geometry, since the complex geometry of the conifold is more familiar and better studied we restrict our attention to this case9 In this limit the internal topological theory corresponds to a $`G/G`$ model on $`S^2`$ (coming from the holomorpohic Chern-Simons theory on $`S^2`$ ) which should also be equivalent, by mirror symmetry, to the large $`N`$ fixed $`k`$ limit of the Chern-Simons theory. This topological theory should also be equivalent to the Penner Matrix model. It would be interesting to verify these equivalences among these topological gauge theories more directly.. This will correspond to a particular limit of our Type IIA theory, where we consider only the small $`<S>`$ region. Recall that this was the regime where the theory retained only the leading dimension operators in the action and led to a theory which was similar to the standard $`N=1`$ supersymmetric gauge theory.

We will be brief for this case, as most of the discussion can be literally borrowed from our discussion in the previous section. We start with $`N`$ D5 branes wrapped over the $`𝐏^1`$ in the $`O(1)+O(1)𝐏^1`$ geometry. The large $`N`$ limit of this, in the limit of shrinking $`𝐏^1`$ corresponds to blowing up an $`S^3`$ with $`N`$ units of $`H_{RR}`$ flux through the $`S^3`$. Let us write the conifold geometry as

$$z_1z_2z_3z_4=\mu $$

Then the genus 0 prepotential is given as

$$F_0(\mu )=\frac{1}{2}\mu ^2\mathrm{log}\mu +P_2(\mu )$$

where $`P_2(\mu )`$ is an undetermined polynomial of degree $`2`$ in $`\mu `$. Now we consider turning on fluxes: The mirror of turning on $`NS`$ 4-form flux corresponds here to turning on $`H_{NS}`$ and in the cycle dual to $`S^3`$. Thus as far as the superpotential is concerned we have

$$W=\frac{1}{\lambda _s}[N_\mu F_0(\mu )+M\mu ]=\frac{1}{\lambda _s}[N\mu \mathrm{log}\mu +a\mu +b]$$

where $`M=M_1+\tau M_2`$, and the discussion reduces to the small $`S`$ limit of the discussion in the previous section.

While this paper was being prepared two papers  appeared which are related to this type IIB construction. In particular (among other things) they consider the gravitational background corresponding to D5 branes wrapped on 2-cycles of CY and their results are consistent with the superpotential analysis here.

5. c=1 Non-critical Bosonic String and N=1 Superpotentials at Large $`N`$

As discussed above the type IIA or type IIB near a conifold background with some fluxes turned on can be interpreted as large $`N`$ limit of certain $`N=1`$ supersymmetric gauge theories. In particular the string expansion is equivalent to the large $`N`$ expansion of a gauge theory. Moreover certain superpotential corrections of the gauge theory can be viewed as computations of the corresponding topological strings in the CY background. These are readily computed and thus carry a large amount of information to all orders in $`1/N`$, for the gauge theories in question. In particular here we will explain how the Type IIA superstring near the small blow up of conifold, or equivalently the Type IIB superstrings in the conifold geometry relate the non-critical bosonic string amplitudes with that of the superpotential computations at the large $`N`$ limit of the corresponding $`N=1`$ gauge systems.

It was shown in  that the conformal theory near the conifold is given by the same system found in  in connection with non-critical bosonic strings on a circle of self-dual radius. This conformal theory is that of a supersymmetric Kazama-Suzuki coset construction

$$SL(2)/U(1)$$

at level $`k=3`$, and the relation with non-critical bosonic strings is that the topological twisting of this system is equivalent to considering bosonic string propagating on a circle of self-dual radius with the fermions of the coset model playing the role of the ghosts in the bosonic string. This relation between bosonic string on a self-dual circle and the superconformal theory of a conifold is in agreement with the fact  that the ground ring of the bosonic string for this background is isomorphic to the holomorphic function on the conifold (which is generated by $`z_1,z_2,z_3,z_4`$ subject to the relation $`z_1z_2z_3z_4=\mu `$) where the cosmological constant of the bosonic string is mapped to the deformation parameter of the conifold. Moreover the observables of the $`c=1`$ theory are mapped to deformations of the conifold geometry:

$$\underset{n}{}ϵ_n(z_1,z_2,z_3,z_4)+z_1z_2z_3z_4=\mu $$

where $`ϵ_n`$ is a polynomial of degree $`n`$ is $`z_i`$. These deformation parameters get mapped to states of the bosonic string which are indexed by a representation of $`SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$ of this system, viewing $`z_i`$ as entries of a $`2\times 2`$ matrix $`M`$ with the conifold being defined as $`detM=\mu `$ and where the $`SU(2)_L`$ and $`SU(2)_R`$ are realized by left and right multiplication of $`M`$ with $`SU(2)`$. In particular the degree $`n`$ polynomial $`ϵ_n`$ decomposes into representation of spin $`(j_L,j_R)=(n/2,n/2)`$ with $`|m_L,m_R|n/2`$. Let us denote the totality of these parameters by $`\mu _i`$ (except for $`\mu `$). The bosonic string amplitudes compute topological B-twisting of the deformed conifold10 Aspects of this relation has recently been verified and certain results of bosonic strings have been recovered directly using the Calabi-Yau picture and the Kodaira-Spencer theory .. For various aspects of $`c=1`$ non-critical bosonic string see . As already discussed the genus $`g`$ partition function will be a function $`F_g(\mu ,\mu _i)`$ of these parameters deforming the conifold background. Recall that in the gauge theory context $`\mu `$ is identified with $`S`$ and we will thus denote $`F_g(S,\mu _i)`$. The topological string computes, at genus $`g`$, the term in the effective action given by

$$\frac{N}{\lambda _s}d^2\theta [𝒲^2]^g_SF_g(S,\mu _i)=d^2\theta F^{2g}_SF_g(S,\mu _i)+\mathrm{}$$

What is the interpretation of this for the gauge theory? As in the usual AdS/CFT correspondences, we would expect that the $`\mu _i`$ will be related to operators on the gauge theory side, deforming the gauge theory action by terms $`\mu _i𝒪_i`$. In fact, in the context of 3-brane probes of the conifold  aspects of such deformations for the gravity side have been studied in  and a similar analysis should be extendable to the case at hand. Thus the topological strings compute the response of the system upon such deformations. In particular at genus $`0`$, turning on the $`\mu _i`$ modifies the superpotential for the gaugino superfield. Also turning on $`F`$ will give rise to $`1/N`$ correction to the superpotential. It would be extremely interesting to understand the source of these corrections on the gauge theory side.

It would also be interesting to find the conformal theory associated with the RR and NS fluxes turned on in the conifold geometry. This is very interesting in view of the fact that before turning fluxes on we have an exactly solvable conformal theory given by $`SL(2)/U(1)`$ KS model. It would be very interesting to find the deformation of this theory. It is likely to involve ingredients similar to the ones encountered in .

6. Wrapped D-branes and Compact CY

Consider type IIA superstrings compactified on a Calabi-Yau threefold. In the above, we considered a situation where we take a large number of $`D6`$ branes wrapped over an $`S^3`$ in the CY, and taking the analog of the near horizon geometry, to decouple the gravity, and then proposing a dual gravity description for the gauge system.

If we wish to repeat what we did in the previous sections, by considering D6 branes wrapped on some $`S^3`$, which is part of a compact Calabi-Yau, and filling the rest of the spacetime, we immediately run into a problem. We cannot wrap a D6 brane over a 3-cycle as there would be nowhere for the flux to go for compact internal CY. However suppose we consider a CY manifold with some number of $`S^3`$’s and we wrap D6-branes and anti-D6 branes over them, in such a way that the net D6 brane charge is zero. This is of course a non-supersymmetric situation.11 We can also consider the type IIB mirror of this where we consider D5/anti-D5 branes wrapped around vanishing $`S^2`$’s of the CY. We expect that the branes will eventually annihilate each other leaving us with an $`N=2`$ background. If the $`S^3`$’s are rigid then this annihilation process takes some time, because there is a potential barrier for the wrapped D6 branes to move in the CY (i.e. there is a potential for the scalar corresponding to moving them in the normal direction in the CY).

We now wish to apply the considerations of this paper and propose a large $`N`$ dual in this context. For the considerations of the gauge theory to be applicable we have to consider the limit where $`S^3`$ has shrunk to zero size. This is the analog of $`Y_0=0`$ in the formula in section 3). What we will find is that taking the large $`N`$ limit induces a transition to a topologically distinct CY, with some fluxes turned on. Moreover the fluxes can disappear as in  leaving us with an $`N=2`$ supersymmetric vacuum. Thus the effect of the brane annihilation at large $`N`$ has been to shift the background.

Consider a Calabi-Yau with $`R`$ vanishing $`S^3`$ cycles $`[C_i]`$ which span a $`K<R`$ dimensional subspace of $`H_3`$. In other words assume

$$Q_{ji}[C_i]=0forj=1,\mathrm{},RK$$

for some integral matrix $`Q`$. Let us consider $`N_i`$ D6 branes partially wrapped around $`C_i`$, where we allow some $`N_i`$ to be negative, in which case we mean the number of the corresponding anti-branes. The condition that the net $`D6`$ brane flux is zero implies that

$$N_i=l_jQ_{ji}$$

for $`RK`$ integers $`l_j`$. Now, let us consider the limit where the $`S^3`$’s are vanishingly small. In this limit, applying the discussion of the near horizon geometry, we are naturally led to consider the $`S^2`$ blown up geometry where the blow up parameter for the $`i`$-th sphere is given by

$$t_i=i\lambda _sN_i=i\lambda _sl_jQ_{ji}$$

Notice that not all the $`t_i`$ are independent. In particular there are only $`RK`$ independent parameters $`l_j`$ which determine them. This is exactly as it should be for the local geometry to have a blowup12 In fact this shift in the hodge numbers can be understood from the viewpoint of inverse process of Higgsing of $`U(1)^{RK}`$ by $`R`$ charged fields  where the charged fields can be viewed as wrapped $`D2`$ branes in the blown up geometry.. In other words the blow up geometry is a CY with $`K`$ less dimension of $`h^{2,1}`$ but $`RK`$ more dimensions of $`h^{1,1}`$. Moreover the condition on the various Kahler classes of the $`𝐏^1`$’s is exactly the same as that found above for the $`t_i`$. This gives further support for the conjecture that the large $`N`$ limit of the wrapped brane-anti-brane geometry, when we have no net branes is equivalent to a blown up CY with the Kahler parameters for the blown up spheres given as above. However, here we will also have RR fluxes through the $`S^2`$’s. In this case the supersymmetry is completely broken  by the RR fluxes. The fluxes can disappear as recently studied in .

It would be interesting to check this generalized conjecture in the topological string setup: Namely this suggests that the topological open string amplitudes in the context of compact CY manifolds when there is no net topological D-brane, and when the D-branes are wrapped over spheres is easily computable by a related closed string theory computation on the blown up CY with different Hodge numbers.

7. Generalizations

There are many natural generalizations of this work. In particular it is natural to consider transitions among topologically distinct manifolds, going through vanishing cycles, and find a large $`N`$ brane system/gravity duals, where the large $`N`$ gauge system will lie on one side of the transition and the dual gravitational system will lie on the other side (this was in fact the philosophy advocated in )13 If we consider a Morse function $`f`$ on a manifold the critical points of it encode certain topological aspects of the manifold. Near a critical point with $`p`$ positive and $`q`$ negative eigenvalues for $`_i_jf`$, for $`ff_{critical}`$ the manifold near the critical point has the geometry of a filled $`S^{p1}\times S^{q1}`$. For $`f>f_{critical}`$ the $`S^{q1}`$ is filled and for $`f<f_{critical}`$ the $`S^{p1}`$ is filled. This is the general kind of transition expected for large number of branes replaced by fluxes. If we consider two manifolds in the same cobordism class, and consider a Morse function on the interpolating manifold the above picture suggests that branes can induce the transition. So if the cobordism classes are trivial and we have suitable branes we can interpolate between any two manifolds in this way.. In other words the large $`N`$ brane systems can be viewed as inducing transitions in the background geometry. For examples there are transitions in the CY which involve the vanishing of certain 3-cycles and blowing up 4 manifolds, such as Del-Pezzo manifolds. In this context it is natural to conjecture the existence of a duality involving a large $`N`$ limit of wrapped D6 branes about the 3-cycles in the context of type IIA with the 4 manifold resolution of the singularity on the gravity side, with certain fluxes turned on14 In fact there is already evidence for some such cases based on quotienting the Chern-Simons duality on $`S^3`$ by finite groups on both sides . For example Chern-Simons on $`S^3/Z_2`$ should be equivalent to $`𝐏^1\times 𝐏^1`$ blow up inside a Calabi-Yau. Some aspects of this predictions have already been checked.. Or in the context of M-theory on 4-folds it is natural to look for transitions involving shrinking $`S^3`$’s and growing 4-cycles, where we consider a large number of $`M5`$ branes wrapped over the $`S^3`$’s and filling the 3-dimensional spacetime, which should be dual to the geometry involving the blowup of the 4-cycle with some $`G`$ flux turned on (in fact in this context the gravity solutions are already worked out in ).

It is also natural to extend our results for the case of $`SU(N)`$ systems to $`SO`$ and $`Sp`$ groups by including orientifolds. In fact it has been shown in  that the large $`N`$ duality of Chern-Simons theory for $`SU(N)`$ groups extend to the $`SO`$ and $`Sp`$ case as well.

Finally, the idea that studying BPS/anti-BPS systems are important for a more fundamental understanding of basic degrees of freedom for string theory as advocated by Sen is in line with the example we have found: We can describe one string background in terms of the ground state of a different one in the presence of D-brane/anti-D-brane systems. In a sense, this idea, combined with the idea that various transitions among manifolds can be induced by large $`N`$ limit of brane systems, suggests that if we start with any background in string theory, and consider complicated enough configurations of branes and anti-branes, we can effectively be discussing arbitrary backgrounds of string theory.

Acknowledgements:

I have greatly benefited from discussions with N. Berkovits. I would also like to thank M. Aganagic, M.F. Atiyah, R. Gopakumar, K. Intriligator, S. Katz, A. Klemm, J. Maldacena, S. Minwalla, N. Seiberg, S. Sinha and A. Strominger for valuable discussions.

This research is partially supported by NSF grant PHY-98-02709.

References

relax G. ‘t Hooft, “A Planar Diagram Theory for Strong Interactions,” Nucl. Phys. 72 (1974) 461. relax M. Kontsevich, “Intersection Theory on the Moduli Space of Curves and the Matrix Airy Function,” Comm. Math. Phys. 147 (1992) 1. relax E. Witten, “On the Structure of the Topological Phase of Two-Dimensional Gravity,” Nucl. Phys. B340 (1990) 281. relax J. Distler and C. Vafa, “A Critical Matrix Model at $`c=1`$,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A6 (1991) 259. relax R.C. Penner, “Perturbative Series and the Moduli Space of Riemann Surfaces,” UCSD preprint (1986). relax J. Maldacena, “The Large N limit of Superconformal Field Theories and Supergravity,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 231. relax S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov and A.M. Polyakov, “Gauge Theory Correlators From Non-critical String Theory,” Phys. Lett. B428 (1998) 105. relax E. Witten, “Anti-de Sitter Space and Holography,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 253. relax R. Gopakumar and C. Vafa, “On the Gauge Theory/Geometry Correspondence,” hep-th/9811131. relax H. Ooguri and C. Vafa, “Kont Invariants and Topological Strings,” Nucl. Phys. B577 (2000) 419. relax J.M.F. Labastida and M. Marino,“Polynomial Invariants for Torus Knots and Topological Strings,” hep-th/0004196. relax V. Periwal, “Topological Closed-String Interpretation of Chern-Simons Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993) 1295. relax M. Bershadsky, S. Cecotti, H. Ooguri and C. Vafa, “Kodaira-Spencer Theory of Gravity and Exact Results for Quantum String Amplitudes,” Comm. Math. Phys. 165 (1994) 311. relax E. Witten, “Chern-Simons Gauge Theory as a String Theory,” hep-th/9207094. relax T.R. Taylor and C. Vafa,“RR Flux on Calabi-Yau and Partial Supersymmetry Breaking,” Phys. Lett. B474 (2000) 130. relax P. Mayr, “On Supersymmetry Breaking in String Theory and its Realization in Brane World,” hep-th/0003198. relax R. Bousso and J. Polchinski, “Quantization of Four-Form Fluxes and Dynamical Neutralization of the Cosmological Constant,” hep-th/0004134. relax I. Klebanov and M.J. Strassler,“Supergravity and a Confining Gauge Theory: Duality Cascades and $`\chi `$SB-Resolution of Naked Singularities,” hep-th/0007191. relax J. Maldacena and C. Nunez, “Towards the Large N Limit of Pure $`N=1`$ Super Yang-Mills,” hep-th/0008001. relax T. Banks, M. Dine and L. Motl, “On Anthropic Solutions of the Cosmological Constant Problem,” hep-th/0007206. relax I. Antoniadis, E. Gava, K.S. Narain and T.R. Taylor, “Topological Amplitudes in String Theory,” Nucl. Phys. B413 (1994) 162. relax N. Berkovits and C. Vafa, “N=4 Topological Strings,” Nucl. Phys. B 433 (1995) 123. relax N. Berkovits, “Covariant Quantization of the Green-Schwarz Superstring in a Calabi-Yau Background”, Nucl. Phys. B431 (1994) 258. relax N. Berkovits and W. Siegel, “Superspace Effective Actions for 4D Compactifications of Heterotic and Type II Superstrings”, Nucl. Phys. B462 (1996) 213. relax J. Polchinski and A. Strominger, “New Vacua for Type II String Theory,” Phys. Lett. B388 (1996) 736. relax J. Michelson, “Compactifications of Type IIB Strings to Four Dimensions with Non-trivial Classical Potential,” Nucl. Phys. B495 (1997) 127. relax S. Gukov, C. Vafa and E. Witten, “CFT’s from Calabi-Yau Four-folds,” hep-th/9906070. relax S. Gukov,“Solitons, Superpotentials and Calibrations,” hep-th/9911011. relax I. Brunner, M.R. Douglas, A. Lawrence and C. Romelsberger, “D-branes on the Quintic,” hep-th/9906200. relax S. Kachru, S. Katz, A. Lawrence and J. McGreevy, “Open String Instantons and Superpotentials,” Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 0260001. relax K. Becker and M. Becker, “M-theory on Eight-Manifolds,” Nucl. Phys. B477 (1996) 155. relax H. Ooguri and C. Vafa, “Geometry of N=1 Dualities in Four Dimensions,” Nucl. Phys. B500 (1997) 62. relax E. Witten, “Branes and the Dynamics of QCD,” Nucl. Phys. B507 (1997) 658. relax K. Hori and C. Vafa, “Mirror Symmetry,” hep-th/0002222. relax S. Cecotti and C. Vafa, “On Classification of $`N=2`$ Supersymmetric Theories,” Comm. Math. Phys. 158 (1993) 569. relax K. Hori, A. Iqbal and C. Vafa, “D-branes and Mirror Symmetry,” hep-th/0005247. relax I. Antoniadis, E. Gava, K.S. Narain and T.R. Taylor, “N=2 Type II-Heterotic Duality and Higher Derivative F-terms,” Nucl. Phys. B455 (1995) 109. relax E. Witten, “Baryons and Branes in Anti de Sitter Space,” JHEP 9807 (1998) 006. relax D. Diaconescu, G. Moore and E. Witten, “A Derivation of K-Theory from M-theory,” hep-th/0005091. relax N. Seiberg and E. Witten, “String Theory and Non-commutative Geometry,” hep-th/9908142 . relax S. Minwalla, M. Van Raamsdonk and N. Seiberg, “Noncommutative Perturbative Dynamics,” hep-th/0002186. relax R. Gopakumar and C. Vafa, “M-theory and Topological Strings I,II,” hep-th/9809187, hep-th/9812127. relax C. Vafa, work in progress. relax M. Aganagic, A. Karch, D. Lust and A. Miemiec, “Mirror Symmetries for Brane Configurations and Branes at Singularities,” Nucl. Phys. B569 (2000) 277-302. relax C. Vafa, “Extending Mirror Conjecture to Calabi-Yau with Bundles,” hep-th/9804131. relax D. Ghoshal and C. Vafa, “c=1 String as the Topological Theory of the Conifold,” Nucl. Phys. B453 (1995) 121. relax S. Mukhi and C. Vafa, “Two Dimensional Black Hole as a Topological Coset Model for Two-Dimensional String Theory,” Nucl. Phys. B407 (1993) 667. relax E. Witten, “Ground Ring of Two Dimensional String Theory,” Nucl. Phys. B373 (1992) 187 ; E. Witten and B. Zwiebach, “Algebraic Structures and Differential Geometry in 2-d String Theory,” Nucl. Phys. B377 (1992) 55. relax R. Dijkgraaf and C. Vafa, unpublished. relax P. Ginsparg and G. Moore, “Lectures on 2d Gravity and 2d String Theory,” TASI summer school 1992, hep-th/9304011. relax I. Klebanov and E. Witten,“ Superconformal Field Theory on Threebranes at a Calabi-Yau Singularity,” Nucl. Phys. B536 (1998) 199. relax D.P. Jatkar and S. Randjbar-Daemi, “Type IIB String Theory on $`AdS_5\times T^{nn^{}}`$,” Phys. Lett. B460 (1999) 281. relax N. Berkovits, C. Vafa and E. Witten, “Conformal Field Theory of AdS Background with Ramond-Ramond Flux,” JHEP 9903 (1999) 018. relax N. Berkovits, M. Bershadsky, T. Hauer, S. Zhukov and B. Zwiebach, “Superstring Theory on $`AdS_2\times S^2`$ as a Coset Supermanifold,” Nucl. Phys. B567 (2000) 61. relax B.R. Greene, D.R. Morrison and A. Strominger, “Black Hole Condensation and the Unification of String Vacua,” Nucl. Phys. B451 (1995) 109. relax R. Gopakumar, A. Klemm, S. Sinha and C. Vafa, unpublished. relax S. Sinha and C. Vafa, to appear.


text:
# Neutrinos and the Supernova Origin of the Elements

## 1 INTRODUCTION TO SUPERNOVA $`r`$-PROCESS NUCLEOSYNTHESIS

A star lives a luminous life by burning H into successively heavier elements. However, as the Fe group nuclei near mass number $`A=56`$ are most tightly bound, no more nuclear binding energy can be released to power the star by burning “Fe.” Therefore, heavy elements beyond “Fe” have to be made by processes other than normal stellar burning. One such process is the rapid neutron capture process, or the $`r`$-process for short. This process is responsible for approximately half the natural abundance of nuclei with mass numbers $`A>100`$. Typical $`r`$-process elements are Eu, Pt, U, and Th. A crude picture for the $`r`$-process is as follows. One starts with some seed nuclei and lots of neutrons. The seed nuclei then rapidly capture these neutrons to make very neutron-rich unstable progenitor nuclei. After neutron capture stops, the progenitor nuclei successively $`\beta `$-decay towards stability and become the $`r`$-process nuclei observed in nature.

The $`r`$-process has a lot to do with supernova neutrinos. Neutrinos and antineutrinos of all three flavors are emitted by the neutron star produced in a supernova. The individual neutrino species has approximately the same luminosity but very different average energy. As the neutrinos diffuse out of the neutron star, they thermally decouple from the neutron star matter at different radii due to the difference in their ability to exchange energy with such matter. With higher temperatures at smaller radii, $`\nu _\mu `$, $`\nu _\tau `$, and their antineutrinos decoupling at the smallest radii are imprinted with the highest average energy while $`\nu _e`$ decoupling at the largest radii are imprinted with the lowest average energy. The average energy of $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ lies between those of $`\nu _{\mu (\tau )}`$ and $`\nu _e`$. Typical average supernova neutrino energies are $`E_{\nu _e}11`$ MeV, $`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}16`$ MeV, and $`E_{\nu _{\mu (\tau )}}E_{\overline{\nu }_{\mu (\tau )}}25`$ MeV. I emphasize that while different supernova calculations give somewhat different numerical values, there is a robust hierarchy of the average supernova neutrino energies: $`E_{\nu _e}<E_{\overline{\nu }_e}<E_{\nu _{\mu (\tau )}}`$. This hierarchy is the most crucial aspect of supernova neutrino emission relevant for our discussion.

A few seconds after the supernova explosion, we have a hot neutron star near the center of the supernova. The neutron star is still cooling by emitting neutrinos. The shock wave which makes the supernova explosion is far away from the neutron star. On its way out to make the explosion, the shock wave has cleared away almost all the material above the neutron star, leaving behind only a thin atmosphere. Close to the neutron star, the temperature is several MeV and the atmosphere is essentially dissociated into neutrons and protons. As the neutrinos emitted by the neutron star free-stream through this atmosphere, some of the $`\nu _e`$ and $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ are captured by the neutrons and protons and their energy is deposited in the atmosphere. In other words, the atmosphere is heated by the neutrinos. As a result, it expands away from the neutron star and eventually develops into a mass outflow — a neutrino-driven “wind” .

The capture reactions $`\nu _e+np+e^{}`$ and $`\overline{\nu }_e+pn+e^+`$ not only provide heating to drive the wind, but also interconvert neutrons and protons. With a significant excess of $`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ over $`E_{\nu _e}`$, neutron production by the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ dominates neutron destruction by the $`\nu _e`$. Consequently, the wind material is neutron rich. As this material expands away from the neutron star, its temperature and density decrease and various nuclear reactions take place to change its composition. When the temperature drops to $`0.5`$ MeV, essentially all the protons are assembled into $`\alpha `$-particles and the material at this temperature just contains neutrons and $`\alpha `$-particles. As the temperature drops further, $`\alpha `$-particles and neutrons are burned into heavier nuclei (the $`\alpha `$-process ). By the time the Coulomb barrier stops all charged-particle reactions at a temperature of $`0.25`$ MeV, nuclei with $`A100`$ have been produced. These nuclei then become the seed nuclei to capture the remaining neutrons during the subsequent $`r`$-process, which occurs at temperatures below $`0.25`$ MeV (e.g., ).

## 2 NEUTRINO OSCILLATIONS AND SUPERNOVA $`r`$-PROCESS NUCLEOSYNTHESIS

An absolutely necessary condition for an $`r`$-process to occur in the neutrino-driven wind is that the wind material must be neutron rich. As $`\nu _{\mu (\tau )}`$ have the highest average energy, significant mixing between $`\nu _{\mu (\tau )}`$ and $`\nu _e`$ would increase the destruction of neutrons by $`\nu _e`$ and drive the wind material proton rich . (Even in the extreme case of $`E_{\nu _e}<E_{\overline{\nu }_e}E_{\nu _{\mu (\tau )}}`$, conversion of $`\nu _{\mu (\tau )}`$ into $`\nu _e`$ can still drive the wind material proton rich as neutron production by the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ is hindered while neutron destruction by the $`\nu _e`$ is aided by the neutron-proton mass difference.) For $`\nu _{\mu (\tau )}`$ with a cosmologically significant (vacuum) mass of $`1`$–100 eV, matter-enhanced mixing with a lighter $`\nu _e`$ would occur below the region where the neutron-richness of the wind material is determined . Therefore, such mixing is severely constrained if the $`r`$-process indeed occurs in the neutrino-driven wind in a supernova. Figure 1 shows the parameters for mixing between $`\nu _{\mu (\tau )}`$ and $`\nu _e`$ that are incompatible with supernova $`r`$-process nucleosynthesis . Note that the $`\nu _\mu `$-$`\nu _e`$ mixing parameters $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta 3\times 10^3`$$`10^2`$ at $`\delta m^2\stackrel{>}{}`$ several eV2 reported by the LSND experiment  lie in the incompatible region. Thus only the LSND parameters at $`\delta m^2\stackrel{<}{}`$ several eV2 are compatible with supernova $`r`$-process nucleosynthesis. The LSND parameters at low $`\delta m^2`$ are also consistent with the results from the KARMEN experiment .

One may ask what happens if the LSND parameters at $`\delta m^2\stackrel{>}{}`$ several eV2 turn out to be true. In this case, supernova $`r`$-process nucleosynthesis can still occur if for example, a light sterile neutrino $`\nu _s`$ is introduced so that $`\nu _{\mu (\tau )}`$ with the highest average energy will be turned into harmless $`\nu _s`$ before they can mix with the $`\nu _e`$ . Of course, one can consider many other possibilities of neutrino mixing that are compatible with supernova $`r`$-process nucleosynthesis. In any case, supernova $`r`$-process nucleosynthesis provides a potential probe for mixing between $`\nu _{\mu (\tau )}`$/$`\overline{\nu }_{\mu (\tau )}`$ and $`\nu _{e(s)}`$/$`\overline{\nu }_{e(s)}`$ at the level of $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta \stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}10}^4`$ for $`\delta m^2\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}`$ eV2. To establish this probe on a solid basis requires us to check the supernova laboratory against the standards of terrestrial experiments.

A terrestrial neutrino oscillation experiment consists of a known neutrino source and a detector with unambiguous signals for neutrino oscillations. In the supernova laboratory, the hot neutron star is the neutrino source. The most crucial aspect of this source is the robust hierarchy of average neutrino energies. As the neutrinos move away from the neutron star, various scenarios of neutrino mixing can occur. The $`\nu _e`$ and $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ emerging from the mixing region are detected by the capture reactions on neutrons and protons, respectively. The signal that we are looking for is the production of $`r`$-process elements such as Eu and U in supernovae. If this signal is observed, any scenario of neutrino mixing that would cause neutron destruction by the $`\nu _e`$ to dominate neutron production by the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ is forbidden.

Note that the use of supernova nucleosynthesis to study forbidden scenarios of neutrino mixing only relies on the necessary condition for an $`r`$-process to occur in the neutrino-driven wind — the wind material must be neutron rich. Provided that we can prove the supernova origin of the $`r`$-process elements, we do not have to understand the exact details of supernova $`r`$-process nucleosynthesis in order to use the supernova laboratory in the “forbidden” mode for studying neutrino mixing. On the other hand, if we also know the exact characteristics of supernova neutrino emission and of the neutrino-driven wind, we can even determine whether a certain neutrino mixing scenario is required based on the sufficient conditions for supernova $`r`$-process nucleosynthesis. However, great improvements in our understanding of supernovae have to be made before the supernova laboratory can be used in the “required” mode for studying neutrino mixing. As the supernova origin of the $`r`$-process elements is the basis for using supernova nucleosynthesis to study neutrino mixing in either the forbidden or the required mode, it will be the focus of the following discussion.

## 3 SUPERNOVA ORIGIN OF THE $`r`$-PROCESS ELEMENTS

I first present indirect arguments for the supernova origin of the $`r`$-process elements based on recent observations of $`r`$-process elemental abundances in metal-poor stars and consideration of Galactic chemical evolution. Two possible direct tests are discussed next.

### 3.1 Indirect arguments

The astrophysical site for the $`r`$-process has to provide a large neutron abundance. This can be achieved by having $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ capture on protons dominate $`\nu _e`$ capture on neutrons in a supernova. Alternatively, neutron-rich material may be obtained in the merger of a neutron star with another neutron star or a black hole. In fact, supernovae and neutron star mergers are considered as the two leading candidate sites for the $`r`$-process. An important distinction between these two sites is the vast difference in the event rate. Massive stars that explode as supernovae are a small fraction of all stars. The progenitor system for neutron star mergers must have two massive stars in a binary. Furthermore, this binary must survive the two supernova explosions that produce the two compact objects for the eventual merger. A rather high estimate of the neutron star merger rate in the Galaxy is $`(3\times 10^4\mathrm{yr})^1`$ (e.g., ). This is still $`10^3`$ times smaller than the Galactic supernova rate.

Let us assume that supernovae are the major source for the $`r`$-process and consider $`r`$-process enrichment of the interstellar medium (ISM). The ejecta from each supernova is mixed with an average mass $`M_{\mathrm{mix}}3\times 10^4M_{}`$ of ISM (mostly H) swept up by the supernova remnant (e.g., ). For a supernova rate that is proportional to the mass of gas, an average ISM in the Galaxy is enriched by supernova ejecta at a frequency of $`M_{\mathrm{mix}}(f_\mathrm{G}^{\mathrm{SN}}/M_{\mathrm{gas}})(10^7\mathrm{yr})^1`$, where the supernova rate per unit mass of gas is estimated using $`f_\mathrm{G}^{\mathrm{SN}}(30\mathrm{yr})^1`$ and $`M_{\mathrm{gas}}10^{10}M_{}`$ for the present Galaxy. Consequently, an average ISM would be enriched with a solar $`r`$-process composition (denoted by the subscript “$`,r`$”) by $`10^3`$ supernovae over a period of $`10^{10}`$ yr. This then determines the $`r`$-process abundances resulting from a single supernova, e.g., (Eu/H)$`{}_{\mathrm{SN}}{}^{}10^3`$ (Eu/H)⊙,r with Eu/H being the abundance ratio of Eu to H. In the spectroscopic notation $`\mathrm{log}ϵ(\mathrm{Eu})\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{Eu}/\mathrm{H})+12`$, we have $`\mathrm{log}ϵ_{\mathrm{SN}}(\mathrm{Eu})\mathrm{log}ϵ_{,r}(\mathrm{Eu})32.5`$ .

The observed Eu abundances in many metal-poor stars  are shown in Figure 2. The “metallicity” is defined by \[Fe/H\] $`\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{Fe}/\mathrm{H})\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{Fe}/\mathrm{H})_{}`$. The low values of \[Fe/H\] for the stars indicate that they were formed at very early times when the ISM had been enriched by only a small number of supernovae. The lowest Eu abundances observed in metal-poor stars are in agreement with the $`r`$-process enrichment resulting from a single supernova discussed above.

The ejecta from each neutron star merger is mixed with approximately the same amount of ISM as swept up by a supernova remnant. However, as the Galactic rate of neutron star mergers is $`10^3`$ times smaller than that of supernovae, an average ISM would be enriched by the ejecta from only $`1`$ neutron star merger over a period of $`10^{10}`$ yr. Consequently, the Eu abundance resulting from a single event would be $`\mathrm{log}ϵ_{\mathrm{NSM}}(\mathrm{Eu})\mathrm{log}ϵ_{,r}(\mathrm{Eu})0.5`$ if neutron star mergers were the major source for the $`r`$-process. This is in clear disagreement with the data in Figure 2 .

Supernovae also provided Fe enrichment of the ISM at \[Fe/H\] $`\stackrel{>}{}2.5`$ . Figure 2 shows that there is a correlation between the abundances of Eu and Fe at \[Fe/H\] $`\stackrel{>}{}2.5`$. This can be explained as the result from mixture of the Eu and Fe produced by many supernovae if supernovae are the major source for the $`r`$-process. On the other hand, an average ISM would be enriched in Fe by many supernovae between the occurrence of two successive neutron star mergers due to the vast difference in the event rate. Consequently, the correlation between the abundances of Eu and Fe, especially its early onset at \[Fe/H\] $`2.5`$, would be very difficult to explain if Eu enrichment were provided by neutron star mergers while Fe enrichment was provided by supernovae . Therefore, consideration of Galactic chemical evolution and observations of $`r`$-process elemental abundances in metal-poor stars strongly favor supernovae over neutron star mergers as the major source for the $`r`$-process. Furthermore, the total amount of $`r`$-process ejecta required from each supernova to explain the observed $`r`$-process elemental abundances in metal-poor stars is consistent with the amount of material ejected in the neutrino-driven wind . In summary, there is strong evidence for the supernova origin of the $`r`$-process elements.

### 3.2 Direct tests

As described in the introduction, the $`r`$-process initially produces very neutron-rich unstable progenitor nuclei. During the decay towards stability, some progenitor nuclei decay to the excited states of their daughters. The gamma rays from the de-excitation of the daughters constitute the signal for the presence of these $`r`$-process progenitor nuclei. If such gamma rays are detected from a future supernova, then we will have proven the supernova origin of the $`r`$-process elements. A supernova becomes transparent to gamma rays after approximately one year of expansion. Therefore, the relevant $`r`$-process progenitor nuclei must have lifetimes of $`\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}`$ yr. Three most promising nuclei are 125Sb, 144Ce, and 194Os. The typical gamma-ray flux from a supernova at a distance of 10 kpc is $`\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}10}^7`$ $`\gamma `$ cm-2 s-1 . To detect such fluxes requires a future supernova and a new detector with a sensitivity of $`10^7`$ $`\gamma `$ cm-2 s-1. Therefore, while this is the most direct means to prove $`r`$-process production in supernovae, it is also the hardest.

If we can find suitable $`r`$-process progenitor nuclei with lifetimes much longer than one year, we may search for the decay gamma rays from the remnant of a past supernova. As a longer lifetime means a smaller decay rate, to ensure a substantial gamma-ray flux requires a nearby supernova remnant (SNR). The Vela SNR is at a distance of $`250`$ pc. The age of the pulsar in this SNR is $`10^4`$ yr. The relevant $`r`$-process progenitor nucleus for gamma-ray detection is 126Sn with a lifetime of $`10^5`$ yr and several prominent decay gamma rays. The expected gamma-ray fluxes due to decay of 126Sn in the Vela SNR are $`\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}10}^7`$ $`\gamma `$ cm-2 s-1 . A new SNR near Vela was discovered recently through its X-ray emission and the gamma rays from decay of 44Ti. As 44Ti has a lifetime of only $`90`$ yr, the age of the new SNR is $`\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}10}^3`$ yr. In this case, we can search for decay gamma rays from a number of actinides with lifetimes of $`10^3`$ yr. The expected fluxes are again $`\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}10}^7`$ $`\gamma `$ cm-2 s-1 .

As we can see, to prove $`r`$-process production in supernovae by gamma-ray astronomy requires a new detector with a sensitivity of $`10^7`$ $`\gamma `$ cm-2 s-1. By comparison, the sensitivity of the Compton Gamma-Ray Observatory just demissioned was $`10^5`$ $`\gamma `$ cm-2 s-1, and that of the INTEGRAL experiment to be launched within the next few years is $`10^6`$ $`\gamma `$ cm-2 s-1. Perhaps a sensitivity of $`10^7`$ $`\gamma `$ cm-2 s-1 can be reached within the next decade.

There is yet another way to prove $`r`$-process production in supernovae if we take advantage of the occurrence of supernovae in binaries. Approximately half of the stars are in binaries. Some binaries initially consist of a massive star and a low-mass star. After the massive one explodes as a supernova, it is possible for the neutron star or black hole produced in the supernova to remain in orbit around the low-mass star. Furthermore, a fraction of the $`r`$-process ejecta from the supernova would be intercepted by the low-mass star. Therefore, $`r`$-process production in supernovae will be proven if we detect $`r`$-process abundance anomalies on the surface of the binary companion to a neutron star or black hole . Large overabundances of supernova products such as O, Mg, Si, and S have been observed recently in the binary companion to a black hole . With the use of the Hubble Space Telescope and the Keck Observatory, perhaps this kind of observation can be extended successfully to the $`r`$-process elements within the next few years.

## 4 CONCLUSIONS

I have discussed the role of neutrinos in heavy element production in supernovae, especially the effects of neutrino mixing on supernova $`r`$-process nucleosynthesis. The neutron-richness of the material in the neutrino-driven wind in a supernova is sensitive to mixing between $`\nu _{\mu (\tau )}`$/$`\overline{\nu }_{\mu (\tau )}`$ and $`\nu _{e(s)}`$/$`\overline{\nu }_{e(s)}`$ at the level of $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta \stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}10}^4`$ for $`\delta m^2\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}`$ eV2. A necessary condition for an $`r`$-process to occur in the wind is that the wind material must be neutron rich. Provided that the supernova origin of the $`r`$-process elements can be proven, this necessary condition can be used to eliminate any scenario of neutrino mixing that would cause neutron destruction by the $`\nu _e`$ to dominate neutron production by the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$.

I have presented indirect arguments for the supernova origin of the $`r`$-process elements based on recent observations of $`r`$-process elemental abundances in metal-poor stars and consideration of Galactic chemical evolution. I have also discussed two direct tests for $`r`$-process production in supernovae: detection of gamma rays due to decay of $`r`$-process progenitor nuclei from a future supernova or nearby supernova remnant and observation of $`r`$-process abundance anomalies on the surface of the binary companion to a neutron star or black hole. Hopefully, these tests will prove the supernova origin of the $`r`$-process elements in the near future, thereby establishing supernova $`r`$-process nucleosynthesis as an extremely sensitive probe for neutrino mixing.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported in part by the Department of Energy under grant DE-FG02-87ER40328.