text:
# Secular Bar-Mode Evolution and Gravitational Waves From Neutron Stars

## I Introduction

Nonaxisymmetric instabilities can develop in rapidly rotating fluid bodies when the ratio $`\beta T/|W|`$ of the rotational energy $`T`$ to the gravitational potential energy $`W`$ is sufficiently large (e.g., Chandrasekhar 1969). In particular, the $`l=m=2`$ f-mode (Kelvin mode), or bar-mode, becomes dynamically unstable when $`\beta >\beta _{\mathrm{dyn}}0.27`$. This $`\beta _{\mathrm{dyn}}`$, originally derived for incompressible Maclaurin spheroid, is relatively insensitive to the equation of state and differential rotation (Pickett et al. 1996; Toman et al. 1998), although it tends to be reduced by general relativity (Shibata et al. 2000). The consequence of the dynamical bar-mode instability has been extensively studied using numerical simulations: the mode grows to nonlinear amplitude by shedding mass and angular momentum from the ends of the bar in the form of two-armed spiral pattern, and the central star assumes a bar shape that lasts many rotation periods (e.g., Tohline et al. 1985; New et al. 2000; Brown 2000; Shibata et al. 2000). It is important to note, however, that these simulations start out with a stationary, dynamically unstable star and such an initial condition may not be realized in an actual core collapse (e.g., Rampp, Müller and Ruffert 1998).

However, it is very likely that in a rotating core collapse (or neutron star binary merger), after the messy dynamics is completed, the newly formed NS settles down into a dynamically stable configuration, with $`\beta <0.27`$, and yet still suffers further secular, rotational instability. “Secularly unstable” means the instability is slow, and is driven by gravitational radiation reaction. In this paper, we will focus this secular instability and the possible gravitational wave signals from newly formed neutron stars in the first seconds/minutes of their lives.

## II CFS Instability: F-, G- and R-Modes

The gravitational radiation driven instability, or Chandrasekhar-Friedman-Schutz (CFS) instability (see e.g., Friedman 1998 for a review), arises for the following simple reason: Suppose in the rotating frame of the star we set up a perturbation (mode) (with frequency $`\omega _r`$ as in $`e^{im\varphi +i\omega _rt}`$) which travels opposite to the rotation. In the inertial frame, the perturbation will be dragged backward by the rotation, and the mode frequency becomes $`\omega _i=\omega _rm\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$. If the spin $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ is sufficiently large, the perturbation will be prograde in the inertial frame. Since the mode has negative angular momentum (because the perturbed fluid does not rotate as fast as it did without the perturbation), as the mode radiates positive $`J`$ through gravitational radiation, the mode’s angular momentum will be more negative; that means the mode is unstable.

The CFS instability mechanism can be applied to different modes of NSs:

1. F-modes: The f-modes are fundamental acoustic waves, corresponding to a global distortion of the star. For the $`m=2`$ mode (bar-mode), the instability occurs when $`\beta >\beta _{\mathrm{sec}}=0.14`$ — This critical $`\beta _{\mathrm{sec}}`$ is only slightly affected by equation of state, and is somewhat reduced (to as small as $`0.1`$) by strong differential rotation (Imamura et al. 1995) and by general relativity (Stergioulas & Friedman 1998).

2. R-modes: In the last few years it was realized that the so-called r-modes are always secularly unstable (for stars consisting of inviscid fluid) (Andersson 1998) and the growth time of the mode through current quadrupole gravitational radiation can be interestingly short (Lindblom et al. 1998). A lot of works are currently being done on r-modes (see http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/neustars00/si-rmode-sched.html for a recent meeting devoted to r-modes), but they are beyond the scope of this paper (see Ushomirsky’s paper in this proceedings).

3. G-modes: G-modes are also unstable when $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ is (approximately) greater than the mode frequency (of nonrotating stars), which typically is $`100`$ Hz, or $`0.1\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{max}}`$. However, the growth time (despite the finite quadrupole moment) is quite long, an thus not interesting (Lai 1999).

Figure 1 shows a comparison of the CFS instability growth times for different modes in a $`M=1.4M_{}`$, $`R_0=20`$ km neutron star. We see that for sufficiently large $`\beta `$, the $`m=2`$ f-mode (the bar-mode) is the most unstable mode, with the shortest growth time (of order seconds to minutes). So the bar-mode instability is most robust if a neutron star is formed with $`\beta `$ in the range of $`0.2`$ to $`0.27`$ — numerical simulations indicate that this is indeed possible (Zwerger & Müller 1997; Rampp et al. 1998; see contributions by New and Brown). In the remainder of the paper we will be concerned with the bar-mode only.

The growth time shown in Fig. 1 is due to gravitational radiation only. There are several complications that can affect the net growth time. We will discuss two of them in the next two sections. Other issues, including the effect of magnetic field, can be found in Ho & Lai (2000).

## III Viscosity in Proto-Neutron Stars

The first complication concerns the viscous dissipation, which tends to suppress the GR driven instability. For a proto-NS with $`T>1`$ MeV, the shear (kinematic) viscosity due to neutron-neutron scattering, $`\nu =\eta /\rho 14\rho _{15}^{5/4}T_{\mathrm{MeV}}^2\mathrm{cm}^2s^1`$ (Flowers & Itoh 1976), is negligible (since $`t_{\mathrm{visc}}R^2/\nu `$ is much greater than the growth time of the mode, $`t_{\mathrm{GR}}`$). The shear viscosity due to neutrino-nucleon scattering is $`\eta =n_\nu p_\nu l_\nu /5`$ (Goodwin & Pethick 1982), where $`n_\nu ,p_\nu ,l_\nu `$ are the neutrino number density, momentum and scattering mean free path. Thus

$$\nu =\frac{\eta }{\rho }cl_\nu \left(\frac{E_\nu n_\nu }{\rho c^2}\right)3\times 10^6\rho _{15}^{4/3}T_{\mathrm{MeV}}\mathrm{cm}^2s^1,$$
(1)
where we have used $`l_\nu 2000(E_\nu /30\mathrm{MeV})^3`$ cm. Contrary to some earlier claims (e.g., Lindblom & Detweiler 1979), the neutrino shear viscosity is also negligible.

The most relevant viscosity in a proto-NS is the bulk viscosity. This arises from the fact that in an oscillation which involves compression, the matter will be temporarily out of chemical equilibrium (in this case, $`\beta `$-equilibrium between n,p,e) and it will try to relax back to the equilibrium by the weak processes

$$e+pn+\nu _e,np+e+\overline{\nu }_e,(\mathrm{URCA})$$
(2)
or

$$e+p+Nn+N+\nu _e,n+Np+N+e+\overline{\nu }_e,(\mathrm{Modified}\mathrm{URCA})$$
(3)
and therefore emitting neutrinos; this neutrino emission serves as damping of the oscillation.

The standard bulk viscosity widely used in the last decade has been the one derived by Sawyer (1989) (correcting a factor of 100 typographic error)

$$\zeta =1.5\times 10^{32}\rho _{15}^2T_{\mathrm{MeV}}^6\omega ^2\mathrm{g}/(\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}),(\mathrm{Modified}\mathrm{URCA})$$
(4)
where $`T_{\mathrm{MeV}}`$ is the temperature in MeV, $`\rho =10^{15}\rho _{15}`$ g/cm3 is the density, and $`\omega `$ is the mode (angular) frequency in $`s^1`$. This is quite large, with the corresponding damping time $`R^2\rho /\zeta 10T_{\mathrm{MeV}}^6`$ s for $`\omega 10^3`$ s-1. Thus one may conclude that the bar-mode instability is suppressed for $`T_{\mathrm{MeV}}>1`$ (see Ipser & Lindblom 1991 for more detailed computations). Similarly, if direct URCA process operates, equation (4) should be replaced by

$$\zeta 1.5\times 10^{36}\rho _{15}^2T_{\mathrm{MeV}}^4\omega ^2\mathrm{g}/(\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s})(\mathrm{URCA})$$
(5)
where we have used the free npe gas relation $`n_e/n_0=0.0765\rho _{15}^2`$ ($`n_0=0.16`$ fm-3) to evaluate the equilibrium electron density (this is not consistent since in a free npe gas URCA precesses are suppressed; but it is adequate for estimate). Equation (5) is valid for $`\omega 118x^{2/3}T_{\mathrm{MeV}}^4`$ s-1 (where the electron fraction $`x=n_e/n=0.02\rho _{15}`$).

However, one should be careful when using eqs. (4)-(5) at high temperatures. In fact, when $`T`$ becomes sufficiently large, the bulk viscosity must go down. The reason is that as $`T`$ increases, the timescale to relax back to $`\beta `$-equilibrium becomes shorter than the oscillation period. So the matter will stay very close to $`\beta `$-equilibrium during the oscillation and there is very little extra neutrino emission associated with the oscillation. Another effect that needs to be included at high temperatures is neutrino absorption (such as $`\nu _e+ne+p`$) which also helps to speed up relaxation to $`\beta `$-equilibrium.

We now outline the derivation of the neutrino bulk viscosity in the regime where matter is opaque to neutrinos (see Sawyer 1980; Lai 2001). Consider the emission and absorption of $`\nu _e`$’s. The $`\nu _e`$ distribution function $`f`$ satisfies the Boltzmann equation

$$\frac{f}{t}=j\kappa f,$$
(6)
where $`j`$ is the emissivity, and $`\kappa =j\left(1+e^{\frac{E\delta \mu }{T}}\right)`$ is the absorption cross section per unit volume (corrected for the effect of stimulated absorption), $`\delta \mu \mu _e+\mu _p\mu _n`$. In equilibrium ($`\delta \mu =0`$; we assume $`\mu _\nu =0`$), we have $`f=f_0=f_{eq}=\left(1+e^{\frac{E}{T}}\right)^1`$ and $`j_0=\kappa _0f_0`$. In a perturbation with $`\delta fe^{i\omega t}`$, we find

$$(i\omega +\kappa _0)\delta f=\frac{e^{E/T}}{(1+e^{E/T})^2}\left(\frac{\delta \mu }{T}\right)\kappa _0.$$
(7)
Similar consideration for $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ gives $`(i\omega +\kappa _0)\delta \overline{f}=e^{E/T}(1+e^{E/T})^2\left(\delta \mu /T\right)\kappa _0`$, where we have used $`\overline{j}_0=j_0`$ and $`\overline{\kappa }_0=\kappa _0`$. The variation of electron fraction $`x=n_e/n`$ is

$$\delta x=\frac{1}{n}\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\left(\delta f\delta \overline{f}\right)\frac{\delta \mu }{(i\omega +\kappa _0)n}\lambda _{\mathrm{eff}},$$
(8)
where $`\lambda _{\mathrm{eff}}=T^2\kappa _0/6`$. Since the matter is degenerate to a good approximation, $`\delta \mu `$ depends only on $`\rho ,x`$. Thus

$$\delta x=\frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{eff}}/\rho }{i\omega +\kappa _{\mathrm{eff}}}\left(\frac{\delta \mu }{\delta n}\right)_x\delta \rho ,$$
(9)
where $`\kappa _{\mathrm{eff}}=\kappa _0+(\lambda _{\mathrm{eff}}/n)\left(\delta \mu /\delta x\right)_n`$. The energy dissipation rate per unit volume (averaged over oscillation period) can be calculated by

$$\dot{E}=\frac{1}{\rho }\delta P\frac{d\delta \rho }{dt}=\frac{1}{2\rho }(\delta \rho )^2\mathrm{Re}\left[(i\omega )\frac{\delta P}{\delta \rho }\right]\frac{1}{2}\zeta \omega ^2\left(\frac{\delta \rho }{\rho }\right)^2.$$
(10)
Using eq. (9) we then find the bulk viscosity

$$\zeta =\frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{eff}}}{\omega ^2+\kappa _{\mathrm{eff}}^2}\left(\frac{\delta \mu }{n}\right)_x\left(\frac{P}{x}\right)_\rho =\frac{\lambda _{\mathrm{eff}}}{\omega ^2+\kappa _{\mathrm{eff}}^2}\left(\frac{\mu _n}{3}\right)^2,$$
(11)
where the second equality applies for free npe gas ($`\mu _n=140\rho _{15}^{2/3}`$ MeV is the neutron Fermi energy), for which $`(\delta \mu /x)_n=3(n/n_e)\mu _n`$ and thus $`\kappa _{\mathrm{eff}}\kappa _0`$.

For modified URCA process, we have

$`\kappa _0=1.034\times 10^3\rho _{15}^{2/3}T_{\mathrm{MeV}}^4\mathrm{s}^1,`$ (12)
$`\zeta =7.9\times 10^{31}\rho _{15}^2T_{\mathrm{MeV}}^6(\omega ^2+\kappa _0^2)^1\mathrm{g}/(\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}).(\mathrm{Modified}\mathrm{URCA})`$ (13)
If direct URCA process operates (which requires sufficiently large $`x`$, a condition necessarily satisfied at early times of the proto-neutron star), we have

$`\kappa _0=1.13\times 10^7\rho _{15}^{2/3}T_{\mathrm{MeV}}^2\mathrm{s}^1,`$ (14)
$`\zeta =6.7\times 10^{21}\rho _{15}^{2/3}\mathrm{g}/(\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}),(\mathrm{URCA})`$ (15)
where the $`\zeta `$ expression is evaluated in the $`\kappa _0\omega `$ limit. We see from Fig. 2 that for $`T>`$ MeV, the viscosity is less than $`10^{25}`$ g/(cm s) (depending on whether URCA or modified URCA processes operates), and thus the bulk viscosity cannot suppress the CFS instability of the bar-mode (see Lai 2001 for more details).

## IV Effect of Star–Disk Coupling

A newly formed rotating neutron star is often surrounded by a disk. As the bar grows in the NS, it will excite density waves in the disk, and therefore transfers angular momentum to the disk or from the disk. This will either enhance or suppress the bar-mode instability — this is simply another form of CFS instability.

The angular momentum transfer is mainly through the so-called Lindblad resonances, where $`2(\mathrm{\Omega }_p\mathrm{\Omega }_k)=\pm \mathrm{\Omega }_k`$ ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_p=\omega _i/2`$ is the pattern rotation of the bar and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k`$ is the rotation of the disk, assumed to be Keplerian). The torques can be calculated using the formalism of Goldreich & Tremaine (1979). At the inner Lindblad resonance (ILR), $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k=2\mathrm{\Omega }_p`$, the driving rate of the bar-mode due to star–disk coupling is (Lai 2001)

$$\gamma _{\mathrm{ILR}}\frac{6\pi ^2}{5}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_p^2}{(\mathrm{\Omega }_s2\mathrm{\Omega }_p)}\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }(r_{\mathrm{ILR}})}{(M/R_e^2)},$$
(16)
where the negative sign in the front implies that the torque tends to damp the mode, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ is the rotation rate of the star, $`R_e`$ is the equatorial radius, and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r_{\mathrm{ILR}})`$ is the surface density of the disk evaluated at ILR. Similarly, at the outer Lindblad resonance (OLR), we have

$$\gamma _{\mathrm{OLR}}\frac{98\pi ^2}{45}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_p^2}{(\mathrm{\Omega }_s2\mathrm{\Omega }_p)}\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }(r_{\mathrm{OLR}})}{(M/R_e^2)},$$
(17)
where the positive front sign means that the torque drives the CFS instability. Clearly, the net effect of star-disk coupling on the mode depends on the relative importance of ILR and OLR. Compared with driving rate of the mode due to gravitational radiation, we find that star-disk coupling is important when $`\mathrm{\Sigma }>10^6M/R_e^2`$. So even a small amount of material outside the proto-NS may potentially affect the CFS instability of the bar-mode.

## V Nonlinear Evolution of Bar-Mode and Gravitational Waveforms

In general, to determine the nonlinear evolution of the bar-mode requires 3d hydrodynamical simulations including gravitational radiation reaction, and one needs to follow the system for a time much longer than the dynamical time of the star. This possesses a significant technical challenge (see recent attempt by Lindblom et al. 2000 on the r-mode evolution where an approximate ansatz for the radiation reaction is adopted).

### V.1 Dedekind-like Bar

One of the advantages of the $`m=2`$ f-mode (as opposed the higher $`m`$ f-modes and or r-modes) is that under certain idealized condition, namely for impressible fluid, there exists an exact solution for the nonlinear development of the bar-mode instability driven by gravitational radiation (Miller 1974; see Lai & Shapiro 1995 and references therein; the latter also includes an approximate, compressible generalization).

The evolutionary sequence is as follows: We start with an axisymmetric Maclaurin spheroid with $`\beta >0.14`$ (secularly unstable). The bar grows and has a pattern angular frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p`$ (which is related to the mode frequency in the inertial frame by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p=\omega _i/2`$). Relative to the bar, there is also an internal rotation $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{in}`$ which is larger than $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p`$. The important point to note is that although the mean rotation of the star $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s\mathrm{\Omega }_p+\mathrm{\Omega }_{in}`$ is near breakup, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p`$ can be much smaller (in fact, at the bifurcation point $`\beta =0.14`$, we have $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p=0`$). As the amplitude of the bar continues to grow, the bar also gradually slows down. Eventually we reach a configuration with zero pattern speed. This is the Dedekind ellipsoid, basically stationary “football” with a fixed figure in space but with a lot internal rotation $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{in}`$.

The gravitational wave (GW) emitted during such a quasi-equilibrium secular evolution is quite interesting. Figure 3 shows the GW amplitude as a function of GW frequency. The GW is quasi-periodic. Initially, we have an axisymmetric star, so $`h=0`$. Then the GW amplitude increases as the bar grows. In the meantime, the bar slows down and the GW frequency ($`=2\mathrm{\Omega }_p`$) decreases. So eventually $`h`$ decreases. Thus we have a non-monotonic GW amplitude evolution, with the GW frequency sweeps downward from a few hundred Hertz toward zero. The timescale of the evolution is of order seconds to minutes, and the characteristic number of cycles of GWs is of order $`10^4`$.

So far we have assumed the star begins its evolution from an axisymmetric state. Recent numerical simulations (e.g., New et al. 2000,; Brown 2000; Shibata et al. 2000), however, indicate that at the end of the dynamical evolution, the star may be already elongated rather than axisymmetric. So one can ask about the long-term evolution of the bar and the emitted GWs. Here the ellipsoid model can also provide qualitative answers. There are two possibilities (see Lai & Shapiro 1995 for details): (1) If the bar has $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{in}>\mathrm{\Omega }_p`$, namely if the bar is Dedekind-like, then the evolution and waveform discussed above should also apply except that we need to cut off the initial growth phase of the bar. (2) Another possibility occurs when $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p>\mathrm{\Omega }_{in}`$, which we discuss in the next subsection.

### V.2 Jacobi-like Bar

If the bar has internal rotation (relative to the bar figure) less than the pattern rotation, i.e., $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{in}<\mathrm{\Omega }_p`$, the bar is called Jacobi-like, and the evolution is quite different. In this case, gravitational radiation reaction tends to decrease the amplitude of the bar, making the star less elongated. In the meantime, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p`$ increases because, even though $`J`$ decreases, the moment of inertia decreases faster. So the GW frequency increases and eventually the star becomes axisymmetric. Here again we have a quasi-periodic GW signal (see Fig. 4), except that the frequency sweeps upwards. The timescale foe the evolution is of order a second, and the number of cycles is of order a few hundred.

Note that at the end of the Jacobi-like evolution, the axisymmetric star may still be secularly unstable. If so the star will continue to evolve in the way described in Sec. V.A.

### V.3 Characteristic GW Amplitude

To recapitulate, there are two types of rotating bars, and their evolution and emitted GWs are qualitatively different: (1) A Dedekind-like bar has large internal rotation, and the resulting waveform sweeps downward in frequency; (2) A Jacobi-like bar has relatively small internal rotation, and the GW frequency sweeps upwards. Figure 5 shows the characteristic GW amplitudes for the two types of bars compared with the sensitivity curves ($`h_{\mathrm{rms}}`$) of LIGO I,II and III. The characteristic GW amplitude is given by (Lai & Shapiro 1995)

$$h_c=h\left|\frac{dN}{d\mathrm{ln}f}\right|^{1/2}=\frac{M}{D}\left(\frac{R_0}{M}\right)^{1/4}\left(\frac{5}{2\pi }\left|\frac{d\overline{E}}{d\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_p}\right|\right)^{1/2},$$
(18)
where $`D`$ is the distance, $`|dN/d\mathrm{ln}f|=|f^2/\dot{f}|`$ is the number of cycles of GW spent near frequency $`f`$, $`E=\overline{E}(M^2/R_0)`$ is the energy of the star, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p=\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_p(M/R_0^3)^{1/2}`$ is its angular pattern speed. For a broad band detector such as LIGO, the best signal-to-noise ratio will be obtained by matched filtering of the data, with $`S/Nh_c/h_{\mathrm{rms}}`$. Note that unlike coalescing compact binaries, the phase evolution of the GW from the evolving bars can not be determined with the accuracy needed for matched filtering, so such a high $`S/N`$ may not be achieved in practice. A new fast chirp transform technique (Jenet & Prince 2000) is promising for detecting such signals.

The event rate of Type II SNe at distance of $`30`$ Mpc is about 100 per year. So even if a small fraction of the NSs are formed rotating rapidly, the GW signals discussed here are promising for lIGO. Of course, it should be emphasized that the waveforms discussed in this section are based on the exact solution for the idealized situation (incompressible fluid). Whether this idealized solution has any resemblance to reality remains to be seen by future studies.

## VI Parametrized Waveforms

Finally we give fitting formulae for the gravitational waveforms generated by a rapidly rotating NS as it evolves from an initial axisymmetric configuration toward a triaxial ellipsoid (Maclaurin spheroid $``$ Dedekind ellipsoid) as discussed in Sec. V.A. We use units such that $`G=c=1`$.

The waveform (including the polarization) is given by eq. (3.6) of Lai & Shapiro (1995) (hereafter LS). Since the waveform is quasi-periodic, we will give fitting formulae for the wave amplitude $`h`$ (Eq. \[3.7\] of LS) and the quantity $`(dN/d\mathrm{ln}f)`$ (eq. \[3.8\] of LS; related to the frequency sweeping rate), from which the waveform $`h_+(t)`$ and $`h_\times (t)`$ can be easily generated in a straightforward manner.

1. Wave Amplitude: The waveform is parametrized by three numbers: $`f_{max}`$ is the maximum wave frequency in Hertz, $`M_{1.4}=M/(1.4M_{})`$ is the NS mass in units of $`1.4M_{}`$, $`R_{10}=R/(10\mathrm{km})`$ is the NS radius in units of $`10`$ km. (Of course, the distance $`D`$ enters the expression trivially.) It is convenient to express the dependence of $`h`$ on $`t`$ through $`f`$ (the wave frequency), with $`f(t)`$ to be determined later. A good fitting formula is

$$h[f(t);f_{max},M,R]=\frac{M^2}{DR}A\left(\frac{f}{f_{max}}\right)^{2.1}\left(1\frac{f}{f_{max}}\right)^{0.5},$$
(19)
where

$$A=\{\begin{array}{cc}(\overline{f}_{max}/1756)^{2.7},\hfill & \text{for }\overline{f}_{max}400\text{ Hz;}\hfill \\ (\overline{f}_{max}/1525)^3,\hfill & \text{for }\overline{f}_{max}400\text{ Hz;}\hfill \end{array}\mathrm{with}\overline{f}_{max}f_{max}R_{10}^{3/2}M_{1.4}^{1/2}.$$
(20)
Note that if we want real numbers, we have

$$\frac{M^2}{DR}=4.619\times 10^{22}M_{1.4}^2R_{10}^1\left(\frac{30\mathrm{Mpc}}{D}\right).$$
(21)
2. Number of GW cycles: The fitting formula is

$$\left|\frac{dN}{d\mathrm{ln}f}\right|=\left(\frac{R}{M}\right)^{5/2}\frac{0.016^2(R_{10}^{3/2}M_{1.4}^{1/2}f/1\mathrm{Hz})}{A^2(f/f_{max})^{4.2}[1(f/f_{max})]}.$$
(22)
Notes to the fitting formulae:

Note (i): Using the above equations, we obtain the characteristic amplitude:

$`h_c=h\left|{\displaystyle \frac{dN}{d\mathrm{ln}f}}\right|^{1/2}=0.016{\displaystyle \frac{M^{3/4}R^{1/4}}{D}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{R_{10}^{3/2}M_{1.4}^{1/2}f}{1\mathrm{Hz}}}\right)^{1/2}`$
$`=5.3\times 10^{23}\left({\displaystyle \frac{30\mathrm{Mpc}}{D}}\right)M_{1.4}^{3/4}R_{10}^{1/4}\left({\displaystyle \frac{R_{10}^{3/2}M_{1.4}^{1/2}f}{1\mathrm{Hz}}}\right)^{1/2},`$ (23)
which agrees with Eq. (3.12) of LS to within $`10\%`$ \[Note that in Eq. (3.12) of LS, the factor $`f^{1/2}`$ should be replaced by $`(R_{10}^{3/2}M_{1.4}^{1/2}f)^{1/2}`$, similar to the above expression.\]

Note (ii): The accuracy of these fitting formulae (as compared to the numerical results shown in LS) is typically within $`10\%`$. When $`f`$ is very close to $`f_{max}`$, the error in the fitting can be as large as $`30\%`$.

Note (iii): The frequency evolution $`f(t)`$ is obtained by integrating the equation $`f^2/\dot{f}=|dN/d\mathrm{ln}f|`$ (note that the frequency sweeps from $`f_{max}`$ to zero). For example, we can choose $`t=0`$ at $`f=0.9f_{max}`$. (Note that one should not choose $`t=0`$ at $`f=f_{max}`$ as the time would diverge — the actual evolution near $`f_{max}`$ depends on the initial perturbations). Once $`f(t)`$ is obtained, the waveform can be calculated as (cf. Eq. \[3.6\] of LS):

$`h_+=h[f(t);f_{max},M,R]\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Phi }(t){\displaystyle \frac{1+\mathrm{cos}^2\theta }{2}},`$ (24)
$`h_\times =h[f(t);f_{max},M,R]\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Phi }(t)\mathrm{cos}\theta ,`$ (25)
where $`\theta `$ is the angle between the rotation axis of the star and the line of sight from the earth, and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t)=2\pi f(t)𝑑t`$ is the phase of the gravitational wave.

Note (iv): $`f_{max}`$ typically ranges from $`100`$ Hz to $`1000`$ Hz (see Fig. 5 of LS); $`M_{1.4}`$ and $`R_{10}`$ are of order unity for realistic neutron stars.


format: text

text:
# Nanoscale anisotropic structural correlations in the paramagnetic and ferromagnetic phases of Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3

\[

## Abstract

We report x-ray scattering studies of short-range structural correlations and diffuse scattering in Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3. On cooling, this material undergoes a series of transitions, first from a paramagnetic insulating (PI) to a ferromagnetic metallic (FM) phase, and then to a charge-ordered (CO) insulating state. Highly anisotropic structural correlations were found in both the PI and FM states of this compound. The correlations increase with decreasing temperature, reaching a maximum at the CO transition temperature. Below this temperature, they abruptly collapsed. Single-polaron diffuse scattering was also observed in both the PI and FM states suggesting that substantial local lattice distortions are present in these phases. We argue that our measurements indicate that nanoscale regions exhibiting layered orbital order exist in the paramagnetic and ferromagnetic phases of Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3.

. \]

Manganite perovskites of the chemical formula A1-xBxMnO3 (where A is a rare earth, and B is an alkali earth atom) have recently attracted considerable attention because they exhibit a number of interesting electronic properties, including the colossal magnetoresistance phenomenon . Recent studies show convincingly that a number of the intriguing properties of the manganites cannot be understood through spatially uniform phases and that local inhomogeneities must play an essential role in these compounds . The high resistivity of the paramagnetic insulating (PI) phase found in most of the manganites at high temperatures, for example, results in part from the presence of the lattice polarons that form when an $`e_g`$ electron localizes on a Mn3+ site, inducing the Jahn-Teller distortion of the MnO6 octahedron . Such lattice polarons were recently detected directly in the PI phase of the manganites by means of diffuse x-ray and neutron scattering . Magnetic and lattice polarons have also been found in other phases of the manganites, including the ferromagnetic metallic (FM) and insulating, and antiferromagnetic insulating phases .

The properties of the high-temperature paramagnetic insulating phase were recently found to exhibit sharp anomalies at several commensurate concentrations of doped carriers, such as $`x`$=3/8 and $`x`$=1/2 . The presence of these anomalies suggested that local charge or orbital correlations of some kind, possibly short-range polaron-polaron correlations, play an important role in the PI phase. Recently, such polaron correlations were indeed observed in La1-xCaxMnO3, La2-2xSr1+2xMn2O7, and Pr1-xCaxMnO3 manganites . Interestingly, the high-temperature structural correlations do not necessarily correspond to the low-temperature order, and in some cases the incipient high-temperature ordering is in direct competition with the ground state . The relationship between the low-temperature ground state and the high-temperature correlations is at present largely unclear.

While local structural correlations appear to play an important role in the macroscopically homogeneous states of the manganites, the microscopic nature of these correlations, as well as the extent to which they affect the electronic properties of the manganites, have yet to be established. To answer these questions, extensive experimental and theoretical work is needed.

In this paper, we report synchrotron x-ray scattering studies of short-range structural correlations and diffuse scattering in Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3. We find a new type of correlated anisotropic lattice distortion in the ferromagnetic and paramagnetic phases of this material. We argue that these correlated distortions are associated with local regions of layered orbital and, possibly, magnetic order. These observed structural correlations then provide a natural explanation for the anisotropic magnetic properties of this three-dimensional perovskite compound.

Single crystals of Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3 were grown using the standard floating zone technique. The x-ray diffraction measurements were carried out at beamlines X22A and X20C at the National Synchrotron Light Source. In each case, the x-ray beam was focused by a mirror, monochromatized by a Si (111) monochromator, scattered from the sample mounted inside a closed-cycle cryostat, and analyzed with a pyrolytic graphite crystal. In this paper, Bragg peaks are indexed in the orthorhombic Ibmm notation in which the longest lattice constant is $`c`$.

Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3 is a paramagnetic insulator at high temperatures. With decreasing temperature, it undergoes a transition to a ferromagnetic metallic state at Tc=250 K, and at TCO=150 K, it becomes a CE-type charge ordered insulator possessing the $`d_{3x^2r^2/3y^2r^2}`$ type orbital ordering . In addition, weak magnetic Bragg peaks due to the presence of an A-type antiferromagnetic impurity phase, in which ferromagnetic layers are stacked antiferromagnetically along the (001) direction, have been observed in some samples below TAF=200 K . Finally, in some of the samples studied previously, these phases were found to coexist with the higher-temperature phases either below TAF or below TCO . Note, these samples were all found to consist of a single structural phase at temperatures higher than 200 K.

The bulk properties of our sample are consistent with the results published in the literature. Fig. 1 shows the temperature dependence of the magnetic susceptibility, electrical resistivity, and the intensity of the (2, 4.5, 0) peak, which is characteristic of the CE-type charge and orbitally ordered state. From the data of Fig. 1, we obtain T$`{}_{c}{}^{}`$260 K, and T$`{}_{CO}{}^{}`$150 K. There is a measurable hysteresis in the magnetic susceptibility below T$``$200 K, and therefore it is possible that the sample contains several structural phases at low temperatures, as was reported in Ref. .

In order to characterize the short-range structural correlations and the single-polaron diffuse scattering, we have measured the x-ray intensity in the vicinity of several representative Bragg peaks. Fig. 2 shows a contour plot of the x-ray intensity in the vicinity of the (4, 0, 0) and the (4, 2, 0) Bragg points. The crystals are twinned in all the three cubic directions of the underlying cubic perovskite structure, and therefore the data of Fig. 2 consist of a superposition of the scattering due to all the twin domains in the crystal. In particular, in the top panel of Fig. 2, the Bragg reflections (4, 0, 0) and (2, 2, 4) coincide, and scattering from both the (hk0) and the (hhl) zones is present. Similarly, the Bragg reflections (4, 2, 0), (3, 3, 2), and (1, 1, 6), and combined scattering from the (hk0) and (hhl) zones are present in the bottom panel of Fig. 2. The main coordinate axes in this figure show the (hk0) zone; the axes for the (hhl) zone are superimposed on the figure.

The data of Fig. 2 exhibit intense, anisotropic, and very broad scattering at the (4.5, 1.5, 0), (3.5, 2.5, 0), and (4.5, $`\pm `$0.5, 0) points in the (hk0) axes setting . Alternatively, this scattering can be ascribed to the (3, 3, 3), (3, 3, 1), and (2, 2, 5) reciprocal space coordinates. For a reason that will become clear later, we will use the latter assignment, in which the scattering occurs with a (0, 0, 1) reduced scattering vector. Note, for crystal with Ibmm symmetry, as Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3 has at temperatures higher than TCO , the (3,3,3), (3,3,1), and (2,2,5) reflections are forbidden. We have studied the temperature dependence of the scattering at these points. Scans were taken along the (00l), (hh0), and (h-h0) directions. The data collected in the (hh0) and (h-h0) scans were essentially identical, and in what follows we will not distinguish them, simply referring to them as scans perpendicular to the (00l) direction. Examples of the scans in the (00l) direction at the (3, 3, 3) reciprocal lattice point are shown in the inset in Fig. 3. To parametrize the data, the scans were fitted to a Lorentzian to the power 1.5 line-shape convoluted with the instrumental resolution, and the resulting fits were used to extract the peak intensities and the intrinsic peak widths.

Because the diffracted x-ray intensity is proportional to the square of the Fourier transform of the atomic density-density correlation function, the broad peaks of Fig. 2 signal the presence of correlated lattice distortions above TCO. The anisotropic correlation length (the domain size) of these regions can be extracted from the intrinsic width of the peaks and is shown in Fig. 3 along with the temperature dependence of the x-ray intensity at the (3, 3, 3) reciprocal lattice point. We find that the correlation length is approximately 3 times smaller in the (001) direction than in the perpendicular direction at all temperatures. As the temperature decreases, both correlation lengths grow and reach their maximum at a temperature just above TCO. The scattering then abruptly collapses at T$`{}_{CO}{}^{}`$150 K. Below TCO, two components in the scattering are observed, a sharp component and a broad component (inset in Fig. 3). The integrated intensity of the sharp component was approximately 100 times smaller than the integrated intensity of the correlations measured at T=150 K, and was approximately independent of temperature below T=150 K. The possible multiphase character of the low-temperature state makes it hard to assign these observed components to specific phases.

The large anisotropy of the structural correlations observed above T=150 K makes it natural to propose that they correspond to the lattice distortions arising from the presence of some kind of layered orbital order in the correlated domains. One possible scenario is that these correlated domains possess the layered $`d_{x^2y^2}`$-type orbital order  and exhibit the associated A-type antiferromagnetism. This scenario is supported by a recent observation of anisotropic spin fluctuations in Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3 by means of neutron scattering . These spin fluctuations exhibited two-dimensional character in the PM phase, and were of the antiferromagnetic A-type in the FM phase . In addition, Nd1-xSrxMnO3 samples with $`x>`$0.51 exhibit the A-type antiferromagnetic metallic (AFM) low-temperature state, and therefore strong AFM fluctuations can be expected in the $`x`$=0.5 compound which lies close to the AFM phase boundary. In the above picture of the correlations, the reduced wavevector of the structural distortion characteristic of the correlated domains in our sample, (0, 0, 1), is perpendicular to the FM layers, and the periodicity of the lattice modulation is twice the distance between these layers .

Is is also possible that the structural correlations of Fig. 2 reflect the gradual change of the crystal structure from the Pbnm symmetry for low Sr concentrations to the Ibmm symmetry for $`x>0.5`$. (The (3,3,3), (3,3,1), and (2,2,5) peaks are allowed in the Pbnm space group.) These two structures exhibit different patterns of the tilts of MnO6 octahedra . The Pbnm symmetry is normally found in the FM and CE-type states in the manganites , while the Ibmm symmetry is characteristic to the layered A-type AFM state in Nd1-xSrxMnO3. The structural features characteristic to the latter lattice symmetry therefore favor the A-type state with the associated orbital and magnetic order. The gradual conversion of the Pbnm structure to the Ibmm structure with increasing $`x`$ can proceed in a variety of possible ways. Spatial phase separation can, for example, take place. A more interesting scenario of a uniform average structure exhibiting fluctuating correlated Pbnm domains is also plausible. We note that our study, as well as the results of Refs. , do not support the presence of phase separation for T$`>`$200 K. Independent on the exact microscopic structure of our sample, the pronounced anisotropy of the Pbnm-type correlations shows that in the correlated domains, the coupling in the $`ab`$ planes is much stronger than the interplane coupling. Since the $`ab`$ planes form the ferromagnetic layers in the A-type AFM state for $`x>`$0.5, it is likely that the diminished interlayer coupling found in the $`x`$=0.5 compound reflect the incipient A-type layered orbital order. In the above scenario, therefore, the presence of the anisotropic lattice fluctuations provide an indirect evidence of the local layered orbital order in the PM and the FM phases.

Our preliminary diffraction measurements on Nd0.7Sr0.3MnO3 samples indicate the presence of weak Bragg peaks characteristic to the Pbnm symmetry group. To determine which of the two scenarios described above is correct, however, it is necessary to perform detailed structural studies of the Nd1-xSrxMnO3 samples for a number of Sr concentration in the vicinity of $`x`$=0.5. In particular, the possible structural fluctuations should be investigated in the AFM state itself and in its immediate vicinity. This work is currently in progress.

We believe that the newly observed type of structural correlations cannot be attributed to small admixtures of the A-type AFM or of the charge-ordered phases with the PI or the FM phases for three reasons. Firstly, at temperatures higher than T=200 K, Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3 samples are believed to consist of a single structural phase . Secondly, the data of Fig. 3 do not show any obvious anomaly at TAF. Finally, the (0, 0, 1)-type scattering abruptly disappears below TCO. We conclude that these correlations are therefore intrinsic features of the PI and the FM phases.

Finally, we briefly discuss the x-ray diffuse scattering observed in the vicinity of the main Bragg peaks. Such scattering is clearly visible in the data of Fig. 2 as an elongated oval shape around the Bragg peak in the top panel, and as a “butterfly-like” shape in the bottom panel. It has been previously demonstrated that diffuse scattering of this kind results from the presence of uncorrelated lattice polarons . The symmetry of the diffuse scattering in Fig. 2 is consistent with the measurements reported in Refs. , and we therefore also interpret its intensity as reflecting the number of single polarons present in the sample.

Fig. 4 shows the temperature dependence of this single-polaron diffuse scattering at a scattering vector $`Q`$=(4, 0.35, 0), that is on the wing of the oval shape in the top panel of Fig. 2. The phonon contribution to the diffuse scattering was estimated from the data for T$`<`$TCO  and subtracted. The remaining part, which reflects the polaron contribution, shows a number of interesting features. First, the number of polarons grows with decreasing temperature in the PI phase, in agreement with Refs. . At Tc, the intensity turns around and starts to fall. At TCO, the uncorrelated polarons abruptly disappear– as would be expected following the formation of long-range orbital order. We note that the concentration of single polarons does not exhibit an abrupt drop at Tc, and the polarons are clearly present in the FM phase. In contrast to this behavior, polaron scattering intensity abruptly decreases upon the transition to the FM state in La0.7Ca0.3MnO3 and La1.8Sr1.8Mn2O7, compounds which are believed to possess a microscopically uniform FM phase . In Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3, both the uncorrelated polarons and the correlated anisotropic lattice distortions are present below the Curie temperature, and therefore the FM phase of this material is clearly less uniform than the FM phase of the former compounds (see also Ref. ). Unlike the intensity of the (3, 3, 3) peak, the intensity of the single-polaron scattering shows a clear anomaly at Tc. It appears, therefore, that the anisotropic lattice distortions discussed above are not directly coupled with the system of the disordered lattice polarons.

In summary, we report observation of anisotropic short-range correlated structural distortions in the paramagnetic insulating phase and the ferromagnetic metallic phase of Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3. We argue that the observed structural correlations indicate the presence of local layered orbital order in our samples. Together with the anisotropy of the magnetic excitations reported in Ref. , these structural inhomogeneities show that the ferromagnetic and paramagnetic phases of Nd0.5Sr0.5MnO3 are nonuniform and exhibit large structural and magnetic fluctuations which, possibly, reflect the incipient layered magnetic order characteristic to the Nd1-xSrxMnO3 samples with $`x>0.51`$. Combined with the results of previous work, our observations strongly suggest that short-range structural correlations associated with local regions of orbital and magnetic order play an important role in magnetoresistive manganite materials.

We are grateful to M. Croft, D. Gibbs, C. S. Nelson, and M. v. Zimmermann for important discussions. This work was supported by the NSF under Grant DMR-9802513, by Rutgers University, and by the US Department of Energy under contract AC02-98CH10886.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In the few last years, there has been attempts to develop a superspace formulation of 2d QFT that is invariant under fractional supersymmetry (FSS) defined by:$`Q^k=P,\overline{Q^k}=\overline{P},K>2`$, together with relations involving both Q and $`\overline{Q}`$ . In these Eqs $`P=P_1`$ and $`\overline{P}=P_{+1}`$ are the two heterotic components of the 2d energy momentum vector operator $`P_m`$; $`QQ_{1/k}`$ and $`\overline{Q}Q_{1/k}`$ are the basic generator of FSS which carry a 2d spin $`s=1/k`$ . Most of the studies of this special class of 2d massive QFT are essentially based on methods of $`U_q(sl(2))`$ quantum group representations and non commutative geometry  . This approach however met many difficulties and has lead to partial results only. Among these difficulties we quote the two following ones associated with the heterotic K=3 case $`(Q^3=P)`$ . The first one deals with the computation of the two points correlation function $`<\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}(z_1),\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}(z_2)>`$ of the two partners $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}(z)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}(z)`$ of the bosonic field $`\phi (z)`$ of the scalar representation $`(\phi ,\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3},\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3})`$ of the $`(Q^3=P)`$ algebra. From the view point of the 2d conformal field theory, one expects from the braiding feature $`z_{12}\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}(z_1)\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}(z_2)=z_{21}\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}(z_2)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}(z_1)`$, that the field operators $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}`$ should anticommute. This result however is not fulfiled in the approach based on the $`U_q(sl(2))`$ quantum groups and non commutative geometry where the $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}`$ fields obey a generalised commutation rule  leading to a two point correlation function $`<\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}(z_1),\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}(z_2)>_{U_q(sl(2))}`$ which violate locality.
The second thing we want to quote concerns the construction of the generalised superspace and superfields. In this context, one uses generalised Grassmann variables $`\theta _1=\theta _{1/3}`$ and $`\theta _2=\theta _{1/3}`$ satisfying a third order nilpotency condition $`\theta _{\pm 1/3}^3=0`$, together with $`\theta _{\pm 1/3}^20`$ and $`\theta _1\theta _2=\omega \theta _2\theta _1`$, where $`\omega `$ is a C-number such that $`\omega ^3=1`$. The condition $`\theta _{\pm 1/3}^3=0`$, which generalizes the usual condition of Grassmann variables of spin 1/2 , is necessary in order to describe off shell representations of the fractional supersymmetric algebra (FSA) in terms of superfields $`\mathrm{\Phi }(z,\theta ,\overline{z},\overline{\theta })`$. In this language, FSS is generated by translations along the $`\theta `$ and $`\overline{\theta }`$ directions, i.e. $`\theta \theta +\epsilon `$ and $`\overline{\theta }\overline{\theta }+\overline{\epsilon }`$, where $`\epsilon `$ and $`\overline{\epsilon }`$ are generalized Grassmann variables of same nature as $`\theta `$ and $`\overline{\theta }`$ . Until now things are quite similar to the superspace formulation of ordinary supersymmetry associated with K=2. However there are weak points in the construction of the generalised superspaces for $`K>2`$. One of these weakness deals with the treatemenent of $`\theta ^2`$, $`\overline{\theta }^2`$ and the $`\epsilon `$ and $`\overline{\epsilon }`$ parameters. In trying to establish a given relation by following two equivalent paths, we get different results. On one hand, $`\theta (\overline{\theta })`$ should commute with itself as required by the identity $`(1x)\theta ^2=0`$ , which implies that either $`\theta ^2=0`$ and $`x0`$ or $`x=1`$ and $`\theta ^20`$. On the other hand $`\theta (\overline{\theta })`$ and $`\epsilon (\overline{\epsilon })`$ are required to satisfy generalized commutation rules type $`\theta \epsilon =\omega \epsilon \theta (\overline{\theta }\overline{\epsilon }=\omega \overline{\epsilon }\overline{\theta })`$; $`\omega ^3=1`$. This is a contradiction since $`\theta (\theta +\epsilon )\omega (\theta +\epsilon )\theta `$. This difficulty may be also viewed from the generalised commutation rule $`\theta \eta =\omega \eta \theta `$. Taking the limit $`\eta =\theta `$, one obtains $`\theta ^2=\omega \theta ^2`$ which implies that $`\theta ^2`$ should be zero.
The aim of this paper is to set up the basis of 2d fractional supersymmetric QFT by using parafermionic field theoretical methods. These methods, which were considered recently in , seems to be the right language to develop a local fractional supersymmetric QFT. This believe is also supported by the fact that after all fractional supersymmetry is nothing but a residual symmetry of massive perturbations of parafermionic critical models. From this point of view; the generators of fractional supersymmetry are just remanant constants of motion surviving after deformations of parafermionic conformal invariance. Thinking of 2d fractional supersymmetry as a finite dimensional subsymmetry of the $`Z_K`$ conformal invariance  for instance, one discovers that all the known difficulties of the abovementioned approach disappear. Moreover we find that fractional supersymmetric algebras are generated by more than one charge operator and can be described in a natural way as a matrix model. The charge operators $`Q_x,x=0,1/k,\mathrm{}`$, form altogether a $`K\times K`$ matrix operator allowing to define the fractional supersymmetric algebra as:

$$trQ^k=P_1,$$
(1)
together with other relations. For details see Eqs (5); (8) and (17).
This paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we study the matrix realisations of 2d supersymmetry. In section 3, we work out the links between fractional supersymmetry and parafermions. Matrix realisations of fractional supersymmetry are analysed in sections 4 and 5. In section 6, we describe brefly the superfield theory of the matter couplings of $`(\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{3})`$ and $`((\frac{1}{3})^2,(\frac{1}{3})^2)`$ fractional superalgebras. In section 7, we present discussions and give our conclusion.

### 1.1 2d supersymmetry as a matrix model

In this paragraph we consider the 2d heterotic supersymmetric algebras respectively defined as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\{Q_{1/2},Q_{1/2}\}\hfill & =& \hfill P_1\\ [P_1,Q_{1/2}]\hfill & =& \hfill 0,\end{array}$$

and

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\{Q_{1/2}^+,Q_{1/2}^{}\}\hfill & =& \hfill P_1\\ \{Q_{1/2}^\pm ,Q_{1/2}^\pm \}\hfill & =& \hfill 0\\ [P_1,Q_{1/2}^\pm ]\hfill & =& \hfill 0,\end{array}$$

and shows that they can be represented as $`2\times 2`$ matrix models. A generalisation to higher dimensional spaces of these representations turns out to offer a natural framework to study fractional supersymmetry. It shows moreover that methods of standard supersymmetry can be also used to deal with exotic supersymmetries.
To start consider the following off diagonal symmetric $`2\times 2`$ matrix Q whose entries are given by the 2d $`(\frac{1}{2},0)`$ supersymmetric generator $`Q_{1/2}`$:

$$𝐐=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& Q_{1/2}& & & \\ Q_{1/2}& 0& & & \end{array}\right]$$
(2)
This matrix operator acts on the 2d space of quantum states $`|B=B(0)|0`$ and $`|F=F(0)|0`$ where the letters B and F stand for Bose and Fermi fields.Taking the square product of Eq (4), it is not difficult to see that the $`(\frac{1}{2},0)`$ supersymmetric algebra (2) may be defined as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}tr[𝐐^2]\hfill & =& \hfill P_1\\ tr[𝐐]\hfill & =& \hfill 0,\end{array}$$

where the suffix tr means the usual matrix trace operation. There are several remarkable features of the matrix definition Eqs (4-5) of the 2d $`(\frac{1}{2},0)`$ supersymmetric algebra; some of them are manifest at the level of the $`K\times K=2\times 2`$ matrix model, others are hidden and emerge for $`K3`$ representations. For details see sections 3 and 4.
Moreover combining the usual constraints of 2d supersymmetry, in particular hermiticity of the energy momentum vector $`P_1,P_1^+=P_1`$ with the features of the matrix model (5), one sees that the realisation of Q, Eq (4), is not the unique one. Indeed, decomposing Q as $`𝐐=𝐐^++𝐐^{}`$

$$𝐐^+=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& Q_x^+& & & \\ 0& 0& & & \end{array}\right];𝐐^{}=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 0& & & \\ Q_y^{}& 0,& & & \end{array}\right]$$
(3)
one sees that the spins x and y carried by the $`Q^\pm `$ charge operators are related as

$$x+y=1,$$
(4)
as required by the first relation of Eq (5). Abstraction done from Eq (2) and (3), there are infinitely many solutions of Eqs (6 -7); we shall first consider the two solutions $`x=y=\frac{1}{2}`$ and x=0 and y=+1 related with the leading zero mode operators of the NS and Ramond sectors of 2d superconformal invariance. Later on we shall explore the interesting cases $`x=\frac{1}{k}`$ and $`y=\frac{(k1)}{k},k=3,4,\mathrm{},`$ and their link with $`Z_K`$ parafermionic invariance.Now using Eqs (6) instead of Eq (4) one finds that the algebra Eqs (5) reads in general as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}tr[𝐐^+𝐐^{}]=P_1\hfill & & \\ tr[𝐐^+𝐐^+]=tr[𝐐^{}𝐐^{}]\hfill & =& \hfill 0\\ tr[𝐐^+]=tr[𝐐^{}]\hfill & =& \hfill 0.\end{array}$$

Eqs (8) has a U(1) automorphism symmetry which breaks down to $`Z_2`$ in the case of Eqs (5) , this is why we shall refer to Eqs (5) and Eqs (8) as 2d $`(\frac{1}{2},0)`$ and $`((\frac{1}{2})^2,0)`$ supersymmetric algebras respectively. Moreover introducing the generators of the gl(2) Lie algebra, we have the following $`2\times 2`$ matrix representations:
(i). the NS like superalgebra.
In this case the supersymmetric $`2\times 2`$ matrix generators $`Q^\pm `$ read as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝐐^+\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{1/2}E_{12},\\ 𝐐^{}\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{1/2}E_{21},\end{array}$$

for $`(\frac{1}{2},0)`$ supesymmetry and

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝐐^+\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{1/2}^+E_{12},\\ 𝐐^{}\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{1/2}^{}E_{21},\end{array}$$

for $`((\frac{1}{2})^2,0)`$ supersymmetry.
(ii). The Ramond like algebra.
Here the matrix generators are realized as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝐐^+\hfill & =& \hfill Q_0E_{12},\\ 𝐐^{}\hfill & =& \hfill Q_1E_{21},\end{array}$$

for the hermitian case

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝐐^+\hfill & =& \hfill Q_0^+E_{12},\\ 𝐐^{}\hfill & =& \hfill Q_1^{}E_{21},\end{array}$$

for the complex one. Note that compatibility between the usual hermiticity (+) of the energy momentum vector $`P_1`$ and the adjoint conjugation (+) of the $`Q^\pm `$ matrix generators requires the following identifications:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}[Q_x^\pm ]^+=Q_{1+x}^{}\hfill & & \\ [Q_x]^+=Q_{1+x}\hfill & & \end{array}$$

Eqs (11) show that $`Q_{1/2}`$ is self adjoint whereas $`Q_0`$ and $`Q_1`$ are interchanged under the (+) conjugation. However knowing that $`Q_0`$ should satisfy a 2d Clifford algebra $`\{Q_0,Q_0\}=1`$, and using the current modes of the Ramond superconformal algebra , one may set $`2Q_{1=}\{Q_0,P_1\}=2Q_0P_1`$ . This identification reduces the number of generators of the algebra Eq (11). Likewise, one may also set $`Q_1^{}=Q_0^{}P_1`$ where $`Q_0^{}`$ together with $`Q_0^+`$ satisfy

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\{Q_0^+,Q_0^{}\}\hfill & =& \hfill 1\\ \{Q^\pm ,Q^\pm \}\hfill & =& \hfill 0,\end{array}$$

and where $`Q_0=Q_0^++Q_0^{}`$. Before going ahead note that the 2d NS like superalgebra generated by $`Q_{1/2}(Q_{1/2}^\pm )`$ exchanges bosons B and fermions F whereas the Ramond like one generated by $`Q_0(Q_0^\pm )`$ preserves the statistics. In the 2d quantum field language, the Ramond like algebra acts on the field doublet $`(\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/2}(z),\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/2}(z)),Q_0^\pm ,\mathrm{\Phi }_{\pm 1/2}=0;Q_0^\pm \mathrm{\Phi }_{1/2}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{\pm 1/2}`$ , as follows:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{\pm 1/2}_{Q_0^{}}\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/2}_{Q_0^{}}_z\mathrm{\Phi }_{\pm 1/2}.$$
(5)
Note, moreover that the NS and R like algebras can be realized by help of Grassman variables $`\theta _{\pm 1/2}^\pm `$ and $`\theta _0^\pm `$ as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}Q_{1/2}^\pm \hfill & =& \hfill \frac{}{\theta _{1/2}^{}}+\frac{1}{2}\theta _{1/2}^\pm _1\\ Q_0^\pm \hfill & =& \hfill \frac{}{\theta _0^{}}+\frac{1}{2}\theta _0^\pm .\end{array}$$

Similar realizations may be also written down for the hermitian charge operators $`Q_{1/2}`$ and $`Q_{1/2}`$. In what follows, we want to extend the above matrix formulation to the case K=3. At first sight this should be possible if one succeeds to relate fractional supersymmetry to an infinite dimensional fractional superconformal invariance in the same manner as usual 2d supersymmetry is related to the superconformal invariances. To that purpose we start by establishing the link between fractional supersymmetry and the $`Z_K`$ parafermionic invariance. Then we study its matrix realisation.

## 2  Fractional supersymmetry and parafermions

Here we want to show that from the point of view of 2d $`Z_K`$ parafermionic invariance, the definition of fractional supersymmetry, say $`(Q_{1/k})^k=P,K>2`$, is just a formal one. The right way to define it is as in Eqs (1). The latter show that FSS is in fact generated by many charge operators which we denote as $`Q_x,x=0,1/k,\mathrm{}`$.More precisely FSS is generated by a $`k\times k`$ matrix $`𝐐`$ whose entries are the charge operators $`Q_x`$ carrying various values of fractional spins. For the $`k=3`$ case we are interested in here, there are in total three pairs of charge operators $`Q_x^\pm ,x=0,1/3,2/3`$, together with $`P_1`$. Altogether, these operators generate the formal cubic nonlinear algebra $`Q^3=P_1`$ which as we shall see, is correctly defined as

$$\begin{array}{ccc}tr[𝐐^+𝐐^{}]\hfill & =& \hfill P_1\\ tr[𝐐_{}^{+}{}_{}{}^{2}]=tr[𝐐_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}]\hfill & =& \hfill 0\\ tr[𝐐^+]=tr[𝐐^{}]\hfill & =& \hfill 0.\end{array}$$

In equation (12) $`Q^\pm `$ are $`3\times 3`$ matrices given by:

$$𝐐^+=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 0& Q_{1/3}^{}& & \\ Q_{2/3}^{}& 0& 0& & \\ 0& Q_1^{}& 0& & \end{array}\right];𝐐^{}=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& Q_{1/3}^+& 0& & \\ 0& 0& Q_0^+& & \\ Q_{2/3}^+& 0& 0,& & \end{array}\right]$$
(6)
Note by the way that here also $`Q_x^+`$ and $`Q_y^{}`$ obey Eqs (13) and $`Q_1^{}=Q_0^{}P_1`$. A way to derive Eqs (17-18) is to consider the $`Z_3`$ parafermionic invariance of Zamolodchikov and Fateev (ZF)  given by :

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm (z_1)\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm (z_2)z_{12}^{2/3}\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm (z_2)\hfill & & \\ \mathrm{\Psi }^+(z_1)\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(z_2)z_{12}^{4/3}[1+5/3z_{12}^2T(z_2)]\hfill & & \\ T(z_1)\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm (z_2)\frac{2/3}{z_{12}^2}\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm (z_2)+\frac{1}{z_{12}}_z\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm (z_2)\hfill & & \\ T(z_1)T(z_2)=\frac{k1}{k+2}z_{12}^4+2z_{12}^2T(z_2)+z_{12}^1T(z_2).\hfill & & \end{array}$$

In these Eqs $`T(z)`$ is the usual energy momentum current, $`\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm (z)([\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm (z)]^+=\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(z))`$ are the ZF parafermionic currents of spin $`\frac{2}{}`$. The algebra (19) has three parafermionic highest weight representations (PHWR)$`[\mathrm{\Phi }_q^q];q=0,1,2.`$ namely the identity family $`I=[\mathrm{\Phi }_0^0]`$ of highest weight $`h_0=0`$ and two degenerate families $`[\mathrm{\Phi }_1^1]`$ and $`[\mathrm{\Phi }_2^2]`$ of weights $`h_1=h_2=\frac{1}{15}`$. Each one of these PHWR $`[\mathrm{\Phi }_q^q]`$ is reducible into three Virasoro HWR $`(\mathrm{\Phi }_q^p),p=q,p=q+mod6`$. For more details on the representation theory of Eqs (18) see \[5-7\]. All we need in the achievement of this study is the algebra Eqs (19),the identities

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm \times \mathrm{\Phi }_q^p=\mathrm{\Phi }_q^{p\pm 2}(a)\hfill & & \\ \mathrm{\Phi }_q^{p\pm 6}=\mathrm{\Phi }_q^p(b)\hfill & & \\ ,\hfill & & \end{array}$$

as well as the following braiding property of the conformal field operators $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1(z_1)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2(z_2)`$:

$$z_{12}^\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_1(z_1)\mathrm{\Phi }_2(z_2)=z_{21}^\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_2(z_2)\mathrm{\Phi }_1(z_1)=\mathrm{\Phi }(z),$$
(7)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2+\mathrm{\Delta }_3,\mathrm{\Delta }_i,i=1,2,3`$, are the weights of the $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$’s. Note that Eq (20-a) is a formal Eq which should be understood as:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm (z_1)\mathrm{\Phi }_q^p=z_{12}^{n1p/3}Q_{n\pm (p\pm 1)/3}^\pm \mathrm{\Phi }_q^p(z_2),$$
(8)
where $`Q_{n\pm (p\pm 1)/3}^\pm `$ are the mode operators of $`\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm `$ which in turn may be defined as

$$Q_{n\pm (p\pm 1)/3}^\pm |\mathrm{\Phi }_q^p=𝑑zz^{n\pm p/3}\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm (z)\mathrm{\Phi }_q^p(0)|0.$$
(9)
In addition to Eqs (20) which predicts the existence of three doublets of the charge operators $`Q_x^\pm ,x=0,1/3,2/3`$, one also has the braiding feature (21) playing a crucial role in the building of FSS. For example the deformation parameter $`\omega `$ (often denoted by q in the literature ) of quantum groups and non commutative geometry dealing with fractional supersymmetry should be related with the braiding property of the conformal field blocks $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1(z_1)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2(z_2)`$. Eq (21) tells us that the parameter $`\omega `$ is equal to $`exp(\pm i\pi \mathrm{\Delta })`$. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }_3=0`$ for instance, $`\omega `$ reduces to $`exp(\pm i[\pi (\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2)])`$, so that for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2=1`$, the field operators $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ anticommute and then should be treated as fermions. Choosing $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1=1/3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2=2/3`$ for example, the two point function $`<\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/3}(z_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_{2/3}(z_2>`$ should be equal to $`<\mathrm{\Phi }_{2/3}(z_2,\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/3}(z_1>=1/z_{12}`$. This result, derived from parafermionic conformal field methods, solves the difficulty of refs  according to which the two point function $`<\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/3}(z_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_{2/3}(z_2>_{U_q(sl(2)}`$ computed in a model of fractional supersymmetry based on quantum groups and non commutative geometry methods; i.e:

$$<\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/3}(z_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_{2/3}(z_2>_{U_q(sl(2)}=e^{2i\pi /3}<\mathrm{\Phi }_{2/3}(z_2,\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/3}(z_1>_{U_q(sl(2)}=\frac{1}{z_{12}}.$$
(10)
Eq (24) shows that the model based on the $`U_q(sl(2)`$ methods is non local. In summary local 2d field theoretical realisation of fractional supersymmetry cannot be generated by only one charge operator. The number of generators may be obtained by analysing the mode operators $`Q_{n\pm (p\pm 1)/3}^\pm `$, n integer. The $`Q_{n\pm (p\pm 1)/3}^\pm `$’s depend on the p charge of the conformal representation $`|\mathrm{\Phi }_q^p`$ on which they act. For q=0 for example, the non vanishing actions of $`Q_x^\pm ,x=0,1/3,2/3`$ on the leading states $`|s,p`$ of spin s, $`0s1`$ and charge p read as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}Q_{2/3}^\pm |0,0\hfill & =& \hfill |\frac{2}{3},0\\ Q_0^+|\frac{2}{3},+2\hfill & =& \hfill |\frac{2}{3},2\\ Q_0^{}|\frac{2}{3},2\hfill & =& \hfill |\frac{2}{3},+2\\ Q_{1/3}^+|\frac{2}{3},2\hfill & =& \hfill |1,0\\ Q_{1/3}^{}|\frac{2}{3},+2\hfill & =& \hfill |1,0.\end{array}$$

From these Eqs and Eqs (22-23), one sees that $`Q_{1/3}^\pm `$ and $`Q_0^\pm `$ cannot act directly on the state $`|0,0`$ similarly $`Q_{2/3}^\pm `$ cannot operate directly on $`|\frac{2}{3},\pm 2`$. This feature gives another indication that FSS should be generated by more than one Q operator as it is currently used in the literature based on quantum groups and non commutative geometry approaches. Recall that the first indication we have mentionned in the introduction of this paper refers to the inconsistences induced by the introduction of the generalized Grassmann variable $`\theta `$ satisfying a higher order nilpotency condition $`\theta ^k=0,k>2`$ with $`\theta ^{k1}0`$ and where the problem of locality rised above is just one of the manifestation of the limit of the methods used. In the approach based on parafermionic conformal field theorical techniques we are considering here, these problems are overpassed. Locality is restored since all fields carrying fractional spins obey an anticommuting statistics and the higher order Grassmann nilpotency necessary for the description of off shell representations of FSS is ensured by the presence of more than one charge operator. Having discussed the link between FSS and parafermions, we turn now to study its relation with matrix theory.

## 3 Fractional supersymmetry as a matrix model

Starting from Eqs (25) and denoting by $`\mathrm{\Pi }_r,r=0,\pm 1`$, the projectors along the states $`|s,p=|i(p=2i)`$ and by $`E_{ij}=|i|j`$ the generators of the gl(3) Lie algebra rotating the state $`|i`$ into the state $`|j,i,j=0,\pm 1`$, (the indices $`\pm `$ refer to the two fractional supersymmetric partners of the bosonic state indexed by i=0.), one sees that the component $`P_1`$ of the energy momentum vector reads in terms of the $`Q_x^\pm `$’s,$`x=0,1/3,2/3`$ and the projectors as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}P_1tr𝐏\hfill & & \\ 𝐏=Q_{1/3}^+Q_0^+Q_{2/3}^+\mathrm{\Pi }_0+Q_{2/3}^+Q_{1/3}^+Q_0^+\mathrm{\Pi }_1+Q_0^+Q_{2/3}^+Q_{1/3}^+\mathrm{\Pi }_1.\hfill & & \end{array}$$

Note that a similar relation to this Eq using $`Q_x^{}`$ instead of $`Q_x^+`$ is also valid . Moreover using Eqs (25), one many rewrite Eqs (26) and its hermetic conjugate in the following form.

$$2P=[Q_{1/3}^+Q_{2/3}^{}+Q_{1/3}^{}Q_{2/3}^+]\mathrm{\Pi }_0+[Q_{2/3}^+Q_{1/3}^{}+Q_1^{}Q_0^+]\mathrm{\Pi }_1+[Q_{2/3}^{}Q_{1/3}^++Q_{}^+Q_0^{}]\mathrm{\Pi }_1.$$
(11)
Comparing Eqs (27) and (26), one finds the following constraint relations:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}Q_{1/3}^{}\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{1/3}^+Q_0^+\\ Q_{1/3}^+\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{1/3}^{}Q_0^{}\\ Q_{2/3}^{}\hfill & =& \hfill Q_0^+Q_{2/3}^+\\ Q_{2/3}^+\hfill & =& \hfill Q_0^{}Q_{2/3}^{}\\ Q_1^{}\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{2/3}^+Q_{1/3}^+\\ Q_1^+\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{2/3}^{}Q_{1/3}^{}.\end{array}$$

Eqs (28) and consequently Eqs (26-27) may be satisfied identically by introducing the following $`3\times 3`$ matrix operator $`𝐐=𝐐^++𝐐^{}`$ whose entries are $`Q_x^\pm `$’s,$`x=0,1/3,2/3`$ are the generators of FSS. This matrix representation is in agreement with the ZF parafermionic invariance property (22-23) and the constraint Eqs (28). Using the gl(3) generators $`E_{ij}=|i|j`$,$`i,j=0,\pm 1`$, one may write down the two following matrix realisations for the $`Q_x^\pm `$’s.
(i)$`(\frac{1}{3},0)`$ Real FSS: This algebra, to which we shall refer hereafter to as 2d$`(\frac{1}{3},0)`$ FSS, is the analogue of Eqs (2) and (5). The matrix representation of the $`Q_x^\pm `$’s reads as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}Q_{2/3}^+\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{2/3}E_{1,0}\\ Q_{2/3}^{}\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{2/3}E_{1,0}\\ Q_0^+\hfill & =& \hfill Q_0E_{1,1}\\ Q_0^{}\hfill & =& \hfill Q_0E_{1,1}\\ Q_{1/3}^+\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{1/3}E_{0,1}\\ Q_{1/3}^{}\hfill & =& \hfill Q_{1/3}E_{0,1}.\end{array}$$

The charge carried by the $`Q_x^\pm `$ of Eqs (29) is the $`Z_3`$ charge of the automorphism symmetry of the matrix operator equation.

$$(E^3)_{ii}=\mathrm{\Pi }_i;i=0,\pm 1.$$
(12)
In the orthonormal basis $`\{|i,i=i=0,\pm 1\}`$, the matrix representation of the $`Q_x^\pm `$’s reads as:

$$𝐐^+=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& Q_{2/3}& 0& & \\ 0& 0& Q_0& & \\ Q_{1/3}& 0& 0& & \end{array}\right];𝐐^{}=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 0& Q_{2/3}& & \\ Q_{1/3}& 0& 0& & \\ 0& Q_1& 0,& & \end{array}\right]$$
(13)
Using Eqs (31) it is not difficult to check that the following relation hold:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}2𝐏=𝐐^+𝐐^{}+𝐐^{}𝐐^+(a)\hfill & & \\ 𝐐^{}=𝐐^+𝐐^+(b)\hfill & & \\ 𝐐^2=𝐏.𝐐^+.(c)\hfill & & \end{array}$$

Taking the traces of both sides of these matrix Eqs, one discovers the algebra Eqs (17) which reads in terms of $`Q_{1/3}`$ and $`Q_{2/3}`$ as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}P_1=Q_{1/3}Q_{2/3}+Q_{2/3}Q_{1/3}\hfill & & \\ 0=\{Q_{1/3},Q_{1/3}\}=\{Q_{2/3},Q_{2/3}\}.\hfill & & \end{array}$$

Note that Eq(33) was expected from the constraint Eq (7). It was suggested in ref \[ 8\] as a linearized form of the non linear operator equation $`[Q_{1/3}]^3=P_1`$. The relation between Eq (33) and 2d$`((\frac{1}{2}^2),0)`$ supersymmetry suspected in  will be considered latter on.
(ii)The $`((\frac{1}{3}^2),0)`$ FSA: This is a complex solution for which the matrix representation of the $`Q_x^\pm `$’s reads as.

$$𝐐^+=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& Q_{2/3}^+& 0& & \\ 0& 0& Q_0^+& & \\ Q_{1/3}^+& 0& 0& & \end{array}\right];𝐐^{}=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 0& Q_{2/3}^{}& & \\ Q_{1/3}^{}& 0& 0& & \\ 0& Q_1^{}& 0.& & \end{array}\right]$$
(14)
Here also the charges carried by the $`Q_x^\pm `$ are $`Z_3`$ charges. Similar calculations as for the $`(\frac{1}{3},0)`$ algebra show that Eqs (32) are again fulfiled for the representation (34). Using Eqs (34) and solving Eqs (32), we find the following relations :

$$\begin{array}{ccc}2P_1=\{Q_{2/3}^+,Q_{1/3}^{}\}+\{Q_{1/3}^+,Q_{2/3}^{}\}(a)\hfill & & \\ 0=\{Q_{1/3}^\pm ,Q_{1/3}^\pm \}=\{Q_{2/3}^\pm ,Q_{2/3}^\pm \}(b)\hfill & & \\ Q_{1/3}^{}=Q_{1/3}^+Q_0^+;Q_{1/3}^+=Q_0^{}Q_{1/3}^{}(c)\hfill & & \\ Q_{2/3}^{}=Q_0^+Q_{2/3}^+;Q_{2/3}^+=Q_{2/3}^{}Q_0^{}(d).\hfill & & \end{array}$$

Eqs (35) define the $`((\frac{1}{3})^2,0)`$ fractional supersymmetrc algebra . It is generated by two $`Z_3`$ doublets of anticommuting charges operators $`Q_{1/3}^\pm `$ and $`Q_{2/3}^\pm `$. The components of each doublet are related to each another by the $`Q_0^\pm `$’s as shown on Eqs (35-c-d). Note that the algebra (35) is stable under the three following conjugations:(a)$`(Q_x^\pm )^{}=Q_x^{}`$; (b)$`(Q_x^\pm )^+=Q_{1+x}^{}`$ and (c)$`(Q_x^\pm )^+=Q_{1+x}^\pm `$ suggesting a link with 2d N=$`((\frac{1}{2})^4,0)`$su(2) supersymmetry formulated in harmonic superspace . In what follows we shall explore this relation in order to use it for the construction of off shell representations of the 2d$`((\frac{1}{3})^2,0)`$ FSS.

## 4 More on the algebra equations (35)

Because of the periodicity $`(pp\pm 6)`$ of the representations of the ZF parafermionic algebra (19) which allow to identify the field operators $`\mathrm{\Phi }^\pm `$ as $`\mathrm{\Phi }^\pm \mathrm{\Phi }_{}^{\pm }{}_{}{}^{2}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{\pm \pm }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}^{\pm }{}_{}{}^{4}`$ ; see Eq (20-b) one may rewrite the charge operators $`Q_0^+,Q_0^{}`$ as $`Q_0^{},Q_0^{++}`$, respectively. Moreover denoting by $`Q_0^0`$ the commutator of the $`Q_0^+`$ and $`Q_0^{}`$ charge operators, one sees from Eqs (29) that $`Q_0^0`$ and $`Q_0^\pm `$ generate altogether an su(2) algebra.

$$\begin{array}{ccc}[Q_0^{},Q_0^+]=Q_0^0,\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^0,Q_0^\pm ]=Q_0^\pm ,\hfill & & \end{array}$$

acting on the $`Q_x^\pm ,x=\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{3}`$ charges as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}[Q_0^0,Q_{1/3}^\pm ]=\pm Q_{1/3}^\pm ,\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^0,Q_{2/3}^\pm ]=\pm Q_{2/3}^\pm ,\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^\pm ,Q_{1/3}^\pm ]=Q_{1/3}^{},\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^\pm ,Q_{2/3}^\pm ]=\pm Q_{2/3}^{}\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^{},Q_x^+]=0,\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^+,Q_x^{}]=0,.\hfill & & \end{array}$$

Eqs (36) correspond just to the zero mode subalgebra of the level 3 of the $`su_3(2)`$ Kac Moody symmetry. The latter is known to be homomorphic to the $`Z_3`$ parafermionic invariance (19) . Now using the identification $`Q_0^{}Q_0^{\pm \pm }`$ and the $`Z_3`$ periodicity $`qqmod(3)`$, one may rewrite the algebra (36) as

$$\begin{array}{ccc}[Q_0^{++},Q_0^{}]=Q_0^0,(a)\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^0,Q_0^{\pm \pm }]=\pm Q_0^0.(b)\hfill & & \end{array}$$

Substituting $`Q_0^{}`$ by $`Q_0^{\pm \pm }`$ in Eqs (37); one gets the following relations which looks like the coresponding ones in 2d N=4 su(2) supersymmetry :

$$\begin{array}{ccc}[Q_0^{++},Q_x^+]=[Q_0^{},Q_x^{}]=0,\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^{++},Q_{1/3}^{}]=aQ_{1/3}^+\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^{},Q_{2/3}^+]=aQ_{2/3}^{}\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^0,Q_{1/3}^\pm ]=\pm aQ_{1/3}^\pm \hfill & & \\ [Q_0^{},Q_{1/3}^+]=bQ_{1/3}^{}\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^{++},Q_{2/3}^{}]=bQ_{2/3}^+\hfill & & \\ [Q_0^0,Q_{2/3}^\pm ]=\pm aQ_{2/3}^\pm ,\hfill & & \end{array}$$

where a=-b=1. Recall that in 2d$`((\frac{1}{3})^2,0)`$ su(2) supersymmetry the coefficients a and b are equal to one, a=b=1,and the analogue of Eqs (35-a-b) read as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}2P_1=\{Q_{1/2}^+,\overline{Q}_{1/2}^{}\}\{Q_{1/2}^{},\overline{Q}_{1/2}^+\}(a)\hfill & & \\ 0=\{Q_{1/2}^\pm ,Q_{1/2}^\pm \}=\{\overline{Q}_{1/2}^\pm ,\overline{Q}_{1/2}^\pm \}(b).\hfill & & \end{array}$$

Observe by the way that apart from the spin of the charge operators, Eq (38-a) differs from Eq (35-a) by the presence of the minus sign which is required by invariance under the su(2) automorphism group of the 2d N=4 su(2) supersymmetric algebra. Nevertheless the similarity between Eqs (35) and (37-38) allows us to build an off shell superspace formulation of 2d$`((\frac{1}{3})^2,0)`$ supersymmetry by mimiking the harmonic superspace formalism .

## 5 Superfield theory.

We start first by describing the superfield theory of the 2d$`(\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{3})`$, fractional supersymmetry Eq (33) especially the matter couplings of the on shell scalar representation $`(\phi ,\mathrm{\Psi }_{\pm 1/3},\mathrm{\Psi }_{\pm 2/3})`$. Using the formal analogy between Eqs (33) and those of 2d N=2 U(1) supersymmetry, namely

$$\begin{array}{ccc}Q_{1/3}\hfill & & \hfill Q_{1/2}^+\\ \theta _{\pm 1/3}\hfill & & \hfill \theta _{\pm 1/2}^+\\ Q_{2/3}\hfill & & \hfill Q_{1/2}^{}\\ \theta _{\pm 2/3}\hfill & & \hfill \theta _{\pm 1/2}^{}\\ \phi \hfill & & \hfill \phi (y)\\ \mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}\hfill & & \hfill \mathrm{\Psi }_{1/2}^+\\ \phi \hfill & & \hfill \phi (y)\\ \mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}\hfill & & \hfill \mathrm{\Psi }_{1/2}^{},\end{array}$$

and following the same lines used in the building of 2d N=2 U(1) supersymmetric matter couplings , one sees that the superfield action $`S[\mathrm{\Phi },\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}]`$ invariant under the 2d$`(\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{3})`$ fractional supersymmetry reads as:

$$S[\mathrm{\Phi },\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}]=d^2z𝑑\theta _{1/3}𝑑\theta _{1/3}𝑑\theta _{2/3}𝑑\theta _{2/3}K[\mathrm{\Phi },\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}].$$
(15)
In this Eq, K is the Kahler potential depending on the chiral superfields $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ given by :

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Phi }\hfill & =& \hfill \phi +\theta _{1/3}\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}+\theta _{1/3}\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}+\theta _{1/3}\theta _{1/3}F,\\ \overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}\hfill & =& \hfill \overline{\phi }+\theta _{2/3}\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}+\theta _{2/3}\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}+\theta _{2/3}\theta _{2/3}F.\end{array}$$

$`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ describe a complex scalar representation of the algebra (33); each bosonic degree of freedom has two partners of spin $`\frac{1}{3}`$ and $`\frac{2}{3}`$. Note that using Eq (42) and the matter superfield representation Eq (43); one gets the right two point free correlation functions; i.e:$`<\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}(z_1)\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}(z_2)>`$ and $`<\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}(z_1)\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}(z_2)>=<\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}(z_1)\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}(z_2)>=0`$. Concerning the $`((\frac{1}{3})^2,0)`$ fractional supersymmetric algebra (35) generated by the four generators $`Q_{1/3}^\pm `$ and $`Q_{2/3}^\pm `$, one may use here also the similarity with 2d N=4 extended supersymmetry. Thus extending Eqs (35) as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}P_1=\{D_{2/3}^+,D_{1/3}^{}\}=\{D_{1/3}^+,D_{2/3}^{}\}\hfill & & \\ 0=\{D_x^\pm ,D_y^\pm \},\hfill & & \end{array}$$

together with

$$\begin{array}{ccc}[D^{++},D_x^+]=[D^{++},D_x^{}]=0;x=\frac{1}{3},\frac{2}{3}\hfill & & \\ [D^{++},D_x^{}]=D_x^+\hfill & & \\ [D^{++},D^{}]=D^0\hfill & & \\ [D^0,D_x^\pm ]=\pm D_x^\pm ,\hfill & & \end{array}$$

and using the Grassman variables $`\theta _{1/3}^\pm `$ and $`\theta _{2/3}^\pm `$ of spin $`\frac{1}{3}`$ and $`\frac{2}{3}`$ respectively, but still satisfying $`\theta _{x}^{\pm }{}_{}{}^{2}=0`$ one can build a superspace realisation of Eqs (44-45) and consequently a 2d quantum superfield theory. A remarkable realisation of the algebra (44-45), stable under the combined conjugation $`+`$ and using the covariant superderivatives $`D_x^\pm `$ and $`D_x^{\pm \pm }`$, $`D_0^0`$ instead of the $`Q_x^\pm `$ generators is given by:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}D_{1/3}^+=\frac{}{\theta _{1/3}^{}}\hfill & & \\ D_{2/3}^+=\frac{}{\theta _{2/3}^{}}\hfill & & \\ D_{2/3}^{}=\frac{}{\theta _{2/3}^+}\theta _{1/3}^{}P_1\hfill & & \\ D_{1/3}^{}=\frac{}{\theta _{1/3}^+}\theta _{2/3}^{}P_1\hfill & & \\ P_1=\frac{}{y}\hfill & & \end{array}$$

where $`y=z\frac{1}{2}(\theta _{1/3}^{}\theta _{2/3}^++\theta _{1/3}^+\theta _{2/3}^{})`$ and where

$$\begin{array}{ccc}D^{++}=[u^{+i}\frac{}{u^i}\theta _{1/3}^+\theta _{2/3}^+P_1]\hfill & & \\ D^{}=[u^i\frac{}{u^{+i}}\theta _{1/3}^{}\theta _{2/3}^{}P_1]\hfill & & \\ D^0=[D^{++},D^{}].\hfill & & \end{array}$$

In this realisation $`u_i^\pm `$ are the well known harmonic variable satisfying $`u^{+i}u_i^{}=1`$ and $`u^{\pm i}u_i^\pm =0`$. Using the realisation (46-47), the on shell matter multiplet $`(0^4,(\frac{1}{3})^4,(\frac{2}{3})^4)`$ of the fractional supersymmetric algebra (44-45) is given by a hermitean superfield satisfying the analytic conditions

$$D_{1/3}^+\mathrm{\Phi }=D_{2/3}^+\mathrm{\Phi }=0,$$
(16)
and the equation of motion

$$D_{}^{++}{}_{}{}^{2}\mathrm{\Phi }=0.$$
(17)
The $`\theta _x^+`$ expanssion of the superfield $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, stable under the combined conjugation $`(+)`$ reads as:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\phi ^{ij}u_i^+u_j^{}+\theta _{1/3}^+\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}^iu_i^{}+\theta _{2/3}^+\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}^iu_i^{}+\theta _{1/3}^+\theta _{2/3}^+F^{ij}u_i^{}u_j^{}.$$
(18)
The action of $`S[\mathrm{\Phi }]`$ describing the dynamics and the couplings of the superfields $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is similar to that of 2d$`((\frac{1}{2})^4,0)`$ su(2) harmonic superspace. More generally the matter couplings of the $`((\frac{1}{3})^2,(\frac{1}{3})^2))`$ su(2) fractional supersymmetry, extending Eqs (44-45) by adjoining the antianalytic part, read in the harmonic superspace formulation \[ 9 \] as:

$$S[\mathrm{\Phi }]=d^2zd^2\theta _{\pm 1/3}^+d^2\theta _{2/3}^+𝑑uL^{+4}(\mathrm{\Phi }),$$
(19)
where $`L^{+4}`$ is a functional of the superfield $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$.

## 6 Discussions and conclusion

Using conformal parafermionic field theoretical methods, we have studied realisations of the fractional supersymmetric algebras extending the usual 2d supersymmetries. We have found that all the known difficulties present in models based on $`U_q(sl(2))`$ and non commutative geometry representations are overpassed. One of the consequences of the new approach is that instead of one generator $`Q_{1/k}`$, FSAs are generated by many basic charge operators $`Q_x,x=1/k,1/2k,\mathrm{}`$,For K=3 for example, the $`(\frac{1}{3},0)`$FSA is generated by two main charge operators $`Q_{1/3}`$ and $`Q_{2/3}`$ satisfying Eqs (33) and the $`((\frac{1}{3})^2,0)`$ FSA is generated by two doublets $`Q_{1/3}^\pm `$ and $`Q_{2/3}^\pm `$ verifying Eqs (35). The proliferation of the fractional supersymmetric generators is the price one should pay in order to build a 2d local fractional supersymmetric QFT. This feature explains why the realisation obtained in ref  solves the constraints of fractional supersymmetry. It tells us moreover that there is a close connection between $`(\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{3})`$ and $`((\frac{1}{3})^2,(\frac{1}{3})^2))`$ FSA’s and 2d N=2U(1) and N=4 su(2) supersymmetric algebras respectively. On the other hand the conformal field methods show us that fractional supersymmetry has other remarkable features which become manifest for $`K3`$. As an example, the standard definition of fractional heterotic superalgebras as $`Q^K=P;k>2`$ is a formal one. The right way to define it is as $`P=tr[Q^K]`$ where Q is a $`K\times K`$ matrix. For K=3, we found that $`Z_3`$ invariant fractional supesymmetric algebra is generated by $`Q_x,x=\frac{1}{3},\frac{2}{3},\mathrm{}`$ together with $`Q_0^\pm `$ rotating the components of these doublets. The energy momentum vector operator $`P_1`$ in the $`Z_3`$ FSA is just the trace of the following $`3\times 3`$ matrix:

$$𝐐^3=Q_0^+Q_{2/3}^+\mathrm{\Pi }_1+Q_{1/3}^+Q_0^+\mathrm{\Pi }_2+Q_{2/3}^+Q_{1/3}^+\mathrm{\Pi }_3,$$

where the $`\mathrm{\Pi }_i`$ ’s are projectors on the states $`|i,i=1,2,3`$. This new result is different from the one used in the literature according to which $`𝐐^3=𝐐_{1/3}𝐐_{1/3}𝐐_{1/3}`$ is a C-operator. Furthermore the method based on parafermions we have been using in this study tells us also that fractional spin objects may be treated as anticommuting objects. The point is that all fractional spin objects involved in the game are valued in the gl(3) nilpotent subalgebra and more precisely their square is identically zero; see Eqs (29). This anticommuting feature is reconfirmed by the braiding property of conformal fields which shows that the field operators $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Delta }_1}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Delta }_2}`$ of fractional spin such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1+\mathrm{\Delta }_2=1`$, should anticommute. In particular the correlation function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}(z_1),\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}(z_2)`$ is equal to $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{2/3}(z_1),\mathrm{\Psi }_{1/3}(z_2)`$;a fact which imply that one may build a local 2d quantum field theory invarint under fractional supersymmetry. In the end of discussion, we would like to note that as far as locality is concerned, the building of a local 2d fractional supersymmetric theory may be achieved by linearizing the cubic relation $`𝐐^3=P_1`$. There are differents ways to perform this linearisation. A way to do it is as we have done in this study where Eqs (26) and (28) are remplaced by Eqs (35-39). Another way is as done in where the nilpotency condition $`\theta _{1/3}^3=0`$ , $`\theta _{1/3}^20`$, necessary for the construction of generalized superspace formalism is solved of two anticommuting Grassman variables $`\theta _{1/3}^+`$ and $`\theta _{2/3}^{}`$; $`\theta _{1/3}^{+2}=\theta _{2/3}^2=0`$. Though this linearisation works, no explanation was given in . In the present analysis this feature can be derived in a rigourous way. the analogue of the higher order nilpotency condition $`\theta _{1/3}^3=0`$, $`\theta _{1/3}^20`$ is trivially satisfied here since $`\theta _{1/3}^{+2}\theta _{2/3}^+=\theta _{1/3}^+\theta _{1/3}^{+2}=0`$.

## Aknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr A.Elfallah and Dr J.Zerouaoui for stimulating discussions. This research work has been supported by the programm PARS under contrat 372-98 CNR.