text:
# References

MIT-CTP-3076

YITP-01-1

Bulk Gauge Fields in the Bigravity Model
Motoi Tachibana 111E-mail:motoi@lns.mit.edu JSPS Research Fellow
on leave from Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan

Center for Theoretical Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.

Abstract

Motivated by a recently proposed “bigravity” model with two positive tension $`AdS_4`$ branes in $`AdS_5`$ by Kogan et al.\[hep-th/0011141\], we study behavior of bulk gauge field in the model. In this case, the zero mode of the gauge field is not constant but depends on the fifth dimensional coordinate transverse to the brane. The zero mode then becomes massive on the brane. From the physical requirement that the mass must be small, a parameter of the model is constrained. We also discuss the Kaluza-Klein modes.

Over the past few years, theories with extra spatial dimensions have received much attention because they potentially solve long standing problems such as the hierarchy problem, as was originally suggested by Antoniadis, Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos and Dvali. Afterwards Randall and Sundrum found a new solution to the hierarchy problem. In addition, they showed that gravity could be localized on a brane with infinite extra dimension. Since then, various types of models including gravity have been studied.

Recently Kogan et al. proposed a new “bigravity” model. The model has only two positive tension $`AdS_4`$ branes in $`AdS_5`$ bulk and no negative tension branes. Owing to the absence of negative tension branes, the model does not have the ghost fields which appeared in the previous “bigravity” scenario and also in the quasi-localized gravity model. But interestingly in the model of  the bounce of the warp factor mimics the effect of a negative tension brane and thus gives rise to an anomalously light graviton Kaluza-Klein mode. Moreover it is possible in this model to circumvent the van-Dam-Veltman-Zakharov no go theorem about the non-decoupling of the extra polarization states of the massive graviton. Similar discussions have recently appeared in .

In this paper, we study behavior of the bulk gauge field in this new “bigravity” model. We are especially interested in how the zero mode of the gauge field behaves in this background.

Following the work by Kogan et al. we shall consider a five dimensional anti-de Sitter spacetime ($`AdS_5`$) with a warp factor

$$ds^2=\mathrm{\Omega }^2(w)(\overline{g}_{\mu \nu }(x)dx^\mu dx^\nu +dw^2),$$
(1)
where $`\mu ,\nu =0,1,2,3.`$ The metric $`\overline{g}_{\mu \nu }(x)`$ denotes an $`AdS_4`$ background. The warp factor $`\mathrm{\Omega }(w)`$ in the conformal coordinate $`w`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(w)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{cosh}(kz_0)}\frac{1}{\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{k}(|w|\theta )},$$
(2)
where $`\stackrel{~}{k}k/\mathrm{cosh}(kz_0)`$ and $`\mathrm{tan}(\stackrel{~}{k}\theta /2)=\mathrm{tanh}(kz_0/2)`$, while $`\mathrm{tanh}(kz_0)kV_1/|\mathrm{\Lambda }|`$. $`k`$ is the curvature of $`AdS_5`$ defined through $`k\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{24M^3}}`$. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the five dimensional cosmological constant which is negative. $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$ are tensions of the 3-branes at the orbifold fixed points, $`w=0`$ and $`w=w_L`$, respectively.

We are interested in behavior of the bulk gauge field in this background metric. Let us start with the following five dimensional action;

$$S_{GF}=\frac{1}{4}𝑑x^4_{w_L}^{w_L}𝑑w\sqrt{G}G^{MN}G^{RS}F_{MR}F_{NS},$$
(3)
where $`M,N,R,S=0,1,2,3,w`$ and $`F_{MN}=_MA_N_NA_M`$. $`A_M(x^\mu ,w)`$ is the bulk U(1) gauge field. The extension to non-Abelian gauge field is straightforward. $`G_{MN}`$ is the five dimensional metric defined through eq.(1). The equations of motions are given by

$$_M(\sqrt{G}G^{MN}G^{RS}F_{NR})=0.$$
(4)
We solve the equations with the gauge condition

$$A_w=0.$$
(5)
As usual, we expand the field $`A_\mu (x^\mu ,w)`$ into zero mode and Kaluza-Klein modes:

$$A_\mu (x,w)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}a_\mu ^{(n)}(x)\rho ^{(n)}(w).$$
(6)
Plugging eq.(1) into eq.(4) with the gauge fixing condition (5) and the mode expansion (6), we have the following equations;

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\overline{g}}\overline{g}^{\nu \sigma }a_\nu ^{(n)}}}_\mu (\sqrt{\overline{g}}\overline{g}^{\mu \rho }\overline{g}^{\nu \sigma }f_{\rho \nu }^{(n)})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Omega }\rho ^{(n)}}}_w(\mathrm{\Omega }_w\rho ^{(n)}),`$
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_w\rho ^{(n)}_\mu (\sqrt{\overline{g}}\overline{g}^{\mu \nu }a_\nu ^{(n)})`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (7)
Here $`f_{\mu \nu }^{(n)}=_\mu a_\nu ^{(n)}_\nu a_\mu ^{(n)}`$.

Both sides of the first equation in eq.(7) must be constant, which we write as $`m_n^2`$. In addition, we choose the Lorentz gauge in curved spacetime. Thus

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\overline{g}}}}_\mu (\sqrt{\overline{g}}\overline{g}^{\mu \rho }\overline{g}^{\nu \sigma }f_{\rho \nu }^{(n)})`$ $`=`$ $`m_n^2\overline{g}^{\nu \sigma }a_\nu ^{(n)},`$
$`_\mu (\sqrt{\overline{g}}\overline{g}^{\mu \nu }a_\nu ^{(n)})`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (8)
Then the equation of motion for the bulk gauge field reduces to

$$_w(\mathrm{\Omega }(w)_w\rho ^{(n)})+m_n^2\mathrm{\Omega }(w)\rho ^{(n)}=0.$$
(9)
The zero mode of the gauge field ($`m_n=0`$) satisfies

$$_w(\mathrm{\Omega }(w)_w\rho ^{(0)}(w))=0.$$
(10)
Remarkably in the present case, unlike the case of the Randall-Sundrum model, the zero mode is not constant but depends on the fifth dimensional coordinate $`w`$ 222For recent work for the bulk gauge fields in the RS model, see Refs... It is of the form

$$\rho ^{(0)}(w)=\frac{\alpha }{\stackrel{~}{k}}\mathrm{cosh}(kz_0)\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{k}(w\theta )+\beta ,$$
(11)
where $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are integration constants. On the other hand, the KK modes satisfy the following equation;

$$\frac{d^2\rho ^{(n)}}{dw^2}+\frac{d\mathrm{log}\mathrm{\Omega }(w)}{dw}\frac{d\rho ^{(n)}}{dw}+m_n^2\rho ^{(n)}=0.$$
(12)
We will come back to this equation later.

Next we shall consider the effective field theory in terms of the zero mode on the $`AdS_4`$ brane. For that purpose we plug eq.(11) into the original action (3). The result is

$`S_{GF}^{(0)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x^4_{w_L}^{w_L}𝑑w\sqrt{G}G^{MN}G^{RS}F_{MR}^{(0)}F_{NS}^{(0)}}`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x^4\sqrt{\overline{g}}\overline{g}^{\mu \nu }\overline{g}^{\lambda \sigma }f_{\mu \lambda }^{(0)}f_{\nu \sigma }^{(0)}_{w_L}^{w_L}𝑑w\mathrm{\Omega }(w)(\rho ^{(0)}(w))^2}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x^4\sqrt{\overline{g}}\overline{g}^{\mu \nu }a_\mu ^{(0)}a_\nu ^{(0)}_{w_L}^{w_L}𝑑w2\mathrm{\Omega }(w)(_w\rho ^{(0)}(w))^2}.`$
This is the action of the massive gauge field in four dimensions. We need to evaluate the $`w`$-integrations appearing in eq.(13) such as

$`I_1`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle _{w_L}^{w_L}}𝑑w\mathrm{\Omega }(w)(\rho ^{(0)}(w))^2,`$
$`I_2`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle _{w_L}^{w_L}}𝑑w2\mathrm{\Omega }(w)(_w\rho ^{(0)}(w))^2.`$ (14)
At first we compute the integration $`I_2`$ which is simpler.

$`I_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{w_L}^{w_L}}𝑑w2\mathrm{\Omega }(w)(_w\rho ^{(0)}(w))^2`$ (15)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4\alpha ^2}{\stackrel{~}{k}^2}}\mathrm{cosh}(kz_0)\left[\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{k}(w_L\theta )+\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{k}\theta \right].`$
Next we evaluate the integration $`I_1`$ which is more complicated.

$`I_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{w_L}^{w_L}}𝑑w\mathrm{\Omega }(w)(\rho ^{(0)}(w))^2`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle _0^{w_L}}𝑑w{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\frac{\alpha }{\stackrel{~}{k}}\mathrm{cosh}(kz_0)\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{k}(w\theta )+\beta \right)^2}{\mathrm{cosh}(kz_0)\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{k}(w\theta )}}`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}F(w_L,\theta ){\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha ^2}{\stackrel{~}{k}^3}}\mathrm{cosh}(kz_0)\left[\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{k}(w_L\theta )+\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{k}\theta \right],`$
where

$$F(w_L,\theta )=\left[\frac{(1+\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{k}(w_L\theta ))(1+\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{k}\theta )}{(1\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{k}(w_L\theta ))(1\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{k}\theta )}\right]^a\left[\frac{\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{k}\theta }{\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{k}(w_L\theta )}\right]^b$$
(17)
with

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2}{\stackrel{~}{k}^3}}\mathrm{cosh}(kz_0)+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta ^2}{\stackrel{~}{k}\mathrm{cosh}(kz_0)}},`$
$`b`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4\alpha \beta }{\stackrel{~}{k}^2}}.`$ (18)
Unlike the case of , this integral $`I_1`$ does not diverge as long as $`L`$, which is the distance between two branes in the original coordinate, is finite. Actually when $`L`$ is infinite, the integral diverges. We might say that $`L`$ plays a role of an infrared cutoff in the model.

If we redefine the brane gauge field $`a_\mu ^{(0)}(x)`$ as

$$\sqrt{I_1}a_\mu ^{(0)}a_\mu ^{(0)},$$
(19)
we can rewrite the action in terms of canonically normalized field as follows;

$$S_{GF}^{(0)}=\frac{1}{4}𝑑x^4\sqrt{\overline{g}}\left[\overline{g}^{\mu \nu }\overline{g}^{\lambda \sigma }f_{\mu \lambda }^{(0)}f_{\nu \sigma }^{(0)}+\frac{I_2}{I_1}\overline{g}^{\mu \nu }a_\mu ^{(0)}a_\nu ^{(0)}\right].$$
(20)
Therefore we can regard $`\frac{I_2}{I_1}`$ as the squared mass of the zero mode of the gauge field in four dimensions, which must be very tiny so as not to violate current experimental bounds. For simplicity, let us consider the case of symmetric configuration, i.e., $`w_L=2\theta `$. In this case, the mass of the gauge field zero mode on the brane is of the form

$$M_{ZM}^2=\frac{k^2}{\frac{1}{4\mathrm{tanh}(kz_0)}\left(\mathrm{cosh}^2(kz_0)+(\frac{\beta k}{\alpha })^2\frac{1}{\mathrm{cosh}^2(kz_0)}\right)\mathrm{log}\left[\frac{1+\mathrm{tanh}(kz_0)}{1\mathrm{tanh}(kz_0)}\right]\frac{\mathrm{cosh}^2(kz_0)}{2}}.$$
(21)
where we have used the relation $`\mathrm{tan}(\frac{\stackrel{~}{k}\theta }{2})=\mathrm{tanh}(\frac{kz_0}{2})`$.

According to the Particle Data Group, present experimental bound on the photon mass is,

$`M_{exp.}<2\times 10^{16}`$(eV). (LAKES98)

Let us assume that $`(\frac{\beta k}{\alpha })^2𝒪(1)`$. At $`xkz_0>>1`$,

$`M_{ZM}^2(x)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{\frac{1}{4(12e^{2x})}\frac{e^{2x}}{4}\mathrm{log}\frac{1+(12e^{2x})}{1(12e^{2x})}\frac{e^{2x}}{8}}}`$ (22)
$`=`$ $`e^{2x}k^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{x1+2e^{2x}}{8(12e^{2x})}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}(1e^{2x})}{16(12e^{2x})}}\right)^1`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8e^{2x}}{x}}k^2.`$
Comparing the above experimental bound with eq.(22), we find that we can make the mass of the gauge field small enough if we choose large enough $`kz_0`$, i.e. $`kz_0>100`$. This condition gives a weaker constraint to the model than that coming from present experimental and observational bounds on the four dimensional effective cosmological constant discussed in .

Finally let us consider the KK modes which satisfy eq.(12). The general solution is given in terms of hypergeometric functions;

$`\rho ^{(n)}(w)`$ $`=`$ $`c_1F(\alpha _n,\beta _n,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}};\mathrm{sin}^2(\stackrel{~}{k}(|w|\theta )))`$ (23)
$`+c_2|\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{k}(|w|\theta )|F(\alpha _n+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},\beta _n+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}};\mathrm{sin}^2(\stackrel{~}{k}(|w|\theta ))).`$
Here $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ are integration constants and

$`\alpha _n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_n}{\stackrel{~}{k}}}\right)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}},`$
$`\beta _n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_n}{\stackrel{~}{k}}}\right)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}}.`$ (24)
In the symmetric configuration, we have only to consider even and odd functions with respect to the minimum of the warp factor. In the case of the odd functions, we have $`c_1=0`$ while the even functions, we have $`c_2=0`$.

In summary, in this paper we investigated behavior of the bulk gauge field in a recently proposed bigravity model. We found that the zero mode of the gauge field is not constant but depends on the fifth dimensional coordinate. The zero mode then becomes massive on a brane and we require that the mass be tiny so as not to contradict current experimental bounds on the photon mass. This requirement leads us to $`kz_0>100`$. We also discussed the KK modes. It will be interesting to study the bulk standard model where scalar field(Higgs) and fermion fields(quarks and leptons) as well as gauge fields are in the bulk. We are also interested in the cosmology of this model.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Andreas Karch and Manolo Perez-Victoria for useful conversations and comments. We also appreciate Zachary Guralnik for careful reading of this manuscript. This work was supported in part by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japan (No. 3666).


format: text

text:
# Periodic Orbit Quantization: How to Make Semiclassical Trace Formulae Convergent*footnote **footnote *Contribution to “Festschrift in honor of Martin Gutzwiller”, eds. A. Inomata et al., to be published in Foundations of Physics.

## I Introduction

Semiclassical periodic orbit quantization is a nontrivial problem for the reason that Gutzwiller’s trace formula  for chaotic systems and the Berry-Tabor formula  for integrable systems do not usually converge in those regions where the physical eigenenergies or resonances are located. Various techniques have been developed to circumvent the convergence problem of periodic orbit theory. Examples are the cycle expansion technique , the Riemann-Siegel type formula and pseudo-orbit expansions , surface of section techniques , and a quantization rule based on a semiclassical approximation to the spectral staircase . These specific techniques have proven to be very efficient for individual systems with special properties, e.g., the cycle expansion for hyperbolic systems with an existing symbolic dynamics. The other methods mentioned have been used for the calculation of bound spectra of specific systems.

Recently, an alternative method based upon filter-diagonalization (FD) has been introduced for the analytic continuation of the semiclassical trace formula . The FD method requires knowledge of the periodic orbits up to a given maximum period (classical action), which depends on the mean density of states. The semiclassical eigenenergies or resonances are obtained by harmonic inversion of the periodic orbit recurrence signal. The FD method can be generally applied to both open and bound systems and has also proven to be a powerful tool, e.g., for the calculation of semiclassical transition matrix elements  and the quantization of systems with mixed regular-chaotic phase space . For a review on periodic orbit quantization by harmonic inversion see .

In this paper we present two different techniques to make semiclassical periodic orbit sums convergent. The first method is an advanced version of harmonic inversion adapted to the special structure of periodic orbit signals given as sums of $`\delta `$ functions . The semiclassical signal, in action or time, corresponds to a “spectrum” or response in the frequency domain that is composed of a huge, in principle infinite, number of frequencies. To extract these frequencies and their corresponding amplitudes is a nontrivial task. In previous work  the periodic orbit signal has been harmonically inverted by means of FD  which is designed for the analysis of time signals given on an equidistant grid. The periodic orbit recurrence signal is represented as a sum over usually unevenly spaced $`\delta `$ functions. A smooth signal, from which evenly spaced values can be read off, is obtained by a convolution of this sum with, e.g., a narrow Gaussian function. The disadvantages of this approach are twofold. Firstly, FD acts on this signal more or less like a “black box” and, as such, does not lend itself to a detailed understanding of semiclassical periodic orbit quantization. Secondly, the smoothed semiclassical signal usually consists of a huge number of data points. The handling of such large data sets, together with the smoothing, may lead to significant numerical errors in results for the semiclassical eigenenergies and resonances. Here, we propose alternative techniques for the harmonic inversion of the periodic orbit recurrence signal that avoid these problems. In a first step we create a shortened signal which is constructed from the original signal and designed to be correct only in a window, i.e., a short frequency range of the total band width. Because the original signal is given as a periodic orbit sum of $`\delta `$ functions, this “filtering” can be performed analytically resulting in a band-limited periodic orbit signal with a relatively small number of equidistant grid points. In a second step the frequencies and amplitudes of the band-limited signal are determined from a set of nonlinear equations. To solve the nonlinear system, we introduce three different processing methods, viz. linear predictor (LP), Padé approximant (PA), and signal diagonalization (SD). It is important to note that these processing methods would not have yielded numerically stable solutions if the signal had not first been band-limited by the windowing (filtering) procedure. Furthermore, this separation of the harmonic inversion procedure into various steps may elucidate a clearer picture of the periodic orbit quantization method itself, and even provides more accurate results than previous calculations  using FD.

The second method is the direct application of the Padé approximant to slowly convergent and/or divergent periodic orbit sums . In the former or the latter case, the PA either significantly increases the convergence rate, or analytically continues the exponentially divergent series, respectively. The PA is especially robust for resumming diverging series in many applications in mathematics and theoretical physics . An important example is the summation of the divergent Rayleigh-Schrödinger quantum mechanical perturbation series, e.g., for atoms in electric  and magnetic  fields. In periodic orbit theory the PA has been applied to cycle-expanded Euler products and dynamical zeta functions . It should be noted that the Padé approximant is applied in both methods in a completely different context, namely, in the first method as a tool for signal processing , and in the second for the direct summation of the periodic orbit terms in the semiclassical trace formulae.

In Sec. II we present our first method to make semiclassical trace formulae convergent. After briefly reviewing the general idea of periodic orbit quantization by harmonic inversion in Sec. II A we construct, in Sec. II B, the band-limited periodic orbit signal which is analyzed, in Sec. II C, with the help of either LP, PA, or SD. In Sec. III we introduce our second method for semiclassical quantization, viz. the direct application of the Padé approximant to the periodic orbit sum. In Sec. IV we present and compare results for the three-disk repeller and the circle billiard as physical examples of relevance. A few concluding remarks are given in Sec. V.

## II Harmonic inversion of periodic orbit signals

### A General remarks

In order to understand what follows, a brief recapitulation of the basic ideas of periodic orbit quantization by harmonic inversion may be useful. For further details see .

Following Gutzwiller  one can write the semiclassical response function for chaotic systems in the form

$$g^{\mathrm{sc}}(E)=g_0^{\mathrm{sc}}(E)+\underset{\mathrm{po}}{}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}S_{\mathrm{po}}},$$
(1)
where $`g_0^{\mathrm{sc}}(E)`$ is a smooth function and $`S_{\mathrm{po}}`$ and $`𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}`$ are the classical actions and weights (including phase information given by the Maslov index) of the periodic orbit (po) contributions. Equation (1) is also valid for integrable systems when the periodic orbit quantities are calculated not with Gutzwiller’s trace formula, but with the Berry-Tabor formula  for periodic orbits on rational tori. The eigenenergies and resonances are the poles of the response function. Unfortunately, the semiclassical approximation (1) does not converge in the region of the poles, and hence one is faced with the problem of the analytic continuation of $`g^{\mathrm{sc}}(E)`$ to this region.

As in previous work , we will make the (weak) assumption that the classical system has a scaling property, i.e., the shape of periodic orbits is assumed not to depend on a scaling parameter, $`w`$, and the classical action scales as

$$S_{\mathrm{po}}=ws_{\mathrm{po}}.$$
(2)
In scaling systems, the fluctuating part of the semiclassical response function,

$$g^{\mathrm{sc}}(w)=\underset{\mathrm{po}}{}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}ws_{\mathrm{po}}},$$
(3)
can be Fourier transformed readily to yield the semiclassical trace of the propagator

$$C^{\mathrm{sc}}(s)=\frac{1}{2\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}g^{\mathrm{sc}}(w)\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}sw}dw=\underset{\mathrm{po}}{}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}\delta \left(ss_{\mathrm{po}}\right).$$
(4)
The signal $`C^{\mathrm{sc}}(s)`$ has $`\delta `$ spikes at the positions of the classical periods (scaled actions) $`s=s_{\mathrm{po}}`$ of periodic orbits and with peak heights (recurrence strengths) $`𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}`$, i.e., $`C^{\mathrm{sc}}(s)`$ is Gutzwiller’s periodic orbit recurrence function. Consider now the quantum mechanical counterparts of $`g^{\mathrm{sc}}(w)`$ and $`C^{\mathrm{sc}}(s)`$ taken as the sums over the poles $`w_k`$ of the Green’s function,

$$g^{\mathrm{qm}}(w)=\underset{k}{}\frac{d_k}{ww_k+\mathrm{i}ϵ},$$
(5)
$$C^{\mathrm{qm}}(s)=\frac{1}{2\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}g^{\mathrm{qm}}(w)\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}sw}dw=\mathrm{i}\underset{k}{}d_k\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}w_ks},$$
(6)
with $`d_k`$ being the residues associated with the eigenvalues. In the case under study, i.e., density of states spectra, the $`d_k`$ are the multiplicities of eigenvalues and are equal to 1 for non-degenerate states. Semiclassical eigenenergies $`w_k`$ and residues $`d_k`$ can now, in principle, be obtained by adjusting the semiclassical signal, Eq. (4), to the functional form of the quantum signal, Eq. (6), with the $`\{w_k,d_k\}`$ being free, in general complex, frequencies and amplitudes. This scheme is known as “harmonic inversion”. The numerical procedure of harmonic inversion is a nontrivial task, especially if the number of frequencies in the signal is large (e.g., more than a thousand), or even infinite as is usually the case for periodic orbit quantization. Note that the conventional way to perform the spectral analysis, i.e., the Fourier transform of Eq. (4) will bring us back to analyzing the non-convergent response function $`g^{\mathrm{sc}}(w)`$ in Eq. (3). The periodic orbit signal (4) can be harmonically inverted by application of FD , which allows one to calculate a finite and relatively small set of frequencies and amplitudes in a given frequency window. The usual implementation of FD requires knowledge of the signal on an equidistant grid. The signal (4) is not a continuous function. However, a smooth signal can be obtained by a convolution of $`C^{\mathrm{sc}}(s)`$ with, e.g., a Gaussian function,

$$C_\sigma ^{\mathrm{sc}}(s)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }\sigma }\underset{\mathrm{po}}{}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}\mathrm{e}^{(ss_{\mathrm{po}})^2/2\sigma ^2}.$$
(7)
As can easily be seen, the convolution results in a damping of the amplitudes, $`d_kd_k^{(\sigma )}=d_k\mathrm{exp}(w_k^2\sigma ^2/2)`$. The width $`\sigma `$ of the Gaussian function should be chosen sufficiently small to avoid an overly strong damping of amplitudes. To properly sample each Gaussian a dense grid with steps $`\mathrm{\Delta }s\sigma /3`$ is required. Therefore, the signal (7) analyzed by FD usually consists of a large number of data points. The numerical treatment of this large data set may suffer from rounding errors and loss of accuracy. Additionally, the “black box” type procedure of harmonic inversion by FD, which intertwines windowing and processing, does not provide any opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of semiclassical periodic orbit quantization. It is therefore desirable to separate the harmonic inversion procedure into two sequential steps: Firstly, the filtering procedure that does not require smoothing and, secondly, a procedure for extracting the frequencies and amplitudes. In Sec. II B we will construct, by analytic filtering, a band-limited signal which consists of a relatively small number of frequencies. In Sec. II C we will present methods to extract the frequencies and amplitudes of such band-limited signals.

### B Construction of band-limited signals by analytical filtering

In general, a frequency filter can be applied to a given signal by application of the Fourier transform . The signal is transformed to the frequency domain, e.g., by application of the fast Fourier transform (FFT) method. The transformed signal is multiplied with a frequency filter function $`f(w)`$ localized around a central frequency, $`w_0`$. The frequency filter $`f(w)`$ can be rather general, typical examples are a rectangular window or a Gaussian function. The filtered signal is then shifted by $`w_0`$ and transformed back to the time domain by a second application of FFT. The filtered signal consists of a significantly reduced set of frequencies, and therefore a reduced set of grid points is sufficient for the analysis of the signal. This technique is known as “beam spacing”  or “decimation”  of signals.

The special form of the periodic orbit signal (4) as a sum of $`\delta `$ functions allows for an even simpler procedure, viz. analytical filtering. In the following we will apply a rectangular filter, i.e., $`f(w)=1`$ for frequencies $`w[w_0\mathrm{\Delta }w,w_0+\mathrm{\Delta }w]`$, and $`f(w)=0`$ outside the window. The generalization to other types of frequency filters is straightforward. Starting from the semiclassical response function (spectrum) $`g^{\mathrm{sc}}(w)`$ in Eq. (3), which is itself a Fourier transform of the “signal” (4), and using a rectangular window we obtain, after evaluating the “second” Fourier transform, the band-limited (bl) periodic orbit signal,

$`C_{\mathrm{bl}}^{\mathrm{sc}}(s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{w_0\mathrm{\Delta }w}^{w_0+\mathrm{\Delta }w}}g^{\mathrm{sc}}(w)\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}s(ww_0)}dw`$ (8)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{po}}{}}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}{\displaystyle _{w_0\mathrm{\Delta }w}^{w_0+\mathrm{\Delta }w}}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}sw_0\mathrm{i}(ss_{\mathrm{po}})w}dw`$ (9)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{po}}{}}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}[(ss_{\mathrm{po}})\mathrm{\Delta }w]}{\pi (ss_{\mathrm{po}})}}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}s_{\mathrm{po}}w_0}.`$ (10)
The introduction of $`w_0`$ into the arguments of the exponential functions in (10) causes a shift of frequencies by $`w_0`$ in the frequency domain. Note that $`C_{\mathrm{bl}}^{\mathrm{sc}}(s)`$ is a smooth function and can be easily evaluated on an arbitrary grid of points $`s_n<s_{\mathrm{max}}`$ provided the periodic orbit data are known for the set of orbits with classical action $`s_{\mathrm{po}}<s_{\mathrm{max}}`$.

Applying now the same filter as used for the semiclassical periodic orbit signal to the quantum one, we obtain the band-limited quantum signal

$`C_{\mathrm{bl}}^{\mathrm{qm}}(s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{w_0\mathrm{\Delta }w}^{w_0+\mathrm{\Delta }w}}g^{\mathrm{qm}}(w)\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}s(ww_0)}dw`$ (11)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{i}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}}d_k\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}(w_kw_0)s},|w_kw_0|<\mathrm{\Delta }w.`$ (12)
In contrast to the signal $`C^{\mathrm{qm}}(s)`$ in Eq. (6), the band-limited quantum signal consists of a finite number of frequencies $`w_k`$, $`k=1,\mathrm{},K`$, where in practical applications $`K`$ can be of the order of $``$ (50-200) for an appropriately chosen frequency window, $`\mathrm{\Delta }w`$. The problem of adjusting the band-limited semiclassical signal in Eq. (10) to its quantum mechanical analogue in Eq. (12) can now be written as a set of $`2K`$ nonlinear equations

$$C_{\mathrm{bl}}^{\mathrm{sc}}(n\tau )c_n=\mathrm{i}\underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}d_k\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}w_k^{}n\tau },n=0,1,\mathrm{},2K1,$$
(13)
for the $`2K`$ unknown variables, viz. the shifted frequencies, $`w_k^{}w_kw_0`$, and amplitudes, $`d_k`$. The band-limited signal now becomes “short”as it can be evaluated on an equidistant grid, $`s=n\tau `$, with relatively large step width $`\tau \pi /\mathrm{\Delta }w`$. It is important to note that the number of signal points $`c_n`$ in Eq. (13) is usually much smaller than a reasonable discretization of the signal $`C_\sigma ^{\mathrm{sc}}(s)`$ in Eq. (7), which is the starting point for harmonic inversion by FD. Therefore, the discrete signal points $`c_nC_{\mathrm{bl}}^{\mathrm{sc}}(n\tau )`$ are called the “band-limited” periodic orbit signal. Methods to solve the nonlinear system, Eq. (13), are discussed in Sec. II C below.

It should also be noted that the analytical filtering in Eq. (10) is not restricted to periodic orbit signals, but can be applied, in general, to any signal given as a sum of $`\delta `$ functions. An example is the high resolution analysis of quantum spectra , where the density of states is $`\varrho (E)=_n\delta (EE_n)`$.

### C Harmonic inversion of band-limited signals

In this section we wish to solve the nonlinear set of equations

$$c_n=\underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}d_kz_k^n,n=0,1,\mathrm{},2K1,$$
(14)
where $`z_k\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}w_k^{}\tau )`$ and $`d_k`$ are, generally complex, variational parameters. For notational simplicity we have absorbed the factor of $`\mathrm{i}`$ on the right-hand side of Eq. (13) into the $`d_k`$’s with the understanding that this should be corrected for at the end of the calculation. We assume that the number of frequencies in the signal is relatively small ($`K50`$ to $`200`$). Although the system of nonlinear equations is, in general, still ill-conditioned, frequency filtering reduces the number of signal points, and hence the number of equations. Several numerical techniques, that otherwise would be numerically unstable, can now be applied successfully. In the following we employ three different methods, viz. linear predictor (LP), Padé approximant (PA), and signal diagonalization (SD).

#### 1 Linear Predictor

The problem of solving Eq. (14) has already been addressed in the 18th century by Baron de Prony , who converted the nonlinear set of equations (14) to a linear algebra problem. Today this method is known as linear predictor (LP). Our method strictly applies the procedure of LP except with one essential difference; the original signal $`C^{\mathrm{sc}}(s)`$ is replaced with its band-limited counterpart $`c_nC_{\mathrm{bl}}^{\mathrm{sc}}(n\tau )`$.

Equation (14) can be written in matrix form for the signal points $`c_{n+1}`$ to $`c_{n+K}`$,

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}c_{n+1}\\ \mathrm{}\\ c_{n+K}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}z_1^{n+1}& \mathrm{}& z_K^{n+1}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ z_1^{n+K}& \mathrm{}& z_K^{n+K}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}d_1\\ \mathrm{}\\ d_K\end{array}\right).$$
(15)
From the matrix representation (15) it follows that

$$c_n=\left(z_1^n\mathrm{}z_K^n\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}z_1^{n+1}& \mathrm{}& z_K^{n+1}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ z_1^{n+K}& \mathrm{}& z_K^{n+K}\end{array}\right)^1\left(\begin{array}{c}c_{n+1}\\ \mathrm{}\\ c_{n+K}\end{array}\right)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}a_kc_{n+k},$$
(16)
which means that every signal point $`c_n`$ can be “predicted” by a linear combination of the $`K`$ subsequent points with a fixed set of coefficients $`a_k`$, $`k=1,\mathrm{},K`$. The first step of the LP method is to calculate these coefficients. Writing Eq. (16) in matrix form with $`n=0,\mathrm{},K1`$, we obtain the coefficients $`a_k`$ as the solution of the linear set of equations,

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}c_1& \mathrm{}& c_K\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ c_K& \mathrm{}& c_{2K1}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}a_1\\ \mathrm{}\\ a_K\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}c_0\\ \mathrm{}\\ c_{K1}\end{array}\right).$$
(17)
The second step consists in determining the parameters $`z_k`$ in Eq. (14). Using Eqs. (16) and (14) we obtain

$$c_n=\underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}a_kc_{n+k}=\underset{l=1}{\overset{K}{}}\underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}a_kd_lz_l^{n+k},$$
(18)
and thus

$$\underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}\left[\underset{l=1}{\overset{K}{}}a_lz_k^{n+l}z_k^n\right]d_k=0.$$
(19)
Equation (19) is satisfied for arbitrary sets of amplitudes $`d_k`$ when $`z_k`$ is a zero of the polynomial

$$\underset{l=1}{\overset{K}{}}a_lz^l1=0.$$
(20)
The parameters $`z_k=\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}w_k^{}\tau )`$ and thus the frequencies

$$w_k^{}=\frac{\mathrm{i}}{\tau }\mathrm{log}(z_k)$$
(21)
are therefore obtained by searching for the zeros of the polynomial in Eq. (20). Note that this is the only nonlinear step of the algorithm, and numerical routines for finding the roots of polynomials are well established. In the third and final step, the amplitudes $`d_k`$ are obtained from the linear set of equations

$$c_n=\underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}d_kz_k^n,n=0,\mathrm{},K1.$$
(22)
To summarize, the LP method reduces the nonlinear set of equations (14) for the variational parameters $`\{z_k,d_k\}`$ to two well-known problems, i.e., the solution of two linear sets of equations (17) and (22) and the root search of a polynomial, Eq. (20), which is a nonlinear but familiar problem. The matrices in Eqs. (17) and (22) are a Toeplitz and Vandermonde matrix, respectively, and special algorithms are known for the fast solution of such linear systems . However, when the matrices are ill-conditioned, conventional $`LU`$ decomposition of the matrices is numerically more stable, and, furthermore, an iterative improvement of the solution can significantly reduce errors arising from numerical rounding. The roots of polynomials can be found, in principle, by application of Laguerre’s method . However, it turns out that an alternative method, i.e., the diagonalization of the Hessenberg matrix

$$𝐀=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}\frac{a_{K1}}{a_K}& \frac{a_{K2}}{a_K}& \mathrm{}& \frac{a_1}{a_K}& \frac{a_0}{a_K}\\ 1& 0& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& 1& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(23)
for which the characteristic polynomial $`P(z)=det[𝐀z𝐈]=0`$ is given by Eq. (20) (with $`a_0=1`$), is a numerically more robust technique for finding the roots of high degree ($`K60`$) polynomials .

#### 2 Padé Approximant

As an alternative method for solving the nonlinear system (14) we now propose to apply the method of Padé approximants (PA) to our band-limited signal $`c_n`$. Let us assume for the moment that the signal points $`c_n`$ are known up to infinity, $`n=0,1,\mathrm{}\mathrm{}`$. Interpreting the $`c_n`$’s as the coefficients of a Maclaurin series in the variable $`z^1`$, we can then define the function $`g(z)=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}c_nz^n`$. With Eq. (14) and the sum rule for geometric series we obtain

$$g(z)\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_nz^n=\underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}d_k\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(z_k/z)^n=\underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}\frac{zd_k}{zz_k}\frac{P_K(z)}{Q_K(z)}.$$
(24)
The right-hand side of Eq. (24) is a rational function with polynomials of degree $`K`$ in the numerator and denominator. Evidently, the parameters $`z_k=\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}w_k^{}\tau )`$ are the poles of $`g(z)`$, i.e., the zeros of the polynomial $`Q_K(z)`$. The parameters $`d_k`$ are calculated via the residues of the last two terms of (24). We obtain

$$d_k=\frac{P_K(z_k)}{z_kQ_K^{}(z_k)},$$
(25)
with the prime indicating the derivative $`d/dz`$. Of course, the assumption that the coefficients $`c_n`$ are known up to infinity is not fulfilled and, therefore, the sum on the left-hand side of Eq. (24) cannot be evaluated in practice. However, the convergence of the sum can be accelerated by application of PA. Indeed, with PA, knowledge of $`2K`$ signal points $`c_0,\mathrm{},c_{2K1}`$ is sufficient for the calculation of the coefficients of the two polynomials

$$P_K(z)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}b_kz^k\text{ and }Q_K(z)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}a_kz^k1.$$
(26)
The coefficients $`a_k`$, $`k=1,\mathrm{},K`$ are obtained as solutions of the linear set of equations

$`c_n={\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{K}{}}}a_kc_{n+k},n=0,\mathrm{},K1,`$which is identical to Eqs. (16) and (17) for LP. Once the $`a`$’s are known, the coefficients $`b_k`$ are given by the explicit formula

$$b_k=\underset{m=0}{\overset{Kk}{}}a_{k+m}c_m,k=1,\mathrm{},K.$$
(27)
It should be noted that the different derivations of LP and PA yield the same polynomial whose zeros are the $`z_k`$ parameters, i.e., the $`z_k`$ calculated with both methods exactly agree. However, LP and PA do differ in the way the amplitudes, $`d_k`$, are calculated. It is also important to note that PA is applied here as a method for signal processing, i.e., in a different context to that in Sec. III, where the Padé approximant is used for the direct summation of the periodic orbit terms in semiclassical trace formulae.

#### 3 Signal Diagonalization

In Refs.  it has been shown how the problem of solving the nonlinear set of equations (14) can be recast in the form of the generalized eigenvalue problem,

$$𝐔𝑩_k=z_k𝐒𝑩_k.$$
(28)
The elements of the $`K\times K`$ operator matrix $`𝐔`$ and overlap matrix $`𝐒`$ depend trivially upon the $`c_n`$’s :

$$U_{ij}=c_{i+j+1};S_{ij}=c_{i+j};i,j=0,\mathrm{},K1.$$
(29)
Note that the operator matrix $`𝐔`$ is the same as in the linear system (17), i.e., the matrix form of Eq. (16) of LP. The matrices $`𝐔`$ and $`𝐒`$ in Eq. (28) are complex symmetric (i.e., non-Hermitian), and the eigenvectors $`𝑩_k`$ are orthogonal with respect to the overlap matrix $`𝐒`$,

$$\left(𝑩_k|𝐒|𝑩_k^{}\right)=N_k\delta _{kk^{}},$$
(30)
where the brackets define a complex symmetric inner product $`(a|b)=(b|a)`$, i.e., no complex conjugation of either $`a`$ or $`b.`$ The overlap matrix $`𝐒`$ is not usually positive definite and therefore the $`N_k`$’s are, in general complex, normalization parameters. An eigenvector $`𝑩_k`$ cannot be normalized for $`N_k=0`$. The amplitudes $`d_k`$ in Eq. (14) are obtained from the eigenvectors $`𝑩_k`$ via

$$d_k=\frac{1}{N_k}\left[\underset{n=0}{\overset{K1}{}}c_n𝑩_{k,n}\right]^2.$$
(31)
The parameters $`z_k`$ in Eq. (14) are given as the eigenvalues of the generalized eigenvalue problem (28), and are simply related to the frequencies $`w_k^{}`$ in Eq. (13) via $`z_k=\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}w_k^{}\tau )`$.

The three methods introduced above (LP, PA and SD) look technically quite different. With LP the coefficients of the characteristic polynomial (20) and the amplitudes $`d_k`$ are obtained by solving two linear sets of equations (17) and (22). Note that the complete set of zeros $`z_k`$ of Eq. (20) is required to solve for the $`d_k`$ in Eq. (22). The PA method is even simpler, as only one linear system, Eq. (17), has to be solved to determine the coefficients of the rational function $`P_K(z)/Q_K(z)`$. Finding the zeros of Eq. (20) provides knowledge about selected parameters $`z_k`$, and allows one to calculate the corresponding amplitudes $`d_k`$ via Eq. (25). The SD method requires the most numerical effort, because the solution of the generalized eigenvalue problem (28) for both the eigenvalues $`z_k`$ and eigenvectors $`𝑩_k`$ is needed.

It is important to note that the three techniques, in spite of their different derivations, are mathematically equivalent and provide the same results for the parameters $`\{z_k,d_k\}`$, when the following two conditions are fulfilled: the nonlinear set of equations (14) has a unique solution, when, firstly, the matrices $`𝐔`$ and $`𝐒`$ in Eq. (29) have a non-vanishing determinant ($`det𝐔0`$, $`det𝐒0`$), and, secondly, the parameters $`z_k`$ are non-degenerate ($`z_kz_k^{}`$ for $`kk^{}`$). These conditions guarantee the existence of a unique solution of the linear equations (17) and (22), the non-singularity of the generalized eigenvalue problem (28), and the non-vanishing of both the derivatives $`Q_K^{}(z_k)`$ in Eq. (25) and the normalization constants $`N_k`$ in Eqs. (30) and (31). Equation (14) usually has no solution in the case of degenerate $`z_k`$ parameters, however, degeneracies can be handled with a generalization of the ansatz (14) and modified equations for the calculation of the parameters. Here, we will not further discuss this special case.

While the parameters $`z_k`$ in Eq. (14) are usually unique, the calculation of the frequencies $`w_k^{}`$ via Eq. (21) is not unique, because of the multivalued property of the complex logarithm. To obtain the “correct” frequencies it is necessary to appropriately adjust the range $`\mathrm{\Delta }w`$ of the frequency filter and the step width $`\tau `$ of the band-limited signal (13). From our numerical experience we recommend the following procedure. The most convenient approach is to choose first the center $`w_0`$ of the frequency window and the number $`K`$ of frequencies within that window. Note that $`K`$ determines the dimension of the linear systems, and hence the degree of the polynomials which have to be handled numerically, and is therefore directly related to the computational effort required. Frequency windows are selected to be sufficiently narrow to yield values for the rank between $`K50`$ and $`K200`$. The step width for the band-limited signal should be chosen as

$$\tau =\frac{s_{\mathrm{max}}}{2K},$$
(32)
with $`s_{\mathrm{max}}`$ being the total length of the periodic orbit signal. The relation $`z_k=\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}w_k^{}\tau )`$ projects the frequency window $`w^{}[\mathrm{\Delta }w,+\mathrm{\Delta }w]`$ onto the unit circle in the complex plane when the range of the frequency window is chosen as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }w=\frac{\pi }{\tau }=\frac{2\pi K}{s_{\mathrm{max}}}.$$
(33)
When calculating the complex logarithm with $`\mathrm{arg}\mathrm{log}z[\pi ,+\pi ]`$, Eq. (21) provides the “correct” shifted frequencies $`w_k^{}`$ and thus the frequencies $`w_k=w_0+w_k^{}`$.

To achieve convergence, the length $`s_{\mathrm{max}}`$ of the periodic orbit signal must be sufficiently long to ensure that the number of semiclassical eigenvalues within the frequency window is less than $`K`$. As a consequence the harmonic inversion procedure usually provides not only the true semiclassical eigenvalues but also some spurious resonances. The spurious resonances are identified by low or near zero values of the corresponding amplitudes $`d_k`$ and can also be detected by analyzing the shifted band-limited signal, i.e., signal points $`c_1,\mathrm{},c_{2K}`$ instead of $`c_0,\mathrm{},c_{2K1}`$. The true frequencies usually agree to very high precision, while spurious frequencies show by orders of magnitude larger deviations.

The harmonic inversion method introduced above will be applied in Sec. IV A to the periodic orbit quantization of the three-disk scattering system, and the semiclassical resonances will be compared with results obtained by the cycle-expansion technique  and the direct application of the Padé approximant to periodic orbit sums discussed in the next Section III.

## III Semiclassical quantization by Padé approximants to periodic orbit sums

The method presented in the previous Section is based on signal processing (harmonic inversion) of the periodic orbit signal. In this Section we introduce our second method for semiclassical quantization, based on the direct application of the Padé approximant to periodic orbit sums.

The PA to a complex function $`f(z)`$ is defined as a ratio of two polynomials and can be computed from the coefficients $`a_n`$ of the Maclaurin expansion of $`f(z)`$, i.e., a power series

$`f(z)={\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}a_nz^n`$with finite or even zero radius of convergence in $`z`$ . However, Eq. (1) does not have the functional form of a Maclaurin power series expansion of $`g(E)`$ in the energy $`E`$. Even disregarding this limitation, a direct computation of the PA to the sum in Eq. (1) would be numerically unstable due to the typically large number of periodic orbit terms. Nevertheless, considering $`E`$ as a parameter, $`g(E)`$ can be rearranged and written as a formal power series in an auxiliary variable $`z`$,

$$g(z;E)=\underset{n}{}\underset{\mu _{\mathrm{po}}=n}{}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}(E)\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}S_{\mathrm{po}}(E)/\mathrm{}}z^n\underset{n}{}a_n(E)z^n,$$
(34)
where the maximum value of $`n`$ required for convergence of the PA is relatively small compared with the number of periodic orbit terms. Of course, the arrangement (34) of the periodic orbit sum as a power series is not unique, and expansions similar to Eq. (34) can be used for other ordering parameters $`n`$ of the orbits, e.g., the cycle length in systems with a symbolic code. However, if no symbolic dynamics exists, the sorting of orbits by their Maslov index is natural both physically and as a way to introduce an integer summation index and will be justified in Sec. IV by the successful numerical application of the method to a regular system without symbolic dynamics. Note that the PA to the periodic orbit sum cannot be applied without any ordering parameter, i.e., when no symbolic dynamics exists and all Maslov indices are zero, which is the case, e.g., for the Riemann zeta function as a mathematical model for periodic orbit quantization . The true value $`g(E)`$ of the periodic orbit sum is obtained by setting $`z=1`$ in Eq. (34), i.e., $`g(E)=g(1;E)`$. In such a case, we have a point PA which is given as a ratio of two polynomials in $`z`$ whose coefficients are non-polynomial functions of $`E`$ all at a fixed value of $`z`$. The usual implementation of the PA as a ratio of two polynomials in $`z`$ whose coefficients are computed, e.g., via the Longman algorithm  would be advantageous if $`g(z;E)`$ were required for many values of $`z`$. In the present case, at each given energy $`E`$ only one fixed value $`z=1`$ is needed and the PA is most efficiently computed by means of the recursive Wynn $`\epsilon `$-algorithm .

To briefly describe the $`\epsilon `$-algorithm, we introduce a sequence of partial sums $`\{A_n\}`$ which converges to (or diverges from) its limit $`A`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$. In the case of divergence, $`A`$ is called the ‘anti-limit’ of $`\{A_n\},`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$. Further, let $`F`$ be a transformation which maps $`\{A_n\}`$ into another sequence $`\{B_n\}`$. The mapping $`F`$ will represent an accelerator, i.e., the sequence $`\{B_n\}`$ will converge to the same limit $`A`$ faster than $`\{A_n\}`$ if the condition

$`{\displaystyle \frac{B_nB}{A_nA}}0`$is fulfilled as $`n\mathrm{}`$. In addition, the same $`F`$ can be applied to wildly divergent sequences $`\{A_n\}`$. Only nonlinear mappings can simultaneously accomplish both goals to accelerate slowly convergent and induce convergence into divergent sequences. The transformation $`F`$ will be nonlinear if its coefficients depend on $`A_n`$, e.g., the so-called $`e`$-algorithm of Shanks , whose mapping $`F`$ is the operator $`e_k`$ which converts the sequence $`\{A_n\}`$ into $`\{B_n\}`$ via

$$e_k(A_n)=B_{k,n}=[n+k/k]$$
(35)
with $`n0`$ and $`nk`$. This is the well-known Aitken $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$-iteration process (i.e., the simplest PA, \[1/1\]) extended to higher orders $`k`$. The general term in the $`k`$th-order transform $`B_{k,n}`$ of $`A_n`$ can be computed efficiently from the stable and recursive $`\epsilon `$-algorithm of Wynn , viz.,

$$e_s(A_m)=\epsilon _{2s}^{(m)}=[m+s/s],$$
(36)
where

$$\epsilon _{s+1}^{(m)}=\epsilon _{s1}^{(m+1)}+\frac{1}{\epsilon _s^{(m+1)}\epsilon _s^{(m)}};m,s0$$
(37)
with $`\epsilon _1^{(m)}=0`$, $`\epsilon _0^{(m)}=A_m`$, $`\epsilon _{2s+1}^{(m)}=1/e_s(\mathrm{\Delta }A_m)`$, and where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the forward difference operator: $`\mathrm{\Delta }x_j=x_{j+1}x_j`$. When $`\{A_n\}`$ is the sequence of partial sums of a power series, the two-dimensional array $`\epsilon _{2s}^{(ms)}`$ yields the upper half of the well known Padé table $`[m/s]`$. However, the $`\epsilon `$-algorithm need not necessarily be limited to power series.

The procedure to apply the above PA to semiclassical quantization by summation of periodic orbit terms works as follows. For a given system we calculate the periodic orbits up to a chosen maximum ordering parameter $`nn_{\mathrm{max}}`$, where $`n`$ can be but is not necessarily related to the Maslov indices of orbits. Note that this set of orbits usually differs from the set of orbits with classical action $`S_{\mathrm{po}}S_{\mathrm{max}}`$, which is required for periodic orbit quantization by harmonic inversion in Sec. II. From the periodic orbit amplitudes $`𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}`$ (including the phases $`\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}\frac{\pi }{2}\mu _{\mathrm{po}})`$ given by the Maslov indices) and actions $`S_{\mathrm{po}}`$, we compute the partial sums (e.g., with $`n\mu _{\mathrm{max}}`$ the Maslov index):

$$A_n=\underset{\mu _{\mathrm{po}}n}{}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}(E)\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}S_{\mathrm{po}}(E)/\mathrm{}}.$$
(38)
The sequence $`\{A_n\}`$ of partial sums is used as input to the $`\epsilon `$-algorithm, Eq. (37), to obtain a converged value $`g(E)`$ of the periodic orbit sum (1). The semiclassical eigenenergies or resonances are given as the poles of $`g(E)`$ and are obtained by searching numerically for the zeros of the reciprocal function $`1/g(E)`$. Such a search requires the evaluation of, e.g., $`𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}(E)`$ and $`S_{\mathrm{po}}(E)`$, at complex values of $`E`$. This can be done in a straightforward manner for the scaling systems considered in this paper. The number of the poles of $`g(E)`$ is not constrained by the size of the sequence $`\{A_n\}`$ of partial sums since our PA is a ratio of two non-polynomial functions of $`E`$.

It is important to note that the Padé approximant is applied here in a completely different context than in the first method where it is used as a tool for signal processing. In Sec. II we have shown that the three techniques LP, PA and SD used for the harmonic inversion of band-limited signals are mathematically equivalent. However, the two methods for periodic orbit quantization introduced in Sections II and III are not necessarily equivalent, and it may well be that one or the other method is more appropriate for the semiclassical quantization of a given physical system. Numerical results for two physical systems with completely different dynamical properties will be presented in the next Sec. IV.

## IV Results and discussion

In this section we want to demonstrate the efficiency and accuracy of the methods introduced above by way of two examples: the three-disk repeller as an open physical system with classically chaotic dynamics and the circle billiard as a bound regular system. Both systems have previously been investigated by means of FD . The three-disk repeller has also served as a prototype for the development and application of cycle expansion techniques , and for this system we will compare the convergence properties of three different methods, viz. harmonic inversion, Padé approximant and cycle expansion.

### A The three-disk repeller

As the first example we consider a billiard system consisting of three identical hard disks with radius $`R`$, displaced from each other by the same distance $`d`$. This simple, albeit nontrivial, scattering system has served as a model for the development of the cycle expansion method  and periodic orbit quantization by harmonic inversion . The three-disk scattering system is invariant under the symmetry operations of the group $`C_{3v}`$, i.e., three reflections at symmetry lines and two rotations by $`2\pi /3`$ and $`4\pi /3`$. Resonances belong to one of the three irreducible subspaces $`A_1`$, $`A_2`$, and $`E`$ . As in most previous work we concentrate on the resonances of the subspace $`A_1`$ for the three-disk repeller with $`R=1`$ and $`d=6`$. In billiards, which are scaling systems, the shape of periodic orbits does not depend on the energy $`E`$, and the classical action is given by the length $`L`$ of the orbit ($`S_{\mathrm{po}}=\mathrm{}kL_{\mathrm{po}}`$), where $`k=|𝐤|=\sqrt{2ME}/\mathrm{}`$ is the absolute value of the wave vector to be quantized. We have calculated all periodic orbits with Maslov index $`\mu _{\mathrm{po}}30`$, which corresponds to the set of orbits with cycle length $`n15`$.

#### 1 Harmonic inversion of the periodic orbit signal

We first calculate the semiclassical resonances of the three-disk repeller by the method introduced in Sec. II, viz. harmonic inversion of the periodic orbit signal \[see Eq. (4)\]

$`C^{\mathrm{sc}}(L)={\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{po}}{}}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}\delta (LL_{\mathrm{po}}).`$\[Setting $`\mathrm{}=1`$, we use $`s=L`$ in what follows.\] In Fig. 1a we present the periodic orbit signal $`C^{\mathrm{sc}}(L)`$ for the three-disk repeller in the region $`0LL_{\mathrm{max}}=35`$. The signal is given as a periodic orbit sum of delta functions $`\delta (LL_{\mathrm{po}})`$ weighted with the periodic orbit amplitudes $`𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}`$. The groups with oscillating sign belong to periodic orbits with adjacent cycle lengths. Signals of this type have been analyzed (after convolution with a narrow Gaussian function, see Eq. (7)) by FD in Refs. . We now illustrate the harmonic inversion of band-limited periodic orbit signals by LP, PA and SD.

In a first step, a band-limited periodic orbit signal is constructed as described in Sec. II B. As an example we choose $`K=100`$ as the rank of the nonlinear set of equations (13), and $`k_0=200`$ as the center of the frequency window. The width of the frequency window is given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }k=2\pi K/L_{\mathrm{max}}=200\pi /3518.0`$. The step width of the band-limited signal is $`\tau =\mathrm{\Delta }L=L_{\mathrm{max}}/2K=0.175`$. The signal points $`c_n=C_{\mathrm{bl}}^{\mathrm{sc}}(L=n\mathrm{\Delta }L)`$, with $`n=0,\mathrm{},2K`$ are calculated with the help of Eq. (10) and presented in Fig. 1b. The solid and dashed lines are the real and imaginary parts of $`C_{\mathrm{bl}}^{\mathrm{sc}}(n\mathrm{\Delta }L)`$, respectively. The modulations with spacings $`\pi /\mathrm{\Delta }k`$ result from the superposition of the sinc-like functions in Eq. (10).

The band-limited periodic orbit signal $`C_{\mathrm{bl}}^{\mathrm{sc}}(n\mathrm{\Delta }L)`$ can now be analyzed, in a second step, with one of the harmonic inversion techniques introduced in Sec. II C, viz. LP, PA or SD. The resonances obtained by LP are presented as plus symbols in Fig. 1c. The dotted lines at $`\mathrm{Re}k=182`$ and $`\mathrm{Re}k=218`$ show the borders of the frequency window. The two symbols very close to the border on the left indicate spurious resonances.

A long range spectrum can be obtained by choosing several values $`w_0`$ for the center of the frequency window in such a way that the windows slightly overlap. By analyzing a periodic orbit signal similar to that in Fig. 1b but with an increased signal length, $`L_{\mathrm{max}}=55`$ we have calculated the semiclassical resonances of the three-disk repeller in the range $`0\mathrm{Re}k250`$. It turns out that they are even more accurate than those obtained previously  using FD. For more details see Ref. . Part of the resonances in the range $`25\mathrm{Re}k65`$ are marked as squares in Fig. 2. The comparison of resonances in Fig. 2 obtained by various semiclassical quantization methods will be discussed below.

#### 2 Padé approximant to the periodic orbit sum

We now apply our second method introduced in Sec. III, the PA to the periodic orbit sum to the same system as discussed above, viz. the three-disk repeller with $`R=1`$ and $`d=6`$. We have calculated the partial sums $`\{A_n\}`$ of periodic orbit terms (see Eq. 38) using all periodic orbits with cycle length $`n15`$, which corresponds to the set of orbits with Maslov index $`\mu _{\mathrm{po}}30`$. The sequence of the partial sums $`\{A_n\}`$ of periodic orbit terms in Eq. (38) converges for wave numbers $`k`$ above the borderline $`\mathrm{Im}k=\mathrm{0.121\hspace{0.17em}557}`$  which separates the domain of absolute convergence of the periodic orbit sum from the domain where analytic continuation is necessary, but strongly diverges deep in the complex plane, where the resonance poles are located. This is illustrated in Fig. 3 for two different wave numbers $`k`$. The dashed line and the plus symbols in Fig. 3a show the convergence of the sequence $`\{A_n\}`$ at $`k=1500.1\mathrm{i}`$. What is plotted is the absolute value of the difference between two consecutive terms, $`\epsilon =|A_nA_{n1}|`$. As can be seen this sequence is slowly convergent, and about two to three significant digits are obtained at $`n=15`$. The convergence can be accelerated using the PA, as is seen by the solid line and squares in Fig. 3a showing the error values $`\epsilon =|A_n^{\mathrm{PA}}A_{n1}^{\mathrm{PA}}|`$ for the sequence of the Padé approximants $`\{A_n^{\mathrm{PA}}\}`$ to the periodic orbit sum. The periodic orbit sum has converged to six significant digits already for $`n=10`$. The situation is even much more dramatic in the deep complex plane ($`\mathrm{Im}k<0.122`$), e.g., at $`k=1500.5\mathrm{i}`$. Here, the sequence of the partial sums $`\{A_n\}`$ of periodic orbit terms exhibits exponential divergence, as can be seen from the dashed line and plus symbols in Fig. 3b. Nevertheless, this sequence converges when subjected to the PA implemented through the $`\epsilon `$-algorithm (solid line and squares in Fig. 3b).

The resonances of the three-disk scattering systems have been obtained by a numerical two-dimensional root search in the complex $`k`$-plane for the zeros of the function $`1/g(k)`$, where $`g(k)`$ is the PA to the periodic orbit sum. The subset of the semiclassical resonances in the range $`25\mathrm{Re}k65`$ are marked by the plus symbols in Fig. 2. They agree well with the squares obtained by harmonic inversion of the periodic orbit signal. For the resonances shown in Fig. 2 we will now discuss the applicability and limitations of the different semiclassical methods to some more extent.

#### 3 Harmonic inversion and Padé approximant vs. cycle expansion

The three-disk scattering system discussed above has purely hyperbolic classical dynamics and has been used extensively as the prototype model for the cycle expansion techniques . As has been shown by Voros , Gutzwiller’s trace formula for unstable periodic orbits can be recast in the form of an infinite and non-convergent Euler product over all periodic orbits. When the periodic orbits obey a symbolic dynamics the semiclassical eigenenergies or resonances can be obtained as the zeros of the cycle expanded Gutzwiller-Voros zeta function. Unfortunately, the convergence of the cycle expansion is restricted, due to poles of the Gutzwiller-Voros zeta function . The domain of analyticity of semiclassical zeta functions can be extended  resulting in the “quasiclassical zeta function” , which is an entire function for the three-disk repeller. This approach allows one to calculate semiclassical resonances in critical regions where the Gutzwiller-Voros zeta function does not converge, at the cost, however, of many extra spurious resonances and with the rate of convergence being slowed down tremendously .

It is very interesting and illustrative to compare the convergence properties of the various methods which have been applied for periodic orbit quantization of the three-disk repeller, viz. the two methods introduced in Sections II and III of this paper and the cycle expansion technique. We will demonstrate that the harmonic inversion method and the PA to periodic orbit sums provide semiclassical resonances in energy regions where the cycle expansion of the Gutzwiller-Voros zeta function does not converge. With the limited numerical accuracy of harmonic inversion by FD applied in Ref. , the semiclassical resonances of the three-disk repeller in the region $`\mathrm{Im}k<0.6`$ were somewhat unreliable. The analysis of band-limited periodic orbit signals introduced in the present paper now allows us to calculate semiclassical resonances of much improved accuracy even deep in the complex plane.

Fig. 2 presents the results of the three different methods in the region $`25\mathrm{Re}k65`$. The resonances calculated by harmonic inversion and the PA to periodic orbit sum are marked by the squares and plus symbols as already mentioned above. The crosses label the resonances obtained by the cycle expansion of the Gutzwiller-Voros zeta function . The dotted line in Fig. 2 indicates the borderline, $`\mathrm{Im}k=\mathrm{0.121\hspace{0.17em}557}`$ , which separates the domain of absolute convergence of Gutzwiller’s trace formula from the region where analytic continuation is necessary. For the two resonance bands slightly below this border the results of all three semiclassical quantization methods are in perfect agreement. The dashed line in Fig. 2 marks the borderline of absolute convergence of the Gutzwiller-Voros zeta function, at $`\mathrm{Im}k=\mathrm{0.699\hspace{0.17em}110}`$ . The Gutzwiller-Voros zeta function provides several spurious resonances which accumulate at $`\mathrm{Im}k0.9`$, i.e., slightly below the borderline of absolute convergence (see the crosses in Fig. 2). The resonances in the region $`\mathrm{Im}k<0.9`$, especially those belonging to the fourth band, are not described by the Gutzwiller-Voros zeta function but are obtained by both the harmonic inversion method and the Padé approximant to the periodic orbit sum (see the squares and plus symbols in Fig. 2, respectively).

### B The circle billiard

As the second example we now demonstrate the applicability of our semiclassical quantization methods to the circle billiard. This system has previously been investigated as a model for periodic orbit quantization of integrable systems , however, to the best of our knowledge, has not yet been treated by the cycle expansion technique  or pseudo-orbit expansion .

The exact quantum mechanical eigenvalues $`E=\mathrm{}^2k^2/2M`$ of the circle billiard are given by zeros of Bessel functions $`J_{|m|}(kR)=0`$, where $`m=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,,\mathrm{}`$ is the angular momentum quantum number and $`R`$ is the radius of the circle. The semiclassical eigenvalues can be obtained by an Einstein-Brillouin-Keller (EBK) torus quantization  resulting in the quantization condition

$$kR\sqrt{1(m/kR)^2}|m|\mathrm{arccos}\frac{|m|}{kR}=\pi \left(n+\frac{3}{4}\right)$$
(39)
where $`n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ is the radial quantum number. In the following we choose $`R=1`$. States with angular momentum quantum number $`m0`$ are twofold degenerate.

The periodic orbits of the circle billiard have the form of regular polygons. They can be labeled by two integer numbers $`m_r`$ and $`m_\phi `$ with the restriction $`m_r2m_\phi `$ which can be shown to be identical with the number of sides of the corresponding polygon and its number of turns around the center of the circle, respectively . Some examples are given in Fig. 4. The angle between two bounces is a rational multiple of $`2\pi `$, i.e., the periods $`L_{\mathrm{po}}`$ are obtained from the condition

$$L_{\mathrm{po}}=2m_r\mathrm{sin}\gamma ,$$
(40)
with $`\gamma \pi m_\varphi /m_r`$. Periodic orbits with $`m_r2m_\varphi `$ can be traversed in two directions and thus have multiplicity 2. For the amplitudes $`𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}`$ of the circle billiard, the Berry-Tabor formula  for integrable systems yields

$$𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}=\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{2}}\frac{L_{\mathrm{po}}^{3/2}}{m_r^2}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\frac{\pi }{2}\left(3m_r+\frac{1}{2}\right)},$$
(41)
with $`\mu _{\mathrm{po}}=3m_r`$ being the Maslov index.

The periodic orbit quantities can be used to set up the semiclassical recurrence signal (4) for the circle billiard which can then be analyzed by harmonic inversion to extract the eigenenergies. Detailed comparisons between results obtained by harmonic inversion and the EBK torus quantization (39) are presented in Refs.  and show excellent agreement. The harmonic inversion method can even be generalized, firstly, to the harmonic inversion of cross-correlated periodic orbit sums  which allows to significantly reduce the number of orbits required for semiclassical quantization, and, secondly, to include higher order $`\mathrm{}`$ corrections in the periodic orbit sum. We do not report these results here but refer the reader to the literature for details. In what follows we want to apply our second method introduced in Sec. III to the circle billiard.

It follows from Eq. (41) that the Padé approximant to the periodic orbit sum should be calculated with an ordering parameter $`n=m_r1`$, i.e.,

$$A_n(k)=\underset{m_r<n}{}𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}kL_{\mathrm{po}}},n=1,2,\mathrm{},$$
(42)
with the lengths $`L_{\mathrm{po}}`$ and amplitudes $`𝒜_{\mathrm{po}}`$ given by Eqs. (40) and (41), respectively. We included all periodic orbits $`(m_r,m_\phi )`$ with $`m_r<100`$ in the calculation of the function $`g(k)`$ which is the Padé approximant to the sequence $`A_n(k)`$. The real and imaginary parts of $`1/g(k)`$ are presented as solid and dashed lines respectively in Fig. 5. The zeros of the function $`1/g(k)`$ agree perfectly to at least seven significant digits with the exact positions of the semiclassical eigenvalues obtained from Eq. (39) and marked by the squares in Fig. 5.

## V Conclusion

We have introduced two different methods to make semiclassical periodic orbit sums convergent. The first method is based on the harmonic inversion of band-limited periodic orbit signals. The characteristic feature of this method is the strict separation of the two steps, viz. firstly, the analytical filtering of the periodic orbit signal and, secondly, the numerical harmonic inversion of the band-limited signal by application of either linear predictor (LP), Padé approximant (PA), or signal diagonalization (SD). The separation of these two steps and the handling of small amounts of data compared to other “black box” type signal processing techniques provides a transparent approach to harmonic inversion as a semiclassical quantization method thus opening the possibility to an easier and deeper understanding of semiclassical quantization itself, and even yields numerically more accurate results than previous applications of filter-diagonalization (FD). The harmonic inversion method can be applied to the periodic orbit quantization of systems with both chaotic and regular classical dynamics, when the periodic orbit signal is calculated with Gutzwiller’s trace formula  for isolated orbits and the Berry-Tabor formula  for orbits on rational tori, respectively. More generally, any signal given as a sum of $`\delta `$ functions can be filtered analytically and analyzed using the methods described in Sections II B and II C. For example, the technique can also be applied to the harmonic inversion of the density of states $`\varrho (E)=_n\delta (EE_n)`$ of quantum spectra to extract information about the underlying classical dynamics .

The second method is the direct application of the Padé approximant (PA) to periodic orbit sums, and allows the resummation of the typically exponentially divergent terms of the semiclassical trace formulae. The Padé approximant can be applied when the total periodic orbit sum can be divided into partial sums with respect to an integer ordering parameter $`n`$, which can be related to, e.g., the cycle length of a symbolic code or the Maslov index of the orbit.

The two methods for periodic orbit quantization have been demonstrated for systems with completely different classical dynamics, viz. the classically chaotic three-disk scattering problem and the integrable circle billiard. A detailed comparison of various semiclassical quantization methods for the three-disk repeller reveals that quantization by harmonic inversion and the Padé approximant to periodic orbit sums can even be applied in energy regions where the cycle expansion of the Gutzwiller-Voros zeta function does not converge.

Evidently, the scope of applications of the methods presented in this paper is wide, and runs from simple models to challenging atomic, molecular, and mesoscopic systems with typically mixed regular-chaotic classical dynamics. Thus, even thirty years after the renaissance of semiclassics by Martin Gutzwiller, new and unexpected insights may be gained into the no man’s land between classical and quantum physics.

###### Acknowledgements.

Fruitful discussions with Dž. Belkić, P. A. Dando, and H. S. Taylor are gratefully acknowledged. We thank A. Wirzba for supplying numerical data on the three-disk system. This work was supported in part by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst.


text:
# Soliton solution in dilaton - Maxwell gravity

## 1 Model discussed

Recently much attention has been given to the study of gravity models appearing in the low energy limit of string theory . These models describe various interacting ”matter” fields coupled to gravity; one of them considers the system of interacting gravitational, abelian vector and scalar fields with the action

$${}_{}{}^{4}S=d^4x|g|^{\frac{1}{2}}\left[R+2\left(\varphi \right)^2e^{2\varphi }F^2\right],$$
(1.1)
where $`R`$ is the Ricci scalar for the metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$, $`(\mu =0,\mathrm{},3)`$; $`F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu `$. We will discuss the stationary and axisymmetric model when both the metric and matter fields depend only on two space coordinates.

The four - dimentional line element can be parametrized according to

$$ds_4^2=g_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu =f(dt\omega _\phi d\phi )^2f^1ds_3^2,$$
(1.2)
and the three - dimentional one can be taken in the Lewis - Papapetrou form

$$ds_3^2=h_{mn}dx^mdx^n=e^{2\gamma }(d\rho ^2+dz^2)+\rho ^2d\phi ^2.$$
(1.3)
The system under consideration may be completely described by the Einstein equations defining the metric function $`\gamma `$, as well as by the set of motion equations for the action

$${}_{}{}^{2}S=𝑑\rho 𝑑z\rho L,$$
(1.4)
where Lagrangian in term of $`\sigma `$ \- model variables  has the form

$`L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}f^2[(f)^2+(\chi +vuuv)^2]`$ (1.5)
$``$ $`f^1[e^{2\varphi }(u)^2+e^{2\varphi }(v)^2]`$
$`+`$ $`2(\varphi )^2.`$
($``$ is connected with the flat two - metric $`\delta _{ab}`$.) Here the magnetic $`u`$ and rotation $`\chi `$ potentials are introduced by ”dualization” in three - dimentional formulation of the stationary theory instead of the vector potential $`\stackrel{}{A}`$ and metric function $`\stackrel{}{\omega }`$ respectively:

$$u=fe^{2\varphi }(\sqrt{2}\times \stackrel{}{A}+v\times \stackrel{}{\omega })+\kappa v,$$
(1.6)
$$\chi =uvvuf^2\times \stackrel{}{\omega },$$
(1.7)
where $`v=\sqrt{2}A_0`$, and three–dimensional operator $``$ is connected with the metric $`h_{ij}`$.

In this letter we will study the case with $`\chi `$ = $`u`$ = 0, i. e. the pure electric configurations. It can be described by the action

$${}_{}{}^{2}S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑\rho 𝑑z\rho Tr(J^P)^2,$$
(1.8)
where $`J^P=(P)P^1`$ and the symmetric $`2\times 2`$ matrix $`P`$ consists of the ”matter” fields:

$`P=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}fv^2e^{2\varphi }& \hfill & ve^{2\varphi }\\ ve^{2\varphi }& \hfill & e^{2\varphi }\end{array}\right),`$ (1.11)
The set of Euler - Lagrange equations in the form of matrix equation reads

$$(\rho J^P)=0,$$
(1.12)
and it is for this equation that we will apply the inverse scattering problem method. The corresponding four - metric becomes static; its space part is determined by the function $`\gamma `$

$`\gamma _{,z}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2}}Tr[J_\rho ^PJ_z^P],`$ (1.13)
$`\gamma _{,\rho }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{4}}Tr[(J_\rho ^P)^2(J_z^P)^2].`$
As it is well known, having one solution of the theory one can obtain anouther one by applying some kind of symmetry transformation. So by changing the dilaton sign one can construct the pure magnetic field configuration with the same metric. Similarly the complex discrete Bonnor transformation  maps the system (1.8) into the one with the Kerr - like space - time metric with NUT parameter.

Thus in this letter we construct the nontrivial asymptotically flat configuration from the trivial fields and space - time metric by using the inverse scattering problem thecnique, and from this with the help of symmetry transformations we obtain the systems with the other set of field variables.

## 2 Inverse scattering problem method

As it has been shown by Belinsky and Zakharov, the vacuum stationary axially symmetric gravitational equations may be integrated by use of the inverse scattering problem method as proposed in  \- . This method allows to obtain the n - soliton configurations from the flat space - time, and in the case of two - soliton solution the Kerr - NUT metric with horizons is constructed .

Let us describe in brief the main aspects of general sheme used in further consideration .

The part of vacuum axially symmetric Einstein equations determining the metric of subspace $`(t,\varphi )`$ reads

$$(\rho J^g)=0,J^g=(g)g^1,$$
(2.1)
($`_i`$ = $`_i`$, $`i=\rho ,\varphi `$) where $`g`$ must satisfy the condition

$$detg=\rho ^2.$$
(2.2)
The integration of (2.1) is associated with the L - A pair

$$[_z\frac{2\lambda ^2}{\lambda ^2+\rho ^2}_\lambda ]\psi =\frac{\rho J_{}^{g}{}_{z}{}^{}\lambda J_{}^{g}{}_{\rho }{}^{}}{\lambda ^2+\rho ^2}\psi ,$$
(2.3)
$`[_\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{2\lambda \rho }{\lambda ^2+\rho ^2}}_\lambda ]\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{\rho J_{}^{g}{}_{\rho }{}^{}+\lambda J_{}^{g}{}_{z}{}^{}}{\lambda ^2+\rho ^2}}\psi ,`$
where $`\lambda `$ is the spectral complex parameter and the function $`\psi `$ = $`\psi (\lambda ,\rho ,z)`$. Then the solution of (2.1) for the symmetric metric matrix $`g`$ represents as:

$$g(\rho ,z)=\psi (0,\rho ,z).$$
(2.4)
The soliton solutions for the matrix $`g`$ correspond to the pole divergense in the spectral parameter complex plane for the matrix $`\psi `$; its pole trajectories are determined by

$$\mu _k(\rho ,z)=w_kz\pm [(w_kz)^2+\rho ^2]^{\frac{1}{2}},w_k=\mathrm{const}$$
(2.5)
for each pole $`k`$.

To satisfy the requirement (2.2), it is useful to note, that when $`g`$ is the solution of Eq. (2.1), the ”physical” function $`g^{ph}`$ = $`\rho (detg)^{\frac{1}{2}}g`$ is the solution, too.

Hence, omitting the intermediate calculations, the resulting expression for the metric tensor n - soliton solution has the form:

$$g_{}^{ph}{}_{ab}{}^{}(\rho ,z)=\rho ^n(\underset{p=1}{\overset{n}{}}\mu _p)[(g_0)_{ab}\underset{k,l=1}{\overset{n}{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{kl}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}\mu _{k}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}\mu _{l}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}N_{}^{(k)}{}_{a}{}^{}N_{}^{(l)}{}_{b}{}^{}],$$
(2.6)
where

$$N^{(p)}=g_0[\psi _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}(\mu _p,\rho ,z)]^Tm_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(p)},\mathrm{\Gamma }_{kl}=(\rho ^2+\mu _k\mu _l)^1N_{}^{(k)}{}_{}{}^{T}g_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}N^{(l)},$$
(2.7)
and the column $`m_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(p)}`$ consists of arbitrairy constants:

$`m_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(p)}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}C_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(p)}& & \\ C_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{(p)}& & \end{array}\right),`$ (2.10)
corresponding to the different charactheristics of the source.

## 3 Exact soliton solution

Now let us apply the inverse scattering problem method to the construction of the static axial - symmetric two - soliton solution for the Maxwell - dilaton gravity model (1.8).

If one takes the matrix Euler - Lagrange motion equation (1.10) and distracts from the physical sence of its components, one can see that its form coinsides with (2.1) for Einstein gravity. The important fact is that the matrix dimention of both this expressions is the same. This gives the reason to believe that the application of the considered above technique allows to obtain an exact solution of the discussed model.

Our system does not have a condition like (2.2), but the asymptotic behavior of the metric and fields raquires

$$P_{\mathrm{}}=\sigma _3.$$
(3.1)
To satisfy this we determine the ”physical” matrix as $`P^{ph}`$ = $`(detP)^{\frac{1}{2}}P`$, which is also the solution of (1.10). This leads to the restriction $`detP^{ph}`$ = $`1`$, in other words for all solutions it must be $`f=e^{2\varphi }`$ (see (1.9)). This limitation being the result of the technique used shows, that the pure nontrivial gravity system or the Einstein - Maxwell system are not contained in the constructed solution.

The initial values of metric and field variables correspond to a flat space - time and a trivial dilaton and electric configurations (3.1). Following , we obtain the solution in the Boyer - Lindkuist coordinats:

$$\rho =[(rm)^2\sigma ^2]^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{sin}\theta ,zz_1=(rm)\mathrm{cos}\theta ,$$
(3.2)
where the new constants $`\sigma `$ = $`\frac{1}{2}(w_1w_2)`$ and $`z_1`$ = $`\frac{1}{2}(w_1+w_2)`$ are introduced (see (2.5)); as one can see below, $`m`$ corresponds to the mass of the source. In analogy with the pure gravity case we impose the conditions on the arbitrary constants (2.8):

$`C_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{(1)}C_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(2)}C_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(1)}C_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{(2)}=\sigma ,C_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{(1)}C_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(2)}+C_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(1)}C_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{(2)}=m,`$ (3.3)
$`C_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{(1)}C_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{(2)}C_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(1)}C_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(2)}=a,C_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{(1)}C_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{(2)}+C_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(1)}C_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{(2)}=b,`$ (3.4)
where $`\sigma ^2`$=$`m^2b^2+a^2`$.

If we introduce the notation

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=r^22mr+b^2a^2,\delta ^2=r^2(ba\mathrm{cos}\theta )^2,$$
(3.5)
then the components of matrix $`P`$ can be presented in the form

$$f=e^{2\varphi }=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }+a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\delta ^2},v=2\frac{br+m(ba\mathrm{cos}\theta )}{\delta ^2}.$$
(3.6)
The four - dimentional line element corresponds to diagonal metric with space part resembling the Kerr one:

$`ds_4^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }+a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\delta ^2}}dt^2{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }+a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2`$ (3.7)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }+a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\mathrm{\Delta }+\sigma ^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}dr^2+\delta ^2d\theta ^2].`$
Hence one can see that $`m`$ is the mass of the source and $`b`$ is proportional to the electric charge.

As it was noted before, it is interesting to construct one field configuration from the other using some symmetry transformation. By changing the dilaton sign from the electric solution one can obtain the pure magnetic solution with the same metric and $`f`$ = $`e^{2\varphi }`$, $`u`$ = $`v`$, where $`f`$ and $`v`$ are determined by (3.6).

Another interesting case is connected with the complex discrete transformation allowing to obtain the rotating system with NUT - parameter. The Bonnor transformation

$$vi\chi $$
(3.8)
leads to a complex changing of parameters $`a`$ and $`b`$ corresponding now to a rotating moment and a NUT - parameter of the source. Given transformation maps the effective Lagrangian $`L(f,v,\varphi )`$ into the one $`L(f,\chi )`$ = 2$`L_E`$, where $`L_E`$ relates to the vacuum gravity. One can see that this Lagrangian appears in the Einstein - Maxwell - dilaton theory with pseudoscalar Peccei - Quinn axion field (EMDA) . (As it is known, the theory (1.1) is not always a subsystem of EMDA) . Thus one can leave the framework of the theory under consideration (1.1) and obtain the EMDA particular solution that presents six ”moduli” field expressed in terms of two variables $`f`$ and $`\chi `$. One of this possible models corresponding to the special solution anzats is considered in ; as an example we would like to present the symplest case with $`f`$ = $`e^{2\varphi }`$ and axion field $`\kappa `$ = $`\chi `$, related to the system without vector fields.

Then the field functions have the form:

$$f=e^{2\varphi }=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\delta ^2},\chi =\kappa =2\frac{br+m(ba\mathrm{cos}\theta )}{\delta ^2}.$$
(3.9)
Using (1.7) we obtain

$$\omega _\phi =\frac{2}{\mathrm{\Delta }a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }[b\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{\Delta }a\mathrm{sin}^2\theta (mr+b^2)],$$
(3.10)
which defines the metric component $`g_{t\phi }`$. Thus the resulting four - metric becames:

$`ds_4^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\delta ^2}}[dt\omega _\phi d\phi ]^2{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2`$ (3.11)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }a^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{\mathrm{\Delta }+\sigma ^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}dr^2+\delta ^2d\theta ^2].`$
It is easy to see that this expression is close to the Kerr - NUT metric. The difference is assotiated with the duplication of $`L_E`$; thit leads to the fact that the metric function $`\gamma `$ = 2$`\gamma _E`$ (see(1.11)), changing the three - dimentional metric (1.3). As the result one has the dependance of the metric on the coordinate $`\theta `$ in the spherically symmetric case (when $`a`$ = $`b`$ = $`0`$), this also concerns the metric (3.7).

At the last time one can note that the equation (1.10) is invariant under the transformation

$$PP^1.$$
(3.12)
It is easy to prove that the solution arising after applying of (3.12) coincides with the one constructed above with the additional replacement $`zz`$ and $`bb`$.

## 4 Discussion

In this letter by use of the inverse scattering problem method the exact stationary axially symmetric solution of interacting electric - dilaton gravity system is constructed. This becomes possible because of the suitable matrix dimention description of the theory under consideration and as a result of the motion equations. Actually this fact plays an important role: so, the direct application of above mentioned technique for the case of the Einstein - Maxwell - dilaton - axion gravity describing by the four - dimentional matrix does not allow to obtain the solution with ”good” asymptotics for metric and fields. The technique used fixes the anzatc not containing the nontrivial gravity or Maxwell - gravity systems as subsystems.

This demonstrates the possibility of soliton solution construction for gravity system with fields described by two - dimentional matrices, and we would hope in further to generalize this for the case of arbitrairy degree of friedom number.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by RFBR grant $`\mathrm{N}^0\mathrm{00\hspace{0.17em}02\hspace{0.17em}17135}`$