text:
# A compact group action which raises dimension to infinity

## 1 Introduction

Interest in group actions with the property that the orbit space has greater dimension than the original space is motivated in part of P.A.Smith’s generalization of the Hilbert’s fifth problem. It asserts that among all locally compact groups only Lie group can act effectively on manifolds. It is now known as the Hilbert-Smith conjecture. The Hilbert-Smith conjecture is known to be equivalent to the conjecture that a compact topological group acting on a compact topological manifold cannot have arbitrarily small subgroups. By the work of Newman and Smith, it is sufficient to prove the special case when the topological group is the $`p`$-adic integers $`\widehat{}_p=\underset{}{lim}\{\varphi _n:/p^{n+1}/p^n\}`$, where $`\varphi _n`$ is the $`modp^n`$ mapping.

C.T.Yang showed that for any $`n`$-manifold $`M^n`$, the orbit space $`M/\widehat{}_p`$ must have integral cohomological dimension $`dim_{}M/\widehat{}_p=n+2`$, and more generally, for any locally compact Hausdorff cohomological $`n`$-dimensional space X supporting an effective $`\widehat{}_p`$ action, $`dim_{}X/\widehat{}_pn+3`$. For locally compact finite dimensional metric space $`X`$, $`dim_ZX=dimX`$, hence Yang’s results imply that if $`X`$ is metrizable, then $`dimX/\widehat{}_pn+3`$ or $`dimX/\widehat{}_p=\mathrm{}`$.

Although no effective action of $`p`$-adic group on manifolds has yet been constructed, there do exist $`p`$-adic group actions on Menger manifolds. Let $`X`$ be a $`\mu ^n`$-manifold. Then there are three constructions of $`\widehat{}_p`$ actions on $`X`$.

(1) Every compact $`0`$-dimensional metrizable group G acts effectively on $`X`$ so that $`dimX/G=dimX`$. Hence $`p`$-adic group acts on Menger compacta. This is done by Dranishnikov  and Mayer and Stark  using $`Pasynkov^{}s`$ partial product description of $`\mu ^n`$. K. $`Sakai`$  has another construction.

(2) $`\widehat{}_p`$ acts freely on $`X`$ so that $`dimX/\widehat{}{}_{p}{}^{}=n+1`$. This example depends on the work of Bestvina, Edwards, Mayer and Stark .

(3) $`\widehat{}_p`$ acts on $`X`$ so that $`dimX/\widehat{}{}_{p}{}^{}=n+2`$. This is done by Mayer and Stark , based on a construction of Raymond and Williams  .

In contrast, no example has been constructed where $`dimX/\widehat{}_p=\mathrm{}`$. A.N. Dranishnikov and J.E.West proved that any compact metric space Y is the orbit space of a $`G`$-cation on a metric compactum $`X`$ with $`dim__pX=1`$, where $`G=_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}(/p)`$. But their paper has an error in their lemma 15.

The goal of this paper is to fix their error and generalize their group $`G`$ to $`\widehat{}_p`$.

## 2 The construction

Notations:

(1) For a given set $`S`$ of positive integers, we define $`G_S=_{iS}Z/p^i`$.

(2) Given a sequence $`K=\{k_i\}_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$, we define $`K^{}=\{k_{2n1}\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$.

(3) If $`B=\{k_ii\mathrm{\Lambda }\}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a subset of $`N`$ (the set of all positive integers), we define $`KB=\{k_i\}_{i\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$.

(4) For the sets of integers in this paper, we will allow them to contain repeating elements, and the union is always a disjoint union. If you like, you can think them as sequences, finite or infinite.

Given a prime $`p`$, an infinite sequence $`K`$ of positive integers, and any finite dimensional simplicial complex $`L`$, we will define $`\widehat{L}(K)`$.

Let’s work on a simplex first. Let $`L=\mathrm{\Delta }^m`$, and $`L^{}`$ be the first barycentric subdivision of $`L`$. Let $`\widehat{L^{(0)}}=L^{(0)}=\stackrel{~}{L}_{(0)}`$, $`\widehat{L^{(1)}}=L^{(1)}{}_{}{}^{}=\stackrel{~}{L}_{(1)}`$, $`K_0=K_1=K`$, $`B_0=B_1=\mathrm{}`$, $`N_0=N_1=1`$. We will inductively construct the following diagram:

Suppose $`s_k:\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k)}\stackrel{q_k}{}\widehat{L^{(k)}}\stackrel{p_k}{}L^{(k)}^{}`$ have been constructed, such that:

(k.1) for each $`(k+1)`$-simplex $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of $`L^{(k+1)}`$, $`s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)})`$ is a closed oriented $`k`$-manifold,

(k.2) the map $`r_{k1}:s_k^1(L^{(k1)}{}_{}{}^{})\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k1)}`$ is a $`N_{k1}`$-$`1`$ covering map,

(k.3) for any simplex $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)}^{}`$, $`s_k:s_k^1(\sigma )\sigma `$ is a $`_{i=1}^kN_i`$ to $`1`$ covering map,

(k.4) for any $`(k)`$-simplex $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of $`L^{(k)}`$,the induced map $`H^1(s_{k1}^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k1)}),/p)H^1(s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k1)}),/p)`$ is trivial,

(k.5) $`\pi _1(s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k1)}))/\pi _1(s_{k1}^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k1)}))G_{B_{K_{k1}}}`$,

(k.6) $`G_{B_k}`$ acts on $`s_k^1(L^{(k1)}{}_{}{}^{})`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k1)}`$ as orbit space. It is a free simplicial action,

(k.7) $`_{i=1}^kG_{B_k}`$ acts on $`s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)})`$ simplicially, and the orbit space is $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)}`$. Hence $`_{i=1}^kG_{B_k}`$ acts on $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k)}`$ simplicially, and the orbit space is $`L^{(k)}^{}`$,

(k.8) The map $`q_k:\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k)}s_k^1(L^{(k1)}{}_{}{}^{})\widehat{L^{(k)}}\widehat{L^{(k1)}}`$ is a homeomorphism.

###### Lemma 1.

$`H^1(s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)}))`$ is a free abelian group. There exists a regular covering space $`E`$ of $`s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)})`$, such that

$$\pi _1(E)/\pi _1(s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)}))G_{B_{K_{k+1}}}$$

Hence $`G_{B_{k+1}}`$ acts on $`E`$ as the deck transformation group.

###### Proof.

$`s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)})`$ is an oriented $`k`$-dimensional closed manifold, hence their $`H_{k1}`$ is a free abelian group, so is its $`H^1`$.

Let $`G`$ denote $`\pi _1(s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)}))`$, $`G^1`$ be the commutator subgroup of $`G`$, $`\{g_1,g_2,\mathrm{},g_l\}`$ be the set of free generators of $`H_1(s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)}))`$, and $`T`$ be the torsion subgroup of $`H_1`$. Let $`f`$ denote the natural map $`\pi _1\pi _1/G^1H_1`$. Denote the first $`l`$ integers in $`K_k`$ by $`n_1,n_2,\mathrm{}n_l`$. Define $`B_{k+1}=\{n_1,n_2,\mathrm{}n_l\}`$, $`N_{k+1}=N_k\times _{i=1}^lp^{n_i}`$. Let $`G^{}`$ denote the subgroup of $`\pi _1`$ generated by $`f^1(\{g_1^{(n_1)},g_2^{(n_2)},\mathrm{},g_l^{(n_l)}\}T)`$. ($`G^1G^{}`$) It is a normal subgroup of $`G`$. $`G/G^{}_{i=1}^lZ/(p^{n_i})=G_{B_{k+1}}`$. There is a canonical regular covering space of $`s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)})`$, denoted as $`E`$, corresponding to the group $`G^{}`$. $`E`$ is a closed oriented $`k`$-manifold. $`r_k:Es_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)})`$ is a $`|G:G^{}|=_{i=1}^lp^{n_i}`$ covering. (This serves the proof for (k+1.2) and (k+1.3)), and $`G/G^{}G_{B_{k+1}}`$ acts on $`E`$ as the deck transformation group, with $`s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)})`$ as orbit space. (This serves the proof for (k+1.5) and (k+1.6)). ∎

For any $`(k+1)`$-simplex $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of $`L^{(k+1)}`$, we get the covering space $`E`$. Let $`cE`$ be the cone of $`E`$. It is a contractible oriented $`(k+1)`$-manifold with boundary. There is a natural projection $`s_{k+1}:cE\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which is a branch covering. $`G_{B_{k+1}}`$ acts on $`cE`$ in the obvious way. (This serves the proof for (k+1.7)). By (k.3), for each $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$, $`s_{k+1}:(s_{k+1})^1(\sigma )\sigma `$ is $`_{i+1}^{k+1}N_i`$ to $`1`$ covering map. (This proves (k+1.3)). Let $`K_{k+1}=K_kB_{k+1}`$.

Case 1: If $`k+2m`$, then for any given a $`(k+2)`$-simplex $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of $`L^{(k+2)}`$, it has $`k+3`$ faces, say $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_2,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_{k+3}`$. For them, using the above construction, we get cones $`c_1E_1,c_2E_2,\mathrm{},c_{k+3}E_{k+3}`$.

For any $`ij`$, $`E_i`$ is homeomorphic to $`E_j`$. $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ meets $`\mathrm{\Delta }_j`$ along one $`k`$-simplex $`\sigma `$. We pick one homeomorphism $`h_{ij}:E_iE_j`$, such that the following diagram commute:

and $`h_{ij}(r_ks_k)^1(\sigma )=(r_k^{}s_k^{})^1(\sigma )`$.

Denote the projection $`E\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)}`$ by $`Pr`$. Given $`\sigma _iE_i`$ and $`\sigma _jE_j`$, if $`Pr(\sigma _1)=Pr(\sigma _2)=\sigma `$ and $`h_{ij}(\sigma _1)=\sigma _2`$, we glue the $`(k+2)`$-simplexes $`c_i\sigma _1,c_j\sigma _2`$ of $`c_iE_i,c_jE_j`$ along $`\sigma _1`$ and $`\sigma _2`$ via $`h_{ij}`$. Do the same for all the pairs $`E_i`$ and $`E_j`$. It can be proved easily that each $`\sigma `$ is glued to exactly one other $`\sigma ^{}`$. So we get a $`(k+1)`$-manifold. (This proves (k+1.3)).

Do the same for all $`(k+2)`$-simplexes of $`L^{(k+2)}`$, we get a $`k+1`$ dimensional complex, denote it as $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k+1)}`$.

Case 2: If $`k+2>m`$, then $`k+1=m`$. For the unique $`m`$-simplex $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, we get a cone $`cE`$. It is the $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{(m)}`$.

Now we want to have the following diagram:

The only thing missing here is $`\widehat{L^{(k+1)}}`$. Since we have the map $`r_kp_k:s_{k+1}^1(L^{(k)}{}_{}{}^{})\stackrel{r_k}{}\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k)}\stackrel{p_k}{}\widehat{L^{(k)}}`$, we can define $`\widehat{L^{(k+1)}}`$ as the following: in $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k+1)}`$, take any $`k`$-simplexes $`\sigma _1,\sigma _2`$, if $`r_kp_k(\sigma _1)=r_kp_k(\sigma _2)`$, then we glue them together. (This proves (k+1.8), and also serves the proof for (k+1.7)). Hence we get an inclusion: $`\widehat{L^{(k)}}\widehat{L^{(k+1)}}`$. This finishes the construction for the step $`k+1`$.

Let $`K^{}=_{i=1}^mB_i`$. We have $`G_K^{}`$ acts on $`\widehat{L}`$ with $`L^{}`$ as orbit space.

For general $`m`$-complex, we define $`\widehat{L}(K)`$ to be the pull back:

###### Lemma 2.

For each $`(k+1)`$-simplex $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of $`L^{(k+1)}`$, the induced map $`q_k^{}:H^1(s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)}),/p)H^1(E=s_{k+1}^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)}),/p)`$ is trivial.

###### Proof.

By the universal coefficient theorem for homology, we have: $`0H_1(C)/pH_1(C;/p)Tor(H_0(C),/p)0`$. In the case $`H_0(C)`$ is free, we have $`H_1(C)/pH_1(C,/p)`$.

Using the relation between $`\pi _1`$ and $`H_1`$, we get the following commutative diagram:

The image of $`\pi _1(E)`$ in $`\pi _1(s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)}))`$ is $`G^{}`$, while $`G^{}`$’s image in $`H_1(s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)});/p)`$ is $`0`$. The map $`\pi _1(E)H_1(E)H_1(E;/p)`$ is onto. Hence we know the map $`q_k{}_{}{}^{}:H_1(E;/p)H_1(s_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)});/p)`$ is $`0`$.

For any chain complex $`C`$, by the universal coefficient theorem for cohomology, we have: $`0Ext(H_0(C),/p)H^1(C;/p)Hom(H_1(C),/p)0`$. In the case $`H_0(C)`$ is free, we have $`H^1(C;/p)Hom(H_1(C),/p)`$. And we have the following commutative diagram:

Since $`q_k{}_{}{}^{}=0`$, we know $`q_k^{}=0`$. ∎

###### Lemma 3.

Given any space $`M`$ and any commutative diagram:

it uniquely determines a map $`f^{}:\widehat{L}M`$ such that, for any $`x\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k)}s_k^1(L^{(k1)}{}_{}{}^{})`$, $`f^{}(q_k(x))=f_k(x)`$, where $`q_k`$ is the projection $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k)}\widehat{L^k}`$.

###### Proof.

For any $`x\widehat{L}`$, there is a $`k0`$, such that $`x\widehat{L^{(k)}}\widehat{L^{(k1)}}`$. The map $`q_k:\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k)}s_k^1(L^{(k1)}{}_{}{}^{})\widehat{L^{(k)}}\widehat{L^{(k1)}}`$ is a homeomorphism. We define $`f^{}(x)=f_k(q_k^1(x))`$. This well defines the map $`f^{}:\widehat{L}M`$. ∎

###### Lemma 4.

Given any subcomplex $`K`$ of $`L`$, integers $`l>mk0`$, any map $`f:\widehat{K}\widehat{L^{(k)}}B^l(/p)`$, there exists an extension $`\stackrel{~}{f}:\widehat{L}B^l(/p)`$.

###### Proof.

Without lose of generality, we suppose $`L=\mathrm{\Delta }^m`$. Since $`B^l(/p)`$ is path connected, if in addition $`k=0`$, the map $`f`$ can be extended to an $`f:\widehat{K}\widehat{L^{(1)}}B^l(/p)`$. The following diagram defines $`\stackrel{~}{f}:q_2^1(\widehat{K^{(2)}})s_2^1(L^{(1)}{}_{}{}^{})B^l(/p)`$.

We will construct the map by induction. Suppose we have $`\stackrel{~}{f}:q_{k+1}^1(\widehat{K^{(k+1)}})s_{k+1}^1(L^{(k)}{}_{}{}^{})B^l(/p)`$. Take any $`(k+1)`$-simplex $`\mathrm{\Delta }L`$, where $`f`$ is not defined on $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ is defined only on $`s_{k+1}^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)})`$.

Since the map $`r_k:Es_k^1(\mathrm{\Delta }^{(k)})`$ induces a trivial map between $`H^1(/p)`$, the map $`\stackrel{~}{f}:E(B^l(/p))`$ is null homotopic. Hence $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ lifts to a map $`EE^l(/p)`$. On the other hand, $`\pi _i(E^l(/p))=0`$ for $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},m`$, we get an extension $`\stackrel{~}{f}:cEE^l(/p)B^l(/p)`$. Do this for all the $`(k+1)`$-simplexes of $`L`$, we have a $`\stackrel{~}{f}:\stackrel{~}{L}_{(k+1)}B^l(/p)`$.

By induction, we get a map $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{(m)}B^l(/p)`$, and we have the commutative diagram:

This defines the map $`\widehat{L}B^l(/p)`$. ∎

Given a finite dimensional simplicial complex $`L`$ and an infinite sequence $`K`$ of positive integers, we can construct a space $`X`$ as following:

Let $`K_1=K^{}`$, $`L_1=\widehat{L}(K_1)`$, $`B_1=K_1^{}`$, $`K_2=(KB_1^{})^{}`$. Inductively, let $`L_k=\widehat{L_{k1}}(K_k)`$, $`B_k=B_{k1}K_k^{}`$, $`K_{k+1}=(KB_k^{})^{}`$. (The way I define the $`K_i`$’s satisfies tow conditions: (1) each $`K_i`$ is an infinite sequence, (2) $`B_i=K`$. )

Let $`X`$ be the inverse limit of $`p_{k+1}:L_{k+1}L_k`$. The group $`G=_{iK}Z/p^i`$ acts on $`\overline{L}`$, and the quotient space is $`L`$.

###### Theorem 1.

For any compact metric space $`L`$, and any prime $`p`$, $`L`$ is the orbit space of a $`G`$-action on a metric compactum $`X`$ with $`dim__pX=1`$, where $`G`$ is a compact group.

###### Proof.

If $`L`$ is a finite dimensional simplicial complex, the $`X`$ is the space we construct above. .

To prove that $`dim_{/p}X1`$, it is enough to show that the restriction map $`i^{}:H^1(X;_p)H^1(A;_p)`$ is surjective for any closed subset $`AX`$. It is equivalent to show that any map $`\varphi :AK(_p;1)`$ extends to $`X`$. We can use of the fact that $`K(_p;1)`$ is a neighborhood retract to relate $`\varphi `$ to maps of $`|L_i|`$ into $`K(_p;1)`$. Consider the infinite mapping cylinder $`M_{\mathrm{}}`$ of the inverse system $`\{p_i:|L_{i1}||L_i|\}_{i=3}^{\mathrm{}}`$, that is, let $`M_i`$ be the mapping cylinder of $`p_i`$, and for each $`i`$, identify the copy of $`|L_{i1}|`$ in $`M_i`$ with the domain end of $`M_{i1}`$. Let $`C_j=_{i=1}^jM_i`$. Then the collapses generate an inverse system $`C_{i1}C_j`$ containing $`|L_{j1}||L_j|`$ with inverse limit $`Z=M_{\mathrm{}}X`$. Now $`AZ`$ and $`\varphi :AK(_p;1)`$ extends to a map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:UK(_p;1)`$ where $`U`$ is an open neighborhood of $`A`$ in $`Z`$.

The collapses of the mapping cylinders $`M_i`$ are connected to the identities of the $`M_i`$ by one parameter families of retractions which extend to give a one-parameter family of retractions $`r_t:ZZ`$ of $`Z`$, $`0t1`$ with $`r_1`$ the identity and $`r_0`$ the retraction onto $`|L_1|`$ and such that for $`t_n=(n1)/n`$, $`r_{t_n}`$ is the projection onto $`C_n`$. By compactness, there is an $`n`$ such that $`r_t(A)U`$ for all $`tt_{n1}`$, so Borsuk’s homotopy extension theorem implies that $`\varphi `$ extends to $`X`$ provided that $`\mathrm{\Phi }r_n`$ extends to$`|L_n|`$. For $`n`$ sufficiently large, the union $`T`$ of all subcomplexes of $`L_n`$ of the form $`p_n^1(\sigma )`$ for simplices $`\sigma `$ of $`|L_{n1}|`$ that $`\sigma r_{t_n}(A)U`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Phi }|_T:TK(_p;1)`$. By lemma, $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ can be extend $`\mathrm{\Psi }:|L_n|K(_p;1)`$. Thus, $`\varphi `$ extends to $`X`$, hence $`dim__pX1`$.

To prove the general case, we first construct a space $`X`$ over the Hilbert cube as follows:

For $`n=1`$, let $`\stackrel{~}{X}_1=I`$, $`K`$ be any sequence of positive integers. $`K_1=K^{}`$, $`B_1=\mathrm{}`$. For each $`n`$ consider the projection $`I^{n+1}I^n`$ and the following diagram:

where $`q_n`$ is assumed by induction, $`\widehat{X}_{n+1}`$ is a pull back, $`\stackrel{~}{X}_{n+1}=\widehat{\widehat{X}_{n+1}}(K_{n+1})`$, $`K_{n+1}=(KB_n^{})^{}`$, $`B_{n+1}=B_nK_{n+1}^{}`$. Let: $`q_{n+1}=p_{n+1}p_n^{\prime \prime }:\stackrel{~}{X}_{n+1}I^{n+1}`$. Let $`G_n=G_{K_n^{}}\times G_{n1}`$.

By induction, we have an action of $`G_n`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{X}_n`$, with orbit map $`q_n`$, so we get an induced action of $`G_{n+1}`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{X}_{n+1}`$ with orbit map $`q_{n+1}`$. $`dim__p\stackrel{~}{X}_{n+1}=1`$. Now form the inverse limits:

We now have an action of infinite product $`G_{K_n^{}}G_K`$ on $`X`$ with orbit map $`q`$.

Using a similar construction as before, i.e. the infinite mapping cylinder, we can prove $`dim__pX1`$. Actually, each $`dim__p\stackrel{~}{X}{}_{k}{}^{}=1`$, so the extension clearly exists.

To complete the proof, let $`L`$ be any compact metric space, embed $`L`$ in $`I^{\mathrm{}}`$, and let $`X=q^1(L)`$.

Note:

(1) If we choose $`K=\{1,1,1,\mathrm{}\}`$, then $`G=/p`$. This fixes the error of A.N.Dranishnikov and J.E.West’s paper.

(2) If we choose $`K=\{1,2,3,\mathrm{}\}`$, then $`G=_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}/p^i`$. On the other hand, $`\widehat{}_p`$ is a subgroup of $`G`$, so we get a $`\widehat{}_p`$ group action on $`\widehat{L}`$. I guess the quotient space has dimension infinity, but I haven’t proven it yet.

###### Theorem 2.

Given any integer $`n2`$, any prime $`p`$, any sequence $`K`$ of positive integers, there is an action of $`G=G_K`$ on a compact, two-dimensional, metric space $`X`$ such that $`dimX/G=n`$, moreover, $`dimX\times X=0`$.

###### Proof.

This follows the same proof as the proof of Theorem A of \[D\]. ∎

###### Corollary 2.1.

For any $`p`$, $`K`$ as above, there is an action of $`G=G_K`$ on a compact, two-dimensional, metric space $`X_{\mathrm{}}`$ such that $`dimX_{\mathrm{}}/G=\mathrm{}`$ and $`dimX_{\mathrm{}}\times X_{\mathrm{}}=3`$.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The study of hadronic decays using lattice techniques has long been known to be feasible in principle . Pioneering attempts were made to study glueball decay  and $`\rho `$ meson decay  in quenched QCD where no actual decay takes place. This underlines the approach: one can study the mixing of hadronic states on a lattice, provided that the energies of the states are close (see ref  for quantitative analysis). Indeed string breaking has been explored this way  as has scalar meson mixing  and hybrid meson decay . The common feature of these examples is that there is little experimental knowledge of the relevant transition matrix elements. Here we rectify this by studying $`\rho `$ meson decay. Another motivation is that non-leptonic weak decays ($`K\pi \pi `$ especially) are very important to understand from non-perturbative QCD and a study of simpler purely hadronic decays will be a useful step in this direction.

On a lattice many features are different from in the real world. The most significant for our purposes is that periodic spatial boundary conditions are imposed. Note that the continuum limit in such a finite volume is defined and, if the spatial extent is $`L`$, the momentum is discrete in units of $`2\pi /L`$. This implies that the two particle spectrum is discrete. For decay of a vector meson in the centre of mass, in a P-wave (actually the $`T_1^{}`$ representation of the cubic rotation group), the decay momentum must be non-zero and hence the lightest $`\pi \pi `$ state will be with momentum 1 and -1 in these units. For the lattices we will use, the energy levels neglecting interactions are illustrated in fig. 1. As has been noted before , a closer match in energy can be achieved by considering the decay of a moving vector meson, see also fig. 1, since this effectively allows a relative momentum in the centre of mass of $`\pi /L`$. Note that in neither case is the $`\rho `$ meson unstable.

As an illustration, consider the transfer matrix with two states, a $`\rho `$ meson with energy $`m\mathrm{\Delta }/2`$ and a $`\pi \pi `$ state with energy $`m+\mathrm{\Delta }/2`$ with a transition amplitude $`x=\rho |\pi \pi `$:

$$e^{ma}\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{a\mathrm{\Delta }/2}& ax\\ ax& e^{a\mathrm{\Delta }/2}\end{array}\right)$$
(1)
This transfer matrix has eigenvalues $`\lambda =e^{Ea}`$ with

$$Em\pm (\mathrm{\Delta }^2/4+x^2)^{1/2}$$
(2)
which is larger than the unmixed splitting by a shift of $`ϵ=(\mathrm{\Delta }^2/4+x^2)^{1/2}\mathrm{\Delta }/2`$ up (assuming $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$) of the two pion state and down for the $`\rho `$ state.

We expect the lightest state with the relevant quantum numbers (isospin 1, $`T_1^{}`$ representation) to be dominantly created by a local (or fuzzed) quark antiquark operator, as conventionally used to study the $`\rho `$ meson. Likewise, the lightest two pion state is expected to be dominantly created by a lattice operator made of two pion operators. These statements are qualitative, and Lüscher has emphasised  that a quantitative description can be based on a careful measurement of the two-particle energy levels (using in principle any lattice operators whatsoever) for different sizes $`L`$. To determine this energy shift accurately is a challenging task. As well as attempting to determine it directly, we measure the mixing $`x=\rho |\pi \pi `$ which allows us to estimate the energy shift from eq. 2, as well as to estimate the transition amplitude directly.

The essence of the determination of this transition amplitude is that when the energies of the two hadronic states ($`\rho `$ meson and $`\pi \pi `$ system with the same quantum numbers) are close (specifically when $`t\mathrm{\Delta }5`$) then the exponentials in $`t`$ corresponding to the two energy states conspire to give a linear dependence (see ref. for a discussion). The transition measured on a lattice then gives access  to the required matrix element since for large $`t`$ (specifically $`(E^{}E)t1`$ with $`E^{}E`$ the energy gap to the first excited state),

$$\frac{\rho (0)|\pi (t)\pi (t)}{\rho (0)|\rho (t)^{1/2}\pi (0)\pi (0)|\pi (t)\pi (t)^{1/2}}=xt+\mathrm{const}$$
(3)
provided that the transition rate is not too large, namely $`xt1`$.

A further cross check  is also possible from the box diagram (see fig. 2d) under similar conditions, since

$$\frac{\pi (0)\pi (0)|\pi (t)\pi (t)_{\mathrm{box}}}{\pi (0)\pi (0)|\pi (t)\pi (t)_{\mathrm{direct}}}=\frac{1}{2}x^2t^2+𝒪(t)$$
(4)
Here the notation $`\pi (t),\rho (t)`$, etc refers to creating a state with those quantum numbers from the vacuum at that time on the lattice. The denominators are to normalise the states to unity. To relate the matrix element $`x`$ to the usual continuum large volume formalism, one has to relate this unit normalisation condition to the usual relativistic one - see ref  for a full discussion. One simple way to do this is by considering the formula for the decay width, though we must emphasise that no actual decay takes place in our case because of the unrealistic quark masses. Then first order perturbation theory (Fermi’s Golden Rule) implies a transition rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=2\pi x^2\rho (E)`$ where the angle brackets indicate that an average over spatial directions will be needed. For a decay from the centre of mass with relative momentum $`k`$, the density of states $`\rho (E)=L^3kE/(8\pi ^2)`$.

We use the mixing we establish on the lattice to evaluate the mass shift $`ϵ`$ of the two-particle state. This mass shift turns out to be too small to measure accurately by a direct determination for the two-pion state, but we are able determine this shift from a study of the $`\rho `$ mass. From our estimate of the energy shift, we are able to use Lüscher’s formalism to determine the $`\rho `$ decay parameters, obtaining results in agreement with the method described above.

Here we present our preliminary study of this problem. We establish methods that give a good signal on a lattice and discuss the cross-checks that can be made. Our analysis is restricted to mesons made of quarks of mass close to the strange quark mass. We discuss the phenomenological implications. Overall we find that lattice study of hadronic transitions is feasible and we find good agreement between our determinations and the expectations from experiment. The vector meson transition to two pseudoscalar mesons is actually rather strong and our methods will apply even better to weaker transitions, such as hybrid meson decay .

## 2 Lattice results

We use the UKQCD data set with $`N_f=2`$ flavours of sea quarks with a NP clover fermionic action and Wilson glue at $`\beta =5.2`$ and $`C_{SW}=2.0171`$, $`\kappa _{\mathrm{sea}}=\kappa _{\mathrm{valence}}=0.1355`$, volume $`16^3\times 32`$ and configurations separated by 40 trajectories . This corresponds  to a quark mass for which $`m_\pi /m_\rho =0.578_{19}^{+13}`$ which is approximately the strange quark mass, with a lattice spacing $`a=0.110(4)`$ fm.

We define $`\rho `$ and $`\pi \pi `$ states as being in a given $`T_1^{}`$ representation of the cubic group in the centre of mass. We consider the $`\rho `$ meson state as having polarisation in a given direction (eg using $`\overline{q}\gamma _zq`$ to create it). We shall consider $`\rho ^+\pi ^+\pi ^0`$ so that the pions are distinguishable and this has contributions from two triangle quark diagrams (see fig. 2(b)) with $`u\overline{u}`$ and $`d\overline{d}`$ creation respectively: each with factors of $`1/\sqrt{2}`$ from the $`\pi ^0`$. We normalise the P-wave $`\pi \pi `$ state with relative momentum $`k`$ in the centre of mass as $`[\pi ^+(k)\pi ^0(k)\pi ^+(\overline{k})\pi ^0(\overline{k})]/\sqrt{2}`$ where $`\overline{k}`$ has the $`z`$-component of $`k`$ reversed. In the cases we will consider, $`k`$ only has a $`z`$-component, so $`\overline{k}=k`$. In order to have a smaller relative momentum, we also consider transitions from a $`\rho `$ with nonzero momentum (where we take the polarisation along the momentum direction). In that case we define $`x`$ as $`\rho _1|\pi _1\pi _0\pi _0\pi _1/\sqrt{2}`$, also the $`z`$-axis is now privileged and we study the $`A_2^{}`$ representation of the symmetry group $`D_{4h}`$.

For the three and four-point correlators, we use a stochastic method to evaluate them from every space-time point on each lattice. Because of this volume averaging, we are able to get results from only 10 lattice configurations. The stochastic sources are Gaussian on one timeslice only  and extended propagator techniques are used to evaluate 3 and 4-point correlators. This study of the three and four-point correlators involved 2880 inversions which is comparable to the number of inversions needed to evaluate propagators from one space-time point on 208 configurations (as used for the two-point correlators ).

We find that the $`\pi \pi \pi \pi `$ P-wave amplitude is dominated by the product of two two-point pion correlators (see fig. 2c) which is accurately known, whereas the correlations between the pions and the box contributions are more noisy. Thus we choose to normalise by the two-point pion correlators. Moreover, in order to suppress contributions from excited states we normalise by the ground state contributions to the ($`\rho `$ and $`\pi `$) two-point correlators as determined by 2-state fits to the UKQCD correlator data  (with local and fuzzed sources and sinks) for a $`t`$-range of 4-12.

We present our results for three-point correlators from eq. 3 in fig. 3. Note that the relevant ratio is quite large, becoming comparable to unity at larger $`t`$. The requirements of our method should be satisfied for $`3t12`$ for $`\rho _1\pi _1\pi _0`$, since we require $`xt1`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }t5`$ where $`a\mathrm{\Delta }=0.14`$ and $`(E^{}E)t1`$ where $`E^{}E0.3`$. The results in this case have quite small errors and do show well the required linear dependence on $`t`$ in this region. The curve is from the two-state transfer matrix model with $`ax=0.06`$. The departure at small $`t`$ is presumably due to excited state contributions to the three-point correlator. These cannot produce a linear dependence on $`t`$, however, although they can contribute a constant even at large $`t`$. Since such constant contributions from excited states are allowed in principle, we show in fig. 4 the slope of the correlator ratio of eq. 3. This is consistent with constant at $`ax=0.06`$ in this region, for both local and non-local $`\rho `$ sources.

As emphasised before , a cross check is available from the box diagram (eq. 4). Note that we need to evaluate this for both the momentum direct ($`1010`$) and crossed ($`1001`$). These contributions are computationally difficult to measure and we have chosen $`t`$ values of 4, 6, 8 and 10 here, as illustrated in fig. 3, again normalising by the ground state two-point correlators, where a comparison is made with the two-state transfer matrix model with $`ax=0.08`$. Since excited state contributions can produce both constant and linear terms for this quantity, we form the linear combination of three adjacent $`t`$-values that eliminates them and so determine $`x`$ by comparing with the two-state transfer matrix model. The resulting values are shown in fig. 4 where they are seen to be compatible with those from the three particle analysis.

Thus we conclude that we do have a consistent lattice determination of $`ax=0.06_1^{+2}`$ for this momentum combination. From this determination of the transition amplitude, we can determine an energy shift, as given by eq. 2, assuming that only the two nearest levels mix. This yields a shift of $`aϵ=0.022_7^{+17}`$ \- up for the $`\pi _1\pi _0`$ state and down for the $`\rho _1`$ state.

For the $`\rho `$ meson, a general investigation of the energy shift due to two pion intermediate states is complicated by the need to regulate the sum over pion momenta. Here we are interested primarily in shifts arising from significant mixing with nearly degenerate energy levels in a finite volume. One signature  of such a shift is that the cubic invariance will be broken: the energy of a $`\rho `$ meson with momentum $`2\pi /L`$ will be different when it is polarised in the momentum direction or perpendicular to it. We have explored this energy shift directly from the study of 2-point $`\rho `$ correlators with momentum $`2\pi /L`$. When the polarisation is along the momentum, there will be mixing with the nearby $`\pi _1\pi _0`$ state for dynamical simulations (but not for the quenched case), while when the polarisation is perpendicular there will be no such mixing. From fits to the correlations (using 207 configurations with local and fuzzed sources at 4 time-points and requiring the excited state mass to be the same for the two fits to the $`t`$-range 4-12), we see a significant mass shift: namely the parallel $`\rho `$ is $`aϵ=0.026(7)`$ lighter than the perpendicular. We illustrate this in fig. 5. This value is in excellent agreement with the mass shift we deduced above by mixing arguments. We measured this mass shift for other sea quark masses, but have a significant signal only for the case ($`\kappa =0.1355`$) studied here. Note that this directly observed mass-shift for the $`\rho `$ state should not be present in a quenched study and it is not, see fig. 5, so we have here one of the few observables that directly come from the sea-quark contributions.

An even more useful result would be a direct determination of the energy shift for the $`\pi \pi `$ state. The optimum way to determine the energies of the two close levels would be by a joint fit (or variational analysis) of the matrix of $`\rho `$ and $`\pi \pi `$ correlations. For this we need the 4-point $`\pi \pi `$ correlator, for which the ratio of contributions to the product of 2-point pion correlators at $`t=8`$ is 1.07(4) for the direct term, -0.04(4) for the momentum-swapped direct term and 0.35(6) for the box terms. The relative error on the total 4-point correlator at $`t=8`$ is $`6\%`$. From fitting the matrix of correlators for $`t`$ from 8 to 12 with two states, we form the combination orthogonal to the ground state, so selecting the first excited (ie mainly $`\pi \pi `$) state. From this we evaluate the ‘un-binding energy’, the $`\pi \pi `$ energy difference from the sum of pion energies, finding $`aϵ=0.02(2)`$. This value is in excellent agreement with our values obtained from the mixing analysis and from the $`\rho `$ mass shift. The error, however, is still extremely large and a major increase in computational resource would be needed to determine this energy shift directly with sufficient precision.

For the case when $`\rho _0\pi _1\pi _1`$, the energies are further apart, the next excited state is closer (see fig. 1) and the expected value of $`x`$ is twice as big since it increases like the relative momentum $`k`$ for a P-wave decay. We estimate that $`4t8`$ is required in this case. As shown in fig. 3, the values of the three-point correlator obtained for this case are approximately twice as large, but there is no longer a region showing linear behaviour. We show the result from the two-state transfer matrix model with the expected larger energy gap ($`a\mathrm{\Delta }=0.47`$ in this case) and normalised by the unmixed $`\pi `$ two-point correlators (as we have used in the figures) and this gives the curve shown in the figure for $`ax=0.12`$. This value is close to twice the value obtained with half of the relative momentum above, as expected. In this latter case, however, we do not have substantial cross-checks and this is qualitative rather than quantitative.

The method we have used to determine $`x`$ depends on eliminating excited state contributions that appear at subleading powers of $`t`$. It is impossible to exclude that a combination of such terms do modify our results significantly. However, the cross checks that we have available are strong: we see consistent values for $`x`$ from local or fuzzed sources from 3-point correlators, from the box contribution to the 4-point correlator and from the 3-point correlator with larger momentum release. We also see consistent evidence for the energy shift of the $`\rho `$ meson with different polarisation directions.

## 3 Phenomenology

We have evaluated the transition $`\rho \pi \pi `$ at an unrealistic quark mass (approximately the strange quark mass), in a finite volume (of size $`16a1.76`$fm) and with $`N_f=2`$ flavours of sea quark. Note that the lattice technique enables the transition to be measured off the energy-shell.

For the $`\rho _1\pi _1\pi _0`$ case, the relative momentum in the centre of mass (with boost given by $`\gamma =1.156`$ to the lattice frame) corresponds to $`ka=\pi /L\gamma `$, hence 305 MeV/c which is close to the experimental momentum of 358 MeV/c for $`\rho \pi \pi `$.

We have normalised the P-wave $`\pi \pi `$ state so that relative momentum $`k`$ and $`\overline{k}`$ are identified which reduces the density of states by 0.5. Since we have evaluated $`x`$ for momentum aligned with the polarisation, there will be an angular average contributing a factor of 1/3. Hence we expect

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=x^2L^3kE/(24\pi )$$
(5)
Our lattice determination is most precise for the transition $`\rho _1\pi _1\pi _0`$ which is not in the centre of mass. We proceed first by evaluating the decay width in the lattice frame. We use the expression of eq. 5 with $`k=\pi /L`$, the relative momentum between the pions in the lattice frame. There are additional factors of $`\gamma `$ from the phase space and from transforming the width to the centre of mass frame. Then, defining a dimensionless coupling constant directly from the reduced width as $`\overline{g}^2=\mathrm{\Gamma }ME/k^3`$ (corresponding to $`g^2/(6\pi )`$ where $`g`$ is the conventional definition of the coupling constant), we find a value of $`\overline{g}=1.40_{23}^{+47}`$ from $`ax=0.06_1^{+2}`$, where we have used our best estimates of the centre of mass values $`E`$ and $`k`$ as discussed below.

One can relate the lattice frame to centre of mass frame by considering the boost of the two pions to the centre of mass (with $`K=2\pi /L`$ and $`\gamma =(1K^2/E^2)^{1/2}=1.156`$). Then in the centre of mass, the cubic spatial volume is modified by $`L\gamma L`$ in the direction of $`K`$ (taken as the $`z`$-axis here). Moreover in this extended cube, pion momenta $`k=2\pi n/\gamma L`$ are allowed with $`n_z`$ half-integral, coming from anti-periodic spatial boundary conditions in the relative pion $`z`$-coordinate. Although this boost (by $`\gamma `$) reduces the two pion system to the centre of mass, the $`\rho `$ will not have zero momentum. This arises since energy is not conserved in the lattice frame, as we measure $`t`$-directed correlations, which implies that momentum is not conserved in the centre of mass. So our estimate above is uncertain by factors of $`\gamma (\pi \pi )/\gamma (\rho )=1.156/1.264`$. As the energy gap between the $`\rho `$ and its decay products gets smaller, this problem will decrease. The transition $`\rho _0\pi _1\pi _1`$ is in the centre of mass, which avoids the above problem, and $`ax=0.12`$ corresponds to $`\overline{g}=1.57`$ which is consistent, although systematic errors in this case are large.

A more rigorous approach is to focus on the two pion energy as in the Lüscher formalism . This has been generalised  to non-zero overall momentum by considering the boost to the centre of mass. Although we are unable to determine the energy shift $`ϵ`$ directly for the two-pion state, if we assume that two levels only dominate the mixing, then we can use our results from the $`\rho `$ meson energy shift and from the shift deduced through mixing from our value of $`x`$. Taking $`aϵ=0.26(7)`$ yields an energy shift in the centre of mass frame of $`ϵ\gamma `$ (since $`E_L^2=E_{\mathrm{cm}}^2+K^2`$). Then the phase shift for $`\pi \pi `$ scattering in the centre of mass is $`\mathrm{tan}\delta =L^2E\gamma ϵ/48`$ to leading order in $`L^1`$ which yields a central value $`\mathrm{tan}\delta =0.109`$ (including the known higher order corrections  in $`L^1`$ gives $`\mathrm{tan}\delta =0.131`$). Now, for a nearby particle pole at $`E=m_\rho `$, one can describe the phase shift $`\delta `$ by using the expression for elastic $`\pi \pi `$ scattering dominated by this pole:

$$\mathrm{tan}\delta =\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(k)}{2(m_\rho E)}$$
(6)
where the phase shift is negative because the pole is below the two body energy. Here $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(k)`$ is the decay width parametrised as $`\overline{g}^2k^3/(Em_\rho )`$ and evaluated with decay momentum $`k`$ and energy $`E`$. Using $`am_\rho =0.508`$, $`Ea=0.709`$ and $`ka=0.198`$, this gives a coupling of $`\overline{g}=1.56_{13}^{+21}`$ which is similar to the value from our simple analysis above. Indeed in the limit of a weak transition and nearly degenerate energy levels, the two approaches would give exactly the same result.

Experimental data exist for the decays $`\rho \pi \pi `$, $`K^{}K\pi `$ and $`\varphi K\overline{K}`$ which all involve the creation of a light quark pair. This gives us some information on the dependence of the coupling strength on quark mass as shown in table 1 (here the coupling $`\overline{g}`$ is normalised to the quark diagrams present in $`\rho `$ decay). In the limit of a heavy spectator quark (as for $`B^{}B\pi `$ for example), $`\overline{g}^2`$ is expected to increase like $`m_Q`$ which is the heavy quark mass. This implies that the coupling does indeed increase with spectator quark mass. We also quote in table 1 the evidence for the $`\rho K\overline{K}`$ coupling coming from Regge analyses  which bears on the spectator quark dependence. It will be interesting to use lattice studies to explore this further.

## 4 Conclusions

The lattice measurement passes all cross-checks: three different estimates of the transition amplitude $`x`$ are presented, of which the three-point analysis of $`\rho _1\pi _1\pi _0`$ is the most comprehensive, yielding a coupling $`\overline{g}=1.40_{23}^{+47}`$. The energy shift of the $`\rho `$ state with momentum $`2\pi /L`$ for different polarisation directions is seen directly which is a powerful cross-check and yields a coupling $`\overline{g}=1.60_{13}^{+21}`$. These values are close to the experimental value (for light quark pair creation) of 1.5.

Our result is in a finite volume and it would be appropriate to test it by using a larger volume, consistent with having the same relative momentum: this implies doubling the lattice spatial dimension in at least one direction. Alternatively it is possible to explore $`\rho _0\pi _{1/2}\pi _{1/2}`$ using antiperiodic spatial boundary conditions  which could give a cross check. These avenues require new dynamical quark simulations so are a major computational endeavour. A further step needed would be to extract the continuum limit of this lattice result. This needs finer lattice spacing and the same physical volume: so again substantial resources. We note that we have used a NP clover formulation which does remove order $`a`$ corrections.

Even though our method can be affected by excited state contamination, the many cross checks we have made are convincing evidence that they are under control. The systematic errors are still very difficult to estimate since we have not made a continuum extrapolation or explored increasing the lattice volume. Moreover we have not extrapolated in sea quark mass, which is possibly the biggest source of systematic error. Our result is for quark pair production with quarks of mass approximately that of strange quarks.

Since we find a strong transition for $`\rho \pi \pi `$, in the sense that $`xt`$ is big compared to unity, we have to rely on a mixing model to estimate most accurately the coupling strength. This would not be the case for a weaker decay. Even though the mixing is strong, our estimate of the $`\pi \pi `$ energy shift is that it is 0.02 in lattice units, which will be very difficult to measure accurately.

We have shown that hadronic transitions can be explored in lattice QCD and the result obtained is consistent with phenomenological values. This supports previous studies of unknown phenomena (eg. hybrid meson decay) and will allow studies of scalar meson decays which will help to untangle the confusing experimental situation.


text:
# Current hysteresis and memory effect in a molecular quantum dot with strong electron-vibron interaction

## I Introduction

Strongly correlated transport through mesoscopic systems with repulsive electron-electron interactions has received considerable interest in the past (see, for example, ), and continues to be the focus of intense experimental and theoretical investigation . The Coulomb interaction suppresses tunneling for certain range of applied voltages, leading to what is commonly called the Coulomb blockade. There is now a growing interest in molecular nanowires and quantum dots used as the “transmission lines”  and active molecular elements  in molecular-scale electronics .

A few experimental studies  provide evidence for a molecular switching effect, when the current-voltage (I-V) characteristics show two branches with high and low current for the same voltage. The effect exists in simple molecules too. It is important to identify the actual mechanism of switching.

Recently we have proposed a negative$`U`$ Hubbard model of a $`d`$-fold degenerate quantum dot, with an intrinsic non-retarded switching mechanism when $`d>2`$ . We argued that the attractive electron correlations could be caused by a strong electron-phonon (vibron) interaction in the molecule, and/or by the valence fluctuations.

It has been recently demonstrated that the low-bias conductance of molecules is dominated by resonant tunneling through coupled electronic and vibration levels . Different aspects of the electron-phonon/vibron (e-ph) interaction effect on the tunneling through molecules and quantum dots (QD) have been studied by several authors . In particular, Glazman and Shekhter, and later Wingreen et al. presented the exact resonant-tunneling transmission probability fully taking into account the e-ph interaction on a nondegenerate resonant site. Phonons produced transmission sidebands but did not affect the integral transmission probability. Li, Chen and Zhou  studied the conductance of a double degenerate (due to spin) quantum dot with Coulomb repulsion and the e-ph interaction. Their numerical results also showed the sideband peaks and the main peak related to the Coulomb repulsion, which was decreased by the e-ph interaction. Kang  studied the boson (vibron) assisted transport through a double-degenerate QD coupled to two superconducting leads and found multiple peaks in the I-V curves, which originated from the singular BCS density of states and the phonon sidebands. Ermakov  calculated the I-V curves of a four-fold degenerate dot including both the onsite Coulomb and e-ph interactions. He obtained a switching effect in the numerical I-V curves, similar to that in the negative-$`U`$ Hubbard model discussed by us recently . However, using a Hamiltonian averaged over the phonons, Ermakov missed all phonon sidebands and obtained an unphysical population ($`n=1)`$ of each QD state. More recently Gogolin and Komnik  have analyzed a nondegenerate QD, $`d=1,`$ coupled with a single phonon mode. They found a switching effect in the Born-Oppenheimer approximation similar to that in our negative-$`U`$ Hubbard model, but surprisingly for a non-degenerate case with $`d=1`$. However, we have to mention that the Born-Oppenheimer approximation does not apply to a non-degenerate level, since there are no “fast” (compared to the characteristic phonon time $`1/\omega _0`$) electron transitions within the dot. Despite differences in the models and approximations, Refs.  pointed to a novel mechanism of the volatile molecular memory caused by the e-ph or any other attractive electron correlations.

Here we develop the analytical theory of a correlated transport through a degenerate molecule quantum dot (MQD) fully taking into account both Coulomb and e-ph interactions. We show that the phonon sidebands significantly modify the switching behavior of the I-V curves in comparison with the negative-$`U`$ Hubbard model . Nevertheless, the switching effect is robust. It shows up when the effective interaction of polarons is attractive and the state of the dot is multiply degenerate, $`d>2`$.

## II Steady current through MQD

We apply the Landauer-type expression for the steady current through a region of interacting electrons, derived by Meir and Wingreen  as (in units $`\mathrm{}=k_B=1`$)

$$I(V)=\frac{e}{\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\omega \left[f_1(\omega )f_2(\omega )\right]\mathrm{ImTr}\left[\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\omega )\widehat{G}^{(1)}(\omega )\right],$$
(1)
where $`f_{1(2)}(\omega )=\left\{\mathrm{exp}[(\omega +\mathrm{\Delta }\begin{array}{c}\\ (+)\end{array}eV/2)/T]+1\right\}^1,`$ $`T`$ is the temperature, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the position of the lowest unoccupied molecular level with respect to the chemical potential. $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\omega )`$ depends on the density of states (DOS) in the leads and on the hopping integrals connecting one-particle states in the left (1) and the right (2) leads with the states in MQD, Fig. 1. This formula includes, by means of the Fourier transform of the full molecular retarded Green’s function (GF), $`\widehat{G}^{(1)}(\omega ),`$ the e-ph and Coulomb interactions inside MQD and coupling to the leads. Since the leads are metallic, electron-electron and e-ph interactions in the leads, and interactions of electrons in the leads with electrons and phonons in MQD can be neglected. We are interested in the tunneling near the conventional threshold, $`eV=2\mathrm{\Delta }`$, Fig.1, within a voltage range about an effective attractive potential $`|U|`$ caused by phonons/vibrons (see below).

The attractive energy is the difference of two large interactions, the Coulomb repulsion and the phonon mediated attraction, of the order of $`1\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$ each. Hence, $`|U|`$ is of the order of a few tens of one eV. We neglect the energy dependence of $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\omega )\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on this scale, and assume that the coupling to the leads is weak, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ $`|U|.`$ In this case $`\widehat{G}^{(1)}(\omega )`$ does not depend on the leads. Moreover we assume that there is a complete set of one-particle molecular states $`|\mu `$, where $`\widehat{G}^{(1)}(\omega )`$ is diagonal. With these assumptions we can reduce Eq.(1) to

$$I(V)=I_0_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\omega \left[f_1(\omega )f_2(\omega )\right]\rho (\omega ),$$
(2)
allowing for a transparent analysis of essential physics of the switching phenomenon. Here $`I_0=e\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and the molecular DOS, $`\rho (\omega ),`$ is given by

$$\rho (\omega )=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\mu }{}ImG_\mu (\omega ),$$
(3)
where $`G_\mu (\omega )`$ is the Fourier transform of $`G_\mu (t)=i\theta (t)\{c_\mu (t),c_\mu ^{}\},`$ $`\{\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\}`$ is the anticommutator, $`c_\mu (t)=e^{iHt}c_\mu e^{iHt},`$ $`\theta (t)=1`$ for $`t>0`$ and zero otherwise. We calculate $`\rho (\omega )`$ exactly in Section III in the framework of the Hamiltonian, which includes both the Coulomb $`U^C`$ and e-ph interactions as

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{_\mu }{}}\epsilon __\mu \widehat{n}__\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{{}_{\mu }{}^{}\mu ^{}}{}}U_{\mu \mu ^{}}^C\widehat{n}__\mu \widehat{n}_\mu ^{}`$ (5)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{\mu ,q}{}}\widehat{n}__\mu \omega _q(\gamma _{\mu q}d_q+H.c.)+{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}\omega _q(d_q^{}d_q+1/2).`$
Here $`\epsilon __\mu `$ are one-particle molecular energy levels, $`\widehat{n}_\mu =c_\mu ^{}c_\mu `$ the occupation number operators, $`c__\mu `$ and $`d_q`$ annihilates electrons and phonons, respectively, $`\omega _q`$ are the phonon (vibron) frequencies, and $`\gamma _{\mu q}`$ are e-ph coupling constants ($`q`$ enumerates the vibron modes). This Hamiltonian conserves the occupation numbers of molecular states $`\widehat{n}__\mu `$. Hence it is compatible with Eq.(2).

## III MQD density of states

We apply the canonical polaron unitary transformation $`e^S`$ , integrating phonons out, as

$$\stackrel{~}{H}=e^SHe^S,$$
(6)
where

$$S=\underset{q,\mu }{}\widehat{n}_\mu [\gamma _{\mu q}d_qH.c.]$$
(7)
is such that $`S^{}=S.`$ The electron and phonon operators are transformed as

$$\stackrel{~}{c}_\mu =c_\mu X_\mu ,$$
(8)
and

$$\stackrel{~}{d}_q=d_q\underset{\mu }{}\widehat{n}_\mu \gamma _{\mu q}^{},$$
(9)
respectively. Here

$`X_\mu =\mathrm{exp}[{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}\gamma _{\mu q}d_qH.c.].`$

The Lang-Firsov canonical transformation shifts ions to new equilibrium positions with no effect on the phonon frequencies. The diagonalization is exact:

$$\stackrel{~}{H}=\underset{i}{}\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }__\mu \widehat{n}_\mu +\underset{q}{}\omega _q(d_q^{}d_q+1/2)+\frac{1}{2}\underset{\mu \mu ^{}}{}U_{\mu \mu ^{}}\widehat{n}_\mu \widehat{n}_\mu ^{},$$
(10)
where

$$U_{\mu \mu ^{}}U_{\mu \mu ^{}}^C2\underset{q}{}\gamma _{\mu q}^{}\gamma _{\mu ^{}q}\omega _q$$
(11)
is the interaction of polarons comprising their interaction via molecular deformations (vibrons) and non-vibron (e.g. Coulomb repulsion) $`U_{\mu \mu ^{}}^C`$. To simplify the discussion, we shall assume, without losing generality, that the Coulomb integrals do not depend on the orbital index, i.e. $`U_{\mu \mu ^{}}=U.`$

The molecular energy levels are shifted by the polaron level-shift due to a deformation well created by polaron,

$$\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }__\mu =\epsilon __\mu \underset{q}{}|\gamma _{\mu q}|^2\omega _q.$$
(12)
Applying the same transformation in the retarded GF we obtain

$`G_\mu (t)`$ $`=`$ $`i\theta (t)\{c_\mu (t)X_\mu (t),c_\mu ^{}X_\mu ^{}\}`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`i\theta (t)[c_\mu (t)c_\mu ^{}X_\mu (t)X_\mu ^{}`$ (15)
$`+c_\mu ^{}c_\mu (t)X_\mu ^{}X_\mu (t)],`$
where now electron and phonon operators are averaged over the quantum state of the transformed Hamiltonian $`\stackrel{~}{H}.`$ There is no coupling between polarons and vibrons in the transformed Hamiltonian, and the electron and phonon averages are independent. The Heisenberg phonon operators evolve as

$$d_q(t)=d_qe^{i\omega _qt},$$
(16)
so that we find after thermodynamic averaging of the phonon correlator over phonon occupation numbers (using the Weyl’s identity for exponential operators)

$`X_\mu (t)X_\mu ^{}`$ (17)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\gamma _{\mu q}|^2}{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\beta \omega _q}{2}}}\left[\mathrm{cos}\left(\omega t+i{\displaystyle \frac{\beta \omega _q}{2}}\right)\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta \omega _q}{2}}\right]\right],`$ (18)
where $`\beta =1/T`$. Repeating the calculations for $`X_\mu ^{}X_\mu (t)`$ we find a simple useful relation

$$X_\mu ^{}X_\mu (t)=X_\mu (t)X_\mu ^{}^{}.$$
(19)
At low temperatures $`T\omega _q`$ the phonon correlator (18) simplifies to

$$X_\mu (t)X_\mu ^{}=\mathrm{exp}\left[\underset{𝐪}{}|\gamma _{\mu q}|^2(e^{^{i\omega _qt}}1)\right].$$
(20)
Next, we introduce the multi-particle GFs, which will necessarily appear in the equations of motion for $`c_\mu (t)c_\mu ^{}`$, as

$$G_\mu ^{(r,+)}(t)i\theta (t)\underset{\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu }{}c_\mu (t)c_\mu ^{}\underset{i=1}{\overset{r1}{}}\widehat{n}_{\mu _i},$$
(21)
and

$$G_\mu ^{(r,)}(t)i\theta (t)\underset{\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu }{}c_\mu ^{}c_\mu (t)\underset{i=1}{\overset{r1}{}}\widehat{n}_{\mu _i}.$$
(22)
Then, using the equation of motion for the Heisenberg polaron operator,

$$i\frac{dc_\mu }{dt}=\left(\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }__\mu +U\underset{\mu ^{}(\mu )}{}\widehat{n}_\mu ^{}\right)c__\mu ,$$
(23)
we derive the following equations for the multi-particle GFs,

$`i{\displaystyle \frac{dG_\mu ^{(r,+)}(t)}{dt}}=\delta (t)(1n_\mu ){\displaystyle \underset{\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu }{}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{r1}{}}}n_{\mu _i}`$ (24)
$`+[\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }__\mu +(r1)U]G_\mu ^{(r,+)}(t)+UG_\mu ^{(r+1,+)}(t),`$ (25)
and

$`i{\displaystyle \frac{dG_\mu ^{(r,)}(t)}{dt}}=\delta (t)n_\mu {\displaystyle \underset{\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu }{}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{r1}{}}}n_{\mu _i}`$ (26)
$`+[\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }__\mu +(r1)U]G_\mu ^{(r,)}(t)+UG_\mu ^{(r+1,)}(t),`$ (27)
where $`n_\mu =c_\mu ^{}c_\mu `$ is the expectation number of electrons on the molecular level $`\mu `$.

We can readily solve this set of coupled equations for MQD with one $`d`$-fold degenerate energy level and with the e-ph coupling $`\gamma _{\mu q}=\gamma _q,`$ which does not break the degeneracy. At zero bias voltage the empty level will lie by some energy $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ above the Fermi levels of the electrodes (Fig. 1). Assuming that $`n_\mu =n,`$ Fourier transformation of the set yields

$$G_\mu ^{(1,+)}(\omega )=(1n)\underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}\frac{Z_r(n)}{\omega rU+i\delta },$$
(28)
$$G_\mu ^{(1,)}(\omega )=n\underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}\frac{Z_r(n)}{\omega rU+i\delta }$$
(29)
where $`\delta =+0`$, and

$$Z_r(n)=\frac{(d1)!}{r!(d1r)!}n^r(1n)^{d1r}.$$
(30)
### A MQD Green’s function at low temperatures ($`T\omega _q)`$

It is the easiest to find the total Green’s function at low temperatures. Indeed, transforming back to real time and using Eqs.(28), (29) and (20), (19) we arrive at

$`G_\mu (t)`$ $`=`$ $`i\theta (t)𝒵_0{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}}Z_r(n)e^{irUt}`$ (33)
$`\times [(1n)\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}|\gamma _{\mu q}|^2e^{i\omega _qt})`$
$`+n\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}|\gamma _{\mu q}|^2e^{i\omega _qt})],`$
where $`𝒵_0=\mathrm{exp}\left[_𝐪|\gamma _q|^2\right]`$. This is an exact solution with respect to correlations and e-ph interactions which satisfies all sum rules. Expanding the exponents in the brackets we find its Fourier component as

$`G_\mu (\omega )=𝒵_0{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}}Z_r(n)[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\omega rU+i\delta }}`$ (34)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l!}}{\displaystyle \underset{q_1,\mathrm{}q_l}{}}|\gamma _{q_1}\mathrm{}\gamma _{q_l}|^2({\displaystyle \frac{1n}{\omega rU_{k=1}^l\omega _{v_k}+i\delta }}`$ (35)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{\omega rU+_{k=1}^l\omega _{v_k}+i\delta }})]`$ (36)
If the e-ph interaction is weak, $`|\gamma _q|1`$, the essential contribution comes only from the first (phonon-less) term, and we recover the result of the Hubbard model

$$G_\mu (\omega )=\underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}\frac{Z_r(n)}{\omega rU+i\delta }.$$
(37)
At finite $`|\gamma _q|1`$, the phonon side-bands become important in Eq.(36), which is obviously in the form of the multi-polaron expansion. If one neglects the correlations, $`U=0,`$ a standard polaron GF  is recovered:

$`G_\mu (\omega )=𝒵_0[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\omega +i\delta }}+{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l!}}{\displaystyle \underset{q_1,\mathrm{}q_l}{}}|\gamma _{q_1}\mathrm{}\gamma _{q_l}|^2`$ (38)
$`\times ({\displaystyle \frac{1n}{\omega _{k=1}^l\omega _{v_k}+i\delta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{\omega +_{k=1}^l\omega _{v_k}+i\delta }})],`$ (39)
where we have applied the sum rule

$$\underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}Z_r(n)=1.$$
(40)
### B MQD Green’s function at finite temperatures, single vibron mode

By applying the same method, as in the case of $`T=0,`$ and going over back to real time with the use of Eqs.(28), (29) and (20), (19) we arrive at

$`G_\mu (t)`$ $`=`$ $`i\theta (t)𝒵{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}}Z_r(n)e^{irUt}`$ (43)
$`\times [(1n)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\gamma _{\mu q}|^2}{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\beta \omega _q}{2}}}\mathrm{cos}(\omega t+i{\displaystyle \frac{\beta \omega _q}{2}})\right)`$
$`+n\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\gamma _{\mu q}|^2}{\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\beta \omega _q}{2}}}\mathrm{cos}(\omega ti{\displaystyle \frac{\beta \omega _q}{2}})\right)],`$
where now

$$𝒵=\mathrm{exp}\left[\underset{𝐪}{}|\gamma _q|^2\mathrm{coth}\frac{\beta \omega _q}{2}\right].$$
(44)
In approximation, where we retain a coupling to a single mode with the characteristic frequency $`\omega _0`$ and $`\gamma _q\gamma `$, we can expand the exponents in the temporal Green’s function (43) in powers of $`\mathrm{exp}\left(\omega t+i\frac{\beta \omega _0}{2}\right)`$. It is then trivial to find the Green’s function in the frequency domain as

$`G_\mu (\omega )=𝒵{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}}Z_r(n){\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}I_l\left(\xi \right)`$ (45)
$`\times [e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}({\displaystyle \frac{1n}{\omega rUl\omega _0+i\delta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{\omega rU+l\omega _0+i\delta }})`$ (46)
$`+(1\delta _{l0})e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}({\displaystyle \frac{1n}{\omega rU+l\omega _0+i\delta }}`$ (47)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{\omega rUl\omega _0+i\delta }}))],`$ (48)
where $`\xi =|\gamma |^2/\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\beta \omega _0}{2},`$ $`I_l\left(\xi \right)`$ is the modified Bessel function, and $`\delta _{lk}`$ is the Kroneker symbol. At low temperatures, where $`\beta \omega _01,`$ $`\xi 1`$ and $`I_l\left(\xi \right)\left(\frac{\xi }{2}\right)^l/l!,`$ this expression gives (36) in the form

$`G_\mu (\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`𝒵_0{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}}Z_r(n){\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\gamma |^{2l}}{l!}}({\displaystyle \frac{1n}{\omega rUl\omega _0+i\delta }}`$ (50)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{\omega rU+l\omega _0+i\delta }}).`$
The molecular DOS is readily found as an imaginary part of Eq.(48):

$`\rho (\omega )=𝒵d{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}}Z_r(n){\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}I_l\left(\xi \right)`$ (51)
$`\times [e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}[(1n)\delta (\omega rUl\omega _0)+n\delta (\omega rU+l\omega _0)]`$ (52)
$`+(1\delta _{l0})e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}[n\delta (\omega rUl\omega _0)`$ (53)
$`+(1n)\delta (\omega rU+l\omega _0)]].`$ (54)
The important feature of the DOS, Eq.(54), is its nonlinear dependence on the occupation number $`n,`$ which leads to the switching effect and hysteresis in the I-V characteristics for $`d>2`$, as will be shown below. It contains full information about all possible correlation and inelastic effects in transport, in particular, all the vibron-assisted tunneling processes (Fig. 2).

## IV Nonlinear rate equation and switching

Generally, the electron density $`n_\mu `$ obeys an infinite set of rate equations for many-particle GFs which can be derived in the framework of a tunneling Hamiltonian including correlations . In the case of MQD only weakly coupled with leads one can apply the Fermi-Dirac golden rule to obtain an equation for $`n.`$ Equating incoming and outgoing numbers of electrons in MQD per unit time we obtain the self-consistent equation for the level occupation $`n`$ as

$`(1n){\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\omega \left\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1f_1(\omega )+\mathrm{\Gamma }_2f_2(\omega )\right\}\rho (\omega )`$ (55)
$`n{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\omega \left\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1[1f_1(\omega )]+\mathrm{\Gamma }_2[1f_2(\omega )]\right\}\rho (\omega )=0`$ (56)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1(2)}`$ are the transition rates from left (right) leads to MQD. Taking into account that $`_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\rho (\omega )=d`$, Eq.(56) for the symmetric leads, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1=\mathrm{\Gamma }_2,`$ reduces to

$$2nd=𝑑\omega \rho \left(\omega \right)\left(f_1+f_2\right),$$
(57)
which automatically satisfies $`0n1`$. Explicitly, the self-consistent equation for the occupation number is

$$n=\frac{1}{2}\underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}Z_r(n)[na_r+(1n)b_r],$$
(58)
where

$`a_r`$ $`=`$ $`𝒵{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}I_l\left(\xi \right)(e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}[f_1(rUl\omega _0)+f_2(rUl\omega _0)]`$ (60)
$`+(1\delta _{l0})e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}[f_1(rU+l\omega _0)+f_2(rU+l\omega _0)]),`$
$`b_r`$ $`=`$ $`𝒵{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}I_l\left(\xi \right)(e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}[f_1(rU+l\omega _0)+f_2(rU+l\omega _0)]`$ (62)
$`+(1\delta _{l0})e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}[f_1(rUl\omega _0)+f_2(rUl\omega _0)]).`$
The current is expressed as

$$j\frac{I(V)}{dI_0}=\underset{r=0}{\overset{d1}{}}Z_r(n)[na_r^{}+(1n)b_r^{}],$$
(63)
where

$`a_r^{}`$ $`=`$ $`𝒵{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}I_l\left(\xi \right)(e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}[f_1(rUl\omega _0)f_2(rUl\omega _0)]`$ (65)
$`+(1\delta _{l0})e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}[f_1(rU+l\omega _0)f_2(rU+l\omega _0)]),`$
$`b_r^{}`$ $`=`$ $`𝒵{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}I_l\left(\xi \right)(e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}[f_1(rU+l\omega _0)+f_2(rU+l\omega _0)]`$ (67)
$`+(1\delta _{l0})e^{\frac{\beta \omega _0l}{2}}[f_1(rUl\omega _0)+f_2(rUl\omega _0)]).`$
Let us analyze the I-V curves for $`d=1`$, $`2`$, and $`4.`$

### A Absence of switching for nondegenerate and two–fold degenerate MQD

There is one term in the sum over $`r`$, $`r=0`$ with $`Z_0(n)=1,`$ if $`d=1.`$ Hence there is only one solution of the rate equation (58)

$$n=\frac{b_0}{2+b_0a_0},$$
(68)
and the current is single-valued at any voltage

$$j=\frac{2b_0^{}+a_0^{}b_0a_0b_0^{}}{2+b_0a_0}.$$
(69)
This is an exact result, which is valid for any e-ph coupling and any phonon frequency. We have to conclude that there is no switching of a nondegenerate MQD. The opposite conclusion reached in Ref. might be due to the Born-Oppenheimer (static) approximation used by Gogolin and Komnik. In fact, the Born-Oppenheimer approximation does not apply to the non-degenerate level model, since there are no “fast”, compared to phonon times $`1/\omega _0,`$ electron transitions within the “molecule”.

In the case of a double-degenerate MQD, $`d=2,`$ there are two terms, which contribute to the sum over $`r`$, with $`Z_0(n)=1n`$ and $`Z_1(n)=n.`$ The rate equation becomes a quadratic one

$$n^2(a_0+a_1b_0b_1)+n(2a_0+b_0b_1)b_0=0.$$
(70)
with two solutions,

$`n_{1.2}={\displaystyle \frac{2a_0+b_0b_1}{2(a_0+a_1b_0b_1)}}`$ (71)
$`\pm \left[{\displaystyle \frac{(2a_0+b_0b_1)^2}{4((a_0+a_1b_0b_1)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{b_0}{a_0+a_1b_0b_1}}\right]^{1/2}.`$ (72)
However, one of them is negative because $`0<b_r<a_r<1`$ for any temperature and voltage. Therefore, we conclude that there is only one physical population of MQD, and the current is also single-valued at any voltage and temperature, in agreement with the Hubbard model .

### B Switching of four-fold degenerate MQD

In this case the rate equation is of the fourth power in $`n,`$

$`2n`$ $`=`$ $`(1n)^3[na_0+(1n)b_0]`$ (76)
$`+3n(1n)^2[na_1+(1n)b_1]`$
$`+3n^2(1n)[na_2+(1n)b_2]`$
$`+n^3[na_3+(1n)b_3].`$
In the limit $`|\gamma |1`$ we have $`b_r=a_r`$, $`𝒵=1,`$ the remaining interaction is $`U=U^C`$ \[see Eq.(11)\] and Eq.(76) is reduced to

$`2n`$ $`=`$ $`(1n)^3b_0+3n(1n)^2b_1`$ (78)
$`+3n^2(1n)b_2+n^3b_3.`$
If we assume now that the non-vibron interaction $`U^C`$ is negative, for example due to valence fluctuations, then we recover the negative-$`U`$ model , and the kinetic equation is reduced to

$$2n=1(1n)^3$$
(79)
in the voltage range $`\mathrm{\Delta }|U|<eV/2<\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`T=0`$ because $`b_0=0`$ and $`b_1=b_2=b_3=1`$ there, if $`|U|<\mathrm{\Delta }/2`$. The current is simplified as

$$j=2n.$$
(80)
Equation (79) has two physical roots, $`n=0`$ and $`n=(35^{1/2})/20.38`$. Hence we obtain two stationary states of MQD with low (zero at $`T=0`$) and high current, $`j0.76`$ for the same voltage as we discussed earlier in Ref. . The current-voltage characteristics show a hysteretic behavior for $`d=4.`$ When the voltage increases from zero, 4-fold degenerate MQD remains in a low-current state until the threshold $`eV_2/2=\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is reached. Remarkably, when the voltage decreases from the value above the threshold $`V_2`$, the molecule remains in the high-current state down to the voltage $`eV_1/2=\mathrm{\Delta }|U|`$ well below the threshold $`V_2`$. This is a correlation mechanism of electronic molecular switching without retardation. Therefore, the negative-$`U`$ degenerate molecular dot possesses the volatile memory originating from the many-particle attractive correlations.

The e-ph coupling results in the phonon sidebands of DOS, which are fully taken into account in Eq.(56) for the self-consistent occupation of the molecular level $`n.`$ In the case of the Coulomb repulsion and the electron-vibron coupling the effective interaction will be attractive, if

$$|\gamma |\left(\frac{U^C}{2\omega _0}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(81)
There is an important difference between switching with vibron-mediated electron-electron attraction and the negative-$`U`$ model. We show the numerical results for $`\omega _0=0.2`$ (in units of $`\mathrm{\Delta },`$ as all the energies in the problem) and $`U^C=0`$ for two values of the coupling constant, $`\gamma ^2=11/13`$ (Fig. 3) and $`\gamma ^2=13/11`$ (Fig. 4). This case formally corresponds to $`U=2\gamma ^2\omega _00.4`$, i.e. close to the same value of the attraction as we have used in the negative-$`U`$ model  (we selected those values of $`\gamma ^2`$ to avoid accidental commensurability of a ladder of the correlated level energies separated by $`U`$ and generated by them phonon side-band ladders with the step $`\omega _0)`$. In the negative-$`U`$ case the threshold voltages were $`eV_1/2\mathrm{\Delta }=10.4=0.6`$ and $`eV_2/2\mathrm{\Delta }=1.`$ However, in the vibron case the threshold for the onset of bistability corresponds to larger voltage bias compared to negative-$`U`$ case (at $`eV/2\mathrm{\Delta }=0.86`$ for $`\gamma ^2=11/13`$ and $`\omega _0=0.2`$). The I-V in the vibron case is much more complex too: as one can see from Figs. 3 and 4, the current discontinuity at the threshold strongly depends on the value of the e-ph coupling constant. The inelastic tunneling processes through the level, accompanied by emission/absorption of the phonons (Fig. 2), manifest themselves as steps on the I-V curve, Figs. 3 and 4. Those steps are generated by the phonon side-bands originating from correlated levels on the dot with the energies $`\mathrm{\Delta },`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }+U,`$ …, $`\mathrm{\Delta }+(d1)U.`$ Since $`\omega _0`$ is not generally commensurate with $`U,`$ we obtain pretty irregular picture of the steps on I-V curve. This comes as no surprise, since the kinetic equation (76) is much more complex compared to the one in the negative-U case, cf. (79). The level occupation approaches the limiting value $`n=0.5`$ at large bias voltages, Figs. 3 and 4.

The bistability region shrinks down with temperature. In the specific example of the negative-$`U`$ model with $`U/\mathrm{\Delta }=0.4`$ the bistability is over at $`T/\mathrm{\Delta }0.1`$ . Importantly, in the vibron case this happens at much lower temperatures. Indeed, the hysteresis loop almost closes at $`T/\mathrm{\Delta }=0.01`$. The critical temperature, below which the current bistability exists in the vibron case, is suppressed by about an order of magnitude compared to the negative-$`U`$ case. At finite temperatures, the overall I-V curve shows the smoothed out steps at the bias voltages coinciding with the voltage where the vibrons are emitted/absorbed as at $`T=0`$ (Figs.3, 4).

In conclusion, we have developed the multi-polaron theory of tunneling through a molecular quantum dot (MQD) taking phonon sidebands and strong electron correlations into account. The degenerate MQD with strong electron-vibron coupling shows a hysteretic volatile memory if the degeneracy of the molecular level is larger than two, $`d>2.`$ The hysteretic behavior strongly depends on electron-vibron coupling and characteristic vibron frequencies. The current bistability vanishes above some critical temperature. It would be very interesting to look for an experimental realization of the model, possibly in a system containing a certain conjugated central part, which exhibits the attractive correlations of carriers with large degeneracy $`d>2.`$

This work has been partly supported by DARPA. The authors acknowledge useful discussions with V.V. Osipov and R.S. Williams.


text:
# The anomalous dimension of the composite operator 𝐴² in the Landau gauge

## 1 Introduction

Nowadays an increasing evidence has been reported on the relevance of the local composite operator $`A_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }`$for the nonperturbative regime of Yang-Mills theories quantized in the Landau gauge. That this operator has a special meaning in the Landau gauge can be simply understood by observing that, due to the transversality condition $`_\mu A^{a\mu }=0`$, the integrated mass dimension two operator $`\left(VT\right)^1d^4xA_\mu ^aA^{\mu a}`$ is gauge invariant, $`VT`$ being the space-time volume. Lattice simulations  have indeed provided strong indications for the existence of the pure gluon condensate $`A_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }`$, confirming its relevance for the infrared dynamics of Yang-Mills. Also, the monopole condensation in compact $`QED`$ turns out to be related to a phase transition for this condensate .

Recently, a renormalizable effective potential for $`A_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }`$ has been obtained in  by using the local composite operator (LCO) technique . This result shows that the vacuum of pure Yang-Mills theory favors a nonvanishing value of this condensate, which provides effective masses for the gluons while contributing to the dimension four condensate $`\alpha F^2`$ through the trace anomaly. It is worth remarking here that this mass has a pure dynamical origin and manifests itself without breaking the gauge group. Both features are indeed expected in a confining gauge theory, being in agreement with the Kugo-Ojima criterion for color confinement .

An important ingredient in the analysis of the effective potential for the gluon condensate is the anomalous dimension $`\gamma _{A^2}`$ of the operator $`A_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }`$. Till now, $`\gamma _{A^2}`$ has been computed up to three loops in the $`\overline{MS}`$ renormalization scheme . The available expression for $`\gamma _{A^2}`$ shows rather interesting properties concerning the operator $`A_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }`$in the Landau gauge. It turns out indeed that, besides being multiplicative renormalizable, its anomalous dimension can be expressed as a combination of the gauge $`\beta `$ function and of the anomalous dimension $`\gamma _A`$ of the gauge fields, according to the relation

$$\gamma _{A^2}=\left(\frac{\beta (a)}{a}+\gamma _A(a)\right),a=\frac{g^2}{16\pi ^2},$$
(1.1)
which can be easily checked up to three loops . This feature strongly supports the existence of some underlying Ward identities which should be at the origin of eq.$`\left(\text{1.1}\right)`$, meaning that $`\gamma _{A^2}`$ is not an independent parameter of the theory.

The aim of this paper is to provide an affirmative answer concerning the possibility of giving a purely algebraic proof of the relation $`\left(\text{1.1}\right)`$, which extends to all orders of perturbation theory. Our proof will rely only on the use of the Slavnov-Taylor identity and of an additional Ward identity, known as the ghost Ward identity, present in the Landau gauge . Furthermore, according to , it turns out that also the anomalous dimension $`\gamma _c`$ of the Faddeev-Popov ghosts can be written as a combination of $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma _A`$, namely

$$2\gamma _c(a)=\frac{\beta (a)}{a}\gamma _A(a).$$
(1.2)
Both relations $`\left(\text{1.1}\right)`$ and $`\left(\text{1.2}\right)`$ can be used as a very useful check for higher order computations in Yang-Mills theories quantized in gauges which reduce to the Landau gauge when the gauge parameters are set to zero, as in the case of the nonlinear Curci-Ferrari gauge .

The work is organized as follows. In Sect.1 we give a brief account of eqs.$`\left(\text{1.1}\right)`$ and $`\left(\text{1.2}\right)`$ by making use of the available three loops expressions. Sect.2 is devoted to their algebraic proof.

## 2 The anomalous dimension of the operator $`A^2`$in the Landau gauge

In order to give a short account of the relations $`\left(\text{1.1}\right)`$ and $`\left(\text{1.2}\right)`$, let us recall the three loop expressions of the gauge $`\beta `$ function and of the gauge and ghost fields anomalous dimensions $`\gamma _A`$ and $`\gamma _c`$, as given in . They read

$$\frac{\beta (a)}{a}=\frac{11}{3}\left(Na\right)\frac{34}{3}\left(Na\right)^2\frac{2857}{54}\left(Na\right)^3,$$
(2.3)
$$\gamma _A=\frac{13}{6}\left(Na\right)\frac{59}{8}\left(Na\right)^2+\frac{\left(648\varsigma (3)39860\right)}{1152}\left(Na\right)^3,$$
(2.4)
and

$$\gamma _c=\frac{3}{4}\left(Na\right)\frac{95}{48}\left(Na\right)^2\frac{\left(1944\varsigma (3)+63268\right)}{6912}\left(Na\right)^3,$$
(2.5)
where $`N`$ is the number of colors corresponding to the gauge group $`SU(N)`$. Making use of the relation

$$\gamma _{A^2}=\left(\frac{\beta (a)}{a}+\gamma _A(a)\right),$$
(2.6)
for the anomalous dimension of $`A_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }`$one gets, up to the third order,

* first order

$$\gamma _{A^2}^{(1)}=\left(\frac{\beta ^{(1)}}{a}+\gamma _A^{(1)}\right)=\frac{35}{6}\left(Na\right).$$
(2.7)
* second order

$$\gamma _{A^2}^{(2)}=\left(\frac{\beta ^{(2)}}{a}+\gamma _A^{(2)}\right)=\frac{449}{24}\left(Na\right)^2.$$
(2.8)
* third order

$$\gamma _{A^2}^{(3)}=\left(\frac{\beta ^{(3)}}{a}+\gamma _A^{(3)}\right)=\left(\frac{75607}{864}\frac{9}{16}\varsigma (3)\right)\left(Na\right)^3.$$
(2.9)
Expressions $`\left(\text{2.7}\right)`$, $`\left(\text{2.8}\right)`$, $`\left(\text{2.9}\right)`$ are in complete agreement with those given in111Notice that the anomalous dimension $`\gamma _O`$ for $`A^2`$ given in  is related to $`\gamma _{A^2}`$ in eq.$`\left(\text{2.6}\right)`$ by $`\gamma _{A^2}=4\gamma _O`$. . Concerning now the ghost anomalous dimension $`\gamma _c`$ in eq.$`\left(\text{2.5}\right)`$, it is straightforward to verify in fact that the relation

$$2\gamma _c(a)=\frac{\beta (a)}{a}\gamma _A(a),$$
(2.10)
holds. This equation expresses the nonrenormalization properties of the ghost fields in the Landau gauge and, as shown in , follows from the ghost Ward identity. Although we are considering only pure Yang-Mills theory, it is worth mentioning that eqs.$`\left(\text{2.6}\right)`$ and $`\left(\text{2.10}\right)`$ remain valid also in the presence of matter fields, as one can verify from .

## 3 Algebraic proof

In this Section we provide an algebraic proof of the relation $`\left(\text{2.6}\right)`$. We shall make use of a suitable set of Ward identities which can be derived in the Landau gauge in order to characterize the local operator $`A^2`$. Let us begin by reminding the expression of the pure Yang-Mills action in the Landau gauge

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`S_{YM}+S_{GF+FP}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle d^4xF_{\mu \nu }^aF^{a\mu \nu }}+{\displaystyle d^4x\left(b^a_\mu A^{a\mu }+\overline{c}^a^\mu D_\mu ^{ab}c^b\right)},`$
where

$$D_\mu ^{ab}_\mu \delta ^{ab}+gf^{acb}A_\mu ^c.$$
(3.12)
To study the operator $`A_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }`$, we introduce it in the action by means of a set of external sources. It turns out that three external sources $`J,`$ $`\eta ^\mu `$ and $`\tau ^\mu `$ are needed, so that

$`S_\mathrm{J}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^4x\left[J\frac{1}{2}A_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }+\frac{\xi }{2}J^2\eta ^\mu A_\mu ^ac^a\tau ^\mu s(A_\mu ^ac^a)\right]}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^4x\left[J\frac{1}{2}A_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }+\frac{\xi }{2}J^2\eta ^\mu A_\mu ^ac^a+\tau ^\mu _\mu c^ac^a+\frac{g}{2}\tau ^\mu f^{abc}A_\mu ^ac^bc^c\right]},`$
where $`s`$ denotes the BRST operator acting as

$`sA_\mu ^a`$ $`=`$ $`D_\mu ^{ab}c^b`$
$`sc^a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2}}f^{abc}c^bc^c`$
$`s\overline{c}^a`$ $`=`$ $`b^a`$
$`sb^a`$ $`=`$ $`Jc^a`$
$`sJ`$ $`=`$ $`0`$
$`s\eta ^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`^\mu J`$
$`s\tau ^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\eta ^\mu .`$ (3.14)
It is easy to check that

$$s\left(S_{YM}+S_{GF+FP}+S_\mathrm{J}\right)=0.$$
(3.15)
According to the LCO procedure , the dimensionless parameter $`\xi `$ is needed to account for the divergences present in the vacuum Green function $`A^2(x)A^2(y),`$ which are proportional to $`J^2`$.

### 3.1 Ward identities

In order to translate the BRST invariance $`\left(\text{3.15}\right)`$ into the corresponding Slavnov-Taylor identity , we introduce two additional external sources $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu ^a`$and $`L^a`$coupled to the nonlinear BRST variation of $`A_\mu ^a`$and $`c^a`$

$$S_{ext}=d^4x\left[\mathrm{\Omega }^{a\mu }D_\mu ^{ab}c^b+L^a\frac{g}{2}f^{abc}c^bc^c\right],$$
(3.16)
with

$$s\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu ^a=sL^a=0.$$

The complete action

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }=S_{YM}+S_{GF+FP}+S_{\mathrm{LCO}}+S_{ext}.$$
(3.17)
turns out thus to obey the following identities:

* The Slavnov-Taylor identity

$$𝒮(\mathrm{\Sigma })=0,$$
(3.18)
$$𝒮(\mathrm{\Sigma })=d^4x\left(\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta A_\mu ^a}\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }^{a\mu }}+\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta L^a}\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta c^a}+b^a\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta \overline{c}^a}+_\mu J\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta \eta _\mu }+\eta ^\mu \frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta \tau ^\mu }Jc^a\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta b^a}\right)$$
(3.19)
* The Landau gauge condition

$$\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta b^a}=_\mu A^{\mu a},$$
(3.20)
and the antighost Ward identity

$$\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta \overline{c}^a}+_\mu \frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }_\mu ^a}=0,$$
(3.21)
* The ghost Ward identity

$$𝒢^a\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{cl}}^a,$$
(3.22)
where

$$𝒢^a\mathrm{\Sigma }=d^4x\left(\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta c^a}+gf^{abc}\overline{c}^b\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta b^c}\tau _\mu \frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }_\mu ^a}\right),$$
(3.23)
and

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{cl}}^a=d^4x\left(gf^{abc}\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu ^bA^{c\mu }gf^{abc}L^bc^c+\eta ^\mu A_\mu ^a\right).$$
(3.24)
Notice that expression $`\left(\text{3.24}\right)`$, being purely linear in the quantum fields, is a classical breaking. It is remarkable that the ghost Ward identity can be established also in the presence of the external sources $`(J,\eta ^\mu ,\tau ^\mu )`$. As we shall see, this identity will play a fundamental role for the algebraic proof of the relation $`\left(\text{2.6}\right)`$.

### 3.2 Algebraic characterization of the general local counterterm

We are now ready to analyse the structure of the most general local counterterm compatible with the identities $`\left(\text{3.18}\right)`$ $`\left(\text{3.22}\right)`$. Let us begin by displaying the quantum numbers of all fields and sources, namely

|  | $`A_\mu ^a`$ | $`c^a`$ | $`\overline{c}^a`$ | $`b^a`$ | $`L^a`$ | $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu ^a`$ | $`J`$ | $`\eta ^\mu `$ | $`\tau ^\mu `$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Gh. number | $`0`$ | $`1`$ | $`1`$ | $`0`$ | $`2`$ | $`1`$ | $`0`$ | $`1`$ | $`2`$ |
| Dimension | $`1`$ | $`0`$ | $`2`$ | $`2`$ | $`4`$ | $`3`$ | $`2`$ | $`3`$ | $`3`$ |

(3.25)
In order to characterize the most general invariant counterterm which can be freely added to all orders of perturbation theory, we perturb the classical action $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ by adding an arbitrary integrated local polynomial $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}`$ in the fields and external sources of dimension bounded by four and with zero ghost number, and we require that the perturbed action $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }+\epsilon \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}})`$ satisfies the same Ward identities and constraints as $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ to the first order in the perturbation parameter $`\epsilon ,`$ i.e.

$`𝒮(\mathrm{\Sigma }+\epsilon \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}})`$ $`=`$ $`0+O(\epsilon ^2),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta (\mathrm{\Sigma }+\epsilon \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}})}{\delta b^a}}`$ $`=`$ $`^\mu A_\mu ^a+O(\epsilon ^2),`$
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \overline{c}^a}}+_\mu {\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }_\mu ^a}}\right)(\mathrm{\Sigma }+\epsilon \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}})`$ $`=`$ $`0+O(\epsilon ^2),`$
$`𝒢^a(\mathrm{\Sigma }+\epsilon \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}})`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{cl}}^a+O(\epsilon ^2).`$ (3.26)
This amounts to impose the following conditions on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}`$

$`_\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (3.27)
$`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }d^4x({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta A_\mu ^a}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }^{a\mu }}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }^{a\mu }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta A_\mu ^a}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta L^a}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta c^a}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }}{\delta c^a}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta L^a}}`$
$`+b^a{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \overline{c}^a}}+_\mu J{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \eta _\mu }}+\eta ^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \tau ^\mu }}Jc^a{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta b^a}}),`$
and

$$\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}}{\delta b^a}=0,$$
(3.28)
$$\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}}{\delta \overline{c}^a}+_\mu \frac{\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}}{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }_\mu ^a}=0,$$
(3.29)
$$𝒢^a\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}=0.$$
(3.30)
From equations $`\left(\text{3.28}\right)`$ and $`\left(\text{3.29}\right)`$ it follows that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}`$ does not depend on the Lagrange multiplier field $`b^a`$ and that the antighost $`\overline{c}^a`$ enters only through the combination $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mu ^a=\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu ^a+_\mu \overline{c}^a\right)`$. As a consequence, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}`$ can be parametrized as follows

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}`$ $`=`$ $`S^{\mathrm{count}}(A)`$
$`+{\displaystyle d^4x\left(\frac{a_1}{2}f^{abc}L^ac^bc^c+a_2\widehat{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mu ^a^\mu c^a+a_3f^{abc}\widehat{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mu ^aA_\mu ^bc^c+\frac{a_4}{2}\xi J^2\right)}`$
$`+{\displaystyle d^4x\left(\frac{a_5}{2}JA_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }+a_6\eta ^\mu A_\mu ^ac^a+\frac{a_7}{2}\tau ^\mu f^{abc}A_\mu ^ac^bc^c+a_8\tau ^\mu _\mu c^ac^a\right)},`$
where $`a_i,i=1,\mathrm{..8},`$ are free parameters and $`S^{\mathrm{count}}(A)`$ depends only on the gauge fields $`A_\mu ^a`$. From the ghost Ward identity condition $`\left(\text{3.30}\right)`$ it follows that

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`a_3=a_6=a_7=0,`$ (3.32)
$`a_8`$ $`=`$ $`a_2.`$
The vanishing of the coefficient $`a_1`$ expresses the absence of the counterterm $`f^{abc}L^ac^bc^c`$. Also, $`a_3=0`$ states the nonrenormalization of the ghost-antighost-gluon vertex, stemming from the transversality of the Landau propagator and from the factorization of the ghost momentum. As shown in , these features are related to a set of nonrenormalization theorems of the Landau gauge. Furthermore, the vanishing of $`a_6`$ implies the ultraviolet finiteness of the operator $`A_\mu c`$. It is easy to check indeed that at one loop order the 1PI amputated Green function $`A_\mu (x)c(x)A_\nu (y)\overline{c}(z)_{1PI}`$ with the insertion of $`A_\mu c`$ is not divergent, due to the transversality of the Landau propagator. These finiteness properties extend to all orders, due to the ghost Ward identity $`\left(\text{3.22}\right)`$. It remains now to work out the condition $`\left(\text{3.27}\right)`$. Making use of the well known results on the cohomology of Yang-Mills theory , it turns out that the condition $`\left(\text{3.27}\right)`$ implies that the coefficient $`a_5`$ is related to $`a_2,`$

$$a_5=a_2,$$
(3.33)
and that $`S^{\mathrm{count}}(A)`$ can be written as

$`S^{\mathrm{count}}(A)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho S_{YM}(A)+a_2{\displaystyle d^4xA_\mu ^a\frac{\delta S_{YM}(A)}{\delta A_\mu ^a}},`$
$`S_{YM}(A)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle d^4xF_{\mu \nu }^aF^{a\mu \nu }},`$ (3.34)
where $`\rho `$ is a free parameter. In summary, the most general local counterterm compatible with the Ward identities $`\left(\text{3.18}\right)`$ $`\left(\text{3.22}\right)`$ contains three independent parameters $`\rho `$, $`a_2`$, $`a_4`$, and reads

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}`$ $`=`$ $`\rho S_{YM}(A)+a_2{\displaystyle d^4xA_\mu ^a\frac{\delta S_{YM}(A)}{\delta A_\mu ^a}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle d^4x\left(a_2\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu ^a+_\mu \overline{c}^a\right)^\mu c^a+\frac{a_4}{2}\xi J^2+\frac{a_2}{2}JA_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }a_2\tau ^\mu _\mu c^ac^a\right)}.`$
It is apparent from the above expression that the parameters $`\rho `$ and $`a_2`$ are related to the renormalization of the gauge coupling $`g`$ and of the gauge fields $`A_\mu ^a`$, while the parameter $`a_4`$ corresponds to the renormalization of $`\xi `$. It should be remarked also that the coefficient of the counterterm $`JA_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }`$ is given by $`a_2`$. This means that the renormalization of the external source $`J`$, and thus of the composite operator $`A_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }`$, can be expressed as a combination of the renormalization constants of the gauge coupling and of the gauge fields. As we shall see in the next section, this property will lead to the eq.$`\left(\text{2.6}\right)`$.

### 3.3 Stability and renormalization constants

Having found the most general local counterterm compatible with all Ward identities, it remains to discuss the stability  of the classical starting action, i.e. to check that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}`$ can be reabsorbed in the starting action $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ by means of a multiplicative renormalization of the coupling constant $`g`$, the parameter $`\xi `$, the fields $`\left\{\varphi =A,c,\overline{c},b\right\}`$ and the sources $`\left\{\mathrm{\Phi }=J,\eta ,\tau ,L,\mathrm{\Omega }\right\}`$, namely

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(g,\xi ,\varphi ,\mathrm{\Phi })+\epsilon \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{count}}=\mathrm{\Sigma }(g_0,\xi _0,\varphi _0,\mathrm{\Phi }_0)+O(\epsilon ^2),$$
(3.36)
where, adopting the same conventions of

$`g_0`$ $`=`$ $`Z_gg,`$ (3.37)
$`\xi _0`$ $`=`$ $`Z_\xi \xi ,`$
$`\varphi _0`$ $`=`$ $`Z_\varphi ^{1/2}\varphi ,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ $`=`$ $`Z_\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }.`$
As already mentioned, the parameters $`\rho `$ and $`a_2`$ are related to the renormalization of $`g`$ and $`A_\mu ^a`$, according to

$`Z_g`$ $`=`$ $`1\epsilon {\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2}},`$ (3.38)
$`Z_A^{1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`1+\epsilon \left(a_2+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2}}\right).`$
Concerning the other fields, it is almost immediate to verify that they are renormalized as follows

$$Z_b=Z_A^1,$$
(3.39)
and

$$Z_{\overline{c}}=Z_c=Z_g^1Z_A^{1/2}.$$
(3.40)
Similar relations are easily found for the sources. In particular, for the source $`J`$ and for the parameter $`\xi `$ one has

$$Z_J=Z_{A^2}=Z_gZ_A^{1/2},$$
(3.41)
and

$$Z_\xi =1+\epsilon \left(a_4+2a_2+2\rho \right)=\left(1+\epsilon a_4\right)Z_g^2Z_A.$$
(3.42)
We see therefore that the relation

$$\gamma _{A^2}=\left(\frac{\beta (a)}{a}+\gamma _A(a)\right),$$
(3.43)
follows from eq.$`\left(\text{3.41}\right)`$. Concerning now the eq.$`\left(\text{2.10}\right)`$ for the ghost anomalous dimension, it is a direct consequence of eq.$`\left(\text{3.40}\right)`$.

Summarizing, we have been able to give a purely algebraic proof of the relationship $`\left(\text{2.6}\right)`$. This means that the anomalous dimension $`\gamma _{A^2}`$ of the composite operator $`A_\mu ^aA^{a\mu }`$is not an independent parameter for Yang-Mills theory in the Landau gauge.

## 4 Acknowledgments

D. Dudal would like to thank J. Gracey for sharing his results on the possible existence of the relations $`\left(\text{1.1}\right)`$ and $`\left(\text{1.2}\right)`$ prior to the publication of . The Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico CNPq-Brazil, the Fundação de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (Faperj) and the SR2-UERJ are acknowledged for the financial support.