text:
# 1 Physics at BABAR

## 1 Physics at BABAR

The BaBar experiment  is designed in order to perform a comprehensive study of CP violation in the B system. The main goal is to investigate if CP violation can be fully explained within the Standard Model by the imaginary phase of the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix, or if other sources of CP violation should be looked for elsewhere .

The strategy is to over-constrain the Unitarity Triangle by measuring at the same time its sides and angles.

The sides can be extracted from measurements of $`|V_{tb}^{}V_{td}|`$ in the study of $`B^0\overline{B}^0`$ mixing, $`V_{ub}`$ from the study of decays of B mesons in charmless final states, and $`V_{cb}`$ from studies of the decay $`BD^{}l\nu `$.

The determination of the angles requires to measure time dependent asymmetries for the decay of a neutral B meson into a CP eigenstate, $`f_{CP}`$, of the form

$$𝒜_{CP}(t)=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(B^0(t)f_{CP})\mathrm{\Gamma }(\overline{B^0}(t)f_{CP})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(B^0(t)f_{CP})+\mathrm{\Gamma }(\overline{B^0}(t)f_{CP})}.$$
(1)
For B0 decays with only one diagram contributing to the final state

$$𝒜_{CP}(t)=\mathrm{Im}\lambda \mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Delta }m\mathrm{\Delta }t),$$
(2)
where $`\lambda =p/q\overline{A}(f)/A(f)`$, $`A(f)`$ and $`\overline{A}(f)`$ are the decay amplitudes and $`p`$ and $`q`$ are the complex coefficients that relate mass and flavour eigenstates of the B mesons . For some decay modes, Im$`\lambda `$ is directly and simply related to the angles of the Unitarity Triangle. Of particular interest are the decays of the neutral B mesons in final states containing a charmonium state and a neutral kaon. For these decays

$$𝒜_{CP}(t)=\pm \mathrm{sin}(2\beta )\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Delta }m\mathrm{\Delta }t).$$
(3)
Experimentally, the measurement of the CP asymmetry $`𝒜_{CP}`$ requires three basic steps:

* the exclusive reconstruction of one B meson ($`B_{CP}`$) in a CP eigenstate (e.g. $`B^0J/\psi K_s`$);
* the measurement of the time $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ elapsed between the decay of the two neutral B mesons produced in the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ decay;
* the tagging of the CP eigenstate at the production time, inferred from the tagging of the other B meson ($`B_{tag}`$) produced coherently in the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ decay.

## 2 The experimental apparatus

The PEP-II storage ring and the BaBar detector have been designed specifically to measure time-dependent CP asymmetries in the neutral B meson decays in the most effective way.

### 2.1 The PEP-II accelerator

PEP-II is an asymmetric B factory consisting of two concentric rings: a high energy ring (HER) with a 9.0 GeV electron beam and a low energy ring (LER) with a 3.1 GeV positron beam. The energy of the two beams has been chosen in order to achieve a center of mass energy of 10.58 GeV, the mass of the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ resonance, and a boost of 0.56 of the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ along the $`z`$ axis. The boost corresponds to an average separation of 260 $`\mu `$m between the decay vertices of the two B mesons produced in the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ decay. The design luminosity of the machine is 3$`\times 10^{33}s^1cm^2`$, which corresponds to about 30 million $`B\overline{B}`$ pairs produced per year.

PEP-II started its activity in factory mode on May 26, 1999 and reached outstanding performance very rapidly. By the time of this conference the achieved peak luminosity was 2.56 $`\times 10^{33}s^1cm^2`$, which corresponds to 85% of the design value. The design daily recorded luminosity of 135 pb-1/day was routinely achieved and exceeded starting in June 2000, with a record of 151 pb-1 accumulated in one day. By the time of this conference the total integrated luminosity delivered by PEP-II was 19.5 fb-1, of which 17.5 recorded at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ resonance and 2 fb-1 at a center of mass about 40 MeV below resonance. Thanks to a data taking efficiency higher than 95%, BaBar accumulated more than 18 fb-1 on tape.

### 2.2 The BABAR detector

BaBar is a cylindrical detector built around the interaction point of PEP-II. It consists of several concentric subdetectors. From the inside out there are:

* a silicon vertex tracker, consisting of 5 layers of double-sided silicon strips;
* a cylindrical drift chamber, filled with a low density gas mixture (Helium-Isobutane: 80%-20%) to minimize multiple scattering;
* the DIRC detector, the main particle identification device of the experiment, which consists of 144 quartz bars;
* an electromagnetic calorimeter, consisting of 6580 CsI crystals;
* a 1.5 Tesla superconducting magnet;
* an instrumented flux return (IFR), consisting of 19 layers of RPCs, for muon identification and KL reconstruction.

The combined tracking resolution of the BaBar experiment can be parameterized as

$$\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }p_T}{p_T}\right)^2=(0.0015p_T)^2+0.005^2.$$
(4)
The performances of electron, muon and kaon identification are summarized in Table 1.

Of particular interest is the good kaon-pion separation capability of the detector obtained from the measurement of the Cherenkov angle by the DIRC detector. The separation is better than 3$`\sigma `$ up to momenta of 3.5 GeV/c as illustrated in Figure 1.

A more detailed description of detector design and performance can be found in .

### 2.3 The data set

Unless otherwise specified, all the results presented in this talk are based on a data set of 7.7 fb-1 recorded at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ resonance and 1.2 fb-1 recorded off peak. These data were recorded by the BaBar detector between January and June 2000.

Since the analyses are still in progress, all results are preliminary.

## 3 Study of B $``$ charmonium decays

A good understanding of B meson decays into final states containing a charmonium resonance is a prerequisite to an analysis of CP violation in the B system. In this section, an extensive set of measurements of inclusive and exclusive branching fractions of B mesons into charmonium decays is briefly summarized. More details can be found in  and .

### 3.1 Inclusive analysis

$`J/\psi `$ candidates are formed from pairs of oppositely charged tracks both identified as leptons. Figure 2 shows the invariant mass distributions for $`J/\psi e^+e^{}`$ and $`J/\psi \mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ candidates after continuum subtraction.

The number of $`J/\psi `$ mesons is extracted from the mass distribution using a probability density function (p.d.f.) derived from a simulation that includes final state radiation and bremsstrahlung. A total of $`4920\pm 100\pm 180`$ $`J/\psi e^+e^{}`$ and $`5490\pm 90\pm 90`$ $`J/\psi \mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ events were reconstructed.

The $`\psi (2S)`$ was reconstructed in its decays to $`e^+e^{}`$, $`\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ and $`J/\psi `$$`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$. For the modes $`\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ and $`e^+e^{}`$, the numbers of signal events are extracted from the mass distribution using a p.d.f. from simulation. A total of $`131\pm 29`$ $`\psi (2S)e^+e^{}`$ and $`125\pm 19`$ $`\psi (2S)\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ events were found. For the decays $`J/\psi `$$`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$, the yields are extracted from a fit to the distribution of the mass difference between the $`\psi (2S)`$ and the $`J/\psi `$ in order to reduce the impact of the radiative tail and the mass resolution of the $`J/\psi `$ candidate. A total of $`126\pm 44`$ events were found in candidates with $`J/\psi e^+e^{}`$, and $`162\pm 23`$ events for $`J/\psi \mu ^+\mu ^{}`$.

$`\chi _c`$ mesons are reconstructed through the radiative decay $`\chi _c\gamma J/\psi `$. The selected photon candidates must have an energy between 0.20 and 0.65$`\mathrm{GeV}`$ in the CM system and be isolated from nearby hadronic showers. The substantial combinatorial background from $`\pi ^0`$ decays is reduced by rejecting any photon that, when combined with any other photon, gives an invariant mass compatible with a $`\pi ^0`$.

As for the $`\psi (2S)`$, the numbers of events are extracted by fitting the distribution of the mass difference between the $`\chi _c`$ and $`J/\psi `$ candidates (Figure 3). We simultaneously fit for a $`\chi _{c1}`$ and a possible $`\chi _{c2}`$ component, assuming the resolution of the two resonances to be the same and fixing the difference between the $`\chi _{c2}`$ and the $`\chi _{c1}`$ masses to the Particle Data Group value.

We found $`129\pm 26\pm 13`$ $`\chi _{c1}`$ and $`3\pm 21`$ $`\chi _{c2}`$ events in which $`J/\psi `$ decayed into $`e^+e^{}`$, and $`204\pm 47\pm 12`$ $`\chi _{c1}`$ and $`47\pm 21`$ $`\chi _{c2}`$ events for the $`\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ mode.

Due to the preliminary status of the analysis, we chose not to quote a branching ratio for B $``$ $`J/\psi `$ $`X`$ at this time. The yields obtained for the decay B $``$ $`J/\psi `$ $`X`$ are used, together with the already precise value of the branching fraction for this decay reported in , as a normalization in the calculation of the branching ratios of $`B\psi (2s)X`$ and $`B\chi _cX`$. The results, summarized in Table 2, are very competitive compared with the world averages.

### 3.2 Exclusive analysis

We considered the exclusive $`B`$ decay channels listed in Table 3.

In these analyses, the reconstruction of the charmonium decays is very similar to the one used for inclusive analysis, but with looser requirements for the lepton identification. In the case of the decay $`J/\psi e^+e^{}`$, we apply a procedure to add photons which are close to the electron tracks in order to reduce the impact of bremsstrahlung on the reconstruction efficiency.

$`K_S^0\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ candidates are formed from pairs of oppositely charged tracks which have an invariant mass between 0.489 and 0.507$`\mathrm{GeV}/c^2`$. In addition we require that the $`K_S^0`$ be consistent with having originated from the $`J/\psi `$ vertex.

$`K_S^0\pi ^0\pi ^0`$ candidates are required to have a mass between 0.470 and 0.525$`\mathrm{GeV}/c^2`$ and an energy greater than 0.8$`\mathrm{GeV}`$. A $`\pi ^0`$ decay to two photons is observed in the EMC either as a single neutral cluster with substructure or as two distinct $`\gamma `$ clusters. The most probable decay point of the $`K_S^0`$ is determined after refitting the two $`\pi ^0`$ mesons at several points along the path defined by their summed momentum vector and the $`J/\psi `$ vertex.

We reconstruct $`K^0`$ decays to $`K^+`$$`\pi ^{}`$ and $`K_S^0`$$`\pi ^0`$, and $`K^+`$ decays to $`K_S^0`$$`\pi ^+`$ and $`K^+`$$`\pi ^0`$. In all cases the candidate $`K^{}`$ is required to have an invariant mass within 0.075$`\mathrm{GeV}/c^2`$ of the nominal value.

Charged kaons are identified by the Cherenkov angle measured by the DIRC detector and/or by the specific ionization measurement (dE/dx) in the DCH, depending on particle momentum.

To isolate the signal for each mode we use the variables $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$, the difference between the reconstructed and expected $`B`$ meson energy measured in the center-of-mass frame, and $`m_{\mathrm{ES}}`$, the beam-energy substituted mass. These variables are defined as:

$`m_{\mathrm{ES}}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{E_b^2𝒑_B^2},`$ (5)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ $`=`$ $`E_B^{}E_b^{},`$ (6)
where $`E_b^{}`$ is the beam energy in the center-of-mass, and $`E_B^{}`$ and $`𝒑_B^{}`$ are the energy and momentum of the reconstructed $`B`$ meson in the center-of-mass.

When deriving branching fractions we have used the secondary branching fractions and their associated errors published by the Particle Data Group .

We determine the number of $`B\overline{B}`$ events from the difference in the multi-hadron rates on and off the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ resonance, normalized to the respective luminosities. The efficiencies for each mode have been obtained from Monte Carlo simulations complemented with measurements of tracking and particle identification efficiencies extracted from data. The shape of the beam-energy substituted mass distribution is parameterized for each mode with the sum of a Gaussian and the ARGUS function .

Figure 4 shows the $`m_{\mathrm{ES}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ distributions of the candidates. In Table 4 we present the yields and measured branching fractions for the individual exclusive modes.

Figure 5 shows the measured branching fractions compared to the values compiled by the Particle Data Group .

## 4 Measurement of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$

The measurement of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ requires five basic steps: exclusive reconstruction of the CP mode; measurement of time elapsed between the decays of the two B mesons; tagging of the flavour of the B meson at production time; measurement of the dilution factors from the data; extraction of the value of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ from a fit to the amplitude of the $`CP`$ asymmetry. The following subsections briefly describe the analysis strategy and the result. For a more detailed description see  and references therein.

### 4.1 Reconstruciton of the CP mode

For a first measurement, we targeted only decays characterized by relatively high accessible branching fractions ($``$10-4–10-5), low backgrounds ($`<`$10%), and reliable theoretical prediction (i.e., no penguin pollution). Only the decays $`BJ/\psi K_s`$ and $`B\psi (2S)K_s`$ have been used so far. The procedure used for the exclusive reconstruction of the B meson is described in .

The yields and purities obtained in each channel analysing 9 fb-1 are reported in Table 5.

The modes $`B\chi _cK_s`$, $`BJ/\psi K_L`$ and $`BJ/\psi K^0`$ are still under investigation and will be included in the analysis in the future.

### 4.2 Time resolution function

The resolution of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ measurement is dominated by the $`z`$ resolution of the tagging vertex. The three-momentum of the tagging $`B`$ and its associated error matrix are derived from the fully reconstructed $`B_{CP}`$ candidate three momentum, decay vertex and error matrix, and from the knowledge of the average position of the interaction point and the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ four-momentum. This derived $`B_{tag}`$ three-momentum is fit to a common vertex with the remaining tracks in the event (excluding those from $`B_{CP}`$). In order to reduce the bias due to long-lived particles, all reconstructed $`V^0`$ candidates are used as input to the fit in place of their daughters. Any track whose contribution to the $`\chi ^2`$ is greater than 6 is removed from the fit. This procedure is iterated until there are no tracks contributing more than 6 to the $`\chi ^2`$ or until all tracks are removed.

The time resolution function is described by the sum of two Gaussian distributions:

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }t)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}\frac{f_i}{\sigma _i\sqrt{2\pi }}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{(\mathrm{\Delta }t\delta _i)^2}{2\sigma _{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\right).$$
(7)
Monte Carlo simulation indicates that $`70\%`$ of the events are in the core Gaussian, which has a width $`\sigma _10.6\mathrm{ps}`$. The wide Gaussian has a width $`\sigma _21.8\mathrm{ps}`$. Tracks from forward-going charm decays included in the reconstruction of the $`B_{tag}`$ vertex introduce a small bias, $`\delta _10.2\mathrm{ps}`$, for the core Gaussian.

A small fraction of events ($``$1%) have very large values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }z`$, mostly due to vertex reconstruction problems. This is accounted for in the parameterization of the time resolution function with a very wide unbiased Gaussian with fixed width of $`8\mathrm{ps}`$.

In likelihood fits, we use a parameterization of the error $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Delta }t}`$ calculated from the fits to the two $`B`$ vertices for each individual event. We introduce two scale factors $`𝒮_1`$ and $`𝒮_2`$ for the width of the narrow and the wide Gaussian distributions ($`\sigma _1=𝒮_1\times \sigma _{\mathrm{\Delta }t}`$ and $`\sigma _2=𝒮_2\times \sigma _{\mathrm{\Delta }t}`$) to account for the fact that the uncertainty on $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ is underestimated due to effects such as the inclusion of particles from $`D`$ decays and possible underestimation of the amount of material traversed by the particles. The scale factor $`𝒮_1`$ and the bias $`\delta _1`$ of the narrow Gaussian are free parameters in the fit. The scale factor $`𝒮_2`$ and the fraction of events in the wide Gaussian, $`f_2`$, are fixed to the values estimated from Monte Carlo simulation by a fit to the pull distribution ($`𝒮_2=2.1`$ and $`f_2=0.25`$). The bias of the wide Gaussian, $`\delta _2`$, is fixed at $`0\mathrm{ps}`$. The last free parameter in the fit is $`f_w`$, the fraction of the very wide Gaussian that describes the tail of the resolution.

Because the time resolution is dominated by the precision of the $`B_{tag}`$ vertex position, we find no significant differences in the Monte Carlo simulation of the resolution function parameters for the various fully reconstructed decay modes. This allows us to determine the resolution function parameters with the relatively high-statistics fully-reconstructed $`B^0`$ data samples. The differences in the resolution function parameters in the different tagging categories (see below) are also small.

Table 6 presents the values of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ resolution parameters obtained from a maximum likelihood fit to a sample of fully reconstructed $`B^0`$ decays. Further details on the procedure and the results can be found in . The vertex parameters are fixed to these values in the final unbinned maximum likelihood fit for $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ in the low-statistics $`CP`$ event sample.

### 4.3 B flavor tagging

Each event with a $`CP`$ candidate is assigned a $`B^0`$ or $`\overline{B}^0`$ tag if the rest of the event (i.e., with the daughter tracks of the $`B_{CP}`$ removed) satisfies the criteria for one of several tagging categories. The figure of merit for each tagging category is the effective tagging efficiency $`Q_i=\epsilon _i\left(12w_i\right)^2`$, where $`\epsilon _i`$ is the fraction of events assigned to category $`i`$ and $`w_i`$ is the probability of misclassifying the tag as a $`B^0`$ or $`\overline{B}^0`$ for that category. $`w_i`$ are called mistag fractions. The statistical error on $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ is proportional to $`1/\sqrt{Q}`$, where $`Q=_iQ_i`$.

The algorithm used in the analysis categorizes the events in four different classes:

when the flavor of the B meson is identified by the charge of the high momentum lepton coming from a semileptonic decay;

when the flavor of the B meson is identified by the charge of the kaon coming from the hadronization of the s quark coming from the decay $`bcs`$;

the tag is chosen according to the output of a neural network that exploits other (correlated) information, such as secondary lepton charge, slow pions from D decays, jet charge;

similar to NT1 but characterized by a smaller tagging power.

When an event satisfied the selection criteria for more than one tagging category, it was assigned to the tag with the highest discrimination power.

#### 4.3.1 Measurement of mistag fractions

The mistag fractions are measured directly in events in which one $`B^0`$ candidate, called the $`B_{rec}`$, is fully reconstructed in a flavor eigenstate mode. The flavor-tagging algorithms described in the previous section are applied to the rest of the event, which constitutes the potential $`B_{tag}`$.

Considering the $`B^0\overline{B}^0`$ system as a whole, one can classify the tagged events as mixed or unmixed depending on whether the $`B_{tag}`$ is tagged with the same flavor as the $`B_{rec}`$ or with the opposite flavor. The observed fraction of mixed events at the time $`t`$ is expressed as

$$\chi (\mathrm{\Delta }t)=w+D/2(1\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Delta }m\mathrm{\Delta }t)),$$
(8)
were $`D=12w`$ is the so called $`dilutionfactor`$. The mixing probability is smallest for small values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }t=t_{rec}t_{tag}`$ so that the apparent rate of mixed events near $`\mathrm{\Delta }t=0`$ is governed by the mistag probability. In addition to improving sensitivity to the mistag fraction, this time-dependent measurement technique also helps discriminate against backgrounds with different time-dependence.

The extraction of the mistag probabilities is complicated in reality by the possible presence of mode-dependent backgrounds. We deal with these by adding specific terms in the likelihood functions describing the different types of backgrounds (zero lifetime, non-zero lifetime without mixing, non-zero lifetime with mixing). Details are described in  and .

The mistag fractions and the tagging efficiencies obtained by combining the results from maximum likelihood fits to the time distributions in the $`B^0`$ hadronic and semileptonic samples are summarized in Table 8. We find a tagging efficiency of $`(76.7\pm 0.5)\%`$ (statistical error only). The lepton categories have the lowest mistag fractions, but also have a low efficiency. The Kaon category, despite having a larger mistag fraction (19.7%), has a higher effective tagging efficiency; one-third of events are assigned to this category. Altogether, lepton and kaon categories have an effective tagging efficiency $`Q20.8\%`$. The neural network categories increase the effective tagging efficiency by $`7\%`$ to an overall $`Q=(27.9\pm 0.5)\%`$ (statistical error only).

Of the 168 $`CP`$ candidates, 120 are tagged: 70 as $`B^0`$ and 50 as $`\overline{B}^0`$. The number of tagged events per category is given in Table 7.

### 4.4 Results

The maximum-likelihood fit for $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$, using the full tagged sample of $`B^0/\overline{B}{}_{}{}^{0}J/\psi K_S^0`$ and $`B^0/\overline{B}{}_{}{}^{0}\psi (2S)K_S^0`$ events, gives:

$$\mathrm{sin}2\beta =0.12\pm 0.37(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.09(\mathrm{syst}).$$
(9)
For this result, the $`B^0`$ lifetime and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_d`$ are fixed to the current best values , and $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ resolution parameters and the mistag rates are fixed to the values obtained from data as summarized in Tables 6 and 8.

The log likelihood is shown as a function of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ in Figure 6.

The results of the fit for each type of $`CP`$ sample and for each tagging category are given in Table 9.

The contributions to the systematic uncertainty are summarized in Table 10.

We estimate the probability of obtaining the observed value of the statistical uncertainty, 0.37, on our measurement of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ by generating a large number of toy Monte Carlo experiments with the same number of tagged $`CP`$ events, and distributed in the same tagging categories, as in the $`CP`$ sample in the data. We find that the errors are distributed around $`0.32`$ with a standard deviation of $`0.03`$, and that the probability of obtaining a value of the statistical error larger than the one we observe is 5%. Based on a large number of full Monte Carlo simulated experiments with the same number of events as our data sample, we estimate that the probability of finding a lower value of the likelihood than our observed value is 20%.

To validate the analysis we use the charmonium control sample, composed of $`B^+J/\psi K^+`$ events and events with self-tagged $`J/\psi K^0`$ ($`K^0K^+\pi ^{}`$) neutral $`B`$’s. We also use the event samples with fully-reconstructed candidates in charged or neutral hadronic modes. These samples should exhibit no time-dependent asymmetry. In order to investigate this experimentally, we define an “apparent $`CP`$ asymmetry”, analogous to $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ in Eq. 1, which we extract from the data using an identical maximum-likelihood procedure.

The events in the control samples are flavor eigenstates and not $`CP`$ eigenstates. They are used for testing the fitting procedure with the same tagging algorithm as for the $`CP`$ sample and, in the case of the $`B^+`$ modes, with self-tagging based on their charge. We also perform the fits for $`B^0`$ and $`\overline{B}^0`$ (or $`B^+`$ and $`B^{}`$) events separately to study possible flavor-dependent systematic effects. For the charged $`B`$ modes, we use mistag fractions measured from the sample of hadronic charged $`B`$ decays.

In all fits, including the fits to charged samples, we fix the lifetime $`\tau _{B^0}`$ and the oscillation frequency $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_d`$ to the PDG values . The results of a series of validation checks on the control samples are summarized in Table 11.

The two high-statistics samples and the $`J/\psi K^+`$ sample give an apparent $`CP`$ asymmetry consistent with zero. The 1.9$`\sigma `$ asymmetry in the $`J/\psi K^0`$ is interpreted as a statistical fluctuation.

Other BABAR time-dependent analyses presented at this Conference demonstrate the validity of the novel technique developed for use at an asymmetric $`B`$ Factory. In particular, the measurement of the $`B^0`$-$`\overline{B}^0`$ oscillation frequency described in  uses the same time resolution function and tagging algorithm as the $`CP`$ analysis, and the $`B^0`$ lifetime measurement described in  uses the same inclusive vertex reconstruction technique as the $`CP`$ analysis. Both result are consistent with the world average .

### 4.5 Current knowledge of the angle $`\beta `$

Figure 7 shows the ($`\overline{\rho },\overline{\eta })`$ plane, with BABAR’s measured central value of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ shown as two straight lines. There is a two-fold ambiguity in deriving a value of $`\beta `$ from a measurement of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$. Both choices are shown with cross-hatched regions corresponding to $`1\sigma `$ and $`2\sigma `$ experimental uncertainty. The ellipses correspond to the regions allowed by all other measurements that constrain the Unitarity Triangle for a variety of representative theoretical parameters. This procedure is discussed in detail in . The following set of measurements and model-dependent parameters are used: $`\left|V_{cb}\right|=0.0402\pm 0.017`$; $`\left|V_{ub}/V_{cb}\right|=\left|V_{ub}/V_{cb}\right|\pm 0.0079`$; $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_d=0.472\pm 0.017\mathrm{}\mathrm{ps}^1`$; $`\left|ϵ_K\right|=\left(2.271\pm 0.017\right)\times 10^3`$; the set of amplitudes corresponding to a $`95\%`$CL limit of $`14.6\mathrm{}\mathrm{ps}^1`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_s`$; $`\left|V_{ub}/V_{cb}\right|`$ in $`[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.070},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.100}]`$; $`B_K`$ in $`[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.720},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.980}]`$; $`f_{B_d}\sqrt{B_{B_d}}`$ in $`[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}185},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}255}]\mathrm{MeV}`$; and $`\xi _s`$ in $`[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1.07},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1.21}]`$.

In Figure 8, a summary of all existing direct measurements of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ is reported. The PDG 2000 world average, obtained from the OPAL  and CDF  results, is compared with a new average that includes the recent ALEPH , Belle  and BaBar  results. The new measurements from the two B factories improved the knowledge of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ by a factor 2.

## 5 Study of B $``$ charmless 2-body decays

### 5.1 Interest of the measurement

The branching fractions for the rare charmless decays $`B^0h^+h^{}`$ $`(h=\pi ,K)`$ provide important information in the study of $`CP`$ violation. If the tree level diagram dominates the decay, the $`\pi ^+`$$`\pi ^{}`$ decay mode can be used to extract the angle $`\alpha `$ of the Unitarity Triangle. If the penguin contribution is not negligible, large theoretical uncertainties  complicate the analysis and the extraction of $`\alpha `$ will require a full isospin analysis . On the other hand, large penguin amplitude improves the prospects for observing direct $`CP`$ violation as an asymmetry in the decay rates for $`B^0K^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\overline{B}{}_{}{}^{0}K^{}\pi ^+`$.

The decay $`B^0K^+\pi ^{}`$ is dominated by the $`bsg`$ penguin amplitude, and provides an estimate of the scale of penguin pollution in the $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ decay. Precise measurement of the decay rates for $`\pi \pi `$ and $`K\pi `$ decays is therefore of central importance.

### 5.2 Analysis strategy

The first step of this analysis consists in selecting decays B $``$$`h^+h^{}`$, where $`h^\pm `$ is either a pion or a kaon. $`B`$ decays to charm mesons are not a significant background to charmless two-body decays because of the relatively small CM momenta of decay products produced from the $`bc`$ transition. The background is dominated by the continuum production of light quarks, $`e^+e^{}q\overline{q}`$ $`(q=u,d,s,c)`$, which typically exhibits a two-jet structure in the CM frame. The topology is markedly different from that of real $`Bh^+h^{}`$ events, which is more spherically symmetric. This difference is exploited using the angle $`\theta _S`$ between the sphericity axes, evaluated in the CM frame, of the $`B`$ candidate and the remaining charged and neutral particles in the event.

Further separation between signal and continuum background is provided by a Fisher discriminant technique . The Fisher discriminant $``$ is calculated from a linear combination of 9 discriminating variables constructed from the scalar sum of the momenta of all charged and neutral particles (excluding the candidate daughter tracks) flowing into 9 concentric cones centered on the $`B`$-candidate thrust axis in the CM frame. More energy will be found in the cones nearer the candidate thrust axis in jet-like continuum background events than in the more isotropic $`B\overline{B}`$ events.

Once the decay $`Bh^+h^{}`$ is identified, the separation between different channels is obtained using two different approaches:

* likelihood analysis, in which the $`K`$-$`\pi `$ separation is determined on a statistical basis;
* cut based analysis, in which the $`K`$-$`\pi `$ separation is performed track-by-track.

A good understanding of the particle identification performances is essential in both analyses.

### 5.3 Results

We determine branching fractions for $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`K^+\pi ^{}`$ decays and an upper limit for the $`K^+K^{}`$ decay using the results of the global likelihood fit. The results are summarized in Table 12.

For the $`KK`$ mode we calculate the $`90\%`$ confidence level upper limit yield and decrease the efficiency by the total systematic error $`(24\%)`$ before calculating the upper limit branching fraction. The statistical significance of a given signal yield is determined by setting the yield to zero and maximizing the likelihood with respect to the remaining variables.

Figure 9 shows the $`n\sigma `$ likelihood contour curves, where $`\sigma `$ represents the statistical uncertainty only. The curves are computed by maximizing the likelihood with respect to the remaining variables in the fit.

## 6 Summary

PEP-II and BaBar had a beautiful start. In their first year of data taking, they have reached about 85% of the design peak luminosity, exceeded the design daily luminosity and accumulated almost 20 fb-1 on tape.

The first physics results, based on about 8 fb-1, have been produced. This talk reviews the first results obtained by BaBar in the measurement of $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$ and in the studies of B $``$ charmonium and B $``$ two body charmless decays.

The results for the data collected in the entire first run of data taking (about 24 fb-1) is expected to be available in Spring 2001.

## Acknowledgments

The work presented in this report was supported by the Department of Energy contract DE-AC03-76SF00515.


format: text

text:
# Generating ring currents, solitons, and svortices by stirring a Bose-Einstein condensate in a toroidal trap

## References


text:
# Solution of a class of one-dimensional reaction-diffusion models in disordered media *footnote **footnote *To appear in Physical Review B

## I Introduction

In this work we investigate in detail some exact properties, in ordered and disordered media, of a wide class of one-dimensional single-species reaction-diffusion models, which play a central role in the description of interacting many-particle systems in physics, chemistry, biology, etc  . We consider systems on the $`10parameter`$ manifold on which (in arbitrary dimensions) the equations of motion of correlation functions close, and the dynamics is soluble.

So far, most theoretical studies on Reaction-Diffusion models consider infinite, ordered media (see e.g  and references therein). We show that for times that exceed the typical diffusion time needed to span the size of the sample, i.e. in the regime where $`L^2/t1`$, (where $`L`$ denotes the size of the lattice chain and $`t`$ the time, see below), finite-size effects dramatically affect the dynamics. A (quenched-)disordered system consisting of a random collection of reaction-domains (each segment, of length $``$ weighted with a probablity $`\omega ()`$) of varying sizes, when $`\omega ()`$ is a decreasing exponential, the density exhibits a stretched exponential decay in the diffusion-limited pair annihilation and diffusion-limited coagulation models . This exponential decay also applies to the autocorrelation function of symmetric exclusion process (SEP) . The picture is realistic for media, where disorder fractures the medium into disconnected reaction zones. The stretched exponential decay of the density of the photogenerated excitons in $`(MX)`$ and $`(TMMC)`$ chains is an experimentally established phenomenon . For other distributions $`\omega ()`$ and other reaction-diffusion systems the situation is more involved. However, in the regime where $`L^2/t1`$, the quenched-disorder always affects the dynamics. Below, we study the density and the two-point non-instantaneous correlation functions for a class of reaction-diffusion systems in presence of quenched disorder.

This paper is organized as follows: in the first part we study reaction-diffusion processes occuring on the soluble $`10`$parametric manifold on which the equations of motion of the correlation functions are closed. In section II we determine this manifold as well as the equations of motions of the correlation functions. In section III.A we obtain the density and non-instantaneous two-point correlation functions for a finite and periodic chain. In section III.B, via the Dynamical Matrix Ansatz (DMA), we generalize previous works by Stinchcombe and Schütz , on the soluble $`10`$parametric manifold and obtain original results. The approach developped allows the exact computation of correlation functions on an open chain of arbitrary length, with injection and evacuation of particles at the boundaries. In the thermodynamic limit we compute the exact density and the non-instantaneous correlation functions. As a by-product we generalize the “Bethe Ansatz” equations previously obtained by Stinchcombe and Schütz for the isotropic chain with symmetry-breaking boundary fields. In section IV, we introduce the disordered systems which we consider in the sequel. In section V, we take advantage of the results of section III.A to study the dynamics of quenched-disordered systems, where the quenched-disorder consist in a superposition of periodic segments with probabilistic weight $`\omega ()`$. We consider the cases where $`\omega ()`$ is exponential and where it is an algebraic function. In section VI we use the original results obtained in section III.B to study the dynamics of quenched-disordered systems, where the quenched-disorder consist in a probabilistic superposition of open segments with probabilistic weight $`\omega ()`$. In section VII, we illustrate previous discussions by considering two physically motivated examples.

## II The Formalism

It is known that models of stochastic hard-core particles are soluble on some manifold on wich the equations of motion of their correlation functions close .

Consider an hypercubic lattice of dimension $`d`$ with $`N`$ sites ($`N=L^d`$), where $`L`$ represents the linear dimension of the hypercube. On the lattice, local bimolecular reactions between single-species particle $`A`$, with hard-core, take place. Each site can be empty (denoted by the symbol $`0`$) or occupied at most by a particle of type $`A`$ denoted in the following by the index $`1`$ . The reactions are specified by the transition rates $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }^{\gamma \delta }`$, where $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ,\delta =0,1`$: $`(\alpha ,\beta )(\gamma ,\delta ),\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }^{\gamma \delta }:\alpha +\beta \gamma +\delta `$.

Probability conservation implies $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }^{\alpha \beta }=_{(\alpha ,\beta )(\alpha ^{},\beta ^{})}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }^{\alpha ^{}\beta ^{}}`$and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }^{\gamma \delta }0,(\alpha ,\beta )(\gamma ,\delta )`$ The state of the system is represented by the ket $`|P(t)=_{\{n\}}P(\{n\},t)|\{n\}`$, where the sum runs over the $`2^N,N=L^d`$ configurations. At site $`i`$ the local state is specified by the ket $`|n_i=(\mathrm{1\hspace{0.33em}0})^T`$ if the site $`i`$ is empty, $`|n_i=(\mathrm{0\hspace{0.33em}1})^T`$ if the site $`i`$ is occupied by a particle of type $`A`$ ($`1`$) .

We define the left vacuum $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }|_{\{n\}}\{n\}|`$, which local representation is $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }|=(\mathrm{1\hspace{0.33em}1})(\mathrm{1\hspace{0.33em}1})`$.

It is by now well established that a master equation can be rewritten formally as an imaginary time Schrödinger equation: $`\frac{}{t}|P(t)=H|P(t),`$ where $`H`$ is the Stochastic Hamiltonian which governs the dynamics of the system. In general, it is neither hermitian nor normal. Its construction from the master equation is a standard procedure (see e.g. ). The evolution operator $`H`$ acts locally on two adjacent sites, $`H=_mH_{m,m+1}`$ and because of probability conservation, we have $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }|H=0`$ . The explicit form of the $`H`$ considered here can be found, e.g., in Ref..

Below we shall assume an initial state $`|P(0)`$ and investigate the expectation value of an operator $`O`$:$`O(t)\stackrel{~}{\chi }|Oe^{Ht}|P(0)`$. For general single-species bimolecular reaction-diffusion systems, there are $`12`$ independent parameters . If one imposes to these parameters the $`2`$ following constraints:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{10}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{00}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{01}\right)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{11}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{00}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}\right);\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{01}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{00}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{10}\right)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{11}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{00}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}\right),`$ (1)
the equations of motion of the correlation functions close and the system is formally soluble (in arbitrary dimensions). It is useful to point out that these solvability constraints allow, through a similarity transformation, to transform the equivalent quantum chain , into another quantum chain sharing the same eigenspectra of an $`XXZ`$ quantum chain with surface fields, of the type solved in Ref..

## III Density and non-instantaneous correlation functions for ordered case, in one-spatial dimension on a finite lattice

For the sequel, in order to compute the sampling average of quantities such as the density and the non-instantaneous correlation functions we need to know the expression of these quantities on a finite lattice. In the following subsection we briefly derive the latter expressions on a periodic finite lattice. In the subsection III.B we compute, as original results, the same expressions on an open lattice with help of Dynamical Matrix Ansatz.

### A The periodic case

For the class of systems which are described on a $`10`$-parameter manifold§§§This soluble $`10`$parametric manifold includes stochastic systems such as Glauber and voter models, the Symmetric Exclusion Process (SEP). , according to the solubility constraints (1), the equation of motion of the density, for a periodic chain of $`L`$ sites, in one-spatial dimension, reads :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}n_m(t)={\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\stackrel{~}{\chi }|n_me^{Ht}|P(0)=A+Bn_m(t)+Cn_{m+1}(t)+Dn_{m1}(t)`$ (2)
where we have defined:

$`A`$ $``$ $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{10}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{01};B\left(2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{10}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{01}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{00}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{00}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}\right)`$ (3)
$`C`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{11}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{10}\right);D\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{11}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{01}\right);E\pm \sqrt{CD};\mu \pm \sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{D}{C}}}`$ (4)
In this work we focus on the case where $`E>0`$ (which also implies $`\mu >0`$).

Solving the equations of motion obtained from (1-3), we obtain in the ordered case (for integer $`m`$ and $`m^{}`$ and for periodic segments of length $`L`$):
$`n_m(t)_{}=\frac{2e^{Bt}}{}_m^{}_{p1.B.Z.}\left(n_m^{}(0)_{}n_m^{}(\mathrm{})_{}\right)\mu ^{mm^{}}(signE)^{mm^{}}\mathrm{cos}\left[p(mm^{})\right]e^{2|E|t\mathrm{cos}p},`$

where $`n_m^{}(\mathrm{})\varphi (1\delta _{A,0})(1\delta _{B+C+D,0})`$, with $`\varphi \frac{A}{B+C+D}`$, and the sum $`m^{}`$ runs over all the integers belonging to the segments of length $``$ under consideration. The sum over $`p`$ runs over the first Brillouin zone ($`1.B.Z.`$): $`p=\frac{2n\pi }{},n=0,\mathrm{},1`$.

With the same notations, we have for the non-instantaneous two-point correlation functions: $`n_m(t)n_l(0)_{}=\frac{2e^{Bt}}{}_m^{}_{p1.B.Z.}\left(n_m^{}(0)n_l(0)_{}n_m^{}(\mathrm{})n_l(0)_{}\right)\mu ^{mm^{}}(signE)^{mm^{}}\mathrm{cos}\left[p(mm^{})\right]e^{2|E|t\mathrm{cos}p}`$, where $`n_m^{}(\mathrm{})n_l(0)=n_m^{}(\mathrm{})`$.

It is useful for the sequel to obtain the long-time behaviour of these quantities in the regime where $`^2/|E|tu=L^2/|E|t1`$, with $`L1`$ and $`|E|t1`$, for the density we have :

$`n_m(t)n_m(\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \underset{m^{}}{}}\mu ^{mm^{}}\left(n_m^{}(0)_{}n_m^{}(\mathrm{})_{}\right){\displaystyle \frac{e^{(B+2|E|)t\frac{(mm^{})^2}{4|E|t}}}{2\sqrt{\pi |E|t}}}`$ (5)
The long-time behaviour ($`^2/|E|tu=L^2/|E|t1`$, with $`L1`$ and $`|E|t1`$) of the two-point correlation functions reads

$`n_x(t)n_{x_0}(0)={\displaystyle \underset{y}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^{xy}e^{(B+2|E|)t\frac{(xy)^2}{4|E|t}}}{2\sqrt{\pi |E|t}}}\left(n_y(0)n_{x_0}(0)_{}n_y(\mathrm{})n_{x_0}(0)_{}\right)`$ (6)
### B Density and non-instantaneous correlation function for the ordered case with open boundary conditions

It is instructive to consider the physically motivated case of a disordered lattice with open boundary conditions. To investigate this situation, we begin with an ordered lattice of length $`L`$ and open boundary conditions: we assume that at site $`1`$ particles can be injected in the system with rate $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ and evacuated with rate $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$. At site $`L`$ particles can be injected in the system with rate $`\stackrel{~}{\delta }`$ and evacuated with rate $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$. We apply the Dynamical Matrix Ansatz (DMA) introduced by Stinchcombe and Schütz to study the ordered Symmetric Exclusion Process (SEP) with open boundary conditions .

For two-states models, the Dynamical Matrix Ansatz assumes that the probability can be encoded by  $`|P(t)=W|\left\{_{j=1}^L(\underset{¯}{E}(t)+\underset{¯}{D}(t)\sigma _j^{})|\right\}|V\frac{1}{Z_L},`$ where $`Z_LW|\underset{¯}{C}^L|V`$ is the normalization constant, $`\underset{¯}{C}=\underset{¯}{E}(t)+\underset{¯}{D}(t)`$, and $`\sigma _j^{}`$ denotes the usual Pauli matrix acting on site $`j`$. We have introduced the vectors $`W|`$ and $`|V`$ on which act the (infinite and time-dependent) matrices $`\underset{¯}{E}(t)`$ and $`\underset{¯}{D}(t)`$ (not to be confused with the combination of rates (3)). To investigate the dynamics, we associate a spin-down to a particle and a spin-up to a vacancy. In so doing, the ferromagnetic ground-state $`|`$ corresponds to an empty lattice.

In this formulation, correlation functions read:

$`n_{j_1}(t)n_{j_2}(t)\mathrm{}n_{j_m}(t)=W|\underset{¯}{C}^{j_11}\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C}^{j_2j_11}\underset{¯}{D}(t)\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{C}^{Lj_m}|V\frac{1}{Z_L}`$, $`j_m>j_{m1}>\mathrm{}>j_1`$.

The master equation, in its Hamiltonian formulation, reads $`\left(\frac{d}{dt}+H\right)|P(t)=0`$, where $`H=_{j=1}^{L1}H_{j,j+1}+b_1+b_L`$. The first term in this expression corresponds to the bulk contribution, while the terms $`b_1`$ and $`b_L`$ correspond to the boundary at site $`1`$ (injection with rate $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ and evacuation with rate $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ ) and $`L`$ (injection with rate $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$ and evacuation with rate $`\stackrel{~}{\delta }`$ ), respectively.

Proceding as in Ref., on the $`10`$parametric manifold (1), we obtain the bulk contribution to the master equation:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\underset{¯}{D}(t)}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`(\sigma _1+\sigma _4)\underset{¯}{C}(\sigma _3+\sigma _5)\underset{¯}{D}(t)+\sigma _2\underset{¯}{C}\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C}^1+\sigma _6\underset{¯}{C}^1\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C}`$ (7)
$`\underset{¯}{S}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`(\sigma _1\sigma _4)\underset{¯}{C}+(\sigma _5\sigma _3)\underset{¯}{D}(t)+\sigma _2\underset{¯}{C}\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C}^1\sigma _6\underset{¯}{C}^1\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C}`$ (8)
$`\sigma _7\underset{¯}{D}(t)^2(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma _8\underset{¯}{C}\underset{¯}{D}(t)+\sigma _9\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}\underset{¯}{C}^2+\sigma _2\underset{¯}{C}\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C}^1\underset{¯}{D}(t)+\sigma _6\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C}^1\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C},`$ (9)
Similarly, the boundary terms give rise to the following equations:

$`0=W|\left\{(2\sigma _4\stackrel{~}{\alpha })\underset{¯}{C}(2\sigma _5\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\stackrel{~}{\gamma })\underset{¯}{D}(t)+2\sigma _6\underset{¯}{C}\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C}^1\right\}=\left\{(2\sigma _1\stackrel{~}{\delta })\underset{¯}{C}(2\sigma _3\stackrel{~}{\beta }\stackrel{~}{\delta })\underset{¯}{D}(t)+2\sigma _2\underset{¯}{C}\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C}^1\right\}|V,`$
where

$`\sigma _1\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{10}0;\sigma _2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{11}\sigma _1C;\sigma _3\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{00}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}+\sigma _10`$ (10)
$`\sigma _4`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{01}0;\sigma _5\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{00}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}+\sigma _40;\sigma _6\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{11}\sigma _4D`$ (11)
$`\sigma _7`$ $``$ $`\sigma _3+\sigma _5(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{00}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{01}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{10}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{11}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{11}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11});\sigma _8\sigma _1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{11};\sigma _9\sigma _4+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{11},`$ (12)
with $`\sigma _2=C,\sigma _6=D,\sigma _1+\sigma _4=A`$ and $`\sigma _3+\sigma _5=B`$, where $`A,B,C,D`$ are the quantities defined in (3). For the SEP model, considered in , we have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}=\mathrm{\Gamma }>0`$ and thus with $`\sigma _2=\sigma _3=\sigma _5=\sigma _6=\frac{\sigma _7}{2}=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\sigma _1=\sigma _4=\sigma _8=\sigma _9=0`$, we recover previous results Ref..

To study the dynamical equations (7) with boundary conditions (10), it is useful to introduce the following notation: $`\underset{¯}{D}_j(t)\underset{¯}{C}^{j1}\underset{¯}{D}(t)\underset{¯}{C}^j`$, and so the correlation functions read $`n_{j_1}(t)n_{j_2}(t)\mathrm{}n_{j_m}(t)=W|\underset{¯}{D}_{j_1}(t)\underset{¯}{D}_{j_2}(t)\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{D}_{j_m}(t)\underset{¯}{C}^L|V\frac{1}{Z_L}`$, $`j_m>j_{m1}>\mathrm{}>j_1`$. For the study of the dynamics of the system we can then introduce the Fourier transform of $`\underset{¯}{D}(t)_j(t)`$ (for $`p0`$): $`𝒟_p(t)_je^{ipj}\underset{¯}{D}_j(t)`$. Seeking a solution of the dynamical equation (7) (for $`p0`$) of the form $`𝒟_p(t)=e^{ϵ_pt}𝒟_p(t=0)`$, we find $`ϵ_p=(\sigma _3+\sigma _5)\sigma _2e^{ip}\sigma _6e^{ip}`$. The equation (9) implies the relation: $`𝒟_{p_1}(t)𝒟_{p_2}(t)=𝒮_{p_2,p_1}𝒟_{p_2}(t)𝒟_{p_1}(t)`$, where $`𝒮_{p_2,p_1}`$ is the amplitude of the scattering matrix which plays a central role in the theory of integrable models. Here, we have

$`𝒮_{p_2,p_1}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _6+\sigma _2e^{i(p_1+p_2)}\sigma _7e^{ip_2}}{\sigma _6+\sigma _2e^{i(p_1+p_2)}\sigma _7e^{ip_1}}}\right),(p_1,p_2)(0,0)`$ (13)
For the SEP model we recover  the scattering amplitude of the isotropic Heisenberg chain

With the definitions,

$`2\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }2\sigma _4}{2\sigma _6}};\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}\beta 1+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\beta }+2(\sigma _1\sigma _3)}{2\sigma _2}};\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}\gamma 1+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\gamma }+2(\sigma _4\sigma _5)}{2\sigma _6}};\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}\delta {\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\delta }2\sigma _1}{2\sigma _2}},`$ (14)
it follows from the boundary conditions that

$`𝒯(p)W|𝒟_p\underset{¯}{C}^L|V={\displaystyle \frac{f_p(\alpha ,\gamma )}{f_p(\alpha ,\gamma )}}e^{2ip}𝒯(p)={\displaystyle \frac{f_p(\beta ,\delta )}{f_p(\beta ,\delta )}}e^{2ipL}𝒯(p),(p0),`$ (15)
where $`f_p(a,b)2(a+b)1+e^{ip}`$. These equations have as solution: $`𝒯(p)=_{l>0}a_l\left(e^{ipl}e^{ip(2l)}\frac{f_p(\alpha ,\gamma )}{f_p(\alpha ,\gamma )}\right)=_{l>0}a_l\left(e^{ipl}e^{ip(2Ll)}\frac{f_p(\beta ,\delta )}{f_p(\beta ,\delta )}\right)`$. Consistency implies the following relation which quantizes the momenta $`p`$’s, as in quantum Many-Body problems:

$`B(p){\displaystyle \frac{f_p(\alpha ,\gamma )f_p(\beta ,\delta )}{f_p(\alpha ,\gamma )f_p(\beta ,\delta )}}=e^{2ip(L1)}`$ (16)
and more generally, for the $`m`$points correlation functions, we have $`e^{2ip_j(L1)}=B_{p_j}_{k=1(kj)}^m\frac{𝒮(p_j,p_k)}{𝒮(p_j,p_k)}`$. Equations (16) and its $`m`$points generalization are the analog of the Bethe Ansatz equations for quantum Many-Body problems .

Correlation functions are then obtained as follows:

$`n_{j_1}(t)\mathrm{}n_{j_m}(t)n_{j_1}(\mathrm{})\mathrm{}n_{j_m}(\mathrm{})=\mathrm{}_{i=1}^m\left[dp_ie^{ip_iϵ_{p_i}t}\right]𝒯(p_1,\mathrm{},p_m)`$, $`j_m>\mathrm{}>j_1;p_i0;\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}im`$. Where $`𝒯(p_1,\mathrm{},p_m)W|𝒟_{p_1}(0)\mathrm{}𝒟_{p_m}(0)|V\frac{1}{Z_L}`$ encodes the initial state of the system.

For finite systems the integration over the momenta, should be carried over $`p^{}s`$ satisfying the relations (16). For infinite system (when $`L\mathrm{}`$) these relations (16) can always be fulfilled (there is a dense set of solutions of these equations) and the integration over the $`p`$’s, runs over the first Brillouin zone (with exclusion of $`p=0`$ which only contributes to the static part of the correlation functions).

We will now focus on the density, which reads (for large $`L`$):

$`n_x(t)n_x(\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \underset{l>0}{}}\left(n_l(\mathrm{})n_l(0)\right){\displaystyle \frac{dp}{2\pi }e^{ipxϵ_pt}\left(e^{ipl}e^{ip(2l)}\frac{f_p(\alpha ,\gamma )}{f_p(\alpha ,\gamma )}\right)},(p0)`$ (17)
With the boundary conditions, we obtain for the stationary density:

i) For the SEP model, where $`\sigma _3+\sigma _5=\sigma _2+\sigma _6`$ (i.e. $`|B|=C+D`$) with $`\sigma _2=\sigma _6>0`$ and $`\sigma _1+\sigma _4=A=0`$, we recover the results of Stinchcombe and Schütz .

ii) For the other cases on the $`10`$parametric manifold (1), for which $`|B|C+D`$, i.e. $`\sigma _3+\sigma _5\sigma _2+\sigma _6`$, and thus $`A=\sigma _1+\sigma _40`$ :

$`n_1(\mathrm{})`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _2\tau _4\eta +\tau _2(\tau _3\sigma _6\eta ^{L2})}{(\eta \sigma _2+\tau _1)(\tau _3+\sigma _6\eta ^{L2})\sigma _2\sigma _6\eta ^{L1}}};n_L(\mathrm{})=\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{\tau _4\sigma _6\eta ^{L2}(n_1(\mathrm{})\varphi )}{\tau _3+\sigma _6\eta ^{L2}}}`$ (18)
$`n_x(\mathrm{})`$ $`=`$ $`(n_1(\mathrm{})+n_L(\mathrm{})2\varphi )\eta ^{x1}+\varphi ,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}1}<x<L,`$ (19)
where, $`\varphi \frac{\sigma _1+\sigma _4}{\sigma _3+\sigma _5\sigma _2\sigma _6};`$ $`\eta \frac{\sigma _3+\sigma _5\sqrt{(\sigma _3+\sigma _5)^24\sigma _2\sigma _6}}{2\sigma _2};`$ $`\tau _1(12(\alpha +\gamma ))\sigma _6(\sigma _3+\sigma _5);`$ $`\tau _22\sigma _4\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+\varphi \left[2(\sigma _6\sigma _5)+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\right];`$ $`\tau _3(12(\beta +\delta ))\sigma _2(\sigma _3+\sigma _5);`$ and $`\tau _42\sigma _1\stackrel{~}{\delta }+\varphi \left[2(\sigma _2\sigma _3)+\stackrel{~}{\beta }+\stackrel{~}{\delta }\right]`$

The dynamical part of the density reads, according to (17),

i) For the SEP model, where $`B+C+D=\sigma _3+\sigma _5\sigma _2\sigma _6=0`$ and $`A=\sigma _1+\sigma _4=0`$, we recover results obtained in references Ref..

ii) For the other processes on the $`10`$parameter manifold (1) (for which $`\sigma _3+\sigma _5\sigma _2+\sigma _6`$ with $`A0`$ and $`\sigma _2\sigma _60`$), we have

$`n_x(t)n_x(\mathrm{})`$ $`=`$ $`e^{Bt}{\displaystyle \underset{y=1}{\overset{L}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{D}{C}}\right)^{\frac{xy}{2}}\left(n_y(0)n_y(\mathrm{})\right)\left(I_{xy}(2|E|t)+\mathrm{}I_{x+y1}(2|E|t)\right)`$ (20)
$`+`$ $`e^{Bt}(1\mathrm{}^2){\displaystyle \underset{y=1}{\overset{L}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{y1}{}}}\mathrm{}^{yk1}\left({\displaystyle \frac{D}{C}}\right)^{\frac{xk}{2}}\left(n_k(0)n_k(\mathrm{})\right)I_{x+y1}(2|E|t),`$ (21)
where $`\mathrm{}\sqrt{\frac{\sigma _6}{\sigma _2}}(12(\alpha +\gamma ))=\frac{2\sigma _5(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+\stackrel{~}{\gamma })}{2\sqrt{\sigma _2\sigma _6}}`$.

Similarly, we obtain the expression of the non-instantaneous two-point correlation functions $`n_x(t)n_{x_0}(0)`$ for an initially translationally invariant system with initial density $`n_m(t=0)=\rho (0),m=1,\mathrm{},L`$. In so doing, we have to replace in (20) $`n_j(0)`$ with $`\rho ^2(0)(1\delta _{x,x_0})+\rho (0)\delta _{x,x_0}`$.

## IV The quenched disordered situation

In the subsequent sections we will exploit the results of the previous section to compute the density and non-instantaneous correlation functions of systems obeying (1) and in presence of quenched disordered. More specifically, we assume that the reaction-rates defined in (3) obey a specific probability distribution. We assume a distribution, which has already been considered in the study the Glauber-Ising Model and other diluted chains (see e.g. ), and more recently, of the symmetric one-dimensional single-species diffusion-limited reaction $`A+\mathrm{}\mathrm{}+A`$ . The first distribution under consideration is the so-called “peaked distribution” which will describe a diluted chain: $`𝒫(A,B,C,D)=q^{\widehat{\alpha }^{\widehat{\beta }}}\delta _{A,A_1}\delta _{B,B_1}\delta _{C,C_1}\delta _{D,D_1}+(1q^{\widehat{\alpha }^{\widehat{\beta }}})\delta _{A,0}\delta _{B,0}\delta _{C,0}\delta _{D,0}`$, where $`0<q<1`$ and $`A,B,C,D`$ have been defined in (3). According to this distribution, the chain is broken into discontinuous segments of (finite) length $``$, with $`+1`$ sites. On these segments the reaction-rates are respectively $`A_1,B_1,C_1,D_1`$. Therefore, each realization has a probabilistic weight $`\omega ()`$:

$`\omega ()=q^{\widehat{\alpha }^{\widehat{\beta }}},\widehat{\alpha },\widehat{\beta }>0,`$ (22)
if the segments under consideration have periodic boundary conditions and a probabilistic weight $`\omega ()`$:

$`\omega ()=\{\begin{array}{cc}(1q^{\widehat{\alpha }})^2q^{\widehat{\alpha }^{\widehat{\beta }}}\hfill & \text{, if }1L2\text{ }\hfill \\ (1q^{\widehat{\alpha }})q^{\widehat{\alpha }^{\widehat{\beta }}}\hfill & \text{, if }=L1\text{ }\hfill \end{array}`$ (25)
if the segments under consideration are open segments.

In Ref., such a distribution (25) has been considered for the symmetric $`A+\mathrm{}\mathrm{}+A`$ reaction, for an initially homogeneous and uncorrelated system. The authors used the relationship of their model to the Heisenberg chain and its symmetries to compute explicitly the autocorrelation function $`n_r(t)n_r(0)`$ .

For periodic segments, we also consider the algebraic disorder-distribution :

$`\omega ()=\{\begin{array}{cc}0\hfill & \text{, if }<b\text{ }\hfill \\ (\gamma 1)b^{\gamma 1}^\gamma \hfill & \text{, if }>b\text{; with }\gamma >2\text{ }\hfill \end{array}`$ (28)
In this section we want to extend Grynberg and Stinchcombe’s  results and calculate explicitly the density and the non-instantaneous two-point correlation functions on the $`10`$parameter space manifold (1) on which the equations of motion of the correlation functions are closed. This is first performed for disordered systems of periodic segments of length $``$ and then for disordered systems of open segments.

To obtain the density of the disordered systems, which we denote $`\overline{n_m}(t)`$, and of the non-instantaneous two-point correlation functions $`\overline{n_m(t)n_l(0)}`$, (where the symbol $`\overline{\mathrm{}}(t)`$ means the average over the time and the disorder), we need the density $`n_m(t)_{}`$ and the non-instantaneous two-point correlation functions $`n_m(t)n_l(0)_{}`$ for a finite and ordered system of length $``$. In this section we consider the disorder-averaging of an observable, say $`O`$, as:

$`\overline{O(t)}{\displaystyle \frac{_{}\omega ()O(t)_{}}{\overline{}}},`$ (29)
where $`\overline{}_{}\omega ()`$, and $`O(t)_{}`$ denotes, respectively, the (time-)mean-value of the segment of length $``$ and the (time-)mean-value of an observable $`O`$ on a lattice of size $``$. In (29), the averaging over the samples (i.e. the quenched-disorder) is carried out over segments of length $``$. It has to be stressed that this summation must be compatible with the nature of the observable $`O`$. In fact, if one is interested in computing the density of particles at site $`m`$, namely $`\overline{n_m(t)}`$, one should carry the summation over all the segments which include the site $`m`$. In this case, $`\overline{n_m(t)}=\frac{_m\omega ()n_m(t)_{}}{_m\omega ()}`$ and similarly for the correlation functions.

To study the mean value of an observable $`O`$, which time-average on a finite segment of length $``$ is $`O(t)_{}`$, we distinguish two regimes:

To study the quantity $`\overline{O(t)}`$ (29), we will distinguish two long-time (i.e. $`|E|t1`$) regimes: the regime where $`uL^2/|E|t1`$, i.e. for typical diffusion-time and the regime where $`uL^2/|E|t1`$, where time is much larger than the typical diffusion-time. In the latter the finite-size effects due to the disorder sampling procedure dramatically affect the dynamics. There is also a third regime, where $`|E|t1`$ and $`u=L^2/|E|t1`$, which is less interesting for our purpose, where we have $`\overline{O(t)}O(t)`$ . In the sequel we will focus on the regimes $`u1`$ and $`u1`$ and omit the case $`u1`$.

We are interested in the long-time behaviour of statistical quantities such as density or correlation functions (see section II.A) and (20). It has been established (see e.g. Ref.) that the long-time behaviour of these quantities are governed by the small momenta $`p`$, ergo by large segments, with $`1L\mathrm{}`$. Here the observables $`O`$ considered are the density operator at site $`j`$, i.e. $`O=n_j`$ and the operator $`n_jn_k`$. For these operators, as discussed, the long-time behaviour on a finite segment of length $``$ follows from a small momentum expansion : $`O(t)e^{(B+2|E|)t}_p\mathrm{exp}\left(|E|tp^2(1+𝒪(1/^2))\right)`$ , according to the results of section II.A and (20). The long-time behaviour ($`|E|t1`$) in the presence of quenched-disorder, in the regimes $`u1`$ and $`u1`$ follows as  :

$`\overline{O(t)}\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{_{\sqrt{\pi ^2|E|t}}\omega ()O(t)_{}}{_{}\omega ()}O(t)\frac{_{\sqrt{\pi ^2|E|t}}\omega ()}{_{}\omega ()}\hfill & \text{, if }u1\text{ }\hfill \\ \frac{_{<\sqrt{\pi ^2|E|t}}\omega ()O(t)_{}}{_{}\omega ()}\hfill & \text{, if }u1\text{ }\hfill \end{array}`$ (32)
Let us note that the SEP model with free boundary conditions, i.e. $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=\stackrel{~}{\beta }=\stackrel{~}{\gamma }=\stackrel{~}{\delta }=0`$, is special in the sense that in this case the quantization constraint (16) of the momenta $`p`$’s is always (for segments of arbitrary length $``$, and not only for the case $`L\mathrm{}`$) fulfilled with $`p=\frac{2\pi j}{},j=0,1,\mathrm{},1`$ .

## V quenched disorder for periodic segments

In this section, we compute the density and the non-instantaneous two-point correlation functions on the soluble $`10`$-parameteric manifold for systems with periodic boundary conditions  For segments (with periodic boundary conditions as well as for open segments) caution is required in order to preserve the parity of the processes when considering the quenched-disordered steady-states of the system. As an example of processes which preserve the parity of the number of particles, such as $`A+\mathrm{}\mathrm{}+A`$ and $`A+A\mathrm{}+\mathrm{}`$ or the process $`A+\mathrm{}\mathrm{}+A`$ and $`A+A\mathrm{}+\mathrm{}`$, one has to take into account that for (finite and infinite) segments with initially odd number of particles there will always remain one particle on each segment (see Ref.). That is the reason for the steady-state (e.g. $`\overline{n_r(\mathrm{})}`$) to be considered separatly. In order to avoid the difficulties due to residual particles, we can restrict to the even subspace, i.e. $`\frac{1}{2}(𝟙+_𝕞\sigma _𝕞^𝕫)|(\mathrm{𝟘})`$. Therefore, we can, e.g., only take into account segments with even number of particles and the disordered steady-states correspond to $`\overline{\mathrm{}}(t=\mathrm{})=\frac{1}{\overline{}}_{}\omega ()\mathrm{}_{}(t=\mathrm{})`$ .

For these periodic systems, we assume that quenched-disorder is characterized by two different distributions: the exponential distribution (22) and the power-law distribution (28).

1) We begin with the first distribution (22) and introduce the following notations: $`\xi \frac{1}{\mathrm{ln}q};s\frac{}{\xi };\tau \frac{2|E|t}{\xi ^2};𝒜\widehat{\alpha }\xi ^{\frac{2(\widehat{\beta }1)}{\widehat{\beta }+2}}\left(\frac{4\pi ^2}{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}\right)^{\frac{\widehat{\beta }}{\widehat{\beta }+2}}+2\pi ^2\xi ^{2\left(\frac{\widehat{\beta }1}{\widehat{\beta }+2}\right)}\left(\frac{4\pi ^2}{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}\right)^{\frac{2}{\widehat{\beta }+2}};`$ and $`\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }(\widehat{\beta }1)\left(\frac{4\pi ^2}{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}\right)^{\frac{\widehat{\beta }2}{\widehat{\beta }+2}}+12\pi ^2\left(\frac{4\pi ^2}{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }}\right)^{\frac{4}{\widehat{\beta }+2}}`$

1.i) To study the density and the correlation functions in this regime, we first expand the expressions obtained in section III.A at small momenta (large $``$) and then proceed to the disorder-averaging according to (32) within a saddle point expansion.

In the regime where $`u1`$, we have for the density of a system with a non-uniform initial density profile : $`n_m(t=0)=n_m(t=\mathrm{})(1+\delta _{m,1})`$. With $`rm1`$, we have:

$`\overline{n_m(t)n_m(\mathrm{})}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2\pi }n_m(\mathrm{})e^{rϵ}}{\overline{}\xi ^{2\left(\frac{\widehat{\beta }1}{\widehat{\beta }+2}\right)}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}\left(𝒜\tau ^{\frac{\widehat{\beta }}{\widehat{\beta }+2}}+(B+2|E|)\frac{\xi ^2\tau }{2|E|}\right)}{\sqrt{\tau ^{\frac{\widehat{\beta }2}{\widehat{\beta }+2}}}}}`$ (33)
For the non-instantaneous correlation functions, we also consider a non uniform initial system: $`n_y(0)n_{x_0}(0)=n_y(\mathrm{})n_{x_0}(0)(1+\delta _{y,1})(1\delta _{y,x_0})+n_{x_0}(0)\delta _{y,x_0}`$. The expression of $`\overline{n_x(t)n_{x_0}(0)n_r(\mathrm{})n_0(0)}`$ with such initial state is obtained from r.h.s. of (33) in replacing $`n_m(\mathrm{})`$ with $`\mu ^{x1}\left(n_{x_0}(\mathrm{})+\mu ^{1x_0}(n_{x_0}(0))(1+\delta _{x_0,1})n_{x_0}(\mathrm{})\right)`$.

1.ii) In the regime where $`u1`$,according to (32), we have for the density

$`\overline{n_m(t)n_m(\mathrm{})}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\alpha }}{\xi }}\right)^{\frac{2\widehat{\beta }}{\widehat{\beta }}}\left(\pi ^2|E|t\right)^{1\frac{\widehat{\beta }}{2}}e^{\frac{\widehat{\alpha }}{\xi }(\pi ^2|E|t)^{\frac{\widehat{\beta }}{2}}}\left(n_m(t)n_m(\mathrm{})\right)`$ (34)
For the non-instantaneous correlation functions, according to (32), we replace in the r.h.s. of (34) $`\left(n_m(t)n_m(\mathrm{})\right)`$ with $`\left(n_r(t)n_0(0)n_r(\mathrm{})n_0(0)\right)`$ Expressions $`n_m(t)n_m(\mathrm{})`$ and $`n_r(t)n_0(0)n_r(\mathrm{})`$ have been obtained previously (5) and (6) for the (infinite) ordered periodic chain
We now consider the second (algebraic) distribution (28) for the disorder average, with $`\gamma >2`$.

2.i) For a system characterized by a non-uniform initial density: $`n_m(t=0)=n_m(\mathrm{})(1+\delta _{m,1})`$, with $`rm1`$

$`\overline{n_m(t)n_m(\mathrm{})}{\displaystyle \frac{n_m(\mathrm{})e^{rϵ}}{\overline{}\xi }}\pi (\gamma 1)b^{\gamma 1}\mathrm{\Gamma }({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma 1}{2}},1){\displaystyle \frac{e^{(B+2|E|)t}}{(4\pi ^2|E|t)^{(\gamma 1)/2}}}`$ (35)
For systems with non-uniform initial states such that $`n_y(0)n_{x_0}(0)=n_y(\mathrm{})n_{x_0}(0)(1+\delta _{y,1})(1\delta _{y,x_0})+n_{x_0}(0)\delta _{y,x_0}`$, we have to replace in the r.h.s. of (35) $`n_m(\mathrm{})`$ with $`\mu ^{x1}\left(n_{x_0}(\mathrm{})+\mu ^{1x_0}(n_{x_0}(0))(1+\delta _{x_0,1})n_{x_0}(\mathrm{})\right)`$.

2.ii) In the regime where $`u1`$, we have for the density, according to (32),

$`\overline{n_m(t)n_m(\mathrm{})}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma 1}{\gamma 2}}\right)b^{\gamma 1}(4\pi ^2|E|t)^{1\frac{\gamma }{2}}\left(n_m(t)n_m(\mathrm{})\right)`$ (36)
For the non-instantaneous correlation functions, according to (32), we obtain: $`\overline{n_r(t)n_0(0)n_r(\mathrm{})}\left(\frac{\gamma 1}{\gamma 2}\right)b^{\gamma 1}(4\pi ^2|E|t)^{1\frac{\gamma }{2}}\left(n_r(t)n_0(0)n_r(\mathrm{})n_0(0)\right)`$.

In these expressions $`n_m(t)n_m(\mathrm{})`$ and $`n_r(t)n_0(0)n_r(\mathrm{})`$ have been obtained in section III.A.

## VI Quenched-disorder for open segments

In this section (with the same notations as in sections V and VI), taking advantage of the results of the section IV, we compute density and correlation functions on the soluble $`10`$-parametric manifold for systems with open boundary conditions.

We consider the effect of quenched-disorder for open segments. We assume that the system is initially uncorrelated, with density $`\rho (0)`$. For technical convenience, we assume the exponential distribution (25). In what follows, the case of (finite) segments with free-boundary conditions (without injection and evacuation of particles at the sites $`1`$ and $``$) corresponds to the case where $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=\stackrel{~}{\beta }=\stackrel{~}{\gamma }=\stackrel{~}{\delta }=0`$ and thus $`\alpha =\frac{\sigma _4}{2\sigma _6},\beta =\frac{1}{2}+\frac{\sigma _1\sigma _3}{2\sigma _2},\gamma =\frac{1}{2}+\frac{\sigma _4\sigma _6}{2\sigma _6},\delta =\frac{\sigma _1}{2\sigma _2}`$.

We introduce the quantities $`\xi _i^{}=\xi _i^{}(\widehat{\alpha },\widehat{\beta }),i=1,2,3`$, where

$`\xi _1^{}\pm \mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{D}{C}}\right),\xi _2^{}\mathrm{ln}|\mathrm{}|\pm \mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{D}{C}}\right),\xi _3^{}\mathrm{ln}|\eta |\pm \mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{D}{C}}\right)`$ (37)
where, as previously, we consider $`D/C=\sigma _6/\sigma _2>0`$ and assume $`\mathrm{}=\frac{2\sigma _5(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+\stackrel{~}{\gamma })}{2\sigma _6}>0`$, for $`\sigma _5>0`$ and $`DC=\sigma _6\sigma _2>0`$, without further restrictions, we can always assume that $`2\sigma _5\stackrel{~}{\alpha }+\stackrel{~}{\gamma }>0`$. In particular, this holds true for free-boundaries systems, where $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=\stackrel{~}{\beta }=\stackrel{~}{\gamma }=\stackrel{~}{\delta }=0`$.

As in the previous section, we distinguish two regimes:

i) In the first one, $`L^2/|E|t1`$, the result is obtained via a saddle-point expansion.

To study the density and the correlation functions in this regime, we first expand the expressions (20) and its correlation functions for small momenta (large $``$) and then proceed to the disorder-averaging according to (32) within a saddle point expansion. In so doing, the saddle points $`s_0=s_0(\xi _i^{}),i=1,2,3`$ are solutions of the saddle-point equation: $`\xi \xi _i^{}\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\beta }(s_0\xi )^{\widehat{\beta }1}+\frac{4\pi ^2\tau }{s_0^3}=0,i=1,2,3`$ For the case $`\widehat{\beta }=1`$, we have $`s_0(\xi _i^{})=\left(\frac{4\pi ^2\tau }{\widehat{\alpha }\xi \xi _i^{}}\right)^{1/3}`$.

The long-time behaviour of the density after averaging over the time and the disorder reads (for $`xL`$):

$`\overline{n_x(t)n_x(\mathrm{})}\tau ^{\nu (\xi _i^{})}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(B+2|E|)\xi ^2\tau }{2|E|}}+max_{\left\{\xi _i^{}\right\}_{i=1,2,3}}\left\{\xi \xi _i^{}s_0(\xi _i^{})\widehat{\alpha }\xi ^{\widehat{\beta }1}s_0(\xi _i^{})^{\widehat{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2\tau }{s_0^2(\xi _i^{})}}\right\}\right],`$ (38)
where $`\nu =\nu (\xi _i^{})`$ is an exponent which depends on the parameters $`\xi _i^{}`$ . On the r.h.s. of (38), in the term $`max_{\left\{\xi _i^{}\right\}_{i=1,2,3}}\left\{\mathrm{}\right\}`$, we select the maxima (over the $`\xi _i^{}`$) of the function $`f(s_0(\xi _i^{}))=\xi \xi _i^{}s_0(\xi _i^{})\widehat{\alpha }\xi ^{\widehat{\beta }1}s_0(\xi _i^{})^{\widehat{\beta }}\frac{2\pi ^2\tau }{s_0^2(\xi _i^{})},(i=1,2,3)`$, where the $`s_0(\xi _i^{})`$ are the solutions of the saddle-point equation.

We see from the formula (38) that the effect of the open boundary appears through the term $`\xi _i^{}`$ (37) and can affect the dynamics with respect to the case of segments with periodic boundary conditions.

For the case where $`\widehat{\beta }=1`$ all the computations can be explicitly carried out as follows.

We define $`\xi ^{}`$ according to $`\left\{\widehat{\alpha }\xi \xi ^{}\right\}^{2/3}max_{\{\xi _i^{}\}_{i=1,2,3}}\left\{\widehat{\alpha }\xi \xi _i^{}\right\}^{2/3}`$. To compute the density, we then distinguish two cases (with $`\widehat{\alpha }\xi \xi ^{}`$). First, if $`\xi ^{}0`$ (or $`\xi ^{}=0`$ and $`\mathrm{}=1`$, as for the SEP model).

$`\overline{n_x(t)n_x(\mathrm{})}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{}\xi }}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{3}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2\tau }{(\widehat{\alpha }\xi \xi ^{})^4}}\right)^{1/6}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3(\widehat{\alpha }\xi \xi ^{})^{2/3}}{2}}(4\pi ^2\tau )^{1/3}+\left({\displaystyle \frac{B+2|E|}{2|E|}}\right)\xi ^2\tau \right)`$ (39)
If $`\xi ^{}=0`$, $`\mathrm{}1`$ and $`\widehat{\beta }=1`$, for the situation considered here (systems initially uncorrelated with initial density $`\rho (0)0`$), we have

$`\overline{n_x(t)n_x(\mathrm{})}{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\alpha }^{1/3}}{\overline{}\xi }}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi ^3\tau }{3}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(4\pi ^2\widehat{\alpha }^2\tau )^{1/3}+\left({\displaystyle \frac{B+2|E|}{2|E|}}\right)\xi ^2\tau \right]`$ (40)
ii) In the other one, where $`L^2|E|t`$, at $`\widehat{\beta }=1`$, with $`\widehat{\alpha }\xi \xi ^{}`$, according to (32), we have

$`\overline{n_x(t)n_x(\mathrm{})}{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\alpha }}{\xi \overline{}}}\left(\pi ^2|E|t\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\alpha }}{\xi }}(\pi ^2|E|t)^{\frac{1}{2}}\right]\left(n_x(t)n_x(\mathrm{})\right)`$ (41)
In this expression, $`n_x(t)n_x(\mathrm{})`$ is given in (20), for the case $`|B|C+D`$.

Similar computations can be performed for $`\overline{n_x(t)n_{x_0}n_x(\mathrm{})n_{x_0}}`$. For systems initially uncorrelated and homogeneous with initial density $`\rho (0)`$ and for the case $`\widehat{\beta }=1`$, the long-time behaviour ($`|E|t1,u=L^2/|E|t1`$) of the two-point correlation functions is the following: $`\overline{n_x(t)n_{x_0}n_x(\mathrm{})n_{x_0}}\tau ^{\nu (\xi ^{})}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{3(\widehat{\alpha }\xi \xi ^{})^{2/3}}{2}(4\pi ^2\tau )^{1/3}+\left(\frac{B+2|E|}{2|E|}\right)\xi ^2\tau \right)`$, where $`\xi ^{}`$ is the quantity defined above. We see that in absence of initial correlations, the two-point correlation function has, in this regime, the same stretched-exponential long-time behaviour as the density (39). The exponent $`\nu (\xi ^{})`$ depends on $`\xi ^{}`$. For the cases considered here ($`\widehat{\beta }=1`$) its value is $`\nu =\frac{1}{6}`$ (as for the SEP model with free boundary conditions, see below and Ref.) or $`\nu =\frac{1}{2}`$ .

In the other regime, the long-time behaviour ($`|E|t1,u=L^2/|E|t1`$) of the two-point correlation functions follows as in (41):$`\overline{n_x(t)n_{x_0}n_x(\mathrm{})n_{x_0}}\frac{\widehat{\alpha }}{\xi \overline{}}\left(\pi ^2|E|t\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\widehat{\alpha }}{\xi }(\pi ^2|E|t)^{\frac{1}{2}}\right]\left(n_x(t)n_{x_0}(0)n_x(\mathrm{})n_{x_0}(0)\right)`$ .

In the presence of initial correlations, the situation changes radically: one should take into account the initial correlation in the disorder-averaging. The latter give rise to results which would be very different from the ones obtained for the density.

## VII Illustration: Two examples

As a first example we consider the symmetric exclusion model (SEP) $`A+\mathrm{}\mathrm{}+A`$, with rates $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}=\mathrm{\Gamma }>0`$, on a diluted chain (periodic and with free boundaries) with distribution probability: $`𝒫(\mathrm{\Gamma })=q\delta _{\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}+(1q)\delta _{\mathrm{\Gamma },0}`$. With the results of the section III.A, III.B, V and VI, setting $`\widehat{\alpha }=\widehat{\beta }=1`$, in the expression of $`𝒜`$ and $``$ (see section V), in the regime $`\mathrm{\Gamma }tL^2`$, we recover the result of Grynberg and Stinchcombe:

$`\overline{n_x(t)n_{x_0}n_x(\mathrm{})}\rho (0)(1\rho (0))\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{3}}}(4\pi ^2\tau )^{1/6}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(4\pi ^2\tau )^{1/3}\right]`$ (42)
This result is valid for open segments as well as periodic segments.

As second illustration, we consider the dynamics of the system described by the following processes: $`A+A\mathrm{}+\mathrm{}`$, with rates $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{00}^{11}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{00}=\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`A+\mathrm{}\mathrm{}+A`$, with rates $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

This model is relevant to the description of dimer adsorption and desorption (see Ref., and references therein).

Contrary to the SEP model, here the effect of open boundaries is real. We assume that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1>\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ and that there is neither injection nor evacuation of particles at the boundary (free boundary conditions) of a segment (i.e. $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=\stackrel{~}{\beta }=\stackrel{~}{\gamma }=\stackrel{~}{\delta }=0`$).

This model preserves the parity of the number of particles, a property which has to be taken into account when computing the steady states (see footnote $`2`$).

Consider a diluted chain described by the distribution probability: $`𝒫(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Sigma })=q\delta _{\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}\delta _{\mathrm{\Sigma },\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}+(1q)\delta _{\mathrm{\Gamma },0}\delta _{\mathrm{\Sigma },0},(0<q<1)`$.

Thus, for segments with periodic boundary conditions, the disorder-distribution simply reads $`\omega ()=q^{}`$.

If we assume segments with free-boundary conditions, the disorder-distribution reads:

$`\omega ()=\{\begin{array}{cc}(1q)^2q^{}\hfill & \text{, if }1L2\text{ }\hfill \\ (1q)q^{}\hfill & \text{, if }=L1\text{ }\hfill \end{array}`$.

It is useful to introduce the notations: $`\varphi =\frac{1}{2};\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}<\eta =\frac{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1}+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}}1;\mathrm{}=1+\frac{2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}>0;B=2(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1);E=\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_1;\xi _1^{}=0;`$ and $`\xi _2^{}=\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{};\xi _3^{}=\mathrm{ln}\eta ;\sigma _1=\sigma _4=\mathrm{\Sigma }_1;\sigma _2=\sigma _6=\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_1;\sigma _3=\sigma _5=\mathrm{\Gamma }_1+\mathrm{\Sigma }_1;\sigma _7=2\mathrm{\Gamma }_1;\sigma _8=\sigma _9=2\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$

We first consider the case of segments with periodic boundary conditions. For a system with non-uniform initial conditions: $`n_m(0)=n_m(\mathrm{})(1+\delta _{m,1})=\frac{1}{2}(1+\delta _{m,1})`$, we obtain ($`r=m1`$), in the regime where $`\xi ,(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)t1`$ , and $`\tau \frac{(\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_1)t}{\xi ^2}`$.

$`\overline{n_r(t)n_r(\mathrm{})}n_m(\mathrm{})\left({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2\tau }{\widehat{\alpha }^4}}\right)^{1/6}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}((2\pi \widehat{\alpha })^2\tau )^{1/3}{\displaystyle \frac{4\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\xi ^2\tau }{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}}\right)`$ (43)
Let us now pass to an open system, with free boundary conditions, for which the initial state is uncorrelated with density $`n_m(0)=\rho (0)`$, (with $`\rho (0)0`$), we have:

In the regime where $`|\mathrm{\Gamma }_1|t,|\mathrm{\Sigma }_1|tL^21`$, with $`\xi ^{}=\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{}>0`$, ($`\widehat{\alpha }\xi \xi ^{}`$)

$`\overline{n_x(t)n_x(\mathrm{})}\{\begin{array}{cc}\left(\frac{4\pi ^2\tau }{(\widehat{\alpha }\xi \mathrm{ln}\mathrm{})^4}\right)^{1/6}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{3(\widehat{\alpha }\xi \mathrm{ln}\mathrm{})^{2/3}}{2}(4\pi ^2\tau )^{1/3}\frac{4\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\xi ^2\tau }{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}\right)\hfill & \text{, if }\mathrm{}<e^{2\widehat{\alpha }/\xi }\text{ }\hfill \\ \widehat{\alpha }^{1/3}\sqrt{\frac{8\pi ^3\tau }{3}}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{3}{2}((2\pi \widehat{\alpha })^2\tau )^{1/3}\frac{4\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\xi ^2\tau }{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}\right]\hfill & \text{, if }\mathrm{}e^{2\widehat{\alpha }/\xi }\text{ }\hfill \end{array}`$ (46)
We note on the basis of this simple example, the effects of the boundary conditions. The SEP model, where the long-time dynamics does not depend on the boundary conditions (see Ref.) of the segments is a special case.

## VIII Summary and conclusion

We have considered the single-species one-dimensional models characterized by rates lying on a $`10`$parametric manifold. Such reaction-diffusion processes are (in arbitrary dimensions) formally completely soluble because the equations of motion of correlation functions are closed. After having generalized a previous approach to the dynamics of (ordered) systems with open boundaries, with help of the Dynamical Matrix Ansatz, we investigated the dynamics of this class of processes in the presence of quenched disorder (consisting in a random distribution of the reaction of periodic and open segments). We have computed the density and the two-point non-instantaneous correlation functions for various initial states. The study of the dynamics in the presence of quenched disorder leads to various regimes. The most remarkable effect of the disorder appears when time is much larger than the typical diffusion time. In this case the finite-size effect radically changes the dynamics: for the SEP model, the non-instantaneous correlation functions no longer decay algebraically but follow rather a stretched exponential. For the other models, in this regime, the quenched disorder also affects the dynamics but less dramatically: the decay of the density and two-point correlation functions is a combination of the ordered exponential (corrected by subdominant terms arising from the disorder average) and a power-law arising from the quenched disorder average. Similar effects of disorder have been reported in recent experiments . We also pointed out the non-trivial effect of the boundary conditions on the disorder average. We have illustrated our results by considering two physically relevant examples.

The support of Swiss National Fonds is gratefully acknowledged.