format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Initially, the higher dimensional gravity theories  were realized with the assumptions that the realistic Kaluza-Klein theories  require compact extra spatial dimensions, other than $`1+3`$ space-time world, of the order of Planck lengths. However, this idea has got a new interest and direction after the intriguing ideas of Randall and Sundrun (RS) that the physical $`3+1`$ dimensional space-time world can be embedded as a hypersurface in a higher dimensional anti-deSitter ($`AdS`$) bulk space-time , leaving the extra non-compact spatial dimensions  of the size of $`mm`$ or even infinite . What is observed crucial about this brane scenario is that at shorter distance than the $`AdS`$ curvature length, the extra dimensions reveal to change the Einstein gravity significantly and above the $`AdS`$ radius it is effectively approximated by the Einstein’s gravity in $`3+1`$ space-time dimensions , pointing the fact that the correction is much suppressed as the number of transverse extra dimensions grow . This has left room for the gravity (and possibly the spin zero counterpart of graviton, i.e. dilaton) to flow freely in the bulk, whereas the standard matter particles are effectively confined in the brane. Such localization of matter on the brane  has changed our conventional wisdom on KK theories , i.e. the size of extra dimensions does not have to be $`1/M_{pl}10^{33}cm`$, but could be much bigger.

In most of recent work \[8-14\] to the solution of Einstein equations in $`n1`$ extra dimensions, the $`3+1`$ dimensions of our world is identified with the internal space of topological defects residing in a higher dimensional space-time. Specifically, the $`3`$-brane world volume is pictured as a domain wall propagating in the five-dimensional bulk space-time , as a local string defect residing in the six-dimensional space-time , as a global monopole defect with a conical deficit angle in seven-dimensional space-time  and its continuation with the co-dimensions four characterizes the instanton solution which describes the quantum nucleation of a five-dimensional brane-world . Most of these and similar work have been judged only from the solutions to Einstein gravity in the extra dimensions. Also in  an idea about the creation of a spherically symmetric brane-world for a $`1`$-brane and a $`3`$-brane in the context of Wheeler-De Witt equation and WKB approximation is furnished. Thus, in this paper, we shall find metric solutions that also include the contribution from higher-curvature terms in the field equations and describe the $`p`$-brane object as a curved or planar defect residing in the higher dimensions.

In order to check the compatibility of the various string inspired low energy effective actions under the brane scenarios and to realize the very natural and more fundamental theory of gravity one cannot avoid the higher-curvature terms in the effective action. This is so from the different perspectives such as the renormalizibility and the asymptotic freedom of the theory in 4 dimensions , and for the stabilization of the scalar potential  in the bulk. Also the action containing second powers of the curvature tensors naturally arise in the string effective action . This has further attraction with the hope that some versions of the higher derivative gravity represent the supergravity duals when $`R`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are the leading order and higher derivatives are of next to leading order in large $`N`$ expansion (see  and references therein). The effective action containing just $`R`$ cannot stabilize the scalar potential defined in the bulk, otherwise, the bulk gauge sector appears in conflict with the large extra dimensions .

An investigation of the higher derivative gravity by adding a dilatonic potential to the effective action is made in ref. where a naked singularity in $`AdS_5`$ bulk persists for the finite $`3+1`$ dimensional Planck mass and dilaton potential acts as the bulk cosmological constant. Also various static and inflationary solutions of the RS model in the Gauss-Bonnet combination have been studied in . But, what is missing in these models is either dilaton or the proper coupling of dilaton to the higher-curvature terms or both. So we consider the string inspired effective action  in dilatonic Gauss-Bonnet combination taking the proper care of conformal weights of the dilaton couplings. A work along this line is recently reported in .

The paper is organized as follows. In the next Section we give the solutions to higher derivative gravity in the background of Ricci constant curvature space-time. In Section 3 we derive the Einstein field equations for a non-factorizable general metric ansatz and will be subsequently utilized in Section 4 to obtain the metric solutions corresponding to higher dimensional defects. In Section 5 we also include the contribution of the higher curvature terms to the field equations and find the metric solutions that characterize planar wall and planar string defects. In Section 6 we consider string inspired effective actions in the dilatonic Gauss-Bonnet combination and study compatibility of the theory with RS type space-time and the conformal weights of dilaton couplings derived from heterotic type I string theory in five space-time dimensions. Our discussions and outlook of the problems are summarized in Section 7.

## 2 Higher Derivative Gravity

The most general effective action involving invariants with mass dimension $`4`$ and vanishing torsion and dilaton field for the higher derivative gravity is given by

$$S=d^{d+1}x\sqrt{g}\left\{\frac{R}{2\kappa ^2}\mathrm{\Lambda }_b+\lambda ^{}\left(\alpha R^2+\beta R_{AB}R^{AB}+\gamma R_{ABCD}R^{ABCD}\right)\right\}+S_B+S_m$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ is the bulk cosmological constant, $`S_B`$ is the boundary action and $`S_m`$ is the matter action which may include the matter trapped in the $`p`$-brane and the $`D(=d+1)`$ dimensional mass term is defined by $`\kappa ^2=8\pi G_{d+1}=8\pi M^{1d}`$. Here we set the string coupling $`\lambda ^{}=\alpha ^{}/8g_s^2=1`$ for simplicity and but the effective action with the proper couplings of dilaton field to the higher-curvature terms and $`\lambda ^{}>0`$ will be presented in Section 6.

The classical field equations derived by varying the above action w.r.to $`g^{AB}`$ can then be expressed in the form

$$G_{AB}+\kappa ^2X_{AB}=\kappa ^2(\mathrm{\Lambda }_bg_{AB}T_{AB})$$
(2)
where the energy-momentum tensor is defined in the well known form

$$T_{AB}=\frac{2}{\sqrt{g}}\frac{\delta S_m}{\delta g^{AB}}=\frac{2}{\sqrt{g}}\frac{\delta }{\delta g^{AB}}d^{d+1}x\sqrt{g}_m,$$
(3)
$`G_{AB}=R_{AB}g_{AB}R/2`$ and $`X_{AB}`$ is given by

$`X_{AB}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g_{AB}(\alpha R^2+\beta R_{CD}R^{CD}+\gamma R_{CDEF}R^{CDEF})`$ (4)
$`+2\left[\alpha RR_{AB}+\beta R_{ACBD}R^{CD}+\gamma (R_{ACDE}R_B^{CDE}2R_A^CR_{BC}+2R_{ACBD}R^{CD})\right]`$
$`(2\alpha +\beta +2\gamma )(_A_BRg_{AB}^2R)+(\beta +4\gamma )^2G_{AB}`$
where $`A,B,\mathrm{}`$ denote the $`D=d+1`$ dimensional space-time indices and the signature we follow is $`(,+,+,+,\mathrm{})`$. The last line of the above expression vanishes for two cases i.e. (i) for the Gauss-Bonnet relation (i.e. $`4\alpha =\beta =4\gamma `$) and (ii) for the background metric of Ricci constant curvature space-time (in which case, since $`R_{AB}g_{AB}`$ and the curvatures are covariantly constant). To simplify the calculation to a greater extent, we keep the freedom in the choice of relations among $`\alpha ,\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ for the later purpose and mainly consider the second case in what follows in this section. We briefly review the general features of the action (1) at first. The general curvature squared terms in the $`d`$-spatial dimensions can be written as ,

$`\alpha R^2+\beta R_{AB}R^{AB}+\gamma R_{ABCD}R^{ABCD}`$
$$=\left[\frac{(d1)\beta +4\gamma }{4(d2)}\right]_{GB}^2+\left(\frac{d1}{d2}\right)(\beta /4+\gamma )C^2+\left[\frac{4d\alpha +(d+1)\beta +4\gamma }{4d}\right]R^2$$
(5)
where the Gauss-Bonnet term $`(_{GB}^2)`$ and the square of the Weyl tensor $`(C^2)`$ are given by

$`_{GB}^2`$ $`=`$ $`R^24R_{AB}R^{AB}+R_{ABCD}R^{ABCD},`$
$`C^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{d(d1)}}R^2{\displaystyle \frac{4}{d1}}R_{AB}^2+R_{ABCD}R^{ABCD}`$ (6)
Ofcourse, for $`d=3`$, $`_{GB}^2`$ is simply the integrand of the Gauss-Bonnet term. Since the Weyl tensor vanishes for a conformally flat $`AdS`$ metric, with the requirement that $`16\alpha +5\beta +4\gamma =0`$ for $`d=4`$, the curvature squared terms naturally arise in the Gauss-Bonnet combination. In the scheme where $`R_{ABCD}^2`$ can be modified to $`C_{ABCD}^2`$ the action (1) may be deduced from the heterotic string via heterotic type I duality . Furthermore, the theory with the Weyl term squared corresponds to the setting $`\alpha =\beta /2d=2\gamma /d(d1)`$. For $`d=4`$ this means $`\alpha =\gamma /6,\beta =4\gamma /3`$ and; evidently, the higher derivative part of the above action is reduced to

$$S=d^{d+1}x\sqrt{g}\left(\frac{R}{2\kappa ^2}\mathrm{\Lambda }_b+\gamma C_{ABCD}C^{ABCD}\right)+S_m+S_B$$
(7)
With $`T_{AB}=0`$, the theory defined by the above action (7) can have only the flat space-time as the vacuum solution. Forthermore, the Einstein gravity with the cosmological constant term is characterized by the setting $`\alpha =\beta =\gamma =0`$, i.e.,

$$S=d^{d+1}x\sqrt{g}\left(\frac{R}{2\kappa ^2}\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\right)+d^dx\sqrt{g}_m+S_B$$
(8)
This gives (with $`S_B=0`$ and $`T_{AB}=0`$$`R_{AB}g_{AB}R/2=\kappa ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_bg_{AB}`$ and the corresponding $`d+1`$ dimensional Ricci curvature and Ricci scalar are then given by

$$R_{AB}=\frac{d}{l^2}g_{AB},R=\frac{d(d+1)}{l^2}$$
(9)
where the square of the curvature radius is defined by $`l^2=d(d1)/2\kappa ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$. For $`d=3`$, this is the square of the curvature radius in the Minkowski space-time. In our notations $`AdS(dS)`$ solution corresponds to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b<0,l^2>0(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b>0,l^2<0)`$. We assume that, for $`d+1=5`$, the equations of motion derived from (1) can have a solution describing the $`AdS_5`$ spacetime. This is indeed the case and whose metric solution is given by ,

$$ds^2=\frac{1}{r}\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +\frac{l^2}{4r^2}dr^2$$
(10)
This is actually a conformally flat $`AdS`$ metric solution. For $`AdS_5`$, the scalar, Ricci and Riemann curvatures (derived from the metric (10) or the eqn(9)) are given by $`(l^2>0)`$,

$$R=\frac{20}{l^2},R_{AB}=\frac{4}{l^2}g_{AB},R_{ABCD}=\frac{1}{l^2}(g_{AC}g_{BD}g_{AD}g_{BC})$$
(11)
This implies that the vacuum solution of Einstein gravity is equivalent to the higher derivative gravity theory with the Ricci constant curvature bulk $`AdS`$. One then easily evaluates

$`R_{ACDE}R_B^{CDE}={\displaystyle \frac{2d}{l^4}}g_{AB},R_{ABCD}R^{ABCD}={\displaystyle \frac{2d(d+1)}{l^4}}`$ (12)
This further shows that the space-time of constant Riemann curvature characterizes the $`AdS_{d+1}`$ with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b<0`$ and $`l^2>0`$. The relations(11-12) are equally applied to the $`(d+1)`$ dimensional conformally flat metric solution given by

$$ds^2=\frac{1}{r}\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +\frac{l^2}{4r^2}dr^2+\frac{1}{r}d^{n1}X^2$$
(13)
where $`d^{n1}X^2`$ denotes the $`(n1)`$ dimensional flat space metric. With the above subtitutions into the equation (2) with $`T_{AB}=0`$, the field equations reduce to the following form:

$$\frac{d(d1)}{2\kappa ^2l^2}\frac{d(d3)}{l^4}\left[d(d+1)\alpha +d\beta +2\gamma \right]+\mathrm{\Lambda }_b=0$$
(14)
There exists two classes of general solutions of the eqn(14) i.e. (i) for $`l^2\mathrm{}`$ : the solution is a flat Minkowski space-time with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b0`$ and (ii) for the vanishing bulk cosmological constant, $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b=0)`$, one has

$$l^2=\frac{2(d3)}{d1}\left[d(d+1)\alpha +d\beta +2\gamma \right]\kappa ^2$$
(15)
therefore, for $`d>3`$, there exist $`AdS(dS)`$ solution if the quantity in the parenthesis is positive (negative). However for other values of $`d`$, viz $`d3`$, the case is less interesting. Specifically, the curvature diverges for $`d=3`$ and $`d=1`$ characterizes a flat space solution. For $`d=2`$, the space-time would be $`dS(AdS)`$ when the quantity in the parenthesis is positive (negative). The eqn(14) is solved for $`l^2`$ if,

$$\left(\frac{d(d1)}{2\kappa ^2}\right)^2+4d(d3)\left[d(d+1)\alpha +d\beta +2\gamma \right]\mathrm{\Lambda }_b>0$$
(16)
A connection of this result to the Supergravity dual of $`𝒩=2Sp(N)`$ and superconformal field theory is discussed in . With the Gauss-Bonnet relation, i.e. $`\alpha =\beta /4=\gamma `$, eqn(16) implies

$$\alpha >\frac{d(d1)}{16\mathrm{\Lambda }_b(d2)(d3)}\frac{1}{\kappa ^4}$$
(17)
This implies that for $`d>3`$ and $`\alpha >0`$, the bulk space-time is always $`AdS`$. And for the free parameters $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma `$, the space-time can be guaranted as $`AdS_{d+1}`$ if the following inequality holds,

$$4\mathrm{\Lambda }_bd(d3)\left[d(d+1)\alpha +d\beta +2\gamma \right]<0$$
(18)
## 3 Einstein Field Equations

In this section we consider a general non-factorizable metric ansatz which might respect the $`4d`$ Poincare invariance. More specifically, we consider the presence of a brane and gravity. Due to the gravitational field on the brane, the brane can be curved and this would eventually rise to give a non-zero cosmological constant in usual $`3+1`$ space-time world. A $`(d+1)`$ dimensional metric ansatz satisfying this assumption is

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`g_{AB}dx^Adx^B=g_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +\gamma _{ij}dx^idx^j`$ (19)
$`=`$ $`e^{2M(r)}\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +e^{2N(r)}(dr^2+d\mathrm{\Omega }_{n1}^2),`$
where $`\mu ,\nu ,\mathrm{}`$ denote the space-time indices of the $`p`$-brane, and $`i,j,\mathrm{}`$ denote $`n`$-dimensional extra spatial indices. We also parameterize the $`n1`$ dimensional sphere recursively as

$$d\mathrm{\Omega }_{n1}^2=d\theta _{n1}^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{n1}d\mathrm{\Omega }_{n2}^2$$
(20)
So the equality $`d=p+n`$ holds and in this paper we concentrate on the case of $`p3`$. For simplicity one can reparametrize the ansatz with the transformation $`dy=e^{N(r)}dr`$ so that

$$ds^2=e^{2U(y)}\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +dy^2+e^{2V(y)}d\mathrm{\Omega }_{n1}^2$$
(21)
where $`y`$ is the radial bulk coordinate. Ofcourse, for $`d+1=5`$ and $`\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }`$, $`U(y)=(1+k|y|)`$ would explain the RS type solution with $`AdS_5`$ bulk geometry , where $`k`$ has the inverse dimension of $`AdS_5`$ curvature radius. Variation of the action (8) with respect to the $`(d+1)`$ dimensional metric tensor $`g_{AB}`$, with $`S_B=0`$, leads to the Einstein’s equations,

$$R_{AB}\frac{1}{2}g_{AB}R=\kappa ^2\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }_bg_{AB}T_{AB}\right)$$
(22)
Here, we are interested to consider a spherically symmetric ansatz for the energy-momentum tensor in the form

$`T_\nu ^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\delta _\nu ^\mu \rho _o(y),T_y^y=\rho _y(y),`$
$`T_{\theta _1}^{\theta _1}`$ $`=`$ $`T_{\theta _2}^{\theta _2}=\mathrm{}=T_{\theta _{n1}}^{\theta _{n1}}=\rho _\theta (y),`$ (23)
where $`\rho _i(i=0,y,\theta )`$ are the brane sources defined in a general $`(d+1)`$ dimensional space-time. With the metric ansatz (21), we evaluate the followings non trivial components of the Einstein tensor,

$`G_t^t`$ $`=`$ $`G_{x_1}^{x_1}=G_{x_2}^{x_2}=G_{x_3}^{x_3}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_pe^{2U}+p\left[(n1)U^{}V^{}U^{\prime \prime }+{\displaystyle \frac{(p+1)}{2}}(U^{})^2\right]`$ (24)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{n1}{2}}\left[2V^{\prime \prime }n(V^{})^2+(n2)e^{2V}\right]`$
$$G_y^y=\frac{p+1}{p1}\mathrm{\Lambda }_pe^{2U}+\frac{p+1}{2}\left[2(n1)U^{}V^{}+p(U^{})^2\right]+\frac{(n1)(n2)}{2}\left[(V^{})^2e^{2V}\right]$$
(25)
$`G_{\theta _i}^{\theta ^i}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{p+1}{p1}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_pe^{2U}+{\displaystyle \frac{p+1}{2}}\left[(p+2)(U^{})^22U^{\prime \prime }+2(n2)U^{}V^{}\right]{\displaystyle \frac{(n2)(n3)}{2}}e^{2V}`$ (26)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{n2}{2}}\left[2V^{\prime \prime }(n1)(V^{})^2\right]`$
In general, the Ricci scalar corresponding to the metric ansatz (21) is

$`R={\displaystyle \frac{2(p+1)}{p1}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_pe^{2U}+(p+1)\left(2U^{\prime \prime }(p+2)(U^{})^22(n1)U^{}V^{}\right)`$
$`+(n1)\left\{2V^{\prime \prime }n(V^{})^2+(n2)e^{2V}\right\}`$ (27)
where the  denotes the differentiation $`d/dy`$. In deriving the above equations we have utilized the $`(p+1)`$ dimensional Ricci scalar, $`\widehat{R}=2\mathrm{\Lambda }_p(p+1)/(p1)`$ obtained from the $`(p+1)`$ dimensional Einstein equation

$`\widehat{R}_{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }\widehat{R}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_p\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }`$ (28)
Here we define the cosmological constant on the $`p`$ brane by the relation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_p=8\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }_{phy}M_{pl}^{p1}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{phy}`$ is the physical cosmological constant defined in usual $`(3+1)`$ space-time. By eliminating two of the above equations or equivalently by using the energy momentum conservation law, $`^AT_{AB}=0`$, we get

$`(p+1)(\rho _y\rho _0)U^{}+(n1)(\rho _y\rho _\theta )V^{}=\rho _y^{}`$ (29)
which is just the $`(d+1)`$ dimensional Bianchi identity derived from the Einstein field equations, i.e., after substituting (24-26) and (23) into (22).

## 4 Global Defect Solutions

For the completeness we briefly discuss on the Eintein gravity (i.e. $`\alpha =\beta =\gamma =0`$) in higher dimensions, $`n1`$, and identify the $`p`$ brane world volume as the internal space of topological defect residing in the higher dimensional space-time.

### 4.1 Domain Wall Solution

For the codimension one, $`n=1`$, the Einstein field equations (24-25), with the ansatz (23), reduce to the following form

$`2pU^{\prime \prime }p(p+1)(U^{})^2`$ $`=`$ $`2\kappa ^2[\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _0(y)]2\mathrm{\Lambda }_pe^{2U}`$ (30)
$`p(p+1)(U^{})^2`$ $`=`$ $`2\kappa ^2[\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _y(y)]{\displaystyle \frac{2(p+1)}{p1}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_pe^{2U}`$ (31)
and the Bianchi identity(29) turns to the simpler form

$$\rho _y^{}=(p+1)(\rho _y\rho _0)U^{}$$
(32)
Now we consider the geometry having a warp factor, that is, $`U(y)=u|y|`$, where $`u`$ is some constant. This ensures the localization of gravity to the $`p`$-brane. With this ansatz, one easily solves eqns (30-31) to get the following general metric solution

$$ds^2=e^{2u|y|}\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +dy^2$$
(33)
where

$`\widehat{R}_{(p+1)}`$ $`=`$ $`(p+1)\kappa ^2(\rho _0\rho _y)e^{2u|y|}`$ (34)
$`u^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{p(p+1)}}\left[(p+1)\rho _0+(p1)\rho _y2\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\right]`$ (35)
For the physically interesting case of $`3`$-brane, one has the following general solutions

$`\widehat{R}_{(4)}`$ $`=`$ $`4\mathrm{\Lambda }_p=4\kappa ^2(\rho _0\rho _y)e^{2u|y|}`$ (36)
$`u^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{6}}(2\rho _0\rho _y\mathrm{\Lambda }_b)`$ (37)
There exists two special cases of these general solutions: i.e. (i) for the trivial sources in the extra dimensions (i.e. $`\rho _0=\rho _y=0`$), one has

$$\widehat{R}_{(4)}=\frac{32\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }_{phy}}{M_{pl}^2}=0,u=\sqrt{\frac{4\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }_b}{3M_{(5)}^3}}$$
(38)
and hence the solution with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b<0`$ ensures the bulk geometry as $`AdS_5`$ and the brane geometry as Ricci flat with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{phy}=0`$, and (ii) the constant source terms in the extra dimensions (i.e. $`\rho _0=\rho _y=const`$) correspond to the spontaneous symmetry breaking in the extra dimensions. For the second case one has

$$\widehat{R}_{(4)}=0,u=\sqrt{\frac{4\pi (\rho _0\mathrm{\Lambda }_b)}{3M_{(5)}^3}}$$
(39)
Clearly, $`\rho _0>\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ guarantees the positivity of $`u`$ and exponentially decreasing warp factor needed to explain the hierarchy between electroweak scale and Planck scale mass  and the fine tuning condition $`\rho _0=\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ characterizes a flat 5d Minkowski space-time solution.

### 4.2 String-like Solution

For the case of $`n=2`$ the Einstein field equations reduce to the form

$`V^{\prime \prime }(V^{})^2puV^{}{\displaystyle \frac{p(p+1)}{2}}u^2`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa ^2(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _0)\mathrm{\Lambda }_pe^{2u|y|}`$ (40)
$`(p+1)uV^{}{\displaystyle \frac{p(p+1)}{2}}u^2`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa ^2(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _y){\displaystyle \frac{(p+1)}{(p1)}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_pe^{2u|y|}`$ (41)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(p+1)(p+2)}{2}}u^2`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa ^2(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _\theta ){\displaystyle \frac{(p+1)}{(p1)}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_pe^{2u|y|}`$ (42)
and the Bianchi identity (29) yields

$$\rho _y^{}=u(p+1)(\rho _y\rho _0)+(\rho _y\rho _\theta )V^{}$$
(43)
Solving the above field equations, the general metric solution can be expressed in the form

$$ds^2=e^{2u|y|}\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +dy^2+e^{2V(y)}d\theta ^2$$
(44)
where

$`u^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(p+1)(p+2)}}\left\{4\kappa ^2(\rho _\theta \mathrm{\Lambda }_b)+\widehat{R}_{(4)}e^{2u|y|}\right\}`$ (45)
$`V(y)`$ $`=`$ $`uy+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{u(p+1)}}{\displaystyle 𝑑y(\rho _y\rho _\theta )}`$ (46)
$`\widehat{R}_{(4)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{u}}\left(\alpha \rho _\theta \right)e^{2u|y|}`$ (47)
where $`\alpha `$ is an integration constant. Notice that the last equation above demands a definite form for $`\rho _\theta `$. One crucial observation is that the inequality $`\alpha >\rho _\theta `$ keeps $`\widehat{R}_{(4)}`$ positive and $`(\rho _\theta \mathrm{\Lambda }_b)0`$ ensures the positivity of $`u^2`$. Obviously, unlike the case of $`3`$-brane in domain wall solution, where only the case $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b<0`$ ensures $`u^2>0`$, for the string like solution one can either have $`+ve`$ or $`ve`$ bulk cosmological constant to guarantee $`u^2>0`$ if $`(\rho _\theta \mathrm{\Lambda }_b)>0`$ still holds. It is also reported in  that for the trivial sources in the extra dimensions, (i.e. $`\rho _i=0`$), only $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b<0`$ can ensure $`u^2>0`$. But this is not always the case as long as we do not set the integration constant $`\alpha =0`$. As a specific solution as $`\rho _y=\rho _\theta =\alpha =constant`$, spontaneous symmetry breaking condition in the extra dimensions , one obtains

$$ds^2=e^{2u|y|}\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +dy^2+r_0^2e^{2u_0|y|}d\theta ^2$$
(48)
$`u^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\kappa ^2}{(p+1)(p+2)}}(\rho _\theta \mathrm{\Lambda }_b)>0`$
$`u_0`$ $`=`$ $`u{\displaystyle \frac{2\kappa ^2\rho _\theta }{u(p+1)}},\widehat{R}_{(4)}=0`$ (49)
### 4.3 Global Monopole-like Defect

The above procedure may not directly apply to $`n3`$, because for $`n=1`$ and $`n=2`$ the extra space is either flat or conformally flat, but for $`n3`$ the extra space is curved and hence the defect solution essentially introduces a solid angle deficit in the extra dimensions. The case is true even if one includes the higher-curvature terms into the field equations and assume $`\widehat{R}_{(4)}=0`$. As gestured in  the location of such defect in the brane might act as window in the higher dimensions. In the conventional Kaluza-Klein theory, our universe in higher dimensions has the topology of $`M_4K`$, where $`K`$ is the compact manifold and the isometries of $`K`$ can be seen as gauge symmetries of the effective four dimensional theory  and the $`5`$ dimensional space-time manifold is factorized as $`M_4S^1`$. However, in the brane set up with a non-factorizable geometry, since the role of the gauge fields is played by the extra components of the graviton , the gauge fields may get mass when at least part of the $`K`$ isometries spontaneously break down in the extra dimensions by the brane. This effect can be observed as the Higgs phenomena in the usual $`3+1`$ dimensional world . This may suggest that a hedge hog type scalar field may explain the monopole defect in the extra dimensions. This is indeed the case as we see in ref. and also qualitatively discussed in .

One can consider the case of $`n3`$ by defining the brane sources in terms of the radial hedge-hodge type scalar fields as in ref. and obtain metric solutions that characterize the monopole-like defects with a solid angle deficit in the extra dimensions. With this in mind, the source terms can be described by a multiplet of $`n`$ scalar fields $`\mathrm{\Phi }^a=\upsilon y^a/y`$, where $`\upsilon `$ is the VEV at the minimum of the $`n`$-sphere, $`y`$ is the extra radial coordinate. Since $`\rho _0(y)=\rho _y(y)=(n1)\upsilon ^2/2y^2`$ and $`\rho _\theta (y)=(n3)\upsilon ^2/2y^2`$, the identity (29) implies that $`V^{}(y)=1/y`$. This brings the non trivial term $`e^{2V}`$ to the simple form and hence one can solve the Einstein equations explicitly by making an appropriate ansatz for $`U(y)`$. As this paper mainly focuses on the dynamics with higher order curvature terms, an investigation of such defect solutions deserves as a topic for separate publication.

## 5 Higher Derivative Field Equations

In this section we shall confine ourselves to the case where the geometry is Gauss-Bonnet type (i.e. $`4\alpha =\beta =4\gamma `$) with the vanishing $`3+1`$ dimensional cosmological constant. We choose our metric ansatz in the form

$$ds^2=e^{2U(y)}\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +dy^2+e^{2V(y)}d\mathrm{\Omega }_{n1}^2$$
(50)
Using the Gauss-Bonnet relation, one can rewrite $`X_{AB}`$ from eqn(2) in the following form

$$X_{AB}=2\alpha (Y_{AB}\frac{1}{4}g_{AB}_{GB}^2)=2\alpha L_{AB}$$
(51)
where $`Y_{AB}`$ is expressed by

$$Y_{AB}=RR_{AB}2R_{ACBD}R^{CD}+R_{ACDE}R_B^{CDE}2R_A^CR_{BC}$$
(52)
In $`3+1`$ dimensions $`L_{AB}`$ is the covariantly conserved Lanczos vector. With the metric ansatz (50) we evaluate the following quantities in the most general forms

$`_{GB}^2`$ $`=`$ $`(p1)p(p+1)\left[(p+2)(U^{})^44(U^{})^2U^{\prime \prime }\right]+2p(p+1)(n1)\left\{np+2(p+1)(n2)\right\}`$ (53)
$`(U^{})^2(V^{})^2+4p(p+1)(n1)\left[(p+1)(U^{})^3V^{}2U^{}U^{\prime \prime }V^{}p(U^{})^2V^{\prime \prime }\right]4(n1)`$
$`(n2)(p+1)\left[U^{\prime \prime }(V^{})^2+2U^{}V^{}V^{\prime \prime }(n1)U^{}(V^{})^3+\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{(p+2)}{2}}(U^{})^2U^{\prime \prime }\right\}e^{2V}\right]`$
$`+2(n1)(n2)(n3)\left[2V^{\prime \prime }(n2)(V^{})^22(p+1)U^{}V^{}\right]e^{2V}`$
$`+(n1)(n2)(n3)(n4)e^{4V}`$
$`Y_t^t`$ $`=`$ $`(p1)p\left[(p+1)(U^{})^43(U^{})^2U^{\prime \prime }\right]+(n1)\left\{(n2)(3p+1)+2p\right\}(U^{})^2(V^{})^2`$ (54)
$`4p(n1)U^{}U^{\prime \prime }V^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{p(n1)}{2}}\left[2(3p+1)(U^{})^3V^{}(p+1)(U^{})^2V^{\prime \prime }\right]`$
$`(n1)(n2)\left[U^{\prime \prime }(V^{})^2+(n2)U^{}(V^{})^3+{\displaystyle \frac{(p+1)}{2}}U^{}V^{}V^{\prime \prime }\right]`$
$`+(n1)(n2)\left[U^{\prime \prime }(p+1)(U^{})^2(n3)U^{}V^{}\right]e^{2V}=Y_{x_i}^{x_i}`$
$`Y_y^y`$ $`=`$ $`(p1)p(p+1)\left[(U^{})^4(U^{})^2U^{\prime \prime }\right]+(n1)(p+1)(n+p2)(U^{})^2(V^{})^2`$ (55)
$`+p(p+1)(n1)\left[2(U^{})^3V^{}2U^{}U^{\prime \prime }V^{}(U^{})^2V^{\prime \prime }\right]+(n1)(n2)(p+1)`$
$`\left[U^{}(V^{})^32U^{}V^{}V^{\prime \prime }U^{\prime \prime }(V^{})^2+\left\{U^{\prime \prime }(U^{})^2\right\}e^{2V}\right]+(n1)(n2)`$
$`(n3)\left[(V^{})^2V^{\prime \prime }+(V^{})^4+\left\{V^{\prime \prime }+(V^{})^2\right\}e^{2V}\right]`$
$`Y_\theta ^\theta `$ $`=`$ $`p(p+1)\left[(p+1)(U^{})^3V^{}(U^{})^2V^{\prime \prime }2U^{}U^{\prime \prime }V^{}\right]+(p+1)(n2)`$ (56)
$`\left[(3n5)U^{}(V^{})^32U^{\prime \prime }(V^{})^24U^{}V^{}V^{\prime \prime }+\left\{2U^{\prime \prime }(p+2)(U^{})^2\right\}e^{2V}\right]`$
$`+(p+1)\left\{p(n1)+2(n2)(p+1)\right\}(U^{})^2(V^{})^2+(n2)(n3)`$
$`\left[\left\{3V^{\prime \prime }(2n5)(V^{})^23(p+1)U^{}V^{}\right\}e^{2V}3V^{\prime \prime }(V^{})^2+(n1)(V^{})^4\right]`$
### 5.1 Planar Wall Solution

In this subsection, we solve the higher derivative field equations for $`n=1`$. These are the generalization of the well-known domain wall solution but includes contribution of higher-curvature terms into the field equations. Since the brane that we are considering is characterized by a conformally flat metric, we shall call the $`p`$-brane object a planar wall (i.e. $`\widehat{R}_{(4)}=0`$) embedded in the bulk $`AdS_5`$. With the metric (50), the field equations (2) reduce to the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{p(p+1)}{2}}u^2{\displaystyle \frac{(p2)(p1)p(p+1)}{2}}\alpha \kappa ^2u^4`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa ^2\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _0(y)\right)`$ (57)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{p(p+1)}{2}}u^2{\displaystyle \frac{(p2)(p1)p(p+1)}{2}}\alpha \kappa ^2u^4`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa ^2\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _y(y)\right)`$ (58)
Clearly, we see that the planar wall solution, i.e., $`n=1`$ and $`\widehat{R_{(4)}}=0`$, requires the brane source terms in the extra dimensions to be equal, i.e., $`\rho _o(y)=\rho _y(y)`$ or they are trivial. In the former case we obtain

$$u^2=\frac{1\pm \sqrt{1+8\alpha \kappa ^4(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _y)(p1)(p2)/p(p+1)}}{2\alpha \kappa ^2(p1)(p2)},p>2$$
(59)
whose metric solution is given by (33). For the $`3`$-brane both the positive and negative root solutions are allowed if the inequality $`0\alpha \kappa ^4(\rho _y\mathrm{\Lambda }_b)3/4`$ holds. This also does not rule out the positive bulk cosmological constant. Clearly, unlike the case in domain wall solution, where $`\rho _0=\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ implies both $`\widehat{R}_{(4)}=0`$ and $`u=0`$, the planar wall solution corresponds to $`u=0orM_{(5)}^3/16\pi \alpha `$. We remind the reader that the case $`\alpha =0`$ does not correspond to the Einstein gravity as long as the $`3`$-brane we are considering remains flat.

### 5.2 Planar String Solution

Now we turn to the case of co-dimensions two, i.e., $`n=2`$. With the ans$`\ddot{a}`$tze (23) and (50), the field equations (2) then reduce to the form

$`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{a(p+1)}{2(p1)}}u^2\right)V^{\prime \prime }+(1au^2)\left\{(V^{})^2+puV^{}\right\}`$ $`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{p(p+1)}{2}}u^2`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(p2)(p+1)}{4}}au^4`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa ^2(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _0)`$ (60)
$`(p+1)(1au^2)uV^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{p(p+1)}{2}}u^2{\displaystyle \frac{(p2)(p+1)}{4}}au^4`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa ^2(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _y)`$ (61)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(p+1)(p+2)}{2}}u^2{\displaystyle \frac{(p+1)(p+2)}{4}}au^4`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa ^2(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _\theta )`$ (62)
where $`a=2p(p1)\alpha \kappa ^2`$. We solve these equations for the physically interesting case of $`3`$-brane and obtain, whose general metric solution is given by (44) with $`\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }`$, the following coefficients

$`u^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1\pm \sqrt{1+a\kappa ^2(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _\theta )/5}}{a}}`$
$`V(y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{uy}{b}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha \kappa ^4u}{10}}{\displaystyle \frac{(4\mathrm{\Lambda }_b5\rho _y+\rho _\theta )}{b(1+b)}𝑑y}`$
where $`b=\sqrt{1+a\kappa ^2(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\rho _\theta )/5}`$ and $`a=12\alpha \kappa ^2`$. These coefficients should also satisfy the following identity, derived from the equations (60-62),

$$b\left\{(V^{})^2V^{\prime \prime }U^{}V^{}\right\}+\sqrt{5}\kappa ^2(\rho _0\rho _y)=0$$
(64)
For simplicity one can choose the positive root of $`u^2`$ in (63). Here one can look for the solutions with a specific tuning condition as $`\rho _y=\rho _\theta =\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$. This means that the brane sources are trivial along with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b=0`$ or they are the constant sources in the extra dimensions. In this case one gets $`b=1`$ and the general metric solution is given by (48) with $`\eta _{\mu \nu }=\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }`$. However, for the case of trivial brane sources in the extra dimensions, ($`\rho _i=0`$), but with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b0`$, one has an extra warp factor $`c`$, i.e.,

$$ds^2=e^{2u|y|}\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +dy^2+e^{2u|y|c}d\theta ^2$$
(65)
where $`c=\beta +1/b+2\alpha \kappa ^4\mathrm{\Lambda }_b/5b(1+b)`$, $`\beta `$ is an integration constant, and $`b=\sqrt{1+12\alpha \kappa ^4\mathrm{\Lambda }_b/5}`$. Obviously, for the vanishing bulk cosmological constant (65) reduces to (48) with $`\eta _{\mu \nu }=\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }`$.

## 6 Dilatonic Gauss-Bonnet Gravity

### 6.1 Dilaton in the Brane Background

In this section we consider the string inspired higher derivative gravity action in the dilatonic Gauss-Bonnet combination and study its compatibility with the RS type non-factorizable metrics (50) and the string amplitude computations, in particular the conformal weights of the dilaton couplings to the higher-curvature terms. The above mentioned action in the low energy limit and for the vanishing torsion, by rescaling dilaton to get the standard normalization of propagator correction-free Gauss-Bonnet scheme , may be written in $`D(=d+1)`$-dimensional space-time as

$`S_M`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }d^{d+1}x\sqrt{g}\{Rϵ(y)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }}+\lambda ^{}e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }}\alpha (R^24R_{AB}R^{AB}+R_{ABCD}R^{ABCD})`$ (66)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{d1}}(\mathrm{\Phi })^2V(\mathrm{\Phi })+\mathrm{}\}+{\displaystyle }_Bd^dx\sqrt{g_{brane}}e^{q\mathrm{\Phi }(y)}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }`$
where the last term is the contribution of boundary action defined at the position of $`p`$-brane, $`\lambda ^{}=\alpha ^{}/8g_s^2>0`$, $`\alpha ^{}`$ is the Regge slope, $`g_s`$ is the string coupling constant, $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }`$ is the brane tension, $`V(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ is the dilatonic potential, which and the subsequent terms denoted by dots we set zero in the present consideration <sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1 When this paper was being typed the reference  with similar effective action appeared in the lanl e-Print archive where the form of potential $`V(\mathrm{\Phi })=c_2f(\mathrm{\Phi })(_A\mathrm{\Phi })^4+\mathrm{}`$ is also included. For generality one can keep the conformal parameters $`m,n`$ and $`q`$ arbitary in the higher derivative gravity coupled to dilaton. Nevertheless, $`m`$ and $`n`$ can be fixed for the particular space-time dimensions of the string frame by matching the coefficients with the tree-level amplitudes to $`𝒪(\alpha ^{})`$ when one restricts the action (66) to the effective string amplitude computations. In the lower dimensions, $`d<10`$, the term $`ϵ(y)`$ may be realized as the negative of the bulk cosmological constant. As explored in  the RS type brane solutions can not be obtained in the low energy supergravities coming from string theory. A possibility left open in  (see also the references therein) that the higher derivative corrections to the gravity action like the ones present in string theory or $`M`$-theory should allow the brane world solutions can be materialized if one defines $`ϵ(y)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$. In this sense the term $`ϵ(y)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is crucial in the obtention of RS type brane solutions and in making the conformal weight of dilaton couplings compatible with the string amplitude computations. In what follows we restrict the action (66) in the $`d+1=5`$-dimensional space-time.

The graviton equation of motion derived from the action (66) can be expressed in the form, defining $`e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }(y)}=f(\mathrm{\Phi })`$,

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`G_{AB}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g_{AB}ϵ(\mathrm{\Phi })e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\alpha \lambda ^{}f(\mathrm{\Phi })\left(g_{AB}_{GB}^24Y_{AB}\right){\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\left(_A\mathrm{\Phi }_B\mathrm{\Phi }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g_{AB}(\mathrm{\Phi })^2\right)`$ (67)
$`+2\alpha \lambda ^{}\{R(g_{AB}^2_A_B)f(\mathrm{\Phi })2g_{AB}^C^Df(\mathrm{\Phi })R_{CD}4_Cf(\mathrm{\Phi })^CR_{AB}`$
$`2^2f(\mathrm{\Phi })R_{AB}+4_{(A}_{|C|}f(\mathrm{\Phi })R_{B)}^C+4_Cf(\mathrm{\Phi })_{(A}R_{B)}^C+2^{(C}^{D)}f(\mathrm{\Phi })R_{ACBD}\}`$
$`e^{q\mathrm{\Phi }(y)}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{g_b}}{2\sqrt{g}}}\delta _A^\mu \delta _B^\nu (g_b)_{\mu \nu }\sigma (y),`$
while the dilaton equation of motion is given by

$`0=\alpha \lambda ^{}f^{}(\mathrm{\Phi })_{GB}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3}}^2\mathrm{\Phi }mϵ(y)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }}+qe^{q\mathrm{\Phi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{g_b}}{\sqrt{g}}}\delta _A^\mu \delta _B^\nu (g_b)_{\mu \nu }\sigma (y)`$ (68)
In eqn(68) prime denotes the differentiation w.r. to $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, $`_{GB}^2`$ is the Gauss-Bonnet term, $`Y_{AB}`$ was defined previously in the section 5 and $`\sigma (y)=\stackrel{~}{\sigma }\delta (y)`$. With the metric ansatz (50), for $`d+1=5`$, the field equations (67-68) reduce to the following forms

$`12\lambda ^{}\alpha e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }}\left\{(U^{})^4(U^{})^2U^{\prime \prime }3n(U^{})^3U^{\prime \prime }+n^2(U^{})^2(\mathrm{\Phi }^{})^2+2nU^{}U^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{\Phi }^{}+n(U^{})^2\mathrm{\Phi }^{\prime \prime }\right\}`$
$`6(U^{})^2+3U^{\prime \prime }{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}(\mathrm{\Phi }^{})^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}ϵ(y)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}e^{q\mathrm{\Phi }}\sigma =0`$ (69)
$`12\lambda ^{}\alpha e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }}\left\{(U^{})^44n(U^{})^3\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\right\}6(U^{})^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}(\mathrm{\Phi }^{})^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}ϵ(y)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }}=0`$ (70)
$`24n\lambda ^{}\alpha e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }}\left\{5(U^{})^44(U^{})^2U^{\prime \prime }\right\}+{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3}}\mathrm{\Phi }^{\prime \prime }{\displaystyle \frac{32}{3}}U^{}\mathrm{\Phi }^{}mϵ(y)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }}+qe^{q\mathrm{\Phi }}\sigma (y)=0`$ (71)
Here the primes denote differentiation w.r. to the fifth bulk coordinate$`(y)`$. Notice that for the case of constant dilaton field w.r. to $`y`$ (i.e.,$`\mathrm{\Phi }(y)=\mathrm{\Phi }_0,\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(y)=\mathrm{\Phi }^{\prime \prime }(y)=0`$) and the bulk geometry having a warp factor $`U(y)=u|y|`$, where $`u`$ is some constant function, the first two equations in the bulk reduce to a single equation, i.e.

$$12u^2+24\lambda ^{}\alpha e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}u^4ϵ(y)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }_0}=0$$

This implies that in the bulk because of the Bianchi identities there could only be two independent equations. To see this explicitly from the equations (69-71) one can formally arrive at the following identity (see also )

$$e^{q\mathrm{\Phi }(y)}\sigma (y)\left\{4U^{}(y)q\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(y)\right\}e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }}ϵ^{}(y)=0$$
(72)
When one defines $`ϵ(y)(=\mathrm{\Lambda }_b)`$ as the bulk cosmological constant, then the requirement that $`ϵ^{}(y)=0`$ equally avoids the breaking of Poincare invariance in the bulk .

### 6.2 Constant Dilaton Solution

One can solve the above field equations with the constant dilaton in the $`AdS`$ bulk i.e. the dilaton remains constant w.r. to the radial bulk coordinate, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(y)=\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$. This can also be associated with the $`D3`$ brane solution of certain version of the string theories. For this case, the Bianchi identity (72) is reduced to

$$4e^{q\mathrm{\Phi }_0}U^{}(y)\stackrel{~}{\sigma }\delta (y)=0$$

which is trivial since $`\delta (y)=0`$ in the bulk. And the field equations (69-70) reduce to the following forms

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dy}}\left(8\lambda ^{}\alpha (U^{})^3e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}6U^{}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{q\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }\delta (y)`$ (73)
$`ϵ(y)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }_0}+12(U^{})^224\lambda ^{}\alpha (U^{})^4e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (74)
where in obtaining eqn(73) we have utilized the equation (74). In the bulk eqn(73) implies that

$$8\lambda ^{}\alpha (U^{})^3e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}6U^{}=c$$
(75)
where $`c`$ is an integration constant. For the constant dilaton the additional terms $`V(\mathrm{\Phi })=c_2f(\mathrm{\Phi })(_A(\mathrm{\Phi }))^4\mathrm{}`$ considered in  does not affect this equation. As a third-degree equation, (75) must have atleast one real solution for the arbitary constant $`c`$. Indeed, it gives all three real solutions if we impose $`ac/2a`$, where $`a=e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2}/\sqrt{\lambda ^{}\alpha }`$. However, to make the various conformal parameters: m, n, q compatible with the string amplitude computations, one needs to restrictively define the integration constant as $`c=8e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2}/3\sqrt{3\lambda ^{}\alpha }`$ with some suitable junction conditions about the brane position. With this one of the real solutions of eqn(75) is given by

$$U^{}(y)=k_+=k_{}=k=\frac{e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2}}{2\sqrt{3\lambda ^{}\alpha }}$$
(76)
Obviously, if $`y>0`$ corresponds to the solution $`U^{}(y)=k_+`$, then $`y<0`$ corresponds to $`U^{}(y)=k_{}`$. The above choice of $`c`$ uniquely reproduces the conformal weight of dilaton couplings compatible with string amplitude computations. Indeed, (76) can also be associated to the RS solution. For the vanishing dilaton field this implies $`k=k_+=k_{}=1/(2\sqrt{3\lambda ^{}\alpha })`$. Before going to make any conclusion here, we first give the full treatment of all equations both in the bulk and on the brane and find the general and consistent solutions.

Again, integrating the equation (73) over an interval that includes the brane position at $`y=0`$, one gets

$$e^{q\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }=6(k_+k_{})+8\lambda ^{}\alpha (k_+^3k_{}^3)e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}$$
(77)
This relates the $`k_+,k_{}`$ with the brane tension $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }`$. Now, one needs to solve eqn(74) with the continuity of bulk cosmological constant $`ϵ(y)(=\mathrm{\Lambda }_b(y))`$ at the brane position $`y=0`$. Therefore, from (74) one has

$$ϵ(y)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }_0}=12k_\pm ^2(2\lambda ^{}\alpha k_\pm ^2e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}1)$$
(78)
implying

$$ϵ(y)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }_0}=12k_+^2(2\lambda ^{}\alpha k_+^2e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}1)=12k_{}^2(2\lambda ^{}\alpha k_{}^2e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}1)$$
(79)
This equation is solved for $`(i)k_+=\pm k_{}=k`$ and (ii) $`k_+^2+k_{}^2=e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}/2\lambda ^{}\alpha `$. Indeed, the second solution covers a broad region of the solution space, where the first solution could be a point on that space. Ofcourse, the solution with $`k_+=k_{}`$ can not be the RS solution as this has continuous metric function at $`y=0`$ which violates the symmetry about the brane position. So we choose the negative sign in the first solution. Notice that for the constant $`c=2e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2}/\sqrt{\lambda ^{}\alpha }`$, eqn(75) can have two real solutions as $`k_\pm =\pm e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2}/\sqrt{\lambda ^{}\alpha }`$ and $`k_\pm =\pm e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2}/2\sqrt{\lambda ^{}\alpha }`$ which satisfy both the solutions of (79) independently. If this is the case, the theory is compatible only with RS type space-time but not with the string amplitudes computation. The solution which is compatible with both the RS type geometry and the string theory is given by (76). And, a possible pair of imaginary solutions is discarded since this demands $`k_+^2+k_{}^2<0`$ and hence $`\lambda ^{}<0`$ for positive $`\alpha `$, but this is again not compatible with the string amplitude computations. Therefore, for the choice $`k_+=k_{}=k`$, one gets

$$ϵ(y)=12k^2(2\lambda ^{}\alpha k^2e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_o}1)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }_0}$$
(80)
Now we solve the equation (71) in the bulk, where one can set $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(y)=\mathrm{\Phi }^{\prime \prime }(y)=0`$, but proper care should be taken at the brane position, i.e. $`y=0`$, where discontinuity of $`\mathrm{\Phi }(y)`$ may appear due to the delta function source. Eqn(71), in conjuction with eqn(74) and $`U^{\prime \prime }(y)=0`$, reduces to the form

$$(5nm)ϵ(y)e^{m\mathrm{\Phi }_0}+60nk_\pm ^2+qe^{q\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }(y)\delta (y)=0$$

which, in the bulk, on using (78) reduces to the form

$$2(5nm)\lambda ^{}\alpha k_\pm ^2e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}+m=0$$
(81)
For the solution $`k_+=k_{}=k`$ one has

$$m=\frac{10n\lambda ^{}\alpha k^2e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}}{2\lambda ^{}\alpha k^2e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}1}$$
(82)
If we integrate eqn(71) in the neighbourhood of brane position, $`y=0`$, with $`U^{}(y)=k_+=k_{}`$, one is left with

$`q{\displaystyle _0_{}^{0_+}}e^{q\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }\delta (y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0_{}^{0_+}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dy}}\left(32n\lambda ^{}\alpha e^{q\mathrm{\Phi }_0}(U^{}(y))^3\right)𝑑y`$
$`i.e.qe^{q\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }`$ $`=`$ $`32n\lambda ^{}\alpha e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}(k_+^3k_{}^3)`$ (83)
Eqn(83) in conjuction with eqn(77) implies

$$\stackrel{~}{\sigma }=\frac{48nk}{q4n}e^{q\mathrm{\Phi }_0}$$
(84)
where

$$q=\frac{16nk^2\lambda ^{}\alpha }{4k^2\lambda ^{}\alpha e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}3}$$
(85)
Notice that in the string amplitude computations , the conformal parameters $`m`$ and $`n`$ are fixed for the given space-time dimensions of the string frame. In $`d+1=5`$ dimensions, $`m=4/(d1)=4/3=n`$. With these conformal weights and vanishing dilaton field, from equations (82), (85), (84) and (80) we get (see also )

$$k=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{3\lambda ^{}\alpha }},q=\frac{2}{3},\stackrel{~}{\sigma }(y)=\frac{32k}{3},\mathrm{\Lambda }_b=ϵ(y)=10k^2$$
(86)
where $`\lambda ^{}=1/8g_s^2`$. These values are well consistent with both the RS brane world scenario and 5-dimensional string theory amplitudes. In the former case the bulk cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b(=10k^2)`$ appears to have opposite sign than that of the brane tension $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }(=32k/3)`$ to ensure the positive tension brane at $`y=0`$, and in the latter case the required values and relations among the conformal weights of dilaton coupling in the five dimensional string theory are satisfied with the proper choice of $`\lambda ^{}`$ or $`\alpha `$ or both.

A possible solution of eqn(75) as

$$k_+=k_{}=k=\frac{e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2}}{2\sqrt{\lambda ^{}\alpha }},$$
(87)
can be associated to the RS solution. This also reproduces the correct sign of conformal weight of the dilaton couplings as in the string amplitude computations. One has in this case

$$m=5n=\frac{4}{3},q=\frac{8}{15}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }=8k,\mathrm{\Lambda }_b=6k^2$$
(88)
This may appear to contradict the second solution of (79) in the sense that $`k_+^2+k_{}^2=e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}/2\lambda ^{}\alpha `$ for $`k_+=k_{}`$. But, we stress that this need not be the case. As we mentioned above that the solution-space of the second solution of (79) is broad and it can cover the first solution as a particular point in that space, where the $`p`$-brane could be located. Further, with the choice of a solution as $`k_+=k_{}=e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2}/\sqrt{\lambda ^{}\alpha }`$, one gets $`m=10,n=4/3,q=32/15,\stackrel{~}{\sigma }=4k,\mathrm{\Lambda }_b=12k^2`$. Here the sign of the brane tension and the bulk cosmological constant get reversed, thereby implies some possible de Sitter region in the solution space. However, since the sign of the conformal weight $`m`$ is same that of $`n`$, these values are not acceptable from the view point of string amplitude computations.

Finally, for the solution $`k_+^2+k_{}^2=e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}/2\sqrt{\lambda ^{}\alpha }`$, but $`k_+k_{}`$, one has from eqn(81) that $`m+5n=0`$ and $`m(14\lambda ^{}\alpha e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}k_\pm ^2)=0`$. This implies that $`m=5n=0`$, which from eqn(83) further implies that $`q=0`$. For the trivial dilaton couplings these results somewhat contradict to those of ref., where there exists some dependence of $`k_\pm `$ on $`ϵ(y)(=\mathrm{\Lambda }_b)`$ for non-trivial $`\alpha `$ and $`\lambda ^{}`$. Similar conclusions have recently been made in  and the solutions for linear dilaton with the trivial case $`m=n=q=0`$ is also generalized. However, there are no solutions of the bulk equation (75) other than mentioned above but still holds the equality $`k_+^2+k_{}^2=e^{n\mathrm{\Phi }_0}/2\sqrt{\lambda ^{}\alpha }`$. Hence, we are in a dilema if the two solutions of (79) are linearly independent. The case of linear dilaton with $`m=n=q=0,V(\mathrm{\Phi })=0`$ and $`ϵ(y)=𝒱(\mathrm{\Phi })`$, dilaton super potential is studied in .

### 6.3 Linear Dilaton: Time Dependent Solution

Our starting point for this subsection is also the string-inspired low energy effective action in the higher derivative gravity model without torsion. However, unlike in the previous subsection, here we assume a simple dilaton-gravity coupling also with the curvature scalar ($`R`$). Indeed, this is the case one has after rescaling $`g_{AB}`$ in order to pass to the scheme in which the whole effective lagrangian is multiplied by $`e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ and the term $`c_2(\mathrm{\Phi })^4`$ is formally absent in the low energy effective action, a scheme often known as ‘$`\sigma `$-parametrization’. This is also necessary for the correspondence with Weyl invariance of the action. Confining ourselves to the $`5`$-dimensional spacetime,

$$S_M=d^5x\sqrt{g}e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }}\left\{R+\lambda ^{}\alpha \left(R^24R_{AB}R^{AB}+R_{ABCD}R^{ABCD}\right)4(\mathrm{\Phi })^2V(\mathrm{\Phi })\right\}$$
(89)
where $`V(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ is the dilatonic potential which we set zero. The inflationary solutions to the above action by considering a conformally flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker metric were realized in , where the extra dimensions were equally treated as large as the usual 3 spatial dimensions. But this is not the case we are considering. We assume the background metric in the following form

$$ds^2=d\tau ^2+e^{2U(\tau ,y)}\delta _{ij}dx^idx^j+e^{2W(\tau ,y)}(dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_{n1}^2)$$
(90)
where $`d\tau `$ is the conformal time interval, so that the usual $`3+1`$ dimensional metric can be expressed in the form $`e^{2U(t,y)}\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu `$, the indices $`i,j`$ denote the spatial indices $`1,2,3`$. We solve the field equations in $`D=5`$-dimensional space-time with a specific choice of the ansatz $`U^1(\tau ,y)=W(\tau ,y)`$. This choice may be realized for the inflationary solutions with the expanding external space and contracting internal spatial dimensions, which should also be true in brane set up where as the brane inflates the extra bulk coordinates get contracted. However, this may not be the case with stable non-compact extra dimensions. We concentrate only on the case with $`n=1`$. Assuming the usual 3-dimensional space as homogeneous and isotropic, the 5-dimensional effective action reduces to the form:

$$S_M=𝑑\tau e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }}e^{2U}\left\{2H^2+\dot{H}+\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^26\lambda ^{}\alpha \left(2\dot{H}H^2+H^4\right)\right\}$$
(91)
where dot denotes the differentiation $`/\tau `$ and we have defined $`\dot{U}(\tau )=H(\tau )`$, the Hubble parameter. The corresponding field equations for the scale factor and dilaton field are

$$\ddot{\mathrm{\Phi }}\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2+2H^2+\dot{H}+2H\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}6\lambda ^{}\alpha (2\dot{H}H^2+H^4)=0$$
(92)
$$\ddot{\mathrm{\Phi }}3\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2+6\lambda ^{}\alpha \left\{H^4+2H^2\dot{H}4\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}H^34H\dot{H}\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}2H^2(\ddot{\mathrm{\Phi }}2\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2)\right\}=0$$
(93)
Indeed, one can modify the action (89) by adding a boundary term so that it does not contain the second derivative of $`H`$. However, here we solve the above two equations for a linear dilaton field with the constant Hubble parameter, i.e. $`\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}=\upsilon =constant`$, $`H=H_0=constant`$. and obtain the following exact real solution:
(i) the trivial solution corresponds to $`H_0=0,\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}=0`$, and (ii) the non-trivial real solution implies

$$H_0^2=\frac{1}{8\lambda ^{}\alpha },\frac{1}{2\lambda ^{}\alpha }$$
(94)
$$\upsilon =\left\{1\pm \sqrt{3(12\lambda ^{}\alpha H_0^2)}\right\}H_0$$
(95)
There could be a pair of imaginary solutions both to $`H_0`$ and $`\upsilon `$, but we discard them. The above solutions could be physically more meaningful as compared to the solutions found in , in the sense that one needs either of the coupling constants $`\lambda ^{}`$ or $`\gamma _3`$ (see the ref.) to be negative. If one judges the action from string low energy effective action and the required relations among Gauss-Bonnet couplings $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma `$, a somewhat unphysical relation persists, otherwise in their solution the Hubble parameter becomes imaginary but this is not the case in our solution. Further, the metric ansatz chosen in  is conformally flat FRW type and is somewhat unphysical to explain the inflationary solutions, in the sense that the extra spatial dimensions equally inflate during the inflationary epoch. But in our parametrization, the extra spatial dimensions get contracted when the usual 3-brane world volume expands.

## 7 Discussions and Outlook

The background metric with the Ricci constant curvature would imply a constraint equation in the theory of higher derivative gravity which defines the bulk space-time geometry as $`AdS(dS)`$. We have studied various solutions of the higher derivative gravity in the brane background by considering the string inspired effective actions in the Gauss-Bonnet combination. The defect solutions in higher dimensions known to the Einstein equations are generalized by including the contribution of higher-curvature terms into the field equations and the general metric solutions that correspond to planar defects are obtained. The string inspired higher derivative gravity theory in the dilatonic Gauss-Bonnet combination is shown to be consistent to both the RS type non-factorizable geometry and the conformal weights of dilatonic couplings in the string amplitude computations with the proper choice of free parameters of the theory. Discussed is also time dependent dilaton solutions in a version of string inspired higher derivative gravity model coupled to dilaton.

There are few interesting topics which deserve future investigations. One of these is to extend the sections 5 and 6 to explain the different brane-world black-hole (BH) solutions without and with dilaton. One such solution as Schwarzschild $`AdS_5`$ black-hole in the background of constant Ricci curvature space-time is realized in ref. . It is also important to further explore dilatonic Gauss-Bonnet BH solutions with more general metric ansatz in the curved and flat brane background. It is also interesting to investigate the cosmological implications of the higher derivative gravity theory of the type considered in Section 6.1-6.2.

## Acknowledgements

The author is greatful to Prof. Y. M. Cho for the constant encouragement and he would also like to thank S.-H. Moon for the discussions. The author is greatful to I. Antoniadis, C. Nu$`\stackrel{~}{n}`$ez, and S. Odintsov for the useful comments and important remarks in the previous version of the manuscript. This work is supported in part by the BK21 project of the Ministry of Education, Korea.


text:
# An elastic model for the In–In correlations in InxGa1-xAs semiconductor alloys

## I Introduction

In recent years, order versus disorder in substitutional semiconductor alloys has motivated several theoretical  and experimental  studies. Special emphasis is given to the understanding of the physical mechanisms behind observed deviations from random distributions in the atomic positions. The distribution of different species over the atomic sites in such compounds is largely responsible for variations in electronic properties such as the band gap, the density of states at the Fermi energy and electron confinement levels. Moreover, the atomic correlations in these systems are responsible for processes such as interface segregation and clustering, which are fundamental in defining the atomic scale structure and roughness of heterostructure interfaces.

In particular, InxGa1-xAs semiconductor alloys with $`x20\%`$ have been the subject of experimental studies indicating deviations from randomicity in their atomic configurations . Zheng et al.  identified a strong correlation between In atoms in $`x=20\%`$ samples. Clusters of 2 – 3 In atoms were reported to form preferentially along the  growth direction, in second-nearest-neighbor (2nn) positions. Chao et al.  investigated $`x=5\%`$ samples and, in apparent contradiction with Zheng’s results, no strong correlations were found in for 2nn pairs along the growth direction, whereas important anti-correlation for first-nearest-neighbor (1nn) pairs along  was reported . The absence of clustering of In atoms in $`x=12\%`$ quantum wires was also noted by Pfister et al.  . Chao and Zheng emphasize that the mechanism behind the clustering/anticlustering effects in these alloys is the strain induced by In atoms, due to the $`7\%`$ mismatch between the GaAs and InAs lattice parameters. Both studies  were based on InxGa1-xAs alloys grown using molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) on GaAs (001) substrates at temperatures $`800K`$. The alloy samples were kept below the critical thickness on GaAs substrate. Cross-sectional images for cleaved $`(110)`$  and $`(1\overline{1}0`$  surfaces, obtained from scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) were used to determine the In distribution in the alloy. We follow here the orientation convention of Pashley et al. .

The only apparent reason for the discrepancy concerning the second-neighbor clustering tendency in these experiments is the In concentration range: Cluster formation was reported in $`x=20\%`$ samples , while no second-neighbor correlation was identified in samples with smaller values of $`x`$ . We investigate this possibility presenting a theoretical study for In-In pair correlations within a Keating model potential  to describe the elastic interactions in the alloy. The Monte Carlo Metropolis algorithm is used to determine the thermodynamic equilibrium configuration at finite temperatures. Phase-diagram calculations predict that InGaAs alloys are completely miscible at the growth temperature , but no detailed theoretical analysis of pair correlation functions has been found in the literature. Therefore, one of the goals of the present work is to determine if the resulting In-In correlations are a consequence of bulk thermodynamics or if growth kinetics is important. Our simulations are then performed within two models, according to the boundary conditions: A bulk model (fully periodic) and an epitaxial growth model (periodic only in the $`x`$ and $`y`$ directions).

## II Formalism

Following Ref. , we define the pair correlation function, $`C\left(𝐫_{12}\right)`$ as

$$C\left(𝐫_{12}\right)=\frac{P\left(𝐫_{12}\right)}{R\left(𝐫_{12}\right)},$$
(1)
where $`P(𝐫_{12})=P(𝐫_1,𝐫_2)`$ is the probability of finding two In atoms at $`𝐫_1`$ and $`𝐫_2`$, which, for homogeneous alloys, is only a function of the relative position $`𝐫_{12}=𝐫_1𝐫_2`$, and $`R(𝐫_{12})`$ is the equivalent quantity calculated for a random alloy with the same composition. If $`C\left(𝐫_{12}\right)>1,`$ we have correlation between the atoms that form the pair, and if $`C\left(𝐫_{12}\right)<1,`$ we have anticorrelation. Correlation indicates an effective attraction between the atoms, and anticorrelation implies a net repulsion.

The Keating potential provides a good description for elastic energies in III-V semiconductor alloys . It is given by

$$U=\underset{ij}{}\frac{3}{8d_{ij}^2}\alpha _{ij}\left[𝐫_{ij}^2d_{ij}^2\right]^2+\underset{\mathrm{}ijk}{}\frac{3}{8d_{ij}d_{jk}}\beta _{ijk}\left[𝐫_{ij}𝐫_{jk}+\frac{d_{ij}d_{jk}}{3}\right]^2,$$
(2)
where $`d_{ij}`$ is the equilibrium bond length between atoms $`i`$ and $`j`$ in the corresponding zincblend binary compound, $`𝐫_{ij}`$ is the relative position vector between nearest neighbors in different sublattices and $`\alpha _{ij}`$ and $`\beta _{ijk}`$ are the bond-stretching and bond-bending constants, respectively. The elastic energy thus results from two contributions: The first summation (performed over nearest-neighbor pairs) refers to the excess energy due to the bond-length variations and the second term (three-center term) gives the contribution due to the deviations of bond angles from their ideal tetrahedral values. Values for $`d_{ij},`$ $`\alpha _{ij}`$ and $`\beta _{ijk}`$ were taken from Ref. . In particular, the difference between $`d_{\mathrm{GaAs}}=2.448`$Å and $`d_{\mathrm{InAs}}=2.622`$ Å leads to the structural mismatch in the system. For heterogeneous bond angles, $`\beta _{ijk}`$ was taken as the geometric mean of the bond-bending constants for the binary compounds:

$$\beta _{ijk}=\sqrt{\beta _{iji}\beta _{kjk}}.$$
(3)
Calculations are carried out in supercells with $`N_xN_yN_z`$ conventional cubic unit cells of the fcc lattice along the $`x`$, $`y`$ and $`z`$ directions, respectively, resulting in a system with $`N=8N_xN_yN_z`$ atoms. InxGa1-xAs semiconductor alloys are modeled by supercells in which $`xN/2`$ sites of the group-III sublattice are occupied by In atoms and the remaining sites by Ga, while the $`N/2`$ group-V sublattice sites are occupied by As atoms. For a given configuration, the energy is minimized by relaxing all the atomic positions in the supercell. Initially, we set the atoms to be randomly distributed, and evolution to thermodynamic equilibrium at the growth temperature ($`T=800`$ K) is carried out through the Monte Carlo Metropolis algorithm, via first-neighbor In $``$ Ga positions exchanges. The calculations are performed at constant volume. In the bulk model (Section 3) we use the Vegard’s law  to give the approximated value for the lattice parameter and for the epitaxial growth model (Section 4) we keep the lattice parameter to the GaAs value, aiming to describe a strained growth process.

## III Bulk model

For the bulk model, after $`10^3`$ MC steps the system attains thermodynamic equilibrium and statistically independent ($`500`$ MC steps apart) alloy configurations are collected into an ensemble to calculate the pair correlation function. This procedure is repeated for 6 initial random alloy configurations, leading to analyzed ensembles of at least 100 configurations for each temperature and composition.

The third column of Table I shows our results for $`x=0.05`$ and $`x=0.20`$ in InxGa1-xAs. Notice an anticorrelation (repulsion) between 1nn pairs and a correlation (attraction) between 2nn pairs. These results are in qualitative agreement with experiments. However, quantitative agreement is poor: Chao’s  experiments indicate a much stronger anticorrelation for 1nn pairs than what is predicted by bulk thermodynamics. In addition, the observed experimental discrepancy regarding the 2nn correlation cannot be explained as a composition effect within the bulk model: There is no increase in the calculated correlation upon increasing In concentration from 5% to 20%.

Although not significantly larger than one, the 2nn correlation is clearly present. It is somewhat surprising that there can be such an effective attraction (for 2nn pairs) between In atoms based on elastic effects alone. Since In atoms are larger than Ga ones, one should expect that In impurities should compress the lattice locally and therefore repel each other. To see this in more detail, let’s consider the interaction of two isolated In impurities in GaAs. We define a pair interaction energy as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E=U2E_0,$$
(4)
where $`U`$ is the Keating energy for the supercell with two impurities and $`E_0`$ the elastic energy for a single impurity, calculated to be $`E_0=138`$ meV. The interaction energy is displayed in Table II. Notice a net attraction (negative energy) along the  direction and a net repulsion (positive energy) along , consistent with the MC results. The interaction energy is therefore highly anisotropic, as can also be visualized in Figure 1. These results can in fact be explained by the intricate geometry of the zincblende structure, as we can see by considering the mean Ga-As bond length deviations induced at nearby site by a single In impurity

$$\mathrm{\Delta }L_i=\frac{1}{4}\underset{j=1}{\overset{4}{}}|𝐫_{ij}|d_{\mathrm{GaAs}},$$
(5)
where $`i`$ is a Ga site and the sum in $`j`$ is performed over the As sites nearest neighbors to $`i`$. Negative (positive) $`\mathrm{\Delta }L`$ at a given site means that the lattice is locally compressed (expanded) at that site by the nearby In impurity, and therefore suggests that putting a second In impurity at that site will be energetically unfavorable (favorable). One can see from Table II that even a larger impurity such as In in GaAs can produce a local expansion of the zincblende structure along certain directions (for instance, the  direction). An exact opposition between the signs of $`\mathrm{\Delta }L`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ can also be readily seen ion the Table, thus supporting the argument given above. The highly anisotropic nature of the pair interactions is in agreement with first-principle calculations for these energies . Interaction energies are determined there from a series expansion in terms of multiatom contributions, fitted to a set of ordered structures. Their results are in qualitative agreement with the present Keating model calculations, giving the most repulsive interactions between first and fourth neighbors \[(110) and (220)\], while the less repulsive ones correspond to second and third neighbors \[(002) and (211) respectively\]. Quantitatively, our results in Table II are lower than those in Ref. by several meV and, in particular, no attractive pair interactions result from the first-principle fits.

## IV The epitaxial growth model

Aiming at a more realistic model describing the experiments, we propose a simple description of epitaxial growth: (i) No periodic boundary conditions are imposed in the $`z`$ (growth) direction; (ii) The first two (bottom) monolayers, with $`N_x=N_y=8`$, represent the GaAs substrate, and the atomic species are fixed as in bulk GaAs. Atomic positions are fixed according to GaAs only in the $`z=0`$ plane; (iii) Growth in the $`z`$ direction proceeds by adding a single alloy monolayer at a time, until $`N_z=8`$: The In $``$ Ga exchanges in the MC algorithm are restricted to the most recently grown monolayer (free surface) and the next monolayer is introduced only after thermal equilibrium has been attained. Atomic correlations between successive monolayers are thus induced by the In distribution in the inner layers. This is a reasonable assumption since, at typical MBE growth rates, the time scales for atomic processes at the free surface are much shorter than those in the previously grown planes. In addition, as can be seen in Table III, there is an elastic-induced attraction between In impurities and the surface. Allowing bulk-surface In exchanges would produce In segregation at the growing surface, an effect that is known to occur but which we do not intend to describe here. In this present model, we do not treat dangling bonds, i.e., the surface is described simply as a truncated semi-infinite solid.

In the fourth column of Table I, we present the pair correlation function for 5% and 20% In concentrations in InxGa1-xAs. There are now two inequivalent in-plane 1nn pairs directions, $`[110]`$ and $`[1\overline{1}0]`$. For the epitaxial growth model, the configurational averages were performed over 20 different configurations for each concentration and temperature. The statistical ensemble in the epitaxial growth model is considerably smaller than for the bulk model, since each growth process here contributes with a single configuration to the ensemble. Moreover, the bottom monolayers are fixed in composition to be of GaAs, which decreases the total number of In pairs in each generated configuration. This leads correspondingly to larger statistical error bars.

We note that for $`x=5\%`$, $`C\left(𝐫_{12}\right)`$ along $`[110]`$ is significantly reduced with respect to the bulk model behavior (see Table I), while pairs along $`[1\overline{1}0]`$ become essentially uncorrelated. This is an interesting feature of the epitaxial growth model: The free surface induces important anisotropy between the $`[110]`$ and $`[1\overline{1}0]`$ directions, and the correlation function in the bulk is approximately the average between those calculated for the two inequivalent directions in the epitaxial growth model. The experimental results of Ref. give $`C(𝐫_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟐}})=0.25`$ along $`[110]`$ for $`x=5\%`$ and $`T=800`$ K. Our corresponding values for the bulk and epitaxial models, $`C(𝐫_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟐}})=0.83`$ and 0.56 respectively, indicate that epitaxial growth is a decisive ingredient in the observed experimental behavior. Although the agreement is still not quantitative, our results confirm that the observed 1nn anti-correlation has an elastic origin. For 2nn pairs with $`x=20\%`$, we do not observe significant increase of the correlation function above the random value. However, the correlation enhancement in going from 5% to 20% seems to be present in the epitaxial growth model, although error bars are too large to allow a more precise statement. Therefore, only elastic effects and a simple epitaxial growth do not provide a clear and quantitative explanation for the clusters formation reported in Ref., even though we detect a tendency for In-In attraction in the growth direction in many of the cases studied. Perhaps a more sophisticated growth model, including aspects such as surface reconstruction and step-mediated growth, is necessary to better evaluate such results.

Acknowledgments This work was partially supported by CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ and FUJB (Brazil).


text:
# Study of Hadronic Decays of the Z Boson at LEP

## 1 Introduction

Each of the four LEP experiments has recorded around 4 million hadronic Z decays, mostly in the period between 1990 and 1995. The analysis of the main physics topics on this subject has been essentially completed, but a few specific points are still under investigation, especially in the QCD sector.

This report summarizes four recent papers on the characteristics of the hadronic decays of the Z, submitted to this conference by the LEP collaborations OPAL, ALEPH and DELPHI.

## 2 Charged multiplicities in Z decays into u, d, and s quarks

Flavour independence is a fundamental property of QCD: a breaking of the flavour symmetry should only occur due to (calculable) mass effects. An observable for testing flavour independence is the multiplicity of charged hadrons in jets originating from quarks of a specific flavour. For the light ($`u`$, $`d`$, and $`s`$) quarks the mass effects are expected to be negligible at LEP energies.

OPAL presents a new, high statistics investigation of the flavour dependence of the strong interaction based on the mean charged multiplicity determined separately for events of primary $`u`$, $`d`$, $`s`$ quarks in hadronic Z decays.

In order to identify the flavour of the primary quark, the leading particle effect is exploited. This effect is based on the correlation between the flavour of the primary quark and the type of the hadron carrying the largest momentum. Three different selections are based on K$`{}_{S}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{0}`$, K± and highly energetic charged particles. Leading K$`{}_{S}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{0}`$ and K± are likely to contain a primary $`s`$ quark from the Z decay. To a lesser extent, due to the requirement of $`s\overline{s}`$ quark pair creation during hadronization, leading K$`{}_{S}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{0}`$ and K± should also emerge from primary $`d`$ and $`u`$ quarks, respectively. In a sample with large momentum (non identified) charged particles, events of primary $`u`$, $`d`$ and $`s`$ quarks are expected to be found in approximately equal proportions.

By requiring a K$`{}_{S}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{0}`$ with momentum fraction $`x_p=p/p_{beam}`$ larger than 0.4, 19,359 events are selected with 58% Z$`s\overline{s}`$ and 16% Z$`d\overline{d}`$. By requiring a K± with $`x_p>0.5`$, 18,979 events are selected with 54% Z$`s\overline{s}`$ and 22% Z$`u\overline{u}`$. By requiring a charged particle with $`x_p>0.7`$, 27,909 events are selected almost equally populated in $`u\overline{u}`$, $`d\overline{d}`$ and $`s\overline{s}`$, but with only 4% heavy quarks.

The presence of a large momentum particle biases the multiplicity. To reduce this bias, the multiplicity measurement was performed in the hemisphere opposite to the one containing the particle used for the tagging. The final corrected multiplicities are

$`<n>_{u\overline{u}}`$ $`=`$ $`17.77\pm 0.52(stat)_{1.20}^{+0.86}(sys)`$
$`<n>_{d\overline{d}}`$ $`=`$ $`21.44\pm 0.69(stat)_{1.17}^{+1.46}(sys)`$
$`<n>_{d\overline{s}}`$ $`=`$ $`20.02\pm 0.14(stat)_{0.37}^{+0.39}(sys),`$
where the $`u\overline{u}`$ and $`d\overline{d}`$ multiplicities are statistically anti correlated (about -89%). The systematic error is dominated by uncertainties on the fragmentation. The multiplicities are consistent in $`1.8\sigma `$ for the $`ud`$ case, in $`1.5\sigma `$ for $`us`$, and in $`0.9\sigma `$ for $`ds`$. The world average of the charge multiplicity (for all flavours) is $`21.07\pm 0.11`$.

The multiplicities were transformed into $`\alpha _S`$ ratios using a NLLA calculation. Ratios of $`\alpha _S`$ for the light quark flavours were found consistent with 1 at a precision of 5 to 9%, superior to earlier investigations.

## 3 Results on identified hadrons

The description of the hadronization process in QCD is connected with confinement and requires nonperturbative methods which are not available. Measurements of identified hadron spectra in $`e^+e^{}`$ improve the understanding of hadronization, and allow tuning the free parameters in the QCD inspired Monte Carlo models. Being closer to the main event, vectors and higher order resonances are of particular interest.

More insights into the hadronization process may be obtained from the analysis of quark and gluon jets separately.

### 3.1 Production of $`\omega (782)`$

ALEPH presents a measurement of the inclusive momentum distributions of the $`\omega (782)`$ meson. The $`\omega `$ cross section is extracted using the invariant mass distribution of $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$ triplets.

The average $`\omega `$ rate per event is

$$<\omega >=0.996\pm 0.032(stat)\pm 0.056(sys),$$

below the predictions of JETSET 7.4 (1.31) and HERWIG 6.1 (1.17) over the full momentum spectrum. This measurement improves substantially the world average of $`1.08\pm 0.09`$.

The muonic branching fraction of the $`\omega (782)`$ is measured for the first time: $`BR(\omega \mu ^+\mu ^{})=(9.8\pm 2.9\pm 1.1)\times 10^5`$.

### 3.2 Production of $`\pi ^0`$, $`\eta `$, $`\eta ^{}(958)`$, K$`{}_{S}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{0}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in 2- and 3- jet events

For isoscalar mesons ($`\eta `$, $`\eta ^{}(958)`$, $`\omega (782)`$, $`\varphi (1020`$)), some theoretical models predict a special enhancement in gluon jets compared to quark jets. L3 found that the measured momentum spectrum in gluon jets is harder than in HERWIG and JETSET.

In a new analysis, ALEPH measures the production rates of $`\pi ^0`$, $`\eta `$, $`\eta ^{}(958)`$, K$`{}_{S}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{0}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in hadronic events, two- jet events and each jet of three- jet events.

Jets are clustered using Durham with $`y_{cut}`$ = 0.01; this classifies 31% of the events as 3 -jet. The lowest energy jet originates from a gluon with 71% probability.

The $`\pi ^0`$ and $`\eta `$ mesons are analyzed using the $`\gamma \gamma `$ decay channel, and the $`\eta ^{}`$ using $`\eta ^{}\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$. K$`{}_{S}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{0}`$ are reconstructed from their decay into $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$s into $`p\pi ^{}`$.

The spectra for $`\pi ^0`$ are reasonably reproduced by JETSET and HERWIG. $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}(958)`$ are well reproduced by JETSET for quark jets and gluon jets. Therefore, the JETSET description of gluon fragmentation into isoscalar mesons is in agreement with the experiment. HERWIG shows a too steep dependence on $`x_p`$ for $`\eta `$ spectra in two- jet events and each jet of three- jet events.

The spectra for K$`{}_{S}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{0}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are well reproduced by JETSET and ARIADNE, while HERWIG fails.

## 4 Rapidity -rank structure of $`p\overline{p}`$

The baryon sector is not well modeled by current QCD–inspired Monte Carlos; only the string fragmentation model JETSET can reproduce the octet and decuplet rates.

In JETSET hadrons results from breaks in the string stretched between the primary quarks. Baryons are formed when diquark -antidiquark pairs are created, and couple to an adjacent (anti)quark. A mechanism to attenuate the strict rapidity ordering coming from this mechanism is the so-called popcorn: a meson “pops up” inside a diquark–antidiquark pair.

To study the relative occurrence of popcorn, DELPHI proposes a novel method based on the rapidity–rank structure of $`p\overline{p}`$ pairs, where rapidity is defined with respect to the thrust axis.

Proton identification is provided by Cherenkov angle measurement from the RICH and ionization energy loss in the TPC. The number of events with one $`p`$ and one $`\overline{p}`$ in each hemisphere is 27.6 thousand. The background to this event sample can be determined from the number of events that have two $`p`$’s or two $`\overline{p}`$’s in a given hemisphere. These events, 10.1 thousand, result mainly from misidentifications, but also from non correlated baryon pairs, and they are subtracted from the signal.

The charged particles in each event are ordered in rapidity. Two types of rapidity -rank configurations for $`p\overline{p}`$ pairs are considered: (a) when the $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ are adjacent in rapidity; (b) when the $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ have one or more mesons between them. The ratio $`R=N(pM\overline{p})/(N(p\overline{p})+N(pM\overline{p})`$ is calculated, where $`N(p\overline{p})`$ and $`N(pM\overline{p})`$ represent the number of rapidity- rank configurations of each type in the data sample, and are implicitly a function of the minimum distance $`\mathrm{\Delta }y_{min}`$ between a baryon in the pair and a meson. The probability that a given rapidity configuration will represent the actual rank order on the string is enhanced as $`\mathrm{\Delta }y_{min}`$ is made larger.

The ratio $`R(\mathrm{\Delta }y_{min})`$ for data is plotted in Figure 1, and compared to the predictions in the cases of no popcorn and 100% popcorn.

The data are consistent with no contribution from $`pM\overline{p}`$ configurations. An upper limit contribution of 15% is determined at 90% confidence level.

Previous studies of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ rapidity difference have claimed evidence for popcorn. This might indicate the importance of dynamical effects not incorporated in JETSET or simply the inadequacy of the popcorn model, although no firm conclusion can be drawn yet.