format: text

text:
# KUNS-1705hep-th/0101162 Test of the Absence of Kinetic Terms around the Tachyon Vacuum in Cubic String Field Theory

## 1 Introduction

The bosonic D-brane has an unstable tachyonic mode on the perturbative vacuum. It has been conjectured  that there is a local minimum of the tachyon potential (non-perturbative vacuum), where the tension of the D-brane and the negative contribution from the tachyon potential exactly cancel each other. On this vacuum, there should be no D-branes and hence no open string excitations at all, leaving only the closed string sector. It has been also conjectured that the solutions on this non-perturbative vacuum represent various lower dimensional D-branes (descent relations).

For studying these conjectures, string field theories have proved to be very useful, and there have appeared many interesting works in this direction . In particular, Witten’s cubic open string field theory (CSFT)  combined with the level truncation approximation  has been successful in verifying the conjecture on the potential height to a very high degree of accuracy . Though most of these conjectures, the potential height problem and the descent relation, have later been proved  in another formulation of open string field theory called boundary string field theory (BSFT) , there still remains an important problem to be understood: how the open string excitations disappear around the non-perturbative vacuum. Note that for analyzing this problem we have to treat all the modes in open string theory other than the tachyon mode. Therefore, CSFT whose action is given in a closed form seems to be rather suited for this problem than BSFT which has concise expression only for the tachyon field.

One of possible ways to prove the absence of physical open string excitations is to show that they all have infinite masses . Another and roughly an equivalent way is to show that the physical components of the open string field fluctuations lack their kinetic terms in the SFT action and hence become non-dynamical  (kinetic term means the quadratic term of the fluctuations containing the derivatives with respect to the center-of-mass string coordinate). In relation to this, an interesting deformed version of CSFT has recently been proposed in  as a possible SFT model around the non-perturbative vacuum. The BRST operator in this model is simply equal to the ghost zero-mode, $`Q_\text{B}=c_0`$, and hence the quadratic term $`\mathrm{\Phi }Q_\text{B}\mathrm{\Phi }`$ contains no kinetic term at all. What we have to do for proving the absence of open string excitations on the non-perturbative vacuum is to derive this kind of SFT from the ordinary CSFT.

The purpose of this paper is to explore, using the level truncation approximation, the possibility that CSFT action expanded around the non-perturbative vacuum contains no kinetic terms for physical fluctuations. Let the action of CSFT be given by $`S=(1/2)\mathrm{\Phi }Q_\text{B}\mathrm{\Phi }+(1/3)\mathrm{\Phi }^3`$, and let us expand the original string field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ as $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Phi }_0+\mathrm{\Psi }`$ with $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ being the classical solution representing the non-perturbative vacuum. Then the term in $`S`$ quadratic in the fluctuation $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is $`(1/2)\mathrm{\Psi }(Q_\text{B}+2\mathrm{\Phi }_0)\mathrm{\Psi }`$. Since the three-string interaction vertex defining the star-product $``$ contains any powers of the derivative $`/x^\mu `$ with respect to the center-of-mass $`x^\mu `$ of the string coordinate $`X^\mu (\sigma )`$, the kinetic term for the fluctuation $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ consists of terms with any number of derivatives. Our expectation is that these kinetic terms all vanish for the physical components of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, where “physical” means being BRST invariant. We are going to study this possibility in the level (2,6) truncation by taking as the fluctuations only the scalar modes at levels zero and two. As the kinetic terms we take the quadratic and the quartic ones in the derivatives $`/x^\mu `$.

As the simplest and encouraging example, let us quote our result in the level $`(0,0)`$ approximation, namely, let us take only the level zero scalar field $`t`$ (see sec. 3.1). The kinetic term for $`t`$ quadratic in the derivative is

$$_{\mathrm{kin}}=\frac{1}{2}\left[1\frac{81\sqrt{3}}{32}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{3^3}{2^4}\right)t_0\right]\left(_\mu t\right)^2,$$
(1.1)
where $`t_0`$ is the classical value of $`t`$ at the non-perturbative vacuum. This kinetic term vanishes at $`t_0=32/(81\sqrt{3}\mathrm{ln}(3^3/2^4))0.436`$, which is close to the value of $`t_0`$ obtained as the stationary point of the level (0,0) potential, $`t_00.456`$. Even this simplest example supports our expectation that the kinetic term for the physical fluctuations totally vanish.

In our analysis in the level (2,6) approximation, we consider the kinetic terms quadratic and quartic in the derivatives for the three scalar fluctuation modes at levels zero and two. Then the coefficients of the kinetic terms form $`3\times 3`$ matrices in the space of fluctuations. Since there is only one physical component among the three scalar fluctuations, the two matrices, one for the kinetic term with two derivatives and the other with four, must have a common zero-mode (namely, the eigenvector corresponding to the eigenvalue zero) in order for the physical fluctuation to disappear from the kinetic terms. We examine numerically whether this condition is satisfied in the neighborhood of the non-perturbative vacuum, and obtain results which support our expectation.

The organization of the rest of this paper is as follows. In sec. 2, after making a setup for the level truncation calculation in CSFT, we present the derivative expansion of the kinetic term of the action and the BRST transformation at a generic translation invariant background. Then, in sec. 3 we carry out the numerical analysis of the kinetic terms and the BRST transformations of the fluctuations to examine whether the kinetic terms for the physical fluctuation can disappear in the neighborhood of the non-perturbative vacuum. Finally in sec. 4, we discuss future problems.

## 2 Derivative expansion of the SFT action

In this section, as a preparation for the analysis in sec. 3, we fix our conventions for the CSFT action, and then present the derivative expansion of the kinetic terms and the BRST transformation for the scalar fluctuation modes in the level (2,6) approximation.

### 2.1 SFT action and the BRST transformation

We shall first recapitulate the gauge-fixed action and the BRST transformation of CSFT in the Siegel gauge. They are both obtained from the gauge invariant action:

$$S_{\mathrm{inv}}=\frac{1}{g_o^2}(\frac{1}{2}_{b_0,x}\mathrm{\Phi }|Q_\text{B}|\mathrm{\Phi }+\frac{1}{3}_{b_0,x}^{(3)}_{b_0,x}^{(2)}_{b_0,x}^{(1)}{}_{1}{}^{}\mathrm{\Phi }|{}_{2}{}^{}\mathrm{\Phi }|{}_{3}{}^{}\mathrm{\Phi }|V_{123}^{}),$$
(2.1)
where $`g_o`$ is the open string coupling constant, and $`_{b_0,x}^{(r)}𝑑b_0^{(r)}d^{26}x_r`$ denotes the integrations over the anti-ghost zero-mode $`b_0`$ and the center-of-mass coordinate $`x^\mu `$ of the $`r`$-th string. The string field $`|\mathrm{\Phi }`$ in (2.1) is a state in the Fock space of the first quantized string and carry ghost number $`1`$. It is expanded in terms of the anti-ghost zero mode $`b_0`$ as

$$|\mathrm{\Phi }(x,b_0)=b_0|\varphi (x)+|\psi (x),$$
(2.2)
where $`|\varphi `$ and $`|\psi `$ carry ghost number $`0`$ and $`1`$, respectively. The ghost zero-mode structure of the BRST operator $`Q_\text{B}`$ is

$`Q_\text{B}`$ $`=c_0L+b_0M+\stackrel{~}{Q}_\text{B},`$ (2.3)
where we have

$`L`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\alpha _0^2+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left(\alpha _n\alpha _n+nc_nb_n+nb_nc_n\right)1,`$ (2.4)
$`M`$ $`=2{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}nc_nc_n,`$ (2.5)
$`\stackrel{~}{Q}_\text{B}`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}c_n{\displaystyle \underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\alpha _{nm}\alpha _m+{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}n0,m0\\ n+m0\end{array}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{mn}{2}}c_mc_nb_{mn},`$ (2.6)
with $`(\alpha _0)_\mu =\sqrt{2}p_\mu =\sqrt{2}(i/x^\mu )`$. The three-string interaction vertex $`|V_{123}`$ is given in the momentum representation for $`x^\mu `$ as

$`|V_{123}`$ $`=\lambda \mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{r,s=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n,m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}N_{nm}^{rs}\alpha _n^{(r)}\alpha _m^{(s)}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}X_{nm}^{rs}c_n^{(r)}b_m^{(s)}\right)\right]|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}_{123}`$
$`\times (2\pi )^{26}\delta ^{26}\left(p_1+p_2+p_3\right),`$ (2.7)
where $`|0`$ is the Fock vacuum satisfying $`(\alpha _n,b_n,c_n)|0=0`$ ($`n1`$), $`\lambda `$ is a constant $`\lambda =3^{9/2}/2^6`$ , and the Neumann coefficients, $`N_{nm}^{rs}`$ and $`X_{nm}^{rs}`$, are defined in . In particular, for $`N_{00}^{rs}`$ we have $`_{r,s=1}^3N_{00}^{rs}\alpha _0^{(r)}\alpha _0^{(s)}=N_{00}_{r=1}^3\left(\alpha _0^{(r)}\right)^2`$ with $`N_{00}=(1/2)\mathrm{ln}(3^3/2^4)`$.

Then the gauge-fixed action $`S`$ in the Siegel gauge, $`b_0|\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$, is obtained from $`S_{\mathrm{inv}}`$ (2.1) simply by putting $`\psi =0`$:

$$S=\frac{1}{g_o^2}(\frac{1}{2}_x\varphi |L|\varphi +\frac{1}{3}_{x_1}_{x_2}_{x_3}{}_{1}{}^{}\varphi |{}_{2}{}^{}\varphi |{}_{3}{}^{}\varphi |v_{123}^{}),$$
(2.8)
where the three-string vertex for the gauge-fixed action is $`|v_{123}|V_{123}|_{b_0^{(1)}=b_0^{(2)}=b_0^{(3)}=0}`$. This action has an invariance under the BRST transformation $`\delta _\text{B}\varphi (\delta S_{\mathrm{inv}}/\delta \psi )_{\psi =0}`$:

$$i\delta _\text{B}|\varphi _3=\stackrel{~}{Q}_\text{B}^{(3)}|\varphi _3_{x_1}_{x_2}_{r=1}^3_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}X^{r3}_{n0}_1\varphi |{}_{2}{}^{}\varphi |c_n^{(r)}|v_{123}^{}.$$
(2.9)
Physical quantities in the present SFT are required to be invariant under the BRST transformation.

### 2.2 Derivative expansion of the action

As mentioned in sec. 1, we are interested in the kinetic term of the string field fluctuation around the non-perturbative vacuum. To analyze it in the simplest framework, we adopt the level (2,6) truncation and take the scalar fields at levels zero and two, both as the vacuum coordinates and the fluctuations. Namely, we restrict the $`N_{\mathrm{gh}}=0`$ component field sector of $`|\varphi `$ to the following form:

$$|\varphi (x)_{N_{\mathrm{gh}}=0}=t(x)|0+u(x)c_1b_1|0+v(x)\frac{1}{\sqrt{52}}\left(\alpha _1\alpha _1\right)|0,$$
(2.10)
Then, reexpressing the three component field $`\left(\phi ^i\right)=(t,u,v)`$ as $`\phi ^i\phi _0^i+\phi ^i`$ with $`\phi _0^i`$ being a (translation invariant) vacuum value and $`\phi ^i`$ the fluctuation around $`\phi _0^i`$, we carry out the derivative expansion of the kinetic term of the fluctuation $`\phi ^i`$ obtained from the action $`S`$ (2.8):

$$S_{\mathrm{kin}}=\frac{1}{2g_o^2}d^{26}x\left(G_{ij}(\phi _0)_\mu \phi ^i_\mu \phi ^j+H_{ij}(\phi _0)^2\phi ^i^2\phi ^j+\mathrm{}\right).$$
(2.11)
Here we are making the simplification of considering only the scalar fields $`(t,u,v)`$. In particular, we took only the trace part of the tensor fields $`v_{\mu \nu }`$ which appear in the expansion of $`|\varphi `$ in the form $`v_{\mu \nu }(x)\alpha _1^\mu \alpha _1^\nu |0`$. We have also discarded the vector field at level two which appear as the coefficient of $`\alpha _2^\mu |0`$. Complete treatment in the (2,6) truncation should take into account the mixing among all the scalar, vector and tensor fields at levels zero, one and two. However, such analysis would be so complicated since the size of the matrices $`G_{ij}`$ and $`H_{ij}`$ become much larger, and there are many physical fields that should be confined. Therefore, we shall carry out the following analysis in the smallest fluctuation space $`(t,u,v)`$ with a hope that the mixing with other components is small.

Now each component of the $`3\times 3`$ matrix $`G_{ij}(\phi _0)`$ is a linear function of $`\phi _0`$ and is given explicitly by (hereafter we omit the subscript 0 on $`\phi _0`$ unless confusion occurs)

$`G_{tt}=1+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{13}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{32}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left(81t33u+15\sqrt{13}v\right),`$ (2.12)
$`G_{uu}=1+{\displaystyle \frac{19}{54\sqrt{39}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{32}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{19}{3}}tu+{\displaystyle \frac{95\sqrt{13}}{81}}v\right),`$ (2.13)
$`G_{vv}=1{\displaystyle \frac{49}{156\sqrt{3}}}t{\displaystyle \frac{539}{4212\sqrt{3}}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{2779}{468\sqrt{39}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{32}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{581}{9}}t{\displaystyle \frac{6391}{243}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{20951}{81\sqrt{13}}}v\right),`$ (2.14)
$`G_{tu}={\displaystyle \frac{11}{6\sqrt{39}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{32}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left(33t{\displaystyle \frac{19}{3}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{55\sqrt{13}}{9}}v\right),`$ (2.15)
$`G_{uv}={\displaystyle \frac{11}{24\sqrt{39}}}t+{\displaystyle \frac{19}{216\sqrt{39}}}u{\displaystyle \frac{4279}{8424\sqrt{3}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{32}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{55\sqrt{13}}{9}}t+{\displaystyle \frac{95\sqrt{13}}{81}}u{\displaystyle \frac{6391}{243}}v\right),`$ (2.16)
$`G_{vt}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{13}}}t+{\displaystyle \frac{11}{24\sqrt{39}}}u{\displaystyle \frac{389}{312\sqrt{3}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{32}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left(15\sqrt{13}t+{\displaystyle \frac{55\sqrt{13}}{9}}u{\displaystyle \frac{581}{9}}v\right).`$ (2.17)
Note that in the present convention we have $`G_{ij}(\phi ^i=0)=diag(1,1,1)`$ at the perturbative vacuum (the minus sign for the $`u`$ field is due to the negative norm property of the ghosty state $`c_1b_1|0`$).

The matrix $`H_{ij}(\phi )`$ for the four-derivative kinetic term have contributions only from the interaction term of (2.8). It is given by

$`H_{tt}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{13}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)v+{\displaystyle \frac{3\sqrt{3}}{64}}\left[\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\right]^2\left(27t+11u5\sqrt{13}v\right),`$ (2.18)
$`H_{uu}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{19}{54\sqrt{39}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)v+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{64}}\left[\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\right]^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{19}{3}}t+u{\displaystyle \frac{95\sqrt{13}}{81}}v\right),`$ (2.19)
$`H_{vv}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{78}}t+{\displaystyle \frac{11}{2106}}u{\displaystyle \frac{5}{18\sqrt{13}}}v\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{156\sqrt{3}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left(49t+{\displaystyle \frac{539}{27}}u{\displaystyle \frac{2779}{3\sqrt{13}}}v\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{192\sqrt{3}}}\left[\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\right]^2\left(581t+{\displaystyle \frac{6391}{27}}u{\displaystyle \frac{20951}{9\sqrt{13}}}v\right),`$ (2.20)
$`H_{tu}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{11}{6\sqrt{39}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)v+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{64}}\left[\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\right]^2\left(33t+{\displaystyle \frac{19}{3}}u{\displaystyle \frac{55\sqrt{13}}{9}}v\right),`$ (2.21)
$`H_{uv}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{22}{1053\sqrt{3}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24\sqrt{3}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{11}{\sqrt{13}}}t{\displaystyle \frac{19}{9\sqrt{13}}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{4279}{351}}v\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{192\sqrt{3}}}\left[\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\right]^2\left(55\sqrt{13}t{\displaystyle \frac{95\sqrt{13}}{9}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{6391}{27}}v\right),`$ (2.22)
$`H_{vt}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{39\sqrt{3}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{8}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{\sqrt{13}}}t{\displaystyle \frac{11}{9\sqrt{13}}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{389}{117}}v\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3}}{64}}\left[\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\right]^2\left(15\sqrt{13}t{\displaystyle \frac{55\sqrt{13}}{9}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{581}{9}}v\right).`$ (2.23)
For completeness we present the potential $`V(\phi )`$ in the (2,6) truncation:

$`V(\phi )=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}t^2+{\displaystyle \frac{27\sqrt{3}}{64}}t^3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}v^2+{\displaystyle \frac{33\sqrt{3}}{64}}t^2u{\displaystyle \frac{15\sqrt{39}}{64}}t^2v`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{19}{64\sqrt{3}}}tu^2{\displaystyle \frac{55}{96}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{13}{3}}}tuv+{\displaystyle \frac{581}{192\sqrt{3}}}tv^2`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{64\sqrt{3}}}u^3{\displaystyle \frac{95}{1728}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{13}{3}}}u^2v+{\displaystyle \frac{6391}{5184\sqrt{3}}}uv^2{\displaystyle \frac{20951}{5184\sqrt{39}}}v^3.`$ (2.24)
### 2.3 Derivative expansion of the BRST transformation

In the analysis of sec. 3, we also need the derivative expansion of the BRST transformation of the fields $`(t,u,v)`$ for identifying their physical (BRST invariant) combination at the non-perturbative vacuum. Since the ghost field in $`|\varphi `$ at level one does not contribute to $`\delta _\text{B}(t,u,v)`$, we have only to consider the ghost fields at level two, $`C(x)`$ and $`C_\mu (x)`$, which appear in $`|\varphi `$ as

$$|\varphi (x)_{\text{level-2 ghost sector}}=iC(x)b_2|0+C_\mu (x)\alpha _1^\mu b_1|0.$$
(2.25)
Then, $`\delta _\text{B}(t,u,v)`$ can be calculated using the formula (2.9). Similarly to the kinetic term (2.11), we carry out the derivative expansion for the contribution from the last term of (2.9) and express the result as

$$\delta _\text{B}\phi ^i=a^i(\phi _0)C+b^i(\phi _0)_\mu C_\mu +y^i(\phi _0)^2C+z^i(\phi _0)^2_\mu C_\mu +\mathrm{},$$
(2.26)
where we have omitted those terms containing the fluctuation $`\phi ^i`$ on the RHS. The explicit expression of the coefficients $`(a^i(\phi ),b^i(\phi ),y^i(\phi ),z^i(\phi ))`$ are as follows:

$`a^t=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3\sqrt{3}}{4}}t{\displaystyle \frac{29}{12\sqrt{3}}}u{\displaystyle \frac{5}{12}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{13}{3}}}v,`$ (2.27)
$`a^u=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{11}{12\sqrt{3}}}t+{\displaystyle \frac{703}{324\sqrt{3}}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{55}{324}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{13}{3}}}v,`$ (2.28)
$`a^v=`$ $`\sqrt{13}{\displaystyle \frac{5}{12}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{13}{3}}}t+{\displaystyle \frac{145}{324}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{13}{3}}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{581}{324\sqrt{3}}}v,`$ (2.29)
$`b^t=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}}t+{\displaystyle \frac{19}{6\sqrt{6}}}u{\displaystyle \frac{97}{6\sqrt{78}}}v,`$ (2.30)
$`b^u=`$ $`\sqrt{2}{\displaystyle \frac{11}{6\sqrt{6}}}t{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{6}}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{1067}{162\sqrt{78}}}v,`$ (2.31)
$`b^v=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{13}}}{\displaystyle \frac{49}{6\sqrt{78}}}t{\displaystyle \frac{931}{162\sqrt{78}}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{2779}{702\sqrt{6}}}v,`$ (2.32)
$`y^t=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3\sqrt{39}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12\sqrt{3}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left(27t29u5\sqrt{13}v\right),`$ (2.33)
$`y^u=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{44}{81\sqrt{39}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12\sqrt{3}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left(11t+{\displaystyle \frac{703}{27}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{55\sqrt{13}}{27}}v\right),`$ (2.34)
$`y^v=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3\sqrt{39}}}t+{\displaystyle \frac{29}{81\sqrt{39}}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{389}{1053\sqrt{3}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12\sqrt{3}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left(5\sqrt{13}t+{\displaystyle \frac{145\sqrt{13}}{27}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{581}{27}}v\right),`$ (2.35)
$`z^t=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{39}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6\sqrt{6}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left(27t+19u{\displaystyle \frac{97}{\sqrt{13}}}v\right),`$ (2.36)
$`z^u=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{44}{81}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{39}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6\sqrt{6}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left(11t3u+{\displaystyle \frac{1067}{27\sqrt{13}}}v\right),`$ (2.37)
$`z^v=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{39}}}t{\displaystyle \frac{19}{81}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{39}}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{119}{351}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}}v+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6\sqrt{6}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{49}{\sqrt{13}}}t{\displaystyle \frac{931}{27\sqrt{13}}}u+{\displaystyle \frac{2779}{117}}v\right).`$ (2.38)
Note that the constant terms in $`a^u`$, $`a^v`$, $`b^u`$ and $`b^v`$ came from $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_\text{B}|\varphi `$ in (2.9), and that the tachyon field $`t`$ is BRST invariant at the perturbative vacuum.

## 3 Testing the absence of the kinetic terms

In this section, we shall study numerically whether the conditions for the absence of the kinetic terms of the physical scalar field are realized near the non-perturbative vacuum. The precise expressions of the conditions will be stated below, in particular, in sec. 3.2. What we shall test are i) location of the zero of $`detG`$ and that of $`detH`$, ii) coincidence of the zero-modes of $`G_{ij}`$ and $`H_{ij}`$, and iii) existence of the BRST invariant linear combination of $`(t,u,v)`$ including the higher derivative terms in $`\delta _\text{B}\phi ^i`$. Unfortunately, these conditions are not satisfied to high precision at the non-perturbative vacuum determined as a stationary point of the potential. Therefore, we shall look at each of them globally in the space of vacuum coordinate $`\phi _0^i=(t_0,u_0,v_0)`$ to test whether there is a point satisfying the condition near the non-perturbative vacuum.

### 3.1 Analysis at level (0,0)

Let us first consider the simplest (0,0) truncation, namely, let us keep only the level zero field $`t`$. In this approximation the field $`t`$ is physical everywhere, $`\delta _\text{B}^{(0,0)}t=0`$, and the potential $`V`$ (2.24) and the metric $`G_{tt}`$ (2.12) are reduced to

$`V^{(0,0)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}t^2+{\displaystyle \frac{27\sqrt{3}}{64}}t^3,`$ (3.1)
$`G_{tt}^{(0,0)}=1{\displaystyle \frac{81\sqrt{3}}{32}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3^3}{2^4}}\right)t.`$ (3.2)
The non-trivial stationary point (non-perturbative vacuum) of $`V^{(0,0)}`$ exists at $`t=64/(81\sqrt{3})0.456`$, while the metric $`G_{tt}^{(0,0)}`$ vanishes at $`t=32/(81\sqrt{3}\mathrm{ln}(3^3/2^4))0.436`$. Surprisingly these two points are very close, supporting that the kinetic term of the physical field $`t`$ is missing. As for $`H_{tt}`$ for the four-derivative kinetic term, it vanishes only at $`t=0`$. However, the level (0,0) approximation would be too poor for such higher derivative kinetic terms.

### 3.2 Analysis of $`𝑮_{𝒊𝒋}`$

Encouraged by the above result in the (0,0) approximation, let us proceed to the analysis of the full $`G_{ij}`$ of eqs. (2.12) – (2.17) and the first two terms of the BRST transformation (2.26):

$$\delta _\mathrm{B}^{ab}\phi ^i=a^i(\phi )C+b^i(\phi )_\mu C_\mu .$$
(3.3)
Namely, we shall examine the lowest derivative kinetic term and the lowest derivative part of the BRST transformation.

Before starting the analysis, let us state our expectation for the disappearance of the physical open string modes in the present situation. Since we have two independent ghost fields, $`C`$ and $`_\mu C_\mu `$, on the RHS of (3.3), there is only one BRST invariant linear combination $`T`$ of the three scalar fields $`(t,u,v)`$ satisfying $`\delta _\mathrm{B}^{ab}T=0`$:

$$T=t+\beta _u(\phi )u+\beta _v(\phi )v,$$
(3.4)
where $`\beta _i(\phi )`$ ($`i=u,v`$) is the solution of

$`a^t+\beta _ua^u+\beta _va^v=0,`$
$`b^t+\beta _ub^u+\beta _vb^v=0.`$ (3.5)
Namely, the level zero scalar $`t`$, which was BRST invariant at the perturbative vacuum, needs a mixing of $`u`$ and $`v`$ to reconstruct a BRST invariant field at the non-perturbative vacuum.

A possible mechanism that confines this physical scalar $`T`$ is that $`T`$ has no kinetic term. In particular, $`T`$ should not appear in $`G_{ij}_\mu \phi ^i_\mu \phi ^j`$. For this to be realized, it is sufficient that the matrix $`G_{ij}(\phi )`$ has a zero-mode $`𝒆_0`$ (i.e., the eigenvector of the eigenvalue zero) and that it has a non-vanishing inner product with $`𝜷(1,\beta _u,\beta _v)`$:

$$𝜷𝒆_00.$$
(3.6)
The reason is as follows. Let $`𝒆_a`$ ($`a=0,1,2`$) be the three orthonormal eigenvectors of the (real and symmetric) matrix $`G_{ij}`$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $`g_a`$:

$$G𝒆_a=g_a𝒆_a,𝒆_a𝒆_b=\delta _{a,b},g_0=0.$$
(3.7)
Then, the two-derivative kinetic term is diagonalized as

$$G_{ij}_\mu \phi ^i_\mu \phi ^j=\underset{a=1,2}{}g_a\left(_\mu \varphi _a\right)^2,$$
(3.8)
where the new field $`\varphi _a`$ is defined by $`\varphi _a𝒆_a𝝋`$. In order for the kinetic term (3.8) not to contain the physical $`T=𝜷𝝋`$, $`T`$ should not be expressed as a linear combination of $`\varphi _a`$ ($`a=1,2)`$, and this is realized if the condition (3.6) holds. We would like to emphasize that the missing combination $`𝒆_0𝝋`$ need not be exactly equal to $`T`$.<sup>*</sup><sup>*</sup>* The requirement $`𝜷𝒆_0`$ is not invariant under a transformation of the coordinate system $`\phi ^i`$ of the field space.  A rather weak condition (3.6) is sufficient.

Therefore, what we have to test first of all is whether the determinant of the matrix $`G_{ij}(\phi )`$ vanishes near the non-perturbative vacuum. Recall that the coordinate $`\phi _c=(t_c,u_c,v_c)`$ of the non-perturbative vacuum obtained as a stationary point of the level (2,6) potential (2.24) is

$$t_c0.544,u_c0.190,v_c0.202.$$
(3.9)
First, the value of $`detG`$ at the point of (3.9) is $`detG(0.544,0.190,0.202)=0.189`$, which is relatively close to zero compared with its value at the perturbative vacuum $`detG(0,0,0)=1`$, indicating that the point (3.9) is near the two-dimensional surface of $`detG=0`$, though not exactly on it.

Figs. 1 and 2 would help understanding how the non-perturbative vacuum is close to the surface $`detG=0`$. In fig. 1 we plot $`detG`$ as a function of $`t`$ for various fixed values of $`(u,v)`$. In particular, the zero of $`detG`$ for $`(u,v)=(u_c,v_c)`$ of (3.9) is at $`t=0.469`$, while the zero for $`(u,v)=(0,0)`$ is at $`t=0.285`$. For $`(u,v)=(u_c,v_c)`$, $`detG`$ has other two zeros at $`t=2.82`$ and $`3.81`$. When $`(u,v)=(0,0)`$, the other two zeros are complex.  On the other hand, fig. 2 shows curves of $`detG=0`$ in the $`(u,v)`$ plane for several fixed values of $`t`$. As a concrete example, assuming the conjectured equality $`u=v`$ at the non-perturbative vacuum , the value of $`u`$ satisfying $`detG(t_c=0.544,u,u)=0`$ is $`u=0.296`$.

As a representative point on the $`detG=0`$ surface which is reasonably close to the non-perturbative vacuum of (3.9), there is a stationary point $`(t_r,u_r,v_r)`$ of the level (2,6) potential (2.24) restricted on the surface $`detG=0`$:

$$(t_r,u_r,v_r)(0.500,0.181,0.222).$$
(3.10)
The value of the potential (2.24) (normalized so that the true value is equal to $`1`$) at this point is $`2\pi ^2V(t_r,u_r,v_r)=0.904`$, while that at the point (3.9) is $`2\pi ^2V(t_c,u_c,v_c)=0.959`$.

The above analysis tells that the non-perturbative vacuum is indeed close to the surface $`detG=0`$. In particular, for $`t0.5`$ the condition $`detG=0`$ combined with the assumption $`uv`$ predicts the expected value $`0.2`$ for $`u`$ and $`v`$. We have also examined the condition (3.6) to find that the inner product $`𝜷𝒆_0`$ on the surface $`detG=0`$ has no zeros at least in the region $`0<u,v<1`$.

### 3.3 Analysis of $`𝑯_{𝒊𝒋}`$

Next let us consider the four-derivative kinetic term in (2.11). What we expect for $`H_{ij}(\phi )`$ in order for the physical scalar $`T`$ (3.4) to drop out from the four-derivative kinetic term is as follows:

* $`H_{ij}`$ has a zero-mode $`𝒇_0`$ at the non-perturbative vacuum.
* The two non-zero-modes of $`H_{ij}`$ span the same two-dimensional subspace as that spanned by the non-zero-modes of $`G_{ij}`$ (equivalently, $`𝒇_0`$ is parallel to the zero-mode $`𝒆_0`$ of $`G_{ij}`$).

If these conditions are satisfied, then $`H_{ij}^2\phi ^i^2\phi ^j`$ is also expressed only in terms of $`\varphi _a`$ ($`a=1,2`$) appearing in the two-derivative kinetic term (3.8).

First, let us see whether $`detH`$ vanishes near the non-perturbative vacuum. Fig. 3 shows $`detH`$ as a function of $`t`$ for several fixed values of $`(u,v)`$. For $`(u,v)=(0,0)`$, $`detH`$ has no zeros in the range of $`t`$ of our interest, and for $`(u,v)=(u_r,v_r)`$ of (3.10), $`detH`$ become close to zero at $`t0.33`$ but does not cross zero. For larger values of $`v`$ compared with $`u`$, $`(u,v)=(0.15,0.30)`$ and $`(0.15,0.35)`$, $`detH`$ has zeros around $`t=0.5`$.

Fig. 4 shows the curves of $`detH=0`$ in the $`(v,u)`$ plane for three values of $`t`$. From fig. 4, we see that, for $`t0.5`$ and $`u0.2`$ corresponding to the non-perturbative vacuum, the $`v`$ coordinate on the $`detH=0`$ surface is $`v0.35`$, which is more than 50% larger than the value of the non-perturbative vacuum. In spite of this discrepancy, it seems miraculous that the surface $`detH=0`$ is rather close to the non-perturbative vacuum. Therefore, expecting that the discrepancy would be resolved in a more precise analysis, let us proceed to the study of another condition, $`𝒇_0𝒆_0`$.

Ideally, we should test whether the two vectors $`𝒆_0`$ and $`𝒇_0`$ become parallel at some point on the curve of the intersections of the two surfaces $`detG=0`$ and $`detH=0`$. However, though the two surfaces are separately close to the non-perturbative vacuum, their intersection curve is not so close to it in the present approximation. For $`u`$ in the range $`0<u<0.3`$, the corresponding $`t`$ and $`v`$ coordinates on the intersection curve do not change rapidly and take values $`t0.9`$ and $`v0.5`$. For large values of $`u`$, the corresponding $`v`$ coordinate become outside the range $`0<v<1`$.  Therefore, we instead carry out an indirect analysis. As $`𝒆_0`$, we take the zero-mode of $`G_{ij}(\phi )`$ at a fixed $`\phi `$ which is on the surface $`detG=0`$ and close to the non-perturbative vacuum. Concretely, we take $`\phi =(t_r,u_r,v_r)`$ of (3.10), and the corresponding zero-mode is $`𝒆_0^r=(0.803,0.308,0.510)`$. Then, we plot, on the surface $`detH=0`$, the absolute value of the inner products $`|𝒇_1𝒆_0^r|`$ and $`|𝒇_2𝒆_0^r|`$, where $`𝒇_1`$ and $`𝒇_2`$ are the normalized eigenvectors of $`H_{ij}`$ corresponding to non-zero eigenvalues. On the intersection curve, the condition $`𝒇_0𝒆_0`$ is equivalent to $`𝒇_1𝒆_0=𝒇_2𝒆_0=0`$. We are going to examine the behavior of the approximate quantities to the two inner products on the surface $`detH=0`$.

Fig. 5 shows these two inner products as a function of $`v`$ with $`t`$ fixed to $`t_r`$ and $`u`$ determined by $`detH=0`$. Note that one of the inner products vanishes at $`v0.3`$ and the other at $`v0.47`$. Moreover, the positions of these two zeros, in particular, $`v0.3`$, are fairly insensitive to the choice of $`𝒆_0`$ used for taking the inner products. Namely, the positions of the zeros change little even if we replace $`𝒆_0^r`$ by almost any vector. This is ascribed to the fact that the eigenvectors $`𝒇_1`$ and $`𝒇_2`$ change their directions rapidly by large angle in the neighborhood of $`v0.3`$ and that of $`v0.47`$, respectively (recall that $`𝒇𝒆_0`$ vanishes when $`𝒇`$ crosses the surface perpendicular to $`𝒆_0`$). Although the inner product $`𝒇_{1,2}𝒆_0`$ is not invariant under the change of the field space coordinates $`\phi ^i`$, the positions of the zeros are insensitive to the coordinate change owing to the same property of $`𝒇_{1,2}`$. For example, if we adopt the coordinates of , $`(\psi ^1,\psi ^2,\psi ^3)=(2t,v/\sqrt{13},2u)`$, the global behavior of the inner products differs from fig. 5, but there are zeros near the corresponding points.

Therefore, the presence of the two zeros of the inner products $`𝒇_{1,2}𝒆_0^r`$, in particular, the zero at $`v0.3`$ which is closer to the non-perturbative vacuum, is very encouraging. It is expected that, as we improve the approximation, the two zeros approach to each other and to $`v0.2`$.

### 3.4 Higher derivative terms in the BRST transformation

We have defined the physical scalar field $`T`$ (3.4) by the requirement that it be invariant under the BRST transformation $`\delta _\mathrm{B}^{ab}`$ (3.3) truncated at the lowest order in the derivatives on $`C`$ and $`_\mu C_\mu `$. However, as given in (2.26), the full BRST transformation contains higher derivative terms, and we have to check whether the $`^2C`$ and $`^2_\mu C_\mu `$ terms are also cancelled in $`\delta _\text{B}T`$. Namely, we shall test whether $`Y(\phi )`$ and $`Z(\phi )`$,

$`Y(\phi )=y^t+\beta _uy^u+\beta _vy^v,`$ (3.11)
$`Z(\phi )=z^t+\beta _uz^u+\beta _vz^v,`$ (3.12)
with $`(\beta _u,\beta _v)`$ satisfying (3.5) vanish near the non-perturbative vacuum.

Let us first consider $`Y(\phi )`$ on the surface $`detG(\phi )=0`$. Fig. 6 shows the curve in the $`(u,v)`$ plane determined by $`Y(\phi )=0`$ and $`detG(\phi )=0`$. Note that this curve passes the point $`(u,v)(0.2,0.2)`$, implying that $`Y(\phi )=0`$ holds near the non-perturbative vacuum.

However, the corresponding curve for $`Z(\phi )`$ is totally outside the region of our interest in the $`(u,v)`$ plane. Therefore, we instead studied the behavior of $`Z(\phi )`$ as a function of $`t`$ for a number of fixed values of $`(u,v)`$ (see fig. 7). From fig. 7 we see that $`Z(\phi )`$ has a zero at a rather small $`t`$ when the $`(u,v)`$ coordinate is close to that of the non-perturbative vacuum.

### 3.5 Summary of the analysis

In this section, we have analyzed the conditions for the absence of the kinetic term of the BRST invariant scalar fluctuation. The conditions can simply be stated as (i) $`G_{ij}`$ and $`H_{ij}`$ have a common zero-mode at the non-perturbative vacuum, and (ii) the BRST invariant fluctuation component can be consistently defined there. We divided the test of the conditions into many steps and examined whether the following quantities vanish near the non-perturbative vacuum: $`detG`$ (sec. 3.2), $`detH`$ (sec. 3.3), $`|𝒇_{1,2}𝒆_0^r|`$ (sec. 3.3), $`Y`$ and $`Z`$ (sec. 3.4). Among them, we obtained fairly good results for $`detG`$, $`detH`$, $`|𝒇_1𝒆_0^r|`$ (the one having a zero at $`v0.3`$ in fig. 5) and $`Y`$. However, the behaviors of $`|𝒇_2𝒆_0^r|`$ and $`Z`$ were not as we expected. They are hoped to improve in a better treatment, in particular, by taking into account the mixing with the vector and tensor components at level two which we neglected in this paper. We have carried out the same analysis also in the level (2,4) approximation, and found that the results are not qualitatively changed.

## 4 Discussions

Our analysis in this paper is incomplete in various aspects, and further detailed studies are needed for confirming the absence of kinetic terms. We have to extend the space of fluctuations to incorporate the vector and tensor components even in the level (2,6) approximation. This is indispensable for making clear the full BRST structure of the fluctuations. We have to consider the kinetic terms with more than four derivatives. And we have to raise the order of the level truncation. What is more important is of course the analytical understanding of the absence of the kinetic terms, though this must be a difficult task since the exact solution $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ for the non-perturbative vacuum would be needed. Conversely, the missing kinetic terms for the fluctuations could give a hint for finding the exact solution. It is also an interesting question whether the CSFT expanded around the non-perturbative vacuum is a topological theory described by a BRST exact action . We have to clarify how such an open SFT can support the closed string sector.

## Acknowledgments

We would like to thank M. Bando, I. Kishimoto, T. Kugo, S. Moriyama, T. Noguchi and S. Shinohara for valuable discussions and useful comments. We would also like to thank S. Moriyama for careful reading of the manuscript. The work of H. H. is supported in part by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japan (#12640264).


text:
# Optimal Non-Universally Covariant Cloning

## I Introduction

The impossibility of perfectly cloning an unknown input state is a typical quantum feature , nonetheless, in the laws of quantum mechanics there’s enough room either to systematically produce approximate copies  or to make perfect copies of orthogonal states  or of non-orthogonal ones with a non-unit probablility . These possibilities have been studied in several works .

Recently, quantum cloning has entered the realm of experimental physics . Moreover it has became interesting from a pratical point of view, since it can be used to speed-up some quantum computations  or to perform some quantum measurements . All these tasks require a spreading of the quantum information contained in a system into a larger system, and quantum cloning is a way to achieve such a spreading.

In this paper we will see how any “spreading” corresponds to a particular completely-positive (CP) map. By exploiting the correspondence between CP-maps and positive operators on the tensor product of the output and input spaces , we can parametrize all the possible spreading transformation. Then we focus on covariant CP-map, showing that quantum cloning is a particular case of permutation-covariance. By means of Schur’s lemmas we completely characterize the positive operators corresponding to quantum cloning transformations. By the same technique, we characterize $`𝐆`$-covariant cloning transformation, where $`𝐆`$ is any single-copy covariance group.

The parametrization of CP-maps, and in particular of cloning and covariant cloning, stands at the base of any further optimization. In fact, quantum cloning can be used to perform some tasks on the copies, and depending on what these copies will be used for, one defines a “goodness” criterion for the cloning process and optimizes accordingly.

The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, we briefly describe a quantum cloning transformation and its relation to CP-maps. Sec. III is devoted to the description of CP-maps in terms of positive operators, while in Sec. IV we treat the case of covariant CP-maps, giving their parametrization with suitable covariant positive operators. In Sec. V we use the previously explained techniques to deal with cloning optimization, focusing on the covariant case.

## II Cloning transformations

In a quantum cloning transformation, the input state $`\rho ()`$ is processed in order to produce $`N`$ output clones (throughout the paper $`()`$ will denote the vector space of linear bounded operators on the Hilbert space $``$). This requires a “spreading” of $`\rho `$ into the joint state $`\rho ^{}(^N)`$ of $`N`$ identical quantum systems. The most general setup for such purpose is the following. Initially, $`\rho `$ is encoded in a quantum system $`S_1`$, while $`N1`$ equivalent systems $`S_i`$, $`i=2\mathrm{}N`$, are prepared in a fixed state $`|\omega _{(N1)}`$. An auxiliary system $`E`$ is provided in a state $`|e`$, in order to make the whole system isolated. A unitary transformation $`U`$ acts on the overall state producing the output

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=U\rho (|\omega \omega |)_{(N1)}|ee|U^{}.$$
(1)
By taking the partial trace of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ on the auxiliary system, we get the joint state $`\rho ^{}`$ of the $`N`$ output systems $`S_i`$. This state will eventually support the clones. Upon calculating the trace with respect to a chosen basis $`\{|j_E\}`$ for $`_E`$ one has

$$\rho ^{}=\underset{j=1}{\overset{dim_E}{}}{}_{E}{}^{}j|\mathrm{\Lambda }|j_{E}^{}=\underset{j=1}{\overset{dim_E}{}}A_j\rho A_j^{}(\rho ),$$
(2)
where $`A_j=_Ej|U|\omega _{(N1)}|e_E`$.

The map $`\rho (\rho )`$ in Eq. (2) is a completely-positive (CP) and trace-preserving linear map from $`()`$ to $`(^N)`$. Trace preserving CP-maps generally describe the evolution of open quantum systems. To understand the general features of quantum cloning and for sake of optimization, it is convenient to treat these maps at an abstract level: a realization theorem guarantees that any CP-map can be achieved as a unitary transformation on an extended Hilbert space , similarly to Eq. (1). CP-maps will be shortly reviewed in the next session.

## III CP-maps and positive operators

A linear map $`:()(𝒦)`$ is completely-positive if its trivial extension $`_{^{}}`$ to $`(^{})`$ is positive, for any $`^{}`$ ($`_{^{}}`$ denoting the trivial map on $`(^{})`$).

Here we recall a convenient notation . Fixing two orthonormal basis $`\{|i_1\}`$ and $`\{|j_2\}`$ for $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ respectively, any vector $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_1_2`$ can be written as

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }=\underset{ij}{}c_{ij}|i_1|j_2|C,$$
(3)
where $`C=_{ij}c_{ij}|i_{\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}2}}j|(_2,_1)`$ is a linear bounded operator from $`_2`$ to $`_1`$.
The following relations can be easily verified

$`AB|C=|ACB^T,`$ (4)
$`\text{Tr}__2[|AB|]=AB^{}(_1).`$ (5)
For every CP-map $`:()(𝒦)`$ we define the positive operator $`R_{}`$ in $`(𝒦)`$

$$R_{}(|\text{11}\text{11}|),$$
(6)
where $``$ denotes the identical map over the extention space $``$, and for the vector $`|\text{11}`$ we used the notation (3) for $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\text{11}`$ the identity matrix with respect to a fixed basis on $``$. The action of $``$ on $`\rho ()`$ can be expressed as

$$(\rho )=\text{Tr}_{}\left[\text{11}\rho ^TR_{}\right],$$
(7)
where the transposition $`\rho \rho ^T`$ is performed with respect to the same fixed basis. In fact, substituting Eq. (6) in Eq. (7), one has

$`\text{Tr}_{}[\text{11}\rho ^TR_{}]=\text{Tr}_{}[\text{11}\rho ^T(|\text{11}\text{11}|)].`$

Then, it is possible to take the factor $`\text{11}\rho ^T`$ inside the CP-map $``$, since they act independently on different spaces. By applying Eq. (4), one obtains

$`\text{Tr}_{}[\text{11}\rho ^TR_{}]=\text{Tr}_{}[(|\rho \text{11}|)],`$

and thus, commuting the partial trace with $``$, and using Eq. (5), one finally gets Eq. (7).

The operator $`R_{}`$ is the only one for which Eq. (7) holds true. In fact, suppose $`R_{}`$ and $`R^{}`$ give the same CP-map $``$ by means of Eq. (7), then

$`\text{Tr}_{}\left[\text{11}\rho ^T(R_{}R^{})\right]=0(𝒦),\rho ().`$

Since an operator $`O(𝒦)`$ is null if $`v|O|v=0(𝒦)`$ for all $`|v`$, it follows that $`R_{}=R^{}`$. Thus, the correspondence from CP-maps to positive operators is “into”.

Since $`R_{}`$ is positive, it can be written as

$$R_{}=\underset{i}{}|A_iA_i|,$$
(8)
where there are many different choices of the vectors $`|A_i`$, which are not necessarily eigenvectors of $`R_{}`$, and generally are not normalized.

Substituting this relation in Eq. (7) and remembering that $`A_i(,𝒦)`$, we find

$$(\rho )=\underset{i}{}\text{Tr}_{}[\text{11}\rho ^T|A_iA_i|]=\underset{i}{}A_i\rho A_i^{},$$
(9)
thus recovering that any CP-map admits different Kraus’s decompositions , depending on the choice of the vectors $`|A_i`$ in Eq. (8).
Clearly, Eq. (8) holds for any positive operator $`R`$ on $`𝒦`$. The map defined by $`R`$ through Eq. (7) is completely-positive, since it can be expressed in the form of Eq. (9) which trivially gives a CP-map. Then the correspondence from CP-maps to operators is also “onto”.

Concluding, Eq. (7) defines a one-to-one correspondence between CP-maps from $`()`$ to $`(𝒦)`$ and positive operators on $`𝒦`$. By exploiting this correspondence, properties of $``$ can be translated into properties of $`R_{}`$. For example, the trace-preserving condition for $``$

$`\text{Tr}_𝒦[(\rho )]=1=\text{Tr}_{}\left[\rho ^T\text{Tr}_𝒦[R_{}]\right],`$

for all $`\rho ()`$ such that $`\text{Tr}[\rho ]=1`$, becomes

$$\text{Tr}_𝒦[R_{}]=\text{11}().$$
(10)
In the following, it will be useful to consider the dual map $`^{}`$ of a CP-map $``$, namely the transformation in the Heisenberg picture versus the Schröedinger picture map $`\rho (\rho )`$. The dual map $`^{}`$ is defined by the identity

$$\text{Tr}\left[\rho ^{}(O)\right]=\text{Tr}\left[(\rho )O\right],$$
(11)
which must be valid for all operators $`O(𝒦)`$. In terms of the operator $`R_{}`$ one has

$$^{}(O)=\text{Tr}_𝒦[O\text{11}R_{}^T_{}],$$
(12)
where $`T_{}`$ denotes partial transposition on the Hilbert space $``$ only .

In the next session, the correspondence $`R_{}`$ will be applied to the covariance condition for a CP-map, which turns out to be the key idea to deal with cloning and covariant cloning.

## IV Covariant CP-maps

Let $`:()(𝒦)`$ be a CP-map, and let $`𝐆`$ be a group with unitary representations $`U`$ and $`V`$ on $``$ and $`𝒦`$ respectively. $``$ is $`𝐆`$-covariant with respect to $`U`$ and $`V`$ if

$$\left(U_g\rho U_g^{}\right)=V_g(\rho )V_g^{},$$
(13)
for any $`\rho ()`$ and $`g𝐆`$.
By means of Eq. (7), the covariance condition becomes

$`(\rho )`$ $`=`$ $`\text{Tr}_{}\left[\text{11}\rho ^TR_{}\right]=`$ (14)
$``$ $`\text{Tr}_{}\left[\text{11}\rho ^TV_g^{}U_g^TR_{}V_gU_g^{}\right].`$ (15)
From the uniqueness of the operator associated to a CP-map, we conclude that $``$ is $`𝐆`$-covariant if and only if

$$R_{}=V_g^{}U_g^TR_{}V_gU_g^{},g𝐆,$$
(16)
or equivalently

$$[R_{},V_gU_g^{}]=0,g𝐆.$$
(17)
Thus, $`𝐆`$-covariance of a CP-map $``$ is equivalent to $`𝐆`$-invariance of the corresponding positive operator $`R_{}`$.

### Group invariant operators

The $`𝐆`$-representation $`W=\mathrm{d}iag(VU^{})`$ on $`𝒦`$, defined as $`W_g=V_gU_g^{}`$, is generally reducible, i. e. the space can be decomposed into a direct sum of minimal invariant subspaces $`_i`$

$$𝒦=\underset{i=1}{}_i,$$
(18)
each $`_i`$ supporting a unitary irreducible representation (UIR) of the group. Given this decomposition one can look at any operator $`O`$ on $`𝒦`$ as a set of operators $`O_j^i`$ in $`(_j,_i)`$, so that $`O=_{ij}O_j^i`$.

Due to irreducibility of the subspaces $`_i`$, $`W_g`$ will be decomposed as follows

$`(W_g)_j^i=\delta _{ij}T_g^j,`$

where $`T^j`$ is the UIR supported by $`_j`$. Two UIR $`T^i`$ and $`T^j`$ are equivalent, $`ij`$, if they are connected by similarity, i. e. through an isomorfism $`I_j^i(_j,_i)`$ such that $`T^j=(I_j^i)^1T^iI_j^i`$.

The invariance equation (16) becomes

$`T_g^iR_j^iT_g^j=R_j^ig𝐆,`$

so that, by Schur’s lemmas (see, for example, Ref. ), one finally has

$$R_j^i=c_{ij}I_j^i,$$
(19)
where if $`ij`$ then $`c_{ij}=0`$, and, if $`ij`$, $`c_{ij}`$ can be different from zero.

Since equivalent representations are related by similarity, in any invariant subspace $`_i`$ one can choose the basis $`\{|i,l,l=1\mathrm{}\text{dim}_i\}`$ so that for $`ij`$

$$i,l|T^i|i,m=j,l|T^j|j,m,$$
(20)
hence

$$I_j^i=\underset{l}{}|i,lj,l|\text{11}_j^i,$$
(21)
and finally

$$R=\underset{ij}{}c_{ij}\text{11}_j^i.$$
(22)
In order to have a positive $`R`$, the matrix $`c_{ij}`$ must be positive, since taking $`|\psi =_i_{l=1}^{\mathrm{d}im_i}\psi _{il}|i,l`$ one has

$`\psi |R|\psi ={\displaystyle \underset{ij}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{d}im_i}{}}}\psi _{li}^{}c_{ij}\psi _{lj}.`$

Recalling that $`c_{ij}=0`$ if $`ij`$, and reordering the indices of the representations by grouping the equivalent ones, the matrix $`c_{ij}`$ assumes a block diagonal form, different blocks corresponding to inequivalent representations, each block including all representations equivalent to the same one. In this way, each block has dimension equal to the multiplicity of the representation. Positivity of $`R`$ implies positivity of each block of matrix $`c_{ij}`$. This structure of $`c_{ij}`$ is reflected on $`R`$ by means of Eq. (22).

## V Optimal covariant cloning

A cloning map is just a CP-map $`𝒞`$ from $`()`$ to $`(^N)`$ with the output copies invariant under the permutations of the $`N`$ output spaces. This is equivalent to a particular covariance of the CP-map $`𝒞`$ for the group of permutations $`𝐒_N`$, namely it corresponds to the invariance of the positive operator $`R_𝒞`$ under the representation $`W=\mathrm{d}iag(VI)`$, where $`V`$ is the representation of $`𝐒_N`$ permuting the $`N`$ identical output spaces, and $`I`$ (corresponding to $`U`$ in Eq. (13)) is the $`𝐒_N`$-trivial representation on the input space. One has

$$𝒞(\rho )=V_\pi 𝒞(\rho )V_\pi ^{},\pi 𝐒_N.$$
(23)
Notice that permutation covariance does not imply that the output state has support in the symmetric subspace of the output space $`^N`$.

As explained in the previous section, Eq. (23) determines a peculiar block structure for the operator $`R_𝒞`$ associated to the map $`𝒞`$. Such a structure is strictly related to the decomposition of $`^{(N+1)}`$ into invariant subspaces for $`V_\pi \text{11}`$. Any possible cloner is described by an $`R_𝒞`$ with that structure and satisfying the trace-preserving condition of Eq. (10). In this way, one classifies all possible cloning maps through the decomposition into irreducibles of the $`𝐒_N`$-representation $`V`$ on $`^N`$.

In addition to permutation invariance, in this paper we will consider covariance under a group of transformations $`𝐆`$, with representation $`T`$ on $``$. This corresponds to the following identity

$$𝒞(T_g\rho T_g^{})=T_g^N𝒞(\rho )T_g^N.$$
(24)
One can choose a cost function $`C(R_𝒞)`$ (related to the following usage of the clones). Covariant cloning is suited to invariant cost-functions of the form

$$C(R_𝒞)C_0(\rho _0,R_𝒞)=C_0(T_g\rho _0T_g^{},R_𝒞),$$
(25)
where $`\rho _0`$ is the seed of the covariant family of states on which we are interested in having the minimum $`C_0`$.

The best cloner is found by minimizing $`C(R_𝒞)`$ vs $`R_𝒞`$, with the constraints of positivity $`R_𝒞0`$, trace-preserving (Eq. (10)), and covariance under permutations and $`𝐆`$ (Eqs. (23) and (24)).

## VI Examples

### Phase covariant qubit cloning

Here, we consider the problem of cloning a qubit in a $`U(1)`$-covariant fashion, where the group representation is given by

$$T_\varphi =\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{i}{2}\varphi (\text{11}\sigma _z)\right].$$
(26)
Since the cloning to two copies is already given in Ref. , whereas the general case for $`N`$ copies is very complicated, here for simplicity we will consider the case of $`N=3`$ copies. We want to achieve the maximum fidelity between input and clones, when the input is an equatorial qubit

$$|\psi _\varphi =T_\varphi \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}[|0+|1]=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}[|0+e^{i\varphi }|1].$$
(27)
In other terms, we want to maximize the fidelity

$`F_\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\text{Tr}\left[𝒞(|\psi _\varphi \psi _\varphi |)|\psi _\varphi \psi _\varphi |\right]F_0=`$ (28)
$`=`$ $`\text{Tr}\left[\text{11}^2|\psi _0\psi _0|(|\psi _0\psi _0|)^TR_𝒞\right].`$ (29)
Since the equator is invariant even for spin flipping, here we will require the additional covariance with respect to the group $`_2`$, with representation $`\{\text{11},\sigma _x\}`$.

In order to satisfy all the covariance requirements, $`R_𝒞`$ must be invariant for permutations, phase shift, and spin flip, i. e. for products of any of the following unitary operators

$`T_\varphi ^3T_\varphi ^{},V_\pi \text{11},\sigma _x^3\sigma _x^{}.`$

The Hilbert space $`^{3+1}`$ can be decomposed into subspaces which are irreducible with respect to the joint action of $`U(1)`$ and $`𝐒_3`$, as shown in Table I.

Looking at Table I, one can see that in this example the matrix $`c_{ij}`$ defined in Sec. IV has the following positive diagonal blocks:

{1}$`,`${2,3}$`,`${4}$`,`${5}$`,`${6,7}$`,`${8}$`,`${9,10}$`,`${11,12}.

To ensure spin flipping covariance, the elements of $`c_{ij}`$ connected by a flip must be equal, for example $`c_{23}=c_{67}`$.

At the end, to fill the blocks of $`c_{ij}`$ in the right way, we need the parameters $`a,b,c,d,e,f,g^+`$, $`𝐯^3`$, where $`de`$, $`fg`$, and $`c𝐯`$. Table II explains how to employ them.

The parameters must satisfy another constraint given by the trace-preserving condition defined in Eq. (10). Within this parametrization it reads

$$a+2b+2c+d+2f=1.$$
(30)
Substituting this equation into the equatorial fidelity $`F_0`$ defined in Eq. (29), one has

$$F_0=\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{3}(eg)+\frac{\sqrt{3}}{3}v_x.$$
(31)
This quantity can be easily maximized by hand, taking into account the constraint given by Eq. (30) and the properties of the parameters. The maximum fidelity is $`F=\frac{5}{6}`$ (see note ) and is achieved for $`d=e=1`$ and all the other parameters equal to zero. The optimal phase covariant cloning is thus described by the operator

$$R_𝒞^{opt}=|\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }|,$$
(32)
where

$`|\mathrm{\Phi }=`$ $`{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}}[`$ $`|1000+|0100+|0010+`$ (33)
$`+`$ $`|0111+|1011+|1101].`$ (34)
The Kraus’s decomposition of the optimal cloner is $`𝒞(\rho )=B\rho B^{}`$, where

$`B=`$ $`{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}}[`$ $`|1000|+|0100|+|0010|+`$ (35)
$`+`$ $`|0111|+|1011|+|1101|].`$ (36)
### Cloning of continuous variables

The parametrization of CP-maps given in Sec. III and its specialization to the covariant case are useful tools for engineering measurements. The idea is to “spread” a quantum state on a larger system with a CP-map $``$, and then to perform a measurement on the spread state. The connection between the POVM $`\{M_i\}`$ on the larger space $`𝒦`$ and the resulting one $`\{M_i^{}\}`$ on $``$ is given by

$$M_i^{}=^{}(M_i)\text{Tr}_𝒦\left[M_i\text{11}R_{}^T_{}\right],$$
(37)
where $`^{}`$ is the dual map of $``$, and the symbol $`T_{}`$ stands for transposition with respect to $``$ only (see Sec. III).

In Ref. , the cloning map for continuous variables of Ref.  is used to achieve the optimal POVM for the joint measurement of two conjugated quadratures $`X_0`$ and $`X_{\frac{\pi }{2}}`$ of an oscillator mode $`a`$ (where $`X_\varphi =\frac{1}{2}[a^{}e^{i\varphi }+ae^{i\varphi }]`$) by measuring them separately on the two clones. Here, we will briefly show how our general method works on this problem.

Denote by $`_3`$ the input space and by $`_1`$, $`_2`$ the two output spaces of the oscillator modes $`a_3`$, $`a_1`$, $`a_2`$ respectively. The cloning is described by

$$R_𝒞=\frac{1}{2}P_{12}\text{11}_3\text{11}_1(|\text{11}\text{11}|)_{23}P_{12}\text{11}_3,$$
(38)
where $`P=V|00|\text{11}V^{}`$, and $`V`$ is the 50% beam splitter unitary transformation $`V=\mathrm{exp}[\frac{\pi }{4}(a_1^{}a_2a_1a_2^{})]`$.

A simple calculation shows that

$$P=\frac{2}{\pi }\text{d}^2\alpha |\alpha \alpha |^2,$$
(39)
where $`|\alpha =D(\alpha )|0`$, and $`D(\alpha )=e^{\alpha a^{}\overline{\alpha }a}`$ is the displacement operator generating the Weyl-Heisenberg ($`WH`$) group. By means of Eq. (39), the invariance of $`R_𝒞`$ defined in Eq. (38) with respect to permutations and displacements can be easily verified.

Using the dual cloning map as in Eq. (37), we should check that

$$𝒞^{}(E_x^0E_y^{\pi /2})=\frac{1}{\pi }|\alpha \alpha |,\alpha =x+iy,$$
(40)
where $`E_v^\varphi =|v_\varphi _\varphi v|`$, and $`X_\varphi |v_\varphi =v|v_\varphi `$. In fact, the last term of Eq. (40) is the well-known optimal POVM for the joint measurement of conjugated quadratures, whereas $`E_v^\varphi `$ is the POVM of the $`\varphi `$-quadrature measurement. Hence identity (40) guarantees that the cloning achieves the optimal joint measurement of the two conjugated quadrature via commuting measurements on clones.

Noticing that

$$E_x^0E_y^{\pi /2}=D(\alpha )^2E_0^0E_0^{\pi /2}D(\alpha )^2,$$
(41)
and exploiting the $`WH`$ covariance, Eq. (40) reduces to

$$𝒞^{}(E_0^0E_0^{\pi /2})=\frac{1}{\pi }|00|.$$
(42)
Substituting Eq. (37) into this last equation, and taking matrix elements $`i|\mathrm{}|j`$, one finally must check that

$${}_{0}{}^{}0|_{\frac{\pi }{2}}0|i|R_𝒞|0_0|0_{\frac{\pi }{2}}|j=\frac{1}{\pi }\delta _{i0}\delta _{j0}.$$
(43)
Since $`V|0_0|0_{\frac{\pi }{2}}=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi }}|\text{11}`$ and $`V|0|0=|0|0`$ (see Ref. ), one has that $`P|0_{\frac{\pi }{2}}|0_0=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi }}|0|0`$. Thus Eq. (43) holds, and the cloning really achieves the wanted POVM.

### Universal cloning

Clearly, the universal covariant cloning of Werner  is a special case of covariant cloning for the covariance group $`U(d)`$, $`d=\text{dim}`$, of all unitary operators on $``$. Here, for sake of comparison to Ref. , we consider more generally the cloning from $`M`$ to $`N>M`$ copies. Hence the cloning is a CP-map $`𝒞`$ from $`(^M)`$ to $`(^N)`$ such that for any $`UU(d)`$ and $`\sigma ()`$

$$𝒞(U^M\sigma ^MU^M)=U^N𝒞(\sigma ^M)U^N.$$
(44)
The cost-function for optimization is the (negative) fidelity between clones and input

$$C(R_𝒞)=F=\text{Tr}\left[\sigma ^N𝒞(\sigma ^M)\right],$$
(45)
where $`\sigma `$ is pure. Owing to covariance, the fidelity $`F`$ does not depend on $`\sigma `$, since any pure state lies in the $`U(d)`$ orbit of any other pure state.

The optimal cloning map of Ref.  is given by

$$𝒞(\rho )=\frac{d(M)}{d(N)}S_N(\rho \text{11}^{(NM)})S_N,$$
(46)
where $`\rho (^M)`$, $`S_N`$ is the projector on the symmetric subspace $`_+^N`$, and $`d(N)=\text{dim}(_+^N)`$. In our framework, one has

$$R_𝒞=\frac{d(M)}{d(N)}\stackrel{~}{S}\text{11}_{^{(NM)}}(|\text{11}\text{11}|)_{^{(M+M)}}\stackrel{~}{S},$$
(47)
where $`\stackrel{~}{S}=S_N\text{11}^M`$. It can be easily verified that $`R_𝒞`$ is both covariant and permutation invariant as it must be.

## Acknowledgements

This work has been supported by the Italian Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica (MURST) under the co-sponsored project 1999 Quantum Information Transmission And Processing: Quantum Teleportation And Error Correction.