format: text

text:
# Extraction of cluster parameters with future Sunyaev-Zel’dovich observations

## 1 Introduction

The interaction of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) photons with the free electrons in the ionized gas of clusters of galaxies produces a small change in the intensity known as the Sunyaev-Zel’dovich (SZ) effect. This distortion arises from the transfer of photons from the low-energy to the high-energy or Wien side of the planckian spectrum. The underlying physics of the SZ effect is well understood and a quantitative description was given by Sunyaev & Zel’dovich , who already realized its cosmological significance. Nowadays there exists reliable observations of the SZ effect (see e.g. ) and dedicated experiments are being prepared, which will provide information about the kinematics and evolution of clusters, which in turn can be used to extract cosmological parameters (see e.g.  for recent reviews).

The intensity change of the CMBR caused by the SZ effect is proportional to the Comptonization parameter,

$$y_c=𝑑l\frac{T_e}{m_e}n_e\sigma _{\mathrm{Th}},$$
(1)
where $`T_e`$ is the temperature of the electron gas in the cluster, $`m_e`$ the electron mass, $`n_e`$ the electron number density, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{Th}}`$ the Thomson scattering cross section, and the integral is calculated along the line of sight through the cluster. We use units for which $`k_B=\mathrm{}=c=1`$. For an isothermal intra-cluster gas one has $`y_c=\tau T_e/m_e`$, where $`\tau =𝑑ln_e\sigma _{\mathrm{Th}}`$ is the optical depth. The distortion of the CMBR is then given by an intensity change

$$\mathrm{\Delta }I_\mathrm{T}=I_0y_c\left(f_0(x)+\delta f(x,T_e)\right),$$
(2)
where

$$f_0(x)=\frac{x^4e^x}{(e^x1)^2}\left[\frac{x(e^x+1)}{e^x1}4\right].$$
(3)
Here $`x=\nu /T_0`$ is the dimensionless frequency with $`T_0=2.725`$ K, and $`I_0=T_0^3/(2\pi ^2)`$. The intensity change is independent of the temperature for non-relativistic electrons, a limit which is valid for small frequencies ($`\nu \stackrel{<}{}100`$ GHz), but for high frequencies it must be corrected  with $`\delta f(x,T_e)`$ either by using an expansion in $`\theta _e=T_e/m_e`$  or calculated exactly . In some rich clusters the optical depth is large enough ($`\tau 0.020.03`$) to require the inclusion of multiple scattering effects .

When the cluster has a relative motion with respect to the CMBR rest frame, there exists an additional distortion known as the kinetic SZ effect , which is identical to a change in the temperature of the CMBR. The corresponding intensity change, for a peculiar velocity $`v_p`$, is $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_\mathrm{K}=I_0y_cf_{\mathrm{kin}}`$, where

$$f_{\mathrm{kin}}=v_p\frac{m_e}{T_e}\frac{x^4e^x}{(e^x1)^2}.$$
(4)
This expression is slightly modified by the corrections caused by the electron temperature .

The total intensity change is just the sum of the thermal and kinetic SZ effects,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{total}}=\mathrm{\Delta }I_\mathrm{T}+\mathrm{\Delta }I_\mathrm{K},$$
(5)
and it is characterized by three parameters: $`y_c,T_e`$ and $`v_p`$. The different contributions to the SZ distortion are presented in figure 1, where the total intensity change in (5) is compared to the thermal effect with vanishing temperature (the first term in (2)). The kinetic SZ effect and the contribution of the relativistic corrections (the second term in (2)) are presented for the parameter choice $`T_e=15`$ keV and $`v_p=500\mathrm{km}/\mathrm{s}`$.

Let us emphasise that all 3 SZ parameters can in principle be extracted from multi-frequency observations of the SZ effect. This is because the frequency dependence of the SZ effect is different for the different parameters. This is clear from figure 1, where one can see that the main effect (the non-relativistic SZ effect characterized by the comptonization parameter, $`y_c`$) has one crossing with the zero-line. The kinetic effect (governed by $`v_p`$) has no crossings of the zero-line, and the relativistic effect (governed by $`T_e`$) crosses the zero-line twice. Thus with several observing frequencies placed optimally and with good sensitivity, one can extract all 3 SZ parameters as we describe in detail in section 6.

In this paper we discuss the possibilities for future SZ observations to extract these 3 cluster parameters, taking into account the parameter degeneracies described in section 2. To this end we try to extract the 3 SZ parameters from a set of simulated galaxy clusters with realistic temperatures and peculiar velocities, using the sensitivities of upcoming experiments like ACT and Planck. In section 6, we discuss the optimal observing frequencies from a theoretical point of view. Finally, we analyze in section 7 the systematic error introduced by a finite frequency bandwidth, which may be as large as few $`\mu `$K and hence important for the next generation of SZ observations.

## 2 Parameter degeneracies

When one estimates the expected error-bars of a given experiment, it is always important to consider the effect of parameter degeneracies. This is naturally also true when considering the SZ effect. Let us clarify that by degeneracies we mean that two sets of parameters give an indistinguishable intensity change due to the limited sensitivity of the observations. In other words, the extracted values of $`y_c,v_p`$ and $`T_e`$ from the same experiment will have larger error bars for some of the clusters than for others.

The degeneracy between the 3 SZ parameters depends on the chosen value of the parameters, e.g. if the peculiar velocity is large and positive, then it is virtually impossible to adjust the temperature and comptonization parameter to mimic the effect on the intensity change of the peculiar velocity. On the other hand, for large and negative peculiar velocities, such imitation is possible.

In figure 2 the solid and dotted lines are virtually indistinguishable. They are with $`T=5`$ keV, $`v_p=145`$ km/sec and $`T=7`$ keV, $`v_p=260`$ km/sec respectively, the comptonization parameter is normalized to make the intensity change agree at 150 GHz. For comparison we see, that the dashed line, $`T=6`$ keV, $`v_p=0`$ km/sec, also normalized to agree at 150 GHz, can more easily be distinguished. As a specific example, let us consider a hypothetical experiment, with 4 frequencies at 90, 181, 220 and 330 GHz, with 1 $`\mu `$K sensitivity. With 3 test clusters all with the same temperature, $`T=6`$ keV and comptonization parameter, $`y_c=2\times 10^4`$, but with different peculiar velocities, $`v_p=200,0,+200`$ km/sec. The resulting $`2\sigma `$ error-contours are given figure 3, and it is clear from the figure, that whereas the temperature error-bars are virtually independent of the real value of $`v_p`$ (always about $`\pm 1`$ keV), then the error-bar of $`v_p`$ is strongly dependent, and may differ from $`10`$ km/sec for $`v_p=+200`$ km/sec to $`70`$ km/sec for $`v_p=200`$ km/sec, i.e. by a factor of 7. Hence it is important to consider a range of cluster parameters when one wants to make predictions about future experiments.

In this paper we therefore use realistic simulations of clusters of galaxies (described below), and the error-bars will not be for a specific cluster, but instead presented for a large samples of clusters.

## 3 Simulated clusters

In order to produce a large sample of clusters with realistic temperatures, comptonization parameters and peculiar velocities, one must basically use an extended Press–Schechter formalism. Let us here discuss the details of the used simulation which closely follows .

The physical parameters (temperature, core and virial radii, central electron density, …) used to describe the clusters are computed according to their mass and redshift. In the following, we use the most favoured cosmological model with critical density described by the following cosmological parameters: the reduced Hubble constant $`h=0.70`$, cold dark matter density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{cdm}=0.12h^2`$, baryonic density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b=0.02h^2`$, total matter density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=\mathrm{\Omega }_{cdm}+\mathrm{\Omega }_b`$, and a cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=1\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.714`$.

The cluster core radius $`R_c`$ is related to the virial radius $`R_v`$ through the parameter $`p=R_{vir}/R_c`$, where we use $`p=10`$ . The virial radius is given by the following equation

$$R_{vir}=\frac{(GM)^{1/3}}{(3\pi H(z))^{2/3}},$$
(6)
where $`G`$ is the gravitational constant and $`H(z)`$ the Hubble constant. For a critical universe, $`R_v`$ is fixed solely by the mass and the collapse redshift of the cluster,

$$R_{vir}=\frac{(GM)^{1/3}}{(3\pi H_0)^{2/3}}\frac{1}{1+z},$$
(7)
with $`H_0=100\times h`$ the value of the Hubble constant today. The electron density profile for the clusters is well described by the so-called phenomenological $`\beta `$ profile as follows

$$n_e(R)=n_{e0}\left[1+\left(\frac{R}{R_c}\right)^2\right]^{3\beta /2},$$
(8)
where $`n_0`$ is the central electron density and $`\beta `$ is a parameter describing the steepness of the profile. The X-ray brightness profiles of galaxy clusters mostly agree with $`\beta =2/3`$, which is the value we use. Finally knowing the virial radius, we can derive the central electron density $`n_0`$ from the gas mass of the cluster $`M_G`$ using the following relation

$$M_G\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_b}{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}\right)=m_p\mu _0^{R_v}n_e(R)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}\pi R^2𝑑R.$$
(9)
In this relation, $`m_p`$ is the proton mass and $`\mu =0.6`$ is the mean molecular weight of a plasma with primordial abundances. In our model, we use a gas fraction of $`0.166(h/0.7)^1`$ (where the gas fraction equals the baryon fraction, and is slightly higher than some observed values ). We compute the temperature of the intra-cluster medium as a function of the mass, the redshift and the cosmological model

$$T=\frac{GM^{2/3}\mu m_p}{2\beta }\left[\frac{H^2(z)\mathrm{\Delta }_c}{2G}\right]^{1/3},$$
(10)
and thus

$$T=1.39f_TM_{15}^{2/3}(h^2\mathrm{\Delta }_cE^2(z))^{1/3},$$
(11)
where $`T`$ is given in keV and $`M_{15}`$ is the mass of the structure in units of $`10^{15}`$ solar masses. $`f_T=0.78`$ is a normalization factor, we take it as a unique value from Bryan & Norman  although it varies very slightly with the cosmological model. $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ is the average over-density ($`\mathrm{\Delta }_c=18\pi ^2`$ for a critical universe) and $`E^2(z)`$ is a function such as $`H^2(z)=H_0^2E^2(z)`$ which depends on the cosmology.

The number density of clusters are derived from a modified Press–Schechter mass function according to Sheth & Tormen  and Wu . The numbers are normalized to Viana & Liddle  and we use $`\sigma _8=\sigma _8^0\mathrm{\Omega }_m^{0.47}`$ with $`\sigma _8^0=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.6}`$.

On the scale of clusters of galaxies we assume that the density fluctuations are in the linear regime. In fact, under the assumption of an isotropic Gaussian distribution of the initial density perturbations, the initial power spectrum $`P(k)`$ gives a complete description of the velocity field through the three–dimensional rms velocity ($`v_{rms}`$) predicted by the linear gravitational instability for an irrotational field at a given scale $`R`$ . This velocity is given by

$$v_{rms}=a(t)Hf(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Lambda })\left[\frac{1}{2\pi ^2}_0^{\mathrm{}}P(k)W^2(kR)𝑑k\right]^{1/2}$$
(12)
where $`a(t)`$ is the expansion parameter, the Hubble constant $`H`$ and the density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ vary with time . The function $`f(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ is accurately approximated by $`f(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Lambda })=\mathrm{\Omega }^{0.6}`$ . Furthermore, under the assumptions of linear regime and Gaussian distribution of the density fluctuations, the structures move with respect to the global Hubble flow with peculiar velocities following a Gaussian distribution $`f(v)=\frac{1}{v_{rms}\sqrt{2\pi }}\mathrm{exp}(\frac{v^2}{2v_{rms}^2})`$ which is fully described by $`v_{rms}`$. This prediction is in agreement with numerical simulations. The velocity of each cluster (at mass $`M`$ associated with the scale $`R`$) is then randomly drawn from the Gaussian distribution.

Thus we have produced a large sample of realistic galaxy clusters each with their true comptonization parameter, temperature and peculiar velocity, and we will in the next sections consider this sample as being what can be observed in future all-sky observations.

## 4 General method

In this section, we present the method used to answer the following question: How well can a multi-frequency experiment measure the physical cluster parameters (namely $`T_e`$, $`v_p`$ and $`y`$)? For a given simulated cluster, we have the true value of the parameters, $`T_e^𝐭,v_p^𝐭`$ and $`y_c^𝐭`$. With these values we can calculate what the true SZ signal should be at each frequency, and then the sensitivity of the experiment gives us an estimate of the expected observational error-bars at each frequency. Now given this observed SZ signal (with its error-bars), we can try to deduce the 3 parameters $`T_e^𝐝,v_p^𝐝`$ and $`y_c^𝐝`$, and corresponding error-bars, and we can then compare with the true values, $`T_e^𝐭,v_p^𝐭`$ and $`y_c^𝐭`$.

To deduce the parameters we have developed a method which in 3 steps finds the central value and 1$`\sigma `$ error-bars of each parameter. The code is an extension of the method developed in Hansen et al. . First, we find the approximate $`5\sigma `$ region in $`y_c`$ (in the range $`10^{6.5}<y_c<10^{1.5}`$). Next, we define a grid for all 3 parameters (using the above mentioned $`y_c`$-range, and $`0<T<20`$ keV and $`2000<v_p<+2000`$ km/sec), and we find an approximate 3$`\sigma `$ range for all parameters. Finally, the code makes a new refined grid in the ranges derived from the previous step (3$`\sigma `$ range), and calculates the central values and 1$`\sigma `$ error-bars for $`T_e`$, $`v_p`$ and $`y_c`$. The deduced central parameters will be unrealistically close to the true values, since we assume that the true intensity variation due to SZ effect is the central observational intensity variation. However, the estimated error-bars will nevertheless be realistic.

In the approach described above, we have assumed that no external information is known about the observed value. In that case, all three parameters are derived from the SZ observations. We can relax this assumption by allowing the temperature $`T_e`$ to be known at $`\pm 10\%`$ accuracy, e.g. from X-rays observations. The temperature is in that case in the limited range of $`\pm 10\%`$ around the real temperature. This would be true for a limited sample of clusters, however, the X-ray observations are time consuming, so one might not want to rely on them for large cluster surveys. By doing this, we estimate the importance of priors on the temperature on the determination of the deduced parameters.

## 5 Application to CMBR and SZ experiments

### 5.1 The ACT experiment

Let us consider the Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT), a proposed future SZ experiment . This experiment will observe at 3 frequencies (150, 220 and 270 GHz), with $`0.91.7^{}`$ resolution, and an expected sensitivity of 2 $`\mu `$K per pixel . The ACT team expects conservatively to observe $`10^3`$ galaxy clusters through the SZ effect.

In order to test the capabilities of ACT to the determination of the cluster parameters, we analyze a subsample with the 500 hottest clusters of our simulation (which with the chosen cosmological parameters lie in the range $`3.6<T_e<7.4`$ keV). For each simulated cluster we have both the true values, and the ones deduced with our method. It turns out, that ACT will basically not be able to extract the temperature (within the reasonable range $`0<T_e<20`$ keV), partly because of the range of temperatures of our cluster subsample. One should keep in mind, that e.g. during cluster mergers the temperatures will rise significantly, in which case the relativistic corrections become more prominent, and a temperature detection would be easier. Thus we have always left $`T_e`$ as a free parameter, which must be marginalized over. We therefore focus on the two other parameters $`y_c`$ and $`v_p`$, for which we have performed two runs, one where the temperature is known within $`10\%`$, and one with no prior knowledge of the temperature.

We find that the comptonization parameter can be deduced with 1$`\sigma `$ error-bars of $`10\%`$ when the temperature is unknown, whereas the results are about $`2\%`$ with prior temperature information. These accuracies are obtained for a cluster with $`y_c10^4`$. For a Compton parameter about ten times smaller the accuracy is still very good $`15\%`$ without prior and $`6\%`$ if the temperature is known to $`10\%`$. We also notice that the error-bars are not symmetric for the unknown temperature case, being larger for positive $`\delta y_c/y_c^𝐭`$, which is because a larger $`y_c`$ can be compensated by a simultaneous larger temperature and larger negative peculiar velocity.

The results for the peculiar velocity show a strong effect of the degeneracies discussed in section 2, namely positive peculiar velocities will be extracted with much smaller error-bars than negative peculiar velocities. In the case with known temperature (always within $`10\%`$) this degeneracy is almost completely broken, the error-bars are almost symmetric, and of the order $`1020\%`$ for most peculiar velocities.

### 5.2 An experiment with 4 frequencies

As we saw above, a SZ experiment measuring at 3 frequencies like ACT produce large error-bars when trying to extract all 3 SZ parameters simultaneously. One way around this problem is to have prior knowledge of the temperature, which thus effectively reduces the number of parameters to two. This improves the accuracy with which the parameters are determined.

Another way around this problem is to increase the number of frequencies of observation. As an example, we show in figures 4 and 5 the $`1\sigma `$ error-bars resulting from 3 different runs. Two of these have no prior information about the SZ parameters. The first (open squares) is the same as discussed above, namely 3 frequencies centred on 150, 220 and 270 GHz and sensitivity 2 $`\mu `$K. The second run (stars) is an extension of ACT, with one extra observing frequency added at 90 GHz. As can be seen on the figures, the error-bars for both $`y_c`$ and $`v_p`$ become smaller and more symmetric, an indication of breaking of the degeneracy. Unfortunately, the level of accuracy reached in this way is far from what was achieved using the prior on the temperature. This is because contrary to the previous case, one then has to solve for the values of all three parameters. One should keep in mind that it may not be realistic to expect X-ray measured temperatures for that many clusters, and that additional observing frequencies thus might be an interesting alternative. For comparison, we have also calculated the 1$`\sigma `$ error-bars when the electron temperature is restricted to the range $`T_e<5`$ keV (which is true for most clusters in our subsample), presented in figures 4 and 5 with triangles. Making such model-dependent assumption (temperatures restricted to the range $`T_e<5`$ keV) is essentially the same as having prior temperature knowledge.

An alternative to add a new frequency band to the ACT experiment could be to measure the SZ effect of the same clusters with a different experiment. An example is the Atacama Large Millimetre Array (ALMA) project, which has a frequency centred on 35 GHz with precision up to a few $`\mu `$K . Such low frequencies are very good in restricting the dominating comptonization parameter. The main feature of ALMA will be a very good angular resolution up to scales of a few to tens of arc-seconds, which will lead to high resolution SZ images.

### 5.3 Planck mission

The Planck satellite  will be observing the millimetre and sub-millimetre wavelengths in nine frequencies. It is thus natural to investigate how well the three SZ parameters can be extracted with the Planck sensitivity. Such analysis was first made by Pointecouteau et al. , with the simplifying assumption of vanishing peculiar velocity. As discussed above, due to the parameter degeneracy such simplification should not be made. In the present study, we rather take explicitly into account the kinetic SZ effect in order to deduce all three cluster parameters. It is worth making the remark that the component separation algorithms for Planck are so efficient that even though the exact shape of the SZ effect is unknown (due to relativistic corrections) the SZ contamination will not be a problem for the CMBR analysis .

We assume that the central Planck frequencies (44, 70, 100, 143, 217 and 353 GHz) are observing with sensitivities (2.4, 3.6, 1.7, 2.0, 4.3 and 14.4 $`\mu `$K). We do not include the lowest and highest frequencies (30, 545, and 857 GHz) which are dominated by other astrophysical sources (point sources, dust), and will thus be used to remove the contaminants. Assuming that the 6 central frequencies have a clean SZ signal is naturally too ambitious, and our results will therefore provide an upper bound on the abilities of Planck. Also Planck will for most clusters not provide any temperature determination, although we note again that this is partly because of the low temperatures of our subsample. The $`1\sigma `$ error-bars on the deduced Compton parameter and peculiar velocities are shown in figures 6 and 7.

The comptonization parameter will be determined to about 2% and 10-15% for $`y_c=2\times 10^4`$ and $`y_c=2\times 10^5`$ respectively. A 10% temperature knowledge will only improve these numbers slightly. The peculiar velocity will only be determined within a factor of a few, however, a 10% temperature knowledge will improve this to about 20-50%.

### 5.4 Extracting the cluster temperatures

Our previous results tell us that extracting the electron temperatures from the data of the studied SZ experiments is problematic due to the limited sensitivities. We have calculated the error-bars on $`T_e`$ for a specific cluster ($`T_e=5`$ keV, $`v_p=200`$ km/sec and $`y=2\times 10^4`$) as a function of the sensitivity. The result is shown in figure 8. The solid line is for an ACT-like experiment with 3 observing frequencies placed at 150, 220 and 270 GHz. As one sees, to reach $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_e`$ of the order 1 keV one must have a sensitivity of about 0.5 $`\mu `$K. However, by introducing one additional channel the errors can be significantly reduced. In particular with an extra measurement at 90 GHz, one can reach $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_e`$ of 1 keV (4 keV) already with $`1\mu `$K ($`4\mu `$K) sensitivity. We thus emphasize that future SZ observations with several observing frequencies should be able to extract the electron temperature directly without the need for independent X-ray information.

Good temperature sensitivities are expected for the next generation of SZ experiments. For instance the South Pole Telescope (SPT) is a new and ambitious project , that will use the SZ effect to search for and count 10,000 clusters of galaxies and cover 4000 squared degrees per year. This telescope will consist of a single 8 meter primary dish, accompanied by an array of 1,000 bolometers, and will measure temperature differences with an accuracy of $`0.1\mu `$K. With several observing frequencies and such impressive sensitivity one will be able to deduce the electron temperature purely from SZ observations.

We remark that SZ can probe the outermost regions of clusters better than X-ray observations, simply because the SZ effect decreases like $`n_e`$, whereas X-ray brightness decreases as $`n_e^2`$. Thus with direct SZ temperature observations and good angular resolution one can find the density profile of the outer cluster region, which directly allows one to infer the outer dark matter density profile . This dark matter profile has not been measured yet at such very large radii, but is predicted from N-body simulations to be $`\rho r^3`$.

## 6 Optimal frequency choice for a SZ experiment

The question of an optimal choice of observing frequencies for the SZ effect has been posed a long time ago and is motivated by the fact that one wants to measure both the thermal and kinetic SZ effects. The measurement of both effects has great importance for cosmology since it allows to probe the clusters physics (through thermal SZ) and the matter distribution at large scales (through kinetic SZ, see for instance Doré et al. ). In order to attain this goal, one needs to have observations at several frequencies in the positive and negative part of the intensity change. In particular, one should have an observation near 218 GHz, where the thermal effect vanishes (figure 1, solid line). At this frequency one can theoretically measure the kinetic effect directly (figure 9, dashed line) which happens to be maximal at this frequency. In a recent paper  it was pointed out, that 217 GHz may not be an optimal frequency when one observes with only 3 frequencies. We will discuss observations with more than 3 frequencies for which such arguments may not apply.

A future, optimal and dedicated SZ experiment could possibly have many observing frequencies. Let us here discuss, from a theoretical point of view, which frequencies would be preferable. Basically we want to extract all 3 SZ parameters, and the actual frequency choice depends upon which parameters we want to extract most precisely, and whether we have prior information such as a temperature determination from X-rays. In order to address the question of optimal frequency choice, we start by re-computing the frequency dependence of both thermal and kinetic SZ effects in view of the most recent developments in the subject. Namely, we compute the thermal effect in its exact form, i.e. including the corrections for the relativistic effects according to Dolgov et al. . The 3 dash-dotted lines in figure 9 are the relativistic contributions to the thermal effect, for cluster temperatures $`T_e=5`$, 10 and 15 keV. That is, for a given temperature one can calculate $`\mathrm{\Delta }I(T_e)`$, and the 3 dot-dashed curves are thus $`\mathrm{\Delta }I(T_e)\mathrm{\Delta }I(T_e=0)`$, normalized to $`I_0y_c`$. As is clear from the figure, this quantity is approximately zero around 181 GHz and again near 475 GHz. This feature is almost independent of the temperature in the first case, but not for the frequency region around 475 GHz.

We have also included in figure 9 the kinetic SZ effect (long-dashed line) for a peculiar velocity of 200 km/sec, while the short-dashed line is the small relativistic correction to it , enlarged 10 times. That is, for a given temperature and peculiar velocity one can calculate $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{kin}}(v_p,T_e)`$, and the short-dashed curve is thus, $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{kin}}(v_p,T_e)\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{kin}}(v_p,T_e=0)`$. The particular case shown was calculated for $`T_e=10`$ keV. Thus, if one wants to differentiate between variations in the background CMBR signal and the kinetic SZ signal, then one should use these corrections, and place observing frequencies at the zero and extrema of the short-dashed curve. The relativistic correction to the kinetic effect is proportional to $`v_pT_e`$, and for a 10 keV cluster with very large peculiar velocity 1000 km/sec, this effect is about a factor 10 smaller than the relativistic correction to the thermal effect. We have seen that the temperature roughly can be detected through the relativistic correction to the thermal effect with an observing sensitivity about 1 $`\mu `$K, so one should have at least 0.1 $`\mu `$K sensitivity (the expected sensitivity of SPT) in order to distinguish between variations in the background CMBR signal and the kinetic SZ effect.

First of all, to extract the dominating comptonization parameter $`y_c`$, one should pick a frequency where the relativistic corrections to the thermal and the kinetic SZ effects give small contributions. Clearly, which is well known, the smaller frequencies are good in this respect (see e.g.  for a recent discussion). Thus if one wants to remain in the atmospheric window, then a frequency of 90 GHz is good (a smaller frequency is even better if the point sources can be acceptably removed). It turns out, however, that an equally good frequency is near 475 GHz (figure 9). At this frequency, the contributions from both the kinetic SZ effect and the relativistic corrections are very small, while at the same time the thermal SZ effect is still quite significant. Observations at such large frequencies would require a careful removal of dust contamination, which can be achieved by fitting the observations at several even higher frequencies to a dust model. The resulting fit can be extended down to lower frequencies in order to extract the dust from the signal .

Let us now concentrate on the cluster temperature. One can in theory extract the temperature using the relativistic corrections to the thermal effect. To do so one should choose frequencies where the relativistic contribution (dot-dashed lines in figure 9) is maximal and zero . The maxima are near 120 and 330 GHz, and as discussed above the zero points are at 181 GHz and near 475 GHz. On the other hand, in order to extract the peculiar velocity one has to measure the kinetic SZ effect (dashed line, figure 9) which reaches its maximum near 217 GHz. The relativistic corrections to the kinetic SZ effect (long dashed line, figure 9) are maximal near 200 and 510 GHz, and disappear near 310 GHz.

As a specific example of the parameter extraction, let us consider an experiment with 4 frequencies and sensitivity of $`1\mu `$K. Let us try to extract the temperature as well as possible. Due to the importance of the comptonization parameter we choose 30 GHz (assuming that point sources can be removed). For the temperature itself we choose the maximum and zero of the dot-dashed lines, namely 181 and 330 GHz. To remove the effect of peculiar velocity we include as the last frequency 220 GHz. The results are presented in figure 10. One finds that for a cluster of 5 keV and comptonization parameter of $`3\times 10^5`$, that with only 4 frequencies, one can extract all 3 parameters simultaneously with $`1\sigma `$ error-bars (open squares) of about 2 keV, $`10^6`$ for $`y_c`$, and $`v_p`$ about $`50\%`$. For larger cluster temperatures the temperature will be extracted with better precision, since the relativistic corrections to the thermal SZ effect are more important. With prior knowledge about the temperature of $`10\%`$ (stars), then the precision on $`y_c`$ is improved by almost a factor of 2, and the precision on $`v_p`$ with almost a factor of 5. It is therefore clear again, that prior temperature knowledge is very important and should be included if one considers small cluster samples. It is even crucial when one wants to deal with the proper motion of the galaxy clusters and the large scale motions.

## 7 Bandwidth and precision of measurements

We have so far been discussing how well a given experiment with few $`\mu `$K sensitivity can extract the cluster parameters, however, for this discussion to be relevant we must make sure that $`\mu `$K sensitivity is achievable. As we will see below, systematic errors as large as $`\mu `$K can appear simply through the finite bandwidths, and such systematic errors cannot easily be removed even in principle.

The distortion of the CMBR caused by the SZ effect can be formally defined through an effective change of temperature for each frequency

$$\mathrm{\Delta }T(x)=T_0\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }I(x)}{I_0}\frac{(e^x1)^2}{x^4e^x},$$
(13)
which is only a formal representation of the SZ distortion, since strictly speaking temperature is not a well defined quantity when the photons are not in equilibrium. The above expression is derived from the relation $`\mathrm{\Delta }I(x)=I_0x^3(ff_0)`$ assuming that $`x\mathrm{\Delta }T(x)/T_01`$, and can have corrections of the order $`x\mathrm{\Delta }T(x)/T_0`$, which can be important for precise measurements. However, we will consider eq. (13) as an exact definition of the effective temperature difference in order to avoid confusions.

The SZ effect in terms of temperature difference from eq. (13) is shown in figure 11 for cluster parameters $`y_c=2\times 10^4`$, $`T=5`$ keV and $`v_p=200`$ km/sec. The typical values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }T100500\mu `$K are more than two orders of magnitude larger than the desired precision of future experiments, which are of the order $`0.15\mu `$K. In this section, we investigate the effects of a finite frequency bandwidth, which can be comparable to, or even larger than, the expected error-bars of future SZ experiments.

Let us start with the SZ effect in the non-relativistic approximation, and emphasize the well known fact that one must use the exact shape of the SZ effect when reducing the observations in a given bandwidth to just one frequency. Usually the experiments detect all photons which fall inside of a bandpass with finite width $`\pm \delta \nu `$ around a central frequency $`\nu _{\mathrm{mid}}`$ and extrema $`\nu _{\mathrm{max}}`$ and $`\nu _{\mathrm{min}}`$. However, because the energy of photons in the atmospheric window is unknown, the resulting flux should be rescaled to the central frequency. In the non-relativistic case this is simple, because the functional shape of the SZ effect is known,

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{exp}}(\nu _{\mathrm{mid}})}{I_0}=y_c\left(f_0(\nu _{\mathrm{mid}})+ϵ_0(\delta \nu )\right),$$
(14)
where $`f_0`$ is given by (3) and $`ϵ_0(\delta \nu )`$ is the shift due to a non-zero bandwidth

$$ϵ_0(\delta \nu )=\frac{1}{\nu _{\mathrm{max}}\nu _{\mathrm{min}}}_{\nu _{\mathrm{min}}}^{\nu _{\mathrm{max}}}𝑑\nu \left(f_0(\nu )f_0(\nu _{\mathrm{mid}})\right).$$
(15)
There are two possible sources of error in (15). First, the central frequency might not be at the exact centre of the band, $`\nu _{\mathrm{mid}}(\nu _{\mathrm{min}}+\nu _{\mathrm{max}})/2`$. It was recently shown that bandpass errors at the 10% level are acceptably small for Planck . Second, the band can be wide enough that the shape of the SZ effect becomes important. We show in figure 12 what the error would be if one does not take the shape of $`f(x)`$ into account. The curves correspond to $`\delta \nu =10,20,30`$ and $`40`$ GHz. Fortunately, such error can be taken into account exactly from equations 3, 14 and 15.

Now, let us consider the case including relativistic corrections, where the exact shape is a priori unknown,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{exp}}(\nu _{\mathrm{mid}})}{I_0}}`$ $`=`$ $`y_c(f_0(\nu _{\mathrm{mid}})+ϵ_0(\delta \nu )`$ (16)
$`+\delta f(\nu _{\mathrm{mid}},T_e)+ϵ_1(\delta \nu )),`$
where $`\delta f(\nu ,T_e)`$ are temperature corrections and

$$ϵ_1(\delta \nu )=\frac{1}{\nu _{\mathrm{max}}\nu _{\mathrm{min}}}_{\nu _{\mathrm{min}}}^{\nu _{\mathrm{max}}}𝑑\nu \left(\delta f(\nu ,T_e)\delta f(\nu _{\mathrm{mid}},T_e)\right)$$
(17)
is the bandwidth error from the relativistic corrections to the thermal SZ effect. This error is shown for bandwidths $`\delta \nu =10,20,30`$ and $`40`$ GHz in figure 13. From this figure we conclude that, if the experimental precision is better than $`5\mu `$K and the frequency bands are large enough, one should take into account the correction from (17). This error will increase for larger temperatures and may also have important contribution from non-zero peculiar velocities, which will shift the shape and zero-point of figure 13 slightly. The main problem of taking into account the error $`ϵ_1(\delta \nu )`$ in (17) is that the electron temperature is a priori unknown. Thus, by using the non relativistic form in eq. (3), to reduce the observations in a given bandwidth to one single frequency, one will always have a systematic error as large as shown in figure 13. The simplest way to avoid such error is to reduce the bandwidth, but this would lead to a reduction in the signal to noise and would increase the statistical error-bars. A possible procedure to significantly reduce this systematic errors could be the following. First, reduce to one frequency, taking into account only $`ϵ_0`$ from (15) (that is, assume the non-relativistic form). Afterwards, one finds the best fit point in the parameter space ($`y_c`$,$`v_p`$,$`T_e`$). Finally, one can recalculate everything, taking into account $`ϵ_1(\delta \nu )`$ for the reduction to one frequency (that is, using the real form of the SZ effect including temperature corrections and peculiar velocity), and subsequently find the new best fit point values for the SZ parameters.

## 8 Conclusions

We have pointed out that there are parameter degeneracies for the Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect. This in particular implies that the error-bars on the peculiar velocities for clusters with positive peculiar velocities is significantly smaller than for cluster with negative peculiar velocities. This parameter degeneracy can be broken either by having prior temperature knowledge, or by observing at several frequencies. For an experiment with $`2\mu `$K sensitivity and 3 observing frequencies (ACT-like), we find that a Compton parameter of the order of $`10^4`$ is often deduced with a good accuracy 2% (10%) with (without) prior information on the electron temperature. The prior information on the electron temperature is even more important for the extraction of the peculiar velocity for which the accuracy reaches 10–20%. Additional observing frequencies also break the parameter degeneracies but the accuracies are not better than with the prior temperature knowledge. In the particular case of Planck, the Compton parameter of $`10^4`$ is extracted very accurately (2%) even without information on the temperature. Prior temperature knowledge is, however, necessary to go from a peculiar velocity determination of a factor of a few to 20–50%.

We have discussed the needed sensitivity in order to extract the cluster temperature using SZ observations only. We have seen that experiments with only 3 observing frequencies need very good sensitivity ($`0.5\mu `$K) in order to determine the cluster temperature with 1 keV error-bars. Already with 4 frequencies one can reach 1 keV (4 keV) temperature error-bars with only $`1\mu `$K ($`4\mu `$K) sensitivity.

We have identified the frequencies which are optimal for deducing the 3 cluster parameters from a theoretical point of view. This optimal choice of 4 observing frequencies and sensitivity of 1 $`\mu `$K allows one to deduce the parameters of a 5 keV, $`y_c=3\times 10^5`$ cluster with $`1\sigma `$ error bars of about 2 keV and $`10^6`$. The velocity is extracted with a 50% accuracy. The optimal frequencies for an actual experiment will depend both on the sensitivity of the experiment and also on which cluster parameters are of primary interest.

We have studied the systematic error which appears due to the finite band-width. This error is related to the shape of the SZ effect. The exact shape of the SZ effect depends on the cluster temperature and peculiar velocity, which cannot be known a priori. This systematic error can be of the order of a few $`\mu `$K, and must therefore be considered seriously by future experiments which aim at such impressive sensitivity.

It is a pleasure to thank Lloyd Knox, Francesco Melchiorri, François Pajot and Rocco Piffaretti for useful discussions. The work of DS was partly supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft under grant No. SFB 375. SP was supported by the Spanish grant BFM2002-00345 and a Marie Curie fellowship under contract HPMFCT-2002-01831.

## References


text:
# XXZ Bethe states as highest weight vectors of the 𝑠𝑙₂ loop algebra at roots of unity

## I Introduction

The XXZ spin chain is one of the most important exactly solvable quantum systems . The Hamiltonian under the periodic boundary conditions is given by

$$H_{XXZ}=J\underset{j=1}{\overset{L}{}}\left(\sigma _j^X\sigma _{j+1}^X+\sigma _j^Y\sigma _{j+1}^Y+\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma _j^Z\sigma _{j+1}^Z\right).$$
(1)
Here the parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ expresses the anisotropic coupling between adjacent spins, and it is related to the $`q`$ parameter of the quantum group $`U_q(sl_2)`$ by the relation $`\mathrm{\Delta }=(q+q^1)/2`$.

Recently it was shown that when $`q`$ is a root of unity, the Hamiltonian commutes with the generators of the $`sl_2`$ loop algebra . The symmetry of the XXZ Hamiltonian is enhanced at the root of unity. The spectra of the XXZ spin chain have been studied numerically , and some generalizations of the $`sl_2`$ loop algebra symmetry have also been derived for some trigonometric vertex models . Furthermore, the spectral degeneracy associated with the $`sl_2`$ loop algebra has been shown for the eight-vertex model and some elliptic IRF models . However, it has been a conjecture that the Bethe ansatz eigenvectors are of highest weight with respect to the $`sl_2`$ loop algebra.

In this paper we show several rigorous results supporting the highest-weight conjecture. Based on the algebraic Bethe ansatz method, we show some part of the conjecture that a regular Bethe ansatz eigenvector of the XXZ spin chain should give a highest weight vector of the $`sl_2`$ loop algebra in the sense of the Drinfeld realization of the quantum loop algebra $`U_q(L(sl_2))`$. Here the regular Bethe ansatz eigenvector is defined by such an eigenvector that is constructed from the Bethe ansatz wave-function where all the rapidities are finite.

Let us consider the classical analogue of the Drinfeld realization of $`U_q(L(sl_2))`$ . The $`sl_2`$ loop algebra $`U(L(sl_2))`$ is generated by the classical analogues of the Drinfeld generators, $`\overline{x}_k^\pm `$ and $`\overline{h}_k`$ for $`k𝐙`$. In the sense of the Drinfeld realization, a representation of the loop algebra $`U(L(sl_2))`$ is highest weight if it is generated by a vector $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ which is annihilated by the generator $`\overline{x}_k`$ for any integer $`k`$ and such that $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is a common eigenvector of generators of the Cartan subalgebra, $`\overline{h}_k`$ ’s. For the case of any $`N`$, we show that a regular XXZ Bethe state $`|R`$ at the root of unity is annihilated by the generators $`\overline{x}_k^+`$’s: $`\overline{x}_k^+|R=0`$, for all $`k𝐙`$. For some particular case of $`N=2`$, we show that the regular XXZ Bethe state $`|R`$ is a common eigenvector of the generators $`\overline{h}_k`$’s of the Cartan subalgebra. Thus, the proof of the highest-weight conjecture is partially completed for the case of $`N=2`$. For the vacuum state, we introduce a method for calculating the eigenvalues of the Cartan generators $`\overline{h}_k`$’s. Some version of the highest-weight conjecture has been addressed in Ref.  from a different viewpoint. It is also addressed in Ref. .

We also discuss a method for calculating the classical analogue of the Drinfeld polynomial. Through some examples of the Drinfeld polynomial, we suggest a conjecture that the irreducible representation of $`U(L(sl_2))`$ generated by a regular XXZ Bethe state with $`R`$ down spins on $`L`$ sites should be given by $`2^{(L2R)/N}`$, when $`L`$ and $`R`$ are integral multiples of $`N`$. The result is consistent with the analytic computation of the degeneracy shown for the eight-vertex model and some elliptic SOS models associated with the eight-vertex model . In association with the $`sl_2`$ loop algebra, the Drinfeld polynomial is also addressed in Ref.  with a different method.

## II $`sl_2`$ loop algebra and the Drinfeld realization

### A Loop algebra symmetry of the XXZ spin chain

We review some results on the $`sl_2`$ loop algebra symmetry of the XXZ spin chain. We first introduce the quantum group $`U_q(sl_2)`$. The generators $`S^\pm `$ and $`S^Z`$ satisfy the following relations

$$[S^+,S^{}]=\frac{q^{2S^Z}q^{2S^Z}}{qq^1},[S^Z,S^\pm ]=\pm S^\pm $$
(2)
Here the parameter $`q`$ is generic. The comultiplication is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(S^\pm )=S^\pm q^{S^Z}+q^{S^Z}S^\pm ,\mathrm{\Delta }(S^Z)=S^ZI+IS^Z$$
(3)
We consider the $`L`$th tensor product of spin 1/2 representation $`V^L`$. The representations of the generators $`S^\pm `$ and $`S^Z`$ are given by

$`q^{S^Z}`$ $`=`$ $`q^{\sigma ^Z/2}\mathrm{}q^{\sigma ^Z/2}`$ (4)
$`S^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{L}{}}}q^{\sigma ^Z/2}\mathrm{}q^{\sigma ^Z/2}\sigma _j^\pm q^{\sigma ^Z/2}\mathrm{}q^{\sigma ^Z/2}`$ (5)
Considering the automorphism of the $`U_q(L(sl_2))`$, we may introduce the following operator

$$T^\pm =\underset{j=1}{\overset{L}{}}q^{\sigma ^Z/2}\mathrm{}q^{\sigma ^Z/2}\sigma _j^\pm q^{\sigma ^Z/2}\mathrm{}q^{\sigma ^Z/2}$$
(6)
Let us now define the operators $`S^{\pm (N)}`$ and $`T^{\pm (N)}`$ by

$$S^{\pm (N)}=\left(S^\pm \right)^N/[N]!,T^{\pm (N)}=\left(T^\pm \right)^N/[N]!$$
(7)
Here we have used the $`q`$-integer $`[n]=(q^nq^n)/(qq^1)`$ and the $`q`$-factorial $`[n]!=[n][n1]\mathrm{}[1]`$. We also note that $`q`$ is not a root of unity. Then, we can show the following expressions

$`S^{\pm (N)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{1j_1<\mathrm{}<j_NL}{}}q^{\frac{N}{2}\sigma ^Z}\mathrm{}q^{\frac{N}{2}\sigma ^Z}\sigma _{j_1}^\pm q^{\frac{(N2)}{2}\sigma ^Z}\mathrm{}q^{\frac{(N2)}{2}\sigma ^Z}`$ (9)
$`\sigma _{j_2}^\pm q^{\frac{(N4)}{2}\sigma ^Z}\mathrm{}\sigma _{j_N}^\pm q^{\frac{N}{2}\sigma ^Z}\mathrm{}q^{\frac{N}{2}\sigma ^Z}.`$
For $`T^{\pm (N)}`$ we have

$`T^{\pm (N)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{1j_1<\mathrm{}<j_NL}{}}q^{\frac{N}{2}\sigma ^Z}\mathrm{}q^{\frac{N}{2}\sigma ^Z}\sigma _{j_1}^\pm q^{\frac{(N2)}{2}\sigma ^Z}\mathrm{}q^{\frac{(N2)}{2}\sigma ^Z}`$ (11)
$`\sigma _{j_2}^\pm q^{\frac{(N4)}{2}\sigma ^Z}\mathrm{}\sigma _{j_N}^\pm q^{\frac{N}{2}\sigma ^Z}\mathrm{}q^{\frac{N}{2}\sigma ^Z}.`$
Here we recall that $`q`$ is generic.

Let the symbol $`\tau _{6V}(v)`$ denotes the (inhomogeneous) transfer matrix of the six-vertex model. We now take the parameter $`q`$ a root of unity. We consider the limit of sending $`q`$ to a root of unity: $`q^{2N}=1`$. Then we can show the (anti) commutation relations  in the sector of $`S^Z0(\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{N})`$

$$S^{\pm (N)}\tau _{6V}(v)=q^N\tau _{6V}(v)S^{\pm (N)},T^{\pm (N)}\tau _{6V}(v)=q^N\tau _{6V}(v)T^{\pm (N)}$$
(12)
Here we recall that $`S^Z`$ denotes the $`Z`$-component of the total spin operator.

Since the XXZ Hamiltonian $`H_{XXZ}`$ is given by the logarithmic derivative of the (homogeneous) transfer matrix $`T_{6V}(v)`$, we have in the sector $`S^Z0`$ (mod $`N`$)

$`[S^{\pm (N)},H_{XXZ}]=[T^{\pm (N)},H_{XXZ}]=0.`$ (13)
Thus, the operators $`S^{\pm (N)}`$ and $`T^{\pm (N)}`$ commute with the XXZ Hamiltonian in the sector $`S^Z0`$ (mod $`N`$) .

Let us now consider the algebra generated by the operators $`S^{\pm (N)}`$ and $`T^{\pm (N)}`$ . When $`q`$ is a primitive $`2N`$th root of unity, or a primitive $`N`$th root of unity with $`N`$ odd, we consider the identification in the following :

$$E_0^+=S^{+(N)},E_0^{}=S^{(N)},E_1^+=T^{(N)},E_1^{}=T^{+(N)},H_0=H_1=\frac{2}{N}S^Z.$$
(14)
It is shown in Ref.  that the operators $`E_j^\pm ,H_j`$ for $`j=0,1`$, satisfy the defining relations of the algebra $`U(L(sl_2))`$.

Noticing the automorphism

$$\theta (E_0^\pm )=E_1^\pm ,\theta (H_0)=H_1$$
(15)
we may take the identification in the following:

$$E_0^+=T^{(N)},E_0^{}=T^{+(N)},E_1^+=S^{+(N)},E_1^{}=S^{(N)},H_0=H_1=\frac{2}{N}S^Z.$$
(16)
### B Classical analogue of the Drinfeld realization

Let us review briefly the Drinfeld realization of the quantum loop algebra . The quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{sl}_2)`$ is isomorphic to the associative algebra over $`𝐂`$ with generators $`x_k^\pm `$ ($`k𝐙`$), $`h_k`$ ($`k𝐙\{0\}`$), $`K^{\pm 1}`$, central element $`C^{\pm 1}`$, and the following relations:

$`CC^1`$ $`=`$ $`C^1C=KK^1=K^1K=1`$ (17)
$`\text{[}h_k,h_{\mathrm{}}\text{]}`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{k,\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}[2k]{\displaystyle \frac{C^kC^k}{qq^1}}`$ (18)
$`Kh_k`$ $`=`$ $`h_kK,Kx_k^\pm K^1=q^{\pm 2}x_k^\pm `$ (19)
$`\text{[}h_k,x_{\mathrm{}}^\pm \text{]}`$ $`=`$ $`\pm {\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}[2k]C^{(k+|k|)/2}x_{k+\mathrm{}}^\pm `$ (20)
$`x_{k+1}^\pm x_k^\pm `$ $``$ $`q^{\pm 2}x_{\mathrm{}}^\pm x_{k+1}^\pm =q^{\pm 2}x_k^\pm x_{\mathrm{}+1}^\pm x_{\mathrm{}+1}^\pm x_k^\pm `$ (21)
$`\text{[}x_k^+,x_{\mathrm{}}^{}\text{]}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{qq^1}}\left(C^k\mathrm{}\psi _{k+\mathrm{}}\varphi _{k+\mathrm{}}\right)`$ (22)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\mathrm{@}\psi _ku^k`$ $`=`$ $`K\mathrm{exp}\left((qq^1){\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}h_ku^k\right)`$ (23)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\mathrm{@}\varphi _ku^k`$ $`=`$ $`K^1\mathrm{exp}\left((qq^1){\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}h_ku^k\right)`$ (24)
Let us consider the classical analogue of the Drinfeld realization . Putting $`q=\mathrm{exp}ϵ`$, we take the limit of $`ϵ`$ to zero: $`q=1+ϵ+\mathrm{}`$. Hereafter we assume the trivial center: $`C^{\pm 1}=1`$. We define the classical analogs of the Drinfeld generators as follows.

$`K`$ $`=`$ $`q^{\overline{h}_0}`$ (26)
$`h_k`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{h}_K+O(ϵ)(k𝐙\{0\})`$ (27)
$`x_k^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`\overline{x}_k^\pm +O(ϵ)(k𝐙)`$ (28)
From the last two relations of the set of defining relations of eqs. (LABEL:drinfeld), we have the following relations

$`\psi _k`$ $`=`$ $`2ϵ\overline{h}_k+O(ϵ^2)(k1)`$ (29)
$`\varphi _k`$ $`=`$ $`2ϵ\overline{h}_k+O(ϵ^2)(k1).`$ (30)
Then, from the classical limit of the quantum loop algebra, we have the following relations:

$`\text{[}\overline{h}_k,\overline{h}_{\mathrm{}}\text{]}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (31)
$`\text{[}\overline{h}_k,x_{\mathrm{}}^\pm \text{]}`$ $`=`$ $`\pm 2x_{k+\mathrm{}}^\pm `$ (32)
$`\overline{x}_{k+1}^\pm \overline{x}_{\mathrm{}}^\pm \overline{x}_{\mathrm{}}^\pm \overline{x}_{k+1}^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`\overline{x}_k^\pm \overline{x}_{\mathrm{}+1}^\pm \overline{x}_{\mathrm{}+1}^\pm \overline{x}_k^\pm `$ (33)
$`\text{[}\overline{x}_k^+,\overline{x}_{\mathrm{}}^{}\text{]}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{h}_{k+\mathrm{}}`$ (34)
Here $`k,\mathrm{}𝐙`$.

Let us consider the classical limit of the isomorphism of the Drinfeld realization of the quantum loop group to the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{sl}_2)`$. It is the isomorphism between the $`sl_2`$ loop algebra and the classical limit of the quantum affine algebra given by the following:

$`E_1^\pm \overline{x}_0^\pm `$ (35)
$`E_0^+\overline{x}_1^{}E_0^{}\overline{x}_1^+`$ (36)
$`H_0=H_1\overline{h}_0`$ (37)
Applying the isomorphism to the identification (16), we have the correspondence:

$`\overline{x}_0^+=T^{(N)},\overline{x}_0^{}=T^{+(N)},\overline{x}_1^+=S^{+(N)},\overline{x}_1^{}=S^{(N)},\overline{h}_0={\displaystyle \frac{2}{N}}S^Z`$ (38)
Let us now give the definition of a highest weight representation for the loop algebra $`U(L(sl_2))`$. They are given by the following:

A representation of the $`sl_2`$ loop algebra is highest weight if it is generated by a vector $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ which is annihilated by the generator $`\overline{x}_k^+`$ for all $`k𝐙`$ and such that $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is an eigenvector of the Cartan generator $`\overline{h}_k`$ for $`k𝐙`$.

Thus, a vector $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is highest weight if it is annihilated by $`\overline{x}_k^+`$ for all integer $`k`$, and it is an eigenvector of the generator $`\overline{h}_k`$ for all integer $`k`$.

## III Formulas of algebraic Bethe ansatz

### A $`R`$ matrix and $`L`$ operator

Let us summarize some formulas of the algebraic Bethe ansatz . We define the $`R`$ matrix of the XXZ spin chain by

$$R(zw)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}f(wz)& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& g(wz)& 1& 0\\ 0& 1& g(wz)& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& f(wz)\end{array}\right)$$
(39)
where $`f(zw)`$ and $`g(zw)`$ are given by

$$f(zw)=\frac{\mathrm{sinh}(zw2\eta )}{\mathrm{sinh}(zw)}g(zw)=\frac{\mathrm{sinh}(2\eta )}{\mathrm{sinh}(zw)}$$
(40)
Hereafter we shall write $`f(t_1t_2)`$ by $`f_{12}`$ for short.

We now introduce $`L`$ operators for the XXZ spin chain

$$L_n(z)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}L_n(z)_1^1& L_n(z)_2^1\\ L_n(z)_1^2& L_n(z)_2^2\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{sinh}\left(zI_n+\eta \sigma _n^z\right)& \mathrm{sinh}2\eta \sigma _n^{}\\ \mathrm{sinh}2\eta \sigma _n^+& \mathrm{sinh}\left(zI_n\eta \sigma _n^z\right)\end{array}\right)$$
(41)
Here $`I_n`$ and $`\sigma _n^a`$ ($`n=1,\mathrm{},L`$) are acting on the $`n`$ th vector space $`V_n`$. The $`L`$ operator is an operator-valued matrix which acts on the auxiliary vector space $`V_0`$. The symbols $`\sigma ^\pm `$ denote $`\sigma ^+=E_{12}`$ and $`\sigma ^{}=E_{21}`$, and $`\sigma ^x,\sigma ^y,\sigma ^z`$ are the Pauli matrices

In terms of the $`R`$ matrix and $`L`$ operators, the Yang-Baxter equation is expressed as

$$R(zt)\left(L_n(z)L_n(t)\right)=\left(L_n(t)L_n(z)\right)R(zt)$$
(42)
We define the monodromy matrix $`T`$ by the product: $`T(z)=L_L(z)\mathrm{}L_2(z)L_1(z)`$, and the transfer matrix $`\tau _{6V}(z)`$ by the trace: $`\tau _{6V}(z)=\mathrm{Tr}T(z)`$. The matrix elements of $`T(z)`$

$$T(z)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A(z)& B(z)\\ C(z)& D(z)\end{array}\right)$$
(43)
satisfy the commutation relations derived from the Yang-Baxter equations such as $`B_1B_2=B_2B_1`$ and

$$A_1B_2=f_{12}B_2A_1g_{12}B_1A_2,D_1B_2=f_{21}B_2D_1g_{21}B_1D_2$$
(44)
Here we recall $`B_1`$ denotes $`B(t_1)`$. Furthermore we can show

$`C_0B_1\mathrm{}B_n`$ $`=`$ $`B_1B_2\mathrm{}B_nC_0`$ (45)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}B_1\mathrm{}B_{j1}B_{j+1}\mathrm{}B_ng_{0j}\left\{A_0D_j{\displaystyle \underset{kj}{}}f_{0k}f_{kj}A_jD_0{\displaystyle \underset{kj}{}}f_{k0}f_{jk}\right\}`$ (46)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{1j<kn}{}}B_0B_1\mathrm{}B_{j1}B_{j+1}\mathrm{}B_{k1}B_{k+1}\mathrm{}B_n`$ (48)
$`\times g_{0j}g_{0k}\{A_jD_kf_{jk}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}j,k}{}}f_j\mathrm{}f_\mathrm{}k+A_kD_jf_{kj}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}j,k}{}}f_k\mathrm{}f_\mathrm{}j\}`$
Let us denote by $`|0`$ the vector where all the spins are up. Then we can show

$$A(z)|0=a(z)|0,D(z)|0=d(z)|0$$
(49)
where $`a(z)=\mathrm{sinh}^L(z+\eta )`$ and $`d(z)=\mathrm{sinh}^L(z\eta )`$ .

Making use of the commutation relations (44) one can show that the vector $`B_1B_2\mathrm{}B_R|0`$ is an eigenvector of the XXZ spin Hamiltonian if the rapidities $`t_1,t_2,\mathrm{},t_R`$ satisfy the Bethe ansatz equations

$$\frac{a_j}{d_j}=\underset{kj}{}\left(\frac{f_{kj}}{f_{jk}}\right)\mathrm{for}j=1,\mathrm{}R.$$
(50)
### B Formulas with infinite rapidities

Let us normalize the operators $`A(z)`$ ’s as follows

$`\widehat{A}(z)`$ $`=`$ $`A(z)/n(z)\widehat{B}(z)=B(z)/(g(z)n(z))`$ (51)
$`\widehat{D}(z)`$ $`=`$ $`D(z)/n(z)\widehat{C}(z)=B(z)/(g(z)n(z)).`$ (52)
Here the normalization factor $`n(z)`$ is given by $`n(z)=\mathrm{sinh}^Lz`$. Then, we can show the following:

$`\widehat{A}(\pm \mathrm{})`$ $`=`$ $`q^{\pm S^Z}\widehat{B}(\mathrm{})=T^{}\widehat{B}(\mathrm{})=S^{}`$ (53)
$`\widehat{D}(\pm \mathrm{})`$ $`=`$ $`q^{S^Z}\widehat{C}(\mathrm{})=S^+\widehat{C}(\mathrm{})=T^+`$ (54)
Here, we recall that $`S^\pm `$ and $`S^Z`$ are defined on the $`L`$th tensor product of spin 1/2 representations. Hereafter, we shall write $`\widehat{C}(\mathrm{})`$’s simply as $`\widehat{C}_{\mathrm{}}`$’s.

We now derive quite a useful formula. Sending $`z_0`$ to infinity in eq. (48), we have the following:

$`\widehat{C}_{\mathrm{}}B_1\mathrm{}B_M0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{M}{}}}B_1\mathrm{}B_{j1}B_{j+1}\mathrm{}B_M|0`$ (55)
$`\times `$ $`e^{t_j}\left(q^{(L/2)(M1)}d_j{\displaystyle \underset{kj}{}}f_{kj}q^{(L/2)+(M1)}a_j{\displaystyle \underset{kj}{}}f_{jk}\right)`$ (56)
where $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_M`$ are given arbitrary. Applying the formula (56) $`N`$ times, we have an important formula in the following:

$`\left(\widehat{C}_{\mathrm{}}\right)^NB_1\mathrm{}B_M|0`$ (57)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{S_N\mathrm{\Sigma }_M}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{P𝒮_N}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{j\mathrm{\Sigma }_MS_N}{}}B_j\right)|0\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{jS_N}{}}t_j)`$ (59)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left(q^{(L/2)(Mn)}d_{j_{Pn}}{\displaystyle \underset{kj_{P1},\mathrm{},j_{Pn}}{}}f_{kj_{Pn}}q^{(L/2)+(Mn)}a_{j_{Pn}}{\displaystyle \underset{kj_{P1},\mathrm{},j_{Pn}}{}}f_{j_{Pn}k}\right)`$
Here the set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_M`$ is given by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_M=\{1,2,\mathrm{},M\}`$ and $`S_N`$ denote the subset of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_M`$ with $`N`$ elements. The symbol $`𝒮_N`$ denotes the symmetry group of $`N`$ elements. The symbol $`P𝒮_N`$ means that $`P`$ is a permutation of $`N`$ letters. Here we recall that $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_M`$ are given arbitrary.

## IV Proof of the annihilation of regular XXZ Bethe vectors by the Drinfeld generators

### A The $`N`$th power of $`C`$ operators acting on regular Bethe states

Let us now discuss the proof for the annihilation property: when $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_R`$ are finite and they satisfy the Bethe ansatz equations (50), then we have

$$S^{+(N)}B_1\mathrm{}B_R|0=0$$
(60)
We may assume $`R>N`$, otherwise it is trivial. Making use of the Bethe ansatz equations (50) we have the following formula:

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left(q^{(L/2)(Rn)}d_{j_{Pn}}{\displaystyle \underset{kj_{P1},\mathrm{},j_{Pn}}{}}f_{kj_{Pn}}q^{(L/2)+(Rn)}a_{j_{Pn}}{\displaystyle \underset{kj_{P1},\mathrm{},j_{Pn}}{}}f_{j_{Pn}k}\right)`$ (61)
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{N}{}}}a_{j_P\mathrm{}}\right){\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{kS_N}{}}f_{j_{Pn}k}\right){\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left(q^{(L/2)(Rn)}{\displaystyle \underset{kj_{P1},\mathrm{},j_{Pn}}{}}f_{j_{Pn}j_P\mathrm{}}q^{(L/2)+(Rn)}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}f_{j_P\mathrm{}j_{Pn}}\right)`$ (62)
By induction on $`N`$, we can show the following formula:

$$\underset{P𝒮_N}{}\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}\left(x_n\underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{n1}{}}f_{j_{Pn}j_P\mathrm{}}y_n\underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{n1}{}}f_{j_P\mathrm{}j_{Pn}}\right)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}(x_ny_n)\times \underset{P𝒮_N}{}\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{n1}{}}f_{j_P\mathrm{}j_{Pn}}$$
(63)
Applying the formula (63) we obtain

$`\left(\widehat{C}_{\mathrm{}}\right)^NB_1\mathrm{}B_R|0`$ (64)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{S_N\mathrm{\Sigma }_R}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_RS_N}{}}B_{\mathrm{}}\right)|0\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{jS_N}{}}t_j)\left({\displaystyle \underset{jS_N}{}}a_j\right){\displaystyle \underset{jS_N}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{kS_N}{}}f_{jk}\right)`$ (66)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left(q^{(L/2)(Rn)}q^{(L/2)+Rn}\right){\displaystyle \underset{P𝒮_N}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}f_{j_P\mathrm{}j_{Pn}}`$
Noting the relation

$$\widehat{C}(\mathrm{})^N=(1)^N\left(S^+\right)^N,$$
(67)
we divide the both hand sides of (66) by the $`q`$ factorial $`[N]!`$, and we have for the case of generic $`q`$

$`S^{+(N)}B_1B_2\mathrm{}B_R|0`$ (68)
$`=`$ $`(1)^N{\displaystyle \underset{S_N\mathrm{\Sigma }_R}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{P𝒮_N}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_RS_N}{}}B_{\mathrm{}}\right)|0\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{jS_N}{}}t_j)\left({\displaystyle \underset{jS_N}{}}a_j\right){\displaystyle \underset{jS_N}{}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{kS_N}{}}f_{jk}\right)`$ (72)
$`\times \left[\begin{array}{c}\frac{L}{2}R+N\\ N\end{array}\right]_q(qq^1)^N\left({\displaystyle \underset{P𝒮_N}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}f_{j_P\mathrm{}j_{Pn}}\right)`$
Here, we have defined the q-binomial by

$$\left[\begin{array}{c}m\\ n\end{array}\right]_q=\frac{[m]!}{[mn]![n]!},\text{ for }mn.$$
(73)
### B The case of roots of unity

Let us now consider the case when $`q`$ is a root of unity. When $`q`$ is a $`2N`$th root of unity or an $`N`$th root of unity with $`N`$ odd, we can show the following equality

$$\underset{P𝒮_N}{}\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{n1}{}}f_{j_P\mathrm{}j_{Pn}}=0$$
(74)
Let us define a function $`F(z_1,\mathrm{},z_N)`$ by

$$F(z_1,\mathrm{},z_N)=\underset{P𝒮_N}{}\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{n1}{}}f_{P\mathrm{},Pn}$$
(75)
Then we can show that there is no pole for $`F(z_1,\mathrm{},z_N)`$ with respect to any variable $`z_j`$, and also that $`F(z_1,\mathrm{},z_N)`$ vanishes when one of the variables is sent to infinity: $`z_j=\mathrm{}`$ for some $`j`$. Therefore we have the equality (74). It follows from (72) and (74) that the action of the operator $`S^{+(N)}`$ on the regular Bethe ansatz state $`B_1\mathrm{}B_R|0`$ is given by zero.

By a similar method with $`S^{+(N)}`$, we can show that the operator $`T^{+(N)}`$ makes the regular Bethe ansatz eigenstate vanishes. Thus, we have obtained

$$S^{+(N)}B_1\mathrm{}B_M|0=0,T^{+(N)}B_1\mathrm{}B_M|0=0.$$
(76)
## V Eigenvalues of the Cartan generators on regular Bethe states

We discuss a method by which we can calculate the eigenvalue of the generator $`\overline{h}_k`$ on a regular Bethe state. For an illustration, we consider the case of $`N=2`$.

Let us calculate the eigenvalue of the operator $`S^{+(2)}T^{(2)}`$ on a regular Bethe state with $`R`$ down-spins: $`|R=B_1\mathrm{}B_R|0`$. Here we recall that $`R`$ denotes the number of regular rapidities. We set $`M=R+2`$. We assume that $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_R`$ satisfy the Bethe ansatz equations, while $`z_{R+1}`$ and $`z_{R+2}`$ are sent to infinity, later. We now consider the formula (LABEL:formula) for the case of $`N=2`$ in the following:

$`\left(\widehat{C}_{\mathrm{}}\right)^2B_1B_2\mathrm{}B_M|0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{S_2\mathrm{\Sigma }_M}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{P𝒮_2}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_MS_2}{}}B_{\mathrm{}}|0\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{jS_2}{}})`$ (77)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\left(a_{j_{Pn}}q^{L/2}{\displaystyle \underset{kj_{P1},\mathrm{},j_{Pn}}{}}(qf_{j_{Pn}k})d_{j_{Pn}}q^{L/2}{\displaystyle \underset{kj_{P1},\mathrm{},j_{Pn}}{}}(q^1f_{kj_{Pn}})\right)`$ (78)
Here we recall $`T^{}=\widehat{B}(\mathrm{})`$ and $`S^+=\widehat{C}(\mathrm{})`$. In eq. (78) we have four cases for the set $`S_2`$: $`S_2=\{R+1,R+2\}`$, $`\{j,R+2\}`$, $`\{j,R+1\}`$ and $`\{j_1,j_2\}`$. Here, $`j,j_1,j_2\{1,2,\mathrm{},R\}`$. For an illustration, we highlight the term with $`S_2=\{R+1,R+2\}`$ in the following:

$`\left(\widehat{C}_{\mathrm{}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_M}{}}B_{\mathrm{}}|0`$ (79)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{R}{}}}B_{\mathrm{}}|0e^{z_{R+1}+z_{R+2}}{\displaystyle \underset{P𝒮_2}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\left(a_{j_{Pn}}q^{L/2}{\displaystyle \underset{kj_{P1},\mathrm{},j_{Pn}}{}}(qf_{j_{Pn}k})d_{j_{Pn}}q^{L/2}{\displaystyle \underset{kj_{P1},\mathrm{},j_{Pn}}{}}(q^1f_{kj_{Pn}})\right)`$ (80)
$`+`$ $`\mathrm{}.`$ (81)
After sending $`z_{R+1}`$ to infinity, we take the limit of sending $`z_{R+2}`$ to infinity. Then, we have the following:

$`\underset{z_{R+2}\mathrm{}}{lim}\left(\underset{z_{R+1}\mathrm{}}{lim}\left(\widehat{C}_{\mathrm{}}\right)^2B_1\mathrm{}B_R\widehat{B}_{R+1}\widehat{B}_{R+2}|0\right)`$ (82)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{R}{}}}B_{\mathrm{}}|0[2]^2\left\{\left({}_{L}{}^{}C_{2}^{}+[3]{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{R}{}}}e^{4t_k}\right)[2]L{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{R}{}}}e^{2t_k}+[2]^2{\displaystyle \underset{j<k}{}}e^{2(t_j+t_K)}\right\}`$ (83)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{R}{}}}\left[\widehat{B}_{\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}j}{}}B_{\mathrm{}}|0\left((q^2+q^2){\displaystyle \underset{kj}{}}e^{2t_k}+(L1)e^{2t_j}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\delta \widehat{B}_{\mathrm{}}}{\delta ϵ_{R+2}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}j}{}}B_{\mathrm{}}|0\right]`$ (85)
$`\times [{\displaystyle \frac{L}{2}}R2][2]^2(qq^1)e^{t_j}a_j{\displaystyle \underset{kj}{}}f_{jk}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{1j_1<j_2R}{}}\left(\widehat{B}_{\mathrm{}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1;\mathrm{}j_1,j_2}{\overset{R}{}}}B_{\mathrm{}}|0e^{t_{j_1}+t_{j_2}}(qq^1)^2`$ (87)
$`\times [{\displaystyle \frac{L}{2}}R2][{\displaystyle \frac{L}{2}}R3][2]a_{j_1}a_{j_2}{\displaystyle \underset{kj_1,j_2}{}}f_{j_1k}f_{j_2k}\mathrm{@}`$
Here, $`ϵ_{R+2}=\mathrm{exp}(2z_{R+2})`$. We note that $`q`$ is generic, so far.

We multiply the normalization factor $`[2]^2`$ with (87). Then we take the limit of sending $`q`$ to a root of unity. If $`L/2R0`$ (mod 2), then all the unwanted terms vanish. We have

$$S^{+(2)}T^{(2)}B_1\mathrm{}B_R|0=\left({}_{L}{}^{}C_{2}^{}+[3]\underset{k=1}{\overset{R}{}}e^{4t_k}\right)B_1\mathrm{}B_R|0$$
(88)
## VI Classical analogue of the Drinfeld polynomial

### A Definition

Let us denote the eigenvalue of the generator $`\overline{h}_k`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ as

$$\overline{h}_k\mathrm{\Omega }=\overline{d}_k^+\mathrm{\Omega }\overline{h}_k\mathrm{\Omega }=\overline{d}_k^{}\mathrm{\Omega }$$
(89)
for $`k1`$ and $`k𝐙`$.

The classical analogue of the Drinfeld polynomial $`P(u)`$ satisfies

$$\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\overline{d}_ku^k=u\frac{P^{^{}}(u)}{P(u)},\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\overline{d}_ku^k=degPu\frac{P^{^{}}(u)}{P(u)}.$$
(90)
### B Some useful formulas

Recall that $`\overline{x}_k^\pm `$ and $`\overline{h}_k`$ denote the classical analogues of the Drinfeld generators $`x_k^\pm `$ and $`h_k`$, respectively. Then, we can show

$$\overline{x}_k^+=\frac{1}{2^k}\left(ad_{\overline{h}_1}\right)^k\overline{x}_0^+,\overline{x}_k^+=\frac{1}{2^k}\left(ad_{\overline{h}_1}\right)^k\overline{x}_0^+$$
(91)
for $`k>0`$. Here $`\overline{h}_1`$ is given by

$$\overline{h}_1=[\overline{x}_0^+,\overline{x}_1^{}],\overline{h}_1=(1)[\overline{x}_1^+,\overline{x}_0^+],$$
(92)
From the second identification (16) we have

$$\overline{h}_1=[S^{+(N)},T^{(N)}],\overline{h}_1=[S^{(N)},T^{+(N)}],$$
(93)
In the second identification (16), we have

$$\overline{x}_0^+=S^{+(N)}$$
(94)
Thus, we can express the generators $`\overline{x}_k^+`$ in terms of $`S^{\pm (N)}`$ and $`T^{\pm (N)}`$ for any integer $`k`$.

The equation (91) can also be formulated as

$$\text{[}\overline{h}_1,\overline{x}_k\text{]}=2\overline{x}_{k+1}^+$$
(95)
Making use of eqs. (95) and (76), we can recursively show that the generator $`\overline{x}_k^+`$ vanishes on regular XXZ Bethe ansatz eigenvectors at roots of unity. Here, we have assumed that the action of $`\overline{h}_1`$ on a regular Bethe ansatz state can be calculated with the method of §5. For $`N=2`$, it is finished as shown in §5. Precisely speaking, however, it is a conjecture for $`N>2`$.

In order to calculate the evaluation parameters of the Drinfeld polynomial, we can use the following:

$$\overline{h}_{k+1}=\frac{1}{2}[[\overline{h}_k,\overline{x}_0^+],\overline{x}_1^{}]$$
(96)
### C An example of the classical analogue of the Drinfeld polynomial

For $`L=6`$ and $`N=3`$, the Drinfeld polynomial of the degenerate eigenspace for $`|0`$ is given by

$$P(u)=(1a_1u)(1a_2u)$$
(97)
where $`a_1`$ and $`a_2`$ are given by $`10\pm 3\sqrt{11}`$. The roots are distinct and the degree of $`P`$ is two, so that the dimension is given by $`2^2=4`$.

## VII Discussion

Through the classical analogue of the Drinfeld polynomial, we can calculate the dimension of the multiplets of the $`sl_2`$ loop algebra.

The dimensions of the $`sl_2`$ multiplets should be consistent with that of the XYZ model: $`2^{(L2M)/N}`$ . In fact, we can show that when $`L=2M`$ and the rapidities $`t_1\mathrm{},t_M`$ are finite-valued solutions to the Bethe ansatz equations we have

$$S^{\pm (N)}B_1\mathrm{}B_M|0=T^{\pm (N)}B_1\mathrm{}B_M|0=0$$
(98)
More details of computation of the classical analogues of the Drinfeld polynomials should be reported elsewhere.

Acknowledgements

This work is partially supported by the Grant-in-Aid (No. 14702012).